Cultural Dimensions of India–Thailand Relations: A Historical Perspective

The ‘Indianisation’ of Southeast Asia

Modern Southeast Asia has been known by different names since before the beginning of the Common Era. India’s classical Sanskrit and Pali texts such as Kathasaritsagara, Brhatkathamanjari, Brhatkatha-sloka-sangraha, Kathakosha, Milindapanha, Niddesa and Buddhist Jataka stories referred to this region as Suvarnabhumi (the Land of Gold) or Suvarnadvipa (the Golden Island). ² The references to Suvarnadvipa, Yavadvipa and Malay-dvipa have also been found in the Ramayana. The Puranas also refer to Suvarnadvipa and Yavadvipa. Though it is impossible to be dogmatic about the exact location of such ancient place names, it seems that they refer to parts of Southeast Asia which attracted Indian merchants in ancient times. ³ Certainly the name and fame of Suvarnabhumi (Suvannabhumi in Pali) or Suvarnadvipa had travelled to far off places, and reference to both have been found in Greek, Latin, Arabic, and Chinese writings. The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (First Century C.E.) refers to it as Chryse (golden) Island, ‘lying not only to the east of the Ganges, but also to the southward of the Chinese Empire’. ⁴ Ptolemy (Second Century C.E.) mentioned it as Aurea Chersonesus. ⁵ In his famous ‘Memoir on the pilgrimage of monks who visited the western countries in search of law’, the Chinese pilgrim I-tsing mentions Kin-tcheu (golden island) and uses it as a synonym of Che-li-fo-che or Srivijayan kingdom. ⁶ The Arab writer Alberuni also refers to both Suvarnabhumi and Suvarnadvipa. He says, ‘The eastern islands in this ocean, which are nearer to China than to India, are the islands of the Zabaj, called by the Hindus Suvarnadvipa,…’. ⁷ In another place, he says: ‘The islands of the Zabaj are called the Gold Country because you obtain much gold as deposit if you wash only a little of the earth of that country’. ⁸ Alberuni included ‘Suvarnabhumi’ in the list of countries of the ‘north-east’. ⁹ In recent times, many European and Indian scholars referred to the Southeast Asian region as ‘Farther India’, ‘Greater India’, ‘Hinduised or Indianised States’. Presently, most scholars use the term ‘Southeast Asia’ to cover the modern states of Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, Brunei and the Philippines. It became popular during the Second World War when the areas south of the Tropic of Cancer were placed under the Allied forces’ ‘South-East Asia Command’. ¹⁰

India and the region of Southeast Asia share a long history of cultural as well as commercial interactions. Textual references of early maritime contacts between India and Suvarnabhumi or Suvarnadvipa can be found in old popular stories in the Sanskrit works namely Kathasaritsagara, Brhatkathamanjari and Brhatkatha-sloka-sangraha as well as in the Buddhist Jatakas and Jain Samaraichcha-katha. The heroes of most of these stories are merchants and, in a few cases, princes, or chiefs in crisis, who wanted to acquire gold by trade or other means. The Kathakosha relates the story of Nagadatta who went to Suvarnadvipa with five hundred ships in search of gold. The Buddhist texts Milindapanha and Niddesa also refer to regular trading voyages between Indian ports and Suvarnabhumi. ¹¹ A Sri Lankan Pali text, Mahavamsa, mentions about the activities of Buddhist missionaries Sona and Uttara who were sent to Suvarnabhumi by Mauryan king Ashoka. ¹² These textual references indicate that interactions between India and the region of Southeast Asia were initiated more than two thousand years ago, mainly through sea voyages, and trade played an important role in strengthening and accelerating relations between the two regions. George Coedes, however, is of a different opinion. According to him, ‘neither archaeological and epigraphic documents nor foreign sources can be dated any further back than the Niddesa’ which dates at the latest to the very first centuries of the Common Era. This Buddhist text enumerates various Sanskrit or Sanskritised place names that may be identified with localities of Southeast Asia. ¹³

Whatever may be the commencing time period, it is certain that there were commercial contacts between India and Southeast Asia since very early times. It is also a fact that traders did not go alone; they brought Indian religion, culture, traditions and philosophy along with them to the shores of Southeast Asia. They were also accompanied by Brahmin priests, Buddhist monks, scholars and adventurers and all of them played an important role in the transmission of Indian culture to the natives of Southeast Asia. Some of the merchants and Brahmin priests married the local girls and were often employed by the local rulers. ¹⁴ Through people to people contact and interaction, the influence of Indian culture slowly and gradually penetrated into the local pattern of life in both the mainland and islands of Southeast Asia. Significant cultural influence, as Lamb says, probably started in earnest between the first century B.C.E. to the first century C.E. and by the fifth century C.E. Indian culture was widely known in the region. ¹⁵

The modern Southeast Asian cultures provide evidence of a long period of interaction with India. Many local languages of this region including Thai, Malay and Javanese contain the words of Sanskrit, Pali and Dravidian origin in significant proportion. Some of them, like Thai language, are still written in scripts which are apparently derived from Indian models. The political and administrative institutions and ideas, especially the concept of divine authority and kingship, are largely shaped by the Indian practices. ¹⁶ For example, the Thai king is considered as the incarnation of Vishnu. The episodes of Ramayana and Mahabharata survive to this day in the puppet shows (known as the Wayang) and short dramas (Lakons) and stories which are still very popular with the local people. Arjuna, who plays the leading role in many lakons, is the greatest favourite of the Indonesian audience. ¹⁷ In the field of art and architecture, ancient religious monuments like the Borobodur stupa, the Angkor Vat temple, My Son temples are best examples of Indian influence. However, it is quite true that the artisans of Southeast Asia did not blindly imitate the Indian prototypes and added new elements of their own. L. E. Williams is of the opinion that ‘most of the art was merely Indian in inspiration, not in execution’. ¹⁸

The fact of Indian cultural impact upon Southeast Asia, past and present, is, indeed, in no doubt. Much controversy, however, has arisen over the process of Indian cultural transmission to distant regions of Southeast Asia. The Indian cultural influence on the ancient Southeast Asian kingdoms has been described by many historians in terms of ‘Indianisation’, which the French scholar G. Coedes defined as ‘the expansion of an organised culture that was founded upon the Indian conception of royalty, was characterised by Hinduist or Buddhist cults, the mythology of the Puranas, and the observance of the Dharmasastras, and expressed itself in the Sanskrit language’. ¹⁹ Nationalist historians of India particularly those who were associated with the Calcutta based ‘Greater India Society’ (formed in 1926) and some western scholars described the region as Greater India, Farther India, Indian colonies, Hinduised or Indianised states. R. C. Majumdar, Kalidas Nag, K. A. N. Sastri, P. C. Bagchi, B. C. Chhabra, U. N. Ghosal, H. B. Sarkar and Nihar Ranjan Ray are some of the leading scholars of this genre. Many of them have persistently used the term ‘colony’ for the ancient kingdoms of Southeast Asia. In fact, Majumdar and P. N. Bose named their books as Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East and The Indian Colony of Siam, respectively. The colonisation theory found a particularly blunt expression in the writings of Majumdar who had asserted that:

Intercourse in the region first began by way of trade, both by land and sea. But soon it developed into regular colonization, and Indians established political authority in various parts of the vast Asiatic continent that lay to the south of China and to the east and southeast of India. The Hindu colonists brought with them the whole framework of their culture and civilization and this was transplanted in its entirety among the people who had not yet emerged from their primitive barbarism. ²⁰

Hermann Kulke and Rothermund are of the opinion that the theory of ‘colonisation’ was a by-product of India’s nationalist movement during the British colonial period. The nationalist Indian historians, ‘smarting under the stigma of their own colonial subjection, tried to compensate for this by showing that at least in ancient times Indians had been strong enough to establish colonies of their own’. ²¹ The ‘colonisation’ theory, however, has now been rejected by most scholars working on the history of Southeast Asia, but at least it stimulated further research on the subject. It was found that there was very little evidence of any form of conquest or direct Indian political influence in the ancient Southeast Asian kingdoms. L.E. Williams argues that,

Southeast Asia was never colonised, politically or through alien settlement, during the centuries of Indic cultural ascendancy. The region made brilliant and selective use of Indic models, but it was not obliged to accept, nor was it offered, administrative control or masses of migrants from India. ²²

Further he states that ‘political imperialism was not then part of the Indian tradition and that the subcontinent was hardly a unified nation-state capable of directing vast colonial conquests’. ²³ Another scholar Dzung is of the similar opinion when she asserted that ‘all early kingdoms were based on the Hindu conception of royalty but never did they become Indian colonies’. She adds,

…through the unique process of acculturation, the ethnically different Southeast Asian peoples absorbed the Chinese and Indic cultural elements and adopted them to their own particular needs. The superimposition of Indian culture never derived from a policy of political subjugation nor to economic exploitation; rather the very process signified a peaceful outlook and a cooperative approach. ²⁴

The archaeological studies have also disapproved the postulation that Southeast Asia was an area culturally less developed than its neighbours. On the contrary, the region had achieved social complexity by the early centuries of Common Era and the traits of Indian culture were selectively absorbed into the pre-existing cultural base. ²⁵ Some scholars are of the opinion that the cultivation of plants and the development of sophisticated metal-using civilisation began here earlier than in India and China. ²⁶ It shows that the people of Southeast Asia were not ‘primitive barbarians’ as Majumdar called them; indeed, they were already in the advanced stage of cultural development before Indian influence made itself felt. In fact, as L. E. Williams said, ‘without the requisite material and institutional infrastructure, aspects of higher cultures could not have been so successfully transplanted to the region’. ²⁷ H. H. E. Loofs has rightly mentioned that ‘the notion of a ‘Neolithic South-East Asia’ as the receiver of influences from an India culturally vastly superior in all aspects has to be abandoned: it was rather as equals that the two met’. ²⁸

By putting forward the idea of ‘selective localisation’ of Indian culture by the Southeast Asian Societies, O. W. Wolters has offered a different insight which is contrast to the colonisation theory. According to him,

…unless there is convincing evidence to the contrary, Indian materials tended to be fractured and restated and therefore drained of their original significance by a process which I shall refer to as localisation. The materials, be they words, sounds of words, books or artifacts had to be localized in different ways before they could fit into various local complexes of religions, social and political systems and belong to new cultural ‘wholes’… ²⁹

The impact of ‘localisation’ is also evident in studies of the art history of the region. In his study of Southeast Asian art history, H. G. Quaritch Wales has attempted to ‘demonstrate the part played by local genius in actually guiding the evolution of the Indianized civilization itself’. ³⁰ He observed that although ‘there was very definite Indianisation it was not so extreme as to destroy local genius’. ³¹ According to Wales, it is the working of the ‘local genius’ that explains the cultural differences in the art styles of Southeast Asian kingdoms, where the Indian influence was common to all. He points to the deviations between the temples of Champa and Khmer as an example. The Chams opted to construct tall temple towers, while the Khmers preferred stepped pyramidical structures. Both were influenced by Indian culture, the deviations reflected deep-rooted pre-Indian convictions: the Chams worshipped the sky while the Khmers worshipped the earth ³² . ‘The Indian share was more active in terms of stimulus, but the local contribution certainly showed no less activity in terms of response’. ³³

Most scholars are in agreement that certainly there was Indian cultural influence upon the kingdoms of Southeast Asia at one point of time and it came through peaceful and non-political methods. But, the native Southeast Asians did not follow Indian cultural traits blindly. They absorbed only those Indian cultural elements into their indigenous cultural patterns which were either consistent with or could be shaped to their own beliefs and necessities. ³⁴ Williams has rightly stated that it has been precisely the ability of native people of this region to ‘absorb without being absorbed’. ³⁵ The Indian cultural influence never eradicated indigenous foundations of their society and culture. In some cases, the fundamental features of Indian society and culture were rejected by them. For instance, the caste system, which is fundamental to the Brahmanical Hindu social structure, is largely absent in South East Asian societies. Moreover, after the introduction of Hinduism and Buddhism the pre-existing religious ideas and practices continued with immense vitality and to bring in conformity with the existing system both Hindu and Buddhist religions were profoundly changed. ³⁶ Indeed, some societies of Southeast Asia have developed a confluence of religions and cultures accommodating their own needs and necessities. Thailand is the best example of such developments.

Indo-Thai Cultural Linkages

The Thai people appeared as early as in the eleventh century in the history of Southeast Asia. In the early centuries of the Common Era, the major part of Siam was subject to the kingdom of Funan, ³⁷ which held power in mainland South East Asia from the first to sixth century CE. After the fall of Funanese Empire, it was placed under the rule of the Buddhist kingdom of Dvaravati which Huien Tsang refers to as Tu-ho-lo-po-to. ³⁸ Dvaravati kingdom flourished until the tenth century C.E. when the Khmers of Kambuja (Cambodia) extended their supremacy over the Lower Menam (Chao Phraya river) valley. ³⁹ The Khmers’ control was gradually established over the whole of Siam. The Thais overthrew Khmers in the thirteenth century C.E. and established their first independent kingdom known as Sukhothai.

Archaeological, epigraphic and other evidences of Indian cultural penetration of Thailand which begun in the early centuries of the Common Era or perhaps even earlier and still continued, have been traced from various parts of Thailand. Indian traders had made their presence in the port cities of southern Thailand in ancient times. The place where Indians first time reached was probably Takkola or modern Takua-Pa. They had also reached to Ligor which is now Nakhon Si Thammarat, Patalung (Phathalung) and Chaiya, all in the southern Thailand. ⁴⁰ A Tamil inscription found in Takua-Pa testifies trade links between the Pallava region of South India and southern Thailand. A mercantile corporation of South Indians called Manikkiramam had established a settlement here and built its own temple and tank, and lived as a ‘self-contained colony’. ⁴¹

The earliest archaeological evidence of maritime trade and exchange between India and Thailand also comes from the inscribed stone seals or inscribed signets discovered in large numbers from the ancient port sites in southern Thailand. The seals, which were actually beads, were imported probably from India. The carved beads and the seals made of various kind of quartz (e.g., carnelian, rock crystal, crypto-crystalline quartz) or gold, used Brahmi script, and are of the style that may be ascribed to the first to third centuries of the Common Era. The seals were inscribed in Tamil or Sanskrit languages. They could have been brought to the ancient port communities of southern Thailand by merchants and were presumably personal signets, used by Indian traders to seal their documents or merchandise. ⁴² A number of semi-precious stone ornaments, especially carnelian, attributable to the second to fourth centuries C.E., have also been excavated from Ban Don Ta Phet in west-central Thailand. These objects, which are now kept in the National Museum of Bangkok, were imported from India by Siamese people to use as adornments to represent their social status, according to the museum label.

Among the earliest relics of Indian cultural influence found in Thailand are the objects found by excavations in 1927 at a small village called Pong Tuk, about ten miles from Ban Pong town in Central Thailand. These finds include remains of a temple and a little statuette of a walking Buddha, dated to the second century C.E. Buddhist sculptures of the Gupta style, a bronze Buddha statue of the Amaravati school and remains of temples have also been discovered in the same locality.^{43, 44} For K. A. N. Sastri, this site was the home of an early ‘South Indian colony’ in the first and second centuries C.E. which flourished up to the sixth century C.E. and then came under the influence of Guptas of North India. ⁴⁵ Excavations from an important Dvaravati site, Nakhon Pathom (situated about 50 km. west of Bangkok), which is known for its famous Buddhist Stupa called Pathom Chedi (Prathama Chaitya in Sanskrit), have revealed several Buddhist sculptures indicating Indian influence. One of the important sculptures among these is the ‘Wheel of Law’ or Dharmachakra (preserved in the National Museum, Bangkok) which contains the figure of a crouching deer. This sculpture symbolises the First Sermon given by Buddha in the Deer Park at Sarnath in India. According to Majumdar, it belongs to that stage in Indian art when Buddha was never represented as a human being and was only indicated by symbols. This art, thus, presumably belongs to an earlier period when the image of Buddha was unknown in Indian iconography, that is, before the beginning of the Common Era. ⁴⁶

Apart from these finds, a number of images of Brahmanical and Buddhist deities have been discovered from all over the country. One of the earliest Brahmanical sculptures in Thailand is the four-armed image of Vishnu in samapadasthanaka posture, discovered from Chaiya, Suratthani Province, eastern coast of Southern Thailand. Its anterior left hand holds a conch shell (sankha) on the hip, the anterior right hand appears to be in abhayamudra and posterior right hand holds a heavy club (gada). The posterior left is missing. Since the image is that of Vishnu, the attribute in the missing hand, as O’Connor says, ‘must have been either the lotus (padma), the round symbol of the earth (bhu) or the discus (cakra)’. ⁴⁷ According to Amara Srisuchat, this image of fifth century C.E. reflects the influence of South Indian tradition. ⁴⁸ Another statue of four-armed Vishnu of eighth century (now in the National Museum of Bangkok) was found at Khao Phra Noe in Southern Thailand (as mentioned on the museum label). It should be noted that most of the images of Vishnu discovered in early Siam were found in the southern and eastern parts of the country. Apart from Vishnu, images of other Brahmanical deities have also been found including Brahma, Surya, Ganesha, Skanda, Uma, Mahisasuramardini and Shiva in both anthropomorphic and phallus forms. Since anthropomorphic images of Shiva are very rare, it appears that he was mostly worshipped in his phallus form. The Mukhalinga (linga with the face of Shiva) of the eighth–ninth century, found at the Nong Wai site in Suratthani Province, is comparable to that of the fifth century Gupta art. The art of making it probably followed Indian philosophy and myths. Therefore, most Shiva Lingas discovered in Thailand are similar to those found in India. ⁴⁹ A stone image of Surya (the Sun god) belonging to seventh–eighth century C.E. (now in National Museum of Bangkok) has been found from the ancient city Si Thep, Phetchabun Province (as mentioned on the museum label).

Likewise, a number of both stone and bronze images of Buddha and Bodhisattvas of pre-Sukhothai period have been found from various parts of Thailand. Some of them are now in the National Museum of Bangkok including a bronze image of standing Buddha (eighth–nineth century, Dvaravati art) discovered from Banfai, Lam Plai Mat District, Buriram Province, which is the largest image found to date; a stele with Buddha protected by Naga’s hood (eighth–tenth century, Dvaravati art) found at Wat Pradu Songthan, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Province; a stone image of standing Buddha (eighth century, Dvaravati art) found at Wat Ro, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Province; and a bronze image of Bodhisattva Padampani (nineth–tenth century, Srivijyan art (all these descriptions are as mentioned on the museum labels).

A point should be noted that Brahmanism and Buddhism existed side by side in the pre-Sukhothai period also. The Mon kings of Dvaravati and Khmers of Cambodia, who ruled the area where the first independent Thai Kingdom of Sukhothai was established, patronised Buddhism and Buddhist edifices were constructed in large numbers. At the same time, they had also adopted Brahmanical religion, customs and ideas. Brahmin priests from India were invited by them to perform rituals, such as Rajasuya or the royal consecration and others. The Dvaravati kings, as Phasook Indrawooth mentioned, were exalted far above ordinary mortals through the magical power of the Rajasuya which imbued the king with divine power. ⁵⁰ The archaeological evidences, like the objects meant for ritual purposes, have also been found that testifies such hypothesis. ⁵¹

The images of Brahmanical and Buddhist deities and other evidences found from various regions of ancient Siam also attests that beliefs and practices of both the religions had existed long before the establishment of the Sukhothai kingdom in 1220 C.E. and the Thais received Indian cultural influence via the Mons and Khmers. ⁵² Buddhism (Therevada or Hinayana) continued to be the dominant religion of the Thais and it became the national religion of Siam, while Brahmanism also exerted great influence on the monarchical system. As Coedes says, Brahmanism found a last refuge at the royal court ⁵³ and survives till today. A number of finest stone and bronze images of Brahmanical gods (deva in Sanskrit) like Vishnu, Shiva, Lakshmi and Ganesha, erected during the Sukhothai, Ayutthaya and early Rattanakosin (Bangkok) periods have been found all over the country. Most of them are now kept in the National Museum of Bangkok. The main Brahmanical deities in Siam were Vishnu or Narayana, Shiva, Brahma, Varuna and Indra (in Thai known as Phra Narai, Phra Isuan, Phra Phrom, Phra Barun and Phra In respectively). The celestial denizens in the ancient Indian mythology had also found place in the beliefs of the people of Siam. Such as, Garuda and Naga took prominent place in the Siamese society. The Siamese people associated Naga with the rainfall and described it by the traditional epithet, ‘The Guardian of the Aquatic World’. ⁵⁴ Garuda has become national emblem of Thailand and can be found on governmental documents, currency and official flags, as well as public and private offices.

The influence of Brahmanical beliefs and practices was further intensified during the Ayutthaya period (1350–1767 C.E.), and continued in the Rattanakosin (Bangkok) period. The inscription of Wat Pa Muang (Mango grove) dated 1361 C.E. tells that King Lue Thai (Lidayya in Pali) installed the statues of Mahesvara and Vishnu at the Devalaya Mahakasetra in a mango grove. Brahmana, Tapasvin, Veda, Sastragama, Dharma, Nyaya and Jyotisastra are also mentioned in this inscription. ⁵⁵ It clearly indicates that in spite of being devout Buddhists, Thai kings did not neglect Brahmanism. Brahminic rituals, dharmasastras and the concept of divine kingship have become essential features of state formation in Thailand. The kings have added and validated their empire with the help of Brahman priests of Indian descent (known as phrahms in Thai). The latter performed royal court ceremonies including the coronation ceremony or Rajyabhiseka based on Satapatha Brahmana and Aitreya Brahmana, invoking the blessings of Brahminic deities. ⁵⁶ The coronation ceremonies are still practiced by the Thai kings more or less in their original form, though presently they have very little power and remains as figureheads under the Constitution of Thailand. The coronation ceremonies included the ritual bath using sacred water from the various rivers. For instance, in 2006 on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary (diamond jubilee) of King Bhumibol Adulyadej’s accession to the throne, several Brahminic rituals such as Kanchanabhisek, Vajrabhisek, and so on, were conducted by the royal court Phrahms (Brahmins) and for these ceremonies the Phrahms specially came to India to collect the holy water from several rivers. ⁵⁷

Since Ayutthya period onwards, each month of the year there is a royal ceremony and the court Brahmans perform the rituals. These ceremonies have been compiled in the well-known text entitled Phra Rajabidhi Sibsong Duan (The Twelve Month Royal Ceremonies) and most of them are Brahmanical. One of them is named Triyambvay Tripavay. It attaches more importance to Saivism. Triyambvay refers to Siva, whereas Tripavay refers to Vishnu. In Ayutthaya and early phase of Chakri dynasty, this ceremony was performed at a Brahminic temple called Devasthan Bosth Brahmana, built by King Phra Buddhayosfachulalof or Rama I. This ceremony was discontinued during the reign of King Prajadhipok or Rama VII. ⁵⁸

Today’s Thailand, pre-dominantly a Buddhist country, can be considered a finest example of harmony between Brahmanism and Buddhism. There are many temples where images of Buddhist and Brahminic gods exist side by side or kept together and devout Buddhist Thai people worship them. Lord Ganesha, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva and Kubera are very popular among the Thai people. There are three separate temples for Siva, Ganesha and Vishnu at Devasthan. Thai Buddhist people frequently visit this place and worship the Brahminic gods in their own style. Devasthan is considered one of the best living evidence of Brahmanism’s influence in the Thai way of life and its customs and ceremonies from the past until now. The presence of Brahminic shrines and deities’ images in modern Thailand and their increasing popularity among the Thai people indicate the continuity of Brahmanical tradition and beliefs from ancient Siam to the present Thailand. Because of the Thai people’s practice of worshipping both Brahminical and Buddhist gods, the Thai religious culture is often characterised as ‘syncretic’.

Some Brahminic gods which have almost been disappeared in India like Indra, riding on his vahana Airavata (known as Erawan in Thailand) are worshiped in Thailand. The temple of Wat Saman Rattanaram in Chachoengsao province, Wat Phra Phutthabat (temple of the Buddha’s footprint) in Saraburi and Shiva temple at Raminthra in Bangkok testifies increasing co-worshiping of Brahminic and Buddhist deities by Thai masses. Apart from this, there are thousands of separate temples of Brahminic gods, built by the Thais and worshiped by them. Lord Brahma (known as Phra Phrom in Thai) is the most stable, famous and always-in-great demand god in entire Thailand. Temples or shrines dedicated to Brahma can be seen everywhere. Only in Bangkok, there are approximately twenty-thousand places where images of Brahma are enshrined. ⁵⁹ In the central area of Ratchaprasong in Bangkok, there is a most sacred Brahma shrine known as Brahma Erawan, located near the Grand Hyatt Erawan Hotel. The beautiful statue of Brahma enshrined in this temple since 1956 was designed and constructed by the royal Thai Government’s Fine Arts department.

Apart from religion, Indian languages and scripts, literature, dharmasastras, art, architecture and politico-religious traditions have also left deep impression on Thailand. The earliest written document discovered in Thailand so far is probably the seal inscribed with the Brahmi script of the first century B.C.E., found at the archaeological site at Ban Khlong Thom in Krabi Province. Many inscriptions which were written in old Indian scripts and Sanskrit–Pali languages have been discovered from various parts of Thailand. Some of them were written in a script which has been found to be identical with the Grantha script used at that time in Southern part of India especially in the Coromandel coastal areas. Examples of these are the inscription of the fifth or sixth century discovered from Wat Mahadhatu in Ligor (Nakhon Si Thammarat) and the four Mon inscriptions (attributed to sixth or seventh century) engraved on an octagonal stone Pillar, found in Lopburi. ⁶⁰ The Khao Rang (in Prachinburi Province) inscription which is dated to seventh century C.E. begins with a verse in Sanskrit while the rest part is in Khmer language mentioning the gifts to a Buddhist vihara. It contains some Sanskrit and Pali words such as vihara, kalasa, sarvapinda, pallavka, and so on. ⁶¹ There are other Sanskrit inscriptions found in Thailand such as the Ban Phan Dung inscription, the Prasad Sdok Kak Thom inscription, the Hin Khon inscription and the Prasad Phnomrung inscription. ⁶² Influence of Indian languages and scripts was continued in the Thai period also when the third king of Sukhothai named Ramkhamhaeng invented Thai script in 1283 C.E. The inscription of King Ramkhamhaeng (dated 1292 C.E.), the first inscription in Thai ever created, contains many Sanskrit and Pali words, such as Srindraditya (the name of the first king of Sukhothai), Sradha (in Sanskrit sraddha means religious faith), Dana (gift), Bihar (Vihara), Gru (in Sanskrit guru and in Pali garu), Prasad (palace), Debada (devta in Sanskrit and Pali, meaning deity), Samudra (sea), and so on. ⁶³ According to Chirapat Prapandvidya who studied Thai inscriptions, the use of Sanskrit words predominantly in Thai inscriptions suggests that the culture that had Sanskrit as its vehicle was deep-rooted in the minds of the Thais before the Sukhothai period. ⁶⁴

The use of Sanskrit and Pali words by Thai people is very common in the present Thailand. There are more than 50% Sanskrit and Pali words in the modern Thai language. ⁶⁵ Thai people always use Sanskrit and Pali words, either consciously or unconsciously, and Thai-ise both languages as their own heritage. Naming people and places with Sanskrit and Pali words is a popular trend in today’s Thailand, though, indeed, the influence of western culture and language is rapidly spreading in the country. The reason why Sanskrit and Pali are very popular for naming people, as Mangmeesukhsiri tells, is because both these languages have many syllables. Both Sanskrit and Pali are polysyllabic, unlike the original Thai words which are mostly monosyllabic. Apart from that, the meanings of the words drawn from Sanskrit or Pali are quite unique and sacred because both the languages are regarded as religious languages in Thai society. ⁶⁶ For some, a Sanskrit word adapted into the Thai language is sweet-sounding, sweeter than the Thai word-sound. That is why Sanskrit has influenced the Thai language and Thai people have borrowed many Sanskrit words. ⁶⁷

The Indian epic Ramayana holds an important place in the diffusion of Indian cultural traits in Thailand. As Desai says, ‘nothing else of Hindu origin has more profoundly affected the tone of Thai life than Ramayana’. ⁶⁸ The Thai version of Ramayana known as Ramakien (Rama’s story) or Ramakirti (Rama’s glory) has been known in Thai society since the thirteenth century, if not earlier. In several inscriptions of Sukhothai period, references to the legend of Rama have been found. Ram cave and Rama as the god Narayana are mentioned in the Stone Inscription No. 1 and No. 2 of Sukhothai ruler Ram Kamhaeng. ⁶⁹ In fact, the name of King Ram Kamhaeng itself indicates that the story of Rama was known at that time. References to the episodes and characters of Ramayana have also been found in early Thai literary works. For instance, the prominent characters of Ramayana namely Rama, Lakshmana and Ravana—the ten-headed demon king are mentioned in Kloong Prakat Chaeng Nam which was composed during the period of King Uthong or Ramadhipati I (1351–1369 C.E.). The episodes of Ramakien have left a permanent mark on Thai arts. In performing arts, there are Thai masked play (known as Khon), Nang Talung, Nang Yai and various kinds of puppets that perform the Rama story. The origin of Khon, which performs exclusively the legends of Rama, is traced back from the Ayutthaya period. It is considered the most artistic of the performing arts and the most difficult to learn. Most of the episodes from the Ramakien presented in the Khon relate to the abduction of Rama by the demon Maiyarab (Mahi Ravana), Hanuman’s journey to Lanka in search of Sita and the fire ordeal of Sita. The Fine Art department organise the Khon on regular basis. There are also arts derived from the Ramakien performance such as short drama, dance, choreography, music, singing, recitation, puppet making, mask-making, costume and many others.^{70, 71}

The episodes of Rama story have inspired the Thai fine arts such as painting, sculpture, handicrafts and architecture. The main characters and episodes of Ramakien form part of the decoration and beautification in Buddhist temples and palaces. The colonnades of the Emerald Buddha temple which is situated in the Royal palace compound are decorated with hundreds mural painting depicting the whole story of Ramakien. In another nearby Buddhist temple named Wat Pho, many episodes of the Rama story are depicted both in bas reliefs and paintings. The sculptures of subdued demons and monkey warriors can be seen as the ‘guardians of doors’ in many Buddhist temples. Moreover, the name of places or cities such as Lopburi (Sanskrit Lavapuri) and Ayutthaya (Sanskrit Ayodhaya) are associated with the Rama story. The popularity of the Ramakien is also evident in a special logo selected by the King Bhumibol Adulyadej at the occasion of completion of sixty years of his accession to the throne in 2006. In this logo, his throne is protectively flanked by Hanumana and Sugriva, the two characters from the Ramakien. Moreover, the tradition to call each Thai king ‘Rama’ with an ordinal number is still in practice and the present King is Rama X. A point should be noted here that the main story of the current version of Thai Ramakien which was composed by King Rama I (eighteenth century) is identical to that of Valmiki’s Ramayana, but with many aspects transposed into a Thai context. The Demon king Ravana (in Thai known as Thotsakan) is more prominent in the Ramakien than Rama (Phra Ram). As A. K. Ramanujan notes, the Thai Ramayana

admires Ravana’s resourcefulness and learning, while his abduction of Sita is seen as an act of love and is viewed with sympathy. The Thais are moved by Ravana’s sacrifice of family, kingdom and life itself for the sake of a woman…. Unlike Valmiki’s characters, the Thai ones are a fallible, human mixture of good and evil. The fall of Ravana here makes one sad. It is not an occasion for unambiguous rejoicing, as it is in Valmiki. ⁷²

The Ramayana, thus, has heavily influenced Thai way of life, but it was transformed into Thai context, not just copied from Valmiki’s Ramayana.

To sum up, one has rightly stated that history is the root while culture is the fruit and these must co-exist. No society or nation can survive without a blend of the two. Fortunately, India and Thailand both share a rich cultural heritage. The cultural and commercial contacts between the ancient ports of India and Southern Siam which probably commenced in the centuries of B.C.E continue to be flourishing in the present era. During the course of time, Indian cultural traits have deeply penetrated into the Thai way of life and their philosophy. The influence of Indian religions, language, literature, art, architecture and philosophy is still apparently evident in the present Thailand. As Amitav Acharya says, ‘when civilizations meet, they do not necessarily clash but can cohabit and cooperate. They do not compete, but can learn from each other’. ⁷³ Civilisational interaction between India and Thailand has also been a mutual learning process. While absorbing Indian cultural elements, Thais have retained the foundational features of their indigenous culture. They have not been passive recipients of Indian elements; their adoption of new ideas, beliefs, values and customs from abroad has been selective and deliberate. Today, interaction between civilisations including the flow of ideas and culture is increasingly being recognised as a powerful force which has shaped world history and still shapes the contemporary global order. In the case of India and Thailand, civilisational linkages constitute a special asset for the further development of multifaceted relationship between the two countries as envisaged in the policy of ‘Act East’ adopted by India in the recent past which has been complemented by Thailand with its ‘Act West’ policy.