Stavisky affair
financial scandal in France (1934)

The Stavisky affair was a financial scandal in France in 1934, involving embezzler Alexandre Stavisky. The scandal had political ramifications for the Radical-Socialist government after it was revealed that Prime Minister Camille Chautemps had protected Stavisky, who died suddenly in mysterious circumstances.
Political rightists engaged in large anti-government demonstrations on 6 February 1934, which resulted in the Paris police firing upon and killing 17 demonstrators. A right-wing coup d'état seemed like a possibility at the time, but historians agree that the multiple rightist forces were uncoordinated and not trying to overthrow the government.
Stavisky
Serge Alexandre Stavisky (1888–1934), who became known as le beau Sacha ("Handsome Sasha"), was a Russian Jew who was born in modern-day Ukraine; his parents had relocated to France. Stavisky tried various professions, working as a café singer, a nightclub manager, a soup factory worker and as the operator of a gambling den. During the 1930s, he managed municipal pawnshops in Bayonne and also knew people active in the financial sector. Stavisky sold worthless bonds and financed his "hockshop" on the surety of what he called the emeralds of the late Empress of Germany, which were later revealed to be glass.
Stavisky maintained his reputation by using his acquaintances with important people. If a newspaper tried to investigate his affairs, he paid it to stop either with large advertisement contracts or by buying the newspaper's company.
The public source identifies “Stavisky affair” as financial scandal in France (1934). This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Stavisky, affair and financial.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Stavisky affair”, the useful work is to connect “financial scandal in France (1934)” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 7, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q211475. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1934 and 1888.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Stavisky affair”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Stavisky affair primary sources, Stavisky affair archive and Stavisky research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Stavisky affair”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Stavisky affair” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.