Leedom Lefferts

In 1900, the Lao ethnonym, and thus the Lao, 'officially' disappeared from Siam. However, Lao culture and identity persisted at local, regional, and national levels. As Keyes (1967) discovered, "a Northeast Thailand-based ethno-regionalism", emerged post-World War II. This regionalism, which we re-term 'Thai Lao' and specify to the majority ethnic community, exists in a contested relationship with both 'Thai' and 'Lao' identity. The survival of the Lao ethnic community's cultural identity occurred despite the best efforts of the Royal Thai Government (RTG) to eradicate aspects of Lao culture. These aspects included Lao language, religion, and history, using the school system, the Lao Buddhist Sangha (order of monks), and the bureaucracy. Beginning in the 1990s, buoyed by a multitude of factors, the Lao ethnic community reappeared as the 'Thai Lao' or 'Lao Isan'. This reappearance was noted in the RTG's Thailand 2011 Country Report (RTG 2011) to the UN Committee responsible for the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. For nearly four decades now, Laoism has recurred in Thai academia, the media, the public sphere, popular traditions, and even Lao apocalyptic millenarianism. Following Smith (1986, 1991, 1999) this paper utilizes a historical ethno-symbolist approach to this recurrence.

This paper employs “globalization” theory, dynamically incorporating space and time, geography and history, to challenge the notion that the development of Southeast Asian cultures along the global sea-faring arc between India and China can be best explained by constructing narratives derived from these major civilisations. The archaeological record shows a complex inventory of contacts and exchanges of goods and ideas from China and India intersecting in Southeast Asia. While globally-based trade and religion were formative, the region’s indigenous resources and cultures not only provided attractive destinations and way-stations, but also molded non-native inputs to the dynamics of already extant socio-cultural systems. The arrival of Buddhism and Brahmanism on Southeast Asian shores is framed within this context and four regions are selected to highlight these processes: the Pyu in Myanmar, Dvaravati in Thailand, the Thai-Malay peninsula, and Pre-Angkorian Cambodia from the mid-first millennium CE onwards. Southeast Asians successfully managed the twin processes of globalization and localism, adapting Buddhist and Brahmanical practices to suit their situations. These fusions facilitated transformations of Southeast Asian societies, setting them on trajectories leading to the formation of fully fledged, unique Buddhist and Brahmanical states such as Angkor in Cambodia, Bagan in Myanmar, and Sukhothai in Thailand.