The post A Look Back at the Achievements of King Rama IX first appeared on Smiling Albino.

The post SEA Dynasties: What happened to the royal family in Vietnam? first appeared on Smiling Albino.

For westerners, the idea of monarchy is difficult to compartmentalize. Almost every modern country has it woven into its contemporary cultural fabric in some way or another, but in Asia, the role of the monarch continued to carry significant weight long after most western countries had relegated it to a symbolic relic of a time long past. So what happened?

In part three of a four-part series, we’re going to take a look at Nepal, one of the world’s most beautiful, exotic, and remote countries. The history of Nepal’s monarchy is a bit of a jumble, especially the further back you go. But once things get going, boy, do they ever get crazy.

It’s said that the first Nepalese royalty – the Kiratas – set up shop around 800 BCE, taking over from disparate clans that had been squabbling amongst each other for centuries. The Kiratis ruled for 29 generations, finishing in 300 CE. Of note during the reign of the 7th Kirati King: Siddhartha Gautama was born in modern day Lumbini. Most people today know Siddhartha by his more common name, the Buddha.

Once the Kiratas fell, Nepal came under control of the Thakuri Dynasty, who kept things going until late 1100’s CE, when the Malla Dynasty came to power. The Mallas lasted for 500 years, expanding territory and carving out a successful little kingdom until the mid-1700’s when infighting led to, surprise, the fracture and eventual collapse of the Malla Dynasty.

Out of these ashes rose King Prithvi Narayan Shah, who founded the Shah Dynasty in 1768. Then known as Gorkha, the Kingdom grew under his leadership, absorbing neighboring cities and states through invasions and pitched battles, including one against British troops called in from colonial India by the King of Kathmandu. Not used to fighting battles on mountainous terrain and in thin air, they were easily defeated. In 1769 King Prithvi consolidated his power, moved the capital to Kathmandu, and renamed his kingdom to Nepal.

Prithvi Shah’s heirs took over after his death in 1775, and continued the push for expansion. Unfortunately, they tried to expand north, into Tibet, but the Chinese Qing Dynasty was having none of that, and the Nepali forces were pushed back. This, combined with internal conflicts – including a few beheadings and exiles – only served to weaken the monarchy. An invasion by the British East India Company in 1814 certainly didn’t help, either, which ended with Nepal ceding a large part of their territory to the British.

With the country reeling, the royal family in disarray, and the role of a fractured monarchy completely up in the air, a noble by the name of Jang Bahadur Rana eventually made his play in a manner that Quentin Tarantino would appreciate. When a powerful general – rumored to be the lover of Queen Rajya Lakshmi Devi (the wife of Prithi Narayan Shah’s great-great grandson) – was found murdered in 1846, the queen called the entire royal court to the armory, or kot, to flush out the killer. A standoff between rival groups ensued, someone flinched, and when the dust settled, over 40 lay dead in what became known as the Kot Massacre.  

Almost immediately, Rana appointed himself Prime Minister – a position that became hereditary – banished the King and Queen to India, and established the Rana Dynasty, with the ex-King’s son Surendra as the titular monarch. From this point on, the country was essentially controlled by two parallel dynasties – the Rana Prime Ministers, who had the power, and the Shah royal line, which added a sheen of legitimacy. This was cemented even further when Surendra’s son Trailokya married three of Rana’s daughters.

When Trailokya died in 1878 his son Prithvi was named King and “ruled” until he died in 1911, when Prithvi’s five-year old son Tribhuwan took the throne. All the while, descendants of Jang Bahadur Rana continued to hold the real power, and by all accounts it was nasty little dictatorship, full of cronyism, corruption, and abuse of power.

In 1951 democracy movements that had begun gathering steam during WWI boiled over. King Tribhuwan sided with the anti-Rana movement and took refuge at the Indian embassy in Kathmandu. Outraged, Prime Minister Mohan Shumsher Rana appointed Tribhuwan’s 3-year old grandson Gyanendra as the new King. However, he was soon reminded that power comes from a mandate from the masses, and when the Indian military evacuated the royal family to India – all except the 3-year old King Gyanendra – and the anti-Rana protests continued, the Prime Minister was forced into peace talks. Three months later, Tribhuwan returned to Nepal as King and initiated a parliamentary democracy. The Ranas were still involved, but they were no longer in charge.

But the peace was not to last. In 1960, Tribhuwan’s son King Mahendra swung the needle wayyyyy back the other way, and initiated a coup. He suspended the constitution, dissolved the elected parliament, dismissed the cabinet, imposed direct rule, and threw the Prime Minister, his closest government colleagues, and a huge number of protestors in jail. He then initiated a system called Panchayat – basically, a decentralized, party-less system of government.

In 1972, Mahendra’s son King Birendra took the throne, continuing his father’s legacy, ruling if not magnificently, at least consistently. However, that’s not to say all was well in Nepal. Civil strife – bordering on outright civil war – ebbed and flowed throughout the 80’s and 90’s triggered variously by land reforms, economic mismanagement, nationalist groups, and various political machinations from all sides. Things held together, but not without cracks.

But all of that paled in comparison to the shocking event which took place on 1 June, 2001. At a family dinner that was held every month, Prince Dipendra – King Birendra’s son – stormed into the hall carrying an M16 and proceeded to shoot and kill 9 members of his family before turning the gun on himself. An investigation found that Dipendra was drunk and had smoked a large amount of hashish that evening, and hinted that he was perhaps angry over disputes about whom he would marry. Among the dead were the Prince’s father King Birendra, his mother, Queen Aishwarya, his brother, sister, aunt and uncle.

In the wake of this tragedy, Birendra’s brother Gyanendra – remember, the 3-year old King-for-a-minute back in the 1950s? – became the new monarch, but it did not go smoothly. With civil strife reaching red-line levels, and a violent Maoist insurgency knocking on his door, he suspended the constitution and took direct control of Nepal in February of 2005. Opposition was fierce, and he restored parliament a year later, but the democracy genie was out of the bottle.

On 24 December, 2007, the Nepalese Constituent Assembly announced that the monarchy would be abolished, and the King’s powers transferred to the Prime Minister. On 28 May, 2008, the Kingdom of Nepal became the Democratic Republic of Nepal. The King had been forced to leave the building, this time for good.

Smiling Albino has kept abreast of all these (recent) events and our team on the ground in Kathmandu is well informed. The, at times, struggling government compounded by the terrible earthquake in April 2015, have created difficulties for the Nepalese people in recent years. Travel to Nepal has proven to be the best way to improve the lives of the people and we highly recommend a trip to the top of the world today! Check out some of our sample Nepal trips here.

For the final part of our series on Southeast Asian monarchies, we’ll look back to the east and follow the rise and fall of the monarchy of Vietnam.

The post Southeast Asian Dynasties: What happened to the royal family in Nepal? first appeared on Smiling Albino.

As many readers know, Smiling Albino is based in Bangkok, Thailand, but also has extensive operations in Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Nepal. Besides being awesome places to explore, one thing that all of these countries have in common is that they entered the 20th century with a strong monarchic system in place. But of them all, only Thailand’s remains a powerful and influential component of contemporary life.

For westerners, the idea of monarchy is difficult to compartmentalize. Almost every modern country has it woven into its contemporary cultural fabric in some way or another, but in Asia, the office of monarch continued to carry significant weight long after most western countries had relegated the role to a symbolic relic of a time long past. So what happened?

In this second instalment of a four part blog series, let’s take a look at the history of royalty in Laos, an incredible story full of war, intrigue, and almost-successes that is generally thought to have begun in 1353, when a fellow named Fa Ngum seized power.

Fa Ngum was descended from leaders of the various tribal states that made up central Southeast Asia at this time, and had spent most of his life living in the Khmer Empire (see Part 1: The history of the Cambodian Royal Family). But as the Khmer Empire began to weaken in the face of disease and ecological disaster, Fa Ngum was sent north to keep the area in check. A few alliances here, a few battles there – including one against his uncle – and he crowned himself ruler of the newly-founded Lan Xang Kingdom; basically, most of present-day Laos and a slice of northeastern Thailand.

Fa Ngum ruled until 1372, when his people sent him into exile, placing his son Oun Huean on the throne. Successive family members followed until 1428, when a cunning queen known as Maha Devi emerged, pulling the strings behind the scenes as seven kings were crowned and then killed over a period of 14 years. In 1442 her fun came to an end when she was drowned as an offering to the mythical Naga serpent. A council of elders took over until 1456, when King Chakkaphat, the grandson of Fa Ngum, was crowned.

Save for a successfully repelled invasion by Vietnam and a few local skirmishes, the next several hundred years saw a long period of peace ruled by good, effective Kings from a fairly straight hereditary line. That all ended in the mid-1500s when a series of succession disputes and wars with nearly everyone in the area left the Lan Xang Kingdom battered and fractured. Eventually, King Nokeo Koumane got things back on track in 1591 when he reunited the broken pieces of Lan Xang, but died without an heir, and everyone got right back to fighting.

In 1637 King Sourigna Vongsa finally pulled everyone together and ruled over a strong and prosperous Lan Xang until he died in 1694. Then – surprise! – everyone got back to fighting, this time far more seriously, resulting in Lan Xang splitting into the northern Kingdom of Luang Prabang, the middle Kingdom of Vientiane, and the southern Kingdom of Champasak, each ruled by various descendants of Lan Xang royalty.

By this time, the Siamese Kingdom had emerged as the big kid on the block, and in 1779 – annoyed at Vientiane for their previous alliance with arch-enemy Burma – Siam invaded. This moment was really the beginning of the end for the Laos Royal Family, and after a four-month siege, the Kingdom of Vientiane fell under Siamese control, with Luang Prabang and Champasak following suit.

(History nerd alert – one of the generals leading the invasion force was Chao Phraya Chakri, founder of the Chakri dynasty that still rules Thailand today).

By this time the Lao royal family was broken, diluted, and ruled in name only. In 1826, Vientiane King Anouvong, weary of Siamese control, raised an army and invaded Siam. Noble intentions or not, it turned out to be a really bad call. The Siamese – better trained and better armed – pushed him back to Vientiane and reduced the once glittering capital to smoldering rubble, forcing Anouvong to retreat all the way to Vietnam. He was eventually betrayed and marched back to Bangkok, where he was displayed in a metal cage until he died in 1829.

Siam allowed the Lao Royal Family to continue “ruling” over the three Kingdoms until 1893, when the Franco-Siamese War kicked off. France won, Siam gave them Laos, and France added it to French Indochina. This didn’t mean much to the dynasties of Luang Prabang, Vientiane or Champasak – they were allowed to “rule” but under the watchful eye of France instead of Siam.

This relationship puttered along for a few decades until the devastation of WWII reorganized global power structures. Laos saw its opportunity and declared independence in 1953, establishing a constitutional monarchy under King Sisavang Vong, former King of Luang Prabang. He was followed by his son, Savang Vatthana who ruled until 1975 when – in the shadow of a terrible civil war and the horrors of the Vietnam War, he was overthrown by communist Pathet Lao forces and imprisoned, where he died of malaria several years later. There were no more kings left.

Today, Laos is one of the five remaining communist states (China, Vietnam, Cuba, and North Korea), and is run by the ironically named Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Check out our sample trips to Laos here.

All is not lost for Lao royalty. The head of the Royal Family today is Soulivong Savang (grandson of Savang Vatthana), and his regent/uncle Sauryavong Savang, who both staged daring escapes from Laos. Along with a disparate group of supporters around the world, they continue to push to establish a constitutional democracy in Laos.

In our next blog, we’ll turn our attention west, to learn the story of Nepal’s monarchy.

The post Southeast Asian Dynasties 2: What happened to the royal families of Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Nepal? first appeared on Smiling Albino.

As many readers know, Smiling Albino is based in Bangkok, Thailand, but also has extensive operations in Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Nepal. Besides being awesome places to explore, one thing that all of these countries have in common is that they entered the 20th century with a strong monarchic system in place. But of them all, only Thailand’s remains a powerful and influential component of contemporary life.

For westerners, the idea of monarchy is difficult to compartmentalize. Almost every modern country has it woven into its contemporary cultural fabric in some way or another, but in Asia, the office of monarch continued to carry significant weight long after most western countries had relegated the role to a symbolic relic of a time long past. So what happened?

In a four part blog series, let’s take a look at the history of royalty in the region beginning with Cambodia.

Cambodian royalty goes back to the 3rd or 4th century, although it’s rather hazy as to what exactly they ruled, who they were, and where they came from. Things gain a bit more focus with the establishment of the Chenla Kingdom in 550 CE, which lasted until 802 CE. After that came the mighty Khmer Empire, which saw the construction of Angkor Wat and borders that stretched from modern day Malaysia to eastern Burma to Southern China and into Vietnam. Wars – both internal and external – as well as ecological instability helped bring the Khmer Kingdom to a close in 1431, after which followed the relatively short dynasties of Chaktomuk, Longvek, Srei Santhor, and Oudong, all of which fought on-again off-again battles with their neighbors.

Then came the French, who in 1867 forced Thailand (then Siam) to give them Cambodia, which by this time had become a vassal state of Siam, the dominant power in the region. The French then appointed a new ruler – King Norodom, whose father was king under Siamese rule. They also helpfully “suggested” he convert to Christianity, and told him to move the capital from Oudong to Phnom Penh. Norodom’s line continued until King Norodom Sihanouk, who ruled from 1941 to 1955, when he abdicated to form his own political party, giving up the throne to his father Norodom Suramarit. Though the role of King still existed, Sihanouk slowly introduced constitutional amendments that gave the head of state similar powers, and wouldn’t you know it, he was soon named Cambodia’s head of state. When Suramarit died in 1960, no new monarch was named.

Now we begin a few decades of extremely complicated political maneuvering by everyone from the CIA to rebel groups to neighboring countries to rival politicians. These politicians emerged as the de facto rulers, and violent clashes, coups, counter-coups and protests erupted with alarming regularity, culminating with the bloody reign of the Khmer Rouge, which ruled from 1975 to 1979. After pulling the surviving bits of the once-great country back together, Cambodia’s Constituent Assembly established a constitutional monarchy, and Norodom Sihanouk was then re-instated as King in 1993.

The next decade saw the role of the monarchy in Cambodia slowly fade, as politicians grew in power and influence. Eventually, Sihanouk had enough of mediating arguments between bickering politicians who mostly ignored him, and issued an open letter announcing his abdication. His son, Norodom Sihamoni, was crowned King on October 29, 2004.

Since then, Sihamoni has played a mostly ceremonial role, and is known as the “quiet king.” He has simple tastes, and meets regularly with Prime Minister Hun Sen, widely seen as the most powerful man in Cambodia. Sihamoni is a bachelor, carrying out official appointments and meeting visiting diplomats with little fanfare. It’s said he is a voracious reader and fan of the arts, and speaks Khmer, English, Czech, and French.

It’s a long way removed from the mighty kings of the Khmer empire, but perhaps a reflection of a more modern era. The future of Cambodia’s royalty is uncertain. You’d have to ask King Sihamoni – once he’s done reading.

Or, come take a look yourself. Check out some of our Cambodian sample trips here.

In our next blog, we’ll turn our attention north, to learn the story of Laos’ monarchy.

The post Southeast Asian Dynasties 1: What happened to the royal families of Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Nepal? first appeared on Smiling Albino.