The Fate of The Romanovs,Greg King,Penny Wilson

[AGRBear]

Who was William R. Maples, PH. D.?

Inside back cover of paperback book reads:

>>Until his death in February 1997, Dr. William R. Maples was distinguished service professor and curator-in-charge of the C. A. Pound Human Identification Laboratory at the Florida Museum of Natural History in Gainsville.  He was president of the American Board of Forensic Anthropology and a fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Science.<<

AGRBear

[AGRBear]

....[in part]....

I would not cite this as gospel bear.  Spiridovitch goes to great lengths discussing how Jews outside the Pale were required to have special permits to live in the area, and their passports DID indeed indicate jewish as ethnicity. Now perhaps this was relaxed for your ancestor, we of course know this means NOTHING as for Yurovsky.  Also, in the eyes of Judaism, one is ALWAYS a Jew when born to Jewish parents.

Spiridovitch was discussing Jews,  we're discussing a man, Yurovsky's father,  who may have converted from Judaism to a Christian religion.  Once the man's  baptism had occurred and the papers are signed,  he was no longer a Jew but a new member of Russian Orthodox Church.  If he takes his children to the Russian Orthodox Church and they are baptised and go through their religious rites,  they are Russian Orthodox.  It doesn't matter to the church if Yurovsky's father's parents or wife was Jewish.

Once Yurovsky became Lutheran when he converted from Judaism or Russian Orthodox in 1905, he was a Lutheran.  It is in error if people write that he was a Jew.

It little matters if the Jewish community considered a person who had been part of Judaism was always a Jew.  Not according to Christains.

According to King,  who had posted on AP sometime ago,  they (he and Wilson)saw the unpublished memiors of Yurovsky. They said where they had seen it and when.   They told us what Yurovsky wrote.  Now, if Yurovsky did not write the truth,  then so be it. But don't make it sound like King and Wilson are involved in  some kind of conspiracy to mislead their readers because they believed AA was GD Anastasia.

Helen gives us web sites about Yurovsky.   She hasn't told us who wrote the articles or what their sources were.  So,  as far as I' concern, we haven't  any new information which proves who is right and who is wrong.  As I suggested,  since some of the posters know people in Ekaterinburg,  they should be able to find Yurovsky's  death record.  It'll give us the information which will tell us his religion....
No, that might not be the case, as I think about it in depth.    Yurovsky was a devoted communists and they  did not believe in God...  Someone will have to go to Tomsk and go through the records at the Russian Orthodox and the Jewish records.  Answers should be there.   If he was Russian Orthodox then Yurovsky's didn't lie in his memoirs about his early life.   If his records are in the Jewish records,  then Yurovsky did lie in his memoirs.   They were Yurovsky's memoirs not Greg King's and not Penny Wilson's.

AGRBear

[Forum Admin]

BEAR,

Lay off the defensive crap about King and Wilson, that's NOT what's being discussed. YOU yourself accuse Yurovsky about lying about EVERYTHING, remember?? shall I pull up all your posts where you question his accuracy at every turn?? Suddenly NOW he's telling the truth. Am tired of your baiting people for the sake of baiting and not for genuine discussion.

[pandora]

I've been following this thread as often as my time allows and I'll be very honest, I haven't read the book nor do I know much about the topic but I'm trying my best to follow! Today, as fortune would provide, I'm going book shopping and I want to buy this book but I'm almost scared to do so as there seems so much argument just in this thread alone about its contents. Historical points are always up for discussion and interpretation depending on the person you're discussing them with, but I've almost lost the theme of this thread...someone point me back (in a nice manner, please) back to the original question of this thread so I will be aware it when I read the book. Thank you in advance.

[helenazar]

I've been following this thread as often as my time allows and I'll be very honest, I haven't read the book nor do I know much about the topic but I'm trying my best to follow! Today, as fortune would provide, I'm going book shopping and I want to buy this book but I'm almost scared to do so as there seems so much argument just in this thread alone about its contents. Historical points are always up for discussion and interpretation depending on the person you're discussing them with, but I've almost lost the theme of this thread...someone point me back (in a nice manner, please) back to the original question of this thread so I will be aware it when I read the book. Thank you in advance.

Hi pandora, it would be great if you get the book and give us your opinion (although I would just get a copy at your local library- if they carry it- instead of buying it). There are several issues being discussed, not just one, so you sort of have to go through them one by one. With this book, its impossible to just discuss one thing since there are many issues at play, which is why we keep jumping from one subject to another. But please come back after you had the chance to read it and join the discussion....

[helenazar]

According to Radzinsky:

(www.fictionbook.ru/author/radzinskiyi_yedvard/zagadki_istorii_13_poslednyaya_noch_poslednego_carya/radzinskiyi_zagadki_istorii_13_poslednyaya_noch_poslednego_carya.html  )   "Yurovsky, Yakov Mikhailovich - Commandant of the Ipatiev House. Was born in 1878 in a poor Jewish family with many children... "

[Puppylove]

I've been following this thread as often as my time allows and I'll be very honest, I haven't read the book nor do I know much about the topic but I'm trying my best to follow! Today, as fortune would provide, I'm going book shopping and I want to buy this book but I'm almost scared to do so as there seems so much argument just in this thread alone about its contents. Historical points are always up for discussion and interpretation depending on the person you're discussing them with, but I've almost lost the theme of this thread...someone point me back (in a nice manner, please) back to the original question of this thread so I will be aware it when I read the book. Thank you in advance.

Hi pandora, it would be great if you get the book and give us your opinion (although I would just get a copy at your local library- if they carry it- instead of buying it). There are several issues being discussed, not just one, so you sort of have to go through them one by one. With this book, its impossible to just discuss one thing since there are many issues at play, which is why we keep jumping from one subject to another. But please come back after you had the chance to read it and join the discussion....

I disagree with Helen (first time for everything!) If you're new to this discussion, as I am, and don't know the issues well, having the book on hand to reference and highlight will help you follow along better.

Like Helen said, this thread has many underlying themes, so it's a good way to sharpen critical thinking skills. I'd say the primary theme is accuracy of sources, the heart and soul of any history book.

[Puppylove]

Who was William R. Maples, PH. D.?

Inside back cover of paperback book reads:

>>Until his death in February 1997, Dr. William R. Maples was distinguished service professor and curator-in-charge of the C. A. Pound Human Identification Laboratory at the Florida Museum of Natural History in Gainsville.  He was president of the American Board of Forensic Anthropology and a fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Science.<<

AGRBear

To be clear, I was not attacking Dr. Maples or his credentials. My question was simply whether his conclusions re identity were to an absolute certainty. I was in error, though, to state he appears to have been wrong in those conclusions. I can't know that until analysis of the recently discovered bones is complete.

[Puppylove]

Once Yurovsky became Lutheran when he converted from Judaism or Russian Orthodox in 1905, he was a Lutheran.  It is in error if people write that he was a Jew.

It little matters if the Jewish community considered a person who had been part of Judaism was always a Jew.  Not according to Christains.

According to King,  who had posted on AP sometime ago,  they (he and Wilson)saw the unpublished memiors of Yurovsky. They said where they had seen it and when.   They told us what Yurovsky wrote.  Now, if Yurovsky did not write the truth,  then so be it. But don't make it sound like King and Wilson are involved in  some kind of conspiracy to mislead their readers because they believed AA was GD Anastasia.

Wow on the Jewish/Christian comments. Just wow.

Bear, please rephrase "conspiracy to mislead." This is a far cry from crafting a framework to support a belief in AA's authenticity, as Annie proposes.

[Puppylove]

Helen, I received information that the 1922 Yurovsky note may be found in the Russian journal Istochnik (1993). Hopefully this helps!

Thanks, Jenn, but I and some others had looked into this the last time we were discussing this subject (about 2 years ago - when the FA was forced to delete the entire "Was Yurovsky Jewish" thread), and it turned out to be a false lead... Someone from this forum  who was using the service of a professional researcher sent me this information at the time. Turned out that what's published in 1993 ISTOCHNIK is parts of the 1920 note and not 1922... (see below). I am convinced that the 1922 memoirs were not published but are just kept  at the Presidential Archives, unavailable to the public... But if Janet really has access to a copy of this memoir in Russian,  why not just post it here? At leasyt the first couple of paragraphs where it talks about Yurovsky's childhood. All I want to do is take a look at the original Russian text to make sure the translation is correct. I am genuinely curious as to where the FOTR authors got this information about Yurovsky since there doesn't seem to be any way of getting these particular memoirs which they claim stated all these things...

Reply about the 1922 Yurovsky memoirs allegedly published in 1993 Istochnik:

"Please find below the result of 4-hours work undertaken to find out the availability of document of your interest in the Russian Archives.
 
The Yurovski note of the year 1922 is really in the Archive of the President of Russian Federation:
 
Fond 3 inventory 58 file 280.
 
Some documents of this Archive were published in the special review "Istochnik" [Source], the supplement to the historic review "Rodina" [Motherland]. We looked through the bibliography. There is information about publication the text of Ya. Yurovski's note in the article "The confession of hangman" in the first issue #0 of the year 1993, pages 109-111. Anyway, as we found out, it is the document of the year 1920 and not of 1922 there. "

Helen, I'm sorry, I really thought the information I posted would finally put this controversy to rest. If Janet has access to the 1922 memoir in Russian it would be great to have her share it here. However, short of access to the original as it rests in the Presidential Archive, you would still have to accept K/W's copy as a true and accurate representation.

Jenn

[Annie]

 However, short of access to the original as it rests in the Presidential Archive, you would still have to accept K/W's copy as a true and accurate representation.

I would have to disagree here. Just because they were the only ones to publish it does not leave theirs alone as accurate unquestionable proof, especially considering the other errors, misquotes, mistranslations and source  problems already proven to be present in this book. I for one certainly want a second opinion.

[helenazar]

Hi pandora, it would be great if you get the book and give us your opinion (although I would just get a copy at your local library- if they carry it- instead of buying it). There are several issues being discussed, not just one, so you sort of have to go through them one by one. With this book, its impossible to just discuss one thing since there are many issues at play, which is why we keep jumping from one subject to another. But please come back after you had the chance to read it and join the discussion....

I disagree with Helen (first time for everything!) If you're new to this discussion, as I am, and don't know the issues well, having the book on hand to reference and highlight will help you follow along better.

Not sure where we disagree here - I don't think we do. I also recommended that pandora get the book and read it, although I don't know if I would actually spend my hard earned money on it, which is why I mentioned the library. I am a librarian after all ;-).

However, short of access to the original as it rests in the Presidential Archive, you would still have to accept K/W's copy as a true and accurate representation.

Well, normally I would more or less take it face value, but in light of all the other errors in the book, it's difficult for me to do so at this point. I am not saying that the authors made up what the source said, I just want to check the accuracy of the Russian translation to make sure it was translated correctly, but there doesn't seem to be any way to do so because this source was not published*** (see below). At the same time I would like to know how the authors got a hold of the 1922 memoir, since it seems to be impossible to get any document from the Presidential Archives - for a "mere mortal" at least... Which is why I keep asking for at least the first paragraph from the original Russian text of the Yurovsky memoirs to be posted here (which wouldn't be so hard to do if the authors really have the copy as they claim). It would at least put to rest this discussion... I don't think this is unreasonable to ask for... Is it?  


*** Even FOTR lists the 1922 memoirs in more than one place (so no, it's not a typo or "editorial mistake") as unpublished, e. g. @ p 590 -591, Chapter 12 footnotes # 13 and 23 and 32. I will try to post scanned pages of this later. So I am not sure why Janet A is arguing so hotly that this memoir was published.. Perhaps Janet is confusing it with the 1920 or 1934 notes, both of which were published?

[helenazar]

Oh, and one more Russian language source about Yurovsky's nationality: http://www.vestnik.com/issues/2004/0721/koi/reznik.htm     "... thus, among the mob of the Ekaterinburg thugs were two unquestionable Jews, Yurovsky and Goloshekin..."   by Semyon Reznik, Vestnik Journal, 15(352) 21 July, 2004 .

Mr Reznik happens to be my mom's first cousin, by the way. He lives in Washington, DC and often publishes on various Russian history subjects with Jewish themes... This is his forte...

[helenazar]

Just because they were the only ones to publish it ...

But that's the problem, they didn't publish it, they only published the translation, which may or may not be correct. The original has not been published so there is no way to check what it really states.

[Forum Admin]

What about the fact that the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence says, including the first hand sources of the time, say Yurovsky was born to Jewish parents.  FOTR relies on ONE unpublished source to wholly dispute this, calling it FACT.  Especially when it is Yurovsky himself, who they also themselves call totally unreliable for OTHER things, ie: the murder itself....SO they themselves rely on their self admitted "unreliable source" to validate the statement as fact.

THIS is the point of discussion...