The Death of Hitler: The Final Word

MOSCOW, 6 APRIL 2016

Lana is perplexed.

Her contacts within the senior Russian administration have made no bones about how hard it is going to be for us to achieve our objective. Our meeting for 11:00 has been confirmed, but in Russia that doesn’t necessarily mean anything. Our faces are stung by frost as we approach the area around the “State Archives of the Russian Federation.” In Russia they’re called GARF (Gosudartstennyy Arkhiv Rossyskov Federatsii). A national institution right in the heart of Moscow. It is based around one of the biggest archive collections in the country, with almost 7 million documents from the nineteenth century to the present day. Chiefly paper documents, but also some photographs and secret files. And it’s for one of those secret files that we are braving the harsh Muscovite climate as well as the no less rough Russian bureaucracy. Lana Parshina isn’t entirely unknown in Russia. A journalist and documentary maker, this young Russian-American woman is regularly invited onto television platforms to talk about what remains her major achievement: the last interview with Lana Peters. Lana Peters was a penniless old woman, forgotten by everyone in a hospice for the poor in the depths of the United States. She hid herself away and refused to talk to journalists. Let alone discuss the memory of her father, one Josef Vissarionovich Djugashvili, otherwise known as Stalin. Lana Peters’ name was in fact Svetlana Stalin, and she was the dictator’s favourite daughter. At the height of the Cold War in the 1960s, she had fled the country and applied to the US for political asylum. From that moment she became the symbol of those Soviets who were prepared to do anything to escape a tyrannical regime. Lana Parshina had managed to persuade the dictator’s shy descendant to grant her a series of filmed interviews. That was in 2008. It was a success that attracted attention all over Russia. Stalin has in fact been coming back into fashion in Moscow for a number of years. Lana Parshina knows the complex gear-wheels of the administrative and bureaucratic Russian machine only too well. She knows how to get access to secret, sensitive, and complex files.

And yet on that morning in April 2016, I sense that she’s worried. We have a meeting with the director of GARF, Larisa Alexandrovna Rogovaya. She alone can authorise us to consult File H. “H” for Hitler.

The tone is set as soon as we enter the main hall of GARF. A soldier with a very 1970s moustache, a bit like Freddie Mercury’s, demands to see our passports. “Check!” he bellows, as if we were intruders. Lana, with her Russian ID, isn’t a problem. My French passport complicates matters. The soldier doesn’t seem at ease with the Latin alphabet, and can’t decipher my name. In Cyrillic characters, Brisard becomes БРИЗАР. That’s how I’m listed in the file of people who have been granted access for the day. After a long check and Lana’s life-saving assistance, we are finally allowed through. The office of the director general of the archives? The lowly official was horrified by the mere question. He was already tending to his next customer with the same cordial tone. “Right at the end, after the third building on the right.” The young woman who answered our question didn’t wait for our thanks before turning her back on us and climbing the dimly lit stairs. GARF looks like a Soviet workers’ city. It spreads over several buildings with sinister façades in the most austere Soviet style, a mixture of constructivism and rationalism. We wander from one building to another, trying to avoid the big puddles of muddy snow. “General Director,” large letters announce on a plaque above a double door in the distance. A black sedan bars the entrance. We have another twenty or so metres to go when a woman with an imposing build hurries from the building to dive into the vehicle.

“That’s the director,” Lana murmurs with a note of despair as she watches the car driving away.

It’s 10:55, and our 11:00 meeting has just flown away from under our noses.

Welcome to Russia.

The two secretaries of the director of GARF have shared out the roles between them: one nice, the other frankly unpleasant.

“What’s it about?”

Even if you don’t understand a language, which is my case with Russian, it’s easy to sense when someone’s being rude to you. So the younger woman–if I wished to be rude I would say the less old of the two–is not our friend.

Lana introduces us, we are the two journalists, she is Russian and I’m French. We’re here because we had a meeting with the director, and also to view a rather special object.

“You won’t see her!” the hostile secretary cuts in. “She’s left for the day. She isn’t here.” Lana explains that we know that already–the dark car outside, the director forgetting that we’re there and evaporating right in front of us. She says all that without shedding an ounce of her enthusiasm. Might waiting be an option? “If it amuses you,” the secretary says at last, leaving the room with a stack of files under her arm, to suggest the importance of the time of which we have dared to deprive her. A Swiss cuckoo clock hangs on the wall above her desk. It says 11:10. The other assistant has been listening to her colleague without a word. Her contrite expression hasn’t escaped us. Lana walks over to her.

A meeting at the Kremlin, in the president’s office. It wasn’t in the director’s diary. Clearly, when Putin or, more probably, his cabinet rings, you run, the secretary explains, lowering her voice, in short phrases. She seems so sweet and her voice is comforting, in spite of the rather negative nature of the information that she’s giving us. And who knows when the director will be back? She doesn’t, at any rate. Has she been summoned away at the last minute because of us? “No. Why would it be because of you?”

It’s just after 5:00 pm. Our patience has paid off at last. Right in front of our eyes a stiff cardboard box has just been opened. Inside, there it is, very small, delicately preserved in a casket.

“So is that him? Is it really him?”

“Da!”

“Yes, she’s saying yes.”

“Thank you, Lana. And that’s all that’s left?”

“Da!”

“You don’t need to translate, Lana.”

Looking more closely, the casket is very like a box for computer disks. In fact that’s exactly what it is. Hitler’s skull is preserved in a disk box! To be precise, it’s a piece of skull presented by the Russian authorities as being Hitler’s. Stalin’s trophy! One of the best-guarded secrets in the Soviet Union and then in post-Communist Russia. And for us, the end of a year of waiting and investigation.

You need to imagine the scene to understand the strange feeling that comes over us. A rectangular room big enough to hold about ten people. A table, rectangular too, in dark lacquered wood. On the wall, a series of drawings under glass, with red frames. “Original posters,” we are told. They date from the Revolutionary era. The Revolution, the big one, the Russian one, the one organised by Lenin in October or November 1917, depending on whether you follow the Julian or the Gregorian calendar. They show proud workers with concave stomachs. Their powerful arms hold a scarlet banner up to the world. A capitalist, an oppressor of the people, crosses their path. How can you tell he is a capitalist? He is wearing a very smart suit and a top hat and has a big fat paunch. He exudes smugness, the smugness of the powerful in the face of the weak. In the last poster, the man with the hat has lost his pride. He is lying on the ground on his back, his head crushed by the worker’s huge hammer.

That perennial symbol. However powerful you might be, you will end up crushed, your head smashed in by the resistance of the Russian people. Had Hitler seen these drawings?

Too bad if he had, because the Russians got him in the end. Or at least they got his skull.

But let us return to the description of the scene.

This little room, this conference room with its hints of revolution, is on the ground floor of GARF, just beside the secretaries’ office where we waited patiently for the return of the director, Larisa Alexandrovna Rogovaya. That opulent woman in her fifties doesn’t just impress her interlocutors with her imposing physical presence. Her sense of calm and her natural charisma distinguish her from the run of Moscow functionaries. Back from the Kremlin, she had passed through the secretaries’ office. Without seeing us. Lana and I had taken our seats in the only two armchairs in the room. An enormous potted plant stood between them, and generously invaded the little space remaining to us. Even if you concentrated very hard, even if you were in a terrible hurry, it was impossible not to notice the presence of two human beings around the giant ficus. It was 4:00 pm at that point. We had leapt to our feet; hope was returning. The telephone had just rung. “In the next room? The conference room? In thirty minutes…” The nice secretary repeated the orders given to her into the receiver. Lana leaned towards me with a smile. It was for us.

In silence, the director had sat down at the end of the big rectangular table. On either side of her, standing to attention, stood two clerks. On her right, a woman old enough to have laid claim to a well-deserved pension. On her left, a man with a sepulchral appearance straight out of a Bram Stoker novel. The woman’s name was Dina Nikolaevna Nokhotovich, and she was in charge of the special collections. The man’s name was Nikolai Igorevich Vladimirsev (he prefers Nikolai); he is head of the department of document preservation at GARF.

Nikolai had set a large cardboard box gently in front of the director. Dina helped him lift the lid. Then they stepped back, hands behind their backs, and focused their eyes on us. An attitude intended as a warning by these two sentries, who were ready to intervene if necessary. Larisa, still seated, put her hands on either side of the box as if to protect it, and invited us to look inside.

It was a moment we had stopped hoping would happen. That bit of skull had seemed inaccessible only that morning. After months and months of interminable negotiations, repeated demands formulated by email, by regular mail, by telephone, by fax (well yes, still often used in Russia), in person with stubborn officials, here we were at last looking at this human fragment. The remains of a cranial box, a good quarter of one, to the naked eye, from the back left part (two parietals and a bit of occipital, to be precise). The object of so much greed on the part of historians and journalists from across the world. Is it Hitler’s, as the Russian authorities claim? Or does it belong to a woman in her forties, as an American scientist recently asserted? To ask that question within the GARF fortress is to talk politics, to cast doubts on the official word of the Kremlin. An option unimaginable to the director of the archives. Absolutely unimaginable.

Larisa Rogovaya has only been the director of GARF for a few days. She has replaced the former director, Sergei Mironenko. An oh-so political and sensitive position in this Putin-era Russia. In our presence, Larisa Rogovaya weighs each word. She is the only one who answers our questions, the two clerks don’t get to say a word. Always concise, two or maybe three words, and that face, in a permanent state of tension. The senior official already seems to regret granting our request. To be precise, she hasn’t granted anything at all. The order to let us study this bit of skull comes from someone higher up than her. How high exactly? Hard to guess. From the Kremlin? Most definitely. But who at the Kremlin? Lana is convinced that it all comes straight from the President’s office. As in the days of the Soviet Union, the State Archives have once again become an effectively secret place. On 4 April 2016 Vladimir Putin signed a decree stipulating that the management, publication, and declassification of the archives, and access to them, fell directly within the remit of the President of the Russian Federation, meaning Putin himself.

The end of the period of open access to historical documents that began under Boris Yeltsin. Exit the charismatic director of GARF, Sergei Mironenko, a friend to many foreign historians and advocate of almost free access to hundreds of thousands of historical pieces in his institution. “Fewer commentaries, more documents. The documents must speak for themselves,” was the refrain he liked to give by way of reply to his colleagues, surprised by this open-door policy. It’s over! Mironenko has gone. His twenty-four years of good and true service as director of GARF changed nothing. With a stroke of the pen, the Kremlin demoted him. He wasn’t fired, he wasn’t retired (at sixty-five he would have been due to retire anyway), he wasn’t moved to a different service–he was demoted. Humiliation was added to disgrace because, of course, the new director is none other than his former subordinate, our dear Larisa Rogovaya. Stalin couldn’t have done better.

Putin’s decree dates from 4 April 2016. And we are standing in front of the box with that piece of skull on 6 April 2016. The thought that Larisa Rogovaya would give a lot to get rid of us doesn’t take away the feeling of paranoia. Her whole body cries out her aversion towards us, her fear of ending up like Mironenko. Then, when we ask if we can take the diskette case from the cardboard box, the tension in the little room immediately goes up a notch. Larisa turns towards her two sentries. A brief confabulation ensues. Nikolai shakes his head disapprovingly. Dina picks up a piece of paper at the bottom of the cardboard box, adjusts her little glasses, which give her a sly look, and walks over to Lana.

At that very moment, the director waves to Nikolai to indicate that she hasn’t changed her mind. He is still dubious, and hesitates for a moment. Then, reluctantly, he plunges his thin arms into the box and delicately takes out the diskette case. “You need to sign the visitor log. Put the date, the time and your names.” Dina shows us where to fill in the form. Lana carefully does so. I let her get on with it and start inspecting the skull. Nikolai interposes himself. He places himself in front of me and, with an appalled “tsutsut” points out my mistake. “First fill in the visitor log,” the director insists. Lana excuses my blunder. The blunder of a Frenchman, a foreigner. He doesn’t understand, she tries to explain to them with a smile, embarrassed as if by a fractious child. Why so many precautions, why this tension? Mironenko passes in front of the open door of the little room. I recognise him from having seen him several times in reports when researching the Hitler file.

He’s alone in the corridor. With a heavy, bowed body, he drags his carcass around without even so much as glancing at us. He clearly knows what we’re doing. Before, he was the one who used to meet journalists. He knows the skull extremely well. It is 5:30 pm, he’s already picked up his thick coat, his cap hides his grey hair, his day is over. Larisa’s isn’t. “Everything has to be done according to the rules. Times change. We must be careful,” the director says as Mironenko leaves the building. “The central administration have given us the green light to show you the skull, but we need to give an account of what happened.” We say we understand, that’s quite normal, obviously, not a problem. Larisa wouldn’t hear a word of complaint from us. This skull, or what is left of it, is becoming a source of discord, of controversy between Russia and… a large part of the rest of the world. Is it Hitler’s? Is Russia lying? Larisa is waiting for us to ask the essential question, the one about the authenticity of the bones. She gives a two-word answer: “I know!” Dina and Nikolai, her deputies, know too. We don’t know. “How can you be so sure?” The precise phrases, prepared in advance, mechanically repeated–Larisa recites them to us perfectly. The years of investigation, of analysis, of cross-checking carried out by the KGB and the Soviet scientists, the best there are…. This skull is him, it’s Hitler. “At any rate, officially, it’s him.” For the first time, the director of GARF modulates her discourse. Her confidence cracks slightly. “Officially.” It’s not an anodyne term. It isn’t scientifically, but “officially” Hitler’s skull.

Nikolai melts away as if by magic. The diskette case and the skull are all ours. Our faces approach the plastic lid. A big label, the brand of computer disk, obstructs our vision. Our contortions as we try to see it from the side change nothing. With a gesture of my hand I ask if we might lift the lid. The key, turn the key? My pantomime works. Nikolai returns, takes a small key from his pocket and frees the bolt. Then he returns to his place just behind us. But he hasn’t lifted the lid. So I repeat my gesture. This time I perform the motion of opening, of lifting. I do it twice, slowly. Larisa blinks, Nikolai has understood and, grumbling, opens the box. The skull is really in front of us at last.

So, this is Hitler. The fragment of bone stored in an ordinary diskette case from the 1990s. What irony for someone who wanted to crush part of Europe and enslave millions of human beings! Hitler, who dreaded ending up in a glass case in Moscow, exhibited by his Russian enemy as a vulgar trophy. He doesn’t have the right to a display worthy of the importance that he has assumed in contemporary history: that of the absolute incarnation of Evil. The Russians put him away in a forgotten corner of their archives and, deliberately or not, they are treating him with as much respect as the remains of a dog. And if it’s so hard to obtain the right to look at it, it isn’t because the Russians fear that it might be damaged, or its preservation compromised, but for political reasons. No one must examine it any more and call into question its authenticity. The skull is Hitler’s. No conditional tense. At least for the Russians.

To be frank, I feel a certain disappointment. Is this really the most secret item in the Russian archives: a sad little bit of bone stored in a diskette case? Remembering that this may be the last human remains of one of the biggest monsters the planet has ever known adds a feeling of disgust to the disappointment. But we must rally. Return to the investigation and remember why we are here: to lift the veil on Hitler’s last hours. To do that, we have to ask the right questions. Where was this skull found? By whom? When? And most of all, how to prove that it really is Hitler’s. We want all that. And to start, we have to analyse this skull. “Analyse?” Larisa says in astonishment as she catches the conversation in English between me and Lana. “Yes, tests… DNA, for example. Bring in a specialist, a medical examiner…” Lana translates our request in detail into Russian. Politely, the director listens to her without interrupting. “That way there would be no more doubt. None. No more questions about the identity of the skull. Hitler or not. Isn’t that important?” And it would put an end to the crazy rumours about the last days of the Nazi tyrant. Hitler in Brazil, Hitler in Japan, at the South Pole…

BERLIN, MAY 1945

A legendary monster or terrifying ghost, Hitler continues to haunt the imagination. After the fall of Berlin on 2 May 1945 two questions remained: Is he dead? Or has he escaped? According to the survivors of his bunker, he took his own life on 30 April 1945. Then he was burnt so that his corpse would not be found. It is precisely this absence of a body that would inevitably prompt a series of rumours to the effect that he might in fact have survived. On 8 May 1945 Leonid Leonov, an author hailed by the Soviet regime, published a passionate text in Pravda: “We demand material proof that this wily corporal has not turned into a werewolf. The little children of the world can sleep peacefully in their cradles. The Soviet armies, like their Western allies, want to see the Führer’s corpse ‘as large as life.’” The tone was set. While that ultimate “large as life” proof was still missing, Hitler’s ghost would linger in people’s minds. And an increasing number of people claimed to have seen him. Among the stories, some were based on tangible facts. One of them is like a spy film. It concerns the journey of the U-530–U for Unterseeboot, the German for submarine. In spite of the fall of the Third Reich, this vessel refused to surrender to the Allies and reached the coast of Argentina on 10 July 1945. Perhaps with secret passengers on board.

At the command post of the U-530 was a very young officer, perhaps too young. His name was Otto Wermuth, and he was only twenty-four. This undistinguished Oberleutnant zur See (the equivalent of a British Sub-Lieutenant or an American Lieutenant Junior Grade) was swiftly promoted on 10 January 1945 to commander of this fighting submarine. In this last year of the war, the Kriegsmarine (the German navy) was suffering, like the rest of the armies of the Reich, from an all-too-obvious shortage of battle-hardened officers. Of course, Otto Wermuth wasn’t a complete beginner, but he hadn’t had time to put himself to the test. He was recruited to the Kriegsmarine with the outbreak of the war against Poland, France, and the United Kingdom, in September 1939. He was nineteen years old at the time, and a long way from the battling figure of the Aryan warrior celebrated by the German regime. Otto Wermuth looked more like an elegant student, with his long face and equally slender, almost skinny, physique. He was quickly appointed to the “U-Boot” division of the Nazi army. Once he had completed his training, he was sent on a mission, in September 1941, as a watch officer.

By the time he found himself in charge of the U-530, an up-to-date submarine with a very long range, in January 1945, Wermuth had never been a commander. The vessel under his command was quite daunting. It was over seventy-six metres long, and could hold a crew of up to fifty-six. With its torpedo and mine launchers, as well as its deck gun, it was a formidable weapon. But the young commander would not really have time to put it to the test.

Sent on a mission off the American coast in April 1945, the U-530 fired nine torpedoes on Allied ships just south of Long Island, near Hudson Bay. These attacks were a complete failure. None of the bombs hit their targets. Wermuth learned of the German capitulation and received the order from his staff to surrender. He refused and decided to flee to Argentina. At the time, that country was a military dictatorship. Even though, under pressure from the United States, the Argentinian rulers had declared war on Germany on 27 March 1945, they continued to feel a certain admiration for the Nazi model. On 10 July 1945, after a two-month voyage, the U-530 arrived 400 kilometres south of Buenos Aires, at the city of Mar del Plata. Wermuth was taken prisoner along with his vessel and its crew. The news spread very quickly. And with it, the suspicion of the presence of Adolf Hitler and his wife Eva Braun on board the submarine. As well as being drawn towards fascism, Argentina had a German community clustered together in Bavarian-style villages in Patagonia. Perfect ingredients for the scenario of Hitler taking refuge in South America.

As soon as he had disembarked, Wermuth was interrogated by both the Argentinian and US navies. The German officer was suspected of berthing in other small towns a few hours before his surrender on 10 July. Had he taken advantage of those stops to unload passengers or documents? On 14 July 1945, a memo was sent to Washington by the American naval attaché based in Buenos Aires. He reported the arrival of a submarine that had unloaded two unidentified passengers.

The Argentinian press also picked up the adventure of the U-530 and published article after article about Hitler still being alive. One of those reports, published in the magazine Critica on 18 July, claimed that the German dictator had found refuge at the South Pole, in an area where the temperature was bearable. The Argentinian Foreign Minister, César Ameghino, was obliged to intervene officially, to put a stop to these rumours. On the day of the publication of the article, he issued a formal denial. Hitler had not been set down on the Argentinian coast by a German submarine.

Still, the FBI investigated the South American trail. Not least because the American secret service had also received some surprising reports. In particular, one about Robert Dillon, a mediocre Hollywood actor. On 14 August 1945, he contacted the FBI to tell them he had met an Argentinian who had been involved in taking Hitler into his country. The story of the submarine again! Dillon went further in his details. The Führer had disembarked with two women, a doctor, and about fifty men. They had hidden in the hills of the Southern Andes. Hitler was suffering from asthma and ulcers. He had also shaved off his moustache. After being checked by the American special services, Dillon’s “scoop” melted away.

Over the years, reports of this kind piled up on the desks of the FBI. They concern Hitler, but also the presence of other Nazis in Brazil, Chile, Bolivia and, of course, Argentina. Not all of these rumours were wildly far-fetched. There really were systems of escape routes for Nazi criminals. One of the best-known of these was the Odessa network. Over the years, it would allow officials from the Third Reich to escape from Europe. It is also true that Argentina offered asylum to numerous Nazi torturers. Among the most notorious of these, Josef Mengele (a doctor in the Auschwitz concentration camp, guilty of barbarous medical experiments on the inmates there), Adolf Eichmann (an active organiser of the “Final Solution’), and Klaus Barbie (head of the Gestapo in the French city of Lyon). But not a trace of Adolf Hitler.

Ten years after the Nazi capitulation, in July 1955, the German legal system decided to close the file on Hitler once and for all. The court in Berchtesgaden, the little town in Bavaria with 7,000 inhabitants, was appointed to lead the investigation. A purely symbolic choice: the German dictator had liked to withdraw to the town for some peace and quiet. He had built his personal residence there, the Berghof. So it was this provincial court that would rule on the Führer’s legal status: dead or alive. The timing was no coincidence. It coincided with the return of Nazi prisoners held by the Soviets. These included key witnesses of the last hours in the Führerbunker, the air-raid shelter where the dictator ended his days. Close to Hitler, they had been captured by the Red Army and immediately imprisoned secretly in the Soviet Union. Their statements had never been made public or transmitted to the Western allies. And certainly not to the German courts. But in 1955 Moscow agreed to free the last Nazi war criminals who were still rotting away in its jails. A political gesture that would have a cost for West Germany; in exchange, the country committed itself to establishing diplomatic and economic relations with the USSR. As soon as they returned, the German courts interrogated these senior dignitaries of the Third Reich. Thanks to their testimonies, it was possible to conclude that Adolf Hitler and his wife, Eva Braun, had taken their own lives on 30 April 1945. On 25 October 1956, Hitler and his wife were officially declared dead by the court in Berchtesgaden. From that moment, the death of the master of the Third Reich could be officially written down and published in history books around the world. The FBI also called off its investigations. For a decade, the American secret services had been carrying out investigations all over the world. With a certain relief Washington accepted the evidence of Hitler’s suicide in his bunker. But the essential factor was still missing: the body. At the time, there was still no physical proof of his death. Until the skull appeared.

Early 2000. The USSR had ceased to exist eight years previously, since its dissolution on 25 December 1991, to be precise. A new Russia tried to rebuild itself amid the ruins of a Communist regime that had been dying for years. Its status as a superpower had disappeared at the same time as the hammer and sickle on its flag. The liberal shock treatment applied by Boris Yeltsin turned the already precarious social and economic balance of the country into a train-ride to hell. In the eyes of the world, the red peril with its enormous nuclear arsenal had disappeared for good. The Russians felt humiliated. But in the year 2000, hope revived in the Kremlin. A new president had taken control of the reins. Admittedly he was young and a little bit shy, but he brought a welcome gravity and temperance to Russia after the Yeltsin years. His name was Vladimir Putin, and he was only forty-seven. This lieutenant colonel in the KGB had only one idea in mind: to restore his country’s glory, and put it back at the centre of the global political chessboard. By way of introduction, he reminded the world that Russia was a great military power. And that it was Russia that had won the war against Hitler.

On 27 April 2000, the eve of the fifty-fifth anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany, Moscow opened a major exhibition of its secret archives. Its title left no doubt about the Russian President’s intentions: “Agony of the Third Reich–the Punishment.” This was unheard-of. In all, a hundred and thirty-five previously unpublished documents were revealed to the public; documents that the historians of the Second World War had dreamed of consulting for half a century. Soviet secret service reports classified as “top secret,” photographs, objects… everything that lifted the veil on the last minutes of Hitler in his bunker. The diary of Martin Bormann, the Führer’s secretary and confidant, was also on show: “Saturday 28 April: our Reich Chancellery is now nothing but a pile of ruins. The world is hanging on by a thread. […] Sunday 29: fire storm over Berlin. Hitler and Eva Braun got married.” Photographs of the Goebbels children, the correspondence of Nazi officials such as the architect of the regime and its arms minister, Albert Speer: “Hitler is decomposing before our eyes. He has turned into a bundle of nerves and completely ceased to control himself.” But the key exhibit was elsewhere, in a special room. An article from Le Monde describes the scene: “In the middle of a room hung with red velvet, a charred fragment of skull, punctured by a bullet-hole, has pride of place in a glass case.”[1]

The exhibition was an international success. The Western media flocked to see it. The Russian authorities had won their bet. Or almost. Doubts concerning the authenticity of the skull arose very quickly. The organisers were embarrassed by the questions of the press. These included the director of the State Archives, the famous Sergei Mironenko–the same Mironenko whose shadow we have spotted in the long corridors of GARF. In 2000, he wasn’t yet hugging the walls, and still held his head high. He reigned over the Russian archives like a tsar. Journalists and historians wooed him with glasses of increasingly strong vodka in a bid to get into his good graces. And more importantly, to get closer to that bit of skull exhumed from the secret store-rooms. In the full glare of publicity, Western doubts put proud Mironenko in a delicate situation. How could he assert that this human fragment was really a part of Hitler? The director of the archives heard these remarks constantly. While he replied that there was no doubt about its authenticity, he felt that it wasn’t enough. Even Alexei Litvin, one of the curators of the exhibition in 2000, had to acknowledge: “It’s true that we haven’t subjected it to a DNA analysis, but all statements conclude that this is Hitler.”[2] Statements? Not indisputable scientific analyses? It was at that moment that Mironenko became aware of the risk of losing control of the situation and seeing a revival of the controversy over Hitler’s death.

Rather than taking a step back, he went into action and dared to go a step further. A new forensic analysis? Carried out by foreign scientists? No problem! The director of the archives was quite proud of himself. Except that he couldn’t close the Pandora’s box that he had just opened.

Of course the Russian authorities wouldn’t grant authorisation for those analyses. However, Mironenko’s offer got people’s hopes up and, with or without authorisation, became one of the last mysteries of the Second World War.

Larisa Rogovaya had been Mironenko’s deputy. Today, the new director of GARF is using the same methods as her illustrious predecessor. Never confronting journalists head on. Around the big rectangular table there are four of us, standing up, looking at the skull. Lana, the two archivists Dina and Nikolai, and me, my eyes fixed on this brownish bone. Apart from Larisa, who is still sitting in her black leather armchair. She seems to be amused at the sight of us, impressed and keen to take things further. She expected that we would want to subject it to forensic analysis. Like Mironenko sixteen years earlier, she too confirms that analyses of the skull are entirely feasible. She even adds that she has dreamed of such analyses. “It would be a lovely opportunity for us,” she claims, giving us her first smile since we arrived. “Yes, that would be perfect. We will support you in this project, you can count on us.” Dina and Nikolai cry in chorus. “That would give us a chance to establish the truth. And to put an end to this disastrous controversy. The one sparked a few years ago by that so-called American researcher.”

Larisa grimaces suddenly as she struggles to conceal her profound revulsion. Her two colleagues freeze as if someone has poured a bucket of icy water over their heads. They try very hard to put on a bold front. Why this unease? Is the director of GARF alluding to the work carried out by a team of American investigators in 2009? The case caused a considerable stir at the time. Nick Bellantoni, an archaeology professor at Connecticut University, claimed to have taken a sample of the skull. That bone sample had then been analysed in his university’s genetics laboratory. And the result was broadcast in a television documentary on the History Channel. “The bone seemed to be very thin,” the American archaeologist says. “Male bone tends to be more robust, and the sutures where the skull plates come together seem to correspond to someone under forty.” Bellantoni was undermining the story put forward by the Russian authorities. Basing his analysis on a DNA test, he also claimed that the skull preserved in Moscow was that of a woman. Nothing to do with Hitler. Doubts resurfaced. The theories of the Führer’s plot and escape gained currency with the American revelations.

Bellantoni’s scoop was immediately repeated in the world’s press. The information was summed up as follows: for years, the Russians have been lying! For Moscow, the insult was both painful and humiliating. Even today it’s a bitter pill to swallow. All the more so in that the director of GARF claims never to have seen that American archaeologist within her walls. Or have authorised the taking of a sample.

Dina picks up the visitors’ log that Lana has filled in. There are several names in the columns above our own. Only a very few visitors have had the privilege of seeing the skull. No more than ten in over twenty years. “All the teams of journalists and researchers who have seen this skull have signed this document. Look, that American’s name doesn’t appear there. He never came here.” Curiously, his visit to GARF has never been recorded in the registers. Unlike our visit. Nick Bellantoni doesn’t deny this administrative oddity. When we asked him the question by email, he replied simply that “all procedures for my work in the Russian archives were managed by the producers of the History Channel. So it is no surprise that my name does not appear on this list. It must have been recorded under the name of the History Channel or the producers.” An argument refuted by the director of the Archives. To be clear, she wrote us an official letter: “I wish to inform you that GARF did not sign any agreements with any television channel, Mr. Bellantoni or anyone else to carry out a DNA examination based on the fragment of Hitler’s skull.”

Might the American archaeologist have acted without permission? The Russian media were categorical. The case became a national scandal. The scholar from Connecticut found himself at the heart of an almost ideological controversy: West vs East, the capitalist bloc against the former Communist bloc. On the Russian national television channel NTV (close to Russian power), in 2010, a whole programme was devoted to Bellantoni’s “scoop.” In the presence of Russian Second World War historians and other popular personalities old enough to remember the war, the American tried to reassure everyone. Above all, he was keen not to come across as a looter of archives. First, he assured everyone that his work had been completely legal. “We received official authorisation from the Russian Archives, with whom we signed a contract to carry out our work.” A claim refuted by GARF, as we have already seen.

But let us return to the thread of the interview with Nick Bellantoni on NTV. The presenter quizzes him about the analyses that he has carried out on the skull:

Bellantoni: “No. We didn’t do that! […] You know, there are a lot of difficulties involved in working on burnt remains. For geneticists, exploring this subject is a real nightmare. It’s extremely difficult to extract markers from this matter that capture the sex of the subject. But we can conclude that the skull in your collection belonged to a woman. Perhaps it was Eva Braun, but we can’t be sure.”

On the stage of the programme, among the guests, an elderly lady comes forward. Her name is Rimma Markova. This actress, famous for acting in Soviet films, embodies the nostalgia for the Stalinist regimes. Even though she is eighty-five, she is still furious: “How did he manage to take those samples? He is telling the world that he’s a thief! He needs to go to prison for what he did.”

Bellantoni: “I’m just a scientist who was invited to examine this skull.”

Rimma Markova: “Tell us who gave you those samples. The Archive staff or the representatives of your television channel?”

It’s always the same line of questioning. Bellantoni is cornered. Is he going to crack on live TV?

Bellantoni: “We’ve been authorised to examine and take samples. It’s part of the contract. I must stress once again that I’m working on this project as a scientist. If you want more details, ask the people in charge of the channel.”

Seven years have passed since then. We also asked Nick Bellantoni to explain to us how he had managed to get hold of those fragments of skull. He replied very promptly: “Our team was authorised to take some small pieces of burnt bone that had become detached from the skull. We didn’t damage or take samples from the skull itself […] I didn’t take those pieces to the United States. They were sent to us by the producers when we came back to the university to carry out the analyses. I imagine that these pieces were given to us by officials. You can check that with the History Channel.”

And that’s what we did.

Joanna Forscher produced Nick Bellantoni’s documentary on Hitler’s skull. Her reply to our questions has the merit of concision: “I have often been asked that question, and unfortunately I cannot reveal any details about how we had this access to the skull.” And she concludes with a mysterious remark: “The circumstances of our access can no longer be reproduced in any way.”

Seven years after the visit by Bellantoni and the History Channel team, the mystery remains unsolved. And GARF is still deeply traumatised.

Larisa grits her teeth. Her fury isn’t directed at us. She narrows her eyes at Dina and Nikolai. Has some corruption taken place? Has money been passed to an archivist to leave the American researcher alone with “Stalin’s trophy” for a few moments. “We don’t know what happened,” the director says, rising to her feet. “We know that this was all illegal, and we deny the results of these analyses.”

Our meeting is about to be cut short. We have to find a way of extending it, to give us time to convince the director of our good intentions. We too want to do tests on the skull. Who can grant us that authorisation? Lana asks the essential question, the only one worth asking, just as Larisa is leaving the room. No answer. Undaunted, she follows the director into the corridor, refusing to let go. They are now in the secretaries’ office–only a few more metres and Larisa will have reached her office. Russian protocol will prevent us from going in uninvited. “What must we do?” Lana asks as politely as possible. “Is it just you? The President’s office…?” Appalled, Larisa turns round. “Certainly not me,” she begins. Then continues, “Sort it out with the Bureau of Investigation! This is nothing more or less than a criminal investigation, into a corpse, part of a corpse. It is the Department of Justice that can reopen this inquiry.” The grey of the walls around us has never seemed as depressing to me as it does now. The trap is closing in. Russian bureaucracy, that hideous child born of seventy years of Soviet control, is waiting to crush us. “I know, it can take months, but I’m going to support your request.” Larisa senses how overwhelmed we are. She seems almost sorry. “Don’t worry,” she says to us at last. “Spasiba, spasiba,” Lana thanks her, and gestures to me to do the same. Once again the director’s face relaxes. “So who would come to carry out these analyses? Find someone scientifically irreproachable, and not an American. Anyone but an American.”

MOSCOW, OCTOBER 2016

The war in Syria, the conflict in Ukraine with the annexation of Crimea, possible interference in the American elections… So many crises are linked to Russia, so many reasons why the Putin regime turns in on itself to complicate our investigation in the National Archives.

“It is an inopportune moment,” we are told by the different services of the sprawling Russian administration. Next month conditions will be better, after the holidays, the summer holidays, then All Saints… Six months have passed like that. Three more stays in the city of Ivan the Terrible, three return trips between Paris and Moscow, and for what? For nothing? Larisa Rogovaya is still director of GARF, but she’s stopped answering us. Her secretaries have skilfully erected a barrier between her and us. My colleague Lana grew up in this country at a time when it was still called the Soviet Union. She understands the reaction of the Russian authorities. “In the eyes of my compatriots, the West wants to hurt us, it rejects us,” she explains. “Our investigation into Hitler is far from anodyne. The story of the skull is a powerful symbol in Russia; it is the symbol of our suffering during the Second World War, of our resistance and our victory. Since this skull was displayed to the public, its authenticity has frequently been called into question. Part of the glorious past of the Soviet Union is being stolen in this way.” When one of these challenges comes from an American supported by an American university within the context of a television documentary… for the Russians, the fact that the channel is American cannot be a coincidence. It must be an attempt at destabilisation on the part of the former American ally. For the American documentary team, they have no intention of destabilising the Russians. So, over seventy years after May 1945, Washington and Moscow are still disputing the paternity of the final victory over Hitler. And that makes any investigation into the Hitler file so sensitive in Russia. Above all, so complicated. “The human factor.” But Lana won’t let go. She repeats those words out loud like a protecting mantra, a Cabalistic formula. “In my country,” she insists, “you mustn’t act rationally, you must be guided by your instinct and stake everything on the shortcomings of our interlocutors.”

So, the human factor. Since our many official requests have got us nowhere, we’re going to bet everything on luck. Kholzunova Avenue, a smart part of town nestling in a loop of the Moskova, the base of GARF, the State Archives of the Russian Federation. By visiting at regular intervals, we have become intimately acquainted with the weekly guard roster. Tuesday is our favourite. On that day, the checks at reception are carried out by a pleasant soldier. Nothing like the severe and rather limited man with the moustache on Monday, or the big-nosed simpleton on Friday. Petite and always cheerful behind her counter, the guard on Tuesdays always activates the turnstile and lets us through without a problem. On this damp Tuesday in autumn, she doesn’t change her good habits. She suspects the reason for our visit. “It’s still Hitler, isn’t it?” Who doesn’t know about that within GARF? “Which service are you visiting today?” she asks, checking our names in her register. “Ah, Dina, you’re going to see Dina Nikolaevna Nokhotovich? I expect you know where to find her… Straight on, last building at the end of the courtyard…” Lana finishes the phrase for her: “…middle door, fourth floor, first left.” She’s trying to sound relaxed. But she isn’t, and neither am I. We’re staking a lot on this visit. Dina Nokhotovich was there when we studied the skull six months ago with the director of GARF. She had witnessed the scene with one of her colleagues, pale Nikolai. Dina is ageless. Time has ceased its assault on this tiny, energetic woman. Do the gloomy halls of the Russian State Archives conceal some sort of magical power, a bubble in time? Why not. The mere fact of walking all the way up to her office makes us feel as if we are plunging into some bygone era, the past of the totalitarian Soviet utopia. Each step we take sends us ten years backwards. As we climb, the dilapidated state both of the steps and of the walls becomes increasingly apparent. Once we reach the fourth-floor landing, we have gone back forty years. Here we are in the middle of the 1970s. The Brezhnev era. The one in which the head of GARF’s special collection, Dina Nokhotovich, still lives and will live forever. The idea of a face-to-face meeting with this eminent functionary of GARF didn’t immediately occur to us. Our first encounter last April lacked a certain warmth. Discreet, if not entirely silent, passive and then almost hostile in her treatment of us, Dina at first displayed no major interest in our investigation. At least that was how it seemed to us. Her secret had not yet been revealed to us. That only happened very recently, the day after our meeting in late October. We were consulting archived documents at GARF once again. The young archivist was surprised to see us so often. Although she was very shy, she finally plucked up the courage to ask why we were there. Hitler’s skull, his death, the investigation… And the hope of an analysis of the human remains. “The bones? But Dina’s the one who found them.” The skull? Our reaction was so immediate that we startled the young archivist. We didn’t care. We absolutely had to know more. So Dina had found the skull. But how? When? Where?

“You’ll have to ask her,” our informant said, still on the defensive. “Here she is now, you can ask her directly.” The head of the special collection, our new friend Dina, was about to finish a day that had started so early that she was exhausted already. While the elderly archivist closed a thick armoured door–one of the many doors leading to the shelves of the archives–Lana put into practice her theory of the “human factor.” A failure. Dina resisted. What did we want from her now? She didn’t have time. She didn’t want to. Lana lost her footing; she couldn’t find the slightest angle, the slightest foothold to cling to. What about vanity? That might work. “Isn’t it strange that you’re never mentioned in all those articles about Hitler’s skull?” I asked Lana to translate word for word. She was acquitting herself to perfection. I continued without letting Dina reply: “We’ve just been told that the skull was rediscovered thanks to you! Your discovery is historical, ground-breaking. The public needs to know.” “Da, da.” Dina replied with several “da’s.” She was coming round. The corridor in which we were talking was tiny and narrow. It connected three doors and a lift. The opposite of the ideal place to receive a confession. “A tea; would you like to come and join us for tea, in a tea room or a restaurant? It would be quieter and easier to talk.” A rookie’s tactlessness, a misunderstanding of Russian culture, Lana would tell me later, explaining my mistake. A man can’t invite a woman for a drink, even if she’s as old as his grandmother. A meeting in her office, yes, that was possible. Tomorrow? “Why not, tomorrow. If you like. But I don’t think it will be terribly interesting,” Dina simpered like a schoolgirl.

If the level of seniority of a state employee must be judged by the size of her office, then Dina could lay claim to the post of “toilet lady.” It was far from that of the head of the special collection of the big State Archives of the Russian Federation. What mistake could this woman have committed, to find herself in such a small and uncomfortable room? Low-ceilinged, with a window so narrow that a child would have had trouble getting its head through it, her office was so small that if more than three people had been in there they would hardly have been able to breathe. It was accessed directly by the stairs, which, on the other floors, normally lead to the toilets. Hence “toilet lady.” A thick silvery mane about ten centimetres long rocks back and forth above a formica table in front of us. Dina is sitting working in semi-darkness. Our arrival doesn’t disturb her activity. Her baroque hairdo resists the laws of gravity and remains powerfully attached to her skull. No stray strand comes away from the capillary mass. Is it a wig? Without even looking up, Dina addresses Lana. She reminds her how precious her time is. In return we assure her that we are perfectly aware of that, and we apologise for interrupting her very important work… Lana is never one to hold back. Dina listens to her not without displeasure [is this what is meant?] and then decides to look at us. “I’d forgotten about our meeting. As I told you yesterday, I don’t know if I can help you, and I still have lots of documents to file.” The transformation is striking. Moving. Dina is dressed up as if for a dance. Colour on her cheeks and on her lips. Pink, unless it’s mauve; at any rate, it’s very much apparent. No, Dina hasn’t forgotten about us. She was waiting for us. For the first time in ages, Lana and I relax. The conversation should go well.

The Viet Cong had won after two decades of war. In that year, 1975, the Communist doctrine triumphed and spread over all the continents. The Soviet Union carried more weight in the world than ever before, and treated the United States as an equal. In Moscow, food shortages had been a thing of the past for a long time, and political purges had become less frequent. The future for the Soviets seemed radiant at last. Leonid Brezhnev had been in charge of the country for eleven years. He had the jowly face of an apparatchik; not brilliant, perhaps, but less terrifying than Stalin. It was in this almost peaceful Soviet Union that Dina Nikolaevna Nokhotovich, at the age of thirty-five, saw her life collapsing from one day to the next. GARF has ceased to exist. The whole of the state administration (a perfect pleonasm, since in the Soviet Union the private sector didn’t exist) was identified in Soviet-compatible terms. The administration for which Dina worked didn’t escape this process, and was soberly entitled “Central State Archives of the October Revolution and the Edification of Socialism.” That was forty-one years ago. In a different era, in a different country, under a different regime.

Dina can’t help pursing her lips between each of her phrases. Her eyes are staring at an imaginary point that removes her from the present moment, from her tiny office at GARF and this neo-capitalist twenty-first-century Moscow. For a long time she says nothing. Then her story begins. “I had just been put in charge of the ‘secret’ department of the archives. That was in 1975. The post was like no other, because it dealt with the confidential documents of the history of our country, the Soviet Union. At that time, the state worked perfectly, and we weren’t short of qualified staff. Custom decreed that my predecessor came to give me the basic information, the information that was supposed to allow me to accomplish my mission as well as possible. Strangely, that never happened.” The former head of the secret department had simply disappeared. Gone, flown away, not a trace. As if he had never existed. And today, Dina can’t remember his name. What happened to him? A sudden transfer to another administration? An accident? A serious illness? Dina never knew and never asked. A Stalinist habit–some people might call it the survival instinct–reigned in this people’s “paradise.” In the Soviet Union, those who disappeared could hope for no help from those who stayed behind. Their memory was erased from the collective memory. In the mid-1970s, Dina didn’t feel like playing at being the heroine; her predecessor was nowhere to be found. Too bad. She would get by without him.

“I was impatient to discover what kinds of documents I was responsible for. I remember, when I went into my new office, I found several safes. Security gave me the keys and I was able to open them.” Even today, these huge safes, tall as sideboards, wide as fridges, stand in most of the rooms in GARF. What do they hide? All of our questions went unanswered. Perhaps they’re just empty. They would be too heavy to move. In 1975, Dina’s safes were really used. “There were documents inside, but also objects. The most surprising thing is that none of those objects had been inventoried. No code, no register, no classification. They quite simply didn’t exist.” A lot of people, in those days, would simply have put everything back in the safe and been particularly careful to forget their existence. Not Dina. “I was curious to know, I wasn’t afraid. Why would I have been afraid? I wasn’t doing anything forbidden. I asked a colleague to join me, and we both started going through this treasure trove. There were objects wrapped in cloth. Some were bigger than others. When I opened the smallest one, I’d have to say that we were quite frightened. It was a piece of human skull.”

The story is interrupted by a strange metallic click. The sound comes closer to Dina’s office. It’s Nikolai. He comes in, pushing a supermarket trolley. The same pale Nikolai Vladimirsev who had been so horrified about the manhandling of the skull. Now we just need the director of GARF and we’d have the full team. Dina isn’t surprised. She gets up and asks us to follow her. The rest of the conversation will take place in the room where we were able to study the skull six months before, on the ground floor of the building. Without taking the trouble to reply to our greetings, or even to apologise for interrupting our discussion, Nikolai follows us with his ridiculous little trolley. The clatter of the wheels on the tiles echoes down the sleepy corridors like some infernal machine. Reaching the room with the rectangular table, Dina takes a seat and asks us to do the same. Nikolai parks his trolley in a corner and takes out some battered files and a thick cotton sheet. The scene is played out in silence. Dina guides her colleague with a wave of the hand and shows him where to set it all down. Files at the end of the table, the worn sheet just in front of us. “There… Everything that I’ve found is here.” Just as Dina says this, her colleague unfolds the sheet with a wide and graceful gesture to reveal… some table legs. “Step forward. You’re allowed to do that.” Nikolai has regained the gift of speech, and seems almost chatty. “Here’s the other proof of Adolf Hitler’s certain death: traces of blood on the legs of his sofa.”

Does Larisa Rogovaya, the director of GARF, know that we’re in here with these historical pieces of forensic evidence? Has she organised this little show? It would be amazing if not. Nothing can be decided without her agreement. Certainly not after the dubious episode with the American archaeologist. I don’t let Lana get in her phrase about the “human factor” again, and pick up the thread of our questions with our new best friends, Dina and Nikolai. “Apart from the skull, there were these bits of wood,” she confirms. “At first, when we took the boxes out of the safe, we had no idea what they could be. When we did some searching, we found a piece of paper. It said: ‘This is a piece of Adolf Hitler’s skull. It must be transferred to the State Archives.’ Without intending to, we had shed light on one of the biggest mysteries since 1945.”

The cult of secrecy, the endless care with which information was hidden away, and punishments for neglecting to obey these two rules: Dina’s professional life, over a long time, is simply summarised here. Of course the archivist wasn’t part of the KGB, but she still had to behave like a spy. Not out of pleasure, but out of obligation. The staff of the Soviet State Archives, depending on their seniority and level of accreditation, were all subject to the same paranoid surveillance by the authorities. Quite simply because they had access to the heart of the matrix of the regime: its deepest, darkest secrets. The Katyn massacre, those thousands of Polish officers executed in a Russian forest on Stalin’s orders during the Second World War, the little arrangements made with the leader of nationalist China, the right-winger Chiang Kai-shek, against Mao the Communist, or internecine battles within the Red Army. Whoever controls the archives can rewrite official history and, with a click of the fingers, destroy the legends that have shaped it. Why should we be surprised that, unlike many states, Russia continues to keep its past locked away? Today, the conditions for consulting the archives remain basic: on the one hand there are open documents, and on the other those that might damage the higher interests of the state. The latter fall under the category “sensitive,” and can only be consulted with express authorisation from the very highest levels of the regime. Which is to say, hardly ever. The problem with Russian documents is that they can all fall under the heading of “sensitive.”

Dina, with her simple post as an archivist, had to accept the life of a pariah without even the frisson of adventure. At least until the fall of the regime, late in 1991. “The USSR was a different time, with different rules,” she acknowledges with a pout. Is it a pout of disapproval or nostalgia? “In 1975 life wasn’t the way it is today. I’m talking about mentalities, material comforts, everything… We had instructions that had to be respected. And so many things were related to ‘defence secrets’…” One of the most important of those instructions was to be suspicious of everyone. Of your colleagues, your neighbours, your own family. And to report the smallest subversive action to your superiors. Finding Hitler’s skull hidden in a box at the back of a safe in the archives–was that subversive? Potentially yes.

After its discovery, there was no going back for Dina. She had to report it to her superiors. Very quickly, it appeared that nobody in her service had ever heard of this human fragment. “I think only my predecessor knew it was there. But since he had disappeared, I never got to the bottom of this affair.” Is that all? Dina finds Hitler’s skull and the story stops there? Wasn’t she rewarded? A promotion, a bigger apartment in a part of the city for deserving citizens? “None of any of that. The director of the archives asked me never to talk about it. You can’t understand, you’re both too young. You, Lana–you’re Russian, aren’t you? You’ve known the Soviet system?“ Lana has forgotten nothing. She often speaks emotionally about the USSR, the way one remembers distant childhood memories. Brezhnev had got fat and old and he was still in charge of the country when Lana was born. That was in 1978. Only a few years after Dina’s adventure. “The atmosphere was very special at that time,” the old archivist continued. “Very special. Any information like the business about the skull could end the life of someone who couldn’t hold their tongue. Hitler and his bones were still classified as ‘top secret.’ For all those years, I never broke my vow of silence.”

Nikolai has set down a photo album in front of us. He probably knows the ins and outs of his colleague’s history so much by heart that he doesn’t need to pay attention to it. The album contains a series of black-and-white photographs neatly glued in and surrounded by a frame drawn in black ink. Each of the photographs has a caption, long or short, handwritten with great care.

Lana translates them for me. “Entrance of the New Reich Chancellery… Gardens of the Chancellery… Entrance of the bunker…” We are holding in our hands the photographic record of the investigation into the death of Hitler. It’s dated May 1946. It contains everything, the external views of the bunker, the inside too, and particularly the scene of the crime, or at least the suicide. But no body. The sofa on which Hitler was supposed to have died was photographed from every angle. Front, side, underneath–nothing is omitted. The back rests in particular held the attention of the investigators. And rightly, since the dark drips appear clearly on the right-hand side of the sofa. On the following page, there are more photographs of the back rests, but this time they have been removed from the rest of the sofa. The precise caption: “Pieces of the sofa with traces of blood. These pieces have been removed to be used as evidence.” Their shapes and sizes correspond feature for feature with the pieces of wood that Nikolai has brought us. “They’re the same,” Dina confirms. “The Soviet secret services removed them from the sofa to bring them to Moscow. They hoped to analyse these traces of blood and check that they were Hitler’s.” Nikolai picks up one of these pieces of wood and shows us the section of the back rest from which the Soviet scientists took their samples in May 1946. Obviously the archivist doesn’t wear sterile gloves. Does he know that he might be destroying any potential traces of DNA? He doesn’t understand when we point this out. What was the result of the samples taken in 1946? “It was blood type A,” Dina goes on. A very widespread blood group in the German population (almost 40 per cent), and more importantly one which, according to Nazi doctrine, proved membership of the “Aryan race.” Of course, it was Hitler’s blood group. The last few pages of the album linger on the skull. The one believed to be Hitler’s, the one we had been able to see for a few moments in that very room. In one of the photographs, an arrow drawn in red points to a hole in the skull.

The Soviet secret services suggest that it looks like the entry wound of a projectile. If the skull is indeed that of the Nazi dictator, it means that he received a bullet directly to the head. A sacriligious hypothesis in 1975. And very dangerous for Dina. Until the fall of the Soviet Union, Moscow wouldn’t let go. Hitler killed himself with poison, the weapon of cowards in the eyes of the Soviet rulers. This version, validated by Josef Stalin, failed to stand up if the skull with the bullet wound was made public.

Dina would have to live with that secret for decades. She wouldn’t be able to travel abroad, she would be under the surveillance of the authorities and wouldn’t be able to change jobs. As a result she spent forty years in the same service, wasting away amid dusty documents that no one could consult. “Our department was called the ‘Department of the Secret Collection,’” she goes on. “The only things kept here were confidential files. And there was no question of declassifying anything. None of the staff of this department were able to talk about anything they did. Even among ourselves, we didn’t talk about the documents of which we were in charge. There was no communication between one floor and another.”

The dashing septuagenarian pursues her mission just as diligently as always. Dina no longer really understands the new rules of her country. Declassified, reclassified–which documents are accessible? She’s a bit lost. “The last time I was able to speak openly about that skull was in the early 1990s. My superiors suddenly opened up all our doors to researchers. There were historians, and then, very quickly, journalists turned up. A lot of journalists. And that’s where everything got complicated.” An article published in the Russian daily Izvestia on 19 February 1993 marked the start of a crisis. “I’m holding in my hands the remains of Hitler’s skull,” the journalist Ella Maximova wrote. “They are preserved amidst conditions of the greatest secrecy in a cardboard box labelled ‘blue ink for fountain pen,’ along with some blood-stained fragments of a sofa that was in the bunker.” She was the first to reveal the scoop. The news was immediately picked up all over the world. For many years, there were rumours claiming that the KGB had not destroyed the Führer’s body, but had kept it hidden somewhere in Moscow.

And then a national newspaper confirmed that the legend was partly true. But wasn’t the skull a fake? Mightn’t it be one of those manipulations of which the Russians were so fond? Western historians immediately declared their fury. They stated categorically that all of this was impossible. Hitler’s skull? What nonsense. Meanwhile the foreign press got very excited. They wanted to see. In this Russia recently freed from its Communist trappings, money dictated the rules. Anything could be bought, anything could be sold, everything had a price. Including Hitler’s skull? Some people said yes. Tension mounted when the correspondent of the German magazine Der Spiegel said he had been offered access to the bones and five interrogation files from eyewitnesses of the last days of Hitler for a large sum of money. And not in roubles. The Russians had been too greedy, and Der Spiegel preferred to withdraw from the auction. “We wouldn’t have given half of what they were demanding,”[3] the magazine’s Moscow correspondent explained at the time.

“Those articles harmed us a lot,” Dina says. “The journalists… saying that we didn’t want to show the skull, that we were asking for money, that’s all false. It was in order to prove it that our authorities decided to organise a big exhibition about the end of the war and display Hitler’s final remains.” With the success that we know about. New scandals about the identification of the skull, and then the decision by the Russian authorities to put the object back in its safe and not let the journalists get anywhere near it. “Of course everyone wants to know if it is really Hitler.” Nikolai can’t conceal the faintly irritated expression that never leaves his face. “You want to study the skull, analyse it, why not? I know it’s his. I know how Hitler killed himself. I’ve read all the dossiers from the investigation. From 1945, when the inquiry began, it’s all there. But if you want to start again, go ahead.” Is that the answer, at last, to all our questions? Is this strange archivist conveying his director’s decision to us? “Can we carry out tests on the skull? Is that it?” Dina and Nikolai look at one another. They are both reluctant to speak. “Our task is to keep the archives in the best possible condition so that future generations can consult them. We don’t have to carry out scientific experiments.” Nikolai doesn’t give a clear answer. Lana points this out as politely as possible. He replies in the same monotonous, reedy voice. “None of these questions concerns us.” A smile. Hold that smile, even if it’s starting to look a little tense. Given her age and her long history in this post, it’s Dina we should be concentrating on if we want to get that important reply. “I imagine that’s possible, yes,” she says at last. When? How? Through whom? So many parameters to be determined, so many points to be illuminated. We can come back very quickly with an important specialist. We’ve chosen him. He knows all about it. “His name?” Nikolai asks. “You know him, we’ve told you all about him in our emails. His name is Philippe Charlier. A Frenchman. He is a qualified medical examiner. Very well known in France. You must know him. The identification of the skull of Henry IV: that was him.”

We’ve made an agreement. Lana talks to the two archivists to confirm once and for all what they have just told us. In the meantime I avidly consult the files that Nikolai has taken the trouble to bring with him. They are the reports by the Soviet secret services into the disappearance of Hitler. Unusually, I am given permission to take photographs of them. “All of them?” I ask. Nikolai says yes. I don’t hold back. I take pictures of everything. Dina looks at me out of the corner of her eye. I can see that she’s uneasy. She’s not happy about a foreigner freely taking pictures of her precious documents. She hovers around me, murmuring a few words in Russian. I don’t understand a word and that suits me fine.

She goes on repeating the same words. I go on. All of a sudden she loses her temper and calls Lana, who is still talking to Nikolai. She talks agitatedly to my colleague, pointing at me with her finger. Lana turns towards me, slightly panic-stricken: “You’ve got to stop. You’re only allowed to take ten photographs. No more than that!” I pretend not to hear her and go on. Now Dina is really shouting at Lana. Why ten? I try to gain some time and pretend to be surprised. Nikolai said I could take as many as I liked. “That’s just how it is,” Lana replies. “She thinks ten is enough.” How can I be cross with dear Dina? She has spent her whole professional life guarding these secret documents. Forty years protecting them from prying eyes, and you can’t just delete something like that. I imagine the shock she must feel seeing me, a Frenchman, a capitalist, pillaging the treasure trove of her professional life right in front of her eyes. She reacted too late; I’ve finished. I’ve got photographs of everything. The Hitler files are now in the memory of my smartphone. Several hundred pages to translate and digest. A painstaking job.

PARIS, OCTOBER–NOVEMBER 2016

The first translations of the documents photographed in the offices of GARF came in quite quickly. Lana has worked wonders. She prefers to send them to me in the evening, after her day’s work. Apart from this investigation into Hitler, she is still freelancing for the Russian media. For my part, I’ve gone back to France. I’m classifying the translated texts by subject and date. Some remain quite obscure. So many unknown names and obscure acronyms clogging up the administrative phrases. The Russian investigators hadn’t much time for poetry. Their work was dictated by efficiency and precision. Here’s one of the first documents I’ve been given:

Nothing’s missing: not the big historic names of Stalin, Hitler, and Goebbels, nor the abbreviations NKVD and USSR. And this was only the beginning. Other names and other equally resonant abbreviations would haunt Lana and me during the months of this investigation like so many ghosts emerging from an accursed past. On the German side: Himmler, the SS, Göring, the Third Reich… On the Soviet side: Beria, Molotov, the Red Army, Zhukov…

As well as these reports, we have collected a series of captioned photographs and some drawings, including diagrams of Hitler’s bunker. They are drawn in pencil on paper by prisoners, SS men, all members of the Führer’s inner circle. They had been ordered to draw them by the Russian special services. The aim was to understand how life was organised in their enemy’s air-raid shelter. Everything is precisely annotated: the apartments of the Nazi dictator, Eva Braun’s bedroom, her bathroom, the conference room, the toilets…

The mass of documents in the GARF collection includes several dozen pages in German. Some interrogations of Nazi prisoners have been transcribed directly in their language and by hand as most of the Red Army typewriters used Cyrillic characters. Luckily, the handwriting of the Soviet interpreters is still quite legible. Except in one particular case, in which the letters look like the scrawls of a spider, not to mention the many crossings-out. These barely decipherable texts wore out the eyes of two of my German-French translators. The first ended up throwing in the towel. As for the second, he asked me not to rely on him in the future if the situation came up again. Their determination was not in vain: thanks to them, I was able to place this document within the great historical puzzle formed by the Russian archives of the Hitler file. These spidery squiggles record the interrogation of a man by the name of Erich Rings, one of the radiographers in Hitler’s bunker. In particular, Rings gives an account of the moment when his superiors asked him to pass on a message about the Führer’s death: “The last telegram of this kind that we have communicated dates from 30 April, at around 5:15 pm in the afternoon. The officer who brought the message told me, so that we would also be informed immediately, that the first phrase of the message was as follows: ‘Führer deceased!’”

If Rings is telling the truth, this information implies that the German dictator’s death occurred before 5:15 pm on 30 April 1945. But might the Nazi radiographer have been lying to the Soviet investigators? They assume that he might. Suspicion is the essence of any good spy. It is a great asset in all circumstances, and allows them to climb through the ranks of their hierarchy with confidence. Suspecting the enemy, his declarations, including those made under torture. Still, this systematic attitude does obstruct the progress of the inquiry. And my own work, too. The texts that I have in front of me concern a period of almost twelve month, leading up to the middle of 1946. So, almost six months after the fall of Berlin on 2 May 1945, the officers in charge of the Hitler file still hadn’t completed their investigation. They asked the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs to grant an additional delay. As well as the transfer of certain German prisoners from Russian prisons to Berlin. The aim was to reconstruct Hitler’s last hours.

This is followed by a long list of Nazi prisoners; then the document resumes:

The letter is signed by two Soviet generals based in Berlin.

April 1946. Why did the investigation into Hitler take so long? What happened in the bunker? The Russians devoted such energy to investigating that truth that escaped them. And yes, more than any other Allied army (the Americans, the British and the French), Soviet troops had taken hundreds of eyewitnesses of the fall of Berlin and the Führer prisoner. Witnesses who were put severely to the test by their jailers. I can see that determination to solve this mystery just below the surface of many of the reports and interrogations. The same questions keep returning, the same threats. Why not simply accept the evidence? Why can’t Stalin and his men admit that the prisoners are telling the truth? I would have made a very bad member of the Soviet secret police. The proof lies in this confrontation between two SS prisoners who were close to Hitler.

The first is called Höfbeck and is a sergeant, the other is called Günsche and is an SS officer.

The inaccuracies in the witness statements drive the investigators mad. Are the prisoners doing it on purpose? There are strong reasons for thinking they are. Let us not forget that for the Nazis, the Communists embody absolute evil (according to Hitler’s doctrine, just after the Jews). Resisting, lying, or distorting reality may seem natural to men inspired by Nazi fanaticism that is still very much alive. Be that as it may, their contradictory answers complicate the precise establishment of the events that preceded the fall of Hitler’s bunker.

Lana and I thought we were sufficiently prepared for this plunge into one of the last mysteries of the Second World War. Big mistake. Even in our most pessimistic scenarios, we couldn’t have imagined the level of complexity of an investigation such as this. We would soon discover that the collection of documents in the GARF stores wouldn’t be the hardest part. Our confidence and optimism were quickly dampened. It was Dina, the head of GARF’s special collection, who alerted us.

Let’s return to our meeting during autumn break 2016 within the walls of the Russian State Archives. Lana and I were busy thanking Dina and Nikolai for their patience. They had already filled the shopping trolley with the pieces of wood from the sofa and the files about Hitler. The interview ended cordially. “We succeeded, we have all the documents about the disappearance of the Führer, it’s a first!” Lana was getting carried away and I let her. Dina didn’t share her enthusiasm. Nikolai had already left without saying a word. We could hear him pulling his trolley along the corridors with the same delightful racket as before. “You haven’t got everything,” Dina suddenly announced, almost sorry to spoil our pleasure. Not everything? “There are still bits of Hitler elsewhere in Russia?” I asked without really believing it myself. “It’s possible…” Dina had trouble answering frankly. “In fact, yes,” she acknowledged at last. “But you won’t be able to see them.” Our house of cards was collapsing. Still biting her lips and avoiding our eyes, Dina felt uneasy. Lana started talking to her as gently as possible to reassure her. To tell her that it wasn’t very serious, but she had to explain everything.

Good news and bad news. Where did I want to start? Lana let me choose. We had left the GARF offices and caught a taxi to get back to our hotel. Let’s start with the bad news. “Not all the Soviet reports on Hitler’s death are kept at GARF. Some of them are stored in the archives of the FSB.” Silence… Was there more bad news? Not for certain. The three initials mean “Federalnaya Sluzhba Bezopasnosti” (Federal Security Service), the Russian secret service. The FSB was set up in 1995. In a way, this was the successor to the KGB, which had been dissolved on 11 October 1991, following an attempted coup d’état against Mikhail Gorbachev in August 1991. The FSB’s methods haven’t fundamentally changed from those of its illustrious elder sibling. Methods based on manipulation and, if necessary, violence. If access to GARF had seemed difficult, how hard would it be to get into the archives of the FSB (the TsA FSB, short for Tsentral’ny Arkhiv FSB)? Lana was almost laughing, our quest had taken such a desperate turn. “There’s something else you need to know,” she continued with a nervous hiccough. “Dina also told me that we would certainly have to dig in the military archives. On the other hand, she was very clear, we can’t expect any help from GARF. The FSB, the military archives, and GARF all hate each other. We’re going to have to manage on our own.”

The taximeter was ticking off the roubles that our route was going to cost. It all seemed so easy for the driver. Two customers, an address, a good GPS, and he was all set. The exact opposite of our investigation. “You don’t want to know the good news? The positive thing that Dina wanted to tell us?” Lana sensed that I was growing weary. Over a year of Sisyphean research was beginning to dent my enthusiasm. “Dina assured me that she liked us, and that she’d support us in our bid to carry out scientific examinations on the skull.” Did Dina have the slightest power over the examination of the skull? Lana started thinking, and then shook her head. Moscow was playing with us, with its fine drizzle. Other people had tried to investigate Hitler. If they’d all failed, was it a coincidence?

A fierce and almost desperate combat? Perfect! Lana doesn’t give up, quite the contrary. She promised me she would obtain all the permissions before the end of the year, the ones that we needed to access the FSB archives and those opening the doors of the Russian State Military Archives (RGVA). “No one resists me for long. I will wear them down,” she assured me with her swaggering air in the departure hall of Sheremetyevo Airport in Moscow. That was less than a month ago. Since then, not a day goes by when I don’t talk to her on the telephone, when we don’t give each other encouragement. I’ve been working on the documents, she’s been working on the Russian authorities. “I’m nearly there, another few days and I’ll have my answer. Stay alert, we’re going to need to react quickly.” Lana doesn’t let go, and she can’t imagine a second failure. Are her connections with Russian power really so solid? How would she convince administrations that were usually so impervious to this kind of request? “Since my work on Svetlana Stalin, I can count on good relations with people of influence, and they know me, they know I’m like a pit bull. I never let go of my prey. And believe me, dictators know me…”