Bloomfield Auctions, an auction house in Belfast, has been urged to cancel the sale of items which are reportedly associated with Adolf Hitler. The auction, which is due to take place in the coming week, will auction off a silver-plated pencil and a signed portrait of the Nazi leader. The pencil is expected to be sold for between £50k ($65k) and £80k, while the photograph is predicted to sell for £10k ($13k) to £15k. Rabbi Menachem Margolin, chairman of the European Jewish Association, has written to Bloomfield’s managing director, Karl Bennett, asking him to withdraw the items. Bennett recently defended the sale, claiming that such items constituted historical artefacts.
Margolin’s letter to Bennett argues that the aim of the sale is “an insult to the millions who perished, the few survivors left and to Jews everywhere”. He adds that auction houses around the world are buying and selling paraphernalia linked to senior Nazis, at the expense of genuine historical artefacts, and that such practices “glorify the actions of the Nazis”.
Margolin concludes his letter: “What is sold and to whom is a matter of public decency and moral responsibility at the end of the day. It is in this spirit of decency that I ask you again to withdraw the Nazi auction items, to send a message that some things particularly when so metaphorically blood soaked, should not and must not be traded”.
Bennett had previously claimed that such items “give us concrete ties to the past so that we can never forget”, and that “all items have a story and tell of a particular time in history”. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Bloomfield Auctions stated: “Bloomfield Auctions is a specialist auction house for militaria across all centuries… All items are a part of history and we shouldn’t be writing history out of books or society”.
Analysis: The ethics of selling Hitler memorabilia
It is estimated that around 12m people were murdered during the Holocaust, over half of whom were Jewish. More than 70 years after that period, the sale of artefacts which have links to the Nazi regime continues to raise ethical questions.
Selling items with links to the Holocaust might be criticised as profiting from one of the darkest phases of human history. The argument that such sales assist in the preservation of memory or historical interest is less persuasive. Many museums or educational institutions such as Yad Vashem, the World Holocaust Remembrance Center, have strict guidelines when it comes to the acquisition of pieces directly connected to Nazis or Nazi-ism. Yad Vashem is known to refuse them or keep them in storage, rather than display them.
There are certainly occasions when it is acceptable to sell objects associated with people or regimes which committed widespread human rights violations. For example, in 2017, several items belonging to Saddam Hussein were sold off by an auction house in the UK. Unlike most objects linked to the Holocaust, these items were not linked to widespread extermination, but to political oppression. Other items linked to Hitler, which have been sold in recent years, include his monogrammed slippers and his Mercedes-Benz 770K. Last year, a swastika banner signed by members of the Hitler Youth was sold by Humbert & Ellis Auctioneers in North Yorkshire.
Although there are people who collect Nazi artefacts out of historic interest or because they are fascinated by the regime, this pursuit inevitably risks glamorising or minimising the fascist atrocities that were committed. Similarly, when such artefacts are sold for large sums at auction, it is unclear who their buyers are and what their motivations are. For some, such items could, undoubtedly, take on a fetishistic or cult-like quality, as Margolin suggests.
In terms of legal issues, there are no global regulations preventing the sale of such items, although countries such as Germany and Austria have stricter laws governing the trade in National Socialist artefacts. In the UK, however, such sales are legal.
In 2016, Germany prosecuted a former Auschwitz guard, Reinhold Hanning, for being an accessory to the murder of at least 170,000 people. Hanning was sentenced to five years in prison. During his trial, the courtroom was presented with a music box which played a tune by Brahms, which had a swastika etched into the lid. During Hanning’s time at the concentration camp, music boxes were given to favoured prisoners. When Hanning was sent to Markkleeberg sub-camp near Leipzig, he gave his music box to a member of staff. The court ruled that both Hanning and the music box were culpable for his role at the camp.
The Hanning case raises an important question – what is the place of objects connected with Nazis in the context of the Holocaust? Surely, the music box was a crucial item in demonstrating the accused’s complicity in the crimes of the regime. Yet, confining such artefacts solely to the courtroom and its function within the legal process suggests their status outside this parameter might be highly contentious.
Overall, decisions to sell artefacts connected with the Holocaust or the Nazi regime need to be viewed on a case-by-case basis. Relying on the argument that such items “preserve history” is not always the most valid justification.
