The West and Siams quest for

modernity
Siamese responses to nineteenth century
American missionaries
Thanet Aphornsuvan
Abstract: This paper examines the interactions that occurred between Westerners and the Siamese elite in the nineteenth century.
The author contends that the perceived superiority of Western
science and knowledge came not as a result of its being Western as
such, but rather as a consequence of the Siamese elites secure
political position in terms of its physical and intellectual powers.
The adoption of Western knowledge was measured against the truth
of Theravada Buddhism and Buddhist political ideas. Western
knowledge and science thus provided the ruling classes with a modern perception of themselves and the world. Nevertheless, the
persistence of Siamese sakdina [feudal] social relations ultimately
prevented complete modernization. Modernity therefore ended up
in the hands of the elite and did not extend to the wider populace.
Keywords: cross-cultural relations; Siamese intellectual history;
Siamese modernity; American missionaries in Siam; Theravada
Buddhism
Author details: Thanet Aphornsuvan is Professor of History and Dean
of the Faculty of Liberal Arts at Thammasat University, Bangkok 10200,
Thailand. E-mail: thanet3@gmail.com.

The focus of this paper is on the processes of modernization that took

place in nineteenth century Siam, most notably in the reign of King
Mongkut. Rather than adopt a one-dimensional view of these processes
from either the Western or the Siamese perspective alone, the paper examines the interactions that occurred between Westerners and the Siamese
elite in their working engagements with each other. By elucidating the
historical context and referring to textual evidence, it has been possible to
South East Asia Research, 17, 3, pp 401431

402

South East Asia Research

recuperate some sense of the exchanges in question as they evolved. The

perceived superiority of Western science and knowledge came not as a
result of its being Western as such, but rather as a consequence of the
Siamese elites secure political position in terms of both its physical and
intellectual powers. Mongkut (King Rama IV, r 18511868) is chosen to
illustrate this thesis because of his distinct reactions to the impact and
influence of things Western. From the initial encounters with the West in
the new power relations that evolved in nineteenth century Siam, Mongkut
placed himself at the fore of the countrys engagement with and contention of modernity. The adoption of Western knowledge was measured
against the truth of Theravada Buddhism and Buddhist political ideas.
One impact of the Westernization of Siam was, ironically, the introduction and development of state religion and its role in politics, particularly
the creation and strengthening of the absolutist regime and subsequently
the persistence of the monarchy.
My concern in this paper is to interrogate conventional perceptions
of the interactions between Siam/Thailand and the West with reference
to its development in the nineteenth century into a modern society.
While there is no doubt that over the past two centuries Siam has borrowed and copied many or even most of the physical infrastructures of
a modern society from Western models, since the early twentieth century, Western influence and practices have nevertheless often been
criticized whenever social problems, particularly among commoners,
were raised. In the processes of modernization, Siam/Thailand has thus
portrayed the West simultaneously as both hero and villain. How and
why such a conventional lovehate perception of the West has come
about constitute the object of this study. My argument is that because
Western knowledge and science were adopted mainly by the royal elite
together with a small group of high-ranking nobles, the choices and
growth of modern ideas and practices were curtailed to suit the purposes of the elite and did not expand to those of the wider populace.
For the elite, Western borrowings were intended as an adornment of its
existing status, and served as powerful symbols in the Siamese mind.
Once they were sure of their political power, the elite exercised their
liberty and authority in selecting that which they liked from the West,
while rejecting that about which they felt self-confident and wanted
therefore to preserve, in opposition to the West. The modern practices
that were later imitated in fragmented form and content by the common people troubled the royal elite because of what they perceived as
a lack of taste and as the un-Thainess of such behaviours.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

403

To illustrate this thesis, I conceptualize the West as a model that

ultimately brought with it ideas of knowledge and power to the recipient culture. Historically speaking, starting from the reign of King Rama
III (r 182451), when Western powers began to convey different and
new impressions of the Siamese, the elite circles began to conceive of
themselves as distinct and different from the common people, exploiting modern knowledge and technology from the West. I differentiate
the space and locality of Westernized practices in Siam, separating them
into two broad categories. One is the private sphere, owned and conducted mainly by private commoners and some officials: for example,
the owners of printing presses and newspapers, and schools that would
later expand into local manufacturing, industry and business enterprises.
One result of their activities has been the creation of the modern public
sphere, the popular audience and the reading population, no matter how
big or small, and a market where people meet face to face and exchange information and knowledge. The second category of space is
the royal public sphere [thi luang] and government institutions, including
Buddhist monasteries and schools. These two domains competed over
their respective goals. In the process, Western superiority was instrumental in their successful competition and the assertion of their legitimate
identities.

Perceptions of the West in pre-modern Siam

The Siamese had enjoyed contact with foreigners, including Westerners, since the sixteenth century. They helped foster the growth of
international commerce, which contributed to the development of capital
cultures as expressed in a unique language, literature and the public
rituals of sacral life.1 At that time, the arrival of the Portuguese did not
have much material or intellectual effect on the Siamese.
The perception of Westerners and things Western that took hold in
nineteenth century Siam as superior symbols for the kingdom was one
both directed and promoted by the Siamese elite. It was also reflected
in the reality that during the Bangkok era Europeans, or farang, engaged in a variety of different professions, as teachers, shipbuilders,
missionaries and doctors. The rarity with which they were depicted by
the Siamese as coolies or lowly people in the kingdom contrasted,
1

David K. Wyatt (1984), Thailand: A Short History, Silkworm Books, Chiangmai, p

89.

404

South East Asia Research

however, with earlier representations of Westerners with whom Siam

had had its first contacts.
One of the sites in which the presence of farang in Siamese society
is visually illustrated is Buddhist temple mural painting. From the sixteenth century, farang, as well as Arabs and Persians, came to trade
with South East Asia. Among the first Europeans to visit Ayutthaya
were the Portuguese and the Dutch. The British and French followed in
the seventeenth century. The Portuguese were mercenaries in the army
of King Naresuan (r 15901605) in the war with Burma. They were
replaced by the Dutch and Japanese samurai in the reign of King
Songtham (r 161028). The French Catholic mission was popular in
the court of King Narai (r 165688) who patronized their activities in
the kingdom and promoted the practices of Western astronomy and
engineering, mainly in the palace compound. During Narais reign, the
first European painting of the king granting a royal audience to the
French envoy, Chevalier de Chaumont, together with other Westernstyle oil paintings, was circulated in the court. This new approach and
art style might have inspired local Siamese artisans and painters to
create their own realistic portraits of important persons and scenery
but it did not.2 In fact, there was no development of realistic painting
and sculpture in Siam until the reigns of Kings Rama III and IV.
Given such intimate contact with Europeans in the Ayutthaya era, it
is not surprising to see many murals featuring farang in the Buddhist
tales. Europeans were depicted in traditional Siamese decorative art, in
woodcuts, as guardians at the doors and windows of monasteries and
as kinnari and kinnorn, animals in the mythical Himaphan forest. Some
were depicted as the guardian angels, or the deva [deities] at the front
of the roof of the ubosot, or monastery ceremonial hall. At the base of
the sema [monastery boundary stones] at Wat Srabua, Petchburi province,
Europeans are seen carrying the sema. The most revealing mural is one
in which the Lord Buddha fights temptation from all kinds of demons
and evil spirits. Here, Europeans with big guns accompany other demons in a troop headed by the demon Mara, attacking the Lord Buddha.
It is interesting to note that, judging from the murals and bas-reliefs in
the monasteries of the Ayutthaya period, the Siamese viewed Europeans as fellow humans from distant places. Some were good at horse-riding
and engineering or were fierce soldiers with guns. Ayutthayan people
2

Apinan Poshyananda, ed (1993), Western-Style Painting and Sculpture in the Thai

Royal Court, The Royal Palace, Bangkok, p 337.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

405

thus saw farang with exceptional expertise and so placed them as deities or guardians of the temple. But at the same time, they thought
farang were not human beings like them, so they also placed them as
animals in the Buddhist jataka tales of the Buddhas previous lives.3
In terms of cultural experiences with Westerners, the Ayutthaya period contacts provided the Siamese with a certain degree of confidence
in dealing with them as merchants and traders in the port cities of
Ayutthaya and Thonburi-Bangkok. Past experiences in the Ayutthaya
port city, where merchants and traders of various races and languages
had worked together under the aegis of the Siamese court, contributed
to a multi-ethnic perception of the world among the Siamese. Europeans were seen as just another group of traders and adventurers who
spoke different tongues, alongside other Asian peoples. The Siamese
preferred to distinguish foreigners by their phasa, or language, rather
than in terms of race. With the tradition of the control of foreign trade
being in the hands of the king and the Siamese nobility, the superiority
of Europeans was not clearly recognized until well into the early Bangkok
period. With an expansion of early European capitalism in the New
World, farang traders in Ayutthaya had also become more aggressive
in their relations with the court and they competed fiercely for economic domination in Siam in the late seventeenth century. The French,
through their Catholic missionaries, were favoured by King Narai, who
granted them land and permission to build a church and school. Narais
policy of using France to balance Dutch and English influences in the
region led to him establishing an embassy in France. For a while, it
seemed that Europeans, especially the French, increasingly dominated
the Siamese court and polity. However, a palace coup against King
Narai in 1688 brought an end for the next hundred years to cultural
economic relations between Europe and Siam that had hitherto been
both close and cordial.
The coup of 1688 against King Narai was masterminded by Phra
Phetracha, whose mother had been wet nurse to Narai, so he and the
king had been raised as foster-brothers. Political tension was created
by anti-foreign and anti-French sentiment, especially after the arrival
of the French mission in 1687 together with six large warships and 500
troops, which were allowed to be stationed in Bangkok and also in
Mergui. The broad coalition of anti-foreigners, including Buddhist
3

Nor na Paknam (1986), Farang nai sinlapa Thai [Europeans in Thai Art], Meuang
Boran Press, Bangkok, pp 25.

406

South East Asia Research

monks, the nobility and low-ranking officers,4 was fuelled by the spectacular role of the kings most powerful minister, Constantine Phaulkon,
a Greek adventurer who had married a Japanese Christian and surrounded
himself with French priests and English merchants. When King Narai
fell seriously ill, Phetracha moved to eliminate Narais successors, including Phaulkon, and finally declared himself the next king. French
troops agreed to leave the country after French missionaries had been
imprisoned and Catholics persecuted. Nevertheless, the new court was
by no means blindly anti-foreign or anti-Christian.5 Soon after,
Phetracha concluded a new treaty with the Dutch, who were the only
Europeans to continue trading with Ayutthaya until the end of the kingdom.6 In this sense, the closing of trade and commerce with Europeans
following the 1688 coup was not the same as Japans exclusionist policy
in the first half of the seventeenth century in which Christianity and
trade with Europeans were the political objectives of the Shogunate,
since they were related to rebellions and peasant uprisings in many
communities.7
It was not until after the Napoleonic Wars in Europe that the West
began to reappear as a real force in South East Asia. The return happened gradually, beginning in the 1820s when the British began to secure
a factory for trade in the region. Soon the new and now more powerful
West, unlike its predecessors, made its impact known to all regional
kingdoms. The modern strength and ability of the Europeans to defeat
China and Burma was perceived as genuinely threatening by the Siamese
elite at that time.
On the other hand, the early Bangkok kingdom was also experiencing the expansion of foreign trade, especially with China. Bangkok
became a cosmopolitan centre, according to D.E. Malloch, a British
merchant who travelled to the city in 1820.8 Malloch noticed many
nationalities working there. To his mind, the merchants and high-ranking officials in Siam were aliens of all sorts who controlled the
4

5
6

Nidhi Eoseewong contends that this broad coalition against Narai was composed of
the nobility, Buddhist monks and commoners. See his (1986) Kanmuang Thai samai
Phra Narai [Thai Politics in the Reign of King Narai], Matichon Press, Bangkok.
Wyatt, supra note 1, at p 117.
Nidhi Eoseewong (2005), Pen and Sail: Literature and History in Early Bangkok,
Silkworm Books, Chiangmai, p 61.
G.B. Sansom (1952), Japan: A Short Cultural History, Stanford University Press,
Stanford, CA, pp 449455.
B.J. Terwiel (1986), Muang Thai and the world: changing perspectives during the
third reign, paper presented at the seminar Asia: A Sense of Place, 14 March,
Faculty of Asian Studies, The Australian National University, Canberra, p 19.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

407

administration of much of Bangkoks foreign trade. Such a mixture of

foreign merchants and officials working under the Siamese king made
it possible for the elite to learn and adopt foreign ideas and practices.
In the early nineteenth century, the proto-colonialism of the West
began to pressurize the Bangkok government. The most important among
these proto-colonial powers were the British, who tried to compel Siam
to sign a commercial treaty in 1821, albeit unsuccessfully. It was not
until the conclusion of the first AngloBurmese war in 1824 that Siam
quickly signed the first modern treaty of friendship and the first commercial agreement between a Western nation and Siam.9 The second
treaty was with the USA in 1833, earning a warmer reception than that
signed with the British. With no military forces in the area, the Bangkok elite did not fear the USA, but had grown to know the Americans
mainly from contacts with the missionaries who had arrived in 1828.
From the time of their arrival in the kingdom, the American missionaries began to cultivate relations with the Bangkok elite, and were soon
able to establish cordial relations with them and with the people who
came to recognize the missionaries major contributions to medicine
and scientific knowledge. By the time Rama IV came to the throne,
American missionaries had been employed to assist the government in
many areas, especially with the introduction of modern science and
technology to the court. Thus the American missionaries became one
of the most important agencies of modernization in nineteenth century
Siam.

The place of missionaries in the modernization of Siam and

the agency of the Siamese
Modernity was demonstrated to Siam by the foreign missionaries and
seized upon by the local elite, who constituted the first institution to
benefit from Western knowledge and power. Conceived originally in
the era of the Sukhothai Kingdom (c 12401438) as a righteous Buddhist monarchy, the Ayutthayan kings in the seventeenth century,
especially Narai, adopted from the Khmer empire the Hindu concept
of kingship in which the monarch was conceived as a God-king with
unlimited power over his subjects.
The local people transformed Hindu gods into attendants of the Buddha
9

Walter F. Vella (1957), Siam Under Rama III, 18241851, J.J. Augustin Inc, New
York, p 120.

408

South East Asia Research

in Buddhist monasteries, or else converted them into local spirits worshipped in spirit houses and shrines.10 The different roles and meanings
of Hinduism for the monarchy and for the common people respectively
provide a pre-modern prototype for the divergent responses to the role
of Western missionaries in the Bangkok kingdom (1782 to the present).
Starting in the early nineteenth century, the mainly American missionaries provided many services to the Bangkok kings, from the translation
of foreign correspondence and scientific texts to the teaching of English to royalty and the provision of medical services to the royal family
and its servants. In short, the early missionaries helped to fashion the
royal elite into modernized persons. Significantly, however, these missions failed in their attempts to convert the Siamese people to Christianity.
In the early Bangkok period, when the West was more interested in
re-establishing its relations with and presence in Siam, missionaries
were quick to make inroads into the kingdom and to insert themselves
into the local communities. The French Catholics, having established
themselves in Siam since the late Ayutthaya period, were able to continue from the basis of an existing foothold, so when Bishop Pallegoix
arrived in Bangkok in 1830, he simply revived and continued the work
of the mission. Notable contributions were made by him in the introduction of modern subjects to King Mongkut, who was at the time
ordained as a monk. Pallegoix taught him geography, physics, chemistry, astronomy, French and Latin, and the king in return taught the French
bishop Pali. When Mongkut became king, he frequently invited Pallegoix
to visit the palace and occasionally to meetings on the translation of
Pali into Siamese. Their intellectual friendship lasted throughout their
lives.
The first two Protestant missionaries who arrived in Bangkok in 1828
were Karl A.F. Gutzlaff, a German; and Jacob Tomlin, an Englishman
who had been sent by the London Missionary Society. Gutzlaff had
resigned from the Netherlands Missionary Society and worked independently. Having always wanted to work in China, he chose Siam
when he was denied entry into the Middle Kingdom; but when his wife
died giving birth to twins in 1831, Gutzlaff left Bangkok for Tiensin,
spending the next 20 years in coastal China until his death in 1851.
Tomlin left Bangkok in 1832. The initial missionary work of both
Gutzlaff and Tomlin was not so successful, since they were confined to
10

Chris Baker and Pasuk Phongpaichit (2005), A History of Thailand, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 19.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

409

working mainly among the Chinese in Bangkok. Their lasting impact,

however, was their request to the American Missionary Society to send
more people to help the mission in Bangkok.
The American missionaries were neither imported by the Siamese
king nor sent by the US government, but came instead because of their
own convictions. In this period, the USA took an anti-imperialist stance
and had become a unified country under the triumph of industrial capitalism after the North had violently crushed the slave power of the Old
South. At the same time, the East had been transformed and restructured both physically and mentally into colonial and semi-colonial
societies under the superior might of the European West. The East with
which the Americans came into contact by the mid- and late nineteenth
century was therefore hardly barbaric or backward at all. Many of
these kingdoms and states (among them Ayutthaya, Malacca and Java)
had for several centuries been establishing trade links and competing
fiercely with the Europeans.
In the case of South East Asia, a further factor to contribute to changes
in these countries before the impact of the Europeans was the massive
migration of Chinese from the mainland from the late eighteenth and
early nineteenth centuries. In fact, China was the ultimate destination
of most missionaries of this period. This was seen in the case of Siam,
which American missionaries often viewed as a stopover on the way to
China. After their first encounters with SinoSiamese and local Siamese
commoners and upper classes, the American missionaries saw a promising opportunity to establish mission work there. One of the positive
factors contributing to this decision was the friendly reception and enthusiastic support of the Siamese elite for American knowledge and
diplomatic relations. In comparison with other countries in the region,
Siam was more lenient towards the work of the American missionaries
and their introduction of new ideas and knowledge. There was no persecution or harsh treatment of Americans in the kingdom. Following a
brief period of negative feeling towards the West at the end of the reign
of Rama III, the accession of Mongkut changed the tone to one that
was decidedly positive and which, more importantly, marked a confidence among the elite in undertaking the modernization of the kingdom.
This special and unique relationship between the Siamese royal elite
and the American missionaries was, in retrospect, pivotal in the formation of modern ideas in Siam and its perception of the modern world.
Protestant missionaries from as early as the 1820s (for example, Tomlin
and Gutzlaff) to the Reverend Dan Beach Bradley in the 1830s played

410

South East Asia Research

a significant role in the development of Siamese intellectual history

more so than their earlier Catholic counterparts or other European traders
had done in the Ayutthaya era (see also Thanapol in this issue). It is
interesting to note that while Europeans such as Bishop Pallegoix and
the English governess to the court, Anna Leonowens, had an influence
upon Mongkut in the cultivation of modern knowledge, the Americans, on the other hand, extended their dissemination of knowledge to
a wider audience of commoners, both in Bangkok and the provinces.
The most effective vehicles of the American missionaries were the use
of modern printing and schools. One last observation on the difference
between American and European missionaries was that the former arrived with a university or college education, while the latter were
equipped only with secondary school qualifications. Their very different religious and educational cultures effected very different results:
the Americans had a culture of self-sufficiency and built many denominational colleges and schools that still exist in Thailand today.11
Dan Beach Bradley of the American Board of Commissioners for
Foreign Missions (ABCFM) arrived in Bangkok on 18 July 1835. At
the time, Rama III had been on the throne for 11 years, succeeding his
father and bypassing his younger step-brother, Prince Mongkut, who
entered the monkhood in order to avoid unfortunate political ramifications arising from the succession conflict. The King, under the then
title of Prince Chetsadabodin, was well known among the Europeans
who had come to trade and conduct official relations with the Siamese
court in the reign of the previous king, Rama II (r 180924). One European observer noted of the prince that all matters relating to peace and
war, to foreign intercourse and domestic regulations, to affairs of religion or policy or justice, were equally at his disposal. Europeans
generally considered him to be capable, intelligent, and well informed.12
The most important and powerful minister was the Chao Phraya Phra
Khlang [Foreign Affairs Minister] Dit Bunnag, who was the leader of
the party of nobility that supported the accession of Rama III. The
Phra Khlang was also awarded the influential position of the superintendency of the Kralahom [Defence] Department in 1830 after the death
of the minister, making him the most powerful minister in Siam throughout the Third Reign. It was not surprising, given such a cordial situation
11

12

I am grateful to Ian Welch of the Australian National University for the information
about the differences between American and British missionaries.
George Finlayson (1826), The Mission to Siam and Hue the Capital of Cochin China
in the Years 18212, Murray, London, p 128, quoted in Vella, supra note 9, at p 4.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

411

in the court at the time of the arrival of the American missionaries in

the 1820s, that the Siamese elite was ready to interact with the new
ideas and forms of knowledge coming from the wider world.
The presence of American missionaries was also significant in setting the tone of the Western impact in Siam as a peaceful and intellectual
encounter between both parties, though the issue of foreign trade with
European powers was soon to become a critical political problem for
the government. Britains Crawfurd mission arrived in Siam in 1821 to
secure a treaty for free trade, but although it was well received and
entertained by the court of Rama II, the British did not get the treaty
they desired. The chief reason was that Siam saw no need for trade
with the West, which might open up more competition from Western
merchants in the area. The Siamese junk trade, which was then monopolized by the King and the Bunnag clan, was seen as adequate to
meet the demands of the kingdom. However, European products were
becoming more attractive to local demands, met by sources in Penang,
Malacca, Singapore, Surat and Canton. One exception during this period was a visit by American vessels from 1818 to 1821, which was
favoured by the Siamese elite because they brought arms. In contrast,
the missionaries brought no arms; nor did they try to coerce Siam into
agreeing a treaty. On the contrary, this time the commodities they brought
were books and tracts, initially on Christianity, but later expanded to
include, among other subjects, modern sciences, medicine and news.
One of the first questions Dr Bradley was asked on his arrival by
Phya Sripipat, the second Phra Khlang,13 was why he had come to
Siam. Bradleys reply was, to heal the sick among the people and to
do all the good I could.14 A similar question was also posed by the
Queen, Mongkuts mother, who asked whether America was a happy
country. Upon hearing an affirmative reply, she then pertinently asked,
Why then have you come here? It was difficult for the Siamese to
understand why the farang might want to leave their own country and
travel elsewhere when all was well at home. For them, travel to faraway places was mainly for the purposes of paying respect to sacred
religious sites such as those housing Buddha relics. Not until the late
13

14

He was also among the senior nobility of the Bunnag clan. He was promoted by
Mongkut to be Somdet Chao Phraya Barom Maha Phichaiyat, or Somdet Chao Phraya
Ong Noi [the younger Somdet Chao Phraya].
Rev George H. Feltus, ed (1936), Abstract of the Journal of Rev. Dan Beach Bradley,
M.D. Medical Missionary in Siam 18351873, Multigraph Department, Pilgrim
Church, Cleveland, OH, p 18.

412

South East Asia Research

nineteenth century was the term go travel [pai thiaw] for pleasure
introduced.15 The appearance of the missionaries was certainly not totally
unheard of before by the Siamese court. As already noted, Portuguese
and French Catholic missions had come to Ayutthaya in the seventeenth century and set up schools and communities there. The
distinctiveness of the American Presbyterian mission in Siam in the
nineteenth century, however, lay in its separateness from the affairs of
an imperial state and power. The zealous and energetic activities of the
Protestant missions to heal the people, both spiritually and physically, marked a radical departure from the activities of previous foreign
ecclesiastical persons and groups in the kingdom.16
The Siamese elites curiosity and questions directed at the American
missionaries were revealing. Inquires were directed at how Bradley
obtained the funds for doing good, and why [he] did not stay in America
to heal the sick there.17 Implicit in this question was whether he was
going to take pay for his services in Siam. To this query, at the suggestion of Mr Robert Hunter, a British merchant resident in Bangkok,
Bradley replied, I would take pay from men who were able to give but
with the expressed intention of appropriating such monies to the benefit of the poor in Bangkok.18 This response seemed to be an acceptable
answer to the Siamese noble because it could be seen as comparable
with similar practices among the local upper and wealthy classes, who,
according to Buddhist beliefs, were good or virtuous people, whose
duty was to give alms, or dhana, to the poor and needy. From their first
encounters with the American missionaries, the Siamese elite felt at
ease and confident that they could deal with these new foreigners in a
more or less Siamese way.
Siamese of every class and status wished to see the curious things
that the Americans had. Bradley noted that when they had a chance to
visit his home, [the Siamese] went through the printing office and
type foundry and bindery and would have scrutinized every nook and
15

16

17
18

Prince Damrong (1894), Atthibai kan pai thiaw [Discourse on Travel], Wachirayan,
Bangkok; see also his (1918) Reuang thiaw thi tang tang phak neung: atthibai theung
reuang thiaw [On Travel to Other Places: Note on Travelling], Sophonphiphatthanakorn Press, Bangkok.
Bradley was from the poor farming district of upstate New York known as the Burnedover district as a result of the upsurge of the Second Great Awakening in the 1820s.
See William G. McLoughlin (1978), Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform, University
of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Feltus, supra note 14, at p 8.
Feltus, supra note 14, at p 8.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

413

corner of my house if allowed. I gave them copies of the Life of Christ

and the Acts of the Apostles beseeching them to give earnest heed to
the Gospel.19
In addition to their interest in farang gadgets, the Siamese were willing to test the new science and medicine of the missionaries, implying
that they had been convinced of its superior quality or efficacy. Prince
Krommakhun Dechadisorn (to whom Bradley referred in his journal as
Kroma Khun Date) often came for treatment, having heard that electricity could cure the palsy and wishing for Bradley to try it on his
hand, which had long been numb.20 Sometimes Bradley was requested
by the Phra Khlang or other nobles to operate on their people.

Mongkut and modernity

Mongkut is widely regarded as the first monarch of the Bangkok dynasty to set Siam on the road to Western-style development. Key to his
ideas and models of Westernization was modern learning to be precise, the languages and vehicles for the dissemination of modern ideas
via the printing press. By focusing on the formal written Siamese script
as opposed to the oral tradition, Mongkut managed to create a new
sphere of contest among the literate elite and between the state and its
subjects. Mongkuts seminal institutional creation was that of the
Thammayut Nikaya as the authentic Buddhist sangha and practice. By
the time Mongkut became king, his revival of Buddhist practice had
achieved both political and social goals. His consciousness of the distinct Buddhist faith and truth in Siam was evidenced by his earnest
contacts with Westerners and their science and knowledge. In a letter
inviting Anna Leonowens to teach English to his children in the court,
Mongkut made it clear that you will do your best endeavor for knowledge of English language, science, and literature, and not for conversion
to Christianity.21 He emphasized to her that, the followers of Buddha
are mostly aware of the powerfulness of truth and virtue, as well as the
followers of Christ, and are desirous to have facility of English language and literature, more than new religions.22
19
20

21

22

Feltus, supra note 14, at p 79.

Prince Krommakhun Dechadisorn was the second highest ranking prince in the kingdom, and one of the sons of the late King Rama II.
Anna Leonowens (1870), The English Governess at the Siamese Court, Trubner &
Co, London, p vi.
Ibid.

414

South East Asia Research

Thus the initial move towards modernity initiated by Mongkut before taking up the throne focused on the monastery, first at Wat
Rachathiwat and later at Wat Bowonniwet. While a monk, Mongkut
learned Latin and French together with modern sciences from Bishop
Pallegoix, who was the first photographer to take a picture of the Princemonk.23 By the 1820s, the Siamese elite had increasingly begun to learn
and practise Western science and knowledge.

Buddhist revivalism in the early Bangkok era

One area crucial to the understanding of the relationship between the
Siamese elite and the modern West was that of religious knowledge. It
is my thesis that the elite, particularly the royal elite, were able to contest and contend with modern Western knowledge and philosophy
because they had already been through a Buddhist revival only decades before in the early Bangkok era. Rattanakosin Buddhism provided
them with a corpus of texts elaborating on cosmology, with a world
view and with social and political treatises. In short, the Siamese elite
were confident that they had found and upheld the truth of the world,
dharma, and that this enabled them to interact with Westerners as intellectual and moral equals.
The major reconstruction of the Siamese mind under Rama I was
based on the reproduction and cleansing [chamra] of the Traiphum,
or The Three Worlds and the reorganization of the Three Seals Law
[kotmai tra sam duang] and the Buddhist Monks Law [kotmai phra
song].24 Historians refer to the new emerging world view of this period
as the Bangkok Worldview [lokkathat rattanakosin]. Basically, the
Bangkok ruling elite still sought the legitimacy of the old Siamese concepts of a Buddhist king and a proper social order based upon sakdina
social relations. The continuity of the Ayutthayan world view was clearly
present in all these reforms, but new additions and modifications reflecting shifting powers and a new world view also took place.
23

24

Another student of the French bishop, Phraya Krasapkitkosol (Mode), while holding the position of royal page, was the second person to take photographs; he was
also a pioneer chemist, specializing in the art of gilding. The third photographer was
Phra Pricha Kollakarn (Sam-ang) and the fourth was Luang Akninaroemit (Chit).
See Apinan Poshyananda, supra note 2, at p 12.
Frank E. Reynolds and Mani B [trans] (1982), Three Worlds According to King Ruang:
A Thai Buddhist Cosmology, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA; Pramuan
kotmai rachakan thi neung kotmai tra sam duang, Vols I and II. The Buddhist Monks
Law is in Vol III (1986), Reuan kaew kanphim, Bangkok.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

415

The important modification in the Traiphum was the re-emphasis of

the role and status of the king as Bodhisattva, or the reincarnation of
the Lord Buddha, in the discourse of the origins of the world and the
human realm. Traditionally, the old Buddhist sutras, as shown in the
Sukhothai kingdom, reiterated the position of the king as being the
great elect [Mahasammata], who charms others by the Norm (dhamma)
he observes and whose virtues clearly mark him out as the chief among
men.25 This aspect of the king was modified in combination with other
Buddhist canonical formulations, especially in South East Asian Buddhist kingdoms, to present the ideal Buddhist king as being a righteous
king, a dharmaraja, an upholder of morality, and as a cakkavatti [universal ruler]. The Sukhothai political discourse clearly demonstrated
the idea that perceived the state as a means to redeem peoples virtue
under the guidance of the king. With this idea, the Traiphum thus idealized another aspect of the king as bodhisattva, or a future Buddha.
The central political implication of the king as bodhisattva was that the
legitimation of the king came from his having accumulated the highest
merit [barami] in this world.26 This notion and understanding of the
Buddhist king, though continuing during the Ayutthaya kingdom, was
much less emphatic than in the Sukhothai period. The reason was that
Ayutthaya became more powerful and prosperous than Sukhothai, resulting in the gradual strengthening of the kingship and its ability to
quell disorder in the empire and attempted coups inside the palace. The
main arena of political conflict in Ayutthaya thus centred on the succession to the throne, which was often challenged by the rising nobility.
The first successful usurper was King Prasat Thorng (r 162956), King
of the Golden Palace, whose power and ruthless undertakings derived
from his control of the Minister of Military Affairs [Kalahome]. Under
Prasat Thorng, the image of the Buddhist paternal king had been transformed into a powerful Cakkavatin, or king of kings. He invented a
new style of Buddhist statue, clothed in the attire of a king, in keeping
with the tradition of Mahayana Buddhism. Another significant development during his reign was the introduction of Khmer concepts of
arts and architecture into the Thai Buddhist temple. Thus political and
25

26

S.J. Tambiah (1989), King Mahasammata: the first king in the Buddhist story of
creation, and his persisting relevance, Journal of the Anthropological Society of
Oxford, Vol 20, No 2, pp 101122.
Nidhi Eoseewong (2000), Prawattisat rattanakosin nai phra rachaphongsawadan
Ayutthaya [The Bangkok History in Ayutthaya Chronicles], Matichon Press, Bangkok, p 74.

416

South East Asia Research

social changes in the Ayutthaya Empire enabled the kings to adopt more
Hinduism into the political discourse, stressing the concept of the theory
of divine kingship. The role or status of the king was therefore more
one of absolute power and its execution than as an upholder of morality. Significantly, none of the great Ayutthayan kings had performed or
claimed glorious deeds by Buddhist standards. The important modification and development of the Buddhist king and political discourse in
the Bangkok kingdom were precisely at this point of restoring the old
Sukhothai version and adding in new ones. Symbolically, the Bangkok
Traiphumikattha or Traiphumwinichai placed the Buddhas seat under
the Bo tree as the centre of the universe instead of the Meru Mount,
according to the Buddhist cosmography. The important implication of
this change was the shift in the centre of the universe and the world,
whereby the king was no longer a god inhabiting the top of the Meru
Mount. This time, he was the Buddhist king of the world who had a
duty to deliver all sentient beings (not only human beings) to Nirvana
or Enlightenment.27 From this Bangkok world view, we can see the
innovative acts undertaken by Rama I, the founder of the Bangkok
kingdom, such as the introduction of state laws for monks [kotmai phra
song], the proclamation of royal glory through the rectification of the
Tripitakas, and so on.28 Be that as it may, the early Bangkok kings did
not totally discard the Ayutthayan form and content of government.
Whenever that old form was dangerous to the new spirit, it would be
taken away or forsaken. The ones that were not compatible with the
Bangkok spirit would be reformed into new ones.
The other exciting change in world view can be seen from the knowledge of geography of the pre-Bangkok mind. In the Traiphum text,
which was reconstructed by King Taksin (the immediate predecessor
of Rama I) in 1776, there was revealing evidence of novel interpretations and representation of Siamese geographical knowledge. B.J.
Terweil points to the changing world view of Siam in the early Bangkok period through reference to maps and illustrations in the text of the
Traiphum.29 The map of the human realm is highly stylized with a
particular geometrical shape. The shapes of the few islands depicted
27
28

29

Ibid, p 80.
See Winai Phongsiphian (2001), Kan phrasatsana lae kan jat rabiap sangkok Siamese
tang tae rachasamai phrabat somdet phra-phuttha-yort-fa-chulaloke theung rachasamai
phrabatsomdet phrachomklao chaoyuhua [Religious affairs and social order in Siamese
order from the reigns of king Rama I to Rama IV], in Winai Phongsiphian, ed, Parithat
prawattisat [Perspectives in History], Rungsang kanphim, Bangkok, pp 75146.
Terwiel, supra note 8, at p 5.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

417

are reminiscent of the continents in the Traiphum, for example, Jambudvipa; Terweil believes that the new map is a mixture between a
map and a mandala, or a set of geometrical symbols.30
Contact with the modern West in the nineteenth century provided the
Siamese elite with new tools to upgrade old learning. These included a
new knowledge of their own nation, that is, the state of Siam vis--vis
its neighbours and distant nations. The traditional views of other kingdoms were based mainly on a Buddhist world view, which emphasized
the moral stature of the king as a reflection of the state of the kingdom.
Changing ideas about reality and its components led the elite to alter
their view of the external world. To know ones neighbours was a new
kind of knowledge. This modern knowledge came with new subjects
such as geography and astronomy in which comparisons could be made
with traditional Siamese knowledge of the same subjects. The quest
for modern erudition and ideas was stimulated and challenged by interactions with American missionaries in ways that allowed the Siamese
elite to decide for themselves what to change and what not.
There was evidence that Siamese painters made use of some European knowledge of maps and defined certain areas according to the
modern Western map. But the only thing that Siamese painters did not
follow through was to locate Siam within the modern map too. Therefore in the pre-Bangkok Traiphum, Siam was still depicted as situated
in the middle of the world, surrounded by other countries and nations.
By the First Reign of the Bangkok kingdom, the revised Traiphum still
maintained the central world view that the Siamese state was in the
middle of the world of nations. But this view was to be greatly redrawn
and a newer version of the modern world was coming to replace it.

The changing Siamese world view

The new knowledge of geography in the early Bangkok period saw the
influence of Western maps in depicting the world more scientifically,
based on Western empirical data. By the reign of Rama II, it was common knowledge among educated people that Siam was not the centre
of the world and that there were real countries, mountains, seas and
various ethnic groups with different languages inhabiting the entire
globe. This modern knowledge filtered through via the books, plays,
poems and architecture of the period. For example, a text composed
30

Terwiel, supra note 8, at p 5.

418

South East Asia Research

under the pen-name Lady Nopphamat provides, in addition to descriptions of traditional state ceremonies and proper manners for women,
information about other nations, including the USA. The supposedly
female author of the book uses the first person pronoun to discuss its
subjects, unusually so, given that at that time the only genre that allowed the representation of subjective individual voices was the nirat
poetic genre, all authors of which were male. Popularly known as Tamrap
thao si chulalak [The Treatise of a Royal Consort], the book is held to
have been written by the consort of a Sukhothai king and depicts events
in the Sukhothai period. Despite the fact that its authenticity was confirmed by King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, r 18681910) and his brother,
Prince Damrong Rachanuphap, revisionist historians led by Nidhi
Eoseewong contest this, instead considering it to have been authored
in the early Bangkok period and, of course, not by a female consort but
by one of the top elites of the realm, and possibly even Rama III himself.31
In terms of Siams changing world view, Tamrap thao si chulalak
provides a good source in its discussion of the origins of the world and
the universe, which was something familiar in the Traiphum. The interesting point in the text is its departure from the old Traiphum
cosmology. Essentially, Nopphamats world has no centre, no Sumeru
Mountain, which was the centre of the universe in the traditional
Traiphum; and no Buddhas Bodhi chair, which, as mentioned above,
was designated as the centre of the universe and the world. Jambudvipa
has no significant meaning other than as a continent, that is, a geographical designation. It is not the birthplace of the Lord Buddha who
will enlighten the whole world. In Tamrap thao si chulalak, all lands
are equal and have their own importance, a representation of the world
very new to the Siamese mind.32
But while there were many significant changes in Siamese views
and understandings of the modern world, cosmology, and even the status of the king and state, there were also certain ideas and practices
that did not change according to the development of the modern mind.
These were the role and status of Buddhism and political attitudes regarding relations between the king and his subjects. Tamrap thao si chulalak
called for loyalty to the king to be absolute and unconditional; so too
the supreme status of Buddhism in Siam. The debate and political
31
32

See Nidhi Eoseewong, supra note 6, at pp 229254.

Nidhi Eoseewong, supra note 6, at pp 245246.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

419

discussion over the form of government and how to achieve that goal
would become dominant topics in the reigns of Rama IV and V when
the impact of and pressure from Western powers grew more pronounced
than in the past.
By the 1840s, Siamese knowledge and awareness of the wider world
had been greatly increased. The attack on China by the British in 1840
in open warfare was an eye-opener for the Siamese. The idea that China
might eventually be humiliated, as Burma had been in 1826, had been
unimaginable only a few years earlier. The Siamese elite began to learn
more of the standing of the Americans and English at Canton. Later,
Prince Chuthamani told Bradley that the king wished to employ an
American sea captain.33
Given the increasingly hostile international scene, it was not too long
before the elite began to compare the strengths of the various countries
of the world. Prince Krommakhun Dechadisorn ventured an answer to
this question, as Bradley notes: He was particularly desirous to obtain
information touching the different races of men now living on the face
of the earth, their manners and customs and the extent of their territories. He said the Roman priest had informed him that the three greatest
kingdoms on the earth now are Rome, England and Russia. He asked
me if it was so. I felt constrained to give a very different account of
Rome than her emissary had done. He requested me at some future
time to show him from maps the different Kingdoms of the earth.34

ChristianBuddhist debates
By the time American missionaries had arrived and begun teaching the
Protestant Gospel, Rama III had not officially prohibited religious activities, except the spread of rumours threatening those Siamese who
had converted or had worked with the mission. By comparison with
Christian mission work in other parts of Asia, Siam was a relatively
congenial place to practise. Given such a degree of tolerance of Christianity in the kingdom, it was not surprising to find occasions of debate
over religion between the American missionaries and local Siamese,
both laypersons and clergy. Their differences were sharpened by the
social and political changes that had taken place in the West and Siam.
The Siamese elite saw no difference between Buddhism and Christianity,
33
34

Feltus, supra note 14, 9 January 1840.

Feltus, supra note 14, at p 71.

420

South East Asia Research

both being world religions that taught people to do good deeds and
avoid bad ones. Mongkut tried to convince Anna Leonowens of Buddhisms similarity to Christianity by showing that Buddhists also believed
in a creator, or phra dharm, though they did not believe in one God. He
protested that the Buddhists are not idolaters, any more than the Roman Catholics are pagans, that the image of Buddha, their Teacher and
High-Priest, is to them what the crucifix is to the Jesuit, neither more
nor less.35 On another occasion, when Bradley criticized a ceremony
paying respect to images of the Buddha, Mongkut replied that the image was a representation of the Buddha, whose teachings were the real
object of such a ceremony.36
Bradley was surprised by the response he received when he introduced a Brother of the mission to the Phra Khlang. Rather than
questioning the ulterior motives of the missionarys work in Siam, which
Bradley thought might have been the Phra Khlangs response, given
their attempts to overthrow the idolatrous teaching of Buddhism, the
Siamese nobleman was in fact most interested in what kinds of seeds
the missionary had brought with him to Bangkok.37 He instructed his
scribe to write down every detail of the seeds, because he hoped to
make himself famous by being the first to introduce American seeds
into Siam. Clearly, the Siamese nobles showed little concern with
American proselytizing activities in the city. Instead, they frequently
requested American doctors to perform medical treatments on their
people at their houses, and afterwards even instructed the missionaries
to preach and distribute their religious tracts to the people in the compound.
Bradley always carried tracts and books on Christianity with him
when he visited the nobles houses and did not hesitate to distribute
copies. In return, he secretly hoped that the Siamese would ask questions concerning the Gospel and life of Jesus so that he would be able
to explain the essence of Christianity at length. To his disappointment,
few questions were ever raised and there was little sign of eagerness
for any further discussion. This came as a result of Siamese traditions
of reading and learning, which discouraged juniors from asking questions. The only group able to query and discuss the subject of religion
with Bradley was therefore that of Buddhist monks. The confrontation
35
36
37

Leonowens, supra note 21, at p 217.

The Bangkok Recorder, Vol I, No 17, p 152.
Feltus, supra note 14, at p 71.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

421

between the Buddhist monks and the American missionaries was significant, for it paved the way for the Siamese to exercise their Buddhist
rational thinking. To be rational in Buddhist thinking was to be logical,
with due regard for empirical phenomena that would guide ones conduct in this-worldly affairs. On another level of Buddhist teaching, the
ultimate aim of life was other-worldly, that is, to elevate ones mind to
the higher level of existence closer to Nirvana. These dual attitudes
towards rationality by the Siamese elite allowed them to be able to
integrate facts of Western origin obtained by empirical investigation
into the elites thinking.38 In the end, the Siamese monks and nobility
were ready to understand the secular history of Western society, but
saw no need for similar changes to take place in Siam.
Buddhism as practised in Siam in the early Bangkok or Rattanakosin
era proved to be very important to the Siamese elite in their encounters with American missionaries. In their attempt to understand the
Americans, their government and society, they could fall back on the
teaching and precepts of Buddhism, which deals with universal subjects from individual life to the family and the state, such as the law
of karma or action, ethics, morality, the proper social order and the
power of the ruler. By the 1830s, a generation of the royal and noble
elite had developed a distinct version of Siamese knowledge based on
the modified version of Siamese Buddhism, which had been reconstructed and purified under the Subtle Revolution of Rama I.39 In
brief, Rattanakosin Buddhism provided a convenient and powerful
political discourse for the elite in formulating novel ideas and a practical means by which to engage with the challenges of Western science
and religion.
Missionaries made concerted efforts to criticize and even attack Buddhism in their missionary work and in their wider activities in the
kingdom. Such opposition to Buddhism was carried on in public and in
private, among the nobility and royalty in the palaces, and in the temples and at Bradleys medical office and tract house. While negative
reactions came from Siamese people of lower ranks, including priests,
this was less so in the case of high-ranking nobles and princes. Rama
38

39

Nidhi Eoseewong (nd), The early Bangkok period: literary change and its social
causes, Mimeograph, p v.
The concept of Subtle Revolution is from David Wyatts perceptive article, The
Subtle Revolution of King Rama I of Siam, in David K. Wyatt (1994), Studies in
Thai History, Silkworm Books, Chiangmai, pp 131172. See also the critical reading of the period in Nidhi Eoseewong, supra note 26, at pp 7090.

422

South East Asia Research

III himself never issued a prohibition directly against the proselytizing

practice of the missionaries.40

Printing technology and the transformation of the Siamese

public sphere
In the mid-nineteenth century, the shape and future of the development
of Siamese intellectual life was bound up with the rise and domination
of the Siamese national language, with the aid of modern printing. The
inventors of modern Siamese printing types were the American missionaries.41 More important, however, was the introduction of the modern
printing of Siamese scripts by Dr Bradley.
Bradleys mission first published tracts on Christianity, and after they
discovered Siamese scripts and literature with ample local users, especially the upper echelons of society, they decided to translate those
tracts into Siamese. Bradley, together with other missionaries such as
Dr Jessie Caswell, Stephen Mattoon and Samuel House, was active in
translating English works into Siamese. They were frequently requested
by the Phra Khlang and the King to write and translate official letters
and treaties and to reply to Western officials and diplomats. Bradley
was also asked to write royal news for publication in the Singapore
press, as for example on the occasion of Mongkuts coronation. Many
such tasks were passed over to Anna Leonowens when she was hired
as secretary to Mongkut.
40

41

But on many occasions, there were rumours and intimidation against Bradleys Siamese
workers and those who accepted the Christian books and tracts from government
officials. Some were even put in jail for a few days until Bradley managed to obtain
the assistance of senior nobles to clear up the situation. Negative reactions from the
palace came at the end of Rama IIIs reign in 185051. The confusion was spurred
by the appearance of James Brooke, who acted as the British official securing treaty
changes from Siam. He was intolerant and, failing to get the Siamese response to his
wishes, before leaving empty-handed he threatened to invade Siam by force. This
incendiary incident led to the censorship of the Christian book, Golden Balance
[Tra-chu thorng] by Rev John Taylor Jones and increased opposition to the missionaries. Immediately after Brookes ship left the Gulf of Siam, the government confiscated
Siamese law books published by the missions printing house. The last incident spread
fear among the missionaries that their work and stay in Siam might be drawing to an
end. Fortunately, the American missionaries were saved by the accession to the throne
of King Mongkut in the same year.
The experiences of American missionaries with the Siamese language were interesting. They started off using Roman letters to transcribe Siamese words to disseminate
tracts of the Gospel, mainly among the SinoSiamese, many of whom were descendants of Catholic families. This practice did not, however, last very long, partly because
the Catholic communities were against the propagation of the Protestant mission.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

423

In terms of the dissemination of ideas and effecting a kind of dialogue between the government and the growing public, credit should
go to the American missionaries and their newspapers, especially the
Bangkok Recorder. The first issue of the Bangkok Recorder came out
on 4 July 1844. Its prospectus was to provide news from Singapore,
China, Burma, Java, Calcutta, Ceylon, Bombay, Surat, Holland, France,
America and from other meuang [cities]. In addition, the newspaper
would report the price of commodities exported from Siam, and vice
versa. Sometimes it would tell stories of phongsawadan [royal chronicles] and foreign customs. It would also carry medical texts and
information on the treatment of diseases, together with texts teaching
English.
The Bangkok Recorder quickly set itself up as the guiding light of
the kingdom. Guided by his strong Protestant revivalism, Bradley used
his pen to expound upon all kinds of evil practices and wrongdoing in
Siam. He even went out by himself to investigate cases, assuring readers of the truth of the news in his papers. Having heard about the illegal
sale of opium among employees of foreign firms, he went with local
officials to arrest the traffickers. The incident led to violent resistance
by the offenders due to their numbers. Bradley reported the incident
and commented with a strong suggestion to the government. In effect,
he said it was the governments duty to enforce the law and punish the
culprits. His open criticism of the existing justice system and its execution by local officials finally led to serious confrontation and even
fierce arguments with King Mongkut and Chao Phraya Srisuriyawong,
the most influential chief minister of the time.
The low point of the Bangkok Recorder came when Mongkut and
Bradley clashed over their own beliefs and desires. On one occasion,
Mongkut invited Bradley and his wife and children to witness a Buddhist ceremony at Wat Hong. It was clear that the King wanted Bradley
to publicize the annual Buddhist ceremony and for Mongkuts appearance in the newspaper to be as accurate as possible. Bradley knew that
too. So after being granted the most gracious reception and freedom to
roam the temple and watch the ceremonies closely, Bradley published
the story in the next issue. The King was disappointed with the report
in which Bradley praised the glamour of the ceremonies, but felt the
need to clarify his viewpoint in depicting them.
Mongkuts response, which was published in the following issue of
the Bangkok Recorder, was that the purpose of paying respect to Buddha images was simply to remind one of the Buddha and his teachings

424

South East Asia Research

and did not indicate that people thought the image a real God in itself.
This differed, Mongkut argued, from paying respects at Chinese shrines,
where objects were taken as representing real deities and divine personages.42
Mongkuts private letter to Bradley was full of criticism. The thing
that annoyed Mongkut was the thought that Bradley had classed him
with the old Siam and that [he] was wishing him dead and out of the
[group] of young Siam.43 Bradley thought Mongkut mistaken in this
concern because he always regarded Mongkut as the father of young
Siam, the life and soul of the many improvements that have been made
in Siam since the beginning of his reign.44
On the last issue of the Bangkok Recorder for the year 1866, Bradley
noticed a great excitement caused by the paper. It would seem too
much for the government corrupted as this is to endure, he wrote.45 It
was hardly surprising that the King discouraged his people from subscribing to the newspaper. Three priests came to request that their names
be erased from the subscription list, and one man had assumed the responsibility of having each of the papers sent to him instead. Another
man at the Mint Department came to advise Bradley to stop reporting
evil-doers, saying that the better way was to let all complaints be brought
directly to the King.
Bradley viewed Siamese justice in a rather dim light. Clearly, his
newspaper carried a heavy dose of moral instruction and teaching. The
paper commented positively on certain members of the nobility who
had passed away, while remaining silent on other less virtuous persons. With help from a couple of Siamese writers, Bradley managed to
build the Bangkok Recorder into the first public vehicle for initiating
checks and balances on the government, a role he did not originally
envisage it as having.

The impact of the West on the royal public sphere

From the beginning of his reign, Mongkut was aware that the institution of the monarchy was in reality not an absolute power in itself. He
believed that the king was a human and that the emphasis on divine
power only detracted from the merit and capabilities of the monarch as
42
43
44
45

The Bangkok Recorder, Vol I, No 17, 3 November 1865, p 152.

Feltus, supra note 14, at p 153.
Feltus, supra note 14, at p 153.
Feltus, supra note 14, at p 162.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

425

a man. He wrote that the origin of kings was a result of the evolution of
a community from a simple village commune into a complex society,
whereby the need arose to have a centre to rule and govern. Hence the
centre was the king whose duty was to secure peace and justice for the
people. The roles of the king were to protect property and to distribute
wealth to the people. Central to the discourse on the origin of king and
government was the idea of justice. Mongkut emphasized the importance of justice in maintaining a strong and righteous kingdom, without
which there would be calamity. The system that helped maintain justice came, in his view, from the kings righteousness and dharma. The
king was someone of good birth based on former lives of excellence on
both the maternal and paternal sides. Although the influence of certain
ideas from the Traiphum narrative can be discerned here, the concept
of justice was a modern one.
Besides having newspapers, Mongkut introduced another novel invention to open up dialogue with his subjects. He began to instil the
practices and understanding of his subjects in a unified and standard
manner. He published the royal gazette, in which all laws and orders
were made known to the public. People could buy and own the royal
gazette, thus ending the age-old government proclamations by mouth
and hearsay. Next he issued his proclamations touching on and criticizing various matters from palace gossip, nobles handling of slaves
to peoples usage of certain phrases and hairstyles. Altogether throughout
his reign, Mongkut issued 343 proclamations.
We can categorize these proclamations into two broad categories:
orders to ask or convince people to act accordingly; and prohibitions.
The main objectives, of course, were to mould Siamese subjects into
an orderly and civilized people in the eyes of Westerners and to discipline wayward subjects into becoming proper human beings. My
reading of Mongkuts proclamations is that he started something very
unusual for his time by communicating directly with his subjects in the
kingdom. The implication is that the vision of the people as the kings
subjects began to change into something more abstract: that is, the citizen of the nation. The traditional Siamese concept of subjects was
concretized by designating that everyone should form a personal relationship with his or her superior. According to the Three Seals Law
[Kotmai tra sam duang] of Rama I, there were two broad categories of
subjects: namely, people who belonged to the king and nobility as corve,
slaves, freed slaves and servants; and people who belonged to the private realm or heads of families, that is, children and wives. There were

426

South East Asia Research

no abstract people who belonged to the nation or state as citizens. The

process of transformation from phrai [corve] and that [slaves] to citizens would be completed under the reforms of Chulalongkorn in the
1890s.
Lastly, Mongkut was the first king who distributed landed property
to all of his children and made it privately owned property with legal
documentation. Note that at that time there was no system of private
ownership in the kingdom. The aim was that in the future his children
should be able to survive economically, despite political upheaval. When
Chulalongkorn was born in 1851, he named him Prince Krommakhun
Phinit Prachanat, meaning being loved or cared for by the people. The
future king had to be the peoples king.

The enigma of Siamese civilization

The peculiar development of Western influence in Siam is best seen in
the last days of Mongkuts life. His ending was symbolic for this discussion because on the one hand the King had shown his mastery of
modern astronomy by predicting correctly the appearance of the solar
eclipse in Siam. On the other hand, he declined the use of modern medicine after he contracted forest fever [khai pa] or malaria on a trip to
the remote village of Hua Wan in Prachuap Khiri Khan province. It
was as if the King had decided to follow his Buddhist karma instead of
resisting it by means of Western knowledge.
On 10 September 1868 at 4 pm, Drs Campbell and Bradley went to
the palace. They were admitted into the royal Audience Hall, but not
into the presence of the King. Bradley noted that, It appears that we
had been called to hear the symptoms of his Majesty and to signify
what medicines in our judgment would best suit his care. Of course we
could not do anything for him as we were not allowed to see the royal
patient. On September 16th, the King as it would seem is sinking under
his disease.46
On 19 September, Bradley was summoned to the royal palace a little
after noon to see the King. Dr Campbell had been called before him
and had already visited and left before Dr Bradley arrived. At that time,
Mongkut was still alive and the Doctor furthermore said that he was
quite surprised to find His Majesty with so much strength and in possession of a perfectly clear mind. Bradley wrote that,
46

Feltus, supra note 14, at p 279.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

427

It had been arranged that [Dr Campbell] should see the King first
and then when he had gone out I was to be conducted in. Accordingly I was conducted in to the Royal Audience Hall and waited for
Phya Booroot to come out from the Kings bedroom for me. I waited
there some eight or ten minutes in company with Kroma Khun
Warachak when Phya Booroot came out with the message that His
Majesty was feeling too much fatigued to receive any more company. But [sic] wished me to say whether I would recommend Dr.
Campbells treatment and whether I thought there was much hope of
recovery under his treatment. I replied that Dr. Campbell had given
me a pretty clear idea of His Majestys symptoms and had expressed
a strong hope of recovery. If [sic] he could be allowed to treat the
case wholly in his own way, and that I was of the same opinion.47
On 28 September, Bradley was called to the palace again by the Prime
Minister, Chao Phraya Srisuriyawong, and asked to search for some
jalap in the Kings European medicine chest as His Majesty desired to
take a little. He found no such medicine there, so the King asked him
to write to Dr Campbell for some. That was the only time that Bradley
was able to give his help. It appears that the King is his own physician
in the main, wrote Bradley.48
On 30 September, Bradley recorded that he Requested the Prime
Minister to give me the privilege of going in to see the King. He said
he feared that would be impossible but that he would send word into
His Majesty announcing that I had come and would like much to see
him once more. By appointment I met His Excellency in the royal audience Hall about 11:00 a.m. when he said he had sent word to the
King of my wishes. Presently a messenger came and said that just then
His Majesty was having a bad spell and wished me to wait a little in the
audience hall. I did so.I waited until after 12:00 noon, when His
Excellency said to me that His Majesty would not be able to see me
today and I suggested that I had better postpone the visit until another
time. Hence I failed of my purpose of seeing the King.49
This was Bradleys last opportunity to see Mongkut. On the morning
of 2 October, he heard that the king had died at 9 pm the previous
night. It was a very solemn announcement, wrote Bradley. The King
47
48
49

Feltus, supra note 14, (2 ed), at p 399.

Feltus, supra note 14, at p 280.
Feltus, supra note 14, at p 281.

428

South East Asia Research

was my acquaintance for thirty-three years, often times virtually my

pupil when he was a priest as also the pupil of my old colleague Rev. J.
Caswell who labored and prayed most earnestly for both his temporal
and spiritual welfare, the Supreme King of this people for more than
17 years.50
Sor Thammayot, an eloquent critic of Thai history, believed that
Mongkut had from the beginning chosen his death by denying Western
medical science, which might have saved his life once more. Sor interpreted the whole tragedy as a reflection of Siamese ignorance towards
progress and civilization, from the royal elite down to the commoners.
They misunderstood civilization as a form of material progress or culture. The possession of modern culture and materiality did not mean
they were civilized.51
From a different angle, it can be seen that Mongkuts strong adherence to Buddhism was in the end also his weakness. As an avid
practitioner of Buddhism, Mongkut showed his belief in a Creator
phra dharm as he had explained to Anna Leonowens, at whose will
all crude matter sprang into existence, but who exercises no further
control over it; that man is but one of the endless mutations of matter.
In the end he must return to the primal source of his being and that
mutability is an essential and absolute law of the universe.52 Modernity in the Siamese world view thus must be ended too.

Conclusion
The American missionaries came to play an unexpected role in fostering certain changes in the Siamese elite world view. They did this without
planning or a clear idea of what would be the end product of their
missionary-cum-intellectual activities, except to bring these idolatrous
Buddhists into Gods grace. American missionaries were perceived
by the Siamese as less dangerous than the British, who were becoming
more and more threatening to the region. The characteristic American
self-confidence and eagerness to teach other people how to be modern
sat well with the Siamese elite, both royal and noble. The Americans
thus were looked upon as a vehicle to supply Siam with what it was
lacking.
50
51

52

Feltus, supra note 14, at p 281.

Sor Thammayot (2004; first edition 1952), Rex Siamen Sium or Phra Chao krung
Siam, Matichon Press, Bangkok.
Leonowens, supra note 21, at p 217.

The West and Siams quest for modernity

429

First was the acquisition of modern knowledge. It was telling that

Siamese people referred to the American missionaries as mor, or doctor in the sense of a learned person or guru. By openly criticizing the
traditional practice and beliefs of the Siamese in things religious and in
other-worldly affairs, the Americans forced the Siamese elite to reach
back to their real understanding of their world. The effort by the missionaries to persuade leading members of the Siamese elite of the folly
of indigenous perceptions of the universe and of the superiority of European ideas and knowledge came to fruition when Mongkut as ruler
of the state and the sangha acknowledged the unscientific aspects of
the Traiphum discourse and certain interpretations in the Buddhist texts.
This criticism was a turning point in modern Thai intellectual history.
The critique of the traditional discourse allowed the Siamese elite room
to manoeuvre in the adoption of new ideas and practices and to make
changes in the old government and social systems. Radical as it was,
however, Mongkuts criticism of the Traiphum did not evolve into a
dismantling of the old Traiphum. Historians contest that Mongkut and
his circle of monks and laypersons had discovered the weakness of
Buddhism.53 On the contrary, I think those members of the elite found
the key to their changing world view, which had dominated their imagination since the beginning of the Bangkok era. As discussed above,
the Traiphum and Buddhism had been revised and reformed by previous kings in the Bangkok era, and in the 1830s Mongkut himself had
also started the new movement of the Thammayutika nikaya, which
aimed precisely at the reform of Buddhist teaching and practice in Siam.
Therefore the weakness of Buddhism was considered to be a serious
issue, since it could be reformed by the Siamese rulers. In this case of
the encounter with modern knowledge, the Siamese elite took advantage of its scope and universal application, turning it to the service of
supporting the Siamese claim of Buddhist original texts and its equal
value to that of modern science. Conversely, by equating Buddhism
with a natural science, the Siamese elite could argue for the adoption
or rejection of any new ideas by measuring them against Buddhism.
This intellectual practice apparently was (and is) problematic, since
the radical and revolutionary thoughts of Siamese intellectuals could
easily end up in the conservative camp by way of a reliance on the
validity of Buddhism.
Finally, the Siamese elites response to American missionaries also
53

Terwiel, supra note 8, at p 20.

430

South East Asia Research

characterized their ambivalent attitude towards the West. On the one

hand, they were willing to accept and learn modern subjects from the
West, while on the other hand maintaining a certain distance from and
lack of trust in farang nationals. It is for this reason that Mongkut chose
to die as he did rather than to request the aid of modern medicine from
the American missionaries as he and others had done before.

References
Apinan Poshyananda, ed (1993), Western-Style Painting and Sculpture in the Thai Royal
Court, The Royal Palace, Bangkok.
Baker, Chris, and Pasuk Phongpaichit (2005), A History of Thailand, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bangkok Recorder, Vol I, August 1844Vol II, January 1867.
Damrong Rachanuphap, Prince (1894), Atthibai kan pai thiaw [Discourse on travel],
Wajirayan, October.
Damrong Rachanuphap, Prince (1918), Reuang thiaw thi tang tang phak neung: atthibai
theung reuang thiaw [On Travel to Other Places: Note on Travelling], Sophonphiphatthanakorn Press, Bangkok.
Feltus, Rev George H., ed (1936), Abstract of the Journal of Rev. Dan Beach Bradley,
M.D. Medical Missionary in Siam 18351873, Multigraph Department, Pilgrim Church,
Cleveland, OH.
Finlayson, George (1826), The Mission to Siam and Hue the Capital of Cochin China in
the Years 18212, Murray, London.
Leonowens, Anna (1870), The English Governess at the Siamese Court, Trubner & Co,
London.
Nidhi Eoseewong (1986), Kanmeuang Thai samai Phra Narai [Thai Politics in the Reign
of King Narai], Matichon Press, Bangkok.
Nidhi Eoseewong (2005), Pen and Sail: Literature and History in Early Bangkok, Silkworm Books, Chiangmai.
Nidhi Eoseewong (2000), Prawattisat rattanakosin nai phra rachaphongsawadan
Ayutthaya [The Bangkok History in Ayutthaya Chronicles], Matichon Press, Bangkok.
Nidhi Eoseewong (nd), The early Bangkok period: literary change and its social causes,
Mimeograph, p v.
Nor na Paknam (1986), Farang nai sinlapa Thai [Europeans in Thai Art], Meuang Boran
Press, Bangkok.
Pramuan kotmai rachakan thi neung kotmai tra sam duang [Three Seals Law] (1986),
Vols I and II; Buddhist Monk Law [Kotmai phra song] is in Vol III, Reuan kaew
kanphim, Bangkok.
Reynolds, Frank E., and Mani B. [trans] (1982), Three Worlds According to King Ruang:
A Thai Buddhist Cosmology, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Sansom, G. B. (1952), Japan: A Short Cultural History, Stanford University Press,
Stanford, CA.
Sor Thammayot (2004; first edition 1952), Rex Siamen Sium or Phra Chao krung Siam,
Matichon Press, Bangkok.
Tambiah, S. J. (1989), King Mahasammata: the first king in the Buddhist story of creation, and his persisting relevance, Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford,
Vol 20, No 2.
Terwiel, B. J. (1986), Muang Thai and the world: changing perspectives during the

The West and Siams quest for modernity

431

third reign, paper presented at the seminar Asia: A Sense of Place, Faculty of Asian
Studies, 14 March, The Australian National University, Canberra.
Terwiel, B. J. (2005), Thailands Political History: From the Fall of Ayutthaya in 1767
to Recent Times, River Books, Bangkok.
Vella, Walter F. (1957), Siam Under Rama III, J.J. Augustin Inc, New York.
Wyatt, David K. (1984), Thailand: A Short History, Silkworm Books, Chiangmai.
Wyatt, David K., ed (1994), The Subtle Revolution of King Rama I of Siam, in
Studies in Thai History, Silkworm Books, Chiangmai.
Winai Phongsiphian, ed (2001), Kan phrasatsana lae kan jat rabiap sangkok Siamese
tang tae rachasamai phrabat somdet phra-phuttha-yort-fa-chula-loke theung rachasamai
phrabatsomdet phrachomklao chaoyuhua [Religious affairs and social order in Siamese
order from the reigns of King Rama I to Rama IV], in Parithat prawattisat [Perspectives in History], Rungsang kanphim, Bangkok.