CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Places & Architecture

Green Boots

Formerly unidentified deceased mountain climber

Architectural plans, a scale model, maps and brass measuring instruments
Places and architectureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 22, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

Green Boots is the body of a formerly unidentified climber that became a landmark on the main Northeast ridge route of Mount Everest. There were several theories regarding the body's identity; the most popular claiming the body belonged to an Indian member of the Indo-Tibetan Border Police expedition (ITBP) who died as part of the 1996 climbing disaster on the mountain wearing green Koflach mountaineering boots. All expeditions from the north side encountered the body curled in the limestone alcove cave at 8,500 m (27,900 ft) until it was moved in 2014.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Green Boots” as formerly unidentified deceased mountain climber. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA strong orientation record where physical form, institutional use and historical geography need to be read together. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1996, 2014—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Green, Boots and Formerly can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the places & architecture register because the source frames it as formerly unidentified deceased mountain climber. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Place names and jurisdictional language are key evidence: both can reveal earlier catalogue descriptions and overlooked record series. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 22, 2026. The first chronological checks are 1996 and 2014.

Critical limits

Modern boundaries and familiar names can conceal earlier jurisdictions or structures that do not align with the present site. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.

Best used for
  • Historic place names
  • Jurisdictional context
  • Routes into maps and plans
Verify next

Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Green Boots”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Green Boots primary sources, Green Boots archive and Green research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Green Boots”?
  2. What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
  3. Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Green Boots” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.