\n
\tAn independent report recently found that the EG B\u00fchrle Foundation\u2019s provenance research into its collection was \u201cinadequate\u201d and that the foundation\u2019s published findings omitted information about many of the works\u2019 previous Jewish owners.<\/p>\n
\n
\tThe 165-page report was written by Raphael Gross, director of the German Historical Museum, and presented in Zurich on June 28. It was commissioned by the canton and city of Zurich and the board of the Swiss art museum Kunsthaus after critics accused the foundation of “whitewashing” the provenance of its collection. <\/p>\n \t\trelated articles<\/p>\n<\/h2>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t \n \tThe foundation is named after Emil Georg B\u00fchrle, who amassed his wealth through the sale of weapons to Nazi Germany and the forced labor of women in Nazi concentration camps and Swiss “welfare” institutions. B\u00fchrle was also known for buying art looted by Nazi soldiers. <\/p>\n \n \tGross\u2019s research team investigated five works and found that the stories of the many Jewish collectors behind the works were \u201cbarely mentioned\u201d in the B\u00fchler Foundation\u2019s provenance research and that \u201ckey milestones were overlooked.\u201d <\/p>\n \n \tThese five works are all by Vincent Van Gogh Peasant Woman Portrait <\/em>(1885), William Kalff Nautilus Bowl<\/em> (c. 1600) Paul C\u00e9zanne Landscape around 1879, Paul Gauguin street <\/em>(1848), and C\u00e9zanne’s Madame Cezanne holding a fan<\/em> (1879\/1988). <\/p>\n \n \t\u201cWithout Jewish collectors, the B\u00fchler Collection would be completely different,\u201d Gross said. \u201cOr to put it another way: without the persecution, the B\u00fchler Collection would never have come into being.\u201d<\/p>\n \n \tThe report strongly recommended further provenance research and suggested that the museum set up a professional committee to determine what to do with the collections lost or confiscated as a result of Nazi persecution. <\/p>\n \n \tGross\u2019s report also questioned whether Swiss art museums should continue to explicitly name collections after German arms manufacturers, which \u201cnot only dignifies their names and the collection as a whole\u201d but also obscures the \u201cfate of their Jewish former owners who suffered Nazi persecution.\u201d<\/p>\n \n \t\u201cThe question is whether public institutions can address this from their moral and ethical standpoint,\u201d Gross said.<\/p>\n \n \taccording to The Art Newspaper<\/em>B\u00fchle’s success selling anti-aircraft guns to the Allies and Nazi Germany made him the richest man in Switzerland during World War II. In 2012, B\u00fchle’s eponymous foundation agreed to loan 205 works to the Kunsthaus Zurich. The works were exhibited in a new $210 million building expansion in 2021, sparking criticism. Artist Miriam Cahn also announced that she would withdraw her work from the institution in response to the exhibition of B\u00fchle’s collection. <\/p>\n \n \tAs a result of the dispute, the city and canton of Zurich and the board of the Kunsthaus Zurich commissioned a report from Gross in May. Of the 205 objects in the B\u00fchler collection, Gross found that 62 had belonged to Jews during the Holocaust, but the B\u00fchler Foundation classified most of them as “unproblematic” or “with no indication of a problem.” “Works with particularly incomplete provenance were classified as unproblematic,” the report said.<\/p>\n \n \tThe city and canton of Zurich and the Zurich Arts Council said in a press statement that they expect to comment on the preliminary conclusions and announce next steps in mid-July. They also thanked Gross and his team of experts for their “comprehensive and very valuable work”.<\/p>\n \n \tIn response to Gross\u2019s report, the foundation\u2019s board of directors said The Art Newspaper<\/em> It “will review the report and comment where appropriate.”<\/p>\n \n \tOn June 14, the EG B\u00fchrle Collection Foundation announced that it was seeking a “fair and equitable” solution with the legal heirs of the original owner regarding the six paintings on display at the Kunsthaus Zurich. Ultimately, five of the paintings were removed from the Swiss museum on June 20. <\/p>\n \n \tAfter the U.S. State Department released new \u201cbest practices\u201d for handling Nazi-looted art in March 2024, the museum\u2019s board reassessed the provenance of the six works. <\/p>\n \n \tThe \u201cBest Practices\u201d expand upon the Washington Principles, which were agreed upon by representatives of 44 countries and 13 non-governmental organizations on December 3, 1998, after three days of meetings at the Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets held at the U.S. State Department.<\/p>\n \n \tThe work in question is by Gustave Courbet Portrait of the sculptor Louis Joseph<\/em> (1863), Claude Monet’s painting of his garden at Giverny, painted in 1895, by Vincent van Gogh Old Tower<\/em> (1884), Portrait of Georges Henri Manuel by Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, 1891, Portrait by Paul Gauguin, 1884 The road to rise<\/em>. <\/p>\n \n\n
![\"Claude](\"https:\/\/www.artnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/monet.png?w=150&h=150&crop=1\")
<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n