The Alexander Palace Time Machine Discussion Forum

I would really appreciate help translating this label which is in the back of a painting depicting a Russian church.  Thanks

I have read the manuscript for Greg and Penny's Anna Andersen book. There is no room for doubt any longer that Franziska was NOT Anastasia.  They have the substantial evidence to show exactly how she literally became so trapped in her lie that she became the claimant.  The long held closed Darmstadt archives have the original investigation reports on the subject;  heck they even now have the RUSSIAN TUTOR's name who taught her Russian because she couldn't speak a word.  Trust me, after the book comes out, there will be the very last nail in this already long dead coffin.

Believe what you will Susana; but even Peter Kurth accepts the reality that Anna Andersen wasn't Anastasia. and he knew her personally.

Oh, and I removed that entire discussion from the DNA papers thread because it had no place there. That section is strictly for publication of and discussion about the specific scientific papers showing the DNA testing. NOT your personal opinions.  Also, you were most wrong about the testing labs. One of the testing labs doing the majority of the work was the United States Air Force Forensic Lab, which destroys your conspiracy theory about it being only English or Russian....

Peter Kurth DOES NOT accept the "reality" that Anna Anderson wasn't Anastasia. For more information read his article on AA in his website:

http://www.peterkurth.com/anna-anastasia.htm

[Message to a moderator of this thread]

Thanks for all the answers ( nena ).

"Belochka", you're a little confused, don't you think?!

:p

Indeed, she is very confused !! ...got me dizzy

Message to a moderator of this thread.

Please DELETE this posting plus reply # 127 and reply # 132. The above two postings are not only offensive but they do not add anything of value to the course of this thread.

Thank you in advance.

Margarita

I find offensive that you find offensive an opinion. Anyway, the moderator is free to censor as she/he pleases. One thing is true neither your post or mine brings anything to the thread, but still some of your posts on this thread made me dizzy.

Happy New Year to all!!!

Thanks for all the answers ( nena ).

"Belochka", you're a little confused, don't you think?!

:p

Indeed, she is very confused !! ...got me dizzy

Really? I could have sworn I had read somewhere that she was allowed to stay in the Moika palace when she visted. Must have heard it wrong.

Maybe they changed their minds later on, but not according to this article... Here they said that Mr Putin refused to let her stay at any of the Yusupov places... To be honest, I would find it hard to imagine if they did let her stay there, since it is now a museum...

Putin did the right thing. Imagine if everyone today made a similar claim because a few generations back their family owned property in Petrograd in 1917.

What a ludicrous idea! Poor Mrs Sfiris will have to learn to rough it at the Astoria or at the Kempinskii.

Margarita 

What a rotten thing to say!!! Mrs. Sfiris's family was robbed of their entire fortune by a band of murderers. The least they could do is offered so kind of compensation and staying in a palace which was stolen from them in the first place is not ludicrous at all.

Corruption is  rampant in Russia and only money counts. Tradition, history and some old values could count less for the current government whose leadership is not less than old communists and KGB members dressed as new capitalists. Poor Russia!!

Luckily, we live in a country where life and private property is respected. But, coming from a family who suffered abusive expropiation in the past I feel other posters should be more sensitive to the plight of people whose family life was ruined by revolution and believe me the effects continue in the next generations.

Interesting about the backgound of Maya! But a pity that pictures of her and her child/children are so hard to find. Is there maybe any source, where it could be to find? Maybe in your journal somewhere in future???

Britt,

Actually pictures of the wedding were widely published in many magazines in Spain, France and Italy. From the top of my head, I remember a complete photographic service made of the wedding in 2005 published in the Spanish Magazine HOLA. Give me a chance and I will scan it for you. No need for subscription there.

By a friend of Point de Vue I know pictures of Nikolaus have been published in that magazine, and pictures of the newborn Constantine  and the happy parents have been sent in block to various society magazines in Europe. No big secret there. I'll try  to get a copy, post it and share it for the enjoyment of all interested. Anyways, they will be published by the usual society magazines in Europe shortly.

Also, if you make the rounds of some Royal forums you will find pictures of this nice family and their first born. They  have a very active social life.

I totally agree with the fact that Amedeo is the rightful heir. The laws of the House of Savoy are very clear so Umberto did not need to clarify or designate a heir. The fact that he gave the title of prince of Venice to his grandson is clear: his grandson was a "private citizen", a commoner, and granting a title, different to the one given to the heirs, meant he was considering his grandson a child from a morganatic marriage as it is the case of many morganatic marriages among royalty and the king or emperor grants some title to give them some rank. Not doing so meant  Emanuele Filiberto would have been "simply" known as Mr. Savoia.

Even if he had agreed to the marriage and he considered his son as the heir, he would have broken the Laws of the House of Savoia and  he should ( and could) have changed them expressly, which he did not do. Therefore, the laws stand and Mr. Vittorio Emanuele Savoia became a private citizen the moment he married Ms. Doria in Las Vegas. The letters are just documents to support what any serious historian knew about the feelings of His majesty Umberto II regarding his son. He did not need to make any statement as the laws were very clear and to save his son and his House anymore public embarassment. One more detail he did do what he said on the letter regarding his will, he left equal parts to his children with no preference for his son as it was customary with the Heir.

I find very distasteful judging people because of their marital affairs or out of marriage children, but saying that the letters could be a forgery is a serious accusation that should not be expressed lightly. Amedeo  is a honorable person and at least he is not accused as Vittorio Emanuele by his country's authorities of being a manager of prostitutes (Vittorio Emanuele is now called the Royal Pimp!!) and being jailed for other crimes. As the poster is a writer of some sorts she should know better.

Amedeo is taking now a clear position on this matter after the disgrace that Mr. Vittorio Emanuele Savoia has brought upon  his family. The House of Savoia needs "to clean house" and he is the only person qualify by the laws of his House to do so.

I am looking for information on the Rachitov or Rashitov family from Odessa. According to some family tradition they were ship builders. The surname  Goldenhorn is related to this family.Some members emigrated to South America in the early 1900's.

Any kind of info would be greatly appreciated.

The judicial system in Italy is not very trustworthy. The district attorney (PM) in this case,Henry John Woodcock, is well known fo choosing to investigate only cases where scandal,and  well -known people are involved. And most of the time, they come to nothing, just a waste of taxpayer's money.

The accusations that the Prince of Naples is a"leader" of a band involved in illegal gambling and prostitution is ludicrous. The Prince, very well known by some scandals, is no leader, least of all of a criminal band. This is just one more Italian operetta. Italians have a knack for being protagonists and this district attorney Woodcock fits the profile. For example, in 2003 he started a case involving a number of politicians and tv stars with accusations that filled 7,000 pages. The case was dismissed for frivolous, not one piece of  evidence. Now with Vittorio Emanuele di Savoia there is a file of 2,000 pages!!!

The arrest was made with the clear intention of publicity. A simple order to appear before the judge is usually used in these cases, especially when you are almost 70 years. Henry John Woodcock is preparing his next career move which is usually to become a politician. In the meantime, many people's lives are destroyed. He is also involving in the case Simeon of Bulgaria as a conspirator with the prince. I wonder what is next, The Pope?

[[]

[

Lisa Davidson wrote:

You are welcome to have an opinion which is unfavorable to Maria Vladimirovna. However, as Moderator, I am drawing the line at your comparison of the descendant of the Tsar Liberator with a woman of dubious moral character. Kindly remove your offensive reference immediately. Maria Vladimirovna has never before been accused of having loose morals, and I will not tolerate that here.

[/b]



Dear Ms. Lisa Davidson/ Moderator,

I would be very careful in calling anybody here "a person of dubious moral character" or "having loose morals", being Ms. Hilton or anybody else. Nobody has that right. In the same way , nobody can  insult Maria V.; I request you don't apply a double standard and offend another person assuming a conduct just for what you see or hear on TV. Ms. Hilton has the same right to be respected as MV, being or not a descendant of a Tsar liberator  ( What on earth being a descendant of a Tsar has to do with having or not loose morals, at least it is not guaranteed!).
We do not know Ms. Hilton or MV private lives, and frankly I couldn't care less, the point here is of historic and genealogical character nothing to do  with morals. The fact that MV is assuming a role and a title that doesn't exist and representing herself the wrong way is not a matter of morals.

Said this, I would kindly request, Ms. Davidson, that you withdraw the offensive remarks in regards to Ms. Hilton who deserves the same respect as any descendant or not of a Tsar liberator.


[/quote]

If you find my remarks regarding that woman offensive, you are welcome to contact the GA and FA. They can overrule me. However, Bob has told me that in the context of this Forum, when I moderate a discussion, I do so as though acting in his stead.

I too have no interest in the personal affairs of Ms. Hilton, I refer instead to her public actions, which as of late includes the public discussion of a rival's reproductive organs. Perhaps things are different where you are, but no one in my acquaintance considers Hilton to be anything but a woman of dubious morals and character in her public demeanor.

Many members of the Romanov dynasty have throughout the years modified their behavior and made life choices out of respect for their family. I believe Maria V. is one of these. I respect her for this, just as I respect most of the actions of the Tsar Liberator. If you have a strong need to disrespect him or his g-g-grandaughter and call her names, freedom of speech allows you to say pretty much what you want - elsewhere though - not here.

I do not have double standards, for the record. I accord everyone regardless of rank respect until or unless I am shown that they don't merit such regard.
[/quote]


I will not contact either the FA or the GA if they trust your judgement that is their problem and their prerrogative, at the end they pay for the site.
However, you are still disrespecting a person,Ms. Hilton,  whom because your acquaintances consider of loose morals you feel entitle to do so. That is so wrong.  Hinting that from where I am inmorality is rampant, well, that is also very wrong. What I do tell you is that I come from a free society where we respect everybody no matter their genealogy.
Putting words in my mouth is also very wrong, I have not insulted neither MV or the Tsar Alexander II, I am just stating that anybody not only his descendants merits respect. Not just because one  is his/her descendant one is  above anybody else, ludicrous.


You do have double standards you demand respect for MV but on the other hand you disrespect another person  you don't even know. You are a moderator, and if you have read the disclaimer at the end of the page you represent the website and I would be more careful before insulting anybody. A representative or somebody linked to Ms. Hilton could be a poster and maybe they will not take lightly your opinions on her.

Feeling myself insulted by your remarks I withdraw voluntarily from this thread considering it demeaning, a thread where people are judged and dismissed because of the opinions of one's acquaintances or what you see on TV.

And as for David Pritchard, seeing your agressiveness to me and other posters,maybe you have not realized this is a forum where one expresses his/her opinions. If a condition to participate is to be a scholar on the subject, well, we would not have the thousands of participants there are. I do not mask myself, I have nothing to hide, do you?
Names are not required on most of the forums for your information. Will my name  change anything? Surely not, because you then will doubt my identity or my credentials so why bother. And I have no reason to disbelieve your credentials, but does that change anything? Your opinion is as good as anybody else. And for the record I find it very distateful to be publishing one's record, and some articles on some magazines and websites do not make you an expert, with all due respect of course. Your opinion  is just one more opinion.

[quote]pentetorri ;
She is pretending to be the head of the Romanov family, but she only recognizes as living Romanov her mother, her son and herself.
[/quote]

The Romanov family constitutes themselves in an association, The RFA, and the chairman of the RFA is Prince Nicholas of Russia. Therefore the head of the romanov family is Prince Nicholas Romanov. And Maria V is the official pretender to the Russian Throne. Those are two different issues.


 [size=16]Official? From which State ?  You are official when there is an office from a State. For your information, she denies the other Romanov the right to belong to the family and even the family name. And she considers herself not only a pretender but an empress and Head of the family.
By the way, there is not a Russian throne to be pretended. Except, for the chairs  [/size]

pentetorri ;
We do not know Ms. Hilton private lives.

Who is Mrs Hilton? Who is this lady? I don’t know her private life either her public life. Please let’s keep this forum related to issues of Russia or for the Romanov Family.[/color]
[size=16]
Read the posts carefully first. And by the way, you will find many Hilton Hotels in major cities Ms. Hilton is one of the heirs.[/size]

Reco ;
4. The heiress of Nicolas II and of Alexandre III  is Countess Xenia Cheremeteff (born in 1942), grand-daughter of Irina A. Romanova, Princess Yussoupova  even if Romanov and their fans do not accept it. Thanks to Yussoupov and Cheremeteff, her daughter has probably more Russian blood in the veins than all complete Romanov with their German blood.
 Reco

NO comments, this sounds insane.

[/quote][/color]


[size=16]If it is insane why you bother to comment, just to be disrespectful? Reco is one of the posters who contributes the most with pictures and info on this forum. Maybe as a newbie you should learn some of the forum etiquette before rambling about the threads with that attitude.[/size]

[/quote]Kmerov wrote:

Trust me, we all know that there dosn't exist an Russian Empire anymore...But that dosn't change the fact that Maria Vladimirovna is head of the Romanov Imperiel family in exile.
All other Romanov relations can't claim that position, because of the family laws. They are not dynasts.
As stated many times over and over again, Maria Vladimirovnas mothers family are of equal birth!

When a Royal or Imperial family is exiled, they normally have a head of their family, and that position is held by the person who would have been the monarch. That is the case with Russia, France, Ethiopia, Albania and so on. That is the common practise, and of course their titles have no effect other than socially maybe.
Some of these Heads of Exiled Families style themselves as King (Albania), and some with other titles to indicate that they are head of the given family in exile..
 
Thus Maria Vladimirovna is Head of the Romanov Family, a Grand Duchess and de jure Empress. Just my two cents, of course.

[size=16]I find no reason to trust your assertions. The fact that they have been repeated over and over do not make them true or real. The facts are very clear, Grand Duke Kyril left Russia as a grand duke and died as one. His son Vladimir was born in Finland as a Prince and died in MIami as such. If the Bagration family  was and is Royal ,during the Empire the rank they should have had in court would be as such and it was not.

With the death of the empire the family laws were extinct. They were created for a ruling imperial family. Exile and revolution was not in its spirit for obvious reasons.
Again , people like the Albanian king, can call themselves whatever they want but it does not mean it is the right thing. You do not see the oldest families of Europe as the Habsburg, saying you are or you are not an Habsburg, or declaring themselves emperors of a non-existent empire. It would be ridiculous.
The whole Romanov family cannot be ignored, just because Kyril and descendants  bent some extinct laws to their ambitions. If Kyril wanted to be an emperor he should have stayed in Russia, fight for his right and not take the back door as early as 1917. Even an old lady as Empress Marie Feodorovna stayed as much as she could, risking her life for one thing Kyril did not have, a sense of duty towards her family, dynasty, and country.

All the rest  is just an Italian operetta.[/size]

Exactly Reco.

Furthermore, MV and her associates apply a double standard when it comes to marriages. According to them there are no more Romanov, except them, because all their cousins have morganatic marriages but they consider the marriage of Prince Vladimir to a Bagration, an equal marriage, because they were Royals hundreds of years ago!

Nobody in prevolutionary Russia would dare to  consider a Bagration a member of a Royal family, with equal status to a Romanov. So, what changed after the Revolution? As I said before it is a monarchy on paper, an array of fantasy titles and roles.

[[[/quote]Lisa Davidson wrote:You are welcome to have an opinion which is unfavorable to Maria Vladimirovna. However, as Moderator, I am drawing the line at your comparison of the descendant of the Tsar Liberator with a woman of dubious moral character. Kindly remove your offensive reference immediately. Maria Vladimirovna has never before been accused of having loose morals, and I will not tolerate that here.[/quote]]

[[/quote]Lisa Davidson wrote:

You are welcome to have an opinion which is unfavorable to Maria Vladimirovna. However, as Moderator, I am drawing the line at your comparison of the descendant of the Tsar Liberator with a woman of dubious moral character. Kindly remove your offensive reference immediately. Maria Vladimirovna has never before been accused of having loose morals, and I will not tolerate that here.
[/quote]



Dear Ms. Lisa Davidson/ Moderator,

I would be very careful in calling anybody here "a person of dubious moral character" or "having loose morals", being Ms. Hilton or anybody else. Nobody has that right. In the same way , nobody can  insult Maria V.; I request you don't apply a double standard and offend another person assuming a conduct just for what you see or hear on TV. Ms. Hilton has the same right to be respected as MV, being or not a descendant of a Tsar liberator  ( What on earth being a descendant of a Tsar has to do with having or not loose morals, at least it is not guaranteed!).
We do not know Ms. Hilton or MV private lives, and frankly I couldn't care less, the point here is of historic and genealogical character nothing to do  with morals. The fact that MV is assuming a role and a title that doesn't exist and representing herself the wrong way is not a matter of morals.

Said this, I would kindly request, Ms. Davidson, that you withdraw the offensive remarks in regards to Ms. Hilton who deserves the same respect as any descendant or not of a Tsar liberator.

As for being in the presence of M.V., I suggest that sometimes, an overwhelm of simple mass and volume can give the impression of - impressiveness. All the press releases, borrowed trappings, or tiny pretend crowns perched atop masses of personage in the world cannot create a title, a throne, an entitlement, or a right.  It is, however, a facinating little show.

How revealing! Your post says much more about yourself then I could ever have learned through normal discourse on this forum. Were you born in a sea port?

By the way, why do you not post your picture on the forum or elsewhere so it can be as ruthlessly critiqued as you have the photographs of the grand duchess?

David

You are taking this thing too seriously. Bach is not saying MV is a call girl. He is just stating the obvious MV is a very large woman that together with her huge hairdo make an impressive sight but those atributes do not give her the appearance of an empress. Let me tell you Queen Elizabeth II is a very minute lady, but she is quite impressive and very royal, the same goes for the Empress of Japan. MV gave me the impression, when I met her, of a very nice lady but I did not see the royal touch there. Maybe it is just me.
Anyway, she does not need that kind of "impressiveness" because she is and will not be an empress ever.

Bach was kind of out of line in his statement about MV but you went too far.
As I said before this topic makes me laugh, all this discussion about a fantasy emperor of a fantasy empire