Re: So who WAS she, then?

[jeremygaleaz]

If AA was FS then  mtDNA shows  this is probable.  HOWEVER,
this thread is about the speculation that if FS was murdered by Grossmann or ended up in England then she could NOT have been AA.  If AA was not FS: "So who WAS she, then?"

So, I don't think it is necssary for some to continue to tell me and others about the mtDNA or that we need to brush up on genetics or stats or historical evidence.

And, as many times as you'd like we can go around and around in circles like this or continue with the thread as intented.

AGRBear

Whatever Bear   It's just a suggestion you can keep going around in circles on your own with historical evidence that often ends up meaning absolutely nothing due to it's subjective nature,  or latch on to something more concrete  like math and science.
The choice is yours  

[AGRBear]

This subject was not my choice and obvisouly it was not yours  

Back to topic, please.

AGRBear

[AGRBear]

Differences between AA and FS:

I. Photographs:
Photograph comparisons won't make everyone happy as to their looking alike....  

II.  Shoe sizes
FS wore shoes that were three sizes larger than AA
 AA wore shoes that were three sizes smaller than FS

Shoes sizes still doesn't accomplish any agreement even though at the trial  there  shown that there was three size difference.

III. Pregnancy
AA- Evidence of a pregnancy but no proof of when.  Claimed to have had a son.
FS- No pregnancy known.

IV. Scars.
FS -  no unusual scars remembered by family; no scars inflicted in factory accident
AA - scars which were claimed to have been inflicted by a bayonet;  small scar on finger claimed to have been from a door; scar from removal of a mole..... Some scar may have been caused by tb and surgery.  Penny mentioned that AA had a "grove" on the side of her head which may prove to be a injury of some kind had occured....

IIV. Height
FS is reported to have been 5'6", which is about 4 inches taller than AA - Helen was th source on this fact.
AA was about 5'2"" tall

IIIV.  Knowledge of Languages
FS - knew German and Katchoubian.  Did not know Russian or English.
AA - knew Russian, German and English

IX.  Ears pierced
FS - one retouched photo shows earrings and pierced ears but this may be in error
AA - doesn't appear to have pierced ears

Anyone have anything to add?

AGRBear

[rskkiya]

You are right not to wait for me and my research -- the book that Greg and I are writing as a follow-up to FOTR is still a couple of years away.  And I'm sure that "as a historian" yourself, you will want to perform your own research, and not rely on that of others.

Penny,
You are quite right about my not waiting for your research -- however, I don't feel the need to reinvent the wheel.  I freely admit that I am no geneticist, so I am grateful for the advice offered by those more familiar with the information at this site, and as a medieval historian I don't have much time to spend taking remedial natural genetics classes -- but would you recommend them as a research tool?

rskkiya
with my poor maths skills, I am certain to need very remedial classes! LOL

[AGRBear]

There are many who think AA was FS, Gertrude's sister.  But we don't know this as a fact.  The birth records of Gertrude have not been found, as yet.

mtDNA can not tell us if Gertrude is AA's sister or 1st to 25th cousin.

daveK has turned out some marvelous stats over on the DNA threads.  Helen has tried to answer my  DNA questions.  And, if you have any, go over and ask.

HOWEVER, this thread is not about DNA or mtDNA, this thread is about if AA was not FS "who was she, then?".

TOPIC PLEASE

AGRBear

[Penny_Wilson]

Penny,
...as a medieval historian I don't have much time to spend taking remedial natural genetics classes -- but would you recommend them as a research tool?

But of course!    As you probably know from your own work, it's necessary to become as familiar as possible with many disciplines -- for example, when researching Russian history, it helps not only to have a good grasp of research principles, but also to have a reasonably good grasp of Russian, French and German.  There are many disciplines that we have to dabble in -- hopefully without becoming dilettantish...  

OT:  So you're into medieval history?  I love medieval novels, like The Sunne in Splendor and Katherine.  There's a really good site on John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford, though of course, I can't find it now....

[Elisabeth]

Differences between AA and FS:

IX.  Ears pierced
FS - one retouched photo shows earrings and pierced ears but this may be in error
AA - doesn't appear to have pierced ears

Anyone have anything to add?

AGRBear

Bear, I think it's interesting that you are suddenly willing to consider as evidence a retouched photo of FS - because it seems to support your claims of physical differences between FS and AA. Yet on another thread you categorically refused to accept as evidence the computer-generated match between photos of FS and AA, precisely because you're convinced that the FS photo they used had been retouched!

The photo you are now citing as evidence that FS might have had pierced ears was published in a Berlin newspaper and was so obviously and badly retouched that not only does FS look like a cartoon character in it, but the "artist" (if you can call him that) even added earrings where there were none in the original!

So we simply don't know if FS had pierced ears or not. The whole issue is a red herring. And since we have already discussed this at some length on another thread, I have to wonder why are you bringing it up again here when you know for a fact that this retouched photo was in error?

[AGRBear]

IX.  Ears pierced
FS - one retouched photo shows earrings and pierced ears but this may be in error
AA - doesn't appear to have pierced ears
 
"one retouched photo"
The pierced ears may be in error.  Seems plain enough to me that this may be in error.  As to the story about the photo in the newspaper,  I hadn't read this.  Thanks for the additional information.  

If FS had pierced ears or did not have pierced ears, I don't know this as a fact one way or the other.  Do you?

AGRBear

[Penny_Wilson]

Bear, I think it's interesting that you are suddenly willing to consider as evidence a retouched photo of FS - because it seems to support your claims of physical differences between FS and AA. Yet on another thread you categorically refused to accept as evidence the computer-generated match between photos of FS and AA, precisely because you're convinced that the FS photo they used had been retouched!

The photo you are now citing as evidence that FS might have had pierced ears was published in a Berlin newspaper and was so obviously and badly retouched that not only does FS look like a cartoon character in it, but the "artist" (if you can call him that) even added earrings where there were none in the original!

So we simply don't know if FS had pierced ears or not. The whole issue is a red herring. And since we have already discussed this at some length on another thread, I have to wonder why are you bringing it up again here when you know for a fact that this retouched photo was in error?
 

I believe we do know that Franziska did not have pierced ears.  I forget where I heard or read this -- but I think the issue has arisen in the past and been solved.

[AGRBear]

If someone remembers the source which tells us that FS did not have pierced ears, let me know and then I can place a footnote on my  list already written and then add it to my list when a new one is posted somewhere down the thread.

Thanks.

AGRBear

[jaa]

Photograph comparisons won't make everyone happy as to their looking alike....

Technology exists that could help determine this on a mathematical basis (facial recognition systems), and/or provide a clearer image for visual comparison (image enhancement).

Sorry to sound like a broken record. I wasn't sure if I was making sense about these computer-based technologies on the "fusion" photo thread.

[Helen_Azar]

Technology exists that could help determine this on a mathematical basis (facial recognition systems), and/or provide a clearer image for visual comparison (image enhancement).
 

I think that this is precisely what they did with the AA/FS photos in the Nova documentary...

Sorry to sound like a broken record. I wasn't sure if I was making sense about these computer-based technologies on the "fusion" photo thread.

If you are going to be involved for any extended amount of time in these AA/FS threads, you will have to get used to sounding like a broken record, trust me!  

[jaa]

I think that this is precisely what they did with the AA/FS photos in the Nova documentary...

I don't think so. The documentary is copyright 1995, which would put face recognition in the early stages of development; the first face recognition algorithms were proposed in 1989. There have been significant improvements in both technologies in the last ten years.

Ten years is a long time in computing. The best graphics workstation in 1995 would have been an SGI Onyx, now obsolete and a collector's item. The best business PC in 1995 was a Pentium Pro running Windows 95 or OS/2, and internet access for most users was a dial-up line and a 14.4 bps modem.

The technology moves fast. The last US government test of facial recognition systems was in 2002, and is now outdated enough that a new vendor test will be done late this summer.

Image enhancement has been similarly updated, most notably with NASA's Retinex technology. This didn't exist in 1995.

I should add that it's entirely possible that the FS image does not contain enough data. The negative would contain the most data, but since the NOVA documentary didn't even use the original photograph, it's doubtful that they had access to the negative, if it still exists.

If you are going to be involved for any extended amount of time in these AA/FS threads, you will have to get used to sounding like a broken record, trust me!  Wink Grin

LOL! I know, I've been lurking. I skip any post with the word "conspiracy." I just thought I'd pre-apologize for boring people.

[Helen_Azar]

Thanks jaa for the info you were able to give us. I don't think any of us find it boring! Is there a simple and fast way anyone can compare the two images with the new computer technology, or does it have to be done by professionals?

[lexi4]

AGRABear,
I am more than willing to leave the mundane behind and stretch my imagination especially when it leads me to a fun conspiracy theory. So as long as we are thinking out of the box, how about this theory.
Maybe Anna was a former Russian, loyal to the monarchy, who served as a ruse to keep people from finding the real Anastasia. And maybe the real Anastasia was living in exile somewhere, hoping to be restored to what was rightfully hers. Of course, I have no evidence of this.