Ms. Hoffmann, the “Gurlitt case” became public ten years ago. More than 1,200 works of art thought to be lost had been found in an apartment in Munich. Before the public became aware of the situation, the District Attorney in Augsburg had hired you as an expert to evaluate some of the works. Later you were also a member of the task force created by the German government to continue the investigation. What do you think, when you reflect back on this time?

That was one of the most intense experiences in my professional life. I had already been specialized in the Nazi art trade for many years, so there was no doubt in my mind that I would contribute my expertise to this case. However, I did not want to be in the public eye, and that became a very difficult balancing act.

After a press conference at the Augsburg Criminal Justice Center, where you spoke publicly about the works of art, you suddenly became the most well-known art historian in Germany. In retrospect, do you regret participating in the task force?

No, not at all. Working in the task force with highly qualified experts was an extremely positive experience. I am still in touch with these people, and there is no doubt that we all benefited from working together. However, to this day I am still disillusioned about the cooperation on the political level.

Could you explain that?

Academics and politics pursue very different goals. Detailed questions that are very important for us as scholars have little relevance in politics. We kept getting new directives and new orders. That felt like a monkey wrench in the works, and it is not how research works. However, in spite of my criticism, I have to admit that the scandal was a boon for provenance research.

So you benefited by the art trove in the Schwabing district of Munich? Could you be more specific?

Our degree program in provenance research was established in 2011. It was the first of its kind worldwide, and it ran well, but it remained somewhat of a niche topic within art history. The sudden public interest in this field led to an enormous increase in training programs. Many new positions were created, and the field has grown. However, we can only benefit from this new interest gradually.

What do you mean by that?

Working in this field requires a great deal of experience. All of the newly hired employees were junior scholars because the training program is still so new. I think that it is a good policy to hire young graduates and give them an opportunity to experience this practical learning phase. However, since there was so much public interest, there was quite a discrepancy between what was desired for us to do and what we were actually able to achieve.

Were you overwhelmed with the work?

Yes, before comparable training modules were set up at other universities, we were flooded with inquiries. Due to the particular situation in Germany, it is not sufficient to fund a few positions for a limited period of time. Dealing with looted art requires a great deal of time, and it cannot be accomplished on the side. The topic is much too important for that.

Despite its relevance, why do you think it took so long for the topic to gain public interest?

German society needed time to approach this topic neutrally. We now have the generation of great-grandchildren who are less emotionally involved and more likely to gradually be willing to deal with this issue. Instead of concealing the involvement of their own ancestors in the Nazi system, as was often the case in past decades, the young generation is now more likely to say: Yes, we would like to know. There is currently a great deal of willingness to look more closely at personal estates and to share documents. 

In the MARI Project, that has been running since 2017, you are investigating the whereabouts of thousands of works formerly owned by the German-Jewish publisher Rudolf Mosse. To do so, you are cooperating with museums, archives, other universities, and the coheirs of the Mosse family. What role do the heirs play in your research?

The first funding phase of the project ended in 2020. The heirs had already financed the technology that we needed to set up the digital MARI-portal. During the Covid pandemic, the heirs provided the only funding support that we had. Without their support, the project would have come to a standstill.

Now the project is in a new funding phase. With support from the German Lost Art Foundation in Magdeburg and the Mosse Foundation in Berkeley, we can continue our work until July 2024. We also received support from the Ernst Reuter Society of Friends, Supporters, and Alumni of Freie Universität Berlin e. V.

The Mosse collection included thousands of works. How many have already been returned to their rightful owners?

Since 2017 we have been able to trace about forty works of art to their current locations. In addition, there are numerous books that we have also found. Currently, discussions are ongoing with regard to the restitution of five more objects. In many cases restitution means that the works are repurchased by the museums where they are found. In those cases the proceeds go to the Mosse Foundation, which supports other art projects as well as our work at Freie Universität.

When the MARI Project was first set up, it was the first of its kind in the world, in which the descendants of victims of Nazi persecutors cooperated with German institutions. Has the model caught on as a useful example?

I think so, and I certainly hope so. There are now several similar projects at various universities in Germany. I myself am planning a new project with a representative of an heir, which I hope will be just as successful as the MARI Project.

Can you reveal more about the new project?

It will deal with the art collection of the spirits manufacturer Adolf Sultan. During the course of our research, we will need to ascertain how many works it includes, but the collection could be comparable in size to that of Rudolf Mosse (see the article “Books with History: The Search for Rightful Owners”). 

What traits do students need to be successful in the field of provenance research?

Many students are interested in becoming the first person to discover something new. They often come to us with a great deal of curiosity as well as a great sense of justice. While that is important, it is not sufficient. They need to learn to work with original sources, which requires painstaking research and good time management.

For many people provenance research is an emotional topic. To what degree can emotions play a role in academic research?

As a researcher, I have to work objectively and without bias. But sometimes I am also moved by the contents of my research. Art is for human beings, for society. Works of art are not merely pictures; they always have social relevance.

Recently, I was invited by a group of heirs to attend a ceremony in Berlin-Nikolassee, where eight Stolpersteine (memorial stumbling blocks) were being placed. It was the very first meeting of the extended family, and it was a very moving moment for everyone, including me. To experience that there are people behind all of the works of art, to find out what happened to the families and how they lived with their works of art: all of these are factors that continue to motivate me in my research work.

Anne Kostrzewa conducted the interview.

---

This article originally appeared in German in the Tagesspiegel newspaper supplement published by Freie Universität Berlin.