The Dyatlov Pass Incident, occurring in February 1959 in the Ural Mountains of the Soviet Union, remains one of the most enigmatic and debated mysteries of the 20th century. The incident involved the deaths of nine Soviet hikers from the Ural Polytechnical Institute in Yekaterinburg, led by Igor Dyatlov, during a skiing expedition. The burial of the victims, as well as the circumstances surrounding their discovery and subsequent handling, is a significant aspect of the case, intertwined with Soviet bureaucracy, forensic investigations, and public speculation.
To understand the burial process, it’s essential to outline how and
when the victims’ bodies were found, as this directly influenced their
handling and burial:
The Expedition and Disappearance: The group
of nine hikers (eight men and one woman, with an additional member who
turned back early due to illness) set out in late January 1959 to reach
Mount Otorten. They were experienced and well-prepared, but failed to
return as scheduled. A search was initiated on February 20, 1959, after
they missed their planned telegraph communication.
Initial
Discoveries (February 26–27, 1959):
Search teams, including
volunteers and military personnel, located the group’s tent on February
26, 1959, on the eastern slope of Kholat Syakhl (translated as “Dead
Mountain” in Mansi). The tent was partially collapsed, with personal
belongings intact, but cut open from the inside, suggesting the hikers
fled abruptly.
On February 26, the bodies of Yuri Doroshenko and Yuri
Krivonischenko were found 1.5 kilometers downhill near a cedar tree,
near a small fire, stripped to their underwear despite the freezing
temperatures (-25°C to -30°C).
On February 27, the bodies of Igor
Dyatlov, Zinaida Kolmogorova, and Rustem Slobodin were found at
intervals along a path between the tent and the cedar tree, suggesting
they were attempting to return to the tent. Slobodin had a fractured
skull, though not deemed fatal at the time.
Later Discoveries
(May 4–5, 1959):
After snowmelt, the remaining four bodies—Lyudmila
Dubinina, Alexander Kolevatov, Nikolai Thibeaux-Brignolles, and Semyon
Zolotaryov—were found in a ravine, 75 meters from the cedar tree, under
4–6 meters of snow. These bodies exhibited severe injuries: Dubinina and
Zolotaryov were missing their eyes, Dubinina lacked her tongue, and
Thibeaux-Brignolles had a crushed skull. Kolevatov had minor injuries
but was found embracing Dubinina.
The staggered discoveries meant
that the burial process occurred in phases, complicated by the remote
location, harsh weather, and the need for autopsies to determine the
cause of death.
Before burial, the bodies underwent autopsies in Ivdel and Sverdlovsk
(now Yekaterinburg), which played a critical role in the handling and
eventual interment of the victims:
First Five Bodies (March
1959):
The bodies of Doroshenko, Krivonischenko, Dyatlov,
Kolmogorova, and Slobodin were transported to Ivdel, a nearby town, for
initial examination. Autopsies were conducted by forensic pathologist
Boris Vozrozhdenny and local doctor Ivan Laptev.
Findings indicated
hypothermia as the primary cause of death for these five, with minor
injuries (bruises, abrasions) consistent with exposure or minor trauma.
Slobodin’s skull fracture was noted but not considered lethal.
The
bodies were preserved in morgue facilities, though the remote region’s
limited infrastructure posed challenges. Identification was
straightforward, as the hikers carried personal documents, and relatives
were involved early.
Last Four Bodies (May 1959):
The
discovery of the final four bodies in May required additional forensic
work due to their advanced decomposition and severe injuries. These
autopsies were conducted in Sverdlovsk under stricter oversight, as the
case had gained attention.
Dubinina, Zolotaryov, and
Thibeaux-Brignolles showed injuries suggestive of massive force
(comparable to a car accident), yet no external penetrating wounds. The
missing eyes and tongue were attributed to natural decomposition or
small scavengers, though speculation about foul play persisted.
Zolotaryov’s identity was briefly questioned due to discrepancies in
dental records, but he was confirmed via personal effects and family
recognition.
Radiation traces were detected on some clothing
(particularly Kolevatov’s and Dubinina’s), prompting further tests,
though results were inconclusive and later downplayed by authorities.
The autopsies were conducted under Soviet protocols, which prioritized
efficiency and often lacked transparency. Families were given limited
access to reports, and some forensic details (e.g., radiation tests)
were classified, fueling later conspiracy theories.
The burial of the Dyatlov Pass victims was marked by logistical
challenges, Soviet bureaucratic control, and emotional turmoil for the
families. The process unfolded in two main phases, corresponding to the
discovery of the bodies.
Burial of the First Five (March 1959)
Location: The bodies of Doroshenko, Krivonischenko, Dyatlov,
Kolmogorova, and Slobodin were buried in Mikhailovskoe Cemetery in
Sverdlovsk, the regional capital and home city of most victims.
Timing: Funerals took place on March 9–10, 1959, shortly after autopsies
and identification. The rapid timeline was typical for Soviet procedures
but caused distress for families seeking answers.
Ceremonies:
The funerals were public, attended by hundreds, including fellow
students, faculty, and locals, reflecting the group’s prominence as
young, accomplished individuals.
Soviet authorities tightly
controlled the proceedings, limiting photography and discouraging
speculation about the deaths. Some attendees reported plainclothes KGB
agents monitoring the events.
Each victim was buried in a separate
coffin, with traditional Russian Orthodox elements (e.g., open caskets,
wreaths), though the Soviet state downplayed religious aspects.
Family Involvement: Families were allowed to view the bodies, though
some reported the bodies were heavily prepared (e.g., makeup to conceal
frostbite discoloration). The emotional toll was significant, as parents
and siblings grappled with the unexplained circumstances.
Graves: The
victims were interred in a dedicated section of Mikhailovskoe Cemetery.
Their graves were marked with simple headstones bearing names, dates,
and photographs, a common practice in Soviet cemeteries.
Burial
of the Last Four (May–June 1959)
Location: The bodies of Dubinina,
Kolevatov, Thibeaux-Brignolles, and Zolotaryov were also buried in
Mikhailovskoe Cemetery, though Zolotaryov’s burial was handled
separately due to his older age and military background.
Timing:
Funerals occurred in late May 1959, after autopsies and additional
investigations. The delay (nearly three months after the first burials)
heightened public and family frustration.
Ceremonies:
These
funerals were smaller and more restricted, as authorities sought to
quell growing rumors about the case. Attendance was limited to close
family and select officials.
Dubinina’s funeral was particularly
emotional, as her severe injuries (missing eyes and tongue) shocked her
family, despite morgue efforts to reconstruct her appearance.
Zolotaryov’s burial was distinct: as a World War II veteran and
non-student, his body was claimed by his family and buried with military
honors, though still in Mikhailovskoe Cemetery.
Controversies:
Families of the last four victims reported discrepancies in official
reports, such as conflicting injury descriptions or restricted access to
clothing and personal effects.
Some relatives, particularly
Dubinina’s and Zolotaryov’s families, demanded further investigation,
but Soviet authorities closed the case in May 1959, citing a “compelling
natural force” as the cause of death.
Rumors of a cover-up
intensified, as the bodies’ condition (e.g., radiation traces, missing
organs) was not fully explained. Families were pressured to accept the
official narrative.
Logistical Details
Transportation: Bodies
were transported from the Dyatlov Pass site to Ivdel by helicopter or
sled, then to Sverdlovsk by train or truck. The remote location and
snowy conditions complicated logistics, risking further decomposition.
Morgue Storage: Ivdel’s limited facilities meant early bodies were
stored in basic conditions, while later bodies were sent to Sverdlovsk’s
larger morgue. Preservation was adequate but not ideal, given the era’s
technology.
Coffins and Preparation: Standard wooden coffins were
used, provided by the state. Morgue staff prepared bodies to conceal
frostbite, injuries, or decomposition, though families noted
inconsistencies (e.g., unnatural skin tones).
Monuments: In the years
following, a memorial plaque was erected in Mikhailovskoe Cemetery,
listing all nine victims. The Ural Polytechnical Institute also
established a memorial at the university, and a stone marker was later
placed near the Dyatlov Pass site.
The burials were not just logistical events but moments of collective
grief and suspicion:
Public Reaction: The Dyatlov group was
well-known in Sverdlovsk’s academic and hiking communities. Their deaths
shocked the region, and the public funerals for the first five drew
significant crowds, amplifying interest in the case.
Soviet Control:
The state’s secrecy—limiting autopsy details, restricting media
coverage, and monitoring funerals—fueled distrust. Some families and
friends pursued private inquiries, preserving diaries, photos, and
letters that later became key to independent investigations.
Legacy:
The graves in Mikhailovskoe Cemetery remain a pilgrimage site for
researchers, tourists, and those fascinated by the mystery. Annual
memorials are held, and the site is maintained by local groups and the
Dyatlov Foundation, founded in 1999 to seek answers.
Several aspects of the burial process raised questions, contributing
to the incident’s enduring mystery:
Restricted Access: Families
reported being denied full autopsy reports or access to personal
effects, such as cameras and journals, which were confiscated by
authorities.
Inconsistent Documentation: Official records listed
hypothermia for most deaths, but the severe injuries of the ravine
victims (e.g., crushed ribs, skull fractures) were poorly explained,
leading to speculation about explosions, avalanches, or military
involvement.
Radiation Concerns: The detection of low-level radiation
on some clothing prompted classified tests, but results were not shared
with families, raising fears of nuclear involvement (e.g., secret
weapons tests in the Urals).
Zolotaryov’s Case: His separate burial
and initial misidentification (due to dental discrepancies) sparked
theories about his background, including speculation he was a KGB agent
or outsider with a hidden role.
In recent decades, efforts to clarify the Dyatlov Pass Incident have
occasionally involved the victims’ burials:
Exhumation Attempts:
In 2018, Zolotaryov’s body was exhumed at the request of journalists and
his family to confirm his identity via DNA testing. The exhumation,
conducted in Mikhailovskoe Cemetery, confirmed he was indeed Semyon
Zolotaryov, debunking impostor theories but reigniting debate about his
injuries.
Russian Re-Investigation (2019–2020): The Russian
government reopened the case, concluding an avalanche was the likely
cause. No further exhumations were conducted, but cemetery records and
autopsy files were re-examined, revealing inconsistencies in injury
descriptions.
Dyatlov Foundation: This group, led by Yuri Kuntsevich,
has maintained the graves and advocated for transparency, ensuring the
victims’ memory endures.