Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Final Chapter => Topic started by: Tsarfan on August 24, 2007, 01:01:28 PM

Title: What Difference Does It Make [if the last remains have been found]?
Post by: Tsarfan on August 24, 2007, 01:01:28 PM
Regarding the breaking story about the possible recovery of bones from the Ekaterinburg murders, Grand Duke Nikolai Romanov, one of the pretenders, commented in a telephone interview from Switzerland, "I would be absolutely delighted if they have really found the remains of Tsarevich Alexei and Maria, but you have to be very cautious with such epoch-making events.''

How, exactly, will a new epoch be made if the bones check out?

Most people who study history seriously have long since accepted that the Romanovs disappeared from the world political stage in any meaningful sense after the revolutions of 1917.  Russian leaders have lost little to no sleep over a possible return of the dynasty since at least 1921.

If this pit does contain the bones of Alexei or Anastasia or Marie, will the Russian economy finally find a sound footing?  Will the Russian press recover its independent voice?  Will the dilemma of the decaying secret cities of the Stalin era be resolved?  Will Putin rethink his strategy of consolidating all power in the presidency?  Will cries rise up for a restoration of the Romanovs?  Will the inexorable march of the Russian state toward a Muslim-dominated demographic come to a screeching halt?

The last historically-relevant decision any Romanov made was to enter World War I. 

Finding a cache of their broken bones being a catalyst for the making of a new epoch?    Puh-leeze.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 24, 2007, 01:16:30 PM
I agree. It would be nice to have the  missing children  buried with their family. And perhaps put an end to the endless  fight over pretenders. But, at the end of the day, it will not change the price of bread or lower taxes will it?
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Annie on August 24, 2007, 01:34:40 PM
To me putting the pretender thing to rest and putting the bodies to rest would be a big thing. It may not be 'epoch making' news but it is big news, because it's something everyone thought would never happen, like finding a needle in haystack. I'm pretty doggone fired up over it.

As for Russia, if this could renew an interest in Russia, its history and its culture, and encourage more tourism, that would be a positive thing. It also means a lot that the government is willing to reinvestigate the murders and reveal previously secret details. This could be a very history book changing event in that way.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Silja on August 24, 2007, 02:28:56 PM
Regarding the breaking story about the possible recovery of bones from the Ekaterinburg murders, Grand Duke Nikolai Romanov, one of the pretenders, commented in a telephone interview from Switzerland, "I would be absolutely delighted if they have really found the remains of Tsarevich Alexei and Maria, but you have to be very cautious with such epoch-making events.''

How, exactly, will a new epoch be made if the bones check out?

Most people who study history seriously have long since accepted that the Romanovs disappeared from the world political stage in any meaningful sense after the revolutions of 1917.  Russian leaders have lost little to no sleep over a possible return of the dynasty since at least 1921.

If this pit does contain the bones of Alexei or Anastasia or Marie, will the Russian economy finally find a sound footing?  Will the Russian press recover its independent voice?  Will the dilemma of the decaying secret cities of the Stalin era be resolved?  Will Putin rethink his strategy of consolidating all power in the presidency?  Will cries rise up for a restoration of the Romanovs?  Will the inexorable march of the Russian state toward a Muslim-dominated demographic come to a screeching halt?

The last historically-relevant decision any Romanov made was to enter World War I. 

Finding a cache of their broken bones being a catalyst for the making of a new epoch?    Puh-leeze.


I think the comment is "immaterial" - forgive me Tsarfan, it's not meant as an offence. Solving the riddle of the whereabouts of the two missing bodies is of historical and merely of historical interest of course.  It has nothing to do with current Russian politics and won't have any effect on it. If these remains are really those of Alexei and Marie/Anastasia all these theories about a possible escape could finally be put to rest.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: mr_harrison75 on August 24, 2007, 02:36:22 PM
I agree.

It's extremely interesting on an historical point of view, and perhaps it will help Russia to look back at their rich and very eventful history, but it won't make a General Monk of Putin...

Of course, the Romanovs perhaps still entertain a little bit the notion of eventually coming back to power in an uncertain future, so he must speak that way...
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Tsarfan on August 24, 2007, 02:58:50 PM
Now come on, guys.  I never said it wasn't interesting.  I've been all over these threads this morning.

My beef was characterizing it as "epoch-making".  Epochs are made when the course of world events takes new turns.

To me, the most use in finding these remains -- if they are whose they are touted as being -- will be to take the main wind out of the sails of those who have supported the various Romanov pretenders over the years.  Once a more general agreement settles in around the notion that they were, in fact, all   pretenders, then perhaps a thoughtful analysis can proceed about the psychology of pretenders and how they have managed to gain support throughout history.

As large as Anna Anderson looms in our own rearview mirrors, in the larger landscape of Russian royal pretenders she was little more than a historical hiccough.  There was a time, such as with the false Dmitri's and with Pugachev's rebellion, when Russian pretenders could ignite revolutions.  About all Anna Anderson managed to do was land some fancy frocks and get put up comfortably on a few estates.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: lexi4 on August 24, 2007, 03:08:09 PM
I have a feeling, that even if the DNA tests confirm the bodies belong to Alexei and his sister, there will still be conspiracy theories.
As to epoch making? Not even close.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Silja on August 24, 2007, 03:25:42 PM

To me, the most use in finding these remains -- if they are whose they are touted as being -- will be to take the main wind out of the sails of those who have supported the various Romanov pretenders over the years.  Once a more general agreement settles in around the notion that they were, in fact, all   pretenders, then perhaps a thoughtful analysis can proceed about the psychology of pretenders and how they have managed to gain support throughout history.

 I don't think this has anything to do with current Russian politics. Whatever royal pretenders, real or false ones, have materiaized throughout history, they have been irrelevant with regard to Russian politics. In this respect I think it's totally unimportant whether these newly discovered remains are those of the Romanov children. Any republic which was a monarchy once has its monarchists. It doesn't matter whom the monarchists have been supporting as the "rightful" air and whether these were real or not.
So not at all epoch making.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Tsarfan on August 24, 2007, 03:34:26 PM
Whatever royal pretenders, real or false ones, have materiaized throughout history, they have been irrelevant with regard to Russian politics.

Not always.  Pugachev pretended to be Catherine's murdered husband, Peter III, and much of southern Russia rallied to his cause.  After initially failing to take him seriously, Catherine eventually became so unsettled by the inroads he made that she started backing away from what was left by then of her liberalization program. 
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: ChristineM on August 24, 2007, 04:57:56 PM
I think it might have everything to do with current Russian politics.   Afterall alongside this story we are confronted with photographs of the 'sexy' president complete with waxed and oiled muscle bound chest.   Its amazing how photographers just manage to trip across the sight of their president, shirtless, casting a line on some distant Siberian river, while at the same time he is announcing building an entire new fleet of attack aircraft.   

Interesting, inexplicable conjunctions - probably just coincidence.

tsaria
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: dmitri on August 25, 2007, 12:31:07 AM
All I can think of the statment made by Prince (please note he is not a Grand Duke and never ever has been one) Nicholas Romanov is that this draws to a close what was once an epoch in Russian history - the Tsarist regime. As for any connection with present day Russia that is completely ludicrous. Monarchy is part of Russian history. It has gone forever apart from the rich heritage left behind. As for pretenders after the 1917 revolution  and the well documented 1918 Ekaterinburg massacre, they have no relevance whatsoever. Russians never took any of them at all seriously. 
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 25, 2007, 09:57:37 AM
All of this brings to mind how overblown anything to do with the Romanovs can be. I can recall buying "File on the Tsar" in the 70's and seeing "now every history book ever written will have to be re-written" on the jacket. Huh? Even a history book on the ancient Greeks? on Modern China? Absolutely ridiculous.

My point, and I do have one, is that this event may be significant for a small group of us - and will go ignored by the world at large.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: imperial angel on August 25, 2007, 08:41:50 PM
Well, I think that it is important in the sense that it answers a long running historical mystery. But, it isn't of political importance for sure. I think it is a question that will aways haunt us though, until we find the answer, which we have. Therefore, it answers the question which we would never have ceased to seek the answer to. The remains seem to be those of Marie from the age estimates. Of course, it is always confusing as the old debates about whether Anastasia's or Maria's remains were buried in 1998 illustrate, with the Americans believing one thing, and the Russians another.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Belochka on August 25, 2007, 09:27:36 PM
My point, and I do have one, is that this event may be significant for a small group of us - and will go ignored by the world at large.

The findings were not ignored by the world at large.  Even here in Australia all the daily newspapers carried a brief report.

However to some of us of the findings if confirmed to be authentic, it will mean a great deal. A horrendous Chapter in Russian history will have its final pages drawn to a close.

For a few of us, it is important that the remains of Alexei and Mariya will re-united inside the common crypt in St. Petersburg where they belong. This is the philosophy of the SEARCH Foundation.

All those who are interred as one will always remind the world of their horrendous deaths.

So yes, it does make a difference.

Margarita
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Robert_Hall on August 25, 2007, 09:53:07 PM
"Brief" being the operative word. It is just a footnote  in history.  This is not making headlines anywhere but here.  How many threads on just this one subject?  As I mentioned earlier- somewhere-  it would be  nice to have the missing children  interned with the family and perhaps  stop  the  impostor protagonists. I doubt it will however.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Annie on August 25, 2007, 11:08:41 PM
It makes a lot of difference to my poor horse. He hopes when the results come in he can finally rest in peace.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: RichC on August 25, 2007, 11:14:06 PM
As for pretenders after the 1917 revolution  and the well documented 1918 Ekaterinburg massacre, they have no relevance whatsoever. Russians never took any of them at all seriously. 

That's my understanding too.  The stories of escape, so popular on this board, have never been taken seriously or generated much interest in Russia itself.  Although other parts of the assassination story, no less fictional, have gained much traction in Russia.

I was talking about this matter, this evening, with another forum member, and it really is noteworthy, I think, that escape (and possible restoration to power) has NEVER been part of the Russian national secular and religious hagiography surrounding the last imperial family.  They're no good as survivors, or escapees. 
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: DeAnochka on August 26, 2007, 12:03:12 AM
The story has itself about two paragraphs in the New Zealand Herald. I'm actually surprised that it has anything at all - but it goes to show that this discovery is important all around the world. It makes a huge difference to a lot of people.

Of course there will always be people out there to ruin the joy of an event of this proportion.

This is, after all, a board of people who hoped that the two bodies would one day be found and are THANKFUL that such a revelation has been made.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: mikeycoleman on August 26, 2007, 01:10:44 AM
But I like your poor old dead horse, Annie.  What will we all do when no one can beat him up?

Mikey
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Mari on August 26, 2007, 01:12:02 AM
This is, after all, a board of people who hoped that the two bodies would one day be found and are THANKFUL that such a revelation has been made.
Posted on: Yesterday at 11:14:06 PM
Posted by: RichC
Quote


I agree with you totally...and not just this Board....Professors of World History, Archaeologists, History Majors and Enthusiasts, Museum Curators, Archivists, Researchers in this Field, Authors of Books on the Imperial Family and Movie Goers throughout the years inspired by such movies as Nicholas and Alexandria, Orthodox Church in Russia. There are a lot more People than you would think interested in this!
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: dmitri on August 26, 2007, 02:05:41 AM
The imposter protaganists will be relegated to the garbage bin of history with other trash.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Belochka on August 26, 2007, 02:50:52 AM
The imposter protaganists will be relegated to the garbage bin of history with other trash.

It will be difficult for most of the imposter protaganists to admit that they made a gross error in judgement. Conspiracy ideas will continue to abound and nothing much will change for those who enjoy such trivia.

Margarita
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Phil_tomaselli on August 26, 2007, 05:06:39 AM
If nothing else it might mean we get some new conspiracy theories..........................
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Annie on August 26, 2007, 06:12:30 AM
After what Margarita posted about the news conference, there really can't be much doubt. They told how they found it, what they found, and how they were handled and gave the names of those handling the remains. Those still wanting to make excuses for their imposter will have to dig even harder than the archaeologists to come up with theories this time. I know they will, but they won't be believed. It is very sad that after all these years and all that happened to them these dead can't be respected as who they really are because some would rather their imposter be real. Even if the results come back conclusively, there will still be accusations of tampering, setups and faking the whole find instead of admitting they were wrong to back the imposter.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: dmitri on August 26, 2007, 05:50:43 PM
Yes well these pathetic supporters of imposters should be placed all in the same room so they can go on about it all in the one room. Nobody takes them seriously anymore. As the years pass they will become a smaller and smaller and increasingly ridiculous group. Prince Felix Yussopov had the right idea about them all decades ago. No wonder any personage who knew the imperial family closely rejected all the imposters as they knew they were complete and utter fakes. It defies imagination how anybody could have ever thought anybody could have escaped from the Bolsheviks. They were some of the most bloody murderers of all time. They had no room for empathy or sympathy. They just wanted as many Romanovs dead as possible. This is clearly shown with what happened to the Romanovs in Ekaterinburg, Apalavesk and as late as 1919 in the St.Peter and St.Paul Fortress. Maria Feodorovna and the Romanovs in the Crimea would have also have been murdered if they had not left in time. 
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: mr_harrison75 on August 26, 2007, 06:05:15 PM
True.

The Reds didn't have the reputation of letting many Romanovs pass through their net. And even in the 20's and the 30's, they tried to murder those who had escaped.

One I'm looking forward to hear what he has to say after this discovery is Mr. Kurth...  ;D
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 26, 2007, 06:23:21 PM
We at the APA are very happy about the news of this discovery. There is every reason for optimism from the further forensic tests. For those who participated in this discovery, our heartfelt thanks.

I am not pleased about the lack of proper manners or graciousness exhibited by some posters on this thread. I will therefore remind everyone that our standards require treating others with respect and courtesy. Even now, perhaps especially now.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Belochka on August 26, 2007, 07:08:32 PM
... One I'm looking forward to hear what he has to say after this discovery is Mr. Kurth...  ;D

Do it really matter anymore?

Margarita
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Tsarfan on August 27, 2007, 01:14:54 PM
Of course there will always be people out there to ruin the joy of an event of this proportion.

I don't think anyone is trying to ruin the joy of the discovery for those whose lives were not complete until the bodies were found.

The question is just what is the "proportion" of this discovery.  The notion that "Professors of World History" (to draw from one post) are going to be wrapping themselves around this discovery is something of a stretch.

From a historical perspective, the discovery of these two bodies would only make a difference if the false claimants had actually had some impact on the political affairs of nations or the course of Russian history and those claims needed to be disproved in order to counter their influence.  But that has never been the case.  Anna Anderson -- who came far closer than any other claimant to gaining popular acceptance -- tied up a German courtroom for a while, created a media stir now and again, and inspired several movies and books.  But Soviet leadership never so much as glanced in her direction.  The Russian people did not look to her for deliverance.  And no other nations let her claim in any way affect their dealings with the Soviet Union.

If Anastasia or Alexei as survivors could have had no impact on the course of world or Russian events, how could the proof that they died when, where, and how most peoople believed all along have any impact?

I'm not saying it's not an interesting story.  But I find the story of the two English princes in the tower more historically significant as their fates actually made a difference in who ruled England after their disappearance.  And I find the question of the fate of Louis XVI's son more historically significant, as there was actually a Bourbon restoration during what would have been his normal lifespan.

Yet, even with the far greater bearing the survival of these English and French royals would have had on history, how much focus is put on their fates in the study of history today?  The study of Russian history, not to mention world  history, will treat this as a footnote even shorter than those assigned to discuss the fates of the English princes and Louis XVII.

That is the real proportion of this story that so fascinates us today.

And, as I watch the crowing beginning on this board about having "won" against the arch enemy and the beginning of defensive arguments and conspiracy theories elsewhere on the internet, I just want to grab everyone by the collar and say . . . "Come on, everybody.  Let's show some sense of true proportion here." 
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 27, 2007, 01:49:15 PM

It will be difficult for most of the imposter protaganists to admit that they made a gross error in judgement. Conspiracy ideas will continue to abound and nothing much will change for those who enjoy such trivia.

Alas...
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 27, 2007, 02:02:12 PM
On this forum we may get a somewhat distorted view of how monumental this news is. Out in the real world of course it's not very monumental. It's an interesting piece of news, historically speaking, perhaps a good human interest story, but most people will just say "Oh how interesting" and forget about it in five minutes. As someone else said, this will change very little really. Most serious historians have already accepted the fact that the entire family died that July night in 1918, and that just because the remains of two children were still missing, it didn't mean they survived. Whether these remains prove to be authentic or not, it's not going to change much for most people. And I include various suppporters of various pretenders in this statement. Most of the latter will probably not accept this as the final answer anyway. So I have a feeling that things will just be status quo, more or less... 
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: LisaDavidson on August 27, 2007, 02:55:29 PM
Just one important point of clarification - the use of the word "pretenders" is needlessly confusing here because we are dealing with royalty. And, I see it being used throughout the Forum to designate someone pretending to be someone they were not, i.e., a Romanov.

In royal terms, a "pretender" is not a faux royal, a pretender is someone who aspires to a throne. Thus, Prince James Edward (son of King James II, who was deposed) was a pretender to the throne of Great Britain because others held the actual office but he had the Jacobite claim to the throne. However, he was not "pretending" to be a King in the sense of trying to deceive someone.

Thus, I have suggested the rather neutral term "claimant" to be used to refer to those who "claimed" to be someone else, such as Anna Anderson.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: RichC on August 27, 2007, 04:38:21 PM
On this forum we may get a somewhat distorted view of how monumental this news is. Out in the real world of course it's not very monumental. It's an interesting piece of news, historically speaking, perhaps a good human interest story, but most people will just say "Oh how interesting" and forget about it in five minutes. As someone else said, this will change very little really. Most serious historians have already accepted the fact that the entire family died that July night in 1918, and that just because the remains of two children were still missing, it didn't mean they survived. Whether these remains prove to be authentic or not, it's not going to change much for most people. And I include various suppporters of various pretenders in this statement. Most of the latter will probably not accept this as the final answer anyway. So I have a feeling that things will just be status quo, more or less... 

I think Dr. Maples said it best in his book when he said that the story of the escape was a fairytale.  I think he went on to say that executioners are not known for taking pity on their victims. 

BTW, I love the use of the term "dustbin of history" in reference to the claimants and their supporters!  I guess Trotsky was good for something!
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Belochka on August 27, 2007, 08:38:09 PM
... The study of Russian history, not to mention world  history, will treat this as a footnote even shorter than those assigned to discuss the fates of the English princes and Louis XVII.

From your position it may be viewed as but a brief "footnote" but for others it may be far more expansive than that and include an entire chapter in Russian history written by Russian academicians. It all very much depends on whose book you select don't you think?

Margarita
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Tsarfan on August 27, 2007, 10:03:55 PM
From your position it may be viewed as but a brief "footnote" but for others it may be far more expansive than that and include an entire chapter in Russian history written by Russian academicians. It all very much depends on whose book you select don't you think?

True.  I'm sure there will be some books written that tell the story of the aftermath of the massacre, including the history of claimants and the finding of the bodies.  But those tales will lie more in the realm of psychology and human interest.

I was speaking more figuratively.  In the larger canvas of Russian history -- by that I mean the entire body   of its histiography -- the events after July 17, 1918 that will dominate the story will be the the rise and fall of the soviet state and the subsequent struggles of Russians to determine the next stages of their development.  To the extent the Romanovs had any impact on Russian history after 1917, it lay in the legacy they bequeathed to Russia while they ruled it, not in when, where, and how their bodies were disposed of.  The story of Romanovs as a force in history runs from 1547 (when Anastasia Zakharyina married Ivan IV) to 1917 . . . not from 1547 to 2007.

There may be one area that could create some surprise.  That is the the approach taken to this affair by the Orthodox Church.  If they succeed in creating a hagiography around the royal family that actually begins to alter the tide of modern Russian history by resurrecting the formula of Autocracy/Orthodoxy/Nationaliity as the best fate to which Russians can aspire, then the finding of these bodies could become a factor in the history of Russia that is yet to be written.  But even in such a scenario, the finding of the bodies would be a matter of convenience to be exploited in futhering a pre-existing agenda, not a causative event in itself.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Silja on August 28, 2007, 04:59:26 PM
Whatever royal pretenders, real or false ones, have materiaized throughout history, they have been irrelevant with regard to Russian politics.

Not always.  Pugachev pretended to be Catherine's murdered husband, Peter III, and much of southern Russia rallied to his cause.  After initially failing to take him seriously, Catherine eventually became so unsettled by the inroads he made that she started backing away from what was left by then of her liberalization program. 

Ah, but this was when Russia was still a monarchy. We were speaking of Republics.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: dmitri on August 28, 2007, 05:47:22 PM
Yes pretenders were a threat to power under the monarchy. Now they are just a curiosity for a minority. It is highly doubtful that Russia will ever be a monarchy again.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Alixz on August 28, 2007, 06:27:06 PM
What ever will we have to talk about?  And Annie, your poor horse is already dead, how can he complain about what we have been doing?  Unless he has been replaced with a "claimant" to the position of "dead horse" and has a vested interest in seeing this through to its conclusion. :-)

Others have vanished and there were no "claimants".  Judge Crater.  Jimmy Hoffa. (now there was someone with historical influence)

And of course the two princes.  If I remember correctly there would have been no Richard III at that time if the princes were not "lost". And I would be just as excited if the British were to announce that the remains of the princes had been found.

And about "pretenders":

I remember Massie referring to Helene of Bourbon as the daughter of the "pretender" to the throne of France.  The same Helene whom Eddy (Duke of Clarence and Avondale)  wanted to marry and to whom Alexander III would have liked to marry Nicholas.

So a "pretender" can be (or could have been) a political issue. 

I for one would like to read a book about the psychology of "claimants" and the psychology of those who believe in them.  Can that be long in coming?

And I don't trust Putin on a world level.  He scares me.  I don't think he is what he is trying to project himself as and under him, the Russians (or a version of the Soviet Union) might rise again. There has already been talk of "sliding back into a cold war situation".  Been there, done that - don't want to do it again.

Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Raegan on August 29, 2007, 01:34:11 PM
The discovery of the remains of Alexei and his sister will not make a huge difference in the world. This is not an earth-shattering event. It is exciting to people who have been studying Russian History for years. It is great timing for those of us who have books coming out on the Romanovs in the very near future. It will finally close the case for survivors and show that once and for all that no one escaped that night. Also, as Annie stated, it could possibly boost Russia's tourism industry. That's about it though. I doubt the Russian people will be filing into the streets and calling for a return of the Romanov Dynasty.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Mari on October 20, 2007, 02:06:58 AM


Quote
The notion that "Professors of World History" (to draw from one post) are going to be wrapping themselves around this discovery is something of a stretch.

You don't know my primary World History Professor, this was just up his Alley and I suspect there are many others that interest Students by bringing up the Anastasia Story and the Death of a Czar in WWI history. I've used it myself in a couple of lectures.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: LisaDavidson on October 20, 2007, 07:23:46 AM
Yes pretenders were a threat to power under the monarchy. Now they are just a curiosity for a minority. It is highly doubtful that Russia will ever be a monarchy again.

Yes, and it would be appreciated if you could please use the correct terminology so that you don't further confuse the issue. I explained this in detail in a post above, but for those who did not read it:

claimant = one who claims something that may or may not be true. example: AA was the best known Anastasia claimant.
pretender = a royal personage who pretends to a throne. example - The Bavarian Royal House head is now considered to be the Jacobite pretender to the English throne.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Annie on October 20, 2007, 11:00:04 AM
If the claimant aspires to a throne, even though he/she's not really the royal person he/she claims to be, then wouldn't that person also be a pretender and claimant at the same time?
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: Robert_Hall on October 20, 2007, 12:53:36 PM
If one wishes to be a purist, there has been no throne of England to pretend to since 1603.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: LisaDavidson on October 21, 2007, 12:44:01 AM
If the claimant aspires to a throne, even though he/she's not really the royal person he/she claims to be, then wouldn't that person also be a pretender and claimant at the same time?

I suppose - but I would imagine that would be rare.
Title: Re: What Difference Does It Make?
Post by: lori_c on October 21, 2007, 03:44:22 AM
IMO it lends closure to an almost 100 year mystery.  It may not make much difference in the grand scheme of things, but I feel lucky to be in the generation that took part in closing a long cold case.  Their mortal remains matter little.  It's their souls that are together in eternity.  But I do feel priviledged to be in the age when the bones were found and they can be accorded the proper burial that was due them.

But no it doesn't change anything that happened in that cellar on that awful July night in Ekaterniburgl