Ayutthaya Kingdom

Ayodhya

The city that became Ayutthaya is known in the Thai chronicle tradition as Ayodhya (อโยธยา). The Northern Chronicle [th] places its earliest settlement in the 930s or 940s^[iii] in the area around the Nong Sano Lake (หนองโสน), founded by Phra Maha Phuttha Sakhon (พระมหาพุทธสาคร), whose lineage was associated with Bang Pan in present-day Phran Kratai district, Kamphaeng Phet province.^{[60][61]: 30 [62]: 5–7} The settlement was then called Mueang Nong Sano (เมืองหนองโสน), and his son succeeded him in 974.^[61]: 30

The son was subsequently deposed by Sindhob Amarin, also known as Phraya Kreak (พญาแกรก), ruler of Phraek Si Racha or Indaprasthanagara, who brought Mueang Wat Doem under his authority; Lavo is likewise said to have come under his rule.^{[61]: 30–3 [63]: 35 [64]}

According to a later chronicle tradition, the Lavo court moved to the site in the 1080s. Narai I, son of Chandrachota of Lavo, was enthroned at Lavapura in 1082 and subsequently transferred his seat to Mueang Wat Doem, renaming it Ayodhya; the older capital thereafter became known as Lopburi.^[65][66][67] Proposed explanations for the move include changes in the course of the Lopburi River,^[66] political or religious divisions within the Lavo elite,^[68] and the recovery of Lavo from Angkorian influence by forces associated with Suphannabhum and Haripuñjaya.^[69]: 42

Narai I died in 1087 without an heir, and nine amatya clans contested the throne until Phra Chao Luang prevailed in 1089.^[67] He married his only daughter to Sai Nam Peung,^[70] whose descendants are said to have ruled Ayodhya until 1351. A second line entered in 1205, when Uthong II, son of Pra Poa Noome Thele Seri of Phrip Phri, took the throne through marriage to the daughter of Dhammikaraja.^[66] His descendants subsequently ruled Ayodhya for more than a century.

Other three port polities

The three remaining polities of Kasetsiri's account had ruling lines of their own. At Suphannabhum, Pansa, a son of Balaraj of Dvaravati Nakhon Pathom, is said to have ruled at Phanthumburi (พันธุมบุรี) on the left bank of the Tha Chin before moving his seat to Mueang Uthong,^[61]: 59 dying in 1006,^{[71]: 34, 39} and was followed by Ramapandita (1006 – c. 1046) and Anga Indra (c. 1046–1081).^{[61]: 59–60 [71]: 42, 44} The throne then passed to Kar Tayy, a Pagan noble, who ruled until about 1121 and moved the principal centre back to Phanthumburi, thereafter called Songphanuri.^{[61]: 60 [71]: 43–5} Mueang Uthong was abandoned during the 12th century,^[72]: 3 and Songphanuri stood vacant until Uthong I took it in 1163, conventionally the start of the Xiān period at Suphanburi.^{[61]: 60–1 [49]: 61} Baker and Pasuk attribute the abandonment of Mueang Uthong to a shift in the river that cut the town off from easy access to the gulf, and suggest that its people moved some 30 kilometres north-east to Suphan Buri, whose strictly rectangular moat of 1.9 by 0.7 kilometres and central relic stupa in Angkorian style may both date to the 12th century.^{[41]: 21–2}

Phrip Phri, at present-day Phetchaburi, was established or re-established in the same generation by Uthong I's elder brother Pra Poa Noome Thele Seri, dated 1157/58 in the Instructions Given to the Siamese Envoys Sent to Portugal of 1684 and 1188 in Du Royaume de Siam.^{[73]: 127 [74]} The 1684 Instructions count four kings over 163 years, the last of them Uthong V.^[73]: 127 Pra Poa Noome Thele Seri extended his reach north to Phraek Si Racha in 1180, appointing his preceptor to govern, over territory that also covered the region proposed for Chen Li Fu;^[49]: 21 to the south, a dispute with Tambralinga in 1196 ended in negotiation and a lasting dynastic tie, which bore fruit late in the 13th century when princes of Phetchaburi revived that polity after its collapse, thereafter known as Nakhon Si Thammarat.^[75]: 41 Both were tributaries of the Sukhothai Kingdom between about 1283 and 1298 on the Ram Khamhaeng Inscription,^{[76]: 3 [77]: 3–4} and both broke away after Ramkhamhaeng's death.^[78] Phrip Phri's standing in Chinese eyes is telling: its ruler bore the Khmer-derived style Gan-mu-ding, yet the texts call the place chéng (城, "city" or "city-state") rather than guó (國, "country").^{[56]: 140 [77]: 3–4}

Lavo followed a separate course after Narai I moved the seat. Shridhammatripitaka of Ngoenyang Chiang Saen is thought to have seized Lopburi in 1106,^[79] after which it passed to Sri Dharmasokaraja I of Tambralinga in the 1110s and fell under Angkor in 1117; it recovered enough independence to send tribute to China in 1155, was retaken by Angkor under Jayavarman VII,^[75]: 39 and late in the century was governed by Nripendravarman, later enthroned at Angkor as Indravarman II.^[80] Five further tribute missions went to China between 1289 and 1299,^{[81]: 23 [82]: 221–222} and by the 1320s the seat is thought to have been held by the maternal grandfather of Ramesuan, Uthong V's son,^[49]: 61 which accounts both for the marriage by which Uthong V acquired Lavo and for Ramesuan's retreat there in 1370. Lavo was not fully incorporated into Ayutthaya's political order until 1388.^[49]: 61

Xiān in Chinese and Vietnamese records

Through this period the polity appears in foreign sources as Xiān (暹), from which the name Siam derives.^[50]: 46 The earliest surviving notices are Vietnamese. The Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư records merchants from Xiān reaching Hǎidōng in 1149 and seeking to trade and establish a post at Yún tún (雲屯), modern Vân Đồn,^{[83]: line 61} with further contacts in 1182,^{[83]: line 25} 1241,^{[83]: line 29} and 1360.^{[84]: line 109} In 1313–1315 Xiān attempted to attack Champa but was repulsed after Đại Việt intervened.^{[85]: line 148 [86]: 121–3} The Ma Nhai inscription of 1335 likewise names Xiān among the polities bringing local products to the Trần court.^[87]

Chinese sources likewise place Xiān among the independent polities of mainland Southeast Asia. The Yuan court sent a mission to Xiān in 1282, although its commander was killed in Champa before reaching his destination.^[88]: 38 Xiān sent its first embassy to the Yuan court in 1292; after initial demands for submission, its king, Gan-mu-ding, appeared in person with tribute in 1295.^{[88]: 38–9} G. H. Luce identified this ruler with the king of Pi-ch'a-pu-li, that is Phrip Phri.^{[56]: 140 [89]} Further embassies followed through the early 14th century, while Lavo sent missions to the Yuan court independently.^[50]: 51 Wang Dayuan's Daoyi Zhilue of 1351 describes Xiān as a trading polity supplying tropical products,^[88]: 39 while Zhou Daguan's account of Angkor in 1296–97 reports large numbers of Siamese at Yasodharapura, influence over Lavapura, and repeated conflict between Siamese and Khmer interests.^[90][91]

The identity of Xiān remains disputed. Older scholarship identified it with the Sukhothai Kingdom or Suphanburi,^[92][59] while Chris Baker and Pasuk Phongpaichit argue that it referred to Ayodhya, noting that the Chinese later used the same name for Ayutthaya and that the Guangzhou gazetteer of 1297–1307 describes Xiān as controlling Shang-shui Su-gu-di, in which Su-gu-di is identified with Sukhothai.^{[50]: 45–46} Vickery instead held that the Chinese term referred to the lower Chao Phraya basin as a whole,^[24][93] while Yoneo Ishii concluded that it could denote a group of port-polities around the Bay of Thailand, including Ayodhya and Suphanburi and possibly Ligor.^{[88]: 37, 41} The evidence therefore does not require Xiān to have denoted a single centralized kingdom throughout the period.

Archaeological and epigraphic evidence

The site owes its shape to a river that no longer runs beside it. Neither the Pa Sak nor the Chao Phraya came close in earlier centuries; the Lopburi River was the main large stream, turning in a long meander that could be enclosed by a canal on the eastern side. Settlement was concentrated on riverside levees and slightly raised ground, and the site flooded most years by about a metre.^[50]: 44

Archaeological evidence indicates a substantial settlement before 1351. Excavations beneath Wat Mahathat and nearby Wat Khun Mueang Chai have found traces of buildings predating the 1100s and pottery dating to the 1270s, while Khmer-style stones reused at Wat Mahathat may derive from an earlier structure.^[50]: 46 An inscription of 937 naming princes of Canasapura (K.949) was also recovered at Ayutthaya, although Skilling cautions that it may have been transported there later.^[39]: 81 The Tamnan mulasasana records monks at Ayutthaya in the 1320s and an earlier monk honoured by the "King of Ayodhia", while the Luang Prasoet chronicle dates the Phananchoeng Buddha image to 1324/5 and the Sukhothai monk Si Sattha [th] visited about 1344.^{[50]: 46–47} Sujato, another Sukhothai monk, is likewise recorded as settling at Ayutthaya early in the 14th century after periods in Sri Lanka and Pagan.^[41]: 37

The Si Sattha inscription gives the city's full name as Ayodhya Si Ramathepnakhon, invoking the Ramayana and identifying the city with the realm of Rama.^[50]: 47 The Wat Khao Kop inscription of the 14th–15th centuries and the Northern Chronicle [th] give the related form Ayothaya Si Ram Thep Nakhon (อโยธยาศรีรามเทพนคร).^{[94][95]: 68}

A further pre-1351 document survives from the crypt of the prang of Wat Ratchaburana. A gold-leaf suphannabat of appointment (Inscription no. พ. 4, อย. 39^[96]) appoints Kamrateng Dhammabhinanda (กัมรเตงธรรมาภินันท์) to the office of Sri Chandrabhanu Jayavaruddha Horathibodi (ศรีจันทรภาณุ ชยาวรุทธโหราธิบดี), in Khmer using a Khom script dated to about 1257. Chit Phumisak argued that the document predates the Ayutthaya period and was deposited in the crypt by the appointee's descendants when Borommarachathirat II built the prang in 1424.^{[97]: 182–4} He further identified kamrateng as an Old Khmer title that was adopted into Thai official terminology.^[97]: 184

Chit also connected the office of Chandrabhanu with Tambralinga, arguing that the title and associated traditions were transferred north when Ayodhya brought its ruling house to the Chao Phraya court.^{[97]: 184–6} The surviving evidence is less direct, however, and Chinese records do not record a Xiān campaign against Tambralinga.

Several sections of the later Three Seals Law preserve material attributed to before 1351, including the laws on slavery and debt and the closing portion of the Phra Aiyakan Betset (พระอัยการเบ็ดเสร็จ), which names Dhammikaraja as reigning king. Chit read its closing date as Shaka era 1156, or 1235 CE.^{[97]: 45–6} He dated section 3 of the Betset to 1343 and interpreted it as prohibiting retaliation and requiring compensation for injury to a straying animal.^{[97]: 51–2} He contrasted this with the Mangrai Sat, which still permitted retaliation under specified circumstances.^{[97]: 52 [98][95]: 295–296}

Foreign traditions also preserve references to Ayodhya. The Burmese Hmannan Yazawin places a country called Ayoja to the south-east, associated with the Gywan, and George Cœdès identified Ayoja with Ayudhya.^[99][100] Malay traditions likewise contain accounts of Siamese from Ayutthaya moving south into the Malay Peninsula before 1160.^[101]

Society before 1351

The written record for the basin before 1351 is largely political and dynastic, with little information on social organisation. Chit Phumisak, writing within a Marxist framework, argued that the lower valley consisted of small slave-holding states engaged in maritime trade and competition for regional primacy. He considered Lavo the longest-standing dominant polity, with the basin's most developed system of bound labour, while also describing it as a centre of learning and trade.^{[97]: 378–9}

Contemporary Chinese accounts provide glimpses of Siamese society and economy. Zhou Daguan, writing at Angkor in 1296–97, noted that Siamese practised sericulture, produced textiles, and supplied skilled sewing labour, while also reporting that the population could be mobilised for warfare.^[91][102] Wang Dayuan, who travelled in the 1330s, described Xiān as dependent on Lavo for rice and capable of launching large naval expeditions against neighbouring polities. Lavo and Sumenbang, identified with Suphannaphum, also produced salt by boiling seawater.^{[88]: 39–40}

Agriculture followed the seasonal flooding of the river, with rice sown according to the rise and fall of water levels rather than through conventional ploughing.^[103]: 68 The Daoyi Zhilue also records shared customs in Lavo and Xiān, including topknots, similar dress and the use of cowries, while noting that women in Lavo exercised considerable authority over economic and travel decisions.^{[103]: 69–70}

Transition to a hinterland state

The Ayutthaya Kingdom shifted from a maritime state to more of a hinterland state during the 15th and 16th centuries. Its absorption of the Northern Cities and the shifting of trade power to the inland trade routes with China facilitated this change of policy. The reign of King Borommatrailokkanat was the peak of this merger between the basin and the Northern Cities, being the scion of generations of intermarriage between the two.^[24][116]

Even though Borommatrailokkanat symbolized the merger between North and South, the Lan Na Kingdom, a state North of Ayutthaya (modern-day Northern Thailand), contested Ayutthaya's growing influence over the Northern Cities. The Ayutthaya-Lan Na War was fought over the Upper Chao Phraya valley for control of the Northern Cities. Whether he preferred the Northern Cities to Ayutthaya or the necessity to have a capital closer to the war, Borommatrailokkanat moved his capital to Phitsanulok. Lan Na suffered setbacks and Borommatrailokkanat eventually sued for peace in 1475.^[24]

Ayutthaya's sphere of influence down the peninsula was contested by the Malacca Sultanate. Ayutthaya launched several abortive conquests against Malacca which was diplomatically and economically fortified by the military support of Ming China. In the early 15th century the Ming admiral Zheng He established a base of operation in the port city, making it a strategic position the Chinese could not afford to lose to the Siamese. Under this protection, Malacca flourished, becoming one of Ayutthaya's great foes until the capture of Malacca by the Portuguese.^[118] Ayutthaya's attention to the portage routes across the upper peninsula meant that it did not send a military expedition to the lower peninsula and the Malay States throughout the 16th century.

Centralization and dominance of the Northern lords

Ayutthaya's sphere of influence was now stretched from the Northern Cities to the Malay Peninsula, with its heartland centered around the old Ayutthaya-Suphanburi-Lopburi-Phetchaburi polity. The Muang Look Luang system was inadequate to govern relatively vast territories. The government of Ayutthaya was centralized and institutionalized under King Borommatrailokkanat in his reforms promulgating in Palatine Law of 1455, which became the constitution of Ayutthaya for the rest of its existence and continued to be the constitution of Siam until 1892, albeit in altered forms. The central government was dominated by the Chatusadom system (Thai: จตุสดมภ์ lit. "Four Pillars), in which the court was led by two Prime Ministers; the Samuha Nayok the Civil Prime Minister and the Samuha Kalahom the Grand Commander of Forces overseeing Civil and Military affairs, respectively. Under the Samuha Nayok were the Four Ministries. In the regions, the king sent not "rulers" but "governors" to govern cities. The cities were under governors who were from nobility not rulers with privileges as it had previously been. The "Hierarchy of Cities" was established and cities were organized into four levels. Large, top level cities held authorities over secondary or low-level cities.

The increased wealth of Ayutthaya resulted in the beginnings of a chronic succession struggle for the Ayutthaya throne. Due to the lack of stable succession law, from each succession from the 16th century onwards, princely governors or powerful dignitaries claiming their merit gathered their forces and moved on the capital to press their claims, culminating in several bloody coups.^[119] With the dominance of the Suphanburi clan, it now had to face the militaristic nobles of the Northern Cities, who increasingly came south for wealth prospects at an increasingly wealthy and powerful Ayutthaya.^[116][24] The first real succession struggles in Ayutthaya occurred in the early 16th century, with the Northern lords playing a prominent role. Under the reign of Maha Chakkraphat, the Northern lords, led by the Lord of Phitsanulok, Maha Thammarachathirat, became kingmakers in Ayutthaya. The final nail for this transition was the overthrow of the Suphanburi clan from the Ayutthaya throne following the 1569 Burmese capture of Ayutthaya, placing Maha Thammarachathirat on the Ayutthaya throne.^[24]

The 15th century also marked a turning point in Ayutthaya's view of itself. King Borommatrailokkanat performed some sort of coronation ceremony, the first in Ayutthaya history, in the 1460s. Prior to the 15th century, Ayutthaya's palaces and temples were inferior in grandeur to cities such as Sukhothai and Phitsanulok. By the early 16th century, Ayutthaya had now rivalled its regional competitors in its city grandeur, building magnificent wats and palaces for kings with a number of tributary states.^[24]

First Burmese wars

Starting in the middle of the 16th century, the kingdom came under repeated attacks by the Taungoo dynasty of Burma. The Burmese–Siamese War (1547–1549) resulted in a failed Burmese siege of Ayutthaya. A second siege (1563–1564) led by King Bayinnaung forced King Maha Chakkraphat to surrender in 1564. The royal family was taken to Pegu (Bago), with the king's second son Mahinthrathirat installed as the vassal king.^{[120]: 111 [121]: 167–170} In 1568, Mahinthrathirat revolted when his father managed to return from Pegu as a Buddhist monk. The ensuing third siege captured Ayutthaya in 1569 and Bayinnaung made Maha Thammarachathirat (also known as Sanphet I) his vassal king, instating the Sukhothai dynasty.^[121]: 167

In May 1584, less than three years after Bayinnaung's death, Uparaja Naresuan (or Sanphet II), the son of Sanphet I, proclaimed Ayutthaya's independence. This proclamation resulted in repeated invasions of Ayutthaya by Burma which the Siamese fought off ultimately finishing in an elephant duel between King Naresuan and Burmese heir-apparent Mingyi Swa in 1593 during the fourth siege of Ayutthaya in which Naresuan famously slew Mingyi Swa,^[122]: 443 although the existence of this battle has been challenged by modern scholars such as Sulak Sivaraksa. Today, this Siamese victory is observed annually on 18 January as Royal Thai Armed Forces day. Later that same year warfare erupted again (the Burmese–Siamese War (1593–1600)) when the Siamese invaded Burma, first occupying the Tanintharyi province in southeast Burma in 1593 and later the cities of Moulmein and Martaban in 1594. In 1599, the Siamese attacked the city of Pegu but were ultimately driven out by Burmese rebels who had assassinated Burmese King Nanda Bayin and taken power.^[122]: 443

In 1613, after King Anaukpetlun reunited Burma and took control, the Burmese invaded the Siamese-held territories in Tanintharyi province, and took Tavoy. In 1614, the Burmese invaded Lan Na which at that time was a vassal of Ayutthaya. Fighting between the Burmese and Siamese continued until 1618 when a treaty ended the conflict. At that time, Burma had gained control of Lan Na and while Ayutthaya retained control of southern Tanintharyi (south of Tavoy).^{[120]: 127–130 [122]: 443}

Later Phitsanulok dynasty to early Prasat Thong dynasty

In 1605, Naresuan died of illness while on campaign against a Burmese spillover conflict in the Shan region, leaving a greatly expanded Siamese kingdom to be ruled by his younger brother, Ekathotsarot (Sanphet III).^{[123]: 173–180} Ekathotsarot's reign was marked with stability for Siam and its sphere of influence, as well as increased foreign interactions, especially with the Dutch Republic, Portuguese Empire, and Tokugawa Shogunate (by way of the Red Seal Ships), among others. Indeed, representatives from many foreign lands began to fill Siam's civil and military administration – Japanese traders and mercenaries led by Yamada Nagamasa, for example, had considerable influence with the king.^[110]: 51

Ekathotsarot's era ended with his death in 1610/11.^[81] The question of his succession was complicated by the alleged suicide of his eldest legitimate son, Suthat, while his second legitimate son, Si Saowaphak, was never legally designated as an heir by Ekathotsarot himself. Nonetheless, Si Saowaphak succeeded to the throne against his late father's wishes, and led a short and ineffective reign in which he was kidnapped and held hostage by Japanese merchants, and later murdered.^{[123]: 203–206} After this episode, the kingdom was handed to Songtham, a lesser son born of Ekathotsarot and a first-class concubine.

Songtham temporarily restored stability to Ayutthaya and focused inward on religious construction projects, most notably a great temple at Wat Phra Phutthabat. In the sphere of foreign policy, Songtham lost suzerainty of Lan Na, Cambodia and Tavoy,^{[123]: 207–208} expelled the Portuguese,^[124] and expanded Siam's foreign trade ties to include both the English East India Company and French East India Company, along with new merchant colonies in Siam representing communities from all across Asia.^{[110]: 53–54, 56} Additionally, Songtham maintained the service of Yamada Nagamasa, whose Japanese mercenaries were at this point serving as the king's own royal guard.^[123]

As Songtham's life began to fade, the issue of succession generated conflict once again when both King Songtham's brother, Prince Sisin, and his son, Prince Chetthathirat, found support for their claims among the Siamese court. Although Thai tradition typically favored brothers over sons in matters of inheritance, Songtham enlisted the help of his influential cousin, Prasat Thong to ensure his son would inherit the kingdom instead. When Songtham died in 1628, Prasat Thong used his alliance with Yamada Nagamasa's mercenaries to purge everyone who had supported Prince Sisin's claim, eventually capturing and executing Sisin as well.^[123]: 213 Soon Prasat Thong became more powerful in Siam than the newly crowned King Chetthathriat, and through further intrigue staged a coup in which Chetthathirat was deposed and executed in favor of his even younger brother Athittayawong, whom Prasat Thong intended to use as a puppet ruler.^{[123]: 215–216}

This form of government was quickly met with resistance by elements within the Thai court who were dissatisfied with the idea of having two acting heads of state. Since Prasat Thong already ruled Siam in all but name as Kalahom, he opted to resolve the issue by orchestrating the final dethronement and execution of the child king in 1629. Thus, Prasat Thong had completely usurped the kingdom by double (perhaps triple) regicide, extinguishing the Sukhothai dynasty 60 years after its installation by the Burmese.^[123]: 216 Many of King Prasat Thong's former allies abandoned his cause following his ascension to the throne. In the course of quelling such resistance, Prasat Thong assassinated his former ally Yamada Nagamasa in 1630 (who now opposed Prasat Thong's coup), and promptly banished all the remaining Japanese from Siam.^[110] While a community of Japanese exiles were eventually welcomed back into the country, this event marks the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate's long-standing formal relationship with the Ayutthaya Kingdom.^[110]

Persian and French influences

Clockwise: 1. Painting by Johannes Vingboons of Ayutthaya, c. 1665. 2. View of Ayutthaya City, by Alain Mallet 1683. 3. Painting of Ayutthaya c. 1665, painted by Johannes Vingboons, ordered by the Dutch East India Company.

Upon his death in 1656, King Prasat Thong was succeeded first by his eldest son, Chai, who was almost immediately deposed and executed by the late King's brother, Si Suthammaracha, who in turn was defeated in single combat by his nephew, Narai.^{[123]: 216–217} Narai finally assumed a stable position as King of Ayutthaya with the support of a mainly foreign court faction consisting of groups that had been marginalized during the reign of his father, Prasat Thong. Among his benefactors were, notably, Persian, Dutch, and Japanese mercenaries.^[123] It should therefore come as no surprise that the era of King Narai was one of an extroverted Siam. Foreign trade brought Ayutthaya not only luxury items but also new arms and weapons. In the mid–17th century, during King Narai's reign, Ayutthaya became very prosperous.^[125]

In 1662 war between Burma and Ayutthaya erupted again when King Narai attempted to take advantage of unrest in Burma to seize control of Lan Na.^{[126]: 220–227} Fighting along the border between the two adversaries continued for two years and at one time Narai seized Tavoy and Martaban. Ultimately, Narai and the Siamese ran out of supplies and returned home back within their border.^{[120]: 139 [122]: 443–444}

Clockwise: 1.The French ambassador Chevalier de Chaumont presents a letter from Louis XIV to King Narai. Constance Phaulkon is seen kowtowing in the lower left corner of the print. 2. The Siamese embassy, with Father Guy Tachard meeting with Pope Innocent XI, 23 December 1688. 3. The 1688 Siamese siege of the French fortress in Bangkok.

While commercially thriving, Narai's reign was also socially tumultuous. Much of this can be attributed to three-way conflict between the Dutch, French, and English trading companies now operating in Siam at an unprecedented intensity due to Siam's role as a center of trade, fostered by Narai. Of these competing foreign influences, Narai tended to favour relations with the French, wary of the growing Dutch and English colonial possessions in the South China Sea.^[110]: 58 Soon, Narai began to welcome communities of French Jesuits into his court, and pursue closer relations with both France and the Vatican.^{[123]: 243–244} Indeed, the many diplomatic missions conducted by Narai to such far-flung lands are some of the most celebrated accomplishments of his reign. Narai as well leased the ports of Bangkok and Mergui to the French, and had many French generals incorporated into his army to train it in Western strategy and supervise the construction of European-style forts.^[127] During this time, Narai abandoned the traditional capital of Ayutthaya for a new Jesuit-designed palace in Lopburi.^{[123]: 250–251}

As a growing Catholic presence cemented itself in Siam, and an unprecedented number of French forts were erected and garrisoned on land leased by Narai, a faction of native Siamese courtiers, Buddhist clergy, and other non-Catholic and/or non-French elements of Narai's court began to resent the favourable treatment French interests received under his reign.^[110]: 63 This hostile attitude was especially directed at Constantine Phaulkon, a Catholic Greek adventurer and proponent of French influence who had climbed to the rank of Narai's prime minister and chief advisor of foreign affairs.^[128] Much of this turmoil was primarily religious, as the French Jesuits were openly attempting to convert Narai and the royal family to Catholicism.^[110]: 62

Narai was courted not just by Catholic conversion, but as well by proselytizing Muslim Persians, Chams and Makassars in his court, the later of which communities launched an unsuccessful revolt in 1686 to replace Narai with a Muslim puppet king.^[129] While members of the anti-foreign court faction were primarily concerned with Catholic influence, there is evidence to suggest that Narai was equally interested in Islam, and had no desire to fully convert to either religion.^[130]

Nonetheless, a dissatisfied faction now led by Narai's celebrated elephantry commander, Phetracha, had long planned a coup to remove Narai. When the king became seriously ill in May 1688, Phetracha and his accomplices had him arrested along with Phaulkon and many members of the royal family, all of whom were put to death besides Narai, who died in captivity in July of that year.^{[123] : 271–273 [131]: 46, 184} With the king and his heirs out of the way, Phetracha then usurped the throne and officially crowned himself King of Ayutthaya on 1 August.^{[131] : 184}

King Phetracha took Mergui back from French control almost immediately, and began the pivotal Siege of Bangkok, which culminated in an official French retreat from Siam. Phetracha's reign, however, was not stable. Many of Phetracha's provincial governors refused to recognize his rule as legitimate, and rebellions by the late Narai's supporters persisted for many years.^{[123]: 276–277} The most important change to Siam in the aftermath of the revolution was Phetracha's refusal to continue Narai's foreign embassies. King Phetracha opted instead to reverse much of Narai's decisions and closed Thailand to almost all forms of European interaction except with the Dutch.^{[123]: 273–276}

Continued prosperity and increased Chinese connections

Despite the departure of most Europeans from Ayutthaya, their economic presence in Ayutthaya was negligible in comparison to the Ayutthaya China-Indian Ocean trade. Lieberman, later reinforced by Baker and Phongpaichit, refutes the idea that Siam's alleged isolationism from global trade following the French and English departure in 1688 led to Ayutthaya's gradual decline leading up to its destruction by the Burmese in 1767, stating:

Clearly, however, the late 1600s and especially the early 1700s inaugurated a period not of sustained decline, but of Chinese-assisted economic vitality that would continue into the 19th century.^{[132][3][133]}

Instead, the 18th century was arguably the Ayutthaya Kingdom's most prosperous,^[134] particularly due to trade with Qing China. The growth of China's population in the late 17th–18th centuries, alongside nationwide rice shortages and famines in Southern China, meant that China was eager to import rice from other nations, particularly from Ayutthaya. During the Late Ayutthaya Period (1688–1767), the Chinese population in Ayutthaya possibly tripled in size to 30,000 from 1680 to 1767. The Chinese played a pivotal role in stimulating Ayutthaya's economy in the last 100 years of the kingdom's existence and eventually played a pivotal role in Siam's quick recovery from the Burmese invasions of the 1760s,^[135][136] whose post-Ayutthaya monarchs (Taksin and Rama I), held close ties, through blood and through political connections, to this Sino-Siamese community.^[3]

Succession conflicts and corruption

Between 1600 and 1767, all but two royal successions were contested with a mini civil war in the capital. The throne became such a powerful and lucrative source of wealth during the 150 years of prosperity that many royals harboured ambitions to seize the throne. An Ayutthaya noble in the 18th century lamented that a large portion of court officials and able generals were killed in multiple succession struggles over the previous 90 years.^[137] The last monarch, Ekkathat, alongside his brother, Uthumphon, undermined Prince Thammathibet, the Front Palace Uparaj and designated heir to his father, King Borommakot, by instigating or exposing his affair with two of his fathers' consorts. Prince Thammathibet was executed for his alleged crimes.

Corruption was rampant due to economic prosperity. Position buying and bribery for political offices became commonplace.^[137]

Introduction of capitalism, rise of commoners, and proto-nationalism

The mass arrival of Chinese farming settlers to Siam in 18th century introduced Capitalism to Siam. The past 150 years of growth encouraged phrai to flee the bonds of government control and become peasant farmers in the countryside to earn wealth. People fled the government phrai system in a variety of other ways, including entering the monkhood and fleeing into the wilderness.^[137]

A new category for people now appeared in the late Ayutthaya records, called phrai mangmi, or a rich "serf".^[137]

From 1688 onwards, the period was characterized by the increasing severity of commoner revolts. The 1688 mass commoner revolt against French Catholicism was unprecedented in Ayutthaya history prior to 1688.^[137] The revolts of 1688 also marked the beginning of proto-nationalism, in which the concept of a proto-Siamese Buddhist nationality was formed. However, Ayutthaya kings only occasionally viewed themselves as the defender of "the kingdom, people [sic], and Buddhism", which wouldn't be fully realized until the Thonburi and Bangkok regimes in response to the traumatic destruction of the Siamese state in 1767.^{[138][28][137]}

Nobility and Buddhism

The 150 years of prosperity brought significant fortunes to the Ayutthaya elite. The Ayutthaya elite created theatre tropes and held elaborate celebrations, funeral ceremonies, and were awarded royal titles, all of which was previously privilege only to royalty.

Kings and nobles now contested with one another for control of the decreasing pool of labour. Repeated Ayutthaya laws on improving the controls of labour highlighted the increasing failures of the elite to control the people.

The turmoil which resulted from increasing wealth resulted in the Ayutthaya nobility turning towards the reformation of Buddhism as a new source of societal order. This was symbolized with the reign of King Borommakot (1733–1758), who was championed as a pious king for having all the characteristics of a virtuous and pious Bodhisattva: building and restoring new temples and dramatically transforming the Ayutthaya skyline during his reign.^[137] In 1753, following the request made by a delegation of Sri Lankan monks who travelled to Ayutthaya, Borommakot sent two Siamese monks to reform Theravada Buddhism in Sri Lanka.

It will however take until the early Rattanakosin period for the surviving Ayutthaya nobility (under the future King Rama I of the Rattanakosin Kingdom) to successfully reform Buddhism in their image and form a near unbroken bond between the Siamese monarchy and Buddhism lasting until the present in modern Thailand.^[137]

• 
  A painting of Weliwita Sri Saranankara Thero (1698–1778) a Sinhalese monk, is widely known. He was the pioneer in the revival of Buddhism in Sri Lanka and re-established the Upasampada in Sri Lanka with the help of the Mahasangha in Siam.^[139]
• 
  The mother-of-pearl inlaid doors of the Phra Phuttha Chinnarat vihara, Wat Phra Si Rattana Mahathat, Phitsanulok. Built in 1756 during the reign of King Borommakot, they are considered a masterpiece of late Ayutthaya art.^[140]
• 
  18th-century Ayutthaya temple murals in Wat Ko Kaew Suttharam, Phetchaburi, constructed by King Borommakot (r. 1733–1758)
• 
  Wihan Phra Mongkhon Bopit, one of King Borommakot's major construction projects that drastically transformed the 18th-century Ayutthaya skyline

Military and political situation to 1759

In the period between 1600 and 1759, the scale of war subsided compared to the preceding era of warfare. Narai tried (and failed) to capture Chiang Mai in the 1650s and 1660s. Ayutthaya fought with the Nguyễn Lords (Vietnamese rulers of south Vietnam) for control of Cambodia starting around 1715. In contrast, the Ayutthaya Kingdom and the Restored Taungoo Burma overall generally engaged in harmonious relations with each other and traded an embassy with each other in the 17th century.

Ayutthaya's military organization had remained virtually unchanged for the next 150 years. Ayutthaya still heavily relied on its mercenary forces. It had failed to create an elite military caste like the Samurai of Japan or the Sikh Rajputs, perhaps due to Ayutthaya kings purposely undermining the creation of such an elite group of warriors that can significantly influence or challenge the throne. On the other hand, the city of Ayutthaya relied on the wet season monsoons making the city impenetrable to a siege for six months a year. Ayutthaya had over time amassed a huge stockpile of large cannons and arms that amazed the Burmese when they opened the treasury of Ayutthaya in the sack of Ayutthaya in 1767. It however lacked the men to arm these weapons, with the failure of the Ayutthaya corvee system and increased economic incentives for phrai to escape due to greater integration with the world's economy over the past 150 years of peace.^[15]

Aftermath

One general, Phraya Taksin, former governor of Tak and of Siamese-Chinese descent, began the reunification effort.^[157][158] He gathered his forces and retook the ruined capital of Ayutthaya from the Burmese garrison at Pho Sam Thon in June 1767, using his connections to the Chinese community to lend him significant resources and political support.^[159][160] He finally established a capital at Thonburi, across the Chao Phraya River from the present capital, Bangkok. Thaksin ascended the throne, becoming known as King Taksin. By 1771, he had defeated all of the local warlords and reunited Siam, with the exception of the cities of Mergui and Tenasserim. The conflict between Burma and Siam would last for another 50 years, depopulating large areas of Siam (including the Northern Cities and Phitsanulok, the former second capital of Ayutthaya) and leaving some areas deserted as late as the 1880s.^{[157][158][15][142][page needed]}

The palaces and temples of Ayutthaya were destroyed, and the city was described by a Danish visitor in 1779 as being buried in undergrowth and inhabited by elephants and tigers.^[161] Ayutthaya however represented centuries of political and economic development that was hard to destroy. It was soon resettled, its former temples being used for festivals and celebrations.^[162] The post-Ayutthaya monarchs took apart most of the ruins that survived the Burmese sack for the construction of the new capital at Bangkok for symbolic and practical reasons. Bangkok was the successor of Ayutthaya in the eyes of the new Bangkok elite and therefore had to transfer its spiritual power through the reuse of its bricks to build Bangkok^[163] while the prospect of future Burmese invasions meant that there was not enough time to build a capital via the traditional method during the early Rattanakosin Kingdom.

Khon theatre

The myth and epic stories of Ramakien provide the Siamese with a rich source of dramatic materials. The royal court of Ayutthaya developed classical dramatic forms of expression called khon (Thai: โขน) and lakhon (Thai: ละคร). Ramakien played a role in shaping these dramatic arts. During the Ayutthaya period, khon, or a dramatized version of Ramakien, was classified as lakhon nai or a theatrical performance reserved only for aristocratic audience. The Siamese drama and classical dance later spread throughout mainland Southeast Asia and influenced the development of high-culture art in most countries, including Burma, and Laos.^[185]

Historical evidence shows that the Thai art of stage plays must have already been highly evolved by the 17th century. Louis XIV, the Sun King of France, had a formal diplomatic relation with Ayutthaya's King Narai. In 1687, France sent the diplomat Simon de la Loubère to record all that he saw in the Siamese Kingdom. In his famous account Du Royaume de Siam, La Loubère carefully observed the classic 17th century theatre of Siam, including an epic battle scene from a khon performance, and recorded what he saw in great detail:

The Siamese have three sorts of Stage Plays: That which they call Cone [khôn] is a figure dance, to the sound of the violin and some other instruments. The dancers are masked and armed, and represent rather a combat than a dance. And though every one runs into high motions, and extravagant postures, they cease not continually to intermix some word. Most of their masks are hideous, and represent either monstrous Beasts, or kinds of Devils. The Show which they call Lacone is a poem intermix with Epic and Dramatic, which lasts three days, from eight in the morning till seven at night. They are histories in verse, serious, and sung by several actors always present, and which do only sing reciprocally … The Rabam is a double dance of men and women, which is not martial, but gallant … they can perform it without much tying themselves, because their way of dancing is a simple march round, very slow, and without any high motion; but with a great many slow contortions of the body and arms.^[186]

Of the attire of Siamese Khôn dancers, La Loubère recorded that, "[T]hose that dance in Rabam, and Cone, have gilded paper-bonnets, high and pointed, like the Mandarins caps of ceremony, but which hang down at the sides below their ears, which are adorned with counterfeit stones, and with two pendants of gilded wood."^[186]

Muay Thai

La Loubère also observed the existence of muay Thai and muay Laos, noting that they looked similar (i.e., using both fists and elbows to fight) but the hand-wrapping techniques were different.^[186] Muay Thai from the Ayutthaya period (better known as Muay Boran) would greatly influence the modern sport of Muay Thai.

The accomplishment and influence of Thai art and culture, developed during the Ayutthaya period, on the neighboring countries was evident in the observation of James Low, a British scholar on Southeast Asia, during the early Rattanakosin era: "The Siamese have attained to a considerable degree of perfection in dramatic exhibitions – and are in this respect envied by their neighbours the Burmans, and Laos who all employ Siamese actors when they can be got."^[185]: 177

Krabi-krabong is a form of sword fighting developed in Ayutthaya that is now recognized as an essential element of traditional Thai culture and arts.^[187] Wat Phutthaisawan, a major ancient temple in Ayutthaya, is considered to be the birthplace of krabi-krabong.

Barge procession

Royal Barge Procession of Ayutthaya Scroll

The Royal Barge Procession of Ayutthaya Scroll was made in 1797 by Chao Phraya Phra Khlang (Nhon) (1782–1805).^[188] The royal tradition of traveling in the Royal Barge Procession dates back to the Ayutthaya era.^[188] It has continued and been maintained to later eras until the present king's reign.^[188] The epic poem "Lilit Phayuhayatra Phetphuang" describes a detailed depiction of royal processions during the Ayutthaya era.^[188] It was composed by Chao Phraya Phra Khlang (Nhon) in 1797 under the royal command of King Phutthayotfa Chulalok Maharaj (1737–1809).^[188] It is based on memories of events witnessed during the late Ayutthaya period.^[188] The descriptions of the royal barges in "Lilit Phayuhayatra Phetphuang" are similar to those mentioned in accounts from the inhabitants of Ayutthaya.^[188]

Royal funeral

Royal funeral of King Phetracha in 1704 scroll

This scroll depicts the royal funeral procession of King Phetracha. The king died on 5 February 1703 and he was cremated nearly 22 months later on 26 December 1704.^[189] This is a typical two-dimensional Thai artwork with black ink and fine lines.^[189] It features mythical creatures of Buddhism and the royal urn. The large, ornate wheeled carts (Ratcharot (ราชรถ) are pulled by state officials in Siamese court uniforms. Some officials wear a lomphok. On the utmost left side is a large cremation building for the king called Phra Merumat (พระเมรุมาศ). On the sidelines (top and bottom) are various stalls. Many acrobats perform tricks to entertain the spectators and mourners.

This scroll was purchased in 1716 by Augustus II the Strong (1670–1733), King of Poland. Augustus II received two drawings from Egidius van den Bempden (1667–1737). Bempden was the mayor of Amsterdam and also director of the Dutch East India Company. The container with Bempden's drawings was rediscovered by a curator 300 years later. These drawings are among the few well-preserved Siamese documents of that era.

Sanskrit influence on the Siamese language

Through Buddhist and Hindu influence, a variety of Chanda prosodic meters were received via Ceylon. Since the Thai language is mono-syllabic, a huge number of loan words from Sanskrit and Pali are needed to compose these classical Sanskrit meters. According to B. J. Terwiel, this process occurred with an accelerated pace during the reign of King Borommatrailokkanat (1448–1488) who reformed Siam's model of governance by turning the Siamese polity into an empire under the mandala feudal system.^{[190]: 307–326} The new system demanded a new imperial language for the noble class. This literary influence changed the course of the Thai or Siamese language, setting it apart from other tai languages, by increasing the number of Sanskrit and Pali words drastically and imposing the demand on the Thais to develop a writing system that preserves the orthography of Sanskrit words for literary purpose. By the 15th century, the Thai language had evolved into a distinctive medium along with a nascent literary identity of a new nation. It allowed Siamese poets to compose in different poetical styles and mood, from playful and humorous rimed verses, to romantic and elegant klong and to polished and imperious chan prosodies modified from classical Sanskrit meters. Thai poets experimented with these different prosodic forms, producing innovative "hybrid" poems such as Lilit (Thai: ลิลิต, an interleave of khlong and kap or rai verses) or Kap hor Klong (Thai: กาพย์ห่อโคลง – khlong poems enveloped by kap verses). The Thai thus developed a keen mind and a keen ear for poetry. To maximize this new literary medium, however, an intensive classical education in Pali was required. This made poetry an exclusive occupation of the noble classes. However, B.J. Terwiel notes, citing a 17th-century text book Jindamanee, that scribes and common Siamese men, too, were encouraged to learn basic Pali and Sanskrit for career advancement.^{[190]: 322–323}

Ramakien

Most countries in Southeast Asia share an Indianised culture. Traditionally, therefore, Thai literature was heavily influenced by the Indian culture and Buddhist–Hindu ideology since the time it first appeared in the 13th century. Thailand's national epic is a version of the story of Rama-Pandita, as recounted by Gotama Buddha in the Dasharatha Jataka called the Ramakien,^[191] translated from Pali and rearranged into Siamese verses. The importance of the Ramayana epic in Thailand is due to the Thai's adoption of the Hindu religio-political ideology of kingship, as embodied by Rama. The Siamese capital, Ayutthaya, was named after the holy city of Ayodhya, the city of Rama. Thai kings of the current dynasty from Rama VI forward, and retroactively, have been referred to as "Rama" to the present day (relations with the west caused the crown to seek a brief name to convey royalty to both Thais and foreigners, following European styles).

A number of versions of the Ramakien epic were lost in the destruction of Ayutthaya in 1767. Three versions currently exist. One of these was prepared under the supervision (and partly written by) King Rama I. His son, Rama II, rewrote some parts for khon drama. The main differences from the original are an extended role for the monkey god Hanuman and the addition of a happy ending. Many of popular poems among the Thai nobles are also based on Indian stories. One of the most famous is Anirut Kham Chan which is based on an ancient Indian story of Prince Anirudha.

Khun Chang Khun Phaen: the Siamese epic folk poem

In the Ayutthaya period, folktales also flourished. One of the most famous folktales is the story of Khun Chang Khun Phaen (Thai: ขุนช้างขุนแผน), referred to in Thailand simply as "Khun Phaen", which combines the elements of romantic comedy and heroic adventures, ending in high tragedy. The epic of Khun Chang Khun Phaen (KCKP) revolves around Khun Phaen, a Siamese general with superhuman magical powers who served the King of Ayutthaya, and his love-triangle relationship between himself, Khun Chang, and a beautiful Siamese girl named Wan-Thong. The composition of KCKP, much like other orally-transmitted epics, evolved over time. It originated as a recitation or sepha within the Thai oral tradition from around the beginning of the 17th century (c. 1600). Siamese troubadours and minstrels added more subplots and embellished scenes to the original story line as time went on.^[192] By the late period of the Ayutthaya Kingdom, it had attained the current shape as a long work of epic poem with the length of about 20,000 lines, spanning 43 samut thai books. The version that exists today was composed with klon meter throughout and is referred to in Thailand as nithan Kham Klon (Thai: นิทานคำกลอน) meaning a 'poetic tale'.

Clothing

Three clothing styles were evident in the Ayutthaya period. Each style depended on social class.

1. Court clothing (worn by the king, queen, concubines, and senior government officials):

• Men: The king wore mongkut (Thai: มงกุฎ), as headgear, round Mandarin collar with khrui and wore chong kben (Thai: โจงกระเบน), as trousers.
  • Court officers, (who served in the royal palace) wore lomphok, as headgear, khrui, and wore chong kben.
• Women The queen wore chada (Thai: ชฎา), as headgear, sabai (Thai: สไบ), (a breast cloth that wrap over one shoulder around chest and back) and wore pha nung (Thai: ผ้านุ่ง), as a skirt.
  • Concubines wore long hair, sabai, and pha nung.

2. Nobles (rich citizens):

• Men: wore mandarin collar shirt, a mahadthai hair style (Thai: ทรงมหาดไทย), and wore chong kben.
• Women: wore the sabai and pha nung.

3. Villagers:

• Men: wore a loincloth, displayed a naked chest, a mahadthai hair style, sometimes wore sarong or chong kben.
• Women: wore the sabai and pha nung.

Contacts with the West

In 1511, immediately after having conquered Malacca, the Portuguese sent a diplomatic mission headed by Duarte Fernandes to the court of King Ramathibodi II of Ayutthaya. Having established amicable relations between the Kingdom of Portugal and the Kingdom of Siam, they returned with a Siamese envoy who carried gifts and letters to the King of Portugal.^[210] The Portuguese were the first Europeans to visit the country. Portuguese mercenaries would also play a major role in the invasion of Lanna in 1539 by King Chairachathirat, and Portuguese soldiers would be considered a respected fighting force for the Kingdom across its existence.^[110]: 37 Five years after that initial contact, Ayutthaya and Portugal concluded a treaty granting the Portuguese permission to trade in the kingdom. A similar treaty in 1592 gave the Dutch a privileged position in the rice trade.

Foreigners were cordially welcomed at the court of Narai (1657–1688), a ruler with a cosmopolitan outlook who was nonetheless wary of outside influence. Important commercial ties were forged with Japan. Dutch and English trading companies were allowed to establish factories, and Thai diplomatic missions were sent to Paris and The Hague. By maintaining these ties, the Thai court skillfully played off the Dutch against the English and the French, avoiding the excessive influence of a single power.^[211]

In 1664, however, the Dutch used force to exact a treaty granting them extraterritorial rights as well as freer access to trade. At the urging of his foreign minister, the Greek adventurer Constantine Phaulkon, Narai turned to France for assistance. French engineers constructed fortifications for the Thais and built a new palace at Lopburi for Narai. In addition, French missionaries engaged in education and medicine and brought the first printing press into the country. Louis XIV's personal interest was aroused by reports from missionaries suggesting that Narai might be converted to Christianity.^[212]

The French presence encouraged by Phaulkon, however, stirred the resentment and suspicions of the Thai nobles and Buddhist clergy. When word spread that Narai was dying, a general, Phetracha (reigned 1688–1693) staged a coup d'état, the 1688 Siamese revolution, seized the throne, killed the designated heir, a Christian, and had Phaulkon put to death along with a number of missionaries. He then expelled the remaining foreigners. Some studies said that Ayutthaya began a period of alienation from European traders, while welcoming more Chinese merchants. But other recent studies argue that, due to wars and conflicts in Europe in the mid-18th century, European merchants reduced their activities in the East. However, it was apparent that the Dutch East Indies Company or VOC was still doing business in Ayutthaya despite political difficulties.^[212]

• 
  Dutch East India Company merchant ships to Bangkok
• 
  The royal barge of the King of Siam (1687–1688), illustrated by La Loubère, the French envoy to Siam under King Louis XIV
• 
  Memorial plate in Lopburi showing King Narai with French ambassadors
• 
  The 1686 Siamese embassy, accompanied by their translator, Abbot Artus de Lionne. Painted by Jacques Vigouroux Duplessis (c. 1680–1732).
• 
  Siamese embassy to Louis XIV in 1686, by Nicolas de Larmessin
• 
  Siamese ambassadors at the Court of King Louis XIV 1686. The Siamese ambassadors came from Ayutthaya to the Palace of Versailles in France. They were led by the noble diplomat Kosa Pan. Engraving made by Sébastien Le Clerc.
• 
  Reception of Siamese ambassadors at the Missions étrangères de Paris (Paris Foreign Missions), December 1686. The Siamese diplomats wear Lomphok headgear. Kosa Pan is one of the dignitaries.
• 
  French Jesuits observing an eclipse with King Narai and his court in April 1688, shortly before the Siamese revolution
• 
  Ok-khun Chamnan, a Siamese ambassador who visited France and Rome on an embassy in 1688
• 
  A portrait of Kosa Pan, a Thai ambassador accredited by King Narai of Ayutthaya to the court of King Louis XIV of France, by Charles Le Brun, 1686

Contacts with East Asia

Between 1405 and 1433, the Chinese Ming dynasty sponsored a series of seven naval expeditions. Emperor Yongle designed them to establish a Chinese presence, impose imperial control over trade, and impress foreign peoples in the Indian Ocean basin. He also might have wanted to extend the tributary system. It is believed that the Chinese fleet under Admiral Zheng He travelled up the Chao Phraya River to Ayutthaya on three occasions.

Meanwhile, a Japanese colony was established in Ayutthaya. The colony was active in trade, particularly in the export of deer hides and saphan wood to Japan in exchange for Japanese silver and Japanese handicrafts (swords, lacquered boxes, high-quality paper). From Ayutthaya, Japan was interested in purchasing Chinese silks, as well as deerskins and ray or shark skins (used to make a sort of shagreen for Japanese sword handles and scabbards).^[213]

The Japanese quarters of Ayutthaya were home to about 1,500 Japanese inhabitants (some estimates run as high as 7,000). The community was called Ban Yipun in Thai, and was headed by a Japanese chief nominated by Thai authorities.^[214] It seems to have been a combination of traders, Christian converts (Kirishitan) who had fled their home country to various Southeast Asian countries following the persecutions of Toyotomi Hideyoshi and Tokugawa Ieyasu, and unemployed former samurai who had been on the losing side at the battle of Sekigahara.^[214]

Padre António Francisco Cardim recounted having administered the sacrament to around 400 Japanese Christians in 1627 in the Thai capital of Ayutthaya ("a 400 japoes christaos").^[214] There were also Japanese communities in Ligor and Patani.^[215]

• 
  Early 17th-century Chinese woodblock print, thought to represent Zheng He's ships
• 
  Luang Pho Tho or Sam Pao Kong, the highly revered Buddha statue in Wat Phanan Choeng temple, was visited in 1407 by Zheng He during the naval expedition.
• 
  A 1634 Japanese Red seal ship. Tokyo Naval Science Museum.
• 
  The Japanese quarter in Ayutthaya is indicated at the bottom center ("Japonois") of the map, 1691.
• 
  Portrait of Yamada Nagamasa c. 1630
• 
  Interior of the Japanese Village museum in Ayutthaya

Notable foreigners in 17th-century Ayutthaya

• François-Timoléon de Choisy
• Claude de Forbin, French admiral
• Louis Laneau, apostolic vicar of Siam
• Yamada Nagamasa, Japanese adventurer who became the ruler of the Nakhon Si Thammarat
• Constantine Phaulkon, Greek adventurer and first councillor of King Narai
• Father Guy Tachard, French Jesuit writer and Siamese ambassador to France (1688)
• Jeremias van Vliet, Dutch Opperhoofd
• George White, English merchant