History
For centuries Nan was an independent kingdom but, due to its remoteness, had few connections to the other kingdoms. The first kingdom around the city Mueang Pua (also known as Varanagara) was created in the late 13th century. Its rulers, the Phukha dynasty, were related to the founders of Vientiane, however it became associated with the Sukhothai kingdom as it was easier to reach from the south than from the east or west. In the 14th century the capital was moved to its present location at Nan.
In the 15th century, when Sukhothai declined in power, it became vassal of the kingdom of Lannathai. In 1443 King Kaen Thao of Nan plotted to capture neighboring Phayao by asking King Tilokaraj to help him fight against Vietnamese troops attacking Nan, even though there was no such threat. Kaen Thao killed the king of Phayao, however the troops of Tilokaraj then attacked Nan itself, and captured it in 1449.
When Lannathai was under Burmese rulership, Nan tried to liberate itself many times without success, which finally led to direct Burmese rulership of Nan in 1714. In 1788 the Burmese rulers were finally driven back, however Nan had to then accept the new Siam rulers. In 1893 after the Paknam crisis Siam had to give a big part of eastern Nan to French Indochina. 1899 Mueang Nan became part of the circle (Monthon) Tawan Tok Chiang Nuea (northwestern circle). 1916 the northwestern circle was split and Nan was assigned into the circle Maharat. When the circles were abolished in 1932, the provinces including Nan became the top-level subdivision of Siam.
Before the early 1980s bandits as well as People's Liberation Army of Thailand (PLAT) guerillas were a big problem in the province, usually destroying highway construction overnight. With the help of the army and the more stable political system the province improved significantly, but is still a very rural and remote area.
For further information, see the article on Nan, Thailand
Read more about this topic: Nan Province
Famous quotes containing the word history:
“If usually the “present age” is no very long time, still, at our pleasure, or in the service of some such unity of meaning as the history of civilization, or the study of geology, may suggest, we may conceive the present as extending over many centuries, or over a hundred thousand years.”
—Josiah Royce (1855–1916)
“When the coherence of the parts of a stone, or even that composition of parts which renders it extended; when these familiar objects, I say, are so inexplicable, and contain circumstances so repugnant and contradictory; with what assurance can we decide concerning the origin of worlds, or trace their history from eternity to eternity?”
—David Hume (1711–1776)
“History is more or less bunk. It’s tradition. We don’t want tradition. We want to live in the present and the only history that is worth a tinker’s damn is the history we make today.”
—Henry Ford (1863–1947)