Since the publication of my article “Network monarchy and crises of legitimacy in Thailand” (Pacific Review, 2005), network monarchy has become an influential concept in the analysis of Thailand’s politics. Though widely adopted, the argument has also spawned rival or complementary coinings, ranging from “autonomous political networks” (Joseph Harris) to “working towards the monarchy” (Serhat Uenaldi), and the “deep state” (Eugenie Mérieau), as well as the “parallel state” and the “monarchized military” (Paul Chambers and Napisa Waitoolkiat). This article revisits the argument, elaborates on the meanings of the original term, and makes a case for network monarchy’s continuing salience in the Tenth Reign.