Defined loosely as the dealing of art valued at over $1 million, today’s masterpiece art market has roots stretching farther back than almost any existing modern day industry. In no other modern arena do you see publicly held corporations, dating back hundreds of years to the 18th century, still thriving and monopolizing the market. The names Christie's and Sotheby's are as synonymous with masterpiece art as those of Van Gogh, Monet, or Dali. These powerhouses control over 90% of the nearly $5 billion dollar a year auction industry, a vast majority of this coming from the auctioning of fine art.

For many years, auctions have seen the elite of society gather together to celebrate the passion that is art and pour out extraordinary sums of money to do so. Seen publicly as the gatekeepers to the masterpiece art market, international media agencies flock to high-ticket auctions where impressionist works are regularly sold at prices well into the tens of millions. With dollar figures like these, easily large enough to buy entire buildings or even some mid-sized corporations, who controls this market?

Obviously the auction houses bear the awesome responsibility of protecting the art buyer’s sizeable investment in a historical piece of humanity's philosophical and spiritual development. Unlike many purchases, however, masterpiece art does not give the owner rights to the images they are buying. In the eyes of the law they are merely custodial caretakers of these great works, playing an important role in our society's dedication to ensuring the enlightenment of future generations. But does these responsibilities fall solely upon the auction houses and their patrons?

The answer may surprise you; for, under closer examination, an industry that seems to have stood the test of time, and thereby earning what should be a foundation as sturdy as the rock of Gibraltar, is actually an industry in upheaval. Time-tested methods for determining authenticity are coming under attack by rapidly advancing technology. Industry standards are being exposed as fallible and taintable by greed, bribery, and manipulation. Countless cases are coming to light in which people are being excluded from participating due to bias and corruption at the highest levels.

In this three part series, we will examine some of these institutions that run the masterpiece art market, where human failings have permanently damaged our record of artistic expression. As with most debased systems, the root of corruption can often be found clear at the top of the food chain.

To truly understand masterpiece art and the forces that control its market, one must first identify two basic concepts that are as important as the works themselves, provenance and the catalogue raisonné. A provenance is the historical record of ownership for a work of art from its creator to its present owner. Usually this consists of a list of names and dates, noting individual owners and the duration of the piece’s residence in their collection. The list is generally supplemented by extensive, often hand-written, documentation including deeds of sale, condition reports, expert authentications, and a myriad of other recorded events comprising the “life” of that work of art. Ideally, a work will have an uninterrupted sequence of owners from creation to current. Unfortunately, this is rarely the case. Often there are time gaps in a provenance where no record was kept, such as when a piece has become lost due to an untimely death or illegal act such as robbery. In these cases, a buyer is at the mercy of the expert authentication system.

A catalogue raisonné is an official publication listing the complete works of a given artist, published by the institute or organization deemed overseer of that artist. For modern artists, those of the 20th century, quite often the family and descendants of the artist establish the official organization that in charge of the catalogue raisonné. Such is the case for Jackson Pollack and Pablo Picasso. More frequently, especially for artists prior to the 20th century, an organization, either private or governmental, is formed (often with the cooperation of descendants of the artist). These organizations are usually comprised of formally trained art scholars and academic experts in the area of the particular artist. Often an expert will prove himself or herself to be the foremost authority for a particular artist, thereby drawing the weight of public opinion within the art world in their direction. The absolute power and influence that a catalogue raisonné carries cannot be understated. For decades, no major work by any well-known artist has been sold publicly without the inclusion of that work in the appropriate catalogue. Understanding, therefore, that catalogues hold infallible regulation over an artwork’s authenticity, and hence its financial value, we begin to see the roots of the art world’s true dynasty.

One quick flip through a Christie's or Sotheby's Spring Impressionist & Post-Impressionist auction guide shows that the Wildenstein Institute authenticated nearly half of all the works being auction. This family-run organization is the publisher and author or co-author for approximately 30 major catalogues (including those of Renoir, Monet, Manet, Velázquez, Pissaro, Gauguin, Marquet, Vlaminck, Vuillard, Chardin, Ingres and Fragonard). Their enormous influence within the art world is further augmented by four premier international galleries (in New York, Paris, Tokyo, and Buenos Aires), the world's largest privately owned art collection (rumored to be valued at over $5 billion) and a diversified conglomeration of department store chains and horseracing stables. They even own leading international art publications including France's oldest and most prestigious scholarly art journal, La Gazette de Beaux Arts.

It is easy to see why this family has reached the preeminent position they enjoy today. The research facilities and archival information found at the Wildenstein Institute in Paris are unmatched. The on-hand inventory they possess and the funds they have available for the procurement of new works is also second to none. Their complete power over the authenticity of billions of dollars in impressionist art, combined with their status as the largest dealers of this art on earth, is perhaps the most classic example of the unethical situation mildly referred to as a conflict of interests – not to mention a near monopoly in the market.

Unfortunately, this is just the beginning. In the October 1991 issue of Spy magazine, Jonathan Napack reported that, through the examination of recently declassified OSS reports, the Wildenstein family had actively participated in business dealings with the Nazis. Karl Haberstock, Adolf Hitler's personal agent charged with purchasing paintings to fill his museum at Linz (Hitler's pet project), met with the patriarchal Georges Wildenstein after hundreds of the best pieces from the Wildenstein collection had been confiscated by a German U-boat. Seeking to preserve his collection and return to his new home in New York, Georges is said to have made a deal whereby his Paris gallery was "Aryanized" and put under the control of Roger Dequoy, a long-time partner of the Wildensteins. Further instructions for Dequoy were to give Haberstock, and thereby the Führer, first pick of anything that came through his hands and to notify them of newly discovered and important collections that they might be interested in “acquiring”.

What is unclear, but repeatedly rumored, is whether Dequoy lead the Nazis to many of the major Jewish collections that were confiscated during the war. There are records of the sale of two major Rembrandts to Haberstock and of the entire collection of the Schloss family directly to Hitler (his second largest acquisition during the war). Both of these situations were presumably “forced sales”, wherein the sellers more likely received a one-way ticket to a concentration camp than any actual money.

It is also documented that the Wildenstein gallery acted as a major transfer point for many Nazi-confiscated works. Perhaps the most incriminating evidence to this effect is the variety of paintings that the Wildensteins owned at the end of the war. Hitler considered all impressionist and post-impressionist art entartete künst, or degenerate art. During the war, Dequoy would often sell vast collections of renaissance and old master art to Haberstock and the Nazis, keeping the more modern pieces for the gallery. Again, it is doesn't take much hypothesizing to connect these facts to the meteoric rise in value of impressionist art and the Wildensteins’ control over many of the catalogues of this genre.

If this collaboration goes unacknowledged by humanity, has it not caused and will it not continue to cause grievous damage to both our artistic scholarship and our free market economy?

That is a question that the art community is beginning to ask itself. Sadly, little has changed in recent years. The Wildensteins still enjoy a life of absolute luxury, owning massive residences in Paris, New York and the Virgin Islands, as well as a 66,000 acre compound in Kenya. Their influence is still felt at every major Impressionist auction and their galleries are still among the most successful in the world. After 4 generations and 125 years in business, the Wildensteins have not publicly acknowledged any wrongdoing, standing by their story that they were French patriots on the side of freedom during the occupation. Their monopoly within the art world remains intact.