The First Art Newspaper on the Net    Established in 1996 Friday, December 3, 2021

U.S. Supreme Court to rule on medieval treasure bought by Nazis
Petra Winter, a director of provenance research with the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, at her office in Berlin, July 8, 2020. Winter's office has seven full-time researchers, including art historians, archaeologists and archivists, to retrace the histories of objects acquired in the Nazi period. Gordon Welters/The New York Times.

by Christopher F. Schuetze

BERLIN (NYT NEWS SERVICE).- After hundreds of years residing in a cathedral in Braunschweig, Germany, the Guelph Treasure has had a comparatively active century. The trove of medieval religious art was sold just before the stock market crash in 1929, sent to the United States and back, then split up and sold. All 82 pieces have changed hands at least twice.

Now, it is the subject of a U.S. Supreme Court case that could see 42 pieces, estimated to be worth nearly a quarter of a billion dollars, on the move again.

The dispute centers on a transaction in 1935, when a consortium of Jewish art dealers that bought the entire collection in 1929 sold those 42 pieces to a German museum. For more than a decade, descendants of those dealers have claimed that the sale was made under duress and that the price paid — the equivalent of about $20 million today — was far below value. At least one of the dealers lived in Germany, then under Nazis rule, at the time of the sale, raising the possibility that his life was under threat while the deal was being brokered, descendants of consortium members say.

The 42 pieces that were sold ended up in the Museum of Decorative Arts in Berlin. In 2014, a German arbitration commission that specializes in Nazi-looted art ruled that the museum had acquired the collection legitimately and did not need to return them.

After the families took the case to a U.S. court, museum administrators and the German government turned to the Supreme Court, hoping it would confirm the case was outside its jurisdiction. The U.S. Solicitor General wrote an amicus brief supporting the German position, as it frequently does with cases involving foreign affairs.

The justices announced this month that they would decide whether the case could proceed and are expected to make a ruling later this year. If they allow it, a lower court will rule on the ownership issue, not the Supreme Court itself.

Nicholas M. O’Donnell, a lawyer representing the families, said they were entitled to bring their case in a U.S. court because Nazi Germany had violated international law.

“Germany seeks to eliminate recourse for Nazi-looted art, and the court will have the chance to answer this question of critical importance for Holocaust victims,” O’Donnell said.

The case has put the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, which oversees Berlin museums including the Museum of Decorative Arts, in an awkward position. The foundation prides itself on its provenance research and on its active role in returning objects to their rightful owners when appropriate.

In an interview, Hermann Parzinger, the president of the foundation, was clear about the foundation’s principles.

“What’s really important is how seriously we take this: We have returned thousands of books and hundreds of pieces of art — we don’t want stolen objects in our collections,” he said.

In this case, however, the foundation says the sale was not only legal but also fair.

“There are those who say that everything that changed hands after Jan. 30, 1933, was confiscated under duress,” Parzinger said, referring to the date the Nazis came to power in Germany. “But we think that each case needs to be investigated.”

The foundation has processed about 50 restitution requests in the past two decades, according to Birgit Jöbstl, a spokeswoman for the foundation. Its own researchers had checked several thousand other works in the collections, leading to 350 objects going back to their rightful owners, she added.

Petra Winter, director of the foundation’s provenance department, said her team of seven full-time researchers, including art historians, archaeologists and archivists, have been systematically retracing the histories of objects acquired in the Nazi period.

In the case of the Guelph Treasure, the foundation’s inquiries suggest that the pieces were in Amsterdam and out of the hands of the Nazis when the collection was sold, and that the consortium’s lead negotiator brokered the deal with Berlin from there.

The foundation’s research also indicated that some of the treasure had been paid for in kind, in a bid to circumvent laws that prevented German money leaving the country: Pieces from the museum’s collection were exchanged as part of the transaction.

She said that the dealers were not able to sell the most valuable items in the collection anywhere else (a museum in Cleveland bought a smaller part at a comparable price) and were getting desperate by the time they made the sale.

“We believe that the final sale price was appropriate,” Parzinger said.

Today, the Museum of Decorative Arts has 44 pieces of the Guelph Treasure — having added two further pieces of the collection to the 42 bought in 1935 — including works made of gold, silver, ivory, glass, tin and sea lion tusk. Among the items are reliquaries with human remains reputed to be the bone fragments of saints brought back from the crusades.

Lothar Lambacher, the museum’s deputy director, said the treasure was “the highlight, the center, the heart of our medieval collection.” Referring to one piece, a delicate statuette of a church that is a masterpiece of 12th-century art, he said, “The dome reliquary is our Mona Lisa.”

The objects have stood in the same display room of Museum of Decorative Arts for the past 33 years. But a decision from the Supreme Court in favor of the families could set in motion a process that would lead to their removal.

O’Donnell, their lawyer, said: “We are grateful for the opportunity to address the Supreme Court on these important questions about holding Germany accountable for its Nazi-looted art.”

© 2020 The New York Times Company

Today's News

July 11, 2020

U.S. Supreme Court to rule on medieval treasure bought by Nazis

A Swiss Dada pioneer finally gets her spotlight

Auctions are crimped as the pandemic forces them online

The National Gallery acquires painting by Camille Pissarro

Incredibly rare maps of the defeat of the Spanish Armada at risk of export

David Zwirner to represent the Estate of Juan Muñoz

Sapar Contemporary exhibits works by Indonesian contemporary puppetry masters

Turkey turns Hagia Sophia back into a mosque

Sotheby's Hong Kong Magnificent Jewels sale totals US$56,473,108

Russia fines LGBT activist for 'gay propaganda' drawings

Christie's online sale fetches $421 mn despite virus pandemic

Exhibition of contemporary Aboriginal Australian memorial poles opens (virtually) at Frost Art FIU

McMullen from Home brings Boston College's museum to viewers

Spitfire tribute as UK says goodbye to WWII icon Vera Lynn

'Batman: The Killing Joke,' Jack Kirby original art help push Heritage Auctions event past $5 million mark

Almine Rech opens an exhibition of new paintings by the New York-based painter Joe Andoe

Leslie K. Johnson named Executive Vice President of Skirball Cultural Center

Todd Smith named Executive Director of Bechtler Museum of Modern Art

Bruneau & Co. announces highlights included in its online-only Antiques & Fine Art auction

The Dance on Camera Festival, when dance is only on camera

Digital theater isn't theater. It's a way to mourn its absence.

Two museums turn a seaside haven into a car lover's dream

Daughter's wedding car worthy of New York's Museum of Modern Art for sale with H&H Classics

Manifesta 13 Marseille introduces Le Tiers Programme

At What Point Do Online Games and Video Games Become Art?

Unique Things to do on the East Coast

Popular smartphone cases Flip cases and wallet cases

Face masks

How To Win In Online Casino Malaysia

How to Appeal an Amazon Suspension

Why use a VPN?

Liposuction Surgery

Museums, Exhibits, Artists, Milestones, Digital Art, Architecture, Photography,
Photographers, Special Photos, Special Reports, Featured Stories, Auctions, Art Fairs,
Anecdotes, Art Quiz, Education, Mythology, 3D Images, Last Week, .


Ignacio Villarreal
(1941 - 2019)
Editor & Publisher: Jose Villarreal
Art Director: Juan José Sepúlveda Ramírez

Royalville Communications, Inc
Founder's Site. The most varied versions
of this beautiful prayer.
to a Mexican poet.

The First Art Newspaper on the Net. The Best Versions Of Ave Maria Song Junco de la Vega Site Ignacio Villarreal Site
Tell a Friend
Dear User, please complete the form below in order to recommend the Artdaily newsletter to someone you know.
Please complete all fields marked *.
Sending Mail
Sending Successful