Hitler's Parents up for Auction

[Dietrich Maerz]

I only know that these two paintings were in Hitler's private art collection, and hung for some time in the Berghof - we have photogrpahic proof of both claims.

There is no doubt that pictures of the parent's of Hitler hung in the study at the Berghof. I just want to point out that in Germany the written evidence says that those pictures (or at least the one of the mother) were painted by Prof. Knirr, who was considered Hitler's private painter.

I think that if somebody buys the pictures he should know that. If you have proof that your two pictures are exactly the ones from the study and on the period photographs - well, then the German sources in the art books are wrong.

[Craig Gottlieb]

I am familiar with Knirr's works, and he certainly painted many subjects, according to record, including Klara (if we believe Speer), Hitler's chauffer Schrek, and of course, several paintings of Hitler. The date of our painting of Klara is 1933, which pre-dates most of Knirr's most famous work. I don't have any reason to believe that Speer was wrong (though he could have been), and guess that he was speaking of a time after the color photo was taken of these paintings as they hung for some time in the Hitler household. He has to be, as there is no mention of Hitler's father's image, which is seen hanging in the snapshot. The first name on both paintings seems to be "Ludwig" but I have not yet been able to identify the last name. It's a fascinating journey when things like these paintings surface, and I feel they have a lot to teach us. How they made the journey from the Berghof, into Hitler's art catalog for a time (ref: Library of Comgress), and then to France, and then to Orange County, and to me . . . it'd be quite a story if we could know it all.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Well, at the moment it is your word again Ernst Klee in his Kulturlexikon. I have no source for his claim, neither do I have proof of your claim that this pair was the one in the study.

I just think that if someone buys it and finds out that in the art history of the Third Reich these two (in)famous and now even more famous pictures are attributed to Prof. Knirr and not "Ludwig ......" there might be a slight problem. This needs to be mentioned and I am astonished that none of the investigative journalists did at least a minimum amount of checking.

I found that contradiction in 10 minutes. But that is how it works with something related to Hitler: first rule is to believe everything and print it!

Please do not misunderstand me: I do not care one way or another. I just think that WAF is such a serious and investigative site that it would "paint" a bad picture if we would not uncover some the history of theses pictures.

We are not the local TV station ...

Maybe you should mention that contradiction in your auction - just to be safe! This is not a lost daVinci and will not be bought by an art lover anyway.

into Hitler's art catalog for a time (ref: Library of Comgress),....

Are the pictures in the catalog named with "Ludwig ...." Or Knirr? Can one see the signature? Is there a index?



Dietrich

[Craig Gottlieb]

Well, not really my word, but the photographic evidence in the Library of Congress, plus the photograph of the Berghof, plus the physical analysis of the paintings themselves, plus the provenance. My expertise comes in having verified these previous elements into a coherent story line. There is unfortunately no index in the LOC catalog, but I know the answer has to be out there somewhere as to who painted these particular two paintings, and hopefully, we'll find out soon. The LOC catalog does exhibit catalog numbers, but I believe these to most likely be annotations made by the LOC itself, not the Nazis. I doubt seriously that the artist will turn out to be a "million dollar master" of any sort, so the value of the paintings should not change significantly. In short, Dietrich, you are right . . . the value of these paintings is not in the artist, but in the subject and the previous ownership. Of course, we'll continue to update the description in the auction catalog to reflect what we know.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The Library of Congress thing is surely helpful for the two pictures you have. The pictures of the study in the Berghof not so much since they show "only" two pictures of Hitler's parents but not the actual signature.

The catalog of the Library of Congress is no proof that the two pictures in the auction are the ones hanging on the wall in period photographs. They could as well be copies of the originals, commissions for whatever reason. Is there anything else known about this Library of Congress documentation?

There is still the written documentation in the German art history that the pictures in the study were painted by Prof. Knirr. But as you said, you will mention that in the auction text and that is all one can ask.

Dietrich

[Leroy]

I was going to ask (but Dietrich beat me to it), who compiled, and what is the source of, the Library of Congress "Katalog"?

[Dietrich Maerz]

Craig,

can you tell me the date which is on the picture of the "Mother of National Socialism" ()?

Dietrich

[herd118]

BTW, The paintings are apparently by Ludwig Johst (1889-1976). He also painted a portrait of Speer in 1944 that was sold by Hermann Historica in 1991.

See the post in Axis History Forum by "majorplm" on 01-24-2011 in the topic "Paintings hung at the Berghof":
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtop...44844&start=75

[herd118]

Also, the portrait of Julius Schreck on p.57 of the Library of Congress's 'Katalog der Privat-Gallerie Adolf Hitler' is apparently by Heinrich Knirr, the signature appears to match Knirr's known examples, and is dated 1936. This painting is a depiction of the Heinrich Hoffmann photo of Schreck.

[schönbeck]

If the paitings were made from a photograph there are probably a couple similar around. Several artists could be possible.

If you compare paitings around the world this is a pretty common practice.

Ron Weinad had seen very similar paitings somewhere else(mentioned previuos in this thread if I don't remember wrong).

[zitadelle1]

Surely not from the late not great konrad kujau?

[Dietrich Maerz]

Mr. Fueß!

Now I really have to ask myself whether this is on purpose, whether this is to mislead the reader or pure shallowness (or even stupidity)?

Of course the two signatures are NOT the same since you took the one of the mother picture and compared to the one on the father picture!

I have learned a long time ago that one always has to check statements and so-called facts -especially in this hobby. This one is on top of the "what else can you produce" scale. Very bad style if I ever see something like that again you have to bear the consequences. Making up false evidence will not be tolerated here!

I would say an apology to the readers would be the minimum ....

Dietrich

[David Fettes]

It doesn't matter who my paintings are signed by . . .

What? Of course it matters, all of the top German art experts say that the painting of his parents from the Berghof were by Prof. Knirr. Your paintings are by Ludwig Johst. Therefore just by using plain ordinary common sense, they are not the same and not from the Berghof.

[Jo Rivett]

Mr. Fueß!

Now I really have to ask myself whether this is on purpose, whether this is to mislead the reader or pure shallowness (or even stupidity)?

Of course the two signatures are NOT the same since you took the one of the mother picture and compared to the one on the father picture!

I have learned a long time ago that one always has to check statements and so-called facts -especially in this hobby. This one is on top of the "what else can you produce" scale. Very bad style if I ever see something like that again you have to bear the consequences. Making up false evidence will not be tolerated here!

I would say an apology to the readers would be the minimum ....

Dietrich

Ha ha ha ha, your right OK, my bad, a big sorry for the false alarm...
On the Sellers auction platform, there was only one Huge blow up of the Signature, and i "assumed" it to be that of the Hitler-mama painting, which is was not, so it was my mistake, and therefore post #161 of mine with the two signatures should be disregarded. I guess with such prestigious artworks, we (me in this case) should not assume ... once again, ignore post 161, that was incorrect, and when i post something that is incorrect, i will not only correct it straight away, but also expect to be asked to correct it. WAF is no place for False information, or Lies, and therefore i tip my hat to Dietrich for picking up on my mistake very quickly ! (i suggest that post 161 be erased, as it is wrong)

Is it my old eyes, or does the date on the Congress picture say 1973 ?

[zitadelle1]

What? Of course it matters, all of the top German art experts say that the painting of his parents from the Berghof were by Prof. Knirr. Your paintings are by Ludwig Johst. Therefore just by using plain ordinary common sense, they are not the same and not from the Berghof.

The problem is that no number of art experts in the world can know which were at the berghof. Only primary sources could say that, and your quote from speer would I believe allude to a much smaller miniature that AH kept at his bedside table. Your last chance would have been The former hausverwalter , Doering, who I once knew , and would have certainly known, but sadly is no longer with us.
I believe all joking aside that these are the former berghof Hung portraits.