Anna Anderson's claim to be Grand Duchess Anastasia


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
She would still have remembered a toe that bent over in the middle and formed a bunion.

Perhaps she didn't have 'bunions' until she stood all that time on her feet at the factories where she worked.

The shoe size was given by FS's mother to Frau Rathlef Keilmann's private detective.
I still remember this being told elsewhere, maybe even by you, as a stepmother who never knew her well, do you have a passage from the book? Why do you trust her PI and think Ernie's was crooked?

But also, shoe size proves nothing because people get it wrong and don't always know and feet change size and shoes run large or small. The shoes are silly beside the DNA.

We won't really know until her birth certificate is found.
Well stop hiding it!:lol:

No really it may never have existed, not all births are recorded (My Aunt Mae, born in 1924 in North Carolina, is a perfect example, the only sibling of 12 not to have one) but that doesn't mean at all she's not family. Again, it's an insult to the scientists involved to think they'd be too stupid to check it out.
 
Perhaps she didn't have 'bunions' until she stood all that time on her feet at the factories where she worked.

According to some of the medical reports it was so pronounced it had to have been present from birth.

I still remember this being told elsewhere, maybe even by you, as a stepmother who never knew her well, do you have a passage from the book? Why do you trust her PI and think Ernie's was crooked?

I am at work (!) without my books. I have found no inconsistensies in Frau Rathlef Keilmann's detective's work, but a lot in Martin Knopf's.

But also, shoe size proves nothing because people get it wrong and don't always know and feet change size and shoes run large or small. The shoes are silly beside the DNA.

Shoe size does not make or break the case, but it is there, no matter how much you try to downplay it.

No really it may never have existed, not all births are recorded (My Aunt Mae, born in 1924 in North Carolina, is a perfect example, the only sibling of 12 not to have one) but that doesn't mean at all she's not family. Again, it's an insult to the scientists involved to think they'd be too stupid to check it out.

I think it was filmmaker Knott who tracked down Carl Maucher.
 
I've been saying for a while that talking to the Anna Anderson apologists is like dealing with creationists, and I see that quote-mining is another similarity.

I've been frustrated, in real life even, by people who insist the world is only 6,000 years old and that any scientific data proving things older is either wrong or 'the devil making you think that.' I heard one man rant on about how carbon dating was 'nothing' and didn't mean anything and if you believed in it you were going to hell. I also saw a mother tell a crying child in a public library that he couldn't check out a book on dinosaurs because the book 'lied' and about the Bible and was therefore evil. Even things carbon dated in the Holy Land are denied to be more than 6,000 by these people. Are they really that backward and uninformed or are they really convinced hell awaits if they believe otherwise? The strange thing is I don't think the Bible ever even says anything about 6,000 years, it's just an estimate somebody came up with allegedly tracing back the 'begats' and estimating the generations.


You know, throughout this discussion, you've been awfully fond of stating things as hard fact that aren't.

Yes very true, and very frustrating:bang:

I just don't like the implication of incompetence, dishonesty, or both on the part of the scientists, especially since there's no evidence for it.

It's awful the allegations and insinuations brought against the scientists, as well as Martha Jefferson Hospital, the Queen, and now even Putin, with NO evidence at all other than the wishful thinking to hold out hope AA could still be AN. It's really wrong. Ironically, I have been repeatedly accused of 'slandering' Gleb Botkin for suggesting he helped her with her 'memories' by these same people.
 
...[in part]...
All this is useless speculation, there is no proof Maucher is not related to FS, and the scientists were sure of this and used him for a sample donor.

Once, again, you are making incorrect assumptions. Here is what Dr. Ginther wrote to Curious One.

>>You also asked about the relationship of Gertrude to Margarete Ellerick. I never wanted to know any more than necessary about any sample because I feared that knowledge might prejudice my result. I do not remember being told anything about Margarete’s family.

I hope this answers your questions.<<

AGRBear
 
Dr. Ginter was not one of the scientists hired or enlisted to do the testing. What he did was an additional test at another time. Did anyone ever ask Gill, Stoneking or Melton?

The biggest question remains is, IF HE'S NOT RELATED WHY DID HIS DNA MATCH? What point do you mean to make here? Please explain.
 
It's awful the allegations and insinuations brought against the scientists, as well as Martha Jefferson Hospital, the Queen, and now even Putin, with NO evidence at all other than the wishful thinking to hold out hope AA could still be AN. It's really wrong. Ironically, I have been repeatedly accused of 'slandering' Gleb Botkin for suggesting he helped her with her 'memories' by these same people.

Such noble words coming from someone who calls Professor Otto Reche "a discredited Nazi".
 
Such noble words coming from someone who calls Professor Otto Reche "a discredited Nazi".

Well, he was a Nazi and he was discredited by his peers...

This is a commentary by someone who did extensive research on Reche and his work:
(I must) point out the scientific fallacies upon which your claims and evidence are based. Otto Reche is a good example of this - here we have a nazi by choice and inclination, whose work was so bad that persons such as Robert Procter, Hermann Graml, Edith Zerbin- Rudin, Stephen Gould and Robert Leakey have discredited it. I explained why in more than one post, as I explained why anthromorphic photo comparison is a subjective science with a narrow degree of scientific certainty, no matter how many graphs, charts and measurements he might have had. It doesn't matter how many graphs and measurements he had, if the foundation has been taken away, does it? Advances in the science of mtdna recovery alone, has proven that his foundational base, his sampling of "long headed Europeans" is false. among other factors such as age, the His photographic "proof" is also false - photo comparison cannot account for the thickness of muscle, fat, skin or bone,among other factors such as age,mechanics of photography and printing and other variables involved in photographic comparison.

There were several of these Nazi anthropologists who were revered at the time, but now criticized. On the history channel they tell of a team of them who traveled to Tibet in the 1930's and 'proved' by facial life masks that the Tibetians were really descendants of aryan Germans from the Rhine Valley. This was one of Hitler's pet theories, however, it is now known to be false. So these Nazis were not as respectable, reliable and accurate as Anderson supporters will have you believe. Therefore, doubt is cast on their 'identification' of Anna Anderson being an 'identical twin' of Anastasia.
 
Well, he was a Nazi and he was discredited by his peers...

This is a commentary by someone who did extensive research on Reche and his work:
(I must) point out the scientific fallacies upon which your claims and evidence are based. Otto Reche is a good example of this - here we have a nazi by choice and inclination, whose work was so bad that persons such as Robert Procter, Hermann Graml, Edith Zerbin- Rudin, Stephen Gould and Robert Leakey have discredited it. I explained why in more than one post, as I explained why anthromorphic photo comparison is a subjective science with a narrow degree of scientific certainty, no matter how many graphs, charts and measurements he might have had. It doesn't matter how many graphs and measurements he had, if the foundation has been taken away, does it? Advances in the science of mtdna recovery alone, has proven that his foundational base, his sampling of "long headed Europeans" is false. among other factors such as age, the His photographic "proof" is also false - photo comparison cannot account for the thickness of muscle, fat, skin or bone,among other factors such as age,mechanics of photography and printing and other variables involved in photographic comparison.

There were several of these Nazi anthropologists who were revered at the time, but now criticized. On the history channel they tell of a team of them who traveled to Tibet in the 1930's and 'proved' by facial life masks that the Tibetians were really descendants of aryan Germans from the Rhine Valley. This was one of Hitler's pet theories, however, it is now known to be false. So these Nazis were not as respectable, reliable and accurate as Anderson supporters will have you believe. Therefore, doubt is cast on their 'identification' of Anna Anderson being an 'identical twin' of Anastasia.

Wouldn't it be awfully nice if you could name your sources.
 
Otto Reche was a Nazi and promolgated the theory that Blood Types were A, B and O and each was assigned to Europeans, Asians or Native Americans, but was mongrelized due to intermarriage. He was a great promoter of the Ayran race nonsense. He was arrested by the Americans after the war and spent 16 months in prison. If you would like to see some of his collegues writings about him, try When Medicine went Mad: BioEthics and the Holocaust by Arthur Caplan or From Racism to Genocide: Anthropology of the Third Reich, by Gretchen Schafft. Sorry, Reche represented a very dark side of Germany.
 
Dr. Ginter was not one of the scientists hired or enlisted to do the testing. What he did was an additional test at another time. ...[in part]...

The two samples were sent by the court to two different labs. One was Dr. Gill and the other was Dr. King of Berkeley who turned the testing over to Dr. Ginther, who did the same testing as Dr. Gill. Because Dr. Gill completed his testing first and published what he found first, Dr. King never published Dr. Ginther's results. She had turned her attention to breast cancer and lost interest in the tests Ginther had done. Later, Ginther acquired permission from Dr. King and continued other tests involving AA, Maucher, Margaret, etc. ....

Massie's book, The Final Chapter goes into more detail about the other tests. Dr. Ginther letter about all of this is on my forum, which you have read, since we've talked about this on AP and other forums. I assume you've forgotten these details.

I'm not near my book at the moment but will return with the page and the quote when I have a moment to do so.

AGRBear
 
The two samples were sent by the court to two different labs. One was Dr. Gill and the other was Dr. King of Berkeley who turned the testing over to Dr. Ginther, who did the same testing as Dr. Gill. Because Dr. Gill completed his testing first and published what he found first, Dr. King never published Dr. Ginther's results. She had turned her attention to breast cancer and lost interest in the tests Ginther had done. Later, Ginther acquired permission from Dr. King and continued other tests involving AA, Maucher, Margaret, etc. ....

Massie's book, The Final Chapter goes into more detail about the other tests. Dr. Ginther letter about all of this is on my forum, which you have read, since we've talked about this on AP and other forums. I assume you've forgotten these details.

I'm not near my book at the moment but will return with the page and the quote when I have a moment to do so.

AGRBear

Where did Dr King say this?
 
I didn't quote Dr. King. So, I'm not sure what you're asking me, Elspeth.

AGRBear
 
Otto Reche was a Nazi and promolgated the theory that Blood Types were A, B and O and each was assigned to Europeans, Asians or Native Americans, but was mongrelized due to intermarriage. He was a great promoter of the Ayran race nonsense. He was arrested by the Americans after the war and spent 16 months in prison. If you would like to see some of his collegues writings about him, try When Medicine went Mad: BioEthics and the Holocaust by Arthur Caplan or From Racism to Genocide: Anthropology of the Third Reich, by Gretchen Schafft. Sorry, Reche represented a very dark side of Germany.

And still he was chosen by the Hamburg court as their anthropological expert.
 
Found one of my old posts on AP which gives us the page in Massie's book where he talks about Ginther and Remy.

>>When looking for information, I had to read a few pages of Massie's THE ROMANOVS, THE FINAL CHAPTER.

In it, Massie tells us that Remy was looking for possible samples that would produce DNA p. 234:

Remy found a Professor Stefan Sadkuhler, who is is said, examined AA on 6 June 1951. He had drawn blood to see if AA was a carrier of hemophila... Sadkuhler gave Remy the slide which Remy broke in half. He sent one piece to Professor Herrmann and the other to Dr. Ginther. Apparently Herrmann was able to get some DNA and sent it to Ginther. And this is what Massie wrote and I quote:
"Ginther found that this DNA did not match the Hessian profile (that is, the doner of the blood was not related to Empress Alexandra), nor did it match the Schanzkowski profile as dervied from Margareth Ellerick." Then Massie talks about possible contamination, etc. etc..<<

Margareth Ellerick was Gertrude's daughter.

Within a few pages surrounding p. 234, Massie talks about Drs. King's and Ginther's role in all of this. Perhaps this is what you wanted to know Elspeth.
 
Last edited:
I didn't quote Dr. King. So, I'm not sure what you're asking me, Elspeth.

AGRBear

I'm asking how you know that the King-Ginther work wasn't published because of the prior publication of the Gill work. As opposed to not being published for some other reason.
 
Found one of my old posts on AP which gives us the page in Massie's book where he talks about Ginther and Remy.

>>When looking for information, I had to read a few pages of Massie's THE ROMANOVS, THE FINAL CHAPTER.

In it, Massie tells us that Remy was looking for possible samples that would produce DNA p. 234:

Remy found a Professor Stefan Sadkuhler, who is is said, examined AA on 6 June 1951. He had drawn blood to see if AA was a carrier of hemophila... Sadkuhler gave Remy the slide which Remy broke in half. He sent one piece to Professor Herrmann and the other to Dr. Ginther. Apparently Herrmann was able to get some DNA and sent it to Ginther. And this is what Massie wrote and I quote:
"Ginther found that this DNA did not match the Hessian profile (that is, the doner of the blood was not related to Empress Alexandra), nor did it match the Schanzkowski profile as dervied from Margareth Ellerick." Then Massie talks about possible contamination, etc. etc..<<

Margareth Ellerick was Gertrude's daughter.

Within a few pages surrounding p. 234, Massie talks about Drs. King's and Ginther's role in all of this. Perhaps this is what you wanted to know Elspeth.

He broke the slide in half? This wasn't a scientist working in a clean-room, right? This was a journalist or something? Lord, no wonder that sample was contaminated beyond repair.
 
It's a fact he signed it, this does not automatically make what he said in it a fact. The fact that he signed it is evidence for consideration with everything else on both sides.

No a brother wouldn't know all, and probably had not seen his sister's bare arms and legs(or even feet) since they were children playing in the creek.

I don't think there was a creek in Borowihlas ...:flowers:

(Sorry not sure of the spelling!)
 
No really it may never have existed, not all births are recorded (My Aunt Mae, born in 1924 in North Carolina, is a perfect example, the only sibling of 12 not to have one) but that doesn't mean at all she's not family. .

I find this interesting? Wasn't it a legal requirement? In the UK you've had a legal requirement to register your child's birth since about 1850 with the penalty of a fine if you didn't.

Or does it depend on the state?
 
Also, FS was NOT working alone in this area. There were other workers around her and the man who died. .

While we may assume so we really don't know for sure. .
It’s a munitions factory, in the middle of a war. I don’t think we are “assuming” when we say that they would not have been the only two people there. It would have been something like this -

http://firstworldwar.com/photos/graphics/gws_womenmunitionsfact_01.jpg

picture taken from
GWS - The Great War: The Standard History of the All Europe Conflict (volume four) edited by H. W. Wilson and J. A. Hammerton (Amalgamated Press, London 1915)
 
Originally Posted by AGRBear
The AEG doctor's report tells us that FS did not receive any serious wounds.

Where is this report, bear? Can you show us proof? A link? An article? The only 'source' of this alleged report is ONE person's post on another message board. The report was not and has not been seen anywhere, and until it does, how do we even know it exists.
Well we take it on trust. We’ve have been told it exists by a respected author who actually went to the places involved and did research, I am happy to accept this. You are sceptical and say you want further proof, that’s up to you. (personally I can’t wait for the day it is published!).

We have a report, recorded in BG's papers and Massie's book (as well as a website about history, and other books I cannot find to verify right now) that FS was indeed injured by pieces of the grenade when it exploded at the factory.

.

As we know, Massie got his info from Von Berenberg-Gossler. Where did the website (which one?) and other books get their info from? Probably Von Berenberg-Gossler again, but where did he get it from? Almost certainly from the Knopf stuff – everything seems to point back to him and he was hardly a disinterested party was he? If it was from other sources – witness testimony of people who were in the factory when the explosion occurred, staff at the hospital (to which as Chat points out, she wasn’t even sent to until at least a month after the explosion) or if any such evidence had actually been found by Knopf then it would have been produced by now..
 
Ferrymansdaughter, it's strange you would be so critical and doubtful of a piece of information that has been used and documented over many decades yet accept another's alleged existence sight unseen when no one can even produce a quote from it much less hard evidence. We have some very basic realities to go on- AA was FS, FS had scars. AA was not AN therefore she did not get the scars from "Ekaterinburg". AA was 99.9% FS therefore it's 'eminently likely' that she received those scars at the grenade factory. Still trying to prove AA to be AN simply isn't a valid position, regardless of these issues, due to the DNA testing.
 
I find this interesting? Wasn't it a legal requirement? In the UK you've had a legal requirement to register your child's birth since about 1850 with the penalty of a fine if you didn't.

Or does it depend on the state?

I really don't know. I believe it was 1913 when the US started requiring birth certificates, but I don't know the laws regarding them. All I know is that my aunt, unlike all of her siblings, didn't have one, and the court clerk accepted my great aunt's memory of Mae's birth as proof to give her one so she could file for Social Security. She's never had any trouble since then. (she was 61 then, she's now 83) If there was a law, it was too late to arrest her parents since they'd both been dead for years.
 
Ferrymansdaughter, it's strange you would be so critical and doubtful of a piece of information that has been used and documented over many decades yet accept another's alleged existence sight unseen when no one can even produce a quote from it much less hard evidence. We have some very basic realities to go on- AA was FS, FS had scars. AA was not AN therefore she did not get the scars from "Ekaterinburg". AA was 99.9% FS therefore it's 'eminently likely' that she received those scars at the grenade factory. Still trying to prove AA to be AN simply isn't a valid position, regardless of these issues, due to the DNA testing.

The information you refer to has no proof to back it up and I think the original source (ie Knopf) is highly suspect. As for the medical report, I see no reason to doubt its existence. The person who claims to have seen it has no reason to lie and their reputation would be ruined if they did. There MUST have been somekind of accident report and you can bet that if it said FS had injuries, Knopf would have published it PDQ.

Incidentally, in a police protocol dated April 1927 describing the first interview of Doris Wingender, Doris is quoted as saying that the explosion at AEG wasn't really that bad at all and that FS only had a breakdown because she had seen someone killed. Obviously it was fairly bad if someone was killed, but even Doris is saying here that FS wasn't injured, but suffered shock.
 
I really don't know. I believe it was 1913 when the US started requiring birth certificates, but I don't know the laws regarding them. All I know is that my aunt, unlike all of her siblings, didn't have one, and the court clerk accepted my great aunt's memory of Mae's birth as proof to give her one so she could file for Social Security. She's never had any trouble since then. (she was 61 then, she's now 83) If there was a law, it was too late to arrest her parents since they'd both been dead for years.


1913? Gosh that's late (but then you are a much younger country ....)
 
The information you refer to has no proof to back it up and I think the original source (ie Knopf) is highly suspect. As for the medical report, I see no reason to doubt its existence. The person who claims to have seen it has no reason to lie and their reputation would be ruined if they did. There MUST have been somekind of accident report and you can bet that if it said FS had injuries, Knopf would have published it PDQ.


Why is it suspect? Why don't you accept that Knopf was right, because he did turn out to be after all. I will not get into reasons I doubt the existence of the other report, only that it's never been produced or even quoted. The main thing is, AA had scars, she didn't get them in Ekaterinburg, but most likely from the grenade factory since she was FS and FS was near an explosion.

Incidentally, in a police protocol dated April 1927 describing the first interview of Doris Wingender, Doris is quoted as saying that the explosion at AEG wasn't really that bad at all and that FS only had a breakdown because she had seen someone killed.

Obviously it was fairly bad if someone was killed, but even Doris is saying here that FS wasn't injured, but suffered shock.

You know I am never ceased to be amazed at how quickly people like Doris and Gilliard you and Chat always call 'liars' suddenly become a reliable source if they say something you like instead of something you don't;) She wouldn't have to have been grievously injured internally to get the scars. My brother in law was in Viet Nam, and got a lot of schrapnel in his legs and partial hearing loss just being in the same area as some fellow Marines who were killed by a thrown grenade (sadly, the men killed were leaving to go home as their tour of duty was over) That would account for the strangely shaped scars.

If you want a wild guess theory, how about that FS got the scars escaping from Grossmann after he tried to cut her up and eat her?
 
If you want a wild guess theory, how about that FS got the scars escaping from Grossmann after he tried to cut her up and eat her?

Remember, AA had fractures to the upper and lower jaws, damage to the skull and signs of inner bleeding. She had a scar from a triangular bayonet through her foot, a scar that went right through her upper lip plus "other scars and mutilations." She also had a trough-like indentation behind her ear, as from a grazing bullet. Try to explain that kind of wounds from shrapnel. Also, according to her brother Felix, she did not go into the hospital until "later".
 
Oh that's right, she did have those more severe injuries. I was just guessing about the schrapnel, it must have been worse. The grenade is still the most likely suspect, regardless of various he said and she said comments. I would really like to get ahold of Knopf's, and BG's, papers because the answers surely lie there. The only thing we can totally rule out is her being AN and getting them in Ekaterinburg.
 
Oh that's right, she did have those more severe injuries. I was just guessing about the schrapnel, it must have been worse. The grenade is still the most likely suspect, regardless of various he said and she said comments. I would really like to get ahold of Knopf's, and BG's, papers because the answers surely lie there. The only thing we can totally rule out is her being AN and getting them in Ekaterinburg.

The "he said she said" happen to be medical reports and X-rays. Sorry. As for Knopf's papers, they probably went the same way as the clothes FS allegedly swapped with Doris Wingender. Nobody ever saw them again. And quite frankly, I doubt even Knopf saw them himself.
 
Sounds like Doris was as inept as the LAPD in the OJ case. But AA was still FS and OJ is still guilty.

If we're going to go way out on limbs and guess things, I have a theory, too. Maybe the reason Doris disappeared is because AA found her again and bribed her to shut up and she'd pay her off when she won her case. You never know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom