Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => Nicholas II => Topic started by: von Ebert on February 12, 2017, 02:05:24 PM

Title: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 12, 2017, 02:05:24 PM
This writer has made comments before on the matter of Czar Nicholas 11 rare  DNA visible markers inherited from birth as did his son Alexei and one sister Anastasia so inherit .

Many will scoff of this writers comments but to clarify I have posted on  RBD (Royal Bloodline Descent    (on Facebook)  to show the rare genetic visible markers do exist and have been doing so since the 4Th century AD on a German King known as Clovis. 

Clovis had 4 sons one was the same name as this writer who also inherited the same visible markers as Clovis, Clovis was a Frank of German origin as was his decedents. Clovis became the first King of France and his German linage descended to royals in the Romanov /German line as well the Kaisers line and that of Queen Victoria and keeps on descending in a few royal lines today.

Some  experts have expressed their theory on the non survivors o the Romanov family of Czar Nicholas 11 and two of his children who inherited his rare gene in the form of a visible marker from birth we do not present a theory but only picture proof of such spoken about.


Frederic von Ebert

Royal Bloodline Descent   on Facebook

Email  royal.bloodline.descent@gmail.com

.



Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 12, 2017, 04:47:59 PM
since the 4Th century AD on a German King known as Clovis.
Clovis lived in the 5th and 6th centuries. 

Quote
Clovis had 4 sons one was the same name as this writer
The sons of Clovis were called Theuderic, Chlodomer, Childebert, and Clotaire. No Frederic or Friedrich, which is a name that only starts to appear regularly in the sources in Carolingians times (with a few earlier (Wisi-)Gothic exceptions.)

Quote
who also inherited the same visible markers as Clovis
Nobody knows what Clovis looked like! There are no contemporary portraits of him and his buried remains in St-Denis are probably mere dust. And that goes for all the Merovingians, as far as I know. The tomb of Clovis's father Childeric I was discovered in the Austrian Netherlands in 1653 and contained loads of treasures (later stolen and melted down), but as far as I can see the bodily remains had either decomposed or were not preserved.

Quote
Clovis was a Frank of German origin as was his decedents.
Germanic, as there was no country called Germany at the time.

Quote
Clovis became the first King of France and his German linage descended to royals in the Romanov /German line as well the Kaisers line and that of Queen Victoria and keeps on descending in a few royal lines today.
Proving descent from the Merovingians to the Carolingians (or anyone else) is notoriously difficult. Surely there is no documented male-line descent. Likely there is female-line descent: That both the Carolingians (from Pepin the Short and onwards) and the Robertians / Capetians descend from Chrotlind, likely daughter of the Merovingian king Theuderic III seems to be one of the most accepted, but it is not 100 % sure, as there are few sources and they are often vague, especially concerning females.

Quote
Frederic von Ebert
Are you a descendant of the Bohemian-Austrian poet Karl Egon (Ritter) von Ebert or of the Bavarian Nazi economist Georg (Ritter) von Ebert (only personal nobility?)
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 12, 2017, 08:32:47 PM
Thanks to those who have provided their opinion   

1. Clovis I may have been born in the the 5th century AD, if so I stand corrected.

2.  There is a photo of Clovis statue when he first became king of France.

3. My maternal ancestors were addressed as _____von Ebert  you may or may not have noticed the name ebert noting a child then the ebert name. Clovis father was called childeric 1 such  was the same of childebert the word Child in front of the names eric or ebert.

4. I have provided the Facebook site for Royal Bloodline Descent. what is posted are facts and if those who may think the photos may be false, I can only say I leave that up to you decide.  As to the statue picture of Clovis that is available upon request showing the same inherited DNA visible markers from birth as those that can be seen at Royal Bloodline Descent  on Facebook 

Frederic von Ebert
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 13, 2017, 12:18:02 PM
2.  There is a photo of Clovis statue when he first became king of France.

You mean this statue (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Bateme_de_Clovis_par_St_Remy-edit.jpg/220px-Bateme_de_Clovis_par_St_Remy-edit.jpg), outside the cathedral in Reims? It was made in 1996, for the 1500th anniversary of Clovis's baptism. It obviously strives to be historical correct in terms of dress and outfits, but in no way did the artist have any idea what Clovis and St. Remy actually looked like.


Quote
3. My maternal ancestors were addressed as _____von Ebert  you may or may not have noticed the name ebert noting a child then the ebert name. Clovis father was called childeric 1 such  was the same of childebert the word Child in front of the names eric or ebert.

Lol, you are charmingly etymoligically naïve. Ebert is a short form of Eberhart (eber = wild boar + hart, hard) and has nothing to do with Childebert, which is the Latinized version of Germanic Hildebert (hild, battle + bert, brilliant). Childebert was never meant to be pronounced with an English ch- sound, but with a /x/ or strong /h/ sound.

The etymology of names can be tricky: Remember that Alix is neither a short form of Alexandra nor a German form of Alice, but a medieval French spelling of Alysse / Alice, a short form of Adélaide(s), from Germanic Adalheidis.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 13, 2017, 03:16:25 PM
For those person of great understanding who may think this writer is naive in thought I would mention Egbert a decedent of the linage inherited the same.  If one has inherited identical visible DNA markers from birth as did Clovis 1  Born 466 AD and Chilperic 11 born 672 AD as well Egbert first King of Kent England one knows they are related by kinship but not necessarily by name.

If one takes the time to look at our Facebook page  Royal Bloodline Descent  the photo facts of same ancestry is there to see, but if not just argue you points right or wrong.

Regarding those who were not born within royal linage such a myself and a few decedents of my maternal linage Ebert or von Ebert we know what DNA  markers we inherited are the same as a number of born royals past and present.

Frederic

email royal.bloodline.descent@gmail.com
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 13, 2017, 05:02:46 PM
For those person of great understanding who may think this writer is naive in thought I would mention Egbert a decedent of the linage inherited the same.  If one has inherited identical visible DNA markers from birth as did Clovis 1  Born 466 AD and Chilperic 11 born 672 AD as well Egbert first King of Kent England one knows they are related by kinship but not necessarily by name.

I don't deny that in some instances the name Egbert / Ekbert / Eckbert may have turned into Ebert, but in most cases it's not very likely: The first /e/ is short in Egbert / Ekbert / Eckbert, while the first /e/ is long in Eberhart and Ebert. Because vowel length plays such a crucial role in Germanic languages, Ebbert, not Ebert, would be a logical diminutive of Egbert / Ekbert / Eckbert.

Quote
If one takes the time to look at our Facebook page  Royal Bloodline Descent  the photo facts of same ancestry is there to see, but if not just argue you points right or wrong.

Sorry, they are too ludicruous to be taken seriously and obviously your knowledge about genetics is as lacking as your knowledge about linguistics.

I suggest you give up making up your own fairytales and rather read a good Eckbert fairytale: "Der blonde Eckbert" by Ludwig Tieck.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 13, 2017, 09:20:57 PM
 
 1.  Thank you to the person who took time to explain his understanding of the Ebert name and where it  may have originated from.

2. To the person who likes to suggest one likes fairy stories when the facts are available to see likes to show their knowledge and superiority appears to be afraid of what can be proven which would conflict with their knowledge.  Might we suggest you do not go on line to Royal Bloodline Descent on Facebook because that web page only shows the facts as they really are and that would conflict with your knowledge and possibly hurt ones feelings. 
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Forum Admin on February 14, 2017, 01:01:10 AM
This vonEbert whoever it is, is another fantasist, who believes in fairy tales, like the "Anastasia" survivor theorists. Don't waste your time engaging this entity. It only believes what it wishes to believe and will grasp onto any detail that suits, rather than analyze the facts. I gave up on this lunatic ages ago and suggest you do the same. Let us face it, all it can do is send you to a "Facebook" page, which is reliable how? It isn't. So judge accordingly.

It wants to believe only what it wants to believe. Reality is meaningless to it.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 14, 2017, 08:33:02 AM

Thank you for your judgment call and if that is what you believe please don't change it.  As to Anastasia she was shot with her family and did not survive.  In your suggested comments this writer is another fantasist who believes in fairy tales that is your right to suggest. Being that you have no wish to see what has been spoken of I can only say those who may take time to view Royal Bloodline Descent on Facebook can make up their own mind,  By the way there is a four in one photo page of the Romanov daughters included on our web page, there you can see Anastasia picture bottom right hand corner which shows the rare genetic visible earlobe markers like her father and her brother so inherited.

Frederic von Ebert


This vonEbert whoever it is, is another fantasist, who believes in fairy tales, like the "Anastasia" survivor theorists. Don't waste your time engaging this entity. It only believes what it wishes to believe and will grasp onto any detail that suits, rather than analyze the facts. I gave up on this lunatic ages ago and suggest you do the same. Let us face it, all it can do is send you to a "Facebook" page, which is reliable how? It isn't. So judge accordingly.

It wants to believe only what it wants to believe. Reality is meaningless to it.

[/quote]
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 14, 2017, 09:18:10 AM
Yes, FA, he may be a raging looney, but I think the Childebert = Child Ebert was a rather funny, ingenious folk etymology! Notwithstanding that it seems to imply backwards descent, i.e. that the Merovingians were his children! Perhaps that's the new fashion in claimants club: Abandon the concept of linear, chronological time and claim you are Anastasia's great grandmother who travelled back = forwards in time and came to her rescue, dragging her out of that basement by her special earlobe? Or gave the Merovingians a cool hair cut and some Viagra, so that they avoided going extinct? :-)

It also baffles me why these people don't put more worth on works by Romantic poets like the above-mentioned Ludwig Tieck, who professed to be seers of mysterious things, ideas, archetypes, webs of interconnection, past, present and future. Even we rational people can agree that the Brothers Grimm knew something about the Anastasia archetype. :-)



Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Kalafrana on February 14, 2017, 01:18:57 PM
Of course, the great majority of people in France, Germany and the Low  Countries are probably descended from the Merovingians, whether they have distinctive ear lobes or not. After all, it's estimated that over one-third of English people are descended from Edward I, and the Merovingians were over 700 years earlier -  over 20 generations.

Ann
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 14, 2017, 04:08:18 PM
I wonder how our bonkers Junker von Ebert would explain that the vile Socialist Friedrich Ebert became president of Gemany in 1919 because the Junkers of the Merovingianly earlobed Wilhelm II shipped off Lenin to Russia to prick more than just the earlobes of the Romanovs. Perhaps because he too (Friedrich Ebert) probably was a descendant of the Merovingians, as you point out, Ann!

Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 14, 2017, 06:04:28 PM
People who you call raging loonie do not swear but keeps their understanding on a balanced level. that is called manners and proper upbringing.  You may ask yourself who does this person think they are. I know who I am, might you.

You show a cuddly warm attitude with a protective mind to suggest to others what they should not do. I congratulate you on your fine personality.


In closing thank you for your input.


Frederic von Ebert




Yes, FA, he may be a raging looney, but I think the Childebert = Child Ebert was a rather funny, ingenious folk etymology! Notwithstanding that it seems to imply backwards descent, i.e. that the Merovingians were his children! Perhaps that's the new fashion in claimants club: Abandon the concept of linear, chronological time and claim you are Anastasia's great grandmother who travelled back = forwards in time and came to her rescue, dragging her out of that basement by her special earlobe? Or gave the Merovingians a cool hair cut and some Viagra, so that they avoided going extinct? :-)

It also baffles me why these people don't put more worth on works by Romantic poets like the above-mentioned Ludwig Tieck, who professed to be seers of mysterious things, ideas, archetypes, webs of interconnection, past, present and future. Even we rational people can agree that the Brothers Grimm knew something about the Anastasia archetype. :-)
[/quote]
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 19, 2017, 04:26:39 PM

Clovis was born in 466 AD  and not in the 5th or 6 centuries as suggested by another. There is a picture of Clovis been ordained and this writer can supply such photo where it shows the rare royal bloodline partial pierce on his earlobes.


Quote
who also inherited the same visible markers as Clovis
Nobody knows what Clovis looked like! There are no contemporary portraits of him and his buried remains in St-Denis are probably mere dust. And that goes for all the Merovingians, as far as I know. The tomb of Clovis's father Childeric I was discovered in the Austrian Netherlands in 1653 and contained loads of treasures (later stolen and melted down), but as far as I can see the bodily remains had either decomposed or were not preserved.

Quote
Clovis was a Frank of German origin as was his decedents.
Germanic, as there was no country called Germany at the time.

Quote
Clovis became the first King of France and his German linage descended to royals in the Romanov /German line as well the Kaisers line and that of Queen Victoria and keeps on descending in a few royal lines today.
Proving descent from the Merovingians to the Carolingians (or anyone else) is notoriously difficult. Surely there is no documented male-line descent. Likely there is female-line descent: That both the Carolingians (from Pepin the Short and onwards) and the Robertians / Capetians descend from Chrotlind, likely daughter of the Merovingian king Theuderic III seems to be one of the most accepted, but it is not 100 % sure, as there are few sources and they are often vague, especially concerning females.

Quote
Frederic von Ebert
Are you a descendant of the Bohemian-Austrian poet Karl Egon (Ritter) von Ebert or of the Bavarian Nazi economist Georg (Ritter) von Ebert (only personal nobility?)
[/quote]
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Forum Admin on February 19, 2017, 04:45:44 PM
You have just destroyed any hope of credibility you may have hoped to have had.

"Clovis was born in 466 AD  and not in the 5th or 6 centuries"

Major problem Mr. "alleged expert", The 5th century is the time period from 401 to 500 in accordance with the Julian calendar in Anno Domini / Common Era. THUS 466 is the 5th century.  If you do not possess even this minimally basic knowledge, then you fail utterly to demonstrate any skill whatsoever, tainting all of your blather.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 21, 2017, 10:20:49 AM
When one reads comments below it displays a dislike of those who say Royal Bloodline Descent  on Facebook posting of certain royals inheriting rare genetic visible DNA markers is not true.

(Quote) This von Ebert whoever it is, is another fantasist, who believes in fairy tales.   Don't waste your time who believes in fairy tales, it goes on to say all it can do is send you to a Facebook page which is reliable how? it isn't,   So judge it accordingly.   It wants to believe what it wants to believe. Reality is meaningless to it.

From those comments the writer criticizing RBD is suggesting it is just fantasy photos showing rare inherited royal markers on Nicholas 11 and other royals who have inherited the same

 If that is the case why was Royal Bloodline Descent able to download a few photos from Alexanders Palace and show the connection with our other posted photos, were they fakes as well?.




This vonEbert whoever it is, is another fantasist, who believes in fairy tales, like the "Anastasia" survivor theorists. Don't waste your time engaging this entity. It only believes what it wishes to believe and will grasp onto any detail that suits, rather than analyze the facts. I gave up on this lunatic ages ago and suggest you do the same. Let us face it, all it can do is send you to a "Facebook" page, which is reliable how? It isn't. So judge accordingly.

It wants to believe only what it wants to believe. Reality is meaningless to it.

[/quote]
[/quote]
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: TimM on February 21, 2017, 11:45:47 AM
Dude, it's Nicholas II, not Nicholas 11.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 21, 2017, 12:05:57 PM
Might you be an expert in DNA inherited visible markers from birth or only an expert in criticizing.

You use the term dude when your addressing a person in your comments which do not relate to subject matter. 

Thank you for your input


Dude, it's Nicholas II, not Nicholas 11.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: TimM on February 21, 2017, 05:26:51 PM
Quote
Might you be an expert in DNA inherited visible markers from birth or only an expert in criticizing.

Where did I say anything about DNA? 

I corrected an error that you were constantly making.  Nicholas 11 means Nicholas the Eleventh.  No such Tsar existed.  The correct way of typing the name is Nicholas II. 


Quote
You use the term dude when your addressing a person in your comments which do not relate to subject matter.


What in the dead gods of Krypton does that have to do with anything?   You were making an error, I pointed it out.  End of story.


Quote
Thank you for your input

You're welcome.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 21, 2017, 06:30:30 PM
Quote
Might you be an expert in DNA inherited visible markers from birth or only an expert in criticizing.
I corrected an error that you were constantly making.  Nicholas 11 means Nicholas the Eleventh.  No such Tsar existed.
 
Going by his own esoteric logic that sees secret Merovingian patterns in everything there is perhaps (anything is likely, just ask him!) a hidden meaning to his usage? In Russian Nicholas 11. / XI = Николай одиннадцатый = Nikolay odinnadtsatniy, which can be broken down (quite contrary to grammar and etymology à la von Ebert) to odin + nad + tsatoy = Odinn / Wothan above the crescent! So Nicholas 11 is Odinn who will defeat Islam in his Caucasian homeland! Hail Odinn, Rurik and Sæhrímnir, the boar (Eber > Eberhart > (von) Ebert) feasted upon in Valhall!

BTW Your high- and well-earlobed dudeness: Nicholas 2. is also quite acceptable.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 22, 2017, 09:08:29 AM
Tim

I have read your comments and suggestions on the subject matter of Nicholas ll and also note this particular subject name on Alexanders Palace web page clearly shows the wording Nicholas ll so who should one follow your suggestion or this web page

On the subject matter of rare visible earlobe markers of some royals within past, and a few present the facts laid out and can be seen on Royal Bloodline Descent on Facebook as well a few of the same can be found on Alexanders Palace site.

As you are probably aware we have received criticism of posting such information and advising that RBD has actual photo proof at our Facebook page , so no matter who criticises on line the facts are there to see, I cannot withdraw my comments because some may think negatively of what I have presented.

As to a photo on line of Clovis and his distant relative Chilperic ll showing the same gene marker the photos taken are from Coinage or in the case of Clovis from a statue when he was been ordained. Such spoken of can be found on line from where I located them from.

I have been advised by two well known geneticist one in the US and the other in England to inherit the same markers one needs to share the same ancestor kinship royal born or not . (Complex family line inheritance)

Frederic von Ebert

royal.bloodline.descent@gmail.com
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Kalafrana on February 22, 2017, 10:23:36 AM
I find it a little unlikely that distinctive earlobes are visible on Merovingian coins, since they are tiny.

A quick look at the Elizabeth II head on a 10p coin in my pocket (quite a bit larger than a Merovingian tremissa) reveals that she is wearing earrings, but her ear lobes are quite simply too small for anything to be discerned about them. My Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal is several times the size, so I will have a look at it when I am at home this evening.

Ann
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 22, 2017, 04:23:31 PM
Ann

You bring up a good point of observation Elizabeth ll has no inherited visible DNA markers on her earlobes but her father George VI and his brother Edward did.  The gene that is still descending and reappears on a few of her grandchildren an a couple of her great grandchildren.

The gene that forms the marker on some and not the others within their family kinship line like myself and a couple of my German ancestors von Ebert's maternal side inherited the visible markers over a hundred years ore more and did not reappear until my birth, and I passed them on to my daughter and she to her child.

My sister and her children did not inherit the same. The issue is why some inherit the visible markers and others within a family line do not.  I have no answer to that question but like Elizabeth 11, she most likely is the carrier otherwise a few of her grandchildren would not have inherited the visible DNA markers. 

I have as mentioned previously been informed by a couple of well respected geneticist that the gene appears descend down both sexes. In regards to her majesties grand children inheriting the marker, they do not appear on her husband or his ancestors only of her father and uncle and later to reappear on a few of her Grand children and Great Grandchildren..

How I discovered the ancestor path of the markers was because some ten or more years ago i received a phone call by a relative that I was on history channel and was advised the German Prince looked identical to me and he married Queen Victoria;s eldest daughter Vicky (Victoria) their first born was Queen Victoria;s grandson Wilhelm ll who showed identical inherited markers of myself .

From that point on the markers have been found on certain born royals and not the others.  However the markers are descending and I have located them in photos such as the ordination statue of Clovis and one of his decedents Chilperic photo of inherited markers are from a carving of a medallion depicting Chilperic ll.  His picture is seen on Wikipedia the free encyclopedia.

I cannot change the ancestral genetic markers and who shared them but their are many sceptical of my findings possibly because any change in unknown history and for some may not undrestand or want to understand.  My website as mentioned is Royal Bloodline Descent  on Facebook and there lies the facts if one would care to find the truth.

Thank you for your comments


Frederic



quote author=Kalafrana link=topic=18585.msg549966#msg549966 date=1487780616]
I find it a little unlikely that distinctive earlobes are visible on Merovingian coins, since they are tiny.

A quick look at the Elizabeth II head on a 10p coin in my pocket (quite a bit larger than a Merovingian tremissa) reveals that she is wearing earrings, but her ear lobes are quite simply too small for anything to be discerned about them. My Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal is several times the size, so I will have a look at it when I am at home this evening.

Ann
[/quote]
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: TimM on February 22, 2017, 05:30:24 PM
Are you related, in any way, to the late movie critic, Roger Ebert?
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: JGP on February 22, 2017, 08:58:09 PM
Tim

I have read your comments and suggestions on the subject matter of Nicholas ll and also note this particular subject name on Alexanders Palace web page clearly shows the wording Nicholas ll so who should one follow your suggestion or this web page

On the subject matter of rare visible earlobe markers of some royals within past, and a few present the facts laid out and can be seen on Royal Bloodline Descent on Facebook as well a few of the same can be found on Alexanders Palace site.

As you are probably aware we have received criticism of posting such information and advising that RBD has actual photo proof at our Facebook page , so no matter who criticises on line the facts are there to see, I cannot withdraw my comments because some may think negatively of what I have presented.

As to a photo on line of Clovis and his distant relative Chilperic ll showing the same gene marker the photos taken are from Coinage or in the case of Clovis from a statue when he was been ordained. Such spoken of can be found on line from where I located them from.

I have been advised by two well known geneticist one in the US and the other in England to inherit the same markers one needs to share the same ancestor kinship royal born or not . (Complex family line inheritance)

Frederic von Ebert

royal.bloodline.descent@gmail.com

I have tried to follow this thread but am having difficulty trying to decipher your words.  I have several questions for you...

What is your first language and/or are you using Google Translate?

Who are the two geneticists you are referring to and what are their names? 

Who is Sarah Martin and what is your relationship to her?

Kind regards,  JGP
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Kalafrana on February 23, 2017, 07:51:43 AM
Herr von Ebert

My apologies for taking so long to respond further to your last message, but some detailed research has been necessary.

My Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal does indeed bear a large representation of the head of Queen Elizabeth II (long may she continue to reign), but this is somewhat stylised, and all that can really be seen is an earring and some hair. I then turned to my grandfather's World War 1 medals, which, conveniently, show George V's ears quite clearly. I will dig out my father's General Service Medal to see whether it carries an earlier representation of the Queen.

However, these portrait heads are much larger than those on Merovingian coins, and based on contemporaneous photographs. As I mentioned yesterday, Merovingian coins are tiny, and it is quite  possible that those who cut the dies for them never actually saw the relevant king at sufficiently close range to see the detail of his ear lobes.

I note from wikipedia that the medallion of Chilperic II you rely on is specifically described as 'modern'.

Ann
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 23, 2017, 08:59:42 AM
Tim

I have read your comments and suggestions on the subject matter of Nicholas ll and also note this particular subject name on Alexanders Palace web page clearly shows the wording Nicholas ll so who should one follow your suggestion or this web page

On the subject matter of rare visible earlobe markers of some royals within past, and a few present the facts laid out and can be seen on Royal Bloodline Descent on Facebook as well a few of the same can be found on Alexanders Palace site.

As you are probably aware we have received criticism of posting such information and advising that RBD has actual photo proof at our Facebook page , so no matter who criticises on line the facts are there to see, I cannot withdraw my comments because some may think negatively of what I have presented.

As to a photo on line of Clovis and his distant relative Chilperic ll showing the same gene marker the photos taken are from Coinage or in the case of Clovis from a statue when he was been ordained. Such spoken of can be found on line from where I located them from.

I have been advised by two well known geneticist one in the US and the other in England to inherit the same markers one needs to share the same ancestor kinship royal born or not . (Complex family line inheritance)

Frederic von Ebert

royal.bloodline.descent@gmail.com

1.My first spoken language is English

2.The two geneticist names will not be disclosed as all communication between myself and those I speak of are not for public information.

3. Sarah Martin is a young woman living in the United states and is a university student studying journalism.

Frederic



I have tried to follow this thread but am having difficulty trying to decipher your words.  I have several questions for you...

What is your first language and/or are you using Google Translate?

Who are the two geneticists you are referring to and what are their names? 

Who is Sarah Martin and what is your relationship to her?

Kind regards,  JGP
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 23, 2017, 11:32:46 AM
Ann

I am Canadian born with a German mother (Ebert) also on some documentation the von before the surname. My fathers side is of Norman English ancestry. Are you American or possibly from England?.

If you would care to receive the picture of Clovis been ordained and Chilperic  ll I can send both photos to an email address other than this location , if you would care to share with others I leave that up to you.

As to what one can see of  what royals of the Romanov side ancestry their cousins on the German side and their English cousins who shared the same DNA marker most can be seen at Royal Bloodline Descent   on Facebook if one would care to see the facts.

In this modern day of royal photos who have inherited the royal markers it appears there is some airbrushing by certain organizations that takes place. What I mean from that is, one may see the true photo of a Royal showing the inherited earlobe markers and the next photo in a different magazine or paper may eliminate such markers by airbrushing them out.

A few years ago I sent proof of what I had spoken about to an editor of a respected royal  magazine, that editor wrote and said Yes I see what you have spoken about, do you mind sending them to my royal expert which I did. The suggested royal expert wrote back and said I;m sorry I don't see any earlobe markers possibly because my eyes are not what they were before.

I contacted the editor and provided the comments of their so called royal expert , the editor said I would agree with my expert I don't see any mentioned earlobe markers, This editor backed out of what he saw and commented on and went with his so called expert.


Finally  I took time to provide the same information to a known English writer of royal books etc, she  looked at the photos on Royal Bloodline Descent and said in her communication, Yes I do see the royal markers and also the same on you, but what good would that do as it would only change some parts of known history.  This writer knew I was born a commoner like most of us but included she saw the same ancestor DNA marker certain royals did exist.

 The photos on RBD Facebook page are real if one chooses to see them, but if not they may never know, that is their choice.

With respect


Frederic von Ebert




Herr von Ebert

My apologies for taking so long to respond further to your last message, but some detailed research has been necessary.

My Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal does indeed bear a large representation of the head of Queen Elizabeth II (long may she continue to reign), but this is somewhat stylised, and all that can really be seen is an earring and some hair. I then turned to my grandfather's World War 1 medals, which, conveniently, show George V's ears quite clearly. I will dig out my father's General Service Medal to see whether it carries an earlier representation of the Queen

However, these portrait heads are much larger than those on Merovingian coins, and based on contemporaneous photographs. As I mentioned yesterday, Merovingian coins are tiny, and it is quite  possible that those who cut the dies for them never actually saw the relevant king at sufficiently close range to see the detail of his ear lobes.

I note from wikipedia that the medallion of Chilperic II you rely on is specifically described as 'modern'.

Ann
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Kalafrana on February 23, 2017, 11:35:02 AM
My apologies. The 'von' confused me.

I am English.

Ann
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Forum Admin on February 23, 2017, 12:10:56 PM
His nearly un intelligible English confuses me. Most Canadians don't write like English is a third language for them.  The evasion of answering direct questions, lack of genuine evidence and sheer lack of grasping how DNA works and what it can can't show also confuse me.

But, then this one is just another pathetic excuse of someone who's life is so empty they have to create some fiction of making themselves connected to "royalty" and retreat to theatrical bleats of indignation when confronted that no rational person actually gives a crap about all of this earlobe nonsense and the unsupported "evidence" which shows nothing at all.

I'd suggest giving this royal wannabee a clear berth, attempts at rational discussion went nowhere some time ago. You are wasting your time giving this any oxygen at all.

Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Kalafrana on February 23, 2017, 02:05:20 PM
Ah, Forum Admin

I'm exercising my rather dry sense of humour by approaching the absurd claims with a degree of mock seriousness!

The points are serious, but the tone is intended to be mocking (or is it a bit too dry?).

Ann
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Forum Admin on February 23, 2017, 02:13:55 PM
We need to design a sarcasm emoji or special sarcasm font. :-)
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Kalafrana on February 23, 2017, 02:40:24 PM
Good thinking.

I'm sure that would be useful for Preved as well as me.

Ann
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 23, 2017, 03:23:43 PM
Thank you for your confusion that was expected you have not disappointed anyone with your comments you show you are unable to understand. If you are able please continue with your negative comments, nothing else is expected of you.

Have a nice day



His nearly un intelligible English confuses me. Most Canadians don't write like English is a third language for them.  The evasion of answering direct questions, lack of genuine evidence and sheer lack of grasping how DNA works and what it can can't show also confuse me.

But, then this one is just another pathetic excuse of someone who's life is so empty they have to create some fiction of making themselves connected to "royalty" and retreat to theatrical bleats of indignation when confronted that no rational person actually gives a crap about all of this earlobe nonsense and the unsupported "evidence" which shows nothing at all.

I'd suggest giving this royal wannabee a clear berth, attempts at rational discussion went nowhere some time ago. You are wasting your time giving this any oxygen at all.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Forum Admin on February 23, 2017, 03:33:01 PM
your comments you show you are unable to understand. If you are able please continue with your negative comments, nothing else is expected of you.


"retreat to theatrical bleats of indignation when confronted that no rational person actually gives a crap about all of this earlobe nonsense and the unsupported "evidence" which shows nothing at all.


Just so you know, I have a post graduate degree and have been studying this subject for some years now. I understand it quite well, especially after speaking with several of the DNA scientists who did the Imperial Family remains DNA. Your snotty attitude proves you are the one who deludes itself into pretending you understand, when you are truly clueless.

PS: You are getting close to being banned from this Forum permanently and every post of yours deleted.  So you might wish to take that into consideration. This ability is in my sole discretion and one of my duties here.
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on February 23, 2017, 07:19:18 PM
Just to let you know before as you have put it been banned permanently, I am somewhat impressed that you have a post graduate degree but not impressed by your domineer.

I would like to address your comments the first been that I know nothing of what I speak of, I suppose that is the reason you don't want to check out Royal Bloodline Descent on Facebook if that is the case because of the reality that is posted there.

The next matter is your comments of this writer shows he is a want to be royal, that is the last thing I would want to be, as royals work harder and longer for their subjects than any of us who have a degree or otherwise.   I have the deepest respect the United Kingdom royal family and her Majesty and husband Prince Philip, You or I could never be of such high standers.

You advise after speaking with several DNA scientists who did the Imperial remains DNA examination might the one who advised me of my findings and suggested the ear markers of the royals and myself are the same and called called a family complex inheritance. In short sharing the same kin royal or not.  As to my power I have none but I have spent many years in a legal occupation/profession.

Now all you need to do in your capacity of an administrator is to as one may say pull the plug if you feel you have the authority to do so.

Frederic von Ebert

Royal Bloodline Descent   on face book

Email address royal.bloodline.descent@gmail.com



Just so you know, I have a post graduate degree and have been studying this subject for some years now. I understand it quite well, especially after speaking with several of the DNA scientists who did the Imperial Family remains DNA. Your snotty attitude proves you are the one who deludes itself into pretending you understand, when you are truly clueless.

PS: You are getting close to being banned from this Forum permanently and every post of yours deleted.  So you might wish to take that into consideration. This ability is in my sole discretion and one of my duties here.
[/quote]
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 24, 2017, 11:41:43 AM
I'm sure that would be useful for Preved as well as me.

Gogol is fast becoming my favourite Russian author because of his outrageous sarcasm. Just the obsession with rank and a bodily characteristic in "The Nose" is enough to make one think of our dear Junker von Ebert, but consider this dinner scene at a peculiar noble's nest in a godforsaken rural backwater, from "Dead Souls":

In the dining-room there were already two boys, Manilov's sons, children of an age to sit at the dinner table but still on high chairs. With them was their tutor, who bowed politely with a smile. The lady of the house sat behind the soup tureen; the visitor was placed between his host and hostess. A servant tied dinner napkins round the children's necks.

'What charming children!' said Tchitchikov, looking at them. 'How old are they?'

'The elder is eight and the younger was six yesterday,' said Madame Manilov.

'Themistoclus,' said Manilov, addressing the elder boy who was trying to free his chin which had been tied up in the dinner napkin by the footman. Tchitchikov raised his eyebrows a little when he heard this somewhat Greek name, which for some unknown reason Manilov ended with the syllable us; but he tried at once to bring his countenance back to its usual expression.

'Themistoclus! tell me which is the finest town in France?'

At this point the tutor concentrated his whole attention on Themistoclus and looked as though he were going to spring into his face, but was completely reassured at last and nodded his head when Themistoclus said: 'Paris.'

'And which is our finest town?' Manilov asked again.

The tutor pricked up his ears again.

'Petersburg,' answered Themistoclus.

'And any other?'

'Moscow,' answered Themistoclus.

'The clever boy, the darling!' Tchitchikov said upon this. 'Upon my soul,' he went on, addressing the Manilovs with an air of some astonishment, 'at his age, and already so much knowledge. I can assure you that that child will show marked abilities!'

'Oh, you don't know him yet,' answered Manilov, 'he has a very keen wit. The younger now, Alkides, is not so quick, but this fellow if he comes upon anything such as a beetle or a lady-bird, his eyes are racing after it at once; he runs after it and notices it directly. I intend him for the diplomatic service. Themistoclus,' he went on, addressing the boy again, 'would you like to be an ambassador?'

'Yes, I should,' answered Themistoclus, munching bread, and wagging his head from right to left.

At that moment the footman standing behind his chair wiped the ambassador's nose, and he did well, as something very unpleasant might else have dropped into the soup. The conversation at the dinner table began upon the charms of a tranquil life, interspersed with observations from the hostess about the town theatre and the actors in it. The tutor kept an attentive watch upon the speakers, and whenever he saw they were on the point of laughing, he instantly opened his mouth and laughed vigorously. Probably he was a man of grateful disposition and wished to repay the master of the house for his kindly treatment of him. On one occasion, however, his face assumed a severe expression and he sternly tapped on the table, fastening his eyes on the children sitting opposite him. This was in the nick of time, for Themistoclus had just bitten Alkides' ear, and Alkides, screwing up his eyes and opening his mouth, was on the point of breaking into piteous sobs, but, reflecting that he might easily lose the rest of his dinner, he brought his mouth back to its normal position and, with tears in his eyes, began gnawing a mutton bone till both his cheeks were greasy and shining.


I'm sure their ludicrious father just as well could have given them Merovingian instead of high-flying Greek names and be led to believe (the novel is about swindling, after all) that the scars of fraternal strife on their ears were divine auspices that little Themistoclus was destined to be become an ambassador and have the ear of the great of this earth or, with his bent for scientific inquiry, a great and misunderstood geneticist!

The next matter is your comments of this writer shows he is a want to be royal, that is the last thing I would want to be, as royals work harder and longer for their subjects than any of us who have a degree or otherwise. 
Those who still have subjects, yes. Who do you think the Orléans, the Romanovs, the Hohenzollerns etc. have worked for for the last 100 years?
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 24, 2017, 12:03:54 PM
I'm exercising my rather dry sense of humour by approaching the absurd claims with a degree of mock seriousness!
The points are serious, but the tone is intended to be mocking (or is it a bit too dry?).

Lol, I was wondering if you were serious, thinking you were much too generously condescending! Great deadpan delivery :-)
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Kalafrana on February 24, 2017, 03:26:07 PM
I'll keep it up.

Do you have any ideas for a sarcasm emojo?

Ann
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Превед on February 25, 2017, 06:14:41 AM
I'll keep it up.

Do you have any ideas for a sarcasm emojo?

I like the tongue-in-cheek: :p
Title: Hello Group
Post by: Dwightzery on February 27, 2017, 05:11:38 AM
Hello,
 
I'm the new guy. I justed wanted to say hello to the gang in hopes of making new freinds.
I hope everyone is doing great and I'm looking forward to great debates within the site.
Have a good day!(http://www.xdreamsx100.site/images/happy.jpeg)(http://www.xdreamsx100.site/images/happy.jpeg)
Title: Hello Everyone
Post by: Dwightzery on February 27, 2017, 05:22:54 AM
Hello,
 
I'm the newbie. I justed wanted to say hi to the gang in hopes of making new buddies.
I hope everyone is doing great and I'm looking forward to great debates within the site.
Have a good day!(http://www.xdreamsx100.site/images/happy.jpeg)(http://www.xdreamsx100.site/images/happy.jpeg)
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: von Ebert on March 27, 2017, 03:34:48 PM
This writer has made comments before on the matter of Czar Nicholas 11 rare  DNA visible markers inherited from birth as did his son Alexei and one sister Anastasia so inherit .

Many will scoff of this writers comments but to clarify I have posted on  RBD (Royal Bloodline Descent    (on Facebook)  to show the rare genetic visible markers do exist and have been doing so since the 4Th century AD on a German King known as Clovis. 

Clovis had 4 sons one was the same name as this writer who also inherited the same visible markers as Clovis, Clovis was a Frank of German origin as was his decedents. Clovis became the first King of France and his German linage descended to royals in the Romanov /German line as well the Kaisers line and that of Queen Victoria and keeps on descending in a few royal lines today.

Some  experts have expressed their theory on the non survivors o the Romanov family of Czar Nicholas 11 and two of his children who inherited his rare gene in the form of a visible marker from birth we do not present a theory but only picture proof of such spoken about.


Frederic von Ebert

Royal Bloodline Descent   on Facebook

Email  royal.bloodline.descent@gmail.com

.


This was Royal Bloodline Descent comments at an ealier date and would like to update our findings of thebloodline that carried the gene that produced the royal ancestor markerthat exists even though ome say it does not exist, We are now aware the same bloodline that produces the visble earlobe markers extend back many cnturies into some
Title: Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
Post by: Forum Admin on March 27, 2017, 05:35:47 PM
I have had quite enough of this self promotion of a silly unsupported, unproven, fictional, and ridiculous, supposition from this user. I'm locking this thread to further comment and "von ebert" with his awful grasp of the English language have been given a "time out" from further posting.