Why? Nobody knows. In fact we’re not even certain that is what happened. What was the impact? Huge, but also debated. Let’s get into it.

First, if you search here on AskHistorians, you’ll see the question often comes up but doesn’t get any responses. My understanding is that it’s been quite difficult to do real scholarship on this event. The royal family at the time and for a lot of Nepal’s history has been extremely guarded and insular. Popular culture among the people of Nepal tended to regard the King and the royals as untouchable, god-like figures. Access to the family was limited; palace communications were tightly controlled. The media didn’t even know about the massacre as quickly as other governments did, which says something about the people working at the palace. We don’t really know what happened, other than reporting by a commission of two (!) people, the Chief Justice of Supreme Court and the Speaker of the House. They did interview some eyewitnesses and provide the story from the OPs post. But there was no forensic work done, it was only a few weeks long, and they rejected an offer from Scotland Yard to help.

In a word, the suicide story is sus.

If this is what happened, the question is why. Prince Dipendra was known to be a frequent user of alcohol and various other drugs, which some blamed. There is also a theory that he wanted to marry another Nepali woman (from the Rana dynasty) who he had met in the UK, but was rebuffed by his own family. Perhaps this was because of the woman’s family ties to India, or political disagreements between the families, or something as mundane as a wealth disparity. None of these seem particularly compelling though.

Also, the wounds from the alleged suicide don’t match up with the handedness of the Prince. Sure, the royals were known for carrying around guns all the time but there were also armed guards everywhereZ And the royal family member who eventually became king was not present. This was Prince Gyanendra.

And then there’s the politics. Dipendra went to Eton. His (murdered) father was educated in Japan. Both believed in a constitutional monarchy, with strong democratic ideals and with people in power. Gyanendra thought the country was falling apart and it was time to return to a traditional autocracy. Three days after the shooting, Gyanendra was king.

So what happened next? To answer that, we have to talk about Nepal in 2001.