Editing Ayutthaya Kingdom (section)

==Government==
===Kings===
{{See also|List of monarchs of Thailand|Monarchy of Thailand|Uparaja}}
[[File:Burmese Depiction of an Ayutthaya King.jpg|thumb|A Burmese depiction of an Ayutthaya king, either depicting [[Uthumphon]] or [[Ekkathat]]]]
[[File:Battle at Pa Than Bridge.jpg|thumb|300px|right|A painting, depicting the event in which two sons of King [[Intharacha (king of Ayutthaya)|Intharacha]] fought each other to the death on elephants at Pa Than Bridge.]]
In its early maritime phase, Ayutthaya rulers were leaders of a port city. Ma Huan described the ruler of Ayutthaya in the 15th century as a ruler wearing gold-trimmed pants who rides on an elephant inspecting the city with one attendant and a ruler who lives in a modest-looking residence. Their relationships to the other cities were a first among equals status. Early Ayutthaya rulers had to balance their interests alongside those of their city vassal states. As Ayutthaya incorporated the Northern Cities and adapted their government functions in the 15th and 16th centuries, Ayutthaya rulers became more regal and assumed more power at the cost of their vassal cities. As the kings became richer through trade in the 17th century, they used their wealth to express their power, including the shrouding of the monarch in Angkorian and Brahmic rituals and symbolism.<ref name=":7" />

The kings of Ayutthaya from the 17th century onwards were absolute monarchs with semi-religious status. Their authority derived from the ideologies of Hinduism and Buddhism as well as from natural leadership. The king of Sukhothai was the inspiration of Inscription 1 found in Sukhothai, which stated that King Ramkhamhaeng would hear the petition of any subject who rang the bell at the palace gate. The king was thus considered as a father by his people.

At Ayutthaya, however, the paternal aspects of kingship disappeared. The king was considered the ''chakkraphat'' ([[Sanskrit]] ''[[chakravartin]]'') who through his adherence to the law made all the world revolve around him.<ref name="Hindu">{{cite web|url=http://www.seasite.niu.edu:85/Thai/literature/ramakian/introduction.htm |title=Introduction |work=South East Asia site |publisher=Northern Illinois University |access-date=3 October 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090531133851/http://www.seasite.niu.edu:85/thai/literature/ramakian/introduction.htm |archive-date=31 May 2009 |df=dmy }}</ref> According to Hindu tradition, the king is the [[avatar]] of [[Vishnu]], destroyer of demons, who was born to be the defender of the people. The Buddhist belief in the king is as righteous ruler ({{langx|sa|dharmaraja}}) who strictly follows the teaching of [[Gautama Buddha]] and aims at the well-being of his people.

The kings' official names were reflections of those religions: Hinduism and Buddhism. They were considered as the incarnation of various Hindu gods: [[Indra]], [[Shiva]], or Vishnu ([[Rama]]). The [[Coronation of the Thai monarch|coronation ceremony]] was directed by [[brahmin]]s as the [[deva (Hinduism)|Hindu god]] Shiva was "lord of the universe". However, according to the codes, the king had the ultimate duty as protector of the people and the annihilator of evil.

According to [[Buddhism]], the king was also believed to be a [[bodhisattva]]. One of the most important duties of the king was to build a temple or a Buddha statue as a symbol of prosperity and peace.<ref name="Hindu" />

For locals, another aspect of the kingship was also the analogy of "The Lord of the Land" or "He who Rules the Earth" (''Phra Chao Phaendin''). According to the court etiquette, a special language, ''[[Rachasap]]'' ({{langx|sa|Rājāśabda}}, 'royal language'), was used to communicate with or about royalty.<ref name="rachasap">{{cite web|url=http://www.mahidol.ac.th/thailand/language.html |title=The National Language |date=1 November 2002 |website=Mahidol University |access-date=17 October 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100305072132/http://www.mahidol.ac.th/thailand/language.html |archive-date=5 March 2010 |df=dmy }}</ref> In Ayutthaya, the king was said to grant control over land to his subjects, from nobles to commoners, according to the ''sakna'' or ''[[sakdina]]'' system<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.unescap.org/huset/lgstudy/country/thailand/thai.html|date=12 February 2002 |title=Thailand: Brief Description of the Country and its National/State Government Structure |website=[[United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific|UN ESCAP]] |access-date=2 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120420221210/http://www.unescap.org/huset/lgstudy/country/thailand/thai.html |archive-date=20 April 2012 |quote=The traditional government system and social structure in Siam during this period was known as the ''Sakdina'' system. All land was owned by the ruler who granted land to members of the royal family and the nobility according to their ranks in the traditional bureaucratic hierarchy. |url-status=dead |df=dmy }}</ref> codified by King [[Borommatrailokkanat#Feudal rank|Borommatrailokkanat]] (1448–1488). The ''sakdina'' system was similar to, but not the same as [[feudalism]], under which the monarch does not own the land.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://links.org.au/node/1754 |title=Class and politics in Thailand |author=Giles Ji Ungpakorn |author-link=Giles Ji Ungpakorn |date=2 April 2012 |work=Thailand's Crisis and the Fight for Democracy |publisher=Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal |access-date=2 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120401180416/http://links.org.au/node/1754 |archive-date=1 April 2012 |quote=This was a system of direct control over humans, rather than the use of land ownership to control labour.... |url-status=live |df=dmy }}</ref> While there is no concrete evidence that this land management system constituted a formal [[palace economy]], the French [[François-Timoléon de Choisy]], who came to Ayutthaya in 1685, wrote, "the king has absolute power. He is truly the god of the Siamese: no-one dares to utter his name." Another 17th century writer, the Dutchman [[Jan van Vliet]], remarked that the King of Siam was "honoured and worshipped by his subjects second to god." Laws and orders were issued by the king. For sometimes the king himself was also the highest judge who judged and punished important criminals such as traitors or rebels.<ref name="indiaruin">{{cite journal|last=Bavadam|first=Lyla|date=14 March 2006|title=Magnificent Ruins|journal=Frontline|volume=26|issue=6|url=http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2606/stories/20090327260606600.htm|access-date=17 October 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121107134247/http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2606/stories/20090327260606600.htm|archive-date=7 November 2012|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref>

In addition to the ''sakdina'' system, another of the numerous institutional innovations of [[Borommatrailokkanat#Royal rank|Borommatrailokkanat]] was to adopt the position of ''[[uparaja]]'', translated as 'viceroy' or 'prince', usually held by the king's senior son or full brother, in an attempt to regularise the succession to the throne{{snd}}a particularly difficult feat for a polygamous dynasty. In practice, there was inherent conflict between king and ''uparaja'' and frequent disputed successions.<ref name="uparaja">{{cite web|url=http://www.soravij.com/mahauparaja.html|title=HM Second King Pinklao|publisher=Soravij|access-date=17 October 2009|archive-date=10 May 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130510011852/http://www.soravij.com/mahauparaja.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> However, it is evident that the power of the throne of Ayutthaya had its limits. The hegemony of the Ayutthaya king was always based on his charisma based on his age and supporters. Without supporters, bloody coups took place from time to time. The most powerful figures of the capital were always generals, or the Minister of Military Department, ''Kalahom''. During the last century of Ayutthaya, bloody fighting among princes and generals, aiming at the throne, plagued the court.{{citation needed|date=March 2022}}

With the exception of [[Naresuan]]'s succession by [[Ekathotsarot]] in 1605, 'the method of royal succession at Ayutthaya throughout the seventeenth century was battle.'<ref name="Phongpaichit">{{Cite book |last1=Baker |first1=Chris |last2=Phongpaichit |first2=Pasuk |date=2017 |title=A History of Ayutthaya |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GHiuDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA158 |location=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |pages=158 |isbn=9781107190764 |access-date=8 March 2022}}</ref> Although European visitors to Thailand at the time tried to discern any rules in the Siamese order of succession, noting that in practice the dead king's younger brother often succeeded him, this custom appears not to have been enshrined anywhere.<ref name="Phongpaichit"/> The ruling king did often bestow the title of ''uparaja'' upon his preferred successor, but in reality, it was an 'elimination process': any male member of the royal clan (usually the late king's brothers and sons) could claim the throne of Ayutthaya for himself, and win by defeating all his rivals.<ref name="Phongpaichit"/> Moreover, groupings of nobles, foreign merchants, and foreign mercenaries actively rallied behind their preferred candidates in hopes of benefiting from each war's outcome.<ref name="Phongpaichit"/>

===Mandala system===
{{Main|Mandala (Southeast Asian political model)}}
Ayutthaya politically followed the mandala system, commonly used throughout Southeast Asia kingdoms before the 19th century. In the 17th century, the Ayutthaya monarchs were able to frequently appoint non-natives as governors of Ayutthaya-controlled towns and cities, in order to prevent competition from its nobility. By the end of the Ayutthaya period, the Siamese capital held strong sway over the polities in the lower Chao Phraya plain but had a gradually looser control of polities the further away from the capital at Ayutthaya.<ref name="A History of Ayutthaya"/> The Thai historian [[Sunait Chutintaranond]] notes, "the view that Ayudhya was a strong centralized state" did not hold and that "in Ayudhya the hegemony of provincial governors was never successfully eliminated."<ref>O.W. Wolters, pp.&nbsp;142–143 citing Chutintaranond, 1990, pp.&nbsp;97–98</ref><ref name="JSS_078_1i_Sunait_Mandala">{{cite journal|last=Chutintaranond |first=Sunait |year=1990 |title=Mandala, Segmentary State and Politics of Centralization in Medieval Ayudhya |journal=[[Journal of the Siam Society]] |volume=JSS Vol. 78.1i |issue=digital |page=image 11 |publisher=Siam Heritage Trust |url=http://www.siamese-heritage.org/jsspdf/1981/JSS_078_1i_SunaitChutintaranond_MandalaSegmentaryStateInMedievalAyudhaya.pdf |access-date=March 17, 2013 |quote=Nevertheless, the Ayudhya kings, as they are described in indigenous and foreign records, never successfully eliminated the hegemony of provincial governors.}}</ref>