Websites and Resources
Conferences and Events
Welcome to lootedart.com
This site contains two fully searchable databases.
The Information Database contains information and documentation from forty nine countries, including laws and policies, reports and publications, archival records and resources, current cases and relevant websites.
The Object Database contains details of over 25,000 objects of all kinds – paintings, drawings, antiquities, Judaica, etc – looted, missing and/or identified from over fifteen countries.
All images on the site are published under fair use conditions for the purpose of criticism and research.
The Report is the first of an annual US government review of the national laws and enforceable policies of 46 of the 47 countries (excluding the US itself) that endorsed the 2009 Terezin Declaration. On art the Report concludes:
'In the realm of movable property, there is much left to do to identify looted art and facilitate a fair solution for its return to rightful owners or their heirs. In most European countries, too many public and private art museums still do not conduct provenance research on their art collections, research that is essential to providing information about potential claims for Nazi-confiscated art. A handful of countries have only recently begun working on the necessary legislation and mechanisms for restituting artwork, and many others have yet to do so. France, which originally had been slow in doing provenance research, is now the only country where the effort to identify, return or compensate Nazi-confiscated artworks and cultural objects rests in the office of the head of government, the prime minister. The country, however, has not revised the law that stipulates that artworks that have been incorporated into public collections cannot be removed from public museums, even if they were confiscated by the Nazis from private collections. The Netherlands, which had done exemplary provenance research and restitution, recently adopted a “balancing test” that gives its museums the right to retain Nazi-confiscated artworks if their interests outweigh those of representatives of families from whom the Nazis confiscated the art. Hungary has conducted some research on its holdings of major looted art but has not provided restitution, nor has it made its research public.
Russia, meanwhile, has essentially nationalized most art and cultural property taken by the Soviet Trophy Brigades, which sent valuables back to Russia from occupied territories (including Germany) in 1945. Despite having enacted a law based upon the 1998 Washington Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art, Russia has done little to conduct provenance research or to restitute or compensate for art recovered at the end of WWII that had been confiscated by the Nazis from Jewish and non-Jewish victims.
There are also positive trends worth highlighting. Five countries – Austria, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom – have established dispute resolution panels to resolve art claims, as envisioned by the Washington Principles and the Terezin Declaration. Moreover, in January 2019, the European Parliament passed legislation recognizing the Washington Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art. It urged the European Commission to support the cataloguing of all data on looted cultural goods and to establish principles for dealing with cultural property in future conflicts.
Based on a November 2018 Joint Declaration with the Expert Adviser to the State Department on Holocaust-Era Issues and the Department’s Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues, Germany allocated significant funds to both public and private museums for provenance research and has informed its public museums that they cannot continue to obtain federal funds unless they participate in the claims process. Germany also reaffirmed that the precepts it committed to in endorsing the Washington Principles and the Terezin Declaration apply to private museums and collections, as well as to public museums.
Another area examined in this report is the progress in identifying, cataloguing, and preserving Judaica that may be found in libraries, museums, and other repositories; their return to their original owners and other appropriate individuals and institutions; and in particular, the restoration of sacred scrolls and ceremonial objects to their original sacred use in synagogues. Return of confiscated Judaica and Jewish cultural property has generally not received as much focus as confiscated and looted art. In the case of certain countries, such as Belarus, progress in this area has stalled. After World War II, the Soviet Trophy Brigades brought hundreds of thousands of books from France to Minsk that had been stolen by the Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg – a Nazi organization tasked with expropriating Jewish cultural property. Most of these books, experts agree, are located in Minsk.'
To read the Report in full and its findings on art, Judaica, real estate, archives and memorialisation, click here.
Beginning in 1933, the German Government revoked German citizenship for tens of thousands of German Jews, not only those resident in Germany, but also those who had left Germany and were resident in other countries. It took similar action against persons resident in parts of Czechoslovakia which had been annexed. Less well known was the revocation of business licenses or even seizure of firms which had been owned by Jews or political opponents. These public actions, totaling nearly 90,000 names of persons and firms, mixed together, were regularly published in the Reichsanzeiger, the official German gazette.
In 1985 a compilation of the citizenship revocations was published in book form by K.G. Saur, Die Ausbürgerung deutscher Staatsangehoriger 1933-1945 (The Expatriation of German Citizens, 1933-1945). However, persons resident outside Germany as well as firms whose names/assets had been seized were not included. The nature/location of property/assets which had been seized was not identified.
These are all now available in a single searchable database on JewishGen. An introduction, 'Revoked German Citizenship and Property Seizures 1933-1945' by Peter Lande is at https://www.jewishgen.org/databases/holocaust/RevokedGermanCitizenship.html. The database, which is listed in the JewishGen Holocaust Database, is at https://www.jewishgen.org/databases/Holocaust/. The information in the database came from Herbert Birett, a German researcher and his original data can be found in a spreadsheet at https://tinyurl.com/y7w4ue6j.
In its latest and unprecedented recommendation, the Commission awarded restitution on moral and ethical grounds to the claimants, heirs of A.B., the former owner of a private bank in Berlin, of the painting 'Lemon Slice' by the Dutch Old Master Jacob Ochtervelt The Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen (bavarian State Paintings Collections) had received the painting as a donation from the daughter of Frits Thyssen in 1987, had never displayed it and had wished to sell it but were impeded by the problematic provenance. They had opposed restitution on the grounds that A.B. had never been the unconditional owner of the painting, which had been acquired through a loan for which the painting was collateral.
However, the Commission, in its unprecedented decision, set out the series of persecutions to which A.B. and his family had been subject, referred to the 'impressive account of the outstanding symbolic importance the family attaches to the painting' and stated that it recommended 'the restitution of the painting [solely] in order to contribute in this way to recognising and making amends for a piece of historical injustice. In so doing, the Commission also takes into account the fact that the interests of the applicants are not opposed by any comparably important interests of the applicant. The defendant received the painting as part of a larger purchase. With regard to the "Lemon Slice", this was not based on a curatorial decision; the painting is not part of the concept of the collection and has not been exhibited by the collection to date'. The restitution is subject to the State of Bavaria receiving 50% of the proceeds of any sale that takes place within ten years of the restitution.
To read the judgement (which was issued solely in German), click here.
To read a guide English translation of the judgement, click here.
Following a three year project funded by the German Lost Art Foundation, the Germanisches National Museum has digitised and put online three of the five travel diaries of Hans Posse, Director of the Dresden Gemaeldegalerie and Hitler's Special Representative for building up his Führermuseum in Linz and for preparing and implementing a distribution programme of artworks to museums in the Reich (1939-1942). Posse's documents in the Deutsche Kunstarchiv include his service diary and five travel diaries documenting his business trips on behalf of Hitler which have been largely unpublished and unexplored to date.
The Reisekladden (Diaries) are great sources for research on Nazi art theft, Nazi museum politics and provenance research containing information Posse needed for his verbal and written reports to Hitler as well as for his conceptual and operational work. They show the full range of his work for Hitler and prove that he was not only Hitler's chief buyer for the Führer Museum, but also Hitler's most important manager of art looting.
The Diaries document in a singular way Posse's activities in the occupied territories, for example in Poland and France, and his contacts with NSDAP organizations such as the local Gauleiters, Gestapo offices, military art protection units, etc. These are not reflected in other archives for the Sonderkommando Linz because they were confidential and only discussed orally. It makes it possible to reconstruct, for example, Posse's inspections of confiscated private collections, as well as his connections to the art trade and the network of art agents he built up, as well as to the competing Nazi organizations in occupied Europe. In doing so, individual works of art are regularly mentioned with their prices and terms of purchase or acquisition.
Hans Posse usually made his travel notes in pencil, directly on site, for example in the looted art depots he visited. The pencil line has now faded, the handwriting is often undisciplined and therefore difficult to decipher, place and person names are often misspelled. The poor readability of the diaries makes it considerably more difficult for the reader to access the content, and requires transcription. The notes also have to be deciphered, as they are usually short notes and lists, which are rarely interrupted by continuous text. Posse often used abbreviations that are not commonly used, such as "Rbdt." (For Rembrandt) or "Hbst." (for the art dealer Karl Haberstock). People, institutions, locations or works have been now indexed and annotated to faciliate research. In addition, historical context and additional background information have been provided to help with reading the diaries.
To access the three digitised diaries, the list of names appearing in them and to learn how to navigate the digitised copies, go to https://editionhansposse.gnm.de/
The German Historical Museum (DHM, Deutsches Historisches Museum) hosts databases of the records of the Munich Central Collecting Point, the Linz and Göring collections but the site has been down since the beginning of March and there is no imminent prospect of repair. There are two alternative locations for the records. One is Fold 3, which has the property cards, scanned and available, sourced from the US National Archives; the second is the Bundesarchiv where new high-resolution colour scans of the property cards are also available online at https://invenio.bundesarchiv.de (subject to registration) through the following search sequence:
- Bundesrepublik Deutschland mit westalliierten Besatzungszonen (1945 ff)
- Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1949 ff)
- Finanzen, Wirtschaft
- B 323 Treuhandverwaltung von Kulturgut bei der
- 5 Restitution von Kunstwerken
- 5.3 Restitutionsnachweise
- B 323/647 bis B 323/694
The recently founded Schweizerischer Arbeitskreis Provenienzforschung (Swiss Association for Provenance Research) has just launched its website and is now open for membership applications. The Association supports the establishment of provenance research and provides a network for provenance researchers in Switzerland. It also encourages the study of the art market and of exhibition and museum history. Details of the association and its board can be found at provenienzforschung.ch (in German and French).
This project interrogates the Jewish contribution to the making of the National Gallery. Despite the importance of many Jewish collectors associated with the Gallery – including Alfred de Rothschild, Ludwig Mond, Walter Samuel, 2nd Viscount Bearsted – these men and women have never been studied as a group in relation to the growth of the institution. Focusing on the period from the foundation of the National Gallery (1824) to the end of the Second World (1945), this project will investigate the role of Jewish donors, dealers and trustees in constructing the collections and in administering the institution. The project will consider what, if anything, was distinctive about Jewish taste in painting, and uncover the motivations behind acts of philanthropy on the part of this cultural minority. It will reconstruct the Jewish presence within networks of kinship, business and sociability that sustained the National Gallery in an era of dramatic expansion yet economic hardship and analyse the dynamics which resulted in paintings owned by eminent Jewish collectors entering the public domain in the era before the Holocaust. The project ‘Jewish Collectors and Donors at the National Gallery (c.1830-1945)’ will provide an opportunity to research a fascinating chapter in Jewish history and the history of collecting and allow the student to receive supervision and training across two outstanding institutions. Full details available here.
Application deadline: 8 June 2020
Start date: 1 October 2020
The Munich Central Collecting Point (CCP) database is back online, though with limited functionality. There are limitations in the extended search via the list function, such as the link to the database of the Linz collection. But searches via the Munich and Linz numbers work now, as do searches for single criteria in the advanced search.
Issued under the current Austrian chairmanship, the newsletter includes a news section, two cases studies, of a Jacobs Lierens claim in the Netherlands and a Josef and Alice Morgenstern recommendation in Austria, an article on provenance research at the V&A Museum, two conference reports and articles on art restitution in the US and tracing of owners of looted artworks in Austria. To read the newsletter, click here.
ZADIK, the Central Archive for German and International Art Market Research, is the world's only specialized archive on the history of the art market. It was founded in 1992 as the central archive of the German and international art trade by the Federal Association of German Galleries and Art Dealers BVDG as a non-profit association. At the end of 2014, ZADIK became an affiliated institute of the Philosophical Department of the University of Cologne. Now ZADIK has been incorporated into the University of Cologne as an independent research institute of the Faculty of Philosophy. To read the University of Cologne Press Release, click here.
James D. Bindenagel, US Ambassador and Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues from 1998-2002, and Conference Director for the 1998 Washington Conference on Nazi-Confiscated Art, has filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the petition for a hearing by the US Supreme Court by the heirs of Paul and Alice Leffmann in respect of their claim for Picasso's 'The Actor' now in the Metropolitan Museum, New York. Ambassador Bindenagel, now Director of the Center for International Security and Governance at the Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-University in Bonn, Germany, argues ia that an earlier court decision that the heirs had waited too long to file their claim is inconsistent with US policy and the HEAR Act:
'The decision threatens to eviscerate the express will of Congress. By limiting the HEAR Act to one time-based defense, the court below will prevent Holocaust-era art claims from being heard on their merits—the precise result that the HEAR Act seeks to avoid. Given that the HEAR Act was a statute intended to have national reach, this Court’s intervention is warranted to prevent the Act from becoming a dead letter.'
As the persecution and mass murder of European Jews unfolded, and shortly after the liberation, activists set out to document the fate of their communities. Jewish historical committees in several countries collected documents, artifacts and testimonies and brought together a major body of evidence - yet one which was later forgotten or used reluctantly. EHRI (European Holocaust Research Infrastructure) for the first time, brings together samples of early testmonies of Jewish witnesses and survivors taken before the 1960s. The testimonies are all on the site in their original form and langauge, and there is also an English translation of every text. To visit the site, click here.
Launched only in German and in Germany, and aiming to make the content "transparently accessible", the database contains the results of provenance and associated research projects funded by the DZK, the data from which has not previously been transparent or accessible. Search categories include people, businesses, events, collections, provenance information, objects, and further documentary sources, and content includes that of the Lost Art database.
Although the DZK states, in the only English language text about it on the site, that "Proveana provides assistance for those whose cultural assets were seized [and] for their descendants", no part of the database, including the registration to use it and press release about it, are in English, the language most accessible to the victims of the Nazis and their descendants. The DZK English language site makes no reference to Proveana, while the German language site features a number of documents about it. It seems that the DZK has no plans currently to change this.
To read about Proveana and to access the database, click here.
In a letter of 17 December 2019 to Holland's Council for Culture (Raad voor Cultuur), the Culture Minister Ingrid van Engelshoven reminds the Council that 2020 is the 75th anniversary of the start of the Second World War during which large scale looting of cultural property took place from mostly Jewish owners. The current restitution policy was drawn up in 2001 in order to combat the injustice and the restitutions that had not been made by the Netherlands.
While much has been achieved, and amendments made since then, she states that there is much concern about whether the restitution policy in its current form is still adequate. In 2016 her predecessor as minister promised Parliament that the policy would be thoroughly re-evaluated in 2020, and she commands the Council to set up an advisory committee with the following remit:
She states that "In order to carry out this assignment, I expect you to hold discussions with the parties involved" and instructs the Committee 'to include at least the following aspects in its evaluation of the policy:
She writes that she 'would like to receive the Council's advice on restitution policy before 1 October 2020, after which I will submit my response to the House of Representatives'.
To read the letter, in Dutch, click here.
In his editorial, Clemens Jabloner, chair of the Austrian Art Restitution Board and Austrian Federal Minister of Justice, writes:
Further and closer cooperation on different questions can be expected in the future, not least the discussion of comparative law and the various legal solutions. At the conference marking the twentieth anniversary of the CIVS in November, my British counterpart in art restitution, Sir Donnell Deeny, stated publicly: “The particular element that our five committees have in common is that they are all chaired by serving or retired senior judges, and, thus, inherently qualified and disposed to provide to the parties a fair process and independent and impartial adjudication.” I am curious to find out what other similarities and points in common will be identified in the future.
To read the Newsletter, click here.
At the end of December 2019 the Dutch Restitutions Committee published their recommendation of restitution for 107 Meissen objects to the heirs of Dr Franz Oppenheimer. At the beginning of January 2020 they published their recommendation of restituiton for 14 Meissen objects to the heirs of Herbert Gutmann. In the Oppenheimer case the DRC concluded that it was 'highly likely' that Dr Oppenheimer 'lost possession of these objects involuntarily due to circumstances directly related to the Nazi regime' and that they should be restituted even if they were of importance to the Dutch state. In the Gutmann case, the DRC concluded the objects were 'auctioned off involuntarily, under pressure caused by circumstances directly connected with the Nazi regime. On these grounds, the Committee's opinion is that the Applicants' interests in the restitution of the objects must be given greater weight than the State's interests in retaining them'.
All 107 Oppenheimer object groups are currently 'part of the Dutch National Art Collection. Of these, 90 object groups are on loan to the Rijksmuseum. The other seventeen object groups are part of the Netherlands Art Property Collection (the NK collection) and are on loan to the Kunstmuseum Den Haag (thirteen object groups) and Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen (four object groups)'. The 14 Gutmann objects are currently 'in Het Loo Palace, the Rijksmuseum and the Zuiderzeemuseum. All objects are part of the Dutch National Art Collection and are the property of the Dutch State'.
To read the Oppenheimer recommendation, click here. To read the Gutmann recommendation, click here.
To read the Gutmann heirs' press release, click here.
The Zentral- und Landesbibliothek Berlin (ZLB) has now digitised three volumes of the Dietzler Auto-Adressbuch for Grosse-Berlin (Greater Berlin) for the years 1932-1934 and these are freely available to all users at https://digital.zlb.de/viewer/metadata/34280679/1/LOG_0000/
Carel van Lier c. 1930. Looted and
restituted ivory hunting horn
©The Estate of Erwin Blumenfeld
The Lost Music Project seeks to reconstruct the history of musical material culture looted, confiscated, displaced, or otherwise lost during the Nazi era in occupied Europe, and the aftermath. Evolving research regarding musical manuscripts, printed music, music-related books and archives, musical instruments, and other musicalia documented in public and private archives will be posted to the Project website. In addition to new research, a goal of this project is to make both information and copies of primary source historical records accessible to the public for further research efforts and analysis. The project is led by Dr Carla Shapreau, Lecturer in art and cultural property law at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, Senior Fellow in the Institute of European Studies, where she is conducting cultural property research, and Curator of the Salz Collection in the Department of Music. For further informaton and to see the website, click here.
The latest Newletter has an editorial by chair of the German Commission, Hans-Jürgen Papier, who writes that the Network is important since "all commissions are dealing with similar problems in the handling of their cases, such as how to deal with gaps in the provenance of an item which, despite intensive research, can not be closed; also dealing with the so-called «Fluchtgut» is one of the aspects that are discussed intensively. For this reason, I am very confident that the network has created another important measure, which will strengthen the work of the commissions in terms of identifying and returning Nazi-looted property and finding fair and just solutions."
Elsewhere in the Newsletter is the 2018 annual report of France's CIVS; advanced notice of a report for the Network by Dr Charlotte Woodhead, to be published in November, on how each committee operates and the differences in approach in determining claims (Recommendation 3 of the 2017 Spoliation Action Plan); a report on the 2011 successful claim by the Budge heirs for three Meissen figures in the Victoria & Albert Museum, London; and the 'presentation' of the Austrian Art Restitution Act and the two bodies created as a result, the Commission for Provenance Research and the Advisory Board.
To read the Newsletter, click here.
The claimants for the Guelph Treasure (Welfenschatz) in the possession of Germany's Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation (SPK) have filed their opposition to the petition filed by the SPK and the Federal Republic of Germany in September 2019 seeking judicial review of a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upholding jurisdiction over the claims. That court rejected in July 2018 and again in June 2019 the appeal by the SPK arguing that the US courts had no jurisdiction over the claim. Germany’s petition to the Supreme Court argues that the allegations concerning the Guelph Treasure were not a taking of property in violation of international law, but rather a question of the Nazis’ taking property from “their own nationals within their own territory.” In response, the claimants argue that the U.S. statute conferring jurisdiction applies to genocidal takings of property in the Holocaust, and that U.S. policy as reflected in the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery (HEAR) Act compels hearing the case.
The claimants also filed a request to return Germany to the lawsuit. The same Court of Appeals last year ruled that the commercial activity of the SPK in the United States was insufficient under the law to obtain jurisdiction over Germany. The claimants address their argument that this reading is at odds with the statute’s text. Germany will have the opportunity to respond in the next 30 days.
The Technical University of Berlin in collaboration with the Department of Modern Art History (Prof. Bénédicte Savoy) is undertaking a one-year project dedicated to the systematic examination and research of the Adolph Menzel Collection of the Berlin banker Ludwig Ginsberg (1873-1939). The extensive collection of Menzel's graphic works comprised a large number of rare prints and contained works on paper, some of them of exceptional quality and beauty. It was described in 1930 as the largest Menzel collection ever in private ownership. The Ginsberg Collection was auctioned off in several lots and is largely lost today. So far, works from the collection have appeared in the Kupferstichkabinett Berlin and at the Leopold-Hoesch-Museum in Düren. Both museums will restitute the works that have been added to their collections as a result of persecution.
The project also focuses on research into Ludwig Ginsberg's fate as a persecuted person and the aryanization of the Bank Gebrüder Ginsberg. The TU seeks proactive support for the project, especially from colleagues in provenance research and custodians of graphic collections. The project is funded by the Deutsche Zentrum Kulturgutverluste. Further information about the project and the Ginsberg family can be found here.
A German government funded research project on international practice in the restitution of artworks stolen under the Nazi regime has been established. Led by Prof. Dr. Matthias Weller, the Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach professor of civil law, art and cultural property law at the University of Bonn, it aims "to provide a comprehensive, comparative analysis of international practice in the restitution of Nazi-looted art [and] to establish a generalized set of rules on how decisions are made based on considerations of fairness and justice. Once established, these rules can be used as guidance and support for those who make decisions and recommendations on matters of restitution."
For full details and to attend the presentation of the project in Bonn on 6 September, click here.
On 18 and 19 November 1938, 43 works from the 'O.' collection of Frankfurt am Main, designated in the auction catalogue as 'non-Aryan' or 'Nichtarischer Besitz', were sold by the Hans Lange auction house in Berlin. They included paintings by Aert van der Neer, Jacob Ruysdael, Thomas Wijck, Franz von Lenbach, Adolf Lier, Caspar Scheuren, Carl Spitzweg and Adolf von Menzel. If anyone has information on the identity of the owner of the 'O' collection, please write to email@example.com. To see the Lange catalogue, click here.
Country-specific information is available on this site for 48 countries, from Albania to Yugoslavia, in the Information by Country section. Details of important, non country-specific, online resources are available in the International section of the site which contains several categories of information. For example:
Restitutions and Case News: provides details of claims and cases ruled on or settled outside the courts with copies of reports and rulings. Full details of a comprehensive range of cases can be found in the News Archive, which is fully searchable by name of family, artwork, museum, city, etc.
Lawsuits: provides details of claims and cases ruled on or being settled in court with copies of court filings and judgements.
Research Resources: provides details of family records, tracing services, art historical resources, texts of post-war reports, and books and publications.
Web Resources: provides details of various online databases of looted paintings, results of provenance research in countries around the world, archival records available online and other research materials.
Seeking Owners of Identified Looted Property: provides lists of names of individuals whose looted property has been identified in institutions in Germany and whose heirs are being sought.
Other categories of information include Governmental Conferences and Hearings, Laws, Policies and Guidelines, Art Trade, and Press, Television, Radio and Film. To explore all these sections, click here.
The site is regularly updated with new resources and developments. To provide details of resources or cases to add to the site, please email firstname.lastname@example.org.