• Can inscriptions help reconstruct how a kingdom expanded across a landscape?

King Citrasena (Chitrasen, later known as Mahendravarman) ruled Chenla in the late 6th to early 7th centuries, during a period when Chenla’s influence was extending across parts of what are now Cambodia, Laos and northeastern Thailand. His reign is known partly through inscriptions recording religious foundations, royal achievements and other acts of authority. 

Pailoplee and Khatshima map 21 inscriptions from at least 19 locations associated with Citrasena, and asked if people were moving between these places, which routes would they have taken? To explore this, they use Least Cost Path (LCP) modelling in a GIS. LCP calculates routes that minimise the “cost” of movement across terrain.

In archaeology, this can help identify plausible corridors shaped by features such as slopes, river valleys and mountain barriers. These models show how movement could have been structured by the landscape under the assumptions of the model.

Across several scenarios, the reconstructed paths repeatedly concentrate around major river systems—especially the Mun River—and particular passes through the Phnom Dong Rek (Dangrek) mountain range. The authors also compare the modelled network with archaeological sites attributed to Citrasena’s period, many of which fall along these reconstructed corridors.

Where river navigation would have been difficult (such as the Khone Phapheng Falls), the authors propose that Citrasena’s forces may instead have moved overland along riverbanks, using waterways as natural guides through the landscape.

The placement of several inscriptions near river confluences also suggests that these locations may have been important for controlling movement, communication and exchange, not simply access to water.

Reference
Pailoplee, S. & Khatshima, K. 2026. “The role of King Chitrasen (Mahendravarman) in the expansion of the Chenla Kingdom: A study of inscriptions and historical geography.” Social Sciences & Humanities Open 14, 103503.
10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.103503

#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Cambodia #Thailand #Laos #Chenla
  • Sometimes the biggest archaeological questions depend on evidence we cannot see during excavation.

Microarchaeology investigates archaeological deposits at microscopic and microstratigraphic scales. In Southeast Asia, this can be especially valuable because monsoonal wetness, tropical weathering, intensive land use and complex depositional histories can affect how archaeological evidence survives. 

Researchers can examine the surrounding sediment for traces of past activity and later disturbance. Methods discussed in this new paper include sediment micromorphology, laboratory micro-excavation, high-resolution imaging, FTIR microscopy and SEM-EDS. Depending on the context, microscopic evidence can help identify burning, trampling, plant processing, sediment movement and environmental change. 

The importance of that context is illustrated by work in northern Laos. At Tam Ngu Hao 2, microstratigraphy was used alongside lithological observations and dating to establish the stratigraphic context of Denisovan fossil evidence. At Tam Pà Ling, it has shown potential for investigating environmental seasonality and possible patterns of early modern human presence. These methods help archaeologists understand what happened to a deposit before drawing conclusions from what it contains.
 
The paper also introduces the Australian Microarchaeology and Palaeosciences Facility (AusMAP) and argues for greater collaboration, training and locally based microarchaeological expertise across Southeast Asia. 

Reference:
Hernandez et al. 2026. Scaling down to look further back: Southeast Asia, deep-time science and microarchaeology. SPAFA Journal 10.
10.26721/spafajournal.651369a4y8 

#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Archaeology #Microarchaeology #Geoarchaeology #ArchaeologicalScience
  • This week on Southeast Asian Archaeology: claims, contexts and careful reading.⠀
⠀
With Malaysia’s National Day, Vietnam’s National Day, Timor-Leste’s Popular Consultation Day, and International Literacy Day all close together, I’m thinking about literacy not just as reading words, but reading evidence: museum labels, old spellings, dates, maps, artefacts, archives, and the occasional viral post with a raised eyebrow.⠀
⠀
The catalyst this week is the recent controversy over historical claims in Malaysia, alongside a timely RSIS piece on how historians, archaeologists, archivists, librarians and curators can help push back against disinformation. Not by attacking people, but by helping everyone ask better questions of the past.⠀
⠀
Also in this week’s issue: Penang’s historical Malay spellings, Cambodia’s new artefact database grant, Singapore’s revised History Gallery, UNESCO’s maritime museum project, new research on Sundadonty, Roti Island, Chenla inscriptions, ancient Myanmar, and more.⠀
⠀
Link in bio.⠀
⠀
#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Archaeology #Heritage #InformationLiteracy
  • How old are the rock paintings of Mainland Southeast Asia? 🎨🪨

A new study from Mangguan in Yunnan, southwestern China, provides another important piece of the puzzle.

Using uranium-thorium dating, researchers analysed tiny calcite deposits that had formed over the paintings. Because the calcite must be younger than the pigment underneath, the dates provide a minimum age for the art. One deposit covering a human figure shows that the painting was already there at least 4,220 years ago.

Mangguan is particularly interesting because it lies only about 15 km from the better-known Cangyuan rock art complex. The two have stylistic similarities and overlapping dates, suggesting they formed part of a broader regional rock art tradition, a comparison can be taken farther south.

The rock paintings at Pha Taem in Luang Prabang, Laos, have previously been compared with Cangyuan, raising intriguing questions about relationships between the rock art traditions of southwestern China and Mainland Southeast Asia.

Most rock art in Mainland Southeast Asia remains poorly dated, so dates like those from Mangguan give us increasingly useful chronological anchors for thinking about these connections.

References:
Wu, Y. et al. 2026. U-Th dating of rock paintings in southwestern China: minimum age of ~4.2 ka BP at the Mangguan site. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 74, 105987. DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2026.105987.

Bo, X. 2020. On the relationship between the Cangyuan rock art in Yunnan, China, and the Pha Taem rock art in Laos. Rock Art Research 37(2).

Tan, N.H. 2018. The Cliff Paintings of Pha Taem, Luang Prabang, Lao PDR. Rock Art Research 35(1).

#RockArt #SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Yunnan #China
  • Extraordinary claims about the past can be exciting. But how do we tell an exciting new hypothesis from pseudoarchaeology?

Recent controversy in Malaysia over claims that ancient Malays taught the Romans shipbuilding provides a useful case study. Rather than piling on the person behind the claims, I think there is a more useful question to ask: how would we actually test an idea like this?

Archaeology gives us some simple tools.

Do the dates work? What is the primary evidence? Does the evidence actually demonstrate the connection being claimed? Are there better explanations? And perhaps most importantly: what evidence would make us reject the hypothesis?

Ancient Southeast Asians really were sophisticated seafarers. Srivijaya really was one of Asia’s great maritime powers. Sungai Batu really does preserve remarkable evidence for early iron production.

None of those achievements needs embellishment to make Southeast Asian archaeology extraordinary.

Swipe through for five questions you can use the next time you encounter an astonishing claim about the ancient past.

🚩 Remember: possibility is not evidence, similarity does not necessarily mean transmission, and extraordinary claims still have to survive ordinary archaeological scrutiny.

Read more about the archaeology behind these claims in this week’s Southeast Asian Archaeology Newsletter.

#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Pseudoarchaeology #Malaysia #MaritimeArchaeology #MediaLiteracy
  • A 4,000-year-old painted stone from Wetar Island may change how we understand the Austronesian story.⠀
⠀
Archaeologists excavating Huknaur 1 in Southeast Indonesia found a painted plaque with a red sun-ray motif linked to the Austronesian Painting Tradition — a wider visual tradition known from eastern Indonesia and nearby islands.⠀
⠀
What makes this find so important is that the plaque appears to be older than the first pottery at the site. That means a shared symbolic tradition may have been present before the full Neolithic package usually associated with Austronesian expansion. This discovery suggests that ideas, symbols, and identity may have travelled ahead of pottery.⠀
⠀
It is a reminder that the spread of people goes beyond tools, crops, or ceramics, and may also have been about belief, belonging, and a shared visual language carried across the sea.⠀
⠀
Swipe through to see why this small object has such big implications.⠀
⠀
Reference:⠀
O’Connor, S., Kealy, S., Kaharudin, H.A.F., et al. (2026). 4000-year-old painted plaque from Southeast Indonesia reveals Austronesian Painting Tradition preceded Neolithic pottery. PNAS 123(34): e2611580123.⠀
⠀
#SoutheastAsianArchaeology #RockArt #Austronesian #Indonesia #Wetar #SoutheastAsia #IslandSoutheastAsia #AustronesianPaintingTradition
  • Plaques, Ponds and Provenance⠀
⠀
This week’s newsletter begins with a 4,000-year-old painted plaque from Wetar Island — a small object with a big story.⠀
⠀
The plaque carries a red sun-like motif linked to the Austronesian Painting Tradition, and it appears before pottery at the site. That suggests visual symbols and shared ideas may have moved through maritime Southeast Asia before some of the usual archaeological markers we associate with Austronesian expansion.⠀
⠀
Also this week: archaeology beneath Angkor’s Sras Srang, suspected Ban Chiang artefacts offered for return from Switzerland, and more heritage news from across the region.⠀
⠀
Link in bio.
  • How do you make a 3-metre stone stand upright for centuries?

At Hintang in northern Laos, archaeologists are beginning to answer that question.

In 2025, a Lao-Australian team excavated Site 7A — the first excavation at a Hintang standing-stone site in around 90 years. Beneath the surface, they found that the stones had been set deeply into pits, with smaller rocks packed around their bases to stabilise them. Roughly one-third of each standing stone was buried underground.

One big question remains, though — how old are the Hintang stones?

Samples were collected for dating, but those results are still being analysed. So, for now, we understand a little more about how these monuments were built.

📖 Shewan, L., O’Reilly, D., Armstrong, B. & Butphachit, A. (2026). “Surveys of Hintang standing stone sites and excavations at Site 7A, Houaphanh, Lao PDR.” Antiquity.
doi: 10.15184/aqy.2026.10408

#Archaeology #SoutheastAsianArchaeology #Laos #Megaliths #Hintang #AncientTechnology #ArchaeologicalResearch #Heritage #NewResearch
  • Angkor’s water system is famous for its scale: enormous reservoirs, long canals, and monumental engineering.⠀
⠀
New research by archaeologist Sarah Klassen highlights how Angkor’s agricultural system also depended on more than 1,000 local temple communities spread across the Greater Angkor Region. These communities helped organise labour, manage local water systems, and coordinate rice production - and suggests that Angkor’s success was built through a combination of top-down and bottom-up management.⠀
⠀
The state created the large hydraulic framework. Local communities adapted to it, expanded around it, and helped make the wider agricultural landscape function.⠀
⠀
Over time, however, this balance changed. Land and resources became increasingly concentrated, the system became more centralised, and some of the flexibility that had helped Angkor cope with earlier environmental stress may have been lost.⠀
⠀
Beyond its temples and kings, Angkor
  • New Evidence from the Southeast Asian Borderlands⠀
⠀
This week in Southeast Asian Archaeology: new dates, new methods, and some wonderfully untidy timelines.⠀
⠀
🪨 Uranium-thorium dating pushes the Mangguan rock paintings in Yunnan back to at least 4,220 years ago⠀
 🥁 AI-assisted restoration takes on damaged imagery on Guangxi bronze drums⠀
 🌾 New work at Angkor asks how infrastructure, local communities and water management shaped resilience⠀
 🗿 Lao-Australian fieldwork maps and excavates the enigmatic Hintang standing stones⠀
⠀
Plus archaeology and heritage news from across Southeast Asia, new research, opportunities, and more.⠀
⠀
I’ve also started experimenting with short visual explainers of new archaeology papers here on Instagram — so follow along if you like your archaeology with fewer footnotes and more pixels.⠀
⠀
Read the latest SEAArch newsletter via the link in bio.⠀
⠀
#Archaeology #SoutheastAsianArchaeology #SoutheastAsia #RockArt #Angkor #Laos #Yunnan #Heritage #ArchaeologicalResearch #DigitalHeritage
Sunday, September 6, 2026
Southeast Asian Archaeology
  • News
  • Resources
  • Countries
    • Southeast Asia
    • Mainland Southeast Asia
      • Cambodia
      • Laos
      • Malaysia
      • Myanmar
      • Thailand
      • Vietnam
    • Island Southeast Asia
      • Brunei
      • Indonesia
      • Malaysia
      • Philippines
      • Singapore
      • Timor Leste
    • Peripheral Southeast Asia
  • Topics
    • Artifact Type
      • Architecture
      • Bones and Burials
      • Ceramics
      • Intangible Cultural Heritage
      • Lithics
      • Megaliths
      • Rock Art
      • Sculpture
    • Field
      • Anthropology
      • Bioarchaeology
      • Epigraphy
      • General Archaeology
      • Metallurgy and Metalworking
      • Paleontology
      • Underwater Archaeology
      • Visual Art
      • Zooarchaeology
    • Other Themes
      • Animism
      • Buddhism
      • Christianity
      • Disaster Risk Management
      • Hinduism
      • Islam
      • Archaeological Tourism in Southeast Asia
  • Visit
    • Virtual Archaeology
    • Unesco World Heritage
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe
  • About
    • About
    • Supporters
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact
No Result
View All Result
Southeast Asian Archaeology
  • News
  • Resources
  • Countries
    • Southeast Asia
    • Mainland Southeast Asia
      • Cambodia
      • Laos
      • Malaysia
      • Myanmar
      • Thailand
      • Vietnam
    • Island Southeast Asia
      • Brunei
      • Indonesia
      • Malaysia
      • Philippines
      • Singapore
      • Timor Leste
    • Peripheral Southeast Asia
  • Topics
    • Artifact Type
      • Architecture
      • Bones and Burials
      • Ceramics
      • Intangible Cultural Heritage
      • Lithics
      • Megaliths
      • Rock Art
      • Sculpture
    • Field
      • Anthropology
      • Bioarchaeology
      • Epigraphy
      • General Archaeology
      • Metallurgy and Metalworking
      • Paleontology
      • Underwater Archaeology
      • Visual Art
      • Zooarchaeology
    • Other Themes
      • Animism
      • Buddhism
      • Christianity
      • Disaster Risk Management
      • Hinduism
      • Islam
      • Archaeological Tourism in Southeast Asia
  • Visit
    • Virtual Archaeology
    • Unesco World Heritage
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe
  • About
    • About
    • Supporters
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact
No Result
View All Result
Southeast Asian Archaeology
No Result
View All Result
ADVERTISEMENT

Related Posts

Source: Bangkok Post 20240801

Southeast Asia’s Ruins: The Case for Minimal Restoration

1 August 2024
0
96

...

Source: Vietnam Express 20240731

Hoi An’s Pagoda Bridge Repainted After ‘Too New’ Complaints

1 August 2024
0
66

...

Source: Borneo Post 20240730

Niah Caves to Attract Global Researchers

1 August 2024
0
37

...

Source: Borneo Post 20240730

Sarawak Boosts Niah Tourism After Unesco Recognition

1 August 2024
0
20

...

Popular This Week

  • Southeast Asian Archaeology memes that will tickle your funny bone and also make you ponder

    Southeast Asian Archaeology memes that will tickle your funny bone and also make you ponder

    68 shares
    Share 68 Tweet 0
  • The most influential books on Southeast Asian Archaeology (a crowdsourced list)

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Southeast Asian Archaeology from a Rock Art Perspective (with annotations)

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • [Paper] Early Metal Age Settlement at the Site of Palemba, Kalumpang, Karama Valley, West Sulawesi

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Negritos or Malays: Who are the original inhabitants of the Philippines?

    2 shares
    Share 2 Tweet 0
Buy me a coffeeBuy me a coffee

If you found this site useful, you can help support it by buying me a coffee!

Ayutthaya, Metropolis of the East

7 April 2008
in Thailand
Tags: Ayutthaya (kingdom)Ayutthaya (province)Ayutthaya Historical ParkBaan HollandaChao Phraya RiverDutch East India Company (VOC)muralNarai the Great (person)Unesco World HeritageWat Phanan Choeng (temple)
1
SHARES
154
VIEWS
Ayutthaya, Metropolis of the East

I was in Bangkok last week but I didn’t make the day trip to the former Thai capital of Ayutthaya as planned. Set in an island in the confluence of the Lopburi, Prasak and Chao Praya rivers, Ayutthaya was the capital to the Thai kingdom from the 14th to 18th centuries. It received many foreign visitors, from as far away as Europe and came to be known as the Venice of the East.

Ancient cultural melting pot [Link no longer active]
Bangkok Post, 05 April 2008

Foreigners thrived in Old Ayutthaya

Ayutthaya, the old capital of Siam, is not only important as a World Heritage listed by Unesco but is also a testament of old Siam’s rich cultural diversity.

“Ayutthaya was full of cultural blends among people of many nations and races,” Anek Sihamat, director of the Third Regional Office of Fine Arts, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya, said.

According to the director, Ayutthaya was mentioned in Dutch, French and Chinese documents as an inland port city where foreigners could trade with Ayutthaya’s kings via the Phra Khlang department.

Its important exports included forest and wild animal products, deer skins in particular. Outstanding foreign traders included the Dutch United East India Company, or VOC for Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie in Dutch. It brought into Ayutthaya goods, especially pottery, from Japan, China and Europe, and exported Siamese goods from Ayutthaya to Japan, Europe and Batavia.

All foreign settlements, except for some Chinese ones, were situated outside the city walls to the south. The Japanese and Dutch communities were located not far from each other. Opposite the Japanese area stood the Portuguese settlement, which consisted of three churches.

In the north were the Chinese, Makassarese, French and Vietnamese settlements, while the Laotian community was situated in the northeast and the Muslim settlement near the Takhian canal.

However, a number of Chinese were allowed to live inside the city walls near the Makham Riang canal. The Chinese mostly earned their living from selling pork, running liquor factories and making furniture and housewares, the director added.

According to Charnvit Kasetsiri and Michael Wright’s Discovering Ayutthaya, Simon de La Loubere, a French envoy to the Kingdom in the reign of King Narai, recorded, relying on oral accounts, that there were as many as 40 ethnic groups under the Ayutthayan king’s sovereignty.

Dhiravat na Pombejra, leading historian and former history lecturer at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Arts, said the nihon-machi (Japanese village) dates to the late 16th to early 17th centuries. Surrounded by canals on three sides, it ran one kilometre along the river and extended 500 metres inland.

The first Japanese who came to settle in Siam were either Roman Catholics fleeing persecution, or so-called ronin, samurai who had lost their masters during the civil wars that ended in victory for the Tokugawa family at the Battle of Sekigahara (1600).

Like other foreign settlements in and around Ayutthaya, the Japanese settlement was a separate village governed by its own leader (or nai). Many Japanese became mercenaries in the service of the kings of Siam.

The most famous of the Japanese mercenary leaders in Ayutthaya was Yamada Nagamasa, who received the rank and title of Okya Senaphimuk from the Siamese king. He and his followers played a crucial role in the fierce succession conflicts that took place from 1628 to 1629 and led to the usurpation of the throne by Okya Kalahom, or King Prasat Thong, who reigned from 1629 to 1656.

In his Diary of the Picnic Incident, Jeremias van Vliet, then director of VOC’s Siam factory, wrote about “pressure from these bald-headed villains”, referring to the Japanese samurai.

According to van Vliet’s Description of the Kingdom of Siam 1638, King Prasat Thong, who once cracked down on the Japanese community in Ayutthaya, called those who had fled away back again after a short time in fear of their revenge. And when their number rose to between 70 and 80, the king gave them a fine tract of land to live on and bestowed titles of honour on the three most prominent Japanese, appointed these men as chiefs over the others, and placed them under one of his mandarins.

In late 1636, there were still about 70 to 80 samurai, whom the king employed as mercenaries, living in Ayutthaya’s Japanese quarter, which adjoined the VOC compound. Most of the samurai had Siamese wives, with whom they had children. And since there were also some Japanese merchants residing in Ayutthaya, the total population of the Japanese quarter may have been about 400 to 550 (see van Vliet’s Siam by Chris Baker, Dhiravat na Pombejra, Alfons van der Kraan and David K. Wyatt).

Dhiravat added that the Japanese intermarried with locals, and soon the community was predominantly mestizo. A famous Luso-Japanese mestizo was Maria Pina de Guimar, who married Greek adventurer Constantine Phaulkon in the 1680s.

Opposite the Japanese village stood the Portuguese settlement, overlooking the Chao Phraya River on the west and having canals on the other three sides. Covering an area of over half a square kilometre, the settlement had three churches of three Catholic orders: The Franciscans in the north of the settlement, the Dominicans in the centre and the Jesuits to the south.

Dhiravat said that the Portuguese settled in Siam in the first half of the 16th century, not long after first arriving to trade with Siam from 1510 to 1511. The Portuguese not only traded there but also became much in demand as mercenaries, thanks to their knowledge of firearms and modern warfare.

Apparently, the land of the Portuguese settlement was granted to the Portuguese as a reward for their help for King Chairacha, who reigned from 1534 to 1547, in the battle of Chiang Kran. During that campaign, according to Portuguese traveller Fernao Mendes Pinto, 120 Portuguese fought for the Siamese king.

In the mid-16th century, there were around 130 Portuguese in Ayutthaya. However, the population of the Portuguese settlement must have grown as more mestizo children were born. By the late 17th century Nicolas Gervaise, a French priest, reported that there were 700 to 800 households in the Portuguese camp, and Father Tachard was told by Constantine Phaulkon that there were in 1685 a little over 4,000 people in the Portuguese settlement. In Thai history, the Portuguese are famous not only for their ships, guns and soldiers but also for their introduction into Siamese cuisine egg-based desserts such as foi thong by Maria Guimar.

The ruins of the Dominican church of St Peter and St Paul, also called Sao Domingos, were excavated by the Fine Arts Department in the mid-1980s with funding from the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation in Lisbon. Many skeletons, coins, rosaries, crucifixes and Dutch clay pipes were found during the excavations. There used to be three churches in all in the Portuguese village, but the Dominican church is the only one that has been excavated.

The skeletons uncovered were mostly those of mestizos from intermarriages. The Portuguese stayed long in Siam, from the early 16th century until the fall of Ayutthaya in 1767. Some Portuguese were even taken to Burma as hostages by the Burmese invaders. The rest followed King Taksin the Great to settle down in Thon Buri, Dhiravat added.

Historian Bulong Srikanok of the Fine Arts Department said that the Portuguese language was used as the official language for trade and diplomacy by the Siamese from the reign of King Ramathibodi II (1491 to 1529) until Siam signed the Burney Treaty with Britain in 1826. That treaty was in three languages – Portuguese, Chinese and English.

According to her, all high-level officials in Ayutthaya could use the Portuguese language fluently.

Father Tachard, who came with the French mission, reported that Siamese nobles were able to converse in Portuguese. During their voyage to Siam, the French Jesuits spent eight months learning Portuguese so that they could communicate directly with the Siamese nobles.

As Portugal was believed to have adopted a policy to convert the Siamese through intermarriages, there were many mestizos born to Portuguese fathers and Mon, Siamese or Chinese mothers in Ayutthaya. After the fall of Ayutthaya, many of their descendants settled in an area of Thon Buri called Kudijeen and worked as Thai-Portuguese translators for the state until the Bangkok period. These translators were called Lam Kudijeen, Bulong added.

By the river on a private-owned dockyard in Tambon Klong Suan Phlu, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya district, once stood the Dutch settlement.

As part of the celebrations marking 400 years of Dutch-Thai relations (1604 to 2004), the Fine Arts Department began an archaeological excavation in the area in October 2003, and found traces of the main building, ceramic shards (Chinese, Vietnamese, Siamese), glassware, Dutch pipes, Chinese coins, cowrie shells and many other items.

Dhiravat said that this site was the Dutch United East India Company’s trading agency from around 1635 to 1765. The land was given to the Dutch in 1634 by King Prasat Thong as a reward for having helped Ayutthaya fight Pattani.

The Dutch first came to Ayutthaya in 1604, hoping for passage to China on a Siamese ship. Although disappointed in this matter, the Dutch stayed on in Ayutthaya, opening a factorij (trading company) in 1608.

Importing silver, Indian textiles and other goods, the Dutch United East India Company, or VOC, exported from Siam forest produce, such as deer skins, sapan wood (a dyewood), eagle wood (an aromatic wood), ivory, wax and benzoin, along with rice, tin and ray skins.

According to a journal kept by Dutch doctor Gijsbert Heecq (or Heeck), in 1655 the Dutch lodge or factorij comprised several buildings, storehouses or godowns, a garden and a graveyard. The head of the Dutch settlement at any given time was of course the head merchant, or opperhoofd, of the VOC trading office in Ayutthaya.

The employees of the VOC lived with local women (mainly Mons), and the Dutch settlement, like other foreign communities in Ayutthaya, came to have a strong mestizo element. Problems concerning mestizo children turned into legal problems in Ayutthaya, leading to the Tra Sam Duang (Three Seals) Law which banned Siamese Buddhist, Laotian and Mon women from marrying Westerners, Muslims and Malaccans. However, enforcement was ineffective. No women were punished for violating the law, Dhiravat said.

According to Dirk van der Cruysse’s Siam & The West 1500-1700, King Narai refused to consent to the departure of children born of Dutch fathers and Siamese mothers, holding that they were his subjects; he only allowed the departure of children under seven years of age.

Dhiravat added that the Dutch stayed longer than the French and other foreigners since they focused on trade. They even offered space on their ships to send Siamese monks to help ease the Buddhist crisis in Sri Lanka. This was recorded in some Dutch papers.

However, there was a scandal involving the Dutch in Ayutthaya. It was called the Picnic Incident.

According to van Vliet’s Report and Historical Account of the Events, on December 16, 1636, a group of Dutchmen sailed past the king’s palace and breached the palace’s safety rules. They continued to party at the sacred Wat Boeretiet (Vorachet). Some of them later scolded and hit a servant of the prince, and entered a house of sick Siamese and stole their food.

When King Prasat Thong learned about the incident, he was outraged and ordered all those Dutchmen arrested and stomped to death by elephants. Thereafter, trading activities between Ayutthaya and the VOC became restricted.

On the bank of the Chao Phraya River outside the city walls to the south stood the French settlement. It was bordered by Khlong Takhian on the west and Wat Phutthaisawan on the east.

Dhiravat said that the first Roman Catholic church on this site was built in the 1660s, on land given to the French Society of Foreign Missions (Societe des Missions Etrangeres) by King Narai (1656 to 1688).

According to him, the Paris-based Society’s vicars-apostolic Bishops Pierre Lambert de la Motte and Francois Pallu arrived in Siam in 1662 and 1664 respectively. They were warmly welcomed by King Narai, who wanted to learn about France, European politics, the court of King Louis XIV and the Christian religion. They therefore decided to stay on and found a mission in Siam with the aim of educating Asians so that they could be ordained and thus work.

The community of French priests was small, but their parishioners and students were Tonkin and Cochinchinese Vietnamese, Chinese, Mons and a few Siamese.

During the Burmese invasion of 1765 to 1767, this area (also called Ban or Bang Plahet) was used as a camp, and was destroyed by the invaders even before the fall of Ayutthaya itself. The church was rebuilt in the reign of King Mongkut in the mid-19th century. The present Victorian-style building dates from the reign of King Chulalongkorn, when St Joseph’s was rebuilt again on the initiative of the French vicar apostolic at that time, Bishop Jean-Louis Vey, and consecrated in 1891. There is still an important Roman Catholic school on the site.

According to Discovering Ayutthaya, there was an English settlement in Ayutthaya. In 1612, King Song Tham granted officers of the British East India Company a large building on the bank of the Chao Phraya River south of the Dutch settlement. Despite support from the king, the company eventually suffered great losses and finally had to withdraw since some British agents tended to trade on their own account.

In Ayutthaya, there were accounts of different groups of Muslims, namely, Moors, Arabs, Persians, Indians, Chams, Makassarese, Malays, Javanese and people from Pattani in the South. They were under the Phra Khlang department that dealt with traders from the “Indic” world. The Muslims were collectively referred to as khaek.

Around Wat Phananchoeng, one of the oldest temples in Ayutthaya, there used to be a large Chinese settlement. It is where the Pak Sak and Chao Phraya rivers join. In the Ayutthaya period, Chinese junks usually anchored in front of this temple.

In the 17th century, many Chinese settled around this temple.

Like many other foreigners, they married Mon women in Ayutthaya, who were rather strong and independent, said Dhiravat.

Anek Sihamat, director of the Third Regional Office of Fine Arts, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya, believed that many foreigners settled down in Ayutthaya due to the Ayutthayan kings’ open-door policy to promote trade.

Certain pieces of art in Ayutthaya reflect foreign influence, such as murals depicting the Chinese in Wat Rajaburana, some Buddha statues with Chinese inscriptions and some Western and Persian-style buildings dating to the reign of King Narai (1656 to 1688), he added.

Anuje Sirikit, a member of the National Museum Volunteers group, said during the recent NMV excursion to foreign settlements in Ayutthaya, “The more I learn about the foreign settlements in Ayutthaya, the more my heart is open to cultural diversity.”

Subscribe to the weekly Southeast Asian Archaeology news digest

Latest Books

The following are affiliate links for which I may earn a commission if you click and make a purchase. Click here for more books about Southeast Asian archaeology.
Sale Malay Silver and Gold: Courtly Splendour from Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei and Thailand
Malay Silver and Gold: Courtly Splendour from...
Amazon Prime
$38.54
Buy on Amazon
Sale The Oxford Guide to the Malayo-Polynesian Languages of Southeast Asia (Oxford Guides to the World's Languages)
The Oxford Guide to the Malayo-Polynesian...
Amazon Prime
$165.87
Buy on Amazon
Sale Majapahit: Sculptures from a Forgotten Kingdom
Majapahit: Sculptures from a Forgotten Kingdom
$44.08
Buy on Amazon
Sale Majapahit: Intrigue, Betrayal and War in Indonesia’s Greatest Empire
Majapahit: Intrigue, Betrayal and War in...
Amazon Prime
$15.74
Buy on Amazon
Sale The Story of Southeast Asia
The Story of Southeast Asia
$24.11
Buy on Amazon
Buddhist Landscapes: Art and Archaeology of the Khorat Plateau, 7th to 11th Centuries
Buddhist Landscapes: Art and Archaeology of the...
Amazon Prime
$56.00
Buy on Amazon

Comments 1

  1. ksap says:
    18 years ago

    very good<<<!!
    I lik3 That!!!**/* ^^
    🙂 ))

    Th@Nl<$$$ @lot!!!

    I+ he|P M3 muchhhhh FOl2 MY WORl>>> ^o^
    F0|2 ALL.::…. =_= ;PPP*

    +H@N|<<<<<SSSSSSS ^^”

    ^__________________________^

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Southeast Asian Archaeology

© 2019

Navigate Site

  • News
  • Resources
  • Countries
  • Topics
  • Visit
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe
  • About

Follow

Never Miss a Discovery
Subscribe for Exclusive Southeast Asian Archaeology News!

Stay connected with the latest breakthroughs, research, and events from across Southeast Asia’s archaeology scene. Sign up today for exclusive weekly updates, trusted by over 2,000 subscribers.

×
No Result
View All Result
  • News
  • Resources
  • Countries
    • Southeast Asia
    • Mainland Southeast Asia
      • Cambodia
      • Laos
      • Malaysia
      • Myanmar
      • Thailand
      • Vietnam
    • Island Southeast Asia
      • Brunei
      • Indonesia
      • Malaysia
      • Philippines
      • Singapore
      • Timor Leste
    • Peripheral Southeast Asia
  • Topics
    • Artifact Type
      • Architecture
      • Bones and Burials
      • Ceramics
      • Intangible Cultural Heritage
      • Lithics
      • Megaliths
      • Rock Art
      • Sculpture
    • Field
      • Anthropology
      • Bioarchaeology
      • Epigraphy
      • General Archaeology
      • Metallurgy and Metalworking
      • Paleontology
      • Underwater Archaeology
      • Visual Art
      • Zooarchaeology
    • Other Themes
      • Animism
      • Buddhism
      • Christianity
      • Disaster Risk Management
      • Hinduism
      • Islam
      • Archaeological Tourism in Southeast Asia
  • Visit
    • Virtual Archaeology
    • Unesco World Heritage
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe
  • About
    • About
    • Supporters
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact

© 2019

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy and Cookie Policy.