ZIONISM IN FRANCE
Joseph Salvador――Lazar Lévy-Bing――Maurice [Moses] Hess――D.
Nathan――Benoît Levy――Dr. A.-F. Pétavel――Ernest Laharanne
――Crémieux――The “Alliance Israélite Universelle”――Albert Cohn
――Charles Netter.
IN France the Zionist idea found a supporter in one of the most
prominent French Jews of the last century, Joseph Salvador (1796‒1873).
He was the first French Jew after the emancipation of the Jews in
France to express the great ideas of ancient Judaism. From 1789
to 1822, when the first edition of his _Essay on Mosaism_ made its
appearance, a period of thirty-three years had elapsed――approximately
the span of a generation, and generally the time it takes for a new
epoch to develop. Salvador, as the intellectual leader of his epoch,
was inspired by those fine moral instincts and that devotion to
humanity which are fostered by the influence of the Bible.
When in 1840 the Eastern question presented itself in all its
disquieting developments, Salvador seemed already to anticipate
the stress and strife that were destined to break forth in those
regions where the cradle of the Jewish nation had stood; and these
anticipations were strengthened when fifteen years later the Christian
nations of the Western world came to wage a sanguinary war for the
Holy Places. According to Salvador, Palestine was destined to become
the economic centre of Jewry, just as much as it was the centre of
Jewish national aspirations. “A new life will be infused into the
mountains of _Judah_, into that platform of the _Moriah_ which to-day
is in the hands of the Turks, and of which it was figuratively said
of old that, sooner or later, it would rise above all hills, all
mountains. The Oriental question, for a while put off or veiled by
other public affairs, will exhaust all the present generation. It
will extend into the next century. To-day, in 1853, its character is
above all a political one: it is a question of Constantinople and the
Dardanelles. To-morrow, perhaps, the discussion will be a commercial
one in regard to Egypt, the Red Sea, Suez. The unity of Europe,
so much desired, so much praised, and never obtained, is already a
question of secondary importance. The centre of the affairs of the
world is changed. The Jew of the new era must rise upon the very soil
where the Jew of the old era was built.”
Illustration: JOSEPH SALVADOR BENJAMIN DISRAELI, M.P.
SAMUEL DAVID LUZZATTO BERNARD LAZARE
“Asia Minor has but two elements of life, two races capable of
civilization and progress, the Greeks and the Jews. Notwithstanding
the deep degradation of the Jews of the East, on the day when new life
(which, by the way, is drawn from the Occident) shall have reanimated
this population, the Jew, by the force of his name, by the promises
of his future, will again become a centre of irresistible attraction
to all the Jewish forces of the Orient, and even of a part of Europe.
A new State will be formed upon the coasts of _Galilee_ and in old
Canaan, where the Jewish claim will dominate under the combined
pressure of historic remembrances, of persecution in some countries,
and of the Puritan sympathy of Biblical England.” These words of
Salvador sounded like the cry of a forgotten generation. It must
be borne in mind that they were written at a time when French Jews
cherished only one hope and one ideal: absorption and assimilation by
their surroundings. It is indeed remarkable that this venerable man,
who was a staunch Jew as well as a French patriot, and is one of the
most eminent figures in Franco-Jewish literature, defended the Jewish
national idea and the restoration of the Jews to Palestine with such
clearness and force.¹
¹ J. Salvador, sa vie, ses œuvres et ses critiques, par le
Colonel Gabriel Salvador [1812‒1889]. Paris ... 1881 ...
(1 _l._ + 539 _pp._) _p._ 231.
Joseph Salvador, par James Darmesteter [1849‒1894],
Versailles, 1882.
To state that he wrote this passage just before the outbreak of
the Crimean War, which seemed a suitable moment for considering
the possibilities in the East more thoroughly than had previously
been done, suffices to indicate the immediate cause. But the mere
opportunity could not by itself awaken such thoughts without the
strong foundation and support of deeper convictions. As he justly says,
“the Jew of the new era must rise upon the very soil where the Jew
of the old era was established.” It is clear that he did not think of
the half-united Jews who do not feel the existence of their spiritual
nationality, and wish to eradicate every trace of it. He was eager
to insist that “the Jewish forces of the Orient and even of a part of
Europe” should create this new Jew.
Joseph Salvador was, like all progressive thinkers of his age,
inspired by the great Revolution, the emancipation of the Jews,
and the brotherhood of all nations. The main thesis of his books
about the Laws of _Moses_ was the “universal mission of Judaism.” No
Jewish thinker of the Assimilation school has defended this theory
more consistently and more powerfully, in language more eloquent
and magnificent. He was therefore generally regarded as the father
of modern progressive Judaism in France. But he did not see any
contradiction between his idea of a spiritual achievement and the idea
of a terrestrial centre, which was suggested by the political thinking
of his day. This fact, in our judgment, proves that the first idea of
a Jewish mission, as conceived by the great Jews of the last century,
was far from negating the desirability of a Jewish national future.
We find a reference to this subject in a long controversy which was
published in the Franco-Jewish fortnightly _Archives Israélites_ in
1864. One of the contributors to this magazine, _M._ Lazar Lévy-Bing,
in a letter entitled “Rétablissement de la Nationalité Juive,” dated
from Nancy, 21 Mars,¹ and in another, “Suite d’une polémique,” Nancy,
2 Mai,² tells us in clear, straightforward terms, that he firmly
believes in a Jewish national future, and considers it the only
solution of the Jewish problem. He had strong religious convictions,
and his most earnest hope was to reconcile the spirit of the age
with the eternal truths of Judaism; for he held that a nation which
repudiated its faith in God would abandon the very foundation of
morality. He regarded union between Jews and the friends of liberty
as an indispensable condition of human progress. He maintained that
the Jews would best serve the universal cause of civilization by
working mainly for their own commonwealth, by preparing for their own
future. Obviously, he says, the minority of Jews in free countries
will be chiefly concerned about the present, and their energies
will be consumed in their own environments, but the majority of Jews
will work in a Jewish direction. There is no incompatibility between
the Restoration of Palestine promised by the prophets, and Jewish
patriotism which strives for the welfare of different states.
¹ XXVᵉ Année.―― ... 15 Avril, 1864. Archives Israélites ...
sous la direction de Isidore Cahen ... (1826‒1902). Paris,
1864, _pp._ 330‒335.
² _Ibid._, 15 Mai, _pp._ 427‒432.
He was strongly supported by a series of articles entitled: _Lettres
sur la mission d’Israël dans l’histoire de l’humanité_, signed
“Maurice Hess”¹ (1812‒1875), a well-known author and distinguished
Jewish nationalist. On the other hand, _M._ D. Nathan, Chef d’escadron
d’artillerie, in a letter, “Une Question Soulevée,” dated from
Toulon 21 Avril,² and M. Benoît Levy, in “Tentative de Conciliation,”
15 Juin,³ denounced the idea of the restoration as a sublime
and unrealizable dream. The heated controversy arose through the
intervention of a Christian theologian, Dr. Abram-François Pétavel
of Neuchatel, who appealed to Jews in favour of their restoration
to Palestine.⁴ He published two books,⁵ in which he dealt with the
question from a theological point of view. His letters to the Jews,
however, lacked clearness. He attempted to bring about a sort of
compromise, but created a bad impression. His action spurred the
opposition afresh, with the result that instead of arguing _ad rem_
it took to arguing _ad hominem_.
¹ _Ibid._ 1ᵉʳ Janvier, _pp._ 14‒17: 1ᵉʳ Fevrier, _pp._
102‒106: 15 Fevrier, _pp._ 145‒149: 1ᵉʳ Mars, _pp._ 198‒202:
15 Mars, _pp._ 240‒244: 1ᵉʳ Avril, _pp._ 287‒292: 15 Avril,
_pp._ 336‒340: 1ᵉʳ Mai, _pp._ 377‒382: 15 Mai, _pp._
432‒436: 1ᵉʳ Juin, _pp._ 472‒477.
His _Rom und Jerusalem_ (1862) is one of the masterpieces
of modern Zionist literature. Hess insists that despite
all attempts on the part of the Jews the Jewish national
instinct cannot be eradicated. The only solution of the
Jewish question, according to him, was the colonization
of Palestine; and he looked to France to make it possible.
The historian Graetz was influenced by Hess’ book in the
direction of Jewish nationalism.
² _Ibid._ 1ᵉʳ Mai, _pp._ 372‒377.
³ _Ibid._ 15 Juin, _pp._ 507‒510.
⁴ _Ibid._ 15 Mars, _pp._ 234‒235. “Une brochure publiée
à Genève et la reconstitution de la nationalité juive.”
――Isidore Cahen.
_Ibid._ 1ᵉʳ Avril, _pp._ 273‒274. “De quelques observations
en réponse aux nôtres une brochure publiée à Genève”: M.
Lévy-Bing, M. Pétavel.――Isidore Cahen.
_Ibid._ 15 Mai, _p._ 416.――Isid. Cahen.
⁵ Israel Peuple de l’Avenir ... Par A.-F. Pétavel ... Paris
... 1861. La Fille de Sion ou le rétablissement de Israël
... Par Abram-François Pétavel ... Paris ... 1868.
At the same time another French writer, Ernest Laharanne, private
secretary to Napoleon III., although a Roman Catholic, wrote a
pamphlet in favour of the reconstitution of the Jews as a nation.¹ He
was inspired with the idea of “progress in human civilization and the
rights of nations.” There is a certain amount of sentimentality in his
pamphlet; but his enthusiasm, although too emotional and rhetorical,
is very dignified. It remains to be said that all the French writers
of that epoch dealt with the question in the abstract. Instead of
giving definite indications of what was to be done, they were content
to express empty hopes and formulate vague suggestions and appeals
(Appendix lxiii).
¹ La Nouvelle Question d’Orient.... Reconstitution de la
Nationalité Juive. Paris ... 1860 ... (8º. 47 _pp._ in
printed wrapper) _p._ 46. Ernest Laharanne, _p._ 47. E. L.
9 Septembre 1860.
One of the greatest French Jews, Crémieux, deserves special mention
here. Isaac Moses Adolphe Crémieux was born at Nîmes in 1796. Having
studied law for some time, he was called to the Bar of his native town
in 1817, and immediately began to practise. He gained a reputation
for eloquence and moral courage. In 1827 he removed to Paris, where
his name was well known. His splendid oratory soon gained him high
esteem in the Law Courts. He gradually rose to fame on account of
his political sagacity and integrity of purpose. In 1840 he came over
to England as the accredited representative of the French Jews to
take part in the deliberations held on the initiative of Sir Moses
Montefiore concerning the Damascus massacres. He was at that time
Vice-President of the “Consistoire Central” of the French Jews. Soon
after his arrival in England he became, with the exception of Sir
Moses Montefiore, the most prominent figure in the agitation which
was inaugurated in this country to obtain reparation from Mehemet Ali
for the anti-Jewish outrages which had been perpetrated within his
jurisdiction. Crémieux then accompanied Sir Moses on his mission to
the East, and by his sound advice and diplomacy helped to surmount
many difficulties. When the success of the mission had been ensured
he proceeded with Sir Moses to Constantinople, where he assisted him
in obtaining from Abdul Medjid the _Firman_ of the 12th _Ramadan_
in favour of the Jews. Two years after this brilliant achievement he
made his début in the political arena. He took his seat in the Chamber
of Deputies, and rose to a position of considerable influence. He
identified himself prominently with the extreme left, and not only
exercised great influence among the members of his own party, but
associated himself more actively than anyone else with the efforts
that paved the way for the Revolution of 1848. From that time he
became one of the political leaders of his country, being always
in power though not always in office. He was several times member
of the French Cabinet, and in 1870 he was one of the members of the
Government of National Defence.
The emancipation of the Jews in Algeria was due to his initiative and
exertions. In 1860 he co-operated with Sir Moses Montefiore in raising
a fund for the Christians in Syria. During the same year he assisted
in founding the “Alliance Israélite Universelle.” He was its first
President, and remained at its helm till his death (1880), taking
a prominent part in all its affairs. He was the central figure of a
great and glorious struggle not only for “Jewish rights,” but also
for the honour, the greatness and the real significance of Jewish
brotherhood and of the ideas of Judaism. From the defence of the
Jewish martyrs of Damascus down to the Berlin Congress (1878) his
career was one long record of strenuous and enthusiastic effort
on behalf of the Jewish people all over the world. He typified and
personified all that is sublime in the Jewish cause. His whole life
proved the consistency of his Jewish convictions. His attitude and
tone were those of a Jewish Victor Hugo. There was no more inspiring
orator and no greater intellect. He was the creator of the “Alliance
Israélite Universelle” in the highest sense. He raised it from
insignificance to the importance it had achieved before he died. His
last official act as the President of the “Alliance” was to sign an
appeal on behalf of Jewish schools in _Jerusalem_.
Illustration: ALBERT COHN CHARLES NETTER
ISAAC M. A. CRÉMIEUX
_Rabbi_ ZADOK KAHN SALOMON MUNK
A ruthless agitation was raised against the “Alliance,” and Crémieux
was personally attacked owing to his advocacy of the emancipation
of the Jews in Algeria, and the international character of the
“Alliance.” The wildest rumours were circulated with regard to the
intentions and activities of the “Alliance,” which were condemned
as anti-patriotic, anti-Christian, and even anti-humanitarian. The
greatest absurdities found their way into the sensational anti-Jewish
Press of several countries, attributing to this humanitarian and
charitable institution innumerable crimes and wickednesses. Had
Crémieux been one of those weak-minded Jewish assimilants who are
so easily frightened by accusations and perturbed by anti-Jewish
prejudice, he would have made concessions or have entirely abandoned
this sphere of activity. But he had sufficient moral strength to
disregard senseless accusations.
Crémieux was not a Zionist in the modern sense of the term. But
one may say, without exaggeration, that his Jewish enthusiasm, his
conception of the greatness of _Israel_, and his love for Palestine
were Zionistic. He was a happy combination of a great Jew and a
great French patriot. Visions of the future of _Israel_ elevated his
intellectual outlook. The resurrection of the Holy Land was for him a
question of first-rate importance. “This is,” he said, “the comfort,
the sunshine of our life.” On another occasion he said: “It must be
admitted that heretofore insufficient attention has been paid to the
Eastern aspect.” Speaking of the agricultural school “_Mikveh Israel_,”
near _Jaffa_, he said: “This will become the very bulwark of the
future. When once the Jews set foot on their own native soil they will
never leave it again.” In all his speeches he laid emphasis upon the
need for knowledge of the _Hebrew_ Bible. The Jewish ideal, to use
his own term, “is quite distinct,” and those who trample upon justice
will have to come back to us, the progeny and successors of those who
first received “the Divine Word.” This is the spirit which animated
the “Alliance Israélite Universelle,” particularly during the earlier
stages of its existence.
One of the most active members of the “Alliance,” and a devoted friend,
pupil and admirer of Crémieux, was Albert Cohn (1814‒1877). He filled
numerous communal and other offices with distinction. He was a member
of the Central Consistory of France, President of the Paris Benevolent
Society, a prominent member of the “Alliance,” and President of the
Society of the Promised Land. He sympathized with all who were in
distress, and participated in their grief; he expended a great part of
his wealth in mitigating their sufferings; his time was always at the
command of the poor. He combined the characteristics of an idealistic
and a practical Jew. He was an ardent communal worker in the Jewish
community in Paris, but at the same time was engaged throughout his
life in Palestinian work. He had a remarkable gift of intuition, and
foretold great future developments in Palestine.¹
¹ Albert Cohn wrote in a letter, in French, from _Jérusalem_,
ce 15 juillet (in a moment of extraordinary clairvoyance):――
“MONSIEUR LE REDACTEUR,
“... when we succeed to make this patriarchal City a centre
of religious studies, a sort of a Jewish University for the
Orient and the adjacent countries ... we shall have erected
a worthy monument to the spirit of the age” (Archives
Israélites, Nº. 16――15 Août, 1864, _p._ 715).
Another French Jew of special note, as one of the first pioneers of
the colonization of Palestine, was Charles Netter (1826‒1882). As
early as 1858 he was the chief promoter of the “Société de Patronage
des Ouvriers Juifs de Paris.” In 1859 (after the Mortara case) he
conceived, together with Crémieux and others, the idea of a “Universal
Jewish Alliance.” The “Alliance” was definitely formed in 1861.
Netter was a member of a Committee of six charged with drawing up the
rules and the general work of organization. A few schools having been
established by the “Alliance” in Turkey and Morocco, Netter began
to direct his attention to the condition of the Jews in Palestine.
He undertook a journey to Jerusalem and made very exhaustive
inquiries. On his return he laid before his colleagues a plan for
the establishment of an agricultural school in the Holy Land, which
was immediately adopted. Returning to Palestine, he selected a
large and convenient site in the vicinity of _Jaffa_, and personally
superintended the erection of the school _Mikveh Israel_, the
construction of the various buildings, the boring of the wells and
the laying out of the grounds and gardens. That Crémieux could not
be silent or idle while the work for _Mikveh Israel_ proceeded, goes
without saying. The school became the favourite institution of all the
original leaders of the “Alliance.” It is a curious coincidence that
the title of Manasseh Ben-Israel’s most famous book, _Mikveh Israel_
(1650),¹ became, two hundred and twenty years after its appearance,
the name of the first Jewish agricultural school in Palestine. Netter
visited Palestine very often in subsequent years. In 1882 he left
Paris for his last visit to _Jaffa_, paying a visit to London on his
way in order to consult the Jewish organizations of England on some
pressing questions connected with the Jews in Palestine. He died at
_Jaffa_ whilst on a visit to _Mikveh Israel_.
¹ The Hope of Israel.