# Italy's Attitude Towards Jewish Cultural Property During and After the Second World War.

Paola Bertilotti

► To cite this version:

Paola Bertilotti. Italy's Attitude Towards Jewish Cultural Property During and After the Second World War. Institute of art and law. NEGLECTED WITNESSES The Fate of Jewish Ceremonial Objects during the Second World War and After, 2011, 9781903987216. hal-04820804

HAL Id: hal-04820804

https://hal.science/hal-04820804v1

Submitted on 13 Dec 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
ITALY'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS JEWISH CULTURAL PROPERTY DURING AND AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR

PAOLA BERTILOTTI

In Italy, the fascist regime had its own anti-Semitic policy from 1938 onwards. A racist census conducted in August of that year was followed by the enactment of the first anti-Semitic laws in September and November. Between 1938 and 1943, the pace of persecution accelerated. Yet it was not until September 1943 that fascist Italy began to participate in the genocidal policy of its German ally. In particular, Italy generally resisted pressure from the Nazis to hand over Jews from its occupied territories in France, Greece and Yugoslavia.

The situation changed radically after Italy announced its unconditional surrender to the Allies on 8 September 1943. German forces quickly occupied northern and central Italy and the Italian occupation zones. In German occupied Italy, Mussolini created the Italian Social Republic – also known as the Salò Republic – a Nazi puppet state which retained control of northern and central Italy with German support.

The German invasion prompted the first deportations of Jews from Italy and the former Italian occupation zones to Nazi concentration and extermination camps.<fnref n="1" /> Between September 1943 and the liberation in 1945, around 8,000 of Italy's 39,000 Jews were arrested and deported by German forces, with the close collaboration of the Italian Social Republic. Only 1,000 of them survived.<fnref n="2" />

For many years, the subject of Italian fascist anti-Semitic persecution received little attention in international historiography. A combination of factors – such as the size of the Jewish community and the relatively small number of Italian Holocaust victims – accounted for this lack of interest.<fnref n="3" /> Because of Italian authorities' refusal to participate in the genocide in their occupation zones in France, Greece and Yugoslavia before September 1943,<fnref n="4" /> scholars

<footnote n="1">¹ See, in particular, Michele Sarfatti, *Gli ebrei nell'Italia fascista. Vicende, identità, persecuzione* (Turin 2000), translated into English by John and Anne C. Tedeschi under the title *The Jews in Mussolini's Italy: From Equality to Persecution*, Madison, Wisconsin, 2006; Marie-Anne Matard-Bonucci, *L'Italie fasciste et la persécution des juifs* (Paris 2007).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Liliana Picciotto, *Il libro della memoria. Gli ebrei deportati dall'Italia (1943-1945)* (Milan 2002), p. 27. According to Picciotto, 7,806 Jews were deported from Italy, of which 1,000 remain unidentified.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Joshua Zimmerman (ed.), *Jews in Italy under Fascist and Nazi rule, 1922-1945* (New York 2005), p. 1.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Léon Poliakov was the first scholar who studied Italian occupation policies, see his *La condition des Juifs en France sous l'occupation italienne* (Paris 1946); *idem*, *Le bréviaire de la haine* (Paris 1993), pp. 181, 188-193 (1st edition, 1951); Léon Poliakov and Jacques Sabille, *Jews under the Italian Occupation* (Paris 1955). From Poliakov's point of view, Italians had helped Jews in Southern France for humanitarian reasons. Concurring with Poliakov's interpretation, historians of Vichy France have generally emphasised the ways in which Italians aided Jews and underestimated the impact of fascist anti-Semitic laws in Italy. See, in particular, Michael R. Marrus, Robert O. Paxton, *Vichy France and the Jews*, (Stanford, CA 1995), pp. 315-321 (1st edition: 1981); Serge Klarsfeld, *Vichy-Auschwitz, Le rôle de Vichy dans la solution finale de la question juive en France* (Paris 1983), vol. 1, pp. 145, 155, 188-189; *idem*, vol. 2, 1985, passim. This interpretation has recently been called into question by</footnote>
were also inclined to believe that in Italy, the administration had not strictly enforced the anti-
Semitic measures enacted by the fascist government from 1938 onwards and that the Italian
population had attempted to rescue Jews from the Holocaust between 1943 and 1945.<fnref n="5" />
Historians generally regarded the 1938 fascist anti-Semitic laws as a mere consequence of the
alliance with Germany and concluded that the active anti-Semitic persecution had begun in
Italy only after September 1943, under German occupation.<fnref n="6" /> Italian historiography was also
slow to confront the reality of fascist and Nazi anti-Semitic policies.<fnref n="7" /> The first scholar to draw
attention to these topics was Renzo De Felice. In his pioneering 1961 study, *The Jews in
Fascist Italy: A History*, De Felice demonstrated the total independence of the Italian fascist
government in the planning and implementation of anti-Semitic persecution.<fnref n="8" /> In the following
decades,<fnref n="9" /> while research on Italian fascism progressed, the topic of fascist anti-Semitic policy
remained neglected.

In Italy, the fiftieth anniversary of the 1938 anti-Semitic laws took place in a new
political context marked by the ‘crisis of anti-fascism’ as an ethical and political paradigm<fnref n="10" />
and the rise of racism against immigrants. Against this background, and under the influence of
the development of Holocaust studies in other European countries and in the United States,
Italian historiography began to draw attention to the fascist anti-Semitic policy.<fnref n="11" /> A number of
studies were published that analysed in depth the impact of fascist persecution on Italian
Jewry and stressed Italy’s complicity in the Holocaust.<fnref n="12" /> The Italian state also changed its

<footnote>Davide Rodogno in *Il nuovo ordine mediterraneo. Le politiche di occupazione dell'Italia fascista in Europa (1940-1943)* (Turin 2003).</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ See, for example, Raul Hilberg, *The Destruction of the European Jews* (London 1961), pp. 421–432; George L. Mosse, *Toward the Final Solution: A History of European Racism* (London, Melbourne, Toronto 1978), pp. 229–230; Jonathan Steinberg, *All or Nothing: The Axis and the Holocaust, 1941–1943* (London, New York 1990); Saul Friedländer, *The Years of Extermination: Nazi Germany and the Jews, 1939–1945* (New York 2007).</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ For an analysis of Italian historiography on fascist anti-Semitism, see Mario Toscano, *Ebraismo e antisemitismo in Italia. Dal 1848 alla guerra dei sei giorni* (Milan 2003), pp. 208–243.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ For example, not a word about genocide or fascist anti-Jewish policy was included in Luigi Salvatorelli and Giovanni Mira’s history of fascism published in 1952.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ Renzo De Felice, *Storia degli ebrei italiani sotto il fascismo* (Turin 1961).</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ On fascism in Italian historiography, see, for example, Renzo De Felice, *Le interpretazioni del fascismo* (Rome, Bari 1969); Guido Quazza, Enzo Collotti, Massimo Legnani, Marco Palla, Gianpasquale Santommassimo (eds), *Storiografia e fascismo* (Milan 1985); Alberto A quarone, *Fascismo e antifascismo nella storiografia italiana* (Rome 1986); Emilio Gentile, *Fascismo. Storia e interpretazione* (Rome 2002).</footnote>

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Sergio Luzzatto, *La crisi dell'antifascismo* (Turin 2004). The values of antifascism served as a basis for democratic consensus in post-1945 Italy. In the 1980s, however, they were challenged, particularly by the crisis in the Communist Party, which had identified itself with antifascist resistance. See also Filippo Focardi, *La guerra della memoria. La Resistenza nel dibattito politico italiano dal 1945 a oggi* (Rome, Bari 2005).</footnote>

<footnote n="11">¹¹ Paola Bertilotti, ‘A poco a poco la memoria. Contrasti e trasformazioni della memoria dello sterminio in Italia’, in Marcello Flores, Simon Levis Sullam, Marie-Anne Matard-Bonucci, Enzo Traverso (eds), *La Shoah in Italia*, vol. 2, (Turin 2010).</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹² See, in particular, Alberto Cavaglion and Gian Paolo Romagnani, *Le interdizioni del Duce: a cinquant'anni dalle leggi razziali in Italia, 1938-1988*, (Turin 1988); Fabio Levi (ed.), *L'ebreo in oggetto: l'applicazione della normativa antiebraica a Torino (1938-1943)* (Turin 1991); Fabio Levi, *Le case e le cose: la persecuzione degli ebrei torinesi nelle carte dell'EGELI, 1938-1945* (Turin</footnote>
attitude. Instead of presenting Italy as a mere victim of the German occupation and
emphasising the heroism of the Italian Resistance,<fnref n="13" /> it gradually acknowledged the need to
come to terms with the past and began to encourage relevant research.<fnref n="14" />

Up to the mid-1990s, Italian scholars mainly focused on fascist anti-Semitic legislation and on what they referred to as ‘the assault on Jewish lives’<fnref n="15" /> – i.e.: the killings, arrests, roundups and deportations to concentration camps that took place under the German occupation. Then, in 1998, Fabio Levi published the first specialised study of economic persecution, which was followed by several other studies focusing on this issue.<fnref n="16" />

In December 1998, the Italian government set up the Commissione per la ricostruzione delle vicende che hanno caratterizzato in Italia le attività di acquisizione dei beni dei cittadini ebrei da parte di organismi pubblici e privati (Commissione responsible for reconstructing the events concerning the acquisition of Jewish assets in Italy by both public and private bodies). This commission was headed by Tina Anselmi, a member of the Italian Parliament.<fnref n="17" /> In 2000 Tina Anselmi, Dario Tedeschi and Michele Sarfatti represented the Anselmi Commission at the Vilnius International Forum on Holocaust-Era Looted Cultural Assets, where they presented the first findings on Jewish owned cultural artefacts.<fnref n="18" /> The following year the Anselmi Commission published its final report, which contained important results.<fnref n="19" /> It presented the legislative and administrative measures issued by fascist and Nazi authorities and gave an initial account of the seizure and destruction of Jewish cultural assets.

1998); Liliana Picciotto, *Il libro della memoria* (Milan 1991); Michele Sarfatti (ed.), *1938. Le leggi contro gli ebrei*, special issue of *La Rassegna mensile di Israel* (1-2) 1988; Michele Sarfatti, *Mussolini contro gli ebrei. Cronaca dell'elaborazione delle leggi del 1938* (Turin 1994); idem, *Gli ebrei nell'Italia fascista*; Marie-Anne Matard-Bonucci, *L'Italie fasciste et la persécution des juifs*.

<footnote n="13">13 See Filippo Focardi, *La guerra della memoria*; Filippo Focardi, “Bravo italiano” e “cattivo tedesco”: riflessioni sulla genesi di due immagini incrociate’, *Storia e Memoria*, 5(1), 1996, pp. 55–83.</footnote>

<footnote n="14">14 By organising conferences and publishing several studies on this topic. See, in particular, Mario Toscano (ed.), *L'abrogazione delle leggi razziali in Italia (1943-1987). Reintegrazione dei diritti dei cittadini e ritorno ai valori del Risorgimento* (Rome 1988); Camera dei deputati (ed.), *La legislazione antiebraica in Italia e in Europa* (Rome 1989).</footnote>

<footnote n="15">15 According to Michele Sarfatti’s expression. See *The Jews in Mussolini’s Italy*, p. 178.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">16 Fabio Levi, *Le case e le cose*. In 2004, Ilaria Pavan publised one of the most important books on this subject, *Tra indifferenza e oblio: le conseguenze economiche delle leggi razziali in Italia (1938-1970)* (Florence 2004).</footnote>

<footnote n="17">17 Tina Anselmi was a member of the Italian Christian Democratic party. During the Second World War, she participated actively in the resistance. In 1976 she was also the first Italian woman to become minister (of Labour and Social Welfare in the Andreotti government).</footnote>

<footnote n="18">18 Dario Tedeschi, Tina Anselmi, Michele Sarfatti, ‘Forum di Vilnius sui Beni Culturali trafugati durante il periodo dell’Olocausto’, *Rassegna mensile di Israel*, 2000, 2, pp. 155–168. The Vilnius Forum took place on 3–5 October 2000 in Lithuania, as a follow-up to the Washington Conference of December 1998, under the auspices of the Council of Europe. Michele Sarfatti’s talk (ibid., pp. 161–164) focused on ‘the Jewish communities’ archives and libraries in Italy under fascist and Nazi rule’.</footnote>

<footnote n="19">19 Commissione per la ricostruzione delle vicende che hanno caratterizzato in Italia le attività di acquisizione dei beni dei cittadini ebrei da parte di organismi pubblici e privati, *Rapporto generale*, Rome, Presidenza del Consiglio dei ministri/Dipartimento per l'informazione e l'editoria, 2001 (referred to below as the Commissione Anselmi).</footnote>
Also in 2001, Enrica Basevi published a study examining the question of Jewish-owned silver,<fnref n="20" /> while Estelle Gislon published an article on the 'fate of Rome's Jewish libraries'.<fnref n="21" /> In 2003, Michele Sarfatti devoted an article to the Jewish communities' libraries and archives during the period of anti-Semitic persecution.<fnref n="22" /> A paper by Paolo Ravenna recounted the history of Ferrara's synagogues during this period.<fnref n="23" />

In November 2002, the Italian government set up a new commission to investigate the fate of the libraries of the Roman Jewish community and of the Italian Rabbinical College, which had been looted by the German occupying forces between October and December 1943. This was the Commissione per il recupero del patrimonio bibliografico della Comunità ebraica di Roma, razziato nel 1943 (Commission for the Recovery of the Bibliographic Heritage of the Jewish community in Rome, looted in 1943). Its final report appeared in February 2009.<fnref n="24" /> Some data on Jewish cultural property can also be found in more general studies on fascist and Nazi anti-Semitic persecution in Italy.<fnref n="25" />

Drawing on previous literature and results of my own research, I shall present an overview of the measures taken by fascist Italy and the Nazi occupiers regarding Jewish art and cultural property between 1938 and 1945 and of postwar restitution measures in Italy after 1945. Let me stress here that even the Anselmi Commission has insisted in its report on the need for extreme circumspection regarding the subject of the seized and looted Jewish cultural assets. Because of the fragmentary nature of the surviving records, it is not always possible to establish the exact nature and extent of the looting and destruction or to determine the ultimate fate of Jewish-owned cultural property.<fnref n="26" /> In particular, there is a lack of data on the looting and destruction of ceremonial objects.

<footnote n="20">²⁰ Enrica Basevi, *I beni e la memoria. L'argenteria egli ebrei: piccola “scandalosa” storia italiana*, (Soveria Mannelli 2001).</footnote>

<footnote n="21">²¹ Estelle Gilson, 'The Fate of the Roman Jewish Libraries', in Giacomo Debenedetti, *October 16, 1943: Eight Jews*, (Notre Dame 2001), pp. 94–98.</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²² Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane, 1938-1945’, *Rassegna mensile di Israel*, 2003, 1, vol. II, pp. 369–385.</footnote>

<footnote n="23">²³ Paolo Ravenna, ‘Il sequestro dei beni delle sinagoghe e altre notizie sulla comunità ebraica di Ferrara dal 1943 al 1945’, *Rassegna mensile di Israel*, 2003, 1, vol. II, pp. 529–570.</footnote>

<footnote n="24">²⁴ For the final report (*Commissione per il recupero del patrimonio bibliografico della Comunità ebraica di Roma, razziato nel 1943, Rapporto finale*), see http://www.governo.it/Presidenza/USRI/confessioni/rapporto/rapporto_finale Attivita_Commissione2.pdf, last consulted on 29 October 2010. The Commission was not able to find any information whatsoever on the looted Roman libraries. See also Dario Tedeschi, ‘Alla ricerca della biblioteca della comunità ebraica di Roma saccheggiata nel 1943. Relazione presentata a Hannover il 12 aprile 2005, in occasione del secondo Convegno sui libri ebraici perduti’, *Rassegna Mensile di Israel*, 2004, 70(3), pp. 165–173.</footnote>

<footnote n="25">²⁵ See, in particular, Silva Bon, *La spoliazione dei beni ebraici. Processi economici di epurazione razziale nel Friuli Venezia Giulia* (Gradisca d'Isonzo 2001); Ilaria Pavan, ‘Indifference and Forgetting: Italy and its Jewish Community, 1938–1970’, in Martin Dean, Constantin Goschler and Philipp Ther (eds), *Robbery and Restitution: The Conflict over Jewish Property in Europe* (New York, Oxford 2007), pp. 171–181; Cinzia Villani, ‘Il “rapporto Moc”. Una relazione tedesca sulla politica patrimoniale antiebraica nella “Zona d’Operazione Litorale Adriatico”. 1943-1945’, *Rassegna mensile di Israel*, 2003, 1, vol. II, pp. 517–528.</footnote>

<footnote n="26">²⁶ Under the Italian Social Republic, the archives of the fascist regime were moved from Rome to the North and some documents were lost. Moreover, most looting operations between 1943 and 1945 were not recorded in the archives. See Commissione Anselmi, pp. 156, 162.</footnote>
# I. THE YEARS OF PERSECUTION (1938–1945)

## THE GENERAL FRAMEWORK OF ANTI-SEMITIC PERSECUTION

In Italy, between 1938 and 1943, the fascist regime took the first measures for the persecution of the Jews,<fnref n="27" /> beginning with the racist census of August 1938.<fnref n="28" /> Between September and November 1938, the main decrees against the Jews were issued by the fascist regime. Decree 1390 of 5 September 1938 excluded Jewish teachers and pupils from regular schools; Jews were compelled to go to Jewish schools. Decree 1381 of 7 September 1938 ordered the expulsion of foreign Jews living in Italy. Decree 1728 of 17 November 1938 contained ‘general measures for the defence of the Italian race’, including a racist definition of Jewish identity and restrictions on economic and civil rights.<fnref n="29" />

In February 1939 the economic persecution of Jews was intensified by decree 126, which confirmed the restrictions on real-estate ownership and on industrial and commercial activities and called for the creation of the Ente per la gestione e la liquidazione immobiliare (Organisation for the management and the liquidation of property; EGELI). Property ‘in excess’ of the values stated in decree 1728/1938 (real estate in excess of 20,000 lire and agricultural property with a value of more than 5,000 lire) had to be transferred to EGELI. A special agreement also allowed the EGELI to sell such assets and to entrust both private and public credit institutions with the management of Jewish property.<fnref n="30" /> After February 1939, new anti-Jewish decrees and administrative circulars were issued almost every week to reinforce the persecution.<fnref n="31" />

On 25 July 1943, Mussolini was overthrown and replaced by Marshal Pietro Badoglio. In spite of Mussolini's fall, the Italian anti-Semitic legislation remained in force. Badoglio government maintained the semblance of alliance with Germany but began secret negotiations with the Allies. An armistice was signed on 3 September and announced by radio on the 8th. The German High Command reacted immediately by ordering the Wehrmacht to invade

<footnote n="27">²⁷ See, in particular, Alberto Cavaglion and Gian Paolo Romagnani, *Le interdizioni del Duce*; Marie-Anne Matard, *L'Italie fasciste et la persécution des Juifs*; Michele Sarfatti (ed.), 1938. *Le leggi contro gli ebrei*; Michele Sarfatti, *Mussolini contro gli ebrei*; idem, *The Jews in Mussolini's Italy*, pp. 95–177; Ilaria Pavan, *Tra indifferenza e oblio*, pp. 69–146.</footnote>

<footnote n="28">²⁸ For the purpose of the August 1938 census, any person born of one Jewish parent was considered Jewish.</footnote>

<footnote n="29">²⁹ Decree 1728/1938, for example, mandated their removal from government jobs and their exclusion from the Fascist Party, and placed restrictions on real-estate ownership and industrial and commercial activities. Jews effectively became second-class citizens. For the full text of the decree, see Renzo De Felice, *Storia degli ebrei italiani sotto il fascismo* (Turin, 1993 edition), pp. 576–580. The racist definition used in this decree was different from the one used in the August 1938 census and also from the Nazi definition. The definition in the decree was inspired by both religious principles and racist ideology. People were classified as Jews if they had three or more Jewish grandparents; people with one or two Jewish grandparents were regarded as Jews if they adhered to the Jewish religion, and as Aryans if they had converted to another religion by 1 October 1938. Unlike German law, Italian ‘racial’ laws did not create a special category of *Mischlinge*. See Michele Sarfatti, *The Jews in Mussolini’s Italy*, pp. 127–133.</footnote>

<footnote n="30">³⁰ Commissione Anselmi, pp. 253–260; Ilaria Pavan, *Tra indifferenza e oblio*, pp. 140–146.</footnote>

<footnote n="31">³¹ Between September 1938 and September 1943, about 180 decrees and circulars were issued by Ministries and public bodies. See Michele Sarfatti (ed.), 1938. *Le leggi contro gli ebrei*; Michele Sarfatti, *Mussolini contro gli ebrei*; Commissione Anselmi, pp. 59–88.</footnote>
Italy.<fnref n="32" /> King Victor Emmanuel III<fnref n="33" /> and Badoglio issued no directives to the Italian Supreme Command. They fled Rome and reached the Allied-controlled territories in southern Italy. Within a few days, the German armed forces occupied northern and central Italy.<fnref n="34" /> The country was split in two. In Southern Italy, under Allied control, Badoglio formed a government that maintained the constitutional structure of the Kingdom of Italy. The king and Badoglio led this 'Southern Kingdom', which was required by the armistice agreement to repeal fascist anti-Semitic legislation.<fnref n="35" /> It was the beginning of a long process.<fnref n="36" /> Jews did not officially recover their civil rights until the passage of a law of January 1944.

Meanwhile, Mussolini had been liberated by the German military from his prison on the Gran Sasso Mountain on 12 September 1943. ‘Il Duce’ immediately set up a new fascist government and created the Italian Social Republic – also known as the Salò Republic – a German puppet state which formally controlled most of northern and central Italy. Two northern Italian territories, however, were directly administered by the authorities of the Third Reich: the Operationszone Alpenvorland (the Prealpine Operations Zone, which included the provinces of Bolzano, Trento and Belluno) and the Operationszone Adriatisches Küstenland (Adriatic Coast Operations Zone, which comprised the provinces of Udine, Gorizia, Trieste, Pola (Pula), Fiume (Rijeka) and Lubiana (Ljubljana)). In the rest of northern and central Italy, the German occupying forces took over only military power and entrusted the Italian Social Republic with civil administration.

German occupation changed the nature of anti-Semitic persecution in northern and central Italy. After 8 September the 'final solution' was implemented: Jews were searched, arrested and deported to death camps by the Nazis with the close collaboration of the Salò Republic.<fnref n="37" /> To escape death, Italian Jews had to go into hiding. At the same time, both the German occupying forces and the Salò authorities ordered the seizure of all Jewish property.

Within the Nazi regime, Office IVB4 of the Sicherheitspolizei-Sicherheitsdienst (Security Police; Sipo-SD) was in charge of anti-Semitic policy. In both German operations zones, civil and military power lay in the hands of an Oberster Kommissar (Supreme Commissioner) – Franz Hofer in the Alpenvorland, Friedrich Rainer in the Adriatisches Küstenland. In both territories, by order of the Supreme Commissioners, the seizure of Jewish assets began as early as October 1943. The seizure operations were ordered by the

<footnote n="32">³² Since 1 August 1943, the Wehrmacht High Command had set in motion a plan to occupy Italy if the country surrendered. The code name of the operation was *Achse* (Axis). See Elena Aga Rossi, *Una nazione allo sbando*, (Bologna 2003), pp. 75–84.</footnote>

<footnote n="33">³³ Victor Emmanuel III (1869–1947) was King of Italy from 1900 to 1946. He had not opposed the enactment of the 1938 anti-Jewish laws.</footnote>

<footnote n="34">³⁴ The city of Rome had already fallen under German control by 10 September, and Naples by 11 September. See Elena Aga Rossi, *Una nazione allo sbando*, pp. 135–149.</footnote>

<footnote n="35">³⁵ On 29 September 1943, Italy signed a second and longer armistice agreement, stating that ‘all Italian laws involving discrimination on grounds of race, color, creed or political opinions [would] be rescinded’ (article 31). See http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/italy03.asp. Michele Sarfatti, *The Jews in Mussolini’s Italy*, p. 175; Mario Toscano, ‘L’abrogazione delle leggi razziali’, in Michele Sarfatti (ed.), *Il ritorno alla vita: vicende e diritti degli ebrei dopo la seconda guerra mondiale*, (Florence 1998), pp. 61–62.</footnote>

<footnote n="36">³⁶ See Mario Toscano, ‘L’abrogazione delle leggi razziali ‘; Mario Toscano (ed.), *L’abrogazione delle leggi razziali in Italia (1943-1987)*.</footnote>

<footnote n="37">³⁷ See Liliana Picciotto, *Il libro della memoria*.</footnote>
commanding officer of the SS and police (Höherer SS – und Polizeiführer) and implemented
by the head of the Sipo-SD (Befehlshaber der Sipo-SD).<fnref n="38" /> In the Alpenvorland, the Oberster
Kommissar’s Central Office was in charge of economic persecution. <fnref n="39" /> According to the
surviving records, the seizures were ordered by the Oberster Kommissar personally on the
basis of the information gathered by the Oberster Kommissar’s Central Office, Section I, SS
Head of Police (Arbeitsbereich I – SS- und Polizeiführer). Afterwards, the Finance Section
(Section III) of the Central Office of the Oberster Kommissar (Arbeitsbereich III, Finanzen)
was entrusted with the management of the seized assets. But the population of this occupation
zone, especially in the South Tyrolean area, had a strong tradition of anti-Semitism and
collaborated with the German occupying forces. South Tyroleans participated in the arrest of
the Jews and in lootings. In particular, the Sicherheit - und Ordnungsdienst (SOD), a local
auxiliary police unit created as early as August 1943, worked for the occupying forces. Most
of the Jews in Merano were arrested by South Tyroleans belonging to the SOD, SS, SD and
Gestapo. The seizures carried out by the SOD were a kind of ‘legally bureaucratised’ theft,<fnref n="40" />
carried out outside the framework of the law but with the approval of the German occupation
forces. The SOD received de facto authorisation to sell the looted assets. In the Adriatisches
Küstenland, Oberster Kommissar Rainer issued an order on 14 October requiring the seizure
of all Jewish property. According to Rainer’s order: ‘the supreme commanders of the SS and
police in Trieste and Lubiana [were] charged with ensuring the registration and safekeeping
(zu erfassen und sicherzustellen) of the property in their respective territories, and with
immediately providing information on such property to the Finance Section of the Oberste
Kommissariat, which [was] responsible for its temporary administration and final evaluation
(einstweilige Verwaltung und endgültige Verwertung)’.<fnref n="41" /> The arrest of Jews and the seizures
were carried out by a special unit of the Sipo-SD, the Einsatzkommando Reinhard, also
known to the local German administration as Abteilung R (Section R) or Aktion R (Action
R), falling directly under the supreme commander of the SS and of Section R of the police,
SS-Gruppenführer und Generalleutnant Odilo Globocnik.<fnref n="42" /> The looting of private property
was systematic. Some of the seized assets (such as food and furniture) were immediately sold.
Others (such as apartments, houses and landed estates) were administered by the Finance
Section pending possible sale. The seized furniture was also partly sent to Berlin. Some

<footnote n="38">³⁸Commissione Anselmi, pp. 107–114.</footnote>

<footnote n="39">³⁹ Ibid., pp. 163–200.</footnote>

<footnote n="40">⁴⁰ According to Silva Bon, *Gli ebrei a Trieste 1930-1945. Identità, persecuzione, risposte*, Trieste, 2000, p. 333.</footnote>

<footnote n="41">⁴¹ Oberster Kommissar in der Operationszone Adriatisches Küstenland, *Anordnung*, 14 October 1943 (quoted in Commissione Anselmi, p. 108).</footnote>

<footnote n="42">⁴² Odilo Globocnik was born in Trieste (then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire) in 1904. He joined the Nazi Party in Austria in 1931 and the SS in 1934. In May 1938, he was made party leader in Vienna, and in November 1939 he was named SS and Police Leader for the Lublin district of Poland. In 1942, Himmler entrusted him with the systematic extermination of the Jews in Poland, the so-called Aktion Reinhard [editors refer to article Nawojka L]. More than 2 million Jews were murdered on his orders. Globocnik also supervised the seizures of Jewish-owned property in Poland. In 1943 he was transferred to Italy. He committed suicide in May 1945 while awaiting trial for war crimes. See Walter Laqueur, Judith Tydor Baumel (eds), *The Holocaust Encyclopedia* (New Haven, London 2001), p. 265; Christian Zentner und Friedemann Bedürftig (eds), *Das Grosse Lexikon des Dritten Reiches* (Munich 1985), p. 218.</footnote>
valuable books were sent to libraries in Vienna and Carinthia.<fnref n="43" /> Works of art and valuables were likewise sent to Germany or Austria.<fnref n="44" /> Private individuals also took advantage of the situation by plundering the houses of Jews. According to reports sent by the victims to the Trieste Jewish community in 1946, 131 apartments had been plundered in Trieste during the German occupation, with total damage estimated at 186,656,388 lire.<fnref n="45" />

In the Salò Republic the German general Rudolf Toussaint was appointed Bevollmächtigter General der Deutschen Wehrmacht [Plenipotentiary General of the German forces] in Italy. Rudolf Rahn became the Reichsbevollmächtigter [Reich Plenipotentiary] for Italy (the equivalent of an ambassador)<fnref n="46" />. The supreme command of the SS and the police was held by Höchster SS und Polizei Führer Karl Wolff<fnref n="47" />. Reporting directly to Wolff, Wilhelm Harster,<fnref n="48" /> who was installed in Verona as chief of the Sipo-SD, set up a network of local branches of the security police in Italy. German anti-Semitic policy was carried out principally by the Sipo-SD and Rudolf Rahn and, secondarily, by the military authorities and the Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg (ERR) – a Nazi party organisation in charge of the confiscation of cultural treasures in occupied Europe from the time of its creation in 1940.<fnref n="49" /> Both German forces and Italian authorities played a role in the arrest of the Jews and the seizure of their property in the Salò Republic, although until November 1943, German forces

<footnote n="43">⁴³ Probably for the central library of the Hohe Schule of the NSDAP, which was transferred from Berlin to Carinthia in 1942 because of air raids. The Hohe Schule was a planned institution for National Socialist research and education.</footnote>

<footnote n="44">⁴⁴ See Cinzia Villani, 'Il rapporto Moc', pp. 522–528; Silva Bon, *Gli ebrei a Trieste*, pp. 333–335.</footnote>

<footnote n="45">⁴⁵ Commissione Anselmi, p. 213.</footnote>

<footnote n="46">⁴⁶ Rudolf Rahn (1900–1975) was a German diplomat. In 1940, he had been a senior embassy official in Paris, responsible for propaganda (see Michael R. Marrus and Robert O. Paxton, *Vichy France and the Jews*).</footnote>

<footnote n="47">⁴⁷ Karl Wolff (1900–1984) joined the NSDAP and the SS in 1931. In 1933 he became Heinrich Himmler's personal adjutant. In 1937 he was promoted to Gruppenführer and in 1942 to Obergruppenführer and General in the Waffen-SS. In 1937, he was appointed Himmler's personal Chief of Staff, and in 1939, he became Himmler's liaison to Führer Headquarters. Wolff was the third-ranking member of the SS staff (after Himmler and Heydrich). In September 1943 he was sent to Italy as the supreme commander of the SS and police. In view of Germany's certain defeat, Wolff put himself in contact with the Allies and arranged an early German capitulation in Italy on 2 May 1945. In exchange, he was shielded from prosecution at Nuremberg trial. In 1964, however, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison by the Munich court of assizes for complicity in at least 300,000 cases of murder, primarily because of his role in deporting Jews to Treblinka (see Christian Zentner und Friedemann Bedürftig (ed.), *Das Grosse Lexikon des Dritten Reiches*, p. 653; Michael Salter, *Nazi War Crimes, US Intelligence and Selective Prosecution at Nuremberg* (UK, New York 2007), pp. 23–54; Kerstin von Lingen, 'Conspiracy of Silence: How the "Old Boys" of American Intelligence Shielded SS General Karl Wolff from Prosecution', *Holocaust and Genocide Studies*, 22 (1), 2008, pp. 74–109).</footnote>

<footnote n="48">⁴⁸ Wilhelm Harster (1904–1991) was a German police officer who joined the NSDAP in May 1933. By November 1933 he became a member of the SS, and in 1935 he joined the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), the Security Service. Between July 1940 and August 1943 he was placed in charge of the German police force in the Netherlands (becoming the commander of the Security Police and SD). By 1941, he was responsible for 'police measures against the Jews'. He organized deportations, and a 1944 report 'referred to him as the man who speeded the "dejudification" of the Netherlands on Himmler's orders' (Jacob Presser, *Ashes in the wind: The destruction of Dutch Jewry* (Detroit 1988), pp. 341–342).</footnote>

<footnote n="49">⁴⁹ Liliana Picciotto, *Il libro della memoria*, pp. 858–866.</footnote>
operated almost alone.<fnref n="50" /> The Sipo-SD and ERR commandos carried out seizures and confiscations.<fnref n="51" /> On 14 October and on 22 and 23 December the libraries of the Roman Jewish community and the Italian Rabbinical College were sent to Germany – presumably by the ERR.<fnref n="52" /> These libraries were located in a building belonging to the Jewish community and included very rare and precious manuscripts and prints, most of them written in Hebrew. Among these rarities were books printed by the most famous Jewish printing houses (Soncino, Bomberg, Bragadin and Giustiniani) as well as other texts printed in the early sixteenth century in Constantinople and in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in Venice and Leghorn. According to a 1934 catalogue, there were 28 very early printed books and 183 sixteenth-century books in the Roman Jewish community's library.

Before November 1943, Italian fascists helped German forces by giving lists of names and participated in arrests. Some Italian local authorities took independent confiscation measures against Jewish property; for instance, the Head of Province [Capo della provincia] of Como ordered that all Jewish bank accounts and deposits be blocked in October 1943.<fnref n="53" /> Furthermore, when members of the Republican National Guard (Guardia Nazionale Repubblicana) arrested Jews who were attempting to flee to Switzerland, they usually seized all their personal possessions.

In November 1943 the situation changed dramatically. At the first congress of the Republican Fascist Party (Partito Fascista Repubblicano; PFR) in Verona, Jews were declared 'foreigners' and 'enemy nationals' for the duration of the war.<fnref n="54" /> Alessandro Pavolini, the Secretary of the PFR, said that Jewish assets would soon be confiscated.<fnref n="55" /> Since Decree 1415 of 8 July 1938 permitted the seizure of enemy property, some local authorities, such as the Head of Province in Grosseto, ordered the immediate seizure of Jewish assets. On 30

<footnote n="50">⁵⁰ In September 1943, the first actions against the Jews involved only divisions of the SS and Wehrmacht. This relates, in particular, to the massacre of Lake Maggiore in September 1943 and the roundup in the Cuneo province of Jews fleeing from France (Liliana Picciotto, *Il libro della memoria*, pp. 818-819; 867-870). From October 1943 onwards, Office IVB4 of the Sipo-SD was in charge of the arrests. In particular, a special Operations Group, headed by SS officer Hauptsturmführer Theodor Dannecker, organised the roundups of 16 October 1943 in Rome and of November 1943 in Florence, Siena, Bologna and Montecatini. In November 1943, Jews were also arrested by German forces in Genoa, Turin, Milan and along the Ligurian coast. Dannecker (1913-1945) had, in 1937, joined the staff of Adolf Eichmann, who ran the Jewish affairs department (*Referat IVB4*) of the Reich Security Main Office (Reichssicherheitshauptamt; RSHA). In 1940 He was sent to Paris as Eichmann's representative advisor on Jewish affairs and was in charge of the deportation of Jews. In January 1943, he was transferred to Bulgaria where he continued his carrier, deporting the Bulgarian Jews. In October 1944, he became Judenkommissar in Italy. At the end of the war, he committed suicide in an American prison camp. See Christian Zentner und Friedemann Bedürftig (eds), *Das Grosse Lexikon des Dritten Reiches*, p. 108.</footnote>

<footnote n="51">⁵¹ See Commissione Anselmi, p. 107.</footnote>

<footnote n="52">⁵² See Commissione per il recupero del patrimonio bibliografico della Comunità ebraica di Roma, razziato nel 1943, *Rapporto finale*.</footnote>

<footnote n="53">⁵³ See Commissione Anselmi, pp. 92-93. We do not know how German authorities responded to this initiative.</footnote>

<footnote n="54">⁵⁴ See point 6 of the 'programmatic manifesto' drafted by the leaders of the PFR under Mussolini's supervision and approved by the PFR congress on 14 November 1943, Michele Sarfatti, *The Jews in Mussolini's Italy*, p. 188.</footnote>

<footnote n="55">⁵⁵ See Commissione Anselmi, p. 93.</footnote>
November the Minister of the Interior, Guido Buffarini Guidi, issued a police order authorising the arrest and internment of all foreign and Italian Jews and the seizure of all Jewish assets.<fnref n="56" /> After December the Italian police began to investigate and arrest the Jews living in the Salò Republic and to carry out seizures.

In almost all the provinces under the control of the Salò government, special offices were established to investigate, seize and manage Jewish assets. Decree 2 of 4 January 1944 called for the confiscation of all seized Jewish property.<fnref n="57" /> On 28 January 1944, the chief of police formally extended the confiscation order from individuals to all Jewish communities and organisations.<fnref n="58" /> A few days later, he gave orders to investigate what had become of the works of art that had been in the synagogues.<fnref n="59" />

Additionally, in both the German occupation zones and the Italian Social Republic, some assets of Jews forced into hiding were stolen, damaged or even destroyed by private individuals, while others were destroyed in bombings.

### JEWISH-OWNED WORKS OF ART AND CULTURAL ARTEFACTS

Persecution measures regarding Jewish owned works of art and cultural artefacts were first issued by the fascist regime in 1939. On 4 March 1939 the Ministry of Education<fnref n="60" /> had issued Measures for the Defence of the National Artistic Heritage now in the hands of the Jews [“Provvedimenti in Difesa del patrimonio artistico nazionale in mano agli ebrei”], asking the offices responsible for export licences for antiques and works of art to hinder and discourage such exports. A circular issued by the Ministry of the Interior on 13 September 1940 also prohibited Jews from dealing in works of art and antiques.<fnref n="61" /> At the same time that seizures were taking place, cultural assets were damaged or destroyed in bombings<fnref n="62" /> or as a result of a growth in violence against Jews, triggered by the enactment of anti-Semitic laws.<fnref n="63" /> Furthermore, some Jews probably had to sell some artistic or cultural artefacts to deal with the financial consequences of persecution, or had to leave such artefacts in the care of non-Jewish friends or relatives.

<footnote n="56">⁵⁶ Police Order 5 required ‘a) the arrest of “all Jews . . . of whatever nationality” and their internment “in provincial concentration camps until they can be collected in special concentration camps suitable for the purpose”; b) “the provisional seizure of all their property” which should subsequently be confiscated “for the profit of the indigent made homeless by enemy air raids”; c) the adoption of “special vigilance” by the police over the children of mixed marriages . . .’ (Michele Sarfatti, *The Jews in Mussolini’s Italy*, p. 188).</footnote>

<footnote n="57">⁵⁷ This decree ordered ‘the heads of provinces, as prefects were now called, to proceed “immediately” to the confiscation of all property belonging to persons “of Jewish race”, including businesses, land and buildings, bank deposits, furniture, bedding, and clothing. The measure applied to both foreign Jews and [Italian Jews]’ (Michele Sarfatti, *The Jews in Mussolini’s Italy*, p. 189).</footnote>

<footnote n="58">⁵⁸ ‘All Jewish communities are to be disbanded and their property sequestered’ (as quoted in Michele Sarfatti, 1938. *Le leggi contro gli ebrei*, p. 197).</footnote>

<footnote n="59">⁵⁹ See Commissione Anselmi, p. 97.</footnote>

<footnote n="60">⁶⁰ At that time the Ministry of Education (instead of the Ministry of culture) was in charge of the “national artistic heritage” and of museum.</footnote>

<footnote n="61">⁶¹ Ibid., pp. 143–144.</footnote>

<footnote n="62">⁶² Turin’s synagogue was destroyed in an Allied bombing raid in November 1942.</footnote>

<footnote n="63">⁶³ Several synagogues were damaged and furnishings of cultural and artistic significance were destroyed, in Ferrara (September 1941), Split (June 1942) and Trieste (July 1942). See Paolo Ravenna, ‘Il sequestro dei beni delle sinagoghe’, Commissione Anselmi, p. 148.</footnote>
However, the systematic seizure of Jewish art and cultural property began in earnest after the start of the German occupation.<fnref n="64" /> In the Adriatisches Küstenland in particular, some of the most important private collections, such as Gino Pincherle’s Stendhal library and the paintings of the Pollitzer family, Aldo Mayer and Count Salvatore Segrè Sartorio, were seized by the Nazis and sent to Carinthia or Germany.<fnref n="65" /> In Trieste the most important books in the Jewish library were seized and sent to the national and university libraries of Vienna and the *Gaumuseum* and *Studienbibliothek* of Klagenfurt.<fnref n="66" /> The remaining books were stored in the Jewish community buildings; most of them were stolen by unknown individuals – probably Italian citizens – on 29 and 30 September 1943. The community’s archives were partly pulped for paper or sold.<fnref n="67" /> In Fiume, the German police seized and removed the books from the Chief Rabbi’s personal library burning down the Jewish community’s library and the synagogue in January 1944.<fnref n="68" /> In the Alpenvorland, the archives and library of the Jewish community of Merano were completely destroyed.<fnref n="69" />

In the Salò Republic, the German forces did not systematically confiscate Jewish libraries but seized the most valuable books – in particular, from the Roman libraries mentioned above. From community archives, they seized relatively recent documents that contained information relevant to arresting Jews – this took place, for instance, in Bologna. There are no precise figures on the seizure of ceremonial objects by the German occupying forces. After the liberation, the Allies found crates in a warehouse in the Merano-Bolzano area that contained silver Jewish ceremonial objects, most of them from the Jewish communities in Milan, Turin and Merano.<fnref n="70" />

As for the Italian authorities, while developing a legal basis for the seizure of all Jewish assets, the Salò’s Council of Ministers also discussed a specific legislative decree on the ‘seizure of works of art, books and artefacts of archaeological and historical interest belonging to Jews or Jewish institutions’. Such seizures were made possible by a circular of 1 December 1943 sent by the Ministry of Education to the Heads of Province, the Superintendents of Monuments and Antiques, the Superintendents of Libraries and police

<footnote n="64">⁶⁴ Ibid., pp. 144–145; 148–155.</footnote>

<footnote n="65">⁶⁵ According to both Silva Bon and the Anselmi Commission, these collections were sent to the Gaumuseum or to the Dorotheum auction house in Klagenfurt (Commissione Anselmi, p. 213; Silva Bon, *Gli ebrei a Trieste 1930-1945*, p. 335). Neither Bon nor the Anselmi Commission has published any information about the fate of these collections.</footnote>

<footnote n="66">⁶⁶ Silva Bon, *Gli ebrei a Trieste 1930-1945*, p. 335.</footnote>

<footnote n="67">⁶⁷ Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane, 1938-1945’, p. 372. Archives of the Union of Italian Jewish Communities (AUCII, Rome), 1934–1947, box 35/C, file entitled ‘Biblioteche, archivi, patrimonio archeologico’, letter sent on 4 July 1946 by the Trieste Jewish community to the Union of Italian Jewish Communities.</footnote>

<footnote n="68">⁶⁸ Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane, 1938-1945’, p. 373. AUCII, 1934–1947, box 35/C, file entitled ‘Biblioteche, archivi, patrimonio archeologico’, letter sent on 13 December 1945 by the Fiume Jewish community to the Union of Italian Jewish Communities.</footnote>

<footnote n="69">⁶⁹ Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane, 1938-1945’, p. 373. Archives of the Jewish Contemporary Documentation Center (ACDEC, Milan), Massimo Adolfo Vitale Archives, box 1, file 2, letter sent on 7 July 1948 by the Merano Jewish community to the Jewish Deportees Research Committee.</footnote>

<footnote n="70">⁷⁰ See Enrica Basevi, *I beni e la memoria*, pp. 64, 79–96, 117–121, 135–148.</footnote>
officers.<fnref n="71" /> When the Salò authorities took measures for the complete confiscation and expropriation of all Jewish property, special attention was devoted to Jewish-owned works of art and cultural assets, in the name of preserving the ‘national heritage’ and to avoid sales and auctions.<fnref n="72" /> On 5 February, for example, the chief of police sent a telegram to the police commissioners asking them to take special care of any works of art and ceremonial objects that they found in the synagogues.<fnref n="73" /> On 11 October 1944, the Minister of the Interior ordered the Heads of Province to send all archives confiscated from Jewish communities, synagogues and private individuals to the General Inspectorate for Race and Demography (Ispettorato Generale Razza e Demografia),<fnref n="74" /> which fell directly under the Office of the President of the Council of Ministers.

Various competing public bodies and authorities were in charge of the administration of the seized property. Looting was perpetrated by local authorities and by the fascist police forces and fascist gangs. Then, the seized property was supposed to be placed in the hands of the EGELI. A special agreement also allowed the EGELI to sell seized assets and to entrust both private and public banks with the management of Jewish assets. Assets of cultural and artistic interest were handed over to regional Soprintendenze (Superintendencies), branch offices of the Ministry of Education responsible for various types of cultural heritage. For example, fascist authorities entrusted the Soprintendenza for art galleries with the Florentine Jewish community’s library and ancient archives. The Head of Province seized Vercelli Jewish community’s library and removed it to the municipal library. After 1944 however, some local authorities created special local offices for the administration of Jewish property, as was the case in Florence and Rome.<fnref n="75" /> In a number of instances fascist authorities decided to store the confiscated assets inside Jewish community buildings, such as the community libraries in Verona, Mantua and Ferrara.<fnref n="76" />

Disregarding the decrees calling for the preservation of the national heritage, fascist activists destroyed valuable cultural assets. In Alessandria, for example, precious manuscripts and hundreds of books, including very rare editions of the Mikra Gedolah, the Talmud and sixteenth-century machzorim, perished when the synagogue and community building were destroyed on 13 December 1943.<fnref n="77" /> In Reggio Emilia the archives were burnt down and the library partly pulped for paper.<fnref n="78" /> Fascist militias often stole Jewish assets without handing

<footnote n="71">⁷¹ Circular no. 665 regarding the 'requisition of Jewish-owned works of art'.</footnote>

<footnote n="72">⁷² Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, p. 378.</footnote>

<footnote n="73">⁷³ Ibid., p. 378.</footnote>

<footnote n="74">⁷⁴ On 15 March 1944, Mussolini transformed the DEMORAZZA (the General Administration for Demography and Race) in the Ministry of the Interior into an Ispettorato Generale Razza e Demografia (General Inspectorate for Race and Demography) to be headed by Giovanni Preziosi and placed directly under the Presidency of the Council of Ministers. In April this Inspectorate was split into two offices – the General Administration for Demography and the General Inspectorate for Race, still headed by Preziosi. The principal aim of the Inspectorate was to intensify persecution against Jews (see Michele Sarfatti, *The Jews in Mussolini’s Italy*, pp. 190–191).</footnote>

<footnote n="75">⁷⁵ Commissione Anselmi, pp. 150–154.</footnote>

<footnote n="76">⁷⁶ Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, pp. 378–379.</footnote>

<footnote n="77">⁷⁷ Ibid., pp. 381–382. ACDEC, General Archives (AG), box 13B, file entitled ‘Alessandria’.</footnote>

<footnote n="78">⁷⁸ Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, p. 383.⁷⁹ Commissione Anselmi, p. 128. Pietro Koch (1915–1945) was a former lieutenant of grenadiers. After Mussolini’s return to power in September 1943, he headed a fascist militia squad that operated first in</footnote>
them over to EGELI or other institutions in charge of their management. For instance, Pietro Koch's militia stole three crates containing furniture, ceremonial objects and silver from the Milan synagogue.⁷⁹ In Turin, where the synagogue was destroyed by an Allied bombing raid in 1942, the surviving books were transferred to a private apartment. However, 'thousands of books' – among which religious texts printed in the eighteenth century – were looted by unknown individuals and never returned to the Turin community. Ancient manuscripts were even used as lampshades.⁸⁰ Nine Maimonides autograph manuscripts were stolen from the Verona community's library,⁸¹ and the Ferrara community's archives and library were almost completely plundered.⁸² The Bologna community's archives and library were also plundered, probably shortly after a bombing raid in October 1943 that partly destroyed the synagogue and community buildings. The same thing happened in Livorno on 18 March 1944; hundreds of ancient prayer books disappeared, as well as a collection of law books.⁸³

We do not have any precise figures on the ceremonial objects looted by the fascist authorities or by private individuals in the Italian Social Republic. Obviously, looting occurred. For example, crates of ceremonial objects were found after the liberation by a group of partisans in Vicenza, in the former offices of the Republican National Guard.⁸⁴

## II. AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR: THE DIFFICULT PROCESS OF RESTITUTION AND COMPENSATION

The most tragic and blatant consequence of anti-Semitic persecution was its demographic impact on Italian Jewry. According to Liliana Picciotto, out of the 46,656 Jews in Italy in 1938, only about 39,900 remained by August 1943. The Allies liberated 2,500 Jews in September 1943. The remaining 37,400 lived in the regions under German and Salò control. Between September 1943 and April 1945, 6,000 Jews were able to flee to Switzerland, 322

Rome and then in Milan after Rome's liberation. Koch's militia squad participated in the arrest of Jews and partisans and in looting operations and frequently tortured its victims. At the end of the war, Pietro Koch was arrested, put on trial and sentenced to death. See Massimiliano Griner, *La banda Koch. Il reparto speciale di polizia 1943-44* (Turin 2000).

⁷⁹ Commissione Anselmi, p. 128. Pietro Koch (1915–1945) was a former lieutenant of grenadiers. After Mussolini's return to power in September 1943, he headed a fascist militia squad that operated first in Rome and then in Milan after Rome's liberation. Koch's militia squad participated in the arrest of Jews and partisans and in looting operations and frequently tortured its victims. At the end of the war, Pietro Koch was arrested, put on trial and sentenced to death. See Massimiliano Griner, *La banda Koch. Il reparto speciale di polizia 1943-44* (Turin 2000).

⁸⁰ Ibid., p. 381. AUCII, 1934–1947, box 35/C, file entitled ‘Biblioteche, archivi, patrimonio archeologico’, letter sent on 19 August 1947 by the Turin Jewish community to the Union of Italian Jewish Communities.

⁸¹ Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, p. 383. AUCII, 1934–1947, box 35/C, file entitled ‘Biblioteche, archivi, patrimonio archeologico’, letter sent on 6 February 1947 by the Verona Jewish community to the Union of Italian Jewish Communities.

⁸² Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, p. 384. AUCII, 1934–1947, box 35/C, file entitled ‘Biblioteche, archivi, patrimonio archeologico’, letter sent on 3 July 1946 by the Ferrara Jewish community to the Union of Italian Jewish Communities.

⁸³ Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, p. 384. AUCII, 1934–1947, box 35/C, file entitled ‘Biblioteche, archivi, patrimonio archeologico’, letter sent on 12 August 1947 by the Livorno Jewish community to the Union of Italian Jewish Communities.

⁸⁴ The National Republican Guard was a Salò paramilitary force. See Commissione Anselmi, p. 152.
were murdered in Italy and nearly 9,000 were sent to Nazi death camps – mostly to Auschwitz-Birkenau.<fnref n="85" /> After the war there were only 28,500 Jews left in Italy, a group constituting about 0.06 per cent of the Italian population.<fnref n="86" /> In some Italian towns, the entire Jewish population had been murdered. At the same time, persecutions had economic and social consequences: between 1943 and 1945, most Jews had been dismissed from their jobs and their property had been looted.

### OBJECTIVE DIFFICULTIES

As the Allies gradually liberated Italy, and Nazi and Italian fascist anti-Semitic legislation began to be repealed, restitution of Jewish property was not always possible. Firstly, many archives, books, works of art and furnishings of cultural or artistic interest had been lost forever. Moreover, it was often very difficult to determine the whereabouts of looted assets. The Nazis had often sent the most valuable objects to Germany, as in the case of the Trieste Jewish community's books. In 1949, the director of the Klagenfurt *Studienbibliothek* informed the local Italian consulate that 147 books belonging to the Trieste community had been found among the library's holdings. These books were eventually returned to Italy, but the others remain missing.<fnref n="87" /> Most of the books looted from the rabbinical college library in Rome were found by the Allies in an unknown location and sent to the Offenbach Archival Depot,<fnref n="88" /> finally arriving back in Italy in 1948.<fnref n="89" />

Even the Jewish assets seized by the Italian Social Republic were not easy to find. Since a number of competing public bodies had been in charge of seizures, Jewish-owned cultural and artistic artefacts looted by the fascist regime could have been sold or could be in the hands of any one of those bodies – the EGELI, the Soprintendenze of the Ministry of Education, the local offices for the administration of the Jewish property, banks, fascist police and militia. The war and German occupation had disrupted Italian public administration, and the archives of the Italian Social Republic contained virtually no records of the looting. Furthermore, in order to escape the advancing Allies, the fascist authorities had also often destroyed their archives or transferred the remaining records and the looted assets to northern Italy. The crates of ceremonial objects from the Florentine Jewish community were discovered thanks to the Partisan Information Service (the Servizio Informazione Patrioti),

<footnote n="85">⁸⁵ Liliana Picciotto, *Il libro della memoria*, pp. 28, 31, 855.</footnote>

<footnote n="86">⁸⁶ Sergio Della Pergola, *Anatomia dell'ebraismo italiano, Caratteristiche demografiche, economiche, sociali, religiose e politiche di una minoranza* (Rome, Carucci 1976), pp. 56, 60, 70.</footnote>

<footnote n="87">⁸⁷ See Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, p. 373.</footnote>

<footnote n="88">⁸⁸ After the allied victory over Germany, depots containing looted assets from all over Europe came under the control of the Allies. During the winter of 1945–1946, the contents of the depots found in the American zone were transferred to collecting points in Munich, Wiesbaden, Marburg and Offenbach for inventory and return to their original owners. Around 2.5–3 million books were processed in the Offenbach depot that concentrated on books and archives. [See Dana Herman’s article. See also Leonidas E. Hill, ‘The Nazi Attack on "Un-German" Literature, 1933–1945’, in Jonathan Rose (ed.), *The Holocaust and the Book: Destruction and Preservation* (Amherst 2001), p. 32; Robert G. Waite, ‘Returning Jewish Cultural Property: The Handling of Books Looted by the Nazis in the American Zone of Occupation, 1945 to 1952’, in *Libraries and Culture*, 37(3), 2002, pp. 213–228.</footnote>

<footnote n="89">⁸⁹ Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, pp. 375–376.</footnote>
which had assigned an officer to trace the looted assets.<fnref n="90" /> On the other hand, it was probably pure coincidence that around fifty books belonging to the Florentine Jewish community were found just after the liberation in the garret of a private house.<fnref n="91" /> Some looted assets were easier to find. The Mantua Jewish community's books, which the fascists had stored in the Jewish community buildings and the municipal library, were found there just after liberation and immediately returned to the Jewish community. Similarly, the Vercelli Jewish community's books were found in the municipal library, where the fascists had stored them. Some other looted assets were simply found in the private homes or offices of former members of the PFR, fascist police and fascist militias. For example, sacred silver belonging to the Milan Jewish community is believed to have been found in the private home of the militia leader Pietro Koch in Milan.<fnref n="92" />

The Captured Enemy Materials Branch of Allied Force Headquarters (CEM) was put in charge of the war booty found in the depots of the German occupying forces and the Italian Social Republic.<fnref n="93" /> As far as we know, the CEM did not search for the rightful owners of this property but entrusted it partly to a new Italian public body, the Azienda Rilievo Alienazione Residuati (Agency for the Acquisition and Disposal of Surplus War Materials; ARAR), which fell under the Ministry of Reconstruction and set up with decree 683 of 29 October 1945. As we shall see below, this decision had heavy consequences. According to an inventory found in the ARAR Archives, the CEM sent 1,369 kilograms of silver to the ARAR. ARAR transferred 946.17 kilograms to a Milan depot on 12 and 13 March 1946. Another depot, in Merano, was used for storing the other 422.83 kilograms, which included 164.4 kilos of Jewish silver belonging either to private individuals or to Jewish communities.<fnref n="94" /> However, ARAR's stated mission was not to search for the rightful owners of the assets placed under its control but to 'take into custody and sell the residual war materials relinquished by the Allied authorities, left behind in Italy by the Germans or purchased in some other manner'.<fnref n="95" />

Another factor that complicated the restitution of Jewish property was the general disorder. The country was being governed by many different authorities, often in competition: the Allied Military Government, the National Liberation Committees and the government of the entity known as the Southern Kingdom. As discussed below, competing public bodies were in charge of the management and restitution of looted assets. Jewish organisations and individual Jews did not know which institution or public body to contact in order to claim their looted property.

Jewish institutions investigated the fate of the looted assets, but often there were no inventories of ceremonial objects or catalogues of the holdings of their libraries – in most cases there never had been any, and sometimes the fascist or the Nazi authorities had also stolen the catalogues.<fnref n="96" /> Some individual Jews did not have sufficient evidence of ownership

<footnote n="90">⁹⁰ See above, p. 19</footnote>

<footnote n="91">⁹¹ Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, p. 373.</footnote>

<footnote n="92">⁹²Commissione Anselmi, p. 160.</footnote>

<footnote n="93">⁹³ Enrica Basevi, *I beni e la memoria*, pp. 57-64.</footnote>

<footnote n="94">⁹⁴Commissione Anselmi, pp. 526-527.</footnote>

<footnote n="95">⁹⁵ Ibid., p. 523.</footnote>

<footnote n="96">⁹⁶ As in the case of the library of the Roman rabbinical college. See Michele Sarfatti, ‘Contro i libri e i documenti delle comunità israelitiche italiane’, p. 376; Commissione per il recupero del patrimonio bibliografico della Comunità ebraica di Roma, raziato nel 1943, *Rapporto finale*, p. 30.</footnote>
to claim their looted property. It should also be stressed that many of the former owners had fled Italy to escape persecution or had died without heirs. This was another reason that many assets remained unclaimed.

Other objects were not recovered because they had been looted by individuals from the synagogues and homes of Jews who had been deported or gone into hiding. Piera Sonnino, who had survived Auschwitz and returned to Genoa after years of hospitalisation, wrote: 'What shall I say about my return? What shall I say about the moment I came back to a city I had dreamed of and longed for, where once I had felt at home? I was back in my city, but now it was empty, my entire family killed. I was drowning in endless pain. My apartment had been stripped bare by looters. Out of all our belongings, only one piece of furniture remained. Some time afterwards, a woman gave me something she had found on the floor in the dust the day my home was looted. It was a picture of my mother, the only one remaining of her final years.'<fnref n="97" /> Giancarlo Sacerdoti is one of the many Italian Jews who have recounted how they discovered their looted property and furniture in their neighbours' houses after the war: 'I often went with my mother in search of the furniture that had been looted from our house. We went from house to house ... The owners of these houses often refused to give our things back. In their opinion, they now belonged to them. While going from house to house, I learned a lot of things. Especially that tears are usually shed over dead people, but woe betide the people who return from the dead and try to open their eyes and ask for their property back.'<fnref n="98" />

## LACK OF POLITICAL WILL

Inadequate legislation enacted by Italy after the liberation also hindered the restitution of Jewish owned assets. On 22 September 1943 Badoglio announced plans to abrogate the anti-Semitic laws.<fnref n="99" /> However, the Council of Ministers of the Southern Kingdom did not approve the proposed abrogation decrees until 27 and 28 December. Anti-Semitic persecution did not officially come to an end until January 1944, when Decree 25 of 20 January 1944 restored civil rights to Italian Jews. The reintegration and restitution process was very slow and began only under Allied pressure.<fnref n="100" />

After Badoglio assumed control of the Italian government in July 1943, he found himself surrounded by fascist ministers who were reluctant to repeal anti-Semitic legislation.<fnref n="101" /> Antifascist leaders entered the Badoglio government only after 22 April 1944,

<footnote n="97">⁹⁷ Piera Sonnino, *Questo è stato. Una famiglia italiana nei lager* (Milan 2004), pp. 97–98.</footnote>

<footnote n="98">⁹⁸ Giancarlo Sacerdoti, *Ricordo di un ebreo bolognese. Illusioni e delusioni (1929-1945)* (Rome, 1983), pp. 162–163 (also quoted in Andrea Villa, *Dai Lager alla terra promessa. La difficile reintegrazione nella “nuova Italia” e l’immigrazione verso il Medio Oriente (1945-1948)* (Milan, 2005), p. 19).</footnote>

<footnote n="99">⁹⁹ Article 31 of the second armistice agreement signed by Italy on 29 September stated that ‘all Italian laws involving discrimination on grounds of race, color, creed or political opinions [would] be rescinded’; Michele Sarfatti, *The Jews in Mussolini’s Italy*, p. 175.</footnote>

<footnote n="100">¹⁰⁰ See Mario Toscano, *L'abrogazione delle leggi razziali in Italia (1943-1987)*, pp. 30–43; Giovanna D'Amico, *Quando l'eccezione diventa norma. La reintegrazione degli ebrei nell'Italia postfascista* (Turin 2006), pp. 31–53.</footnote>

<footnote n="101">¹⁰¹ For example, Gaetano Azzariti, Minister of Justice in the Badoglio government from 26 July 1943 to 15 February 1944, had for the previous three years presided over a commission known as the</footnote>
and the first decree regarding the restitution of looted Jewish property was not issued until 5
October 1944, after the antifascist and more progressive leader Ivanoe Bonomi had replaced
Pietro Badoglio as Prime Minister.¹⁰² Bonomi headed a coalition government that included
the Communists, the Socialists, the Christian Democrats, the Liberals, the members of an old
antifascist party called the Democrazia del Lavoro and those of a left-wing resistance party,
the Partito d’Azione. In spite of this new political context, the abrogation of anti-Semitic
legislation was a very piecemeal process, which took approximately three years.

It should be kept in mind that the Italian Jewish community was a very small one.
Jews were not a political priority for the antifascist governments following the liberation.
Government records show that antifascist ministers had other victims to take care of. At a
meeting of the Council of Ministers on 4 April 1945, communist as well as liberal leaders
insisted that the government should not ‘go overboard’ – that is, should not do ‘too much for
Jews’.¹⁰³ Furthermore, from the point of view of the antifascist political class, the new Italian
democratic state was not accountable for the crimes of the fascists. The antifascist leaders did
not want to acknowledge any continuity between the new Democratic Italy and the fascist
regime.¹⁰⁴ Government records also suggest that the antifascist members of the government
were heavily influenced in their work by suggestions from the public administration.¹⁰⁵ Since
the Italian public administration was never really purged of its fascist civil servants,¹⁰⁶ the
drafting of the restitution legislation was marked by continuity with the fascist period, or at
least by blind formalism and indifference to the victims’ fate. Furthermore, to negotiate good
peace conditions, Italian governments had to downplay the role of Italian fascists in crimes
against humanity and Italian participation in the Holocaust.¹⁰⁷ For all these reasons, the Italian

‘Tribunal of Race’, established under the fascist regime by Decree 1024 of 13 July 1939, and had been
charge of investigations for the ‘verification of race’; Michele Sarfatti, *The Jews in Mussolini’s Italy*,
p. 368.

102 Ivanoe Bonomi (1873–1951) became prime minister on 18 June 1944, following the liberation of Rome. He had been a moderate political leader in pre-fascist Italy. See Enzo Collotti, Renato Sandri, Frediano Sessi (ed.), *Dizionario della Resistenza* (Turin, 2006 edition), pp. 784–785.

103 See Archivio Centrale dello Stato, *Verbali del consiglio dei ministri. Luglio 1943 – maggio 1948*, Rome, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri Dipartimento per l'informazione e l'editoria, Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, 1994, vol. 4, p. 530. See also Giovanna D'Amico, *Quando l'eccezione diventa norma*, p. 103; Mario Toscano, *L'abrogazione delle leggi razziali*, p. 59.

104 See, for instance, the undated letter sent by Luigi Gasparotto, Minister of Reconstruction, to the office of Prime Minister De Gasperi, in the Central Archives of the Italian State (ACS, Rome), Presidency of the Council of Ministers (PCM), 1944–47, 1948–1950, file 3.2.2/12573-2.

105 See, for instance, a letter from the Ministry of Justice to the Finance Ministry, the Ministry of Treasury, the Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Labour and the Prime Minister's Office, 17 November 1944; letter from Enrico De Martino, director of the EGELI, to the Minister of Treasury, 21 September 1944; correspondence between the Prime Minister's Office and the Finance Ministry, between 20 April 1946 and 22 June 1946 in ACS, PCM, 1948–1950, file 3.2.2./11472, folders 2, 4 and 8. See also Giovanna D'Amico, *Quando l'eccezione diventa norma*, pp. 46–53.

106 See Claudio Pavone, *Alle origini della Repubblica. Scritti su fascismo, antifascismo e continuità dello Stato* (Turin 1995), pp. 70–184; Hans Woller, *I conti con il fascismo. L'epurazione in Italia (1943-1948)*, (Bologna 1997).

107 Italian authorities choose to put emphasis on the Italian resistance movement. Between 1945 and 1947, the Italian Foreign Office organised exhibitions on ‘Italian contributions to the war’ against Germany. See, for instance, the Archives of the Italian Foreign Office (ASMAE, Rome), ‘Segreteria generale’, box 28/2, files entitled ‘Mostra documentaria organizzata dal ministero dell’Italia occupata
postwar governments, though antifascist and democratic, had no interest in enacting laws that acknowledged looting and genuine persecution even before September 1943.<fnref n="108" />

To expedite the slow process of Jewish rehabilitation, on 13 July 1944 the Allies issued an order that authorised the restitution of Jewish property. On 20 August 1945 the Allied Military Government created a Commission in Trieste within the Finance Division of Headquarters Allied Military Government, with special responsibility for the restitution of Jewish assets in the former Adriatic Coast Operations Zone. This Commission closely cooperated with the Trieste Jewish community to track down looted assets and return them to their rightful owners.<fnref n="109" />

At the same time, in northern Italy, the resistance movement was taking more drastic measures to put an end to anti-Semitic persecution and purge fascists. By decree of 14 September 1944, the Comitato di Liberazione Nazionale Alta Italia (National Liberation Committee of Upper Italy; CLNAI) stated that after liberation all the laws enacted by the Italian social republic were to be considered null and void. On the same day another decree stated that all the anti-Semitic laws were to be abrogated.<fnref n="110" /> Right after liberation, the CLNAI also authorised the seizure of all property belonging to Salò political activists and members of fascist militia squads, the fascist police and the fascist armed forces.<fnref n="111" /> This formed a strong basis for the abrogation of anti-Semitic laws and the restitution of Jewish assets looted by the fascist and the Nazi authorities. However, the Allied Military Government was not willing to let the resistance movement run the country – especially because of the influence of the communists within the CLNAI. On 28 May 1945, the Allies issued an order stating that the decrees issued by the CLNAI were to be regarded as having the force of law only if they had been confirmed by the Allied Military Government.<fnref n="112" /> After liberation, the Italian provisional government in Rome gradually expanded its authority, to the detriment of CLNAI, and on 30 April 1946 the CLNAI was disbanded.<fnref n="113" />

## INADEQUATE LEGISLATION

The measures taken by the Italian government to abrogate Nazi and Italian fascist anti-Semitic laws were not as drastic as those taken by the CLNAI. Most of the abrogation decrees were issued between 1944 and 1947 and related to the restoration of civil rights and the restitution

sulla guerra di liberazione e sui danni subiti dall'Italia'and 'Contributo italiano alla guerra'. The Minister of the Interior asked the civil service for reports that could show that the persecution of the Jews was perpetrated solely by the German occupying forces. See circular letter from the National Security Department (Direzione Generale della Pubblica Sicurezza) to the prefects dated 21 September 1945, in ACS, Ministry of the Interior (MI), Direzione Generale della Pubblica Sicurezza, AGR, A5G-IIGM, 1944–48, box 3.

<footnote n="108">¹⁰⁸ For more information on this topic, please see my article 'Riconoscimento, reintegrazione e risarcimento. Le vittime della persecuzione antisemita in Italia 1944-1965', *Italia contemporanea*, 254, 2009, pp. 43–59</footnote>

<footnote n="109">¹⁰⁹ See Ilaria Pavan, *Tra indifferenza e oblio*, p. 198.</footnote>

<footnote n="110">¹¹⁰ See Gaetano Grassi (ed.), “Verso il governo del popolo”. *Atti e documenti del CLNAI 1943-1946*, (Milan 1977), p. 171.</footnote>

<footnote n="111">¹¹¹ Order 6 of 26 April 1945.</footnote>

<footnote n="112">¹¹² Claudio Pavone, *Alle origini della Repubblica*, p. 172.</footnote>

<footnote n="113">¹¹³ See Franco Catalano, *Storia del Comitato di liberazione nazionale alta Italia*, (Milan 1975); Aldo G. Ricci, *Aspettando la Repubblica. I governi della transizione, 1943-1946*, Rome, 1996.</footnote>
of jobs and looted property. <fnref n="114" /> With regard to Jewish property, Decree 252 of 5 October 1944 repealed the confiscation measures implemented by Decree 1728 of 17 November 1938 and Decree 126 of 9 February 1939. Jewish former owners were entitled to claim their looted property from the EGELI or from subsequent purchasers. Surprisingly enough, the EGELI – the authority set up in 1939 to organise the lootings – was entrusted with the restitution of Jewish property. It has to be stressed that neither the EGELI nor the subsequent purchasers were expected to go in search of the rightful owners. In order to get their seized assets back, Jewish owners therefore had to make formal claims. Moreover, the original Jewish owners were required to pay normal administrative and management fees,<fnref n="115" /> and they had only one year to reclaim their property.

The Salò Republic's measures targeting Jewish property were repealed even later. Decree 393 of 5 May 1946 declared the lootings carried out under the Italian Social Republic from 1943 to 1945 to be null and void. But with respect to the looted assets sold by the fascist authorities to third parties, Decree 393 did not automatically consider the purchasers of Jewish assets to have acted in bad faith.<fnref n="116" /> The only way that Jewish claimants could nullify such sales and recover their property, therefore, was to prove the bad faith of the new owners (art. 1). Since this was almost impossible to prove, the Jewish claimants were generally unable to recover their assets, even when they filed a lawsuit against the purchasers.<fnref n="117" /> Jewish owners had ten years to lay claim to any assets in the possession of public bodies, but only three years if they were in the possession of private individuals. Decree 393 again entrusted the EGELI with the return of the confiscated Jewish assets and required the Jewish claimants to pay normal administration and management fees. In 1949, for example, the Florence Jewish community had to pay 419,400 lire in storage fees in order to recover the eighteen crates of looted ceremonial objects and books that had been discovered in 1945.<fnref n="118" />

Moreover, Italian legislation did not enable the original Jewish owners to lodge official objections to management decisions of the EGELI or subsequent purchasers. Many Jewish owners refused to pay the management fees, considering them unjust and intolerable. One Jew wrote to the EGELI, 'It is unacceptable to make the victims of persecution pay for management conducted to their detriment by scavengers whose only intention was to acquire the assets of people slated for extermination in gas chambers.'<fnref n="119" /> The Union of Italian Jewish

<footnote n="114">¹¹⁴ See ACS, PCM, 1948–1950, file 3.2.2/11472-1. For the full text of these decrees, see Mario Toscano in *L'agrogazione delle leggi razziali in Italia (1943-1987)*.</footnote>

<footnote n="115">¹¹⁵ As confirmed by Decree 222 of 12 April 1945 (art. 7), concerning the assets looted by the fascist regime before 1943.</footnote>

<footnote n="116">¹¹⁶ In contrast, in France, postwar legislation considered all purchasers of Jewish assets to have acted in bad faith. See Mission d'étude sur la spoliation des Juifs de France présidée par Jean Mattéoli, Claire Andrieu, Serge Klarsfeld, Annette Wieviorka, *La persecution des Juifs de France 1940-1944 et le rétablissement de la légalité républicaine, Recueil de textes officiels 1940-1999* (Paris 2000), p. 180. See also Ilaria Pavan, *Tra indifferenza e oblio*, pp. 189-191, 202.</footnote>

<footnote n="117">¹¹⁷ See ACS, PCM, 1948–1950, file 3.2.2/11472-2 and 3.2.2/11472-4; AUCII, 1934–1947, box 65A. See also Ilaria Pavan, *Tra indifferenza e oblio*, pp. 190–192; 237–261.</footnote>

<footnote n="118">¹¹⁸ Before the objects were returned in the summer of 1949, the assets had been sequestered by the court of justice in Florence, for two reasons: first, the partisans who had discovered the crates had claimed their contents as a reward, and second, the seized items had been used as evidence in the trials of a former fascist gang (see Commissione Anselmi, pp. 159–160).</footnote>

<footnote n="119">¹¹⁹ Letter quoted by Ilaria Pavan in 'Indifference and Forgetting', p. 176.</footnote>
Communities (Unione delle Comunità Israelitiche Italiane) supported these protests and entered into long-term negotiations with the Italian government on the cancellation of the fees and taxes.<fnref n="120" /> The issue of unclaimed Jewish assets was raised again in the late 1950s. ‘A memorandum from the Ministry of Treasury in 1958 recommended cancelling the demands for payment issued by EGELI over the previous years on “ethical, legal and financial” grounds, pending “the forthcoming statute of limitations set by the Reintegration Laws [December 1958], after which any Jewish asset still held by the state would be forfeited, as a fair refund for the administration expenses previously incurred”.<fnref n="121" /> It was by this logic that in January 1960 the Attorney General’s Department [Avvocatura generale] of the Italian Government, in remarks on the EGELI, could say, ‘We believe that the state has by now acquired the right of ownership of the seized assets and is free of any obligation to return the sale price or to pay any compensation for the use of the items. The state is therefore free to dispose of these assets as it sees fit.’<fnref n="122" /> In the 1960s, the Italian state therefore sold some Jewish assets (such as furniture, jewels, stocks and bonds).<fnref n="123" />

In the immediate postwar years, neither Jewish communities nor individual Jews received any automatic financial compensation from the Italian state for having been victims of fascism. If their restitution claims were dismissed, however, then Jews could claim compensation for ‘war damages’. Law 1543 of 26 October 1940, which had been approved by the Senate and Chamber of the Fascists and Corporations [Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni] and was still in force in post-fascist Italy, made it possible to request compensation ‘for the loss, destruction or deterioration of movable or immovable property [resulting from] any event of the present war’.<fnref n="124" /> In 1953 an additional law was enacted on this subject (Law 968 of 27 December 1953). Because both laws stated that only Italian citizens could apply for compensation, no foreign Jews could benefit from them. Moreover, Law 968 provided indemnification for damage to houses, to industrial, commercial or agricultural buildings, to work tools, to clothing and to furniture (art. 4) resulting from military operations – including bombing attacks, lootings and reprisals (art. 3) – but it excluded all assets regarded as luxury goods, such as jewels, ornamental furniture, horses, pleasure boats, cars used for personal convenience, stocks and bonds, castles, holiday homes and funerary monuments (art. 5).<fnref n="125" />

In Italian law, heirless estates usually go to the state. After protracted negotiations with the Italian state, the Union of Italian Jewish Communities was granted title to the estates of heirless Jews who died during the Holocaust by Decree 364 of 11 May 1947.<fnref n="126" /> This was an exceptional measure, all the more so because the state decided to grant this title to Jewish communities free of charge. However, this measure was only valid for two years after the

<footnote n="120">¹²⁰ See, in particular, Unione delle Comunità Israelitche Italiane, *V congresso della comunità (1956-5716). Relazione del Consiglio*, Rome, D.A.P.Co, 1956, p. 25 in AUCII, 1948-today, box 15D, file entitled ‘relazione del consiglio’.</footnote>

<footnote n="121">¹²¹ See Ilaria Pavan, ‘Indifference and Forgetting’, p. 176.</footnote>

<footnote n="122">¹²² Ibid.</footnote>

<footnote n="123">¹²³ Commissione Anselmi, pp. 287–300.</footnote>

<footnote n="124">¹²⁴ Ibid., pp. 32–33.</footnote>

<footnote n="125">¹²⁵ Law 968 of 27 December 1953. See also Commissione Anselmi, pp. 194–200.</footnote>

<footnote n="126">¹²⁶ Giovanna D’Amico, *Quando l’eccezione diventa norma*, pp. 289–308.</footnote>
enactment of the decree or two years after a person's death or the registration of the death certificate, and its impact was therefore limited.<fnref n="127" />

In the immediate postwar years, Jewish communities had also to face the problem of rebuilding their places of worship. In 1947, the Lateran Pacts – the Concordat signed in 1929 between Mussolini and the Church – were included unchanged in the Constitution of the Italian Republic.<fnref n="128" /> They proclaimed Catholicism the official religion of the state, and it was therefore the Italian Republic's duty to reconstruct churches, but not synagogues. To settle this issue, the Union of Italian Jewish Communities urged the Italian government to regard the synagogues as parish churches.<fnref n="129" /> Finally, Decree 736 of 17 April 1948 established that the Italian state had to participate in the reconstruction of non-Catholic places of worship. The Jewish communities did not, however, receive enough money from the state to rebuild the destroyed synagogues. They were able to begin reconstruction only thanks to contributions from their members.<fnref n="130" />

The restitution process of the looted artistic and cultural Jewish assets was a difficult one, for obvious reasons; there was no special legislation, and the Italian state entrusted the restitution of Jewish artistic and cultural assets, such as works of art, ceremonial objects and books, to the same public bodies that were in charge of the administration of looted buildings (EGELI) and surplus war materials (ARAR). According to Decree 683 of 29 October 1945, the task of the ARAR was to sell all of the assets in its stores, rather than search for their rightful owners. According to Decree 119 of 28 February 1947, owners had only 180 days to claim their property back once it was acquired by the ARAR.<fnref n="131" /> But ARAR had already begun to sell off the assets the year before the enactment of the decree – auctions of ‘surplus war materials’ were held as early as 1946.<fnref n="132" /> In April 1946, the Union of Italian Jewish Communities was informed that looted Jewish assets were stored in the Bolzano ARAR depot.<fnref n="133" /> It then embarked on lengthy negotiations to recover these assets. Finally, in 1948, the ARAR returned most of the Jewish ceremonial objects in its possession. Yet the ARAR did not return assets with no obvious religious significance to their rightful owners, instead organising auctions to sell such objects on behalf of the Italian state.<fnref n="134" /> Between 1946 and 1948 the Italian state sold over 700 kilograms of silver objects – including Jewish-owned silver looted by the fascists and the Nazi occupation forces – pocketing more than 8 million lire.

<footnote n="127">¹²⁷ ACS, PCM, 1948–1950, file 3.2.2 /12573-3.</footnote>

<footnote n="128">¹²⁸ On this topic see, in particular, Mario Casella, *Cattolici e costituente: orientamenti ed iniziative del cattolicesimo organizzato (1945-1947)* (Naples 1987); Jean-Dominique Durand, *L'Église catholique dans la crise de l'Italie (1943-1948)* (Rome 1991); Giovanni Miccoli, ‘La chiesa di Pio XII nella società italiana del dopoguerra’, in Francesco Barbagallo et al. (eds), *Storia dell’Italia repubblicana*, vol. I: *La costruzione della democrazia* (Turin 1994), pp. 537–613.</footnote>

<footnote n="129">¹²⁹ See AUCII, 1948–today, box 15B, file entitled ‘relazione congresso’.</footnote>

<footnote n="130">¹³⁰ Commissione Anselmi, p. 161.</footnote>

<footnote n="131">¹³¹ Decree 119 of the 28 February 1947.</footnote>

<footnote n="132">¹³² See Enrica Basevi, *I beni e la memoria*, pp. 27–42; 65–77.</footnote>

<footnote n="133">¹³³ Telegram sent on 9 April 1946 by the Merano Jewish community to the Union of Italian Jewish Communities (quoted in Enrica Basevi, *I beni e la memoria*, pp. 79–82). We do not know how the Merano Jewish community obtained this information.</footnote>

<footnote n="134">¹³⁴ Enrica Basevi, *I beni e la memoria*.</footnote>
In 1946, the Ministry of Education created the Ufficio recupero (office for the recovery of works of art and books, also known as the Siviero office)<fnref n="135" /> in order to trace the Italian artistic and cultural property looted under German occupation – a category which included Jewish property. There was no law, however, that clarified the relationships between the different public agencies in charge of the restitution and management of the Jewish assets – the EGELI, the ARAR, the Ufficio recupero, and the Soprintendenze of the Ministry of Education. The restitution of Jewish assets crucially depended on negotiations between these public agencies, with their conflicting objectives and policies. In the immediate postwar years, the Ufficio recupero tried to trace the Jewish assets looted under German occupation and supported the claims of the Jewish communities against the ARAR.<fnref n="136" /> But the Union was less willing to work with the Ufficio recupero in the late 1960s, possibly because the Ufficio recupero had a new set of interests; unclaimed Jewish assets had by then become ‘national heritage’ and could be allocated to the State.<fnref n="137" />

Another flaw in the restitution legislation was that it did not devote sufficient attention to the anti-Semitic persecution carried out under the fascist regime from 1938 to 1943. Before 1943, when foreign Jews tried to emigrate, the Italian authorities often accused them of smuggling in order to seize their cultural and artistic property.<fnref n="138" /> After 1945, the Italian Republic did not enact any law addressing this specific subject, and such accusations of smuggling were still treated as legitimate. A case in point is the porcelain collection of Julius Kaumheimer, a German Jew who had fled to Italy after 1935 and left Italy for San Francisco in 1939. This collection, confiscated in 1939 as contraband, has been in the hands of the Museum of Trento [Museo Nazionale di Trento] ever since. In 2000, the Trento authorities were still claiming that the Museum was the rightful owner of the collection.<fnref n="139" />

In the immediate postwar years, it was difficult to implement the restitution laws, because Italian public administration was in disarray, and the authorities were not always even capable of properly managing the depots where looted Jewish assets were stored. For instance, there were often robberies in ARAR depots, and agency managers were constantly complaining about the laxity of their employees.<fnref n="140" /> Moreover, given the institutional complexity of restitution and the inadequacy of the legislation enacted by the Italian state, the efficiency of the process depended heavily on local authorities' goodwill. In the days following the liberation, a number of prefects that had been appointed by the resistance movement in Northern Italy (the so-called 'Liberation prefects') decided, in accordance with the Allied military government order of 13 July 1944 and of CLNAI's Decree of 14 September 1944, to return immediately all the Jewish assets looted by the fascists and the Nazi occupier to their rightful owners, thus anticipating the Italian government's Decree 393 of 5 May 1946. For example, as early as 13 May 1945, the Bologna prefect Gianguido Bolognese issued a circular that ordered the purchasers and the administrators of looted

<footnote n="135">¹³⁵ Ibid., pp. 179–184.</footnote>

<footnote n="136">¹³⁶ Ibid., pp. 79–88.</footnote>

<footnote n="137">¹³⁷ Commissione Anselmi, pp. 156–157.</footnote>

<footnote n="138">¹³⁸ After September 1943, Jews could no longer escape Italian territories under the control of the German forces or the Salò Republic. Moreover, the German occupying forces and the Salò Republic had authorised the seizure of all Jewish property.</footnote>

<footnote n="139">¹³⁹ Commissione Anselmi, pp. 146–147.</footnote>

<footnote n="140">¹⁴⁰ Ibid., pp. 93–94.</footnote>
Jewish property to return it immediately to its rightful owners and to give an account of their management decisions.<fnref n="141" /> In contrast, civil servants could be reluctant to participate in the restitution process. The journalist Enrica Basevi recently recounted the story of her father’s silver collection, which was looted by the SS in Genoa and auctioned off in January 1948 by the ARAR, even though her father had submitted a restitution claim.<fnref n="142" /> The ARAR was also very strict about checking the evidence of ownership presented by the Jews who were the rightful owners of the looted assets. When such evidence was considered inadequate, the ARAR required the Jewish owners to pay a deposit for the return of their property.<fnref n="143" /> For example, in 1951, to secure the return of a Sefer Torah stolen during the Nazi occupation, the Jewish community of Merano had to pay 50,000 lire to the ARAR.<fnref n="144" />

### III. CONCLUSIONS

Inadequate legislation and the widespread indifference of the Italian population during the postwar years make research on looted Jewish cultural artefacts in Italy very difficult today. Records have been lost or destroyed. On the topic of the looted Jewish cultural and artistic assets, the Anselmi Commission’s final report leaves many questions unanswered. Because of the fragmentary nature of the surviving records, it provides neither a list of the looted assets nor precise data on the restitution process.

More recently, the Commissione per il recupero del patrimonio bibliografico della Comunità ebraica di Roma, razziato nel 1943 (Commission for the recovery of the bibliographic heritage of the Jewish community of Rome, looted in 1943), which was set up by the Italian government in 2002 to search for the looted Roman Jewish community library, was unable to achieve any concrete results.<fnref n="145" /> This commission proceeded on the assumption that parts of the Roman Jewish community’s library had been transferred to the Soviet Union at the end of the war. Research was carried out at the Rudomino All-Russia State Library in Moscow. But the Commission obtained only partial access to the documents and was not able to determine what had become of the books.

Nevertheless, it should be stressed that, in recent years, the attitude of the Italian courts towards the restitution of looted assets has changed, thanks to pressure from Italian Jewish communities and to Italy’s endorsement of the principles for dealing with Nazi-confiscated art established at the Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets of 29–30 June 1998. In the late 1980s, the Milan community brought a legal action against Siviero’s Ufficio recupero for the recovery of certain looted and recovered Jewish assets – including

<footnote n="141">¹⁴¹ Andrea Villa, *Dai lager alla terra promessa. La difficile reintegrazione nella nuova Italia e l'immigrazione verso il Medio Oriente (1945-1948)* (Milan 2005), p. 23.</footnote>

<footnote n="142">¹⁴² By doing so, ARAR overstepped the limits of its competence (it should not have disregarded Basevi’s claim). In 1948, Basevi found several pieces from his collection in antique shops in Milan, Turin and Venice, and had to buy them back (see Enrica Basevi, *I beni e la memoria*, pp. 125-127).</footnote>

<footnote n="143">¹⁴³ This ‘deposit’ (cauzione) was refunded only if ownership could later be proved to the ARAR’s satisfaction, and even then the ARAR could deduct administrative fees. It is not known whether the Merano Community’s deposit (see next sentence) was ever refunded.</footnote>

<footnote n="144">¹⁴⁴ Commissione per la ricostruzione delle vicende che hanno caratterizzato in Italia le attività di acquisizione dei beni dei cittadini ebrei, p. 160.</footnote>

<footnote n="145">¹⁴⁵ Commissione per il recupero del patrimonio bibliografico della Comunità ebraica di Roma, razziato nel 1943, *Rapporto finale*, p. 6.</footnote>
ceremonial objects. The court of Lazio stated that these assets were to be returned to the
Jewish communities. Since then, Italian courts have tended to return seized assets to their
former owners or to the community.<fnref n="146" /> Moreover, Italian law has changed: Law 233 of 18
July 1997 allocates to Jewish communities the Jewish assets confiscated during the period of
anti-Semitic persecution that were still in the hands of the Italian state. This may explain why
the Jewish community is now much more willing to cooperate with the Italian authorities than
it was in the 1960s.<fnref n="147" />

<footnote n="146">146 Commissione Anselmi, pp. 160–161.</footnote>

<footnote n="147">¹⁴⁷ See above, p. 32 [p. 00].</footnote>