Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - strom

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Imperial Claimants Post Here / Re: Vasili Filatov
« on: November 11, 2011, 05:47:12 PM »
Dear friends:

I note that Radzinsky mentions the surname of 'Filippov' in his record of the survival of the Heir --an identification which appears to be tacitly supported by HH Valerian Obelensky. One wonders if this might not have been a misspelling of 'Filatov'.  That is not an impossible explanation for the identity of the Radzinsky 'Heir' and the man known as Vassili Filatov --the pseudoym adopted by the Heir after the events of 1918.  I think we all must wait for more information coming out of Russia on the lineal descendants of the last Emperor and Empress --moreover it appears there are also lineal descendants in the west. 



I am interested in finding out why GD Kirill traveled with the Inter-Allied delegations when they left Petrograd for Port Romanov in February 1917.  It appears he occupied a full carriage.  The matter was reported by Samuel Hoare (Fourth Seal) though I have never seen it reported elsewhere.  I suspect there must have been some very 'interesting' discussions between Milner, Revelstok and the Grand Duke on the long journey north concerning the approaching 'troubles' in Russia --perhaps the English simply said everything will proceed 'perfectly well, thank you'!       

Rasputin / Re: The Murderers of Rasputin
« on: October 18, 2011, 01:58:25 PM »
Re: Cap. Sukotin

  I have noticed that Gleb Botkin (in his Real Romanovs) very likely encountered Cap. Sukotin at Tsarskoe selo on Sun. Dec. 18 [n. s. Dec. 31] 1916 --though the precise date is not supplied it certainly followed hard on the assassination of Father Grigori.  I present below Botkin's account of Sukotin’s ‘parable of the revolution' and ‘prediction of the revolution’:
  I remember particularly a conversation I had with Cap. Sukotin, a very intelligent and well-informed officer of the General Staff, as follows: 
  The soldier sits in his trench and thinks and this is what he thinks, ‘Why have I been taken away from my native village and set to die?’  ‘To die’ is all he can do because, in most cases, he is given a stick instead of a rifle and you can’t fight Germans with sticks!  Here’s another thing he thinks, ‘Why have I a stick when I should have a rifle?’  He thinks…and others help him to think and wherever he turns he hears the word, Treason!’ 

  Well, he’ll soon be through with his thinking and then you, here, will try to stop him with the machine-guns of your police, but, you forget, that a man who has sat day and night, months after months, and year after year under the fire of German guns cannot be frightened by police machine guns –you can fire at him with anything you like, but you won’t stop him now!

  Then, Sukotin snatched a picture of the Emperor from my father’s desk and pointing to it went on, "What I want to know is what’s this man thinking about?  He’s bringing it on himself!  Personally, the nobleman in me will only be roused when I see the Czar dragged by the mob to execution in the marketplace!   

  Botkin responded by asking, "So, you consider that the revolution is unavoidable? 

  Sukotin chuckled ominously, "Do you want me to make a prediction?

  Botkin nodded his assent and Sukotin said, "Well, the revolution will begin in February 1917!"

     In assessing such obvious treason one should not suppose Sukotin a prophet --what he knew, he knew because he was well-informed.  The question that must be raised is not what Sukotin knew, but who knew what he knew and let Russia fall over the abyss.   

The Hohenzollern / Re: Kaspar Hauser and the Grand Dukes of Baden
« on: October 03, 2011, 05:18:12 PM »
Dear Freinds:

Kaspar Hauser was of great interest to GD Nicolas Mikhailovich whose mother, I believe, was a princess of Baden.  He was in communication with the Grand Duke of Baden who apparently 'sympathized' with the GD's assertion that Hauser was dispossessed by a conspiracy.  Moreover, of course the fate of Hauser was of supreme interest to Steiner and to Anthroposophy.  It should not be considered, of course, inconsequential that Prince Frederick of Saxe-Altenburg, the life-long defender of 'Anna Anderson' (certainly the fourth daughter of the Emperor Nicholas II) was also concerned about the fate of Hauser.  The Anthroposophists apparently believed there was a close analogy between the fate's of Hauser and GD Anastasia and this goes far in explaining Prince Frederick's allegiance to Anna Anderson as well as the protection afforded to her by numerous highly-placed German anthropops (sic!) after 1925 amongst whom was Harriet Rathlef.     

Imperial Russian History / Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« on: July 11, 2009, 03:20:56 PM »
Oh, one more thing.

Anna Anderson Manahan said on the tenth aniversary of the revolution that Grand Duke Kirril was the 'first to betray the emperor'.  I suspect he was the 'premiere' --the highest personage, but he may have also been among the first to organize the ruin of the soverreign.  I suspect Kirril was up to his neck in the machination to replace the sovereign already days before 2.23 and was likely a close associate of Rodzianko on the morning of Mon. 2.27 as the revolt became a general mutiny in the capital.

Does anyone know when Kirril arrived back in the capital from his 'exile' at Port Romanov (Murmansk) in Jan. 1917?       

Imperial Russian History / Re: Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
« on: July 11, 2009, 03:10:15 PM »

 'Treason, cowardice and deceit --all around!' 

I have looked at the strange itinerary of the last Emperor on his last journey as sovereign. 

Of course, the old plan was to hijack the Imperial Person on the way.  Somewere I heard that a likely spot to squirrel Him away would be the extensive Rodzianko estates near Novgorod just North of Dno (DNO).  Rodzianko certainly planned to force a 'ministry of confidence' sometime on March 1 either holding up the emperor at Bolognoe  or at Dno and it would appear that the beginning of the interruption of the Imperial passage was at Bolognoe, at around 12:00 A.M. on March 1 (O.S.) even if the Person's Train was not stopped until about 2:30 A.M.  The meeting at Bolognoe did not materialize possibly for a number of reasons, but Dno might have been a better spot for Rodzianko anyway --it was just south of Novgorod.  However, by the time the Emperor got to Dno Rodzianko had some serious problems at the Tauride Palace.  In any event, one must not forget that the Rail was compromised already by about 4:00 P.M. on 2.28. 

What interests me just now though is the strange triangulation of the Emperor's terrible day of March 1 that began at Bolognoe and ended at 7:30 when he pulled into Pskov with the depressing interlude at the 'abyssmal' DNO around 4:30. 

Petrograd, Pskov and Bolognoe form a perfect equilateral triangle defined by the Imperial rail!  It was a trap, a web, directed from the 'hub' of Petrograd at the 'summit'.  I wonder if some occult machination might have been applied?   

One wonders if the Emperor took the mortal web imposed by his enemies as a moral ruin --he certainly knew the map.                       

Imperial Claimants Post Here / Re: Margda Boodst
« on: March 24, 2008, 10:45:49 AM »
While the almost 1000 yr old schism of the Church gets on one's nerves, the old unity of the Faith should not shock anyone who cares about Christianity.  I think the Eastern Church always conserved the ancient Faith of the Apostles with a slightly more refined sense of spiritual complexities and so many fine Westerners have always known this.  In any event, for the Imperial survivors to have been taken under the wings of the Roman Church seems to fit well with the exigenecies of their post-Revolution lives in the West --how easy would it have been for Magda Boodts to find an Orthodox Church at Como?         

Imperial Claimants Post Here / Re: Larissa Fedorovna/Tatiana Claimant
« on: March 24, 2008, 10:32:46 AM »
Just thought I'd add that there is good reason to think that whatever the 'grave' of 'Larissa F' may signify (and it need not mean the death of GD Tatiana N), the English claimant (very discreet) to the name and person of GD Tatiana may have resurfaced in Central Europe and lived until the 1970's.  The Imperial Romanovs knew something about the creation of fake graves per the 'death' of the Emperor Alexander I.     

The Alexander Palace / Re: Alexander Palace Restoration
« on: February 20, 2008, 11:50:24 AM »
Whatever any of us think, there are countless reminders of Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna in Russia. If you visit the Armoury Museum of the Kremlin in Moscow you are reminded of them. It is fascinating to see clothes from Nicholas II and Alexandra on display there. They are part of a much wider picture. It is an incredible tragedy that Alexander III died so young. Nicholas might just have learned more if his father had lived longer. Certainly the country would have avoided many disaster if Alexander III had lived longer. He knew to keep Russia out of wars. That was her only hope for survival.

It is known that A III did not only ill prepare his son but ill prepared the nation for the horrors of the new century.  N II tried his best to not only rise to the occasion of his accession but correct the mistakes of his father.  Finally, it is mute.  There is destiny at play for both father and son --and grandfathers too.  The nation needs to remember and revere the dynasty.   

The Alexander Palace / Re: Alexander Palace Restoration
« on: February 20, 2008, 11:32:37 AM »
Douglas, no disrespect but as has been said many times, we are a minority group (admittedly comparatively large).  Our interest is very much centred on the Russian monarchy - more specifically the last IF.  In my experience Russians are not hugely interested themselves and if Russia is to truly tap into the vast incomes tourism can bring, then it needs to have wider appeal than just Romanov addicts. 
The Catherine Palace will always be the significant draw at Tsarskoe because it is impressive in size and a beautiful spectacle which conjures up everything a tourist would like to associate with the Tsars - rich Rococo covered in gold and screaming opulence.  For the majority of us forum users a far more poignant and tangible link with the last IF is more appealing. 
The Alexander Palace is not really significant in terms of design/beauty/scale/historical context - as much as I and most of the forum would like to think it is.  It will never be a massive tourist draw.  It's charm and significance is almost entirely based around Nicohlas & Alexandra, OTMA & A, Rasputin etc.  I adore the place, I would go back every year if I could, but plainly speaking to the vast majority it's not Giza, The Colosseum, Versailles or even Peterhof.  I love it just the way it is, simple, without crowds or fuss and that makes the IF far more tangible than some recreation.  The only caveat being the desperate need to repair and maintain the fabric of the building as it stands.

Well, I have read that the A Palace was considered by architectural historians to be the masterpiece of Quarenghi --a man of many masterpieces.  Personally, I think it beauifully solves problems of lighting in large buildings before electricity while introducing an entirely new kind of footprint.  It may be that the Russians have not yet adjusted to the role of the former dynasty in their history and culture not to mention the culmination of that influence during the time of the last Emperor.   
As always I've waffled rather - so please excuse me that.  We should always remember that we have a very specific interest and that to the vast majority of people the IF are a complete unknown.  The Alexander Palace is not the answer in terms of creating a tourist hotbed - and I very much hope it never will be.

I heartily agree with Griffith's last post.  However, things did not work out for Russia's material benefit throughout most of the 20th cen.  It might be better in the 21st.  Peace is required. 

As for the liberalization of Jewish policy in Russia, I think the old regime was moving in that direction and conservative forces in Russia were moving against it.  It was another of those questions that could not be fully addressed during the war.  Anya said something to the effect that the preceived liberaism of the Imperial couple as regards the Jewish question actually precipitating the abdication of the Emperor --I suppose she could be right.  It has been said that the sovereigns of Russia anticipated enlightened public policy over the history of modern Russia.  It is another good reason to revere the old regime.     

I have read somewhere that GD Ernest was accommodated at the Pavlovsk palace during his visit to the Russian Imperial Family (probably in early December 1916).  He reported spent at least a full 24 hour period at the Alexander palace.   

As regards the visit of GD Ernest --it would appear that the visit of GD Elizabeth and GD Victoria Melita to the Alexander Palace in early december 1916 may have been timed to coincide with the appearance of Ernest.  From what we know of the exchanges between the Empress and her sister and former sister-in-law, the meetings did not go well --possibly related to the failure of Erest's mission. 

Imperial Claimants Post Here / Re: Margda Boodst
« on: April 19, 2007, 02:31:30 PM »
A "Prie-Dieu" it's this kind of bench that we Catholics use to be on our knees praying. Prie-Dieu, in French mean litterally: "Pray-God".


As regards the use of the 'prie-dieu' in Russia --i have seen an exemplar made in Russia for the Empress Marie the Consort of Alexander II and retained by the House of Hesse.  It appears to resemble some of the other furnishings made for the Winter Palace after the reign of Nicholas I.  I am not quite sure how it came to Hesse.  It surely reflects the eclectic spirituality of the Russian Imperial Family --neither strictly of the east or the West!     

Filatov's family does seem to bear a striking resemblance to the Alexandrovich.  Moreover, there seems to be strong reason to believe that Alexei survived.  Whatever happened during those last hours in the Ipatiev house, and I suspect there are a number of separate and competing threads to the story, what was put over as history by the Western and Soviet authorities --intellectual and otherwise, is not what happened.  

Whomever he is,  he apparently believes in Filatov's claim.  And, apparently thinks Alexei escaped and hopes to prove that something else occured than what Yurovsky and the others claimed.

I can agree on that there might have been an escape, however, like many others,  I don't see anything that gives me reason to believe that Filatov was Alexei.  I think it was his height [Fliatov was far too short] that convinced me.....  But I'm just one person and I've not really gone into his story accept for what's been on the various threads.

As for children being born out of wedlock in the royal Romanovs.  I'm sure that it occured.  I doubt that anyone kept records.  DNA testing can quickly establish relationships these days, so, if there is a question,  it can be shown through such testing.


PS:  Over on the following thread are photographs:;action=display;num=1089372646;start=0#0
PSS  Welcome to our forum MariaR.  It is always good to hear new voices and if anyone "flames" you,  send me a PM [personal message] and let me know when and where because I know what it feels like   ::) .....

There are many aspects of the 'Filatov' family narrative that point to a close affinity with the Imperial Family.  As regards his resemblance (and that of his children) to the Alexandrovich it must be granted that the man suffered much --far more than we can even imagine if his story is true.  That fact can change a man.  One cannot but wonder how much the Soviets knew of him and his real identity.  Is that why the Putin government keeps a security guard on his son? 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7