No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 November 2024
This article proposes a re-examination of one of the most controversial cases of reparations: the Treaty of Versailles. By focusing on Article 238, which stipulated the restitution of objects stolen or displaced by the German army during the First World War, we can see that the treaty helped to solidify norms concerning the protection of civilian property in wartime and gave civilians a right to have a voice in international law. However, the process of restitution was beset with both practical and political challenges and its success hinged on the role of public authorities, the nature of the objects returned and the impact of social class dynamics. Through this study, we are able to gain a more nuanced understanding of the possibilities of restitution, its potential as well as its limitations.
1 ‘Les Vitraux de la Cathédrale de Saint-Quentin sont retrouvés,’ L'Avenir, 30 Oct. 1922; Archives nationales, Pierrefitte-sur-Seine, France; ‘War of 1914–1918. War Damages. Restitution of Property Taken by the Germans (1914–1933)’; Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 1, 6. (All subsequent archival material is from this collection at the Archives nationales and will be referenced with the document information and then: AN, Restitution, box, folder and page numbers).
2 See for example: Bazyler, Michael, Holocaust Justice: The Battle for Restitution in America's Courts (New York: New York University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.
3 Felwine Sarr and Bénédicte Savoy, Rapport sur la restitution du patrimoine culturel africain. Vers une nouvelle éthique relationnelle (2018). Available at: https://www.vie-publique.fr/files/rapport/pdf/194000291.pdf (last visited 23 Dec. 2023).
4 Sandholtz, Wayne, Prohibiting Plunder: How Norms Change (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 47–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 101–26.
5 For more on this process over history, see for example: Sandholtz, Prohibiting Plunder; Lindsay, Ivan, A History of Loot and Stolen Art: From Antiquity Until the Present Day (London: Unicorn Press, 2014)Google Scholar.
6 ‘Practice Relating to Rule 50. Destruction and Seizure of Property of an Adversary,’ International Humanitarian Law Database, International Committee of the Red Cross, available at https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule50 (last visited 1 Sept. 2023).
7 Keynes, John Maynard, The Economic Consequences of Peace (London: Macmillan & Co., 1919)Google Scholar.
8 Taylor, A.J.P., The Origins of the Second World War (London: Penguin Books, 1991), 70, 72Google Scholar.
9 See for example: Steiner, Zara, The Lights That Failed: European International History, 1919–1933 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Marks, Sally, ‘Mistakes and Myths: The Allies, Germany, and the Versailles Treaty, 1918–1921,’ The Journal of Modern History 85, no. 3 (2013): 632–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gomes, Leonard, German Reparations, 1919–1932: A Historical Survey (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10 Sandholtz, Prohibiting Plunder, 9, 101–26.
11 Gomes, German Reparations, 8.
12 A description of the fund ‘War Damages: Restitution of Goods and Movable Property Taken by the Germans (1914–1933)’ is available at: https://www.siv.archives-nationales.culture.gouv.fr/siv/rechercheconsultation/consultation/ir/consultationIR.action?irId=FRAN_IR_055321&details=false&gotoArchivesNums=false&udId=root&auSeinIR=true&formCaller=GENERALISTE (last visited 29 Aug. 2023).
13 ‘The Treaty of Versailles,’ The Avalon Project, available at https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/partviii.asp (last visited 29 Aug. 2023).
14 On Article 231, see: Burnett, Philip Mason, Reparation at the Paris Peace Conference from the Standpoint of the American Delegation, Vol. 1 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1940), 142–57Google Scholar. The recognition that ‘total reparation’ was impossible can also be seen in the minutes of the experts meetings on reparations. Ibid., 670–866.
15 Burnett, Reparation at the Paris Peace Conference, 109–11, 784.
16 Debate did, however, arise on the issue of restitution or payment ‘in kind’, which involved the transfer of property equivalent to that destroyed or seized by the German military, which would be credited to Germany’s reparations account. Allied hesitations were multiple: French negotiators, for example, feared the renewal of German industry, and British and American negotiators were concerned that German imports into France would result in a reduction of their own export industries. Payment in kind was thus restricted in scope and was delimited by further articles in the Treaty of Versailles. This is, however, outside the purview of this article. See Burnett, Reparation at the Paris Peace Conference, 111–25 on payment in kind.
17 Minutes of the Experts, 2 Apr. 1919, in ibid., 788–800.
18 ‘The Treaty of Versailles.’
19 Burnett, Reparation at the Paris Peace Conference, 3–8, 109–26. Burnett also discusses the wider question of ‘war guilt’ in detail, explaining how the Allies had originally intended Article 231 as an assertion of Germany's theoretical liability, in contrast to the limited liability established in Article 232. The Allies themselves referred to Article 231 as a ‘preamble’ clause. Ibid., 142–57, 814. See also La Documentation internationale: La Paix de Versailles, Responsabilités des auteurs de la Guerre et Sanctions (Paris: Les Éditions internationales, 1930).
20 ‘Mémoire de la Délégation française, déposé le 17 février 1919. Note sommaire au sujet des faits criminels qui ont amené la guerre mondiale, qui en ont accompagné le debut et qui ont été commis au cours des hostilités’ in La Documentation internationale, 47–8. Available on Gallica: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k15107217/f11.item (last visited 14 Feb. 2024).
21 See Burnett on French public opinion regarding the need for reparations and restitution: Burnett, Reparation at the Paris Peace Conference, 3–4, 110.
22 McPhail, Helen, The Long Silence: The Tragedy of Occupied France in World War 1 (London: I.B. Tauris, 2014), 91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
23 ‘List, by Alphabetical Order, of the Names of German Officers and High Officials Accused by Diverse Victims of Theft of Art or Valuables Committed in Their Homes,’ 20 Jan. 1922 (?), AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/2, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 6.
24 Williamson Murray and Jim Lacey, eds., The Making of Peace: Rulers, States and the Aftermath of War (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 210. The chapter ‘Versailles: The Peace Without a Chance’ argues that ‘the nature of the war, its extraordinary length, its cost in lives and damage, the fury with which the contending powers waged it, the emergence of popular opinion as a major factor in international relations, and, perhaps most important, the manner in which the conflict came to a sudden and unexpected end in Nov. 1918’ made a ‘satisfactory peace’ impossible.
25 Gomes, German Reparations, 10.
26 See for example Protocol ‘D’ for the Application of Article 238: ‘Definitive Text Sent to the Germans, Article 238, Application Procedure, Protocol, Restitution Service,’ 1 Mar. 1921, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 4, Sub-Folder 2, Sub-Sub-Folder 4, 52–65.
27 This can be seen in the final files of: ‘Detailed Inventories and Forms of Shipments from Wiesbaden and Elsewhere,’ AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/11, Folder 3.
28 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 7.
29 ‘War of 1914–1918. War Damages. Restitution of Property Taken by the Germans (1914–1933),’ Online Reading Room, Archives nationales, available at: https://www.siv.archives-nationales.culture.gouv.fr/siv/rechercheconsultation/consultation/ir/consultationIR.action?consIr=&frontIr=&optionFullText=&fullText=&defaultResultPerPage=&irId=FRAN_IR_055321&formCaller=GENERALISTE&gotoArchivesNums=false&auSeinIR=false&details=false&page=&udId= (last visited 29 Aug. 2023).
30 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 8.
31 Note, ‘Evaluation of restitutions to come in deduction of reparations,’ 31 Mar. 1921, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 4, Sub-Folder 1, 2.
32 A key report notes that at the time of the armistice the French government took possession of very important depots constituted by the German Protection Services and housing the ‘near totality of the collections of certain museums of the North of France (Lille, Valenciennes, collection of La Tour de Saint-Quentin)’. Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 7.
33 Letter from Mr. Saugon, General Consul of France in Hamburg to Mr. de Celles, Paymaster General, General Sequester of Property Restituted by the Germans, 14 Oct. 1927, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/11, Folder 3, Sub-Folder 2, 4.
34 Shipping form from Wiesbaden, Convoy 10 of 8 Nov. 1924, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/10, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 9, Sub-Sub-Folder 2, 1.
35 On the restitution of cultural property after the Napoleonic wars, see for example: Chamberlin, E.R., Loot! The Heritage of Plunder (Leeds: Sapere Books, 2020)Google Scholar; Boyer, Ferdinand, Napoléon et la restitution par les Musées du Louvre et de Versailles des oeuvres d'art confisquées sous la Révolution (Paris: De Nobele, 1969)Google Scholar; Sandholtz, Prohibiting Plunder; Alice M. Goff, ‘To the Vandals They Are Stone: A Profane Pre-History of the German Temple of Art, 1794–1830’ (PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 2015).
36 ‘War of 1914–1918. War Damages. Restitution of Property Taken by the Germans (1914–1933),’ Online Reading Room, Archives nationales.
37 Letter from Mr. Lecluse to the Service for the Recuperation of Art Objects and Movable Property Taken by the Germans, 10 Feb. 1920; Letter from the Service for the Recuperation of Art Objects and Movable Property Taken by the Germans to Mr. Lecluse, 14 Feb. 1920; Letter from Service for the Recuperation of Art Objects and Movable Property Taken by the Germans to the Director of the Industrial Restitution Service, Wiesbaden, 14 Feb. 1920, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/7, Folder 2, Sub-Folder 6, Sub-Sub-Folder 7, 1–3.
38 ‘List of Persons from Douai that Presented Themselves to the Sequester 25 Apr. 1921,’ AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/4, Folder 6.
39 Shipping Forms no. 165–243, 4th Convoy from Frankfurt, 7 Dec. 1920, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/10, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, Sub-Sub-Folder 3, 11.
40 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 6.
41 ‘List, by Alphabetical Order, of the Names of German Officers and High Officials Accused by Diverse Victims of Theft of Art or Valuables Committed in Their Homes,’ 20 Jan. 1922 (?), AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/2, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 6.
42 Prost, Antoine, ‘Les cimetières militaires de la Grande guerre, 1914–1940,’ in Le Mouvement Social 4, no. 237 (2011): 136Google Scholar.
43 Ibid., 138.
44 Letter from the Archivist of l'Aisne, Charged with the Recuperation of Property Abandoned by the Enemy, to Sir the Minister of Liberated Regions, 1 Sept. 1921, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/8, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 1, Sub-Sub-Folder 5, 6.
45 Letter from the Interior Minister to the Prefects of l'Aisne, Pas-de-Calais, l'Oise, Somme, 30 Apr. 1917, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 3, Sub-Sub-Folder 5, 5–7.
46 See for example: Report, 5 Dec. 1919, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 3, Sub-Sub-Folder 3, 12.
47 Letter from Mr. Hurier-Vieville, 30 Dec. 1920, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/4, Folder 3, 23.
48 Letter from the Prefect of l'Oise to Sir the Minister of Liberated Regions, 2 Mar. 1921, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/4, Folder 3, 7.
49 Report, 5 Dec. 1919, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 3, Sub-Sub-Folder 3, 8.
50 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 5–6.
51 Report, 5 Dec. 1919, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 3, Sub-Sub-Folder 3.
52 Procedure for the application of Article 238. Specific protocol on the restitution of cash, objects of all kinds (machines and industrial material for railways and agriculture excepted) and securities, 20 July 1920. Available at: https://www.siv.archives-nationales.culture.gouv.fr/mm/media/download/FRAN_ANX_011793.pdf (last visited 23 Dec. 2023).
53 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 6.
54 One can see this, for example, in the minutes of the Reparations Commission's meeting on 14 Apr. 1921: ‘Report of Mr. De Terrier-Santans, Deputy Director of the French Restitution Services of the Session He Attended of the Reparations Commission on 14 Apr. for the Drafting of Protocol D,’ 15 Apr. 1921, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 4, Sub-Folder 2, Sub-Sub-Folder 4, 68–101.
55 McPhail, The Long Silence, 92.
56 ‘Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 29 July 1899, Article 56,’ International Humanitarian Law Database, International Committee of the Red Cross, available at: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/hague-conv-ii-1899/regulations-art-56 (last visited 13 Feb. 2024).
57 Sandholtz, Prohibiting Plunder, 102.
58 Ibid., 106.
59 Ibid., 105.
60 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 7.
61 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 5.
62 ‘Report, Aisne Department, Saint-Quentin Arrondissement, Town of Saint-Quentin, Theft of Art Collections Committed in the Cellars of the Musée Lécuy’ (undated), AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/2, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 1, Sub-Sub-Folder 2, 3.
63 ‘Mémoire de la Délégation française, déposé le 17 février 1919’ in La Documentation Internationale (1930), 47.
64 One can see this during the period of the German military withdrawal following the armistice. When French General Alphonse Nudant raised the issue of the illegal confiscation of civilian property by the German Army at the first plenary meeting of the Armistice Commission on 18 Nov. 1918, General Winterfeldt responded that ‘naturally the German High Command had given orders to prevent excesses of this character, but that a precipitate retreat of an army of 3,000,000 men could not possibly be made without some disorder and expressed regret that the discipline of the German Army had been seriously impaired by reason of political events’. Samuel Shartle, Spa, Versailles, Munich: An Account of the Armistice Commission (Philadelphia: Dorrance and Company, 1941), 54–5.
65 Sally Marks, ‘The Myths of Reparations,’ 232–33, 236–39, 254–55; Marks, ‘Mistakes and Myths,’ 644–45; Macmillan, Margaret, Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World (New York: Random House, 2001), 192Google Scholar; Trachtenberg, Marc, ‘Reparations at the Paris Peace Conference,’ Journal of Modern History 51, no. 1 (1979): 24–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
66 ‘War of 1914–1918. War Damages. Restitution of Property Taken by the Germans (1914–1933),’ Online Reading Room, Archives nationales.
67 Shipping Forms no. 165–243, 4th Convoy from Frankfurt, 7 Dec. 1920, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/10, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, Sub-Sub-Folder 3, 18, 24, 21, 19, 29, 10 (in order of list).
68 Note: ‘What has the Service for the Recuperation of Art Objects and Movable Property done? (Question posed by the Finance Commission of the Chamber of Deputies),’ Paris, 26 May 1920. Available at: https://www.siv.archives-nationales.culture.gouv.fr/mm/media/download/FRAN_ANX_011793.pdf (last visited 14 Feb. 2024).
69 Receipt, 31 Dec. 1918, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/3, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 7, Sub-Sub-Folder 2, 3.
70 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 1.
71 Letter to the Princesse de Poix, 10 Apr. 1920, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/4, Folder 3, 26.
72 Princesse de Poix, Letter of 6 Apr. 1920, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 12. The letter can also be found in: AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/4, Folder 3, 24.
73 Report, 10 Jan. 1921, modified on 20 Feb. 1922, AN, Restitution, Box AJ/28/SEQUESTRE/1, Folder 1, Sub-Folder 2, 11–12.
74 For more recent cases, see Newman, Michael, Transitional Justice: Contending With The Past (Cambridge: Polity, 2019)Google Scholar.
75 Sandholtz, Prohibiting Plunder, 144–5.
76 Howard, John B., ‘The Final Act of the Paris Conference on Reparation,’ The Distribution of Reparation from Germany (Washington, DC: US Department of State, 1946), 19Google Scholar.