Author Topic: Kaiser Wilhelm II  (Read 276623 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #15 on: August 27, 2004, 10:49:52 AM »
Felix took their two Rembrandts out of the St. Petersburg palace, it was the same time that they hid all of that silver (shown in the Yussupov thread), and nothing had yet been "nationalized" it was still quite personal property. No theft about it at all.

Offline grandduchessella

  • Global Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 13039
  • Getting Ready to Move to Europe :D
    • View Profile
    • Facebook page
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #16 on: August 27, 2004, 11:43:16 PM »
Quote
Felix took their two Rembrandts out of the St. Petersburg palace, it was the same time that they hid all of that silver (shown in the Yussupov thread), and nothing had yet been "nationalized" it was still quite personal property. No theft about it at all.


I've said twice that it wasn't theft--that it was his and he took it before the Bolsheviks could get it. I admire his ingenuity--he escaped with more of his stuff than most.
They also serve who only stand and wait--John Milton
Come visit on Pinterest--http://pinterest.com/lawrbk/

Offline Lisa

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1464
  • Alix & Ella
    • View Profile
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #17 on: August 28, 2004, 02:28:37 AM »
Quote
I think it might be useful to keep in mind that the lines between state and personal property for the old dynasties weren't always clear.  When one is an absolute monarch, the personification of the state, drawing sharp lines between public and private possessions can be very challenging.



I agree. Remember the French King Louis XIV which said "L'Etat, c'est moi" (the State, it's me!)...

Annie

  • Guest
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #18 on: August 28, 2004, 12:38:55 PM »
I don't think anyone is a thief who takes something that had been in their family for years, even if they were ousted from power. The real 'thieves' were the ones to took it for themselves, like the way the Bolsheviks found the Yussoupov stash and got the money for it, making the family very sad. To me it would be beyond heartbreaking and frustrating, I'd want to hit someone and scream "damn you that's MINE!"

If it's a family fortune thing and not just the government itself, I say let them have it. I have heard of presidents and their wives sneaking things out of the White House before they officially leave office, and to me that IS stealing since it never belonged to them in the first place.

MarquisAnthony

  • Guest
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #19 on: September 17, 2004, 10:36:32 AM »
While I agree that the art, fortunes, and such technically and legally belong to the dynastic families and their heirs, I wonder what everyone thinks of this idea. As I read the other posts of the outrage at the Bolsheviks, the French revoluntionaries and others who took possession of the royal's estate's and properties. I thought, could this action have been a process of history "righting wrongs." This is what I mean:

-Royal families and aristocracies gained all of this wealth from holding power. They enacted laws that kept them in possession of power. Despite them being a large minority, they held a majority of the land and economic wealth.
-The people of each respective country dealt with years of oppression and inequality. The vast estates of the old aristocracies were built  by the backs of the poor. In Russia the serfs were a commodity. It was these people who polished and preserved all of the furniture, antiques, silverware, and jewelry kept in these estates. They kept the lawns perfectly manicured. And all of this they often did with little respect in return and without  equal compensation for their services.
-The aristocracy for a large part of history in several countries did not pay or did not pay the full amount of taxes paid by the common citizens. The 18th and 19th century descendants of the lower classes may have seen the wealth of the upper as belonging to them by right of history. And the movement of these properties to state museums allows the people to enjoy the relics and elements that they all created, preserved, and contributed to society.

Robert_Hall

  • Guest
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #20 on: September 17, 2004, 11:42:52 AM »
I have tried to make this point before, Marquis. To no avail here !! I do believe, just as you said, that the possesions of the imperial/royal families came about because the people they ruled provided them- by their work. So, the "people" are taking back what they had given in the first place !
Undoubtedly their were thieves amongst the revolutionaries as well, looting is what the word might be. However, taking such proerty for the benefit of the people who provided them is justifeid, in my "revolutionary" opinion.
In the case of the dynasties, they were indeed the "State" so when they lost that mandate, they also lost all claim to the wealth the state had provided them.
Perhaps, in a non-violent dispossesion, the Civil List solution of Britain might have worked elsewhere as well. Perhaps not.
I do know something about the eastern Euro monarchies. In former Yugoslavia, there is a family fight going on between themselves over property returned to the. In Bulgaria, an amicable settlement seems to have come to pass- The property that Ferdinand of Coburg aquired with his funds from his own family have been returned, and some quite gladly given back !! {those places are a fortune to keep up, and do not generate enough revenue to justify keeping them}.
I think much the same is going on in Romania, Art would know more about that.
I do not see any Romanov stampede to collect former property. It would be an expensive and ultimately lost cause anyway.
The Germans and French also have come to terms, I think. In Germanys case, so much more is involved, what with half the stuff being returned was in East Germany. In France, there are 2 noble systems- Bourbon and Bonaparte who seem to have come to a mutual settlement, often with conflicting claims.
In any case, it will all end up in the multi-nationals anyway, and we cannot turn back time. So, let it be.
Cheers,
Robert

MarquisAnthony

  • Guest
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #21 on: September 17, 2004, 02:18:57 PM »
Excellent points Robert. I actually had some fear in posting my opinion :o

Robert_Hall

  • Guest
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #22 on: September 17, 2004, 05:18:35 PM »
I know, stepping on eggshells sometimes here. But, it is all discussions and sharing of opinions- right? And I have seen worse in either direction than anything I may have said.
Cheers,
Robert

Offline HerrKaiser

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1373
    • View Profile
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #23 on: October 11, 2004, 12:58:45 PM »
Wilhelm spent many years during the beginnings of his exile writing his memoirs. Overall, historians and the academic community did not look fondly on his memoirs as the writings were in large part an explanation from his point of view as to the elements leading up to and causing the Great War. As the vanquished, his view was not taken seriously or of much value. Wilhelm, much like Nickolas II, always had a fond image of the mystique of the life of a English country gentleman. Such dreams likely come from their days visiting Queen Victoria at her country estates. Wilhelm never got over the Versailles Treaty, having felt Germany got snookered. He believed that had he been able to hold off the Bolsheviks in Berlin, the outcome would have been much different for him and his country. He was in almost complete psychological breakdown during his flight to Holland, but it does seem in later years he came to not only accept but enjoy his exile. He even spoke, on occasion, lovingly about his mother. While he initially cheered Hitler and Hitler's acheivements, Wilhelm, who was not at all anti-semetic, scorned Hitler and other Germans who followed that course. Wilhelm, in the end, was horrified at what had become of his beloved Germany.
HerrKaiser

Offline HerrKaiser

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1373
    • View Profile
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #24 on: October 12, 2004, 09:57:29 AM »
It seems to me that there is actually a blended concept to this idea of whose property belongs to whom. Robert and Marquis make excellent points especially, as Robert points out, that we are in a different era now and there is little chance of turning back some aspects of time...and property. The subjects of the aristocracies did in fact create the wealth of the monarchs, much to the subjects misery. But, the subjects, while acheiving little monetary wealth, had a HUGE benefit from the monachies in the social and religious systems that were set in place. Western civilization and the structure and nature of art, science, philosophy, architecture, sociology, etc, are due in large part to the aristocracies giving such things back to their subjects. So, it was a give and take, take and give. When the aristocracies got "fired", so went the corner office, the limo, and the other perks and bonuses. I think the bigger issue is not so much who among the current generation of generally unaccomplished aristocratic lineage have their forebearers' treasures or which museums/states have been recipients of such; rather, where are the treasures that were, in fact, stolen by private looters and military-sponsored looting? Ultimately, everything of value will be available for public viewing/enjoyment. We just need to find it all.
HerrKaiser

MarquisAnthony

  • Guest
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #25 on: October 12, 2004, 12:18:58 PM »
Unfortunately HerrKaiser I don't think that it would bethat easy. Private property rights can withhold anyonr aristocrat from having to reveal what treasures they have. Only their current decreasing wealth has led the upper-classes to open the doors to their palaces and houses to show the magic that onc occurred in them.

Offline HerrKaiser

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1373
    • View Profile
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #26 on: October 12, 2004, 12:44:18 PM »
Hi Marquis. I did not mean to search the warehouses of aristocracy. My point was that a more concerted effort be made to track down the looted wealth that is known to have disappeared over the last 7 decades...and return it to the public arena.
HerrKaiser

Robert_Hall

  • Guest
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #27 on: October 12, 2004, 01:11:14 PM »
And an admiral endeavor it is indeed ! Sadly hampered by the real thieves and "collectors" who get to it first.
Of course, what is amazing to me, that what with the violence and destruction of wars, revolutions and normal disasters of fire and nature,  so much is still left to find.
Sometimes I do think the question should not be "who owns it" but "does it still exsist"?
One of the greatest treasures- the Amber Room- has just been re-created, what would the scenario be if the original is actually found ?
Sometimes repatriation can be as complicated as "rightful heir" questions, I think.
Cheers,
Robert

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #28 on: October 12, 2004, 01:12:57 PM »
Quote
And an admiral endeavor it is indeed !


Is it being sponsored by the NAVY?
;D

Offline HerrKaiser

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1373
    • View Profile
Re: Kaiser Wilhelm II
« Reply #29 on: October 12, 2004, 01:44:46 PM »
So right, Robert. Has any tracker of such things ever created a measurement of lost items? For example, after wars, it is typical to describe damage in percentages of cities destroyed. Has any offered a percent of total Romanov jewels or Hohenzollern jewels unaccounted for? Both in terms of volume and value?
HerrKaiser