A Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust: Looted Art Bibliography

Bibliography: Looted Art

1. 1940-1948 Museum Acquistions Project. Washington: Royal Netherlands Embassy, November 1998.
Note: During WWII, the Nazis looted art from the occupied Netherland and transferred the booty to Germany. Although the Dutch government in exile in London took measures that enabled many confiscated art objects to be returned to their rightful owners, the ongoing problems related to the issue have led the Netherlands to launch new initiatives: the Origins Unknown Project which will investigate the orgins of art objects returned from Germany and in the custody of the Dutch State; the Museums Acquisitions Project, a museum-led project, which will investigate art object acquisitions during and after WWII.

2. Aalders, Gerard. "By diplomatic pouch: art smuggling by the Nazis". Spoils of War no. 3(December 1996): 29-32.
Note: The article's focus is on the transportation of looted art to be collected or sold. Looted paintings of Old Masters went straight to the Reich for the planned Führermuseum in Linz or into the collections of high Nazi officials. Degenerate modern art was sent to Switzerland via diplomatic packet to be sold or exchanged for German paintings. In Eastern Europe, ERR, a special plunder force looted both private and public collections, whereas in the West museum collections were touched less frequently than the private collections of Jews.
Online: http://www.dhh-3.de/biblio/bremen/sow3/diplom.htm.
3. Adams, E. E. "Looted art treasures go back to France". The Quartermaster Review 26(September-October 1946): 16-23, 77-80, 83-84, 87.
4. Akinsha, Konstantin. "The secret depositories slowly open". ARTnews 91, no.4(April 1992): 48+.
Note: The author predicted that the thousands of artworks stored in Russia as looted German objects will become known soon with the new open policies in Russia.
5. Akinsha, Konstantin. "A Soviet-German exchange of war treasures?". ARTnews 90, no.5(May 1991): 134-139.
Note: The General Relations Treaty between the USSR and Germany in 1990 provided for the return of looted art seized by the Soviets and the repatriation of art stolen from the USSR by Nazis. Article looks at the problems of identifying, locating and repatriating these works. Soviet art scholars are cited.
6. Akinsha, Konstantin. "The turmoil over Soviet war treasures". ARTnews 90, no.10(December 1991): 110-115.
Note: Traces new development in German-Russian negotiations about looted art. Soviet Culture Minster Gubenko's announcement that the Soviet Union will return objects looted from Germany after WWII only for equivalent art stolen from the USSR by the Germans is reported.
7. Akinsha, Konstantin. "Duma does it". ARTnews 96, no.4(April 1997): 65-66.
Note: The Russian Parliament has passed a law that "trophy" artworks seized by the Red Army in Germany and Eastern Europe are the property of the Russian Federation.
8. Akinsha, Konstantin. "Hermitage sequel". ARTnews 96, no.3(March 1997): 56.
Note: "Master Drawings Rediscovered", the second show of German trophy artworks hidden since the end of WWII opened at the Hermitage. The future of the looted art remains unclear.
9. Akinsha, Konstantin. "War loot: drawings for Deutsche Marks?". ARTnews 91, no.7(September 1992): 35.
Note: According to Russians, the Bremen Kunsthalle may have to pay for its Old Master drawings, looted by the Red Army during WWII, if they are to be returned from Russia.
10. Akinsha, Konstantin. "Russia: whose art is it?". ARTnews 91, no.5(May 1992): 100+.
Note: Rising nationalism and religious revivalism are demanding that Russia return cultural property to other former Soviet republics and to the Russian Orthodox Church.
11. Akinsha, Konstantin and Grigorii Kozlov. "Spoils of war: the Soviet Union's hidden art treasures". ARTnews 90, no.4(April 1991): 130-141.
Note: The USSR seized a great deal of work from the Soviet occupation zone of Germany; some of the loot was returned to East German museums in the late 1950s, but much of it is still in Russia. There is a debate on the question of repatriation.
12. Akinsha, Konstantin and Grigorii Kozlov. "Yeltsin - repatriation is a long way off". ARTnews 91, no.6(Summer 1992): 45+.
Note: Russia's Boris Yeltsin indicates that the return of German cultural loot will take place only on a mutual basis.
13. Akinsha, Konstantin and Grigorii Kozlov. "Moscow: war loot - drawings for Deutsche marks?". ARTnews(September 1992).
14. Akinsha, Konstantin and Grigorii Kozlov. "To return or not to return". ARTnews 93, no.8(October 1994): 154+.
Note: Disclosure of the fact that Russia has secret museum storehouses of art looted from Germany during WWII has created a controversy in Russia between those who believe the art should be returned and those nationalists who consider the booty legitimate compensation for lost Soviet culture. Russian and German restitution commissions, established in 1992, have not been able to agree on exchange issues. <
15. Akinsha, Konstantin and Grigorii Kozlov. "Moscow: let the museums decide". ARTnews(December 1992).
16. Akinsha, Konstantin, Grigorii Kozlov and Sylvia Hochfield. Stolen treasure: the hunt for the world's lost masterpieces. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1995. xiii, 301 pp.
Note: Published in the US as Beautiful loot: the Soviet plunder of Europe's art treasures, this account of how the Soviets looted artworks at the end of WWII is a detailed and dramatic tale. The story takes place during the two-year period between the Battle of Stalingrad and the fall of Berlin in May 1945. The Russians occupying Germany stole the German art of Berlin and Dresden, as well as art plundered by Germans, as compensation for Soviet losses.
17. Akinsha, Konstantin and Grigorii Kozlov. "Das Gold von Troja liegt in Moskau (Trojan gold residing in Moscow)". ARTnews 4(April 1993).
18. Akinsha, Konstantin and Grigorii Kozlov. "The Soviets' war treasures: a growing controversy". ARTnews 90, no.7(September 1991): 112-119.
Note: Evidence of the existence of German artworks looted by the Soviets during WWII is creating a controversy in Russia. At last, documents are being published giving details about the number of artworks removed from Germany by the Russian Trophy Commission after WWII and stored in secret places.
19. Akinsha, Konstantin and Grigorii Kozlov. "The discovery of the secret repositories". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 162-165. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: The authors' first article in ARTnews magazine, in 1991, on the secret art repositories removed by the Soviets from Germany at the end of WWII was written with the naive hope that it would convince Russia to return the confiscated treasures. In this essay, the authors note many interesting facts about the creation of the secret repositories, noting that the removal of art objects was part of Stalin's foreign policy.
20. Aldous, Tony. "Lost without trace". History Today (London) 42(August 1992): 2+.
Note: The looting of Czechoslovakian cultural treasures since the overthrow of the Communist regime threatens to destroy the country's tangible heritage, according to a leading art administrator at the International Art Antique & Architectural Theft Conference held in London in June 1992. Experts at the conference agreed that there is a growing international epidemic of fine art theft. A new organization, CoPAT (Council for the Prevention of Art Theft) has been created to combat the problem.
21. Alford, Kenneth D. The spoils of World War II: the American miitary's role in stealing Europe's treasures. New York: Birch Lane Press, 1994. xii, 292 pp.
Note: Alford chronicles WWII-era looting, noting that the magnitude of this plunder surpassed everything done in past wars. His emphasis is on the thievery committed by American military in Germany.
22. "Art confiscated by Soviets uncovered". Facts on File 55, no.2874(December 31, 1995): 1012+.
Note: Artworks stolen by Russian troops during WWII have been placed on exhibit in Moscow.
23. Art Looting Investigation Unit: final report. Washington: War Department, Strategic Services Unit, May 1, 1946. 170 pp.
24. Art with a dubious past (The Irish Times). August 14, 1998.
Note: The dispute over two Egon Schiele paintings detained in New York City after they were borrowed from European owners for a MoMA show in January has created a dilemma for museum directors who fear that the issue of art stolen during the Holocaust will over-burden museum personnel with research into the provenance of artworks and affect the amount of European art available to international audiences.
25. Attias, Laurie. "Looking for loot at the Louvre". ARTnews 97, no.4(April 1998): 74.
Note: The Von der Heydt Museum claims that the Louvre is maintaining artwork illicitly shipped out of Germany during WWII.
26. Beck, Ernest. "Hungary asks Russia for missing art treasures". ARTnews 91, no.4(April 1992): 45+.
Note: Thousands of missing art treasures looted from Hungarian Jews during WWII have been located in Russia.
27. Bittman, Alexander. "Spoils of war". History Today 49, no.1(January 1999): 3.
Note: Over one million Hungarian artworks were looted from Hungarian Jews by the Red Army; some of these pieces are on display in Moscow and Budapest. Although a restitution agreement was signed in 1992, Russia and Hungary have yet to agree on the matter.
28. Bloedow, Edmund. "The authenticity and integrity of 'Priam's Treasure'". Boreas 14-15(1991-1992).
29. Blumenthal, Ralph. "Without portfolio: wartime art daredevils". New York Times Section 2(February 12, 1995 (Late New York edition)): 32.
Note: This is a story about WWII missing art.
30. Boguslavskij, Mark. "Legal aspects of the Russian position in regard to the return of cultural property". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 186-190. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: The author's goal is to provide the reader with basic legal information about Russian-German reciprocal return of cultural property negotiations along with his comments.
31. Boguslavskij, M. M. "Contemporary legal problems of return of cultural property to its country of origin in Russia and the Confederation of Independent States". International Journal of Cultural Property 3, no.2 (1994): 243-256.
Note: An analysis of the international legal regulations and legal practice leads to the conclusion that there is a need to sign multilateral and bilateral agreement on cultural cooperation between the member states of the Confederation of Independent States.
32. Bohm, Elga. "Der Central Collecting Point Munchen: erste Kunstsammelstelle nach 1945 (The Central Collecting Point in Munich: the first collecting point for art works after the Second World War 1945)". Kolner-Museuems-Bulletin (Germany)(1987): Part 4.
Note: Article on the Central Collecting Point in Munich established by Monuments officers accompanying the American occupation army after WWII to collect art confiscated by the Nazis during the war.
33. Boylan, Patrick J. Review of the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (Hague Convention of 1954). Paris: UNESCO, 1993. 248 pp.
34. Braun, Hugh. Works of art in Malta: losses and survivals in the war. London: HMSO for the British Committee on the Preservation and Restitution of Works of Art, Archives and Other Material in Enemy Hands, 1946. v, 46 pp.
35. Breitenbach, Edgar. "Historical survey of the Intelligence Department, MFAA Section, in OMGB, 1946-1949". College Art Journal 9(Winter 1949-1950): 192-198.
Note: Describes the elaborate organization of a German Documents Center and how looted art works were identified and listed to establish ownership and to check claims submitted though the MFA&A.
36. Breslau, Karen. "The heist of 1945: the looted treasures of Europe may at last be returned to their owners". Newsweek 118, no.3(July 15, 1991): 51+.
Note: Article on the Soviet possession of German artworks stolen at the end of WWII.
37. Buomberger, Thomas. "The baron's share?". ARTnews(November 1998): 75.
Note: Over forty art objects seized from Baron Eduard von der Heydt during the Holocaust are to be returned to the rightful owners.
38. Burdick, Ansje M. Ethics, museums and artwork looted during World War II. Eugene: University of Oregon, 1998. 82 pp., plus appendices. (Master's thesis for the Arts & Administration Department, University of Oregon).
Note: This study examined the most recent ethics policies of the American Association of Museums, the Association of Art Museum Directors and the International Council of Musuems in relation to the current discovery of looted art in United States art museums. Ethics policies were analyzed to determine how the policies guide museums currently dealing with claims against their collection and prevent the acquisition of looted art in the future. In addition, three professionals knowledgeable about looted art were interviewed to determine the perception of the adequate or inadequate nature of the policies. Both the policy analysis and interview revealed the ethics policies to be vague. Interview subjects made recommendations to be included in future policies. (Author's abstract).
39. Burr, Nelson R., compiler. Safeguarding our cultural heritage: a bibliography on the protection of museums, works of art, monuments, archives and libraries in time of war. Washington: Library of Congress, 1952. 117 pp.
Note: Although there are a few titles from World War I, most of the citations date from 1936 on reflecting the Nazi rise to power and the Spanish Civil War.
40. Busterud, John A. "The treasure in the salt mine". Army - Arlington (Association of the United States Army) 47, no.3(March 1997): 47-51.
Note: At the end of WWII, US and Allied forces discovered looted art deep in a mine near Merkers, Germany. The author, commander of both munitions and security platoons, was assigned the task of guarding and ultimately removing the wealth and art from the mine.
41. Cembalest, Robin. "It's official: the Trojan Gold is in Russia". ARTnews 92, no.4(April 1993): 125.
Note: Russian government officals have acknowledged that they are holding the Trojan Gold Treasures at meetings in February 1993.
42. Chamberlin, Eric Russell. "Adolf Hitler". In Loot! The heritage of plunder, 149. London: Thames and Hudson, 1983.
Note: This book on looting since the beginning of history has a section on the warloads, Napoleon and Hitler, the "alpha and omega of looters". Hitler planned the rebuilding of his hometown, Linz, Austria, with his own mausoleum at its center as the heart of the Third Reich, along with the world's greatest art gallery. All party and state officials were ordered to help Hans Posse, the Director of Dresden Art Gallery and Hitler's art expert, in collecting art for the Linz gallery. Hitler's agents divided the artworks into that which was confiscated from the state's internal enemies and that which was safeguarded from the state's external enemies; other property was purchased, although frequently at a low price. The collecting headquarters for the Linz Gallery was below ground near Munich; all major works were photographed.
43. Clark, Ian Christie and Lewis E. Levy. National legislation to encourage international cooperation: the challenge to our cultural heritage. Paris: UNESCO, 1986.
44. Clemen, Paul, ed. Protection of art during war: reports. Leipzig: Seeman, 1919.
45. Collings, Matthew. "In search of Schliemann's gold". Modern Painters 8, no.2(Summer 1995): 29-35.
Note: Matthew Collins visited Moscow and St. Petersburg during the Spring of 1995 to make a BBC program on art exhibits of works taken by the Red Army from German collections after WWII. Collins interviewed collectors and museum officials and reports a shift in attitudes about where these works should be permanently located.
46. Congress. House. Committee on Armed Services. Authorization to Secretary of the Army to return certain works of art to the Federal Republic of Germany. Washington: GPO, 1981. 5 pp. (97th Cong. 1st sess., H.Rpt.97-298).
47. Congress. Senate. Committee on Armed Services. Temporary retention in the U.S. of certain German paintings. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1948. iii, 89 pp. (80th Cong. 2nd sess., S. Hrg., 1948).
Note: Hearings about German paintings confiscated by the US after WWII.
48. Czernin, Hubertus. Die Ausl"schung: der Fall Thorsch (The extinction: the Thorsch case). Vienna: Molden, 1998.
Note: The "extinction" of the name of Alphonse Thorsch who held a prominent position as the founder of a Vienna bank was accomplished when the family fled the Nazis who then expropriated all the Thorsch private and business property in Austria and those foreign properties within the Nazi sphere of influence. After the death of their parents, the Thorsch children sought restitution. Their experiences with the Austrian authorities are an example of what victims and heirs have had to go through.
49. Czernin, Hubertus. "Law of return?". ARTnews(November 1998): 80.
Note: The Austrian government is researching a number of paintings in Osterreichische Galerie believed to have been looted from Jews during WWII to determine their rightful owners.
50. Davies, Martin and I. Rawlins. War-time storage in Wales of pictures from the National Gallery, London: the course of events, some technical problems. London: HMSO, 1946. 15 pp.
Note: Describes the plans for removal and evacuation of the collection with details of the preparation of pictures for transportation.
51. de Jaeger, Charles. The Linz file: Hitler's plunder of Europe's art. Exeter: Webb and Bower, 1981. 192 pp.
Note: This is the story of Hitler's great dream of creating a world center of German and European art in Linz, as well G"ring's attempt to amass a large collection of his own at Karinhal; and how they competed to gain possession of the masterpieces looted from conquered Europe. The author's belief that Hitler's failure as architect and artist was behind his driven rise to power was confirmed by Professor Robert Waite, author of The Psychopatch God: Adolf Hitler, who associates Hitler's compulsion to destroy and rebuild to a deeply rooted association in Hitler's mind between being an artist and being a creative and innovative poltical leader.
52. De Visscher, Charles. International protection of works of art and historic monuments. International Information and Cultural Series 8. Washington: State Department, 1949. [50 pp.] (Reprinted from Documents and State Papers of June 1949).
Note: These essays by Belgian jurist Charles De Visscher, based upon the well-established thesis that the protection and preservation of cultural resources is an international responsibility, offer the reader not only an excellent review of plunder through history, but also a point of departure in future planning efforts to safeguard cultural achievements of all countries through international efforts.
53. Decker, Andrew. "An untapped, if forbidden, source". ARTnews 91, no.7(September 1992): 36+.
Note: Works of art stolen by the Red Army from German museums during WWII are beginning to resurface. The author brings up the issue of whether these artworks can be legally sold.
54. Decker, Andrew. "A legacy of shame". ARTnews 83, no.10(December 1984): 54-82.
Note: The first in a series of investigative articles on unclaimed Jewish property in Austria, Decker's article brought attention to the fact that approximately 8,500 artworks, once owned by Holocaust victims, had been kept for fifty years in Austrian repositories.
55. Decker, Andrew. ""My argument was not with the German people"". ARTnews(September 1992): 36 - 37.
Note: This article focuses on the WWII looting of sheepskin documents dating from the 15th and 16th centuries from a German parish house and recording legal transactions. These parchments have been returned to Germany by an American serviceman's widow, a concentration camp victim, who found the documents among her husband's belongings.
56. Decker, Andrew and Konstantin Akinsha. "A worldwide treasure hunt". ARTnews 90, no.6(Summer 1991): 130-138.
Note: Negotiations between the Soviet and German citizens for the return of looted German art focus on the Gerstenberg, Malevich, and Koenigs Collections.
57. Decker, Andrew and Milton Esterow. "Austria's bid for justice". ARTnews 95, no.11(December 1996): 90.
Note: Austria finally agrees to return art stolen from Austrian Jews during WWII to the heirs of owners. If heirs cannot be found, the art will be auctioned off with the proceeds going to victim organizations. This is a switch in policy; in the past, claims submitted were ignored.
58. Decker, Andrew and Ferdinancd Protzman. "Vienna: complexity, contradictions". ARTnews 88, no.5(May 1989): 63.
Note: Report on Austria's effort to return art to Jews and other rightful owners.
59. Decker, Andrew and Mariana Schroeder. "Blocking the black market". ARTnews 94, no.4(April 1995): 46.
Note: Black market activity in artwork may lessen as a result of a NYC court ruling calling for the return of three stolen drawings to Germany. The artworks had been captured by Russians at the end of WWII and later stolen from a Russian museum.
60. Deshmukh, Marion. "Recovering culture: the Berlin National Gallery and the U.S. occupation, 1945-1949". Central European History 4, no.411-439(27).
Note: Based on records of the US National Archives and Records Administration, this article traces German-Allied relationships regarding the National Gallery in Berlin after World War II, including the repair of damaged museums and the temporary removal of some of the artwork to the US.
61. Deshmukh, Marion. "Recovering culture: the Berlin National Gallery and the U.S. occupation 1945-1949". Central European History 27(1994): 411-439.
Note: The author used NARA's OMGUS records to ascertain American contributions to Western Germany's postwar cultural identity, specifically that of the Berlin National Gallery.
62. Dobrzynski, Judith H. "How did you get that art in the war, Daddy?". New York Times(January 25, 1998 Late edition): 4.
Note: Two Schiele paintings were on loan from Austria's Leopold Musuem to the Museum of Modern Art when two families claimed that the Nazis had confiscated the paintings from their relatives. NYC District Attorney Morgenthau subpoenaed the paintings. This is the most recent example of an American museum found to be in possession of looted WWII art.
63. Dobrzynski, Judith H. "A bulldog on the heels of lost Nazi loot". New York Times(November 4, 1997).
Note: In this interview with Hector Feliciano, a Puerto Rican journalist who lived for years in Paris and wrote The lost museum, the Nazi conspiracy to steal the world's greatest works of art, Feliciano reflects on the fact that wars seem to make people go beserk. Feliciano, whose book has proven to be extremely valuable to those who track stolen art, is now writing a sequel.
64. Dobrzynski, Judith H. "Capitol Hill looks at issue of art stolen in wartime". New York Times(February 15, 1998).
Note: Still interested in the Holocaust, Congress turned its direction away from gold, bank accounts, and insurance to look at looted art.
65. Dornberg, John. "The mounting embarrassment of Germany's Nazi treasures". ARTnews 88, no.7(September 1988): 130-141.
Note: The author addresses the issues of ownership and legality as they apply to the Federal German government loaning museums paintings once owned by Hitler and Goering.
66. Dostert, Paul. "Art recovery in Luxemburg". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 103-108. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: Luxembourg hopes for strengthened cooperation with the former Soviet Union and other countries of the former Eastern Bloc to determine what losses may be discovered there.
67. "Dresden paintings". ARTnews(November 1956 - Part II).
Note: Report on the sudden emergence of the famous Dresden Gallery of paintings missing since the end of WWII. The paintings were exhibited in Berlin.
68. Duboff, Leonard D. and Mary Ann Crawford Duboff. "The protection of artistic national patrimony against pillaging and theft in law and the visual arts". In Law and the Visual Arts Conference. Portland, OR: Northwestern School of Law, 1974.
69. Ebeling, Ashlea. "Hey, that's my picture on your wall". Forbes 258, no.1(December 14, 1998).
Note: Article on how defective title insurance coverage protects art owners when there are ownership disputes.
70. Eggen, J. B. "La commission Américaine pour la protection et le sauvetage des monuments d'art et d'histoire dans les zones de guerre (The American Commission for the Protection and Salvage of Artistic and Historic Monuments in War Areas)". Mouseion (Paris) 55-56(1946): 1-2.
Note: Eggen tells about the establishment of the Roberts Commission in 1942 to define the policy of the War Department regarding fine arts and archives. As a result the Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives Service was set up to carry out the policies.
71. Eichwede, Wolfgang. "Models of restitution (Germany, Russia, Ukraine)". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 216-220. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: The author suggests developing models of solution showing appreciation for all cultures and demonstrating the advantages of cooperation in restitution efforts.
72. Elen, Albert J. Missing Old Master drawings from the Franz Koenigs Collection. The Hague: Netherlands Office for Fine Arts, 1989. 280 pp.
Note: This list of the missing Old Master Drawings from the Koenigs Collection is an introduction to the collection which was illegally removed from the Netherlands during WWII. Only 35 of the original 527 drawings had been recovered at the time this handlist was prepared.
73. Esterow, Milton. "A heavenly treasure". In The art stealers, 78-99. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan, 1973.
Note: This chapter in Esterow's book is on the Belgian polyptych, "The Adoration of the Lamb", the world's most stolen masterpiece. The latest theft was by the Nazis who moved the panels to the Altaussee salt mine where it was found by Monuments Officers at the end of World War II after the Officers were advised of its location by a German art expert who had served on the staff of Alfred Rosenberg, who had been in charge of looting France.
74. Esterow, Milton. "A little justice in Austria". ARTnews 94, no.7(September 1995): Editorial.
Note: This editorial traces ARTnews' investigation into Austrian government manuevers to avoid returning Nazi art loot hidden in the Mauerbach monastery to its rightful owners or to other Jewish victims.
75. Estreicher, Charles, ed. Cultural losses of Poland: index of Polish cultural losses during the German occupation. London: n.p., 1944. xvii, 497 pp.
Note: As a emigré from Poland, Estreicher, a noted art historian, contributed to Allied efforts to restore property seized by the Nazis.
76. Faison, S. Lane ,. Jr. "Investigating art looting for the MFA&A". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 139-141. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Faison worked as an art-intelligence officer, investigating the Nazi confiscation agencies, during WWII, and later became the final director of the Munich Central Collecting Point in 1950 when he was assigned the task of close the Munich site. Faison tells of his dismay when he realized that works still awaiting provenance identification were to be sent to Austria and notes that Austria has been plagued with lawsuits about these objects ever since.
77. Farmer, Walter I. "Custody and controversy at the Wiesbaden Collecting Point". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 131-134. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: At the end of the war, the author, an architect, became the Director of the Wiesbaden Collecting Point, the central collection site for German-owned works of art. When, in November 1945, Farmer received directions to select 200 of the most important German works of art to be sent to the US temporarily, Farmer called a meeting of MFA&A members to protest the decision which he felt would discredit everything that had been done to demonstrate the integrity of the US in the its handling of German cultural treasures. The group agreed to prepare and send the Wiesbaden Manifesto, the only act of protest by officers in WWII. The paintings were sent along with the protest which was publicized by an article, "German Paintings in the National Gallery, a protest", by Charles Kuhn, a former Monuments Officer, which appeared in the College Art Journal in January 1946.
78. Fedoruk, Alexander. "Ukraine: the lost cultural treasures and the problem of their return". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 72-76. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: While part of the former USSR, Ukraine was not able to pursue the return of its cultural treasures lost during WWII. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine is eager to obtain information on the fate of Ukrainian cultural property lost during and after WWII. The author presents a clear picture of the wartime plundering activities and notes the problems of creating an inventory of lost cultural property.
79. Feliciano, Hector. The lost museum: the Nazi conspiracy to steal the world's greatest works of art. New York: BasicBooks, 1997. ix, 278 pp.
Note: In the late 1930's, Paris was the world's center of art where some of the most important painters, collectors, art dealers, and experts of this century resided. We learn how the Nazis stripped French museums, churches, gallery owners, and art collectors of rare art works between the years 1939 and 1944, shipping paintings, drawings, and sculpture for the museum of European art planned for Austria after the war, as well as for the private collections of high Nazi dignitaries. By the time of the Liberation in 1944, France was the most looted country in Western Europe: one-third of all the art in private collections had been taken by the Nazis for Hitler's planned "super museum" at Linz, with less desirable works of art sold off to the art trade. The author focuses on the collections of five Jewish families in France; the Rothschild, Rosenberg, Bernheim-Jeune, David-Weill, and Schloss collections were chosen because of their size and importance, as well the fact that they demonstrate the methodical nature of the Nazi effort to confiscate valuable art.
80. Feliciano, Hector. "The Mauerbach Case: an equivocal sale. Part II". Spoils of War no. 3(December 1996): 24-27.
Note: The author notes that Mauerbach auction catalog, prepared by the London auction house Christie's, has a foreward by Thomas Klestil, President of Austria, stating that the artworks hidden in the Alt Aussee salt mines and stored at the Mauerbach monastery belonged to Austrian Jews. Feliciano objects and points out that the Nazis had used Alt Aussee to store art looted from all over Europe; he also notes that Austria was very secretive about the unclaimed art and made no real effort to find the rightful owners. Feliciano is critical of Christie's for not checking on ownership claims before the sale.
Online: http://www.dhh-3.de/biblio/bremen/sow3.
81. Fiedler, Wilfried. "Legal issues bearing on the restitution of German cultural property in Russia". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 175-177. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Professor Fiedler is known for his legal knowledge in the fields of cultural property and state secession. He notes the legal basis for the German request for restitution is based on treaty regulations made after the opening of Eastern Europe in 1989 and explains the difficulties arising from different interpretations of those documents.
82. Field protection of objects of art and archives. War Department Pamphlet No. 31-103. Washington: War Department, 1944. 46 pp.
Note: A manual of instructions prepared by the American Commission for the Protection and Salvage of Artistic and Historic Monuments in War Areas providing criteria for selecting objects for preservation and outlining procedures for safeguarding art, records and buildings.
83. Fieldler, Wilfried. "Safeguarding of cultural property during occupation - modifications of the Hague Convention of 1907 by World War II". In Fifth Colloquium on the Legal Aspects of International Trade in Art: Licit Trade in Works of Art. Paris: International Chamber of Commerce, Check status. (Colloquium, Vienna, September 28-30, 1994).
84. First aid protection for art treasures and monuments. Washington: GPO, Undated. 2 pp.
Note: WWII instructions to American troops.
85. Fischer, Klaus P. "Life in Nazi Germany". In Nazi Germany: a new history, 341-393. New York: Continuum Publishing, 1997.
Note: In this chapter, Fischer reminds the reader that "Hitler was not only a soldier-politician but also an artist with a keen eye for the aesthetic who knew that persuasion required conversion, and that conversion, at its deepest level, was emotional rather than cerebral." Culture was put to the good uses of the state early in the Nazi regime: Goebbel's Reich Cultural Chamber was established to deal with cultural life. Artists were forced to join this organization if they wanted to practice their art and non-Aryan artists were excluded. In parallel, Rosenberg's Office for the Supervison of Idealogical Training and Education, became the state's official watchdog, involved in book burning and emptying museums of "non-German" or "degenerate" works of art. Goebbels and Rosenberg were later responsible for looting much of Europe's art treasures.
86. Flanner, Janet. "The Beautiful Spoils". In Men & monuments: profiles of Picasso, Matisse, Braque, & Malraux. New York: Da Capo, 1990.
Note: Flanner's fascinating account of the looting of art by the Nazis.
87. Florisoone, Michel. "La commission fran‡aise de récuperation artistique (French commission to recover artworks)". Mouseion (Paris) 55-56, no.1-2(1946): 67-73.
Note: An account of the creation of a French commission similar to the Roberts Commission, the British Committee on Works of Art and other Material in Enemy Hands (Macmillan Commission), and the Inter-allied or Vaucher Commission/.
88. Fodor, Istv n. "The restitution of works of art in Hungary". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 92-94. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Hungary's cultural treasures suffered from the Nazis, the Hungarian Facists, and the Soviet Army. In the 1980s, the Soviet Union secretly returned some paintings. In 1992 a commission was set up whose task was to plan the return of works taken from Hungary and held in Russia. A 40,000-item database of lost art has been set up in Budapest where the first meeting of a joint Hungarian-Russian restitution working group met in 1994.
89. Fodor, Istv n. "The restitution of works of art in Hungary". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 79-84. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: This article focuses on Hungary's losses of artworks during and after WWII, and on the work of the Committee for the Restitution of Cultural Property which was set up on May 19, 1993.
90. Foundoukidis, Euripide. The work of the International Museums Office and associated organizations during the period June 1940-January 1945. Paris: International Museums Office, [1946?]. 16 pp.
Note: Includes an inventory of monuments and works of art destroyed or damaged during WWII.
91. Francese, Pier Benedotto. "Art treasures moved because of war: a cultural legacy of the Second World War - the Italian experience". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 85-90. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: Italy established an Office for the Recovery of Works of Art in 1946.
92. Frankfurter, Alfred M. "Return of the Dresden paintings". ARTnews 54(February 1956).
93. Freitag, Gabriele. "Archival material on National Socialist Art plundering during the Second World War". Spoils of War no. 1(December 1995): 34-36.
Note: Archival material on Nazi art plundering is widely dispersed. The ERR records are found in a number of German locations, as well as Paris, Kiev, Riga and Moscow.
94. Freudenheim, Tom L. "Will everything become suspect?". ARTnews 97, no.3(March 1998): 100.
Note: Art institutions and governments both have failed to resolve the art theft problems dating from WWII. Now authorities and curators are urged to address the issues legally and ethically.
95. Gambrell, Jamey. "First return of war booty". Art in America 83, no.6(June 1995): 31+.
Note: A 19th century painting was returned to the Bremen Kunsthalle from the Ukrainian Ministry of Culture as the first official return of looted WWII art to Germany from Russia.
96. Gambrell, Jamey. "Will Russia return spoils of war?". Art in America 83, no.3(March 1995): 29.
Note: Russia's plunder of German art at the end of WWII was discussed at the three-day symposium, Spoils of War, in New York City.
97. Gambrell, Jamey. "Displaced art". Art in America 83, no.9(September 1995): 88-95, 120.
Note: The dispute over looted art taken by the Red Army from German and Hungarian collections continues to be a concern. The Russians consider the captured art to be legal acquisition as compensation for Russian losses during WWII inspite of claims from heirs of Holocaust victims.
98. Ganslmayr, H. "Study on the principles, conditions and means for the restitution or return of cultural property in view of reconstituting dispersed heritages". Museum 31, no.1(1979).
99. Glenny, Michael. "The Amber Room: what happened to the tsars' greatest jewel? The story of a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigman". Art & Antiques(March 1989).
Note: In April 1945, just before the Soviet Army captured K"nigsberg, the Nazis packed the panels into seventy-two crates and loaded them onto a convey of trucks. The Amber Room has never been seen since. Although a few "untiring sleuths" are still hoping to discover those 72 crates somewhere in Europe, Russians are now working to replace the Amber Room.
100. The gold of Troy: searching for Homer's fabled city. New York: Harry N. Abrams, in association with the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation and the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, 1996.
101. Goldmann, Klaus. "The Trojan treasures in Berlin: the disappearance and search for the objects after World War II". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 200-203. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Germany first found out the fate of the missing Trojan Treasures when they were alerted by news of the forthcoming publication of an article on the topic by Akinsha and Grigorii in ARTnews in 1991. In 1994 Berlin museum staff were permitted to inspect the Schliemann treasures.
102. Goldmann, Klaus. "The Treasure of Troy: hidden history". Spoils of War no. 2(July 1996): 12-13.
Note: Author urges a cooperative search for any still missing Trojan treasures.
103. Graeme, Chris. "Art heritage saved for humanity". (Undated).
Note: This is the second part of the story of how the Hermitage art collections were evacuated in the Summer of 1941.
104. Graeme, Chris. "Art heritage saved for humanity". (Undated).
Note: During WWII the Soviets ordered the monumental task of evacuating the contents of the Hermitage to the Urals. Two trains were sent off before rail routes were cut off and dedicated staff worked to protect the rest of the collection.
105. Grambrell, Jamey. "Displaced art". Art in America 83, no.9(September 1995): 88-95.
Note: Paintings from Germany taken by the Red Army at the end of WWII have gone on exhibit in Russia; the art world is concerned about the ownership dispute.
106. Greenfield, Jeannette. The return of cultural treasures. 2d ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. xviii, 361 pp.
Note: Dr. Greenfield traces displaced cultural treasures through their legal tangles, analyzes the work of international agencies and conventions, and, in the last chapter, offers her own formula for the resolution of national claims for the cultural property.
107. Greenfield, Jeannette. ""The Spoils of War"". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 34-38. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: In this paper, Greenfield presents the act of plundering in WWII in historical context starting with the Assyrians in the first millenium BC, noting that greed and barbarism were behind pillage through the centuries. Nazi looting only differed in its scale, its ruthlessness, its planning, its recording, and its emphasis on valuable artwork.
108. Greenfield, Jeannette. "Art theft and the art market". In The return of cultural treasures, 232-251. 2d ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. xviii, 361 pp.
Note: This chapter notes the theft and looting of art, including that of World War II.
109. Grenzer, Andreas. "The Russian archives and their files: researching the Soviet losses of property". Spoils of War no. 1(December 1995): 33-34.
Note: Although much of the Soviet archives is now open, researchers have found very little record material on Soviet losses of cultural property.
110. Grenzer, Andreas. "Research project, "Fate of the Treasures of Art removed from the Soviet Union during World War II"". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 124-132. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: Russia has set up a database which provides information on the loss and restitution of individual artworks and collections removed from the Soviet Union during WWII.
111. Grenzer, Andreas. "Report on the archive situation in Russia as relates to researching the losses of cultural property". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 142-145. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: Some of the Soviet archives are only now being accessed in terms of researching the losses of cultural property.
112. Grimsted, Patricia Kennedy. "The fate of Ukranian cultural treasures during World War II: archives, libraries, and museums under the Third Reich". Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas 39, no.1(1991): 53-80.
113. Grimsted, Patricia Kennedy. "'Trophy' archives and non-restitution: Russia's cultural 'Cold War' with the European Community". Problems of Post-Communism 45, no.3(May-June 1998): 3-16.
114. Grogan, David. "A quiet Texan, dead 10 years, is suddenly the prime suspect in a WWII theft of priceless medieval art". People Weekly 33, no.26(July 2, 1990): 48+.
Note: Article on the Quedlinburg Treasures discovered in Texas.
115. "Groups formed to protect cultural treasures war areas". Museum News 21(September 1, 1943): 1-2.
Note: Provides information about the establishment of the American Commission for the Protection and Salvage of Artistic and Historic Monuments in Europe and the Committee on Protection of Cultural Treasures in War Areas.
116. Guide to the Special Archive. Moscow: MediaLingua and Classica, 1997. http://www.archives.ru Website.
Note: The Special Archive is a unique, quite recently declassified archive, containing millions of documents seized by the Nazis from 1939 to 1945, as well as German archives, taken out from Germany by Stalin after WWII. Included among the holdings are information on Rosenberg's index on cultural objects of occupied Soviet regions, information on slave labor in Germany, and material on looted art.
117. Hall, Ardelia R. "The recovery of cultural objects dispersed during World War II". Department of State Bulletin 25, no.635(August 27, 1951): 337-340, 344-345.
Note: In this article written six years after the end of WWII, the author reports on the dispersal of art in the American Zone of Germany where more than 1800 repositories in mines, castles, churches, monasteries and remoted villages were discovered and the contents transferred to US collecting points. Once identified by MFA&A Monuments officers, the objects are returned to their rightful owners. Lists of cultural losses and missing artworks are still being compiled.
118. Hall, Ardelia R. "The U.S. program for return of historic objects to countries of origin, 1944-1954". Department of State Bulletin 31, no.797(October 4, 1954): 493-498.
Note: In 1954, the Department of State returned WWII displaced cultural treasures to foreign embassies in Washington to be restored to their rightful owners. Most of the objects had entered the US through art-trade channels.
119. Hamlin, Gladys E. "European art collections and the war". College Art Journal 4(March - May 1946): 155-163, 209-212.
Note: A survey of the looting, hiding, and discovery of European art treasures.
120. Hamlin, Gladys E. "European art collections and the war". College Art Journal 4(May 1946): 219-228.
Note: Hitler refused to move art from Berlin until the very end of the war when he consented to move things to nearby flaktowers and to salt mines; however most other German cities did evacuate their art for safekeeping. Hamlin writes about the process of checking this art for loot to be sent to Collecting Points, as well as the procedures used at the Collecting Points with an emphasis on the one at Munich: most of the art kept at Munich was taken from the Alt Ausse salt mine where the largest art collection outside of the Vatican was stored. Hamlin describes, in detail, the art, as well as, the people involved in returning the treasures to their rightful owners.
121. Hamlin, Gladys E. "European art collections and the war". College Art Journal 4(March 1946): 155-163.
Note: In Part 1 of a two-part survey of the looting, hiding, and discovery of European art treasures during WWII, the author describes how before WWII German plans were for made to systematically looting European art. Experts were sent as scholars and touists to other countries to make detailed lists of artworks for looting. When the Nazis did occupy countries they took what they wanted; in the case of the Eastern countries, they destroyed material concerning their history and culture.
122. Hammer, Katharina. Splendor in the dark: the recovery of art treasures in Salzkammergut at the end of WWII. Vienna: Osterreichiscer Bundesverlag, 1986. 290 pp.
Note: This book, part of a series on Austria, deals with the storage and salvage of art works in WWII in Austria. The rescued art included Hitler's collection, Austrian museum collections kept there for protecion, and other art plundered from individuals, churches, and museums.
123. Hammett, Ralph. "ComZone and the protection of monuments in Northwest Europe". College Art Journal 5(January 1946): 123-126.
Note: Hammett, a Monuments specialist, writes about his experiences as a Monuments officer mostly in France. He gives details about procedures followed in recording information, including the catalog system he created listing all monument, art collections, castles, and libraries in the G-5 Section, ComZone.
124. Hammond, Mason. "War and art treasures in Germany". College Art Journal 5(March 1946): 205-218.
Note: A Harvard University art scholar, Mason Hammond describes the great cultural losses in Germany, while noting the elaborate and generally successful protection measures taken by the Nazis.
125. Hamon, Marie. "Spoliation and recovery of cultural property in France, 1940-1994". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 63-66. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Before the declaration of war, the German government drafted a list of artworks it wanted to obtain from other countries. In France, a gallant French curator, Rose Valland, worked with the ERR to learn as much as possible to gain as much information as possible about the confiscation, even making copies of some of the German inventories. The author has made a list of restitution claims made after the war and described the recovery procedures.
126. Hamon, Marie. "The Working Group on Cultural Property". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 43-63. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: An exchange of views between France and Germany took place as early as 1991 owing to the possibility of the GDR's and Russia's returning French cultural property to France. A working group was formed to collect information on lost art and archives. Some of the WWII lost art appears on the art market.
127. Hancock, Lee. "Judge extends order forbidding removal of art". Dallas Morning News(June 28, 1990).
Note: Legal progress in the Quedlinburg Treasures Case.
128. Hancock, Lee and David Thorne Park. "E. German church files suit for return of art treasures". Dallas Morning News(June 19, 1990): 1A.
Note: Legal progress in the Quedlinburg Treasures Case.
129. Hancock, Walker. "Experiences of a Monuments Officer in Germany". College Art Journal 5, no.4(May 1946): 271-311.
Note: Hancock, a distinguished sculptor at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, was one of the first Monuments officers to reach France with the First Army. He describes his work in detail: the discoveries, the organization of collection centers, the gathering of German experts. Later, he was one of the Monuments Officers who protested the movement of German art to the US, saying that he felt that the action betrayed the confidence of the German scholars who had worked with him.
130. Hartung, Ulrike. "The 'Sonderkommando Künsberg': looting of cultural treasures in the USSR". Spoils of War no. 2(July 1996): 14-16.
Note: Author presents a picture of how the Nazis confiscated art in the Soviet Union.
131. Heirs sue museum for painting: art dealer's family says Seattle Art Museum isn't right to delay return of Matisse work (Universal Time). August 14, 1998.
Note: The heirs of Paul Rosenberg, considered the most important art dealer in 10th and 20th cantury art between WWI and WWII, are suing the Seattle Art Museum, for possession of an Henri Matisse painting, "Odalisque". The painting was left behind when the Rosenbergs fled to New York from Paris upon the Nazis invasion of France in 1940. The painting was sold in 1954 by a Paris gallery to a New York City gallery where a Seattle man purchased it; in 1991 the man donated the painting to the Seattle Art Museum.
132. Helligar, Jeremy. "The art of the matter: Rita Reif fights to reclaim a painting she says Nazis stole from her family". People Weekly 49, no.9(March 9, 1998): 69+.
133. Henry-Künzel, Ginger and Andrew Decker. "Never look a gift horse in the mouth". ARTnews 93, no.4(April 1994): 51-52.
Note: Gold treasures from Troy looted by Russia from Germany at the end of WWII will be shown in Pushkin Museum exhibit soon to the consternation of German museum officals.
134. Heufs, Anja. "Archives in the Federal Republic of Germany on art theft: an overall view". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 135-141. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: Article focuses on the archival material in the FRG containing material relevant to the issue of Nazi art theft.
135. Heuss, Anja. "Der Klosterschatz Petschur (The Petschur Monastery treasure)". Kritische Berichte 23, no.2(1995): 44-51.
Note: Author recounts the problems of returning looted art after WWII due to altered national borders, new governments, and displaced ethnic groups, focusing on the problems of art works from the Baltic countries.
136. Hiller, Armin. "The German-Russian negotiations over the contents of the Russian repositories". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 179-185. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: A member of both the German-Russian and the German-Ukranian joint commissions on the return of cultural property, Hiller asks that Russia honor the spirit and letter of the Good Neighborliness Treaty of 1990 and that they attune the domestic legislation they have announced to international law.
137. Hiller, Marlene P. "The documentation of war losses in the former Soviet Republics". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 81-83. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Author proposes a plan to approach the problems of finding out who appropriated culture treasures from Soviet cultural institutions during WWII; where these objects were taken and what happened to them; who recovered them; and what happened to them in the period from 1945 to 1990. Recovering what information about cultural losses can still be obtained is a goal of the Bremen Research Institute for Eastern Europe.
138. Hinchberger, Bill. "Brazil uncovers Nazi war loot". ARTnews(September 1998): 67.
Note: A Picasso and a Monet allegedly taken to Brazil as Nazi war loot in 1941 have surfaced in a Sao Paulo art gallery, shortly after another stash of 25 works turned up in southern Brazil, and before the completion of a joint government-citizen commission report on war loot in the South American country.
139. Hochfield, Sylvia. "St. Petersburg: will the Hermitage return the Degas". ARTnews 94(March 1995).
140. Hochfield, Sylvia. "Under a Russian sofa: 101 looted treasures". ARTnews 92, no.4(April 1993): 120-125.
Note: Prints and Old Master drawings, stolen from the German Karnzow Castle during WWII by Red Army officers, have been found in a search by Russian art historians, Konstantin Akinsha and Grigorii Kozlov. Arkinsha and Kozlov have been researching the fate of WWII looted art for years; it was they who announced to the world in 1991, the existence in the USSR of secret storerooms filled with artworks looted from Germany after the war, including the Trojan gold treasures.
141. Hochfield, Sylvia. "The Russians renege". ARTnews 93, no.6(Summer 1994): 68+.
Note: At recent restitution meetings, Russians noted that in talks before the end of the war, the Soviet had told Western Allies of their plans to take compensation in the form of German property as compensation for their immense losses; as a result, loot removed by official trophy brigades was legal. The Germans expressed pessimism about the restitution talks.
142. Hochfield, Sylvia. "Twice stolen". ARTnews 94, no.4(April 1995): 85-86.
Note: This article is on the problems of repatriation of looted art taken from Germany by the Russian army after WWII. The Germans, hoping to get their own works back, are considering compensation of works looted by Germans from the Russian collections. Other interests are concerned that many of the works were stolen by Germany from occupied countries.
143. Hochfield, Sylvia. "Nobody knows what to do next". ARTnews 94, no.5(May 1995): 65-66.
Note: More on the debate between the Germans and the Russians about the return of German works taken by the Red Army at the end of WWII.
144. Hochfield, Sylvia. "Do the right thing". ARTnews 97, no.2(February 1998): 66.
Note: The art world has recently taken steps to face the challenges of restitution: the new Commission for Art Recovery aims to recover art taken from Jewish victims for heirs or for Jewish charity; the Holocaust Art Restitution Project aims to act as a clearinghouse for stolen art information; and the International Research Center for the Documentation of Wartime Losses is being organized to gather and disseminate information relating to culture displace in times of war.
145. Hochfield, Sylvia. "Will the Hermitage return the Degas?". ARTnews 94, no.3(March 1995): 48+.
Note: The Russians have agreed to return Degas' "Place de la Concorde" to the heirs of a German collector; the heirs and the Hermitage Museum agreed to divide the Gerstenberg Collection. There is concern that the Russian government may not allow the return of any German artwork. Heirs to the Siemens, Kohler, and Krebs Collections, moved from Berlin to Russia after the war, are negotiating the return of these works.
146. Hochfield, Sylvia. "The Malevich legacy: heirs vs. museums". ARTnews 92, no.9(November 1993): 65+.
Note: Malevich collections at two U.S. museums are under scrutiny as the artist's heirs claim the paintings.
147. Hochfield, Sylvia. "The Russian surprise". ARTnews(January 1999): 56, 58.
Note: At the Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets in December 1998, plans were announced for a mega website as a central registry of art looted by the Nazis for access by claimants and collectors. Russian delegate Kulishov shocked the conference participants when he invited victims or heirs to claim their looted art treasures in Russia, because the Russian parliament adopted a bill nationalizing most of the cultural property captured by the Red Army trophy brigades after WWII exempting only church property, non-Nazi public property, family heirlooms of non-Nazis, and the property of Nazi enemies and victims. This article raises concerns about what is a Nazi victim and describes the complexity of making claims against Russia.
148. Hochfield, Sylvia. "Wrestling with restitution". ARTnews(Summer 1998): 59.
Note: When the Baroness Rothschild returned to Austria to claim family property, the government demanded a share of the artworks under the Export Prohibition Law. In order to export the collections, she was forced to "donate" 230 objects to Austrian museums. The Austrian culture minister has announced that Austria will return these assets to their rightful owners upon inventory; the Rothschild collections will be the first case to be dealt with because of the clear proof of possession.
149. Hochfield, Sylvia. "Back to the drawing room". ARTnews(December 1998): 61.
Note: Nine 19th-century Dresden drawings in the custody of Russians now living in New York City have been returned to the Dresden Gallery where they join the bulk of the collection returned by the Russians in the 1950s. About 1500 prints and drawings remain missing.
150. Hochfield, Sylvia. "Statute with limitations". ARTnews(November 1998): 57.
Note: A proposed bill to set limits on reclaiming stolen artworks is seen by its proponents as stabilizing the art markets by reducing the number of lawsuits.
151. Hoffman, Barbara. "The spoils of war". Archaeology(November-December 1993): 37-40.
Note: Author finds the legal framework and applicable laws for resolving issues of war booty and stolen artworks far from simple. The two most significant international agreements protecting cultural property are the Hague Convention of 1954 and the UNESCO Convention adopted in 1970.
152. Honan, William H. "Germans to get priceless gospels lost in '45". New York Times(May 1, 1990): A1, A19.
Note: Samuhel Gospels, part of the Quedlinburg Church Treasures, are returned to Germany.
153. Honan, William H. "A trove of medieval art turns up in Texas". New York Times(June 14, 1990): A1, D22.
Note: Quedlinburg Church Treasures are traced to Texas.
154. Honan, William H. "Second missing manuscript turns up in German hands". New York Times(June 16, 1990).
155. Honan, William H. Treasure hunt: a New York Times report tracks the Quedlinburg hoard. New York: Fromm International, 1997. 289 pp.
Note: Honan, brought into the Quedlinburg art theft case by Willi Korte, art sleuth, followed a tip and ended up in Texas where the New York Times reporter turned up the obituary of the thief, a former Army officer who had found the sacred objects in a mushroom cave.
156. Honan, William H. "Ely Maurer, who repatriated art looted by Nazis, dies at 84". New York Times(June 29, 1997): 29.
Note: Maurer served as a State Department legal advisor on the repatriation of cultural treasures after WWII, determining the rightful owners of looted art. He was called in as an expert by lawyers involved with the Quedlinburg case involving medieval treasures taken from a cave by an American soldier at the end of WWII.
157. Honan, William H. "Journalist on the chase". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 153-155. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Honan, New York Times reporter, tells of the clues that led him to Texas looking for the Quedlinburg Church Treasure's thief.
158. Honan, William H. "Texas bank admits it has missing art". New York Times(June 19, 1990): C18.
Note: Quedlinburg Church Treasures located in a Texas bank.
159. Honan, William H. "Judge refuses to order silence about stolen art". New York Times(JUne 21, 1990): B3.
Note: Quedlinburg Church Treasures as a legal issue.
160. Honan, William H. "Church lawyers say stolen art was moved". New York Times(June 24, 1990): 19.
Note: Quedlinburg Church Treasures as a legal issue.
161. Honan, William H. "Germans send lawyers to Texas". New York Times(June 1990): C22.
Note: Quedlinburg Church Treasures as a legal issue.
162. Honan, William H. "Letter show thief knew value of the Quedlinburg Treasures". New York Times(September 3, 1994): A1.
Note: Meador's letters indicate that he understood the value of the Quedlinburg Church Treasures.
163. Honan, William H. "Case against heirs of art thief is all but over". New York Times(April 14, 1998): 14.
Note: The heirs of Joe Tom Meador may have to pay more than $50 million in estate taxes, penalties and interest to the IRS for the Army lieutenant's Quedlinburg loot taken at the end of WWII and sold by the heirs to European art dealers who in turn sold them Germany.
164. "How the Republic of Austria forced the Rothschilds to donate art". Der Standard(February 14-15, 1998).
Note: To allow Clarice de Rothschild, widow of Alphonse, to take the rest of the Rothschild collection out of Austria after the war, she was pressured to donate seven paintings and 34 other art objects to the Art History Museum in Austria.
165. Howe, Thomas Carr. Salt mines and castles: the discovery and restitution of looted European art. New York: Bobbs Merrill, 1946. 334 pp.
Note: Before joining the Navy in WWII, Howe served as director of the California Palace of the Legion of Honor. In this entertaining book, he tells of his experiences as a Monument officer in Europe where he discovered hidden art and was instrumental in establishing Central Collecting Points directed by Monuments officers and staffed by German museum personnel who cared for the paintings while restitution efforts were going on.
166. Huebner, Jeff. "Landscape of pain: the fight over Daniel Searle's Degas which a Jewish family says was stolen by the Nazis". Chicago 47, no.5(May 1998): 24+.
Note: An Art Institute of Chicago trustee is the owner of Degas' Landscape with smokestacks which is the object of a claim by the heirs of Nazi victims.
167. Hughes, Robert. "Hold those paintings! The Manhattan D.A. seizes alleged Nazi loot". Time 151, no.1(January 12, 1998): 70.
Note: Two paintings by the Austrian Expressionist, Egon Schiele, have been confiscated by Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau from the comprehensive show of Schiele's works at the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) pending a criminal investigation into their rightful ownership. On loan from the government-supported Leopold Foundation in Vienna, the paintings have been claimed by heirs of Viennese Jewish families who lost them to the Nazis in the 1930s.
168. Hughes, Robert. "Russia's secret spoils of World War II: the Hermitage in St. Petersburg breaks its silence on a hidden trove of Impressionis treasures". Time 144, no.16(October 17, 1994): 85.
Note: Two paintings by the Austrian Expressionist, Egon Schiele, have been confiscated by Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau from the comprehensive show of Schiele's works at the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) pending a criminal investigation into their rightful ownership. On loan from the government-supported Leopold Foundation in Vienna, the paintings have been claimed by heirs of Viennese Jewish families who lost them to the Nazis in the 1930s.
169. Hume, Christopher. "Art sleuth recovered Nazi loot". Toronto Star(December 8, 1998): 1-3.
Note: In December, Lane Faison spoke at the Art Gallery of Ontario about his postwar advantures, first as an art expert with the Art Looting Investigation Unit of the OSS, and later as the director of the Central Collecting Point at Munich where he oversaw efforts to gather and return millions of art objects.
170. Ilatovskaya, Tatiana. Master drawings rediscovered treasures from prewar German collections. New York: Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation and State Hermitage Museum in association with Harry N. Abrams, 1996. (Catalog of the exhibition held at the State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, December 3 - March 31, 1997).
171. "Instances of repatriation by the USSR". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 145-147. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Summary of the symposium presentation by Irina Antonova at the international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: In the view of Irina Antonova, the document, "On the legal bases for a solution to questions concerning cultural property removed to the USSR as a result of WWII", demonstrates the legality of the art's presence in the Soviet Union.
172. Interim report. Paris: Commission for the Study of the Spoilation of Jews in France: April-December 1997, December 31, 1997. 119 pp.
Note: In February 1997, the Prime Minister asked Mr. Jean Mattéoli, former Resistance member and president of the Council for Economic and Social Affairs, to study the conditions under which property belonging to Jews was confiscated in the context of WWII French anti-Semitic policies promulgated by the Vichy government inspite of French law founded on principles of secularity and equal rights. The report, finding that the Vichy government instituted an industry of spoliation from 1940 to 1944, sets forth the Commission's other objectives which include research into the origins of artworks deposited in national museums, and specification for the conditions of future sales of goods coming from spoliation.
173. International Military Tribunal: Nurnberg, 1. Toronto, Ontario: Nizkor Project, 1996-1998.
Note: This webpage leads to the transcripts of the postwar Nurnberg Trials including the U.S. Chief of Counsel for Prosecution of Axis Criminality's 1946 Nazi conspiracy & aggression which includes Chapter 8 on "Economic aspects of the conspiracy", Chapter 10 on The slave labor program", Chapter 11 on "The concentration camps", and Chapter 14: "The plunder of art treasures" with information on the Einsatzstab Rosenberg (ERR); the cooperation of Hermann Goering; General Government's confiscation laws and decrees; the nature, extent and value of property stolen; and legal references and list of documents relating to the plunder of art treasures.
Online: http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/imt.
174. Järvinen, Markkhu. Convention of the Hague of 1954 by UNESCO for the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict. n.p.: International Council on Archives, 1995. 9 pp. (Presentation at XXXIst International Conference of the Round Table on Archives, "War, Archives, and the Comity of Nations, 1st working session, "Protection of Records During War", Washington, September 6-9. 1995).
Note: The Hague Convention of 1907 introduced legal protection to cultural property at a time when there were separate fighting zones; WWI with long-range artillery and aerial bombings made this separation obsolete. During WWII, attempts were made by the Allies to safeguard cultural property in Europe. After WWII, there was a fresh movement for international cooperation re cultural heritage protection under UNESCO resulting in the 1954 Convention. The speaker reminds us that although the main attention is given to the more visible monuments, buildings, museums and artworks, archives and libraries are important issues in the ocnsideration of cultural heritage.
175. The Jeu de Paume and the looting of France. New York: Cultural Property Research Foundation, 1998. 3 pp.
Note: The purpose of this project is dedicted to the historical reconstruction of the Nazis' WWII seizure of Jewish cultural property in France when the Jew de Paume Museum in Paris became a notorious collection spot for confiscated art.
Online: http://docproj.loyola.edu/jdp/index.html.
176. Jir sek, Pavel. "Losses of cultural property from the territory of the Czech Republic due to World War II". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 232-233. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Pavel states that there was little outflow of Czech cultural treasures to Germany until 1945, except for Jewish art. At the end of the war, many collections were destroyed or relocated by first the Germans and then the Soviets.
177. Jolis, Alan. "War loot goes on-line". ARTnews 95, no.8(September 1996): 58.
Note: The French plan to produce a catalog of art works stolen from Holocaust victims; in the meantime they will put the art illlustrations on the web.
178. Kaplan, Alissa. "Hot on the paper trail: the profits of plunder". ABCNEWS.com(November 6, 1998).
179. Kaplan, Alissa. "Details emerge on assets' fate: 'all of Europe' benefited from war booty". ABCNEWS.com(December 19, 1997).
180. Kaufman, Joshua Kleinman ,. Jeff. "Society to prevent trade in stolen art". Spoils of War no. 2(July 1996): 11-12.
Note: The recent establishment of The Society to Prevent Trade in Stolen Art (STOP), a non-for-profit organization, will hopefully help, through its education programs and resource services, to combat trade in stolen and fraudulent art.
181. Kaye, Lawrence M. "The statute of limitations in art recovery cases: an overview". IFAR Journal (International Foundation for Art Research) 1, no.3(Autumn 1998): 22-28.
Note: Statutes of Limitations vary from one state to another in the United States; European Statutes of Limitations are governed by Civil Codes except for the U.K. which shares a common law jurisdiction with the U.S.
182. Kaye, Lawrence M. "Laws in force at the dawn of World War II: international conventions and national laws". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 100-105. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: This essay presents an overview of international and national efforts to protect cultural property with an emphasis on the laws in force at the beginning of WWII. Although the international agreements did not prevent the terrible cultural loss of WWII, their principles served as the basis for the repatriation of cultural property following the war.
183. Kienle, Christiane. "Return to Dresden after decades: an exhibition of the State Galleries Dresden". Spoils of War no. 5(June 1998): 35-37.
Note: In April, 1998, a "Back to Dresden" exhibition of works of art lost during World War II, but since returned to former owners, opened at the Dresden Palace. These artwork thefts happened in 1945 during the surrender of the depositories to the Soviet Army.
Online: http://www.beutekunst.de/.
184. Kienle, Christiane. "The return of ivory sculptures to Germany". Spoils of War no. 3(December 1996): 59-61.
Note: This is the tale of the repatriation of the Darmstadt ivory sculptures as a result of public pressure and the solidarity of the international museum world. The sculptures, stolen from a German hiding place after the war, surfaced at a Parisian auction in 1993. The fact that museums were informed about ivory figures and the auction house was put under pressure led to intensive negotiations that resulted in the five apostles returning to Darmstadt.
Online: http://www.dhh-3.de/biblio/bremen/sow3.
185. Klessman, Eckart. "Von Bomben gerettet und doch verloren? (Saved from the bombs and yet lost?)". Art (Hamburg) no. 3(March 1993): 44-53.
Note: This is a report on WWII hidden art which has disappeared. Note is made of arrangements for the return of the old master drawings and prints from the Kunsthalle Bremen which were taken by Soviets at the end of the war.
186. Klessman, Eckart. "Die Amerikaner beienten sich aus den Depots der Nazis (The Americans help themselves at the Nazi depositories)". Art (Hamburg) no. 8(August 1993): 78-81.
Note: Author criticizes the handling of artworks by the Allies at the end of the war, especially the American military and speculates that many items were illegally transported to the US. The artworks were brought together by Monuments officers at Collecting Points in Europe, but many objects formerly in Soviet and German collections have never been discovered.
187. Klessman, Eckart. "Die Amerikaner beienten sich aus den Depots der Nazis (The Americans help themselves at the Nazi depositories)". Art (Hamburg) no. 8(August 1993): 78-81.
Note: Author criticizes the handling of artworks by the Allies at the end of the war, especially the American military and speculates that many items were illegally transported to the US. The artworks were brought together by Monuments officers at Collecting Points in Europe, but many objects formerly in Soviet and German collections have never been discovered.
188. Kline, Thomas R. "Recent developments in the recovery of Old Master drawings from Bremen". Spoils of War no. 5(June 1998): 15-19.
Note: Drawings, estimated to be worth more than $10 million and believed to have been stolen first from Bremen, at the end of World War II, and later from Baku, were seized in September 1997 by the U.S. Customs Service. The criminal case, involving a Japanese national charged with violating the National Stolen Property Act, sets the stage for a dispute between Bremen and Baku over ownership of the drawings.
Among National Archives Library's periodical holdings.
Online: http://www.beutekunst.de/.
189. Kline, Thomas R. "Recovering wartime losses and other stolen art and cultural property found in the United States". Spoils of War no. 3(December 1996): 6-9.
Note: Kline's article offers advice on how theft victims should go about recovering located cultural property found in the United States.
Online: http://www.dhh-3.de/biblio/bremen/sow3.
190. Kline, Thomas R. "Legal issues relating to the recovery of the Quedlinburg Treasures". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 156-158. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Kline's job with Korte and Honan was to ensure that nothing was done in the hunt for the Quedlinburg Church Treasures that would jeopardize the making of a lawful claim to the treasures. In this presentation, Kline traces the steps along the way to settlement of the case and remarks on other instances in which victims have brought claims of cultural-property theft and pursued them to settlement on favorable terms or to success in courts, including the Bremen Kusthalle case.
191. Kline, Thomas R. and Willi A. Korte. "Archival material on National Socialist Art plundering during the Second World War". Spoils of War no. 1(December 1995): 40-41.
192. Klugmann, Claudia. "Kriegsverluste der Gemälde- und Pleastiksammlung des Museums der bildenden Künste (War losses of the picture and sculpture collection of the Museum of Fine Arts)". In Museum der bildenden Künste (Museum of Fine Arts), 7-40. Leipzig: Jahresheft, 1994.
Note: This is a list of about 200 paintings and pieces of sculpture missing since the war from the Leipzig Museum of Fine Arts.
193. Knyschewskij, Pawel Nikolawitsch. Moskaus Beute. Wie Verm"gen, Kulturgüter und Intelligenz nach 1945 aus Deutschland geraubt wurden (Moscow loot: how property, cultural treasures and intelligence were robbed from Germany after 1945). München: Landsberg am Lech, 1995. 241 pp.
Note: This book gives a clear picture of how industrial plants were moved from Germany to the Soviet Union, as well as a view of the looting of cultural treasures by the Red Army.
194. Koenigs, Christine F. "Under duress: the sale of the Franz Koenigs Collection". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 237-240. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: The Koenigs Collection included paintings and old master drawings in 1935 when Koenigs, a German living in Amsterdam, loaned his collection to the Boymans Museum in Rotterdam. In 1939, Koenigs was prepared to negotiate with the museum for the sale of the collection when the threat of invasion forced him to leave Amsterdam. Parts of the collection were sold separately; the Koenigs drawings are now in Russia.
195. Kogelfranz, Siegfried and Willi A. Korte. Quedlingburg - Texas und zurück (Quedlinburg - Texas and back). Unich: Droemer Knaur, 1994. 512 pp.
Note: The tale of Korte's pursuit of the Quedlinburg Church Treasures.
196. Kommenda, Benedikt. "Schiele: Was alles gegen die Konfiszierung spricht experten verweisen auf einen US-Präzedenzfall, in dem ein eindeutig von den Nazis geraubtes Kunstwerk nicht den früheren Eigentümern zurückgegeben wurde (Whatever is said against the confiscation, experts point to a U.S. precedent wherein artwork looted by the Nazis is not returned to its previous owner)". Museum Security Mailinglist Reports(March 1998).
Note: Arbitation over the confiscation of two Schiele paintings is difficult because of the discrepancy between American and European rights of ownership. In Anglo-American law, the good trust of ownership principle, cited by Rudolf Leopold in Austrian law, does not exist; according to the European ownership principle, if the "sincere owner" buys from a trader through authorized trade means, with "good trust" and on the trader's recommendation, he or she becomes owner even, if subsequently, it is discovered that the painting has been stolen. This principle, which provides for secure ownership in trading, is not recognized in American law.
197. Konchin, Evgraf. "Tainik Villii Holzdorf (The hiding place in the Villa Holzdorf)". Kultura 30(July 1994).
198. Koordinierungstelle der Länder für die Rückführung von Kulturgütern (Coordinating State Office for the return of cultural treasures). n.p.: Federal States of Germany, Undated.
Note: The German Coordinating State Office for the Return of Cultural Treasures (Koordinierungsstelle) was founded to research and document European cultural losses as a result of WWII and postwar historical events. Close contact with affected archives, museums, and libraries have been maintained in order to collect missing objects and research results in a database designed for this purpose. The Koordinierungsstelle sponsored an international meeting, "Cultural treasures moved because of the War: A Cultural Legacy of the Second World War Documentation and Research on Losses" (http://www.dhh-3.de/biblio/bremen/treasures/contents.html), late in 1994, and began distributing expert information on cultural losses in its international newsletter, Spoils of War (http: www.dhh-3.de/biblio/bremen/bremen0.html) as a result of that meeting.
199. Korfmann, Manfred. "The value of the finds to the scientific community". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 207-211. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Korfmann expresses his view that the Trojan Treasures are extremely important for cultural and scientific research.
200. Korkmazova, Evgenia. "Review of the 1997 Russian press on the issue of the restitution of cultural values. Part II.". Spoils of War no. 5(June 1998): 41-43.
Note: This review of the Russian press draws on the "Restitution File" maintained by Bibliographer Korkmazova.
Among National Archives Library's periodical holdings.
Online: http://www.beutekunst.de/.
201. Korte, Willi. "Trans-Art". Spoils of War no. 0(1995): 5-7.
Note: Trans-Art International has created an international database, the Historic Art Theft Registry, for stolen works of art that protects the ownership claims of WWII victims of looting.
202. Korte, Willi. "Search for the treasures". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 150-152. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: The Quedlinburg Church Treasures were stored by the Germans in the Altenburg cave near the church. In 1945, Joe T. Meador, an American officer, stole many of the most valuable objects and sent them to his home in Texas. When Meador's heirs began to sell parts of the treasure after his death in 1980, Korte, a private investigator specializing in WWII displaced art, became involved through the Foundation for Prussian Cultural Heritage in Berlin. Korte persuaded first New York Times reporter Bill Honan and then Tom Kline, an attorney with a Texas law firm, to join him in working on the case which resulted in the return of the treasures.
203. Korte, Willi. Trans-Art. Washington, Trans-Art. 2 pp. Vol. Undated.
Note: Description of the Historic Art Theft Registry of Trans-Art International, L.C., an international database for stolen works of art that protects the ownership claims of war theft victims regarding their missing property without paying fees.
204. Kostenevich, Albert. Hidden treasures revealed: Impressionist masterpieces and other French paintings preserved by the State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg. New York: Harry N. Abrams, in association with the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation and the State Hermitage Museum, 1995. (Catalog of the exhibition held at the State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, opened March 30, 1995).
Note: This catalog lists paintings from the Krebs, Gerstenberg, Scharf, Koehler and other collections that were removed from German repositories in the Soviet Zone of Occupation and shipped to the USSR. When some of the public art was returned to Germany, the privately owned collections were kept; now their rightful ownership is contested.
205. Kot, Sergei. "The Ukraine and the Russian Law on removed cultural values". Spoils of War no. 5(June 1998): 9-15.
Note: This discussion of the effect on the Ukraine by Russian law on removed cultural assets notes that cultural property was evacuated from the Ukraine to Russia during WWII and Ukranian cultural porperty was transferred to the USSR in the scope of postwar restitution and now kept in Russia.
206. Kot, Sergei. "Ancient Ukranian mosaics and frescos lost during the war and now located in Russian museums". Spoils of War no. 5(June 1998): 37-41.
Note: In 1934-1936, the Mikhailovsky Catheral in Kiev was blown up by communist leaders sent from Moscow. The most valuable mosaics and frescos were removed and sent to museums of Kiev. During the German occupation, the Germans moved engravings, maps, drawings, plans, and photographic negatives and positives, mosaics, frescoes were taken to Germany. At the end of the war, possessions of Ukranian museums were given over to the Soviet Union, but they never made their way back to the Ukraine.
Online: http://www.beutekunst.de/.
207. Kotzsche, Dietrich. "Der Quedlinburger Schatz wieder vereint: 31 Oktober 1992 bis 30 Mai 1993 (Quedlinburg Treasure united again: October 31, 1992 unitl May 30, 1993". Museums-Journal (Berlin) 7, no.1(1993): 47-49.
Note: Treasure taken from the Quedlinburg church to the US after WWII has been restored to the church and exhibited in Berlin.
208. Koulichov, Valery. "The history of the Soviet repositories and their contents". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 171-174. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: This is a history of the Soviet repositories - how they came into being and what they contain.
209. Kowalsi, Wojciech. "Introduction to International Law of Restitution of Works of Art Looted during Armed Conflicts. Part II". Spoils of War no. 3(December 1996): 10-11.
Note: In this part of his series, the author quotes legal philosophers to show that citizen's property should be excluded from war and given proper protection.
Online: http://www.dhh-3.de/biblio/bremen/sow3.
210. Kowalski, Wojciech. "Introduction to International Law of Restitution of Works of Art looted during armed conflicts. Part III". Spoils of War no. 4(August 1977): 39-41.
Note: The author traces looting and restitution up to the 19th century, noting that Napoleon's looting activities had an effect on the development of international law.
211. Kowalski, Wojciech. Liquidation of the effects of World War II in the area of culture. Warsaw: Institute of Culture, 1994. 115 pp.
212. Kowalski, Wojciech. "Internationaler Kulturgüterschutz in Europa: deutsch-polnische Fragen (International cultural asset protection in Europe: German and Polish questions)". Kritische Berichte 23, no.2(1995): 52-57.
Note: This account tells of Poland's attempts to reclaim her cultural treasures taken as booty through history from the middle ages to the present with a positive focus on current talks between Germany and Poland about the exchange of WWII looted art.
213. Kowalski, Wojciech. "Poland. Part I: Historical overview". Spoils of War no. 1(December 1995): 22-24.
Note: After their WWI experience, Polish scholars collected information on their cultural losses from the first days of war in 1939. The author tells of the efforts to inventory losses and prepare restitution claims during and after WWII.
Online: http://www.dhh-3.de/biblio/bremen/.
214. Kowalski, Wojciech. "World War II cultural losses of Poland: a historical issue or still a 'hot' political and legal topic". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 235-236. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Polish art collections, kept mostly in residences and palaces, were not well documented before 1939 when the Germans ordered that all public art be confiscated, including all church property with the except of liturgical objects needed for ordinary services. There has been some progress toward restitution during this decade and there is now hope for more.
215. Kowalski, Wojciech. "Introduction to International Law of Restitution of Works of Art looted during armed conflicts. Part I". Spoils of War no. 2(July 1996): 6-8.
Note: An history of wartime plundering and early attempts to restrict looting during the war and return loot after the war.
Among National Archives Library's periodical holdings.
Online: http://www.beutekunst.de/.
216. Kowalski, Wojciech. "Introduction to International Law of Restitution of Works of Art looted during armed conflicts. Part IV". Spoils of War no. 5(June 1998): 7-9.
Note: Author notes that the 19th century witnessed the adoption of the first legal acts banning destruction and looting of what is today referred to as cultural property. The Lieber Code of 1863, the Brussels Declaration of 1874, and the Hague Convention of 1899 paved the way to modern laws on the protection of cultural heritage in time of war.
Among National Archives Library's periodical holdings.
Online: http://www.beutekunst.de/.
217. Kreis, George. Switzerland and the looted art trade linked to World War II. n.p.: Center for Security Studies and Conflict Research, 1997.
Note: Switzerland played a central role in the movement of art during WWII as a secure storage place for endangered art, and as a center for negotiating the sale of artworks. Kreis reports on the situation at the outset of the war, the role of Switzerland as a storage site, and Switzerland as a market place beginning with the Gallery Fischer sale in Lucerne in 1939 of German "degenerate art".
218. Kuhn, Petra. "Comment on the Soviet returns of cultural treasures moved because of the war to the GDR". Spoils of War no. 2(July 1996): 45-47.
Note: Over two million cultural objects have been returned to the GDR by Russia, according to the author.
219. Kuhn, Petra and Doris Lemmermeier. "Documentation and research of cultural losses related with World War II in the Federal Republic of Germany". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 91-102. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: Germany has dealt very carefully and sensitively with other European countries about their cultural losses during WWII. They have registered lost public and private cultural property and recorded its whereabouts if known.
220. Kuhnke, Monika. "Poland. Part II: Problems related to the recording of the war losses in the area of works of art". Spoils of War no. 1(December 1995): 25-29.
Note: The author notes that the "Loss Catalogue" based on reports sent to London during the war and published in 1944, failed to account for the immense devastation Warsaw suffered after the fall of the Rising in 1944 when the city virtually ceased to exist. More recent work has resulted in a number of catalogues and a database of information about over 41,000 lost artworks most of them identifiable by photograph.
221. Kunzelman, Charles J. "Some trials, tribulations, and successes of the Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives teams in the European theater during WWII". Military Affairs 52(January 1988).
222. Kurtz, Michael J. American cultural restitution policy in Germany during the occupation, 1945-1949. Washington: Georgetown University, 1982. iv, 224 pp. (PhD Dissertation, Georgetown University, 1982).
Note: The author provides a valuable insight into the Western program for cultural restitutions at the end of the war, with emphasis on American policies and Soviet lack of cooperation.
223. Kurtz, Michael J. Nazi contraband: American policy on the return of European cultural treasures, 1945-1955. New York: Garland, 1985. v, 309 pp.
Note: The only study known on the topic of policy and WWII cultural restitution, this book presents in detail the American approach to cultural restitution as based on: its propaganda value as an Allied effort to preserve cultural treasures; the Anglo-Saxon concepts of justice calling for the return of stolen property; and, the pressure placed on the government by Americans in the arts and archives spheres with an interest in cultural preservation and restitution. His descriptions of the looted art recovery process offer a clear picture of the Nazi efforts to protect their looted art and gold in castles, bunkers and mines.
224. Kurz, Jakob. Kunstraub in Europa 1939-1945 (Art theft in Europe, 1939-1945). Hamburg: Facta Oblita, 1989. 444 pp.
225. La Farge, Henry. Lost treasures of Europe: 427 photographs. New York: Pantheon, 1946. 352 pp.
Note: Photographs of monuments and architecture before and after bombing.
226. Lambsdorff, Hagen Graf. "Return of cultural property: hostages of war or harbingers of peace? Historical facts, political positions, and an assessment from the German point of view". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 241-243. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Art historians in uniform hunted down cultural property in other countries under Hitler's instructions to transfer cultural property to Germany. After the war, much of the German-looted cultural treasure was sent by the Allies to Collecting Points for return to their rightful owners. In the Soviet Zone, the stolen cultural property was moved directly to the Soviet Union. The author states that the return of cultural property is one of the most difficult problems facing Germany and Russia.
227. "The last prisoners of war". Economist (London) 335, no.7910(April 15, 1995): 15.
Note: According to this editorial, Russia signed the Hague Convention of 1907 outlawing looting in war and should return Germany's treasures.
228. Latham, Ernest Tyger ". Conducting research at the National Archives into art looting, recovery, and restitution, 6-page typescript. Washington: Ernest "Tyger" Latham, 1998. (Paper presented at the Holocaust-Era Assets Symposium, National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, Maryland, December 4, 1998).
Note: Tyger Latham tells of his research experience at the National Archives and Records Administration's College Park facility working with records related to looted art, its recovery, and its restitution.
229. Lauria, Joe. "An amicable resolution". ARTnews 97, no.9(October 1998): 54.
Note: Holocaust victim heirs and art collector Daniel Searle settled on an equal division of the present mark value of a Degas pastel looted by the Nazis.
230. LeBor, Adam. "The last Nazi art scandal". Independent(November 18, 1998).
Note: The fact that governments are finally taking action to address the fact that many art collections belonging to Jews were looted by the Nazis before and during WWII will be looked at by the Conference on Holocaust Era Assets participants to be held in Washington. Countries have made commitments to identifying looted art in databases in order to ensure the art's return.
231. Lee, Rensselaer W. "The effect of the war on Renaissance and Baroque art in Italy". College Art Journal 4, no.2(January 1945): 81-91. (Paper presented at the Archaeological Institute of America's Symposium, "Europe's Monuments as Affected by the War," at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, December 28, 1944).
Note: This survey of damaged Renaissance and Baroque monuments and architecture in Italy also notes that paintings and movable sculptures placed in deposits for safekeeping were sometimes looted by Nazis. In a final postscript paragraph, the author gives information about French losses: stolen private collections and Renaissance architecture.
232. Leistra, Josefine. "A short history of art loss and art recovery in the Netherlands". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 53-57. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Leistra describes the losses in the Netherlands caused by specific Nazi art policy. Kajetan Mühlmann, Nazi art historian, was in charge of Nazi art looting; he confiscated a number of private collections, but the public collections and the royal collection were left intact. Some of the private collections were located after the war; in 1947, it was estimated that 80% of the museum quality artwork had been recovered, whereas only 25% of the lesser quality objects were located.
233. Leistra, Josephine. "New York Conference "Spoils of War"". Spoils of War no. 0(1995): 8-9.
Note: This report on the Bard Conference, "The Spoils of War", held in NYC in January 1995, gives a summary of the present situation concerning the recovery of art and archives missing since WWII.
234. Leistra, Josephine. "The Mauerbach Case. Part I". Spoils of War no. 3(December 1996): 22-24.
Note: In 1955 Austria was given looted artworks along with the responsibility for returning them to the owners; objects unclaimed by January 1956 were to be given to organizations set up by the Allies to assist Holocaust victims. This was not done and much of the collection remained as Austrian state property deposited in the Mauerbach monastery near Vienna, with some works placed in Austrian museums and embassies. As a result of an article by Andrew Decker in ARTnews, a list of the objects was published to enable claimants to file their claims before September 30, 1986. After that date, Austria transferred title of ownership of the unclaimed objects to the Jewish community in Austria which sold them at auction in 1996.
235. Leistra, Josephine. "Art recovery in the Netherlands". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 28-42. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: Research into missing art was stopped in the 1950s in the Netherlands because all the Collecting Points in Germany had been explored for missing art. Some complicated missing art cases were left unsolved; in the late 1980s, the European political climate changed and a number of old master drawings from the Koenigs Collection were returned to Netherlands by the German Democratic Republic.
236. Leonard, D. G. "Archives, bibliothèques et oeuvres d'art en Italie durant la guerre (Archives, libraries and artworks in Italy during the war)". Revue historique (Paris) 202(July 1949): 24-51.
Note: A review of the damage done in Italy during WWII with a list of damaged monuments and works of art.
237. Levin, Itamar. The last chapter of the Holocaust? The struggle over the restitution of Jewish property in Europe. Revised ed. Jewish Agency for Israel and the World Jewish Restitution Organization, 1998. 208 pp.
Note: Levin, Journalist and Deputy Editor of the "Globes", Israel's business newspaper, has been reporting for several years on the property looting that took place during WWII. This book is about the struggle for the restoration of Jewish property in Europe; the second edition reports on the significant developments that have occurred during the past year including: the Swiss banking settlements, acknowledgment of the property seized by the Custodian of Enemy Property in the UK, and progress in Norway and France on the issue. Art and insurance are now being looked at more closely. Levin's chapters cover different topics and different countries - all related to restitution.
238. Lipman, Thomas W. "44 nations pledge to act on art looted by Nazis". Washington Post(December 4, 1998): A2.
Note: The Holocaust-Era Assets Conference participants in Washington approved guidelines for restoring ownership to looted art worldwide.
239. Lorentz, Stanislaw. Canada refused to return Polish cultural treasures. Warsaw: National Museum, [1950?]. 85 pp.
240. Lowenthal, Constance. "The Quedling embarrassment". ARTnews 91, no.6(Summer 1992): 158+.
Note: Commentary on the controversy over medieval church art looted by a US serviceman during WWII. The soldier's heirs have returned the art after receiving payment from Germany.
241. Lowenthal, Constance. "German booty in Texas". Wall Street Journal(August 2, 1990).
Note: Quedlinburg Church Treasures located in Texas.
242. Lowenthal, Constance. "The Quedling embarrassment". ARTnews 91, no.6(Summer 1992): 158.
Note: Commentary on the controversy over medieval church art looted by a US serviceman during WWII. The soldier's heirs have returned the art after receiving over a million dollars in payment from Germany, a payment considered ransom by some. The author suggests that the Department of Justice should take action to support the US plicy to restore cultural property to the rightful owners.
243. Lowenthal, Constance. "Stolen art: a positive move toward international harmony". Museum News 70, no.5(September-October 1991): 22-23.
Note: A review of the draft Unidroit proposal on how claims for stolen or illegally exported cultural property should be treated..
244. Lowry, Glenn D. Testimony. Washington: House of Representatives, 1998. (Testimony by Glenn D. Lowry, Director, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, before the House Banking & Financial Services Committee, in Washington, February 12, 1998).
Note: Speaking on the fate of works stolen or misappropriated during the WWII era, Lowry noted that provenance research on art in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s is very complicating. Archival documents are written in many languages and distributed all over Europe. Art dealers frequently act as middlemen protecting anonymous clients. In illustrating the time and effort needed for provenance research, Lowry cited the Museum of Modern Art's experiences with a Matisse, as well as the Museum's recent experience with the Schiele paintings.
245. Lust, Jacques. "The spoils of war removed from Belgium during World War II". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 58-62. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: During WWII, Belgium was plundered of its cultural resources, as well as its gold reserves, industry and workforce. The Nazi ERR seized Freemason, socialist and Jewish assets.
246. Lust, Jacques. "Recovery of Belgian artworks and libraries lost during the Second World War". In Cultural treasures moved because of the war: a cultural legacy of the Second World war: documentation and research on losses, 13-22. Bremen: Koordinierungsstelle der Länder, 1995. (Documentation of the International Meeting in Bremen, November 30 to December 2, 1994).
Note: Looted art.
247. MacLeish, Rod. "The art and the glory". Vanity Fair(March 1995): 125.
Note: Comments on a Hermitage exhibit of art treasures taken from Nazi Germnay by Russia at the end of WWII.
248. Mann, Vivian B. "Jewish ceremonial art and private property". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 84-87. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: The Nazis did not address Jewish art holdings in a uniform manner. In Bohemia and Moravia (now part of the Czech Republic), the Nazis envisaged a "Museum of the Extinct Jewish Race" in Prague, as a result, collected Jewish art was cataloged by Jewish curators; much of the collection survived the war intact and is now cared by a Jewish community. In Danzig, a Free City after WWI, members of the Jewish community met in 1938 to send their archives to Jerusalem and sell their communal property to finance the emigration of members. Two tons of ceremonial objects were sold to an American-Jewish organization for deposit at the Jewish Theological Seminary in Manhattan; other memorabilia went to the Jewish Museum in New York. Nearly all of the Danzig Jews and their tangible heritage were saved. The Jewish community of Worms, the oldest surviving synagogue in Germany until Kristallnacht, suffered total destruction, the plight of most Jewish communities in Europe. During the war, a Jewish commission, headed by Professor Salo Baron of Columbia University, researched and created a list of works known to have belonged to European Jewish institutions. Following the war, recovered objects were distributed to Jewish communities worldwide.
249. Marks, John. "How did all that art end up in museums?". U.S. News & World Report 124, no.22(June 8, 1998): 38-40.
Note: Looted art has turned up in US museums and museum directors are being forced to deal with issues related to how they acquired the art.
250. Maser, Werner. Hitler's letters and notes. New York: Harper and Row, 1973.
Note: Hitler considered the planned Linz musuem, a showcase for his collection, to be an important part of his legacy to Germany.
251. Maurer, Ely. "The role of the State Department regarding national and private claims for the restitution of stolen cultural property". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 142-144. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: Maurer describes the role of the State Department in the postwar recovery of looted cultural property that was looted in Europe and ended up in the United States. The State Department, without legal power, has tried to persuade disputed art owners and conciliate disputes, before suggesting the application of legal powers by other agencies including the Justice Department, the Defense Department, and the Internal Revenue Service.
252. Meisler, Stanley. "The Hermitage". Smithsonian 25(March 1995): 40-41.
Note: Article about the display of Impressionist art confiscated from Germany during WWII by the Red Army.
253. Merryman, John Henry. "The protection of artistic national patrimony against pillaging and theft". In Law and the visual arts, 153-172. Portland, OR: Leonard D. DuBoff and Northwestern School of Law, Lewis & Clark College, 1974.
Note: The author writes about the legal issues related to the international traffic in stolen and illegally exported works of artistic and cultural importance.
254. Meyer, Karl E. "The hunt for Priam's treasure". Archaeology 46, no.6(November-December 1993): 26+.
Note: Russians admit that Priam's Treasure, found by Schliemann at Troy in 1873, is in the Pushkin Museum in Moscow.
255. Meyer, Karl E. The plundered past. New York: Atheneum, 1973. xxv, 353 pp.
256. Meyer, Karl E. "Russia's hidden attic: returning the spoils of World War II". New York Times Current Events(February 1, 1995): A20.
Note: Meyer analyzes the reasons for Russia's reluctance to return art seized from Germany after WWII and suggests that submitting the dispute to the World Court would be a face-saving solution for Russia.
257. Meyer, Karl E. "Who owns the spoils of war". Archaeology 48, no.4(July 1995): 46-52.
Note: Germany and Russia dispute the ownership of booty the Red Army took from Germany at the end of WWII. Old Masters, Impressionist paintings and the Treasure of Priam are involved in this international discussion.
258. Meyer, Karl E. "Who owns the gold of Troy?". New York Times Current Events(September 26, 1993): 414.
Note: Meyer believes Russia should return the Trojan gold treasure to Berlin.
259. Meyer, Karl E. "The lost spoils of Hitler's war". New York Times Current Events(September 2, 1990).
Note: Meyer describes the art looting that took place at the very end of WWII.
260. Mihan, George. Looted treasure: Germany's raid on art. London: Alliance Press, 1944. 94 pp.
Note: Nazi art looting satisfied three needs: their desire to return all German works of art to their fatherland; their interest in using art treasures to obtain foreign currency needed for German armaments; and, the need of Nazi high-ups to acquire an air of culture. This work affords the reader early research into the robbery committed by the Nazis.
261. "MoMA fights Schiele subpoena". Art in America 86, no.3(March 1998): 33.
Note: The Museum of Modern Art is fighting a subpoena from district attorney Robert Morgenthau which resulted in the seizure of two paintings in the museum's show, "Egon Schiele: The Leopold Collection, Vienna".
262. Moorehead, Caroline. The lost treasures of Troy. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1994. xiv, 306 pp.
263. Morey, Charles R. "What we are actually doing to save Europe's art". ARTnews 43(May 15-31,1944): 9-10, 24-25.
Note: Includes General Eisenhower's order to the troops in Italy late in 1943 respecting the preservation of artistics treasures and describes the special organization to safeguard monuments and works of art.
264. Morey, Charles R. "The war and mediaeval art". College Art Journal 4, no.2(January 1945): 75-80. (Paper presented at the Archaeological Institute of America's Symposium, "Europe's Monuments as Affected by the War," at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, December 28, 1944).
Note: This is a detailed account of the war damage suffered by mediaeval art in Europe. The author reports that most of Europe's mediaeval treasures survived, but that we do not know the fate of Germany's artworks.
265. Morris, Collin R. "The law and stolen art, artificacts, and antiquities". Howard Law Review 36, no.1(1993): 201-226.
Note: The article focuses on the legal side of art theft, looking at international and U.S. law.
266. Morris, Naomi. "On the trail of looted art". Maclean's (Canada) 111, no.30(July 27, 1998): 48-51.
Note: Legal claims are forcing curators and collectors worldwide to examine their collections for looted art; at this time in history, the declassification of documents, the increased accessibility of online information, and the death of collectors of the WWII generation have brought up new questions of ownership. The art world is now trying to deal with issues of restitution; issues that have come to the surface following the publication of Lynn Nicholas' book, The rape of Europa, and Hector Feliciano's 1996 work on stolen French works, The lost museum. The author details the looted art issue as it relates to Canadian galleries and museums.
267. Muntz, Eugene. "Les annexions de collections d'art ou de bibliothèques et leur r"le dans les relations internationales, principalement pendant la Révolution fran‡aise (Annexations of art collections and libraries and their role in internatinal relations, especially during the French Revolution)". Revue d'histoire diplomatique Check this article it says 94,p.481; 95, 375, 96,p. 481(1894-1896): 375,.
Note: According to Charles De Visscher in the foreword of International Protection of Works of Art and Historic Monuments, this classic study by Eugene Muntz gives a long account of the seizure and appropriation of works of art from ancient time to the first Empire. In the 18th century, for the first time, limiting the effects of war solely to the destruction of the enemy's armed forces became a mark of national virtue and the longheld practice of plundering artworks was almost given up only to return at the end of the century with unprecedented violence.
268. "Museums adopt Holocaust-Era art restitution guidelines". IFAR Journal (International Foundation for Art Research) 1, no.3(Autumn 1998): 20-21.
Note: The Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) adopted a broad set of guidelines for American museums to deal with WWII looted art not yet returned to the rightful owners. The guidelines had been drawn up by a Task force chaired by Philippe de Montebello, Director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
269. Naimark, Norman M. "Cultural trophies". In The Russians in Germany: a history of the Soviet Zone of Occupation, 1945-1949, 175-178. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1995.
Note: The Soviets followed an official policy of claiming German art: first of all, they sought to recapture cultural treasures seized earlier by official German orders; next they wished to locate objects taken by individual Germans; and finally, they seized German artworks as trophies of war. Trophy battalions flew their loot, much of it German loot from other countries, to the USSR.
270. Nazi-plundered art hard to trace. July 22, 1998. (Article appears on the Museum Security Mailinglist Reports at http://museum-security.org/reports/04098.html#1).
Note: Philippe de Montebello, Director of MoMA, and Chair of a taskforce on looted art from the Association of Art Museum Directors, reports that it is very difficult to trace the ownership of pieces plundered by Nazis through art records. During the 1990s, there have been claims for Swiss gold, Italian insurance policies, and now looted art. During the Fall of 1998, the State Department will co-host a 39-country conference on how to accomplish the remaining restitution of looted goods.
271. Nicholas, Lynn H. The rape of Europa: the fate of Europe's treasures in the Third Reich and the Second World War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994. x, 498 pp.
Note: In this thoroughly researched book, Nicholas reports on the fate of cultural treasures during a European conflict in which works of art were sought by Nazi Germany: "Never had works of art been so important to a political movement and never had they been moved about on such a vast scale, pawns in the cynical and desperate games of ideology, greed, and survival". Hitler's cultural impact started with his fight on degenerate art in 1937, a fight involving the removal of 16,000 objects from German institutions for sale or burning. Collections of approved art confiscated from Jews and seized from occupied countries by military art specialists were sent to German museums, set aside for Hitler's proposed Linz art center, or acquired for Goering's private collection at Carinhall. Nicholas tells remarkable stories about art collector and art dealers and the extent to which they went to hold on to their artworks.
272. Nicholas, Lynn H. "World War II and the displacement of art and cultural property". In The spoils of war - World War II and its aftermath: the loss, reappearance, and recovery of cultural property, 39-48. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. (Paper presented at international symposium, The Spoils of War, sponsored by Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New York, January, 1995).
Note: An overview of the unprecedented scope of WWII art displacement accompanied by ideological, legal, and political justifications and watched over by highly trained art specialists assigned to the armies of most of the belligerents. Nicholas traces the importance of art to Hitler's idea of a pure Germanic Empire, purged of "degenerate" art and