Introduction

As a student of Thai history, I have always been puzzled by the change of the name of my country from Siam to Thailand in 1939. I had no love for the hybrid word Thai + land and formerly participated in Back to Siam, a sort of literary movement to revert to the former name. In the late 1960s, while studying in the United States, I joined a group of Thai students who regularly wrote brief articles that were published back in Bangkok.

These were rather well received by the public and eventually collected and printed in two paperback volumes under the curious title Kid thung muang Thai (Thinking of the Land of the Thai). In using the term Muang Thai (Land of the Thai) in our writings, my friends and I saw no contradiction in continuing to propose a movement Back to Siam. Our proposal went nowhere, in any case. Nevertheless, when I returned home I still cherished the belief that Siam was a more appropriate name. At one point I had a visiting card printed with my address listed as Bangkok, Siam. My visiting card did not advance the Back to Siam movement either.

Since 1973, I have taught history at Thammasat University in Bangkok, where my main assignment has been modern Thai political history. I often asked students about their opinions of choosing between the names Siam and Thailand. To my surprise, they always preferred Thailand; some even looked at me strangely, as if I were impossibly boran (old fashion and outdated).

Armed with this experience, from 16 to 18 December 1998, I sought to participate in an international conference on Post-Colonial Society and Culture in Southeast Asia, held in Myanmar, another country whose name had also changed. I felt that it might be timely, at least on a personal basis, to try to understand the case of Thailand and Siam nomenclature.