I remember watching "History Channel"'s documentary on Rasputin when I was just a boy. What a load of garbage. I always felt like it was a falacy, thank you for the revision of history and the cognitive dissonance 🙏🏻
Thanks for this. When I learned the truth about how Tsar Nicholas had been slandered, I wondered as to whether Rasputin's case might be similar. Subsequently, I heard that he had been vindicated by official investigations. But your article makes matters much clearer for me. The enemy of God and man is utterly flagrant in the magnitude of his deceit! 🙏☦️♥️
Wow what a fascinating article!!! I didn't know about St. John of Kronshtadt's statements about Rasputin; that's a kind of "game changer" for me. And also, thank you for reproducing Maria Nikolaevna's drawing of Pokrovskoe - it is heartbreaking to see her young artistic talent depicting a place that meant so much to her and her family, as they paused on their final journey.
Thank you for breaking down this vast sea of information into digestible chunks. I am new to orthodoxy and only have begun to research the truth, but I was immediately reminded of the very dramatic negative portrayal on the 90s kids movie Anastasia! Another friend with whom I shared that there are all kinds of primary sources detailing the facts of Rasputin’a holy life countered that he was always taught that ‘Rasputin was a drunk’, and that made me want even more to learn the truth and undo the lies that have distorted our perceptions of
not willing to be a negative person, but I have a few questions:
* If he became a itinerant, it means he abandoned his family, correct?
* nice house for a peasant family, where was the wealth coming from?
* Why all this hatred organized against him by so many different people? jealous of his influence on the czar? Why the consistent allegations related to women? why not any other type of accusations?
1) No. He traveled because he was called to a pilgrimage. He always returned to his family, and while he was away he always made sure that friends and his own parents cared for his wife and children. Being called to a pilgrimage and then returning to family ≠ abandonment.
2)This was the Rasputin family house, not that expensive considering the location and structure. It didn’t stand out much in comparison to the other houses in Pokrovskoye. As for his apartment in Saint Petersburg, it was government provided and the furniture didn’t even belong to him.
3) This is a heavy question that is answered throughout the articles. Gerard Shelley succinctly explains it: “I realised that the fearful things attributed to Rasputin were, in many cases, the actual doings of his accusers. Perhaps no man in history has been so furiously calumniated.”
Well, ever since I found out more truth about tsar... how he wasnt some oampered snob, but lived almost like a monk in spite of all the riches and how he willinhly abdicated just to be killed by tge order of a madman, I began doubting these slanders too.
That is Andrew Cook's theory. Margarita Nelipa disagrees. I wrote two threads following Cook's research (see footnote 42), but now I lean towards Nelipa's version of the events. Mironova's theory is also interesting. Check the footnotes
I have great respect for the article but u mention some people that I do not think they are historians, and on the other hand, the Beilis case does not look like that at all, I have read a bit and it looks like a libel to me, its gross. Mironova´s version looks also surreal to me but she gives good arguments and she convinced me when she says there was a double in Petrograd. Very shocking to read her. But I do not think there is proove to blame the jews at all, although it might look suspicios. I would apreciatte if u tell me what u think. Genuily shocked by all of this and gratefull for the effort
Ultimately, I have chosen not to speak much about who was to blame. Rather, Grigory Efimovich’s personal piety and faith were the main focus of this article. I will not comment on the results of the Beilis Affair, but I wouldn’t be that quick to exonerate Beilis. In any case, the point of that paragraph was to lay out Kosorotov’s expertise and the origin for the well-founded theory that Rasputin was ritually murdered.
It is hard to read and accept something that strongly disagrees with one's preconceived notions, especially with regards to Church matters. However, I am just laying out the historical facts and writing down what many Saints who knew Rasputin said about him. Read the article in good conscience and with an open mind.
This is not true. Indeed, he opposed pogroms against the Jewish population of Russia, but if you look at his statements according to Metropolitan Antony (Khrapovitsky) and Gerard Shelley, you’ll hardly find the Jewish advocate you’re talking about.
Simanovich was some sort of secretary, not his sponsor, and even then their relationship wasn’t as close as you’d believe. Platonov dedicates Chapter 21 of his book “A Life for the Tsar” to this matter. Simanovich made a lot of things up, that is, if he even wrote the diary. Rasputin’s notes and dialogue in that book are also made up, which should clear your doubts about his “support for Gapon.” How logical would it be for Rasputin, not only to support a liar, fake Christian, and church robber, but to do it as soon as he arrived in Saint Petersburg? Apart from Rasputin’s actual statements (not those made up by Simanovich) do you not find it weird that Lenin, upon coming to power, would accuse Rasputin to be the chief “pogromist” in the “tsarist gang” that “drenched Russia in the blood of Jews…” ?
I remember watching "History Channel"'s documentary on Rasputin when I was just a boy. What a load of garbage. I always felt like it was a falacy, thank you for the revision of history and the cognitive dissonance 🙏🏻
Thanks for this. When I learned the truth about how Tsar Nicholas had been slandered, I wondered as to whether Rasputin's case might be similar. Subsequently, I heard that he had been vindicated by official investigations. But your article makes matters much clearer for me. The enemy of God and man is utterly flagrant in the magnitude of his deceit! 🙏☦️♥️
Great article, I barely knew he was this pious! Please post more
Because he wasn’t pious.
Great argument. Did you even read the article or are you just expressing your preconceived biases?
Wow what a fascinating article!!! I didn't know about St. John of Kronshtadt's statements about Rasputin; that's a kind of "game changer" for me. And also, thank you for reproducing Maria Nikolaevna's drawing of Pokrovskoe - it is heartbreaking to see her young artistic talent depicting a place that meant so much to her and her family, as they paused on their final journey.
Thank you for breaking down this vast sea of information into digestible chunks. I am new to orthodoxy and only have begun to research the truth, but I was immediately reminded of the very dramatic negative portrayal on the 90s kids movie Anastasia! Another friend with whom I shared that there are all kinds of primary sources detailing the facts of Rasputin’a holy life countered that he was always taught that ‘Rasputin was a drunk’, and that made me want even more to learn the truth and undo the lies that have distorted our perceptions of
history and truth and the church. Thank you.
Thank you for your work.
Hello,
not willing to be a negative person, but I have a few questions:
* If he became a itinerant, it means he abandoned his family, correct?
* nice house for a peasant family, where was the wealth coming from?
* Why all this hatred organized against him by so many different people? jealous of his influence on the czar? Why the consistent allegations related to women? why not any other type of accusations?
1) No. He traveled because he was called to a pilgrimage. He always returned to his family, and while he was away he always made sure that friends and his own parents cared for his wife and children. Being called to a pilgrimage and then returning to family ≠ abandonment.
2)This was the Rasputin family house, not that expensive considering the location and structure. It didn’t stand out much in comparison to the other houses in Pokrovskoye. As for his apartment in Saint Petersburg, it was government provided and the furniture didn’t even belong to him.
3) This is a heavy question that is answered throughout the articles. Gerard Shelley succinctly explains it: “I realised that the fearful things attributed to Rasputin were, in many cases, the actual doings of his accusers. Perhaps no man in history has been so furiously calumniated.”
He was just a paid servant of the Jews
Thank you for all those footnotes.
Thank you for reading!
that's great to hear a correction.. in most cases he's shown as a witch.
Well, ever since I found out more truth about tsar... how he wasnt some oampered snob, but lived almost like a monk in spite of all the riches and how he willinhly abdicated just to be killed by tge order of a madman, I began doubting these slanders too.
May it be so.
I thought he was killed by the British intelligence
That is Andrew Cook's theory. Margarita Nelipa disagrees. I wrote two threads following Cook's research (see footnote 42), but now I lean towards Nelipa's version of the events. Mironova's theory is also interesting. Check the footnotes
I have great respect for the article but u mention some people that I do not think they are historians, and on the other hand, the Beilis case does not look like that at all, I have read a bit and it looks like a libel to me, its gross. Mironova´s version looks also surreal to me but she gives good arguments and she convinced me when she says there was a double in Petrograd. Very shocking to read her. But I do not think there is proove to blame the jews at all, although it might look suspicios. I would apreciatte if u tell me what u think. Genuily shocked by all of this and gratefull for the effort
Ultimately, I have chosen not to speak much about who was to blame. Rather, Grigory Efimovich’s personal piety and faith were the main focus of this article. I will not comment on the results of the Beilis Affair, but I wouldn’t be that quick to exonerate Beilis. In any case, the point of that paragraph was to lay out Kosorotov’s expertise and the origin for the well-founded theory that Rasputin was ritually murdered.
It is hard to read and accept something that strongly disagrees with one's preconceived notions, especially with regards to Church matters. However, I am just laying out the historical facts and writing down what many Saints who knew Rasputin said about him. Read the article in good conscience and with an open mind.
If you didn’t read the article do not comment
This is not true. Indeed, he opposed pogroms against the Jewish population of Russia, but if you look at his statements according to Metropolitan Antony (Khrapovitsky) and Gerard Shelley, you’ll hardly find the Jewish advocate you’re talking about.
You didn’t ask a question. You made an ignorant accusation and I corrected you.
Simanovich was some sort of secretary, not his sponsor, and even then their relationship wasn’t as close as you’d believe. Platonov dedicates Chapter 21 of his book “A Life for the Tsar” to this matter. Simanovich made a lot of things up, that is, if he even wrote the diary. Rasputin’s notes and dialogue in that book are also made up, which should clear your doubts about his “support for Gapon.” How logical would it be for Rasputin, not only to support a liar, fake Christian, and church robber, but to do it as soon as he arrived in Saint Petersburg? Apart from Rasputin’s actual statements (not those made up by Simanovich) do you not find it weird that Lenin, upon coming to power, would accuse Rasputin to be the chief “pogromist” in the “tsarist gang” that “drenched Russia in the blood of Jews…” ?