Abstract
Historical dimension has been a missing aspect in studies on medicine and health development in Thailand. This was partly because the interrelation between health and its socio-political contests was not adequately appreciated. History of medicine and public health in Thai society was understood merely as a chronology of medical technological advancement and the growth of state medical service. This study explores works in the field of Thai medical and public health history both in Thai and English languages. It aims at assessing the state of knowledge and suggesting directions for further studies in medical and public health history in Thailand. The study found that although there were a number of studies in medical and public health history done by physicians, pubic health export, and social scientists, most of the works only compiled and listed the chronologies of events. They didn’t adequately provide historical explanation or interpretation of the events. Such studies failed to create new understanding on the medical history in Thailand. Not only new historical knowledge has been absent, but there was a lacking of the development of relevant methodology in medical historical study. Historical writings in the early period were mostly done by medical or public health professionals in an attempt to “construct their own discourses.” The changing of Thai political landscape after October 14, 1973, has led to the new area of historical knowledge. Medical and public health history was no exception. New interpretation of health and medical history was created within the contests of pro-democratic movement. Although various new sociological and historical methodologies were gradually developed and used, it was only in the past decade that greater interest in historical methodology and historiography has gained currency resulting in a building up of new knowledge of the Thai medical past. The current state of knowledge in Thai medical history focused on two main issues. The first concerned with the evolution and domination of modern medicine. The second issue was in the changes and discontinuity of traditional Thai medicine. The repetitive theme was mainly on the decline of traditional medicine and the success of modern medicine which has become mainstream and increasingly dominant in Thai society. There was a lack of critical scrutiny of medical institutions and historical figures. This was partly because of the adherence to writing history with the framework of the Great Man and the royal nationalism theory. There was a need to put more emphasis on understanding medical history as related to social, cultural, and political circumstances.
