Hey, I was wondering if anyone remembers the story of the Princess Alice (the ship) from the game. I'm making a fan page for Shadow Hearts/Koudelka and I am trying to find out if there is any connection between the ship described in the game and the real Princess Alice that sank in the Thames in 1878. All I remember is that there were a lot of paintings of the disaster in the monastery somewhere and I think Ogden the caretaker was involved somehow. Does anyone remember anything?

I vaguely remember thinking that there wasnae much of a connection between the boats- just the name and the fact they sunk, but I really don't know. In the game I'm sure it said something to do with Charlotte at the boat part. I don't know what though, cuz my brain keeps telling me it wis that her parents died. Bt if her mum was sending her letters in Nemeton that can't be right. I could swear it had something to do with Charlotte though. But dinnae listen to me cuz I never know anything about games.

Story of the Princess Alice and Charlotte is not related to each others. Spoiler ahead ...

The caretaker guy, Olgen was the captain of the ship which sank and he was feeling guilt over that incident for years. When Elaine's husband (forgot the name) started to gather human parts for his attempt to bring back Elaine, he inlisted the old guy's help.

After months of hunting people and butchering them, I guess that guilt begin to surface again and the old guy were in brink of madness. He and Elaine's husband were so sure that all their evil deeds could actually pay off by resurrecting Elaine back to life but when it failed, both of them were devasted. I guess that when the old guy really went insane.

If you remember the scene involving the old guy in the guiltine room which involve Koudelka and a real sharp axe , then you will remember the old guy keep repeating that it wasn't his fault that the ship sank.

Betty (the old man's wife) also will inform you about the guy's guilt and all just before she pop her head with the shotgun.

Well, hope that's help.

PS : Was there really a ship named Princess Alice sank in River Thames? I didn't know that.

WOW! You made it make sense!

Thanks

Story about Charlotte is different. That's about a child who thinks her mum had abandonned her till the end of her life.

If you take the letters from the safe and meet her again in CD 3 (she will appear as a boss fight, she and her chairs and tables ... very hard battle if you don't have the letters).

Give the letters and she will dissappear. You can read the letters to find out about the mother and the father of the child and the condition how she was end up there.

Thanks you guys. If anyone is interested the link to the information I found is as follows:

"The Bywell Castle was in collision with the Princess Alice, in the Thames, on September 3rd, 1878. The Princess Alice, licensed to carry 936 persons, was supposed to have been carrying almost 700 when struck. She was literally cut in half and sank almost instantly. The Captain of the Princess Alice lost his life. His 1st Mate, Long, said the Bywell Castle was seen when 150 yards off and shouts were raised and the steam-whistle sounded to warn her off. Conversely, the Captain of the Bywell Castle blamed the Princess Alice for starboarding her helm when she ought to have continued on the port helm. It was said in the press that Thames navigation seemed happy-go-lucky with each pilot doing what seemed right in his own eyes, accommodating the movements of his vessel to the exigencies of the tide and the circumstances of the moment. Lord Sandon proposed that a Committee should be appointed consisting of one member from Trinity House, one from the Admiralty, one from the Steamship Owners' Association of London and three from the Board of Trade to consider the Rule of the Road, lights, signals, speed, number of passengers carried, appliances for saving life and the hours during which passengers could be carried by river steamers. It was said that the London Steamboat Company laid a claim in the Admiralty Court against the owners of the Bywell Castle for £20,000 as compensation for the loss of the Princess Alice. Visitors to the scene of the wreck visited in large numbers and became so unruly, taking away souvenirs, that the police had to restore order. It was also rumoured that valuable items were removed from dead bodies."

(From the Illustrated London News, 1878)

Doesn't seems that a whole lot of people were actually grief-stricken by this incident. A lot of help those rules did to the Titanic years later.

Well ... either way, this incident shows that the developers of this game actually took an actual incident and twisted a bit to add to the story.

BTW, anyone remember the gruesome detail on how Elaine's hubby and Olgen carried out their murders in London?

I remember reading the case of Jack the Ripper and one of the theory says that the killer was more than one and they used a special cart to prevent detection.

Really? That Jack The Ripper theory is well cool! Is that the right time as well for the murders? Suppose they killed a lot more people than Jack did. But then again it prolly would have been easy to kill people and not get noticed. If you were just killing randoms. Ooh. Historical.

But I don't think what Elaine's husband did is related to Jack the Ripper. If you see the beginning of the game, it is stated the year which the game suppose to be in (forgot which year it was), those Ripper murders were around 1880s. There were only 5 of them and the last one was around 1890 (around that time) while the f first ones are around 1888. Elaine's Husband was dead at that time.

However, if ya play Koudelka's sequel (for PS2) named Shadow Hearts, you will find a Boss enemy named Jack who was a doctor and works in an orphanage in London who were experimenting on human sacrifice to bring back his death mom. i think that character suits Jack the Ripper more than Elaine's husband.

For once, the murderer in Jack the Ripper ripped open his victims without remorse. Elaine's husband showed too much remorse for his action.

As for killing randomly, it is not random which is why murders are went undetected, it is people's interest on the victim. No one will care if a homeless man in a park got killed, but if some senator's son got killed in the same way, the whole freaking country will be in turmoil as if the world is coming to an end. In some way, that's is what Jack was trying to proof and in some sick way, he did prove it.

There is 1 MILLION homeless in US Alone. Do you remember when the last time your neighbourhood beggar (which you always see in the street very day) you had saw him?

Sorry. The randoms thing is down to.. err... cultural differences. I didn't mean killing randomly. Here, randoms would mean people who nobody knows/cares about. But I think that's slang so it's my own fault.

Never thought of that Jack guy being Jack the Ripper either. I know nothing about Jack The Ripper though. I've never really studied English history.

And I didn't think anybody even knew exactly who Jack The Ripper was. The last thing I heard was that he was still a mystery. So how does anyone know he killed without remorse? How would anyone who wasn't actually directly related to the plot of Koudelka know that Patrick did show remorse? It's very hard to see how, more than a hundred years after a crime, there can be solid evidence of how anybody felt.

Well, I for one concluded that Jack the Ripper didn't show any remorse from reading the case properly. I used to be a Sherlock Holmes fan and very interested in reading crime stories (especially the unsolved one). Jack the Ripper case was one of my favorite one.

In his letter to the Scotland Yard, Jack shows no remorse for his actions. Matter a fact, he riddiculed the police for unable to catch him and also descripted in details how he killed and mutilated the women.

If you read the letters from Elaine's hubby, he did show a large amount of remorse for his actions. Not exactly an act of a physchopath.

i would of said patrick was a bit insane.

He doesn't sound crazy to me ... just freaking desperate.

He wanna "save" his dead wife and the Emigre Document must have seen as a "saving" tool.

Only thing was, he didn't study the ancient text properly so he didn't know that wat he gonna resurrect is the body only without the soul.

it still boggles my tiny brain that he didn't even bother to read the whole thing actually. how can you read enough of it to tell you what to do but not to tell you what it does?

ah well i don't know why elaine married him in the first place.

actually she probably just married him to annoy james. that's like the only good reason.

and i still think he was insane. like, insane with greif. is that actually a proper thing... sorry i'm not making much sense am i?
i think what i mean to say is, is being insane with greif something that's happened to a lot of people in medical records or whatever? cos i think patrick went a bit crazy.

Well ... three reasons I can think of on why he (Patrick) didn't read the text properly before he tried it :

1. He didn't know how to read Emigre Document. I think it was written in Gaul language (ancient European which inhabited the northern side of Europe) or maybe Roman (Roger did say he translated it for the Vaticans).

2. Albert Simon who sold him the document provided him with all the information he needed and he didn't bother to read others. Well, those who played Shadow Hearts will know the part Simon played.

3. Time. Patrick didn't have much time since Elaine's body is starting to decompose. I don't think he has years to study the document properly.

The Emigre Document is about how to bring back the Dead (resurrection) but unfortunately, the soul part is beyond human comprehension. The Druids who conducted this experiments did bring back the dead but as slaves. I don't think Patrick realized this part till it was too late.