There is a well known photograph on the internet which many people have
unquestioningly accepted as being genuine. We include that photo here, along with the caption which someone online had added beneath it.
No genuine Theosophist or student of H. P. Blavatsky is likely to give credence to the photo, nor to the caption, and there are a few reasons for this:
#1. The figure on the right of the picture resembles the appearance and description commonly applied to a “Master” invented twenty or more years after HPB’s death by the controversial English Theosophist C.W. Leadbeater. He was the first to invent and describe the appearance and details of this individual, who he named the “Master R.” (for Rakoczy or Racokzy) and who he claimed had previously been Comte de Saint Germain. It was Leadbeater who first sowed the initial seeds for today’s New Age obsession with “Saint Germain,” who is worshipped (and channelled!) by many as a so-called “Ascended Master.”
HPB did indeed have personal knowledge of a “Hungarian Initiate” (her words) or “Magyar Philosopher” (Col. Olcott’s words) but never named or identified this individual in any way. He is only very briefly mentioned a few times and it is apparent that his connection and involvement with the Theosophical Movement was not as close or direct as that of other Adepts. She also never suggested him to be St. Germain, although there is good evidence to suggest that she did have knowledge regarding the actual St. Germain. More has been written about the fake “Master R.” in the article Theosophy Warns Against Ceremonial Magic and Who Was Saint Germain?
#2. There is no such Master as “El Morya.” The real Master Morya is not known by such a name or title, which apparently equates to “God Morya” or “Lord Morya,” and which was first invented by Guy Ballard of the “I AM Activity,” the earliest “Ascended Masters” group. Anyone who has read the actual letters of the actual Master M. will have discovered how strongly this Mahatma objects to reverential titles and terms of praise or worship. Those who speak of “El Morya” or “Morya El” are invariably those who are unacquainted with facts and history.
#3. Looking at the “photo,” it becomes immediately apparent that if HPB were to stand up from her seated position, she would then be of almost the same height as the three men behind her. This cannot be so, especially since the real Master Morya is described as being a very tall individual, of at least 6’5″ tall.
But the “photo” is no photo at all. It has been found to be merely a black and white photograph of this drawing by an unknown artist, which is thought to date from sometime between the 1930s and 1950s.
“Credulity breeds credulity,” said the Master K.H. in The Final Mahatma Letter. It’s always worth doing research and investigation before accepting anything as genuine, legitimate, or authentic, especially when it relates to the Masters of Wisdom, whose names, identities, pictures, and teachings, have been utterly desecrated, misrepresented, and travestied, by those who claim to revere them.
~ BlavatskyTheosophy.com ~
You may also like to read Who are you, Madame Blavatsky?, The Masters and Madame Blavatsky, Masters of Wisdom: Outwardly Mortal, Inwardly Immortal, Words from The Masters about H. P. Blavatsky, A Film about H. P. Blavatsky, and Praise for H. P. Blavatsky and Theosophy.
T H E O S O P H Y 
I have a copy of the actual “photograph” which has been in our family since the mid 1960’s. It is heavily silvered, which makes it likely that the photograph dates from the earlier part of your time range. It is clearly of a picture in an album and includes the typewritten comment: “This magnificent picture was taken in Adyar, India about 85 years ago. A picture of the great soul, Madame Blavatsky and the three Masters with whom she worked to found the Theosophical Society. These great ones are shown as they appeared in the physical at that time. Reading from left to right they are Lord Kuthumi, Lord Morya and Lord St Germaine.”
Searching the Internet for indication of the actual age and artist of the original painting I once found another photo which shows it in a frame, with an indecipherable artist’s signature, usually cropped out, on the bottom left hand corner. It also exists in two versions, one with the Masters having much darker faces and more detail on St Germain’s cloak in the bottom right hand corner, as you’ll notice in the bottom version. The top version is the one that I have.
My personal guess is that the original artwork is in a style that dates from the late nineteenth or early twentieth century, and that Kuthumi’s style of clothing is extemely unlikely. It can’t be as old as claimed, and someone’s had a go at retouching it who didn’t want to think that the Masters might possibly have had dark skins.
I think that, among other things, ‘St Germain’ (the historical personage) circulated some kind of beauty cream to ladies of the French Aristocracy… doesn’t inspire confidence. Your final point about desecration of the images/names etc of the Masters raises a question – most of us will have seen reproductions of the HPB authenticated portraits. When were they first circulated publicly, which she would not have approved of? The earliest I know of is in the Hare Bros book, ‘Who Wrote the Mahatma Letters’; one of the duo was, I believe, a lecturer in religion (one assumes before the book was published)for the TS Adyar’s English Section.
The historical St Germain was spoken of so highly by HPB – the entry in her “Theosophical Glossary” p. 308-309 being just one example, in which he is described as “certainly the greatest Oriental Adept Europe has seen during the last centuries” – that one may justly assume that he was/is indeed a great and noble soul and adept (calling him an “Oriental” Adept is interesting and perhaps a clue of some sort as to his real inner identity) regardless of some of his sideline activities.
It could be argued that some of the phenomena HPB performed for people, such as duplicating rings for women to wear and take home, etc., isn’t particularly confidence-inspiring either and yet the main bulk of her work and words show her to have been at the very least a true Initiate and even, as William Judge maintained, inwardly a great Adept, working in and through that body.
But of course each must form their own conclusions.
I don’t know the answer to your question but it would be interesting to know. It raises another question, which is how can one be sure that even the first public circulation of such pictures was a genuine printing of the HPB-authenticated pictures of the Masters? It’s possible that they have still never been made public and that only reproductions and copies have been made available.