Symposium on The Future of Restitution - What Can We Learn from the Work of the Monuments Men and Women?

On 12 September, 2024 an international symposium was held in Amsterdam on the future of the restitution policy on the restitution of WWII cultural objects. Organized by the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands and the Minister of Education, Culture and Science, Eppo Bruins, who opened the meeting, founder and chairman, Robert Edsel, was among the esteemed scholars and experts to take the stage. Edsel's remarks focused on the lessons learned from the experience of the Monuments Men and Women, and how those lessons should serve as guiding principles to those who today work in the fields of provenance research and restitution.

Below, the full text of Robert Edsel's remarks.

Photo courtesy of Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands.

We are gathered here on the eve of the 80th anniversary of American forces liberating the first Dutch citizens from four years of Nazi occupation. Within two months of liberation, Margraten would become the site of what today we know as the Netherlands American Cemetery and the unique grave adoption program that the citizens of Limburg Province created to honor the 18,000 dead American men and women who were buried there. I want you to see this image of the cemetery not to promote my new book, but to provide context to our collective efforts to right the wrongs of World War II. I want it to serve as a reminder during my remarks of our shared responsibility to be worthy of the young men and women whose sacrifice paid for our freedom.

“But they died fighting the war,” you might say. “What does that have to do with the restitution of Nazi looted art? “Everything!” is my answer. In 1946, General Eisenhower said: “For a democracy at least, there always stands beyond the materialism and destructiveness of war those ideals for which it is fought.” Ideals should not expire. They should endure. We should see to that. They are just as valid today, and perhaps even more important, than they were eighty years ago. And one of those ideals was respect for the cultural property of others.

The Monuments Men and Women – scholars, architects, artists, museum curators, and librarians who volunteered for military service – were responsible for implementing the unique policy of the Western Allies: All looted objects were to be returned to the countries from which they were taken for final restitution to their rightful owner. Anything less called into question the commitment of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France to create black-and-white clarity between Nazism and the rule of law. Unraveling the greatest theft in history was a daunting task, but, by 1951, Monuments Officers had located and returned almost four million stolen objects to European nations in addition to turning over custody of almost one million objects belonging to German museums and cultural institutions. Their epic achievement begs the question: if just a few hundred men and women working in war-torn Europe, operating without any playbook or modern technology, achieved such success, why are we having such a difficult time finishing the task? Perhaps of greater value to those of us gathered here today: how would the Monuments Men and Women counsel us to achieve a better outcome?

Based on my many interviews with the Monuments Men and Women – the twenty-one whom I found plus an equal number of family members of Monuments Officers who died before I began my mission, I am confident they would want us to know the following:

• It is axiomatic that looting exists in war. Be prepared.

• The North Star of restitution requires an absolute commitment to our shared cultural beliefs and international law to do what is right, fair, and just. All other considerations – degrees of difficulty, appearances, and criticism – must be set aside.

• Procedures and protocols must bend to justice. Be entrepreneurial in finding solutions. Be courageous in their implementation.

• Ethical leadership begins with each of us doing our job and setting an example for those around us to emulate.

• Be super partes, not super opportunists. Remember, it’s not about you, it’s about the object and where it rightly belongs.   

• Engage the general public. Their support is essential to success. Speak to them in a way they’ll understand. You’ll be surprised just how much they care. I recall hearing people at a restaurant in Dallas sobbing as they watched television footage of the fire that engulfed Notre Dame. Most of those people knew little if anything about the history of the cathedral, but they knew enough, and cared enough, to express horror at the sight.

• Celebrate the success of others. The roadblocks they overcame may help facilitate your work. For those who took pleasure in criticizing the film, consider this perspective: The Monuments Men film was a $160 million two-hour public service commercial about the importance of preserving our shared cultural history – about YOUR work – starring nine of the world’s most famous actors. It also led to an invitation by President Obama to screen the film at the White House before other government leaders. That contributed mightily to the Monuments Men and Women Foundation’s efforts to encourage the U.S. Army to reconstitute the Monuments Officer training program that began several years ago.

• International cooperation is a prerequisite, but fidelity to cause must supersede nationality or constituency. The best example I can provide is this: in November 1945, thirty-two of the thirty-five Monuments Officers serving in Germany risked court martial by objecting to orders from Washington to ship to the United States 202 paintings that without question belonged to Germany. They were willing to suffer the wrath of the United States military to stand up to their own government in defense of the ideals and principles General Eisenhower would cite in his speech months later.

• Honor the legacy of the two Monuments Men – one of whom is buried in Margraten – who died in combat doing what we now do from the safety of our offices. Uphold the ideals they held dear.

One current restitution claim demonstrates just how far off this course despite those much-vaunted Washington Principles. Two years ago, Ms. Gerdien Verschoor, a member of the Dutch Supervisory Committee for Provenance Research, stated: “We have a duty to ensure that those objects are brought back and returned to the descendants of the individuals who once treasured them.” That is true of course, or at least it should be. But if it is true, how do we explain the following:

In 1949, restitution staff in the Netherlands returned a painting by Bernardo Bellotto to the wrong owner. When notified of this fact by the Monuments Men just two weeks later, restitution staff took no action. But the man who received the painting in error did. After removing the Führermuseum label from the back of the canvas, he fabricated a new provenance for the picture and then sold it. Today it is on display at the Museum of Fine Arts in Houston, Texas.

Who are the culprits in this story? The post-war restitution staff in the Netherlands, who when notified of their mistake, did nothing? The man who received the painting in error, falsified the provenance, and sold it? The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, which has mocked the Washington Principles by employing a technical defense – the Act of Sovereign State Doctrine – to avoid inquiries and retain possession of the painting? Or a present-day senior Dutch restitution official, who when asked to help the Monuments Men and Women Foundation right this wrong, refused?

I think General Eisenhower’s words – as they do so often – hold the answer. Following the late summer/fall 1945 returns of the Ghent Altarpiece and Bruges Madonna to Belgium, and a token group of paintings to France and the Netherlands, General Eisenhower said: “It is our privilege to pass on to the coming centuries treasures of past ages.” Note that he didn’t characterize the work as a “duty,” rather a “privilege,” a source of pride.

We had a choice eighty years ago. Do what conquerors have always done and keep the spoils of war, or break with past centuries and establish a new standard, a new ideal. We have a similar choice today. When we choose to turn our back on the simple, like the case of the Bellotto painting, we have no hope of solving the complicated. The inescapable truth is this: when any one of us turns a blind eye to injustice, all of us who are dedicated to the righteous work of restitution lose.