Anna Anderson's claim to be Grand Duchess Anastasia

[ferrymansdaughter]

During Anderson's German court cases the press were always more interested in reporting her side of the story then the opposing benches less glamorous perspective, editors often pulled journalists after reporting testimony delivered by her side and ignored the rebuttal, resulting in the public seldom getting a complete picture......

​

This comment that papers removed their reporters before the rebuttals and did not present both sides fairly really should be proven or disproven if possible. I can't imagine that any decent newspaper editor worth his salt would do this, since it would lead to accusations of bias (where there any such accusations at the time?)​

You said you like comments from people who were there. He was there, he saw it happen. What good would names of 1950's German papers do, no one would be able to check it out anyway.....

Actually they would. Most papers these days have online archives so it would be very easy to check these to see how the case was reported. You get us the names of the papers and we will see what we can find. For example, we have a subscription at work to Frankfurter Allgemeine and I am hoping to look at their archive for the articles written during the trail (I believe by Klaus Wagner) to see what they said. FAZ is the German equivalent of the Times but I am sure there were reports in other papers such as Die Welt. There are also a lot of articles about the case in the Times archive but I don't have time to sift through them right now. It may take me a couple of weeks because of work commitments but I will post some here. If nothing else it will be very interesting to read some contemporaneous reporting of the case for ourselves.​

 

[Anna was Franziska]

This comment that papers removed their reporters before the rebuttals and did not present both sides fairly really should be proven or disproven if possible. I can't imagine that any decent newspaper editor worth his salt would do this, since it would lead to accusations of bias (where there any such accusations at the time?)​

You AA supporters always use 'eyewitness accounts from those who where there at the time!' Well, that's what this is!

I had always wondered why there was so much pro AA info in the media and so little, if any, from the other side. When I saw his remarks, it really rang a bell for me- no wonder! Also notice the parts where he and Prince Michael both say the movie "Anastasia" was so popular that it swayed a lot of public opinion against them and they couldn't fight the glamour of the 'lost princess' story. Most people would rather believe the 'poor thing stiffed by her awful relatives' excuse, because believing the myth was more fun.
​

 

[Anna was Franziska]

I don't suppose he would have taken the case if he had not thought from the outset that she was an imposter.

It was seeing the files on FS given to him by others that made him so sure. It wasn't just a hunch. According to him, there was a lot of evidence proving she was FS. I can only hope one day his memoirs will come out so we can see.

(Incidentally, can you tell us what the actual source for these interviews is? When was von Berenberg-Gossler interviewed, and by whom? "Remembering Anna Anderson part II" doesn't tell us much.)

I don't know if it was that website or if it was republished from a magazine with their permission. Maybe you can write and ask them.
​

von B-G is quoted as saying There is no proof that she received any help from the Soviets. If she had financial help from them, how come she was always so hard up?

It may not have been financial help. It could have been a lot of other things- maybe help with memories of inside Russia, maybe getting her out of legal trouble when she was about to be declared FS and charged with fraud (I think even PK once said the Germans said 'someone very high up' had stopped this from happening, but no name was given)

Just because Lenin had a file on her, doesn't particularly mean that much since the Soviets had files on lots of people. I expect they had files on Grand Duchesses Olga, Xenia, et al - most if not all high profile emigres. Incidentally, who found that he had this file and where was it? In his desk drawer? In the Kremlin? In the state archives? When did the file begin? The statement above would suggest that the file began in 1920 or just after.

You are expecting me to know quite a bit. I have only read the same article as you. We can only guess. There was one other mention of this, once on AP, it was posted that during one of Bob A's trips to Russia, this file on AA and how Lenin helped her came up in conversation. If I had the money and time and access to Russian files, I'd go investigate, however I don't. I am, though, assuming this info is not to AA's benefit of being "Anastasia" or surely one of her globe trotting supporters would have found it and told us.
​

 

[ChatNoir]

It was seeing the files on FS given to him by others that made him so sure. It wasn't just a hunch. According to him, there was a lot of evidence proving she was FS. I can only hope one day his memoirs will come out so we can see.

I wonder where this lot of evidence went in court. It seems to me it all ran out the door with Doris Wingender.

It may not have been financial help. It could have been a lot of other things- maybe help with memories of inside Russia, maybe getting her out of legal trouble when she was about to be declared FS and charged with fraud (I think even PK once said the Germans said 'someone very high up' had stopped this from happening, but no name was given)

Yes, I am sure Lenin knew a lot of intimate things from the court. As for this 'someone very high up', I have already in a former post explained to you that it was just a Nachtausgabe bluff. She was not about to be charged with anything, as you should remember from my earlier posts, the Bavarian Police refused to give in to demands from Darmstadt that she be arrested for fraud.

 

[Elspeth]

Just a reminder that to stay in compliance with the copyright law, we need to make sure that less than 20% of the total is posted here. Since this appears to be a book rather than an article, it shouldn't be a problem, but I thought I'd mention it.

Elspeth
Royal Forums admin

 

[Anna was Franziska]

That's all I have for now, I have no idea how long the book is but it's been out of print for over 75 years and the writer had no heirs so I doubt anyone is going to cause grief over it. Anyway it's surely far less than 20%.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Some things I wanted to bring to attention:

Of all of my close relatives, I would want to see the Grand Duchess Xenia first.

I liked this aunt a lot, and I am sure that she will recognize me better then the other aunts, although I do not understand why other persons who have known me well beforehand do not recognize me now.

My aunt Xenia Alexandrovna often called me "Astouchka", and when I have recalled this name to her, she will no longer have doubt of my identity.

This is very telling for two reasons, Xenia was not the aunt AN was close to, but Olga, and it was later proven that the nickname was completely false and no one had ever called Anastasia by that name.

the one who called herself Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicolaievna declared that in fact, being in Romania, she had, due to the advice of her companion, tried all means to alter her facial features. She received, from an intermediary, this person who died in Romania, a device (apparatus), that she used on her face and succeeded a little in changing the form of her nose and mouth.

Well isn't this interesting! I laughed out loud when I first read this part. It must mean that deep down she and her supporters knew she didn't resemble AN very much and tried to make excuses. It was a silly excuse, which is probably why we never hear more of it, only claims of her being 'identical', of pictures where she's biting her lips or hiding the lower part of her face with props such as her hand or a boa. Also there has been the excuse that her face changed after it was healed from being bayonetted/rifle butted, which is also ridiculous because it would have been a scarred version of AA"s face not a different face altogether. But the fact that they tried to make excuses for her 'changed' appearance proves they recognized the differences early on and tried to compensate for them.

Here is Von Kliest's very words on how she became "Anastasia" instead of 'Tatiana"

I asked the Unknown one if she would consent to say her name to me. I wanted to write on a slip of paper two names, whereby she would cross out the one that would be false, after which I would destroy the paper. The unknown one accepted my suggestion. I wrote on the paper the names of Anastasia and of Tatiana in Russian and then I passed her the paper. Having read it, she crossed out the name of Tatiana, and returned me the paper that was immediately destroyed, as planned. Some moments later, the unknown one asked me not to change anything in our rapport, because of this declaration, and not to observe etiquette.

From Clara P's letter, a wild story of how she came to be in the canal- it wasn't a suicide attempt! She was followed by (unknown enemies) from Romania and when they found her, they drugged her, changed her clothes and threw her in the canal!

The young lady does not want one to say that she is the Grand Duchess, or Mrs Tschaiikovsi, for when those who followed her discovered the hideout of her family to Bucharest, she had to flee again. She tried to loose their track leaving first to Paris where she knows a Baron Taube. From Paris, she came to Berlin. She was scarcely there for eight days when someone recognized her. One evening, in an automobile, she was drugged to sleep, they removed her clothes for her and put on others, and she was thrown, still totally drugged, in a lake by the zoo. When she was drug out, it was believed that she had tried to commit suicide, and was driven to the Elisabeth hospital. As she is not known in Warsaw under the name Tschaiikovski, she was transferred to the Dalldorf asylum. It is absurd to believe that this lady, who fled Bucharest in the middle of so many difficulties to save her life, wanted to commit suicide here, in Berlin. Only a madman would concede that. This lady has a firm will to live,

Also note that Clara's telling of the story puts her first in Paris before coming to Berlin, a new twist to the story. In both the accounts of Clara and Von Kliest, she allegedly gave birth along the way on the trip, Clara giving a name (Alexis) and Von Kliest a date (Dec. 5, 1918) Later supporters were to deny this as 'Von Kliest's lies' but you see the name did not come from him but Clara.

In conclusion, what's obviously going on here is either that she herself has told so many different versions of the story she is mixed up, or that she has so many others helping her invent it they cannot keep their tales straight. It's all obviously ficticious, and as any policeman or detective will tell you, the first sign of a liar is constantly changing the story.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

I wonder where this lot of evidence went in court. It seems to me it all ran out the door with Doris Wingender.

Oh no, it continued on and in 1961 three judges ruled that her ID as FS was 'eminently likely.' FS continued to be a factor all along and this is why it was her family who was seeked out to give a DNA sample. FS especially isn't 'out the door' now that scientists believe FS is the true identity of AA to 99.9% accuracy, and that a random match would be one in 56,000 years. I'm sorry I know how badly you want to get rid of FS but she's still here. Everytime you see a pic of AA, that's her!

Yes, I am sure Lenin knew a lot of intimate things from the court. As for this 'someone very high up', I have already in a former post explained to you that it was just a Nachtausgabe bluff. She was not about to be charged with anything, as you should remember from my earlier posts, the Bavarian Police refused to give in to demands from Darmstadt that she be arrested for fraud.

This is your opinion of the Nachtausgabe, and the Berlin police did agree with Darmstadt's ID as FS. As for the reasons she wasn't officially charged, it's probably because she was taken to the US by Gleb to get her out of there.

 

[ChatNoir]

And what did AA say about von Kleist? "The baron and his lies." The child was not born on December 5, 1918, that was the day the AA party crossed over the Dniestr and into Moldova. The child was born in autumn of 1919, she herself did not remember the date. The name of the child was not Alexei, but Alexander.
As we all know, both Gilliard and Constantine Savich have been caught in lies several times. After the book was written, Gilliard burned all his files. The book was not a success upon publication and quickly went out of print.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Of course she, the baron and Clara all changed things as they went along when they realized something else might look better. She also (and this is in Kurth's book) mentioned being sexually active with guards, but apparently dropped that when she thought it might make her look bad to aristocrats. It was probably Rathlef, a writer by profession (like Gleb) who perfected the final version. The bottom line is, her entire 'escape story' is so full of holes you could drive a semi hauling a wide load through it.

 

[ChatNoir]

Some things I wanted to bring to attention:

Of all of my close relatives, I would want to see the Grand Duchess Xenia first.

I liked this aunt a lot, and I am sure that she will recognize me better then the other aunts, although I do not understand why other persons who have known me well beforehand do not recognize me now.

My aunt Xenia Alexandrovna often called me "Astouchka", and when I have recalled this name to her, she will no longer have doubt of my identity.

This is very telling for two reasons, Xenia was not the aunt AN was close to, but Olga, and it was later proven that the nickname was completely false and no one had ever called Anastasia by that name.

And now we have no proof from Kleist, because his documents were burned together with Gilliard's papers.

the one who called herself Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicolaievna declared that in fact, being in Romania, she had, due to the advice of her companion, tried all means to alter her facial features. She received, from an intermediary, this person who died in Romania, a device (apparatus), that she used on her face and succeeded a little in changing the form of her nose and mouth.

Well isn't this interesting! I laughed out loud when I first read this part. It must mean that deep down she and her supporters knew she didn't resemble AN very much and tried to make excuses. It was a silly excuse, which is probably why we never hear more of it, only claims of her being 'identical', of pictures where she's biting her lips or hiding the lower part of her face with props such as her hand or a boa. Also there has been the excuse that her face changed after it was healed from being bayonetted/rifle butted, which is also ridiculous because it would have been a scarred version of AA"s face not a different face altogether. But the fact that they tried to make excuses for her 'changed' appearance proves they recognized the differences early on and tried to compensate for them.

This sounds like one of Savich's stories. You remember him, who went around making speeches about AA and how she had been married to a member of the mob in Poland.

Here is Von Kliest's very words on how she became "Anastasia" instead of 'Tatiana"

I asked the Unknown one if she would consent to say her name to me. I wanted to write on a slip of paper two names, whereby she would cross out the one that would be false, after which I would destroy the paper. The unknown one accepted my suggestion. I wrote on the paper the names of Anastasia and of Tatiana in Russian and then I passed her the paper. Having read it, she crossed out the name of Tatiana, and returned me the paper that was immediately destroyed, as planned. Some moments later, the unknown one asked me not to change anything in our rapport, because of this declaration, and not to observe etiquette.

And if you remember correctly, she already told Thea Malinovsky in the fall of 1921 who she was.

From Clara P's letter, a wild story of how she came to be in the canal- it wasn't a suicide attempt! She was followed by (unknown enemies) from Romania and when they found her, they drugged her, changed her clothes and threw her in the canal!

The young lady does not want one to say that she is the Grand Duchess, or Mrs Tschaiikovsi, for when those who followed her discovered the hideout of her family to Bucharest, she had to flee again. She tried to loose their track leaving first to Paris where she knows a Baron Taube. From Paris, she came to Berlin. She was scarcely there for eight days when someone recognized her. One evening, in an automobile, she was drugged to sleep, they removed her clothes for her and put on others, and she was thrown, still totally drugged, in a lake by the zoo. When she was drug out, it was believed that she had tried to commit suicide, and was driven to the Elisabeth hospital. As she is not known in Warsaw under the name Tschaiikovski, she was transferred to the Dalldorf asylum. It is absurd to believe that this lady, who fled Bucharest in the middle of so many difficulties to save her life, wanted to commit suicide here, in Berlin. Only a madman would concede that. This lady has a firm will to live,

Also note that Clara's telling of the story puts her first in Paris before coming to Berlin, a new twist to the story. In both the accounts of Clara and Von Kliest, she allegedly gave birth along the way on the trip, Clara giving a name (Alexis) and Von Kliest a date (Dec. 5, 1918) Later supporters were to deny this as 'Von Kliest's lies' but you see the name did not come from him but Clara.

And where is the copy of Clara's letter? Burned, together with the other "evidence.

In conclusion, what's obviously going on here is either that she herself has told so many different versions of the story she is mixed up, or that she has so many others helping her invent it they cannot keep their tales straight. It's all obviously ficticious, and as any policeman or detective will tell you, the first sign of a liar is constantly changing the story.

I would say that the sure sign of a liar, is to burn all evidence.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

And now we have no proof from Kleist, because his documents were burned together with Gilliard's papers.

That must have been very handy for AA supporters.

This sounds like one of Savich's stories. You remember him, who went around making speeches about AA and how she had been married to a member of the mob in Poland.

You are only assuming. There is no connection. It appears that AA told him this.

And if you remember correctly, she already told Thea Malinovsky in the fall of 1921 who she was.

I recall that you keep saying that, but there's no proof other than word of mouth, and when she said it to the paper she said 1922, then tried to say they changed it. That's very very shaky ground, it doesn't hold up.

And where is the copy of Clara's letter? Burned, together with the other "evidence.

Good thing we have a copy!

I would say that the sure sign of a liar, is to burn all evidence.

Could be somebody who was fed up with the whole thing. Or since he's a liar, maybe he didn't really burn it and the papers will turn up someday in an old attic.

 

[ChatNoir]

That must have been very handy for AA supporters.

But not so handy for Gilliard, who had to admit in the Hamburg court that he had been telling lies.

You are only assuming. There is no connection. It appears that AA told him this.

Of course there is a connection, Savich was the co-author of this book.

I recall that you keep saying that, but there's no proof other than word of mouth, and when she said it to the paper she said 1922, then tried to say they changed it. That's very very shaky ground, it doesn't hold up.

Word of mouth? What about testimony in Hamburg both from Nurse Malinovsky and Dr. Chemnitz. And she did NOT say 1922 to the paper, the Nachtausgabe either lied, or made an honest mistake. In any case, they did not restore the original document to Ms. Malinovsky. Besides, in 1922 AA was far away from Dalldorf, and the story would have made no sense at all.

Good thing we have a copy!

We do?

Could be somebody who was fed up with the whole thing. Or since he's a liar, maybe he didn't really burn it and the papers will turn up someday in an old attic.

I doubt that very much. If those papers again saw the light of day, they would most probably be very damaging for the Gilliard/Savich team. The first thing you do when committing a crime, is to erase all clues.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

I am not arguing with you over the nurse again. You think the paper lied, I think she did, we'll never solve it. But it sure looks like she was not right, since AA was not AN, and never really mentioned being a grand duchess until Clara gave her the idea.

Savitch's name is not on the book. He had nothing to do with the contents as what I posted is signed statements from the people who said them. It was Von Kliest who told the story of the face altering device.

 

[ChatNoir]

Oh no, it continued on and in 1961 three judges ruled that her ID as FS was 'eminently likely.' FS continued to be a factor all along and this is why it was her family who was seeked out to give a DNA sample. FS especially isn't 'out the door' now that scientists believe FS is the true identity of AA to 99.9% accuracy, and that a random match would be one in 56,000 years. I'm sorry I know how badly you want to get rid of FS but she's still here. Everytime you see a pic of AA, that's her!

The judges ruled that the claimant was defeated. FS was again a factor in the final suit, and the end of that claim went out the door with Doris Wingender and her doctored photos. And every time I see a picture of AA, I see AN.

This is your opinion of the Nachtausgabe, and the Berlin police did agree with Darmstadt's ID as FS. As for the reasons she wasn't officially charged, it's probably because she was taken to the US by Gleb to get her out of there.

No, this is not my opinion of the Nachtausgabe, this is Thea Malinovski's opinion. And as you have seen from my earlier post, nobody at the police headquarters wanted to take responsibility for the "identification" of AA as FS. The whole thing was orchestrated from Darmstadt. And she was not taken to US by Gleb, but by Xenia Leeds. Also remember, she was back again a year and a half later, and nobody ever tried to arrest her for fraud.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

The judges ruled that the claimant was defeated. FS was again a factor in the final suit, and the end of that claim went out the door with Doris Wingender

To put it kindly, this just plain isn't so. It's a reality that FS remained a factor all along and ended up being her true identity. Look at Berenberg Gossler, he was using FS years after Doris 'ran out the door.' You've tried that dog too many times, he won't fetch.

And every time I see a picture of AA, I see AN.

That may be what you see, but that's not who you're looking at.

No, this is not my opinion of the Nachtausgabe, this is Thea Malinovski's opinion.

If she was lying, or mixed up, what does that mean? Nothing! It didn't happen, and if her shaky word is all we have that's not much! Come on and get real, as much attention as she got after her claim started with Clara do you really believe if she was AN she just sat there in an asylum all that time knowing who she was and allowing herself to be treated like a crazy peasant? Please, think through this.

And as you have seen from my earlier post, nobody at the police headquarters wanted to take responsibility for the "identification" of AA as FS. The whole thing was orchestrated from Darmstadt.

Yes they did. His name was Drescher. I have names and dates.

The Berlin police department eventually admitted they had decided to go along with Darmstadt's identification, and Heinz Drescher of Berlin Police Headquarters said that he had signed certain documents saying that identity has been established. "According to the material we have from the Haus-und-Vermoegensverwalten of the former Grand Duke of Hesse, and from various notices in the press, the alleged Grand Duchess Anastasia of Russia, is, in reality, Franziska Schanzkowska, born on 16.12.96 in Borowihlas, and this is supposedly proved definitively."

And she was not taken to US by Gleb, but by Xenia Leeds.

Gleb took her, there are pics of them arriving together. Leeds wasn't even at home. Leeds did not go asking for her, Gleb asked Leeds.

 

[ChatNoir]

I am not arguing with you over the nurse again. You think the paper lied, I think she did, we'll never solve it. But it sure looks like she was not right, since AA was not AN, and never really mentioned being a grand duchess until Clara gave her the idea.

There is no need to argue, AA could not have told Thea Malinovsky anything in the fall of 1922, so therefore it HAD to be 1921, the only fall they spent together at Dalldorf.

Savitch's name is not on the book. He had nothing to do with the contents as what I posted is signed statements from the people who said them. It was Von Kliest who told the story of the face altering device.

And where are those "signed statements" now? Burned to ashes. As AA said: "The baron and his lies."

 

[Anna was Franziska]

There is no need to argue, AA could not have told Thea Malinovsky anything in the fall of 1922, so therefore it HAD to be 1921, the only fall they spent together at Dalldorf.

or, perhaps, it never happened at all!

I am NOT arguing you over this silly nurse story again. You know I don't believe it's credible so it's useless.

And where are those "signed statements" now? Burned to ashes. As AA said: "The baron and his lies."

AA was no truth teller herself. She shouldn't blame the man for her own mess.

ALSO note much of what is in contention came from Clara, not the 'baron!' Apparently this is the original version she told Clara in the asylum? Her version is different from the baron's.

 

[ChatNoir]

or, perhaps, it never happened at all!

I am NOT arguing you over this silly nurse story again. You know I don't believe it's credible so it's useless.

As I have said, there is nothing to argue about. The Hamburg testimony from her and Dr. Chemnitz speak for itself.

AA was no truth teller herself. She shouldn't blame the man for her own mess.

Funny you should say that. Every doctor or person who studied her and was close to her, testified to her absolute honesty. According to them, she never contradicted herself or told lies.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Oh Chat how many times have we been through this? If you use testimony from one side you have to accept it from another too but you call everyone else 'liars' so it all becomes silly. Just because a person says something doesn't make it true. And she did lie if she pretended to be someone other than her true self FS.

May we PLEASE stick to this topic of items posted new in this thread and not rehash the entire mess we've done a 100 times before? This is becoming redundant or the 150th time and running everyone else off because they don't want to see it again.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Again, some of the new issues:

Some things I wanted to bring to attention:

Of all of my close relatives, I would want to see the Grand Duchess Xenia first.

I liked this aunt a lot, and I am sure that she will recognize me better then the other aunts, although I do not understand why other persons who have known me well beforehand do not recognize me now.

My aunt Xenia Alexandrovna often called me "Astouchka", and when I have recalled this name to her, she will no longer have doubt of my identity.

This is very telling for two reasons, Xenia was not the aunt AN was close to, but Olga, and it was later proven that the nickname was completely false and no one had ever called Anastasia by that name.

the one who called herself Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicolaievna declared that in fact, being in Romania, she had, due to the advice of her companion, tried all means to alter her facial features. She received, from an intermediary, this person who died in Romania, a device (apparatus), that she used on her face and succeeded a little in changing the form of her nose and mouth.

Well isn't this interesting! I laughed out loud when I first read this part. It must mean that deep down she and her supporters knew she didn't resemble AN very much and tried to make excuses. It was a silly excuse, which is probably why we never hear more of it, only claims of her being 'identical', of pictures where she's biting her lips or hiding the lower part of her face with props such as her hand or a boa. Also there has been the excuse that her face changed after it was healed from being bayonetted/rifle butted, which is also ridiculous because it would have been a scarred version of AA"s face not a different face altogether. But the fact that they tried to make excuses for her 'changed' appearance proves they recognized the differences early on and tried to compensate for them.

Here is Von Kliest's very words on how she became "Anastasia" instead of 'Tatiana"
I asked the Unknown one if she would consent to say her name to me. I wanted to write on a slip of paper two names, whereby she would cross out the one that would be false, after which I would destroy the paper. The unknown one accepted my suggestion. I wrote on the paper the names of Anastasia and of Tatiana in Russian and then I passed her the paper. Having read it, she crossed out the name of Tatiana, and returned me the paper that was immediately destroyed, as planned. Some moments later, the unknown one asked me not to change anything in our rapport, because of this declaration, and not to observe etiquette.

From Clara P's letter, a wild story of how she came to be in the canal- it wasn't a suicide attempt! She was followed by (unknown enemies) from Romania and when they found her, they drugged her, changed her clothes and threw her in the canal!
The young lady does not want one to say that she is the Grand Duchess, or Mrs Tschaiikovsi, for when those who followed her discovered the hideout of her family to Bucharest, she had to flee again. She tried to loose their track leaving first to Paris where she knows a Baron Taube. From Paris, she came to Berlin. She was scarcely there for eight days when someone recognized her. One evening, in an automobile, she was drugged to sleep, they removed her clothes for her and put on others, and she was thrown, still totally drugged, in a lake by the zoo. When she was drug out, it was believed that she had tried to commit suicide, and was driven to the Elisabeth hospital. As she is not known in Warsaw under the name Tschaiikovski, she was transferred to the Dalldorf asylum. It is absurd to believe that this lady, who fled Bucharest in the middle of so many difficulties to save her life, wanted to commit suicide here, in Berlin. Only a madman would concede that. This lady has a firm will to live,

Also note that Clara's telling of the story puts her first in Paris before coming to Berlin, a new twist to the story. In both the accounts of Clara and Von Kliest, she allegedly gave birth along the way on the trip, Clara giving a name (Alexis) and Von Kliest a date (Dec. 5, 1918) Later supporters were to deny this as 'Von Kliest's lies' but you see the name did not come from him but Clara.

In conclusion, what's obviously going on here is either that she herself has told so many different versions of the story she is mixed up, or that she has so many others helping her invent it they cannot keep their tales straight. It's all obviously ficticious, and as any policeman or detective will tell you, the first sign of a liar is constantly changing the story.

 

[ChatNoir]

Oh Chat how many times have we been through this? If you use testimony from one side you have to accept it from another too but you call everyone else 'liars' so it all becomes silly.

No, I don't call everyone liars, only the ones that have been caught in the act. As for von Kleist, AA was the one who called him a liar.

Just because a person says something doesn't make it true. And she did lie if she pretended to be someone other than her true self FS.

No, it doesn't necessesarily make it true. But your rebuttals are usually: I don't believe it. And that is not enough for me to change my opinion.

May we PLEASE stick to this topic of items posted new in this thread and not rehash the entire mess we've done a 100 times before? This is becoming redundant or the 150th time and running everyone else off because they don't want to see it again.

You mean: Don't try to pick apart my reasonings for believing in AA as FS?

 

[Anna was Franziska]

As for von Kleist, AA was the one who called him a liar.

AA has no room to call anyone that name.

But your rebuttals are usually: I don't believe it.

And what do you do but come in calling everyone involved a liar or asking for 'proof' meaning, guess what, YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT.

What you missed here is that much of what is in contention here came from Clara, not the 'baron.' It looks like perhaps AA and Clara made up the original version in the asylum and the story changed when she went to Von Kliest's. Rathlef, a writer, perfected the final version you see today, however, the old original versions need to be considered to see just how much her story changed over time, proving even more how false it all was!

Clara said AA was drugged and thrown in the canal. Clara said she was in Paris first. Why did AA later decide to drop these parts of the story? There is also a lot of conflicting info on her 'rescuers' and the baby. The story appeared to be in much confusion and disarray until Rathlef used her common sense and professional writing skills to come up with a final draft. However it belonged in the fiction section of the libarary, not history!

I am so frustrated, and aching to discuss this with anyone who will look at it realistically and objectively!

 

[ChatNoir]

AA has no room to call anyone that name.

And why not? We already have opposing testimony to his date for the birth of AA's son.

And what do you do but come in calling everyone involved a liar or asking for 'proof' meaning, guess what, YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT.

No, I do not call everyone involved a liar, only the ones who obviously were liars.

What you missed here is that much of what is in contention here came from Clara, not the 'baron.' It looks like perhaps AA and Clara made up the original version in the asylum and the story changed when she went to Von Kliest's.

And sadly, we do not have Clara's original letter to back anything of this up. It was burned with Gilliard's papers, remember?

Rathlef, a writer, perfected the final version you see today, however, the old original versions need to be considered to see just how much her story changed over time, proving even more how false it all was!

Rathlef only wrote down what AA told her. As to the rescue story, she uses the letter from Inspector Grünberg to back it up. She also has a lot of signed statements from witnesses, doctors and others. And she did not have to burn any of it.

Clara said AA was drugged and thrown in the canal. Clara said she was in Paris first. Why did AA later decide to drop these parts of the story?

Where is the proof that she wote this at all? There was a reason for Gilliard's burning of evidence.

There is also a lot of conflicting info on her 'rescuers' and the baby. The story appeared to be in much confusion and disarray until Rathlef used her common sense and professional writing skills to come up with a final draft. However it belonged in the fiction section of the libarary, not history!

The witness Sarscha Gregorian gave the date of 12/5/1918 as the day AA crossed the Dniestr. AA herself said that the baby was born in autumn of 1919, but she herself could not remember the exact date.

I am so frustrated, and aching to discuss this with anyone who will look at it realistically and objectively!

Anybody out there?

 

[ChatNoir]

A little note about Harriet von Rathlef-Keilmann's manuscript:

For a whole year I nursed the invalid day and night. During this period I noted down all her utterances in the hope that the material thus compiled would induce those most closely concerned to interest themselves in the fate of the unknown woman and to acknowledge her.
In the autumn of 1926, I sent all my material to Copenhagen through the Danish Embassy, accompanied by a letter addressed to the Grand Duchess Olga, in which I requested her to read my manuscript, and to try to persuade the Dowager-Empress Maria Feodorovna to read it also. After a brief interval my manuscript was returned, and I learned from Mr. Zahle, the Danish Ambassador, that the Grand Duchess Olga had read only the chapter dealing with her own visit to the invalid, of which she found the account quite correct. As her knowledge of German was slight, she had not read the rest. It was not stated whether the Dowager-Empress had read it or not, and it was not until later that I learned that it had never been brought to her notice at all.

 

[Menarue]

AnnawasF. Just a question. This is translated from the French. The unknown one is "inconnu" ? Just out of curiosity. Is that what they called the woman in all the writings? That shows really how they thought of her and is interesting. In fact all those writings you have posted are very interesting indeed.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

AnnawasF. Just a question. This is translated from the French. The unknown one is "inconnu" ? Just out of curiosity. Is that what they called the woman in all the writings? That shows really how they thought of her and is interesting. In fact all those writings you have posted are very interesting indeed.

I don't know for sure, I'll ask the man who did the translating. I do know that in the asylum and in Berlin she was called "Fraulein Unbekannt" again 'unknown' if that means anything.

One thing I am very curious about is who were the mysterious people who kept following her around supposed to be, and why was this dramatic storyline omitted from the final version of the escape story? If they were so horrible that she had to flee Romania to Paris, and then Berlin, where they found her anyway, drugged her and threw her in the canal!? It's never mentioned who they were and why they were after her. While googling I found a French site that called them 'relatives', so was she claiming Romanovs were chasing her? Wouldn't the Bolsheviks have been a lot more believable? She never specified who it was and what they wanted, other than, presumably, her to be dead. This version contradicts directly with the one where she left her child and came immediately and tearfully to Berlin in search of "Aunt Irene."

It's my guess that Rathlef, a professional writer, is the one who perfected the final version that became the one everyone knows today, though it was not the original. The first version sounds like something she and Clara made up in the asylum, it was changed a little at the Von Kliest's and again by Rathlef, perhaps trying to make it sound more acceptable to the general public in her newspaper stories about Anderson's plight.

The "Paris" storyline was also left out. This, of course, makes no logical sense at all, since if she were the real AN, she would have stayed in Paris, where she would have known many people. Gilliard presumed that Anderson and Clara had added the Paris episode to fit in with the story from the Berlin Illustrater, the magazine that began the idea for the claim. "Lebt eine Zarentochter?" ("Is One of the Tsar's Daughters Alive?") the cover story from that issue, told a tale that Anastasia had gone to Paris. Therefore, they had to include a stop in Paris into their invented tale.

 

[AGRBear]

To put it kindly, this just plain isn't so. It's a reality that FS remained a factor all along and ended up being her true identity. Look at Berenberg Gossler, he was using FS years after Doris 'ran out the door.' You've tried that dog too many times, he won't fetch.



That may be what you see, but that's not who you're looking at.




If she was lying, or mixed up, what does that mean? Nothing! It didn't happen, and if her shaky word is all we have that's not much! Come on and get real, as much attention as she got after her claim started with Clara do you really believe if she was AN she just sat there in an asylum all that time knowing who she was and allowing herself to be treated like a crazy peasant? Please, think through this.



Yes they did. His name was Drescher. I have names and dates.

The Berlin police department eventually admitted they had decided to go along with Darmstadt's identification, and Heinz Drescher of Berlin Police Headquarters said that he had signed certain documents saying that identity has been established. "According to the material we have from the Haus-und-Vermoegensverwalten of the former Grand Duke of Hesse, and from various notices in the press, the alleged Grand Duchess Anastasia of Russia, is, in reality, Franziska Schanzkowska, born on 16.12.96 in Borowihlas, and this is supposedly proved definitively."
...[in part]..

No, the Berlin police department didn't admit they believed AA was FS. The police department continued to believe FS was murdered by Grossmann. There was one lone policeman whom people claim signed some document but the document either vanished like so many things have or never exsisted. And this was when, the 1940s? If you have a copy of this document, I and others would like to see it. As for the newspapers, which you've claimed earlier that the Romanov's attorney was bias and claimed she was GD Anastasia, I guess this wasn't entirely true, because you've just given us an example that some claimed she was FS. This shoots down what the Romanov's lawyer's claimed.

AGRBear

 

[Anna was Franziska]

And why not? We already have opposing testimony to his date for the birth of AA's son

More like conflicting reports. But considering he was fake anyway, there is no right date.

... AA herself said that the baby was born in autumn of 1919, but she herself could not remember the exact date.

No wonder since it didn't happen.

And sadly, we do not have Clara's original letter to back anything of this up. It was burned with Gilliard's papers, remember?

It's published in the book. Maybe Berenberg-Gossler had a copy in his memoirs.

Rathlef only wrote down what AA told her. As to the rescue story, she uses the letter from Inspector Grünberg to back it up.

Then explain why it changed so many times?

The witness Sarscha Gregorian gave the date of 12/5/1918 as the day AA crossed the Dniestr.

Chat- psst- the trip NEVER HAPPENED.

 

[ChatNoir]

Invented tale, indeed. From Peter Kurth's book:

But Constantine Savitch - who also disappeared at the end of the twenties - was not content to let the matter rest. In 1929 he, "the Representative of the Head of the House of Romanov," teamed up with Pierre Gilliard, "the Representative of the Grand Duke of Hesse," as coauthor of The False Anastasia, the vicious, vituperative book that was meant to put and end to Anastasia's "career" and simultaneously to annihilate Harriet von Rahtlef, the woman Gilliard now described as Anastasia's "impresario."
What a lot of work must have gone into The False Anastasia! What misplaced concern over a "poor, highly strung invalid" with an idee fixe. But Gilliard and Savitch had only been carrying out the wishes of their masters, two of the most unlikely collaborators in the annals of royalty. Ernest Louis of Hesse and Kyril of Russia had both been married to the same woman - Grand Duchess Victoria Feodorovna, who had left the one to marry the other - and were, understandably, not on speaking terms Anastasia, who succeeded in uniting them against all odds, eventually declared both of these princes to be "creatures."