The In-Famous Romanovs — A Hundred Years Old Media Bubble
When I started looking into the case of the disappearance of the Romanov Family including Nicholas II, Alexandra Fedorovna, OTMA and Aleksei, I noticed that it was not so much about what exactly happened but what was written about what had happened or, rather had not happened, by the press and in the press. Books, newspapers, journals, diaries, and articles included.
Soon, it became obvious that it was the written word that ruled the case, not facts, evidence, truth, or even detective work. It was opinions, emotions, subjective perspectives, and twisted views of others not directly involved or connected to the case that determined the degree of what was intentionally revealed and what intentionally stayed hidden.
It seemed media outlets and written word were used to create impressions suited for the occasion and the main goals, whether of local, national, or even international level. Private matters were mixed up with state interests, and personal aspirations with high level political ambitions.
These interwoven elements made up a distorted picture of the events and were used to create deception points, which, when taken as a basis for action, lead to more confusion, twistedness and secrecy.
Media is a powerful outlet, and the written word is a deadly tool, a weapon that hits target precisely, terminating better than any other means of assassination. Physical assassination is nothing in comparison with the written word because it stays forever in minds of people, and on the pages of magazines, journals, and newspapers, reflecting what should have never been reflected and telling what has never happened.
Having these thoughts in my mind, I have decided to have an overview of the main media ‘outbursts’ of the past 100 years connected to the Romanovs, namely the mystery of the disappearance of Nicholas II, his wife, Alexandra Fedorovna, and his children, Olga Nikolaevna, Tatyana Nikolaevna, Maria Nikoalevna, Anastasia Nikoalevna, and Alexei Nikolaevich, and present how the written word and the press was used at each particular point in time to mislead and also to establish a certain ‘truth’ which was far from the truth itself.
The Beginning — The Year 1918
The ‘Disappearance’ of the Romanovs
It all started with anticipation. The anticipation of an event that was not the event at all, but was presented as such some time before this non-event took place. The creation of the ‘anticipation’ of the non-event began with spreading of misinformation. The spreading of misinformation was in the interests of the two countries — Russia and Germany. Let’s have a look at some press ‘appearances’ of the time.
June 1918, Russia
Although some nonsense about the Romanovs had been written before, this time, the nonsense produced and spread concerned fake news in regards to the death of the former Emperor, Nicholas II, and his family. The newspaper ‘Siberian Life’ in its issue N62 summed up some of this ‘news’ in a compilation article dated Thursday July 18, 1918. The original ‘news’ itself appeared at different dates end of June 1918. Here are some excerpts from this summary:
‘Freedom of Russia’ (formerly ‘Russian Vedomosti’) responds to rumours about the fate of Nikolai Romanov in the issue №53 of June 23, 1918:
‘In recent days, reports continue to appear in some Moscow newspapers regarding the fate of Nicholas II and his family, either confirming, based on information from various sources, the initial rumour about the murder of the former emperor, or refuting this rumour. Some messages contain various details of what happened in Yekaterinburg.
Unfortunately, we are unable to verify these rumours through our correspondent in Yekaterinburg. In Moscow, at the German embassy, our employee, who went there yesterday to check the said message, was given a categorical answer that the embassy had no information either confirming or refuting rumours about the murder of Nicholas II or members of his family. A similar answer was given in Soviet circles. The Soviet authorities also do not have any information from Yekaterinburg concerning the fate of the former Emperor .’
The newspaper ‘Bel. Rus.’ reported by telegraph from Petrograd on June 24, 1918:
‘New Life telegraphs from Tsaritsyn that, according to information received, the former Tsarina Alexandra Fedorovna and her two daughters, Olga and Tatyana, have been brought to Perm. The former Tsar Nikolai Romanov and the former heir are not there. Railway employees who accompanied the train with prisoners say that Nikolai Romanov was killed last week. The exact date of the murder is not indicated, but it is reported that news of the murder of Nikolai Romanov appeared only two days after the murder.
The former Tsar was allegedly shot by two guards guarding him. The railway workers did not receive any information regarding the former Heir.’
The officialdom of the Soviet government ‘Izvestia’ in issue N. 129 of June 25, 1918, provides the following categorical denial — a telegram about the murder of Nikolai Romanov from the chairman of the Yekaterinburg Soviet of Deputies:
‘Ekaterinburg, June 24. The rumour about the murder of former Tsar Nikolai Romanov is yet another provocative lie.’ Comrade of the Chairman of the Executive Committee Zagvoskin. Secretary Korobolkin.
July, 1918
It appears that in unison with the Russian side spreading the rumours about the death of Nicholas II in the Russian press, the German side was doing just the same. Here are some examples of such occurrences:
3 July 1918, Germany
‘In the German newspapers, an announcement of the death of the Emperor was published 13 days earlier than the supposed news e.g. 3 July (new style 1918). This was told to me by Germans, thinking that it is all a fake.’ — excerpt from the testimony of S.V. Markov
5/6 July 1918, Kiev, Ukraine
Count Alvensleben, while paying a visit to Alexander Nikolaevich Dolgorukov (1872–1948) and Bezak, shared in secret a certain ‘news’ with them:
‘During this conversation, Alvensleben warned us that between July 16 and July 20 (new style) a rumour or news of the assassination of the Emperor (Nicolas II) would spread, and that this rumour or news should not bother us: like the rumour about the murder of the Emperor, which took place in June, it would be false, but that it was necessary for His salvation.’ — an excerpt from the testimony of Alexander Nikolaevich Dolgorukov
17–21 July 1918, Yekaterinburg, Russia
Indeed, on the dates mentioned by Count Alvensleben there was appearance of the news of the assassination of Nicholas II in the form of ‘official’ posters distributed in Yekaterinburg as well as a newspaper announcement in the local papers:
‘After the Bolsheviks announced that they had shot the former Tsar, I read about it in the newspaper and asked Varakushev if it was true. He answered that the son-of-a-bitch Goloshchekin was spreading these rumours, but in reality, the Tsar was alive.’ — an excerpt of the testimony of the conductor of the Omsk railway, A.V. Samoilov
‘I remember well and categorically assert that on the day when the Bolsheviks announced in the evening the execution of the former Tsar, I brought dinner for the Tsar’s family that day and personally saw the former Tsar and his family, and all the persons whom I had seen earlier.’ — an excerpt from the testimony of Ekaterina Semenovna Tomilova, an employee of the Soviet canteen in Yekaterinburg
August 1918, Moscow, Russia
As soon as the ‘news’ about the death of Nicholas II had been spread, the campaign of him being discredited as a former head of the state began. The campaign was initiated by the Russian side with the appearance of the excerpts from Nicholas II personal diary of 1917. The excerpts had been hand-picked to suit selected political events of the period, mainly the period preceding the revolution of October-November 1917. The excerpts were published in in the newspaper ‘Pravda’. Here is one of them from the issue N170 to illustrate the point:
XXVIII
Nikolai Romanov is delighted with the socialist-revolutionary Kerensky, and consequently with the party of Kerensky. The more power Kerensky has, the better for Romanovs.
8 July, Saturday
A good, hot day. Went for a walk in the park with Tatyana and Maria. In the afternoon, worked in the same areas of it. Yesterday and today, the guards were serving well while on duty, and there was no wandering around in the park, while we were walking — from the 4th squad and 1st combat regiment.
There was a shake up in the government — Prince Lvov resigned, instead of him Kerensky was appointed as the Chief of the Council; he will remain with the same military and navy minister, taking into the team trade and industry minister.
Right now, this person is in his right place. The more power he has, the better.
These press excerpts as well as personal testimonies in regards to them illustrate how the press was used by the ones in power to misguide and confuse the public. These confusing pieces of information that appeared at different times in the media created a distorted picture and an illusion of the events that never took place, which no doubt suited political agenda of the time.
The Years 1920–1925s
Unsolicited ‘Memoirs’ and Opinions of Others
What suited the political agenda of certain countries involved certainly also suited selected society circles, both in Russia and abroad. For, those circles could use already existing confusion in regards to the former Imperial Family, namely Nicholas II, Alexandra Fedorovna and their children, to their own advantage. The advantage mainly being a potential leadership of the country, — Russia, — where, at the time, political and power struggle was still ongoing.
The initial misinformation about the execution of the Imperial Family was quickly picked up by the interested parties and turned into ‘sorrowful’ stories of the Family who are no more. These parties went even further — they initiated an ‘investigation’ which was to prove that the execution certainly took place and the ones to blame for it are the Bolsheviks, the unwanted opponents of many. And what better thing to do if not to use the investigative materials for that?
And so, certain memoirs and ‘investigations’ proving the death of the Imperial Family were released into the international market — from Paris to Vladivostok to the USA.
These materials not only did not help to restore the truth, but buried it even deeper under piles of twisted information and misleading evidences as well as hand-picked mix and match testimonies from the investigative materials.
P. Gilliard (1879-1962), the former tutor of the former heir, Alexei Nikolaevich, and N. A. Sokolov (1882–1924), an investigator appointed by Alexander Vasilievich Kolchak (1874–1920), seem to be the most active contributors to this, with France and Germany being the biggest supporters of such material. Just for the information, the publishing house ‘Slovo’ which published the ‘investigation’ of N. A. Sokolov in Berlin was financed by the influential German publishing house — Ullstein Verlag.
19 December 1920, Paris, France
The first to strike the chord was Pierre Gilliard, who surprisingly quickly wrote his ‘memoir’ and claimed he knew the ‘truth’, because he was oh-so-close to the Family. He even managed to publish it in the journal ‘L’Illustration’ in Paris. His truthful ‘memoirs’ were called ‘Трагическая судьба Русской Императорской фамилии’/‘The Tragic Fate of the Russian Imperial Family’.
‘The time has come to inform the world of the truth of the Ekaterinburg crime in all its details and in all its disgust. It is necessary to give the broad strata of society the information it lacks so that it can consciously judge and adopt a correct opinion about the circumstances that had as their epilogue the shocking night of July 16–17, 1918.
The silence to which we were obliged by the judicial investigation was widely used, first of all, by the perpetrators of the crime and by low-grade literature, which further confused public judgment. The time has come for those who know the truth to inform others of it — this is a duty that lies upon them, no matter how heavy it may be.’ — an excerpt from ‘The Tragic Fate of the Russian Imperial Family’ by P. Gilliard
1921, Vienna, Austria
A year later, this time in Austria, another memoir by P. Gilliard was published — ‘Император и его семья’ / ‘The Emperor and His Family’ (Peterhoff, September 1905- Yekaternburg, May 1918). Yet again, Gilliard was very interested in claiming he knew the ‘truth’ of the astonishing drama’, which others did not.
‘In September 1920, after three years in Siberia, I was finally able to return to Europe. I retained a vivid memory of the astonishing drama in which I had been closely involved, together with the indelible impression of the astonishing peace of mind and ardent faith of the victims of this drama. […] I will try to describe here the drama of a whole life, as I first only foresaw it under the brilliant exterior of a magnificent court, and as it appeared to me later, during our imprisonment, when circumstances allowed me to penetrate into the intimate life of the Tsar’s family. In fact, the Ekaterinburg crime is only the culmination of a cruel fate, the denouement of one of the most moving tragedies that have ever been experienced. — an excerpt from ‘The Emperor and His Family’ by P. Gilliard
1922, Vladivostok, Russia
Just yet another year later, M.K. Diterichs (1874–1937) enthusiastically chimed in with his ‘truthful’ view of the situation which was published in two parts (I and II) in Vladivostok and called ‘Убийство Царской семьи и гибель членов Дома Романовых на Урале’ / ‘The Murder of the Royal Family and the Death of the Members of the House of Romanov in the Urals’.
‘From a political-civil point of view, there are Tsars in the world who by their nature are called to reign, but there are Tsars who by their nature are called to be martyrs of reigning. The late former Emperor belongs to the latter group. […] The direct line of the Romanov dynasty has ended: it began in the Ipatiev Monastery of the Kostroma province and ended in the Ipatiev House of the city of Yekaterinburg. A new accession to the Russian throne of any of the surviving members of the lateral lines of the House of Romanov may, of course, happen, but not as a nomination of a candidate by any political party, group or individuals, but only by a resolution of the future All-Russian Zemsky Sobor’. — an excerpt from ‘The Murder of the Royal Family and the Death of the Members of the House of Romanov in the Urals’ by M.K. Diterichs.
1924, Paris, France
Two years later, N. A. Sokolov, now safely in Paris, also decided to leave his mark in the history by claiming his version of the ‘truth’ aided by hand-picked mix and match evidences and testimonies of the investigation that he, whether willingly or unwillingly, was responsible for. The evidence that in his memoirs referred to as confidential suddenly became quite public and non-confidential thanks to his book published in French by the publishing house Payot: ‘ENOUÊTE JUDICIAIRE SUR L’ASSASSINAT DE la Famille Impériale Russe’.
1925, Berlin, Germany
In November 1924, N. A. Sokolov unexpectedly died in his garden in Paris, yet his spirit lived on in a not-quite-finished book in Russian ‘Убийство Царской семьи’ / ‘The Murder of the Imperial Family’ which was published in 1925 by the publishing house ‘Slovo’.
‘Within the bounds of law, I have tried to do everything possible to find the truth and preserve it for future generations. I did not think that I would have to speak about it myself, hoping that the Russian national government would establish it with its authoritative verdict. […] I do not at all pretend that I know all the facts and through them the whole truth. […] I know that in this study the inquisitive human mind will not find answers to many questions: it is necessarily limited, because its main subject is murder.’ — an excerpt from ‘The Murder of the Imperial Family’ by N.A. Sokolov
Apart from the above mentioned publications there were other ones which aim was the same — to establish the fact of the murder of the former Russian Imperial Family and to showcase it to the world in ‘serious printed works’ in vivid colours of horror:
‘Recently, several serious printed works have appeared, primarily abroad, based partly on memoirs and partly on some official documents of the investigation, about the murder of the members of the Tsar’s Family by the Bolsheviks in Yekaterinburg. In America, a book was published by the above-mentioned Telberg [‘The Last Days of the Romanovs’ 1920], who was the Administrator of the Council of Ministers in Omsk; in England, a book was published by Wilton [‘The Last Days of the Romanovs’ 1920], a correspondent for the newspaper “Times”, who spent all his time in investigative work in the Urals; […] in Peking, a book was published by the Hegumen Seraphim [‘Orthodox Tsar-Martyr’, 1920], who accompanied the bodies of the Grand Duchess and Grand Dukes killed in Alapaevsk during their transportation from Alapaevsk first to Chita, and then to our Spiritual Mission in Peking.’ — an excerpt from the preface of ‘The Murder of the Royal Family and the Death of the Members of the House of Romanov in the Urals’ by M.K. Diterichs.
‘Echoes’ of the Nicholas II and Alexandra Fedorovna
In parallel and in conjunction with all these ‘serious printed works’ yet another stream of publications fled into the hands of general, and not only, public. While publications about the ‘murder’ of the former Imperial Family aimed at discrediting the Soviets and blaming them for their deeds, these publications aimed, by showcasing intimate and private thoughts of Nicholas II and Alexandra Fedorovna, to discredit them in the eyes of the overseas and Russian readers. Both approaches served immediate political agendas, not considering the Family themselves.
1922, Berlin, Germany
The same publishing house ‘Slovo’ that published in 1925 ‘The Murder of the Imperial Family’ by N. A. Sokolov, three years prior to that also published Alexandra Fedorovna’s letters to Nicholas II in two volumes — ‘Письма Императрицы Александры Федоровны к Императору Николаю Второму’/ ‘The Letters of the Empress Alexandra Fedorovna to the Emperor Nicholas II’. One thing though, ‘a black box with the initials N. A. engraved on it’ mentioned in the book’s preface as the initial source of the letters had never been left behind in Yekaterinburg, therefore could not have been miraculously ‘found’ there.
[…] The Empress’s letters were found in Yekaterinburg after the murder of the royal family in a black box with the initials N. A. engraved on it. They were kept there together with the letters of Emperor Wilhelm, which had already been published. The letters to the Emperor were all written in English, but some names, individual words, and sometimes even whole phrases were written in Russian.[…] — an excerpt from the preface of ‘The Letters of the Empress Alexandra Fedorovna to the Emperor Nicholas II’
1923, Berlin, Germany
A year later, the same publishing house ‘Slovo’ released yet another publication, ‘Дневник Императора Николая Второго’ /‘Diary of the Emperor Nicholas II’, containing the extracts from his diaries covering the period of 1896–1906. Noteworthy is the title — the ‘Diary’ and not ‘Diaries’, despite its contents. The title itself is intentionally misleading, making the readers to believe it is a certain Diary, whilst it is just a compilation of entries dated 1896–1906. The preface is also misleading, presenting a distorted and all negative image of Nicholas II:
‘The reign of Emperor Nicholas II represents one of the darkest pages of Russian history. It ends the so-called Petersburg period with an unheard-of cataclysm, which, as is now customary to say, threw Russia back two hundred years, in other words, as if it brought to naught the grandiose work of two centuries and symbolized this by moving the capital to Moscow.
The catastrophe crept up after the calm, outwardly brilliant reign of Alexander III, when Russia seemed at the apogee of its power, and this circumstance prompts us to shift the burden of responsibility to the personality of the successor. It goes without saying, however, that the causes of the great catastrophe had been accumulating for a long time and lay deep, and the personality of the head of state, his individual qualities could only influence the acceleration or delay of the development of the painful process.’ — an excerpt from the Preface to ‘Diary of the Emperor Nicholas II’
1925, Moscow, USSR
Among the ‘echoes’ stands out an article ‘Конец Династии Романовых’/’The End of the Romanov Dynasty’/’The End of the Romanov Dynasty’, by Y. Sobolev published in the journal ‘Ogonek’ (N12 (103)). The article, in a way, wraps up the ‘echo’ campaign in the press, putting supposedly a ‘firm seal’ on the future of the former Imperial Family, other Romanovs included, with its final paragraph:
‘It is impossible to speak seriously about the claims of the former Grand Duke Kirill, who declared himself Emperor of All Russia, or about the appointment of Nikolai Nikolaevich as the ‘guardian’ of the Russian throne. This is the epilogue of not even a tragicomedy, but an amusing farce.’ — a closing paragraph of the article ‘The End of the Romanov Dynasty’ by Y. Sobolev
1925, Paris, France
As if echoing the ‘echo’, another publication was released in 1925 ‘JOURNAL INTIME DE NICOLAS II (1914–1918)’/ ‘The Diary of Nicholas II (1914-1918)’. It was published in French by the publishing house Payot in Paris.
This battle of the word-swords was finished with the death of Vladimir Lenin (1870–1924) on 21 January 1924, and the arrival of his successor, Joseph Stalin (1878–1953), who would make the subject of the former Russian Imperial Family a confidential and secret one with no publications or mentions of it allowed in any of the Soviet press. The silence period would last 40 years till mid 1960s.
The 1960s
Radio Interviews with the ‘Killers’
After long period of silence, surprising as it is, in 1963–1964, the subject of the former Russian Imperial Family and the fate of the Romanovs was resurrected by the Soviets.
In this regard it is important to note that 1963–1964 were the last two years of the Khrustchev’s Thaw and most of life changing political and cultural events of the 10 year era had already happened. So, the resurrection did not seem to be tied to any particular external event.
The resurrection of the subject happened by the means of the radio recoding of the recollections of the three remaining participants of the infamous Yekaterinburg 1918 events. Who knows, perhaps, there was some private matter which was not visible to the naked eye of the public that was noteworthy or important enough to be able to prompt such public ‘confessions’.
And so, G. P. Nikulin (1894–1965), the former Assistant Commandant of the Ipatievsky house, M. A. Medvedev (Kudrin) (1891–1964), a former Yekaterinburg Cheka officer, and I. I. Rodziansky (?-1987), a once member of the board of the Ural Regional Cheka, were summoned to the Soviet Radio Committee to tell their tales and patched recollections of the events.
December 1963, Moscow, USSR
‘On the evening of July 16 1918 (new style), in the building of the Ural Regional Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution (located in the American Hotel in the city of Yekaterinburg — now the city of Sverdlovsk), the Ural Regional Council met in an incomplete composition. When I, a Yekaterinburg Cheka officer, was summoned there, I saw familiar comrades in the room: the Chairman of the Council of Deputies, Aleksandr Georgievich Beloborodov, the Chairman of the Regional Committee of the Bolshevik Party, Georgy Safarov, the Military Commissar of Yekaterinburg, Filipp Goloshchekin, a member of the Council, Pyotr Lazarevich Voikov, the Chairman of the Regional Cheka, Fyodor Lukoyanov, my friends, members of the board of the Ural Regional Cheka, Vladimir Gorin, Isai Idelevich (Ilyich) Rodzinsky (now a personal pensioner, lives in Moscow) and the commandant of the House of Special Purpose (Ipatyev House), Yakov Mikhailovich Yurovsky.’ — an excerpt from the recollections of M.A. Medevedev (Kudrin)
1964, Moscow, USSR
‘…Our situation was rather grave. Yurovsky and I were waiting for some kind of end. We understood, of course, that some kind of end had to come. And then one fine day… yes, on the morning of July 16th, Yurovsky said to me: ‘Well, lad, they’re summoning me there, to the presidium of the executive committee to see Beloborodov. I’ll go, and you stay here.’ And so, three or four hours later, he comes back and says: “Well, it’s decided. Tonight… The city is now being declared under siege, right now. Tonight, we must carry out the liquidation… we must liquidate everyone.’ — an excerpt from the recollections of G. P. Nikulin
15 May 1964, Moscow, USSR
- Tell us about the note in red ink, the archive mixed up the originals, so to speak.’
‘Ah, the correspondence I had with Nikolai. By the way, in the archive, I think, the document, I don’t know where they show all this, in the Museum of the Revolution, apparently, there are apparently two letters written by me in French with the signature… (foreign language). Russian officer. In red ink, as I recall now, we wrote two letters, we wrote them, that’s how it was decided. It was a few days before, well, before all these events, just in case, they decided to start a correspondence of such a nature that a group of officers…, about the approaching liberation, to prepare them, so that they would be ready for that, so… and so on…’ — an excerpt from the recollections of I. I Rodziansky
Note the inconsistencies about the meeting, the summoning and the timing of decisions made in the excerpts of the recollections of Medvedev (Kudrin) and Nikulin. They are quite telling and are just a tip of the iceberg of the rest of the inconsistencies in their recollections. As such these stories did not add anything new to the already existed official narrative, but they created an extra dimension to them, sort of validating the previous narratives and conclusions.
After this, all went quiet for another 20 plus years until one ‘fine day’. The day that established another deception point in the former Russian Imperial Family fate and prompted another round of misinformation and misinterpretations.
The 1980s
The Announcement of the Discovery of the ‘Burial Site’ of the Romanovs
The decade of ‘great revelations’ in the press concerning the former Russian Imperial Family started in 1979 with the discovery by A. Avdonin and Geliy Trofimovich Ryabov (1932–2015) of a burial site which they at the time believed was of the Romanovs. The search was prompted by an investigator G. Ryabov, and the actual discovery of the location of the site was made by the geologist A. Avdonin and his colleagues.
In addition to being a professional investigator, G. Ryabov was also a freelance consultant to the USSR Minister of Internal Affairs, a co-author of the story ‘I’m from Counterintelligence’, and to add to this a screenwriter. A. Avdonin — a Soviet and Russian geologist, the Doctor of Geological and Mineralogical Sciences.
In 1989, contrary to the original agreement with Avdonin, Ryabov decided to make public their ‘secret’ and reveal the information about the burial site. And what better means to use than the press? But not just any press, the one that targets international and expat audiences. Quite unusual move for a freelance consultant to the USSR Minister of Internal Affairs.
Here is the recollection of Igor Ivanovich Vinogradov (1930–2015), a friend of G. Ryabov, and the head of the poetry department at the journal ‘Novy Mir’, of how this media campaign was started:
‘Under a plausible and previously agreed upon pretext for an emergency (ridiculously naive), my wife and I immediately summoned to Moscow our old friend, the Venetian Slavic scholar Mariolina Doria de Zuliani (now better known as Countess Marzotto); she, having already forgotten the meaning of our naive password due to long non-demand and being somewhat embarrassed by the fact that she could not remember whose “birthday” she was so urgently invited to, nevertheless, true to friendship, immediately flew in, and we introduced her to the problem and all the materials, after which she flew away just as urgently.’ — excerpt from the recollections of I. Vinogradov from his preface to an article by G. Ryabov, ‘Descent into Hell. The Posthumous Fate of the Royal Family.’
September 1987, Moscow, USSR
Prior to the decision of G. Ryabov to reveal the information about his and Avdonin’s discovery, an article ‘Дневник последнего самодержца’/‘The Diary of the Last Autocrat’, — by Nikolai Eroshkin (1920–1988), a Soviet historian and a specialist in Russian history, appeared in the journal ‘Ogonek’ (issue N37). Most likely it is not connected to Ryabov’s decision at all. However, it is interesting to note the tone of the article and the view of Nicholas II it presents:
‘The reader of the diary sees the entire conscious life of a man who, by the will of fate, stood at the head of a vast state for 23 years. Day after day, before going to bed or in the morning after breakfast, he wrote down in his diary the most remarkable, from his point of view, facts and events.
And from the pages of the diary there emerges the image of a narrow-minded, cruel ruler indifferent to the needs of the people, an irreconcilable admirer of autocracy, a religiously mystically minded philistine, inclined to an idle life, to wine, gambling, hunting and to quiet family joys, such as reading historical novels aloud and pasting photographs into albums.’ — an excerpt from the article ‘The Diary of the Last Autocrat’ by Nikolai Eroshkin
5, 8, and 12 April 1989, Italy
As was agreed between Vinogradov, Ryabov and Mariolina Doria de Zuliani, she wrote a series of articles, — three to be precise, — about the former Russian Imperial family and the discovery of the burial site that Ryabov and Avdonin made in Yekaterinburg. The three articles were published in the Italian newspaper ‘Il Giornale’.
Here is a recollection of Vinogradov about the event of them appearing in the Italian press:
‘And so, on the 5th, 8th and 12th of April 1989, three articles by Mariolina appeared one after another in the famous Italian newspaper “Il Giornale”, telling about the execution of the Tsar’s family, about the history of the secret burial, about the results of the search undertaken by the group of Ryabov and Avdonin. The articles were supplied with photographs, including those from Ryabov’s expedition album. This was the first publication in the world about the Yekaterinburg discovery, which immediately became a sensation.
The deed was done — it was no longer possible to keep the information quiet. — excerpt from the recollections of Vinogradov from his preface to an article by G. Ryabov, ‘Descent into Hell. The Posthumous Fate of the Royal Family.’
16 April 1989, Moscow, USSR
Following the articles by Mariolina Doria de Zuliani an interview of G. Ryabov about him discovering the supposed burial site of the Romanovs, was published ‘Moscow News’ (issue N16 ) — a newspaper that targeted expats working in the USSR.
‘And on April 16, under the headline ‘The Earth Gave Up a Secret’, Ryabov’s interview and ‘Moscow News’ were published — it became impossible to hide this ‘secret given up by the earth’ from the public in Russia as well.’ — excerpt from the recollections of Vinogradov from his preface to an article by G. Ryabov, ‘Descent into Hell. The Posthumous Fate of the Royal Family.’
April 1989, Moscow, USSR
In the same month, yet another article about the discovery of A. Avdonin and G. Ryabov was published in the magazine ‘Rodina’ (Mother Land). The article was written by G. Ryabov himself:
‘Both publications, the Russian and the Italian, appeared with links to a more detailed essay by Geliy Ryabov published in the ‘Rodina’ magazine (№4 and №5). This was originally intended to help the planned publication take place. But it seems that the Rodina editorial board dealt with its own problems: the 4th issue of the magazine appeared almost immediately after ‘Moskovskiye Novosti’.’ — excerpt from the recollections of I. Vinogradov from his preface to an article by G. Ryabov, ‘Descent into Hell. The Posthumous Fate of the Royal Family.’
20–27 May 1989, Moscow, USSR
A month later and probably just as follow up on what had been published in the mentioned above media, an article ‘Расстрел в Екатеринбурге’ /‘The Execution in Yekaterinburg’, appeared the journal ‘Ogonek’ (issue N21). The article was written by Edward Radzinsky (1936-), a Soviet and Russia writer, with the following opening quotation:
‘Whoever applauds the king will be beaten, whoever scolds him will be hanged’ — this is what was said during the days of the French Revolution after the execution of the king.’ — one of the opening quotations of the article ‘The Execution in Yekaterinburg’ by Edward Radzinsky.
It is interesting to note that as Avdonin had envisaged, the outpourings regarding their discovery and the Romanovs were perceived negatively by the authorities and caused a negative attitude towards the author, that is, towards Ryabov.
However, regardless of what Avdonin thought, the press had been used once again to serve personal ambitions and to stir something that perhaps no one wanted to really stir to such a degree. But as Vinogradov noted — ‘The deed was done’. The deed which changed the course of many lives and even opinions and views, and started yet another round of twistedness and misinformation. This time, based on supposedly good intentions of G. Ryabov. But as we all know: ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions’.
What followed ‘the deed’ has its own story.
The 1990–1991
Intervention of the USSR Government — The ‘Burial Site’ Excavated
4 August 1990, Sverdlovsk (former Yekaterinburg), USSR
Worried for the safety of the burial site, especially after Ryabov’s outpourings in the Russian and international press, A. Avdonin decided to send an official letter to the Chairman of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR, B. N. Yeltsin (1931–2007), telling about his and Ryabov’s findings of 1979.
October 1990, Moscow, USSR
In October 1990, A. Avdonin and his colleague, G. P Vasiliev, were summoned to Supreme Council of the RSFSR. As a result of the conversation the decision to perform an official excavation was made by B.N. Yeltsin:
‘In October, G.P. Vasiliev and I were summoned to the Supreme Council of the RSFSR. The conversation took place with the assistant to the chairman, V.V. Ilyushin. He reported that B.N. Yeltsin attached great importance to the information we had provided and considered it necessary to open the place where the remains were hidden, entrusting its organization to the chairman of the Sverdlovsk Regional Executive Committee, E.E. Rossel.’ — an excerpt from the book ‘Ganina Pit’ by A. Avdonin
11–13 July 1991, Sverdlovsk (former Yekaterinburg), USSR
‘The official extraction of the remains was carried out by a group of specialists formed by the Sverdlovsk Regional Executive Committee on the instructions of E.E. Rossel.
On July 11–13, 1991, the burial site of the alleged remains of the Tsar’s Family on the Old Koptyakovskaya Road was uncovered. The author was also involved in the work of the specialists.’ — an excerpt from the book ‘Ganina Pit’ by A. Avdonin
August 1991, Moscow, USSR
Just about a month later an attempted coup was organised by the chairman of the KGB, Vladimir Kruchkov, which eventually led to the collapse of the USSR and the end of the USSR era as it had been known since 1918.
The bottom line: stories and narratives should be written by people to whom these stories belong and not by those who use stories of others to advance in life, career, or political influence. Each and every one owns their stories and this ownership should be honoured.
