Joseph Fuhrmann: Rasputin, the untold Story

[Janet Ashton]

I am very surprised that no-one else has noticed this one yet! :-

http://www.amazon.com/Rasputin-Untold-Joseph-T-Fuhrmann/dp/1118172760

It's been years in the coming, and is far more than a revised version of his old, highly-readable 1990 biography. Joe Fuhrmann spent years after the fall of Communism researching in archives in Moscow and Siberia, gathering new material on Rasputin's life, and it has all been woven into this book. His view of Rasputin has always been down to earth and unmelodramatic, looking at him as human being rather than a saint or devil. This is supplemented by his thorough understanding of the political context - since Joe is an academic historian who edited Nicholas and Alexandra's wartime correspondence and did truly in-depth notes on the letters. His style, though, is very accessible - this isn't an ivory-tower book at all - he always puts things simply and directly; I like his style. Finally, he also takes a full look at some of the recent revisionist theories on Rasputin's murder and assesses them all to come to his own conclusions.

When I first began serious research on Nicholas and Alexandra in 2001, Joe's sensitive and nuanced bio of Rasputin was one of the biggest influences on my thinking, and it has been an honour to get to know him (courtesy initially of Greg King) and to be able to bring this book to your attention now, hoping you enjoy it and will debate it with interest (but play nice, please! :-) ).

[Sarushka]

Looking forward to this!

[Janet Ashton]

Looking forward to this!

Please do post your thoughts, because I showed Joe the Forum and Book Finder some years ago, and he saw your review of his first Rasputin book and was rather pleased.

[edubs31]

I real part of the Kindle sample, sounds good! Will be on my list of books to purchase.

[Forum Admin]

We just ordered our copy. Once it arrives and I get a chance to read it, I will be happy to put in my two kopecks.

[Janet Ashton]

We just ordered our copy. Once it arrives and I get a chance to read it, I will be happy to put in my two kopecks.

Excellent - I'll look forward to reading them and passing on to Joe.

[Forum Admin]

OK, been a little busy, so haven't quite finished this yet. Am up to 1916 or so.  Extremely well written, concise, and as promised in the foreward, he leaves the reader to draw their own conclusions.  Having read Rasputine by Spridovitch, I'm glad to see that he recognized that while S. made some errors, there is a wealth of good and reliable first hand information.

He seems a bit "extra harsh" on Nicholas and Alexandra. Particularly Alexandra.  She really couldn't help her mental condition after all.  She was a frantic mother, who not only had to be afraid of losing her child, she had the extra burden of being responsible for the Heir to the Throne!  She would have invited a farm mule into the Palace if that mule displayed any ability to heal Alexei!  Also, the entire regimental and pre marital days of Nicholas are overlooked.  Nicholas' only exposure, socially, before marriage was his Regimental officers.  All of them drank to excess and chased loose women.  That would not have scandalized Nicholas nearly so much.

Also, Fuhrmann missed one point in Spiridovitch, that I believe helps explain things. A lot.  Nicholas did authorize two separate background investigations about Rasputin.  Particularly the Stolypin report is of interest.  The independent investigations revealed that while there was "some" truth about Rasputin, particularly his carousing with women and frequenting prostitutes, the most serious allegations turned out to be false and made up or substantially exaggerated.  Now, Nicholas knew full well that much of his Suite hated Rasputin and wanted him gone.  He, logically, drew that conclusion that these made up and over blown allegations were simply the machinations of these members of his Suite and government, to try to persuade Nicholas to get rid of Rasputin.  Thus, like the boy who cried wolf, when things WERE serious during the War, Nicholas refused to consider the veracity of the new allegations as simply more of the same.

This little quibble aside, I'm enjoying the book and finding it useful to really grasp the full story of Rasputin and his interactions with the IF and Russian public perceptions of the time. Looking forward to the end.

Rob

[Janet Ashton]

He seems a bit "extra harsh" on Nicholas and Alexandra. Particularly Alexandra.  She really couldn't help her mental condition after all.  She was a frantic mother, who not only had to be afraid of losing her child, she had the extra burden of being responsible for the Heir to the Throne!  She would have invited a farm mule into the Palace if that mule displayed any ability to heal Alexei!  Also, the entire regimental and pre marital days of Nicholas are overlooked.  Nicholas' only exposure, socially, before marriage was his Regimental officers.  All of them drank to excess and chased loose women.  That would not have scandalized Nicholas nearly so much.

Thanks for your thoughts, Rob - I'll pass the post on.

Joe argues in this book and in the last one that Nicholas and Alexandra were not so blind to Rasputin's faults as both defenders and detractors have suggested they were - he mentions R's fondling of Olga A's arm in their near-presence as an example - and was also the person who drew attention to Alexandra's underlinings in a book she gave Countess Carlow, which emphasized the dissolution of certain Holy Men. He told me that this book was actually R's own writings, though!

I generally see him as sympathetic to N and A, within limits - more so to Nicholas for sure; he tends to argue that A. did most of the damage while N. tried to resist, which has become a standard position now to many; but in his edition of the correspondence he was the first serious historian I know of who described Alexandra as "intelligent" (though lacking in common sense) and highly praised her organizational abilities.

[griffh]

I just wanted to say that I have just finished reading Joe's new book on Rasputin

He seems a bit "extra harsh" on Nicholas and Alexandra. Particularly Alexandra.  She really couldn't help her mental condition after all.  She was a frantic mother, who not only had to be afraid of losing her child, she had the extra burden of being responsible for the Heir to the Throne!  She would have invited a farm mule into the Palace if that mule displayed any ability to heal Alexei!  Also, the entire regimental and pre marital days of Nicholas are overlooked.  Nicholas' only exposure, socially, before marriage was his Regimental officers.  All of them drank to excess and chased loose women.  That would not have scandalized Nicholas nearly so much.

Thanks for your thoughts, Rob - I'll pass the post on.

Joe argues in this book and in the last one that Nicholas and Alexandra were not so blind to Rasputin's faults as both defenders and detractors have suggested they were - he mentions R's fondling of Olga A's arm in their near-presence as an example - and was also the person who drew attention to Alexandra's underlinings in a book she gave Countess Carlow, which emphasized the dissolution of certain Holy Men. He told me that this book was actually R's own writings, though!

I generally see him as sympathetic to N and A, within limits - more so to Nicholas for sure; he tends to argue that A. did most of the damage while N. tried to resist, which has become a standard position now to many; but in his edition of the correspondence he was the first serious historian I know of who described Alexandra as "intelligent" (though lacking in common sense) and highly praised her organizational abilities.

Gosh I just wanted to add a few comments as well.  I enjoyed reading Joe's new book in a way that I was not expecting.  What moved me were all the archival material on his earlier life that portrayed Rasputin to me in a new light, not a particularly "better" light, but a fuller picture of the man.  Right now the passages I am thinking of escape me, but there was something more human about Joe's rendering of Rasputin than I recall having ever read before.  I could almost see Alix picking and choosing the best parts of the man which were clearly his insights and loyalty.  Also Joe let us hear Rasputin's voice through his writings. 

The other thing that gave a depth to Joe's book was his inclusion of the material on Rasputin's tortuous attempts to overcome lust which reminded me of several eminent Victorian men, including on one of Britain's Prime Ministers, who (with his wife's consent) tested his own chastity by inviting prostitutes home to tempt him. 

I think that Joe's portrayal of N and A is sympathetic, more so than what most historian has written.  Joe clearly gives gives Alix credit for being intelligent and portrays her at least in one instance as a woman who yields to her husband's will (i.e. the Tsar's March 1914 banishment of Rasputin).  And I think this is a departure from the usual portrayal of Alexandra as an half-mad obsessive mystic that Nicholas could not stand up to.   

[griffh]

I forgot to add one of the things that impressed me with Joe's sympathetic treatment of Alix was his inclusion of her letter to her sister-in-law, Eleonore Hesse from Petra's book.

He wrote:

"Nicholas and his family did not attend Stolypin's funeral--some took this as a sign of their hostility to the great statesman.  The truth was actually more complicated, and, as usual, a full review of the evidence that has only recently come to light shows that Alexandra was judged unfairly by contemporaries and historians.  Although she disliked Stolypin because he had been Rasputin's passionate foe, the empress was shaken by the attempt on his life.  In a letter to her sister-in-law Eleonore dated September 2, 1911, the tsaritsa echoed the general opinion that the prime minister would recover.  She was thankful that Stolypin "slept for five hours, and is not in great pain"; he never lost consciousness and was speaking "very lucidly."  "They think he is out of danger," Alexandra continued.  "His liver seems to be only slightly affected...Fortunately, N., O. and T. were in the foyer when it happened; Tatiana came home very tearful and is still a little shaken whereas Olga put on a brave face throughout...Pray God he will make a full recovery.  It is such a sorrowful event, and I was not there with the others!"  (Fuhrmann, Rasputin: The Untold Story, p.89.) 

[Taco]

A few weeks ago I bought Rasputin, the untold story online. I really like the book. It solves a lot of questions, but there is a new one too. On page 239 Fuhrmann writes:

The commander reported that “Rasputin’s body was destroyed on the morning of  March 11, between 7 and 9 o’clock, near the main road from lesnoe to Peskarevka, at a forest in the total absence of anyone but us, the humble participants in this event.”

As a person interested in maps and geography I always check where places are located. On Google Maps I found a Lesnoie (60°22'39"N   30°11'45"E) near Lembolovo, 50 km north of Saint Petersburg and the A 120 "leads" to Pervomayskoye, but it is hard to believe this Lesnoie was a place worth mentioning on 10 March 1917. Till 2006 it was a military base and now a deposit.

But, there is a Lesnoy Prospekt (Woodland Lane) in the north of Saint Petersburg, leading to Pargolovo, ten kilometers north; the next street to the East is called Ul. Pargolovskaya, ending at the Prospekt Murinskiy. There is a Metro station called Lesnaia, and the Park Lesotekhnichsekoy Academii is nearby.

Is there anyone who has more details on the exact location of Peskarevka? Then it could be possible to locate Lesnoe too. Thanks

[rudy3]

The area, where the truck with the body of Rasputin got stuck, is called Lesnoj (not Lesnoe) and is located in the Northern outskirts (at that time, now a suburb, close to subway station Lesnaya) of Petrograd. Next to Lesnoj, to the east, are the areas called Bolshaya and Malenkaya Kushelevka, next to it Piskarevka.
Today's railwaystations (for local trains, called "Elektrichka") show best the line: Lanskaya, Kushelevka, Piskarevka.
Rasputin's remains were destroyed in the cauldrons of the Polytechnical Institute in Lesnoj.
Rudy

[Forum Admin]

"Lesnoe" "Lesnoje" and "Lesnoie" are all English spellings for the SAME PLACE NAME in Russian.  I explained that already in email to Taco, but I guess my answer wasn't good enough for him.

It's all the same place.

[rudy3]

A pity it is all the same place, in English. In todays Russia there are over 30 villages called Lesnoe, in Russia before the revolution (for ex. incl the Ukraine) there were over 60! There is only one city called Lesnoy, in the Sverdlovsk province. "Our" Lesnoy is a part of St. Petersburg, so no independant village...
Rudy

[Forum Admin]

at the time Rasputin was cremated, it was just empty forest of course.