Our Doubts regarding the Identification of the Corpse of Louis II King of Bohemia and Hungary.

: The coalitioned man-at-arms batallion of Louis II (1516-1526) King of Bohemia and Hungary had crushing defeated by overwhelmingly Turk army of Suleiman (1520-1566) the Magnificent at close to Mohacs on 29 August 1526. Louis II and his trusty servant, Istvan Aczel escaped from the losing battle, but both of them drowned into a brook (perhaps a local stream, named Csele) or a swampy fishpond. The one of the Bohemian noble, Ulrich Czettritz von Neuhaus royal court chamberlain was the single eyewitness of this luckless misadventure, furthermore - according to his first verbal report - he failed to help to the King from the sludge. The same Czettritz identified the King’s dead body on the spot on 18 October of 1526, but the King’s corpse turned up from a newly dug sepulchral mound instead of water, swamp or any kind of original surface. Ferenc Sarffy (royal castle head of Győr) joined to Czettritz’s scene investigation and Sarffy reported Istvan Brodarics Chancellor about the case on 19 October 1526. The details of royal corpse identification is well-known from the copy of Sarffy’s letter, which one has been preserve at Poland. According to the Sarffy’s report the corpse of Louis II was taintless, in spite of the royal dead body spent underground circa 50 days and unknown persons previously removed it. In our opinion it would have been decompose because of late autodigestion or adipoceration. So if Sarffy’s report is right about the undamaged condition of corpse, it must not Louis’ dead body. It could not excluded that Ferenc Sarffy deliberately embellished the truth. Nevertheless Louis was not buried by Ulrich Czettritz or Maria Habsburg — Louis’ widow, who sent Czettritz to the corpse identification —, or Maria’s brother Ferdinand Archduke of Austria, who aspirated to the throne. Point of interest that finally the King’s funeral was made by John Szapolya vaivoda of Transylvania, who occupiedwith his army the crowning city (named Szekesfehervar), because he aspirated to the throne also and he was a politician on the other side of the fence. The ceremonial funeral became on 9 November 1526, when the royal body was dead for 72 days. This is the reason why we have been sceptical about Louis’ corpse was in suitable condition for the procession of burial, where some important Hungarian people surely inspected him and nobody failed to notice that the King’s body had had signs of advanced decompose. In our opinion - considering that date of the scene investigation, then circumstances of the medical examination, finally Czettritz was not a skilled doctor - could be 66 percent chances that Czettritz and Sarffy should not found the corpse of Louis II. An English document proves our statement. Thomas Wolsey Chancellor, Archbishop of York wrote a letter to Henry VIII King of England from Westminster on 23 October 1526. The Chancellor informed Henry VIII in this document about the founding and burying process of Louis II. Out of consideration for the distance between of England and Hungary, the news could not arrive from Győr (Sarffy reported Brodarics on 19 October) to London (Wolsey reported Henry VIII on 23 October) within four days, because other letters, news and reports were coming 3 or 4 weeks delay. Our conclusions that Louis’ corpse was finding at least 3 or 4 weeks before the scene investigation of Czettritz and Sarffy. Accordingly the corpse which was found on 18 October it should neither the King’s body nor Louis’ corpse was buried at Szekesfehervar on 9 November 1526.