Anna Anderson's claim to be Grand Duchess Anastasia

[ChatNoir]

If you accept his version, and the things the AA supporters claimed years ago which is where he got his info, Kurth's book based mostly on those things and has nothing from the 'other side.' He was clearly making a case for AA to be AN (though not nearly as blatant as Lovell!)

As far as I can see, Kurth's book is the most researched one on the market regarding this case. To say that he has "nothing from the other side" is pure fiction. He has the whole FS story (including all the things that don't measure up), the letters from Olga, Gilliard's statements (some of which were proven false), the oral and written statements from family members and people connected to the court. It is all there if you care to read it.

As I said above, if you believe the version relayed by AA supporters. I don't accept every single quote by every person as a 'fact.'

ONE you can't even name, and as we've seen from the ears and face 'experts' they are not always reliable or accurate. We know now they weren't since AA was not AN.

I don't think we have an official ruling on that yet.

Their English wasn't 'atrocious' as in they couldn't speak it, it was the dialect and properness of it. I'm sure most Brits think most Americans speak 'atrocious' English but this is not the same thing as a lack of knowledge of the language. If you want to hear really 'atrocious' English check out the tapes and videos of AA/FS and her massacre of it ("dirt I was living!")

You never heard AA's English in the 20's, only after she had been staying in Germany for over 30 years. According to Xenia Leeds, "her English was good, but her grammar a bit rusty."

AA supporters really push this a bit too hard. I realize they are desperate to do so since those who knew AN well said she did NOT use German and you're trying to come up with excuses why she could have, but if you're going to go by quotes from eyewitnesses you have to accept theirs, too, even though they disagree with your perceived view.

As I have already told you, I took German at school, but never used it at home. Still, I could speak almost fluent upon my first arrival in Germany. And my friends from Norway, who never use English at home, speak it freely here when they visit.

Something you need to realize here- just because something is written down in Kurth's book and you can quote it doesn't make it a 'fact', it's just a piece of evidence for consideration like everything else.AA supporters smugly ask for 'sources' because they know there isn't much written down on the anti AA side (partly because, as Berenberg Gossler said, it was never recorded because the papers only wanted AA's side because it sold better, and partly because most rational people don't bother because they know the DNA speaks for itself) and they can always whip out Kurth's book and quote a page and this is supposed to be a 'fact' that trumps everything else, but it's already been defeated by the DNA

If you want something written down from the opposition, just check out Gilliard's book "La Fausse Anastasie". The only problem is, there are too many glaring lies in it.


[SIZE=+0]

Massie's book, Godl's site, and other books I no longer have handy. I have been reading on this subject for 32 years now, I see a lot, don't always have a page number handy. This plays right into the hands of AA supporters, because they can always whip out Kurth's book and think they can trump us with a 'real' 'source' but it's really just a collection of hearsay and parts of the story. I could also write a book and quote a page, but that wouldn't make you believe it.

[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+0]I still don't think you have understood what "hearsay" means. Look in Prince Christopher's book, it's full of it. And Kurth's book can be had today for a buck.
[/SIZE]

Again, in his acknowledgements for "Final Chapter" he quotes that he used the unpublished works of Berenberg-Gossler among others. Since BG was an attorney in the AA case, apparently he had access and and records of things we don't see (and no AA supporter is ever going to put them in their book!)

If the records and "things" exist, I think we would have seen them a long time ago.

I had a copy of Final Chapter but like a few other books it disappeared in my last move (2005) I had a copies of it and Welch's books from my local library and went to get them but they are now checked out by somebody else (which is good so that person can find out AA is not AN!) I have also owned and checked out a lot of books over the years. Some are in libraries no longer near me. Others have been taken off the shelf as too old and put in book sales. I had the books with me at the time I wrote my site, and also I got help from other people who owned the books who emailed me the info.(and why am I even explaining myself and what good will it do?)

It would do a lot of good if you could verify your sources.

In the end you can never trump the truth. History and science have spoken. The DNA tests proved AA was not AN and matched FS's family. Now the bones found last summer are proven to be the last two missing kids, whichever daughter it is, they are now all accounted for. So this means that all the quotes, hearsay,'testimony' etc. of all those pro AA witnesses were either wrong, lying or mistaken. AA was not AN, and never was in Russia and never knew anything AN would have known. That's the bottom line and the final chapter.

Sorry, but the final chapter is still waiting to be written. Stay tuned.

 

[Russophile]

Peter Kurth's finances are Peter Kurth's business.
In regards to his book as compared to James Blair Lovells', really please don't include them in the same category. Peter Kurth did a lot of extensive research on his. James Lovell had written a couple of chapters (the King Kong one and the one on the 6th child) that were false.
Massie agrees (In the Romanovs, the final chapter) that PK's work is superior to that of the Lovell work.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

I DID say that Kurth's book is better than Lovell's! I have read and read thru Kurth's book many times, and while it is very full of research and information, it still leans toward AA's side and conveniently leaves out things that damage her case. When I went researching I was surprised how many things I found that I never knew before, because AA books are written by AA supporters.

among the things AA suporters don't want you to know and don't tell or emphasize in their versions of the story:

Irene's COMPLETE DENIAL STATEMENT of AA as AN
Sophie B.'s COMPLETE DENIAL STATEMENT of AA as AN
Harriet Rathlef being heavily involved in the Steiner movement and how this affected AA's backing
AA accusing Lord Mountbatten of poisoning Rathlef when she died of appendicitis
Gleb's uncle being the head of the Russian emigre' community in Berlin
The ENTIRE rude letter Gleb sent to Olga/Xenia
MANY QUOTES of COMPLETE DENIAL by Olga A. from her bio
Volkov's statement that those surrounding AA were 'suspect' and made excuses for her incorrect answers
the differing versions of AA's escape story
the fact that Zina Tolstoy originally ID'd AA as TATIANA and later switched to Anastasia when AA did
the fact that the children of Leuchtenberg and Von Kliest believed AA to be FS
the existence of a German book alleging Ernie's trip to Russia 3 years before AA 'dropped the bomb'
there being no real proof of FS's height other than guesses years later
that Dassel had met AA before the 'man with the pockets' 'shocker'
that AA was close with Gleb's sister 2 years before the 'funny animals' 'shocker'
that AA refused to go anywhere to meet anyone new without being accompanied by one of the Botkins
that Gleb had written a novel called "The Baron's Fancy" that seemed to tell out the AA story before it happened
that Berlin was impoverished and in political turmoil at the time of FS's disappearance, (there was a coup attempt on the gov't - joined by the Berlin police- in early March 1920) explaining why her case slipped through the cracks in the early days of the investigation

and many more


I agree that Welch's book does a poor job of making the case for FS, she seems to take it for granted everyone accepts that fact and all she needs to do is tell the story. I disagree, as we can see on these forums, the case does need to be made for FS because some do everything they can to get her out of the picture so AA can still be AN and the fun little mystery can go on, but really that's who AA was even if it's unpopular to some.

 

[Russophile]

A lot of bio's tend to slant things one way or the other. It's up to the reader to keep an objective mind set.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

In the case of an ordinary bio, is this person nice or not, that's one thing, but the AA case was also a historical drama and a court case involving many others. The funny (well not funny) thing is, when I first made my website I was blasted by AA supporters for it being one sided. I admit it is, but the reason is to try to balance out that just about every other AA book and website is slanted her way. I also figured since everyone knew the classic AA story and its details and I wanted to show things that weren't so commonly known (and yes make a much needed case against her claim)

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Since Chat mentioned Gilliard's Le Fausse Anastasie I will post some passages from it that were translated by a friend and former AA supporter (I won't mention his name or screen name until I get his permission) for your consideration:

Baroness Buxhoeveden's visit

The Baroness Buxhoeveden was without interruption in the service to the Russian Imperial family, as a maid of honor, from 1913 to 1918, but ever since 1904 she had long stays at the court. She therefore knew the Grand Duchesses since their childhood and had seen them daily for years. She rejoined the Imperial family in Siberia and was separated from them six weeks before the catastrophe.

Here is the narrative of her visit:

"March 12, I left for the hospital, accompanied by Mrs Tolstoii, my father the Baron Charles Buxhoeveden, the lieutenant Adriieevski and Mr. Schwabe (along with Ms. Peuthert.) Although it was very early, - it was 8 in the morning,- the director of the hospital seemed to have been warned of our visit, and a nurse took us into the women's common room where the patient was located. She was in bed close to the wall, she was turned facing against the window, in full sunlight. When she heard us enter the room, she hid herself under the cover to hide herself from our stares, and we were not able to get her to show us her face. The nurse and Mrs. Tolstoii told me that she always acted in this manner when someone wanted to she her, but the nurse added that the patient had a habit of acting in this manner with an older woman, Miss Peuthert, a former patient of the hospital and who apparently had the unknown one's confidence, and who was also present when I arrived.

The unknown one spoke German with Miss Peuthert. Although she was permitted to get up, she prefered to stay in bed as long as possible. This is how I found her. She was in a night shirt and a white morning coat, her hair was pulled away from the forehead and pulled back, and was arranged simply. After asking my companions to move away from the bed a little, I tried to attract the young woman's attention as I caressed her hair and speaking to her in English while using the types of phrases I would have used while speaking with the Grand Duchesses, but I did not refer to her by any name other than 'Darling'. She did not reply and I saw that she did not understand a word of what I had said, (proof AA didn't then know English) for when she raised the cover after a certain period of time, and I saw her face, there was nothing in her eyes which showed she had recognized me. The eyes and forehead showed some resemblance to the Grand Duchess Tatiana Nicolaievna, resemblance that disappeared, nevertheless, as soon as her face was not covered. I had to remove the cover by force, and I saw that neither the nose, the mouth, nor the chin were formed like that of the Grand Duchess. The hair was lighter in color, some of her teeth were missing-and the remaining ones were not like those of the Grand Duchess, whose teeth were arranged like those of her Majesty the Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, that is to say that the superior teeth were slightly inclined inwards. The teeth of this young woman on the contrary were all right. Her hands were also completely different, the fingers were longer and the nails narrower. I wanted to measure her height, but she refused, and I found it impossible to get an exact measurement without force. We judged roughly that in any case, she was smaller than me, while the Grand Duchess Tatiana was more than ten centimeters taller than me. I have been able to verify this, thanks to the patient's official measurement at the time of her arrival at the hospital and that corresponded exactly with the one which was taken in my presence.

I tried to awaken the memory of the young woman by all the possible means; I showed to her an 'icon', with the date of the Romanov jubilee, that the emperor had given to some persons of the suite, after that a ring that had belonged to the empress; the latter had been given given to her in the presence of the Grand Duchess Tatiana. But none of these things seemed not to evoke in her the slightest recognition. She remained completely indifferent, she whispered some incomprehensible words into Ms. Peuthert's ear. Although I noted a certain similarity in the upper part of the face with the unknown -currently Mrs. Tschaikovski- with the Grand Duchess Tatiana, I am sure that she is not her. I later learned that the she supposes that she is the Grand Duchess Anastasia, but she does not physically resemble her in the least. She has none of the special characteristics that would allow any one who knew the Grand Duchess Anastasia well to identify her.

When Ms. Peuthert saw that the unknown one remained completely mute and did not show that she recognized me, she tried to attract her attention by whispering some words into her ear in German and showing photographs of the Imperial family to her. She pointed to the Empress, while saying: 'Tell me, isn't that mamma?' (Or similar words). In the end she put into her hands a copy of a Russian New Testament with ribbons of the Russian national colors. All these attempts failed, the patient remained mute and strove to hide her face with her cover or her hands. I must point out that the Grand Duchess Anastasia hardly knew any German words and that she pronounced them with a strong Russian accent."]

(again we have first hand witness to AN's disfunction in German)

 

[ChatNoir]

I DID say that Kurth's book is better than Lovell's! I have read and read thru Kurth's book many times, and while it is very full of research and information, it still leans toward AA's side and conveniently leaves out things that damage her case. When I went researching I was surprised how many things I found that I never knew before, because AA books are written by AA supporters.

among the things AA suporters don't want you to know and don't tell or emphasize in their versions of the story:

Irene's COMPLETE DENIAL STATEMENT of AA as AN

From Kurth's book: "We had lived earlier in such intimacy," Irene declared, "that it would have sufficed had she given me the least sign, or had made an unconscious movement to awaken in me a feeling of kinship and to convince me." "I could not have made a mistake."

Sophie B.'s COMPLETE DENIAL STATEMENT of AA as AN

From Kurth's book: The Baroness left the room. Outside, said Schwabe, she "confirmed again that it was not the Grand Duchess, but she added that there was some resemblance."

Harriet Rathlef being heavily involved in the Steiner movement and how this affected AA's backing

I fail to understand how this had anything to do with the AA case.

Gleb's uncle being the head of the Russian emigre' community in Berlin

From Kurth's book: As president of the Berlin Russian Refugee Office Botkin was the official spokesman for the emigre colony.....

The ENTIRE rude letter Gleb sent to Olga/Xenia

The letter was not sent to any of them, but published in the press. The entire letter is printed in Kurth's book, pages 230-231.

MANY QUOTES of COMPLETE DENIAL by Olga A. from her bio

From Kurth's book:
"All of us who were in Berlin in those days," Olga wrote, "could find no resemblance to Anastasia apart from the similarity of the feet." Before granting Andrew the permission to investigate the affair, however, Olga added frankly: "You think I may be wrong. Such mistakes can of course happen. One way or the other it is ghastly."
(In 1964 Grand Duchess Olga's biographer, Ian Vorres, pieced together her rather scattered recollections to form a narrative: Vorres, 173-180. It contributes nothing new to the story and, in its tone and lucidity, bears small resemblance to Olga's formal testimony at Toronto (March 23-24, 1959, Hamburg).

Volkov's statement that those surrounding AA were 'suspect' and made excuses for her incorrect answers

I would like to know where this statement comes from. In the meantime, a footnote from Kurth's book: Dr. Ludwig Berg, the chaplain at St. Mary's, took the trouble to confirm explicitly Frau von Rathlef's account to the meetings with Alexis Volkov.

the differing versions of AA's escape story

There is only one version, found in Harriet von Rathlef Keilmann's book.

the fact that Zina Tolstoy originally ID'd AA as TATIANA and later switched to Anastasia when AA did

From Kurth's book: Everyone looked at her very intently and came to the conclusion that she was indeed Grand Duchess Tatiana.

the fact that the children of Leuchtenberg and Von Kliest believed AA to be FS

From Kurth's book: Duchess Natalie, the eldest, had quickly convinced herself of Anastasia's authenticity and leaped to her defense at any provocation. Duke Dmitri, however, and whis wife, Duchess Catherine, remained skeptical, even hostile, and eventually disowned Anastasia altogether.
In reality the Kleist family, like the Leuchenberg family and many others, was still deeply divided over the issue of Anastasia's identity. One of the sisters, Irina - who Gerda kept insisting was dead - now lived in East Berlin, where she was active in the theatre, and kept fond and "favorable" memories of Anastasia.

the existence of a German book alleging Ernie's trip to Russia 3 years before AA 'dropped the bomb'

I am afraid this book was too obscure for anybody to "discover". Besides, you have already read my post about the rumors in the Entente press.

there being no real proof of FS's height other than guesses years later

And where does Kurth try to prove it?

that Dassel had met AA before the 'man with the pockets' 'shocker'

From Kurth's book: no one was able to contradict Gerda's testimony, not even when she declared that Felix Dassel, Anastasia's star witness, had already met her once at the Kleists' apartment in Berlin, several years before the supposedly revelatory meetings at Castle Seeon. Dassel had heard this charge before and had denied it.
Gerda von Kleist was asked to take the oath before she stepped down. She declined.

that AA was close with Gleb's sister 2 years before the 'funny animals' 'shocker'

Kurth describes the meeting with "Tanya" in great details. Gleb told the Leuchtenbergs that AA probably got the information about the drawings from his sister, but they all denied any talk about the caricatures.

that AA refused to go anywhere to meet anyone new without being accompanied by one of the Botkins

This is sheer nonsense. The only time "Tanya" was called in, was when she went with AA to Scloss Seeon.
Gleb was called in for the new meeting with the Schanzkowski family. And that was all, duly covered in Kurth's book.

that Gleb had written a novel called "The Baron's Fancy" that seemed to tell out the AA story before it happened

Could you please provide me with the date of publication?

that Berlin was impoverished and in political turmoil at the time of FS's disappearance, (there was a coup attempt on the Weimar gov't which was joined by the police in early March 1920) explaining why her case slipped through the cracks in the early days of the investigation

What do you mean "slipped through the cracks?"

I could go on, but those are good for now.

I think you better go on.....

I agree that Welch's book does a poor job of making the case for FS, she seems to take it for granted everyone accepts that fact and all she needs to do is tell the story. I disagree, as we can see on these forums, the case does need to be made for FS because some do everything they can to get her out of the picture so AA can still be AN and the fun little mystery can go on, but really that's who AA was even if it's unpopular to some.

And as I have proven to you, all you need is in Kurth's book. Like it or not.

 

[ChatNoir]

Isn't it funny that when Buxhoeveden states that AA's eyes looked like Tatiana's, nobody raises an eyebrow. When Zinaida Tolstoy does the same thing, it clearly shows how little she knew.
Curious and curiouser.

 

[ChatNoir]

I must point out that the Grand Duchess Anastasia hardly knew any German words and that she pronounced them with a strong Russian accent."]

(again we have first hand witness to AN's disfunction in German)

I think that is the point I have tried to get across many times: AA spoke a hopelessly muddled German with a heavy Russian accent, Franziska spoke, as a native, good German.

 

[Russophile]

In the case of an ordinary bio, is this person nice or not, that's one thing, but the AA case was also a historical drama and a court case involving many others. The funny (well not funny) thing is, when I first made my website I was blasted by AA supporters for it being one sided. I admit it is. . .

Well at least you admit it. This isn't an easy subject by any means.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Isn't it funny that when Buxhoeveden states that AA's eyes looked like Tatiana's, nobody raises an eyebrow. When Zinaida Tolstoy does the same thing, it clearly shows how little she knew.
Curious and curiouser.

What Bux said was that the head, forehead and eyes bore a resemblance to T from across the room but it disappeared as she saw her whole face.

What Tolstoy said was that she ID'd AA as T because she 'had the Tsar's eyes.' Obviously, Zina didn't know Tatiana enough to know that she didn't have 'the tsar's eyes'. It's also 'curiouser' that ZT, who was so sure AA was T, didn't mind changing her ID to AN when the 2 girls looked hardly anything alike. This is why I say she didn't know either girl well.

Note that Bux gave a very detailed description of how AA and TN differed. She also said how she spoke to her in English in phrases she had used with the GD's and it was obvious she didn't understand a word of it. AA KNEW NO ENGLISH at that time!

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Well at least you admit it. This isn't an easy subject by any means.

If you're going to quote me on my own work, don't cut me off in mid sentence and try to change the meaning. Of course it's one sided against AA, because everyone has heard all the same old pro aa legends over and over again, and most books and websites were slanted in her favor. I am the necessary balance, and pointing out the other side aa supporters aren't going to tell you.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

I think that is the point I have tried to get across many times: AA spoke a hopelessly muddled German with a heavy Russian accent, Franziska spoke, as a native, good German.

You completely ignore that AN was not functional in German but knew Russian and English well and French fair. As BB said, she spoke to AA in English and she didn't understand a word!

You'll never know just how FS spoke because there aren't enough reliable witnesses to tell. But we do know that AA didn't have any Russian accent.

 

[ChatNoir]

What Bux said was that the head, forehead and eyes bore a resemblance to T from across the room but it disappeared as she saw her whole face.

Please point out the "across the room" part.

What Tolstoy said was that she ID'd AA as T because she 'had the Tsar's eyes.' Obviously, Zina didn't know Tatiana enough to know that she didn't have 'the tsar's eyes'. It's also 'curiouser' that ZT, who was so sure AA was T, didn't mind changing her ID to AN when the 2 girls looked hardly anything alike. This is why I say she didn't know either girl well.

As Count Hardenberg said when he saw AA's picture: She does not look like Anastasia, nor Tatiana, but seems to be a mixture of the two.

Note that Bux gave a very detailed description of how AA and TN differed. She also said how she spoke to her in English in phrases she had used with the GD's and it was obvious she didn't understand a word of it. AA KNEW NO ENGLISH at that time!

And still she raved in English during sedation. How do we know that she did not understand Buxhoeveden? Did she tell her?

 

[ChatNoir]

You completely ignore that AN was not functional in German but knew Russian and English well and French fair. As BB said, she spoke to AA in English and she didn't understand a word!

And how did BB know this? Just because she did not answer does not prove that she did not know what BB said to her. And as for AN's "functionality" in German, how do you know that?

You'll never know just how FS spoke because there aren't enough reliable witnesses to tell. But we do know that AA didn't have any Russian accent.

Being a girl from Hygendorf, I think we can with fair accuracy assume that she spoke fluent German like her siblings. And as for AA's Russian accent, you just highlighed BB's words to that effect.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

From Kurth's book: The Baroness left the room. Outside, said Schwabe, she "confirmed again that it was not the Grand Duchess, but she added that there was some resemblance."

So you accept an alleged comment said only to a supporter over her own signed emotional testimony on the meeting?

Here the report of the princess Irene of Prusse:

At the end of August 1922, I made a decision, on the request of the counselor Gaebel and police inspector Dr Grunberg, to return to Berlin to establish if the enigmatic person was my niece Anastasia. Dr Grunberg took me, in the company of Miss of Oertzen, to his house in the country, close to Berlin. The unknown one lived there under the name of "Miss Anny", and, as I arrived impromptu, she was not made aware of who I was, so that our encounter took place without her being affected by my presence.

I saw right away that she could be not be any of my nieces; for, although I not seen them for nine years, the basic traits of the face could not have changed to this point, in particular the position of the eyes, the ears, etc.

At first sight, one could possibly have found a certain resemblance with the Grand duchess Tatiana.

At first I remained with the unknown one in the company of Miss of Oertzen, then alone, but I was not able to notice in her any signs which led me to believe that she recognized me. I had lived in 1912 and 1913 entire weeks with my nieces and since that time I have changed little.

At the table, we sat straight across from each one other; then, she got up and left, without saying a word, and went to her room. At this time I already had the conviction that she was not my niece, but, at the desire of the Dr Grunberg, I went up to her room, and approached her bed. I addressed her in vain with words in the language that we habitually used, recalled situations from the past, spoke the nicknames or the names of persons we knew: she did not react to anything. She still did not reply when I prayed for her to say a word or to make a sign that she had recognized me; even when -in order to not neglect anything - I said to her: "Do you not know your Aunt Irene?"

To the Grunbergs big disappointment, who were so well intentioned, I left with the firm conviction that this unknown one is not my niece; I no longer kept the least doubt in this respect.

We had lived, formerly, in such intimacy, that it would have sufficed for a small sign or an unconscious movement to awaken in me a familial feeling to convince me.

Signed: Irene, Princess Henri Of Prussia.]

From Kurth's book: As president of the Berlin Russian Refugee Office Botkin was the official spokesman for the emigre colony.....

You find no suspicion in the fact that he held this position, and AA was so well circulated in the emigre community, and that Gleb and Tatiana were her great supporters? Curiouser and curiouser!

The letter was not sent to any of them, but published in the press.

Public humiliation and accusations, how much worse!

The entire letter is printed in Kurth's book, pages 230-231.

I was looking just yesterday, appears to be edited.

In 1964 Grand Duchess Olga's biographer, Ian Vorres, pieced together her rather scattered recollections to form a narrative: Vorres, 173-180. It contributes nothing new to the story and, in its tone and lucidity, bears small resemblance to Olga's formal testimony at Toronto (March 23-24, 1959, Hamburg).

No, her bio is loaded with very emotional and lenghty denials of AA. Her last testimonies were not in favor of AA. She died only a few months later.

I would like to know where this statement comes from. In the meantime, a footnote from Kurth's book: Dr. Ludwig Berg, the chaplain at St. Mary's, took the trouble to confirm explicitly Frau von Rathlef's account to the meetings with Alexis Volkov. There is only one version, found in Harriet von Rathlef Keilmann's book.

I found it in Klier and Mingay's book, not having a copy here (I had to borrow it from an interlibrary loan and sent it back, it's not in this area) I can't give their source. His quotes seemed aimed at Rathlef, since she was the one with her who made excuses for her being 'ill' when she made the mistakes.

From Kurth's book: no one was able to contradict Gerda's testimony, not even when she declared that Felix Dassel, Anastasia's star witness, had already met her once at the Kleists' apartment in Berlin, several years before the supposedly revelatory meetings at Castle Seeon. Dassel had heard this charge before and had denied it.

Just because he denied it doesn't make it so. And don't forget the notebook story too (how Leuchtenberg wrote the story in a notebook and and allegedly hid it when Dassel game, he could have been tipped off. But since he'd met her before, it wasn't needed.

Gerda von Kleist was asked to take the oath before she stepped down. She declined.

And didn't you tell me most of the people 'declined' and that it wasn't necessary? Do you have a list of who did and did not take oath?

Kurth describes the meeting with "Tanya" in great details. Gleb told the Leuchtenbergs that AA probably got the information about the drawings from his sister, but they all denied any talk about the caricatures.

Well of course they're going to deny it! Doesn't mean it didn't happen.

This is sheer nonsense. The only time "Tanya" was called in, was when she went with AA to Scloss Seeon.

She wouldn't go without her, needed her Cyrano whisperer. Also didn't AA refuse to go to the US w/o Gleb? And somewhere else? "Not w/o Gleb!" This was from the Kurth book!

Gleb was called in for the new meeting with the Schanzkowski family. And that was all, duly covered in Kurth's book.

From a certain point of view. It could easily have been told with very different commentary in the other direction.

Could you please provide me with the date of publication?

1930
Amazon.co.uk: The baron's fancy: Gleb Botkin: Books

What do you mean "slipped through the cracks?"

We've been through this many times before. Due to the problems in the city at the time there wasn't time to make the connection between FS's disappearance and the girl in the asylum. Later once things were better too much time had passed. This is why it took Ernie's detective giving full time and effort and money to the case to uncover the truth.

And as I have proven to you, all you need is in Kurth's book. Like it or not.

No there's a whole lot more I found in other sources that tell me a different story on some things.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Continuing the translations from Le Fausse Anastasie

June 7, 1922, I, Arthur Gustavovitch Kleist, was present for the questioning of the unknown one which took place at the Dalldorf asylum. She declared the following:

'I arrived in Berlin in the middle of the month of February 1920, I do not remember the exact date. I arrived here alone, coming from Russia and having gone through Romania. Immediately in Berlin, I changed clothing, in order not to be recognized. for it seemed to me that I was followed. I no longer know what with that which I changed clothing. I was free for less than a week, for I was first placed in the Elizabeth Hospital, where I spent six weeks, then I was transferred to the Dalldorf asylum.'

After that, the unknown one was overcome by strong emotion, and, when I ask her how she came from Russia she does not give any response and only declared that her companion died in Romania. Being in an extreme agitation the unknown asked me if it was possible to recognize her and if her relatives in Paris had been informed about her stay with me. After giving her a negative response I told her it was preferable not to advise her relatives in Paris because in my opnion it would be more convenient to inform her relatives in Denmark. For the moment the unknown one then abstained from giving any information to me.

That same evening, at supper, 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.

Continuing my questioning, I wanted to know with whom she had come from Romania with and how she had made Marie Peuthert's acquaintance. Replying to the first question, the Unknown one declared that she had arrived in Berlin alone and and that her companion died in Romania. She refused to say more about it (she remained stubbornly silent). Replying to the second question, she explained that she had made Marie Peuthert's acquaintance at the Dalldorf hospital, that she had not known her beforehand and that in any case she had not come with her to Berlin.]

June 20 1922, the young woman that I had taken to my house from the asylum invited me to come to her room and, in the presence of my wife, the Baroness Marie Karlovna Kleist, she asked me to protect her and to emphasize her rights. I told her that I was at her disposal, provided that she reply quite frankly to my questions, I asked for her first who she was. The response was adamant: She was the Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicolaiievna, the youngest daughter of the Emperor Nicholas II. Next, I asked for her to give her account of the slaughter of the Imperial family and how she was able to save herself. I obtained the following response:

Yes I was present at the time of the slaughter of the Imperial family, and, when the slaughter began, I hid myself behind the back of my sister Tatiana who was killed by a blow (shot). Next, I received some blows (shots) and lost consciousness. When I regained consciousness I was located with the family of a soldier who had saved me. Then with a female relative of the soldier and I left for Romania; and when this last one died (in Romania), I travelled to Germany alone; I had the intention to live hidden due to the fear of being followed and to earn my living by working. I did not have any money, but I possessed some jewels; I sold them, and with this money I arrived here.

All these trials deeply shook me, so that, for a moment, I lose all hope to see the arrival of better days. ALthough knowing Russian, I avoid speaking it, for this language evokes in me extremely painful memories, the Russians treated us so poorly, me and my parents (family).

The Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicolaiievna consented to confirming all that she had said to me in the presence of General Schulmann. She equally agreed to invite, for recognition and identification, Prince Dolgorukov, who was in the service of Her Majesty the Dowager Empress Marie Feodorvna, whose arrival in Berlin was expected soon.

July 1922, the young person that I took from the Dalldorf asylum at my place confirmed adamantly, for the second time to me, Arthur Gustavovitch Kleist, that she was the Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicolaievna. She added:

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 the reason I will write to Xenia Alexandrovna a letter that I will pray you send to her.

After that, 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.
(Signed) Baron Klesit

August 4 1922, Zenaiide Sergueiievna Tolstoii communicated, to me, Arthur Gustavovitch, Baron Kleist, that which follows: August 2 years ago, the one that calls herself the Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicolaiievna communicated to me that she was saved hands of the bolsheviks by the Russian soldier Alexander Tschaiikovski. It was with the family of the latter, consisting of his mother Marie, his sister Veronica, twenty-eight years old, and of his brother Serge (younger than his sister), and herself, Anastasia Nicolaiievna, arrived to Bucharest (Romania), where she remained until 1920.

She bore Tschaiikovski's child, a boy that must now be almost three years old. The child has black hair like his father, as are were his eyes. The Tschaiikosvki family lived in a street situated close to a train station: It was, probably, the street "Swienti Voevosi", she does not remember the house number. In 1920, Tschaiikovsi was attacked in a Bucharest street; he died from his injuries. Then Anastasia Nicolaiievna, without warning anyone, flees Bucharest and arrived in Berlin. Here she takes a room in a small boarding house, close to the train station, in Friedrichstrasse. Anastasia Nicolaiievna does not remember the name of the boarding house. Next, Anastasia Nicolaiievna declared that her child remained with the Tschaiikovski family, and she prayed to have him returned to her as fast as possible.

(Signed) Baron Kleist]
[/i]

 

[Anna was Franziska]

And here is the passage from Clara Peuthert, some wild tales indeed!

[It is necessary to grant special interest to the declarations that the patient gave to Ms. Peuthert and that she recorded in a letter that is addressed to Princess of Prussia, August 23, 1922. (Princess Irene of Prussia, sister of the Empress of Russia)

I wrote in February to the Grand Duke Hesse-Darmstadt that there resides in Dalldorf asylum a young lady who says she is the Grand Duchess Anastasia Nicolaiievna Romanov.

As I often saw this young lady in photographs during her in her youth, and during a stay which I did in Russia, I promised to get her out of this place where she is living (utterly) abandoned.

She related to me, that at the time of the assassination of the Imperial family, she received injuries to her hand and behind her ear, then was knocked to the floor, upon which she fainted. A mere soldier, named Tschaiikovski, took her and hid her. HIs mother and his sister cared for her. But when it was noticed that a corpse was missing a search was undertaken to find the soldier; the family who was taking care of Anastasia was in danger and fled to Bucharest. As this young lady was alone in the world and the name Romanov could endanger her, Anastasia, then seventeen years old, married the soldier whose family formerly belonged to Polish nobility. Anastasia gave birth to a son that carried the name of Alexis. They lived in Bucharest for a certain period of time, I think about two years, then the family's hideout was discovered; Anastasia's husband was injured by a bullet which struck his lungs; he was brought back seriously injured to the house, where he died, due to the continuous blood loss he suffered.

As a living relative of Anastasia on her mother's side, as sister of the Tsarina, you will understand and forgive that Anastasia, abandoned by all, was not able to have a marriage of her own blood. This is the biggest concern of the unfortunate one to know how you will accept this thing, especially her Grand Mother. This onoe seems besides to be her enemy and wants to take advantage of the assassination of the emperor to govern. This is the reason why Anastasia does not want to emphasize her rights as the Grand Duchess although she is. It is necessary to act with a lot of prudence. I pray you come see this lady. I photographed her last week; though they cannot be very useful, since the young lady is at the moment very sick. She was transported from the Dalldorf asylum to the house of Baron Kleist, who mixed this matter with his own goals and interests and wants to be her only advisor. This is the reason why the lady left this family under a ruse in order to quietly reflect on what she should do.

When Your Highness was this be visiting at Potsdam, the baron did not allow that the young lady to speak to you. I insistently ask that you come to see her at once; only you can prove the truth. Currently, this lady is with a good family, but it is not necessary that the Baron know it. I will reveal you then where she is located.

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, (as shown by the fact that) she has already spent three years without her son.

I ask therefore that you take this matter seriously and to examine (to see) if all of this is true. The current situation cannot go on much longer, since more than six months have passed without anyone being concerned for this lady.

She lives like a poor creature! With the highest consideration, (Signed) Marie-Clara Peuthert]

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Below is Left: Gertrude Schanzkowska Franziska's sister who recognized AA (Gleb Botkin himself admited to a resemblence between the two of them) and Right: Anna Anderson
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/franz4.jpg

Below Left and Right Anna Anderson. Center: Gertrude Schanzkowska
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/franz5.jpg

Below Left and Right: Anna Anderson. Center: Karl Maucher (Franziska's great-nephew)
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/maucheraa.jpg

Another comparrison of Anna Anderson's lips (Left) and Felix Schanzkowska's daughter Waultrad
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k136/tsarskoe/lips3.jpg

 

[Anna was Franziska]

More interesting info from the translatorabout the AA case not the book)

Apparently Scotland Yard did a study of AA's and Anastasia's handwriting within the past ten years or so which concluded that the samples were not writen by the same hand. (It has been suggested that there were not as many samples as was used by Minna Becker during AA's trail. Yet apparently Scotland Yard thought the samples sufficient enough to make an accurate comparison.)


The often cited study by Moritz Furtmayr used a photograph of Maria (rather than Anastasia) when comparring it with photographs of AA's right ear. He also mistakenly believed that AA's original "mug" shot had been reversed and thus the photograph did not depict her right ear but her left (Apparently to explain why her right ear did not match the right ear of Anastasia) Yet if you look at the mug shot and look at how her hair is parted you can tell that it is not a mirror image since she always parted her hair in the same manner in the early 1920's. Also when comparing that photograph of Anna's ear with others one can see that it is in fact her right ear and not her left. Apparently the reason the ear did not match is simply because it is not the same ear.

NOVA ear test:

I believe the study in question was performed by Peter Vanesis. He did appear on the NOVA program (Though I am unsure who originally authorized the study.)

The study showed photographs of several women's ears (the scientific observers were blind to the various ears identities) and compared them to known photographs of the Grand Duchess Anastasia's ear. He along with several colleagues picked the photographs of AA as being closest to Anastasia's. Vanesis gave a photograph of Anna's left inner ear a perfect "5" match to that of a photograph of Anastasia's ear (on a scale of 1 to 5) and a "4" on her left ear. Yet interestingly one of Vanesis's colleagues disagreed with Vanesis and the others that the ears of AA and Anastasia were the same and thus inadvertently proving that the experiment was indeed subject to the viewer's interpretation and not objective.

 

[ChatNoir]

So you accept an alleged comment said only to a supporter over her own signed emotional testimony on the meeting?

Schwabe was hardly a supporter.

You find no suspicion in the fact that he held this position, and AA was so well circulated in the emigre community, and that Gleb and Tatiana were her great supporters? Curiouser and curiouser!

Well circulated? From a few months at the Kleists? As for Serge Botkin, he only went as far as saying: She is either Anastasia or a miracle, and I don't believe in miracles. I think it is now time to back up your allegations against the Botkins with some facts, not only innuendo.

Public humiliation and accusations, how much worse!

Read my post on why this was done!

I was looking just yesterday, appears to be edited.

Appears to be? Please explain.

No, her bio is loaded with very emotional and lenghty denials of AA. Her last testimonies were not in favor of AA. She died only a few months later.

And it still cannot erase her own writings to AA.

I found it in Klier and Mingay's book, not having a copy here (I had to borrow it from an interlibrary loan and sent it back, it's not in this area) I can't give their source. His quotes seemed aimed at Rathlef, since she was the one with her who made excuses for her being 'ill' when she made the mistakes.

What mistakes? She answered all the questions from Volkov correctly, and then she asked him some questions that only the intimates of the court could have known the answers to.

Just because he denied it doesn't make it so. And don't forget the notebook story too (how Leuchtenberg wrote the story in a notebook and and allegedly hid it when Dassel game, he could have been tipped off. But since he'd met her before, it wasn't needed.

Gerda Kleist was a very hostile witness, and remember, she was the one who insisted that her sister was dead while she was very much alive. So much for her credibility. And the notebook story you have gotten completely wrong. What happened was that Dassel wrote down everything he remembered from the hospital in Tsarskoye Selo, gave it to the Duke of Leuchtenberg for safekeeping so that nobody could afterwords say that he changed his story to change the outcome of the meeting with AA.

And didn't you tell me most of the people 'declined' and that it wasn't necessary? Do you have a list of who did and did not take oath?

I told you no such thing. The judges were the ones who determined who should take the oath. I do not have a list.

Well of course they're going to deny it! Doesn't mean it didn't happen.

This seems to be your answer to every thing that does not fit with your version of the story.

She wouldn't go without her, needed her Cyrano whisperer. Also didn't AA refuse to go to the US w/o Gleb? And somewhere else? "Not w/o Gleb!" This was from the Kurth book!

Cyrano whisperer? What on earth are you talking about. Tatiana Botkin was the first person who could have exposed her. As for USA, she was invited as a guest of Xenia Leeds. Gleb was only the middleman. And "not with out Botkin" was for her final meeting with the Schanzkowsky siblings. And that was all.

1930
Amazon.co.uk: The baron's fancy: Gleb Botkin: Books

Thank you. That shows you that the story was written AFTER AA went back to Germany.

We've been through this many times before. Due to the problems in the city at the time there wasn't time to make the connection between FS's disappearance and the girl in the asylum. Later once things were better too much time had passed. This is why it took Ernie's detective giving full time and effort and money to the case to uncover the truth.

We have been through this before, and obviously you have not read all about it. The police were trying to find out who miss Unknown was, but did not tie her to FS, apparently because there was no reason to. And Knopf picked FS because he got all the help he needed from Doris Wingender, who's testimony was full of holes, falsified photos and incorrect dates.

No there's a whole lot more I found in other sources that tell me a different story on some things.

Then please let us know.

 

[ChatNoir]

More interesting info from the translatorabout the AA case not the book)

Apparently Scotland Yard did a study of AA's and Anastasia's handwriting within the past ten years or so which concluded that the samples were not writen by the same hand. (It has been suggested that there were not as many samples as was used by Minna Becker during AA's trail. Yet apparently Scotland Yard thought the samples sufficient enough to make an accurate comparison.)

Maybe we could have the source for this test?

The often cited study by Moritz Furtmayr used a photograph of Maria (rather than Anastasia) when comparring it with photographs of AA's right ear.

And what is your source for this?

He also mistakenly believed that AA's original "mug" shot had been reversed and thus the photograph did not depict her right ear but her left (Apparently to explain why her right ear did not match the right ear of Anastasia) Yet if you look at the mug shot and look at how her hair is parted you can tell that it is not a mirror image since she always parted her hair in the same manner in the early 1920's. Also when comparing that photograph of Anna's ear with others one can see that it is in fact her right ear and not her left. Apparently the reason the ear did not match is simply because it is not the same ear.

He did not use the mug shot, he used a photo taken at Dalldorf that had previously given some problems in the ear region. He discovered that the photo had ben inverted in printing, and when corrected, there was no more problems with the ears.

 

[ChatNoir]

As for the sources for "La Fausse Anastasie", where are they now?
Burned. Burned by the author who evidently did not want anybody else to see them.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

What good is any of this? The only 'source' any of you are ever going to accept is Kurth's book.

There is really no need to keep defending what this or that person said, because we know which ones were wrong! We know that AA was not AN. We know that anything she allegedly 'knew' was told her by somebody, though we'll never know who that somebody is because no one leaves a paper trail of fraud in their diary. So you'll keep asking for 'sources' knowing there is nothing with a page number thinking that anything in Kurth's book will always trump it because it has a page number. But, that does not automatically validate everything said and done and quoted as true or accurate.

It all comes down to this:

The DNA proved AA 100% exclusion not to be AN and to be FS with 99.9% assurance.

ALL the bodies have been found.

Therefore there were no survivors.

Not even Anastasia.

Therefore AA was not Anastasia.

Therefore it makes no difference who all said what and what page it's on.

It's over.

 

[ChatNoir]

Below is Left: Gertrude Schanzkowska Franziska's sister who recognized AA (Gleb Botkin himself admited to a resemblence between the two of them) and Right: Anna Anderson

Thank you for the photo display, I think we now all know that there was no connection between AA and the Schanzkowsky family.

 

[ChatNoir]

What good is any of this? The only 'source' any of you are ever going to accept is Kurth's book.

And Harriet Rathlef's book. And Gleb Botkins book. And Hans Nogly's book. And Nidda von Krug's book.

There is really no need to keep defending what this or that person said, because we know which ones were wrong!

Do we really? And this is not so much about defending anything, more like "stick to the facts."

We know that AA was not AN.

We do?

We know that anything she allegedly 'knew' was told her by somebody, though we'll never know who that somebody is because no one leaves a paper trail of fraud in their diary.

You are so rigth. We will never know.

So you'll keep asking for 'sources' knowing there is nothing with a page number thinking that anything in Kurth's book will always trump it because it has a page number. But, that does not automatically validate everything said and done and quoted as true or accurate.

True, but I always like for posters to back up where they found so and so quote, it makes it more legitimate than something taken out of the thin air.

It all comes down to this:

The DNA proved AA 100% exclusion not to be AN and to be FS with 99.9% assurance.

Provided the sample came from AA.

ALL the bodies have been found.

That's still debatable.

Therefore there were no survivors

Not even Anastasia.

Therefore AA was not Anastasia.

Therefore it makes no difference who all said what and what page it's on.

It's over.

And that is your opinion.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Then Chat, please tell me why this is still 'debatable.' As I explained in my previous post- and many others- a very big problem here is that you believe if you can drag out a page number from Kurth's book that's a 'fact'- well that's not necessarily so, because you may quote a person, yet that does NOT qualify what they said as an automatic fact. I have given you other quotes from people you call liars, and sources you won't accept. What do you expect me to to do? If you want to stick to facts so badly, I am afraid you are going to have to accept the DNA results since you cannot disprove them.

Instead of rehashing all the old quotes we've bored everyone with for numerous pages, answer me this, and if you can't, I don't see any reason to even debate.

1. Do you still believe AA to be AN
2. Since she was proven not to be AN by DNA, please tell me why you won't accept the results, and I want facts and sources that prove the DNA was switched, not just that it 'could' have have or 'must' have happened. You continue to complain about the 'chain of custody' yet you cannot produce one FACT or SOURCE how this occured. If you cannot do that, you really have nothing more than empty speculation. Since you demand sources and quotes from others, you should stick to your own rules and give me SOURCES that prove the DNA sample was not from AA. Also please explain why the hair and the intestine sample matched exactly though they were done in two different places. Again I need NAMES of those involved and PROOF of the wrongdoing or mishandling.
3. Do you accept that all the bodies have now been found? If not, why not?

 

[ChatNoir]

Then Chat, please tell me why this is still 'debatable.' As I explained in my previous post- and many others- a very big problem here is that you believe if you can drag out a page number from Kurth's book that's a 'fact'- well that's not necessarily so, because you may quote a person, yet that does NOT qualify what they said as an automatic fact. I have given you other quotes from people you call liars, and sources you won't accept. What do you expect me to to do? If you want to stick to facts so badly, I am afraid you are going to have to accept the DNA results since you cannot disprove them.

I expect you to stick to the facts. It's as simple as that.

Instead of rehashing all the old quotes we've bored everyone with for numerous pages, answer me this, and if you can't, I don't see any reason to even debate.

Then why do you bother?

1. Do you still believe AA to be AN

What I believe, has no bearing on the case.

2. Since she was proven not to be AN by DNA, please tell me why you won't accept the results, and I want facts and sources that prove the DNA was switched, not just that it 'could' have have or 'must' have happened. You continue to complain about the 'chain of custody' yet you cannot produce one FACT or SOURCE how this occured. If you cannot do that, you really have nothing more than empty speculation. Since you demand sources and quotes from others, you should stick to your own rules and give me SOURCES that prove the DNA sample was not from AA. Also please explain why the hair and the intestine sample matched exactly though they were done in two different places. Again I need NAMES of those involved and PROOF of the wrongdoing or mishandling.

I have a quote from Dr. Gill: "The putative sample from AA".
When he was asked if the mystery of AA was solved, he answered: "That is not for me to say."

Do you accept that all the bodies have now been found? If not, why not?

So far, I have seen no proof.

 

[Anna was Franziska]

I expect you to stick to the facts. It's as simple as that.

But your version of 'facts' is only a quote from Kurth's book by one of her supporters. You deny everything else. This is not 'facts.'

What I believe, has no bearing on the case.

Then why do you still keep defending her claim?

I have a quote from Dr. Gill: "The putative sample from AA".
When he was asked if the mystery of AA was solved, he answered: "That is not for me to say."

You latch onto this and make a big deal out of it while ignoring all the scientific proof. I'm sure he never meant for it to be taken that way. You also need to explain why the hair also matched the intestines. The odds of both of them matching on two different switches/errors is impossible, therefore perhaps you lean toward intentional wrongdoing? By who? Please give facts to explain why you would feel this way.

So far, I have seen no proof.

When the scientific results on the new bodies come in at the end of this month, will you finally admit there were no survivors?

Is there ANYTHING that will ever make you admit she was FS? People have told me that if AA came back from the dead and told you herself she wasn't AN you still wouldn't believe it. What would it take?

 

[Anna was Franziska]

Thank you for the photo display, I think we now all know that there was no connection between AA and the Schanzkowsky family.

We don't know that at all. Her DNA matched theirs 99.9%. According to all the news services whenever a new story comes out, 'A woman named AA claimed for decades to be AN, but was later proven by DNA testing to be a Polish factory worker named FS.' It's pretty much accepted fact and common knowledge now save conspiracy theorists.