Gross_History of Zionism, 1600-1918, Vol. 2 (of 2)

Area. Income.

Name. │ Year.│ Hect.│ Pop. │ Francs

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

I. JUDEA. │ │ │ │

Mikveh-Israel¹ │ 1870 │ 225 │ 150 │ ――

Mozah │ 1873 │ 59 │ 28 │ ――

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Petach-Tikvah │ 1878 │ 2275 │ 1500 │ 466,971

Katra │ 1882 │ 500 │ 150 │ 76,415

Rishon-le-Zion │ 1882 │ 1180 │ 1190 │ 121,213

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Wady-el-Chanin │ 1882 │ 285 │ 200 │ ――

Jehudie │ 1883 │ 12 │ 15 │ ――

Ekron (Mazkeret Mathya) │ 1884 │ 1275 │ 300 │ 144,918

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Kastinieh │ 1888 │ 550 │ 150 │ ――

Rehobot │ 1890 │ 1300 │ 600 │ 128,415

Artuf │ 1896 │ 460 │ 50 │ ――

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Ben Shemen │ 1906 │ 210 │ 100 │ ――

Bir Jakob │ 1907 │ 200 │ 70 │ ――

Ain Ganim │ 1908 │ 65 │ 100 │ ――

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Hulda │ 1909 │ 182 │ 40 │ ――

│ │ │ │

II. SAMARIA. │ │ │ │

Zichron Jacob │ 1882 │ 1850 │ 1000 │ 183,210

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Um-el-Dschemal │ 1889 │ 253 │ 80 │ ――

Schweja │ 1891 │ 851 │ 50 │ ――

Hedera │ 1891 │ 1750 │ 200 │ 121,915

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Kefar Saba │ 1894 │ 635 │ 30 │ ――

Atlit │ 1897 │ 460 │ 50 │ 18,950

Hefzi-bah │ 1905 │ 200 │ 8 │ ――

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Tanturah │ ―― │ 40 │ 16 │ ――

│ │ │ │

III. GALILEE. │ │ │ │

Rosh-Pinah │ 1882 │ 3800 │ 800 │ 48,096

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Yessod Ha-Maaleh │ 1883 │ 910 │ 300 │ 29,913

Mishmar Ha-Yarden │ 1890 │ 230 │ 100 │ 27,453

Ain-Seitun │ 1891 │ 509 │ 20 │ ――

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Metula │ 1896 │ 1350 │ 310 │ 69,685

Sedjera │ 1899 │ 1850 │ 200 │ ――

Mahanayim │ 1899 │ 100 │ 100 │ ――

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Milhamie │ 1902 │ 1350 │ 100 │ 74,100

Mescha │ 1902 │ 900 │ 200 │ 70,122

Yemma │ 1902 │ 2750 │ 400 │ 91,027

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Kinnereth │ 1908 │ 550 │ 80 │ 13,300

Delaika │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――

Mizpah │ 1908 │ 360 │ 40 │ ――

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Dagania │ 1909 │ 320 │ 30 │ ――

Migdal │ 1910 │ 450 │ 100 │ ――

Merchavyah │ 1911 │ 900 │ 100 │ ――

─────────────────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼────────

Poriah │ 1911 │ 350 │ 30 │ ――

│ │ │ │

IV. TRANS-JORDANIA. │ │ │ │

Bene Yehuda │ 1888 │ 315 │ 83 │ ――

¹ The Mikveh Israel Colony is situated outside of Jaffa, to the

south. The _Alliance Israélite Universelle_ has here a fine

and large agricultural school for Jews. At the time of our

visit――in 1914――about 150 pupils were enrolled. Some of them

we found in the well-kept garden, weeding and hoeing. Others

were engaged in planting through a newly planted vineyard.

Still another group were piling brush and rubbish; while a

considerable number were in classrooms undergoing just then

an examination in the theoretical branches of study. They

were a fine and manly-looking lot of young men and boys,

mostly Russian-Jews. The glow of health was on their cheeks.

They had none of the hunted and depressed look which has

been imprinted upon millions of Jews by persecution and

oppression. It seemed to us that, in a minor sense, these

young Jews were already lifting up their heads because

of the drawing nigh of the redemption of their land and

their nation. They looked as though it afforded them great

satisfaction to till the soil of the land, which some day

must be the happy home of their people. There was a quiet

modesty, coupled with justifiable pride, in their bearing.

LIST OF COLONIES IN 1913.

│ Year │

Name of the │ of │ # of │ Area in│ Kind of work,

colony. │ Start│ Souls│ Dounams│ institutions, etc.

─────────────────┼──────┼──────┼────────┼───────────────────────────

JUDEA. │ │ │ │

Mikveh Israel │ 1870 │ 150 │ 2,612 │ Agricultural School of

│ │ │ │ the “Alliance Israélite

│ │ │ │ Universelle”; 100

│ │ │ │ pupils, 15 teachers and

│ │ │ │ officials. Manager: M.

│ │ │ │ Krause.

Rishon le-Zion │ 1882 │ ―― │ ―― │ Plantations. School

│ │ │ │ for boys and girls.

│ │ │ │ Kindergarten. Religious

│ │ │ │ school “Netzah Israel.”

│ │ │ │ People’s Hall (Bet Am)

│ │ │ │ with library and

│ │ │ │ orchestra. Great wine

│ │ │ │ cellar and centre of

│ │ │ │ the wine trade.

Nachlath Jehuda │ 1913 │ 850 │ 11,402 │ Plantations. Founded in

│ │ │ │ commemoration of Dr.

│ │ │ │ Leo (Jehuda) Pinsker.

│ │ │ │ Dwellings for labourers.

│ │ │ │ The colony is situated

│ │ │ │ in the neighbourhood

│ │ │ │ of Rishon.

Rehobot │ 1890 │ 800 │ 14,193 │ Plantations; vines,

│ │ │ │ olives and almonds.

│ │ │ │ School for boys and

│ │ │ │ girls. Kindergarten.

│ │ │ │ Religious school

│ │ │ │ “Netzah Israel.”

│ │ │ │ Zoological collections

│ │ │ │ of Dr. Ah’roni.

│ │ │ │ Place of the yearly

│ │ │ │ celebration “Chagigah.”

Wadi el Chanin │ 1882 │ 200 │ 2,793 │ Plantations. School

(Ness Ziona) │ │ │ │ for boys and girls.

│ │ │ │ Vineyards and gardens

│ │ │ │ planted by J.C.A.

│ │ │ │ for the labourers

│ │ │ │ of the neighbouring

│ │ │ │ colonies. Kindergarten.

│ │ │ │ Bee-keeping.

Ekron │ 1884 │ 350 │ 12,723 │ Agriculture, Plantations.

(Maskeret Batja) │ │ │ │ School for boys and

│ │ │ │ girls. Kindergarten.

│ │ │ │ Religious school. Most

│ │ │ │ of the colonists were

│ │ │ │ engaged in agricultural

│ │ │ │ work in Russia.

Katrah (Gederah) │ 1884 │ 200 │ 5,632 │ Plantations, Agriculture.

│ │ │ │ School for boys and

│ │ │ │ girls. Religious school

│ │ │ │ “Netzah Israel.” This

│ │ │ │ colony was founded by

│ │ │ │ the Bilu pioneers.

Kastinie │ 1896 │ 150 │ 5,622 │ Agriculture. Religious

(Beer Tobia) │ │ │ │ school “Netzah Israel.”

│ │ │ │ This colony was founded

│ │ │ │ by the Odessa Chovevé

│ │ │ │ Zion.

Dschemama │ 1911 │ 25 │ 6,000 │ In the early stages of

(Ruchama) │ │ │ │ colonization. The land

│ │ │ │ was bought by two

│ │ │ │ companies of Russian

│ │ │ │ Jews, and is cultivated

│ │ │ │ by a group of labourers.

Bir Jacob │ 1907 │ 25 │ 2,048 │ Colony of labourers.

│ │ │ │ Plantations. Was founded

│ │ │ │ by Dagestan Jews.

Hulda │ 1909 │ 50 │ 1,890 │ Jewish National Fund

│ │ │ │ Domain. In this colony

│ │ │ │ the so-called Herzl

│ │ │ │ Forest (of olive trees)

│ │ │ │ in commemoration of

│ │ │ │ Herzl is planted.

Ben Shemen │ 1906 │ 120 │ 2,329 │ J.N.F. Domain and Farm.

│ │ │ │ Second part of the

│ │ │ │ Herzl Forest. Houses

│ │ │ │ for Yemenite Jews.

│ │ │ │ Agricultural institu-

│ │ │ │ tions and experiments

│ │ │ │ (Mr. I. Wilkanski).

Abu-Shushe │ 1912 │ ―― │ 7,000 │ In the early stages of

│ │ │ │ colonization.

Kafruriah │ 1912 │ 20 │ 5,000 │ In the early stages

│ │ │ │ of colonization.

│ │ │ │ Cultivated by a group

│ │ │ │ of labourers.

Artuf │ 1896 │ 70 │ 4,670 │ Agriculture. School

│ │ │ │ for boys and girls.

│ │ │ │ The first settlers

│ │ │ │ were Bulgarian Jews,

│ │ │ │ Sephardim. Now property

│ │ │ │ of Mr. Isaac Goldberg

│ │ │ │ of Wilna.

Mozah │ 1890 │ 40 │ 1,100 │ Agriculture, three-

│ │ │ │ quarters of an hour

│ │ │ │ from Jerusalem.

│ │ │ │ Synagogue. Mill. Vines

│ │ │ │ and vegetable-growing.

Dilb │ 1913 │ ―― │ 1,800 │ In the early stages of

│ │ │ │ colonization.

Petah-Tikvah │ 1878 │ ―― │ ―― │ Plantations. The largest

│ │ │ │ colony in the country.

│ │ │ │ Schools for boys and

│ │ │ │ girls. Centre of the

│ │ │ │ religious schools

│ │ │ │ (Dr. Auerbach). Home

│ │ │ │ orphans. Soup for

│ │ │ │ kitchen for labourers.

│ │ │ │ Agricultural school.

Machne Yehouda │ 1913 │2,500 │ 23,837 │ Settlement for Yemenite

│ │ │ │ Jews.

Yehoudieh │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ ――

Ain Ganim │ 1908 │ ―― │ 762 │ Settlement for labourers.

(Fedje) │ │ │ │ Founded by Chovevé Zion

│ │ │ │ for the Petah-Tikvah

│ │ │ │ labourers (a little

│ │ │ │ house and orchard for

│ │ │ │ every family).

Bir Ados │ 1912 │ 40 │ 4,220 │ In the early stages of

│ │ │ │ colonization.

Kinnereth Colony │ 1908 │ 25 │ 5,572 │ In the early stages of

│ │ │ │ cultivation.

Kinnereth Farm │ 1909 │ 60 │ 3,703 │ Farm of the Jewish

│ │ │ │ National Fund. Farm for

│ │ │ │ girls of the “Union of

│ │ │ │ Women.”

Dagania │ 1910 │ 45 │ 3,072 │ Farm of the Jewish

(Um d’shuni) │ │ │ │ National Fund. Farm for

│ │ │ │ girls of the “Union of

│ │ │ │ Women.”

Poriah │ 1911 │ 60 │ 3,703 │ Property of one of

│ │ │ │ the American Achuzah

│ │ │ │ Companies.

Mispah │ 1908 │ 50 │ 3,420 │ Agriculture.

(En Katab) │ │ │ │

Hattin │ ―― │ ―― │ 2,000 │ Agriculture.

Lubic │ ―― │ ―― │ 7,082 │ ――

Near Tiberus │ ―― │ ―― │ 830 │ ――

Migdal │ 1910 │ ―― │ 5,000 │ Farms and Plantations

│ │ │ │ belonging to a

│ │ │ │ Plantation Company.

Jessod Ha-Maaleh │ 1883 │ 225 │ 12,228 │ Agriculture. School for

│ │ │ │ boys and girls.

Rosh Pinah │ 1882 │ 650 │ 20,102 │ Agriculture and

│ │ │ │ Plantations. School for

│ │ │ │ boys and girls. Centre of

│ │ │ │ the Baron’s (I.C.A.’s)

│ │ │ │ administration for the

│ │ │ │ Colonies of Upper Galilee

│ │ │ │ (M. Kalvaryjski).

Machanaim │ ―― │ ―― │ 21,885 │ ――

Ain Zeitun │ 1891 │ ―― │ 6,016 │ ――

Mishmar │ 1884 │ 125 │ 7,596 │ Agriculture. School for

Ha-Yarden │ │ │ │ boys and girls.

Metulah │ 1896 │ 325 │ 16,907 │ School for boys and girls.

Bene Yehouda │ ―― │ 50 │ ―― │ ――

│ │ │ │

JAULAN. │ │ │ │

Lands in the │ 1886 │ ―― │ 70,000 │ Belong to the Jewish

Jaulan │ │ │ │ Colonization Association

│ │ │ │ ――not inhabited.

│ │ │ │

SAMARIA. │ │ │ │

Kafr Saba │ 1892 │ ―― │ 7,321 │ Plantations, mostly

│ │ │ │ almonds. Occupied

│ │ │ │ by a little group of

│ │ │ │ labourers.

Chederah │ ―― │ ―― │ ―― │ Agriculture, Plantations.

│ │ │ │ School for boys

│ │ │ │ and girls. In the

│ │ │ │ neighbourhood of the

│ │ │ │ “Garden of Samaria”

│ │ │ │ (Mohilewer) ethrogim

│ │ │ │ (citrons) and oranges.

│ │ │ │ Baron Rothschild’s

│ │ │ │ eucalyptus wood, the

│ │ │ │ greatest in the country.

Nachliel │ ―― │ 500 │ 31,355 │ Settlement for Yemenites.

Chederan Ann │ ―― │ ―― │ 1,200 │ In the early stages of

│ │ │ │ colonization.

Chefzibah │ ―― │ ―― │ 7,000 │ Property of the Company

│ │ │ │ “Agudath Netaim.” Olives

│ │ │ │ and almonds.

Kerkur and Bedus │ 1912 │ ―― │ 11,400 │ In the early stages of

│ │ │ │ colonization.

Zichron Jacob │ 1882 │ ―― │ ―― │ Plantations, Agriculture.

(Samarin) │ │ │ │ School for boys and

│ │ │ │ girls. Mostly Roumanian

│ │ │ │ Jews. Centre of the

│ │ │ │ Baron’s (the I.C.A.’s)

│ │ │ │ administration with

│ │ │ │ beautiful buildings.

│ │ │ │ Library. Hospital with

│ │ │ │ 20 beds.

Shveia │ 1888 │ ―― │ ―― │ School for boys and girls.

Bath Shlomo │ 1888 │1,150 │ 30,668 │ ――

Marah │ 1907 │ ―― │ ―― │ ――

Herbet Menshie │ 1911 │ ―― │ ―― │ ――

Tantura │ ―― │ ―― │ 300 │ ――

Atlit │ 1897 │ 50 │ 6,800 │ Experimental Station.

│ │ │ │

LOWER AND │ │ │ │

UPPER GALILEE. │ │ │ │

Merchavia (Fule) │ 1911 │ 100 │ 9,415 │ Co-operative Labourers.

Sedjera Farm │ 1899 │ 100 │ ―― │ Farm. Co-operative

│ │ │ │ Labourers.

Sedjera Colony │ 1900 │ 200 │ 17,717 │ Agriculture.

Mesha │ 1902 │ ―― │ ―― │ Agriculture.

Melhamieh │ 1902 │ 200 │ 16,023 │ Agriculture.

Yemma │ 1902 │ 300 │ 24,422 │ Agriculture.

Bet Jen │ 1904 │ 100 │ 4,549 │ Agriculture.

(Bet Gan) │ │ │ │

LXXIX.

THE MANIFESTO OF THE _BILU_ (1882)

IN 1882, in a little lodging-house in Galata, Constantinople, a meeting

of young Jews was held. Most of those present were students, artisans

or scholars. The assembly resulted in the formation of a Society called

_Bilu_, from the initials of the words: _Beth Iakob Lechu Venelcha_

(House of Jacob, come, let us go!). The Society had many branches, each

bearing some name well known in Jewish history, as _Kreti U’phleti_.

There was an artisans’ branch, called _He’charash Ve’hamasger_

(carpenters and locksmiths). From headquarters was issued the following

manifesto (in Hebrew):――

“To our Brethren and Sisters in the Exile, Peace be with you!

“‘If I help not myself, who will help me?’ (Hillel).

“Nearly two thousand years have elapsed since, in an evil hour, after

an heroic struggle, the glory of our Temple vanished in fire and our

Kings and chieftains changed their crowns and diadems for the chains

of exile. We lost our country, where dwelt our beloved sires. Into the

Exile we took with us, of all our glories, only a spark of the fire, by

which our Temple, the abode of our Great One, was engirdled, and this

little spark kept us alive while the towers of our enemies crumbled to

dust, and this spark leapt into celestial flame and shed light upon the

faces of the heroes of our race and inspired them to endure the horrors

of the Dance of Death and the tortures of the autos-da-fé. And this

spark is now again kindling and will shine for us, a true pillar of

fire going before us on the road to Zion, while behind us is a pillar

of cloud, the pillar of oppression threatening to destroy us. Sleepest

thou, O our nation? What hast thou been doing till 1882? Sleeping and

dreaming the false dream of Assimilation. Now, thank God, thou art

awakened from thy slothful slumber. The Pogroms have awakened thee

from thy charmed sleep. Thine eyes are open to recognize the cloudy

structure of delusive hopes. Canst thou listen silently to the flaunts

and the mockery of thine enemies? Wilt thou yield before the might

of...? Where is thine ancient pride, thine olden spirit? Remember that

thou wast a nation possessing a wise religion, a law, a constitution,

a celestial Temple, whose wall is still a silent witness to the glories

of the Past, that thy sons dwelt in Palaces and towers, and thy cities

flourished in the splendour of civilization, while these enemies of

thine dwelt like beasts in the muddy marshes of their dark woods. While

thy children were clad in purple and fine linen they wore the rough

skins of the wolf and the bear. Art thou not ashamed to submit to them?

“Hopeless is your state in the West; the star of your future is

gleaming in the East. Deeply conscious of all this, and inspired by the

true teaching of our great master Hillel: ‘If I help not myself, who

will help me?’ we propose to build the following society for national

ends:――

“1. The Society will be named _Bilu_, according to the motto: ‘House

of Jacob, come, let us go!’ It will be divided into local branches

according to the number of members.

“2. The seat of the Committee shall be Jerusalem.

“3. Donations and contributions shall be unfixed and unlimited.

“What we want:――

“1. A Home in our country. It was given to us by the mercy of God, it

is ours as registered in the archives of history.

“2. To beg it of the Sultan himself, and if it be impossible to obtain

this, to beg that at least we may be allowed to possess it as a state

within a larger state; the internal administration to be ours, to have

our civil and political rights, and to act with the Turkish Empire only

in foreign affairs, so as to help our brother Ishmael in his time of

need.

“We hope that the interests of our glorious nation will rouse the

national spirit in rich and powerful men, and that everyone, rich or

poor, will give his best labours to the holy cause.

“Greeting, dear brethren and sisters.

“Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one, and our Land, Zion,

is our own hope.

“God be with us!”

_The Pioneers of Bilu._

The last survivors of the _Bilu_ still in Palestine are: Israel

Belkind, S. Belkind, Mrs. Feinberg (_née_ Belkind), Dr. Chissin,

Drubin, Swerdloff, Leibowitz, Hurwitz and Zaladichin.――Of the veterans

of the _Chovevé Zion_ Colonization we met in 1914――to mention only a

few――Gissin in Petach Tikvah, the Stamper family (Stamper was one of

the first, and the most energetic settlers, he came from Roumania);

Shalit, Meerowitz, Lubman, Freimann in Rishon; Idelowitz, now in

Alexandria, managing the “Carmel” Wine business; Eisenberg, Goldin,

Hirschensohn, Mme. Basia Makow in Rechoboth, and of the old “Menucha

Ve-Nachla” (the Warsaw Colony) settlers: Bucharski, Padua, Weinstein,

Bresner, Rafalkes, Appel.

LXXX.

ZIONISM AND JEWISH ART

IT is somewhat difficult to distinguish between Jewish art, that is to

say between art expressing the Jewish national spirit, and ordinary art

cultivated by the Jews.

Is Jewish art possible to-day? National art requires a soil out of

which to issue, and a sky towards which to unfold. We――present-day

Jews――have neither. We are inhabitants of many countries, and our

thoughts ascend to different skies. Within our innermost soul we know

of no earth and no sky. We have no country to bear our hopes in its

lap and lend firmness to the tread of our feet, and we have no national

sun to bless our sowings and irradiate our day. National art requires

a homogeneous community out of which it arises and for which it exists.

We have merely fragments of a community, and as yet there is hardly

any stirring of the part to assemble into a whole. But without these

premisses national art cannot come into existence; it cannot be made.

It is no hothouse growth, but healthy, sapful plant life in a free

native atmosphere. No artificial conditions may be created for it, it

must come and develop with the progressing renascence.¹

¹ Martin Buber, _Jüd. Künst., Lesser Ury_.

Another question presents itself. Are, at present, Jewish artists

possible, i.e. artists who respond inwardly and in their works to

Jewish individuality? If we may answer this question in the affirmative,

the inner possibility of Jewish art is affirmed too. Because, as a

rule, two elements have to co-operate so that a national artist may

be evolved: a strain of national heredity, and a national environment;

the former consecutive, not acquired by experience, but brought in

unconsciously, the latter rather atmospheric, and up to a certain point

consciously experienced. Since, in the most favourable conditions,

present-day Judaism contains only the material and the elements of

transformation of national environment, a Jewish artist would have

to derive his national individuality chiefly from qualities received

through heredity. But this would tend to prove that the artistic

aptitude of the Jewish race is still aglow like live coal under ashes,

and that it only needs personalities gifted with creative energy, and

in whom this aptitude concentrates, condenses and transmutes into works,

to bring forth Jewish artists. Are Jewish artists possible nowadays? By

way of reply it may suffice to show that there are Jewish artists, or

rather that with many Jewish artists we have the impression that their

art has a national character.

It is very doubtful indeed whether any clear definition can be given

of Jewish national art equally acceptable from the standpoint of

the nationalist and that of the artist. We shall, therefore, confine

ourselves to a brief outline of the evolution of Jewish artistic

activity in painting and sculpture in modern times, without entering

into the old and much-discussed question of ancient Palestinian

Jewish painting, sculpture, architecture, etc., medieval Jewish

miniature-painting of a religious or semi-religious character and more

or less Jewish origin, and the arts of poetry and music cultivated by

Jews since remotest antiquity and bearing undoubtedly in some cases the

national character.

The sphere of art, particularly painting and sculpture, became

accessible to the Jews at the same time as the realm of modern science

and European culture and education, at the beginning of the nineteenth

century. The fugitives from the Ghetto began to devote themselves to

the study of art with more or less zeal, according to the opportunities

afforded and conditions prevailing in the countries in which they

lived――in Western Europe at an earlier period and in Eastern Europe

somewhat later. Having received their training in different countries,

they were naturally influenced by various schools of art. Some attained

great distinction and merit, deserving to be placed in the foremost

rank of European art, but these repudiated their Judaism, _e.g._

Munkácsy; others gained locally a high reputation; the majority of them,

however, did not rise above mere mediocrity.

Benjamin Ulmann, an Alsatian, born in Strasburg, 1829, was a historical

and portrait painter of some merit; Jean Jules Worms, born in Paris,

1832, painted genre-pictures with a good deal of animation; Leopold

Pollack, born in Lodenitz, Bohemia, 1809, was a genre-painter of much

refinement. He was an artist possessed of various accomplishments, who

gained distinction in artistic circles as a “Slav”; Felix Schlesinger,

born in Frankfurt O/M., 1814, and educated at Paris, became a famous

French painter and was much appreciated as a genre-painter; Emil Lévy,

born in Paris, 1826, deserves mention as a painter of idyllic scenery

that showed considerable skill combined with simplicity; Louis

Neustaeter, born in Munich, 1829 (_d._ 1899), achieved a reputation

as a portrait painter; Felix Possart, born in Munich, 1837, was a most

versatile popular painter; Nathanael Sichel, born in Mainz, 1843, was

a historical painter of great talent; Eugene Benjamin Fischel, born in

Paris, 1821 (_d._ 1895), was a historical painter (“The Arrival at the

Inn” at the Luxembourg Museum since 1863), and devoted himself later on

to painting of miniatures; Eduard Bendemann, born in Berlin, 1811 (_d._

1889) was a painter of good taste and highly artistic accomplishments:

he painted for the most part historical pictures, some of which

are hung in German museums; Carl Jacoby, born in Berlin, 1853,

distinguished himself among German painters of his time for his

remarkable correctness in drawing; Friedrich Friedlaender, born in

Vienna, 1825 (_d._ 1895), displayed the peculiar style of “Viennois”

painting of his time; Toby Rosenthal, born in New Haven, U.S.A., 1848,

was a disciple of Pilloty, and endeavoured to emulate his master;

Herman Junker, Frankfurt (_b._ 1838); Karl Blosz, Munich; Edmund Edel,

Charlottenburg; Julius Ester, Munich; August Gross, Vienna; Tullo

Massarini, Rome; Albert Raudnitz, Munich; Ernest Raudnitz, Paris;

Emanuel Spitzer, Munich; Ernst Nelson, Berlin, and others are known

more or less as painters of various subjects.

The most notable of Jewish sculptors of the earliest period were:

Antoine Samuel Adam Salomon, born in La Grete, France, 1818; Max

Klein, born in Hungary, 1847; Josef Rona of Budapest; Adolf Huszar of

Budapest, among whose important works should be mentioned the famous

monument of the Hungarian national poet, Petöfi; Johann Silbernagel

of Vienna, famous for his charming little statuettes; Charles Samuel,

born in Brussels, 1862, who executed the monument of the great Belgian

statesman, Frère d’Orban; Moses Jacob Ezekiel, born in Richmond,

Virginia, U.S.A., 1844, who established a great reputation in America

and in Italy, and others.

It cannot definitely be said that this imposing host of artists

belonging to the Jewish people who have enriched Art, during a

comparatively short period――proving in that way the Jewish capacity for

art――have in their works revealed a pronounced Jewish spirit. Jewish

artists and their works are scattered all over the world, and there is

no possibility even of bringing copies of their works together in one

collection, so as to ascertain _ad oculos_ whether there is, in spite

of all the differences of schools and influences of environment, any

trace of a special character to distinguish them from other collections

of this kind, as the special character can only be distinguished when

a number of pictures can be reviewed together. Seeing that the racial

element is no doubt a potent factor in art, the work of the Huszars of

Budapest, the Massarinis of Rome and the Possarts of Munich must have

something in common because, after all, in the depths of their being,

they are neither Magyars, nor Italians, nor Germans, but Jews. On the

other hand, one may say that these Jews, having become an assimilated

unit of the peoples among whom they had lived, been educated and

worked, have no longer anything in common with and do not represent

any specific school of Jewish art.

Another question is, whether the aforementioned Jewish artists have

been engaged in presenting Jewish subjects (which is a question

altogether removed from the previous, more fundamental question). This

question can be easily answered: Jewish subjects were dealt with by

Eduard Bendemann (“Boaz and Ruth,” “The Mourning Jews,” “Jeremias”);

Emile Lévy “The Feast of Tabernacles” and other pictures); Moses Jacob

Ezekiel (various statues of great artistic value).

Apart from these artists who proved that Jews were capable of becoming

more or less important artists, there were even at an earlier period

some who not only displayed generally great artistic skill, but also

gave evidence of understanding something about Jewish art.

First and foremost among these pioneers was Henry Leopold Levy, born

in Paris, 1840, who painted “Joash saved from the Massacre of the

Grandsons of Athaliah” (1867), “Hebrew Captives weeping over the

Ruins of Jerusalem” (1869), and other pictures. Being, so to speak,

a divinely inspired artist, his works give proof of profound emotions

and transcendental beauty and force. His mastery of dramatic effect,

his extent and depth of passion remind one of an old Hebrew prophet.

Moritz Daniel Oppenheim, who was known as “Professor Oppenheim”

of Frankfurt (1801‒82), is not of much importance from an artistic

standpoint. In his time he was one of the most prominent illustrators

of Jewish patriarchy. His “Pictures of Jewish Life” give the impression

of great devotion and have gained considerable popularity through

thousands of reproductions.¹

¹ The Jews of the Continent offered a splendid album, bound in

marone velvet, inlaid with gilt bronze, in 1842 to Sir Moses

Montefiore after his return from the East, in commemoration

of his efforts on behalf of the persecuted Jews of Damascus.

On each cover is a painting by Jewish artists. About these

paintings the authors of the address――which was signed by

1490 subscribers――say:――

“The consecration of Joshua by the legislator Moses, as the

leader of the armies of Israel, was the first step towards

creating Israel a separate state. The pencil of Professor

Oppenheim’s genius has here worthily represented this

event. Israel’s mourning at the streams of Babel, painted

by the masterly hand of Bendemann, brings in the background

before our spirit, Jerusalem in flames, and the house of

God in ruins. Thus both representations combine whatever

constitutes Israel’s pride and grief; whatever in the pages

of history is capable of inspiring the champion of Israel

with courage and zeal” (_Allg. Zeit. d. Judenthums_, 10

September, 1842).

A tragic figure in the annals of art was Simeon Solomon, born in

Bristol, 1834 (d. in London, 1905). At an early age he showed signs of

artistic ability and――as his biographers say――“came under the influence

of D. G. Rossetti.” His drawings and paintings developed the mystical

and sensuous tendencies of the pre-Raphaelite school to the extreme. He

published a number of designs for the “Song of Songs” and reproductions

of the drawings illustrating Jewish ceremonies. Keen critics of art

ascribe to his genius a stimulating originality which influenced the

whole pre-Raphaelite artistic school.

The pinnacle of Art, speaking generally, was reached by three prominent

masters: Joseph Israels (1824‒1911), Max Liebermann, and Solomon J.

Solomon, R.A.

It was Joseph Israels who succeeded in representing the twilights of

the Dutch atmosphere in all their individuality and tender charm. To

understand how to portray Nature and Humanity, and more especially

suffering Humanity, with equal care and art, and to bring into relief

their organic interaction; to represent rural scenes, not as a stage

setting but as an atmosphere, not forcible but imbued with poetic

feeling; to invest human nature with a breath of such delicate lyricism

that the impression created is one of love rather than of mere beauty;

that is the chief characteristic of Israels’ art, which to us seems so

entirely Jewish. It is the enchanting melancholy, the gentle, delicate

longing, the half-uttered tones, the soft harmonies which are divined

rather than seen or heard that make Israels appear so extraordinarily

modern. It is not merely because Israels was a Jew, not merely because

his greatest works represent Jewish subjects, but because his art was

characterized by a rich poetic fancy, by kindliness and melancholy,

and at the same time by a priestly solemnity and a great simplicity

which harmonize so wonderfully with the deepest emotions of the Jewish

Psyche, that we are justified in regarding Israels as a national-Jewish

painter. We are acquainted with the Jewish Rabbi, the calm, discerning,

introspective thinker, seeking for the great _ethos_ of existence in

all the passing phenomena of life. Joseph Israels was a painter-rabbi.

He painted with the same fervour as a _midrash_ scholar would teach,

with which a Jehuda-ha-Levi would sing. A “Gaon” in the domain of Art,

a “Baal-Shem” who works spells, causing angels to appear not by means

of prayers and texts; not by means of cabbalistic incantations, but

by means of colours, light and shade effects. Where so visible as

in Israels, creations are the groups of Divine sparkle flying about

the world, the creative embodiment of the “naked souls” thirsting for

existence, peace and incarnation of which the Cabbala speaks with so

much enthusiasm and of which Chassidism dreams.

In all his paintings Israels succeeded in effecting a concentration in

composition which focussed all interest upon the soul, upon sensation.

Israels has not been content to fix by the masterly stroke of the brush

a moment of dramatic intensity surprised in his model [as for instance,

in the _Writer of the Law_ (_The Thora-Writer_)], or the influences

of the moment upon the emotions and expressions of the subject, but

the soul itself and the whole soul-state. This directness was attained

by Israels through the double study of man and his destiny in direct

relation to nature.

Encyclopædias give the names of his masters and types in Amsterdam and

Paris. But had Israels been a mere follower of his masters, then his

name would not be found in encyclopædias. For decades, for many decades,

he, the versatile painter, devoted himself to historical painting.

No catalogue has rescued the titles from oblivion. When questioned

concerning his early works, he answered the present writer with one of

his characteristic subtle smiles: “How should I know where they are?”

It was not until he had attained full maturity, or according to general

ideas, after he had well passed maturity, that Israels became what

he now is: he found himself after the sun of his life had passed the

meridian.

Max Liebermann regards himself as a disciple of Israels, but is

considered by others to be superior in the brilliancy and versatility

of his genius. He was practically the father of the German “Secession,”

and is the greatest living painter in Germany and one of the greatest

in the world. Solomon J. Solomon is one of the most celebrated English

painters. Dignified and serene, he has a wonderfully extensive and

many-sided grasp of his art. As to Jewish art, it is a disputable

point whether Liebermann’s pictures bear indications of a pronounced

Jewish character――some writers having maintained that such is the case.

Israels’ “Thora-Writer,” and particularly his “Son of an Old People”

――which is justly supposed to have been inspired by the new national

movement――appeal undoubtedly to the Jewish consciousness by their

exceptional impressiveness. The picture which established Solomon J.

Solomon’s reputation was his “Samson and Delilah,” while his “Allegory”

of 1904 is said to depict the triumph of Judaism as the last and only

religion of the world.

In closing the review of this epoch, mention must be made of Lesser Ury

of Berlin, an artist of great severity and sadness, whose “Jeremias”

and other pictures display some originality singularly independent of

influences from without――in which fact some critics thought they could

trace some visions of Jewish awakening.

A similar change was noticeable in Eastern Europe during the period

of transition which began there some decades later than in the West.

Here, too, some young Jews entered the academies of art just as others

went to the universities for scientific study, but, of course, with

that difference in the prospects of success which distinguish art from

science, that art depends more on natural gifts than on capacity to

study. Some Polish, Galician and Russian Jews pursued their studies

in Cracow or Petrograd, some others studied at Munich and Paris. Some

deliberately emphasizing their national origin and country, others

showing, through their new environment, a leaning towards a diversity

of practical and theoretical motives.

Joseph Redlich (1821‒81) was an engraver of world-wide fame during

the first half of the century. Alexander Lesser of Warsaw (1819‒91),

the son of a Jewish merchant, was described as “the father of Polish

historical painting.” Of no importance as a painter, the curious fact

remains that this typical Polish Jew was in his time appreciated as

a painter of Polish national history (the first and most important

publishers of illustrated books and periodicals in Warsaw were Merzbach,

Gliksberg, Lewenthal, the son of a Hebrew teacher, and Wolf, who was of

Jewish origin).

Leopold Horowitz, born in Hungary in 1831, who lived many years in

Warsaw, and since the expulsion of foreign Jews from Russia in Vienna,

has the twofold distinction of being an eminent portrait painter

of European fame, and a well-known and noble-minded Jew. His Jewish

picture “The Ninth of Ab” (the anniversary of the Destruction of the

Temple) is a work of grand style, exquisitely finished; his portraits,

too, gained highest praise. He is much interested in Jewish matters,

and was prominently associated with the foundation of the “Jewish

Museum” at Vienna.

One of the greatest painters of the last generation in Russia was

Isaac Levitan, born in 1860 (d. 1900), the master of Russian landscape.

This Jew of the Russian Ghetto taught Russian artists to abandon mere

topography for a poetical treatment of landscape scenery. He did not

only paint admirably the rich purple of the northern sunset, the thin

clouds, dawn and darkness, but also the very soul of the landscape.

A writer in the (anti-Jewish) _Novoye Vremia_ had to admit that “this

full-blooded Jew knew as no other man, how to make us realize and

love our plain and homely country-scene.” Levitan’s pictures adorn the

Tretjakov Museum at Moscow, and have the right of undisturbed shelter

in that city that was not unconditionally granted to their originator.

Leonid Pasternak, born in 1862, is an important Russian painter,

particularly known for his connections with Tolstoi.

The most wonderful romance of Jewish vitality and force of

self-regeneration is the story of Mark Antokolski (1842‒1900).

Whatever modern critics may think of the special value of his

master-works――classical or pseudo-classical――from an up-to-date point

of view, the fact remains that this Lithuanian Jew, who was a son of

poor parents at Vilna, brought up in the atmosphere of the _Cheder_

(religious school) and the Vilna _Schulhof_, which is the most typical

and best known centre of what is distinctly Jewish, is recognized, as

far as sculpture is concerned, in Paris the metropolis of art. He

introduced Russian sculpture into European art and his works have been

highly appreciated, seeing with what intense delight and admiration

they have been regarded by the highest in his native land, where he was

entrusted with the task of executing the greatest national monuments,

but his works have also received the highest praise throughout the

world. Bernstamm Aronson and ♦Ginzburg, distinguished by exceptional

maturity in study and powers of concentration, the former an eminent

master where powers of imagination and fascination were concerned, the

latter of an observant, subtle intelligence, which proved so useful to

him in the careful reproduction of details dealing with nature. They

are devoted to the art of sculpture in Paris and in Russia.

♦ “Guenzburg” replaced with “Ginzburg” for consistency

All these artists proved that Jews can be artists. Jewish art in

Jewish subjects was here and there to be observed. Isidore Kaufmann,

a Hungarian Jew, born in 1853, executed some appreciable work in

genre-painting of Polish-Jewish life. He displayed in his “Visit of the

Rabbi,” “Talmud Students” and other little pictures, a great simplicity

and freshness, and a delightful sense of humour, but these pictures,

humorous as they are, have merely anecdotes for the outlines of their

scheme. A real awakening of Jewish art in a higher sense was left to

the present period of the Jewish National Revival and Zionism.

This new period was inaugurated by two Polish-Galician Jewish artists,

who, while their respective artistic achievements were of different

value, were instrumental in opening new perspectives for Jewish art;

these were Moritz Gottlieb and Ephraim Moses Ha’Cohen Lilien.

Moritz Gottlieb, born in a small village in Galicia, about 1860, was

a disciple of the great Polish national painter Jan Matejko. Of great

imaginative power and intense feeling, a real artist, he succeeded

in mastering the intricacies of modern painting. He soon became a

favourite of his tutor, and was much admired in artistic circles at

Cracow, where his works were immensely appreciated on account of the

suave and well-balanced style of his pictures. His prospects of a great

future increased with his popularity. It is said――_se non é vero é ben

trovato_――that when he expressed his intention of devoting himself to

Polish historical painting, Matejko remarked: “My son, you are a Jew;

you cannot weep on the graves of Polish kings; leave it to others.”

So Gottlieb devoted himself to Jewish subjects, the most important

of which was his admirable “Jew Praying in the Synagogue.” This

masterpiece so full of inspiration was more than a picture; it was

a message to Jewish artists, one of the most simple and impressive:

“You shall go back to your own people; you shall find and see your own

greatness and glory; you shall be your own selves again!”

The hand of death removed him in early manhood――at the end of the

eighties of the last century――Moritz Gottlieb’s name was cherished by

the new generation of Jewish artists as that of a noble pioneer who had

ushered in the era of Jewish art.

About ten years later, Lilien, having terminated his studies at Munich,

settled in Berlin, and got in touch with the young Zionist intellectual

movement. By means of his illustrations in black and white, which

combined modernism with archaic forms, permeated by the Hebrew spirit,

he soon succeeded in introducing a new element in artistic skill, and

played a prominent part in shaping the modern tendencies of a somewhat

independent young Jewish art. As to the artistic value and originality

of his remarkable and exceedingly fruitful art, opinions may differ

considerably, yet there is no doubt, as a master of an unique style

of drawing, touch, finish and execution, and as a pioneer and advocate

of methods expressing Jewish aspirations, types and ideas, he is

unrivalled, and his works have had a far-reaching effect in encouraging

Jewish artists to devote themselves to the extension of Jewish art on

a self-dependent and self-inspiring basis. The message of Gottlieb and

the impulses of Lilien can be easily traced, even among the important

Jewish artists who have been their contemporaries or have lived at a

later period and have occupied honoured positions in general as well as

in Jewish art.

Samuel Hirschenberg, Leopold Pilichowski and Henry Glitzenstein form,

with all the distinction of their individualistic and high artistic

qualifications, a sort of triumvirate in the realm of art. All these

came from the same country――Poland――and from the same district of

that country; they were contemporaries in age as well as in their

outlook on life, seeing that all these represent the new, emancipated

intellectual type of the Polish Jew with a touch of Jewish nationalism

of the eighties, who differ so distinctly from the old type of the

“assimilation” Jews of a previous period.

Samuel Hirschenberg excelled in the painting of a variety of subjects.

His distinctness and fine blending of colours, his skill in creating

broad and accurate outlines of figures are indeed remarkable. He

was a modest, earnest and most industrious worker of really artistic

aspirations. He had a strong predisposition for big canvases and was

averse from anecdotal subjects. He was unable to paint anything of

a small type. The Jewish people, its suffering, and his persecuted

brethren formed the subjects of his brush. “Golus” (copies of which are

well known) is a specimen of his art and outlook. Of keen perception,

the life-blood of Jewry pulsing through his veins, he painted his

“Wandering Jew,” presenting with tragic force the synthesis and the

resentment caused by Jewish Martyrdom.

He was one of those who had penetrated most deeply and powerfully the

tragedy of the _Golus_, with all its great and desperate dreadfulness

and all its abysmal horror, who felt it within their innermost marrow

and blood, who went through life with its sad brand on their brows. The

brush with which he painted was the master’s heart, and the colour――his

blood, the warm life-blood. The blood which has been flowing for

thousands of years from the ever-open wound of the creative genius

and of the nation. He dreamt to base the future upon sacred ruins.

He deemed as nothing the laurels of the _Golus_ as compared with the

feeble light which began to glow more and more vividly far away in the

old country and in his bosom, which overflowed with sadness and longing.

He was a priest of art and a priest of the Jewish renaissance. During

the last years of his life he went to Jerusalem to take part in the art

work of Bezalel, and died there――as he had lived――upright and resigned

to his fate, hiding from the world the sufferings of a noble soul.

Leopold Pilichowski is quite different in artistic temperament.

Cheerful, thorough and pleasant, guided by a truly artistic instinct,

he possesses the natural gifts of an eminent artist, being a keen

observer of life, of charming personality, and an enthusiastic worker.

He achieved a high reputation by reason of his admirable blending of

colours, his excellent and attractive style, the life-like expression

of his portraits and the careful attention bestowed upon details. In

France he attained high distinction, and recently also in this country

where his works have found considerable appreciation. But the favourite

subject of his art is Polish Jews. His picture entitled “Wearied,” the

two figures of old wearied Polish Jewish pilgrims――is in conception

and execution a masterpiece; this picture has been so frequently

reproduced that it is now one of the most popular and most impressive

Jewish pictures of the time. He expresses more forcibly than any

other contemporary painter the intense fervour of Jewish prayer. He

endeavours to penetrate the secrets of Polish-Jewish pathos in his

charming picture “The Feast of our Rejoicing” and in another, entitled

“Sorrow” which, probably, no other painter would have been able to

understand. He describes and creates an historical record for the type

of the Polish Jew as he knew him――in the fervour of his prayers, in the

glory of his devotion, in the attractiveness of his misery.

Henry Glitzenstein, who now lives in Rome, is the son of a _Melamed_

(religious teacher) in the little village of Turek, Poland. In Italy

and throughout Europe, where his works have at several exhibitions

gained highest distinction, he is recognized as being one of the

greatest sculptors of the age. In ability, taste, gracefulness,

originality and invention, he is a sculptor-poet, who excels all

Jewish sculptors that ever lived, and even many non-Jewish artists of

standing. It is not presumptuous to assert that Glitzenstein is one of

the most modern sculptors, whose modernism does not merely amount to

the acceptance of a certain “fad” but means original and constructive

ability. He, too, is a dreamer of the Ghetto, but at the same time a

master of a living art. His “Messiah,” the incarnation of the mighty,

asleep yet about to awaken to any movement towards the Jewish future,

is a work of an enormous conception.

Hirschenberg’s “Wandering Jew,” Pilichowski’s “Wearied” and

Glitzenstein’s “Messiah,” though undoubtedly independent individual

works, have yet to a certain extent been influenced by the new national

spirit set aglow by Gottlieb and Lilien, and by the literature of the

Jewish Revival.

To this category of Jewish artists belongs Hermann Struck, who combines

artistic refinement with orthodox Jewish devotion and Zionist

aspirations, a master of the first water, who has executed etchings

of Israels’ works and those of other great artists, and has a fine

record for original portrait painting, Palestinian landscapes, and

other drawings of exceptional skill; Moses Maimon, a distinguished

Russian-Jewish painter, the author of the very popular “Marranos in

Spain,” and of other pictures of value; Jehuda Epstein, who has given

proof of possessing great power of imagination by his great sketch

“Maccabean,” a picture made for Herzl, who had it in his studio;

Minkowski (Warsaw), whose Pogrom pictures are of really artistic value;

Pffeffermann (Pan), a man of considerable artistic achievement, who has

been engaged on the teaching staff of the Bezalel; Weinles and Altmann

(Poland), who are responsible for various pictures and studies of

Jewish subjects; Wachtel (Galicia), who emulated Lilien; and Hochmann

(Cracow), who was guided by Glitzenstein’s works. In Russia there

are the painters: A. A. Maneritsch, M. L. Schafrom, A. B. Lachowski,

and the sculptors: F. Bloch, M. L. Dillon, J. A. Troupianski, of the

younger generation, and――of the older generation――Gabowitsch, J. J.

Brodski, who represent modern Jewish art. In the important colony of

artists and art students in Paris, including Leo Minsenberg, Leopold

Gottlieb, Cylkow, Markus, Kramstück, Elie Nadelman and others of Warsaw,

a real Jewish awakening has been observed, particularly among the

younger members of the colony.

Special mention should be made of the well-known landscape painter

Abraham Neumann of Sierpce, Poland, who has a fine long record of

artistic work. He participated most actively in stimulating Jewish

artistic activity in Poland and Galicia.

With regard to sculpture, Alfred Nossig has also to be mentioned.

Nossig can boast, among his various accomplishments, also that of

an able sculptor _con amore_. In some of his works he has dealt

impressively with national Jewish subjects.

Another Jewish sculptor of note should be mentioned, _viz._ F. Beer

of Paris (died in 1910). He was an ardent Zionist and a great personal

friend of Herzl, and contributed his share to Zionist artistic work

(the badges of the Congress).

In this country, Will Rothenstein has become very popular through

several of his pictures devoted to scenes of Jewish life; Isaac

Snowman and his brother Louis [Conrad] are artists of recognized

accomplishments, and have painted valuable pictures of this kind.

Wolmark is well known as an artist of exquisite taste and idealistic

aspirations. His inclination has led him to the rendering of subjects

dealing with Jewish life, so admirably dealt with in some of the

pictures. He is a strong individualist and truth-seeker, and has in

recent times manifested a decided inclination for futurism, of which

he is one of the champions. Jacob Epstein is the most representative

of sculptors and combines genius with technical skill.

The foregoing survey of Jewish activity forces us to the following

conclusions:――

I. The numerous Jewish works of art, especially in painting and

sculpture of such marked ability, with no previous history, patronage

or encouragement, and produced under most unfavourable circumstances

in a comparatively short time, showed that Jewish genius was as much

capable of development in the sphere of art as in music, poetry or the

drama, and has made its influence felt at every opportunity.

II. The great artistic value――with few exceptions――of the works

of these masters who either were acquainted with the older Jewish

traditions, like Israels, H. P. Levy, Ezekiel, or who had come direct

from the Ghetto, like Antokolski, compared with the Assimilationist

Jews who were either satellites or plagiarists, proves that, even

during the period previous to the present national Revival, Jewish

consciousness (like any other deep racial consciousness) has stimulated

the vigour and originality of artistic activity.

III. The beneficial effects of the National movement in Jewish artistic

craftsmanship can be observed in two directions:――

(a) in the artistic value of the productions, especially with

regard to Jewish subjects, and

(b) in the degree of influence of the artistic activity

on the Jewish people.

With regard to the first point, the progress made can be easily

gauged by comparing, for instance, Bendemann and Emil Levy with

Gottlieb, or Oppenheim with Lilien, and so on. Jewish life at the

period of Assimilation, like the literature of that period was

presented essentially in apologetic terms and addressed itself always,

consciously or unconsciously, to Gentiles, as if to say: “Think of us,

we are really not as detestable as you believe us to be, we are rather

attractive”; but, on the other hand, national artists say: “We are what

we are,” and more than that, seeing that to deal with Jewish subjects

from a national standpoint is self-centred, and therefore more of a

psychological question. We are what we are, neither better nor worse

than others: we endeavour to know ourselves, and we want to see our

images reflected in our own art. Oppenheim’s Jews are so idealistically

exaggerated that one would not recognize them if one were to meet them

in their shops on the “Zeil” in Frankfurt, while Gottlieb’s Jews are

so orientally peculiar, that meeting them in the market-place dealing

with tapestry one would have the impression that these dealers are

descendants of oriental princes, although the artist had no intention

of producing this impression.

The second point is still more important. The art of the period of

Assimilation, like the active character of Assimilation, is essentially

individualistic and aristocratic, while the art of the period is

decidedly of a collective and democratic character. Logically and

psychologically, there can be no movement of Assimilation in masses,

because Assimilation _must_ be opposed to cohesion or a movement for

the cohesion of Jews, except for ritual purposes. A Jew becomes a

doctor, a lawyer or a painter――the more he succeeds in his career among

Gentiles, the less he is brought in contact with the Jewish masses:

nobility of character or generosity may make him a philanthropist

to the masses whom he may endeavour to patronize; on the other hand,

the absence of these qualities will make him wholly indifferent, but

anyhow the chain of natural and simple intercourse is broken. This was

necessarily the course of Assimilation in every direction, and also

showed us the relationship of Jewish artists to the Jewish masses.

All those Huszars, Ronas, Schlesingers and Pollacks had no inclination

and no possibility whatever of acquiring the artistic education of

the people from whom they sprang. In this respect the situation has

considerably improved owing to the national movement, _Chovevé Zion_

and Zionism. Now, many Jewish artists live among the people, and are

influenced by them. Not only in Russia, where there is now a strong

movement for propaganda ♦and mutual help among Jewish artists (under

the tutorship of Ilja Ginzburg)――a movement which was unthinkable in

the time of the Assimilation tendencies――but even in Paris a tendency

has made itself felt in this direction in the Jewish colony of artists

in recent times. Among the masses in the East of London, too, there is

an Organization called _Ben Uri_, for the propaganda of art. Lectures

are arranged, instruction is given, and popular articles are published

on various subjects of art. That popularity is due to the activity of

the publishing firms _Phœnix_, _Libanon_, the monthly _Ost und West_,

and other publications.

♦ “amd” replaced with “and”

Summing up the effects of relationship between Jewish art and Zionism,

we see that Zionism has played its part in the revival of Jewish art.

On the other hand, Jewish art has contributed much to the propaganda of

Zionism. It cannot be too often repeated that the creative and active

forces of Zionism have always been literature, education and art:

they have stimulated the people’s hearts and minds, they have opened

the people’s eyes and enlisted their generosity. One of the greatest

agencies of Zionist propaganda has been the Bezalel, the work of

the enthusiastical Jewish artist Boris Schatz, who is in his own art

a disciple of Antokolski, but who stands himself, unrivalled, as a

pioneer in the propaganda of Jewish artistic activity in Palestine.

It is not hazarding too much to assert, that with an important

development of colonization and education in Palestine we are going

to see a really original Jewish art. But even in the Diaspora,

the awakening of Jewish consciousness will ennoble, popularize and

strengthen Jewish art. Jewish artists should not pursue any particular

tendency in addition to their own art; they should be only artists,

and true to themselves. Art must be free, and being free it will――as a

necessary and natural consequence――eventually offer ample scope for the

national genius.

LXXXI.

PROGRESS OF ZIONISM IN THE WEST SINCE 1897

1. _England_

IN England Zionist propaganda was very much hampered for want of an

influential and well-supported Hebrew press and literature――which,

after all, form the most powerful factor in the national propaganda,

and an intellectual weapon in the struggle, the more so because through

them can be maintained a direct closer touch and personal relations

with Palestine. These two factors have made Zionism in Eastern Europe

something more than a formal organization governed by certain statutes;

it has now become a living force. Zionist propaganda there has also

suffered from want of extensive university groups that have brought a

great educational force into the Movement in continental countries. In

England, where class divisions are so pronounced, in ideas, language

and customs, and where the pressure of the Jewish problem from outside

is not felt, the difficulties in the way of Zionist propaganda were

naturally much greater. Besides these difficulties, there was another

fact that did not fail to influence the position. The centralization

of the financial institutions and the greater facility for political

organization were no doubt of considerable advantage, as they afforded

English Zionism in this respect means of propaganda not accessible

to the Movement in other countries. But there was also an important

drawback, namely, the Movement has been concentrated on these two

appeals. The consequences of such a development manifested themselves

in two directions: in the influence upon the Organization, and in

the effect on non-members of the Organization. As for the internal

influences, although the general Zionist work might have appeared here

as elsewhere to be of the greatest importance, nevertheless it must

be admitted that the financial institutions necessarily absorbed more

energy, and carried more weight, while observers from outside were

faced more directly than in any other country with this particular

aspect of the Zionist Organization. In Eastern Europe, the public

outside of Zionism was also made aware of the existence of a political

scheme and financial matters; but what they realized most immediately

and forcibly was above all an intellectual activity, a new system

of education, a new attitude towards all questions of the day and a

new and close relationship with Palestine. In England, outsiders saw

little or nothing of what others saw elsewhere. All they realized was

a political scheme which they naturally endeavoured to magnify and to

exaggerate for the sake of controversy, clinging obstinately to their

own opposition to “Utopia,” and looking at the comparatively meagre

financial means as something that was unable to impress them to any

great extent.

Yet they were greatly mistaken. Zionism in England was in its

essentials not in the least different from what it is in Russia or

anywhere else. It must be admitted that it has not yet sufficiently

developed all the various branches of its activity, but this is

not due to a difference in its principle, but to the divergence in

local conditions for which the idea is not responsible. If all its

potentialities have not yet been developed, there is no reason why they

should not be so very soon. Notwithstanding all kinds of difficulties

and domestic controversies, Zionism in England was propagated and

furthered by a great number of able workers. Among those who took a

leading part in the work in England since the earliest period may be

found: the Haham Dr. Moses Gaster, Joseph Cowen, Herbert Bentwich, the

late S. B. Rubenstein, L. J. Greenberg, Jacob de Haas, Jacob Moser,

Charles Dreyfus, the late Rabbi A. Werner, the late A. Vecht, the late

A. Lozinsky, the late A. Ginzberg, L. Kessler, Percy Baker, the late J.

Massel, E. Ish-Kishor, M. Shire, J. Cohen-Lask, Rev. J. K. Goldbloom,

the late Rev. David Wasserzug, Dr. S. Fox, E. W. Rabbinowicz, Miss H.

Weisberg, Dr. Moses Umanski, H. M. Raskin, H. Comor, the late H. M.

Benoliel, Solomon Cohen, E. Guilaroff, and others.

Somewhat later――not exactly in the literal sense――the older leaders

were joined by new workers of influence and eminent ability. The

most notable are: Dr. Ch. Weizmann, Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rev. Isaiah

Raffalovich, Leon Simon, Harry Sacher, Norman Bentwich, Albert M.

Hyamson, Dr. S. Brodetsky, S. Landman, Leonard Stein, Rev. M. H. Segal,

Bertram Benas, Joseph Jacobs, Paul Goodman, Israel Cohen, Dr. Joseph

Hochman, Samuel Cohen, Israel Sieff, Simon Marks, Dr. Salis Daiches,

F. S. Spiers, and others. In University and intellectual circles also

important progress in Zionist thought could be perceived. One of the

most prominent of the intellectual Zionists is the Haham Dr. Gaster. He

was born at Bucharest in 1857. Having matriculated there, he proceeded

to the Jewish Seminary, Breslau, where in due course he received his

rabbinical diploma. He is also a Doctor of Philosophy of the University

of Leipsic. He published numerous important works on the Roumanian

language and literature, and on the subject of folklore, on which he

is one of the first authorities. He has written text-books for general

and Jewish schools in Roumania. His compendium of Scripture history has

been adopted as a standard work throughout the country. He produced the

first excellent translation of the Hebrew Prayer Book into Roumanian.

In 1885 he left Roumania and came to England, where he was appointed

Haham of the Spanish and Portuguese Congregations in succession to

the late Haham Dr. Artom (1887). This office he resigned in 1918.

He brought new life into those congregations and largely aided by

his valuable literary work in the promotion of oriental studies in

England. Gaster was an ardent Zionist long before the First Congress.

Profoundly touched by the unfortunate position of the Jews in Roumania,

he assisted in establishing the first Jewish colony in Palestine,

Samarin (Zichron Jacob)――and organized meetings in Roumania which were

addressed by Laurence Oliphant and others. Indeed it was the part he

took in these matters that, in some measure, led to his expulsion from

Roumania. In England he joined the Zionist Organization from its very

beginning. His learned speeches and writings gave a great impetus to

the propaganda.

Herbert Bentwich, a zealous and devoted supporter of the Jewish

colonization in Palestine, was as well known in the _Chovevé Zion_

movement as he is in the Zionist Organization. He was the organizer

and leader of the Maccabean Pilgrimage to Palestine of 1897. In several

articles in the English press he answered the attacks made upon Zionism.

Being a lawyer by profession his services were invaluable in the

foundation of the Zionist financial institutions. A well-known figure

at the Zionist Congresses, he is a most active worker in local affairs,

especially in the Order of Ancient Maccabeans, in connection with

which organization he recently helped to found a land company for the

purchase of land in Palestine. He is indefatigable in the propaganda

of Zionism, and one of the few English Zionists who succeeded in making

Zionism a tradition of his family by means of the closest personal

contact with Palestine.

Israel Zangwill may be described as one of the most distinguished

propagandists of the Zionist idea during the period 1899 until 1906,

when he founded the Territorialist Organization. To this brilliant

writer and orator belongs the credit of having contributed greatly

towards making Zionism popular in England. An English writer of

enchanting dexterity, possessed of a keen sense of humour and capacity

to appeal to the crowd, he discredited the old idea of Assimilation.

Though his views on the future of Palestine have undergone considerable

modification, his pamphlets and early speeches are still useful and

appreciated in Zionism.

Mr. Joseph Cowen, who takes a most active and responsible part in

Zionist work, particularly with regard to the financial institutions,

plays an important part in central as well as in local organization.

He was for some years a member of the Actions Committee and one of the

most prominent representatives at Zionist Congresses and Conferences.

Mr. L. J. Greenberg’s name is found in the Zionist records of the

first few years in connection with the movement in England, as well

as internationally, and in his work he has always associated himself

with Mr. Cowen. He was always deemed resourceful and an energetic

propagandist in England, and was for a certain period a member of the

central management of the Organization. He was Honorary Secretary of

the English Zionist Federation, and a member of the Actions Committee,

and in these capacities did admirable work. Both Mr. Cowen and Mr.

Greenberg were deeply attached to Herzl, and assisted him in his work

in England.

The late S. B. Rubenstein was one of the veterans of the old _Chovevé

Zion_, and as a representative Zionist was very active in the movement

since the First Congress. Mr. Jacob de Haas, a journalist of great

versatility, combined with great devotion and inexhaustible enthusiasm

for the cause, worked hard in England, and now continues his useful

work zealously in the United States. Mr. Leopold Kessler, a faithful

adherent to Zionism since its inception, has been active, partly in

South Africa and partly in England, more especially in connection with

the financial institutions and the Actions Committee. The Rev. Isaiah

Raffalovich, Rabbi of the New Hebrew Congregation, Liverpool, a native

of Jerusalem, an inspired _Chovev Zion_ and Zionist, is doing excellent

propaganda work. The late Joseph Massel, of Manchester, a man of great

Jewish learning, a Hebrew writer and translator, was a well-known and

popular figure at the Zionist Conferences in England, as well as at the

Zionist Congresses. He was one of the few Hebraists who introduced an

element of Hebrew literature into the Zionist propaganda in England.

The late Aron Vecht (1856‒1908), a man of striking individuality,

was an ardent Jewish nationalist. He founded the weekly paper, _The

Jewish Standard_, and was one of the founders of the _Chovevé Zion_

Association in London, and later, when Herzl launched the Zionist

movement, became one of his most devoted followers.

Mr. Jacob Moser, J.P. (Lord-Mayor of Bradford, 1910‒11), deserves an

honourable place among the Zionist leaders. A prominent philanthropist

in his city, and a devoted Zionist, he has been for a number of years

a leading representative of the Movement and was elected a member of

the Actions Committee, and attended most Zionist Congresses, where he

gained great popularity. He visited Palestine and became a generous and

zealous patron of Hebrew education there. The Hebrew Gymnasium at Jaffa,

which is the first and foremost Hebrew educational institution in the

Holy Land, was practically founded by him, and owes its existence and

maintenance to his exertions and generosity. Dr. Charles Dreyfus, J.P.,

of Manchester, has associated himself with the Zionist movement now for

some years. He has been a member of the Actions Committee and President

of the English Zionist Federation.

Some Zionists have worked, and are now working, with great enthusiasm

in the sphere of Hebrew education. The method of Hebrew teaching known

as “Ibrith B’Ibrith” (Hebrew in Hebrew), which was first introduced by

Zionists into Palestine and Russia, was first recommended in England

by Mr. David Yellin, of Jerusalem, at public meetings addressed by

him on his visits to this country, and was strongly supported by

Mr. Israel Abrahams. In the work of encouraging the diffusion of the

Hebrew language in England those most active were: in London――Rev.

J. K. Goldbloom――and before his removal to the United States Mr. E.

Ish-Kishor, and――in Liverpool――Dr. Samuel Fox, an able Hebraist and

educator, formerly editor of the _Ha-Magid_, assisted by a number

of efficient Hebrew teachers, Mr. Maximovski (now in America), Mr.

Rumianck, Mr. Wassilewsky, Mr. Port, Mr. A. Doniach, the young Hebrew

poet Pinski, Mr. Beilin, Mr. Hodes, and others. There are in London,

as well as in the provinces, some Hebrew-speaking societies and groups

that work for the maintenance of Hebrew as a living tongue. The late

J. Suwalski, an able Talmudist and Hebrew writer, edited and published

in London for some years a Hebrew weekly, _Ha-Yehoudi_, under most

difficult conditions. After his death the publication of this paper

was suspended, but in Hebraist circles a propaganda is again on foot

for the purpose of securing the reappearance of a Hebrew weekly.

In tracing the more recent development of Zionism in England, a number

of representatives and workers of a prominently intellectual and

literary character cannot escape our attention: Dr. Samuel Daiches,

Lecturer in Biblical Exegesis and Talmudics at Jews’ College, and

author of numerous works on Assyriologian, Biblical Babylonian and

Talmudical Babylonian subjects, a scholar of recognized merits, has

an excellent Zionist record as a delegate to the Congresses, a Zionist

writer, and as a most faithful propagandist of the national idea and

the Hebrew language. His brother, Dr. Salis Daiches, Minister of the

Edinburgh Hebrew Congregation and author of studies on philosophy,

is an active member of the Organization. Both are faithful to the

traditions of their old rabbinical family and particularly to that of

their father, the venerable Rabbi Israel Hayim Daiches of the Great

Bet Ha-Midrash Congregation, Leeds, who many years ago, when Rabbi at

Neustadt-Shirvint, Russia, was one of the first of the orthodox Rabbis

to identify themselves with the Zionist idea.

The beginning of a University movement and the literary activity

in connection with Zionism are, undoubtedly, remarkable features

of Zionist development in England in recent years and deserve due

consideration. Most prominent in this useful and promising movement are:

Leon Simon, Norman Bentwich, Harry Sacher, Albert M. Hyamson, Dr. Selig

Brodetsky, Samuel Landman, Dr. Joseph Hochman, Leonard Stein, the Rev.

M. H. Segal and others, who, as Hebrew scholars and English writers

of a highly cultivated literary taste, have founded University Zionist

Societies, and are frequently lecturing on Zionist and general Jewish

literary subjects. During the four years of the European War, despite

the pressure on their time and energies which their non-Zionist duties,

in most instances in the service of the State, involved, they produced

a Zionist literature remarkable not only in all the circumstances for

its quantity, but also for its quality. They established and produced

two periodicals, _The Zionist Review_, the monthly organ of the English

Zionist Federation (editors, Mr. A. M. Hyamson and Mr. Leon Simon),

in a sense the successor to _The Zionist_, which ceased publication on

the outbreak of war, and _Palestine_, the weekly organ of the British

Palestine Committee (editor, Mr. Harry Sacher). Of books all of a high

quality and a permanent character, _Zionism and the Jewish Future_

(editor, Mr. H. Sacher), which immediately became the standard work in

England on Zionism, and passed into a second edition which soon became

exhausted, _Zionism――Problems and Views_ (editors, Mr. Paul Goodman and

Mr. Arthur D. Lewis), _Palestine――The Rebirth of an Ancient People_ (Mr.

Albert M. Hyamson), _Palestine of the Jews_ (Mr. Norman Bentwich), and

_England and Palestine_ (Mr. H. Sidebotham), published by the British

Palestine Committee, have all appeared since 1914. At the same time

the same small band of writers have been active in the periodical

press, and by means of a number of pamphlets, which deal with different

aspects of Zionism and the Palestine question, have had considerable

influence on public opinion, Jewish and non-Jewish, throughout the

English-speaking world. Some members of this small band have also

written on Zionism and Palestine in some of the leading American

periodicals. Without being by any means exhaustive, one may mention

among recent pamphlets: _The Case of the Anti-Zionists_ (Leon Simon),

_Great Britain, Palestine and the Jews_――(1) _Jewry’s Celebration of

its National Charter_, (2) _A Survey of Christian Opinion, What is

Zionism?_ (Dr. Chaim Weizmann and Dr. Richard Gottheil), _The Jewish

Colonization in Palestine: Its History and its Prospects_ (S. Tolkowsky),

_A Jewish Palestine: The Jewish Case for a British Trusteeship_ (H.

Sacher), _Zionism and the Jewish Religion_ (F. S. Spiers), _Zionism and

the Jewish Problem_ (Leon Simon), _A Hebrew University for Jerusalem_

(H. Sacher), _Zionism and Socialism_ (Lewis Rifkind), _Jewish

Emancipation: The Contract Myth_ (H. Sacher), _History and Development

of Jewish Colonization in Palestine_ (L. Kessler), _Zionism, its

Organization and Institutions_ (S. Landman), _Jewish Colonization and

Enterprise in Palestine_ (I. M. Sieff), _Zionism and Jewish Culture_

(Norman Bentwich), _Zionism and the State_ (H. Sacher), _Zionism and

the Hebrew Revival_ (E. Miller), _Hebrew Education in Palestine_ (S.

Philipps), _British Projects for the Restoration of the Jews_ (A. M.

Hyamson), _Cosmopolitanism and Zionism_ (Arthur D. Lewis), _The Jewish

National Fund_ (Joseph D. Jacobs), _Zionism in the Bible_ (N. Sokolow),

_Achievements and Prospects in Palestine_ (S. Tolkowsky), _Hebrew

Education in Palestine_ (Leon Simon), and a number of the essays of

“Achad Ha’am,” translated into English by Mr. Leon Simon.

Of important articles in the principal English weeklies and reviews

may be mentioned “Palestine and Jewish Nationalism,” by Mr. Leon Simon,

in _The Round Table_, “The Development of Political Zionism,” by Mr.

Israel Cohen in _The Fortnightly Review_, by Mr. Albert M. Hyamson in

the _Quarterly Review_, and also several other articles by the same

writer in _The New Statesman_ and _The New Europe_. _The Times_ and

_The Manchester Guardian_, not to mention other daily periodicals, have

given valuable and frequent support, in their editorial columns and

elsewhere, to the Zionist cause.

It is chiefly due to the exertions of Mr. Leon Simon, who stands at

the head of the University Zionist Organization, that the revival of

interest in living Hebrew has spread among the young intellectuals. It

is worthy of notice that this young scholar, who was born and educated

in this country, was so strongly inspired by the Zionist idea that

he acquired so thorough a knowledge of the Hebrew language that he is

now a good Hebrew speaker, as well as a highly appreciated contributor

to the Hebrew monthly _Ha-Shiloach_. The Rev. M. H. Segal, formerly

Minister of the Newcastle-on-Tyne Congregation, author of _Mishnaic

Hebrew and its Relation to Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic_, who belongs to

the same group, is an excellent Hebrew writer. This movement has been

greatly influenced by Asher Ginzberg――Achad Ha’am――who lives in London,

and whose writings are very highly appreciated in intellectual quarters.

Mr. Simon has translated some of his books into English. A great

supporter of this movement is Dr. Ch. Weizmann, who is an old worker

in University circles.

Evidently Zionism is attracting more and more attention and

consideration, and has the moral support and sympathy of distinguished

scholars and spiritual leaders, among whom we may mention the Goldsmid

Professor of Hebrew at the University of London and Rabbi of the

Bayswater Synagogue, Hermann Gollancz, and Dr. S. A. Hirsch, a

well-known Talmudist and Emeritus Lecturer at Jews’ College. Dr. Hirsch

was one of the distinguished _Chovevé Zion_, and took great interest in

the Zionist movement. He was for a time Chairman of the Joint Committee

of the English Zionist Federation and the Maccabeans.

The foregoing sketch, incomplete as it is, gives some idea of

the amount of energy and labour expended on the work of Zionist

organization and propaganda in England. If it is not as large and

vigorous as it might be, and as it is undoubtedly going to be owing

to the new development, it cannot be denied that there is in England a

strong Zionist movement supported by an ever-increasing number of able,

determined and devoted workers.

2. _South Africa_

In South Africa Zionism is powerful and important. Among the first

representatives of the movement there must be mentioned as the most

notable: Dr. J. H. Hertz, Johannesburg (he was Delegate to the Fourth

Zionist Congress, 1900), who is now Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew

Congregations of the British Empire. Other staunch supporters were the

Rev. Dr. J. L. Landau, Mr. S. Goldreich, the late Rev. D. Wasserzug,

Mr. S. L. Heymann, Mr. S. Lennox-Loewe, Mr. R. Alexander, Mr. J.

Heymann, Dr. Abelheim, Mr. J. L. Cohen, Mr. H. Lyons, Mr. R. Feigenbaum,

Mr. H. B. Ellenbogen, Mr. S. S. Grossberg (Bulawayo), Mr. B. Aaron,

Mr. J. Blum, Mr. A. Beyer, Mr. N. Richardson, Mr. J. Kark, Mr. B. J.

Chaimowitz, Mr. A. Deremeik, Mr. A. M. Abrahams, Mr. J. Kaplan, Mr. J.

Schwartz, Mr. Groimann, Mr. Hersh, Mr. S. Bebor and others. They have

a well-organized Zionist Federation, of which the advocate, Mr. Maurice

Alexander, is the Chairman. They also have their own Zionist Press,

always send delegates to the Zionist Congresses and maintain a strong

and successful propaganda in their country. The enthusiasm manifested

by the masses is as great as the wonderful generosity with which they

support all Zionist institutions in and outside of Palestine. One

is simply struck with admiration at the wonderful results they have

achieved in the way of contributions.

3. _Canada_

In Canada the Zionist movement began in 1898 and immediately met with

great success. Zionists propagated their principles at mass meetings

and soon attracted enthusiastic workers for their cause, and by their

help they were enabled to form organizations in Montreal, Toronto,

Winnipeg, Hamilton, London, Kingston (Ontario), Ottawa, and on the

Pacific Coast. (The first Zionist Society in Canada was the _Agudath

Zion_ in Montreal.) First and foremost among the leaders is Mr.

Clarence I. de Sola, a brother of the late Rev. Meldola de Sola, the

minister of the Sephardi Community of Montreal. Both were the sons of

Dr. Abraham de Sola, LL.D., who was Professor of Semitic Literature

at the McGill University of Montreal, and the leading Jewish Rabbi and

writer in Canada. Mr. Clarence de Sola is President of the Federation

of the Zionist Societies of Canada. The Rev. A. M. Ashinski (now at

Pittsburg), Dr. David M. Hart, the Rev. B. M. Kaplin, Mr. J. S. Leo,

Mr. A. Levin, the Rev. D. H. Wittenberg, Mr. H. G. Levetus, Mr. Leon

Goldman, Mr. B. Levi, the late Mr. Falik and many others were the

principal, untiring workers from the first; and the distinguished

Hebraist Rabbi Menkin (Hamilton), the eminent preacher Rabbi Abramowitz

(Montreal), Mr. L. Lewinsky (Toronto), Mr. J. Friedmann (Ottawa),

Mr. S. Jacobs (Montreal), Mr. Leon Cohn, Dr. Shayne, Mr. David Levy,

Mr. Louis Fitch, Mr. A. A. Harris, Mr. S. Frankel, Mr. E. Geffen, Mr.

Joseph Finsberg, Mr. H. Nathansohn, Mr. Bernard Lasker and many other

enthusiastic speakers, workers and writers contributed to the efforts

that made the Federation of the Canadian Zionists a living force in the

great movement, and the most active and most respected section of Jewry

in that important part of the British Empire.

4. _Other Parts of the British Empire_

There are also some Zionist groups as well as individual supporters in

New Zealand, in Australia and in all other parts of the British Empire.

In Egypt Zionism has recently made considerable progress.

5. _The United States_

The United States of America, with its three million Jews, of whom by

far the greater number have migrated there from Russia during the past

two generations, has naturally become an important centre of Zionism.

It is impossible to give, in a brief outline, a proper conception of

the greatness and importance of Zionist activities in America.

America is a world in itself, and this can equally be said of American

Zionism. The majority of Zionists may already perhaps, or will very

soon, reside in the English-speaking countries. The extent of Zionism

in the United States cannot be gauged by the payment of the “Shekel”

(the annual obligatory Zionist contribution) , which is not by any

means a criterion as far as Zionist allegiance in America is concerned.

It is sufficient to mention such well-known names as: Justice Louis D.

Brandeis, Nathan Straus, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Dr. Harry Friedenwald,

Professor Richard Gottheil, Miss Henrietta Szold, Dr. Solomon Solis

Cohen, Professor Israel Friedlaender, Rev. Dr. Pereira Mendes, E.

Lewin-Epstein, Zolotkow, Louis Lipsky, J. de Haas, Professor Felix

Frankfurter, Leon Sanders, Dr. C. S. Rubensohn, Nathan D. Kaplan,

Judge Aaron J. Levy, Judge Julian W. Mack, Dr. H. M. Kallen, Rabbi

H. H. Rubenowitz, Louis Robison, Dr. Benjamin L. Gordon, Julius Meyer,

S. Abel, A. E. Lubarski, Maurice L. Avner, Rabbi S. Margolis, Rev. Max

Heller, Joseph Barondess, Rev. H. Masliansky, Abraham Goldberg, Bernard

Richards, B. Rosenblatt and many others, representing all classes,

sections and shades of American Jewry――these names enable one to form a

slight idea of the greatness of the movement.

Mr. Louis D. Brandeis, Justice of the Supreme Court, stands at the head

of the Organization, and his influence in America equals almost that of

Herzl in this hemisphere. Dr. Shemaryah Levin, representing the Inner

Actions Committee, has done much to stimulate propaganda in America,

and is strongly supported by a number of distinguished Zionists who

have recently arrived there.

The movement has, however, a long and honourable record in America

(where, as in other countries, the Zionist movement was preceded by a

_Chovevé Zion_ movement). There have been not only the _Shove Zion_ in

New York and the _Chovevé Zion_ in Philadelphia in 1891; the beginning

was much earlier. Mention has already been made of the Rev. M. J.

Raphall’s activities; but he did not stand alone in his efforts. An

attempt to form a _Chovevé Zion_ organization was made at Cincinnati

in 1855. In the _Occident_ of Philadelphia, of March 8th, 1860, Mr.

Simon Berman, the author of the Hebrew book _Massot Shimon_ (published

in 1874), published the details of a _Chovevé Zion_ plan he had then

formulated. Still later, Adam Rosenberg worked most energetically in

connection with _Chovevé Zion_ in other countries, and with the first

colonists in Palestine. Rosenberg attended also the First Zionist

Congress.

The Federation of American Zionists was organized on July 4th, 1897,

with Professor Richard Gottheil as President, Dr. B. Felsenthal of

Chicago, Dr. M. Jastrow of Philadelphia, Dr. S. Schaffer of Baltimore,

Dr. J. L. Bluestone, Rev. H. Masliansky, as members; Mr. C. D. Birkhahn

acted as Hon. Treasurer, and Rabbi Stephen S. Wise as Honorary

Secretary.

The old and highly esteemed Dr. Gustav Gottheil, father of Professor

Richard Gottheil, who had formerly been Rabbi at Manchester (and a

friend of Professor Theodores), and had just then become Rabbi at

New York (where he died in 1903), identified himself with the Zionist

movement. Professor Richard Gottheil joined the movement from the

beginning. He was a friend of Herzl, a member of the Actions Committee

and a prominent figure at the Zionist Congresses. In order to spread

a knowledge of the Zionist movement, the first Committee of the

Federation resolved to issue a series of publications, and Professor

Gottheil wrote his first pamphlet, _The Aims of Zionism_, in 1897. Five

years ago he published an important work on Zionism. For a long time Dr.

J. L. Magnes was most actively engaged in Zionist work, and he is still

most active in the work of organizing Hebrew education in the United

States.

The late Dr. Marcus Jastrow, who served on the first Committee, was

an orientalist and a rabbi, pre-eminently known as a man of genius

and thoroughness, and as an author of a great dictionary of the

Aramaic-Talmudic language, and of other works of great value. It is

not generally known, and therefore worthy of notice here, that when he

was preacher at the Great Synagogue in Warsaw at the beginning of the

sixties at the time of the Polish Insurrection, he was an enthusiastic

friend of the Poles in their struggle for national liberty. Poles and

Polish-Jewish patriots still cherish his memory with deep reverence.

The present Zionist movement in America, as compared with the earlier

one, is of course much stronger and healthier, but it is interesting

to observe that the movement in America is not one that sprang up only

recently.

During the present war American Zionism has come providentially to the

succour of Palestine with an enthusiasm and a generosity unequalled

in history, and it is undoubtedly qualified and destined to play a

prominent part in the Zionist solution of the Palestinian problem.

6. _Germany_

The geographical position of Germany――its proximity to Russia and

Austria――the numerical strength of its Jewish population, and their

long tradition of Jewish learning and Jewish activity, have combined to

make that country favourable soil for the growth of Zionism. Nor must

the prevalent anti-Semitism be left out of account as a factor making

in the same direction. Whereas, for instance, the Jewish University

student in England is welcomed in the various students’ associations

and clubs, the Jewish students at a German University are practically

compelled to form an organization of their own. This is one of the

causes of the remarkable growth of the Zionist Students’ movement in

Germany――a movement which, while it is not free from the besetting sin

of over-organization, has undoubtedly done a great deal to transform

the spirit of German Jewry. But from the earliest years, even before

the growth of the Students’ movement, Zionism has always been in

Germany a serious intellectual movement, contending for supremacy with

the “Reform” theory of Judaism, and never failing to hold its own. The

first official paper of the movement was _Die Welt_, and the _Jüdischer

Verlag_ in Berlin was for long the most important Zionist publishing

concern; while in the extent of its Zionist literary and artistic

output Germany is probably second to no other country. Yet it is

characteristic that a Zionist Congress has only once (Hamburg, 1911)

been held in Germany, though the headquarters of the movement were

for a time at Cologne and afterwards at Berlin, and though Germany has

been the home of such distinguished Zionists as Dr. Max Bodenheimer,

for many years at the head of the Jewish National Fund, Dr. Franz

Oppenheimer, the expert in co-operative colonization, and Julius Simon,

to say nothing of members of the Inner Actions Committee like Wolffsohn,

Hantke and Warburg.

7. _Smaller European Countries_

Holland gave to the movement one of its earliest leaders, Heer

Jacobus Kann, who was associated with Wolffsohn in the administration

after Herzl’s death. It has now a well-organized and active Zionist

Organization, to which a great impetus was given by the Eighth Congress

at the Hague, 1909. Dutch Zionists take a very active part in the

general organization work and in that of the Jewish National Fund, the

headquarters of which are at present at the Hague. The Dutch Zionist

Federation has an excellent weekly paper, _De Joodsche Wachter_, which

has appeared regularly for several years. Zionism in Holland has had

for several years a University Movement. In connection with Holland, a

place of honour in Zionist history belongs to Belgium, and particularly

to Antwerp, which has been for several years an important Zionist

centre. M. Jean Fischer, most noteworthy of the Antwerp group from the

point of view of the organization, is a member of the Actions Committee

and of the great financial institutions of Zionism. He and his friends

have taken an important part in colonization undertakings in Palestine.

Switzerland, the land of Zionist Congresses, has a good organization

with many zealous and able workers. In Denmark and Sweden the Zionist

organization has lately developed great activity, owing to the Zionist

Office which has been established at Copenhagen. Rumania (which was

almost equal to Russia in the _Chovevé Zion_ movement) and Bulgaria are

still more important as centres of Zionist activity.

LXXXII.

THE INSTITUTIONS OF ZIONISM

The Zionist institutions――_A. General_: 1. The Congress――2. The

Actions Committee――3. The Annual Conference――4. The Federations

in various countries――5. The English Zionist Federation

――6. The Order of Ancient Maccabeans――7. The Palestine Society.

――8. The _Poale Zion_――9. The _Mizrachi_――10. Women Zionist

Societies――_B. Financial_: 1. The Jewish Colonial Trust

――2. The Anglo-Palestine Company――3. The Anglo-Levantine

Company――4. The Jewish National Fund――5. The Palestine Land

Development Company――6. The _Kedem_ Company――7. The First

London _Achuzah_ Company――8. The Maccabean Land Company

――_C. Institutions in Palestine_――_D. Miscellaneous

Institutions_.

A. GENERAL:

1. _The Congress_

THE Zionist Congress is the supreme authority in the Movement. Until

the fifth Congress, Congresses were held annually, but since the sixth

Congress they have been held biennially. The first Congress was held on

the 29th of August, 1897, at Basle, Switzerland. Most of the subsequent

Congresses were held at the same place: the second in August, 1898; the

third in August, 1899; the fifth in December, 1901; the sixth in August,

1903; the seventh in August, 1905, and the tenth in September, 1911.

The fourth Congress was held in London in August, 1900; the eighth took

place at the Hague in August, 1907; the ninth at Hamburg in December,

1909, and the eleventh at Vienna in August, 1913.

The Congress consists of delegates representing the shekel payers

throughout the world, who assemble for the purpose of international

discussion of the Jewish question and decisions concerning the

world-wide Zionist Organization. The Congress, as the controlling

body of the movement, interprets the programme of Zionism, settles

the details of organization, elects the executive and examines the

financial affairs of the movement. The officials and committee of

the movement are responsible to the Congress. The Zionist banking

institution, the Jewish Colonial Trust in London, is also controlled

by the Congress, as only members of the Actions Committee can become

members of the Council of the Trust. A deciding voice in the control

of the Jewish National Fund is secured to the Congress, as only members

of the Council of the Jewish Colonial Trust can become members of the

Jewish National Fund. (See below as to the Jewish Colonial Trust and

Jewish National Fund.)

Only shekel payers (paying a sum of one shilling or a corresponding

sum in foreign coinage) have the right to elect delegates to a Congress.

The payment of that sum by a person who accepts the principles of

Zionism as adopted by the first Congress entitles him or her to

membership of the International Zionist Organization.

The last Zionist Congress, which was the eleventh, was attended by

538 delegates, who represented the Zionists in the following countries:

Russia, France, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, United States of America,

Canada, Turkey, Belgium, Holland, Roumania, China, Bulgaria, Italy,

Hungary, Serbia, Australia, South Africa, Greece and England.

2. _The Actions Committee_

The Executive power of the movement is vested in the Greater Actions

Committee, consisting of twenty-five members, and in a Smaller Actions

Committee, consisting of six members. The members of the present

Greater Actions Committee are:

Dr. Max Bodenheimer, Jean Fischer, Dr. Frank, Dr. Friedemann,

B. A. Goldberg, Dr. H. G. Heymann,¹ A. Idelsohn, Jakobus Kann,

L. Kessler, Dr. Klee, J. Kremenezky, Dr. Alexander Marmorek,

Leo Motzkin, J. A. Naiditsch, A. Podlischewski, Dr. Leon Reich,

I. A. Rosoff, S. Rosenbaum, Heinrich Schein, Julius Simon,

Adolf Stand, Robert Stricker, M. Ussischkin, Dr. Chaim

Weizmann,² and David Wolffsohn³

¹ Died in 1918.

² Dr. Chaim Weizmann was recently elected a member of the

Smaller Actions Committee.

³ Wolffsohn died in 1914.

The members of the present Smaller Actions Committee are:

Professor Dr. Otto Warburg, Dr. Arthur Hantke, Dr. Victor

Jacobson, Dr. Shemaryah Levin, Nahum Sokolow, and the late

Dr. E. W. Tschlenow.¹

¹ Dr. Tschlenow died in London in 1918.

The Greater Actions Committee is the executive body of the Congress

according to its constitution, but it is only convened to decide on

important questions. It meets several times in the year, and must

meet not less than once a year. Only the Greater Actions Committee is

competent to consider and decide questions relating to the Zionist

organizations in the various countries. The Committee has also the

right to inquire into and examine the work of the Smaller Actions

Committee.

The Smaller Actions Committee is the superior Executive of the whole

Zionist Organization, and is entrusted with the management of all

branches of the Zionist movement and activities all over the world.

3. _The Annual Conference_

The name of this institution is somewhat misleading, as the conference

called Annual Conference is really a biennial conference held in those

years in which a Zionist Congress does not take place. The holding

of such conferences was decided upon by the fifth Congress. This

conference is in reality an extended meeting of the Greater Actions

Committee, and is attended not only by all members of that Committee,

but also by the president and vice-presidents of the last Congress,

the presidents of the permanent commissions, the presidents of the

federations and amalgamated organizations of the various countries,

the directors of the banking institutions, the members of the Congress

tribunal, the legal adviser of the Congress and the auditors. The

conference is somewhat limited in the scope of its activities,

as it may only examine the accounts of the organization, accept

resolutions, and draw up a programme of activity for the next period

of administration. The conference has no right to carry out elections

of committees or officials or to alter or modify the Zionist programme.

4. _The Federations in Various Countries_

The name “Federation,” as far as the Zionist movement is concerned,

is frequently synonymous with the amalgamated organizations in any

particular country. But, on the other hand, it sometimes designates an

organization consisting of a number of societies and groups which have

federated, for the purpose of propagating Zionism on certain defined

lines. The Smaller Actions Committee is authorized to grant recognition

to a federation in any country, providing such a body comprises not

less than 3000 shekel payers and satisfies them as to such other

requirements as the Smaller Actions Committee may impose upon it.

5. _The English Zionist Federation_

The English Zionist Federation was established in 1898, and according

to its constitution, amended and revised in 1907, its object and

constitution are:

“The English Zionist Federation as ‘Landes Comité’ of United

Kingdom shall carry on its operations in accordance with the

constitution adopted by and in sympathy with the decisions

arrived at from time to time by the Zionist Congress.

“The Federation shall consist of such Jewish Associations and

Bodies in the United Kingdom as desire, subject to the general

sanction and direction of the Executive Committee, to promote

the acquisition of a publicly recognized legally secured home

in Palestine for the Jewish people, or in addition thereto,

any of the following objects:

(a) The fostering of the National idea in Israel.

(b) The support of the regular International Congress of

duly accredited representatives of the Jewish people,

for the consideration of the position of Jews in the

different countries of their dispersion, and for taking

such measures as may be deemed conducive to their

general welfare.

new colonies by placing as many Jews as possible living

in Palestine as settlers on the land, and encouragement,

guidance and assistance of new settlers anxious to

establish colonies, or any handicrafts, industries or

arts in Palestine and neighbouring lands.

(d) The study of Hebrew literature and the use of Hebrew as

a living language.”

The functions of the Federation are: to be the medium of communication

between affiliated societies and the Executive Council (Actions

Committee) and with Zionist Associations in other countries; to advise

on the steps necessary for the furtherance of the general movement,

and adopt such means as may be approved for carrying into effect the

resolutions adopted by Congress held from time to time; and to initiate,

in connection with the various objects of the Federation, propaganda,

which shall partake of one common character throughout all the

federated bodies.

The Constituent Societies affiliated to the Federation now number

sixteen in London, twenty-seven in the Provinces, and four in the

Dominions and Colonies. Of these forty-seven ten are Women’s and Girls’

Societies and six Junior Societies.

The general government of the Federation is vested in a Central

Committee, consisting of delegates from all the federated societies.

The Executive Power of the organization is vested in a Council

consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents, Honorary Secretary and

twenty other members of the Council.

For the purpose of carrying out the work of the Federation a number

of sub-committees deal with various special matters (Propaganda,

Literature, Palestine, Finance, etc.).

6. _The Order of Ancient Maccabeans_

This is a Friendly Society, established in 1894, and registered on the

8th of May, 1901, under the Friendly Societies’ Act, 1896. When Herzl

came to England before the first Zionist Congress the members of the

Society, who then belonged to the “Lovers of Zion” movement, pledged

their adherence to the Zionist cause. The Society is an avowedly

Zionist Order, and every member on admission has to declare his

willingness to be a Zionist, to pay the shekel and to assist generally

through the Order in the work of resettling the Jews in Palestine.

Since the Zionist Congress of 1909 the Society has been recognized as

a separate Federation, having a membership of over three thousand, as

required by the regulations of the Zionist Organization.

The Executive Power of the organization is vested in a Grand Council.

7. _The Palestine Society_

The Palestine Society is an association of Jews who desire the

establishment in Palestine of a centre of Jewish life, which shall

offer a full opportunity for the free development of the Jewish

religion, Jewish ideals and Jewish culture. It is not formally

associated with the Zionist Organization.

The activities of the Society include the following:

(a) Propaganda for the purpose of creating among Jews and Jewish

Institutions in England a public opinion favourable to the furtherance

of Jewish activities in Palestine.

(b) The collection and dissemination of information concerning the work

that is being carried on by existing Palestinian institutions.

(d) The organization of visits to Palestine.

In the spring of 1912 a Palestine Exhibition and Bazaar was held in

London, in aid of two Jerusalem institutions――the Bezalel and the

Evelina de Rothschild School. The Exhibition had the effect of exciting

interest in Palestine among all sections of English Jews. It was then

felt that a systematic effort should be made to press the claims of

Palestine upon the Anglo-Jewish middle-class. Accordingly a body known

as the Palestine Committee was founded for this purpose. This Committee

held a series of drawing-room meetings, which met with a fair measure

of success.

In order to undertake activities of a more extensive and more varied

kind, a properly constituted society――the Palestine Society――was formed

in the autumn of 1913. During its brief existence it performed useful

work, as, for instance, the arrangement of a series of drawing-room

meetings, at which lectures were delivered by eminent speakers. The

speakers and chairmen included: the Chief Rabbi, the Rev. M. Adler,

the Rev. A. A. Green, the Rev. Dr. J. Hochman, the Rev. Morris Joseph,

Dayan H. M. Lazarus, the Rev. W. Levin, the Rev. E. Levine, the Rev.

D. Wasserzug, Lady Swaythling, Dr. A. Eichholz, Mr. H. R. Lewis, Mr.

J. Prag, and Mr. Israel Zangwill.

Fifteen of the London Jewish ministers are members of the Society, and

have preached a number of sermons with sympathetic references to the

Society and its aims.

In the course of the year 1914 the Liverpool Bezalel Association became

affiliated to the Palestine Society. A branch of the Society was also

formed at Glasgow, and when the War broke out branches were in course

of formation at Leeds, Brighton and in several of the suburbs of London.

At the outbreak of the War the membership of the Society numbered

approximately 250, though no widespread propaganda was ever attempted

either for the enrolment of members or for the collection of funds,

as it was intended from the outset that the work of the Society should

be limited to those circles which other agencies had not succeeded in

reaching.

Among other activities of this Society were:

(1) An effort to induce literary and kindred societies to include a

discussion of the Palestine question in their programmes for the 1914

to 1915 session, the Society providing the speakers, of whom it had

compiled a list.

(2) An attempt was made to organize a tour to Palestine in the spring

of 1914. Owing to difficulties that arose in respect of the choice of

date and the time available, an organized tour on a large scale had

to be abandoned; three members of the Committee, however, visited

Palestine during that year. A tour was projected for the spring of

1915; that had, of course, to be abandoned owing to the War.

(3) The first two pamphlets of an intended series were prepared,

dealing with the agricultural colonies in Palestine and the work of

their educational institutions respectively. A summary account of

general Jewish activities in Palestine in 1913‒14, and of the measure

of support it had received from English Jews, was also in preparation

when the War broke out. It had been intended to publish all this matter

in a Palestine Annual, and to reprint most of it separately in due

course.

There is reason to believe that in the brief period of its active

life (it suspended activity on the outbreak of the War) the Society

succeeded in arousing an interest in Palestine as a centre of Jewish

aspiration among a large circle of Jews whom other agencies have left

untouched, and in creating in certain quarters an atmosphere more

favourable than had existed heretofore. It must be added that the

Society has merely suspended its activities and not abandoned them.

This was explained in a letter from its President, Dr. Eichholz, which

appeared in the _Jewish Chronicle_ of December 3rd, 1915.

The Officers and Committee for 1913‒14 were: President: Dr.

A. Eichholz; Vice-Presidents: the Very Rev. the Chief Rabbi,

the Very Rev. the Haham, the Rev. Morris Joseph, Sir Isidore

Spielmann, C.M.G., F.S.A.; Treasurer: Albert M. Hyamson;

Committee: Mrs. A. Eichholz, Miss H. M. Bentwich, the Rev. Dr.

J. Hochman, Dr. M. Epstein, Harry R. Lewis, Leon Simon, Robert

B. Solomon, F. S. Spiers; Hon. Secretaries: Miss A. Stein

and Leonard Stein; Hon. Corresponding Secretary in Palestine:

Michael E. Lange.

8. _Poale Zion_

The national idea forms the premiss of Zionism. To bring this idea to

life, to provide a durable foundation for the national unification of

the Jews upon their very own, old historical ground, that is the aim

of Zionism. In its tendency, therefore, it comprises the whole Jewish

people; its immediate object, however, apart from the self-evident

conservation of the ideal of national unity, bears upon fragments,

so to say, of the people; upon more or less considerable parts of

population, individuals, groups, and classes. Their specific attitude

towards Zionism hinges on two main points, of which one is more of

spiritual, and the other more of material nature. Both must be equally

considered, for both are effective, although in varying degree. However,

when a particular class is considered in its relation towards Zionism,

it behoves to examine first of all the point of view to which this

class itself attaches most importance. It may of course be open to

discussion whether when forming an estimate of national and social

questions the economic aspect ought always to be considered foremost,

but there is no doubt that it is so regarded by the working-class.

Let us also admit it for the Jewish workmen. If we take class interest

into account the workman may speak first, then the Jew within him. It

will appear that it is precisely from a closer examination of the class

interest of the Jewish workmen and the interrelations between them and

the general working-class, that their position towards Zionism results

most simply, as we already see this clearly indicated, and as it will

be evolved in the near future, given certain conditions.

Jewish workmen may be divided into two categories, apart from several

intermediate divisions. The one is nationally indifferent, class

interest alone carries weight with it. By entering into the general

working-class the workmen of this category are, so to say, engulfed by

it; they retain no trace of national needs and wishes. The numerically

by far larger category comprises the actual masses of Jewish workmen

in Russia, Galicia, and America. These Jewish workmen also join the

general working-class, but they occupy within it a very distinctly

noticeable separate position. Where the amelioration of the economic

condition of the working-class is concerned, the obtaining of higher

salaries, the reduction of working time, in short, in all questions

falling within the sphere of class interest they hold together with

the other workmen. Just as they suffer from unemployment like these,

so they make common cause with them on special occasions, for instance,

strikes. But beyond the material questions of existence there is much

which separates them. They are sociable enough to come together for a

short time with the other workmen where need and interest demand it,

but they are not sufficiently ♦homogeneous to unite socially with them.

They cannot shake off a certain feeling of alienage in the camp of the

general working-class. Critical points soon arise on the boundaries

of economical questions, deep contrasts become manifest which are not

brought about by ill-will, but are rather caused by historical forces

which even to-day are still at work. What will it profit if, in order

to proceed summarily, one ascribes this segregation of the Jewish

workmen to a thousand years of atavism? The disclosure of the cause,

whether acceptable or not, does not do away with the fact. And it is

a fact that these Jewish workmen wield a strong national and religious

influence, that religion is no “private concern” for them, as it is

designated by the workmen’s programme, or only private concern inasmuch

as religion is prudently left undiscussed by the labour party.

♦ “homogenous” replaced with “homogeneous”

Probably from such differences and sentimental contrasts it is to

be explained that voices became loud which demanded the independent

organization of the Jewish workmen. Such a demand might be considered

by the leading party as an anomaly, since the Jewish workmen are not

at all taken into account nationally but pass as appendages of the

various nations. And if it was not merely euphemism when the Jews were

accorded the same right to exist, when the name or the nation in whose

country they became settled was conferred upon them, wherefore an

independent organization? Now, the course of evolution of the Jews up

to the present, especially its last phase, has revealed that not only

the masses of Judaism which are not yet on a high plane of cultural

development feel nationally. It is just in the Zionism of the educated

Jews that the full justification of the national movement shows itself.

We may point out without fear the difference between the conscious

Zionistic action and that part of Judaism which is unconsciously

national through the power of historic conditions.

The Jewish workmen are the natural allies of Zionism, but they will

become the actual and co-operating allies only through independent

workmen organizations. The Jewish workmen, independently organized,

would go hand in hand with the labour party in all single claims

dictated by class interest, but otherwise they would be independent.

National as the Jewish workmen are distinctly enough in life, national

in consequence of their education, their peculiarities――why should

they not be so as a working-class? Do then the workmen of other nations

lay aside their nationality when they take their stand to the social

question? And do they give up their nationality when they have done

for the moment with debate and action? And the Jewish workmen alone

should renounce their nationality, they who are not even yet capable of

sharing properly in the culture of another nation? Although it is not

out of love for Zionism that the Jewish workmen, for the greater part,

feel nationally, they may yet in time become national even in a Zionist

sense. And that through the natural community of interests, passing

from the unconscious to the conscious, which will establish a more and

more intimate relation between them and Zionism. The whole political

development of recent times has made it clear to the Jewish workmen how

powerful the national thought is among workmen. Even in the event of

the victory of the collectivistic idea it could hardly become different

in regard to race contrasts. And when Eduard Bernstein in the epilogue

of the translation of Mr. Webb’s _History of the Trade Unions_ observes:

“Class struggles manifest themselves only seldom so acutely as national

ones,” we may add that race contrasts may still exist long after class

contrasts will have disappeared.

It is evident of what extraordinary importance for Zionism the Jewish

working-class would become. The workmen if they became Zionist would,

so to say, constitute the solid effective force which could be relied

upon at any moment. On the other hand, it can well be assumed that

the Jewish nation will meet as far as possible the claims of the

working-class. It is only with the attainment of the Zionist aim that

the condition for the prosperity and unfolding anew of national life

will be realized for the first time. Judaism, united as a nation, will

hereby be confronted by the question with the solution of which all

civilized nations are so anxiously preoccupied. The difficulties may

be ever so great, occasional crises and storms may break forth, but

the nations will not be permanently depressed thereby, nor paralyzed.

Like other nations the Jews hold the unshakable belief in a continually

progressing economical amelioration, in a prosperous development of

all. Even that party which has developed class contrasts into a theory

of society, is seen to be receding ever more from the revolutionary

principle and paying homage to the evolutionary. To the principle of

evolution Zionist Judaism also holds fast, and will, surely, as soon

as it is nationally consolidated, not be willing to lag behind other

nations as regards social legislation. And if one may conclude from

the historical past of a nation what its conformation will be in the

future, so, doubtless, a breath of that gentle spirit will be felt in

the modern Jewish community which pervades the Mosaic legislation. And

this not only as regards the future but also the present. The Jewish

National Fund is the model of a broad Mosaic-socialistic institution

which has for its object the nationalization of the soil.

The _Poale Zion_ was established in 1901. It originated in Russia, and

has now adherents in America, Palestine, Austria, Russia and the United

Kingdom. At the time of the Zionist Congress at the Hague in 1907 an

International Conference of the _Poale Zion_ was held, which led to

the establishment of the General Union of the _Poale Zion_ Societies in

America, Russia, Austria, Palestine, England, etc., on federal lines.

The programme of the organization represents a synthesis of Zionism and

Socialism on the basis of the Basle programme.

The principles of the _Poale Zion_ have been fully expounded in a book

written by Dr. Pasmanik, entitled _The Theory of the Poale Zion_. Among

its official publications may be mentioned _The Jewish Worker_, Cracow;

_The Jewish Fighter_, New York; _Forward_, Vilna.

It is not easy for the Gentile workman to understand and appreciate

to the full the position taken up by the Jewish workmen who support

the principle of the _Poale Zion_. The Gentile workmen have no national

problem to solve; they have only an economic question to deal with. The

Jewish workmen are face to face with two problems, the economic and the

national. The _Poale Zionists_ are convinced that although a nation may

love its traditions it must concern itself also with immediate economic

needs. It is for this reason that they are primarily Zionists, although

supporters of Socialism. Unlike other Socialists they deem it their

duty to devote themselves mainly to their own national cause. Apart

from this, they have a great love for Jewish tradition, and are in the

fullest sense of the term nationalists.

9. _The Mizrachi_

The _Mizrachi_ (a composite word derived from “_Merchaz Ruch’ni_,”

which means Intellectual Centre) is an organization of religiously

orthodox Zionists.

After the fifth Zionist Congress, where a lively debate took place

on the question of national Judaism on a religious basis, the desire

arose among those Zionists who maintained orthodox views on religious

questions to organize themselves for common purposes. The object of the

_Mizrachi_ is therefore of a cultured and not a political character. It

strives to champion, within Zionism, by means of a sound organization,

the standpoint of orthodox religious belief, and further, to show

clearly that a conservative tendency in religious matters can go side

by side with national aspirations. Politically the _Mizrachi_ has no

special aim, but desires to work in unison with all other Zionists.

Soon after the fifth Congress Russian Zionists of _Mizrachi_ conviction

assembled at a conference in Vilna and officially founded the

_Mizrachi_. Subsequently support was also forthcoming from _Mizrachi_

Zionists in other countries, and at the sixth Congress the organization

was represented by a group of over one hundred delegates. From the

19th to the 21st of August, 1904, a general _Mizrachi_ Conference took

place at Pressburg. This conference was called by Rabbi I. J. Reines of

Lida, Russia, and was attended by a large number of Rabbis from Russia,

Roumania, Galicia, Hungary, Germany, England and America. Rabbi Reines

was elected president of the entire organization. The regulations

of the organization maintain in general the Zionist principle, but

lay particular stress upon the necessity of the _Mizrachi_ cultural

tendency. Already at this conference three centres of propaganda were

created, an East European centre for Russia, Roumania and Galicia,

of which Rabbi J. Reines became the president; a West European centre

for the other European countries, with its seat in Frankfort, of which

Rabbi Dr. Nobel became president; and an American centre at New York,

of which Rabbi D. Klein became president.

In addition to the usual shekel and the local contributions, the

_Mizrachi_ members pay a further contribution to cover the expenses

of an office and propaganda. The _Mizrachi_ carries out its aim by

organizing mass meetings, issuing from time to time periodicals,

pamphlets and leaflets, and arranging lectures and debates for its

members.

The fear expressed on the beginning of the _Mizrachi_ movement, that

the _Mizrachi_ as a section might destroy the unity of Zionism, has

proved unfounded. From the past activity of the _Mizrachi_ it is now

certain that their propaganda is not detrimental to the interests

of Zionism――that on the contrary their principal aims, such as the

fostering of belief in the laws of our forefathers, the maintenance of

ancient rites and customs, and the revival of the Hebrew language, are

such as to obtain for them continually new supporters among strictly

orthodox Jews.

Among a number of books written to explain the standpoint of the

_Mizrachi_, there should be mentioned _Zionism from the Standpoint

of Orthodoxy_ (1904), by Rabbi Dr. Roth of Papa (Hungary); _The

Voice of Zion_ (1905), by Rabbi Reines, and _Mizrachi_ (1907), by

Dr. Feuchtwanger.

10. _Women Zionist Societies_

In the measure in which the Jewish national movement had begun to

expand the question was raised more and more frequently what the

attitude of the Jewish woman would be towards this movement. In the

Jewish nation woman occupies a pre-eminent position.

At the time of the existence of the Jewish state the whole inner life

rested upon family organization. Woman is the entirely coequal ruler of

the home, and truly regal is the description which the Bible traces of

her. She is prophetess and bard, the inspirer of all that is good and

strong, and the bestower of the prize of combat. She is the first to

display that wonderful enduring heroism which is the heritage of the

Jewish race. She initiates the great national works; it is significant

that tradition traces back the liberation out of Egypt to the merit

of noble women. At the time of the erection of a spiritual country

after the loss of the homeland, at the time of formation of the Talmud,

the high appreciation of woman rose still more. In the writings of

that time she appears as the naive leader whose untrammelled and

unsophisticated mind grasps the nature of things, and who, quick in

discernment, settles matters resolutely. But the highest importance

woman attains during the period of the “Ghetto.” Here all life

concentrates in the family. Free civic life is replaced by the narrower

but pleasurable family life. Here woman becomes the creator of a

self-contained family culture. She relieves man of a great part of his

business dealings and makes it possible for him to devote himself to

his intellectual pursuits. In the midst of the heaviest persecution she

inspires him with courage and confidence. She brings up her children

to be valiant and steadfast Jews. She carries into the home a wonderful

natural freshness which replaces as far as possible the tender verdure

of the lost country. The Jewish woman it is who, in this time of

suffering, encourages man to persistence in the faith. Spanish-Jewish

women urged their husbands to seek death together with them. In all the

massacres and persecutions of the Middle-Ages Jewish women gained the

highest crown of martyrdom.

But the disposition of the Jewish woman has radically changed since

complete or partial emancipation. The cause lies in the change of the

whole situation. At the time of the Ghetto the sufferings of the Jew

were as unspeakably heavy as his joys were profound and intimate. For

good and for evil he was under the shadow of a great fate, and therein

he developed. Suffering destroyed his strength, the passive heroism

peculiar to him, home happiness, his kindness of heart and joy of

sacrifice; both united made him true, true to the past and true to his

nation. This grew gradually different. With the advance of so-called

civilization persecution became more petty and perfidious; it no longer

threatened existence itself at any moment, but it crept into every

hour of life, into each everyday activity. The one stab of the dagger

had become a thousand pinpricks, out of the great fate which drew

heroism out of man, and an abundance of passions, virtues, resolutions,

renunciations, struggles and victories of all kinds, a painfully

dragging, tortured and harassed existence had come into being. And

with lesser sufferings the joys got lesser too. The beautiful unity of

home-life became loosened through the great gulf between old and young,

such as is not met with in any other nation of the world. The increased

struggle for daily life separated married couples and impeded the

education of the children, the apparently greater absence of danger

operated against the strong national resistance and the welding and

segregating special customs.

This state of dissolution was reinforced to a great degree by the

declaration of the legal equifranchise of the Jews. Their instinct of

self-preservation adapted itself to the new conditions of existence in

just as extreme a manner as their seclusion had formerly been extreme.

In the now arising fanaticism for assimilation the women, who adapt

themselves most easily to their surroundings and assume their nature,

shared most intensely. While all strove after non-Jewishness the inner

structure of Judaism was crippled, all innate power discarded, Jewish

solidarity dispensed with and independent culture destroyed.

The rigid family organization upon which the vitality of the Jewish

nation reposed, collapsed under the impact of the extraneous; with

Jewish customs the Jewish home began to break up, with the evanescence

of fidelity love too faded. An attempt was made to stupefy through

an outward life of luxury, as bustling as possible, the feeling of

forlornness brought about by the want of inner contentment. Thus it

frequently happened that the assimilated Jewish woman became ever

more estranged from her sphere of activity. She who had formerly been

mistress in her own house was often the slave of her servants; she gave

herself up to a dull, nervous idleness; with her the old charitableness

of the Jews became snobbishness. The desire for beauty which formerly

animated Jewish woman, was distorted by her into a tasteless and

unhealthy love of finery, as if someone transformed a beautiful

national costume into the gaudy robe of a carnival pierrot. Sincere,

devoted faith has gone without making room for a new and strong

conception of life; the more burdensome religious practices have been

given up, a few easier ones have been outwardly retained, without

apprehension of their meaning and without the feeling of their sanctity.

The synagogue and the sermon, the only religiously stimulating momenta,

which one attended ever more seldom, were not sufficient to counteract

a thousand other influences of life and surroundings.

Therefore Jewish woman, more so than man, needed a great, inspiring

Jewish ideal. And on the other hand, the realization of this ideal

needed the collaboration of woman no less than the collaboration of man.

For national rejuvenation in its innermost core can emanate from Jewish

woman to a considerable extent. For a nation without a land and for a

nation in dispersion, home is the pillar of life. In the Diaspora the

Jewish home is the Jewish nation. In the first instance it was found

desirable that Jewish woman should become active for Zionism, that is

contribute in speech and writing to the diffusion of the national idea,

and exhort to self-help. Through her warmth of feeling and freshness

of will she is to help to reunite the divergent members of the nation,

and from her love of the nation a community of souls is to resuscitate.

She must recognize that she can only then become a whole personality

if she values highly the peculiarity of her race, and if she tends

and develops the Jewishness in her. She will then again make home and

family life what they once were: the hub of life and the spring of ever

new energy. One will see there Jewish works of art on the walls, Jewish

books upon the table, and Jewish customs being practised with deep,

gladsome understanding. Then the quiet force which overcomes laughingly

everything inimical will again gather in the family. True, living

love for the great destiny of the Jewish nation, strong, helpful love

for its present, hopeful and cheery readiness to work for the future

of this nation, and preparation of this future through energetic

collaboration in the Zionistic organization, which acknowledges no

difference of duties and rights between man and woman――with this

message the modern Jewish national idea appealed to the Jewish woman.

To be sure, Jewish woman did not enter the national movement in numbers,

nor at once: nevertheless she joined the first pioneers of the _Chovevé

Zion_ as well as the first Zionists. At all Zionist congresses Jewish

women took part as delegates, and in Palestine they have unfolded a

particularly beneficial activity in the domain of home industry for

women.

B. FINANCIAL

1. _The Jewish Colonial Trust_

The Jewish Colonial Trust is the financial instrument of the Zionist

movement, and its main object is the industrial and commercial

development of Palestine and the neighbouring countries.

Among the prominent Jews who supported the formation of the

Company from its inception were the following: S. Barbasch,

_Odessa_; Herbert Bentwich, _London_; M. T. Eliasberg, _Pinsk_;

T. H. Ellman, _Braila_; M. Farbstein, _Warsaw_; Leopold

Kahn, _Vienna_; Samuel L. Heymann, _London_; Theodor Herzl,

_Vienna_; Isidor Jasinowski, _Warsaw_; J. H. Kann, _The Hague_;

Stanislaus Landau, _Lodz_; Gregorie Lurie, _Pinsk_; Max

Mandelstamm, _Kieff_; Alex. Marmorek, _Paris_; Oscar Marmorek,

_Vienna_; Moritz Moses, _Kattowitz_; Max Nordau, _Paris_;

Samuel Pineles, _Galatz_; Heinrich Rosenbaum, _Jassy_;

S. T. Sachs, _Dwinsk_; Leib Schalit, _Riga_; Moritz

Schnirer, _Vienna_; Heinrich Steiner, _Vienna_; W. Temkin,

_Elizabethgrad_; E. W. Tschlenow, _Moscow_; David Wolffsohn,

_Cologne_; and Oser Kokesch, _Vienna_.

According to the Company’s Articles of Association it was permitted

to commence business as soon as an eighth part of its capital, viz.

£250,000, had actually been paid up. This stage was reached at the

beginning of 1902.

The subscribers to the Memorandum and Articles of Association

were: David Wolffsohn, Jacobus Henricus Kann, Samuel Leopold

Heymann, Samuel Barbasch, Gregorie Lurie, Salomon F. Sachs,

Heinrich Rosenbaum. For the last four the Haham, Dr. Moses

Gaster, acted as Attorney. The first Council of the Company

consisted of Dr. Theodor Herzl, Dr. Moritz Schnirer, Dr. Oser

Kokesch, Dr. Leopold Kahn, Oscar Marmorek, Dr. Max Mandelstamm,

Dr. Richard Gottheil, Dr. Israel Jelsky, Isidor Jasinowski, Dr.

Max Bodenheimer, D. J. Bernstein-Kohan, Samuel Pineles, J. H.

Ellman, Dr. Alexander Marmorek, Wladimir Temkin, Dr. Samuel

Schur, Carl Herbst, Dr. E. W. Tschlenow, Dr. Salomon Rosenheck,

and M. Ussischkin.

The first directors were the aforementioned subscribers to the

Memorandum, and the first Governors were: Dr. Rudolf Schauer,

Leib Schalit, Abraham Hornstein.

The first Secretary of the Company was Mr. James H. Loewe, who

resigned his post in May, 1903, on his appointment as Manager

of the East End Branch of the International Bank of London, Ltd.

For the first business year (1902) Mr. David Levontin was

Manager.

The Company carries on ordinary banking business at its Head Office

in the City of London (10‒12 Walbrook) and its East End Branch (41

Whitechapel Road, E.), and is registered at Somerset House as bankers,

in accordance with the requirements of the law.

The nominal capital of £2,000,000 is divided into £1,999,900 ordinary

shares of £1 each and 100 founders’ shares of £1 each. These latter

shares are jointly held by those persons who for the time being are

the members of the Council of the Company. The members of this Council

are appointed by the Actions Committee of the Zionist Congress from

the members, and are entitled at any General Meeting of the Company on

all questions, with the exception of that relating to the declaration

of a dividend, to as many votes as all the holders of ordinary shares

present and voting at such General Meeting. The capital issued,

including the aforementioned 100 founders’ shares, amounted, on the

15th May, 1916, to £261,658. The Company is controlled by a Council

consisting at present of twenty members, who are at the same time the

joint holders of the founders’ shares referred to above, and by a Board

of Directors consisting at present of thirteen members, of whom four

are Governors ( Representatives of the Council). Until his death in

September, 1914, David Wolffsohn was President of the Council and a

Governor. He succeeded the late Dr. Herzl in these positions on his

death in 1904. Previous to that Wolffsohn was Chairman of the Board

of Directors, which position he had held since the formation of the

Company in 1899.

The members of the present Council are Professor Dr. O.

Warburg (Vice-President), Dr. M. J. Bodenheimer (Reporter), M.

M. Ussischkin, I. A. Rosoff, A. Podlischewsky, Simon Rosenbaum,

I. Naiditsch, J. H. Kann, L. Kessler, Jean Fischer, Dr. V.

Jacobsohn, M. Hornstein, Dr. A. Marmorek, Julius Simon, L.

Motzkin, Dr. A. Hantke, J. Kremenetzky, Dr. A. Friedemann, Dr.

A. Klee. The members of the present Board of Directors are:

Dr. V. Katzenelsohn (Chairman), J. H. Kann (Vice-Chairman),

S. Barbasch, H. Urysohn, Joseph Cowen, I. A. Rosoff, M. M.

Ussischkin, Jean Fischer, Julius Simon, L. Kessler, M.

Feldstein, Dr. V. Jacobsohn, J. Kremenetzky. The last four

members are the Governors.

2. _The Anglo-Palestine Company, Ltd._

This Company was registered on the 27th January, 1902, and began

its business operations in the spring of 1903. Its Head Office is

at _Jaffa_, and it has Branches at _Jerusalem_ (Manager: Dr. Isaac

Levy; Sub-Manager: S. Gordon), _Hebron_ (Manager: S. Slonim), _Haifa_

(Manager: V. Kaisermann), _Beirut_ (I. Lipawsky, who died in October,

1915, was Manager before the outbreak of war), _Safed_ (Manager: J.

Karniol), _Tiberias_ (Manager: Mr. Bentovim).

The Managing Director of the Company is Mr. David Levontin,

who is assisted at the Head Office by S. Hoofien, Assistant

General Manager, and J. Grasowsky and M. Arwas, Sub-Managers.

The Company is the mainstay of Jewish colonization in Palestine.

It advances money to Land Societies for buying land, which is then

sold to new immigrants, also to building societies for establishing

modern hygienic quarters in the vicinity of towns (Jaffa, Jerusalem,

Haifa, etc.). It also makes advances for the installation of water

supplies in the Jewish Colonies, and grants loans on long terms for the

development of plantations. It has further organized with its own means

Co-operative and Loan Societies for the purpose of buying agricultural

implements and selling the products of the soil, especially oranges,

lemons and wine. The Company has also elaborated various projects

for public enterprises, such as tramways, irrigation works, electric

lighting, etc. The Company also carries on every kind of banking

business, dealing with all elements of the population regardless of

race or creed. Thus the Company has become an important factor in the

economic life of the country.

The nominal capital of the Company is £120,000, divided into 120,000

ordinary shares of £1 each. The paid-up capital on the 15th May, 1916,

was £99,727.

The Board of Directors of the Company consists of the

following members: J. H. Kann (Vice-Chairman), Dr. N.

Katzenelsohn, S. Barbasch, H. Urysohn, Joseph Cowen, M. M.

Ussischkin, L. Kessler, M. Feldstein, J. Kremenetzky, I. L.

Goldberg, D. Levontin (Managing Director). The last Chairman

of the Company before the war was the late David Wolffsohn.

3. _The Anglo-Levantine Banking Company, Ltd._

This Company was registered on the 8th May, 1908, and has since then

carried on banking business in Turkey.

The nominal capital of the Company is £100,000, and the paid-up capital

on the 15th May, 1916, was £25,038.

The Board of Directors consists of the following members: Dr.

N. Katzenelsohn (Chairman), J. H. Kann (Vice-Chairman), S.

Barbasch, Joseph Cowen, M. Feldstein, Dr. V. Jacobsohn, L.

Kessler, J. Kremenetzky, D. Levontin, S. Mitrani, H. Urysohn.

The Constantinople Managers are: S. Mitrani (Director) and Dr.

V. Jacobsohn (Director).

4. _The Jewish National Fund_

The Jewish National Fund was established in accordance with a decision

of the second Congress, its object being to acquire land for the Jewish

people in Palestine, such land to remain for ever the property of the

whole Jewish nation. The management of the Fund has deemed it its duty

to promote all undertakings of public utility in Palestine, assisting

thereby to the utmost the general progress of the work of colonization.

The Jewish National Fund is the most popular of Zionist institutions.

The Jewish National Fund was legalized in this country on the 8th of

April, 1907, as an “Association Limited by Guarantee, and not having

a Capital Divided into Shares.” By the constitution of the Association

the permanent right of control is vested in the representatives

elected by the Zionist Congress, who are identical with the holders

of founders’ shares and members of the Council of the Jewish Colonial

Trust, Ltd. (referred to above).

According to the Articles of Association, only 75 per cent of the

assets of the Fund may be invested in Palestine; the remaining 25 per

cent must always be left in the shape of money on deposit or investment

of an easily realizable nature. The Bankers of the Association are the

Jewish Colonial Trust, Ltd. The Fund amounted at the end of the year

1914 to £209,243 18s. 6d.

The means of collecting contributions to the Fund are numerous and

varied. They include: General Donations, Collecting Sheets, Collecting

Boxes, the Golden Book, National Fund Stamps and Telegrams, Olive Tree

Donations, Contributions to the Workers’ Dwelling Fund, etc. The Golden

Book has been instituted for the purpose of entering the names of

Zionist workers and supporters, on payment of the sum of £10 or more.

The first Golden Book, containing 5000 names, has already been filled.

It is an elaborately executed work of art, and is generally exhibited

at Zionist Congresses. The second Golden Book, now in use, was produced

by the Palestinian Art School “Bezalel” at Jerusalem. On the entry of a

name in this book, an artistically executed certificate is issued.

A few years ago another book, called “Memorial Book,” was instituted

for the purpose of perpetuating the memory of Jews who have defended

the honour or property of the Jewish people in Palestine, or have been

permanently and successfully occupied in the interest of the Jewish

National Fund, or have left by will, according to their means, a

considerable legacy for the benefit of the Fund.