Chronicles From World War One: Stories from the War – Non-Fiction (?) and Fiction

“What is your name?”

“David Freedman, your Excellency.”

“You’re a Jew?”

The spokesman nodded.

A pause.

“A Jew may fight well, your Excellency,” came the suggestion softly.

The Colonel looked up.  “How many were sent out?”

“Two thousand, your Excellency.”

“And there are only 300 now?”

The Jew nodded.

In the world of literature, fiction can sometimes reveal more about life than simple fact.

Though sometimes based on and emanating from reality, fiction can shed light on how that reality is interpreted and understood – by men as individuals and by the masses; by cultures and civilizations – within the intellectual, emotional, and spiritual context of an age.  Perhaps this is especially so for fiction emerging within and from a time of war.

For this post, here are two very different items – one fiction; one possibly fact – that address the experience of Jews during the Great War in very different ways.  The first is a news item pertaining to Jewish civilians in “Seletin” (probably “Selyatin“, Ukraine), in the context of the general experience of Jewish civilians in the Eastern War Zone.  The second, far lengthier item, is fiction: A story about the interaction of Jewish soldiers in the Russian Army with Jewish civilians in the Eastern War Zone, their Gentile comrades, and, officers. 

The full text of both items is presented below…

______________________________

The news item appeared in The Jewish World (brother publication of The Jewish Chronicle) in October of 1916.  Taken from the Arbeiter Zeitung of Austria, the item recounts the experience of a Jewish woman and her children during the occupation of her district by Cossack forces.  The outcome of the short account, concluding upon a note of skepticism and ambivalence, is vastly different from that of most contemporary stories about the treatment during WW I of Jews by Cossack troops (in both the secular and Jewish press) examples of which include “The Tragedy of Israel in Poland” (February 14, 1915), “Loyalty of Jews in War Lands Unshaken” (1915), and “How Russian Jews Suffered in War” (November 3, 1916).  In that regard, an underlying theme of this brief item – vaguely akin to Jacob A. Abramowitz’s “My Experience as a Jewish Cossack”, which appeared in The Jewish Exponent (of Philadelphia) on May 6, 1922 – is that of the incongruity between dire expectation and puzzling (and strangely benign?) reality.

Like the great majority of news items in both the Chronicle and World, the names of the item’s author, like that of the correspondent who provided it to the latter publication, is unknown.

The item…

The Cossack in a New Light
The Jewish World

October 11, 1916

An Austrian paper – the Arbeiter Zeitung – is responsible for a story concerning some Cossacks which represents them as far different than the popular notion conceives these gentlemen.  We are told that: –

When the Russians were occupying the Seletin district, a Jewess, her children gathered around her, was preparing her scanty evening meal, for provisions were at their scarcest.

There was a knock at the door, and with a look of horror the woman signed to her grown-up daughter to open it.  Three Cossacks stepped in, and shaking the snow from their cloaks asked for something to eat.  The woman offered all she had and, falling on her knees, begged mercy for her children.  The Cossacks looked at her wonderingly, remarking that they were not accustomed to eating human beings, and then, glancing round, noticed the signs of extreme poverty everywhere.

A short whispered conversation among them followed, and then two of the Cossacks went off, leaving the third to chop up some wood.  Half an hour later the Cossacks returned, bringing with them an ample store of eatables and drinkables.  They had visited the residence of a wealthy Jew, and the store of provisions which he had laid up for the Sabbath feast was now shared by the Cossacks with the Jewess and her little ones – the first good meal they had enjoyed for many months. 

We hope this is a true story, but frankly we should like to have the version of the matter as it appeared to the “wealthy Jew” who was deprived of his “Sabbath Feast”. 

________________________________________

________________________________________

The second item, reprinted from the Jewish Comment (about which I’ve no information – !) is by Samuel Roth (likewise, about whom I’ve no information – !!).  It’s similar in length and representative of the literary style of other works of fiction, as well as non-fiction essays, published in The Jewish World during the Great War.

The distinguishing quality of Roth’s writing is its very subject:  While the main focus and central issue of most World War One-era literary pieces in The Jewish World is the perennial challenge of maintaining and above all perpetuating a sense Jewish peoplehood, let alone Jewish belief – within and through successive generations (the topic of intermarriage is a prominent theme*) within a world in which one’s identity is simultaneously a subject of fascination and deprecation (and more).  Roth’s story, however, uses the experience of Jews in the military as a setting to explore both the above conundrum, and, valor and physical courage on the part of Jews.

In terms of dramatis personae, Roth’s characters comprise:

Colonel Sergei Seminovich, an officer in the Russian Army’s 49th Infantry Regiment

Nikolai (last name not given; presumably a Private), a soldier of peasant background serving in Colonel Seminovich’s Regiment

Private David Freedman, newly assigned to Colonel Seminovich’s Regiment

Rivkeh, a Jewish woman, and owner of a dwelling in the village of “T.”, and acquaintance of David, whose husband is also serving in the Russian Army

Rivkeh’s un-named father

The story’s plot elements involve the striking contrast between the peasant soldier Nikolai and David; the interaction of David with Rivkeh and her family – particularly his bravery in protecting them from depredations by Nikolai and some of the latter’s fellow troops; David’s physical strength and leadership qualities, regardless of whether leading troops of Jewish or Russian nationality.  Finally, a striking aspect of Roth’s story – particularly in light of the characterization of the attitude of Russian WW I military officers towards Jews, as presented in earlier blog posts – is the attitude of Colonel Seminovich towards David: The Colonel shows neither favor nor disfavor towards David, treating him matter-of-factly, and within the context of the story, entirely fairly.  The tale ends with Colonel Seminovich attending David’s funeral, quietly commenting to himself, “God knows, it’s the only honour I can give him now,” before forwarding the Private’s altered surname to Warsaw for commendation.

* Perhaps I’ll bring you examples of such stories in future posts.

And so, “Reinforcements”…

Reinforcements
By Samuel Roth
The Jewish World

June 23, 1915

THE sky had been darkening swiftly, threatening at any moment to send down a furious rainstorm on the little band of soldiers, the remnant of that valiant forty-ninth regiment that a German battalion, falling upon them from the rear by a strategic move, had cut to pieces two days before.  The worn-out and frightened survivors lay huddle up in their tents, peering now at the black, fuming clouds, and again across the vast stretches of snow over which the reinforcements were now momentarily expected.  Col. Sergei Seminovich, the only remaining officer, walking imperiously through the camp and swearing softly under his breath, was behaving as though he believed that the god of Russia had spared his five-foot-ten just so that the soldiers might be able to look up to him and pick up courage. 

One of the soldiers, a big peasant with immense shoulders and menacing black eyes, had spread his blanket on the snow and, defying all military decency, was comfortably smoking a pipe.  The colonel paused at his tent and frowned.  “Nikolai, why don’t you lie in your tent?”

“It’s warmer out here,” was the sullen reply.

A slight pause.

“Perhaps you would like to take a run, Nikolai?”  The colonel’s voice had softened.

The giant rose with a grunt, stared at the colonel and shrugged his thick shoulders unconcernedly.  At the same time he emptied out his pipe on the snow.  The colonel gave him his own horse and a moment later the peasant was speeding across the plain.

The colonel looked after him for a moment in silence, then retired to his own tent.

An hour later Nikolai reappeared and dismounted before the colonel’s tent.

“Well?” asked the colonel coming out.  “Have you seen anything?”

Nikolai, holding one hand on the sadly, looked at the colonel steadfastly.  “A wagon-load of potatoes and a handful of Jews,” he answered.

The colonel’s face darkened.  “Are you sure about that?” he asked.

The peasant nodded.

Sergi Seminovich was lost in thought for a moment, then he nodded to his inferior to depart. 

Nikolai did not budge an inch.

“You may retire to your tent now,” he said, impatiently.

Nikolai grunted, patted the horse’s back, and turning round slowly walked unconcernedly toward his tent.

The colonel’s hand instinctively sought the hilt of his sword.  He hated that stupid, impertinent peasant.  He wanted to call him back, gaze at him sternly, and say:  “Why don’t you say ‘Yes, your Excellency,’ you rogue!”

But he realised that as matters stood he had to exercise extraordinary caution lest his men lose all courage and surrender themselves to the enemy.  He decided in his heart to put off the punishment for a more opportune time.

 A FEW minutes later the “reinforcements” arrived.  It had already spread among the soldiers that the newcomers consisted only of Jews and a few Poles.  …  So there were no demonstrations.

One of the newcomers, a middle-sized, stocky, man of about 40 years, a private, reported to the colonel.

“Where is your officer,” asked Sergei Seminovich, sternly.

“He fell in the march, your Excellency.”

“And there’s not an officer left?”

“No, your Excellency.  They fought bravely and – they died.”

“What is your name?”

“David Freedman, your Excellency.”

“You’re a Jew?”

The spokesman nodded.

A pause.

“A Jew may fight well, your Excellency,” came the suggestion softly.

The Colonel looked up.  “How many were sent out?”

“Two thousand, your Excellency.”

“And there are only 300 now?”

The Jew nodded.

The officer bit his lips as though he wished to say that those Germans were a lot of pests!

Five minutes after the arrival of the “reinforcements” the brow of the sky suddenly became as black as night, a blast of thunder broke the impatience of the heavens, and a terrific flood of rain poured down on the frozen plain, frightening even Nikolai into his tent.

The newcomers proceeded calmly though very swiftly with the erection of their tents.  Now and then a flash of lightning revealed them to the shivering soldiers peering fearfully out of their tents.

Their attention was drawn particularly by Freedman who, though not very tall and not as thick-shouldered as Nikolai, worked as though he were composed of steel and lightning.  They saw him drive a pole into the frozen ground with the same ease with which a child would dig a shovel into the sand.  His own tent was up in about a minute, but he did not enter it till every other tent was erected and every man was sheltered.

The storm raged fully an hour.  When it ceased night had already spread over the plain.

Nikolai was entering the colonel’s tent with the object of persuading him to let him have another blanket when he heard the Jewish spokesman petitioning the commander thus:

“Your Excellency, we had an eventful journey.  Besides, God has spared our lives.  The men want permission to pray.”

Nikola protruded his head into the midst, stared hard at the Jew and burst into a torrent of gruff laughter.  “Haw! haw! haw!  A nice camp this will be with Jewish prayers!  The devil take us all!”

The colonel gazed at the peasant sternly.  “Nikolai, retire!  And do thou not ever dare to intrude in that manner!”

Nikolai grinned and walked out.

Meanwhile, Freedman, without so much as glancing at the peasant, had not taken his eyes from the face of the colonel.

Sergei Seminovich turned to him regretfully.  “I fear I cannot grant you that.  It may cause a fatal dissension in the ranks.”

Freedman saluted and returned to his comrades.

THE lines were formed before dawn.  At noon the “remnant” reached the village of T.  From here Sergei Seminovich communicated with the general at Warsaw, revealed to him pitiful plight of his regiment, and pleaded that reinforcements be sent out immediately and under good care to the village, which seemed to be at a safe distance from the Germans.  A half hour after their arrival the colonel gave the soldiers permission to “look the place over” as they pleased.  Camps was for the time broken, and the soldiers scattered in all directions.

Freedman took a narrow path by himself and walked along thoughtfully.  It was a cold, clear day.  The mud on the ground was frozen, and the walking was fine.  He had only gone a slight distance when he came in front of a farmhouse that was still as though it were inhabited.  Seized by curiosity, he went up to the door and knocked upon it gently.  No response.  His second knock was a little louder.  Still no response.  This time he knocked heavily.  The window opened slowly for a moment so that he could not see who it was, but after waiting another minute he had the satisfaction of hearing heavy footsteps approaching the door.  The door was drawn open with a sudden jerk and Freedman found himself face to face with an aged, broad-shouldered man armed with a gun, whom he recognised as one of his own people. 

“I am one of the soldiers,” explained Freedman.  “We are staying here for some time.  I had no intention of entering here.  But the stillness of the place aroused my suspicions and so I knocked.”

The man in the doorway gazed at the soldier critically and said, articulating every syllable slowly, “I see you’re a Jew.”

Freedman nodded.

“It’s hard to tell a Jew in a Russian uniform,” continued the aged proprietor.  “Won’t you come in?”

Freedman hesitated a moment and entered.

The room gave evidence of a great deal of recent excitement.  Chairs were upset, knives and implements lay on the table, a middle-aged women and a girl who must have been her daughter were crouching in the centre of the room and the whimpering of children could be heard from underneath the beds.

Freedman smiled, and turning to the woman: “Your husband is in the army, is he not?”

“Yes,” the woman answered, sighing but turning her face away.

Freedman approached closer to her and paled perceptibly.  “I didn’t know I was going to meet you here, Rivkeh,” he said huskily.  She did not answer, but looked curiously over his strong, well-knit form.

The old man had meanwhile barred the door and was not approaching them.  He looked with surprise at the woman and the soldier.

“Why, father, this is David.  Don’t you remember?”  There was a tender ring in her voice.

“David!” he exclaimed.  “Sure, why”…  then he glanced at Rivkeh and did not complete his sentence.  “And how about heating the samovar in honour of our guest?”  he said instead.

Half an hour later complete peace had been restored in the household.  The whole family, including Freedman, were seated around the table drinking tea and chatting.

“So your husband is in the army against which you were just preparing to defend yourself.” He remarked.  Then, after a pause: “It’s a sad business, this.  And most of us are swallowed up in it.  I, too, shall never return!”

“Oh, you mustn’t talk that way!” exclaimed the woman.  “Your wife, your children.”

Freedman interrupted her.  “I have none, Rivkeh.  I – I have kept my word!”

The woman paled swiftly and turned her face away.

SUDDENLY voices gruff and boisterous became audible from without, and then a loud rap sounded against the door.  The whole house was again thrown into confusion.  Freedman, pistol in hand, went up to the door and unbarred it.  A number of soldiers led by Nikolai burst in, but paused at the menacing attitude of the Jew.  The latter addressed himself calmly to the leader: “Nikolai, I am known as a sure shot, and I cannot possibly miss you at this distance.  I give you a minute to take yourself and your friends out of here!”

Nikolai stared at him in sheer amazement.

“A half minute is up, Nikolai!  Your life is less valuable to me than that of a rat!”

Nikolai and his men, scowling fiercely, left the house.

“That’s the ugliest thing about the Russian army, said Freedman after a long pause.  “I cannot believe that an army with such things on its conscience can really win battles.”

The man shook his head, but the woman was looking out of the window.

The young girl who till now had not said a word, took the soldier’s hand and said in a shaky voice: “You have perhaps saved us all, sir!  How can we thank you?”

Freedman smiled and glanced at her mother.  Then he said to the girl: “I don’t think I need thanks.  In fact I am glad to have done this for you and – your mother!”

When he left a half hour later, the woman burst into an irrepressible flood of tears.

The colonel had received a warning from a Russian outpost some twenty versts away.  So till very late that night the soldiers were compelled to work away at the necessary temporary fortifications.  Often Freedman stopped in his work and stood motionless for many minutes gazing dreamily out to the far distance.  Where he stood the cold moonlight fell over them as though steeling them to the life of horror they were living.

The following morning Nikolai came up behind Freedman, laid a hand on his shoulder and attempted to swing him around.

“Is there anything you want, Nikolai? asked the Jew, turning around calmly.

“Yes; I want to brain you – you damned Jew!”

“Do it – if you can!” said Freedman, smiling.

The giant drew back his arm and swung it viciously at the head of Freedman.  The Jew, still smiling, caught his wrist in a flash and gripped it tightly.  The big peasant writhed with pain, but he clinched his teeth and stood his ground.

Freedman acted very swiftly.  He gave an additional tug at the giant’s wrist and dropped it at his side.

Nikolai stared hard at him for a few seconds and muttered: “You damned Jew!”

Both of the Jew’s hands reached out like steel bars.  He seized the giant by the shoulders, held him that way till every drop of blood had left Nikolai’s face, and then, with one great tug, hurled him bodily over the trench.

Just then the colonel came up.  He took in everything in a second, and said, frowning at Freedman: “Report immediately to my tent!”

But no sooner had Freedman entered the commander’s judiciary chamber than one of the advance guard flew into camp terribly excited: “The Germans are coming,” passed along the lines.  Everything else was put aside and the defences were completed.

TOWARD evening of that day the colonel received word from the Russian post that the Germans were nearing that section and that they would probably arrive from the north-west by midnight.  It was advisable to send out two detachments to meet them.  The colonel instantly sent for Nikolai and Freedman.

“The Germans are coming” he explained to them, “and they will be here by midnight.  This is very fortunate, because it makes it possible for us to offer them sufficient resistance to last us till the troops from Warsaw arrive.  There are no officers at my command, so I am going to put this matter in the hands of both of you.  Remember, it is all for the sake of Russia and your own wives and children.  You, Nikolai, will take two hundred men and lead them up to the wood near the village of K.  There you will hide your men behind the trees and the sides of the hill and attack them as they come.  You, Freedman, will take an equal number of men and pause with them about two versts from K.  When you hear that the battle is on, bring your detachment up from the near and outflank them.  This is bound to confuse them, and unless their numbers are overwhelmingly large it may seriously prevent them from marching on.  Do you understand me?”

Both men nodded.

“There is a great deal in this for both of you,” continued the colonel.  “It all depends upon the amount of devotion and ability you display in this task that I am assigning you.  Now, do your duty!”

The colonel shook hands with both of them, and then proceeded to aid them in the preparation.  (Isn’t it peculiar than in such important moments we do not think of distinctions?)

An hour later both detachments were well on their way toward K.  They marched silently through the big snow fields, under a swiftly darkening sky.  Night fell.  The march continued.  Freedman’s detachment reached the point designated by the commander and paused.  The men spread out their blankets are ate from their knapsacks a few of the things they had been permitted to take along with them for this short while.

A little after midnight the soldiers rose to their feet at the sound of firing that came to them over the fields.  The battle was on!  Freedman ordered the soldiers to form in line and march on.  A little distance up the road they met a number of soldiers retreating from the battle.  One of them explained that an overwhelming force of Germans had arrived and opened a terrific fire; there was absolutely no possibility of holding out against them, though Nikolai kept most of his men behind the trees and the hill.  Further up the road they met more refugees.  Freedman lifted his sword in the air and raised his voice high.  “Russians,” he cried, “we are going to outflank those Germans whether they number a thousand or even a million.  You will either fall in line or I will have you shot down as traitors and cowards!  Choose quickly!”

Reinforced by the refugees from Nikolai’s detachment, Freedman made a sharp turn and marched in a roundabout way so as to reach K. from the north-west.

Nikolai’s men were one by one falling under the steady fire of the Germans.  But from their position they did the enemy a great deal of damage.  The German detachment had three cannon which were not being used because a big firing machine can be of no avail against an army which is scattered behind trees and under rocks.  Nikolai was swearing under his breath as the minutes passed by and there was no sign of Freedman.  “The damned Jew!” he growled beneath his breath.  “The coward!”

THERE was a burst of drums and trumpets from the rear, and the reinforcements, headed by Freedman, appeared.  At first the Germans were nonplussed by this strategic move, but a minute later they charged the newcomers like tigers.  Freedman saw in a second what must be done; those cannon must be captured and turned against the Germans.  He instantly called thirty men to his side and, headed by himself, they charged the point where the guns stood.  Too late the Germans realised their intention.  A moment after the strong figure of Freedman mounted one of the cannon.  A hundred guns were pointed at him and he fell.  But his followers took possession of the three cannon and opened fire on the charging Germans.  Ten minutes later the latter were fleeing back, pursued by the forces of Nikolai.

The pursuit of the Russians was only a pose; they knew well enough that they were incapable of contending with the superior force with which they might now be met.  So after a slight run they returned.

At dawn Nikolai and his men returned to T.  The body of Freedman was borne by twenty of his followers and placed in a sheet in front of the Colonel’s tent.

Nikolai rendered the commander an accurate description of the battle, including the capture of the cannon by the Jew.

“Those Jews certainly know how to die,” remarked Sergei Seminovich.

The peasant bit his thick lips and turned away.

A number of Jewish soldiers petitioned the colonel to permit them to bear along with them the corpse of Freedman till they would come to a town where there was a Jewish burial place.  To this the commander consented silently.

Despairing of ever obtaining the necessary reinforcements, the colonel on the following day again broke up camp and continued the retreat toward Warsaw.  The body of Freedman was carried all day by his faithful followers.

When night fell, Nikolai approached the colonel and informed him that the soldiers were dissatisfied with the fact that the corpse of the Jew was being carried in their midst and they had fears…

The colonel measured the peasant from head to foot.  “Nikolai,” he said sternly, “I have tolerated your insolence a long time.  I shall put an end to it right now.”  He stepped out and called the guard.  “I want you to hold this man in confinement till you get further instructions from me!”

They bowed and led the dazed Nikolai out of the tent.

They were met by reinforcements the next day.  When the town of B. was reached the corpse was taken into the Jewish cemetery and buried with prayer on the part of the Jewish soldiers.  The colonel stood in the crowd near the grave, bareheaded.  “God knows, it’s the only honour I can give him now,” he muttered to himself.

That afternoon he wrote out his report for the general in Warsaw.  Among the names recommended for honourable mention was the queer name “Vriedmun.”  As the colonel glanced over it he smiled complacently.  What an artful people the Russians may be when they want to! [Jewish Comment]

The Ambivalence of Acceptance – The Acceptance of Ambivalence III: “The Jews and The War”, by Maurice Barres – Correspondence from French Jewish Soldiers

To have a “place” can mean different things: A place can be a physical location; it can be a relationship to others, be they family, friends, or strangers; it can imply a sense of familiarity with and belonging to the zeitgeist of a particular age.  And sometimes, it can be all these definitions – changing in degree and intensity – at once.

For the French writer, journalist, and politician Auguste-Maurice Barrès’, the “place” of the Jews of France during that nation’s hour of crisis in the First World War was addressed by the chapter “The Israelites” in his 1917 book Les Diverses Families Spirituelles de la France (The Various Spiritual Families of France), the full text of which you can read in English, and, the (original) French.

While the above-mentioned chapter (one of eleven within his book) comprises 23 pages, his monograph includes a “Notes and Appendix” section of 41 pages (page 268 through page 309).  For chapter Five – “The Israelites” – relevant material can be found on pages 282 through 292, correlating to footnotes #12 through #14 in chapter Five.

As a supplement to my earlier posts covering the “The Israelites”, and to fully appreciate Barrès’ writings Jews in the French Army, you can read a translation of the relevant pages of the Notes and Appendix section, below.  And, (yet!) further below, near the end of the post) you can read the text in the original French. 

Intriguingly, from the Notes and Appendix section of the book, it can be seen that despite his attitude towards French Jewry during the Dreyfus affair, by 1917 Barrès’ had been engaging in correspondence with Jewish soldiers serving in the French Army, and, some representatives of the Jewish community of France.  Similarly, paralleling the contents of Chapter Five, in the Notes and Appendix Barrès alludes to three Jewish soldiers who fell for France:

The first (anonymous) soldier –  Aged 33, sergeant to the 360th Infantry Regiment, this Jewish soldier took part in the fighting of Reméreville, Crévic, Bois Saint-Paul, Velaine-sôus-Ainance, from August 25 to September 14, 1914.”  The second soldier – mentioned by name – Charles Halphen, who served in the 39th Artillery Regiment, and was killed in action on May 15, 1915.  The third soldier – also mentioned by name – Captain Raoul Bloch, killed on May 12, 1916, near Verdun.  The information about the anonymous 33-year-old sergeant was of such accuracy that I was immediately able to identify him, based on his archival record from the SGA, and, information in Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française.  He was Sergent-Major Max Jean Francois Claude Levy.

It’s particularly notable that the biographical backgrounds of Bloch, Halphen, and Levy, all deeply patriotic, encompass a wide spectrum of religious belief (particularly represented by Max Levy) and represent different levls of acculturation. 

Paralleling my post aboutThe Israelites, this post presents “PARTIE À REMPLIR PAR LE CORPS (‘PART TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CORPS’)” Cards for Levy, Halphen, and Bloch, and includes biographical information about each soldier as derived from both the Cards and other sources, such as l’Univers Israélite (reviewed at the Dorot Jewish Division of the New York Public Library), and the above-mentioned Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française.  And…just like my prior post…to enable you to distinguish between my additions and the original text more easily, “my” information is presented in maroon-colored text, like this.  (Refer to my earlier post, Three Soldiers – Three Brothers? – Fallen for France: Hermann, Jules, and Max Boers) for a longer discussion about information in “PARTIE À REMPLIR PAR LE CORPS (‘PART TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CORPS’)” Cards.)

In addition, this post lists the names of French Jewish soldiers who lost their lives on the same dates as Levy, Halphen, and Bloch.  The record for each of the soldiers comprises that soldier’s 1) rank, 2) country or land of birth, and, 3) the geographic location where he was killed.  All these names were obtained from the SGA’s Base des Morts pour la France de la Première Guerre mondiale (Database of Killed for France in the First World War) database.

So, to begin, the title and table-of-contents of Les Diverses Families Spirituelles de la France…

______________________________

______________________________

MAURICE BARRÈS

OF THE FRENCH ACADEMY
PRESIDENT OF THE LEAGUE OF PATRIOTS

THE VARIOUS SPIRITUAL FAMILIES OF FRANCE

PARIS
EMILE-PAUL FRÈRES, EDITORS
100, RUE DE FAIBOURG-SAINT-HONORÉ. 100
PLACE BEAUVAU
1917
______________________________

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapters.                                                                                                   Pages.

I          Our diversities disappear on August 4, 1914                        1
II        … And reappear in the army                                                       9
III       The Catholics                                                                                  19
IV       The Protestants                                                                              51
V        The Israelites                                                                                   67
VI      The Socialists                                                                                   90
VII    The Traditionalists                                                                       137
VIII   Catholics, Protestants, Socialists, all defending France, defend their particular faith                                                                                                                193
IX      An already legendary night (Christmas 1914)                   205
X       Twenty-year-old soldiers devote themselves to creating a more beautiful France                                                                                                            215
XI    This profound unanimity, we will continue to live it     259

Notes and Appendix                                                                               269

PRINTING CHAIX, RUE BERGERE, 20, PARIS – 842-1-17. (Lucre Lurilleux)

______________________________

NOTES AND APPENDIX

(12) NOTE FROM PAGE 74. – “I would like to know more about the war activity of the Israelites in Algeria than I could have obtained …”

Someone authorized to speak in their names writes [to] me:

“They serve, for the most part, in the Zouaves and were there (until lately) in the proportion of a quarter.  They took part in the battles of Belgium, the Marne (particularly at Chambry), Soissons, Arras, Yser, Champagne, Verdun, the Somme, Dardanelles, Serbia.  It is especially the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 8th Zouaves, constituted in Algeria, who set them at the beginning.  The 45th division, formed at Oran of reservists and territorials, was the one that crossed Paris in the first days of September, and was immediately sent by Gallieni to the vicinity of Meaux, to carry the blow which was decisive.”

______________________________

(13) NOTE FROM PAGE 78. – “The documents which I possess on the moral elite of the Israelites only make known to me consciences which seem emptied of their religious tradition …”

On this subject, a young Jewish, industrial, Lorraine officer, who was the object of a beautiful citation by the order of the army, writes me an interesting letter which begins with these words: “I am a Jew, sincerely believing and attached to my religion …”  I leave some fragments:

“Let us take as an example,” said the officer, “an Israelite of what is called the good bourgeoisie, that is, the second lieutenant who writes to you …  I had a medium education (classical studies to Carnot, then beginning of right).  My parents are from Alsace, and under Louis-Philippe, one of my grandparents was Mayor of Altkirch.  For my part, I did my military service, like all the young people I knew, without much pleasure or enthusiasm, and only thought of the war when my father told me about his campaign of 1870.

Suddenly comes the period of tension in 1914, then mobilization.  I would have liked you to see our joy, to we Jews who, according to you, sir, do not have real love of their country or have it only by gratitude for a country where they have not been martyred …  I remember that Saturday night, when my parents accompanied me to Paris-Lyon-Méditerranée.  My mother was crying and my father laughed with joy despite having tears in the corner of his eye.  For my part, I give you my word of honor and [as a] soldier; I was happy without calculation, happy to fight for my country that I loved …  All my friends to whom I said goodbye, without doubt that it was goodbye to me, had the joy at heart of the idea of taking over Alsace, of which we for the most part are native.

I insist on this instinctive sentiment of patriotism; I would like us to know each other better, we other Jews, who are not ashamed of our race and who do not use our fortune to offer hunts to people ruined by fragments.  I believe you only see two kinds of Jews:

First of all, the little aristocracy, with enormous fortunes, and which is not very interesting (characterized by its platitudes toward the great names of Catholicism).

Then, there are the Polish Jews who clutter our country and who, to eat, do all the trades (the latter are only interesting by the misfortunes they have endured in Russia).

But there are also the believing Jews, sincere, profoundly fond of their country, not seeking to dazzle others by their fortune and their luxury of bad taste: in short, the good bourgeoisie.  You believe too much that Jews are beings apart, who have a special mentality.  Between the “Nucingen” and the “Gobseck”, there is something else.

I had a hard time at the front because during the first winter we were not yet used to this war of “moles” and in the Vosges (col de Sainte-Marie) we suffered a lot from the cold.  For men, physical suffering alone counted; but as an officer I had painful days.  This inaction weighed on me.  The loneliness in our wooded mountains breeds melancholy, bad feelings; in short weariness.  It was then that my faith intervened and saved me morally.  I remembered the prayer I was making at night, before kissing my mother and who is very similar to your “Pater noster”.  I prayed and the Lord supported me; gave me calm.  Whenever I had a decision to make, I thought of Him and I was quiet.

At the moment of the attack itself, the duty imposes on you enough work so that one can think only of the orders received and the means to execute them for the best.  But before!  The half hour preceding the offensive attack or reconnaissance has a tragic grandeur.  Every one, Catholic, Protestant, or Jew, collects himself, and the true believers recognize themselves in their calm, which at this moment can not be feigned.

I write to you in all sincerity.  Whenever I saw that I had to go to death, I thought of “Him,” and my duty seemed natural, without merit.  When I was buried, I thought myself wounded to death and my first thought was still for my God.

The Jewish religion is not made for the people, because it is not composed of small external practices, but only of the idea of God and the survival of the soul.  That’s why there are few true believers.

It happened to me, wanting to gather me, to go to a church and I do not think I committed sacrilege.

This is my state of affairs, which I am simply exposing to you, feeling sympathy for you.”

(Letter from Second Lieutenant L., December 29, 1916.)

______________________________

On the same subject a letter signed by an important name in Parisian society:

I do not want to let you believe that the consciences of the Israelites who died for France with love “are emptied of their religious tradition”.  However, I can only bring you “texts” by formally asking you to take them only as anonymous.  By modesty first, and by justice also for unknown heroes, I desire that the name of my son be piously guarded by you without being published …

I regretfully conform to this desire; I will not mention the name of the hero, who held a high office; I limit myself to analyzing the small file that is communicated to me.

Aged 33, sergeant to the 360th Infantry Regiment, this Jewish soldier took part in the fighting of Reméreville, Crévic, Bois Saint-Paul, Velaine-sôus-Ainance, from August 25 to September 14, 1914.  [Max Jean Francois Claude Levy]  At this date, he writes to his parents a letter that will be the last:

Papa, adored mama.  Thank you for your tender cards and letters that I receive very well, but in package.  Last night those of August 31st and September 1st.  You are, I am sure, an admirable nurse, but I will not need your care for this time.  We are now held back for a long time from the line of fire where we have been since August 26, especially since September 2.  I did not have an attack, not a scratch, and yet I felt almost sure, so much I had the powerful feeling of God’s protection that he granted me for all and by you my admirable parents.  So that I had no merit in feeling no hesitation in throwing myself between bullets and shells; I saw them veer around me.  I did not commit any act of valor, at all, I hasten to say it, I just went where I was told to go.

Three days later, having proposed to conduct a reconnaissance, he enters the village of Bezange-la-Grande.  A young peasant advises him to “turn around”.  He answers: “I am charged with a reconnaissance, one must go farther …”, and almost immediately he falls, hit in the head by an explosive bullet.  He had said to his father on leaving him: “I will bring you back Lorraine, or I will stay there.”  The inhabitants buried him and the mayor was able to send the parents the medal of piety found on their son; it bore the traditional inscription: “You shall love the LORD.”  [This is a reference to the Shema Yisrael prayer, in Deuteronomy 6, Verses 4-5 The full text: 

4) Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one.
שְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל: יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ, יְהוָה אֶחָד.
5) And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
וְאָהַבְתָּ, אֵת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, בְּכָל-לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל-נַפְשְׁךָ, וּבְכָל-מְאֹדֶךָ.]

On the paper he had prepared before his departure and where he expressed his last wishes, he invoked the sacred word: He walked with God all the days of his life.  Suddenly we no longer saw him because God had taken him.”  [A reference to Chapter 5, Verse 24, in GenesisThe actual text: And Enoch walked with God, and he was not; for God took him.  וַיִּתְהַלֵּךְ חֲנוֹךְ, אֶת-הָאֱלֹהִים; וְאֵינֶנּוּ, כִּי-לָקַח אֹתוֹ אֱלֹהִים.]

And again: “For myself, I know that my Redeemer lives and that He will raise me up from the earth, and that when my flesh is destroyed, I will see God.  I will see Him with my eyes.”  [A reference to Verses 25 through 27, in Chapter 19 of the Book of Job The actual text:

25) But as for me, I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that He will witness at the last upon the dust;
וַאֲנִי יָדַעְתִּי, גֹּאֲלִי חָי; וְאַחֲרוֹן, עַל-עָפָר יָקוּם.
26) And when after my skin this is destroyed, then without my flesh shall I see God;
וְאַחַר עוֹרִי, נִקְּפוּ-זֹאת; וּמִבְּשָׂרִי, אֶחֱזֶה אֱלוֹהַּ.
27) Whom I, even I, shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another’s. My reins are consumed within me.]
אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי, אֶחֱזֶה-לִּי–וְעֵינַי רָאוּ וְלֹא-זָר: כָּלוּ כִלְיֹתַי בְּחֵקִי.]

[Perhaps Max Levy’s “medal of piety” referred to by Barrès’ was a Mezuzah in the form of an amulet…?]

Max Jean Francois Claude Levy

Sergent Major, 16063 / 16635, France, Armée de Terre, Infanterie, 360eme Regiment d’Infanterie, 22eme Compagnie
Killed by the enemy [Tué a l’ennemi] at Carency, Pas-de-Calais, France, May 9, 1915
Born August 9, 1887, 10eme Arrondissement, Paris, France

Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française, p. 56
Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française lists name as “Levy, Max”, and gives date and location as May 5, 1915, Villers-aux-Bois”

Buried at Necropole Nationale “Notre-Dame-de-Lorette”, Ablain-Saint-Nazaire, Pas-de-Calais, France – Tombe Individuelle, Carre 87, Rang 4, No. 17468
SGA burial record gives name as “Levy, Max”

______________________________

On Israel believing, still this document of the sacred union.  M. Lancrenion, priest, medical aide-major in the 1st group of the 39th artillery, writes to the mother of the young Charles Halphen, lieutenant of the 39th artillery, fallen on the field of honor on May 15, 1915, a letter of which here is the end:

The friendship, linked by me with your son, has turned into respect and admiration for his heroic death.  And I want to tell you too, the infinitely powerful and merciful God, in whom we all believe, though different from religion, in which your son believed (he told me), took from him, I hope, the right and loyal soul, who sacrificed himself for duty, and he took it for immortality …  I prayed from the bottom of my heart yesterday, today, this God of mercy, to receive your son to him, and to gather you to him, when the time will come for an eternal and happy meeting …  May this word of a minister of God not calm your pain, but bring you hope, support your courage, help you bear the sacrifice.

Charles Nathan Halphen

Lieutenant, 65, France, Armée de Terre, Artillerie
39eme Regiment d’Artillerie de Campagne
Killed by the enemy [Tué a l’ennemi], at Neuville-Saint-Vaast, Pas-de-Calais, France, May 15, 1915
Mr. Georges Halpen (father)
Born December 3, 1885, 17eme Arrondissement, Paris, France

l’Univers Israélite 10/8/15, 1/26/17
The Jewish Chronicle 7/30/15
Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française, p. 41
Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française gives name as “Halphen, Charles” and date as May 12, 1915

l’Univers Israélite: “Professeur au college Chaptal; Cite a l’ordre de l’armee; Il etait fils de feu Georges Halphen, membre de l’Academie des sciences”

Buried at Cimetiere Militaire “Ecoivres Milit. Cemetery”, Ecoivres – Mount Saint Eloi, Pas-de-Calais, France – Tombe Individuelle, Rang 23, No. 731, 65

______________________________

(14) NOTE FROM PAGE 92. – I am told: “You have seen exceptional Israelites, newly arrived among us or great intellectuals”, and I am given to read the correspondence of Captain Raoul Bloch, killed on May 12, 1916 before Verdun, who belonged to the business world.  His letters, in a firm tone, exude the most salutary patriotic and family feeling.

Raoul Bloch

Capitaine, France, Armée de Terre, Infanterie
306eme Regiment d’Infanterie
Killed [Tué], May 12, 1916, at Mort Homme, Fromerville, Meuse, France
Born April 11, 1872, Auxerre, Yonne, France

Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française 1921, p. 17
American Jewish Yearbook V 21, p. 38

Place of burial unknown (None?…)

Aged forty, assigned to the service of the [reserves], he asks to go into active [service].  “I am anxiously waiting to do my duty as I desire and understand it; as French and Jew, I have to do it twice.  The country is at this moment in need of all its men valid for defense, arms in hand; – I am in a service that can be done very well with men of age and less nimble, my duty is to offer my services elsewhere …»

On the 6th of January, 1915, he sends to his wife this page full of the earthly piety of an Alsatian Israelite:

With what joy I will go to the side of Alsace and what memories by penetrating into uniform in this country of our dreams!  Our poor fathers would flinch in their graves!  Finally, the “revenge” of which they spoke so much, whose heart overflowed! and my brave brother, my old under the hood, and in what tragic moments! with what pleasure I will avenge him and Robert my brother too soon disappeared!  What a note to pay the Bandits and how I will be fierce creditor!

Tell them all, brothers and sisters, that never can our hearts have vibrated so much in unison and have so intensely communicated.  I often think of all those who surround you at this moment with such tender affection, and help you to bear valiantly the heavy contribution of the country that I imposed on you as well as myself.  To be one of those who have contributed directly to your home birthplace will be for me a sweet joy and a complement to our life so united and so tender.  What a beautiful anniversary of our twenty years of cleaning, the “rue de la Mésange” once again French! what more beautiful gift can I dream to bring you!  And Lauterbourg, Niederbronn, Bionville, all in our three colors!  You must understand why I wanted and had to leave, the whole family tradition is not with me?  To be able to take you and our darlings to Alsace-Lorraine and tell them: Papa has helped in the measure of his strength to return these two beautiful countries to France, what a better reward for me?

 __________________________

______________________________

– .ת. נ. צ. ב. ה
תהא

נפשו
צרורה
בצרור
החיים

May 9, 1915 – Max Jean Francois Claude Levy

The books Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française (in combination with the SGA database) and Die Jüdischen Gefallenen Des Deutschen Heeres, Deutschen Marine Und Der Deutschen Schutztruppen 1914-1918 – Ein Gedenkbuch, reveal the names of approximately 90 French Jewish soldiers, and 27 German Jewish soldiers – killed in action or died of wounds – for the above date.

May 15, 1915 – Charles Nathan Halphen

Freyberg, France, Seine-Maritime; Rouen; l’Hopital (“Partie a Remplir par le Corps” card could not be found or identified in SGA database; name from Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française
Koskach, Isaac, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 16850, Belgique; Het Sas
Midowitch, Kiel, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 20493, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Zerbib, Messim Emile, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 10859, Pas-de-Calais; Roclincourt

The names of Midowitch and Zerbib do not appear in Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française.

May 12, 1916 – Raoul Bloch

Bernheim, Lucien Germain Edouard, Aspirant, France, 6473, Meuse; Vauquois
Darmon, Mimoun, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 17288, Meuse
Walter, Stephan, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne – Lodz), Meuse; Thierville; 1600 m a l’ouest de

Walter’s name does not appear in Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française.

______________________________

______________________________

NOTES ET APPENDICE

(12) NOTE DE LA PAGE 74. — «J’aimerais avoir sur l’activité guerrière des Israélites d’Algérie des précisions que je n’ai pu me procurer…»

Quelqu’un d’autorisé à parler en leurs noms m’écrit:

«Ils servent, pour la plupart, dans les zouaves et s’y trouvaient (jusqu’à ces derniers temps) dans la proportion d’un quart.  Ils ont pris part aux combats de Belgique, de la Marne (particulièrement à Chambry), devant Soissons, à Arras, sur l’Yser, en Champagne, sous Verdun, dans la Somme, aux Dardanelles, en Serbie.  Ce sont surtout les 1er, 2e, 3e, 4e et 8e zouaves, constitués en Algérie, qui les ont encadrés à l’origine.  La 45e division, formée à Oran de réservistes et de territoriaux, est celle qui a traversé Paris dans les premiers jours de septembre et qui a tout de suite été expédiée par Galliéni dans les environs de Meaux, pour y porter le coup qui fut décisif.»

(13) NOTE DE LA PAGE 78. — « Les documents que je possède sur l’élite morale des israélites ne me font connaître que des consciences qui paraissent vidées de leur tradition religieuse…»

Là-dessus, un jeune officier israélite, industriel lorrain, qui a été l’objet d’une belle citation à l’ordre de l’armée, m’écrit une lettre intéressante qui commence par ces mots: «Je suis juif, sincèrement croyant et attaché à ma religion…»  J’en détache quelques fragments:

«Prenons comme exemple, me dit cet officier, un israélite de ce que l’on appelle la bonne bourgeoisie, c’est-à-dire le sous-lieutenant qui vous écrit…  J’ai eu une instruction moyenne (études classiques à Carnot, puis commencement de droit).  Mes parents sont originaires d’Alsace, et, sous Louis-Philippe, un de mes grands-parents était maire d’Altkirch.  Pour ma part, j’ai fait mon service militaire, comme tous les jeunes gens que je connaissais, sans grand plaisir ni enthousiasme, et ne pensais à la guerre que lorsque mon père me racontait sa campagne de 1870.

»Tout à coup arrive en 1914 la période de tension, puis la mobilisation.  J’aurais voulu que vous puissiez voir notre joie, à nous juifs qui, d’après vous, Monsieur, n’ont pas l’amour réel de leur patrie ou ne l’ont que par reconnaissance pour un pays où ils n’ont pas été martyrisés…  Je me souviens de ce samedi soir, lorsque mes parents m’ont accompagné au Paris-Lyon-Méditerranée.  Ma mère pleurait et mon père riait de joie en ayant malgré tout use larme au coin de l’œil.  Pour ma part, je vous en donne ma parole d’honneur et de soldat, j’étais heureux sans calcul, heureux de me battre pour mon pays que j’aimais…  Tous mes amis à qui j’ai dit au revoir, sans me douter que c’était un adieu, avaient la joie au cœur à l’idée de reprendre cette Alsace dont nous sommes pour la plupart originaires.

»J’insiste sur ce sentiment instinctif de patriotisme; je voudrais que I’on nous connaisse mieux, nous autre juifs, qui n’avons pas honte de notre race et qui n’usons pas de notre fortune pour offrir de chasses aux gens ruinés à particule.  Je crois que vous ne voyez que deux sortes de juifs :

»D’abord la petite aristocratie, aux fortunes énormes, et qui est peu intéressante (caractérisée par sa platitude envers les grands noms du catholicisme).

»Ensuite, les juifs polonais qui encombrent notre pays et qui, pour manger, font tous les métiers (ces derniers ne sont intéressants que par les malheurs qu’ils ont endurés en Russie).

»Mais il y a aussi les juifs croyants, sincères, aimant profondément leur pays, ne cherchant pas à éblouir les autres par leur fortune et leur luxe de mauvais goût: bref, la bonne bourgeoisie.  Vous croyez trop que les juifs sont des êtres à part, qui ont une mentalité spéciale.  Entre le «Nucingen» et le «Gobseck», il y a autre chose.

»J’ai passé au front de durs moments, car pendant le premier hiver nous n’avions pas encore l’habitude de cette guerre de «taupes» et dans les Vosges (col de Sainte-Marie) nous souffrions beaucoup du froid.  Pour les hommes, la souffrance physique seule comptait; mais, comme officier, j’avais de pénibles journées.  Cette inaction me pesait.  La solitude dans nos montagnes boisées engendre la mélancolie, les mauvais sentiments, bref la lassitude.  C’est alors que ma foi est intervenue et m’a sauvé moralement.  Je me suis souvenu de la prière que je faisais tout petit, le soir avant d’embrasser ma maman et qui ressemble beaucoup à votre «Pater noster».  J’ai prié et le Seigneur m’a soutenu, m’a donné le calme.  Chaque fois que j’avais une décision à prendre, je pensais à Lui et j’étais tranquille.

»Au moment de l’attaque même, le devoir vous impose suffisamment de travail pour que l’on ne puisse penser qu’aux ordres reçus et aux moyens de les exécuter pour le mieux.  Mais avant!  La demi-heure qui précède l’attaque ou la reconnaissance offensive, possède une grandeur tragique.  Chacun, catholique, protestant ou juif se recueille, et les véritables croyants se reconnaissent à leur calme, qui, à ce moment, ne peut être feint.

»Je vous écris en toute sincérité.  Chaque fois que je voyais qu’il fallait aller à la mort, je pensais à «Lui», et mon devoir m’apparaissait naturel, sans mérite.  Lorsque j’ai été enseveli, je me suis cru blessé à mort el ma première pensée a été encore pour mon Dieu.

»La religion juive n’est pas faite pour le peuple, car elle n’est pas composée de petites pratiques extérieures, mais uniquement de l’idée de Dieu et de la survie de l’âime.  C’est pourquoi il y a peu de véritables croyants.

»Il m’est arrivé, voulant me recueillir, d’aller m’agenouiller dans une église et je ne crois pas avoir commis un sacrilège.

»Voilà mon état dame que je vous expose simplement, sentant chez vous une sympathie.»

(Lettre du sous-lieutenant L., 29 décembre 1916.)

Sur le même sujet une lettre signée d’un nom important dans la société parisienne:

Je ne voudrais pas vous laisser croire que les consciences des Israélites morts pour la France avec amour «sont vidées de leur tradition religieuse».  Je ne peux cependant vous apporter des «textes» qu’en vous demandant formellement de ne les prendre que comme anonymes.  Par modestie d’abord, et par justice aussi pour les héros inconnus, je désire que le nom de mon fils soit par vous pieusement gardé sans être publié …

Je me conforme à regret à cette volonté; je tairai le nom du héros, qui occupait une haute charge; je me borne à analyser le petit dossier que l’on me communique.

Agé de 33 ans, sergent au 360e régiment d’infanterie, ce soldat israélite a pris part aux combats de Réméreville, Crévic, Bois Saint-Paul, Velaine-sôus-Ainance, du 25 août au 14 septembre 1914.  A cette date, il écrit à ses parents une lettre qui va être la dernière:

Papa, maman adorés.  Merci de vos tendres cartes et lettres que je reçois très bien, mais en paquet.  Hier soir celles du 31 août el du 1er septembre.  Vous êtes, j’en suis sur, une infirmière admirable, mais je n’aurai pas pour celle fois besoin de vos soins.  Nous sommes aujourd’hui retenus en arrière pour longtemps de la ligne de feu où nous sommes depuis le 26 août, surtout depuis le 2 septembre.  Je n’ai pas eu une atteinte, pas une égratignure, et pourtant je me sentais presque sûr, tellement j’avais sur moi la sensation puissante de le protection de Dieu qu’il m’accorda pour tous et par vous mes admirables parents.  De sorte que je n’ai eu aucun mérite à n’éprouver aucune hésitation à me jeter entre les balles et les obus; je les voyais dévier autour de moi.  Je n’ai d’ailleurs commis aucun acte de valeur, du tout, je m’empresse de le dire, je me suis contenté d’aller là où l’on me disait d’aller.

Trois jours plus tard, s’étant proposé pour conduire une reconnaissance, il pénètre dans le village de Bezange-la-Grande.  Un jeune paysan lui conseille «de faire demi-tour».  Il répond: «Je suis chargé d’une reconnaissance, il faut aller plus loin…», et presque aussitôt il tombe frappé à la tête d’une balle explosible.  Il avait dit à son père en le quittant: «La Lorraine, je vous la rapporterai ou j’y resterai.»  Les habitants l’ensevelirent et le maire a pu faire parvenir aux parents la médaille de piété trouvée sur leur fils; elle portait l’inscription traditionnelle: «Tu aimeras l’Éternel.»  Sur le papier qu’il avait préparé avant son départ et où il exprimait ses dernières volontés, il invoquait la parole sacrée: Il chemina avec Dieu tous les jours de sa vie.  Tout à coup on ne le vit plus parce que Dieu l’avait pris.»  Et encore: «Pour moi, je sais que mon Rédempteur est vivant et qu’il me ressuscitera de la terre, et que lorsque ma chair aura été détruite, je verrai Dieu.  Je le verrai de mes yeux.».

Sur Israël croyant, encore ce document d’union sacrée.  M. Lancrenion, prêtre, médecin aide-major au 1er groupe du 39e d’artillerie, écrit à la mère du jeune Charles Halphen, lieutenant au 39e d’artillerie, tombé au champ d’honneur le 15 mai 1915, une lettre dont voici la fin:

L’amitié, liée par moi avec votre fils, s’est transformée en respect et en admiration devant sa mort héroïque.  Et je veux vous le dire aussi, le Dieu infiniment puissant et miséricordieux, dans lequel nous croyons tous, quoique différents de religion, dans lequel votre fils croyait (il me l’a dit), a pris auprès de lui, je l’espère, l’âme droite et loyale, qui s’est sacrifiée pour le devoir, el il l’a prise pour l’immortalité …  J’ai prié du fond de mon cœur hier, aujourd’hui, ce Dieu de miséricorde, de recevoir votre fils auprès de lui, et de vous réunir à lui, quand le temps sera venu pour une réunion éternelle et heureuse…  Puisse cette parole d’un ministre de Dieu, non pas calmer votre douleur, mais vous apporter l’espérance, soutenir votre courage, vous aider à supporter la sacrifice.

(14) NOTE DE LA PAGE 92. — On me dit:  «Vous avez fait voir des israélites d’exception, nouvellement venus parmi nous ou bien grands intellectuels», et l’on me donne à lire la correspondance du capitaine Raoul Bloch, tué le 12 mai 1916 devant Verdun, qui appartenait au monde des affaires.  Ses lettres, d’un ton ferme, respirent le plus salubre sentiment patriotique et familial.

Agé de quarante ans, affecté au service des étapes, il demande à passer dans l’active.  «J’attends impatiemment de faire mon devoir comme je le désire et le comprends; comme Français et Juif, je dois le faire doublement.  Il faut au pays en ce moment tous ses hommes valides pour la défense les armes à la main; — je suis dans un service qui peut se faire fort bien avec des hommes d’âge et moins ingambes, mon devoir est d’offrir mes services ailleurs…»

En date du 6 janvier 1915, il envoie à sa femme celte page toute pleine de la piété terrienne d’un Israélite alsacien :

Avec quelle joie je m’en irai du côté de l’Alsace et quels souvenirs en pénétrant en uniforme dans ce pays de nos rêves!  Nos pauvres papas en tressailleraient dans leurs tombes!  Enfin, la «revanche» dont ils ont tant parlé, dont leur cœur débordait! et mon brave frère, mon ancien sous la capote, et dans quels tragiques moments ! avec quel plaisir je le vengerai ainsi que Robert mon frère trop tôt disparu!  Quelle note à faire payer aux Bandits et combien je serai féroce créancier!

Dis-leur à tous, aux frères et sœurs, que jamais peut être nos cœurs n’ont tant vibré à l’unisson et n’ont communie d’une façon aussi intense.  Je pense souvent à tous ceux qui t’entourent en ce moment d’une affection si tendre et t’aident à supporter vaillamment la lourde contribution du pays que je t’ai imposée ainsi qu’a moimème.  Être de ceux qui auront contribué directement à te rendre ton berceau natal sera pour moi une bien douce joie et comme un complément à notre vie si unie et si tendre.  Quel bel anniversaire de nos vingt ans de ménage, la «rue de la Mésange» redevenue française ! quel plus beau cadeau pourrai-je rêver de t’apporter!  Et Lauterbourg, Niederbronn, Bionville, tout cela sous nos trois couleurs!  Tu dois comprendre pourquoi je voulais et devais partir, toute la tradition familiale n’est-elle pas avec moi?  Pouvoir emmener toi et nos chéris en AIsace-Lorraine et leur dire: Papa a aidé dans la mesure de ses forces à rendre ces deux beaux pays à la France, quelle plus belle récompense pour moi?

References and Suggested Readings

Barrès, Maurice, Les diverses familles spirituelles de la France, Paris, Émile-Paul frères, Paris, France, 1917, at Archive.org

Maurice Barrès, at Wikipedia

Maurice Barrès, at For and Against Dreyfus

Maurice Barrès, at Radical Right Analysis

Englund, Steven, An Affair As We Don’t Know It (Book Review of An Officer and A Spy, by Robert Harris), at Jewish Review of Books, Spring, 2015

Die Jüdischen Gefallenen Des Deutschen Heeres, Deutschen Marine Und Der Deutschen Schutztruppen 1914-1918 – Ein Gedenkbuch, Reichsbund Jüdischer Frontsoldaten, Forward by Dr. Leo Löwenstein, Berlin, Germany, 1932

Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française (Israelites [Jews] in the French Army), Angers, 1921 – Avant-Propos de la Deuxième Épreuve [Forward to the Second Edition], Albert Manuel, Paris, Juillet, 1921 – (Réédité par le Cercle de Généalogie juive [Reissued by the Circle for Jewish Genealogy], Paris, 2000)

“Died for France in the First World War” “PARTIE À REMPLIR PAR LE CORPS (‘PART TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CORPS’)” forms, at Morts pour la France de la Première Guerre mondiale

French Military War Graves, at Sépultures de Guerre

Mechon Mamre, at Mechon-Mamre.org

The Ambivalence of Acceptance – The Acceptance of Ambivalence II: “The Jews and The War”, by Maurice Barres, in The Jewish Exponent, July 26, 1918 (Original French Text)

Here’s Auguste-Maurice Barrès “Les Israélites”, the fifth chapter in Les Diverses Families Spirituelles de la France (The Various Spiritual Families of France), in the original French.  You can read the chapter’s English-language translation, with added commentary, here.   

LES DIVERSES
FAMILLES SPIRITUELLES
DE LA FRANCE

MAURICE BARRÈS

DE L’ACADÉMIE FRANÇAISE
PRÉSIDENT DE LA LIGUE DES PATRIOTES

LES DIVERSES FAMILLES SPIRITUELLES DE LA FRANCE

PARIS
EMILE-PAUL FRÈRES, ÉDITEURS
100, RUE DE FAIBOURG-SAINT-HONORÉ. 100
PLACE BEAUVAU
1917
______________________________

TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Chapitres. – Pages.

I  Nos diversités disparaissent au 4 août 1914 … – 1
II  …Et réapparaissent à l’armée – 9
III  Les Catholiques – 19
IV  Les Protestants – 51
V  Les Israélites – 67
VI  Les Socialistes – 90
VII  Les Traditionalistes – 137
VIII  Catholiques, Protestants, Socialistes, tous, en défendant la France, défendent leur foi particulière – 193
IX  Une nuit déjà légendaire (Noël 1914) – 205
X  Les soldats de vingt ans se dévouent pour que naisse une France plus belle – 215
XI  Cette unanimité profonde, nous continuerons à la vivre – 259

Notes et appendice – 269

PRINTING CHAIX, RUE BERGERE, 20, PARIS – 842-1-17. (Lucre Lurilleux)

______________________________

CHAPITRE V

LES ISRAÉLITES

Une grande affaire d’Israël dans son éternelle pérégrination, c’est de se choisir une pairie.  Il ne la tient pas toujours de ses aïeux ; il l’acquiert alors par un acte de volonté, et sa nationalité est sur lui comme une qualité dont il se préoccupe de prouver qu’il est digne.

Beaucoup d’israélites, fixés parmi nous depuis des générations et des siècles, sont membres naturels du corps national, mais ils sont préoccupés que leurs coreligionnaires nouvellement venus fassent leurs preuves de loyalisme.  Aux premiers jours de la guerre, quand une émotion hostile se produisit dans l’ancien ghetto parisien (au 4e arrondissement) autour des juifs de Russie, de Pologne, de Roumanie et de Turquie, une réunion se tint chez l’un des rédacteurs du journal le Peuple juif, qui en donne le récit : «Ne croyez-vous pas, dit quelqu’un, qu’il soit nécessaire d’ouvrir une permanence spéciale pour les engagés juifs étrangers, afin que l’on sache bien que les juifs eux aussi ont donné leur contingent?»

Le jour même, un appel en français et en yiddisch fut lancé aux Juifs immigrés, les invitant à venir s’inscrire dans les salles de l’Unîversité populaire juive, 8, rue de Jarente.  Ils l’accueillirent avec enthouiasme, comme un bouclier, et, dit le Peuple juif, «pas un commerçant juif des quartiers juifs ne s’abstint d’en apposer un exemplaire à sa devanture, bien en évidence…  Dès le lendemain, une foule énorme se pressait dans les salles de l’Université populaire juive…  Chacun voulait être inscrit au plus tôt et être en possession de la carte attestant son engagement ; carte magique qui rompait les files d’agents dans les service d’ordre et apaisait le courroux des concierges et des voisines trop zélées.» (Le Peuple juif, octobre 1916.)

Des jeunes gens de bonne volonté, des intellectuels ce semble, interrogeaient, renseignaient, prêchaient, inscrivaient ces recrues disparates.  Le plus zélé était un israélite de vingt-deux ans, élève de l’École des ponts et chaussées, petit, chétif, les yeux ardents, presque fébriles, d’une âme forte et envahissante.  Enthousiaste, il rêvait de mettre debout une véritable légion juive.  Rothstein était un sioniste.  Par ce gage donné à la France, il ne doutait pas de servir la cause d’Israël.

Comment l’entendait-il?  Pensait-il obtenir de la victoire des Alliés la réalisation des projets si curieux, qui ne vont pas sans grandeur, du docteur Herzl, ou plus simplement et plus sûrement voulait-il augmenter par des sacrifices la force morale, I autorité d’Israël?  Un mot qu’il prononça ne laisse pas de doute sur la vigueur et la direction de sa pensée.  Il donnait rendezvous à ses amis après la guerre en Palestine.

Quand tous furent engagés, lui-même signa la feuille d’enrôlement.

Parti simple soldat, Amédée Rothstein fut promu sous-lieutenant, puis cité à l’ordre de l’armée pour avoir «montré une fougue et un sang-froid remarquables, qui ont fait l’admiration des officiers d’infanterie et de ses hommes», enfin nommé chevalier de la Légion d’honneur pour «s’être particulièrement distingué le a5 septembre 1915 en sortant le premier des tranchées et en entraînant vigoureusement ses hommes, ce qui a contribué à donner un élan superbe à la première vague d’assaut».

On aimerait connaître les pensées, les étonnements, les sympathies, les espérances de ce jeune héros d’Israël au milieu des soldats et des paysages de la France, dans une atmosphère morale si différente de son propre esprit, mais dont il s’enivrait et voulait s’enrichir.

J’ai lu de lui une analyse de la thèse de Pinès sur la «littérature judéo-allemande», analyse écourtée, bien sèche, qui fait regretter un travail plus considérable «trop subjectif, trop personnel», nous dit-on, qu’il avait consacré au même sujet.  Telles quelles, ces dix pages, où il écoute le peuple juif parler, montrent son idée fixe, son obsession des souffrances et des espoirs d’Israël, et son regard tourné vers la Palestine.  II semble mettre au-dessus de tout le sentiment de la fierté nationale qu’il se préoccupe de concilier avec l’idéal humanitaire.

Nous possédons ses Ultima verba dans une lettre adressée à son aumônier, M. Léon Sommer : «Actuellement, dit-il, je tiens ma vie comme entièrement sacrifiée, mais si le sort veut bien me la laisser, a la fin de la guerre je la considérerai comme ne m’appartenant plus, et, après avoir fait mon devoir envers la France, je me dévouerai au beau et malheureux peuple d’Israël dont je suis issu.  Mon cher aumônier, au cas où je viendrai à disparaître, j’aimerais bien dormir sous l’égide de David.  Un «Maguem David» me bercerait peut-être d’un dernier frisson, et mon esprit se complaît à la pensée de dormir mon sommeil éternel à l’ombre du symbole de Sion».

Le 18 août 1916, le sous-lieutenant Rothstein tombait à la tête de ses hommes, frappé d’une balle au front.

Il y a quelque chose de douloureux et d’attachant dans celte destinée d’un jeune esprit qui regarde le monde et la vie exclusivement à travers la nation juive el qui meurt au service de ceux qu’il aime le plus, mais dont il tient à se distinguer.  C’est une des épreuves innombrables d’Israël errant.

Maintenant approchons-nous d’un pas, et de cet ami du dehors venons à nos adoptés.

Les juifs d’Algérie, durant cette guerre, nous font voir Israël qui vient de se lier à la civilisation française et qui désire ardemment coopérer à nos droits, à nos devoirs et a nos sentiments.  Il y a quarantecinq ans, ils ne participaient à aucun droit.  Crémieux soudain leur accorda un privilège qui a fort bouleversé les Arabes.  Il les décréta citoyens français.  La noblesse de ce titre, les prérogatives qui lui sont attachées et notre éducation semblent les avoir transformés en patriotes.  Leurs pères ne connaissaient que le commerce, mais eux vibrèrent a l’appel aux armes.  Ils partirent, me dit-on, avec un grand enthousiasme.  In témoin m’assure qu’on les entendit s’écrier : «Noua courrons aux Boches, et nous leur enfoncerons nos baïonnettes dans le ventre au cri de l’Éternel».

Le cri est superbe et emmène notre imagination vers les vieux temps bibliques et l’épopée des Macchabées.  J’aimerais avoir sur l’activité guerrière des Israélites d’Algérie des précisions que je n’ai pu me procurer (12); mais, passant à un autre compartiment de ce même chapitre des adoptés qui se conduisent en bons Français pour payer et justifier leur adoption, j’apporte un témoignage certain qui nous met devant une âme noble et véhémente, el nous introduit au milieu des tourments intimes de l’Israël francisé.

J’ai entre les mains la correspondance familiale de Robert Hertz, élève de l’École normale supérieure, professeur de philosophie au lycée de Douai, fondateur des Cahiers du socialisme, fils d’un israélite allemand.  Et c’est ce dernier point qui fait le tragique de sa position et de sa pensée.  Ses lettres à sa femme sont admirables de plénitude et de chaleur.  Je lui fais tort si je ne vous dis pas son amour de son foyer, sa vigoureuse curiosité intellectuelle qui s’exerce de la manière la plus originale au cours même de la guerre, sa pleine satisfaction dans cette discipline militaire où il satisfait ce qu’il appelle sa «nostalgie de la cathédrale absente», enfin sa volonté indomptable et bien réfléchie d’aller a jusqu’au bout».  A plusieurs reprises, mon nom blâmé, loué, revient sous sa plume, et j’écoute nos accords et nos désaccords avec la plus grande attention, car la guerre ne laisse rien en nous que nous refusions de reviser.  Mais je ne m’arrêterai pas; j’ai hâte d’aller presque brutalement, c’est pour l’honneur de ce Robert Hertz, jusqu’à sa pensée toute nue et frémissante, «Si je tombe, écrit-il à sa femme, je n’aurai acquitté qu’une toute petite part de ma dette envers le pays…»

Et là-dessus, ce morceau capital:

Chère, je me rappelle des rèves de quand j’étais tout petit, et plus tard lycéen, là-bas, dans la chambre près de la cuisine, avenue de l’Alma.  De tout mon être je voulais être Français, mériter de l’être, prouver que je t’était, et je rêvais d’actions d’éclat à la guerre contre Guillaume.  Puis ce désir d’«intégration» a pris une autre forme, car mon socialisme procédait de la pour une large part.

Maintenant le vieux rêve puéril revit en moi plus ardent que jamais.  Je suis reconnaissant aux chefs qui m’acceptent pour leur subordonné, aux hommes que je suis fier de commander, eux, les enfants d’un peuple vraiment élu.  Oui, je suis pénétré de gratitude envers la patrie qui m’accepte et me comble.  Rien ne sera trop pour payer cela, et que mon petit gars puisse toujours marcher le tête haute, et dans la France restaurée ne pas connaître le tourment qui a empoisonné beaucoup d’heures de notre enfance et de notre jeunesse.  «Suis-je Français?  Mérité je de l’être?»  Non, petit gars, tu auras une patrie et tu pourras faire sonner ton pas sur la terre en te nourrissant de cette assurance: «Mon papa y était et il a tout donné à la France».  Pour moi, s’il en faut une, cette pensée est la plus douce récompense.

Il ý avait dans la situation des Juifs, surtout des Juifs allemands nouvellement immigrés, quelque chose de louche et d’irrégulier, de clandestin et de bâtard.  Je considère cette guerre comme une occasion bien venue de «régulariser la situation» pour nous et pour nos enfants.  Après ils pourront travailler, s’il leur plaît, à l’œuvre supra et inter nationale, mais d’abord il fallait montrer par le fait qu’on n’est pas au dessous de l’idéal national…  (Lettres communiquées.)

L’auteur de ce testament l’a signé de son sang, certifié de sa mort.  Robert Hertz a été tué le 13 avril 1915 à Marchéville, étant sous-lieutenant au 330e d’infanterie.  Je ne crois pas qu’il soit possible de trouver un texte où s’affirme avec plus de force et d’émotion le désir passionné d’Israël de se confondre dans l’âme française.

Voilà des Israélites nouvellement venus parmi nous el chez qui la part irraisonnée, quasi animale qu’il y a dans notre amour de la patrie (comme dans notre attachement à notre mère), n’existe pas.  Leur patriotisme est tout spirituel, acte de volonté, décision, choix de l’esprit.  Ils préfèrent la France; la patrie leur apparaît comme une association librement consentie.  D’ailleurs, ils peuvent trouver dans cette situation même une raison de se dévouer, et Robert Hertz, fils d’Allemand, nous fait voir en termes admirables que se connaissant comme un adopté il veut se conduire de manière à mériter son adoption.  Mais il est d’autres Israélites en grand nombre, enracinés depuis des siècles et des générations dans le sol de France et mêlés familièrement aux bonheurs, aux malheurs de la vie nationale.  Je me demande ce qu’ils trouvent de soutien patriotique dans leur religion.  Que subsiste-t-il en eux du vieil Israël pieux, et quel secours celui-ci offret-il à ses fils engagés dans la guerre?

M. le grand rabbin du Consistoire central de France, dans une lettre que j’ai sous les yeux, répond : «Mes aumôniers et moi, nous avons constaté depuis le début de la guerre chez les soldats israelites une grande recrudescence de foi religieuse s’alliant à l’enthousiasme patriotique».  Cependant je n’ai pas detextes.  J’indîque en toute bonne foi les lacunes de mon enquête.  Les documents que je possède sur l’élite morale des Israélites ne me font connaître que des consciences qui paraissent vidées de leur tradition religieuse (13).  Ce sont des libres-penseurs.

Les libre penseurs issus du catholicisme ou du protestantisme vivent, pour one grande part, du vieux fonds chrétien ; durant des siècles, ils furent préparés dans les petites églises de village.  Mais ces israélites, de quoi sont faits leur dévouement et leur acceptation?  Que leur a dit la Sagesse qui repose dans l’ombre de la vieille synagogue?  Vers quel synonyme de Jéhovah sont-ils inclinés quand ils prononcent le Fiat voluntas tua?  Et comment se nuance leur consentement sur cette gamme morale qui va de l’attente douloureuse au joyeux appétit du sacrifice?

Un jeune juif nous donne une réponse à ces grandes questions.  Roger Cahen, sorti depuis peu de l’école normale supérieure, âgé de moins de vingt-cinq ans, est sous-lieutenant dans les bois de l’Argonne.  Sous le feu allemand, il se livre avec volupté à des examens de conscience dont ses lettres nous donnent le dessin.  Claires et fortes, avec tous les germes qui annoncent le grand talent, elles respirent la confiance d’un jeune intellectuel qui, parlant à sa famille, à des amis sûrs, à son ancien maître, M. Paul Desjardins, ne craint pas d étaler sa fierté et sa liberté spirituelle.  Ce sont autant de petites méditations où l’on voit que le jeune soldat ne cherche et ne rencontre que lui-même dans tout le chaos de cette guerre.  Roger Cahen ne s’aventure pas au delà du cercle de clarté que répand sa petite flamme intérieure: «Je ne crois à aucun dogme d’aucune religion», écrit-il.  C’était son opinion avant la guerre; il s’y confirme en décembre 1915, deux mois avant sa fin héroïque.  «Je viens de lire la Bible.  Elle est pour moi un recueil de contes, de vieilles et charmantes histoires.  Je n’y cherche el n’y trouve pas autre chose que des émotions poétiques.»

Ce sont des émotions poétiques encore qu’il cherche dans la guerre, et il en trouve de fort belles.  Je le crois tout à fait quand il écrit: «J’ai en moi une abondance de gaieté indéfiniment renouvelable, une âme toute fraîche et nette, accueillante, à tous et à toutes les sensations.  J’ai chaque matin l’impression que je viens seulement de naître et que je vois le vaste monde pour la première fois…»  Certaines de ses lettres écrites sur ses genoux, à la lueur d’une pauvre bougie, à cinq mètres sous terre, sont d’un grand lyrique.  Ecoutez avec piété ce fragment de l’éternelle poésie:

Splendeur du jour naissant, aucun hymne n’égalera celui qui monte dans l’Ame des hommes qui veillent dans les tranchées quand, après des heures d’attente, ils sentent, puis voient apparaître et grandir le jour triomphant.  Aces instants-là, j’ai tout un orchestre en moi.  Si je pouvais noter ces chants intérieurs qu’aucun concert ne me rendra jamais!  Si vous saviez combien elles sont riches et belles les émotions que donne la venue au monde do jour bien-aimé!

Je n’entendrai jamais les prisonniers de Fidelio monter sur la tour, sans associer à la musique sublime de Beethoven cette voix du petit sous-lieutenant…  Une nuit, voyant venir dans le ciel, à la lueur des fusées, une flotte de nuages chargés de pluie, il les salue en lui-même du chant des mariniers du premier acte de Tristan.  Au fond des tranchées, en première ligne, il note que les seuls événements de son histoire «ce sont les changements de l’ordre naturel, la tombée de la nuit, la naissance du jour, un ciel couvert ou étoile, la chaleur ou la fraîcheur de l’air.  Cette confusion avec la vie du monde donne à notre vie une grandeur, une beauté incomparables…»

Ainsi attaché à la splendeur universelle, il défie le destin.  «J’ai confiance que quoi qu’il arrive aujourd’hui, demain, dans huit jours, je me suis monté assez haut pour dominer les événements et ne les regarder qu’avec curiosité».  Et le voilà qui lève son regard: «Le ciel est tout bleu.  Bourdonnement d’avions.  Nous assisterons encore aujourd’hui à des luttes.  A voir les avions se chercher, foncer l’un sur l’autre, se mitrailler, reprendre le large, revenir à la charge jusqu’à ce que l’un des deux s’enfuie ou tombe, je retrouve tout pur le plaisir passionnant des courses de taureaux: émotion pareille, l’arène est en haut.»

Tout cela se résume dans cette profession de foi:

Au risque de vous paraître fou, je déclare en mon âme et conscience que j’aime être ici; j’aime la tranchée de première ligne, comme un «pensoir» incomparable: on y est ramassé sur soi-même, toutes ses forces rassemblées ; on y jouît d’une entière plénitude de vie.  J’y suis comme sous un réflecteur, je m’y vois dans une clarté toute crue, avec une lucidité qui mieux que n’importe quel bureau de travail facilite l’analyse…  Je lis peu, j’ai plus de plaisir à voir autour de moi, à essayer de démêler et de coordonner mes impressions; travail de prolongement et d’approfondissement, ce que mes hommes font pour les boyaux, je le fais en moi-même.

Si vous étiez disposé à la longue à trouver ce dilettantisme un peu voulu, hâtez-vous de reconnaître dans cette volonté, qui de toute manière serait méritoire, un fond bien touchant de tendresse.  Ces lettres, le courageux enfant les écrit à ses parents.  A-t-il cette tranquillité toujours dans son cœur?  Je le crois.  Mais je suis sûr aussi qu’il veut la donner aux siens.  Eh! ne cesse-t-il de leur répéter, en fin de compte, c’est un enrichissement d’images el de sensations:

Je suis heureux comme un homme à qui l’on offrirait une touffe de roses à respirer.  Et puis l’habitude de ne contempler que des spectacles de la plus grande poésie m’agrandit l’âme…  Cette campagne aura été pour moi, comme je m’y attendais, une excellente épreuve.  Elle m’aura fait un homme; elle m’aura appris que je puis m’assurer toujours sur moi-même.  Elle m’aura élargi la vue (toute ma vie intérieure est devenue plus facile, plus large – large comme une avenue où j’aimerais voir aller et venir beaucoup de passants) — surtout en me montrant les effets que peuvent avoir sur les autres un visage égal, souriant, accueillant à n’importe quelle heure, et quelques bonnet paroles.

A chacune de ses lettres, sa conclusion ne manque jamais d’être qu’il se tient désormais pour un bon et solide instrument.  C’est le refrain et le ressort de sa pensée quotidienne.  Il a trouvé sa règle et sa voie.  II est sûr de lui.

Pour définir sa méthode et son état d’esprit, son culte ou sa culture du moi, il trouve une quantité d’expressions pleines d’esprit: «Réjouissez-vous, écrit-il à ses parents, mais non d’une joie de primitif, à la façon des Boches, d’une joie critique.»  Un autre jour, voulant indiquer la monotonie des journées et des heures et son repos quasi-monastique d’esprit, il écrit : «Je jouis du sentiment de la continuité.»  Et encore : «J’étais fait pour cette vie aventureuse…  Je jouis de l’exercice voluptueux de ma volonté.»

Son refrain dans cette dure vie ne varie pas un instant.  Chaque jour, il note : «Je crois faire de sérieux progrès intérieurs.  Je rapporterai une magnifique collection d’images et d’impressions.»

A la longue, on s’en offenserait.  Vraiment, dans un tel drame, cette volupté de collectionneur…  Eh! il est à la peine, ce vaillant, nous n’allons pas lui chicaner son droit de prendre son réconfort où il le trouve: admirons plutôt qu’il se crée de la volupté, là où tant d’autres gémiraient.  Une nuit qu’il est de garde dans la tranchée, entre une et quatre heures, et que les halles et les grenades s’écrasent contre le parapet, il note les combinaisons et le scintillement des étoiles, et ajoute : «Il faudra que j’apprenne l’astronomie.»

Cela est très beau.  Et cela lui est utile pour être un brave.  C’est en suivant sa volupté qu’il s’achemine ù l’héroïsme.

Notons-le en passant.  Roger Cahen est justifié par Pascal, qui disait dans sa haute sainteté : «L’homme est esclave de la délectation; ce qui le délecte davantage l’attire infailliblement.»  Pascal avec les jansénistes présentait là une doctrine de saint Augustin, qui lui-même l’avait prise chez Virgile.  A leurs yeux, c’était en outre une vérité de sens commun : «On ne quitte les biens de la terre que parce qu’on en trouve de plus grands au service de Dieu.»  Roger Cahen, qui aimait lire Virgile dans sa tranchée, aurait pu prendre pour devise Trahit sua quemque voluptas.  Telle était sa voie pour prononcer à son tour et à sa manière le Fiat voluntas tua.

Je tache de mettre à profit mon isolement et l’acuité que donne le danger pour mieux me connaître.  Si vous saviez avec quelle simplicité on se considère et on se juge dans ce pays!  J’ai réussi jusqu’à présent à me maintenir dans un état d’égalité et d’insouciance philosophique, de constante acceptation.

Le voilà, le mot de tous, l’acceptation!  Et ce n’est pas le mol seulement, c’est bien la pensée.  Toute chaude, toute noble, profondément douloureuse pour ceux qui l’écoutent avec une parfaite sympathie, mais pour lui nuancée de paix joyeuse:

Je me suis interdit de porter des jugements de valeur sur les événements de ma vie; je les accepte tous comme des occasions que m’offre te sort pour mieux me connaître et m’améliorer.

Et encore :

Je regarde.  Je me laisse émouvoir.  Ne suppose pas que je fais des efforts d’intelligence pour voir les choses et les hommes à leur place dans le tout: aucun vraiment.  J’ai fait cet effort-là autrefois, dans la première partie de la vie, avant la guerre.  Maintenant le pli est pris.  Délivrance de toute tension.  La vie me paraît simple, simple, et toujours si admirable que je ne comprends pas qu’on ne s’y prête pas avec reconnaissance…

Un des jeunes amis à qui il adresse ces belles lettres cherche à le classer et lui dit : «Tu es fataliste.»  Roger Cahen proteste avec vivacité: «Ni fataliste, ni déterministe ; j’accepte seulement avec amour tous les événements qui sont créateurs de sentiments nouveaux, de forces nouvelles; je suis celui qui espère toujours, je suis persuadé que le Messie est à venir.»

Un autre jour, il écrira : «Je suis d’une àme très pieuse, mais ma piété est celle de Jean Christophe: «Sois pieux envers le jour qui se relève.»  Mon Dieu, c’est le Temps, le Temps très bon et très puissant.»

Enfin, à la veille de sa mort, cette belle page :

J’ai été purement stoïcien entre quinze et dixsept ans; j’avais alors Marc-Aurèle constamment sur ma table et je me grisais à froid d’Epictète…  Depuis la guerre, j’ai dépassé et abandonné la doctrine stoïcienne; je n’avais plus besoin de cet échafaudage, je l’ai mis bas.  J’étais mal à l’aise dans son déterminisme, et puis elle me paraissait vraiment trop sèche et manquer de cœur.  Je continue à croire que la principale vertu est l’effort de la raison pour voir les choses à leur place dans l’ensemble, pour les «remettre au point» en toute vérité et simplicité, et à mon détriment s’il le faut, quelque douloureux que ce soit, mais je ne crois pas que le monde soit pénétré déraison.  Je constate qu’il est mené uniquement par les sentiments et les passions.

Quelle solitude dans ces réflexions!  On peut hardiment supposer que ce petit recueil de lettres exprime une manière de penser qui fut à peu près unique dans les ravins de la Fille Morte.  Roger Cahen est seul en face de la nature.

J’ai été habitué de longue date à la solitude; j’ai appris à l’aimer et a la rendre féconde; je travaille intérieurement le plus possible; je sais vivre au milieu des gens qui me sont indifférents comme si j’étais seul, sans récriminations insensées contre eux et sans me ronger moi-même, en toute paix, avec un complet détachement de ceux auprès desquels je dois vivre.  Enfin, tout ce que je vois autour de moi, pays, ciel, forêt el scènes humaines, tout est si beau, si beau que la joie de la contemplation est constamment la plus forte.  Avec les camarades, je me contente de relations de politesse, avec la nature, j’ai d’intimes, émouvantes et très douloureuses relations d’affection.

C’est vrai qu’il est différent, mais comment le lire sans l’aimer, ce jeune intellectuel, mort à vingt-cinq ans pour la France!  Certes, il est heureux qu’a côté de lui il y ait eu Péguy, Psichari, Marcel Drouet, et les jeunes Léo Latil, Jean Rival Cazalis, enfants tout lumineux.  Sa liberté d’esprit, son isolement, sa nature fine et noblement voluptueuse sont tout de même une forme de courage bien élégante el bien forte.  Et puis il se rattache à notre terre par sa culture; il écrit dans sa cagna en se servant de Montaigne comme d’un pupitre, il raffole de la Chartreuse de Parme.  Seul, absolument seul jusqu’à cette heure, il nous représente, au milieu de la guerre, une attitude d’amateur qui fut celle, vis-à-vis de la vie, d’un nombre immense de jeunes lettrés.  Leurs domaines imaginaires furent submergés par un flot d’émotion qui leur monta du cœur; ils se livrèrent, dans le vaste océan, à la commune passion.  Où sont les cénacles de la Revue Indépendante, de la Revue Blanche?  Roger Cahen continue, renouvelle, élargit une conception de l’existence que nous avons tellement aimée, il y a un quart de siècle.  Il l’héroïse.  Tombé au champ d’honneur, dans cette Argonne où, durant six mois, il avait inlassablement écouté dialoguer ses pensées, il est porté à l’ordre de la 18e brigade d’infanterie et pleuré, nous dit un sergent, par les hommes de sa compagnie.

…..Roger Cahen, Robert Hertz, Amédé Rothstein, toutes ces ligures vigoureusement caractérisées offrent quelque chose de rare et de singulier.  J’aime suivre en elles les âges divers, les étapes, la formation d’un personnage, le jeune intellectuel juif, qui joue un grand rôle depuis plusieurs années en France, mais je ne les donne pas comme représentatives de la communauté Israélite française (14).  Les vieilles familles enracinées par des générations dans le sol de France aimeront mieux prendre pour héros exemplaire et pour étendard, le grand-rabbin de Lyon, qui tombe au champ d’honneur en offrant un crucifix au soldat catholique mourant.

Dans le village de Taintrux, près de Saint-Dié, dans les Vosges, le 29 août 1914 (un samedi, le jour saint des juifs), l’ambulance du 14e corps prend feu sous le tir des Allemands.  Les brancardiers emportent, au milieu des flammes el des éclatements, les cent cinquante blessés.  L’un de ceux-ci, frappé à mort, réclame un crucifix.  Il le demande à M. Abraham Bloch, l’aumônier israélite, qu’il prend pour l’aumônier catholique.  M. Bloch s’empresse; il cherche, il trouve, il apporte au mourant le symbole de la foi des chrétiens.  Et quelques pas plus loin, un obus le frappe lui-même.  Il expire aux bras de l’aumônier catholique, le Père Jamin, jésuite, de qui le témoignage établit cette scène.

Nul commentaire n’ajouterait rien à l’émotion de sympathie que nous inspire un tel acte, plein de tendresse humaine.  Un long cortège d’exemples vient de nous montrer Israël qui s’applique dans cette guerre à prouver sa gratitude envers la France.  De degré en degré, nous nous sommes élevés; ici la fraternité trouve spontanément son geste parfait: le vieux rabbin présentant au soldat qui meurt le signe immortel du Christ sur la croix, c’est une image qui ne périra pas.

References and Suggested Readings

Barrès, Maurice, Les diverses familles spirituelles de la France, Paris, Émile-Paul frères, Paris, France, 1917, at Archive.org

Maurice Barrès, at Wikipedia

Maurice Barrès, at For and Against Dreyfus

Maurice Barrès, at Radical Right Analysis

Maurice Barrès, (photographic portrait by Atalier de Nadar [Photo (C) Ministère de la Culture – Médiathèque du Patrimoine, Dist. RMN-Grand Palais / Atelier de Nadar]), at images d’art

Englund, Steven, An Affair As We Don’t Know It (Book Review of An Officer and A Spy, by Robert Harris), at Jewish Review of Books, Spring, 2015

Weber, Eugen, Inheritance and Dilettantism: the Politics of Maurice Barrès, Historical Reflections / Réflexions Historiques, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Summer/été 1975), pp. 109-131, at JSTOR

The Ambivalence of Acceptance – The Acceptance of Ambivalence IV: The Death and Life of Rabbi Abraham Bloch – in Philippe-E. Landau’s “Les Juifs de France et la Grande Guerre” – 1999

Avant de faire des recherches sur le service militaire juif dans l’armée française pendant la Grande Guerre, l’histoire de Grand Rabbin Abraham Bloch m’était totalement inconnue. Grâce à diverses sources numériques et textuelles, j’ai rapidement découvert son histoire et, dans un contexte plus large, ses relations avec l’expérience du judaïsme français pendant cette guerre et au-delà.

Une excellente source d’informations sur le rabbin Bloch apparaît au sein de Philippe-E. Landau.  La monographie de Landau, Les Juifs de France et la Grande Guerre. Le texte intégral de son chapitre sur le rabbin est présenté ci-dessous.

Mythe et réalité: la mort du grand rabbin Abraham Bloch

Les Juifs de France et la Grande Guerre (page de couverture)

De 1915 à la défaite de 1940, la mort au champ d’honneur du grand rabbin Abraham Bloch symbolise la communion de corps et d’esprit de la communauté avec la nation.  Image d’Epinal autant pour la jeunesse israélite que pour les générations ayant vécu la Grande Guerre, elle représente la fidélité patriotique du judaïsme français.

Ce pieux tableau, où le grand rabbin, alors aumônier et brancardier, décède des suites de ses blessures sous une pluie de tirs ennemis après avoir apporté un crucifix à un soldat catholique agonisant, reste dans la mémoire collective « une image qui ne périra pas » selon Maurice Barrés. (1)

L’israélitisme a retenu cet événement pour revendiquer son sacrifice durant l’épreuve.  La mort du grand rabbin a d’ailleurs bénéficié d’une publicité importante, ne fût-ce que par l’article enthousiaste que lui a consacré Maurice Barrés.  L’information est ensuite diffusée par l’ensemble de la presse nationale.  Aussi, il ne s’agit pas simplement d’un épisode limité à l’histoire communautaire.  De loin, il dépasse le contexte confessionnel car il est l’image même de l’union sacrée.  On ne saurait jauger l’impact de cette mort sur la mentalité de l’après-guerre, soucieuse de perpétuer la fraternité des tranchées.

D’abord simple fait d’actualité à la fin de l’année 1914, l’événement prend de l’ampleur sous la plume de l’écrivain nationaliste qui réveille davantage l’ardeur patriotique de l’israélitisme.  Les rabbins et les notables saluent la mort glorieuse d’Abraham Bloch, mais se montrent toutefois discrets sur son fameux geste.  A-t-il vraiment apporté un crucifix?

Mais l’enthousiasme l’emporte sur la raison.  Dès 1917, une fois que la presse s’est emparée de l’histoire et que le peintre Lucien Lévy-Dhurmer a fixé pour l’éternité le geste du grand rabbin, le rabbinat accepte.  Voilà Abraham Bloch devenu « martyr » pour ses coreligionnaires et « saint » pour la nation.

Tableau de Lucien Lévy-Dhurmer représentant le rabbin Abraham Bloch tenant un crucifix devant un soldat mourant

Loin de périr, l’image se diffuse dans toutes les familles israélites sous forme de cartes postales et le souvenir du grand rabbin est relaté dans toutes les manifestations patriotiques que célèbre la communauté.

Si, dans les années vingt, cet épisode réconforte le judaïsme qui y voit la consécration, à partir des années trente, la mort du grand rabbin devient l’objet d’une récupération politique et d’une surenchère patriotique.  Les anciens combattants, notamment ceux de l’Union patriotique des Français israélites, utilisent cette image symbolique pour mieux raviver le souvenir de l’union sacrée.

UN GRAND RABBIN PATRIOTE

Né à Paris en 1859, Abraham Bloch a 55 ans lorsque la guerre est déclarée.  Malgré son âge avancé, il se propose de devenir aumônier et est affecté au 14e corps d’armée.

Le grand rabbin Abraham Bloch (image de Judaica Algeria)

Issu d’une famille alsacienne pieuse, il a un parcours strictement rabbinique.  Après des études au séminaire israélite de Paris, il est envoyé à Remiremont (1884-1897) où il démontre un zèle particulier qui lui vaut l’estime des fidèles.  Il devient ensuite grand rabbin d’Alger de 1897 à 1908.  Les manœuvres antisémites générées par l’affaire Dreyfus l’obligent à veiller aux intérêts communautaires et à soutenir la cause républicaine.  Le grand rabbin de France, satisfait de son action, décide de le promouvoir en lui offrant la responsabilité du grand rabbinat de Lyon et de sa région, poste qu’il occupe de 1908 jusqu’à la mobilisation. (2)

Le rabbin Israël Lévi, dans un article qu’il lui consacre en janvier 1915, témoigne de son ardeur patriotique alors qu’Abraham Bloch est de santé fragile: « Quand fut décrétée la mobilisation, l’autorité militaire demanda au grand rabbin de Lyon de désigner l’aumônier destiné à suivre le 14e corps d’armée.  Sourd aux objurgations de ses amis et de ses proches, Abraham Bloch n’hésita pas à revendiquer pour lui l’honneur de servir son pays. » (3)

Ce dernier s’adapte très vite à la nouvelle situation.  S’il note avec ironie et plaisir dans son carnet qu’il est le « curé juif », car sa tenue ne le distingue guère des autres aumôniers, il se félicite de l’union sacrée: « … Je suis le doyen de la bande.  Les officiers sont charmants avec nous tous. » (4)

Si, pour le moment, le grand rabbin a peu d’Israélites à réconforter, il en profite pour visiter des coreligionnaires dans la région des Vosges où il avait déjà noué de durables relations lors de son premier pastorat.

Mais l’offensive allemande interrompt ses visites amicales.  Après Fraize et Provenchères, les bataillons se trouvent en face de Saint-Dié à la date du 25 août.  Deux jours plus tard, le grand rabbin note pour la dernière fois dans son carnet: « Nous attendons l’ordre de départ pour chercher des blessés.  En attendant, on dit que c’est du côté de Saint-Dié que l’on aurait bombardé… » (5)

Ici s’achèvent les impressions d’Abraham Bloch.  Désormais, le journal des marches et opérations du 14e corps d’armée nous renseigne sur l’évolution des combats et sur les conditions de sa mort.

Le 28 août, le grand rabbin n’a ni le temps ni le loisir d’écrire, car l’attaque a repris et se fait très violente.  Les troupes, dont la 58e division, ont reçu l’ordre précis de « reprendre l’offensive coûte que coûte sur Taintrux et Anozel. » (6)  Pendant la nuit du 28 au 29 août, les secours doivent évacuer plus de 600 blessés et récupérer 150 soldats sur le champ de bataille.  Malgré les pertes subies, les troupes françaises entendent rester maîtresses des lieux alors que l’artillerie allemande se déchaîne.  Le col d’Anozel devient l’enjeu de la lutte, car l’ennemi veut prendre cette position qui lui permettrait alors d’accéder à la petite ville de Saint-Dié.

Les combats font toujours rage.  Le journal de marche mentionne la ténacité des troupes: « Pendant cette journée qui a été très dure pour notre régiment, le personnel a fait preuve du plus grand calme sous le feu des obusiers allemands. » Le 29 août, vers 12 heures, les brancardiers dont Abraham Bloch doivent transférer 450 blessés en provenance de Taintrux tandis qu’ils sont toujours confrontés « au feu de l’artillerie ennemie ».  L’abbé Dubodel, aumônier catholique et témoin oculaire, confirme l’extrême violence des combats pendant cette journée : « Alors recommence le feu, plus violent que jamais; couchant pêle-mêle à terre blessés, brancardiers, voitures d’ambulance.  A l’arrivée au poste de secours, 5 ou 6 disparus, un aumônier militaire blessé, un rabbin juif blessé. » (7)

Un rabbin peut-il être autrement que juif?  L’expression de l’abbé Dubodel, qui connaît pourtant le grand rabbin depuis le début du mois d’août, fait sourire.  Quoi qu’il en soit, il est certain que pendant plusieurs heures, entre 12 heures et 18 heures, les troupes françaises ont subi les assauts répétés des forces allemandes et sont alors obligées de se replier et de « descendre vers la Meuse afin de s’y maintenir ».

Ce serait vers 17 heures que le grand rabbin aurait été tué dans les conditions que relate le médecin-major Raymond dans le journal des marches du groupe des brancardiers de la 68e division d’infanterie:

« …  Il (le service des brancardiers) évacue d’abord les blessés du 229° installés à l’école d’Anozel (une trentaine environ), le plus près de la ligne de feu, puis ceux du poste de secours du 30e d’infanterie situé dans la grange du village.  A ce moment commence le bombardement.  Un obus tombe sur le poste de secours que le groupe est en train d’évacuer, sans blesser personne mais commençant à incendier la grange.

Ce second poste évacué, le groupe s’occupa du troisième organisé par le 229e et situé dans la dernière maison du village.  À ce moment, le bombardement bat son plein, un obus tombe sur le poste de secours, un autre sur la maison voisine qu’il incendie.  (…)  Les obus continuent à tomber autour du poste et battent la route.

L’un d’eux tue un brancardier de corps et projette violemment sur le sol le brancardier du groupe Dubodel, cette chute violente lui occasionne une fracture à la base du crâne.  Evacué, cité à l’ordre de l’armée.

Le rabbin (M. Bloch, rabbin à Lyon, section de la fémorale, mort en quelques instants) des brancardiers de corps qui transportait un blessé est également tué… » (8)

La bataille se calme dans la soirée.  Vers 21 h 45, le chef d’état-major envoie cette note au général commandant en chef : « Gros combats aujourd’hui sur tout le front du 14e corps, grosse fatigue, grosses pertes incalculables, encore en raison de l’étendue du front : 20 kilomètres dans les forêts. » (9)  Le lendemain, on dénombre plus de 1000 blessés.  Selon les autorités militaires, il est clairement admis que le grand rabbin Abraham Bloch a été tué « par un obus qui lui a emporté la cuisse gauche et une balle dans la poitrine.  A Taintrux, en évacuant un blessé». (10)  Il s’agit d’un cas banal en ce samedi 29 août 1914.

Carte “PARTIE À REMPLIR PAR LE CORPS” pour le rabbin Abraham Bloch

LA PRESSE FAIT L’EVENEMENT

Dès le 17 septembre, Les Archives israélites annoncent à leurs lecteurs la disparition du grand rabbin, devenu la première victime rabbinique dans ce contexte où l’on s’évertue à célébrer avec force l’union sacrée.  Dans un article en page 2, le rédacteur se contente de mentionner les conditions de sa mort:

« La guerre a fait une victime dans le Rabbinat français et elle a choisi pour sa proie, l’un de ses membres les plus dignes, les plus pieux et les plus respectés: M.  le grand rabbin Abraham Bloch.

On possède sur les circonstances tragiques dans lesquelles M. le grand rabbin Bloch de Lyon a trouvé la mort sur le champ de bataille, les renseignements suivants fournis par M. l’abbé Debodel de Châteauroux, qui fut blessé au même endroit…

Vers deux heures de l’après-midi, le corps des brancardiers de la 58e division de réserve dont il faisait partie prodiguait ses soins dans une ferme de 150 blessés environ.  Une batterie allemande n’ayant pu avoir raison d’un bataillon d’alpins, dirigea ses feux sur la ferme.  On évacue les blessés…  Mais le feu de l’ennemi fait rage, couchant pêle-mêle blessés, aumôniers et brancardiers.  C’est à ce moment que le Grand Rabbin Bloch tombe pour ne plus se relever, tandis que l’abbé Debodel s’en tire avec une blessure. »

Ce court article reste fidèle à la déclaration du médecin-major et s’appuie sur le témoignage de l’abbé Debodel (en réalité Dubodel) publié dans Le Salut public de Lyon du 8 septembre 1914.  L’abbé est en fait le seul témoin oculaire qui fut proche du grand rabbin lors du bombardement.

Les journalistes ne mentionnent pas encore le crucifix que le grand rabbin aurait apporté à un soldat agonisant.  Cet acte aurait été à l’origine de sa mort.  En mai 1915, lors de l’assemblée générale ordinaire du Consistoire de Paris, le président Edouard Masse évoque le décès d’Abraham Bloch, mais sans décrire les circonstances de sa disparition.  Comme tant d’autres, il aurait été tué à l’ennemi en remplissant ses fonctions de brancardier: «…  La fin héroïque du Grand Rabbin Abraham Bloch, a montré, dès le début des hostilités, comment nos aumôniers savent, quand il le faut, mourir pour leur pays, en faisant preuve non seulement du plus admirable courage, mais encore d’une largeur d’idées dont l’opinion publique, sans distinction de cultes ou de partis, a si unanimement souligné la beauté. » (11)

La « largeur d’idées » désigne-t-elle le fameux geste du grand rabbin?  Peut-être!  Dans ce cas, Edouard Masse se montre bien sceptique et doute de la nouvelle version de la mort d’Abraham Bloch apparue dès novembre 1914.  Il en est de même pour les autres membres de l’assemblée, qui ne relèvent pas l’affirmation du président.

Pourtant, au début de l’automne 1914, une information va profondément modifier cet événement qui devient déjà un symbole de l’union sacrée.  Selon une lettre du père Jamin, aumônier catholique du 14e corps, adressée au père Chauvin alors curé à Lyon, le grand rabbin serait mort par un éclat d’obus mais après avoir trouvé et apporté un crucifix à un soldat grièvement blessé.  Saisi par ce détail qui illustre davantage l’union sacrée, le père Chauvin communique aussitôt l’information à la veuve d’Abraham Bloch le 24 septembre 1914:

«…  Avant de quitter le hameau, un blessé, le prenant pour un prêtre catholique, lui a demandé à baiser un crucifix.  M Bloch a trouvé le crucifix demandé et l’a fait baiser à ce blessé.  C’est après avoir accompli cet acte de charité qu’il est sorti du hameau accompagnant un autre blessé jusqu’à la voiture la plus proche.  L’obus l’a atteint à quelques mètres en avant de la voiture où le blessé venait de monter.

J’ai pensé que ces détails consoleraient une douleur qui doit être bien vive. » (12)

La famille du grand rabbin avertit le rabbin Israël Lévi qui fut son ami depuis leurs études au séminaire rabbinique.  Grand patriote, Israël Lévi estime que cet exemple illustre parfaitement le dévouement des Israélites pendant la guerre.  Citant la lettre du père Jamin, il rédige une note qui précise les conditions de la mort dans Les Archives israélites.  Il conclut : « …L’acte de ce rabbin allant chercher un crucifix pour le donner à baiser à un blessé — alors que les obus tirés sur l’ambulance obligeaient à une évacuation rapide et mourant presque tout de suite après, ne méritait-il pas d’être relevé? » (13)

Les Archives Israélites ne font pas grand cas de cette histoire qui est relatée dans la rubrique « Échos israélites de la guerre » entre la promotion des combattants et les actions patriotiques du baron Edmond de Rothschild.  Toutefois, la description retient l’attention des journalistes de la presse non juive, dont Gérard Bauer qui consacre un grand article sur la question intitulé « La mort d’un rabbin » et publié dans L’Écho de Paris du 7 novembre 1914.  L’auteur, en signalant le sacrifice d’un grand rabbin, glorifie l’union sacrée:

« …  Or un soir qu’il s’employait à cette mission courageuse, il entendit parmi les plaintes, l’appel d’un fantassin agonisant.  Le pauvre garçon frappé d’une façon qui ne pardonne pas s’était légèrement dressé sur un coude et d’une voix affaiblie, lui avait demandé un crucifix…

Le rabbin n’eut aucun moment d’hésitation.  À une centaine de mètres se profilait un prêtre penché lui aussi sur des mourants.  Il le rejoignit en grande hâte, lui demanda de lui prêter son crucifix, revient près du blessé et s’agenouillant à son côté, lui approche l’image du Rédempteur des lèvres.  Et le soldat expira dans ce baiser.

Mais tout à côté un autre agonisant, qui avait vu le geste du rabbin, lui demanda de le renouveler pour lui.  Cette fois non plus l’israélite n’hésita pas.  Il se releva, mais dans le moment qu’il se relevait une balle – on n’avait pas cessé de se battre – une balle vint le frapper au front.  Il s’affaissa, tombant mort à côté du moribond qu’il allait secourir, tenant dans sa main crispée le crucifix, dont pour la première fois, il avait fait usage. »

Cet article doit retenir toute notre attention car il s’agit pour la première fois d’une version romancée de la mort d’Abraham Bloch.  D’où Gérard Bauer tient-il ses informations, sinon de la note du rabbin Israël Lévi qui repose sur la lettre du père Chauvin?  Par ailleurs, il dénature les faits.  Le rabbin n’a accompli cet acte qu’une fois et a été tué par un éclat d’obus selon le témoignage du père Jamin.  Plusieurs questions se posent.  Pourquoi n’est-ce pas le prêtre catholique qui apporte l’absolution au soldat mourant?  Qui est d’ailleurs cet aumônier qui aurait pu témoigner par la suite sur le geste du grand rabbin?  Ni le pasteur Rivet ni le père Jamin ne sont aux côtés d’Abraham Bloch lors de l’offensive allemande!  Seul l’abbé Dubodel se trouve non loin du grand rabbin, mais il n’a jamais évoqué l’acte.

Pour Gérard Bauer, il faut une mort héroïque à l’image de l’union sacrée.  Un vulgaire éclat d’obus n’est pas assez digne pour un tel geste.  Mieux vaut une balle!  Une action charitable ne suffit pas.  Il faut renouveler l’acte.

Cette version fait son impression sur la mentalité de l’époque et même après.  Le rabbinat, s’il doute du geste, ne remet pas en cause l’information.  Après tout, elle sert le patriotisme du judaïsme.  La communauté a besoin elle aussi de héros et de martyrs et s’approprie cette histoire.  A l’occasion du premier anniversaire de la mort d’Abraham Bloch, le grand rabbin de Lille Édgard Sèches salue le sacrifice de son collègue: « …  Martyr, il l’a été, certes.  Ce mot, vous ne l’ignorez pas, signifie TÉMOIN.  Oui, il a été témoin de notre amour ardent pour la France.  Oui, il a rendu lui-même le témoignage que cet amour peut aller jusqu’au sacrifice complet de la vie.  (…) Sa mort a plus fait pour le judaïsme et le rabbinat français que les discours les plus éloquents. » (14)  Reprenant l’expression de Maurice Barrés, le grand rabbin de France Alfred Lévy rend aussi hommage à Abraham Bloch, mais ne mentionne pas l’objet : « …  Le nom de cette victime du devoir ne périra point; il sera la gloire, l’auréole sainte de sa famille, du rabbinat, du judaïsme français.  » Sur ce point précis, les rabbins sont très discrets.  Est-ce par conviction religieuse et par désapprobation du geste, ou tout simplement parce qu’ils doutent de la véracité de l’acte?

Préparant son étude intitulé Les Diverses Familles spirituelles de la France, Maurice Barrés conserve la version romancée dans un article paru dans L’Écho de Paris du 15 décembre 1915 et repris dans son livre.  C’est l’occasion pour l’homme de lettres nationaliste de célébrer les vertus de l’union sacrée : « …  De degré en degré, nous nous sommes élevés; ici la fraternité trouve spontanément son geste parfait: le vieux rabbin présentant au soldat qui meurt le signe immortel du Christ sur la croix, c’est une image qui ne périra pas. » (15)

Désormais, de La Dépêche algérienne à La Tribune de Genève, la presse nationale et internationale reprend à son compte cette version devenue quasiment officielle.  Cette fin tragique, mais combien symbolique, retient aussi l’attention de la classe politique et du poète Edmond Rostand qui compose en mars 1918 ces quelques vers:

« Un prêtre en bonnet de police
Veut s’élancer vers un mourant:
Il tombe.  Un rabbin le remplace,
Le porte à son frère chrétien,
Et sur ce mourant qu’il assiste
Tombe et meurt, merveilleux déiste,
Pour un Dieu qui n’est pas le sien! » (16)

Enivré par la victoire républicaine, l’israélitisme conserve dans sa mémoire la mort du grand rabbin Abraham Bloch devenue un mythe pour la génération des anciens combattants.  Nulle autorité ne remet en cause le geste.  L’histoire est trop belle et surtout elle a trop fait couler d’encre et susciter l’enthousiasme pour que le doute s’installe désormais dans les esprits.

Pourtant, en 1921, le père Jamin revient sur cet épisode dans son ouvrage Conseils aux jeunes gens de France, après la victoire, dans lequel il écrit: « …  J’ai raconté en septembre 1914, dans une lettre privée qui a été publiée la mort héroïque du Rabbin Bloch, aumônier militaire sur le champ de bataille de Saulcy, près de Saint-Dié.  Je n’y avais pas assisté moi-même, mais je tenais le récit de plusieurs témoins oculaires. » (17)

Le père Jamin ne mentionne pas les témoins dont il tient l’information.  Qui sont-ils?  L’abbé Dubodel, la personne la plus proche du grand rabbin pendant les bombardements, n’a jamais confirmé le fait.  Les combattants présents ne se sont jamais manifestés dans la presse et auprès de la famille Bloch.  Est-ce le père Chauvin de Lyon qui a amplifié l’histoire?  Dans ce cas, pourquoi n’est-il pas démenti par le père Jamin?  Ces deux prêtres ont-ils eu l’intention d’édifier une image d’Épinal dans le contexte si précieux de l’union sacrée, ne pouvant plus arrêter l’anecdote qui s’est transformée en mythe?

La mort d’Abraham Bloch immortalise l’union sacrée et la participation israélite durant le conflit.  Le peintre Lucien Lévy-Dhurmer renforce le mythe dès 1917 avec sa toile représentant le grand rabbin qui brandit un crucifix sur un blessé mourant au milieu des flammes.  Dans les années vingt, l’œuvre est reproduite sous forme de carte postale qui fait œuvre d’image pieuse.  En même temps, lors des diverses célébrations patriotiques, le rabbinat a soin de rappeler devant le public le sacrifice du grand rabbin.

L’événement, entretenu par la mémoire collective, ressurgit avec plus de violence dans le contexte timoré des années trente.  L’Union patriotique des Français israélites tente de se l’approprier afin de reproduire l’union sacrée si chère aux anciens combattants et que l’actualité vient sans cesse démentir.

UNE HISTOIRE QUI ARRANGE ET DERANGE

La mort du grand rabbin Abraham Bloch relève désormais de l’histoire.  Mort pour la patrie dans les conditions que nous connaissons, il devient un martyr aux yeux de ses contemporains, soucieux de défendre l’image de l’israélitisme dans une France républicaine.  La disparition d’un simple soldat dans le même contexte n’aurait peut-être pas retenu l’attention, mais par le fait qu’il s’agit d’un rabbin, connu et respecté de tous, l’anecdote prend alors de l’ampleur.

Le sacrifice d’Abraham Bloch symbolise la grandeur de l’union sacrée et enorgueillit la mémoire collective puisqu’il réunit tous les critères nécessaires, à savoir: l’engagement patriotique avec le volontariat, la vocation spirituelle avec l’aumônerie, la fraternité avec l’aide apportée au soldat agonisant, la tolérance avec le crucifix.

Si le grand rabbin devient un martyr pour la cause, la communauté n’en fait pas pour autant un héros dans le sens où nous l’entendons habituellement, car il n’est pas mort en combattant ou en résistant à l’ennemi comme le fit le jeune David Bloch.

L’image d’Epinal que retiennent les esprits durant plusieurs générations va pourtant devenir suspecte aux yeux de certains historiens. (18)  Le fameux geste provoque le doute.  Bien que n’apportant aucune preuve à leurs affirmations, ils considèrent comme peu plausible l’acte du grand rabbin.  C’est néanmoins pour eux l’occasion de dénigrer l’israélitisme, pour lequel ils n’éprouvent que méfiance et d’attaquer le rôle de l’Union patriotique des Français israélites dans son appropriation de l’événement.  Or, cette histoire n’est qu’un bref épisode pour l’Union patriotique.  Étudiant cette affaire, Michel Abitbol conclut: «Comme tout bon mythe qui se respecte, cette histoire ne fut jamais authentifiée.» (19)

Aussi, les circonstances de cette mort nous interpellent.  Puisque le débat est ouvert et qu’il ne sera jamais clos tant que les carnets de guerre (s’ils existent!) des véritables témoins seront introuvables, nous ne saurons pas si le grand rabbin est bien décédé un crucifix à la main en secourant un blessé.

Toute guerre engendre des mythes.  Pour preuve, retenons l’histoire du soldat Chauvin et celle de la fameuse « tranchée des baïonnettes.» (20)  Le judaïsme français, tout comme la IIIe République, a besoin de mythes pour nourrir sa dimension historique.  Déjà, à la veille de la Grande Guerre, Ernest Lavisse considérait que l’enseignement ne pouvait pas se passer des héros et de leurs légendes.  La mémoire succédant à l’histoire, elle offre de nombreuses possibilités comme le rappelle Pierre Nora: « L’histoire est la reconstruction toujours problématique et incomplète de ce qui n’est plus.  La mémoire est un phénomène toujours actuel, un lien vécu au présent éternel; l’histoire une représentation du passé.  Parce qu’elle est affective et magique, la mémoire ne s’accommode que des détails qui la confortent; elle se nourrit de souvenirs flous, télescopants, globaux ou flottants, particuliers ou symboliques, sensible à tous les transferts, écrans, censure ou projections. » (21)

Après guerre, Jean Norton-Cru est l’un des premiers à douter de l’authenticité de certains témoignages relatifs à la Grande Guerre.  Son étude critique à l’égard de l’expression « Debout les morts! » lancée par Jacques Péricard doit nous interroger.  Selon Jean Norton-Cru, le témoignage n’est jamais parfait: « Chaque témoin complète instinctivement, et suivant sa nature propre, la série de phrases rapides dont plusieurs lui ont échappé.  Il remplit les blancs instantanément et oublie désormais que c’étaient des blancs, des vides.  Ce qu’il a cru voir, il croit sincèrement l’avoir vu.  Il est donc presque impossible que sur une trentaine de dépositions on trouve deux qui concordent, même à peu près. » (22)

La Grande Guerre, dans l’enthousiasme qu’elle provoque et au travers de la victoire française, donne naissance à des mythes, à des situations qui permettent à l’imagination de dévoiler toute la grandeur du sacrifice consenti pendant les quatre années.  Verdun, l’héroïsme des combattants, les charges à la baïonnette sont autant d’exemples qui amplifient une réalité sûrement moins idéale.  Le traumatisme lié à la violence et à la souffrance tend à accentuer la déformation de l’histoire au profit de la mémoire.

Nous pouvons ainsi comprendre qu’une simple anecdote peut devenir un mythe, surtout lorsque des mystificateurs s’en emparent.  Dans le cas présent, il est certain que Maurice Barrés, en utilisant l’article de Gérard Bauer et la lettre du père Jamin, a facilité la diffusion de ce mythe.

C’est à partir de l’été 1934 que l’affaire Abraham Bloch ressurgit dans la communauté lorsque l’Union patriotique des Français israélites animée par Me Edmond Bloch se sert du geste du grand rabbin pour célébrer la fraternité des tranchées et, surtout, pour lutter contre l’antisémitisme.  Contrairement à ce que pense Maurice Rajsfus, l’Union patriotique n’a pas inventé le mythe Abraham Bloch.  Elle s’en est servi pour sa propre cause, à savoir ranimer l’unité entre les anciens combattants alors que l’intolérance se développe et que le souvenir de l’union sacrée s’efface des esprits au moment où la nation subit les effets des crises sociale et économique.  Certes, il s’agit bien d’une manœuvre politique de la part d’Edmond Bloch, qui saisit l’occasion du vingtième anniversaire de la mort du grand rabbin pour démontrer l’action de son mouvement.  Mais les membres de l’Union patriotique comme leurs coreligionnaires sont convaincus de l’authenticité du geste.  Ce symbole, tout en rendant hommage au rabbin, doit populariser cette association qui vient à peine d’être fondée.  Face à la montée des ligues et à l’engagement de nombreux Juifs dans les partis progressistes, Edmond Bloch et ses amis jugent nécessaire de regrouper des Israélites patriotes, viscéralement attachés au maintien de l’ordre républicain.

Dans ce contexte, il faut comprendre le rôle de l’Union patriotique lorsque son président décide l’érection d’une stèle à la mémoire du grand rabbin près du col d’Anozel en septembre 1934, lieu où est tombé Abraham Bloch.  S’il n’y a pas ici un aspect politique, ce monument s’inscrit dans la volonté de rendre un pieux hommage à une personnalité et de maintenir vivante la mémoire collective.

Avec les soutiens implicites des consistoires central et de Paris, en présence de nombreuses autorités rabbiniques, dont le grand rabbin de Nancy Paul Haguenauer, et politiques, comme M.  Mathieu préfet des Vosges et Georges Rivollet ministre des Pensions, Edmond Bloch prononce un discours fort remarqué qui témoigne de cette mentalité patriotique tout en apportant une nouvelle version du geste d’Abraham Bloch:

«…  Il se pencha vers un blessé, qui le prenant pour un prêtre catholique, lui demanda l’absolution.  – “Je ne suis pas catholique, mon pauvre ami, je suis rabbin.” — “Ne pouvez-vous pas au moins, m’obtenir un crucifix?”

Un prêtre catholique brancardier passait non loin de là, portant, avec l’un de ses camarades, un blessé sur une civière.  Le grand rabbin lui demanda s’il possédait un crucifix: le prêtre en avait un, mais sur la poitrine, à l’intérieur de sa capote; sans abandonner son brancard, il l’indiqua à Abraham Bloch qui ouvrit le vêtement, prit le crucifix et l’apporta au blessé… » (23)

Où et comment Edmond Bloch a-t-il pu recueillir ces nouvelles informations?  Selon René Lisbonne, membre de l’Union patriotique et ami de l’avocat, le père Jamin aurait lui-même décrit la scène. (24)  Dans ce cas, pourquoi le prêtre devenu témoin n’est-il pas invité à la manifestation pour y faire lui-même sa déclaration?  Son témoignage aurait eu certainement plus d’impact sur le public.

Aussi, chacun — faute de preuve concrète et directe – peut donner libre cours à son imagination pourvu qu’elle s’inscrive dans le sens de l’union sacrée.  Les adhérents de l’Union patriotique sont sensibles à cette idée, comme l’exprime toujours leur porte-parole: « …  Plus que les autres Français, nous nous devons à la patrie.  Les liens naturels, sentimentaux, affectifs, qui unissent tous les Français à la mère commune sont communs à tous.  Nous en ajoutons un supplémentaire : la gratitude. »

Cet événement retient l’attention de la presse communautaire qui ne voit dans l’action d’Edmond Bloch qu’un agissement d’ancien combattant s’inscrivant dans la continuité de l’union sacrée.

Fin 1937, la mort du grand rabbin est à nouveau rappelée à la communauté.  Le consistoire de Lyon propose d’ériger un monument à la mémoire de son grand rabbin sur une grande place de la ville. (25)  Edouard Herriot, le maire radical, est favorable au projet.  Dans un courrier du 31 janvier 1938, il informe le grand rabbin Bernard Schoenberg que le conseil municipal accorde la place Antonin-Gourju pour l’édification du monument.

Dès le début, le projet soulève pourtant des réactions.  Le grand rabbin de Lyon, appuyé par ses collègues du Consistoire central, dont Israël Lévi, s’oppose à l’érection d’une statue représentant le grand rabbin apportant un crucifix au blessé.  L’objection religieuse est valable.  Le grand rabbin de France rappelle l’hostilité du judaïsme à toute image sculptée selon le commandement « Tu ne feras pas d’image taillée, ni aucune figure de ce qui est dans le ciel en haut ou sur la terre en bas ou dans les eaux au-dessous de la terre » (Exode, 20).  Il est à remarquer qu’aucune communauté n’a réalisé une œuvre de ce type dans les cours des synagogues ou dans les cimetières israélites.

Mais l’hostilité est encore plus forte du côté de la population locale.  Si les Israélites, dans leur ensemble, sont favorables au projet car ils y voient la reconnaissance de la cité, les antisémites refusent l’édification d’un tel monument, comme le rapporte une note confidentielle émanant de Lucien Coquenheim, président du comité lyonnais :

«…  Mais cette objection (religieuse) qui n’était peut-être pas absolument insurmontable, est aujourd’hui, largement dépassée par l’objection antisémite, qui a brisé l’unanimité non juive, sans laquelle le projet initial perd, singulièrement, de sa signification et de sa portée.  Car dès lors, ce n’est plus une œuvre de paix sociale que poursuivra l’érection du monument, mais provoquera un combat, au cours duquel un Grand rabbin sera, injustement calomnié, atteignant ainsi tout le Judaïsme français. » (26)

En 1938, la ville du radical Herriot connaît de nombreux troubles antisémites occasionnés par des membres de l’Action française et des ligues locales.  Il est aisé de parler de coalition antisémite face au projet, car les nationalistes s’organisent et font pression sur le conseil municipal pour abandonner l’idée d’un monument dédié à un Israélite, de surcroît grand rabbin.

Selon un rapport confidentiel du comité lyonnais, il est fait mention de menaces à l’égard des membres de la communauté et de doutes de la part de la population sur le sacrifice d’Abraham Bloch.  Lucien Coquenheim est obligé de mener une enquête sur les agissements des antisémites:

« L’enquête poursuivie par les membres du comité lyonnais, auprès des survivants, ces derniers mois, leur a permis de découvrir que des émissaires ont été envoyés auprès de ces témoins pour s’assurer du sens dans lequel ils déposeront.  Donc, la campagne est prête, elle attend un prétexte pour être déclenchée; l’annonce officielle de l’érection.

La pensée du comité lyonnais est dominée par deux principes:

— Ne pas fournir à nos adversaires le “prétexte” qui déclenchera la campagne avant d’être prêt pour la lutte;

— Ne pas avoir l’air de céder au chantage antisémite. » (27)

L’Action française, par l’intermédiaire de ses camelots, se démène pour annuler le projet.  Une véritable campagne est organisée à laquelle le comité lyonnais n’entend pas répondre.  Des tracts sont distribués, des affiches collées.  Le public lyonnais demeure méfiant.  Dans ce contexte, Albert Manuel suggère à Lucien Coquenheim de mener une enquête plus approfondie sur les conditions de la mort du grand rabbin.  Le Consistoire de Paris finance les démarches du comité lyonnais, chargé de retrouver et d’interroger les témoins.  De février à juillet 1938, les survivants de cette époque sont contactés.  Lucien Coquenheim rencontre les abbés Jamin, Guyetant et Rouchouze, le pasteur Rivet, le médecin-major Raymond et l’institutrice de Taintrux, Mme Richard.

Les témoignages n’apportent rien de concret.  Bien au contraire!  Le doute persiste sur l’acte du grand rabbin.  Personne n’est capable de confirmer si le grand rabbin a bien apporté un crucifix au soldat et est mort après cet acte.

Le père Jamin et le pasteur Rivet se contentent d’expliquer leur absence à ce moment.  Confirmant sa lettre de septembre 1914, le père Jamin affirme toutefois qu’il tient l’information d’un soldat qui lui aurait fait ce récit.  Mais il est incapable de mentionner le nom du témoin en question.

L’abbé Guyetant, nullement évoqué dans les témoignages depuis 1914, mais ancien brancardier, confirme le fait que le rabbin est bien tombé à une vingtaine de mètres de lui, mais il ne mentionne pas son geste.  Pire, selon lui, le grand rabbin Abraham Bloch aurait reçu l’absolution: « …  Monsieur l’abbé a vu le rabbin tomber à 15 ou 20 mètres de lui.  Comme celui-ci portait une soutanelle, des brancardiers prêtres catholiques le prenant pour un aumônier catholique, lui donnèrent l’absolution.. .» (28)

Monseigneur Rouchouze ne se présente pas non plus comme un témoin oculaire et estime que le médecin-major est peut-être la seule personne à connaître la vérité.  Mais la déclaration de ce dernier adressée à Albert Manuel le 14 avril 1938 confirme plutôt sa déposition mentionnée dans le journal de marche du corps des brancardiers:

« …  Vers la fin de la matinée, nous terminons l’évacuation d’un poste de secours situé dans Anozel, quand ce poste a été bombardé.  Il ne restait plus que quelques blessés couchés sur brancard et un nombre de brancardiers insuffisant pour les transporter.  Les aumôniers se sont alors joints, spontanément, aux brancardiers pour emporter les derniers brancards.

C’est donc en transportant un blessé que l’un des aumôniers que j’ai appris ultérieurement, être M. le rabbin Bloch a été tué par un éclat d’obus, à quelque distance du village d’Anozel. » (29)

Vingt ans plus tard, les souvenirs du médecin-major sont intacts, à ceci près que le grand rabbin serait mort en fin d’après-midi.

Puisque, selon une version, Abraham Bloch se serait mis en quête du crucifix, il aurait pu rejoindre une maison dans l’espoir d’en trouver un.  Lucien Coquenheim contacte l’institutrice du village, présente au moment des bombardements et du retrait des troupes françaises.  Dans une lettre adressée à la fille du grand rabbin en juin 1938, elle est incapable elle aussi de mentionner les circonstances de la mort d’Abraham Bloch: « …  Les aumôniers catholiques et autres lui ont rendu immédiatement tous les devoirs.  On m’a dit que votre père avait demandé le crucifix à un confrère catholique-alors je ne sais pas s’il est allé vraiment en chercher un dans une maison, cela c’est un souvenir très précis… » (30)

En plein repli et sous une pluie d’obus, l’urgence est avant tout l’évacuation des blessés.  Peut-on imaginer Abraham Bloch abandonner sa fonction de brancardier pour aller chercher un crucifix au moment où la bataille fait rage?  D’autant plus que la maison la plus proche, où se trouve peut-être un crucifix, se situe à plus de 350 mètres.  Le grand rabbin n’aurait-il pas pu avoir la présence d’esprit de demander un crucifix en médaille à un soldat?

Quant à l’abbé Dubodel, il est impossible de recueillir son témoignage.

À l’automne 1938, faute de preuves suffisantes, le comité lyonnais abandonne définitivement le projet.  Le grand rabbinat préfère cette solution, estimant qu’il n’est pas utile d’accentuer la discorde entre Français.  Avec amertume, Lucien Coquenheim écrit: «…  la présence des Grands Rabbins délégués, chefs du judaïsme français nous paraît indispensable.  Car leur absence, en raison de la contestation élevée par nos adversaires, serait interprétée à Lyon comme un désaveu de la cérémonie ou geste ou les deux à la fois. » (31)

Même le grand rabbin de France, à savoir Israël Lévi, n’intervient plus dans le débat.  Pourtant, il fut l’ami d’Abraham Bloch et le premier à dévoiler la lettre du père Chauvin dans la presse communautaire.  A-t-il douté lui aussi du fameux geste, alors qu’en pleine union sacrée, il en était convaincu?

Le doute subsiste.  Y a-t-il eu des mystificateurs?  Dans quel but et pour quel profit?

Peut-être que le père Jamin a embelli l’histoire, à la fois par sympathie pour le grand rabbin et par souci de magnifier l’union sacrée.  L’ouverture d’esprit d’Abraham Bloch et son attitude joviale et toujours volontaire ont fortement impressionné le corps des brancardiers.  Auprès des cinq prêtres, il a montré une autre image du Juif, brisant ainsi bien des préjugés.  Voilà un rabbin patriote, dévoué à la cause et courageux!

L’abbé Dubodel n’a jamais infirmé ou confirmé l’authenticité de l’acte.  Sans doute ne souhaitait-il pas dénigrer cette image trop séduisante qui avait déjà envahi la mémoire et qui symbolisait si bien l’union sacrée…  Il en est de même pour le grand rabbin Israël Lévi qui, héritier de la science du judaïsme et professeur à l’École des hautes études, a préféré le maintien de ce mythe plutôt que de le réduire à une simple anecdote.

Symbole de l’union sacrée et glorification du patriotisme juif, même après la Seconde Guerre mondiale, l’image du geste du grand rabbin est encore présente dans les esprits.  Le grand rabbin de France Jacob Kaplan, lui-même ancien combattant de la Grande Guerre, retient de cet exemple la persistance de la concorde, fondamentale à toute nation:

«…  Elle ne périra pas enfin car elle parlera toujours à l’âme française qui unit en un accord si harmonieux les tendances les plus diverses, à la manière de ce splendide paysage vosgien…  oui, elle parlera toujours à l’âme de la France si comprehensive et si libérale parce que la France ne peut pas ne pas être éprise de grandeur et d’héroïsme, d’humanité et de générosité.

Le geste de Taintrux, exemple d’union sur le champ de bataille est aussi un symbole d’entente pendant la paix. » (32)

Élevée au niveau de mythe national et communautaire, l’histoire de la mort du grand rabbin Abraham Bloch n’est toujours pas close.  Le débat reste ainsi toujours ouvert…

(1) Maurice Barrés, Les Diverses Familles spirituelles de la France, Emile-Paul, 1917, p. 93.
(2) ACIP, dossier Abraham Bloch.  SIF, fonds Abraham Bloch.
(3) L’Univers israélite, 1er janvier 1915.
(4) SIF, fonds Abraham Bloch, carnet de notes, 8 août 1914.
(5) Ibid., 27 août 1914.
(6) SHAT, dossier 26 N.145.  Journaux de marche du 14e corps d’armée.
(7) Ibid.
(8) SHAT, dossier 26 N.154.  Journaux du service Santé, 29 août 1914.
(9) SHAT, dossier 22 N.1033.  Opérations du groupe des brancardiers, 29 août 1914.
(10) SHAT, dossier 26 N.154.
(11) ACIP, série PV.  Assemblée générale du 30 mai 1915.
(12) SIF, fonds Abraham Bloch.  Lettre du père Jamin à Mme Bloch, 24 septembre 1914.
(13) Les Archives israélites, 5 novembre 1914.
(14) L’Univers israélite, 8 octobre 1915.
(15) Maurice Barrés, op. cit., p. 93.
(16) La Revue des Deux Mondes, 1er mars 1916, p. 66.
(17) Fernand Jamin, Conseils aux jeunes gens après la victoire, Perrin, 1921, p. 89.
(18) Consulter David H. Weinberg, Les Juifs à Paris de 1933 à 1939, Calmann-Lévy, 1974, p. 107, Maurice Rajsfus, Sois Juif et tais-toi!, E.D.I, 1981, pp. 214-215, et Michel Abitbol, Les Deux Terres promises – Les Juifs de France et le sionisme, Olivier Orban, 1989, p. 281.
(19) Michel Abitbol, op. cit., p. 281.
(20) G. de Puymège, «Le soldat Chauvin » (pp. 45-80), et Antoine Prost, «La tranchée des baïonnettes » (pp. 111-141), Les Lieux de mémoire.  La Nation, t. 2, sous la direction de Pierre Nora, Gallimard, 1986.
(21) Pierre Nora, «Entre mémoire et histoire», Les Lieux de mémoire, t. 1, p. XIX.
(22) Jean Norton-Cru, Du témoignage, Éditions Allia, 1989, p. 25.
(23) L’Univers israélite, 7 septembre 1934.
(24) Ibid.
(25) ACIP, carton B.134.  Année 1938, projet d’érection d’un monument Abraham Bloch.
(26) Ibid.
(27) Ibid.
(28) Ibid.
(29) ACIP, carton B.134.  Année 1938, lettres reçues.
(30) SIF, fonds Abraham Bloch.  Lettre de Mme Richard à Mme Netter (fille du grand rabbin Abraham Bloch) du 17 juin 1938.
(31) ACIP, carton B.134.
(32) Journal des communautés, n° 202, septembre 1958.

abréviations

ACIP: Association consistoriale israélite de Paris
SHAT: Service historique de l’armée de terre (SHAT Vincennes)
SIF: Séminiare israélite de France (Paris)

références
 
Landau, Philippe-E., Les Juifs de France et la Grande Guerre – Un patriotisme républicain, CNRS Editions, Paris, France, 1999
Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française (1914-1918), Angers, 1921 – Avant-Propos de la Deuxième Épreuve, Albert Manuel, Paris, Juillet, 1921 – (Réédité par le Cercle de Généalogie juive, Paris, 2000)
Page listant le nom de Rabbi Abraham Bloch dans Les Israélites dans l’Armée Française (les notations et les griffonnages (!) sont les miens)
 Carte postale du tableau de Lucien Lévy-Dhurmer représentant le rabbin Abraham Bloch tenant un crucifix devant un soldat mourant (“Artiste AK Le Grand Rabbin Aumonier Abraham Bloch, rabbin comme aumônier”), sur oldthing.de
Photo de Rabbi Abraham Bloch, à Judaica Algeria

The Ambivalence of Acceptance – The Acceptance of Ambivalence IV: The Death and Life of Rabbi Abraham Bloch – in Philippe-E. Landau’s “The Jews of France and the Great War” – 1999

Prior to researching Jewish military service in the French Army during the Great War, the story of Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch was entirely unknown to me.  Through a variety of digital and text sources, I soon learned more about his life, and in a larger context, the relationship of his story to the experience of French Jewry during that conflict, and beyond. 

One excellent source of information about Rabbi Bloch appears within Philippe-E. Landau’s monograph, Les Juifs de France et la Grande Guerre  (The Jews of France in the Great War).  His chapter on the Rabbi is presented below, translated from the French. 

Myth and Reality: The Death of Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch

Les Juifs de France et la Grande Guerre / The Jews of France in the Great War (front cover)

From 1915 to the defeat of 1940, Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch’s death on the field of honor symbolizes the community’s communion of body and spirit with the nation.  As much for Jewish youth as for the generations having lived the Great War, the image of Epinal represents the patriotic fidelity of French Judaism.

This pious picture, where the chief rabbi, then chaplain and stretcher-bearer, dies from his wounds in a shower of enemy fire after bringing a crucifix to a dying Catholic soldier, remains in the collective memory as “an image that will not perish” according to Maurice Barrés. (1)

Israelitism retained this event to claim its sacrifice during the ordeal.  The death of the chief rabbi has also benefited from important publicity, if only by the enthusiastic article that Maurice Barres has given him.  The information is then disseminated by the entire national press.  Also, it is not just an episode limited to community history.  By far, it goes beyond the denominational context because it is the very image of the Sacred Union.  We cannot gauge the impact of this death on the post-war mentality, anxious to perpetuate the fraternity of the trenches.

The first simple fact of the day at the end of the year 1914, the event is growing in the pen of the nationalist writer who awakens more the patriotic ardor of Israelitism.  The rabbis and the notables salute the glorious death of Abraham Bloch, but are however discreet on his famous gesture.  Did he really bring a crucifix?

But enthusiasm prevails over reason.  In 1917, once the press took hold of the story and the painter Lucien Lévy-Dhurmer fixed for eternity the gesture of the chief rabbi, the rabbinate agrees.  Here is Abraham Bloch becoming a “martyr” for his co-religionists and “saint” for the nation.

Lucien Lévy-Dhurmer‘s painting of Rabbi Abraham Bloch holding a crucifix before a dying soldier

Far from perishing, the image spreads in all Jewish families in the form of postcards and the memory of the Chief Rabbi is recounted in all the patriotic demonstrations that the community celebrates.

If, in the twenties, this episode comforts the Judaism which sees there the consecration, from the thirties, the death of the chief rabbi becomes the object of political recovery and patriotic outbidding.  Veterans, especially those of the Patriotic Union of French Jews, use this symbolic image to better revive the memory of the Sacred Union.

A GREAT RABBI PATRIOT

Born in Paris in 1859, Abraham Bloch is 55 when war is declared.  Despite his advanced age, he plans to become a chaplain and is assigned to the 14th Army Corps.

Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch (image from Judaica Algeria)

Coming from a pious Alsatian family, he has a strictly rabbinic background.  After studying at the Jewish seminary in Paris, he was sent to Remiremont (1884-1897) where he demonstrated a particular zeal that earned him the esteem of the faithful.  He then became chief rabbi of Algiers from 1897 to 1908.  The anti-Semitic maneuvers generated by the Dreyfus affair forced him to look after community interests and to support the republican cause.  The chief rabbi of France, satisfied with his action, decided to promote him by offering him the responsibility of the chief rabbinate of Lyon and his region, a position he held from 1908 until mobilization. (2)

Rabbi Israel Levi, in an article he devotes to him in January 1915, testifies to his patriotic ardor while Abraham Bloch is of fragile health: “When the mobilization was decreed, the military authority asked the Chief Rabbi of Lyon to appoint the chaplain to follow the 14th Army Corps.  Deaf to the objurgations of his friends and relatives, Abraham Bloch did not hesitate to claim for himself the honor of serving his country.” (3)

The latter adapts quickly to the new situation.  If he notes with irony and pleasure in his notebook that he is the “Jewish priest”, because his outfit hardly distinguishes him from other chaplains, he welcomes the Sacred Union: “… I am the dean of the band.  The officers are charming with us all.” (4)

If, for the moment, the chief rabbi has few Jews to comfort, he takes the opportunity to visit fellow Jews in the Vosges region where he had already established lasting relations during his first pastorate.

But the German offensive interrupts friendly visits.  After Fraize and Provenchères, on the 25th of August the battalions are in front of Saint-Dié.  Two days later, the chief rabbi notes for the last time in his notebook: “We are waiting for the order of departure to look for wounded.  Meanwhile, it is said that it was on the side of Saint-Dié that one would have bombed…” (5)

Here ends the impressions of Abraham Bloch.  From now on, the 14th Corps the journal of marches and operations tells us about the evolution of the fighting and the conditions of its death.

On August 28, the Chief Rabbi has neither the time nor the leisure to write, because the attack has resumed and is very violent.  The troops, including the 58th Division, have been specifically ordered to “retake the offensive at all costs on Taintrux and Anozel.” (6)  During the night of August 28 to 29, relief workers must evacuate more than 600 wounded and recover 150 soldiers on the battlefield.  Despite the losses suffered, the French troops intend to remain masters of the place while the German artillery is unleashed.  The Anozel pass becomes the stake of the fight, because the enemy wants to take this position which would then allow him to reach the small town of Saint-Dié.

The fighting is still raging.  The daily newspaper mentions the tenacity of the troops: “During this day, which was very hard for our regiment, the personnel showed the greatest calm under the fire of the German howitzers.  On August 29, around noon, stretcher bearers including Abraham Bloch were to transfer 450 wounded from Taintrux while they were still facing “enemy artillery fire.”  Abbé Dubodel, Catholic chaplain and eyewitness, confirms the extreme violence of the fighting during this day: “Then the fire recommences, more violent than ever; the wounded lying pell-mell on the earth; stretcher bearers; ambulance cars.  On arrival at the aid station, 5 or 6 missing, a wounded military chaplain, a Jewish rabbi wounded.” (7)

Can a rabbi be anything but Jewish?  The expression of Father Dubodel, who knows the chief rabbi since the beginning of August, makes us smile.  Be that as it may, it is certain that for several hours, between noon and six o’clock, the French troops suffered the repeated assaults of the German forces and are then obliged to retreat and “descend towards the Meuse in order to maintain it.”

It would be around 5 pm that the chief rabbi was killed in the conditions described by Major-General Raymond in the journal of the march of the stretcher-bearer group of the 68th Infantry Division:

“… It (the stretcher-bearer service) first evacuates the wounded of the 229th installed at the school of Anozel (about thirty), the closest to the line of fire, then those of the aid station of the 30th infantry located in the village barn.  At this moment the bomging begins.  A shell falls on the emergency station that the group is evacuating, without hurting anyone but starting to burn the barn.

This second post evacuated, the group took care of the third organized by the 229th and located in the last house of the village.  At this moment, the bombing is in full swing, a shell falls on the first aid post, another on the neighboring house that it burns. (…)  The shells continue to fall around the station and beat the road.

One of them kills a stretcher-bearer of the corps and violently throws the stretcher of the Dubodel group on the ground; this violent fall causes him a fracture at the base of the skull.  Evacuated, quoted to the order of the army.

The rabbi (Mr. Bloch, rabbi in Lyon, section of the femoral, died in a few moments) of the stretcher bearers who carried a wounded man is also killed…” (8)

The battle is calm in the evening.  At about 9:45 p.m., the chief of staff sent this note to the commander-in-chief: “Heavy fighting today on the entire front of the 14th Corps, great fatigue, large incalculable losses, again because of the extent of the front: 20 kilometers in the forests.” (9)  The next day, there are more than 1,000 wounded.  According to the military authorities, it is clearly admitted that Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch was killed “by a shell that took away his left thigh and a bullet in his chest.  In Taintrux, evacuating a wounded man.” (10)  This is a trivial case on this Saturday, August 29, 1914.

“PARTIE À REMPLIR PAR LE CORPS” card for Rabbi Abraham Bloch

THE PRESS MAKES THE EVENT

As early as September 17, Les Archives israélites announce to its readers the disappearance of the Chief Rabbi, who became the first rabbinic victim in this context where one strives to celebrate with force the Sacred Union.  In an article on page 2, the editor is content to mention the conditions of his death:

“The war has made a victim in the French rabbinate and it has chosen for its prey, one of its most worthy, most pious and most respected members: Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch.

On the tragic circumstances in which the Chief Rabbi Bloch of Lyons died on the battlefield, we have the following information provided by Father Debodel de Chateauroux, who was wounded in the same place …

At about two o’clock in the afternoon, the corps of stretcher-bearers of the 58th Reserve Division, of which he was a member, cared for him on a farm of about 150 wounded.  A German battery could not get the better of an alpine battalion, and directed its fires on the farm.  The wounded are being evacuated.  But the fire of the enemy is raging, waving pell-mell wounded, chaplains and stretcher-bearers.  It is at this moment that Chief Rabbi Bloch falls to no longer get up, while Father Debodel gets away with an injury.”

This short article remains faithful to the declaration of the doctor-major and is based on the testimony of abbot Debodel (in reality Dubodel) published in Le Salut of Lyon of September 8, 1914.  The abbot is in fact the only witness ocular who was close to the chief rabbi during the bombing.

The journalists do not yet mention the crucifix that the chief rabbi would have brought to a dying soldier.  This act would have been the cause of his death.  In May 1915, during the Ordinary General Assembly of the Consistory of Paris, President Edouard Masse evoked the death of Abraham Bloch, but without describing the circumstances of his disappearance.  Like so many others, he would have been killed by the enemy as a stretcher-bearer: “… The heroic end of Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch showed, from the beginning of hostilities, how our chaplains know, when he it is necessary to die for their country, demonstrating not only the most admirable courage, but also a breadth of ideas of which public opinion, without distinction of cults or parties, has so unanimously emphasized beauty.” (11)

Does “breadth of ideas” refer to the famous rabbi’s famous gesture?  Perhaps!  In this case, Edouard Masse is very skeptical and doubts the new version of the death of Abraham Bloch appeared in November 1914.  It is the same for the other members of the assembly, which do not fall under the assertion of the President.

Yet, early in the fall of 1914, information will profoundly modify this event which is already becoming a symbol of the Sacred Union.  According to a letter from Father Jamin, Catholic Chaplain of the 14th Corps, addressed to Father Chauvin, then pastor in Lyon, the Chief Rabbi died by shrapnel but after having found and brought a crucifix to a seriously wounded soldier.  Seized by this detail which further illustrates the Sacred Union, Father Chauvin immediately communicated the information to the widow of Abraham Bloch on September 24, 1914:

“… Before leaving the hamlet, a wounded man, taking him for a Catholic priest, asked to kiss a crucifix.  Mr. Bloch found the requested crucifix and had it kissed.  After completing this act of charity, he left the hamlet accompanying another wounded man to the nearest car.  The shell hit him a few meters ahead of the car where the wounded man had climbed.

I thought that these details would comfort a pain that must be very lively.” (12)

The grand rabbi’s family informs Rabbi Israel Levi, who has been his friend since their studies at the rabbinical seminary.  A great patriot, Israel Levi believes that this example perfectly illustrates the dedication of the Israelites during the war.  Quoting Father Jamin’s letter, he writes a note specifying the conditions of death in Les Archives israélites.  He concludes, “… the rabbi’s act to get a crucifix to give to a wounded man to kiss – while the shells [that were] fired at the ambulance required a quick evacuation and died almost immediately afterwards, did it not deserve to be relieved?” (13)

Les Archives Israélites do not pay much attention to this story, which is narrated in the column “Jewish Echoes of the War” between the promotion of combatants and the patriotic actions of Baron Edmond de Rothschild.  However, the description caught the attention of journalists in the non-Jewish press, including Gerard Bauer who devotes a major article on the issue entitled “The death of a rabbi” and published in L’Echo de Paris November 7, 1914.  The author, by pointing out the sacrifice of a chief rabbi, glorifies the Sacred Union:

“… One evening when he was busy with this brave mission, he heard among the complaints the call of a dying soldier.  The poor boy, hit in a way that did not forgive [mortally wounded], had slightly stood on one elbow and in a weak voice, asked him for a crucifix…

The rabbi had no hesitation.  A hundred meters away, a priest was leaning over the dying.  He joined him in haste, asked him to lend him his crucifix, came back to the wounded man and kneeling at his side, [the wounded man] approached the image of the Redeemer [with his] lips.  And the soldier expired in that kiss.

But next to him another dying person, who had seen the Rabbi’s gesture, asked him to renew it for him.  This time the Israelite did not hesitate either.  He got up, but when he got up a bullet – we had not stopped fighting – a bullet hit him on the forehead.  He sank down, falling dead by the side of the dying man he was going to succor, holding in his clenched hand the crucifix, which for the first time he had used.”

This article should receive our full attention because it is for the first time a fictionalized version of the death of Abraham Bloch.  Where does Gerard Bauer hold his information, if not the note of Rabbi Israel Levi based on the letter of Father Chauvin?  Moreover, he distorts the facts.  The rabbi did this act only once and was killed by shrapnel, according to Father Jamin’s testimony.  Several questions arise.  Why is it not the Catholic priest who brings absolution to the dying soldier?  Who is this chaplain who could have testified later on the action of the chief rabbi?  Neither Pastor Rivet nor Father Jamin are with Abraham Bloch during the German offensive!  Only Father Dubodel is not far from the chief rabbi, but he never mentioned the act.

For Gérard Bauer, one needs a heroic death in the image of the Sacred Union.  Vulgar shrapnel is not dignified enough for such a gesture.  Better a ball!  Charitable action is not enough.  We must renew the act.

This version makes its impression on the mentality of the time and even after.  The rabbinate, if it doubts the gesture, does not question the information.  After all, it serves the patriotism of Judaism.  The community also needs heroes and martyrs and appropriates this story.  On the occasion of the first anniversary of the death of Abraham Bloch, the chief rabbi of Lille, Édgard Sèches, salutes the sacrifice of his colleague: “… Martyr, he was, certainly.  This word, you do not ignore, means WITNESS.  Yes, he has witnessed our ardent love for France.  Yes, he himself testified that this love can go to the complete sacrifice of life. (…)  His death did more for Judaism and the French rabbinate than the most eloquent speeches. (14)  Following the expression of Maurice Barrés, chief rabbi of France Alfred Lévy also pays tribute to Abraham Bloch, but does not mention the object: “… The name of this victim of duty will not perish; he will be the glory, the holy halo of his family, of the rabbinate, of French Judaism.”  On this point, the rabbis are very discreet.  Is it by religious conviction and disapproval of the gesture, or simply because they doubt the veracity of the act?

Preparing his study entitled The Diverse Spiritual Families of France, Maurice Barrés retains the fictionalized version in an article published in L’Echo de Paris on December 15, 1915 and included in his book.  It is an opportunity for the nationalist man of letters to celebrate the virtues of the Sacred Union: “… From degree to degree, we have risen; here the fraternity spontaneously finds its perfect gesture: the old rabbi presenting to the soldier who dies the immortal sign of Christ on the cross is an image that will not perish.” (15)

From now on, from La Dépêche Algerienne to La Tribune de Genève, the national and international press has taken over this version, which has become almost official.  This tragic, but symbolic end, also holds the attention of the political class and the poet Edmond Rostand who composes in March 1918 these few verses:

“A priest in a police cap
Wants to rush towards a dying person:
He falls.  A rabbi replaces him,
The door to his Christian brother,
And on this dying person he attends
Falls and dies, wonderful deist,
For a God who is not his!” (16)

Inebriated by the Republican victory, Israelitism keeps in memory the death of Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch, which has become a myth for the generation of veterans.  No authority calls into question the gesture.  The story is too beautiful and especially there has been too much ink and excited enthusiasm for the doubt [that] is now installed in the minds.

However, in 1921, Father Jamin returns to this episode in his book Advice to Young People of France, after the victory, in which he writes: “… I related in September 1914, in a private letter that was published the heroic death of Rabbi Bloch, military chaplain on the battlefield of Saulcy, near Saint-Die.  I had not assisted myself, but I was telling the story of several eyewitnesses.” (17)

Father Jamin does not mention the witnesses whose information he keeps.  Who are they?  Father Dubodel, the closest person to the Chief Rabbi during the bombing, never confirmed the fact.  The fighters present never appeared in the press and with the Bloch family.  Is it Father Chauvin from Lyon who amplified the story?  In this case, why is it not denied by Father Jamin?  Did these two priests, intending to build an image of Epinal in the precious context of Sacred Union, no longer able to stop the anecdote that turned into a myth?

The death of Abraham Bloch immortalizes Sacred Union and Jewish participation during the conflict.  The painter Lucien Lévy-Dhurmer reinforces the myth since 1917 with his canvas depicting the chief rabbi who brandished a crucifix on a dying wounded in the midst of the flames.  In the twenties, the work is reproduced in the form of a postcard which is a work of pious image.  At the same time, during the various patriotic celebrations, the rabbinate is careful to remind the public of the sacrifice of the chief rabbi.

The event, maintained by collective memory, resurfaced with more violence in the timid context of the thirties.  The Patriotic Union of the French Jews tries to appropriate it to reproduce the Sacred Union so dear to veterans and that the news constantly denies.

A HISTORY THAT ARRANGES AND DERANGES

The death of Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch is now history.  Dead for the fatherland in the conditions we know, he becomes a martyr in the eyes of his contemporaries, anxious to defend the image of Judaism in a republican France.  The disappearance of a private soldier in the same context may not have attracted the attention, but by the fact that it is a rabbi, known and respected by all, the anecdote then takes the extent.

The sacrifice of Abraham Bloch symbolizes the greatness of the Sacred Union and prides the collective memory since it meets all the necessary criteria, namely: the patriotic commitment with the voluntary service, the spiritual vocation with the chaplaincy, the fraternity with the help given to the dying soldier, tolerance with the crucifix.

If the chief rabbi becomes a martyr for the cause, the community does not make him a hero in the sense that we usually hear him, because he did not die fighting or resisting the enemy like the said young David Bloch.

The image of Epinal that holds the minds for several generations will however become suspect in the eyes of some historians. (18)  The famous gesture causes doubt.  Although they do not provide any proof for their claims, they consider the Chief Rabbi’s action to be implausible.  Nevertheless, it is an opportunity for them to denigrate Judaism, for which they have only mistrust and to attack the role of the Patriotic Union of the French Jews in its appropriation of the event.  But this story is only a brief episode for the Patriotic Union.  Studying this case, Michel Abitbol concludes: “Like any good myth that respects itself, this story was never authenticated.” (19)

Also, the circumstances of this death challenge us.  Since the debate is open and it will never be closed until the war logs (if they exist!) true witnesses will be untraceable, we will not know if the grand rabbi died [with] a crucifix in hand by rescuing a casualty.

Every war breeds myths.  As proof, let us retain the story of the soldier Chauvin and that of the famous “trench of bayonets.” (20)  French Judaism, like the Third Republic, needs myths to nourish its historical dimension.  Already, on the eve of the Great War, Ernest Lavisse considered that teaching could not do without heroes and their legends.  Memory succeeding history, it offers many possibilities as Pierre Nora recalls: “History is the always problematic and incomplete reconstruction of what is no more.  Memory is an ever-present phenomenon, a bond lived in the eternal present; history a representation of the past.  Because it is emotional and magical, memory only accommodates the details that comfort it; it feeds on vague memories, telescoping, global or floating, particular or symbolic, sensitive to all transfers, screens, censorship or projections.” (21)

After the war, Jean Norton-Cru is one of the first to doubt the authenticity of some testimonies relating to the Great War.  His critical study of the phrase “The standing dead!” launched by Jacques Pericard must question us.  According to Jean Norton-Cru, testimony is never perfect: “Each witness instinctively completes, and according to his own nature, the series of quick sentences, many of which have escaped him.  He fills the blanks instantly and now forgets that they were blanks; voids.  What he thought he saw, he sincerely believes he has seen.  It is therefore almost impossible that on about thirty statements there are two that agree, even approximately.” (22)

The Great War, in the enthusiasm it provokes and through the French victory, gives birth to myths, situations that allow the imagination to reveal the greatness of the sacrifice made during the four years.  Verdun, the heroism of fighters, bayonet charges are all examples that amplify a reality surely less ideal.  The trauma of violence and suffering tends to accentuate the distortion of history in favor of memory.

We can understand that a simple anecdote can become a myth, especially when mystifiers seize it.  In the present case, it is certain that Maurice Barrés, using Gérard Bauer’s article and Father Jamin’s letter, facilitated the diffusion of this myth.

It was from the summer of 1934 that the affair of Abraham Bloch resurfaced in the community when the Patriotic Union of French Jews led by Mr. Edmond Bloch uses the gesture of the Chief Rabbi to celebrate the fraternity of the trenches and, above all, to fight against anti-Semitism.  Contrary to what Maurice Rajsfus thinks, the Patriotic Union did not invent the myth of Abraham Bloch.  It has used it for its own sake, to revive unity among veterans as intolerance develops and the memory of Sacred Union is erased from the minds as the nation suffers social and economic crises.  Admittedly, it is a political maneuver on the part of Edmond Bloch, who seizes the occasion of the twentieth anniversary of the death of the chief rabbi to demonstrate the action of his movement.  But the members of the Patriotic Union as their co-religionists are convinced of the authenticity of the gesture.  This symbol, while paying tribute to the rabbi, must popularize this association which has just been founded.  Faced with the rise of the leagues and the involvement of many Jews in the progressive parties, Edmond Bloch and his friends consider it necessary to regroup patriotic Jews, viscerally attached to the maintenance of the republican order.

In this context, it is necessary to understand the role of the Patriotic Union when its president decides [upon] the erection of a stele in memory of the chief rabbi near the Anozel pass in September 1934, the place where Abraham Bloch fell.  If there is not a political aspect here, this monument is part of the will to make a pious homage to a personality and to keep alive the collective memory.

With the implicit support of the central and Paris presidencies, in the presence of numerous rabbinical authorities, including the chief rabbi of Nancy Paul Haguenauer, and politicians, such as Mathieu Prefect of the Vosges and Georges Rivollet Minister of Pensions, Edmond Bloch delivers a strong speech noticed that testifies to this patriotic mentality while bringing a new version of Abraham Bloch’s gesture:

“… He leaned over to a wounded man, who took him for a Catholic priest and asked him for absolution. – “I’m not a Catholic, my poor friend, I’m a rabbi.” – “Can you not at least get me a crucifix?”

A Catholic stretcher priest was passing nearby, carrying, with one of his comrades, a wounded man on a stretcher.  The chief rabbi asked him if he possessed a crucifix: the priest had one, but on his chest, inside his cloak; without giving up his stretcher, he indicated it to Abraham Bloch who opened the garment, took the crucifix and brought it to the wounded…” (23)

Where and how was Edmond Bloch able to gather this new information?  According to Rene Lisbon, a member of the Patriotic Union and friend of the lawyer, Father Jamin himself would have described the scene. (24)  In this case, why is the priest who has become a witness not invited to the demonstration to make his own declaration?  His testimony would certainly have had more impact on the public.

Also, [for] everyone – a lack of concrete and direct evidence – can give free rein to his imagination provided that it fits in the direction of the Sacred Union.  The adherents of the Patriotic Union are sensitive to this idea, as their spokesperson always says: “… More than the other French, we owe it to our country.  The natural, sentimental, affective bonds which unite all Frenchmen to the common mother are common to all.  We add one more: gratitude.”

This event draws the attention of the community press, which sees in Edmond Bloch’s action only a veteran’s action which is part of the continuity of the Sacred Union.

Late 1937, the death of the chief rabbi is again reminded to the community.  The consistory of Lyon proposes to erect a monument to the memory of its chief rabbi on a large square in the city. (25)  Edouard Herriot, the radical mayor, is in favor of the project.  In a letter of January 31, 1938, he informed the Chief Rabbi Bernard Schoenberg that the city council grants Antonin-Gourju Place for the construction of the monument.

From the beginning, the project raises reactions.  The chief rabbi of Lyon, supported by his colleagues from the Central Consistory, including Israel Levi, oppose the erection of a statue representing the chief rabbi bringing a crucifix to the wounded.  The religious objection is valid. The Chief Rabbi of France recalls the hostility of Judaism to any image carved according to the commandment “You shall not make a carved image, nor any figure of what is in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters below the earth.“ (Exodus, 20).  It should be noted that no community has made a work of this type in synagogue courts or Jewish cemeteries.

But the hostility is even stronger on the side of the local population.  If the Israelites, as a whole, are in favor of the project because they see the recognition of the city, the anti-Semites refuse the construction of such a monument, as reported in a confidential note from Lucien Coquenheim, chairman of the committee of Lyon:

“… But this (religious) objection, which may not have been absolutely insurmountable, is today largely overtaken by the anti-Semitic objection, which has broken the non-Jewish unanimity, without which the initial project loses, singularly, of its meaning and scope.  Since then, it is no longer a work of social peace that will continue the erection of the monument, but will cause a fight, during which a Chief Rabbi will be unjustly slandered, thus reaching all French Judaism.” (26)

In 1938, the city of the radical Herriot knows many antisemitic disturbances caused by members of the Action Française and local leagues.  It is easy to speak of anti-Semitic coalition against the project, because the nationalists are organized and put pressure on the municipal council to abandon the idea of a monument dedicated to a Jew, moreover a great rabbi.

According to a confidential report from the Lyon committee, mention is made of threats to members of the community and doubts on the part of the population about the sacrifice of Abraham Bloch.  Lucien Coquenheim is obliged to conduct an investigation into the actions of anti-Semites:

“The investigation pursued by the members of the Lyon committee, among survivors, in recent months, has allowed them to discover that emissaries have been sent to these witnesses to make sure of the meaning in which they will testify.  So, the campaign is ready, it is waiting for a pretext to be triggered; the official announcement of the erection.

The thought of the Lyon committee is dominated by two principles:

– Do not provide our opponents the “pretext” that will trigger the campaign before being ready for the fight;

– Do not seem to give in to antisemitic blackmail.” (27)

L’Action Française, through its hawkers, is struggling to cancel the project.  A real campaign is organized to which the Lyons committee does not intend to answer.  Leaflets are distributed; posters pasted.  The Lyon public remains suspicious.  In this context, Albert Manuel suggests to Lucien Coquenheim to conduct a more thorough investigation into the conditions of the death of the Chief Rabbi.  The Consistory of Paris finances the proceedings of the Lyon committee, responsible for finding and interviewing witnesses.  From February to July 1938, the survivors of this time are contacted.  Lucien Coquenheim meets the abbots Jamin, Guyetant and Rouchouze, the pastor Rivet, the doctor-major Raymond and the teacher of Taintrux, Mrs. Richard.

The testimonies bring nothing concrete.  On the contrary!  Doubt persists about the act of the chief rabbi.  No one is able to confirm whether the chief rabbi brought a crucifix to the soldier and died after this act.

Father Jamin and Pastor Rivet are content to explain their absence at this time.  Confirming his letter of September 1914, Father Jamin asserts, however, that he keeps the information of a soldier who told him this story.  But he is unable to mention the name of the witness in question.

Father Guyetant, not mentioned in the testimonies since 1914, but a former stretcher-bearer, confirms the fact that the rabbi had fallen to about twenty meters from him, but he does not mention his gesture.  Worse, according to him, chief rabbi Abraham Bloch would have received absolution: “… Monsieur l’Abbe saw the rabbi fall 15 or 20 meters away from him.  As he wore a cassock, Catholic priest stretcher-bearers mistook him for a Catholic chaplain gave him absolution.” (28)

Monsignor Rouchouze does not appear as an eyewitness either and considers that the medical officer is perhaps the only person to know the truth.  But the latter’s statement addressed to Albert Manuel on April 14, 1938, confirms his statement mentioned in the march journal of the stretcher corps:

“… towards the end of the morning, we finished the evacuation of an emergency station located in Anozel, when this post was bombarded.  There were only a few wounded left on stretchers and a number of stretcher-bearers insufficient to carry them.  The chaplains then spontaneously joined the stretcher bearers to carry the last stretchers.

It was thus while carrying a wounded man that one of the chaplains whom I later learned, Rabbi Bloch was killed by shrapnel, at some distance from the village of Anozel.” (29)

Twenty years later, the memory of the doctor-major is intact, except that the chief rabbi died in the late afternoon.

Since, according to one version, Abraham Bloch was searching for the crucifix, he could have reached a house in the hope of finding one.  Lucien Coquenheim contacted the village teacher, present at the time of the bombing and withdrawal of French troops.  In a letter addressed to the grand rabbi’s daughter in June 1938, she is also unable to mention the circumstances of Abraham Bloch’s death: “… The Catholic chaplains and others immediately gave him all the responsibility.  I was told that your father asked a Catholic confrere for a crucifix-so I do not know if he really went to get one from a house’ that’s a very accurate memory…” (30)

In full retreat and under a shower of shells, the urgency is above all the evacuation of the wounded.  Can we imagine Abraham Bloch abandoning his duties as a stretcher bearer to fetch a crucifix when the battle is raging?  Especially since the nearest house, where may be a crucifix, is more than 350 meters away.  Could not the grand rabbi have the presence of mind to ask a soldier for a crucifix?

As for Father Dubodel, it is impossible to collect his testimony.

In the fall of 1938, for lack of sufficient evidence, the Lyon committee definitively abandoned the project.  The chief rabbinate prefers this solution, considering that it is not useful to accentuate the discord between the French.  With bitterness, Lucien Coquenheim writes: “… the presence of the chief Rabbi delegates, leaders of French Judaism seems to us indispensable.  Because their absence, because of the protest raised by our opponents, would be interpreted in Lyon as a disavowal of the ceremony or gesture or both.” (31)

Even the chief rabbi of France, namely Israel Levi, no longer intervenes in the debate.  Yet he was the friend of Abraham Bloch and the first to unveil Father Chauvin’s letter in the community press.  Did he also doubt the famous gesture, while in full union sacred, he was convinced?

Doubt remains.  Have there been mystifiers?  For what purpose and for what profit?

Perhaps Father Jamin embellished the story, both out of sympathy for the chief rabbi and for the sake of magnifying the Sacred Union.  The open-mindedness of Abraham Bloch and his cheerful and always voluntary attitude strongly impressed the coprs of the stretcher bearers.  With the five priests, he showed another image of the Jew, thus breaking many prejudices.  Here is a patriotic rabbi, devoted to the cause, and brave!

Father Dubodel never denied or confirmed the authenticity of the act.  No doubt he did not wish to denigrate this alluring image which had already invaded the memory and which symbolized so well the Sacred Union …  It is the same for the chief rabbi Israel Levi who, heir to the science of Judaism and professor at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes, preferred to maintain this myth rather than reduce it to a simple anecdote.

A symbol of the Sacred Union and glorification of Jewish patriotism, even after the Second World War, the image of the gesture of the Chief Rabbi is still present in the minds.  The chief rabbi of France Jacob Kaplan, himself a veteran of the Great War, retains from this example the persistence of concord, fundamental to all nations:

“… It will not perish at last because it will always speak to the French soul which unites in a harmonious agreement the most diverse tendencies, in the manner of this splendid Vosges landscape … yes, it will always speak to the the soul of France so comprehensive and so liberal because France can not, not be in love with grandeur and heroism, humanity and generosity.

The gesture of Taintrux, an example of union on the battlefield is also a symbol of understanding during peace.” (32)

Raised to the level of national and community myth, the story of the death of Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch is still not closed.  The debate thus remains open…

(1) Maurice Barres, The Diverse Spiritual Families of France, Emile-Paul, 1917, p. 93.
(2) ACIP, Abraham Bloch file.  SIF, Abraham Bloch fonds.
(3) L’Univers israélite, January 1, 1915.
(4) SIF, Abraham Bloch fonds, notebook, August 8, 1914.
(5) Ibid., August 27, 1914.
(6) SHAT, file 26 N.145.  Journals of 14th Corps.
(7) Ibid.
(8) SHAT, file 26 N.154.  Medical Service Journal, August 29, 1914.
(9) SHAT, file 22 N.1033.  Operations of the stretcher-bearer group, August 29, 1914.
(10) SHAT, file 26 N.154.
(11) ACIP, PV series.  General meeting of May 30, 1915.
(12) SIF, Abraham Bloch fonds.  Letter from Father Jamin to Mrs. Bloch, September 24, 1914.
(13) Les Archives israélites, November 5, 1914.
(14) L’Univers israélite, October 8, 1915.
(15) Maurice Barrés, op. cit., p. 93.
(16) The Revue des Deux Mondes, March 1, 1916, p. 66.
(17) Fernand Jamin, Advice to Young People After the Victory, Perrin, 1921, p. 89.
(18) See David H. Weinberg, The Jews in Paris from 1933 to 1939, Calmann-Lévy, 1974, p. 107, Maurice Rajsfus, Be Jewish and Shut Up!, E.D.I, 1981, pp. 214-215, and Michel Abitbol, The Two Promised Lands – The Jews of France and Zionism, Olivier Orban, 1989, p. 281.
(19) Michel Abitbol, op. cit., p. 281.
(20) G. de Puymege, “The Soldier Chauvin” (pp. 45-80), and Antoine Prost, “The Trench of Bayonets” (pp. 111-141), Places of memory. The Nation, t. 2, under the direction of Pierre Nora, Gallimard, 1986.
(21) Pierre Nora, “Between memory and history”, Les Lieux de mémoire, t. 1, p. XIX.
(22) Jean Norton-Cru, From the Testimony, Éditions Allia, 1989, p. 25.
(23) L’Univers israélite, September 7, 1934.
(24) Ibid.
(25) ACIP, carton B.134. Year 1938, project of erection of a monument for Abraham Bloch.
(26) Ibid.
(27) Ibid.
(28) Ibid.
(29) ACIP, carton B.134.  Year 1938, received letters.
(30) SIF, Abraham Bloch fonds. Letter from Mrs. Richard to Mrs. Netter (daughter of Chief Rabbi Abraham Bloch) of June 17, 1938.
(31) ACIP, carton B.134.
(32) Journal of Communities, No. 202, September 1958.

Abbreviations

ACIP: Association consistoriale israélite de Paris
SHAT: Service historique de l’armée de terre (SHAT Vincennes)
SIF: Séminiare israélite de France (Paris)

References

Landau, Philippe-E., Les Juifs de France et la Grande Guerre – Un patriotisme républicain, CNRS Editions, Paris, France, 1999

Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française (1914-1918) (Israelites [Jews] in the French Army), Angers, 1921 – Avant-Propos de la Deuxième Épreuve [Forward to the Second Edition], Albert Manuel, Paris, Juillet, 1921 – (Réédité par le Cercle de Généalogie juive [Reissued by the Circle for Jewish Genealogy], Paris, 2000)

Page listing Rabbi Abraham Bloch’s name in Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française (the notations and “doodles” (!) are my own)

Postcard of Lucien Lévy-Dhurmer’s painting of Rabbi Abraham Bloch holding a crucifix before a dying soldier (“Künstler-AK Le Grand Rabbin Aumonier Abraham Bloch, Rabbi als Feldgeistlicher”), at oldthing.de

Photograph of Rabbi Abraham Bloch, at Judaica Algeria

The Ambivalence of Acceptance – The Acceptance of Ambivalence I: “The Jews and The War”, by Maurice Barres, in The Jewish Exponent, July 26, 1918

“I hold my life as wholly sacrificed, but if fate should be kind enough to spare me, after the war I shall consider my life as no longer belonging to me, and, after having done my duty towards France, I shall devote myself to the great and unhappy Jewish people from whom I am descended.” 

A perennial, central, and universal aspect of human nature has been the need for acceptance – and the validation of that acceptance – by one’s surrounding culture, society, and nation.  The overlapping motivations for this range from the pragmatic and material, to even the spiritual – at least in so far as politics being a substitute for religion.  The paradox with the need for validation – whether it be for an individual, or, for the “place” of a distinct group – is that typically, that very validation is accorded greater credence when it emanates from one who is unafillated with, and ultimately in opposition, to that very person or group.

A striking example of this was manifest as the cover article of The Jewish Exponent (of Philadelphia) in its issue of July 26, 1918, published only four months before the end of the Great War.  Entitled “The Jews and The War,” the essay is an English-language translation of a chapter within Maurice Barrès’ 1917 book Les Diverses Families Spirituelles de la France (The Various Spiritual Families of France), entitled “les Israelites” (“The Israelites”).

As such (you can view the book’s table of contents by scrolling below…) that chapter was one of five (or six, depending on how you interpret the text!) of the book’s eleven chapters, which taken together focused upon the various groups within and comprising the nation of France, whose unity Barrès deemed essential to the survival of that nation at a time of existential crisis.  Noteble is the fact that while two of these “families” – Catholics and Protestants – are defined by religious belief and doctrine; a fourth – the Socialists – can be termed political (with economics thrown in for the mix?); and the fifth – the Traditionalists – one might be deemed cultural. 

Ultimately, Barrès title subsumes and equalizes all these groups within the larger whole of France, as, families.  And, among these national families of France is the Jewish people, a family defined not only in terms of terms of the nature of its religous belief (or, disbelief, as the case may be), but simultaneously with a particular land, and ultimately, peoplehood – the Jewish people.  In his discussion about the Jews of France, rather than engage in a lengthy religious, philosophical, or political exegesis, Barrès simply presents accounts about the enlistment, military service, and death in action of three French Jewish soldiers: Sous Lieutenant Amadee Rothstein, Sous Lieutenant Robert Walter Hertz, and Caporal Robert Cahen. 

The examples of these three men – three, alas, of very many – seem to have been chosen based on their ancestry, the symbolism inherent to their stories, and finally, the sense of literary expression evident in their correspondence with friends, family, and even in literary or academic journals: Rothstein (from the fourth Arrondissement?), a proud Zionist, born in Cairo in 1891; Hertz, a student of the Normal College and professor of philosophy in the college of Douai, born in Saint Cloud in 1891, to a father of German Jewish ancestry; Cahen, a graduate of the Normal College and freethinker who wrote, “I do not believe in any dogma of any religion.”  “I have just read the Bible.  It is for me a collection of tales, of old and charming stories.  I do not look for, nor do I find in it anything else but poetic emotions.” – None and nevertheless, a Jew.  

Obviously – ! – Barrès penned his book in French, (I don’t know if an English-language translation exists, the 1917 edition being available at archive.org., while you can – I think! – more easily read the chapter in its original French text, transcribed here.)  In that light, it’s interesting that the Exponent did not mention the name of the text’s translator.  Could this person have been M. Marcel Knecht, mentioned in the article’s preface as a member of the French High Commission to the United States? 

______________________________

You can read the full text of Barrès’ article / chapter – as presented in the Exponent – below, transcribed verbatim, below. 

I’ve supplemented the text by including “PARTIE À REMPLIR PAR LE CORPS (‘PART TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CORPS’)” forms (for example, see my earlier post, Three Soldiers – Three Brothers? – Fallen for France: Hermann, Jules, and Max Boers) Cards for Rothstein, Hertz, and Cahen, listing biographical information about each soldier as derived from both the Cards and other sources, such as l’Univers Israélite (reviewed at the Dorot Jewish Division of the New York Public Library), and the 2000 reprint of Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française 1921.  To enable you to distiniguish between my textual additions and the original article, more easily, this information is presented in maroon-colored text, like this

To place the lives of these three men in greater perspective, at the “end” of this rather lengthy post, I’ve listed the names of French Jewish soldiers, and German Jewish soldiers, who lost their lives on the same dates as Rothstein, Hertz, and Cahen.  The record for each of the French Jewish soldiers comprises that soldier’s 1) rank, 2) country or land of birth, and, 3) the geographic location where he was killed.  All these names were obtained from the SGA’s Base des Morts pour la France de la Première Guerre mondiale (Database of Killed for France in the First World War) database.  And, the record for each of the German Jewish soldiers comprises the soldier”s name, rank, military unit, and (where known) place of burial.  Notably, of the eighty-eight French Jewish soldiers who were killed in action or died of wounds on May 9, 1916, the names of twenty-seven men do not appear in Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française

(Amidst discussion of a stark and haunting topic, a technical point:  The databases at the SGA website give access to an extraordinary trove of historical and genealogical information.  But, while records can be searched using the soldier’s date of birth, there is no search field for the date on which a casualty was incurred.  Okay, back to the discussion…)

______________________________

What about Maurice Barrès’; what about his article?

The animating idea underlying M. Marcel Knecht’s laudatory introduction to Barrès’ article is that the circumstances of the Great War, with the nation of France in peril and its survival dependent upon the steadfast unity of all elements of its population, caused a sea-change – a “great transformation” (adopting Karl Polanyi’s appelation from an entirely different topic…), as it were – in the latter’s perception of the Jews of France.  (And perhaps indirectly – albeit unaddressed in the essay – Jews, “in general”?  But, that’s speculation…)  This changed perception centrally manifested itself in terms of a straightforward appreciation of the dedication, valor, and willingness for self-sacrifice on the part of French Jewish soldiers, and secondarily, as the consequent willingness to accord the Jews of France a place within and of the national body – a place symbolic; yet a place quite real – paralleling that of other groups which together comprise the French nation.

But, that’s simplifying things a little.  The issue at hand is more complex, for Barrès actually divides the Jews of France into two distinct groups.

One group is comprised of those Jews whose families have a long tradition of residence and ancestry in France, as evidenced in the opening paragraph, “Many Jews, settled in our midst for generations and centuries, are natural members of the national body,” and later, “But there are other Jews in large numbers, rooted for centuries and generations in the soul of France, and intimately identified with the joys and sorrows of the national life.”

Second, those Jews whose connection to France is been less immediate both temporally and geographically, their hhaving been born and raised in the country’s colonies (such as Algeria), or whose immediate ancestry even derives from the land of the nation’s foe, Germany, epitomized in the adjective “adopted”.  This is seen in such comments as as, “Passing on to another portion of this category of adopted ones who conduct themselves as good Frenchmen in order to pay for and justify their adoption, I advance positive evidence, which brings us before a noble and ardent soul and introduces us into the midst of the intimate sufferings of Gallicized Israel,” and, “Let us now come a little nearer, and from this friend from the outside let us proceed to our adopted ones.” 

In any case, however well-written the essay, Barrès’ closing and ending sentences are revealing, and a sign – perhaps intentional; perhaps taken-for-granted – of his perception of the nature and “place” (a place real; a place symbolic) of the Jewish people in the world, and in history.

First, there’s the sentence with which the very article commences, “For Israel in his eternal wandering, choosing a country is a matter of great importance.”  Israel – the Jewish people – is definied by definition and nature as a wanderer; as eternally homeless, despite finding homes – a secularized political version of a Christian theological definition.  Curiously, this seems at odds (perhaps Barrès’ himself neither perceived nor contemplated the contradiction!) with a not-so-passing reference to the re-establishment of a Jewish nation-state:Did he [Amedee Rothstein] expect to obtain from the victory of the Allies the realization of the curious plans, which are not without grandeur, of Doctor Herzl, or did he, more simply and with more certainty, desire to increase through sacrifice the moral force and prestige of Israel?  One word which he uttered leaves no doubt of the strength and direction of his thought.  He told his friends he would meet them after the war in Palestine.” 

And, the closing paragraph, in reference to the death of Rabbi Abraham Bloch:

“The old families rooted for generations in the French soil will take, as their typical hero and standard-bearer, the Chief Rabbi of Lyons, who falls on the field of Honor offering a crucifix to the dying Catholic soldiers. 

“In the village of Taintrux, near Saint-Die, in the Vosges, on the 29th of August, 1914 (on a Saturday, the sacred day of the Jews), the field hospital of the 14th Corps catches fire under the German bombardment.  The stretcher-bearers, amid flames and explosions, carry away 150 wounded.  One of the latter, mortally struck, asks for a crucifix.  He asks it of M. Abraham Bloch, the Jewish chaplain, whom he takes for the Catholic chaplain.  M. Bloch bestirs himself, he seeks, he finds, he brings to the dying man the symbol of the faith of the Christians.  And a few steps further on, a shell strikes him down.  He dies in the arms of the Catholic chaplain, Father Jamin, a Jesuit Father, whose testimony is proof of this incident. 

“No comment could add aught to the feeling of sympathy inspired in us by such an act, so full of human tenderness.  A long procession of instances has just shown us Israel striving in the war to demonstrate his attitude towards France.  Step by step we have risen; here fraternity spontaneously meets its perfect gesture; the old Rabbi presenting to the dying soldier the immortal sign of Christ on the cross is a picture that will never perish.”

Aside from the historicity (actually, the lack thereof) of Barrès’ account of Rabbi Abraham Bloch’s death (about which you can read much more in English and French, from a translation and transcript, respectively, of the chapter “Mythe et réalité: la mort du grand rabbin Abraham Bloch“, from Philippe-E. Landau’s Les Juifs de France et la Grande Guerre) I’m struck by the symbolism and power of this tale in terms of the self-identity of French Jewry.  It parallels (if it doesn’t even unintentionally anticipate!) the story of “The Four Chaplains” – at least, as reported during and promulgated after the Second World War – vis-a-vis the self-perception of American Jewry.  (There were many other Jewish men – both soldiers and Merchant Marine crewmen – who became casualties during the loss of the U.S.S. Dorchester on February 3, 1943, whose names have vanished from history.  Maybe more about that topic in the future…)

Anyway, back to Maurice Barrès’, the writer; the journalist; the politician, and simply, the man… 

Born in 1862, he was fifty-five years old when Les Diverses Families Spirituelles de la France was published in 1917.  He died only six years later, in 1923. 

Did the composition of “les Israelites”, within Les Diverses Families Spirituelles de la France, mark a genuine sea-change in his beliefs about and attitude towards the Jewish people, or did this signify only a temporary moderation, modified by expediency, from his prior beliefs about the Jews – most evident during the Dreyfus Affair?  I do not know.  Now do I know if subsequent to 1917 he penned anything further about the Jewish people.  (A cursory web search seems to yield no further writings in this vein.)  Well, it’s notable that For And Against Dreyfus mentions that he, “…deduced Dreyfus’s guilt “by his race”, while in 1897, Les Déracinés, the first volume of his trilogy Roman de l’énergie nationale, rejected the legacy of the Enlightenment, which had made a moron of France.”   However, his biography at Wikipedia (being cognizant of Wikipedia’s ideological bias) states, “During World War I, Barrès was one of the proponents of the Union Sacrée, which earned him the nickname “nightingale of bloodshed” (“rossignol des carnages”).  … During the war Barrès also partly came back on the mistakes of his youth, by paying tribute to French Jews in Les familles spirituelles de la France, where he placed them as one of the four elements of the “national genius”, alongside Traditionalists, Protestants and Socialists – thus opposing himself to Maurras who saw in them the “four confederate states” of “Anti-France”.” 

There is a winding road between these two extremes.  Perhaps Barrès took only a temporary detour from a certain well-established ideological path; perhaps hegenuinely navigated to a land of different belief.  Perhaps he remained somewhere between; perhaps the issue became moot, after a time.

In any event, onwards to his article, which you can view, and read, below.

________________________________________

__________________________

______________________________

The Jews And The War
By Maurice Barres
Member of the French Academy

(Translation for The Jewish Exponent)

The article here presented for the first time in an English translation is notable not only because it comes from the pen of a member of the French Academy and one of the foremost European litterateurs of the day but because the glowing tribute paid to the Jewish people has been written by one who in the past has stood on the side of the enemies of the race, having lent his influence to the unenlightened activities of the anti-Semites.  His new realization of the intrinsic worth of the Jews as a people and of the immense services which the Jews have rendered to the cause of France and her Allies in the great struggle for the freedom of the world, constitutes one more conversion of striking significance and illustrates anew one of the remarkable effects of the great awakening brought forth by the war.  The author himself does not hesitate to refer to his change of views and in reviewing the correspondence of Robert Hertz, he says, “On various occasions my own name, now condemned, now praised, recurs under his pen, and I listen to our agreements and disagreements with the greatest attention, FOR THE WAR LEAVES US NOTHING, WHICH WE SHOULD REFUSE TO REVISE.”  The article consists of a chapter from “Les Diverses Families Spirituelles de la France” (The Various Spiritual Families of France), a book by M. Barres, just published, in which the distinguished author describes how the diverse population of France has been welded into one whole by the struggle against a common enemy, and pays enthusiastic tribute to the different classes of people living in the country, which have attested their loyalty by sacrifice.  M. Marcel Knecht, a member of the French High Commission to this country, who recently wrote in the Jewish press on the important role which the French Jews have played and are still playing in the present struggle, paid particular attention to the new book of M. Barres, asking for it the special consideration of the Jews in this country, “because this book contains the greatest praise for the Jewish attitude in the war.”  He said further: “This book was written by a man who, during the Dreyfus affair, and who since has always been on the other side of the barrier.  He is a Lorrainer, a great French writer, a member of the French Academy, a man occupying a great official position in the Nationalist Party of France, Maurice Barres, who was not particularly considered a friend of the Jews.  He has written in this book a great chapter on the Jews, praising their heroism.”

 __________________________

______________________________

MAURICE BARRÈS

OF THE FRENCH ACADEMY
PRESIDENT OF THE LEAGUE OF PATRIOTS

THE VARIOUS SPIRITUAL FAMILIES OF FRANCE

PARIS
EMILE-PAUL FRÈRES, EDITORS
100, RUE DE FAIBOURG-SAINT-HONORÉ. 100
PLACE BEAUVAU
1917
______________________________

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapters. – Pages.

I  Our diversities disappear on August 4, 1914 – 1
II  … And reappear in the army – 9
III  The Catholics – 19
IV  The Protestants – 51
V  The Israelites – 67
VI  The Socialists – 90
VII  The Traditionalists – 137
VIII  Catholics, Protestants, Socialists, all defending France, defend their particular faith – 193
IX  An already legendary night (Christmas 1914) – 205
X  Twenty-year-old soldiers devote themselves to creating a more beautiful France – 215
XI  This profound unanimity, we will continue to live it – 259

Notes and Appendix – 269

PRINTING CHAIX, RUE BERGERE, 20, PARIS – 842-1-17. (Lucre Lurilleux)

 __________________________

______________________________

For Israel in his eternal wandering, choosing a country is a matter of great importance.  His country is not always a heritage from his ancestors; he acquires it then by an act of his free will, and he assumes his citizenship as a quality of which he is anxious to prove himself. 

Many Jews, settled in our midst for generations and centuries, are natural members of the national body, but they are concerned that their newly-arrived co-religionists should prove their loyalty.  In the early days of the war, when a hostile feeling rose up in the ancient Parisian Ghetto (in the fourth Arrondissement) against the Jews from Russia, Poland, Rumania and Turkey, a meeting was held in the home of one of the editors of the newspaper, The Jewish People (Le People Juif), of which it published a report, “Do you not think, “ said one, “that it is necessary to organize a special service for enlisted foreign Jews in order that it may become known that the Jews have also brought forward their contingent?”

The same day an appeal in French and Yiddish was addressed to the immigrant Jews inviting them to come and register in the rooms of the Jewish People’s University, 8 Rue de Jarente.  It was received with enthusiasm, and, says The Jewish People, “Not one Jewish tradesman in the Jewish quarter failed to display a copy of it in his show window very prominently.”  On the very next day, an enormous crowd thronged the rooms of the Jewish People’s University.  Each one wished to be registered as soon as possible, and to be in possession of the card certifying to his enlistment, the magic card which opened the ranks of police officers and calmed the wrath of janitors and over-zealous neighbors.  (Le People Juif, October, 1916.)

Eager young men, intellectuals, it seems, questioned, informed, exhorted, and registered these motley recruits.  The most zealous was a 22 year old Jew, a student of the engineering school, small, frail, with gleaming, almost feverish eyes, with a strong and aggressive spirit.  This young enthusiast dreamed of creating a veritable Jewish legion.  Rothstein was a Zionist.  By this devotion given to France, he was sure that he was serving the cause of Israel. 

How did he understand it?  Did he expect to obtain from the victory of the Allies the realization of the curious plans, which are not without grandeur, of Doctor Herzl, or did he, more simply and with more certainty, desire to increase through sacrifice the moral force and prestige of Israel?  One word which he uttered leaves no doubt of the strength and direction of his thought.  He told his friends he would meet them after the war in Palestine. 

When all had enlisted, he himself signed the sheet. 

Having departed as a simple soldier, Amidee Rothstein was promoted second lieutenant then mentioned in an army order “for having displayed remarkable vigor and coolness to the admiration of the infantry officers and of his men,” and finally made a Knight of the Legion of Honor, “for having particularly distinguished himself on the 25th of September, 1915, by being the first to leave the trenches, and vigorously carrying his men along with him, which helped to give superb dash to our first wave of assault.”

We should like to be familiar with the thought, the wonderments, the sympathies, the hopes of this young hero of Israel amid the soldiers and landscapes of France, in a moral atmosphere so different from his own spirit, but with which he was intoxicated, and wished to enrich himself. 

I have read his analysis of the treatise by Pines on “Yiddish Literature,” an analysis quite brief and unadorned, which makes us regret a more considerable work, “too subjective, too personal,” we are told, which he had devoted to the same subject.  “Such as they are, these ten pages, where he hears the Jewish people speak, reveal his fixed idea, his obsession on the sufferings and hopes of Israel, his gaze towards Palestine.  He seems to place over everything the feeling of national pride, which he endeavors to reconcile with the ideal of humanity.” 

We have his ultima verba, in a letter addressed to his chaplain, Mr. Leon Sommer.  “At the present moment,” says he, “I hold my life as wholly sacrificed, but if fate should be kind enough to spare me, after the war I shall consider my life as no longer belonging to me, and, after having done my duty towards France, I shall devote myself to the great and unhappy Jewish people from whom I am descended.  My dear chaplain, in case I should die, I should very much like to sleep under the Shield of David.  A Mogen David would rock me with a last thrill and my soul would he happy in the thoughts of sleeping my eternal sleep under the shadow of the emblem of Zion. 

On the 18th of August, 1916, Lieutenant Rothstein fell at the head of his men, struck by a bullet in the forehead. 

______________________________

Sous Lieutenant Amadee Rothstein

Sous Lieutenant, 1635, France (Egypte), Armée de Terre, Legion d’Honneur
Légion étrangère, Regiment de Marche de la Legion Etranger
(“En subsistance au 4eme Regiment de Afrique”)
Killed by the enemy [Tué a l’ennemi] August 18, 1916 at Fortin Route du Fort de Vaux / Verdun a Vaux, Meuse, France
Born June 20, 1891, Cairo, Egypt

l’Univers Israélite
9/8/16 (article), 11/16/17
Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française 1921, p. 72 (“Rothstein, Amedee”)
l’Univers Israélite: “Inhume a Haudainville (Meuse), avec le ministere de M. Sommer, aumonier militaire.  Il aviat ete cite deux fois a l’ordre de l’armee en fait chevalier de la Legion d’honneur”

Specific place of burial unknown

______________________________

There is something painful and alluring in the destiny of a young spirit who regards the world exclusively through the Jewish nation, and who dies in the service of those he loves most, but from whom he insisted on being distinguished.  It is one of the innumerable trials of wandering Israel. 

Let us now come a little nearer, and from this friend from the outside let us proceed to our adopted ones. 

The Algerian Jews, during the war, show us Israel just united to French civilization, and ardently eager to partake of our rights, our duties and our sentiments.  Forty-five years ago they had not a single right.  Cremieux suddenly granted them a privilege which greatly upset the Arabs.  He decreed them French citizens.  The nobility of this title, the prerogative attached to it, and our education seem to have transformed them into patriots.  Their fathers were only familiar with commerce, but they thrilled with the call to arms.  They departed, I am told, with great enthusiasm.  A witness assures me that they were heard to exclaim: “We will throw ourselves on the Boche, and we will bury our bayonets in their bodies with the battle cry of the Eternal.” 

The cry is superb, and carries out imagination back to old Biblical times and to the Maccabaean epic.  One authorized to speak in their name writes me as follows: 

“They are serving for the most part in the Zouaves, and were there (until recently) in the proportion of one in four.  They have fought in the battle of Belgium, of the Marne (particularly at Chamigay), before Soissons, in Arras, on the Yser, in Champagne, at Verdun, on the Somme, at the Dardanelles, in Servia.  It is especially in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 8th Zouaves, which included them in the beginning.  The 45th Division, formed in Oran of reservists and territorialists, is the one which went through Paris the first days of September, and which was immediately sent by Galliene to the neighborhood of Meuse, there to deliver the blow which was decisive.”

Passing on to another portion of this category of adopted ones who conduct themselves as good Frenchmen in order to pay for and justify their adoption, I advance positive evidence, which brings us before a noble and ardent soul and introduces us into the midst of the intimate sufferings of Gallicized Israel. 

I have before me the family correspondence of Robert Hertz, student of the Normal College, professor of philosophy in the college of Douai, founder of the Socialist Memoranda, the son of a German Jew.  And it is this last circumstance which constitutes the tragedy of his position and his psychology.  His letters to his wife are admirable in their fullness and warmth.  I should not be fair to him if I did not mention his love for his hearthstone, his vigorous intellectual curiosity which operates in the most original manner even in the course of the war, his entire satisfaction with that military discipline where he satisfied what he calls his “nostalgia for the absent cathedral,” and finally his indomitable and deliberate will [to] go “to the limit.”  On various occasions my own name, now condemned, now praised, recurs under his pen, and I listen to our agreements and disagreements with the greatest attention, for the war leaves us nothing which we should refuse to revise.  But I shall not stop; I hurry on almost brutally, for the very honor of this Robert Hertz, to his naked and quivering thought, “If I fall,” he writes to his wife, “I shall have discharged only a very small part of my debt to our country.” 

And on this point this splendid passage:

“My dearest, I recall my dreams when I was very little, and later a student in d’Alma Avenue.  With all my being, I wanted to be a Frenchman, to deserve to be one, to prove that I was one, and I dreamed glorious deeds in the war against William.  Then this desire for “integration” took another form, for my Socialism proceeded largely from it.

“Now the old boyish dream lives again in me, more ardent than ever.  I am grateful to my chiefs who accept me as their subordinate, to the men whom I am proud to command, to them, the children of a people truly elect.  Yes, I am filled with gratitude to the fatherland which receives me and crowns me.  Nothing will be too much to pay for that, so my little lad can always walk with head erect, and, in the France restored, to free from the torment which poisoned many hours of our childhood and youth.  ‘Am I a Frenchman?  Do I deserve to be one?  No, little one you will have a country and yes you will be able to walk proudly on the earth, nourishing yourself with this assurance:  ‘My daddy was there, and he gave everything to France.’  As for me, if I need any, this thought is the sweetest reward.

There was something in the position of the Jews, especially in the recently arrived German Jews, which was dubious and irregular, clandestine and spurious.  I consider this war as a welcome opportunity to ‘regularize the situation’ for ourselves and for our children.  Afterwards, they will be able to work, if they so please, for the super and international ideal, but first of all, one must demonstrate by deeds that one is not beneath the national ideal.

The author of this testament signed it with his blood, certified it with his death, Robert Hertz was killed on the 13th of April, 1915, at Marcheville, at the time second lieutenant in the 330th Infantry.  I do not think it would be possible to find a text revealing with greater strength and feeling the passionate desire of Israel to lose himself in the French soul. 

______________________________

Sous Lieutenant Robert Walter Hertz

Sous Lieutenant, 453, Armée de Terre, 330eme Regiment d’Infanterie
Killed by the enemy [Tué a l’ennemi] April 13, 1915; Died on the field [Mort sur le terrain] at Marcheville, Meuse, France
Born June 22, 1881, Saint Cloud, Seine, France

l’Univers Israélite
10/8/15
Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française 1921, p. 42
l’Univers Israélite: “Eleve diplome de l’Ecole des Hautes-Etudes”

Place of burial unknown

______________________________

Such are the Jews recently arrived among us and in whom the unreasoning, almost animal part which there is in our love for our fatherland does not exist.  Their patriotism is wholly spiritual, an act of the will, a decision, a choice of the spirit.  They prefer France, that country presents itself to them as a freely constituted association.  Moreover, they are able to find in this very condition a reason for devotion, and Robert Hertz, the son of a German, shows us in admirable manner that, knowing himself to have been adopted, he wished to conduct himself in such a way as to be worthy of his adoption.  But there are other Jews in large numbers, rooted for centuries and generations in the soul of France, and intimately identified with the joys and sorrows of the national life.  I ask myself what patriotic support do they find in their religion?  What remains in them of pious Israel of old, and what aid does the latter offer to its sons engaged in the war? 

The chief rabbi of the Central Consistory of France, in a letter which I have before me, answers: “My chaplain and myself have, since the beginning of the war, established the fact that there has been a great return of faith among the Jewish soldiers which fuses with their patriotic enthusiasm.”  Nevertheless, I have no documents in my possession.  I point out in simple good faith, the gaps in my investigation.  The documents which I possess on the moral elite among the Jews introduce me only to such spirits as appear to be devoid of their religious tradition.  They are all free thinkers.  [Subsequently, Mr. Barres received a number of communications, revealing the fact that with many of the Jewish soldiers fighting and dying for France, their religion is a great element in the sum of their moral strength.]

The free thinkers who emerge from Catholicism or Protestantism subsist, in large measure, on the ancient Christian foundation; for centuries they have been prepared in the little village churches.  But these Jews, what is their devotion and resignation made of?  What has the spirit of wisdom which rests in the shadow of the old synagogue told them?  Towards what synagogue of Jehovah do they incline when they pronounce the Fiat voluntas tua?  And how do the gradations of their assent group themselves on the moral scale which runs from painful expectancy to joyful eagerness for self-sacrifice.

One young Jew gives us an answer to these great questions.  Roger Cahen, recently graduated from the Normal College, less than 25 years old, is a second lieutenant in the forests of Argonne.  Under the German fire, he gives himself up voluptuously to an inspection of his conscience of which his letters gives us a sketch.  Clear and strong, with all the buddings which promise great talent, they exhale the confidence of a young intellectual who, speaking to his family, to loyal friends, to his old teacher, M. Paul Derjardine, is not afraid to reveal his pride and his spiritual freedom.  They are like to many little meditations where it is clearly seen that the young soldier looks for and finds only himself in all the chaos of this war.  Roger Cahen does not venture beyond the circle of light which is shed by his small inner frame.  “I do not believe in any dogma of any religion,” he writes.  That was his view before the war, he confirms himself in it in December, 1915, two months before his heroic end.  “I have just read the Bible.  It is for me a collection of tales, of old and charming stories.  I do not look for, nor do I find in it anything else but poetic emotions.” 

It is poetic emotions, also, which he looks for in war, and he finds many very beautiful ones.  I believe him entirely when he writes: “I have within me a fund of joyousness without end, a soul which is fresh and pure, receptive to everybody and to every sensation.  Every morning I have the feeling that I have only just been born and that I am seeing the vast world for the first time.”  Certain of his letters written on his knees, in the light of a small wax candle, five meters under the ground, are of great lyric power.  Listen reverently to this fragment of eternal poesy:

“Splendid of the nascent day, no hymn can equal that which rises up in the soul of the men who watch in the trenches, when, after hours of expectance they first feel, and then see appear and grow the light triumphant.  At those moments, I have a whole orchestra within me.  If I could only write down this inward music which no concert will ever restore to me.  If you only knew how rich and beautiful are the emotions of the dearly beloved day into the world.”

In the bottom of the first line trenches he notes down that the only events in his history are “the changes in the natural order, nightfall, dawn, an overcast or starry sky, the war with or the coolness of the air.  This amalgamation with the life of the world gives to our own life an incomprehensible grandeur and beauty” 

Thus bound up with the universal splendor, he defies destiny.  “I am confident that whatever happens today, tomorrow, in a week, I have shown myself lofty enough to dominate events and to look at them only with curiosity.”

All that is summarized in this confession of faith:

“At the risk of appearing insane to you, I declare with all my soul and conscience that I love to be here.  I love the first line trenches as an incomparable “Thinkery.”  Here you retire into yourself, with all your powers concentrated: here you enjoy complete fullness of life.  I am here as under a reflector.  I see myself here under a very keen light with a clearness which better than any study chamber encourages self analysis.”

To each one of his letters, his conclusion is always that henceforth he considers himself a good and strong instrument.  It is the refrain and the mainspring of his daily thought.  He has found his rule of life and his road.  He is sure of himself. 

This is his manner in pronouncing in his turn the flat voluntas tua:

“I endeavor to take advantage of my isolation and of the keenness of mind induced by danger for knowing myself better.  If you only knew with what simplicity one looks upon oneself and judges oneself in this region.  I have succeeded unto the present in maintaining myself in a state of philosophic equanimity and indifference of constant resignation.”

There it is, this universal word, resignation.  And it’s not a word alone, it is indeed the thought.  Very warm and noble, profoundly painful for those who listen to it with perfect sympathy, but for him shot through with a joyful peace:

“I have forbidden myself to pass judgment on the value of the events of my life; I accept them all as opportunities which fate offers me for knowing myself better and for improving myself.”

It is true that he is unique, but how can one read him without loving him, this young intellectual who died at the age of 25 years for France.  Indeed, he is happy that besides here there were Reguy, Psichari, Marcel Drouet and the young Leo Latil, Jean Rival Cazalia, luminous children all.  His spiritual freedom, his isolation, his fine and noble voluptuous nature, are yet a form of courage very elegant and very strong.  Roger Cahen continues, revives, and broadens a conception of life which we so much loved a quarter of a century ago.  He seals it with heroism.  Having fallen in the field of honor, in that Argonne where, for six months he had indefatigably listened to his thoughts, he is cited in the order of the 18th Brigade of Infantry, and wept for, a sergeant tells us, by the men in his company.

______________________________

Caporal Roger Cahen

Caporal, 7586, Armée de Terre, 149eme Regiment d’Infanterie
Killed in combat by gunshot [Tué par coup de feu au combat] May 9, 1915
at Aix-Noulette, Pas-de-Calais, France
Born October 17, 1892, Havre, Seine-Inferieure, France

l’Univers Israélite
12/7/17
Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française 1921, pp. 21 and 26 (Name appears as both “Cahen, Roger” and “Cohen, Roger”)

Place of burial unknown.

______________________________

Roger Cahen, Robert Hertz, Amedee Rothstein, all of these strong individualized figures, present something rare and singular.  I like to follow in their various epochs, the stages, the formation of a personality, the young Jewish intellectual, who for several years has been playing a big role in France, but I do not offer them as representatives of the Jewish French community.  The old families rooted for generations in the French soil will take, as their typical hero and standard-bearer, the Chief Rabbi of Lyons, who falls on the field of Honor offering a crucifix to the dying Catholic soldiers. 

In the village of Taintrux, near Saint-Die, in the Vosges, on the 29th of August, 1914 (on a Saturday, the sacred day of the Jews), the field hospital of the 14th Corps catches fire under the German bombardment.  The stretcher-bearers, amid flames and explosions, carry away 150 wounded.  One of the latter, mortally struck, asks for a crucifix.  He asks it of M. Abraham Bloch, the Jewish chaplain, whom he takes for the Catholic chaplain.  M. Bloch bestirs himself, he seeks, he finds, he brings to the dying man the symbol of the faith of the Christians.  And a few steps further on, a shell strikes him down.  He dies in the arms of the Catholic chaplain, Father Jamin, a Jesuit Father, whose testimony is proof of this incident. 

No comment could add aught to the feeling of sympathy inspired in us by such an act, so full of human tenderness.  A long procession of instances has just shown us Israel striving in the war to demonstrate his attitude towards France.  Step by step we have risen; here fraternity spontaneously meets its perfect gesture; the old Rabbi presenting to the dying soldier the immortal sign of Christ on the cross is a picture that will never perish. 

 __________________________

______________________________

– .ת. נ. צ. ב. ה
תהא

נפשו
צרורה
בצרור
החיים

April 13, 1915 – Sous Lieutenant Robert Walter Hertz

Jewish Casualties in the French Army

Cahen, Rene, Caporal, France, 1957, Meurthe-et-Moselle; bois le Pretre
Israel, Lucien, Caporal Fourier, France, 17557, Meuse; Verdun; l’Hopital No. 1

Jewish Casualties in the German Army

Cohen, Siegfried, Soldat, 21 Bayerisch Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 2 Battalion, 6 Kompagnie, at Apremont
Goldmann, Leo Alfred, Soldat, 36 Landwehr Infanterie Regiment, 2 Battalion, 5 Kompagnie – Kriegsgräberstätte in Harville (Frankreich), Grab 110
Schloss, Moritz, Kriegsfreiwilliger, I Bayerische Armee Korps, 2 Landwehr Eskadron
Steinitz, Bernhard, Unteroffizier, 93 Reserve Infanterie Regiment 93, 1 Battalion, 3 Kompagnie – Ulrichstein-Jüdischer Friedhof

May 9, 1915 – Caporal Roger Cahen

Jewish Casualties in the French Army

Aberbach, Tobie, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 25537, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Abram, Pierre, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Italie), 19535, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Abramovitch, David, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 20487, Pas-de-Calais; Mont-Saint-Eloi (pres); Berthonval
Astruc, Mail, Caporal, France (Bulgarie), 19272, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Barkan, Jacques, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23139, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Baur, Georges Henri Victor, Sergent, France, 12156, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Ben Hamou, David, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 1639, Belgique; Nieuport-Bains
Ben Mouchi, Isaac Zenon, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 18775, Turquie; Dardanelles; Gallipoli Peninsula
Ben Soussan, Abraham, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 995, Belgique; Nieuport
Benarroche, Isaac, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 4623, Pas-de-Calais; Roclincourt
Benbassat, Moise, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Turquie), 20110, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Berkovitch, Berg, Canonnier Servant de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23184, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Berlevy, Moise Herich David, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23028, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Chait, Moise, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26319, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Cherki, Moise, Caporal, France (Algérie), 16297, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Chwat, Nathan, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 25411, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Cohen, Liaou, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 994, Belgique; Nieuport
Czajkowski, Boleslas Charles, Sous Lieutenant, France (Turquie), 9038, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Daici, Elias, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France, 26788, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
David
, Louis, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Italie), 26087, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast

Davidovici, Salomon, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Roumanie), 27022, Pas-de-Calais; Mont-Saint-Eloi
Dobrowolski, Ronald, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 25389, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Dores, Rahmiel Faivel, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23567, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Evlagon, Vitali, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Turquie), 22914, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Fain, Judas, Caporal, France (Algérie), 1841, Somme; Abbeville
Feldmann, Charles Maurice Albert, Sergent, France, 12243, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Fogelbaum, Salomon, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 20456, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Frankel, Felix, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France, 6378
Fried, Jean, Soldat de 1ere Classe, France (Roumanie), 22953, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Garbarovitz, Albert, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26409, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Gerchinovitz, Valodia, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23489, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Ginsbourg, Simon, Soldat, France (Russie), 23130, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Goldberg, Guibel, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 25446, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Goldenberg, Salomon, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Turquie), 26836, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Golstein, Faivel, Soldat de 1ere Classe, France (Pologne), 26469, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Gourevitz, Isaac, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26362, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Guez, Emmanuel, Caporal, France (Algérie),  Belgique; Nieuport
Haron, Maurice, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Egypte), 21598, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Herscu, Joseph, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Roumanie), 24462, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Kandel, Leib Leon Ori Selig Georges, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26495, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Katz, Francois, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 29188, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Katzigna, Abraham, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26339, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Konetzki, Jacques, Soldat de 1ere Classe, France (Russie), 26892, Pas-de-Calais; nord de Arras
Krakouschansky, Helcite, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23396, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Leiba, Moise, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Roumanie), 26907, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Leibovici, Nahman Georges, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Roumanie), 26901, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Levine, David, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26916, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Levy, Chaim Lemel, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 23023, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Levy, Isaac, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Turquie), 22973, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Levy, Max Jean Francois Claude, Sergent Major, France, 16063 / 16635, Pas-de-Calais; Carency
Levy, Paul Emile, Lieutenant, France, 45, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval / Mont Saint Eloi
Litwak, Levy, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 20586, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Manassohn, Isaac, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 23573, Pas-de-Calais; Saint Vaast; secteur de Berthonval
Migdal, Leibus, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 25386, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval,
Miller, _____, France (Indefini)
Moscowitch, Maurice, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Egypte), 27086, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Novak, Antoine, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Hongrie), 25283, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Picard, David, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France, 823, Pas-de-Calais; Carency
Posner, Nathan, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Roumanie), 26970, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Praschker, Idel, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie),  Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Rapaport, Boris, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Israël), 26986, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Rosa, Joseph, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 25373, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Rosenbaum, Hermann, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 34017, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Roterman, Moschelt, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26486, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Rotker, Victor, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 23051, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Rousseau, Daniel, Adjutant, France, 27968, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Schapiro, Simon, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26337, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Schlitt, Aron, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23548, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Schtraim, Ilhaim, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26493, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Schulman, Abraham, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23148, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Sklarewski, Samuel, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23411, Pas-de-Calais; Mont-Saint-Eloi
Sobol, Barouch, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 20449, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Spack, Salomon, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23475, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Tchellebides, Clement, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Turquie), 22401, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Terner, Aron, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Roumanie), 19617, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Tiano, Moise, Soldat de 1ere Classe, France (Grèce), 22909, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Waichmann, Israel, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 23502, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Wechsler, Sigmund, Soldat de 1ere Classe, France (Roumanie), 27053, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval
Weichman, Schulim, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 23094, Pas-de-Calais; La Targette
Weil, Alphonse, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France, 8236, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Weinberg, Casimir, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 25383, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Weinberg, Lazare Rene, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France, 9690, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Wolger, Mayer, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Russie), 26313, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Wunenberger, Francois Leon, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France, 22311, Pas-de-Calais; secteur de Berthonval
Yakar, Isaac, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Turquie), 23075, Pas-de-Calais; Neuville-Saint-Vaast
Zenou, Mouchi ben Isaac,  France (Indefini),  Turquie; Dardanelles; Gallipoli Peninsula
Zerbib, Nathan, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 2375, bord du Ceylan
Zimmerling, Michel, Caporal, France (Russie), 23700, Pas-de-Calais; Berthonval

The names of twenty-seven of the above men do not appear in Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française.  They are: Aberbach, Benbassat, Berkovitch, Berlevy, Chait, Liaou Cohen, Dobrowolski, Fried, Gerchinovitz, Herscu, Francois Katz, Katzigna, David Levine, Chaim Lemel Levy, Isaac Levy, Migdal, Moscovitch, Praschker, Rotker, Schapiro, Schtraim, Sklarewski, Wechsler, Weinberg, Wolger, and Yakar

Jewish Casualties in the German Army

Blass, Max, Soldat, 12 Bayerisch Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 2 Battalion, 8 Kompagnie, at Arras – Kriegsgräberstätte in St.Laurent-Blangy (Frankreich), Kameradengrab
Blumenthal, Otto, Soldat, 55 Infanterie Regiment, 2 Battalion, 5 Kompagnie – Kriegsgräberstätte in Illies/Nord (Frankreich), Block 5, Grab 1
Bodenheimer, Arthur, Unteroffizier / Landsturmmann, 201 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 10 Kompagnie – Kriegsgräberstätte in Langemark (Belgien), Block A, Grab 4842
Burger, Fritz, Soldat, 7 Bayerisch Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 10 Kompagnie, Bayoneted by a Senegalese soldier, Died while Prisoner of War on 5/15/15, at French Military Hospital, Le Mans
Davidsohn, Ludwig, Unteroffizier, 110 Infanterie Regiment, 2 Battalion, 8 Kompagnie
Ephraim, Eduard, Soldat, 208 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 1 Kompagnie
Freimann, Sigmund, Gefreiter, 10 Bayerisch Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 1 Kompagnie, at Neuville
Gerechter, Georg, Soldat, 208 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 12 Kompagnie
Gross, Salo, Soldat, 205 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 1 Kompagnie
Herrmann, Friedrich, Soldat, 111 Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 2 Kompagnie
Itzig, Georg, Gefreiter, 206 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 2 Kompagnie
Laibon, Abraham, Soldat, 55 Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 11 Kompagnie
Levy, Julius, Unteroffizier, 14 Feldartillerie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 4 Kompagnie – Kriegsgräberstätte in Lens-Sallaumines (Frankreich), Block 11, Grab 155
Lilienfeld, Bernhard, Soldat, 39 Landwehr Infanterie Regiment 39, 1 Battalion, 2 Kompagnie
Lowy, Ernst, Soldat, 13 Bayerisch Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 11 Kompagnie, at Bukow, Galizia, Poland
Mendel, Emanuel Emil, Soldat, 39 Landwehr Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 4 Kompagnie
Mey, Salomon, Soldat, 39 Landwehr Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 1 Kompagnie
Mischlowitz, Siegfried, Soldat, Lehr Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 4 Kompagnie
Neufeld, Herbert, Soldat, 109 Leib Grenadier Regiment, 3 Bataillon, 9 Kompagnie
Nussbaum, Julius, Unteroffizier, 13 Bayerisch Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 11 Kompagnie, at Bukow, Galizia, Poland
Oppenheimer, Salli, Unteroffizier, 77 Landwehr Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 4 Kompagnie
Philipp, Hans, Dr., Oberleutant, 7 Bayerische Reserve Infanterie Regiment, Maschinen-Gewehr Kompagnie, at Souchez – Kriegsgräberstätte in St.Laurent-Blangy (Frankreich), Kameradengrab
Rauschmann, Willi, Soldat, 206 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 1 Kompagnie
Reich, Siegfried, Soldat, 231 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 2 Battalion, 7 Kompagnie
Reichhold, Louis, Soldat, 10 Bayerisch Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 3 Bataillon, 9 Kompagnie, at Neuville – Kriegsgräberstätte in St.Laurent-Blangy (Frankreich), Kameradengrab
Silberbach, Arthur, Soldat, 55 Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 10 Kompagnie – Kriegsgräberstätte in Illies/Nord (Frankreich), Block 5, Grab 3
Thal, Adolf, Gefreiter, 73 Landwehr Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 11 Kompagnie
Weinstein, Artur, Soldat, 205 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 2 Battalion, 5 Kompagnie – Kriegsgräberstätte in Vladslo (Belgien), Block 8, Grab 905

August 18, 1916 – Sous Lieutenant Amadee Rothstein

Jewish Casualties in the French Army

Amsellem, Salomon, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 24892, Somme; Maurepas
Attar, _____, France (Indefini) (“Partie a Remplir par le Corps” card could not be found or identified in SGA database)
Ben Simon, Joseph David, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France, 26067, Somme; Maurepas
Benchetrith, Jacob, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 21048
Canoui, Elie, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 6454, Somme Maurepas
Dahan, Rene, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Algérie), 21054, Somme; Maurepas
Danziger, Manasse Michel, Aspirant, France, 8025, Meuse; Vaux Chapitre
Fischhof, Robert Eugene, Sous Lieutenant, France, Somme; Maurepas
Godchaux, Alcide, Sous Lieutenant, France, Somme; Maurepas; sud de
Levine, Albert, Soldat de 2eme Classe, France (Pologne), 33288, Meuse; Vaux; Damloup
Saada, Isaac, Soldat, France (Algérie), 16818, Somme; Maurepas

Jewish Casualties in the German Army

Guggenheim, Hartwig, Unteroffizier, 692 Fussartillerie Batterie
Hermann, Siegfried, Soldat, 55 Landwehr Infanterie Regiment
Hirsch, Helmut, Soldat, 80 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 12 Kompagnie
Lemberger, Julius, Soldat, 119 Grenadier Regiment, 3 Battalion, 10 Kompagnie
Minkel, Max, Soldat, 68 Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 3 Kompagnie
Neumann, Markus, Soldat, 144 Infanterie Regiment, 2 Battalion, 8 Kompagnie
Priester, Max, Unteroffizier, 64 Reserve Infanterie Regiment, 3 Battalion, 12 Kompagnie
Simon, Fritz, Soldat, 1 Garde Reserve Regiment, 2 Battalion, 7 Kompagnie
Stern, Isaak, Soldat, 123 Grenadier Regiment, 1 Battalion, 4 Kompagnie
Wolf, Aloys, Unteroffizier, 364 Infanterie Regiment, 1 Battalion, 4 Kompagnie

References and Suggested Readings

Barrès, Maurice, Les diverses familles spirituelles de la France, Paris, Émile-Paul frères, Paris, France, 1917, at Archive.org

Maurice Barrès, at Wikipedia

Maurice Barrès, at For and Against Dreyfus

Maurice Barrès, at Radical Right Analysis

Maurice Barrès, (photographic portrait by Atalier de Nadar [Photo (C) Ministère de la Culture – Médiathèque du Patrimoine, Dist. RMN-Grand Palais / Atelier de Nadar]), at images d’art

Englund, Steven, An Affair As We Don’t Know It (Book Review of An Officer and A Spy, by Robert Harris), at Jewish Review of Books, Spring, 2015

Weber, Eugen, Inheritance and Dilettantism: the Politics of Maurice Barrès, Historical Reflections / Réflexions Historiques, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Summer/été 1975), pp. 109-131, at JSTOR

Die Jüdischen Gefallenen Des Deutschen Heeres, Deutschen Marine Und Der Deutschen Schutztruppen 1914-1918 – Ein Gedenkbuch, Reichsbund Jüdischer Frontsoldaten, Forward by Dr. Leo Löwenstein, Berlin, Germany, 1932

Les Israelites dans l’Armée Française (Israelites [Jews] in the French Army), Angers, 1921 – Avant-Propos de la Deuxième Épreuve [Forward to the Second Edition], Albert Manuel, Paris, Juillet, 1921 – (Réédité par le Cercle de Généalogie juive [Reissued by the Circle for Jewish Genealogy], Paris, 2000)

“Died for France in the First World War” “PARTIE À REMPLIR PAR LE CORPS (‘PART TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CORPS’)” forms, at Morts pour la France de la Première Guerre mondiale

French Military War Graves, at Sépultures de Guerre

Chronicles From World War One: Jewish Civilians in Eastern Europe: “How Russian Jews Suffered in War” – The Jewish Exponent, November 3, 1916

In its issue of November 3, 1916, an article describing the plight of Jewish civilians in Poland – during the advance, occupation by, and retreat of Russian military forces through that country – appeared The Jewish Exponent of Philadelphia.  As indicated in the article’s introductory paragraph, this news item was itself derived from a series of reports previously published in The New York Times, with information obtained from “confidential reports”.  

The Exponent presented the information in this article under seven major headings.  Namely:

1) The Attitude of the Russian General Staff towards Jewish soldiers (400,000 then serving in Russian army)

2) The Situation of the Jewish populace in Poland

3) The Experience of the Jews of Galicia

4) Taking of hostages and expulsion of Jews

5) Treatment of Jews during the retreat of the Russian army

6) Implications and impact of “Kush Incident” on the treatment of Jews by the Russian army, as reported on and instigated by the Russian military periodical Nash Vestnick

7) The Plight of Jewish refugees

The “take-aways” (in the jargon of 2019) from a reading of this article are simple, and, striking:

The seeming irrelevance – at least as perceived at the level of the Russian General Staff – of the dedication and loyalty Jewish soldiers in the Tsar’s army, and the General Staff’s corresponding near-automatic assumption of treachery on the part of all Jews – both soldiers and civilians;

…the generally hostile attitude of non-Jewish Poles towards Polish Jews (albeit not universally and consistently so), which was communicated to and influenced the attitude of Russian military leadership towards Polish Jewry;

…and, the difficulty (if not the practical impossibility) of self-defense – any projection of power, for that matter – by Polish Jews, whether individually or collectively. 

Read more, below…

______________________________

How Russian Jews Suffered In War
Confidential Reports tell of Their Persecution by Military and Civilians
(From the New York Bureau of The Jewish Exponent)

November 3, 1916

THE STORY of what the Jews suffered in Russia during the war, although barred by the censor from the columns of the Russian press, has come to The New York Times in a series of confidential reports, each one bearing open some aspect of the situation.

Soon after war was declared the Jewish people by word and deed offered every assurance of loyalty to Russia and her cause.  They responded to the mobilization summons as eagerly as any other element of the population.  Great numbers of students, barred from the Russian university because they were Jews, abandoned their courses in foreign institutions and returned to Russia to serve as volunteers.

An examination into the circumstantial sources from which the charges of Jewish treachery and espionage actually sprang about, showed according to a report of the Central Committee, that most of the accusations were made and prosecuted without reference to the ordinary rules of evidence and n utter disregard of the laws governing judicial procedure in such cases.  The written records from which it could be ascertained whether or not these charges were supported by legal evidence sworn to by witnesses are conspicuously absent.

On the other hand, the Central Committee found that the military authorities often pursued the most rigorous course on mere hearsay and rumors which they did not ignore even in the absence of sufficient proof for fear that some possible act of espionage or treason might escape unpunished.

The written records of eight typical cases of Jews charged with treason in the early days of the war show that six of these proceedings fell through for want of proof.  One defendant, a miller, was accused of guiding German artillery fire with the arms of his windmill.  On the day of a certain bombardment the wing kept turning the wheel in the direction of the Russian position under fire from which it was surmised that the miller was transmitting signals to the German gunners.  He was acquitted.

Another defendant was accused of possessing a secret telephone in his moving-picture establishment by which he could send information from the Russian lines to the German trenches.  The telephone case, which was heard in the town of Lomsch, not only terminated in the vindication of the defendant, but his accuser, a military inspector, was himself convicted of bribery and extortion.  It was proved that he deliberately manufactured false evidence in order to have the defendant arrested and obtain money and jewelry from his relatives by pretending to save him from the rope.

Most of the charges alleged nothing more treacherous than conversations in which the defendants either gave information to German soldiers or withheld information from the Russians.

Jewish Soldiers Suspected

Despite the triviality and collapse of these charges, the story of Jewish treachery continued to gain ground until it even took root in the ranks of the army, bringing the Jewish soldiers themselves, of whom there were about 400,000 in the Russian lines, under suspicion.

The General Staff issued a circular in April, 1915, demanding the careful collection of all available facts pointing to treachery and disloyalty on the part of Jewish soldiers.  The same kind of order was issued with reference to Jews who were doing service in the medical, sanitary, and commissary branches of the army. 

“This evidence,” a proclamation asserts, “is indispensable in view of the fact that after the war it will be necessary to pass serious judgment upon the question of Jewish service in the ranks of our army; therefore, it is extremely desirable to have at hand the testimony, systematically collected by members of the various military branches who had to tolerate the menacing presence of the Jew in their very midst.”

Aside from inflicting a stigma upon the Semitic soldiers, the General Staff took official cognizance of the alleged acts of Jewish infamy.  Numerous proclamations were issued against the crimes of the Jewish populations in the theatre of war.  They were accused among other things of refusing to feed the Russian soldiers and of putting poison in the food when they did feed them.  They were accused of betraying the movements of Russian troops, by overhead or underground wires, many of which were supposed to emanate direct from the synagogues and Jewish cemeteries.  They were accused of transporting secret supplies to the German troops.  They were accused of harboring soldiers in their cellars and yards and allowing the Russian to march into traps of destruction.  Thus in November the following proclamation was issued from the division headquarters in the region of the fortress of Novoe Georgievsk:

Articles appear in German newspapers to the effect that the German troops have found in the Jew a trustworthy ally who, having access to unknown supplies of food, is often diffident enough to serve the Germans in every way that might do damage to Russian interests.  In German victory the Jews saw their escape from the imperial yoke and from Polish oppression.

Information of a similar nature has also been received from the army at the front.

To protect the army against the perfidious activities of the Jewish population, the Commander in Chief hereby orders that in all occupied points hostages be taken from the Jewish inhabitants with a warning that any act of treachery by the Jews while the town was in our hands, or even after its evacuation, would mean the forfeit of the lives of those taken as hostages; that the disclosure in these places of any wireless apparatus or signaling stations or underground telegraph communications, etc., would expose those responsible to the full rigor of the law.

The Situation in Poland

During the occupation of Poland by Russian troops in the opening year of the war the Jews there inspired imperial distrust for several reasons.  In the first place, the anti-Semitic Poles, to whom Jewish competition in business was always distasteful, did everything in their power to fan the flames of suspicion and hatred.  Secondly, the condition of Jewish life in Poland, very different from that of the Gentiles, or even the Jews of the Russian provinces, also contributed to general uneasiness in the ranks of the army.  To quote the report of the Central Committee on this point:

“For the most part, the Jewish population of Poland has not yet emerged from its past, but clings securely to its pristine self-conscious kind of existence.  They retain the medieval costumes of the race, which give the men who wear beards and queer, dark clothes an especial alien and ominous aspect.  They speak a language that is neither Polish nor Russian, but a jargon, Yiddish, founded a hundred years ago and developed by admixture of Slavic and Hebrew words. 

“All these conditions naturally added to the feeling of estrangement between the Jewish inhabitants and Russian soldiers who invaded their territory and who for the first time looked upon people of such peculiar appearance.  Naturally, they became suspicious of a people who, though Russian subjects, spoke a language sounding like German, a language understood easily enough by the enemy, but not by the Russians.

“The excuse of suspicion on the one side evoked an attitude of fear and timidity on the other.

“The anti-Semitic element naturally encouraged the hostile attitude of the army, believing that it would result, if not in the extermination of the Jews, at least in their ruin or a radical abridgement of their rights after the restoration of the Imperial Government in Poland.”

The story concerning secret telephone communications with the Germans received the widest audience in military circles and more than once innocent Jews had to pay with their lives for this particular accusation.

Another story which did much damage was to the effect that the Jews were responsible for the scarcity of money throughout the empire, that the Jews were concealing great stores of coinage in their cemeteries, cellars and other secret places.  They were even alleged to have carried great sums of money across the border in coffins.

The Situation in Galicia

The experience of the Russian Army in its invasion of Galicia proved to be another source of anti-Semitic resentment.  The Galician Jew differed but slightly in appearance and customs from the Polish Jews.  He spoke the same incomprehensible language, only understood by the Germans.  There was really nothing to distinguish the two excepting that the Galician Jews were more ferociously hostile to the Russian Army than the Jews under Muscovite rule.  True enough, the Galician Jews offered the Russians no cordial reception.  For them the ravaging Cossack typified the whole Russian Army.

So it happened that whatever difficulties the Galician Jews created for the Russian Army in its Carpathian campaign reacted directly against the Jews of Poland and Russia.

The tendency to put all Jews, whether Russian or Austrian subjects, in the same unfriendly class first manifested itself officially in a proclamation issued by the General Staff on the southwest front.  Subsequently, the same order issued on January, 1915, was sent to all points of the front.  It read as follows:

The events of the present war have revealed a decidedly unfriendly attitude toward us on the part of the Jewish inhabitants of Poland, Galicia, and Bukowina.  Whenever our forces stopped, the friendly inhabitants open the subsequent occupation of those regions by the Germans have had to endure great hardships because of the lying reports made by the Jews to Austrian and German authorities.

Wherefore, to relieve the inhabitants of Jewish prosecutions and to protect our armies against the espionage in which the Jews are engaged on all our fronts, the Commander in Chief has forbidden the presence of the Jews in the vicinity of our armies and their migration to any point south of the city of Yaroslav; furthermore, in view of the slanders perpetrated by the Jews against the population, and in view of the espionage practiced by the Jews, the Commander in Chief has ordered that hostages be taken who shall be liable to the punishment of death by hanging.  For every peaceful inhabitant made a victim of by Jewish slander, and for every instance of Jewish espionage, the lives of two hostages shall be forfeited.

This step is taken top protect the peaceful and friendly inhabitants from suffering as the result of Jewish lies; it is taken on the basis of six months experience which has brought our military authorities to the firm conviction that the Jews have and will continue to display a disloyal and relentless attitude toward the local population.

Taking of Hostages

The taking of hostages was a circumstance which caused the deepest resentment throughout the whole Jewish population of Russia.  Hostages were taken beginning with the second month of the war in Prushkov province of Warsaw.  Thereafter, the military authorities adopted this policy as a guarantee against Jewish treachery throughout the provinces of Poland, Courland and Kovno.  As a rule, the hostages were rabbis and wealthy Jews – the most influential members of the community.  They were men not only valuable to their own people, but men who had also proved themselves exceptionally energetic in the humanitarian endeavor of providing and caring for wounded Russian soldiers and their families, irrespective of religious faith.

The report of the Central Committee records the execution of three men held as hostages in Sohachev in December, 1914.  The reason for their execution could not be ascertained.

The decree quoted above was only one of a series of similar proclamations which culminated in the anti-Semitic propaganda of 1914 and in the spring of 1915.  Shortly after the war began, orders were issued directing the Jews of certain towns on the Polish-German frontier to retire into the interior, taking with them as much of their belongings as they could carry.  Beginning with perfunctory proclamations that were to all appearances prompted by military necessity, the policy of the authorities within a few months assumed a relentless course of discrimination against the Jews.

By the end of December, 1914, under the lash of military proclamations, the exodus of Jews had developed into a great upheaval of the whole Semitic population of Poland.  On January 25, 1915, a general order was issued expelling the Jews from more than forty towns in the region of Warsaw.  More than 100,000 Jews had to abandon their homes under this decree.  They were driven from one town to another in rapid succession, and they had no time in most cases to collect the necessities of life, such as food, clothing and utensils.  Old men, women and children – all the able-bodied Jews being at the front fighting for Russia – made up this dreary and endless caravan of misery, which the military authorities got into motion. 

Once the order to leave was issued, the Jews were expected to comply without a moment’s delay.  All considerations of home, family and property had to de abandoned.  The rabbis, on behalf of their community, often appealed to the military commander for an extension of the allotted time.  Sometimes the appeal was granted; more often it was refused.  The police, moreover, being themselves held strictly responsible for the prompt execution of military orders, were right on the heels of the Jews with whips and threats.

The report of the expulsion of the Jews from Smorgon, province of Vilna, in September, 1913, [sic] cites an occurrence where a Cossack officer, on finding that two sons and an aged father had not vacated their homes with the rest of the Jews, demanded to know the reason why.  The sons declared that they did not know what to do because their old father was lying very ill in bed and could not possibly be moved without endangering his life.  The officer asked to see the old man.  On being brought to his bedside the officer drew a revolver, put a bullet through the sick man’s brain and remarked to his sons, “Now you are free to go.”

On many occasions Jewish inhabitants fleeing from their native towns saw the sky illuminated that night with the flames of their burning homes.  They had no redress unless the commanding officer happened to be especially humane.  Thus, in Ynova [sic]. the military commander, Gabrilowitsch [sic], in checking the instigation of a pogrom against the Jews, reminded the Cossacks and peasants that he knew “neither Jew nor Gentile, only Russian subjects”.  Very often, too, especially during a period of Russian advance, soldiers who engaged in pillage, even of the Jews, were punished with the full rigor of the law.

Crimes Following the Retreat

When the Russians were thrown back into Poland, the protection of the Jewish inhabitants along the line of retreat became so extremely lax that they were at the mercy of Cossacks and peasants.  The cry was, “All Jews are traitors.”  The following is reported to have taken place in the town of Lokachi, province of Volinski:

“On July 24 the Cossacks and Dragoons, in order to distinguish between the Gentiles and Jews of the village, ordered the former to display ikons in their windows.  This being done, they hastened to destroy and plunder Jewish property.  The pogrom began in the shop of a Jew when a Cossack demanded a pound of tobacco, costing not less than four roubles.  The Jew replied that he did not keep such high-priced tobacco in stock, whereupon the Cossack pierced him with his lance and killed him.  Following this occurrence the whole Jewish population fled and encamped in the open about two miles from the village.  For the three following days the destruction of property continued without cessation.  When their was nothing else to destroy the Cossacks rode out to the spot where the Jews had encamped under the open sky.  They lined up the Jews and robbed them of all their money and valuables.  One of the Jews, Gershon Pfeffer, resisted their violence.  They dragged him into the woods and he never returned.  On August 11 a gendarme found his coat there all covered with blood.”

A Cossack, in a letter to his brother concerning conditions in a town he had helped to sack, wrote as follows:

“The people here are very poor, not sure of getting anything, and you spend very quickly whatever you get.  With 70 cents a months you can’t go very far, when you have to put up for the horses’ feed, too.  Bread you get wherever you can.  Kill a Jew and he has not got anything, and we club them like dogs, only there is nothing to be had; they are starving of hunger themselves.”

The Kush Episode

The wholesale and systematic expulsion of the Jews did not begin until May, 1915, when it was practically coincidental with the publication of what is termed the most vicious canard of the war.  On May 5, the official military organ, Nash Vestnick, published a dispatch which read as follows:

“On the night of April 28, in the village of Kush, southwest of Shavie, the Germans made a successful attack upon a detachment of our infantry which was resting in that vicinity.  The occurrence revealed sedition and treachery of the part of certain elements of the population, especially the Jews.  Before the appearance of our troops in this village, the Jews had concealed German soldiers in many of their cellars.  At a given shot, the Germans poured in on us from every direction.  Rushing out of the cellars they attacked the house occupied by the commander of our infantry regiment.  This disastrous event demonstrates the military necessity of taking the most diligent precautions in places which the Germans had formerly occupied and of which the inhabitants are largely Jews.”

Distributed by the Petrograd Agency to all the important newspapers, this dispatch created a tremendous wave of anti-Semitic feeling even among the more intelligent people.  The Kush dispatch, furthermore, was placarded in and posted in nearly all the large cities and in all towns near the war zone.

An investigation of the German raid on Kush by two members of the Duma, Kerensky and Friedman, established beyond a doubt, according to a report of the Central Committee, that the Kush dispatch was a lie from beginning to end.  The facts as developed by this inquiry showed that out of forty houses there were only two occupied by Jews which had cellars.  These cellars, moreover, were merely very small basements, which could not have possibly accommodated any German soldiers.  On April 26, in the evening, a detachment of Russian infantry moved into the town.  Owing to the presence in the village on that very morning of a German scouting party, the Russians were warned by one of the inhabitants that the Germans were not more than four versts away, but they merely laughed at the suggestion and paid no attention to it.  On the same night a bombardment set the village on fire.  On the 27th the commanding officer advised all the inhabitants to leave the town, so that when the German attack took place on the 28th there was not a single Jew in the village.

Plight of the Refugees

This Kush dispatch had a very pointed effect upon the Gentile population of Russia when the exodus of the Jews reached its climax in the wholesale expulsion of about 200,000 Jews from the provinces of Kovno and Courland.  They met with hatred and contempt all along the route of their flight.

Furthermore, although the problem of transporting so large a mass of people across the country was a very serious one, neither the railroad nor military officials gave it much consideration.  The refugees were packed into freight and cattle trains and kept there for many days at a time with disease and filth and epidemic in their midst.  In the beginning, the railroad officials, taking advantage of their misfortune, tried to charge third-class rates for accommodations in box cars.  This abuse, however, was quickly checked by the Provincial Government.

Part of the refugees were transferred without delay to the districts of the provinces of Poltava Ekaterinoslav designated as a new pale of settlement by the authorities; others fled to other villages and towns of adjoining provinces, hiding in synagogues, barns, or under the open sky.  Some had passports and documents, which would entitle them to retain residential rights; others had nothing, and they were continually hounded from place to place.  Freight cars packed with Jews poured into the provinces of Poltava, Ekaterinoslav, and Tavrich and soon evoked from these districts a clamor of protest.

“In Homel,” reads the report of the Central Committee, “the members of the Jewish committee organized to give aid to the refugees as they passed through the town were ordered not to approach the cars with provisions under the threat of being shot.  They were strictly prohibited from giving any food to the refugees.  In connection with the circumstance, the Gentile population of the town was also very hostile to the refugees.  There were times when stones were thrown at the Jews and several were killed, and there were also times when the Gentiles, seeing that the ‘criminals’ were merely old, trembling men and women and children, immediately changed their entire attitude.

“It may be noted with satisfaction,” reads the committee’s report, “that in those provinces where the influence of the Black Hundred was not allowed to dominate the Gentile inhabitants showed no enmity toward the Jews, but, on the contrary, displayed on many occasions the warmest sympathy.”

The expulsion of the Jews took place on the eve for the call for recruits of the class of 1916.  Hence, thousands of young Jews who had been driven out as “spies” were ordered to return to their native provinces at once to fulfill their military obligations.

The expulsion of the Jews was followed by economic demoralization of business in all the provinces from which they were driven.  Although the nationalistic paper of Kovno, Litovskaya Russ, urged the Gentiles to take advantage of their economic opportunities after the Jews were gone, business remained at an absolute standstill.  The shops in all the main streets of Kovno remained shut.  There was hardly a grocer, butcher, or delicatessen store to be found.  Jewish industries and factories were shut down and thousands of men were thrown out of employment. 

Towards the end of May the Government and military authorities realized that the expulsion of Jews had been a great mistake.  But in order to retain the political effect of this movement and continue the distinction between the Jews and the rest of the population, the authorities agreed to have them return provided that they gave hostages as a guarantee that there would be no treachery.  Feeling it impossible to accept a condition which was based on a presumption that they were capable of treachery, most of the Jewish communities rejected the invitation and the situation remained unchanged. – New York Times

Readings and References

Lohr, Eric, The Russian Army and the Jews: Mass Deportations, Hostages, and Violence During World War I, Russian Review, V 60, N 3, July, 2001, pp. 404-419

Petrovsky-Shtern, Yohanan, The “Jewish Policy” of the Late Imperial War Ministry: The Impact of the Russian Right, Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, V 3, N 2, Spring, 2002, pp. 217-254

Vital, David, A People Apart – A Political History of the Jews in Europe, 1789-1939, Oxford University Press, N.Y., 2001

Chronicles From World War One: Jewish Civilians in Eastern Europe: “The Russo-Jewish War Victims” – The Jewish Chronicle, February 11, 1916

Through 1914 and 1915 (and beyond…) the Jewish Chronicle and Jewish Exponent closely focused news coverage upon the experiences, travails, and suffering of Eastern European Jewry, in the context of the social dislocation and suffering engendered by the military and political leadership of Russia, and to a lesser extent, the military forces of the Central Powers.  This took the form of relatively brief news items, and, lengthy analyses and editorials.  The commonality of this material being, that these were direct, relatively (well, in the context of a century ago!) “real-time” news reports, closely linked in time and space to the events at hand.

On Friday, February 11, 1916, the Chronicle published a lengthy news item that approached the tragedy of the Jews of Eastern Europe from another context: The newspaper reported on a meeting that took place in Whitechapel, London, a few days earlier (on Sunday, February 6, to be specific) at the Pavilion Theatre.  There, significant figures in British Jewry spoke before attendees – largely from the East End of London – in an effort to exhort them to make charitable donations in support of their suffering brethren, the majority of those in attendance doubtless having immediate family in the East, and thus having a direct and urgent connection to the issue at hand.

Those present at the gathering included (comments quoted from Wikipedia, thus there might be some oversimplification as well as ideological bias here…):

Elkan Nathan Adler – “English author, lawyer, historian, and collector of Jewish books and manuscripts.”  “Adler was extremely active in English-Jewish communal affairs, especially in education, and was an ardent Zionist; he was an early member of the Hovevei Zion in England. Per his will, his personal archives are now at the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America

Joseph Herman Hertz – “British Rabbi and biblical scholar.  He held the position of Chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom from 1913 until his death in 1946, in a period encompassing both world wars and the Holocaust”

Louis Samuel Montagu, 2nd Baron Swaythling- “prominent member of the British Jewish community, a financier, and a political activist”

Claude Joseph Goldsmid Montefiore – “founding president of the World Union for Progressive Judaism, a scholar of the Hebrew Bible, rabbinic literature and New Testament. He was a significant figure in the contexts of modern Jewish religious thought, Jewish-Christian relations, and Anglo-Jewish socio-politics, and educator. Montefiore was President of the Anglo-Jewish Association and an influential anti-Zionist leader, who co-founded the anti-Zionist League of British Jews in 1917″

Nahum Sokolow (Nahum ben Joseph Samuel) Sokolow – “Zionist leader, author, translator, and a pioneer of Hebrew journalism”

And – as you can read below – the meeting was opened with Baron Swaythling’s reading of a letter from Leopold de Rothschild (“British banker, thoroughbred race horse breeder, and a member of the prominent Rothschild family“.

Though I have little familiarity with significant figures in the history of British Jewry, I think it notable that the six men above span a spectrum of opinion regarding Jewish nationalism and Zionism, from Montefiore (by whom and especially about appeared many opinion pieces in the Chronicle throughout the Great War) on one end to Adler and Sokolow on the other.  As to the attitude of the other figures mentioned, I do not know if they were indifferent, noncommittal, or simply silent.

Notably, the article was one of the very few times that The Jewish Chronicle (as opposed to The Jewish World) published a photograph in association with an article.  The image – you can view it below – shows a young boy seated between an elderly man covered in blankets, to his left, and a woman – his grandmother? – his mother? – on his right.  Both the boy and woman (a basket before her – the family’s only remaining possessions?) have their attention focused directly on the photographer, while a woman and young girl (a mother and daughter?) are seated in the background.

Is he the same boy who appeared in the photograph that was published in The Jewish World on October 27, 1915?

There’s no way of knowing, and certainly one hundred and three years later in 2019, no way of ever knowing.

There are numerous statements in this post that bear deep consideration and contemplation, and if attention was accorded to all, “this” introduction would be lengthier than the article itself.  So…  Perhaps the most telling comment, appropriately reserved by the Chronicle’s anonymous reporter for the article’s conclusion, was that of Nahum Sokolow, who stated, “If there were two parties in Jewry to-day, it would be those who had given and those who had not, those who worshipped the Jewish God and those who bowed down to the golden calf; the party of Moses and the party of Korach.  They had to choose between God and Baal.  The party of God would accept the resolution.” 

________________________________________

“Seven million Jews – a population exceeding that of Belgium by one million, have borne the brunt of the war…  True all the peoples of this area suffered the ravage and pillage by the war, but in no degree comparable to the suffering of the Jews…  Hundreds of thousands were driven from their homes on a day’s notice, the more fortunate being packed and shipped as freight – the old, the sick and insane, men, women and children, shuttled from one province to another, side-tracked for days without food or help of any kind – and the less fortunate being driven into the woods and swamps to die of starvation.  Jewish towns were sacked and burned wantonly.  Hundreds of Jews were carried off as hostages into Germany, Austria, and Russia…  These Jews, unlike the Belgians, have no England to fly to.”

THE RUSSO-JEWISH WAR-VICTIMS
MEETING IN THE EAST END
THE DUTY OF ANGLO-JEWRY
The Jewish Chronicle

February 11, 1916

A large gathering crowded all parts of the Pavilion Theatre, Whitechapel, on Sunday afternoon. 

Pavilion Theatre, 191-193 Whitechapel Road, London, England)

The meeting was held in connection with the fund that is being raised for the benefit of the Jewish sufferers in the Russian and Polish war zone.

Lord SWAYTHLING, Treasurer of the fund, who presided, read the following letter from Mr. Leopold de Rothschild, the President: –

DEAR LORD SWAYTHLING,

I shall be very grateful if you will kindly express to the meeting on Sunday next my great regret that I do not feel able to attend, since after a week of work in the City, a rest seems necessary for me.  There are two things in connection with our fund for the relief of the Jewish sufferers by the war to which I should like to refer.  The one is the manner in which the people of the East End have supported it.  It is not the first time that I have had reason to admire their splendid sympathy and their generousity when their feelings had been touched by the misfortunes of their coreligionists in other lands.  I should like also to pay my tribute of gratitude to what our colonies have done.  All will agree that they have responded nobly.

With best wishes for a successful meeting in so good and urgent a cause.

I remain,
Yours very truly,
LEOPOLD DE ROTHSCHILD

Leopold De Rothschild

The CHAIRMAN said he would like to associate himself with that expression of gratitude, not only to the East End of London but to the Provinces and Colonies for the magnificent way in which they had responded to the appeal made by the Committee.  That meeting was intended not solely and only for the East End of London, but was intended also as an appeal to the West, North and South, the Provinces and the Empire.  One of the objects of the gathering was to call attention to the close union between the Fund for the Relief of the Jewish Victims of War in Russia and the Central London Committee for the Relief of the Polish Jews.  From that day onward all official receipts from the combined Committee would either bear the signature of himself or of Mt. Otto Schiff, and would contain a portrait of their President, Mr. Leopold de Rothschild.  Specimens of these receipts were to be obtained at that meeting, and they would be a guarantee that the money would be properly applied.  He had received during that week two letters from Baron Gunzburg, President of the Petrograd Committee which acted as the distributing agents in Russia.  In the first letter he wrote that the Russian Government in certain large districts where there were a large proportion of Jewish refugees were providing kosher meat for the benefit of all classes so that the Jews could partake of the food provided freely.  In the second letter the Baron reported that in certain large districts the Government had not been able to provide sufficient food, and the Petrograd Committee had had to relinquish some of their cherished schemes for the permanent benefit of the Jewish refugees in order to meet their immediate wants in the shape of food.  This was a pity, because the Committee in London were hoping that more permanent relief might be given.  But this fact could only spur them on to renew their efforts to first meet the immediate needs and provide them large funds for permanent assistance.  His late father used to tell him – he did not know whether he had Rabbinical authority for it – that one of the great objects of the Day of Atonement was that every Jew and Jewess during the day suffered the pangs of hunger and were therefore made more sympathetic towards those who were really hungry on more than one day of the year.  In this case, judging from all the letters received by those who had correspondents with Russia, they knew that their coreligionists there were hungering and were also suffering from another form of physical pang, that of cold.  The Jewish refugees were ill-fed, ill-clothed, and were compelled to find shelter where they could.  He appealed to them to continue and increase their efforts on behalf of their poor brethren.  (Cheers.)

The CHIEF RABBI said that that was the second time he had spoken to that hall and the fourth occasion that he had been called upon to address a large meeting called for the purpose of helping their suffering brethren in the war zone.  He felt, however, that the honour of British Jewry was at stake, and it was for him to convince them and the larger audience that would be reached through the newspapers that there was a sacred duty confronting them and that very much more must still be done if they were to discharge their obligations to their suffering brethren.  To realise what British Jewry should do he invited them to glance for a moment at the manner in which the Jewry in the United States had faced and grappled with this problem.  When fifteen months ago, a few weeks after the outbreak of the war, tales of distress in the Polish provinces reached America various private attempts at relief were made.  These were started all over the country, usually from the poorest classes and gradually a sum amounting to about £ 300,000 was collected in the United States for the benefit of the sufferers in the war zone.  Some months ago the leaders of American Jewry realised that a sum like £ 300,000 from a population of three million Jews was hopelessly inadequate.  They felt that the fund would never grow as it ought to grow, and that moneys commensurate with the evil would not be collected unless the wealthy classes could be interested in the movement.  A new committee was organised, and it was decided to hold a general mass meeting for this cause towards the middle of December.  Only a few days before his death Dr. Solomon Schechter was asked either to be present at the meeting or to send a message.  He (the Chief Rabbi) wished to quote one or two sentences from the message from this appeal from the grave sent to the meeting by that great scholar.  He spoke of the sacrifices that the poor had made, and went on to ask: –

Rabbi Joseph Herman Hertz in 1913

Unfortunately this cannot be said of our better situated classes whom the Lord has blessed with wealth and with all the good things of this world.  Many, it is true, have made smaller or larger contributions, but none, almost, has responded in the way hoped for, considering the fortunes this class commands, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the terrible dimensions of this disaster.  It is not for me to pass judgement upon my people, but I cannot refrain from remarking that it would seem to me that we have not realised the greatness of the disaster, which has overwhelmed our people, nor have we comprehended the full extent of our duty.

This was absolutely true.  Only the relatives of those suffering in the war zone had realised what was happening there, and when this new committee appealed to the large Jewish public and to the non-Jewish public and acquainted them with the facts the response was encouraging.  At the meeting to which he had referred, in the course of one evening no less than £ 160,000 was collected.  The meeting determined that during 1916 the sum of £ 1,000,000 should be New York’s contribution towards the amelioration of that vast ocean of suffering.  (Cheers.)  The effect of that meeting was educational.  Tens of thousands of Jews and non-Jews heard of what was going on.  Speeches were delivered by the Bishop of New York, United States Senators, Presidents of Universities – and these addresses opened the eyes of the Jewish and non-Jewish public.  The Chief Rabbi went on to say: This is not a political meeting.  Nothing is further from the objects of this gathering.  We know THERE ARE TWO RUSSIAS.

There is the Russia of the future, the Russia of democracy, the Russia of freedom, and everything that is good and noble in Russia belongs to that class.  That Russia is heart and soul with us and with the suffering Jews in this ordeal, in this martyrdom.  Thus recently at Petrograd a non-Jewish Committee was formed, with Count Tolstoi, ex-Mayor of Petrograd, as President, to help the suffering Jews in this war zone.  But it is criminal to hide the fact that there is, unfortunately, besides this Russia of Tolstoi, the Russia of Ivan the Terrible, and a great deal of the woes in the war zone are attributable to this dying Russia.  Proceeding, the Chief Rabbi cited a passage, quoted at the New York meeting by Senator W.J. Stone: –

Seven million Jews – a population exceeding that of Belgium by one million, have borne the brunt of the war…  True all the peoples of this area suffered the ravage and pillage by the war, but in no degree comparable to the suffering of the Jews…  Hundreds of thousands were driven from their homes on a day’s notice, the more fortunate being packed and shipped as freight – the old, the sick and insane, men, women and children, shuttled from one province to another, side-tracked for days without food or help of any kind – and the less fortunate being driven into the woods and swamps to die of starvation.  Jewish towns were sacked and burned wantonly.  Hundreds of Jews were carried off as hostages into Germany, Austria, and Russia…  These Jews, unlike the Belgians, have no England to fly to.

The only England to which they could appeal was their charitable hearts. (Cheers.)  The American newspapers published lists of promises of weekly and monthly contributions ranging from 10 cents to 1,000 dollars.  He had before insisted on the necessity of the relief being of a continuous character.  It was no use saving a man from starvation in October and allowing him to starve again in January or February.  The Chief Rabbi then referred to the institution of a Jewish Relief Day in the United States, and read President Wilson’s proclamation relating thereto.  The American papers, continued Dr. Hertz, had not yet come to hand showing what response had been made to the appeal to the President.  They had read only one cable, which revealed the fact that £ 400,000 was collected in one day, among the Jews and non-Jews of New York City alone.  (Cheers.)  After describing what had been done in England, and the response made especially by the provinces and the colonies, the Chief Rabbi repeated his view that nothing less than £ 500,000 should be the response of British Jewry to the appeal.  He pointed out that not hundreds of thousands but millions were dependent on the Petrograd Committee for every crust of beard they ate.  The Petrograd community, numbering only between 15,000 and 20,000 Jews, had collected £ 100,000 for local help and had contributed a similar sum for general relief.  If Petrograd could do this, how much more should be done by London and the other Jewish communities in Great and Greater Britain.  He urged them all nobly to discharge their duty.  (Cheers.)

MR. HERMAN LANDAU pointed out that the contributions of British Jewry did not amount to 10s a head, which was not a great sacrifice in view of so much misery and suffering.  He made the interesting confessions that since the war he had not bought s single new article of clothing but had devoted the money he would have spent to the refugees.  He appealed for general self-denial.  They hoped to be able to send Baron Guznburg 75,000 roubles weekly.  He stated that the Central Committee had paid £ 3,000 for the refugees from Palestine and a further £ 2,500 had gone for the same purpose.  Some support had also been extended to the Yeshiva at Mir, which had received the pupils of other Yeshiboth.  He urged that on the coming festival of Purim generous gifts should be made to the fund.

MR. CLAUDE G. MONTEFIORE moved the following resolution: –

Claude J.G. Montefiore (from PaintingStar.com)

That in view of the ever-increasing distress of the Jewish population in the Russian and Polish war zone, this meeting pledges itself to make every sacrifice to enable the existing organisations to carry on its relief work.

He said that it might seem wrong to spur the willing horse, but the need was imperative.  He referred to the united character of that meeting, at which every section of the community was represented.  The distress they were endeavouring to meet was of appalling magnitude, appalling in its quantity and degree.  The resources the refugees might have had at first were becoming exhausted, and more and more claims were being made on the relief fund.  The charity of the Russian Jews has its limits, and the spread of the war zone added to the distress.  He was glad to think that some help had been given by the Russian Government, but it was nevertheless a fact that the Government was not giving to the Jews in the same proportion as to other refugees, and therefore distress among the Jews was greater.  He stated emphatically, that every penny contributed would go straight to Russia.

MR. LEONARD L. COHEN seconded the resolution, and referred to the fact that three-quarters of the refugees were in need of clothing, and those who were familiar with a Russian winter would know what that meant.  Mr. Elkan Adler had gone to Petrograd to see the way in which the money was being administered, and he had no doubt he would bring back a satisfactory report.  He regarded the representative character of that meeting as a very happy augury for the future.

Elkan Nathan Adler (from geni.com)

M. NAHUM SOKOLOW, who was enthusiastically received, supported the resolution in an eloquent speech in Yiddish. 

Nahum Sokolow

He said that it was a bitter thing to have to appeal for his fellow-Russian Jews who did not want to be dependent on “the gifts of flesh and blood.”  But it really was not charity they were asked to give, but an insurance premium for the future of Judaism.  The Russian Jews were the depositories of the spiritual and intellectual treasures, of the traditions of the Jewish people, and that gave them a right to ask for help in the time of their need.  He compared the present crisis with the expulsion from Spain.  The horrors of 1492 were but child’s play when set besides the sufferings of the Russian Jews.  He gave a vivid description of the varied character of the relief work that was being conducted, not only for the purpose of satisfying the material needs of the refugees but also for maintaining their commercial life.  He pointed out that the artisans were easier to help than the students and those who followed intellectual pursuits.  The great danger they had to avoid was that of pauperization, and the relief in a good many cases was afforded in the shape of loans rather than of gifts.  The crisis had united all parties.  The East was working with the West.  If there were two parties in Jewry to-day, it would be those who had given and those who had not, those who worshipped the Jewish God and those who bowed down to the golden calf; the party of Moses and the party of Korach.  They had to choose between God and Baal.  The party of God would accept the resolution.  (Loud Cheers.)

The resolution was carried unanimously.

On the motion of Mr. H.G. LOUSADA, seconded by Dayan FELDMAN, a vote of thanks was passed to the colonies and provinces for their help, and a vote of thanks to the Chairman was passed on the motion of Dayan CHAIKIN, seconded by Dayan HILLMAN. 

References

– People –

Adler, Elkan N., at Wikipedia

de Rothschild, Leopold, at Wikipedia

Hertz, Joseph Herman, Chief Rabbi, at Wikipedia

Montagu, Louis S., 2nd Baron Swaything, at Wikipedia

Montefiore, Claude G., at Wikipedia

Montefiore, Claude G., at PaintingStar

Sokolow, Nahum ben Joseph Samuel, at Wikipedia

– Places –

Pavilion Theatre in Whitechapel, at Wikipedia

Chronicles From World War One: Jewish Civilians in Eastern Europe: “Loyalty of Jews in War Lands Unshaken” – Boston Traveler, 1915

By the summer of 1915, with the Great War having raged through and beyond Europe for well-nigh a year, news about the military service of Jewish soldiers and naval personnel had become a regular feature in Jewish (and not only Jewish) periodicals published among some of the major combatant nations of both the Allies and Central Powers.

In The Jewish Chronicle, this generally took the form of brief vignettes about the experiences and observations of individual servicemen, along with – albeit much less frequently – analysis and commentary about Jewish military service in the armed forces of the British Commonwealth, as a whole.  The Jewish Exponent (of Philadelphia) seems to have alluded to or actually published news items of a similar nature (derived from material in The Chronicle?), with of course – after all, this was 1915, two years before the United States’ direct involvement in military operations – relatively little about Jewish military service in America’s armed forces.  Which news content would inevitably change, come 1917…

What the Chronicle and Exponent did have in common was reporting on the travails and suffering of the Jews of Eastern Europe – then, the location of the demographic core of the Jewish people – amidst the ebb and flow of the armies of the Central Powers (well – primarily, Germany) and Allies (primarily – well, Russia).  Probably due to the military centrality and geographic setting of England vis-a-vis the war, new items of this nature seems to have been vastly more common in the Chronicle than the Exponent, albeit the latter did (as you can read in previous posts…) cover this topic, with great prominence.

In the summer of 1915, the themes of these two subjects – the military participation of Jews in the militaries of both the Allies and Central Powers, and the fate of Jewish civilians in Eastern Europe – were fused into a single, lengthy article by Alexander Brin (at the time a reporter for The Jewish Advocate, of which he became editor in August of 1918), in The Boston Traveler, under the title “Loyalty of Jews in War Lands Unshaken”.  Republished by The Jewish Exponent on August 27, Brin’s article – fascinating; compelling; infuriating – devotes its first half to a broad survey of worldwide Jewish military service, and its latter half to a summary (illustrated by specific incidents) of the brutalities – brutalities chaotic; brutalities calculated; brutalities intentional – endured by the Jews of Poland, through the accidental intersection of German opportunism, Polish hostility, and the ideology of the civilian and military leadership of Imperial Russia.

Of particular note – especially in light of my prior post The World at War, The Jews in War: Jewish Military Service in World War One, which includes a statistical overview of the approximate number of Jewish servicemen, and Jewish military casualties (fatalities) in the Great War – is Brin’s presentation of the number of Jewish soldiers in the belligerent nations.  Being that his article was published in 1915 and reflective of data available up to that point in time, a comparison with numbers in Dr. Martin Gilbert’s 1976 Atlas of Jewish History (previously published in the Committee for a Jewish Army’s 1943 book The Fighting Jew) is illuminating.  The numbers are doubly ironic, for in 1915, as much as in 1918 (as observed by David Vital) the countries in which served the greatest number of Jewish soldiers were not England, France, or Germany, but instead Imperial Russia, and, Austria-Hungary. 

Three decades later, the irony continued – as irony often does:  In the Second World War, the country in which served the greatest number of Jewish soldiers was the Soviet Union.

So.  Below…  You can view an image of Brin’s article, as it appeared in the Exponent.  (The resolution is 395 dpi, for those so curious.) 

So, further below…  You can read a full transcript of the article.  I’ve inserted comments [such as:comment...”] where appropriate, to elaborate on and clarify points raised in the article. 

________________________________________

“Great battles – perhaps the greatest thus far – have been fought in what may be well called Jewish country.  The great armies that have been swaying back and forth in Poland and in Galicia have fought every inch of ground in Jewish towns and villages.  The great fortresses, captured or besieged, stand in the very heart of the Jewish centre of population.  Fire and sword are being carried through territories thickly sown with Jewish populations.

“And yet while practically half the race is facing extermination four-fifths of it – represented by all the Jews in the warring nations – is loyally giving its all to the mother country.”

LOYALTY OF JEWS IN WAR LANDS UNSHAKEN
Honored for Bravery Under All Colors – Plan for Race Recognition
The Jewish Exponent
August 27, 1915
(Alexander Brin, in Boston Traveler)

From the beginning of their history up to the present time the Jews have been the world’s chief sufferers in every upheaval, notwithstanding they have been most loyal and patriotic citizens.  To this precedent the present war is no exception.

After twelve months of war, with slaughter unparalleled in history, the full horror of the war zone is beginning to loom large in the world’s eye.  The general public is beginning to realize that they have suffered not only the hardships of war, but in many instances also the redoubled persecution incident to the unleashing of man’s primitive passions.

In eastern Europe the Jews are living in an inferno.  The battle smoke alone hides the ocean of tears and blood.  When the veil of war is lifted, the stupendous tragedy will be revealed.  If matters continue as they are the political future of the Jew of Russian Poland and Galicia will cease to be a problem.  There will be hardly any of them left.  There are fewer in the world today by some hundreds of thousands than a year ago.

From reliable reports that have just reached this country, we learn, of the appalling misery of the hundreds of thousands of Jews who are innocent victims of the conflict.  They suffer because of the war, but they suffer also because they are Jews.  Theirs is a double burden of woe.

The world has shuddered in sympathy for Belgium.  Of late realization has come that the fate of Poland, invaded and conquered, but once, but a dozen times – has been ten times worse.  Poland has no sympathetic natural neighbor to extend a helping hand.  No tons of foodstuffs have been rushed to Poland’s starving.  And yet Belgium, Poland and even war-and-typhus Serbia are buoyed up by the feeling of a purposeful martyrdom, by the hope of restored freedom, by the bonds of a patriotic consciousness.

Suffering Staggers Imagination

The suffering of the Jewish people in the eastern war zone staggers imagination.  Today hundreds of thousands of them are starving, homeless, driven from place to place by the armies that are fighting for Russia and those fighting against her, without future, without country, without refuge.

The number of Jews in proportion to total population is larger in Poland than that in any other country.  The struggle now raging there has rooted up whole stretches of country where they have been domiciled for centuries.  The Jews in Galicia have been scattered all over Austria, the Jews of Russian Poland have been driven to the interior.  Families have been parted never to come together again; fathers, brothers and sons have been swallowed up in the war, never to return; homes have been devastated, belongings seized or destroyed; wives, sisters and daughters sacrificed to the passions of the passing soldier.

Great battles – perhaps the greatest thus far – have been fought in what may be well called Jewish country.  The great armies that have been swaying back and forth in Poland and in Galicia have fought every inch of ground in Jewish towns and villages.  The great fortresses, captured or besieged, stand in the very heart of the Jewish centre of population.  Fire an sword are being carried through territories thickly sown with Jewish populations.

And yet while practically half the race is facing extermination four-fifths of it – represented by all the Jews in the warring nations – is loyally giving its all to the mother country.  The extent to which the war affects the Jewish race may be gathered from a consideration of their numbers in the nations now fighting.

Russian Empire – 3,983,800
Austria Hungary – 2,758,202
Great Britain – 250,000
Germany – 615,000
France – 100,000
Turkey – 175,000
Belgium – 12,100
Luxembourg – 1,970
Serbia – 17,000
Italy – 33,617

Total – 9,450,178

The number of Jewish soldiers in the countries now at war is as follows:

Russian Empire – 350,000
British Empire – 20,000
Germany – 50,000
Austria-Hungary – 175,000
Serbia – 2,500
Belgium – 1,800
France – 25,000
Turkey – 9,000
Italy – 1,000

This makes a total of 634,900.  Even from Morocco and Tripoli come Jewish troops – they number 20 per cent of the Zouaves.

Have Won High Praise

They after playing no part for eighteen centuries in the various wars which have reddened the fields of Europe, the Israelite is today plunged into the very vortex of this world war.  Himself a militant advocate of peace, he is today pouring his blood like water in defense of his native land.  In Russia, his loyalty to the Czar, in spite of recent anti-Semitic persecution, is termed “one of the phenomena of the war”.  Yet not the word has been uttered by the government that indicates a loosening of these cruel laws.  The Jew is still persecuted in Russia, though his courage has won him medals and crosses.  The famous “my beloved Jews” manifesto at the outbreak of hostilities has ended in the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Jews from their homes.

Four thousand five hundred Jewish soldiers were killed in one charge of the battle of Arras.  These heroes, in whom dwelled the Maccabean spirit of old, were members of the French Foreign Legion.  They were all volunteers and were born in Russia.  Their heroism called forth the highest praise from the commanding officers.

Now and again there trickle through the news channels wonderful stories of Jewish heroism and bravery.  From every battlefield, whether it be in France, or in Flanders, in East Prussia or in Poland, in Galicia or in Serbia, or at the Dardanelles, the same story comes.

Honored in Death

The Zion Mule Corps, recruited from Jerusalem refugees, attained signal distinction in the Dardanelles, one private winning the coveted Distinguished Conduct Medal.  A news report tells of English soldiers driving back a German attack and the killing of the Bavarian commander, a Jew, who remained behind to hurl a deadly bomb at the foe.  With all the honors of war, this brave soldier was buried by his enemies, and the Jewish service was read for him by Jews in British ranks.  [This is correct.  Alexander Brin is referring to a news item that appeared in The Jewish Chronicle on July 2, 1915, only two months before the publication of his essay.  Entitled, “German Jewish Officer Bayonted,” the text follows:

In the course of a letter from Squadron Sergt.-Major V. Rathbone, King Edward’s Horse, to his brother, Mr. M. Rathbone, the former writes: – “I was up and down the trenches for twenty-four hours, with one hour’s rest.  We captured a German officer, Lieut. Max Seller, of a Bavarian Cavalry Regiment.  He and about fifty men were attacking us with hand bombs and the officer was bayoneted on the parapet.  I helped to bury him with our own casualties.  He was a Jew so I had the service altered by the Chaplain.  Possibly his people might be glad to know, and if you asked the JEWISH CHRONICLE and the Jewish World to mention it they might learn of it.  He was a plucky chap and our fellows could not help expressing admiration at his effort to bomb us.”

Who was Max Seller?

Born in Gunzenhausen, Bayreuth, Germany, on November 25, 1890, he was the son of Martha Seller.  An Unteroffizier in the 7th Bavarian Reserve Infantry Regiment, he was wounded on September 3, 1914.  Promoted to the rank of Leutnant der Reserve (equivalent to Reserve Second Lieutenant?), he was eventually assigned to the 10th Company, 3rd Battalion, of the 5th Bavarian Reserve Infantry Regiment, where he was a Zugfuhrer (Squad Leader).  Twenty-four years old, he was killed – as described in Sergeant-Major Rathbone’s account – on June 24, 1915.  Max Seller is buried in the British Military Cemetery “Hyde Park Corner” at Ploegsteert (Belgium), at Block 1, Row B, Grave 21.

______________________________

Max was one of six Jewish war dead from Bayreuth, as seen in this page from Die Jüdischen Gefallenen Des Deutschen Heeres, Deutschen Marine Und Der Deutschen Schutztruppen 1914-1918 – Ein Gedenkbuch:

______________________________

This document, from the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, is a record of Lt. Seller’s burial.  Note the specific mention of a “Jewish Memorial”…

______________________________

…however, until this past decade, Max’s matzeva bore no religious symbol.  As described by Stephen Daisley in The Jewish Chronicle in October of 2017, in “Retelling the Tale of a Plucky Chap“, this symbolic anonymity was rectified in 2016:  This occurred through he efforts of German historian Robin Schäfer, who worked in concert with the German ambassador to Belgium, and, the CWGC.  Thus, the matzeva now bears a Magen David. 

Stephen Dailsey’s article recounts The Lieutenant’s story in detail, relating biographical information about his family and their subsequent fate, and includes a photograph of Sergeant-Major Rathbone.

You can view Lt. Seller’s matzeva as it appeared in April, 2013, in the photo essay Vanishing Point: Stumbling through Ploegsteert, at the blog of photographer Nick. J. StoneMr. Stone’s photo essay includes images of three records pertaining to Max Seller’s military service, as well as genealogical information (some the latter of which has been incorporated into “this” blog post).  You can see in the image that Max Seller’s matzeva (visible at the front right) simply listed his name, military unit, and date of death. 

Well, unlike so many millions killed in the Great War, he has a place of burial. 

At least there was that.

Stepping back, several news stories of this nature – about Jewish soldiers in opposing armies who became military casualties at the hands of one another – appeared in the Chronicle and Exponent early in the Great War (not so much if at all, later), the setting for such tales typically being the Eastern War Zone.  As such, a solidly verified account of this nature from the Western War Zone was unusual.  Such stories, regardless of their veracity, reflected the implications, complexities and possible tragedies – in terms of the conflict between universalism and peoplehood – inherent to, resulting from, and perhaps inevitable with Jewish political emancipation, and its attendant service in the military forces of opposing nations.  Max Seller’s story still bears resonance, and in the context of the ongoing history of the Jewish people, will continue to do so.  (But, I digress.  Back Alexander Brin’s article….)

The first British soldier to fall in German Southwest Africa was Ben Robinson, a famous Jewish athlete.  [Brin is probably referring to Private Benjamin Rabinson, Serial Number 189.  From Buluwayo, a member of the 1st Battalion, Rhodesia Regiment, he was killed in action on February 7, 1915.  His name appeared in The Jewish Chronicle on March 19 and April 23 of that year, with (as was typical) absolutely no information about his next of kin or place of residence, as well as on page 113 of British Jewry Book of Honour.  He is buried at the Swakopmund Municipal Cemetery, in Namibia.]  In Buluwayo, half a company of reserves is composed of Jews.  Victoria Crosses, Iron Crosses, St. George’s Crosses, Crosses of the Legion of Honor decorate the breasts of the Jewish soldiers who are defending the countries of their birth and adoption.

Wherever we turn, we find the Jew prominently patriotic.  In England the late Lord Rothschild presided over the Red Cross fund, and Lord Chief Justice Isaacs is understood to have saved the financial situation not only for England, but for all her allies.  In Germany, Ballin, the creator of the Mercantile Marine, is now the organizer of the national food supply, stands as the Kaiser’s friend, interpreter and henchman, while Maximilian Harden voices the gospel of Prussianism, and as Zangwill says: “Ernst Lissauer – a Jew converted to the religion of Love, sings “The Song of Hate”.  In France, Dreyfus has charge of the battery to the north of Paris, while General Heymann, grand officer of the Legion of Honor, commands an army corps.  In Turkey, the racially Jewish Enver Bey [Enver Pasha; Ismail Enver Pasha], is the ruling spirit, having defeated the Jewish David Bey, who was for alliance with France, while Italy, on the contrary, has joined the allies, through the influence of Baron Sonnino, a Jew.  The military hospitals of Turkey are all under the direction of the Austrian Jew, Hecker.  In Hungary, it is the Jews who, with the Magyars, are the brains of the nation.

An error on Brin’s part!…  The Wikipedia entry for Enver Bey notes the following:  “Enver was born in Constantinople (Istanbul) on 22 November 1881. Enver’s father, Ahmed (c. 1860–1947), was a Gagauz Turk either a bridge-keeper in Monastir or a small town public prosecutor in the Balkans and his mother Ayşe, an Albanian.  His uncle was Halil Pasha (later Kut). Enver had two younger brothers, Nuri and Mehmed Kamil, and two younger sisters, Hasene and Mediha.  He was the brother in law of Lieutenant Colonel Ömer Nâzım.   He studied for different degrees in military schools in the empire and ultimately graduated from the Harp Akademisi with distinction in 1903.  He became a major general in 1906.  He was sent to the Third Army, which was stationed in Salonica.  During his service in the city, he became a member of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP).”

Poles are Hostile

And all the record of devotion and patriotism only emphasized the cruel suffering of the six millions of Jews in the eastern war zone.   Fortunate is the Jew who, fighting for Russia, loses his life in the first charge on the battlefield.  How infinitely greater his suffering, to be forced to march through his native village and witness the picture of his ravished women, of aged men with nails driven into their eyeballs, tongues cut off and mutilations on young and old alike.

Whenever the Russians enter a city the native Poles invariably accuse the Jews of being friendly to the Germans, of being German spies.  The attempt of German newspapers to spread the belief that Germany was the real deliverer of the Jews in Poland only aggravated their plight.  Whenever the Germans took a town similar accusations were made and accepted as true by the conquerors.  And when in the intervals between the surging armies villages – already pillaged and looted – were left to their own devices, the native Poles often took advantage of the situation to rob, pillage and slaughter.

Scarcely ever is there any redress.  The Russian officials were almost invariably in sympathy, or at least connived at, the outrages against the helpless population.

A few authentic reports received in this country from a Russian editor, Miasoiedow, will disclose to the readers the effectual methods Russia is using in protecting her “beloved Jews,” demonstrating at the same time the true greatness of the true Russian.

Hundreds are Jailed

No sooner did the Russians enter the city than mischief was set afoot.  Hundreds of Jews were jailed because several Poles, notorious thieves and criminals, accused the Jews of according the Germans a friendly reception.  A number have been shot, knouted, hanged, imprisoned as hostages.  Immediately after that, Russian soldiery pillaged the town.  The stores were first rendered barren, then fired.  When certain representative Russian Jews petitioned the Russian commander on behalf of the population, he told them that “should any Jew dare set foot over the threshold of his room,” he would “execute him on the spot.”

The noble answer of the murderous Russian executive terrified the Jews to such an extent that for weeks they remained hidden in cellars, without food or cover.

Here is another incident of the greatness of the “true Russian spirit”.  Editor Miasoiedow talks about.

The following outrages are contained in the report of Dr. Arthur Levy and may be considered authentic:

“In Staschew, eleven Jews were hanged in the synagogue.

“In Klodawa, two of the most respected Jewish citizens were hanged on the balcony of their own house one Friday evening as the Jews came out of the synagogue, and the wife of one of them had to provide the rope.  The corpses were left in that position for twenty-four hours, and the neighbors were not allowed to close their shutters to the horrible sight.

Girls Seek Death

“In Schidlowee Jewish girls threw themselves into the lake because they had been outraged and would not carry that disgrace through life.

“In Ostrowice the Cossacks demanded that the rabbi, Zadik Kalischer, be turned over to them to be hanged because they believed he had assisted the Austrians.  The fact is that he, together with the Polish priest, went to meet the Austrian and German troops at the time of the latter’s invasion, just as they had approached the Russian troops on a previous occasion, to ask that the inhabitants of the town be kindly treated.  When the rabbi hid himself from the Cossacks, they waited until the feast of Yom Kippur was in progress in order to surround the synagogue on Kol Nidre evening and effect the capture in that way.  When they had seized the rabbi and were about to execute him, the German invasion again reached Ostrowice, and the Cossacks were forced to retire, after they had burned the rabbi’s home.

“During the Friday evening services the Governor of Petrikov and troops invaded the synagogues of the town and pulled the scrolls from the ark in the search for a telephone which they claimed the Jews had hidden there in order to keep in communication with the German invaders.

“In Kleczew 150 Jews were seized as spies and sent to Warsaw.  The whole Jewish population of Zyrardow, Prutshkow, Bialobrzeg, Iwangorod, Grodzisk, Skierneiwice and many other places were expelled.  In Skierneiwice the expulsion order was carried out on the Sabbath eve, and the 10,000 Jews of the town left their homes with Sabbath lights still burning and the rabbi at their head.

“In Lowicz two young Jews from Zgierz, named Sandberg and Frenkel, were accused as spies and hanged, after one of them had been mutilated.  The same misfortune befell Moses Lipschitz, a corn merchant and respected Talmudist, because he had done business with Germany before the war.  In Bechawa, in the government of Lublin, 78 Jews were hanged as spies on one day in October.  In Kramostaw, in the same government, many Jewish houses were burned and most of the 200 Jews there, with their wives and children, were destroyed.

Hang Children

“In Zdunsky-Wola all the Jewish women and girls were outraged, one of them, whose husband was on the line of battle, died in consequence.”

In line with Dr. Levy’s report, the article by Dr. George Brandes on the tragedies of the Jews in Poland gives similar examples.  The reputation of Dr. Brandes is international and his aloofness from political questions lends to his statement that element of disinterestedness.  Dr. Brandes says:

“In the towns of Janow and Krasnik the Jews were accused of having put out mines to destroy the Russians.  The Jews, and among them many children, were hanged on the telegraph poles, and two towns destroyed.

“The town of Samosch was conquered by the Austrian Sokol troops, those beautiful slender people you do not forget when once you have seen them train in the capital of Galicia.  When they were driven away from the Russian army the Poles accused the Jews of the town of having been the accomplices of the Austrians.  Twelve Jews were arrested.  When they denied the charge, they were sentenced to death.  Five of them had already been hanged, when in the middle of the execution, a Russian priest, carrying an image of the Virgin in his hand, appeared and with his hand on this image took the oath that the Jews were innocent and that the accusation was all an outcome of Polish hatred of the Jews.  He proved that the Poles of the town  themselves had supported the Austrians and that even a telephone connection with Lemberg could be found.  The seven Jews were then set free; five had already been hanged.

“In the town of Jusefow, the Jews were accused of having poisoned the wells through which hundreds of Cossacks had lost their lives.  Seventy-eight Jew s were killed, many women were ravished and houses and shops plundered.”

Burned Alive in Hay

Another story is told of a Jew, H. Lipewsky, who was driving a wagonload of hay toward Wirhallen.  He was stopped by a plaotton of Cossacks and ordered to throw down the hay.  Having done as instructed, Lipewsky proved to the Cossacks that the wagon contained no German soldiers.  Yet Lipewsky was thrown in the wagon, covered with hay and set afire.  Several Jewish soldiers witnessed the incident, but for obvious reasons could not intervene; they reported it, however, in the city, and when friends of Lipewsky came out to the place of the tragedy, they found a heap of charred bones.

A number of women and girls were ravished.  The Cossacks would carry them off to the barracks and assault them.  Many nights in succession the deadly silence of Suwalki was startled by agonizing screams of these unfortunate women.

Lomza witnessed the most bloody deeds of Cossack bestiality.  A student of the Kieff Uiversity tells the following:

“The Russians entered Lomza on a Sunday evening.  A Jewish merchant, Markus Cohen, was arrested.  The Cossacks, while plundering his house, found several invoices from German business men.  This was enough.

“Tuesday afternoon he was hanged on a tree in the heart of the city.  A placard reading: “This is the body of a Jewish traitor and spy, Markus Cohen,” was fastened to the body.

“Immediately after that the Cossacks galloped through the streets shouting: ‘Kill the Jews, they betrayed our country.’

“In the house of the leather dealer, Neuman, they found the entire family hidden in the basement.  A barrel of gasoline was brought and the house fired.  All the members of the family perished.

“In another Jewish house was found a beautiful young girl.  The bound and gagged her and before her eyes killed her father.  The mother succeeded in escaping.  The girl was then so shamefully treated by scores of men that she died in the hands of the torturers.”

Await War’s End

The present war in Europe, in which every one of the big nations is concerned, cannot come to an end without a conference in which not only every nation directly concerned is represented, but it must also receive the support and participation of neutral powers, of which the United States may be one.

This conference, it is expected, will deal with every question involved in the struggle, and with others in which all the participants are interested.

The status of the Jews in all the countries is a subject that may come before that important body.

With the object of having it brought before the peace conference, or by whatever name the assemblage may be called, committees have been formed in several countries, United States included, which are expected to use every means at their command to have the matter made a subject for consideration.  The move has received the support of some of the leading men of the country, non-Jews as well as Jews.  Jews feel that now is the time to prepare, so that when the proper time comes they may be united for action. 

References

Websites

Enver Bey – Biography at Wikipedia

Alexander Brin Dead at 87 – News article at archive of Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Leutnant der Reserve Max Seller – Grave Record at Commonwealth War Graves Commission

Retelling the Tale of a Plucky Chap, by Stephen Daisley – The Jewish Chronicle, October 17, 2017

Benjamin Rabinson (“B. Rabinson”) – Grave Record at Commonwealth War Graves Commission

The Jewish Advocate (History of publication) – at Wikipedia

Nick J. Stone’s photographs – at Flickr

Invisible Works – Nick J. Stone’s photography blog

Books

Adler, Michael, British Jewry Book of Honour, Caxton Publishing Company, London, England, 1922

Die Jüdischen Gefallenen Des Deutschen Heeres, Deutschen Marine Und Der Deutschen Schutztruppen 1914-1918 – Ein Gedenkbuch, Reichsbund Jüdischer Frontsoldaten, Forward by Dr. Leo Löwenstein, Berlin, Germany, 1932

Chronicles From World War One: Jewish Civilians in Russia: “A Roadside Scene in Russia” – A Photograph in The Jewish World, October 27, 1915

My prior posts – “The Tragedy of Israel in Poland” by Herman Bernstein, and “If It Be True … A Terrible Indictment Against Russia” by ‘Mentor’ of The Jewish Chronicle – presented a vivid and detailed literary “picture” of what befell Eastern European Jewry amidst military operations of the Central Powers and Imperial Russia, during the early part of the Great War in 1914 and 1915.

Words alone, however, as compelling as they be, are by nature limited in the force of their message.  To that end, in its issue of October 27, 1915, The Jewish World (the Chronicle’s brother publication), amidst portraits of Jewish soldiers of the British Commonwealth, published a photo spanning two pages, and depicting a subject entirely different: An image of Russian-Jewish refugees.

The picture is shown below:

Notably, the location and date of the image, let alone the identity of the photographer, are not given.

The only information about the photo is what is presented in the caption:  “One of the many pathetic scenes which are, unfortunately, only too common on the highways of Russia in these days, showing Russo-Jewish families who have fled their homes  to escape the ravages of war and are undecided which way to turn or what to do.”

A central aspect of the image is literally present in its very center: A boy in late childhood appears to be gazing directly at the photographer – pensively, motionlessly – even as the attention of other persons in the image is fixed elsewhere.  Yet, in the boy’s very anonymity there is a host of questions that are unanswered, which will forever remain unanswered.

Who was he?

Did he (and his family) survive the war?

By the close of the Great War, did they eventually return to their home?

If not, where did they settle – elsewhere in Russia; in Poland?

If not, did they emigrate elsewhere?

If so, where?

Western Europe?

The United States?

South America?

The Yishuv?

If his family remained in Eastern Europe, and they survived the years of chaos, savagery, and anti-Jewish persecution that followed the end of the Great War, what then? 

Assuming that he was roughly ten years of age in 1915, by 1941, he would have been in his mid-thirties when the Third Reich invaded Poland in September of 1939, and the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941. 

What then…?