GOEPEL Erhard (EN)

Between May 1942 and September 1944 Erhard Göpel worked for the Sonderauftrag Linz in the Netherlands, Belgium and France. In these three countries he punched large, partly irreparable holes in national and private art collections.

Cultural-historical education

Friedrich Wilhelm Erhard (Erhard) was born on June 3, 1906 in Leipzig.¹ He is the son of Friedrich Hermann Göpel and of Berta Elise Erna Otte. After finishing high school in Leipzig, he studied art history in Leipzig, Vienna, Berlin and Munich. During his student days he served intermittently, as an assistant to the art historian, art dealer, art collector and founder of the Fondation Custodia in Paris, Frits Lugt.²

On December 7 1933, Göpel registered with the Reichsverband Deutscherschriftsteller. From 1935 on he was a member of the Nationalsozialistische Volkswohlfahrt (NSV).³ He declared to be of Aryan descent.⁴ The NSV is part of the NSDAP, which does not mean that Göpel was a member of the party. In any case, the name Göpel (or the spelling variation Goepel) does not appear in the overview of NSDAP members.⁵

On October 25, 1939, he was called up for the Wehrmacht.⁶ According to a self-declaration from 1953, he became Dolmetscher (interpreter) in the rank of Hauptmann (captain) for Dutch, French and English on the staff of the Sixth Army under General Walter von Reichenau.⁷ Göpel's tasks included interrogating prisoners of war, showing German officers around places of interest in the various cities of Normandy and writing two studies on Normandy and Brittany, intended for Belehrung der Truppe, cultural-historical education for the German soldiers.

Sonderauftrag Linz

Between May 1, 1942 and September 1944, Göpel worked in the Netherlands, Belgium and France for the Sonderauftrag Linz as Vertreter des Sonderauftrags beim Reichskommissar in den besetzten niederländischen Gebieten.¹ He himself refered to his work as an 'expert', but the term 'chief purchaser' that the OSS will later use for him appears to be more appropriate.

Göpel scoured the art market for the Sonderauftrag Linz, often with the help of intermediaries and other informants. In France, particularly in 1943, he was involved in the purchase of at least three hundred and sixty works of art. He did business with, among others, Otto Abetz, Maria Almas-Dietrich, Eugen Bruschwiller, Galerie E. Garin, Hildebrand Gurlitt, Karl Haberstock, Rudolf Melander Holzapfel-Ward, Jozef Oscar Victor Leegenhoek, Jean-François Lefranc, Bruno Lohse, Victor Mandl, August Liebmann Mayer, Eduard Plietzsch, Cornelius Postma, Alfred Rosenberg, Alfred Strölin, Walter Hermann Weber, Adolf Wüster, Jan Zarnowski and the auction house Hôtel Drouot.

Purchases

Via the Sonderkonto, the special account in the name of Hermann Voss, Göpel bought two large paintings by Louis-Nicolas van Blarenberghe from the 18th century for Francs 2 million from Almas-Dietrich via Mandl.¹ For Francs 1.5 million he purchased from Bruschwiller Reiterbildnis Marquis de Galens from the school of Rubens.² At Galerie E. Garin, Göpel acquired from Bauern im Freien by Andreas Both for Francs 350,000 and a Reiterstück by J.A. Small for Francs 180,000. In November 1944, on Göpel's order, the painter Dietz Edzard purchased from this art dealer a work from the French 17th century: Young man playing the flute in shepherd's clothing.³ In addition to paintings, Göpel also focused on graphic artworks and drawings. According to an invoice dated 1 January 1943 in Nice, Holzapfel supplied him with fourteen drawings for a total of Francs 385,000, including Étude de chats et de tigre by Eugène Delacroix, L'inspiration, a graphic work by Jean-Honoré Nicolas Fragonard, Portrait de femme: Madeleine Chapelle and robe de mariée by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, a work attributed to Jean-Antoine Watteau, Étude de nu, two works by Pierre-Paul Prud'hon, Étude pour 'La Justice' and Étude pour 'Andromaque', Frau und Kinder by Jan Siberechts and finally Façade d'une chaumière by Thomas Wijck.⁴ In the autumn of 1943, Göpel bought Hubert Robert’s Interior of a Ruin from Leegenhoek, as well as the painting Die büßende Magdalena by Lucas van Uden, offered via S. Th. Haasmann.⁵ And with Zarnowskias (a Polish man) as intermediary, Göpel at Leegenhoek also acquired a painting by Berckheyde, St. Apostlen Köln.⁶ For Göpel, Mandl was one of the most important suppliers of works for the Führermuseum. From him he obtained works by, among others, Pompeo Girolamo Batoni (Cardinal Potier de Gesvres), Alexander Adriaenssen, Jan Muller (attributed to), Daniel Seghers (Blumenstrauß in einer Glasvase), Konzertdarstellung, an image of a concert by an unknown Italian artist, and a painting by Giovanni Battista Tiepolo.⁷ In addition to Gurlitt, Göpel also made various purchases from Zarnowski himself. In May 1943, he bought Architekturzeichnung by Giovanni Maria Gali da Bibiena for Francs 20,000. A few months later, on 28 August, he acquired a drawing by Jan van de Velde Flusslandschaft mit Bäumen for Francs 20,000. He purchased an architectural drawing by Jacopo Zucchi for Francs 40,000 and Die Enthauptung der Heiligen Reparata by Bernardo Daddi.⁸ A Still Life by Giovanni Battista Ruopolo which came from a restorer named Stepanow and costed Francs 150,000.⁹ And finally, Zarnowski sold him a work by an anonymous artist, Stilllife with poultry.¹⁰ A final example: in July 1943, Göpel took three works (from a French industrialist who had acquired them from the estate of the Duc de Polignac) from Paris to The Hague. They were intended for the Führermuseum but never arrived in Dresden: Anthony Van Dyck Portrait of the Engraver Paul Pontius, Meindert Hobbema Landscape: A Wood and Peter Paul Rubens Descent from the Cross.

Schloss collection

The history and confiscation of this collection under the direction of Bruno Lohse has been extensively written on elsewhere.¹ Göpel entered the scene when this collection was moved to Paris. On April 26, 1943, he sent Martin Bormann a telegram. The tone is business-like, but between the lines it is clear how excited Göpel really was. In the telegram – which will haunt him for decades to come – he wrote, among other things, how Bruno Lohse had spent years tracking down the collection. Furthermore, even with the conditions set by the Vichy government in mind, Göpel considered its purchase an excellent opportunity to further expand the collection for the Führermuseum. Bormann lent him a willing ear. Dr. Gerlach, advisor to the Deutsche Botschaft in Paris, was instructed to negotiate the financial details. Göpel was assigned the task of choosing the works of art that were suitable for the Museum of Linz.

Based on an appraisal by the Dutchman Cornelius Postma, the experts of the Louvre, René Huyghe and Germain Bazin, chose first 49 works of art that were intended to the museum in Paris. Göpel, assisted by Bruno Lohse, selected 262 paintings from the still considerable remainder.² These were transferred to the Jeu de Paume. Rose Valland was present at the time of arrival there. In a memorandum (dated 2 November 1943) to her director, Jaujard, she wrote:

“The Schloss collection brought from the Dreyfus Bank, 262 paintings arrive at the Jeu de Paume. Works handed over in the presence of Darquier de Pellepoix, Lohse, Lefranc (in charge of the collection), and Dr. Erhard Göpel who accepts delivery of the paintings on behalf of the Führer.”³

Göpel had his doubts about the quality and authenticity of the remaining 22 works. They were left for later inspection by Hermann Voss.⁴ The purchase of the 262 paintings involved an amount of Francs 50 million.

Now only the transport needed to be arranged. Lohse travelled ahead to Munich to prepare for arrival there. Göpel remained in Paris. Two weeks later, on November 24, he drew up two lists of 13 and 12 boxes respectively, in which the works will be transported, divided into two shipments. The transport to Munich, supervised by Göpel, ran smoothly.

There are different readings about the fate of the paintings that were not selected neither by the Louvre nor by Göpel. According to Bruno Lohse, Jean-François Lefranc was commissioned to market them. Through the intervention of Almas-Dietrich, the ERR acquired two small paintings from the remainder, a work from the Rembrandt school (Jew in a Fur Cap or Bearded man in a fur hat) and a work painted on wood from the Frans Hals school Portrait of an old woman, both believed to be forgeries. However, they did end up in Hitler's collection. Two other paintings, still according to Lohse, found their way to Dresden via Göpel: a woman's portrait from the Netherlands 17th century and a Religious Fragment, attributed to Rogier van der Weyden.⁵ Apart from the ERR and Göpel, part of the remaining works came into the hands of Cornelius Postma.⁶

After the war, all works from the Schloss collection seem to have been lost. However, 167 have been recovered to date.⁷

Shortly before the end of the war, Göpel went into hiding in Laubach. He was not convicted. In 1945, American art historian Samson Lane Faison Jr. was posted to the Art Looting Investigation Unit (ALIU) of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). While working for the Central Collecting Point in Munich, he accidentally discovered that Erhard Göpel lived in the same city. On May 9, 1950, Faison questioned him about the Schloss collection.⁸ Göpel weakened his involvement in the whole affair on several points. For example, he hid behind the fact that, after all, the French government and the Louvre also contributed to its division. So why would he have wanted to be 'plus Pape que le Pape'?

Human trafficking

During the war, human life was only of any value if the occupier recognized it and was prepared to give concrete substance to it, either in the form of protection or in the form of issuing a visa. In many cases the occupier did not fulfill the agreements or promises. Once the coveted artifact or sought-after information has been obtained, there was nothing left for the former owner or the tipster to count on. Göpel saved the lives of a number of Jews, but only when they were of use to the Sonderauftrag Linz. When this usefulness was lacking or whenever he felt it too great a personal burden when he was called upon to do so, he left people to their fate. A striking example of this is the way Göpel dealt with August Liebmann Mayer when this Jewish art historian came to be arrested by the Gestapo.¹ Göpel managed to postpone his deportation to Auschwitz for a week so that he could get as much information as possible from Mayer about the owners of works of art and about their locations. Göpel showed an ice-cold, almost cynical mentality.

Demise

Erhard Göpel died on October 29, 1966 in Munich from the effects of diabetes. His wife Barbara Sperling, whom he first met during the war in the German embassy in Paris, died in Munich on September 26, 2017.