[betraaaus]

Call to re-name country Siam

The Nation, Published on Jun 28, 2004

A proposal that the Kingdom's name be changed back to Siam yesterday won support from the chairman of the National Human Rights Commission.

Prof Saneh Chamarik said that with problems threatening Thai-land's unity, including renewed violence in the deep South, it was time to reconsider the issue.

He said he supported the proposal by political activist Surachai Dantrakul that Siam once again be used as the country's name as it reflected the country's diversity better than the name Thailand.

Speaking at a panel discussion on "Stateless People" at Thammasat University, Saneh said that for him the name Thailand was a symbol of centralised power.

Siam was the country's official name until May 1949. The name Thailand was first used under an ultra-patriotic government in 1939. The old name was re-adopted during World War II, but it was changed back to Thailand after Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram returned to power.

Saneh also called for systematic action to solve the problem of stateless people. The law on nationality should be amended to "better focus on people's security rather than the country's security", he said.

Sirinart Sirisunthorn

THE NATION

[heennaRaf]

This is very interesting, let's go back to the meanings behind both names when the names was changed officially. The Khmer controlled the country and called it Siam meaning 'dark-skinned people'.

800 years ago, after being influenced for some time by these Khmer forces they chose Thai, meaning 'free' (at that time) so the name Thailand was chosen to make a public display of their freedom.

Then a patriotic leader and soldier Luang Plaek Phibunsongkhram, changed the name officially from Siam to Thailand, I mean all the people referred to themselves at Thai already. The vote was passed 110:5 or a close number to that, now they consider changing it back ?? The amusing part of all this is the fact that has been discussed so much on here as for the Thai people being overly concerned with the color of one's skin tone to such a degree that skin bleaches are a huge industry for the majority of households regardless of social status. Cute ! Confusing, but cute.

[Avgustslim]

Would a rose, by any other name, Smell as sweet? Yes. What's in a name? I'm not sure. Will the name change anything? My thoughts point to "No."

I highly doubt that changing the name back to Siam will have any impact on the recent violence in the south. I'm not opposed to changing the name of the country; It will always be the same ol' country to me. What do they hope to accomplish by doing this? I still do not fully understand their motives.

[heennaRaf]

I am confused too, I am thinking it is because the Thai name is only a couple hundred years old whereas the the Siam name is going back about 1 thousand years.

Ohh and the vote was 132:5 my mistake not 110:5

[Galsteinbok]

really?! well but i prefer Thailand cuz people especially chinese living here in Singapore like to read it wrongly. They somehow will read it like "siam" but not "sir-am".. and read as "siam" in hokkien mean go away. Kinda insulting the country and everytime i heard that i will piss off by them.

[whimpykid]

Out of the two choices, I prefer Thailand, I don't believe in all this political propaganda about the old name. It does not represents the people, the animals and the land of Thailand.
How about we give Thailand a complete new name.
How about "The Democratic Kingdom of Paul"
any other suggestions.

[Hammaduersnes]

Before I read this mail I thought Siam sounded a good name and because I also remember it has long history. But then when I hear Stacker's description of what Thai means and the fact Thai people use thai to describe themselves I am confused. Is the name really an issue in Thailand? Either way, I love thailand!

[Phywhewashect]

How about asking the Thai people what they want to call their country? As outsiders, it really shouldn't matter to us. After all, Thailand is not even the name that the Thai people (or Siamese) use; they say Prahtet Thai. The "land" in Thailand is English, right?

Of course, we English-speakers call Spain, Italy, Germany, and dozens of other countries by names other than what the residents of those countries say for their own nation. And they, in turn, don't refer to the USA or England or Nipon by the right name either.

Whatchya gonna do?

[Ggskbpbz]

And how many Thai people refer to Thailand as »ÃÐà·Èä·Â ?

[heennaRaf]

The Thai people did speak MrBrad they voted for Thailand 132:5
We were simply discussing an idea that a politician came up with and trying to determine what the reasoning behind such thinking would be. The translation of »ÃÐà·Èä·Â is Thailand correct but the language calls for »ÃÐà·È to be a prefix before all countries names not just their own. »ÃÐà·Èä·Â translates country of Thai, and by Thai choice this internationally would be Thailand.

Correct they refer to »ÃÐà·Èä·Â, notice they do say ä·Â they do not say »ÃÐà·Èä«áÍÁ

[rhiniddibiarmr]

The reason that this topic came up is because the conflict in the south.
Thailand means land of Thai.
Which represent to the race of Thai only.
While nowadays Thailand has many ethnicities besides Thai.
There are Chinese, Khmer, Melayu, etc.
The name "Siam" in the past conclude all races in the kingdom. (Mon, Laos, Khmer, Melayu, etc.)
So if it is changed back to be Siam then it would represent all races and ethnics in the country.

My own opinion as Thai people ( Thai race), it does not matter to me which name to use. It does not change anything.
Because in my idea the conflict in the south is deeper than just solve by changing the name.

[heennaRaf]

Quote[/b] (Neung @ June 29 2004,14:47)]Thailand means land of Thai.
Which represent to the race of Thai only.
While nowadays Thailand has many ethnicities besides Thai.
There are Chinese, Khmer, Melayu, etc.....It does not change anything......
Because in my idea the conflict in the south is deeper than just solve by changing the name.

I think it changes nothing as well, so why bother with changing what the people have agreed upon. But then you mention the South.. I agree again a name change will NOT fix this problem.

The term Thai, a thousand years ago, meant free. Now yes it means land of the Thai, but the race of Thai in itself is Khmer, how they have seperated themsleves who knows. But the Thai were Khmer and around the 13th century some of these farmers took a stand and built their own kingdoms. The first two I think were in Sukhothai (also the name of the Kingdom), and in Chiang Mai, with Chiang Rai being the Capitol a few years later. But the interesting thing is the roots are Khmer, the leaders of what became known as Thailand, as with all the people at the beginning, were Khmer.

When did the Malay start coming up into Thailand anyone know?

[shieclulaweew]

There might be more to a name than it appears on the surface. Perhaps a clever namechange alone cannot solve social problems, but it helps alleviate them. Gandhi realized this when he changed the name of the lowest Indian cast (Pariah) from "Untouchables" to "Children of God" Quite a difference, I would say.

The proposed change of Thailand to Siam can be viewed as another example of political correctness in the Land of Smiles.

Personally I like the name "Siam" more. To me it represents a land of ancient times, unspoiled by Western influences. Sometimes I like standing amongst the ancient ruins and imagine a time when they were teeming with life.

If you have the opportunity to read Siam literature, I highly recommend doing so.

[heennaRaf]

I agree, I like the sound of Siam more too When I hear Siam i think culture when I hear Thailand I think I need to send my mother-in-law $500 dollars again hehe

I have never read, is the grammar, wording, and general language as easy to understand as modern Thai?

[Almolfuncomma]

LOL "Sending $500 to my mother-in-law". That was so funny!! I just burst laughing and laughing. Some things remain the same all over the world!!!

[Phywhewashect]

Name changes can matter sometimes.

Did the 1989 change of Burma to Myanmar change anything politically? Do the people feel united with their government?

Then there's Upper Volta which in 1984 became Burkina Faso.

And a few years earlier in 1981, British Honduras changed its name to Belize.

If I were asked--I haven't been, by the way--I, too, would favor "Siam." I like the sound of it. Moreover, Siamese cats and Siamese twins would have a place to identify with.

[SantaClaus]

Delawang, I think you slightly misunderstood. The point about the South we were referring to the recent violence in the South, contemplating if changing the name would reduce the problems or hinder their feelings in any way.

We were not saying that the South should not be part of the nation

[XGoFivk7]

Origin of Thais as Kmer?!! That's pretty original! I don't quite remember any history book clearly saying that. I know that for a couple of centuries the Kingdom of Cambodia dominated the region, but as the origin of the Thai people? Definitely, there are people of Kmer and Mon origins in Thailand, but they certainly aren't the majority (in the geographical region of what is now Thailand), nor have they been the rulers. The picture is much more complex than that.

There is this larger group of people not only restricted to the location of Thailand called the "Tai". These include the Shan people of Burma, the Lao, ethnic groups in North Vietnam, and Southern Yunnan. They all share a similar language stock and many common cultural identities. They all share this famous legend about Khun Borom. Historians have pointed to these people as the "origin" of present day Thailand, ...if... you want to talk about "origin".

However, the more I read history, the more I'm convinced that we modern day people have been pretty much brainwashed by the pretty recently invented concept of nation-state in our definition of an identity. I would say that Thailand as a nation only happened when we changed from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy in 1932. Before that we were a Kingdom, ruled by a King, whose subjects have always included various groups of people. And that concept of Kingdom did not include the concept of national geographic boundaries, it was rather based on the power of influence. If the King's power included the people of Lao and Malaysian, then they were part of the Thai Kingdom. It was because of the colonial powers of England and France that gave shape to those countries as seperate states, and who have defined our borders.

Thailand is much more 'multi-cultural' than would appear. In our bloods are a mix of races: Tai, Mon, Kmer, Lao, Chinese, even muslim Malay, and now increasingly farang. These peoples have coexisted in peace (and in war, periodically) in the land of what is now called Thailand for several centuries. I find it fascinating to read accounts of established foreign quarters in Ayudhya. These included Portuguese, French, British, Chinese, Japanese, oh, and don't forget the very influential muslim Persians, the origin of the Bunnag family. During the time of Sukhotai, there were Kmer influence, yes, but there was also Chinese, Mon, Burmese and Lao influences.

I would like to see nations relinquish the very divisive concept of nation-state and see ourselves as diverse cultures coexisting together within boundaries that are defined for adminstrative purposes that wouldn't be used as excuses for war. The world is getting increasingly smaller, isn't it? Hasn't it reached the point where killing our neighbors is actually killing ourselves? Look at the example of US and Iraq, does anyone sincerely see US more powerful because it went to war with Iraq?

I think I'm one of the few who seem to identify with Siam as synonymous with Thailand. I was living as a young girl in the middle east in the early 70s, and when we mentioned Thailand, they didn't know where that was, but they knew about the famous Queen of Siam and of course, our Siamese cats.

I don't mind the name of Siam, if it can help re-identify the Thai people as belonging to a multicultural mix of people.

[heennaRaf]

Quote[/b] (globalwoman @ July 03 2004,06:42)]Origin of Thais as Kmer?!! That's pretty original! I don't quite remember any history book clearly saying that. I know that for a couple of centuries the Kingdom of Cambodia dominated the region, but as the origin of the Thai people? Definitely, there are people of Kmer and Mon origins in Thailand, but they certainly aren't the majority (in the geographical region of what is now Thailand), nor have they been the rulers. The picture is much more complex than that.

Not much more complex than many think, it actually is fairly simple if read from multiple viewpoints rather than simply one text.

[quote=http://www.wordiq.com/definition/History_of_Thailand]

Quote[/b] ]
The Thais are related linguistically to groups originating in southern China. Migrations from southern China to Southeast Asia may have occurred in the 6th and 7th centuries. Malay, Mon, and Khmer civilizations flourished in the region prior to the arrival of the ethnic Thai.
Sukhothai
Main article: Sukhothai kingdom
Thais date the founding of their nation to the 13th century. According to tradition, in 1238, Thai chieftains overthrew their Khmer overlords at Sukhothai and established a Thai kingdom.

[quote=http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Sukhothai_kingdom]

Quote[/b] ]This event traditionally marks the founding of the modern Thai nation, although other less well-known Thai kingdoms, such as Lanna, Phayao and Chiang Saen, were established around the same time.

[heennaRaf]

[quote=http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Thai_alphabet]

Quote[/b] ]The Thai alphabet is probably derived from the Old Khmer (ÍÑ¡¢ÃÐà¢ÁÃ) script, which is a southern Brahmic script of the Indic family. According to tradition it was created in 1283 by King Ramkhamhaeng the Great (¾è͢عÃÒÁ¤Óá˧ÁËÒÃÒª).

[quote=http://www2.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/thailand.htm]

Quote[/b] ]At the time of this migration, about 100 A.D., the area was controlled by Mon and Khmer kingdoms. The Mon and Khmer also originated in South China but migrated into the area several centuries before the Tai peoples. The Tai people accepted the overlordship of the Khmer Empire and served as their military allies. The name Siam comes from the Khmer reference to the Tai as the syam, the dark-brown people.

In 1238 a Tai clan threw off the overlordship of the Khmer and established a kingdom at Sukhotai in what is now north central Thailand. At that time they adopted the name Thai, meaning free. The difference in the pronunciation of Thai and Tai is that the t in Thai is an aspirated or hard t whereas the t in Tai is a soft or unaspirated t.

[quote=http://www.guidetothailand.com/thailand-history/siam.htm]

Quote[/b] ]In several places along the Menam River Thai mercenaries revolted, setting up independent muang or city-states in place of Khmer rule.

Another informative site, that too seems very accurate in regards to what we are taught in University.