Diaries and Missing Diaries and that Newsletter ! ?

[sarapuk]

I thought it would be a good idea to put this one up in the Forum. There were several Diaries and the last Diary entry was on 31st January 1959. The Newsletter known as 'Evening Otorten' was dated 1st February. The Newsletter was found pinned to the Tent near its entrance. The last Campsite before the ascent up the slopes of the Mountain to the final Campsite was on 31st January 1959. The distance between the 2 Campsites was about 1 mile. The Dyatlov Group had already said in their Diaries that the temperatures were around minus 20 degrees centigrade on their journey. And that that temperature was to be expected in that area of Siberia. They found the going difficult because of the depth of snow and winds. And thats why they prefered to camp near the Forest, for some shelter, and also of course for some wood to burn. So if they had time to write the 'Evening Otorten' why arent there more Diary entries !  ?  Or are there Missing Diaries ! ? Or maybe pages torn out of Diaries ! ? And of course why did they travel a mere mile to set up Camp in such an exposed position ! ?

[KFinn]

I have not been able to find where in the case files and witness statements it said that the Evening Otorten was pinned to the tent, I've only seen it was in the belongings.  Can you point me to that? 

[marieuk]

i read that they often wrote their diary entries in the morning.  Not sure how true that is, and would imagine it wasn't always the case, but could explain why they wrote the 'Evening Otorten' and not their diaries.  Equally as you suggest, maybe they've gone missing?   At the moment I'm finding it hard to know what is true!

[Missi]

It might have been that whatever happened, happened after they finished the Evening Otorten and before they had a chance to write their respective diary entries.
Another idea could be they planned to include the Evening Otorten in their group diary and were to tired to write in their own diaries.

Yet I did read yesterday or the day before, that the storage included some diaries. If that is true, maybe they left the journals that were already filled, started new ones on the mountain and those were taken? Were any diaries found in the tent? I can't remember...

[sarapuk]

It might have been that whatever happened, happened after they finished the Evening Otorten and before they had a chance to write their respective diary entries.
Another idea could be they planned to include the Evening Otorten in their group diary and were to tired to write in their own diaries.

Yet I did read yesterday or the day before, that the storage included some diaries. If that is true, maybe they left the journals that were already filled, started new ones on the mountain and those were taken? Were any diaries found in the tent? I can't remember...

 The Search Parties found a lot of stuff in the abandoned Tent. They found, notebooks, itinerary and many other small items and documents. All the Diaries were found in a Field Bag but interestingly the Diary of Kolmogorova, whose last date of entry was January 30th, was taken from the Tent and sent to the Search Parties Base Camp. Prosecutor Tempalov took the other Diaries. It seems that there are missing Diaries and maybe also missing Diary Entries. If that isnt suspicious then I dont know what is.

[sarapuk]

I have not been able to find where in the case files and witness statements it said that the Evening Otorten was pinned to the tent, I've only seen it was in the belongings.  Can you point me to that?

I spotted it somewhere but forget where now. I will have look asap.

[sarapuk]

I have not been able to find where in the case files and witness statements it said that the Evening Otorten was pinned to the tent, I've only seen it was in the belongings.  Can you point me to that?

Here is the information you need.  Go to Factual Information.  Then Material Modern.  Then Publications / Media, and scroll down to Potyazhenko - Interview.  And you will find what he said which I have copied below. I think this information is extremely important but its been overlooked for some reason.



Tent. You said you looked into the tent. How? Through the entrance, through the incision?
– Through the cut. It was almost all open. Like a torn rag. I raised a cut and looked.

– What did you see in the tent?
– There was no order in the tent. They were changing their clothes in the corners. One could see things in groups, frozen pieces of bread lay around, it seems there was a can of meat. At the entrance I saw a piece of paper. Named Combat Leaflet. I was surprised, just like in the army - a combat sheet.

– How was it located in the tent, attached to a wall or lying around?
– I do not remember exactly. It seems to me that he was somehow attached to the wall of the tent. Wetted whether with tea, or saliva - and frozen.

– Were there drawings in this combat sheet? What was written there? Tell in detail about this leaflet.
– There were no drawings. I did not read what was in it. I remembered that it was written "Tasks for tomorrow." They wrote with pencil. It was obvious that they wrote in field conditions. Pencil in some places broke through the paper. The handwriting was so uneven. As if written on a knee.

[Manti]

There were no "tasks for tomorrow" in Evening Otorten though. So what is Potyazhenko talking about?

[KFinn]

I have not been able to find where in the case files and witness statements it said that the Evening Otorten was pinned to the tent, I've only seen it was in the belongings.  Can you point me to that?

Here is the information you need.  Go to Factual Information.  Then Material Modern.  Then Publications / Media, and scroll down to Potyazhenko - Interview.  And you will find what he said which I have copied below. I think this information is extremely important but its been overlooked for some reason.



Tent. You said you looked into the tent. How? Through the entrance, through the incision?
– Through the cut. It was almost all open. Like a torn rag. I raised a cut and looked.

– What did you see in the tent?
– There was no order in the tent. They were changing their clothes in the corners. One could see things in groups, frozen pieces of bread lay around, it seems there was a can of meat. At the entrance I saw a piece of paper. Named Combat Leaflet. I was surprised, just like in the army - a combat sheet.

– How was it located in the tent, attached to a wall or lying around?
– I do not remember exactly. It seems to me that he was somehow attached to the wall of the tent. Wetted whether with tea, or saliva - and frozen.

– Were there drawings in this combat sheet? What was written there? Tell in detail about this leaflet.
– There were no drawings. I did not read what was in it. I remembered that it was written "Tasks for tomorrow." They wrote with pencil. It was obvious that they wrote in field conditions. Pencil in some places broke through the paper. The handwriting was so uneven. As if written on a knee.

Thank you, kindly!  I've been chasing that lead for awhile, just trying to find valid info on where it was found...I don't know how I've missed this interview. I shall go read!!!

[sarapuk]

There were no "tasks for tomorrow" in Evening Otorten though. So what is Potyazhenko talking about?

Well he never read the newspaper. But he said that that was written on it.

[KFinn]

I'm trying to nail down things.  So, we have 6 known diaries; the group diary, Zina's, Lyuda's, Rustem's, Yuri Yudin's and an unknown diary.  I assume for the sake of argument (which could be totally off base,) that the notebook found in Zolotaryev's jacket was his diary.  That makes 7.  We are still missing, Igor's, Yuri D and Yuri K (along with the topo drawings,) Kolevatov's, and Thibo's.  The unknown diary should be one in of theirs (through process of elimination.)  If the pocket notebook was not his diary, then Zolotaryev's is still missing, as well.

Akselrod stated that they determined the date of death based on a diary entry for February 2, that was found in the tent.  (https://dyatlovpass.com/they-died-with-dignity)

"Date of death of the guys was set very simple. In the far corner of the tent was a diary with the date of the last entry - February 2, 1959. That is, the hikers just started the route."

So, one of the missing diaries has a later entry than any of the existing diaries we have access to.  Makes ya really, really curious what the other diaries have to say....

[Missi]

As far as I know, the date of death was reported as the night of Feb 1st to Feb 2nd because of the date put on Evening Otorten. A diary entry dated Feb 2nd would imply that either someone wrote after midnight and was very correct as to which date was or they lived one day longer than is widely believed. Am I mistaken?

[KFinn]

As far as I know, the date of death was reported as the night of Feb 1st to Feb 2nd because of the date put on Evening Otorten. A diary entry dated Feb 2nd would imply that either someone wrote after midnight and was very correct as to which date was or they lived one day longer than is widely believed. Am I mistaken?

One of the many discrepancies and oddities. 

So, who all saw the Evening Otorten actually posted inside the tent?  One person.  Everyone else who saw it, saw it after the tent was down or off the ridge after the tent and contents were flown out.  The pilot is the only man who claims to have seen the Evening Otorten actually in the tent, attached to the wall.  If he is perhaps wrong, it is entirely possible the Evening Otorten was written the day before.  It is interesting to compare his statements with others.  The pilot swears there were no students on the ridge at this time.  But he flew to the tent after the tent was found by the students.  The students say they had to cut holes into the tent to see inside.  The pilot says he just looked in the door.  They also disagree on the state of things inside the tent. 

Again, just more curious oddities that is the DPI.

[sarapuk]

I'm trying to nail down things.  So, we have 6 known diaries; the group diary, Zina's, Lyuda's, Rustem's, Yuri Yudin's and an unknown diary.  I assume for the sake of argument (which could be totally off base,) that the notebook found in Zolotaryev's jacket was his diary.  That makes 7.  We are still missing, Igor's, Yuri D and Yuri K (along with the topo drawings,) Kolevatov's, and Thibo's.  The unknown diary should be one in of theirs (through process of elimination.)  If the pocket notebook was not his diary, then Zolotaryev's is still missing, as well.

Akselrod stated that they determined the date of death based on a diary entry for February 2, that was found in the tent.  (https://dyatlovpass.com/they-died-with-dignity)

"Date of death of the guys was set very simple. In the far corner of the tent was a diary with the date of the last entry - February 2, 1959. That is, the hikers just started the route."

So, one of the missing diaries has a later entry than any of the existing diaries we have access to.  Makes ya really, really curious what the other diaries have to say....

Yes there appears to be missing Diaries and maybe even Diaries with pages missing. Which obviously arouses suspicion.

[sarapuk]

As far as I know, the date of death was reported as the night of Feb 1st to Feb 2nd because of the date put on Evening Otorten. A diary entry dated Feb 2nd would imply that either someone wrote after midnight and was very correct as to which date was or they lived one day longer than is widely believed. Am I mistaken?

Well thats hard to say. I dont know about you but I sometimes write something down and put the next days date on.

[sarapuk]

As far as I know, the date of death was reported as the night of Feb 1st to Feb 2nd because of the date put on Evening Otorten. A diary entry dated Feb 2nd would imply that either someone wrote after midnight and was very correct as to which date was or they lived one day longer than is widely believed. Am I mistaken?

One of the many discrepancies and oddities. 

So, who all saw the Evening Otorten actually posted inside the tent?  One person.  Everyone else who saw it, saw it after the tent was down or off the ridge after the tent and contents were flown out.  The pilot is the only man who claims to have seen the Evening Otorten actually in the tent, attached to the wall.  If he is perhaps wrong, it is entirely possible the Evening Otorten was written the day before.  It is interesting to compare his statements with others.  The pilot swears there were no students on the ridge at this time.  But he flew to the tent after the tent was found by the students.  The students say they had to cut holes into the tent to see inside.  The pilot says he just looked in the door.  They also disagree on the state of things inside the tent. 

Again, just more curious oddities that is the DPI.

What I find unusual is that he said that he didnt actually read the Newsletter just the Headline. I dont know about you but the first thing I would have done is read everything in that Newletter. After all it was pinned to a prominent location in the Tent.

[KFinn]

As far as I know, the date of death was reported as the night of Feb 1st to Feb 2nd because of the date put on Evening Otorten. A diary entry dated Feb 2nd would imply that either someone wrote after midnight and was very correct as to which date was or they lived one day longer than is widely believed. Am I mistaken?

One of the many discrepancies and oddities. 

So, who all saw the Evening Otorten actually posted inside the tent?  One person.  Everyone else who saw it, saw it after the tent was down or off the ridge after the tent and contents were flown out.  The pilot is the only man who claims to have seen the Evening Otorten actually in the tent, attached to the wall.  If he is perhaps wrong, it is entirely possible the Evening Otorten was written the day before.  It is interesting to compare his statements with others.  The pilot swears there were no students on the ridge at this time.  But he flew to the tent after the tent was found by the students.  The students say they had to cut holes into the tent to see inside.  The pilot says he just looked in the door.  They also disagree on the state of things inside the tent. 

Again, just more curious oddities that is the DPI.

What I find unusual is that he said that he didnt actually read the Newsletter just the Headline. I dont know about you but the first thing I would have done is read everything in that Newletter. After all it was pinned to a prominent location in the Tent.

Yes!  I'm way too curious and nosey not to read the whole thing, lol!  But didn't he also mention there were tasks written on it for the next day, as well?  How would he have known that if he didn't read further?!

[Missi]

As far as I know, the date of death was reported as the night of Feb 1st to Feb 2nd because of the date put on Evening Otorten. A diary entry dated Feb 2nd would imply that either someone wrote after midnight and was very correct as to which date was or they lived one day longer than is widely believed. Am I mistaken?

Well thats hard to say. I dont know about you but I sometimes write something down and put the next days date on.

Yes, it is hard to say. But it's something to keep in mind, I'd say. As for me, I'd only put the "next" days date on a paper, if it was actually really already the next day, meaning after midnight. But then again I might have some rather strange and maybe autistic traits...

As far as I know, the date of death was reported as the night of Feb 1st to Feb 2nd because of the date put on Evening Otorten. A diary entry dated Feb 2nd would imply that either someone wrote after midnight and was very correct as to which date was or they lived one day longer than is widely believed. Am I mistaken?

One of the many discrepancies and oddities. 

So, who all saw the Evening Otorten actually posted inside the tent?  One person.  Everyone else who saw it, saw it after the tent was down or off the ridge after the tent and contents were flown out.  The pilot is the only man who claims to have seen the Evening Otorten actually in the tent, attached to the wall.  If he is perhaps wrong, it is entirely possible the Evening Otorten was written the day before.  It is interesting to compare his statements with others.  The pilot swears there were no students on the ridge at this time.  But he flew to the tent after the tent was found by the students.  The students say they had to cut holes into the tent to see inside.  The pilot says he just looked in the door.  They also disagree on the state of things inside the tent. 

Again, just more curious oddities that is the DPI.

What I find unusual is that he said that he didnt actually read the Newsletter just the Headline. I dont know about you but the first thing I would have done is read everything in that Newletter. After all it was pinned to a prominent location in the Tent.

I'd say that depends on how much time he had. If he only looked to confirm there was nobody requiring immediate help before reporting back to his authorities, he might have noticed the paper hanging (or maybe lying, who knows) and not taking the time for reading. The paper would be there still later, but sunlight might be gone soon.

As far as I remember, the task list is another thing just one person told about with nobody else to confirm or a piece of evidence to be shown. Couldn't make something out of it just yet.

[KFinn]

I doubt it was to make sure no one needed help.  The tent had already been checked and found empty and the bodies at the cedar had been found.  Plus, he was just a pilot.  He wasn't a rescuer/searcher.

[KFinn]

And yes, the pilot is the only person to mention tasks on the paper. 

[Paf]

"Date of death of the guys was set very simple. In the far corner of the tent was a diary with the date of the last entry - February 2, 1959. That is, the hikers just started the route."

 Evening Ortoten is dated on Feb first, and the unknown Diary last entry is maybe dated on Feb. 2d. (Just a "2." actually. But this 2 here fit with Sacha's Birthday. -not the right Sacha (written "kolevatov") though, but still Sacha's (Zolotaryov) birthday.)
The group diary might be missing one page. We don't have any mention in this dairy of Kolevatov's ankle, despite the fact he needed painkiller (but it could be the problems "Comrad Kolevatov" had with his sled in Ortoten).

But if somebody wrote "everything went well" on feb.2, could they have died on Feb.3, on their way back from Ortoten ? No ski track found further though, I think !
Anyways, that would still mean we have some missing entry in the group diary, because they were pretty good at keeping it up-to-date everyday ! (even if Ortoten replace feb.1 entry, why is there no Feb.2 ?)

For the "tasks", we don't have the verso of the paper... only one recto.
If it was an old to-do list, they maybe though that wasn't relevant. Or the copy-maker just didn't turn the paper.

[WinterLeia]

I’m new to the forum and I had a question about the unknown diary. It’s the only diary that mentions them celebrating Kolevatov’s on 1/30. Except that wasn’t his birthday. The only explanations I’ve seen for this is that they were trying to interject some normalcy into the scene, or maybe it’s a belated birthday party, as they might not have been in a position to mark it in any way in November. However, Zina mentions that 1/29 is Yuri Doroshenko’s birthday. And it seems odd to me that they would celebrate Kolevatov’s birthday two months late and not include Yuri, whose birthday was just the day before. Could the explanation be that the person got Kolevatov mixed up with Yuri? If that is the case, then the only author of the unknown diary that makes sense is Semyon, as the rest knew each other far too well to misidentify anyone. If that is the case, it’s probably likely that the K Tibo is not Nicholai. While I know that some people refer to Nick as Kolya (or close to that), the author of the unknown diary calls him Nick T. Normally if we’re introduced to someone by a certain name we stick to that name. A person named Daniel might go by the name Dan or by his middle name Richard. But if we were introduced to him as Dan, that’s what we’ll call him, and if other people are saying the name Richard, we might not realize they’re talking about the same person.

[eurocentric]

I’m new to the forum and I had a question about the unknown diary. It’s the only diary that mentions them celebrating Kolevatov’s on 1/30. Except that wasn’t his birthday. The only explanations I’ve seen for this is that they were trying to interject some normalcy into the scene, or maybe it’s a belated birthday party, as they might not have been in a position to mark it in any way in November. However, Zina mentions that 1/29 is Yuri Doroshenko’s birthday. And it seems odd to me that they would celebrate Kolevatov’s birthday two months late and not include Yuri, whose birthday was just the day before. Could the explanation be that the person got Kolevatov mixed up with Yuri? If that is the case, then the only author of the unknown diary that makes sense is Semyon, as the rest knew each other far too well to misidentify anyone. If that is the case, it’s probably likely that the K Tibo is not Nicholai. While I know that some people refer to Nick as Kolya (or close to that), the author of the unknown diary calls him Nick T. Normally if we’re introduced to someone by a certain name we stick to that name. A person named Daniel might go by the name Dan or by his middle name Richard. But if we were introduced to him as Dan, that’s what we’ll call him, and if other people are saying the name Richard, we might not realize they’re talking about the same person.

Welcome to the forum.

According to would-be 10th hiker, Slavik (Vladislav) Bienko, who Semyon replaced, Semyon and Tibo were 'inseparable' when he saw everyone off at the railway station. So you'd anticipate Semyon would be on casual name terms with Tibo/Kolya six days on. That said he was older, an ex-soldier, and may have adopted a formal address when writing.

It is still odd for anyone to call him Nick T though (or the unnecessary duplication of K Tibo), it's not as if there was more than one Nick, and people tend to distinguish between those with the same name in that way.

The diaries were typed up for the case files, and it could be they mixed up a reference to an 'Aleksander', which besides Kolevatov was also the origin of Semyon's second name and how he had first introduced himself to the group. Sasha is a diminutive of that name, so besides 3 Yuris this group also had 2 Aleksander/Sashas.

This is the thing about Russian names, they all have 2, and then there's usually a third or more, a nickname drawn from one of the other names. Nikolay could be Nick, Tibo (from Thibeaux-Brignolle) or Kolya (which is said by some sources to originate as a reworking of the letters from Nikolay). Yuri D could be Yura or Yurka. Yuri K could be Georgiy or Krivo, Igor Gosya and so on. Many of them had been on past hikes together or knew each other at university so different nicknames may have been adopted in different company to avoid verbal confusion between 2 with the same name.

The coincidences continue with birthdays too. 3 of them, Rustem, Zina and Igor, had their birthdays a fortnight earlier across consecutive days, 11th, 12th & 13th January. You could probably win the lottery with those odds across a group of only 9 people. Inevitably that would enter their conversation when it was Yuri D's birthday, which I'm sure they'd celebrate, it was his 21st, and his ex, Zina, mentions it and how they chatted about his playboy past - up until then things had been a bit awkward and frosty between the two.

Some forum members have suggested 'Aleksander's' birthday was celebrated on 30th because it was the eve of St Aleksander's Day in Russian Orthodoxy. It may be it was Semyon's birthday being brought forward, because his was on 2nd February (his 38th, on which he is taken to have died). That way the group could celebrate another round of consecutive birthdays.

There are many errors in the diaries though, and this could simply be another example of their apparent lack of spatial awareness and time. Zina doesn't seem to know what date or even year it was, and Igor thought they'd be hundreds of kms away from human settlements in his last diary entry, him being the only one to write anything on 31st (they were 50kms from Vizhay).
 
As regards the satirical leaflet/newspaper, it may have been incorrectly dated or purposefully advance dated, to be left on Mount Otorten around the time of their anticipated arrival, as a gift for future hikers to read.

[sigaffa]

I’m new to the forum and I had a question about the unknown diary. It’s the only diary that mentions them celebrating Kolevatov’s on 1/30. Except that wasn’t his birthday. The only explanations I’ve seen for this is that they were trying to interject some normalcy into the scene, or maybe it’s a belated birthday party, as they might not have been in a position to mark it in any way in November. However, Zina mentions that 1/29 is Yuri Doroshenko’s birthday. And it seems odd to me that they would celebrate Kolevatov’s birthday two months late and not include Yuri, whose birthday was just the day before. Could the explanation be that the person got Kolevatov mixed up with Yuri? If that is the case, then the only author of the unknown diary that makes sense is Semyon, as the rest knew each other far too well to misidentify anyone. If that is the case, it’s probably likely that the K Tibo is not Nicholai. While I know that some people refer to Nick as Kolya (or close to that), the author of the unknown diary calls him Nick T. Normally if we’re introduced to someone by a certain name we stick to that name. A person named Daniel might go by the name Dan or by his middle name Richard. But if we were introduced to him as Dan, that’s what we’ll call him, and if other people are saying the name Richard, we might not realize they’re talking about the same person.

Welcome to the forum.

According to would-be 10th hiker, Slavik (Vladislav) Bienko, who Semyon replaced, Semyon and Tibo were 'inseparable' when he saw everyone off at the railway station. So you'd anticipate Semyon would be on casual name terms with Tibo/Kolya six days on. That said he was older, an ex-soldier, and may have adopted a formal address when writing.

It is still odd for anyone to call him Nick T though (or the unnecessary duplication of K Tibo), it's not as if there was more than one Nick, and people tend to distinguish between those with the same name in that way.

The diaries were typed up for the case files, and it could be they mixed up a reference to an 'Aleksander', which besides Kolevatov was also the origin of Semyon's second name and how he had first introduced himself to the group. Sasha is a diminutive of that name, so besides 3 Yuris this group also had 2 Aleksander/Sashas.

This is the thing about Russian names, they all have 2, and then there's usually a third or more, a nickname drawn from one of the other names. Nikolay could be Nick, Tibo (from Thibeaux-Brignolle) or Kolya (which is said by some sources to originate as a reworking of the letters from Nikolay). Yuri D could be Yura or Yurka. Yuri K could be Georgiy or Krivo, Igor Gosya and so on. Many of them had been on past hikes together or knew each other at university so different nicknames may have been adopted in different company to avoid verbal confusion between 2 with the same name.

The coincidences continue with birthdays too. 3 of them, Rustem, Zina and Igor, had their birthdays a fortnight earlier across consecutive days, 11th, 12th & 13th January. You could probably win the lottery with those odds across a group of only 9 people. Inevitably that would enter their conversation when it was Yuri D's birthday, which I'm sure they'd celebrate, it was his 21st, and his ex, Zina, mentions it and how they chatted about his playboy past - up until then things had been a bit awkward and frosty between the two.

Some forum members have suggested 'Aleksander's' birthday was celebrated on 30th because it was the eve of St Aleksander's Day in Russian Orthodoxy. It may be it was Semyon's birthday being brought forward, because his was on 2nd February (his 38th, on which he is taken to have died). That way the group could celebrate another round of consecutive birthdays.

There are many errors in the diaries though, and this could simply be another example of their apparent lack of spatial awareness and time. Zina doesn't seem to know what date or even year it was, and Igor thought they'd be hundreds of kms away from human settlements in his last diary entry, him being the only one to write anything on 31st (they were 50kms from Vizhay).
 
As regards the satirical leaflet/newspaper, it may have been incorrectly dated or purposefully advance dated, to be left on Mount Otorten around the time of their anticipated arrival, as a gift for future hikers to read.

Hello Forum members ... this is my first post to your group. I too have often wondered if the 'Evening Ortoten' was written as a humorous anecdote to be left at the summit on the following day's trek - I understand it was common to leave messages on summits for future hikers to examine?

Maybe two things support this theory - 1) as a simple piece of satirical humour written by DP members only for their own amusement, the best location for it might have been within the pages of the group diary, and 2) if the Potyazhenko testimony can be taken as accurate, it might suggest that the 'Evening Ortoten' was placed in a prominent position in the tent to be ready for easy access the following morning - as pack-up before the summit-hike commenced?

It is possible that the 'Evening Ortoten' could also help in establishing a possible time-line for the afternoon/evening spent in the tent, but I realize that previous forum members have raised a possibility that it could have been written prior to February 1st and post-dated (and that others have questioned it's existence at all).  Kind regards.

[eurocentric]

I’m new to the forum and I had a question about the unknown diary. It’s the only diary that mentions them celebrating Kolevatov’s on 1/30. Except that wasn’t his birthday. The only explanations I’ve seen for this is that they were trying to interject some normalcy into the scene, or maybe it’s a belated birthday party, as they might not have been in a position to mark it in any way in November. However, Zina mentions that 1/29 is Yuri Doroshenko’s birthday. And it seems odd to me that they would celebrate Kolevatov’s birthday two months late and not include Yuri, whose birthday was just the day before. Could the explanation be that the person got Kolevatov mixed up with Yuri? If that is the case, then the only author of the unknown diary that makes sense is Semyon, as the rest knew each other far too well to misidentify anyone. If that is the case, it’s probably likely that the K Tibo is not Nicholai. While I know that some people refer to Nick as Kolya (or close to that), the author of the unknown diary calls him Nick T. Normally if we’re introduced to someone by a certain name we stick to that name. A person named Daniel might go by the name Dan or by his middle name Richard. But if we were introduced to him as Dan, that’s what we’ll call him, and if other people are saying the name Richard, we might not realize they’re talking about the same person.

Welcome to the forum.

According to would-be 10th hiker, Slavik (Vladislav) Bienko, who Semyon replaced, Semyon and Tibo were 'inseparable' when he saw everyone off at the railway station. So you'd anticipate Semyon would be on casual name terms with Tibo/Kolya six days on. That said he was older, an ex-soldier, and may have adopted a formal address when writing.

It is still odd for anyone to call him Nick T though (or the unnecessary duplication of K Tibo), it's not as if there was more than one Nick, and people tend to distinguish between those with the same name in that way.

The diaries were typed up for the case files, and it could be they mixed up a reference to an 'Aleksander', which besides Kolevatov was also the origin of Semyon's second name and how he had first introduced himself to the group. Sasha is a diminutive of that name, so besides 3 Yuris this group also had 2 Aleksander/Sashas.

This is the thing about Russian names, they all have 2, and then there's usually a third or more, a nickname drawn from one of the other names. Nikolay could be Nick, Tibo (from Thibeaux-Brignolle) or Kolya (which is said by some sources to originate as a reworking of the letters from Nikolay). Yuri D could be Yura or Yurka. Yuri K could be Georgiy or Krivo, Igor Gosya and so on. Many of them had been on past hikes together or knew each other at university so different nicknames may have been adopted in different company to avoid verbal confusion between 2 with the same name.

The coincidences continue with birthdays too. 3 of them, Rustem, Zina and Igor, had their birthdays a fortnight earlier across consecutive days, 11th, 12th & 13th January. You could probably win the lottery with those odds across a group of only 9 people. Inevitably that would enter their conversation when it was Yuri D's birthday, which I'm sure they'd celebrate, it was his 21st, and his ex, Zina, mentions it and how they chatted about his playboy past - up until then things had been a bit awkward and frosty between the two.

Some forum members have suggested 'Aleksander's' birthday was celebrated on 30th because it was the eve of St Aleksander's Day in Russian Orthodoxy. It may be it was Semyon's birthday being brought forward, because his was on 2nd February (his 38th, on which he is taken to have died). That way the group could celebrate another round of consecutive birthdays.

There are many errors in the diaries though, and this could simply be another example of their apparent lack of spatial awareness and time. Zina doesn't seem to know what date or even year it was, and Igor thought they'd be hundreds of kms away from human settlements in his last diary entry, him being the only one to write anything on 31st (they were 50kms from Vizhay).
 
As regards the satirical leaflet/newspaper, it may have been incorrectly dated or purposefully advance dated, to be left on Mount Otorten around the time of their anticipated arrival, as a gift for future hikers to read.

Hello Forum members ... this is my first post to your group. I too have often wondered if the 'Evening Ortoten' was written as a humorous anecdote to be left at the summit on the following day's trek - I understand it was common to leave messages on summits for future hikers to examine?

Maybe two things support this theory - 1) as a simple piece of satirical humour written by DP members only for their own amusement, the best location for it might have been within the pages of the group diary, and 2) if the Potyazhenko testimony can be taken as accurate, it might suggest that the 'Evening Ortoten' was placed in a prominent position in the tent to be ready for easy access the following morning - as pack-up before the summit-hike commenced?

It is possible that the 'Evening Ortoten' could also help in establishing a possible time-line for the afternoon/evening spent in the tent, but I realize that previous forum members have raised a possibility that it could have been written prior to February 1st and post-dated (and that others have questioned it's existence at all).  Kind regards.

Welcome to the forum.

I like the idea of them inventing the world's first Post It note, a leaflet stuck to or pinned on the tent.

For some reason it's called a Combat Leaflet, but the contents reads like it's for someone else's knowing amusement and the Evening Otorten title possibly like that of an evening newspaper.

Hiker birth rates, stove assembly times, talk of love, the problems with drag sleds, a tease about the yeti being seen around Otorten, and a quiz question about the cold, asking can 9 tourists get by with one blanket and a stove.

I think I read somewhere that the rescue party found a similar note from the Blinov group on Otorten.

[sigaffa]

Welcome to the forum.

I like the idea of them inventing the world's first Post It note, a leaflet stuck to or pinned on the tent.

For some reason it's called a Combat Leaflet, but the contents reads like it's for someone else's knowing amusement and the Evening Otorten title possibly like that of an evening newspaper.

Hiker birth rates, stove assembly times, talk of love, the problems with drag sleds, a tease about the yeti being seen around Otorten, and a quiz question about the cold, asking can 9 tourists get by with one blanket and a stove.

I think I read somewhere that the rescue party found a similar note from the Blinov group on Otorten.
[/quote]

Thank you for the welcome eurocentric 

There is SO much to get focused on with the DPI, but the presence and purpose of the "Evening Otorten" has always interested me. In a "theoretical" time-line, I have thought about the idea that on their final night the group raised their tent in poor weather and a difficult position on the slope and then, to raise spirits once inside the tent decided to use the last bit of available day-light toauthor something lighthearted and humorous - ready to leave on the summit the following day? This might then explain the lack of other diary entries - by the time they had completed the "Evening Otorten" - as a group, daylight had gone, and they needed to focus on eating and preparing for sleep.

All conjecture of course. I also remember reading that the Blinov group left a note on the summit (though I have never seen it's contents?) But based on the practices of larger expeditions (to mountain peaks and elsewhere), I can imagine that the Dyatlov group would have wanted to leave some memento of their success at the summit the following day.

The "Evening Otorten" is one of so many examples where I think the investigation process was handled very poorly. I assume:

- the original no longer exists? (I have only ever seen photo's of the typed-up transcript)
- the original was never photographed?
- the dimensions were never recorded?
- the hand-writing was never attributed?
- the "source" was never recorded - by this I mean were there tear-marks down one edge to suggest it was torn from one of the diaries, or was it a separate (and ? larger) piece of paper - perhaps brought along by the group specifically for it's purpose?

I know it all seems a little trivial in the larger mysteries of the DPI, it is just an example about the investigative process that really frustrates me - a single photograph and five minutes of note-taking could have laid all my questions to rest!

Kind regards.

[anson68]

Пишу на русском, так как без разницы, сам через переводчик прогоню, или потом кому нужно сделают.
Явные ошибки.
Нет никакого "боевого листка" , в 59 после нахождения его сразу назвали "сатирическим", боевым он стал позже, в воспоминаниях.
2 тетрадь Масленникова скан 31.
https://dyatlovpass.com/maslennikov-notebook-2
Так же он назван и блокноте Григорьева.

И глупость это, писать листок на верху, у них полдня на стоянке на Ауспии  было, там всё и написали, при свете дня, и без ветра.

У вас что, в стране вечерних газет не было, или вы настолько молодые, что бумажных газет не застали.
Вечерние как раз и делались с утра. Это утренние, с вечера предыдущего дня.

Никаких дневников в полевой сумке Игоря не было. Привязка дневника неизвестного к этой сумке, который в деле назвали дневником Зины, произошла из-за вмешательства Атманаки, именно он принёс его вместе с этой сумкой, может даже внутрь положил.
Каждый как положено у себя дневник держал.
У кого в это день был общий дневник, пока точно не известно.
Так же в деле есть и копия общего дневника группы.
Настоящий дневник Зины, дневник Люды, а так же записная книжка Рустема, были отданы родным. Так же Юдин сохранил свой дневник. В деле они никак не упомянуты.
Про дневник Саши ничего явного нет, одни разговоры. Его записная книжка, которую Зина подарила ему, так же как и остальным, найдена пустой.
В теории, после закрытия дела, дневники можно возвращать родным. Почему не вернули, и даже не нашли, кто же написал приписанный Зине, не известно. Дневник группы ни к чьей личной собственности не относился, но при желании могли его вернуть в институт. Тем более, что копии уже были в деле.

Я также помню, что читал, что группа Блинова оставила записку на вершине

Что и как оставляла группа Блинова, неизвестно, даже в его личном дневнике никаких подробностей, про тот поход 59 года. Наверно у вас в памяти всё таки Карелин, вот они записку на Ойко-Чакуре оставляли.