Why I shall not promote Christie’s Horten jewelry sale

As I write those words, the 254 lots of jewelry of Mrs. Heidi Horten (1941-2022), are being sold live at Christie’s, in Geneva. Horten was the widow of businessman Helmut Horten, who died in 1987. She inherited her wealth upon the death of her husband, the founder of the German department store business Horten AG, and in May 2020, Forbes estimated Mrs. Horten’s net worth at US$3.0 billions. As an historical jewelry expert, I should be all over the sales – Heidi Horten had in her collection magnificient pieces including a very unique Renée Boivin Lion shoulder brooch that dazzles me.

There is great historical and craftmanship wealth in this sale and it is with a heavy heart that I will not share the great beauty of this pieces. See, the Horten’s fortune, which was used to acquire the jewelry collection which is being sold, was amassed, at least in part, through the purchase of Jewish businesses under duress during the Nazi era.

Ergo, my ethical dilemma!

Let me first state that I do not blame Christie’s for doing its job. Asking that Christie’s give a large percentage towards charities is silly, the auction house does not have the power to do so. It is contracted to sell the Horten’s Jewels Collection within very specific directives from the estate of the late owner. It surely has no arguments in contesting a will and if not them, another auction house would have happily taken over the job.

Secondly, I am fully aware that the jewelry industry is far from being an ethically and morally clean business, seen as a great part of the industry is rooted in colonialism, thievery and abuse. As a jewelry historian and gemologist, I get all the time the same questions about the traceability of the stones, child workers, and blood diamond fueling conflicts and poverty, to which I humbly answer: most stones in period jewelry were mined in horrible conditions, often stolen by powerful state-powers, however nowadays there are stricter and highly regulated standard for mining and purchasing diamonds – while countries and individuals have thrived to return stolen and ill-gotten historical pieces to their places of origins. There is still work to be done, no questions, but the business is a long way from what it was just a hundred years ago.

My ethical dilemma with the current sale of Mrs. Heidi Horten’s jewelry collection (or any of her art) is that Mr Horten, a German of Jewish confession, willingly took the side of the Nazi and acquired by forced and terribly undervalued many Jewish businesses from people who then were sent to death camps. He never tried to hide his active membership to the Nazy party and how he massively benefited financially from it. This is how Mr. Horten proudly became a billionaire. I won’t address the question of restitution as I know many have tried and most failed – but I will raise the question of benefiting the sale of goods acquired with Mr. Horten’s money because it did not just happen seventy-odd years ago, Mr. Horten lived and died a billionaire until the late eighties and his wife until last year.

My take is that the collection should be put into a museum and an apology should be given to the victims of WWII in Germany and their descendants. No one took it upon themselves to bring to justice Mr. Horten while he was alive, nor has anyone considered it right to ask his wife and heiress to rectify a wrong – but now that the collection is up for grabs, we should consider the moral implication of making money, business as usual, for crimes that can still be brought to justice – crimes, even if over seventy years past, that should have been brought to justice while its perpetrator was still alive.

There is no single answer to whether there is such a thing as "bad conscience" in business or the jewelry industry; everyone will have varying perspectives on the matter. Some may believe that the passage of time and the use of proceeds for charitable purposes can, to some extent, mitigate the ethical concerns surrounding the sale. Others might argue that any association with a morally dubious past should be enough to prevent the sale from taking place, regardless of the potential philanthropic benefits.

Ultimately, the ethical implications of the Horten sale may depend on one's personal values. It is nevertheless crucial for the jewelry industry to engage in ongoing discussions about ethical practices and to strive for transparency, accountability, and social responsibility in its operations. I like to find consolation in the fabulous line of Elizabeth Taylor when asked about her feelings regarding wearing the Krupp diamond, a magnificent 33.19 carats diamond that was named after his infamous owner Alfried Krupp, who was also a monstrous character in German history during WWI and WWII. She would simply say: “now it belongs to a nice Jewish girl." (Taylor converted to Judaism in 1959 after Michael Todd was killed in a plane crash and prior to her marriage to Eddie Fisher. Both men were Jewish.).

It may sound hypocritical when working in an industry like the jewelry one, but alas, I will seat that one out and will not promote or feature the pieces, however extraordinary, of Mrs. Heidi Horten’s jewelry collection on my media.