One thing that has long bothered me about the contents of the Somerton Man’s suitcase is the white tie (the one with the “T Keane” name on it). As the always-entertaining Pete Bowes asks in a recent tomsbytwo blog post,

What manner of man carries a white tie in his luggage?

tools_tie

To which I’d add: what manner of man wears a white tie at all? And indeed, up until just now I had no sensible answer at all to either question (unless you count American white-tie gangster chic as a possibility). However, I just found a curious line from history, that suggests how wearing a white tie might very possibly get you killed in post-WW2 Australia…

It turns out that one of the most famous (long) white tie-wearers of the 20th century was French lawyer and fascist politician Pierre Laval (the 101st French President), one of only three men executed by the post-WW2 French High Court for political war crimes.

Pierre_Laval_a_Meurisse_1931

(Pierre Laval a Meurisse 1931” by Agence de presse Meurisse‏Bibliothèque nationale de France. Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons.)

The book “Nazi Dreamtime: Australian Enthusiasts for Hitler’s Germany” by David Bird mentions (pp. 214-216) that well-known Australian Professor Kelver Hayward Hartley (1909-1998) for a while wore a white shirt and white tie in some kind of emulation of Pierre Laval, openly signalling his Nazi-aligned anti-democratic views: and so in 1939 he inevitably came to the attention of the NSW Special Branch. Though Sergeant Simons and Constable Jones wrote a report damning his politics, they concluded that he was essentially harmless, and so he survived WW2 unscathed.

So… might the white tie in the Somerton Man’s suitcase actually be a sign of his far-right political allegiance? Right now, I can’t conceive why anyone in 1948 would consciously want to place themselves under Laval’s long shadow, unless they were themselves a fascist.

Unless anyone knows better… 🙂

As promised, here are my work-in-progress transcriptions for the newly-released pages #7 and #8 of the Blitz Ciphers. I’ve had to add a few new symbols to the transcription alphabet, so there are now about sixty or so: doubtless some will prove to be duplicates, but I’d rather slightly expand the alphabet when transcribing than make a wrong assumption that can’t easily be undone.

And what do they tell us? Well, I’ve already tried a series of statistical tests on them, though without anything jumping out so far. Even though they have a trailing-off instance count distribution with E at the top of the heap and D not far behind it, the rest seems fairly arbitrary.

Unlike Dave Oranchak, I haven’t spent years thinking about how to crack unbroken homophonic ciphers, so I don’t really know if this is expected behaviour. Some of the symbols could well be nulls, but I don’t (yet) have a good tool for predicting homophonic nulls: but maybe that’s just too old-fashioned a thing to hope for.

Here are some analysis links to Dave Oranchak’s Webtoy: page #7 analysis and page #8 analysis. Note that these only worked for me in Firefox (not IE), but other browsers may also work.

Overall: as of right now, I’d say the Blitz Ciphers looks a bit loose and patternless: in particular, the contact tables don’t quite ‘feel’ right.

Yet unlike Rich SantaColoma commenting on Klaus Schmeh’s page from a few days ago, I’m not yet ready to call this as an outright fake. Rather, what I’m saying is that the Blitz Ciphers seem to combine the instance frequency counts of monoalphabetic ciphers with the disorder of polyalphabetic ciphers and the inscrutability of homophonic ciphers. Two out of the three I could probably still feel comfortable with simultaneously (and work with), but having all three in play at the same time leaves me a bit… suspicious.

Basically, the jury’s out on this one, and they’re asking for pizza.

Page #7 (rotated 180 degrees from the image as released):

15491625601_57c6aec33d_o

CAV~MrMmEewmDFT
BedaDeBCMmazMCTfr*TRE
rBe.qREmdp*&Y&bzMDEw;
jes.q&pCM.Ydfejqz
IgRD.JWqEED.aECMqul
*YdqeMBC.epRBmLTT
CeMEDBjEYAeNFLQXXqf%REqA
DkC.eEBRAYrlTjJEYWFvI
Mf.XaKQjeCy*zjMLQd
D.eDEQjlJa.IMdT
Tgj.DdQl.GzHu.wAdzY
Dp.z*kECEzEkCwmedYT
CMETCzDkCzrYDE&RgdVX
CMExLRpde&TrYjDEweedDC
CTMEDkEk&wMjqEArVSSdK
DCTkEISABeDdylbIdRMEDY
gQl@AeqEM*jRSMYwrdeDl
*eeqElYeSME*uVKk.elKLm.
eEDELCYLNTgRm:Jd..zaDtdM
VVDdgEDIRCgjm..erzd
DEDedgLCvkEMjD.z*kEjMLglE
REdf*EDRJBBDba.KIZEZpH
Cj.fDnzjE.aET.lE
jeeSq.zAE

Page #8

15494781095_c5394506f1_o

nedXYjEDbzqYaFIUS
tLpTQkEZBWJMHDAZE
KgRiBjGSbTJUCW
HIEnXciSgJIlaiA
kTQZYjYBjdDZl
HfsMCFHIcWTEDR
XYZqEGCpZ.QDJE
FIGqJbElDtUjS
MgHeEFjCHafXElb
dMEDSjFIDcjEj
eMDFZlpVnHeECe

Note that my expanded transcription alphabet looks like this (click for larger image):-

revised-blitz-alphabet495

Earlier this year, I was interviewed for an episode in a new series of Myth Hunters (in the US, “Raiders of the Lost Past” in the UK). The documentary makers focused on a particular well-known group of Beale Treasure Hunters from some decades back: but for me, talking on camera brought a whole load of conflicting research strands to the front of my mind.

Specifically, people usually talk about the Beale Ciphers in a very polarized they’re-either-real-or-they’re-fake kind of way. But this doesn’t do the subject justice at all: in fact, to me the evidence suggests the Beale Papers are both real and fake at the same time. Which is a juicily paradoxical place to begin…

Firstly, the cryptology. I now believe that Jim Gillogly was just plain wrong when he concluded that what we now call the “Gillogly strings” are evidence of hoaxery. Rather, I have no doubt at all that they offer strong evidence of some kind of keystrings “poking through” the B1 ciphertext: nothing else makes any kind of practical sense to me. So on the one hand, I would say that I find the evidence that ciphertexts B1 and B3 do use some kind of genuine cipher system (because B3’s stats look extremely similar to B1’s stats) based on the DoI to be extremely convincing.

Yet secondly, the deciphered text of B2 doesn’t seem to tally with the account given in the text of the pamphlet. The writer writes: “To systematize a plan for my work I arranged the papers in the order of their length, and numbered them”. However, the deciphered text reads:-

I have deposited in the county of Bedford […] the following articles, belonging jointly to the parties whose names are given in number “3,” herewith […]

Paper number “1” describes the exact locality of the vault so that no difficulty will be had in finding it.

So who numbered the pages? The original encipherer (say, Thomas Beale?) as the ciphertext implies, or the writer of the pamphlet as the pamphlet text implies? The answer is simple: if the cipher is real, then the pages were numbered by the original author — but if the cipher is fake, it was the pamphlet writer who numbered them. There’s no middle ground to be had.

Logically, then, my conclusion is that if the cryptology demonstrates – as I think it does – that the Beale Ciphers B1 and B3 are genuine ciphers, then I think it is extremely likely that the pamphlet text is just a confection, a frippery. Indeed, I’d go so far as to say that this implies that all the letters included in it are fake as well.

In which case, it seems that we have a new Third Way to proceed along: that while the ciphers (and possibly the name Thomas Beale) appear to be based on some kind of actual cryptography, everything else is probably something else entirely. Right now, my opinion is that the pamphlet is very probably some kind of retrospective whitewash (or do I mean ‘hogwash’?) wrapped around a genuine cipher.

Currently, the secret history of the Beale Papers looks to me like this: that while Robert Morriss probably was given a box at his hotel in 1822 by someone (Thomas Beale, why not?) to look after, when in 1845 Morriss forced the box open, it was simply to take what was inside for himself – there were no letters, no grizzlies, no stampede, none of it. But all Morriss actually found was some sheets of paper with numbers on and (I suspect) a Declaration of Independence: mystified, he eventually passed this on to a third party, who came to realise the relevance of the DoI to the sheets of dictionary cipher, and thus was able to crack the B2 ciphertext (though not the other two).

But as for the letters and the pamphlet… to my eyes, they’re nothing more than a fabrication, perhaps to justify Morriss’s breaking the locks, or perhaps to help Ward sell his pamphlets: possibly even both. But regardless, I don’t believe that anything much we find in the pamphlet (the ciphers aside) will help us move towards decrypting those ciphers. The secret is genuinely in the ciphers, sure, but I trust the rest of it not one jot.

Make of that what you will! 🙂

Did Soviet spy Arnold Deutsch die on the SS Donbass? To work towards an answer to that question, I decided to compile my own mini-history of the SS Donbass from numerous archival sources. Here’s what I found…

SS Donbass

There have been several ships called “SS Donbass” in modern times, but we’re only interested in the first of these – the one that was sunk in November 1942. Here’s what it looked like:-

convoy_pq17_donbass

This paricular SS Donbass was built in 1935, with a gross tonnage of 7925 tons and a loading capacity of 7602 tons: a decent-sized ship. Other key statistics to satisfy passing merchant marine historians:-
* Length: 140.12m
* Width: 17.94m
* Draft: 8.45m
* Machine power: 2 x 1400 hp (I think, please correct me if this is wrong)
* Max speed: 10 knots

In 1940, the ship was then transferred across from Sovtanker Steamship Company into the main fleet.

SS Donbass in Convoy PQ-17

According to this post, in mid-1942 the Donbass travelled from Buenos Aires to New York with a large consignment of oil. Once there, it was fitted with two 65mm cannon and eight heavy machine guns to allow it to defend itself, and then sent on to Reykjavik.

En route to Russia as part of the PQ-17 convoy operation, it rescued 51 men from the US transport ship SS Daniel Morgan. It repulsed 13 air attacks and 1 submarine attack, knocking down two German He-111 bombers (04th July 1942) and one Ju-88. The rescued US sailors even helped man the nose gun.

The captain (Mikhail Ivanovich Pavlov) and senior engineer (Mefodiy Martynovich Fedorov) were awarded British medals (I’m guessing Atlantic Star Medals?)

According to the crew manifests, 28 additional Russian crew members came on board in New York: I’m told that these were from the SS Ashgabat, which had not long before sunk off the American coast (but I don’t have a reference for this).

SS Donbass in Operation FB

The Donbass was not so fortunate in Operation FB, travelling from Arkhangelsk to Reykjavik. Having passed Novaya Zemlya on the way out on 4th November 1942, it was attacked by Nazi bombers the following day, but was able to use its cannons to drive them off. However, its lucky streak ended on 7th November 1942, when it was attacked by the vastly stronger German destroyer Z-27: in rapid succession, the Donbass was hit by torpedoes, its oil caught fire and set the whole ship ablaze, the Donbass split into two huge pieces fore and aft, and the front half sank.

However, the crew kept on fighting, manning the cannon and machine guns on the ablaze aft end of the ship. But when their ammunition ran out, Captain Zielke finally ordered the crew to abandon the Donbass’s dying hulk: they were left floating in the icy seas for a while, but were than picked up by the Z-27. The coordinates were: 76° 25’N, 45° 54’E.

On 9th November 1942, the fifteen captured seamen were handed to the Coast Guard at the Northern Norwegian port of Alta, and then driven to a POW camp. In February 1943, they were transported to a concentration camp for sailors in Gdynia (Poland), where they stayed until 1945 (Zielke escaped the camp but was recaptured after a month on the run). While there, however, at least four of these fifteen died of starvation. Captain Zielke, who survived, was awarded the Order of Lenin.

The Dead

Here is the memorial plaque to the SS Donbass, listing the 33 men and women who died on it that fateful day.

Donbas41-memorial-plaque

With Arnold Deutsch in mind 🙂 , I cross-referenced this list with the various other crew lists available. This is because I don’t even remotely believe that Deutsch would have been on the SS Donbass in both Convoy PQ-17 and Operation FB: hence I think we can almost certainly rule out anyone who was in both convoys. Or who was female.

Key:-
[*] = arrived at New York from Buenos Aires in July 1942
[A] = was taken on board from the Ashgabat
[F] = female crew member
— = (whoever was left)

Left column:
[*] Morozov Arseniy Maksimovich, 1st Assistant, 1894
— Andrianov, Mikhail Ivanovich, 2nd Assistant, ?
[*] Oparin Mikhail Nikolayevich, 3rd Assistant, 1913
[*] Kalandadze Nina Germanovna, 4th Assistant, 1918
[*] Fedorov Mefodiy Martynovich, Art. Mechanic, 1894
[*] Malakhov Ivan Dmitriyevich, 3rd engineer, 1915
[*] Gal’tsev Nikolay Stepanovich, Senior electrician, 1911
[F] Klimushcheva Iya Petrovna, Marine medic, ?
— Cheremnykh Vasiliy Nikolayevich, Boatswain, ?
— Nilov Mikhail Konstantinovich, Motorman Grade 1 (Sailor), 1911
[*] Vasil’yev Boris Mikhaylovich, Sailor, 1917
[*] Yeres’ko Filipp Grigor’yevich, Sailor, 1912
[*] Gorlachev Aleksandr Yegorovich, Sailor, 1915
[*] Butenko Fedor Vasil’yevich, Sailor, 1912
[*] Trimasov (Tremasov) Kuz’ma Andreyevich, Sailor, 1915
[*] Kochurkin (Kochkurin) Nikolay Ignat’yevich, Sailor, 1917
[A] Shibanov Aleksandr Alekseyevich, Sailor, [Aged 36]

Right column:
[*] Slobodzyan (Slabodzyan) Valentin Philippovich, Carpenter 1921
— Lavrent’yev Fedor Ivanovich, Motorman Grade 1, 1910
[*] Khachko Viktor Petrovich, Motorman Grade 1, 1912
[*] Lemza Aleksey Sergeyevich, Motorman Grade 1, 1914
[A] Radionov German Stepanovich, Motorman 1 Class, [Aged 28]
[*] Tagiyev Ismail Dzhanilovich, Motorman Grade 1, 1915
[A] Pashchenko Viktor Filippovich, Motorman Grade 1, [Aged 24]
[*] Galkin Nikolay Pavlovich, Motorman Grade 1, 1912
[*] Kuznetsov Ivan Ivanovich, Motorman Grade 1, 1914
[A] Mashchenko Petr Gordeyevich, Motorman 1 Class, [Aged 32]
[*] Mechik Leonid Aleksandrovich, Donkerman, 1908
[*] Yurkovskiy Fedor Konstantinovich, Cook, 1909
[*] Kamnev Grigoriy Timofeyevich, Chef, 1916
[F] Voronina Avgusta Aleksandrovna, Orderly, 1920
[F] Pakhtusova Agrippina Petrovna, Maid, ?
[A] Afonasenko Trofim Semenovich, Motorman 1 Class, [Aged 25]

Who is left?

If Arnold Deutsch died on board AND he appears under a different name in the lists of the dead, he must be one of the following four people:-

— Andrianov, Mikhail Ivanovich, 2nd Assistant, ?
— Cheremnykh Vasiliy Nikolayevich, Boatswain, ?
— Nilov Mikhail Konstantinovich, Motorman Grade 1 (Sailor), 1911
— Lavrent’yev Fedor Ivanovich, Motorman Grade 1, 1910

Make of that what you will.

The Anthon Transcript was a document shown to Professor Charles Anthon by Martin Harris in New York in February 1828: Harris claimed that it was a copy of the “reformed Egyptian” letters used to write the Golden Plates. The story goes that these Plates had been hidden in a hill near where Mormon founder Joseph Smith lived; that the Angel Moroni first directed Smith to them in 1823 (though he only took them away in 1827); and that Smith claimed to have translated the Book of Mormon from these Plates.

It is normally reported that the Anthon Transcript is the same as the “Caractors” document widely shown on the Internet, and which was first supplied by David Whitmer…

800px-Caractors_large

…but since reading an essay called The Anthon Affair by Jerome J. Knuijt, I’m really not so sure any more.

What is specifically odd is that, when later quizzed about the meetings he had with Martin Harris, Anthon wrote that the transcript “consisted of all kinds of crooked characters disposed in columns” (1834), “like the Chinese mode of writing” (1841). Moreover, “the whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into various compartments;“, and that this resembled “a rude representation of the Mexican zodiac“, “evidently copied after the Mexican Calendar given by Humboldt“.

Incidentally, the 24-ton Aztec Calendar Stone (to which Anthon was undoubtedly referring) had been rediscovered not long before (in 1790), and looks like this:-

Aztec-Calendar-Stone-enhanced

LDS writers typically downplay any connection with von Humboldt’s writing, by (for example) saying that that Joseph Smith was but a “poorly educated farmboy“, who could not possibly have amassed a “frontier library”. It seems far more likely to me that von Humboldt’s writings (e.g. about Indians writing in hieroglyphics etc) or similar ideas about Mesoamerican history instead made their way to Joseph Smith via the cracked mirror of newspaper summaries. But that’s the kind of argument that can be (and indeed often is) batted back and forth ad nauseam: it really doesn’t interest me.

So it turns out that the central mystery of the Anthon Transcript is not only why a document so intensely central to the claims of Mormonism is not only absent from the archives, but why it is also so clearly misrepresented as being the “Caractors” document. The latter may well also be a document connected to early Mormons (notes from a shorthand Bible? The 1823 Detroit Manuscript?), but it is now hard for me to see how the Caractors page could in any obvious way be the same one described so specifically by Charles Anthon.

Knuijt seems to have his doubts that David Whitmer – one of the Three Witnesses to the Golden Plates – was an altogether reliable source for the Caractors to have come from: and reading Whitmer’s Wikipedia page (ha!), this scepticism seems to be reasonably justified. All I know is that until the actual Anthon Transcript or the actual Detroit Manuscript turns up (someone must surely have taken a copy of the latter, right?), this is probably a debate that cannot be settled anywhere apart from a pub car park. 🙂

* * * * * * *

Note: the two letters from Professor Charles Anthon (to Eber D. Howe, 17th Feb 1834; and to Reverend Coit, 3rd April 1841) can be found transcribed here.

I’ve just been contacted by the owner of the Blitz Ciphers, with five more scans of Blitz Cipher pages we hadn’t previously seen.

These continue the original set’s apparent theme of mystifying geometrical shapes combined with unhelpful-looking annotations in a 50-odd symbol cipher alphabet: feel free to bang your head against the walls of these strange diagrams, Voynich researcher style, if you like.

Me, I’m much more interested in the prosaic-looking text-only pages #7 and #8, particularly page #7 (ignoring the tiny annotation in a second hand). My Plan A is therefore to transcribe these two pages carefully (even though there’s a fair bit of what looks like water damage, most seems legible with only light amount of image enhancement) and then throw various cryptological / statistical tests at them to see what emerges.

#7: 15491625601_57c6aec33d_o

My hunch? Just as I noted before, this still looks to me like a homophonic cipher with possibly a few nulls, in broadly the same vein as the Copiale Cipher. As such, I’m guessing the plaintext will be a well-known European language, particularly English or German.

But what my nose isn’t sniffing here is anything that would sit in a mainstream Masonic tradition: these, such as the (now comprehensively cracked) Action Line Cryptogram, would probably be dominated by text describing candidates knocking at doors to be initiated via faux-historical rituals than a set of curiously arcane geometric diagrams.

…unless you know better? 🙂

Gordon Cramer has just posted about Edward John Rice, a machinist at Australia’s Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation, who the management there tried to dismiss in 1942 for allegedly being a Communist. They were also very annoyed about the way he tried to force Mrs Dawkins, the nice lady from the canteen, into telling him all the gossip to go into the staff magazine of which he was one of the four editors.

What inspired Gordon was what Rice apparently said to a man called Keane (a surname guaranteed to set many Somerton Man theorists aquiver with excitement):-

Mr. Ashburner (for the CAC): Do you remember when you were distributing literature in the factory telling a man named Keane that “My one wish above all is to lead a revolution in this country, and when the shooting starts you want to shoot fast”?

Rice: No. I never said anything like that. You produce this man.

Mr. Ashburner: Don’t worry, he will be produced.

Gordon Cramer then appended lots of pictures of aircraft factories and alleged microwriting to help make his case that all these pieces linked together. But why did he not look at the rest of the reports of the tribunal from that same week to see if he could find out “Keane”‘s first name?

The report Gordon cited was from the Monday 3rd August 1942 edition of the Adelaide News. But the Wednesday 5th August 1942 Daily Advertiser names the same witness as Charles Keenan:-

Mr. Charles Keenan, employee of the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation. said that Rice had distributed pamphlets to some employees. Rice said that the Friends of the Soviet Union had issued them and admitted he was a Communist. He spoke of leading a revolution.

The Thursday 6th August edition of the Sydney Morning Herald voiced Rice’s denials of these lurid claims:

Rice, in evidence, denied that he had told an employee, Keenan, that he wanted to lead a revolution, that he would shoot or cut the throats of capitalists or that he was a Communist.

I’m not keen on this being the Somerton Man’s Keane: in fact, I’d go so far as to say this identification is 100% pants. 🙂

I thought I’d just give a gentle Cipher Mysteries tap to all your virtual elbows: that there’s a Voynich pub meet this evening (i.e. Sunday 28th September 2014 from 7pm onwards) in a splendidly historic London tavern, and that it would be great to see all or any of you there. As always, if you have a particular interest in one or more other historical ciphers (i.e. not just the Voynich Manuscritp), you’re more than welcome too.

Oh, and if you are planning to come along, please free to say hello beforehand via a comment here or an email, particularly if there’s any cipher-related book from my overstuffed bookshelves that you’d like to borrow.

Alas, I can’t promise that Rupert Allason will turn up with a copy of Arnold Deutsch’s fingerprints in his hand and that we’ll all be drinking champagne to toast the newly-identified Somerton Man (now wouldn’t that be good). But cheers and hope to see you there all the same! 😉

(I’m claiming neither plaudits nor brickbats for this suggestion, it’s Pete Bowes’ bonny baby: but funnily enough, I rather like it.)

Born in 1903 in Hungary, Czechoslavakia, Vienna or somewhere else completely (nobody knows), Arnold Deutsch was a brilliant young academic (with a PhD in chemistry at just 24) with an interest in Wilhelm Reich’s sex stuff who then moved to London to become, while a psychology graduate, a devastatingly well-connected Soviet spy. In fact, the Cambridge Five (including Lil’ Kim Philby) were his boys, and it was Deutsch who came up with the strategy of embedding them deep within the Establishment.

But then in 1937 Stalin got super-edgy and paranoid, and pulled all his wildcard agents back to Moscow, to be executed and replaced by a new cadre of even more hard-core home-bred Communist crazies. However, Deutsch managed to escape that fate: and was kept on “as an expert on forgery and handwriting”, says Wikipedia (with a straight face).

However, when he finally got abroad again in the 1940s, Deutsch is believed to have died, though – as you’d expect – nobody is sure quite how, where or even when.

Arnold-Deutsch

Might he be the Somerton Man, found dead on an Australian beach in 1948?

Somerton-Man-front

Facially, the photos do look quite similar: they were of similar age, and they seem to share the same propensity for mystery. And dying so publicly and yet at the same time so privately has a curious rightness to it.

Up until now, I’ve hated every single speculative spy story floated to explain the Somerton Man that crossed my path: and yet I find myself smiling with delighted intrigue at this particular one. You know, “wouldn’t it be nice if…?”

And surely the best part of it all is that Arnold Deutsch’s fingerprints must surely be somewhere – Nigel West would know, wouldn’t he? Rupert, my man, have you still got a copy of Deutsch’s file upstairs? We have a nice set of fingerprints to compare it with… 🙂

Right now, I think there is a ~35% chance that the Somerton Man was a Russian merchant seaman who had worked on a WWII Lend-Lease ship bringing goods from America to Vladivostok on the Pacific Route. We know his physical appearance, height, fingerprints, and his rough date of birth: and that he was found dead on a South Australian beach on 1st December 1948.

What struck me last night was that this might well be all we need to work with.

So at long last, I’ve finally formed a Somerton Man plan. Here’s what I’ll do (though it won’t happen in a day or even a week):-

(1) Find the Soviet crew lists for Lend-Lease ships landing on the West Coast of America during 1941-1945 (e.g. via Ancestry.com or elsewhere), and merge them into a single list.

Once this is filtered for merchant seamen of the right age (and I’ll happily take your suggestions as to what age range to filter against), my estimate is that I should have ~250 names to work with.

(2) Find out if any of these were alive in 1949 and beyond.

As I recall, there is a Maritime Cemetery in Vladivostok. My guess is that a fair few of these merchant seamen will be buried there: hopefully I’ll be able to find a nice administrative list or database to work with.

I estimate that this should reduce the list to something closer to 100 names. If other usable secondary databases exist, they might help get the list down to ~50 names.

Once I get to this point, it seems that there are four parallel strategies to follow, each of which might independently work:-

(3a) Trace these 50 names further using other Soviet databases. (Though because this was the era of Stalin’s Russia, there might well be rather less to go on than one would normally hope for).

(3b) Find crew-lists of Soviet ships arriving in or leaving from Australian ports 1943-1948 (and/or Australian alien seamen registration forms), and cross-reference against these.

(3c) Network through to retired Russian merchant seamen who worked on Lend-Lease ships and see what / who they remember. (There are, as I also recall, Homes for Retired Seamen in Vladivostok, which would seem to be a good place to start).

(3d) See if I can get a Vladivostok journalist interested enough in the story to try to run it in a paper. Who knows what might come out of it.

Perhaps one of these will work, perhaps it won’t. But it certainly beats sitting around trying to guess what “MLIABO” might conceivably stand for (“Making Love Is A Bad Option”, etc). 😉