The make of a bayanet

Simple,
BECAUSE annaanderson's entire agenda is that AA WAS AN. PERIOD.
Logic dictates simply that if AA was NOT AN, then there IS NO POINT TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION.

You have invited people to be part of this forum.  Annaanderson joined and asked a question about the make of a bayonet.  I think it proper to treat her questions with respect and to give a reply with the information she or anyone else deserves.  It doesn't matter to me if she believes AA was GD Anastasia or if she likes the color pink or if she adores  cats.  

If she had not asked the question about the make of the bayonet,  I would never have ended up learning from David's knowledge  or wondering about the blade marks found or not found on the bones found in the mass grave.

Let me say this:  I am not afraid of questions nor am I afraid of what the answers might be.

AGRBear

[ribs showed possible signs of damage from bayonet thrusts]

Thank you Elisabeth.

Gladly, AGR Bear. It's not exactly hard to find. Check Robert K. Massie's The Romanovs: The Final Chapter, p. 62:

"The easiest body to identify - labeled by the Russians as Body No. 7 - was that of a middle-aged woman whose ribs showed possible signs of damage from bayonet thrusts. What immediately caught the eye and attention of Dr. Levine was the elaborate and beautiful dental work in this skull [...] Seeing this work, Levine and Maples pronounced this skull and these remains as belonging to the Empress Alexandra."

I don't know if you noticed but I posted in #100  a diagram which shows Alexandra's skeletal remains which were found and noted by  Klier and Mingay.  It shows the rib cage area was gone.  Are they in error?  Or is  Massie who tells us that this same skeleton #7's ribs show possible signs of damage from bayonet thrusts?  Maybe both are right?  But how can that be?  

Let me go get the colorized diagram of the grave site and let's see if any of the ribs which belonged to Alexandra are found on that diagram.

I'll be right back.

Here it is.

Diagram of the position of the skeletons in the mass grave.

You can see how one body was placed on top of another....

I colorzied the bones, however, I'm not sure if I put the correct colors on the right bones.  

If you see anything I need to change or add colors to the bones not yet colorized, please,  let me know.  

On the leg bone of #3 is something that looks like part of a skull.  Does that belong to #8??

1. Anna S. Demidova
2. Dr. Botkin
3. GD Olga
4.  Nicholas II
5. GD Marie/Anastasia
6. GD Tatiana
7. Empress Alexandra
8. Ivan Kharitonov
9. Alexsi Trupp

I promised I'd do this on one of these threads but forgotten which one so I placed it here.

AGRBear

Perhaps some of Alexadnra's bones settled downward and mixed with Demidov's bones which we learn from testimony was struck with Ermakov's bayonet.  I presume each rib fragment would have to be tested to know which  ribs were Alexandra's and which rib bones were Demidov's.


AGRBear

Assuming, of course, that the mark on Andersen's foot was made by a bayonet. I think it has only been established that there was a scar on her foot.

You have invited people to be part of this forum.  Annaanderson joined and asked a question about the make of a bayonet.  I think it proper to treat her questions with respect and to give a reply with the information she or anyone else deserves.  It doesn't matter to me if she believes AA was GD Anastasia or if she likes the color pink or if she adores  cats.  

If she had not asked the question about the make of the bayonet,  I would never have ended up learning from David's knowledge  or wondering about the blade marks found or not found on the bones found in the mass grave.

Let me say this:  I am not afraid of questions nor am I afraid of what the answers might be.

AGRBear

I think Annaandersen was deliberately provocative in the way in which he asked his questions. And if answers were provided that seemingly contradicted his thesis that Andersen was Anastasia, he ignored them.

There is a difference between academic freedom and tolerance for rudeness. I don't know why he has withdrawn from the board, and I won't speculate, but please don't turn this into another "the board has lost a poster because people wouldn't listen" issue.

Frankly, I think this thread has degenerated into a discussion of violence and brutality that is pointless. Will history be served if we know in what order the people in that room died? Or who took how many stab wounds?

One can only hope they all died quickly, but Penny Wilson and Greg King's book, along with the testimonies of the people that shot them, seem to indicate that there was an enormous amount of suffering in a relatively brief period of time. The question of the bayonet has been answered, and this is beginning to be ghoulish.

Simon

Not to mention boorishly repetitive.

Not to mention boorishly repetitive.

I think you mean "bearishly repetitive"    

...[in part]....
NOW if you want to actually delve into the events of that night, then go over to the "Last Days" section and start an appropriate thread about the events of that night as re: usage of bayonets.

For those who are interested in evidence which surround the deaths of Nicholas II and the others,  as FA suggested, I'll take some of this information and place it over in the thread about Testimonies of Yurovsky and Others in the Final Chapter section as I have time and so it won't get lost as this thread slowly fades away....

http://hydrogen.pallasweb.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=lastdays;action=display;num=1106530719;start=0

It'll start on page 8.

http://hydrogen.pallasweb.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=lastdays;action=display;num=1106530719;start=175

So, if you'd like, please, join me and we can continue the conversation about the evidence of blade marks on the bones.  If this subject is too "gory", "boorish" or "repetitive" for you,  please,  feel free to avoid the discussion.

AGRBear