Jewish Military Chaplains – Excursions in Jewish Military History and Jewish Genealogy

Pacific Pesach: The Guam Haggadah – III [Updated [post…]

(“This” post, which dates back to January of 2017, is now slightly updated: Now included below is a photographic portrait of Captain Ornell J. Stauffer, from the National Archives’ collection Photographic Prints of Air Cadets and Officers, Air Crew, and Notables in the History of Aviation – NARA RG 18-PU. I don’t know the Advanced Flying School from which (then) Lt. Stauffer graduated and received his commission, but you can read more about his life via the Genealogy Center of the Allen County Public Library of Fort Wayne, Indiana.)

(Meantime, I’m working on posts covering a variety of subjects, which – ! – I hope to eventually complete…)

________________________________________

One wonders what happened to the 2,700-odd Jewish servicemen after the evening of March 28, 1945 (15 Nisan 5705).

Certainly, the overwhelming majority survived the war and returned to the United States after Japan’s surrender.

Some – with a probability verging on certainty – did not.

Case in point, the image below: An Honor Roll, created by Chaplain Cedarbaum, bearing the names of sixty-five Jewish airmen who were casualties while serving in the 20th Air Force. Based on this and other information, he planned to eventually create a book about Jewish aviators who served in the 20th Air Force as crewmen in B-29 Superfortress bombers. His plans never came to fruition, at least as he expected…

…The above photograph was received by Noah and Sadie G. Finkelstein, whose son, 2 Lt. Joseph Harold Finkelstein, a Co-Pilot in the 6th Bomb Squadron of the 29th Bomb Group, was killed during a mission to Tachiarai Airfield, Kyushu, Japan, on May 5, 1945. (1) (His name appears under the heading “314th Wing.”) The image inspired them to create their Memorial Album covering Jewish airmen who were casualties – killed or missing – in the 20th Air Force. As recorded by Noah in the book’s forward, “I decided to attempt to obtain biographies of all those whose names appeared on the plaque, and to publish an album to their memories.”

So far as I know, Noah and Sadie’s book is almost unique, for it is one of the very few monographs giving detailed biographies of American Jewish military casualties – in the context of a specific time frame, activity, and theater of war – that appeared during the twentieth century.

Some Jewish periodicals, such as the South African Jewish Times, and, the Jewish Criterion (Pittsburgh, Pa.) allocated special sections at the war’s end for comprehensive photographic and biographical coverage of Jewish military casualties, but this material was never translated into books. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Volume Two of the 1947 publication American Jews in World War II, by I. Kaufman, presents state-by-state lists of the names of American Jewish servicemen who received awards for military service, or, who were casualties (wounded, injured, or killed; the book does not specifically identify men who were POWs). The entries in this volume are limited to a man’s name, rank, city of residence, and military awards, being derived from information recorded on National Jewish Welfare Board – Bureau of War Records Master Index Cards.

Cover page of the Finkelstein’s Memorial Album, “Dedicated to the Boys of the 20th Air Force”.

A stylized aircraft flies towards a burning sun: A brief introductory poem by Sadie Finkelstein on page 4. Sadie composed other poetry for her book. This comprised three other four-line poems with allegoric illustrations (the one shown above is from page 16), and, two full-length poems in Yiddish. The latter include English translations by Paul Monroe, and, Ruth Kaswan.

Notice that this powerful image – probably in pen and ink – is signed by “M.D.”, who also created the preceding illustration. Unfortunately, “M.D.’s” full name is not given in the text.

____________________

Unknown at the time to Chaplain Cedarbaum, among the sixty-five men whose names appear on the plaque, seven would survive as Prisoners of War (POWs). Their names, dates of capture, and crew positions follow:

Einstein, Alvin J., S/Sgt. – June 22, 1945 – Gunner (Central)
Ginsberg, Abraham Saul, Sgt. – May 29, 1945 – Gunner (Right)
Greenwald, Mortimer L., Sgt. – August 2, 1945 – Gunner
Leavitt, Harold F., S/Sgt. – May 26, 1945 – Radar Operator
Moritz, Wallace, 2 Lt. – May 29, 1945 – Navigator
Siegel, LeRoy, Sgt. – April 7, 1945 – Gunner
Unterman, Melvin, Capt. – May 26, 1945 – Bombardier

Among those who did not survive, the majority were never found, due to the combination of physical circumstances and / or locations in which their aircraft were lost. Their names of most are commemorated at the Tablets of the Missing at the Honolulu Memorial, in Honolulu, Hawaii.

Of the sixty five, the Finkelsteins’ book presents biographies and photographs for twenty-four. They are:

Bauch, Selig H., Sgt. – Radar Operator
Berkowitz, Martin, S/Sgt. – Radio Operator
Binger, Marvin Louis, Sgt. – Gunner (Right)
Broome, Richard Jerome, Sgt. – Flight Engineer
Cohen, Abe, PFC (Not actually an air crewman; died while trying to rescue a comrade from a burning building.)
Cohen, Monroe Melvin, F/O – Navigator
Feinberg, Robert Alvin, 2 Lt. – Radar Operator
Finkelstein, Joseph Harold, 2 Lt. (Their son) Co-Pilot
Greenspan, Marvin Jerome, Cpl. – Gunner (Right)
(Shot down over Japan on 4/15/45 (his first mission); captured immediately; murdered shortly after under direction and instigation of Second Lieutenant Ippei Tamura.)
Harris, Benjamin L., 2 Lt. – Flight Engineer
Hoenig, Sidney, F/O – Bombardier
Klein, Donald Philip, S/Sgt. – Radar Operator
Kronick, Archer S. (Asher Simcha bar Yoel), Sgt. – Gunner (Central)
Levinson, Gerald M., 2 Lt. – Flight Engineer
Levy, Jules, 2 Lt. – Navigator
Orkin, Milton, 2 Lt. – Navigator
Porjesz, Kurt, S/Sgt. – Radio Operator
Powsner, Maurice J., F/O – Bombardier
Schneider, Leon, 2 Lt. – Bombardier
Sheshansky, Harold, S/Sgt. – Gunner (Central)
Siegel, Norman Sydney, 2 Lt. – Navigator
Stein, Monroe, 1 Lt. – Bombardier / Navigator
Tomberg, Leon,1 Lt. – Bombardier
Weiner, Herbert Coften, 2 Lt. (Actually, a casualty in Australia with the 5th Air Force)

The sixty-five names alluded to above represent a portion of Jewish servicemen who were casualties in the 20th Air Force. The total number stands substantially higher and includes six other POWs. The names and dates of capture of the latter are:

Levine, Joseph, 1 Lt. – December 14, 1944 – Bombardier
Levine, Stanley H., 2 Lt. – August 8, 1945 – Flight Engineer
Newman, Irving Sidney, 2 Lt. – August 20, 1944 – Navigator
Paul, Chester E., 1 Lt. – December 14, 1944 – Co-Pilot
Presender, Robert Eugene, 1 Lt. – March 2, 1945 – Navigator
Sellz, Norman, S/Sgt. – April 7, 1945 – Radar Operator (Sole survivor of his crew)

Many more names could be presented, but this list will suffice, for now.

Perhaps better to let one man symbolically speak for all – for those few who returned; for the many who did not: Irving S. Newman, at a reunion of the 468th Bomb Group in September of 1995.

From Dorchester, Massachusetts, Irving was a navigator, and one of three survivors (along with the flight engineer and radar operator) of Calamity Sue, a 468th Bomb Group B-29 piloted by Captain Ornell J. Stauffer. Calamity Sue was lost on a mission to Yawata, Japan, on August 20, 1944 (the crew’s second combat mission) when a nearby B-29, the Gertrude C, was deliberately rammed by a Japanese fighter, debris from the disintegrating B-29 striking and mortally damaging Stauffer’s aircraft.

A portrait of the Stauffer crew, from Irving Newman’s collection, is show below. The photograph was taken at Smoky Hill Army Air Field (later Schilling Air Force Base), Salina, Kansas, in February of 1944. The men stand before “Eager Beaver”, a B-17F Flying Fortress. (Photo c/o Irving Newman)

They men in the image are:

Rear row, left to right:

Pilot – Captain Ornell J. Stauffer (KIA)
Co-Pilot – Lieutenant Jimmie Wine (bailed out, later killed)
Navigator – Second Lieutenant Irving S. Newman (survived – POW)
Bombardier – Second Lieutenant Ben R. Bloom (KIA)
Flight Engineer – Second Lieutenant Austin C. Shott (survived – POW)

Front row, left to right:

S/Sgt. James A. O’Brien – Gunner (Left Blister) (KIA)
T/Sgt. Walter A. Dansby – Radio Operator (Survived – POW)
S/Sgt. Clinton A. Martin – Gunner (Central Fire Control) (KIA)
Sgt. Raymond J. Keelan – Radar Operator (KIA)
S/Sgt. Michael J. Karlovich – Gunner (Right Blister) (KIA)
T/Sgt. Robert W. Bonner – Gunner (Tail) (KIA)

Missing Air Crew Report 9685, covering the loss of Captain Stauffer’s B-29 (42-6368 – Calamity Sue), includes the following postwar statement by T/Sgt. Dansby:

“I will tell the story as far as I how it, however, I don’t know much. We were flying at 26,000 ft. and suddenly something hit us. I was knocked out of my seat on my back. I met Capt. Dean, a pilot on TDY. He tells me the following: We were in the No. 4 spot in a four plane formation and a Jap fighter approached us. He misjudged our speed and before he could pull away he rammed our formation leader, Lt. Col. Clinkscales. The wreckage from the plane hit the plane I was in and knocked off our tail assembly. That was the Capts.’ story. After having been hit, we went into a spin. The co-pilot [Wine] let the landing gear down and he and the engineer [Shott] opened the nose wheel door. The engineer bailed out at once at I would guess 20,000 ft. The navigator [Newman] who was squatting between the pilot [Stauffer] & co-pilot with his maps had to run back & put his parachute on. He bailed out about 14,000 ft. and after I got back on my feet I bailed out at about 3,000 ft. Although I was last out, I saw the navigator coming down after I hit the ground. I finally met up with him and they captured us about ten minutes later. After staying in solitary confinement for 4 months I was sent to a prison camp. Later I met up with the rest of the men who was shot down the same day. Col. Carmichael, Richard, was among the men who were brought in later, but, except for the three of my crew who I knew bailed out, I never saw any of the remaining eight of the crew. I heard a report after the war was over that six parachutes were seen to come from my plane – but none of them ever showed up at the prison, which was named Omori Prison between Tokyo & Yokohama, camp where I was. It seems that this camp was the staging area for B-29 airmen. Except for a few scattered around in China & other parts of Japan B-29 prisoners were brought to this camp. At war’s end there was almost 150 B-29 men in this camp, but none of our missing crewmen ever showed up.”

________________________________________

Captain (then Flying Cadet) Stauffer’s portrait, from NARA’s Photographic Prints of Air Cadets and Officers, Air Crew, and Notables in the History of Aviation – NARA RG 18-PU.

________________________________________

Like many veterans of the Second World War, Irving wrote an account of his experiences. Intended for his family, and in a symbolic sense simply for the historical record – to make a historical record of the past for its own sake – Irving actually began this process very soon after being liberated from captivity in Omori, Japan, in 1945. As he recounted, “This book was started in September of 1945, aboard the USS Yarmouth. She was a little out of her accustomed territory. Boston to Nova Scotia was her regular run, but here she was come to take me home from my Pacific war. I wrote laboriously, telling who, what, when and where, but never why; that always escaped me.”

The book is arranged chronologically and encompasses such topics as Irving’s pre-war life in the Boston area, his training as a bombardier, and navigator; his relationships with other airmen, particularly his crew members and fellow POWs; being Jewish in the military in the 1940s (though not a central thrust of the book); the loss of Calamity Sue, his capture, and the realities of interrogation by the Japanese; life as a prisoner of war.

Given the immediacy of its composition, the book is a work of great clarity, detail, directness, and near-complete frankness. As Irving himself implied, there is genuinely and intentionally very little “why” in the book in the way of discussion of deeper religious or philosophical issues.

Which, perhaps, when pondering the names above – why some men returned,; why some did not – is just as well.

We all have to answer such questions in our own way.

Here is a brief answer from Irving, speaking for his father, Harry Newman:

____________________

(1) Their B-29, serial 42-93953 and commanded by 1 Lt. Ralph E. Miller, was shot down by Petty Officer Toru Kurita of the 343rd Kokutai, who was flying a N1K2-J Shiden Kai fighter plane. The crew consisted of:

Pilot: 1 Lt. Ralph E. Miller (Eaton Rapids, Mi.)
Co-Pilot: 2 Lt. Joseph H. Finkelstein (Los Angeles, Ca.)
Navigator: 2 Lt. Charles C. Winder (Salt Lake City, Ut.)
Bombardier: 1 Lt. Clyde M. Roush (Neosho Rapids, Ks.)
Flight Engineer: T/Sgt. William H. Chapman (Calhoun, Ga.)
Radar Operator: 2 Lt. Jack M. Berry (Atlanta, Ga.)
Radio Operator: Sgt. Jack V. Dengler (Danville, Il. / Salt Lake City, Ut.)
Gunner (Central): Sgt. Albert R. Howard (Cullman, Ak.)
Gunner (Left): Pvt. Merlin R. Calvin (Saint Louis, Mo.)
Gunner (Right): Cpl. Clark B. Bassett, Jr. (Son of Clark B. and Bonnie W. Bassett, of 202 Niagara St., North Tonawanda, N.Y.)
Gunner (Tail): Cpl. Irving A. Corliss (Somersworth, N.H.)

“No eventual”, because five men did survive the aircraft’s shoot-down, by parachuting. They were 2 Lt. Berry, Sgt. Dengler, Cpl. Corliss, and Pvt. Calvin. All captured uninjured, they were murdered – while prisoners of war – on June 20, 1945. The fifth crewman, Cpl. Clark B. Bassett, Jr., severely wounded and unconscious, was parachuted from the plane by those men, and died of his wounds not long after landing. He is the only member of this crew who has a place of burial. (Acacia Cemetery, North Tonawanda, N.Y.)

Corporal Clark B. Bassett, Jr., from the North Tonawanda Evening News of December 27, 1948.

The plane’s other crewmen – Miller, Finkelstein, Winder, Roush, Chapman, and Howard – were presumably still aboard the aircraft when it crashed at sea, at a place still – and probably forever – unknown.

Rear row: Roush, Winder, 1 Lt. Paul E. Remmetter (Killed in Action April 16, 1945; replaced by Lt. Miller), Finkelstein, Berry
Front row: Howard?, Dengler, Chapman or Corliss, Bassett

Rear row, left to right: Roush, Winder, Remmetter, Finkelstein, Berry
Front row, left to right: Howard, Dengler, Chapman, Bassett, Corliss, Calvin

1/6/17

1077

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 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

Pesach with the Jewish Brigade: Italy – March, 1945

One purpose of this blog has been to present information about the military service of Jews, across a variety of eras, conflicts, and locations, with – well, at least so far, and for the immediate future – an emphasis on Jewish military service during the First and Second World Wars. Accordingly, most of the information and photographs thus far presented have focused upon the military service of Jews in the armed forces of the WW II Allies, and for WW I, both the Allies and Germany.

In terms of the Second World War, the post covering women drivers in Britain’s Auxiliary Territorial Service (the A.T.S.) was derived from and based upon a group of photographs published in Parade – Middle-East Weekly, on February 12, 1944.

But, Parade has far more to offer: One such item is a photo essay that was published in Parade’s issue of April 14, 1945, focusing on Pesach (Passover) services held by soldiers of the Jewish Brigade of the Second World War in late March of 1945.

____________________

Certainly well known in the Jewish press of the Second World War (both within and certainly beyond the English-speaking world) the singular significance of the Jewish Brigade was that – as a military formation, though small in terms of numbers – it manifested and symbolized a necessary and critical step on the path towards Jewish military and ultimately political autonomy, regardless of how tentative such autonomy actually was prior to May of 1948. For in the lives of nations as much as individuals, symbols (that’s why countries have flags) and symbolic actions can be as important as reality, for they can inspire; if not generate; if not perpetuate that reality. And, in a practical sense, postwar, members of the Brigade provided aid – physical, psychological, and spiritual – to survivors of the Shoah.

In terms of the unit’s actual designation, while popularly known as the “Jewish Brigade”, the unit was actually the “Jewish Infantry Brigade Group”, and was a component of the Palestine Regiment.

The Palestine Regiment itself had been formed in August of 1942, and was comprised of separate infantry companies (“Palestine Infantry Companies”) first formed in 1940 from among Arabs and Jews living in Mandatory Palestine, these companies – at that time – having been part of the Royal East Kent Regiment, otherwise known as “The Buffs”.

The Palestine Regiment was reformed in 1944, with the Brigade’s creation being announced on 20 September. The Brigade was comprised of three infantry Battalions (1st, 2nd, and 3rd), and the 200th Field Regiment, the latter a component of the Royal Artillery.

There are a number of interesting and valuable sources of information about the Jewish brigade, ranging from the scholarly to the more “popular”, differing in literary tone, style, and emphasis. Several such works are in English, while I suppose (?!) there are vastly more in Hebrew and Yiddish.

According to Appendix I of Morris Beckman’s The Jewish Brigade, the Jewish Brigade Group suffered the loss of 83 soldiers killed in action or died from wounds, and, 200 wounded. Beckman’s book does not delineate the criteria for the determination of these numbers, but, does mention that they’re based on information provided by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, the Imperial War Museum, and, information in Jacob Lifshitz’s Sefer ha-Brigadah ha-Yehudit: Korot ha-ḥaṭivah ha-loḥemet ṿeha-matsilah et ha-Golah (Book of the Jewish Brigade / The Story of the Jewish Brigade Fighting and Rescuing the Diaspora) (ספר הבריגדה היהודית קורות החטיבה היהודית הלוחמת והמצילה את הגולה).

The Brigade’s awards are given as follows:

Military Cross – 4
Military Medal – 7
Member of the British Empire – 4
Commander of the British Empire – 1
Order of the British Empire – 2
United States awards – 2
Mentioned in Dispatches – 78

My research, based on the CWGC database, both volumes (1989 and 1994) of Henry Morris’ We Will Remember Them, and Yoav Gelber’s Jewish Palestinian Volunteering in the British Army During the Second World War), show the following losses:

Between April, 1941 and May, 1944: As members of the Palestine Regiment, before the establishment of the Jewish Infantry Brigade Group: 33 soldiers, killed in action and / or died on active service; one soldier (Pvt. Norbert Gabriel, PAL/11574) as a POW in Greece.

Between October 20, 1944, and May 7, 1945: After the actual formation of the Jewish Infantry Brigade Group, during combat in Italy: 40 soldiers.

From May 9, 1945 to November 20, 1946: Postwar, on active service: 19 soldiers.

Just as the date of the photographs is indicated in the article, so is the Brigade’s location: Near the Senio River, in northern Italy. This is described in greater clarity in Beckman’s book:

“On 23 March 1945 178 Company received new orders. They were to move up to the line at once, and again the long convoy, with their men eager for battle, took to the road. Eventually they reached their base at the small village of Brisighella. This was an idyllic spot, on a ridge from which they could look across orchards, olive groves and vineyards sloping down to the south bank of the Senio. Confronting their sector was the crack German 4th Paratroop Division. From their hilltop positions on the north side of the river, the Germans could observe the Brigade, especially during daylight hours, when their snipers and light artillery frequently reminded the more incautious Brigadiers that curiousity killed the cat.”

And with that, here’s Parade’s article…

FRONT LINE PASSOVER

Parade – Middle East Weekly
April 14, 1945

“Parade” reporter GEORGE BONNEY and cameraman BELA ZOLA visit the Jewish Brigade during Passover

The Jewish Brigade is in action. They were firmly established on the Eighth Army front while World Jewry celebrated Passover. That their battle inauguration coincided with the age-old custom was, for them, an historical occasion for the word Passover, properly interpreted, means “The Festival of Freedom.”

Up in the line, near the Senio river, the Chaplain said: “We are now in the front line of the fight for freedom. It is an opportunity to avenge our people.”

Circumstances would not allow the full ceremony, but the troops began their eight-day ritual in the best way possible. Alert in their positions they observed the Seder — opening feast—with Palestine wine and Matzot. The Matzot or unleavened bread is essential because it commemorates the exodus of Jews from Egypt when, unable to wait for their bread to rise, they quickly baked flat cakes and fled.

The military authorities were extremely considerate and helpful. Matzot was provided through normal Army channels and, with a special consignment of Palestine wine, was sent up the line by mule train under the cover of darkness. Possible, but he couldn’t be everywhere. Some detachments were obliged to read their own Haggadah, a narration of the Exodus.

We traveled up to a forward position to see the preparations.

Dug in on the banks of the Senio, a mortar detachment prepared their feast with augmented Army rations. They planned to celebrate in the evening but cooked by day, because their derelict strongpoint received enemy attention at night. As a matter of fact, shells lobbed over during the day and their location is fast becoming scarred with yawning holes. Still, they grinned and filled hay box containers to await the appropriate time for the Seder.

In the husk of a farmhouse, barely 1,000 yards from the enemy, we saw an infantry platoon enjoy an Eve of Passover lunch. They ate in relays while some of their number cleaned weapons and the wireless operator, mug in hand, sat listening – intent on his task. Supplies had not caught up with them but, somewhere, somehow, they had gathered tulips and spring bulbs. Perched on the crazily warped window ledge, the flowers added a touch of gaiety to the desolation around them.

The M.O. was later going to take the service. They had set up their position behind a crumbled church. A knocked-out Sherman, relic of a former battle, provided sleeping quarters. With the earth scooped out from underneath and the turret cleared it affords a two-storied residence.

Later we visited a troop of 25-pdr gunners. Arrangements had been made to hold a service between the gun positions, but the rain streamed down, lightning flashed and the crashing of thunder mingled with the gun-fire. Hurriedly everything was moved into the attic of a nearby farmhouse and those of the troop not on duty crowded in to join the festival.

Lighted candles cast eerie shadows on the ancient rafters, but the gathering sang their Palestinian folk-songs with cheerful abandon. True, it was all part of their annual festival, but there was something more to it – determination and tremendous enthusiasm to carry on the fight. Indeed, training was speeded up and the Jewish Brigade entered the line earlier than was originally intended.

Volunteers from British units have transferred and there are representatives from more than 30 nations in the Brigade. Many are orthodox in their religious beliefs and everything is done to respect the Kosher principles. A Shohet (slaughterer) travels with H.Q., and live cattle are dealt with in suitable circumstances. At other times an alternative ration scale is issued, containing among other things, canned fish.

______________________________

“The Jewish Brigade, composed mainly of Palestinians but containing a number of United Kingdom Jews transferred from other units, is in action in Italy. Passover, festival of freedom, is celebrated in front line; Jewish chaplain leads congregation in reading from Haggadah, narration of exodus from Egypt.”

(Though no names are presented among the photo captions with the exception of Brigadier Benjamin, there is a clue to the identity of the officer leading Erev Seder Services: The three pips on his epaulette designate the rank of Captain. Based on Morris Beckman’s The Jewish Brigade, he is either (? – !) Captain Shimon Mazo, or, Captain Leon Shalit, both of whom – as junior chaplains – conducted Seder Night Services, which had been organized by Senior Chaplain Rabbi Bernard M. Caspar.

The very fact that the photo essay has a date associated with it – Pesach of 1945 – enables the determination of the time – let alone the day! – when this image was captured: About 6:35 P.M., Wednesday, March 28, 1945. (The 14th of Nisan, in the year 5705.)

______________________________

“Infantry platoon men off duty east Matzot, unleavened bread, drink Palestine wine, in much shelled farmhouse. Matzot was provided by a British D.I.D.”

(Coincidentally, one of the soldiers in the photo may be identifiable: A box or container of some sort, bent and folded, is prominently located in the right center of the table. Upon the end of this object is the surname “NADLER”. Is “Nadler” the soldier seated at the right center of the photo?)

(“D.I.D.”? – “Detail Issue Depot”)

______________________________

“Platoon signaler remains at his post, keeps contact with troops ever further forward. Platoon have to eat Passover lunch in relays as men come off duty.”

______________________________

“Monocled Brigadier E.F. Benjamin, commanding Jewish Brigade, a Canadian-born regular British Army officer, with some of staff.”

______________________________

“Company commander on way to battle-scarred farmhouse on top of hill keeps carefully to track as land is mined. Heaps of earth on left are dug-outs.”

______________________________

“Cookhouse of mortar detachment is only 1,000 yards from German lines and cook must raise as little smoke as possible or he will attract more enemy shells.”

______________________________

“Men of 25-pdr battery carry on with work. Service was to have been held between gun sites but storm forced men to farmhouse for service and eve of Passover supper.”

______________________________

Just as the date of the photographs is indicated in the article, so is the Brigade’s location: Near the Senio River, in northern Italy. This is described in greater clarity in Beckman’s book:

The series of maps and aerial photographs below – all from Google – show the Brigade’s approximate location at the time the above photographs were taken.

______________________________

Northern Italy, showing major cities and highways. Though not visible at this scale, Brisighella is about half-way between Bologna and San Marino.

______________________________

Zooming in for a closer look. The Brigade’s approximate location is denoted by the red circle, to the southwest of Faenza.

______________________________

Closer… This map brings surrounding cities, towns, and roads into greater clarity.

______________________________

And, closer… Brisighella, the location of the Brigade’s headquarters, is denoted by the blue oval, while the probable disposition of the Brigade itself is indicated by the red oval just to the northwest or Errano. Though not labeled on the map, the Senior River (Fiume Senio) winds between Riolo Terme and Ponte del Castello.

______________________________

More detail. The Brigade headquarters and probable location of the Brigade itself are indicated in blue and red, while the Senio River is the very faint, very thin, blue irregular “line” alongside Riolo Terme, Cuffiano, Tebano, and Biancanigo.

______________________________

Here is an air (or satellite?) view of the map displayed above. Farms and cultivated areas are interspersed between hills.

______________________________

The Senior River can be seen as an irregular blue line meandering just south of Riolo Terme, Cuffaino, and Biancanigo, and north of Tebano. German troops would have been situated north of the river.

______________________________

And, an air / satellite view of the above.

______________________________

Finally, a map of 8th Army dispositions in the Imola area (from the 85th Infantry “Custermen” Division) illustrates the location of the Brigade in the context of other Allied military units during the second week of April, 1945. The location of the Brigade is indicated by the red oval.

References

Websites

Brigadier Ernest Frank Benjamin (Wikipedia)

British Army Abbreviations (The Lincolnshire Regiment)

British Army Officer Rank Insignia (Wikipedia)

Capture of Imola (United States 85th Infantry Division)

Jewish Brigade (Wikipedia)

Jewish Brigade Group (Jewish Virtual Library)

Jewish Holiday (date and day of week) calculator (JewishGen)

NOAA – ESRL Sunrise / Sunset Calculator (NOAA)

Palestine Regiment (Wikipedia)

Books

Beckman, Morris, The Jewish Brigade: An Army With Two Masters, Spellmount, Stoud, Gloucestershire, England, 2014

Soldiers of The Great War: Jewish Military Service in WW I, as Reported in l’Univers Israélite (The Jewish World) – “Les aumôniers du culte israélite” (Chaplains of the Jewish Faith), November 27, 1914

Paralleling my research in coverage within The Jewish Chronicle of Jewish military service during World War One, I’ve also reviewed the periodical l’Univers Israélite – The Jewish World – concerning the military service of French Jewish soldiers during that time. Due to the publication schedule of the periodical, as well as the length and format of each issue, the total number of such articles, though many, has turned out to be fewer, and typically of shorter length, than those in the Chronicle.

But, what was published within the l’Univers Israélite was nevertheless as compelling and interesting – sometimes as profound, in its own way – paralleling the nature of what appeared in the Chronicle. Items of note include biographical profiles of French Jewish soldiers (and inevitably military casualties) – many such items, news from foreign Jewish communities, discourses on religion and politics, and, lengthy descriptions of religious services held by, and among, French Jewish soldiers “in the trenches”.

Among the above, one such item is the following: Information aimed at the families of servicemen concerning contacting Jewish chaplains assigned to the various French army corps. Notably, this as the first really “lengthy” concerning French Jewish military service that appeared in l’Univers Israélite, this article did cover actually cover the military experiences of French Jewish soldiers, per se.

____________________

The article is provided in the original French, accompanied by English translation. (My own translation.) Further articles from l’Univers Israélite will be presented in the future. Likewise, translated. In the meantime, a PDF of this article is available here.

____________________

Les aumôniers du culte israélite

En CAMPAGNE

Chaplains of the Jewish Faith
In Campaign

l’Univers Israélite
November 27, 1914

The Jewish World
November 27, 1914

Tous nos coreligionnaires ne savent pas qu’aux armées en campagne sont attachés des aumôniers des différents cultes et que le culte israélite a droit à un aumônier par corps d’armée. Quelques-uns ne tiennent peut-être pas à le savoir. C’est un tort. Même en laissant de coté, si c’est possible, la question de religion et la question de dignité, une considération de sécurité devrait engager tous les israelites à faire appel, le cas échéant, aux bons offices de l’aumônier du culte dont ils relèvent. L’aumônier, qui marche à l’arrière du corps d’armée, peut se mettre en relation avec les militaires israélites dont il connaît l’existence, les visiter s’il y a lieu dans les ambulances, prendre ou se procurer de leurs nouvelles et communiquer avec leurs familles ; assimilé à un officier sans troupes, il peut se charger de recevoir et de distribuer des colis.

Not all of our coreligionists are aware that chaplains of various religions are attached to armies in the field and that Israelite worship is entitled to chaplains by the army corps. Some may not be keen to know. This is wrong. Even leaving aside, if possible, the question of religion and the question of dignity, a security consideration should engage all Israelites to appeal, if any, to the good offices of the chaplain under whom they worship. The chaplain, who walks to the rear of the army corps, can relate to the Israelite soldiers which he is aware, visit the place where the ambulances are taken or obtain their news and communicate with their families; compared to a non-troop officer, he may be responsible for receiving and distributing the packages.

Nous croyons donc rendre service aux familles Israélites qui ont quelqu’un des leurs à l’armée en dressant la liste des aumôniers israélites actuellement en fonctions, avec l’indication du corps d’armée auquel ils sont attachés:

We believe as a service to Israelite families who have someone of theirs in the army listing the current functions of Israelite chaplains, with indicating the army corps to which they are attached:

1er corps           MM     Hermann, rabbin de Reims (en congé).
2e corps                        Tchernaïa, rabbin; ministre-officiant d’Enghien.
3e corps                        Nathan Lévy, rabbin de Rouen.
4e corps                        Albert Hertz, rabbin.
5e corps                        Maurice Zeitlin, rabbin.
6e corps                        Joseph Sachs, rabbin de Châlons-sur-Marne.
7e corps                        Paul Haguenauer, grand-rabbin de Besancon.
8e corps                        Julien Weill, rabbin de Paris
(précédemment M. Schumacher, rabbin de Dijon).
9e corps                        Léon Sommer, sous-rabbin, ministre-officiant de Tours.
13e corps                      Marcel Sachs, rabbin à Paris.
15e corps                      Hirschler, ministre-officiant à Marseille.
16e corps                      Joseph Cohen, gran rabbin de Bayonne.
17e corps                      Moïse Poliatscheck, rabbin de Toulouse.
18e corps                      Ernest Ginsburger, grand rabbin de Genève.
20e corps                     Maurice Eisenbeth, rabbin de Sedan.
Place de Toul,             M. Isaac Bloch, grand-rabbin de Nancy.
Place de Verdun,        M. Jules Ruff, rabbin de Verdun.
Place d’Epinal,           M. L. Sèches, grand-rabbin de Lille.

First Corps                          M.M. Hermann, Rabbi of Reims (on leave).
2nd Corps                           Tchernaia, Rabbi; officiating minister of Enghien.
3rd Corps                            Nathan Levy, Rabbi of Rouen.
4th Corps                            Albert Hertz, Rabbi.
5th Corps                            Maurice Zeitlin, Rabbi.
6th Corps                            Joseph Sachs, Rabbi of Chalons-sur-Marne.
7th Corps                            Haguenauer Paul, Chief Rabbi of Besancon.
8th Corps                            Julien Weill, Rabbi of Paris
(formerly Schumacher, Rabbi of Dijon).
9th Corps                            Sommer Leon, Deputy Rabbi, Officiating Minister of Tours.
13th Corps                         Marcel Sachs, Rabbi in Paris.
15th Corps                         Hirschler, Officiating Minister at Marseille.
16th Corps                         Joseph Cohen, Grand Rabbi of Bayonne.
17th Corps                         Poliatscheck Moses, Rabbi of Toulouse.
18th Corps                         Ernest Ginsburger, Chief Rabbi of Geneva.
20th Corps                         Maurice Eisenbeth, Rabbi of Sedan.
Place de Toul                    M.L. Isaac Bloch, Chief Rabbi of Nancy.
Place de Verdun               M.L. Jules Ruff, Rabbi of Verdun.
Place d’Epinal                  M.L. Sèches, Chief Rabbi of Lille.

En écrivant à un aumônier, on libellera l’adresse comme suit:

M. le rabbin (grand-rabbin) X..
Aumônier du culte israélite
Groupe des brancardiers de Corps
…eme corps d’armée

Writing to a chaplain, words are addressed as follows:

Rabbi M. (Chief Rabbi) X…
Chaplain of the Jewish faith
Corps Stretcher Group
…th Army Corps

La première destination à donner à la lettre est le Bureau central militaire à Paris ou la ville qui est le siège du dépôt de la section d’infirmiers du corps d’armee en question (consulter le tableau affiché dans les bureaux de poste).

The first destination to give the letter is the Military Central Bureau in Paris or the city that is the seat of the filing of the nursing section of the corps in question (see the chart displayed in post offices).

On remarquera que les 10e, 11e, 12e, 14e, 19e, et 21e corps d’armée n’ont pas, à notre connaissance, ou n’ont pas encore d’aumônier israélite. Nous reviendrons sur cette lacune et sur quelques autres desiderata dans un prochain où nous étudierons l’organisation du service de l’aumônerie militaire, au point de vue Israélite, et la place faite à notre culte.

Note that the 10th, 11th, 12th, 14th, 19th, and 21th army corps have not, to our knowledge, or do not yet, have Israelite chaplains. We will return to this absence and upon some other desiderata in the future or we will study the organization of the service of the military chaplaincy, from the Israelite perspective, that has instead made our worship.

Pacific Pesach: The Guam Haggadah – V (References)

References

Books

Finkelstein, Noah and Sadie G., Memorial Album – Dedicated to the Boys of the 20th Air Force, Noah and Sadie G. Finkelstein, Los Angeles, Ca., 1951

Herbert, Kevin, Maximum Effort: The B-29s Against Japan, Sunflower University Press, Manhattan, Ks., 1983

Izawa, Yasuho; Holmes, Tony; Laurier, Jim, J2M Raiden and N1K1/2 Shiden/Shiden-Kai Aces (Aircraft of the Aces), Osprey Publishing, Oxford, England, 2016

Kaufman, Isidor, American Jews in World War II – The Story of 550,000 Fighters for Freedom – Volume I, The Dial Press, New York, N.Y., 1947

Marshall, Chester, and Stallings, Scotty, The Global Twentieth – An Anthology of the 20th AF in WW II – Volume II, Marshall Publishers, Memphis, Tn., 1987

Newman, Irving S., ETA Target 1400 Hours, or Hi Ma, I’m Home, 1945 (unpublished manuscript)

Tanakh – A New Translation of The Holy Scriptures – According to the Traditional Hebrew Text, The Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia, 1985

The Chumash – The Stone Edition – The ArtScroll Series, Mesorah Publications, Ltd., Brooklyn, N.Y., 1997

Magazines

Mapping Japan for the Bombers, Popular Mechanics, December, 1945, pp. 24-25

Newspapers

(No author), The Jewish Post (Indiana), May 3, 1946 (Brief note concerning Chaplain Cedarbaum’s anticipated creation of a book about Jews in the 20th Air Force.)

Clark B. Bassett, Jr. – The Evening News, North Tonawanda, N.Y., June 6, 1945; December 1, 1948; December 27, 1948; November 2, 1982

Jewish Concept of Freedom

Commentary on Parshas Metzora, by Rabbi Dovid Zauderer, at http://www.ourvillageshul.com/single-post/2016/04/15/Zmail-Parshas-Metzora

Commentary on “Freedom”, by Rabbi Benjamin Blech, at http://virtualjerusalem.com/holidays.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3266:freedom-without-limits&catid=56:passover&Itemid=3266

Military Units

949th Engineer Aviation Topographic Company guidon, at http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/194394-949th-engineer-aviation-topographic-co-enola-gay/

949th Engineer Aviation Topographic Company organization within 20th Air Force, at http://www.cbi-history.com/part_xv.html\

Pesach and Haggadot

The Haggadah, at AISH website, at http://www.aish.com/h/pes/h/Haggadah-An-Introduction.html

The Haggadah, at Chabad website, at http://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/1735/jewish/The-Haggadah.htm

The Haggadah, at Ohr Somayach website, at http://ohr.edu/ask_db/ask_main.php/188/Q2/

The New Haggadah

Rabbi Mordechai Kaplan, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordecai_Kaplan.

The New Haggadah, at phy6.org/outreach/Haggadah/Haggadah notes.rtf

Crew of B-29 42-93953

B-29 42-93953, Missing Air Crew Report 14364

B-29 42-93953, at http://aomorikuushuu.jpn.org/B29-42-93953.html

Fate of Crew of B-29 42-93953, Case File 36-305, concerning B-29 #42-93953 (No Nickname), Crash at Miyazaki-ken, Nobeeka city on 5 May, 1945

Web Sites and Other Information

Go Down Moses, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_Down_Moses.

Guide to the Papers of David Cedarbaum (1903-1987), undated, 1944-1951, 1955, 1959, 1989 (bulk 1944-1946), at http://findingaids.cjh.org/?pID=1358852

Jewish servicemen and women celebrate Passover, at https://www.flickr.com/photos/center_for_jewish_history/

Navy Nurse Corps Insignia, at http://www.blitzkriegbaby.de/nnc/nnc3.htm.

Greenspan, Marvin J., Cpl., USAAF, NARA Records Group 331, Investigation Report 1834

Greenspan, Marvin J., Cpl., USAAF, War Crimes Trial Record 296

Kronick, Archer S., biography at http://www.findagrave.com/

Pacific Pesach – The Guam Haggadah – IV (Major David I. Cedarbaum, Rabbi)

Is one picture is worth a thousand words? – Well…? Maybe.

Is one picture is worth a memory? – Hmmm…? Definitely.

Given Major Cedarbaum’s efforts on behalf of the Jewish servicemen on Guam, it is more than fitting to present an image of the Major, himself. The picture below, from his Jewish Welfare Board Chaplaincy Record (available at Ancestry.com) is a fitting denouement to the prior posts covering Pesach on Guam in 1945.*

Intriguingly, due to the quality of the photo, which clearly shows two newspapers in the Rabbi’s library, the image can be approximately dated.

At the left is The Jewish Floridian, of July 13, 1945. (This newspaper is available in digital format at the Florida Digital Newspaper Library of the University of Florida George A. Smathers Library, via the Florida Jewish Newspaper Project.)

At the right is The Jewish Post, of August 3, 1945. (The Post is available in digital format at the website for the – appropriately enough, Jewish Post – of the Indiana Historic Newspaper Program.)

Digital images of the first page of each newspaper are presented below.

Given that Major Cedarbaum was stationed on Guam between March and October of 1945, this suggests that the photo was taken in mid to late August of that year.

Major David Isadore Cedarbaum, Rabbi, ASN 0-529289

The Jewish Floridian, July 13, 1945

The Jewish Post, August 3, 1945

____________________

And, a possible segue for a future blog post…

…of particular note in The Post is the item “Fighting For America”, by artist Leon Blehart. Fighting for America was issued by the Jewish Welfare Board and depicted – through cartoon vignettes – actions (sometimes involving wounds, or worse) by Jewish servicemen which resulted in military awards. The series appeared from (at least?) – May through October of 1945. The sketches in each release presented actions by four to five soldiers, from all branches of the American military.

This “Fighting for America” item in The Jewish Post of August 3, 1945, appeared in The Jewish Exponent (Philadelphia) on the same day, and is shown below:

The actions depicted in the first two, and fourth vignettes, pertain to the following servicemen:

PFC Jerome Rubin, 75th Infantry Division; Incident occurred January 18, 1945; Mother (?), Marion Rubin, of 5502 14th Ave., Brooklyn, N.Y.; In Casualty List published in New York Times on 3/17/45; Story reported in Chicago Jewish Chronicle 8/10/45

1 Lt. Robert Burton Paris, 342nd Bomb Squadron, 97th Bomb Group, 12th Air Force; From Memphis

“Cpl. Isidore Goldberg” is probably Pvt. Isidore Goldberg; Father Ben Goldberg, of 1311 Grant Ave., New York, N.Y.; In Casualty List published in New York Times on 9/10/44

Pacific Pesach: The Guam Haggadah – II

Title Page: SEDER IN THE MARIANAS – PASSOVER – 5705 – 1945

Acknowledgements and Officiating Chaplains

Page 1: Kiddush Blessing

Page 2: Kiddush Blessing (continued); Blessing over Greens (Parsley); Dividing the Matzah (Among 2,700 servicemen, who was the lucky Private First Class who found the afikomen?!)

Page 3: A noteworthy section of the Guam Haggadah – an uneasy if not irresolvable balance between particularism and universalism – is found under the heading “Let My People Go”.

The text obviously, pointedly, and directly address Jewish peoplehood, Zionism (albeit without that word), and a sense of collective pride, through the text, “Men can be enslaved by intolerance. When Jews are forced to give up their Jewish way of life, to abandon their Torah, to neglect their sacred festivals, to leave off rebuilding their ancient homeland – they are slaves. When they must deny that they are Jews in order to get work – they are slaves. When they must live in constant fear of unwarranted hate and prejudice – they are slaves.”

The thrust of that text is curiously counterweighted by setting Pesach in the form of a generalized yearning for “freedom”, but “freedom” defined as an individual, if not philosophical, if not universalistic value of the Enlightenment – rather than a particularistic and covenantal concept – set in the frame of the war effort of the United States, and the Allies, in general.

This is evident in such statements as, “Peoples have suffered, nations have struggled to make this dream come true. Now we dedicate ourselves to the struggle for freedom.” “It means liberation from ail those enslavements that warp the spirit and blight the mind, that destroy the soul even though they leave the flesh alive. For men can be enslaved in more ways than one.” “Pesach calls us to be free, free from the tyranny of our own selves, free from the enslavement of poverty and inequality, free from the corroding hate that eats away the ties which unite mankind.” “Pesach calls upon us to put an end to all slavery! Pesach cries out in the name of God, “Let my people go.” Pesach summons us to freedom.”

Though I do not have access to the 1942 edition of Rabbi Kaplan’s New Haggadah, I wonder if this text – perhaps reflective of the hopes, aspirations, and ambivalence pervasive among early and mid twentieth century American Jewry (and still today?…) – is derived from that work.

Page 4: “Let My People Go” (continued); Art depicting Moshe Rabbenu in the wilderness

Page 5: “Go Down Moses”; Art depicting Moses and Aaron confronting Pharaoh

Page 6: Presentation of Matzah; The Four Questions

Page 7: The Four Questions (continued); Pesach narrative

0-haggadah-08_edited-3

Page 8: Pesach Narrative (continued)

Page 9: Dayenu!

Page 10: Dayenu (continued); “In every generation do men rise up against us, and God delivers us from their hands.”

Page 11: Display of Symbols of Pesach (Shankbone and Matzah)

Page 12: Display of Symbols of Pesach (maror (bitter herbs))

Page 13: Call to Hallel; Hymn “Praise the Lord”

Page 14: Benediction over Matzah; Blessing over Bitter Herbs

Page 15: The Pesach Meal is Served; Opening the Door for Elijah

Page 16: Opening the Door for Elijah (continued); Eliyahu Hanavi

Page 17: Closing Benediction; Singing of America

Back Cover: Printed by 949th Engineer Aviation Topographic Company

Your PDF version of the Guam Haggadah can be found here.

Pacific Pesach: The Guam Haggadah – I

Pesach – Passover – is the most universally observed festival of the Jewish people – regardless of the nature of one’s religious beliefs, level of observance, or political affiliation.

Though Pesach certainly carries a festive air, the holiday is far more than merely “a holiday”; at least, as such days are understood in the conventional sense of the term.

Pesach commemorates – even as it celebrates – the origin of the Jews as a distinct people sharing a national ethos and identity, through the form of a vivid historical narrative suffused with overtones, messages, and commentary – some subtle; some direct – about their identity, ideals, and relationship to God.

While it is obviously true that a central message of Pesach is the moral and practical imperative of freedom from slavery – whether that slavery be physical, intellectual, psychological, or spiritual – the core of the celebration extends beyond “freedom” per se, as a philosophical concept and legal actuality. For, pure and unalloyed “freedom”, if not carefully guarded and consciously guided, can in time revert back into a form of slavery.

In a fuller sense, the message of Pesach is not simply “Let my people go!”, but, “Let My people go that they may worship me in the wilderness.” (Exodus, 7:16) *

The Haggadah – an example of which is the subject of this post – is the central text that serves as both a narrative and guide for the Pesach Seder. Though Haggadot are centered around the central and ordered sequence of elements that comprise the Pesach Seder, the actual text and physical appearance of “a” Haggadah is not solidly fixed. Even the most cursory Internet search for the term “Haggadah” reveals a myriad of images of the text – some simple; some elaborate. Thus, with each new iteration of the Haggadah, its wide variety of forms, formats, and styles are reflective of the cultural conditions and historical forces influencing the long and continuing history of the Jewish people, shedding light on the mindset, values, and beliefs of the community or organization which published the text. In that sense, each new publication can be a sociological, cultural, artistic, and linguistic “window” upon the past. Such is so with the Guam Haggadah.

____________________

The document presented in this post – “Haggadah – Seder in the Marianas : Passover 5705-1945” – is one such example. This Haggadah was published for and used by Jewish soldiers, airmen, and sailors stationed on the Island of Guam – the southernmost island of the Marianas archipelago, in the western part of the North Pacific Ocean – for Pesach services in March of 1945.

One might aptly call it the “Guam Haggadah.”

This Haggadah – in remarkably good condition – is among the holdings of the Dorot Jewish Division of the New York Public Library.

The three men whose names appear on page two of the text – David I. Cedarbaum (Army), and, Philip Lipis and Elihu Rickle (both Navy) – were chaplains serving Jewish military personnel on Guam.

As indicated by the notation on the last page, the text was printed by the 20th Air Force’s 949th Aviation Engineer Topographical Company.

The text of the Guam Haggadah is derived from the revised edition of The New Haggadah, edited by Rabbi Mordechai Kaplan and published by Behrman’s Jewish Book House in 1942. The literary descendant of Kaplan’s 1942 Haggadah exists today as The New American Haggadah, and is available at Berhman’s House.

Mention of the Guam Haggadah is made in “Volume I” of the two-volume 1947 publication American Jews in World War II. In an extensive account of Chaplain Cedarbaum’s service with the 20th Air Force (in a chapter entitled “They Delivered the Atom”) it is stated that, “He had hardly reached his new post when he found himself involved, along with Navy chaplain Philip Lipis, in the organization of an ambitious Passover service on Guam, the first ever held in that part of the Pacific. The ancient Seder services were celebrated on March 28, simultaneously in two large mess halls.

“Twenty-seven hundred soldiers and sailors attended. The Hebrew Haggadah they used had been printed on the Island by 20th AF presses. No doubt to all of them it was the most impressive service of their lives.”

At least one photograph from the Seder is available on the Internet.

At the flickr Photostream of the Center for Jewish History (CJH), an image from the David Cedarbaum papers shows, “Jewish servicemen and women celebrate[ing] Passover together by eating matzo. A caption next to the photo notes that the woman pictured is one of only seven Jewish women stationed in Guam.” The woman in question is an Ensign in the Navy Nurse Corps. Copies of the Guam Haggadah can be seen on the table before both her, and, the happily distracted (!) serviceman to her left.

The next post will show the individual pages of the Guam Haggadah.

* Alternatively, “Send out My people that they may serve Me in the Wilderness.”