Re: For Serious Claimants, Please

[Janet_W.]

It was the measles, and I think this portion of the discussion deserves its own section, so I will begin one in the section specifically about the family.

[AGRBear]

So, they did have their hair in July 1918.

AGRBear

[Forum Admin]

yes, they did, but remember that human hair doesnt grow all that fast, so they did not have LONG braidable hair only just one year later.

[Valmont]

This is all especulation. There is not a fact to support this theory, is it?

On the other hand, I honestly would like to read Rodger's point of view on the MtDna Analisys.

Arturo Vega-Llausás

[Antiquarian2001]

I am not sure where this post belongs but since it concerns escapees I am posting it here pending a check by the administrator.
With the Great War on it could not have been possible to escape thru Germany. I have a friend whose grandparents escaped thru Persia. Apparently there was a flourishing trade between Persia and Russia in those days. It was a long way to go from Petrograd. Does anyone have more information about  survivors who used this route.

[Forum Admin]

Please go to the Russian Revolution section, and start a new topic there about this question. I am sure you will get some interesting answers there.

[AGRBear]

So, all photographs taken after they had the measles  meant they either had no hair [the shaved heads photo] to short hair [bobed] to July  1918?

Can anyone direct me to photographs taken only  in Ekaterinburg of the family.  Either on the web or in books.

Thanks

AGRBear

[Candice]

I haven't seen any photos of the girls in Ekaterinburg without their hats off. Their hair could have been short. Photos show a full fringe.

[Candice]

FA, didn't Nicholas abdicate in favour of his brother Michael? Therefore Alexei wouldn't necessarily be a threat, especially being so weak and ill.  

It seems to me that Yurovsky, being a bit of a dark horse, could have played a part in the escape.  Just another angle to look at.

Ok
on the "switching Alexei" notion...WHY would the Bolsheviks not be keeping a very close eye on the TSAREVITCH? If any single person could have given the White Army a figure to fight for after Nicholas, it would have been Alexei...You can be very very very certain that Yurovsky would have made dead sure Alexei was in the basement.

[kensue]

In Peter Kurth's book "The Lost World of Nicholas and Alexandra", he stated that the girls wore wigs while their hair was growing out.

[Valmont]

Yes Candice, Nicholas abdicated in favor of his brother Michael, still, regardless of the abdication (refused by Michael), the  figure of Alexei being alive, would have given the White Army a stronger reason to fight back. So, it seems to me like nonsense to  make a great effort to save him, just to keep him hidden the rest of his  life.

Arturo Vega-Llausás

[jeremy galeaz]

For Robert Hall

Mr. Hall,

You wouldn't happen to have the names (and names of the authors )of those books you mentioned on "Anastasias and Alexis" handy would you?
I've tracked down a few books, but it would but it might be a great help if there are a few I'm missing.

thanks
J. Galeaz

[Candice]

I don't think the intention was to hide Alexei for the rest of his life. I'm sure the plan was to return the Monarchy.  As time passed things didn't turn out the way they planned, so Alexei had no chose but to stay and lived where they hid him. This is just speculation on my part.

[rskkiya]

Candice,

     While your notion of revolutionaries secretly wanting to reestablish the Monarchy is charming...it does'nt really make any sense to me. One of the goals of the Revolution was to free Russia of Autocracy - that is the Tsar!
    Although many people have stated that some of the IF 's "keepers"  may have become more sympathetic with them after getting to know them, I am doubtful that any of them started hatching plots to secret away the extreamly ill Tsarevich and keep him in seclusion until the time was right for him to be revealed...
    Its a charming idea - something out of Victor Hugo - but not logical... at least not to me.  

Still I may be wrong!

[_Rodger_]

It's not quite clear that 'free' is the appropriate term given that by any measure or stretch of the imagination, the Soviet Union was the worst generally recognized government in the history of the modern world.    

I used the phrase 'generally recognized' because the USSR was recognized by Western governments as legitimate.  I don't believe the US recognized Hitler's Reich as a legitimate government, but I could be wrong on that.  If it had, it certainly broke diplomatic relations quickly.