A SIAMESE GRAVE
Lucio Nalesini
A Siamese Style Tomb at Koper/Capodistria (Slovenia)
In the middle of the last century Capodistria was a small but busy town, placed on an ancient island. Until 1797 a centuries old state border divided Capodistria from the town of Trieste, just a few miles ahead: the gonfalon of the St. Marc Republic fluttered above the former, while the latter was under the yellow and black flag of the Habsburgs. The political division was not equalled by fidelity. Capodistria was conscious of her importance in the High Adriatic area: the chronicles record in fact frequent uprisings against the Venetian suzerainty. In previous times Capodistria tried to lead the other towns of Istria and entered an alliance with the Patriarch of Aquileia against Venice. However, in AD 1291 the Treviso Truce between Venice, Pietro Gardenigo being the Doge, and the Patriarch of Aquileia handed over once for all[1] Capodistria and the whole Western coast of Istria to the Serene Republic.
Such was the antagonism between the two former enemies that a mighty castle[2] was built in between the island and the mainland to secure a steady military control of the town, while the sea-borne trade was severely reduced in order to abate the local economic prosperity.
Three Capodistrian brothers in Siam
At the beginnings of our story, in the middle of the 19th century, Capodistria was under the Habsburgs since a few tens of years, as we said above. The Central European love for order and laboriousness and the Venetian-like passion for trading and wider horizons, mixed in the local feelings and behaviour. This period saw the achievement of the corn-dealers belonging to the Grassi family. Antonio Grassi, son of Giacomo and husband of Anna Apollonio, settled close to the town’s Main Gate at the Almerigogna Palace. They also lived door to door to their close friend and cousin, the painter Bartolomeo Gianelli (1824-1894). The Grassi family grew up eleven children (five daughters and six boys), thanks also to the gains of the flourishing corn business.
Trade always had ups and downs. When the commercial fortune of the Grassis passed through a serious crisis, the family moved to Trieste, at that time booming because of her new status as a Free Port and of the contemporary decline of Capodistria. In 1869 the opening of the Suez Canal gave to Mitteleuropa an opportunity to increase the trade with India and Far East through Trieste, which was her natural harbour. The tight relation then established between the Empire and the town was emphasised by the Emperor Francis Joseph, granting to Trieste the title of “Town immediate to the Empire”. No wonder then that the Grassi family moved to Trieste under the pressure of the economic crisis. Antonio Grassi’s second son, Joachim (Gioachino)[3], received the degree of architect from the University of Venice. Feeling the Adriatic horizons too narrow for himself, he decided to try his own luck in the Orient following the path already traced by other men born in the same region (Marco Polo, the Blessed Odorico from Pordenone, Mons. Giovanni Maria Percoto and (why not?) even Constantine Yerakis - Phaulkon[4] who, however born elsewhere on the Adriatic Sea, was a citizen of Venice). It was the year 1870. He won the Siamese Royal Family’s favour, presumably after the erection of two buildings on the “Klong (Canal) Bangkok Yai“, on behalf of Sudjai and Thui, the sons of the then Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Siam, Chao Phya Bhanuwongse. This was the first step of a quick and overwhelming career which led him to build palaces, temples and even a Catholic Church on behalf of the Royal Family throughout twenty-three years of residence in that Asiatic realm.
Gioachino, better known in Siam under his Christian name of Joachim[5], founded a building contractors in Bangkok which was to work over twenty years on behalf of the Royal House as well as the Siamese Government, the two being almost the same thing, as members of the former often hold the most prominent posts of the latter. Gioachino won name erecting two twin buildings (four in all) along the Klong Bangkok Yai[6]. These buildings (one of which is still standing, though in poor conditions) were admired beyond their real architectural values because their style differed so deeply from the local canons. We can catch a glimpse of the impact roused by this novelty on the Siamese mind in Kanchanakhapat’s novel “Klong’s boys”. As a matter of fact, I discovered the survived building just following the itinerary described in this story.
The architectural venture turned out to be reasonably expensive, so that the building of Bhuraphaphirom Palace for HRH the Prince Bhanurangsi, King Rama V’s brother[7], was eventually entrusted to Gioachino. On 18 March 1876, the western style “laying of the foundation-stone” ceremony took place, another absolute novelty for the Siamese kingdom. The Bhuraphaphirom Palace does not unfortunately exist any longer. It stood in the middle of a wide park not far from the Royal Palace and the Chao Phya River, or Menam[8] as it is commonly referred to by Westerners. I said “does not unfortunately exist any longer”, because today popular commercial centres and extremely crowded and noisy streets replaced the palace and the park.
The only existing record of this palace is an old photograph published on the Bangkok Times of January 31st, 1891, in occasion of the tonsure [9] ceremony of the Prince Royal of Siam. Eight to nine hundred guests attended this ceremony in a fairy atmosphere. The article describes staircases, halls and verandas, while the sight of the surroundings enjoyable from the upper story was of a “dazzling brightness”. Splendid collections and ionic and Corinthian columns as well as many more works of art filled the interiors, “passing from one wonder to the next”. “Wide terraces, beautified with Japanese lamps waved by the gentle breeze, giving a charming aspect to the whole scene, roofed the building”[10].
In the neighbourhood of the Bhuraphaphirom Palace there was a second building, now disappeared. Proofs of its paternity are also missing. Walter Tips mentions it in his Siam’s Struggle for Survival on page 76: “Monday, 3 July 1893. “I take a walk to the administrative offices of the railways, installed in Sapatoum Rd. in a palace called Miramar. It is a shapeless and poorly-built imitation of the palace of Maximilian by Grassi”. As I said above, there is no proof that Grassi erected this palace too, nor was I able to find any other record of this building. However, the name of the hotel Miramar standing today in the same area could be a remembrance of the Grassi’s palace.
A year later, in 1877, Gioachino got a much more prestigious commission: the erection of the ubosot[11] of Wat Nivet Dhamma[12] Pravat in Bang Pa In. This was the first Buddhist temple erected by a Westerner, and still is the sole Buddhist temple built in a western (Neogothic) style. The same style was adopted for other buildings of the monastery, including the lodgings of the monks (kuti) in the Sangkhawat[13].
King Rama V expressly chooses this style in order to astonish the congregation with a completely new building. His plan succeeded. Only the unmistakable presence of the yellow-dressed monks and novices distinguish this Buddhist monastery from a Roman Catholic Church, both inside and outside.
Joachim had the opportunity to accompany the Prince Swasti Sobhon to Europe as his own personal interpreter soon after the finishing of this Wat. We learned this information from a letter written by Joachim to HRH the Prince Devawongse Varoprakar on June 22nd 1893. In that year (1881) Joachim had a chance to visit his ill mother, probably in Trieste. In that occasion he decided to take two of his younger brothers with himself. They were Giacomo, born in Capodistria on 10 April 1850, and Antonio (like their father), born in Capodistria on 16 January 1841. The latter previously worked as sculptor in Budapest, where he opened an atelier. As soon as his brothers joined him in Bangkok, Joachim changed the trade name of his building contractors as “J. Grassi & Brother”. The company changed once more the name in the 1883, on the occasion of the joining of a new partner (but only for a year), the Viennese Egon Müller. It became so the “Grassi Brothers & Co.”[14] With their help Joachim enlarged the activity, eventually entering as member in the Tram Society of Bangkok, besides some sawmills on the western shore of the river Chao Phya (the Menam for the westerners).
We know moreover that he was joint manager (but probably also joint-owner) of the “The Siam River Steamboat Co.”[15]
We can now quickly review the most important buildings erected by the Grassi brothers in Bangkok:
1) The Phra Palace, built on behalf of HRH the Prince Naris, one of the King’s younger brother. The Silpakorn University now occupies the premises.
2) The Justice Palace. It does not stand any longer, as a new Justice Palace was built on the same spot in 1960. In the original project a clock tower surmounted the palace, and has been the highest point of the town (apart from the Golden Hill Chedi, which is erected on the top of an artificial hill). Unfortunately the ground subsided about ten years later, and the clock tower was eventually demolished.
3) The present Ministry of Defence (1884). This three storeys building was initially planned as a barrack. Its structure is still the original one, notwithstanding the many transformations. The picture of a military parade performed during the feast for the return of King Chulalongkorn from his first visit to Europe (1898), clearly shows that the building façades did not change since then on.
4) The Custom Palace (1888). It is a pleasant western style building standing on the Chao Phya bank, between the Sheraton and the Oriental hotels. Today it is the seat of the River Police. The tourist guide published in 1890 by the Bangkok Times describes it as being “This building is another of the many graceful structures erected in Bangkok within the last ten years and occupies an imposing position n the river bank”.
5) The Sirirat Hospital. At that time Bangkok had no hospitals, at least according to today’s meaning of the word. There were only some first aid stations, mostly managed by missionaries. The decision to build an hospital resulted from a propitious combination of circumstances. The concern of the British residents on the occasion of the fiftieth year of reign of Queen Victoria finally convinced the King to promote and finance (the British residents contributed but a few Bahts[16]) the building of two pavilions for the new hospital, one of them being dedicated to Queen Victoria. The pavilions do not exist any longer, but the hospital does. It is the oldest and also the most prestigious hospital in Bangkok, for it cares the Royal Family.
6) The New Prison. Justice was a complex matter in Siam. Each Department and each Authority managed his own justice. A centralised organisation of the Courts of Justice and of the Prisons’ system was first achieved in 1882. This required suitable prisons, and once again the Grassi brothers (were entrusted). However, nobody had any idea of how to plan such a building. This led the three brothers to study and visit other similar institutions abroad, particularly in Singapore. The works lasted so long that the first prisoners moved into the cells before the works were finally ended in 1891. A few years ago, on the occasion of the sixtieth birthday of the Queen, the prison, now completely empty, was transformed in a park. The buildings, however, are still standing there.
Antonio’s death
In the while Antonio Grassi decided to return home, maybe because of the health, or maybe because of homesickness. He certainly was already rich. Antonio settled in Trieste with Giovanna Ciampi, his wife, and Aurelio, their son, as his parents and brothers lived there. His residence in Trieste was short. He believed that the sweet climate of Florence will better suite his poor health (probably phthisis). But in Florence he got a bronchitis and died on the earliest days of July 1887. His body was transferred by train to Trieste, whence a long train of cars left to Capodistria on 7 July, at 8 AM. At the main town gate, the Porta della Muda, the body was received by the Podestà (Mayor) and other city personages at 10 AM. The train proceeded on Via Suburbana and the then Via Eugenia[17] until the Cathedral, where the funeral rite was officiated. He came back in the town where he was born 46 years before, but where he lived shortly, having worked as sculptor in Budapest and in Siam.
What about his personality? According to the official chronicles he was beloved and even admired. However, a subtle irony pervades the memorial article dedicated to him by the local newspaper La Provincia, on 16 July 1887, and questions Antonio’s generosity. After having stressed his “conspicuous fortune”, the journalist regrets Antonio’s untimely departure, as it happened “maybe before his soul had the possibility to benefit his own birthplace. In spite of that, he left five hundred (italics in the original) Italian liras to the native municipality to be distributed among the poor men, and wished his corpse lay in peace in this cemetery, and that a luxurious monument (worth 35,000 liras) ordered to Florentine craftsmen will remember him forever”.
This monument in Siamese style still stands in front of the entrance to the Capodistria cemetery; we shell come back on it in the last chapter.
Gioachino becomes a French citizen
We already noticed the wide interests of the eclectic Gioachino, far beyond the building activity. His flair always led him where honours and profit were possible. At that time France competed with the Great Britain to consolidate her hold in Indochina. French intervention started in 1862 with the conquest of eastern Cochin China. In 1863 Cambodia accepted French protectorate, offered under the official pretext of defend Cambodia from Siam[18].
Gioachino saw the French conquest of Viet Nam as a business chance. While his links with the French authorities in Indochina are still unclear, the French Embassy in Bangkok proposed the French Government to appoint a honorary citizenship to Gioachino Grassi for unspecified services. He received also the decoration of the Official of the Dragons of Annam. He intrigued with the Italian Government too, who conferred him the Knighthood of the Crown of Italy on 9 September 1889[19]. As for the French citizenship, the motivations of the Italian decoration remain unclear, as he never worked for Italy, nor was an Italian citizen.
For Gioachino the trouble was that the relationship between France and Siam were increasingly deteriorating. The French interference in the Siamese internal affairs was growing, and Siam felt threatened[20].
The reflexes of this political situation for Gioachino. Together with some prominent Siamese men he founded another society, called “Siam Lands, Canal and Irrigation Co.” finalized in the cutting irrigation canals, he managed in a particularly favorable agreement getting from the Siamese Government.
What was the matter? The Grassi's company, whose Manager and greatest shareholder was the Grassi self, was engaged to cut the irrigation canals, wherever necessary, obtaining practically a fifty-years monopoly to cut canals, and as reward it was reserved the right to sell the ground at the two sides of every cut canal, for the width of a kilometre. This concession raised a tide of criticisms from the most conservative layers, which didn't look favourably that a so large part of the Chao Phya plain[21] became property of a foreigner, that moreover was, as French subject, a potential enemy.This is not the place to speak with greater details about the project self, we speak about only as far as it relates to the “political” implications, that have determined afterwards the departure of Grassi from Siam and his re-entry in Europe. You/he/she was inserted therefore in the agreement the article 3, that it foresaw the obligation from Grassi, to become Siamese citizen, what would have, naturally, settled things once and for all. But Grassi didn't do so much as expressly foreseen by arctic 3 and therefore the government intervened (1892) to arrange the sale of the shares of Grassi, to a person better liked by the Siamese State. In this case was another Austro-Hungarian citizen, a certain Erwin Müller, who had in precedence already founded the company “B. Grimm”, still alive today in Bangkok.
From a brochure, written on this matter by Joachim Grassi and dated Trieste, March 1900, but only edited in August 20th, 1902[22], we deduce that the above-mentioned brochure had been prepared in order to being exposed at the Siamese section of the Universal exposition in Paris (1900). But the author had heard that the execution of the works had been suspended, and he had preferred to postpone it temporarily.
Afterwards, however he writes: "I was very happy to hear, lately, that HM the King, had given orders to remove all the obstacles that interposed to the continuation of the enterprise.
Insofar I have thought to complete the explanations that I didn't have the time to give before my departure from Siam. I hope that they will be of some utilities for those people that have decided to complete the irrigation works, and to reply to the wrong objections of certain detractors of the enterprise.” [23]
He cared a lot, our Gioachino, about the completion of his project, and we also notices it from the bitterness with which he says Good-By to that country that he thought by now to be his country. He still writes in the same brochure: “Personally I would have been very happy to be able to complete the jobs I had started, and to realize a part of my program. Inauspiciously the fate has been contrary, and I am today satisfied, to have been the promoter of this big enterprise, destined to produce big results and to have worked for the good of the Country, that has given me hospitality and has allowed me to operate usefully during the best years of my existence.” [24]
Grassi also did a translation in English of the above-mentioned brochure by the title “Scheme of Irrigation in Siam” and he sent it to the Minister of Interior of Siam, prince Damrong Rachanuphab, accompanied by a letter, dated Trieste November 26th 1902, in which he confirms his sorrow to not have brought the work to conclusion, either to have been obliged to leave the country: “. . . to prove that I bear no rancor for having been the victim of injust treatment created by false suggestion on the part of interested partners who for the sake of avoiding my severe control of the scheme and get their hands free invented the pretext of political intrigues of that epoch (1893) and mixed me up with it to serve their intents which drove me out of the management of this entreprise, . . .” and “. . .hoping also to arrive still in time to be useful to the country which I love and where I have passed the best years of my life.”
The same regret being obliged to leave Siam, he expresses in a letter addressed May 13th 1893, to Prince Devawongse, Foreign Minister, when his decision to go back in Europe had already become definitive: “... Seeing that there is not much prospect for my Firm to obtain Government works I have decided to go to Europe...I would have been most happy to employ the remainder of my existence at the service of this my adopted country but circumstances has decided otherwise and I am very sorry to be compelled to leave this country under such circumstances...”
In other words, his French citizenship alienated the favour of the Government and of the Royal Family, and as a consequence he was not anymore able to maintain his position. Events followed in rapid succession. On 13th July 1893 two French gunboats entered the Chao Phya River. The gunfight that followed, the so-called “Paknam incident”, caused victims as well as the unjustifiable French reaction (after all it was the French who penetrated armed and threatening into the Siamese territory). Besides being compelled to indemnify France with a considerable amount of money, Siam had to surrender large territories to Cambodia and Laos, therefore practically to France who was their “protector”, When all this happened, Gioachino Grassi had already left Bangkok in early July to go back to Europe.
We cannot omit to speak about the last works carried out by the Grassi Brothers Co. Company, which were in some way affected by his closeness to the French environment.
One of these was the building to become the core of “Le Collège de l’Assomption”. On the occasion of the first centenary of the opening of the courses in this French friars-led college, In occasione del primo centenario dell’apertura dei corsi presso questo collegio, condotto da religiosi francesi, on 16/1/1885[25], they published a booklet about the College ups and downs. One learns that, after the opening of the second regular academic year, on 26/1/1886, which saw the enrolment of 130 students, Father Émile Colombet entrusted the building contractor of Gioachino Grassi, “the architect with the highest reputation in Siam at that time”, to erect a modern building to respectably house his students for the sum of 50,000 Baht. The foundation stone was solemnly layed a year later, on the Assumption Day (15th August) 1887, for the College was dedicated to the Assumption of Virgin Mary.
The last building we have to deal with is the Saint Joseph Cathedral at Ayutthaya. The Church was ordained a first time on 25th March 1685; it was then a brick structure, about which we can read something in the book Au pays des Pagodes. The church as well as the whole city of Ayutthaya was destroyed during the Burmese invasion in 1767. Father Perraux arrived in Siam in 1886 after various vicissitudes and the reconstruction of the Siamese State, to become the fifth parish priest of Ayutthaya from 1872 until 1893, the same year Grassi left. But it was only in 1883 that Father Perraux was able to entrust the Grassis Brothers company for the building of a new church on the same spot of the ancient one, and dedicated as previously to Saint Joseph. The building of the church lasted many years, mainly because of financial problems.
It is not a big church. The contrast with the Wat Nivet Dhamma Prawat at the near Bang Pa In is remarkable, but not surprising for the difference of the financial means. We must understand it from this viewpoint: it was not the building ordered by the King, but the church erected with the contribution of the believers and reusing 120,000 old bricks gathered among the ruins of the ancient town bought by Father Perraux on November 1st 1882, while the timber was purchased by Father Perraux taking advantage of an opportunity. It was 20 large and 200 small teak logs for the foundations. These details emphasize the poor means available at the beginning of the building. Not for nothing eight years elapsed before the church being opened, with all its marbles (possibly the remnants of Bang Pa In), its stuccoes and the coloured windows, which were later partially damaged by kids hunting birds with slings.
About March 19th 1891 Father Perraux addressed a circular letter to all the Christians of the Mission, in order to invite them at the solemn blessing of the Saint Joseph church and the consecration of the high altar, on Sunday 19 April. Already on 17 April Bishop Vey sailed from Bangkok to Ayutthaya accompanied by eleven brothers, the band of the Small Seminarian and some boats full of Christians. They arrived at night-time. After a short rest, on the morning of Saturday April 18th the Parish priest Father Perraux received an Episcopal chair offered for that occasion by the architect, Mr Joachim Grassi. Without any doubt the architect expressed in this way his gratitude to Father Perraux for having inserted his name in the inscription commemorating the erection of the church. This inscription still exists, and it is placed on the inner side of the main portal.
D O M
HANC SACRAM ÆDEM IN HON S. JOSEPH
LOCO ALTERIUS IN PRIMORDIES A SOCIETATE MISSIONUM AD
EXTEROS SUMPTU REGIO AN MDCLXXXV EREXTÆ ET A
BIRMANIS DIRUTÆ AN MDCCLXVII TANDEM IN NOVAM FORMAM
OPERA JOACHIM GRASSI ARCHITECTÆ EXTRUCTAM BENEDIXIT
RR DD J L VEY EPIS GERASEN AN MDCCCXCI XIII KAL MAII
It was 1891, and of all the Grassi brothers only Joachim is mentioned. But after Antonio’s death also Giacomo was still in Bangkok. What became of him?
GIACOMO’S DEATH
Gioachino Grassi left Capodistria alone, faced alone the Siamese’s wariness and the rivalry of the other western firms at the beginning of his career. And he was still alone during the most difficult moments, when the relation between Siam and France deteriorated, in spite of having been joined by two junior brothers.
In fact, on the second page of the Bangkok Times of 15th October 1890 appeared the following “Death” announcement:
Death
At Bangtaphan, of fever, on the 13th
of October, JAMES GRASSI, aged 39 years,
deeply regretted.
Bangtaphan (or Bang Tha Pan), today’s Bansapan[26], is a small town in the Prachuap Kiri Khan Province, some hundreds kilometres south of Bangkok, but in Gioachino’s times this was the name of the whole Province. The modern Italian-Thai iron-industry recently superseded the zinc and gold mines as the most important local economic activity. A century ago the railway track connecting Bangkok to Singapore had to cross the town. We learn from a letter of him, that Gioachino’s firm had some interests in railways, but in my opinion he meant the railway to Battambang[27]. Giacomo’s residence in Bantapan was therefore most probably due to perspectives on the mines, but I wasn’t able to find any record of this.
On his grave, in the Silom Road Christian Cemetery at Bangkok, there is a tombstone bearing the following inscription:
GIACOMO DE GRASSI[28]
born at Capodistria on 10 April 1850
died at Bang Tha Pan
on 13 October 1890
the grieved brother Gioachino placed
R.I.P.
Gioachino’s last years in Europe
Gioachino left Siam in first days of July 1893, disappointed with the Siamese Royal House after many years of loyal service. In the letter of 15 June 1893 to the Private Secretary of the King, HRH Prince Krom Mun Sommot Amorabandhu, Gioachino urged the King for a tangible recognition of his work during a 23 years long residence in Siam. He wrote: “[…] I should also consider a great fortune if His Majesty the King should think to bestow on me some discernment if I deserve it […]”.
Later on, Gioachino clearly expressed his disappointment for the decoration obtained in the while in a letter dated 22 June 1893 to HRH Prince Krom Luang Devawongse Varoprakar. He deemed especially inadequate the motivation of the Fifth[29] Class of the Crown of Siam, for it “was conferred in consideration of my long residence in this country, and nothing is said if I deserved or not an acknowledgement for my service during over twenty years”. Below Gioachino continued “and in consideration of this I dare return the enclosed decoration, hoping that HRH will submit to His Majesty the King my humble observations” and “I confide that His Majesty the King will concede me the usual courtesy and grant adequate honours to my merits and to the Orders of Official of the Dragons of Annam and of the Crown of Italy of which I had the honour of being invested since a long time”. Only a deep disappointment or over-estimations of his own merits can explain the unprecedented return of a royal sign of honour.
On June 15 he wrote that “I wish to avail myself of this free time to travel to Europe for a while”, but it was forever.
He settled like his mother and other brothers in Trieste, in Via Stadion 14 (today Via Cesare Battisti), where he was to remain until 1897. The San Giusto[30] town was then a busy place attracting people looking for better social and economic conditions, and many people from Capodistria did so.
Gioachino moved to a flat on the first floor at n. 20 of the same street just the time to buy a nice five storeys building in Piazza San Francesco (today Piazza Giotti), no. 2[31], exactly in front of the place where the synagogue was later erected[32]. There, in a flat as large as the whole second floor, he spent the last years of his life together with his wife Anna Apollonio, born Stölker. Gioachino passed away on August 19th 1904. Amalia followed him about eight years later, on March 23rd 1912. They rest in the family’s tomb in Trieste Sant’Anna Cemetery, on the central alley, very close to the main entrance.
In the home of Piazza San Francesco, Gioachino wrote the above mentioned booklet on irrigation in Siam, a copy of which followed his (presumably) last letter to the Siamese Royal Family, on 26 November 1902. In this letter he expressed his regret for what had happened, and declared to nourish no rancour against them.
Grassi or De Grassi?
So far we always talked about the Grassi family; only on Giacomo’s tombstone the reader met the name De Grassi. This research in fact sprang out from this problem: who was De Grassi? As Gioachino’s family moved to Trieste long before his death, the memory of his activity waned and nobody in Capodistria was able to answer me about who he really was and what he did.
Those who still had a vague memory of the bygone events, when enquired “What was he doing”? answered “He sailed”. Though at that time one has to sail to reach Siam, the jumbo-jets being not yet available, the sailor was not his job. Moreover, there was just a rumour on he having been my grandfather’s “santolo”[33], but I wasn’t able to verify.
I looked for information about Antonio De Grassi in Thailand too, but even there my questions remained unanswered. He apparently left no trace of his residence in Bangkok, nor his brother Gioachino, who “made the monument”. On the point of abandoning the research, I learned that the grave of Gioachino De Grassi in Bangkok was still visible. On this tombstone I found the same phrase of the Capodistria tomb: “the grieved brother Gioachino placed”. No doubt, there rests the third brother.
At the moment we had Antonio, with his tomb in Capodistria, Giacomo buried at Bangkok, and the third brother, Gioachino, who erected his brother's graves. There wasn’t only one De Grassi who worked in Siam: now we suddenly had three.
What the De Grassi did there was however still unknown, and nobody knew anything about this name. I went vainly through the books telling the stories of the farangs in Siam, until I found an anonymous article (“The Threshold of Modern Art in Siam”) in a University library. The article cited, beside Annibale Rigotti and John Clunish, also J. Grassi. Was it possibly that J. stood for Joachim? As the reader will probably remember, De Grassi was a subject of the Imperial-Royal Government of His Apostolic Majesty Franz Josef, and therefore J. stood for Joachim, or, putting it down into Italian, “the grieved brother Gioachino”.
Now we had a happier perspective. At least I knew that Grassi was an architect. I discovered also an old map of Bangkok (1878) indicating the homes of the most important farangs[34]. On the river, almost opposite to the Royal City Trade Centre, there was the home of the architect Grassi (I surveyed the area just to discover that no old building is left). I then learned that Grassi kept an architect office going. He presented a project even for the Oriental Hotel, the most prestigious hotel in Bangkok and the whole Southeast Asia. However, the Grassi’s project was rejected, as the architect Cardu won the competition.
Meanwhile, I knew for certain that there lived many Grassi architects. Surprisingly enough, also the De Grassi architects were many (at least three). I further discovered that in the Bang Pa-In Royal Summer Residence there is a pagoda or Wat[35] calling on visitors’ attention for its diversity. This Wat was built in Neogothic style, and inside even the Buddha statue occupies the same position of Christ in the Christian churches. The building finished in 1878, which is the very same year of the above-mentioned map of Bangkok. The author of the building was a farang, not a Thai: the architect Gioachino Grassi from Trieste. A Thai diary later confirmed the architect’s name as Yunking (Joachim) Gressi (Thai people read “a” as in English). The J. of the anonymous article really meant Joachim! They were one and the same person.
There still was the question of the family name.: why did they write Grassi instead of De Grassi? I wrote to the then Mayor of Capodistria, Mr. Juri. He replied that during the 19th century the municipality had no General Registry Office, the Church being in charge of these records. So I went to the Parish church of Capodistria and, using the birth date engraved on the tombstone of Giacomo (10 April 1850) as the starting point soon discovered that in that day no Giacomo De Grassi was born, but Giacomo Grassi, son of Antonio (son of the late Giacomo) and Anna Apollonio. It was then easy to find out the other brothers; among them there were two Antonios (one clearly died very early) and the first-born Joachim (Gioachino), born at Capodistria on 26 December 1837, whom the Court of Justice of Trieste recognised the claim of his sons to bear the name De Grassi instead of Grassi on 15 January 1924.
The Tomb of Antonio De Grassi at Capodistria
If the search of the identity of the De Grassis and of the Grassis was so important for the compiling of this article, the tomb of Antonio De Grassi was the point out of which the interest for the three Capodistrian brothers sprang out.
Since my childhood, my attention was attracted by this tomb while going to this cemetery, gently stretched on the slope of the San Canziano hill[36]. The local people used to call the monument with the greatest simplicity “the Indian tomb”. We may say that this monument became so a natural presence, that nobody took account of it any longer in spite of its eccentricity. Just a few of them wondered the meaning of those strange towers topped by metallic cusps, or the origin of those elegant and slender stylised architectural elements placed on the gables. When I was a child, someone remembering the erection of the tomb was still alive. Today nobody remember it. The monument is generally accepted, as part of the landscape, car nobody has ever seen the graveyard without it.
Very few people realise that is the sole example of a purely Thai monument built in Europe, and one executed carefully and lovingly in every detail. Whoever has seen the beautiful prangs of Wat Phra Keo, will certainly notice the perfect correspondence with the prangs of the Antonio De Grassi’s tomb. Anyone who has seen Wat Arun, and especially at dawn, can draw a parallel with the arrangement of the prangs of the Capodistria tomb. If anyone has seen the terrifying giant Yaksha with the gnashing teeth defending the gates of Wat Arun, will recognise them in the sculpture of one of the gables. Who is familiar with the Buddha statues that can be seen in plenty around Bangkok and their gestures will soon realise the position of Buddha as portrayed on another gable of the tomb.
The funerary monument of Antonio De Grassi is made by a basement enclosed with a fence. Inside the fence there is a trap door giving access to the crypt where the deceased lies. At the basement’s corners there stand four little stones. They were not placed there at random, nor is their shape casual, because it corresponds perfectly to most classic bai sema. What is a bai sema? It is a little stone usually placed at the four corners and at the mid-side of the sacred area where the Bot or Ubosot (the most sacred building of the Thai temple) stands. These stones can be very simple, or even so complex that a pavilion is needed to guest them. Inside the sacred enclosure nobody, not even the king, can give orders. The tomb of Capodistria has four of them, instead of the eight commonly found in the Thai temples, but their shape is identical[37]. The presence of the bai semas around the monument of De Grassi should be considered just the reproduction of a Thai architectural style element, or as the sign of an exaggerated self-estimation?
On the basement, and inside the space delimited with the four little stones, there is the pedestal in Carrara marble. Four triple pillars stand on its corners, while the statue of the deceased stand in the centre.
The base of each little pillar is decorated with a traditional Thai motive, that is the Nak canson, representing the bow of the Naga. Their shape undoubtedly comes from the leaves wrapping the node of the bamboo cane[38].
In the centre of the pedestal rises the statue of Antonio covered on the four sides by four tombstones, on which one may read:
South
To the memory
of
Antonio de’ Grassi
from Capodistria,
who in the love of God
and of the Fatherland
lived and died
West
Antonio,
more than in the stone
sweet and indelible
remains in the chest of your family]
your beloved name
and your memory
North
Your perseverance
in the immovable virtue
and in the work
on the beaches of
Siam
for long years to come
the dearest stone
and the art remember
East
Your desolate
consort
Giovanna born
Ciampi
and the son Aurelio
bitterly mourn you
----------------
The brother Gioachino
this monument
On this base there stands the herma of Antonio, a moustached gentleman with an imposing appearance. We cannot question the similarity of this statue to the real man, for we didn’t find any picture of him. Only one picture of his brother Gioachino is left, but we cannot see any similarity between the two.
The triple pillars supporting the upper and more characteristic part of the monument are decorated with a scale-motive following the snakeskin.
As we said before the decorations at the base of these pillars represent the bow, the weapon of the Nagas, while the pillars are covered with a scale-motive, because naga is a Sanskrit word meaning “snake”. The Naga is a special snake, for he is a semi-divine snake dwelling underground and watch rich treasures. He is also a symbol of the Ocean. He is to be found in lakes and in the sky, where can cause the rain. In the stormy days appears as a rainbow, a link between the earth and the sky. As such, a couple of Nagas supported the stairs used by Buddha to descend from the heaven. The Naga-King, Muchalinda, opened his seven heads for seven days in order to protect the meditating Buddha.
The Nagas are enemies of Garuda. The motive of the Nagas fighting Garuda is common in Thai art. Moreover, the snakes symbolised the wisdom and the healing. We shall speak again on the Nagas when describing the frontons of the tomb.
On the architraves connecting the four triple pillars one finds the four frontons, two of which deserve a closer look.
The slanting sides of the fronton have a triple cornice[39] moulded in the shape of a Naga (Nak sadung). In Thailand their body is decorated with glazed pottery tiles, while here the scales (Bai raka) are made of marble. At the upper and lower end of the slanting sides representing the Nak sadung, we find three elegant stylised elements normally present on the roofs of the sacred buildings: the chofas.
The thin apex looking as a stylised bird adorning the two ends of the roof are variously translated as “bunch of sky” or “tassel of sky”. It represents the Garuda[40], Vishnu’s vehicle adopted by Buddhism to attract Vishnu believers. His representation by means of a stylised bird head is consistent with the Bangkok or Rattanakosin style. At the finishing of a temple it is used to have a ceremony ending with the placing of the chofas. It is nevertheless difficult to ascertain the precise origin of this decoration.
Southern fronton. A gate of the Wat Phra Keo is surmounted by a prang. Two yakshas, two giants with a cruel face and the sharpened canines stand on the sides of the gate. Lions, snakes and even human beings can watch the entrance of the sacred buildings instead of the yakshas, as is the case of Wat Po. For a western mind it may be difficult to understand why the defence of the sacred places is entrusted to demonic beings, but that’s it.
Eastern fronton. Here we have a Buddha in Bhumisparsamudra, that is Buddha calling the earth to witness on his reasons. Just a moment before moving his right hand to touch the earth, Buddha was meditating under a banyantree[41], holding the hands in his lap with the palm turned up. He was on the point to reach the enlightenment when the gods of the earth warned him about a possible attack by the Demon. His disciples worried and became anxious. The Master tranquillised them saying that he will defeat them using his own strength. When the demon Mara heard this, sent on the earth his three daughters (Trsna, Rati and Raga, i.e. thirst, desire and pleasure) to divert Buddha[42] from his thoughts. But Buddha, leaving his left hand in the lap, just moved the right hand on the right kneel touching the earth with the fingers, so calling for the earth’s attention. The earth rushed to help him and, squeezing the hairs soaked with the water of many offerings, caused an enormous waterfall, which carried off the daughters of Mara.
Inside the space delimited by the frontons there is another pedestal on which stand the five prangs. The four smaller prangs are placed on the corners, while the larger, central one on a stepped base.
What is a prang? The prang is a tower-shaped stone building originated in the Khmer empire (today’s Cambodia), where it was called prasat. In Siam it has slenderer and almost phallic shapes. The original prasat had rectangular foundations, a high basement and a cell surmounted by the tower. This richly decorated tower materialised the link of the sky and the gods with the deceased, who was represented in the cell with a statue or a symbol (e.g. the linga). Because of the syncretism of the Southeast Asian people who received and amalgamated in their believes the aspects of different religions, the tower represents, according to the Buddhist cosmogony, the Mount Meru, that is the abode of the gods, while the other four smaller prangs represent the mountains on the four cardinal points where resides the sun, the moon and the stars.
In Thailand the prasat was built with more elegant shapes and added some features, such as a trident[43] on the summit, and some niches on the upper part of the tower representing the dwelling of the god Indra, often depicted riding the white elephant Erawan. Antonio’s tomb at Capodistria do not lack this niche; it is to be found above the three steps on which one see five, four and three aligned angels’ (Theppanom) statues respectively. They wear coneshaped headgears. The niche is, on its turn, surmounted by small triangular gables decorated, as the lower gables, with the “chofa”. The uppermost part of the monument is certainly unorthodox from a Buddhist viewpoint, but consistent with the cemeterial setting, as it is topped by a Christian cross.
[1] In former times Capodistria has already been occupied by Venice, who destroyed her city walls.
[2] In 1819 the battalion Hunters of the I. R. Government demolished Castel Leone, by that time a tumbledown ruin after centuries of negligence.
[3] Joachim Grassi was born at Capodistria on 26/12/1837, and was christened on 7 January 1838.
[4] Constantin Ierakis was born at Cefalonia from Greek father and Venetian mother in the 1643. Since very young he came to the ancient Siam where, partly because the intrigues of which he was a master, partly because its objective ability, he earned then the respect of the Siamese ruler, Narai. He became, with the name of Phaulcon (ierakis in Greek means falcon), his adviser, the most powerful man in Siam.
[5] All his brothers were christened with an Italian name. The senior was baptised with a German name (Joachim), although he currently used the Italian form (Gioachino).
[6] The Klong Bangkok Yai is elsewhere also called "Klong Bang Luang”
[7] King Rama V is also known as King Chulalongkorn, as he will also be called in the present study.
[8] In Thai menam means river. Its official name is Menam (river) Chao Phya, where Chao Phya is the real name.
[9] The tonsure was the most important and solemn ceremony among all the ceremonies related to the childhood. It consisted in the cut of the tassel of hair that was left on the head of the child since his first month of life. It happened when the child had reached the thirteenth year of age (11 for the female).
[10] Bangkok Times, 31/1/1891.
[11] Ubosot or bot (from Pali uposathªgªra, and Sanskrit uposadhªgªra) is the monks’ meeting pavilion of the Thai monastery.
[12] Dhamma is the teachings of Buddha.
[13] A wall usually separates the Sangkhawat, housing the monks, from the Putthawat, or space reserved to the sacred functions.
[14] See the registration of the commercial companies by the Austro-Hungarian consulate to Bangkok.
[15] See “The 1894 Directory for Bangkok and Siam” published by the Bangkok Times (pag.145).
[16] The Bhat (sometimes, in the past also Tical) is the Thai currency
[17] Now Cankar Rd., called via Eugenia because it was opened by the baron Calafati, during the brief French occupation, in honor of Eugene de Beauharnais.
[18] What a service Gioachino did to obtain a French recognition seldom granted to foreigners is not altogether clear. Maybe he obtained it only for his affluence.
[19] Roll number 39,527.
[20] Patrick Tuck, The French Wolf and the Siamese Lamb, White Lotus, Bangkok 1995.
[21] The central part of the Chao Phya River plain extended over 240,000 ha.
[22] Printed by Stabilimento Tipografico Unione E. Meneghelli & Co.
[23] Étude sur l’irrigation du Royaume de Siam, p. 15.
[24] Ibidem.
[25] Previously the school worked for very few students only as school of English language.
[26] The different spellings of the Thai names are caused by the different ways adopted in order to transliterate the Thai alphabet.
[27] Patrick Tuck, The French Wolf…, cit.
[28] About his family name see the chapter below.
[29] Underline by Gioachino Grassi.
[30] San Giusto is the Patron Saint of Trieste.
[31] During the year 1903, the house number changed and, since then until today, became the number 8.
[32] The Synagogue has been erected in the year 1910 by the architects Brothers Berlam
[33] Godfather, in the local dialect.
[34] With the term “farang” are called, in Thailand, the foreigners by Caucasian origin, white
[35] With “pagoda” we call here a religious building, proper of the Buddhist religion. Elsewhere it is also called “temple”, but Thai people call it “Wat.” I would prefer to follow this name, because the other quoted names don't define it with enough clearness.
[36] San Canziano is the name of the hill where the cemetery lies since 1811.
[37] See fig. 1.
[38] See fig. 2.
[39] That is made by three superimposed telescope-cornices.
[40] Garuda is a cruel bird represented often with back and human hands. It serves Vishnu as mount. Besides being the stepbrother of the Naga, it is also his harsh enemy. Garuda is often depicted while fighting with the Naga.
[41] Banyan (Ficus benghalensis, or F. indica), unusually shaped tree of the fig genus in the mulberry family (Moraceae) native to tropical Asia. Aerial roots that develop from its branches descend and take root in the soil to become new trunks. The banyan reaches a height up to 30 meters (100 feet) and spreads laterally indefinitely. One tree may in time assume the appearance of a very dense thicket as a result of the tangle of roots and trunks. ( Enc. Britannica)
[42] For sake of simplicity we call Buddha (the Enlightened) also the man who did not yet reach the enlightenment.
[43] The trident (Sanskrit trishula) is Shiva’s weapon.