Museum Heists and the line between Paraphernalia and Memorabilia

On October 27th, 2020 The Guardian ran a news story about War Museums across the Netherlands tightening their security following a series of thefts. The original story can be read here. The story was also picked up by CBC News [link] and by the New York Post [link].

The targets in this heist were various pieces of Nazi artifacts and WWII paraphernalia. The Guardian reports an increasingly high demand globally for WWII artifacts and in particular for items of historical significance to Germany and the Nazis. Three separate institutions were hit in the days and weeks leading up to the guardian article. The reports detail items ranging from uniforms to antique guns to silverware used by high ranking officials. All three articles point to the rising demand and market value for WWII artifacts.

This may come across as a salacious topic, museum heists and stolen artifacts. The guardian article certainly was not afraid to invoke the image of a dramatic heist and movie quality thieves. However it is important to remember that the items now lost were not simply high in monetary value on the collectors market. They represent ideologies which advocated for the deaths of millions. These artifacts belong in museums as they help ground the past in reality. Yet they should not become memorials to those who committed atrocities. It becomes a question of the thin line between preservation of the past and a kind of voyeuristic interest in items which are connected with human tragedy. Profound historical events like those which occurred in the second world war must not be allowed to fade from the collective consciousness. Particularly as we face an increasingly skeptical world and a world where increasingly loud voices choose to deny the horrific realities of the past. While viewing objects from this time period may solidify the reality of these events, it becomes problematic when they start to be treated like curios or sought after collectors items. Those who carried out these thefts, or else those who down the road will buy these artifacts on the black market, are emblematic of a different relationship with history. One which looks at these reminders of tragedies as things to be celebrated. At the Oorlogsmuseum in Ossendrecht only artifacts associated with the Nazis were taken, items of historical significance to the allied side were left alone. The rise of the Alt-Right and similar movements across North America and Europe create the harmful potential for these reminders to be used as memorabilia.

The Oorlogsmuseum, the museum hit in the most recent heist, is a private collection curated by Jan De Jonge. CBC focused on De Jonge extensively in its coverage of the heists. The news story produced by CBC is more in depth than the reporting done by either the Guardian or the New York Post. However the CBC article reads almost more as a human interest story about the curator, focusing on the museum as his life's work and mentioning the volunteering he does with other historical organizations. Quotes included from De Jonge himself explain the motivation for the theft and the reason behind the rarity of many of the pieces in his collection. According to De Jonge the immense anti-Nazi and anti-German sentiment following WWII lead to many items associated with the Nazi party to be thrown away or destroyed. Remaining artifacts are scarce and considered highly valuable among museums and private collectors. Troubling however is the political factors which are likely influencing the increased demand for these items internationally. The destruction of many Nazi artifacts immediately following WWII was aimed at putting an end to the ideology. Historians and archivists are tasked with the challenge of ensuring the past is remembered without promoting the preservation of harmful ideals.

Having physical artifacts to view and exams are important to our understanding of the past. Seeing an object in a museum or elsewhere on display makes history seem more real and more tangible. The institutions which have been targeted by thieves have lost powerful teaching tools and the wider communities have lost opportunities to learn through witnessing. Professional historical institutions like museums or heritage societies have an ethical mandate to preserve artifacts and present the past through exhibits. Following the rash of thefts other museums in the Netherlands have returned artifacts which were on loan from other institutions. Museums which feature items associated with Nazi Germany are careful to present the past without advocating for the ideologies they are associated with. As these stolen items make their way onto the black market they may be used to perpetuate, spread or celebrate harmful political beliefs by private collectors and enthusiast. The loaning of historical articles and exhibits between museums offers the chance to see them to individuals who otherwise would not get the chance to due to geographical location. This is especially significant when dealing with an event like the Second World War. The rash of thefts not only results in the loss of the stolen artifacts but has had a ripple effect causing fewer people to experience artifacts due to increased security measures. These are the issues that arise for the historically minded reader of eye catching news stories like this.

Sloan

November 7th, 2020 for Interdisciplinary History Group at MacEwan