2006-08-06 22:29:43 · 5 answers · asked by jb1 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
No, here's a website that verifies the fact that she could withstand questioning for any length of time and gave wrong answersd to many questions about her childhood...
2006-08-06 22:36:17 · answer #1 · answered by Sidoney 5 · 1⤊ 4⤋
DNA evidence taken from Anna Anderson did not match with the living Romanov's.Unfortunately that is the end of the physical story. Anna Anderson was one of the most fascinating women of her time and that alone should give her a footnote in history.
2006-08-07 11:48:38 · answer #2 · answered by Jane B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, although I romantically hoped for a long time she was. Here's an article:
http://experts.about.com/e/a/an/Anna_Anderson.htm
This article argues that she was - many of Anna Anderson's scars seemed to be identical to those of Anastasia's (scroll down towards the bottom):
http://www.concentric.net/~tsarskoe/
My own reason, proof of which hit me the first time I saw Anna Anderson speaking on film, was that she was not refined. A daughter of the Czar would have had that inborn breeding that (admittedly only on one portion of film) Anna Anderson did not. I believe, as is the general consensus, that she was Franziska Schanzkowska, a Polish factory worker.
2006-08-07 10:37:36 · answer #3 · answered by Sybaris 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. DNA testing has shown that she was not Anastasia. When the burial site for the Russian Imperial Family was found several years ago, however, there were remains for only 5 of the 7 Romanovs. I haven't seen anything since then saying whether they have been able to figure out which two were missing and why.
2006-08-07 18:05:18 · answer #4 · answered by Irish1952 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
DNA evidence, from the bodies of the Romanov family, firmly excluded this poor Anna woman.
Besides, Anastasia's body was found in the grave in Ekaterinburg.
2006-08-07 11:39:05 · answer #5 · answered by Mike P 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋