The City of Slaughter

This poem was written by Bialik in Hebrew and translated by Jabotinsky into Russian in 1903 after a horrible pogrom in Kishinev. It had enormous impact on the Jewish people and lead to creation of many self-defense organizations. This new mentality was crucial to defending the Yishuv and thereafter defending Israel. Ted Belman

From The City of Slaughter:

    Do not fail to note
    in the dark corners of Kishinev
    crouching husbands, bridegrooms, brothers
    peering through the cracks of their shelters,

    watching their wives, sisters, daughters
    writhing beneath their bestial defilers,
    suffocating in their own blood,
    their flesh portioned out as booty.
    And what did these watchers
    cradle in their hearts?
    Did they pray for a miracle:
    Lord, Lord, spare my skin this day?
    These are the sons of Maccabees?

    The heirs of Hasmoneans
    who lie in the privies and jakes and pig styes
    with trembling knees,
    concealed and cowering,
    crammed by the scores
    in all the sanctuaries of their shame?
    Their pious ruses and denials are of no account,
    and in the time of affliction,
    on the trampled ground of the present

    or on the horizon brimming with blood,
    their cries, their confessions, their scourgings
    will be of even less account,
    fists beating against the stones.
    There will be no salvation for the shamed.
    And even their resignation,
    their making peace with shame,
    will not redeem
    the cracked pillars of the synagogue

    or recompose
    the charred scrolls of the Sefer Torah.
    For there is rot in their bones,
    corruption in their hearts,
    weakness in their knees,
    and their bitter cry sent into the storm
    of Kishinev and every Kishinev to come
    shall not be heard,
    not even in the porticos and corridors of heaven.

Pajamas Media | May 29, 2011 | David Solway 

Chaim Nachman Bialik’s great poem about Russia’s Kishinev pogrom of 1903 needs to be read and re-read.

In 1903, the Jewish community in the town of Kishinev, the capital of the Russian province of Bessarabia, was decimated by a pogrom, a frequent occurrence in that part of the world. It was triggered by the age-old blood libel, the Jewish inhabitants of the town suspected of murdering a young Christian boy and using his blood in the baking of matzo. The riot lasted three days, killing and wounding hundreds of Jews, destroying houses and looting businesses. As the New York Times for April 28, 1903, reported, “At sunset the streets were piled with corpses and wounded. Those who could make their escape fled in terror, and the city is now practically deserted of Jews.”

Events of this barbarous nature have been a commonplace of Jewish history, whether in Eastern and Central Europe or in the Holy Land, whether in Kishinev or in Hebron where 67 Jewish men, women and children were butchered and the Jewish community expelled in the anti-Jewish riots of 1929. These are only two of the more notable “incidents” in an uninterrupted chronicle of anti-Semitic bloodletting, culminating in the Holocaust and morphing today into the multipronged attack by the Muslim world, the international left, the United Nations and European capitals on the state of Israel.

The rampage in Kishinev, however, has assumed a kind of emblematic status owing to a celebrated poem, “The City of Slaughter,” by Israel’s national laureate,Chaim Nachman Bialik, who visited the town to prepare a report on the massacre. Few read the report today but the poem, over 400 lines long and filled with macabre detail and vehement denunciation, has become part of the Jewish archive, and is said to have contributed to strengthening the Zionist project and to the eventual formation of the paramilitary Hagannah in Mandate Palestine. Interested readers might be moved to consult Simon Dubnow’s History of the Jews in Russia and Poland and the essay collection Pogroms: Anti-Jewish Violence in Modern Russian History.

 
What makes the poem especially memorable is not only its vivid account of the pogrom but its undisguised condemnation of Jewish passivity and abject resignation — in some instances, as we know, even of collaboration — in the face of endemic Jew-hatred and the repeated eruptions of carnage to which Jewish communities were subjected. Its description of Jewish men cowering in cellars while their women were being raped and disemboweled is utterly harrowing and unforgettable. Bialik knew, as Daniel Gordis explains in a seminal essay, “The Shame of It All,” that the re-creation of Israel was “about changing the condition of the Jew, by changing the nature of the Jew.”

Jews could no longer sit back, defenseless and afraid, while their people were being terrorized and killed. A state would need to be re-established in which the Jewish people would refuse to be the helpless victims of the world’s undying enmity, “shocked by what is done to them [and] infuriated by their powerlessness,” as Gordis writes. And so in the course of time it came to pass that Israel rose again from the darkness of history, not without great suffering and continued slaughter, but with pride, conviction, strength and purpose. Bialik’s poem, with its unsparing judgment of Jewish docility and nonresistance, was instrumental in “changing the nature of the Jew.”

Not entirely however. For among the Jewish population both in Israel and in the Diaspora are many who, like their Kishinev forebears, remain feeble and compliant, timorous conciliators rather than courageous fighters. They live in modern cities, not in shtetls and ghettos. Most flaunt university and college degrees, not yehshiva parchment, and preen themselves on their sophistication and putative insights. The texts they bend over, indifferent to the fury that rages around them, are not the sacred scrolls of the faith, as was the case with their ancestors, but treatises of propitiation, anti-Zionist screeds and manifestos of spurious enlightenment. The result is, mutatis mutandis, the same. True, they no longer cower in cellars while their women are being defiled, but their complicity in the campaign to weaken the Jewish state, reduce its borders to indefensible proportions and encourage its adversaries who wish to destroy it is evident. They are content to watch Israel being raped and dismembered.

Indeed, many actually facilitate the process. Elhanan Yakira in his important 2010 book, Post-Zionism, Post-Holocaust, transfers Bialik’s thesis into the contemporary milieu, speaking passionately about “the participation of Jews and Israelis in the anti-Zionist campaign,” which he regards as “in effect…annihilationist,” as a position characterized by “ignorance, bad faith, or malice” adopted by a “community of opprobrium.” It is nothing short of a “moral disaster” perpetrated by the descendants of Bialik’s colony of submissives who today have transformed the acceptance of victimhood into the disparagement of their own.

 
For the Court Jews are everywhere, the kapos abound, the so-called “peace” constituency retains its prominence, left-wing Jewish professors work tirelessly in classrooms, lecture halls, blogs, articles and op-eds to delegitimize an embattled nation, rabbinical fellow-travelers engage in “dialogue” with antis-Semites and support influential figures ill-disposed toward the Jewish state, Jewish voting blocs mobilize on behalf of their antagonists and betrayers, Israeli revisionist historians and Jewish UN apparatchiks act as Palestinian water-carriers, Jewish public intellectuals and journalists propose solutions to the Middle East conflict that would lead to the disappearance of Israel, directors of Jewish organizations invite Palestinian jihadists to lecture them, or abet sanctions against Israel, or back a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood. These trimmers and delinquents stubbornly deny who their real enemies are, as they saunter cheerfully toward the abattoir. For those who want names and addresses, I provide a compendious list of such tergiversators in my recent book, Hear, O Israel!. But the most reprehensible among them are already well known.

Bialik still has their measure. This is why his poem stays fresh and contemporary and needs to be read not simply as a literary artifact but as a political lesson for the present and a warning for the future. I present below a sort of hybrid version, a cross between an adaptation and a free translation, substantially abridged and focusing on the spiritual and intellectual defection of far too many Jews wherever they may be found. I have taken a few small liberties in the rendering but I believe they are warranted in the evolving context of cultural resilement among a significant element of modern Jewry. The message of the poem is no less relevant today, when the very existence of Israel is increasingly threatened and terrorist charters call for the killing of Jews, than it was in 1903 when the Zionist movement was just gaining momentum.

 

March 20, 2012 | 6 Comments »

Leave a Reply

6 Comments / 6 Comments

  1. Early in the morning of Monday, April 7, 1903, about 150 Jewish men assembled in Kishinev’s town square.
    A few had rifles, some had pistols, while others carried crowbars and pikes. They formulated a plan to defend
    Kishinev’s Jews. But the Russian police had other ideas. They descended on the square and confiscated the weapons,
    leaving the Jews entirely at the mercy of the mob. Bialik’s poem, masterful as it is, says nothing about this.
    The Mayor of Kishinev spent April 6-7 cowering in his house, intimidated by the mob; while the Governor of
    Moldavia did nothing to stop the riot.

  2. Power blinds, Samson Blinded

    “It is shameful for five million souls to rely on others, to offer their neck for the axe and cry for help without trying their own strength to defend their property, honor, and the life” Ahad Haam about the Kishinev massacre.

    Jews used to fear a lot, and the fear made them law-abiding. Abiding the law all the way to death.

    Jews knew for sure of the upcoming Kishinev pogrom in 1903, and organized considerable self-defense units. When police and army surrounded and disarmed them, the units acquiesced with no fight. They were ready to fight pogrom mob, but not the law enforcement agencies, even though the law was clearly discarded in the anti-Semitic Russia.

    Few Jews opposed the Holocaust massacres. Most submitted to what they deemed legal orders of Germany.

    Israelis largely detest the Arabs, and want a Jewish state, but submit to treacherous government that pushes for a Jewish state with Arab majority.

    Jews are not afraid to fight and die. We fought Gonta’s army in the Ukrainian town of Uman; we lost and died, but died decently. Jewish soldiers were decorated with the highest medal more often than any other ethnic group in the USSR during the WWII. Israelis bravely fought against the superior Arab forces.

    Consider this: Jews illegally kept and employed firearms in Tsarist Russia which threatened our national existence. Jews refrain from illegally procuring and employing firearms in Israel whose government poses a similar threat. Arthur Koestler explained the phenomenon in his Darkness at Noon: people who associate themselves with the system persist in their delusion even when the system represses them.

    After the Kishinev massacre, Jews recognized that the government is our enemy. In the subsequent Gomel pogrom, Jewish self-defense opposed the police by force. What would it take for the Israelis to do the same?

  3. Robert Weinberg, “The Pogrom of 1905 in Odessa: A Case Study” in Pogroms: Anti-Jewish Violence in Modern Russian History, John D. Klier and Shlomo Lambroza, eds. (Cambridge,1992): 248-89

    The lurid details of the pogrom can be found in several eyewitness and secondary accounts. Although the list of atrocities perpetrated against the Jews is too long to recount here, suffice it to say that pogromists brutally and indiscriminately beat, mutilated, and murdered defenseless Jewish men, women, and children. They hurled Jews out of windows, raped and cut open the stomachs of pregnant women, and slaughtered infants in front of their parents. In one particularly gruesome incident, pogromists hung a woman upside down by her legs and arranged the bodies of her six dead children on the floor below.

    The pogrom’s unrestrained violent and destructive excesses were
    in large measure made possible by the failure of authorities to adopt any countermeasures. Low-ranking policemen and soldiers failed to interfere with the pogromists and in many instances participated in the looting and killing. At times, policemen, seeking to avenge the attacks of 16 and 18 October on their colleagues, went so far as to provide protection for pogromists by firing on the self-defense units formed by Jews, students, and revolutionaries. For their part, soldiers, concluding from the actions of the police that the pogrom was sanctioned by higher authorities, stood idly by while pogromists looted stores and murdered unarmed Jews. Some policemen discharged their weapons into the air and told rioters that the shots had come from apartments inhabited by Jews, leaving the latter vulnerable to vicious beatings and murder. Eyewitnesses also reported seeing policemen directing pogromists to Jewish-owned stores or Jews’ apartments, while steering the rioters away from the property of non-Jews. As the correspondent for Collier’s reported, ” Ikons and crosses were placed in windows and hung outside doors to mark the residences of the Russians, and in almost every case this was a sufficient protection.” Indeed, Odesskii pogrom i samooborona, an emotional account of the October tragedy published by Labor Zionists in Paris, argues that the police more than any other group in Odessa were responsible for the deaths and pillage.

    Read more

  4. Jewish resistance in Kishinev pogrom

    Jewish Resistance:

    In his review of Raul Hilberg’s book The Destruction of the European Jews [“Nazi Bureaucrats and Jewish Leaders,” April 1962], Professor H. R. Trevor-Roper leans heavily on Hilberg’s thesis that “for two thousand years . . . the Jews had been unlearning the habit of resistance. . . . For two thousand years they had believed that by yielding and compromise they would survive the spasmodic pogroms and expulsions which were their fate. Their habits, their institutions, their responses were conditioned by that belief.”

    . . . In the two-thousand-year period of Diaspora history, Jews offered physical resistance (often armed) when attacked by Christians or Moslems, so many times that the notion of appeasement and docility as a typically Jewish response to non-Jews has no universal validity. But a historian must note that the attitudes of Jews in modern national states was quite radically different from that of Jews in medieval Europe.

    With the outbreak of the Russian pogroms in 1881, the Jews in Odessa were among the first to form self-defense groups, drawing upon an even earlier tradition of self-defense that went back to 1648—49 when the Cossacks revolted against the Polish nobility and pogromized the Jews. Suppressed by the Czarist government, the self-defense groups had little success against the pogromists who outnumbered them. But by 1903, in the wake of the Kishinev pogrom, self-defense became general Jewish policy; self-defense groups were organized by the Jewish Labor Bund and the Poale Zion—mostly young working people who realized that the Jews could not count upon the Czarist government and its institutions to protect them. Self-defense units sprang up in Bialystok, Chudnow, Kertch, Odessa, and Zhitomir. During the Russian civil war and the pogroms in the Ukraine in 1919—1922, Jewish self-defense groups were active in many places.

    READ MORE