On the night of December 16-17, 1916, Grigori Rasputin—the Siberian mystic who had gained extraordinary influence over the Russian imperial family—was murdered in the basement of the Moika Palace in St. Petersburg. The official account, preserved in Prince Felix Yusupov's memoir, describes a conspiracy of Russian nobles acting alone to save their country from Rasputin's malign influence. Declassified British intelligence files, forensic analysis of autopsy records, and testimony from multiple sources suggest a more complex picture: that a British Secret Intelligence Service agent named Oswald Rayner was present during the killing, and that British intelligence may have facilitated or even directed the operation to keep Russia in World War I.
By December 1916, Grigori Rasputin had become the most powerful unelected figure in the Russian Empire. The Siberian peasant and self-proclaimed holy man wielded extraordinary influence over Tsarina Alexandra through his apparent ability to stop the bleeding episodes of her hemophiliac son, Alexei. With Tsar Nicholas II at the front commanding Russian forces, Alexandra effectively governed from Petrograd—and Rasputin governed Alexandra.
This arrangement alarmed both Russian patriots and Allied governments. Rasputin openly advocated for Russia to negotiate a separate peace with Germany. British intelligence intercepts of Alexandra's correspondence showed Rasputin's direct involvement in ministerial appointments, military decisions, and foreign policy. If Russia withdrew from the Eastern Front, Germany could redeploy millions of troops westward. For Britain and France, fighting a war of attrition in the trenches of Belgium and France, this prospect was catastrophic.
Ambassador Sir George Buchanan's cables to London in autumn 1916 describe a government paralyzed by court intrigue, with "the Tsarina and her friend" blocking competent ministers and pursuing policies that benefited Germany. In one November 1916 cable, Buchanan wrote that Rasputin had become "the greatest single obstacle to Allied victory in the East."
Prince Felix Yusupov was everything Rasputin was not: aristocratic, Western-educated, fabulously wealthy, and married into the imperial family. He had attended Oxford from 1909 to 1912, where he became close friends with Oswald Rayner, a fellow student who would later join British intelligence. Both were members of the Bullingdon Club, the exclusive drinking society for wealthy undergraduates.
By 1916, Rayner was officially attached to the Anglo-Russian Commission in Petrograd but actually worked for the Secret Intelligence Service under Samuel Hoare. His fluency in Russian and intimate knowledge of Russian aristocratic society made him a valuable asset. Declassified personnel files confirm he was on the SIS payroll from early 1916 and filed regular intelligence reports to London.
The friendship between Yusupov and Rayner is documented in contemporary letters and photographs. What remains contested is whether this friendship was leveraged for operational purposes—whether British intelligence used Rayner's access to Yusupov to facilitate or direct the removal of Rasputin.
In November 1916, Vladimir Purishkevich—a far-right member of the Duma—gave a speech denouncing Rasputin's influence and calling for action to save Russia. Yusupov approached him afterward, and the conspiracy began to take shape. They recruited Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich, whose imperial lineage would provide protection, and two others: Lieutenant Sergei Sukhotin and Dr. Stanislaus Lazovert.
"The time has come to act. Either he dies, or we all perish with Russia."
Vladimir Purishkevich — Diary entry, November 1916The standard account, provided by Yusupov in his 1927 memoir, describes a carefully planned operation. Lazovert would provide potassium cyanide to poison wine and cakes. Yusupov would lure Rasputin to his palace on the pretext of introducing him to his beautiful wife, Princess Irina. When the poison failed to work—a detail that has never been satisfactorily explained—Yusupov shot Rasputin with a Browning pistol. When Rasputin incredibly rose and attempted to escape, Purishkevich shot him multiple times in the courtyard. The conspirators then drove the body to the Neva River and pushed it through the ice.
This account has several problems. The autopsy found no trace of poison. The ballistics don't match the weapons the conspirators admitted using. And multiple sources place additional people at the scene—people Yusupov never mentioned.
Dr. Dmitry Kosorotov performed the autopsy on December 19, 1916, three days after fishermen pulled Rasputin's body from the Neva. His report, suppressed for decades and only published in full in the 1990s, contains details that contradict the conspirators' story.
Kosorotov found three gunshot wounds. Two were consistent with the .32 caliber Browning pistols that Yusupov and Purishkevich used. But the third—the fatal wound to the center of the forehead—came from a larger weapon. Forensic analysis conducted by British barrister Richard Cullen in 2004, using enhanced photographs of the autopsy, determined the head wound was consistent with a .455 Webley revolver, the standard sidearm of British military officers.
Kosorotov also noted that the head wound was fired from a distance of less than eight inches and at a slightly downward angle—suggesting the victim was on the ground and the shooter standing over him. This is consistent with an execution, not a panicked shooting during an escape attempt.
Perhaps most significantly, Kosorotov found no poison in Rasputin's stomach contents, despite the conspirators' claims of feeding him cyanide-laced food and wine. Either Lazovert provided fake poison, the cyanide had degraded to inert compounds, or—as some historians now believe—the poisoning story was fabricated to make the murder seem more dramatic and Rasputin more supernatural in his resistance to death.
Oswald Rayner's presence in Petrograd on the night of December 16-17, 1916, is established by declassified intelligence files. What remains disputed is whether he was at the Moika Palace.
The most direct evidence comes from John Scale, a fellow British intelligence officer who worked alongside Rayner. In a 1960 private letter to historian Michael Kettle, Scale wrote that Rayner had told him he was present during the killing. Scale had no apparent motive to fabricate this claim—he made it in private correspondence, decades after the event, when there was no political advantage to be gained.
Additional circumstantial evidence includes:
"Rayner told me he was there that night. He said very little else about it, and I knew better than to press him."
John Scale — Private letter to Michael Kettle, 1960If Rayner was present, several questions follow. Was he there as Yusupov's friend, providing moral support? As an observer, reporting back to British intelligence? Or as an active participant—perhaps the person who fired the fatal shot?
British intelligence had compelling strategic reasons to want Rasputin dead. His influence over the Tsarina was pushing Russia toward a separate peace. Alexandra's correspondence, which British cryptanalysts were reading, showed Rasputin directly advising against offensive operations and in favor of peace negotiations.
Samuel Hoare's cables to 'C' (Mansfield Cumming, head of MI6) in November and December 1916 express alarm about the trajectory of Russian policy. One November cable, declassified in 2000, explicitly requests authorization for "active measures" to preserve the Anglo-Russian alliance. The response, if any, remains classified.
Ambassador Buchanan met with members of the Duma opposition in late November, according to both British and Russian sources. While there's no direct evidence he met with the conspirators, he was certainly aware through intelligence channels that a plot against Rasputin was forming. His cables show no attempt to warn the Russian authorities or discourage such action.
Felix Yusupov published his account in 1927, eleven years after the events and after the Bolshevik Revolution had destroyed the Russia he knew. His memoir is detailed, dramatic, and completely silent on any British involvement. He describes five conspirators: himself, Purishkevich, Dmitri, Sukhotin, and Lazovert. He makes no mention of Rayner, despite their well-documented friendship.
Vladimir Purishkevich's diary, published in excerpts in 1923, corroborates Yusupov's basic narrative but includes an intriguing detail: he refers to "additional persons present" without naming them. He also describes the scene as more chaotic than Yusupov's account suggests, with multiple shots fired by multiple people.
Grand Duke Dmitri, in limited statements before his death in 1942, confirmed the conspiracy but never addressed the question of foreign involvement. Dr. Lazovert, in a much later account, insisted he provided real poison and could not explain why it had no effect.
The silence is notable. None of the Russian conspirators ever publicly named Rayner or any other British participant. This could mean he wasn't there—or that the conspirators agreed to protect him and, by extension, British intelligence's role in the operation.
Several historians remain skeptical of British involvement, offering alternative explanations for the evidence:
Critics of the British involvement theory note that intelligence agencies are often credited with more competence and coordination than they actually possess. The idea that MI6 successfully orchestrated a high-level political assassination, left no documentary trail, and maintained operational security for a century may overestimate the service's capabilities in 1916.
The lack of a smoking gun—a cable explicitly ordering Rayner to participate, or a report describing his role—is significant. Intelligence operations of this sensitivity would presumably be documented, even if classified. The fact that nothing explicit has emerged in over a century of declassification may indicate there was nothing to find.
Certain facts are not in dispute:
What cannot be definitively established is the extent of British involvement. The evidence is consistent with three scenarios: (1) British intelligence learned of the Russian conspiracy and allowed it to proceed without interference; (2) British intelligence actively encouraged and facilitated the conspiracy through Rayner's relationship with Yusupov; or (3) British intelligence directed the operation, with Rayner present as participant or supervisor, possibly firing the fatal shot.
Rasputin's death did not save Imperial Russia. The February Revolution erupted less than three months later. Nicholas abdicated in March 1917. The Bolsheviks seized power in October. By July 1918, the entire imperial family had been executed.
The British agents who operated in Petrograd during this period dispersed. Samuel Hoare returned to London and had a long political career, serving in multiple cabinet positions. Oswald Rayner worked in academia and business, never speaking publicly about his intelligence service. He died in 1961, taking whatever he knew to his grave.
The Russian conspirators fared variably. Felix Yusupov escaped to Paris and lived in exile until 1967. Vladimir Purishkevich died of typhus in 1920. Grand Duke Dmitri survived because Nicholas had exiled him to Persia immediately after the murder—a punishment that saved him from the Bolsheviks' systematic execution of Romanovs.
Multiple Freedom of Information requests have been filed seeking complete declassification of MI6 files related to Rayner and the 1916 Petrograd station. The responses have been consistent: many files remain classified under exemptions for national security and protection of intelligence sources and methods. Some files have been "lost" or "destroyed in accordance with retention schedules."
Russian archives contain extensive material on the murder investigation conducted by the Provisional Government in 1917, but these files focus on the Russian conspirators. References to foreign involvement, if they ever existed, may have been destroyed during the subsequent revolutions and purges.
What remains is circumstantial evidence, forensic analysis, and the testimony of participants who had reasons to lie or tell partial truths. This is typical of intelligence operations from the era—designed to be deniable, with multiple layers of separation between authorization and action.
The standard account of Rasputin's murder—that Russian nobles acting alone killed him to save their country—is incomplete. British intelligence had the motive, means, and opportunity to participate. An agent with direct access to the lead conspirator was present in the city and possibly at the scene. The forensic evidence suggests a weapon that none of the named conspirators possessed.
This does not prove that British intelligence ordered or executed the killing. It does establish that the historical record contains significant gaps, that the participants withheld information, and that the full truth was never meant to become public.
Whether Oswald Rayner fired the fatal shot, provided tactical support, or merely reported on events organized by others may never be definitively established. What can be said is that the murder of Grigori Rasputin—long presented as a purely Russian affair—had an international dimension that the official accounts deliberately obscured.
The incomplete declassification, the forensic anomalies, and the participants' studied silence all point in the same direction: toward a conspiracy larger than the one described in the memoirs, involving actors with interests that extended beyond Russia's borders, planned and executed in the shadow of the Great War's brutal calculus.