Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Myth and Legends of Survivors => Topic started by: Annie on August 16, 2007, 05:55:21 PM

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 16, 2007, 05:55:21 PM
It really doesn't matter what they said, because they were going on memory and could very well have been mistaken. We've been through all this before, the rock star, the memory article, somebody standing on an incline or in higher heels, etc. Height is perhaps the most subjective and most easily misjudged thing of all. Who cares what they said? If it's not a doctor's record proving her as measured at a certain height we don't know. You cannot go by eyewitness accounts based on faded memories years later because they may well be incorrect. You could line up 10 people and they'd all give her height as something different and they'd all swear they were right, just like the ones who met the rock star. As I keep saying, just because somebody says something doesn't make it necessarily a fact. You keep holding to these statements and opinions by various individuals as 'facts' and they are no more than what they are, a comment, an opinion based on memory that cannot be proven. Three different people all guessed my shoe size wrong, am I not me?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 17, 2007, 01:22:05 AM
interesting to note that Peter the Great had small feet but wore shoes that were larger to not appear to have such small feet ... wonder whether FS was measured in her shoes rather than without them ... that probably explains the height differences.

seriously check the DNA AGR Bear and you will find the truth if you really are interested ... it would seem from previous posts that you have no interest whatsoever
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on August 17, 2007, 07:08:13 AM
It is strange haw Bear she will continue to talk about their heights in many other threads. They realy must have to see that DNA for themselves to make sure that it is accurate becuase it may not be correct. Her height realy does not matter that is not enough proof, since we have DNA as the major evidence.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 17, 2007, 07:49:24 AM
precisely there is really no further place to go .. the DNA destroyed all the other "evidence" completely.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on August 17, 2007, 08:37:48 AM
...you could line up 10 people and they'd all give her height as something different and they'd all swear they were right....

... [ in  part]...

Name me one person who knew FS before Feb. 1920 who tells us that she was shorter than 5 feet 6 inches?


AGRBear





Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 17, 2007, 09:46:29 AM
Name one person other than the Wingenders who admitted to knowing her?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on August 17, 2007, 09:50:58 AM
precisely there is really no further place to go .. the DNA destroyed all the other "evidence" completely.
Yes it sure is true and people still refuse to believe the fact that DNA covers all the evidence. They just want to keep on going on and on about AA's height and apperance. It realy does not matter about what height AA was becuase DNA did all the work of proving it was not Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 17, 2007, 10:04:22 AM
That's right, and something I can't understand is how anyone can claim to believe the DNA, yet say BUT they still have 'questions.' If you totally acccepted the DNA there would be no other questions and none of the other stuff would matter anymore. You'd simply know it was wrong. So if anyone is still trying to prove a very vague height difference due to ONE person's word over the DNA, I would have to say that person didn't really accept the DNA. But I hope she doesn't think proving one person said the wrong height discounts or in any way questions the DNA results because it doesn't.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on August 17, 2007, 10:19:19 AM
Name one person other than the Wingenders who admitted to knowing her?

A lot of people  [family, friends,  neighbors, teachers, co-workers, doctors, nurses...] knew FS from the time she was born in 1896.  And,  it true,  not one, including FS's family, step forward and testified  AA was FS accept the Wingenders.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on August 17, 2007, 10:36:12 AM
That's right, and something I can't understand is how anyone can claim to believe the DNA, yet say BUT they still have 'questions.' If you totally acccepted the DNA there would be no other questions and none of the other stuff would matter anymore. You'd simply know it was wrong. So if anyone is still trying to prove a very vague height difference due to ONE person's word over the DNA, I would have to say that person didn't really accept the DNA. But I hope she doesn't think proving one person said the wrong height discounts or in any way questions the DNA results because it doesn't.
It just does not make no sense at all, if you claim to believe in DNA, and you still have questions then something is not right. I mean obviously they do not know what they are talking about or is it just they do not want to except the existence of DNA, or is it that they think the DNA maybe inaccuate and they need to check it again and they want to make sure it is right? or it could be that they think that DNA has inaccuate information. Please put away all that mess, it is not helping to prove anything, the DNA did all that.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 17, 2007, 10:59:43 AM
Please put away all that mess, it is not helping to prove anything, the DNA did all that.

This should be the epitaph at the end of the whole AA debate!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 17, 2007, 12:35:48 PM
Yes there really isn't anything more to discuss. Anderson was a fraud and the DNA proves it completely.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on August 17, 2007, 12:52:26 PM
Yes there really isn't anything more to discuss. Anderson was a fraud and the DNA proves it completely.
Amen to that Dmitri and Annie I agree with you both there is nothing to discuss further becuase the point is the DNA proved that Anna Anderson was a fraud and their is nothing to talk about end of story!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on August 18, 2007, 03:45:54 PM
Name one person other than the Wingenders who admitted to knowing her?

A lot of people  [family, friends,  neighbors, teachers, co-workers, doctors, nurses...] knew FS from the time she was born in 1896.  And,  it true,  not one, including FS's family, step forward and testified  AA was FS accept the Wingenders.

AGRBear

It seems that someone in FS's  past  would have stepped forward and said:  "I  knew AA when she was FS ," and then gotten their own two thousand marks from the newspapers who would have loved to have run another story on  FS being AA..   


I don't fault in Annie for having taken longer  than I to come to the conclusion that AA was GD Anastasia.

I'd appreciate  if she and others would have patience as I  and others work through these differences  listed about FS and AA.

Back to the shoe sizes of FS and AA f for some clearification.

Who brought the shoes into court evidence in AA's trial?  Was it  the Wingenders or  one of FS's  siblings?   


AGRBear

     

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 18, 2007, 03:54:50 PM
Even though I don't believe the shoe sizes prove a thing, like I said I asked my own brother, son and a friend what size I wore and they all got it wrong and all guessed different sizes, and this does not mean I am not me. I don't think there's any way shoe size can prove or disprove anyone's identity, and we can't even prove it was their shoes, or that the shoes, if they were, were the size they actually should have worn. And of course shoes mean nothing compared to DNA. But I would still like to know:

Quote
Who brought the shoes into court evidence in AA's trial?  Was it  the Wingenders or  one of FS's  siblings?   

Who was it? One avid AA supporter claimed it was FS's 'mother', but I believe the mother to be dead by then, and have seen no mention of her in books. When I pressed further, he apparently came up with the story that the 'mother' was actually a third wife of the deceased father, who was married again, and had never been a 'stepmother' to the kids since they lived with their mother after the divorce. So how would this woman even know? My own brother and son and best friend don't know my shoe size! And again, how can you even prove whose shoes they were? That's why the whole shoe thing doesn't hold up as reliable 'evidence'.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on August 19, 2007, 08:53:18 AM
...[in part]....

 
I don't fault in Annie for having taken longer  than I to come to the conclusion that AA was GD Anastasia.


CORRECTION: I don't fault  Annie for having taken longer  than I to come to the conclusion that AA was NOT GD Anastasia.

Sorry Annie.  Did not notice my error until this morning.

AGRBear
 

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on August 19, 2007, 09:03:41 AM
...[in part]...

Quote
Who brought the shoes into court evidence in AA's trial?  Was it  the Wingenders or  one of FS's  siblings?   

Who was it? One avid AA supporter claimed it was FS's 'mother', but I believe the mother to be dead by then, and have seen no mention of her in books. When I pressed further, he apparently came up with the story that the 'mother' was actually a third wife of the deceased father, who was married again, and had never been a 'stepmother' to the kids since they lived with their mother after the divorce. So how would this woman even know?.....

I don't recall your conversation with whomever "he"  is.   I just recall someone telling us  that FS's shoes were brought into court by either the Wingenders or someone from FS's family.  This is when a comparison was made with  AA's shoe size and FS's shoe size which was  3 sizes difference.  FS's being the larger and AA being the smaller.    Using search with the key word "shoe" doesn't bring up any of these posts so  without spending anymore time on looking for the posts,  I'm asking  for this information and it's source so we can get this information straight.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 19, 2007, 09:37:03 AM
Do some research AGR Bear. You will easily find that AA and FS were the same person. The DNA proves it.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: PrincessSophie on August 20, 2007, 08:54:14 AM
Annie,

Experts only THINK they know everything!  I applaud your search for the truth - whatever that may be.  And, Dmitri, I respect your views - I really do but you have already reached your conclusions - which is fine.  Let others do the same journey you did in their own time and let them make their own conclusions.   Surely, as the gentleman and scholar that I know you are, you can allow people - particularly a lady - to do this without fear of recriminations?

Kind regards
Sophie
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on August 20, 2007, 09:52:46 AM
The road to truth is always the best one to travel.

Fully agree.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 20, 2007, 09:29:24 PM
Well time for you to accept the truth AGR Bear. Franziska Schankowska was Anna Anderson. Put away your nonsense and accept the truth as it has been well and truly proven.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: KiKi on August 20, 2007, 11:56:51 PM
I dont think AA was Anastasia because AA had that pointy nose and Anastasia nose was all different and there lips and mouth were different too.  But these two pictures DO NOT show a woman holding her hands the same way like.  You cant just make up stuff because you want it to be that way.  And its kind of dumb to post the pictures yourselve that show different from what your'e saying.  Thanks for listening.

I was also going to mention the pointy nose.  One would think if it was hit by a gun butt it would have been flattened and not pointy.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on August 21, 2007, 12:00:14 AM
A lot of people  [family, friends,  neighbors, teachers, co-workers, doctors, nurses...] knew FS from the time she was born in 1896.  And,  it true,  not one, including FS's family, step forward and testified  AA was FS accept the Wingenders and dimtri  :) .

Goodnight dimtri,  whereever you are.

AGRBear


Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Belochka on August 21, 2007, 12:18:29 AM
...  And,  it true,  not one, including FS's family, step forward and testified  AA was FS accept the Wingenders and dimtri  :) .

AGRBear

I never realized that some called Dmitri "testified" in that Court. Hmm   ::)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 21, 2007, 01:11:31 AM
Poor AGR Bear gets it wrong again and again.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 21, 2007, 01:13:45 AM
Yes what a fraud AA was.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 21, 2007, 01:42:54 AM
Those who have said there is nothing to discuss should simply stop posting on this thread, it is becoming boring and repetitious. I will delete further repeating of this same identical idea because I think the intention of such posts is to stiffle, rather than encourage, free discussion.

The topic is differences between FS and AA. All off topic posts henceforth will be deleted.

After stating your opinion, it is inappropriate to insist that others agree with you.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: PrincessSophie on August 21, 2007, 02:10:29 AM
I think this pic more than any other really emphasizes just how unlike AN AA's features really were. She's really openly exposed them all here.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/sonotan.png)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/amouth.jpg)

Here's another matchup I found:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/anaa.jpg)

Are the adult women the same in these comparisons?  The noses look different to me.  The first one is a cute button nose and appears (to me) to resemble ANs, the other one is different.  Why is this.

The other point I would make is that people make a huge issue about ANs mouth being thin and those other women not so thin.  Couldn't she have had dental work?  And before you say, what if she did.  The point is that dental work can push out your lips to make them look more sensuous.  Not as drastically as botox but it works!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Foxglove on August 21, 2007, 02:44:40 AM

Are the adult women the same in these comparisons?  The noses look different to me.  The first one is a cute button nose and appears (to me) to resemble ANs, the other one is different.  Why is this.

The other point I would make is that people make a huge issue about ANs mouth being thin and those other women not so thin.  Couldn't she have had dental work?  And before you say, what if she did.  The point is that dental work can push out your lips to make them look more sensuous.  Not as drastically as botox but it works!

Yes, the first and the fourth picture is of Anna Anderson. I wouldn't say that the first photo shows AA with a "cute button nose," but it may simply be the position of the camera in conjection to the face.

As for dental work, what kind exactly can push out the lips and make them plumper?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: PrincessSophie on August 21, 2007, 02:50:13 AM
I don't know how to insert pictures (or hyperlinks) but has anyone seen this one?

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Image:Anna1922berlin.jpg


Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: ferrymansdaughter on August 21, 2007, 06:27:28 AM

As for dental work, what kind exactly can push out the lips and make them plumper?


Especially in 1920?

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 21, 2007, 07:43:15 AM
Yes they are the same, one is looking straight forward and the mugshot is at an angle where the face is lowered giving a different view of the nose. There is no 'button nose' on either pic of AA, she had a rather large and bulbous nose.

There were no collagen injections in 1920. The reason AA's lips look so much bigger, wider, thicker and more shapeless than AN's is because they were different people. Besides AA never would have done anything to increase the size of her lips she tried her best to disguise them by sucking them in and under to make them look more like AN's in most pics.

And speaking of 'dental work', AA had most of her teeth yanked out when she heard the Romanov family dentist was coming to examine her. Even so, he still said the jaw was nothing like Anastasia's.

And LOL at the rifle butt leaving a nose flat not pointy! :D
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 21, 2007, 07:49:57 AM
I don't know how to insert pictures (or hyperlinks) but has anyone seen this one?

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Image:Anna1922berlin.jpg




Yes I have. That's a real difference between AA and AN, look at that big, pointy nose. AN's was small and rounded on the end.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: PrincessSophie on August 21, 2007, 08:20:35 AM

Are the adult women the same in these comparisons?  The noses look different to me.  The first one is a cute button nose and appears (to me) to resemble ANs, the other one is different.  Why is this.

The other point I would make is that people make a huge issue about ANs mouth being thin and those other women not so thin.  Couldn't she have had dental work?  And before you say, what if she did.  The point is that dental work can push out your lips to make them look more sensuous.  Not as drastically as botox but it works!

Yes, the first and the fourth picture is of Anna Anderson. I wouldn't say that the first photo shows AA with a "cute button nose," but it may simply be the position of the camera in conjection to the face.

As for dental work, what kind exactly can push out the lips and make them plumper?

I'm not a dentist myself but have had a full mouth reconstruction for aesthetic reasons (that's code for I didn't have a hollywood smile so I had my teeth done!)  My upper teeth I had made a little longer and a little thicker which had the effect of making my lips stick out more.  It's not quite an Angelina Jolie effect but that's what it did.  Now you guys are going to think I'm vain!  Damn it!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: PrincessSophie on August 21, 2007, 08:40:09 AM
I think this pic more than any other really emphasizes just how unlike AN AA's features really were. She's really openly exposed them all here.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/sonotan.png)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/amouth.jpg)

Here's another matchup I found:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/anaa.jpg)

Based on these photos, I would agree with you.  These indicate very marked differences in the eyes.  To me, and I am no expert by any means, it looks like the older woman has the protruding eyes of someone with a thyroid condition.  Sorry, that sounded bitchy.  They are wider and much closer to the eye brows than those of the child's. The ears also look different to me.  The child has little pointed tips at the bottom of her ears whereas the adults ears are rounded with no apparent tips - at least none that I could see from these particular photos.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: PrincessSophie on August 21, 2007, 08:41:26 AM
I don't know how to insert pictures (or hyperlinks) but has anyone seen this one?

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Image:Anna1922berlin.jpg




Yes I have. That's a real difference between AA and AN, look at that big, pointy nose. AN's was small and rounded on the end.

That's what I have just said in another post, Annie!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 21, 2007, 09:06:46 AM
Yes the eyes of the real Grand Duchess Anastasia are completely different from the fraud AA/FS. Eyes never really change unless cataracts grow or they savagely damaged or removed and replaced with glass ones. 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 21, 2007, 09:45:57 AM
Yes AA and FS look the same. It is quite obvious. It's not surprising though as their DNA was identical.

Very true. The 'differences' are just stuff the supporters cling to but are really no more than hearsay that can't be verified, like the shoes and height stuff. There is nothing in the 'differences' lists that can't easily be explained away especially now that we have the DNA to prove AA was not AN but FS.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 21, 2007, 09:46:47 AM
Detailed photographic comparison of AN/AA/FS.

http://www.freewebs.com/anastasiafranziska/photographiccomparisons.htm
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 21, 2007, 12:11:10 PM
That looks like a very good site. Thanks for the link.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Lemur on August 21, 2007, 12:43:35 PM
That's great! Seeing them matched up that way surely shows up Anderson for who she really was, FS. I'm glad someone has finally done this, because usually all we see are sites that try to convince you she was Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 21, 2007, 01:17:31 PM
Oh no, I can't get the site to come up! Conspiracy theory, the AA supporters sabotaged it! :o

edit it's back
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Foxglove on August 21, 2007, 02:54:30 PM
I'm not a dentist myself but have had a full mouth reconstruction for aesthetic reasons (that's code for I didn't have a hollywood smile so I had my teeth done!)  My upper teeth I had made a little longer and a little thicker which had the effect of making my lips stick out more.  It's not quite an Angelina Jolie effect but that's what it did.  Now you guys are going to think I'm vain!  Damn it!

I've had dental implants put in for my two maxillary lateral incisors, and never had any changes in my upper lip. I did ask my dentist about it afterwards, and he said it usually occurs when the bridges are placed forward in the mouth, and cause the upper lip to stick out more. Well, that was enough for me, because I wasn't about to deal with another overbite, even a subtle one. I assume then protruding lips will only occur depending on the position and shape of the teeth, which didn't seem to be the case with Anna Anderson.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 21, 2007, 04:31:05 PM
Another reminder - this topic is NOT about differences between Her Imperial Highess, The Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicholievna and Anna Anderson. The topic is differences between Franziska Schanzkowska and Anna Anderson. We do have many other threads that deal with the former topic. I just deleted another off topic post on this thread - I will be forced to delete others if this continues.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 21, 2007, 05:40:14 PM
There were no differences between FS and AA genetically. They were one and the same person. That has been proven by DNA testing. Carl Maucher was Anderson/Schankowska's blood relative. This is very well documented.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 22, 2007, 12:07:32 AM
Even dental plates don't change the fundemental shape of lips. Photographic comparison between AA and the real Grand Duchess Anastasia simply do not favour AA. The eyes are the really telling evidence. They look absolutely nothing alike. What a shame we don't have colour photos from the period as I wonder whether the eye colour of the two women was at all alike either.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: ferrymansdaughter on August 22, 2007, 06:48:02 AM
Even dental plates don't change the fundemental shape of lips. Photographic comparison between AA and the real Grand Duchess Anastasia simply do not favour AA. The eyes are the really telling evidence. They look absolutely nothing alike. What a shame we don't have colour photos from the period as I wonder whether the eye colour of the two women was at all alike either.

But one thing several people said was that AA had eyes like AN and the Tsar .  More importantly, the colour of AA's eyes (a very deep blue) was commented on by a lot more people who met her (and didn't  necessarily think she was AN).  If she had had brown eyes for example, we would know about it!  Unless of course Dmitri, you think they were all colour blind??

However, it is a shame we don't have a colour photo of Franciszka since her own family said they couldn't recall the colour of her eyes.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 22, 2007, 07:06:47 AM
Even dental plates don't change the fundemental shape of lips. Photographic comparison between AA and the real Grand Duchess Anastasia simply do not favour AA. The eyes are the really telling evidence. They look absolutely nothing alike. What a shame we don't have colour photos from the period as I wonder whether the eye colour of the two women was at all alike either.

But one thing several people said was that AA had eyes like AN and the Tsar .  More importantly, the colour of AA's eyes (a very deep blue) was commented on by a lot more people who met her (and didn't  necessarily think she was AN).  If she had had brown eyes for example, we would know about it!  Unless of course Dmitri, you think they were all colour blind??

However, it is a shame we don't have a colour photo of Franciszka since her own family said they couldn't recall the colour of her eyes.

Ah, but that's the thing, they said NICHOLAS'S eyes, not ANASTASIA'S! How do we even know Anastasia's eyes even looked anything like his? She could have taken after another family member. Just as you say no one remembered FS for having particularly memorable eyes, the same could have been said about the real Anastasia. You never even hear anything mentioned about any of the girls' eyes other than Marie, who was said to have very large dark blue eyes called 'Marie's saucers.'

 I guess looking at those huge bulging eyes staring over the sheets AA was hiding the rest of herself beneath were very attention getting to people, where they hadn't been noticed much when she was only FS.


And AA certainly didn't have any 'dental plates' in Feb. 1920. You can see how thick her lips are in those mug shots because she hadn't yet started to suck them under like she did after she started pretending to be AA. And why would AA want thicker lips? She wanted thinner ones, so she could fake being AN easier. Dental plates argument makes no sense!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 22, 2007, 07:24:55 AM
Yes isn't it completely ludicrous how far people will go to perpetuate a lie?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 22, 2007, 07:34:40 AM
Yes! Dental plates indeed! We need to drag back up the 'grasping at straws' thread!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: PrincessSophie on August 22, 2007, 08:31:12 AM
Yes! Dental plates indeed! We need to drag back up the 'grasping at straws' thread!

I can only say that from personal experience it is possible!

Sophie
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 22, 2007, 08:50:29 AM
one wonders how your dental plates have any relevance in the photographic comparison and discussion ... back to the topic of the thread please ... the photos speak for themselves as does the DNA
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 22, 2007, 09:25:47 AM
Even dental plates don't change the fundemental shape of lips. Photographic comparison between AA and the real Grand Duchess Anastasia simply do not favour AA. The eyes are the really telling evidence. They look absolutely nothing alike. What a shame we don't have colour photos from the period as I wonder whether the eye colour of the two women was at all alike either.

But one thing several people said was that AA had eyes like AN and the Tsar .  More importantly, the colour of AA's eyes (a very deep blue) was commented on by a lot more people who met her (and didn't  necessarily think she was AN).  If she had had brown eyes for example, we would know about it!  Unless of course Dmitri, you think they were all colour blind??

However, it is a shame we don't have a colour photo of Franciszka since her own family said they couldn't recall the colour of her eyes.

Ah, but that's the thing, they said NICHOLAS'S eyes, not ANASTASIA'S! How do we even know Anastasia's eyes even looked anything like his? She could have taken after another family member. Just as you say no one remembered FS for having particularly memorable eyes, the same could have been said about the real Anastasia. You never even hear anything mentioned about any of the girls' eyes other than Marie, who was said to have very large dark blue eyes called 'Marie's saucers.'

 I guess looking at those huge bulging eyes staring over the sheets AA was hiding the rest of herself beneath were very attention getting to people, where they hadn't been noticed much when she was only FS.


And AA certainly didn't have any 'dental plates' in Feb. 1920. You can see how thick her lips are in those mug shots because she hadn't yet started to suck them under like she did after she started pretending to be AA. And why would AA want thicker lips? She wanted thinner ones, so she could fake being AN easier. Dental plates argument makes no sense!

I have another item to add to this 'eye' discussion.

From this site again:
http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at/PrinceFriedrich.html

When Zinaida Tolstoy, who had been a friend of the Tsarina at Tsarskoye Selo came to visit  Franziska was extremely reluctant, gripping the bedclothes over her head. Eventually, doctors had to be called to help with the ensuing tussle. Franziska need not have worried; Zinaida proclaimed afterwards that she must be Tatiana: she had the eyes of the Tsar.


See this is what I mean, people were saying the eyes reminded them of NICHOLAS but the girl was not specifically remembered as a daughter on her own. Besides Anastasia's eyes never having been commented on for being anything special, we know by accounts that Tatiana had very dark grey eyes not "Nicky's" color so if all they're going on is it 'must be' his daughter because they remember his eyes being that color that's not much to go on. It just shows the  desperation of the miserable Russian emigre' community to have anyone left to latch onto.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on August 22, 2007, 09:32:13 AM
I think the remarks of  FS's brother Felix in a signed affidavit  tell us that  Felix saw  differences between his sister FS and the woman he had just met in May 1927?

So, let's take this one point at a time.

#1
Felix  signed an affidavit which states that the woman he met was not his sister FS.

Is this correct? 

Yes?

or

No?


AGRBear



Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 22, 2007, 09:44:40 AM
I think Felix S. did believe she was his sister but refused to claim her so she wouldn't get into trouble for filing a false claim, fraud, and have to go to jail and pay back all that money. What good could have come from him accepting her, for her, or him? None.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 22, 2007, 09:47:08 AM
Bear, so many things about FS are UNKNOWN, therefore it is hardly fair to classify them as difference, such as whether she had ever been pregnant. 

This early post sums it up. None of the 'differences' can be proven, they are all just hearsay and comments from memory that may well have been incorrect. There are some things about FS we will NEVER know, and we can't use unverfied comments as 'proof' there were any 'differences.' Especially since we now know AA was FS.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 22, 2007, 09:59:21 AM
Yes far better to stick to the DNA as that is not heresay but fact. It showed there were no differences between AA and FS.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 22, 2007, 01:38:48 PM
Yes far better to stick to the DNA as that is not heresay but fact. It showed there were no differences between AA and FS.

I agree that DNA is a better objective source of proof of identity. However, what the DNA showed as regard to Anna Anderson as it pertains to Shanzkowska is that AA's mt DNA was an exact match for that of Carl Maucher, a maternal line descendant of the Schanzkowska family.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 22, 2007, 05:23:40 PM
Yes it is quite clear that there are no differences as they are/were one and the same person.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on August 22, 2007, 05:36:29 PM
Yes it is quite clear that there are no differences as they are/were one and the same person.
Yes that is true there was no difference between AA and FS because DNA proved that that was her identidy and it is so. Therefore as their are many differences between AA and A becuase obviously it was not her.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: ferrymansdaughter on August 23, 2007, 07:56:46 AM

And speaking of 'dental work', AA had most of her teeth yanked out when she heard the Romanov family dentist was coming to examine her. Even so, he still said the jaw was nothing like Anastasia's.


I am aware that the following is off topic but it is an answer to the point made by Annie above (which  is totally inaccurate since the dentist  did not see the casts until FIVE YEARS after AA's teeth were pulled) and we don't seem to have a "teeth" thread.

1.  AA's teeth were pulled whilst in Dalldorf  - i.e. prior to May 1922 when she was discharged. 

2.    AA went to Castle Seeon in March 1927.   The dentist, Kostritski  who was then living in Paris, was repeatedly asked to go to  Castle Seeon by the Duke of Leuchtenberg and to personally examine the invalid .   He  declined to do so,  so the Duke of Leuchtenberg had plaster casts made of AA's teeth and jaws and asked Kastritski  to look at them.   Eventually Kastritski got to look at the casts, which were taken to him.  According to the dentist at Prien who had treated AA, she had a peculiar hereditary characteristic in the lower jaw which any dentist would not miss.  [ I don't know exactly what this was meant to be.] 

When Kastristski saw the casts, he did not comment specifically about these features although he remarked generally that the teeth showed hereditary features.  He then said "as if I would have left the teeth  in this condition" [which no-one had said he did.]   Also, he did not say that AN did not have such hereditary characteristics, nor did he actually say "the jaw was nothing like hers."    He seemed more concerned that people would think he was a bad dentist.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 23, 2007, 09:07:24 AM
I wonder what that has to do with anything? It has been proven AA was not the Grand Duchess Anastasia so why discuss such irrelevant matters? You might as well talk about any other unrelated woman from the same generation as they would also have nothing to do with Grand Duchess Anastasia
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 23, 2007, 09:49:36 AM


1.  AA's teeth were pulled whilst in Dalldorf  - i.e. prior to May 1922 when she was discharged. 

Yes, because she heard that the dentist was coming to examine her. Story relayed to someone on this board who said and I quote "Marine Beddleston (Vassily's daughter) and Andrew Romanov told me that once FS knew the Imperial dentist was coming to examine her mouth she had all of her teeth pulled!"

Quote
2.    AA went to Castle Seeon in March 1927.   The dentist, Kostritski  who was then living in Paris, was repeatedly asked to go to  Castle Seeon by the Duke of Leuchtenberg and to personally examine the invalid .   He  declined to do so,  so the Duke of Leuchtenberg had plaster casts made of AA's teeth and jaws and asked Kastritski  to look at them.   Eventually Kastritski got to look at the casts, which were taken to him.  According to the dentist at Prien who had treated AA, she had a peculiar hereditary characteristic in the lower jaw which any dentist would not miss.  [ I don't know exactly what this was meant to be.] 

When Kastristski saw the casts, he did not comment specifically about these features although he remarked generally that the teeth showed hereditary features.  He then said "as if I would have left the teeth  in this condition" [which no-one had said he did.]   Also, he did not say that AN did not have such hereditary characteristics, nor did he actually say "the jaw was nothing like hers."    He seemed more concerned that people would think he was a bad dentist.


You are really, really reading stuff into this that isn't there. Special hereditary characteristic he couldn't miss? Afraid of being called a bad dentist? Please! That's really grasping at straws. The bottom line is the dentist did not find anything in the casts that would make him think she was AN. In fact he testified to it in court.

And there's no way anyone's teeth could have rotted out so badly between 1918 and 1920 if they slept with sugar in their mouth every night. FS must have had dental problems from childhood to have been so bad off at such a young age.

Dr. Kostrinksky had visited the family in Tobolsk, because in his book "Lost Splendor" Felix commented that the dentist, who was also the Yussoupov family dentist, on his first visit to them after his return from seeing the IF, relayed a message to his mother Zenaida from the Tsar saying "tell Princess Yussoupov she was right" (about Rasputin)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: ferrymansdaughter on August 23, 2007, 12:02:32 PM


1.  AA's teeth were pulled whilst in Dalldorf  - i.e. prior to May 1922 when she was discharged. 

Yes, because she heard that the dentist was coming to examine her. Story relayed to someone on this board who said and I quote "Marine Beddleston (Vassily's daughter) and Andrew Romanov told me that once FS knew the Imperial dentist was coming to examine her mouth she had all of her teeth pulled!"

Which dentist are you referring to now?  As I said, AA's teeth were pulled before May 1922 Kastritski did not see her until 1927.  Are you referring to another Imperial dentist who visited her in  Dalldorf before 1922?  No - there wasn't one.  Obviously Vassily's daughter and Andrew Romanov  are either being misquoted or they were quoting second hand and  getting as mixed up as you.

Quote
2.    AA went to Castle Seeon in March 1927.   The dentist, Kostritski  who was then living in Paris, was repeatedly asked to go to  Castle Seeon by the Duke of Leuchtenberg and to personally examine the invalid .   He  declined to do so,  so the Duke of Leuchtenberg had plaster casts made of AA's teeth and jaws and asked Kastritski  to look at them.   Eventually Kastritski got to look at the casts, which were taken to him.  According to the dentist at Prien who had treated AA, she had a peculiar hereditary characteristic in the lower jaw which any dentist would not miss.  [ I don't know exactly what this was meant to be.] 

When Kastristski saw the casts, he did not comment specifically about these features although he remarked generally that the teeth showed hereditary features.  He then said "as if I would have left the teeth  in this condition" [which no-one had said he did.]   Also, he did not say that AN did not have such hereditary characteristics, nor did he actually say "the jaw was nothing like hers."    He seemed more concerned that people would think he was a bad dentist.

You are really, really reading stuff into this that isn't there. Special hereditary characteristic he couldn't miss? Afraid of being called a bad dentist? Please! That's really grasping at straws. The bottom line is the dentist did not find anything in the casts that would make him think she was AN. In fact he testified to it in court.


It is my personal opinion that he seemed concerned people would think he was a bad dentist - look at his words.    Since you got the dates of the examination wrong by 5 years, are you sure he actually testified in court? 

And there's no way anyone's teeth could have rotted out so badly between 1918 and 1920 if they slept with sugar in their mouth every night. FS must have had dental problems from childhood to have been so bad off at such a young age.


The Imperial family  did not have good teeth (other than Alexandra) but AA allegedly had hers pulled because they had been loosened by blows to the face/damage to her jaw which was broken at some time (whatever the cause.)   


Dr. Kostrinksky had visited the family in Tobolsk, because in his book "Lost Splendor" Felix commented that the dentist, who was also the Yussoupov family dentist, on his first visit to them after his return from seeing the IF, relayed a message to his mother Zenaida from the Tsar saying "tell Princess Yussoupov she was right" (about Rasputin)

What relevance does this have? I am not disputing that he was their dentist.

You can say what  you like about "grasping at straws"  - but you got your facts wrong and you don't like being corrected. 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 23, 2007, 12:12:59 PM

Which dentist are you referring to now?  As I said, AA's teeth were pulled before May 1922 Kastritski did not see her until 1927.  Are you referring to another Imperial dentist who visited her in  Dalldorf before 1922?  No - there wasn't one.  Obviously Vassily's daughter and Andrew Romanov  are either being misquoted or they were quoting second hand and  getting as mixed up as you.

What I posted was a DIRECT QUOTE taken from another thread here on this forum, made by the person who had the experience. Nothing got 'mixed up' in copy and pasting. You just don't like to believe it and of course you think all the Romanovs are greedy liars out to sabotage poor AA ::)

Quote
It is my personal opinion that he seemed concerned people would think he was a bad dentist - look at his words.    Since you got the dates of the examination wrong by 5 years, are you sure he actually testified in court? 

I really think the 'bad dentist' thing is a stretch. Again I got my info on the testifying from another poster's post. I have been digging through all the old threads saving stuff like that. It was posted by Stepan who almost always quotes a book but I don't have it now. He is European and has access to many foreign language books we don't and always has info I had never heard of before.

Quote
The Imperial family  did not have good teeth (other than Alexandra) but AA allegedly had hers pulled because they had been loosened by blows to the face/damage to her jaw which was broken at some time (whatever the cause.)   

I know Maples commented on the sad state of Nicky's teeth but he was 50 years old. A person in their early 20s would have had to have had a lifetime of decay to get that bad so young. OTMA had a dentist. I don't think AA got her teeth pulled for any other reason than she feared being shown up by the dental records of AN.

Quote
What relevance does this have? I am not disputing that he was their dentist.

To show he was still visiting them that late, so he would have known how bad AN's teeth were or were not left and they couldnt' change that much in a couple years.

Quote
You can say what  you like about "grasping at straws"  - but you got your facts wrong and you don't like being corrected. 

What wrong facts did I give? You accuse me of getting the date of the exam wrong,but I NEVER gave you a date of the exam! I said her teeth were pulled and I mentioned the cast being made and seen but I NEVER gave you any date so if you assumed the years you were wrong.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: ferrymansdaughter on August 23, 2007, 12:27:35 PM

Which dentist are you referring to now?  As I said, AA's teeth were pulled before May 1922 Kastritski did not see her until 1927.  Are you referring to another Imperial dentist who visited her in  Dalldorf before 1922?  No - there wasn't one.  Obviously Vassily's daughter and Andrew Romanov  are either being misquoted or they were quoting second hand and  getting as mixed up as you.

What I posted was a DIRECT QUOTE taken from another thread here on this forum, made by the person who had the experience. Nothing got 'mixed up' in copy and pasting. You just don't like to believe it and of course you think all the Romanovs are greedy liars out to sabotage poor AA ::)

Who mentioned greedy liars -not me?  What "experience" - Vassily's daughter and Andrew?  They weren't there when she had her teeth out.

Quote
You can say what  you like about "grasping at straws"  - but you got your facts wrong and you don't like being corrected. 

What wrong facts did I give? You accuse me of getting the date of the exam wrong,but I NEVER gave you a date of the exam! I said her teeth were pulled and I mentioned the cast being made and seen but I NEVER gave you any date so if you assumed the years you were wrong.
[/quote]

Annie, stop splitting hairs.  You said she had her teeth out because the dentist was going to visit her.   She had them out FIVE YEARS EARLIER!  Was she psychic???

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 23, 2007, 01:12:52 PM


Annie, stop splitting hairs.  You said she had her teeth out because the dentist was going to visit her.   She had them out FIVE YEARS EARLIER!  Was she psychic???

You're mixing stories. The part about Vassily's daughter was one thing, the dentist and the jaw cast another from a different source. I gave no dates for either. Perhaps she heard in the asylum that he was coming to visit. That is what the Romanovs said, that's all I know, they were there and involved, you and I weren't.


Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on August 23, 2007, 04:25:49 PM
Getting back on topic, here's another great comparison that shows just how very different the chins, mouths, noses, jaws and facial bone structure of AA and AN really were.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/aamouth-1.jpg)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/bigan-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Foxglove on August 24, 2007, 12:06:52 AM

 I guess looking at those huge bulging eyes staring over the sheets AA was hiding the rest of herself beneath were very attention getting to people, where they hadn't been noticed much when she was only FS.

I just laughed out loud at that mental image of "huge bulging eyes."  ;D

As for the teeth, I remember reading (maybe on this forum? I cannot recall where specifically), that AA had her teeth pulled out from intermittent places. Instead of a group of two or three in one section of the jaw, where it was expected teeth would be cracked, damaged, or loosened from a hit, the teeth that were removed were said to be from all over the place. Can anyone confirm if this is true? Also, were the teeth that were pulled damaged in some way? If she really was hit with a rifle-butt to the face, she must have had chipped teeth, or deep cracks, even on teeth that weren't pulled.  ???
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 12:28:17 AM
Yes just goes to prove once a fraud always a fraud. Can't wait for the DNA results on the discovered remains to be released. It will bury this nonsense about Anderson once and for all. 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 12:29:50 AM
and isn't it interesting that all the articles on the newly discovered remains refer to Anna Anderson as the Polish peasant Franziska Schankowska.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Lemur on August 24, 2007, 09:40:31 AM
and isn't it interesting that all the articles on the newly discovered remains refer to Anna Anderson as the Polish peasant Franziska Schankowska.

Yes those news stories do seeem to quote that as if it's a matter of accepted fact which it is. How nice to see that after reading posts by so many who refuse reality.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on August 25, 2007, 11:46:32 AM
and isn't it interesting that all the articles on the newly discovered remains refer to Anna Anderson as the Polish peasant Franziska Schankowska.

Yes those news stories do seeem to quote that as if it's a matter of accepted fact which it is. How nice to see that after reading posts by so many who refuse reality.
Yes it is very sad it is so pathetic! Many people rufuse to except the real stuff.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Richard_Schweitzer on October 12, 2007, 12:22:02 AM
Heavens! I probably shoud not get into this but, not having scanned the whole thread did no one look into Hallux Vagus. The bunions are usually an accompaniment, not the deformity. The most common form, I believe is Hammer Toe, but there are other orthedpedic manifestations. Surely a brother would have seen that in rural Pomerm of 1910.

Now, I know this is a thread based on there being no mtDNA research.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on October 12, 2007, 03:14:35 PM
Let's say for the sake of this thread that all DNA tests were proven to be contaminated and can not be used as evidence to prove AA and FS were the same person.  So, we'll have to go back in time and find evidence which proves AA is not FS.

Differences between AA and FS are:  ......

At my request from my first post,   I asked that DNA was not part of this thread. There are other threads where this is discussed.

Yes,  I think the foot deformity should be added to the list.

Thank you Richard.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Richard_Schweitzer on October 12, 2007, 03:58:32 PM
If I am not mistaken (no records to refer to) I think Shura noted and commented on that deformity.

I would like to point out here for those who see my particular position, and continuing quest (which is not advocacy), as some form of "fanaticism," that the approach of this thread, with its beginning hypothesus or assumptions, as a premise, returns to examine the view I expressed at the announcement of the mtDNA results (which, incidentally we knew long in advance of the release, and agreed be provided to Prince Phillip then, and to other discrete individuals as well).  I am dealing with evidence. The comparisons in this thread are some of that evidence.

mtDNA comparisons are evidence. Generally they do not prove absolute identity, although discrete comparisons, by statistically observed results can rule out other comparisons, their main weight is to rule out relationships, and establish (again statistically) the likelihood of relationships. That may be an over simplification of the forensics, but it should be enough for serious people to review again all the other evidence, especially the physically known, and consider the merits of continuing to investigate whether there may have been factors not yet examined that would affect the weight that is given to that one form of evidence -mtDNA comparisons.

Now, I do not intend by that to bring in to this discussion the relative "values" or weights to be given to the different forms of evidence, nor do I challenge the prepondrance assigned to one form of evidence in respect to another. This is just an examination of what is publically know about one part of the other classes of evidence.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Richard_Schweitzer on October 16, 2007, 08:28:57 PM
Since my time for these postings is becoming limited, and I can only scan the topics from time to time now, What I will do is post responses or such information as I have on the one thread that someone set up with my name. I will put this on all the threads that have put recent statements about my replies or questions to me. Earlier, I had copied out only one set of questions from “Rob,” that I will transfer to the single thread. Anyone else who wants follow-up will have to transfer their post to that thread. No guarantees of satisfaction.

I recognize that there is an effort to assure me that I am not Don Quixote, and that there are no windmills. I do not propose to “convince” anyone of anything. I do not advocate. When asked, I have stated my views. Such facts as I have, I share. I state them, I don’t try to prove them.

My reason for posting again, was being drawn in by the calumnies against those now dead; then drifting into two other threads of related topics. For a broader overview, some might consider going back over my posts to various threads on this site over years past. I think they will find they make up a consistent whole. If not, the fault is mine.

Dick Schweitzer

 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: klava1985 on October 17, 2007, 10:46:02 PM
Woooo, I'm cross-eyed from reading through this whole thread...

If there's even anything else to say, I think we can all agree that this story has maintained its life for all these years because of the pieces on both sides that just don't fit, never have, and probably never will.

I think the DNA evidence is conclusive enough for us to be forced to conclude that all of the other conflicting data must be dismissed. If we can't account for the contradictions, we must still assume that there is information out there (regarding who lied, or why the descriptions were different, etc) that we may never have access to but that would resolve these contradictions. I think this is essentially Annie's and Helen's positions. Anything further about how those gaps might be filled in is speculation--who lied, why, what this or that person might have been afraid of, etc. And I think all the endless speculation is exactly what's so appealing for so many people--the process of constructing a narrative out of all this stuff is endlessly engaging, which is why there are 29 pages on this thread alone.

For my part, I'm willing to dismiss everything except the height. What I mean is, I HAVE to dismiss the height thing, because the DNA evidence trumps it all. It's just that I'm less comfortable with this one data point.

Regarding the height, let's say all we have is are the testimonies of the Wingenders or the Schanzkowskas. And of course Annie is right and people's memories can't always be trusted... I'm fine with this. There are all kinds of ways in which I've remembered people falsely. Or been remembered falsely. But, have you ever been off on height? Maybe you're lousy at estimating someone else's height, but surely you remember if someone was shorter or taller than you...? My sister is 1.5 inches taller than me, and I think of her as being MUCH taller, and my mother is .5 inches shorter than me, and I think of her as being noticeably shorter. It's all in the angle to which I have to adjust my eyes to meet hers. And even though I can't reliably say that that someone else is 5-7 or 5-8, I can surely say that X person is taller than me and in turn shorter than Y person. I can't think of a single instance when I've wrongly remembered someone as being taller or shorter relative to me or relative to another person we have in common. Don't you think this automatic assessment is a basic human reflex, probably related to survival? Is this person bigger or smaller than me...

But, reasoning by this sort of analogy is not proof, as everyone says whenever anyone tries to do it in support of an opinion that is at variance with their own (then they turn around and talk about their brother's perception of their shoe size, or what have you... :) ). I get that. And anyone might have lied or misguessed her height for any number of reasons.

It's just interesting to me. I might be able to resolve a difference of an inch or so, but four?

So, a question that remains for me: is the 5-6 height for FS based solely on eyewitness testimony, or were there medical records from her previous hospitalizations that gave these stats as well?

Regardless, I believe AA was FS. This little difference (well, okay, the language thing is tough, too, but in that case the testimony is so contradictory that I'm willing to do what Helen typically suggests--allow it to cancel itself out; but I'm not aware of any testimony saying FS was a short babe) is the one that sticks out for me as tough to resolve. I have to place it on this kind of graph in my mind as an outlying data point, not relevant in light of the weight of the other evidence, but it's still there. I'd be a lot happier with this story if it could be documented away.

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on October 17, 2007, 11:11:11 PM
re: height.

Bob A. is 6'7. However, he always stoops or slouches. (he is used to doorways, planes, etc. being too short). Nobody EVER realises how tall he really is. Until he stands straight up next to someone when the subject is raised.

My point? People can appear taller or shorter if they want to present as such.  Taller people can slouch or stoop all the time to appear shorter. Shorter people can wear taller shoes and clothing that accentuates height . You would be surprised at how much this will affect the perception of others. I used to work for Harry Weiss, a (in)famous Los Angeles attorney. Harry wore tall hats, impeccably tailored suits and taller shoes. Everyone always thought he was 5'8-5'10.. Harry was 5'5...on a good day...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on October 18, 2007, 12:30:40 PM
klava1985  wrote in part:

>>... It's all in the angle to which I have to adjust my eyes to meet hers. And even though I can't reliably say that that someone else is 5-7 or 5-8, I can surely say that X person is taller than me and in turn shorter than Y person. I can't think of a single instance when I've wrongly remembered someone as being taller or shorter relative to me or relative to another person we have in common. Don't you think this automatic assessment is a basic human reflex, probably related to survival? Is this person bigger or smaller than me... <<

I agree about the height differences and it is because of what I read that I started some of these threads about differences and similarities.

If  someone is 6  feet 7 inches tall,  believe me,  I'd be looking up,,,   if someone was 5 feet  5 inches, I'd still be looking up...

For a personal  story.    One of my  sons is  6 feet 2 inches another son is 5 feet  11 inches.  People do think the shorter son is taller because he stands upright.   But when  a person moves to the taller son to shake hands the misconception  vanishes.   There is no mistake the taller son is taller. 

The two Wingender women lived with  FS.  They saw her standing next to them and others  in different positions.   And,   they believed she was taller.   Both of them were taller than 5 feet 2 inches which  was AA's height

As far as I'm concern,   all the evidence [height and DNA]  should  tell us that AA was FS  but it doesn't.   And,  this  why this topic continues long after the tests  were completed.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: klava1985 on October 18, 2007, 01:20:30 PM
Well, obviously it's possible, if unlikely, to mistake someone else's relative height. And obviously this must be what happened in the FS/AA case.

We know that AA's height was medically documented at just under 5-2, correct? So that's the agreed-upon height for AA, no slouching involved, correct? So for FS to have seemed taller to someone who was 5-4, either they were lying, misremembering, *they* were slouching, or FS was wearing high heels or high hats during those encounters...

This just bugs me more than all the other things that bug me about this whole story. If FS's height is only attested to and not documented in her medical records, it'll be easier to assume that FA, et al are correct and her height was just misguessed or lied about.

If FSs and AA have different medically documented heights, well then it remains a curious outlier as a data point. Ultimately meaningless, but curious.

Does anyone know if there is documentation on FS's height?

Otherwise, although there are many other intriguing alleged differences that will probably never be satisfactorily explained with the information we have (only given speculative explanations, if anyone even feels the need), I personally can live with those.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on October 18, 2007, 03:01:49 PM
Does anyone know if there is documentation on FS's height?

Well, there doesn't even seem to be a decent photo of FS before she "became" AA, let alone a medical chart with her height recorded... If I had to make a bet, I would say the answer is no. All the descriptions about FS are hearsay, basically.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 18, 2007, 05:06:19 PM
Does anyone know if there is documentation on FS's height?

Well, there doesn't even seem to be a decent photo of FS before she "became" AA, let alone a medical chart with her height recorded... If I had to make a bet, I would say the answer is no. All the descriptions about FS are hearsay, basically.

I agree Helen, there are no records, and the only comments about her height came from a coworker who said "I think she was 5'4" and the girls from the boarding house saying she was "a little taller than us" and they were 5'3". This is hearsay, remembered years after seeing her last, and very inaccurate and unreliable. One person can have taller shoes, be standing on higher ground, she could have had her hair styled higher on her head, etc., or they can just plain remember incorrectly, which happens a lot.

It really irks me how so many AA supporters boldly state it as a 'fact' that FS was 5'4", or even 5'6", (where did that one come from?!) when there is NO proof of this. I found out that by looking into the details and background of the stuff they pass off as 'facts' I have found them to be either nonexistent, unverifyable, or very shaky.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 18, 2007, 05:15:14 PM
Well, obviously it's possible, if unlikely, to mistake someone else's relative height. And obviously this must be what happened in the FS/AA case.



Not unlikely at all! Here's an old story I tell, but you obviously haven't heard it before. On a music message board I'm on, a group of fans all met the singer on the same night. They all reported his height as something different, from 5'2" to 5'8"! They were all so sure, they even used 'proof' such as 'I'm 5'6" and he was taller than me!' or 'I'm 5'5" and I was looking down on him!' They all swore they were right, and actually argued and got nasty with each other. And that was only the next day, can you imagine trying to estimate a height YEARS later??!!

n their article "The Magic of the Mind", exploring the accuracy of eyewitness testimonies, Dr. Elizabeth Loftus and Katherine Ketchum explain how this occurs:

As new bits and pieces of information are added into long-term memory, the old memories are removed, replaced, crumpled up, or shoved into corners. Little details are added, confusing or extraneous elements are deleted, and a coherent construction of the facts is gradually created that may bear little resemblance to the original event.

Memories don't just fade, as the old saying would have us believe; they also grow. What fades is the initial perception, the actual experience of the events. But every time we recall an event, we must reconstruct the memory, and with each recollection the memory may be changed--colored by succeeding events, other people's recollections or suggestions, increased understanding, or a new context.

Truth and reality, when seen through the filter of our memories, are not objective facts but subjective, interpretive realities. We interpret the past, correcting ourselves, adding bits and pieces, deleting uncomplimentary or disturbing recollections, sweeping, dusting, tidying things up. Thus our representation of the past takes on a living, shifting reality; it is not fixed and immutable, not a place way back there that is preserved in stone, but a living thing that changes shape, expands, shrinks, and expands again, an amoebalike creature with powers to make us laugh, and cry, and clench our fists. Enormous powers--powers even to make us believe in something that never happened.


THIS is why all the hearsay evidence on her height, shoes, hair color, etc. really is void and useless and does not even begin to stand up against the DNA though AA supporters will continue to call it 'Sixty years of proof' ::)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on October 18, 2007, 05:23:24 PM
The Wingender sisters  didn't  just meet her once and then go off and answer some questions for some survive. 

AGRBear

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 18, 2007, 05:26:34 PM
The Wingender sisters  didn't  just meet her once and then go off and answer some questions for some survive. 

AGRBear



But it had been years since they'd seen her! Try to think hard about someone you haven't seen for years. Can you honestly estimate their size? Read the "Magic of the Mind" description of long term memory again!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Foxglove on October 18, 2007, 07:05:33 PM
I am curious: did the Wingender sisters ever properly measure their own heights, or have someone measure their heights officially as a reasonable comparison? One would assume that a person would know his or her own height, but from personal experience, I know that sometimes people just offer a reasonable guess. Meanwhile, I have had family members and guests stay weeks at a time at my house, and sadly, I couldn’t tell you any of their heights. One strange thing I noticed is that I often will recall a female as being the same height as I am, and a male as being taller. Unless a person is unusually short or tall, I just do not notice. I wonder if it is because my father is taller than I am, and my mother just around my height, and I subconsciously transpose my impressions upon people based on these observations growing up?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: klava1985 on October 19, 2007, 04:02:22 PM
Well, for the record, I stood in line at the supermarket behind Steve Tyler when I was 15... and I can assure you absolutely that he was shorter than me at 5-51/2....:)

Man, where do you get the time for fansites and this site and all that... ?

Anyhoo, I accept that memory plays tricks, as I said. On the other hand I honestly do believe that I can remember relative heights for anyone I've known more than casually. I might not be able to say "Abby was 5-2" with any certainty, but I can say she was shorter than I am, about the same height as our friend Pammy, and shorter than Thalia, who was still a little shorter than me. I'll have to wait for the next high school reunion (our 30th) to check this, but so far I've never run into an old friend and been surprised by their height. Unless they were still growing last time I saw them...

But here I was thinking this was a universal human capability and I guess it's not. Maybe it's along the same lines as I never have to write down directions and form an instant map in my head, even if I'm in a city I've never visited before. Some people are really lame at this; maybe they're lame about assessing height, too.

Well, in any case, it's moot. DNA does rule. Someone, or several someones, messed up or lied about her height.

I guess this points up the root of all evil in this debate. We're all prone to reasoning from analogy, and assuming that others think the way we do. In one of these threads there was a question of why Felix S would have made the crass comment "she was sausages long ago" unless he knew she was in fact alive, but in fact we have no idea why Felix might have said such a thing. WE wouldn't, but that doesn't mean HE wouldn't. Just an example. *I* wouldn't mess up someone's height by 4 inches, but someone else might.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 19, 2007, 04:58:13 PM
That is why DNA rules, you throw out all the guessing and he said she said and get your final answer!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on October 19, 2007, 09:42:00 PM
Yes guessing, would not be reliable or accurate. DNA tests contains important facts, evidence and information. When your guessing your not able to come with one possibly answer, you have all these estimates close and way off. AA supporters are realy saying that FS is taller than AA because FS was 5ft 6in and AA was 5ft 2in. They are only saying this based on their opinions and guessing. This is not even a fact? how do they know if it is true or not? it is only a guess and opinion. Like they did with Alexei's height.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 20, 2007, 03:17:09 PM
Okay, so my son took my car to a concert at UVA and so here I sit with too much time on my hands. I took my comparisons anotehr step further and tried to blend half of AA's face with half of FS's. It wasn't easy to get a workable match, not because they don't look alike- they do- but because the pics were so many different sizes, shades of lighting, and posed angles of the face. I did the best I could, and after working it out and using the computer to straighten the tilted head of one pics, VIOLA!

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafsalf8.jpg)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafshalf12.jpg)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafshalf5.jpg)   (http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafshalf9.jpg)

Here are some of the other experiments, other side of the faces>(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafshalf4.jpg)

here's the pics used by Oxlee the forensic facial expert when he determined FS to be AA>(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafshalf.jpg)

I also tried to match up AA and AN, but nothing would fit! Their noses, lips, chins, and entire face shapes were so different, it wasn't even close.


Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on October 20, 2007, 04:53:44 PM
Of course, Annie AA and Anastasia don't match becuase their two different people. Their, nose, eyes, lips, and faces are all different. Yes FS and AA photos are both different shades and blury. But you can still see the same features in FS and AA. Great job Annie! You did on their faces. Some of those photos, are bad and could be retouched.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 20, 2007, 04:56:40 PM
Thanks, I know they're far from perfect but the main thing is the face shape and features match up.  Here is another one I made:

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafshalf13.jpg)

 I saw on a TV show once that if you took any person's face and cut it in half and matched halves in opposite ways, one side would be prettier and one side would be rougher when compared with themselves. This has happened in this experiment as you can see, and since AA and FS are the same person, it is just two halves of the same face!



Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: klava1985 on October 21, 2007, 08:41:27 PM
so here I sit with too much time on my hands.


I think this sums it up.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 21, 2007, 08:43:11 PM
so here I sit with too much time on my hands.


I think this sums it up.

And yet, here you are as well!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on October 22, 2007, 09:55:21 AM
The case most definitely seems to be closed!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Eddie_uk on October 22, 2007, 11:09:11 AM
Great job Annie! How anyone can say they are not the same person is beyond me. :)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on October 22, 2007, 12:47:46 PM
Ah, but you guys are conveniently forgetting that FS's picture was altered to look like Anna Anderson!  And the DNA was switched. 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Eddie_uk on October 22, 2007, 01:09:42 PM
DOH! Thanks for pointing that out Helen. I forgot that someone wanted to go to all the trouble of altering FS'a face to appear more like AA. Not to mention that somone, some how and for some reason managed to switch the samples of DNA! ;)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 22, 2007, 01:21:26 PM
Well, you know they had to discredit poor AA somehow, they'd stop at nothing, and money was no object! :P

Really, I am tired of hearing about the 'retouched' pic. Really, how much could have been done in a time with no computers, airbrush, photoshop, CGI, or even electronic tools? It's not like it was changed to look like a different person, and even if it was changed to look like AA, the AA pic STILL DOESN'T LOOK LIKE AN! *snicker* The pic of AA I used was taken in 1929, two years after the FS pic was allegedly 'retouched' so they couldn't copy it. Looking closely for 'retouching' in the FS pics, all I can see is that the features were emphazised due to the poor condition of the pic. It's really no more than airbrushing the zits out of your senior portrait! The mouth does look deformed in one version, but the main thing that never changes is the shape of the face and the chin, and that's the real dead giveaway that AA is FS, and the features are the same size and shape and in the same place. Geoffrey Oxlee found the FS pic more than sufficient to do his face fusion on NOVA and he found AA to be FS.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on October 22, 2007, 01:24:39 PM
Ask AGRBear, she will explain how it was done to you in detail...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on October 22, 2007, 01:36:02 PM
She doesn't even know how the intestines were switched! I guess I have to admit to bein VMOL again!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on October 22, 2007, 05:10:45 PM
She doesn't even know how the intestines were switched!

She has lots of very good theories! Try and disprove them. 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on October 22, 2007, 06:38:40 PM
Her theories maybe good, but not strong enought to prove something!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Belochka on October 22, 2007, 06:53:33 PM
She doesn't even know how the intestines were switched! I guess I have to admit to bein VMOL again!

Somehow, by someone, at some point in time.

There is a the presumption that there may also be some kind of "motive". [That presumtion of course could be rebutted].

Thus we can determine without prejudice that we have clear grounds to initiate an Inquiry.

Bear are you up to the task?

Margarita
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on October 23, 2007, 06:06:35 PM
Bear are you up to the task?

Bear is always up to this kind of task ;-)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on November 06, 2007, 09:29:04 AM
I was just reading this and wanted to bump it up because a lot of what is in here was brought up again in the Richard Schweitzer thread and and AA intestines thread and the Botkins thread.

This is just another place where John Manahan is referred to as a "tenured" professor at the University of VA.  But there are some interesting links to other sites and some interesting postings from some who lived in or around Charlottesville.

Read and enjoy.  If you have time, try to read it all.  It is very interesting.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on November 06, 2007, 01:29:40 PM
Yes the conspiracy theories are utterly ridiculous. It's rather pathetic actually to see an article such as this which proves that some are still deluded and in complete denial.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 06, 2007, 06:15:14 PM
I wonder what John Manahan's reaction would have been if he lived to the day when the DNA results proved that he wasn't the Tsar's son-in-law after all...  Or I wonder what he would have done if his wife was still alive at that time...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 06, 2007, 06:24:44 PM
I wonder what John Manahan's reaction would have been if he lived to the day when the DNA results proved that he wasn't the Tsar's son-in-law after all...  Or I wonder what he would have done if his wife was still alive at that time...

He probably would have thought the KGB switched the intestines ;)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 06, 2007, 06:27:57 PM
Would he have continued the charade as the "Tsar's son-in-law" if AA were still alive at the time, or would he have had at least some second thoughts? I have a feeling that he would probably have went with what was most beneficial for him: i.e. continue the charade.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 06, 2007, 06:37:43 PM
I have a feeling that he would probably have went with what was most beneficial for him: i.e. continue the charade.

Just like she continued her charade because  it because it was most beneficial to her, and some of her supporters continue because it is most beneficial to them.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 06, 2007, 06:45:54 PM
Beneficial at least to save face, if nothing else. Oh well.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 06, 2007, 06:47:45 PM
I don't know if he'd ever have accepted the DNA results, but I do think if she had admitted to being FS he would have likely divorced her in anger and humiliation and she'd have lost her meal ticket (which was another reason for her to continue her charade)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 06, 2007, 06:50:58 PM
I do think if she had admitted to being FS he would have divorced her in anger and humiliation

I don't think he would have believed her. He would have said that she must be confused. He had too much invested in that woman - not financially, in other ways - it' was almost as if she gave him a new identity for what he craved- a piece of royalty for himself (remember: he was a royal history buff)...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on November 13, 2007, 10:02:52 AM
I have found an ORIGINAL photo of Anastsaia Tchaikowsky, sent out to the worlds newspapers in 1935 to publish with the story of her filing her legal claim.  It shows something I rather long suspected. Take a close look, it isn't even a PHOTOGRAPH, its a photo of a drawing. TOTALLY useless IMO for any possible claimant comparison. I'd say this image must be discredited for anything other than a possible general "likeness" off Ms. Tchaik.  Isn't this the one always used?? I'd say this is rather important...

(http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/img/AA1935.jpg)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 13, 2007, 10:15:18 AM
Thanks, FA, that is a great find! No wonder nobody came running saying she was FS. (but nobody came running saying she was Anastasia, either!)

I think this (little picture inset) is a version of the same one, trying to compare to the real AN in Tobolsk, but it only exposes the differences. (In fact I once had an AA supporter swear BOTH pics were Anastasia in Tobolsk!)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/anna.jpg)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Foxglove on November 13, 2007, 05:38:02 PM
That picture does not look very much like AA. Why did they not release a photograph? Honestly, if I were to see that drawing in the paper, without reading the name, or the story, my first thought would be to assume that the woman in the portrait was of Italian origin.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on November 13, 2007, 07:29:41 PM
yet that photograph has been used for decades to PROVE the resemblance between AA and ANR. Clearly, this was what those people around Anastasia Tchaikowsky WANTED to be used for the world press. That photo came from the Hearst Newspapers Photo "Morgue" which is now being sold off.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 13, 2007, 07:38:52 PM
yet that photograph has been used for decades to PROVE the resemblance between AA and ANR. Clearly, this was what those people around Anastasia Tchaikowsky WANTED to be used for the world press.

Exactly, the less detailed close comparison, the better for their cause. Which is also why even to this day AA supporters will use the drawing of FS (center), not the original or the retouch,  to compare to AA
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/fs3-1.jpg)

because they know the other two look exactly like this
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/012fs.jpg)

so it makes me wonder if some supporters past and present might deep down have known or feared that AA wasn't really AN but FS.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Belochka on November 13, 2007, 10:30:01 PM
... That photo came from the Hearst Newspapers Photo "Morgue" which is now being sold off.

No doubt the queue of interested persons considering its purchase will be less than noticeable.

Margarita  
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 14, 2007, 07:54:10 AM
What I don't understand is why they used that picture to send out to the newspapers in order to find out who Unberkant was if they had plenty of perfectly good photos of AA, which they could have used instead? It makes no sense... It's almost like they didn't want her recognized.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on November 14, 2007, 09:28:21 AM
For clarification here is the photo again with the story which accompanied it.  The original text is attached to the picture:
(http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/img/AA1935.jpg)

May 2, 1935:

"Daughter" Bids For Fortune of Late Czar


New York: A formal application filed in Surrogates Court here today (May 2) may bring into question once again the claim of Mme. Anastasia Tchaikowsky that she is really Grand Duchess Anastasia, daughter of the late Czar Nicholas II, of Russia.  If she can prove her claim, Mme. Tchaikowsky will be sole heir to a vast fortune that is estimated as high as $100,000,000.  The claimant is now living somewhere in Europe, in semi-retirement.  It is her claim that she was saved when the rest of the ruling family of Russia were slain, by a tender-hearted soldier named Tchaikowsky who smuggled her out of the execution cellar and later married her.
K-5-2-35  1250A
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 14, 2007, 09:38:41 AM
Well, this picture doesn't look like either AA or Anastasia... But funny enough, IMO it does resemble the altered one of Franciska (the one in the middle) - - in profile and with a different hairstyle...

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/fs3-1.jpg)

BTW, why would they have used a picture in profile instead of a frontal shot, that's another thing that doesn't make much sense... Who came up with this picture to use as the tool to identify their unknown patient?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on November 14, 2007, 09:53:33 AM
Why they chose the 1922 image, I don't know, BUT look what happens to the original sketch after publication by photogravure in a newspaper, and the reprinted again in a book with further distortion from the reprint of the reprint of the sketch - or for some reason the original was painted over and then printed. Can't tell which. the interesting thing is that I have often seen the 1935 version used, that funky little black cross thing on her neck just at the collar line always bothered me...:

(http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/img/AA1935.jpg)
(http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c124/Rachael89/The%20Romanov%20album/abba1922.jpg)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 14, 2007, 09:56:05 AM
Why didn't they just use the original?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 14, 2007, 02:13:30 PM
Why didn't they just use the original?

Quote
It's almost like they didn't want her recognized.

That's it, the less detail, the worse it was to compare to AN, and the easier it was to pass off the fake. This really makes me even more suspicious than ever some involved in her claim knew very well she wasn't AN and didn't want anyone else to find out. If they had really thought she looked like the real AN, they would have used more and better quality pics. Because they didn't, it shows they knew they had something to hide, IMO.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on November 14, 2007, 11:15:52 PM
If someone had asked me about the picture of Anastasia in Tobolsk, I would have said that even Anastasia doesn't look like Anastasia in that picture.

I know that her hair is still short, but I would not have picked that as an Anastasia photo.  She does look somewhat like Olga and Marie, but it seems in that picture that she has aged so much and, of course is concentrating so closely on whatever it is that she is looking at, but I just didn't see the Anastasia of old.  No wonder they chose that photo to use as a comparison.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 15, 2007, 06:56:26 AM
I don't think it looks like her, either, I always thought it looked like Olga A. But either way, it still doesn't look like AA.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 20, 2007, 09:53:31 AM
A friend of mine found yet another hole in AA's ridiculous 'escape' story. I had always assumed the security around the family would have been very heavy, even more so the night of ther murders. This is why the story of someone allegedly taking AN to a nearby house is impossible. There is no way they wouldn't have been found out. They wouldn't have made it, and any suspicous activity would have gotten the house searched and its occupants shot. Of course it doesn't matter since AA wasn't AN, but just another nail in the coffin of her story:

In affidavit from Sir Thomas Preston, who was British Consul-General in Ekaterinburg at the time of the Romanov murders:

"On the night of the murder a curfew had been imposed, forbidding anybody to appear in the streets after 8 p.m. on pain of death, a regulation which nobody who valued his life would have dared to disobey. In these circumstances we are asked to believe that Svboda 'and his friend' were able to produce a hourse and cart, to (enter) the House Epatiev, identify and bring out the wounded Anastasia (whom they had never seen before), and take her to a house nearby when every house in the vicinity was under the strictest surveillance of the ubiquitous agents of the Tcheka."

Source: "The Last Grand Duchess", Vorres, pp. 244-245

Anyone sneaking around on the streets of Ekaterinburg that night would have been shot on sight. This really rules out not only the 'cart' story but the 'Heinrich Kliebetzel' story. There is just no way such activity could have been pulled off under the noses of the Bolsheviks and Cheka that night.

Unless, of course, you choose to beileve Sir Thomas Preston to be a liar, or Vorres to be a liar, or that I 'made this up', or that they were lucky enough to sneak by the Bolsheviks! (none of which is true)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 20, 2007, 02:31:46 PM
"On the night of the murder a curfew had been imposed, forbidding anybody to appear in the streets after 8 p.m. on pain of death, a regulation which nobody who valued his life would have dared to disobey. In these circumstances we are asked to believe that Svboda 'and his friend' were able to produce a hourse and cart, to (enter) the House Epatiev, identify and bring out the wounded Anastasia (whom they had never seen before), and take her to a house nearby when every house in the vicinity was under the strictest surveillance of the ubiquitous agents of the Tcheka."

Source: "The Last Grand Duchess", Vorres, pp. 244-245

Annie, you're forgetting that Vorres has been reported to not be a reliable source and to make things up in his book.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 20, 2007, 02:37:52 PM
"On the night of the murder a curfew had been imposed, forbidding anybody to appear in the streets after 8 p.m. on pain of death, a regulation which nobody who valued his life would have dared to disobey. In these circumstances we are asked to believe that Svboda 'and his friend' were able to produce a hourse and cart, to (enter) the House Epatiev, identify and bring out the wounded Anastasia (whom they had never seen before), and take her to a house nearby when every house in the vicinity was under the strictest surveillance of the ubiquitous agents of the Tcheka."

Source: "The Last Grand Duchess", Vorres, pp. 244-245

Annie, you're forgetting that Vorres has been reported to not be a reliable source and to make things up in his book.

No I'm not  ;)



Unless, of course, you choose to beileve Sir Thomas Preston to be a liar, or Vorres to be a liar, or that I 'made this up',

Isn't it funny how everyone who wrote something against AA is a liar?  Go figure, huh?  ???
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Louis_Charles on November 20, 2007, 07:14:33 PM
Gosh, girls, it's just like recess at the Romanov school, isn't it?

Annie, I am pleased that you have lashed yourself to yet another mast, and look forward to hearing all about what you learn from the Vorres book. You could even write to him. I think he's still alive. Make sure you tell him how dedicated to Olga's memory you are, it will probably impress him.

In fact, I know nothing about Preston but see no reason to doubt his testimony, although I have my doubts about how effective a curfew would have been. These clowns couldn't carry off a decent execution and body disposal operation.

And Helen, thanks for the valuable input. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

Good luck punching holes in her ridiculous story, though. I suppose you think that the DNA testing wasn't enough?

Simon
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Suzie on November 27, 2007, 10:51:47 AM
The difference in the lips of AA and AN really show in this picture.  How did her supporters explain that away? Scarring from injuries or having her teeth removed?

Suzie
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 27, 2007, 12:11:56 PM
The difference in the lips of AA and AN really show in this picture.  How did her supporters explain that away? Scarring from injuries or having her teeth removed?

Suzie

I have heard the following lame excuses:

"A rifle butt will do that to you." (apparently they mean a permanent fat lip? Upper and lower?)

or that the bayonet cut through her upper lip and it healed that way.

Oh sure, like a Bolshevik on a mission to murder is only going to poke you in the lip and pull it out, like 'ooh sorry!'  ::)  or that it would have healed as a different mouth, instead of a scarred, deformed version of her own mouth.  ::)

But deep down the supporters must have known the difference in the lips was drastic and that's why they told her to bite them/suck them in as you can see in so many pics. (either that or cover her lower face with a hankie)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Suzie on November 27, 2007, 12:32:26 PM
Are there any pictures of the scars on AA's body that were used as evidence in court? I always thought she looked remarkably scar-free on her face, especially for someone who was supposed to have been bayonetted and clubbed in the face. Scars take a long time to fade.
Suzie
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on November 27, 2007, 01:56:49 PM
AA had some scars, but they were from the grenade explosion at the factory where she worked as FS (source: Massie). AA supporters try to say she was never injured in the blast, but this is only because they want to have you believe the scars were from "Ekaterinburg." There is no way a person can stand next to a man who is literally blown to bits, as her coworker was, and not suffer shrapnel and other wounds from it. AA supporters also say her brother said she had no scars. Well, first, I believe the brother was intentionally denying her for his and her own good, so that doesn't hold much weight with me, but even if he wasn't, how would he know? When was the last time he saw his sister's bare body? When they were children playing in the creek? Women wore long dresses and stockings in those days, and it's unlikely a brother would have seen or known her scars to name them anyway. Besides, the scars happened after she left home. (I am sure my brother couldn't name my scars for a million dollars!)

They always word things that sound good, but when you look into them, there really isn't much if any evidence there. The statement that AA and AN had 'identical scars' really has no basis. One of the scars they claim matched is one on her finger, where she alleges that a carriage door shut on it as a child. However, Olga. A. reported that it was Marie who closed her finger in a train door, not Anastasia in a carriage door, and that whomever her informant was for this 'memory' had gotten a small piece of a story but had the details wrong. This is typical of all AA's 'evidence' if you really look into it. (BTW check out my website, I have dug into all that stuff)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on December 05, 2007, 04:20:01 PM
Here are some photographs which I compiled of AA and the Schanzkowski family

Below is Left: Gertrude Schanzkowska Franziska's sister who recognized AA (Gleb Botkin himself admited to a resemblence between the two of them) and Right: Anna Anderson
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/franz4.jpg)


Below Left and Right Anna Anderson. Center: Gertrude Schanzkowska
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/franz5.jpg)


Below Left and Right: Anna Anderson. Center Maria-Juliana Schanzkowska who the Schanzkowski family said Franziska most resembled.  When Franziska's former teacher and his wife were shown a photograph of Anna Anderson they stated that it didn't look like Franziska but like Maria-Juliana.  Also note that both AA and Maria-Juliana have the same hairstyle- with the exception that they parted their hair on opposite sides.
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/franz3.jpg) 

Below Left and Right: Anna Anderson. Center: Karl Maucher (Franziska's great-nephew)
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/maucheraa.jpg)

 Below: (Top) Anastasia's handwriting.  (Center) Franziska's handwriting (Bottom) Anna Anderson's handwriting. Notice how the way Anastasia's
"s" differs from how both Franziska and Anna wrote their "s" and how similar both the "s" and the "k" are between Franziska and Anna.
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/hand1.jpg)

Below: From Left to Right: Anna Anderson, Waltraud (Felix Schanzkowski's daughter), Anna Anderson and Felix Schanzkowski.
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/franz2.jpg)
And enlargement of the series above. Note the remarkable resemblance between their mouths.
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/lips2.jpg)

Below: From Left to Right: Anna Anderson, Tatiana Nikolaivena Romanova (Anastasia's sister), Maria-Juliana Schanzkowska (Franziska's sister), Anna Anderson. At first glance one can see some similarity between AA and Tatiana, but then when one looks at the photograph of Maira-Juliana one can see the ways AA differs from Tatiana and how much she resembles Maria-Juliana (Franziska's sister).
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/atma.jpg)

Another comparrison of Anna Anderson's lips (Left) and Felix Schanzkowska's daughter Waultrad
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/lips3.jpg)


Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: rosieposie on December 20, 2007, 05:10:47 AM
Wow that is great comparisons especially on the lips.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Nala on January 02, 2008, 09:40:38 AM
after looking at the pics more closely...i can't believe i semi thought AA was AN

it is so obvious that she is not AN in any way shape or form

and like it was mentioned before...it is interesting that she seems to be hiding her features and there are very few "mug shots" showing her face from the front..no angles etc..in her later years

I think most people just want someone to have survived that fateful and tragic night and want to believe that maybe miracles can happen, myself being one of those people

personally as unlikely as it sounds ( and probably is not true) ..if anyone DID survive ...i think Larissa F would be maybe the only semi probable survior.

 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: LisaDavidson on January 02, 2008, 06:06:03 PM
With all due respect, it appears that no one survived, and to think otherwise at this point is perhaps misinformed or wishful thinking.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 07, 2008, 01:38:44 PM
Although not new to Imperial Family history, I had no idea an AA cottage industry of sorts existed on the outer edges. Now I have to confess that I've been mired in these threads for days!

In my opinion the photographs confirm what the DNA results proved conclusively: AA was not AN. Any resemblance in shadowy or posed pictures I would attribute to careful staging, pure coincidence or wishful thinking.

What confounds me is this: how is it possible for a reasonable person to make the great leap of faith required for Anastasia to survive the massacre (only to become a one-woman freakshow who runs naked on rooftops and cremates cats in her fireplace); yet, post-DNA results, be unable to cross the chasm (maybe not a chasm, more of a puddle) that leads from AA  to FS?  It makes no sense.

Jenn

Ps. Annie, your pop culture references are hysterical! It ages me mercilessly, but I remember Jan Brady and George Glass as if it were yesterday....
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 08, 2008, 12:55:07 PM
Annie, thanks so much for your warm welcome in the Forum Announcements section! I've learned a lot from your photo comparison threads; I especially appreciate your impassioned defense of DNA (which really shouldn't require defending) and your application of simple common sense in unraveling the AA mystery. (Thanks also to Helen and FA for making the science behind the DNA understandable to math dorks like me, and for insisting that its impact not be minimized...)

It's fascinating how AA hijacked Anastasia's story for her own; for me, personally, there's no doubt that Anastasia herself is with her family and at peace in a better world, and has been since July 1918.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 09, 2008, 08:50:51 AM
Yes you are perfectly correct. There were some who desperately wanted somebody to have survived even though this was impossible. The hoax continued even long after the vast majority of Romanovs and other relatives had completely rejected Anna Anderson. DNA evidence has confirmed their testimony. One wonders why anybody would continue with the fraudulent claims of Anna Anderson. It really is beyond comprehension for anybody who has studied Russian history and findings about the matter. I guess some people, for whatever reason, choose to ignore facts.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 09, 2008, 11:47:35 AM
Hi Dmitri,

I appreciate and concur with each of your comments! It seems pretty clear from the slowdown in these threads that most people have accepted, via the DNA results or their own common sense, that AA was not AN. Something still perplexes me though (disclaimer: I've never read Mr. Kurth's book, only his website), the belief of some that AA could not have been a Polish peasant or worker. What an opinion they must have of the working class! Now, when I look at the photo of FS, my eyes see a young, well-groomed, not un-photogenic woman of her time. She's not foaming at the mouth, she doesn't seem to be covered in pig slop, she does not appear to have been raised by wolves. Change her clothes, toss a few jewels in her hair, she could pass for highborn as easily as low. Now fast forward a few decades to AA and her well-documented eccentricities. Is this the behavior of the "royal" and the "well-bred?" (Whatever that really means....) Again, what an opinion some must have of the upper classes!

I can understand a desire for survivors. I can well imagine that those who had time to think struggled desperately to survive. But in the chaos of that cellar, I would think death, when it came, was undoubtedly a mercy.

Jenn
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 09, 2008, 03:11:06 PM
Hi Dmitri,

I appreciate and concur with each of your comments! It seems pretty clear from the slowdown in these threads that most people have accepted, via the DNA results or their own common sense, that AA was not AN.

Oh, if only it were that easy.

Quote
Something still perplexes me though (disclaimer: I've never read Mr. Kurth's book, only his website), the belief of some that AA could not have been a Polish peasant or worker. What an opinion they must have of the working class! Now, when I look at the photo of FS, my eyes see a young, well-groomed, not un-photogenic woman of her time. She's not foaming at the mouth, she doesn't seem to be covered in pig slop, she does not appear to have been raised by wolves. Change her clothes, toss a few jewels in her hair, she could pass for highborn as easily as low. Now fast forward a few decades to AA and her well-documented eccentricities. Is this the behavior of the "royal" and the "well-bred?" (Whatever that really means....) Again, what an opinion some must have of the upper classes!

This has always irritated me too, how judgemental and condescending of them to have such an attitude. Many movie stars have come from humble and poverty stricken backgrounds to portray any role, even royalty.

I know I have ranted on this and every part of the story somewhere on here, and even made a website about it. (the link is in my sig)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 09, 2008, 05:48:49 PM
I think the late Ava Gardner is a classic example of a movie actress who showed how somebody born into a relatively poor family could be extremely gracious. She showed this in her portrayal of the Austrian Empress Elisabeth in "Mayerling". Certain social graces can be learnt.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 09, 2008, 07:57:12 PM
I think the late Ava Gardner is a classic example of a movie actress who showed how somebody born into a relatively poor family could be extremely gracious. She showed this in her portrayal of the Austrian Empress Elisabeth in "Mayerling". Certain social graces can be learnt.

You're absolutely right. FA once posted that he met her and she was very classy, and just as sophisticated as the millionaires she hung out with in their mansions and yachts. She was raised in an old shack in NC with a dirt floor and no shoes.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on January 09, 2008, 08:14:14 PM
I more than met Ava. I stayed in her flat with her as her guest in London for ten days, and we were friends for years.  She was as elegant, classy, gracious and "aristocratic" as anyone when she wanted to be, despite being raised literally barefoot in a dirt floor tobacco farmer's shack in North Carolina.  She was a very close friend to Princess Grace of Monaco and God Mother to Princess Caroline.  Now to be fair, she loved bawdy off color jokes and could drink and swear with the best of them, but, and a big but, she was equally every bit the elegant classy "lady" or "princess".

I miss her.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 10, 2008, 12:46:01 PM
Not knowing anything about her I just googled Ava Gardner, what a stunning beauty! I'm trying to come up with a modern equivalent of someone born into modest means who's managed to pull of that same easy sophistication and I'm stuck! Okay, there's Madonna, the poster child for reinvention, but her affected English accent is about as believable as AA's supposed Yorkshire one. Britney? Hmm....poor Britney....not sophisticated at all, but certainly exhibiting behaviors AA would recognize; I hope she FINALLY finds a way to overcome her demons. Bill Clinton maybe? (but you'd have to be willing to overlook some trashy behavior there too). Maybe this is harder than I thought!

Annie, I checked out your website, you and Mr. Kurth use the same pictures to reach very different conclusions! Freedom of speech aside, I hope he updates his site to reflect the reality once all bodies have been accounted for.

Jenn
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 10, 2008, 02:32:10 PM

Annie, I checked out your website, you and Mr. Kurth use the same pictures to reach very different conclusions!

Jenn

I tried to expose how for years AA supporters have used clever tricks to make them appear alike at first glance, but if you really compare the two faces front forward AA looks like FS and not AN. Those large, full lips and the flat, squared chin are particularly different from AN's lower face (which is why they were often disguised in pictures with boas, hankies and just plain sucking the lips under) All of the pics AA supporters use to claim 'resemblance' are conveniently dark, shadowy, shaded, to the point of not being able to see the features clearly. Some even obviously mimic a certain well known pose or photo of the real Anastasia in hopes the power of suggestion will win over more believers. I did my best to counteract that by pointing out all the little tricks, along with the very clear resemblance between AA and FS (because they are the same person)

One of the silliest things AA supporters claim is a 'family resemblance' between AA and the Dowager Empress, AN didn't even look like her and AA wasn't pretending to be her. Interestingly enough, the pics that look most like FS are always compared to Marie F. by AA supporters, as if they secretly know or feel that AA did look more like FS and they didn't dare compare them to AN when the differences were so drastic. As you said, it's hard now to even believe anyone ever even considered AA was AN.

Quote
Freedom of speech aside, I hope he updates his site to reflect the reality once all bodies have been accounted for.

That would be nice, and an honorable, and intelligent thing to do. It might also be a way to remarket his book. Sadly I don't think it'll ever happen. He won't admit AA was an imposter, guess it means too much to him to hold onto the fantasy. He's never admitted the DNA tests were accurate, and still claims doubts that the intestines even belonged to AA. (though like other supporters he can't tell you whose intestines they were and why they matched the Schanzkowska family!)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 23, 2008, 11:10:14 AM
Hi, this is a continuation of the AA discussion that erupted in the "Why did they kill the children?" thread.

Cody, I appreciate that you're trying to approach the "Polish peasant" issue as objectively as possible, and I'll respect your wish to discuss what AA knew versus how she behaved. Would you please share whatever knowledge you believe AA had that would preclude her from being a member of the Polish peasant or working class?  Upfront, I am of the opinion that she belonged to the sponging class (which I suppose would not limit her to any particular point along the socioeconomic spectrum); and in this I believe she excelled.

I'm interested to hear your (or anyone's) comments!

Jenn
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 23, 2008, 10:31:28 PM
Very well put indeed! Anderson made a habit of sponging off others for most of her life. What a hide she had. It would appear it was thicker than a rhinocerus. The only thing she really achieved, apart from tricking the gullible,  was having no shame whatsoever when it came to living off so many for so long. I guess they got what they deserved.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 24, 2008, 08:39:06 AM
Now to be fair, she loved bawdy off color jokes and could drink and swear with the best of them..

That means nothing.. think Pss Margaret of Britain ;-)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 24, 2008, 11:45:47 AM
Hi, this is a continuation of the AA discussion that erupted in the "Why did they kill the children?" thread.

Cody, I appreciate that you're trying to approach the "Polish peasant" issue as objectively as possible, and I'll respect your wish to discuss what AA knew versus how she behaved. Would you please share whatever knowledge you believe AA had that would preclude her from being a member of the Polish peasant or working class?  Upfront, I am of the opinion that she belonged to the sponging class (which I suppose would not limit her to any particular point along the socioeconomic spectrum); and in this I believe she excelled.

I'm interested to hear your (or anyone's) comments!

Jenn

Sure, Jenn, I'll be glad to.  What shocks me the most on Anna Anderson was that she knew that Grand Duke Ernest was at Tsarskoye Selo around 1916.  That was something not many Polish peasants would have known.  How then did Anna Anderson know that?  She had to have some inside information from someone, because she couldn't have read it in any book.  Annie tried to offer an explanation of the many Russian refugees in Germany around 1920, although that doesn't prove that Anna Anderson was around them, but at least it gives one possible explanation.
With that being said, since this topic has been discussing the photograph comparisons between Anna Anderson and Anastasia, I would argue that photographic comparisons prove nothing.  While there have been experts who have shown that Anna Anderson is not Anastasia due to photographic comparisons, there have also been experts who have shown that Anna Anderson is Anastasia due to photographic comparisons.  The DNA, therefore, is what has the final answer.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 24, 2008, 11:51:13 AM
What shocks me the most on Anna Anderson was that she knew that Grand Duke Ernest was at Tsarskoye Selo around 1916.  That was something not many Polish peasants would have known.  How then did Anna Anderson know that? 

But he wasn't. This is just an ambiguous theory, not a fact that has been proven. In fact, most serious historians do not believe this to have happened...

With that being said, since this topic has been discussing the photograph comparisons between Anna Anderson and Anastasia, I would argue that photographic comparisons prove nothing.  While there have been experts who have shown that Anna Anderson is not Anastasia due to photographic comparisons, there have also been experts who have shown that Anna Anderson is Anastasia due to photographic comparisons.  The DNA, therefore, is what has the final answer.

I agree with you about photographic comparisons, they are pretty much meaningless other than a fun exercise since they are so subjective. The DNA indeed had and has the final word, as it does in many cases.

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 24, 2008, 12:05:24 PM

What shocks me the most on Anna Anderson was that she knew that Grand Duke Ernest was at Tsarskoye Selo around 1916.  That was something not many Polish peasants would have known.  How then did Anna Anderson know that? 

There was already a book published in Germany in 1922 "In the Face of the Revolution" (B. Himmelstjerna, "Im Angesicht der Revolution", 1922, the publisher is Steeler) that openly accused Ernie of making the trip and claiming to have facts to back it up. So, the story was out there THREE years before she dropped the 'bomb'. So there goes that 'shocker.'

Being available in Germany in 1922, there is a chance AA could have seen it or known about. If she herself didn't, one of her supporters, such as Von Kliest or Rathlef, could have, and told her to use the trip story.

However, as Helen said, there is no proof the trip ever even happened.

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 25, 2008, 05:41:01 AM
Quite correct Annie. As for Princess Margaret at least she was completely royal and not a complete fraud.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 25, 2008, 09:28:27 AM
As for Princess Margaret at least she was completely royal and not a complete fraud.

My point was that behavior doesn't always constitute birth-right. Princesses don't always behave like royalty and "peasants" can often behave like princesses.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on January 25, 2008, 09:39:01 AM


Sure, Jenn, I'll be glad to.  What shocks me the most on Anna Anderson was that she knew that Grand Duke Ernest was at Tsarskoye Selo around 1916.  That was something not many Polish peasants would have known.  How then did Anna Anderson know that?  She had to have some inside information from someone, because she couldn't have read it in any book.


Anna Manahan did not "know" that Ernst-Ludwig (not Ernest) was at Tsarskoie Selo in 1916, because there is in fact not one piece of genuine evidence he actually WAS there.  There are in fact only two possible windows of time the trip could have occurred, and Nicholas' time is accounted for by the record evidence.  Most saliently, of the literally hundreds of people who would necessarily have had to have SEEN Ernst Ludwig at the Palace (given the way the Palace worked), there is not one single first hand report that he was there.  General Spiridovitch was still in charge of personal security for Nicholas, he would have KNOWN about the trip, yet, oddly he never said anything about it in the years after the Revolution, in any of his exhaustive works or even in his papers (which are in the Yale University Library).  The only two sources who say the trip "happened" were not actually even THERE, but say that someone "told them that they had seen Ernst Ludwig at the AP".

There is no document in either Russia or Germany that even makes mention of the trip, much less confirms it happened.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 25, 2008, 12:00:51 PM
Hi Cody, thank you for your response; I'll defer to the members who offered their feedback re the 1916 trip since I am just now learning about the event, or non-event as it were.

I've enjoyed the photo comparison. I'll admit when I first looked at Kurth's site, I had a "holy cow!" reaction to a few of those pictures, but then I put on my glasses. Annie's feature-by-feature facial deconstruction was the perfect rebuttal.

Jenn

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 25, 2008, 12:48:55 PM

Anna Manahan did not "know" that Ernst-Ludwig (not Ernest) was at Tsarskoie Selo in 1916, because there is in fact not one piece of genuine evidence he actually WAS there.  There are in fact only two possible windows of time the trip could have occurred, and Nicholas' time is accounted for by the record evidence.  Most saliently, of the literally hundreds of people who would necessarily have had to have SEEN Ernst Ludwig at the Palace (given the way the Palace worked), there is not one single first hand report that he was there.  General Spiridovitch was still in charge of personal security for Nicholas, he would have KNOWN about the trip, yet, oddly he never said anything about it in the years after the Revolution, in any of his exhaustive works or even in his papers (which are in the Yale University Library).  The only two sources who say the trip "happened" were not actually even THERE, but say that someone "told them that they had seen Ernst Ludwig at the AP".

There is no document in either Russia or Germany that even makes mention of the trip, much less confirms it happened.

I'm basically seeing the same thing, when I went back and did some research on it.  Referring to Massie's book, The Romanovs, it states that history has no record of Ernst trip to Russia.  However, Massie doesn't rule out the slight chance that it could have happened.  Nevertheless, you're right that the person who told about the trip were not there to witness it--the kaiser's stepson and daughter-in-law mentioned the trip 50 years later, although the information was to come from the kaiser (Massie 177-178).
Still, I do wonder if it could be possible.  Germany did fall two years later.  Maybe the kaiser was aware of what was happening, and he wanted to try and get out of the situation.  I'm thinking of email a former professor, whose strength is German History, and get his point of view.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 25, 2008, 01:21:06 PM
The fact that there is no evidence of the trip makes me even more sure that AA and/or her supporters got the story from "In the Face of the Revolution" (B. Himmelstjerna, "Im Angesicht der Revolution", 1922, the publisher is Steeler) and tried to use it to make it look like she had some kind of 'inside information' to boost her claim.

AA was famous for character assassination of those who denied her: Ernie was a 'spy', Sophie B. a 'traitor', Felix Y. tried to kill her, Mountbatten poisoned Rathlef and Leuctenberg, none of which are true)

But, even IF Ernie did go to Russia, which he didn't, I don't think it makes him a guilty of treason. During the American Civil War, Lincoln's wife's brothers, who were in the Confederate army, were visitors to the Washington, DC- to see their sister, no political intrigue.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 25, 2008, 02:05:14 PM

AA was famous for character assassination of those who denied her: Ernie was a 'spy', Sophie B. a 'traitor', Felix Y. tried to kill her, Mountbatten poisoned Rathlef and Leuctenberg, none of which are true)


And don't forget another one: Olga A knew AA was her niece but denied her because she wanted to get her hands on the money...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 25, 2008, 05:04:33 PM
A complete fraud from beginning to end. You have to wonder about the bizarre behaviour of those who supported and continue to support the fraud. Examine the vast majority of them and money appears to be their motive. Certainly interfering with the truth never got in their way.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on January 25, 2008, 05:29:12 PM

Anna Manahan did not "know" that Ernst-Ludwig (not Ernest) was at Tsarskoie Selo in 1916, because there is in fact not one piece of genuine evidence he actually WAS there.  There are in fact only two possible windows of time the trip could have occurred, and Nicholas' time is accounted for by the record evidence.  Most saliently, of the literally hundreds of people who would necessarily have had to have SEEN Ernst Ludwig at the Palace (given the way the Palace worked), there is not one single first hand report that he was there.  General Spiridovitch was still in charge of personal security for Nicholas, he would have KNOWN about the trip, yet, oddly he never said anything about it in the years after the Revolution, in any of his exhaustive works or even in his papers (which are in the Yale University Library).  The only two sources who say the trip "happened" were not actually even THERE, but say that someone "told them that they had seen Ernst Ludwig at the AP".

There is no document in either Russia or Germany that even makes mention of the trip, much less confirms it happened.

I'm basically seeing the same thing, when I went back and did some research on it.  Referring to Massie's book, The Romanovs, it states that history has no record of Ernst trip to Russia.  However, Massie doesn't rule out the slight chance that it could have happened.  Nevertheless, you're right that the person who told about the trip were not there to witness it--the kaiser's stepson and daughter-in-law mentioned the trip 50 years later, although the information was to come from the kaiser (Massie 177-178).
Still, I do wonder if it could be possible.  Germany did fall two years later.  Maybe the kaiser was aware of what was happening, and he wanted to try and get out of the situation.  I'm thinking of email a former professor, whose strength is German History, and get his point of view.

I don't think there can be any doubt the Kaiser wanted out of the situation. On the 6th February 1915 the Crown Prince wrote to Ernst Ludwig with his own opinion that only England and France would benefit from continuing conflict between Germany and Russia, and urging Ernst Ludwig to "make contact with Nicky and advise him to come to an amicable agreement with us....Our diplomats are so stupid and incompetent that one must put in one's own hand in order to achieve a favourable outcome." This resulted in the Grand Duke's sending an emmissary to Stockholm to await contact from the Russians - which never came. The Empress wrote to her brother instructing him to call his man home. But I don't think one necessarily has to assume that EL gave up at that point: a year later he was still writing to his relatives talking of his hopes for world peace, and it remained a preoccupation for the rest of his life.
To me the Crown Prince's letter is highly significent in linking the imperial family to the peace moves, and in specifically instructing EL to become personally involved. It may perhaps explain why the Crown Princess was always convinced that the trip took place, even if she was misremembering the details of a less direct peace move.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 25, 2008, 06:20:12 PM

AA was famous for character assassination of those who denied her: Ernie was a 'spy', Sophie B. a 'traitor', Felix Y. tried to kill her, Mountbatten poisoned Rathlef and Leuctenberg, none of which are true)


And don't forget another one: Olga A knew AA was her niece but denied her because she wanted to get her hands on the money...

Oh yes, poor Olga being labeled a greedy moneygrabber who turned her back on her own niece. I have often thought, IF AA had been AN, it would have been more beneficial for Olga to accept her, that way if she won she'd have given her a lot more money than she ever got from the family! That's one thing that's so silly about it-Olga was allegedly 'bought off' but she had no money, and was not one of the more favored members of the family! It's so obvious the real reason Olga denied AA is because she really wasn't AN.

 Just like Sophie B. was supposed to have betrayed the family in exchange for her freedom, yet spent over a year running and hiding from the Bolsheviks and only getting out of Russia when she met up with the British military. Sigh, most of the junk the AA supporters came up with to villify those who  denied her didn't even make sense!

Here is another quote from Olga's Vorres bio:

"But the whole story is palpably false. I was convinced then, as I am now, that it is so from beginning to end. Just think of the supposed rescuers - vanishing into thin air, as it were! Had Nicky's daughter been really saved, her rescuers would have known just what it meant to them. Every royal house in Europe would have rewarded them. Why, I am sure that my mother would not have hesitated to empty her jewel-box in gratitude. There is not one tittle of genuine evidence in the story."

Brilliant, I never even thought of that! If anyone had the real Anastasia they'd surely have used her immediately to get money. But course, the rescuers, being ficticious, did nothing.

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 26, 2008, 06:15:43 AM
It is also worth noting that Christian X sent emissaries to Russia in an effort to end the war and was rejected. Remember he was a first cousin of George V and Nicholas II and his wife Alexandrine was the sister of the German Crown Princess. He was so excellently placed to act as a mediator. Sadly Nicholas II, yet again, rejected a sensible outcome that may well have saved his throne and the lives of his wife and all of his children. 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 26, 2008, 12:40:54 PM
That is interesting, I never knew about the Danish relatives also trying to help.

Back to photographic comparisons, here are a few more using some different pictures:

AN and AA

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/anaafaces4.jpg)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/anaafaces3.jpg)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/anaafaces2.jpg)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aaanlips.jpg)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aaside1.jpg)

FS and AA

This is of course the world champ, IMO, showing FS looks exactly like AA

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/franisan.jpg)

but you can see the features, face shape and hair part match in them all

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafsfaces3.jpg)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafsfaces.jpg)

(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc148/anniekit/Romanovs/aafsoxlee.jpg)

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 26, 2008, 08:32:17 PM
Yes Annie unless somebody was like Blind Freddie it was extremely obvious before any DNA tests were revealed that Anderson was not Grand Duchess Anastasia. To think these people thought that people could be as stupid as they were and to believe not only the photographic rubbish but everything they came out with. It is utterly outrageous and quite deliberately criminal.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AnastasiaEvidence on January 27, 2008, 06:38:50 PM
Exactly Dmitri! The DNA revealed everything it proved that AA was a fraud and that she was FS NOT AA. In those photos that Annie just posted you can see the complete differences AA and Anastasia have. Notice that AA's eyes are very wide, and her lips are also too think. The facial features they have are totally different; AA/FS doesn't have any bangs and Anastasia does. Her headline is completly different from Anastasia's. Sometimes the photos could have been changed to make her features similar to Anastasia. AA/FS doesn't have the same features of Alexandra, like Anastasia does.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 28, 2008, 11:28:17 AM
Yes Annie unless somebody was like Blind Freddie it was extremely obvious before any DNA tests were revealed that Anderson was not Grand Duchess Anastasia. To think these people thought that people could be as stupid as they were and to believe not only the photographic rubbish but everything they came out with. It is utterly outrageous and quite deliberately criminal.

I guess apparently that you think the photographic experts, who upon making comparisons, considered Anna Anderson to be Grand Duchess Anastasia were somehow unqualified?  Photographic evidence alone creates two sides--one side that Anna Anderson is not Anastasia, and one side that Anna Anderson is Anastasia.  It is the DNA that has the final say.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on January 28, 2008, 11:31:42 AM
"photographic comparison" is not and "expert" science.  It is totally subjective, and you can always find some "expert" to get the result you want, it isn't at all "independent".  Two "experts" can get polar opposite "results".  DNA can be replicated by ANYONE and will always get the same result.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 28, 2008, 12:00:30 PM
"photographic comparison" is not and "expert" science.  It is totally subjective, and you can always find some "expert" to get the result you want, it isn't at all "independent".  Two "experts" can get polar opposite "results".  DNA can be replicated by ANYONE and will always get the same result.

Thank you for that statement.  Anyway, I thought I'd post this message for the group.  My former professor, who I emailed about Grand Duke Ernst's possible trip to Russia sent his reply.  It's very short, so I'll post the entire message:
Cody, sounds pretty far out to me [the grand duke's trip].  The Germans thought they were winning in 1916, especially against Russia.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 28, 2008, 12:17:34 PM
The most modern photographic test done on AA, by Geoffrey Oxlee in the 90's, showed her to be 100% FS. Oxlee is so respected in Britain he has earned awards from military intelligence, and is called as an expert witness in many forensic legal cases.

It's also true that Otto Reche, a Nazi with some very odd ideas about anthropology, was discredited by his peers, most namely Robert Leakey. As for the others? I hate to join the conspiracy theorits, but IMO the pictures look SO unalike in bone structure- especially the chin- I do wonder if some of them weren't promised a cut from Grandanor corp. or something? AA supporters always accuse those who denied her of being 'paid off' how do we know it wasn't the other way around? Can't be proven one way or the other.  Either that or they were just really, really wrong.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 28, 2008, 01:24:24 PM
Thank you for that statement.  Anyway, I thought I'd post this message for the group.  My former professor, who I emailed about Grand Duke Ernst's possible trip to Russia sent his reply.  It's very short, so I'll post the entire message:
Cody, sounds pretty far out to me [the grand duke's trip].  The Germans thought they were winning in 1916, especially against Russia.

These are the sentiments of most reputable historians. IMO, the GD's trip is an absolute fantasy originated by some unknown sources and enthusiastically picked up by FS, who was at the time trying to come up with information no one else knew (supposedly) in order to promote her claims...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on January 28, 2008, 02:52:21 PM
Quite right Helen.  All the more since we now know Anna Manahan was NOT GD ANR, her supposed "knowledge" of the alleged visit of Ernst Ludwig had to have been something she heard or read, and NOT any genuine knowledge of actual events.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 28, 2008, 02:55:58 PM
Quite right Helen.  All the more since we now know Anna Manahan was NOT GD ANR, her supposed "knowledge" of the alleged visit of Ernst Ludwig had to have been something she heard or read, and NOT any genuine knowledge of actual events.

That's right, that's why I always bring up that there was a German book published in 1922 alleging the trip, also a Russian book at that time. This is where AA got her 'knowledge' (the idea to mention the trip) but unfortunately over the years so many supporters used and still try to use this so called 'inside information' as 'proof' she was AN. AA mentioned it in 1925, three years after the story was out there, yet supporters always try to use it as some shocking special info that favored her claim. (it has been only recently I found out about the books, a German poster here who owned a copy told us about it) That is why, the majority of time when the trip is mentioned, it's in connection with AA and her accusations. But again, the there is no real proof of the trip.

The more we learn, the faker AA gets all the time (even addition to the DNA)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on January 28, 2008, 04:34:23 PM
"photographic comparison" is not and "expert" science.  It is totally subjective, and you can always find some "expert" to get the result you want, it isn't at all "independent".  Two "experts" can get polar opposite "results".  DNA can be replicated by ANYONE and will always get the same result.

Thank you for that statement.  Anyway, I thought I'd post this message for the group.  My former professor, who I emailed about Grand Duke Ernst's possible trip to Russia sent his reply.  It's very short, so I'll post the entire message:
Cody, sounds pretty far out to me [the grand duke's trip].  The Germans thought they were winning in 1916, especially against Russia.

Note though that the rumours about the Grand Duke started in 19*15.* It was in 1915 that the German court felt compelled to issue a denial; in 1915 that the Grand Duchess Elisabeth was accused of hiding her brother in Moscow, and in 1915 that EL's fully-documented (in the Empress's letters as well as the German Crown Prince's) attempt to get involved in secret diplomacy occurred.

I wonder if anyone here can name the "reputable historian" who did the research leading to the revelation of the Crown Prince's letters to Ernst, as posted by me in another thread, and let us all know what his conclusions were.....

Did Marco Polo go to China? It's a question reptable historians will argue about until Kingdom Come, and whatever the fun of the fight none would ever be so foolish as to pretend to have found the final answer.....

With that I think I will bid you all adieu.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 28, 2008, 04:57:56 PM
Note though that the rumours about the Grand Duke started in 19*15.* It was in 1915 that the German court felt compelled to issue a denial; in 1915 that the Grand Duchess Elisabeth was accused of hiding her brother in Moscow ...

We are aware that GD Elisabeth was accused of hiding her brother the grand duke in her monastery in 1915, but she also proved at the time that this wasn't the case by (if I remember correctly) letting the mob in and showing them that she was not hiding anyone there, let alone her brother. It sounds like the rumor was conceived at this time and later propagated further by someone(s), which is often the case with rumors and/or conspiracy theories. FS obviously took advantage of this and jumped on the bandwagon. But the fact that the rumor started as early as 1915 still doesn't make it anything more than a rumor. I'm sorry, I don't really understand the point you are trying to make here about the rumor starting in 1915...

What 1915 letters are you referring to, would you post some excerpts please?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on January 28, 2008, 06:00:46 PM
I'm a bit perplexed myself by what 1915 "rumors" have to do to support a 1916 visit myself.  Since the 1915 discussions were just rumors, as Janet A. acknowledges, why is this "evidence" to support a 1916 visit? It would follow logically that the 1916 allegations were also just rumors as well.  I must repeat that the only evidence, to use the word loosely and not imply how compelling it is as evidence, point to only two small windows of time in early 1916, we have the court calendars and Nicholas was either booked up with other people (none of whom report seeing EL) or actually not even IN the Palace at the time.  Again, the real smoking gun to me is Spiridovitch, was IN the Palace at the time in question, knew EL from visits he made with the IF to Darmstadt as well as EL's visits to the IF before the war, and Spridivotch was well aware of where Nicholas was and with whom he might have met at the times in question. WHY would he remain silent about this important point long after the revolution? Why is it not even anywhere in his papers, which are at Yale??

As for marco Polo, at least HE himself admitted to going to China. EL never admitted a secret Russia Visit.  Further, there is at least SOME extrinsic evidence to support Marco Polo DID go to China. (His death inventory included the golden Chinese tablet of passage, Polo's escorting a chinese princess to her wedding was confirmed by Persian historians and the astronomical drawings Polo made purportedly on his voyage have been shown to be so accurate that given the lack of astronomical expertise at the time, they could only have been made at the place and time Polo claimed.) There is ZERO extrinsic evidence EL went to Russia. Nothing but innuendo and rumor. NOT one person who was physcially present at the time and place ever made mention of the visit. EVER.

I'd buy Polo going to China long before Ernst Ludwig in Tsarskoe Selo in 1916
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 29, 2008, 01:20:37 AM
To be fair, on those who support the grand duke's trip to Russia, I offer the following explanation--regardless of whether or not, I personally agree with it (I'm playing "devil's advocate").  Perhaps, the grand duke was worried about what would become of his sister, brother-in-law, nieces, and nephews, and decided to act?  Furthermore, Kurth's argument that the grand duke would like to have some authority to his place restored in the Weimar Republic, could have affected his judgement.  Don't forget, Wilhelm II did declare war on the cousin of his kinsmen.

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on January 29, 2008, 04:51:45 AM
OK, I'm going to have one more shot at this topic..... ;D

The evidence I posted on the Crown Prince is actually in this same thread, post 227. Given that, and given the rumours current at the time, which may have been predicated on no more than leaked knowledge of EL's emmissary to Sweden I am simply open to the possibility that if a visit to Russia occured, it was in 1915, rather than the 1916 mentioned by a couple of tenuous witnesses and fixed on firmly by Peter Kurth and/or the Hamburg hearings, I believe.

And, yes - given the mercurial, emotional temperament of the Grand Duke it is just as possible that he went as much for his sister's sake as for Germany's.

As I state in post 227, I have no prejudice as to whether the visit took place or not - but I am not prepared to state categorically that it did not, and I don't know that other historians do either.

As a final clarification: to me, Ernst Ludwig's vacillating opinions and the "Kaiser's personal monarchy" are far more interesting than Anna Anderson, and it's from this perspective that I take any view at all on any putative trip....

Now I will bow out. I actually find posting here quite hard - it seems to take a while for stuff to go through....
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 29, 2008, 06:19:08 PM
  Perhaps, the grand duke was worried about what would become of his sister, brother-in-law, nieces, and nephews, and decided to act?

I really don't think anyone foresaw their doom, even King George V denied them asylum. And, as has been mentioned, at that time, the Russians were winning!

Quote
Furthermore, Kurth's argument that the grand duke would like to have some authority to his place restored in the Weimar Republic, could have affected his judgement.  Don't forget, Wilhelm II did declare war on the cousin of his kinsmen.



You've got to realize, anything Kurth says on this must be aimed at getting validity for AA's accusations in order to 'prove' her claim (which as we have discussed, they do not)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 30, 2008, 12:27:52 PM
  Perhaps, the grand duke was worried about what would become of his sister, brother-in-law, nieces, and nephews, and decided to act?

I really don't think anyone foresaw their doom, even King George V denied them asylum. And, as has been mentioned, at that time, the Russians were winning!

Quote
Furthermore, Kurth's argument that the grand duke would like to have some authority to his place restored in the Weimar Republic, could have affected his judgement.  Don't forget, Wilhelm II did declare war on the cousin of his kinsmen.



You've got to realize, anything Kurth says on this must be aimed at getting validity for AA's accusations in order to 'prove' her claim (which as we have discussed, they do not)

To answer both points, I can't remember if it was King George V who denied the imperial family, or his prime minister at that time.  Somehow if memory serves me correctly, George V wanted to offer sanctions to Nicholas, but his prime minister pressured him not to.  As for Kurth, I know that he is an Anna Anderson apologist, but he also does a good job giving both sides of the argument time.  At the same time your statement "anything Kurth says on this must be aimed at getting validity for AA's accusations in order to 'prove' her claim," I could easily change that to everything you say is to deny Anna Anderson her claim, because you're an anti-Anna Anderson apologist.  Nevertheless, the DNA is on your side, so do try to be more objective.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 30, 2008, 01:00:12 PM



To answer both points, I can't remember if it was King George V who denied the imperial family, or his prime minister at that time.  Somehow if memory serves me correctly, George V wanted to offer sanctions to Nicholas, but his prime minister pressured him not to.

Yes he was advised against it, but it was still he himself who made the decision.

Quote
As for Kurth, I know that he is an Anna Anderson apologist, but he also does a good job giving both sides of the argument time.  At the same time your statement "anything Kurth says on this must be aimed at getting validity for AA's accusations in order to 'prove' her claim," I could easily change that to everything you say is to deny Anna Anderson her claim, because you're an anti-Anna Anderson apologist.  Nevertheless, the DNA is on your side, so do try to be more objective.

He's more than an apologist, he's still a believer. As far as 'doing a good job with both sides', I will say that his book is far more fair than Lovell's. But I have also found out interesting info from other sources that were very damaging to her case that he omitted (cherry picking? Just a guess!) However, unfortunately, from reading many of his statements in message board posts in the last few years, it appears he has become obsessed with disproving 'the FS theory' and still demanding AA is AN. So yeah, I really can't accept Kurth investigating the trip for any other reason than to validate AA's claim.  My personal take on it is that as long as it was still a 'mystery' he would give value to both sides, (which is why his book was as fair as it was) but now that he has to fight the DNA, he's really gone all pro AA.(sorry I have just been too involved in this and seen too much from personal experience to believe otherwise)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: LisaDavidson on January 30, 2008, 02:32:09 PM



To answer both points, I can't remember if it was King George V who denied the imperial family, or his prime minister at that time.  Somehow if memory serves me correctly, George V wanted to offer sanctions to Nicholas, but his prime minister pressured him not to.

Yes he was advised against it, but it was still he himself who made the decision.

Quote
As for Kurth, I know that he is an Anna Anderson apologist, but he also does a good job giving both sides of the argument time.  At the same time your statement "anything Kurth says on this must be aimed at getting validity for AA's accusations in order to 'prove' her claim," I could easily change that to everything you say is to deny Anna Anderson her claim, because you're an anti-Anna Anderson apologist.  Nevertheless, the DNA is on your side, so do try to be more objective.

He's more than an apologist, he's still a believer. As far as 'doing a good job with both sides', I will say that his book is far more fair than Lovell's. But I have also found out interesting info from other sources that were very damaging to her case that he omitted (cherry picking? Just a guess!) However, unfortunately, from reading many of his statements in message board posts in the last few years, it appears he has become obsessed with disproving 'the FS theory' and still demanding AA is AN. So yeah, I really can't accept Kurth investigating the trip for any other reason than to validate AA's claim.  My personal take on it is that as long as it was still a 'mystery' he would give value to both sides, (which is why his book was as fair as it was) but now that he has to fight the DNA, he's really gone all pro AA.(sorry I have just been too involved in this and seen too much from personal experience to believe otherwise)

Annie:

I have known Peter Kurth for a long time. As recently as last year, he told me that he does not dispute the DNA evidence that AA was not Grand Duchess Anastasia. He is vehement that AA was not Franziska Schanzkowska. That is his point of disagreement. And, he is not an apologist for AA, he was her biographer, and that book has held up amazingly well other than the fact that she was not who she thought she was.

Peter's posts often get deleted from this Forum for a myriad of reasons, and that's the only reason I am posting this. He cannot explain his views himself and I think we will leave it at that.

Lisa
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 30, 2008, 02:34:11 PM
As recently as last year, he told me that he does not dispute the DNA evidence that AA was not Grand Duchess Anastasia.

Oh, but he does. Ask him again. 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 30, 2008, 02:40:59 PM
As recently as last year, he told me that he does not dispute the DNA evidence that AA was not Grand Duchess Anastasia.

Oh, but he does. Ask him again. 

What he doubts is that the intestines came from AA. His position is identical to Schweitzer's which is well documented here.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 30, 2008, 02:42:51 PM
As recently as last year, he told me that he does not dispute the DNA evidence that AA was not Grand Duchess Anastasia.

Oh, but he does. Ask him again. 

Maybe I will do that.  I wonder if he has an email address on his website?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 30, 2008, 02:50:19 PM
As recently as last year, he told me that he does not dispute the DNA evidence that AA was not Grand Duchess Anastasia.

Oh, but he does. Ask him again. 

Maybe I will do that.  I wonder if he has an email address on his website?

He's not at all hard to find, he posts all over the place wherever AA is being discussed. You can currently see him on AGRBear's forum:

http://agrbear.hyperboards.com

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 30, 2008, 02:52:06 PM
As recently as last year, he told me that he does not dispute the DNA evidence that AA was not Grand Duchess Anastasia.

Oh, but he does. Ask him again. 

Maybe I will do that.  I wonder if he has an email address on his website?

It may be somewhere on this site: http://www.peterkurth.com/ANNA-ANASTASIA%20NOTES%20ON%20FRANZISKA%20SCHANZKOWSKA.htm, where PK argues that the DNA is wrong (was contaminated/switched/someone's else's) and that Anna Anderson was indeed Anastasia, regardless of DNA results ("...no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity...") ... 

Please let us know if you get in touch with him, Cody, and get a definitive answer. I will be the first to apologize if he indeed tells you that he accepts the DNA results and accepts that Anna Anderson was not Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 30, 2008, 03:00:00 PM
Kurth's position is identical to Schweitzer's. They call the intestine sample 'putative' and do not accept that its source was Anna Manahan's body, though no one can give an definitive answer as to where else it came from, or how it came to be swapped. So a technical acceptance of the DNA tests is not the same thing as believing that the tests proved AA was not AN. They still believe AA was AN. They do not accept that AA was FS, and that something strange must have occured in order for her DNA to match that of Franziska's great nephew, Carl Maucher.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 30, 2008, 03:02:19 PM
Kurth's position is identical to Schweitzer's. They call the intestine sample 'putative' and do not accept that its source was Anna Manahan's body, though no one can give an definitive answer as to where else it came from, or how it came to be swapped. So a technical acceptance of the DNA tests is not the same thing as believing that the tests proved AA was not AN. They still believe AA was AN. They do not accept that AA was FS, and that something strange must have occured in order for her DNA to match that of Franziska's great nephew, Carl Maucher.

This is my understanding too, but let's give him the benefit of the doubt and see if Cody can get the most current answer directly from PK.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 30, 2008, 03:03:51 PM
Kurth's position is identical to Schweitzer's. They call the intestine sample 'putative' and do not accept that its source was Anna Manahan's body, though no one can give an definitive answer as to where else it came from, or how it came to be swapped. So a technical acceptance of the DNA tests is not the same thing as believing that the tests proved AA was not AN. They still believe AA was AN. They do not accept that AA was FS, and that something strange must have occured in order for her DNA to match that of Franziska's great nephew, Carl Maucher.

This is my understanding too, but let's give him the benefit of the doubt and see if Cody can get the most current answer directly from PK.

If he's changed his mind, he must have done so since this morning :-X
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 30, 2008, 03:04:34 PM
Annie, AGRBear has her own forum? Then Kurth has found a safe haven indeed!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 30, 2008, 03:07:30 PM
Annie, AGRBear has her own forum? Then Kurth has found a safe haven indeed!

Yes, indeed.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 30, 2008, 03:09:55 PM
If he's changed his mind, he must have done so since this morning :-X

Did he post something somewhere this morning where he once again insisted that Anna Anderson was Anastasia? Somehow I'm not really surprised. It's his perogative to believe whatever he does, but he needs to realize that it does not help his credibility one bit....
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 30, 2008, 03:44:04 PM
If he's changed his mind, he must have done so since this morning :-X

Did he post something somewhere this morning where he once again insisted that Anna Anderson was Anastasia? Somehow I'm not really surprised. It's his perogative to believe whatever he does, but he needs to realize that it does not help his credibility one bit....

Yes, that is sad but true. I would hope he'd do the honorable thing and write a final chapter about the DNA and how she turned out not to be AN. This way he may even be able to get a new issue of his book printed and distributed. It would be a better service to history to do it that way and complete the story than to cling to a dream that has faded and an ideal that has been disproven- especially since arguing against science and condoning conpiracy theories, as you say, do nothing for one's credibility. Perhaps he feels that if AA is FS his work was pointless and he has no legacy and this is why he still champions her cause, but it doesn't have to be like that.  He would have a better reputation as a serious historian if he'd just admit the truth and add it to the end of his book (at least IMO)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 30, 2008, 03:53:16 PM
I would hope he'd do the honorable thing and write a final chapter about the DNA and how she turned out not to be AN.

I can almost guarantee that he won't. But stranger things have happened...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 30, 2008, 04:09:54 PM
I didn't read Kurth's article, "Anna-Anastasia: Notes on 'Franziska Schanzkowska,'" word for word, but what I did see is that he agrees with the DNA results that Anna Anderson is not Grand Duchess Anastasia, but he disagrees that Anna Anderson was in fact Franziska Schanzkowska.  I sent him an email, so hopefully he'll give me an answer.  If not, I may go to that forum Annie mentioned, and see if I can find him.
With that being said, I've read previous posts on here that Kurth holds to a position that the DNA was corrupted.  For all we know, maybe it was.  I'm not a scientist, but from what I understand it doesn't take much to corrupt a DNA sample--if it's not properly cared for.  Still, I would think that other tests would have been done by now, but more than likely the scientific community considers the matter closed.  I suppose that if he does respond back to me, I can ask him if there has been any attempt to have Anna Anderson's DNA tested again, or if any other scientist has thought that Anna Anderson's DNA was corrupted.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on January 30, 2008, 04:30:45 PM
Cody,
I have spoken to Dr. Teri Melton of Mitotyping Technologies, who did the original Anna Manahan/Carl Maucher testing. There is no doubt, in her mind, or anyone of the other scientists that the original sample could NOT have been "corrupted" and as far as they are all concerned, in her exact words "there is no need to re test the samples as you will get the exact same results".

The reason the samples could not have been corrupted is simple.  The Anna Manahan sample was tested first and sequenced BEFORE the Carl Maucher sample was even taken or sequenced.  As a result, nobody could have possible known the Maucher sequence OR contaminated the Anna Manahan sample with Maucher mtDNA.  The fact that the Anna Manahan sample was a 99.5% likelihood MATCH to the Carl Maucher DNA is of itself proof to the scientific community that the testing was accurate. You see, simply put, if the sample was "corrupted" there couldn't have been any sequence stable enough to sequence; "if" the sample was "tainted" by outside DNA it would have never matched the Maucher sample to such a high degree of certainty (unless one of the scientists handling the sample was themselves a very close cousin to Maucher (they weren't) and the fact that FOUR different labs all got the exact same results rules out the possibility of corruption, contamination or scientific error.

The science is simple and clear. Anyone who thinks the Anna Manahan testing was corrupted or contaminated simply just doesn't grasp the simple science of it all.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on January 30, 2008, 05:47:12 PM
If he's changed his mind, he must have done so since this morning :-X

Did he post something somewhere this morning where he once again insisted that Anna Anderson was Anastasia? Somehow I'm not really surprised. It's his perogative to believe whatever he does, but he needs to realize that it does not help his credibility one bit....

Yes, that is sad but true. I would hope he'd do the honorable thing and write a final chapter about the DNA and how she turned out not to be AN. This way he may even be able to get a new issue of his book printed and distributed. It would be a better service to history to do it that way and complete the story than to cling to a dream that has faded and an ideal that has been disproven- especially since arguing against science and condoning conpiracy theories, as you say, do nothing for one's credibility. Perhaps he feels that if AA is FS his work was pointless and he has no legacy and this is why he still champions her cause, but it doesn't have to be like that.  He would have a better reputation as a serious historian if he'd just admit the truth and add it to the end of his book (at least IMO)

He DOES have a reputation as a serious historian; and when people employ hm to talk on their talk shows about his latest book and this and that I seriously doubt they are googling on the internet to find out what people think of his opinions on Anna Anderson, based on a book written in 1983.

Another point to ponder is this: that after the DNA results appeared, various people hounded PK around newsgroups like ATR, demanding that he APOLOGISE for his opinions in his (pre-DNA) book and publicly flagellate himself for being wrong. That's my impression anyway. Given that, are you surprised someone might get hyper-defensive over what they wrote and might cling to it tenaciously....?

BTW, like I say, I don't believe in or care about Anna Anderson one iota, nor do I know Peter Kurth personally, but I have followed enough of this debate over the years to have a view on what I've seen as a cultural and historiographical phenomenon.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on January 30, 2008, 06:18:26 PM
I didn't read Kurth's article, "Anna-Anastasia: Notes on 'Franziska Schanzkowska,'" word for word, but what I did see is that he agrees with the DNA results that Anna Anderson is not Grand Duchess Anastasia, but he disagrees that Anna Anderson was in fact Franziska Schanzkowska. 
Well, actually in this particular article, while he does argue the Schankowska angle, he never states that he accepts that AA was not Anastasia, in fact he clearly says that he still is convinced that she was genuine. He does it in a very ambiguous way, but if you read between the lines it is clear that he is saying that he does not believe the DNA results which showed that AA could not have been Anastasia...

"For me—just because of some tests—I cannot one day say, `Oh, well, I was wrong.'  It isn't that simple.  I think it's a shame that a great legend, a wonderful adventure, an astonishing story that inspired so many people, including myself, should suddenly be reduced to a little glass dish'.” 


"...I knew the results of Dr. Gill's analysis for several weeks before they were announced.  In October 1994, from Lenox Hill Hospital, I issued a statement, which I quote here in edited form: 
I knew Anna Anderson for more than ten years and have been acquainted with virtually everyone involved in her quest for recognition over the last quarter-century:  friends, lawyers, companions, neighbors, journalists, historians, Russian and European royalty and aristocratic families—a wide array of competent witnesses who didn't hesitate to acknowledge her as the daughter of the tsar.  My experience of her character, my thorough knowledge of her case, and, it seems to me, probability and common sense all convince me that she was indeed Anastasia of Russia.

This conviction, while obviously challenged by today's announcement, remains unshaken.  As a layman, I’m not in a position to dispute Dr. Gill's findings; had the results revealed only that Mrs. Anderson was not a member of the Romanov family, I might have been able to accept them, if not easily, then at least eventually.  I am unable, however, by any persuasion of science or forensic testing, to credit the identification of Mrs. Anderson with Franziska Schanzkowska.

I can state without fear of reasonable contradiction that no one who knew Anna Anderson closely, who lived in her company for months and years, who tended and treated her through multiple illnesses as her doctor or nurse, who spoke with her at length and in detail about the stages of her life, who observed her comportment, carriage and demeanor and heard her converse intelligently on many subjects in several languages—I affirm that no one who knew her as I and others did can believe that she was born in an East Prussian farming village as the daughter and sister of beet farmers.
Anastasia (1913; 1908) and Anna Anderson (1953; 1949). In 1920, during her incarceration at the Dalldorf Asylum in Berlin, most of Mrs. Anderson’s front teeth were removed; for this reason, she tended to cover her mouth when speaking and photographed.  It was noted on examination of the skeletons unearthed at Ekaterinburg in 1991 that the teeth of the Russian imperial family were in bad condition, sharing "a special family dental disease.” Dental records of the imperial family have not been found.

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind.
"

I don't think there is any question about what he saying there. In any case, the best thing to do is ask him directly, as in "yes or no" and see what he tells you. Good luck, I hope you are able to get in contact with him.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Belochka on January 30, 2008, 07:51:50 PM

This conviction, while obviously challenged by today's announcement, remains unshaken.
 
Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind."

I don't think there is any question about what he saying there.

Until those public statements are retracted then the general public cannot be compelled to believe that Mr Kurth has re-evaluated his position.

Margarita
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on January 30, 2008, 09:28:56 PM
What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive 

William Shakespeare.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Belochka on January 30, 2008, 10:21:23 PM
What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive 

William Shakespeare.

Oh what a web it is that eliminates the truth.

Margarita
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: J_Kendrick on January 30, 2008, 10:49:00 PM
What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive 

William Shakespeare.

Oh what a web it is that eliminates the truth.

Margarita


... and the truth is...

"Oh, What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive" comes from the Scottish poet Sir Walter Scott... not from Shakespeare.

JK
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Belochka on January 30, 2008, 10:59:55 PM
What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive 

William Shakespeare.

Oh what a web it is that eliminates the truth.

Margarita


... and the truth is...

"Oh, What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive" comes from the Scottish poet Sir Walter Scott... not from Shakespeare.

JK

And the second truth is that the other quote was my own.

Nice to see that you still remain among us John.

Margarita
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: J_Kendrick on January 30, 2008, 11:08:11 PM
What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive 

William Shakespeare.

Oh what a web it is that eliminates the truth.

Margarita


... and the truth is...

"Oh, What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive" comes from the Scottish poet Sir Walter Scott... not from Shakespeare.

JK

And the second truth is that the other quote was my own.

Nice to see that you still remain among us John.

Margarita


;-)

JK

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on January 31, 2008, 07:36:51 AM
Thank you for correcting me.

All my life, I have been told that the quote came from Shakespeare!

And now I know the "truth"  ;-)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on January 31, 2008, 07:57:49 AM
I didn't read Kurth's article, "Anna-Anastasia: Notes on 'Franziska Schanzkowska,'" word for word, but what I did see is that he agrees with the DNA results that Anna Anderson is not Grand Duchess Anastasia, but he disagrees that Anna Anderson was in fact Franziska Schanzkowska. 
Well, actually in this particular article, while he does argue the Schankowska angle, he never states that he accepts that AA was not Anastasia, in fact he clearly says that he still is convinced that she was genuine. He does it in a very ambiguous way, but if you read between the lines it is clear that he is saying that he does not believe the DNA results which showed that AA could not have been Anastasia...

"For me—just because of some tests—I cannot one day say, `Oh, well, I was wrong.'  It isn't that simple.  I think it's a shame that a great legend, a wonderful adventure, an astonishing story that inspired so many people, including myself, should suddenly be reduced to a little glass dish'.” 


"...I knew the results of Dr. Gill's analysis for several weeks before they were announced.  In October 1994, from Lenox Hill Hospital, I issued a statement, which I quote here in edited form: 
I knew Anna Anderson for more than ten years and have been acquainted with virtually everyone involved in her quest for recognition over the last quarter-century:  friends, lawyers, companions, neighbors, journalists, historians, Russian and European royalty and aristocratic families—a wide array of competent witnesses who didn't hesitate to acknowledge her as the daughter of the tsar.  My experience of her character, my thorough knowledge of her case, and, it seems to me, probability and common sense all convince me that she was indeed Anastasia of Russia.

This conviction, while obviously challenged by today's announcement, remains unshaken.  As a layman, I’m not in a position to dispute Dr. Gill's findings; had the results revealed only that Mrs. Anderson was not a member of the Romanov family, I might have been able to accept them, if not easily, then at least eventually.  I am unable, however, by any persuasion of science or forensic testing, to credit the identification of Mrs. Anderson with Franziska Schanzkowska.

I can state without fear of reasonable contradiction that no one who knew Anna Anderson closely, who lived in her company for months and years, who tended and treated her through multiple illnesses as her doctor or nurse, who spoke with her at length and in detail about the stages of her life, who observed her comportment, carriage and demeanor and heard her converse intelligently on many subjects in several languages—I affirm that no one who knew her as I and others did can believe that she was born in an East Prussian farming village as the daughter and sister of beet farmers.
Anastasia (1913; 1908) and Anna Anderson (1953; 1949). In 1920, during her incarceration at the Dalldorf Asylum in Berlin, most of Mrs. Anderson’s front teeth were removed; for this reason, she tended to cover her mouth when speaking and photographed.  It was noted on examination of the skeletons unearthed at Ekaterinburg in 1991 that the teeth of the Russian imperial family were in bad condition, sharing "a special family dental disease.” Dental records of the imperial family have not been found.

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind.
"

I don't think there is any question about what he saying there. In any case, the best thing to do is ask him directly, as in "yes or no" and see what he tells you. Good luck, I hope you are able to get in contact with him.


I mean - really - so what?
We all have "convictions" based on our own experience and emotional understanding and beliefs which may fall in others' opinion - or even our own - somewhat short of being obejctive. No-one is compelled to agree with us. I have a friend/associate who is a very devout Catholic and who firmly accepts that Rasputin (who has written two books and several papers on) healed Alexis through prayer, and yet no-one for a second claims that this invalidates his work on Russian history, dating back to his phD thesis on Tsar Alexis in the 1960s, or tries to arraign him before an internet court for trial as a not a "reputable historian" who should renounce his heretical views.....
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 31, 2008, 09:04:38 AM
I didn't read Kurth's article, "Anna-Anastasia: Notes on 'Franziska Schanzkowska,'" word for word, but what I did see is that he agrees with the DNA results that Anna Anderson is not Grand Duchess Anastasia, but he disagrees that Anna Anderson was in fact Franziska Schanzkowska.
Well, actually in this particular article, while he does argue the Schankowska angle, he never states that he accepts that AA was not Anastasia, in fact he clearly says that he still is convinced that she was genuine. He does it in a very ambiguous way, but if you read between the lines it is clear that he is saying that he does not believe the DNA results which showed that AA could not have been Anastasia...

"For me—just because of some tests—I cannot one day say, `Oh, well, I was wrong.'  It isn't that simple.  I think it's a shame that a great legend, a wonderful adventure, an astonishing story that inspired so many people, including myself, should suddenly be reduced to a little glass dish'.” 


"...I knew the results of Dr. Gill's analysis for several weeks before they were announced.  In October 1994, from Lenox Hill Hospital, I issued a statement, which I quote here in edited form: 
I knew Anna Anderson for more than ten years and have been acquainted with virtually everyone involved in her quest for recognition over the last quarter-century:  friends, lawyers, companions, neighbors, journalists, historians, Russian and European royalty and aristocratic families—a wide array of competent witnesses who didn't hesitate to acknowledge her as the daughter of the tsar.  My experience of her character, my thorough knowledge of her case, and, it seems to me, probability and common sense all convince me that she was indeed Anastasia of Russia.

This conviction, while obviously challenged by today's announcement, remains unshaken.  As a layman, I’m not in a position to dispute Dr. Gill's findings; had the results revealed only that Mrs. Anderson was not a member of the Romanov family, I might have been able to accept them, if not easily, then at least eventually.  I am unable, however, by any persuasion of science or forensic testing, to credit the identification of Mrs. Anderson with Franziska Schanzkowska.

I can state without fear of reasonable contradiction that no one who knew Anna Anderson closely, who lived in her company for months and years, who tended and treated her through multiple illnesses as her doctor or nurse, who spoke with her at length and in detail about the stages of her life, who observed her comportment, carriage and demeanor and heard her converse intelligently on many subjects in several languages—I affirm that no one who knew her as I and others did can believe that she was born in an East Prussian farming village as the daughter and sister of beet farmers.
Anastasia (1913; 1908) and Anna Anderson (1953; 1949). In 1920, during her incarceration at the Dalldorf Asylum in Berlin, most of Mrs. Anderson’s front teeth were removed; for this reason, she tended to cover her mouth when speaking and photographed.  It was noted on examination of the skeletons unearthed at Ekaterinburg in 1991 that the teeth of the Russian imperial family were in bad condition, sharing "a special family dental disease.” Dental records of the imperial family have not been found.

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind.
"

I don't think there is any question about what he saying there. In any case, the best thing to do is ask him directly, as in "yes or no" and see what he tells you. Good luck, I hope you are able to get in contact with him.


I mean - really - so what?


Helen answered a question asked by Cody: whether or not Kurth still believes AA was AN.  Though most  of us knew it anyway, she found quotes to prove it. That's why it was posted.

IMO, it's not a 'so what' harmless thing that he's still out there touting his views and actively trying to persuade people not to accept the DNA. Sadly, innocent students and information seekers could be misled by his theories, and this is not a service to the historical or scientific community, or reality.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on January 31, 2008, 11:32:55 AM
I didn't read Kurth's article, "Anna-Anastasia: Notes on 'Franziska Schanzkowska,'" word for word, but what I did see is that he agrees with the DNA results that Anna Anderson is not Grand Duchess Anastasia, but he disagrees that Anna Anderson was in fact Franziska Schanzkowska.
Well, actually in this particular article, while he does argue the Schankowska angle, he never states that he accepts that AA was not Anastasia, in fact he clearly says that he still is convinced that she was genuine. He does it in a very ambiguous way, but if you read between the lines it is clear that he is saying that he does not believe the DNA results which showed that AA could not have been Anastasia...

"For me—just because of some tests—I cannot one day say, `Oh, well, I was wrong.'  It isn't that simple.  I think it's a shame that a great legend, a wonderful adventure, an astonishing story that inspired so many people, including myself, should suddenly be reduced to a little glass dish'.” 


"...I knew the results of Dr. Gill's analysis for several weeks before they were announced.  In October 1994, from Lenox Hill Hospital, I issued a statement, which I quote here in edited form: 
I knew Anna Anderson for more than ten years and have been acquainted with virtually everyone involved in her quest for recognition over the last quarter-century:  friends, lawyers, companions, neighbors, journalists, historians, Russian and European royalty and aristocratic families—a wide array of competent witnesses who didn't hesitate to acknowledge her as the daughter of the tsar.  My experience of her character, my thorough knowledge of her case, and, it seems to me, probability and common sense all convince me that she was indeed Anastasia of Russia.

This conviction, while obviously challenged by today's announcement, remains unshaken.  As a layman, I’m not in a position to dispute Dr. Gill's findings; had the results revealed only that Mrs. Anderson was not a member of the Romanov family, I might have been able to accept them, if not easily, then at least eventually.  I am unable, however, by any persuasion of science or forensic testing, to credit the identification of Mrs. Anderson with Franziska Schanzkowska.

I can state without fear of reasonable contradiction that no one who knew Anna Anderson closely, who lived in her company for months and years, who tended and treated her through multiple illnesses as her doctor or nurse, who spoke with her at length and in detail about the stages of her life, who observed her comportment, carriage and demeanor and heard her converse intelligently on many subjects in several languages—I affirm that no one who knew her as I and others did can believe that she was born in an East Prussian farming village as the daughter and sister of beet farmers.
Anastasia (1913; 1908) and Anna Anderson (1953; 1949). In 1920, during her incarceration at the Dalldorf Asylum in Berlin, most of Mrs. Anderson’s front teeth were removed; for this reason, she tended to cover her mouth when speaking and photographed.  It was noted on examination of the skeletons unearthed at Ekaterinburg in 1991 that the teeth of the Russian imperial family were in bad condition, sharing "a special family dental disease.” Dental records of the imperial family have not been found.

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind.
"

I don't think there is any question about what he saying there. In any case, the best thing to do is ask him directly, as in "yes or no" and see what he tells you. Good luck, I hope you are able to get in contact with him.


I mean - really - so what?


Helen answered a question asked by Cody: whether or not Kurth still believes AA was AN.  Though most  of us knew it anyway, she found quotes to prove it. That's why it was posted.

Yes; I followed the thread; mine was more a rhetorical question

IMO, it's not a 'so what' harmless thing that he's still out there touting his views and actively trying to persuade people not to accept the DNA. Sadly, innocent students and information seekers could be misled by his theories, and this is not a service to the historical or scientific community, or reality.

IMO (and IME) most people can make up their own minds on the basis of ALL available evidence, can see that Peter Kuth has a vested emotional interest in this, and also respect his continued desire to ask questions on scientific technique. Like it or not, some people are always going to hold views you consider to be irrational, and - luckily - in this case no-one dies if they do.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 31, 2008, 01:18:56 PM
I went back and re-read what Kurth wrote, while looking at what Helen posted.  I still seem to interpret Kurth as saying that he can accept that Anna Anderson was not a member of the Romanov family.  But what he can't accept was that she was a Polish factory worker, and this appears to be due to the fact that he knew her personally.  I'm going to be fair here, I never met Anna Anderson, but if I did, maybe I'd have a hard time accepting she was a Polish peasant.  Still, the DNA has the final word, which he acknowledges, but I hope he emails me back.  If not, the maybe I'll visit that other forum.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 31, 2008, 01:20:36 PM

IMO, it's not a 'so what' harmless thing that he's still out there touting his views and actively trying to persuade people not to accept the DNA. Sadly, innocent students and information seekers could be misled by his theories, and this is not a service to the historical or scientific community, or reality.

IMO (and IME) most people can make up their own minds on the basis of ALL available evidence, can see that Peter Kuth has a vested emotional interest in this,

Some have questioned if the interest is emotional only. If it's only emotional, you can have that privately, in your own room. But to continue to argue it actively seems there is an agenda.

 
Quote
and also respect his continued desire to ask questions on scientific technique.

Sorry, but I don't. I can see someone questioning it ONCE, but when answers have been given and thoroughly and intelligently as they have been here on this forum, and by Dr. Melton, and elsewhere over the last 14 years, and some people still whine intestine switch or tampering, that reeks of either complete ignorance, or irrational fanaticism, either or both causing a pitiful, delusional denial of reality. What's so honorable about that? The respectable thing to do would be to admit they had been wrong and move on.

Quote
Like it or not, some people are always going to hold views you consider to be irrational, and - luckily - in this case no-one dies if they do.

People need to hear the story before they make up their own minds. This is why AA supporters actively spreading around suggestions of intestine tampering and payoffs by the Queen are dangerous because they may mislead some people who don't know the whole story who go looking for answers. There is very little opposition to the AA myth online if you google it, you get Kurth, Godl, and a couple dozen other pro AA sites. What's this going to tell the person who's just gaining interest and wanting to know? There's a good chance many otherwise smart people may fall for it. This is why I made my site, to present the other viewpoint. Most others who disbelieve AA don't feel it's necessary to tell the other side, they feel anyone with any sense will see the truth, and everyone else is too crazy to matter. I disagree. I still believe there are good people out there, kids, students, seekers of all ages, who honestly want to know about this 'mystery' and deserve an honest answer, not a runaround fantasy perpetuated by those desperate to hold onto a proven falsehood as much as any child dislikes giving up his bottle or finding out the Easter Bunny isn't real.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on January 31, 2008, 01:25:03 PM
I went back and re-read what Kurth wrote, while looking at what Helen posted.  I still seem to interpret Kurth as saying that he can accept that Anna Anderson was not a member of the Romanov family.  But what he can't accept was that she was a Polish factory worker, and this appears to be due to the fact that he knew her personally.  I'm going to be fair here, I never met Anna Anderson, but if I did, maybe I'd have a hard time accepting she was a Polish peasant.  Still, the DNA has the final word, which he acknowledges, but I hope he emails me back.  If not, the maybe I'll visit that other forum.

Then you interpret incorrectly.He has clearly stated his belief that AA is AN. And that's far from the only place online he's stated it. He's been on several forums, most recenty AGRBear's. He was very active on the KW forum before it closed to posting, if you join you may still be able to read his posts there. He uses his initials, PK, and there is no question where he stands. He believes AA is AN, and he still actively argues this position.

This statement, at the bottom of what Helen posted, is really all you need:

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind.  "
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 31, 2008, 01:33:54 PM
Annie, love your post! However, I now think that bolded sentence means nothing at all; if you look at it closely, it's committing without the commitment!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 31, 2008, 01:57:21 PM
Here's hoping Cody gets a yes or no response, instead of wordplay, from Mr. Kurth.

I'd love to see Kurth write a retraction, if for no other reason than out of respect for the memory of a 17 year old girl. But I suppose if HE TRULY BELIEVES he befriended Grand Duchess Anastasia, then he won't apologize, and we shouldn't expect him to. People generally don't apologize for a belief they still hold. And like Janet said, no one's going to die because of it....

The historical and scientific records speak for themselves (as does Annie's website)! His book is nothing more than a curiosity now, and if some unlucky student bases a research paper on it, then they didn't research very well at all!

Jenn
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on January 31, 2008, 02:36:40 PM
I keep wanting to post  "Bear has a web site??"  When did she put it up?

Also, Peter Kurth is not the only one with a book about AA and Anastasia.  What about James Blair Lovell?  I picked his book up at a library tag sale for $1 and even the librarian said "That's about all its worth now."

There have many many "claimants' to many many different thrones and royal identities.  Why does AA obsess us so much?  I think it is because it happened and she lived while many of us were alive. ( and some of us still are, I think ;-) )  Some of us were young and some not so young, but I believe that is what makes us debate and debate.

That and we (even though we know it to be true) still don't want to believe that such a horrible murder could have happened.  But then in the years following Yekaterinburg and in all the wars fought since then, other equally brutal and horrible murders have taken place.  I am sure that there are forums that discuss those topics just as contentiously as we do this one.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on January 31, 2008, 02:40:30 PM


This statement, at the bottom of what Helen posted, is really all you need:

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind.  "


What a politician Mr. Kurth would make.


Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on January 31, 2008, 03:33:08 PM
Here's hoping Cody gets a yes or no response, instead of wordplay, from Mr. Kurth.


Well, guess what?  You're going to get it!  Kurth emailed me a few minutes ago.  The gist of what Kurth had to say is this.  His position has not changed, since he wrote Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna Anderson.  He still recognizes her to be the grand duchess.
And in respect to the DNA testing, I think I need to quote him:

"DNA science has progressed substantially since those days, and I'm also convinced (especially having been in Russia and seen how badly the Romanov bones were handled, mishandled and manhandled by all kinds of people) that the 1994 results would never be accepted by a court of law.  The 'contamination' and 'chain of custody' issue alone would eliminate them from the running -- the same applies to the putative samples of AA's hair and intestine."

And so there you have it!  That is Kurth's position.  Anna Anderson was truly the Grand Duchess Anastasia, and the DNA was corrupted.

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on January 31, 2008, 04:13:05 PM
Here's hoping Cody gets a yes or no response, instead of wordplay, from Mr. Kurth.


Well, guess what?  You're going to get it!  Kurth emailed me a few minutes ago.  The gist of what Kurth had to say is this.  His position has not changed, since he wrote Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna Anderson.  He still recognizes her to be the grand duchess.
And in respect to the DNA testing, I think I need to quote him:

"DNA science has progressed substantially since those days, and I'm also convinced (especially having been in Russia and seen how badly the Romanov bones were handled, mishandled and manhandled by all kinds of people) that the 1994 results would never be accepted by a court of law.  The 'contamination' and 'chain of custody' issue alone would eliminate them from the running -- the same applies to the putative samples of AA's hair and intestine.""

And so there you have it!  That is Kurth's position.  Anna Anderson was truly the Grand Duchess Anastasia, and the DNA was corrupted.



Cody,
I have spoken to Dr. Teri Melton of Mitotyping Technologies, who did the original Anna Manahan/Carl Maucher testing. There is no doubt, in her mind, or anyone of the other scientists that the original sample could NOT have been "corrupted" and as far as they are all concerned, in her exact words "there is no need to re test the samples as you will get the exact same results".

The reason the samples could not have been corrupted is simple.  The Anna Manahan sample was tested first and sequenced BEFORE the Carl Maucher sample was even taken or sequenced.  As a result, nobody could have possible known the Maucher sequence OR contaminated the Anna Manahan sample with Maucher mtDNA.  The fact that the Anna Manahan sample was a 99.5% likelihood MATCH to the Carl Maucher DNA is of itself proof to the scientific community that the testing was accurate. You see, simply put, if the sample was "corrupted" there couldn't have been any sequence stable enough to sequence; "if" the sample was "tainted" by outside DNA it would have never matched the Maucher sample to such a high degree of certainty (unless one of the scientists handling the sample was themselves a very close cousin to Maucher (they weren't) and the fact that FOUR different labs all got the exact same results rules out the possibility of corruption, contamination or scientific error.

The science is simple and clear. Anyone who thinks the Anna Manahan testing was corrupted or contaminated simply just doesn't grasp the simple science of it all.

PS Kurth only uses the word "putative" with respect to the hair and intestine sample because that is the word Gill used in his original report.  "Putative: purported; commonly put forth or accepted as true on inconclusive grounds;"  In this case, it was accepted by Gill that the samples were from Anna Manahan based on the MJH records AND the acceptance by Schweitzer and Kurth that the samples were indeed hers.  In point of fact, it was only AFTER the test results came back that Kurth (and Schweitzer) began to use the word "putative". Kurth was quite satisfied about the integrity of the samples until the results came back and were not what was expected. "Conveniently" he now questions this same integrity.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on January 31, 2008, 05:49:17 PM
Good work Cody! Thank you for going straight to the source. Disappointing resolution, however. The man really does inhabit an alternate universe.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 31, 2008, 07:16:22 PM
Thanks FA. Kurth's irrational obsession with an obvious fraud is bizarre in the extreme.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Belochka on January 31, 2008, 08:07:29 PM
As a layman, I’m not in a position to dispute Dr. Gill's findings;

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind. "

IMO, it's not a 'so what' harmless thing that he's still out there touting his views and actively trying to persuade people not to accept the DNA. Sadly, innocent students and information seekers could be misled by his theories, and this is not a service to the historical or scientific community, or reality.

The other victim in this tale is the unsuspecting non-science student can be easily mislead by erroneous information.

Indeed how can any "layman" be in any firm position to evaluate the merits of DNA analyses and then conclude that there is "no evidence" to alter that belief?

IMO (and IME) most people can make up their own minds on the basis of ALL available evidence, can see that Peter Kuth has a vested emotional interest in this, and also respect his continued desire to ask questions on scientific technique. Like it or not, some people are always going to hold views you consider to be irrational, and - luckily - in this case no-one dies if they do.

To assert that "people can make up their own minds on the basis of ALL available evidence" requires the ordinary person to have the ability to differentiate tested scientific facts from opinions that are highly prejudicial in their nature, not based on sound principles and lack certainty.

To suggest that one should "respect his continued desire to ask questions on scientific technique" must be placed into question when Mr Kurth admitted that he is a "layman". Frankly, from a technical  perspective the two elements, i.e. questioning the veracity and complexity of scientific procedures by a layman outside their field are incompatible. Prejudicial factors such as one's emotions must be set aside when one deals with cold data as it emerges in the laboratory environment.

Might not it be more desirable that laypersons "respect" the professional medical scientists who have no agenda or vested emotional interest in their work?

Margarita
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on January 31, 2008, 08:18:22 PM
Extremely well said. It is high time objectively obtained scientific results were respected. None of these proven experts have had any axe to grind, unlike the rabid supporter of the well known fraud Anderson, Peter Kurth. The public has voted though as his book on Anderson rarely sells for more than US$0.01 on amazon.com
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 01, 2008, 08:36:43 AM

What a politician Mr. Kurth would make.

Absolutely. LOL. He would be excellent in presidential debates ;-)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 01, 2008, 08:38:40 AM
And so there you have it!  That is Kurth's position.  Anna Anderson was truly the Grand Duchess Anastasia, and the DNA was corrupted.

That's what I thought. Thank you, Cody.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on February 01, 2008, 11:40:31 AM
As a layman, I’m not in a position to dispute Dr. Gill's findings;

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind. "

IMO, it's not a 'so what' harmless thing that he's still out there touting his views and actively trying to persuade people not to accept the DNA. Sadly, innocent students and information seekers could be misled by his theories, and this is not a service to the historical or scientific community, or reality.

The other victim in this tale is the unsuspecting non-science student can be easily mislead by erroneous information.

Indeed how can any "layman" be in any firm position to evaluate the merits of DNA analyses and then conclude that there is "no evidence" to alter that belief?

IMO (and IME) most people can make up their own minds on the basis of ALL available evidence, can see that Peter Kuth has a vested emotional interest in this, and also respect his continued desire to ask questions on scientific technique. Like it or not, some people are always going to hold views you consider to be irrational, and - luckily - in this case no-one dies if they do.

To assert that "people can make up their own minds on the basis of ALL available evidence" requires the ordinary person to have the ability to differentiate tested scientific facts from opinions that are highly prejudicial in their nature, not based on sound principles and lack certainty.

To suggest that one should "respect his continued desire to ask questions on scientific technique" must be placed into question when Mr Kurth admitted that he is a "layman". Frankly, from a technical  perspective the two elements, i.e. questioning the veracity and complexity of scientific procedures by a layman outside their field are incompatible. Prejudicial factors such as one's emotions must be set aside when one deals with cold data as it emerges in the laboratory environment.

Might not it be more desirable that laypersons "respect" the professional medical scientists who have no agenda or vested emotional interest in their work?

Margarita

Any historical student worth their salt takes the commentary of a layman on scientific matters for exactly what it is. I am not interested in commenting any further than this, or entering into a moral debate about what might or might not be "desirable" in historical or emotional matters - it happens, whether you consider it "desirable" or not, and in analysing its worth one takes it for what it is.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on February 01, 2008, 11:51:15 AM
As a layman, I’m not in a position to dispute Dr. Gill's findings;

Since I wrote those words, no evidence has come to my attention that alters my belief in Anna Anderson's authenticity.  I want this to be clear, because I frequently hear that I've changed my mind. "

IMO, it's not a 'so what' harmless thing that he's still out there touting his views and actively trying to persuade people not to accept the DNA. Sadly, innocent students and information seekers could be misled by his theories, and this is not a service to the historical or scientific community, or reality.

The other victim in this tale is the unsuspecting non-science student can be easily mislead by erroneous information.

Indeed how can any "layman" be in any firm position to evaluate the merits of DNA analyses and then conclude that there is "no evidence" to alter that belief?

IMO (and IME) most people can make up their own minds on the basis of ALL available evidence, can see that Peter Kuth has a vested emotional interest in this, and also respect his continued desire to ask questions on scientific technique. Like it or not, some people are always going to hold views you consider to be irrational, and - luckily - in this case no-one dies if they do.

To assert that "people can make up their own minds on the basis of ALL available evidence" requires the ordinary person to have the ability to differentiate tested scientific facts from opinions that are highly prejudicial in their nature, not based on sound principles and lack certainty.

To suggest that one should "respect his continued desire to ask questions on scientific technique" must be placed into question when Mr Kurth admitted that he is a "layman". Frankly, from a technical  perspective the two elements, i.e. questioning the veracity and complexity of scientific procedures by a layman outside their field are incompatible. Prejudicial factors such as one's emotions must be set aside when one deals with cold data as it emerges in the laboratory environment.

Might not it be more desirable that laypersons "respect" the professional medical scientists who have no agenda or vested emotional interest in their work?

Margarita

Good points, Belochka, but I'll say one thing about laypeople challenging the "experts."  Kurth's problem in acknowledging that Anna Anderson was Franziska Schanzkowska, is because he knew Anna Anderson well enough in life, and just can't accept that what he saw with what science is telling him.  It happens all the time, of course.  I'll give an example that some of us may remember in the States.  After the wrestler, Chris Benoit, murdered his wife, son, and then took his own life, a sample of his brain was examined to try and see what caused him to happen the way he did.  The results were that Benoit had a brain of an 80 year old man with dementia.  When those results were reported to Vince McMahon, he replied something along the lines of, "From a layman's perspective, I don't see how Chris Benoit could have done the things that he did--let alone even go to the airport."  But that was what the report was saying, and quite frankly I agree with McMahon.  But to return to Kurth, here is what I think his logic is: "How could a Polish peasant learn three or four languages, and be able to fool people who actually knew the Grand Duchess Anastasia (the Botkins and her cousins)?  It just doesn't make sense!"
And to me, in some ways it doesn't.  I mean I mentioned earlier the possibility of "role-playing," but there are some things that Anna Anderson could do that I doubt role-playing could do.  However, I'm not a psychologist.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 01, 2008, 11:51:49 AM
We were discussing the issue of whether at this time Peter Kurth accepts the DNA results or not, and if he still believes that AA was Anastasia. I think we have our answer right from the horse's mouth, so there is really nothing more to say. To me, his stand on the DNA issue makes him unreliable in general because this is such a huge and obvious mistake on his part. Maybe some others feel differently, that's their right.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 01, 2008, 12:12:31 PM

Good points, Belochka,

Yes, very good.

Quote
  Kurth's problem in acknowledging that Anna Anderson was Franziska Schanzkowska, is because he knew Anna Anderson well enough in life, and just can't accept that what he saw with what science is telling him.

No matter how disappointing it may be to him, it doesn't alter reality. Do you think guys who get stuck paying child support for a child they don't believe is theirs put up a fight over 'switches'? I've never seen that happen, and directly affects their personal lives. I knew a situation where a girl had a baby with 2 perspective fathers. The baby had an odd ear deformity that the grandfather of possible daddy #2 also had, making most everyone sure that meant he was the father. The baby also looked more like that guy, and had a similar milk allergy to one he'd had as a baby. But when the DNA tests came back, possible daddy #1 was the father and #2 was excluded. This just goes to show you, ears be damned, intangibles and 'what about the milk allergy' (or in AA's case hallux vagus) just fall by the wayside once the definitive proof is in. There are no more 'buts', it's OVER, no matter how much someone doesn't like it. But to continue to deny reality for what you'd rather hear is irrational and not at all a respectable position. BTW, no one yelled switch in that case, though #2 did hope to be the father. His family had been very attached to the child.

Every day, men must be made to pay child support, and people get convicted and go to jail based on DNA evidence, regardless of the 'what abouts', because DNA is the final answer, game over. All these people don't like it but you never hear about any of them coming up with conspiracy theories, much less having a 14 year fit over how it was wrong, tampered with, not mine, etc. as some have done over AA. And as FA says, it's interesting they never questioned the authenticity of the samples until they revealed an unfavorable result!


Quote
But to return to Kurth, here is what I think his logic is: "How could a Polish peasant learn three or four languages, and be able to fool people who actually knew the Grand Duchess Anastasia (the Botkins and her cousins)?  It just doesn't make sense!"

If you really look into it, there are loads of very reasonable explainations and windows of opportunity. After all there were half a million emigres' from Russia in Berlin in those days. Though you may not like it, you really should also at least consider the possibility that the Botkins may well have been in on the whole thing and were helping her! It was Gleb who founded Grandanor corporation to get money for the case, with the promise of payouts to investors if they won the case. With an alleged fortune at stake, you really don't know what some people may do. AA supporters often accuse AA's 'enemies' of being 'payed off' but they refuse to accept that it may have been the other way around.


Quote
And to me, in some ways it doesn't.  I mean I mentioned earlier the possibility of "role-playing," but there are some things that Anna Anderson could do that I doubt role-playing could do.  However, I'm not a psychologist.

What exactly is it that makes you believe she couldn't just be pretending?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 01, 2008, 01:30:10 PM
What exactly is it that makes you believe she couldn't just be pretending?

Annie, this is a whole other issue that doesn't even belong on this thread, plus we have discussed it ad nauseum in the past. For some people she was convincing, for others she wasn't, it was a personal perspective, and no matter what you say, it will remain a personal perspective (sort of like the photos: "she looks exactly like Anastasia!", "she looks nothing like Anastasia!"). You won't get anywhere arguing this....
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 01, 2008, 01:56:38 PM
Oh I know, it's ALL been discussed ad nauseum in the past.

Speaking of not belonging in this thread, it was origionally a photo comparison thread, but we've sure gone OT! Ernie's alleged trip, Kurth's beliefs, and now the same old retinue again. I'm really surprised someone hasn't complained before now.  Seems like almost every thread ends up this way. Siigh.

But I will say that on the subject of 'convincing' consider that most of those 'convinced' had very little contact with or never even met the real AN. The product they bought was a generic GD, a piece of Imperial Russian nostalgia. Few of them ever recognized her as "Anastasia" specifically.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on February 01, 2008, 02:01:08 PM
[
Any historical student worth their salt takes the commentary of a layman on scientific matters for exactly what it is. I am not interested in commenting any further than this, or entering into a moral debate about what might or might not be "desirable" in historical or emotional matters - it happens, whether you consider it "desirable" or not, and in analysing its worth one takes it for what it is.

Quite true.  When it comes to DNA analysis, Kurth is indeed the layman, who is only speculating on scientific matters that he does not comprehend.   I have permitted this discussion because I feel it is critical in analysing the "worth" of Kurth's statements for what they are.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on February 01, 2008, 02:27:39 PM
[
Any historical student worth their salt takes the commentary of a layman on scientific matters for exactly what it is. I am not interested in commenting any further than this, or entering into a moral debate about what might or might not be "desirable" in historical or emotional matters - it happens, whether you consider it "desirable" or not, and in analysing its worth one takes it for what it is.

Quite true.  When it comes to DNA analysis, Kurth is indeed the layman, who is only speculating on scientific matters that he does not comprehend.   I have permitted this discussion because I feel it is critical in analysing the "worth" of Kurth's statements for what they are.

Well, I don't at all mean to sound scathing of him - I mean that people can set things in context for themselves and make their own judgment.....Supression of and apologies for his opinions are not required, whether one agrees with him or not
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 01, 2008, 02:50:35 PM
Supression of and apologies for his opinions are not required, whether one agrees with him or not

Actually, DNA science is not an opinion but fact. That's the whole point (which Kurth and some others don't seem to understand), and there is no agreeing or disagreeing with facts - facts are facts, not opinions. Kurth does not understand the science -that's quite obvious - so by speaking out about it as if he does understand it (albeit he admits he is a "layman" while in the next breath giving out information that's simply wrong), he is misleading people. I don't know if he realizes it or not, or if he does it deliberately or not, but that's exactly what he is doing. Yes, he has the right to speak out, but by speaking out he also opens himself up for criticism of his statements, especially since these statements are wrong (and this too is not an opinion but fact). So he (or anyone else for that matter) shouldn't be so surprised when his credibility is damaged as a result of him "speaking out" about something he doesn't know the first thing about, something that's not an opinion but fact, or that he is criticised for his statements. This free speech stuff - it works both ways, you see.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: LisaDavidson on February 01, 2008, 03:01:59 PM
Okey dokey.

So, it's now time to return to topic.

The fact remains, the AA/FS/AN topic is fascinating to many people still. But this thread is as Rob as pointed out, supposed to be about photographic comparison of those women.

No more OT posts, please start new topics!
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 01, 2008, 03:11:41 PM
Is there any way you can 'split' this thread in two at where it veered off course, rename it and let us continue here? (I know you can with other forum software) That way this interesting discussion will not get lost in a photo thread, and the photos will not get lost due to the discussion.

One more comment: Helen's last post was excellent, and sums it all up perfectly.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on February 03, 2008, 12:23:01 PM
I opened up a new thread in the book discussion boards to continue the Kurth discussion, if anyone's interested.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Foxglove on February 03, 2008, 04:07:42 PM
Plus, it is extremely hard to learn one language--let alone three--unless one starts at a young age.  I think this needs to be addressed as well.

That would depend on the person. I had to study French for almost seven years in school, and I can barely string two sentences together. This took place during my elementary school days, when as a child, I should have picked the language up with lesser problems than an adult. However, as an adult, when I took one semester of Spanish at college, I found it so much easier to learn, in that I was able to carry on a rudimentary conversation with an Argentinean woman by the end of the course of four months (I got an A in the course).

Meanwhile, I just returned from a trip to Mexico, where most of the staff at my hotel can speak up to four languages. Apart from their native Spanish, most can speak English, French, Italian, and German. These people never had the luxury of being taught other languages at school, and since they are all in their early twenties to thirties (a couple of folks in their late teens), we could not classify them as young children, either. I can tell you first hand that their English is very good, in that it goes beyond the basic greetings and small talk of weather, one’s location, etc. When I heard different staff members chattering away in Italian and German with relative ease, I assumed the same held true when speaking in those languages as well. The hotel never trained for them to learn any of these languages (I asked); they just learned from interacting with the guests. Our taxi driver said he learned English “from the streets” (I suppose interacting with people, too).

So what does this mean in the end? Some people, even as adults, have an easy time picking up languages; some (like me) have an easy time picking up certain languages, but not others. What we really should be inquiring is as to whether AA was actually fluent in languages such as Russian, or whether she could merely carry on a conversation at an intermediate (but not elementary level), or whether she simply “understood” them without actually speaking them.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on February 03, 2008, 05:03:30 PM
My Grandmother, from Warsaw born in 1886, had little formal schooling past about our 8th grade. She could read, write and do arithmetic.  She spoke Polish, Yiddish, English, Russian and German. We today forget how "polyglot" Central Europe and Poland were at the turn of the 20th century.  Poles spoke their native polish of course, Russian because they were part of the Russian Empire, Jews spoke Yiddish, and many also spoke German because of the close relationship with Germany and Poland.

the "language" question is a non-evidentiary issue to me.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on February 03, 2008, 05:30:41 PM
Annie, AGRBear has her own forum? Then Kurth has found a safe haven indeed!

Peter Kurth has his own website.

He does not need my forum as a "safe haven".

Before you let others make up your mind about my forum,  please,  join myself and others and see for yourself.   My site is based on facts accompanied by sources, and,  I respect everyone's opinion.

http://agrbear.hyperboards.com/

Trying to compare the one known COPY of a photograph which we are told is that of FS is difficult, because we don't know if the copy is good copy or if it was altered.  Unfortunately,  the original has been bought by an unknown person therefore we can't compare the original to the copy so experts can tell us if the copy is  true likeness or not.

It matters not to me if the copy is a true likeness,  I am just interested in my journey in discovering the truth. 

What is is?

AGRBear




Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: AGRBear on February 03, 2008, 06:00:11 PM
Bear, the pic you posted is not retouched. It may be a weak, faded COPY but it's not retouched. What could anyone have done to it? It's so blurry!

Compare: faded unretouched copy of FS photo on left, retouched on right. Big difference.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/WuvDaNick/redo2.jpg)

Some believe the two white dotes were lent on the slide the photographer used when he copied the original photo / or copy of FS.  Others suggest the two white dotes are  "china white" [correction fluid]  used to alter a copy of a copy and it had not completely dried which resulted in the two smudges in the hair. 

Both photos above have the two white dotes/ smudges.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on February 03, 2008, 06:40:42 PM
I agree with FA on the language issue.

AA never proved to anyone's satisfaction that she could speak Russian and I believe her English (in the beginning) had a Polish or German accent. Actually, in the Dahldorf, she wouldn't speak at all.

Remember also, that the Grand Duchesses were NOT taught German.  Everyone in the family conversed in English because Alix could not speak Russian and would not speak German.  English was the only language that Alix and Nicholas had in common!

Odd, now that I think about it, that Nicholas with all of his mastery of languages did not speak German.

Alix's French was determined to be "school girl" and French was the official language of the court.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Forum Admin on February 03, 2008, 08:13:28 PM
AlixZ

The Grand Duchesses WERE taught German. They didn't speak it well, but were taught German.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on February 03, 2008, 09:21:26 PM
AGRBear, I'm sorry if it appeared I was being rude re your forum being a "safe haven."  As a newbie I've taken the time to read hundreds (maybe thousands!) of the myth and legend posts and it's clear to me that you are the most open-minded poster this board has ever known. It's your willingness to explore ALL possibilities that prompted my Kurth comment. I meant no offense to you personally.

Thanks so much for the invitation to visit your forum!
Jenn

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 03, 2008, 10:48:38 PM
I agree with FA on the language issue.

Yes, me too. People think that because someone is 'poor' they don't know languages. Maybe because most people in the US, poor or not, do not speak foreign languages, mainly because it's a big country and they don't have to. In some parts of Europe, as FA said, there were so many languages so close together people had to learn them out of necessity. I also know people who studied 2 or 3 years of German or French in school and now can hardly speak it at all.

Quote
AA never proved to anyone's satisfaction that she could speak Russian and I believe her English (in the beginning) had a Polish or German accent. Actually, in the Dahldorf, she wouldn't speak at all.

In the beginning? Her English stank until the end! Get a copy of the NOVA special and listen to how grammatically bad her broken English was, and how bad her accent was, even after years in the US!

I am not convinced AA knew much of any language other than German and Polish (Kashub) before she started pretending to be Anastasia. All we have as 'proof' are a few comments from supporters who claim to have heard her. Others, like Olga and Felix Y., said she was only functional in German when they met her in the 20's. SHE never proved she could speak Russian or French in public, and you'd think if she could have, she would have.  The REAL AN would have spoken good English with a British accent, because that's what she heard every day from her parents growing up. A REAL AN would have known a great deal of French. German was the least known and used of the Romanov kids, yet it was AA's language of choice. That is a glaring blooper for AA IMO.



Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: LisaDavidson on February 04, 2008, 02:26:28 PM
This is a reminder to stay On Topic.

If Grand Duchess Ella has time to split this topic, terrific. As a moderator, my only interest is to keep everyone on subject and to ensure that everyone "plays nicely with others".

The subject of what languages Anna Anderson spoke is indeed interesting, but it is not pertinent to AA/AN/FS Photographic Comparison, and all further posts on that topic will be removed, as were posts relative to Mr. Kurth, after my instruction to return to topic.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on February 04, 2008, 06:31:05 PM
Thanks for the correction, FA. 
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: dmitri on February 05, 2008, 10:02:45 AM
Thanks for your clarification Ms. Davidson. I guess people only raised the issues you now decide to delete because the Forum Administrator was actually commenting on them.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: LisaDavidson on February 05, 2008, 04:26:37 PM
Thanks for your clarification Ms. Davidson. I guess people only raised the issues you now decide to delete because the Forum Administrator was actually commenting on them.

I have reported your remarks to the Forum Administrator.

I was very clear that posters should stay on topic.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on February 27, 2008, 08:39:22 AM
I rarely wander into this section, but in light of recent forum drama, I have a question:

What is it about Anna Anderson that provokes such strong and varied reactions?

As someone who's more or less indifferent to the AA case, I'm truly curious. What is it about her that makes people willing to devote hundreds of hours and thousands of posts to proving or disproving her claim? How does she manage to evoke such passion from both sides of the argument? Most of all, why can't anyone seem to agree to disagree -- what harm does it do if someone chooses to believe the "wrong" side of the case?




I'd very much appreciate it if we could PLEASE try not to turn this into another debate about the woman's identity. I don't want to know why you're on whichever side of the case -- I only want to know why you feel so strongly about her in general.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Laura Mabee on February 27, 2008, 10:01:06 AM
Fascinating thread Sarushka!
I too am in the camp of indifference, so this will be an interesting thread to follow.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on February 27, 2008, 10:45:08 AM
Fascinating thread Sarushka!
I too am in the camp of indifference, so this will be an interesting thread to follow.


Ok, I'll bite: the saga has something for everyone. You have a mixed-up protagonist with murky origins, you have class warfare and international intrgue, family dynamics, language dynamics, ethnic dynamics, identity theft, cutting-edge science and technology, possible mental illness or outright derangement, courtroom drama with eyewitness testimony, lots of physical and circumstancial evidence and charges of evidence-tampering and conspiracy, lost bones, found bones, cats in a fireplace, an author in the guise of a knight in shining armor on behalf of the protagonist, and mountains of sympathy for a murdered grand duchess.

What's not to love?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on February 27, 2008, 10:48:53 AM
OK - here goes.

I am interested in her because I was around when her case went to trial in Berlin in 1964.  Up until that time I didn't even know her name!

I was young and just beginning my Romanov research.  We learned so little about Russian history when I was in school and because we were in the middle of the "Cold War", Soviet Russia was not something we knew much about either.  The general impression was that behind the "Iron Curtain" were the "evil communists".

So to hear about a real life Russian Grand Duchess who might have survived the murder of the family was a big deal to me.  I actually became more interested in Imperial Russian history because of reading about the trial.  And it wasn't ancient history at that time, it was happening in the "now".

I know that many others who post here had been born and were in school at that time, but I just can't impress enough on the younger posters here how much it means (to me) to have lived while history that effects our studies of Imperial Russia was being made.

In the 1960s the Great War and the murder of the Romanovs were almost still close enough in time to reach out and "touch" them.  Actually, WWII was close enough to "touch" because so many of our parents had served and we were only one generation away and could talk to them in person about it.

I heard recently (and way off topic) that the last American soldier (who is still alive) to serve in the Great War is 107 and living in (in think) Virginia.

Just imagine how young this man was, barely 16 in 1917 when he enlisted!

But anyway, back to topic.   :-)

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 27, 2008, 01:59:28 PM
I don't really care about Anna Anderson per say, but I got involved in all this because of the scientific aspect... and was sucked in!

I don't think Anna Anderson is so unique as far as these types of reactions from people. Throughout history, there have been numerous pretenders (just look at the pretenders thread), and they all had their passionate champions as well as opposition, equally as passionate. We are just more familiar with Anna Anderson's case because of the nature of this forum and also because she was quite recent...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Eddie_uk on February 27, 2008, 03:03:11 PM
I feel strongly about the AA topic because I don't like frauds. It was also a very hurtful thing to do (to pretend to be a callously murdered, much loved, girl that is).
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on February 27, 2008, 04:09:58 PM
Ok, I'll bite: the saga has something for everyone. You have a mixed-up protagonist with murky origins, you have class warfare and international intrgue, family dynamics, language dynamics, ethnic dynamics, identity theft, cutting-edge science and technology, possible mental illness or outright derangement, courtroom drama with eyewitness testimony, lots of physical and circumstancial evidence and charges of evidence-tampering and conspiracy, lost bones, found bones, cats in a fireplace, an author in the guise of a knight in shining armor on behalf of the protagonist, and mountains of sympathy for a murdered grand duchess.

What's not to love?

Of course! I myself am intrigued by the mystery and drama of the case. I don't think it's at all odd to be interested in the case. But what baffles me is why so many people seem to get personally offended by the mere fact that someone else doesn't view the AA/AN issue the same way they do. I've seen flame wars and email harrassment rise out of this issue time and again. A friend of mine who runs an Anastasia fan site recently got a series of rude and condescending emails from an AA-supporter, berating her for not accepting the "truth" that AA = AN. What's up with that kind of crusading?


I feel strongly about the AA topic because I don't like frauds.

That makes sense to me; it's the kind of answer I'm looking for.


I don't think Anna Anderson is so unique as far as these types of reactions from people. Throughout history, there have been numerous pretenders (just look at the pretenders thread), and they all had their passionate champions as well as opposition, equally as passionate.

Certainly I understand why those involved directly with the case would be passionate about it -- people like Gilliard, Botkin, and even Peter Kurth, who knew either AA or AN personally should be expected to feel strongly about all this. But the rest of us -- what's our excuse? Why does this case evoke such passion, indignation, and even fury in people that never had even a remote connection with AA or AN?


I'm trying to think of something similar that would rile me up to the extent that the AA/AN case seems to bother others. What would it take for me to think "You believe THAT? What the %@$# is wrong with you?" Holocaust denial, maybe....
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on February 27, 2008, 04:20:03 PM
Annie -- thank you for the answer in the last paragraph of your post. Regarding the rest of it -- please can I remind you that I specifically asked for posters in this thread to avoid addressing AA's identity (which for the record includes discussion of photographs, Botkin's involvement, DNA, etc.) but rather stick to a discussion of attitudes toward the case as a whole. I'm interested in motivation, not opinion. In other words this isn't the place to argue your case, regardless of what side you're on.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on February 27, 2008, 05:14:47 PM
Ok, I'll bite: the saga has something for everyone. You have a mixed-up protagonist with murky origins, you have class warfare and international intrgue, family dynamics, language dynamics, ethnic dynamics, identity theft, cutting-edge science and technology, possible mental illness or outright derangement, courtroom drama with eyewitness testimony, lots of physical and circumstancial evidence and charges of evidence-tampering and conspiracy, lost bones, found bones, cats in a fireplace, an author in the guise of a knight in shining armor on behalf of the protagonist, and mountains of sympathy for a murdered grand duchess.

What's not to love?

Of course! I myself am intrigued by the mystery and drama of the case. I don't think it's at all odd to be interested in the case. But what baffles me is why so many people seem to get personally offended by the mere fact that someone else doesn't view the AA/AN issue the same way they do. I've seen flame wars and email harrassment rise out of this issue time and again. A friend of mine who runs an Anastasia fan site recently got a series of rude and condescending emails from an AA-supporter, berating her for not accepting the "truth" that AA = AN. What's up with that kind of crusading?


I feel strongly about the AA topic because I don't like frauds.

That makes sense to me; it's the kind of answer I'm looking for.


I don't think Anna Anderson is so unique as far as these types of reactions from people. Throughout history, there have been numerous pretenders (just look at the pretenders thread), and they all had their passionate champions as well as opposition, equally as passionate.

Certainly I understand why those involved directly with the case would be passionate about it -- people like Gilliard, Botkin, and even Peter Kurth, who knew either AA or AN personally should be expected to feel strongly about all this. But the rest of us -- what's our excuse? Why does this case evoke such passion, indignation, and even fury in people that never had even a remote connection with AA or AN?


I'm trying to think of something similar that would rile me up to the extent that the AA/AN case seems to bother others. What would it take for me to think "You believe THAT? What the %@$# is wrong with you?" Holocaust denial, maybe....

Hi Sarushka,

Good point about holocaust denial. Genocide denial in any form, really. I don't waste my breath much on holocaust deniers because I and hopefully most of the Western World have seen plenty of footage of victims, corpses, ovens, camps before and after liberation. No doubt some of you here have had the experience of visiting the hallowed ground of Dachau, Buchenwald, Treblinka, etc. (I have not). The Nazi regime was nothing if not well-documented.

As for AA, on the face of it she's not much more than a footnote to the Russian imperial family history. But...thanks to this forum, average posters have the opportunity to hear and weigh the evidence and basically try the case for or against her claim themselves. Kind of like any high profile case we don't have a vested interest in, but obsess about while it lasts (OJ, Scott Peterson, pick your poison).
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: lexi4 on February 27, 2008, 09:06:17 PM
I rarely wander into this section, but in light of recent forum drama, I have a question:

What is it about Anna Anderson that provokes such strong and varied reactions?

As someone who's more or less indifferent to the AA case, I'm truly curious. What is it about her that makes people willing to devote hundreds of hours and thousands of posts to proving or disproving her claim? How does she manage to evoke such passion from both sides of the argument? Most of all, why can't anyone seem to agree to disagree -- what harm does it do if someone chooses to believe the "wrong" side of the case?


I'd very much appreciate it if we could PLEASE try not to turn this into another debate about the woman's identity. I don't want to know why you're on whichever side of the case -- I only want to know why you feel so strongly about her in general.

Sarushka,
I am so glad you asked these questions as I have wondered the same thing myself. I've seen people be really cruel to one another on the forum regarding this topic. And I don't understand it. It all seems so inmature to me. I will be interested to see the responses you get.
Lexi
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on February 28, 2008, 01:42:57 PM
I feel strongly about the AA topic because I don't like frauds. It was also a very hurtful thing to do (to pretend to be a callously murdered, much loved, girl that is).

I think that Eddieboy_uk sums it up quite nicely.  It is quite simple to sum it up in the way he did. 

There are those people, too, who are abnormally committed to both sides and for no logical reason what so ever.  I believe that both sides took their positions because whether for or against AA, those people also seem to abnormally worship the Romanovs.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on February 28, 2008, 04:59:05 PM
I feel strongly about the AA topic because I don't like frauds. It was also a very hurtful thing to do (to pretend to be a callously murdered, much loved, girl that is).

I think that Eddieboy_uk sums it up quite nicely.  It is quite simple to sum it up in the way he did. 

There are those people, too, who are abnormally committed to both sides and for no logical reason what so ever.  I believe that both sides took their positions because whether for or against AA, those people also seem to abnormally worship the Romanovs.

To be fair to the abnormal: a shared obsession is politely called "a common interest." Anyone not interested in the Romanovs (99.999 percent of the population or more) would probably regard a good chunk of the forum's posts as perilously close to abnormal, whether the post is about AA or Faberge.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: lexi4 on February 28, 2008, 05:46:59 PM
I feel strongly about the AA topic because I don't like frauds. It was also a very hurtful thing to do (to pretend to be a callously murdered, much loved, girl that is).

I think that Eddieboy_uk sums it up quite nicely.  It is quite simple to sum it up in the way he did. 

There are those people, too, who are abnormally committed to both sides and for no logical reason what so ever.  I believe that both sides took their positions because whether for or against AA, those people also seem to abnormally worship the Romanovs.

To be fair to the abnormal: a shared obsession is politely called "a common interest." Anyone not interested in the Romanovs (99.999 percent of the population or more) would probably regard a good chunk of the forum's posts as perilously close to abnormal, whether the post is about AA or Faberge.

I think that is an accurate assessment puppylove1
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 28, 2008, 08:58:57 PM
I have a very long term interest in the story, and the Romanovs, going back to my days in Jr. High. As an ex (semi) believer, I really feel like it's my duty and mission to try to show others the things that made me 'see the light'. After the DNA tests, and I knew for sure, I started exploring other explainations for some of the 'nagging questions' I used to wonder about. I had many "oooohhh!" moments as the 'mysteries' fell one by one. As I researched more, I realized that most of the myth surrounding AA was actually slanted to one side, and when you stop  accepting the list of goods at face value and investigate them further, it all makes sense and the house of mirrors shatters in the face of reality.  Many of the quotes and 'facts' listed by supporters were inaccurate or very misleading when you look into the details behind them. The incredible legend that formed around this story actually outgrew reality and took on a life of its own. However, underneath, it was just a man behind the curtains, like in the Wizard of Oz.

For me personally, because I can see so clearly now how it was all so overblown and false, I can't stand it when some people want to hold onto the old story so bad due to their agenda/ego/personal emotional attachement that they defy the realities of history and science and actively recruit and mislead new information seekers who honestly don't know any better and are only looking for answers. So as long as they are still out there, I will be too, telling the others side. This is why I made my website. Even though those of us who know the story well take for granted that it's over and AA was FS, there really isn't that much out there that explains that. Just do a google search. There are dozens of webpages and sites and books and movies out there which lead people to think she might be AN. Add that to the handful of still devoted followers who won't give up trying to win them over, and I still think there's a reason to fight on for truth and justice in history, and the honor and dignity of a murdered teenage girl who had her identity stolen by an unstable woman who (urged on by her avid backers) pranced around the world using her name for fame, possible financial gain, and at the very least, a meal ticket. FS lucked into a new identity just when she was so ready to be rid of her own that she tried to kill herself. But in the end, please, let Anastasia be remembered as herself, and not AA. As for the strong feelings, the AA supporters have them for AA and want to hold onto that fantasy, while those who are on the side of truth and reality do it to stop the myth from perpetuating into the future.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on February 28, 2008, 09:32:28 PM
Annie -- again, PLEASE don't use this thread as a place to discuss AA's identity or proselytise your side of the case. This is the third time I've had to make this request. I don't want to see this thread spiral into yet another debate about who AA was. If we can't stick to topic, I'm just going to ask FA to delete the thread.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 28, 2008, 09:38:10 PM
Annie -- again, PLEASE don't use this thread as a place to discuss AA's identity or proselytise your side of the case. This is the third time I've had to make this request. I don't want to see this thread spiral into yet another debate about who AA was. If we can't stick to topic, I'm just going to ask FA to delete the thread.

Oh, please just delete my post! I had a mod delete the other one because you complained. Just forget it. I give up.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: royaltybuff on February 28, 2008, 10:24:23 PM
I would venture to say that, like me, most people interested in the Romanovs today became interested because of the Anna Anderson story. Because it evokes the memory of coming to love a part of history, it is hard for some people to accept the evidence. It holds sentimental value for many. If the story isn't true then all the time they spent studying it and learning is somehow invalidated. Just a thought.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on February 28, 2008, 10:30:59 PM
I'm pretty sure my first encounter with the Romanov story came from an Unsolved Mysteries segment on Anna Anderson. But I can't for the life of me tell you what really sparked my interest in the IF. All I know is it wasn't AA. Go figure.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: royaltybuff on February 28, 2008, 10:59:50 PM
For me, the fact that Anastasia was a descendant of Queen Victoria interested me more than anything, not the fact that a lady named Anna Anderson said she was Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Gabriella on February 29, 2008, 12:04:40 AM
I rarely wander into this section, but in light of recent forum drama, I have a question:

What is it about Anna Anderson that provokes such strong and varied reactions?

Sarushka, thats's a very good question, and I wonder myself why that is discussed with such strong and varied reactions even today, for meanwhile
DNA analysis proved definitely that she could not be Anastasia.

I learned about her in 1974 when I was a teenager and her case was discussed in german magazines. For me it was such an unbelievable story: one of the daughters of the murdered Tsar could have survived the massacre of Ekaterinburg. And at that time there had been no method that proved definitely whether Anna Anderson is or isn't Anastasia, so in my opinion she would take it into her grave.

At first I was a believer of her story, too, but I must confirm, all the articles I had read a that time were in pro-Anna-Anderson-tenor. i read about many people who believed Anna Anderson - and most of them had been people who had known the real Anastasia - for she had so much knowledge about the Tsar's family and even about intimate things which could only be known by a member of the family or people close to them. There had been so many trials and biological tests to support her claims, f. ex. they compared pictures of her ears with pictures of Anastasia's ears - and because there were some consensuses in these tests it was said she could be Anastasia.

When she died her case was discussed again, and now as a keen reader of crime novels I had my doubts about that lady. All what was used to prove that  she was Anastasia could be turned against her. Meanwhile I had learned that many members of russian nobility and members of the staff of the Imperial Family had published their reminiscenses of the that time after they fled from Russia. So Anna Anderson could have known most of all these  things by reading articles or books about the Imperial Family. And mostly I was shocked by the fact that she did not recognised "her aunt" Irene of Prussia when she was visited by her in the hospital.

I was really glad when a few years later it was clarified by DNA analysis that she was definitely not Anastasia. I thought and hoped also for poor Anna Anderson that would  put an end to all the endless discussions - but as a member of this forum I learned it did not.

I don't know why we still discuss that matter - perhaps, and that is my personal opinion, it is because people who believed in her cannot admit that they were misguided by that fraud.

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Mari on February 29, 2008, 02:13:25 AM
Quote
I thought and hoped also for poor Anna Anderson that would  put an end to all the endless discussions - but as a member of this forum I learned it did not.
Quote


Are there any AA supporters left? I haven't read any posts from Supporters since the last two bodies were found. Just the same people hashing over and over...I really don't know why People have obsessed over this one subject. But it is so bitter towards Authors and people who write on the subject and in discussion on many of the Russian threads that I will not post in most of them.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on February 29, 2008, 11:17:20 AM

Are there any AA supporters left? I haven't read any posts from Supporters since the last two bodies were found. Just the same people hashing over and over...I really don't know why People have obsessed over this one subject. But it is so bitter towards Authors and people who write on the subject and in discussion on many of the Russian threads that I will not post in most of them.

Because it is not 100% confirmed that the found bodies are those of Alexei and Anastasia/Maria, then AA supporters will still exist.  However, once these tests support, which they probably will, that the Ekaterinburg remains are those of Alexei and Anastasia/Maria, then I doubt there will be too many AA supporters left.
But back to why the AA case is interesting, I think it will vary from person to person.  I always found it interesting, because it left a glimpse of hope that someone might have survived that night.  And then I had to read Kurth's book to see what all the fuss was about.  After reading Kurth's book, I found AA to be an interesting individual--although there will still some issues Kurth did not address--but I think the DNA provides the final answer.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: royaltybuff on February 29, 2008, 12:02:30 PM

Are there any AA supporters left? I haven't read any posts from Supporters since the last two bodies were found. Just the same people hashing over and over...I really don't know why People have obsessed over this one subject. But it is so bitter towards Authors and people who write on the subject and in discussion on many of the Russian threads that I will not post in most of them.

Because it is not 100% confirmed that the found bodies are those of Alexei and Anastasia/Maria, then AA supporters will still exist.  However, once these tests support, which they probably will, that the Ekaterinburg remains are those of Alexei and Anastasia/Maria, then I doubt there will be too many AA supporters left.
But back to why the AA case is interesting, I think it will vary from person to person.  I always found it interesting, because it left a glimpse of hope that someone might have survived that night.  And then I had to read Kurth's book to see what all the fuss was about.  After reading Kurth's book, I found AA to be an interesting individual--although there will still some issues Kurth did not address--but I think the DNA provides the final answer.

I agree
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 29, 2008, 12:50:16 PM
I believe that both sides took their positions because whether for or against AA, those people also seem to abnormally worship the Romanovs.

That's not quite true... I feel strongly about the misinformation floating around in the AA case (and by that I mean the scientific information, yet I don't worship the Romanovs at all. In fact, I have posted more than once my criticisms of them on various subjects. My feeling is based solely on seeing misinformation about something I actually know about (i.e. DNA science) as well as my disgust with those who use their positions as supposed "published authors" to mislead the reader... That's all :-)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 29, 2008, 12:55:40 PM
Are there any AA supporters left?

Yes, Peter Kurth is still the self admitted supporter. I know there are others, even if they don't post here, they post in other places...
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Laura Mabee on February 29, 2008, 01:11:22 PM
Ok, I'll bite: the saga has something for everyone. You have a mixed-up protagonist with murky origins, ... cats in a fireplace

Okay, I got to ask. Cats in the fireplace? Do you mean the number of Cats AA owned or is there another incident I'm unaware of?
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 29, 2008, 01:36:35 PM
Ok, I'll bite: the saga has something for everyone. You have a mixed-up protagonist with murky origins, ... cats in a fireplace

Okay, I got to ask. Cats in the fireplace? Do you mean the number of Cats AA owned or is there another incident I'm unaware of?

She used to cremate her dead pets in the fireplace.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Eddie_uk on February 29, 2008, 01:39:52 PM
Hilarious!!!! :D :D

Poor things! Thats disgusting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Laura Mabee on February 29, 2008, 01:50:09 PM
She used to cremate her dead pets in the fireplace.

Oh my Lord.... wow.... that's all I got to say on that one.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on February 29, 2008, 01:52:21 PM
Ok, I'll bite: the saga has something for everyone. You have a mixed-up protagonist with murky origins, ... cats in a fireplace

Okay, I got to ask. Cats in the fireplace? Do you mean the number of Cats AA owned or is there another incident I'm unaware of?

She used to cremate her dead pets in the fireplace.

Well, I suppose that's one way to get rid of them--even though the bones will remain behind.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Alixz on February 29, 2008, 03:14:34 PM
Cody    ;-)  The bones remain after cremation?  You think?   ;-)  Maybe even clumsy cremation in a field far far away?

I am trying to remember why I wrote what I did a few days ago about both sides worshiping the Romanovs.

I think what I was trying to say that those who believed in AA worshiped the family so much that they needed to worship a real survivor. And the "abnormal" part the was lengths they would go to to find a reason to believe.

Those who did not believe wanted to worship the family as unsullied and martyred murder victims.  And the "abnormal" part, again, was the lengths that they would go to in order to do that.

No criticism implied or intended.

Heck, I went through a "worshipful" stage myself years ago.  I think its hard not to.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 29, 2008, 03:19:50 PM
Poor things!

Well, they were dead. Thankfully she didn't burn live cats in the fireplace! ;-)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on February 29, 2008, 06:17:49 PM
I think what I was trying to say that those who believed in AA worshiped the family so much that they needed to worship a real survivor. And the "abnormal" part the was lengths they would go to to find a reason to believe.

Those who did not believe wanted to worship the family as unsullied and martyred murder victims.  And the "abnormal" part, again, was the lengths that they would go to in order to do that.

No criticism implied or intended.

Heck, I went through a "worshipful" stage myself years ago.  I think its hard not to.

I think you're onto something.

I've always wondered if some of the folks who actually met AA -- particularly those who'd never met AN -- became supporters simply because they became enamoured of the idea that they'd met a grand duchess.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 29, 2008, 07:05:44 PM



I've always wondered if some of the folks who actually met AA -- particularly those who'd never met AN -- became supporters simply because they became enamoured of the idea that they'd met a grand duchess.

I does seem that way sometimes, as if maybe their lives are a little less special if she were 'only' FS.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on February 29, 2008, 08:37:19 PM



I've always wondered if some of the folks who actually met AA -- particularly those who'd never met AN -- became supporters simply because they became enamoured of the idea that they'd met a grand duchess.

I does seem that way sometimes, as if maybe their lives are a little less special if she were 'only' FS.

Maybe that's why a handful AA-supporters persist even in the face of the DNA results: they want HER to be special, too.

Really, it must have been a thrill to meet her at the height of the case's mystery. Imagine being able to think you *might* have met a princess....
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on February 29, 2008, 09:15:36 PM



I've always wondered if some of the folks who actually met AA -- particularly those who'd never met AN -- became supporters simply because they became enamoured of the idea that they'd met a grand duchess.

I does seem that way sometimes, as if maybe their lives are a little less special if she were 'only' FS.

Maybe that's why a handful AA-supporters persist even in the face of the DNA results: they want HER to be special, too.

Really, it must have been a thrill to meet her at the height of the case's mystery. Imagine being able to think you *might* have met a princess....

Oh she was special all right. Not necessarily the person I'd handpick to carry on my family's legacy, though. Does anyone know if she left behind any kind of diary? It would have been fascinating if she'd documented her metamorphosis, for those who regard her as a fraud; it would have been heartbreaking if she'd documented her psychological disintigration, for those who believe she was mentally ill. I veer wildly between sympathy and disgust when I attempt to pin down in my own mind who she really was.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on February 29, 2008, 09:51:48 PM
A diary admitting to the whole fraud, now that would be a blockbuster find! It would be nice, but I doubt it. I've always said, nobody leaves a paper trial of fraud. Unfortunately, this makes it hard to prove who was involved and how it happened.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on March 01, 2008, 10:06:17 AM
You know what I like best about the AA case? Riding the teeter-totter of the mystery. Even though I do have a pretty fixed opinion about her identity, I still like to bounce back and forth between websites like Annie's and Peter Kurth's and let the evidence on both sides tantalize my mind. Call me crazy or superficial, but I don't go too in-depth simply because I enjoy dabbling in the uncertainty.

Even the DNA results don't completely solve the riddle of Anna Anderson. If you do belive the science, you've got to wonder how she pulled it off for so many years. If you don't belive the science...well, let's not go there -- it gets ugly.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: halen on March 01, 2008, 10:15:37 AM
Sarushka, you are definetly not crazy. I do like how you used the teeter totter comparison to the AA. Best explanation I  ever heard.

For me it was always the specuatlation and the uncertainity of the AA case. In my hearts of hearts and somewhat intelligent brain matter knew that AA was not ANR...however, again IMHO this case was of the biggest "WHAT IFS" in history and the Romanov lore.

The joys of history!

Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on March 01, 2008, 10:30:33 AM
Good points all! In my opinion there is no ambiguity about who this person was; respecting the intent of Sarushka's thread I'll leave it there. What my little bird brain cannot grasp is why anyone would have wanted this particular individual to be Anastasia. And for those AA supporters (who seem to have gone underground but Annie assures us they haven't!) who fixate on Anastasia's brattiness to explain AA's brattiness, AA's behavior was beyond bratty. Even though Anastasia is beyond caring who pretends to be her, I still feel protective of her memory, as I am of any murdered child's memory.

Jenn
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on March 01, 2008, 10:45:10 AM
No, the AA supporters are still very active wherever they can find audience. They have been on  my forum, the royal forums (until the thread was taken down), and wikipedia discussion from time to time. There is one more issue I want to address here about the original question. Some of you have surmized that the great love for the Romanovs, and Anastasia, may be the reason so many people hold onto AA. This may be, or at some time was, the reason for some, but I can state now, after having talked to them at length on many sites and in private online for four years now that in most cases the most avid AA devotees active today don't even like the Romanovs. In fact, they often belittle those who 'worship' the Romanovs and like to talk about them and their world. Even recently, I had a couple people doing this on my forum and it got very nasty until one person was banned. On the contrary, most of today's AA supporters (I could name 4 or 5 very recognizeable names but I won't) seem to have a very deep hatred and resentment for the family and those who honor and admire them. Perhaps a big part of this is there belief that the royals 'turned their backs' on AA and denied her her name and fortune ::)
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Puppylove on March 01, 2008, 10:59:25 AM
Very interesting, Annie. Just to be clear, I knew nothing about AA before coming to this board. All I know about her, I learned here and at Kurth's site. So it's still very possible to be interested in the Romanovs without caring about AA at all. It took me some time to grasp what Belochka has been saying all along, that Nicholas II and his family exist INDEPENDENTLY from AA. AA merely attached herself (through fraud or mental illness) to their memory like a tick on a dog. Now a tick can  be difficult to remove, but it is never truly part of the dog.

Jenn
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on March 01, 2008, 11:14:38 PM
I just have to add one more thing before I go to bed. I have spent today being stalked by an obsessed AA supporter who has been trolling my guestbooks. The IPs show that 16 of the 18 troll comments I got were from the same address, but they all used different names. Some of them were rude, some bizarre, others, almost threatening. I have had to shut both guestbooks down for now. I seriously don't know why this person is so extreme and upset, other than that I dilligently fight the AA myth. Apparently, this person wants AA's myth to go on so badly they cannot stand me or my site. I had to add this because it's another aspect of 'what's the big deal' and the way people sometimes behave because of this legend.

As creepy as it's been, I suppose I should take it as a compliment that they must see my site as some kind of threat to the belief they want to perpetuate. If it were useless, they wouldn't be so aggressive to attack it. Who? I have my suspects, most likely one recently banned from my site. This is, apparently, what the AA story does to some people.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Cody on March 02, 2008, 12:24:58 PM

Does anyone know if she left behind any kind of diary? It would have been fascinating if she'd documented her metamorphosis, for those who regard her as a fraud; it would have been heartbreaking if she'd documented her psychological disintigration, for those who believe she was mentally ill. I veer wildly between sympathy and disgust when I attempt to pin down in my own mind who she really was.

That would be interesting, if she left behind a diary, but I assume if would have been found by now.  To the best of my knowledge, her husband passed away sometime ago--at least I think he did.  I assume that his house has probably been searched, and someone would have found a diary from AA, if it existed.  On an earlier thread, I said once that I wondered if AA might have been the victim of "role-playing," which means that you act a certain way, because you think you are a particular person, and you act how you think they would have acted.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Sarushka on March 02, 2008, 02:27:47 PM
I just have to add one more thing before I go to bed. I have spent today being stalked by an obsessed AA supporter who has been trolling my guestbooks. The IPs show that 16 of the 18 troll comments I got were from the same address, but they all used different names. Some of them were rude, some bizarre, others, almost threatening. I have had to shut both guestbooks down for now. I seriously don't know why this person is so extreme and upset, other than that I dilligently fight the AA myth.

Now that's the sort of thing I just don't get. Why should anyone feel so strongly about AA that they'd want to harass a stranger? That's giving the case a wildly exaggerated level of importance.
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Janet Ashton on March 02, 2008, 03:41:10 PM
I just have to add one more thing before I go to bed. I have spent today being stalked by an obsessed AA supporter who has been trolling my guestbooks. The IPs show that 16 of the 18 troll comments I got were from the same address, but they all used different names. Some of them were rude, some bizarre, others, almost threatening. I have had to shut both guestbooks down for now. I seriously don't know why this person is so extreme and upset, other than that I dilligently fight the AA myth.

Now that's the sort of thing I just don't get. Why should anyone feel so strongly about AA that they'd want to harass a stranger? That's giving the case a wildly exaggerated level of importance.

Quite....
Title: Re: Anastasia Claimant - Anna Anderson a.k.a Franziska Schanzkowska Part 6
Post by: Annie on March 02, 2008, 04:07:20 PM
I just have to add one more thing before I go to bed. I have spent today being stalked by an obsessed AA supporter who has been trolling my guestbooks. The IPs show that 16 of the 18 troll comments I got were from the same address, but they all used different names. Some of them were rude, some bizarre, others, almost threatening. I have had to shut both guestbooks down for now. I seriously don't know why this person is so extreme and upset, other than that I dilligently fight the AA myth.

Now that's the sort of thing I just don't get. Why should anyone feel so strongly about AA that they'd want to harass a stranger? That's giving the case a wildly exaggerated level of importance.


Quite....

I know there are those who feel that way about me, however, I am not the one talking to myself on a guestbook using 13 different names, and answering back! The person complained I went all over the internet talking about it. Obviously, person is also there, or they would not be aware. The person said I was crazy and obsessed, but, well, you know the story about the kettle! At least I don't troll and harass people in private and make it personal. I do believe if AA/FS could see us now, she'd be very disappointed!


Another issue on the subject of 'big deal,' I do have a hard time understanding why some people want to hold onto belief in AA so badly, why it means so much to them in their personal lives. Even though she's FS, it's still an interesting story! Like I've said before, there are men who get slapped with paying child support for a kid they don't want for 18 years because of DNA testing, and people put in prison due to DNA testing, yet I have never once heard any of them, though it affects their lives directly, yell foul, switch, or come up with conspiracy theories. Even OJ said the DNA was his but planted, not switched. I just don't get why it's so important to hang onto some faint hope and fantasy that she was AN. Maybe a believer can explain this for us.