MAASTRICHT, the Netherlands — Luxury, legacy, and a touch of subversion — the European Fine Art Fair (TEFAF) returned to the MECC convention center in the Netherlands this week with an extraordinary selection of museum-quality artworks. Despite its somewhat remote location, the fair has maintained its reputation as one of the world’s premier art events since its inception in 1988, drawing collectors, curators, and connoisseurs from across the globe.
But beneath the veil of champagne and caviar, another narrative unfolded — one of increasing accountability, market adaptation, and the quiet reshaping of provenance to fit modern scrutiny. Some dealers have embraced the heightened scrutiny and public demand for transparency concerning provenance and good title, while others subvert these needs through various means. Throughout the fair, ambiguous provenance descriptions remained prevalent, including phrases such as “Property of a Hong Kong Gentleman,” “Old German colonial collection” and “private collection.” One dealer explained: “I don’t put all of it [provenance] in the catalogue because it’s not that interesting.”
TEFAF has a long-standing partnership with the Art Loss Register (ALR) — in place since 2000 — to ensure that galleries’ submitted lists are cross-referenced against extensive databases of stolen, missing, and disputed objects. But despite efforts to improve vetting procedures, a number of provenance discrepancies were still evident at this year’s fair.
Galerie Chenel in Paris offered a marble Roman “Cuirass of an Emperor” whose provenance listed two “private collections” and two Sotheby’s London sales, one in 1961 and another in 1964. Aside from the notable absence of documented provenance prior to 1961 — more than five decades after Italy enacted its 1909 cultural patrimony laws — another aspect of this provenance version merits closer examination. When Galerie Chenel initially offered this same torso at Frieze Masters in London last October, the provenance provided contained an additional name: the notorious dealer Robert Hecht, who consigned the work to Sotheby’s 1964 sale. This omission of Hecht’s name at TEFAF could be attributed to the fair’s longstanding emphasis on rigorous vetting procedures or a broader market reluctance to engage with material linked to the controversial dealer. Notably, in recent years, Galerie Chenel has had other objects seized at TEFAF. Hyperallergic has contacted the gallery for comment.
This practice of modifying or omitting problematic names or sites from provenances is not unheard of within the art market, as seen with the Bubon bronzes. These bronzes were looted and circulated through Hecht’s network during the 1960s — the same decade when this torso was first recorded — before entering various museums and private collections worldwide. Currently, many Bubon bronzes are returning to Turkey through voluntary repatriation or legal intervention.
Charlotte Chambers-Farah, the Art Loss Register’s art fair manager, acknowledged these concerns in an email to Hyperallergic.
“It is inevitable that with exhibitors from across the entire art market TEFAF sees some material arrive that might be called into question,” Chambers-Farah said. “Indeed, with 15,000 items at the fair, it is probably statistically unavoidable regardless of what is done.”
Security was another underlying theme, with noticeably heightened bag and coat checks — a likely response to the dramatic jewelry heist that rattled the fair in 2022. The increased precautions lent an uncanny air to the fair’s signature sense of opulence, complete with the famed floral displays meant to reaffirm its place as a pinnacle of the international art world.
The elephant in the room, however, was the upcoming implementation of EU Regulation 2019/880, set to take effect in June 2025. Expected to significantly reshape the European art market, the new rules will apply to anyone purchasing or owning “non-European art” outside the European Union, requiring import licenses and stricter due diligence measures. Cultural goods will be classified into two categories: high-risk items, primarily antiquities from archaeological excavations, and low-risk items, which include objects over 200 years old with a minimum value of €18,000 (~$19,528).
As Chambers-Farah pointed out, this year’s increased scrutiny had a tangible effect. “It will be interesting to see in the long term what impact the changes that were implemented this year in the vetting will have, but there is no doubt that the additional attention being paid to provenance had an impact on the pieces that were offered in certain sections,” she told Hyperallergic.
The fair’s programming and exhibitor choices subtly reflect collecting as a form of cultural subversion. The presence of politically resonant works, coupled with an increased emphasis on diversity, suggests a market that is not only responding to demand but also engaging with broader cultural conversations. Amid headlining works by (largely male) artistic giants such as Vincent van Gogh, Titian, Pablo Picasso, Gustav Klimt, Ai Weiwei, and Rembrandt van Rijn, standout presentations spotlighted emerging and historically underrepresented artists. For example, a juxtaposition installation of several ancient African sculptures in front of a striking painting by Cameroon-born artist Franck Kemkeng Noah titled “The Rituals of Museums” (2022) highlighted — perhaps unintentionally — the treatment of African art in Western contexts.
TEFAF has placed a strong emphasis on attracting new buyers, spotlighting new artists, and exploring new markets. Among the 273 galleries present, striking examples of African modernism and works by pioneering Palestinian-born artist Juliana Seraphim stood out as particular highlights. Meanwhile, this year’s TEFAF Summit addressed a critical issue facing the arts sector: the decline in public financial support. Panels explored new models for private arts funding, underscoring the urgency of sustainable patronage in an increasingly precarious economic and political climate.
The removal of problematic provenance, the persistence of vague ownership, and the ongoing reluctance by some dealers to disclose full histories all point to an industry still grappling with its past. Change is happening — albeit at a pace dictated more by broader market forces rather than moral reckoning.
