|
|
|
|
THE FALSE ALEXEI A typical imposter is the individual who claimed to be the Czarevich Alexis Nicolaevich who, it is alleged, secretly survived the massacre at Ekaterinburg! The interesting article on the Web which makes the case that Alexei Tammet-Romanov was in fact the Czarevich is well written and includes a detailed discussion of DNA testing and hemophilia. The author clearly knows his subject and has made a good case for the thesis that Czarevich did not suffer from hemophilia but another genetic ailment. Where the case falls down is in presenting evidence of why the Czarevich's life was spared, how he escaped and what happened to him subsequently. No evidence of this (beyond hearsay claims by the individual concerned) are presented and some alleged inconsistencies in reports of the execution and its aftermath which could be explained in any number of ways. The fact that the Czarevich's body was not found has already been explaned in the testimony of those charged with the disposal and burial of the Imperial Family and their servants; Maria and Alexis's bodies were burnt separately. The intimation is that the Bolsheviks wanted to make it seem as if he had been killed, but keep him as a hostage. Yet there is no evidence that even when faced with an international outcry over the murders, when the Czarevich could have been produced, that the Soviets had actually obtained custody of the young Prince. Having done so, why would they allow him to escape? If they had deliberately spared his life, why did they not hang onto his person? If they had such custody, or knew him to have escaped, why would they not advertise it later. Or today, why would it not be expedient for them to tell this astonishing story? The case is initially well argued and coherently presented, but then falls apart when the events subsequent to the murder are clearly an unsubstantiated hypothesis, based largely on the testimony of the claimant himself who died twenty years ago and whose testimony, therefore, must be considered hearsay. If, as is suggested, the Czarevich had really escaped into the custody of Count Benckendorf, why did the Benckendorf's not reveal this later? This is a family that would have been proud to have succoured the heir to the Imperial Throne. Why have none of the alleged witnesses of these astonshing events ever come forward to support this story? Possession of a star of the Black Eagle is no evidence whatsoever; stars of this Order regularly come up on the international market since, unlike the Collars of the Order, they were not returnable to the Emperor-King. Why are there no records in the German Achives? The essay supporting this claimant starts well but deteriorates into conjecture and fantasy; there is no evidence too tie the individual callig himself Heino Tamnet and the person of the Czarevich together, and the argument that this is because it was such a great secret that nothing was written down is simply ridiculous. Why keep this extraordinary story a secret once the Czarevich was safe from the clutches of the Soviets?
|
