Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => Maria Nicholaievna => Topic started by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 01:11:57 AM

Title: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 01:11:57 AM
It will be interesting to have further information on the female remains discovered alongside those which are said to be those of Alexis. It should be possible to obtain information on whether the female remains are those of Maria or Anastasia by height difference one would think. The Russians have always said that Anastasia is already buried therefore it would seem the new remains are those of Maria.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: clockworkgirl21 on August 24, 2007, 02:18:59 AM
Accounts of what happened in the celler say Maria was shot in the thigh, so according to this, Maria was in the grave.
(http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/5396/romanovbulletswo7.th.jpg) (http://img340.imageshack.us/my.php?image=romanovbulletswo7.jpg)
But here's something I never thought of before. Others probably have, but I've never seen it discussed. How well did the shooters know each person? They could have shot one girl and mistook(is that a word?) her for another daughter.  ???
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 08:40:16 AM
I think we have all been along this path before.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Annie on August 24, 2007, 12:07:22 PM
I have always doubted the shooters could tell one girl form another by name. Most of them were Letts, not even Russians, and I doubt most poor Russians in outlying areas could have told all the girls apart either. They didn't have all the books and pics we have today, or even the postcards available in St. Petersburg or Moscow. Most Russians knew the Tsar's picture but I'd say most only saw the girls' pics, if ever, in the 1913 tercentenary portrait. This is another reason I have doubted so many 'survivor' rumors about people saying they saw the girls. I don't think they'd have known if they did.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 12:16:59 PM
Well the survivor stories all display a complete and utter lack of knowledge of russian history so what can you expect? They are all so ridiculous like those who tell them.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alexander_IV on August 24, 2007, 12:19:53 PM
I have always doubted the shooters could tell one girl form another by name. Most of them were Letts, not even Russians, and I doubt most poor Russians in outlying areas could have told all the girls apart either. They didn't have all the books and pics we have today, or even the postcards available in St. Petersburg or Moscow. Most Russians knew the Tsar's picture but I'd say most only saw the girls' pics, if ever, in the 1913 tercentenary portrait. This is another reason I have doubted so many 'survivor' rumors about people saying they saw the girls. I don't think they'd have known if they did.

Even in this day and age, with all the books and pictures, it's sometimes hard to tell which is which. At least it is for me.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 12:29:04 PM
It is not difficult to work out who is who in the Romanov family if you make a study of them.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alexander_IV on August 24, 2007, 12:33:36 PM
Exactly, if you've been looking at those pictures for a while, it's not hard anymore probably, but I doubt any of the shooters would have been in that case.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 12:38:43 PM
Yurovsky knew them well over a period of time. As for the rest they had their orders to shoot to kill and that is what they did and they also used bayonets. The job was completed and nobody survived, period.   
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: rosieposie on August 24, 2007, 10:02:04 PM
Yurovsky knew them well over a period of time. As for the rest they had their orders to shoot to kill and that is what they did and they also used bayonets. The job was completed and nobody survived, period.   

Well said.

Can anyone tell me whose bodie is whoses in the diagram? Thanks.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: clockworkgirl21 on August 24, 2007, 10:07:34 PM
1- Demidova
2- Botkin
3- Olga
4- Nicholas
5- Anastasia (or Maria)
6- Tatiana
7- Alexandra, but she is not there
8- Kharitonov
9- Trupp

Anyone know why some circles are black, others white?
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: rosieposie on August 24, 2007, 10:21:25 PM
Thanks for that. I knew number 4 was Nicky.   Because it said he was shot in the heart.

I am wondering why Anastasia/Maria doesnt show that she was shot in the head.  Or is it cause the skull is to badly damaged to see.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 24, 2007, 10:46:32 PM
they all died ... its very easy to understand
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: rosieposie on August 24, 2007, 10:50:23 PM
I have coloured and labeled all the diagrams so everyone knows who is who. Thanks Clockwork.
Dmitri if your going to keep being saracastic then stop it please.   How would you like to be held captive and then watch your family being shot. 

(http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w30/i_love_rasputin/romanovbulletswo7col.jpg)


Sorry the names didnt come up the way I like it.  Here is a link if that is the case :D

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w30/i_love_rasputin/romanovbulletswo7col.jpg
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 25, 2007, 12:11:31 AM
This has all been stated before. The information is readily available.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: EmmyLee on August 25, 2007, 10:45:40 AM
It will be interesting to have further information on the female remains discovered alongside those which are said to be those of Alexis. It should be possible to obtain information on whether the female remains are those of Maria or Anastasia by height difference one would think. The Russians have always said that Anastasia is already buried therefore it would seem the new remains are those of Maria.

I don't know much about this sort of thing, but unless a femur was found among the 44 fragments, how would they be able to tell what height the young woman was in order to distinguish between Maria and Anastasia?
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: LenelorMiksi on August 25, 2007, 11:00:47 AM
The report says the remains of the woman are from the ages of 18-23, which points to Maria rather than Anastasia, who was barely 17 when she died.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Lisa on August 25, 2007, 11:47:53 AM
Exactly!
And nobody hear saw these fragments... We just know that they are are 44, and from some mm to cm (but how many cm? 10? 15? 20?)...
It's diffucult to imagine, when you are not a specialist, these bones... An anthropologist often need only tiny fragments to know a lot of things.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 25, 2007, 12:10:06 PM
Anastasia is already buried with her parents and sisters.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alexander_IV on August 25, 2007, 12:47:10 PM

And nobody hear saw these fragments...
I've seen some on the Belgian news today :)
There was a press conference in Yekaterinaburg where they (or some) were shown apparently.
No femur though. They looked pretty much undistinguishable, might have been pieces of shoulderblade or pieces from the pelvis
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Lisa on August 25, 2007, 01:07:31 PM
Haha! Very intersting! Can we see it online?
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alexander_IV on August 25, 2007, 01:10:01 PM
They don't have their entire news program online, only pieces of it.
But this piece isn't online (yet). I hope they put it up later tonight. I'll check in now and then and post something if they do :)
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alexander_IV on August 25, 2007, 01:54:56 PM
There was an item on the French spoken news in Belgium as well (with even more info)
And the bones are shown as well

http://rtlinfo.alinfini.be/index.php?option=com_vpl_videoplayer&task=play&mmo=5990
It starts at about 3/4
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 25, 2007, 04:09:44 PM
The report says the remains of the woman are from the ages of 18-23, which points to Maria rather than Anastasia, who was barely 17 when she died.

The ages given were only a rough estimate. Not exact. The bones of the boy were estimated at 10-13. Alexei was only 2 weeks shy of 14. So it could very well be Anastasia there. I personally believe it is Anastasia. I always have. The other remains are all too old and too tall for her.
Only the Russian's think Maria is missing and I think Dr. Maples is correct in his findings.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Joyann1 on August 25, 2007, 06:26:37 PM
i was on holiday and i just heard it today they found Maria and alexei omg thats good news now we finally no what happend
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Joyann1 on August 25, 2007, 06:28:24 PM
well i hope its them they dotn know for sure lol
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 25, 2007, 06:54:51 PM
yes can't wait for the DNA results
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alexander_IV on August 25, 2007, 08:16:49 PM
The skeletons shown in that link I posted earlier are those from the original grave btw, not from this one.
Thanks MikeyColeman :)
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Joyann1 on August 25, 2007, 08:38:42 PM
dos anyone have an picture or video about it?
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alixz on August 25, 2007, 09:35:13 PM
The link by Alexander_IV is very interesting!

I only understand about 1/4 of the French, but enough to be excited about the find.

They do show some bones that might be from the original grave before they were buried in St. Petersburg.  However, they also show the fragments and a bullet.

I wonder ( and this is just me) does it really matter if the grand duchess with Alexei is Marie or Anastasia?  Now that all of the bodies have been found, the identification of which bones belong to which grand duchess is moot??  They are all there and no one survived.  Whether they were buried in the first grave of the one found recently, we now know that they are all there.

I seriously doubt that Yurovsky buried Alexei and took a few bones from the other grave to throw in with him.  So some of the bones in the new grave are female and belong to a grand duchess.  After all this time, it is just good enough to know that the right number of bodies is there.  DNA will prove that she is a Romanov and that the survivor stories were fiction.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Joyann1 on August 25, 2007, 10:14:41 PM
well actully i do care i want to know how was buried there for 90 yeard Maria or anastasia
Yes indeed al those fake claimants lol
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 25, 2007, 11:45:10 PM
The survivor stories have already been proved as fiction.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: clockworkgirl21 on August 26, 2007, 02:02:06 AM
I know that if the bones are of Aleksey and one of the girls, it really won't matter which girl it is, because they'll all be there and we'll know for sure no one escaped, but it's still interesting to know which girl was really missing for 16 years after the others were found.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 26, 2007, 03:29:14 AM
well they are pretty sure which daughter it is
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 26, 2007, 04:57:30 PM
No they're not.

I think the reason they're only mentioning Maria and not Anastasia is because they've already buried a girl as Anastasia and they couldn't say they've found Anastasia's remains, of course.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 26, 2007, 05:07:47 PM
Holly Anastasia not only died in Ekaterinburg but is also buried in St.Petersburg already. Have a read at what Bob has written. He after all has seen the remains.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 26, 2007, 06:40:41 PM
I didn't say she didn't die. Everyone knows that...
And I'm aware her name is on a body buried in St. Petersburg. I've read what Bob thinks for years now. I've talked to a couple of people who've also seen the remains in person and they don't have the same opinons. The Russian scientists may not be right. The American scientists may not be right. Nobody knows for sure. I'm just waiting to see how tall the new remains are. That would be extremely helpful in identifying the girls seeing as there's no way Anastasia was 5 ft 7'' but Maria was.
Nobody knows if it's Anastasia so just stop repeating yourself until we know more about the new remains.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 26, 2007, 07:44:06 PM
Guess you were there with your tape measure.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: mikeycoleman on August 26, 2007, 07:51:04 PM
Dmitri, what scientific proof leads you to believe that body 5 is Anastasia?  You seem so sure.

The only thing I have heard that leads people to say it is her is that the skull "looks" like her, and that is as much proof as the people who say AA is Anastasia because she "looks" like her.

I do think the Russian govt. wanted to end the Anastasia hype and the talk of the murders (a sore spot in their history) that they would have said anyone in the grave was Anastasia.

Mikey
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 26, 2007, 08:09:07 PM
I very much doubt it. Russians have never believed in AA. They knew from the very beginning Anastasia died with the rest of her family. Give them some credit for knowing about these matters. They are far from unknowledgable and really couldn't care less about the nonsense to do with AA and other pretenders. It is good that the remains of Maria and Alexis have been found and hopefully in due course will join the rest of the remains of their close family in the crypt in St.Petersburg.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Belochka on August 26, 2007, 08:27:10 PM
Russian forensic scientists are highly trained personnel. They should be given full credit for their professionalism, diligence and thanked for their monumental undertaking.

Margarita
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 26, 2007, 08:30:46 PM
I agree with you, Mikey.
There is no real proof Body No. 5 is Anastasia. Actually, there seems to be a lot of things working against it.
Again, once we can find out the height and the other things, we can find out who is who out of TMA.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: NAOTMAA Fan on August 26, 2007, 09:25:20 PM
Guess you were there with your tape measure.

Dmitri, I find your seemingly high sense of self assuredness on who is who in the crypt somewhat idiosyncratic. Perhaps you are in possession of information we were not aware of?? Unless you have unassailable proof that it is Anastasia buried in The Fortress of St. Peter and Paul, I should think it would be only fair to stop plaguing others for their own beliefs.


I also thought I might add something of interest. Some years ago I watched a documentary that involved the 1991 remains and whether or not Anastasia was in the grave. It could be Nova's Anastasia, Dead or Alive? or even the A&E's Anastasia, but I do recall them using height to distinguish between Marie and Anastasia. The scientists (I recall them being Russian) method was to take the height of the rifle of a soldier standing beside "Anastasia" and use it to see if it matched the height of the skeleton found (as it would seem the rifle and the Grand Duchess are the same size) . It went on later to say there was a match concluding it was Anastasia. However I have recently viewed this photograph again and realized it is Marie pictured, not her sister. I do not know if this was later corrected but I thought it would be of interest to some. Does anyone recall any documentary with this piece of evidence?

Here is the photograph they used:
 
(http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x232/KeeganYoung/th_mariaguard.jpg) (http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x232/KeeganYoung/mariaguard.jpg)
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 26, 2007, 09:40:22 PM
I remember watching that documentary. I can't believe I'd forgotten about that.
That really proves some things about their way of identifying 'Anastasia's remains'.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: mikeycoleman on August 26, 2007, 10:15:23 PM
Russians have never believed in AA. They knew from the very beginning Anastasia died with the rest of her family. Give them some credit for knowing about these matters.

I am not saying they believe in her or not.  I am saying that perhaps the constant talk (predominatnly by Americans) may have been something that the Russians wanted to put the kybosh on.  A constant reminder of anyones negative past can be awkward to say the least.

Russian forensic scientists are highly trained personnel. They should be given full credit for their professionalism, diligence and thanked for their monumental undertaking.

I do not mean, in any way to imply that they are not good at what they do.  But if I remember correctly, at the time their technology was somewhat behind that of other countries.  They did a great job, and made the initial identifications.  That being said, officials in Russia were claiming Anastasia was among the 9 bodies BEFORE any true identifications had been made (and at the time, they were working off of the assumption that body 1 (Demidova) was Nicholas).

I believe that there were ulterior motives in how adamant they were on the presence of Anastasia.

But no offence meant.

Mikey
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 27, 2007, 12:08:54 AM
No offence taken at all. It would seem that primarily Americans were the only ones really concerned about Anastasia and the whole silly AA saga whereas others tended to look at it all more objectively. There has been so much rubbish talked in the area of AA being Anastasia that objectivity about the remains went out the window. Remember these remains have been looked at by many different people and they do not agree. If you take AA out of the picture like Bob I tend to think it was Anastasia that was buried and Marie and Alexis that have been missing. 
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: XJaseyRaeX on August 27, 2007, 01:14:27 AM
how long will it take for them to find out for sure?
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: mikeycoleman on August 27, 2007, 02:03:27 AM
AA had no influence on which body was which.

Body 5 was the tallest GD skeleton.  Marie was the tallest GD

Body 6 had a mature sacrum and pelvis.  Body 6 > 20 years

Body 5 had incomplete molar roots.  Body 5 < 20 years

Body 6 had complete molar roots.  Body 6 > 20 years

Body 6 had a mature collarbone.  Body 6 > 20 years

Growth maturity of the 3 GD skeletons - 3 oldest, 6 middle, 5 youngest.

The Russian scientists claim that 3 is Olga, 5 is Tatiana, and 6 is Anastasia.  But if 6 is under 20 years old she cannot be Tatiana and if 5 is older than 20, she cannot be Marie or Anastasia.

Why do the Russian scientists claim 6 is Anastasia?  Facial reconstruction?  That is not a reliable method or identification.  In police facial reconstructions, a re-fleshed skull is used to jog the memories of family and friends.  If someone sees it and says "that looks like .." then technicians check dna and dental records to determine identity. 

Mikey
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: nena on August 27, 2007, 07:06:10 AM
Mickey, Tatiana was tallest GD.
I believe also 3 is Olga, 5 is Tatiana, and 6 is Anastasia....They didn't match all bones correct fo a long time.....\About skull number 6-Russians says it is Anasatsia because they used her pictures, and what was matter> It was Anasatsia.....But, again, it is all very strange...
 Anastasia's skull-number 6 (http://www.livadia.org/missing/remains24.jpg)
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alixz on August 27, 2007, 07:22:39 AM
Mikey,

Your posting is confusing me.

I thought that Tatiana was the tallest of the grand duchesses. And all of the  <  and >  signs have always confused me. (But that is just me, I have a mind block against them)   ;-)

I originally thought, too, that the Russians said that Marie was the "lost" grand duchess in order to stop the rumors no matter who was making them up.  Because of all of the "rumored survivors" Anastasia and Alexei were the two most controversial and publicized.  To announce 80 years after the murders that they were the two not found, would only add fuel to an already burning fire.  The believers of the world would emit an collective "Ah Ha"

For 16 more years, believers have been able to argue with the findings because of the different opinions of the scientists from Russia and Dr. Maples in the USA.  And now there is a group who still care and want to know which grand duchess it truly is.  I doubt that there would be much discussion if everyone had agreed on Anastasia as the missing grand duchess 16 years ago.

Forensics anthropology is an not an exact science.  Especially not when dealing with bones that were so badly mistreated and then not found for 80 to 90 years.

But Yakov Yurovsky was there and he said that the bodies were buried separately and now we know that he was telling the truth.  And actually why would he have reason to lie?  In the 1920s when he wrote his memoirs, he was a hero in the Soviet Union and had no way of knowing that 80 years later, that the Soviet Union would be no more and that what remained of the bodies would be found.

There was such amazing confusion on the three days following the murder and the defacing of the bodies that it is no surprise that Yurovsky would make mistakes (with the exception of Alexei - he was an immature male and easy to identify) about which young grand duchess or for that matter which woman he and his soldiers tried to burn. (The original rumor was that Alexandra had been burned with Alexei)

All of our speculation over which grand duchess has now been found is only fueling the fires of conspiracy and charges of incompetence in the way that the investigation has been handled both in the 90s and now.

I truly don't care which grand duchess it is as long as it is a grand duchess.  That way all have been found.  The right number of family members have been recovered.  And you know something else?  I would bet that the Imperial Family itself, who have been together forever since that night in 1918, don't truly care about their earthly remains at all.

But what I don't understand is why the Orthodox Church and the remaining Romanovs are doubting the results.  Finding the bodies only brings the mystery surrounding the story to and end.  Why would they not want that?
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: EmmyLee on August 27, 2007, 12:40:43 PM
But what I don't understand is why the Orthodox Church and the remaining Romanovs are doubting the results.  Finding the bodies only brings the mystery surrounding the story to and end.  Why would they not want that?

That is my question exactly. I don't see why they can't accept the DNA results. Why are they so set that the remains interred in the Fortress are NOT those of the IF? What have they got to lose by accepting the remains?
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 27, 2007, 02:30:43 PM
It should be possible to obtain information on whether the female remains are those of Maria or Anastasia by height difference one would think. The 

Not really, not with any kind of certainty.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 27, 2007, 02:35:09 PM
how long will it take for them to find out for sure?

They will never know for sure...
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: mikeycoleman on August 27, 2007, 04:21:48 PM
 :-[  Eeep!  Yes, Tatiana was the tallest GD.  My bad.  And the skeletons are given height range and not the "exact" heights I am assuming.

And all of the  <  and >  signs have always confused me. (But that is just me, I have a mind block against them)   ;-)

Alixz, I always learned it as the monster wants to eat the greater thing.  > he is eating to the left.  < he is eating to the right.  That is how I remember them (and it took me a long time to figure that out!)

I still have not heard any scientific evidence pointing to a 17 year old girl in the original grave.  Ulitimately, no, it doesn't matter who is who, as long as we have an accounting of them all.  I am just curious.

Didn't some of the original reports from the new grave say that there were a few long bones?  Maybe femurs or humerouses (is that word right?  humerii?)  Just something  I thought I heard.

Mikey
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 28, 2007, 03:05:14 AM
I guess it is all politics and agendas, sadly. These are of course only remains. The Romanovs are long gone. 
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Mari on August 28, 2007, 08:13:50 AM
I don't see how they could pinpoint age that exact. The 20 year age appears to be kind of a ballpark figure...but if a 17 year old girl is mature why would her bones not look the same as a 20 year old? In the end probably the skulls are going to match up better with the shape of the head and teeth  and then height!  I know that it will be hard with less bones from this second site but they can tell maybe if it is younger  than 20 and height for the GD! If and I hope it is....that they are all accounted for now!
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 28, 2007, 08:22:20 AM
I don't see how they could pinpoint age that exact.


They really can't. They can only come up with an age range, as large as 10 years or even more. In biology nothing is that exact, and individuals mature at different rates, therefore you can't say that specific remains belong to someone who is 20 or 21 years old as opposed to 23 or 24years old with any kind of certainty, but of course they can tell the difference if it is someone who is 25 years old as opposed to 50 years old. So no, they wouldn't really be able to tell the difference between a 17-18 old remains and 20-21 year old remains with 100% certainty... Hence they will never know whose remains were missing Maria's or Anastasia's...
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 28, 2007, 02:42:35 PM
There are many ways to determine age with a human skeleton. Backbones, collar bones, teeth..etc.. They may not be able to tell the exact age but they can get very close. A seventeen year old and a girl almost twenty have different levels of maturity. Seventeen year old girls can not be fully mature and look the same as a twenty year old. You can see this from the different levels of maturity in Olga and the youngest girl's remains.
Height would be one of the best way's I think. That's one of the reasons I'm so sure that Anastasia isn't the one buried in St. Petersburg right now. The body they buried as Anastasia was the tallest of all the girls they found. We all know how short Anastasia was! How could she be the tallest in death? Especially when the bones had been sawn in half; which would make the bones even shorter. Maria was the one that was the tallest! The Russians used a picture they THOUGHT was Anastasia to determine her height, but it was actually a picture of Maria that they used.
I really can't wait to find out the height of the new remains..
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 28, 2007, 03:03:57 PM
The body they buried as Anastasia was the tallest of all the girls they found. We all know how short Anastasia was! How could she be the tallest in death?

It's possible. I know someone who grew at least 5 or 6 inches in one summer when they were 15-16. I personally grew about 5 inches between 17 and 18. This is why none of these things you mention are fool-proof, and there is really no way to pinpoint someone's age, other than give a fairly wide range (unless of course it is someone a lot younger or a lot older than 17). As I mentioned earlier, different people physically mature at different rates, that's biology - and it's not very precise.

P.S. I don't have an opinion one way or another as to who is buried with the rest of the family, the only opinion I have is that there is no way to know for sure, unless we had the girls' individual DNA to compare, which of course we don't. But that would be the only sure way to tell, period.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 28, 2007, 05:14:18 PM
Yes there is really no way of knowing how much Anastasia grew in the last year of her life. To surmise that she didn't at that age is questionable.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 28, 2007, 07:13:43 PM
Biologically, yes, people do develope differently but I'm not talking about everyones growth rates. Of course it's plausable that she grew maybe 1-2 inches or so. But it's extremely ridiculous to think that Anastasia's height surpassed all of her sisters within 6 months. How anyone could think that Anastasia, infamous for being short for her age, could reach about 5'8 within 6 months is something I can't understand.
Also, Anastasia was in despair about her weight; even remarking that she had not yet turned into an elephant but might soon, and if she had actually gone through such an amazing growth spurt of around 5-6 inches she wouldn't be gaining so much weight. Growing 6 inches within 6 months would slim her down considerably and Alexandra would've surely commented about it in a letter. The only letter I recall her writing around that time which mentions Anastasia's growth was the one where she says, "Anastasia, to her despair, is now very fat...round and fat to the waist, with tiny feet."
Olga was the shortest of the girls after Anastasia and as you can see in the picture on the left, 6 months before she died she was still a lot shorter than Olga. I find it strange that the body the Russians thought was Anastasia was Maria's height and the developement fit her age exactly.
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f297/Romanov_Albums/th_11111111111111111111111111111111111.jpg) (http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f297/Romanov_Albums/11111111111111111111111111111111111.jpg)
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Temperance on August 29, 2007, 07:40:16 AM
Of course it is possible Anastasia went through a growth spurt in the last few months of her life but I think Holly made a good point that no one in the family wrote of any growth spurt. I would think they would have mentioned that in letters. Who knows though. I guess all that really matters is the entire family has been found. Whether the girl recently discovered with Alexei was Anastasia or Maria doesn't really matter.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alixz on August 29, 2007, 08:44:47 AM
Some young girls grow tall very early.  I went to my full height of 5'6" by the time I was twelve and I towered over a lot of my school mates both boys and girls until well into our teens.

But to me, the pictures do show the heights more clearly.  However, pictures can be deceiving without a proper perspective graph.  That is why crime investigators put a ruler into the photos that they take at a crime scene.  Without a known perspective any item can look as big as a house or as small as a pea.

And it would seem in this case that no long bones have yet been found, so height may be a moot point.  Also, no intact skulls have been found either as yet, so facial comparison is also moot at this time.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 29, 2007, 11:47:56 AM
Anastasia never grew tall at any point. She was always very short for her age and really hated it.
Though we may not be able to get an exact figure of height from pictures, you can cleary see who was tallest and shortest out of the girls.
Considering Olga was the only girl positively identified and had a height of just under 5'5, we can look at pictures and judge how much shorter or taller TMA were next to her.
Tatiana isn't too much shorter than Olga. She looks maybe 1 to 2 inches taller. That corresponds to the remains which show she was about 5'6 and at the least twenty years old.
Maria looks around 2 inches taller than Olga and 1/2 to 1 inch taller than Tatiana. That corresponds to the remains which show that she was 5'7 and a half and at least eighteen years old.
Anastasia is the shortest of all the girls which would make her less than 5'5. She looks about 3 to 4 inches shorter than Olga. That would make her about 5'2 - 5'3.

(I remember reading somewhere that Anastasia was 5'2. Does anyone else remember reading this?? I can't remember the source. ???)
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Annie on August 29, 2007, 07:49:54 PM
I've been reading this site with several pages of very interesting insight into the skeletons and who might be who and why.

http://livadia.org/missing/remains4.htm

Falsetti and France support Maples' theory of "all of the skeletons appear to be too tall to be Anastasia," as was reported by Dr. France in the Forensic Conference last February in Reno, Nevada.

To us it seems rather obvious that a legend still looms in the back of the public's mind. There's a good chance that what the Americans did know about this case, previous to being assigned to work on it, probably came from the public interest story of Anna Anderson. Legend has no place in science, the fact is that Anna Anderson's DNA testing did not produce a match.


Maples was not alone, those two others agreed.

It is our opinion that, for different reasons, both the Americans and the Russians are guilty of letting their pride get in the way of a solid answer.

This sounds like it may be the reason for it. No one is going to admit they were wrong. But we need to know for sure, it's the right thing to do.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 29, 2007, 08:16:10 PM
Alia and the rest made a nice page, but I don't agree with anything they concluded from it.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 30, 2007, 08:08:35 AM
I guess all that really matters is the entire family has been found. Whether the girl recently discovered with Alexei was Anastasia or Maria doesn't really matter.

Yes, exactly.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 30, 2007, 02:27:28 PM
I guess all that really matters is the entire family has been found. Whether the girl recently discovered with Alexei was Anastasia or Maria doesn't really matter.

Yes, exactly.
Well of course. That's kind of obvious.
But some people, like me, would like to know who is who. Not only for historical reasons but to know who died from what injury. It would also give us clues as to how the murder actually happened.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 30, 2007, 02:48:20 PM
I guess all that really matters is the entire family has been found. Whether the girl recently discovered with Alexei was Anastasia or Maria doesn't really matter.

Yes, exactly.
Well of course. That's kind of obvious.
But some people, like me, would like to know who is who. Not only for historical reasons but to know who died from what injury. It would also give us clues as to how the murder actually happened.

Yes, of course I understand that. But unfortunately we will never know for sure, that's the bottom line... All we have are educated guesses on the part of scientists, due to the lack of individual nuclear DNA.

Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: mikeycoleman on August 30, 2007, 03:05:22 PM
Alia and the rest made a nice page, but I don't agree with anything they concluded from it.

I agree.  And it is an interesting theory.  But I don't buy it.  The idea that Tatiana looked enough like her mother to be confused for her (in their state) is a good one, but Anastaisa also looked a lot like her mother.

M and A should have at least been close to the end of their growth.  O and T should have definitely been done.  So the heights is still an issue.  Maybe a bigger one with Tatiana missing.

Mikey
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: nena on August 30, 2007, 07:09:15 PM
I often look at Romanov skull pics., and to be honest, I can not find Maria's.....so for me, she is missing daughter......
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 30, 2007, 07:33:23 PM
I often look at Romanov skull pics., and to be honest, I can not find Maria's.....so for me, she is missing daughter......
Besides my many personal reasons for knowing Anastasia was missing, I've looked at the skulls countless times and I've looked at Anastasia's face since I was little and I don't see/feel that Anastasia was there. I can feel Maria there. Not only that, but the body fits her description exactly. The tallest, about 18-19...etc.
You have to use logic and not faceless skulls. If you actuallly think about the remains they say are her's, you would understand that they cannot belong to Anastasia.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on August 31, 2007, 05:00:19 AM
What are your many personal reasons I wonder?
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Lyss on August 31, 2007, 08:40:44 AM
The first time I opened "Tsar: the lost world of Nicolas and Alexandra" and came to the photo with the three skulls (Alexandra and two of her daughters)  immediately recognized Olga. It was like getting hit to the head with something: I just knew it was Olga. As for Anastasia or Maria, I never saw it clearly. It could have been Anastasia concidering the fact that Yurovsky wrote that they've burned Demidova instead of one of the girls (and according to his testemonies Anastasia and Demidova were standing together in the basement when teh shooting appeared, Maria standing further away from them).
The weird thing is, I always "felt" if Maria was the last one of the girls who died, being so far of the rest that night; Olga and Tatiana were holding eachother and screeming, and Anastasia and Demidova were together, Demidova fainting and waking up after the shooting. I just have this feeling they shooters didn't pay so much attention to (the killing of) Maria, being so busy with the others.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Joyann1 on August 31, 2007, 11:33:03 AM
well they did they all had 1 person to shoot at but i always tought it was maria because the russian source was more to me i dont know why
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on August 31, 2007, 02:27:06 PM
What are your many personal reasons I wonder?
I really don't think I'll be telling you or anyone else who posts here since you'd probably just come up with some sarcastic remark.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: mikeycoleman on August 31, 2007, 08:40:38 PM
Well played, Holly.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: NAOTMAA Fan on September 01, 2007, 12:06:30 PM
Quite right Holly! Bravo!!
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on September 01, 2007, 08:37:45 PM
Haha...thanks guys.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on September 01, 2007, 09:44:45 PM
You see I do not agree either with website they made about the missing livadia site they think that Tatiana is missing. But the problem I think is they had got  Anastasia and Tatiana confused with each other.  They are right about Olga and Maria I agree to that! I was reading it and they had got the idenitification of the sculls mistaken. They claim that
'Yurovsky's note: when one of the Grand Duchesses was being laid on a sheet she supposedly sat up and cried out. The whole band of soldiers was said to turn on her with their bayonets. The damage patterns fit this description, and it is possible that Shvibz could have survived the round of bullets, but sadly it seems that the youngest of the four girls was struck down that night.' he does not even know whuch grand duchess it was, for Anastasia when they say' it sadly seems' that is a thought or a conclusion. Never know becuase Yurovsky's information on the account is not accurate enough to believe. You can not always assumed that realy happened. You have to go by the information, records, remains of the victims. I think the if we would find out who's body was who we would have more clues in finding what happened during the murder.

This is my opinion I see many pictures of the skulls and bones and according to records, the conditions of the skulls. But I think that skull 6. is Maria's becuase it fits her age development and growth, looking at those 1917 pictures of the girls hair shaved notice Maria's lump on her head she had it was very identical to that of skull 6 and her height was around 5ft and 7in. So I believe that it is Anastasia that has been the missing grand duchess all these years becuase all of the bodies did not fit her size or growth and plus there is no way someone can grow fast by four inches in less than a year it is highly unliky not impossible though but her development could not grow that fast since she was short. I think Anastasia is realy missing. Holly very fantastically said! I agree.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alixz on September 02, 2007, 02:35:22 AM
I not sure that all of the gory details of the murders need to be known.  We know that they died horribly and that each man was given a target, but that each man wanted to be able to say that he had been the one to kill the tsar, so they all disregarded Yurovsky's instructions and aimed for Nicholas.

I can not imagine the pure terror of that night.  The family and their retainers were cornered and murdered.  I know that some here would like a "blow by blow" description of each murder and each injury, but the bottom line is that they all died in terror trying to hide from a fusillade of bullets and there was no where to hide.  So they clung to each other and, I am sure, screamed and prayed.

My father recounted the bombing of the Arizona in Pearl Harbor in this way. " Men tried to escape from the screaming bombs as they dropped from the sky on the unforgiving decks of the ship.  The scene was so terrible and mind shattering that many sailors tried to dig "fox holes" in the steel decks as many more jumped into the burning debris in the water.  There was panic and confusion as the sailors tried to escape the now broken and burning ship. They looked for salvation but most found none."

I have always seen the murder at Ipatiev House the same way.  Mind shattering terror and confusion with the "fight or flight" reflex kicking in, but there was no way to fight and no were to run.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: azrael7171918 on September 02, 2007, 08:13:21 AM

 You are quite right Alixz

 The details that we have made up my mind that there were no survivors or survivors that would have come forward with their minds intact.


Azrael
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: AGRBear on October 01, 2007, 04:50:50 PM
I'm looking for  quotes in sources that tell  us how tall everyone was.

Nicholas II
Alexandra:
Olga:
Tatiana:
Maria:
Anastsia:
Alexei:  12 years old -  5 feet 1/2 ich on 1 Jan. 1917,  ruler mark on the door of one of the grand duchesses in Tsarskoe Selo....

I'd like to see  who, what,  where and why their heights were recorded [ plus your sources, please].

Thanks.

AGRBear
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Annie on October 03, 2007, 11:21:59 PM

'Yurovsky's note: when one of the Grand Duchesses was being laid on a sheet she supposedly sat up and cried out. The whole band of soldiers was said to turn on her with their bayonets.

This really deeply disturbs me :'( What kind of people could not have pity for the poor innocent girl who had managed to survive.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on October 03, 2007, 11:34:35 PM
Those who no longer saw these people are fellow human beings, but enemies of the state that had to be disposed of. These were brutal and committed murderers. They had no compassion or interest in the individuals. They just wanted them dead. It's difficult to enter the minds of callous murderers. They all though share one thing in common - no remorse or compassion.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Joyann1 on October 04, 2007, 04:21:44 PM
yess.. they just wanted to pout an end behind the monarchie
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Amanda_Misha on October 04, 2007, 06:53:41 PM
I think just as Alixz is very sad everything what that night happened  :(
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on October 05, 2007, 07:37:13 AM
It was more than sad, it was totally brutal. What was truly sad was Nicholas and Alexandra allowing the situation to get so badly out of hand that their children were slaughtered.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Holly on October 05, 2007, 03:14:40 PM
I agree, Dmitri.
The part about one of the girls sitting up and screaming really disturbs me too. I have a feeling it was Anastasia.
I think the thing that disturbs me the most is when they pulled them out of the water after they were dead and the water had washed away all the blood and they looked as if they were still alive with rosy cheeks and everything. I don't know why that's so disturbing to me but it really is. :(
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: anna11 on October 06, 2007, 06:57:45 AM
Quote
What was truly sad was Nicholas and Alexandra allowing the situation to get so badly out of hand that their children were slaughtered.

Awww, that's a bit unfair. Do you think for one second that if Nicholas and Alexandra had an incling that what they were doing would have led to the slaughter of their family they would not have changed? It was not N & A's fault the family died. Well it was, but certainly not in the short term. If the Provisinal Government had remained in power for even another year, they probably would have been moved out of the country.

Anyway, haven't they concluded that the skeleton recently found is too short to be Anastasia, and therfor must be Maria?

Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on October 06, 2007, 08:20:03 AM
Yes many think it was Maria who was missing.

'Yurovsky's note: when one of the Grand Duchesses was being laid on a sheet she supposedly sat up and cried out. The whole band of soldiers was said to turn on her with their bayonets.

This really deeply disturbs me :'( What kind of people could not have pity for the poor innocent girl who had managed to survive.

Annie, thats right. I is said they had not sympathy for the innocent girls. They just wanted them dead. It is very said. I agree with you Dmitri it was a completly brutal act. They were nothing but selfish rats. The bolshevik party was control by Lenin. So, they followed any orders that Lenin wanted and he indeed wanted the family to die. I think it is such a pity. It is very mean and cruel to keep shooting and clubbing the innocent girls and they ended up in so much pain and torture. >:( I think it is totally wrong and evil.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: anna11 on October 06, 2007, 08:38:18 AM
What I find more disturbing than the actual murders, is that those people can write and talk about them is such a cavalier way. It's almost like 'Yeah, well ya know, little Alexei was sitting in the corner and I just shot him in the head' WTF? Surley someone who commits a murder, or any kind of killing, ending a life (Because I suppose to them it wasn't murder, just necessary killing) cannot just talk about it so casualy? It's beyond me.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Joyann1 on October 06, 2007, 09:05:07 AM
yes indeed it was a very brutal act to do     especially theny didnt had any sort of trial .

look at marie antoinette she had an trail ( ok it wasnt a fair one ) but she had one!
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Alixz on October 07, 2007, 05:46:56 PM
One of the reasons that I have never liked the "insanity defense" for murderers is that, to me, everyone who kills is insane.

There are people in this world who have such a hatred for others that they can and do kill.  It is happening right now in the Middle East.  The "suicide bombers in Iraq" are a case in point.  They truly hate those whom they kill and truly believe that they will go to a beautiful "here after" for what they are doing.

One of the things that civilization is supposed to correct is man's cruelty to man or, if you like, "man's inhumanity to man".  We are the only species on this planet that kills for sport or revenge or anger.

It doesn't seem implausible to me that a group of men could kill seven Romanovs (including the young women and Alexei).  We have all either lived through or studied the Second World War.  The holocaust was a greater crime against humanity, but Hitler had no problem finding men to go along with his ideas and expedite them.

In some countries human life is "cheap", by which I mean, the killing of people in those countries does not bother people the way that it bothers us.  I believe in Russia in the beginning of the 20th century that those who fought the autocratic system had seen so much violence and killing not only in the Great War but also in the wake of autocratic decisions, that they did not hold the Romanovs' life with any respect at all.

To those guards, it was just another job.  They were just "following orders".  It may be true that some of the guards did not have any idea what the actual event would be like and the killing did make them sick.  But there were those, Yurovsky included, who no longer saw the Romanovs as human beings, but more like trash to be taken out.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on October 08, 2007, 12:05:42 AM
The collapse of the Tsarist regime put the former imperial family into a new and unchartered territory. They went from being people of extreme importance to ones who were deprived of all rights and eventually life itself. Given the growing political instability in the country, it has always amazed me that Alexandra and the children did not move to Peterhof which was closer to Finland than Tsarskoe Selo. That was where they had spent a great deal of time during the turbulent time of 1905. The real error of judgement was Nicholas II being at Stavka and not in St.Petersburg. He was able to be easily kept away from his family and held in a situation where an abdication was demanded. Poor Maria, poor Olga, Tatiana, Anastasia and Alexis. They were innocent victims who should have had the chance to leave and be spared imprisonment in the Alexander Palace, Tobolsk and eventual murder in Ekaterinburg.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Belochka on October 08, 2007, 01:01:03 AM
... The real error of judgement was Nicholas II being at Stavka and not in St.Petersburg.

If Nikolashka remained Supreme Commander the military losses may have been greater. Information points to the fact that Nikolashka was not displeased with his dismissal. Nikolai II correctly believed that as Head of State it was his responsibility to assume command of his dispirited army who were retreating rather than advancing towards victory.

General Spiridovich claimed that Nikolashka knew perfectly well that it was because of him the Russian army had lost the battle in the first year.

Nikolai was not setting precedent by accepting Supreme Command. Peter the Great did exactly the same during the Swedish Campaign.   

He was able to be easily kept away from his family and held in a situation where an abdication was demanded. Poor Maria, poor Olga, Tatiana, Anastasia and Alexis. They were innocent victims who should have had the chance to leave and be spared imprisonment in the Alexander Palace, Tobolsk and eventual murder in Ekaterinburg.

Whether Nikolai was at Stavka, Alexandrovskii Palace or in St. Petersburg it can not be proven whether his destiny would have been any different. Essentially he failed to receive firm support from his extended family after his decision of August 23, 1915. Had the Family been seen to be cohesive rather than demonstrate fragmentation, much would have been very different indeed.

Following the Abdication, the question then concerned why the new Minister of Justice, Alexander Kerensky placed the Imperial Family under immediate arrest? His affiliation with the socialist revolutionaries helps provide the answer.

No one of course could predict the Ekaterinburg massacre. The Family died together as innocent victims of a brutal new regime at the hands of a sadistic maniac.

Margarita
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Romanov_Fan19 on October 09, 2007, 05:44:30 PM
When shall we hear more     When will the bodies rest with their parents
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on October 12, 2007, 06:51:12 PM
Yes it is taking so long for us to hear about the remains. They were only inoccent people, who never did anything wrong. This is so sad.  Sometimes, I think that if OTMA would have lived, things would have been better. It would be so hard to say goodbye to them, becuase we miss them so much!
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: dmitri on October 12, 2007, 11:37:45 PM
Time will reveal all. The children saw the very best and worst of life in their short lives. They had the fortune and misfortune of being the children of Nicholas and Alexandra. These children would have always have been a rallying point for those who wanted the old regime restored. It was finished and their deaths ensured there could be no turning back.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: Olishka~ Pincess on October 13, 2007, 06:00:55 AM
Exactly, I agree with you dmitri it is time that will reveal to us, what will happen. We can agree that it is both positive and negative outcomes and things have happened in their lives. There is no turning back. Hopefully we will hear more about the remains of the family.
Title: Re: Remains of Maria
Post by: stacey on October 29, 2007, 07:27:08 AM
I too am very eager to hear more about this--how did I miss it before, apparently the newspapers and other media here in the US have no interest in the Romanovs at all!!  >:(

Thanks admins for filling us in on this very important info!!!

About whether the missing GD is Anastasia or Marie is, in a sense, a moot point, I agree--what is important is to identify these two bodies definitively and if they are indeed the missing Imperial children, to reunite them with their family.

STILL--I have always tended to think that the missing daughter was Anastasia (and not because I have any belief in AA!!). The height and age of the girl identified by the Russians as Marie just never seemed right.

And if the news that this newly found daughter is 5'2.5" tall is indeed true--then she cannot possibly be Marie!! Marie was several inches taller than that--death doesn't shrink a person by 4 or 5 inches!!! But the height would be perfect for Anastasia, since her height has always been said to have been around 5'2" to 5'3".

And the fact that she is said to have been between 18 and 23 years is pretty much meaningless--at the time of their deaths Marie was just barely 19 and Anastasia barely 17. These ages are simply too close to say which daughter she was with an estimated age range of 18-23 years!