Anna Anderson Discussion of Evidence

Thanks to ImperialHighness who has the book, I now know the info:

B. Himmelstjerna, "Im Angesicht der Revolution", 1922, the publisher is Steeler.

This book is allegedly based on letters and diaries and claims to be historical fact. Whether or not it is we will never know, but one thing for sure, the publish date of 1922, and being a German book proves with no doubt that the idea for the story of Ernie visiting Alix during the war was already out there and it was nothing unique and secret that 'only Anastasia could have known.'  I feel another 'mystery' has been put to rest here, if not about the trip itself, certainly about AA's part in it. She or one of her supporters COULD have had access to this book when they made up the story on Ernie.

Since  my great uncles , who were exeucted by the Bolshviks in 1918,  claimed to have been a part of  "uncle Ernie" visit to Nicholas II,  I am grateful for having learned about this book, if it is based on fact.   If anyone ever reads it please  send me a PM because I'd like to know more of the details and, of course,  I will  have a few questions  to which this book may give the answers which may  help me prove this family story.

AGRBear

It is well documented that the "visit" never happened. It was thrown out of the German court during the AA trial as heresay.

How very interesting. More evidence of the fraud and her team at work.

This is not evidence, nor is it a discussion of the evidence.

One wonders what the definition of "evidence" is.

One wonders what the definition of "evidence" is.

You might want to check into that.

Opinion is saying things like "X was a fraud".

Evidence is saying things like: "Anna Anderson claimed that she injured her finger in a carriage accident. Grand Duchess Olga stated it was Maria who had the injured finger. Does anyone know of corroboration for this?"

Opinion is saying, "the Anna Anderson supporters always  xy, purpetuating her fraud"

Evidence is saying, "what is the evidence of the alleged visit to Russia by Ernst of Hesse in 1916?"

[X was a fraud]

One wonders what the definition of "evidence" is.

Opinion is saying things like "X was a fraud".

Evidence is a broad term that requires that a fact is supported by compelling information that can be based (in this example) on one's knowledge or observation.

Thus in this scenario:

"X" was a fraud must be qualified by presenting compelling proof (the DNA profile). The scientific analysis that is reproduceable, demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that based on this submitted information "X" was a fraud.

Opinion is saying, "the Anna Anderson supporters always  xy, purpetuating her fraud"

A valid personal observation that provides information that can provide persuasive evidence in certain circumstances. It relates to the behavior of the "supporters".

Evidence is saying, "what is the evidence of the alleged visit to Russia by Ernst of Hesse in 1916?"

In this case there is no available documented evidence only speculation.

Margarita

Thank you for amplifying my points.

Yes Belocka you explained things well.

This topic came up in another thread where one poster insisted no one had been hurt by her claim. I disagree, I believe many people were hurt emotionally, financially, or had their reputations damaged by it all. Let's examine those involved and give our opinions, and evidence if available, of who may have been hurt by the case.

Here's my list:

Olga A.: Spent many years fighting the case, and living with accusations of abandoning her 'niece', a jab at her rep that survived long after her death and sadly surfaces to this day.

Xenia A: Along with her sister Olga, the subject of accusations and rude letters from AA supporters.

Ernie H.: Along with the above two, had to endure the threats and accusations from the claimant which no doubt compounded the grief of losing two siblings, four nieces and a nephew to  hideous violent murder

Gleb Botkin's wife and children: with so much time and money spent on AA instead of earning a living with a real job, the family ended up financially destitute.

Edward Fallows: His daughter said the case broke him financially and physically, and "killed him." It is likely his family suffered as a result, too.

Sophie Buxhoevedon: Falsely accused of 'betrayal' by AA supporters, a blow to her rep

Felix Yussoupov: Allegedly accused of attempted murder by AA

Earl Mountbatten: Accused of poisoning Harriet Rathlef and George Leuchtenberg, again as with the above 2,  character assassination

Anastasia herself: having her identity stolen and being confused with an eccentric old Polish woman

the German court system/German taxpayers: the cost and burden of the long, drawn out trial

Without offending nobody I would include in list a Marie Feodorovna to give the false hope him to return to see one of its granddaughters

Greetings to all

Without offending nobody I would include in list a Marie Feodorovna to give the false hope him to return to see one of its granddaughters

Greetings to all

Yet the Dowager prefered not to accept that her son Nikolai and his entire family were murdered. However your point is a valid one.

Margarita

Anna Anderson's false claim is an early example of "stolen identity" without the involvement of technology, of course. Many people are hurt emotionally and financially in these schemes.

Pandora, I had never thought of it that way.

Identity theft is a big industry in the world today.  I would say that Franzeska almost invented it, as you said, without the benefit of today's technology.  Good point.

And a lot of people were hurt by her.  Not just the closest of the Romanovs, but anyone who gave her a chance or a break.  She treated them poorly and acted badly and rudely.  She took everything they gave and gave nothing in return except trouble.

It is no wonder that so many doors closed to her as the years passed.  And it is no wonder that the Romanovs simply tried to ignore her.  They knew the truth and tried their best to get on with life without Franzeska and her lies.

AA/FS was a fraud and a professional con-artist.  I am not one of those who believes she was 'nuts' and somehow deluded herself and believed she was the GD.  I think she knew exactly what she was doing all along and was constantly looking for new victims.  When she was senile I can't say - but until then her whole life was one of constant, calculated deception and manipulation of others.

Obviously, like most of these cases, she hurt many people. I agree with everything Annie posted. I think though she had mental problems, and wasn't fully aware of what she was doing, especially not later on, when she had fully become accustomed to believing that she was Anastasia, when she obviously was not. She wasn't aware at least not fully she hurt so many people, but that doesn't excuse it. She still hurt them. I don't think by saying she didn't know what she was doing, that excuses all the havoc she caused. I think however much she believed herself Anastasia, she was aware of some of this hurt, and simply didn't care, mental problems or no. Some of these people were enemies, many were well meaning people who got caught up in this fraud and almost became her enablers through utterly no fault of their own. I'm not an AA expert, but there were no doubt more people she hurt than just the people listed so far.. what about Harriet Rathlef, or the cousin who had married the millionare in America.. was it Xzenia Leeds, or something like that? I know those names were mentioned on some other thread, but in my opinion, anyone even if they were a supporter, could be defined as hurt, or at least, used.