Restitution?

[jacqueline]

Most aristocratic estates before the revolution were not freehold. That is to say, they were either mortgaged or their ownership was partitioned to get access to cash, or more commonly to pay off debt. How would you attempt to return ownership of an estate to
Pr. Poor No-one'i'vich Gotnomoneyisky, when ownership of his former estate was....

Pr. P.N.Gotnomoneyisky   = 25.68%
Merchant Bank               = 74.32%

This is interesting. Where can I find a reference with these type of statistics? 

[james_h]

jacqueline,

The issue of restitution is a very murky situation; I'll use an extreme example to illustrate my case more easily.

Princess Z.N. Yusupova

Land (215,200 Desyatiny)    =        21,300,000.00 Rubles
Stocks and Bonds                =          3,200,000.00 Rubles
1914 Profits                        =             730,100.00 Rubles

Never the less, what the Dynasty spent annually exceeded its income. That is not to say that every year they got further and further into debt. That was not the case as the interest of the Stocks and bonds in all likelihood was higher than the interest on the debt the Yususpov's accumulated.

There was in Moscow a very, very large number of Nobles indebted to merchant owned banks, indeed a number of merchants become very wealthy from primarily lending money to the increasingly poorer nobility. All of these records would be, in the recently opened Russian archives. Check out the banks owned by merchants, like the Morozov's.

As an example, lets assume Princess Yusupova borrowed from a Morozov merchant bank a mere 12,000 rubles to make up her income deficit in 1917. Just before the revolution.

Her descendant filled for reparation and received 20,000,000.00Roubles from the current Russian government. (It's more likely she'd get nothing at all).
So government gave her 20 Million Rubles.
+ 20 Million Rubles


Now, let’s assume, also in aforementioned hypothetical situation, that I am a descendant of the owner of that merchant bank. I would in turn sue Yusupov descendant for 100 years of unpaid debt and at perhaps 8% per year for 100 years on a 12,000. Ruble advance I would sue her for 26,397,135. Rubles. She would find herself indebt to me for 6 Million Rubles. So after taking all her current government restitution I would go after her personal fortune in Greece, and once again the yusupov's would find themselves penniless and quite possibly homeless.

You see jacqueline, merchants kept VERY meticulous records. Especially of debtors. I'm sure they are all still there. If nobles care to pursue this they should hope that the descendants of the merchants are not as money hungry, or it may not turn out quite as expected. Although as this entire restitution issue is borne out of the fact that almost after 100 years after the revolution aristocratic descendants yearn for a lifestyle they cannot provide for themselves it could be quite ironic..... To go after money and end up with significant debt...


Regards
James

P.S. Try reading, D. Pokrovskii, "Ocherki Moskvy," Istoricheskii vestnik 51 (Feb. 1893): 793-94.

[Valmont]

Very interesting  indeed.. That is a subject  I had not thought about...interesting...

[jacqueline]

james,

Why would any of the Yussopov's borrow money from a bank? I am sorry, james, but I will not take your assumptions down this slippery slope of an argument. Assumptions are dangerous things and I'd rather deal with facts.

I understand how you can have these viewpoints and make such arguments because most of what has been published is by pro-soviet authors. However, I wholeheartedly disagree with these authors and their arguments because their "facts" are quite skewed by a singular view point -- one that is incorrect and corrupt.   You see, james, it was not only the merchant banks that kept meticulous records. Unfortunately, many archives were destroyed but when the complete truth is reveled you will not be able to take pleasure in an irony of the nobility being indebted ...

Also, the nobility is not "money hungry", as you call it,  when all they seek is restitution of what is rightfully theirs and has been in their families for almost a millennium. Any argument about merchant bank debts would not apply to all the nobility, especially not the Yussopovs.

Jacqueline

[james_h]

jacqueline

Assumptions nothing,

Unfortunately jacqueline you are quite wrong. In "The Aristocracy in Europe 1815 - 1914" by Dominic Lieven, yes of the Princely Russian House of Lieven, seems to have no trouble at all in believing in aristocratic debt. Exposure of even the Yussopov's annual deficit of expenditure over income is due to him. Now unlike most he knows the subject. Don’t be foolish jacqueline, in 1859 Count N.P. Sheremetev had debts of 6 million rubles. In 1899 the Stroganoff's Ural mines were HEAVILY in debt to the point of the last Stroganoff Count having to sell the factories and mines off. The Merchant Firsanov made a fortune in leading to Aristocrats.

As for publishing bias, the Reference I quoted earlier was published decades before the revolution. There are no assumptions jacqueline, Check out the archived records of the following....


1.   Moscow Merchant Bank (Shareholders =  Maliutin’s, Morozov’s, Liamin’s, Vishniakov’s, Khludov’s, Grachev’s  Smaller Shareholders = Kokorev’s, Rukavishnikov’s, Tretiakov’s,  Krestnovnikov’s, Baranov’s, Bardygin’s, Bakhrushin and Prokhorov’s.  1882 - 200 shareholders.)
2.   The Trade Bank (  Nadianov)
3.   The (Moscow) Discount Bank ( Moscow Germans – Knoop et el.)
4.    Corporate Moscow Bank (The Riabushinsky Group)
5.   The United Bank
6.   J.W. Junker and Co. Bank
7.   The Moscow Private Bank
8.   Moscow Land Bank
9.   Moscow Merchants’ Mutual Credit Society

Short of the Ministry of Finance these were the largest financial institutions in the Empire and all, if not completely merchant owned were certainly majority merchant owned.

The information you are after will be in the annual statements of these institutions, all still intact an all un-tampered with by soviets.

It is unfortunate for the pro-noble perspective of restitution but it is a reality, unfortunately you must accept it.

As much as an old estate of a noble could be considered an restitution able "asset" so to could debt to a merchant's descendant.

James

[james_h]

  when all they seek is restitution of what is rightfully theirs and has been in their families for almost a millennium. Any argument about merchant bank debts would not apply to all the nobility, especially not the Yussopovs.

Jacqueline

That is a vulgar fiction Jacqueline, none of the aristocratic estates in Russia when compared with western Europe were even very old. That's not taking into account the enormous changes of ownership that took place. Neither the Moika nor Arkhangleskoie palaces were built by the Yusupovs, merely purchased. Just as they sold their "Yusupov Palace" on the fontanka. Rakitnoe was originally Tsarist.
The Beloselsky palace was Romanov for only a few decades, not much longer than it's actual age.
This links into what you asked earlier, as women could and did inherit money and property and art and jewels things went from one family to another with a rapidity not seen in any other aristocracy in Europe. The wealthiest post-Catherine nobles were only marginally older than old American families or for that matter elite merchant dynasties themselves.

James

[james_h]

There is an oft repeated fiction here, that Russian Noble = Wealth. To help dispel this let me point out the inequity even amongst nobles.
In 1858 The wealthiest 127 Russian nobles; the first 3 Russian Nobles were wealthier than the next wealthiest 64 nobles combined. An inequality present in NO OTHER continental European aristocracy.

[Robert_Hall]

Excellent evidence and argument, James_H. One of the best threads on thw whole forum, imo.
Cheers,
 Robert

[Valmont]

There is an oft repeated fiction here, that Russian Noble = Wealth. To help dispel this let me point out the inequity even amongst nobles.
In 1858 The wealthiest 127 Russian nobles; the first 3 Russian Nobles were wealthier than the next wealthiest 64 nobles combined. An inequality present in NO OTHER continental European aristocracy.

This is still happening in real life.  One of my classmates in college was one of the wealthiest guys  in school, now ten years latter after his father's death he income has decreased a lot and his debt is really high, but a lot of people still thinking he is as wealthy as he used to because he still  keeping  his lifestyle... not as much as he used to either...  but what James says, makes perfect sense to me.....

Arturo

[james_h]

This is still happening in real life.  One of my classmates in college was one of the wealthiest guys  in school, now ten years latter after his father's death he income has decreased a lot and his debt is really high, but a lot of people still thinking he is as wealthy as he used to because he still  keeping  his lifestyle... not as much as he used to either...  but what James says, makes perfect sense to me.....

Arturo

It does make sense. In any aged family the amount of money they possess over the centuries is NEVER constant. Old families learn to keep up appearances even when the trough is almost empty. You borrow from Peter to pay Paul. Mortgage this to invest in that, all the while no one is aware of what's really going on, and in truth most others are doing the same thing.... it's only upon implosion does it become obvious. Then you hear the "I should have know, the wallpaper seems to have been falling off the walls."   and "Yes, they did seem to be showing sign of strain, I should have guessed"    or my favorite....... "I always suspected that was the case" 

J


Hang on I've just thought of another...... when "Old rich, whomever died, and no one got much at all" 

[Vassili_Vorontsoff]

Am James,

I 'm admiring, it is rather  interesting to listen to you, clear datas...

It is generally acknowleged taht  in people's mind there is an association between noblesse  and richness iwhich is for the more  exaggerated never the les  perhaps is it still  the case also today?

One speaks much (more)about the nouveaux riches nowadays,there are depicted as  billionaires, importants incomes could also mean in the seam time  importants debts… 

In the case of Youssoupov, I am astonished I read the memories of the prince where he states that (before the revolution)  his family  was in an opulent situation…! 

But we may have a qualified opinion,a debt (don't exaggerate) is not always synonymous with misery! They had their properties and their titles (what has less of value today) if one compares their business to a state it is rare that there is no  debts at all, the  United States (even if it is less bigger than  Third World countries) remains the first puissance world!!!

It would be  instructive to compare with restitution in Europe I do not have heard the family Kinsky or another one have to pay interet to merchants...

Vassili

[james_h]

Vassili

Thank you.

"It is generally acknowleged taht  in people's mind there is an association between noblesse  and richness iwhich is for the more  exaggerated never the les  perhaps is it still  the case also today?

One speaks much (more)about the nouveaux riches nowadays,there are depicted as  billionaires, importants incomes could also mean in the seam time  importants debts…" - Vassili

That's true. However the britsh aristocracy appears to have been from 1790's to WW1 the wealthiest aristocracy in Europe. Today's figures....
Bedford  600 Million Pounds
Devonshire  500 Million Pounds
Buccleuch 55 Million Pounds
Roxburghe 70 Million Pounds
Northumberland  300 Million Pounds
Sutherland  148 Million Pounds
Westminster  5000 Million Pounds
Grafton 100 Million Pounds

Not very impressive! The Duke of Buccleuch  had an income larger than perhaps any Russian Grandee and is today only worth as stated above. It would stand to reason a Sheremetev, Yusupov, Orlov Davydov etc... would be worth less.
As to the wealth of the nouveaux riches. It means new money, correct?
If restitution were to happen Vassili, would not all russian aristocrats be correctly classified as new money?
What would be the difference between a newly wealthy man and an impoverished Prince? Non Imperial titles in Russia were meaningless for societal prestige. Title is not synonymos with taste and culture let alone wealth.

Orlov-Davydov, Yusupov... both roughly as wealthy as one another yet one family was more tasteful and cultured than the other. Yusupov's were welcome everywhere, Orlov-Davydov's were not.

"In the case of Youssoupov, I am astonished I read the memories of the prince where he states that (before the revolution)  his family  was in an opulent situation…! " - Vassili

Felix an amusing historical oddity, but he's an unreliable account for anything....anything. I wouldn't  believe if he swore he had a shower, let alone an issue where lying enhances his own prestige.

Vassili check out the Merrill Lynch & Capgemini World Wealth Report. From 2004 until 2006 there are 2 Million more millionaires in the world. Bringing the total to more than 9 million, Millionaires in the world. It makes the clinging to restitution seem, imo, pathetic.

J


 

[jacqueline]

To say that the  Sheremetevs or Yusupovs were in any way impoverished is absolutely ridiculous.   But the exact size of an particular noble family fortune doesn't matter anyway. What matters is that it was stolen. It should be returned.

[David_Pritchard]

Then, if there are many free translators on the web... May I ask why you do not use one?.. My mother told me once that good manners were not only eating with your mouth closed and your elbows off the table.. It is also  making the other people feel the most comfortable possible, also as a sign of respect to them...

I hope one day you will find a meanning to this advise..
Best Regards,

Arturo Vega-Llausás

Our two Francophone might find the online  computer translators to be as lacking as I find them. One would have to rewrite every sentence to correct the errors of the computer translator. As it is, the French language can communicate certain thoughts, perceptions and emotions much more effectively than English. Had your mother been truly concerned with good manners, you should have been taught to speak French as a child.

If you speak Castilliano how hard can it be to read French?

David

[james_h]

To say that the  Sheremetevs or Yusupovs were in any way impoverished is absolutely ridiculous.   .

Clearly, which is why I never said that.
Putting words in other peoples mouths is absolutely ridiculous.