• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What happened to the Romanov Family? - Sources A and B give similar accounts. Does this mean they are reliable?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

History Coursework: What happened to the Romanov Family? (A) Sources A and B give similar accounts. Does this mean they are reliable? Both Sources A and B are similar in that they all state that Nicholas Romanov, two royal servants and a maid were all murdered by the Reds in Ipatiev House in 1918. Both sources are different interpretations of the same information. Source A is an account of Judge Sergeyev's findings by an American newspaper, and Source B is a short extract from the report given to the British government by Sir Charles Elliot. Both sources were written in 1918, before Judge Sergeyev was sacked. Both America and Britain were strong opponents of the Bolshevik regime suspected of the murder of the Russian royal family and as such their dependability can be immediately questioned, they may have been biased against the Reds. Judge Sergeyev himself was a white supporter and as such his documented reports may be biased against the Bolsheviks by making them seem worse and more atrocious than they actually were, and therefore damaging them in a critical time of the Russian revolution. The Whites were the forces opposing communist Russia, composing many minority groups who were for some reason or other against the ideas that communism was founded upon. Foreign governments for example, and the aristocracy of Russia were whites. Both Britain and America opposed the Bolsheviks because they withdrew Russia from WWI by signing the treaty of Brest-Litovsk with Germany in March of 1918. The fact that the governments of the authors of both sources were against the Reds would imply a bias on behalf of their authors, and as such would leave the reliability of both sources questionable. However, since source B is not a public document, and is instead addressed to the British government it seems unlikely that the author, Sir Charles Elliot, would have attempted to distort the truth. ...read more.

Middle

The extent to which D is reliable can also be tested by cross-referencing it with some of the other sources. In doing so the reliability of D is proved doubtable as by comparing the account D gives with those offered in sources A, B, E, I and J many dissimilarities present themselves, making it seem less likely that D is reliable. Sources A and B both disagree with D on who was actually killed by the Reds, source I also disagrees with D on who was actually executed, and source J - although it does not directly state it - advocates that perhaps not all the children were killed. Source D does however also agree with some sources on other aspects of the murders. For example, sources J and C both agree with D in that the corpses of the royal family were transported by lorry to a location for destruction. Source E in particular directly opposes a number of the details that are offered in source D. In source E Mevdevev's wife states that 'my husband fired (at the royal family) too', and the account also establishes that Mevdevev bragged to another guard of how he 'emptied two or three bullets into the Tsar.' which straightforwardly contests the statement that Mevdevev gives in source D of 'He (Mevdevev) walked out and heard the shots. Walking into the room he saw all the members of the Tsars family lying on the floor.' Mevdevev's account in source D implies that he had nothing to do with the killing of the royal family. Sources D and E are distinctly dissimilar, and complement each other in no way apart from that the Tsar was killed in the shooting. Source E does not even firmly ascertain who the other victims were. It is understandable however, that in source D Mevdevev would not have confessed to participating in the killings of the royal family (assuming that the statement Mevdevev's wife makes in source E is in fact correct), in view of the fact that his investigators were White Russians. ...read more.

Conclusion

The fact that the leadership was not involved by the soviet of the Ural in such a politically important decision is what is most surprising about this source. In this source however it is implied that only the Tsar was killed on the order of the Ural soviet. 'His wife and son have been sent off to a secure place.' This contradicts many sources (Sources A and B as well as all other sources related to the investigation of Judge Sokolov) and makes the reliability of source E questionable. (F) How far does source J confirm what the other sources said about what happened to the Tsar and his family? Source J, in my opinion is the most important and reliable source for many reasons. Source J was a report from a British newspaper published in 1994. It states that "two of the imperial families five children were found missing when archaeologists opened a shallow burial pit near Ekaterinbourg". This tells the reader that it was true about the bodies being transported out of Ekaterinbourg. Source J is backed up by modern technology and is proved to be much more reliable than any of the other sources. Source J identifies exactly where and who the bodies are present. Source J is also supported by many other sources and the ones that do not support source J are most likely distorted. In conclusion, Source J, along with sources C and D, believe that the corpses were taken, in a lorry, to a mine, in an attempt to dispose of any evidence. Also, sources A and B agree with J that 5 people were killed. However other sources disagree with J on certain matters, such as how many were killed, as sources C and D believe they were all killed. I still believe that, considering it has DNA information and that it is a secondary source published 75 years after the alleged shootings and has had more time to gather evidence, source J is the most trustworthy source. Adeeb Elhag - 11TS ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. These three sources do not all give the same impression of Stalin. Source A ...

    Source K is the last source that supports Stalin. This was part of a biography of Stalin and it was written in 1947. Stalin was still alive at this point, and people wouldn't dare to write anything bad about Stalin, being aware of what happens at show trials.

  2. China 1945-90 - source based questions.

    The Red Guards attacked anything remotely connected with the West, capitalism, the Soviet Union or intellectualism, From source C which was written by an eyewitness account whose father was threatened by the Red Guards and was accused of having "capitalist tiles" Nonetheless, as source F delivers the positive side of

  1. The blance sheet for russia.

    Lenin and the Bolsheviks had made it abundantly clear that if the revolution was not spread to the West, they would be doomed. On the 7th March 1918, Lenin weighed up the situation: "Regarded from the world-historical point of view, there would doubtlessly be no hope of the ultimate victory

  2. Stalin Sources Questions

    Stalin is using his "fear factor" to put across his message. He is attempting to justify that his next in command are devious and Stalin is also trying to portray them as negative. In a way he is trying to turn the Russian people against his fellow comrades.

  1. The Romanovs had ruled Russia since 1613

    *To introduce agrarian reforms to win back the support of the peasantry * *To instruct Peter Stolypin his prime minister Peasants resented the strip framing that gave them only scattered parcels of land. Stolypin had hoped that his plans for agrarian reform would succeed in ending the major causes of peasant discontent.

  2. Stalin - Source based work

    This was also the time of the second of the five-year plans. Many peasants who had not lost their land during the early introduction of collectivism had died during the famine caused by the diversion of grain from the country to the industrialised areas, and others had left the land to join the workers on the factories.

  1. Romanov Family Question F

    It was made to show us how the author thought the Tsar had died. As with sources E and F little can be said about the reliability of this source.

  2. What Happened To The Romanov Family

    Because the account came from someone that had been tortured, which means that he could have been forced to say something that supported the Whites. So he could be twisting the story. I also disagree that it is reliable, because although it is said to be an eyewitness account, a

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work