The legal foundation of state stability in the early bangkok period

THE LEGAL FOUNDATION OF STATE STABILITY IN THE EARLY BANGKOK PERIOD SIRIPORN DABPHET (M.A.), NUS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE 2013 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Over several years of my study at National University of Singapore, many people have given me valuable assistance and support. The person I wish to acknowledge first and foremost is my M.A. and Ph.D. supervisor, Associate Professor Bruce Lockhart, who had spent over countless hours to clarify my writing and argument. I am grateful for his intellectual guidance along the way of my research and for giving me strong and warmest encouragements for the past six years. He was patient and supportive, abundantly helpful, and offered invaluable guidance. This work would never have been possible without his support. I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the members of the supervisory committee, Professors Maurizio Peleggi and Michael Feener. I am grateful for their interdisciplinary graduate seminars and for their timely and useful comments. Without the intellectual and helpful guidance of them, this work would not have been completed. I also owe special thanks to many teachers. My appreciation must go to Professors Hong Lysa, Prasenjit Duara, Mark Emmanuel, Thomas DuBois, and Douglas Kammen for stimulating intellectual experience through their courses. In addition, I am grateful to Professors Timothy Barnard, Teow See Heng, Huang Jianli, and Dr. Christian Lammerts for their guidance. I also owe a big debt to Dr. Hong Lysa for her words of encouragement and inspiration. I would also like to convey thanks to Prof. Maitrii Aung-Thwin and the two anonymous examiners for giving me invaluable guidance that considerably helped to improve my dissertation. I also enjoyed a warm and memorable friendship from my fellow graduate colleagues in the History Department- in particular; Hu Wen, Zou Kunyi, Hwang Eunshil, Wong Leemin, Oh Wen-Ci, Christine Chan, and Chau Huy Ngoc. We shared knowledge, suggestions, fine humor, junk food, and oftentimes gossip. Special thanks must go to my Thai friends, Kridsanah Pornpibun, Somrak Chaisingkananont, and Panu Wongcha-um, for sharing good times in Singapore. Special thanks must also go to Edgar Liao for his generous assistance in proof-reading my work and for helping me improve the work. I also owe many thanks to Ho Chi Tim, Pang Yang Huei, Clarence Ngui, and Natasha Sarkar for reading an early draft. In addition, I am grateful to all administrative staffs of the History Department, who always provide assistance and friendship to the students- in particular: the ex-graduate secretaries Kelly Lau and Gayathri D/O Dorairaju, and the graduate secretary Adeline Loi. I would also like to convey thanks to National University of Singapore and the Department of History in particular for granting me the research scholarship and providing the financial support for my research trip. In Thailand, I sincerely thank to all my professors and colleagues at the Department of History, Faculty of Social Science, Srinakharinwirot University for supporting my study at NUS. I also wish to extend my deepest gratitude to my exsupervisor, Associate Professor Wutdichai Moolsilpa, for his constant encouragement, helpful advice, and all assists, and to Dr. Woraporn Poopongpan of the Department of History, Silpakorn University for advice and sharing knowledge. I also thank the staffs at the Division of Thai archival scripts and inscriptions, National Library of Thailand for providing much-needed assistance. ii To my family, I wish to express my eternal gratitude to my parents and my aunt for their support and many other acts of kindness, especially care of my lovely dogs. There were many supports behind this work. I was greatly indebted to many people who had assisted me, even while the remaining errors of facts and interpretations remain my responsibility. iii CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………………………… .i SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………………………….………… vii ABBREVIATIONS AND SHORT FORMS USED IN FOOTNOTES……………………………… …ix INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………………………1 1. The “State” and “Monarch” in Early Modern Siam………………………………………….….1 2. The Study of Legal Transformations in the Context of Southeast Asian History………………………………………………………………………………14 3. The Three Seals Code………………………………………………………………………………………21 4. Research Questions………………………………………………………………………….…………… 24 5. Literature Review…………………………………………………………………………………………….25 6. Sources and Scope of the Study………………………………………………………………………48 CHAPTER 1: ORIGINS OF MONARCHICAL AND LEGAL AUTHORITY IN THAI TRADITION…………………………………………… 52 1.1 Notions in Traditional Thai Law ………………………………………………………………………54 1.2 Buddhist Conceptions of Kingship and the King’s Legal Authority…………………………………………………………….…………………59 1.2.1 Three Aspects of the Dharmaraja Kingship………………………………… .61 1.2.2 The Significance of the Traiphum and Thammasat to the King’s Legal Authority………………………………….…………………… 67 1.3 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………75 CHAPTER : THE LEGITIMATION OF KING RAMA I’S AUTHORITY THROUGH LAWS……………………………………………………………… …………… 77 2.1 The Quest for Legitimacy After Rama I’s Ascension ………………………………………78 2.1.1 The Legitimation of Rama I’s Ascension to the Throne………………… 79 2.1.2 Religious Virtue and Its Impact to Rama I’s Legitimation of Authority……………………………………………… 90 2.2 Law as the Potent Tool of Rama I’s Legitimization of Authority………………………95 2.2.1 Legislation on Morality at the Beginning of Rama I’s Reign……………95 2.2.2 Laws on Administration and Social Order…………………………………….101 2.3 Conclusion…………… …………………………………………………………………………………… 104 CHAPTER : LAWS AND THREATS CONCERNING ROYAL AUTHORITY……………… 108 3.1 The Contents of Laws on Royal Authority………………………………………………………109 3.1.1 Acts Concerning Royal Ptige…………………………………….………………….109 3.1.2 Acts on the Security of Royal Authority……………………………………….113 3.1.3 Acts Relating to Military Discipline……………………… ……………………114 3.1.4 Acts on Controlling Influence of Princes and Nobles…………………….116 3.2 Threats to Royal Authority…………………………………………………………………………….119 3.2.1 Impact of the “Bun Barami” Conception………………………………………120 3.2.2 Vagueness of Succession Laws ……………………………………………………122 3.2.3 The Structure of Administration and iv the Threat to Royal Authority……………………………………………………….124 3.3 The Use of Law in Maintaining Royal Authority in the Early Bangkok Period………………………………………………………………………… 127 3.3.1 Legislation Relating to Royal Security ………………………………………….128 3.3.2 Cases of Conspiracy …………………………………………………………………….130 3.3.3 Laws Prohibiting Anonymous Letters ………………………………………….136 3.4 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….………… 142 CHAPTER 4: LAWS AND OFFENCES AGAINST STATE AUTHORITY…………………………147 4.1 The Laws on State Authority: the Ayaluang and Ayarat ……………………………… 149 4.2 Offences Against State Authority in the Laws…………………………………………………151 4.2.1 “Rawang Lamoet”: the Violation of the Law ……………………………….152 4.2.2 “Rawang Amphrang”: the Concealment of the Truth………………… 159 4.2.3 “Rawang Bang-art”: Misbehavior and Corruption……………………… 161 4.2.4 “Rawang Kanchok”: Abuses of Authority…………………………………… 164 4.3 The Laws Concerning State Authority in the Early Bangkok Era …………………… 165 4.3.1 Official’s Offences Concerning Judicial Duty………………………………166 4.3.2 The state’s Attempt to Prevent Official Abuses of Power…………… 170 4.4 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….………………173 CHAPTER 5: THE STATE’S LEGAL MEASURE IN BUILDING SOCIAL ORDER………………………………………………………………… 175 5.1 The Laws and Offences Concerning Security and Social Order ……………………….176 5.2 Piracy……………………………………………………………………………………………………………185 5.3 Opium and Chinese Secret Societies…………………………………………… 192 5.3.1 The Expansion of Opium Consumption and Illegal Trade………………………………………………………………………….192 5.3.2 Chinese Secret Societies……………………………………………………………….199 5.4 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………206 CHAPTER 6: LAWS ON THE CONTROL OF MANPOWER ……………………………………….208 6.1 The Control of Manpower through Laws in the Ayudhyan Period………………….212 6.1.1 The Laws on Manpower………………………………………………………………….213 6.1.2 The Issue of Biracial People in Relation to Manpower…………………… 216 6.2 The Control of Manpower in the Early Bangkok Era ……………………………………….222 6.2.1 Problems on Manpower……………………………………………………………….224 6.2.2 The State’s Measures to Control Manpower……………………………… 225 6.2.3 Examples of Court Politics and the Misappropriation of Phrai………………………………………………………237 6.3 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………….239 CHAPTER 7: THE ESTABLISHEMENT OF STATE AUTHORITY THROUGH THE SANGHA LAWS……………………………………………………… 243 7.1 The Relationship Between the Monarchy and the Sangha……………………… 245 7.1.1 Historical Relationship Between v the Monarchy and the Sangha……………………………………….…………… 245 7.1.2 The Decline of the Sangha and the Monarch’s Responsibility ………………….……………………………………250 7.2 The Revival of Buddhism and the Organization of the Sangha………………….251 7.2.1 The Revival of Buddhism and the Sangha in Taksin’s Reign……………………………………………………………………………252 7.2.2 The Revival of Buddhism and the Sangha in Rama I’s Reign………………………………………………………………………… 257 7.3 The Sangha Laws: the Restoration of the Sangha…………………………………… 262 7.3.1 Monks’ Acting as “Phumibun”…………………………………………………… 266 7.3.2 Monks’ Lack of Accurate Knowledge of Buddhism……………………….271 7.3.3 Monks’ Violating Monastic Disciplines…………………………………………274 7.4 Assessing the Effectiveness of the Law Enforcement…………………………………… 276 7.4.1 The State’s Control Over the Sangha………………………………………………276 7.4.2 Assessing the Enforcement of Laws……………………………………………… 279 7.5 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………….282 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………………………288 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………………………………… 301 vi SUMMARY This research examines the relationship between law, religion, and the state in the early Bangkok period (1782 – 1851). Specifically, it explores the usage of law by the state and rulers and assesses the effectiveness of law enforcement. In addition, it offers an alternative interpretation of pre-modern Thai history by making the distinction between the “monarch” and the “state”. The first chapter studies the Buddhist influences in traditional Thai law, and the cosmological concept that underpinned the authority of the laws and royal legislation. Chapter Two analyses King Rama I’s legitimation of his authority through legislations concerned with morality. It demonstrates the relationship between religion and the legitimation of monarchical power in the traditional Thai politics. The third chapter explores the three laws on the royal authority and analyzes factors that impacted the stability of royal authority. Chapter Four discusses the laws and offences against the stability of the state dealing with state affairs and officials. Chapter Five examines the laws and offences relating to social order. It examines offences that affected the living of people such as robbery, and offences concerning the security such as piracy and crimes relating to Chinese secret societies. The sixth chapter discusses the control of manpower through the laws on manpower and other problems concerning manpower. Examples both in the Ayudhyan and Bangkok periods provided in Chapter Two – Five show the state’s responses to the cases through revising old laws and promulgating new laws. Chapter Seven analyses the state’s establishment of authority over the Sangha through monastic laws. vii This work reveals that religious conceptions of kingship influenced and shaped the nature of pre-modern Thai politics, especially the sacred authority of Thai king. However, it argues that, in practice, the king’s authority was not as venerated as it was supposed to be and the laws sometimes were broken. The ineffectiveness of the implementing of law and the repetitive nature of laws indicate that the scared status of the laws, and correspondingly, the authority of the Thai monarch, was undermined at times. viii Lingat, Robert. Prawatsat kotmai Thai (History of Thai Law). volumes. Edited by Charnvit Kasetsiri and Wikal Phongphanitanon. Bangkok: Khongkan Tamra, 1983; written in 1935. Manop Thawornwatsakun. Khunnang Ayutthaya (The Nobility of Ayudhya). Bangkok: Thammasat University Press, 1993. Maha Makut Rajwitthayalai. Phrasutra lae phra-atthakhatha (Buddhist Sutra and Commentary). Bangkok: Maha Makut Rajwitthayalai, 1988. Mongkut, King. Prachum prakat Ratchakan thi (King Mongkut’s Notifications). Bangkok: Ongkankha Kurusapha, 2005. Nantha Natiworawong, trans. Ekasan khong Holanda samai Krung Si Ayudhya Pho. So. 2151–2163 lae Pho. So. 2167 – 2185 (The Dutch Records in the Ayudhyan Period, 1508–1620 and 1624–1642). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 1998. Narinthornthewi, Kromluang. Chotmaihet khwamsongcham (Records of Remembrance). Bangkok: Kurusapha, 1973. Nangsue phraratchakamnot khong Phrachao Krung Thonburi waduai sin sikkha (King Thonburi’s Notification of Religious Precept). Bangkok: Phimthai, 1915. Nidhi Eoseewong. “Chak Somdet Phrachao Krung Thonburi thung Somdet Krom Phraya Damrong Ratchanuphap” (From King Taksin to Prince Damrong Rajanubhab). In Krung taek, Phrachao Tak lae prawattisat Thai (Ruination, King Taksin and Thai History), 110-153. Bangkok: Matichon, 1997. _______. Kanmueang Thai samai Phra Narai (Thai Politics in the Reign of Narai). Bangkok: Matichon, 2000. 305 _______. Kanmueang Thai samai Phrachao Krung Thonburi (Thai Politics in the Thonburi Reign). Bangkok: Matichon, 2007. Nutchanat Kit-ngam. Phraratchaphithi boromrachaphisek: prawattisat charit phrapheni chak phraratchaniphon “Yophrakiat Phrabatsomdet Phraphutthaloetlanaphalai Ratchakan thi 2” (The Coronation Ritual: The Traditional History from Rama II’s Eulogistic Verse). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 2003. Phairot Ketmankit, trans. Banthuek rueang khwamsamphan rawang Prathet Thai kap nana prathet nai sattawat thi sipchet (17) lem song (2) (Records of the Relationship between Thailand and Foreign Countries in the Seventeenth Century, Vol. 2). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 1960. Phraratchaphongsawadan Krung Thonburi chabap Phan Chanthanumat (Royal Chronicles of Thonburi, Phan Chanthanumat Version). Bangkok: Kurusapha, 1985. Phraratchaphongsawadan Krung Si Ayutthaya chabap phraratchahatthalekha (The Royal Chronicles of Ayudhya: Royal Autograph Edition). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 1999. Prachum kotmai Thai boran phak thi waduai thammasat pakon lae kotmai phitcharana anachak lae tham thiamkan (Collections of Ancient Thai Law: The Story of Thammasat and Laws of Secular and Religion Procedure). Bangkok: Mahamakut Ratchawitthayalai Press, 1939. Prachum phratamra boromrachuthit phuea kanlapana samai Ayutthaya (Collected Documents on Royal Land Donations to Ecclesiastic Establishments in the Ayudhya Period). Bangkok: Commission for the Publication of Historical, Cultural, and Archaeological Sources, 1967. 306 Prachum phongsawadan phak thi 34 (Collected Records, Vol. 34), Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 1969. Prachum phongsawadan phak thi 36 (Collected Chronicles, Vol. 36). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 1967. Prachum phongsawadan phak thi 39 (Collected Chronicles, Vol. 39), Bangkok: Sihong, 1927. Prachum phongsawadan phak thi 62, lem 35 (Collected Chronicles, part 62, Vol. 35). Bangkok: Khurusapha, 1969. Prachum phongsawadan phak thi 69 (Collected Chronicles, part 69). Bangkok: Khurusapha, 1969. Phraratchaphongsawadan Krung Si Ayutthaya chabap Luang Prasertaksornnit (Royal Chronicles of Ayudhya, Luang Prasertaksornit Edition). Bangkok: Ongkankha khurusapa, 1961. Rama I. “Nirat Tha Din Daeng”. In Phraratniphon Ratchakan thi (Royal Writings of Rama I), 103-132. Bangkok: Sophonphiphatthanakan, 1921. Rujaya Abhakorn, M.R., ed. Phrabatsomdet Phrachulachomklao chaoyuhua nai khwamsongcham haeng lok (King Chulalongkorn in Memory of the World). Bangkok: Samnak Ho Chotmaihet, 2011. Saichon Sattayanurak. Phutthasatsana kap neawkhit thangkanmueang nai ratchasamai Phrabatsomdet Phraphutthayotfachulalok (Pho. So. 2325– 2352) (Buddhism and Political Thought in the First Reign (1782–1809)). Bangkok: Matichon, 2003. Satian Lailuk, ed. Prachum kotmai pracham sok: Kotmai Ratchakan thi – Ratchakan thi (Collected Laws: The laws in the Reigns of Rama II and Rama III). Bangkok: Dali may, 1934-1935. 307 _______. “Kotmai chamra lek” (The Decree on the Registration of Manpower). In Prachum kotmai pracham sok lem (The Annual Collection of Laws, Vol. 4), 1-7, Bangkok: Daily Mail, 1935. Seksan Prasertkun. “Rat Thai nai Kotmai Tra Sam Duang” (Thai State in the Three Seals Code). In Kotmai Tra Sam Duang kap sangkhom Thai (The Three Seals Code and the Thai Society), 73-83. Bangkok: Samnakngan Watthanatham, 1992. Siriporn Dabphet. “Phra Aiyakan Banphanak: Sathanaphap bukkhon lae kanchat rabiap sangkhom Thai samai boran” (Law on the Organization and Control of Manpower and the Organization of Traditional Thai Society). Warasan Prawatsat (Journal of History). Srinakharinwirot University (2003): 33-45. _______. “Kansang khwammankhong khong sathaban phramahakasat lae banmueang: sueksa chak Phra Aiyakan Kabotsuek nai Kotmai Tra Sam Duang” (The Establishment of Royal and State Stability through the Law on Rebellion and War). Warasan Sangkhomsat Mo. So. Wo. (Journal of Social Sciences). Srinakharinwirot University (2008): 48–63. Sombat Chanthonwong. “Phraya Cakkraphatdirat nai Traiphum Phraruang: khosangket bang prakan kiaokap khwammai thangkanmueang” (Chakkrapadirat in Traiphum Phraruang: Remarks on Political Meaning). Warasan Prawatsat (Journal of History). Srinakharinwirot University 4, no. (1979): 1-17. _______. “Satsana kap kanmueang: Khosangket bueangton waduai udomkan lae withesobai khong Phrabatsomdet Phraphutthayotfachulalok” (Religion 308 and Politics: Primary Observations on Ideology and Strategy of Rama I). In Botphichan waduai wannakam kanmueang lae prawattisat (Critiques on Political Literature and History), 317-399. Bangkok: Khopfai, 1997. Sisak Wanlipodom. “Kotmai Tra Sam Duang kap khamchea khong Thai” (The Three Seals Code and the Belief of the Thais). In Kotmai Tra Sam Duang kap sangkhom Thai (The Three Seals Code and the Thai Society), 91-113. Bangkok: Samnak-ngan Watthanatham, 1992. Thammapricha (Kaeo), Phraya. Traiphumlok winitchaikhatha, Vol. 2, (The Consideration of Three Worlds). Bangkok: Kurusapha, 1977. Thiphakorawong, Chaophaya. Phraratchaphongsawadan Krung Rattanakosin Ratchakan thi (Royal Chronicles of the First Reign of the Bangkok Era). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 2002. _______. Phraratchaphongsawadan Krung Rattanakosin Ratchakan thi (Royal Chronicles of the Third Reign of the Bangkok Era). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 1995. Traiphummikatha, Phraratchaniphon Phraya Lithai Chabap truatsop chamra mai (Traiphummikatah, a Writing of King Lithai: Revised Version). Bangkok: Samnakngan Salakkinbang ratthaban, 1982. Turpin, François Henri. Prawatsat haeng Phraratchanachak Sayam (History of the Kingdom of Siam). Translated from Histoire naturelle et civile du royaume de Siam by Paul Xavier. Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 1996. Udomsombat, Luang. Chotmaihet Luang Udomsombat (Luang Udomsombat’s Dispatches). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 1960. 309 Van Vliet, Jeremias. Ruam banthuek prawatsat Ayutthaya khong Van Vliet (Collections of Ayudhyan History of Van Vliet). Bangkok: Krom Sinlapakon, 2003. Wannarat, Somdet Phra. Sanggitiyavamsa (The Chronicles of Buddhist Councils). Bangkok: Siwaphorn, 1978. Winai Phongsiphian. “Khwamsamkhan khong kotmai Tra Sam Duang: waen song sangkhom Thai” (The Significance of the Three Seals Code: The Reflection of Thai Society). In Kotmai Tra Sam Duang: waen song sangkhom Thai (The Three Seals Code as a Source for the Study of Thai Society), A Complete Research Paper Volume I, edited by Winai Phongsiphian, 1-32. Bangkok: The Project TSC. 2004. _______. “Khwamru rueang sathaban kasat lae Kot Monthianban” (Knowledge of the Institution of Kingship and the Palatine Law). A paper for a seminar titled “The Three Seals Code: The Reflection of Thai Society”, on July 28, 2005. Woraporn Poopongpan. “Phaplak sathaban kasat nai Kot Monthianban” (Image of the Institution of Monarchy in the Palatine Law). In Kot Monthianban chabap chalerm phrakiat (The Palatine Law, in Honor of His Majesty), edited by Winai Pongsipian, 65-257. Bangkok: the Thailand Research Fund, 2005. Wutdichai Moolsilpa. “Chak phraifa su samanchon” (From Manpower to Citizen). Warasan Ratchabanditsathan, Samnak Thammasat lae Kanmueang (The Journal of the Royal Institute, Moral and Political Science Division) 28, no. (2003): 316–330. 310 Wutdichai Moolsilpa. “Phrai lueak nai - tamchai phrai samak, Pho. So. 24112442” (Phrai’s Choosing A Master – Giving Satisfaction to Phrai, 1858– 1899). The Journal of the Royal Institute, Moral and Political Science Division 37, no. (2012): 271-295. _______. “Panha fin nai Mueang Thai kon sunthisanya Bowring” (Problems of Opium in Thailand before the Treaty of Bowring). In Thai, Chin, Yibun nai yuk chakrawatniyom mai (Thailand, China, and Japan in the Period of Neo-Imperialism). Bangkok: Suwiriyasan, 2008. MA theses and PhD dissertations Achara Kanchanomai. “Kanfuenfu Phraphutthasatsana nai samai Rattanakosin tonton (Pho. So. 2325–2394)” (The Revival of Buddhism During the Early Bangkok Period, 1782–1851). MA thesis (History), Chulalongkorn University, 1980. Davisakd Puaksom. “Kanpraptua thang khwamru khwamching lae amnat khong chonchannam Sayam Pho. So. 2325–2411” (The Readjustment of Knowledge, Truth, and Power of the Elites in Siam, 1782–1868). MA thesis (History), Chulalongkorn University, 1997. Manisa Piyasink. “Sueksa laksana sangkhom Thai: Wikhro chak botlongthot nai kotmai Tra Sam Duang” (A Study of Thai Society: An Analysis of Punishments in the Three Seals Code). MA thesis (Southeast Asian History), Silpakorn University, 1978. Montri Ngoensawat. “Naewkhit nai kanlongthot khong kotmai Tra Sam Duang” (The Concept of Punishment in the Law of the Three Seals). MA thesis (Law), Thammasat University, 2006. 311 Paphatsaun Thianpanya. “Kansueksa priapthiap khamphi Phra Manu Thammasat chabap phasa Sansakrit kap phasa Mon” (A Comparative Study of Sanskrit and Mon Versions of the Manu Dharmasastra). MA thesis (Sanskrit Language), Silpakorn University, 1996. _______. “Chakkawanwitthaya Sayam: kansueksa thima khong amnat thang kanmueang lae kotmai nai kotmai Tra Sam Duang” (Siamese Cosmology: A Study of the Sources of Political and Legal Authorities in the Three Seals Law). PhD diss. (Integrated Science), Thammasat University, 2009. Sunan Chaimay, “Saphap thang setthakit lae sangkhom nai samai Phrabatsomdet Phrachomklao Chaoyuhua” (Economics and Society in the Reign of Mongkut). MA thesis (History), Srinakharinwirot University, 1981. Waraporn Tinanon, “Kankha samphao khong Thai samai Rattanakosin tonton” (Junk Trade of Thailand in the Early Bangkok Period). MA thesis (History), Chulalongkorn University, 1979. Woraporn Poopongpan. “Kot Monthianban nai thana lakthan prawatsat Thai samai Ayutthaya thung Pho. So. 2348” (The Palatine Law as a Source for Thai History from the Ayutthaya Period to 1805). PhD dissertation (History), Chulalongkorn University, 2007. English-language sources Books and articles Akin Rabibhadana. The Organization of Thai Society in the Early Bangkok Period, 1782–1873. Ithaca, New York: The Department of Asian Studies, Cornell University. 1969. 312 Andaya, Barbara Watson. “Political Development between the Sixteenth and Eighteenth Centuries”. In The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia, Vol. 2, From c.1500 to c.1800, edited by Nicholas Tarling, 402-459. Singapore: Cambridge University Press, 1992. _______. The Flaming Womb: Repositioning Women in Early Modern Southeast Asia. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2006. Anderson, Benedict. “Studies of the Thai State: The State of Thai Studies”. In The Study of Thailand: Analyses of Knowledge, Approaches, and Prospects in Anthropology, Art History, Economics, History, and Political Science, 193–247. Ohio: Ohio University Center for International Studies, 1978. Baker, Chris and Pasuk Phongpaichit. A History of Thailand. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Bell, Catherine. Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. Benda, Harry. “The Structure of Southeast Asian History”. Journal of Southeast Asian History 3, no. (March 1962): 106-138. Berman, Harold J. Faith and Order: The Reconciliation of Law and Religion. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000. _______. The Interaction of Law and Religion. New York: Abingdon Press, 1974. Bowring, John. The Kingdom and People of Siam, Vol. 2. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1977. Brague, Rémi. The Law of God: The Philosophical History of an Idea. Translated by Lydia G. Cochrane. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007. Brennan, Catherine. Max Weber on Power and Social Stratification. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997. 313 Butt, John. “Thai Kingship and Religion reform (18th–19th Centuries)”. In Religion and Legitimation of Power in Thailand, Laos, and Burma, edited by Bardwell L. Smith, 34-51. Chambersburg, PA: ANIMA Books, 1978. Chaiyan Rajchagool. The Rise and Fall of the Thai Absolute Monarchy: Foundations of the Modern Thai State from Feudalism to Peripheral Capitalism. Bangkok: White Lotus, 1994. Day, Tony. Fluid Iron: State Formation in Southeast Asia. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2002. Dhani Nivat, Prince. “The Old Siamese Conception of the Monarchy”. In Collected Articles, 91-104. Bangkok: The Siam Society, 1969. Dhiravat na Pombejra. “VOC Employees and their Relationships with Mon and Siamese Women”. In Other Pasts: Women, Gender, and History in Early Modern Southeast Asia, edited by Barbara Watson Andaya, 195-313. Hawai`i: Center for Southeast Asian Studies, University of Hawai`i at Manoa, 2000. Engel, David M. Law and Kingship in Thailand During the Reign of King Chulalongkorn. Ann Arbor: Center for South and Southeast Asian studies, The University of Michigan, 1975. Fairbank, J.K. and S.Y. Teng. China’s Response to the West. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1963. Geertz, Clifford. Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth-Century Bali. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1980. Golding, Martin P. and William A. Edmundson, eds. The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 314 Gonda, J. Ancient Indian Kingship from the Religious Point of View. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1969. Gorski, Phillip. The Disciplinary Revolution: Calvinism and the Rise of the State in Early Modern Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. Gullick, J.M. Indigenous Political Systems of Western Malaya, 2nd edition. London: Atlantic Highlands, 1988. Heine-Geldern, Robert. “Conceptions of State and Kingship in Southeast Asia”. Far Eastern Quarterly 21, no. (1942): 15–30. Hong Lysa. Thailand in the Nineteenth Century: Evolution of the Economy and Society. Singapore: ISEAS, 1984. Hunt, Alan and Gary Wickham. Foucault and Law: Towards a Sociology of Law as Governance. London: Pluto Press, 1994. Huxley, Andrew. “Introduction”. In Thai Law: Buddhist Law, Essays on the Legal History of Thailand, Laos and Burma, edited by Andrew Huxley, 1-30. Bangkok: White Orchid Press, 1996. _______. “Thai, Mon & Burmese Dhammathats – Who Influenced Whom?” In Thai Law: Buddhist Law, Essays on the Legal History of Thailand, Laos and Burma, edited by Andrew Huxley, 31-60. Bangkok: White Orchid Press, 1996. Ishii, Yoneo. Sangha, State, and Society: Thai Buddhism in History. Translated by Peter Hawkes. Honolulu: The University of Hawaii Press, 1986. _______. “The Thai Thammasat”. In Laws of South-east Asia, Volume 1, the PreModern Texts, edited by M. B. Hooker, 143-203. Singapore: Butterworth, 1986. Kemp, Jeremy. Aspects of Siamese Kingship in the Seventeenth Century. 315 Bangkok: Social Science Association Press of Thailand, 1969. Lengyel, Emil. Asoka the Great, India’s Royal Missionary. New York: Watts, 1969. Lieberman, Victor. Strange Parallels: Southeast Asia in Global Context, c. 800– 1830: Integration on the Mainland. Michigan: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 2003. Lingat, Robert. “Evolution of the Conception of Law in Burma and Siam” Journal of the Siam Society 38, no. (1950): 8–31. Loos, Tamara. Subject Siam. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2006. Mabbett, I.W. “Devaraja”. Journal of Southeast Asian History 10, no. (1969): 203–223. Mabbett, I.W., ed. Patterns of Kingship and Authority in Traditional Asia. London: Croom Helm Ltd, 1985. Nidhi Eoseewong. Pen & Sail. Edited by Chris Baker and Ben Anderson. Bangkok: Silkworm Books, 2005. Quaritch Wales, H.G. Ancient Siamese Government and Administration. New York: Paragon Book Reprint, 1965. Reynolds, Craig. “Power”. In Critical Terms for the Study of Buddhism, edited by Donald S. Lopez Jr., 211-228. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1976. _______. “Buddhist Cosmography in Thai Intellectual history”. In Seditious Histories: Contesting Thai and Southeast Asian Pasts, 161-184. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 2006. Reynolds, Frank and Mani B. Reynolds, trans. Three Worlds According to King Ruang, a Thai Buddhist Cosmology. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Buddhist Studies Series, 1982. 316 Reid, Anthony, ed. “Introduction: Slavery and Bondage in Southeast Asian History”. In Slavery, Bondage and Dependency in Southeast Asia, 1-43. New York: St Martin’s Press, 1983. _______. Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, 1450–1680, Vol. 1–2. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993. _______. Southeast Asia in the Early Modern Era: Trade, Power, and Belief. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993. Rocher, Ludo. “Hindu Conceptions of Law”. In Law and Religion, edited by Gad Barzilai, 227-249. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2007. Scott, James C. The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009. Schuer, Frederick and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong. The Philosophy of Law. Fortworth: Harcourt Brace Collage Publisher, 1996. Skilling, Peter. “King, Sangha, and Brahmans: Ideology, Ritual and Power in PreModern Siam”. In Buddhism, Power and Political Order, edited by Ian Harris, 182-213. London and New York: Routledge, 2007. Skinner, William G. Chinese Society in Thailand: An Analytical History. New York: Cornell University Press, 1957. Sunait Chutintaranond. “‘Mandala,’ ‘Segmentary State’ and Politics of Centralization in Medieval Ayudhya”. Journal of the Siam Society 78, no. (1990): 89-100. Tambiah, Stanley L. The Buddhist Conception of Universal King and Its Manifestation in South and Southeast Asia. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya, 1987. _______. World Conqueror and World Renouncer. Cambridge: Cambridge 317 University Press, 1976. Terwiel, B.J. “Bondage and Slavery in Early Nineteenth Century Siam”. In Slavery, Bondage, and Dependency in Southeast Asia, edited by Anthony Reid, 118-137. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1983. _______. Thailand’s Political History: From the Fall of Ayutthaya to Recent Times. Bangkok: River Books, 2005. Thanet Aphornsuwan. “Buddhist Cosmology and the Genesis of Thai Political Discourse”. In Religion and Democracy in Thailand, edited by Canan Atilgan and Imtiyaz Yusuf. Bangkok: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e.V., 2008. Tips, Walter E.J. Crime and Punishment in King Chulalongkorn’s Kingdom. Bangkok: White Lotus, 1998. Van Vliet. Van Vliet’s Siam. Translated and edited by Chris Baker, Dhiravat Na Pombejra, Alfons vander Kraan and David K. Wyatt. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 2005. Vickery, Michael. “The Constitution of Ayutthaya: An Investigation into the Three Seals Code”. In Thai Law: Buddhist Law, Essays on the Legal History of Thailand, Laos and Burma, edited by Andrew Huxley, 133210. Bangkok: White Orchid Press, 1996. Vella, Walter F. Siam under Rama III, 1824-1851. New York: J.J. Augustin, 1957. Weber, Max. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A. R. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. Edited by Talcott Parsons. London: The Free Press of Glence, 1964.) Wenk, Klaus. The Restoration of Thailand under Rama I 1782-1809. Translated by Greeley Stahl. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1968. 318 Wolters, O.W. History, Culture, and Region in Southeast Asian Perspective. Ithaca: Southeast Asia Program, Cornell University, 1999. Wyatt, David K. “Family Politics in Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Siam”. In Studies in Thai History, 98-106. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 1994. _______. Thailand: A Short History. New Haven: Yale University. 1982. _______. The Politics of Reform in Thailand: Education in the Reign of King Chulalongkorn. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969. _______. “The ‘Subtle Revolution’ of King Rama I of Siam”. In Moral Order and the Question of Change: Essays on Southeast Asian Thought, edited by David K. Wyatt and Alexander Woodside, 9-52. New Haven: Yale University Southeast Asia Studies, 1984. MA theses and PhD dissertations Brailey, Nigel J. “The Origins of the Siamese Forward Movement in Western Laos, 1850–1892”. PhD diss. (History), The University of London, 1968. Gesick, Lorraine. “Kingship and Political Integration in Tradition Siam 17671824”. PhD diss. (History), Cornell University, 1976. Lammerts, Dietrich Christian. “Buddhism and Written Law: Dhammasattha Manuscripts and Texts in Premodern Burma”. PhD diss. (Asian Religions), Cornell University, 2010. Reynolds, Craig J. “The Buddhist Monkhood in Nineteenth-Century Thailand”, PhD diss. (History), Cornell University. 1973. Seksan Prasertkul. “The Transformation of the Thai State and Economic Change, 1855–1945.” PhD diss. (Political Science), Cornell University, 1989. 319 Siriporn Dabphet. “The Coronation and Thai Kingship since the Mid-Nineteenth Century”. MA thesis (History), National University of Singapore, 2008. Sunait Chutintaranond. “Cakravartin: the Ideology of Traditional Warfare in Siam and Burma, 1548-1605”. PhD diss. (Southeast Asian History), Michigan: University Microfilms International, 1991. _______________________ 320 [...]... purpose The appearance of the king in the processions signifies the rule of the Universal Monarch over the entire world.23 These rituals showed and emphasized the significant and leading status of the king as an individual The king was represented as the main performer of the “ritual state – and indeed he effectively manifested and personified the state itself Moreover, the laws also reflect the king’s... the Oath-Taking Ceremony, the Royal Procession on land and by boat, the drinking of the Water of Allegiance, and the Ceremony of the Viewing of the Troops and the Royal Elephant Some are agricultural ceremonies such as the Ploughing Ceremony and the Brahman Water-Lowering Ceremony Buddhist ceremonies were also significant as the king was the head of Buddhist patrons In these rituals, the king was the. .. study of legal transformations in early modern Siam gives a broader insight into the nature of regional change and continuity in early modern Southeast Asia The phrase, early modern Southeast Asia”, is a periodization of Southeast Asia to study change and continuity in this region Many scholars have long studied Southeast Asia in the early modern period Harry Benda proposes the periodization of Southeast... with the state as a polity.7 Other scholars have discussed the pre-modern Siamese state in terms of the criteria of statehood in modern definitions Chaiyan Rajchagool, for instance, discusses the nature of the pre-modern Siamese state by comparing its nature with that of a modern nationstate He first looks at the issue of geophysical boundaries.8 From this view, the Siamese state in the early modern period. .. region They encourage us to view the state in another way, in which families completed for power and their actions influenced the formation of the state These studies are applicable partly in the study of legal transformation in the Early Bangkok period They help us to understand better the competition for power between political figures and influential families in Thai history, their abuse of authority,... counterfeiting of official documents, are included However, these offences involved the officials more than the ruler, hence this dissertation’s argument is that they constituted offences against state authority Some offences in the Ayaluang are similar to the decrees mentioned in the Kot Monthianban and the Kabotsuek, especially acts relating to the stability of the king’s authority Among them are prohibitions... distinction between the “monarch” and state in Thai laws The discussions above indicate much overlap between the two kinds of authority In Chapter 3, the discussion will focus more on the distinct characteristics of “royal” authority, while the distinct characteristics of state authority will be examined in Chapter 4 2 The Study of Legal Transformations in the Context of Southeast Asian History The. .. consisting the institutions and apparatus of governance, and the institution of the “monarchy”; the two were conflated and treated as the same (and all of the terms used referred to the ruler as an individual rather than to the institutions and structure through which he governed) In other words, the king was the state as well as the monarchy” This can be seen in the terms used to address the king... the center of the universe and the residence of the god Indra – and practices of the Burmese court and the belief of being the devaraja, the God King in ancient Cambodia, which was based on HinduMahayana Buddhist belief.33 I.W Mabbett also examines patterns of kingship in traditional Asia and analyzes the devaraja in Khmer Angkor.34 In the Buddhist context, the nature of power has been considered in. .. Nobility of Ayudhya) (Bangkok: Thammasat University Press, 1993) 3 They include Akin Rabibhadana, The Organization of Thai Society in the Early Bangkok Period, 1782–1873 (Ithaca, New York: Department of Asian Studies, Cornell University, 1969); Lorraine 2 the state and the monarchy as equivalent, but focus on the state, subsuming the monarchy under the state. 4 They have usually used the term “rat” in their . considered a state . Some scholars define the state in early modern Southeast Asia in familial terms. According to them, the forming of early modern mainland Southeast Asian states involved nobles. completed for power and their actions influenced the formation of the state. These studies are applicable partly in the study of legal transformation in the Early Bangkok period. They help us to understand. semantically linked to the ruler. Phillip Gorski, in his study of the rise of the state in early modern Europe, proposes that there are other ways to define statehood than relying only on state theories.