101 Reasons AA was GD Anastasia

[Annie]

FA- Thanks, that's right, since Nicholas did match his brother, there is no question who he was!

Bear- do you really want me to start into my rebuttals again?

[AGRBear]

...[in part]...

Bear- do you really want me to start into my rebuttals again?

When you do, because I know you will,  could you give us some sources this time,  PLEASE.

And,  could we take one step at a time instead of taking 10 or 20 at a time?

AGRBear

[AGRBear]

(We do this on another board I'm on -- not a history board, but I think it could be a good way to keep things straight.  The rules: no discussion here -- there are other threads for that -- just a list.  I'll start....)

1.Princess Xenia of Russian recognized her.

2.....

Why don't we start with #1 about Princess Xenia of Russia:   Did she reconize AA as being GD Anastasia?

AGRBear

[Annie]

(We do this on another board I'm on -- not a history board, but I think it could be a good way to keep things straight.  The rules: no discussion here -- there are other threads for that -- just a list.  I'll start....)

1.Princess Xenia of Russian recognized her.

2.....

Why don't we start with #1 about Princess Xenia of Russia:   Did she reconize AA as being GD Anastasia?

AGRBear

At first, but later denied her and felt taken. Her sister, Nina, never believed her. Both had played with AN a few times as children, but weren't very close. They didn't live nearby.


I will take on every single one of these if you want!  

[AGRBear]

(We do this on another board I'm on -- not a history board, but I think it could be a good way to keep things straight.  The rules: no discussion here -- there are other threads for that -- just a list.  I'll start....)

1.Princess Xenia of Russian recognized her.

2.....

Why don't we start with #1 about Princess Xenia of Russia:   Did she reconize AA as being GD Anastasia?

AGRBear

At first, but later denied her and felt taken. Her sister, Nina, never believed her. Both had played with AN a few times as children, but weren't very close. They didn't live nearby.


I will take on every single one of these if you want!  

If we take it one step at a time, then Bear can find the sources and it'll give other posters a chance to comment as well.  We don't have to rush and do this in one day.

Let me first make sure we're talking about the same person ands that everyone else is on the same page.

Princess Xenia of Russia was Xenia Georgievna, Princess of Russia and daughter of GD George Mikailovitch, who was the son of Mikail and grandson of Nicholas I.  This makes her second cousin to Nicholas II's children.
#1:

A. When did Xenia say she  believe AA was GD Anastasia?

B. When did she change her mind?  

C. Did she give a reason for changing her mind?

D. And, where did the family live because you mention they lived far away?

As for Nina,  she is not Xenia, so let's keep this present discussion just about Xenia, please.

AGRBear

[AGRBear]

For more information and photographs of Princess Xenia see the following thread:

http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/YaBB.cgi?num=1092249107/0

[CorisCapnSkip]

However...DNA said that those two different persons are one and the same, and we can't discuss it, for DNA is not to be discussed but accepted like a faith. If this is not absurd, tell me what it is...RealAnastasia.

I wrote Peter Kurth at the time, and still feel, it is too bad DNA is accepted as gospel when human error or human intervention can play such major parts.  (NOT AN ACCUSATION against anyone in this case--just a possibility in any case.)  As I told him at the time, I was still reeling from the O. J. Simpson verdict--you know, that one that said O. J. wasn't a murderer and Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman killed themselves to frame him.   8-)  Tell me another!  

By the way, Mr. Kurth wrote me a lovely reply.

[CorisCapnSkip]

There are too many unanswered questions in this entire saga of survivors, it seems to me, this is just my opinion, that solving some of these mysteries would help us all to understand better, no matter which side of the fence you sit on.

A huge unanswered question for me is, why are so many impostors, be they other Romanovs, old West outlaws, or the Lindbergh baby, fairly easily disproven and Anna Anderson so hard?  There is as much or more in favor of her being Anastasia as against it.

[Ra-Ra-Rasputin]

There are too many unanswered questions in this entire saga of survivors, it seems to me, this is just my opinion, that solving some of these mysteries would help us all to understand better, no matter which side of the fence you sit on.

A huge unanswered question for me is, why are so many impostors, be they other Romanovs, old West outlaws, or the Lindbergh baby, fairly easily disproven and Anna Anderson so hard?  There is as much or more in favor of her being Anastasia as against it.

Anna Anderson is easily disproven by those who have some sense.

The DNA proves Anna Anderson was not Anastasia Nicholaevna. However, the problem lies in that some people don't want to believe that, and so we get the conspiracy theories.

Anna Anderson looked nothing like Anastasia.  She spoke nothing like her and acted nothing like her.  Those closest to the IF either never met her or denounced her. Those who did accept her as Anastasia were not close to the IF and had only met Anastasia a few times as a young child, or in some cases, they had never even met her at all.

There is actually very little that is convincing about Anna Anderson's claim if you dig a little deeper and don't take people like your hero Peter Kurth at face value.

But then, conspiracy theories are always more fun than the boring truth- that Anna Anderson was Franziska Shankowska and that Anastasia was murdered with her family.  So, this absurd merry go round of 'but the DNA MUST have been switched! The Romanovs wanted to keep the 'fortune' that didn't exist!' will continue until people just don't care anymore.

Rachel
xx

[Lemur]

There are too many unanswered questions in this entire saga of survivors, it seems to me, this is just my opinion, that solving some of these mysteries would help us all to understand better, no matter which side of the fence you sit on.

A huge unanswered question for me is, why are so many impostors, be they other Romanovs, old West outlaws, or the Lindbergh baby, fairly easily disproven and Anna Anderson so hard?  There is as much or more in favor of her being Anastasia as against it.

Actually, the old west outlaws were not 'easily disproven' until, you guessed it, DNA testing proved their bones didn't match their relatives. Until then, there were all kinds of wild stories, alleged 'memories' and other clues, but the DNA is the last word. No one has doubted the testing. I think there are still some outlaws, maybe Billy the Kid? who still need to be tested but they can't find a female relative of a striaght female line to get the mtDNA from.

The Lindbergh baby was a good one too, the claimant even had the odd toe deformity that ran in the family. His face vaguely could have been the baby grown up. But again, DNA is the last word. While the claimant was not the baby, there was another person, in Europe, claiming to be Lindbergh's love child and this was proven true by DNA! Either way, DNA is the answer!

[Louis_Charles]

Lemur makes an excellent point. In fact, few historical imposters were easily disproven until the advent of verifiable testing such as the DNA --- the claims of Naundorff to be Louis Charles, the Lost Dauphin, survived for 160 years, until the DNA knocked them out.The Lindbergh case is also interesting, in that the legitimate family immediately accepted the German family's identity as their relatives once the DNA testing had been completed, despite the fact that it might have tarnished their father's reputation. And surely the newly-recognized Lindberghs might have a financial claim on the estate?

The "problem" with DNA testing is that it destroys the romance that invests an imposter. Has there been a single notable imposter from Perkin Warbeck until Anna Andersen who has actually turned out to be real? I think there is a fascinating book on this topic waiting to be written. Why do we feel the need for celebrity survival ( for example, there was a rash of articles in the 1970s in the tabloids that claimed JFK and Marilyn Monroe were off somewhere )? Does this phenomenon carry over into ordinary life, i.e. do we believe that victims of, say, the World Trade Center attack managed to escape?

Just curious.

[Forum Admin]

Lets keep some basic things in mind about mtDNA testing, as people get confused, and there is far too much dis-information out there. mtDNA does two things: It establishes non-familial relationships between individuals with 100% accuracy. mtDNA mutates within a family VERY rarely, at least no often than one gene marker in ten generations, and most scientists believe closer to 20 generations. Regardless, a mis-match means "you're out". Period.  

The ONLY possible way for a bad test is a bad sample. Period.

The second thing mtDNA can do is say ONLY that there IS a maternal familial relationship, but it can not say exactly how far back.

Now the original mtDNA testing done on the Anna Manahan sample was done with fewer genetic markers than today. (six vs. twenty). Now, is today's test more "accurate", sure. BUT and this is the BIG BUT (no jokes please... ) does today more precise accuracy make the earlier tests UNRELIABLE. ABSOLUTELY NO.  

There were FIVE mis-matched markers between AA and the known Victoria maternal mtDNA line. A 20 point test would only show MORE mis-matches, and not less. The original mis-matches remain and will always remain no matter how more accurate the tests may become, the original test are STILL ACCURATE to determine an exclusion.  The ONLY new result from the 20 point test would be to determine with greater accuracy (than the 98% probability of the original) that AA was related to FS. PERIOD.

THERE REMAINS TO THIS DAY NO SCIENTIFIC REASON TO RESTEST TO DETERMINE IF AA WAS AN. THIS is the point I keep harping on, because no scientist in the field has ever shown that the original tests are inaccurate, the exclusion factor remains, it is only for the "inclusion" factor that todays tests are better.

Think of it this way, my first computer back in 1987 was a 186 AST with the then astounding 500 meg hard drive...Now I use a 500 Mac G4 with a 120 GIG hard drive. Is today's new compter better, sure, but was my old computer useless and unreliable? Nope...the advances of today dont diminish previous technology...they just make it better, the same is true with the mtDNA testing.

[Ra-Ra-Rasputin]

Thanks for that, FA.

I have been trying to explain that on several posts but some people just don't seem to get it.  The original mismatch will always be there, no matter how many points can be tested.

Simon makes a very good point; there seems to be a general obsession amongst the public to believe in miraculous survival.  Why is this? Human nature, I suppose, leads us to want to believe that people we love and admire are not dead, but why people who mean nothing to us? Why would it matter if Anastasia didn't die? Whose life would it really affect? Why do people care so much? It's really rather perplexing.

I could understand the vehemance of people who claim AA was AN if they were a relation, but complete random strangers? Getting so het up about it when Anastasia is just a long dead girl in a sepia photograph is incomprehensible to me.

Rachel
xx

[Lemur]

There are those who believe Elvis and Jim Morrison are still alive, despite bodies being in their graves!

[CorisCapnSkip]

The coincidences are just so much.  Why would AA claim AN and Alexei survived when the possibility of Alexei's survival is so unlikely?  Yet theirs are the ONLY two bodies NOT found with the others, when an imposter COULDN'T have known what the grave contained.  No one did except the people in on the actual burial, and how could a would-be imposter have contacted them and made them talk?  I don't believe Alexei could have survived long.  Even if he escaped being shot, he was too gravely ill and with no family to take care of him.  There's still no "closure" until we know for sure what happened to him.

Had those two bodies been with the others, I'd have immediately dismissed the claims of Anna Anderson despite all the other coincidences, BUT THEY'RE NOT.  And without them there is no closure.