Slavery in Thailand, a reappraisal

A ceiling painting in the Ananta Samakhon Throne Room shows how King Chulalongkorn freed the slaves. It is an almost Byzantine scene: Chulalongkorn standing majestically in the center against a beautiful sky and lying at his feet are half-naked, indistinct and dark figures with broken chains.

This happened in 1905 after he and his father Mongkut had already relaxed various laws and regulations on chore services and slavery in previous years. This is one of the many reforms Chulalongkorn made and why he is still loved and honored by all Thais. There is a real veneration around his person, especially among the rising middle class and a portrait of him can be admired in almost every home. The old 100-baht banknote also shows this emancipation scene.

I might add that in the colonial empire of the civilized European nation of the Netherlands, the Dutch East Indies, slavery was only completely and definitively abolished in 1914. We have nothing to be proud of about slavery.

The 'official' history of slavery in Thailand

Both Thai and Western historiography on Thailand is particularly reticent when it comes to slavery. In most history books a few lines are dedicated to it, usually in the sense of 'it was not too bad' and 'one's own fault'. That has a number of reasons. It was the famous prince Damrong (1862-1943) and Kukrit Pramoj (1911-1995) who assumed without question that all Thais must have been free, because the word 'thai' also meant 'free'. In addition, slavery in Thailand was seen as uniquely 'Thai', less cruel and coercive, and completely different from the West. Many said that slavery should be seen in the 'Southeast Asian context', as a link in the patron-client relationship. Furthermore, the population would have consisted of 'only' thirty percent slaves, most of whom would have been (voluntary) debt slaves (with the possibility of release) and they were treated well.

Bishop Pallegroix (1857): '…slaves in Siam are treated well, better than servants in England..just like children of their masters…'

Slavery has existed throughout Southeast Asia for centuries. The image shows a relief of slaves in the Khmer Empire (about 1100). We can safely assume that all those beautiful monuments from the Khmer Empire, but also those in Thailand until 1900, were mainly built by slaves, although many Chinese guest workers also participated in Thailand.

Southeast Asia was rich in land and resources but poor in people. The main concern of the rulers was the need to bring more people to their empire, usually by organizing raids in neighboring countries.

This last sentence is an important part of the following story, most of which I take from Katherine Bowie's article mentioned below. She delved into old sources, quoted more European travelers and interviewed old to very old people about what they remembered. A completely different picture emerges from that than from the descriptions of the above-mentioned books and persons. She mainly writes about the ancient kingdom of Lanna, but also about Central Thailand.

Number of slaves and type of slavery

What slavery really looked like in ancient Siam, particularly in the nineteenth century. Dr. Richardson says in his diary of his travels to Chiang Mai (1830) that three quarters of the population were not only slaves but war slaves (that's what I call prisoners of war who were held in slavery). General McLeod also mentions a figure of two thirds of the population as slaves in Chiang Mai, many of whom came from the areas north of Chiang Mai, which was then Burma. John Freeman (1910) estimates that half of Lampung's population was made up of slaves, the majority of whom were war slaves. Other sources tell of the numbers of slaves of the noble class. People in the highest class owned between 500 and 1.500 (the king) slaves, while lesser gods like the Phrayas owned between 12 and 20 slaves. These numbers also show that at least half of the population must have been slaves.

Oral tradition paints a similar picture, bearing in mind that no one likes to admit that they are descended from a slave. War slaves were a majority of all slaves. Many villages consisted entirely of war slaves. Those who could provide information about their ancestors' ancestry very often placed it outside Chiang Mai, in the areas north (now southern China, Burma (the Shan States) and what is now Laos).

War slaves

As I noted above, for the rulers of Southeast Asia, control over people was much more important than control over land. There was a proverb that said 'kep phak nai saa, kep khaa nai meuang' ('put the vegetables in a basket and put the slaves in the city'). The famous inscription of Ramkhamhaeng (13th century) of Sukhothai, who is generally seen as a 'paternal' ruler, also says this: '…if I attack a village or a city and take elephants, ivory, men and women, then I will give all that to my father.' The chronicles describe how King Tilok of Lanna took 12.328 war slaves after a conquest in the Shan States (Burma, 1445) and settled them in Lanna 'where they still live today'.

Simon de la Loubère, in his description of Ayutthaya in the seventeenth century, says: 'They are only engaged in driving slaves'. Ayutthaya and Burma outdid each other in plundering towns and cities.

mr. Gould, a Briton, describes what he saw in 1876. '…The Siamese warfare (in Laos) turned into a hunt for slaves on a grand scale. All they had to do was drive the slaves to Bangkok. The unfortunate creatures, men, women and children, many still infants, were herded through the jungle to the Menam (Chaophraya). slavers in Africa. Many died of diseases, others were left sick in the jungle…'. The rest of his story follows suit.

After the capture (and total destruction) of Vientiane in 1826, 6.000 families were taken to Central Thailand. After a revolt in Cambodia in 1873 and its suppression by Siamese troops, thousands of people were enslaved. Bowring estimated that there were 45.000 war slaves in Bangkok during the reign of Rama III. They were the property of the king, who gave them in part to his subjects. An English quote:

“Wales claims that “no regard was paid to the sufferings of the persons thus transported” (1934:63). Lingat refers to frequent

mistreatment and Crawfurd considered that war captives were better treated by the Burmese than the Siamese, despite his judgment that in

where the Burmese were “cruel and ferocious to the last degree”; and none were condemned to work in chains as in Siam” (Crawfurd 1830, Vol 1:422, Vol 2:134-135).

Antonin Cee quoted King Mongkut several times: 'Don't whip the slaves in front of foreigners'. That regarding the treatment of slaves in ancient Siam.

Let me be brief about the following. Bowie also describes how in the border regions of Siam there was a brisk trade in slaves obtained through local raids on villages and kidnappings. There was also a trade in slaves from other parts of Asia, especially from India.

Debt bondage

Bowie finally goes into more detail about debt slavery. She shows that it was often not a personal decision, but that the politics and coercion of the state played a major role in addition to poverty and very high interest rates.

Conclusion

Research by Bowie shows that the number of slaves in Thailand was much larger than often stated, half to more of the total population. This certainly applies to Northern Thailand and most likely also to Central Thailand. She disputes that economic necessity (debt bondage) was the main cause of slavery. Violence, such as war, robbery, kidnapping and trade, played a much greater role.

Finally, there are many testimonials that show that the treatment of slaves was no better than we know from the cruel Atlantic slave trade.

Finally, this also means that the population of Thailand is not a 'pure Thai race' (if such a thing can even exist), as the ideology of 'Thainess' claims, but a mixture of many different peoples.

Sources:

• Katherine A. Bowie, Slavery in nineteenth century northern Thailand: archival anecdotes and village voices, Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia, 2006
• RB Cruikshank, Slavery in nineteenth century Siam, PDF, J. of Siam Society, 1975

'previously published on Trefpunt Thailand'