What is claimed but unverified: the specific circumstances of his alleged childhood captivity. The identity of the person or persons who allegedly kept him. The existence of any connection to the Baden royal family. The identity of the assailant who allegedly stabbed him in December 1833, if the wound was not self-inflicted. Whether he was murdered, and if so, by whose direction.
What the DNA study established: his mitochondrial DNA is haplogroup W, not haplogroup H1bs. The specific maternal connection to the House of Baden is excluded. The earlier Münster result to the contrary was most likely a contamination artifact. The study found no evidence for the prince theory and significant methodological grounds to discount the finding that had appeared to support it.
Separating these categories is essential to understanding both the significance of the 2024 study and its limitations. The study did something precise: it answered the specific genetic question. It did not, and could not, resolve the larger historical question of who Kaspar Hauser was.
—
## The Documentation That Remains
The historical archive of the Kaspar Hauser case is extensive and has been scrutinized closely. Several categories of primary documents shape what can be responsibly said about the case.
The two letters from 1828 have been examined repeatedly. Their handwriting has been analyzed. The observations of investigators at the time — including police officers, physicians, and Feuerbach himself — are preserved. Feuerbach’s 1832 published report is a primary document from someone who personally investigated the case, however contested some of his conclusions.