Art Nouveau in the architecture of South-coast villas and palaces as a contribution of outstanding personalities of their owners and architects to the cultural landscape of Crimea

Kotliar Elena Romanovna PhD in Art History Associate Professor, Department of Visual and Decorative Art, Crimean Engineering and Pedagogical University named after Fevzi Yakubov 295015, Russia, Republic of Crimea, Simferopol, lane. Educational, 8, room 337 allenkott@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Khlevnoi Vladimir Aleksandrovich Lecturer, Department of Fine and Decorative Arts, Crimean Engineering and Pedagogical University named after Fevzi Yakubov 295015, Russia, Republic of Crimea, Simferopol, lane Educational, 8, office 337 allenkott@mail.ru

The term cultural landscape is based on a number of concepts put forward by scientists who have considered it from different angles. Based on the concept of the noosphere, put forward by the Russian encyclopedic scientist Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky (1863-1945), D. S. Likhachev proposed the term homosphere, designating it as "a sphere of influence and impact on the surrounding world of human activity" ^{[12, p. 91]}. In D. S. Likhachev's research on the ecology of culture, the historical landscape described by him is characterized as a natural and cultural territorial complex formed as a result of long-term interaction between man and nature, his economic and socio-cultural activities ^{[12, p. 144]}.

The Soviet and Russian scientist, specialist in classification theory and geographer Vladimir Leopoldovich Kagansky (born 1954) described the cultural landscape as an archetype with a number of aspects inherent in it, which, in addition to the geographical features of the region and the transformation of the surrounding nature by people, include ethical, sacred, semiotic and aesthetic components. "A cultural landscape is an earthly space, the living environment of a sufficiently large (self–preserving) group of people, if this space is both integral and structured, contains natural and cultural components, and is mastered utilitarianly, semantically and symbolically" ^[6]. According to V. L. Kagansky, the cultural landscape is dialectical in its essence, since with a combination of natural and cultural components, continuity and discontinuity, the coexistence of autonomous components and transitional contact zones coexist in it. The author proposed a metaphor for the cultural landscape as a "carpet of places", an "iconic text", which requires both dynamics in space and a change of points of view to comprehend ^[6].

Therefore, we can talk about the cultural landscape, in particular, the multicultural Crimea, as a mosaic, the overall picture in which is created with the help of many separate diverse components (culture of mastering nature, languages, everyday and religious traditions, semiotics of art, architectural traditions, etc.) ^[11].

The definition of the term "cultural landscape" is impossible without studying interdisciplinary research, in particular, regionalism. The subject of such studies is the analysis of the development of specific cultural trends within a given geographical space, determined by climatic, landscape, territorial and administrative boundaries. Of particular interest for research on regional culture are multilingual, multiethnic, and multi-confessional regions.

The works of Dmitry Nikolaevich Zamyatin (born 1962), a cultural critic and geographer, founder of the Center for Humanitarian Studies of Space of the Russian Scientific Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage named after D. S. Likhachev, contain an interdisciplinary field of research, humanitarian geography, which initially developed as part of anthropogeography, and later - within the framework of economic, as well as socio-economiceconomic geography. This branch of science is a synthesis of cultural landscape studies, cognitive geography, sacred geography, figurative (imaginative) geography, mythogeography ^[5]. The concepts of imaginative geography include the following terminology: regional identity (regional self-awareness), cultural landscape, mental-geographical space, figurative-geographical space, local myth. D. N. Zamyatin presented the "geographical image" as a system of archetypes, stereotypes and symbols characteristic of the designated territory and directly dependent on its cultural development.

The functions of the cultural landscape vary from a specific location to a tourist route, due to the significance of the original source. The categories of cultural landscapes include recognition, personalization, cultural significance, locations, and the actualization of a given region in certain historical periods.

D. N. Zamyatin also drew attention to the role of diverse cultural texts in the formation of the geographical image (the term was introduced into the thesaurus of the main cultural concepts by A. Ya. Flier, based on the works of the famous Russian cultural critic and semiotic Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman (1922-1993) ^[13], as well as the philosopher, orientalist, philologist Alexander Moiseevich Pyatigorsky (1929-2009). We are talking about both verbal (written sources) and non-verbal texts, such as music, architecture, fine art, as well as the important importance in the formation of texts of local myths.

Quote from Diana Sergeevna Berestovskaya, Doctor of Philosophy (1934-2020): "Crimea is a multicultural space, irreducible to one foundation, to ethnic one–dimensionality" ^[3]. The history of Crimea, due to its unique geographical location on the routes "from the Varangians to the Greeks", at the intersections of trade routes, has been characterized since ancient times by a constant change of state entities, ethnic groups, trade and other professional ties that have left their mark on Crimean culture ^[14].

Thus, the variety of ideas that have developed in society about a particular cultural landscape is presented in the form of a set of cultural texts, from verbal to sacred philosophical, value, visual and auditory. The Crimean cultural text is distinguished by a large number of diverse features, including both unique natural areas and numerous historical events, as well as outstanding personalities whose activities were associated with Crimea.

The dialogue of cultures, the recognition of the equivalence of the "culture of the other" is a necessary condition for the optimal development of both each of the subjects within the framework of their own identity and the further development of the cultural landscape as a whole ^[2].

An important aspect of our research is the identification of individual texts and codes of cultures among the multilingual space of the Crimean ecumene, as well as the fixation of their meaningful and visual transformation as a result of the inevitable mutual influence in the process of long-term coexistence in close proximity. Such a polystylistic phenomenon certainly includes the architectural Art Nouveau style, which is an example of programmatic eclecticism.

One of the significant patterns of the cultural landscape in general, and Crimea in particular, is the role of outstanding personalities who have contributed to the culture of the region. The personalities of individual cultural figures have, on the one hand, a pronounced individual character, and on the other, they are united by the impression of both the amazing nature of Crimea and the richness of its cultural heritage, which they supplemented with their cultural and creative activities ^[11]. Such undoubtedly iconic personalities include both architects who worked in the Crimea during the Art Nouveau period, and their famous customers of palaces and mansions, whose bright individuality has remained in history.

The Art Nouveau style spread both in Western and Eastern European, as well as in Russian decorative, applied and fine arts and architecture in the last third of the XIX-first third of the XX century. The distinctive features of the "new style" were elegant decorativeness, which spread not only in decorative and applied arts and interiors, but also in the general design of architecture, as well as an appeal to natural curvilinear forms. Images of stylized natural forms, bizarre vignettes of intertwined plant stems, flowers, and fruits, creating an overall elegant impression, became common in the Art Nouveau era. Both decorative painting and architecture were dominated by the ornamental type of composition. Emphasized decorativeness prevailed in the plastic of the decor, the composition was a linear or continuous rapport of plant elements, into which larger compositional accents were inscribed, for example, figures of animals, birds, people, flower pots, etc., inscribed in arched, round or oval cartouches. 

Curvilinear natural forms prevailed not only in the whimsical drawing of wrought-iron fences, plastic stucco, stained glass, wooden carvings, tapestry, but also determined the choice of an unusual composition in the layout of architectural facades, with a large number of omega-shaped window and door openings, often located asymmetrically relative to the facade; previously rectilinear lines of arches, cornices, and especially decor facades also often had a loose, curved silhouette ^[16]. The French critic Charles Blanc (1813-1882) wrote about Art Nouveau architecture: "Architecture in its highest sense is not a structure that is decorated, but an ornament that is built" ^[15]. An architect, according to Blanc, is a "jewelry builder." According to the researcher of the Crimean Art Nouveau Alexander Ivanovich Kovalenko (born 1949), "... relief ornamentation (Art Nouveau) merges with the form, becomes inseparable from it. It is impossible to draw a line between an ornament symbolizing a structure and a real structure that has received an ornamental interpretation" ^[8].

Despite a number of common features that make it possible to identify the belonging of an architectural structure to the Art Nouveau period, all buildings belonging to this style are distinguished by a pronounced individuality and eclecticism of elements borrowed from previous historical styles of world architecture, as well as often an ethnonational regional flavor. This is due to the fact that mansions, palaces, and sometimes public buildings were erected taking into account the wishes of the customer, and accordingly reflected, among other things, their ethnocultural characteristics. One of the most striking examples is the Alupka Vorontsov Palace, built in the oriental Moorish style, the villa "Victoria" of S. S. Crimea in Feodosia, replete with Karaite symbols, etc. The Oriental style prevails in the planning and decoration of the architecture of the modern era in Crimea, which is an alloy of elements of Arabic and Turkish architecture, Armenian architecture, Karaite elements, Crimean Tatar structures of the Golden Horde, etc. Simultaneously with ethnic elements, elements of ancient classicism appear in modern architecture in Crimea, depending on the nature of the building and the preferences of the customer, Gothic, Baroque. However, the regional character of Crimean buildings, according to A. I. Kovalenko ^[8], is almost always recognizable due to the fact that: "for Crimea, in this case, the East and ancient Greece have always been dominant. That is why the "symbiosis of traditions" in the architectural monuments of the Crimea has its own unique plastic appearance, which makes it possible to accurately identify its geographical origin."

The "Crimean style", as defined by E. A. Aybabina (born 1947) in architecture and decorative and applied arts of the peninsula, was formed over the centuries on the basis of Scythian-Sarmatian art, influenced by various features introduced during the period of ethnic migrations, and later Seljuk art, "the stylistic principles of which were transferred to the Crimean soil by Armenian by the masters." "A number of researchers believe that in the conditions of Crimea, the decoration of buildings does not depend on their confessional affiliation and the same type of decoration is found on monuments of the Christian and Muslim circles" ^[1],[7].

An important role in the formation of the architectural appearance of the Crimea during the modern period belongs to the famous Architect of the Highest Court, Nikolai Petrovich Krasnov (November 23 (December 5) 1864, village of Khonyatino, Glebovskaya parish of Kolomna County – December 8, 1939, Belgrade) – Academician of Architecture, chief architect of Yalta, author of the project of the famous Livadia Palace, one of the most recognizable buildings in Crimea. At the age of 12, N. P. Krasnov entered the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, from which he graduated in 1885 with a Large Silver Medal for the Gymnasium project. This award allowed the architect to receive the title of "class artist of the 3rd degree, the right to work independently in drafting and building construction", as well as to be awarded personal honorary citizenship. In 1911, N. P. Krasnov was awarded by Nicholas II the title of Architect of the Highest Court and the rank of state Councilor, and in 1913 he received the title of Academician of Architecture. As the chief architect of Yalta, N. P. Krasnov participated in the construction of many famous Crimean architectural monuments, in particular, such as the church in Yalta in Neo-Romanesque style, Alexander Nevsky Cathedral in neo-Russian style and St. Nicholas Church. Nina in Yalta in the Armenian style, the bank of the Mutual Credit Society in Simferopol, as well as the Dulber Palace of Grand Duke Peter Nikolaevich Romanov in Mishor in the neo-Mudekhar style, Villa Xenia V. A. Chuikevich in Simeiz in the neo-Romanesque style, the Selbillar mansion ("Cypress Grove") of Princess N. A. Baryatinskaya in neo-Renaissance style, I. N. Zagordana, E. O. Maitop in Yalta in neo-Renaissance style, Prince F. F. Yusupov's hunting house in Kokkoz village (Sokolinoe) in the Crimean Tatar style of the Muslim Renaissance (Khan's Palace style), N. Sviyagin in Simeiz, etc.

The most famous building of N. P. Krasnov is the Livadia Summer Palace of Emperor Nicholas II (Fig. 1), built by the personal order of the emperor in 1909-1911 in the style of the Italian Renaissance. The palace was built in the traditions of the country summer palaces of Italy and France, and despite its impressive size, it gives the impression of lightness and elegance due to its white color, for which it was named the White Palace. For the construction, a local white Inkerman stone was chosen, impregnated with a special composition to avoid spoilage from mold. The palace was built using new advanced technologies: a reinforced concrete frame was used inside it, which gave the building earthquake resistance (thanks to which the palace was not damaged during the earthquake of 1927), the palace was also equipped with two types of heating – fireplace and central water, and electrified from its own power plant. The palace is also known for the fact that in 1945 it became the venue for the post-war Yalta Conference of the allies of the anti-Hitler coalition.

The style of the summer imperial palace – Neo-Renaissance – allowed the architect to create an ensemble that fits perfectly into the surrounding south coast landscape. The lightweight structure of the building, clean, not overloaded with decor, stands out as a local silhouette against the background of the blue sky and sea, as well as the bright greenery of the Livadia Imperial Park, and in cloudy weather is complemented by silhouettes of cumulus clouds, merging with them. The building uses the simple rectangular volumes of the main building and flat-roofed towers typical of the Renaissance, semicircular arches that decorate the entrance, semicircular tops of "double" and "triple" windows, as well as balustrades above the cornices.

Illustration 1. Imperial Livadia Palace, summer residence of Nicholas II, Crimea, Yalta, village Livadia. 1909-1911 Architect N. P. Krasnov.  

According to the project of architect N. P. Krasnov, in 1912-1914 the villa "Victoria" was built by the famous public figure of S. S. Crimea in Feodosia (Fig. 2).

Solomon Samuilovich Krym (1867-1936) – Prime Minister of the Crimean regional government in 1919, philanthropist, agronomist, initiator of the creation of the Tauride University. His father, Samuel Avraamovich Krym (1835-1898), a native of an ancient Karaite family, the mayor of Feodosia, was also known as a public figure and teacher. S. S. Krym was a member of the State Duma and the State Council of the Russian Empire from the Tauride province, headed the Tauride provincial Zemstvo. In 1917, he was appointed Commissioner of the Provisional Government in charge of the department of the Ministry of Agriculture for the management of national (nationalized) agricultural enterprises of the specific department. In 1917, he initiated the creation of the Tauride Scientific Association. One of the initiators of the creation of the Tauride University in Simferopol. Permanent member, then Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Taurida University. In 1918, he was elected Prime Minister (Chairman of the Council of Ministers) and Minister of Agriculture of the Crimean Regional government, and held these posts until 1919. In April 1919, he emigrated on a ship of the French squadron from Sevastopol.

The Crimea family was the most influential among the Karaite community in Feodosia, it owned a steamship company, a commercial bank and other large facilities. While in exile, S. S. Crimea was a member of the board of the Crimean Community in Paris, and also founded the Karaite Society in France in Paris ^[10].

  The building is built in the Spanish-Moorish style, neo-Mudejar, and consists of various asymmetrically arranged volumes of simple rectangular shapes. The role of the main accents emphasizing the central volume is played by five-part and three-part windows with columns-imposts of the Ionic order. The Art Nouveau style as a whole is characterized by the decorative eclecticism of facades, therefore the use of traditional national elements organically fits into the general plastic structure of elegant decorativeness.

In general, the decoration of the building is characterized by the use of a large number of Seljuk ornaments, the so-called "plaits".  In the decoration of the building, the "plait" in the form of a harness is repeated in the edging of doorways, in the design of semi-columns, in arched openings at the entrance to the building, and the arch connecting the two volumes of the building. The "plait" on the gate-entrance to the building is decorated at the ends with palmettes – a stylized image of palm leaves. The palmette was a symbol of special honor and respect, belonging to a noble family. Also, the Seljuk type includes intertwined star-shaped images located in a circle. Star-shaped 6- and 8-terminal sockets, having a geometric Seljuk character of an intertwined cord, decorate the transition between two volumes of the building connected by an arch ^[9].

In the central part of the semicircular pediment above the door, a monogram is placed in a keel–shaped medallion - a decorative letter "K", obviously indicating the coat of arms of the Crimea family. The space around the coat of arms is occupied by an intertwined vine, the next row is a thick semicircular plait made like a Seljuk plait and protruding above a flat pediment. In the center above the pediment, the harness is decorated with a lion's head, the stylized image of which dates back to the Scythian "animal style". In the next tier of the ornament there are images of a lion, a griffin and a bird of paradise inscribed in a floral ornament. In the sacred Jewish interpretation, these symbols mean Messianic aspirations, their images against the background of the Tree of Life, or the Tree of Paradise, are often found in synagogues ^[11]. The lion symbol, which is repeatedly repeated in the exterior decor, also has the meaning of supreme power, indicating the high position in the society of the owner of the estate.

Illustration 2. Villa "Victoria" in the village of Crimea, Feodosia. 1914

Architect N. P. Krasnov.

Another typical example of the use of neo-mudekhar style in the architecture of N. P. Krasnov is the Dulber Palace of Grand Duke Peter Nikolaevich Romanov (1864-1931) in Koreiz, built in 1897 (Fig. 3). Drawings and sketches by the customer himself, P. N. Romanov, who traveled a lot in the Arab East and was fond of Oriental culture, served as the basis for the design of the palace. In terms of the palace resembles the letter "p", it is based on simple rectangular shapes. The central facade above the entrance is made in the form of a protruding tower, completed with a dome with a spire, which is typical for the palaces of Andalusia. The shape of the windows is characterized by a pronounced oriental flavor, from omega-shaped to pointed shapes. The elegant beauty and bright individuality of the building is given by the oriental ornamental decor of small segments, made in the form of shallow reliefs. A characteristic feature is also the cornice decor, which protrudes in the form of teeth. The general appearance of the palace impresses with oriental luxury and at the same time the harmony of proportions, combined with the originality of the ornamental decoration.

Illustration 3. The Dulber Palace of Grand Duke Peter Nikolaevich Romanov in Koreiz. 1897 Architect N. P. Krasnov.

The building of the villa "Xenia" by Varvara Andreevna Chuikevich in Simeiz belongs to a different style, neo-Romanesque, the author of the project of which is also N. P. Krasnov. The style of the asymmetrical building dates back to the Northern European castle architecture, the villa is decorated with an octagonal tower above the entrance with an octagonal prism topped with a weather vane. Massive walls made of gray unpainted stone, wooden cornice supports and roof details, the pointed silhouette of the tower and the second roof, powerful segments of the gallery balustrade emphasize the rough neo-Romanesque castle style. Metal details such as a weather vane, balcony railings and the upper balustrade above the right entrance are used as decoration. 

Illustration 4. Villa "Xenia" by V. A. Chuikevich in Simeiz. 1906 Architect N. P. Krasnov.

One of the famous architectural monuments of the modern era is the apartment building of the mayor of Yevpatoria, the famous philanthropist who did a lot for the city, S. E. Duvan (Fig. 5).

Semyon Ezrovich Duvan (1870-1957) was a famous philanthropist, mayor, chairman of the zemstvo council and the public municipal assembly of Yevpatoria, one of the most prominent representatives of the city government of the Tauride province. At the initiative of S. E. Duvan, using the city budget and his own funds, an international resort was developed in Yevpatoria, schools, hospitals, a city theater, a city library, and a power plant were built. S. E. Duvan was a Karaite of noble origin, the grandson of Simcha Babovich, the first Crimean gakham (the highest spiritual rank of Karaites).

The building of the S. E. Duvan apartment building was built in 1899 according to the project of architect P. Ya. Seferov. Pavel Yakovlevich Seferov (Bogos Akopovich Seferyants) (1872-1914) was born in Yevpatoria in the family of a merchant of the 2nd guild Hakob (Yakov) Seferov, was a graduate of the architectural department of the Moscow Art School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture. According to the architect's project, a number of buildings belonging to recognizable architectural monuments were erected throughout the Crimea, and especially in Yevpatoria. Such structures include the city's first power plant, the Alexander II public library building, designed jointly with the city architect A. L. Heinrich, the Pushkin City Theater, a cafe and a hotel in the center of Yevpatoria "Beau-Rivage" – "Beautiful Coast", etc.

The building of the apartment building is a two-storey structure, rectangular in plan, divided along the facade into three horizontal tiers and abundantly decorated with decorative stucco. The central entrance is decorated with a balustrade with a baroque pediment. Elements of the Baroque style, such as the portico and balustrade formed by fillets, were traditional for the interior decoration of Karaite prayer houses-kenas, in particular, for gehal altars, and were used by the architect as a sign of S. E. Duvan's belonging to the Karaites ^[11].

In the center of the pediment, a coat of arms is placed in a round medallion. In its center there is an image of tamga, part of the Karaite coat of arms. Tamgas were originally generic signs for branding cattle, found among both Karaites and Crimean Tatars and having ancient Turkic roots, and later used as coats of arms. The Karaite tamga had the appearance of a two-horned spear "senek", similar to the letter "U". The horns of the tamga on the medallion are complemented by an upper closing element, forming the silhouette of a shield – another Karaite coat of arms symbol. Grape shoots are depicted on both sides of the tamga, Viticulture is one of the most ancient types of agricultural crafts in the Crimea, therefore this motif is similar in the ornamentation of many Crimean ethnic groups. The general shape of the monogram may also represent a stylized letter "D", as a symbol of the Duvan family. In the upper part of the pediment there is another medallion, an oval on an unfolded scroll. The image of the Torah scroll, as the main Jewish shrine, is associated with wisdom and paramount importance. On both sides of the scroll are placed palmettes, a symbol of glory and honor. Above the window cornices, the palmetta resembles a semi-polar symbol typical of Karaites. Pilasters with patterned capitals also resemble columns traditional for the decoration of gyehals: the symbols of the Jerusalem Temple are the columns Yahin and Boaz ^[11]. Between the windows of the side parts of the facade there are heraldic sculptural cartouches with the image of a lion's head above crossed anchors connected by ropes. The lion symbol represents power, and the anchors emphasize the regional character of the port city.

Illustration 5. Apartment house of S. E. Duvan, Yevpatoria. 1899

Architect P. Ya. Saferov.

Another famous building in Yevpatoria is the villa of the Karaite merchant Yufuda Mordechaevich Gelelovich (1876–?), built in 1910-1912 in the Moorish neo-Mudekhar style, thanks to which the villa was named "Moorish" (Fig. 6). Since 1921, the Yevpatoria Museum of Local Lore was located in the villa. It is highly likely that the architect of the villa was A. L. Heinrich, the author of numerous architectural projects of buildings in Yevpatoria at that time.

Adam Ludwigovich Heinrich (1869-1944) was a graduate of the vocational school in Lodz, Poland, and then the St. Petersburg Institute of Civil Engineers. From 1894 to 1918, he served as the chief architect of Yevpatoria. A. L. Heinrich was distinguished by progressive views and used bold combinations of stylistics and new achievements in construction in his projects, which was facilitated by his engineering specialty. The authorship of A. L. Heinrich belongs to such famous buildings of Yevpatoria as St. Elias Church, the City Council, branches of the St. Petersburg Bank, hotels, villas, numerous apartment buildings. 

The complex volume of the villa, based on the Moorish style, is a rectangular structure with a protruding entrance tower, with a deep cornice and a flat four-pitched tiled roof. A characteristic element of the decor are omega-shaped window openings, as well as the design of the entrance in the form of an openwork archivolt supported by two thin columns. On the pediment above the main entrance there is a characteristic mudekhar oriental ornament in the form of a pattern. The second entrance, located on the same facade, to the right of the main one, is blocked by a prism-shaped dome and decorated with a mihrab ornamental finial along the pediment. Stepped teeth are placed above the cornice of the building in the form of a balustrade. The walls of the building combine smooth and embossed stripes. The stone relief of the gables and panels of the entrance is supported by the relief of massive carved oak doors.

Illustration 6. The mansion of Y. M. Gelelovich, Yevpatoria. 1910-1912

Architect A. L. Heinrich.

Sevastopol, which suffered more than other cities of the Crimea during the Second World War, practically did not preserve pre-revolutionary buildings, however, on its Northern side there are remains of the estate of the tsarist General Konstantin Dmitrievich Khlebnikov (1838-1908) (Fig. 7). The time of construction and the architect are unknown, the building was severely damaged by time, as well as by fire. However, the preserved end pediment is very interesting and represents an example of the Crimean neo-Baroque, another variant of the Art Nouveau style. Above each window there is a "castle" decorated with an acanthus leaf, and on the corner portal, topped with a semicircular cornice, there is a magnificent Baroque monogram made of vegetable curls.

Fig. 7. The estate of General K. D. Khlebnikov, Sevastopol. Kon. XIX–beginning. XX century. The architect is unknown.

Having analyzed a number of coastal architectural monuments of the Crimea of the modern period, the following conclusions can be drawn. The Art Nouveau style spread in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in architecture and decor in both Western and Eastern Europe, including Russia. Art Nouveau represented a kind of synthesis of the historically architectural styles preceding it, the new embodiment of which received the prefix neo: (neo-Renaissance, neo-Mudekhar, neo-Baroque, Neo-Romanesque, etc.). National elements characterizing the multiethnic cultural landscape also played an important role in the Crimean modern architecture. The uniqueness of the buildings of the Art Nouveau period, as part of the cultural landscape of the Crimea, consisted in the individual and recognizable handwriting of famous architects of that time, such as N. P. Krasnov, A. L. Heinrich, P. Ya. Seferov and others. The mansions and palaces of the Crimea also reflected the character of the personalities of famous customers of villas and palaces, whose activities entered the annals of the history of the Crimea at the junction of the XIX and XX centuries.