|
|
|||||
|
May 6, 2021 -
Droog Magazine periodical for investigative
journalism
The 2018
book
The German historian Anton Joachimsthaler published Hitlers Ende (in English: The last days of Hitler, 1997), in which he very carefully describes Hitler in the last weeks of his life, his suicide and the attempt to burn his corpse in the garden of the Reichskanzlei. He also pays extensive attention to the teeth identification, the confusing statements of the Soviets about Hitler's fate and the conspiracy theories that arose as a result. The trial that took place in 1956 in West Germany, at which Hitler was officially declared dead, is also discussed extensively. Joachimsthaler quotes abundantly from the testimonies of SS men who were involved in the attempt to cremate Hitler's and Eva Braun's remains. Most of these SS men were captured by the Soviets at the beginning of May 1945 and only released in 1955 after extensive and sometimes even maddening interrogations
Joachimsthaler's study makes it crystal clear that Hitler and Eva Braun committed suicide on 30 April 1945 in the Führerbunker under the garden of the Reichskanzlei in Berlin. Their bodies were then brought above ground and burned in the garden of the Reichskanzlei. According to Joachimsthaler, this was done in such a way that nothing was left of them - which is, in my opinion, one of the few erroneous conclusions which this thorough researcher drew in his in-depth Hitler studies. Soviet soldiers in fact took two partially charred corpses from a shell hole above the Führer bunker for autopsy on 5 May 1945.
On 8 May 1945, these two carcasses were positively identified as Hitler and Braun. After some wanderings, their remains (minus a jawbone and a skullcap fragment), the corpses of the Goebbels family and General Krebs, and the carcasses of Hitler's two dogs ended up in a temporary grave on a Soviet barracks site in Magdeburg. When the barracks grounds were returned to the GDR in 1970, Andropov, then head of the KGB, feared that neo-Nazis would somehow get wind of this grave and possibly declare it a place of pilgrimage. He had the remains exhumed and burned at an incinerator near Schönebeck. The ashes were grounded up and thrown into a tributary of the Elbe. What the Soviets did not know at the time
was that this was happening near the prehistoric 'Ringheiligtum Pömmelte', where
people were sacrificed on a large scale some four
thousand years ago. That sanctuary, known today as
the German Stonehenge, was not discovered until
after the fall of the Wall. The
death
of Hitler. The full story with new
evidence from secret Russian Archives These authors also draw wrong conclusions on some points; for example, they think that a sketchbook found by Soviet soldiers in the Führerbunker in May 1945 and that is kept in Moscow, is a sketchbook with drawings and water colours made by Hitler. But the theory that these were actually made by Hitler lacks any hard evidence. Nevertheless: both books, that of
Joachimsthaler and that of Petrova/Watson, are
thorough studies, in which almost all aspects around
Hitler's death - including the post-war rumours that
he had escaped from Berlin - are sufficiently
treated. After 1995 no new facts have become known.
2018 – La mort d'Hitler. Dans les dossiers secret du KGB All the more strange is the appearance of
the book La mort d'Hitler. Dans les dossiers
secret du KGB by French journalist
Jean-Christophe Brisard and Russian-American Lana
Parshina in 2018, which also appeared in Dutch and
English translations (respectively De dood van
Hitler. Het ware verhaal and The death
of Hitler. The final word).  The Czech, Hungarian and Italian versions.
The book is presented as containing 'news' about Hitler's death - but there is no relevant news in it at all - everything that is presented in this book is already described in the aforementioned books from 1995. Which, and this is the most peculiar thing, are not mentioned in the source material at all - even though they were clearly used as sources. Although not literally quoted, using material from other sources without explicitly mentioning it is simply called: plagiarism.
Is there really nothing new in this French
book? Yes - two things, but they have no connection
whatsoever with Hitler. In 2009, American
archaeologist Nick Bellantoni claimed to have
conducted DNA tests on bone fragments from the skull
cap preserved in Moscow and attributed to Hitler for
a History Channel documentary. There is just no
evidence that this American ever had access to that
material. This is not news about Hitler, but it does
say something about the reliability of all sorts of
documentaries on the History Channel and other
Hitler channels.
"In just a few years, this doctor has gained a strong reputation for solving historical riddles. History's most famous murder victims speak under his deft fingers. Poison, stabbing weapon, pistol, nothing escapes him. His record not only impresses his colleagues, but also the general public all over the world. The remains of all kinds of kings have passed through his hands, such as Henry IV, Louis IX the Holy and Richard the Lionheart, as well as mythical figures like Joan of Arc or the demons of the French Revolution, the terrible Robespierre...". In reality, serious scientists very much question Philippe Charlier's methods and conclusions (see Sandrine Cabut. Polémiques sur le crâne supposé d'Henri IV. Le Monde, Paris, 20-01-2014). And anyone who knows the slightest bit of
history will be alarmed when someone claims to have
examined the remains of, for example, Joan of Arc.
And for those who delve a little into this matter,
even more alarm bells will ring. Richard the Lionheart (1157-1199) a.k.a. Richard I Lionheart, Richard Coeur de LionPhilippe Charlier examined a white-brown powder contained in a lead box excavated from Notre Dame Cathedral in Rouen in 1838. The box had this inscription: 'Hic jacet cor Ricardi regis anglorum' (Here lies the heart of Richard, King of the English). His body was buried in the abbey of Fontevrault. His embalmed heart was placed in a lead coffin in the cathedral of Notre Dame in Rouen. So coffin and contents could be authentic. But this fact could also inspire forgers. In-depth research into this box or what happened to it between 1838 and 2012 has not taken place. C14 analysis of the contents has not taken place. Be that as it may: Charlier did
toxocological and pollen research on this powder.
Whether this powder was indeed once the heart of
Richard the Lionheart is impossible to say. But
suppose it was: the research only yielded
information about embalming techniques circa 1200,
nothing about the English king. a.k.a. Lodewijk IX en Saint Louis/Sint Lodewijk Now, around 1895, Pope Leo XIII was in urgent need of money. A lively trade in relics arose to fill the papal coffers, in which he was not too scrupulous. Among other things, he lifted the ban on reproductions of Veronica's sweatband. Clerics turned these reproductions into relics of the second order by touching them with the 'real' sweat cloth. The Pope kept the monopoly. The second-rank sweat cloths were therefore always delivered with a card, which bore the signature of the canon of St Peter's Cathedral, plus a fine seal of lacquer. There is a lively trade in these tissues on E-bay. The 1894 part of the story is therefore suspect. It is quite possible that the remains of a random dead person were taken to Tunis. Be that as it may, in 1985 this relic was moved again, this time to Versailles Cathedral. Philippe Charlier and his team examined these entrails (or rather, what remained of them) attributed to Louis IX in 2015 and, in good Charlierian fashion, did not question the authenticity of the material. They examined it with a microscope and found traces of an adult male schistosoma - a type of intestinal worm. From this, Charlier concluded that King Louis IX suffered from schistosomiasis (a worm infection). And so it goes. The most amazing thing about this story is
that a renowned medical journal published and thus
authenticated these pseudo-scientific findings.
a.k.a. Jeanne d'Arc
There is no corpse of Joan of Arc: after her execution at the stake in Rouen, 30 May 1431, her ashes were grinded and scattered in the Seine. The only conclusion Charlier could initially draw was that C14 dating showed that a clothing remnant from the pot would date from the 15th century. So there is no evidence that remains of Joan of Arc were examined by Charlier. Yet this is what the 2018 book claims. And to make things even stranger: in 2007, Charlier claimed that the remains in the jar came from an Egyptian mummy, who had died somewhere between the sixth and third centuries before Christ. Where does this leave Joan of Arc?
a.k.a. 'Vert Galant', Henry IV This French king was murdered in 1610. During the French Revolution, his tomb was plundered and his bones disappeared. A 20th century antique dealer claimed to have come into possession of the skull of this king in 1919. This skull was examined by Charlier in 2010 and attributed to Henri IV. Many historians and medics at the time and afterwards expressed serious doubts about Charlier's research. Bertrand
Ludes,
in 2014 head of the Paris Forensic Institute and
president of the French Association for Forensic
Medicine put it very diplomatically: "Philippe
Charlier sometimes goes too far in interpreting his
results."
Maximilien de Robespierre (1758-1794) Maximilien de Robespierre was beheaded in Paris on 28 July 1794. Body and head were buried in an unmarked grave in the now defunct Errancis cemetery (now Place de Goubeaux). So
Charlier did not investigate any of Robespierre's
remains. What then? Only his death mask - and he
built all sorts of unverifiable theories and
conclusions from that research.
As a result, the next day this quality newspaper told its readers in a large article that The Death of Hitler by Jean-Christophe Brisard and Lana Pershina would contain sensational news - quod non. The fact that this book is based on theft from earlier books was not mentioned, of course. The nonsense from the book was also reprinted without any criticism: "Philippe
Charlier,
the doctor of forensic medicine who also examined
the corpses of Richard the Lionheart, Joan of Arc
and Robespierre".
This article is a translation of: Jaap van den Born & Bart FM Droog. Hitlers Ende / the death of Hitler. Of: het bedrog van Jean-Christophe Brisard en Lana Parshina in De dood van Hitler. Droog Magazine, Eenrum, 01-05-2018. https://www.bartfmdroog.com/droog/niod/hitlers-dood.html
Sources
Anton
Joachimsthaler. Hitlers
Ende.
Legenden und Dokumente. Mit 138 Abbildungen
und Dokumenten.
Herbig, [München], 2. überarbeitete Auflage
2004 (1. Auflage 1995). Czech – Hitlerova smrt Dutch – De dood van Hitler English – The death of Hitler Estonian - Hitleri surm Finnish - Hitlerin kuolema Hungarian – Hitler halála Italian – L'ultimo mistero di Hitler Japanese – ヒトラー死の真相 Polish – Śmierć Hitlera Portuguese – A morte de Hitler Romanian – Moartea lui Hitler Spanish – La muerte de Hitler Russian – Смерть Гитлера Swedish – Sanningen om Hitlers död Sources
on Richard Lionheart and/or Charlier Sources on Louis IX and/or Charlier Jacques Levron.
Louis IX, King of France. Encyclopaedia
Britannica,
[gezien 05-04-2018]. Sources on Joan Arc and/or Charlier Paul A. Laguerre.
Joan of Arc. Find A Grave Memorial 22152, Find
a
grave.com,
13 May 2001 (gezien 31-03-2018).
Source on Henri IV and/or Charlier Sandrine
Cabut.
Polémiques sur le crâne supposé d’Henri IV.
Le
Monde,
Paris, 20-01-2014. Sources on De Robespierre and/or Charlier Editors.
Maximilien Robespierre. New
World
Encyclopedia,
23-11-2016 (accessed 31-03-2018).
|
|||||
| |
|||||
| |
