approximation can be made from a 1929-30 calculation and has been reproduced in
Table I below. Calculations are still problematic, however, since it is likely that the
figures included non-Catholic Christians as well, hence the anomaly of the “Phayab"
An exam ple o f this is B.A.A .. 15 June 1933, 31/4/52. In this w ill, Hong Zhucun. an elderly C hinese businessman transferred his property in Siam to his fam ily as he retired to China.
29 M .E.P.A., Compte-Rendu 1920.
For detailed figures and references, see Appendix C: Catholic Population in the M ission o f Siam. 1917-47.
The Catholics did not set up a Mission in the north until the early 1930s.
Nevertheless, the table is helpful since it reflects the general trends o f missionary activities. Around 32 percent of the Christian population was located in the central region, while 27 percent were located in the northeast. The other regions with high concentrations were the east with 14 percent of the population, and the west with just under 10 percent. The west would be ceded to the Salesians in 1929-30, while the east was coming under the control o f the indigenous clergy.
L ocation Population Bangkok 8725 Ayutthaya 4118 Prachinburi 4250 Chantaburi 2912 Phayab 7338 Phitsanulok 237 U don 9016 Nakhon Sawan 245 Nakhon Chaisi 2781 Nakhon Ratchasima 4532 Nakhon Si Thammarat 192 Ratchaburi 4839 Pattani 16 Phuket 261 Total 49462
Table 1. Population and Distribution o f Christians in Siam, 1929 -3 0 31
Intriguingly, the statistics also record the presence o f Christians in the south. However, in 1923, the Vicar-Apostolic noted had noted that there were no Catholics in Phatthalung province (in the south) or its vicinity, mentioning only that there were missionaries in Perak, which lies in modern-day Malaysia.32 Furthermore, there are no records of the Mission o f Siam sending missions to the south during this period,
31 B .A .A ., Population o f Siam by religion (1 929-30), 64/1/27.
unlike its contemporary efforts in the north which were extensively documented. Therefore, it can be assumed that these small communities were either Protestants or were being administered more efficiently by another authority, such as the Mission of Malacca.
Thus, the major points of concentration for the Christian population were in the central region and the northeast. That a significant proportion o f Catholics in Siam were under the administration of the Mission of Laos may have given the Siamese authorities cause for concern, especially amidst rumours o f Catholics paving the way for further French annexations in the region. The lack of concern on the part o f the Missions o f Siam and Laos over this issue suggests that the Church authorities regarded divisions of jurisdiction that did not follow national borders as entirely normal. The Church’s lack of sensitivity to these national concerns would become a major source o f antagonism in the 1930s and 1940s.
Also problematic was the fact that many of the converts were from ethnic minorities, mainly Chinese and Vietnamese, but also other groups as diverse as northern hill-tribes and descendants o f Portuguese settlers. When arrangements were being made for the Salesians to take over parishes in Ratchaburi, the Vicar-Apostolic had commented that:
[The Salesians] study the Siamese language with much ardour, but a single language is insufficient for this polyglot country; they are fortunate to have some seminarists from their Institute that have stayed in China and each knowing a Chinese dialect, sufficient to perfect them among the Chinese of Siam.33
The comment reflects the diverse language skills that were required for missionaries to operate effectively in Siam due to the differences between the local
communities that priests were expected to serve. A concrete example o f this diversity is the Bangkok parishes, all o f which had different ethnic compositions. The Church of St. Francis Xavier primarily had an Annamese or Annamese
descendant congregation, while their counterparts at the Santa Cruz and Holy Rosary Churches were primarily ethnic Chinese. It should be noted here that the Santa Cruz and Holy Rosary Churches had past connections with the Portuguese fathers and a small Portuguese descendant community. Similarly, the Church of the Immaculate Conception was dominated by Khniers or Khmer descendants. To a certain extent, some of this heritage had, even by this early point, been diluted. For example, the language found in Church documents from St. Francis Xavier and Immaculate Conception Churches were in Thai rather than Vietnamese or Khmer. Nevertheless, there was still a consciousness within the parish community that they were
descended from a race other than Siamese, although this realisation was no longer expressed explicitly.
In contrast, there are a considerable number of Chines e-language documents that appear in the records o f the Santa Cruz and Holy Rosary Churches. Thai or Church-Thai language documents were also signed with Chinese characters. The differences between these four parishes suggest that the degree of integration into Siamese society was different for each ethnic group. The Chinese in particular had or were given prefixes such as “Jin” and “Jek” that announced their ethnicity. Whilst the term “Jek” has devolved into a pejorative term, its regular occurrence in documents drafted by the Church as well as by the parishioners themselves suggests that it was a common term at the time and did not have any offensive implications. Also unique to the Chinese community was their itinerant character, which caused headaches for Mission authorities who wished to keep accurate statistics. For some