Georgy wants the Ekaterinburg remains re-examined

[Kalafrana]

I would have more respect for Maria Vladimirovna if she would simply admit that she was mistaken about the remains, and that she now accepts that they genuine. The validation of the second second of remains would provide a useful pretext.

Ann

[Belochka]

I would have more respect for Maria Vladimirovna if she would simply admit that she was mistaken about the remains, and that she now accepts that they genuine. The validation of the second second of remains would provide a useful pretext.

Ann

The problem Mariya Vladimirovna faces is that she was far too eager to seek favor with Alexis II. Now it seems she understands that she must march into the opposite direction to seek new favors.

The shameful disrespect she clearly demonstrated against the Imperial remains, which are interred in the Cathedral, can never be undone.

Indeed how can she now resign to the flaws relating to her past performances?

Margarita

[JonC]

FA what is there that I need to prove anyway? It is a known FACT that the data use by the ' scientists ' for them to come to their conclusions has never been released. It is a well known FACT that other scientists have to have access to that data for the findings to be verified. As far as the KNOWN SCAR on Nicholas's head being ABSENT from the skull identified as been ' his ' leaves honest skepticism on the whole study. What amazes me is why ' renown ' Romanov experts on this and other sites try to force non believers to accept their untenable position. Apparently after Georgy met the Patriarch neither could he. I like his grit and determination.
Many on this site who previously loved him and his Maria have now sold him to the Gypsies, stoke and all, and that IS cruel! JonC.   

[PAVLOV]

The Grand Duchess is not interested in the bones, or the Romanov family, or the Russian Orthodox Church.
She is only interested in herself, and her own interests.
She has a very good education and appears to be very intelligent, although she speaks very badly. I cannot understand why she has not sat herself down and thought this whole thing through rationally. If so, she should have realised that she is on a wild goose chase to nowhere.

She  is an irritation to many people because she is so very, very far from where she thinks she ought to be, and she will never get there.

She must be very wealthy and very bored to spend so much time on a lost cause.

[JonC]

Margarita

 I am in no way excusing Maria, her son and especially their ancestors for what they have done in the past BUT I guess if you say that questioning whether the ' remains ' of the Imperial Family are in fact those of the Imperial Family you would have to include under your ' SHAME  ' category the whole Orthodox Church establishment including Patriarch Alexy who had publicly classified the remains, at the actual burial, as being ' victims of the revolution ' and NOT the Imperial Family. I believe Patriarch Kirill must have the same view as well. Its tougher to argue against FACTS as opposed to mass hysteria. Maria is well within her rights to do so. That sham burial should and will eventually BE undone. JonC.

[LisaDavidson]

FA what is there that I need to prove anyway? It is a known FACT that the data use by the ' scientists ' for them to come to their conclusions has never been released. It is a well known FACT that other scientists have to have access to that data for the findings to be verified. As far as the KNOWN SCAR on Nicholas's head being ABSENT from the skull identified as been ' his ' leaves honest skepticism on the whole study. What amazes me is why ' renown ' Romanov experts on this and other sites try to force non believers to accept their untenable position. Apparently after Georgy met the Patriarch neither could he. I like his grit and determination.
Many on this site who previously loved him and his Maria have now sold him to the Gypsies, stoke and all, and that IS cruel! JonC.   

I realize that you were likely only speaking for effect, JonC, but do you know that 250,000 Gypsies were murdered by the Third Reich? And that their death rates were proportionately so high that they were 2nd only to the losses suffered by Jews?

I might also remind you of board policy that precludes questioning the accuracy of the Yekaterinburg remains.

[JonC]

Lisa, thank you for your response. Of course, as you surmised, I did not intend to insult the ' Gypsies '. I don't understand what you referred to as the ' accuracy ' of the Ekaterinburg remains. I wasn't referring to the accuracy of the scientist's work, they did a fine job. I was referring to the validity of the study as a whole since the Russian Orthodox Church does not, till this day accept that study. I'm sure you are aware that one of their objections to the total acceptance of the Ekaterinburg study was that the famous SCAR being absent on the skull presented to those scientists by the respective authorities. I believe the new Patriarch is still waiting for an explanation. In joining the discussion on this thread I thought I would re-iterate what another poster had written to show I was in full agreement with the Church and Georgy.

Maybe I don't understand? Are we on this site not permitted to refer to the position of the Church on this subject? JonC.

[LisaDavidson]

Lisa, thank you for your response. Of course, as you surmised, I did not intend to insult the ' Gypsies '. I don't understand what you referred to as the ' accuracy ' of the Ekaterinburg remains. I wasn't referring to the accuracy of the scientist's work, they did a fine job. I was referring to the validity of the study as a whole since the Russian Orthodox Church does not, till this day accept that study. I'm sure you are aware that one of their objections to the total acceptance of the Ekaterinburg study was that the famous SCAR being absent on the skull presented to those scientists by the respective authorities. I believe the new Patriarch is still waiting for an explanation. In joining the discussion on this thread I thought I would re-iterate what another poster had written to show I was in full agreement with the Church and Georgy.

Maybe I don't understand? Are we on this site not permitted to refer to the position of the Church on this subject? JonC.

I don't think I understood your position very well, JonC, and am relieved that you did not intend to insult Gypsies. (who I mention because Hungarian members of my family were imprisoned with Gypsies (or Roma) at Dachau, I tend to be a bit sensitive about this.).

While the Emperor did have a visible scar during his lifetime, I don't know there is any evidence that his wound penetrated his skull and that therefore we should discredit DNA evidence and mtDNA evidence which indicates that the corpse found in the Koptyaki Forest was his. But, I also have always said even if the Lord Jesus announced that the identification of the remains was accurate (and I did word that phrase awkwardly), there would still be people who doubt and there would be someone with a cat obsession who thought Franziska Schanzkowska was Grand Duchess Anastasia!

[Kalafrana]

I'm inclined to think that the scar is a bit of a red herring, and that the DNA is what should be relied upon.

[Carolath Habsburg]

Which scar?¿ the one he got when he went to Japan?

[LisaDavidson]

Which scar?¿ the one he got when he went to Japan?

Yes.

[JonC]

Lisa, I understand where euphoria could over power reasonable thinking, especially when it comes to Anna A etc,. What, though, is the thinking of the Church? Church authorities are pretty adamant that a scar has to be there - to the point that they are making its resolve a condition for them to finally accept the buried bodies, at the Peter and Paul Cathedral, to be the Royal Family's. How can they be made to accept that, as you say, a scar doesn't necessarily need to be there?
And, if all the DNA facts are there, why are they continuing to refuse to accept the findings if this scar thing can't be proved? JonC.

[Kalafrana]

I am not a medic so I'm going cautiously here. A flesh wound is not necessarily going to cause visible damage to bone, even when the bone is close to the surface, as in this case. Scalp and facial injuries often bleed very heavily, as these areas have many small blood vessels. I would guess that Nicholas was fortunate enough to suffer only a glancing blow, which bled a lot and gave everyone a hell of a fright (not surprisingly) but nothing worse. In later life the surface scar doesn't seem to have been particularly noticeable - you can't see it in all those family snapshots (obviously it would have been airbrushed out of the studio pictures).

Ann

[Janet Ashton]

I am not a medic so I'm going cautiously here. A flesh wound is not necessarily going to cause visible damage to bone, even when the bone is close to the surface, as in this case. Scalp and facial injuries often bleed very heavily, as these areas have many small blood vessels. I would guess that Nicholas was fortunate enough to suffer only a glancing blow, which bled a lot and gave everyone a hell of a fright (not surprisingly) but nothing worse. In later life the surface scar doesn't seem to have been particularly noticeable - you can't see it in all those family snapshots (obviously it would have been airbrushed out of the studio pictures).

Ann

The medical report by the doctors present at the time of the Otsu attack stated unequivically that the sword blow damaged only the periosteum, which is the layer of blood vessels and cartilege protesting the skull. I gather that Dr Derevenko later (after Ekateriburg) told investigators a different tale, but he was not present at the attack and had never seen Nicholas's skull, do he was not quite qualified to pronounce on this - assuming he said such a thing and was not actually misunderstood by investigators.
To put it blntly, the periosteum would have rotted away, so there would be no evidence on Nicholas's bare skull of any mark. Some of the report made by Dr Rambakh after Otsu used to be available online, very easily accessible to anyone with an interest (even those bent on trying to prove that the Tsar escaped Ekaterinburg! :-)). Personally, my interest was in the Otsu angle, but it's nice to have that tale cleared up.

[JonC]

I think that a more pressing issue would be, ' what's going to sway the new Patriarch into changing the Church's official position? ' You would think Maria and her son Georgy would have tried to do that. Instead Georgy came out of the meeting with the Patriarch demanding a whole new investigation??!? JonC.