The wealthiest person in History?

Xanikk999

History junkie
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
11,232
Location
Fairfax county VA, USA
I think this deserves its own thread because wealth is not easily measurable if you go back far enough in History. I can imagine it would be debatable who would be the most wealthiest if you compare their wealth back when they lived and compared it to an equivalent amount of worth today taking inflation into account.

My three choices on who may be the most wealthiest people in history are:

Mansa Musa (Legends state that he handed out such massive amounts of gold on his pilgrimage to Mecca, that it destabilized the region contributing to massive inflation)
Marcus Licinius Crassus (His wealth at one point was the size of the entire roman treasury. I dont remember if that was because he controlled the treasury or not for his own personal use. Legends state molten gold was poured down his throat to humiliate him for his legendary greed. Could be false.)
John D. Rockefeller (Probably the richest American to ever live. His wealth back in his day if adjusted to current levels of inflation would be much larger than Bill Gates wealth was)
 
Xanikk999 said:
Mansa Musa (Legends state that he handed out such massive amounts of gold on his pilgrimage to Mecca, that it destabilized the region contributing to massive inflation)

I find that unlikely.
 
I find that unlikely.

Yeah so do I that's why its just a legend. However there were contemporary historians who wrote about him and described his large caravan procession in vivid detail. He had plenty of servents thousands of them each carrying loads of treasure and gifts behind him. At least according to these writers.
 
Xanikk999 said:
However there were contemporary historians who wrote about him and described his large caravan procession in vivid detail. He had plenty of servents thousands of them each carrying loads of treasure and gifts behind him.

I would suggest that those same contemporary historians recorded that first anecdote (not necessarily a legend) about his trip as well. I'm not suggesting that the rest isn't true. But it is kind of telling that we have to cite a legend in defence of his wealth rather than something more tangible like Crassus' reputed 200,000 - 300,000 sestertius fortune. In any case, I doubt we're going to make progress in this matter because as you've noted we're dealing with something that is difficult to quantify accurately even now. The final point to consider is that there isn't much, if anything, to gain from having this discussion anyway. :dunno:
 
Relative to his own period, it would certainly be Crassus.

In terms of theoretical wealth, it'd be Nicholas II of Russia, due to the fact that the Russian Empire prior to 1905 still operated on the notion that all territory and wealth within the empire actually belongs to the Tsar, who lends it to his people as a perpetual usufruct.

In terms of real wealth, it'd likely be Rockefeller.
 
Well, if we are to believe Herodotus, the most financially wealthy may have been Croesus, or his father - they'd have had most of the world's coins in their time! :D

As for theoretical wealth, rulers have always been the most wealthy. And probably still are, considering that sultan in Brunei. In relative terms the ottoman sultans were "wealthier" than any other contemporary european monarchs. I'm not sure what was the theoretical position of the chinese emperors and the indian princes.
 
If we are to pretend the Second Book of Kings entirely lacks figurative language, then I would say Solomon has him beat. There was so much gold in the Kingdom of Israel that silver became worthless, and was promptly used to make shovels and scythes.
 
If we are to pretend the Second Book of Kings entirely lacks figurative language, then I would say Solomon has him beat. There was so much gold in the Kingdom of Israel that silver became worthless, and was promptly used to make shovels and scythes.

How does that work? Wouldn't an excess of gold make silver more valuable due to scarcity?
 
How does that work? Wouldn't an excess of gold make silver more valuable due to scarcity?

Yes, well, the author of 2 Kings likely wasn't an economist; not that it matters anyway -- the gold anecdote is supposed to be an outrageous hyperbole to portray just how wealthy the kingdom was. Attempting to assign scientific value to it is missing the point, though there is likely a bit of historical truth to the notion that after David's wars started concluding, Israel began banking in unprecedented amounts of wealth from trade and the resources from their newer territories.

I suppose one could say that an extravagant amount of gold flowing into Israel doesn't necessarily devalue it so long as foreign peoples will still trade the same amount of stuff for it, but that's still beside the point.
 
The wealthiest man in history was most likely Crassus, though some of the leading Hanseatic merchants may well have given him a run for his money. But, as has already been said, this is extremely hard to quantify.
 
I would suggest that those same contemporary historians recorded that first anecdote (not necessarily a legend) about his trip as well. I'm not suggesting that the rest isn't true. But it is kind of telling that we have to cite a legend in defence of his wealth rather than something more tangible like Crassus' reputed 200,000 - 300,000 sestertius fortune. In any case, I doubt we're going to make progress in this matter because as you've noted we're dealing with something that is difficult to quantify accurately even now. The final point to consider is that there isn't much, if anything, to gain from having this discussion anyway. :dunno:
Oh, I don't know, the Cairene Medieval historians were pretty good. I'd assume if there's actual substance in the claim of this kind of sudden influx of massive amounts of cold making prices go haywire, it would be found in al-Maqrizi's (1362-1444) history of the Mameluks. Generally Maqrizi is big on reporting Cairo market fluctuations as responses to various political events. It would be written after Musa's pilgrimage in 1324 of course. And to actually tell if there's anything in there specifically (I really do think Maqrizi is where the claim originates though), I'd have to break out the late 19th c. French translation at my friendly local university library.
 
I've never been able to work out how Crassus became so absurdly wealthy. I know there are the stories of his cunning business practices such as buying houses that were on fire and then quickly putting it out and selling them at a profit, but I can't say that sounds like an enormously sustainable business to me (although I'd like to see them try it on The apprentice). What was the secret?
 
I've never been able to work out how Crassus became so absurdly wealthy. I know there are the stories of his cunning business practices such as buying houses that were on fire and then quickly putting it out and selling them at a profit, but I can't say that sounds like an enormously sustainable business to me (although I'd like to see them try it on The apprentice). What was the secret?
Well, if Crassus lived in another time and place, I'd make a silly joke and speculate that he was involved in pyramid schemes. :mischief:

Seriously: I'm not familiar enough with the Roman Republic to have any sensible idea. But there were a lot of ways of making lots of money back then, as now - and not so many ways of detecting dishonesty.
 
Well, if Crassus lived in another time and place, I'd make a silly joke and speculate that he was involved in pyramid schemes. :mischief:

Seriously: I'm not familiar enough with the Roman Republic to have any sensible idea. But there were a lot of ways of making lots of money back then, as now - and not so many ways of detecting dishonesty.

Well, going by some very rough estimates, he would need to have been expanding his personal fortune at well over the modern equivalent of $100 million per day, every day, for the better part of 3 decades.
 
Crassus got wealthy by...

1. inheritance. He was born into a wealthy family.
2. seizing the wealth of proscripted people during Sulla's dictatorship
3. buying up destroyed real estate in Rome at far under market value, then reselling it at a huge profit (apparently real estate speculation was a new market in those days)
 
Where does Queen Victoria fit in all this? To what extent did she own India?
 
I don't know if that's even relevant in terms of theoretical wealth -- I think India belonged to the British Empire as a nation, not the monarchy.
 
Atahualpa, Emperor of the Incas, had gold and silver mines a plenty.
 
Back
Top Bottom