Romanovs and Russian History


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I guess the word wasn't so much conclusions, but that I thought they made the incidents of OTMA and the Rus and then Marie and the guard more important than they really were. I agree FOTR did bring a lot of new stuff to light. I don't have the book in front of me, but when I do I will look it up and say specifically what they said about the OTMA and Rus incident and then Marie and the guard. Marie and the guard is also mentioned in Rappaport's new book, and her source for the Marie and the guard incident was the Yurovsky note, which as far as I recall was where FOTR got it as well. I read the book 5 years ago though.
 
Interesting. I believe that they were raising questions about it. I have "The Romanovs and Mr. Gibbes" and the book raises that question as well. What happened, we don't know. Probably never will. . .
 
I don't think we will ever know either. I have never read the Romanovs and Mr. Gibbes. How good is it? I didn't know it mentioned so much stuff about their last days. I'll look it up. Have you read the book by Helen Rappaport on the Romanovs published this year ( winter)? It's interesting to compare it to FOTR.
 
Grace Angel said:
I don't think we will ever know either. I have never read the Romanovs and Mr. Gibbes. How good is it? I didn't know it mentioned so much stuff about their last days. I'll look it up. Have you read the book by Helen Rappaport on the Romanovs published this year ( winter)? It's interesting to compare it to FOTR.
Click to expand...
Have not.I'll have to hold it at the library. I am quite behind on all the reading I want to do! :nonono:
 
I´m amazed nobody has mentioned The Romanovs: Love, power and tragedy by Alexander Bokhanov yet. The book is quite expensive, but it has to be one of the best publications ever. Hundreds and hundreds of pictures, full of accurate information, wonderfully heavy and sooooooo good.
 
There is a new book about Serge called, "the Russian Riddle" by Tamar Anolic. It's available at Eurohistory.com at their bookstore. I got the flyer with my magazine yesterday and the book looks interesting. I'll have to start saving up for it.
 
I have just purchased a copy of Moscow, Splendours of the Romanovs which was published to coincide with the exhibition at the Grimaldi Centre (now transfered to Russia). It is a lovely book - beautifully illustrated - but with an extensive text in the form of a series of essays featuring for example the splendours of the court Life, Russian jewellery & imperial commands & an extensive photographic record of th elast days of the Romanov family. The really good news is that Amazon are selling it a considerably reduced price to the original.
 
Katrianna said:
There is a new book about Serge called, "the Russian Riddle" by Tamar Anolic. It's available at Eurohistory.com at their bookstore. I got the flyer with my magazine yesterday and the book looks interesting. I'll have to start saving up for it.
Click to expand...
I haven´t heard of this book. Isn´t this a novel that is Romanov fiction?
 
I've just acquired a new book about the Romanovs entitled, "The Fate of the Romanovs" I can't remember the author at the moment, and it is quite thick, but it looks very good.
 
redrose_2121 said:
I've just acquired a new book about the Romanovs entitled, "The Fate of the Romanovs" I can't remember the author at the moment, and it is quite thick, but it looks very good.
Click to expand...
Greg King and Penny Wilson. I blog with them on another forum. They are hard at work on another bio. this time depicting the mystery of Anna Anderson and Franziska Schanowska. Looks like publishing has been delayed and will be put until this fall, I believe.
 
:previous:
I hope to buy this book, it has to be a fascinating read.:flowers:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
these are really good books:

Last Days of the Romanovs: Tragedy at Ekaterinburg by Helen Rappaort
Royal Russia: The Private Albums of the Russian Imperial Family

these next two are historical fiction books that stay pretty close to the truth only with a little bit of romance added to it.

Anastasia's Secret by Susanne Dunlap
The Romanov Connection by William Green
 
AnastasiaEvidence said:
I haven´t heard of this book. Isn´t this a novel that is Romanov fiction?
Click to expand...


No, it's nonfiction. I've read that it has a lot of already familiar information in it though, and nothing much that is new. I haven't read it though.
 
The new book “The Resurrection of the Romanovs..." by G.King and P.Wilson

WHAT I LEARNED AND UNDERSTOOD FROM COMMUNICATION WITH GREG KING
That's what I Learned and Understood from Communication with Greg King.
(about “The Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson, and the World's Greatest Royal Mystery” by G.King and P. Wilson)

I must say at the outset that while I have not read the new book of Greg King, and Penny Wilson (my English is so-so), but since the end of December 2010 (and until the end of January 2011), I daily actively communicated with Greg King on their web-forum ColdHarbor (my English is sufficient for this :) and we discussed about this book. I'll briefly lay out my conclusions below:

1. Of course, the authors have done a lot of research (archives) - I give them their due in connection with this great work, and I agreed with some of their conclusions on several themes. However, they decided to ignore the fact that some files (Hesse's archives) were created under the control of the most ardent enemies of Anna Anderson (under the control of "Uncle Ernie" and his lawyers). As I understand it, the book don't contains no one critical word about Hesse's archive (not even talking about a critical analysis of each document from this archive).

2. Authors rejected (without good reason) many evidence against Franziska Shanzkowska (hereafter FS) and in favor AA's self-identification. For example, they are (without any basis) rejected the recognition of the Berlin police the killing of FS (Grossmann, at 1920), and the authors (without a valid reason) considered the version that the Berlin Police did a statement about the identification of AA as FS - all this is merely a by their “BELIEF” and their “PRESUMPTION” - as G. King himself wrote on web-forum ColdHarbor (further abbr. CH)...
Another example: the authors reject (without any reason) the reports of five well known German professional psychiatrists (made by them in 1925 and 1927) that they exclude any kind of fraud or hypnosis in AA claims to be Anastasia ("Anastasia. The riddle of Anna Anderson" by Peter Kurth \ in Russian, p .103, 104, on my reverse translation \).
In particular, Dr. Bonhoeffer wrote:
"Her posture, facial expressions and elegance in manner of speaking suggests that she derives from an educated family ... She probably grew up surrounded by a great princess, she was a daughter of an (military) officer or some sort of a court of the tsar's family ... She could not take over all of the books or stories of other people. " ("Anastasia. The riddle of Anna Anderson" by Peter Kurth \ in Russian, p.103, 104 \).
In addition, I cite below the evidences of psychiatrist from sanatorium "Shtillehaus” in Oberstdorf, where AA was in the autumn and winter of 1927 (" Anastasia. The riddle of Anna Anderson "by Peter Kurth \ in Russian, p. 150-153). Dr. E. Saathof (Chapter the sanatorium) in the final diagnosis wrote:
"It is absolutely impossible that Frau Tchaikovsky - an impostor." Dr. Saathof also wrote also: "I consider it impossible that this woman was from the lower classes of society ... I think it is absolutely impossible that this woman was deliberately played the role of the other woman. Moreover, the observation of her behavior as a whole does not contradict her assertion that she was the one who calls herself."
The conclusions others German psychiatrists and psychoanalysts were the same. These diagnoses are particularly significant given that the coincidence psychiatric diagnoses belonging to one national school, rarely exceeds 60-65% ("Diagnosis in psychiatry," Morozov GV Shumsky N G. http:// www.solarys-info.ru/ articles / article.aspx? Id = 6432 ).
I asked Mr. King (on web-forum CH) whether he knew of several opposite testimony of psychiatrists or psychoanalysts, or someone from physicians Anna Tchaikovsky? Or even one? - how you can easily guess, Greg King did not answer me this question.

I could cite many more such examples of apparent bias of this book (Greg King and Penny Wilson), but will limit the foregoing. Several customers on Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.com (in their Reviews) wrote:
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: The Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson, and the World's Greatest Royal Mystery
Amazon.com: LittleNell8's review of The Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasi...
Amazon.co.uk: Customer Reviews: The Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson, and the World's Greatest Royal Mystery

3. G.King in the book and on the web forum (ColdHarbor) tried many times to present Dr. Sergei Rudnev as only a narrow specialist in one area of medicine (treatment of bone tuberculosis), and even as an inexperienced physician and/or a liar.
Probably, G. King did not bother to carefully look for information about this famous Russian doctor.
In fact, the high medical level Dr. Sergei Mikhailovitch Rudnev confirmed not only that he was famous in Russia and managed hospitals in Russia and in Germany (as well as the fact that he was caused by the Bolsheviks for the treatment of their leader Lenin), but also the fact that in 1925 he had cured AA in a very difficult situation for her, when many thought she would die soon. She died in 1984 and she was grateful to Dr. Rudnev all his life. In addition:
I quote the facts about Rudnev from the book "Hippocratic Oath" by Corresponding Member of the RAS G.Domogatsy:
Georgy Zatsepin
"My father told me that the well-known surgeon Sergey Rudnev enjoyed the reputation of a brave doctor who takes even the most difficult, almost hopeless operation. … In the 1910's Dr. Rudnev built own clinic. In 1917 / 1918 Rudnev treated (in his clinic) the famous Russian General Alexander Brusilov".
Dr. Rudnev was also privat-docent at Moscow University: Óêàçàòåëü èì¸í:*Ð // senar.ru
A privat-docent - a position in higher education in Russia (until 1917) and Germany. Position privat-docent could occupy only a man with a PhD.
Dr. Rudnev was also a director of own hospital and the CHIEF surgeon of the Red Cross hospital in Moscow: "" -
All these facts disproves all of obviously biased attempt of G.King to discredit Dr. Sergei Rudnev
As I understand it, King & Wilson recognized that wounds and injuries (on the head, the body and legs) of Anna Anderson were a much more severe than injuries FS (which she received as a result of a squabble in 1918) - this is why King & Wilson are trying to discredit Dr. Rudnev (who diagnosed AA in 1925). But they "forget" (?) that these wounds and injuries (of AA) were also described in March 1920 at a clinic in Daldorfe.
Furthermore, as correctly wrote one reviewer on Amazon.com (see link on LittleNell8's review above):«Am I to believe that when Franziska Schanzkowska jumped into the Landwehr Canal she shrank whilst she was in the water? Franziska was taller than Doris Wingender, who in turn was taller than the claimant [AA]. Franziska took size 39 shoe size, and when she came out of the water her shoe size had shrunk to 36? And acquired there and then those unforgettable eyes? Am I to believe this? I think not.»

4. DNA-testing IS NOT “A SACRED COW”!
Unfortunately, Greg King (and all FS's supporters and fans) does not understand some very important things related to the validity of evidences and tests in the balance of probability theory (such as Likelihood ratio, hereafter LR).
DNA test is not “a sacred cow”, and Likelihood ratio (LR) of other evidences and tests may be far more convincing (much more) than the LR of DNK-test.
Meanwhile, for a proper understanding of DNA'LR (liklihood ratio of DNA) is necessary to know at least the simplest elementary foundations of probability theory. Greg puts the DNA-testing as "the cornerstone", but does not understand basic things that are needed to compare the LR of DNA tests with LR of other tests.
See in detail posts 154 and 155 at:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f80/dna-and-the-law-17723-8.html#post1200825
or http://proza.ru/2011/01/29/982 (part 4)

Of course, I think (I hope and I want to believe) that Greg King and Penny Wilson wrote this book in a state of sincere (honest) mistake (and being blinded a glare of the "sacred cow" of DNA tests in 1994 and 2010). But this does not change the essence in full and the essence of their book «The Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson, and the World's Greatest Royal Mystery».
In any case, in fact, this book not only has some historical errors, but in King&Wilson's efforts to discredit all the witnesses in favour of Anna Anderson and the expert witnesses at the Hamburg trial, they discredit themselves.

Boris Romanov
Ph.D (Candidate of Technical Sciences), writer

P.S. Those readers who know little about the history of Anna Anderson (Anna-Anastasia), I advise you to first read the articles on this theme on the page of Vladimir Momot:
Âëàäèìèð Ìîìîò / Ïðîçà.ðó - íàöèîíàëüíûé ñåðâåð ñîâðåìåííîé ïðîçû
(Anna-Anastasia (, The Night without a Dawn ()
and, how GD Anastasia was rescued during the night July 17, 1918 :
http://proza.ru/2011/02/04/954
 
Last edited:
BorisRom said:
As I understand it, King & Wilson recognized that wounds and injuries (on the head, the body and legs) of Anna Anderson were a much more severe than injuries FS (which she received as a result of a squabble in 1918) - this is why King & Wilson are trying to discredit Dr. Rudnev (who diagnosed AA in 1925). But they "forget" (?) that these wounds and injuries (of AA) were also described in March 1920 at a clinic in Daldorfe.
Click to expand...
In addition, I quote below an excerpt from the review on Amazon.com (by "chocolate lover"):
Amazon.com: chocolate lover's review of The Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasi...
An example of K and W's arguments being unconvincing is regarding the supposed attack on Fransiska during her time working as a farm worker. They are trying to put forward their argument of where the serious injuries (later seen on Anna Anderson, but never before noted on Fransiska) could have occurred. They regularly note in their footnotes their source as a summary by Herr Meyer called 'Evolution of Fransiska Schanskowska to Anastasia'in the Darmstadt Staatarchiv - but I can find no mention anywhere in their book of who he is - and why his 'evidence' should be believed.
The attacker is unnamed, the weapon is guessed at... presumably there were no witnesses, nor hospital records to convince us, nor quotes from fellow workers... it all seems a bit of a 'theory' put forward by someone trying to fill in a few gaps (and create a few injuries on Fransiska, just for good measure). I noticed a lot of inconsistencies in this part... especially that the attack supposedly happened in early Autumn, and Fransiska turned up back at the Wingenders that same Autumn, where Doris is supposed to have noted that Fransiska maybe had some wounds, especially 'the mark on her head'(!) Is this supposed to really account for the broken upper, lower jaws and nose area which we have been told (in this book!) were absolutely definite injuries on Anna Anderson. And the scar from an injury straight through Anna Anderson's foot - which K and W imply happened during this 'farm attack' on Fransiska - had it healed so quickly that she did not limp a little, or complain of pain from it?? The Wingenders never even mentioned it.
This episode/ chapter concludes by saying that Fransiska's work had ended in violence, and she had no hope so decided to throw herself in the canal.... despite K and W previously having told us that (since the supposed attack in 1918) Fransiska had worked another whole season at the same farm (in 1919), and had actually only gone back to the Wingenders because the land work season had ended in the November!!! This chapter is just so UNCONVINCING!

Incidentally, during the First World War in Germany there were more than 3 million prisoners were Russian soldiers. Hundreds of thousands were used in agricultural work. It is also known that the Russian prisoners (soldiers) wanted to get to the farm work and appreciated this opportunity, and they were afraid of losing it. So, it would be very doubtful that a Russian solider would beat up a German woman for fear of being shot the next day. Also, I wondering if there were any stats on how many Russian soldiers were known to have beaten up a German while in a camp like Gut-Freid Estate?
Is it known whether at least a few cases (or at least else one) when Russian prisoners (soldiers of WWI) attacked and have beaten German woman?

I have asked these questions to G. King (on web-forum ColdHarbor). The only thing that supporters of FS could answer me was this:
«Doris Wingender's statement in 1927 that refers to "damaged teeth, especially those in her upper front jaw, black and at jagged angles." (ROTR, p. 286)»

My conclusions:
Neither G. King nor other FS's supporters could not give any other known cases of beating a German woman (by Russian prisoners, soldiers). It is clear that the Russian prisoners were afraid of losing their jobs in the agricultural farms, and they feared severe punishment for such offenses. Therefore, it is very doubtful that the Russian prisoner could beat FS up to such wounds and injuries which had AA in the reality. "Damaged teeth, especially those in her upper front jaw, black and at jagged angles." (P. 286) - it is all that FS's supporters can inform .
Therefore, this hypothesis of King & Wilson (that FS had ostensibly the same wounds and injuries as AA \Anastasia\) - this fancy hypothesis is bursting like soap bubble.

BorisRom said:
Authors rejected (without good reason) many evidence against Franziska Shanzkowska (hereafter FS) and in favor AA's self-identification. For example, they are (without any basis) rejected the recognition of the Berlin police the killing of FS (Grossmann, at 1920), and the authors (without a valid reason) considered the version that the Berlin Police did a statement about the identification of AA as FS - all this is merely a by their “BELIEF” and their “PRESUMPTION” - as G. King himself wrote on web-forum ColdHarbor
Click to expand...
In addition, for all FS's supporters another truly deadly fact: FS (Franziska Shanzkowska!) had been a patient at the Dalldorf hospital four months in 1917. And then she (FS?! - according King&Wilson) came back in 1920 as Froilein Unbekant! And noone recognized her! How was it possible? - In 1917 FS was 21 years old in 1920 - 23 \ 24. Teenager aged 13-16 years, can significantly change a face and other part of body up to 20 years, but this is not that case: FS could not change over the 2.5 years (21-24) so that no one knew her there!

ROTR King&Wilson p. 285: At the beginning of 1917, Franziska was transferred to the State Institue for Welfare and Care in Berlin's
Wittenau distric, Dalldorf. She stayed there four months. (see also http://agrbear.hyperboards.com/index.php?action=view_topic&topic_id=242)

End of March 1920 AA ( Froilein Unbekant!) was sent to Dalldorf Asylum.
17 June 1920 AA was fingerprinted and photographed. These photographs were sent from Berlin out to Stuttgart, Brunswick, Hamurg, Munich, Dresden... (Weimar Republic). Places in Berlin, which probably included FS asylum where she spent some time more than once, were checked throughly....
http://agrbear.hyperboards.com/index.php?action=view_topic&topic_id=19&start=1

From the beginning of Autumn 1921, when AA announced she as GD Anastasia, and especially since the beginning of 1922, she attracted
attention in Dalldorfe. Including, apparently, she attracted attention of the doctors and nurses - including, obviously, those doctors and
nurses who worked in Dalldorfe in 1917 (when FS was there for four months).
All this taken together does not leave absolutely no doubt that if AA was FS, she would be being identified as FS:
-- or at registering in Dalldorfe in March-April 1920,
-- or when trying to identify her persona and thorough inspection in July 1920,
-- or when her persona began to attract attention in the winter 1921\1922 and spring 1922,
-- or in any other day of her two-year stay in Dalldorfe.
All this taken together makes a once more bursted soap bubble from fancy hypothesis King and Wilson that AA could be not recognized and identified as FS in Daldorfe.
 
Last edited:
Eurohistory.com has just come out with The Grand Dukes by Arturo Beeche, it's a book about the Grand Dukes of Russia and their lives, it's a companion to The Grand Duchesses. I plan to order it when I have extra money, the reviews have been very good.
 
thank you Katrianna for the link! he have a lot of interesting books!
 
Your very welcome, it is a great link. I can spend a lot of time there browsing.
 
A good book on the romanovs to read is "the Romanov prophecy" by Steve Barry
It maybe fiction but is still a good read as well as "the romanovs:tragedy in ekaterinburg"
 
I just love the story of the life at the Russian imperial court and also the daughters of the lady czar the beautiful grand duchesses Olga ,Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia who were OTMA together and called Olishka, Tatya, mashka and shizvik or Ana. Does anyone know if any books where only the 4 are the only characters?
 
Biographer/Historian Carolly Erickson

I have the book The Last Tsarina by Carolly Erickson and I see she writes quite a few books on royal families. Has anyone read anything by her?
 
lavenderagate said:
I have the book The Last Tsarina by Carolly Erickson and I see she writes quite a few books on royal families. Has anyone read anything by her?
Click to expand...

I have and read the last czarina, the bio on empress Josephine and the hidden diary of Marie Antoinette, I love all her books and hope to get more soon .
 
Interesting books about Russia - and Russian Royal family

Hello, friends!!!

Where do you take the information about Russian history?
Especialyy about the Romanovs and the Rurikovitchi
Which sources and literature do you prefer?

I had found some interesting things in the free Research Library, for example, that:

reslib.com/book/Encyclopedia_of_Russian_History__Gacl_

but I am interested in more sources..

thank you!!!
 
I believe that most good Romanov books are written by Robert k massie and also Greg king.
I have also read and have the books by Robert Alexander based historically on the imperial family : the Romanov bride (on Ella's marriage to Sergei), rasputin's daughter, the kitchen boy and I love them all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately, I find Massie a bore. I'm not even going to look at his work on Catherine II. I have his work on Dreadnaught and honestly, I feel a root canal would be more interesting.
GD24, you might try Christopher Warwick's book on Ella. it's a good read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
King Vittorio Amadeo II (1666-1732) and Spouses (Anne Marie d'Orléans & Anna Canalis)
Replies
2
Views
393
Blog Real
Blog Real
R
King of Andorra
Replies
5
Views
1K
Blog Real
Blog Real
Lady M
Newb here!
Replies
5
Views
508
doro
doro
T
Constitutional and Dynastic Matters in the Norwegian Monarchy
Replies
6
Views
979
Tatiana Maria
T
Blog Real
King Magnus IV/VII (1316-1374) and Queen Blanche of Namur
Replies
1
Views
534
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom