Why the name change from siam to thailand and why thai land?

[ATF]

Thailand has never been colonized but it has been occupied by the Japanese, British and Americans.

Isn't that apples and oranges, though?

It means that Thailand lost sovereign control of the Country during WWII but the foreign powers never had enough time to impose their laws, culture and control of the people. Even though this period occupation was limited to mainly Bangkok and the surrounding areas, the whole Country was never under full occupation.

Of the three countries you mentioned, it's only clear that Japan had the intention to colonize. I don't know about England. As for the U.S., we were never officially at war with Thailand and only came to help rid them of the Japanese.

Anyway, not trying to play the part of scholar here. Everything I know on the topic can pretty much be found on Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Thai_Movement

As an aside, the Free Thai Movement certainly explains the U.S.'s favored relations with Thailand when compared to other western powers.

Yes you are correct Japan would have tried to colonize Thailand but America never colonized Japan just occupied it. Same with the Allies and Germany.

[HerbalEd]

Many foreigners see the UK as a FREE land

Unfortunately many foreigners would be wrong. Britain (or to be more accurate, the political elite in UK) have turned what was a relatively free country into what is fast approaching a totalitarian state. Whereas a few decades ago one was only constrained by what was specifically forbidden in law, it is now becoming a situation where you can only do (or say) what is specifically allowed. There is no longer any democratic accountability. Laws are rammed through without any public consultation - single-issue lobby groups, bureaucrats and quangos dictate what becomes law, regardless of what the demos might feel about it.

One of the amusing ironies of geography is that when a country adopts politically correct terms into its name it is usually to cover up the fact that it tends to the opposite.

A good example of this is a country which was formed about the same time as Siam became Thailand, when the British relinquished India and it split into India and Pakistan.

Pakistan means 'land of the pure'....

England is fast becoming a "totalitarian state," is it? Talk about hyperbole. You should live in N. Korea for a while and you'd be very happy to indeed to live in the "totalitarian state" of England.

[herb59]

siam was too easy to write and remember.

[KhaoNiaw]

I understand that the Cultural Mandates were designed to create a sense of nationalism, and even encourage a phobia of outsiders. But that doesn't contradict the point I made, which you quoted above.

It was part of a process of military nationalism and centralization (and also opened the door to potential claims to Tai Yai areas - a greater Thai/Tai culture). Southern Muslims, for example, could more easily be part of Siam, a collection of ethnic groups and cultures, but did not ethnically fit into the land of the Thais with a centralized and mandated language and culture. It wasn't about excluding outsiders, more about excluding those already there who were 'not real' Thais, or trying to force them to change their ways.

Please read again what I wrote. You even quoted it: "I understand that the Cultural Mandates..."

Yet you responded by saying: "It wasn't about excluding outsiders..."

But,oh yes they were.

Mandate 2

On preventing danger to the nation, issued 3 July 1939, consisted of five items:

• "Thai people must not engage in any business without considering the benefit and safety of the nation."
• "Thai people must never reveal anything to foreigners that might damage the nation. These actions are a betrayal of the nation."
• "Thai people must not act as agent or spokesman for foreigners without considering the benefit of the Thai nation, and must not express opinion or take the side of foreigners in international disputes. These actions are a betrayal of the nation."
• "Thai people must not secretly purchase land on behalf of foreigners in a way that endangers the nation. These actions are a betrayal of the nation."
• "When a person has betrayed the nation, it is the duty of Thai people to actively and quickly put a stop to it."

_________________________

The second part of your statement: "...more about excluding those already there who were 'not real' Thais, or trying to force them to change their ways," is absolutely correct. But, again, that doesn't contradict the point I'm trying to make.

It's not an either-or choice. It's both.

Edit: formatting

Yes, that's fair comment. My original point was simply that it was actually Siam that was more inclusive of the various ethnic identities. Changing to Thailand was intended to promote national unity by stamping out, rather than embracing, variety and was imposed by a ruling elite in Bangkok. The effects are still felt in the country today.

[wotsdermatter]

Most of the above posts are incorrect. Check out Google and you will find that Thai does not mean freedom, etc., as expounded but something completely different. Research before posting then you will not waste time of others.

[aTomsLife]

siam was too easy to write and remember.

So you have trouble remembering how to spell Thailand?

[nisakiman]

Many foreigners see the UK as a FREE land

Unfortunately many foreigners would be wrong. Britain (or to be more accurate, the political elite in UK) have turned what was a relatively free country into what is fast approaching a totalitarian state. Whereas a few decades ago one was only constrained by what was specifically forbidden in law, it is now becoming a situation where you can only do (or say) what is specifically allowed. There is no longer any democratic accountability. Laws are rammed through without any public consultation - single-issue lobby groups, bureaucrats and quangos dictate what becomes law, regardless of what the demos might feel about it.

One of the amusing ironies of geography is that when a country adopts politically correct terms into its name it is usually to cover up the fact that it tends to the opposite.

A good example of this is a country which was formed about the same time as Siam became Thailand, when the British relinquished India and it split into India and Pakistan.

Pakistan means 'land of the pure'....

England is fast becoming a "totalitarian state," is it? Talk about hyperbole. You should live in N. Korea for a while and you'd be very happy to indeed to live in the "totalitarian state" of England.

I think your herbs have gone to your 'ed.

Everything is relative.

If you're happy for the state to dictate how, when and where you can smoke, drink eat and think, then obviously the UK is your kind of place. Personally, I prefer to live my life the way I decide, not the way someone else decides I should. You must be so absorbed in the UK system that you haven't noticed the salami slice approach to depriving you of your freedoms. Fine. If you're happy with someone else telling you how much sugar you can put in your tea, or how much you can drink, good for you. You are one of the unquestioning compliant ones. The state loves you because you do as you're told. Just be sure you don't harbour any thoughts that don't fit the orthodoxy (although I'm sure you are 100% 'on-message' as far as matters PC are concerned [do you read the Grauniad, by any chance?]) or else you'll get your collar felt by the state enforcers.

Voltaire once said: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it".

This principle used to be an integral part of the unwritten constitution of England, and forms the bedrock of the whole concept of 'freedom of speech'. Now we have people being prosecuted for airing unpleasant opinions on Twitter and for wishing to adhere to their Christian principles by refusing to accommodate gay couples, to name but two examples. There are countless more. We are even hearing calls for 'climate change denial' to be made a crime. George Orwell was chillingly prescient when he wrote '1984'. It is all coming to pass. The thought police are an ever increasing power.

So before you utter your glib comments about North Korea, stop and look around you. See what is happening.

Oh, we may not be at North Korean levels yet, but we are definitely on that slippery slope. And the ostriches who refuse to see it will be as culpable as the ones who are instigating it. And no, I'm not a tinfoil hatter; I'm just aware of what is going on around me, and old enough to know the difference between then and now.

[redandyellow]

I still like Siam pussy (cats)

Siam is perceived as exotic

[Smurkster]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The reason for the name change was to make it more inclusive of all the different 'Tai' groups in Thailand.

Siamese is a subset of Thai, it is specifically the ethnic group in the central Thai region. Thailand, or Muang Thai, is able to include the Siamese, Lanna, Isaan/Lao, Shan, and even the Zhuang in China. Tai is a broader ethno linguistic group and the name is meant to include everyone that speaks one of these languages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_languages

In a way it's similar to 'Germanic'. A Shan person to this day will still call the area he lives in, in Burma, 'Muang Thai', but he would not identify with 'Siam'. The change was meant to address this and increase nationalism and a sense of unity in all the Tai speaking peoples.

Siam at the time was looking to regain all of the areas outside of its borders that contained Thai speaking peoples. They were interested in creating a greater Thai empire. They wanted Lao back from the French, Shan back from the British, and even dreamed of capturing part of China were the Zhuang lived.

There were basically interested in creating a larger state encompassing all Tai speaking peoples, similar to what Italy and German had done and were continuing to do with speakers of their languages.

yep and that is why they were part of the "axis" during WW2, trying to use Japan to put pressure on the French and Brits to make concessions, a "greater Siamese" state, like as you said Italy, Germany or even Serbia Slobodan times

[FritsSikkink]

it means land of the free AND land of the thai people. makes perfect sense as it is the land of thai people AND it has remained free from colonialism.

Isn't thai = free? Therefore why would siam be changed to thailand aka freeland? Ok free from colnialism. That's right after all during that period surround countries were colonized so i suppose the country was called free land to show how it's free from wester colonialism am i correct?

Why would you call your land England? Land of the Eng???

[ultimate weapon]

Whenever a poser like this comes up I ask my good lady. So I just asked her what does the Thai word "thai" mean...I got the usual answer...Mi-loo. I asked her what is the Thai word for "free" or "freedom"...she rattled off something that was a million miles from the word "thai". I come across this a lot. I could ask 20 Thai people what a certain word means and get 20 different answers. I also sometimes ask Thai people what a word I hear regularly in use means...and a lot of the time i get "Mi-loo" again. Kinda puzzles me how people use a word a lot of the time and don't actually know what it means. One I have been trying to find a meaning for is "Na"....as in "Na-Krap". I have never met a Thai person who can tell me what the "Na" means even though is used a million times a day by many people?

It's mei lu not mi loo you thunk.

[ATF]

it means land of the free AND land of the thai people. makes perfect sense as it is the land of thai people AND it has remained free from colonialism.

Isn't thai = free? Therefore why would siam be changed to thailand aka freeland? Ok free from colnialism. That's right after all during that period surround countries were colonized so i suppose the country was called free land to show how it's free from wester colonialism am i correct?

Why would you call your land England? Land of the Eng???

It comes from Angle as in Anglo Saxon.

[ultimate weapon]

it means land of the free AND land of the thai people. makes perfect sense as it is the land of thai people AND it has remained free from colonialism.

Isn't thai = free? Therefore why would siam be changed to thailand aka freeland? Ok free from colnialism. That's right after all during that period surround countries were colonized so i suppose the country was called free land to show how it's free from wester colonialism am i correct?

Why would you call your land England? Land of the Eng???

It comes from Angle as in Anglo Saxon.

so why not angleland or anglo saxon land?

[Richard W]

the thing is thai is considered a subset of tai not the other way around. Shouldn't it have been named tailand instead?

The English language distinction between 'Tai' and 'Thai' was invented in the middle of the 20th Century. Unfortunately, I don't recall who invented it, but the invention is credited to a single linguist. Most ethnonyms outside Thailand use 'Tai' - the 'th' is a feature of the dialects of Thailand and Laos, and not of the more northerly dialects in those two countries.

Siam was a misunderstanding from when the first Europeans, Portuguese, came to Thailand and asked the elite (Chinese group of people from whom the Kings were elected), from where they came; Xian the said, and the Portuguese wrote it as Siam (A History of Thailand, Cambridge University Press, page 8).

The elite people are Tai, not to mess with the word thai, the name of the country was (and is again) Muengnua Thai (Thai Country), where mueang means city-state, i.e. Country of Free City-states. Timeline is back at Sukhothai period, so late Medival, around 1300; the capital was moved to Ayutthaya in 1351 (same book, page 5-6).

The tale of the capital moving undermines your source. (It's a nation-building misrepresentation.) What happened was that the power of the kings of Sukhothai waned and that of the kings of Ayutthaya waxed, until the kings of Sukhothai became subjects of the kings of Ayutthaya.

A good example of this is a country which was formed about the same time as Siam became Thailand, when the British relinquished India and it split into India and Pakistan.

Pakistan means 'land of the pure'....

It's real origin is as an acronym (roughly speaking); the literal meaning 'land of the pure' is just a pleasing, reinforcing coincidence.

[Richard W]

It comes from Angle as in Anglo Saxon.

so why not angleland or anglo saxon land?

In short, umlaut. Compare Danish and Denmark and France and French.

[aboctok]

Siam is derived from the sanskrit Syam which means ' brown people/race'' (or something along those lines)

I suspect this is a folk etymology.

The Sanskrit śyāma does mean black or blackish. However, the initial consonant, ś, is a palatal fricative. The corresponding Thai letter is therefore ศ, so if Siam were derived from the Sanskrit śyāma one would expect it to be spelled ศยาม and not สยาม with the dental fricative ส.

ส is a dental fricative? And ศ is a palatal consonant? งงมากเลย! I'd like to hear someone pronounce a palatal fricative when speaking Thai. I'll have (a little) of what you're having.

[HerbalEd]

Most of the above posts are incorrect. Check out Google and you will find that Thai does not mean freedom, etc., as expounded but something completely different. Research before posting then you will not waste time of others.

So you did a bit of googling and now your the resident expert on the subject?? And, since you failed/refused to tell us what you now think is the factual truth, there's no danger of you being rebutted.

Edited December 20, 2014 by HerbalEd

[AYJAYDEE]

it means land of the free AND land of the thai people. makes perfect sense as it is the land of thai people AND it has remained free from colonialism.

Isn't thai = free? Therefore why would siam be changed to thailand aka freeland? Ok free from colnialism. That's right after all during that period surround countries were colonized so i suppose the country was called free land to show how it's free from wester colonialism am i correct?

re-read my post

You said land of the thai people. Thai = free.

its also an ethnicity!

The Thai people, formerly known as Siamese are the main ethnic group of Thailand and are part of the larger Tai ethnolinguistic peoples found in Thailand and adjacent countries in Southeast Asia as well as southern China. Their language is the Thai language, which exists in different regional variants,^[12] and is classified as part of the Tai–Kadai family of languages, and the majority of Thai are followers of Theravada Buddhism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_people

[HerbalEd]

England is fast becoming a "totalitarian state," is it? Talk about hyperbole. You should live in N. Korea for a while and you'd be very happy to indeed to live in the "totalitarian state" of England.

I think your herbs have gone to your 'ed.

Everything is relative.

If you're happy for the state to dictate how, when and where you can smoke, drink eat and think, then obviously the UK is your kind of place. Personally, I prefer to live my life the way I decide, not the way someone else decides I should. You must be so absorbed in the UK system that you haven't noticed the salami slice approach to depriving you of your freedoms. Fine. If you're happy with someone else telling you how much sugar you can put in your tea, or how much you can drink, good for you. You are one of the unquestioning compliant ones. The state loves you because you do as you're told. Just be sure you don't harbour any thoughts that don't fit the orthodoxy (although I'm sure you are 100% 'on-message' as far as matters PC are concerned [do you read the Grauniad, by any chance?]) or else you'll get your collar felt by the state enforcers.

Voltaire once said: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it".

This principle used to be an integral part of the unwritten constitution of England, and forms the bedrock of the whole concept of 'freedom of speech'. Now we have people being prosecuted for airing unpleasant opinions on Twitter and for wishing to adhere to their Christian principles by refusing to accommodate gay couples, to name but two examples. There are countless more. We are even hearing calls for 'climate change denial' to be made a crime. George Orwell was chillingly prescient when he wrote '1984'. It is all coming to pass. The thought police are an ever increasing power.

So before you utter your glib comments about North Korea, stop and look around you. See what is happening.

Oh, we may not be at North Korean levels yet, but we are definitely on that slippery slope. And the ostriches who refuse to see it will be as culpable as the ones who are instigating it. And no, I'm not a tinfoil hatter; I'm just aware of what is going on around me, and old enough to know the difference between then and now.

Actually I'm not English nor do I live in England ... but I've visited several times and no one there told be how much sugar I could put in my tea. In fact, it looks like a very free country to me. Unlike some place I know, the press is free to say pretty much what they want, people can publicly express their grievances against the government, and you don't go to prison for several years if you speak ill of the royal family.

A bit of artistic flourish is fine to liven up on's argument, but to have at least a bit of credibility, it's best not to exaggerate to the absurd.

BTW, I'm 70 y.o., have traveled and lived all over the world for many years under various governments (good & bad ... & very bad), and I'm not at all naive about the evils of the world and the erosion of certain personal liberties. But the sky is not falling ... at least not my sky.

[HerbalEd]

Whenever a poser like this comes up I ask my good lady. So I just asked her what does the Thai word "thai" mean...I got the usual answer...Mi-loo. I asked her what is the Thai word for "free" or "freedom"...she rattled off something that was a million miles from the word "thai". I come across this a lot. I could ask 20 Thai people what a certain word means and get 20 different answers. I also sometimes ask Thai people what a word I hear regularly in use means...and a lot of the time i get "Mi-loo" again. Kinda puzzles me how people use a word a lot of the time and don't actually know what it means. One I have been trying to find a meaning for is "Na"....as in "Na-Krap". I have never met a Thai person who can tell me what the "Na" means even though is used a million times a day by many people?

It's mei lu not mi loo you thunk.

There is no only-one, official way to spell Thai words in English. I've seen variousThai words transliterated in various ways in Thai-English dictionaries ... including "my-loo" and "mai-lu" and other spellings which I'm too lazy right now to look up in my ten or more T-E dictionaries.

Edited December 20, 2014 by HerbalEd

[GOLDBUGGY]

I wouldn't read too much from a countries name.

Ever been to Greenland?

[Richard W]

ส

is a dental fricative? And ศ is a palatal consonant? งงมากเลย! I'd like to hear someone pronounce a palatal fricative when speaking Thai. I'll have (a little) of what you're having.

AyG was obviously talking about the difference in Sanskrit.

[HerbalEd]

so why not angleland or anglo saxon land?

Are you putting us on or just obtuse? Haven't you ever learned or noticed that languages have changed over the centuries. Just like peoples and cultures, they change, evolve, adapt, are influenced by other cultures & languages, etc. Thus shoppe turns to shop ... we park in the driveway and drive on the parkway ... etc., etc.

[khunPer]

Siam was a misunderstanding from when the first Europeans, Portuguese, came to Thailand and asked the elite (Chinese group of people from whom the Kings were elected), from where they came; Xian the said, and the Portuguese wrote it as “Siam” (A History of Thailand, Cambridge University Press, page 8).

The elite people are “Tai”, not to mess with the word thai, the name of the country was (and is again) “Muengnua Thai” (Thai Country), where mueang means city-state, i.e. Country of Free City-states. Timeline is back at Sukhothai period, so late Medival, around 1300; the capital was moved to Ayutthaya in 1351 (same book, page 5-6).

The "Kings were elected"??

From what I have read of ancient Thai history, the historians talks about elected (or selected) by the elite from the elite (noble/royal families) based on skills in battle/warfare and politics, but also charisma, during the 400-years of Sukothai and Ayutthaya periods – rather a question of whom of the many princes in the polygamous dynasties that had most supporters – but it’s also mentioned that noble generals took the throne in a kind of coup d’etat.

The present Chakri dynasty were founded after the second fall of Ayutthaya by King Taksin (Rama I) – a son of a Chinese tax-collector and Siamese mother, he was adopted by the “Prime Minister” and given the Thai name “Sin”, but called “Prince Tak” by his supporters after showing skills in warfare – his coronation as King of Siam was in 1767, the following year he relocated the capital to Thonburi on the riverbank opposite a trade station named Bangkok.

[fgh654vb]

1. The ally of Siam at the time (1939) was Deutchland -> the leaders at the time thought that changing the name to Thailand would put them more in line with their ally. (one theory)

2. In Thailand, one way of getting a new start, fresh start, or starting over is to change ohe's name. (another theory)

[Richard W]

The present Chakri dynasty were founded after the second fall of Ayutthaya by King Taksin (Rama I) a son of a Chinese tax-collector and Siamese mother, he was adopted by the Prime Minister and given the Thai name Sin, but called Prince Tak by his supporters after showing skills in warfare his coronation as King of Siam was in 1767, the following year he relocated the capital to Thonburi on the riverbank opposite a trade station named Bangkok.

Rama I, the founder of the Chakri dynasty, succeeded Taksin when the latter became unacceptable.

[AYJAYDEE]

Thailand has never been colonized but it has been occupied by the Japanese, British and Americans.

Isn't that apples and oranges, though?

no

[AYJAYDEE]

Whenever a poser like this comes up I ask my good lady. So I just asked her what does the Thai word "thai" mean...I got the usual answer...Mi-loo. I asked her what is the Thai word for "free" or "freedom"...she rattled off something that was a million miles from the word "thai". I come across this a lot. I could ask 20 Thai people what a certain word means and get 20 different answers. I also sometimes ask Thai people what a word I hear regularly in use means...and a lot of the time i get "Mi-loo" again. Kinda puzzles me how people use a word a lot of the time and don't actually know what it means. One I have been trying to find a meaning for is "Na"....as in "Na-Krap". I have never met a Thai person who can tell me what the "Na" means even though is used a million times a day by many people?

in that context, it doesnt have a meaning. its used to make the words flow properly

[kurtramsbottom]

I wouldn't read too much from a countries name.

Ever been to Greenland?

Iceland comes close but does have an argument against it

[micmichd]

I wouldn't read too much from a countries name.

Ever been to Greenland?

Greenland was full of green meadows some 1000 years ago.