Curved spacetime is not a modern interpretation of general realtivity.
http://www.space.com/15524-albert-einstein.html
"In 1916, Einstein published the general theory of relativity, which held that acceleration distorts the shape of time and space. In a nutshell, space and time are curved near a massive object — the fabric of space-time is distorted."
Curved spacetime is a consequence of general relativity.
This reference is itself a modern interpretation of Einstein's intent.
gravitational_aether said:
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable"
You continue to misread and misquote Einstein's 1920 University of Leyden address. The whole of the reference you extracted the above from is,
Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.
In context and when including that portion in bold above all references to "the ether" can be replace by the word "space". Note: even in this address, Einstein did not use the term space-time, other than in a geometrical context.
gravitational_aether said:
"the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state."
The paragraph of the cited address just prior to your above quote,
Mach's idea finds its full development in the ether of the general theory of relativity. According to this theory the metrical qualities of the continuum of space-time differ in the environment of different points of space-time, and are partly conditioned by the matter existing outside of the territory under consideration. This space-time variability of the reciprocal relations of the standards of space and time, or, perhaps, the recognition of the fact that "empty space" in its physical relation is neither homogeneous nor isotropic, compelling us to describe its state by ten functions (the gravitation potentials g_(mn)), has, I think, finally disposed of the view that space is physically empty. But therewith the conception of the ether has again acquired an intelligible content, although this content differs widely from that of the ether of the mechanical undulatory theory of light. The ether of the general theory of relativity is a medium which is itself devoid of all mechanical and kinematical qualities, but helps to determine mechanical (and electromagnetic) events.
The portion in bold once again suggests that at the time the concept of space-time was to Einstein a geometric description of space and time. The further unification and concept of a physically unified space-time is a modern interpretation.
Then later, in that portion in red and bold, Einstein asserts that this ether of general relativity has no independently observable parts or
kinematical qualities (independent motion), something which was later discarded with the frame-dragging effect, which is supported by the GP-B experiment... Which does suggest that space itself, the ether Einstein was referring to, does have some at least weakly defined kinetic interaction with matter.., an independently defined motion. As I said, general relativity has been and continues to be an evolving theory of gravitation.
gravitational_aether said:
The state of the aether at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether.
Edit to add: The above seems to be a rephrasing of the following,
What is fundamentally new in the ether of the general theory of relativity as opposed to the ether of Lorentz consists in this, that the state of the former is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the stateof the ether in neighbouring places, which are amenable to law in the form of differential equations; whereas the state of the Lorentzian ether in the absence of electromagnetic fields is conditioned by nothing outside itself, and is everywhere the same.
Replacing Einstein's reference above to the ether of general relativity with "space" paints a little different picture.
Here lies the seeds of a kinetic character of space/space-time. A crack in the door which at the time had not been fully explored and realized.
Context is always important. And always of more importance when reading historical accounts, through the rose colored glasses of what we know today that was unknown in the past.
There are aspects of general relativity and even quantum mechanics that could be discussed, which have similarities to some of the discussion in this thread. It does not seem to me that beginning such discussion would be of any value, since you seem so ridgely fixed the your own misguided interpretations.
Disclaimer: Let it be known that much of this post are the product of my own "misguided" interpretations, and any liberties of interpretation, should not be automatically assumed the mainstream view. As I have mentioned to some extent there remains among historians some debate..!