Who Shot Lenin?

Fania Kaplan, the SR Underground, and the August 1918 Assassination Attempt on Lenin Author(s): Scott B. Smith Source: Jahrbcher fr Geschichte Osteuropas, Neue Folge, Bd. 46, H. 1 (1998), pp. 100-119 Published by: Franz Steiner Verlag Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41050066 . Accessed: 15/10/2013 09:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Franz Steiner Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Jahrbcher fr Geschichte Osteuropas.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Scott B. Smith, OR Portland,

Who ShotLenin? Fania Kaplan, theSR Underground, on Lenin and theAugust1918Assassination Attempt
In thecatalogue intheRussian ofperplexing theattempt on Lenin's Revolution, episodes lifeoutside inMoscowontheevening theMikhel'son ofAugust 30, 1918 occupies Factory a prominent theKremlin commandant P. D. Mal'kov and a dayslater place.1Whenfour ofLatvian Communists executed thealleged a former anarchist named Fania attacker, group authorities knewnextto nothing abouttheattack. Kaplan,theBolshevik Kaplanhad been arrested atthesceneandsubsequently confessed to theshooting, butherinterrogators were ofa larger terrorist unable toestablish whether shehadaccomplices or actedas part group, to the whether shehadtiesto anypolitical orwhether herattack had anyconnection party, on Chekachief M. S. Uritskii on thesamedayas theattack assassination ofthePetrograd within la. M. Sverdlov LenininMoscow.Nonetheless, anhouroftheassassination attempt theparty ofrevolutionattributed ittotheSocialists-Revolutionaries, parexcellence publicly herself an SR, G. I. Whenthe Cheka learnedthatKaplan considered ary terrorism.2 all local Sovietsto arrest of Internal ordered thePeople's Commissar Affairs, Petrovskii, in the Red Terror of the of the PSR the to the devastation that SRs, an order opened way autumn of 1918.3 in thedarkaboutthe at largeremained In fact, theChekano less thanthepopulation trial of the until for the show of the attack Socialist-Revolutionary preparations origins an exAs part ofthesepreparations, members Central Committee beganattheendof 1921.4 i "Voennaia boevaia rabota a thin entitled Semenov SR named pamphlet Grigorii published thefirst for za 1917-1918gg."5Semenov'sbombshell Partiisotsialistov-revoliutsionerov he had headed. This he ties to the terrorist timedetailed SR organization, group Kaplan's oftheSR withtheknowledge and support theAugust 30 attempt had organized asserted, in thesummer as the At theSR trial itself of 1922,Semenovstarred Central Committee. His remained a defendant. witness for the he pamphlet prosecution, though formally leading
1Research andExchanges theInternational Research for thisarticle was supported from bya grant for theUnitedStates Board(IREX), with funds Endowment theHumanities, bytheNational provided administers theRussian, and Information andtheU.S. Department ofState, which Eurasian, Agency, EastEuropean Richard research (Title8). I wouldliketothank Pipes andJonathan Daly for program their comments on a draft ofthisarticle. 2 Ia. Sverdlov Vsem sovetam i krasnoarmeiskikh krest'ianskikh vsem rabochikh, deputatov, in: Izvestiia vsem, VTsEK,31 August1918,p. 1. armiiam, vsem, vsem, in:Izvestiia Pnkazo zalozhnikakh, VTsIK,4 September 1918,p. 5; see also Arest eserov, pravykh in:Izvestiia be noted that while theBolsheviks arrested VTsIK,5 September 1918,p. 3. Itshould SRs, ofthebourgeoisie andtheofficer they designated onlyrepresentatives corpsas hostages. la. reters,Vice-Chairman ot theCheka at thetime,concededas much:see 1. Mikhel s 5-ia in: na t. Lenina:Vospominiia VChK Ia. Peters, byv.zam. Predsedatalia godovshchina pokusheniia account oftheassassination IzvestiiaVTsIK, 30 August1923,p. 1. The confused attempt byM. Ia. how little the fronte. Latsis Dva goda bor'byna vnutrennem Moskva 1920,pp. 23-24 also reveals tothepreparation ofthetrial. Chekaknewaboutitprior 5 Semenov'sreminiscences in thepro-Bolshevik first Berlinnewspaper 24 appeared Novyimir, cameoutas a separate inBerlin, andwerefinally 1922,subsequently February pamphlet republished inMoscowlater in 1922.All references aretotheMoscowedition. byGosizdat
Jahrbcher fur Geschichte 46 ( 1998) H. 1 o FranzSteiner Wiesbaden Osteuropas GmbH,SitzStuttgart/Germany Verlag

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

onLenin101 Assassination andthe 1918 the SR Underground, Fania Attempt August Kaplan, ofa setofdisilluandofthetestimony bothofhis owntestimony served as thefoundation to the PSR. Yet as the additional evidence SRs whoprovided sioned former linking Kaplan hadjoinedthe that Semenov notions ofjusticeandrevealed trial fellfar short ofelementary havebeen time historians some and become a Cheka in 1921 Communist earlier, agent Party The ties,ifany,between s testimony. to Semenov' credence reluctant to lendmuch Kaplan ofspeculation. a matter andtheSRs haveremained theAugust 30 assassination to shroud has continued a fogofmystery In other respects of elaborated theversion historians and Soviet While for decades propagandists attempt. in the two scholars at SR and sketched Semenov first trial, developed by Kaplan's attempt account the received were the first to theWest, BorisOrlovandSemion question Lyandres, of theshooting. Orlov in theeyewitness and to lay barethecontradictions descriptions asmore at while fire the shots that did not concluded Lenin, cautiously Lyandres Kaplan who had shotLeninor whatgroupstoodbehindit, it couldnotbe established serted that he expressed seriousdoubtthatKaplan would have been physically capable of though the Lenin cultand of official With the dethronement out the assassination attempt.6 carrying and haverepeated andjournalists in Russia,a hostofhistorians ofthearchives theopening Cheka have examined historians who Two elaborated these Kaplan's arguments. prominent did that haveconcluded A. L. Litvin andthelateD. A. Volkogonov, file, Kaplanprobably totheassassination theSRs boreno relation at anyrate, notshoot Leninandthat, attempt.7 and to rivalries theassassination instead attributes literature Most of thisrecent attempt and Stalin within the Bolshevik Dzerzhinskii, variously leadership Sverdlov, conspiracies - andoneintrepid Leninhimself that has asserted as themain investigator conspirator figure a pretext to launchtheRed Terror.8 to provide "assassination attempt" stagedtheentire of theRussianFederation of theProcurator theoffice ofthesecharges, Undertheimpact reand officially to have been conducted declaredthe 1918 investigation "superficially"
6 BORISOrlov Mif o Fanni Kaplan, in: Vremiai my 2 (1975) pp. 153-163 and 3 (1976) A New Look attheEvidence, ontheLifeofLenin: Lyandres The 1918Attempt pp. 126-159;Semion 2 (1993) in Istochnik has beenreprinted in: Slavic Review48 (1989) pp. 432-448. Orlov's article 2 (1993) pp. 79-87, to Orlov,Sud na terrorom [sic],in: Istochnik response pp. 63-74. N. D. Kostin's from oflengthy butis useful for itspublication reiterates thestandard Sovietinterpretation, excerpts Moskva 1990. The inhisSudnadterrorom. hisviewsmore Kostin fully develops Kaplan'sChekafile. v Lenina:FanniKaplan,Lidiia Konopleva as Kto strelial has beenreprinted Orlov-Kostin exchange ili kto-to in: Rodina10 (1993) pp. 59-77. drugoi..., 7D. VOLKOGONOV v dvukh Vol. 1. Moskva1994,pp. 396-399; Lenin:Politicheskii knigakh. portret 42 (1991) p. 5; A. L. Litvin V Lenina"strelial" A. L. LitvinDelo 2162 i drugie del,in: Sobesednik in: Rodina7 (1995) pp. 58-60. See also GrigoriiNilov [Aleksandr Kravtsov] Dzerzhinskii, Fanni London 1990,pp. 28-45, 148-155; E. Danilov Taina "vystrelov" Grammatika Leninizma. v Lenina, ili za chtokaznili 1 (1991) pp. 113-130;E. Danilov Trivystrela in:Zvezdavostoka Kaplan, na Leninabyloinstseniin:Neva 5-6 (1992) pp. 306-324;Oleg Vasil'ev Pokushenie Fanni Kaplan, na vozhdia:signalk 29 August1992,p. 6; E. Danilov Pokushenie in: Nezavisimaia rovkoi, gazeta, v Kremle:Ot Lenina in:Ogonek 35-36 (1993) pp. 10-16; Nikolai Zen'kovich Pokusheniia terroni, i do Eltsina:Tainy.Versii.Podopleka.Moskva 1995,pp. 5-23; Idem Vozhdina mushke: terakty Minsk1996,pp. 8-26. instsenirovki. 8Vasil'ev Pokushenie Leninizma na Leninabyloinstsenirovkoi pp. 148p. 6. Nilov Grammatika 155 arguesfora Stalin-Dzerzhinskii (in whichLenin subsequently acquiesced),while conspiracy variant. More theSverdlov-Dzerzhinskii Litvin V Lenina"strelial" Dzerzhinskii pp. 58-60 optsfor that theentire affair cautious is Volkogonov Leninvol. 1, p. 397, whoasserts mayhavebeen"one s role,see comment on Sverdlov' Foran additional oftheBolsheviks' circumspect bigmystifications." Lyandres The 1918Attempt p. 442, n. 57.

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

102

ScottB.Smith

theinvestigation into theshooting in 1992.9 that Theemerging opened orthodoxy Kaplandid notshootLeninis now finding itswayintosecondary accounts.10 While thecontradictions, andpatchiness oftheevidence oddities, gathered bythecontemthe Bolshevik of the assassination have fueled that porary investigators argument attempt did not shoot voluminous SR sources that shed on the assassination have Lenin, light Kaplan notbeenexamined Themost arethetranscripts oftheSR suchmaterials seriously. important in Marchtrial andofthepretrial carried out the GPU 1922, April copies interrogations by intheState Archive oftheRussianFederation ofwhich arehoused (GARF). Whilethetrial value.Scholars itnonetheless evidence ofgenuine itself was a sham, historically produced that thecontempothe material andwerefurther hadno accesstothis hamstrung by emphasis ex-SRs andtheother of Semenov accounts ofthetrial rary gaveto thecharges newspaper acdistorted The Sovietpressprovided withtheprosecution. who cooperated onlybrief, - theSR Central members who Committee defendants countsof thetestimony ofthetrue - making to assess critically itvirtually to death weresubsequently condemned impossible at the trial. of the evidence adduced any this The archival trialmaterial is now available.To be evaluated however, properly, of the the Thefirst material must be divided into twocategories. twentycomprises testimony Comweremembers oftheSR Central eleven ofwhom defendants atthetrial, twoprincipal refused to defendants the first of the other members of mittee. and generally group They the PSR while never the At in the answer trial, denying investigation. anyquestions pretrial various toparry andsought themselves defended hadopposed Bolshevik rule, forcefully they Yet elements of Stalinist mode. trial in the Stalinist a show this was not practice high charges: ofdefendants ofa second reliance ontheconfessions intheprosecution's werepresent group thePSR. Ofthetwelve anddenounced offered their whoadmitted abjectconfessions, guilt, and his close associateL. V. Semenov of in the second menandwomen group defendants, the evidence confessions Their detailed the main roles. provided principal played Konopleva the The evidence SRs of the first thefar more by second provided group.11 prominent against the assassination version of not the of defendants undergirded only prosecution's group of thismaterial weaknesses The obvious accounts as well. Soviet but all subsequent attempt, itor to of the assassination led recent have understandably attempt disregard investigators use itonlyselectively. itis no is available, thefirst ofdefendants from Now that theevidence however, group A of the second. the to or comparison rigorous necessary prudent disregard testimony longer to the a reliable offers instead ofdefendants thetwogroups from oftheevidence approach of For 30 assassination trial material andtotheAugust analysis attempt. purposes systematic versions ofthe one andtwoofthisarticle ofpresentation, andclarity separate present parts This of defendants. of each the evidence on assassination group relying respectively attempt, what is to sure the inevitable its way grasp provides only repetitions, despite approach, be what should where tothetwoaccounts, common differed, and,ultimately, accepted they
9 "Postanovlenie in: o vozbuzhdenii obstoiatel'stvam," po vnov' otkryvshimsia proizvodstva Istochnik2(1993)p. 88. 10E. Robert Service Lenin:A Political Ind. 1995, Life.Vol. 3. The IronRing.Bloomington, g. pp. 29-33. 1 1In atthe as witnesses SRs wereinterrogated a slewofother addition, bytheGPU andappeared andother members former Central Committee trial. thewitness wereseveral leaders, topparty Among whoseleadership ofthemost N. I. Rakitnikov, V. K. Vol'skii, andK. S. Burevoi, unequivoincluding oftheCivilWargained them a (fleeting) ofthePSR inthelatter callypro-Soviet stages wing exemption from prosecution.

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

onLenin103 1918 Assassination andthe the SR Underground, Fania Attempt August Kaplan, returns to theeyewitness ofpart whichthen is thesubject as fact.This comparison three, the recent studies ofthe and other evidence that have confession, accounts, inspired Kaplan's the first time of evidence for This of the various classes assassination permits attempt. sifting world and of the 30 assassination a full bothoftheAugust reconstruction shadowy attempt from which itissued. SR organizations ofunderground I madeon the with thecase theprosecution evidence bestbegins An analysis ofthetrial ofdefendants. Farandawaythemostimportant ofthesecondgroup basisofthetestimony of a Russianimperial Bornin 1891 intothefamily came from G. I. Semenov. testimony an Semenov of inwhat is nowtheEstonian official example presents outstanding city Tartu, for ofimprisonment andhismentality.12 terrorist oftheRussian Except periods revolutionary to his timeexclusively theWorldWar,he devoted service and exile,and forarmy during educated and not the of fourteen. work from particuPoorly revolutionary age underground all thewhilein absorbed from to party, he drifted in socialist party theory, larlyinterested career as a professional in 1921 . He beganhistortuous andended terrorism, up a Communist Thisgroup, of the Latvian in the "Combat Social-Democracy." Organization revolutionary and the active terrorist national Social-Democratic oneofseveral during after organizations and in itscommitment to terrorism detachments theSR combat of 1905,rivaled revolution and exile in 1907, Semenov After his first arrest actsof terror.13 brutal carried outmany ofan anarchist-communist under the his terrorist career resume returned to auspices illegally for remained an anarchist-communist Semenov Social-Democrats. of Latvian splinter group Russianrevolutionary thefamiliar his way through thenextseveralyearsas he worked to Francein 1912. terrorism until he emigrated ofarrest, exile,escape,andrenewed pattern to Russiathat andjoinedthePSR in 1915.He returned with anarchism There he broke year officer. thewaras a noncommissioned he served into thearmy; andwas drafted throughout andlater assisted as Commissar ofthe9th in 1917,he served Activein army Army politics seizure to overturn the Bolshevik effort to find in the futile troops Kerensky pro-government ofpower. inthePSR' s effort toorganize forces became a keyfigure After October Semenov military moved into the SR and thereafter forthedefense of theConstituent naturally Assembly the in and Saratov until his first arrest under worked He Moscow, Petrograd, underground. ofimprisonment seemtohavebroken Semenov. inthefall of19 18. Ninemonths newregime, his the that Semenov had were SRs changed political circulating among By May reports In fact, Semenov' s in enlisting in theRed Army.14 and expressed an interest orientation on to believe that he as went further. There is reason of heart signed good change probably became for hisreleasein June 1919.He certainly a provocateur for theChekain exchange
12 of information is drawn from theinterrogation thefollowing Unlessotherwise noted, biographical arkhiv Federatsii Rossiiskoi Semenov on 20 April1922,Gosudarstvennyi GARF) f. 1005, (henceforth of Semenov,see Viktor Shklovskii op. 1A, d. 1347, 1. 69-71. For a briefcharacterization withSemenov whoworked Sec. ed. Moskva1990,p. 144. Shklovskii, Sentimental 'noe puteshestvie. himas "obtuse andsuitable for intheunderground in 1918,described politics." li See Anna GeifmanThouShaltKill: inRussia,1894-1917.Princeton Terrorism Revolutionary 1905-1907 godov v Latvii.Moskva 1952, 1993, pp. 106-108 and Ia. P. Krastyn' Revoliutsiia pp. 187-194. 14GAilF f. of L. V. Konopleva,30 March 1922); her 1005,op. IA, d. 347, 1. 67 (interrogation in:GolosRossii,18 March1922,p. 2. account is confirmed byV. Chernov Samozashchita predatelei,

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

104

ScottB.Smith

a forhimto have struck a Cheka agentby 1920,and thisseemsthemostlikely moment credence to the in SR circles deal.15 His quickreemergence after his releaselendsfurther tojointheNarod theservices oftheCheka, as doeshisdecision that hehadentered suspicion with the Sovietregime, that stood reconciliation the of the for the closest party group, wing with andwas riddled Chekaagents. The Cheka In 1920,Semenov tasksfortheBolsheviks. beganto handlemoredelicate Savinkov's Boris the war for use him to Poland Polish-Soviet against during dispatched in SR a coverforhimself Semenovsecured Warsaw-based RussianPoliticalCommittee. the the successor of in Poland from the circles an PSR, Minority bywrangling assignment was arrested Semenov thefront at theend of July, to theNarod group.16 by the Crossing whomhe theintervention ofSavinkov, later after andreleased twomonths Polishauthorities in 1917. Semenov andfrom knew from theprerevolutionary penearmy politics emigration and Savinkov his services as a trated Savinkov's terrorist, agreed byoffering organization a passport Polandwith andLenin.Departing to assassinate to Semenov's Trotsky proposal he had to Russia as not return Semenov did and 100000 rubles agreed bySavinkov, supplied on In Berlinhe give a detailedreport instead to Germany. withSavinkovbuttraveled attheSovietmission.17 Savinkov himfor ofthePSR, which toRussiaSemenov expelled quittheMinority Uponhisreturn went and once the Communist In 1921 he measure. abroad, Party again January joined good L. Abroadhe metup with SR circles.18 on migr information time togather this apparently had in 1918,who likeSemenov theunderground V. Konopleva,his close associatefrom Whilestilloutside oftheCommunist becomean agentoftheChekaandmember Party.19 Lenin what of in the a cametoplay keypart Russiathey hopedwouldbe thefirst preparation The the Bolshevik of the aimed at of a seriesof modeltrials dictatorship.20 opponents
15 whoknewhimwell:M. A. TlSLENKO member ofSemenov's Thiswas theviewofa former group, Razoblachenie lzhi,in: GolosRossii,23 March1922,p. 3. 16 GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 347, 1. 103 ofSemenov); GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 349,1.94 (testimony "Golosa of Vol'skii); see also S. Maslov Proshloeprovokatora (pis'mo v redaktsiiu (testimony Rossii"),in: GolosRossii,17 March1922,p. 1. 1 See the Rossiiskn to LeninandTrotsky: sentbyDzerzhinskii Semenov'sreports from excerpts Istorii Noveishei Dokumentov Khraneniia Tsentr RTsKhlDNI)f.76, op. 3, d. 226, 1.6-10 (henceforth of iz dokladaSemenova).See also GARF f. 1005, op. 1A, d. 349, 1. 94-104 (testimony (vypiska ofI. D. SmilgaandA. A. Mazalov). Semenov);GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 349, 1.88-92 (testimony The andKaplan's attempt. his 1918terrorist about that he toldSavinkov Semenov related organization Warszawa1920, in hisBor'ba s bol'shevikami. theattempt credit for Savinkov claimed sameyear, Savinkov from histalkswithSemenov. false- mayhavestemmed claim- clearly p. 32. Savinkov's See Delo toKaplanortheassassination tohisSoviet later denied attempt. anyconnection interrogators the stoodbehind to theChekasurely 1920reports Moscow1924,p. 36. Semenov's BorisaSavinkova. attacks terrorist ofplansfor theuncovering announced ofNovember Sovietstatement 30, 1920that Committee SR Central declared thatimprisoned members, againstSovietleaders.The authorities all be considered wouldhenceforth ofWrangel's andofficers of Savinkov, followers hostages. army 30 November in: Pravda, See Pravitel'stvennoe 1920,p. 1. soobshchenie, 18 RTsKhlDNIf. 17,op. 84, d. 45, 1. ofSemenov); GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 349, 1.98 (testimony Komitet 8 (G. SemenovV Tsentral'nyi 1921). RKP(b), 5 December 19 lzhip. 3. Razoblachenie ForKonopleva'stiestotheCheka,see TlSLENKO 20 inV. I. Lenin D. I. Kurskii ofJustice ofFebruary See Lenin'sletter 20, 1922toPeople'sCommissar are works Fifth sochinenii. Polnoesobranie ed.,vol.44. Moskva1964,pp. 396-400. Lenin'scollected valuable which sheds Thisletter, oftheSR trial. hisroleinthepreparation screened toconceal carefully toNEP, was one oftheonlydocuments thetransition andlegalviewsduring onLenin'spolitical light to itin print, notto copyit,to refer therecipients oftheletter thefilter. Leninordered allowed through andmisleading ofLenincontain editions to itinanyway.Previous hisname ortoconnect onlya brief Sochineniia. Third from it:see V. I. LENIN ed.,vol. 29. Moskva1934,p. 419. excerpt

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

onLenin105 andthe 1918 Assassination Fania the SRUnderground, Attempt August Kaplan, mostof Committee focused first on theSR Central showtrials Bolshevik members, planfor hispamphlet Russiabyearly 1921.Semenov whom hadbeenrounded produced up in Soviet - to Fania Kaplan's anditsties- andthetiesoftheparty ontheSR underground leadership Committee on DecemCentral ittotheCommunist andsubmitted assassination Party attempt therevoluhis sinsbefore hisneedto expiate a letter ber5, 1921. He attached professing theCentral Committee from a report tion.21 On December Dzerzhinskii, 28, after formally her own submitted In trial of SRs.22 for a the report, January Konopleva major approved plan to much were of this as much the same Semenov; published report portions ground covering of the four after The same 28.23 on fanfare Pravda days publication day, February by trial.24 theupcoming in Berlin, theGPU announced brochure Semenov's In great The charges by Semenovand Konoplevawereindeedsensational.25 brought in in terrorism involvement the the of recounted two former SRs the detail, history party's ofBrestoftheTreaty oftheratification that under theinfluence testified 1918.Konopleva the B. N. Rabinovich, LenininMarch1918.She informed toassassinate Litovsk shedecided that she in Commission in the SR CentralCommittee Petrograd, Military representative wishedto knowthe act."She nevertheless as an "individual theattack wouldcharacterize who to KonoplevaandP. T. Efimov, to herplan.According attitude Central Committee's the second member of at the trial as a also with her and in the appeared participated attempt totheplan Committee Rabinovich andA. R. GotsoftheCentral ofdefendants, agreed group oftheBureau theconsent toMoscowtoobtain traveled inaddition, Rabinovich inPetrograd; went theBureau, from With thego-ahead Committee. oftheCentral KonoplevaandEfimov to but returned their to shoot twoweeksreadying toMoscowandspent Lenin, Petrograd plan itout.26 without carrying their withSemenov, whomshe knewfrom In Petrograd Konoplevasoonjoinedforces of the ConstitAfter the dissolution in the Commission intheparty work early year. Military which concentrated intheCommission, as themain Semenov uent figure emerged Assembly, detachments worker and on thesoldiers ofthePetrograd onorganizing loyal forming garrison inPetrograd hadbecomeextraordinarily thepolitical tothePSR. By May,when atmosphere in theindustrial suburb ofworkers andtheBolshevik tensedueto foodshortages shooting to take the to andKonopleva ofKolpino,Semenov advantage leadership began push party members inPetrograd Committee TheCentral ofthesituation andseizepower. (GotsandD. blockedanysuchpreparations, SR Committee, D. Donskoi),supported by thePetrograd whena wave ofarrests in a further blow suffered and Semenov's however, mid-May hopes he had assembled.27 the rolled through organization the as a way of facilitating on to theidea ofterrorism latched In thiscontext, Semenov he formed theremnants ofhis organization inPetrograd. From overthrow oftheBolsheviks theveteran SR terrorist ofhimself, Combat a "Central Detachment," Konopleva, consisting
22Marc JansenA ShowTrialUnderLenin:The TrialoftheSocialistRevolutionaries, Moscow 1922.TheHague 1982,p. 23.
21RTsKhlDNI f. 17, op. 84, d. 45, 1. 8-9 (SEMENOV V Tsentral'nyiKomitet RKP).

LiGARF f. Doklad o voennoi i boevoi rabotePSR); 1005, op. 1A, d. 346, 1.69-86 (L. V. KONOPLEVA Pokazaniia Lidii Konoplevoi, in: Pravda, 28 February1922, p. 1.

24"Rabota"eserov: 28 February in: Pravda, Ot Gos. Politicheskogo 1922,p. 1. Upravleniia, 25The andthat ofKonopleva; his testimony, Semenov'sbrochure, account synthesizes following I have citedit. ofthesecondgroup ofdefendants, members where I haveusedtestimony byother

DIn additionto see AR1<t. 1005, op. A, d. 346, 1. 99-100 (interrogations Konopleva' s testimony, of Efimov 12 and 3 1 March 1922). 27In additionto Semenov's noe puteshestviepp. 145-153. brochure,see Shklovskii Sentimental'

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

106

Scott B.Smith

E. A. Ivanova, andoverhalfa dozenPetrograd workers. Semenov'sgroup beganpreparaof Zinov'ev and Volodarskii, tionsforthe assassination themostprominent Bolshevik leaders inPetrograd. Thewould-be that an terrorists soondiscovered Volodarskii presented kill him a his easier Semenov decided to first and member of target. Accordingly, appointed theworker to carry outtheattack. When hadbeencompleted, group, Sergeev, preparations final of the to Semenov, Gots Semenov met Gotsandaskedhimfor plan.According approval will attributed this to a failure of and told askedSemenov towait.Semenov, however, request an if to itself. Such to ahead the shoot Volodarskii opportuopportunity presented Sergeev go notfarfrom the shothimdead on thestreet arosethenextday,June 20, and Sergeev nity connection to the murder. denied Obukhov The SR Central Committee any factory. publicly of the renunciation Rabino viehjustified theCentral Committee's to Semenov, According that wait. Gots's Semenov request attempt byciting murder theCentral Committee's denialofan SR tieto Volodarskii's outraged Although its toMoscow it intact and moved themembers oftheCombat Detachment,stayed operations at theend of theparty to seize powerin Petrograd after Semenov was unableto persuade for of Semenov'sgroupfocusedon preparations members June.In Moscow thefifteen surveilestablished oftheorganization Themembers attacks onLeninandTrotsky. terrorist his death becauseof theimpact a movefirst lance and beganto prepare Trotsky, against attitude to terror. the turned to Gots to Semenov have on the Red clarify party's Army. might instructed and was now terrorism that to Gots appropriate agreed According Semenov, Gots At a secondmeeting atthefirst LeninorTrotsky Semenov to killeither opportunity. would the Committee that Central with a solemn the recognize promise againapproved plan deedoftheparty. theactas an official inVolhynia Roitman BornFeigaKhaimovna thescene. FaniaKaplanentered Atthis stage to the who gravitated andterrorist was a former anarchist in 1887,Kaplan,likeSemenov, in 1906 whena bombshe and She was arrested PSR in thelastyearsoftheOld Regime. in their hotel for theKiev governor-general werepreparing several other terrorists exploded commuted and her sentence she had sentenced to her. death, room, slightly injuring Though Mal'tsev in in the Akatui and Siberia of the Old the prisons Regime years passed remaining Whilein prison wereincarcerated.28 wheremostwomenpolitical Kaplan abanprisoners herself andbegantoconsider that shehadembraced as a teenager beliefs doned theanarchist soon moved to Moscow but she came the an SR. Freedfrom Revolution, by February prison to theprose1918.29 toMoscowafter Shereturned south totheCrimea. According February of 1918 the summer ofdefendants atthetrial, cution andthesecondgroup Kaplanshared by In Moscow she leaders. on Bolshevik ofterrorist attacks inthenecessity Semenov'sbelief an SR. whocalledhimself a lawyer ledbyV. K. Rudzievskii, joineda terrorist organization Lenin of its own for unknown to Semenov, Thisgroup, attempts against began preparations to SR group oftheunderground I. S. Dashevskii, one oftheleaders and Trotsky. working in touch and Semenov the ran across officers to theeastern transfer front, organization put
28Lyandres The 1918 Kaplan's name and pp. 434-437 clearsup the confusionsurrounding Attempt which The basic facts are clear fromthe protocols of Kaplan's interrogation, past partyaffiliation. her last name as Roid nor some migr nevertheless preventedneitherthe Bolsheviks fromrendering name of Dora. See I. VOLKOVICHER SRs fromgiving her a first (ed.) K istoriipokusheniia na Lenina (Neopublikovannye materialy),in: Proletarskaiarevoliutsiia 6-7/18-19 (1923) pp. 275-285, here p. 284. 29Volkovicher (ed.) K istoriipokusheniia pp. 282-284.

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Assassination onLenin 107 andthe 1918 Fania the SR Underground, Attempt August Kaplan, Marusia tojoin hisgroup, andSemenov invited with met, Kaplananda certain Kaplan.They than Rudzievskii's which was certainly moreformidable organization.30 ofLenin. He developed a plan nowstepped for theassassination Semenov uppreparations this at Moscow factories. to shootLeninat one ofhisweekly Friday By point appearances hadmoved south to Saratov to crossthefront forSamara most oftheSR Central Committee Committee ofMembers oftheConstituent andtheincipient Assembly (Komuch).Donskoi inMoscowas part ofa MoscowBureauoftheCentral andE. M. Ratner, remained however, wouldnot to Semenov, DonskoimetKaplanandtoldhertheparty Committee. According in the members of the renounce an attempt on Lenin.Threeconsecutive Fridays August to On the third staked out factories where Lenin be might expected speak. organization the where as it for the south of Moscow held river, Friday, responsibility region Kaplan a revolver turned out,Leninspokeat theMikhel'sonFactory. She carried suppliedby a worker named Novikov. member ofthegroup, Semenov andwas accompanied byanother in stairwell as he followed Lenin out stumbled the After themeeting Novikov intentionally for behind Leninandcreated an opportunity ofthefactory. Thisdelayed thecrowd Kaplan fellinto from thefactory to his automobile. to shootLeninas he stepped Kaplan quickly Bolshevik butNovikov hands, escapedunnoticed. theCentral Committee disclaimed for the To thedismay oftheterrorists, responsibility that theneedto protect thePSR from attack. Semenov metwithDonskoi,who explained theCentral disassociation oftheparty from Bolshevik terror Committee's justified Kaplan's the renunciation of demoralized The Central Committee's thoroughly responsibility attempt. members nevertheless decided to an on but several terrorists, They organize attempt Trotsky. to at theCentral Committee's refusal Tislenkoto Saratov to expressoutrage dispatched in the name to to assassinate attack and Trotsky request permission acknowledge Kaplan's theidea,but to Konopleva, Gotsapproved of SRs." According of an "autonomous group butsoon carried out a series of robberies to came of it. The ever funds, gather group nothing its and arrested Semenov and several other when the Cheka wind of activities got collapsed members. II in 1922.How muchtruth Such werethecharges that oftheSR trial did layat theheart Emil the Social-Democrat as a defense contain? Vandervelde, Belgian briefly they engaged answer: "It is perfectly for thefirst ofdefendants, clear lawyer group gave an unequivocal was thought Semenov later with those who incited him."31 In that all this fact, up by together ofthefirst ofdefendants at thetrial and ofother close examination ofthetestimony group - each of whomat one time SR sourcesshowsthat Gots,Donskoi,and E. M. Timofeev - madeno suchclaim.Their served s linktotheCentral Committee as Semenov' testimony a wealth ofevidence on Semenov' s organization andthebackground to theAugust provides In addition, that is notcolored to pleasetheBolshevik 30 attempt bya desire prosecutors. would be to the first of SRs they testimony hoped helpful group defendants migr gathered V. M. Chernov, and published itin theBerlinSR newspaper "Golos Rossii."Rabinovich,
30 andtestimony, see: GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 346, 1.90 (testiIn addition to Semenov's brochure In his ofDashevskii). ofP. N. Pelevin);GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 346, 1. 146-148 (testimony mony whom he remembers misnames whom he callsPepeliaev, andRudzievskii, Semenov Pelevin, brochure, as Gruzdievskii. v Moskve,in: Dvenadtsat Quotedin V. VoitinskiiSud nad sotsiahstami-revohutsionerami v Moskve.Berlin1922,p. 35. Sud nad sotsialistami-revoliutsionerami smertnikov:

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

108

Scott B.Smith

issuedstateandV. M. Zenzinov, each ofwhom hadbeenactiveintheparty underground, theonlymember known to have as didM. A. Tislenko, of Semenov'sorganization ments, to after the Civil War.32 Western emigrated Europe discussed the several times From these sources itis clearthat theSR Central Committee it Each decided attacks on Bolshevik leaders after October. of terrorist time, possibility focused itshopeson theupcoming terror. Attheendof 1917,theCentral Committee against methnot to be Constituent and members goadedinto"conspiratorial Assembly urged party faced with the the But after the dissolution of ods" by Bolshevik Assembly, provocation. than had realwas more secure that the Bolshevik hold on realization they power dawning Committee In midtheCentral their ized,someSR leaders January begantorethink position. consider theuse of terrorist that theCentral Committee member N. N. Ivanovproposed to discuss Ivanov'sproposal methods theBolsheviks. Chernov supported Although against a ban on left intact itandthusin effect refused to consider theissue, theCentral Committee it in thedirectives itsopposition toterrorism Committee embodied terrorism.33 TheCentral concentrate on SRs to in which instructed to building organizationsJanuary, dispatched party to theBolshevik a masssocialist dictatorship.34 opposition 1918- ithad talkofterrorism Atall levelsoftheparty, however, throughout percolated SRs remained andfor theOld Regime mainweaponagainst after all beentheparty's many well-known Ivan Kaliaev's recall One need of theonly method only struggle. political logical oftheSR attachthedepths a bombwas notan SR" to understand "an SR without remark, returned to theissueattheinitiative Committee In February theCentral ment toterrorism.35 V. A. of assassinating whichraisedthepossibility of the Khar'kovparty organization, the Central in While forces Ukraine. of Bolshevik the commander Antonov-Ovseenko, in conditions viewthat endorsed Chernov's themajority vetoed suchan attack, Committee commissar ofa Bolshevik themurder comea time when couldinprinciple ofCivilWarthere theuse therefore didnotforswear Committee themasses.The Central wouldrevolutionize Commitother Central and some Ivanov the Soviet ofterrorism Moreover, regime.36 against
32 in March1922; totheBerlinSR organization ofSemenov's submitted an account Tislenko group 19. An Archives a copyis intheHoover Institution coll.,box 8, folder HIA), Nicolaevsky (henceforth Razoblachenie under thetitle edited version lzhi,in: GolosRossii,23 March1922,p. 3. The appeared ofdefendants tothefirst anddeleted references errors editors corrected (Donskoi, group grammatical andE. A. Ivanova). Timofeev, 33 ofIvanov);GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 368, 1.80-81 GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 368,1.65 (testimony See also V. ofGenderman). ofTimofeev); GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 368, 1.90 (testimony (testimony in:NovaiaRossiia42-43 (1938) M. ZenzinovProvokator Semenov (k predstoiashchem protsessam), to was concocted for which in question was that ofBukharin, testimony pp. 9-12,here p. 9. Thetrial rolein inthe1930s.Bukharin's a terrorist hadformed showthat Semenov andBukharin organization andthesecond for Semenov as oneofthedefense he served theshowtrial oftheSRs,atwhich lawyers ofthe him.In his letter totheFebruary-March thuscamebacktohaunt ofdefendants, plenum group him hadtasked theparty in 1937,Bukharin Communist Central Committee pleadedinvainthat Party fevral'skoSee Materialy to the party. to defendSemenovbecause of Semenov'sgreatservices istorii 2-3 (1992) pp. 3^4, herepp. 26-28. TsK VKP(b) 1937g., in: Voprosy martovskogo plenuma 34 1917 sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov See Marc Jansen(ed.) Partiia perevorota posleOktiabr'skogo iz arkhiva P. S.-R.Amsterdam 1989,pp. 53-119. goda:Dokumenty ^ Quotedin GeifmanThouShaltKill p. 44. JO ARF 1. 105, otTimoieev); GARF1. 1005,op. 1A,d. 368,1.81 (testimony op. 1A,d. 368, 1.^8 ofVedeniapin); GARF ofGots);GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 368, 1.89, 162-163 (testimony (testimony f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 369, 1. 140-142 (testimony ofRakitnikov).

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

on Lenin 109 andtheAugust1918Assassination FaniaKaplan,theSR Underground, Attempt

theBolsheviks, and theparty terrorist methods ofstruggle tee members against supported in Lenin.37 offers from SRs interested received assassinating many leadership themostimportant ofthese oftheAugust 30 assassination Fortheinvestigator attempt, testified that she had come to her herarrest, FaniaKaplan.After offers camefrom Kaplan that after her evidence confirms inFebruary.38 Indeedother Leninalready decision to shoot N. V. Fomin to the veteran Siberian SR inMoscow inthespring, arrival Kaplansuggested inturn suchan attack to theCentral Committee Lenin. Fomin that assassinate proposed they all underhaddelegated to supervise whom theCentral Committee member V. M. Zenzinov, informed the Central Commitwork in Moscow. Zenzinov and ground conspiratorial military the Central Commitand thereafter communicated teeoftheFomin-Kaplan proposal shortly on forSiberia, butKaplan stayed to Fomin.39 Fominsoondeparted tee'snegative response A. V. Liberov, one of theSR firm in herterrorist convictions. in Moscow and remained in prison that he had seenKaplan in recalled later at thetrial, defendants ofthefirst group ofthe Lenin.40 V. K. Vol'skii, whoas a leader toassassinate andknew shewanted thespring twice in 1918 and that hehadmet totrial, testified Narodgroup was notbrought May Kaplan leader.41 a topBolshevik to assassinate shetoldhimofherdesire also to havecometo believein thesametime that Thiswas roughly Konoplevaclaimed Efimov to assassinate Lenin. andtohavetraveled toMoscowwith thenecessity ofterrorism from thetestimony herstory outofthin aircanbe established ThatKonopleva didnotinvent s assertion recollections confirm that ofRabino vichandTimofeev. Rabinovich's Konopleva' Leninwithout the name of the PSR. Rabino vich sheproposed toassassinate sought invoking buttraveled to Moscowto ascertain theopinion oftheMoscow Bureauof to dissuadeher, TheBureau herproposal, butKonoplevanevertheless went theCentral Committee. rejected
37Ivanovtestified attheSR Trialthat he supported terrorist acts:GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 368, 1. to thetrial, he said thata smallnumber of other Central 58; in an interrogation by theGPU prior favored terrorist methods ofstruggle: GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 347, 1.4 (interroCommittee members onthis camefrom theformer Central Committee of7 April1922).Less reliable testimony gation point that Chernov toldhimin May or June1918 that he member D. S. Rozenblium who stated (Firsov), favored terrorist attacks on Sovietleaders: GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 346, 1. 191, 194 (interrogations N. V. Sviatitskii, who stated that and of23 and30 March1922) andfrom Chernov, Gots,Zenzinov, all supported terrorism: of 19 March Timofeev GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 346, 1. 168 (interrogation SR offers to assassinate Lenin,see GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 369, 1. 17-18 1922). For rank-and-file intheparty, ofTimofeev). Foradditional evidence ofgeneral terrorist sentiment see GARF (testimony f.1005,op. 1A,d. 369,1.32 (testimony ofIvanova); GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 347,1. 10 (interrogation ofla. T. Dedusenko 8 April1922);ZenzinovProvokator Semenov pp. 9-10; B. Rabinovich Kak to bylo,in: GolosRossii,17 March1922,p. 3. 38 Volkovicher (ed.) K istorii pokusheniia p. 284; Kostin Sud nadterrorom p. 83. 39 in an article Zenzinov first on themurder other ofFominand several Kaplan'sproposal reported members oftheConstituent Assembly bya squadofCossacksin Omskin December1918; thearticle intheParisnewspaper La France 1919 andreprinted in V. M. Zenzinov was published Libre,6 June admiralKolchaka v Omske 18 noiabria 1918 goda: Sbornik (ed.) Gosudarstvennyi perevorot in a letter in reParis 1919,pp. 152-153. He amplified his reminiscences to Chernov dokumentov. inV. M. Chernov Iudin in:GolosRossii,25 Februto Semenov' s allegations, sponse quoted potselui, Committee also recalledthe ary 1922, p. 2. S. V. Morozovof theMoscow Bureauof theCentral anddated ittoMarch(GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 374, 1. 172). ForZenzinov's Kaplan-Fomin proposal Bor'ba rossiiskoidemokratii s work in Moscow generally, see V. M. ZENZINOV underground bol'shevikami v 1918 godu:Moskva- Samara- Ufa- Omsk.HLA,Nicolaevsky coll.,box 8, folder that ofKaplanwas basedon morethan Zenzinov'sknowledge 24, pp. 13-18. All ofthisestablishes as Lyandres asserts information," (The 1918Attempt "hearsay p. 435). w E. OLITSKAIA Vol. 2. Frankfurt/Main Moi vospominanna. 1971,p. 143. 41GARF f . ofV. K. Vol'skii23 March1918); see also 1005,op. 1A,d. 346, 1. 173 (interrogation of Semenov17 April1922). GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 347, 1.42 (interrogation

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

110

ScottB.Smith

to Moscow.42 Timofeev's corroborates Rabinovich's accountof theBureau's testimony that he of he testified as well intercepted Konoplevaand rejection Konopleva'sproposal; in Moscow andsentthem backto Petrograd.43 Efimov that likeKonopleva Evidence from thefirst ofdefendants also establishes Semenov, group inthespring to for terrorist attacks the Bolshevik andKaplan, leadership began push against intheMilitary inthewinter andearly of 1918 of 1918.Semenov's work Commission spring Semenov'saccount ofit.44 fell under ofDonskoi, wholargely confirmed thesupervision By Gotstestified forSemenov'sactivities May responsibility passedto GotsandRabinovich. because tobuildan underground Semenov's efforts that military organization they supported the situation in in June. With tension oftheextraordinary political Petrograd Maypolitical theparty needed ofspontaneous worker disorders andthepossibility real, quite supercharged but Gots and as a terrorist an "armedfist."45 This "fist"was not intended detachment, each recalledthatSemenovdid notconcealhis desireto engagein terrorist Rabinovich before themurder askedshortly inthespring of 1918.According to Gots,Semenov attacks had at and elsewhere of workers theBolshevik whether of Volodarskii Kolpino shooting that it had terrorism. Gots towards of the Central Committee the attitude replied changed not.46 Committee's abouttheCentral Gots'stestimony Tislenko's account opposition supports of Withthesupport activities. into Semenov's further and provides to terrorism insight in one of the chief of staff served as Tislenko SemenovandtheSR Military Commission, SR who with thehelpofanother a posthehadsecured oftheRedArmy, divisions Petrograd and to use hisownaccess to documents to Semenov He proposed thearmy. hadpenetrated for when it left of Commissars train the Council the of to blow Petrograd People's up passes this but to Semenov to MoscowinMarch. plan, representatives agreed According Tislenko, members from a secondrequest Donskoirejected vetoed it.When oftheCentral Committee and in to for ofSemenov's Semenov, several Tislenko, group permission engage terrorism, the before for the Tislenko toactontheir others decided own,though Volgashortly departed ofVolodarskii.47 murder and hadhappened onVolodarskii toldGotsthat Semenov After that assassination, Sergeev no less he was claimed to shoot Semenov ofhis proximity takenadvantage him; surprised theparty's Gotspublished conversation On thebasisofthis hadhappened. than Gotsatwhat Delo naroda. Committee in theCentral theassassination for denialofresponsibility organ andsentIvanovato Moscowto acrossthefront Semenov'sgroup Gotsdecidedto transfer of Semenov's The responsibility of whathad happened. Committee inform the Central in common Volodarskii became murder of for the knowledge thehighest organization of the SR leadership.48 spheres to E. M. of Semenov'sgroup andturned overmanagement forthefront Gots soon left the Central Committee. Bureau of the Moscow members of the four one of Timofeev, unit use as a partisan for tokeepthegroup Semenov's Timofeev together proposal approved
42RabinovichKak to bylop. 3. 43GARF f. ofTimofeev). 1005,op. 1A,d. 369, 1. 1-9 (testimony 44GARF f. of Donskoi); see also 1005,op. 1A, d. 354, 1. 69-76 and d. 355, 1. 3-25 (testimony Semenov Zenzinov Provokator p. 9. 45GARF f. ofGots). 1005,op. 1A,d. 350, 1.74 (testimony 46GARF f. d. 1. 64 of 1005,op. 1A, 350, (testimony Gots);Rabinovich Kak tobylop. 4. *' orTislenko). HIA, Nicolaevsky coll.,box 8, lolder19,p. 1 (statement 48 ofGots);GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 350, GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 350,1.66-70,76-79 (testimony 1.178-183(testimony ofIvanova);GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 371, 1. 129 (testimony ofD. F. Rakov).

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SR Underground, andthe 1918 Assassination onLenin111 Fania the Kaplan, August Attempt ontheeastern front. Semenov went to Saratov to makepreparations for themoveacrossthe of the murder of front. There he metTislenkoand told him aboutthe circumstances the to resume terrorist attacks Central Committee's Volodarskii. Theyagreed despite opposiHe metTimofeev returned to Moscow in midand argued that his tion,and Semenov July. in there in the took which had to be left case terrorMoscow, ought party up group, gathered leaders remained ism.Timofeev, insisted that terrorism Bolshevik however, against unacceptwith theinternational socialist moveablesincetheBolsheviks hadnotdefinitively broken beenunableto getacross ment.49 returned to Moscow from Gotsmeanwhile Penza,having himandagainaskedwhether theCentral Committee attitude towards thefront. met Semenov ithadnot.50 terror had changed, butGotsreplied overto the In midleft for Saratov andhanded Semenov' s organization Timofeev August D. D. him that the was lastofitsCentral Committee liaisons, Donskoi, organization telling later. acrossthefront soon.DonskoimetSemenov several Semenov to be transferred days himthat she had "definite terrorist informed Fania Kaplanhadjoinedhis groupand that before schemesand wishes."Donskoiaskedto meether,whichtheydid "veryshortly" that the for a terrorist but Donskoi was 30. attack, explained party not August Kaplanargued hard." His testimony attacks andthat sheshould "think continues: nowcarrying outterrorist
"I added also thatin her position,wishing to carryout a terrorist act, she would put herself outsidetheparty if she acted.... I gotthe impression thata strongdecision had maturedin her, and would but I thought thatmy indicationsin this regardwould be completelyauthoritative exertsome influence."51

renunciation After theattempt onAugust 30 andtheSR Central Committee ofiton Sepmet andaskedhim ifhehadanyconnection toKaplan'sattempt. tember Semenov 6, Donskoi that Semenov admitted he hadprovided herwith therevolver sheused,and explained that devoteitself he had been inspired to by Kaplan's example.His groupwouldhenceforth terrorism and actas an "autonomous of SRs." The conversation became heated and group toreturn several tosayhe wouldsubmit to theparty's Semenov stormed out, only dayslater orders andmoveto theeastern front.52 theassassination thedayafter Tislenko had arrived from Saratov to Meanwhile, attempt, in Semenov's terrorist Its had demanded that members, however, join activity. organization Semenov thepromised Central Committee ofresponsibility for theattack produce acceptance on Lenin. When itwas notforthcoming, convened a at the they meeting group'sconspiratorialdachaatTomilino him. toconfront Semenov claimed that theCentral Committee Though hadreneged on itspromise, all except and Ivanova knew thereal Tislenko, (who Konopleva, to that had Semenov deceived them. The execution of story) began suspect Kaplan only intensified their nonetheless to securea vote of confidence in anger.Semenovmanaged himself as leader, anda majority ofthegroup decidedto continue with terror iftheCentral
49GARF f. of Timofeev); TISLENKORazoblachenie lzhi p. 3. 1005, op. 1A, d. 373, 1.2-4 (testimony 50GARF f. of Gots). 1005, op. 1A, d. 372, 1. 122 (testimony 51GARF f. of Donskoi). According to B. A. BABINA 1005, op. 1A, d. 372, 1. 164-165 (testimony FevraT 1922, in: Minuvshee: Istoricheskii almanakh2 (1986) pp. 7-80, here pp. 24-25, Donskoi gave her a ratherdifferent account of this conversationwhile in prison beforethe trial. She quotes him as saying: "She [Kaplan] indeed came to us, and in particularto me personally,with a proposal to send herto kill Lenin. I looked at herthen- a rather woman,but unquestionablynot normal and with pretty various defects:deaf, halfblind,somehow exalted. Like a holy fool! Least of all did it occur to me to take herwords seriously."Donskoi' s testimony in thetrialis morereliablethanthe much laterreminiscences of Babina and, as will be shown below, helps to make sense of Kaplan's testimonyto her interrogators. 52GARF f. of Donskoi). 1005, op. 1A, d. 372, 1. 166 (testimony

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

112

ScottB.Smith

A minority of six, including Semenovand Tislenko, Committee gave explicit approval. didnotgiveits if the Committee to ahead even Central proposal go supported Konopleva's selected Tislenko totravel toPenza,where sanction. Thegroup Gots,andseveral Timofeev, to travel acrossthe werehiding Committee other members oftheCentral out,stillhoping themembers Timofeev that in Penza,Tislenko informed front to Samara.Uponhis arrival ofAugust renunciation oftheattempt ofSemenov's hadbeensurprised bytheparty's group if did continued terrorist wouldviewtheir 30 andaskedhowtheparty activity they notuse this was outofthequestion that thesupport ofGots, Timofeev theparty name.With replied Tislenko if did not cease its activity. the and threatened group unspecified punishments this totheterrorists. returned toMoscowandcommunicated Tislenko, Semenov, Konopleva, from a severe suffered butthey on and decidedto target and a fewothers Trotsky, stayed carried out their refused to finance because Donskoi of They operations. shortage funds, to the Cheka. and were soon but morale deteriorated several betrayed they "expropriations," others werearrested.53 Semenov andseveral Ill ofdefenthis review oftheevidence Itshould be clearfrom bythetwogroups supplied to Committee of the SR Central the attitude of concerned that thecentral dants point dispute thedefenhowmuch ofSemenov'sstory notobscure Yet thisshould Semenov's activities. of The party intheir conceded dants ofthefirst leadership's appointment testimony. group inclinathe terrorist in to setup an underground Semenov military organization Petrograd; of forthemurder tionsof Semenovand his associates;theorganization's responsibility to for continued where Semenov transfer to its Moscow, Volodarskii; subsequent press ofdefendants was agreed on bybothgroups acts- all this outterrorist to carry permission as fact. be accepted atthetrial andshould from evidence ofdefendants andtheadditional ofthefirst The testimony migr group assassination the 30 account of that Semenov's SRs also establishes attempt August clearly Of course after thefact as a concoction cannot be dismissed bya Chekaagent-provocateur. to but he related from cameultimately whatthe SRs knewabouttheshooting Semenov, he before andofKaplan's attempt ofVolodarskii ofthemurder several SRs thehistory long thebasic factsto bothDonskoi and to theCheka. IndeedSemenovrecounted defected he had he toldDonskoithat 30 assassination within Tislenko attempt: daysoftheAugust invited Tislenko to a and in the that she used the revolver attempt suppliedKaplan with do what to terrorists discussed at which the terrorist ofthe distraught organization meeting knewabout Committee Mostmembers oftheCentral in thewake of Kaplan's execution. to Kaplan butSemenov'sconnection inthemurder ofVolodarskii, involvement Semenov's S. V. Morozov E. M. Ratner and Donskoi told both secret. was a more Still, closely guarded 1919he aboutitin 1918,andin February Committee oftheCentral oftheMoscowBureau act indeout the had carried that K. S. Burevoi member Committee toldtheCentral Kaplan a act. it as to sanction refused members had Committee after the Central party pendently to write DonskoiaskedNovikov claimthat ofSemenov's there is no confirmation While up 53 to Ivanova stated that Tislenko lzhi Razoblachenie Tislenko (inaddition p. 3. Inhisstatement, not toterror andwasthus knew about the Central Committee and upset himself) opposition Konopleva this detail. See alsoGARFf. 1005, omitted with GolosRossii Semenov; op. 1A,d. 373,1. 12-13 ofTimofeev). (testimony

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

on Lenin 113 andtheAugust1918Assassination FaniaKaplan,theSR Underground, Attempt

a picture ofKaplanfor for theparty MorozovaskedKonoplevafor hisexperiences archive, inNovember 1918.54 thesamepurpose members no doubt that FaniaKaplanhad shotLenin The Central Committee expressed thatshe had. was abundant evidence of Semenov'sorganization, becausethere on behalf - orto the the second of defendants recourse to of the Evenwithout testimony group having intentions and a picture ofKaplan's terrorist ofKaplanherselfemerged clearly testimony the first of defendants. from the evidence by group Kaplanproposed supplied unambiguously inthespring of 1918 a terrorist attack on Lenin totheSR Central Committee herservices for in at leasttwoother anddiscussed herdesire to shootLeninwith SRs, on three occasions, before she told Donskoi Semenov to Donskoi thesameperiod. 30, brought Kaplan August andhe formed theimpression that herdetermination was quite that sheintended tokillLenin, after 30 that he had Donskoi learned from Semenov shortly August provided Kaplan strong. members as several Central Committee witha weapon.At thesametime, knew,Tislenko inMoscowtofind themembers ofSemenov's arrived upset byKaplan'sexecuorganization The circumstantial oftheparty. evidence that she had actedon behalf tionand convinced of thefirst is thus since the defendants to the 30 August attempt quitestrong, linking Kaplan and their It is therefore of to themselves can be party. group hardly suspected lying implicate andthat she might have "cometo the to believethat Kaplanwas notinvolved impossible as has Such a scenario that Mikhel'son Factory evening byaccident," Lyandres suggested.55 evidence to Semenov's with theunambiguous cannotbe squared Kaplan organization, tying that shewas ofthemembers ofthat theconviction on thepart leastofall with organization and had acted on its behalf. a member oftheir group in theattempt. In evidence tobelieve There additional is,moreover, Kaplanwas involved had a terrorist and was arrested at the scene. More thefirst of Kaplan past place, course, In light to theshooting. of whathas been established she confessed above, importantly, her buttruthful. She stated that she to interrogators appearscautious, Kaplan's testimony andpostponed therealization wanted tokillLenin, becausehehadbetrayed socialism oftrue to theBolshevik socialismfordecades;thesewere standard SR motives foropposition had to Lenin in 1918 andhadever She testified that she decided assassinate regime. February since been preparing to carry out her intention, whichfitswell withthe testimony of In addition, Zenzinov and Morozov abouther Marchproposalto assassinateLenin.56 that Donskoi' s admonition to herto "think hard"and Kaplan'stestimony strongly suggests nottoinvolve theparty inheractions in her mind her figured prominently during interrogation. Shewas quick to state that shewas a socialist andseveral times underlined thefact that shewas no longer an anarchist, butrefused several to admit that she through interrogations was an SR or to revealherattitude to theSRs' Komuchgovernment in Samara.Kaplan that she was an SR onlyafter severalinterrogations, whentheChekahad acknowledged established her affiliation some of her from already party byrounding up pastacquaintances
54GARF f. ofMorozov);GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 347, 1. 1005,op. 1A,d. 374, 1. 178 (testimony 72 (interrogation ofKonopleva 6 April1922); GARF f. 1005,op. 1A,d. 374, 1. 199 (testimony ofE. M. Ratner); GARFf.1005,op. 1A,d. 346,1.163(interrogation ofBurevoi 16 March1922); Chernov Samozashchita predatelei p. 3. 55 Lyandres The 1918Attempt p. 447. It should be pointed outthat Zenzinov referred to Kaplan's Marchproposal to shoot Leninin his article ofJune before Proletarskaia revoliutsiia theprotocols ofKaplan's 1919,three years published interrogation.

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

114

ScottB.Smith

shenever claimed a sanction from theparty andinsisted that shehadcarried out Still, prison. heract"personally" and"according toherconvictions."57 one oftheitems found in Kaplan's possession herarrest was a train after ticket Finally, on therailroad to Kazan'. Kaplan initially to thestation of Tomilino, lineleading denied butin a later concededitwas herswhenshe sucha ticket, having interrogation implicitly shehadacquired it.58 Theconspiratorial dachaoftheSemenov refused to state where organimembers as notonlySemenov butseveral ofthefirst zation was indeed atTomilino, group testified. DonskoiandIvanovabothacknowledged ofdefendants it,theMoscow SR M. A. discussed at length his it fortheparty, and Tislenko that he had rented Davydovtestified after execution.59 of the at Tomilino with the members shortly Kaplan's organization meeting herirrefutably to Tomilino is a lastpieceofevidence ofa ticket tying Kaplan's possession to Semenov. there doubtthat can be no reasonable On thebasis of all thismaterial, Kaplan was a thatshe wantedto kill Lenin,and thatshe was at member of Semenov' s organization, theBolshevik leader. Theoften-repeated Mikhel'son as part ofSemenov's plantoassassinate the of and to SRs that was linked to Semenov's claims onlyatthetime organization Kaplan be established intheSemenov cannot hermembership the1922trial andthat organization In view ofthis, theadditional evidence that has been advancedin are simply mistaken.60 most of itssignificance. did not shoot Lenin loses of the that support argument Kaplan in the intheeyewitness accounts andsomeoddities There areindeed somecontradictions andfar more for thisthat aresimpler area variety ofexplanations butthere case as a whole, the of in fashion theories than the investigators August currently among conspiracy probable inthese theories: most ofevidence 30 attempt. Threeclusters Kaplan's figure prominently aboutthegun a set of the terrorist to out attack; arguments inability carry allegedphysical found andthenumber ofcartridges from Lenin'sbody, removed that was used,thebullets in the eyewitness accountsof the scene outside at the scene; and the contradictions on Leninhinges that Mikhel'son. Theargument mainly Kaplanwas notcapableofshooting deaf and too she was also have some hersupposed blindness, investigators suggested though in notblind:shehad losthersight was definitely unstable emotionally.61 Kaplan,however, 62 who normal the not in she did vision, person 1909,butitreturned 1913. Although regain andnervoushim. As toherinstability three orfour meters shot Leninstood awayfrom only in the in favor rather than her is an argument ness,this given against participation terrorism,
57 Volkovicher (ed.) K istoriipokusheniia pp. 282-285; D. Rudnev, S. Tsybov Sledovatel' VerkhovnogoTribunala: Dokumentrnyi ocherk.Tallin 1971, p. 82. 58Volkovicher (ed.) K istoriipokusheniia pp. 283, 285. 59GARF f. of Donskoi); GARF f. 1005, op. 1A, d. 373, 1. 151 1005, op. 1A, d. 349, 1. 17 (testimony (testimonyof Ivanova); Tislenko Razoblachenie lzhi p. 3; GARF f. 1005, op. 1A, d. 348, 1. Ill thuserrswhen he assertsthatthe Central Commitof Davydov 6 May 1922). LYANDRES (interrogation tee membersdisputedthe existence of the dacha (The 1918 Attempt p. 447). 60Lyandres The 1918 Lenin, Attempt p. 447; LlTVlNDelo 2162 i drugie del p. 5; VOLKOGONOV vol. l,p. 397. 01This is advanced in varyingdegrees by Orlov Mif o FarmiKaplan, m: Vremia i my 3 argument p. 440, n. 46, and (1976) p. 131; Nilov GrammatikaLeninizma p. 41; Lyandres The 1918 Attempt p. 445; Litvin Delo 2162 i drugie del p. 5. Kaplan's past blindness is well-established,but the only laterrecollectionof her conversationwithDonskoi reference to her deafness is Babina's half-century mentionher having a hearingproblem,though (Babina FevraT 1922 p. 25). None of Kaplan's friends theyrecalled with considerable emotionthe storyof her loss of vision. 62F. Radzilovskaia, L. Orestova Mal'tsevskaia zhenskaia katorga 1907-191 1 gg., in: Katorga i ssylka59 (1929) pp. 115-146, herep. 123. None of thepeople who metKaplan in 1917-1918 asserted thatshe was blind.

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

onLenin115 the andthe 1918 Assassination Fania SR Underground, August Attempt Kaplan, with andpsychological diffiofRussian terrorists emotional record well-documented grave culties.63 intheassassination havealso pointed to quesofKaplan'sinvolvement attempt Skeptics removed laterfrom Lenin's body,and the was used,thebullets tionsaboutthegunthat to havebeenused to shootLenin found atthescene. The gunthought number ofcartridges several after the assassination to was recovered the Cheka only days attempt. According by to see a woman'sarmfire thesecondand third Lenin's chauffeur S. K. Gil', who turned therevolver that shehadused. thewoman shots atLeninandthen dropped gavechasetoher, a public named Itwas not, found atthescene.Onlyafter however, appealdida local worker This story has struck recent therevolver, a Browning, to theCheka.64 Kuznetsovdeliver is evidence to indicate that since there some as tantalizing investigatorssuspicious, especially while it in briefcase.65 have been found another Moreover, appears might Kaplan's weapon theBrowning hitLeninandone hitPopova) andthat three werefired that shots (twobullets theChekafound four inbyKuznetsov hadthree ofitssixbullets turned remaining, cartridges after the several atthescenein itssearch days shooting.66 havefurther assert that recent tests on theBrowning In addition, andLitvin Volkogonov that the bullet removed from Lenin's states confused matters. bodyin 1922 was Volkogonov the in Litvin that caliber ofthebullet notfired the turned charges byKuznetsov; by Browning ofthebullet removed after Lenin'sdeathin 1924.67 in 1922differs from thecaliber removed thesecharges sinceneither scholar citeshis source, butrecent Itis difficult to address fully serious doubt on their The the of cast testson thebullets Ministry Security validity. by that of the was fired from the of established one bullets BrownMinistry Security "probably" wereinconclusive. The Ministry's makesno mention on thesecondbullet report ing;tests calibers orthepresence ofa secondweapon.68 ofdiffering bullet of theassassination adducedin mostof therecent studies The last cluster of evidence in the of the focuses on the contradictions accounts The Soviet eyewitness shooting.69 attempt the chairman of the authorities accorded to three witnesses MikheFson Gil', factory priority committee N. la. Ivanov, andS. N. Batulin, thedeputy commissar for thelocal Red military else outside thefactory division. None of thesemennoranyone had actually seen Army shoot their accounts focused on what occurred after the and Lenin; Kaplan shooting on to behavior the On these the witnesses contradicted each Kaplan's prior shooting. points other intheir at the time and in their later recollections. The most contratestimony glaring diction lies in thedivergent accounts ofKaplan's arrest, inwhich each IvanovandBatulin claimed tohaveplayed theleading role.Although theauthorities seemto havedecidedlater togivepriority toIvanov' s claim, because he was chairman ofthefactory commitprobably
63See AmyKnight FemaleTerrorists in theRussianSocialistRevolutionary in: Russian Party, Review38 (1979) pp. 152-154 andGeifman ThouShaltKill pp. 167-172. 64 in: Izvestiia Revol'ver, VTsIK, 3 September 1918,p. 4. VOLKOGONOV without citation thata gunwas found in Kaplan's Lenin,vol. 1, p. 398 asserts briefcase. Theprotocols ofKaplan'sinterrogation makeno mention ofthisgunanditnever in figured theprosecution's case. But see thebrief on theinitial searchof Kaplan in KOSTIN Sud nad report terrorom p. 80. 66Volkogonov del p. 5. Lenin, vol, 1,p. 398; LitvinDelo 2162 i drugie 67Volkogonov vol. 1,p. 398; LitvinV Lenina"strelial" Dzerzhinskii Lenin, p. 58. 58 E. MaksimovaSledstvie in: Izvestiia, 4 March1994,p. 7. po deluFanniKaplanprodolzhaetsia, w See Lyandres The 1918Attempt na vozhdia especially pp. 437-442 andDanilov Pokushenie pp. 11-12.

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

116

ScottB.Smith

Atthetime, Batulin infact didnotassert until later that he hadcaptured tee,Ivanov Kaplan.70 that is and does not of one the straightforward provided onlydescription Kaplan's capture, it to be or other is contradict thetestimony ofIvanov, witnesses; Gil', obviously preferred.71 inthetestimony havemainly to do with contradictions Theremaining Kaplan's activities Someofthese havesimple at Mikhel'son to Lenin'sshooting. Gil', for explanations: prior Lenin at thetime a who was to with M. G. woman confused instance, talking Kaplan Popova, in the in theattack.72 thecontradictions Morebroadly, of theshooting and was wounded one as draof a crime stem from the chaos accounts scene,particularly typical eyewitness that those it come as no should maticas an assassination present gave surprise attempt: contain theunpublished Chekainterrogations hadoccurred. Indeed accounts ofwhat varying on which therecent andconfusion than thepublished evenmorecontradictions testimony relied.73 30 have of the testimony might eyewitness Although August attempt investigators it too needsto be treated seemto be a good and unambiguous at first source, critically, to inflate their thedesireofwitnesses ofindividual because oftheunreliability witnesses, for details add or embellish the authorities to own roles,and laterefforts propaganda by tobuildan account on which foundation a decidedly Thismaterial shaky provides purposes. offers a surer for evidence theother oftheassassination; placeto start. Kaplan'sinvolvement the Semenov Mikhel'son as of was at Since it is clearthat group'splanto part Kaplan that mostofthe the conclusion was tied to the and that Semenov assassinate PSR, Lenin, - that was organized Lenin'sshooting havedrawn ofthesubject recent students byfigures - takeson theauraofthefantastic. theonlyeviwithin theBolshevik Virtually leadership Lenin'srecuto V. D. Bonch-Bruevich comment is Sverdlov's dencefor this during theory the meant Sverdlov without Lenin. do were that onlythat probably making peration they on not that it did was dependcompletely surprisingly, perhaps leadership showing, party of his much as concedes as him.74 for without Leninandcouldfunction Litvin, one, theory have must Semenov that for ittohaveanyweight, when he admits is far-fetched a conspiracy of there is nota shred which of 1918- for thespring theChekafrom with beencooperating have been led of the assassination other recent Litvin and evidence.75 attempt investigators
70See Ivanov's 2 in Volkovicher (ed.) K istorii of September pokusheniiap. 278 and his testimony account in Podrobnosti pokusheniia na tov. Lenina, in: Izvestiia VTsIK, 3 September 1918, p. 4. Compare Ivanov Kak ranili Ilicha, in: P. Posvianskii (ed.) Pokusheniia na Lenina 30 avg. 1918 g.: Dokumenty,vospominaniia ochevidtsev,gazetnye materialy1918 g., nekotoryedannye iz protsessa TsK Partii sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov, protokolydoprosa Kaplana i dr. Vtoroe izd. Moskva 1925, p. 23. 71Volkovicher (ed.) K istorii pokusheniiapp. 279-280. Much has also been made of the differing P. D. Mal'kov the mostdetailed accountsof Kaplan's executionprovidedby theKremlincommandant of whichis his Zapiski komendantaMoskovskogo Kremlia. Moskva 1959, pp. 157-161. Subsequent of the authorieditionsofMal'kov' s memoirsupplyfewerdetailsofthe execution, probablya reflection execution. Mal'kov's about a sordid early-morning ties' reluctanceto divulge too much information accounts are not contradictory; theysimplyvary in theirdegree of detail. 72 Volkovicher (ed.) K istorii pokusheniia p. 277; S. K. Gil' Shest' let s V. I. Leninym: vospominaniia lichnogo shoferaVladimira Il'icha Lenina. Moskva 1947, pp. 37-38. 13 clearlypuzzled KUDNEV,TSYBOV Sledovater Verkhovnogo Inbunala p. 84. ine contradictions to the scene with Ivanov and Gil' to reenactthe shooting.See who returned the Cheka investigators, were shot by la. M. The photographs of thereenactment. 2 (1993) pp. 75-78 forphotographs Istochnik who was assistingin the investigaexecutionerof the Imperial family, returned the recently Iurovskii, tion. 74This is how Bonch-Bruevich Sverdlov's remark.See Tri pokusheniia na V. I. Lenina, interpreted in: V. D. Bonch-bruevich Vospominaniia o Lnine. Vtoroe izd. Moskva 1969, pp. 327-383, here p. 361. 75Litvin V Lenina "strelial" Dzerzhinskii 59. p.

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

andtheAugust1918Assassination on Lenin 117 FaniaKaplan,theSR Underground, Attempt

for theSR trial is no more than that theevidence reliable produced bytheir assumption astray era a to see the relation trials of the Stalin for the that and, by tendency generally, produced LeninandtheRed Terror as akinto that between theassassination between against attempt between Terror ofthe1930s.Theimplicit andtheGreat theKirovmurder analogy Kaplan's WhiletheBolsheviks madeeffective use of is misleading. and theKirovmurder attempt in the Red a to unleash assassination Terror, they hardly required pretext attempt Kaplan's introduced most of the thewaythat Stalin didinthe1930sandhadindeed already practices with theRed Terror. associated that does notmeanall aspectsoftheassassination Ifconspiracy theories aregroundless, therevolver clear. The confusion about and are (or revolvers) continuing attempt completely thepossibility ofa secondgunman found atthescenemeansthat thenumber ofcartridges certain that since Norcanonebe absolutely cannot be excluded. KaplanshotLeninherself, theevidence is overwhelming that she didandthere is virtuno onesaw herdo it,although Whatis certain is that Semenov'sgroup to support a rivalscenario. orgaallyno evidence andthat was involved in it andsurely thequestion nizedandcarried outtheattempt Kaplan theassassination is thekeyone. ofwho stoodbehind attempt clearis theattitude oftheSR Central to the The finalpointthat is notfully Committee Put acts of Semenov's Semenov and terrorist and organization. simply, Konopleva plans fortheorganization's sanction from theCentral Committee claimedclear,unambiguous in emigration defendants andtheir while theCentral Committee actions, supporters disputed claimofCentral it is to Semenov's On several thisvigorously. grounds, impossible accept Itdoesnotfit wellwith theCentral Committee's at this Committee general posture approval. cautious to the Bolsheviks which was one of of the Civil War, (due mainly opposition stage withfearof a spontaneous to the Treatyof Brest-Litovsk) commingled popularanti- which the havehastened. theassertion that terrorism Bolshevik Moreover, might eruption leaders leaves several terrorist attacks on Bolshevik Central Committee episodes supported iftheCentral their Committee To citetwoexamples: plans,neither approved perplexing. from Moscowwith Efimov atthetime oftheir nor s return Lenin, attempt against Konopleva' the after the of 30 makes to invoke the name of PSR reluctance attempt August Kaplan's muchsense. to saytheleast, for theparty's to deny Yet itwas disingenuous, anyconnection leadership Semenov'sgroup from his instructions to totheAugust 30 attempt. ultimately sprang party in and leaders were contact with buildan anti-Bolshevik military organization, party regular him thesummer. theparty's ofSemenov'sactivities was Moreover, throughout disapproval as as the members of the first of defendants maintained at the trial. not clearly group strong Notonly wereno members ofSemenov's from theparty, buttheparty organization expelled welcomedSemenov himself back intothefoldafter his releasefrom prisonin 1919 and 1 1 8-1 1 9. In the Committee remained an active SR 9 9 addition, Central Konopleva throughout turned to Semenov inAugust 1919whenitdecided to senda terrorist detachment to Siberia came this toassassinate Admiral Kolchak. of Semenov's Though nothing plan, appointment theprestige as a terrorist that he continued to enjoyin the toheadthedetachment indicates ofthePSR.76 topcircles are the SR leadership and Semenov'sorganization The ambiguous relations between the E. A. in the and at the trial. further role of Ivanova both by organization suggested
76RTsKhlDNI f. zasedaniiaTsK PSR, 14 August1919); GARF f. 274, op. 1, d. 7, 1. 15 (protokol ofTimofeev); GARFf. 1005,op. 1A,d. 347, 1.67 (interrogation 1005,op. 1A,d. 373,1.65 (testimony ofKonopleva30 March1922).

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

118

ScottB.Smith

member N. N. Ivanov and a of the CentralCommittee Ivanova was the step-sister the Northern of been a member of Combat terrorist note, Flying having prerevolutionary in 1906-1907 earned it This detachment's attacks ofAlbert Detachment ("Karl"). Trauberg her the fearsome SR terrorist as one of most a deserved organizations.77 Despite reputation the a member of Semenov'sorganization. Ivanovawas indisputably Nonetheless, denials, first of defendants at the her as a member of the members Central Committee group accepted rather in 1918was probably In fact, Ivanova'splacein Semenov's trial. impororganization the to members of and she were the Semenov tant. Tislenko, organization only Konopleva, own ties to the she had her but to Committee's knowof theCentral opposition terrorism, on Bolshevik leaders attacks ofterrorist He was a supporter herbrother. through leadership Semenov's considered and in June1918 evenbriefly him, Through organization. joining which favored Committee oftheCentral a minority knewthat Ivanovaprobably terrorism, In addition, her terrorists.78 would-be herandherfellow haveemboldened wouldcertainly have doubts well as an SR terrorist andhercredentials tiestotheleadership may quelledany oftheir as to thelegitimacy members oftheorganization therank-and-file enterprise among it. towards attitude andtheparty's and Semenov's the SR leadership therelations between of untangling The difficulty offalse instances several documented that there are the fact is underscored by organization to therevolution. actsprior for terrorist denialsofresponsibility Committee Central Still,it of morecommon to another, conformed is likelythattheSemenovorganization pattern to of terrorist recurrent the terrorism SR organizations escape tendency prerevolutionary the outactsofterror andtocarry oftheparty thecontrol autonomously, violating leadership to these close resemblance bore a Semenov's the orders of party organization leadership.79 ofthe SR terrorists, Likeprerevolutionary SR terrorist many organizations. prerevolutionary mind the much to did not and anarchist ties to had ofthegroup past members pay groups before the the As had been the that absorbed matters ofdoctrine practice leadership. party's the civilian bodies from isolated were the of themembers revolution, organization completely the And no less thanbefore at thedachain Tomilino. and livedin seclusion of theparty the memacts welded for terrorist and of isolation of theexperience revolution preparation Thishelpsexplain toitsleader. a devotion andcultivated bersofthegroup whythe together Semenov of to the members even as hold to began suspect together groupcould continue to terrorism. attitude Committee's them abouttheCentral misleading theSemenov for was ampleprerevolutionary there In other organizawords, precedent Thisshould be a the to relation itsambiguous andfor tion'sdevelopment leadership. party of the assassination final reasonto putto restthemyths attempt August30, surrounding theMikhel'son outside ofwhat somedetails ofwhether 1918.Regardless Factory happened - is - andmostimportantly, theattack who stoodbehind thebasic picture remain murky, and Soviet Bolshevik that no clear.It shouldcomeas propagandists, surprise memoirists, details suchas children with oftheattack, versions issuedmythologized historians replete of the that it be Nor should to incongruitiesthe1922trial, surprising Kaplan. rushing capture andthepopular heirs and of Lenin's the on for the tendency guardians, part proclivity secrecy 77 in:IstorikoA. Trauberga, seeZ.KlapinaPamiati inKarl's detachment involvement For Ivanova's Partiia sotsialistov2-3 (1922) pp. 58-62 and A. I. Spiridovich biulleten' revoliutsionnyi i ee predshestvenniki. revoliutsionerov 1916, Petrograd p. 363. 78 f.1005, 7 April GARF 1.4 (interrogation ofIvanova d.347, f.1005, GARF 1922); op. 1A, op.1A, ofIvanov). d. 350,1.132(testimony 79 Thou Kill seeGeifman Shalt andfor false Central Committee denials ofresponsibility, Forthis pp.65-69.

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

andtheAugust 1918Assassination on Lenin 119 FaniaKaplan,theSR Underground, Attempt

on a matter havegivenriseto to suspect theofficial version ofevents ofLenin'sbiography, andtheresponsibility of Sverdlov for the a myriad aboutFaniaKaplan's survival ofmyths for that. Yet these are no less Soviet featured assassination history myths mythical attempt. buttheAugust 30 attempt on Lenin'slifewas notone ofthem. somestrange conspiracies,

This content downloaded from 146.50.98.28 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:12:20 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions