King Taksin the Great

Chapter 1: The Royal Biography of King Taksin the Great

The Royal Portrait of King Taksin the Great
(Image from the book Somdet Phra Chao Taksin Chom Badin Maha Rat)
Note: For further information on the royal portrait, see the appendix.

1.1 When was King Taksin the Great born?

The birth of King Taksin the Great is believed to have occurred on Sunday, the fifteenth day of the waxing moon in the fifth lunar month of the Year of the Tiger, Chulasakarat 1096, at five o’clock in the morning, corresponding to April 17, 1734, the third year of the reign of King Borommakot. Police Lieutenant Pisal Senawet (1972: 2, 6) composed the following poem on this occasion.

               กาลฤกษ์ขึ้นสิบห้า                ค่ำจิตร มาสเฮย
เจ็ดสิบเมษอาทิตย์                              ค่อนเช้า
ห้าโมงก่อนเที่ยงสถิต                         ตกฟาก
ปีเกิดบวกขาลเข้า                                ครบถ้วนชาตา

The Royal Birth Horoscope
(Image from the book King Taksin the Great)
The Royal Birth Horoscope
(Image from the National Library of Thailand)

However, the book written by Thuan Boonyaniyom (1970: 4) states, “In the Buddhist Era 2277, at dawn on Sunday, the fifteenth day of the waxing moon in the sixth lunar month of the Year of the Tiger, Lady Nok Yiang gave birth to a son.” The commemorative book for the unveiling of King Taksin the Great’s monument in Chanthaburi Province (2001: 13) notes that he was born at approximately 5:00 a.m. The exact date of his birth remains uncertain. For example, Sethuen Suphasophon (1984: 31) wrote, “King Taksin of Thonburi was born in Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya on Sunday, the fifteenth day of the waxing moon in the fifth lunar month of the Year of the Tiger, corresponding to April 7, 1734.” Nevertheless, many authors have stated that King Taksin the Great was born on April 17, 1734 (the book King Taksin the Great by the Foundation for the Preservation of Ancient Monuments in the Old Palace, 2000: 13; the commemorative book for the unveiling of King Taksin the Great’s monument in Chanthaburi Province, 1981: 13; Sanan Silakorn, 1988: 3). However, two historians have expressed differing opinions.

Veena Rojanarata (1997: 86) expressed the following opinion:
“In the case of the date of birth, Nithi Eawsriwong proposed in Thai Politics in the Era of King Taksin of Thonburi, using a backward calculation from the date of death as recorded in the royal astrologer’s chronicles, which state that he passed away at the age of 48 years and 15 days. According to French records, he was executed on April 7, 1782, making his birth date March 23, 1734. However, if one follows the Thai sources which record his death on April 6, 1813, his birth date would be March 22, 1734. This point aligns with the information King Mongkut provided to Dr. Smith for writing Thai history, stating that King Taksin the Great was born in March 1734.”

Suchit Wongthet (1985: 64), citing certain essays by Luang Phisut Panichayalak (Mom Luang Permyos Isarasena), stated: “In the book King Taksin the Great by Prayun Pisnaka, it is recorded that King Taksin was born at five o’clock in the morning on Tuesday of the seventh lunar month, Year of the Tiger, Chulasakarat 1096 (B.E. 2277). However, the book does not specify whether it was the waxing or waning moon. In that seventh month of the year, there were four Tuesdays: the 7th waxing day, the 14th waxing day, the 6th waning day, and the 13th waning day, corresponding to Tuesday, June 8, June 15, June 22, and June 29, 1734. If this book is correct, his birth would have fallen on one of these four days, but it cannot be definitively concluded. For reference, see the Astrological Chronicle Compiled with the Annals, Part 8.”

According to the letter chronicle, in the Year of the Tiger, Chulasakarat 1144, on Wednesday, the 13th waning day of the fifth lunar month, King Taksin passed away at the age of 48 years and 15 days. Calculating backward from Wednesday, the 13th waning day of the fifth month by 15 days brings it to the 13th waxing day of the fifth month, and going back 48 years, it falls on his birth date: Friday, the 13th waxing day of the fifth month, Year of the Tiger, Chulasakarat 1096, corresponding to April 16, 1734. The astrological chronicle notes that on Friday, the 8th waning day of the fifth month (April 5, 1782), King Phutthayotfa ascended the throne. On Wednesday, the 13th waning day of the fifth month (April 10, 1782), King Taksin died. According to the royal chronicles, Somdet Chao Phraya Maha Kasatsuek returned to Thonburi on Saturday, the 9th waning day of the fifth month (April 6), and King Taksin was executed on that same day.

In the book King Taksin by Prayun Pisnaka, it is stated in Volume 1, page 40, that King Taksin was born on a Tuesday in the seventh lunar month. However, in Volume 2, page 436, it is noted that important dates of King Taksin were calculated by Phraya Borirak Vejakarn in comparison with the solar calendar. According to this calculation, his birth date was Sunday, the fifteenth day of the waxing moon in the fifth lunar month, Chulasakarat 1096, Year of the Tiger, which corresponds to April 7, 1734. The fifteenth waxing day of the fifth month in that year was indeed a Sunday according to the Thai calendar, but in the Western calendar, it corresponded to Sunday, April 18, not April 7. The Western record states Wednesday, which corresponds to Wednesday, the fourth waxing day of the fifth month in the Thai calendar—not the fifteenth waxing day.

As for Phrakhun Borirak’s statement that the birth occurred on the fifteenth day of the waxing moon in the fifth month, it is unclear what evidence he based this on. However, there is a clue in the astrological chronicle: when he passed away on the thirteenth waning day of the fifth month, he was 48 years and 15 days old. If the 15-day remainder is counted backward from the thirteenth waning day to the thirteenth waxing day, it fits exactly 15 days. But the thirteenth waxing day happened to fall on a Friday, a relatively weak day that does not correspond to the character of King Taksin of Thonburi, who was strong and courageous. Therefore, it was adjusted to the fifteenth waxing day, which was a Sunday, to better reflect the royal authority shown in his biography. This is only a hypothesis. Phrakhun Borirak has long passed away, so there is no one to consult regarding this matter.

Police Major General Suchart Phueaksakorn (http://www.dabos.or.th, 28/11/2001) wrote regarding the horoscope of King Taksin the Great as follows: “However, other documents state that the birth date of King Taksin the Great was on the 15th waning day of the fifth lunar month (the book Aphinihan Banburut), or on April 17 (the book Chakri Dynasty and the Taksin Royal Lineage), or on April 7 (SOMDEJ PHRA CHAO TAK SIN MAHARAT by de Fels, Jacqueline). The latter claims can be disregarded, because I calculated that the 15th waning day of the fifth month, B.E. 2277, corresponds to April 4 of that year. Therefore, if the king’s age at death is calculated from that date, it would not reach 48 years and 15 days as recorded in the astrological chronicles, which is one of the most reliable sources. Thus, using the historically plausible dates of death suggested—April 6, April 7, or April 10, which correspond to the 13th waning day of the fifth month—and calculating backward according to the king’s age at death in the chronicles, the results are as follows: if King Taksin died on April 6, his birth date would be March 22, 1734; if he died on April 7, his birth date would be March 23; and if he died on April 10, his birth date would be March 26. Since March 26 is considered too late, only March 22 and March 23 remain. I therefore exclude March 22, leaving March 23, which corresponds with the Jesuit chronicle (Chronicles Compiled, Part 39). From studying and calculating the planetary positions and strengths on March 23, 1734, and selecting an appropriate time by considering the king’s biography and abilities throughout his life as recorded in historical documents, the most likely time was determined to be 5:45 a.m. on Tuesday, March 23 (according to Thai astrology, it was still considered Monday, March 22, because it had not yet reached dawn at 6:20 a.m.). At this time, the royal ascendant was in Pisces, first decan, first navamsa. Subsequently, by calculating and verifying the positions and influences of the planets in the horoscope, it was concluded that this date and time is highly plausible.”

“Thus, it can be predicted that the person will have a small build and a pale yellowish complexion… Historical records clearly indicate that he was of Thai-Chinese descent, which accounts for his pale yellowish skin. As for whether his build was indeed small as predicted, there is evidence recorded by a Danish naturalist who once met him, stating: ‘…We have now followed the biography of a small-built man from birth to the time he was about to shape both Thai society and his own history, creating a story that has been passed down because of the greatness of the individual and his deeds…’ (A History of Modern Thailand by B.J. Terwiel). Moreover, placing the royal ascendant in Pisces—the same sign as the Sun—indicates not only that he would be unappreciative of others’ merits (the Sun in Pisces, a water element, is called ‘the Sun sets in water’)…”

The Royal Portrait of King Taksin the Great
(Image from the book King Taksin the Great, the Conqueror of Thonburi)

Since the Sun transits between houses with Venus, it retains the strength to express one of his prominent characteristics, namely being a good leader. In summary, King Taksin the Great was born on March 23 (according to Eastern astrology, still considered March 22), B.E. 2277, Chulasakarat 1096, which corresponds to Tuesday (Eastern astrology still considers it Monday), the 4th waning day of the fifth lunar month, Year of the Tiger, at 5:45 a.m. in Ayutthaya. (Compiled on February 2, 1998)

Dr. Suree Phumiphamon (1996: 76) stated, “…King Taksin the Great was born on March 23, 1734…” which corresponds with the view of Police Major General Suchart Phueaksakorn.

1.2 Are there any stories about the miraculous powers or virtuous deeds of King Taksin the Great?

Diagram Showing the Components of a Traditional Thai House

  • 1. It is said that at the time of his birth, the sky was clear without clouds, but lightning struck the central post (the main pillar supporting the roof ridge) without causing any harm to the infant.

  • 2. It is also said that he had a remarkably deep navel, capable of holding an entire betel nut (with its husk), which was unusual for other children. His body, as a young child, appeared to have a square shape: measuring from the navel to the feet equaled the distance from the navel to the hairline at the forehead; measuring the full arm span from fingertip to fingertip equaled the length from the feet to the forehead. Individuals with such characteristics were considered true great men by ancient Thai and Chinese scholars (Thuan Boonyaniyom, 1970: 5; Sanan Silakorn, 1988: 3).

  • 3. When he was three days old, a python coiled around the basket in which he was placed (Police Lieutenant Pisal Senawet, 1972: 2). This caused his father and mother to fear potential danger, as Chinese custom often required children born during ominous events to be buried alive. However, this could not be done in Thailand due to the law, so they considered abandoning him outside the home. Chao Phraya Chakri, upon learning of the situation, felt compassion for the child and requested him from his father in Haiphong, who willingly handed him over to Chao Phraya Chakri.

Note: Police Lieutenant Pisal Senawet (1972: 328–329) explained: “In many Chinese chronicles, such as the Xihan story, it is told that Le Pang, the King of Han who ascended the throne of the great Chinese empire, had an omen involving a snake. When Le Pang encountered a white snake blocking his path, he killed it with a sword. A spirit said, ‘You, the purple snake, have killed the white snake.’ In Chinese symbolism, the white snake represents a high official or prince. In another account, when Le Yu claimed the throne from King Guangde of the Sima family, he entered a forest and met a child who said he was serving a large snake. Le Yu scolded the child, and their fear vanished. This symbolizes that Le Yu was like a dragon, and the children feared him greatly, even though they were under a large snake, because they could not oppose the dragon. Le Yu thus became king of the Nan Song dynasty. In the Meng Qiao or Ming Chao story, Zhu Yuanhe, the first emperor, is described as having poisonous animals on his head, yet he became the first emperor of the Ming dynasty. Therefore, Hai Phong may never have read Chinese chronicles and was naturally startled and frightened.”

The riverside pavilion of Wat Kosawas has two piers. It is unclear at which pier the young boy Sin was tied and displayed at the foot of the steps. As of 1988, the canal has silted up, and the steps now stand on dry land. (Image from the book King Taksin the Great, Conqueror of Thonburi)

  • 4. When he grew older and studied at Wat Kosawas, he once acted as the dealer in a fan-tan game. Other children played loudly, and the abbot ordered all the students playing the game to be punished by whipping. King Taksin, however, was whipped and tied over the steps of the riverside bridge as a public warning, so that others would not follow his example. The abbot forgot to release him until after 8 p.m., fearing he might drown as the tide rose. When they reached the riverside, the steps had floated away, and the boy (Sin) was still tied to them, miraculously surviving. (Police Lieutenant Pisal Senawet, 1972: 12–14)

Giant Honeybee (Apis dorsata Fabricius)
(Image from http://kanchanapisek.or.th/kp6/BOOK15/graphics/question/b15-m4.jpg; http://plantpro.doae.go.th/plantclinic/clinic/other/bee/bee29.htm)

  • 5. During the topknot-cutting ceremony, giant honeybees settled on the ceiling in the area where water was to be sprinkled and remained there for seven days and seven nights. Afterward, the bees flew away, serving as another miraculous omen. (Police Lieutenant Pisal Senawet, 1972: 15)

  • 6. At the age of 21, he was ordained. One day, while monks Sin and Thongduang were waiting to receive alms, a fortune teller approached, stopped, and stared at the two monks. After observing them for some time, he laughed and walked away. When asked, he explained that both were extraordinary; based on their characteristics, each would become a ruler. (Prayoon Pisnaka, 1984: 7–8)

King Taksin the Great
(Image from the book King Taksin the Great)
King Buddha Yodfa Chulaloke the Great
(Image from the book The Royal Weapons of the City)

  • 7. The royal virtue manifested in miraculous deeds

Woramai Kabilsingh (1997: 41–42, 48–49) wrote about the manifestation of King Taksin the Great’s royal virtue and miraculous deeds: “When King Taksin set out by boat to attack Nakhon Si Thammarat, a severe storm arose. Some warships of the royal fleet and the rear fleet sank, broke apart, or sought shelter in the bay. King Taksin then ordered a pavilion to be built high on the shore, arranged offerings for the guardian deities of the ocean, lit incense and candles, performed worship, and made a solemn vow invoking the Triple Gem and his own royal merit accumulated from past lives and the present. By the power of his royal command and miraculous virtue, the storm immediately calmed, becoming completely still at the moment of his vow. Consequently, the royal barge and all warships, though small, were able to sail safely across the ocean without danger. When he led the army to attack Chiang Mai, upon reaching Lum Luang district, he stopped and encamped at a pavilion there. At that time, it was the hot season and a period of drought. He declared, ‘Do not worry; this is my responsibility. Tonight, do not strike the evening drum. Mark the hour at eleven p.m. I will cause rain to fall.’ He then ordered Phraya Ratchaprasit to build a pavilion, perform ritual offerings to the deities on the hill, and made a solemn vow, invoking his royal merit and accumulated virtue from past lives to the present as a refuge for his troops. By the power of his vow and the deities, at the appointed time the sky was clear, but by 10 p.m. heavy rain began to fall, flooding the forest and carrying timber downstream in a remarkable way. By morning, he mounted the royal elephant to lead the army across the hills to reach Lamphun.”

1.3 Who was the father of King Taksin the Great?

  • 1. The father had several names as follows:

In the book “Aphinihan Banphaburut,” a Thai manuscript on white khoi paper, consisting of two volumes (property of Mom Chao Piyapakhinath Supradit), it is stated that the father of King Taksin the Great was named Hai Hong, with the title Khun Phat (tax officer of the gambling den) during the reign of King Borommakot (King Boromkosa). He was a wealthy man with full assets, including male and female slaves, and sought the patronage of Chao Phraya Chakri Samuhanayok, who had his residence near the walls of Ayutthaya.

The term ‘Hong’ or ‘Heng’ is in the Teochew dialect, while in Beijing pronunciation it is ‘Feng.’ Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn explained in the book Khuen Thin Chin Yai (1998: 6) that “… the term Hai Hong in Mandarin is pronounced ‘Haifeng,’ a township in the southern part of Guangdong province, midway to Tanghai, towards Shenzhen. The notion that King Taksin was from Tanghai comes from G. William Skinner’s Chinese Society in Thailand (New York: Cornell University Press, 1975), which aligns with the Chinese dynastic chronicles of the Qing dynasty under Emperor Qianlong. Chinese scribes recorded the royal biography of King Taksin, stating: ‘Zheng Zhao’s father was from Guangdong province, engaged in trade in Siam, and Zheng Zhao was born there. When Zheng Zhao grew up, he became capable and served in Siam. After Zheng Zhao defeated the Burmese, the people of the country raised him as ruler.’

Note: ‘Zheng Zhao’ is the Chinese pronunciation of King of Thonburi; in Teochew it would be ‘Tejiao.’ Pol. Col. Pisal Senaves (1972: 328) explained that Hai Hong was the name of King Taksin’s father and that he was undoubtedly Hainanese Chinese, as indicated by the surname ‘Hai,’ which is one of the Hainanese surnames. Other Chinese groups such as Teochew, Cantonese, or Hokkien did not have this surname. Furthermore, the term ‘Hainan’ is likely a corruption; the correct form should be ‘Hainam,’ which separates into ‘Hai’ meaning ‘sea’ and ‘Nam’ meaning ‘south,’ collectively meaning ‘South Sea,’ possibly referring to the South Sea island.”

  • 2. In the “Royal Chronicles of Cambodia,” translated by P.T. Luang Ruangdej Anan (Thongdee Thanarat – father of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat), it is recorded about the King as follows: “In the year 1131 of the Chula Sakarat (B.E. 2312), the Year of the Ox, King Taksin, a Chinese-Hai–Ngang descendant residing in Ayutthaya, gathered forces and went to battle against the Burmese, achieving victory and driving them out of Siam. He then established himself as ruler in Ayutthaya and sent officials with a formal letter written in elegant script to King Narai Rajathibodi of Cambodia, accompanied by gifts of flowers, silver, and gold, to present to King Taksin as a gesture of royal friendship, following the precedent of earlier times.” (Sathuen Suphasophon, 1984: 33)

  • 3. The commemorative book for the unveiling of King Taksin the Great’s monument in Chanthaburi Province (1981: 1) and the book Somdet Phra Chao Taksin Maharat by the Foundation for the Preservation of Ancient Monuments in the Old Palace (2000: 164) state that King Taksin’s father was a Chinese immigrant of the Tae clan named Haihong. Later researchers found that Haihong was actually a district in Guangdong Province (Teochew region), and the father’s name appearing in post-Manchu dynasty sources is Shen Yong (the name “Yong” appears in some documents, e.g., Thai Journal 19(71): July–September 1999, by Praphat Trinarong, The Realm of King Taksin, 1999: 17). Some sources, however, claim that “Yong” was originally the personal name of King Taksin himself before he became the adopted son of Chao Phraya Chakri (Mom Rajawongse Chonmasawat Chomphunuch, The Biography of Nine Great Kings, Bangkok: Phittayakarn, 1971: 241; and the commemorative book for the unveiling of King Taksin the Great’s monument in Ratchaburi Province, 1998: 1).

  • 4. Pimphrapai Phisankul (1998: 94) wrote: “… In the year 1734 CE (2277 BE), a hero was born among the Teochew community of Ayutthaya during the reign of King Boromkot. This was King Taksin the Great. His father, of the Tae clan, was named Yong and came from the district of Tenghai…”

  • 5. Sang Phatnotai (n.d.: 23, 139) wrote in Traveling in Teochew that “… ‘Haihong’ mentioned in the books is the name of a district in Teochew, not a person’s name. ‘Haihong,’ ‘Haihong,’ or ‘Haihong’ are all the same. Today it is the southernmost and smallest district of Shantou Province. In ancient times, it was likely very barren, so the father of King Taksin migrated to Ayutthaya…”

  • 6. Chusiri Jamraman (1984: 65) stated, “… The reason the biographers used the district name as a personal name might have been the idea of King Taksin’s father himself, so that the location of their ancestry could still be traced. If someone tried to trace it, merely providing the given name and surname might not be enough, because the same surnames are extremely common. King Taksin’s father bore the Teochew surname ‘Teh,’ which in Beijing dialect is pronounced ‘Zheng’; there are countless people with the Teh surname in Teochew…”

  • 7. Dr. Suree Phumiphamorn (1996: 76) wrote, “… King Taksin’s father was named Nai Yong, of the Teh (Teochew) clan. He was a Teochew Chinese, originally from Haihong, a small district of Shantou, and settled at Khlong Suan Phlu. He gained distinction as the tax collector of gambling houses in the city of Tak…”

  • 8. However, in the book Viet Nam su ky or The Annals of Vietnam, translated over 80 years ago by Nai Yong Yuan, an artilleryman (first printed in 1900), it is stated that King Taksin’s father was a Teochew Chinese named Kok Huay SaeTin : “King Taksin of Thonburi’s paternal lineage was Teochew Chinese, residing in the old city district, of the Tin clan, named Kok Huay. When old Ayutthaya fell to the Burmese invaders, Phraya Tak established himself as king, founding the city in the area of Bangkok Yai, calling it Thonburi.” (Sethuen Suphasophon, 1984: 33)

  • 9. However, according to the book Who Killed King Taksin by Woramai Kabilsingh (1997: 6-7), King Taksin’s father was named Chien Low Saelim. Chien Low was the son of Chien Sun, also called Chien Chuan Chu, and his wife was a Thai woman named Nang Nok Iang.

In summary, King Taksin’s father had multiple recorded names, such as Hai Hong, Shen Yang or Shen Yong, Yong, Gok Huai, and Chien Low. His surname may have been Teh (Tae), Tin, or Lim. He is generally described as a Chinese of Teochew (Chaozhou) or Guangdong descent, although Pol. Col. Phisal Senaves believed he was Hainanese. It is clear that historians have not reached a consensus regarding the exact name and surname of King Taksin’s father. One historian has offered an interpretation as follows (Veena Rojanarat, 1997: 86).

1. The story of King Taksin’s father shows that “Hai Hong” is a district in Chaozhou (Teochew), pronounced “Haifeng” in Mandarin and “Hai Hong” in Teochew. The book Si Si Er Mo Zhu Shi, written after the Manchu dynasty, records that his original name was Shen Yong, a Cantonese who enjoyed traveling and spending freely, eventually becoming poor and emigrating to Thailand, later achieving wealth through gambling. Nithi Eawsriwong noted that K.S.R. Kulap may have been the first to record the father’s name as Yong Saetae, which likely informed later Chinese sources. Moreover, Tuan Li Sheng discovered the tomb containing King Taksin’s ceremonial garments in Hua Fu Subdistrict, Chenghai District, Teochew (Chaozhou), Guangdong Province, southeastern China, along with a family shrine built in 1921 (B.E. 2464) that likely preserved the royal lineage and buried symbolic remains according to Chinese custom. This may indicate that the paternal lineage originated in that district, a dry and arid region, which prompted the family to migrate to Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya.

Tomb of King Taksin’s Ceremonial Garments, Tenghai
(Siem Lo Te Awng Taksin Tai Di)
(Image from Dujanawa in the Middle of the Ocean)

2. The surname and original name of King Taksin are relatively consistent across sources. According to the Royal Chronicles of Thonburi, Phan Chantanumas (Jerm), Vol. 2/Khai, his original Chinese name was Jiang, a merchant’s name pronounced “Zheng” in Mandarin and “Teh” in Teochew. This aligns with Qing dynasty chronicles, which recorded the name “Zheng Zhao” based on letters from Thonburi, and with the Chinese scholar Tuan Li Sheng, who gave the name “Tae Sin.” Some sources state his original name was “Yong” (M.R. Chonmasawat Chompoonuch, 1971: 241). King Chulalongkorn later formalized the name as Somdet Phra Chao Taksin, known among Chinese speakers as “Teh Sin Tak.” Thus, it can be concluded that King Taksin used this surname, and most sources agree his original name was Sin.

3. As for King Taksin’s Chinese ancestry, most evidence indicates he was Teochew. However, the Qing dynasty chronicles suggest Cantonese ancestry, while the Northern Royal Chronicles No. 1/Khai claim descent from the Mon king Mak Khatok (Veena Rojanratha, 1997: 86). Evidence of his Chinese heritage in Thai chronicles includes that during Ayutthaya’s fall, thousands of Chinese joined Phraya Kamphaeng Phet (later King Taksin) to fight the Burmese. When overwhelmed, Phraya Kamphaeng Phet led Thai and Chinese troops out of enemy encirclement to regroup at Rayong. Local Thai-Chinese forces voluntarily pledged allegiance and joined him, demonstrating that only Phraya Kamphaeng Phet/Taksin could unite them. King Taksin awarded Thai titles to the Chinese helpers, such as Luang Pipit, Luang Pichai, Luang Phrom, Khun Cha Mueang Sue Rai, and Muen Thong, placing them in command of Chinese troops wielding spears. At Rayong, when attacked, the Chinese troops fought fiercely, routing the enemy over 2–3 km, after which Taksin sounded the victory gong. During the campaign to Chanthaburi, Chinese troops joined and succeeded in battle. Once forces were consolidated there, King Taksin led the combined Thai-Chinese army against Burmese positions along the Chao Phraya, especially at Pho Sam Ton camp, defeating the enemy and then subduing local warlords across various cities (Sang Phatnothai, n.d.: 143).

1.4 What was the name of King Taksin’s mother?

His mother was Thai, named Nang Nok-iang, who is believed to have possibly been the daughter of a nobleman during the reign of King Boromkhet or the daughter of the governor of Phetchaburi (from Somdet Phra Chao Taksin Maharat, Foundation for the Preservation of Ancient Monuments in the Former Royal Palace, 2000: 13).

Dr. Suree Phumiphamorn (1996: 76) stated that the mother of King Taksin the Great was a noblewoman from Ban Laem, Phetchaburi Province.

Thuan Boonyayom (1970: 4) recounted that “As for Nang Nok-iang, she was the daughter of a high-ranking nobleman serving in the royal court of King Boromkhet. Her father presented her to serve closely as a lady-in-waiting to the king. Nang Nok-iang was a refined lady, beautiful according to the palace standards.”

Chusiri Chamroman (1984: 65) mentioned King Taksin’s mother, stating, “… She is often described as a Thai noblewoman from Ayutthaya (and some modern writers have suggested that she was still a young woman during the time Prince Thammathibet was alive, and that she had served in the palace of that prince).”

Woramai Kabilsingh (1997: 7) wrote that Nang Nok Yiang was the daughter of Than Phluk and Than Thong Chieb. However, the Histoire de Siam (Ayutthaya period), published in Paris in 1771 at the early Thonburi period, mentions King Taksin’s mother as “a Chinese woman,” noting that Phraya Tak, whose mother was Chinese, was both a politician and a warrior, paving the way for his future greatness (Sethuen Supasophon, 1984: 34). Veena Rojanarata (1997: 86) stated that King Taksin’s father married a Thai woman named Lue Yang, which Nithi Eawsriwong suggested was likely a corrupted form of the name Nang Nok Yiang.

After King Taksin ascended the throne, he granted his mother the title of Krom Phra Thepamat. She later fell ill with a severe fever and passed away in 1774 (Sang Phathnothai, n.d.: 315).

1.5 What are the names by which King Taksin the Great was commonly called?

The names by which King Taksin the Great was called are numerous, each reflecting the relationship with and the feelings of the person addressing him (King Taksin the Great, Foundation for the Preservation of Ancient Monuments in the Former Royal Palace, 2000: 18–22). Notable examples include:

1. Ganernsi – appears in Qing dynasty annals up to the 8th month of the 37th year of Qianlong, likely referring to Phraya Kamphaeng Phet.
2. Khun Luang Taksin – a name used by people during the Rattanakosin period.
3. Chinese Chiang – appears in Thai sources written during the Thonburi period.
4. Zheng Guoying – appears in Danang chronicles (Vietnamese documents), pronounced in Mandarin; Vietnamese called him Chinh Kokhuay, Cantonese called him Zheng Guoying.
5. Zheng Guoering – appears in Chinese sources in standard Mandarin, meaning “Zheng the Hero of the Nation.”
6. Zheng Zhao – appears in Qing dynasty official documents, meaning “King Zheng.”
7. Chao Krung Thon – used by King Chulalongkorn (Rama V).
8. Chao Taksin – used by King Mongkut (Rama IV).
9. Chao Mueang Tak – name used when he was governor of Tak.
10. Chao Mueang Ra Haeng – referring to the twin towns Tak and Ra Haeng.
11. Taksin – appears in the testimonies of old Bangkok captives; some said he was governor of Tak, others said of Ra Haeng.
12. Tae Chiao – appears in royal letters sent to the Chinese emperor.
13. Tae Sin – appears in the documents of Tuan Li Sheng, the Chinese scholar, when discussing the father’s history.
14. Tae Sin Tak – Rama IV issued this name; used among the Chinese as a Thai idiom.
15. Tia Sin Tad / Tia Sin Twat – used in information provided by King Mongkut to Dr. Smith; Tia = surname Teh, Sin = Sin, Tad / Twat = Mueang Tak.
16. Phi Ea Sin – appears in Qing dynasty annals, transliterating “Phraya Tak.”
17. Phandin Ton – appears in the memoirs of Krom Luang Narindhadevi.
18. Phraya Tak – appears in primary sources during the Thonburi restoration of Ayutthaya.
19. Phraya Taksin – appears in testimonies of captives from old Bangkok; likely used to distinguish him from other Phraya Tak.
20. Phra Si Sanphet – appears in Thai black manuscript chronicles, royal letters, and correspondence between Thonburi and Lanchang (Laos), Chulasakarat 1140.
21. Pa – a term he used to refer to himself.
22. Somdet Phra Chao Krung Thonburi Maharaj – appears in books by Natwut Sutthisongkram.
23. Somdet Phra Chao Taksin Krung Thonburi – appears in government documents of the Secretariat, Cabinet, April 12, 1954, regarding the unveiling of his statue.
24. Somdet Phra Brom Noraphutthangkun – appears in the Thonburi Royal Chronicles.
25. Somdet Phra Brom Racha 4 Chao Krung Thonburi – appears in the Royal Chronicles, copy of the Royal Letter.
26. Sin – his personal name; used or known at the end of Ayutthaya and during his reign.
27. Head of the Siamese nation – used by the Qing court before officially recognizing him as Thai king in the 4th month of the 37th year of Qianlong; appears as Zheng Zhao.

1.6 Did King Taksin have any siblings?

Woramai Kabinsingh (1997: 8) wrote that Jian Lo, bearing the surname Lim, and his wife Nang Nok Iang had their first son, who was fair-skinned with delicate features like his mother. His complexion and facial appearance were unusually handsome compared to other boys of his age. They named the child Jian Sin according to an auspicious time. Later, they had two more sons named Jian Sue and Jian Jin, and three daughters whom Nang Nok Iang named Prayong, Prayat, and Prayom (or Phayom). All three daughters were beautiful, with fine complexions and graceful figures resembling their mother.

1.7 Where was King Taksin’s original residence or family home located?

The original residence of King Taksin was located in front of the house of Chao Phraya Chakri, near the city wall of the royal capital (Praphat Treenarong, 1999: 18). However, Woramai Kabinsingh (1997: 6–7) wrote that “In Sam Khok (Pathum Thani), a town blessed with abundant rivers and fertile fields, there stood a large house by the riverbank. The owner of the house was a man of Chinese descent named Jian Lo, bearing the surname Lim, whose wife was a Thai woman named Nok Iang. The couple worked diligently to build their livelihood from the inheritance they had received from their parents, investing it in the rice trade until they became prosperous. They expanded their rice shop into a rice mill, purchasing paddy to mill and sell as polished rice. Later, they bought boats to transport rice for sale in Ayutthaya and Suphan, becoming well known among merchants and government officials in the town and in the capital city of Ayutthaya.”

1.8 Did King Taksin truly have an adoptive father?

It is told that “Chao Phraya Chakri adopted him as his son and named him Nai Sin” (For the Thai Nation, n.d.: 41). In the book Tribute to Eminent Figures, Volume 3 (Praphat Treenarong, 1991: 1), it is written that “He was graciously cared for by Chao Phraya Samuhanayok during the reign of King Borommarachathirat I (King Borommakot).” Sanan Silakorn (1988: 3–4) also wrote that “Later, Chao Phraya Chakri asked to take the boy Sin as his adopted son.” In The Miraculous Ancestors, a passage concerning his early years, based on the chronicle of Phra Achan Thongdee of Wat Kosawas, recounts that “…since Chao Phraya Chakri adopted the Chinese boy Hai Hong as his son and raised him until he grew up, he gained great fortune and wealth. Chao Phraya Chakri therefore named the boy ‘Nai Sin’.”

Thuan Boonyaniyom (1970: 5) provided details explaining why the father and mother of King Taksin decided to give him to Chao Phraya Chakri as an adopted son, as follows: “Khun Phat became deeply fearful for various reasons (as seen in The Miraculous Power or Merit of King Taksin the Great, Nos. 1–3). He therefore consulted with Lady Nok Iang, and in the end, they decided not to keep the boy. Khun Phat was a man who strongly believed in omens, for the child’s birth had been followed by two misfortunes within three days. He feared that if the boy were kept, misfortunes would continue to occur. Yet, in his heart, he felt that the child was destined for greatness, though he himself could not raise him. Thus, Khun Phat decided not to keep the boy in his care.”

The reputation that Khun Phat would not raise the boy himself reached Chao Phraya Chakri Sri Samuhanayok (equivalent to a Minister of Interior for the northern administration, paired with the Minister of Defense for the southern administration at that time). Chao Phraya recognized that the two miraculous events—the thunderbolt striking the post in front of the birthing room without harming the child, and a large python coiled calmly around the winnowing basket before slowly uncoiling and leaving—were auspicious omens for the boy’s future. Believing that if a person of great merit and high status took the child under their care it would benefit his destiny, Chao Phraya, who was naturally kind and fond of children, immediately offered to become the boy’s guardian when he learned that Khun Phat would not keep him. Khun Phat and Lady Nok Iang gladly agreed, even though her heart did not wish to part with her beloved child. It took much consolation to persuade her, yet Chao Phraya was highly respected and benevolent, and the boy would remain nearby, able to see his parents each morning and evening. Once both husband and wife consented, Chao Phraya joyfully accepted the child, raising him as his adopted son.

“…After Chao Phraya Chakri Sri Samuhanayok took the boy as his adopted son, he experienced great fortune, with wealth and valuables flowing in, becoming far richer than before. Because of the increase in his assets following the adoption of the boy, Chao Phraya Chakri named him ‘Sin’ and kept his hair in a braided style rather than a topknot, so as to preserve the boy’s Chinese lineage. Chao Phraya cherished and cared for the young Sin deeply, raising and nurturing him as if he were his own biological son.”

Regarding the matter of King Taksin the Great’s father, some writers have questioned whether he was truly the son of Nai Hai Hong, and why Chao Phraya Chakri adopted him as his son and honored him without prejudice despite his Chinese heritage. Various hypotheses have been proposed, such as:

  • 1. Thuan Boonyaniyom (1970: 16–17), in an additional commentary in Part 1, wrote: “As mentioned earlier, there is no clear evidence regarding the reason for the marriage between Lady Nok Iang and Khun Phat. From reviewing two to three chronicles, it can be summarized that the Grand Vice King during the reign of King Borommakot, named Chao Fa Thammathibet (Kung), was a distinguished poet and inclined toward women even within the royal palace, earning the epithet ‘the prince obsessed with love.’ He was involved with Chao Fa Sangwan and Chao Fa Nim, wives of the king. When King Borommakot learned of this, he investigated and confirmed it, and the Grand Vice King was executed. Lady Nok Iang may have secretly been a consort of the Grand Vice King and become pregnant, after which she was sent to marry Khun Phat, a wealthy tax officer. Khun Phat and Lady Nok Iang likely understood and agreed to this arrangement, and Chao Phraya Chakri Sri Samuhanayok was probably aware as well. One part of the chronicles also mentions that when Nai Sin was still a young child, if his hair was not braided, one could discern a resemblance to a person of great merit and high status, though Chao Phraya did not disclose this to anyone.”

  • 2. Sanan Silakorn (1988: 104–106) cited the opinion of Ajarn Khongdet Praphatthong, an archaeologist from the Archaeology Division, Fine Arts Department, regarding the debated origins of King Taksin, in the article “Prisana Khun Luang Tak” published in Silpa Wattanatham Journal, Vol. 6, No. 8, June 1985: 85–93. It was suggested that he may have been a secret son of King Borommakot, with the following reasoning: 

“Late Ayutthaya society at that time was highly stratified. Thai people were proud of their lineage, and it would have been extremely unlikely for Chao Phraya Chakri (Wat Rong Khong) to fully accept a Chinese boy as his adopted son, providing him with education and preparing him for a high-ranking official career. Yet, King Taksin began his official career and quickly rose to become Lord of Tak (Phraya Tak) at the age of 33, which strongly indicates that this was no ordinary circumstance. In those times, ancestry was scrutinized far more carefully than today; without noble lineage, no one could attain a rank such as ‘Chao Phraya’ or govern a city. For a Chinese child, or even a mixed-blood child, to be adopted by the former Chao Phraya Chakri of Wat Rong Khong and rise to such status would have been nearly impossible. Even for high-ranking officials, the social environment would have made it extremely difficult to accept such an adopted child. At best, he might have been kept as a servant rather than a son. Observing certain royal behaviors recorded in the memoirs of Krom Luang Narintara Devi, it is apparent that Khun Luang Tak (King Taksin) showed concern and loyalty toward the royal family of Ayutthaya in its final days, seeking to honor the royal lineage. This may indicate that he himself belonged to the Ayutthayan royal lineage. In this light, the mystery of his origin resembles ‘water seeping under the sand.’ If he truly had foreign or mixed blood, why would he have safeguarded the original Ayutthaya royal line and even attempted to restore the nation’s independence during the kingdom’s collapse? That would be unlikely for someone of foreign or mixed ancestry in that era. If Khun Luang Tak did not have a Chinese father named Nai Hai Hong, a tax officer, then the fact that Chao Phraya Chakri, after retiring, took him in as an adopted son must have involved a highly secret and profound reason, perhaps that his mother had been a consort or concubine of King Borommakot before he ascended the throne.”

“It can be stated that during the time when King Borommakot was still Grand Vice King at the Front Palace, contemporaneous with the late reign of his elder brother, a period of turmoil arose with a succession struggle between the Rear and Front Palaces. While these events were unfolding or just before major actions were taken, he may have considered ways to secure the safety of his officials, servants, and offspring so that they could survive the impending royal threat, for any misstep could have meant the end of their futures and even the eradication of servants and descendants. Due to the uncertainty of the situation, he had to discreetly relocate lesser-known consorts to safe and hidden locations, while princes, princesses, and consorts with children could not avoid exposure and had to face potential danger together. Once the crisis passed, he ascended the throne as a full king. Some officials moved to safety likely returned, while others may not have resumed their former positions. It is also possible that he maintained secret communication with close and trusted officials, entrusting them to provide care and protection without letting anyone else know. In such circumstances, Chao Phraya Chakri, who was out of official service, became the adoptive father of Khun Luang Tak, thereby safeguarding the royal lineage from potential destruction amid jealousy and enmity. Viewed in this context, the mystery surrounding his origins is both thought-provoking and remarkable. The rapid progression of Khun Luang Tak’s official career is particularly notable. His birth year is recorded as 2277 BE, during the second year of King Borommakot’s reign. When King Borommakot passed away in 2301 BE, Khun Luang Tak was only 24 years old. From then until 2310 BE, when Ayutthaya fell under the reign of Khun Luang Suriyamarin (King Ekathotsarot), he had reached 33 years of age. His last official position was Phraya Wachiraprakarn or Phraya Kamphaeng Phet, an important frontier city of Ayutthaya and a major assembly point for northern campaigns. Kamphaeng Phet ranked just below Phitsanulok in importance. While serving as governor, he may have only recently assumed the position before being drawn into the Burmese conflict, effectively making him the last governor of Kamphaeng Phet. After the fall of Ayutthaya in 2310 BE, he quickly restored independence by establishing Thonburi as the new capital, assuming kingship at the age of 33.”

  • 3. Weena Rojanaratha (1997: 85–86) critiqued the claim that King Taksin was the adopted son of Chao Phraya Chakri Sri Samuhanayok, citing Nithi Eawsriwong’s interpretation that the story may have been fabricated later to present him as culturally Thai in the eyes of Thai people. Upon examining the evidence, it was found that the Chao Phraya Chakri who could have adopted Nai Sin died too early to have been his patron through schooling and service as a royal page, and there is no reliable historical evidence confirming his existence.

    Praphat Trinarong, in The Reign of King Taksin (Part 1), published in Thai Journal 19(7): July–September 1999: 18–20, cited Lt. Yod Khachornyot, R.N., of the Naval History Division, who authored Royal Biography of King of Thonburi. Lt. Yod explained that Chao Phraya Chakri appears in the Royal Chronicles of Ayutthaya, compiled by Somdet Krom Phra Borommanuchit Chinorot, noting that during King Borommakot’s reign, in CS 1096 (BE 2276), Luang Cha Saen Yakorn was appointed Chao Phraya Chakri. However, according to the Royal Letters Chronicle, Vol. 2, Part 1, he was appointed Chao Phraya Aphai Montri as acting Samuhanayok, and this individual (Luang Cha Saen Yakorn) died in the year of the Dog, CS 1104 (BE 2285), when King Taksin was eight years old. Subsequently, Phraya Ratchaphakdi was appointed Chao Phraya Ratchaphakdi as acting Samuhanayok.

    The title “Chao Phraya Chakri” refers to the office of Samuhanayok; anyone holding that office would be called Chao Phraya Chakri regardless of personal name. In this sense, King Taksin must have been under the patronage of the Samuhanayok (at least two officeholders) from his early childhood until he was no less than 24 years old.

According to later royal biographies, Chao Phraya Chakri (Luang Cha Saen Yakorn, who had been promoted to Chao Phraya Aphai Montri as Samuhanayok) took him to raise as an adopted son and named him Sin. When he reached the age of five (some sources say nine), he was sent to study Thai and Khmer scripts and the Tripitaka under Phra Ajahn Thongdee Mahather at Wat Kosawas.

He continued his studies at Wat Kosawas until the age of thirteen, when he underwent the traditional head-shaving ceremony (Sokan). Afterward, Chao Phraya Chakri presented him to serve as a royal page under King Borommakot, who assigned him to work with Luang Nai Sak, Chao Phraya Chakri’s son.

This Chao Phraya Chakri is believed to have been Chao Phraya Ratchaphakdi, because Chao Phraya Chakri (Chao Phraya Aphai Montri) had already passed away in the year of the Dog, CS 1104 (BE 2285), as previously cited.

1.9 How did King Taksin receive his education?

At the age of about eight or nine, Chao Phraya Chakri brought the boy Sin to study under Phra Ajahn Thongdee at Wat Kosawas (also called Wat Khlang or Wat Choeng Tha), a temple that Chao Phraya Chakri had founded while serving as the Minister of Finance (Praphat Trinarong, 1991: 1). Phra Ajahn Thongdee was tasked with teaching him various subjects. Young Sin learned Thai language skills, including reading and writing, as well as Khmer script and the Tripitaka, continuing his studies until the age of thirteen (Thuan Boonyaniyom, 1970: 6–7).

Woramai Kabilsingh (1997: 8–9) wrote that “Upon growing older, he became a disciple of Phra Ajahn Suk of Wat Phraya Mueang, who was a student of Phra Ajahn Samnak at Wat Pantai in Wiset Chai Chan. He was ordained and studied under him. As for the Chinese language, he studied under a Chinese teacher. When he was to enter government service, his father entrusted him to a high-ranking official he personally knew, Phraya Ratchasuphavadi (the elder) of Ban Pratu Chin, who was also of Chinese descent.” … “Than Chian Sin (King Taksin) was intelligent, learned both Thai and Chinese languages, and was diligent and persevering in his duties.”

Thuan Boonyaniyom (1970: 11) wrote: “From the time Nai Sin entered service in the royal palace, he constantly sought to acquire knowledge from the Royal Academy, which included Thai, Chinese, and Indian scholars. In Thai studies, he learned grammar, literature, and studied classical poetic forms such as khlong, chan, and kap klon. In military science, he studied the treatises on war strategy and weapons, practicing the use of all kinds of weapons employed at the time—on elephantback, horseback, and on foot—until he became highly skilled and proficient, difficult to match by anyone.”

Chusiri Jamraman (1984: 83–85) summarized in Historical Reports: Archaeological Documents, Vol. 18, No. 1, January–December 1984, as follows:

In another aspect of his education, King Taksin appears to have been interested in study from a young age and continued his learning even after his coronation as king. He studied on his own as well as under various teachers he met, particularly Phra Ajahn Suk, who had once been his preceptor, focusing on Vipassana meditation. He also seems to have had an interest in astrology, as evidenced by the fact that during times of personal and state concerns, he often practiced meditation and predicted the futures of officials and palace attendants using astrological calculations. Another outcome of his education, not recorded in his official biography, was his study of the Thai language and literary composition. Even in his youth, he appears to have been well-versed in literature and writing, as demonstrated by his authorship of the Ramakien drama. Additionally, he possessed knowledge of and could communicate fluently in Chinese and Vietnamese when conversing with Chinese and Vietnamese monks.

Veena Rojanarata (1997: 87) cites Nithi Eawsriwong, noting that, upon examining the primary sources still extant today, many aspects remain unclear and lack reliability. For example, accounts of King Taksin’s education before entering royal service as a page, said to be based on the chronicles of Phra Ajahn Thongdee Mahathera as cited in Aphinihan Bapaburut, are considered rather unreliable, since it is highly unlikely that a monk could have recorded the life of a child whose future as a king could not have been foreseen. However, by examining the king’s own literary work, the Ramakien drama, it is plausible that he possessed knowledge of Buddhism and Thai customs and traditions, as well as an education befitting a person of noble Thai upbringing, likely under the care of his Thai mother. The fact that he was fluent in Chinese or followed certain Chinese customs may have resulted from his need to continue his father’s business, which was probably trade conducted according to Chinese practices, rather than from holding the position of tax collector as his father did.

This observation aligns with Dr. Suree Phumiphamorn (1996: 77), who notes that “…he engaged in caravan trade at the city of Tak. At that time, caravans transported forest products from the north to Ayutthaya, including forest goods, grilled fish, and salted fish…” It also corresponds with the Royal Chronicle of Thonburi by Panchanumas (Cherm), which records that King Taksin was a caravan trader before gaining royal favor and being appointed to govern the city of Tak, eventually serving as Phraya Tak. If this observation is accurate, his experience as a caravan merchant likely helped him preserve certain Chinese cultural traits and provided him with practical skills useful for later restoring national sovereignty, such as military abilities, familiarity with northern territories of the Ayutthaya Kingdom, proficiency in Chinese, Vietnamese, and Lao languages, and acquaintance with local people who would play roles in his future efforts to reclaim independence.

1.10 When was King Taksin ordained as a monk?

At the age of 13, he was ordained as a novice monk at Wat Sam Vihara (or Sam Pihan, Praphat Trinarong, 1999: 20) outside Ayutthaya to receive further education.

When he reached the age for ordination, Nai Sin entered the monkhood at Wat Kosawad under the abbotship of Phra Ajarn Thong Dee. He remained in the monastery for three Rains Retreats (vassa) before disrobing to resume his civil service, and he no longer wore the traditional topknot thereafter (Tuan Boonyaniyom, 1970: 9, 15–16).

Wat Kosawad is an important temple located on the left bank of the Lopburi River, opposite Pom Tai Sanom and the Pak Tho Canal, to the north of the city island near Khu Mai Rong, where the royal barge was kept, in Tha Wasukri Subdistrict, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya District, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Province. It is an old temple built during the Ayutthaya period. Originally, it was called Wat Khoi Tha, with a story that a beautiful daughter of a wealthy man ran away with her lover. Her father waited longingly for her return and built a pavilion hoping that if she came back to seek forgiveness, he would forgive her and give her the pavilion. After waiting many years without seeing her return, he built a temple and dedicated the pavilion to it. Later, the temple’s name became Wat Teen Tha or Wat Choeng Tha because it was a place for gathering grass to feed the elephants and horses of the palace. When Chao Phraya Kosathibodi (Pan) renovated the temple during King Narai the Great’s reign, it was renamed Wat Kosawad. The temple is considered important because it was a major center for monastic education and housed monks skilled in various crafts, such as painting, carving, and palm-leaf manuscript writing, who were able to pass on their knowledge effectively to their disciples.

Wat Choeng Tha

However, some have claimed that this temple was called Wat Khlang. Chalerm Sukasem disputed this, stating in Archaeology, Vol. 2, No. 2, that Wat Khlang was originally the name of Wat Samnakos in Tambon Phai Ling, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya District. It was restored by Chao Phraya Kosathibodi (Lek) and Chao Phraya Kosathibodi (Pan). Originally, Wat Khlang’s full name was Wat Phra Ya Khlang, named after the official holding the position, generally referred to as Phra Ya Khlang or Phra Khlang. When the temple was restored, it received this name. Today, the temple where King Taksin studied under Phra Ajaan Thong Dee Maha Thera is called Wat Choeng Tha. It is said that King Chulalongkorn later renamed it Wat Kosawas, similar to Wat Choeng Tha in Lopburi, located by the river near Phra Narai Ratchaniwet, which he also restored.

1.11 How did King Taksin the Great serve in government during the reigns of King Boromkosa and King Ekathat (Phra Thinang Suriya Amarin)?

At about the age of 13, the young boy Sin entered royal service as a page in King Boromkosa’s court, alongside the son of Chao Phraya Chakri, Luang Nai Sak. Later, upon reaching the age for ordination (around 21 years old), he respectfully requested permission to enter the monkhood and resided at Wat Kosawas, observing monastic discipline for three years. After disrobing, he returned to royal service as before (Chusiri Chamrman, 1984: 82). Upon his return, the king, recognizing Sin’s thorough knowledge of customs and traditions, assigned him duties as a page responsible for reporting royal affairs in both the Ministry of Interior and the Royal Court Secretariat (Commemorative Publication for the Opening of King Taksin the Great’s Monument, Chanthaburi Province, 1981: 18). In addition, the king, aware of Sin’s other competencies, appointed him as an overseer of judicial matters within the Royal Court Secretariat.

An example image of the royal lion seal
(Image from 100 Years of the Ministry of Interior and Thai Journal)

Later, He was graciously appointed as a royal envoy tasked with carrying the royal seal of the lion to adjudicate legal cases in the northern cities. Possessing extensive knowledge of the law, He presided over cases with decisiveness, integrity, and fairness, showing no fear of any external influence.

Note:
According to the book 100 Years of the Ministry of Interior (2535: 85–92; http://www.moi.go.th/sign.htm, accessed 30/8/2547), the seals and colors of the Ministry of Interior evolved from official position seals. In ancient times, position seals were extremely important because government documents, dating back to the Ayutthaya period, were authenticated with these seals rather than signatures. Prince Krom Phraya Naritsaranuwat explained: “In the past, signatures were not used; instead, personal or positional seals were used in their place. Therefore, the monarch and common people who conducted official correspondence created their own seals for personal use.”

Personal and positional seals: Traditionally, there was a custom of granting royal seals as a mark of honor or rank. A royal seal granted by the monarch could be one previously used by the king or newly made. Once granted, it was no longer called a royal seal but specifically referred to as a personal or positional seal. Recipients of a personal seal were required to return it if it was no longer in use, and recipients of a positional seal had to return it upon leaving the office. No one else was allowed to use or press it. These seals were considered a form of rank insignia, and for important positions, the king himself would personally grant the seal.

His Royal Highness Prince Krom Phraya Naritsaranuwatthiwong also offered a hypothesis regarding the origin of the official seals for positions, stating: “The royal lion seal likely existed first because originally there was only one Senabodi (minister) position, second only to the king in administering state affairs, but with greater responsibility in military matters. The title ‘Senabodi’ implied authority over the army, and the seal honored bravery, as reflected in the term used for courageous men, ‘Narasinha.’ Later, as administrative duties increased and one person could not manage alone, another position was added, dividing responsibilities: one overseeing civil affairs—those not engaged in war. For the new position’s seal, only the ‘Elephant Lion’ could be chosen. In fact, the term ‘Elephant Lion’ was slightly mistaken; it was a metaphor praising a brave elephant likened to a lion, derived from ‘Narasinha.’ Subsequently, when these two officials could no longer manage, four more Senabodi positions were created, known as the ‘Chatusadom,’ to assist in administration.”

Moreover, the royal lion seal as it appears on the impressions in the “Three Seals Code” during the reign of King Rama I differs from the lion seal in use today. Prince Krom Phraya Naritsaranuwatthivong speculated that this may be because the original seal had worn down from use, requiring a re-engraving, but the re-engraving (called ruk, meaning carving grooves deeper so the design stands out) could only be done minimally, necessitating a new seal altogether. (Ruk follows the same ritual as engraving a seal, including an auspicious time, chanting by monks, and a ceremonial installation, similar to the Suphanbat inscription ritual; the only difference is that the ruk ceremony does not include a scribe.) The craftsman who made the new seal may not have copied the old one, or may not have seen it at all, resulting in differences in the design. Regarding the use of the royal lion seal as the official seal of the Minister of the Interior and the Ministry of Interior itself, since the time of Somdet Krom Phraya Damrong Rajanubhab as Minister of the Interior to the present, the lion seal symbolizing “Interior Ministry” appears in various forms on buildings, equipment, and materials, but with no single, standardized design. For example, the seven seal impressions each have unique features, including different postures, surrounding patterns, and even the direction the lion’s face faces. The lion relief on the gable of the Ministry of Interior’s current main building (constructed in the reign of King Rama V) has a different appearance, with lotus bud–like decorations surrounding it rather than a circular motif as in the seals. In the reign of King Rama VI, the Ministry of Interior’s official flag featured the lion standing on a pedestal without a surrounding circle. It can thus be assumed that from the time the king granted the royal lion seal as the official seal of the Samuhanayok, it later became the official seal of the Minister of the Interior. Regardless of how craftsmen adapted the lion’s appearance for aesthetic or practical purposes, the lion seal has always signified the Ministry of Interior. There is no legal text specifying a standard design. However, if a standardized form is desired, one could refer to the writings of Phraya Anuman Rajadhon, who noted that after the transition to a democratic government, the ministerial seal ceased to be used for stamping, being replaced by signatures, except for its continued use as a departmental emblem. That King Boromkosa entrusted such duties to a young courtier likely reflects his recognition of Nai Sin’s keen interest and solid knowledge in law and administrative procedures. During the three years he spent as a monk, Nai Sin likely did not study only religious matters, but also pursued knowledge in reading, writing, and learning from senior monks who had previously served in government.

His achievements in the field of law became evident during the reign of King Ekathat, when His Majesty granted Mr. Sin the authority to adjudicate cases in the northern cities. Upon returning to report to the king, he earned royal satisfaction and was subsequently appointed as Luang Yokkrabat in the city of Tak to assist Phra Ya Tak in administrative duties.

Somphop Chantrapraba, in the discussion on “Luang Yukkrabat Ratchaburi,” mentioned matters related to His duties (here referring to the reign of King Rama I, who once held the position of Luang Yukkrabat Ratchaburi). He noted that while serving as a court page, His Majesty performed meritoriously and was promoted to Nay Wera Khwa, serving under Nai Rittiphakdi, and subsequently elevated in rank to Luang with the noble title Luang Yukkrabat. At the same time, Somphop included explanations of the Yukkrabat position as written by Mom Ratchawong Khukrit Pramoj in “Japan Scene,” stating:

“Consulting a dictionary reveals that ‘Yukkrabat’ or ‘Yukkrabat’ was an ancient civil service position under the Ministry of the Palace, tasked with being stationed in provincial cities to oversee legal matters. The position corresponded to modern-day prosecutors, heads of administrative court divisions, or court clerks, and officers responsible for supplying military equipment, which seems minor.” from Mom Ratchawong Khukrit Pramoj’s account in Japan Scene, the duties become clearer: “The Thai Yukkrabat position was responsible for monitoring the conduct of officials in various provinces, ensuring they performed their duties properly and maintained honesty and loyalty.”

Map showing the location of Tak Province
(Image from Map of Thailand)

King Taksin the Great’s service as Luang Yuk Krabhat (Deputy Governor) of Tak was successful, leading to his promotion in both rank and title to Phraya Tak, replacing the previous Phraya Tak who had passed away. At that time, Tak was of great strategic importance as a northern frontier between Siam and Burma. The holder of this position had to be intelligent and trustworthy. With the previous governor and deputy deceased, His Majesty graciously appointed him as the Governor of Tak while he was still under 30 years of age.

Map showing the locations of various temples in Ayutthaya
(Image from Ayutthaya book)

When King Boromkhocha’s reign ended in 2301 BE, Krom Khun Phonphinit, his son, ascended the throne as King Borommarachathirat IV, also known by other names such as Khun Luang Ha Wat and King Uthumphon. This Ayutthaya monarch was praised as “the finest of the Suan Phlu dynasty,” but he reigned for only a little over two months (some sources say three) before abdicating in favor of his elder brother, Krom Khun Anurakmontri, to prevent a potential civil war, which he wished to avoid, and then entered the monkhood at Wat Ayodchaya (Wat Ayothaya or the original temple) and resided for the rains at Wat Pradu Songtham. Later, when Krom Khun Anurakmontri became King Borommarachathirat III, also known by names such as King Ekathat and Somdet Phra Thinas Suriyasan Amarin, he became the last monarch of Ayutthaya. Following this, King Taksin held the position of Phraya Tak (sometimes called Phraya Taksin) and governed Tak with widespread respect and popularity. He also commissioned the construction of a temple called Wat Khoi Khao Kaew, commonly referred to by locals as Wat Phraya Taksin, located along the Ping River with the Mae Tho Creek flowing through, in Pa Mamuang Subdistrict, Mueang Tak District (Praphat Trinarong, 2000: 21).

King Taksin, during his tenure as Governor of Tak, administered the oath of allegiance (holding the Phiphat Satya water) to his officials at Wat Khoi Khao Kaew, also known as Wat Doi Khao Kaew, in Tak Province (image from the book King Taksin the Great).

Wat Khoi Khao Kaew, also called Wat Doi Khao Kaew or Wat Phra Chao Taksin, is in Mae Tho Subdistrict, about 250 meters from the Ping River. The site includes an ordination hall (ubosot) with paired boundary stones (bai sema), a vihara, a chedi, and a Buddha footprint replica inside the ubosot. Two chedis in front enshrine the ashes of King Taksin’s parents.
(Image from http://www.thai.net/MAESOT_MET/tourist.htm)

The damaged wall of the ordination hall at Wat Khoi Khao Kaew, Mae Tho Subdistrict, Mueang Tak District. Wat Khoi Khao Kaew, or Wat Khoi Don Kaew, is situated on a hill about 30 wa above the plain. One chedi there is broken. It is said that King Taksin, when holding the title Phraya Chiraprakarn, made a wish and divination before leading forces to defend the country during a Burmese invasion, and threw the chedi’s spire, breaking it onto the temple grounds in the flower garden. The broken chedi remains at Wat Khoi Khao Kaew. About 300 meters downhill lies Wat Klang Suan Dok, or Wat Khao Kaew, where the king built a chedi at the spot where the spire fell, and it was from this site that he achieved victory through his wish and divination.
(Image and text from Somdet Phra Chao Taksin Chom Bodin Maharaj)

Later (B.E. 2303 / 1760), while serving in Mueang Tak, he performed merit-making at Wat Khoi Khao Kaew and Wat Doi Klang, which are adjacent temples in Ban Raeng Subdistrict, Mueang Tak. It is famously recorded in Aphinihan Banphabut, citing the chronicles of the abbot of Wat Khoi Khao Kaew, that he made a wish and divination by throwing a wooden object, which struck only the narrow middle of a glass cup, breaking it. The intact pieces of the cup were then used to construct a chedi enshrining the Buddha’s relics. As governor of Tak, he improved the city, bringing it to prosperity, at a time when Tak was an important frontier town of central Thailand.

In B.E. 2307 (1764), King Ekathat appointed Phraya Tak Sin as Phraya Chiraprakarn (some sources call him Phraya Wichianprakarn), governor of Kamphaeng Phet, which was a first-class frontier city at that time. He was required to receive his commission in Ayutthaya, but before he could return to Kamphaeng Phet, the Burmese army invaded the kingdom and laid siege to Ayutthaya. The new governor was thus compelled to delay his journey to assist in the defense of the capital, which helped establish his reputation as a skilled warrior. When the Burmese vanguard advanced to the city, Phraya Chiraprakarn commanded troops to resist and engage them. The siege of Ayutthaya by the Burmese lasted for over three years.

Note:
The Chronicles of Memories is a Thai chronicle that records events briefly from the fall of Ayutthaya to the Burmese in B.E. 2310 (1767) onwards. The Vajirañāna Library obtained this document from the Front Palace in B.E. 2451 (1908). King Chulalongkorn remarked that this chronicle is unusual compared to other works in terms of style and…

King Taksin the Great
(Image from the book King Taksin the Great; http://www.tungsong.com/Modify-Lifetsgcity/LifeTsgCity/DigitalLibrary/Importantdays/SDay/Data/Taksinday.html)

The style of the writing is feminine, and the content indicates close familiarity with internal affairs, suggesting that the author was likely a royal family member. It is believed that Krom Luang Narindradevi, a younger sister of King Buddha Yodfa Chulaloke, was the recorder. When King Chulalongkorn passed away, another copy of the same chronicle was obtained. The text continues uninterrupted and concludes in the reign of King Rama III, B.E. 2381 (1838). Since Krom Luang Narindradevi passed away in B.E. 2370 (1827), the chronicle contains 11 years of text beyond her lifetime.

The library is therefore certain that Krom Luang Narindradevi was not the author of this chronicle. The identity of the actual author remains unknown. In later editions, the library has simply titled it “Chronicle of Memories” (Sang Phatthanaothai, n.d.: 153-154).