(Unknown pages of the history of the death of the Emperor’s family)
One cannot choose the time
One only lives and dies in it.
Alexandr Kushner
Introduction
It is possible that the time has come to tell the truth about the events, occurred in Ipat’ev’s house in July of 1918. In the subsequent nine decades, the mysteries surrounding these events have spawned a great number of myths concerning participants of this tragedy. One of the brightest characters of those myths was and still is the Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova. The overwhelming majority of modern authors on this topic connect Anastasia’s rescue with the life of Anna Anderson. Their resounding verdict is the same: “Of all those who claim to be Anastasia, Anderson is the most famous.” In order to confirm or refute this widespread opinion, three questions must be answered:
1. Who was the Romanov family guard in Ipat’ev’s house?
2. Who was shot on the night on July, 17, 1918 and with what motive?
3. Was Anna Anderson in fact Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova?
The answers, which have been confirmed in light of recently discovered historical documents and the results of scientific research, should put an end to false theories surrounding these questions.
1. The Tsar’s Family Guard
In order to understand how the murder of the family of the former Emperor could have happened, one must examine by whom and how the royal family were guarded in the house of engineer Ipat’ev. The first chairman of the Executive committee of Yekaterinburg Soviet of workmen’s and soldiers’ Deputies Bykov in his book “The last days of the Romanovs” answers this question as follows: “They were under the most vigilant supervision of guards, which consisted of employees from the closed factory owned by the Zlokazov brothers and from the Sysert plant” [1]. White Guard investigator Nikolay Sokolov concurred: “Employment records of Zlokazovs’ employees, who served as the inner guard, were found among the many abandoned documents. Documents listing the responsibilities of Sysert workers, who carried out outer guard, were also found.” [2]
However, archived records indicate to the contrary. The guard of the family of the former Emperor in fact consisted of soldiers of The 1st Ural infantry regiment, which had been formed in Yekaterinburg in March of 1918. The regiment was formed in former barracks of Orovay regiment (the author’s note). Colonel Ivan Ivanovich Branizkiy was appointed to be regiment commander. He came from a well-known count family. He was a career officer. He graduated from the Typhlis officer cadet infantry school in 1904. By the beginning of the First World War he had attained the rank of captain and had been serving in the 60th infantry regiment. As a participant of combat operations he received the rank of colonel after September, 1916 [3]. For commanding positions, he appointed only military officers. Captain Ivan Sergeevich Pavlishev became his deputy on drill, and lieutenant Malyutin was the secretary of regiment headquarters [4]. Nowadays this position is called commander of regiment headquarters (the author’s note). The regiment was first immersed in battle at the end of March of 1918, when it routed ataman Dutov’s detachments of cossacks in the Orenburg steppe.
When the All-Russia Central Executive Committee ordered commissar Yakovlev to transport Nikolas II and his family from Tobolsk to Yekaterinburg, Branizkiy allocated a detachment consisting of two companies of the 2nd battalion, to assist Yakovlev. Commander of the battalion lieutenant Alexandr Alexandrovich Busyazkiy was appointed to be the commander of the detachment [5]. On 22nd of April detachments of Yakovlev and Busyazkiy arrived in Tobolsk. Colonel Kabylinskiy’s detachment ensured the safety of the family and escorted them to Tobolsk according to the order of Provisional Government. As a result of Tsarevich Alexey’s illness, the family had to be separated. Nikolay Alexandrovich, his wife, and his daughter went with Yakovlev while the rest of the children stayed in Tobolsk. Under Yakovlev’s orders, Kabylinskiy delegated his powers to commissar Hochryakov, to whom Busyazkiy set aside the 4th company of soldiers and ten soldiers from machine-gun party for guarding the royal children. The list of the majority of those soldiers was published in books by Sokolov and Diterichs [6]. During the journey from Tobolsk to Yekaterinburg commissar Yakovlev undertook or just performed the attempt of “escape” with Nikolas II through Omsk. The scandal destroyed all the precautionary measures which had been taken for safe journey of the family. Colonel Branizkiy immediately had to form another detachment, consisting of the 1st, 2nd and 6th companies, and on 28th of April came out to meet the train of Yakovlev [7]. On the 30th of April the train with the former Emperor arrived at station Yekaterinburg-1. From the crowd who met the train at the platform, appeals to immediate lynching of Nikolas II were heard. They had to send the train on to station Yekaterinburg-2, now known as station Shartash (the author’s note). Halfway to the next station, Nikolas Alexandrovich, his wife, and his daughter and a small entourage let off and transported by car to engineer Ipat’ev’s house, which was marked as “Jail ¹2” in original documents. Later it was called the HOUSE OF SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT. To fend off assassination attempts by the mob that was organized by anarchists, Ipat’ev’s house was turned into a fortress. Two rows of fence, machine-guns, windows on the second floor were painted over, guards were posted at the central steps, along the fence, and in the garden to ensure the safety of the family [8]. Avdeev, a member of local Emergency Committee, was appointed to be commissar of Jail ¹2. On the evening of 30th of April, the deputy Of Yekaterinburg Emergency Committee Zaitzev submitted a report to Avdeev and the head of Regional military registration and enlistment office detailing an incident where soldiers had behaved carelessly with prisoners and visitors of Jail ¹2 [9]. The next day, Branizkiy received a copy of the report and corresponding order from Regional Military Commissar “to institute strict guideless for guard duty in the jail, so that the guards would be more disciplined and not enter into any conversations with prisoners. The Court of Revolutionary Tribunal will institute proceedings against guilty of non-observance of indicated order” [10].
In order to understand how workers appeared to be in The Red Army one must remember, in accordance with “The Decree governing the term of service in the Red Army” beginning the 22nd of April, 1918, units must be formed on contractual basis. The period of service was half a year. Salary of soldiers was 100 roubles, and salary of officers – 300-400 roubles. With the weakening of the economy and stoppages in the manufacturing industry, the present Decree gave people a chance to earn a living. On May 9, 1918 at the Sysert Plant, about fifty workers were recruited for a regiment. They arrived in Yekaterinburg on the 11th of May. On May 30th and July 11th, the same number of recruits were enlisted at the plant of Zlokazovs brothers, now known by locals as Iset Brewery. Possibly, lists of these recruits became the reason for White Guard investigation to surmise that all the guard duty of the House of Special Assignment consisted of plant workers [11].
In connection with the recommencement of military operations by Ataman Dutov in Orenburg region, Branizkiy received instructions from Regional Military Commissar ¹3865 of the 11th of May regarding the urgent need to march and depart. From Branizkiy’s report ¹1328 of 12th of May follows that the regiment left together with attached 1st Yekaterinburg troop of cavalry [12]. Altogether 1174 Red Army men left with Branizkiy. According to Instruction ¹ 53 of May 19, 1918 [13], initially the march had been planned for ten days till 20th of May. But because of Czechoslovaks approach, the regiment couldn’t be back in Yekaterinburg in time before the city was captured by General Gayda’s army on 25th of July. All that time the regiment’s headquarters, so as the troop’s headquarters remained in Yekaterinburg. Because of some sickness since the 11th of May Malyutin was temporarily removed from his post and stayed in Yekaterinburg [14]. On 18th of May, according to Order ¹57, he was back to his duty. He had about 300 people at his disposal, including soldiers of non-combatant company and Red Army men, who were on mission in Tobolsk. To secure Ipat’ev’s house, a group of guards was formed from these soldiers, where several people from machine-gun party were included along wit two Red Army men from each company. Among those Red Army men was a soldier of the 1st company named Anton Chaykovskiy, or Gaykovskiy, as in the regiment’s documents both readings can be found [15,16].
After the arrival of the remainder Nikolas’s children to Yekaterinburg from Tobolsk on May 26th, a “combined detachment of the 1st Ural infantry regiment” was formed from the soldiers who were in the city and soldiers who had returned from their missions. The other soldiers were sent to the front, because the regiment had sustained great losses. Molchanov was appointed to be commander of the detachment. For intensification of the house guard duty since May 27th, an additional observation post was organized at the bell tower of the Temple of Ascension. The first observers on that post were soldiers Melne and Chernenko, who returned from the Tobolsk mission [17]. On May 31st, an order was received at the headquarters of the regiment from Yekaterinburg military commissar Zotov about commissioning the buildings of the regiment for temporary quarters of the 3rd Yekaterinburg reserve Soviet regiment. Headquarters of the regiment and “combined detachment” moved to Popov’s house on Ascension Lane and converted the second floor of the house into barracks. This quickly strengthened the guard shifts during periods of the greatest activity of local anarchists under Zhebenev leadership. From the memoirs of a participant of royal family’s shooting M.A.Medvedev (Kudrin) in December, 1963: “Anarchist’s leader Zhebenev shouted to us at Council: “If you don’t exterminate Nikolas the Bloody, we will do it ourselves!”[18].
Thus supervision of guarding the House and ensuring the Emperor’s family safety were carried out by the headquarters of the 1st Ural infantry regiment, while control of the maintenance regimen of the family was assigned to the Emergency Committee and particularly to Commissar Avdeev.
On the 4th of July, a new General officer commanding of North-Ural-Siberian front R. Berzyn’ arrived in Yekaterinburg, and in person visited Ipat’ev’s house with the intent to inspect operations there. As a result of that inspection, Avdeev and his assistant Moshkin were dismissed of their duties, and in their stead, chekists Yurovskiy and Nikulin were assigned. The internal guard was partially replaced with soldiers from 6th Tukum Lettish infantry detachment. That detachment arrived in Yekaterinburg from Petrograd on 20-s of June and was quartered in a building of New Gostinyi Dvor together with 4th Yekaterinburg regiment [19]. This Lettish regiment was one of the first join the Bolsheviks. In October 1917, its soldiers were guarding Smolnyi and in spring of 1918 they were ensuring the safety of the Soviet government when it moved from Petrograd to Moscow [20]. They also took part in the assassination of the Tsar’s family.
2. Motives and Victims of the shooting.
In order to understand the motives that led leaders of Soviet Power to make a decision about the extermination of Romanov family, we must remember the sequence of events that occurred in the beginning of July of 1918, which plunged the state into the depths of Civil war.
The 6th of July – the murder of German ambassador count Mirbach in Moscow and the beginning of rebellion of left socialists-revolutionists.
The 10th of July – on session of the 5-th All-Russia Congress of Soviets the Constitution of The Russian Social Federative Soviet Republic was ratified.
The 13th of July - The Decree “On nationalization of the properties of overthrown Russian Emperor and members of former emperor house” was passed.
Before those events, Lenin and Trozkiy repeatedly mentioned in their speeches the necessity of holding open court against the former emperor of Russia. After the murder of Mirbach by left socialists-revolutionists, it was unstable as “Brest’s peace”, against which they acted, and could blow up just as soap bubble. The reaction of German government followed and the beginning of the socialists-revolutionaries’ rebellions in Moscow, Petrograd, Yaroslavl, Rybinsk, Kovrov and other cities of Central part of Russia created a threat to existence of Soviet Power itself. For the struggle against its former supporters and rebellious Whiteczechs, a large, well-armed army was needed. Agitators recruited workers and peasants for the Red Army, but there was no money to pay their salary. While at the beginning of May there was just one infantry regiment in Yekaterinburg, there were already seven of them by the middle of July. For forming and maintenance of quickly growing army, money was needed, which couldn’t be given by state financial system under conditions of the depressed economy. The Bolsheviks’ adopted Constitution annulled all the obligations for international loans that had been taken by Tsar’s government. This destroyed the continuity in foreign policy and the Bolsheviks deprived themselves of the opportunity to obtain an international loan to support their army. Under these conditions, the most effective persuasion became slogans: “Expropriation of expropriators” or “Steal the stolen”. Lenin’s government was engaged in these very things, passing the Decree on the 13th of July. It was no secret that the Romanov family was the richest not only in Russia, but in the entire world. One of appraisals of the financial state of Nikolas II included: “Enormous properties belonged to the Russian Emperor and members of former emperor’s house: lands, gold-fields, fabrics and plants, vineyards, etc. By the end of 19th century, the collective lands of the Romanovs numbered nearly 22 million acres. Liquid assets held in foreign banks, were determined to be no less than 700 million roubles” [21]. The absence of legal grounds for the Decree caused misgivings of possible restitution. To avoid the possible consequences, the Soviet People’s Committee made a decision about physical elimination of the possessor and all heirs. By that time, the possible successor of the throne Michael Alexandrovich has been killed in Perm. The former Emperor and his family had been living under control in Ipat’ev’s house. His sister and her mother, widowed Empress Maria Fedorovna, has been under the same control in Krym, and the sister of Nikolas II’s wife Elizabeth Fedorovna – in Alapaevsk. This situation made it possible to put an end to Nikolas Aleksandrovich Romanov and his heirs with one stroke. The possibility that the former Emperor, members of his family and relatives could lead the counterrevolutionary movement and become its “centerpiece” is still stated as the official justification for their murder. However, this Bolshevik argument was refuted by the Romanovs themselves, who miraculously survived the Red terrorism. Neither mother nor sisters of Nikolas II, nor his cousins became the “centerpiece” of counterrevolution. The Bolsheviks, upon achieving the desired financial result, to supplement already reliable sources, robbed and destroyed the Russian Orthodox Church, Russian manufacturers and peasantry, in order to take possession of their properties to achieve own goals.
To maintain diplomatic relations with Germany, leaders of All-Russia Central Executive Committee shifted all the responsibility for the murder onto the Ural Council, initially hiding information about former Empress and children’s death [22]. One year later in September 1919, in Europe the information was spread with links on the publication in “Pravda” newspaper about the legal proceedings which had taken place in Perm against the participants of royal family’s murder. This message was included by Vilton and general Diterichs in their books [23]. I, like so many other investigators, tried to find this issue of the newspaper or re-printing of that message in other newspapers. Unfortunately, the number of “Pravda” newspaper with such a message simply never existed. Evidently, the information about the case was false, but why then among the accused on that case appears secretary of the headquarters of the 1st Ural infantry regiment lieutenant Malyutin as a member of “Yekaterinburg Deputies’ Council”? In order to find the answer for that question, it is necessary to look at documents, surrounding the events which took place at Ipat’evs house in the night of 17th of July of 1918.
The most known and available original work for researchers today is the document which is called “The memoirs of commandant of the House of Special Assignment in the city of Yekaterinburg Yurovskiy Yakov Michailovich, member of the Party since 1905, about assassination of Nikolas II and his family” [24]. It can be found in the Archives in the Center of documentation of public organizations of Sverdlovsk region. This document was personally certified and passed to be kept by the commandant’s son, counter admiral A.Y. Yurovskiy in 1958. According to the postscript, made by his son, Y.M. Yurovskiy had passed that document in 1920 to historian M.N. Pokrovskiy to be kept. In different Archives of Russia, there are several copies of that document without a name, that’s why it is more known to researchers as “A note by Y.M.Yurovskiy”. Surely this is not the Yurovskiy’s report to the leaders of AEC, but in his memoirs about the events of those days Yurovskiy wrote that “after getting on 16th of July telegram from Perm in secret language with the order to exterminate Romanovs Philip Goloshekin ordered to carry it out”. During the period of left socialists-revolutionists rebellion, Perm was a transit point of telegraph connection between Moscow and Yekaterinburg (the author’s note). In order to carry out the order, he selected 12 people with revolvers and divided up among them who they were supposed to shoot. Further in the text closer definition was made: “all together 12 people were shot: Nikolas, Alexandra Fedorovna, Alexis, four daughters – Tatyana, Olga, Maria and Anastasia, - doctor Botkin, man-servant Trupp, cook Tichomirov, one more cook Charitonov and fraulein, whose name the commandant forgot”. Modern researchers draw attention to two inaccuracies, made by the author on listing the victims of shooting. One of them was that Yurovskiy called room maid Anna Demidova “fraulein”, and the second being the fact of two cooks being present. From documents of that period, it’s known that there was only one cook in Ipat’ev’s house – Ivan Michailovich Charitonov, and in the text of “A note”, which is kept in SARF [25], his surname is missing, or more exactly wasn’t filled in. Several surnames and names Yakov Yurovskiy inserted in typewritten text with his own hand (the author’s note). Some of researchers, acquainted only with the SARF document, came to conclusion that as there was no surname of the second cook, Yurovskiy just mixed up surnames and wrote down Charitonov as Tichomirov. However, Yurovskiy’s mistake is in the other thing. He named the position incorrectly and modified the surname of kitchen attendant Terechov. Terechov held this post as far back as in Alexandrovskiy Palace. As a member of imperial suite he lived in Tobolsk and on 23d of May of 1918 with the royal children and he was transported to Yekaterinburg [26]. According to testimony of Pavel Medvedev, quoted in Sokolov’s book: “At first they carried food for the Tsar’s family from soviet canteen which was located on the Main Prospect… Later their cook was allowed to make food, and he did so…”[27]. This explains the reasons of Terechov’s appearance in Ipat’ev’s house. The cook Charitonov just physically couldn’t alone manage the preparation of food for twenty people. 13-year Ljenya Sednev, though he was called cook assistant, couldn’t aid Charitonov, as he was kept in the house to communicate with the sickly Alexis. Yurovskiy, who entered the post of commandant only on 4th of July, recorded two men working in the kitchen as two cooks. Thus, according to Yurovskiy’s memoirs, 12 people were shot. This is also confirmed by records of examination of Pavel Medvedev’s wife Maria. She told on interrogation: “Being in private with me, my husband explained to me, that several days ago Tsar, Tsarina, Heir, all Duchesses and servants of the tsar’s family, all together 12 people had been killed” [28]. Why then in conclusions of the investigation of General Public Prosecutors department of Russia, and also in conclusions of investigator Sokolov, it’s a matter of 11 victims of assassination? Why in their memoirs, which were written later than the ones by Yurovskiy, the other participants of the events talk only about 11 bodies? So in abovementioned memoirs by the participant of the shooting Medvedev (Kudrin), dated the December, 1963, it’s written: “I came down to the truck, to count the bodies once more – all 11 are present, – cover them with the loose end of smooth woolen cloth” [29]. Similar to that are evidences of Austrian prisoner of war Rudolf Lacher, who happened to be present on that night in Ipat’ev’s house. On one of the sessions of Supreme Appeal Court in Senate of FRG on Anna Anderson’s case in January, 1966, Lacher under oath testified that on the night of the murder of tsar’s family out of his window he had counted “eleven blood-stained bundles”, which he had taken for the bodies of the Romanovs and their servants. He saw that “blood-stained bundles” – the bodies wrapped in sheets, - were being dumped in a truck, and counted them [30]. Earlier, on 27th of July of 1965, during one of the sessions of the same proceedings, a tailor from Vienna Henry Kleybenzetl bore his testimony. He presented his identity card and documents, confirming that in July 1918, he had been living in Yekaterinburg, where he had been an apprentice of tailor Baudin. A building where Baudin lived, was located near Ipat’ev’s house and Kleybenzetl often had to fix outfits of soldiers who were guarding tsar’s family. In the night on the 17th of July soldiers brought wounded Anastasia in Baudin’s house, and he together with master’s wife Anna had to look after the Duchess. In the morning “red guards” came in the house, but they “knew the owner too well to raid the house”. They announced that Anastasia had disappeared. On the third day the guard came for Anastasia – the one of those who had brought her [31]. Testimonies of these two witnesses, who stood during the proceedings for opposite parties, confirm that Anastasia had succeeded to avoid death on that fatal night, but how? Yurovskiy himself explained it. In his speech on the 1st of February of 1934 on the conference of old Bolsheviks in the city of Sverdlovsk, he told about the shooting of Tsar’s family. This is how he described incident, which had taken place after the shooting: “When the first dead bodies were carried away, I was told, but don’t remember exactly by whom, that somebody had taken valuables. Then I understood that obviously, there had been value in things taken by them. I immediately held a meeting, gathered people, and required to return valuables that were taken. After some denial two people, who had taken the valuables, returned them. After threatening the ones who would loot with shooting I removed those two, and ordered comrade Nikulin, as far as I remember, to accompany the transport, after warning him that to shoot those who had valuables…”[32]. Thus, during this incident, around the bodies in yard could be only soldiers of outer guard. Evidently, it was they who carried the wounded Anastasia out of the yard of Ipat’ev’s house. After all as Vladimir Vysozkiy sung: “Regulations don’t tell to shoot twice”. About the fact of Anastasia’s disappearance testifies the announcement of Housing Commissariat in newspaper “Izvestia” ¹138 of 21st of July, 1918. Before adducing the text of that message, it has to be reminded, that the announcement of Ural Council about Nikolas II’s shooting was made on a meeting in a new city theater on the 22d of July, while the official announcement of Central Executive Committee of Soviets of 19th of July was published in newspaper “Ural worker” only on 23d of July. Until that moment, the information about the assassination had been kept in the strictest confidence. The search for Anastasia by the chekists under false pretense caused the wave of discontent among city people. As a result the following announcement appeared in newspaper:
“Rumours have come to Housing Commissariat’s notice that some unknown people on behalf of Commissariat inspect apartments and rooms without having proper certificate for that, and that is why the Housing Commissariat brings to all Yekaterinburg citizens’ notice that one must admit for buildings’ examinations only those people who can present card of the Housing Commissariat showing the right for inspection with attached stamp. In the event of those who come without cards or with cards but without attachment of stamp, one must immediately inform on the phone number 7-35 and 6-26, in order to apprehend offenders. Housing Commissar, Zhilinskiy.”
Beside this message there was an announcement of Military Commissariat of North-Ural-Siberian front published about the fact that on the 18th of July, company commander of the 4th company of the 4th Yekaterinburg regiment Nikolay Eglik had run away. He stole 14 thousand roubles, which had been given to him for distribution of the salary among the Red Army men of the company. He had something to do with the people who saved Anastasia, as she was moved out of Baudin’s house on the morning of July 19th.
There was one more mysterious chapter in the history of Tsar’s family death. In his report of the December 18, 1918 addressed to Minister of Justice of Kolchak’s government Starynkevich, public prosecutor of Kazan Court Chamber Mirolyubov, who had been carrying out the supervision under the process of investigation, informed about the following:
“According to Kuhtenkov’s testimony, who held the post of property manager of workers’ club at Verh-Isetskiy plant, on the 19th of July at 3 am Ermakov, Kostousov, Levatnyh, Partin and Krivov came to the club. They started to hold a conference in the party room and he, the witness, heard the phrase: “In all there were 13 people, a doctor was the thirteenth”. When those people saw him, the witness, they didn’t want to continue their talk in his presence and immediately went out in the garden, but Kuhtenkov became interested in their talk, quietly followed them, hid in the grass and started to listen. First of all he heard Kostousov’s phrase: ”…for the second day we are busy; yesterday we buried, today we had to re-bury”. From further talk he understood that Levatnyh, Partin and Kostousov took part in burial of fallen sovereign and his family”. Thus, from the yard of Ipat’ev’s house 11 bodies were moved out while at re-burial on the 18th of July it appeared to be 13 of them. In his memoirs Yurovskiy wrote that “12 people were selected (including 7 Letts) with revolvers who were supposed to carry out the sentence. Two of Letts refused to shoot the girls”. As it was said earlier, soldiers of the 6th Tukum Lettish infantry regiment had been called “Letts” at that time in the city. Because of attacks of Kolchak’s army and Czechoslovaks in the middle of July on the territory of district martial law was introduced. On the 10th of July District Commissar Anuchin signed the order ¹59 “On mobilization”. That order was published in the newspaper “Izvestiya” ¹132 of the 14th of July, 1918. Under these conditions refusal of soldiers to carry out the instruction could mean only one thing for them – shooting. In order to explain somehow disappearance of the soldiers on the 4th page of newspaper “Izvestiya” ¹138 of 21st of July announcement of garrison commander Zotov was published. There he reported that the Red Army men of the 6th Tukum Lettish infantry regiment Ludvig Berzien and of the 1st Ural infantry regiment Alexey Petrovich Baranov left the Red Army without permission. This was the only announcement of that kind during all the period of issuing newspaper in 1918. The announcement looks even more strange as according to instruction of District Commissariat on military affairs information about soldiers leaving their units without permission, weekly had to be presented by secretaries of regiments to Commissariat. According to extant archive documents only from the 1st Ural infantry regiment in April left more than 20 soldiers without permission [33]. As for Alexey Baranov he was much known person. On the 13th of April he, as a delegate from the front, made a report on a conference in Yekaterinburg about desertion of Teplogorsk Red Army men from Dutov’s front. The resolution of his report was taken as a basis for the instruction of commissariat on military affairs ¹ 42 of 22nd of May, 1918. Baranov, as a member of the 4th company guarded children of Nikolas II in Tobolsk and on the way to Yekaterinburg, that’s why accusations of his desertion are just ridiculous. Obviously, the soldiers Baranov and Berzien were those people who paid with their own lives for refusal to shoot in children. Their dead bodies were buried in Ganina Yama together with bodies of members of the family of Nikolas II and his suite.
After the assassination in Ipat’ev’s house the events were developing as following. The 6th Tukum Lettish infantry regiment on the 17th of July left for Yaroslavl, where in the evening of next day took up the struggle with rebellious left socialists-revolutionists. The headquarters of the regiment remained in Yekaterinburg till the moment when the city was captured by Gayda’s army [34]. The biggest part of the combined detachment of the 1st Ural infantry regiment left for regiment’s positions in Orenburg. The commander of the regiment at that time was Ivan Sergeevich Pavlishev, who on the 5th of June replaced colonel Branizkiy on this post. From just arrived people everybody in the regiment got to know about the events which had occurred in Yekaterinburg and about the role of commissar Yurovskiy in them. This was a moral slap in the face for officers of the regiment. Officers’ meeting was held, where commander-in-chief Blyuher was invited. Adjutant of the regiment captain Bartovskiy said to Blyuher that “it has been 6 months according to contract and they fairly finish their service as honest military specialists and that politically they are different people with bolsheviks”. On Blyuher’s question “why were you in the regiment then?” officers answered: “Because we have signed a contract”. Blyuher, persuading officers to keep the regiment, offered to continue till joining the Red Army and then go apart. He left the meeting and in 15 minutes I.S. Pavlishev came to him and said: “We discussed your offer, commander, and decided to stay, but we have plea for you – do not assign commissars for us”. Blyher satisfied officers’ request and on the 5th of September of 1918 together with Blyuher’s detachments the regiment broke out of encirclement and continued to be at war [35]. In autumn it was renamed into the 268th infantry regiment and was included in the 30th infantry division, which was under V.K. Blyuher’s command. As for the headquarters’ secretary lieutenant Malyutin, after the assassination of Romanov family by chekists “behind his back”, he disappeared without a trace from the city together with Anastasia and the regiment’s documents. The last information, yet obtained about his fate was the message about that very “Perm case” of 1919, where he was accused of trivial stealing.
3. Anastasia.
On the 30th of January of 1998 the Commission on investigation the questions, related to researches and re-burial of the remains of Russian Emperor Nikolas II and members of his family headed by vice-premier of the government Boris Nemtzov confirmed the report of Russian experts on identification of the remains, which had been found on Koptyaki road in 1991.
On the 30th of July, 1998, in Yekaterinburg the representative of the General public prosecutor’s department of Russia and members of Sverdlovsk region administration have signed “The Protocol of passing the remains of Russian Emperor Nikolas II, members of his family and close people” addressed to G.V. Velimbahov, the Head of the State Gerold by the President of Russian Federation “for burying at the Petropavlovskiy Cathedral in Saint-Petersburg”.
Those who wish can acquaint themselves with the copy of that protocol in The Sverdlovsk museum of regional ethnography, where it is presented in constantly working exposition “The Romanovs”. A gross mistake has crept into the text of this historical document with dozen of personal signatures of high-ranking government officials. To be buried together with all found remains the remains of “Romanova Anastasia Nikolaevna, born in 1899” have been passed, but this is the date of Duchess Maria birth standing with the name of Anastasia and there is something behind it. Scientific battles developed around identification of the remains have been reflected even in the book, composed by Victor Aksyuchitz “Repentance. The materials of government Commission on investigation the questions, related to researches and re-burial of the remains of Russian Emperor Nikolas II and members of his family”. Conclusion of the group of american anthropologists headed by doctor William Mapples, the director of the S.A. Pound laboratory of identification of human remains, became the stumbling block. After examination of the found remains, Mapples came to conclusion, that among them the remains of 17-year old Duchess Anastasia were absent, because he didn’t find the remains which would be in accordance with her age and height. But the skeleton ¹5 is absolutely in accordance with Maria’s age and height. The substantiations of conclusions on that matter and polemics with Russian colleagues doctor Mapples stated in detailed writing in his book “Dead men do tell tales” [36]. Unlike Mappels Russian scientists headed by professor V.N. Zvyagin, in spite of evident discrepancies, came to conclusion, that the skeleton ¹ 6 which had been found in burial was the remains of Anastasia [37]. Besides the incompatibility of the skeleton and age and height of Anastasia, on bones, forming big toes it hasn’t been discovered any traces of very rare congenital orthopedic disease of feet hallux valgus of the 3d degree, which Anastasia had had.
For consultation on that matter I had to appeal to The Scientific Research children’s orthopedic Institute after G.I. Turner, which is the main organization of Russia on given problem. Research supervisor of feet pathology department doctor of medical science Michael Pavlovich Konyuhov informed me that given disease can be met very seldom. During last 11 years at the Institute only 8 cases have been registered when such a diagnosis has been given. According to information of the Federal service of state statistics during that period of time in the country more than 14 million children have been born. It follows that for one child, born with such pathology, there are 1, 75 million healthy children. Among numerous women who tried to pretend to be saved Anastasia Romanova, there was only one, who had such disease discovered by doctors. Her name was Anastasia Chaykovskaya, Anna Anderson-Manahan. About the life of that remarkable woman tens of books and articles have been written. She claimed that she was Duchess Anastasia and by order of the court tried to return her name. Results of handwriting and anthropologic examinations, made by specialists from FRG, unequivocally proved that Anna Anderson and Grand Duchess Anastasia Romanova was the same one person. However, in February of 1967 Appeal Court in Senate of FRG rejected to satisfy her claims because of lack of evidence. Unfortunately the most weighable for German court anthropological evidence has been found only in 1976 by one of the famous court experts of FRG doctor Furthmayer. Moritz Furthmayer discovered that Darmstadt experts, who had given negative conclusion on identification, had used for comparing external ears of Anastasia and Anna the picture of Anna, which had been made from turned over negative. On comparing the right pictures doctor Furthmayer got concurrence in 17 anatomic positions. For acknowledgement of identity in court concurrence of 5 positions out of 12 is enough.
In 2006 director of “The Munich Fund of composer A.K. Glazunov” Nikolay Vorontzov was so kind to give me copies of some documents and magazines’ publications about Anna Anderson, which he have been keeping in his personal archive. Among them was the conclusion of Moritz Furthmayer and scientific article of E. Kaizer-Lindner about researches, which had been made in 1958 in The Mainz University by doctors Aikshtedt and Klenke and in 1965 by founder of German anthropological society professor Otto Reche, who had came to the same conclusions:
1. Missis Anderson is not a polish fabric worker Franciska Shanzkovskaya.
2. Missis Anderson is Grand Duchess Anastasia Romanova.
In September of 2006 I passed these materials in Sverdlovsk Regional Bureau or forensic medicine examination with the offer to give an inference about legitimacy of conclusions of German scientists. Modern computer technologies allow doing similar examinations more exact. Alas. Year and a half later I received an answer saying that such researches were pointless, because negative result of genetic examination existed. It happened in fact, that in June of 1994, thanks to extant in American hospital sample of Anna Anderson’s tissue, in Oldermaston, Great Britain, doctor Gill have made analysis of DNA from that “material” delivered to him. As a result of that examination English genetic came to conclusion that DNA, excreted from that “material” correlated with DNA of grand nephew of Franciska Shantzkovskaya Karl Mauter. This conclusion still evokes a lot of disputes.
But after I acquainted myself with archive documents of the 1st Ural infantry regiment, for me these conclusions became simply absurd. How polish worker, who always lived in Germany, could know that in the guard of the Ipat’ev’s house was a soldier of the 1st company named Chaykovskiy?
On the other hand, comparative genetic examination is, saying in mathematic language, possibility of concurrence of certain amount of signs. The result of six nines after comma is considered to be absolute concurrence. In that case, the possibility of correlation only on sign of feet disease of Anastasia (Hallux valgus) is a cut above any genetic examination. In my article “Anna-Anastasia” [38] I already mentioned that Anna had color of hairs, color of eyes, height, size of foot and scars from childhood traumas exactly the same as Grand Duchess. If we take these “signs” of concurrence of Anna Anderson and Anastasia Romanova into account, the possibility of identity grows till sixteen nines after comma. This is considerably more exact than genetic examination and means that on the Earth with the population of 6,5 billion people just cant exist two different people with such similar signs.
4. Conclusion.
After discovering in summer of 2007 of a new burial on Koptyaki road, General public prosecutor’s department of Russia again instituted proceedings about the death of members of tsar’s family. This allows today if there is political will on state level to solve a question about studying of archives documents, related to Anastasia. The most part of those documents are now in closed funds of Russian Archives and today is unavailable for researchers. It’s about documents of The State Archive of Russian Federation (SARF), The Russian State military Archive (RSMA) and The Archive of Federal Security Department (FSD), where they keep documents of Counterintelligence section of ASPA. Besides that there are unique archive documents in USA, Germany and Denmark, which Russian scientists never touched yet.
NOTES
1. P.M. Bykov “The last days of the Romanovs”, Ural Worker, Sverdlovsk, 1990, p. 80
2. N.A. Sokolov “The murder of Tsar’s family”, Algoritm, BSK, 2007, p.203
3. From personal archive of doctor of the science of history S.V. Volkov.
4. The State Archive of Sverdlovsk Region (further in text SASR), F.472, In.1, D.17, Sh.13
5. At the same place.
6. M.K. Diterichs “The murder of Tsar’s family and members of Romanovs’ house in Ural”, OPO Publishing House “Veche”, 2007, p. 227
7. SASR F.472, In.1, D.18. Sh.156
8. P.M. Bykov “The last days of the Romanovs”, Ural Worker, Sverdlovsk, 1990, p. 78
9. SASR F.472, In.1, D.18. Sh.159
10. SASR F.472, In.1, D.18. Sh.158, 158ob
11. Greg King, Penny Vilson “The Romanovs”, OPO Publishing House “Eksmo”, 2008, p. 836-841.
12. SASR 18. Sh.161
13. From The Russian State Military Archive (further in text RSMA). F. 3576, In.1.D.44.Sh.15
14. RSMA F. 3576. In.1.D44.Sh.21ob
15. RSMA F. 3576. In.1.D46.Sh.60ob
16. RSMA F. 3576. In.1.D44.Sh.20ob
17. SASR F.472, In.1, D.15. Sh.175
18. RCHIDNI F.588, In.3, D.12. Sh.43-58
19. SASR F.472, In.1, D.11. Sh.33
20. N.A. Nefedov “The Red Lettish infantrymen”. The magazine “Veche”, ¹¹4,5,6, 1982
http://constitution.garant.ru/DOC_5404.htm
21. From The Center of documentation of public organizations of Sverdlovsk region (further CDPOSR), F. 216. The Newspaper “Ural Worker” of the 23d of July, 1918.
22. M.K. Diterichs “The murder of Tsar’s family and members of Romanovs’ house in Ural”, OPO Publishing House “Veche”, 2007, p. 11
23. CDPOSR, F.221. In.2. D. 497 F.P. Sh.9-15
24. SASR F.601, In.2, D.36. Sh.32-61
25. N.A. Sokolov “The murder of Tsar’s family”, Algoritm, BSK, 2007, pp.53, 188.
26. The same place, p. 214.
27. M.K. Diterichs “The murder of Tsar’s family and members of Romanovs’ house in Ural”, OPO Publishing House “Veche”, 2007, p. 78
28, From Russian Center of keeping and studying of documents of recent history (RCKSDRH) F.588, In.3, D.12. Sh.43-58
29. Peter Kurth “Anastasia. The mystery of Grand Duchess”, Punlisher Zaharov, 2005. pp.382-383.
30. The same place, pp. 369-371
31. CDPOSR, F.41. In.1. D. 151. Sh.10-22
32. SASR F.472. In.1, D.17. Sh.293-296
33. The newspaper “Izvestiya” ¹138 of the 21st of July, 1918.
34. For the history of the 30th infantry regiment (The speech at the meeting with writers on the 22d of November, 1935).
35. From the personal archive of G.L. Blyuher.
36. William R. Maples, Ph.D. and Michael Browning “Dead men do tell tales”. New York. 1994. 238-268.
37. “Repentance. The materials of government Commission on investigation the questions, related to researches and re-burial of the remains of Russian Emperor Nikolas II and members of his family”, M. “Vybor”, “Bost-C”, 2003, pp.133-137
38. Vladimir Momot “Gone with the wind” (Under author’s edition “Anna-Anastasia”). Literary miscellany “Panorama”¹7 (1349) Los Angeles
Yekaterinburg, 2008
Translated by Oksana Bushmanova