But as I've pointed out previously, Volkov himself is not misquoted in FOTR. The words "leave them in peace" are correct, and those are the only words attributed directly to Volkov. All claims that the grand duchesses were in any way abused come from the authors' mouths, not Volkov's.
No, that's not correct. The words were "would not leave them in peace". That is very different from "left them in peace", which was what Volkov really said. Another source was used to further demonstrate how the GDesses were not left in peace, and then the authors' conclusion was made that most likely something untoward had happend to the GDs, even the possibility of rape was implied - even though not exactly spelled out (things were worded in a way where the reader may imagine it).
You're mistaken. Here's a photocopy of the page in question with Volkov's quote hi-lighted:
My copy is a first edition hardcover.
Okay. If I remember all of this correctly, this is where the footnote number was moved by the book editor/publisher's people which has caused all this critizism. When it was first noticed and someone posted it, I instantly voiced, without knowing King and Wilson's story, that someone had eliminated part of a sentence or many sentences and the footnote ended at the end of the sentence printed which was the wrong place because it wasn't the correct source. Later, Wilson came on AP and posted, like Ashton had retold what she knew, that some sentences had been removed. So when this occured, and it doesn't matter who's to blame at this point since the error was not caught, the error was and still is there in the book. Helen, Annie, FA and others have read about this error on AP and later on King's and Wilson's forum. That should have been the end of it. Errors happen. As much as authors would like them not to happen, it happens. According to Ashton, Wilson has placed the blame on her shoulders because it was her and King's book. So, why are we thrashing through all of this again? Because of Helen and Annie. Everywhere, on AP, my forum, Annie's forum, other forums, they coninue this attack. Even Amazon had to eliminate their comments on the book, which is very rare and proves how vile these attacks have been.
I can undertand FA's concern. He disagrees with what King and Wilson wrote. He has been giving us his sources and his interpretation of what Volkov said. He believes that the drunken soldiers on the Russ would never have touched the daughters of the ex-Tsar Nicholas II. But this is his opinion. King and Wilson think something more might have happened. They tell us in plain words that they nor does anyone else know everything that happened on the Russ.
FA believes that because no one else wrote anything which Gibbes remembered, it just didn't happen. Gosh, if life was only so simple.
I and others are suppose to realize that we're thinking like people living in 2008 and not 1918. Please remember, I stated that if you read diaries and letters of other aristocracts who were prisioners of the Bolsheviks, that the revolutionaries anger and hatred for the rich, in my family's case the "Kulacks" that this spurred these revolutionaries into acts upon these people (Tsar on down to a shop keeper's cat) that were horrific.
If you want to believe the man in charge of the guards, well, then do, but, think, I have, I can realize that of course he's not going to make any comments in any report that he had lost control of his men from 2 PM to the time the Russ docked at Ekaterinburg.
Yes, there were a number of servents, also, on the Russ.
Yes, the boat wasn't that big.
Yes, the duchesses remained dressed.
Yes, Alexei was locked in a cabin.
Yes, the soldiers were drunk, shooting off their guns, and throwing grenades.
"Rodinov and his band of drunken soldiers passed from cabin to cabin, reshuffling passeingers...< wrote King and Wilson p. 140.
And why do you think they did this? I assume it was intimadation. Why would they want to intimidate their passengers? I can speculate, why they'd want to intimidate their passengers, can't you? But do we know for sure? No.
And, THEN there is the soft hearted and frighten Gibbes. His character is nothing like Volkov's. Gibbes is more sensitive. His brain is collecting every sound of every moment. He hears the Grand Duchesses screaming. He doesn't tell anyone. Why should he? The others were on board the Russia, too. They heard what they heard. As FA states, the boat was small and the walls thin. And, what Gibbes heard was never forgotten by Gibbes. Later, Gibbes tells us adopted son George his "worst memory".
Evidently, FA doesn't believe Gibbes' son. But why would Gibbe's son lie? George had personally seen the emotions in his adopted father's face and eyes. This memory of Gibbes remained with George who in turn retold the story.
Again, let me say, King and Wilson stated that they nor anyone else knows what happen on the Russ. Whatever it was, the results was something Gibbes would never forget.
Now, you can read all sides, and, then make up your own mind.
And you can ask more questions. That's part of being part of a discussion. I assure you I will view the events differently than FA or Helen or Annie. Perhaps it's because, like George Gibbes, I have personally talked to people who suffered under the Bolsheviki who did terrible things to them. All were part of a revolution. Good people often times do bad things in revolutions, and, many of the Bolsheviks did in those times.
AGRBear
