Send us a textTo learn more, please visit Janet Berg's website.Show Notes: 3:30 Katz Gallery targeted by Nazis as of 1938/39.4:00 Katz family’s survival based on a Rembrandt painting6:30 Bergs hired Lynn Nicholas, author of Rape of Europa, to research art looted from Katz Gallery8:45 Rembrandt’s Portrait of Raman was exchanged with Nazis for 25 Jewish lives, returned by Dutch Government and donated to the L.A. County Museum10:30 Characters in Rembrandt’s Shadow based on family12:45 Family became aware of location of looted paintings when visiting Dutch museum 15:00 manifestations of trauma 20:00 Family escaped to Jamaican internment camp25:30 Katz Gallery’s inventory meant for Führermuseum in Linz and for Göring27:00 Family is seeking return of 144 paintings from Dutch Government28:00 Dutch Government possesses paintings looted from Katz Gallery 29:00 Nazis gave appearance of legitimacy to sales by Katz Gallery31:15 Berg’s second book, RestitutionKatz Gallery History:In the late 1880s, Dutch Jewish businessman Katz opened a gallery to sell arts and antiquities that became an authoritative leader in the European art world in the 19th into the 20th Century. It specialized in 16th and 17th Century Dutch Master paintings, including those by Rembrandt and one of Rembrandt’s star students, Ferdinand Bol.Brothers Nathan and Benjamin Katz took over the business in 1930, attracted Nazi collectors during WWII and by May 1940 they were faced with a choice: sell paintings to Nazi officials like Göring and art dealer Alois Miedl [3] or face torture and murder. Janet Berg's husband is the grandson of gallery owner Benjamin Katz. Many of the Katz Gallery WWII sales became the subject of restitution claims in the Netherlands. After WWII, the Netherlands was a party to various “Collection Point Agreements” by which it agreed to receive certain looted artworks as a custodian until they could be returned to their owners, including paintings taken from the Katz family. Many of those works are now on display at various Dutch museums and state buildings, or in their storage. The terms of those collection point agreements define the Netherlands “as custodians pending the determination of the lawful owners thereof; [and] that said items will be returned to their lawful owners”. By definition, one would imagine that a ‘custodian’ would guard property – not take ownership of it. Also as Janet mentioned, the Katz heirs pursued their claims with the Dutch government without much success. In late 2012, the Dutch Restitution Committee issued its findings related to a claim for return of 189 works “sold” to the Nazis, only recommending return of a single painting. After that a US suit was filed in federal court that was recently dismissed and is on appeal.The Bergs' suit in the US is Berg v. Kingdom of the Netherlands, et al, Docket No. 18-CV-3123 (D.S.C. 2018).Please share your comments and/or questions at [email protected] by Toulme.To hear more episodes, please visit Warfare of Art and Law podcast's website.To leave questions or comments about this or other episodes of the podcast and/or for information about joining the 2ND Saturday discussion on art, culture and justice, please message me at [email protected]. Thanks so much for listening!© Stephanie Drawdy [2025]

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related