Forgers, connoisseurs, and the Nazi past

The authentication and accurate attribution of art can be a complex issue. Connoisseurship and ethics, politics and the media can get mixed in among the "active ingredients" that can obstruct efforts to correct scholarly misattribution in the sense of having mistaken the work for that of a master. The expertise of forgers Han van Meegeren and Wolfgang Beltracchi went way beyond artistic skill, technical skill, extensive knowledge of art history and the methods employed by the true masters. The connoisseurs who supplied the authentications were giving and receiving something in return, and this caused the ethical lines to blur. Political opportunism enabled van Meegeren to hide his sympathy for the Volkgeist conventions of Nazi art with a clever plot device by which he could demonstrate that he had conned a member of the Nazi elite. The Beltracchis concocted the history of production of a hitherto unknown number of modern art works by linking the fake provenances to pre-packaged narratives that invoked the most sordid elements of the cultural policy of the Third Reich. At their trials, the forgers assumed the role of "masters of ceremonies" who entertained the court staff and spectators. Unsurprisingly, the media conferred folk hero status on them. This article highlights the uncanny parallels and patterns in the art forgery careers of these two forgers, and specifically also in the misattribution of their forged works. Considering how intricate the interdependencies between evidence and beliefs can be, the ethical responsibility of the art trade when forgeries are sold comes into question. More scientific testing continues to expose some of the secrets of master forgers, but no forgery trial, law report, or media report can completely de-contaminate art history. The relevance of information ethics to the study of art history and material culture deserves to be highlighted more frequently

Droit de Suite

No abstract available

Conflicts of procedure between courts and arbitral tribunals with particular reference to the right of access to court

No abstract available

The Holy Family on an unholy odyssey: legal ownership of stolen trophy art

No abstract available

Cohabitation: Chebotareva v Khandro

No abstract available

The role of digital technology in the restitution of cultural artifacts

Should states and museums use digital technology as a replacement for restitution and repatriation of cultural artifacts such as the Parthenon Sculptures? Technological solutions that help them face up to the injustices of the past are laudable but will not necessarily defuse the repatriation claims they may be bound by. It is unrealistic to expect robots to settle disputes concerning the ownership and belonging of collection items that evoke relationships, knowledge, and sacrifice

Restitution of art and cultural objects and its limits

Art and cultural objects have a complex nature and status. A legal approach cannot escape having to state which objects come within the scope of the definition, but an objective legal definition in abstracto is difficult to provide. Both the legitimate and the underground art markets are implicated in the trade involving these objects. Global legal diversity further complicates the distinction between the licit and the illicit trade. This article takes stock of restitution and suitable dispute settlement mechanisms against this backdrop. Restitution processes have become more openly policy-oriented, and the meaning of 'restitution' now extends to overcoming the legal obstacles in the way of return. Law can provide the framework for negotiation and dispute settlement in many cases, but the ethical dimension is a particularly powerful agent for restitution of Nazi spoliated art and human remains

Restitution of art and cultural objects and its limits

Art and cultural objects have a complex nature and status. A legal approach cannot escape having to state which objects come within the scope of the definition, but an objective legal definition in abstracto is difficult to provide. Both the legitimate and the underground art markets are implicated in the trade involving these objects. Global legal diversity further complicates the distinction between the licit and the illicit trade. This article takes stock of restitution and suitable dispute settlement mechanisms against this backdrop. Restitution processes have become more openly policy-oriented, and the meaning of 'restitution' now extends to overcoming the legal obstacles in the way of return. Law can provide the framework for negotiation and dispute settlement in many cases, but the ethical dimension is a particularly powerful agent for restitution of Nazi spoliated art and human remains

State courts or ADR in Nazi-era art disputes: a choice "more apparent than real"?

No abstract available

Richard Garnett, Substance and Procedure in Private International Law Oxford

No abstract available