Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Myth and Legends of Survivors => Topic started by: investigator on January 27, 2004, 02:26:02 AM

Title: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: investigator on January 27, 2004, 02:26:02 AM
Anna Anderson and Anastasia had many similarities.  Eventually through DNA tests it was proven that Anna Anderson was not Anastasia.  Though i believe that the DNA tests could have been manipulated to have the wanted results to prove that Anna Anderson was not Anastasia.  But many supporters of Anna Anderson still believe that she was Anastasia and she had been deprived of her wealth and title.  Many doctors also testified that Anna Anderson and Anastasia were one person.  I believe in my heart that Anna Anderson was Anastasia.  Because she had similar physical traits, she had scars which Anastasia also had.  She knew certain things which she could have only known by having access to the Royal family. What is your opinion?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BobAtchison on January 27, 2004, 09:19:44 AM
Anna Anderson made many mistakes in describing the rooms of the Alexander Palace.  They were obvious mistakes that someone would make if they has looked at pictures of the palace and misunderstood what they were looking at.  It was obvious Anna Anderson had never been in the palace. The real Anastasia would not have made those errors.

One of the Romanov family told me how when one of them entered a chapel with Anna Anderson she crossed herself - the wrong way.  It would be very diffcult for an person born into the Orthodox faith to make this mistake.

Also, Anna Anderson attended a lecture by a friend of mine at the Virginia Museum of Art.  She was old and senile at the time.  During the lecture she started speaking Polish loudly - there were some Poles in the lecture who were quiet surprized by this - as you can imagine.  the real Anastasia did not speak Polish.

Then there were witnesses to the murder, who saw all the bodies and identified them.  They saw Anastasia and Aleksey - all of them.

Finally we have the forensics - it is very difficult to argue with those findings.

A person can have an opinion about anything that diverges from reality.  If I avoid looking in mirrors I still think/believe I'm thin and 20 years old.... but I'm not.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lanie on January 27, 2004, 10:46:53 PM
Personally, I don't think Anna Anderson looked like Anastasia at all.  All the pictures--she's got her head bowed in a certain way that one sees in some pictures of Anastasia, and the nose looks similar from that angle, but that's the ONLY resemblance I've noticed, ever.  I agree with Bob wholeheartedly!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: investigator on January 28, 2004, 02:43:57 AM
When the Romanov Family was buried the bones of Tsarevich Alexei and Marie Romanov were never found.  Even the Russian Orthodox Church was not convinced that the bones are those of the Tsar and his family.  But the Patriarch of the Orthodox Church in Russia, Alexei II, had disputed the authenticity of the findings and refused to officiate at the burial.  So the mystery still lives on.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on January 29, 2004, 05:03:23 AM
As sad as it is, I do not believe that Anna Anderson was Anastasia: I believe that Anastasia died with the rest of her family in Ipatiev House.

I know that many people do not want to believe it, but realistically, it would be nearly impossible for anyone to have survived the massacre, especially considering that each member of the firing squad was assigned a person (or persons) to shoot.

Bob, may I inquire as to who the witnesses were that claimed to have seen the bodies of Alexei and Anastasia? Also, what do you think became of the bodies? Do you think they were burnt or buried elsewhere?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: investigator on February 01, 2004, 03:06:24 AM
Anna Anderson also claimed to have knowledge about Anastasia's uncle Grand Duke Ernst of Hesse.  She said that he had visited Russia in 1916, when his country and Russia were at war.  This was denied by the Grand Duke but his stepson testified in court in 1966 that he knew that the Grank Duke had made that trip to Russia in total secrecy.  I mean how did Anna Anderson know about this trip.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: anna on February 01, 2004, 09:44:55 AM
This is a difficult matter. I think we never know. If they find the missing bones, maybe then we get an answer.
But if Anna was Anastasia? According to Bob, she made many mistakes. But if a person came  through such terrible trauma in life? Isn't natural you got many blackouts in your mind? You don't want to remember?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on February 02, 2004, 03:54:01 AM
Yeah but you don't just start speaking Polish as a result of trauma!  ;D

Also, she looks nothing like Anastasia . . . folks can kid themselves all they like, but look at Anastasia's features, which were very delicate, and then look at Anna Anderson's. *I* look more like Anastasia than Anna Anderson (and no, (LOL) I'm NOT claiming anything here!  ::) )

her features are completely different. For her to be Anastasia, she would've had to have had extensive plastic surgery, which, of course, wasn't available in the early 20th century.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on February 02, 2004, 09:21:12 AM
Let us not forget the most critical point in this whole discussion, which is that the mtDNA testing has shown that without doubt (at least without a statistically significant doubt anyway: something like a 99.999% accuracy) that Anna Anderson was in no way related to Empress Alexandra.  A recent discussion on the subject with a molecular biologist from the University of Texas indicates that the testing performed in 1994 was completely reliable then, and remains so today.  The only significant change in the analytical process in the last ten years is that the testing is now performed by machine but the underlying science remains exactly the same.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: NAAOTMA on February 03, 2004, 07:32:23 PM

Ten years ago I had the honor of attending a Mayo Clinic Lecture. The speaker was Dr. Ivanov, who did the DNA testing on the Romanov remains. His presentation, with the DNA results up on the screen as he talked, left no doubt in my mind, as much as I wanted to believe that someone escaped from that cellar, that the Tsar Family (as he referred to them) had all died on that July night.

As for Maria and Alexis not being found in the grave, a possible explaination is that Maria's body was mistaken for Alexandra's body and disposed along with Alexis's as such. Maria was tall, like the Empress, and had a sturdier build than her older sisters. The famous "note" outlining the murder and burial of the Romanovs contains the information that the Empress's body and Alexis's body were both burned, not buried with the rest. Since we know Alexandra was identified by her exquisite dental work as well as her DNA after being found in the burial pit, and the youngest female skeleton found had the skeletal characteristics of a female about Anastasia's age, not older like Maria, the scientific evidence seems pretty clear.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dr. Douglas B. Willingham on February 04, 2004, 04:55:54 PM
Greetings, all:

In the early '90s I had the pleasure of visiting the late Dr. William Maples, the forensic anthropologist who was part of the team that identified the skeletal remains of the Imperial Family and their retinue. This almost three-hour recorded interview was conducted in Dr. Maples' lab at the University of Florida at Gainesville. Apart from the compelling mtDNA evidence, Maples looked at such things as bone length, concluding that the missing skeletons were those of Anastasia and Alexei. I have a transcription of that interview.

My question is, is the prevailing opinion that Maria's is the female skeleton not accounted for? And which of the Grand Duchesses were entombed, by name, in the Cathedral of SS Peter and Paul?

Best to all,
Doug
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lanie on February 04, 2004, 06:09:44 PM
Looking at photos of all the girls, and then comparing them next to Nicholas who was 5'6, 5'7 (I think so), it looks to me like even if Anastasia is missing in the grave, the heights gotten from the extrapolated bones have to be wrong.  But I personally believe Tatiana is missing, so.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on February 17, 2004, 04:13:41 AM
Doug: to answer your question about which of the Grand Duchesses are entombed in the Cathedral of Peter and Paul, I believe the three are Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana and Anastasia.

I'm with Dr. Maples, I believe that Anastasia is missing. With that said, I think that the bodies of her and Alexei are yet to be found, but are somewhere in the Koptyaki forest.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AnneS on February 17, 2004, 10:51:43 AM
Though I don't have anything new to add to this discussion, I've always been under the impression that the missing bodies were absolutely Alexis' and either Anastasia's or Marie's.  

I have come across articles and at least one book that claims Alexis survived and is buried in Canada.  The purported facts escape me right now but I do remember that the grave has the royal crest on it.  Is anyone familiar with the story?  Also, could the family of the person who claimed to be Alexis be sued by Romanov descendants for using the crest?  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: insight on February 17, 2004, 02:37:32 PM
I saw that on a web site too. All you to do is compare the photo's...IMHO he looked nothing like Alexei. When you look at two photo's, you would see it "in the eyes" if it were him.

It's an interesting question about the crest though. My guess is that they probably wouldn't waste their time. I would also think that it would be frustrating for the Romanov family with all the "unproven claims".

If you were Alexei or Anastasia and you had survived, would you honestly risk your life/spouse's life or that of your children? In fact you would probably go to extreme lengths to keep it a secret.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: emily on February 17, 2004, 06:04:07 PM
Quote
Personally, I don't think Anna Anderson looked like Anastasia at all.  All the pictures--she's got her head bowed in a certain way that one sees in some pictures of Anastasia, and the nose looks similar from that angle, but that's the ONLY resemblance I've noticed, ever.  I agree with Bob wholeheartedly!

??? ??? ??? ??? ??? :ooh my gosh i dont know what i think anastasia is a historical figure yat they did have a blood test from one of her closest kin and they didnt match so i believe that anna isnt anastasia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Galina on February 18, 2004, 09:19:07 AM
Dear Anne
Romanovs would have been very busy indeed if they took everyone to court for using their name, crest ect.
So many pretenders. I think they generally handeled it all with dignity.



Speaking about survivors:yes, there is all scientific evidence we can have, but, but, but - how could people who new real Anastasia recognise her in AA? It is odd who Russia revolution repearts the French one -there was a story of 'missing'' Dophine, too...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on February 18, 2004, 06:09:00 PM
I don't know... maybe it's me, but Anna Anderson and Anastasia look absolutely nothing alike to me! I have always been fascinated by this story and read quite a few books on the topic, and have seen many pictures. Even prior to the revelation of the discovery of the nine bodies in shallow grave in siberia, and consequent DNA testing of Anna Anderson's remains, I always wondered how people can accept the fact that she may be the same person, if the features in the pictures look completely different. Yes, a person's face ages and changes somewhat, but the basic features stay the same. Anna Anderson's features were not even similar to Anastasia's!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on February 20, 2004, 02:36:00 AM
I 100% agree with you, Helenazar: you only have to look at the photographs to know she is completely false.

"Oh, but [insert name of person here] recognised her as Anastasia", pro-Anna Anderson folks will say. To them I say: whoever recognised Anna Anderson as Anastasia was: A) being unrealistically hopeful, B) was bribed or C) couldn't've known or remembered Anastasia as well as they thought.

It's very obvious that Anna Anderson was NOT Anastasia. You only need to look at the photos and be honest with yourself.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on March 03, 2004, 09:15:23 PM
It seems to me that we should not take our opinions too seriously. The matter of identifying someone through photographs is a completely personal opinion. We must all remember that during the "Anastasia" trials experts all agreed that Anastasia and Anna Anderson are the same person.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on March 05, 2004, 04:00:34 AM
My opinion is that they had completely different facial structures . . . I honestly believe that anyone that cannot see this must be deceiving themselves. No disrespect intended, but I honestly cannot understand how folks could say that they could be the same person. The shape of the nose, forehead, chin and cheekbones are completely different.  ::)

On the other hand, Anna Anderson's and Franziska Schanzkowska's features were, at worst, very similar.

I understand that some folks disagree with me, and I respect that . . . everyone is entitled to their opinion.  :)

As for the experts identifying Anna Anderson as Anastasia . . . I must question their credibility. DNA results proved them wrong.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on March 05, 2004, 04:04:17 PM
   I'm not advocating Anna or anything like that. However, I personally can not deny the fact that experts believed Anna was Anastasia.
  I also believe there is not much of a resembelance between the two. Then again I haven't really studied the photos under a magnifying glass. It's just another interesting thing about Anna Anderson. They have the same foot defect and they have very similar ears. True, DNA has "proved" that Anna is not Anastasia. However there are even questions about the reliability of Anna's DNA. There is also the fact that Anna Anderson and Schanzkowska had different shoe sizes and hair color.
 Whoever Anna Anderson is she will always remain an enigma. If she wasn't Anastasia she was obviously disturbed. At any rate it sure is an interesting story.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Scott Williams on March 15, 2004, 12:34:28 AM
Have studied the sujbect of HIH Tsar Nicholai for years.

Fascinating and as you all write, there are theories, BUT concerning HIH Grand Duchess Anastasia, one ought to pay careful heed to the Court Process in Germany in the 1960s, Anna Anderson's last attempt at having her identity recognised and realise the meticulous German court could not decide either way.
The study took in facial features; earlobes which are like finger prints; etc. etc. Even the Dowager Empress was nearly convinced till that ONE main Prince Romanov who lived in France and refused to accept her... there were political reasons for this.

Further studies show that the USSR watched and watches all proceedings very carefully and that they did indeed 'exert pressures' against any positive identification.
HIH Grand Duchess Anastasia was plump; small and tending to put on weight easily. Although through the influence of HIH Tsaritsa Alexandra all but Alexei spoke English mainly as the daily language, all the children were tutored in and had a fluent knowledge of German, French etc. The Russian Royal family were often in Poland and this language was known also to them.
A very close study of the DNA results did indicate that when HRH The Prince Philip of Britain gave his blood for the comparison, those who were 'against' applauded and congratulated themselves... BUT A FEW YEARS later we read in the newspapers that experts no longer recognise the DNA tests as they were corrupted by procedures which were not fulfilled 100% WHY does one hear so little of this??

Anyone reading the Filatov book claiming that Alexei indeed also escaped; survived in Southern Russia and died in the 1980s... having released only bits of information to his family over the years; and knew the authorities would never let him live if he revealed the information... the book is now translated from the Russian language... and I'm not talking about the chap in Canada who claimed to be the Tsarevitch.

Anyone notice how, though the Tsaritsa adopted the Russian Orthodox religion, she brought the family up with deep biblical beliefs according to her former Lutheran teaching... a mixture; but the children were very biblically-based.

Scott Williams. [Australia]
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on March 24, 2004, 07:15:35 PM
Here are a couple of problems that I have with photographic comparisons:

* It's always easy to spot a resemblance between similar physical types.  There was a girl in my college sorority called Laura who bore a strong, strong resemblance to GD Marie in terms of build and general facial characteristics.  When Laura reaches middle age, I have no doubt that photos of her would echo this resemblance, and give us an idea what Marie might have looked like had she lived that long.  And I don't suppose that Laura is the only person ever born to look like Marie -- there must be, after all, a certain finite number of ways that facial features can be arranged, as well as a finite number of physical types.  I find it easy to write off photographic comparisons for this reason alone, especially as --

* -- most comparisons that we are asked to make are between a photograph of a young Grand Duchess and a middle-aged or even elderly woman.  Are there NO photos of these claimants at a young age?  For instance, a photo of Olga and Michael at the time of their wedding might be nice.

* I think our minds are pre-conditioned by our own prejudices to reject or accept these alleged resemblances -- in other words, if you want to see the likeness, it's there, and if you don't, it's not.  I think professional photographic comparisons are more complex that just eyeballing grainy photos.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Jessica Z. on April 01, 2004, 06:34:42 PM
I myself do not believe that Anna Anderson and Anastasia were the same person.  Having read Robert Massie's book "The Romanovs: The Final Chapter" I came to this conclusion.  Anna Anderson was acutally polish and she was found in a mental hospital.  There are people who knew her as Anna Anderson who have stated that she had hinted to not being the princess.  Massie is my most trusted author on the Romanov's and I trust his opinion on these things.  There's a pretty big section in the book on imatators to the throne its acutally quite interesting.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on April 01, 2004, 06:46:57 PM
Not to discredit Massie or his books which I have read and appreciate. However don't let him be your final word on the subject. Read all of the books about Anna Anderson if you want an objective opinion.

I'm sorry, but I can't fathom reading one book and expecting that one book to be totally objective. I've read alot of books and I read them all with an open mind. You must also take into account exactly what the author is trying to convince you of.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet Whitcomb on April 01, 2004, 07:01:03 PM
Massie's work is the entry point for many of us.  But since he is an excellent researcher, I'm sure he wouldn't mind knowing that we use his works as a starting point, then continue on.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on April 01, 2004, 07:05:56 PM
Yes, well Jessica Z. said she came to a "conclusion" based on Massie's book. I suggested she read further rather than take his book as the "last word" on the Anna Anderson situation.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Katharina on April 02, 2004, 04:25:30 AM
When trying to answer a question about the imperial family's dentist I found the following information:

According to Ian Vorres, Dr. Kostrizky, the dentist of the imperial family, testified that the jaws of Mrs.Tchaikovsky-Anderson had nothing in common with the jaws-of which there was a plaster impression-of Grand Duchess Anastasia.

Is this true? If so, why is this statement neglected in all past and present claimant's discussions?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on April 02, 2004, 07:28:42 AM
Where did you find this information?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: John Sarkissian on April 04, 2004, 05:11:07 PM
Rob,
I recently posted a comment about why mosr picture comparisons use pictures from similar angles, not to make them look similar but because it is the only logical way to show similarities, since pictures from different angles of the same person can often be misleading to the identity of the person.
However this reply either didn't get posted, or ot was removed. I believe I posted it under the photo aging discussion group. But it is not even there? :'(

John
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on April 04, 2004, 06:37:40 PM
John
Not my doing. I do not remember the post, and certainly did not remove it for any reason.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Katharina on April 06, 2004, 01:31:16 AM
Quote
According to Ian Vorres, Dr. Kostrizky, the dentist of the imperial family, testified that the jaws of Mrs.Tchaikovsky-Anderson had nothing in common with the jaws-of which there was a plaster impression-of Grand Duchess Anastasia.


Quote
Where did you find this information?


Jmentanko,
this text can be found in the book "The Last Grand Duchess" by Ian Vorres, 2001 edition, ISBN 1552633020, p. 253, Notes to Chapter Nine, Note 1 (4) right column.

Can anybody confirm Ian Vorres' statement? Do you think he got this information from Grand Duchess Olga?

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: investigator on April 20, 2004, 10:18:32 AM
Ok if Anna Anderson was not Anastasia how come she knew about that trip her uncle Grand Duke Ernst of Hesse made to Russia in 1916 when his country and Russia were at war.  So how did she know this? Who told her?  I mean i am sure she did not read this in a book.  She had to be there to know this.  I know what the DNA report says and in view of that report Anna Anderson was not Anastasia.  

Well it is sad to see Anna Anderson because it seems that she was not a normal person and was very disturbed.  I truly hope from my heart that Anastasia survived and lived a complete life because it somehow lessens the tradegy.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BobAtchison on April 20, 2004, 12:28:46 PM
Unfortunately for F.S. this trip never took place, so F.S. recounting the story is no indicator of her having special, insider knowlege of any kind.

Bob
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BobAtchison on April 20, 2004, 12:45:24 PM
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.

When FS walked into the hospital chapel with Olga she crossed herself instinctively in the Catholic manner - had she been one of the Tsar's daughters she never would have done this.  A Polish Catholic would.

There were other indicators that she wasn't Tatiana or Anastasia they told me but those are the two that pop out in my mind and the one about the dentist directly relates to this thread.

They heard this directly from Olga and other members of the family.

Bob
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on April 20, 2004, 04:44:20 PM
If I recall correctly Anna Anderson was "married" to some man before she was found in Berlin. They were married in a Catholic ceremony. I go to a Catholic school and if I remember correctly (I could be wrong) you have to be baptized Catholic before you can be married in a Catholic ceremony.

Therefore, I think that the story about her marriage corresponds with how she crosses herself. It makes sense.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on April 22, 2004, 11:40:28 PM
Actually, both parties don't have to be Roman Catholic to be married in the RC church. If one is and the other agrees to raise the children RC, then they are allowed to marry.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on April 23, 2004, 08:10:23 AM
Thanks for clearing that up. The main reason I believed it to be true was because before my Aunt and Uncle were married Catholic he "had" to be baptized Catholic. Everyone told me it was because they both had to be RC to be married RC!

And to think it was all a big lie ;D!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Valmont on April 23, 2004, 02:25:50 PM
Quote
Ok if Anna Anderson was not Anastasia how come she knew about that trip her uncle Grand Duke Ernst of Hesse made to Russia in 1916 when his country and Russia were at war.  So how did she know this? Who told her?  I mean i am sure she did not read this in a book.  She had to be there to know this.  I know what the DNA report says and in view of that report Anna Anderson was not Anastasia.  

Well it is sad to see Anna Anderson because it seems that she was not a normal person and was very disturbed.  I truly hope from my heart that Anastasia survived and lived a complete life because it somehow lessens the tradegy.  


Somehow, deep down in our hearts we wish they could have escaped and live happily ever after. Unfortunatelly, the facts had showed us the contrary.
Anna WAS NOT Gd Anastassia..

Best

Arturo Vega-Llausás
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Joanna Mayer on April 23, 2004, 10:52:32 PM
This is a very understandable and well expressed notion. Of course the princess ought to live happily ever after...but I dont think that history and fairy tales often match up...sigh!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: borgia on April 29, 2004, 08:38:08 PM
I wonder if Anna truly did beleive that she was Anastasia;or was she knowingly pulling a hoax,or was she so out of touch with reality ,that she just  had no idea of what she was doing and saying.I read that John,the man she married,was as much a loon that he claimed that Anna was related to several other famous people, who had no connection to the Romanovs.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on April 29, 2004, 08:45:06 PM
Whoever Anna Anderson is I am certain that she believed inside she was GD Anastasia. I don't think anyone can keep a front like she did for as long as she did.

I don't like Manahan. It's my opinion he married Anna only because he thought that she had "connections." I think that is disgusting. He disgusts me.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Namarolf on April 29, 2004, 11:18:19 PM
What about Queen Sophia and Juan Carlos of Spain? I think they got married in an Orthodox Church in Athens (I recall a pic of them with the marriage crowns about their heads), so I guess she was still Orthodox. And if she was -did the Roman Catholic Church allows a Roman Catholic to get married in a non Catholic ceremony? Was there a Roman Catholic ceremony also? I would be very thankful if some of our friends from Spain in this forum could provide some details  about this.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: darius on April 30, 2004, 04:11:22 AM
Juan Carlos of Bourbon and Sofia of Greece were married in May 1962 by Catholic and Orthodox rites.The Catholic service came first in the San Dionisio Church followed by an Orthodox ceremonyin Athens Metropolitan Cathedral. I imagine that although Don Juan Carlos was only designated by Franco as his successor rather that a Prince of Asturias or an Actual monarch as in the case of his grandfather Alfonso XIII Sofia would have been required to convert to Roman Catholicism as in the case of her predecessor Victoria Eugenie of Battenburg prior to her marriage to Alfonso XIII in 1906.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BobAtchison on April 30, 2004, 08:56:18 AM
Toothless, homely, unsophisticated and poor, Anna/Franziska was an unlikely candidate for the fame she received. Coming from humble, even what we would call 'backwoods' or 'red-neck' origins, she ended up circulating in the highest circles of society and gained true celebrity status.  She had beautiful clothes, furs, expensive accessories - high-born men paid court to her.  She loved the glamour and the attention she received.

Anna/Franzinska was a con-artist from the beginning.  She may not have been educated but she was street smart, cunning and willing to take huge risks.  She knew she was lying all along and no fool.  Her family knew the lies she was telling but they stood back in awe of what she had achieved and decided not to oppose her. Her lies made her one of the most famous characters in the 20th century - hey, she even had a stage play and movie done about her - and Ingrid Bergman played her!  What a compliment that would have been - one of the most beautiful woman of the time playing you.

For her entourage of followers she must have felt a mixture of contempt and conspiratorial pride that she had attracted a mafia-like cadre of supporters. Some of them must have grown to realize she was a fraud, but they either stayed with her for the 'ride' or were afraid to admit they had been wrong about her.

It takes a strong, manipulative even criminal mind to be able to pull off the deception Anna/Franziska did.  I think it started out small and just got - to her excitement, fear and delight - bigger and bigger.  The more attention she received the bigger the stakes and the bigger the reward.  Anna/Franziska was one smart cookie, she knew what to do to cover her tracks and she was willing to do whatever the cost to keep it going.  She was utterly indifferent to what happened to her supporters, or what they paid emotionally or financially for their adherence to her cause.  A successful con-artist cares nothing for her victims.  There are plenty of examples of such people today.

The true story of Franziska is worthy of a great movie for she was
one of the greatest frauds in modern times.  It's not only a story about her, it's also about her victims....

Bob
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: butterball on April 30, 2004, 11:15:04 AM
 isn't it possible that the poor woman having become traumatized...tried to kill herself and then having failed that ...accepted a new life as a lost but glamourous GD - she may not have even innitially intended to lie...she may have actually forgotten that she was Fransiska ?  

a real metamorphosis so to speack        
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BobAtchison on April 30, 2004, 12:22:56 PM
We all need to watch for con-artists out there - you never know when these wolves in sheep's clothing will appear and make you their next victim.  Here's some advice I found on the web:

SIGNALS THAT SHOULD MAKE YOU SUSPICIOUS

Most people are probably not going to fall for the short con of the carnival barker, at least not more than once.  It is the Long Con - the well laid out plan of a shrewd talker and planner that will trap the truly unsuspecting - like the Microsoft executive, like the Eiffel Tower purchaser.  These are the people that do the serious damage and who must be guarded against.  

You cannot buy a security system to protect yourself from these people.  The only security system you have is your good judgment - something that is not always up to par when you are financially desperate or painfully lonely.  Therefore, here are some warning signals that should be heeded when you are vulnerable and a stranger or even a friend that you do not really know a lot about starts making plans for your money:

 "I'll Never Steal from You"  

(1)  Beware of the person who says, "I'll never steal from you," when discussing the "plan."  That's like saying, "I'll never throw food in your face."   If they feel the need to bring this up, it means they are actually imaging the act of throwing food in your face - or stealing from you. Responsible, honest people wouldn't even think the thought. 

"Any Day Now..."        
 
(2)  Beware of the person who says, "We're almost there,"  over and over and over and over, or any variation of this concept, such as "Any day now,"  "We've got to get this show on the road," "Next month, I'm going to....", "My big check will be here any day"...The con artist will stretch this anticipation out as long as you will tolerate it.  When the con man suspects you have finally had enough, he will spring his trap and disappear with your money. 

Most victims will allow this procrastination to extend long beyond a common sense deadline because THEY DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH.  Their denial is no different than denial by a spouse who suspects infidelity in their mate.  The financial and emotional losses that will result when the truth is acknowledged are too painful to face.  As long as the truth is denied, maybe it really isn't the truth.  Inevitably, the con artist will help the victim face the cruel reality of the truth by fleeing with all the money that his allotted time would allow him to collect.

The Contract that Is Supposed to "Protect" You

 (3)  The richest man in America knew the value of a contract even when he was a kid.  Bill Gates actually convinced his sister to sign a contract securing some mutual agreement between them when they were still school kids living at home.  He no doubt recognized that the enforcers of legal contracts - the law (in this case, his parents) would have the power to require fulfillment of the terms if necessary.  However, this law is only good for law abiders.  I have watched a doctor who lost approximately $1400 in a Small Claims Court judgment go from "Oh well, do I pay this at the court clerk's window?" to "Never mind, I'll talk to my attorney and get back to you." when he was advised by the judge that it was the plaintiff's responsibility, not the court's, to collect the money.  

Enforcement of laws comes in two forms: conscience or coercion.  A signed contract is only enforceable if you have the money to pursue it in court.  Therefore, when you sign a contract with an employee, business partner, friend; when you sign over a piece of real estate, a  vehicle, etc., you are almost certainly guaranteeing that any fraudulent issues which may arise will go to civil, not criminal, court.  

Never, never sign a contract without an attorney or totally objective third party's participation and notarized signature.  The con man can change any part of  the contract that was made between you and him.  The police may only require him to fax a copy  of the signed agreement - just to get you off their back and close the case. 

However, in Small Claims Court, if you are attempting to collect on a debt, you can be certain that very few minutes will pass before the judge looks at you and says, "Do you have a signed contract?"  Therefore, if you try to collect civilly on a debt, you are already at a disadvantage if you do not have a signed contract with the defendant.  But if you do have a contract, the chances are the police will not help you....

The Victim as the "Traitor" 

(8)  The con artist will attempt to gain control of your thinking so that you won't use your common sense.  He may even become belligerent at times in the hopes of intimidating you into compliance.  He will never do this at the beginning of the scam before he gains your confidence.  He will wait till the end when you are tiring of the excuses or procrastination.  He will attempt to make you feel like a traitor to the "cause" or a fool who doesn't have the patience to wait just a little longer to make a lot of money.

Never fall for this.  Use your common sense.  What are the reasons that he is procrastinating?  Check them out for yourself.  If he won't tell you or won't give you someone to contact, allow your common sense to take over - and end the scam before you lose more than you already have.

Here's a link to the complete page with more on this.

Bob

http://www.straightshooter.net/Beware_of_the_Con_Artist.htm
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet Whitcomb on April 30, 2004, 12:56:09 PM
Bob, if "Anna" was not Anastasia, and--just as importantly--didn't think she was Anastasia, and managed to deceive so many people . . . that says something (actually, quite a lot) about the people who supported her. Either they also were enjoying the coattail ride, wanted to support the bedraggled woman (whoever she was) out of sympathy, or wanted to believe in her for any number of reasons that would dovetail with their own psychological needs.

I'm still in the process of accepting your explanation re: Gleb Botkin. I'll get there  :) , but since his father was, from all I've read, such a stickler for veracity, as well as being a very introspective person, it's difficult for me to think of Gleb as going along with something, long after he might have begun to feel uneasy about it . . . and his sister doing the same. After all, although they did not forfeit their lives, their lives were certainly turned upside down, and they lost not only their parent but their greatest advocate.

It would be interesting to know how Manahan was regarded before all the Anna/Anastasia hoopla.  At some point I think "Anna"--despite earlier shystering--may well have considered herself the actual grand duchess, looking upon all those photos adorning the Manahan home as actual photos of her. (The "Anastasia Complex"?  ::) ) I've read enough about her final years with Manahan to think that, at the end, they were both mentally and physically frail people, clinging to each other and to life.

But the earlier portion of her story--with so many people believing in her, incorporating her into their lives, or simply investing their time/energy/money due to the curiosity/novelty factor--sounds like a 20th century version of "The Emperor's New Clothes." (Not, of course, to be confused with the 20th Century Fox version!  ;) )
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet Whitcomb on April 30, 2004, 01:05:30 PM
Excellent points all, Bob. Thanks also for the website. Unfortunately, Life is a 24/7 exercise in "watch your back."
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on April 30, 2004, 01:59:29 PM
It's all so simple, isn't it . . .
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BobAtchison on April 30, 2004, 02:57:43 PM
Thanks, Janet - having been a victim in the past all I can say is I wish I had known then what I know now!

Bob
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on May 02, 2004, 09:55:32 AM
I consider Anna to be intelligent. No doubt she wasn't "book smart." However, she was certaintly good at manipulating/dealing with people. I have to give her some credit.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on May 02, 2004, 10:17:07 AM
Many "con artists" WANT people to think they are not very intelligent, it lends credence to their tales. Usually, a con artist gains trust by telling their victim exactly what the victim wants and expects to hear. They have an answer for everything, always plausible. Excuses for everything when questioned, delaying actual proof as long as possible, changing their story as needed or ignoring the question completely and changing the subject to something else to deflect the genuine question. Eventually, they will turn against their "friend" when the victim realizes the truth, and they will lay blame on the "friend/victim" again to try to disguise their con. That which they complain of most loudly is what they themselves are hiding. The one thing they can NEVER do is provide the actual, genuine proof of their claims, they always provide some ambiguous, yet believable, generality, but NEVER can provide the actual facts proven by a verified outside source....is always just smoke and mirrors, nothing of substance or reality.

I think Anna Anderson knew exactly what she was doing...a typical con act.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on May 02, 2004, 07:21:10 PM
Just another word of warning. Sadly, folks, "Joanna Meyer" or whoever it is still tried to come into the forum again today using phony addresses and names as a guest. This time, they used "frontline@pbs.org" as an email!! all the IP addresses though resolve to Denver Colorado and attworldnet or a colorado public office IP. If you ever wonder if someone is serious, click on the little envelope under the guests name, and you will get their email address. THESE were clearly bogus postings still attempting to disrupt the forum for some sick and twisted reasons. Sorry again if anyone read their silly stuff. Talk about wasting time and energy, you would think these losers would identify their real identity if they really wanted to participate, or otherwise devote themselves to something constructive and publicly useful instead.
FA
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on May 02, 2004, 10:58:01 PM
Thank you for letting us know this, FA. It's a shame someone will go to this extent to cause problems on our forum!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: borgia on May 12, 2004, 06:12:53 PM
Whatever,whoever Anna Anderson was;its too bad that she could not have  come to enjoy her life and found some real happiness  .
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: wintermead on May 13, 2004, 12:30:10 PM
  Well its hard to blame a lost and mentally unstable woman (who's real life was so difficult) for regecting  that personality and  then embracing a life of drama and romance as another person!

 Maybe its not so much that Fransisca LIED about being Anastasia as she simply forgot herself...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Guinastasia on May 14, 2004, 02:15:53 PM
Could she possibly have just been delusional?  I mean, most historians accept that Anderson was mentally ill-perhaps she really DID indeed believe she was Anastasia-she seemed to me less as someone trying a fraud and more of someone with delusions of grandeur.  (Like people who think they're Napoleon, or Jesus or whoever).

From what I've read, the woman was used by a lot of people, and she was, to put it bluntly, crazier than an outhouse rat (case in point-she was a hoarder, an animal hoarder, both big warning signs), paranoid, delusional, etc.  

So I don't think it was a deliberate hoax, at least not on her part.  Of if it started out as one, it sure seems like she believed it.  


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Ivan Kent Steinke on May 17, 2004, 03:09:06 PM
     I am not entirely convinced that Anna Anderson and Grand Duchess Anastasia were not the same person. Lili Dehn, Tatiana Botkin, Grand Duke Andrei, Mathilde Kesschinska- all of these persons positively identified this woman as being their friend or relative.
     Even if, however, Anna Anderson was not Anastasia she was certainly not Franziska Schanskowska, regardless of what the DNA says. Whoever she was, and whatever life she lived before, her existance is documented from Feb. 17, 1920. Franziska did not dissapear until March. The two of them are accounted for at the SAME TIME! Also, Anna Anderson was examined by a German doctor in the 1950s, a doctor who certified that she had once been pregnant and given birth. The Schanskowska family affirmed, once, that Franziska had never been pregnant.
    I think there is a simple answer to the problem with the DNA. If you look carefully at the whole procedure you will find that there was only one European royal family directly involved- the Windsor, in England. The Hohenzollerns no longer have anything to lose politically [if Anna Anderson turns out to be Anastasia]. The Romanovs have nothing to lose politically, either- only the Windsors, who would suffer a massive public relations nightmare at having left a poor royal cousin in the gutter. There are already many in England who see the Windsors as incorrigibly corrupt, and who clamor for their removal. Does Prince Phillip want this scandal to make things worse? Of course not.
    The Windsor family is one of the wealthiest in the world, with a fortune exceeding $25 billion for the queen alone. Also, contrary to what some people, the royal family of Great Britain is not absolutely devoid of power. In some ways they are still one of the most powerful families in the world.
    It would not have been difficult, at all, for the Windsors to have rigged the results, in order to protect their own public relations image and political position.
   
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on May 17, 2004, 04:53:10 PM
According to Forbes the Queen is worth $525 million.

BTW, your "simple" answer to this problem, is not simple at all.

But hey, whatever pumps your tires!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on June 25, 2004, 12:33:41 PM
Is it true that Anna Anderson first said she was G.D. Tatiana?

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on June 25, 2004, 04:43:35 PM
AGRBear,

As far as I know, someone else supposedly said it about her while she was in a mental hospital... Personally I think that the fact that the poor woman was in such a place, is a pretty good sign that she was a bit unstable.....I am still convinced that this woman -having undergone some significant emotional trauma- chose to reject one painful history for a new "past". I wonder if she was  even aware of this "choice" herself.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on June 25, 2004, 05:44:49 PM
So, the next questions might be:
Did she jump into the canel or was she pushed?

Did she belong in the asylum or was this just what the German police did automaticaly when it appeared someone tried to commet sucide and needed help...?

Or was she from day one part of some deep dark CHEKA plot to make sure no one believe another person who claimed they were a survivor of the night of the 16/17 July 1918?

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on June 26, 2004, 06:42:50 AM
Sigh . . .  I cannot comprehend how some people can still believe that Anna Anderson was Anastasia. It's preposterous. There is overwhelming evidence against it. She was Franziska Schanzkowska. One only has to look at a photo of Anna Anderson, and a photo of Franziska Schanzkowska, to see that they are one and the same.

If this is not enough, Anna Anderson has different features to Anastasia. The nose, the eyes, the mouth, they're all different.

Thirdly, we have the DNA evidence.

Some people are always going to believe that Anna Anderson was Anastasia, but the evidence against this is overwhelming.

Furthermore, I recall that Mr Atchison wrote on another thread here that Anderson was overheard speaking in Polish on occasions. This is because she was Franziska Schanzkowska.

And just to confirm - yes, it was suggested by a patient (Clara Peuthert) at the Dalldorf Asylum that Anna Anderson was Tatiana.

Quote: "At first she accepted her identity, however the realisation she was considerably shorter was a factor in her switch to Anastasia."

From:http://www.fr-d-serfes.org/royal/annaanderson.htm

In addition: one cannot fail to notice that on all the websites that promote the "Anna Anderson was Anastasia" theory, photos of Franziska Schanzkowska are omitted. This is because Anderson and Schanzkowska are the same person, and the webmasters of these websites would be inadvertedly contradicting themselves to include photos of Schanzkowska.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lisa on June 26, 2004, 07:07:41 AM
Alice,I totally agree with you!

(http://www.dnai.org/images/mc4/romanovs/anna_anderson.jpg)

Here is Anna...I can't find a photo of Francizca on the web....
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on June 26, 2004, 11:18:24 AM
I found some photos of dear Franny on the web.

http://www.peterkurth.com/ANNA-ANASTASIA%20NOTES%20ON%20FRANZISKA%20SCHANZKOWSKA.htm

It's Peter Kurth's website too.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Peter Kurth on June 26, 2004, 12:44:15 PM
Not only that, but there are just three pictures of "Franny" on it -- actually, only one, showing how it changed over time with various retouchings.

Cheers!  pk ::)


Quote
I found some photos of dear Franny on the web.

http://www.peterkurth.com/ANNA-ANASTASIA%20NOTES%20ON%20FRANZISKA%20SCHANZKOWSKA.htm

It's Peter Kurth's website too.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Ilana on June 26, 2004, 03:01:47 PM
It's very hard to tell in some instances.  Luckily, I'm not sure it even matters anymore.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on June 26, 2004, 04:50:58 PM
Quote
Not only that, but there are just three pictures of "Franny" on it -- actually, only one, showing how it changed over time with various retouchings.

Cheers!  pk ::)


Oopsy, next time I'll specify.

I'm so glad to know you're checking up with this discussion. Franny and/or Anna would be very pleased.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on June 26, 2004, 10:15:36 PM
I encourage everybody to minimise this window so that only the photo posted by Lisa is showing, and put it beside the photo of Franziska on Mr Kurth's website.

Note how even the part in the hair is at exactly the same place on both Anna Anderson and Franziska. Anna Anderson's eyes are further apart than Anastasia's. Also, I love the comparison of the ears. Note how the lobe of Anna Anderson's ear is much thicker than that of Anastasia's ear.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lisa on June 27, 2004, 03:42:54 AM
I remember to have read a small item on Anna. There was  photos of Anastasia, of Anna and of Francizsa...  I did not understand how one had been able to believe that Anna and Anastasia were the same person, while Anna and Francizsa did not was!!!  There were some  years between the photos of Francizca and the ones of Anna and it was visibly the same person!!!

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on June 28, 2004, 04:55:20 AM
Lisa - YES! I was reading a book about Anna Anderson (the title escapes me) and there were photos of Anastasia, Anna Anderson and Franziska. When I saw the photo of Franziska I did a double-take - I was SURE they must've captioned it wrong, and it was meant to be captioned "Anna Anderson". I was thunderstruck that, with the existence of this photo of Franziska, anyone could believe that Anna Anderson was Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lisa on June 28, 2004, 11:15:38 AM
This is for that, that I wanted to add a photo of Anna and of Franzisca!  ...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on July 09, 2004, 02:14:23 PM
Yeah, and also, in James Blair Lovell's book, there is a picture of Anna Anderson's ear in close-up and a picture of Anastasia's ear in close-up. The photos are captioned "Comparison of Anastasia's ear with Anna Anderson's.

THE PICTURE OF "ANASTASIA" WAS ACTUALLY of Grand Duchess MARIE. I hope that is not the picture they used to determine her authenticity.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on July 09, 2004, 02:17:45 PM
On the pro-Anderson side, however, it is known that Franziska S. had black hair and her family didn't know what color eyes she had, while Anna Anderson's hair was light brown and everyone remarked on her blue eyes.

I am merely playing Devil's Advocate here. I am not decided on this enigma yet :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on July 11, 2004, 12:38:48 AM
Has anyone read the book "The Pretender" by Mary Morrissey? It is about anna anderson, I think. Judging by the title it's not in her favor!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on July 11, 2004, 10:48:34 AM
Abby,

   Hello! I agree with you regarding the notorious "Ear" mixup...but surely we are flogging a dead horse with this topic... I thought that the DNA results made this all quite clear...although it is a great fascination to see how people can convince themeselves of almost anything even in the face of evidence to the contrary.        
   Anna A. was a sad and disturbed woman who convinced a number of people (and herself) that she was Anastasia. I don't think that this was a deliberate fraud, I doubt that she was clever enough for that, or else she would have develeloped a better command of  Russian, French and English. Nevertheless I am convinced that she was not who she claimed to be.
   I'm not familiar with the book that you mentioned.

R.    
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on July 11, 2004, 03:35:51 PM
I always thought that Anna had a better understanding of English than German. Or, perhaps I'm thinking of somebody else. :-/
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on July 11, 2004, 05:09:35 PM
Yes, rskkiya, I agree that she was just very delusional and beleived, in her mind, that she was Anastasia.

JM, I read in "Alexandra: The Last Tsarina" that the Grand Duchesses learned English, Russian, French, and German, in that order. So you are right. They also spoke English with their mother all the time. So they didn't have much reason to speak in German.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 12, 2004, 09:36:30 PM
I would love to believe she was the real thing, but I don't. As far back as the 30's, the siblings of the Polish factory worker she turned out to be were trying to tell everyone it was her.

I don't think she looked anything like Anastasia. Okay the ear, that's it. Her face shape and body shape were nothing like Anastasia. Remember Anastasia was 17 when she vanished, and would have been in her mid 20's when she 'reappeared.' People don't change that much from 17 to 15, I didn't change at all. It didn't look like her.

How can the memories be explained? Easy, and I'm surprised no one thoiught of it before.

Gleb Botkin!

The doctor's son who grew up with the Imperial children. They were playmates and had an elaborate fantasy world together as shown in a recently released book of his drawings made for the children. Gleb was the same age as Anastasia, and probably had a crush on her. He saw her last in the window of the Ipatev house. He waved and bowed to her in the window, then had to go because no one was allowed to stay and look at the house.

So Gleb knew all the personal inside stuff of the Imperial kids. He lived in the palace for years, and was with them in Tobolsk, right up until they were moved to Ekaterinburg. A lot of the memories she would have had were a part of his life, too. Even the Ernie thing.

Consider too that Gleb was a writer, a journalist, and would have been good at creating a fantasy. Greed cannot be ruled out. If she could be proven to be Anatasia, she'd be rich. It could have worked- she'd be Anastasia, he'd feed her the memories, they'd split the money. I don't mean to accuse anyone, and if this were true I can' t say I'd even blame him. It was a brilliant plan.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on July 12, 2004, 10:33:55 PM
One thing I can tell you absolutely and positively is that Gleb Botkin was no con-man.  He truly and strongly believed in Anastasia Manahan, and he never wavered in this belief.  

If she was Anastasia -- and I myself believe it likely that she was -- then Gleb and his sister Tatiana were her two truest friends. And if she wasn't Anastasia, then the Botkins were still her truest friends -- and you do them a grave disservice by suspecting them in this manner.  Belief in Anastasia Manahan does not equate with criminal intention -- especially as this "criminal endeavor" made none of them into rich people -- quite the opposite, in fact.

And it's also a matter of fact that neither Gleb nor his sister "lived in the palace for years."  In fact, the only member of the Botkin family with regular entree to the palace was Dr Eugene -- and his involvement with and devotion to the Imperial Family was a point of contention with Mrs Botkin, and put a strain on their marriage.

Gleb was also not "with" the family in Tobolsk.  He lived in the Kornilov House across the road, was never allowed into the house, and was even stopped from waving to the girls from the street.

So the Botkin children's contact with the Imperial children is something that is often exaggerated.  ;)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on July 12, 2004, 11:16:06 PM
There are a lot of things about Anna Anderson that i cannot understand. I mean, for example, that cannot help wondering how could she have so much information(even when she made many mistakes describing the Alexander palace rooms) on the private life of the Imperial family. It´s amazing the interview she had in Seeon with Felix Dassel, an old soldier she knew from her and Maria´s hospital in the Feodorovsky village. She knew even his nickname. After a couple of days he told she could be no other but the real Anastasia.
Still more difficult for me to understand is how Lily Dehn, being so close to the family did recognize her at once...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on July 12, 2004, 11:20:30 PM
Honestly, I am NOT trying to offend anyone, but I have to comment on the treatment of Peter Kurth in this forum.  I thought people of all views were welcome here, but it seems that Mr. Kurth, a respectable person, is thoroughly and utterly loathed here at the forum.  I believe that someone remarked rather distastefully about pictures of Franziska Shanzkowska on his website, and then when Mr. Kurth came here in order to set the record straight, he was quite rudely rebuffed by a snide little comment that went something like, "I'm glad you're checking up on our formum, Mr. Kurth" (something like that).  I myself tend to lean to the side of Anna undoubtedly being Anastasia, but I respect other's opinions.  However, I highly resent comments like I've seen on this forum that are downright uncalled for directed at someone who believes Anna to be Anastasia.  And I also might add that a lot of people on this forum dismiss others who believe in Anna to be unrealistic and basically living in a dream world, and everything they have to say is almost automatically discredited as wishful thinking, even though many of them like Mr. Kurth indeed have very legitimate facts.  I think everyone, no matter what their views, should refrain from distasteful personal assaults.

Again, I am not trying to alienate anybody on this forum.  I mean no disrespect.  I only want everyone to be able to share their ideas without being verbally attacked.

   Peace  :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 13, 2004, 07:53:13 AM
Quote
One thing I can tell you absolutely and positively is that Gleb Botkin was no con-man.  He truly and strongly believed in Anastasia Manahan, and he never wavered in this belief.  

If she was Anastasia -- and I myself believe it likely that she was -- then Gleb and his sister Tatiana were her two truest friends. And if she wasn't Anastasia, then the Botkins were still her truest friends -- and you do them a grave disservice by suspecting them in this manner.  Belief in Anastasia Manahan does not equate with criminal intention -- especially as this "criminal endeavor" made none of them into rich people -- quite the opposite, in fact.

And it's also a matter of fact that neither Gleb nor his sister "lived in the palace for years."  In fact, the only member of the Botkin family with regular entree to the palace was Dr Eugene -- and his involvement with and devotion to the Imperial Family was a point of contention with Mrs Botkin, and put a strain on their marriage.

Gleb was also not "with" the family in Tobolsk.  He lived in the Kornilov House across the road, was never allowed into the house, and was even stopped from waving to the girls from the street.

So the Botkin children's contact with the Imperial children is something that is often exaggerated.  ;)


I recently read a book put out by Gleb's daughter. According to that book, Gleb was VERY close to Anastasia, Alexei, and Marie. The book is full of artwork and stories they made up together about a ficticious world where animals run things. The fact that they were playmates and close friends was mentioned many times. Gleb's daughter got the information straight from her father.

edit: here is a link on the book
http://20th-century-history-books.com/0679451420.html

I do not mean to imply that Gleb was 'criminal' in his support of Anna. He may have really believed her, he may have only wished it was her until he did, or he may have really been feeding her memories, we will never know. Either way, Gleb and Anna were wonderful people and I have nothing bad to say about them, really. But it is a theory that cannot be discarded.

On the subject of Mr. Kurth's book, I totally enjoyed it.  It gives a lot of insight and  information on a lot of people and is very interesting, whether or not Anna was Anastasia. Even if she wasn't, I'd still like to believe Anastasia did get away and lived somewhere in obscurity.

I am from VA, where Mrs. Manahan eventually settled, and I followed her stories with great interest for for many years. I remember when she passed away and it was on the news, they showed her house and she had cats. I love cats too, and I was thinking what a wonderful, kind person she must have been tohave cared for all those cats. I really, really did want her to be Anastasia, but wasn't surprised when the DNA tests said she wasn't.  I had romaniticized the story so much when I was young, and as I got older and more  cynical and negative about everything, I could see she really didn't look like Anastasia at all and it probably wasn't true. But if it did somehow turn out that she was after all I would be delighted.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on July 13, 2004, 09:53:00 AM
Quote
Honestly, I am NOT trying to offend anyone, but I have to comment on the treatment of Peter Kurth in this forum.  I thought people of all views were welcome here, but it seems that Mr. Kurth, a respectable person, is thoroughly and utterly loathed here at the forum.  I believe that someone remarked rather distastefully about pictures of Franziska Shanzkowska on his website, and then when Mr. Kurth came here in order to set the record straight, he was quite rudely rebuffed by a snide little comment that went something like, "I'm glad you're checking up on our formum, Mr. Kurth" (something like that).  I myself tend to lean to the side of Anna undoubtedly being Anastasia, but I respect other's opinions.  However, I highly resent comments like I've seen on this forum that are downright uncalled for directed at someone who believes Anna to be Anastasia.  And I also might add that a lot of people on this forum dismiss others who believe in Anna to be unrealistic and basically living in a dream world, and everything they have to say is almost automatically discredited as wishful thinking, even though many of them like Mr. Kurth indeed have very legitimate facts.  I think everyone, no matter what their views, should refrain from distasteful personal assaults.

Again, I am not trying to alienate anybody on this forum.  I mean no disrespect.  I only want everyone to be able to share their ideas without being verbally attacked.

    Peace  :)


I think you are refering to me. :) When I posted that link to Peter's site that had the picture of Franny I didn't specify that there was only one of Franny. The rest were pictures of Anna Anderson. This is honestly what I meant but I suppose nobody really understood. Heck, I'd be insulted too if I thought somebody was twisting my website. Not that I have a website.

BTW, Peter is not "thoroughly and utterly loathed." I own his book on Anna and I think it is one of the best Romanov books that I have ever read. That book still causes me to doubt the DNA. I LOVE IT. I sure hope he doesn't feel "loathed" because that isn't the case.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on July 13, 2004, 10:12:23 AM
Peter Kurth is very welcome in this Forum!  He is one of the most respected authors in the field and his contribution to the forum is appreciated and valued by all of us.  Peter is our friend and colleague. There are multiple sides and opinions to be presented on many things Romanov, but we all share the same objectives.

If anyone ever  feels unwelcome, write me a private note with your concerns.  As most of you know we have had repeated problems with spamming of the forum by one person using multiple identities. The story behind this is well known and we deal with it each time they reappear.
Rob
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on July 13, 2004, 09:42:20 PM
Thanks again for clearing that up guys  :)  Again, not meaning to have sounded rude.   :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on July 29, 2004, 09:54:43 AM
Hey, I know the explanation for this! Has anyone ever read the book 'The Anastasia Syndrome', by Mary Higging Clark (I think)? According to this book, people, at the point of death, can get reincarnated into someone else's body who is also at a point of death but survives and inherit all their memories and become that person. Maybe that's what happend with Anna Anderson and Anastasia! I am kidding of course, but hey, this seems to be as good explanation as any at this point. Seriously though, I just looked at Peter Kurth's website (by the way I do like the website, Peter) and at the comparison pictures, and even though it seems that pictures of Anna chosen for this were the ones that most resemble Anastasia's (same angles, similar expressions), I still don't see the resemblance at all! I have to admit, young Anna Anderson does resemble Tatiana, but that's neither here nor there. I don't know if because I am in the science  field , it is my nature to be sceptical about things like this and to question them and to demand scientific proof, or maybe I am just not much of a romantic or maybe I am closed minded, but.... to me when sufficent scientific proof is presented in the form of DNA results, from several reputable sources, I tend to accept it more than any other proof or information, such as photos, testimonies, etc. I have read the published results of the the tests that were done, I am familiar with the methods they used to get these results, I understand these results very well, I know that they were done correctly, and I know that they were repeated by another reputable lab, so I am not sure what else is needed to be presented as proof. I have to mention that based on these tests, the scientists can't say 100% that Anna Anderson was Franciska Schankowska, they can only say that her DNA profile matched that of someone in that family, however they can say 100% that Anna was not GD Anastasia Romanov.  To be honest, and again this is a purely subjective observation, if these DNA tests showed that she could have been Anastasia, I would have been more surprised because I just don't see the resemblance. Maybe other people can see it and I respect that, but I honestly don't! It's interesting how different people can look at the same pictures and see totally different things, just goes to show you that not everyone perceives things the same way! It's also interesting how the subject of Anna vs Anastasia brings out such passions in people, much like religion and politics. I myself am getting caught up in it, oh no!   ;D

Quote
There are a lot of things about Anna Anderson that i cannot understand. I mean, for example, that cannot help wondering how could she have so much information(even when she made many mistakes describing the Alexander palace rooms) on the private life of the Imperial family. It´s amazing the interview she had in Seeon with Felix Dassel, an old soldier she knew from her and Maria´s hospital in the Feodorovsky village. She knew even his nickname. After a couple of days he told she could be no other but the real Anastasia.
Still more difficult for me to understand is how Lily Dehn, being so close to the family did recognize her at once...

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on July 29, 2004, 12:45:32 PM
Quote
.... I just don't see the resemblance. Maybe other people can see it and I respect that, but I honestly don't! It's interesting how different people can look at the same pictures and see totally different things, just goes to show you that not everyone perceives things the same way!....  



I don't see a resemblence either.  Back in the pre-DNA days, I tried and tried to see the resemblence but couldn't.  I wanted to see a resemblance!  I was able to see a similarity when AA posed in the same or similar positions as AN, but heck, I think I could even pass for AN under those circumstances.  I think the clinching factor for me though are the lips.  AA's lips were very broad (like FS's were), while AN's were slim and dainty.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on July 29, 2004, 01:44:42 PM
Alexa,

Yes, you hit the nail right on the head, for some reason I couldn't put my finger on it before: the lips are the most obvious difference between the faces, and I think this is why most of the pictures that have any resemblance at all between Anna and Anastasia (even then it's stretching it) is when Anna is covering her mouth, which she seemed to do a lot, for whatever reason. But even then the other features are still not the same! As far as I know, the shape and size of lips is not something that changes spontenously as the person gets older (unlike the nose, that actually can change somewhat with age), and unless AA had  collagen injections, which I seriously doubt, then just  based on the shape of her mouth she cannot be Anastasia. Whenever you look at pictures of other surviving Romanovs, like GD Olga, the Tsar's sister for example, or of other Romanovs who got the chance to get old, and whose teenage pictures are available, as well as the ones from their old age, it is always pretty obvious upon closer inspection that it's the same person, just a lot older. You can always see that even when a person looks a lot different in old age which is common, the basic features are still the same. This is the case with everyone, you and I included, and you can always see the young person's features in the old person's face. There are quite a few pictures available of AA when she was in her early and mid- twenties which was not that long after the time when the 17-year-old Anastasia's last pictures were taken. In my opinion, the young Anna Anderson looked even less like Anastasia than the old lady Anna Anderson.  Like you, I always wanted to see the resemblance between them and I wanted AA to be Anastasia, but I just never saw it! I honestly am bewildered sometimes that people think that she looked like her... I am not trying to be patronizing to anyone who has said that they think she looks like her, I respect their opinions, I just don't see it at all, as much as I would have liked to...

Helen
Quote
I think the clinching factor for me though are the lips.  AA's lips were very broad (like FS's were), while AN's were slim and dainty.

Alexa

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on July 29, 2004, 03:19:59 PM
Helen, what you said about aging is another aspect I've often thought of.  You're absolutly right about not being able to see the remnants of a young AN in an old AA.

Also, and I'm not sure if I'm going to explain this right, but AA didn't seem to age like any of Nicky and Alix's families.  Aging seems to me a hereditary thing.  For example, 2 of my aunts, several of my cousins, as well as myself, inherited my grandmother's skin, which is why at 32 people still think I'm in college, and my 79 year old aunt looks about 55.  It seems to me that when I look at pictures of MF, OA, XA, Irena, VMH, etc, they all aged quite gracefully.  Not to insult AA, but she seemed to have a togher skin than the IF and RF's of Europe/England.  I'm probably making no sense what-so-ever.  I guess what I'm trying to say is that looking at the IF and RF, I can see the blue blood even in old age, but with AA I can't.

Okay, I'll stop sounding like a blathering idiot now.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on July 29, 2004, 05:18:27 PM
Alexa,

I do know what you mean. It can be argued of course that AA had a completely different lifestyle than her royal "relatives", was exposed to different elements, so to speak, had been through a lot more than these sheltered people, so that could do the trick and age a person quite contrary to her genetics, but it still comes down to her basic features, because no amount of hardships could change those.... In any case, this is a fascinating topic that can be discussed endlessly, and not lose its fascination to many. It's interesting to hear what other people think!

Helen
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on July 29, 2004, 05:57:41 PM
Quote

... it still comes down to her basic features, because no amount of hardships could change those....



Um.  Being bashed in the face with a rifle butt could...   8)

To tell you the truth, though, I really don't set a lot of store in photographic comparisons.  Sure, some people are very regular of feature, and remain so for their entire lives -- but then there are those, like me, who can look like entirely different people from photograph to photograph.  And remember the Filatov case -- that family looked so much like the Romanovs (one sister bearing a striking resemblance to Alexander III and another to Alexandra Feodorovna) -- yet they have faded into obscurity because of the DNA situation (I don't remember if they failed to match Romanov DNA, or if they refused to take the tests -- either way, merely looking like the Romanovs did their case no good at all).
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Sunny on July 29, 2004, 07:00:34 PM

"(I don't remember if they failed to match Romanov DNA, or if they refused to take the tests -- either way, merely looking like the Romanovs did their case no good at all)."  Penny, have read that they absolutely refused.


Sunny
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on July 29, 2004, 07:49:10 PM
Penny,

It's true, looking like someone doesn't automatically qualify you as their relative, or not looking like a family member doesn't disqualify you either. I look absolutely nothing like my mother but I know for a fact that she is my biological mother  ::) Not looking anything like your own picture, and I don't mean instantly recognizable features, but more subtle things, the shape of the eyes or spacing between them, the shape of  the mouth, the shape of the face itself, can all that be really changed that much by being hit with rifle butts? I don't know... But in any case, what I was trying to say was that I was just baffled by the fact that many people look at the same pictures I am looking at and insist that they see a lot of resemblance, whereas I don't  see it at all . This of course may just be my own perception, but that's all I have to go by. As I mentioned before, even though I never saw any resemblance between AA and AN in the past, I did always kind of wish that AA really did turn out to be AN, since I always felt sorry for this woman, especially since I think that she genuinly believed that she was Anastasia and wasn't really trying to defraud anyone... But the deciding factor for me was finally based on the DNA results. Anna Anderson may not have been proven to be Francisca Schankowska, that's kind of irrelevant to me anyway, but she had been shown not to be related to Alexandra's maternal relatives, therefore could not be Anastasia. Deep down I kind of wish it were different, but  that's just the way it goes sometimes.Life often  doesn't have a fairy tale ending  :(
Quote

Um.  Being bashed in the face with a rifle butt could...   8)

To tell you the truth, though, I really don't set a lot of store in photographic comparisons.  Sure, some people are very regular of feature, and remain so for their entire lives -- but then there are those, like me, who can look like entirely different people from photograph to photograph.  And remember the Filatov case -- that family looked so much like the Romanovs (one sister bearing a striking resemblance to Alexander III and another to Alexandra Feodorovna) -- yet they have faded into obscurity because of the DNA situation (I don't remember if they failed to match Romanov DNA, or if they refused to take the tests -- either way, merely looking like the Romanovs did their case no good at all).

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on July 29, 2004, 08:53:37 PM
Quote
Penny,
... Not looking anything like your own picture, and I don't mean instantly recognizable features, but more subtle things, the shape of the eyes or spacing between them, the shape of  the mouth, the shape of the face itself, can all that be really changed that much by being hit with rifle butts? I don't know...


I believe a face can be "really changed that much."  Think of all the people who sustain facial injuries and need reconstructive surgery.  Eyewitness testimony and the physical evidence we have -- like the damage to the facial area of Marie's skull -- plus expert opinion -- like Koryakov's expressed ideas about the state of the skeletons in the grave --  all support the assertion that the victims "still living" when the bodies were being moved were beaten severely.  If Anastasia was still living when she was taken from the basement room -- and I believe she was -- then the likelihood is high that she was beaten in the face too.

Quote
But the deciding factor for me was finally based on the DNA results. Anna Anderson may not have been proven to be Francisca Schankowska, that's kind of irrelevant to me ...


But it's entirely relevant to the case.  FSS declared that AM was FS, but she couldn't have been for a number of reasons.  Size for one.  How could FS's feet have shrunk two sizes and more so that she could have worn the shoes that AM did?  The hallux valgus, the cauterized mole, the pregnancy, etc, etc.  -- all are valid reasons to doubt the DNA results -- which are interpreted today using more than the six-point comparison that was used in 1994. And remember that the ancient DNA was "amplified," which doesn't necessarily make it more reliable...

I don't think that we will ever really know if AM was GD A.  Some will continue to believe and some will continue to disbelieve.  But it's only belief, either way. I think it's an interesting thing to discuss -- but what disturbs me above anything is the flippant and dismissive fashion in which AM is labelled crazy or delusional or pitiable (not by you, Helen, but by some).  If -- IF -- she was GD A, how would we all then wish to have treated her?  This is how I think we should treat her now, because if she was as easily dismissed as a survivor as some people claim, we would not now be discussing her.

Quote
Life often  doesn't have a fairy tale ending  :(


There was absolutely nothing "fairy tale" about AM's story.  I think Alexeiev's book title -- although it's not about her -- describes her story perfectly: "The Last Act of a Tragedy."
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on July 29, 2004, 09:00:26 PM
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Penny.  :)   ;)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 29, 2004, 09:39:30 PM
I don't think anyone thinks AA's life was a fairy tale. The fairy tale is the whole 'lost princess' mystique, the idea that she *could* have gotten away, and the 'fairy tale ending' part, that would only have come if Anna were proven to be Anastasia, inherited her money and her title. So it's not the actual story anyone is thinking is a fairy tale, it's the general idea of the dream, the idea of all the 'ifs' connected with it.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on July 29, 2004, 10:33:38 PM
Yes, that's true, Penny, no matter who Anna Anderson was, this certainly is a tragic story, and this is exactly what I meant when I said not everything in life has a "fairy tale" ending, meaning that this was anything but. No matter who she was, this woman should not be treated flippantly, she was a human being and obviously has been through a lot no matter how you look at it. What I meant when I said that it's irrelevant whether she was FS or not was that to me, that part didn't even play any role, I just know that based on my understanding of DNA tests, and it is substantial, that she could not have been Anastasia. But when it comes down to it, it doesn't matter to me if this woman was Franciska Schankowska or royalty, she was a person who obviously suffered a great deal in her life. I don't think anyone would voluntarily would want to go through what she had gone through, whether they are mentally ill or not.
As you said, this controversy will continue I am sure, not just here on this website, with everyone having different opinions, and that's ok, that's what makes a forum like this one interesting to all of us.
Quote

I believe a face can be "really changed that much."  Think of all the people who sustain facial injuries and need reconstructive surgery.  Eyewitness testimony and the physical evidence we have -- like the damage to the facial area of Marie's skull -- plus expert opinion -- like Koryakov's expressed ideas about the state of the skeletons in the grave --  all support the assertion that the victims "still living" when the bodies were being moved were beaten severely.  If Anastasia was still living when she was taken from the basement room -- and I believe she was -- then the likelihood is high that she was beaten in the face too.


But it's entirely relevant to the case.  FSS declared that AM was FS, but she couldn't have been for a number of reasons.  Size for one.  How could FS's feet have shrunk two sizes and more so that she could have worn the shoes that AM did?  The hallux valgus, the cauterized mole, the pregnancy, etc, etc.  -- all are valid reasons to doubt the DNA results -- which are interpreted today using more than the six-point comparison that was used in 1994.  

I don't think that we will ever really know if AM was GD A.  Some will continue to believe and some will continue to disbelieve.  But it's only belief, either way. I think it's an interesting thing to discuss -- but what disturbs me above anything is the flippant and dismissive fashion in which AM is labelled crazy or delusional or pitiable (not by you, Helen, but by some).  If -- IF -- she was GD A, how would we all then wish to have treated her?  This is how I think we should treat her now, because if she was as easily dismissed as a survivor as some people claim, we would not now be discussing her.


There was absolutely nothing "fairy tale" about AM's story.  I think Alexeiev's book title -- although it's not about her -- describes her story perfectly: "The Last Act of a Tragedy."

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on July 29, 2004, 10:43:45 PM
Yes, Annie, thank you, you have expressed exactly the point I was trying to make with my "fairy tale" analogy that I think Penny may have misunderstood, the fact that Anna's story didn't end as many people had hoped it would, and what certainly would have made a really nice ending....
Helen
Quote
I don't think anyone thinks AA's life was a fairy tale. The fairy tale is the whole 'lost princess' mystique, the idea that she *could* have gotten away, and the 'fairy tale ending' part, that would only have come if Anna were proven to be Anastasia, inherited her money and her title. So it's not the actual story anyone is thinking is a fairy tale, it's the general idea of the dream, the idea of all the 'ifs' connected with it.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on July 29, 2004, 11:15:57 PM
I didn't misunderstand.  ;D  But -- even if Anastasia Manahan had been identified positively as GDss A, and even if she was then restored to her former position, there wouldn't have been a fairy tale ending.  She would still have lost family, home and country.  A positive resolution to her case wouldn't have erased these events -- and even with a "happier" ending, her story would still have been the last act of a tragedy.  I think that I don't share your point of view because I can't see anything "fairy-tale" or dream-like in her situation, whatever the outcome.  As AM herself said, "It's all dirt."
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 07:52:53 AM
Quote
 A positive resolution to her case wouldn't have erased these events -- and even with a "happier" ending, her story would still have been the last act of a tragedy.


That's true, even the ones who survived in exile, while lucky to be alive, did not have 'happy' endings because they lost so much and never got to go home.


Quote
 I think that I don't share your point of view because I can't see anything "fairy-tale" or dream-like in her situation, whatever the outcome.


That's the difference there, we are not saying it's about HER SITUATION, only the 'idea' of the lost princess being found alive, and the mystery and mystique of the whole story in general.

Of course, there are some here who would probably use 'fairy tale' to describe the story Anna told of her 'escape', because they don't believe it.There could be others who believe Anastasia is like Sleeping Beauty, out there in the forest somewhere, and after 100 years a handsome prince will awaken her with a kiss.

Also, a fairy tale doesn't always end in happily ever after. The Ginger Bread Man was eaten, the (orginial Hans Christian Anderson) Little Mermaid died.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on July 30, 2004, 09:23:07 AM
Quote

I believe a face can be "really changed that much."  Think of all the people who sustain facial injuries and need reconstructive surgery.  


I agree a face can change, but not to the point where a person is unreconizable.  Take Mark Hamil of Star Wars fame for instance.  He sustained major facial injuries and had to undergo many operations to reconstruct his face, but when the third Star Wars movie came out, we all knew it was Mark Hamil we were watching and not someone who may or may not resemble him.  

My personal thought is that if AA were AN, and had sustained tremendous trauma to her face to the point where her facial features would have changed drasitcally, he face (without plastic surgery) would have been deformed.  But then again, that's just me.  I don't begrudge anyone who thinks otherwise.  I'm just enjoying the debate.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 09:46:51 AM
Oh I am sorry, but the face changing stuff reeks of a bad Days of Our Lives plot! First of all, no, people's faces don't change that much from 17 to 25. I could post pics of me but I don't have an older one scanned, only my high school picture. Today, at 42 years old, even though my face isn't as young as it once was, and I am no longer the svelte girl I once was, I am still recognized regularly in stores by former high school classmates I haven't seen in years. I in turn recognize them, even the boy who once had bright red hair and is now completely bald with a grayish beard!

Let's pretend for a moment that Anastasia did escape and did have facial injuries. First off, the blow of the rifle butt would likely have caused internal injuries that lead to her death. If not, think about this- she's out there in the woods- IF it did heal up by itself, it wouldn't look like a completely different normal face, it would be disfigured to the point of almost a grotesque look, all caved in and deformed. She would have had to have had immediate medical attention by someone with the skills of TODAY'S plastic surgeons to even look normal again. That is highly unlikely, considering what few doctors there were in that area were forced to work for the army, and most likey no one capable of doing reconstructive surgery, and if they did the facilties were not available.

Now you may say, she may have had this done later in the big city. Okaaayy. Who paid for it? She had no money or insurance, if there even was health ins. in those days. Even IF there was a competant surgeon willing to do it for free, her injuries would already have healed wrong, so even with surgery she still would appear unnatural and disfigured. They did not have the Hollywood plastic surgeon to the stars techniques back then, and even though we have them now, I still find soap opera plots of Stephano Di Mera having someone's face changed to look like someone else ridiculous. There are other factors, including bone structure, height, voice, and, of course, DNA.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on July 30, 2004, 10:06:19 AM
Quote
....IF it did heal up by itself, it wouldn't look like a completely different normal face, it would be disfigured to the point of almost a grotesque look, all caved in and deformed. She would have had to have had immediate medical attention by someone with the skills of TODAY'S plastic surgeons to even look normal again....



Yes, that is exactly my point!


Quote
... I still find soap opera plots of Stephano Di Mera having someone's face changed to look like someone else ridiculous....


What????  You weren't fooled when Roman came "back from the dead" with a different face and 6 inches taller?  And you weren't surprised when it turned out wasn't he Roman after all, but John Black? ;) ;D

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 11:34:58 AM
Quote



What????  You weren't fooled when Roman came "back from the dead" with a different face and 6 inches taller?  And you weren't surprised when it turned out wasn't he Roman after all, but John Black? ;) ;D

Alexa


:D ;D

And don't you think the wife would know the husband's whole body, not just the face? It's ridiculous! How many times has Roman died now, 4 or 5? Remember the time they even had conclusive DNA and buried a skeleton, but Stefano had tampered with the results and he turned up alive later? Argh!  He's 'dead' again on that island with all the other 'dead' people! I can't even watch it anymore!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on July 30, 2004, 11:51:50 AM
Ummm I dont think that Anastasia was ever on this soap opera... Topic please!

It can be useful to try to compare images of say-- Olga Alexandrovna or Xenia A. with young Anastasia and with  Anna/Francisca to see family members would age ...

Personnally I dont see any similarities between AA and any IF member other than the whole bipedal primate connection... :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 12:54:43 PM
No, it was kind of on topic, it grew out of the comment that the rifle butt face/plastic surgery theory was as unrealistic as one of the storylines on that soap opera ;) (read the previous posts if interested in details of this)

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 01:03:04 PM
Quote
 Penny, have read that they absolutely refused.


Sunny


No, that did not help their case at all. Though I'm sure it was for an "I'm not even going to dignify that with a response" type of reaction, if SOMEONE had submitted their DNA, it would have helped them finally prove it didn't match and put the whole thing behind them. There are so many people in the British royal family who'd been a match for Anastasia, it would have been great if one of them had offered. By refusing, they only left the door open for people to theorize they didn't want it tested because it would match and she'd take the money, or something like that. They could have done themselves a favor by submitting a sample.

But, of course, there would still be those who'd still say  the results were wrong or tampered with anyway, so what's the use.

While I honestly do not believe AA was Anastasia, (not anymore, I did many years ago) until her body is found, we can always hope perhaps the real Anastasia did escape and lived a long happy life in obscurity. After all, if you were the daughter of the Tsar, wouldn't you be afraid to reveal yourself in the time of  the Stalinist regime? I know this is not likely though, but maybe more likely than a mentally unstable, rugged Polish worker being the missing princess.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on July 30, 2004, 01:59:18 PM
Quote
No, it was kind of on topic, it grew out of the comment that the rifle butt face/plastic surgery theory was as unrealistic as one of the storylines on that soap opera ;) (read the previous posts if interested in details of this)




Here we go again with the ridiculing of a different opinion.  It never stops, does it?   "Reeks of a bad Days of Our Lives plot," indeed!  >:(

If you re-read my posts carefully, you will see that no-where did I claim that AM had had plastic surgery.

For further information concerning the injuries/deformities on AM's face and body, please consult Peter Kurth's extensive body of work.



Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 04:27:54 PM
Sorry Penny, I really am. I thought if a rifle butt had hurt her badly enough to change her appearance it would have surely had to have been restored by surgery. I am aware she has scars, but nothing extensive enough to change her features or bone structure of her face.

It is true we all have different opinions but when it's been proven that AA was not Anastasia by DNA there isn't much left, I don't think. But as I said, as long as her body remains missing we will never know for sure if she lived or not, but I really think the AA thing has run its course and used up all of its possibilities :-/ Are there no other leads besides the AA thing anywhere?

I also want to say, I don't want to be someone who sounds mean about this to any AA supporters. I used to believe in her myself, and nobody would want it to be true more than me. I just can't believe anymore. But if there are any more facts I'd be interested to hear them.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on July 30, 2004, 04:43:30 PM
Quote
For further information concerning the injuries/deformities on AM's face and body, please consult Peter Kurth's extensive body of work.


That's something I really need to do.  It's been years ('90, '91 maybe) since I've read it cover to cover.  I remember when I did read it Peter got me to sway to his side of fence, it was so convincing.  A few years later I read the James Blair Lovell book, and ended up firmly on the opposite side.  I just couldn't believe that Nicky and Alix could give up a child, even if it were a girl.  Sorry, just can't do it.  And since this was a claim made by AA, I just can't buy her story of being AN.  But like I've said before, that's just me.  I still find the whole thing facsinating and love hearing other people's opinion from both sides.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 04:48:02 PM
Quote

  I just couldn't believe that Nicky and Alix could give up a child, even if it were a girl.  Sorry, just can't do it.  
Alexa


What's this about giving up a child? I don't I've heard that one yet. :-/
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on July 30, 2004, 05:00:55 PM
Quote

What's this about giving up a child? I don't I've heard that one yet. :-/


I'm at work, so can't reivew the book before writing this, so I may be off on it a bit (it's been a long, long time since I read the book).  Anyway, here it goes...

Some guy had interview AA while she was still in Germany and tape recorded the conversation.  Lovell somehow (can't remember how) got a hold of the tapes, and while listening to them heard AA talk about how Alix and Nicky had a 5th daughter, born between AN and Alexis.  Devasted at not having a son, and worried another daughter would weaken the monarchy (or something along those lines), AA claimed Alix and Nicky gave the daughter up for adoption.  I can't remember the details of who adopted the supposid child, but she (or her family) ended up in Holland or Denmark.  Lovell claimed to have tracked the familiy down and to have met with the missing daughter's grand-daughter.  Lovell said she was a spitting image of Alix.

Now, some of this could be rusty.  I'll review the book over the weekend and give you a better synopsis.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 05:54:06 PM
Thank you Alexa. I never heard that one. I can't believe they'd do that, they were too loving and devoted to the family. Besides, with Alexandra's 'false pregnancy' in 1902, there wasn't much time for any other pregnancy :-/

I have an interesting one: Xenia just kept on having boys, six in a row. Wouldn't have been interesting if someone could had been 'switched at birth', especially her son born in 1904? She also had one born the same time as Tatiana, and the 'false' pregnancy. Then they'd have had their healthy boy. I know this was not really going to happen, but it was a thought.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: IlyaBorisovich on July 30, 2004, 05:55:00 PM
Penny,

Just out of curiosity, did your research for FOTR have any effect on your belief that AA could have really been AN?  Was your belief reinforced or eroded in any way?  I've assumed from your posts here that you do believe that AA was AN, but I apologize if I've read that into what you've said.  I was convinced that there was no way AA could've been AN after the DNA evidence was revealed, but after reading your posts and considering their source, I'm beginning to have some nagging little thoughts on the subject.  I'd appreciate your sharing your insights on that, if you wouldn't mind.

Thanks,
Ilya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on July 30, 2004, 07:14:02 PM
Annie, I've only just started re-reading/skimming through the chapters that deal with the "5th daughter."  The daughter was supposed to have been born during Alix's false pregnancy/miscarriage of 1903 (I've always been confused on whether or not she was really pregnant or not).  AA states that Alix was drugged during labor and delivery, and that when she gave birth to a daughter, Phillipe Vachot (who was one of the mystics Alix used to help conceive a boy) whisked the daughter away and gave her to a Dutch family who was at the time in Russia.

I also find it interesting that Lovell says Peter Kurth dismissed the story in his book.  I'll have to review that book too.  I'd love to hear his take on it.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on July 30, 2004, 09:47:07 PM
Thanks again Alexa. That is interesting, though far fetched. What a story! The main reason I doubt any of it is because we have the complete diaries of N &A and surely something would have been said, besides the fact they were not the kind to give away their child. But that false pregnancy thing does leave things open to speculation!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on July 30, 2004, 09:59:01 PM
I have heard variations on the myth of "the secret child given away at birth' from a lot of people (some of them at this site!) and in at least two or three "survivor/alternative history of the Romanovs" books. Its quite a popular urban myth.

AHHH well... it seems that some people still feel the need to reinvent the wheel...

R.



Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on August 01, 2004, 01:45:38 AM
Quote


 If Anastasia was still living when she was taken from the basement room -- and I believe she was -- then the likelihood is high that she was beaten in the face too.




Penny, the interesting thing about Anna Anderson is that she never really related the full tale of the basement murder in CONSISTENCY. After telling the story in bits and peices in her earlier years, she told James Blair Lovell (when she was at the end of her life) that 'something very different happened..than what everyone thinks. There was no massacre'.
Do you think she was just toying with Lovell and trying to muddle up the facts, or was the original story she told (about escaping from the Ipatiev house with a soldier named Alexander Tschaikovsky in a wagon under the starry night) all a fabrication?

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on August 01, 2004, 03:37:05 AM
Quote
 If Anastasia was still living when she was taken from the basement room -- and I believe she was -- then the likelihood is high that she was beaten in the face too.




Penny, the interesting thing about Anna Anderson is that she never really related the full tale of the basement murder in CONSISTENCY. After telling the story in bits and peices in her earlier years, she told James Blair Lovell (when she was at the end of her life) that 'something very different happened..than what everyone thinks. There was no massacre'.
Do you think she was just toying with Lovell and trying to muddle up the facts, or was the original story she told (about escaping from the Ipatiev house with a soldier named Alexander Tschaikovsky in a wagon under the starry night) all a fabrication?



I'll jump in and share some relevant information on this.  There are two crucial things to remember here:

1.  Anastasia Manahan, from about the late 1950s onward, took an absolute delight in spinning the most incredible stories, often designed to shock people or provoke them.  A lot of what she said in her later life has to be understood in this light-and that goes for almost everything she said to Lovell.  That said, however, among the boxes of correspondence that we have, are several letters she did write to the de Graff family in Holland (if memory serves, the supposed fifth daughter was allegedly given to them), though it is not evident that she actually believed in her claim.

2.  James Lovell's book is completely unreliable on any number of levels, but before it was published I read the manuscript and questioned him on several things (among them, the infamous "King Kong" speech) and he admitted to me that it neer took place (along with many other incidents).  He tried to explain this away owing to Anastasia Manahan's well-known rambling and disjointed way of telling a story or revealing information, but clearly I put little faith in anything in his book that he claims was "revealed" to him.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lisa on August 01, 2004, 05:06:55 AM
Anna and Franziska  (Franziska is in the midle)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/lyzotchka/1.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on August 01, 2004, 08:24:24 AM
Thankyou for posting that Lisa! As far as I'm concerned that's the only evidence that's required - there's a BLATANT resemblance.

I'd also like to say that if - IF - we assume that Anna Anderson was Anastasia, and that the differences in face are because of blows to the face with a rifle butt - then I'm curious to know WHY there are no obvious disfigurements in her face - even plastic surgeons today cannot make a badly disfigured face "perfect", but rather, they make it functional instead (restoration of vision, nasal reconstruction, etc). So . . . I find it almost impossible to believe that:

A. Anna Anderson's face was reconstructed to look like in those photos (kudos to the surgeon if it was, everyone in Hollywood would've wanted the name)

B. Anna Anderson's face was reconstructed to look very similar to Franziska Schankowska's.

and

C. Anna Anderson, after having her face battered with a rifle butt, was able to access a plastic surgeon almost immediately (which would be the very least required, for such a marvellous reconstruction. Otherwise, the scar tissue would significantly hamper any such efforts at reconstruction).
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 01, 2004, 08:40:28 AM
Quote
Thankyou for posting that Lisa! As far as I'm concerned that's the only evidence that's required - there's a BLATANT resemblance.



Yes, I agree, thanks for posting them.

Franziska's lips were so much fuller than Anastasia's, and the only way she could hide this was the tight lip biting face she makes in so many pictures, one that Anastasia made in a lot of pics. I really think she used that to make the resemblance appear closer. Also, the eyes are wider and bigger than Anastasia's, and her browbones and cheekbones are different too. I am really surprised the court cases went on as long as they did, and not surprised that a person very close to her for a long time, Pierre Gilliard, fought this woman until his dying day. He had nothing to gain, he only wanted the truth.

While there do remain inticing bits of info that hint at the possibility of an escape, even if that did happen, I still say Anna Anderson was not Anastasia. I know speculation is interesting and fun, but how about exploring other possibilities other than this?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on August 01, 2004, 09:18:21 AM
Quote
Thankyou for posting that Lisa!


Thanks from me too.

Btw, my boyfriend, who have never seen pictures of AA or FS, was just peeking over my shoulder when I was looking at the pics.  I asked him if he thought all the pictures were of the same woman.  I was wondering if he would say FS was the different one.  He said the one of FS and the 2 bottom ones of AA were all the same woman and the top ones were a different person all together.  I guess this shows, yet again, that perception is an individualistic thing -- we all see things differently.

Just my 2 cents.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 01, 2004, 09:26:23 AM
The top left one (profile) is the one I think looks like a different person, but it was probably posed that way for that reason. The fluff is partially covering her face, and her features look different from that angle. I have also seen pictures of her posed with a parakeet on her finger, usually held in front of her mouth.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AnastasiaFan on August 01, 2004, 09:58:46 AM
Quote
Anna and Franziska  (Franziska is in the midle)


OMG! A chill went down my spine when I saw Franziska's picture! She and Anna Anderson are one and the same, no question!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on August 01, 2004, 10:08:13 AM
Well, i don´t know if anyone has noticed it but the old photo of Franziska has been VERY VERY touched up(neck, mouth, chin,ETC,ETC,ETC...). The one who did it could have changed anything on her face, so i woud not pay too much attention to that photo. That photo is no longer so for me but some kind of a drawing...

Anyway, the upper right first photo taken of Miss Unknown is free of "touchings up", and i cannot see she looks like the Grand Duchess. Also, if someone is trying to explain the differences where caused by the blows, why her nose is NOT broken??? I´d say the nose would be one of the first things to be desfigured, no?

I can find some similarities with Anastasia in later photos of Anna A., mainly when she was an old woman, but in these photos from the 1920s i do not see Anastasia at all.

And now, i wonder why, if the DNA test is supposed to be definitive(?), why there are still doubts about Anna´s identity?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 01, 2004, 10:35:43 AM
Quote
Well, i don´t know if anyone has noticed it but the old photo of Franziska has been VERY VERY touched up(neck, mouth, chin,ETC,ETC,ETC...). The one who did it could have changed anything on her face, so i woud not pay too much attention to that photo. That photo is no longer so for me but some kind of a drawing...


It could be because it's very old, I have a lot of older pics that have looked fuzzy like that. I think if anyone was going to retouch it to make it look more like AA they'd have done more to it, because it's not a perfect match, but the resemblance is much more there than to Anastasia.

Quote
Also, if someone is trying to explain the differences where caused by the blows, why her nose is NOT broken??? I´d say the nose would be one of the first things to be desfigured, no?


Yes, yes, I've been saying that too. If the changes were caused by injuries, her face would not look like a different person's face but a messed up, disfigured version of her own face. That's why I assumed anyone who believed that must surely have thought she had reconstructive surgery. This woman's face is not the face of Anastasia Nikolaievna Romanov, and not the face of a beauty, but she is not a hideously disfigured person at all.

Quote
And now, i wonder why, if the DNA test is supposed to be definitive(?), why there are still doubts about Anna´s identity?


I have a my theories:

1)keeping the subject alive and hot for the possibility of future books, TV shows, or other projects. But I REALLY think this topic has long since run its course, at least in the mass appeal and intrigue it once had. There is too much contrary evidence.

2)Some people must feel that the results are false or tampered with, or that the rich Romanovs paid the scientists off, or something like that.

3)It's just no fun to believe it's over and she was a fake. But it doesn't have to be over! Just because I don't believe in AA doesn't mean there is no more mystery. As long as two bodies remain missing, we can continue to speculate, wonder and research the story.




Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on August 01, 2004, 10:42:47 AM
Greg- thanks for that bit of information about Lovell's book. That's horrible how he printed untrue stories and "revelations" made by Anna Anderson!

If I remember correctly, from reading one of my books, in Pierre Gilliard's "Le False Anastasia", he printed a photo of FS after it had been touched up. But there was also a photo in the Berliner Nachtausgabe  that ran a photo of the original FS.

That one that is posted above is the original. And it looks like AA. The one that was touched up in Gilliard's book can be seen here: http://www.peterkurth.com/ANNA-ANASTASIA%20NOTES%20ON%20FRANZISKA%20SCHANZKOWSKA.htm

and you can tell the difference.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 01, 2004, 10:57:21 AM
Thank you Abby, I never knew Gilliard wrote another book!

Right now I'm looking at the set of pics labeled

Spala 1912, Hanover 1938, Tsarskoe Selo 1916

1938- Here we go with the lip biting bit that makes her look more like Anastasia. Wasn't it also true, as I have read here, that she voluntarily had her teeth pulled when someone told her the royal dentist was coming to examine her?

1916- This one looks very, very, very retouched

edit sorry the site would not let me link only the one pic
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on August 01, 2004, 07:39:40 PM
Snipped for length

Quote

I'd also like to say that if - IF - we assume that Anna Anderson was Anastasia, and that the differences in face are because of blows to the face with a rifle butt - then I'm curious to know WHY there are no obvious disfigurements in her face - even plastic surgeons today cannot make a badly disfigured face "perfect", but rather, they make it functional instead (restoration of vision, nasal reconstruction, etc).  


I suggest you check Peter's book on this issue-Anastasia Manahan had extensive previous facial injuries when first examined in 1920, including the right side of her mouth and right jaw having been subjected to repeated blows that knocked teeth out and actually fractured or broke bones-this is why in the first photos of her she always was faced to the left, and even hid the right side of her jaw.  These were injuries estimated as having been a few years old by the doctors who examined her, and had obviously healed somewhat, but the effect remained-even as an old lady she still spoke with a handkerchief held up to the right side of her mouth.

As to the FS photo: All I can say is that there is no known unretouched version of it-the one posted here has been examined by a number of experts over the years and been shown to have been heavily drawn over, the hairline changed, the lips altered, etc., presumably to heighten the appearance to AA.  If we had an unretouched photo of FS it would be useful, but we don't.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AnastasiaFan on August 01, 2004, 08:17:17 PM
Quote
As to the FS photo: All I can say is that there is no known unretouched version of it-the one posted here has been examined by a number of experts over the years and been shown to have been heavily drawn over, the hairline changed, the lips altered, etc., presumably to heighten the appearance to AA.  If we had an unretouched photo of FS it would be useful, but we don't.


That's interesting about the picture being touced up. However to me it doesn't change the fact that Anna Anderson and Anastasia looked nothing alike......or the fact that Anderson's DNA proved she was an imposter.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on August 01, 2004, 09:03:43 PM
I suppose she was not the grand duchess whereas the DNA test said so, but to believe she was Franziska is another, quite different, thing. Franziska´s family said she had no deformity in her foot, that famous hallux valgus that Anastasia and Anna both had. In fact, Shura said when she first saw Anna´s body that it was identical to that of Anastasia. However she changed her mind later on.
Franziska´s feet were also bigger, as her own brother testified. Anna had beautiful hands, a lady´s hands, and Franziska had not. The doctors said Anna´s had given birth to a son and Franziska´s family said that Franziska did not. I could go on and on with differences between Anna and Franziska.

And no one will convince me that a polish peasant/ factory worker in 1910s had the possibility to know, for example, if the billiard room in Maria´s and Anastasia´s hospital in the Feodorovsky Gorodok was upstairs or downstairs, or recognize one of the injured soldiers and tell the nickname Anastasia´s invented for him.

Anna may not be Anastasia, but anyhow the mistery remains as to who she was and how she knew the things she knew.

Well, it´s just coming to my find that she also comitted some mistakes about the palace rooms...so it´s always the same for me, a haunting mistery.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on August 02, 2004, 03:45:11 AM
Quote

That's interesting about the picture being touced up. However to me it doesn't change the fact that Anna Anderson and Anastasia looked nothing alike......or the fact that Anderson's DNA proved she was an imposter.


I'm not attempting to argue that Anastasia Manahan was Grand Duchess Anastasia, but in this case there are many facts that have slipped by the wayside over the years, replaced with opinion, with rumor, with innuendo.  Taking it back to its basic form is most important.  Appearance has never been a productive line of argument in this case: those who want to see Anastasia will, those who don't, won't.  Dozens of forensic and anthropological experts in the 20th and now the 21st Century have studied the hundreds of photos of AA, AN, and the one of FS, and most of the results by these professionals have come out in favor of AA having been Anastasia, whereas the most recent study came out against her.  Again-because it's not an exact science-it comes down to opinion.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on August 02, 2004, 06:22:40 AM
Wholeheartedly agree Greg - we could all sit here and argue for and against 'til the cows come home - the fact is that we can never be 100% sure. I believe there is a SLIGHT possibility that AA was Anastasia, whereas some people people there is only the slight possibility that she wasn't. Others are 100% convinced, for and against.

Personally, I find it very interesting to read everyone's opinions on the matter.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Adele on August 02, 2004, 06:25:48 AM
Quote

I'm not attempting to argue that Anastasia Manahan was Grand Duchess Anastasia, but in this case there are many facts that have slipped by the wayside over the years, replaced with opinion, with rumor, with innuendo.  Taking it back to its basic form is most important.  Appearance has never been a productive line of argument in this case: those who want to see Anastasia will, those who don't, won't.  Dozens of forensic and anthropological experts in the 20th and now the 21st Century have studied the hundreds of photos of AA, AN, and the one of FS, and most of the results by these professionals have come out in favor of AA having been Anastasia, whereas the most recent study came out against her.  Again-because it's not an exact science-it comes down to opinion.

Greg King



Greg,
  Thank you for your lucid comments.
   I recently had the opportunity to show some friends some photos of myself taken when I was 3 years old, 12 years old and then 18 years old.
   My friends swore that the photos were not of the same person; they thought I was joking.  But they really were photos of myself at different ages.  
   And not only did the photos look like different people, but I look nothing like my parents.  Nor does my brother.
    Looks/photos, as they say, can be deceiving!

Warm regards,
Adele
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AnastasiaFan on August 02, 2004, 08:46:24 AM
Quote
Again-because it's not an exact science-it comes down to opinion.


Agreed. And it's my opinion that Anastasia and Anna Anderson look like two very, very different people.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kim on August 02, 2004, 09:41:13 AM
While it is true that opinions vary, I still believe there is a difference between an opinion and something that can be PROVEN which can show an opinion to be incorrect.

For example, I have a friend who told me you had to take street A to get to the bowling alley the back way. I said, no, you take street b and it leads right to it. She got mad and told me she had a right to her opinion and I was insulting her. So, I drove up street a, and no bowling alley. Then I drove up street b and there it was. Regardless of her 'opinion' if there is evidence showing the opinion was not accurate, that takes precedence over opinion alone. Facts do mean something. Now, she could have looked at the bowling alley and told me in her opinion it wasn't a bowling alley, well, that just wouldn't be realistic.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Candice on August 02, 2004, 05:44:19 PM
People's looks do not alter as they get older they become more defined.  In fact their facial structure is the same.  What makes an individual is their character and spirit which gives them the characteristics in the facial structure.  The mouth, nose, eyes, ears the shape and alignment between them doesn't alter including the distance from the bridge of the nose to the forehead where the hair line starts is always the same the space from the lower lip to the chin never changes.

Regards
Candice
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on August 06, 2004, 10:05:25 AM
Candice

YES peoples looks do change after they become adults.
If someone gains/looses weight or experiences a stroke or some debilitating condition their appearance changes. Alix as a bride and Alix as a older lady look significantly differant.

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on August 06, 2004, 11:12:43 AM
Quote
People's looks do not alter as they get older they become more defined.  In fact their facial structure is the same.
Are these 2 women related? if so, how?
(http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/forumimages/mom1.jpg)(http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/forumimages/mom2.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Adele on August 06, 2004, 11:15:00 AM
Quote
Candice

YES peoples looks do change after they become adults.
If someone gains/looses weight or experiences a stroke or some debilitating condition their appearance changes. Alix as a bride and Alix as a older lady look significantly differant.

R.



And some people change drastically with age:  For you Anna Akhmatova (Russian poet) fans out there:  if you've seen a photo of her taken in 1912 and then one taken of her in 1960, it's almost impossible to see any kind of similarity.  Even her childhood friends who didn't see her again until the 1950's and 60's didn't recognize her.  

---Adele
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on August 06, 2004, 11:15:26 AM
Well, i would swear they are the same person. Young and older...aren´t they?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on August 06, 2004, 11:17:42 AM
My mother at age 20 and age 75
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on August 06, 2004, 11:19:58 AM
Don´t ask me why, but i supposed she would be :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Louise on August 06, 2004, 11:25:00 AM
FA, your mother is very beautiful at both ages!

Louise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on August 06, 2004, 11:46:39 AM
Do you find any resemblance?

Sorry for the bad quality. It comes from the Family albums, so it was not retouched to resemble later photographs of Anna Anderson.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v373/tsarskoyeselo/anna2.jpg)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v373/tsarskoyeselo/anna1.jpg)

And Anna...

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 06, 2004, 01:33:04 PM
FA I could tell they were the same lady and felt it was your mom too! My mom is also 75 and when she went to her 55 yr. class reunion a couple years back, all the older people recognized their classmates as older versions of themselves. My mom can point to each person in the group pic and tell me who it is. And like I said before, even now at age 42 I am still recognized by former classmates who haven't seen me for years. A person may get older, wrinklier, fatter or skinnier, but the bone structure and features aren't going to suddenly look like another person's.

Antonio, it is becoming 'old' to me that people are using pics of Anna holding her mouth in that lip biting tight smile that the real Anastasia used to wear in some pics. I am convinced she either did it, or was told to do it, because it made her face look most similar in that pose. Also since her lips were so  much fuller and shaped differently than the real Anastasia's it was good to hide them;)

No offense to AA or her believers. I think AA was a very sweet lady who loved her cats and was a nice person. But she wasn't Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on August 06, 2004, 01:39:51 PM
I guess my idea failed. To me, they look so different...I guess Im too close to her to see what you guys saw. to quote SNL from years ago: "Nevermind"
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Adele on August 06, 2004, 01:41:35 PM
Don't you think, tho, it depends upon how much one has physically suffered in ones life (which is why I brought up Anna Akhmatova and how totally different she looked ---so that her childhood friends didn't even recognize her when she was in her 60's).  Starvation, unbelieveable stress like war,  etc. can really alter a person's looks...
--adele
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Petros Petrovich Petr on August 07, 2004, 11:54:10 PM
I would have no trouble accepting Anna Anderson as the daughter of the last czar if it had not been for these facts:
1) Anna hardly spoke any russian

2) the Grandduchess Olga Alexandrovna Romanova  testified that Anna Anderson was not her niece at all

3) Anna lied about her name in the first place it was really Franziska Schanzkowska

4) she failed to answer certain questions only Anastasia would know

With all this in mind I think one thing is true Anna heard of the tale of Anastasia and because she was told she looked like Anastasia, she came to believe it. Anna was locked in the fantasy of being the grandduchess. And played on their simularities in order to gain wealth.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 08, 2004, 12:07:19 PM
I know the DNA tests showed Anna Anderson probably wasn't Anastasia.

Re-reading Peter Kurth's book, though, I'm still struck by how many unanswered questions there are here. There were family members who DID appear to recognize her at first and then backed off, maybe due to family pressure. There were things she appeared to remember that only Anastasia would have known -- i.e. calling a soldier at her hospital "The Man with the Pockets" or Grand Duchesses Anastasia and Tatiana throwing paper pellets at passersby on the day that war was declared. The physical scars matched Anastasia's; the behavior was actually fairly consistent with someone who had post traumatic stress.

Maybe Franziska was touched in the head to begin with and was reacting to the emotional trauma of losing her fiance in the war and the explosion at the factory.  But maybe it was more than that.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 08, 2004, 03:43:09 PM
Hi FA!  Your mother was gorgeous!  At first I thought it was a moviestar! Wow! :o  

Actually I did not think they were the same person at all.  But then I figured it must've been a trick question and I started looking for similarities.  I found that the cheekbones/cheeks were the same when she smiled.  So I changed my mind and knew they probably were the same person.  But at first glance, they look NOTHING alike, and it takes a while for me to scout out a similarity.  :)

I think this adds to the point of AA supporters, though.  I consider myself one of them (most of the time, anyway--I'm still kindof unsure  ;)).  People obviously in the case with your mother can change drastically throughout the years, or over even just a few years as I've seen with some of my relatives' pictures.  But I still find considerable similarities in AA and AN.  The way she smiles her cheeks stick out in the same manner, her eyes get scrunched up the same, her chin broadens the same--just her whole face is to me a version of the same person, only older.  And when I looked on Peter Kurth's website I made an effort to put my personal feelings aside and really look critically at the comparisons.  And she STILL resembled what an older version of AN I think would look like.  But there were also pictures where she looked nothing like AN (however not as many as where she did).  However that can be attributed to cases like FA's mom.  

And thank you, FA, for posting the great pics! :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 08, 2004, 10:01:19 PM
I don't think I've changed that much in appearance from adolescence to my thirties, but it seems to depend on the person. My grandmother, for instance, was in a near fatal car accident in her late forties that broke nearly every bone in her body. She was in the hospital for a year. Looking at pictures of her face prior to the accident and after it are like looking at two different women. You might say they're related to one another, but you might not say they're the same person at first glance.

When I look at the photos of Anna Anderson, Anastasia and Franziska on Peter Kurth's web site, I change my mind from moment to moment about who she was. She does look like Franziska -- but Kurth said all the photos of her are retouched to make them look like Anna Anderson.

Anna Anderson looked SO much like Anastasia in some pictures, even more in the expressions than she did in features. The angle of the head, the way she kind of purses her lips, the squint ... all very similar to Anastasia. At some angles she looks like she could be a fifth sister to the grand duchesses. There's a pronounced resemblance to both Tatiana and Anastasia, especially in some of the photos taken in the 1920s. In another of the pictures on the Web site I could have sworn it was a photo of Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna until I saw that it was Anna Anderson in her forties.  She does have that look of a mentally ill or brain damaged woman in a couple of the shots too and she looks years older than Anastasia would have been in the dates given for the photos. But all her physical, emotional and mental health issues were bound to have taken a toll on her appearance.

It remains a mystery for me.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Katya04 on August 09, 2004, 07:49:53 AM
Quote
I would have no trouble accepting Anna Anderson as the daughter of the last czar if it had not been for these facts:
1) Anna hardly spoke any russian

2) the Grandduchess Olga Alexandrovna Romanova  testified that Anna Anderson was not her niece at all

3) Anna lied about her name in the first place it was really Franziska Schanzkowska

4) she failed to answer certain questions only Anastasia would know

With all this in mind I think one thing is true Anna heard of the tale of Anastasia and because she was told she looked like Anastasia, she came to believe it. Anna was locked in the fantasy of being the grandduchess. And played on their simularities in order to gain wealth.


Yes like her family said, she always wanted to die a great actress!

Though Prince Yusupov called her a frightful playactress :-/
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Katya04 on August 09, 2004, 07:53:14 AM
About the people recognizing her at first then backing down, I don't think it was 'family pressure.' I think they wanted it to be her alive so much that they were hoping so hard they saw something that wasn't really there, and when they got less excited and emotional, they realized it wasn't her after all.

About the pictures from Candice, I have a question: suppose these people ARE who you say they are, how does this prove anything about any escape? They are only portraits, they show nothing as evidence.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 09, 2004, 02:12:12 PM
I agree with bookworm that Anna Anderson definitely had a pronounced resemblance to Tatiana in the 1920's--much more so than a resemblance to Anastasia.  But a lot of pictures of her from that period do remind me a lot of Anastasia as well.  I think she pretty much lost the "Tatiana look" after the twenties and thirties, or so.  

It is just SO strange that she had such a pronouncement of Tatiana in her!  Really really weird.

Also, I've found pictures of AA where she has almost the exact same smile as Olga Nikolaevna--albeit not even close to being beautiful like Olga's.

Again--ODD, to say the least. :o
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on August 09, 2004, 02:25:56 PM
I really don't see the whole Tatiana thing. If someone could post some comparison pictures it might help convince me. Tatiana had a thinner face and higher cheekbones, IMO, and Anna Anderson had a rounder, fatter face (but she did not have a fat face, just bigger than Tatiana's, who was very thin). Also Tatiana's lips were not as full as AA's, either.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 09, 2004, 02:41:28 PM
Sadly, I am not all that computer literate and don't have the ability to post pictures  :(  (I tried once to put pictures on photobucket.com but it was apparently undergoing some kind of construction or something--I can't quite remember :-/)  But I believe that some resemblances to Tatiana are on Peter Kurth's website, which was listed in this thread, I believe.  :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BattleAngel on August 09, 2004, 04:08:13 PM
Here is the picture that I found and that struck me by the resemblance to Tatiana.

Here is one caveat.
I first saw this and was stunned on a computer with a slightly darker monitor setting.
When I looked at it on my other monitor I wasn't half so impressed by the likeness.
THAT however seems to be the whole crux of the AA debate.
There IS indeed just enough likeness to make on wonder...
Anyway, here's the picture.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v405/MissMcallister/31.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 09, 2004, 09:31:43 PM
Thank you, that does remind me of Tatiana!

Here is a link on the AA subject though this is an opposite point of view from Kurth's, if you want to consider them both:

http://www.serfes.org/royal/annaanderson.htm

Scroll halfway down the page for "The Unmasking of AA"

Looks like this author shares my suspicions about Gleb Botkin  :-/

some excerpts from the article in the link:

Few of Anna Anderson's supporters were more cunning, knowledgeable or influential than Gleb Botkin; nephew of Serge Botkin and son of the Imperial Family's personal physician Dr Eugene Botkin who perished with his royal patients in the Ipatiev House in 1918.

Gleb Botkin had an intimate knowledge of palace life, having spent much of his youth near the Imperial Family. As such it's impossible he was deceived by Anderson, he must have known she was a fraud and used her for his own aims. Botkin was one of many sources of obscure information Anderson would recount as "memories" to astound friend and foe alike. Beside abundant Russian émigrés another source were dissolute members of the German aristocracy, most having lost their wealth and power with the fall of the Kaiser. ..........

Gleb Botkin was a novelist and illustrator by profession and used his talents to almost triumphant effect, writing numerous articles and a book on the validity of Anderson's claims. He also created the prevailing myth the Grand Duchesses Xenia and Olga (sisters of Nicholas II) tried to bribe Anderson to renounce her claim with the offer of a house anywhere in the world and a generous annuity, an impossibility considering their precarious financial situations.


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BattleAngel on August 09, 2004, 10:29:52 PM
Very interesting article Annie.

It's SO unlikely that the little one would have survived that it boggles the mind--but of course hope was always alive that somehow...

The Anna Anderson story is darned fascinating, and not in the least because this woman managed to look at one time or another like at least THREE members of that family!

Ah well, it makes no never mind now, after all even had the poor little one survived the massacre it's unlikely she would have made it til now.

In my heart of hearts I don't feel that AA was our Anastasia but if she had been...Oh if she HAD been...how unspeakably sad and cruel THAT would have been.

Mary
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on August 10, 2004, 07:19:25 AM
Quote
Thank you, that does remind me of Tatiana!

Here is a link on the AA subject though this is an opposite point of view from Kurth's, if you want to consider them both:

http://www.serfes.org/royal/annaanderson.htm

Scroll halfway down the page for "The Unmasking of AA"

Looks like this author shares my suspicions about Gleb Botkin  :-/

some excerpts from the article in the link:

Few of Anna Anderson's supporters were more cunning, knowledgeable or influential than Gleb Botkin; nephew of Serge Botkin and son of the Imperial Family's personal physician Dr Eugene Botkin who perished with his royal patients in the Ipatiev House in 1918.

Gleb Botkin had an intimate knowledge of palace life, having spent much of his youth near the Imperial Family. As such it's impossible he was deceived by Anderson, he must have known she was a fraud and used her for his own aims. Botkin was one of many sources of obscure information Anderson would recount as "memories" to astound friend and foe alike. Beside abundant Russian émigrés another source were dissolute members of the German aristocracy, most having lost their wealth and power with the fall of the Kaiser. ..........

Gleb Botkin was a novelist and illustrator by profession and used his talents to almost triumphant effect, writing numerous articles and a book on the validity of Anderson's claims. He also created the prevailing myth the Grand Duchesses Xenia and Olga (sisters of Nicholas II) tried to bribe Anderson to renounce her claim with the offer of a house anywhere in the world and a generous annuity, an impossibility considering their precarious financial situations.




This is, quite simply, not only garbage but slanderous garbage at that.  Not only is the article riddled with factual errors, but worse it asserts things like the above opinion as fact, without any evidence, and in the process not only distorts the truth but blackens the name of a man unable to defend himself.  Gleb was certainly one of AA's most vehement supporters, and he had a temper because he believed in her completely, but to write that Gleb knew AA was a fake is ludicrous and unfortunately typical.  What aims did Gleb have?  I know his family and I feel for them at having to put up with this kind of badly researched, unsupported opinion, not fact.  There is no evidence whatsoever that Gleb fed AA information, or for that matter that his sister did so either-by the time they met nearly a decade after she was pulled from the Lanwehr Canal, AA had already said almost everything that now forms part of the record.

It's a shame that this sort of blatantly erroneous information is out there to be read and believed-it's irresponsible any way you cut it, and dishonorable.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 07:47:54 AM
Yes, it is true that this man wrote an articile using his opinion as fact, and that is not right. However, just as he couldn't read Gleb's mind and know for sure what his motives were, neither can any of the rest of us. Though I only speculate and have no evidence, I cannot discount the possibility that Gleb had something to do with it, it only makes sense. I don't see how it's impossible. I read another article once that said Grand Duke Hesse had said the Russian emigre community (not mentioning names) was responsible for her 'memories.' Either way, if she was not Anastasia as most evidence seems to prove, then SOMEBODY had to have given her the information. We may never know or be able to prove who, they are all gone now.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 08:01:20 AM
Again I must say, I am NOT against AA, I think she was a wonderful lady, and I believed in her for years. I can't say how overwhelmingly happy it would make me to know that Anastasia(one of my favorite historical figures) survived to old age, and ended up living in Virginia (my home state!) with a bunch of cats (my favorite animal!) That would be the 'coolest' thing in the world to me! I WANT to believe! But sadly, it's just not realistic :'(

Since I don't believe anymore, after re-looking at the pictures years later, and after the DNA tests, I am looking for things to explain the 'mysteries' in the story, as anyone interested would do. I also am saddened to see so many good researchers and scholars hanging onto the AA story and still trying to prove it, or at least leave the door open for it, when there are other things to be explored! There are still questions surrouning Anastasia that have nothing to do with Anna Anderson Manahan. I would love to see investigation into other things that may have happened.

I also agree with the person who said if she really had been Anastasia, how sad it must have been for her not to be believed. But on the other hand, if she was not, think how sad it must have been for the remaining members of the family, to be teased with hope that was dashed, then tortured for years with lawsuits. I was reading a book last night about how sad it was for GD Olga to have to have Anna yelling "Dear Aunt Olga!" at her even in her last years. It must have been bad enough losing her family the way she did, 'pretenders' must have been a constant heartbreak to her.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 10, 2004, 08:48:38 AM
Absolutely nothing I have read about Gleb Botkin or his sister Tatiana gives any suggestion that they were insincere in their belief in Anna Anderson or that they "fed" her information.

They didn't see her again for several years after she'd been dragged out of the canal. During that time Anna Anderson had apparently seen countless magazine articles, heard stories from Russian monarchists, and told the story of her escape. The details of what she said didn't change after she met Gleb. Now, whether or not you believe she knew things that weren't printed in magazines and books and weren't common knowledge to the monarchists, it's a fact that she said everything before she met the Botkins.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 08:57:53 AM
The Botkins were not the only Russian exiles with knowledge of palace life. Like GD Hesse (Alexandra's brother, who was very upset by AA) said, many in the Russian emigre community could have told her things. She also could have overheard things, or been told stories as 'remember when' tales by some very innocent people. There were also letters, telegrams and even  telephones in those days, so just because someone hadn't 'met' a person doesn't mean they never corresponded. We're doing it right now!  ;)

Since Anna in all likelihood was NOT Anastasia, SOMEONE had to have fed the memories to her, but none of us can prove who did or did not, so it is still open to speculation as long as opinion is not stated as fact.

One more thing, doesn't it mean anything to any of you that Alexandra's brother was so vehemently opposed to Anna? Other than Ella, he was the sibling most close to Alexandra's family and he knew Anastasia well, much better than some of the cousins who only saw her occasionally and had their doubts. I have cousins I only saw a few times a year at dinners or parties, and some of them I could probably not pick out of a lineup of them and a few other similar looking people. But Ernie was very close to them all, as was Olga. They'd know. Now I know some of you may say Olga was pressured by the family to deny Anna, but WHY? She sure didn't have any money from them. She had already lost her title and any rights when she married a commoner. She had NOTHING to lose by accepting Anna and everything to gain if she really was her beloved niece. Ernst of Hesse had NOTHING to gain or lose either. So don't you think these people would have loved to have had their beloved Anastasia back in their lives if they thought for a moment it really was her?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 10, 2004, 09:09:41 AM
It's possible that she heard stories from the people in the Russian monarchist circles she moved in or read magazine articles and picked up some information. But she had no contact with the Botkins until AFTER she'd already told her main story.

I think it's wrong to attribute sinister motives to the Botkins when there's zero proof of it. They certainly never made money on Anna Anderson.

I still find room for reasonable doubt in the matter. I don't know if Anna Anderson was or was not Anastasia. But I don't think the Botkins were ever anything but true believers.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 09:17:28 AM
Quote
I think it's wrong to attribute sinister motives to the Botkins when there's zero proof of it. They certainly never made money on Anna Anderson.


I'm not saying it was 'sinister!' ::) I'm not 'attributing' anything definite to them. But it is a possibility and a theory. No, it's not a fact that can ever be proven, but neither is the idea that he totally believed her and was not just perpetuating an interesting story. No money? He did not earn anything from his book "The Real Anastasia?"

Quote
But I don't think the Botkins were ever anything but true believers.


We will never know, but we can all continue to guess. There is no proof either way.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 10, 2004, 09:23:04 AM
Again, I can only reiterate -- she told the story BEFORE she had any contact with the Botkins siblings.

Gleb Botkin spent a lot of of his own money on keeping Anna Anderson afloat. He also had a wife and kids to support. He didn't get rich from writing a book about her. If anything, he sabotaged her by losing his temper with the Imperial family and taking them to task in public. He was as true a believer as any religious fanatic and he was a little bit eccentric, being a worshiper of Aphrodite and the feminine principle about 50 years before it became stylish.

There is documentary evidence that she wasn't in contact with the Botkins prior to the mid 1920s. By that point she'd had numerous opportunities to tell the story in Russian monarchist circles.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 09:29:30 AM
I still don't think it can be proven they never spoke by phone, letter or some other correspondence. There's no way to prove that. Yes it's true she was already in the emigre circles and anyone could have told her. We will never be able to prove who did or did not tell her what. But I do believe someone, likely a number of people, did.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 10, 2004, 10:29:16 AM
It is EXTREMELY unlikely that either of the Botkins would have contacted this woman by phone or by letter prior to the mid-1920s. I don't like the idea of implying they did when there is clear evidence that Anna Anderson DID have contact with a number of other contacts of the Imperial Family prior to meeting the Botkins. If you believe she was fed the information, it could easily have come from someone other than the Botkins.

I still find Kurth's book convincing. There are things she knew and did that couldn't be explained easily, even if you take her friendshiip with the Botkins and others into account.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 11:31:22 AM
While it is possible they were a factor at some point, I have said I don't think the Botkins were her only, or her first source. There are a lot of people who could have told her things either intentionally or incidently in conversation. But I do not believe there is anything she 'knew' or 'remembered' that can't be explained away as someone else's information, even dating back to the time the lady at the asylum showed her the picture.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Katya04 on August 10, 2004, 12:55:27 PM
Quote

ne more thing, doesn't it mean anything to any of you that Alexandra's brother was so vehemently opposed to Anna? Other than Ella, he was the sibling most close to Alexandra's family and he knew Anastasia well, much better than some of the cousins who only saw her occasionally and had their doubts. I have cousins I only saw a few times a year at dinners or parties, and some of them I could probably not pick out of a lineup of them and a few other similar looking people. But Ernie was very close to them all, as was Olga. They'd know. Now I know some of you may say Olga was pressured by the family to deny Anna, but WHY? She sure didn't have any money from them. She had already lost her title and any rights when she married a commoner. She had NOTHING to lose by accepting Anna and everything to gain if she really was her beloved niece. Ernst of Hesse had NOTHING to gain or lose either. So don't you think these people would have loved to have had their beloved Anastasia back in their lives if they thought for a moment it really was her?


Right, and what about Pierre Gilliard? The ones who were closest to the family were the ones most opposed because they could see she was not their beloved Stasi. The whole case must have been a perpetual source of pain for people who had suffered such a tragedy. I am sorry for them :'( :'(
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_Ashton on August 10, 2004, 05:09:40 PM
Quote
Again I must say, I am NOT against AA, I think she was a wonderful lady, and I believed in her for years. I can't say how overwhelmingly happy it would make me to know that Anastasia(one of my favorite historical figures) survived to old age, and ended up living in Virginia (my home state!) with a bunch of cats (my favorite animal!) That would be the 'coolest' thing in the world to me! I WANT to believe! But sadly, it's just not realistic :'(.


Sorry - I don't think you understand. Greg didn't say: Gleb Botkin believed in AA therefore she was Anastasia. He didn't say: I believe in AA and will do anything to prove it. He simply said: there is no reason to doubt the honesty of Botkin's opinion. I wonder why it is that you assume that this a posteriori observation from someone who knows Botkin's daughter well and is familiar with the affects that her father's obsession had on her childhood supports some specific agenda? Don't you think that Gleb Botkin was a human being with a reputation that deserves support regardless of whether one agrees with his conclusions? Or do you perhaps think it's "all about the Romanovs"?

Quote
Since I don't believe anymore, after re-looking at the pictures years later, and after the DNA tests, I am looking for things to explain the 'mysteries' in the story, as anyone interested would do. I also am saddened to see so many good researchers and scholars hanging onto the AA story and still trying to prove it, or at least leave the door open for it, when there are other things to be explored! There are still questions surrouning Anastasia that have nothing to do with Anna Anderson Manahan. I would love to see investigation into other things that may have happened.




Sorry - who do you think is "hanging onto" a story? Who do you think is trying to "prove" what? Which questions do you imagine will be left unanswered by whom?
I can assure you, I am a LOT more familiar with these said "good researchers and scholars" than you are and I personally see no grounds for your condescending assumptions about their opinions and methodology.

Janet

PS I am not an Anderson supporter; I don't count the nasty little Grand Duchess Anastasia as "one of my favourite historical characters". On the other hand I do study history with an open mind, piece by piece, fact by fact - I don't draw sweeping conclusions and I don't impute my own emotional agenda re. Romanovs onto others. If you "want" to believe she lived to be a dear old lady surrounded by your favourite animal - that's fine. Please don't assume that others proceed on the same basis.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 06:02:20 PM
Quote

PS I am not an Anderson supporter; I don't count the nasty little Grand Duchess Anastasia as "one of my favourite historical characters". On the other hand I do study history with an open mind, piece by piece, fact by fact - I don't draw sweeping conclusions and I don't impute my own emotional agenda re. Romanovs onto others. If you "want" to believe she lived to be a dear old lady surrounded by your favourite animal - that's fine. Please don't assume that others proceed on the same basis.


My goodness there is no need to be so cruel to what I said! You COMPLETELEY misunderstood. When I listed all that, I was only trying to show you that I was not against Anna and that I honestly would like to believe, and I have tried to  believe, and at one time I did believe. But with the DNA tests, and all the pictures and opinions and evidence on both sides I have studied completely, and moreso after joining this board, I have sadly concluded that I am unable to believe there is any chance AA was Anastasia. It is nothing sweeping or emotional, it was after much research and scrutiny. Although I do feel now that my former belief in Anna was more emotional and wishful thinking than reality, for I can no longer even see in the pictures what I saw before. I am no skeptic, never was, and I have always been idealistic and a dreamer, too much for my own good at times and it has not always served me well in life.

Still, I cannot speak for anyone else and never said or implied anyone did believe for that reason. I don't know what anyone else's reasons are, I can't read their minds. The harshness with which people are sometimes met when they oppose this view is unecessary! Are there people with an agenda who thrive on keeping the AA story alive? The fact that some are so defensive at the mere suggestion of the idea only leads me to lean in the direction that possibly it is true. But then again anything is possible!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_Ashton on August 10, 2004, 06:47:59 PM
Quote

My goodness there is no need to be so cruel to what I said! You COMPLETELEY misunderstood. When I listed all that, I was only trying to show you that I was not against Anna and that I honestly would like to believe, and I have tried to  believe, and at one time I did believe. But with the DNA tests, and all the pictures and opinions and evidence on both sides I have studied completely, and moreso after joining this board, I have sadly concluded that I am unable to believe there is any chance AA was Anastasia. It is nothing sweeping or emotional, it was after much research and scrutiny. Although I do feel now that my former belief in Anna was more emotional and wishful thinking than reality, for I can no longer even see in the pictures what I saw before.


I don't think there was anything cruel in what I said. I just asked you to remember that not everyone starts from the same position you do, and that you cannot therefore asume you know anything about their conclusions, their motives or their methodology. I asked you specifically to note that when Greg addresses the issue of Botkin's honesty, it is a unjusitifed leap to assume that he is talking about the Anderson issue per se - which you *did* assume. You certainly have not not studied this issue the way some others have, so it might do you some good to look at their posts, step by step, piece by piece - *without* assuming that they are all about Anna Anderson being any one individual. Especially if, as you say, you want to look at the "missing body" issue from all sides.


Quote
Still, I cannot speak for anyone else and never said or implied anyone did believe for that reason. I don't know what anyone else's reasons are, I can't read their minds. The harshness with which people are sometimes met when they oppose this view is unecessary! Are there people with an agenda who thrive on keeping the AA story alive? The fact that some are so defensive at the mere suggestion of the idea only leads me to lean in the direction that possibly it is true. But then again anything is possible!


Oppose WHAT view? What agenda could anyone possibly have in "keeping the AA story alive" if it were a dead duck? - To undermine their own reputability?

Again you completely misunderstand. My only point was that this isn't ALL ABOUT ANNA ANDERSON BEING ANASTASIA.

Janet
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 10, 2004, 06:49:48 PM
Quote

Sorry - I don't think you understand. Greg didn't say: Gleb Botkin believed in AA therefore she was Anastasia. He didn't say: I believe in AA and will do anything to prove it. He simply said: there is no reason to doubt the honesty of Botkin's opinion. I wonder why it is that you assume that this a posteriori observation from someone who knows Botkin's daughter well and is familiar with the affects that her father's obsession had on her childhood supports some specific agenda? Don't you think that Gleb Botkin was a human being with a reputation that deserves support regardless of whether one agrees with his conclusions? Or do you perhaps think it's "all about the Romanovs"?



Sorry - who do you think is "hanging onto" a story? Who do you think is trying to "prove" what? Which questions do you imagine will be left unanswered by whom?
I can assure you, I am a LOT more familiar with these said "good researchers and scholars" than you are and I personally see no grounds for your condescending assumptions about their opinions and methodology.

Janet

PS I am not an Anderson supporter; I don't count the nasty little Grand Duchess Anastasia as "one of my favourite historical characters". On the other hand I do study history with an open mind, piece by piece, fact by fact - I don't draw sweeping conclusions and I don't impute my own emotional agenda re. Romanovs onto others. If you "want" to believe she lived to be a dear old lady surrounded by your favourite animal - that's fine. Please don't assume that others proceed on the same basis.


I agree with you regarding Gleb Botkin and the sincerity of his opinion. I think his reputation shouldn't be blackened without some proof to the contrary. But "nasty little Grand Duchess Anastasia?" LOL. Isn't that blackening the reputation of another dead person? Anastasia Nicholaievna was a high-spirited girl whose "nastiness" consisted of tripping palace servants, pulling her cousin's hair in childish fights over who was taller, and giving humorous imitations of people at the court. I'm sure she wasn't always a perfect little angel, but her naughtiness sounds like normal kid stuff to me. Let's not go overboard here.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 06:55:52 PM
 ::) Oh, come on, nobody 'blackened' Gleb's name, I merely suggested he may have been one of the people who gave her 'memories', and we can never prove or disprove that regardless of our personal opinions.

If you think the guy who wrote the article I posted the link to blackened his name, take it up with him, not me.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_Ashton on August 10, 2004, 07:18:43 PM
Quote

I agree with you regarding Gleb Botkin and the sincerity of his opinion. I think his reputation shouldn't be blackened without some proof to the contrary. But "nasty little Grand Duchess Anastasia?" LOL. Isn't that blackening the reputation of another dead person? Anastasia Nicholaievna was a high-spirited girl whose "nastiness" consisted of tripping palace servants, pulling her cousin's hair in childish fights over who was taller, and giving humorous imitations of people at the court. I'm sure she wasn't always a perfect little angel, but her naughtiness sounds like normal kid stuff to me. Let's not go overboard here.


Well...maybe  8). But my main point was that if anyone was going to sit around "hoping" that one of the kids had survived, it probably wouldn't be Anastasia they'd be dreaming about...

Janet
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 10, 2004, 07:25:02 PM
Sounds like a spoiled brat to me. "tripping servants", bet they didn't think of it as "kid's play".
Cheers,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 10, 2004, 07:25:23 PM
Janet, I have not come to my conclusions lightly or haphazardly. I have been fascinated with this story since I was 12- that's 30 years now. I have read much more than the posts on this board piece by piece, I have read many books and articles, seen many shows and documentaries, and now many websites. I never jumped the gun and assumed anything.

Quote
My only point was that this isn't ALL ABOUT ANNA ANDERSON BEING ANASTASIA.


It sure didn't sound like that to me, oh well. But I agree, I never thought that either, that's why it's a shame it always comes back to that with all the other possibilities to be explored.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 10, 2004, 07:46:37 PM
Quote
Sounds like a spoiled brat to me. "tripping servants", bet they didn't think of it as "kid's play".
Cheers,
Robert

When it comes down to it, I bet all five of those kids were spoiled rotten brats who could have benefited from a spanking or two, at least in childhood. There are plenty of stories about Alexei sticking fruit on the toes of ladies in waiting or ordering soldiers to march into the sea. I read somewhere that all  the girls weren't all that considerate of the servants either and were messy and bossy on occasion. How could they not have been spoiled when they were royalty in Russia? Their father had the power of life and death over everyone. They knew from the cradle that they were more important than anyone else, regardless of how 'simply' their parents tried to raise them.

I think Anastasia was naughty and mischievous and sometimes did things that weren't very nice like tripping people or pulling hair or being cutting or teasing her siblings. She was also spirited, dramatic, full of fun and loved her family to distraction. Her personality is probably why the family gave her nicknames like 'imp' and 'quicksilver.' She was so vibrant that her personality comes across through photos 100 years later.

"Nasty little Anastasia" isn't a very good epitaph for a child who may not have lived much past her 17th birthday.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 10, 2004, 08:34:54 PM
It very well may not be, especially for a child. As mentioned earlier, "why Anastasia"? I would have choosen to be one with a better reputation. However, it is exactly that superoir attitude, not coupled with superior intelligence, that led them to that basement-all of them. Even their acts of charity were done in a condescending, self serving way- i.e. they are "earning points" rather than helping others out of sheer kindness or necessity. "humbling oneself" indeed.
Well, there I go again.
Cheers anyway,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 10, 2004, 10:23:37 PM
Quote
It very well may not be, especially for a child. As mentioned earlier, "why Anastasia"? I would have choosen to be one with a better reputation. However, it is exactly that superoir attitude, not coupled with superior intelligence, that led them to that basement-all of them. Even their acts of charity were done in a condescending, self serving way- i.e. they are "earning points" rather than helping others out of sheer kindness or necessity. "humbling oneself" indeed.
Well, there I go again.
Cheers anyway,
Robert


"All of them?" So the actions of the 13-year-old boy and his 22-, 21-, 19- and 17-year-old sisters led to their year and a half long imprisonment, mental torture and potentially the threat of rape as well as murder, and final painful, bloody death by bayonet and multiple gunshot wounds? I don't think you really mean that.

Children aren't to blame for the actions of their parents, regardless of whether they are royal or commoner, regardless of whether they are sometimes haughty, arrogant, thoughtless of the feelings of those lower than themselves or not. Actually, I think the five children were, for the most part, kind and thoughtful. They had their moments of acting otherwise, but so do we all. Olga, Tatiana, Marie, Anastasia and Alexei had no individual power to change what occurred in their country. They died because of the actions of their countrymen and perhaps the failings of their mother and their father.

But even Nicholas and Alexandra didn't deserve to die that way.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 10, 2004, 10:29:20 PM
I cannot believe what unkind things are being said here out of prejudice against people of royal birth. It's been a long day for me, folks, but I am utterly disgusted by this.

OTMAA were hardly perfect cardboard saints, but neither were they totally bratty and nasty and self involved as you speculate (proof? it would be nice, but oh wait, that would get in the way of your conclusions, wouldn't it?). They were normal kids, they had good and bad days, and they were living in a fish bowl. I think they proved their mettle while they were imprisoned, but that is just my opinion.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 10, 2004, 10:32:59 PM
Please, I said nothing about them deserving what became of them. And of course I do not believe the children especially merited such treatment. What I was pointing out is that percieved ideas of them, as they projected [intentionally, conciously or not] led to the hatred of them that in turn led to their terrible fate.

Best,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on August 10, 2004, 11:02:54 PM
Quote
When it comes down to it, I bet all five of those kids were spoiled rotten brats who could have benefited from a spanking or two, at least in childhood. There are plenty of stories about Alexei sticking fruit on the toes of ladies in waiting or ordering soldiers to march into the sea. I read somewhere that all  the girls weren't all that considerate of the servants either and were messy and bossy on occasion.


Hello Bookworm,

Really, i mean no offence, i perfectly know about those anecdotes about Alexei, but could you tell me please where did you read about the girls being bossy, messy and unkind with the servants?

I think i´ve read almost every memoir of those close to the family or those who simply had a brief meeting with them, and did not find anything that would suggest for a moment that kind of behavior. As for the servants i read the girls never gave orders, so to say. Instead, they would kindly ask for anything her mother or themselves would need.

Elizabeta Ersberg, a maid working for the grand duchesses preserved after the revolution a box full of things related to them. She had a lot of tiny notes, the kind wich the Empress was so fond of, writen by the girls, asking for she to do something. I do not know the perfect translation but more or less they said "Liza, would you kindly do "this or that" please?"

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 11, 2004, 01:10:38 AM
Quote
It very well may not be, especially for a child. As mentioned earlier, "why Anastasia"? I would have choosen to be one with a better reputation. However, it is exactly that superoir attitude, not coupled with superior intelligence, that led them to that basement-all of them. Even their acts of charity were done in a condescending, self serving way- i.e. they are "earning points" rather than helping others out of sheer kindness or necessity. "humbling oneself" indeed.
Well, there I go again.
Cheers anyway,
Robert


Robert: Perhaps you did not intend it, but it sounds as if you think the Romanov children had behaved differently, they would not have been murdered. I disagree. I think they could have been perfect, and the Ural Regional Soviet would still have killed them.

What is your source for saying that their acts of charity were insincere and self serving? I cannot imagine being so arrogant myself that I could attribute motives to others, so I wonder how you manage it?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Sunny on August 11, 2004, 06:47:38 AM
LisaDavidson and Antonio, couldn't agree more with your opinions on this matter.

Sunny
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on August 11, 2004, 07:09:58 AM
I also agree with Lisa and Antonio. I was poised to write a reply - then saw that Lisa and Antonio had covered everything I wanted to say in their respective replies.

Cheers, people.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 11, 2004, 08:32:22 AM
I saw those comments last night but didn't respond, because I couldn't believe anyone really felt that way and surely they were only looking for some kind of reaction, perhaps for fun. If they really did mean those things, it is indeed sad.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 11, 2004, 08:53:22 AM
Quote

Hello Bookworm,

Really, i mean no offence, i perfectly know about those anecdotes about Alexei, but could you tell me please where did you read about the girls being bossy, messy and unkind with the servants?

I think i´ve read almost every memoir of those close to the family or those who simply had a brief meeting with them, and did not find anything that would suggest for a moment that kind of behavior. As for the servants i read the girls never gave orders, so to say. Instead, they would kindly ask for anything her mother or themselves would need.

Elizabeta Ersberg, a maid working for the grand duchesses preserved after the revolution a box full of things related to them. She had a lot of tiny notes, the kind wich the Empress was so fond of, writen by the girls, asking for she to do something. I do not know the perfect translation but more or less they said "Liza, would you kindly do "this or that" please?"



The Russian author Eduard Radzinski (sp? I'm sure I've butchered the name) and his book about the fate of the Tsar alluded to it. I don't remember exactly what the passage said, but I think it was fairly mild -- maybe that the girls were occasionally careless with their clothing and didn't tidy things up or that they might have been occasionally bossy to maids. Some of my books are in storage and I think that's one of them, so I can't look it up. Maybe someone else could.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on August 11, 2004, 09:07:22 AM
Quote

The Russian author Eduard Radzinski (sp? I'm sure I've butchered the name) and his book about the fate of the Tsar alluded to it. I don't remember exactly what the passage said, but I think it was fairly mild -- maybe that the girls were occasionally careless with their clothing and didn't tidy things up or that they might have been occasionally bossy to maids. Some of my books are in storage and I think that's one of them, so I can't look it up. Maybe someone else could.


Sounds to me like they were typical kids.  What kids don't tidy up all the time, aren't careless with their clothes, and can't at times be bossy?  Even the best of kids will do all that at times.  HEck, I don't even want to tidy up, but I know if I don't no one else will.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on August 11, 2004, 09:51:36 AM
Robert,
Please cite historical references that lead you support your conclusions about the Imperial children's "superior attitude without superior intelligence" etc being the reason people hated them and they only participated in charity work to "win points".  All of the first hand sources we have seen support an opposite conclusion, that they were all kind, polite and no more "mischevious" than any other child of the same age and were all very proud of the charity works they did..
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 11, 2004, 09:57:50 AM
Hence the difference, they did have servants to pick up after them.
Now if you all will take your knee-jerk reactions away & re-read the key words I said, I was making no judgement on them nor did I say they, any of them, deserved what they got.
To those who knew them intimately they were a different lot than what the vast rest of the world knew. Hence they provided the very fuel for the revolutionary propaganda that generated the hatred & resentment. {historical learned lesson from the french experience}.
As far as their checkbook charity, it was no different than anyone else of their ilk, anywhere. ANYTIME. And this I can say from my own experience.
I can assure you I am not anti-Romanov, least of all anti-monarchist.  I have a huge library on the very subject, covering all eras, countries, cultures, families from a wide variety of viewpoints [although I try to saty with historical perspective, I also read a great deal of autobios and such]. I take a pragmatic, non sentimental view of people & events.
Now, of course no child, of any class or culture, deserves to be punished for the actions of their parents, or for the simple fact that they were born in a certain circumstance.  This is true from Cambodia to Sudan, pauper or peer. However it is a sad, tragic fact that thousands are. No child deserves to go naked & hungry either, but millions do.
Personally, I have has much sympathy for the Romanov children as I do for those slaughtered in Uganda because they were from "the wrong tribe" and those in Cambodia because their parents were "educated".
Sorry if this bursts some romantic bubbles amongst you,but this is how I see things.
Cheers,
Robert

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 11, 2004, 10:18:24 AM
Quote
Hence the difference, they did have servants to pick up after them.
Now if you all will take your knee-jerk reactions away & re-read the key words I said, I was making no judgement on them nor did I say they, any of them, deserved what they got.
To those who knew them intimately they were a different lot than what the vast rest of the world knew. Hence they provided the very fuel for the revolutionary propaganda that generated the hatred & resentment. {historical learned lesson from the french experience}.
As far as their checkbook charity, it was no different than anyone else of their ilk, anywhere. ANYTIME. And this I can say from my own experience.
I can assure you I am not anti-Romanov, least of all anti-monarchist.  I have a huge library on the very subject, covering all eras, countries, cultures, families from a wide variety of viewpoints [although I try to saty with historical perspective, I also read a great deal of autobios and such]. I take a pragmatic, non sentimental view of people & events.
Now, of course no child, of any class or culture, deserves to be punished for the actions of their parents, or for the simple fact that they were born in a certain circumstance.  This is true from Cambodia to Sudan, pauper or peer. However it is a sad, tragic fact that thousands are. No child deserves to go naked & hungry either, but millions do.
Personally, I have has much sympathy for the Romanov children as I do for those slaughtered in Uganda because they were from "the wrong tribe" and those in Cambodia because their parents were "educated".
Sorry if this bursts some romantic bubbles amongst you,but this is how I see things.
Cheers,
Robert



I think the difference is that people here feel they KNOW the Romanovs on an intimate level. We've read their letters and diaries, looked at hundreds of pictures of them in every possible mood, read anecdotes about their lives, read about their deaths in painfully vivid detail, hoped for Anastasia's survival, seen pictures of their skeletons and pored over DNA results. We know these people in a way we don't the poor little kids in Uganda and Cambodia, though I'm sure everyone here feels bad in the abstract for any child who suffers. It's the story of one dead child that breaks the heart, not the abstract account of millions of deaths. That's why you got the reaction you did.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 11, 2004, 10:29:37 AM
Yes, I have read the same things, the same pictures [although one reason I so enjoy this forum is the many things that I have NEVER seen or read !!] anf I have been at it as long as any of you. I started early, age 10 or so, as soon as I could read, which was very early indeed. I can well assure you that was quite some time ago as well.
I understand the almost childish devpotion some people have for the family, I do not share it, but I do not put anyone down for it, even if it passes the ridiculous. Hence the point- these people lived & died almost 100 years ago.  A short time by our modern standards, yet still a distant vanished age. Ther are similiar devotee to Marie & Louis, even Cleopatra has her defenders [They can be an odd lot, but no less devoted than Romanov fans].
Best to all,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on August 11, 2004, 10:52:42 AM
Robert,
How does your theory match with what we know about the murders themselves, the fact that many of the men did not want to kill the children, and even when drunk, some of them just couldn't shoot them in the basement?
If you made your statement that some of the Russian people "perceived" the Imperial children in that way which led to their being hated, I could agree, but you assert your statements as genuine assessments of the children themselves, which is contrary to what is known about them.

This is where I take issue, as I have never seen first hand accounts to support your statements. Please let me know where you find them.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_W. on August 11, 2004, 12:34:05 PM
Good grief.  :-[

To begin with--and speaking personally--my own interest in OTMAA coincides with my interest in children, period.  When I have empathy for Alexei's hemophillia attacks, or applaud Marie's pluckiness, or appreciate Olga's sensitivity, I think also of how these situations are universal to all children.

As in the case of Anne Frank, existing documentation about OTMAA gives us a window into their family situations, how their personalities developed as they matured, etc.

Yes, I have noticed some folks at this website oversentimentalize OTMAA. Not my style at all; in fact, I didn't appreciate it when I was oversentimentalized by my mother's childless friends. Yech!  ;)

However, on this thread, the pendulum swings in the other direction . . . and the mood has definitely become ugly.

I think it has been fairly well documented that Anastasia could be a very challenging child, and that her cousins her own age found her difficult. Anastasia was, for three years, the youngest in the family. She undoubtedly felt a profound sense of competition with her older sisters. And then there's that foot deformity. Plus, along comes Alexei and displaces her, not only as the youngest, but also as the longed-for boy! I've seen children with fewer issues have considerable disciplinary problems, and I'm not surprised, then, that Anastasia was "enfant terrible" of the family. She compensated, it would seem, by becoming a fearless type, a prankster, a "candid camera" pest of sorts (along with some truly creative self-portraits), and--in short--a pesky little sister with a proclivity for teasing and using shocking language. So she was not a little role model, by any means, but an active, micheivious child, acting out certain feelings that--taken within the context of her environment--were understandable. As a former teacher, I am sure that, had she been my student, I would have had my hands full! But I also would have appreciated her liveliness and sense of spirit . . . I simply would have wanted to directed that spirit, just as I'm sure her parents and tutors attempted to do.

As for Alexei, yes of course he exhibited spoiled behaviors. He was the youngest, the only son, and a hemophilliac . . . and a little boy, for goodness sakes! Not to be chauvinistic, but when I was growing up I saw the same types of behaviors in boys my own age, then in boys I babysat, and eventually in boys in my own classroom.

His parents, it seems, did what they could. And there are indications that despite his pranks and (to be honest) occasional churlishness, he was maturing into a thoughtful and sensitve adolescent.

Now, as for the behaviors of the others . . . Who says anyone has to be 100% angelic at all times? Certainly there were times when OTM must have been grumpy, moody, lazy, and disinclined to the industriousness that their mother promoted. So what else is new?! Welcome to the Wonderful World of Adolescence!

I am sure the children were grumpy at times about Alexandra pushing them to do charitable works. Again, nothing new. But they followed through, and guess what? We know that Olga and Tatiana both became naturally charitable as they grew older. I believe Marie also was developing in that area as well.

Oh, and I remember reading that the children could behave "like wild Indians." Do you know of any children that don't, on occasion, become wild and boisterous? I was brought up very strictly, to be polite and thoughtful, but of course I got out of hand at times. I was a kid, for pete's sake!

Perhaps what we're also talking here is degree. My own research indicates that as the children matured, they became adept at participating in social situations (such as committees) with dignity and cordiality. Nowhere have I found that they were spoiled high-hats. Even during their final days of captivity OTMA good-naturedly helped move beds around when a couple of hired women came in to mop and clean.  

Alexandra was a practical woman who could make her own bed, clean a grate, knit, sew, darn, etc.  She encouraged these "homely" talents in her children as well. Nicholas also had a humble streak. He enjoyed talking with people from all walks of life; he loved long walks in the countryside; and he was known to try to relate to what his soldiers would be experiencing, to the point of trying out the new military kit by wearing it during an extended walk. Both he and Alexandra, then--beyond their Victorian/Edwardian propriety--had a certain amount of empathy for others. Yes, we know that Alexandra could be frosty and neurotic and that Nicholas could be distancing. And we all wish, in retrospect, that they had been more sensitive to a number of issues which would ultimately bring down the Romanov empire. But from the comments of those who were close to them, I have yet to read any creditable criticisms that would make me think that Nicholas, Alexandra and their children were nasty and self-centered. They were, instead, a very bourgeosis family, at odds with their more sophisticated, hypercritical relatives . . . and that is why so many of us continue to remember them, so many years after their horrific deaths.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Louise on August 11, 2004, 12:46:35 PM
Thank you, Janet.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Jane on August 11, 2004, 02:34:23 PM
A very well-stated, clear, intelligent and eloquent post , Janet.  Hear hear.

Jane
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 11, 2004, 03:24:18 PM
Ok, one more time:
NOWHERE have I presented any theory. And, I do not pretend to know much about children. [I do admire  Olga & Tatiana a great deal. They did show maturity & true dignity far beyond their years. Can go so far as to say I almost relate to their experience in some ways] I am sure they were no worse or better than any other of their age & circumstance.
What I was trying to say, that the perception of the ENTIRE family, as used by the leftist propagandists, was used against them to such an extent that any redemtion was almost impossible. This same attitude was expressed even more so long after their deaths- by Stalin & his machine. Mike can cite the original works, I have read translations as cited in western revolutionary writing. Much the same was said in A-H , Germany and even UK but to much less effect.
In context, the autocracy [another thread] was doomed, but the monarchy need not have been.  Case in point, the Windsor pr disasters of the last decades, failure to respond with honesty & openess almost proved a disaster. If not an actual end of the monarchy, a dangerously low public opinion where before was a benevolent apathy with the occasional public expression of happiness at the birth of a new prince [sometimes princesses as well].
Which brings us back to the point of this thread -lost somewhere I think,  AA & Anastasia. Purely hypothetical [as all conjecture with history is], IF the Windsors were to meet a similiar fate, i.e. death & dissapearance, who would be the likely "lost prince [princess] ?
Did AA choose to be AN or did someone else choose for her? In the case of the Windsors, it would be a manufactured illusion with all the modern wizardry at hand.
Carry on !
Robert
P.S.- my blanket statement re: their charitable efforts was indeed unfair on my part. Of course I was not their confessor, so I was wrong to make that sound like a judgement of them. I was going by my own personal experience with people on both sides of the altar/checkbook. If I hurt feelings there- which I seem to surely have done, I am truely sorry.
R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 11, 2004, 07:29:00 PM
Quote
Yes, I have read the same things, the same pictures [although one reason I so enjoy this forum is the many things that I have NEVER seen or read !!] anf I have been at it as long as any of you. I started early, age 10 or so, as soon as I could read, which was very early indeed. I can well assure you that was quite some time ago as well.
I understand the almost childish devpotion some people have for the family, I do not share it, but I do not put anyone down for it, even if it passes the ridiculous. Hence the point- these people lived & died almost 100 years ago.  A short time by our modern standards, yet still a distant vanished age. Ther are similiar devotee to Marie & Louis, even Cleopatra has her defenders [They can be an odd lot, but no less devoted than Romanov fans].
Best to all,
Robert


"Childish devotion?" I'm not sure that's entirely fair. It's certainly condescending.

The memories of people who lived and died 100 years ago are entitled to a certain amount of respect. They are of interest to many people because it was a fascinating, tragic period of history, because the photos and letters and anecdotes enable us to understand them in a way we can't other historical figures, and because they were in many ways a very attractive family.

They are also Russian Orthodox saints. A certain amount of religious reverence is part of the esteem some people have for them.

I don't see anything particularly wrong or childish about liking the Romanovs or the study of them as a hobby. Apparently you also share it or you wouldn't have started reading about them when you were a child. I was about 10 too when I read Massie's Nicholas and Alexandra. I've never stopped being interested in the more than 20 years since.

Hey, it's better than an addiction to Elvis.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 11, 2004, 09:14:38 PM
Elis ??? oh dear, messing with that lot does make this look like childs play !
However, there are some running around claiming that Diana is alive !! [no comment].
So, FA, you want citations of the propaganda? Well, I shall have to dig that up from storage...banished when I left the leftists activism.
Nothing you have not already read if you ever studied revolutionary tactics and workers activism.
Much the "the people who till the fields should have the bread" stuff. The Romanovs provided ample fodder for that.
As far as looking to get attention, I can assure you, if I wanted to rattle some cages, I have much harsher thoughts to share. But that is for another thread.
If you have not gathered yet, I do not believe AN survived, therefore AA was not her [she?].  I have a very generous thought that AA BELIEVED she was AN though.
As an interesting aside here; I used to attend an annual "costume ball" in London. I do not think it still goes on. Well. there was a different theme each year, & each of those "themes" were actually a sub-group. Well every few years it was the Russian Court's turn to have the Theme, so, you guessed it, everyone came as their favourite Romanov [or Romanoff] or others in the Court.  Beautiful, lavish affairs. What I am getting at, some of these people actually BELIEVED they were who they were portraying for the night. Once they got into their character, they would not leave it.  I could fall for the illusion. The few times I attended, AN was not the centre of attention. I recall Alexandra, Olga & Tatiana "stealling the show"., even an unbelievable Alexei. There were AN's, but never the in the spotlight, at least the times I was there. The point is that these people did not find her all that interesting. And they knew their roles well.  AA probably would have created a stir, but she was not in the "period".
Cheers,
Robert

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 11, 2004, 09:34:59 PM
Certainly, bookworm, and much more intellectually stimulating! ;)  ;D

I must applaud all those who stuck up for the Romanovs here.  Of course they had their faults, but they were HUMAN!  Besides, the children were innocent and charming (most of the time), just like children from all walks of like are.  And they had their grumpy moments, also just like normal children.  

And I'm pleased, Robert, that you have retracted your vicious, unfair, statement about the children's charitable works as acts to selfishly benefit themselves.  I'm glad you realized that was an incredibly stupid statement.

As for "childish devotions," that's also hypocritical!  Everyone has their own obsessions, and obviously Robert has some sort of devotion to the family otherwise he wouldn't be here.  So that was also a bit of a careless comment.  

And Robert, I'm sure we're all ears to hear your other "harsh" comments you spoke of, considering they probably easily refutable.  ;)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 11, 2004, 10:23:24 PM
Michelle, glad to see you are so open mineded & non-judgemtal yourself. Again, read what I said. I made no accusation about false charity on the part of the children themselves. I apologised for offending the feelings of other posters. Not for any thing else.
Childish devotion stands. And yes, I do have an interest in the subject,  A continuing one as well. AND I have my own "childish devotions", the Romanovs just do not happen to be one of them.
And how are you so sure anything I say is so easy to refute, when I haven't said anything that needed refuting. I openly declared from the begining that these were MY thoughts & opinions. I have expressed some pretty harsh statements in the past, on other subjects. Those deal with revolution, civil war & political science. Not nurseries & churches. When called for, I can cite as necessary. I often play devil's advocate in those discussions, and I am able do play either side.
Cheers,
Robert
I also refrain from calling other posters names.
Best,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Louise on August 11, 2004, 10:27:56 PM
Would it be possible to show some respect and a degree of civility in these posts. Comments like I just read."I'm glad you realized that was an incredibly stupid statement. " is not constructive dialogue. If you disagree with Robert's post, fine, then respectfully disagree. Rudeness is not a way to win friends and influence people.

Louise

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Adele on August 12, 2004, 06:09:53 AM
Quote
Would it be possible to show some respect and a degree of civility in these posts. Comments like I just read."I'm glad you realized that was an incredibly stupid statement. " is not constructive dialogue. If you disagree with Robert's post, fine, then respectfully disagree. Rudeness is not a way to win friends and influence people.

Louise
 



Thanks, Louise.  I've notice of late there's been a down-slide into rudeness in many of the posts.  You're absolutely right; there's no need for it.  ---Adele
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 12, 2004, 08:02:02 AM
Back to the 'opinion' on face comparsions subject: this reminded me of something that happened on another board.  People there often post pictures of the singer (Bono of U2), sometimes with his wife, Ali, and one or more of their 4 kids. Every time somebody posts one of the oldest daughter, I never fail to be stunned at the amount of people who post 'she looks just like mum!' and 'she's a perfect Ali clone!' because I fail to see ANY resemblance between her and the mother, she looks to me to be the image of her dad! I try to see what they see but I don't. They are not joking, they are serious and will fight you. But all I can see is the father's face, coloring, complexion, and basic features. I made this trio shot of the daughter with the parents on each side. I'm asking you people what you think, since you probably aren't close to this situation. (I don't think this is that off topic since we have been discussing the looks and opinion thing)

(http://www.boomspeed.com/kittylove/alijordanbono.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 12, 2004, 08:25:08 AM
Good point. I see the resemblance to her father. Another "eye of the beholder" thing: on a totally different discussion board a raging argument was going on about who Pr. William resembles. To me, it is a no-brainer- his late mother [the vast majority of opinion]. Yet others insist it his father he resembles. [ I sense some rabid anti-Diana sentiment amongst those]. A case of  "we see what we want to see".
Cheers,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on August 12, 2004, 10:31:38 AM
I am going to ask you all to please stay civil in your discussions and refrain from personal attack.  Michelle, you rose to high dudgeon about a perceived slight to Peter Kurth in another thread, then you yourself were outright rude to Robert here... uncalled for.

I for one was satisfied with Robert's explanation and apology and would hope that everyone else would have been as well. This is a disucssion of difference of opinion, and different opinions when supported are to be respected.  I trust that the discussion about Robert's posting has come to a permanent end now.
Thanks
FA
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on August 12, 2004, 12:45:05 PM
Quote
...I made no accusation about false charity on the part of the children themselves...


During WWI, Sergei Esenin was posted to the hospital patronized by Marie and Anastasia at Tsarskoye Selo. He worked as a clerk, and as a doctor's assistant.  Here's what he had to say about the Imperial visitors:

"No sooner do you get everything in order than the distinguished visitors appear. You have to show them this, explain that – they go through the wards, upset everything, and the questions! They interfere in everything and you can’t say a word. You have to stand at attention. And the Tsar’s daughters are the biggest plague of all – I wish them far away! They come first thing in the morning, send the whole hospital topsy-turvy and throw the doctors quite off their stroke. They go round the wards full of emotion and hand out icons like nuts off a Christmas tree – to tell you the truth, they just play at 'soldiers.' "

So although Robert has withdrawn his statement, he might have found some sympathy from Esenin!  :-*

It must be said, though, that like Robert, Esenin did not question the sincerity of the Grand Duchesses' feelings towards their hospital work (though I hesitate to call this "work," since they seemed to enjoy the visits as part of their social life).  Later on, Esenin wrote one of his poems in praise of Marie and Anastasia and the "the youthful humility of their tender hearts."  M and A were reportedly thrilled by the poem, and "astonished" that the poet had understood them so well.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on August 12, 2004, 12:52:03 PM
Thanks for that bit of info, Penny! While we all assume that the soldiers must have been grateful for the company of the young girls in such a horrible place, it is also fair to understand that they were probably frivalous and a little immature at times, and maybe some of the soldiers saw the girls as little more than a distraction or a nuisance. Marie and Anastasia probably liked to flirt with the wounded soldiers and wanted to make them feel better and relished the experiences they were allowed to partake in outside their sheltered palace life.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_W. on August 12, 2004, 01:01:49 PM
I second Abby's opinion and am also appreciative of Penny's information re: a soldier's viewpoint.

Many of us have undoubtedly been in post-operative situations during which people who meant well--perhaps!  ;)--just complicated the situation, rather than improving it. I can easily imagine Marie and Anastasia showing up at the hospital--prodded into doing "their duty" by their mother--and, being still quite young, creating a not-always-so-helpful distraction. What they saw no doubt sobered them on occasion, but all the same they were "celebrities" who, it is to be easily imagined, caused a bit of a to-do whenever they appeared.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 13, 2004, 12:19:25 PM
Quote
Good point. I see the resemblance to her father. Another "eye of the beholder" thing: on a totally different discussion board a raging argument was going on about who Pr. William resembles. To me, it is a no-brainer- his late mother [the vast majority of opinion]. Yet others insist it his father he resembles. [ I sense some rabid anti-Diana sentiment amongst those]. A case of  "we see what we want to see".
Cheers,
Robert


I think he looks just like Diana, but with a little of the big mouthed 'horse faced' look of the current Windsors when he smiles big.

Simon and Garfunkel once sang, "a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest.." the same can be said for seeing. I do believe sometimes objectivity is not always there for whatever reason. I know a woman who gets furious when you mention her childrens' likeness to her ex husband, whom she now hates. I guess if she saw him in the kids she'd hate them too so she doesn't allow it. Also, people just sometimes have different brains and think and see things I really can't understand. A lot of factors come into play.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 13, 2004, 02:03:07 PM
Well, I'm seriously sorry if I've offended anybody here by my comments on Robert.  I'm one of those people who ALWAYS needs to put their two cents in because that's just who I am, and sometimes if I'm angry, I'll just get 'caught up in the moment.'  So again, sorry, people. :-[  I'm most certainly ready to put this argument (or whatever it is) to rest.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 13, 2004, 02:34:51 PM
Quote

I think he looks just like Diana, but with a little of the big mouthed 'horse faced' look of the current Windsors when he smiles big.

Simon and Garfunkel once sang, "a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest.." the same can be said for seeing. I do believe sometimes objectivity is not always there for whatever reason. I know a woman who gets furious when you mention her childrens' likeness to her ex husband, whom she now hates. I guess if she saw him in the kids she'd hate them too so she doesn't allow it. Also, people just sometimes have different brains and think and see things I really can't understand. A lot of factors come into play.


I think William resembles both parents, actually. His father Prince Charles, on the other hand, is starting to look more and more like his maternal grandfather and his grandfather's brothers as he gets older. I don't think he looked nearly as much like the former king when he was younger. Harry doesn't seem to resemble his father's side at all and I've never thought he looked like his mother either. On the other hand, I've seen photos of some of his cousins on his mother's side that look very much like him.

The rock star's daughter whose picture is posted above also looks like both parents. Most of us are probably a blend.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 13, 2004, 08:18:51 PM
The rock star's mom (I think--I forgot if the young girl or her father was the rock star :-/) actually looks a lot like Condoleeza Rice! :o  ::)  LOL

But the girl I don't think looks at all like either of her parents.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 13, 2004, 08:49:24 PM
The father is Bono of U2  :)

There are other pics where the wife doesn't look like Rice, she looks more like Catherine Zeta Jones, again, more different looks in pics! ;)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 13, 2004, 09:13:14 PM
Oh, that's right!  I had a ditzy moment there, forgetting who was the rock star! LOL  I really SHOULD pay more attention to things, like my mom always nags  me!  :D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_Ashton on August 15, 2004, 04:14:35 PM
Quote

It sure didn't sound like that to me, oh well. But I agree, I never thought that either, that's why it's a shame it always comes back to that with all the other possibilities to be explored.


Annie, Greg has never posted anywhere that he believes AA was Anastasia - all he has ever said was that he thinks there are puzzling unanswered questions here. That's true, whatever your perspective on the matter. On this board alone, he has said that he has no wishes either way, that it's not a question of disbelieving the DNA tests, and so forth. Additionally, he doesn't like posting on this topic, and when six months ago I first alerted him that this board had appeared, he told me that if he joined he had no intention of posting on this topic, for several reasons. Yet he does so, because people have questions and he is a kind and generous person who gives time to answer points that he CAN answer when they are topics he has researched - and because he thrives on intellectual discussion. The risk in this is that others (I don't mean you) post insulting comments suggesting that "Fate of the Romanovs" is just a prequel to some book about AA (how offensive, considering the work that went into it! - and considering how important and ground-breaking a book it is - whereas the principle ground-breaking research on AA was done twenty years ago by Peter Kurth). This sort of reaction is completely unhelpful, and I don't think it's helpful either for you to be posting comments suggesting that you think people (e.g. Greg and Penny) are artificially "trying to keep the issue alive" for the sake of future books. That isn't fair and it isn't true - this threda has been up on the board for six whole months, and FA of all people started it in recognition of the fact that people want to talk about it. I apologize if I jumped down your throat - this isn't about your opinions on AA at all - you can hold watever view you like on that or any historical matter. What it's about is the fact that I can tend to get a little upset when people post personal attacks on those who are important to me simply because they are trying publicly to help others out.

As for Gleb Botkin - he didn't even necessarily KNOW the Romanovs that well, so the sincerity of his opinion is pretty irrelevant to the question of who AA was. He could be sincere and still be wrong. This has been pointed out here before (albeit not quite in these words!) - by Penny Wilson.....

Janet
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 15, 2004, 05:50:12 PM
Quote
Annie, Greg has never posted anywhere that he believes AA was Anastasia - all he has ever said was that he thinks there are puzzling unanswered questions here. That's true, whatever your perspective on the matter. On this board alone, he has said that he has no wishes either way, that it's not a question of disbelieving the DNA tests, and so forth. Additionally, he doesn't like posting on this topic, and when six months ago I first alerted him that this board had appeared, he told me that if he joined he had no intention of posting on this topic, for several reasons. Yet he does so, because people have questions and he is a kind and generous person who gives time to answer points that he CAN answer when they are topics he has researched - and because he thrives on intellectual discussion.


I realize Greg never posted that he believed AA was Anastasia, and I never said he did, and I don't think that about him at all. I respect him and have admired and enjoyed his work for years.

I have never said or read myself what you say about "Fate of" being called a prequel by some, (I haven't read that whole long thread in the book section yet) and I don't think that either.

But at times, I did wonder why some people kept on putting doubts in our minds and getting defensive over any anti-AA things, especially very intelligent, educated people who had done so much research, in the face of so much scientific evidence to the contrary. I don't know the meaning of it, we can all assume anything. But I am saying, if anyone is planning on writing another book and is 'feeling us out' for possible reaction, (and there is nothing wrong with that if anyone is, what better place to come? Roald Dahl used to 'feel out' his own kids when he was writing kids books!) mine is that I am still very interested in the Romanovs, and the missing bodies, but I would rather see energy put into other possible theories rather than AA again. I want more Romanov books! I want to read them, I want to buy them! Just not more on AA. We have Mr. Kurth to keep us up on that. And if anyone, and I mean anyone at all, is defensive about it on behalf of Mr. Kurth, they don't need to be, we all have our opinions and are never going to agree on everything. I also understand his emotional attachment to the issue and I respect him as a writer too. Penny too. I won't mention this topic again and I am sorry if I have offended anyone.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on August 16, 2004, 12:01:05 PM
On another thread we were talking about the grave of the nine bodies in Pig's Meadow and how many times had the grave been opened for inspection or  distrubed by a laying of a cable.  I thought the following statement, in part,  of Penny Wilson as interesting:

Quote

When researching and then writing FOTR, we came across several items that we did not include in our text either for reasons of space, or because we did not have a multiplicity of sources to support them.  One of these items was the theory that the grave had been opened in 1928/29.  I'm at work now, and as I don't have access to our research notes here, I couldn't tell you exactly where we came across mention of the grave being opened at that time, but I do remember that we felt it made a certain amount of sense:  In the West, the Anna Anderson matter was a sensational piece of news, and Stalin was just settling into his new job -- perhaps he was curious to know if all the bodies were in the grave.
......

Penny


One would think Stalin  would have known the answer and digging up the grave in Pig's Meadow wasn't necessary.  Or, had he discovered in Lenin's papers that two of Nicholas II's children had escaped and were stilll missing.  If this is the case,  did Stalin continue the search?

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 16, 2004, 12:50:25 PM
Trying to figure out Stalin would be impossible, I think.  However, the "conjecture" on my part would be:
He did know all along what went on & where the bodies were. He was just the sort of person to be that way. He had dirt on everybody & used it freely to get his ends met didn't he?
To me, this explains why there was never any great deal of an effort to get involved in the AA thing to begin with. i.e. let the foolish capitalists wallow in it.
I was either told or read some time ago [unstubstaniated & vague memory] that Stalin had a fascination about the Romanovs, almost verging on a fetish.  He had a secret collection of possesions, not necessarily of great value, but things they used, like china & such.  He kept private papers of theirs for his perusal before giving them to the archives. And, of course the famous story of his having fixtures from either a yacht or train installed at his private dacha.  I have not read a great deal about him, but it may have been in Svetlana's auto-bio ?? Or perhaps some of my old commie exiles in London telling their tales.
At one tiime there was a story, since disproven that he had a head or 2 in storage, much like  [proven] the Hitler skull.
I think we shall never know what he really had known or what was propaganda all around.
Like most great dictators of the eras, he left little of a paper trail himself.
Cheers,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 16, 2004, 01:01:51 PM
I don't think there's any argument Stalin was a bad man. The stories I've read on him are horrific. I'm sure he had the whole story and knew that there were no Romanov surivors and that's why he made no comment on the AA case. I think if he had thought one might be alive and be some kind of possible threat to his power he'd have done more. But again it's all speculation.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 16, 2004, 06:21:30 PM
I think Stalin was not concerned about any Romanovs, dead or alive. They could not even unite amongst themselves, let alone present an effective united front against him.  This was the time when more governments were recognizing the legality of Soviet rule.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on August 16, 2004, 09:59:02 PM
I think Stalin had more than a "fetish" about the Romanovs.  I think he feared that one of them might return and create an "uprising" against him.  And, the Romanov didn't necessarily have to be one who was directly in line to the throne.    

I think the most probable Romanov was Nicholas [Nicolasha] Nicholasovich  whom Stalin was still trying to find in 1928.

Even in his elderly age, Nicholasha hadn't lost his "spit and fire".
He was one of the leaders of the "Fighting Group" who were terrorists sent into Russia.  This group of Nicholashaites hoped to turn the tables on Stalin by using the tactics of terroism used by the Bolsheviks.  One of the leaders was Kutepov.....

p. 292 The Flight of the Romanovs by Perry and Pleshakov:  "In early summer of 1928 Kutepov sent another gorup with ambitious goal of assassinating one of the leading Soviet officials, Nicholas Bukhharin...."  True, the plot failed but this didn't mean if didn't frighten Stalin.

So, yes,  I think Stalin was worried in 1928.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 16, 2004, 10:35:48 PM
Well, I respectfully disagree.
1, N.N. was not hard to find, if anyone was looking for him at that time.
2. By 1928 these little "terrorist" groups were like swatting flies to the Soviet regime. They invnted the "art" if one could actually use that term. His agents had infiltrated them so effectively, that  they posed no real threat.
What Stalin [& the rest] was really after was Romanov/Imperial assets. That is another story however.
Cheers,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 16, 2004, 10:40:23 PM
There's no doubt Stalin was worried about the Romanovs in the 1920's and 1930's. He dispatched KGB agents (or whatever they were called then) to inflitrate groups associated with Nicholasha. Young Russians was infiltrated by Stalinist agents - and many of the Romanovs were part of the Young Russians.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on August 16, 2004, 10:46:59 PM
They were more than pesty flies, Reilly had informed Nicholasha of the Trust and their infiltration and the plots which followed 1925 were no longer known to the Soviet agents.  And, this did worry Stalin.  who knew his govt. was built on sand....

Quote
....
What Stalin [& the rest] was really after was Romanov/Imperial assets. That is another story however.
Cheers,
Robert


Anderson did talk about some secret word she needed to remember for her Swiss bank account, which I understand is still there.... One can only imagine the interest gathered from 1917 to 2004...

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 16, 2004, 10:59:59 PM
One could easily argue that one need not necessarily be afraid of one's opponet to inflitrate, but to remain unafraid of them.
I thought the secret Swiss bank account story had been debunked. In any case, Swiss banking laws have changed since then, and if such does still exsist, it could be found now. Much like the Marcos & Pahlavi, Duvalier & Ceauceceau [sic], etc. accounts. {and I am NOT comparing the Romanovs to those persons, just examples of the new system].
Best,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on August 17, 2004, 07:37:19 AM
Quote
They were more than pesty flies, Reilly had informed Nicholasha of the Trust and their infiltration and the plots which followed 1925 were no longer known to the Soviet agents.  And, this did worry Stalin.  who knew his govt. was built on sand....


Anderson did talk about some secret word she needed to remember for her Swiss bank account, which I understand is still there.... One can only imagine the interest gathered from 1917 to 2004...

AGRBear


Anna Anderson never claimed there was money in any Swiss bank to the best of my knowledge; she said there were deposits in an unnamed British bank (contrary to the way the facts get convoluted, she never said the Bank of England) and in Germany (which there were, in the Mendelssohn Bank in Berlin, later divided up between Nicholas II's remaining heirs).  

The "secret word" was the password under which deposits were made-it was "Bark," as in Peter Bark, Nicholas II's Minister of Finance.

The question of whether there was any money after WWI in the UK is even more convoluted; most people insist Nicholas withdrew all of them at the start of the War, but Alexandra's letters make clear that she regularly received withdrawals from these UK funds, delivered to her by Sir George Buchanan, and the Empress herself believed this to be true, as she told Lili Dehn at the time of the Revolution, "At least we shan't starve, for we have a fortune in the Bank of England."  Whether this was personal Romanov money (Alexander II had set up a personal account that began with 20 million rubles) or was state money, as William Clarke suggests, remains somewhat unclear.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kim on August 17, 2004, 07:45:59 AM
Quote

 in Germany (which there were, in the Mendelssohn Bank in Berlin, later divided up between Nicholas II's remaining heirs).  



Greg King


:o :o

I never knew that. Who got the money??
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 17, 2004, 09:17:33 AM
Well, we can go around forever on the Stalin thing. Obviously we have different viewpoints. In any case, sand is used to make cement. In this case pretty cheap cement, but cement nonetheless.
However, those Swiss bank accounts  would not have given interest. They never have, and still do not. That was not their purpouse anyway.
I have often been curious about those funds Greg referred to [well, Alex. did actually] When did they stop ? Money run out? They did run into finance problems in Tobolsk & could have used it then.
Was it evenually dispersed [well what was left of it] to any survivors, either in Germany or Britain?
Back to AA & AN- there were many fund raising schemes on her  [AA] behalf, yet none seemed to actually benefit her personally. She was always living on the generosity of others. It is inconcievable [to me] that if she were indeed a Romanov let alone AN herself, she would have been left by the rest of the family to live as a sideshow money scam operation.
Cheers,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 17, 2004, 09:29:38 AM
Quote
It is inconcievable [to me] that if she were indeed a Romanov let alone AN herself, she would have been left by the rest of the family to live as a sideshow money scam operation.
Cheers,
Robert


Yeah me too, or that anyone would have been so heartless as to deny her a birthright and shut her out, especially after the tragedy she witnessesed, just for a few pieces of mostly phantom money. It's the intangibles like this that make me doubt AA's story more than anything else.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 17, 2004, 11:14:47 AM
Even if AA was AN, the Romanov family probably wouldve never been 100% sure of her identity as the lost grand duchess, so it's not really relevant to dismiss her story based on thinking the extended family was heartless, considering that they were never really all that sure. :)

Just an idea. :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 17, 2004, 11:25:34 AM
Quote
Even if AA was AN, the Romanov family probably wouldve never been 100% sure of her identity as the lost grand duchess, so it's not really relevant to dismiss her story based on thinking the extended family was heartless, considering that they were never really all that sure. :)

Just an idea. :)


Oh that is far from the only thing I base it on. I just said it was intangibles such as this that add up for me. I could make a list. Maybe we should have an open debate on this, two sides facing off like a high school debate team.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on August 17, 2004, 12:02:02 PM
Greg King wrote:
Quote
...The "secret word" was the password under which deposits were made-it was "Bark," as in Peter Bark, Nicholas II's Minister of Finance.


It's been a very long time since I read the book which I was drawing from memory.  So, if this "secret word" was meant just for Nicholas II, Alexandra, the girls and Alexie,  who came up with the word "Bark"?   What is your source, Greg?  I believe Anderson came close and said it had something to to with a "trunk" of a tree, or something like that.....

Ralph is right,  certain Swiss banks didn't  have accounts with accumulated interest.

Just because money was growing scarce in the Ipatiev House didn't mean there wasn't enough money for the family to draw upon....  I think, it was the difficulty of getting the needed papers to the right people to get to the source of the money and then back again.  The Soviets were preventing all transactions to all the Romanovs and other nobles.

AGRBear

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_Ashton on August 17, 2004, 03:36:59 PM
Quote

The Russian author Eduard Radzinski (sp? I'm sure I've butchered the name) and his book about the fate of the Tsar alluded to it. I don't remember exactly what the passage said, but I think it was fairly mild -- maybe that the girls were occasionally careless with their clothing and didn't tidy things up or that they might have been occasionally bossy to maids. Some of my books are in storage and I think that's one of them, so I can't look it up. Maybe someone else could.


I think you and Antonio were actually talking about the same testimony - that of Elizaveta Ersberg, who apparently described the children to her own family in generally favourable terms, but certainly characterised Olga as "spoilt, capricious and lazy" at times. We have to remember that this is the way they might have seemes to people who had less easy lives - the likes of Elizaveta for instance would not have been afforded the luxury of a nervous breakdown while nursing; and had Olga been a soldier serving at the front - such behaviour could have got her shot.
This is not a criticism of Olga; rather more an observation that perhaps sometimes people who were friends rather than servants have a tendency where these Romanovs are concerned to charaterise as saintly or heroic behaviour which was really fairly unremarkable....

I think I come across as the negative voice here this week....:-)

Janet
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: jenthered@msn.com on August 18, 2004, 11:21:46 AM
Hi, I think that your argument is most interesting, but I don't agree with you, but not because of DNA, although that is pretty irrefutible. As a portrait painter, I look at people closely all the time, and have also had many commissions for posthumous portraits. In comparing photos of the two, especially those of Anastasia in her last years, they seem so unalike to me, particularly in one feature, the mouth, which changes in shape very little from birth to death. Anastasia's mouth was rather small, Anna's generous, with a broader countenance. I haven't looked for awhile, but am now working on commissioned portraits of the four girls, and will investigate more slowly. I do think that when something is long believed, it can be almost impossible to believe that it "tain't so"
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on August 18, 2004, 11:28:55 AM
Quote
Hi, I think that your argument is most interesting, but I don't agree with you, but not because of DNA, although that is pretty irrefutible. As a portrait painter, I look at people closely all the time, and have also had many commissions for posthumous portraits. In comparing photos of the two, especially those of Anastasia in her last years, they seem so unalike to me, particularly in one feature, the mouth, which changes in shape very little from birth to death. Anastasia's mouth was rather small, Anna's generous, with a broader countenance. I haven't looked for awhile, but am now working on commissioned portraits of the four girls, and will investigate more slowly. I do think that when something is long believed, it can be almost impossible to believe that it "tain't so"


I've often said (and firmly believe) that the thing that most differentiates AA from AN is the lips.  The lips of these two women are just so different, that I can't see them being one and the same.

Also, I'd be very intersted in what else you see when you do your portrait.  An artist's eye can see so much more than the average person.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_Ashton on August 18, 2004, 12:28:35 PM
Could I make a gentle plea here on behalf of the internet and the Board archive, not to mention a little private research?

Several times in this thread I've observed people asking questions which have either already been answered in an earlier thread, or which could actually be answered quite easily with a bit of research on the internet or in a library. Same goes for other threads too actually. I don't want to sound churlish here, but I believe in self-empowerment (rewarding thing, research!) and I do think a few minutes alone with Google could save the bother of directing a question at someone who is already really busy, gets a LOT of queries every day, and has limited time for the internet - whereas some of the posters here seem to spend a LOT of time on it and could maybe use it more productively.

That way no-one will be disappointed either.

Just a thought...

Janet
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on August 19, 2004, 01:16:09 AM
FWIW, I wholeheartedly agree and would only add that it would also be nice if the word "indeed" was *banned*.  

Sheesh...it's the most overused word on this forum, and used in ways that go beyond "prissy" and artificial (not to mention an inability to articulate otherwise) and venture into the realm of *cheese*.   >:(

In a few instances it works. Most of the time superfluous.  :P
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 19, 2004, 08:20:30 AM
Well, talk about a thread going off course! Something we all need to remember is that message boards draw all types of people, and not all of them are going to be as perfect as you are. When you get a large number of people together, there are going to be some you like and some that annoy you, that's the way it is. But it really isn't very nice to make sweeping judgements of them and their posts as if people whose style or personality you dislike have less of a right to be here and they are getting in your way.

As for the 'google' search, I think we have all been frustrated to do one that shows up with hundreds, even thousands of results that must be gone through, some are not actually the correct topic, some links are down, some sites are extensive and hard to navigate. I don't see anything wrong with a person dropping by here to ask a question. Some of us (who spend way too much time online!) enjoy answering them, so if some of you are too 'busy' there will always be another person to help. I would think that would be one of the purposes for having a message board devoted to a certain subject.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Louise on August 19, 2004, 08:27:50 AM
Janet A, thanks for your post. I understood the message you were conveying and appreciate it. Googling is fun, informative and one never quite knows what you'll find when you do.

Louise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on August 19, 2004, 08:48:47 AM
Quote
Well, talk about a thread going off course! Something we all need to remember is that message boards draw all types of people, and not all of them are going to be as perfect as you are. When you get a large number of people together, there are going to be some you like and some that annoy you, that's the way it is. But it really isn't very nice to make sweeping judgements of them and their posts as if people whose style or personality you dislike have less of a right to be here and they are getting in your way.

As for the 'google' search, I think we have all been frustrated to do one that shows up with hundreds, even thousands of results that must be gone through, some are not actually the correct topic, some links are down, some sites are extensive and hard to navigate. I don't see anything wrong with a person dropping by here to ask a question. Some of us (who spend way too much time online!) enjoy answering them, so if some of you are too 'busy' there will always be another person to help. I would think that would be one of the purposes for having a message board devoted to a certain subject.


It's called "constructive criticism", a sort of take it or leave it comment.  The part concerning "indeed" was mentioned only because this forum is knee-deep in "indeeds" and wouldn't it be wonderful if some could try to discover (ah, again that ugly word, "research")  a new word or two?

Your shrill responses to these suggestions include demands of a PC approach (defined by you) from those who do the suggesting.  This is not something I am willing to do, and stand by everything I have written (there is certainly plenty of evidence here to back it up).

Cheers
Dashkova
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 19, 2004, 09:59:27 AM
Quote

It's called "constructive criticism", a sort of take it or leave it comment.  The part concerning "indeed" was mentioned only because this forum is knee-deep in "indeeds" and wouldn't it be wonderful if some could try to discover (ah, again that ugly word, "research")  a new word or two?

Your shrill responses to these suggestions include demands of a PC approach (defined by you) from those who do the suggesting.  This is not something I am willing to do, and stand by everything I have written (there is certainly plenty of evidence here to back it up).

Cheers
Dashkova


So now you're saying people are 'stupid' and need to learn more words? That also isn't very nice. Some people here don't even speak English as a first language and they do very well. I am not suggesting a "PC" approach, I don't even like PCness. I'm just saying it would be kind to realize that not everyone thinks, writes and reacts exactly like you, and that doesn't make them wrong, or stupid, or in need of 'constructive criticism.' It is sad when posts leave the subject and are more pointed personally at a poster rather than the message itself.


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on August 19, 2004, 10:04:53 AM
Hi,
You have all gotten off topic again here.  No finger pointing here, but PLEASE continue this discussion privately by IM or email. This thread is NOT the place for this.
No TV tonight for anyone. ;D
Just kidding, but please, keep it civil, no personal snipes and on topic.
Thanks.
FA
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on August 19, 2004, 04:05:32 PM
No TV for tonight?Kewl!Does that mean I might finally get to go to bed at a decent hour?If only I could get my kids to sleep early lol.Maybe you should ground us off the forum too FA lol.Just kidding. :) ;) ;D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on August 27, 2004, 06:52:11 PM
Good evening,

Did Anna and Anastasia really have the same foot deformity?

Thank you
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on August 27, 2004, 07:17:27 PM
Yes, as far as i know they had the same foot deformity called hallux valgus( spelling...)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kim on August 27, 2004, 07:41:28 PM
I have a theory on this, call it crazy, but the whole story is wild. Is there any chance that the foot problem could have arisen later, such as bunions from working at the factory, or even a problem caused by the tuberculosis of the bones Anna suffered from for many years? One more, now this one is really going to get jumped on- is there any chance that she actually broke her own foot and had it grow back wrong when she heard that Anastasia had the problem? It kind of reminds me of the original, more gruesome version of Grimm's Cinderella, where one stepsister cut off her own toe to make the shoe fit, and the other cut off her own heel to try to make the shoe fit, they wanted to be the princess so badly....
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on August 27, 2004, 07:50:29 PM
This has been a point  that always bugs me and brings me back to wondering about Anna.

I have tried to find info on the web and books but it always discusses adults and bunions. Never children. Never birth defects. Never why a child would have this.

So I wonder if maybe it was called that then and has a different diagnosis now. Or maybe after decades of prenatal care and vitamins it just doesn't occur enough to be mentioned.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Tim on August 27, 2004, 09:59:05 PM
Regarding the feet question.  Anastasia was born with the foot deformity called Hallux Vulgus.   Doctors looked at her feet and decided they were not severe enough to warrant surgery.  In some cases-as with Anastasia the condition can be hereditary while in other cases wearing bad shoes can cause it.  When Anna's feet were inspected by doctors it was determined that the condition was so pronounced that in Anna's case, as with Anastasia, the condition had been present at birth and was not caused by wear and tear from mal-fitting shoes.  Alexandra Tegleva Gillard (Shura) who had been Anastasia's nurse commented that Anna's feet as with Anastasia's - the right foot was worse than the left.

to see a photo of Anastasia's condition please see Peter Kurth's website at http://www.peterkurth.com/ANNA-ANASTASIA%20NOTES%20ON%20FRANZISKA%20SCHANZKOWSKA.htm

To see a photo of Anna's feet please see James Blair Lovell's book.

Thanks
Tim
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on August 28, 2004, 04:13:23 AM
To my knowledge, hallux vulgus ("bunions") is a developed condition.

The problem is that the bone is displaced (from ill-fitting shoes or leg-length discrepancies), and extra bone and fluid can accumulate around the base of the big toe, causing pain and inflammation.

While it is correct that genetics can create a predisposition to bunions, I don't believe that one can be born with the condition (but, I am not a medical expert. Rather, I have had bunions for many years and have read extensively on the subject).

Certainly, Anastasia could've been born with a genetic predisposition to it, but all I've read makes me skeptical that she was born with the condition itself.

Because of this, I do not put much weight in the "evidence" regarding the foot deformity allegedly shared by AA and AN.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lisa on August 28, 2004, 07:09:47 AM
About the hallux valgus
http://www.rad.washington.edu/anatomy/modules/HalluxValgus/HalluxValgus.html
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kim on August 28, 2004, 09:49:49 AM
I had read somewhere Anastasia was not diagnosed until age 12 or 13. I have never heard of such a thing being present at birth. Goodness, how could a child ever learn to walk?

I still believe Anna Anderson's condition was acquired later due to her hard life and possibly the tuberculosis of the bones she suffered from. I also think that bone condition is to blame for her (alleged) loss of height. (one person claimed Franziska was an inch or 2 taller than Anna Anderson) This is not unusual or out of the question. I have an aunt who used to be 5'5" and is now 5'2" due to osteoporosis.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kransnoeselo on August 28, 2004, 01:09:52 PM
Just to clarify-Anna's tuberculosis of the bone was in her left arm and this didn't affect her height which was 5'2".  The statement of Franziska's height came from Doris Wingender whose mother had lodge Franziska in Berlin prior to her disappearance.  Both she and her sister Louise were 5'3" and stated that Franziska was taller than they were (See Peter Kurth's website for more Franziska discrepancies).  Her family was unable to give an accurate height measurement- as well as an inability to remember her eye color.

Thanks
Tim
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on August 28, 2004, 04:15:37 PM
Over and over I read about the height of Nicholas II's daughters.  I assume most of this is known through data and perhaps with the use of  photographs, but when was the last photograph taken which tells us  the height of Anastasia, who was still growing, in July of 1918?

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on August 28, 2004, 10:04:08 PM
I am pretty sure that Anastasia was about 5'2" when she died because I have read it in various books, but one of the last photos I've seen of her standing was the bald head garden picture. I think there were probably pics of her from Tobolsk in "The Last Tsar" by Marvin Lyons, but I don't have the book right now to look. I think Olga was like 5'5". Marie 5'6" or 5'7" and Tatiana 5'7" or 5'8"
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kransnoeselo on August 28, 2004, 11:14:15 PM
     Unfortunately, the heights of the Grand Duchesses are all estimates since no records were kept as to their precise heights.  In addition even if the heights had been known it would have proven difficult to match them with the skeletons found in Ekaterinburg since the leg bones of the skeletons had been cut by Russian scientists by the time William Maples (The forensic expert sent by then Secretary of State James Baker) arrived there in the early 1990's.  Therefore the heights of the bodies were measured in a less accurate manner.
    The Grand Duchess Anastasia had always been short for her age and this had remained so even after the revolution as witnessed in the photograph of the Duchesses in the garden at Tsarskoe Selo taken by Pierre Gillard.

(http://www.concentric.net/~tsarskoe/garden.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kransnoeselo on August 29, 2004, 01:02:55 AM
Hello,

I am new to the forum, and have just read through almost all of the posting in this line as well as others regarding Anna Anderson.  It appears that there has been a lot of discussion regarding Anna's similarities or lack thereof to the Grand Duchess Anastasia and yet there have been few posts of photographs.  

I thought it might be useful to add various photos of both Anna and the Grand Duchess Anastasia from different angles and lighting situations.  I hope they are of some interest.  

Thanks
Tim  

(http://www.concentric.net/~tsarskoe/mini.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kransnoeselo on August 29, 2004, 01:29:36 AM
Here are a few more photos. I did want to make a comment regarding Anna's wide upper lip which has been mentioned as one of the reasons the two look so dissimilar: Harriet Rathlef von Keilmann who care tended for Anna during her near fatal bout with tuburculosis wrote in her book in 1929 that Anna would sit for long periods of time brushing her upper lip with a tooth brush in order to make it puffy in an attempt to cover up the fact that she was missing her front teeth.  If one looks at her fist photos from Dalldorf one can see that while her lips are full they are nothing like they are in the photos from the mid to late 1920's.
For more photos of Anna please see PeterKurth.com For more of the Grand Duchess Anastasia please see the Beinecke library ( A Yale Library which houses Anna Vyrubova's albulms) at http://beinecke.library.yale.edu/dl_crosscollex/SearchExecXC.asp

Thanks, Tim

(http://www.concentric.net/~tsarskoe/mini2.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on August 29, 2004, 02:22:41 AM
I'm not seeing a resemblance (but, I never do). I know that photographic comparisons are subjective - what one person sees, another won't.

In my opinion these are two completely different people. The cranial and facial shapes are completely different, in my opinion. The nose is different. The mouth is different. The eyes are different. Someone (not sure if it was even on this thread) posted a comparison of the ears from Peter Kurth's site. The ears are different, also.

To me, AA's face is simply not Anastasia's face. I know there are others who will swear black and blue they are one and the same . . . that's why it's so important to analyse more than photographs.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: EMMA on August 29, 2004, 07:47:33 AM
I Totally agree with you Alice.  The photos of Anderson when she was older somewhat resmemble what younger Anastasia might have looked like as an old woman, however, in her younger pictures, it is so obvious that it is not the same person.  I see a lot of Alix in Anastasia, when I look at young Anderson, there is nothing there.  The eye area is totally different with the two women.  In certain pictures,  she somewhat resembles Tatiana, but this is just in pictures.  When Anastasia smiles, or scrunches up her face, yes, I see that she does resemble this woman however, it is simply not the same person. When I imagine the real Anastasia, not just the face in a picture, her looks are so far off from this woman.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 29, 2004, 12:34:18 PM
When I look at the photos of Anna Anderson and Anastasia side by side, I still see a resemblance. I still can't say for sure that Anna Anderson was NOT Anastasia. I can't say that she was either. You're looking at woman many years older, many pounds lighter, missing teeth and suffering from tuburculosis. Face shape and body shape were both changed.

I think people tend to see what they want to see. If you've made up your mind that she was an impostor, you see a different person entirely. There's still a mystery there for me.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Candice on August 29, 2004, 01:32:15 PM
Anna and Anastasia did not have the same foot problem.  My source tells me that Anastasia's left leg was shorter than the right due to an accident she had as a young child.  The physician attending her at the time of her fall, accidentally pulled her leg and somehow injured the main nerve causing it to shrink from the waist down. She had a limp for life sometimes she would wear a shoe with a platform so her limp wasn't as noticeable.  That is why she stands the way she does with her hip slightly at an angle.  Anastasia was only to 5 feet tall.


Anna and Anastasia's facial structure is totally different.  Anna's nose is wider and dips at the point.  Anastasia's nose is straight and slim no dip. Anastasia does not have dimples on her cheaks nor does she have a wide round face. Anastasia's  face is eligant and slightly oval.  

Facial features do not alter as one matures they are more defined and characteristic.

Candice
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on August 29, 2004, 01:58:02 PM
Quote
Anna and Anastasia did not have the same foot problem.  My source tells me that Anastasia's left leg was shorter than the right due to an accident she had as a young child.  The physician attending her at the time of her fall, accidentally pulled her leg and somehow injured the main nerve causing it to shrink from the waist down. She had a limp for life sometimes she would wear a shoe with a platform so her limp wasn't as noticeable.  That is why she stands the way she does with her hip slightly at an angle.  Anastasia was only to 5 feet tall.


I just want to know who your source is?!

Quote
Anna and Anastasia's facial structure is totally different.  Anna's nose is wider and dips at the point.  Anastasia's nose is straight and slim no dip. Anastasia does not have dimples on her cheaks nor does she have a wide round face. Anastasia's  face is eligant and slightly oval.  

Facial features do not alter as one matures they are more defined and characteristic.


The anthropological experts during the "Anastasia" trials all confirmed that Anna and Anastasia were the same person. But hey, you're obviously the better judge. 8)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 29, 2004, 03:08:26 PM
Quote
Anna and Anastasia did not have the same foot problem.  My source tells me that Anastasia's left leg was shorter than the right due to an accident she had as a young child.  The physician attending her at the time of her fall, accidentally pulled her leg and somehow injured the main nerve causing it to shrink from the waist down. She had a limp for life sometimes she would wear a shoe with a platform so her limp wasn't as noticeable.  That is why she stands the way she does with her hip slightly at an angle.  Anastasia was only to 5 feet tall.


Anna and Anastasia's facial structure is totally different.  Anna's nose is wider and dips at the point.  Anastasia's nose is straight and slim no dip. Anastasia does not have dimples on her cheaks nor does she have a wide round face. Anastasia's  face is eligant and slightly oval.  

Facial features do not alter as one matures they are more defined and characteristic.

Candice


I think I've read just about everything written in English on the Romanovs and Anastasia in the past 30 years. I don't remember reading ANYTHING about one of her legs being shorter than the other or this childhood accident and the incompetent doctor. Her childhood nurse saw Anna Anderson's feet in the hospital and said her foot problem was exactly the same as Anastasia's. Soldiers who were at the Grand Duchess' hospital spoke about Anastasia's "rapid, squirrel-like walk" but certainly never mentioned a limp. A story like that is something that would certainly have come out during the Anastasia trials if it were true. Her Aunt Olga would have known the story and mentioned it. I also think Anastasia was taller than 5 feet tall. Five feet two sounds about right if you look at pictures of her next to her sisters.

Various anthropologists studied numerous pictures and came to the conclusion that her ears were a perfect match to Anastasia's. Prior to DNA, the ear test was used as proof of identity in German courts.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on August 29, 2004, 04:12:22 PM
I have always seen a remarkable resemblance.

Cameras sometimes catch more than just a likeness , sometimes they pick up certain characteristic traits of personality. Especially when it is a candid shot. A certain way a person holds their body when they are happy or sad. This I see in many of the shots even though science has proven otherwise.

Also ours ears and nose grow all through our lives . When I look at my face in pictures from 30 yrs ago I see evidence of this and also in my mother's photos.

I believe Anna was a pretty darn good imposter from a physical stand point. My grandma always said we all had a twin out there in the world.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on August 29, 2004, 05:40:24 PM
I just have to say this ::)

Science changes . Human preception is flawed.

Until this year science believed that nothing traveled faster than the speed of light. Well, that was disproven this year when it was discovered that there are particles out there that were beyond our preception and can be in two places at one time. They travel at a speed we are just learning to recognize.

I spent  2 days at a lecture given by an astronomer who talked about light and our preception of color. The sky is not blue but violet. Our brains filter the light and we see a blue sky. But it doesn't mean that the sky is not violet. I was taught that the sky was blue because it reflected the ocean.

Annie today is not Anastasia but there is always tomorrow.



Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on August 29, 2004, 07:01:07 PM
I'd love to know who Candice's source is as well.
As far as Anastasia's leg being shorter than the other,frankly I think that story is a load of crap.I have never heard of such a thing before.Of all the pictures I have seen of Anastasia I have never seen where you could say one leg is shorter then the other.Her legs look perfectly fine to me.
As far as her foot goes it looks like a bunion to me.My mother had the same condition that arose in her childhood and got so bad she had to have surgury to correct the problem.I believe it could be genetic since my sister had the same problem and had to have it corrected also.They both seem to have inherited it from my grandfather.
After looking at these pictures of AA and Anastasia yet again I still see no resemblance.I just don't believe that AA was Anastasia.But like they say people will see what they want to see. :-/
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 29, 2004, 07:06:03 PM
and if you put my avatar pic next to my second grade pic and didn't tell anyone who they were most people would say it was the same person. The third pic on the bottom row here looks like me when I was 12.

(http://www.concentric.net/~tsarskoe/mini2.jpg)

Yet most pics of Anastasia look nothing like me.

Whenever anyone makes a collage of Anna/Anastasia pics they always choose the ones that look most like her, and they are usually the ones with Anna biting her lip in the tight smile, hiding the fact her lips were nothing like Anastasia's. You could also post side by side pics of them that don't look anything alike, or pics that look like Tatiana.

It's not that I don't want to believe that I don't see it.  I do want to believe, and as I've said over and over I did believe for many years. But now that it is very unlikely and I don't, I don't see what I used to in the pics, which makes me think it was partly wishful thinking, and may be for some other people too. But the main thing is, taken apart one at a time, the features just don't look anything alike. If she were ruled in court to be 'the same person' then why didn't she win??

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on August 29, 2004, 07:33:35 PM
IMO she didn't win because there was too much "nonexistent money" involved.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 29, 2004, 08:04:15 PM
Yeah that's usually the one that gets mentioned. But if there was money I don't understand why the Dowager Empress lived off the charity of her kin in her last days, and Xenia and Olga, especially Olga, never had much of a lavish lifestyle. But really I can't believe that Olga, Xenia, or any of the family would have denied a real Anastasia after all she'd been through. I honestly believe they'd have welcomed her with tears and open arms if it were her. They were not cold enough to shut her out. Kyril, yes, he'd do that. But I don't think Olga and Xenia liked him either.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on August 29, 2004, 08:08:54 PM
I agree Annie.I just don't believe that MF,Xenia and Olga would have shut out the real Anastasia like that.She was Family and you just don't do that to family.If AA had been Anastasia they would have welcomed her with open arms and hearts.
I agree with the money issue as well.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Candice on August 30, 2004, 05:42:45 AM
In my last statement I referred to Anastasia's left leg being shorter than the right. I apologize, my source pointed out to me that in fact that was a mistake.  It was her right leg that was shorter than the left.

However, my source maintains that there was nothing wrong with Anastasia's feet.  If you observe the group photo of the girls each of the girl's waist is horizontal but Anastasia's waist is at an angle, which I think supports my sources statement.

Felix called Anna Anderson a liar and fraud.  Felix new the truth. If Felix new then certain members of the family will know the truth.  In my opinion this is evidence that should be investigated.

Candice
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on August 30, 2004, 06:12:58 AM
Quote
In my last statement I referred to Anastasia's left leg being shorter than the right. I apologize, my source pointed out to me that in fact that was a mistake.  It was her right leg that was shorter than the left.

However, my source maintains that there was nothing wrong with Anastasia's feet.  If you observe the group photo of the girls each of the girl's waist is horizontal but Anastasia's waist is at an angle, which I think supports my sources statement.

Felix called Anna Anderson a liar and fraud.  Felix new the truth. If Felix new then certain members of the family will know the truth.  In my opinion this is evidence that should be investigated.

Candice


With respect, your unnamed source is either mistaken or giving your erroneous information.  Alexandra Tegleva, nursemaid to the Imperial children, herself declared that Anastasia had suffered from a deformity of the feet, not a problem with her leg, and there is not one shred of evidence to corroborate the latter contention.  To believe your friend, you have to dismiss the first-hand knowledge of a woman who saw Anastasia on a daily basis for many years.

As to Felix-which Felix would this be?  Yusupov, a proved liar, drug addict, and murderer?  Or Schanzkowsky, who-any way you slice it-perjured himself in numerous documents about AA, changing his mind and opinion first one way then the next?  Neither man, I think it safe to say, has much to offer in the way of "truth."

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on August 30, 2004, 06:25:44 AM
"Also ours ears and nose grow all through our lives."

No, the ears are one of the few features that remain more or less the same throughout our lives. That's precisely why they were analysed for this case.

"Various anthropologists studied numerous pictures and came to the conclusion that her ears were a perfect match to Anastasia's. Prior to DNA, the ear test was used as proof of identity in German courts. "

Then, these anthropologists were either drunk on Lemon Stolichnayas or paid generously to reach this conclusion. Please examine the photographic comparison of AA and AN's ears on Peter Kurth's website. If you do, you will undoubtedly see that the lobe on AA's ear is much thicker than that of AN's. Same for the rim of the ear.

I assure you that I am not drunk, nor have I been paid generously to reach this conclusion. However, I will readily accept any such generous payments.  ;D

"The anthropological experts during the "Anastasia" trials all confirmed that Anna and Anastasia were the same person. But hey, you're obviously the better judge."

Yes, obviously.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kim on August 30, 2004, 08:04:44 AM
Quote

With respect, your unnamed source is either mistaken or giving your erroneous information.  Alexandra Tegleva, nursemaid to the Imperial children, herself declared that Anastasia had suffered from a deformity of the feet, Greg King


I once saw a picture of Anastasia sitting with her mother on the main forum here. She was barefoot and you could see the deformity. There is photographic evidence if anyone can find the picture. I don't recall which thread it was in.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lisa on August 30, 2004, 08:34:50 AM
Here are 2 pictures, but it's not the same foot... I don't understand ??? Do you know which foot "have" the hallux valgus?

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/lyzotchka/Sanstitre3.jpg)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/lyzotchka/hallux.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on August 30, 2004, 10:02:10 AM
Quote
It's not that I don't want to believe that I don't see it.  I do want to believe, and as I've said over and over I did believe for many years. But now that it is very unlikely and I don't, I don't see what I used to in the pics, which makes me think it was partly wishful thinking, and may be for some other people too. But the main thing is, taken apart one at a time, the features just don't look anything alike. If she were ruled in court to be 'the same person' then why didn't she win??


The court didn't actually claim that AA and AN were the same person. If I can remember correctly -- in the end -- AA's claim wasn't proven or disproven. However, the experts who were appointed by the court to study pictures did find that AA and AN were one and the same. And they did study AA's and AN's features one at a time!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kim on August 30, 2004, 10:26:42 AM
I agree w/ the people who said that the relatives would never have rejected Anastasia had she been real. It's kind of insulting to the Tsar's mother and sisters to even insinuate they believed her but lied because they were afraid she'd take the money. They were not that hard hearted. I also don't think Prince Yusupov knew Anastasia that well in her life. Though he did have an amazing memory for detail as you can tell reading his book, he wasn't around the IF that much other than Dmitri and being there was a 14 yr. age difference they did not grow up together as playmates.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kim on August 30, 2004, 02:17:34 PM
and thank you Lisa for the foot photos.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Candice on August 30, 2004, 06:02:05 PM
Lisa, thank you for showing the photos.  I simply cannot see any deformity in her foot/feet.  In one photo she has a sock on and the other is simply not very clear.  All I see is Anastasia flexing her foot.

I have also looked at photos of Anna Anderson and it is very clear that her stance the way she carries her posture is very different to Anastasia's body structure and posture.  They're physically very different. Look at the way they both stand.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Candice on August 30, 2004, 07:13:10 PM
Greg_King, point taken.  However, Kyrill too looked at Anna's feet at the hospital and called her a fraud.  Kyrill knew the secret too.  If Anastasia's true physical problem were known to everyone then it would be difficult for the real person to be identified, don't you think?



Quote

With respect, your unnamed source is either mistaken or giving your erroneous information.  Alexandra Tegleva, nursemaid to the Imperial children, herself declared that Anastasia had suffered from a deformity of the feet, not a problem with her leg, and there is not one shred of evidence to corroborate the latter contention.  To believe your friend, you have to dismiss the first-hand knowledge of a woman who saw Anastasia on a daily basis for many years.

As to Felix-which Felix would this be?  Yusupov, a proved liar, drug addict, and murderer?  Or Schanzkowsky, who-any way you slice it-perjured himself in numerous documents about AA, changing his mind and opinion first one way then the next?  Neither man, I think it safe to say, has much to offer in the way of "truth."

Greg King

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on August 30, 2004, 07:14:54 PM
Quote
Here are 2 pictures, but it's not the same foot... I don't understand ??? Do you know which foot "have" the hallux valgus?

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/lyzotchka/Sanstitre3.jpg)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/lyzotchka/hallux.jpg)


Maybe it's just me but I can clearly see in the second photo that it was the right foot that had this deformity.I can see where the bone on the side of her foot is starting to point outward and her big toe is starting to be pushed in toward her other toes.
I can understand why the doctors said Anastasia didn't need surgery yet because it wasn't that severe.
The first photo looks to me like Anastasia was just flexing her foot.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on August 30, 2004, 07:17:07 PM
Quote
I have also looked at photos of Anna Anderson and it is very clear that her stance the way she carries her posture is very different to Anastasia's body structure and posture.  They're physically very different. Look at the way they both stand.


I don't understand how somebody -- by looking at a few pictures -- can come to such a firm conclusion about a very complicated issue. Unless you have some sort of background in this subject and have intensely researched and studied photos -- I have a tough time simply accepting your judgement. I'm skeptical about AA and I believe that DNA has pretty much closed the case. However, the remaining mysteries of the AA/AN situation can't be "solved" by amateurs looking at pictures; at least not IMO. I still accept the judgement of the experts.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 30, 2004, 09:42:22 PM
It just continues to boggle my mind that people simply cannot see the OBVIOUS identicality between AA and AN!!!!! :o  Yes I've seen some pictures where AA doesn't look at all like AN, but I've seen many more where she DOES.  The former can be explained, because as I'm sure is true for most people, I have pictures of myself where I look NOTHING like other pictures of me--and that goes for pictures of my mother, grandmother, aunt, etc.  So it really isn't all that unusual to me that a few of AA's pictures don't look like AN.  I see the same way her features are manipulated when she has different sorts of expressions, and in many pictures, AA's face is the EXACT same narrow structure--just older.  Most of all, I can see the resemblance in her eyes the most.  The pictures recently posted here convey this, among others I've seen.  

Or, maybe I'm just a lunatic.  ::)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: ChristineM on August 31, 2004, 03:47:39 AM
My understanding is that the Grand Duchess Anastasia had hallux vulgus in both feet, the right foot being more severely affected than the left.

Re Merrique's first photograph above - I find the bandage pinned on the little grand duchess's leg very touching.   I wonder what scrap she had been in.

tsaria
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on August 31, 2004, 06:22:01 AM
"It just continues to boggle my mind that people simply cannot see the OBVIOUS identicality between AA and AN!"

It can't be that obvious then, can it, if people cannot see the "identicality" you're referring to? Please Michelle, I would love to hear the specifics of this alleged "identicality" (ie: what is it that's identical about them?).

"Many pictures, AA's face is the EXACT same narrow structure--just older."

Please - do you have a link to such pictures?

I, myself, can never understand how people can't see the obvious resemblance between myself and Tatiana Nicholaevna.  ;) Not to mention my obvious resemblance to various celebrities . . .
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on August 31, 2004, 08:00:31 AM
Quote
"Also ours ears and nose grow all through our lives."

No, the ears are one of the few features that remain more or less the same throughout our lives. That's precisely why they were analysed for this case.

"Various anthropologists studied numerous pictures and came to the conclusion that her ears were a perfect match to Anastasia's. Prior to DNA, the ear test was used as proof of identity in German courts. "

Then, these anthropologists were either drunk on Lemon Stolichnayas or paid generously to reach this conclusion. Please examine the photographic comparison of AA and AN's ears on Peter Kurth's website. If you do, you will undoubtedly see that the lobe on AA's ear is much thicker than that of AN's. Same for the rim of the ear.

I assure you that I am not drunk, nor have I been paid generously to reach this conclusion. However, I will readily accept any such generous payments.  ;D

"The anthropological experts during the "Anastasia" trials all confirmed that Anna and Anastasia were the same person. But hey, you're obviously the better judge."

Yes, obviously.


I really can't let this stand unchallenged.  You've made an irresponsible and reckless charge against a number of court appointed professionals who had no stake at all in the resolution of the Anna Anderson case.  I think you should back up your accusation that they were drunk or bribed with some hard evidence, or retract your statement.  You can disagree with their conclusions and voice an opinion, but the fact that you presumably disagree with that opinion does not entitle you to make such a slanderous statement that has, to the best of my knowledge, no basis in fact.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on August 31, 2004, 08:29:44 AM
Quote
Greg_King, point taken.  However, Kyrill too looked at Anna's feet at the hospital and called her a fraud.  Kyrill knew the secret too.  If Anastasia's true physical problem were known to everyone then it would be difficult for the real person to be identified, don't you think?





Kirill must have been gifted with exceptional psychic abilities, then, as he never once met Anna Anderson-at a hospital or elsewhere.  His brother Andrei met her and came away convinced she was Anastasia, but Kirill-no-never saw her.  I hope this isn't something your unnamed "source" passed along to you as further evidence because it never took place.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Candice on August 31, 2004, 09:17:03 AM
Alice, the authorities that made the assumptions of identicality between AA and AN were in my opinion wrong! I agree.  There are many differences including the ears.  

I think it very hillarious how the authorities had to revert to ears because they couldn't get a perfect match with the features. Even though they reverted to using the ears they still didn't even patch!  

One way of examing the similarities between AA and AN is to blow up a good frontal portrait picutre of Anastasia and one of Anna Anderson (same dimentions) then make transparencies of them so there is no fiddle and superimpose them.  If you project images on a wall you should be able to see very clearly the differences when you place one over the other.  

Authorities have been known to make mistakes.

Candice
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Candice on August 31, 2004, 09:48:42 AM
Greg_King, my source didn't tell me.  I will have to go back to my notes.  

You say, that Andrei met her. Well,  Kirill must have asked Andrei questions about the meeting, what Anna was like and looked like.  Surely Andrei must have been scouting for information?  In any case the Romanovs didn't accept her or her story.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on August 31, 2004, 10:04:56 AM
Well, in fact some of the Romanovs said she was Anastasia, i mean Andrei and Princess Ksenia. Also Grand Duchess Olga seemed to recognize her and wrote her for months after their first meeting. Pierre Gilliard after visiting Anna asked the doctor about the "Grand Duchess´s" health, so at the beginning he could have thought she could be Anastasia. Lily Dehn was positively convinced that she was Anastasia. Those were really intimate persons who had known the Grand Duchess, so how could be judge just comparing photographs?

And also, the DNA test should have said the last word on this subject, but why then there´s still so much discussion? Could DNA test be mistaken?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on August 31, 2004, 11:50:59 AM
Quote
Alice, the authorities that made the assumptions of identicality between AA and AN were in my opinion wrong! I agree.  There are many differences including the ears.
 

Why is it that the experts are always wrong? Can't somebody else be wrong for once?

Quote
I think it very hillarious how the authorities had to revert to ears because they couldn't get a perfect match with the features. Even though they reverted to using the ears they still didn't even patch!
 

Actually, the "authorities" did get a match concerning AA's ears and features. It was positive!


Quote
One way of examing the similarities between AA and AN is to blow up a good frontal portrait picutre of Anastasia and one of Anna Anderson (same dimentions) then make transparencies of them so there is no fiddle and superimpose them.  If you project images on a wall you should be able to see very clearly the differences when you place one over the other.
 


Interesting! Is this something you have tried on your own? Personally, I'd love to know what the results of this extensive undertaking were.


Quote
Authorities have been known to make mistakes.


I've never met someone so determined to prove just that.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on August 31, 2004, 02:24:56 PM
Quote
"Also ours ears and nose grow all through our lives."

No, the ears are one of the few features that remain more or less the same throughout our lives. That's precisely why they were analysed for this case.

 



http://www.physweekly.com/archive/96/12_09_96/cu5.html


Please check out to see how our ears grow yearly. Thanks
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on August 31, 2004, 03:25:14 PM
So if ears grow, would you say that this is a positive statement for the Anna Anderson supporters, being that those who think Anastasia's and Anna Anderson's ears looked different in the photos, or a negative for the supporters (because they claimed that the ears were the same ears)?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 31, 2004, 03:53:25 PM
Alice--

I am not computer literate enough to provide links to pictures, and anyway there are pics posted right on this thread of VERY similar photos of AN and AA.  So I'm sorry that I can't provide you with any.  

I already told what was identical (to me anyway) about them--the narrow face and stucture, the eyes most especially, many pictures her nose looks long and narrow like AN, the way she seems to express herself physically--I thought I already mentioned these in my last post?  Or maybe I'm just delusional. ::)  

But, Alice, why is it that you and others on the board get somewhat defensive when someone expresses how much AA and AN look alike?  Has it ever ocurred to you that others may have some different opinions than yourself?  Again I'm sorry that I'm not able to post/link pictures.

And yes, maybe the identicality isn't that obvious to people who are adamant that AA wasn't AN.  Even though I lean toward the pro-Anna side, I can admit that there are a number of pics that don't look all that much like AN.  But there are many more that do.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on August 31, 2004, 04:22:53 PM
Michelle
In my opinion, the reason many people get "frustrated" with those who still discuss the "physical" similarities between AA and Anasatasia is simply because that part of the discussion is now moot.  Whoever AA may have been, the mtDNA testing shows without question AA was NOT Grand Duchess Anastasia.

A new acquaintace of mine has a wife who is quite literally a physical twin of my niece...so startling when I met her that I questioned her deeply about her family, even though there is no way she is related to my sister. Physical similarity is a subjective matter. The science of the mtDNA is without question.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on August 31, 2004, 05:23:15 PM
IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with discussing the similarities of AA and AN. It is not a challenge to the DNA results. There are so many fascinating details concerning AA and her claim that it would be terrible if everything was dismissed because of science. I don't even like science.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on August 31, 2004, 05:58:24 PM
Ya, science isn't all it's cracked up to be, IMHO.  But, that's probably not worth all that much, anyway LOL ::) :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: RobMoshein on August 31, 2004, 06:40:39 PM
Quote
... it would be terrible if everything was dismissed because of science. I don't even like science.

So true, what has science ever proved? The earth is round? Gravity?? heavier than air flight? Men on the Moon?? Curing disease?? Electricity? Computers?? The Internet?  I HATE SCIENCE.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on August 31, 2004, 07:05:52 PM
Quote
So true, what has science ever proved?

A question I did not ask.  :-/


***
Quote
There are so many fascinating details concerning AA and her claim that it would be terrible if everything was dismissed because of science.
***
See above to get an idea of what I truly said. :) I enjoy discussing Anna Anderson and I don't want to stop just because DNA has proved that she isn't Anastasia. She had a fascinating life, and her case -- I believe -- is worthy of discussion. I accept the DNA but I don't think that should prevent us from discussing AA.

Quote
I HATE SCIENCE

8)

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: bookworm on August 31, 2004, 07:50:27 PM
No scientific theory is ever completely proven. The point of science is to keep asking questions and experimenting and expand one's knowledge. At the moment the DNA evidence says that Anna Anderson wasn't Anastasia, based on what the testing of the mitochondrial DNA indicated.

On the other hand, as I've posted before, I look at a lot of the evidence that indicates she knew things that only Anastasia could have known, that her ears were judged by experts to be a match to Anastasia's, that she had a number of physical similarities to Anastasia, like the feet, physical scars, eye color, facial resemblance and that people who knew Anastasia recognized her as Anastasia. Sorry, but I'm not prepared to say that's all irrelevant because of the mitochondrial DNA evidence. If I were a juror today and all the available evidence was put before me, I'd come up with the exact same verdict the German juries did: identity not proven -- but not ruled out completely, either.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on August 31, 2004, 08:41:38 PM
Forgive me if I have my facts wrong but I am tired tonight and cannot find the right references.

I will be juror for a minute....

They got Anna's DNA  from a hair found in a box of books bought by someone and from a tissue sample from an operation a few or many  years before the testing? What hospital or lab keeps tissue samples and how long do they keep them? Years?
Or did someone in that  hospital establishment say"maybe we better keep this because one day it may prove interesting"? Hospitals purge records periodically and I can't imagine any such institution keeping tissue samples from individuals for more than the period of years when someone can no longer sue them. It would become medical waste and be disposed of . Why was Anna's still there? The report of findings....maybe..but the actual sample...

I may be way off base and hospitals keep all the stuff they take from us and  test . I find it weird that they were able to recovery that tissue.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on August 31, 2004, 08:50:02 PM
It was Martha Jefferson hospital in Charlottesville. I read an article once that said this place has a rep for stashing and saving everything and never losing anything, even UVA Medical Center would have lost it or ditched it, but not Martha Jefferson!

From what I've seen, the sample was not found immediately after her death but was rediscovered years later, just in time to test since the bones had been found after Communism fell.

I think I may have doubted the tests more if she had not matched either family, but since it came out as a no for the Queen Victoria line and a probable for the Schanskowska line, I had to figure, she's most likely FS. But that doesn't mean for certain that AN died in Ekaterinburg, it's very likely, but a body is missing. There's a ghost of a chance she got away, but wasn't Anna.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on September 01, 2004, 08:23:44 AM
Wow - all hell has broken loose RE: my comments. (Not completely unexpected!)

"I really can't let this stand unchallenged.  You've made an irresponsible and reckless charge against a number of court appointed professionals who had no stake at all in the resolution of the Anna Anderson case.  I think you should back up your accusation that they were drunk or bribed with some hard evidence, or retract your statement.  You can disagree with their conclusions and voice an opinion, but the fact that you presumably disagree with that opinion does not entitle you to make such a slanderous statement that has, to the best of my knowledge, no basis in fact. "

No intention whatsoever to be disrespectful or slanderous - tongue-in-cheek. Obviously it didn't come across as that, and I apologise.

I have no evidence at all that the (unnamed) anthropologists were drunk on Lemon Stolichnayas, or paid generously.I assumed the "Lemon Stolichnayas" remark gave it away that it was sarcastic. (As if I could possibly know specifically what they were drinking . . . IF they were drinking . . .)

So I retract the Lemon Stolichnaya and the bribery remarks, respectively. I do not, however, retract my opinion that I find the anthropologist's "evidence" that AA and AN are the same person to be ludicrous. DNA dis-proved this theory.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on September 01, 2004, 08:30:37 AM
Yes, I remember reading that the hospital saved every little thing from all their patients, and Anna Anderson's piece of intestine was still there and in pretty good shape. The hospital also swore by their security and said that nothing is ever removed or tampered with without their knowing it. I beleive that the sample was pure and hadn't fallen into the hands of anyone out to disprove Anna Anderson.  I don't think the hair was messed around with, either. It doesn't seem likely.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on September 01, 2004, 08:41:30 AM
Thankyou, Inquiring_Mind - I stand corrected. However, I still don't think that 0.51mm growth per year is enough to account for the MUCH thicker lobe and rim on AA's ear.

And Michelle - I understand that people have differing opinions, that's exactly why I visit the board.

Cheers.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on September 01, 2004, 09:48:05 AM
OK,
There is one part of the discussion which is fact.  First, I used to work in a hospital in college.  Pathology samples are routinely stored for at least several years, sometimes many years.  Pathologists hate to throw their samples away. So, there is nothing at all weird about the AA sample being retained, and frankly, no one remembered it was there for a long time. No one questions it is her, to my knowledge.

Second. mtDNA is not a 'theory'.  It is now an accepted medical fact that mitochondrial DNA passes maternally unchanged down generations. There is NO question about this. Yes, as Penny pointed out, there can be an occassional false positive ie: that unrelated people can have matching mtDNA, but critically, there cannot be a false NEGATIVE. IF you are related maternally, your mtDNA will MATCH. Period. This is not theory.

Different labs performed the exact same testing. All had the exact same result. The only part of the science different today is that machines now do what people did by hand then. NOTHING is different. Go find a forensic biologist. Ask.

Yes, the Gill testing of the Ekaterinburg remains is flawed, and probably not valid today. But that test has no relationship to the fact that AA can NOT have been Anastasia, period. Was she FS? that is open to question, but she was NOT related to the IF.
Anyone with evidence otherwise is most welcome to present their evidence, to support the mere wishful thinking otherwise here.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 01, 2004, 05:35:12 PM
Re:the ears--

Couldn't it be possible that the so-called "thickness" of AA's ear lobe compared to AN's can be attributed to the seemingly different distances at which the two pictures were taken?  I'm well aware that people don't think the ears look the same (however, I'm most certainly not one of those people as I think the two ears look absolutely IDENTICAL).  But couldn't the farther awayness (sorry for bad wording ::)) in the AN picture as opposed to the closer view taken in the AA picture be attributed to the apparent "thickness" of AA's earlobe?  

Oh boy, I sure hope this made sense....... :-/ :-[
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on September 02, 2004, 07:34:10 PM
Thank you for all your comments. I have since done some research of my own and found that larger or teaching hospitals with the resources do keep as much as they can. My apologies.

I just don't think anyone kept my appendix from 1963. This is meant to inject some levity!

Thank you again.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on September 03, 2004, 10:56:02 AM
What kind of security do hospitals have that protect these body parts that have been removed?  

Is the door to these places locked and only certain people able to enter?

Is the door guarded?

How easy is it for people to come and go, even if the area is considered  out of bounds for those without security clearings?

From my personal experience,  I've been in hospitals in the middle of the night and I've had no difficulty in walking into places I never should have been.

It seems to me that the "worker bees" who clean floors and rid the hospitals of the garbage move freely throughout ....

Maybe, someone can explain to me where all these "body parts" are kept in the hospital in question.   Is it a large storage room filled with jars, boxes, plastic bags....?

I for one have doubted Ana Anderson was Anastasia, however, I am keeping an "open mind" on this subject.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on September 03, 2004, 11:24:47 AM
From the American Society of Cytopatholgy:
biopsy glass slides must be retained for a minimum of 10 years, unless local regulations require longer retention.6 Slides may be stored on-site in the laboratory or on institutional premises, or may be stored off-site. Whether stored on-site or off-site. Academic and research goals may merit longer slide storage by individual laboratories. Medicare requires all samples be held at least 7 years.

Additionally, the Council of American Pathologists (CAP) has strict security and storage guidelines to which all certified labs must adhere and report regularly.

From my personal experience, the Path. lab is a secure area, accessible only to authorized personnel, and the storage facility is locked and access restricted.  The only samples usually left "out" are those being tested at that time.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 03, 2004, 11:39:14 AM
In addition, if a person did break in I doubt they'd even know where to begin and would not have a chance to dig among the thousands of samples before they were caught. Samples are usually numbered to a number corresponding on some confidential list, I doubt anything has a person's name written on it. Most of these places are in out of the way hallways and some have alarms on the doors- one of my kids accidently set one off years ago and the guards came running!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on September 03, 2004, 11:42:18 AM
Sorry, I forgot to include that part. Patient confidentiality is primary when samples are stored under Federal guidelines.  The samples themselves are assigned a code number on the sample.  The master list of patient names corresponding is in fact kept separate and secure from the sample storage itself.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: NAAOTMA on September 03, 2004, 05:45:58 PM
Having worked in a hospital for many years, I can add my "seconding" of the Forum Administrator's facts regarding pathology sample protocol, patient confidentiality, and patient privacy. Melissa K.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on September 04, 2004, 10:50:48 AM
These slides are placed in a secure place.  They have codes.... to protect the patient.  Where do these codes reach the patient's records?  Lab?  Doctor's office?  Somewhere in the hospital where the doctor calls to connect his patient with the code / lab work?

I assume there is some kind of connection point or else the doctor couldn't give the results of the lab work.

I, also, assume this is the point where errors have occured. Just the other day,  I remember the news reporting some poor fellow thought he had aides for the last ten years and it appears his lab work had gotten mixed up with someone elses....

As for finding a slide in this secure place,  I'm sure there is some kind of numbering system and this can be good or bad depending upon the person/ people dealing with the system.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 04, 2004, 11:06:54 AM
Martha Jefferson Hospital is well known for its efficiency. They have a better record than even the University of Virginia Medical Center (also in Charlottesville) which has an excellent reputation.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on September 04, 2004, 11:07:00 AM
Quote
These slides are placed in a secure place.  They have codes.... to protect the patient.  Where do these codes reach the patient's records?  Lab?  Doctor's office?  Somewhere in the hospital where the doctor calls to connect his patient with the code / lab work?

I assume there is some kind of connection point or else the doctor couldn't give the results of the lab work.

I, also, assume this is the point where errors have occured. Just the other day,  I remember the news reporting some poor fellow thought he had aides for the last ten years and it appears his lab work had gotten mixed up with someone elses....

As for finding a slide in this secure place,  I'm sure there is some kind of numbering system and this can be good or bad depending upon the person/ people dealing with the system.

AGRBear

First, the codes NEVER reach the patient record. Only the lab results themselves reach the patient record. The lab codes the samples, and there is a log in the lab corresponding names to codes. Names are stored alphabetically in the system, and then the sample code is entered with the name as it is received in the lab. After testing, the lab sends the results to the requesting physician under the patient name not the code. The code is only for internal use so that unauthorized entry into the lab can't result in breach of patient confidentiality. From experience, the chance of mistake at this point is less than one in a million, and usually happens only when similar samples are being tested at the same time...ie:  several dozen HIV tests run in one batch.

The coding system for storage is pretty "idiot proof", although different labs may use different systems. Usually, there is a sequential sheet of duplicate stickers and each sample as it arrives is given one sticker and the other gets stuck into the patient name record.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on September 04, 2004, 11:32:14 AM
Quote

 [in part]
First, the codes NEVER reach the patient record. Only the lab results themselves reach the patient record. The lab codes the samples, and there is a log in the lab corresponding names to codes. Names are stored alphabetically in the system, and then the sample code is entered with the name as it is received in the lab. After testing, the lab sends the results to the requesting physician under the patient name not the code. The code is only for internal use so that unauthorized entry into the lab can't result in breach of patient confidentiality....


I was not meaning the hospital in question was subject to making errors or that personal at this hospital or others were subject to errors.  

The reason for my question was to discover where a person who needed or wanted the information needed to go to find the link of names to code.

Thank you.

AGBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: sandy on September 04, 2004, 03:40:35 PM
Excuse me folks, but what is the purpose of this? Do some of you believe the samples were tampered with intentionally? For all I've read in these threads of people claiming 'slander' against someone for suggesting a person gave Anna Anderson her memories, is it also not the same to accuse these hospitals and scientists of negligence, or even insiunate they may have been bribed? What else could this mean? Do some of you believe a person sneaked into the labs and pulled a switcheroo, or just bribed the technicians? Who? Why? How? Was this pay off financed by all that phantom money in the bank of England in Anastasia's name? Who got it out? Please! Was the hair found in the books switched too? What would be the purpose of this, now, after so many people are dead and gone and there is no money and no throne? Don't you think that's more than a stretch?

And why do some of you continue to hold onto the Perm fabrications? Is it for the honor of Summers and Mangold alone? I don't want to be rude but I cannot believe some of you actually are convinced the women were taken away alive, killed in Perm, then taken back to the SAME HOLE and dumped in with Nicholas? Pray tell WHAT would be the purpose of that? IF and I do mean IF they were taken to Perm and killed later, they would have put them in a different place for 2 reasons, one, they didn't like driving around with the bodies of Romanovs with the Whites in the area, and second, wouldn't it be easier to throw off the trail by splitting the bodies up into groups? What would be the logic of chancing coming all the way back to the same spot just to throw them in? It is beyond preposterous in my opinion.

This is interesting to discuss but some things cross the line of even being worthy for credible consideration. Perhaps it is time to let the souls of both these troubled women, Anastasia Nikloaievna Romanov and Anastasia Manahan/Franziska Schwanskowska  rest in peace.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AnastasiaFan on September 05, 2004, 02:23:18 PM
Quote
Excuse me folks, but what is the purpose of this? Do some of you believe the samples were tampered with intentionally? For all I've read in these threads of people claiming 'slander' against someone for suggesting a person gave Anna Anderson her memories, is it also not the same to accuse these hospitals and scientists of negligence, or even insiunate they may have been bribed? What else could this mean? Do some of you believe a person sneaked into the labs and pulled a switcheroo, or just bribed the technicians? Who? Why? How? Was this pay off financed by all that phantom money in the bank of England in Anastasia's name? Who got it out? Please! Was the hair found in the books switched too? What would be the purpose of this, now, after so many people are dead and gone and there is no money and no throne? Don't you think that's more than a stretch?

And why do some of you continue to hold onto the Perm fabrications? Is it for the honor of Summers and Mangold alone? I don't want to be rude but I cannot believe some of you actually are convinced the women were taken away alive, killed in Perm, then taken back to the SAME HOLE and dumped in with Nicholas? Pray tell WHAT would be the purpose of that? IF and I do mean IF they were taken to Perm and killed later, they would have put them in a different place for 2 reasons, one, they didn't like driving around with the bodies of Romanovs with the Whites in the area, and second, wouldn't it be easier to throw off the trail by splitting the bodies up into groups? What would be the logic of chancing coming all the way back to the same spot just to throw them in? It is beyond preposterous in my opinion.

This is interesting to discuss but some things cross the line of even being worthy for credible consideration. Perhaps it is time to let the souls of both these troubled women, Anastasia Nikloaievna Romanov and Anastasia Manahan/Franziska Schwanskowska  rest in peace.


Very, very, very well said Sandy. To think that all the testing were tampered with is insane, especially since there is NO evidence to even begin to support it.  However when it comes to people letting the souls of Anastasia and Franziska rest in peace, I sadly don't think that will ever happen. Too many people wish to ignore DNA fact and continue to invent conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 05, 2004, 02:31:46 PM
I agree AnastasiaFan. Sad but true :-/
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Kransnoeselo on September 05, 2004, 03:12:01 PM
           I think that one must look at the argument (That those who support Anna's claim are "ignoring" the DNA evidence) in the reverse as well.  One can justifiably say that those who deny Anna's claim ignore; Handwriting evidence; Ear and facial studies, Testimony by many who knew the Grand Duchess; and memories which Anna had which she could not have obtained in books or from other sources.  
          It's a fallible argument to say that the DNA evidence is the definitive proof in this matter.   Would any good dectective rule out volumes of evidence in favor of the results of one avenue of thought -one I might add which has been challenged by many, including the Japanese and the most recent American study? I think not.  
          I find it amusing that so many people readily accept it.  Many who argue against her know very little about Anna, have never read any of the biographies about her or done any research into the matte. (Not to say that everyone who argues against her claim is ignorant of all the facts-but indeed most are)  There have been many misleading statements regarding Anna from reputable sources here and elsewhere on the web that I am not surprised that many people have made up their minds without doing any personal research.
          Yet, if there is so much information which has yet be explained on Anna's behalf than this line of argument simply cannot be justifiably ignored.  History cannot ignore all the facts without accepting at the same time that the whole truth will not be known.

Tim
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AnastasiaFan on September 05, 2004, 03:31:46 PM
Quote
          I think that one must look at the argument (That those who support Anna's claim are "ignoring" the DNA evidence) in the reverse as well.  One can justifiably say that those who deny Anna's claim ignore; Handwriting evidence; Ear and facial studies, Testimony by many who knew the Grand Duchess; and memories which Anna had which she could not have obtained in books or from other sources.  
           It's a fallible argument to say that the DNA evidence is the definitive proof in this matter.   Would any good dectective rule out volumes of evidence in favor of the results of one avenue of thought -one I might add which has been challenged by many, including the Japanese and the most recent American study? I think not.  
           I find it amusing that so many people readily accept it.  Many who argue against her know very little about Anna, have never read any of the biographies about her or done any research into the matte. (Not to say that everyone who argues against her claim is ignorant of all the facts-but indeed most are)  There have been many misleading statements regarding Anna from reputable sources here and elsewhere on the web that I am not surprised that many people have made up their minds without doing any personal research.
           Yet, if there is so much information which has yet be explained on Anna's behalf than this line of argument simply cannot be justifiably ignored.  History cannot ignore all the facts without accepting at the same time that the whole truth will not be known.

Tim


Most people I know who don't believe in Franziska/Anna Anderson are not basing it JUST on the DNA evidence. If you read other threads, you will see this. I, along with others, did not say "oh well the DNA said she isn't her, so she isn't her." It's not that simple. DNA is just the scientific fact. DNA aside, I don't believe it was her because I seriously doubt anyone could have survived such a brutal event, Anna Anderson and Anastasia look NOTHING alike, and -- as others have stated -- I seriously, seriously, seriously doubt Anastasia's Aunt Olga, along with other relatives, would have turned their backs on her if she had truly been the Grand Duchess. Olga loved Anastasia and would never have done this. You pile all of that together and add the DNA fact, and you get an imposter.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on September 05, 2004, 04:03:31 PM
Quote
 
           It's a fallible argument to say that the DNA evidence is the definitive proof in this matter.   Would any good dectective rule out volumes of evidence in favor of the results of one avenue of thought -one I might add which has been challenged by many, including the Japanese and the most recent American study? I think not.  
        


Actually, the mtDNA evidence IS definitive proof in this matter.  If this were a criminal case, and AA accused of having committed a crime, based on the mtDNA evidence, she would be acquitted, REGARDLESS of everything else since she is exluded from the possibility of maternal relation to the Hesse line.. Please cite your specific sources in Japan and "recently in America" which challenge the accuracy of mtDNA evidence.  Dr. Melton, who performed one of the AA mtDNA tests is a world recognized forensic expert in every court in the United States, and her testimony is considered as conclusive in cases such as this.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 05, 2004, 05:30:05 PM
Quote
(Krasnoeselo)I find it amusing that so many people readily accept it.  Many who argue against her know very little about Anna, have never read any of the biographies about her or done any research into the matte. (Not to say that everyone who argues against her claim is ignorant of all the facts-but indeed most are)  There have been many misleading statements regarding Anna from reputable sources here and elsewhere on the web that I am not surprised that many people have made up their minds without doing any personal research.


I really don't know anyone like that. Most of us are enthusiasts who know a lot and have checked it all out. I know for sure for myself, you are not describing me. I have been interested for many years and at one time was an AA believer. I have read every book, seen every documentary and read the websites. All along, I hoped so hard it was her. I kept thinking, yes, then no, then yes. At times I wondered if it was just hope and wishful thinking that made me see things that weren't there. But the DNA test was the final end for me, because I believe it is accurate. While some pics with some mouths look remotely like Anastasia, many look nothing like her at all. Other pics of Anastasia look more like me as a kid than AA! So it's not something we can really go on. Scientific evidence is. As for the ears and all that, well, we will never know the whole story behind that. But we have the DNA, and we have our answer. It may not be the one we wanted, the one we hoped for, but that's the way it goes. Hanging onto it now is like standing crying in the stadium after your team lost the Super Bowl. Wish all you want, it's over, and it's not coming back.

Quote

, and -- as others have stated -- I seriously, seriously, seriously doubt Anastasia's Aunt Olga, along with other relatives, would have turned their backs on her if she had truly been the Grand Duchess. Olga loved Anastasia and would never have done this. You pile all of that together and add the DNA fact, and you get an imposter.


That is a big factor for me. In addition to the DNA and the other things, the intangibles are what make the story for me. I don't believe that Olga or the other family members would have turned their backs on her and lied in court, especially after the ordeal she'd been through. To say they did is the same as calling them callous, uncaring, heartless people and I don't believe that.

here are the 'intangibles' that lock the case for me:

*the DNA (of course)
*the family would NOT have rejected the poor lost girl, at least not the close members like Olga and Xenia and Ernie.
*the fact that the surviving person closest to her for the longest time and most recently, Gilliard, fought the case tooth and nail until his dying day. So what if Ernie paid him to help, Ernie needed someone on his side, he'd lost his sisters and the kids and the court cases and accusations of imposters must have hurt him deeply. The last testimony of Olga before she died was heart wrenching. How terrible she had to have been hounded for so long after suffering such losses in her life. I pity them!
*the Schanskowska family first accepted, then denied her. This tells me they did recognize her, but once they got to thinking, they backed out. Why? Think about it- if they admitted she was their sister and signed the papers, her case was over. That might mean she'd be liable for the costs and fees and expenses of it all, plus possible countersuits, and who'd pay? She was unstable and had no money. Her family would be responsible! Her brother even asked 'if I say she's my sister, will I be held responsible for her?' That must have concerned him. Not only the bills she ran up, but her keep the rest of her life, she'd never be able to hold a job and had nothing. By their denial, they gave her a life as "Anastasia", which is what she wanted, she'd be famous and someone would always take care of her. It was best for her and for them to let her go to her 'new life.' She also would have hated them for spoiling her chances.
*I hate to touch on this again and get jumped on, but, the memories. Somebody fed them to her. They HAD to. She wasn't Anastasia and could not have had them. I personally believe a person or most likely numerous people fed her these tales, some unintentionally, and some purposefully. Were there gold diggers who believed she'd get the mythical fortune? It very well could be.
*unlikely chance for escape. While it makes a great story, one I have long pondered and been interested in, any escape by any family member that night is more than extremely unlikely. Even if they did, which I doubt, they would not have survived the severe injuries with no doctor. I don't believe anyone could have escaped that massacre.


So, it all adds up for me, and the case is now closed. I did not come by any of this easily or without  much thought and consideration over many years. Others are free to their opinions, mine makes sense to me.

This does not mean I'm calling her a liar. The biggest mystery concerning Anna to me is, did she really believe it, was she crazy or pretending, was she  pretending in the beginning and it became real to her later? She was also a tragic figure. But she is forever linked to the IF and we remember her.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 05, 2004, 10:03:28 PM
As Annie has said about Olga and the others not recognizing AA, I have an argument.  I have read in The Riddle of Anna Anderson and The Romanovs: The Final Chapter (however I can't quite remember about the latter if I actually read this) that Olga at first recognized AA, but then she withdrew her blessing.  Couldn't somebody have threatened her for some bizarre reason into retracting her belief.  At first she wrote a bunch of letters to AA that were very endearing to her.  I just find it so strange that she would seem so sure of AA's identity and then all of a sudden toss that belief away.  Besides, so many of the Romanov relations DID believe her.  That plus the memories (again I find it highly unlikely that she was "fed" these reminiscences), the eerie likeness between AA and AN, the handwriting, the scientific analysis of her ears, add up to what makes me believe that AA was indeed genuine.  And her eyes--I see Anastasia in those eyes.  They look so much like hers.  I don't think it's impossible that people could've somehow contaminated the DNA--for some sick reason.  As Greg and Penny said, that DNA test is being largely discredited.  I think some people let the DNA block the other major coincidences of her looks, memories, etc.  But I also think it goes either way--the people who believe in her will always believe in her no matter what, and those who don't believe in her will always disbelieve no matter the evidence to the contrary.  

I know people are going to really jump all over me for this.   ::)  It kinda seems like anyone who believes AA's claim is jumped on. :(
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on September 05, 2004, 10:37:50 PM
Hi Michelle! I am sorry if you feel like you are jumped on for supporting AA. This is really an unsolved mystery and everyone's opinion is as good as the others' because we don't know whether or not the DNA was tampered with, We don't know how Anna A. knew all the things she did. We don't know why the Romanov's relatives and staff at first supported her, then later denied her (something that I find kind of cruel -- for whatever reason this happened) and we don't know what the deal was with the missing Franscesca S., the Polish factory worker. I am always open to different angles of this fascinating story. I think it's amazing how twenty years after this woman died, we are still discussing her with zeal -- and debating a claim that she made in 1920!
Even if she wasn't Anastasia, she was a mystery on her own -- such an alluring and complicated story. I would give anything to know who she really was and the events of her life up until the time she jumped off that bridge. Most people are quick to assume that the DNA tests were either completley right or wrong, and I doubt those that are alive today and know the truth will ever be able to prove anything.
For me, Anna Anderson's case is just as astounding as the mystery of the disappearance of two bodies from the Romanov family's grave. (I do think that it WAS the Romanovs in the grave. I used to think they might have escaped but now I very highly doubt it. But that is for another thread..) :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on September 05, 2004, 10:39:20 PM
Quote
I know people are going to really jump all over me for this.   ::)  It kinda seems like anyone who believes AA's claim is jumped on. :(


Michelle, I think that Brien Horan has summed up the situation perfectly, and these words always inspire me to keep an open mind:

 "I knew her well and therefore have formed a
 personal opinion in her favor.  I cannot
 dispute DNA findings and I am not a
 conspiracy theorist.  But I cannot suspend
 everything I know on the basis of these
 tests.... The odds are long that a fake
 claimant would be the right height, eye
 color and hair color, to begin with.
 The hallux valgus is an even greater
 longshot.  The handwriting match is
 mindboggling.  And the ears send the odds
 right out of the park.

 "Can these odds be computed mathematically?
 What if this evidence makes it a million to
 one in her favor, and the DNA makes it a
 million to one against?  This can't be
 reconciled --  either the DNA was not hers
 or the ears were not hers, but we can
 identify the ears as we can see that they
 were attached to her head!"

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on September 05, 2004, 10:50:27 PM
Michelle, Olga spoke at length before her death about Anna Anderson. You can read her thoughts in "The Last Grand Duchess". She did not recognize AA as Anastasia, but she realized that people (perhaps like you) would rather believe the fairy tale. Greg and Penny have certainly not disputed all of the DNA results. In the case of mtDNA, which has been identical in all female line descendants of Victoria INCLUDING THE KOPTYAKI REMAINS, there has been no challenge. And, AA's mtDNA does not match the rest of the family. Sorry.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on September 05, 2004, 11:01:45 PM
Quote

 
  "Can these odds be computed mathematically?
  What if this evidence makes it a million to
  one in her favor, and the DNA makes it a
  million to one against?  This can't be
  reconciled --  either the DNA was not hers
  or the ears were not hers, but we can
  identify the ears as we can see that they
  were attached to her head!"



Penny, the frustrations of this man reflect many of ours (well mine, anyway) very well. Thanks for putting that in there!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 06, 2004, 12:16:08 AM
Abby and Penny, thank you so much for your very kind words.  I greatly appreciate it :)  And thank you for not jumping on me :)  That quote you posted, Penny, is very interesting, and inspiring :D  I'm very grateful!

Lisa:  You don't have to apologize.  I'm well aware of those facts.  Maybe you believe it to be a fairytale, but I believe that Anna Anderson was genuine.  If this frustrates or annoys you, I'm sorry.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on September 06, 2004, 12:20:48 AM
Michelle: I was not apologizing, I was pointing out that AA's mtDNA is not a match for Alexandra or Philip and this is unfortunate for someone who believes she was ANR. I do believe that you and others are entitled to have opinions on AA that differ from mine or others. In fact, I consider Peter Kurth a dear friend and he certainly believes differently, as well as knowing much more about AA than do I. I think what we do is we agree to disagree and keep on discussing whenever.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 06, 2004, 11:06:44 AM
Quote
Michelle, Olga spoke at length before her death about Anna Anderson. You can read her thoughts in "The Last Grand Duchess". She did not recognize AA as Anastasia, but she realized that people (perhaps like you) would rather believe the fairy tale.


I have read several things about Olga A. that were just heartbreaking. The poor thing, she was devastated over the fate of her brother's family and then to have to endure years of torture and reminders as AA drug her case through court. After her last testimony on the witness stand as an old woman not long before her death, she sadly stepped down and had to have AA yelling out "Aunt Olga!" at her. How this had to keep upsetting her and bringing up bad memories. I never heard Olga recognized her at first. She did give her a chance, more of a chance than anyone else did, and I do believe she wanted her to be her niece so badly that she looked for any possibility, then realized it just wasn't there. I do not believe Olga would ever have rejected or ignored a real Anastasia. Olga loved her. She was already the black sheep of the family and had married a commoner. She lived in modest means. She surely wasn't protecting a fortune she did not posess. I am sorry for Olga and all the sadness in her life, and the extra emotional stress caused by pretenders.

Quote
In the case of mtDNA, which has been identical in all female line descendants of Victoria INCLUDING THE KOPTYAKI REMAINS, there has been no challenge. And, AA's mtDNA does not match the rest of the family. Sorry.


Very true. But I am sorry if anyone feels offended. I do not think bad things about people who want to believe in AA and I don't think I have said anything rude. I was a believer once myself. On the other side I have seen a few incidents were people (including me) opposing Anna's claim have been treated harshly by some supporters. While I do totally believe the DNA tests and I don't really believe anyone could have escaped the brutal massacre, we will always have one glimmer of hope until the 2 missing bodies are found. However, I am sure that even if she did miraculously escape she still wasn't Anna Anderson.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on September 06, 2004, 08:23:04 PM
Quote

I have read several things about Olga A. that were just heartbreaking. The poor thing, she was devastated over the fate of her brother's family and then to have to endure years of torture and reminders as AA drug her case through court. After her last testimony on the witness stand as an old woman not long before her death, she sadly stepped down and had to have AA yelling out "Aunt Olga!" at her.


Annie-

Olga did not testify at any of the AA trials, nor is the quote from the Vorres book about a pretender running up to her and saying "Dear Aunt Olga!" attributed to AA-it was another claimant who made it.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 07, 2004, 06:13:59 AM
I got that from the Kurth book ??? I'll have to go back and check (I don't own the book it's at the library so give me awhile)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Penny_Wilson on September 07, 2004, 02:01:22 PM
In 1959, Judge Backen of the Hamburg Tribunal's Rogatory Commission traveled to Paris, London, New York and Montreal in order to hed testimony from witnesses too elderly or infirm to travel.  Among these were Felix Y, Gleb Botkin, Faith Lavington, Xenia Leeds and a few of the Leuchtenbergs.  

In Toronto, GDss Olga gave what she called an "interview," rather than testimony, being rather angry at having to speak at all.  She met the Judge at the German consulate, and listened to his questions for several hours, refusing to tell the story from the beginning and giving "curt and evasive" answers to only a few questions, including the famous answer that it was "not customary in our family to discuss things overmuch."

In the end, she herself declared the interview over, and left the room.  It was here that she "ran slap into a woman who cried, 'Aunt Olga! Dear Aunt Olga! At last!'"  So this was a Canadian impostor -- or at least an impostor in Canada -- and not AA herself, who was in Germany.

I can understand that Olga must have been very upset at this whole affair, but I don't sympathize with her overmuch, because I don't believe from everything that I have read on the subject -- published and unpublished -- that she was entirely forthcoming or honest.  Romanov family members recall her months of "anguished indecision," and how even afterwards -- as late as 1927 -- she was torn: Grand Duke Andrei wrote to Serge Botkin that year, "I have been able to determine that GDss Olga Alexandrovna takes great interest in this affair, and that despite the fact that she has been influenced to deal with the matter as though it were a complete fabrication,  she still worries over it a good deal... Although [she] sends out letters to affirm that she does not believe in the sick woman, this does not correspond at all to her true feelings and she is suffering severely in spirit as a result."

So Olga clearly had some doubts about something.  And had she been forthcoming about them, perhaps they could have been explored and laid to rest -- but instead, she wrapped herself in family secrecy and ended up blaming Ambassador Zahle for the whole thing.  Not terribly admirable, in my opinion...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 07, 2004, 02:10:11 PM
ANOTHER claimant? Oh boy.

I think the problem with some of the family not commenting was due to the old 'not going to dignify that with a response' thing, which is bad, because it only leaves the door open for people to think all kinds of things. If they had just spoken out, we'd know for sure.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 07, 2004, 09:09:34 PM
Wow Penny!  That is VERY interesting!!! :o  I love it when you post! :D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on September 07, 2004, 11:50:07 PM
One problem in analyzing Olga's behavior in this matter is we can't really ask her questions about what she did and why she did it. If we assume that she meant what she said about AA not being Anastasia (and I do), her behavior can still makes sense if we believe that her family's murder was deeply troubling to her and that even rejecting an imposter was very painful for her. At what point would it have been okay for her to say, enough is enough? For me, I don't blame her for her agitation and frustration - she already said AA was not her niece - why was she being bothered about it again? That's just my take, but I do understand how Penny came up with a different one.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on September 12, 2004, 10:01:07 PM
I think with Anna Anderson, we need to examine the facts, and leave the opinions out of it. Opinions are subjective, facts are not. A fact is a fact. It's concrete.

We can all argue about whether or not Anna Anderson and Anastasia look alike, but this is OPINION, not fact.

And the facts are indisputable. You can dispute opinions, but not facts.

FACT: Anna Anderson's DNA did NOT match that of the Duke of Edinburgh, whose mother's mother was a sister of Alexandra.

FACT: Anna Anderson's DNA DID match that of a relative of the missing Franciszka Schanzkowska.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: plk on September 19, 2004, 01:54:55 PM
Quote

Annie-

Olga did not testify at any of the AA trials, nor is the quote from the Vorres book about a pretender running up to her and saying "Dear Aunt Olga!" attributed to AA-it was another claimant who made it.

Greg King


Actually, Greg, Olga did testify for the AA trials, in 1959 -- I would have to dig out some files to say which month, though March of that year sticks in my mind.  The reason:  it was then that the first Hamburg tribunal (Landesgericht-Hamburg) sent what they call a "rogatory commission" out of Germany to foreign parts, in order to depose witnesses who otherwise couldn't or wouldn't come to Hamburg.  (This was the same season that the judges themselves -- not this "commission" -- went to Unterlengenhardt in the Black Forest to see AA, who also refused to go to Hamburg!)  

Anyhow, lots of witnesses were heard at that time and formally deposed under the standard of German law -- that is, they were obliged to *sign* their testimony after they gave it, but not *swear* to it unless the judges of the tribunal considered it especially significant OR suspected the witnesses of perjury (in which case they could be prosecuted).  In Germany the term for this kind of off-the-stand testimony is "Eidestaettliche Erklaerung," or, more formally, "Deklaration an Eides statt" -- meaning that it is delivered without the oath, but that it *can,* if necessary, lead to a legal summons to appear in court. This keeps all the lawyers and any witness high up on their toes, because they know what they say can be challenged by the judges and the court itself.

Olga was heard at one or the other consulates in Toronto (German or Canadian, I don't remember which) sometime that spring.  Many others too -- Dima and Catherine Leuchtenberg, Xenia Leeds, Yussupov (in Paris), Gleb Botkin, etc.  

It was in Toronto that Olga delivered the quintessential (I would say the "ultimate") remark about the "Anastasia" affair, when she was asked if she had ever "discussed" her experiences of AA (both personal and received) with other members of her family, in particular, her mother, the Dowager Empress.  She replied:  "It was not customary in the House of Romanov to `discuss' things overmuch" -- a trait we can still see and follow in the fortunes of the British royal family, the only dynasty left that still appeals to the sanctity of monarchy.  (I don't count Japan; that isn't my expertise, though I note, as we all do, that Masako, the unfortunate Crown Princess of that country, is suffering the worst she was warned about before she, a "commoner," married Naruhito -- depression, chronic anxiety, paranoia, etc.).

Gyles Brandreth's new book about HM and the Duke of Edinburgh, 'Philip & Elizabeth: Portrait of a Marriage,' fully and openly authorized by them, makes plain the strain between the generations in the House of Windsor.  More, it reveals the strain between siblings, with the Prince of Wales and the Princess Royal directly opposing and contradicting one another about the facts and effects of their upbringing -- the Princess, in particular, rejecting her brother's notion that their mother was "cold" to them in some way.  The Princess, not known for her reticence, declares that Charles's account of their childhood "beggars belief."  It isn't hard -- at least, it shouldn't be hard -- to cast imagination backward 75-80 years, to the time just after the Russian revolution, and think about what the scattered and (literally) decimated Romanov family had to deal with a) as exiles and b) still believing fervently in dynastic law.  In this the whole "Anastasia" affair is contained.

Whether Vorres's account of the "Aunt Olga! Aunt Olga!" episode is true or not, I have no way of knowing; I assume that it is (because this kind of thing happens all the time, and also to me, who am only *associated* with the Romanovs).  

I do know that Eugenia Smith (Smetisko), the "other" Anastasia produced by "LIFE" magazine in 1963, pursued Olga with a particular fervor, as did many fly-by-nights.  I also know that Olga's family -- at least, her elder son, Tikhon Kulikovsky, who wrote to me about it -- hated Vorres's book and its "too journalistic" approach.  Tikhon, with Vorres, put together the "Anna Anderson" material in "The Last Grand Duchess," long after Olga was dead (she died in 1960; Vorres's book appeared in 1964).  

pk
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_W. on September 19, 2004, 02:31:11 PM
I'm very interested in knowing what Tikhon meant by "too journalistic."

Ian Vorres' book just happens to be one of the few books I could find at my local library when I first became interested in the subject of the Romanovs. I found the book highly intriguing, since Vorres was obviously speaking with a woman whose time was limited on this earth, and in order to write a complete account he linked her quoted remarks with his own research and commentary. However, since Vorres made Olga's sections quite clear and distinct from his own, I did not have a problem with that. I feel indebted to Vorres, in fact, for so much is lost when people die, and rarely do people find it important enough to take the time and patience to interview the elderly.

That being said, I would be open to any information those "in the know" could provide re: Tikhon's opinion. Did he feel that his mother had been misquoted? That too much information had been published, or not enough? Or perhaps, since Tikhon apparently had a working relationship with Vorres, a disagreeement evolved re: the style and/or tone of the book, once it was published?

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: plk on September 19, 2004, 03:32:11 PM
Quote
I'm very interested in knowing what Tikhon meant by "too journalistic."

Ian Vorres' book just happens to be one of the few books I could find at my local library when I first became interested in the subject of the Romanovs. I found the book highly intriguing, since Vorres was obviously speaking with a woman whose time was limited on this earth, and in order to write a complete account he linked her quoted remarks with his own research and commentary. However, since Vorres made Olga's sections quite clear and distinct from his own, I did not have a problem with that. I feel indebted to Vorres, in fact, for so much is lost when people die, and rarely do people find it important enough to take the time and patience to interview the elderly.

That being said, I would be open to any information those "in the know" could provide re: Tikhon's opinion. Did he feel that his mother had been misquoted? That too much information had been published, or not enough? Or perhaps, since Tikhon apparently had a working relationship with Vorres, a disagreeement evolved re: the style and/or tone of the book, once it was published?




Janet -- I can't answer all of these questions for you, but some of them I can.  And FWIW, I have "documentation" from Tikhon -- that is, letters he sent to me.

The whole idea of Vorres's book (apart from its ultra-religious/Orthodox intention) was very much "in collaboration with ... ", as a publisher would say.  Not one sentence in it quoting Olga A. bears the slightest resemblance to her actual speech -- this is what Tikhon meant, I think, by it being "too journalistic."  It isn't the facts or the story he objected to, but the distortion of his mother's views by the distortion of her speech (i.e., her thought).  

Vorres has been riding on this thing now for 40 years -- I hold that against no author, God knows, although I do think when "The Last Grand Duchess" was re-issued a few years ago some time and expense might have been taken to update it.  I'm not allowed to do that with my "Anastasia," as the rights are held (apparently in perpetuity) by the publisher -- HOWEVER, a new edition would require my permission and cooperation.

I didn't mean to suggest in my post that there was something "wrong" in Vorres's account -- I only wanted it clear that Olga had been dead for 3 years by the time it appeared, and was never able herself to go over it and make additions, corrections & changes ... and even this I wouldn't point out if people didn't quote that book as if it were a bible of some kind ... which they do ... the Kulikovsky sons (as opposed to their very stable descendants right now in Toronto) both suffered mightily from being "low" members of the Romanov family, as determined by their grandmother and by Olga's sister ... one of the reasons Olga and Col. K. left Europe in 1947 was to get away from that rubbish ... in Vorres's book this is presented in the best possible light ... but the truth is that Grand Duchess Xenia was given a life pension and grace-and-favor by their cousin George V, while Olga was left to starve and milk cows because she had married a commoner -- that is, broken the rules.

You people don't *think* about this enough.  pk
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on September 19, 2004, 07:43:32 PM
Amen, Brother Kurth! I love "TLGD" for many reasons, but it is obvious from looking over the 4th edition that there was a falling out between Vorres and Tikhon Kulikovsky. Over what, I don't know, but he only thanks Guri and that is a glaring ommission. And, there are so many mistakes in photo captioning - I wanted to cry. Bob and I would gladly have overseen this for the publisher for little or no money - just to make sure it was correct. Of course, now it's incorrect forever!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JonC on September 20, 2004, 10:08:53 AM
Penny your reply to Michelle is interesting. Certainlly ears that match  is an indicator.
Do you know when the study was done on her ears and who did it?
Also do you think someone should use modern techniques of facial recognition used today at airports to identify terrorists. Just a thought. If AA's face is going to be an identification marker as you and others believe then why hasn't someone done it. DNA, as Dr. Knight has shown con be manipulated based on the researcher's honesty/interest in the outcome of the results i.e.  Dr. Gill supposedlly adding 'fresh blood' in his team's results and Dr. Knight's hidden pretender. What do you think?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 20, 2004, 10:59:57 AM
Here, here, Jon C.!!! ;)  I'd so LOVE for scientists or whoever to do a facial thing on AA!!! :D  

And BTW, is plk (the YaBB Newbie) Peter Kurth???  I'm only asking because Lisa Davidson called him "Brother Kurth."  Sorry for this annoyance. :-/  :-[
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_W. on September 20, 2004, 11:01:27 AM
Thanks, Mr. Kurth, for your reply to my questions about The Last Grand Duchess. It seems there is always a story behind the story!  ;)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on September 20, 2004, 11:57:53 AM
Yes, I believe the poster "plk" to be our friend, the writer Peter Kurth. If it's not Peter, he writes a great deal like him.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on September 20, 2004, 12:02:06 PM
plk is indeed Mr. Peter Kurth.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: plk on September 20, 2004, 04:58:24 PM
Quote
plk is indeed Mr. Peter Kurth.


Indeed, indeed, I am ... I'm also really fascinated by the wide range of information and opinion here on a subject that has become, for me, much less "sensitive" than it once was.  pk
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on September 20, 2004, 06:10:03 PM
It is so very nice to have you here Mr. Kurth.
I would honestly love to be able to sit down and speak to you about your wonderful books and your experiences with Anna Anderson.It is one thing to read the books but quite another to actually hear things.I would love to hear your knowledge on this fascinating subject.It is so nice to have your insight here.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JonC on September 20, 2004, 06:25:52 PM
'...less sensitive...' plk?....Good for you!

Best regards. JonC.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 20, 2004, 09:07:50 PM
Yay!!  Peter Kurth is AWESOME!!!! :D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on September 21, 2004, 02:31:29 PM
Quote
Penny your reply to Michelle is interesting. Certainlly ears that match  is an indicator.
Do you know when the study was done on her ears and who did it?
 Also do you think someone should use modern techniques of facial recognition used today at airports to identify terrorists. Just a thought. If AA's face is going to be an identification marker as you and others believe then why hasn't someone done it. DNA, as Dr. Knight has shown con be manipulated based on the researcher's honesty/interest in the outcome of the results i.e.  Dr. Gill supposedlly adding 'fresh blood' in his team's results and Dr. Knight's hidden pretender. What do you think?


It amazes me that Anna Anderson still has her supporters. She was exposed by her Polish accent as an imposter.  Shortly after her claims were publicised it was said to AA face '' I agree that severe shock can cause amnesia,  but I didn't realise it could give you a Polish accent''. This  was meant to be a put down and said in an highly sarcastic manner by someone who knew all the Romanovs personally and  who found Anna Anderson and her rediculous claims detestable. Anna Anderson did have a Polish  accent.

She was attempting to steal the identity of a dead Princess. Could anything be so shameless.




Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 21, 2004, 03:54:51 PM
Quote

She was attempting to steal the identity of a dead Princess. Could anything be so shameless.



Yes, it could. The people who helped and encouraged her. IMO they were the most shameful because she was mentally ill. I'm not naming names because I don't know who for sure. But she did have help, she had to, she was not Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on September 21, 2004, 04:41:28 PM
Quote
Yes, it could. The people who helped and encouraged her. IMO they were the most shameful because she was mentally ill. I'm not naming names because I don't know who for sure. But she did have help, she had to, she was not Anastasia.


I totally agree, Annie. One thing I know for sure about AA is that she really believed that she was Anastasia. If somebody was feeding this to her so that they may profit, they deserve to rot.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on September 22, 2004, 08:47:25 AM
Ok

   So if we agree that AA was mental unstable and actually believed herself to be Anastasia--  we still  cannot entirely condemn all of those who surrounded her as being complete con artists. Remember that she was "recognized" at first by another inmate at the asylum, and while some people could have been self interested in the long run I feel that many folks gathered around her because they truly wanted her to be who she claimed to be!

The violence of some of the recriminations and accusations are evidence of just how psychic scarring was attached to this situation. This sort of thing is still going on, even with all the DNA evidence.

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on September 22, 2004, 09:10:38 AM
No one is accusing everyone, but surely some people took advantage of the situation.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on September 22, 2004, 10:37:12 AM
Hail The Goddess Annie  :)

Good point!
Yes I don't doubt that there were people who were far more interested in the suppossed Tzarist fortune than anything else. The paradoxical point lies in finding the threashold at which devotion turns into a career (cruel) or into dementia (crazy). So many people devoted themselves to this lady- a person with severe emotional problems - some looking for the gravy train and some hoping against hope, but I think everyone came away burned.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JonC on September 23, 2004, 08:02:01 AM
Ok I have a new project. I must admit Michelle inspired me. Unfortunately, I don't have the talent to do it.

I wonder if anyone or group of you who posts on this site has the artistic eye that could study the face of AA and compare it to Anastasia N.?

The study has to be completely scientific with all the measurements. i.e. the distance between the eyes, brow to chin, forehead etc., what do you all think? Bob should we start a new thread? DNA be damned and all that!!! I would love to see it done. Best regards. JonC
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 23, 2004, 03:11:35 PM
LOL!  :D  How did I inspire you, JonC? ;D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JonC on September 24, 2004, 07:53:01 AM
To Michelle.

You inspired me because I felt a sense of genuine delight in your post. Unadulterated and genuine, a rare quality. Never change! Best regards. JonC.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 24, 2004, 02:31:51 PM
Awwww!  Jon C, I'm blushing!!!!! :D ;D  Thank you so much!  And--hopefully ::)--I won't change! ;) 8)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on September 26, 2004, 12:52:54 PM
This letter was sent to us by a legitimate forum member, who asked me to post it here, but with the reference to his family omitted. It was written by GD Olga to a cousin of the member. This is the english translation, the originals below:
February, 15th 1928, Hvidore

Dear Miss B***,

Thank you for your nice letter.

Indeed, you understand like us the absurdity of this story! More and more, I see that this story is all about blackmail and money. Let’s say I’m mistaken.

But how can you believe that her maid, Ms Gilliard, who knows her since she was 6 weeks (and Mr Gilliard, who was as well with the beloved family until the moment they were separated in June 1918 could be mistaken?)
It’s ridiculous as well to say that the grand mother and I don’t want to have her close to us.

What a shame to talk like that.

I say openly that my cousin André must have some vile motives to side against us…
Uncle from Hesse is also serene with the fact that the person is not our niece. He has proofs, as you may have seen or read in “L’Illustration” where the photos of the ears were, now it’s a known fact that the ears never change.

Now to answer your question: Mother feels healthy for her age. My heart too, but every unpleasant event (like the renewal of the Tchaik History) disturb my heart and makes it beat too fast. At night this is bothersome because I feel it more.

I’ve had a little flu with fever, two days in bed and sore throat.

Currently I’m working again relentlessly on our aquarelles, producing things about Crimea.
I have some sketches with me here and I’m working out, mixing things together, so much that I have the feeling the day is too short…

I can start at 8:30am, but at 4pm I can’t work anymore, and I have many other duties…

The boys are charming! They prefer German lessons to French lessons!
Together we saw a very interesting movie: “The man without homeland” (American), very patriotic and nice. They were overjoyed!

We send you our best wishes.

Greetings from Mother, Xenia, Emilia Jr, Cecilia and Gustav.

I kiss you heartily, dear Miss B****!

Olga
(http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/forumimages/olgapg1.jpg)(http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/forumimages/olgapg2.jpg)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on September 29, 2004, 08:31:26 AM
Hey guys, I have an idea!  Maybe AA wasn't AN, but she did know the real AN.  Maybe AN didn't want to get any attention because she was scared of KGB agents or what have you, and so got AA to pretend to be her.  AN could've fed her the exact info on everything.  That way all the attention would be on AA instead of the real grand duchess, who wanted to live in secrecy because she was scared.  

Just a thought.  Who knows? It could've happened.  They never found AN's body, so maybe she met up with AA somehow who would've loved the idea of being a royal as opposed to a peasant factory worker, and therefore ensuring AN's safety. I sounds sort of plausible......:-/
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: IlyaBorisovich on September 29, 2004, 05:09:15 PM
I tend to agree with that line of reasoning.  I don't think AA was AN, but I don't think she was FS either.  The thought that she may have known AN is intriguing.  I think this possibility is one that warrents more careful consideration.

Ilya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on September 29, 2004, 11:26:04 PM
Peter Kurth has always been adament that AA was not FS, and he knows enough about the case for me to accept his word on this.

I don't see how AA could have known ANR, she just had little beyond casual contact with anyone who wasn't a close family member.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on September 30, 2004, 03:25:08 AM
Something thats puzzled me for years is why do upper class people - actually look upper class in their facial features and countenance? And how do we recognise this type of person as the authentic article, and how do we instinctively know an imposter when we see one?

To digress I have seen  babies 12 months old in prams who looked common, who looked working  class, who looked worn out and beaten? I have also seen other babies the same age, from middle to upper class homes - who actually  look confident, beaming, happy with life, and in some mysterious way highly representative of their class  and  station. Why is this?.

I suspect its got a lot to do with freedom from stress, contented sleep, better food and more regulalr meals,  and perhaps inner satisfaction, and of course bloodline/s. You then have other traits to consider [not genetic] acquired from their parents, or guardians, and siblings, thiese being their personal expressions, their frown-lines, smile patterns, head and body stance, and their manner/s, bearing, acquired ACCENTS, and timbre  of their voices. You also have the speed, timing  and pitch of their voice patterns to consider.

In  short what I am saying is why do Kings and Queens look like Kings and Queens, Why do Judges look like Judges, and Comedians, Cleaners, and Barrow Boys [spivs] look like who  they are? How is it done, what causes it, and why is it so accurate a gauge to a persons credentials.

The relevance to AA is she had not one ounce of Regal bearing / or upper class acquired  mannerisms in her whole body and this is the give - away clue to her unmasking as an imposter, its as infalliblle as an DNA test. Ears nose, and eyes we all have - but regal bearing, voice and manner, No, we can acquire imitation accents but never the real thing.  

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on September 30, 2004, 04:47:47 AM
Quote
The relevance to AA is she had not one ounce of Regal bearing / or upper class acquired  mannerisms in her whole body and this is the give - away clue to her unmasking as an imposter, its as infalliblle as an DNA test. Ears nose, and eyes we all have - but regal bearing, voice and manner, No, we can acquire imitation accents but never the real thing.  



With respect, I suggest you familiarize yourself a bit more with the facts of the case (perhaps a careful reading of Peter Kurth's book).  Dozens of people who encountered AA-both pro and con-were in a position to evaluate her bearing, and no one at the time concluded she was, if not Anastasia, then at least a young woman of some social standing, due to her manner.  The Duke of Leuctenburg-who did not support her claim-nevertheless described her as "a member of our circles"-i.e., a woman of noble birth.  Had she really not had the behavior and manner to at least move in these circles, don't you think it odd that those who met her would not have at once recognized her as someone not of their milieu?  The fact is, the evidence on her mannerisms and behavior is overwhelming and it supports what the Duke of Leuctenburg and others said.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on September 30, 2004, 09:04:43 AM
Quote

With respect, I suggest you familiarize yourself a bit more with the facts of the case.  Dozens of people who encountered AA-both pro and con-were in a position to evaluate her bearing, and no one at the time concluded she was, if not Anastasia, then at least a young woman of some social standing, due to her manner.  The Duke of Leuctenburg-who did not support her claim-nevertheless described her as "a member of our circles"-i.e., a woman of noble birth.[shortened quote] Greg King


The  last photograph I saw of AA - she looked  downcast. To suggest that this woman was a Royal Princess from one of the most beautiful families in the world is absurb. This DNA report [brief extract] may assist you further.

In 1993 bones found two years before in a shallow grave in Ekaterinenburg in Russia, were identified as the remains of the last Tsar, Tsarina and three of their five children, the royal physician and three servants. To prove relationship with the Romanov family, the DNA extracted and amplified by polymerase chain reaction, was compared to a blood sample provided by Prince Philip, the husband of Queen Elizabeth the second of England, a grand nephew of the tsarina.

Soon after, Anna Anderson Manahan, a US immigrant, deceased in 1984, who had claimed all her live to be the youngest daughter of the last Tsar, Anastasia, supposedly escaped from the bolshevik firing squad, was proved NOT to be who she claimed. Moreover, her DNA very closely matched that of an other immigrant from Pomerania (Germany-Poland), a great nephew of the women Franzisca Schanzkowska. In the 1920s a private investigator of the Grand Duke of Hesse had identified Anna Anderson with Schanzkowska.


[Taken from the Anastasia Hoax]
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on September 30, 2004, 10:46:24 AM
I think that the whole "looking like a royal" or "looking like a commoner" illusion may be a coincidence. There were many royals that were downright ugly and peasants who were beautiful.
I think the rich and high society only look better in general because they have access to the luxuries of life like high-end beauty products and the best medical and dental care.
Of course nowadays things are so drastically differnent. The celebrities we see in tabloids and magazines would not look half as good as they do if they were regular middle-class citizens without the six-figure income and expansive staff waiting on their every need.
There is something to be said for a natural beauty, however, and the Imperial Family had it; they didn't need any pampering. We have to remember that they were in the public eye all the time, and there were probably a lot of poor people that were really good looking too but could not get credit for it because they were peasants.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: IlyaBorisovich on September 30, 2004, 10:50:15 AM
As Greg said, many who met AA were impressed with her refined bearing.  While she may not be descended from the Romanovs, could she perhaps be related to one of their retainers (meaning by that not just the ones who died beside them in Ekatrinburg)?.  She might have been related to a lady-in-waiting, or someone else who would've been in the palace on a regular basis.  That would account, at least partially for her memories without having had anyone "feed" them to her.  I still think that this is a plausible possibility that should not be dismissed out-of-hand.

Ilya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on September 30, 2004, 12:42:59 PM
Quote
[SHORT QUOTE]

There is something to be said for a natural beauty, however, and the Imperial Family had it; they didn't need any pampering. We have to remember that they were in the public eye all the time, and there were probably a lot of poor people that were really good looking too but could not get credit for it because they were peasants.


Thank you for supplying the two words I need to sum up my curiosity led search for natural Beauty. The quest for and acquirance of. Very  few have it, and studying the famous  photograph of the Princessess you might ask yourself ''Why do  all  five sisters look so glamourous''. So natural?

The real tragedy is this family were murdered  by a Political monster. Lenin, yes Lenin. What a pity they were not rescued. Anderson knew  full well what  she was doing and must have got great joy out of the people she hoodwinked. Was this Cinderellas revenge?

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on September 30, 2004, 12:53:46 PM
The Romanovs were not murdered, either directly or indirectly, or by the orders of, Lenin.

Typical fluffball remark.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on September 30, 2004, 01:03:24 PM
Quote
The Romanovs were not murdered, either directly or indirectly, or by the orders of, Lenin. Typical fluffball remark.


All the books I have read claim the decision was taken at the very highest level with Lenin being the surpreme decision maker and  consulted at  all times. His nod was vital. Lenin feared a Royalist revival of fortunes.

Brief Except from book review: The fate of the Romanovs by King and Wilson [Authors]

At the time of the Romanovs' murder, most of Russia was controlled by various anti-Bolshevik forces, who in fact won control of Yekaterinburg nine days later. King and Wilson's hypothesis that the Romanovs were killed by local Bolsheviks to prevent their possible liberation by White forces has some plausibility but is still not conclusive. They do not totally invalidate the claims by the head of the "execution" squad, Yakov Yurovsky, nor his accomplice Mikhail Medvedev (alias Kudrin) who both wrote of instructions (permission?) to kill the Romanovs coming not from Yekaterinburg itself but from Perm, the closest centre in direct telegraphic contact with Moscow.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on September 30, 2004, 01:11:52 PM
Please cite the books you have read.

The Ural Soviet took the decision to kill the Romanovs.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on September 30, 2004, 01:14:20 PM
Can you even cite the author of the book review and the publication in which it appeared?

I know they're busy people, but I certainly hope Greg or Penny can respond to this.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on September 30, 2004, 01:49:56 PM
Quote
Can you even cite the author of the book review and the publication in which it appeared? I know they're busy people, but I certainly hope Greg or Penny can respond to this.


There are numerous books all claiming that it was Lenin who ordered the killings. The following two cites I  found in less than 2 minutes by doing a simple Google Search.

From: Fathom – The Source for On- line learning.

The revolutionary ferment of 1917, following two years of military defeats at a terrifying human cost, brought the reign of the Romanovs to an end. Following the collapse of the Provisional Government and the Bolshevik coup in November of 1917, Nicholas II and his family were sent into internal exile and were eventually killed, in July 1918, on Lenin's orders

The Unknown Lenin is the fourth volume in Yale University Press's 'Annals of Communism' published under a joint Russo-American board and with the cooperation, in this case, of the Russian Centre for the Preservation and Study of documents of Recent History. If there were any fellow-travellers for the Evil Empire left this book should become required reading. It shows that it was Lenin, not Stalin or Hitler, who began state terrorism, government sponsored genocide, executions without trials, state sponsored starvation, concentration camps, and the use of mental asylums as prisons. Here are 122 documents from the 4000 in Lenin's 'Secret Archive'. They were examined by Prof. Pipes, the first Western scholar to see them, and reveal the truth about Lenin: the orders to kill farmers, push Jews and Ukrainians 'to the front, not letting them into government agencies', to help left-wing British intellectuals by lying and to destroy churches and murder priests. The editor is one of the most important living historians of twentieth century Russia and this book is one of the most valuable ever published with regard to the horrors of Russian communism.

If you consider Lenin blameless in this matter that is your right and perogative but please read again this item; It shows that it was Lenin, not Stalin or Hitler, who began state terrorism, government sponsored genocide, executions without trials, state sponsored starvation, concentration camps, and the use of mental asylums as prisons. A disgraceful man indeed.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on September 30, 2004, 02:13:52 PM
   Perhaps we are simply discussing semantics ...the Romanovs were not 'murdered" - they were executed. Soldiers killed  in World War I were considered casualties of war they were not "murder victims".(Of course - if they were strangled by a corporal over some disagreement in the mess hall ...that might prove a different issue  ;))

   BB while I would suggest that some of differences between the "wretched" little ones in prams vs the beaming, healthy uppercrust babies might have more to do with a good diet, a loving homelife and proper health care, rather than any inborn "noble" tendencies.  I have been witness to far too many examples of upperclass twits in arms! Some very nice, very well bred but ugly "right honourables" have sadly produced dreadfully plain children. Are they less noble?
   Confidence is a paradox. Once you acquire some; it gets easier to gather more and more, and with that confidence - the head held high, the eyes widen, the cheeks bloom and the posture becomes more and more graceful. The few photos that I have seen of AA do not suggest any great beauty or grave dignity. I can only perceive a woman who's eyes seem utterly lost. If others found her dignified that is their "oppinion" and oppinion is a  thing that cannot be easily measured or quantified...
One mans beauty is another mans beast.

r.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on September 30, 2004, 02:57:29 PM
Not even the BlueBlood Brits I know would buy this "inbred superiority" claptrap.
As for state terrorism, that political tool was used long before Lenin. He hardly invented the Spanish Inquisition.
But- the victor writes the history books, right or wrong. It is also hardly surprising to see anti-Lenin writers recieve support from anti-Lenin states.
This is, however all off-topic to say the least.
[a dedicated anti-revisionist revisionist-]\Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on September 30, 2004, 03:48:19 PM
The babies in prams differences is a ''worth thinking about hobby'' of mine.. That it  occurs is provable and its seen everywhere. My daughter is a 1st year primary school teacher, she told me she knew instinctively which social class her new charges were from, which town areas, good, poor, or bad,  and she  even had a clue from their overall demeanor as to their future learning prospects and classroom attitude towards her and others.

This was on topic  isofar as I was arguing that all the Princesses including Anastasia were  stamped with a birth - right seal of quality, that in some respects we all are stamped, and its almost impossible to shake off. It can be done  and  great actors from good homes - but humble beginnings prove it. In the case of the Russian Princesses no acting was required, they had the stamp of authenticity about them all, whilst Anderson did not. My remark Cinderellas Revenge was both apt and true.

In the British Royal Family the surpreme Royal Figure was Queen Mary of Teck. A comparision study of her photograph with her Russian cousins might convince you that my point contains some merit. They are  not superior, simply naturally beautiful, with grace and bearing.

Please note that I am not stating that good brains and good looks are companion qualities, they are not, all I am saying is that  Anderson was on close examination  not a Romanov. The DNA result simply confirmed everyones suspicions about her.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on September 30, 2004, 04:43:38 PM
Something Blue wrote:
There are numerous books all claiming that it was Lenin who ordered the killings. The following two cites I  found in less than 2 minutes by doing a simple Google Search.

*****
There are numerous books all claiming that it was not Lenin who ordered the killings.  (There is not an echo in here).


From: Fathom – The Source for On- line learning.

"On line learning"?? How scholarly.

And this...
The Unknown Lenin is the fourth volume in Yale University Press's 'Annals of Communism' published under a joint Russo-American board and with the cooperation, in this case, of the Russian Centre for the Preservation and Study of documents of Recent History. If there were any fellow-travellers for the Evil Empire left this book should become required reading. It shows that it was Lenin, not Stalin or Hitler, who began state terrorism, government sponsored genocide, executions without trials, state sponsored starvation, concentration camps, and the use of mental asylums as prisons. Here are 122 documents from the 4000 in Lenin's 'Secret Archive'. They were examined by Prof. Pipes, the first Western scholar to see them, and reveal the truth about Lenin: the orders to kill farmers, push Jews and Ukrainians 'to the front, not letting them into government agencies', to help left-wing British intellectuals by lying and to destroy churches and murder priests. The editor is one of the most important living historians of twentieth century Russia and this book is one of the most valuable ever published with regard to the horrors of Russian communism.

***Did you copy that from the end covers?

If you consider Lenin blameless in this matter that is your right and perogative but please read again this item; It shows that it was Lenin, not Stalin or Hitler, who began state terrorism, government sponsored genocide, executions without trials, state sponsored starvation, concentration camps, and the use of mental asylums as prisons. A disgraceful man indeed. [/quote]

I must disagree with you.  "State terrorism," and "Government sponsored genocide," etc, etc, goes back *quit3* a bit farther than any of the names you mentioned.
And, sorry, but this is a debate I am not interested in continuing, as you can do nothing to change my mind and I've many other things to do.  So, please do not interpret silence as agreement.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on September 30, 2004, 07:37:23 PM
British_Blue,

I understand what you are trying to say about reconizing a persons background because I usually can when I'm standing  in a crowd or walking somewhere.  Of course, this is generally speaking.  There are some people you'd never be able to tell their background.

I assume this is a nack which some have and that some people don't have this nack or some people don't think about it or  care to have this nack.

Please,  don't send me a post stating that you don't care if a person are rich or poor.  No one has mentioned someone was better than anyone else.  

Here is an example of how someone knows the background of another.  In this case it was a stranger telling me:

I remember going to Europe the first time.  The people in the country knew my husband and I were from the USA even before we spoke.   And,  I'll never forget the answer I received on the day I finally asked some lady in a store how did she know we were from the USA.  I expected her to say it was our clothes or .... well, I wasn't sure what....  She said in English which was better than mine,  "Even before you said anything I knew.  It's your teeth."  Hmmmm,  so that was it.  Simple.  So,  the rest of that vacation,  I noticed the teeth of everyone.  And,she was right.  95% of the the people from USA had straight and well cared for teeth whereas many of the Euopeans,  some which were high in the social ladder in thier country, had a crooked tooth or teeth which never knew braces and retainers.

I'm sure this example isn't as true, now, but it was back in the dark ages  ;)

As for Ana Anderson acting like a Grand Duchess,  if I had known her,  my views may have been different or the same as Kurth.  If she did act like a GD. does it mean she was one or was clever and had learned how to act like one?  Course,  I have to think of the stage play which was later made into a movie ..... Having a senior moment.  Can't think of the name.  It's the one where the young woman who is from the lower class is taught by a professor because of a bet  to act like an upper class women and she learned to speak the proper British English and act like a proper lady.  My Fair Lady?  Yes,  I think it was.  Anyway,   the young woman did, he won his bet.....  But in  truth,  there is more than speech and clothes ....  It's a way of thinking or not thinking  [all depends on how one views it].    And, there are the small things....  Things a GD would have done without giving thought to do....

I think,  Ana's true self would have been best discovered in the first six months, thereafter, since she was around upper class, she would have changed and discovered how to act....  

For her lanuage,  I don't recall what Ana Anderson spoke or refused to speak.  Some say she had a Polish accent.  I know when I'm in the south or in a foreign country,  I easily pick up their accent.  Some people are good minics.  

Just the other day I read an article about people who, while young,  learn various lanuages.  They usually end up writing with a mix ....  Only adults can learn to separate ......  I remember my family, who spoke German, sprinkled with Russian and a attempt at the American English,  created our own language.

Even, now,  my English sentences are often reverse showing my German background.  


AGRBear

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on September 30, 2004, 08:54:10 PM
    Agrbear...
   Perhaps the person who "knew that you were an american" was able to tell this because so many americans travel with two or three expensive cameras dangling around their necks, The average yank tourists also tend to wear lots of t-shirts and shorts when traveling abroad and they almost always carry brightly pattern umbrellas and raincoats. (this is - of coarse- a generalization.) ;)l

   BB-- I am so sorry that your daughter can already tell the "uppercrust' from the "working class"--she will no doubt continue to perpetuate this distinction by subtely encouraging the "proper children" and pay less attention to the "other" ones -- thus creating a self-
fulfilling prophecy. A sad prophecy - I might add.
   The comments that you have made regarding the "inborn" "inheirent" worth of the Romanovs as "to the manor born" not only perpetuate sterioytypes about them, these remarks perpetuate steriotypes about the English, as people obsessed with class conciousness and social caste systems. As an Englishwoman abroad, I find this steriotype particularly perjorative.

R.

PS--You don't have to try AA all over again, BB ...most of us already know the facts.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on September 30, 2004, 10:16:04 PM
Quote
   Agrbear...
    Perhaps the person who "knew that you were an american" was able to tell this because so many americans travel with two or three expensive cameras dangling around their necks, The average yank tourists also tend to wear lots of t-shirts and shorts when traveling abroad and they almost always carry brightly pattern umbrellas and raincoats. (this is - of coarse- a generalization.) ;)l


You are missing the point.  What I was trying to say,  there are certain things which tell other people who we are.  In your case, you see "yank tourists" wearing "t-shirts", "shorts" with an umbrella .... etc. .

I do not fit your sterio type of what you think an American looks like as a tourtist.   It was our teeth.

However, you are proving the point British_Blue and I were trying to say.  You can reconize certain people, in this case the young to 40 year old "yank tourists".

I think that Ana Anderson's early actions would have told some of us that she was or wasn't  a GD.   All we can go on is what he said/ he said.  So,  I'm not sure I can gain a conclusion either way?

Your right,  I didn't mention the DNA,  but that's something some believe, at this time not then and the times we're talking about.

Course, this opens a pandora's box,  if Ana Anderson was SF and  not Anastasia then she was a good enough actress to convince some that she was the  GD.    Where does that take us?  Did she do this on her own?  Or was this something more than just a sick Polish factory worker with delusions of granduer?   Can we turn toward the Bolshviks who would have had more reasons than anyone to create a Ana Anderson who would be rejected?  Especially since they couldn't find her alive or dead.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: pushkina on September 30, 2004, 10:17:50 PM
Quote
   Agrbear...
    Perhaps the person who "knew that you were an american" was able to tell this because so many americans travel with two or three expensive cameras dangling around their necks, The average yank tourists also tend to wear lots of t-shirts and shorts when traveling abroad and they almost always carry brightly pattern umbrellas and raincoats. (this is - of coarse- a generalization.) l


hi rsskya,

you may be joking with the above but it's really true about the teeth. as an american living abroad now amongst other western ex-pats, you really can tell americans, not by clothes, taste, or political behavior but by shining, gleaming and perfectly straight...teeth. outerwear such as you've described i've never seen (even in stores at home) and perhaps not eeryon has the l.l.bean catalogue but they all had a dentist!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 01, 2004, 02:51:42 AM
Quote
 [Short Quote] I am so sorry that your daughter can already tell the "uppercrust' from the "working class"--she will no doubt continue to perpetuate this distinction by subtely encouraging the "proper children" and pay less attention to the "other" ones -- thus creating a self-
fulfilling prophecy. A sad prophecy - I might add.

PS--You don't have to try AA all over again, BB ...most of us already know the facts.


If you read my post you will see I said my daughter notes the obvious social class of her charges, thats all I said. Its unfair to her, and to all teachers, for you to  jump in here and add 'that she then will perpetuate  this distinction by payling less attention  to the other ones [the serfs presumably] This is  uncalled for and it does not happen.

Others have pointed out Britains  class system. Yes its still with us. It will remain with us for decades. For whats its worth all nations have class systems with America heading the League. Being a newbie I simply answered points made in posts, to some this was seen as  if I was trying to educate you. Heaven forbid.

I would like to thank ABBY,  RSKKYA, AND AGRBEAR, in your posts you all said something which  I had not heard before, was completely unaware of, or better still was food for thought. So thank you.

Does AA stand for Apple Annie, it should, because thats exactly who she was - an Apple Annie person.

To close Anderson was an imposter, perhaps she was copying The Tichbornne Claimant, whose  own Mother recognised him has her dead Son and heir [He was trying to claim the family estate - but got unmasked]  When Anderson was fished out of the canal maybe she tried to elicit sympathy by exaggerating her difficult life, and being a psyscho she got carried away and added ''I am an exile / escaping Grand Duchess'' touches to her alibi.

Anderson was simply a poor refugee from Poland , a country renowned for its great actors. Her claims got her to America and fame, and good luck to her. There's one born every minute and she proved it. [W C Fields]   


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Olga on October 01, 2004, 03:12:19 AM
Quote

I suspect its got a lot to do with freedom from stress, contented sleep, better food and more regulalr meals,  .and perhaps inner satisfaction, and of course bloodline/s.


That is crap. Somebody's personality is not determined thruogh the 'blueness' of their blood.  Do they have 'inner satisfaction' because they know they're better than everyone else because of their social position in life?

British Blue, your ideas about breeding, ancestry and social rank are archaic and ignorant.

If I go around acting like a snobby cow would I appear to be upper-class?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 01, 2004, 05:23:31 AM
Quote


British Blue, your ideas about breeding, ancestry and social rank are archaic and ignorant. If I go around acting like a snobby cow would I appear to be upper-class?


Yes, you most definitely would. I couldn't get away with it, but perhaps you can. Why not try going around ''acting like a snobby cow'' - and see what happens.

For starters, may I suggest that you practice each day clicking your fingers in an impatient manner, this  exercise  will get you started on the slippery slope of snobbery. May I suggest that your first attempts at adopting an air of grace and favour Regality are practised on waiters and chambermaids, then if you must, work your way up to Managers and Legal Advisors and of course your Racehorse trainer and retained Jockeys.

I'm not certain of the correct code, maybe its one finger  click for a waiter and two finger clicks for a Manager, so you will have to ask around. A  word of warnig Jockeys  can be rather temperamental so don't overdo it.

My sister worked in one of Londons Grand Hotels and being in reception and the Senior Housekeeper [20 years] she encountered real arrogance and uncivilty - it goes with the job. You must admit that quite a lot of snobby cows do play up in hotels, and my sister has a collection of ''Snobby Cow storys and anecdotes'' I could supply you with so you don't fail at the first hurdle and make a fool of yourself.   

Perhaps AA did not have this streak towards others, and because of this maybe it unmasked her. Maybe she give just one finger click when it was the custom to give two. Please let us all know how you get on. Who knows you might even be able to pose as Anna Andersons daughter and start a new round of 'wouldn't it be fun hoaxes''.


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Candice on October 01, 2004, 09:11:54 AM
BB, I think you do have a point.  There is definitely a difference that can be noted. It doesn't have anything to do with money or how much you spend on yourself, not even if you're a "snobby cow".  It is just there.  Unexplainable.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 01, 2004, 11:12:39 AM
    In all charity, we ought to remember that Anna Anderson (or AA) was originally 'discovered' in a mental asylum, so exactly how well mentally ill people can recognize "an inheirent nobility of nature" may well be questioned!
   As to the dignity issue...no doubt that in with every passing year, just as AA's delusions grew, so also grew her own confidence and the confidence of her true supporters in her new identity. Its the paradox of confidence again.

   For the record I have never believed that AA was Anastasia. She was a deeply troubled woman who was too often in the hands of certain individuals with "personal agendas" as well as outright con artists. I do find it interesting to  examine the arguments made about her both pro and con, and to examine the psychology of  "devotion" of some of her believers.

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 01, 2004, 02:07:16 PM
ANNA ANDERSON AND THE TICHBORNE CLAIMANT.

Please read these brief excerpts for your self and see if you can find a connection. Points 1- 7 are pertinent.

The Tichborne Claimant litigation was a long and complex legal matter, as the court battle unfolded it generated immense interest around the world. Dr. Kenealy[for the Defendant] tabled all the familiar evidence in his clients favor, centrally the identification of the plaintiff by the dowager Lady Tichborne, arguing that a mother always knows who her child is. The opposing council rebutting by declaring the aged dowagers recollection was faulty, they showed how she had told journalists, prior to Orton's arrival on the scene, that Sir Roger was 32 when he was 36 and had very light brown hair when it was in fact black (Orton's was brown with hints of red) She said he had a round face when photographs show he had a long thin head. They also pointed out that once the dowager had met the claimant her memories of Sir Roger changed to harmonize with him.

Tichborne attorneys wasted no time and systematically dismantled the Claimant's intricate web of lies, pointing out:

When interviewed by Sir Roger's former French tutor, Monsieur Chatillon, about his alleged early life in France he had to be questioned in English as he had forgotten French, his first language. Nor could he remember any incidents of his alleged youth - not a single thing he had seen or done: names of playmates, dog names, books he had read, music he liked, games he had played - and although Sir Roger had constantly played chess with his cousins and friends the claimant did not know how, or even the names of pieces.

Orton's action collapsed after 102 days in court. He was charged with perjury and sent to trial - found guilty after 188 days on trial, the claimant was ordered to stand as Justice Mellor pronounced sentence. For perjury charged in the first count of the indictment he was sentenced to seven years penal servitude, a similar term for perjury charged in the second count including forgery of the Tichborne Bonds. The two terms to run consecutively, amounting to a sentence of 14 years penal servitude. By the time the tide had turned and he came to realize his deception was approaching its finale he later wrote he felt relieved that the years of pretense, of having to be on guard and show were finally over and as the judge convicted him he felt the weight of the world lifted from his shoulders.

In the wake of his legal defeat many of Orton's supporters remained loyal as ever, refused to believe they had been duped and believed an establishment conspiracy was at the root of his failure.

Arthur Orton was not the first or last of the world's great impostors. Before him was Carl Frederick Naundorph, a German impostor who claimed to be the Dauphin, son and heir of King Louis and Marie Antoinette who perished in the dungeons of the French Revolution. After Orton came Anna Anderson, another German impostor and fantasist who claimed to be the Grand Duchess Anastasia, daughter of Russia's Tsar Nicholas II, who was murdered with his family in the wake of the Russian Revolution. Neither could speak their alleged mother tongues and both achieved equal if not greater fame and controversy than their colleague Arthur Orton. All had a similar modus operandi and were able to convince scores of respected people they were who they claimed using the following seven tools of misinformation:

1. He/she possessed vague but supposedly fabulous memories only the real person should have known, he/she possessed physical attributes and/or corporeal blemishes the person they claimed to have been is known to have had.
2. He/she had a highly colourful account of narrowly escaping death, lived a meek life in seclusion before deciding to right a wrong by coming forward to claim their name.
3. A blow to the head, illness (brain fever, alcoholism, syphilis, etc) or other impairment resulting in memory loss was advanced to explain why claimant could not answer specific questions relating to his/her alleged past when questioned by authorities.
4. Within their entourage of supporters are associates or servants of families or dynasties they claimed membership, who acknowledge him/her as authentic and solicit donations from sympathetic people to support the claimant. The wealthy are enticed (swindled) to invest in legal efforts to gain legal recognition, and offered a relative percentage of imagined monies and estates to be placed in the claimants hands.
5. An elaborate conspiracy involving faceless groups, governments, aristocratic and/or royal houses was claimed to have been involved in a cover-up, explaining why tangible evidence never existed (they stole, destroyed or frustrated it). Establishment backed conspiracy theories were claimed to have been the reason why bids to gain recognition in courts failed.
6. It is fallaciously claimed and endlessly repeated as truth that deceased members of dynastic groups involved in opposing the claimant had secretly confessed that he/she was genuinely whom he/she claimed, further that opposition was due to some nefarious political agenda or financial motivation.
7. The true identity of the claimant was discovered, relatives were found to substantiate who he/she truly was. The claimant came from the lowest socio-economic level in society and his/her supporters claimed such a person wouldn't possess the education or social skills to convince high born personages that he/she was born on their level, they also alleged that persons claiming them as relatives were bribed to do so.

THE CLAIMANT'S CONFESSION.

"I could not get away from those who were infatuated with me and firmly believed I was the Real Sir Roger... Of course I knew perfectly well I was not, but they made so much of me, and persisted in addressing me as Sir Roger, that I forgot who I was and by degree I began to believe I really was the rightful owner of the estates. If it had not been that I was feted and made so much of by the colonialists in Sydney I should have taken the boat and gone the rest of my days to Panama with my brother."

Extracts from the Tichborne Claimant / See books / www articles / contains work of others/

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 01, 2004, 07:55:58 PM
BB

  Well while there are certain obvious similarities between this case and that of AA these are some signficant differences.
  For example - the erzatz Tichbourne was not mentally unstable and suicidal when he made his claims, while Anna A was in an asylum when she was "discovered".
  I was under the impression that 'Sir Rodger' was really after an inheiritence and while that's what it eventually turned into with AA, I don't think that she had the presence of mind to plan out a cohesive scheme from the beginning. I'm not justifiing her actions, I simply feel that she was as much a victim as the grieving royals.

  I do agree with you about the importance of constant reinforcement for the individual from "believers" to maintain the mythic role.

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 02, 2004, 02:44:46 AM
Quote
BB

   Well while there are certain obvious similarities between this case and that of AA these are some signficant differences.
   For example - the erzatz Tichbourne was not mentally unstable and suicidal when he made his claims, while Anna A was in an asylum when she was "discovered".
   I was under the impression that 'Sir Rodger' was really after an inheiritence and while that's what it eventually turned into with AA, I don't think that she had the presence of mind to plan out a cohesive scheme from the beginning. I'm not justifiing her actions, I simply feel that she was as much a victim as the grieving royals. I do agree with you about the importance of constant reinforcement for the individual from "believers" to maintain the mythic role.  R.


R. Please don't make the mistake of assuming that because someone is mental, or found in a Mental Hospital that they are mad, or somehow weak, feeble minded, or incapable of handling their affairs. They usually are not, or to be put it another way 'they very rarely are''. Anna might well of been the Joan Crawford type, she might have been admitted into this hospital under the pretence of mental illness - whilst in actual
fact all she really wanted was a warm bed for the night? Maybe it was cold outside and she was unemployed and homeless and had no money and this was her motive. And motiVe one, always leads onto motive/s 2 - 3 -4, and so on, and maybe Anna was simply a remarkable scrounger. A survivor.

I am always suspicious of suicides who get fished out of rivers. Did she fill her pockets with stones, did she tie a weight around her neck or body, did she jump off an high-bridge into the  rivers deepest spot, did she post a goodbye cruel life note, was it high tide, was it a proper river, or nothing more than a deep stream, and how come she did not drown.

If i was committing suicide I would at least give some great thought to it, whilst my American cousins no doubt would arm themselves with a paperback on '' Foders Guide to Rivers and Canals for Would be Suicides'' 3rd edition. It wouldn't be a bad idea for us to re-enact the suicide and maybe we could find someone to volunteer to be Anna, who would you suggest? do you know some old Bolshevik maybe who might take on the suicidal role of Anna and jump into a river whilst we take notes. ?  

The suicide might have been carefully calulated by Anna, perhaps this staged suicide is a good clue to her future behaviour patterns. All we know is that she ended up in a warm and secure environment and didn't die. Whilst poor Anastasia did die - and this is in some respects the wickedness and sadness of it all.

You could ask yourself did AA petition the Soviet Government for details of her alleged families remains and whereaqbouts, did she offer to have them reburied, did she write to the Soviet Embassy protesting at what happened, or ask to visit the area to lay a wreath or have someone do so on her behalf.

Did she make a nuisance of herself in someway, this being in the bereaved survivor way you would expect. Did she hold protest meetings and become a rallying head figure  for the Russian Nobility. No she did not, AA, sat at home and  smirked at how clever she was and what fools some people are.

Just put yourself in the real Anastsia shoes, your family, your brothers and sisters have been brutally killed  and your estates stolen, how would you  contain your anger at the injustice done to you? And, incidently, would the real Anastsia marry a commoner, wouldn't AA have been invited to the homes of all the Crowned heads of Europe if her claims  were true. Did our HM The Queen ever contact her, or her Cousin Phillip, or she them, so there's your answer from the UK end.  

Lenin's men killed her and her family, acting on his express orders, its immaterial whether they were executed, murdered, wiped out, or silenced.

I'm expecting an AA book soon, or TV mini series [a weepy] Howard  Keel for Prince Charming and Julie Andrews look alikes in the parts. Does anyone have some good suggestions for the theme song title?

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Olga on October 02, 2004, 05:25:03 AM
Quote
do you know some old Bolshevik maybe who might take on the suicidal role of Anna and jump into a river whilst we take notes. ?  


And you would accidently turn it into a murder reenactment?

Quote
Lenin's men killed her and her family, acting on his express orders, its immaterial whether they were executed, murdered, wiped out, or silenced.


The Ural Soviet acted by themselves. Period.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 02, 2004, 08:05:04 AM
Olga, are you aware that there are three basic forms of finger clicking The first is the here-boy, a command whose origin expresses the cry of a Royal personage whose forbears have been natural rulers for many centuries. The second form is the take-it-away– now- will - you, this being a snappy informal command, you then have the American, super fast double click, used in Las Vegas and said without humour.

Whilst performing the Russian disciplined finger click, the clicker must create a rhythmic and quite intricate finger movement, whilst at the same time saying the words rats, rats, rats, three times under their breath. The intention is to project a feeling of annoyance at the service offered. The whole object of finger snapping is to accentuate the difference between you, and those of a lesser milieu.

You will need to practice graceful movements of the arms, and shoulders and, in particular, the expressive twists and turns of the hands from the wrists to the fingers. And, to achieve a high level of satisfaction with finger-clicking you must develop great skill in manipulating others to do your bidding. That having been said, it should be encouraged for your friends and especially your partner to adopt a subservient role towards you. This can always be encouraged by a few swift kicks under the table if they happen to forget their place.  

OLGA YOU MENTIONED FRIEND LENIN [ Dear Darling little Lennie]

I have some pages from one of Lenin’s Speeches; the following remarks are taken from it [translation]

Comrades the Golden rule of Communism is: Treat a serf like a serf. When a place gets robbed, it's always a Politician with the most knowledge of the place. When someone gets shot, it's a Policy decision and not payback time. When you get a bad vibe about a comrade, something will go down, so strike first / kill without hesitation.  

Intellectuals tend to invoke the Law; they make our people hesitant, so kill them, or throw them in jail.

"One way or another, our Commissars must be behind every killing, every mugging, dissapearance and robbery. We must expect family, friends, neighbours, and even children to inform on each other.

Political Assassination must be encouraged.Just  remember everybody knows who the released prisoners are, they see the missing teeth, the body sores, the starved expressions and glossy eyes, this suggests we treat them like trash in the Lubianka, so don’t spit on them and don't beat the crap out of them for no good reason. In fact don't release them its too dangerous. Write that down will you all - No More releases.

Brothers remember you can only flaunt so much wealth before this attracts attention. So keep a low profile. Remember that buying brand-new cars, desks, dachas, and weapons is not good for our image. If anyone wants to be famous then popp them before they cause us trouble.

The only way we can remain in power is to kill the protestors. So give protestors just 3 months maximum then its time to liquidate them before they get any ideas. This Anna Anderson dame  is she one off ours, or one of theirs. I told those idiots to kill the lot, and now we have this loudmouth running to the Press. I just hope she’s not genuine. Find out who counted the corpses and shoot him for  safety.
[Lenin]
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 02, 2004, 10:54:11 AM
It seems I read something very recently that did finally make a link between Lenin and the murders. And yes, I say MURDERS. You may all what happened to the Tsar an execution in a political way, but the brutal way those girls were slaughtered is nothing short of murder most vile.

Lenin always vowed to kill all the Romanovs. He was 17 and taking his final exams when his brother was hung for terrorist activiites and he swore then revenge on the Romanovs, he often said he wanted them all dead. All, meaning, he had no feeling for the kids either. Some of you Bolshy sympathizers give him too  much credit. He was a creep. The only reason he isn't remembered as more of a monster is that Stalin so far surpassed him. But he will never be excused.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 02, 2004, 10:59:46 AM
According to the book "Last Act of a Tragedy" by Russian researchers who went into the long secret Bolshevik archives, there is no "smoking gun" evidence Lenin ordered the murders. All of the telegrams and documents show that the Ural Soviet was acting on their own, and that Lenin approved the murders after the fact.
If anyone has documentation otherwise, please share it with us.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 02, 2004, 11:11:07 AM
If there had been orders from Lenin, quite possibly it was through Yurovsky who had been in Moscow.  It is known that he had close contact with Lenin before he returned to Perm and then Ekaterinburg.

If a verbal order, than there would not have been a document or telegram to trace.

If someone else knows if anyone else from the Ural Soviets or the CHEKA had visited Lenin, then they may have been carried verbal orders along with some document stating that a person or persons were to follow the barriier's orders signed by Lenin.

Once the deed was done,  Lenin couldn't be blamed.  Lenin was clever in keeping his hands clean of many  other deeds, why not this one.

AGRBear

PS British Blue, just saw this and thought I'd highlight it:

Quote
....[in part]

OLGA YOU MENTIONED FRIEND LENIN [ Dear Darling little Lennie]

I have some pages from one of Lenin’s Speeches; the following remarks are taken from it [translation]
....This Anna Anderson dame  is she one off ours, or one of theirs. I told those idiots to kill the lot, and now we have this loudmouth running to the Press. I just hope she’s not genuine. Find out who counted the corpses and shoot him for  safety.
[Lenin]


Do you have a date on "Lennie's" speech?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 02, 2004, 11:15:21 AM
AGR,
Please before you make these speculations, READ the book. There is no evidence to support your speculations.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 02, 2004, 11:41:11 AM
Quote
According to the book "Last Act of a Tragedy" by Russian researchers who went into the long secret Bolshevik archives, there is no "smoking gun" evidence Lenin ordered the murders. All of the telegrams and documents show that the Ural Soviet was acting on their own, and that Lenin approved the murders after the fact.
If anyone has documentation otherwise, please share it with us.


Last month I bought six books because they were recomended  on various threads and I'm sorry to say "THE LAST ACT A TRAGEDY" was not one of them.

From everything else I've read,  I can understand how some would come up with the conclusion that the Ural Soviets acted on their own, however,  Comrad Yurovsky wasn't just acting under the Ural Soviets,  he was in direct contact with Lenin.

So,  since I'm keeping an open mind here,  what did this book have to say about Yurovsky?

AGRBear

PS  I thought Yurovsky's relationship with Lenin was well known.  Unfortuantely,  I  don't have a good enough memory to remember which books and the pages so I'll have to take a look and hope I can find the right box.... Remember my books are in boxes.  I think Lenin and he met in Germany....  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on October 02, 2004, 12:03:16 PM
"Bolshie sympathasiers"??? Heavy shades of McCarthyism with a touch of Mary Whitehouse do I hear ?
Sure, Lenin had no use for the Romanovs, obviously few did. There was no great effort to save them by their "allies" was there?.
The Ayatollah spent more effort and expense in chasing down Pahlavis.  And it was not like the Romanovs were not sitting ducks.  Lenin [and Stalin] went after the money, far more productive than more dead Romanovs.
And that speech ! Loosely translated would be generous indeed. Just where did that come from? Sounds more like JEdgar Hoover than VI Lenin to me. Speaking of whom, that man had little use for AA either.
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 02, 2004, 12:24:54 PM
First,
Yurovsky was not in direct communication with Lenin. His direct contact was with Sverdlov (chairman of Central Exec Committe in Moscow). The military commander of Ekaterinburg, Goloshchyokin went to Sverdlov in Moscow, and was specifically denied permission to execute the IF. Lenin told Sverdlov that he specifically wanted the IF brought to Moscow for a public "show trial"
Sverdlov's exact words;"Filip, (Goloshchyokin) tell the comrades that the ARCEC does not give official sanction to an execution."

The front, however, had moved to less than 30 miles from Ekaterinburg, and so the Regional Ural Soviet met and decided it was too dangerous to move them, and went ahead and resolved to the executions. Yurovsky was following the orders of the Regional Soviet, he was not the one who even proposed the executions in the first place.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 02, 2004, 12:37:08 PM
But surely they'd have been killed once they reached Moscow anyway? Someone I know told me they did find a smoking gun connection, I don't have it, I don't know. But I don't think he cared and was probably glad, well maybe a little miffed he didn't get the honor.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 02, 2004, 12:59:19 PM
The weakness in the arguments about the actions of the Ural Soviets appear to be:

The Romanovs were arrested, they were State Prisoners, they were kept alive for 482 days, lets guess  that the orders to execute them were one day old, so who give the orders to keep them alive for 481 days, and kill them on the 482nd day? So from this we can presume orders were given for the family to  die.

Its mooted that the Ural Soviets killed them on their own initiative. Lets assume this is true, then we must ask ourselves ''Which other important personages did they kill on their own intitative'', and here's the important point 'Why did these heroes of the new Soviet Empire set about hiding the bodies of the Tsar  and his family. Why the dismembering, the burning with gasoline, the throwing of the remains down mine shafts.

These Ural Soviets sound to me like bounty hunters, its alleged they were the killers of people who deserved to die, yet our Soviet heroes took no photographs of their victims, did not boast  of there exploits, and if it was such a worthy deed - why did they not parade the bodies to the local townsfolk and thereby claim the credit for ridding Russia of these so called despots?

I say the man who ordered the cover up, was the same man who ordered that the family should be killed, killed  and their bodies destroyed and hidden. That this perosn was resident in Moscow, that he was someone who had enough good sense to distance himself from the actual killings. An ex-school teacher perhaps who was fearful of a public trial if the balance of power shifted.

I state that if the Ural Soviets did act on their own initiative, that after the killings they would have acted differently, had medals struck in their honour, took  souveniers from the bodies, and hiding the bodies was not what you would expect, or the usual custom in this sort of brigand / lawless Urals situation.

Lenin was behind it, and the cover up [the hiding of the bodies] is the smoking gun that leads back to him.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 02, 2004, 01:35:30 PM
I might reply to British Blue, but his arguments make no logical sense whatsoever. Can someone try to explain to me what he means??
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on October 02, 2004, 02:41:57 PM
Not really. His opinion is that Lenin ordered the assassination. He probably has not bothered to read King and Wilson who went through the scenarios and concluded that it was the Ural Regional Soviet who was responsible.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 02, 2004, 02:49:42 PM
I for one wish pronounes were abolished but they haven't been, however,    I am pretty sure British Blue's "he" is referring to Lenin.

I dug around my boxes,  but,  the pile is, now, twice as large and I could not find the one particular book was I was looking so I  can not give a page and book title.

I think Greg King's bio on Yurovsky talks about him having lived in Germany..... Berlin was one place...

More I think about it,  the more I do remember that some have claimed Yurovsky was in contact with Lenin before and after..... the execution.

My conclusions are pretty close to British Blue on this subject, however,  I, also, understand how the Ural Soviets were starting to do things on their own about that time.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 02, 2004, 03:27:37 PM
While I was looking for one book,  I did find The People's Tragedy by Figes.  On page 640 he writes:   "....Yakob Yurovsky, the local Cheka boss who led the execution squad, was one of Lenin's most trusted lieutenants--ruthless, honest, intelligent and cruel."

Figes called Yurovsky a "trusted lieutenant".  That alone screams out at me that Yurovsky wasn't just a local boy who just by chance of fate became the executioner of Nicholas II.

AGRBear

PS  British Blue, I keep forgetting to ask:  To whom did "Lennie" give this speech?  Where?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 02, 2004, 04:08:34 PM
BB

  Is it really neccessary to be so brusque in your posts?
Perhaps in your enthusiasm to express yourself, you don't quite realize just how coarse and crude some of your remarks can seem.
  Olga is a charming and witty young lady with whom I have often chatted - and who disagrees with some of your statements.  Many of your responses to her seem pointedly unkind. Surely you are better than this.
  I am still uncertain what your earlier remarks about someone "reinacting AA's suicide attempt" were meant to suggest. Your comments do not seem worthy of an individual who cares so very much about "nobility" and "dignity." Might I humbly suggest some charity on your part?

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 02, 2004, 04:11:25 PM
Quote
Olga, are you aware that there are three basic forms of finger clicking The first is the here-boy, a command whose origin expresses the cry of a Royal personage whose forbears have been natural rulers for many centuries. The second form is the take-it-away– now- will - you, this being a snappy informal command, you then have the American, super fast double click, used in Las Vegas and said without humour.

Whilst performing the Russian disciplined finger click, the clicker must create a rhythmic and quite intricate finger movement, whilst at the same time saying the words rats, rats, rats, three times under their breath. The intention is to project a feeling of annoyance at the service offered. The whole object of finger snapping is to accentuate the difference between you, and those of a lesser milieu.

You will need to practice graceful movements of the arms, and shoulders and, in particular, the expressive twists and turns of the hands from the wrists to the fingers. And, to achieve a high level of satisfaction with finger-clicking you must develop great skill in manipulating others to do your bidding. That having been said, it should be encouraged for your friends and especially your partner to adopt a subservient role towards you. This can always be encouraged by a few swift kicks under the table if they happen to forget their place.  

OLGA YOU MENTIONED FRIEND LENIN [ Dear Darling little Lennie]

I have some pages from one of Lenin’s Speeches; the following remarks are taken from it [translation]

Comrades the Golden rule of Communism is: Treat a serf like a serf. When a place gets robbed, it's always a Politician with the most knowledge of the place. When someone gets shot, it's a Policy decision and not payback time. When you get a bad vibe about a comrade, something will go down, so strike first / kill without hesitation.  

Intellectuals tend to invoke the Law; they make our people hesitant, so kill them, or throw them in jail.

"One way or another, our Commissars must be behind every killing, every mugging, dissapearance and robbery. We must expect family, friends, neighbours, and even children to inform on each other.

Political Assassination must be encouraged.Just  remember everybody knows who the released prisoners are, they see the missing teeth, the body sores, the starved expressions and glossy eyes, this suggests we treat them like trash in the Lubianka, so don’t spit on them and don't beat the crap out of them for no good reason. In fact don't release them its too dangerous. Write that down will you all - No More releases.

Brothers remember you can only flaunt so much wealth before this attracts attention. So keep a low profile. Remember that buying brand-new cars, desks, dachas, and weapons is not good for our image. If anyone wants to be famous then popp them before they cause us trouble.

The only way we can remain in power is to kill the protestors. So give protestors just 3 months maximum then its time to liquidate them before they get any ideas. This Anna Anderson dame  is she one off ours, or one of theirs. I told those idiots to kill the lot, and now we have this loudmouth running to the Press. I just hope she’s not genuine. Find out who counted the corpses and shoot him for  safety.
[Lenin]


Have you been drinking today?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 02, 2004, 04:28:37 PM
I  did understand the "finger clicking" examples.  Because,  some of the super rich with titles or without titles forget the people who are there to serve them are not puppets or less human.

So,  the question I have next:  Did Ana Anderson have any of these "finger clicking" moments?

AGRBear

PS Sorry Dashkova,  I changed my posting.  I did originally say:
"I can not speak for British Blue drinking habits,  but I didn't have that impression while reading the postings and I don't think 99 % of others did either.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 02, 2004, 04:34:52 PM

AGRBear:
"I can not speak for British Blue drinking habits,  but I didn't have that impression while reading the postings and I don't think 99 % of others did either. '

I *really* hope you're wrong about that.  :-/  May we hear from some others on this?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 02, 2004, 04:40:27 PM
Agrbear

Help!

If BB's last few posts made sense to you, then please explain them to me!!

    What speeches of Lenin's? When were they made? To whom? Where can they be found?

BB...
dear darling Lennie? BB This sort of thing (and the finger snapping remarks) are not the type of comments that express the dignity which I though you held so precious.

Rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 02, 2004, 05:02:26 PM
BB wrote:
The babies in prams differences is a ''worth thinking about hobby'' of mine.. That it  occurs is provable and its seen everywhere. My daughter is a 1st year primary school teacher, she told me she knew instinctively which social class her new charges were from, which town areas, good, poor, or bad,  and she  even had a clue from their overall demeanor as to their future learning prospects and classroom attitude towards her and others.

This was on topic  isofar as I was arguing that all the Princesses including Anastasia were  stamped with a birth - right seal of quality, that in some respects we all are stamped, and its almost impossible to shake off. It can be done  and  great actors from good homes - but humble beginnings prove it. In the case of the Russian Princesses no acting was required, they had the stamp of authenticity about them all, whilst Anderson did not. My remark Cinderellas Revenge was both apt and true.

In the British Royal Family the surpreme Royal Figure was Queen Mary of Teck. A comparision study of her photograph with her Russian cousins might convince you that my point contains some merit. They are  not superior, simply naturally beautiful, with grace and bearing.

******
Oh my! So saith Mrs. Bucket (pronounced "Boo-KAY")!
Mrs. Bucket, I cannot decide whether your views/ideas/apparent thought processes are more hilarious or scary.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JM on October 02, 2004, 05:07:49 PM
Hyacinth would be such an amusing neighbour!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 02, 2004, 05:12:22 PM
If you go back and read my last couple of posts,  I asked the same questions about "Lennie" and his speech.

I understood the "finger snapping" section.  British Blue was telling you how some of the "to full of themselves" people accomplish their "finger snapping".  

AND,  I think British Blue was worndering if Olga had every seen this occur.  It's not a pretty sight to witness.  

I couldn't tell you the sick feeling I have when I see this occur.... I usually try to right that wrong in some way...

It appears this thread is straying.  

So,  again, I ask,  was Ana Anderson every reported as being a "finger  snapper".

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on October 02, 2004, 06:19:06 PM
I have to admit that I'm having some trouble understanding what British Blue is trying to say some of the time, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that he's a drunkard! ::)

And as for Annie calling you "Boshie sympathizers" I must say that I also get that impression many times as well.  The so-called "McCarthyism" isn't as terrible as many would believe.  If someone was trying to hunt down Nazis, would people still scream about that as much as when Commies were tracked down?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 02, 2004, 06:45:48 PM
Michelle wrote:
I have to admit that I'm having some trouble understanding what British Blue is trying to say some of the time, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that he's a drunkard! ::)

******
You may be right.  Hyacinth wouldn't be seen tipsy in public.  Well, actually I think she *has* a couple of times, but not on purpose.  Maybe this was another accident.

Michelle wrote:
And as for Annie calling you "Boshie sympathizers" I must say that I also get that impression many times as well.  The so-called "McCarthyism" isn't as terrible as many would believe.  If someone was trying to hunt down Nazis, would people still scream about that as much as when Commies were tracked down?[/quote]

*****I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about, but count me in on the "Bolshie sympathizers", I don't have a problem with that label, personally.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 02, 2004, 06:51:32 PM
Michelle /  Annie
Who is being called a "bolshy sympathizer?" Dashkova? Rskkiya? BB? FA? (I am so lost!)

Angebear
I do not know about AA's finger snapping habits -- why not ask Mr. Kurth?

BB-
Please show some of that noble charity that you so treasure when adressing those not "to the manor born"-- and do try to make your posts less cryptic.

back to the topic please!
R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 02, 2004, 07:52:37 PM
Quote
...[in part]...
Had she really not had the behavior and manner to at least move in these circles, don't you think it odd that those who met her would not have at once recognized her as someone not of their milieu?  The fact is, the evidence on her mannerisms and behavior is overwhelming and it supports what the Duke of Leuctenburg and others said.

Greg King


I think this is how we got into the subject.

"Finger snapping" was just one mannerism of the people, who have been raised to think that they are the betters, and, who thought  the servents, workers, and those employed are to be used and not respected.

If you have not experience or seen  such behavior,  then you are fortunate.

AGRBear

PS  I am not indicating that Ana Anderson was a "finger snapper", however, she did have some mannerism to which King refers from what he's read or from the "he said/ she said" grapevine since he is in touch with the Romanovs and others involved with the family.

PSS:  This is why the anti-Bolshvik and pro-Bolshviks jumped on their side of the line:
Quote
It seems I read something very recently that did finally make a link between Lenin and the murders. And yes, I say MURDERS. You may all what happened to the Tsar an execution in a political way, but the brutal way those girls were slaughtered is nothing short of murder most vile.

Lenin always vowed to kill all the Romanovs. He was 17 and taking his final exams when his brother was hung for terrorist activiites and he swore then revenge on the Romanovs, he often said he wanted them all dead. All, meaning, he had no feeling for the kids either. Some of you Bolshy sympathizers give him too  much credit. He was a creep. The only reason he isn't remembered as more of a monster is that Stalin so far surpassed him. But he will never be excused.


Everyone already knows I am on the anti-Bolshvik/communist side of the line.  


AGRBear


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 02, 2004, 10:05:33 PM
Dashcova,

Thank God - you do have a sense of humour. I laughed at your response ''Have you been drinking today''. Wonderful.  Alas, I have never had a pint of beer in my life, or smoked, or even touched a cigarette. I have not been tipsy, or purchased alchohol. If you wish to reply to this ''You sound like a downright misery,'' I would agree with you wholeheartedly. 100%.

R. I have been teasing Olga, and maybe have overdone it. It was her who was abrupt  [see her snobby cow remark/ her post] In return I posted my nonsense about finger-snapping etc, this is what we in England call teasing, a wind up, pulling your leg. It might well be that British humour does not cross the Atlantic well and so it sounded out of character, or unintentionally unintended rude. In actual fact I am a very polite person. Quiet, shy, and somewhat thoughtful.

Moderator: To understand my arguments about the cover-up and concealment of the Royal Families bodies. Simply switch the words Ural Soviets to Mexican Bandits, Cuban Guerillas, or Iraqi Insurgents, then ask yourself if any of these groups had captured a enemy  of  such prominence - would they have concealed all evidence of the crime, and gone to such lengths to hide the bodies? It reminds me of the German Treblinka,  Chelmno, and  Belzec killings. The elaborate cover up and concealmment. Now do you understand.

I do think my own post about finger clicking was hilarious, I enjoyed writing it, and if you read this, please take what was said with a pinch-of-salt- you will [then] realise that like AA, I was having a little joke, a subtle tease,  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 02, 2004, 10:16:50 PM
Quote
It seems I read something very recently that did finally make a link between Lenin and the murders. And yes, I say MURDERS. You may all what happened to the Tsar an execution in a political way, but the brutal way those girls were slaughtered is nothing short of murder most vile.

Lenin always vowed to kill all the Romanovs. He was 17 and taking his final exams when his brother was hung for terrorist activiites and he swore then revenge on the Romanovs, he often said he wanted them all dead. All, meaning, he had no feeling for the kids either. Some of you Bolshy sympathizers give him too  much credit. He was a creep. The only reason he isn't remembered as more of a monster is that Stalin so far surpassed him. But he will never be excused.



Hmmmm...let's see.  Just what would have driven Alex Ulianov and company to commit deeds that rated execution?
Funny what living under an utter despot can do to one's outlook.
And yes, I do give Lenin (though he was very much flawed) a LOT of credit.  Within ten years of the Revolution the previously LOCKED doors to education and a decent life were flung open to the Russian people. The NEP program brought capitalism back into the picture as well.
Perfect? No way! Lives lost to get there? MANY.  But at least life was at last changing for the better, and no matter how much any of you "Imperial Fluffballs" seem to wish otherwise, the Russian people DESERVED better lives than what they were getting under the Romanovs.
Lenin was no more creepier than anyone else who ever ruled Russia.  And at least he helped to point the country in a direction where people who never had a chance to read before not only learned but began writing books, where those who could only dream of medical care not only had full coverage but could become doctors.
Did your precious Romanovs do ANY of this for 99 percent of the population for whom they claimed such devotion?
Check yourself and think about which scenario is creepier.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 02, 2004, 10:22:28 PM
Mrs. Bucket,

You need to work on your backpedaling act.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 02, 2004, 10:52:51 PM
Quote

And yes, I do give Lenin (though he was very much flawed) a LOT of credit.  Within ten years of the Revolution the previously LOCKED doors to education and a decent life were flung open to the Russian people. The NEP program brought capitalism back into the picture as well. Perfect? No way! Lives lost to get there? MANY.  But at least life was at last changing for the better, and no matter how much any of you "Imperial Fluffballs" seem to wish otherwise, the Russian people DESERVED better lives than what they were getting under the Romanovs. Lenin was no more creepier than anyone else who ever ruled Russia.  And at least he helped to point the country in a direction where people who never had a chance to read before not only learned but began writing books, where those who could only dream of medical care not only had full coverage but could become doctors. Did your precious Romanovs do ANY of this for 99 percent of the population for whom they claimed such devotion?
Check yourself and think about which scenario is creepier.


The job of ruling Russia is beyond the capabilities of one man, or even 10 good men. Lenin, unfortuanately did not deliver on his promises and because of this, and Stalin, Russia lost 50 years 'good rule',  production, and prosperity. 1917 - 1967. Its people suffered enormous hardship,  deprivation,  care, poverty and starvation.  Then in the background you had  the purges, the gulags, the KGB, and  the German Forces attack.

You speak of schools and education. Surely you are aware that the educated were killed, the writers purged, and publishers could not be found who would publish your work. Was this progress?

To understand the situation better, in  1917, the USA, Britain, and Germany, had great problems. The people in these countrys were just marginally better than those in Russia. The greatest  slums in Europe were situated just 2 miles south of Buckingham Palace.

So what Lenin encountered [spoke about] was fairly  common  throughout  Europe, and not  confined to Russia,, or caused  by Romanov misrule. For what its worth, I can name 10 countrys today, which are in a worse state than Russia in 1917, and no one cares about them, or its people. So lets blame ourselves for this shall and not figurehead people like the Romanovs.

Russia lost 30 million of its finest people during the  50 years of Soviet misrule, and it is  this which annoys the world, it is this fact which we all shudder at. They killed 10 million  Anastasias - whilst we mourn one.

You did not have this degree of cruel suffering under the Tsar.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 02, 2004, 11:17:02 PM
Mrs. Bucket,
You demonstrate a very sad lack of knowledge of pre-revolutionary Russia with regard to the lives of the largest portion of the population (high 90s percentile).

And...frankly, I believe you are uneducable on this matter, so I won't even bother to explain further nor will I recommend steps you could take to improve your knowledge.  It would be like casting pearls before...well, you know, of course.

Your comments are a slap in the face to the millions that DID suffer under the tsarist rule, who never had even a prayer of a chance at a better life.

You should apologize for your remarks. Due to your profound ignorance, I realize you will not.

The least you could do is take your own advice and "keep to your station," and discuss what you seem to know best.  HINT:   NOT the history of the Russian people.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on October 02, 2004, 11:28:25 PM
BB- what a cartload of bull pucky ! Far more than 10 millions died in 300 years of making the Romanovs the most obscenely rich dynasty.
And the "sainted" capitalist west ? What glories were brought to the Belgian Congo, the peoples of the British Empire, the expansion of the US at the cost of slave lives as well as the Native population.
The vanity of imperial pretenders and the trivial pursuit of who has the right to an illusionary throne who has been denied what in ill-gained property, unearned dignities as well as hollow holiness pales in comparrison to the real sufferers in all of these scenarios.
However, all this is not the subject of the discussion here, is it?
AA vs AN ? or Lenin vs Vanderbilt? The question seems to have been lost here.
Cheers,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Olga on October 02, 2004, 11:57:29 PM
Quote
OLGA YOU MENTIONED FRIEND LENIN [ Dear Darling little Lennie]


Immaturity.

Quote
It seems I read something very recently that did finally make a link between Lenin and the murders. And yes, I say MURDERS. You may all what happened to the Tsar an execution in a political way, but the brutal way those girls were slaughtered is nothing short of murder most vile.

Lenin always vowed to kill all the Romanovs. He was 17 and taking his final exams when his brother was hung for terrorist activiites and he swore then revenge on the Romanovs, he often said he wanted them all dead. All, meaning, he had no feeling for the kids either. Some of you Bolshy sympathizers give him too  much credit. He was a creep. The only reason he isn't remembered as more of a monster is that Stalin so far surpassed him. But he will never be excused.


Do you think Alexander Ulyanov was a ‘terrorist’ just for fun?

Quote
"Bolshie sympathasiers"??? Heavy shades of McCarthyism with a touch of Mary Whitehouse do I hear ?
Sure, Lenin had no use for the Romanovs, obviously few did. There was no great effort to save them by their "allies" was there?.
The Ayatollah spent more effort and expense in chasing down Pahlavis.  And it was not like the Romanovs were not sitting ducks.  Lenin [and Stalin] went after the money, far more productive than more dead Romanovs.
And that speech ! Loosely translated would be generous indeed. Just where did that come from? Sounds more like JEdgar Hoover than VI Lenin to me. Speaking of whom, that man had little use for AA either.
Robert


Yes, loose translation indeed. Or using words that are approximately the same.

Quote
While I was looking for one book,  I did find The People's Tragedy by Figes.  On page 640 he writes:   "....Yakob Yurovsky, the local Cheka boss who led the execution squad, was one of Lenin's most trusted lieutenants--ruthless, honest, intelligent and cruel."


Sounds biased to me, but then again I’m just a dirty Bolshy sympathiser.

Quote
Olga is a charming and witty young lady with whom I have often chatted - and who disagrees with some of your statements.  Many of your responses to her seem pointedly unkind. Surely you are better than this.


Balshoye spasiba, moya dorogaya.  :)


Quote
Michelle wrote:
I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about, but count me in on the "Bolshie sympathizers", I don't have a problem with that label, personally.


Me neither.

Quote
Michelle /  Annie
Who is being called a "bolshy sympathizer?" Dashkova? Rskkiya? BB? FA? (I am so lost!) .


I think we are.

Quote
It might well be that British humour does not cross the Atlantic well and so it sounded out of character, or unintentionally unintended rude.


It appears that British 'humour' does not travel well to Australia either.

Quote
Hmmmm...let's see.  Just what would have driven Alex Ulianov and company to commit deeds that rated execution?
Funny what living under an utter despot can do to one's outlook.
And yes, I do give Lenin (though he was very much flawed) a LOT of credit.  Within ten years of the Revolution the previously LOCKED doors to education and a decent life were flung open to the Russian people. The NEP program brought capitalism back into the picture as well.
Perfect? No way! Lives lost to get there? MANY.  But at least life was at last changing for the better, and no matter how much any of you "Imperial Fluffballs" seem to wish otherwise, the Russian people DESERVED better lives than what they were getting under the Romanovs.
Lenin was no more creepier than anyone else who ever ruled Russia.  And at least he helped to point the country in a direction where people who never had a chance to read before not only learned but began writing books, where those who could only dream of medical care not only had full coverage but could become doctors.
Did your precious Romanovs do ANY of this for 99 percent of the population for whom they claimed such devotion?
Check yourself and think about which scenario is creepier.


I would have to agree with Dashkova entirely.  :)

Quote
You did not have this degree of suffering under the Tsar.


*shudders* I think I'll just let other people comment on the stupidity of this statement.

Quote
BB- what a cartload of bull pucky ! Far more than 10 millions died in 300 years of making the Romanovs the most obscenely rich dynasty.
And the "sainted" capitalist west ? What glories were brought to the Belgian Congo, the peoples of the British Empire, the expansion of the US at the cost of slave lives as well as the Native population.
The vanity of imperial pretenders and the trivial pursuit of who has the right to an illusionary throne who has been denied what in ill-gained property, unearned dignities as well as hollow holiness pales in comparrison to the real sufferers in all of these scenarios.
However, all this is not the subject of the discussion here, is it?
AA vs AN ? or Lenin vs Vanderbilt? The question seems to have been lost here.
Cheers,
Robert


The Romanovs were dictators and despots. They lived on the toil and sweat of 90% of the population's work and labour.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 03, 2004, 03:37:35 AM
OLGA:

''The Romanovs were dictators and despots. They lived on the toil and sweat of 90% of the population's work and labour''.


Reply. For society to function you need division of labour, bosses, workers, advisors, labourers, right down to Agricultural serfs. In many cases you have situations in which there are not sufficient employers, workplaces, factorys, or jobs. This means the disadvantaged [usually the workers] suffer. I imagine this is what happened in Russia, a rural society, over populated, with insufficient work for all . This happens in all societys, e.g. Africa,  Argentina, China, etc.

In my opinion you are singling out the Romanovs for something that they had no control over. This being Rural Economic misfortune in a changing Society. Poverty  is an accepted  fact of life in all societys and ages.

I have seen for myself the poverty in South Africa, I was thrown out of my hotel for stating that one day change would come, Mandela would be President.  This came about because I wanted to send some food and cold drinks to a little black girl who sat outside the hotel waiting for her Mother, a worker in the hotel, to finish  work. It was not allowed.

From this little incident i want the Bolshies amongst you to realise that many Capitalist Pigs do have hearts, we do cross the road to  help, and we do abhor injustice.

Leading on from this I say the Soviets killed the TSARS children, children, underlined, you say this was a deserved fate, we differ. [We most certainly do differ on this point] If your proud of this then shame on you.



Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Olga on October 03, 2004, 04:40:25 AM
Quote
Reply. For society to function you need division of labour, bosses, workers, advisors, labourers, right down to Agricultural serfs.


Yes but you do not need 90% of the population living in poverty and squalor.

Quote
In my opinion you are singling out the Romanovs for something that they had no control over. This being Rural Economic misfortune in a changing Society.


The Romanovs had control over EVERYTHING. They could have done many things to change with the times.

Quote
Poverty  is an accepted  fact of life in all societys and ages.


So us lucky ones can just sit back and watch others suffer because it's an 'accepted fact of life?'

Quote
I have seen for myself the poverty in South Africa, I was thrown out of my hotel for stating that one day change would come, Mandela would be President.  This came about because I wanted to send some food and cold drinks to a little black girl who sat outside the hotel waiting for her Mother, a worker in the hotel, to finish  work. It was not allowed.


Clap clap for you.

Quote
From this little incident i want the Bolshies amongst you to realise that many Capitalist Pigs do have hearts, we do cross the road to  help, and we do abhor injustice.


Apartheid in South Africa has nothing to do with Bolsheviks or Russia. Cross the road to help if it benefits you or another 'Capitalist pig'?

Quote
Leading on from this I say the Soviets killed the TSARS children, children, underlined, you say this was a deserved fate, we differ. [We most certainly do differ on this point] If your proud of this then shame on you.


I have never said that the Tsar's children deserved to die. If you think this because I sit on the left of the political spectrum then you have got some serious UNBIASED reading to do. It was not the deserved fate of OTMA Nikolaevna nor Alexei Nikolaevich. It was however, the deserved fate of Nikolai Alexandrovich.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on October 03, 2004, 07:43:57 AM
Quote
OLGA:
Leading on from this I say the Soviets killed the TSARS children, children,


Since this has nothing to do with Anna Anderson I'll keep my response brief.  Having just spent four years intensive research on this subject, coupled with 20 years previous research on the attendant issues, I can state firmly and without any doubt at all that Lenin did NOT order any execution.  In our book "The Fate of the Romanovs" we thoroughly examined every single assertion made about responsibility, then went back to first-hand accounts, primary materials, and archival sources, many of which had never been examined nor published before.  And they all conclusively show, as Rob says, that the Ural Regional Soviet acted on its own.  Lenin is in fact on recorded numerous times as having specifically opposed the proposed wholesale slaughter of the Imperial Family as an act that would damage the Soviet Government in the eyes of the world.  The most the evidence allows anyone to say is that Sverdlov probably told Goloschokin that if circumstances (i.e., the advance of the Whites and the evacuation of Ekaterinburg) demanded it, then Nicholas could be dealt with as necessary.  Lenin had nothing to do with what happened to the Romanovs in Ekaterinburg, nor (as Sokolov correctly states in his book, and as borne out by the previously unpublished complete accounts of Ekaterinburg Cheka members Isai Rodzinsky and Michael Medvedev (Kudrin)) with the assassinations at Alapayevsk.  There is even more proof that he had no idea beforehand that Michael was to be killed, and evidence that he even opposed the execution of the four Romanov Grand Dukes in Petrograd in 1919, which conflicts with "accepted" history.  Lenin, being pragmatic, had no use for Nicholas, and wanted him dead, but the evidence is overwhelming that he wanted him dead only after he had been put on public trial, and had no plan to exterminate the rest of the family.  Various Romanovs were under the direct control of Bolsheviks for upwards of 14 months in some cases, and yet the only ones executed (excluding the four mentioned above) were those imprisoned by the Ural Regional Soviet (which controlled Perm and Alapayevsk).  I suggest you read further on this with an open mind and let the evidence lay out the case for you.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 03, 2004, 08:33:32 AM
Quote

[1] I can state firmly and without any doubt at all that Lenin did NOT order any execution.  In our book "The Fate of the Romanovs" we thoroughly examined every single assertion made about responsibility, then went back to first-hand accounts, primary materials, and archival sources, many of which had never been examined nor published before.

[2] Lenin is in fact on recorded numerous times as having specifically opposed the proposed wholesale slaughter of the Imperial Family as an act that would damage the Soviet Government in the eyes of the world.

[3] And evidence that he even opposed the execution of the four Romanov Grand Dukes in Petrograd in 1919, which conflicts with "accepted" history.

[4] Lenin, being pragmatic, had no use for Nicholas, and wanted him dead, but the evidence is overwhelming that he wanted him dead only after he had been put on public trial, and had no plan to exterminate the rest of the family.  Greg King


Its a strange quirk of fate about Russian Political Prisoners that they don't die, they simply dissapear in vast numbers and when their relatives try  to learn what became off them - the relatives themselves get lost after leaving the Police Station, and  do not return home.

Another interesting fact is Lenin did not want anyone to die, he had no enemies, no quarrels with the establishment, yet, all the leading figures in pre- 1917 Russia ''dissapeared''. Of course  Lenin knew nothing about this, and it might well be matters got out of hand, and 'his trusted Lieutenants did not have  his  high  ideals''. No doubt he had on his desk bundles of tickets of transit to Lisbon, free passes and pardons, but isn't  it strange we never saw any reprieves authorised by  him. Maybe he was busy hiding things.

Whats even more of a  co-incidence is Stalin made all the same loveable mistakes. Including loving his  Secretaries so much that he raped them and had them shot, and their familys liquidated if they kicked up a fuss trying to trace their daughters.

One hopes Anastsia and her Sisters are canonised  by the true Russian Church, and maybe every Xmas the Russian People will be allowed to celebrate St Nicholas's day. As a matter of fact I was born on St Nicholas's day. so from now on I will remember the Tsar, his wife, and  family on this day from now on.

PS: The Sunday Mail did a  magazine article on the Lubianka Prison, with photos of the main two resident killers, there still alive, maybe you can  use their memoirs in your book in order to absolve all and sundry for what occurred. May i suggest the title 1001 Royal Excuses.




Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 03, 2004, 08:50:47 AM
BB

  If you are still visiting this site, I should like to thank you for the private message that you sent me. In brief might I make a few suggestions about the best ways to enjoy this site?
  Perhaps you don't realize it but there members here from all over the world, some students, some scholars some retirees, and trust me- there are many English and other folk who do understand British "humour."
So comments about it "not translating well across the pond" are rather silly and a bit juvenile.  
  Whether it was your intention or not, some of your posts have come across as very abrasive. This might not have been your indended desire. I do understand this sort of thing, as in previous incarnations I too have posted statements which were "insulting" to many posters. With time I have learned how to moderate my statements and still make (I hope) clever and thoughtful posts. Of course I still make remakes that upset some applecarts --we all do-- thats half the fun here! We have a wide political spectum here as you may have guessed running to all extreams some Romantic  monarchists, some friends to a republic, some reactionary neo faschists, and some liberals, socialists and anarchistic revolutionaries as well.
   This site need not be seen as entirely an internet soap box either pro or con romanovs/revolution, nor is it just a tea party for the mutual appreciation society! Its a splendid place for people to chat about various topics regarding Russian history.

Now back to topic please!

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 03, 2004, 08:52:15 AM
Brava, Olga!

Many thanks to Mr. King for his post, and most of all, for his and Ms. Wilson's research.

Hyacinth (that's you, BB), you continue to amaze and astound!  How is it you can speak with such confidence on subjects you obviously know so little about!?
And all those silly statements about "division of labor force"!  I know from your television appearances that "station" and "one's place" means a great deal to you, so maybe that explains it.  The attempted show of kindness to the little girl at the hotel you regard, I'm sure, as noblesse oblige.  Your comment about change in South Africa performed as shock value. You would *never* actually work for such reforms.  It simply isn't done!


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 03, 2004, 09:08:55 AM
Dobray ultro Dashkova!

Hello... When was BB on telly? (do private message me at your leasure  ;))

  I just thought to compare the dynamic of  the AA/ Anastasia myth to this sort of site. Interesting parralels...
  We all choose names that may imply cryptic meanings and make statements and claims that can sometimes be false or misleading. We all have impressions of one another based on these choices - which may well be altogether wrong...It does take a diligent study of the facts or in this case "emails" to find out the truth.

(By the way - Olga- it was my pleasure to speak the truth about you!  ;D )

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 03, 2004, 09:20:00 AM
Quote

Its a strange quirk of fate about Russian Political Prisoners that they don't die, they simply dissapear in vast numbers and when their relatives try  to learn what became off them - the relatives themselves get lost after leaving the Police Station, and  do not return home.

Another interesting fact is Lenin did not want anyone to die, he had no enemies, no quarrels with the establishment, yet, all the leading figures in pre- 1917 Russia ''dissapeared''. Of course  Lenin knew nothing about this, and it might well be matters got out of hand, and 'his trusted Lieutenants did not have  his  high  ideals''. No doubt he had on his desk bundles of tickets of transit to Lisbon, free passes and pardons, but isn't  it strange we never saw any reprieves authorised by  him. Maybe he was busy hiding things.

Whats even more of a  co-incidence is Stalin made all the same loveable mistakes. Including loving his  Secretaries so much that he raped them and had them shot, and their familys liquidated if they kicked up a fuss trying to trace their daughters.

One hopes Anastsia and her Sisters are canonised  by the true Russian Church, and maybe every Xmas the Russian People will be allowed to celebrate St Nicholas's day. As a matter of fact I was born on St Nicholas's day. so from now on I will remember the Tsar, his wife, and  family on this day from now on.

PS: The Sunday Mail did a  magazine article on the Lubianka Prison, with photos of the main two resident killers, there still alive, maybe you can  use their memoirs in your book in order to absolve all and sundry for what occurred. May i suggest the title 1001 Royal Excuses.






True! Lenin did more to hurt more people than help anyone. Education? More like RE education, and anyone who didn't conform 'disappeared.'  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 03, 2004, 09:23:54 AM
BB

(ohh gawwd)

At the risk of calling on [glb]Captain Obvious [/glb] let me explain to you that the Russian Orthodox Church has in fact declaired NAOTMAA all to be passion bearers and saints. I do hope that you understand  what NAOTMAA stands for.

Please do stop the not very clever or subtle or witty remarks about Lenin and Co. People here frown on similar vulgarities about Nicholas' family, so please do try to play nicely.

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 03, 2004, 09:29:56 AM
Olga,

I am a man, age 63, not a female. So if you must please call me Mr Bucket.

And i want to share an abrasive little secret with you. I am a British Royalist, my family are British Royalists. My father served in WW1 and WW2, and on reporting for duty he took an Oath to serve the King. I have not served in the forces but I honour his memory by continuing the tradition by being a Royalist. And another abrasive little secret, I go horse racing a lot and when I pass the Queen [HM The Queen is at most of the big meetings] I bow, I bow to her and her Office.
You see I am a typical  Brit.

You need  someone to remind you about Lend Lease, USA Liberty Ships, American  and British  Aid to Russia, Soviet spies, and how the West helped Russia and its people. The exception to my adverse comments is Russian writers, with Anton Chekhov leading the field.

I imagine you have travelled by train from St Petersburg to Moscow [ I have] then please confirm for us all that the  shanty towns are still there. Someone on the train said they were dog kennels, or allotments, they were in fact villages and people lived there.

The collapse of Communism was long overdue.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 03, 2004, 09:37:37 AM
BB
I must again ask that you stay on topic!

There is a separate thread to discuss the CCCP/USSR  and Russia today. Its under the heading of the Russian Revolution.

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 03, 2004, 10:15:47 AM
R.

I was replying to insults delivered. I did not know what the initials meant. NAOM --- ? Thank you for educating me. I intend to stop posting.

Rewriting history is not for me. And reading falsehoods goes against the grain. And I hate Revisonists posing as historians. Its quite an industry now, and getting bigger.

BB.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 03, 2004, 10:19:32 AM
I have a headache.
The thread is about Anna Anderson and Anastasia. I haven't seen this in the discussion for three pages now.
I tolerated the murder discussion, since it relates. BB, please read Greg's book on the subject. Greg and Penny are genuinely experts on what happened in Ekaterinburg, having spent decades working with all the available material.  When Greg says without doubt Lenin did NOT order the murders, he speaks with the evidence behind that conclusion. NOT sweeping  generalities about people and events that occured thirty years AFTER the fact as some "evidence" of what happened in 1918. Please, find "Last Act of a Tragedy" by Aleksyeyev and read the archive material for yourself.
Frankly, you make one small mistake of judgment, which creates much larger problems here. Lenin was NOT a good guy by any stretch of the imagination. The simple historical reality that HE himself did not order the execution of the IF is NOT and I repeat NOT some "apologia" for Lenin. To use a slang expression from "our side" of the pond...."Its just the facts, M'am."

and please, don't be so condescending about we "Yanks". I for one, studied at Pembroke College, Cambridge, reading economics, and later spent months living in London as an "articled clerk" (pronounced "ahtickled clark"), and can speak "british" english with a correct Home Counties accent that no one ever suspects I'm an American when I want to. BBC-America is one of the three most watched channels in the house.

Just saw your last post. NAOTMAA = Nicholas, Alexandra,Olga,Tatiana,Marie,Anastasia,Alexei.

Please feel free to post! Just, please, stay on topic and we like facts more than suspicion. With over 22000 postings now, I have to try to keep things tidy. But I never want anyone to not express themselves when they care to.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 03, 2004, 11:02:30 AM
I guess Lenin covered his tracks on the executionof Nicholas II, Michael and everyone else connected to the Romanov family.   And, no matter the logic some of us used,  it will not penatrate the minds of those who see otherwise.

However,  I'm not concern about the few of you who continue to tell us  that the credit of this execution stopped at the local level and not at the top with Lenin.  So, this isn't for you because you've made up your mind.

I am worried about the youth who are reading remarks that claim that there was  a glorious victory under those who admire those involved in   the Russian Revolution under Lenin and later Stalin.  There were other opportunities at that point in time to have taken between the months of Feb/March to Oct/Nov of 1917.  But they did not devlope due to the Bolshviks.

Emp. Nicholas II had abdicated and had given the crown to his brother GD Michael, who then turned to the new and rising govt. known as the Provisional Govt. who were interested in people's rights.  

Lenin, with his gold train supplied by the Germans who wanted Russia to go into revolution and lose interest in the fight against the Germans,  rushed to Russia and he and his friends started their "killings"....  They didn't care about the Provisional Govt which had a great start on making a new and better Russia without the kind of blood shed which was about to occur under Lenin and then Stalin.

British Blue's figures of how many died under the rule of Lenin and Stalin were low.  There were 10,000,000 [if you use the Bolshevik numbers] to 20,000,000 to 28,000,000 [if you count the numbers by those who watched all these people die] between Oct/ Nov 1917 to about 1925.

Just to take that into some kind of example as to the number of 20 to 28 million people,  the USA at this time is at war in Iraq to save their 25 million.

Why did so many people die?  The Revolutionaries were so full of hate, anger and revenge  that they killed not just the people who were in White Army uniform,  they killed anyone [men, women, children] who got in there way.

During a revolution it is usually true senseless killings occur within the first six month or a year or two but this killing did not stop in Russia under Lenin and grew even worst under Stalin.

Most of you have seen the inoscent people being held as hostages in Iraq and then hear that their heads are sawed off with swords.  This kind of senseless killing didn't happen once a week in Russia nor was it for the television audience at at that time.  This happen daily and not just with adults.

The pro-communists can tell you that the White Army had their own terrible killings.  Some of this is true.  People sometimes do things which are just as horrific as their enemies.  I think the numbers of the "murdered" runs about a few thousand at the most.  Of course,  because it's less in number will never make
murder right no matter what flag you are fighting under.

What Biritsh Blue is saying about events in Russia after Oct/Nov 1917 is what the communists would like to hide.

It's like this debate if Lenin gave the order to execute Nicholas II or it it was the Ural Soviet who had achieve this act on their own.  Since all were Bolshviks and it was their character to do this kind of killing,  it really doesn't matter who pulled the trigger.  Both Lenin and his "trusted lieutenant" Yurovsky had just one goal in mind.  That was to eliminate all the Romanovs who might rise up later and lead a revolution against the revolutionaries.   So,  it really doesn't matter if you, I, King, Wilson, or anyone else can or cannot find a single telegram or a note which gave the actual order to shoot and kill Nicholas II.

When Ana Anderson appeared and claimed she was Anastasia, a number of things occured.

(1)  The story of what occured in Ekaterinburg was brought up again and the horror of not just a Emp. of Russia but also his wife and children were killed made the headlines
(2)  Someone in Lenin's staff had to find out what happen that night how many bodies were in the grave and it was discovered that two bodies were missing  and we'll never know how people vanished or how many false documents were created or what was destroyed....
(3)  People outside of Russia were reminded of the character of the Bolsheviks who by then were calling themselves communists
(4)  A wave of new stories were being revealed  of what was actually happening in Russia under Stalin

Lenin and Stalin had men who were "trusted lieutnants" who were  professional executioners.  One of their more popular means of killing in a foreign country  [yes,  they didn't just stay in Russia] was making a death look like sucide.

Between Lenin and Stalin,  they completely ruined just about everything and placed the blame on the Romanovs.

I agree, Nicholas II made a lot of mistakes but dispite these mistakes life was changing in Russia. True, it was not fast enough for Lenin and those who were suffering poverty.

At no time,  do I claim that monarch is better than democracy.  So, when people critize this posting,  remember,  I am not claiming a monarch is better than a dictator.  I do not.  The lives of the masses depend upon  the moods of a monarch/dictator.  If you have a one person who is evil and wicked they should be set aside.  This doesn't mean "death to all the enemy".

In 1917 Nicholas II was not evil. Yes, under his watch people did die because of various events which prove he held his prejudices.  And to these people is was evil and very wrong.  Although he didn't understand  religious freedom nor demoracy he did  give in to the creation of a Duma.

Some will rise up and say that the Duma was useless and an attempt that was too late.  It was the beginning and some things don't happen over night.

But all of this became moot when the Provisional Govt. didn't have unity under a strong leader and this gave an open for Lenin who was later replaced with Stalin.

Lenin had been a socialist but Stalin,  well,  he was a man after power.  He was a cruel and vicious man.  And this cruelity and viciousness was allowed by all of his men and everyone else down to the local policeman.

Train load after train load carried men, women and children to Siberia without blankets, food and a pot to pee in.  Now, if the journey took a day, well,  that would have been one thing.  The trains took weeks to get to Siberia....  The dead men, women, children were tossed out of the cars and littered the edges of the tracks....  Dogs, cats, wolves, rats were carrying away human body parts .....

Anyone who tried to tell you that this inhumanity was good for the future of Russia is very very wrong.

Many of you have heard about Hilter and how the Nazi's were inhumane.  The Jewish population have given us a great deal of information of what really happen.  But you don't hear this about Lenin and Stalin. Why?  All the voices who rejected Lenin or Stalin  were considered "enemies of the people" and they vanished.  

The world was so busy with WWI and WWII that the terrible events occuring in Russia was not reported and those who did were eliminated or were buried in communist lies.

Am I against communism,  you bet I am.  I believe in peoples rights and love my freedom of speech here in the USA.

No government is perfect and many terrible things happen in every country as a new governemnt rises.  USA is no acception.  

This was not the place to get on my soap box, nor was it a place for those who wrote postings before me.  This is suppose to be the thread about Ana Anderson.

I believe it is possible that the Bolshviks may have created claimants which wold make it harder for any real daughter of Nicholas II, had she survived, to come forth and be believed.

I'm not sure that is the case for Ana Anderson who had jumped into a canal in front of a Berlin policeman who fished her out and because it appeared to the policeman that Ana was trying to comit sucide,  she automaticaly was taken to an asylum.  Again, British Blue is correct,  just because Ana was in an asylum doesn't mean she was crazy.

By the time Ana Anderson died,  I do think she believed she was GD Anastasia Romanov.

I remember reading about the woman who played the part of aunt Bee in the Andy Griffon tv show.  After the show was over, the town by the same name as the one in the show adopted aunt Bee.  When she became part of the world elderly people are known to find,  aunt Bee believed she was still aunt Bee.  It's sad but the mind sometimes accept the imaginary.

Anyway,  I hope everyone has a good day and be thankful that Russia has realized there is a better road to take.

AGRBear

PS Under the Russian History - Revolution we've discussed this subject and there you can find my own and those who think I am absolutely wrong debate.  We have books, pages and data over there, as well.

PSS  Forum admin. and I were writing at the same time and he pushed his post button just before I did.  I will copy this post and let's go over to the Russian History-Revolution and continue this topic.  

PSSS  Please British Blue,  do not stop your posting.  You have far more knowledge than I do and I wouldn't want it lost because a few here have bounced on you on this posting.  That goes for those of you who haven't posted and joined this debate.  




Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 03, 2004, 11:23:07 AM
Excellent post, AGRBear! I have been reading a book called "The Russian Century" in which many of the atrocities against innocent Russian citizens are detailed. Even in Sophie Buxhoevedon's book there are horror stories of people being killed simply out of hatred. In one town, they were killing all merchants, so one store owner and his wife left town while their teenage boys were at school. When the boys got home, they were tortured to death becuase they couldn't answer the question of where their parents were.

The thing is, of course everyone is going to see thing their way, and it's also true that all books are written from a certain point of view. Any author, even me, could emphasize certain things or leave certain things out depending on what backs up the things they want to point out. Some people who accuse us of loving the IF too much and not seeing their faults, well, that could also go for people who are fans of the revolutionaries. I think this is a good idea for a thread in The Russian Revolution forum.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: BRITISH_BLUE on October 03, 2004, 11:37:22 AM
Thank You all for your best wishes and supportive  private emails, 12 in number. I am a newbie beginner, and have just realised that my missives were becoming missiles.  I know what terrible wrongs have been done to the Russian people. Especially in my thoughts are the WW2 Russian troops who were butchered in Poland  by the awful German SS.  

I learnt my Russian History from War  books, from tales of the Gulags, from biographies, from newspapers, and from visiting the Auschwitz- Birkenau, Mauthausen and Maidanek Concentration Camps. The  camps showed me what real indifference mean, they also revealed the evil world of East European Politics.

The Russian Royal family were victims. Anastasia and her brothers and sisters were victims. Stalins son was a victim.  Both Anne Frank and Anastasia were [did 'someone say] simply casualities of war''. How sad.

I do not intend to post again.

BB. ENGLAND.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 03, 2004, 11:39:10 AM
Topic Please!

 Anna Anderson was a woman who had the luck to possess remarkable similarly shaped ears as Anastasia and to also suffer from Halus Vargus (sp) a foot condition which Anastasia also had.
 However  I do not think that she was a willing con artist. FA & BB may well disagree with me!  :) I am still convinced that she had been traumatized by tragedies in her own life ( as Franscisca Skansovska ) and thru the ironies of luck was mistaken for a GrDss. She adapted to this new live as best she could - taking her cues from those around her.
 I have read that near the end of her life she stopped trying to convince anyone of anything regarding her identity. Is this true? Any comments?

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on October 03, 2004, 11:57:52 AM
Who was there left to convince? By then, had she not sort of drifted off into another, Romanov-dream world ?
[like so many of her supporters I imagine]. I thought it truely sad, her final phase.  I do not know, but from afar, it looked like they both had althzeimers, [sic] having witnessed it close up in person here.
I would guess Peter Kurth would know the most about that.
Best,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 03, 2004, 12:04:46 PM
Take our debate over to
Russian History
Revolution
Pros and Cons of Oct/Nov Revolution
found at:
http://hydrogen.pallasweb.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=revolution;action=display;num=1096819058

See you there  ;D

GRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 03, 2004, 12:26:24 PM
a Question.

  Anna Anderson spoke Polish and Anastastia of course spoke Russian. But as I don't know Polish---please- is it similar to Russian? A romance language, or Finno Ugric or a more slavic tongue? A dialect of russian? please do clarify

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 03, 2004, 02:03:20 PM
Polish is related to Russian, but really in the same way that, for example, French is related to Italian. Polish also does not use the cyrillic alphabet.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 03, 2004, 03:40:00 PM
Thank you FA :D

   Another point... I dont know if I had brought this topic up before...but did anyone ever escourt AA to an Orthodox church? I believe that most Poles are Catholic and there are certain differences between the way that an Orthodox believer "crosses" themselves vs. a Catholic. (Sometimes this is refered to as push vs. pull -- Orthodox cross themselves head- torso- right- left and sometimes a bow to the floor, while it's  head- torso- left- right with Catholics. )
  This would have been quite automatic for someone born into the Orthodox church, but for someone unfamiliar with this - it would have been telling sign.
I have also heard that Anna became interested in quasi occult philosophies later in life... Is this just a rumour?

Sorry to be full of silly questions today  ;) please be patient with me!

R
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 04, 2004, 10:41:47 AM
Quote
Thank You all for your best wishes and supportive  private emails, 12 in number. I am a newbie beginner, and have just realised that my missives were becoming missiles.  I know what terrible wrongs have been done to the Russian people. Especially in my thoughts are the WW2 Russian troops who were butchered in Poland  by the awful German SS.  

I learnt my Russian History from War  books, from tales of the Gulags, from biographies, from newspapers, and from visiting the Auschwitz- Birkenau, Mauthausen and Maidanek Concentration Camps. The  camps showed me what real indifference mean, they also revealed the evil world of East European Politics.

The Russian Royal family were victims. Anastasia and her brothers and sisters were victims. Stalins son was a victim.  Both Anne Frank and Anastasia were [did 'someone say] simply casualities of war''. How sad.

I do not intend to post again.

BB. ENGLAND.




We are losing another newbie.  His reasons are valid.  I do think that something should be done to prevent us from losing another newbie.   Since I don't read all the theads,  I have no idea how many newbies we've lost because of these few.  Or,  how many have not posted their views because they are afraid of these "missles" striking them.

It would be a huge shame for this excellent forum to be ruined by a few because of a few.

Like I've said to our forum admin.,   he's caught between a rock and a hard spot,  but I do think that I for one am getting quite weary of the threads being ruined by "missles".


AGRBear

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 04, 2004, 10:48:13 AM
Aww, cheer up now, AGRBear.  He hasn't gone anywhere! Why, just in the past several hours he has been busily sending out instant messages to "the three", as you term some of us. Below is the instant message he sent. It's kind of funny in a way because he does not address anyone directly, rather copied and pasted a message he sent to Annie.

Why do you suppose he circulated this hostile diatribe?

And this KGB business. Somehow I *knew* he was of the tin foil hat set.

Here's a copy of the message he sent to at least two others:


(No subject) on: Today at 1:46am

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COPY OF MESSAGE TO ANNIE


Hi Annie,
[from Bob]

I received a triumphant message from Rysskia, answering mine to her, in which she states. I am a Socialist, we have nothing in common, and Dascova and Olga are my good friends.

Do you know anything about these 3, like where they live, are they in Russia, are they Russians, is proving that the Ural Soviets the killers a public relations excercise for the KGB. Are they agents.  

What I have noticed is they show no sympathy for Russia's old / or new problems. For the dead, and the vanished. It was taking over my  life  posting, and did no good, people cannot be reformed and these three   fools prove it.

BOB.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 04, 2004, 10:57:56 AM
OK
I was trying to stay out of this. I am not going to point fingers or name names at ANYONE, as I myself was a little unsure of where BB was coming from.
What I AM going to say is this: EVEYRONE must remain MORE civil and polite and less personal in their attacks. I have had several people express to me that they no longer want to post because of the attacks against them.

If you even suspect for a moment that you are included, consider yourself included, please.
FA
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on October 04, 2004, 11:05:17 AM
Rsskiya. I think one may find that Eastern Rite Catholics tend to cross themselves the same as Orthodox. This has been my experience [Greek/Ukraine/Bulgarian Eastern Rite].
As for BB, I am surprised he has not IMed me, as I am probably more scarlett than my comrades here !!
Cheers
Robert
[that was NOT an invitation, BB]
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 04, 2004, 11:10:15 AM
To the best of my knowledge, based on attending and participating in a number of Russian Orthodox services and family members of that faith, *and* some good friends who are Greek Orthodox, yes, they all cross themselves the same way, which is opposite of the Western rite.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 04, 2004, 12:18:50 PM
HOW in the world did someone get a hold of a private message of mine, and why was it posted? I don't like it that my name is being used in this :(
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 04, 2004, 12:26:19 PM
These three remind me of three cats who know how to attack and retreat.  When you go to find them,  they can look so innocent.  And when they sleep they can appear so  angelic.  Then they wake, stretch,  look around, and,  give the apperance of being so so petable and they rub against you showing they have great affection for you.  You leave them and they may be good or maybe not.  Cats don't change their habits for people.  They never have and never will.

I assume that British Blue's attackers will not understand my comparing them to cats.

Formun Admin. doesn't have a chance with these clever females because females have perfected their cat-like metholds since we were living in caves and the men were out hunting.

I wish him luck, however,  I did hope for some kind of acknowledgment that the attacks on British Blue were not accpetable on this thread or anywhere else.  He didn't, and, so the cats are pretending they did nothing wrong at all.

Such good little kittens, who have lost their mittens.  Meaow.

It's sad to think I've had to turn into a protective grandma cat because I hate this "catty" stuff.

I have work to do.

Maybe I'll be back in a week or two.  Maybe not.  

Bye,

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 04, 2004, 12:41:32 PM
Quote
HOW in the world did someone get a hold of a private message of mine, and why was it posted? I don't like it that my name is being used in this :(


A copy of the IM in question was sent to me and at least one other was sent to Rskkiya.  I received my  copy as an IM from the poster named British Blue.

I posted it here to point out that British Blue had forwarded a message intended for you to at least two other posters, apparently in some weird attempt to let Rskkiya and I know what he thought about us.  I have no idea why he did not address us directly, nor why he brought you into this.  It's almost as though he was attempting to hide behind you as he strikes at others.

I have no idea why he did it! No one was more surprised than me when I checked my messages this morning and found his/your IM there!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 04, 2004, 12:53:09 PM
Quote
These three remind me of three cats who know how to attack and retreat.  When you go to find them,  they can look so innocent.  And when they sleep they can appear so  angelic.  Then they wake, stretch,  look around, and,  give the apperance of being so so petable and they rub against you showing they have great affection for you.  You leave them and they may be good or maybe not.  Cats don't change their habits for people.  They never have and never will.

I assume that British Blue's attackers will not understand my comparing them to cats.

Formun Admin. doesn't have a chance with these clever females because females have perfected their cat-like metholds since we were living in caves and the men were out hunting.

I wish him luck, however,  I did hope for some kind of acknowledgment that the attacks on British Blue were not accpetable on this thread or anywhere else.  He didn't, and, so the cats are pretending they did nothing wrong at all.

Such good little kittens, who have lost their mittens.  Meaow.

It's sad to think I've had to turn into a protective grandma cat because I hate this "catty" stuff.

I have work to do.

Maybe I'll be back in a week or two.  Maybe not.  

Bye,

AGRBear


Molodyets, AGRBear! As a proud Leo, I don't mind the cat comparison at all  ;D
However, I think in this case it's a tad misplaced, since after all,  BB, by sending out this IM the way he did, and saying the things he said in it, well, he kind of "put his foot in it," revealing behavior that could certainly be considered rather "catty."  And, that's not anyone's fault but his own.

I also today learned that in other IM's to another poster, British Blue referred to me as a Daschund.  Hmmm...dog, cat, cat, dog, oh well, both utterly lovable.  I will take both as a compliment.  :-*
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 04, 2004, 01:21:04 PM
 I don't know how that ended up on other people's PMs but I would appreciate that my name not be used. If you must post a private PM in public (which I consider very dishonorable and bad form) please erase my name from it, it couldn't possibly matter which member it was addressed to. :(
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 04, 2004, 01:32:45 PM
What is bad form is forwarding the post *with your name on it* to anyone else.  The privacy factor ended with British Blue's actions.

However, I will not use your name should I receive further backhanded information from BB or anyone else.

I do confess it would be most interesting to know what your response was to the original! lol!  ;D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 04, 2004, 01:41:35 PM
 
Quote
What is bad form is forwarding the post *with your name on it* to anyone else.  The privacy factor ended with British Blue's actions.


I was assuming that was a blunder, but if it was intentional, that was bad form as well.

I have been on a lot of message boards, and taking private stuff onto the open forum is never good :(


Quote
I do confess it would be most interesting to know what your response was to the original! lol!  ;D


Actually I haven't responded yet, if I did, it would only to say that I don't know if you guys are KGB or not. Anyone could or  could not be KGB for all I know. :P
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 04, 2004, 01:53:58 PM
I won't post it again because I said I wouldn't, but Annie, if you scroll up and look at where I first posted the forwarded IM.

Do you see where  it says in all caps:  "COPY OF MESSAGE TO _____" ?

That was not my typing, that was the work of British Blue.  Now, how can that possibly be inadvertant?  

I had to read it several times to figure out just what was it that had been sent.  I knew there was a member here with your screen name, but I had no idea who BOB was, all I knew is that something sent to you from somebody named "BOB" was forwarded to *me* by British Blue.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 04, 2004, 01:55:28 PM
OK, ALL Y'ALL:
ENOUGH, STOP, GENUG, NYET.
>:(
If you people have a problem about stuff off topic and with user's personalities, TAKE IT PRIVATE AND KEEP IT THERE.
I WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY OF YOU CONTINUING THIS PERSONAL ATTACK ON EACH OTHER IN THE FORUM.

PERIOD.

No more posting Private IM messages WITHOUT sender's permission
PERIOD.

I feel like the fourth grade playground monitor and am sick of this and should not have to be dragged into this childish behavior.
ALL Y'ALL KNOW BETTER.


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_W. on October 04, 2004, 02:03:32 PM
Thank you, Forum Administrator.

It will be nice to see something other than bickering on this thread.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on October 04, 2004, 03:55:08 PM
Quote
a Question.

   Anna Anderson spoke Polish and Anastastia of course spoke Russian. But as I don't know Polish---please- is it similar to Russian? A romance language, or Finno Ugric or a more slavic tongue? A dialect of russian? please do clarify

R.



I'm no expert on either language and can only give an opinion from my own experience.  My father's family is Polish, and I grew up hearing the language quite a lot (as a young child, I could understand it, but no longer).  There are words that are the same in both languages (nastrovya (ignore the spelling please) comes to mind), but I'm not sure to what extent the similarities are.  All I know is that 10 years ago, my dad picked me up from the airport and told the Russian cab driver which way to go from JFK.  The cab driver and my dad argued over it in English.  We ended up going the way my dad wanted to, but the cab driver was saying stuff the whole way in Russian.  When we got out of the cab, my dad told him off in Polish.  The cab driver's eyes popped out of his head and asked my dad in Russian if he understood everything that he had said.  My dad told him in not so nice Polish that he did.  My dad chalks it up to knowing Russian curse words from his father, who picked them up while serving in the Russian army during WWI, but to me it looked like more than just that.  Maybe if you're Polish, you don't need to know a whole lot of Russian to be able to understand it?  Who knows?  Like I said, I'm just going by what I've seen within my own family.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Dashkova on October 04, 2004, 04:01:26 PM
What a great story Alexa!  I have on several occasions seen my native speaker Russian spouse carry on conversations with Poles; they in Polish, he in Russian and both understanding one another completely.

I'm told the languages are different but easily understood by both.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on October 04, 2004, 04:14:14 PM
Quote
What a great story Alexa!  I have on several occasions seen my native speaker Russian spouse carry on conversations with Poles; they in Polish, he in Russian and both understanding one another completely.

I'm told the languages are different but easily understood by both.


Glad you enjoyed the story.  I have to admitt, I laughed my butt off when the cab driver realized my dad knew exactly what names he was being called.  We still laugh about it.

I've heard the same thing about Russian and Polish, and after witnessing the conversatino my dad had, it clicked in my head on why AA could understand Russian, but would never speak it.  

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 04, 2004, 04:16:00 PM
Now, that is an interesting story because my Polish grandmother said most emphatically that she could not understand Russian as it was too different.  I think my analogy about French and Italian is probably a good one. A Frenchman might understand some Italian words and vice versa...but they are not that close...
Perhaps Mike can shed some light for us.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on October 04, 2004, 04:22:18 PM
Quote
Now, that is an interesting story because my Polish grandmother said most emphatically that she could not understand Russian as it was too different.  I think my analogy about French and Italian is probably a good one. A Frenchman might understand some Italian words and vice versa...but they are not that close...
Perhaps Mike can shed some light for us.


See. now my dad says the same thing, but when I ask him to explain how he understood what the cab driver was saying (not just the curse words) he just blows it off.  He's very aloof when it comes to stuff like that.  All I know is what I saw.  Maybe it's more like English and Swedish.  Before I went to Sweden, I couldn't speak or understand a word of it (except what I picked up from language tapes), but now I can at least understand some of it.  The languages seem very different at first, but once you hear Swedish enough, the differences fade quite a bit.  That's not to say I can understand everything I hear in Swedish, but I have an easier time understanding Swedish than I do German, a language I studied for 3 years.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 04, 2004, 05:03:23 PM
Hello Its Rskkiya!
 Thanks for the information about both the Polish and Russian languages and the Orthodox church. I had thought that if the languages sounded similar to non Polish/Russian speakers that could explain some of the AA/Anastasia connections.
  Annie, I am so sorry about the tempest in a teapot...
  And to all the numberless posters whom I may have offended in the past, I can only say that as a scholar and a teacher -  sometimes I can be brusque... :-[

I do hope that we can let this "personal issue undercurrent" go now!

the cat rskkiya 8)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Inquiring_Mind on October 05, 2004, 09:05:06 PM
Hello again,
I really appreciate the imput here, and I am more committed  in my  effort to bring my family together with pictures and a coming together with purpose so that the next generation knows who and what they came from.

Maybe I do want to believe in survival because it hurts so much as a mother to think that children could be treated so harshly.

I read everything about Anna and daily change my mind.

So I will continue to read and wonder..

Susie
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Olga on October 05, 2004, 10:36:15 PM
I have not served in the forces but I honour his memory by continuing the tradition by being a Royalist.
You do this just because your father did? Aren't you your own person? Are you not able to think for yourself?

And another abrasive little secret, I go horse racing a lot and when I pass the Queen [HM The Queen is at most of the big meetings] I bow, I bow to her and her Office.


Do you see lots of upper class bluebloods there? The Queen is nothing more than an archaicfigurehead who symbolises British Imperialism and the grossly unjust class system. Why should she live in  a wonderful palace, have people bowing and kissing her shadow just because she was born into that position?

                                                                                             

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.  ;D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on October 06, 2004, 02:19:22 AM
Quote

See. now my dad says the same thing, but when I ask him to explain how he understood what the cab driver was saying (not just the curse words) he just blows it off.  He's very aloof when it comes to stuff like that.  All I know is what I saw.  Maybe it's more like English and Swedish.  Before I went to Sweden, I couldn't speak or understand a word of it (except what I picked up from language tapes), but now I can at least understand some of it.  The languages seem very different at first, but once you hear Swedish enough, the differences fade quite a bit.  That's not to say I can understand everything I hear in Swedish, but I have an easier time understanding Swedish than I do German, a language I studied for 3 years.

Alexa


I suppose at this point in the discussion, I would like to know what the sources are for the repeated claim that AA spoke Polish?  I know of only one such assertion, and it comes from a period when AA was living in Virginia after her marriage to John Manahan.  Any number of people asserted she spoke a number of languages or understood them, but Polish was never among them.  And, in any case, (since presumably this goes to the theory that AA was Franziska Schanzkowska), FS who grew up in western Poland, in the Pomerania region, spoke Katchoubian dialect, as her siblings all testified, and as the police reports on her assert.  She picked up some Polish, but it was not enough to even speak in complete sentences, and her German, learned after she came to Berlin, was in fact her best language after Katchoubian.

So again, I wonder who heard her speak Polish, because if it's in line with the theory that she was FS, it contradicts the evidence of her family and the existing reports in FS's police files.

Greg King

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on October 06, 2004, 08:24:16 AM
Quote

I suppose at this point in the discussion, I would like to know what the sources are for the repeated claim that AA spoke Polish?  I know of only one such assertion, and it comes from a period when AA was living in Virginia after her marriage to John Manahan.  Any number of people asserted she spoke a number of languages or understood them, but Polish was never among them.  And, in any case, (since presumably this goes to the theory that AA was Franziska Schanzkowska), FS who grew up in western Poland, in the Pomerania region, spoke Katchoubian dialect, as her siblings all testified, and as the police reports on her assert.  She picked up some Polish, but it was not enough to even speak in complete sentences, and her German, learned after she came to Berlin, was in fact her best language after Katchoubian.

So again, I wonder who heard her speak Polish, because if it's in line with the theory that she was FS, it contradicts the evidence of her family and the existing reports in FS's police files.

Greg King



Hey Greg,
Could you let us know which languages AA spoke, other than German and English?  It's been ages since I read your book, and with all the information about her floating around, both true and false, my brain confuses much of the clutter.

Also, who in Virginia asserted that she spoke Polish?  Just curious as to how this rumor got started.

Thanks!
Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 06, 2004, 08:24:42 AM
Mr. King
Wow! Once again there seems to be a great deal of misinformation about ! I felt quite certain that a number of books and documentaries on AA/the Romanovs have commented on Fransisca-Anna speaking Polish!
I don't disbelieve you-- you are a historian and an author of some renown -- but this is strange news indeed. Is the dialect of the region that Anna was from at all similar to either Polish or Russian?
Thanks again for this new bit of information!

One confused kitty ???
Rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: cville on October 06, 2004, 04:36:00 PM
All DNA tests are not the same. There's some doubt surrounding the Manahan test.

First, there is zero evidence chain to assure that the tissue sample that left Charlottesville, Virginia, is the same thing that arrived at the testing site. Substitutions along the route and near the point of delivery were possible. There was motive, means, and opportunity for that due to how it was shipped. That was accepted from the start and is not in doubt. Because of that, although the test is useful in the court of history, that test would not be accepted in a US court of law.

Second, by now many have seen the British medical journal "Annals of Human Biology" for January 2004. An article there casts doubt on some DNA samples against which Anna Manahan's were compared. The DNA is said to have been too well preserved, and contaminated with "fresh" DNA. Here's the abstract:

Annals of Human Biology - Publisher: Taylor & Francis Health Science. January 28, 2004

Background: A set of human remains unearthed near Ekaterinburg, Russia has been attributed to the Romanov Imperial Family of Russia and their physician and servants. That conclusion was officially accepted by the Russian government following publication of DNA tests that were widely publicized.

The published study included no discussion of major forensic discrepancies and the information regarding the burial site and remains included irregularities. Furthermore, its conclusion of Romanov identity was based on molecular behaviour that indicates contamination rather than endogenous DNA.

The published claim to have amplified by PCR a 1223 bp region of degraded DNA in a single segment for nine individuals and then to have obtained sequence of PCR products derived from that segment without cloning indicates that the Ekaterinburg samples were contaminated with non-degraded, high molecular weight, 'fresh' DNA.

Aim: Noting major violations of standard forensic practices, factual inconsistencies, and molecular behaviours that invalidate the claimed identity, we attempted to replicate the findings of the original DNA study.

Subject: We analysed mtDNA extracted from a sample of the relic of Grand Duchess Elisabeth, sister of Empress Alexandra.

Results: Among clones of multiple PCR targets and products, we observed no complete mtDNA haplotype matching that reported for Alexandra. The consensus haplotype of Elisabeth differs from that reported for Alexandra at four sites.

Conclusion: Considering molecular and forensic inconsistencies, the identity of the Ekaterinburg remains has not been established. Our mtDNA haplotype results for Elisabeth provide yet another line of conflicting evidence regarding the identity of the Ekaterinburg remains.

To see the web page for this: http://tinyurl.com/3nvcn

That's a shortcut to:
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=8dflwglxwh0j0qgunm13&referrer=parent&backto=issue,1,14;journal,3,34;linkingpublicationresults,1:102426,1
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 06, 2004, 05:00:04 PM
Quote
All DNA tests are not the same. There's some doubt surrounding the Manahan test.

First, there is zero evidence chain to assure that the tissue sample that left Charlottesville, Virginia, is the same thing that arrived at the testing site. Substitutions along the route and near the point of delivery were possible.

Second, by now many have seen the British medical journal "Annals of Human Biology" for January 2004. An article there casts doubt on some DNA samples against which Anna Manahan's were compared. The DNA is said to have been too well preserved, and contaminated with "fresh" DNA. Here's the abstract:
 

Point one: Actually, all labs that performed the Manahan test signed off on the chain of handling as meeting national standards. It WOULD be admissible in a Court of Law.

Point 2: You mix apples and oranges.  The January 2004 article you cite refers only to the work done by Gill on the Ekaterinburg samples and has nothing to do with the Manahan samples whatsoever. There is simply no question about the samples of the living descendants who were compared being exactly who and what they purport to be. The only "contamination" question (if there actually IS one) about the Imperial Family DNA from Ekaterinburg.

PLEASE keep your facts and issues straight in this regard.
Thanks.
FA
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on October 06, 2004, 05:02:02 PM
The above test to which you refer has been discredited, at least in part due to a claimant with an agenda finding his way into credited co-authorship of the study. Repeated requests to Dr. Knight to explain or clarify this irregularity have resulted in his promising to explain this at a later date, after publication of yet another paper.

You also conveniently fail to state that there were multiple identical samples of DNA from the late Mrs. Manahan in addition to the hospital's materials. If you cannot explain this ommission, we may be forced to conclude that you, too, have an agenda, not to mention, a bias.

As to the Mrs. Manahan speaking Polish issue, Peter Kurth states that she did not speak Polish and for me, his word is sufficient. Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich, on the other hand, is not always reliable and he is a possible source of the Mrs. Manahan speaking Polish issue. He said something to the effect that Nicky's daughter may have changed in looks, but no daughter of the Tsar would speak Russian with a Polish accent.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: cville on October 06, 2004, 10:53:06 PM
Correction of Point One. No one signed off on the transmission of the Manahan intestine test piece because no one could. It was shipped unaccompanied. There seems to be no problem with the handling at both ends, but those who shipped and those who received have no knowledge that nothing happened in-between, and stated so in at least one newspaper story (The Daily Progress - Charlottesville, VA) at the time. That is what keeps it from being accepted in a court of law, which requires the evidence be secure every step of the way.

So far as I know, there was no other DNA test with even that much credibility, though I'd be interested in learning of any. Hair was tested but there is no evidence but informal and circumstantial the hair came from Anna Manahan.

One member of a group of scientists issuing the report has an interest in the matter. So what? They all signed off on the report, have had ample time to backtrack, and have not done so.  Until they do, that objection is stretching things. But then Anna Anderson's adventures have been stretching things for years.

Perhaps Peter Kurth will have new insights when he's interviewed in a few weeks for a program on the Disney Channel. It will likely be broadcast in the next six months.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 08, 2004, 07:18:55 PM
While we wait for Kurth's interview,  I hope I can continue an earlier topic on this thread which spilled over to another thread and I was told to bring it back here.  

See Posts  2 Oct. ...

This was Forum Admin. wrote me last:
Quote
They are on the AA/Anastasia thread, about Oct. 1. in response to British Blue.
the gist of it:Yurovsky was not in direct communication with Lenin. His direct contact was with Sverdlov (chairman of Central Exec Committe in Moscow). The military commander of Ekaterinburg, Goloshchyokin went to Sverdlov in Moscow, and was specifically denied permission to execute the IF. Lenin told Sverdlov that he specifically wanted the IF brought to Moscow for a public "show trial"
Sverdlov's exact words;"Filip, (Goloshchyokin) tell the comrades that the ARCEC does not give official sanction to an execution."

The relevant telegrams are in Last Act of a Tragedy, published in 1996, by Aleksyev, who spent much time going thru all the relevant files and archives  in Russia, able to read whatever he wanted. there simply are NO telegrams from Lenin ordering the murders.


This is after I wrote......  I'll be right back I have to copy it....

Quote

Evidently you are just having fun at Jon C's expense.  Why doesn't this surprise me?   It is unfortunate  Jon C's  suggestion is being rediculed.  Since his thoughts are not that much different than my own thoughts that one, two or all may have escaped.  Unlike R and others,   I can understand what Jon C. is trying to discover.  

Jon C. ,  it is possible that one, two or all of the Imperial Family escaped.  I for one do not believe the history written by the CHEKA of Ekaterinburg, the Ural Soviets nor Lenin and Stalin's people.
----
Here is a good example:  

Time and time again,  we are being told that Lenin did not sent a telegram to Ekaterinburg to give the order of the execution of the Imperial Family.

In the book THE FALL OF THE ROMANOVS by Steinberg and Khrustalaev pps.  290-291.

In brief the authors talk about Filipp Goloshchekin's visit to Moscow in early July.

"There is some indication that a contingency plan was discussed.  In the 1930s, Yurovsky stated that while Goloshchekin was in Moscow in early July 'the center' decided 'what to do if abandoning Yekaterinburg became unavoidable'-- implying that this was a decision in favor of executing th forer tsar..."

The authors go into the possible trial if  Nicholas II was taken to Moscow.

A few paragraphs later the authors write:
"Did Moscow respond with a direct order?  If a decision to execute the former tsar and his family had alrelady been made in Mocow, no such order would have been necessary.  According to Yurovsky, however an order to  'exterminate the R-----ovs' did arrive in Yekaterinburg sometime before 6:00 in the evening on 16 July [Document 159]."   "But Yurovsky's statement is not proof.  It also raises more questions."
----
You bet it raises more questions by me and others.

Knowing how well Lenin, Ural Soviets and CHEKA could cover up a single telegram,  means to me that they were certainly capable of covering up the escape of one or all of the Imperial Family on the night of 16/17 July 1918.

.... others can't seem to accept this possibility.  However, after long last,  they will admit a very very distant possibility one or two of the Imperial Family may have escaped for a day or two or nine months.  [I have no idea  where C1 is taking them on this, althought I can guess.]  But,  I, Jon C., and others can.   I assume that is why this thread was created in the first place because of the possibility there are  "Serious Claimants".

When I, Jon C. or anyone else dares to think  one or all escaped the doubters ask for evidence.

I have mentioned the fact that a high offical in the German community had told people that  when the word came out of Russia around the date of 16 July 1918 that Nicholas II had been executed that it was not to be believed.....

I have mentioned various names of people who claimed they had seen one or all members of the Royal Family after 16 July 1918....

There is evidence that trains were being searched by Red Army who were looking for the "missing" Romanovs...

This evidence is set aside by those who believe the CHEKA, Ural Soviets and Lenin that they executed the Imperial Family.

The CHEKA, Ural Soviets, Lenin and Stalin and other communists have had a long long time to eliminate all evidence that could have proven an escape of one, two or all.

Conspiracy.  You bet!

Why?  As I've said before,  "The CHEKA, Ural Soviets, Lenin and communists did not/  do not want the world to know that the Imperial Family was not executed on the night of 16/17  July 1918 because of the approaching White Army but they  [nine we know of out  of the eleven] were MURDERED when there  was no longer a threat from the White Army rescuers.

AGRBear


I have one more thing to add so,  I'll be right back.


AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 08, 2004, 07:38:41 PM
Quote
Telegram:

R- wrote:
"The FA has made several posts about the the "telegram from the government issue" Please reread them! R. "

I'll be more than happy to read or reread Forum Admin. posting o the telegram.  Where may I find them?  

Meanwhile,  since I've continued to read The Fall of the Romanovs by Steinberg and Khrustalaev,  I see on p. 292:

"The main evidence that a telegram ordering execution came from Moscow is a statement made in the 1960s by a member of the Kreimlin guard who claimed that he personally carried Lenin's message to the telegraph office"confirming" the "decision" of the Ural party committee to execute the former tsar and his family."  following this statement is the number 53.  So,  I turned back to note #53 which reads "Radzinsky, Last Tsar, pp. 345 -346.

So I went out to my garage,  moved about ten boxes and found Radzinsky's book.  

Radzinsky continues with a letter of Nikolai Lapik,  director of the Progress Factory's museum in the town of Kuibyshev p. 345-6:  
"We have in our museium a tpyed record of a conversation between F. F. Akimov and A. G. Smyshlyaev...."

To make it brief,  Radzinsky talks about the telegram and more.  The telegrapher had refused to give up the "copy" of the telegram and the  "ribbon", a gun was pulled, threats and the operator gave up the  "copy" and the 'ribbon".

Radzinsky's conclusion was:
"So, the Sovnarkom and Central Executive Commmitte (that is, Lenin and Sverdlov) sent that telegram to Ekaterinburg  'with confirmation of this decision' about the execution of the tsar's family."


-----


We  [I and Robert] have  already agreed he probably has more books in his library than I but I'm not sure if he could out number me if I counted ALL the books I've bought and read. Besides, I'm not sure what the number of books have to do with my theory that there may have been "survivors"  There are many readers who have used the library and don't own but a few books.  

Nor have I ever announced that I thought a "real" claimant or descendant has ever  surfaced.

All I am asking is that you open up your mind to the possible fact that the CHEKA, Ural Soviet and Lenin may have covered up events of the night of 16/17  July 1918 in the Ipatiev House in Ekaterinburg , Siberia , Russia.  I used the telegram because there is a controvery over it's exsistence, too.

And, once you have opened your mind,  then allow those of us who think it is possible that one, two or all may not have been executed that night as the CHEKA, Ural Soveits and Lenin try to make us believe they were.

AGRBear


So,  now,  most of you can see what was being talked about.

From what I've read,  it appears to me that Lenin did give orders to execute Nicholas II, and,  another place I differ is,  I think Yurovsky, who was one of Lenin's "lieutenants",  was in all of this "up to his ears" from it's conception.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 08, 2004, 08:15:26 PM
Agrbear This is  the FA statement about the " telegram question"
.
Quote
According to the book "Last Act of a Tragedy" by Russian researchers who went into the long secret Bolshevik archives, there is no "smoking gun" evidence Lenin ordered the murders. All of the telegrams and documents show that the Ural Soviet was acting on their own, and that Lenin approved the murders after the fact.
If anyone has documentation otherwise, please share it with us.


Ok? Rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 08, 2004, 11:04:32 PM
I am not sure if an "okay" answered any of my findings in other books.  Since I don't have "Last Act of a Tragedy", what does it say about the typed letter in the museum and the destruction of the "telegram"?  And, what does it mean that one person was free to look at documents?  Who is he?  And,  what made him acceptable to the Russians?  Since I'm sure he is highly regarded by the Forum Admin.,  then he is honest and forthright, this said, then I suspect    if there had been anything before he gained his permission,  the last shreads of evidence was gone before he got there..  

What does it say about Yurovsky being Lenin's faithful lieutenant?  These two knew each other in Germany.  These two saw each other many times, and,  before the execution. They believed in being terrorists.   Unlike some people think  Yurovsky wasn't just a person who just happen to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time and  I will not feel sorry for him because he chose his own fate in these events.

I have mentioned the various books which follow my thoughts and conclusion in many threads.  

I  hardly think one book is going to halt my distrust toward the CHEKA, Ural Soviets, Lenin, later Stalin, communism, and, now some of the misguided people who are still willing to hide the truth.

R- Why are you suddenly talking for our Forum Admin. ?   I realize he is quite busy and has probably some pain in his neck from the stuff that was happening over in the  serious claimant just as he was having it here for a time, but I'm sure he can speak for himself here.

Also, R.,  you have not unblocked my ability to write to you directly as you've said twice, now.  Could I please write you privately,  I let you write me  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 08, 2004, 11:17:18 PM
agrbear
No I was just pointing out the FA's statement about the Last Act of a Tragedy...I am certainly not his mouthpeice!
LOL Larks I just got the hang of the "quote" fuction ...LOL

R
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on October 09, 2004, 02:39:35 AM
Quote

Hey Greg,
Could you let us know which languages AA spoke, other than German and English?  It's been ages since I read your book, and with all the information about her floating around, both true and false, my brain confuses much of the clutter.

Also, who in Virginia asserted that she spoke Polish?  Just curious as to how this rumor got started.

Thanks!
Alexa


From the beginning of her story in 1920, the accounts all agree that AA spoke a very fragmented form of German in daily conversation.  She understood Russian, but generally refused to speak it (though she did do so in front of any number of witnesses, and also was recorded by a doctor-a native Russian-as having spoken it in her sleep and at other times).  Generally, as Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna recalled of her visits to AA, when asked a question in Russian, AA would answer in German, so no one could claim she did not understand it.  She spoke fragmentary French, though not very gramatically, and her English was likewise fragmented-she understood it and could speak it, but could not formulate it into gramatical sentences very well.

As to the assertion that as an old lady she spoke Polish: the lady who believes she heard this is a respected friend of mine, and I believe she sincerely does believe that this is what she heard, but it would be the first recorded instance of it happening in this case, which is why I remain skeptical.  But as she is well-known in her own right, I'm not going to drag her into this!

As an aside: I don't know about anyone else, but by this time, on this thread, for me to answer every single message (20 pages worth) has to load on the "Post a reply" page, which takes a very long time.  So perhaps very specific topics related to AA or anything else being discussed here could be posted as new threads for those of us condemned to dial-up?  Just a thought.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on October 09, 2004, 02:48:04 AM
Quote
I am not sure if an "okay" answered any of my findings in other books.  Since I don't have "Last Act of a Tragedy", what does it say about the typed letter in the museum and the destruction of the "telegram"?  And, what does it mean that one person was free to look at documents?  Who is he?  And,  what made him acceptable to the Russians?  Since I'm sure he is highly regarded by the Forum Admin.,  then he is honest and forthright, this said, then I suspect    if there had been anything before he gained his permission,  the last shreads of evidence was gone before he got there..  

What does it say about Yurovsky being Lenin's faithful lieutenant?  These two knew each other in Germany.  These two saw each other many times, and,  before the execution. They believed in being terrorists.   Unlike some people think  Yurovsky wasn't just a person who just happen to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time and  I will not feel sorry for him because he chose his own fate in these events.

I have mentioned the various books which follow my thoughts and conclusion in many threads.  

I  hardly think one book is going to halt my distrust toward the CHEKA, Ural Soviets, Lenin, later Stalin, communism, and, now some of the misguided people who are still willing to hide the truth.

R- Why are you suddenly talking for our Forum Admin. ?   I realize he is quite busy and has probably some pain in his neck from the stuff that was happening over in the  serious claimant just as he was having it here for a time, but I'm sure he can speak for himself here.

Also, R.,  you have not unblocked my ability to write to you directly as you've said twice, now.  Could I please write you privately,  I let you write me  


AGRBear:

Please see pages 292-93 in "The Fate of the Romanovs" for the most up to date assessment of Radzinsky's claim.  You will see it falls far short of what he intimates.

As to your claim that Yurovsky knew Lenin in Germany: this is certainly news to me, or indeed to any Lenin scholar.  I daresay we saw and uncovered as much information as anyone yet on Yurovsky in our book, including his unpublished memoirs, and there is no evidence whatsoever that the two men met in Germany.

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 09, 2004, 10:39:17 AM
I thought this was a known fact that Yurovsky and Lenin were close even before the revolution known as Red October [Oct/Nov 1917].

I remember reading about Yurovsky's first meeting of Lenin was in Germany,  however,  my memory fails me as to what book it was.  Perhaps,  the author was merely spreading a rumor.  Not unusal in the older books.   So, for now, until I remember the source  [probably a book on Lenin],  I'll have to voice it as a rumor.  

Hmmmmm,  I can't seem to pull it out of my memory.

Sorry folks.

When I do find it,  I will post.

Now,  I'm off to find the box which has King and Wilson's book to read what they have to say about Radzinsky.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 09, 2004, 11:23:56 AM


Took my reply which was posted here  to a new thread:
http://hydrogen.pallasweb.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=revolution;action=display;num=1097423232;start=0


AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: HerrKaiser on October 09, 2004, 03:05:19 PM
In actuality, Anna Andersen and the Grand Duchess had very little resemblances. Nearly every adult you know "looks like" their grade school photos; especally when comparing people in their early 20s to their youth. This was the timeframe of comparison for Anna. Anna Andersen bore no such similarites to Anastasia that would give us cause to say "that is she!".

Clearly, however, Anna had facts about the Romanovs that she must have learned by means other than studying published histories. Anna may have known one or more of the executioneers or guards during the imprisonment of the royal family. Such a person could have gained Anastasia's confidence, and Anastasia could have communicated many personal facts which were later told to Mrs. Andersen.

Manipulating the DNA test would be a serious crime, but not outside the realm of possibility, especially since there were many people, including some royals, who did not want the test to be positive. Of course, another lab could do the test to validate or invalidate the original findings.

Nonetheless, it seems the actual physical appearance from photos when the women were only a few years apart in age tells us these were not the same individuals. A person would age and contort under extreme stress from surviving the revolution, but she would not get a different facial structure.

Now the bigger mystery and questions are about how Anna Andersen came to know what she knew.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: cville on October 09, 2004, 05:59:16 PM
Whether Anna Anderson and Anastasia Romanov resembled each other is a hot conjecture. Sometimes it depends on which pictures are being compared. Three that may be relevant are these:

The famous Life Magazine cover of 1963 that Life said said was taken in 1916 - Anastasia is at 1 o'clock
http://www.freewarehof.org/czarkids.jpg

This teenage photo of Anastasia (origin unknown)
http://www.freewarehof.org/anasgirl.jpg

This German hospital photo of Anderson circa 1923. There is no question that this person and the thumbnail photo out there in the left upper corner are the same person. The thumbnail is Anderson in 1968.
http://www.freewarehof.org/anderson.jpg

How that thumbnail came to be taken is found on my web page telling some anecdotes about Anna Manahan: http://www.freewarehof.org/manahans.html

Perhaps photo imaging software and a sharp eye can shed some light on the matter.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on October 09, 2004, 11:22:40 PM
I'm certain you didn't intend it, Cville, but you are using one of Bob Atchison's colorized photos of Anastasia. Do you have his permission to do so? I recognize his work, and I remember when he did this photo colorization. I wonder because you don't attribute his work to him.

Also, I'm sure you mean no offense, but you refer to the Tsar's children as "kiddies". These young murder victims deserve a more respectful designation, don't you think?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: pushkina on October 10, 2004, 01:09:15 AM
cville:

this quote i lifted from your page:

"Girls like Maria who spent their childhood having tea with the Czar's children every Wednesday weren't trained to make a living, but Maria had some talent and endless spunk, it appears."

does anyone know about this? weekly meetings bewteen the imperial children and R's kids?  wasn't maria at school in SP?  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on October 10, 2004, 01:11:32 AM
This, I am afraid, is yet another instance of someone claiming a far closer relationship with the IF than actually existed.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: cville on October 10, 2004, 01:12:46 AM
The images on that page come from a variety of sites and sources, including my own archives.  Where I got that one I have no idea. It was not from a site that carried attributions. I'd appreciate it if you would direct me to a site where he has this photo. I'll follow-up from there.

The original images on my site - those produced by me -  are copyrighted but freely available for all to use without attribution.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on October 10, 2004, 01:24:41 AM
I believe this is the same colorized photo that appears on the "My Name Is Anastasia" website that is part of the Alexander Palace "family" of sites. This website was done in 1997 (as I recall) because of the animated cartoon.

I have two friends who do colorizations of Romanov photographs - and I remember this being one of Bob's.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: cville on October 10, 2004, 02:32:59 AM
Lisa,

Thank you for your interest and your work on this. I do appreciate it. After some exploration, I decided to use the image in its original state without the color enhancement.

Along the way I came across a most enticing photo of the sisters. Most people here may have seen it but for me, it was a new treat.
http://members.tripod.com/~Pharaoh30/duchesses.gif

If that won't display, it appears at the bottom of this page:
http://members.tripod.com/~Pharaoh30/index-4.html
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 10, 2004, 10:57:53 AM
The color photo of Anastasia was absolutely Bob Atchison's and was NOT used with his permission.
For the record, Bob does NOT permit his pictures to be used without his permission, so do NOT reproduce anything off the website without asking first.
Second, for the record. Maria R met the IF once. Period. For tea, and it lasted about 90 minutes or so.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on October 10, 2004, 11:07:07 AM
Quote
Second, for the record. Maria R met the IF once. Period. For tea, and it lasted about 90 minutes or so.


I thought thats what I had read somewhere once but I couldn't remember.I didn't think Maria R. had any kind of deeper relationship with the IF.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: pushkina on October 11, 2004, 12:16:07 AM
Quote
Second, for the record. Maria R met the IF once. Period. For tea, and it lasted about 90 minutes or so.



so, cville,

did marya rasputin TELL [/i] you that she had weekly teas with the IF or did you just assume it?

from my recollections, the rasputin girls, while being brought up in SP and on the edges of at least middle class life with some society connections, were not being brought up as members of the leisure class and definitely not as members of the nobility.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on October 11, 2004, 12:59:45 PM
Well, there's a lot of info supporting and thwarting the case of Anna Anderson. In history, you need to look at both sides or your view might not be correct. I personally shift back and forth in my belief (I seriously have nothing better to do...)

Evidence

-Anna Anderson reminded Maria Rasputin of the Red Cross nurse outfit incident and convinced her.
-Anna reminded Gleb Botkin's son about the "funny animals"
-Anna's face, scars, feet, features, ears (specially) resembled that of the Grand Duchess.
-Anna also had the same foot deformity as Anastasia, hallux vulgus.
-Anna recognized people that the genuine Anastasia knew by their voice.
-Anna knew about the peace mission her uncle went on (yes, it was true).
-Also later on it was discovered that the DNA test was not taken %100 correctly.
-There is strong evidence supporting that the DNA test was rigged, by the people who wanted to discredit Anna.
-Anna's ears looked exactly like Anastasia's. No matter what photographs or methods were used the result was the same. The ears were identical.
-(This probably falls under the features point, oh well) Anna had the same mesmerizing eyes, and identical auburnish hair color. (Is auburnish a real word if not it is now!!! ;D)
-Anna's handwriting was very similar to that of the Grand Duchess.
-According to interviews of some of the executioners, it was declared that Anastasia had survived.
-There is a chance that only the Tsar, Tsarina, and Tsarevitch were killed and the daughters imprisoned somewhere else after their parents' deaths and Anastasia ran away and survived.

Evidence thwarting Anna

-Anna read magazines about the royal family.
-Anna had accurate details about the family's bank account (it is highly unlikely that Anastasia would have had this information).
-Anna was "proven" that she wasn't Anastasia through DNA (though after an thorough investigation problems about the test were uncovered).

Anna was probably NOT Franziska. Because

-Franziska's hands were rough while Anna's were soft and well kept.
-Anna could speak many languages that Franziska could not. This was confirmed by Franziska's family.
-Forensic experts found many differences between the two faces.
-Franziska's teeth were like "black stumps".
-Franziska did not have hallux vulgus while Anna and Anastasia did.
-Franziska's siblings met Anna and said she was too polite to be their sister.
-Franziska disappeared in the May of 1920 while Anna was found in February.
-Also if Franziska was admitted to Berlin hospitals and sanatoriums six times by 1920 why did no one recognize Anna?

But then again she could've been

-Franziska's sibling said she did look like Anna.
-Franziska did resemble Anna a bit.

Please visit this website which helped convince me a bit that Anna was Anastasia, http://www.geocities.com/kransnoeselo/Front.html

Anyway, Anastasia was a delightful child and it was a terrible thing that happened in Ipatiev house during the night of July 17th of 1918. Also if Anna wasn't Anastasia, she is still a remarkable person herself. Both deserve recognition. Well, that took a long time to type...At least I have chocolate to guide my way!! MUAHAHAHAHA...I'm not weird, well not a lot...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: JonC on October 11, 2004, 03:43:20 PM
To all.

Hey, I suggested earlier for someone to make a detailed mathematical study of both Anna A. and Anastasia N.s' faces. Something on the lines of the study done on the Egyptian Sphinx by that NYC detective forensic artist. I saw it on National Geographic a while ago.

The face on the Sphinx had been thought to belong to some pharoah...I forget who...( Kufu?) and after the study which involved comparing its profile, distance between the eyes and size of forehead, etc., with a known image of that Pharoah it was found that the face on the Sphinx didn't match that Pharoah at all.

As a matter of fact the face on the Sphinx didn't match any known Pharoah what-so-ever.

Now we have so many artists on this web site I'm sure someone could take on the study. Best regards. JonC.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on October 11, 2004, 04:18:36 PM
Quote
To all.

Hey, I suggested earlier for someone to make a detailed mathematical study of both Anna A. and Anastasia N.s' faces. Something on the lines of the study done on the Egyptian Sphinx by that NYC detective forensic artist. I saw it on National Geographic a while ago....

...Now we have so many artists on this web site I'm sure someone could take on the study. Best regards. JonC.


Heck, I still want to see computer aging of AN to middle-age and de-aging of AA to childhood.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Sergei on October 11, 2004, 06:39:34 PM
Quote
I have not served in the forces but I honour his memory by continuing the tradition by being a Royalist.
You do this just because your father did? Aren't you your own person? Are you not able to think for yourself?

And another abrasive little secret, I go horse racing a lot and when I pass the Queen [HM The Queen is at most of the big meetings] I bow, I bow to her and her Office.


Do you see lots of upper class bluebloods there? The Queen is nothing more than an archaicfigurehead who symbolises British Imperialism and the grossly unjust class system. Why should she live in  a wonderful palace, have people bowing and kissing her shadow just because she was born into that position?

                                                                                             

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.  ;D


Hi Olga
Just out of curiosity,  what is someone with your anti-royalist views doing on a discussion board about a royal (well, imperial) family? Do you feel the same way about the Romanovs? If you follow your opinions about the Queen through weren't the Romanovs  too symbols of a grossly unjust class system etc etc?  Or did the fact they died tragically redeem them in your eyes?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Olga on October 12, 2004, 02:25:28 AM
I know, I'm a bit confusing. I feel the same way about the Romanovs as I do the Queen. Thier deaths did not redeem them in my eyes. I'm just interested in Imperial Russia. What I said about the Queen and the British class system equally applies to Imperial Russia. It's a bit of a paradox that I find royalty so interesting yet I'm quite the leftie.  ;D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on October 12, 2004, 06:59:32 AM
You are not alone there, Olga !
Cheers,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on October 12, 2004, 12:16:29 PM
Quote

Heck, I still want to see computer aging of AN to middle-age and de-aging of AA to childhood.

Alexa


Is this what you're looking for?

http://www.geocities.com/kransnoeselo/Front.html
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on October 12, 2004, 06:43:40 PM
Quote

Is this what you're looking for?

http://www.geocities.com/kransnoeselo/Front.html


No.  I mean to take a picture of AN and age her the way the authorities age missing children to see what they would like at a certain age.  I'm interested to see what AN would have looked like at, say, age 30.

On the other side, I'd like to take a pic of AA and de-age her to see what she would have looked like at, oh I don't know, maybe 10.  I'm curious to see AA would have looked like AN as a child, and to see if AN would have looked like AA as an adult.  Any comparison would of course be purely one's own opinion, but my curiosity is peeked.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 12, 2004, 07:53:00 PM
I don't think the things about Franziska's family denying her hold much weight, there were reasons for that. Read the "Schanskowska family" thread here on this forum.

I would also love to see an aged AN and deaged AA pictures. It might finally stop all this. In her very last pic, I mistook Anastasia for her Aunt Olga A. I think she would have looked more like her if she had lived.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Sergei on October 12, 2004, 07:56:14 PM
Hi everyone, such a fascinating discussion. I guess we all have one or two incidences which seem to confirm or deny for us the possibility that AA may have been G.D Anastasia. For some it's a photo that looks like Anastasia or doesn't or a book which states something that adds to or detracts from the case. A story which stays in my memory is this but before I start it I must apologise for not being able to cite the source as it was some years ago. (Annoying I know!) All I can recall is that it was the autobiography of an American woman who had lived in Russia before the Revolution. She may have been a diplomat's wife. Here goes...
At the opera or the ballet her box was adjacent to that of the Imperial Family and she watched as Anastasia ate chocolates from a box thereby getting her gloves stained. During the interval she heard Anastasia humming a tune which was quite haunting and unknown to the author. She must have asked someone with her or perhaps even talked to Anastasia as she learned that the song was an obscure Russian folk tune about a girl who lost a doll. Years later in the 1920s the author was walking along a country path through some woods on Long Island when she came upon another woman, quite bizarrely dressed, sitting under a tree. What struck the author was that the woman was humming the same obscure tune as GD Anastasia had been all those years ago!
Later she mentioned to her hosts about the strange woman she had seen and they suggested that it may have been the woman claiming to be Anastasia who was staying at a nearby estate. (Perhaps it was the time when the claimant was staying with Mrs Leeds on Long Island?)
I know, I know .....mere coincidence, this proves nothing, especially with no quoted source but for some reason it has stayed with me.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 13, 2004, 09:38:35 AM
Im locking this thread. It has gotten too big.
Please start a specific new thread for anything else you want to bring up!
Thanks
FA
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on October 13, 2004, 10:31:01 AM
Hi everyone!!

As the old AA and AN thread has now been locked by the FA, and I have a comment, I must start a new thread, alas.  However, I must say I am most relieved that those 21 pages won't have to go on and on and on.........::)

So anyway, I wanted to say how incredibly interesting that tidbit was that Sergio shared with us!!! :o :o :o :o  Infact, I find it quite creepy!  Oh, the poor thing! :'( :'( :'(  How terribly disturbed she was!  For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about, read Sergio's post on the other AA/AN thread right before FA posted that he was going to lock it.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 13, 2004, 12:18:29 PM
Part 2   :)  I like it.

I'll pull Sergio's quote over:

"Hi everyone, such a fascinating discussion. I guess we all have one or two incidences which seem to confirm or deny for us the possibility that AA may have been G.D Anastasia. For some it's a photo that looks like Anastasia or doesn't or a book which states something that adds to or detracts from the case. A story which stays in my memory is this but before I start it I must apologise for not being able to cite the source as it was some years ago. (Annoying I know!) All I can recall is that it was the autobiography of an American woman who had lived in Russia before the Revolution. She may have been a diplomat's wife. Here goes...
At the opera or the ballet her box was adjacent to that of the Imperial Family and she watched as Anastasia ate chocolates from a box thereby getting her gloves stained. During the interval she heard Anastasia humming a tune which was quite haunting and unknown to the author. She must have asked someone with her or perhaps even talked to Anastasia as she learned that the song was an obscure Russian folk tune about a girl who lost a doll. Years later in the 1920s the author was walking along a country path through some woods on Long Island when she came upon another woman, quite bizarrely dressed, sitting under a tree. What struck the author was that the woman was humming the same obscure tune as GD Anastasia had been all those years ago!
Later she mentioned to her hosts about the strange woman she had seen and they suggested that it may have been the woman claiming to be Anastasia who was staying at a nearby estate. (Perhaps it was the time when the claimant was staying with Mrs Leeds on Long Island?)
I know, I know .....mere coincidence, this proves nothing, especially with no quoted source but for some reason it has stayed with me."

 
 
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 13, 2004, 12:21:21 PM
Also, like our newest poster's, Evanescence's,  remarks:

"Well, there's a lot of info supporting and thwarting the case of Anna Anderson. In history, you need to look at both sides or your view might not be correct. I personally shift back and forth in my belief (I seriously have nothing better to do...)  
 
Evidence
 
-Anna Anderson reminded Maria Rasputin of the Red Cross nurse outfit incident and convinced her.
-Anna reminded Gleb Botkin's son about the "funny animals"
-Anna's face, scars, feet, features, ears (specially) resembled that of the Grand Duchess.
-Anna also had the same foot deformity as Anastasia, hallux vulgus.
-Anna recognized people that the genuine Anastasia knew by their voice.
-Anna knew about the peace mission her uncle went on (yes, it was true).
-Also later on it was discovered that the DNA test was not taken %100 correctly.
-There is strong evidence supporting that the DNA test was rigged, by the people who wanted to discredit Anna.
-Anna's ears looked exactly like Anastasia's. No matter what photographs or methods were used the result was the same. The ears were identical.
-(This probably falls under the features point, oh well) Anna had the same mesmerizing eyes, and identical auburnish hair color. (Is auburnish a real word if not it is now!!! )
-Anna's handwriting was very similar to that of the Grand Duchess.
-According to interviews of some of the executioners, it was declared that Anastasia had survived.
-There is a chance that only the Tsar, Tsarina, and Tsarevitch were killed and the daughters imprisoned somewhere else after their parents' deaths and Anastasia ran away and survived.
 
Evidence thwarting Anna
 
-Anna read magazines about the royal family.
-Anna had accurate details about the family's bank account (it is highly unlikely that Anastasia would have had this information).
-Anna was "proven" that she wasn't Anastasia through DNA (though after an thorough investigation problems about the test were uncovered).
 
Anna was probably NOT Franziska. Because
 
-Franziska's hands were rough while Anna's were soft and well kept.
-Anna could speak many languages that Franziska could not. This was confirmed by Franziska's family.
-Forensic experts found many differences between the two faces.
-Franziska's teeth were like "black stumps".
-Franziska did not have hallux vulgus while Anna and Anastasia did.
-Franziska's siblings met Anna and said she was too polite to be their sister.
-Franziska disappeared in the May of 1920 while Anna was found in February.
-Also if Franziska was admitted to Berlin hospitals and sanatoriums six times by 1920 why did no one recognize Anna?
 
But then again she could've been
 
-Franziska's sibling said she did look like Anna.
-Franziska did resemble Anna a bit.  
 
Please visit this website which helped convince me a bit that Anna was Anastasia, http://www.geocities.com/kransnoeselo/Front.html  
 
Anyway, Anastasia was a delightful child and it was a terrible thing that happened in Ipatiev house during the night of July 17th of 1918. Also if Anna wasn't Anastasia, she is still a remarkable person herself. Both deserve recognition. Well, that took a long time to type...At least I have chocolate to guide my way!! MUAHAHAHAHA...I'm not weird, well not a lot...  

« Last Edit: Oct 12th, 2004, 5:07pm by Evanescence »"
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 13, 2004, 12:26:11 PM
Yes ..what a charming story... but its not really conclusive --an obscure russian folk song -- well the fact that Anna Anderson and Anastasia knew the tune is nice but its rather a foaf story  --  a "friend of a friend" or in this case a quaint point from an unnamed book which has been rephrased into a clever and delightful remark.
Good luck in locating the book- I would like to see it.
Rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_W. on October 13, 2004, 01:13:10 PM
I seem to remember this story from the Anastasia book by James Blair Lovell. Or perhaps from Peter Kurth's book about Anastasia. I'm away from both books . . . can anyone confirm?!

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 13, 2004, 03:34:06 PM
Thanks FA and Michelle for the new thread. Regardless of which side we stand on this, we all love to discuss it!

Haunting story.

But since Evanescence's comments have been moved here, so must my comments on them. I would not put too much value on the Schanskowska's family's 'denial' of AA. There were reasons for that, they are listed in the Schaskowska family thread here on this forum.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Anya on October 13, 2004, 04:16:17 PM
Quote
I seem to remember this story from the Anastasia book by James Blair Lovell. Or perhaps from Peter Kurth's book about Anastasia. I'm away from both books . . . can anyone confirm?!



Janet, I've read that story in James B. Lovell's book.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Val289 on October 13, 2004, 11:41:43 PM
I know I've read that same story too.  Unfortunately I can't remember which book I've read it from.  I have Kurth's book, and searched it for that reference, but came up empty handed.  Perhaps it was the J.B. Lovell book, but unfortunately I can't remember - I suppose that doesn't help much -  :-/
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Elisabeth on October 14, 2004, 06:47:45 AM
I’ve read all 21 pages of the old thread – one thing kind of stood out for me. People have thoroughly discussed Anna Anderson’s resemblance (or lack thereof) to Anastasia Nikolaevna in terms of DNA evidence, physical appearance and injuries, her bearing, the languages she spoke or did not speak, her memories, the facts she knew, etc. But we haven’t yet discussed in any great detail Anna Anderson’s emotional instability, which I've always thought one of the stronger (if not strongest) points in favor of her being the grand duchess. See Peter Kurth’s biography for an unusually sensitive treatment of this subject.

Of course, when Kurth wrote his book, most people outside of the psychiatric community were unaware of post-traumatic stress disorder. It didn’t receive much attention in the media until the 1990s (when it got a little too much attention, if you ask me, and became not only an over-used term but something of a cliché ). Since then, however, I’ve often wondered if Anna Anderson suffered from some form of severe post-traumatic stress disorder. It would account for the fact that she did from time to time throughout her life manifest certain symptoms of mental illness but was never insane (according to ALL of her doctors). Many of her symptoms fit the disorder – suicidality, problems with memory, overall aversion to talking about the trauma, sudden and inexplicable fits of rage, difficulty in forming or maintaining  personal relationships (partly because of extreme suspiciousness of others, including close supporters and friends), sleep disorders and somatic symptoms (headaches, other physical pains).

I'm curious to know whether anyone else has any thoughts about this.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on October 14, 2004, 09:35:57 AM
I think you had made a very worthwhile analysis and I have felt this may be a factor for some years. However, was this "disorder" caused by events in Ekaterinburg [?]then becomes the question- all over again.
Cheers,
Robert
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on October 14, 2004, 03:07:38 PM
I agree.It does seem like AA suffered from post traumatic stress disorder.It just makes you wonder what was the trauma that caused this.Unfortunately I doubt we'll ever know.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 14, 2004, 03:27:17 PM
Here's a thought that just stuck me.  

I remember reading somewhere,  I think it was the newspaper, about a group of people whom someone had  claimed  had been secretly part of the royal suite.  Their duty was to go to the distant towns and pretend they were the Royal Family.  Each person looked like the person they were supose to be.  Kinda like we have in the US with all the Elvis impersonators.  Only then,  the task was not a difficult task to fullfill.  There were no televisions sets and this "double family" could just spread their  "good will" to the commers who wanted to see them up close and personal.

If Ana Anderson is not Anastasia or FS,   could she have been part of the "double family", if such a "double family" did exsis?.

Seems like to me it was the newspaper and I remember there was a photograph and some realative of the "double" who had brought this attention to the newspapers.  Evidently,  these "doubles" vanished and the realative  was trying to find information from the Soviets.

I don't recall ever seeing a follow up.

Gosh,  this clip could have been ten even thirty years ago.

Oh,  I do recall another clip having to do with Alexei having a double who was used for the times he couldn't walk and he had to make an appearance at some important state function.  This was separate from this other "double family" clip.

I think Churchill had a "double", or rumor of one,  during the war because of some threat of some kind which later was written as the main theme of a book and then a movie.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 14, 2004, 04:52:53 PM
Agrbear...  :D
   Well AA was a lot older and in fact really didn't look like Anastasia. She didn't speak French or English properly and there are serious doubts as to whether she even spoke Russian. Aside from the fact that we have no evidence of any secret "double family"(LOL) existing at all -- this may prove to be the zaniest theory I have ever heard!
     A trophy for the most outlandishly creative attempt at reinventing the AA/Anastasia connection! :D :D  

Brilliant! (actually you do make me smile Agr!)
r.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 14, 2004, 06:02:13 PM
Didn't make it up, R..

I had forgotten all about it till the moment before I wrote it.

AGRBear

PS  I thought I might have saved this odd clip but it's not in my box.  

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Robert_Hall on October 14, 2004, 06:12:36 PM
Sounds like one of those wild theories that had best been left forgotten.
R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Greg_King on October 14, 2004, 06:45:41 PM
The absurd "doubles" theory comes from two sources:

1.  In Lovell's book, AA claimed to him that the whole family had doubles.  This is a claim she never made before or after, and my sense is that she was amusing herself by feeding a gulliable Lovell the most absurd things she could think of.
2.  Anatoly Gryannik's book "The Last Will of Nicholas II," which not only claimed the family had doubles who were shot, but then makes the (in the Romanov case) supremely absurd claim that not only were Nicholas, Alexandra, etc., rescued, but so were Michael Alexandrovich, Ella and the Alapayevsk victims, the four grand dukes shot in Petrograd in January, 1919, etc., and they all lived happily ever after in Tashkent with people like Olga Alexandrovna (presumably it was her double then living in Denmark and Canada!)

Greg King
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 14, 2004, 07:01:25 PM
No, those  were not the sources about the "double family", Lovel's book may ??? have been where I read about Alexei....

I think it was in the San Francisco Chronicle,  and it was an interview of a person who was looking for his realative who was,  the article said, one of the doubles used on these "good will" trips.  The relative and the others had vanished.  My memory can't seem to pull up more.  Sorry.
I had hoped to find the clip but it wasn't where I usually place this kind of odd clips.

AGRBear

PS  I have not read: Anatoly Gryannik's book "The Last Will of Nicholas II.  Did he suggest  the people executed  in the basement were  the "double family" and not the Romannovs!???
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 14, 2004, 07:07:01 PM

Agrb
Well I don't think that Mr. King is exactly recommending the book-- but have a good time.

R
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 14, 2004, 07:08:43 PM
It's a new one on me.

Have you read it, R.?

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Val289 on October 14, 2004, 09:13:50 PM
Elisabeth has posted a very interesting analysis.  From everything I've read about the two subjects - I would venture to say that it's very possible that AA did suffer from some sort of severe (and chronic) post traumatic stress disorder .  Anybody who met AA, certainly didn't doubt that she had been through something very traumatic.  Just what type of traumatic event she may have experienced will probably be debated for a very long time.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Elisabeth on October 15, 2004, 05:40:09 AM
I brought up the PTSD issue because, while I find Bob A's analysis of Anna Anderson as a con artist interesting (also helpful, in terms of spotting con artists!), I just have to wonder how someone so emotionally unstable could have pulled off a long con. And not just for years, but for decades.

If anything, Anna Anderson seems to have gone out of her way to lose friends and alienate people. Her behavior was often not only damaging to other people, but also intensely self-destructive. In addition, we have the testimony of so many people that she never seemed to be acting a role. All of this makes me think that Anna Anderson, whether she was Franziska Schanzkowska or someone else, was not completely insincere in her insistence that she was Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna... on some level, she must have believed it herself, or come to believe it.  I know that some chronic PTSD sufferers do have major problems with identity (dissociation or loss of self), but I've never read about such a complex case before. Whoever Anna Anderson was, she was a genuine mystery.

The missing bodies from the mass grave also continue to bother me... I've gone over this route from Ekaterinburg to Pig's Meadow to the Four Brothers and back, over and over again, and like Penny Wilson and Greg King, I cannot figure out how Yurovsky and his men could have managed simply to lose two corpses that were then never seen again. Living people can disappear, but corpses tend to hang around... if Anastasia and Alexei were killed, then someone had to have buried their bodies somewhere.

Perhaps the Bolsheviks really did try to burn the bodies of Anastasia and Alexei and bury them separately from the others, and then Stalin had the smaller grave opened and the bodies removed at some later point in time (Penny Wilson mentioned elsewhere that the larger, mass grave was possibly opened, on the orders of Stalin, in 1928 or 1929). Or perhaps the smaller grave was also disturbed, even destroyed, when the cable was laid at a later date? I have trouble believing anyone could have survived the massacre, but the missing bodies are... mysterious.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on October 15, 2004, 09:10:08 AM
Quote
If anything, Anna Anderson seems to have gone out of her way to lose friends and alienate people. Her behavior was often not only damaging to other people, but also intensely self-destructive. In addition, we have the testimony of so many people that she never seemed to be acting a role. All of this makes me think that Anna Anderson, whether she was Franziska Schanzkowska or someone else, was not completely insincere in her insistence that she was Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna... on some level, she must have believed it herself, or come to believe it.  I know that some chronic PTSD sufferers do have major problems with identity (dissociation or loss of self), but I've never read about such a complex case before. Whoever Anna Anderson was, she was a genuine mystery.
 


Just a idea that popped into my head while reading this.  Is is possible that AA, due to PTSD, suffered amnesia of some sort (tyring to forget everything related to her trauma) so she really didn't know who she was.  Susequently, when people said she looked like a GD, she subconsiously decided she was becuase being a GD would be better than facing whatever nightmare she had been through?

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 15, 2004, 09:36:10 AM
 :) Well stated!
This has been my general notion for quite some time!
r
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on October 15, 2004, 11:31:10 AM
Wow! :o  This PTSD thing is most certainly FASCINATING!!!!!!!!!!! :o :o :o
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: ISteinke on October 19, 2004, 07:01:35 PM
The other day I was doing some serious thinking about this whole "AA"- Anastasia issue, and literature that I had read [on the subject]. I came up with some thoughts that I wanted to run by all of you, just to see what you think.
    It seems to me that one of the greatest pieces of evidence [in Anna Anderson's favour] is the way that she behaved in regard to work/employment.  It is also a strong piece of evidence against Anna Anderson having been Franziska Schanskowska.
    I have read [in a number of books on the subject] that one of the greatest problems the exiled Russian royals experienced was their utter lack of awareness that people were supposed to hold jobs and support themselves. In Russia none of them had ever worked at any job except serving in the military and the government. In exile none of them "found direction," in the sense of employment. One author has written that Kyril had no job except being "pretender."
    However mentally unstable they may be, a working class person (like Franziska) is always, by nature, going to go and out and look for some sort of job [to support themself].
    Anna Anderson's behavior is striking, in that she behaved exactly as the [other] exiled grand dukes and duchesses did. Even in times when she was poor and destitute the thought of going out and finding any kind of employment WHATSOEVER never seems to have crossed her mind. In other words, she behaved exactly as one would expect a displaced grand duchess to behave, and exactly opposite of how a "working girl" would act.
    This seems to be a glaring example of subconscious behavior revealing, at least, what socio-economic class of people she came from.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on October 20, 2004, 08:23:23 AM
That is very insightful, ISteinke.  *applause* :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alexa on October 20, 2004, 08:43:45 AM
Quote
....Anna Anderson's behavior is striking, in that she behaved exactly as the [other] exiled grand dukes and duchesses did. Even in times when she was poor and destitute the thought of going out and finding any kind of employment WHATSOEVER never seems to have crossed her mind. In other words, she behaved exactly as one would expect a displaced grand duchess to behave, and exactly opposite of how a "working girl" would act.
     This seems to be a glaring example of subconscious behavior revealing, at least, what socio-economic class of people she came from.


I tend to disagree that AA's lack of motivation to find a means of self-support an argument that she was AN.  I once knew someone (who ended up marrying and soon after got divorced from a very good friend of mine) who had the same narsacistic self-entitlement issues that AA did.  This woman displayed through her actions her belief that for the lone reason that she existed that everything should be handed to her.  It was her God given right that the world revolve around her, and God put the rest of us on this planet to serve and support her.   Nothing was ever good enough.  And if she didn't get her way, she would begin to manipulate the poor unsuspecting souls who were her friends in order to achieve what she wanted (to not work, not have to worry about paying rent, putting her own needs before that of anyone else's including her own child).  She is not a woman who grew up in the lap of luxury.  In fact, she was at the most lower-middle income while growing up, but I would say more likely she would have been considered lowincome.  And yet, she still had the attitude that she deserved all the benefits of working toward a goal of any kind without having to put in any effort.  Like I said, she existed, and therefore she deserved it, more so than the next person who did work for what they got, and how dare that person have more of anything (happienes, money, material things or any kind) than she.

So, to cut my rambing off before I go too far (if I haven't already) my point is, you don't have to be born rich or royal to be born with a sense of self entitlement.  Narcasism is psycological issue that anyone born to any family can have.

Alexa
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 20, 2004, 08:47:50 AM
ISteinke

  Well you comments about the "work dynamic" are very interesting and thoughtful - but I think a bit off.
  Many of the Romanov women were able to create jobs for themselves as fashion designers or perfume designers, trading in on their exotic history...Of course the great depression put paid to any greater success that they might have had --when its hard to buy food few people will want designer clothes or cologne! I know of many individuals who have no apparent understanding or ability to find work --and to my knowledge none of them are Royal or members of a pampered Nobility!  8)
  A woman who is mentally unstable may have no real comprehension of the mudane dynamics of getting work, and buying food, shelter and clothing--simply because she is mentally unstable!

good point tho'
Rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 20, 2004, 10:56:22 AM
Since Anna Anderson was pretending to be Anastasia, [if believing the DNA]  she couldn't very well break out of the mold of being a royal and then expect her peers to believe she was royal.

I think the "post traumatic stress disorder " is a good path to take when trying to understand Anna Anderson.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 20, 2004, 12:07:33 PM
Sorry. Here I go, again,  changing the topic from the mental state of Anna Anderson to something else.  But,  I thought this should be over on this thread:

Quote

Annie-

To be absolutely correct she never claimed to Anastasia until she had been erroneously identified by another patient as Tatiana-the facts don't allow anything further than that statement, so the idea that someone "gave her the idea first" is just opinion.

The records included previous reports, but the important thing is that they confirm that FS sustained no physical injuries, nor in her examination were any marks, scars, or deformations noted during a careful examination (nor in any of the exams that followed over the next 3-4 years).  The story that she suffered these injuries seems to have cropped up in the 1920s when the Berlin police detective attempted to prove that AA was FS, and needed to explain the scars.  Why no one consulted the records during the period before the war I couldn't say, and they were presumed lost after WWII, but were not.

Greg King


Quote

Annie, just because it's new doesn't mean it isn't correct.  Penny and myself had the extreme good fortune to be allowed to see FS's complete medical files from 1915-16-1920, which no one had ever viewed before.  And they detail extensively that she suffered no injuries (among a number of other important things).

By the way, AA never claimed first to be Tatiana, then switched to Anastasia-it was a fellow patient who erroneously identified her as Tatiana.

Greg King


I thought there were scars which proved she had been stabbed by a guard trying to kill her if she was Anastasia or  piece of metal from some explosion in the factory if she was FS???

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Antonio_P.Caballer on October 20, 2004, 12:42:02 PM
Greg,

Then, if you have seen Franziska´s medical files, and there´s nothing said about the feet malformation(for example), it´s not possible that Anna was Franziska, no?

I might be mistaken, but did not the DNA test stated that Anna was related to Franziska´s family? Really, the more i learn about this whole subject the less i know or even understand it.

Now, IMHO, whoever Anna was, i don´t think she was Franziska.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Angie_H on October 20, 2004, 03:36:35 PM
I know there have been discussions regarding AA & AN's photos for comparison and there is the DNA evidence. Can anyone list things that AA did or said that made people believe or not-believe her? And why are there those who said Ernst went to Russia and those who say he didn't? I never know what to believe when it comes to that  ???
Angie
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: ISteinke on October 21, 2004, 11:25:28 AM
Here are some more thoughts on Anna Anderson and Franziska Schanskowska

    According to research done and documented by Peter Kurth, Anna Anderson spoke French well enough to be able to converse fluently with hotel staff. Also, she could play the piano beautifully, and had a wide knowledge of many different subjects. By all acounts FS was barely educated at all.
     I could by the idea that someone may have fed her "memories" of life at the imperial court. However, the ability to speak fluent French and to play the piano beautifully is a skill acquired over time, and with much effort. It can be documented that Anna Anderson, after Feb. 17, 1920, never took french or piano lessons. These were skills that she already possessed at that time.
      One has to take into account the life of a peasant/worker. Peasants/working class people, in that time as well as now, are invariably so occupied making a living, that they don't have time to learn "the finer things in life." The definition of "liberal arts" in ancient times had to do with occupations that "free-born" or wealthy persons, unhindered by work and poverty, are able to engage in. FS would never have had the money or time in her life to study these things.
      DNA or no, the ability of Anna Anderson to do skilled things, which FS would never have had the time to have learned, has to be explained.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 21, 2004, 11:32:17 AM
Most of the information that I have read about Fransiska S. (A.A.) point out that as a child she loved to read history and that piano lessons were often offered at schools...
Many people have remarked that she seemed to speak no language very well and the French comments that I am aware of are from late in her career as a "pretender" so to speak.

R.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 22, 2004, 12:22:22 PM
An interesting conversation continues over on another thread.  Just click on AGRBear on top of quote and it'll take you over to that thread.

Quote
I remember the first time I had read there might be a connection between Georg Karl Grossmann and  Franziska Schamzkovski [sp. used in the book] and the possible connection to Anna Anderson.

Book is:
Encyclopedia of Murder by Colin Wilson and Patricia Pitman, Printed 1962  pps. 243-44.

The book tells us that Grossmann was a serial killer who lived in Berlin near the Silesian railway terminus.....  The police found a "trussed-up"  body of a female recently butchered in Grossmann's kitchen.

The serial cases became known as "Die Braut auf der Stulle"  [Bread and Butter Brides" which refers to many of his victimes having been "companions of the night known in Berlin as "brides"].

The police think that Franziska was murdered by Grossmann and the police records show they told Schamzkovski family on 13 Aug 1920 due to the entry in Grossmann's diary.... Yep,  he kept a diary and list of his victims.  The name he wrote was "Sasnovski".

I remember when I read that Grossmann had hung himself in his cell,  I thought,  "Well,  wasn't that conventient for everyone."

It is thought Grossmann may have killed more than 50 females.

GRBear

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 22, 2004, 02:09:07 PM
Just going to repost this point of view for those who missed it in the long thread.

http://www.serfes.org/royal/annaanderson.htm
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 22, 2004, 02:37:04 PM
http://www.serfes.org/royal/annaanderson.htm

I'll repeat.  Interesting stuff  reading  another person's opinion on  Anna Anderson and why he thinks she was FS.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Angie_H on October 26, 2004, 01:22:14 PM
I've been reading the various threads on AA and other Imperial Claimants. So I don't think this question has been asked and if it has I'm sorry. But, did anyone ever contact Anna Vyrubova in regards to the claimants? Especially with AA. With all the time she spent with the family, she better than anyone could definately identify someone from the family and verify any statements they made
Angie
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: ISteinke on October 26, 2004, 01:29:16 PM
Anna Vyrubova was purposely avoided by Gleb and Tatiana Botkin, as well as the rest of the supporters of Anna Anderson, due to her Rasputin ties and the resulting ignominy.

Personally I think it was a stupid move to make [on the part of AA's supporters]. Outside of Anastasia's own immediate family noone in the world knew her better than Vyrubova. Presumably AA's detractors would have probably said [in response to a Vyrubova recognition] that this proved her [AA] false, but I think we can see the flawed logic that that would have entailed.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 26, 2004, 02:13:12 PM
Or maybe she was wisely avoided since she was close to the family and would have known for sure ;) to me that is another blow to the AA=AN cause.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: ashanti01 on October 26, 2004, 02:25:30 PM
It sounds like until the two missing bodies are found and ID with the correct DNA work, this question will remain open.

I don't know whether or not Anna Anderson was Anastasia, but if a person can have so many positive that are equal to , if not greater than, the negatitives, then there has to be some truth to it... but then again I really don't know
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 27, 2004, 07:39:27 AM
Dmitri would have been another good person, besides Anna V., who would definitely have known Anastasia. Why was he not consulted?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: ISteinke on October 27, 2004, 12:23:10 PM
If Lili Von Dehn, of all people, believed her to truly be Anastasia, the case is closed, as far as I am concerned.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on October 27, 2004, 12:26:51 PM
Yes, unquestionable science be DAMNED, what does mtDNA mean anyway?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 29, 2004, 07:49:37 AM
Quote

I tend to disagree that AA's lack of motivation to find a means of self-support an argument that she was AN.


Your story illustrates a very good point, Alexa.

I also want to add to this opening comment that I also don't think that's a good argument for AA being AN at all! FS was known for lazing around reading history books while her family worked on the farm. She may have worked in the factory during the war but that's not saying she wanted to. I also agree AA seems like mentally unstable people who cannot hold a job and honestly don't want to. Later in life, she lived in squalid conditions and collected large numbers of animals (though I commend her for caring about them) She fits the stereotype of a lot of poor slackers in the US and I guess other parts of the world too who are not suited to hold a full time job but want someone to take care of them. Pretending to be a princess works out just fine;) (though I don't believe she did it to be crooked or a con artist, I think she was used by people with that intention and she was mentally ill)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 29, 2004, 08:35:32 AM
Quote
Yes, unquestionable science be DAMNED, what does mtDNA mean anyway?


Brilliant!

   I agree completely with FA-- we might wonder about similarities and paradoxes between AN and AA but to try to deny in the light of science the truth, simply because we don't find it romantic or that we just believe in AA is insulting in the extream!
   It reminds me of the weird amost culty element of some of the members/posters at this site... Not everyone mind you, but some folks here appear quite fanatical in their perspectives.

Rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 29, 2004, 10:32:37 AM
Quote


    It reminds me of the weird amost culty element of some of the members/posters at this site... Not everyone mind you, but some folks here appear quite fanatical in their perspectives.

Rskkiya


Excuse me, are you calling the non-AA people the fanatical ones? ???
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on October 29, 2004, 01:02:16 PM
No Annie--
There are fanatic types everywhere in all manner of threads...I am  NOT calling on anyone in particular. Actually there are very few at the AP site at the moment ... OK?

red Rskkiya
 8)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on October 29, 2004, 02:24:41 PM
In  William Clarke's book THE LOST FORTUNE OF THE TSARS  p. 124:  
"....daughter of a landlady who said Franzisca had disappeared in 1920 and re-appeared briefly in 1922.  The German paper, Berliner Nachtausgobe followed up the story in some detail, with the help of private detectives and finally published its main find on March 31 1927.  Anna and Franzisca, it concluded, were one and the same person."


Anyone have anything more on this published article in 1927?

Was this brought up at the trial?

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on October 29, 2004, 02:30:25 PM
Very interesting, Bear. I hope someone can post us more on this.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 09, 2004, 04:14:00 PM
I also quote that from the original AA forum someone posted that Franziska's nephew said that his aunt never wanted to be a poor peasant and wanted to be someone great or something. My answers to that are simple:

HE NEVER KNEW FRANZISKA!!

I may have gone over the line, too much sugar... But that is the truth, Franziska never met her nephew. I personally believe Anna was not Anastasia (even though I'd like to) but she wasn't Franziska either. I'm very curious about who Anna really was, I've met people who've met Anna in the past and they all believed she was Anastasia (until the DNA evidence disproved that) I think she had a form of mania, and since her breakout in 1920 she had gone through something terrible (unknown...) and believed herself to be Anastasia.

Also, I'm curious about Franziska too, I wonder where she disappeared etc... but no one seems interested in them, just in Anastasia. Also about the fact that she didn't speak English or Russian, people who've seen her through her breakouts comment that she spoke both languages with good accents. I'm not sure about the truth, perhaps only a few people in the world know. Anna did look much older than Anastasia than Anastasia would've looked if she was 19. I can't dismiss the DNA evidence either. In the end I think Anna Anderson was a individual herself not being Anastasia or Franziska.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 09, 2004, 04:53:18 PM
While it is true he never met her, I'm sure he heard stories and family legends. My family has always been like that, handing down tales from one generation to the next. I have told my kids many vividly detailed stories of relatives who died before I was born. Carry on!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on November 09, 2004, 09:36:58 PM
Re: Evanescence's comments about how much older AA looked than AN would have at 19.  One usually will look much much older and "hardened," if you will, when one goes through an absolutely horrific tragedy/trauma, as the case most certainly would be if she was Anastasia.  I doubt very highly that Anastasia would've still looked like the young vivacious teenager we all know from pictures after having witnessed her entire family being murdered in the most brutal way, and no doubt herself having been tortured when the Bosheviks were trying to finish her off too.  She would most certainly look possibly twenty years older--not to mention the fact that she only weighed like eighty pounds because of malnourishment and sickness.  That honestly does make a person look older.  When I was severely anorexic in late 7th, onto 8th, and all throughout 9th grades (12, 13, 14) I looked so much older than I was supposed to.  And my middle school pictures as well as my freshman year of high school (9th grade) pictures look weirdly older than my sophomore (10th grade), junior (11th grade), and now senior pictures because I was so sick and malnourished that it made me age.  Granted I was lower on the scale than AA ever was (all time low of a whopping 69 pounds), but at eighty some or even seventy some pounds (which I think she was at at some point--I read it I believe in Kurth's book) a person will look older than their real age.  Again, that plus the whole humongous trauma factor very easily could've have altered her appearance drastically.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 12, 2004, 03:57:29 PM
True, stress does cause early aging. I'm actually currently 95 pounds (I'm 15 years old) and you're right about what AA (if she was Anastasia) would've looked like after she'd gone through all that. Also she did have much of her front teeth removed due to her smashed jaw (even though she never shows her teeth in photos) so she probably did look older than 19. Seeing AA earliest photos from around 1920 she didn't at first resemble Anastasia but when I compared photos with Anastasia's they looked very much alike. It's so weird how if AA wasn't Anastasia how come they were so similar? That's not something to just disregard.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on November 13, 2004, 09:34:32 PM
Sigh . . . but there is a definite resemblance between AA and the photo of FS.

I didn't know there were any photos of FS in existence, until I saw it in a book one day. Expecting the caption under it to say "Anna Anderson" I was amazed that it instead read, "The only photo of FS" (to paraphrase). I thought to myself, "how can anyone think that this woman is Anastasia, when this photo is in existence?"

Even the part in the hair is the same for AA and FS.

And you can't believe everything you read. For example:

Fact: DNA says AA was not AN, but was a relative of FS's nephew.

Fact: AA had injuries and scars that FS did not have. (Penny and Greg have told us that the medical files for FS do not record any of the "injuries" that AA supposedly had.)

So if we are to believe that both of the above facts are actually facts, then AA was not FS, but was a relative of FS. This doesn't make sense. So the only other conclusion is that one or more of the following is not true:

1. DNA for AA did not match that of the Romanovs.

2. DNA for AA did match that of a relative of FS.

3. FS did not have the scars and injuries that AA had.

4. AA had scars and injuries that FS didn't have.

*scratches head*

I also find it odd that there is only one photo of FS in existence. How convenient.  ::)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on November 13, 2004, 10:30:05 PM
Did any of the diaries mention that Anastasia had grown?

I think she did.

If I'm right, and  Anastasia had grown,  then Anna wasn't tall enough to be Anastasia.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Abby on November 13, 2004, 11:48:25 PM
Nah, I think that Anastasia was about 5'2 at the time of her death and Anna Anderson was the same height. I thought I remember somewhere reading that Fransiska S. was more like 5'6 or something.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 14, 2004, 09:18:41 AM
Height reports from various different sources mean nothing. On a message board dedicated to my favorite rock star, his height has been reported as anywhere from 5'2" to 5'8", all from people who met and stood next to him and all swear they are right and everyone else is wrong. A lot of things come into this, who was standing where, on what elevation or decline, who had what shoes on, perception, memory, etc. It's unreliable.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 14, 2004, 04:41:48 PM
Maybe he was wearing high heels? Lol, kidding...I'm corny I know but FS's REAL, GENUINE, brother with the same mother as FS said that there was a resemblance with AA and his sister if you looked from the front but a striking difference when you looked from the side. Her brother probably didn't have a reason to lie, he and his sister were very close. Even if AA's enemies bribed or threatened him he most likely told the truth anyway (hey, they spent a lot of time together, having the same mother and all). What if AA was Anastasia? Why would a woman lie for approximately 60 years just for wealth and fame? I wouldn't, I would keep my true identity, also all the other Anastasia claimants eventually confessed that they weren't Anastasia (guess the pressure was too much, huh?). Yes, there is the DNA testing, and I can't deny science but Gertrude and FS didn't share the same mother, they only shared the same father. Oh, and one last thing Anastasia probably stopped growing at the age of seventeen.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 14, 2004, 06:27:56 PM
Quote
Maybe he was wearing high heels? Lol, kidding...I'm corny I know but FS's REAL, GENUINE, brother with the same mother as FS said that there was a resemblance with AA and his sister if you looked from the front but a striking difference when you looked from the side. Her brother probably didn't have a reason to lie, he and his sister were very close.


He DID have a reason to lie! He was afraid of being held responsible for her, and the expenses she had incurred. He even asked, 'if she is my sister, I don't have to be held responsible for her, do I?' There were also reports that later in his life he laughed that 'she wanted to be Anastasia, we left her to what she wanted.' Don't forget the letter written by a lawyer to Gertrude in 1959 telling her that though she had recognized AA as her sister in 1938 but denied her in order to 'save her career as Anastasia' that the time was up and she could no longer be held responsible for lying, which she had worried about for years. Think about it- if her siblings had ruined her claim, they'd have had to take her home, poor and mad, and they likely would have been charged for her court costs and other bills. Who'd want to claim a sister like that? ;)


Quote
What if AA was Anastasia? Why would a woman lie for approximately 60 years just for wealth and fame? I wouldn't, I would keep my true identity, also all the other Anastasia claimants eventually confessed that they weren't Anastasia (guess the pressure was too much, huh?).


Again, why admit it, humiliate yourself, and possibly get charged money for all the legal cases, etc. Also, there are laws against bringing false claims to court, which carry jail time! She couldn't afford to confess! Besides that, I believe she was mentally ill and came to honestly believe she was Anastasia.

Quote
Yes, there is the DNA testing, and I can't deny science but Gertrude and FS didn't share the same mother, they only shared the same father. Oh, and one last thing Anastasia probably stopped growing at the age of seventeen.


That is by no means a proven fact. That is only one theory in one person's book. I don't believe it. They most likely were whole sisters. I can't image the scientists doing the tests, after searching for a maternal relative, would have been stupid enough not to check it out thoroughly. After all it IS the main prerequisite for testing.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on November 15, 2004, 09:12:30 AM
Evanesence

About your remark on "why would AA lie about  being Anastasia for sixty years ... "
   Well she was first "discovered" in a mental asylum and spent much of her life in similar mental homes or "private spas" as they were sometimes called --She may simply have been insane or at best  --very confused about who she was ... PTSD or psychotic tendencies have also been discussed here.
   The mDNA makes it pretty clear who she was NOT-- so we may well wonder who she was and why she thought what she did...

rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AGRBear on November 15, 2004, 09:51:04 AM
I haven't picked up the Peter Kurth's book ANASTASIA.  THE RIDDLE OF ANNA ANDERSON.  I did this morning to look for what he had written, if anything, about FS.  I happen to turn to  pps. 332-33 about Rudopf Lacher, who was an Austrian prisioner of war in Ekaterinburg who served as the personal orderly to Yurovsky.  And,  he was the last living witness of Yurovsky's "boys".  He, however, wasn't part of the executioners.  Anyway, he refused any interviews, however, he did say, just ask AA if she remembers "Rudolf".

When AA was asked if she knew a "Rudolf", and I quote:
She did not remember "Rudolf".

Is this just one more person AA should have remembered?  Or had it just been too long for her to remember?


AGRBear

PS  Forgot to mention the pipe.  Lacher had  "a gold case, a handkerchief or two, and a small cigarette holder, shaped like a tobacco pipe.  It had belong to the Tsar."  When shown to AA, she expressed her father's  "pipes were darker than that".   It wasn't a pipe but a cigarette holder, the kind Nicholas II used in his last days.

Those who wanted to believe AA was GD Anastasia,  searched why AA would not reconize the holder and proved her father's "pipe" was darker, probably dark amber.  

The point was, to me, that it wasn't a pipe it was a cigarette holder, and, it had been the one GD Anastasia's father had used while in the Impatiev House.


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: LisaDavidson on November 15, 2004, 03:28:33 PM
I doubt whether the girls would have remembered names of Yurovsky's "staff" since he was their jailer for scant days before becoming their murderer.

AA made many mistakes and these have been dealt with by her supporters in differing ways. For example, she got rooms wrong on the Alexander Palace. We felt that with AP being her home for many years that ANR would not have made such a mistake.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 15, 2004, 05:37:27 PM
Quote

He DID have a reason to lie! He was afraid of being held responsible for her, and the expenses she had incurred. He even asked, 'if she is my sister, I don't have to be held responsible for her, do I?' There were also reports that later in his life he laughed that 'she wanted to be Anastasia, we left her to what she wanted.' Don't forget the letter written by a lawyer to Gertrude in 1959 telling her that though she had recognized AA as her sister in 1938 but denied her in order to 'save her career as Anastasia' that the time was up and she could no longer be held responsible for lying, which she had worried about for years. Think about it- if her siblings had ruined her claim, they'd have had to take her home, poor and mad, and they likely would have been charged for her court costs and other bills. Who'd want to claim a sister like that? ;)



Again, why admit it, humiliate yourself, and possibly get charged money for all the legal cases, etc. Also, there are laws against bringing false claims to court, which carry jail time! She couldn't afford to confess! Besides that, I believe she was mentally ill and came to honestly believe she was Anastasia.


That is by no means a proven fact. That is only one theory in one person's book. I don't believe it. They most likely were whole sisters. I can't image the scientists doing the tests, after searching for a maternal relative, would have been stupid enough not to check it out thoroughly. After all it IS the main prerequisite for testing.


Good points, probably AA wasn't Anastasia and had a form of mania (beliving to be someone else) and had a horrible past she wanted to forget but there are some images that haunt my mind...

How can a woman have the same ears, face, eyes, scars, and bodily marks as another and have had the same memory as another woman and be called someone else? I don't know if AA was Anastasia but I hold firm beliefs that she wasn't FS (I don't know but a part of me just wants her to be Anastasia, you could kinda say I'm biased but I'm still open to other opinions), maybe they had strong resemblances but there's so much proof that says she wasn't FS. Anyway, anyone else have any ideas on who AA really was?? Oh and I don't know why I'm typing this but I got interested in the whole AA situation when I read a book about Anastasia and it mentioned AA. I did a web search on it about a year ago and that's what got me so interested. Ouch, my fingers are stiff from all the typing now... I've layed off the geography homework too long now, Grrr... I hate geography...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 15, 2004, 05:40:47 PM
Other points, FS was commited to six mental asylums in Berlin before how come no one reconized her (if she was AA) when she ended up at the Dalldorf asylum?

Also FS had different features rough hands etc. than AA...

Another thing, AA was signed in at the Dalldorf asylum with an identity that translated into English meant; Unknown Russian woman. Why did they think she was Russian??
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 15, 2004, 06:37:04 PM
Well, I don't think she looks like her either. Her chin is shaped differently, the eyes are too far apart, the lips are much thicker, the mouth wider, and the cheek bones are wrong.  :-/
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on November 15, 2004, 07:17:55 PM
OK
Here is my problem...
   All the photos that I have seen of AA look  just like the photos of FS, or have been so retouched as to be almost "cartoons" !
    So where can I find good clear photos of both women - both FS and AA - to compare them to each other.

rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 15, 2004, 08:59:29 PM
Yeah most of the pics Kurth shows are blurred or those ones of her biting her lip- to hide that she has such a bigger mouth and fatter lips than Anastasia had.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on November 16, 2004, 10:55:50 AM
Oh really?  None of the ones I've seen are blurred.  I believe that it was said that FS's picture was touched up to look like AA.  IMO AA's face is remarkably right e.g. cheekbones, etc.  (albeit of course some photos show her looking less similar, but I also have photos of myself that don't look like me at all).
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Denise on November 16, 2004, 12:57:02 PM
I agree with Annie on this one.  So many of the AA photos are either "glamour shots" or the biting of her lip so it is hard to get an idea of her true appearance.  She rarely did a straightforward photo--either playing coy with the camera or making a face.

And I would like to see a good, unblurred photo of FS.  I've seen the 3 PK has up, and it is hard to say if any are original.  

The other thing, so much of the so-called resemblance between AA and Anastasia is based on photos that are deliberately positioned next to one another of the two of them.  I think a REAL resemblance would be apparent if any 2 photos were compared.  Moot point, though, thanks to the DNA testing....

Denise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on November 16, 2004, 01:02:05 PM
Are such unretouched photos available? They all seem to have been reworked to look like one person or another...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 16, 2004, 01:18:35 PM
Quote
Another thing, AA was signed in at the Dalldorf asylum with an identity that translated into English meant; Unknown Russian woman. Why did they think she was Russian??


Evanescence ,

I thought "Freuilen Unberkant" just meant "Miss Uknown" where does the "Russian" part come from?

Also, Polish people are often mistaken for Russian, it is not that surprising that AA may have been too, if she was FS and Polish. It really is not as much of a stretch as it would have been if she were, say, French and mistaken for Russian.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 16, 2004, 01:20:17 PM
Quote
I agree with Annie on this one.  So many of the AA photos are either "glamour shots" or the biting of her lip so it is hard to get an idea of her true appearance.  She rarely did a straightforward photo--either playing coy with the camera or making a face.

And I would like to see a good, unblurred photo of FS.  I've seen the 3 PK has up, and it is hard to say if any are original.  

The other thing, so much of the so-called resemblance between AA and Anastasia is based on photos that are deliberately positioned next to one another of the two of them.  I think a REAL resemblance would be apparent if any 2 photos were compared.  Moot point, though, thanks to the DNA testing....

Denise


Thanks!

I'm going to post this again for you since you weren't around before, it's a collage of AA pics with the only known pic of FS in the middle:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v393/lyzotchka/1.jpg)

While some claim the mouth was retouched, you can still the the basic facial shape and chin are the same as AA's, compared to Anastasia's much smaller mouth, thinner lips, and totally different chin:

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

The bone structure is just totally different.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Denise on November 16, 2004, 01:27:15 PM
Annie, the bottom left and top right pictures of AA look so much like the photo of FS.  AS you say, even if the FS photo is retouched, you can't change the basic facial structure.  

I used to fervently believe that AA and Anastasia were the same person.  Now, even putting aside the DNA evidence, the photographic evidence is overwhelming.  AA is MORE similar to FS appearance than she ever was to GD Anastasia.

Denise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 16, 2004, 01:39:00 PM
Although some people seem to see a strong to mild resemblence betweem the two, I have to admit I don't see any at all, and never have. I remember before the DNA tests, when I read Peter Kurth's book and was still trying to figure this out, I was thinking, well it sounds like she may be Anastasia, but looking at the pictures I thought, she can't possible be - she looks so different! I can't find even one feature that resembles AN's, no matter how hard I try. I know some people are not going to like me saying this, but I grew up around a lot of Polish people, and  to me AA looks like a typical Polish lady, especially when she was in her 30's and 40's. But of course that's neither here nor there. The deciding factor for me, as it should be for everyone else, is the DNA evidence that showed that AA could not have possibly been Anastasia, even though it didn't prove that she was FS.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 16, 2004, 02:02:48 PM
Quote
.  

I used to fervently believe that AA and Anastasia were the same person.  Now, even putting aside the DNA evidence, the photographic evidence is overwhelming.  AA is MORE similar to FS appearance than she ever was to GD Anastasia.

Denise


Me too.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Elisabeth on November 16, 2004, 02:05:59 PM
And I third - or is it fourth? - that. AN looks like FS, even without consideration of the DNA tests (which are definitive, in my opinion).
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Denise on November 16, 2004, 02:20:26 PM
Quote
And I third - or is it fourth? - that. AN looks like FS, even without consideration of the DNA tests (which are definitive, in my opinion).


You meant AA, not AN, correct?  :)  And yes, I think the DNA is definitive also.

Denise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 16, 2004, 05:06:02 PM
Quote

Evanescence ,

I thought "Freuilen Unberkant" just meant "Miss Uknown" where does the "Russian" part come from?

Also, Polish people are often mistaken for Russian, it is not that surprising that AA may have been too, if she was FS and Polish. It really is not as much of a stretch as it would have been if she were, say, French and mistaken for Russian.


Oh, I read it in Peter Kurth Biography of AA. Also they labelled her Russian because she spoke poor German with a typical Russian accent.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 16, 2004, 05:23:50 PM
Quote
Although some people seem to see a strong to mild resemblence betweem the two, I have to admit I don't see any at all, and never have. I remember before the DNA tests, when I read Peter Kurth's book and was still trying to figure this out, I was thinking, well it sounds like she may be Anastasia, but looking at the pictures I thought, she can't possible be - she looks so different! I can't find even one feature that resembles AN's, no matter how hard I try. I know some people are not going to like me saying this, but I grew up around a lot of Polish people, and  to me AA looks like a typical Polish lady, especially when she was in her 30's and 40's. But of course that's neither here nor there. The deciding factor for me, as it should be for everyone else, is the DNA evidence that showed that AA could not have possibly been Anastasia, even though it didn't prove that she was FS.  


Yes, it's true when you just see AA's pictures and AN's pictures seperately. But when you put certain ones together, it matches like crazy, it's even scary. On Peter Kurth's biography on AA and FS the picture of AA's ears and AN's ears were shown. That was seriously freaky. Maybe AA wasn't AN but to me she certainly wasn't Franziska. They might look a bit alike but the noted by the family (they weren't told of AA's hair color) they said FS's hair was very dark, almost black. While AA's hair was dirty blonde with a redish tint. Noted by the Schanzkowsa family the personalities were very much alike. Gertrude also said that FS had no special birthmarks or scars. AA and AN had many. The scar on the forehead, the IDENTICAL ears, the hallux vulgas (which by no means is very common), and the scar on the back where a mole was removed. Also two people cannot have the same memory unless they were told by someone, or were witnesses. AA and AN had the same memory. Oh and even AA's enemies (one of AA's relatives, Princess Nina I think) said AA could speak Russian and French very well and also said she couldn't be a Poilsh peasant because of her royal personality. Here I quote from Peter Kurth;

Quote
DNA tests tell us nothing about "Franziska Schanzkowska.”   They don't explain how she spoke "more English than German" already in the early 1920s [28], or how she arrived in America in 1928 speaking fluent English, having had only the most rudimentary "lessons" in the form of Mother Goose rhymes.  [29]  They don't explain her intimate acquaintance with the history, customs and lore of the Romanov family and every royal house of Europe; how she could deal with hotel staff in French [30]; play the piano with or without sheet music; walk, sit, stand or offer her hand in exactly the home-trained manner [31]; how she recognized members of the Romanov family just by the sound of their voices [32]; "walked through the garden calling the flowers by their quaint Russian names," etc.


Oh and another thing, Gertrude was the only relative who said AA was FS and that was during a non-voluntary (she was basically forced to) confrontation.

Eeeekk, I found out something even more freaky. When AA met An's childhood nurse she called her by her nickname only used by her and put perfume on her face. A old ritual that only AN's nurse and AN shared... The mystery continues...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 16, 2004, 07:38:52 PM
Yes, these certainly are questions that have not been  answered, and it would be interesting to find out what the story is, but this doesn't change the fact that AA's DNA showed that she could not have been AN. I am not going to insist that she was FS because you can't prove that with DNA, but she most certainly was not Anastasia...

Also, when I mentioned before that I didn't see any resemblence between AA and AN, this actually was exactly what I was doing - looking at photos of AA and AN side to side and comparing them and this is when I saw absolutely no resemblence. I mean none at all. I wanted to see it, but I just didn't. There wasn't even one feature on her face that was the same. I know they say she had very similar ears but that really didn't do it for me. We can't accept ear evidence as opposed to DNA evidence, ear comparison and handwriting comparison are not scientific evidence, even if some people may feel that they are.  So regardless all those things you mentioned, I have to go with the scientific evidence as well as my own two eyes.  :o  :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on November 16, 2004, 08:47:07 PM
Resemblences between AA, AN and FS.
In my poor opinion--They are all bipedal mammals. LOL  ;D

All photos are of young Caucasian females from the late 19th/early 20th centuries- all have dark blond to brown hair and all possess complete facial features (no missing noses or eyes)

Thats about it...
sorry!

PS if I pose in the right light with my hair up - I look like GD Maria or Olga (so I have been told ;))but that certainly is just a trick- not any evidence at all ...
Makeup, lighting and a touched up image can work wonders!

Not anyone but
rskkiya  ;D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Lanie on November 16, 2004, 09:27:35 PM
Quote
PS if I pose in the right light with my hair up - I look like GD Maria or Olga (so I have been told ;))but that certainly is just a trick- not any evidence at all ...
Makeup, lighting and a touched up image can work wonders!


If I look down in the right light my nose and facial features look a bit like Anastasia's.  I second the trick bit. There's one photograph in Peter Kurth's Tsar, of Anna Anderson in profile from 1920, and you can see how much she does NOT look like AN.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on November 17, 2004, 05:41:47 AM
Quote
On Peter Kurth's biography on AA and FS the picture of AA's ears and AN's ears were shown. That was seriously freaky


The ears are completely different. AA's have a much thicker lobe.  ::)

AA's face is simply not Anastasia's. As for the comparisons of "expressions" between AA and AN, let's remember that it's much easier to find linear similarities in expressions in black and white photographs, because the contrast is more pronounced.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 17, 2004, 06:12:15 AM
And also on the 'expressions' it should be noted there is a good possibility some of these were intentional, such as AA's lip biting pose. It seems she did try to look like AN.

This is not impossible or unusual. Actors do this all the time, try to use their expressions and gestures to make up for a lack of actually looking like the person they are portraying. Another 'rock star' example- at a concert, I met an impersonator of the singer I had come to see. The way he moved, his facial expressions, his gestures, his poses, were SO much like the singer it gave me the chills. I went off with a glowing opinion of him. He appeared to be the singer's long lost twin. But when I posted his pictures on the singer's website, people posted that they didn't see a resemblance, other than the way he was dressed. So much of it was that he had this guys' mannerisms down pat, but he really didn't look like him in pics (though at times he, too, tries to mock certain expressions)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Elisabeth on November 17, 2004, 07:12:32 AM
These are all good points. I'm surprised no one has commented on   Anna Anderson's eyes - much larger, more deeply set and expressive than Anastasia's. Quite beautiful, actually, and judging from the one photo, FS had exactly the same eyes.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 17, 2004, 02:59:22 PM
Quote

The ears are completely different. AA's have a much thicker lobe.  ::)

AA's face is simply not Anastasia's. As for the comparisons of "expressions" between AA and AN, let's remember that it's much easier to find linear similarities in expressions in black and white photographs, because the contrast is more pronounced.


Actually, they are identical. Many forensic experts used different techinques but in the end the result was always the same. The ears were the same... Also a doctor said that Anna and Anastasia had to be identical twins or the same person.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on November 17, 2004, 03:12:58 PM
Quote

Actually, they are identical. Many forensic experts used different techinques but in the end the result was always the same. The ears were the same... Also a doctor said that Anna and Anastasia had to be identical twins or the same person.


Just because doctors said AN and AA's ear were identical doesn't mean anything to me.When I look at the pictures of both ears I see nothing in common other than they are ears.AN and AA looked nothing alike to me.Sure AA held certain poses in pictures taken of her to make her resemble AN,but that's all they were to me,posed photographs.
I have to agree with Helen Azar,I have to go with the scientific evidence as well as my own two eyes.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Merrique on November 17, 2004, 03:15:59 PM
Quote
PS if I pose in the right light with my hair up - I look like GD Maria or Olga (so I have been told ;))but that certainly is just a trick- not any evidence at all ...
Makeup, lighting and a touched up image can work wonders!

Not anyone but
rskkiya  ;D


Ya know,if I pose in the right light,clothing,and make up I could look like DE Marie cause I do have the dark hair.
And if you wanna count my shortness,I'm 5'1",I could be GD Anastasia. ;D :D :o
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on November 17, 2004, 03:38:34 PM
Well I must say that I've always seen a resemblance in AA to AN even when looking at AA's picture separately from AN's.  To me the facial structure is the same.  The one that gets me the most is the picture of AA sitting in a hospital bed which I think is the one on the bottom right.  She looks so much like AN.  Not  with the picture of AN that is shown, but other pictures.  There's just something about her that strikes me as Anastasia.  I can't help it--to me it's just there.  Everybody has different perceptions of things.  Some of us see AN in AA's pictures, and others don't.  We're not all going to see things in one particular way.  For me, I can't just throw away everything I've learned about AA just for one single piece of evidence.  No matter how "compelling" it is.  Because I consider other things about her much more compelling.  Unfortunately, many people who don't ignore everything else and who don't focus solely on the DNA are chased off the board like poor ISteinke.  Even credible researchers who happen to disagree with the DNA are tarred and feathered (two cetain people come to mind which I belive are a great loss to this forum).
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 17, 2004, 04:41:59 PM
As people once told me, don't leave! Everyone's opinion should be heard. But people should not be so upset when others disagree or offer valid reasons why they don't feel the same way. It's no offense to you personally!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 17, 2004, 05:44:21 PM
Quote
 Everybody has different perceptions of things.  Some of us see AN in AA's pictures, and others don't.  We're not all going to see things in one particular way.  


This is true Michelle, everyone does have different perception of things and no one will see things the same way. This is why we must look at objective evidence such as DNA, this is something that goes beyond perception, this is scientific evidence that will leave no questions about certain things on either side, unlike most other evidence that still leaves questions due to perception issues. This is the whole point here. The thing is, no matter how much other evidence we may have, it all does come down to DNA evidence. If DNA shows that AA couldn't have been AN, then all the other evidence is irrelevant. Unless you can clearly and realistically justify why we shouldn't believe the DNA evidence which no one has been able to do as of yet.

And nobody "chased" Isteinke out of the forum, she (or he? sorry not sure) made the choice to leave because he/she could not handle being challenged, which is unfortunate because this could have been an interesting discussion if Isteinke could have shown good evidence to back up her/his opinions. In fact, I personally asked Isteinke not to leave but to stay and defend his/her statements, but Isteinke would not do it. Isteinke made some very unusual accusations against Queen Elizabeth of England, without any rhyme or reason, and when these accusations were challenged, ISteinke threw a fit and left the forum. When you present controversial ideas you better know how to defend them, otherwise of course everyone will challenge you. And if you can't defend something you state, then your credibility will go right out the door.... These are not my rules, that's just the way the world operates, Michelle...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Evanescence on November 17, 2004, 07:40:22 PM
Quote
As people once told me, don't leave! Everyone's opinion should be heard. But people should not be so upset when others disagree or offer valid reasons why they don't feel the same way. It's no offense to you personally!


Very true Annie, everyone's is entitled to their own personal opinion.  ;D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Alice on November 18, 2004, 05:02:18 AM
Quote

Actually, they are identical. Many forensic experts used different techinques but in the end the result was always the same. The ears were the same... Also a doctor said that Anna and Anastasia had to be identical twins or the same person.


Please examine the ears for yourself:

http://www.peterkurth.com/PHOTOS.htm

You will notice that the lobe on AA's ear is much thicker than that of AN's.

Also, 3 photos beneath the ear comparison photos, there's one of AA side-on. THIS photo shows her ear is nothing like that of Anastasia's.

Also, to AA believers: how do you explain the much fuller lips? Collagen injections, perhaps? How do you explain the crown in the hair of AA being in the same place as FS?


Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Olga on November 18, 2004, 05:45:35 AM
Is it just me or do the pictures on Kurth's site never show up?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Karentje on November 18, 2004, 05:48:31 AM
Hi Olga

I think the problem must be with your computer, because I have no trouble viewing them.
Sincerely

Karentje
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 18, 2004, 06:15:13 AM
Quote

Please examine the ears for yourself:

http://www.peterkurth.com/PHOTOS.htm

You will notice that the lobe on AA's ear is much thicker than that of AN's.

Also, 3 photos beneath the ear comparison photos, there's one of AA side-on. THIS photo shows her ear is nothing like that of Anastasia's.


Thanks Alice, I never thought so either. Besides, it isn't accurate to compare a living woman's ear with an old black and white photo that had been enlarged. There was no way to get a fair example of what the real Anastasia's ear looked like. I guess that's why the court didn't put much stock in it.

As for the 'identical' body markings someone mentioned, what is that? That speculation of what injuries AN might or could have recieved in Ekaterinburg matched with what was on AA"s body? Isn't that only speculation?

Also, 2 of Anastasia's most well known scars were NOT on AA- the forehead scar she used bangs to cover (AA never used bangs) and her damaged little finger from when Nicholas shut it in a carriage door when she was only 3.

Quote
to AA believers: how do you explain the much fuller lips? Collagen injections, perhaps?


Oh didn't you know, being beaten in the face by the Bolsheviks gives you a fat lip that never goes away;) Sorry, but seriously, the wider mouth and fuller lips are big giveaways that is NOT AN's mouth.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: IlyaBorisovich on November 18, 2004, 03:31:49 PM
Quote

Oh didn't you know, being beaten in the face by the Bolsheviks gives you a fat lip that never goes away;)


It astounds me that, even after all that's transpired here in the past week or so regarding these snide, sniping comments, you can still be contemptuous of anyone who doesn't believe what you know to be true.  Isn't being the queen of the playground enough for you, or must you continue to mock those who disagree with you?  Grow up!

Ilya
(part of the agenda/conspiracy)  Whew!  Feels good to get out of that closet!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Elisabeth on November 18, 2004, 03:49:08 PM
Whenever I read these Anastasia/Anna Anderson threads I always think someone should write a serious novel about AA, with all kinds of existential themes about identity, because this topic invariably and inevitably becomes so emotional on all (I won't even say both) sides - clearly there is some larger issue at stake for most of us when we argue about it! Doesn't it all seem highly symbolic of something?... Something really important?... I'm just not sure what, or I would write the novel myself!

If anyone agrees with me about this, let's start a new thread. Why does AA move us so, to anger or to pity, even if we don't believe she is AN? Why does she move us to similarly deep emotions if we DO believe she is AN? Why do we get so worked up? What's going on?
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Denise on November 18, 2004, 04:05:39 PM
Great idea Elisabeth!!  All the drama here lately has gotten me to thinking about these same issues...

Denise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 18, 2004, 04:06:38 PM
Quote
Whenever I read these Anastasia/Anna Anderson threads I always think someone should write a serious novel about AA, with all kinds of existential themes about identity, because this topic invariably and inevitably becomes so emotional on all (I won't even say both) sides - clearly there is some larger issue at stake for most of us when we argue about it! Doesn't it all seem highly symbolic of something?... Something really important?... I'm just not sure what, or I would write the novel myself!

If anyone agrees with me about this, let's start a new thread. Why does AA move us so, to anger or to pity, even if we don't believe she is AN? Why does she move us to similarly deep emotions if we DO believe she is AN? Why do we get so worked up? What's going on?


Elisabeth, I strongly agree with you. I noticed that this type of thing doesn't really happen on other threads, at least not to such an extent. I mean, why do people get so personally involved with all this, it's not like we even knew this woman and not like it will make any difference at all to any of us whether she was AN or not. I find myself getting caught up in all this too, and I am not even sure why. I also think there should be a separate thread about this and people who have been involved in these discussions and others who want to express an opinion about this, can come on it and reflect and vent about what they think. It will be like group therapy  ;). But hopefully this thread won't cause any more fights to break out! :o
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 18, 2004, 04:08:24 PM
ME the 'Queen of the playground?' No way. I've also been bullied and thrown off on here too. And speaking of 'growing up' I think quite a few AA supporters need to stop having tantrums and running off because people post things they don't want to see.

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 18, 2004, 04:24:15 PM
BTW, I just looked at Peter Kurth's website for the first time and for the first time saw the AA/AN pictures there. I think I understand now. It seems that the pictures that most resemble each other were specifically chosen to be put up there side by side. Some have similar hair styles (like the one where AA has bangs like AN) and some similar facial expressions. So this way I do see the resemblence. But this just simply isn't fair. I have seen many other pictures of AA and none of them resembled AN, but these selected ones do because they were very carefully chosen, it seems. This by no means can be accepted as evidence because human mind can play all kinds of visual tricks on us when it comes to things like this. This is why the only evidence I will accept is DNA, and I don't really care what anyone thinks of me.  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: AnastasiaFan on November 18, 2004, 04:33:45 PM
Quote
and I don't really care what anyone thinks of me.  


LOL, you sound like me now. Anyway, you're right, DNA is the only way to know for sure, and the DNA clearly shows that AA was *NOT* Anastasia. DNA aside, I think that one picture in Kurth's Tsar book which shows AA in front and then in profile is also CLEAR evidence that she wasn't the Grand Duchess. She didn't look anything like Anastasia. Okay, that's all I'm going to say. I always tell myself I won't get involved with the AA threads!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 18, 2004, 04:49:34 PM
Lol, I have long since given up on caring what people think of me. I used to, but it never did any good anyway.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Janet_W. on November 18, 2004, 04:49:54 PM
Elisabeth, a thread about why we find the Anastasia question so very involving--to the point of figurative fistfights--seems very right on.

I think the 1956 film respresents some of those reasons quite well. Extreme loss . . . and the need to reclaim that which was taken away from you. The need to be recognized . . . maybe even loved.

On the other side, the anger one feels when advantage is taken of those who want, so very, much something to be true. Plus the anger felt towards those who bilk and deceive.

And a third category . . . How some people become so caught up in the fantasy they've created, that fantasy--for them--takes on its own reality.

By the way, if anyone saw The Affair of the Necklace--a  film from three or four years ago based on an infamous hoax which helped take down Marie Antoinette--these themes are also explored, albeit in a somewhat different contex.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on November 18, 2004, 04:54:13 PM
Let me interject one point here, that sometimes gets lost, and I think leads to some of the frustration on both sides.

"Ear shape" or facial resemblance is SUBJECTIVE. People see, or don't see, what they EXPECT. Remember my experiment where I posted my great aunt's photo, and 75% of you saw a resemblance, because, contextually you expected the photo to "be" someone.

DNA is OBJECTIVE. It doesn't matter who does the testing, or their motives. The science is what it is. Anyone can repeat it and get the same answer.

So, for those who say "DNA aside"...you stray back into the realm of subjective analysis, and will argue forever, letting your mind decide what your eyes are seeing...

IMHO.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on November 18, 2004, 06:36:39 PM
Quote
ME the 'Queen of the playground?' No way. I've also been bullied and thrown off on here too. And speaking of 'growing up' I think quite a few AA supporters need to stop having tantrums and running off because people post things they don't want to see.



Annie, I DO NOT recall ANY time when you were harrassed to the extent that oh, say, YOUR OWN ripping apart and absolute NASTY SLANDER was placed upon a credible researcher.  YOU try to undermine ANYONE who comes across your virulently anti-AA path NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE!  THAT to me, really says something about you, dear.  You have no idea how many newbies you scare away from these threads because of your CONSTANT b******ness.  I get emails numerous times from newbies saying how scared they are to post on here because they just happen to be supportive of AA.  

Now I know you clearly don't care what people on this board think of you, but how about in the real world?  I certainly hope for your sake that you conduct yourself in just an infinitesimally more likeable manner.  If not, I honestly can't see how you can possess ANY friends. That's sad.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 18, 2004, 06:59:14 PM
Quote

Annie, I DO NOT recall ANY time when you were harrassed to the extent that oh, say, YOUR OWN ripping apart and absolute NASTY SLANDER was placed upon a credible researcher.  YOU try to undermine ANYONE who comes across your virulently anti-AA path NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE!  THAT to me, really says something about you, dear.  You have no idea how many newbies you scare away from these threads because of your CONSTANT b******ness.  I get emails numerous times from newbies saying how scared they are to post on here because they just happen to be supportive of AA.  

Now I know you clearly don't care what people on this board think of you, but how about in the real world?  I certainly hope for your sake that you conduct yourself in just an infinitesimally more likeable manner.  If not, I honestly can't see how you can possess ANY friends. That's sad.


Well you haven't exactly been the sweetest thing yourself, dear. And I have had plenty of emails and PM's of people telling me they agree with me but don't want to get into a fight. I don't see what I have done other than express my opinions and evidence against AA. If you don't want to hear them, ignore them.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 18, 2004, 07:10:09 PM
And this is why, ladies and gentlemen, we need a "group therapy" thread!  ;)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Denise on November 18, 2004, 07:18:06 PM
Yes Helen, we do  ;D.  I think (JMHO, no flames, please  ::))
that there comes a point in academic discussions where further insistance on our viewpoint is futile.  We need to respectfully agree to disagree after a certain point.  It is clear that many posters here are aware of the viewpoints of the "serial posters." Therefore, the need come back with the last word over and over is kind of annoying.  

I am NOT saying anyone poster does this, as I am guilty of it on other, non-academic, bulletin boards.  Most of us who have been studying the Romanovs for a long time have valid reasons that we believe what we do.  No one else's research is the same as our own, so it is doubtful we will be convinced to another's viewpoint just by their say so.

This being said, I LOVE the give and take and exchange of ideas here.  I am a newbie, but not scared off in the least!!  8)

Denise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 18, 2004, 07:21:12 PM
It is weird there are more heated posts over this topic than there are over anything else, even pro or anti Bolshevik stuff or the revolution itself!

It reminds me of a music forum I'm on, where there is one album that people fight over. There are 14 albums by the band, and if people like or dislike any of the rest of  them but that one it's no big deal. But if that one is discussed all hell breaks loose! People insult each other, call each other stupid, mentally inept, even cussing (which is allowed there) The threads usually end up closed. I have never seen such a reaction on any album by them or any other band!

The thing is, it was their least popular album. The people who like it insult those who didn't like it, that they were insufficient, like the "Emperor's New Clothes" thing, which offends them, and they insult the album and remind them how many people hated it and how poorly it sold, and the personal attacks get worse.

I have tried to analyze why the feelings of it were so strong. One person posted that when you insult the album, it's like insulting your opinion and therefore you personally. I can't understand that, it's only a cd and we all have different preferences. But it's fiercely defended by those who like it, and they HATE the people who try to point out its faults and failures. It must be something like that with this topic, it's something people take personally. Weird parallel, but it's the only other subject that matches what happens here I've ever seen.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Denise on November 18, 2004, 07:32:25 PM
Quote

I have tried to analyze why the feelings of it were so strong. One person posted that when you insult the album, it's like insulting your opinion and therefore you personally. I can't understand that, it's only a cd and we all have different preferences. But it's fiercely defended by those who like it, and they HATE the people who try to point out its faults and failures. It must be something like that with this topic, it's something people take personally. Weird parallel, but it's the only other subject that matches what happens here I've ever seen.


Annie, it is also what I see on many parenting boards, regarding Work at Home moms vs Stay at Home moms, or whether or not to let a baby cry it out at night to get to sleep.  Rather than admit that people have the right to differing views, I think people internalize their beliefs to the point that any words against them becomes a personal attack, as you stated above.  

Anyway, you are right.  Although I used to be very pro-AA, I realized upon the release of the DNA evidence that it was a pipedream (for me at least  :) ).  It would be nice if part of the IF had survived, but not too likely.  And I have no personal investment in the answer, either way.  It is an academic question, albeit a fascinating one.

Denise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 18, 2004, 07:34:21 PM
Hey, I want to know what album that is that everyone is so passionate about! I guess every discipline has it's own "Anna Anderson" ;D!
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Annie on November 18, 2004, 07:36:37 PM
Quote

Annie, it is also what I see on many parenting boards, regarding Work at Home moms vs Stay at Home moms, or whether or not to let a baby cry it out at night to get to sleep.


Oh yes, I've seen that one go down in a Letters to the Editor battle in my newspaper. It does get heated!


Quote
 Rather than admit that people have the right to differing views, I think people internalize their beliefs to the point that any words against them becomes a personal attack, as you stated above.  


Anyway, you are right.  Although I used to be very pro-AA, I realized upon the release of the DNA evidence that it was a pipedream (for me at least  :) ).  It would be nice if part of the IF had survived, but not too likely.  And I have no personal investment in the answer, either way.  It is an academic question, albeit a fascinating one.

Denise


I agree :) and I'm going to get offline now, so everyone say whatever you want, I won't comment! :D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 18, 2004, 07:51:48 PM
So basically it is human nature to have disputes about everything and break up into opposite camps. Sorry - I am going to go off topic a little, but this reminds me of Gulliver's Travels, when two warring nations of the Lulliputians were asked what they were fighting about. No one remembered until they found a very ancient man who knew. It turned out that many years ago, before any of those involved were alive, the heir to throne at the time, being a small child, broke a hard boiled egg on the narrow side of the egg and cut himself, so his father the king made a law that all subjects must break their eggs on the wider side. Some people were ok with that, and some didn't like it so a rebellion broke out and they created their own nation and have been at war ever since. But of course no one remembered anymore why they were fighting. I think this is the way this story went, I may have forgotten the details, but you get the gist... Anyway, there is a moral to this story somewhere, although I think we still remember what we are fighting about... ;) ;D
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: jeremygaleaz on November 18, 2004, 08:01:19 PM
HHMMMM.....

FS's sister Gertrude testified that FS was NOT wounded in the grenade explosion...I had overlooked that...

Also, there may be another piece of objective evidence listed in FS's files that we could be overlooking (though it wouldn't be as good as fingerprints)

Medical records do, more often than not, record a person's HEIGHT.....

Jeremy  
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Michelle on November 18, 2004, 08:04:08 PM
Quote

Well you haven't exactly been the sweetest thing yourself, dear. And I have had plenty of emails and PM's of people telling me they agree with me but don't want to get into a fight. I don't see what I have done other than express my opinions and evidence against AA. If you don't want to hear them, ignore them.


Annie, are you absent-minded or something?  Did you TOTALLY forget how terrible you treated Penny Wilson?  Why didn't you take YOUR OWN ADVICE and IGNORE HER POSTS if YOU didn't like them?  I really can't imagine how you must treat people if they dare to disagree with your opinions.  Maybe you should've been bullied a little back on that playground of your youth.
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Helen_Azar on November 18, 2004, 08:15:33 PM
Quote
HHMMMM.....

FS's sister Gertrude testified that FS was NOT wounded in the grenade explosion...I had overlooked that...

Also, there may be another piece of objective evidence listed in FS's files that we could be overlooking (though it wouldn't be as good as fingerprints)

Medical records do, more often than not, record a person's HEIGHT.....

Jeremy  


Jeremy, from what I understand, FS is reported to have been a good 4 inches taller than AA (around 5'6" to AA's 5'2"). Now, this is just a shot in the dark, but can TB of the bones effect someone's height, like say, osteoporosis can? I know that AA was suffering from it for many years, could it have "shrunk" her height or changed her bone structure at all? I don't know anything about that and I know it sounds kind of dumb, but we've all heard of stranger things happening...
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on November 18, 2004, 08:25:42 PM
Hey

Michelle.... Annie
PLEASE! Lets please play nicely ok?

Michelle both you and Annie have always had very strong opinions and while you two do not always agree on many topics (just as you and I do not always see "eye to eye" :) ) you are both mature enough to look beyond this. ;D
As far as I know "Penny Wilson" is on holiday/writing a new book/asleep/at a party... she may even be here now -- it is not important!
IF she is not posting now that is her decision and she is a big girl who can take care of herself...

rskkiya
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Denise on November 18, 2004, 08:36:42 PM
Quote

Michelle.... Annie
PLEASE! Lets please play nicely ok?

Michelle both you and Annie have always had very strong opinions and while you two do not always agree on many topics (just as you and I do not always see "eye to eye" :) ) you are both mature enough to look beyond this. ;D



Here, here, rskkiya, well said.  Can't we all just let this go?  We can disagree on this.  The more we keep re-hashing all the bad feelings, the less we can learn from each other.  

Let's play nice, OK?

Denise
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: rskkiya on November 18, 2004, 08:46:30 PM
Spasibah...
    Anyway, about the whole "metaphorical fistfight over who was AA" issue, I think that Helen A has a fine point -- Why do we care? I suppose I find bad science and conspiracy theories much more annoying than anything else-- perhaps that's my "thorn"...

My interest in the whole 'Romanov clan" is really very secondary to my passion for information about the revolution.

rskkiya

Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Denise on November 18, 2004, 08:56:52 PM
Quote
My interest in the whole 'Romanov clan" is really very secondary to my passion for information about the revolution.

rskkiya



I commend you for this.  I am just beginning to delve into the political aspects of Russia during the reign of Nicholas II.  I got interested while young in AA, and now that DNA is proven her to be someone other than a member of the IF, I am trying to understand exactly how Russia became such a powderkeg.  

And I think that "why we care" is because of the nature of AA's claim.  She had so many supporters, and seemed to live the part.  If she wasn't royalty, then who was she?  And how did she pull this off.  And because of the newness of the science of DNA, some believers have a hard time accepting it, because it would mean ALL those other witnesses, supporters, and experts would have to be wrong.  

I think emotions are running a bit too high here, though.

Denise  :)
Title: Re: Anna Anderson and Anastasia
Post by: Forum Admin on November 18, 2004, 08:58:20 PM
JEEZZZZ.
OK another thread locked because you people just can not seem to get along.

I am so sick of having to be playground monitor for people who take things too personally and behave toward others in a manner the would never tolerate towards themselves.

STOP IT. NOW. all y'all.