Pictures of Rasputin

[Helen_Azar]

Hard to say, the photo is too blurry, plus the facial hair is very confounding. But I would say no, because Rasputin always had that crooked part in his hair and this guy doesn't. Also, this guy seems to have curly thick hair, while Rasputin had thin straight hair. Unless this is because he is a lot younger in the unknown photo...   

[Richard_Cullen]

Helen

The facial characteristics don't match

R

[Belochka]

I never thought it looked like him either, but it's most often labeled as him with his children, l-r, Maria, Varvara and Dmitri.

The image is indeed Rasputin with his children:

L to R, Matrena (b. 1898), Varya (b. 1900) and Dmitri (b. 1895).

The image appears in his daughter's memoirs Распутин. Почему? (Rasputin. Why?)

[Helen_Azar]

In this one you can really see that it's Rasputin, and of course it must be, since it appeared in Maria Rasputin's own memoirs.

Just goes to show you, once again, that you can't really trust pictures to positively identify someone.  Thanks, Belochka.

[Annie]

While I am not doubting the photo, I do want to point out that Maria R. was not always a totally reliable source. There are several inaccurate or questionable passages in her book "Rasputin: The Man Behind the Myth" written with Pat Barham. She also became very eccentric in her later years, even at one time accepting and taking up with AA, but soon falling out and denouncing her.

[Belochka]

Thanks, yes, just like with AA, photos are not a precise science to go by. There can be so many light distortions and things that 'just don't look like' people.

The problem we are discussing here is the quality of the published photograph. Unfortunately many published photographs of this image are inadequate, lacking reasonable definition. I was lucky to find one that offered more facial details that enabled us to identify that the image is indeed Rasputin.

Furthermore there is no reason to claim that the photo is really some other individual.

[Suzie]

I like the portraits and I like (at least what little I know) about Rasputin. He was as much a victim as the rest of Russian people, Royal, aristocratic and peasant who died during a time of chaos. I have never understood why he gets pegged as the "bad guy" (that dreadful cartoon comes quickly to mind).
Suzie

[Emyrna]

I agree with that.  I personally believe he was used as a scapegoat.

[Bev]

Usually, taking bribes to influence the choice of goverment officials is considered bad form

[Belochka]

Rare photographs of Rasputin c1916:
http://photoarchive.spb.ru:9090/www/showChildObjects.do?object=2001453521
Joanna

The first photograph that you posted was actually taken in 1904 when Grigorii Rasputin first came to St. Petersburg.

[Reference: Bokhanov, Анатомия мифа (Anatomy of a myth), 2000].

Margarita

[Sarushka]

[dunya]

I like the portrait, its lovely, I like the fact that you read a book then draw a portrait, more  indeed.
Rasputin was an interesting character really, I can see why he effected your art.

[dunya]

[Mr. White]

Where did you get this? What is the story behind it? I have never seen an Icon of Rasputin.

[lori_c]

I have a question, what house was allegedly 'pulled down' in 1977? I think his home in Siberia still stands, and even if it didn't, a lot of people could have lived there between 1916 and 1977 who could have done that. It is also unlikely he did with his wife and kids around,come on.

His apt. in St. Petersburg is still there today. So I really doubt this hair theory for many practical reasons.

You may be thinking of the Ipatiev house.  It was razed in 1977 (headed by Yeltsin, no less).