The founder of this second Jesuit residence was Fr. Tomaso Valguarnera from Sicily. He arrived from Macau in 1655 and was to remain in Siam for fifteen years until 1670. He was then appointed Visitor of the Japanese and Chinese Province, but returned to Siam in 1675 and died there in 1677. A Portuguese pilot, Sebastiao Andres, arrived in Ayutthaya about the same time as Fr. Valguarnera and asked to be admitted to the Society as a coadjutor brother. He died only seven months later, leaving his property valued at 14,000 “Scudi Romani” to the Society for the foundation of a college.

Fr. Valguarnera had come to Siam because the Christians, many of them Japanese, had urgently requested one or two Fathers of the Society. He built a residence and a church in the Portuguese settlement, just across the river from the Japanese settlement. In 1666 we know that “the Fathers have a school in their house. They pay one person to teach and take care of it.” Was this already the “Collegio San Salvador”? It does not seem so. The liquidation of the property of Brother Sebastiao Andres must have taken longer and only at the end of this time was Fr. Valguarnera in a position to found the college in Ayutthaya. The annual letter of 1671 says: “In the Kingdom of Siam, by order of Your Paternity, the residence has been made a college by Fr. Valguarnera, who is now Visitor. As the first member of the Society to be sent there, he was the first to introduce the Society into that empire of the Orient. Having built a house and a church, he arranged that a college could easily be erected. In it are performed all the ministries of other houses and colleges, giving the Sacraments, teaching children. There are four priests and one coadjutor brother.”

Fr. Valguarnera was not always Superior during the fifteen years that he lived in Siam. In 1663 he was succeeded by Fr. Joao Cardosa, who had come to Siam in 1659, and who, in 1662, went to the Tenasserim to found a residence there. On May 19, 1662 we find Fr. Cardosa giving hospitality in the Tenasserim to Mgr. Lambert de la Motte and two priests of the MEP on their way to Ayutthaya. Fr. Cardoso was at that moment the only priest in the city, and was taking care of two churches. The parish priest of the second church had just died, and no one had yet been sent to take his place. A year later Fr. Cardosa was to give hospitality to Mgr. Pallu, shortly after which he was sent to Ayutthaya to take the place of Fr. Valguarnera as superior. Since Fr. Valguarnera, was also an architect, had been asked by the King to rebuild the walls of Ayutthaya. It seems that no other Jesuit went to take the place of Fr. Cardosa in the Tenasserim.

Like Fr. Valguarnera, who after fifteen years in Siam was named Visitor of the Province of Japan and China (1670 – 75), Fr. Cardosa was also an important person. He later became Provincial of Japan (1673 – 76). Fr. Valguarnera returned to Siam in 1675 and again was occupied with rebuilding the walls of Ayutthaya.

After Fr. Valguarnera surely the most important member of the residence in Ayutthaya must have been Fr. Jean Maldonado, a Belgian. He was in Ayutthaya from 1673 to 1691, and for many of these years was Superior.

During this period of fifty-four years (1655 – 1709) besides the Fathers we have mentioned, about thirty other Jesuits passed through the residence, nineteen of them Portuguese, four French, one Belgian, one Pole, and one Japanese. About sixteen of them were just passing through on their way to China, or having been expelled from nearby missions. The actual members of the residence were rarely more than four. Most of the time there were only two. At the beginning of the eighteenth century there remained only Fr. Gaspar da Costa, and when he died in 1709, there was a period of one or two years when no Jesuit lived in the residence.

We would like to know the details of their apostolic work, but it is difficult to discover anything more than what has been quoted above. They were doing parish work and teaching some of the Portuguese and Japanese. As the years passed, the number of Japanese decreased, so that by the end of the eighteenth century the Japanese settlement was empty. That so little is known about their work is not due to the lack of records. Quite a few of them wrote their memoirs, but, of course, they didn’t write about the simple routine work of every day. They recounted mostly their adventures during their travels, the accidents due to storms, pirates, wars, etc.

The Mission of Siam was part of the Japanese Province. The missionaries were burning with the desire for martyrdom which so many of their brothers had received in Japan. At times it even seems that they were inviting martyrdom. In reading, for instance, the account of Fr. Michael Boym, a Pole, one has the feeling that he was trying to force the Dutch, the Siamese and the Annamites to grant him the grace of dying a martyr.

The Jesuit Mission of Siam was part of the Province of Japan, and hence depended on the Provincial who was residing in Macau. The parish in which he resided was part of the Malacca Diocese. This diocese had been erected in 1558 as a suffragan of Goa and so was part of the Portuguese Padroado. Since the arrival in India of Vasco da Gama, all the missions of Asia had been subject to the Royal Padroado of the King of Portugal. (The Philippines were the only exception, since they belonged to the Spanish Padroado.) This Padroado, far from being a usurpation of power by the government, was part of the system of the Church, recognized by the Holy See. However, it is well known that after the seventeenth century, instead of helping the missions, the Padroado system became a hindrance. This was due especially to the fact that the country of Portugal was patron not only of its few possessions or colonies in Asia, like Goa and Macau, but of all the missions of Asia: China, Japan, Annam, Thailand and India. Missionaries of other countries, members of various religious Orders, were allowed to work under the Padroado, but only in limited numbers.

After the Council of Trent the Holy See became more and more conscious of its duty to direct missionary work instead of leaving it to the Spanish and Portuguese governments. In 1622 the Congregation of Propaganda was established. In 1658 through the initiative of Jesuit, Fr. Alexandre de Rhodes, the Institute of the Mission Etrangeres de Paris (MEP) was founded. Mgr. Lambert de la Motte, together with two priests, left for his Vicariate Apostolic of Cochinchina in 1660. He arrived in the Tenasserim on May 19, 1662 to enjoy the hospitality of Fr. Joao Cardosa, and on August 22nd he reached Ayutthaya.

The Bishop and two priests went to stay in the Portuguese settlement of Ayutthaya. In their mind this was to be a temporary stopover in their long trip to Cochinchina. In fact, it turned out to be for Mgr. Lambert de la Motte his permanent residence. Because of the persecution raging in Cochinchina he could not go there. Later on he made two trips to Tonkin and Cochinchina to organize apostolic work there and ordain a few local priests. But he came back to Ayutthaya and lived there until his death on June 5, 1679.

About their reception they wrote: “As soon as they arrived (in Ayutthaya) the news spread among the Portuguese. This obliged them to pay their respects to the “Captain” of the settlement, who received them very well. He took care to find them lodging near his house, and having sent notice of their arrival to the clergy and religious of the city, most of them came to pay their respects, according to the custom of the country.”

So it had started well. Unhappily the relations of the newcomers with the missionaries already in Siam were to deteriorate. Let us hear again from the MEP missionaries: “Seeing they could notice the poor spiritual condition of this place. This made them, after they had returned the courtesy visits, stay on their own.” And again, “The Portuguese religious of Ayutthaya at first did not have any difficulty acknowledging him (Mgr. Lambert) as Bishop . . . But this zealous prelate, having dared admonish them about some defects, those Fathers took this as an offence, and by common agreement, they decided to make trouble.” It would be difficult not to see a complex of superiority in the newcomers. Surely this was not a very diplomatic or sympathetic approach. How did they feel about the Jesuits? Fr. Valguarnera was in the midst of liquidating the heritage of Brother Andres to have funds to establish his college. He was criticized as being a merchant instead of a priest. When the same Fr. Valguarnera, in obedience to the request of the King, started his work of repairing the walls of Ayutthaya, the French missionaries wrote: “Fr. Valguarnera is busy with nothing else but repairing walls.” They had just arrived from Europe, full of zeal and with high ideals. Were they not a bit quick in criticizing missionaries who had been on the spot for a long time? Of course, the missionaries had their defects, but with their long experience of their work in Siam, they would hardly be ready to accept criticism so quickly from newcomers.

Were these little misunderstandings the cause of the opposition that was to develop between the missionaries of the Padroado and the Vicar Apostolic? Hardly. Neither was it a question of nationality, because he and his companions were French. Among the Jesuits and other religious groups there was already a mixture of nationalities in addition to the Portuguese, and many of various nationalities occupied important positions. The root cause came from the fact that the French missionaries had been sent by Propaganda to break the monopoly of the Portuguese Padroado.

In the years following 1653, when the Portuguese government learned of what was happening in Paris with the agreement of Propaganda, it began to oppose those maneuvers with all its strength. Fr. Alexandre de Rhodes was the first victim of this opposition, since he was the one who had initiated the plan. When he wanted to go back to the mission, his Jesuit Superiors did not dare let him go back to any mission depending on the Padroado. In 1654 at the age of sixty-four he was sent to Persia. There four years later he was to die, but having labored so successfully that the Shah took part in his funeral.

In the midst of this conflict, when the first missionaries of the new Institute, Mgr. Lambert de la Motte and his companions, started their trip to Asia, they could not, of course, think of taking the normal route by sea from Lisbon as did missionaries of the Padroado, but went overland through the Middle East, Syria, Persia and India. A few months after their arrival in Ayutthaya, before Christmas 1662, they heard that orders had come from Lisbon not to recognize their authority, they were to be prevented from reaching their mission, and, if possible, they should be seized. These orders were the affair, not only of the State but of the Church as well. In fact, the Padroado ,meant that there was no distinction between Church and State. The Archbishop of Goa, as well as any missionary, even non-Portuguese but depending on the Padroado system, had to look on the newcomers as intruders and usurpers of the legitimate religious authority.

This situation obliged the MEP missionaries to leave the Portuguese settlement. They went to stay in the Cochinchinese settlement. There they remained until the year 1665, when the King, Phra Narai, granted them a piece of land called by them, “St. Joseph Settlement”. There they gradually established all their mission institutions: Cathedral, seminary, etc. This old “St. Joseph Settlement” is even today the property of the Mission. It is the St. Joseph parish of Ayutthaya, still surrounded by a Christian village. For a whole century before the destruction of Ayutthaya in 1767 it was the center of the Vicariate Apostolic of Siam governed by the MRP.

Two years after arriving in Ayutthaya enroute to the Vicariate in Cochinchina, Mgr. Lambert de la Motte and the recently arrived Mgr. Pallu felt that Siam with its policy of religious tolerance was the most convenient base for their persecuted missions of Cochinchina, Tonkin and China. So they asked Rome for jurisdiction over Siam. After a long consideration of this request, Rome approved it in 1669, insisting only that the peace they enjoyed in Siam should not let them forget their more important missions elsewhere. Mgrs. Lambert and Pallu were given the right to nominate the Vicar Apostolic of Siam. They nominated Mgr. Louis Laneau who was then consecrated bishop on March 25, 1674. Thus Siam became de facto, though not de jure, the first mission of the MEP where they could reside permanently. Mgr. Laneau was followed by an uninterrupted succession of seventeen MEP Vicars Apostolic, first in Ayutthaya, then later in Bangkok. In 1965 when Mgr. Chorin died, he was succeeded by a Thai. But even today a good number of MEP missionaries are working in four of the ten dioceses of Thailand.

The transfer of the jurisdiction of the Siam mission from the head of the Malacca Diocese to the Vicar Apostolic of Siam not only did not stop the opposition of the Padroado, but rather embittered it still more. In 1573-74 three Bulls and four other Roman Constitutions were issued to support the authority of the Vicar Apostolic. But the Padroado missionaries simply declared them null and void, since they contradicted the older privilege of the Padroado.

The Dominicans of Ayutthaya protested to the Vicar Apostolic that they were ready to submit to the orders of Rome as soon as the Jesuits, who were the most important group of Padroado missionaries, made their submission. Subsequently, Propaganda began to exert pressure on the Jesuits. The Jesuit General in Rome found himself between the anvil of the Padroado and the hammer of Propaganda. If he were to force the Jesuits of Siam, Tonkin and Cochinchina to submit to the Vicars Apostolic, he would provoke a reaction of the Portuguese government, which would affect all the other Jesuit missions dependent on the Padroado. In 1672 the Archbishop of Goa finally admitted that the Kingdom of Siam was outside his jurisdiction, but continued to claim that the Portuguese settlement, being “Portuguese land”, was still under his jurisdiction.

At last in 1681, by order of the General, the Jesuits of Ayutthaya made their submission to the Vicar Apostolic. But among the Portuguese Christians a deep antipathy remained against the French missionaries, an antipathy still deeply felt in the first half of the nineteenth century among the Portuguese Christians of Bangkok.

Among the Jesuits the one who made his submission most sincerely, although not without heartbreak, was Fr. Jean B. Maldonado, a Belgian, who had been convinced from the beginning of the rights of the Padroado. Along with him was his companion, the Portuguese Manoel Soares. It was noteworthy that after the fall of Phaulkon in 1688, when the MEP missionaries were put in jail, the Portuguese settlement rejoiced. It was only the Jesuits who dared show a sincere sympathy for the prisoners, trying to help them in all possible ways. In Goa the submission of the Jesuits was considered by the religious authorities there as treason, and they used all their influence on the Jesuit Superiors in Macau to have the “traitors” removed. In 1691 the Jesuit Visitor, Fr. Aleixo Coelho, arrived in Ayutthaya from Macau. He appointed Fr. Antonio Diaz as new Superior and ordered Fr. Maldonado back to Macau. The Vicar Apostolic, seeing in these measures an attack on his authority, had Fr. Maldonado come to stay with him. In spite of the remonstrances of Fr. Diaz, in reality not very strong, the Vicar Apostolic commissioned Fr. Maldonado to go to Rome, carrying letters to the Holy See and to Fr. General explaining the situation to them. Despite a few attempts between 1691 and 1694 Fr. Maldonado did not succeed in getting any farther that India. There he changed his mind and submitted to his Superiors in Macau. We find him there in August 1694. Two yeas later he was sent to Cambodia where he arrived by way of Ayutthaya during Holy Week of the year 1696, and where he was to die in 1699.

Let us begin by making the acquaintance of the actors who played the leading roles in the origin of this mission, a mission which gave such promise in its early days and ended in sudden tragedy. There is no need to speak of the actors in France: Louis XIV, the “Sun-King”, his minister, Colbert, and his confessor, Fr. de la Chaise. But we must speak of Phra Narai, the King of Siam, and his all powerful minister, Constance, or Constantine Phaulkon.

Phra Narai, the Great (1656 – 1688) is certainly the best known and the most brilliant of the kings of the Ayutthaya period (1350 – 1767). He was the contemporary of Louis XIV of France (1643 – 1715) and Kanghsi (1661 – 1722). It was during his reign that Ayutthaya reached its greatest splendor. Open to relations with the rest of the world, he had in his capital, and even at his service, Japanese, Portuguese, British, Dutch and French citizens. To the southeast of the capital were foreign settlements of various nationalities.

Phra Narai was a son of the usurper and tyrant Prasat Thong (1629 – 1656). According to Siamese custom it was not necessary for the eldest son of the King to succeed to the throne. It could pass to the brother of the dead King, as it did in this case. But at the death of Prasat Thong, a half brother of Narai usurped the throne from his uncle. Narai supported his uncle and fought the usurper who was defeated and put to death. The uncle, the rightful successor, occupied the throne. He made Narai his Uparad, that is, his Viceroy. A few weeks later Narai had to turn against the King he had helped put on the throne in order to avenge the honor of one of his sisters whom the King had raped. He attacked and killed the King, and thus became himself King at the age of twenty-five.

Though keeping Ayutthaya as the official capital of the kingdom, Phra Narai made Lop Buri (Louvo) a second capital. He built a great palace there where he spent most of his time, feeling less bound by the court etiquette there than in Ayutthaya.

Among the many foreigners at Phra Narai’s court, the most famous and by far the most successful was Constantine Phaulkon, often written as Falcon. • He was born around 1647 in Kefalonia, one of the islands of the Ionian Sea. His father was Greek and his mother Venetian. The poverty of his family and his love of adventure made him leave home. He offered his services to an Englishman and traveled with him around the Mediterranean Sea and later to England. He came to Siam on the ship of a merchant of the East India Company. Since he was intelligent and enterprising, he soon learned perfectly the Siamese language, both the common form spoken by all and the royal usage. Since the beginning of 1674 he had free entry to the court. He ingratiated himself with the “Barcalon” or “Phraklang”, the Minister of the Treasury and Finance, and earned his favor by exposing the dishonesty and exactions of the Moslem merchants who were the agents of the royal trade, at that time a monopoly of the King.

The Phraklang introduced Phaulkon to the court, and soon he won the confidence and friendship of the King, so much so that people used to call him wittily “the second Phraklang”. At the death of the Phraklang, the King wanted to give Phaulkon that title, but he wisely declined, representing to the King that his would excite too much jealousy among the Siamese. In fact, as the King’s favorite, he had even greater power than that of the Phraklang. In 1683 the King ennobled him giving him the title of Chao Phraya, and as was the custom on such an occasion, a new name. He became “Chao Phraya Vichayen”, the name under which he is known in Siamese history.

In 1682 he married a Catholic girl, Dona Guyomar de Pinha, who was half Portuguese and half Japanese. His marriage was the occasion of his return to the Catholic Church in which he had been baptized. He had become a Protestant while in the service of the Englishman. His conversion was sincere. He was instructed by Fr. Maldonado and received into the Church by Fr. Antoine Thomas. This Fr. Thomas remained in Siam for only ten months while waiting to continue on to China where he was to distinguish himself as the successor of Fr. Verbiest in the Bureau of Mathematics and Astronomy in Peking. Phaulkon lived most of the time in Lop Buri, not far from the King’s palace, in his own sumptuous residence.

Well before the arrival of Phalkon in Siam, the relations of the MEP missionaries with the court were excellent. They had received, as we have already noted, a grant of land from the King for their mission works. Later in 1673 the King, feeling that the first piece of land was not sufficient, added another piece. He helped build the St. Joseph’s Cathedral and showed his favor in many other ways. On their part the missionaries had pointed out to the court of Siam and to Paris the advantage of establishing diplomatic and commercial relations between the two countries. Moreover, in the Diary of the Mission as well as in the letters of the missionaries of the time, several references are made to the interest showed by the King for the Christian faith. Hopes were nurtured that His Majesty might accept this faith. The idea was accepted by Phra Narai with great eagerness. He counted on friendship with France to counterbalance the influence of the Dutch, who with their bases in Batavia and Malacca, were growing more and more powerful in the neighborhood of Siam. In 1680 a first Siamese embassy left for France with an MEP priest as adviser. Unhappily this embassy perished completely in a storm near Madagascar. Phra Narai did not lose heart. In 1684 a second embassy set out, this time also with an MEP adviser. This one succeeded. Louis XIV felt it his duty to send an embassy of his own to Siam. The “Chevalier” de Chaumont was name ambassador, seconded by the “Abbe” Choisy. Returning on the same ship were the Siamese ambassadors and three MEP advisers.

Six Jesuits, mathematicians recruited in France at the request of Fr. Verbiest and about to leave for China , took advantage of the occasion to make the better part of their trip. They were Frs. Fontenay the Superior, Tachard, Leconte, Nouvet, Gerbillon and Visdelou. They set out from Brest on March 3, 1685 and arrived safely in Ayutthaya on October 3rd of the same year. Mgr. Laneau went to meet the embassy at the “barre” of the Chao Phraya River. He was extremely kind to the Jesuits, inviting them to stay with him at his residence. However, on their arrival in Ayutthaya they met Phaulkon who had already prepared very convenient lodgings for them next to the residence of the Portuguese Jesuits. Here they found only the old Manoel Soares, since Fr. Maldonado had gone to Macau. According to Tachard, the residence was a small house infested with Tukae, that is, Geckos, ”a very poisonous lizard” (sic).

The King, who had come to Ayutthaya to hold an official audience for the ambassadors, returned to Lop Buri. The Jesuits also went on to Lop Buri and were again given convenient lodgings by Phaulkon. On November 22nd they were received in audience by the King. A few days later Phaulkon suggested to the King the project of getting twelve Jesuits, scientists, to set up in Siam an observatory like the one in Peking. This pleased the King very much, especially because on December 11th there had been an eclipse of the moon. He had asked the Fathers to set up their instruments and make observations at a hunting lodge which he had near Lop Buri. In this way he had the occasion to assist personally at the observations.

It was agreed that one of the Fathers would go back to France to urge the execution of this plan. Fr.Tachard was chosen All this was undertaken, of course, AMDG (for the greater glory of God) as a means of attracting the Siamese people to the faith. But Phaulkon, who knew Siam well, insisted that if the Siamese were to be converted, there should be another Jesuit house in addition to the observatory. There the Fathers should live, as far as possible, the austere and retired life of the Buddhist monks, so highly venerated by the people. The Fathers should dress in the monk’s habit and through frequent contact with the people attract them to Christianity. He cited the example of Robert de Nobili in India to prove his point. It is worth noting that many Europeans who came to Siam during this period were similarly impressed by the austerity of life of the monks. The MEP Fathers had also thought of dressing like the Buddhist monks, but when they proposed this to Propaganda, the answer was negative.

On December 14, 1685 the French ambassadors left for France rather disappointed. They had successfully concluded a commercial treaty with the King of Siam. They had also obtained a declaration of freedom to preach Christianity in the country. But this declaration was never made public. The main purpose of the Chaumont embassy was to convert the King of Siam to Christianity. De Seignelay, Minister of the French Navy, handed over to the ambassador instructions which had been given at Versailles on January 21 of the same year. This document states that “the main purpose in the decision of His Majesty to send an ambassador to Siam is the hope raised by the missionaries of the benefit that the religion would derive and the hopes based on fairly reliable foundations that the King of Siam, touched by the signs of esteem of His Majesty, would finally, with the grace of God, decide to embrace the Christian faith for which he had already showed such inclination. Chaumont, seeing that he wasn’t making any progress through spoken words alone, decided to send through Phaulkon a written request, asking the King bluntly to become a Christian. To this the King answered, according to Phaulkon who acted as interpreter: “If God, the all powerful Creator of the Universe, had wished all men to worship Him in the same way, could He not have given men the same feeling and the same inclination to worship Him in that same way? But just as we admire the beauty and variety of natural things, it is to be believed that He takes as much pleasure in being worshipped in different ways… Anyway, I entrust myself and my kingdom unto his Divine Mercy and Providence, only wishing that He will dispose of them according to his Divine Wisdom.”

Returning to France with the French ambassadors was one more Siamese embassy, escorted by the “Abbe” de Lionne and another MEP priest. Fr. Tachard went along with them to carry out his mission. When the King had met the Jesuits on the occasion of the eclipse of the moon, he had talked particularly with Tachard, promising him that on his return he would find in Lop Buri an observatory, a church and a residence, and in Ayutthaya, a church and a residence. On the same ship went a group of twelve Siamese youth. The embassy reached France on June 18,1686. The young Siamese were sent to study, some of them at the College Louis-le-Grand, while others took up various technical arts. On Easter Sunday 1687 they were baptized, with the French nobility vying for the honor of being their godfathers and godmothers.

The five French Jesuits bound for China had to wait in Siam for a year and a-half before being able to continue their journey. They left Siam on June 18,1687 and arrived in Ningpo July 23rd They had attempted to leave a year earlier on July 2, 1686, only to be shipwrecked as soon as they left the river and entered the sea. From there it took them two months to get back to Ayutthaya and Lop Buri. At the beginning of November 1686 they went to Ayutthaya to stay with the Portuguese Jesuits, since Phaulkon had built for them a beautiful new church and residence. During Advent some of them were able to preach in Portuguese. Later they went back to Lop Buri where they lived in the quarters of the foreign ambassadors.

In the meantime, during the year 1686 negotiations continued between the French Ministers and two Siamese Ambassadors with Fr. Tachard acting as middleman. He was the man most trusted by Phaulkon. “It is well known,” wrote Abbe de Lionne, “that all the business and negotiations went through the Jesuits, who were very proud of this”. We may note here that Fr. Tachard had earlier been Provincial of Guyenne, Southwest France. After his first trip to Siam, he always carried Siam in his heart, and enjoyed the full confidence of Phaulkon.

Tachard’s first task was to find the twelve Jesuit scientists requested by Phra Narai. Louis XIV put this task in the hands of Fr. de la Chaise, his confessor. Fr. de la Chaise asked the five French Provincials to provide the men. Many Jesuits volunteered. Fourteen were chosen, not counting Tachard: Frs. Le Boyer, de Boze, Thionville, Dolu, Richaud, Coloemon. Poucher, Comilh, d’Esparguac, de Saint-Martin, le Blanc, du Chaz, de la Breuille, and Rochette. Tachard ws named their Superior. Fr. Rochette died during the trip to Siam.

This second French embassy was led by two Extraordinary Envoys, Ceberet and de la Loubere. Accompanying the expedition went also six hundred soldiers under the command of General Desfarges. According to Abbe de Lionne, “everybody in the squadron, even the King’s ambassadors, looked to Tachard as the soul of the whole expedition. They started out on March 1st and arrived in Siam on the 27th of September1687. The embassy stopped in Ayutthaya where on November 2nd the King received the envoys with Mgr. Laneau and Fr. Tachard in solemn audience. From there they proceeded to Lop Buri where the King received the Jesuits in a two hour’s audience, showing them extreme kindness and familiarity. He spoke to them about learning the language so that later they could talk to him directly without an interpreter.

In fact, it had already been agreed with Phaulkon that at least three of the Fathers would learn the royal language. For this purpose they would live in a Buddhist monastery with two learned Abbots as teachers. The Fathers would follow all the rules of the monastery, not excluding the rule of eating only one meal a day. They would leave the monastery only once a day at 10 A.M. to offer Mass and eat their meal with the community.

The other Fathers lived in the lodgings provided by Phaulkon. Though temporary they were so luxurious that the Fathers had scruples about their religious poverty. As for the residence and observatory, here is what Fr. Fontenay wrote on May 12,1687: “Work has not yet started on the college building in Ayutthaya . . . but the Lop Buri college is going up. It is eight feet above the ground and the first floor of the observatory is finished.” To which Tachard adds: “This building (of Lop Buri) was a little more advanced when we arrived. The King ordered the addition of one floor. It will be the most beautiful house (of the Society) in the Indies, because the King and his minister will spare nothing to make it sumptuous. The church, too, would have gone ahead if I had not asked Phaulkon to wait until my return from my second trip to France before laying the foundations. I wanted to bring to Siam a good architect to take care of this.” This was written at the end of 1687. Tachard had been in Lop Buri during November and December 1687. Were the buildings ever finished? And did the Jesuits move into them during the few months of 1688 before the revolution?

Fr. Tachard again took an active part in the negotiations between the French envoys and the Siamese court. The commercial treaty was renewed with even better conditions for France. The declaration about religious affairs, signed during the previous embassy was still not published, to the great sorrow of the MEP missionaries. Phaulkon insisted that it was better to leave this to the King’s good will.

A thornier question was the one of the French military presence. The King, advised by Phaulkon, allowed them to garrison the two most important points of access to Siam at that time. Bangkok on the Chao Phraya River was the key to the Kingdom from the Gulf of Siam, and Mergui on the Indian Ocean was the gate of access for those coming from the west. These two French garrisons would defend Siam from a possible attack by the Dutch from the south, and by the British from India. But the problem was on whom the French garrison would depend. For the Siamese it was clear that they depended on the King of Siam. For the French it was equally clear that they depended on the King of France. This problem was still not clarified when the French envoys departed.

Fr. Tachard, who had given over his office of Superior to Fr. Le Boyer, was preparing to leave for France on January 3, 1688 together with de la Loubere. Phaulkon was unhappy over the results of the negotiations with the official envoys, and relied even more on Tachard. He was received by the King who gave his letters and gifts for the King of France and for the Pope, making Tachard his ambassador in all but name. Tachard’s audience with the King was on Christmas Eve. He did not miss the occasion of talking to the King about the birth of Christ. “Does Your Majesty know that on this night, while Your Majesty is giving me messages for the two greatest powers in the world (Louis XIV and Pope Innocent XI), God sent messengers to the world to announce a most important and precious message to the world?” His Majesty asked about this message, and so Tachard had occasion to explain to him the mystery of Christ’s birth.

After arriving at Brest in July 1688 Tachard went first of all with the Siamese mandarins to Rome. On December 23rd they were received in solemn audience by Pope Innocent XI to whom they offered the letters and presents from the King of Siam. Then in March 1689 he completed with Louis XIV and his ministers in Paris the mission entrusted to him by Phaulkon and King Phra Narai. Alas! By that time Phra Narai and Phaulkon were both dead, and the French Jesuits, the companions of Tachard, had all left Siam, with the exception of one Jesuit who was held in prison with the MEP missionaries.

It is easy to understand that the sudden elevation of a foreigner to a position of favorite of the King could not by excite the jealousy of the grandees of the country. The head of the opposition was a highly placed Mandarin, Phra Petracha. His opposition increased when rumors were heard of the possible conversion of the King to Christianity. Petracha, who had many friends in the principal Buddhist monasteries of Ayutthaya and Lop Buri, spread reports that there was imminent danger of the suppression of Buddhists and the destruction of all the temples, together with other such wild rumors.

In March 1688 the King fell sick. Petracha grew bolder and multiplied his plots. Phaulkon sensed the approaching crisis and realized that the only way to protect himself and the King was to bring the French soldiers to the court of Lop Buri. The Jesuits agreed with him, but the MEP advised against this move. To bring French soldiers to Lop Buri now would be to expose them to slaughter. Remaining in the Bangkok fortress would not only insure their safety, but would guarantee the safety of all in the future.

In the midst of all this anxiety Phaulkon gave proof of his Christian faith in his solicitude for the salvation of the King. He had Fr. Beze, who was considered a physician, live near the King and visit him frequently with the hope of possibly baptizing him on his deathbed. He also gave himself to good works during the Lent of that year before Easter on April 18th, serving the poor, attending daily Mass and prayer, and taking part in the Holy Week services.

On May 18th Petracha acted openly. With a group of his own loyal soldiers and supported by the people eager to fight against the enemies of religion and the King, he occupied the Palace under the pretext of defending the ailing King against a plot of Phaulkon. When Phaulkon heard the news, he rushed to the Palace with three French officers and fifteen British soldiers, the guard of the King. In his hurry Phaulkon entered the Palace first with the three French officers. They were immediately surrounded and taken into custody. Petracha pretended that everything had been done by the King’s order, treated the French officers with kindness, and assured everyone that “nothing would be changed in the relations of Siam and France except to improve them.” As for Phaulkon, he was arrested as a traitor. These protestations did not deceive anyone except the few Frenchmen who detested Phaulkon. On May 20th the adopted son of the King, Phra Pit, who was considered as already won over to Christianity, was murdered. On June 1st Phaulkon’s wife and all the Christians of his entourage were put in jail and treated cruelly. The French Jesuits, however, were not at all molested.

Certain by now that the French would not intervene in favor of Phaulkon, Petracha had him killed on June 5th. He had asked for a confessor, but this was denied him. He died after kneeling in prayer and protesting his innocence. The Jesuits learned these details from a Mandarin who had been in charge of his execution.

At the beginning of July, Petracha put to death in Ayutthaya the two brothers of the King. The King himself died a natural death, we may believe, on July 10th. Fr. de Beze and Fr. Paumard, MEP saw him twice in his last days, the last time just two days before his death. The King had begged this of Petracha, who agreed that the two French priests could see him as physicians, but threatened them with death if they spoke of religion to the King. In spite of the prohibition, the two priests tried to exhort the King to receive baptism, but the interpreter on whom they had to depend, afraid of Petracha, refused to translate their words.

In this way Petracha became King of Siam. Even the Annals of Siam speak of him as a usurper. He had the power, but he was left with the thorn of the French garrison in Bangkok. For Mergui the French had already accepted to evacuate it. For Bangkok Petracha had at first tried force of arms, but even with the help of the Dutch, he failed to dislodge the French, and was forced to resort to negotiation. On October 18th a treaty was signed. The French troops agreed to leave Bangkok and Siam. Petracha would lend them ships to take them as far as Pondichery. The ships would then return. Petracha promised safety and freedom for the Frenchmen who would remain in Siam. To guarantee the execution of the treaty both sides exchanged hostages.

The negotiations were nearing conclusion when on October 1st Mme. Phaulkon arrived in Bangkok. After her earlier cruel treatment, she had to resist the shameful advances of Luang Sorasak, the son of Petracha, who in 1703 was to succeed Petracha to the throne with the fitting name of Phra Chao Seua, that is, “King Tiger”. The poor woman with the help of Fr. de Beze had succeeded in escaping to Bangkok, trusting in the chivalry of the French soldiers. But Petracha demanded absolutely that she be returned to his custody promising, however, that she would not be ill treated. Reluctantly, the French agreed, and this time Petracha kept his word. Up until 1720 Mme. Phaulkon was the superintendent of the royal kitchen in the Ayutthaya Royal Palace, - a position of honor that she maintained well, behaving all the while as a perfect Christian. A grandson and granddaughter of Phaulkon were among the prisoners of the Burmese in 1767. Later in 1771 they returned to Siam. So surely there must be somewhere in Thailand descendants of Phaulkon.

After the revolution, the French Jesuits in Lop Buri left for Ayutthaya to stay with their Portuguese colleagues. Then in October we find them all in Bangkok with the exception of Fr. de la Breuille, who had decided to stay in Ayutthaya. They all left with the French garrison at the beginning of November 1688.

No sooner had the French garrison left that it became evident that the French failed to keep their part of the treaty. Some of the Frenchmen who were to remain as hostages left with the garrison, and some of the Siamese hostages who were to be sent back after passing the “barre” were not sent back. Those who remained in Siam paid for it. Mgr. Janeau, the MEP missionaries, some other Frenchmen, the seminarians, and many Christians were jailed. Even some British Protestants and Siamese Buddhists who had been friends of the missionaries suffered the same punishment. Among the Portuguese the Dominicans and Jesuits were not affected, but Fr. de la Breuille, who had remained with the Portuguese Jesuits, was also jailed. The seminary and some churches in Ayutthaya, Lop Buri and elsewhere were plundered and some also burned. The prisoners found themselves in great need and subject to abuse. However, many people came to their aid, both British Protestants and Siamese Buddhists. The Jesuits of the Portuguese residence distinguished themselves by their charity. But the Dutch Protestants and the Portuguese Catholics showed nothing but joy at the plight of the French prisoners.

In August 1689 The French Commander returned with his ships to the island of Phuket, contacted again the Siamese King and sent back the Siamese hostages. After that the plight of the prisoners began to improve. But it was only a year later in August 1690 that they were set free, and even then not completely free. On April 21, 1691 they were allowed to return to their mission of which nothing remained but the walls. Thus in the space of less than two years the mission of the French Jesuits, which had begun with such promise, came to an end. Nothing remained but the wall of the observatory which had been solidly built, but which had never been used to make any observations. The actors of the tragedy, the thirteen Jesuits, were scattered, and practically none of them ever saw Siam again.

One of these, however, could never forget Siam. Fr. Tachard received in France the first news of the Siamese revolution just when a French squadron was ready to sail for Siam. The squadron was re-routed and instead of going to Siam, went to Pondichery in India. From India Tachard wrote to the Phraklang in November 1690 saying among other things: “I may assure you that from the first moment I was assigned to go to the Kingdom of Siam, I felt in my heart such affection for the Siamese people that I considered myself to be Siamese. I don’t know if there is any Siamese who has supported the interest of the King of Siam as much as I”. He wrote that he would be waiting for the order of the King of Siam to go to Ayutthaya to bring His Majesty the messages of the King of France and the Pope. The letter was given to the Siamese mandarins who were returning home, but he never got an answer. He wrote again, and at last, an interpreter came, sent by the King. This interpreter went back with more letters from Tachard. After these many comings and goings, in 1693 orders were sent from Siam to have Tachard return to Ayutthaya.

But when the King’s message arrived in India, Tachard with all the Pondichery Frenchmen had fallen prisoner to the Dutch and had been brought back to Europe. Nevertheless, he did not lose heart. He obtained new instructions from the French King, and in 1697 was in Mergui on Siamese soil. More letters were sent to Ayutthaya. After a long silence, the Phraklang answered rather rudely, refusing him permission to come to Ayutthaya and reproaching him for his lack of etiquette for having come on a commercial ship instead of a ship of the King of France. Tachard went back to India. In October 1698 he is once more in Mergui, but this time on a warship of the King of France. He was allowed to go to Ayutthaya. He arrived on December 28th together with Fr de la Breuille, a Coadjutor brother, and a small following. After a long negotiation about the way he would be received at court, he was finally received in solemn audience on January 29 1699 with Fr. de la Breuille . . . great ceremonies, fine words, exchange of letters and gifts. But the heart was missing. Everything remained as it was before. About the middle of February 1699 Tachard left Siam for the last time. He surely must have dreamed of Siam during the remaining twelve years of his life. He died in Chandernagor, a French possession in India in 1712.

While the French Jesuits were acting out their drama, or rather, their tragedy, the Jesuits of the residence-college of the Portuguese settlement were untroubled spectators. The persecution that followed the fall of Phaulkon and the ascent of Petracha to the throne did not touch them. They were even able, as we have seen, to bring help to the prisoners. After April 1691 the situation of the MEP Vicariate returned to its normal state of calm, or as one might better say, “to a state of coma”. In fact, all of Siam, after the brilliant period of Phra Narai, was in decline. A missionary arriving in Siam at the beginning of the eighteenth century observed, “I was surprised to see the state of decay into which the whole Kingdom had fallen. No longer does one see great numbers of foreign or Siamese ships… The Kingdom looks like a desert. The population has been reduced by more than half.”

The situation of the Ayutthaya Christianity during the episcopate of Mgr. Louis de Circe (1700 – 1727) was miserable. “The number of Christians in Ayutthaya was about 800 to 900, divided into three settlements: the so-called Portuguese Christians who dress in European style; the Siamese Christians, and the Cochinchinese and Tonkinese Christians… The Siamese Christians number only 80 or 90. Mgr. de Circe wrote in 1714, “In these twelve years that I am here, we have had less than one hundred conversions of adults.” And again, “In 1723 there were nine adults baptized. It was a great joy for the apostolic workers.”

And what about the Jesuits who were part of this slumbering mission? Of the 800 to 900 Christians, the 80 or 90 Siamese as well as the 450 to 500 Tonkinese and Cochinchinese were under the care of the MEP missionaries. The highest number of the so-called Portuguese would hardly reach 400. They were divided into two parishes, one belonging to the Jesuits and the other to the Dominicans. Although the power of Portugal in Asia had been replaced by that of the Dutch and British, these Portuguese, mostly Eurasians, jealously preserved their Portuguese names, dress and language. The apostolate among them could not have been very intense. As we have already noted, between 1703 and 1709 there was only Fr. Gaspard de Costa left in the Jesuit residence. When he died, no one came immediately to replace him. Mgr. de Cice, writing on January 14, 1711, remarked that for eighteen months after the death of Fr. da Costa the Jesuit church had been left without a priest, so that he had to rush the ordination of a priest to put him in charge of that church.

In the year 1712, however, the Catalogue of the Japan-Chinese Province listed two Jesuits for Ayutthaya, Fr. Joseph Anselmus as Superior, and Antonio Soares as member of the “Collegium Siamese”. From this time until the middle of the century

There were usually two Fathers in Ayutthaya. The institution was usually called “Collegium”. Though the Christians may have been few, the sacred ceremonies were carried out with all the solemnity and pomp that the Portuguese liked. A Jesuit, Fr. Philip Sibin, passing through Siam in 1724 wrote, “On Holy Thursday of this year, April 13th, the Crown Prince of Siam with his sister, who is also his wife,  were here in our church to attend religious ceremonies for at least four hours. They listened to the sermon and watched the procession. They were present from about 10:15 P.M. till almost 3 A.M. with such devout attention that it won admiration, since the Prince is an infidel. All this time the Blessed Sacrament was solemnly exposed. I wish I had the gift of tongues to be able to explain to them the mysteries of our Faith! The First Queen came after the procession to our church out of curiosity to see the ornaments and the apparatus. She praised them all.”

At St. Joseph Cathedral similar things were happening. Princes of the royal family came to the feasts, listened to the sermons. All this was a consolation for the missionaries and gave them hope for better days in the future.

But alas! Suddenly everything changed, not for the better, but for the worse. A new Phraklang, supported by a brother of the King, started a real persecution in October of 1730. It was not so violent as to make martyrs, but so perfidious as to suffocate every possibility of apostolate, and this in a mission that for the last forty years had been dormant. Then in October 1731 it reached its climax when the Phraklang placed a memorial stone at the entrance of St. Joseph Cathedral with four prohibitions inscribed on it:
 

1. Forbidden to write Christian books in English or Pali language.
2. Forbidden to preach Christianity to the Siamese, Laotians or Peguans.
3. Forbidden to admit any of these nationalities to become Christians.
4. Forbidden to say anything disparaging of Buddhism.

With such prohibitions it was a simple matter during the following thirty years for any anti-Christian official to make trouble for Christians and missionaries. The Jesuits were not exempt from such abuse, which at times amounted to pure blackmail. On December 28, 1749 Fr. Montanha, S.J. together with the Bishop was summoned by the Phraklang for a long period of questioning. On leaving the Phraklang Fr. Montanha remarked to the Bishop, “This fellow called us only with the hope of getting as good a gift from Your Excellency as he got from me not long ago. I had to spend one hundred and fifty piastres on him.”

It is true that those prohibitions did not include the Annamites or Chinese living in Siam. But even for these, the stone reminder facing them every time they went to church was a serious intimidation. No special trouble was made for the Portuguese Christians who were the main care of the Jesuits. But with the passing of the years, the Jesuits had at last begun to get interested in the local people. This appears from the annual letter written from Macau on December 31, 1748. Let me quote from it at some length for it throws much light on the situation of that time:

“The Siamese Mission. Besides a church and a house which is called ‘Collegium Inchoatum’, there are two Fathers taking care of the settlement called the “Portuguese settlement’. The number of adult Christians in this settlement does not surpass five hundred, all of them foreigners.• Of the natives of this Kingdom of Siam, very few have been converted to the Faith, and those mostly on their death-bed, fearing, as they do, the wrath of the King. He has forbidden his subjects most rigorously from embracing the law of God.” Here the letter tells of the stone placed at the entrance of the Cathedral, of the devotion of the Siamese for Buddhism, and their veneration for their numerous pagodas and for the Buddhist monks. Then it continues, “In 1747 Fr. Jose Montanha baptized and received into the Church two Siamese who were extremely fervent and ready, should the King so order it, to make the sacrifice of their lives rather than apostatize from the Faith.” The letter then continues telling of the diligence of the missionaries in baptizing babies in danger of death, and of the means used to do it without exciting opposition. The MEP Fathers, too, in their letters tell of thousands of babies baptized when dying. The letter goes on, “As for the people of other countries, the King does not forbid them to practice their religion. So in our churches the Fathers perform publicly the ordinary ceremonies. In the Portuguese settlement they have processions with great beauty and solemnity. These always attract many non-Christian onlookers, among them also people of high rank.’

“In front of our church there is a wooden cross that is commonly known as the “Miraculous Cross”, because of the great number of favors obtained through it’s invocation. It was set up by the Japanese at the time when, to escape the persecution raging in their own country, they had taken refuge in Siam and started, with the permission of the King, a settlement there of their own. However, with the passing of time, the Japanese settlement disappeared, some families dying out and others taking refuge in Cambodia or Cochinchina. Eventually, the cross remained alone on the opposite bank of the river across from our church. So later on, since God granted many favors through its invocation, and to make it more accessible to the people for their veneration, it was transferred to the front of our church. We wrapped the wood, worn out through age, with a tin covering.’

“This standard of our redemption, though a sign of foolishness for the Gentiles, is here very much revered by the infidels, who in their needs commend themselves to it, and not in vain. They offer it gifts of flowers and money in thanksgiving for the favors they have obtained. The Buddhist women going to market, when passing in front of it with their wares, make the same kind of offerings in order to gain the favor of the Cross. Buddhists possessed by evil spirits, drive out the impure guests through the power and virtue of the Cross. The fame of so many marvels moves all the heathen to great reverence for this Cross. When they pass in front of it with their boats while rowing, they usually bow down as a sign of reverence.’

“A Buddhist boatman paid dearly for his lack of reverence to this Cross. The fellow, wanting to stop his boat just in front of the Cross, threw a cable around it. Someone warned him about his irreverence, but he paid no attention. Suddenly he felt that his boat was going aground though the water was more than three fathoms deep and the draught of his boat was hardly a few palms. The boatman, thinking that there might be a pole in the water under his boat, jumped onto the river to free the boat from this hidden obstacle. But he never came up, he drowned! After waiting awhile another man jumped in, and later a third. . . but no one of them was ever to be seen again! The fame of this extraordinary happening spread all over. . .”

The reader will pardon this long quotation that may seem of little moment. In fact, however, it describes quite well the character of the Siamese, not only of the eighteenth century, but even of our time. They are curious about the ceremonies of other religions; they have a superstitious veneration for whatever may be a talisman with supernatural power. But if we look more deeply, it reveals how religious the Siamese are, even in our century of demythologization.

Glancing through the Jesuit Catalogue, the last Catalogue of that time, we find the names of sixteen Jesuits in Siam between 1701 and 1753. There are some gaps; perhaps more names should be added. Of the sixteen, fifteen are priests and one is a coadjutor Brother. With the exception of one Frenchman and two Germans, all the others are Portuguese. Usually two Fathers were together at a time, rarely only one. But suddenly in 1751 there are five Fathers, three Portuguese and two Germans. It seems as though Fr. Montanha, who had been Rector in Siam and that year had become Provincial, was using his new authority to carry out some new plans for Siam. We note the two Germans, “ Pater Sebastianus Zverger, Visitator et Rector Coll. Siamensis”, and “Pater Joseph Neugebauer, Architectus Coll. Siamensis”. This Father had entered the Society as a coadjutor brother, but having come to Macau in 1736 was raised to the priesthood. Expelled from there in 1750, he came to Siam as architect. Perhaps there were some plans of developing the College of Ayutthaya. But probably no great work was done, for he remained in Siam only one year. In 1753 there is the same Rector, two Portuguese Fathers and the coadjutor Brother, Antonio Cardoso, “Oeconemus Coll. Siamensis”, but the architect, Fr. Neugebauer has gone.

Not many years later two terrible storms broke at the same time, one on the Society of Jesus and the other on Siam. In 1759 in Portugal, Pombal began the attack that in a few years was to bring about the suppression of the Society of Jesus. He arrested and expelled all Jesuits both from the national territory and from all the colonies of Portugal. He could not, of course, arrest and banish the Jesuits of Siam, but he banished those of Goa and Macau on whom the Siam mission depended. The mission remained completely isolated.

In that same year of 1759 the Burmese attacked Siam once more. They were Siam’s hereditary foe and had many times tried to destroy her. Taking advantage of the weakness of the Kingdom and its internal dissensions, a Burmese army captured Mergui and the Tenasserim. Then coming up from the southwest it attacked the capital, Ayutthaya, at the beginning of April 1760. The Portuguese settlement was the first to receive the attack. A part of it was burned, but the Christians offered such strong resistance that the enemy was forced to retreat. The Christians were thanked by the royal government for their bravery. But this was only a prelude to the tragedy to come. In the following years the Burmese subdued all the north of the country, and at the end of 1765 came again to lay siege to Ayutthaya, destroying everything in their way. Throughout 1766 up to the beginning of 1767 they tightened their grip on the capital. In March 1767 the Portuguese settlement and the Cathedral to the south of the city were isolated and surrounded. The Christians fought bravely, but they were few and short of ammunition. They situation was hopeless; they were swamped by the tide of the attackers.

In these circumstances “a Portuguese Jesuit Brother, pressed by fear and hunger, came over to the Bishop’s place in order to find at the seminary some remedy for his pains. He was given a room and invited to the table of the missionaries. This was more effective for him than any medicine.” Who was this “Brother” that is never mentioned again? What could have happened to him? Or was this a slip of the pen of the writer who wrote “Brother” instead of “Father”?

On March 21st a Jesuit and a Dominican, who were the parish priests of the Portuguese settlement, surrendered to the Burmese together with their Christians. For two days their churches and property were protected in order to persuade the Bishop with his Christians to surrender, also. In fact, to resist longer was only to cause useless slaughter. So after parlaying with the Burmese General and being promised safety and protection for all persons and property, on March 23rd the Bishop surrendered. But, as it turned out, the Cathedral and seminary, as well as the Jesuit and Dominican churches, were all plundered. The houses of some Christians near the Cathedral were burned down. The fire spread to the Cathedral and the seminary which were both reduced to ashes. On the nights of April 7th-8th the Burmese entered and set fire to Ayutthaya.

Bishop Brigot, his missionaries together with their Christians and seminarians, a Jesuit, Dominicans, another Portuguese priest, and their Christians were taken prisoners. During the month of May they were brought in a southwesterly direction toward Tavoy in Burma. Towards the end of May the Jesuit fell sick with Dysentery and soon died. The place where he died was Bang Chang in the countryside of Samut Songkhram. Bishop Brigot wrote that “he was buried with the roar of the guns of the galleys and from the walls of the city, so that he was honored with greater honors than a Burmese officer.”

And so came to an end this anonymous Father? Brother? and the old Jesuit mission in Siam. The names of the Dominican and Portuguese priests, and, of course, the MEP missionaries are all known. But the last Jesuit died unknown. Those were bad times for the Jesuits. In April of that same year the Spanish Jesuits had been banished by the King of Spain following the fate of their Portuguese and French brothers. Seven years later the Society would be suppressed by the Pope.

It was the end of the Kingdom of Siam and the end of the Society of Jesus. Would they ever rise again from death? Would they meet again? Siam rose in an almost miraculous way in a few years time. The Society never completely disappeared and was re-established in 1814, forty-one years after its suppression. But the interval would be long before it would meet Siam again: one hundred and eighty-seven years. And when the Society returned, it was not to Siam anymore, but to Thailand, and not to Ayutthaya, but to Bangkok, or rather, to Krung Thep Maha Nakorn . . . as the capital city is called today by the Thai people.

1. Beze “Memoire du P. de Beze sur la vie di Constance Phaulkon, Premier Ministre de Siam sa triste fin…”, Publie par Jean Drans et Henri Bernard, S.J., Tokyo Pressses Salesiennes, 1947

2. Bouvet “Voyage de Siam du P. Bouvet”, precene d’une introduction avec une biographie et une bibliographie de son auter… par J. C. Gatty, Leiden, P.J.Brille, 1963 (Publications under the auspices of the Southeast Asia Pogram, Cornell University)

3. Boym Photocopy of a Latin manuscript from one archive in Rome

4. Burnay J. Burnay, “Notes, Chronologiques sur les Missions Jesuites au Siam au XVII Siecle”, Archivum Historicum Societatis Jesus, Extractum e Vol. XXII, 1953

5. Cardim “Batalhas da Companhia de Jesus Na Sua Gloriosa Provincia Do Japao Pelo Padre Antonio Francisco Cardim De Mesma Companhia de Jesus, Natural de Vienna de Almantejo Lisbon Imprensa Nacional 1894

6. Cartas Cartas y Escritos de San Francisco Javier, Anodadas por el P. Felix Zubillaga, S.J., B.A C. Madrid, MCMLIII

7. Launay “Histoire de la Mission de Siam 1662 – 1811 avec deux volumes de Documents” par Adrien Launay, M.E.P., Paris Anciennes Maison Douniol et Reteaux, P. Tequi, Successeur, 1920

8. Launay I Documents Vol. I

9. Launay II Documents Vol. II

10. Tachard I “Voyage de Siam Des Peres Jesuites Envoyes Par Le Roy, aux Indes a la Chine”, Suivant la copie de Paris imprimee Par Ordre Le Da Majeste a Amsterdam, Chez Pierre Mortier Libraire MDCLXXXVIII

11. Tachard II “Second Voyage du P. Tachard et des Jesuites Envoyes par le Roy Au Royaume De Siam,” Suivant la Copie de Paris Imprimee, A Amsterdam, Chez Pierre Mortier Libraire, MDCLXXXIX

12. Wood “A History of Siam from the Earliest Times to the Year A.D. 1781, With a Supplement Dealing With more Recent Events” by W.A.R. Wood, Bangkok, 1924(?)