What do you think?
Rate this book
A Brief History of Thailand: Monarchy, War and Resilience: The Fascinating Story of the Gilded Kingdom at the Heart of Asia
Thailand is known for its picturesque beaches and famous temples, but there's much more to this popular holiday destination than many realize.
A Brief History of Thailand offers an engaging look at the country's last 250 years--from coups and violent massacres to the invention of Pad Thai in the 1930's. Readers will learn the vibrant story of Thailand's emergence as a prosperous Buddhist state, its transformation from traditional kingdom to democratic constitutional monarchy and its subsequent rise to prominence in Southeast Asian affairs.
Thailand's dramatic history spans centuries of conflict, and this book recounts many of these fascinating episodes, including:
With this book, historian and professor Richard A. Ruth has skillfully crafted an accessible cultural and political history of an understudied nation. Covering events through the King's death in 2016, A Brief History of Thailand will be of interest to students, travelers and anyone hoping to learn more about this part of the world.
A Brief History of Thailand offers an engaging look at the country's last 250 years--from coups and violent massacres to the invention of Pad Thai in the 1930's. Readers will learn the vibrant story of Thailand's emergence as a prosperous Buddhist state, its transformation from traditional kingdom to democratic constitutional monarchy and its subsequent rise to prominence in Southeast Asian affairs.
Thailand's dramatic history spans centuries of conflict, and this book recounts many of these fascinating episodes, including:
With this book, historian and professor Richard A. Ruth has skillfully crafted an accessible cultural and political history of an understudied nation. Covering events through the King's death in 2016, A Brief History of Thailand will be of interest to students, travelers and anyone hoping to learn more about this part of the world.
352 pages, Paperback
Published March 15, 2022
53 people are currently reading
311 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
October 13, 2023
Krating Daeng, was a militant group, set up to terrorise protesting students and hunt down suspected communists in the early 70’s. It translates as Red Guar / Red Bull. A Sino Thai pharmacist called Chaleo Toovidhya created a pick me up fizzy drink and successfully advertised this drink throughout Thailand during that time and called the drink Krating Daeng after that military group. An Austrian on vacation in Thailand in the 80s took the worldwide rights out for the name, and the rest is history. The author of this very good brief history writes rather pointedly that most consumers of this energy drink would be “unaware of the connection between the beverage and the brutal organisation…” from where the name sprang.
The thing that struck me about this brief history was that when the absolute monarch fell in 1936 and Thailand became a constitutional monarchy, there came a strange failure in the ideals of how democracy works. For a nation that has promoted itself as a peaceful destination for tourists, cheap and smiley with great places of both historical and religious significance to visit, to read of the violence of the political class is disturbing to say the least. Untold coups and corruption seems the order of the day between and with both populists and royalists. The red shirts v the yellow shirts was the recent attire for those nailing their political colours to the cross. Cross? Being a Buddhist nation, perhaps I had better say Wat. And did those colour coded fights become violent at times.
A few other things struck me as very interesting.
The influence of Chinese immigration into Thailand over the many centuries, with the Thai people not particularly homogenous, with most having some Sino blood in them. Other groups to live in Thailand are the Laotians and the Malay, with various subgroups. Occasionally anti-Chinese sentiment was used as propaganda.
Thailand’s role in WW2 being on the side of Japan. Based on this book, there was a bit of a balancing act as to keeping the country out of the bloodshed, with only the British really holding it against the Thais.
The US influence during the Vietnam War was huge. Thailand sent volunteer troops to fight alongside the US, though after initial admiration by the US this dissipated as regulars failed to be as committed. The poverty-stricken regulars were there for the incentives, be that the pay or the western consumer goods. In some cases, the Thai troops held onto their TV rather than fight.
There are no end notes in this Brief History. The author makes it clear in the introduction that he was only going to include a Further Reading section and Bibliography, as the book is aimed the general public. In this reader's opinion, he has done a good job and I recommend this to anyone that requires a brief history of this fascinating county.
P.S. I spent 2 days in Bangkok in an attempt to reduce jet lag after a flight from the UK to my home in Brisbane. It worked. I wandered the streets in those 2 days along with seeing some of the sights such as the Grand Palace and taking the trip around the canals. The street food was wonderful. As to the organised chaos that is Bangkok’s traffic, all I can say is that Brisbane is a village in comparison.
The thing that struck me about this brief history was that when the absolute monarch fell in 1936 and Thailand became a constitutional monarchy, there came a strange failure in the ideals of how democracy works. For a nation that has promoted itself as a peaceful destination for tourists, cheap and smiley with great places of both historical and religious significance to visit, to read of the violence of the political class is disturbing to say the least. Untold coups and corruption seems the order of the day between and with both populists and royalists. The red shirts v the yellow shirts was the recent attire for those nailing their political colours to the cross. Cross? Being a Buddhist nation, perhaps I had better say Wat. And did those colour coded fights become violent at times.
A few other things struck me as very interesting.
The influence of Chinese immigration into Thailand over the many centuries, with the Thai people not particularly homogenous, with most having some Sino blood in them. Other groups to live in Thailand are the Laotians and the Malay, with various subgroups. Occasionally anti-Chinese sentiment was used as propaganda.
Thailand’s role in WW2 being on the side of Japan. Based on this book, there was a bit of a balancing act as to keeping the country out of the bloodshed, with only the British really holding it against the Thais.
The US influence during the Vietnam War was huge. Thailand sent volunteer troops to fight alongside the US, though after initial admiration by the US this dissipated as regulars failed to be as committed. The poverty-stricken regulars were there for the incentives, be that the pay or the western consumer goods. In some cases, the Thai troops held onto their TV rather than fight.
There are no end notes in this Brief History. The author makes it clear in the introduction that he was only going to include a Further Reading section and Bibliography, as the book is aimed the general public. In this reader's opinion, he has done a good job and I recommend this to anyone that requires a brief history of this fascinating county.
P.S. I spent 2 days in Bangkok in an attempt to reduce jet lag after a flight from the UK to my home in Brisbane. It worked. I wandered the streets in those 2 days along with seeing some of the sights such as the Grand Palace and taking the trip around the canals. The street food was wonderful. As to the organised chaos that is Bangkok’s traffic, all I can say is that Brisbane is a village in comparison.
January 26, 2023
I’m going to be doing quite a bit of traveling over the next year for work. So I decided to check out some history books on various areas in Asia that I may be travelling do. Thailand is first on the list. Thailand was the only Southeast Asian nation not to be colonized by a European power. In many ways this was a blessing (not subjugated by foreign powers, avoided the worst of the mass damage/casualties in both World Wars, etc). In other ways, it was a curse. Without a clear external enemy, Thailand has perpetually turned in on itself leading to constant political strife and upheaval (the country has suffered 19 coup attempts since 1932). This short book (352 pages) does a really good job of capturing all that drama. The book is really informative and maintains a brisk pace so readers don’t get bogged down in the minutia of hard to pronounce names and places. Would recommend for anyone interested in Thailand. Solid 3 Stars.
What follows are my notes on the book:
The Ayutthaya Kingdom dominated the area we consider modern Thailand for over 400 years (1351-1767). Burma invaded and captured Ayutthaya in 1767. The royal family fled and the king died of starvation in the jungle.
Taksin the Great was from a royal family and served as a page in the government. A devout follower of Buddhism, his half-Chinese descent and multi-lingual ability facilitated his rise in both commerce and political power. He crowned himself king in 1767 and proved a brilliant general against the Burmese who he fought throughout the 1770s, introducing horse cavalry (instead of elephants) in a series of improbable victories. He established a new capital in Thonburi. By 1779 he finally pushed the Burmese out of Thai territory. He then directed his armies against other threats on their long periphery. He mercilessly punished their Lao neighbors that supported the Burmese. He forcibly relocated their people into his territory to increase the number of farm hands in the rice fields. He established a modern bureaucracy to run the state outside wartime expediency. His obsession with Buddhism led him to believe he possessed supernatural powers and he demanded the monks bow down before him. He cruelly punished anyone who did not. This set in motion a wholesale rebellion by the royals back in Ayutthaya against this half-Chinese upstart, many of whom never truly accepted him as their king. His general Thongduang returned to put himself forward as the new king after Taksin was exiled to a monastery. Taksin was killed to prevent his return.
Thongduang consolidated power and crowned himself Rama I. He established his new capital in the moat-ringed city of Bangkok. Shortly afterwards Burma invaded again with a force of 100K,which Rama defeated. To maintain his control over captured peoples he began the practice of branding them on the forearm.
King Mongkut (Rama IV) of The King and I fame was passed over because he was only 20. He spend 27 years as a Buddhist monk which exposed him to outside ideas and gave him insight into the lives of commoners. He led a reform movement of Buddhism. He traveled extensively to other Wots (temples) including along the borderlands where he learned multiple languages. He studied Latin and English with Catholic and protestant missionaries. This exposed him to Western terminology that would be relevant later during treaty negotiations. Siam was initially thrilled when the British destroyed and conquered their rival Burma. But also shocked at how quickly such a powerful kingdom and fallen. The British had already conquered Hong Kong, Singapore, and Burma while the French were moving into Indochina.
King Mongkut was uniquely positioned to handle these crises when he became king in 1851. In economic treaty negotiations, he avoided provoking the British avoiding any pretext for invasion. Seeing how the British treated “petty monarchs” in Asia and Africa, he treated his guests graciously with feasts and performance that helped wear down British resolve. He negotiated fair economic treaties with Britain and other western powers which recognized him as on par with European monarchs. The freed him from the claim of Chinese suzerainty and tribute. King Mongkut died of jungle fever after traveling to witness an eclipse.
His son became King Chulalongkorn the Great, the modernizer of Thailand. Son of Mongkut, he has a cult like status in Thailand even to this day. Before he was of age, his father named a regent. This was dangerous as both the regent and the general of the army both had ambition and ability to limit the young king’s power. Like his father, the young king would bide his time, learn, and observe. He toured most of Southeast Asia learning modern governmental practices of European colonies. He overhauled taxation and centralized authority to the palace to relieve the pressure of funding the royal family then multiplying exponentially with all their consorts. Of course he kept his own harem (91 wives and 77 children). He initiated the phasing out of slavery in the country. He eliminated the prohibition against commoners touching royalty as well as the requirement to prostrate themselves before the king. He modernized and educated his army to make it more resistant to colonial powers. He weakened rival royal families and aristocrats by placing trusted brothers and half-brothers in ministry positions, even though many lacked administrative experience or were incompetent. Many Lao states rebelled and though crushed, French encroachment stripped many of these loosely affiliated territories from Thailand. The British viewed Siam as a buffer from their territories and France’s. After the French captured Laos, the British did not intervene as they did not view that area as part of their buffer space. The king felt let down by the British. Chulalongkorn implemented military conscription, public education, legal and banking reforms.
Bangkok had to forge a shared national identity as it entered a new century if it hoped to survive as a modern nation. This task fell to King Vajiravudh. He studied at Sandhurst and Oxford. He enjoyed literature, writing, and the arts and was more aloof than his charismatic father. In a way, this literary ability helped him to convince his people that their security lay in their shared cultural elements. He created a youth nationalist movement similar to those emerging in the US and Europe only more militaristic and social. His obsession with this mock-army and his lavish coronation almost led to a coup by the real army. This led him to redirect his efforts to other nationalist projects: water and electrical works, a university, and the establishment of surnames. He redesigned the flag along more European lines.
WWI: torn between former allegiance to Britain, fear of French expansion, and reliance on German commerce and engineering advisors, Siam remained neutral until July 1917 after u-boat attacks killed two Thai princes returning home. They went out of their way to avoid being associated with other East Asian coolie laborers, sending aviation and technical teams to Europe. They were still exposed to unfamiliar weather and French racism. Vajiravudh adopted the attitudes of the European upper class and began writing racist anti-Chinese propaganda. He began educating women. He died without an heir. His lavish spending bankrupted the country and set up the end of the absolute monarchy in 1932 under King Prajadhipok (Rama VII) in a bloodless coup.
Prajadhipok was the second youngest of Chulalongkorn’s 77 children and never wanted or prepared to reign. While he pulled the country back from economic ruin, there were other challenges including growing political awareness and the formation of public opinion as a result of increased literacy and journalism. He slashed the national budget, including for the military. Economic pain was compounded by the global recession in the 1930s and plunging value of their exports (rice). A coup was launched in 1932 by European-educated Thais self-styled as “The Promoters.” The king could have returned to Bangkok with his own army, or fled the country, but chose to comply with the demands of the Colonel that executed the coup d’état. The ease with which this coup was carried out set the stage for the seemingly constant number of coup attempts (12 successful, 7 failed). Overthrowing the regime prove to be the easy part. Fashioning a new government that please all factions was far more difficult.
The promoters had a little faith in the rural population which made up 80% of the country. They passed a new constitution, but slow rolled the introduction of democracy, at least until the population was educated. By giving the king and princess a role in the formation of the new constitution, they opened the door obstruction. The weakness and inability to lead gave the old regime motivation to push back and restore their prerogatives. Many of the Peoples Party were tarred as communists to discredit them by royalists. The king’s obstruction of the transition to a new form of government likely contributed to its perpetual weakness and susceptibility to future coups.
To prevent a return to an absolute monarchy, there was a second coup a mere year after the first one. Then a failed counter-coup/rebellion. The King abdicated in 1935. The People’s Party chose the nine-year-old grandson of king Chulalongkorn then studying in Switzerland as the new king. They thought the absence would give them time to weaken royal authority and establish their government. All it did was weaken everybody and open the door to the 1930s militarism under the lead of Phibun Songkhram. Tapping into anti-Chinese sentiment and to foster claims to their lost territories in Laos, they renamed the country Thailand. This was the Thai’s land. Phibun exposed his country to greater military influence through control of the arts and sports. Phibun and his chef invented their national dish: Pad Thai. Working to invent a homogeneous Thai culture that would mark non-adherents as outsiders. Phibun admired Japan and sought closer ties with this new power as a safeguard against potential European colonialism.
The outbreak of war in Europe & Japan’s invasion of China gave Phibun his greatest opportunity to recapture lost territory in Laos and Cambodia while the major powers were all tied down. In early 1941, Thailand invaded French Indochina and fought well. Japan mediated a peace treaty that gave parts of Cambodia to Thailand but also assured France they would not lose any more territory. Japan gained assurance that France and Thailand would not ally with any third power (UK) in the pacific. Another example of Thailand’s bamboo (flexible) diplomacy whereby they tend to ally with the dominant power in the region as needed.
As war grew closer to their country, Phibun regretted his earlier anti-American rhetoric and declared neutrality. Japan gave Thailand multiple options to consider: join in an alliance (and regain all their lost lands) or let Japan pass thru their territory. Phibun dithered after hearing about the attack on Pearl Harbor. On December 8 Japanese forces landed in southern Thailand. After an initial skirmish, Thai forces stood down and let the Japanese pass through, amove that was approved by the government retroactively. Thailand declared war on the UK and the US in 1942. The British felt stabbed in the back. Thai ambassador to the US Seni convinced the US government that Thailand was acting under duress as an occupied nation with long ranging consequences (US sympathy and protection from the British after the war). The OSS trained Thai grad students to be spies and guerrillas to fill in their intelligence gaps in Thailand (the Free Thai Movement). While the Thai populace initially welcomed the Japanese, their mood quickly soured under Japanese arrogance and poor treatment. Over 100K southeast Asians died in the construction of the railway down the Malay peninsula (including the Bridge over the River Kwai). Different factions of Thais actively supported both sides in the war (more bamboo diplomacy or fence sitting).
Chinese “allies” interfered with US-trained guerillas/spies in Thailand. After the war, the British desired vengeance. Thailand voluntarily returned British possessions but refused to return French possessions they had captured. France blocked their admission to the UN, leaving them no room to negotiate. Though the Allies bombed Japanese positions in Thailand, the country largely escaped the damage suffered by everyone else. The introduction of democracy was extremely unstable.
The young king, now 20 returned home from Europe. He was shy and awkward and unmotivated to lead. He mysteriously died from a gunshot wound to the head in 1946 (the investigation botched, it could have been suicide, an accident, or regicide). His death and the government’s inability to address poor living standards (in part because of British demands/purchase of rice) the country suffered another coup. Phibun was back in charge. This strong man who allied with the Japanese was not a popular choice with the international community.
He reorganized the Thai military along US lines. They exploited US fears of communism to gain military and economic aid. The Thai populous largely supported anti colonial insurgencies in south Asia while the United States backed France. The 1949 “Palace Rebellion” failed as Phibun fought back with tanks and artillery…this would not be another bloodless coup.
To help maintain ties to the US, the hardliner Phibun sent 4K troops to fight in Korea. The army killed many navy officers who had supported Pridi’s Palace Rebellion. The Navy retaliated and abducted Phibun in plain sight, but the other Army hardliners retaliated without concern for his life and the Navy coup failed. Pao (head of the police force) conducted the “Radio Coup” in 1951 restoring the 1932 constitution and weakening the monarchy. This period dominated by the opium trade and Pao grew the police force until it rivaled the army. With the history of Phibun’s collaboration with Japan, Pao seemed a useful alternative given his anti-communist bona fides. He played up the threat of communism and the US showered him with weapons. Pao orchestrated a sham trial and had Pridi executed for the death of the king. Pao killed anyone who protested, including public figures, journalist, and members of the government.
Phibun continued to consolidate power in the government while Pao dominated the police and Sarit dominated the armed forces. Harsh/racist policies sparked uprisings by both Chinese, Lao, and Malay Muslim citizens. To hold onto power, Phibun held a democratic election in 1957 (something he had previously crushed) as a way to outmaneuver his rivals….instead it would be his undoing. With all the vote-stealing the election became a sham and made Phibun look insecure and weak. He declared martial law, roughed up democratic protesters, and worst of all put Sarit in charge for the response. The populace was disappointment after Phibun’s grand democratic rhetoric. Sarit clandestinely aligned with the protests and fanned flames agasint a corrupt election and regime. Despite his role in it, he became a symbol of honest and good government. Capitalizing on the corruption weary public, in 1957 he overthrew the government in as swift a coup as Thailand had ever seen. Phibun fled to Japan. Pao fled to Switzerland.
In 1958, Sadit conducted a coup against his own government and made himself Prime Minister eliminating all democratic processes. Sadit restored the king to be used as a symbol to rally the people around, intentionally subordinating himself as a means of insulating himself.
In the 1960s Thailand supported of the US effort in Vietnam wholeheartedly. However, rampant corruption generated a strong communist insurgency. United States gave $1 billion in aid to Thailand from 1952 to 1972. They welcomed US bases and personnel (45K) which saw a boom in the sex trade. In addition to the payday of US financial aid, Thailand had their own interest in Laos/Vietnam.
There was a significant increase in the number of protest in 1970s against the military-dominated government and the US who supported it. Thousands of protesters were drawn to the egalitarian rhetoric of the communists, but hard right cracked down on them during this era. US service members helped promote unsavory business (sex work, gambling etc.). Multiple coup attempts in the 1970s. Most of them failed. Tourism doubled and then tripled in the 1970s & 80s up to the 5 million tourists a year. Then tens of millions by the turn of the century.
The Peoples Constitution was passed in 1997…this democratic document didn’t even last a decade. Political infighting and the 1997 East Asian financial crisis (too much easy money and bad loans) hurt Thailand immensely.
Business tycoon Thaksin formed a populist party and rallied the country to support him as he ran the country like a big business. He prosecuted the war on drugs and had many extrajudicial killings carried out. He intimidated or attacked all his detractors (including NGOs and foreign press) as “unpatriotic”. As his power and prestige began to rival the king the king, many thought he needed to be taken down. His personal business interests (including a monopoly on TV stations), nepotism, and lavish wealth created plenty of opportunities for conflict of interest and corruption. His failure to court the military disgruntled top generals and contributed to a resurgence of violence in the Muslim dominated southern regions.
He was ousted in a 2006 coup. Yellow shirts (royalists) and red shirts (democratic protesters) clashed violently for much of the next decade, tarnishing Thailand’s reputation as a friendly and welcoming tourist destination. In exile, Thaksin stirred up violent protests across the country. The king died in 2016 after reigning for 70 years. Both sides hoped his death would further their cause.
What follows are my notes on the book:
The Ayutthaya Kingdom dominated the area we consider modern Thailand for over 400 years (1351-1767). Burma invaded and captured Ayutthaya in 1767. The royal family fled and the king died of starvation in the jungle.
Taksin the Great was from a royal family and served as a page in the government. A devout follower of Buddhism, his half-Chinese descent and multi-lingual ability facilitated his rise in both commerce and political power. He crowned himself king in 1767 and proved a brilliant general against the Burmese who he fought throughout the 1770s, introducing horse cavalry (instead of elephants) in a series of improbable victories. He established a new capital in Thonburi. By 1779 he finally pushed the Burmese out of Thai territory. He then directed his armies against other threats on their long periphery. He mercilessly punished their Lao neighbors that supported the Burmese. He forcibly relocated their people into his territory to increase the number of farm hands in the rice fields. He established a modern bureaucracy to run the state outside wartime expediency. His obsession with Buddhism led him to believe he possessed supernatural powers and he demanded the monks bow down before him. He cruelly punished anyone who did not. This set in motion a wholesale rebellion by the royals back in Ayutthaya against this half-Chinese upstart, many of whom never truly accepted him as their king. His general Thongduang returned to put himself forward as the new king after Taksin was exiled to a monastery. Taksin was killed to prevent his return.
Thongduang consolidated power and crowned himself Rama I. He established his new capital in the moat-ringed city of Bangkok. Shortly afterwards Burma invaded again with a force of 100K,which Rama defeated. To maintain his control over captured peoples he began the practice of branding them on the forearm.
King Mongkut (Rama IV) of The King and I fame was passed over because he was only 20. He spend 27 years as a Buddhist monk which exposed him to outside ideas and gave him insight into the lives of commoners. He led a reform movement of Buddhism. He traveled extensively to other Wots (temples) including along the borderlands where he learned multiple languages. He studied Latin and English with Catholic and protestant missionaries. This exposed him to Western terminology that would be relevant later during treaty negotiations. Siam was initially thrilled when the British destroyed and conquered their rival Burma. But also shocked at how quickly such a powerful kingdom and fallen. The British had already conquered Hong Kong, Singapore, and Burma while the French were moving into Indochina.
King Mongkut was uniquely positioned to handle these crises when he became king in 1851. In economic treaty negotiations, he avoided provoking the British avoiding any pretext for invasion. Seeing how the British treated “petty monarchs” in Asia and Africa, he treated his guests graciously with feasts and performance that helped wear down British resolve. He negotiated fair economic treaties with Britain and other western powers which recognized him as on par with European monarchs. The freed him from the claim of Chinese suzerainty and tribute. King Mongkut died of jungle fever after traveling to witness an eclipse.
His son became King Chulalongkorn the Great, the modernizer of Thailand. Son of Mongkut, he has a cult like status in Thailand even to this day. Before he was of age, his father named a regent. This was dangerous as both the regent and the general of the army both had ambition and ability to limit the young king’s power. Like his father, the young king would bide his time, learn, and observe. He toured most of Southeast Asia learning modern governmental practices of European colonies. He overhauled taxation and centralized authority to the palace to relieve the pressure of funding the royal family then multiplying exponentially with all their consorts. Of course he kept his own harem (91 wives and 77 children). He initiated the phasing out of slavery in the country. He eliminated the prohibition against commoners touching royalty as well as the requirement to prostrate themselves before the king. He modernized and educated his army to make it more resistant to colonial powers. He weakened rival royal families and aristocrats by placing trusted brothers and half-brothers in ministry positions, even though many lacked administrative experience or were incompetent. Many Lao states rebelled and though crushed, French encroachment stripped many of these loosely affiliated territories from Thailand. The British viewed Siam as a buffer from their territories and France’s. After the French captured Laos, the British did not intervene as they did not view that area as part of their buffer space. The king felt let down by the British. Chulalongkorn implemented military conscription, public education, legal and banking reforms.
Bangkok had to forge a shared national identity as it entered a new century if it hoped to survive as a modern nation. This task fell to King Vajiravudh. He studied at Sandhurst and Oxford. He enjoyed literature, writing, and the arts and was more aloof than his charismatic father. In a way, this literary ability helped him to convince his people that their security lay in their shared cultural elements. He created a youth nationalist movement similar to those emerging in the US and Europe only more militaristic and social. His obsession with this mock-army and his lavish coronation almost led to a coup by the real army. This led him to redirect his efforts to other nationalist projects: water and electrical works, a university, and the establishment of surnames. He redesigned the flag along more European lines.
WWI: torn between former allegiance to Britain, fear of French expansion, and reliance on German commerce and engineering advisors, Siam remained neutral until July 1917 after u-boat attacks killed two Thai princes returning home. They went out of their way to avoid being associated with other East Asian coolie laborers, sending aviation and technical teams to Europe. They were still exposed to unfamiliar weather and French racism. Vajiravudh adopted the attitudes of the European upper class and began writing racist anti-Chinese propaganda. He began educating women. He died without an heir. His lavish spending bankrupted the country and set up the end of the absolute monarchy in 1932 under King Prajadhipok (Rama VII) in a bloodless coup.
Prajadhipok was the second youngest of Chulalongkorn’s 77 children and never wanted or prepared to reign. While he pulled the country back from economic ruin, there were other challenges including growing political awareness and the formation of public opinion as a result of increased literacy and journalism. He slashed the national budget, including for the military. Economic pain was compounded by the global recession in the 1930s and plunging value of their exports (rice). A coup was launched in 1932 by European-educated Thais self-styled as “The Promoters.” The king could have returned to Bangkok with his own army, or fled the country, but chose to comply with the demands of the Colonel that executed the coup d’état. The ease with which this coup was carried out set the stage for the seemingly constant number of coup attempts (12 successful, 7 failed). Overthrowing the regime prove to be the easy part. Fashioning a new government that please all factions was far more difficult.
The promoters had a little faith in the rural population which made up 80% of the country. They passed a new constitution, but slow rolled the introduction of democracy, at least until the population was educated. By giving the king and princess a role in the formation of the new constitution, they opened the door obstruction. The weakness and inability to lead gave the old regime motivation to push back and restore their prerogatives. Many of the Peoples Party were tarred as communists to discredit them by royalists. The king’s obstruction of the transition to a new form of government likely contributed to its perpetual weakness and susceptibility to future coups.
To prevent a return to an absolute monarchy, there was a second coup a mere year after the first one. Then a failed counter-coup/rebellion. The King abdicated in 1935. The People’s Party chose the nine-year-old grandson of king Chulalongkorn then studying in Switzerland as the new king. They thought the absence would give them time to weaken royal authority and establish their government. All it did was weaken everybody and open the door to the 1930s militarism under the lead of Phibun Songkhram. Tapping into anti-Chinese sentiment and to foster claims to their lost territories in Laos, they renamed the country Thailand. This was the Thai’s land. Phibun exposed his country to greater military influence through control of the arts and sports. Phibun and his chef invented their national dish: Pad Thai. Working to invent a homogeneous Thai culture that would mark non-adherents as outsiders. Phibun admired Japan and sought closer ties with this new power as a safeguard against potential European colonialism.
The outbreak of war in Europe & Japan’s invasion of China gave Phibun his greatest opportunity to recapture lost territory in Laos and Cambodia while the major powers were all tied down. In early 1941, Thailand invaded French Indochina and fought well. Japan mediated a peace treaty that gave parts of Cambodia to Thailand but also assured France they would not lose any more territory. Japan gained assurance that France and Thailand would not ally with any third power (UK) in the pacific. Another example of Thailand’s bamboo (flexible) diplomacy whereby they tend to ally with the dominant power in the region as needed.
As war grew closer to their country, Phibun regretted his earlier anti-American rhetoric and declared neutrality. Japan gave Thailand multiple options to consider: join in an alliance (and regain all their lost lands) or let Japan pass thru their territory. Phibun dithered after hearing about the attack on Pearl Harbor. On December 8 Japanese forces landed in southern Thailand. After an initial skirmish, Thai forces stood down and let the Japanese pass through, amove that was approved by the government retroactively. Thailand declared war on the UK and the US in 1942. The British felt stabbed in the back. Thai ambassador to the US Seni convinced the US government that Thailand was acting under duress as an occupied nation with long ranging consequences (US sympathy and protection from the British after the war). The OSS trained Thai grad students to be spies and guerrillas to fill in their intelligence gaps in Thailand (the Free Thai Movement). While the Thai populace initially welcomed the Japanese, their mood quickly soured under Japanese arrogance and poor treatment. Over 100K southeast Asians died in the construction of the railway down the Malay peninsula (including the Bridge over the River Kwai). Different factions of Thais actively supported both sides in the war (more bamboo diplomacy or fence sitting).
Chinese “allies” interfered with US-trained guerillas/spies in Thailand. After the war, the British desired vengeance. Thailand voluntarily returned British possessions but refused to return French possessions they had captured. France blocked their admission to the UN, leaving them no room to negotiate. Though the Allies bombed Japanese positions in Thailand, the country largely escaped the damage suffered by everyone else. The introduction of democracy was extremely unstable.
The young king, now 20 returned home from Europe. He was shy and awkward and unmotivated to lead. He mysteriously died from a gunshot wound to the head in 1946 (the investigation botched, it could have been suicide, an accident, or regicide). His death and the government’s inability to address poor living standards (in part because of British demands/purchase of rice) the country suffered another coup. Phibun was back in charge. This strong man who allied with the Japanese was not a popular choice with the international community.
He reorganized the Thai military along US lines. They exploited US fears of communism to gain military and economic aid. The Thai populous largely supported anti colonial insurgencies in south Asia while the United States backed France. The 1949 “Palace Rebellion” failed as Phibun fought back with tanks and artillery…this would not be another bloodless coup.
To help maintain ties to the US, the hardliner Phibun sent 4K troops to fight in Korea. The army killed many navy officers who had supported Pridi’s Palace Rebellion. The Navy retaliated and abducted Phibun in plain sight, but the other Army hardliners retaliated without concern for his life and the Navy coup failed. Pao (head of the police force) conducted the “Radio Coup” in 1951 restoring the 1932 constitution and weakening the monarchy. This period dominated by the opium trade and Pao grew the police force until it rivaled the army. With the history of Phibun’s collaboration with Japan, Pao seemed a useful alternative given his anti-communist bona fides. He played up the threat of communism and the US showered him with weapons. Pao orchestrated a sham trial and had Pridi executed for the death of the king. Pao killed anyone who protested, including public figures, journalist, and members of the government.
Phibun continued to consolidate power in the government while Pao dominated the police and Sarit dominated the armed forces. Harsh/racist policies sparked uprisings by both Chinese, Lao, and Malay Muslim citizens. To hold onto power, Phibun held a democratic election in 1957 (something he had previously crushed) as a way to outmaneuver his rivals….instead it would be his undoing. With all the vote-stealing the election became a sham and made Phibun look insecure and weak. He declared martial law, roughed up democratic protesters, and worst of all put Sarit in charge for the response. The populace was disappointment after Phibun’s grand democratic rhetoric. Sarit clandestinely aligned with the protests and fanned flames agasint a corrupt election and regime. Despite his role in it, he became a symbol of honest and good government. Capitalizing on the corruption weary public, in 1957 he overthrew the government in as swift a coup as Thailand had ever seen. Phibun fled to Japan. Pao fled to Switzerland.
In 1958, Sadit conducted a coup against his own government and made himself Prime Minister eliminating all democratic processes. Sadit restored the king to be used as a symbol to rally the people around, intentionally subordinating himself as a means of insulating himself.
In the 1960s Thailand supported of the US effort in Vietnam wholeheartedly. However, rampant corruption generated a strong communist insurgency. United States gave $1 billion in aid to Thailand from 1952 to 1972. They welcomed US bases and personnel (45K) which saw a boom in the sex trade. In addition to the payday of US financial aid, Thailand had their own interest in Laos/Vietnam.
There was a significant increase in the number of protest in 1970s against the military-dominated government and the US who supported it. Thousands of protesters were drawn to the egalitarian rhetoric of the communists, but hard right cracked down on them during this era. US service members helped promote unsavory business (sex work, gambling etc.). Multiple coup attempts in the 1970s. Most of them failed. Tourism doubled and then tripled in the 1970s & 80s up to the 5 million tourists a year. Then tens of millions by the turn of the century.
The Peoples Constitution was passed in 1997…this democratic document didn’t even last a decade. Political infighting and the 1997 East Asian financial crisis (too much easy money and bad loans) hurt Thailand immensely.
Business tycoon Thaksin formed a populist party and rallied the country to support him as he ran the country like a big business. He prosecuted the war on drugs and had many extrajudicial killings carried out. He intimidated or attacked all his detractors (including NGOs and foreign press) as “unpatriotic”. As his power and prestige began to rival the king the king, many thought he needed to be taken down. His personal business interests (including a monopoly on TV stations), nepotism, and lavish wealth created plenty of opportunities for conflict of interest and corruption. His failure to court the military disgruntled top generals and contributed to a resurgence of violence in the Muslim dominated southern regions.
He was ousted in a 2006 coup. Yellow shirts (royalists) and red shirts (democratic protesters) clashed violently for much of the next decade, tarnishing Thailand’s reputation as a friendly and welcoming tourist destination. In exile, Thaksin stirred up violent protests across the country. The king died in 2016 after reigning for 70 years. Both sides hoped his death would further their cause.
May 25, 2022
This was a very intriguing read, especially when looking at not only the history of the royal family but also the political parties as well. The explanation of The King and I was pretty interesting. I am also glad the author went in depth on the number of coups that occurred within the history of the nation.
July 28, 2022
Absolutely fascinating, was a great read before traveling to Thailand.
November 11, 2024
Ruth’s aim in this work is to track the modernization of the Thai state from around the 18th century to the early 2010s. He briefly recounts the political and geographical influences that shaped the Thai society (and its interplay with its many ethnic neighbors). Once a general background has been established, Ruth embarks on the focus of the work, how different kings pushed the process of modernization along. He starts with the challenges posed by European colonization of neighboring polities and follows the delicate balance needed to maintain independence without constant warfare. He then focuses on the push and pull between democratic forces and an active/repressive military establishment. While certainly including the impact of European and then American presence in the area, Ruth is more interested in the tensions within Thai society and the unsettled question of their resolution. While the latter part of the book would benefit from a wider analysis and a reduction of the attention paid to the constant change of factions in power, the book as a whole is more than adequate introduction to the general reader curious as to the forces shaping modern Thai politics and society.
November 27, 2023
The book gives a good overview of the history of modern Thailand, but doesn't really cover anything before the late 18th century. It would be better if the book had at least one chapter describing the earliest inhabitants of Thailand, where they came from, and what their different kingdoms were like. Many of Thailand's most interesting historical sites are from centuries before the start of this book.
The modern period is nicely summarized but focuses mainly on the state and monarchy. Not as much attention is paid to the lives of ordinary Thais. I sometimes got the impression that the author was reluctant to be too critical for fear that the book might be censored or banned in Thailand.
Overall, the book was interesting and worth reading, but there are probably better single-volume histories of Thailand.
The modern period is nicely summarized but focuses mainly on the state and monarchy. Not as much attention is paid to the lives of ordinary Thais. I sometimes got the impression that the author was reluctant to be too critical for fear that the book might be censored or banned in Thailand.
Overall, the book was interesting and worth reading, but there are probably better single-volume histories of Thailand.
January 13, 2024
4.5 stars
I really really enjoyed this brief history of Thailand. It gave an overview of Thailand’s past and especially delved into the political past of the last 100 years. I found it really fascinating and feel like I have a better understanding of Thailand’s political and historical sphere. Some of the most interesting parts were Thailand’s involvement in the World Wars as well as that Red Bull’s formula originates from there. I feel we could have dived into a bit more of the social history of Thailand and the different parts of the country (the Tsunami and it’s effects were not mentioned for example, which I find a bit odd), but then again, it’s a brief history, right? Definitely recommend to everyone interested in this country’s (political) past!
I really really enjoyed this brief history of Thailand. It gave an overview of Thailand’s past and especially delved into the political past of the last 100 years. I found it really fascinating and feel like I have a better understanding of Thailand’s political and historical sphere. Some of the most interesting parts were Thailand’s involvement in the World Wars as well as that Red Bull’s formula originates from there. I feel we could have dived into a bit more of the social history of Thailand and the different parts of the country (the Tsunami and it’s effects were not mentioned for example, which I find a bit odd), but then again, it’s a brief history, right? Definitely recommend to everyone interested in this country’s (political) past!
Read
August 9, 2023I don't often review non-fiction, but this one is worth it, for those intereested in this subject. This "brief" history is 400+ pages "brief", and mostly focuses on history since the beginning of the 20th century, but it does a fine job. Most of it is a pretty interesting read. I especially found the last chapter interesting since I was there during the events described. This gave me an outside perspective to review what I experenced. If you are interesting in Southeast Asian history, this is a worth while read. Some of his suggestions for "further reading" sound fascinating too, but I haven't sourced the yet.
March 3, 2024
"Brief" is a subjective term but this didn't feel like a brief history. Teaches a lot about the history of Thailand from the fall of Ayutthaya till 2016, mostly keeping it interesting with stories of the character. The book did get a little bit confusing starting the end of the 20th century, probably because the politics on the ground were confusing with the never-ending military coups and the countless heads of states put in place since World War 2
April 13, 2024
Good primer, but focuses a bit too much on the government/monarchy than Thai culture itself. Sometimes feels like I’m reading through a Wikipedia page about a timeline of Thai coups. Additional star for the author’s writing style though.
March 2, 2023
Disappointed the book starts in the 1700s, rather than discussing earlier civilizations. However, this allows for a more detailed look at Thailands recent history.
June 9, 2023
Information dense but a great overview of Thai history. I read it while touring Thailand.
February 27, 2024
good for capturing recent history. bit hard to follow the different names n such for some reason. quite dry. if one wanted to get a quick history lesson though, this is the one I guess
February 17, 2025
Best version so far, the author has an extensive knowledge of the region.
The book covers 2021.
I have ordered the print version to insert my notes.
The book covers 2021.
I have ordered the print version to insert my notes.
July 20, 2025
A walkthrough of the history and its multiple twists and turns to make it from a buffer country to a dichotomy of democracy and monarchy that is still looking for a balance.
November 10, 2025
Moral - Leaders should be fair and honest in their responsibilities and power. People should understand policies and effects in politics.
November 4, 2023
I finally got around to reading A Brief History of Thailand after it's been in my TBR for quite some time. I use to live in Thailand, and despite knowing some things about the history and culture, it was all very entry level knowledge. During my time there, I lived through two coups, and the death of the King. I figured that I should probably have a bit of a deeper understanding for a country that I lived in for close to a decade.
It's interesting to note that Thailand as we know it today was a result of Western Imperialism, and the country attempting to reshape itself into that Western Ideal of what a country should be. Despite the fact that people have lived in the area for so long, the idea of Siam, and later Thailand, is actually very modern and not very old.
The book itself is focused mainly on the Monarchy, and the power struggles at the top of the government. Less time was spent on the individual people, and how they lived throughout the changing periods in Thailand's history.
Overall, it is a good book that glosses over the history of the nation, and goes into some detail as to why the country is the way that it is. If you are interested in a more in depth look at the country, probably look elsewhere, as this is merely a "Brief History", as the title states.
It's interesting to note that Thailand as we know it today was a result of Western Imperialism, and the country attempting to reshape itself into that Western Ideal of what a country should be. Despite the fact that people have lived in the area for so long, the idea of Siam, and later Thailand, is actually very modern and not very old.
The book itself is focused mainly on the Monarchy, and the power struggles at the top of the government. Less time was spent on the individual people, and how they lived throughout the changing periods in Thailand's history.
Overall, it is a good book that glosses over the history of the nation, and goes into some detail as to why the country is the way that it is. If you are interested in a more in depth look at the country, probably look elsewhere, as this is merely a "Brief History", as the title states.
March 3, 2024
Interesting read, although there have been so many coups it was hard to keep track in some chapters!
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews