History of the Kingdom of Siam and of the revolutions that have caused the overthrow of the empire, up to A.D. 1770Turpin, F. H. (François Henri)
History
History of the Kingdom of Siam and of the revolutions that have caused the overthrow of the empire, up to A.D. 1770
Turpin, F. H. (François Henri)
Thailand -- Description and travel; Thailand -- History
The Princes were captured and confined in the palace dungeons. From
that moment knew that death would soon be their portion and that their
uncle would never pardon them as they were the sons of his enemy. They
were put to the question, and in their answers they showed more
firmness than would have been expected from their youth. Sentence had
preceded trial and hence they were unanimously condemned to death.
The younger had designed some dresses for a theatrical performance
which he had desired to be performed. He asked that, before his death,
he might be allowed to see them. This showed that he was childish, or,
rather frivolous. The Queen, in vain begged that their request might
be granted. The King replied that they had been born with desires that
would one day be fatal to the State. These Princes whose fate should
have excited compassion were not regretted in the least. It was
generally known that their tastes were depraved. It was not by their
death that the Crown Prince really became King. He gave his whole
heart to his nephew, who had refused the crown that the Siamese had
wished to offer him.
The King's predilection excited the jealousy of his eldest son who
made a plot to assassinate their cousin, and a day was arranged for
the execution of this wicked design.
The Prince had gone to pay his respects to the King and was attended
by his cousins who by certain gestures gave him an inkling of the plot
against his life. He became frightened and fell at the King's feet who
being informed of the plot, made enquiries into the truth of it. The
second and third of his sons were convicted of being the authors of
the barbarous idea. This father, horror stricken, summoned them fore
him and pronounced such dreadful punishments against them that, in
order to clear themselves, they protested that their elder brother had
led them into crime. The father was deeply grieved on learning that
his dearest son had been the most guilty. He summoned him to his
presence and made him lie on the ground to receive his punishment. The
Priest-prince, witness of the terrible scene, of which he was the
innocent author, thought of what the consequence might be, of a
punishment inflicted on one who might one day be his master. He
prostrated himself on the body of the guilty and cried out. "Father,
order that I receive the beating rather than your son". The King was a
father and was soon turned from his purpose by his feelings. His wrath
merely found vent in threats against his guilty son, who, to become
reconciled with the priest-prince, entered the same monastery; but in
the shadows of his retreat he enjoyed all the sweets of power. The
chief officers of state and the people continued to regard him as the
heir-presumptive to the crown. As it happened, he left the priesthood
in 1740 and his father declared him his successor. Henceforth he lived
in the palace which was appointed for Crown princes, but was quite
unworthy of his father's choice.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account