Quotes of the Day

In the weeks after June 1, 2001, Nepal reeled in disbelief. The gruesome massacre of King Birendra, Queen Aiswarya and eight other members of the royal family traumatized the nation and left it struggling for an explanation. Was it the work of Maoist rebels? An attempted coup, perhaps? The truth would be harder for Nepal to accept—a privileged, trusted son had murdered his own family. Jonathan Gregson, a Calcutta-born journalist now based in London, was in Kathmandu in the weeks after the attack, running with a pack of foreign reporters who fought to tell the story. One by one the grieving eyewitnesses came forward and recounted the same chilling tale: Crown Prince Dipendra Bir Bikram Shah had gunned down his family, then shot himself.

The trouble is, no one in a position to shed real light on the killer's thinking has spoken to the press. As a result, Gregson's book Massacre at the Palace: the Doomed Royal Dynasty of Nepal is itself doomed to rehash the sparse news and plentiful rumors that swirled in the immediate aftermath. Gregson relies heavily on the official report into the incident. Excellent though it was, that report explained only what happened, not why. To probe deeper, Gregson would have had to interview such players as the Queen Mother, the new Crown Prince Paras, or Dipendra's paramour, Devyani Rana. But they're not talking. It's not clear who did speak with Gregson, either: his book is based in large part on unnamed sources, speculation and rumor, and the text is littered with assertions of questionable veracity. It's "taken for granted," for example, that Queen Aiswarya led those who wanted to strip Dipendra of his titles and allowance if he married Rana. Gregson cites no authority for such assertions. Meanwhile, the dark mind of the killer prince remains as enigmatic as ever.

• Thomas Laird/Kathmandu
• Massacre at the Palace explores regicide in Nepal