Before the King Rama I Monument: A Case Study of the Decision-Making Process of the Royal Elite in the Creation of the Monument of King Rama I and Phra Phutthayodfa Bridge during the 150th Anniversary of Bangkok Celebration

Abstract

Background and Objectives: This article aims to study the thought processes and decision-making of the committee responsible for constructing the royal monument to honor King Rama I, also known as the Phra Pathom Borom Rachanusorn, in celebration of the 150th anniversary of Bangkok. The study highlights that, although the committee was composed of members of the royal family and high-ranking ministers close to the absolute monarchy, representing the conservative faction, their diverse educational backgrounds and personal experiences influenced their perspectives. Consequently, they incorporated modern Western ideas, such as the creation of public utility structures, into their considerations for the Phra Pathom Borom Rachanusorn monument, specifically the Phra Phutthayotfa Bridge.

Methods: The study utilized historical methods, focusing on the analysis of primary documents from the King Rama VII archives related to the construction of the Royal Memorial by the Royal Secretariat Department, stored at the National Archives of Thailand. In addition, secondary sources concerning the construction of the Royal Memorial and the Phra Phutthayotfa Bridge were also examined. The findings were compiled and presented in both descriptive and analytical formats.

Results: The educational background and personal experiences of the committee influenced their thought processes, as seen in their approach to constructing the monument of King Rama I. King Prajadhipok (Rama VII) issued a royal command to form a committee to consider building a monument to commemorate the great kindness of King Rama I during the 150th anniversary celebration of Bangkok. The committee, consisting of members of the royal family and high-ranking ministers close to the absolute monarchy, representing the conservative side proposed three different approaches: The first approach was to construct a statue directly honoring the monarchy. This proposal was supported by senior royals with backgrounds tied to the traditional monarchy, many of whom were sons of King Rama IV. The second approach was to build public utility structures, such as bridges or buildings to house the statue, which would enhance the monarchy’s image and provide economic benefits. This approach was supported by the new generation of royals, the children of King Chulalongkorn (Rama V), and the ministers educated abroad. The last approach was to collect funds for charity or public benefit, encouraging public participation in honoring the monarchy. This idea was not supported by senior royals but was favored by the younger generation, who later amended the proposal to use the collected funds for both a royal statue and public utility projects. Ultimately, King Prajadhipok decided to build the Phra Pathom Borom Rachanusorn Monument alongside the Phra Phutthayotfa Bridge, which would connect Bangkok to Thonburi. This decision aligned with the approach of the new generation of royals and demonstrated a blending of royalist tradition with modern Western ideas, such as the creation of public utility structures.

Application of this study: This study fills the gap in explaining the construction of the monument of King Phra Phuttha Yodfa Chulalok the Great (Rama I) by connecting the committee's decision-making and thought processes to their educational backgrounds and personal experiences. In this regard, the article provides valuable information for the study of Thai social history and may contribute to a deeper analysis of the history of ideas.

Conclusions: The conclusion of this study highlights the decision-making process behind the construction of the first royal monument to commemorate the 150th anniversary of Bangkok, reflecting the complex ideologies among the leaders of the absolute monarchy. Some groups focused on honoring the monarchy through symbolic monuments, while others aimed to create public benefits that reinforced the monarchy’s legitimacy through public structures, such as the Phra Phutthayotfa Chulalok Bridge. The study’s results suggest that, although the creation of physical symbols emphasized the importance of the ancestors, the ideological conflict between conservatism and modernism played a crucial role in shaping the project. Ultimately, King Prajadhipok's final decision not only reflected the supreme power of the absolute monarchy but also demonstrated a compromise between honoring the monarchy and responding to public expectations in an era of change.