Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Forum Admin

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 320
61
"Les Derniers Années de la Cour de Tzarskoe Selo", Spiridovitch, Payot, Paris.  My personal translation from the original French:

CHAPTER 19
The Year 1914


   The fact that the two oldest Grand Duchesses, Olga and Tatiana Nicholaiovna, had reached their age of majority, gave rise to the idea in the heads of some of diplomats that one of them should be married to the Crown Prince of Rumania.
   The father and son had both come to Petersburg at the beginning of that year; however the young man was badly brought up and little cultivated, and had a mop of uncombed hair, and so greatly displeased not only the Grand Duchesses, but the Empress herself.
   After their departure, they teased Olga quite a lot about that subject, and this always put her in a bad mood.
   The rumors about an imminent marriage of Grand Duchess Olga were firmly going around in the Crimea, after it was learned that Their Majesties were going to go to Rumania.
   Olga Nicholaiovna would not be separated from her family.  "I shall never leave Russia" she said to one of those near to her.  "I shall never marry anyone who is not Orthodox" she declared that summer to one of the Officers of the Standardt.
   There were not just mere phrases.  One needed only look here in the face to see that she breathed sincerity, look in her clear and pure eyes to understand that as she pronounced these words, that the was saying them with the most intimate and sincere conviction, that her decision in these things was most firm.
   With all her being, with all her thoughts, Olga Nicholaiovna was a young Russian girl.  More than that, he had realized the ideal of the young Russian girls and she was quite conscious of it.
   The persons in the Tsar's entourage had heard for themselves all of the rumors about the eventual marriage, and everyone was of the opinion  that such a thing would not do for the daughter of a Tsar of Russia.  Everyone wished to see the Grand Duchesses marry Russians and stay in Russia.
...  It was most unpleasant for us to listen to the absurd conversations of the Rumanians about the occasion of the visit of the Russian sovereigns.  Our diplomat, who had done much to obtain a transfer to this post, committed a misstep which was rather humiliating for the Imperial Family.  He had listened to the last idiot in Constanza who had told him that the Tsar was bringing his daughters to Rumania to marry them there.  Everyone among us was furious at our diplomats and were even more vexed at those storytellers who were repeating that story at that time about the marriage of one of our Grand Duchesses to the son of the Crown Prince, even though the matter had been definitely resolved, and was negative.  All those who knew the truth, however, were glad for it.

62
Forum Announcements / Re: Forum Members Not Heard From in a Long While
« on: March 14, 2017, 12:14:13 AM »
Thank you. It is gratifying to be appreciated.  ;)  While the number of posts is lower than it once was, the number of users daily is still strong. About 1000 users per day come here. There are about 150 users here at any one time of the day.  There will never be a charge to access the historical information here. That has always been Bob's pledge, and will never change.  Free and unfettered access to this historical information and the accuracy and confidence of that accuracy of that information will always be our guiding goal.

63
Forum Announcements / Re: Forum Members Not Heard From in a Long While
« on: March 13, 2017, 02:51:37 AM »
I am disturbed by the tone of this post. Nobody is removed because of what they said. Over the last decade, perhaps a dozen users, out of the several thousand, were banned for their behavior. NOT their beliefs.

We are dedicated to free speech. Rules are necessary. I try to keep the rules as flexible as possible, but some rules are simply required. We can't have libelous speech for living people. We can't have abusive behavior of other users. We decided to accept the DNA findings of the IF remains (after personal conversations with those who did the DNA analysis and published the conclusions) and felt continued discussion of "survivors" was simply divisive and not appropriate.

Tania was never banned from the Forum.  I found her a lovely person and had no problem with her.

I am no "dictator" and frankly find such to be disgusting and based on supposition and not reality.  Nobody prevents free discussion here. We encourage free discussion, so long as the few rules are followed.

Myth and unsupported fantasy suppositions aren't allowed, such is not the purpose of a factual based history forum. Any other rational factual based discussion is encouraged.

Von Ebert's libelous accusations are frankly disgusting.  This website has been here for 20 years. This website is copied and catalogued by the Library of Congress as a valuable resource, of which we are most proud.

Von Ebert has been asked repeatedly to provide factual basis for assertions and has repeatedly refused to provide the answers.  The unsupported and unsubstantiated rantings of assertions are not the point of this Forum.

The fact that Von Ebert believes that founder of the website is not working with me shows how little he knows and how incorrect he is.  The founder of this website is my husband of 25 years and I have been the admin of this Forum since day one and act with his full support, authority and confidence.

Of the 3,000 or so users of the Forum, only a small handfull have left. Only a dozen or so were banned. 99% of our users are still registered, welcomed and free to participate or not as they wish. There is no "problem".

If you have "true" information, be prepared to demonstrate the TRUTH of the information with more than your belief and "say so". Have evidence and demonstrate the evidence. Von Ebert refuses to do so.

Yet, von Ebert is still here, No?

I demand an apology or if Von Ebert doesn't like this Forum, go elsewhere.

64
have you tried https://www.abebooks.com/

65
Palaces in St. Petersburg / Re: Private rooms of the Winter Palace
« on: March 03, 2017, 05:06:18 PM »
My apologies, the misunderstanding was mine. Stupidly I did not read the topic header. I'm very sorry.

66
Palaces in St. Petersburg / Re: Private rooms of the Winter Palace
« on: March 01, 2017, 05:18:04 PM »
http://www.alexanderpalace.org/palace/dressingroom.html

people always forget about the main APTM website.  :(

67
Tatiana Nicholaievna / Re: I think this is a fake item...
« on: March 01, 2017, 05:55:52 AM »
The quality of everything about this piece indicates it is an utter and complete fake. Fabergé never made anything painted, much less painted so badly. As mentioned the "Italy" signature also indicates a total fake. Every word of the listing is a deliberate deception. There should not be the slightest doubt of the fact of this being a deliberate fake of dubious quality and zero provenance.

To use a Death Camp victim of the Nazis to "legitimize" this fraud adds insult to injury.

68
The Myth and Legends of Survivors / Re: Offers of Asylum - How Many?
« on: February 28, 2017, 01:17:23 PM »

Didn't the Kaiser make an offer to take in Alexandra and the girls?


Not quite. As part of the negotiations for the Bolshevik Russia withdrawing from the War, Germany insisted on Russia granting "the safety and protection of all of the Princesses of German blood" ie: Ella, Alix and the Grand Duchesses.

69
Nicholas II / Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
« on: February 23, 2017, 03:33:01 PM »
your comments you show you are unable to understand. If you are able please continue with your negative comments, nothing else is expected of you.


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


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

PS: You are getting close to being banned from this Forum permanently and every post of yours deleted.  So you might wish to take that into consideration. This ability is in my sole discretion and one of my duties here.

70
Nicholas II / Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
« on: February 23, 2017, 02:13:55 PM »
We need to design a sarcasm emoji or special sarcasm font. :-)

71
Nicholas II / Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
« on: February 23, 2017, 12:10:56 PM »
His nearly un intelligible English confuses me. Most Canadians don't write like English is a third language for them.  The evasion of answering direct questions, lack of genuine evidence and sheer lack of grasping how DNA works and what it can can't show also confuse me.

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

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


72
Nicholas II / Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
« on: February 19, 2017, 04:45:44 PM »
You have just destroyed any hope of credibility you may have hoped to have had.

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

Major problem Mr. "alleged expert", The 5th century is the time period from 401 to 500 in accordance with the Julian calendar in Anno Domini / Common Era. THUS 466 is the 5th century.  If you do not possess even this minimally basic knowledge, then you fail utterly to demonstrate any skill whatsoever, tainting all of your blather.

73
Forum Announcements / Re: need help with photos of the GARF
« on: February 19, 2017, 11:56:42 AM »
No, files can not be attached to a PM. They have to be sent email.

74
Nicholas II / Re: The Romanov bloodline decending from 4th century AD
« on: February 14, 2017, 01:01:10 AM »
This vonEbert whoever it is, is another fantasist, who believes in fairy tales, like the "Anastasia" survivor theorists. Don't waste your time engaging this entity. It only believes what it wishes to believe and will grasp onto any detail that suits, rather than analyze the facts. I gave up on this lunatic ages ago and suggest you do the same. Let us face it, all it can do is send you to a "Facebook" page, which is reliable how? It isn't. So judge accordingly.

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

75
Spiridovitch:
Prince Vladimir Petrovitch Metchersksi, Chamberlain of His Majesty's Court, owner and editor in chief of the newspaper "Grazdanyin" ("The Citizen" weekly monarchist newspaper in Petersburg, pretending to be reactionary) Prince Metcherski loved Emperor Nicholas II as both the monarch and the son of Alexander III, with whom he had had a great friendship since his youth, starting when Alexander Alexandrovitch was still Tsarevitch.
   In the Prince's office one could see a portrait photograph of Tsar Alexander III with the following dedication: "In memory of past years and of our evenings. Your devoted, Alexander."
And on the photograph of Emperor Nicholas II, given to the Prince on January 14, 1910, was inscribed:
"To the indefatigable combatant for the maintenance of the historical foundations necessary for the continuing development of the Russian State."
   The Emperor respected the Prince as a friend of his father, great patriot and personal friend.  He often desired to know the Prince's opinions on political matters, but always guarded his independence.  The Emperor called him once "the Minister without a portfolio." However, there were two matters which the Emperor prohibited the Prince from touching: the Jewish question and external politics. There were what the Prince himself called "the forbidden circle."

Be careful of the modern Australian translation. The original French uses many 19th century idioms and terms which require contextual translation. Having read the recent translation, I found it lacking, sloppy  and unfamiliar with the contemporary idioms, vocabulary and contextual usages of the text. It is only a vague guide and misses the details

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 320