Author Topic: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson  (Read 146221 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TimM

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1937
    • View Profile
    • Rex and Hannah Chronicles Wikia
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #90 on: December 28, 2010, 01:32:35 AM »
Quote
and speaking personally, here no one will ever convince me that it was not Anastasia whose remains were found then given the uniform opinions of the disparate American forensic teams who examined and opined on the original Koptyaki remains

Me neither.  Anastasia died with her family that terrible day in 1918.   DNA proved that.  Case closed.
Cats: You just gotta love them!

Alixz

  • Guest
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #91 on: December 28, 2010, 10:04:59 AM »
The only problem that ever had with the Koptyaki findings was that at first only 9 of the 11 were found.  That in itself is not the problem.  The others were just buried elsewhere.  The problem that I found was that at first, the identification of the missing was in doubt.  Then as Anastasia "escapee supporters" began to question the identity of the woman who was not in the original grave and many thought that it was Anastasia not Maria who was missing - suddenly small amounts of bone and teeth were found and with almost nothing to work with the "remains" were said to be that of Marie and Alexei.  That put Anastasia in the original grave with the others.

I repeat that I have always wanted to believe that all of the family escaped.  I never wanted to think of the horror that took place in the basement of Ipatiev House and hoped that it was a myth.  I also never believed that Anna Anderson was Anastasia Nikolaevna and I gave my reasons in prior posts.

However, it just seemed too convenient that authorities found those dusty charred remains and then declared them to be Maria and Alexei so quickly.  Then those very important remains were put aside and stored in a "back room" somewhere never to be heard of or talked about again.  

I know that the Russian Orthodox Church has not actually recognized any of the remains found in the original grave and especially not in the second grave conclusively and I don't know why  it hasn't but I also don't know if it matters of not.

I hope that reading this book helps me to understand more than I do now.  I wonder if the "gossip" or whatever it was about Ernst Ludwig visiting his sister Empress Alexandra during the war matters or not either.  I don't know if Anna Anderson possibly knowing about the visit matters or not either in helping to prove or disprove any theories.  Everything seems so convoluted.

In the end the DNA testing of Anna Anderson's tissue against that of Franciska's relatives showed a great certainty that Anna Anderson was not Anastasia Nikolaevna but was in reality Franciska Schanzkowska.  I know that experts say that DNA doesn't lie, but it always seems to me that DNA testing gets its results through the "back door".  It tells what isn't - not what is.  And even then, does it show conclusively what isn't true or does it only show a "high probability" of what isn't true?  

It is like saying that the results show that Anna Anderson "could" have been Franciska and so she "might" not have been Anastasia.  It never says "definitely".

I hope that I haven't spent good money on a book that won't help me to understand anything more that I already do.  But I know that Greg and Penny have done an enormous amount of research and that alone should make the book worth reading.  If only to find something new to debate about.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 10:11:04 AM by Alixz »

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #92 on: December 28, 2010, 11:09:18 AM »
The only problem that ever had with the Koptyaki findings was that at first only 9 of the 11 were found.  That in itself is not the problem.  The others were just buried elsewhere.  The problem that I found was that at first, the identification of the missing was in doubt.  Then as Anastasia "escapee supporters" began to question the identity of the woman who was not in the original grave and many thought that it was Anastasia not Maria who was missing - suddenly small amounts of bone and teeth were found and with almost nothing to work with the "remains" were said to be that of Marie and Alexei.  That put Anastasia in the original grave with the others.

I repeat that I have always wanted to believe that all of the family escaped.  I never wanted to think of the horror that took place in the basement of Ipatiev House and hoped that it was a myth.  I also never believed that Anna Anderson was Anastasia Nikolaevna and I gave my reasons in prior posts.

However, it just seemed too convenient that authorities found those dusty charred remains and then declared them to be Maria and Alexei so quickly.  Then those very important remains were put aside and stored in a "back room" somewhere never to be heard of or talked about again.  

I know that the Russian Orthodox Church has not actually recognized any of the remains found in the original grave and especially not in the second grave conclusively and I don't know why  it hasn't but I also don't know if it matters of not.

I hope that reading this book helps me to understand more than I do now.  I wonder if the "gossip" or whatever it was about Ernst Ludwig visiting his sister Empress Alexandra during the war matters or not either.  I don't know if Anna Anderson possibly knowing about the visit matters or not either in helping to prove or disprove any theories.  Everything seems so convoluted.

In the end the DNA testing of Anna Anderson's tissue against that of Franciska's relatives showed a great certainty that Anna Anderson was not Anastasia Nikolaevna but was in reality Franciska Schanzkowska.  I know that experts say that DNA doesn't lie, but it always seems to me that DNA testing gets its results through the "back door".  It tells what isn't - not what is.  And even then, does it show conclusively what isn't true or does it only show a "high probability" of what isn't true?  

It is like saying that the results show that Anna Anderson "could" have been Franciska and so she "might" not have been Anastasia.  It never says "definitely".

I hope that I haven't spent good money on a book that won't help me to understand anything more that I already do.  But I know that Greg and Penny have done an enormous amount of research and that alone should make the book worth reading.  If only to find something new to debate about.

1. Bob Atchison saw and held he remains of the original 9 in Ekaterinburg not long after they were unearthed. As a trained portrait painter (he studied under Chuck Close, actually) Bob has an eye trained for facial shapes and recognition.  As a Romanov scholar, he is intimately familiar with the faces of the IF.  He told me the moment he got home from the trip that he was 100% certain the skull was Anastasia and not Maria.  Now make of that what you will, however in the end, the question is moot. All were accounted for.

Alixz, the DNA science is indeed 100% certain. The "doubt" is infinitesimal, in the case at hand, the "probability" that the DNA found is NOT the Imperial Family is on the order of 10 billion to 1. Science is so precise that they feel "bound" to include the hugely impossible alternative.  The certainty level that AA was NOT ANR is 1 in a trillion.  There is 100% certainty that AA was separated from a common maternal ancestor by at LEAST 25 generations as revealed by the Five mis-matched mDNA loci.  ONE mis-match is a genetic mutation that occurs only once in 20 generations.  This is the problem with the AA=FS match, it can only say that AA and FS were related within the last five generations because there was no mDNA mis-match.

Offline Kalafrana

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2912
    • View Profile
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #93 on: December 28, 2010, 11:59:45 AM »
'This is the problem with the AA=FS match, it can only say that AA and FS were related within the last five generations because there was no mDNA mis-match.'

So what we have is certainty that Anna Anderson was not Anastasia, but a degree of doubt that she was FS?

I also have a degree of doubt that the remains in the second grave are Anastasia rather than Marie, though, to be perfectly honest, I did not want it to be Anastasia that was unaccounted for (my initial reaction, 'Oh no, it WOULD be Anastasia!'). However, they all now accounted for, and all died at the Ipatiev House.

Ann

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #94 on: December 28, 2010, 12:23:45 PM »
Well, yes and no. While there is "some" degree of doubt that AA was FS directly, WHAT are the odds that AA was so very closely related to FS? Certainly far far far more than picking some random Eastern European woman...

Greg and Penny's book simply brings those odds to such a high level that the rational person must conclude they are one and the same person.

Alixz

  • Guest
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #95 on: December 28, 2010, 01:40:43 PM »
FA thank you for the information.  I know that Bob is quite knowledgeable and his information means a great deal.

Kalafrana - I too thought as you did when the initial finding came out.  The two most talked about "survivors" were always Anastasia and Alexei and at first, it seemed as if they were still missing.  I truly have no doubt as to who was in the larger grave.  9 people were found and the make up of the group made it clear that it was the Imperial Family and their retainers.

I just still have problems with how hurried everything was with the second grave site.  Almost as if there had to be two more found just to put the survivor theories to rest.  I just can't help it.  The remains were so small and so degraded and burned and powered, it just still makes me wonder.  It felt contrived to put the "survivor" theories to rest.

But that does not mean that I think that Anna Anderson was Anastasia.  I have said before, that I could never come to terms with Anna Anderson and the way she lived and treated people.  I still feel that if she were the real Anastasia, she would have just told Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna something that only the two of them would have known and be done with it.

I do believe that Anna Anderson was Franciska, but I still would like to know when and why she decided to take on the identity of a dead girl and what her motives were.  It certainly wasn't greed or the idea of living the good life because she didn't.  Why did she jump into the canal?

The only reason I can come up with is mental disease.  Some kind of mental disorder that was not yet recognized by doctors.

Are these the kind of questions that the book answers?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 01:58:08 PM by Alixz »

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #96 on: December 28, 2010, 01:57:27 PM »
It is truly unfortunate that W.R Maples didn't live long enough to compare the bones of  remains listed as "Body No. 5" with those found in the last two graves found in July of 2007.  This is what Maples  wrote:  "Half of her middle face was missing, a pattern of damage already seen in Body No. 3.  Dr. Levine and I agree that she was the youngest of the five women whose skeletons lay before us.  We concluded this from the fact that the root tips of her third molars were incomplete.  Her sacrum, in the back of her pelvis, was not completely developed.  Her limb bones showed that growth had only recently ended.  Her back showed evidence of immaturity, but it was nevertheless the back of a woman at least eighteen years old.  We estimated her height at 67.5 inches [that's a little more than 5 feet 6 inches].  The Russians told us that a bullet had been found in a lump of adipocere near the body.  We believe this skeleton is that of Marie, who was nineteen years old at the time of the murder."



Maples had a lot more bones to view than the fragments of bones found in the two graves in July of 2007.

Kings and Wilson's latest book deals with AA/FS and this is what he has just told us.

We don't conclude anything other than that the Romanovs were killed in the Ipatiev House. Aside from going in briefly to the identification of the 2007 Koptyaki remains (and speaking personally, here no one will ever convince me that it was not Anastasia whose remains were found then given the uniform opinions of the disparate American forensic teams who examined and opined on the original Koptyaki remains) we simply report what is true-they have all been found. We interviewed Michael Coble about the whole "conspiracy" scenario for this as well as with the AA DNA tests, and you can find his comment on this in the epilogue.

Bear's  position still finds  Maple's findings worth more weight  than the Russians who view the same remains as being Marie, who was about 5 feet 6 inches, and not Anastasia,  whom most believe never grew taller than 5 feet 2 inches.

I just finished RESURRECTION OF THE ROMANOVS and found it worth every penny.  (No pun intended.)  This is a book about   AA / FS.  Do not buy it if you are doing so to discover evidence about the subjects such as the one about  which  Grand Duchess is buried in which grave  (mass grave found earlier or the latest two graves of 2007).

AGRBear

 
« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 02:02:31 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Alixz

  • Guest
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #97 on: December 28, 2010, 02:03:38 PM »
Bear, I am confused by your quotes.

Did Maples think that the bones were Anastasia or Marie?

Did the Russians think that the bones were Anastasia or Marie?

Who thought what?  I have read that quote three times and I still can't figure it out.

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #98 on: December 28, 2010, 02:28:17 PM »
The Americans believed the remains found in the first grave site were Maria.  The Russians and Bob believed it was Anastasia who was found and Maria was the missing one (finally discovered in 2007)

Offline Kalafrana

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2912
    • View Profile
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #99 on: December 28, 2010, 02:40:59 PM »
'We estimated her height at 67.5 inches [that's a little more than 5 feet 6 inches].'

Actually it's 5ft 7 1/2.

Ann

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #100 on: December 28, 2010, 03:08:41 PM »
Bear, I am confused by your quotes.

Did Maples think that the bones were Anastasia or Marie?

Did the Russians think that the bones were Anastasia or Marie?

Who thought what?  I have read that quote three times and I still can't figure it out.

Sorry for the confusion.

Maples believed Body No. 5 found in the mass grave was GD Marie.  The Russians believe Body No. 5 was Anastasia.

 I'll quote from his book DEAD MEN DO TELL TALES which gives us why his conclusion is important:

>>Until his death in February 1997, Dr. Williams R. Maples was a distinguished service professor and curator-in-charge of the C.A. Pound Human Identification Laboratory at the Florida Museum of Natural History in Gainesville.  He was president of the American Board of Forensic Anthropology and a fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences.<<

AGRBear
« Last Edit: December 29, 2010, 09:14:21 AM by Alixz »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline Janet Ashton

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 719
  • www.directarticle.org
    • View Profile
    • Direct Article
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #101 on: December 28, 2010, 03:31:33 PM »
[quote{Greg King}]and speaking personally, here no one will ever convince me that it was not Anastasia whose remains were found then given the uniform opinions of the disparate American forensic teams who examined and opined on the original Koptyaki remains

Me neither.  Anastasia died with her family that terrible day in 1918.   DNA proved that.  Case closed.
[/quote]
 
Greg's point is a contention that Anastasia's body was missing from the original grave.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 03:53:09 PM by Janet Ashton »
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep had fallen on you -
Ye are many; they are few.

Offline LisaDavidson

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2665
    • View Profile
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #102 on: December 28, 2010, 03:33:21 PM »
Just a reminder to our Forum Members: this thread is about Greg and Penny's book. It's not about FS/AA and I find that some of the posts are discussing that and not the book. I will review the posts and delete which violate Forum policy after taking some time to digest all of this. BTW, violations of our policy would be in some cases, doubting the DNA tests.

Also as a matter of clarification, our friend Peter Kurth has in numerous emails to me said he accepted that AA was not ANR, so I wish people would stop saying that he does not. It's tiresome to have to keep re-quoting myself! Peter did not believe that AA was FS. I don't know what he thinks now that Resurrection has come out.

As to "does the book cover x" questions: I know that some of our members cannot purchase the book but please go to your library and if you cannot buy it and request it from Interlibrary loan if necessary. I don't think it's fair to our members who are writers to have to reveal all of their research this way.

Suffice to say, King and Wilson fully explain to at least my satisfaction who Franziska was and how she was able to impersonate the Grand Duchess for most of her life. It's a fascinating story, so I would urge you to read it if you can.

Offline Janet Ashton

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 719
  • www.directarticle.org
    • View Profile
    • Direct Article
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #103 on: December 28, 2010, 03:38:55 PM »
The Americans believed the remains found in the first grave site were Maria.  The Russians and Bob believed it was Anastasia who was found and Maria was the missing one (finally discovered in 2007)

At least one Russian scientist (Filipchuk, I think) presented data which also suggested that the youngest girl was the one missing. I don't think it can or should be reduced to a matter of nationality, because when it is people begin to raise accusation of particular emotional bias (e.g. Russians "wanting" AN dead, or Americans "influenced by Hollywood" etc into hoping she survived) over what is or was a matter of scientific dispute. Maples - for example - was 100% clear on believing that AN was dead - regardless of his firm belief that her body was missing.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 03:44:25 PM by Janet Ashton »
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep had fallen on you -
Ye are many; they are few.

Offline TimM

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1937
    • View Profile
    • Rex and Hannah Chronicles Wikia
Re: "Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson" by King And Wilson
« Reply #104 on: December 28, 2010, 04:26:39 PM »
Well, it really doesn't matter which girl was in the second grave, the DNA tests proved she is related to the others found in 1991.  Therefore, all the Romanov's have been accounted for.    They all died in 1918.

AA, whoever she was, was not Anastasia.
Cats: You just gotta love them!