DNA evidence is usually regarded as conclusive but Mr Peter Koltypin-Wollonskoy who, with Prince Alexis Scherbatow, heads an organisation called the Russian Expert Commission Abroad, does not concur. "We do not argue with the DNA evidence," Koltypin-Wollonskoy told me. But he claimed that the DNA evidence proved only that the bodies were Romanovs and not necessarily those of the tsar and his family. Large numbers of Romanovs were killed in the course of the Russian civil war; many of them would have similar DNA profiles to those of the Yekaterinburg bones. Perhaps more importantly, there had been no record of continuous custody of the Yekaterinburg bones since their existence was made public in 1991. Experts, forensic scientists and historians have been able to go to Yekaterinburg to take samples of bones and teeth almost at will. At least one of the bones of Body Number Four (Tsar Nicholas) has inexplicably gone missing from the local morgue.
Most significantly, Koltypin-Wollonskoy argues, the "Yurovsky Note" has been shown to be a fabrication. The veracity of the note has now been challenged from inside the Russian Government Commission by one of its members, Sergei Belyayev, who says that while the Yekaterinburg bones could be those of the tsar and his family, the evidence available does not allow him to join the rest of the commission in declaring categorically that these are the genuine remains.
Other members of the commission are expected to join Mr Belyayev soon in a minority report.
If the Yurovsky note is false, then it could be claimed that the second mass grave did not exist, that the Yekaterinburg bones could be those of other Romanovs and that the relics in the church in Brussels were the only remnants of Russia's imperial family. It is understood that Belyayev's views will be taken into account by the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow) at the synod which begins tomorrow.
The Moscow church will have a number of decisions to make. First it must decide on whether or not the bones are genuine. If it does so it will then decide on whether or not the Romanovs were martyrs for their faith and worthy of canonisation. There are different burial ceremonies for saints and for ordinary mortals. In both cases, however, the church is likely to demand not only the identification of the bones as being those of the imperial family but also on the individual identification of each skeleton. This is a scientifically impossible request. All the daughters, for example, would have the same DNA. Scientists working on identification by comparing the skulls to photographs of the deceased insist that the missing female skeleton is that of Grand Duchess Maria. Those working on identification through examining the stages of development of bones of different age groups insist it is that of Grand Duchess Anastasia. All agree that the skeleton of the tsarevich, who suffered from haemophilia, is missing.
And from Yekaterinburg in recent days has come the news that the regional governor Eduard Rossel has said the missing skeletons have been found by a local scientist. Veniamin Alekseyev, who was rumoured to be the scientist in question, denied to this newspaper, in a phone conversation from Moscow, that he has the missing remains.
There are, it can be seen, fewer certainties surrounding the Romanov remains than had been previously believed. It is sure, however, that the vast majority of the descendants of the one million Russians who fled the revolution will continue to believe that the relics in Brussels are the only true remains. As a group they are virulently anti-communist. They have seen President Yeltsin, the former Communist Party boss in Yekaterinburg, take their imperial flag as his own. They have seen him, the man who had the Ipatiev House razed to the ground in the 1970s, install the double-headed tsarist eagle as his presidential symbol. They will not allow themselves to believe that he has taken possession of the tsar himself. And as long as a female skeleton remains unaccounted for, the mystery of Anastasia will live on.