The Alexander Palace Time Machine Discussion Forum
 
 User Info & Key Stats   
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
October 01, 2014, 09:22:13 PM
462154 Posts in 8962 Topics by 14514 Members
Latest Member: kryptorleanist
News: We think Pallasart is the best web design company in Austin and for good reason - they make this forum possible! Looking for a website? Call them at 512 469-7454.
+  The Alexander Palace Time Machine Discussion Forum
|-+  Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty
| |-+  The Final Chapter (Moderators: LisaDavidson, Sarushka, BobAtchison, Forum Admin)
| | |-+  The Missing Bodies
  0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 Go Down Print
Author
Topic: The Missing Bodies  (Read 63154 times)
Reply #480
« on: November 14, 2011, 03:25:25 PM »
aleksandr pavlovich
Guest

I understand from something I have read about this, that the recent discovery of remains claimed to be the 'missing pair' were something like 45 miles from the main mass grave site - why on earth such a distance???

"LondonGirl," regretably the source that you read was either a typo or badly (I am strongly resisting the punning "gravely") misinformed!  Regards,  AP.
Logged
Reply #481
« on: November 15, 2011, 08:30:55 AM »
Forum Admin Offline
Administrator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
www.alexanderpalace.org Posts: 4518

View Profile WWW

I understand from something I have read about this, that the recent discovery of remains claimed to be the 'missing pair' were something like 45 miles from the main mass grave site - why on earth such a distance???

45 METERS. Not miles...
Logged
Reply #482
« on: November 15, 2011, 01:31:42 PM »
LondonGirl
Guest

45 metres? Even so - why not bury them all together?
Logged
Reply #483
« on: November 15, 2011, 04:07:12 PM »
TimM Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
Posts: 1403

View Profile WWW

Because they wanted to confuse whomever found the bodies, that they would find nine, not eleven, and conclude that these were not the remains of the IF and their servants.
Logged

Author of The Rex and Hannah Chronicles.
Reply #484
« on: November 16, 2011, 12:15:52 AM »
Kalafrana Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
Posts: 2546

View Profile

Plus the whole business was a complete muddle, done in a great hurry and atmosphere of panic. The Fate of the Romanovs makes that very clear.

Ann
Logged
Reply #485
« on: November 16, 2011, 07:50:30 AM »
Forum Admin Offline
Administrator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
www.alexanderpalace.org Posts: 4518

View Profile WWW

No they didn't want to "confuse" anybody. They themselves were "confused".  They tried to burn the bodies, they chose the two smallest to try to burn first.  The bodies had already frozen, so they took forever to burn and didn't burn well. They buried the two burned bodies where they were, and took the other ones to a spot nearby. Period.
Logged
Reply #486
« on: November 16, 2011, 03:28:18 PM »
LondonGirl
Guest

No they didn't want to "confuse" anybody. They themselves were "confused".  They tried to burn the bodies, they chose the two smallest to try to burn first.  The bodies had already frozen, so they took forever to burn and didn't burn well. They buried the two burned bodies where they were, and took the other ones to a spot nearby. Period.


The two 'smallest'? That would suggest Alexei and Anastasia, would it not? Why then is the set of female remains recovered identified as Maria? 
Logged
Reply #487
« on: November 16, 2011, 03:58:57 PM »
TimM Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
Posts: 1403

View Profile WWW

They weren't sure which one it was, they just know it's one of the Little Pair, since the DNA results proved she was related to the other one (Alexei).
Logged

Author of The Rex and Hannah Chronicles.
Reply #488
« on: November 16, 2011, 04:11:21 PM »
aleksandr pavlovich
Guest

No they didn't want to "confuse" anybody. They themselves were "confused".  They tried to burn the bodies, they chose the two smallest to try to burn first.  The bodies had already frozen, so they took forever to burn and didn't burn well. They buried the two burned bodies where they were, and took the other ones to a spot nearby. Period.


The two 'smallest'? That would suggest Alexei and Anastasia, would it not? Why then is the set of female remains recovered identified as Maria?  

  Momentarily setting DNA aside, the body of the Heir would of course be readily indentifiable as to gender (and the sailor undershirt).
  Regarding the females of the family however, IMO, post-mortem bloating (prior to the semi-arresting by freezing) can be very misleading in compariason to the recognized "living" size/shape of others of similiar age.  Then there was the intentional crushing of the facial features at a certain point. Add to this the hurried and ( and the FA has commented) "confused" state/attempt of the disposals.  
  I concur that all are accounted for, thus the identity of to the GD Maria N. versus the GD Anastasia N., IMO, presently is an exercise in futility.                                                                                                            Regards,   AP.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2011, 04:30:30 PM by aleksandr pavlovich » Logged
Reply #489
« on: November 16, 2011, 10:27:25 PM »
darius Offline
Graf
***
I love YaBB 1G - SP1! Posts: 336

View Profile

There is quite a good documentary - youŽll find it on youtube if your search "Romanov" which investigates the finding, the DNA testing etc.  It should answer most questions.
Logged
Reply #490
« on: November 17, 2011, 08:01:07 AM »
Forum Admin Offline
Administrator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
www.alexanderpalace.org Posts: 4518

View Profile WWW

No they didn't want to "confuse" anybody. They themselves were "confused".  They tried to burn the bodies, they chose the two smallest to try to burn first.  The bodies had already frozen, so they took forever to burn and didn't burn well. They buried the two burned bodies where they were, and took the other ones to a spot nearby. Period.


The two 'smallest'? That would suggest Alexei and Anastasia, would it not? Why then is the set of female remains recovered identified as Maria? 

No one has ever "identified" the female remains specifically as such is in fact impossible.  As stated, all that can be shown is that the female has a 100% sibling relationship to the male, and both have 100% parental relationship to Nicholas and Alexandra.  All children are accounted for, but to specifically identify Anastasia and Maria to one set of remains or the other is simply not possible.
Logged
Reply #491
« on: November 17, 2011, 08:21:56 AM »
Kalafrana Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
Posts: 2546

View Profile

'No one has ever "identified" the female remains specifically as such is in fact impossible.  As stated, all that can be shown is that the female has a 100% sibling relationship to the male, and both have 100% parental relationship to Nicholas and Alexandra.  All children are accounted for, but to specifically identify Anastasia and Maria to one set of remains or the other is simply not possible.'

As I understand it, identifying which of the Grand Duchesses was which from their remains could only be done on the basis of their ages, as established from the development of bones and teeth. As I read 'The Fate of the Romanovs', certain developments normally take place between the ages of 17 and 20. Marie was 19 (just) at the time of the murders and Anastasia 17 (just). In consequence, it's impossible to be certain whether it was Marie or Anastasia whose remains were found with Alexei's. By contrast, it is clear from developments which take place between 20 and 25 that two of the sets of remains found in the main grave were Olga and Tatiana.

Ann
Logged
Reply #492
« on: November 17, 2011, 09:47:54 AM »
LisaDavidson Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Posts: 2605

View Profile

In "The Romanovs: The Final Chapter", Massie quotes a Yekaterinburg official who said (I am paraphrasing) - we will never know who the daughter missing from the main grave was. These four girls were sisters, born two years apart. We can account for the oldest two, but between the younger two, we don't know. The original burial detail had some knowledge of who was who, but there was a second detail that moved the bodies from the Four Brothers and did the burning and the burying on the old road. The men on the second detail were from the Perm Cheka and had never guarded the Imperial Family. One of the members of the detail, Gregory Sukharukov, said the sister burned was Anastasia, but this was likely speculative.
Logged
Reply #493
« on: November 17, 2011, 03:21:22 PM »
TimM Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
Posts: 1403

View Profile WWW

The one thing we do know is that all of them have now been accounted for.
Logged

Author of The Rex and Hannah Chronicles.
Reply #494
« on: November 26, 2011, 11:50:49 PM »
billmcl2 Offline
Newbie
*
Posts: 38

View Profile

No one has ever "identified" the female remains specifically as such is in fact impossible.  As stated, all that can be shown is that the female has a 100% sibling relationship to the male, and both have 100% parental relationship to Nicholas and Alexandra.  All children are accounted for, but to specifically identify Anastasia and Maria to one set of remains or the other is simply not possible.
[/quote]

This is contradicted by the insistence of the Russians that Maria's remains were missing from the mass grave and by the insistence of the Americans that it was Anastasia's remains that were missing. Apparently both groups of scientists believed that they could conclusively identify the skeletal remains.

Chapters 18-20 of FOTR extensively discuss the unearthing, examination, and identification of the remains. According to K&W, Falsetti and France immediately recognized that the remains designated by the Russians as Anastasia's (based solely on the imperfect technique of photographic superimposition) in fact belonged to an older female, based on the following factors (quoted from p. 455, FOTR):

1)  height (later photographs clearly show that Anastasia was shorter than her sisters)
2)  lack of signs of immaturity in the vertebrae and bones
3)  age and development of the pelvic rim
4)  age and development of the clavicles
5)  age and development of the dental roots

After measuring these parameters in each skeleton, the Americans established that the remains of Maria (skeleton #5), Tatiana (#6), and Olga (#3) were all present in the mass grave because the bones displayed a clear developmental progression from 19 years to 21 years to 22 years of age. This confirmed Maples' conclusions from an earlier examination.

Contrary to assertions made in this thread, Forensic Anthropologists can actually determine the age of a skeleton fairly precisely - especially the skeleton of a child or adolescent who was still growing. In addition to the 5 factors listed above, modern FAs would also examine the closure of cranial sutures, the development of molars and wisdom teeth, and the extent of epiphysial fusion - the closing of the "growth plates" at the ends of the long bones and clavicles. All of these factors exhibit clearly identifiable progressions within limited age ranges. FAs can cross-reference the age ranges for each factor to narrow down the age of the skeleton quite precisely. It would be relatively simple to put a group of skeletons like those in the mass grave in chronological order by age once these factors had been measured. (The age of older skeletons is determined by the degree of deterioration in the bones rather than by growth and development, and is somewhat less precise.)

The essential point is that there are clear developmental differences between the bones, skull, and teeth of a 17-year old and those of a 19-year old. This is how France and Falsetti recognized immediately that skeleton #6 could NOT be Anastasia. There may not have been enough bones in the second grave to clearly determine the age of the female skeleton but it is virtually certain that Anastasia's bones were NOT found in the first (mass) grave. Therefore, the female remains in the second grave had to belong to her since the DNA tests confirmed the presence of two siblings. The following website is a good place to start if you're interested in this topic:

http://www.anthro4n6.net/forensics/#Age

I respect the opinion expressed by AP, Tim, and others that it doesn't matter which remains are in which grave since they are all accounted for. What fascinates me is the determination of the Russian scientists to "prove" that Anastasia's remains were present in the mass grave, despite the insistence of the more qualified American scientists that they were missing. I wonder if it was simply a case of US/Soviet rivalry that the Russians would not back down from or whether they were following the dictates of their political masters to make sure that no living "Anastasia" could ever claim a Romanov inheritance. It's one of the remaining unsolved mysteries of the Romanov executions. I also find it interesting that Falsetti's world-class expertise earned him an invitation back to Siberia to examine the remains found in the second grave (see the National Geographic documentary Finding Anastasia), even though many of his conclusions about the skeletons in the mass grave were flatly rejected by most of the Russian scientists.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Website by Pallasart - Austin Web Design