A Lie and a Libel: The History of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (review)

120 SHOFAR Spring 1997 Vol. 15, No.3 excursus on the authenticity of"Perzent" as a Jewish version of"Prozent" (pp. 115-122) seems far too long. It also seems to me that forms like "kain" for "kein" may not represent any sound difference at all (as Richter claims) but merely a way to show the protagonist is uneducated. (This is similar to forms like "wuz" and "iz" in English.) Generally the limitations ofthis work are ofthis minor kind rather than fundamental. It is unfortunate that the book ends abruptly with the last literary work analyzed and without an overall conclusion. It would,seem from Richter's book that variations ofvocabulary (the use ofHebrew words) are .the only characteristic which is not inherently derogatory and is therefore frequently used by JeWish writers. Variations in pronunciation and especially variations in German word order have a clearly derogatory connotation, and authors who do not want to attack the Jews generally avoid or understate them. All in all this study shows how easily even relatively slight "Jewish" deviations from German syntax and grammar could be used to emphasize the Jews' foreignness. The use of language to stereotype Jewish characters in German literature has an evident parallel in American literature-the way Black speech is presented. In both the German and American cases, minority ethnic variations in language are used as a mark of inferiority and exclusion and are not given the type of affectionate treatment reserved for "majority" dialects. This book presents an interesting and rarely studied aspect ofthe relationship of the majority in German-speaking Europe to the Jewish minority. It is solid and well balanced and provides food for thought. Only those whose knowledge ofthe subtleties ofthe German language is rather sophisticated will be able to benefit from its close analysis, however. For those able to follow the analysis, Richter's book adds another aspect to the picture of German Jewish society, acculturated to Germany but still noticeably though subtly distinct from the rest ofthe population. For those who distrusted the Jews there was still a ~lUance about them which made them outsiders who could never be totally accepted. Steven Lowenstein Levine Professor of Jewish History University of Judaism A Lie and a libel: The History ofthe Protocols o/the Elders o/Zion, by Binjamin W. Segel, translated and edited by Richard S. Levy. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1995. 148pp. $22.50. This is an unusual and unusually useful little book in several respects. Most of its pages are devoted to a new English-language edition of an expose ofthe falsehood ofthe Protocols, which Segel published in 1926 under the title "Welt-Krieg, Welt-Revolution, Book Reviews 121 Welt-Verschworung, Welt-Oberregierung" [World War, World Revolution, World Coilspiracy, World Super-Government] in Berlin. But even more useful to most American readers will be Richard Levy's substantial introductory essay, "The political career ofthe Protocols ofthe Elders ofZion." Thirdly, there is an appendix presenting eight pages of passages from the Protocols itself. Each of these three sections is placed in context by Levy's properly scholarly apparatus. In addition, there is a chronology ofthe publication ofthe many versions ofthe Protocols, a bibliography, and an index. The Protocols is a legendary work in several respects. First and foremost it is a libelous legend, professing to be the "protocols" of a meeting ofJewish elders as they plot to take over the world. Depending on the version, these elders met in the old Jewish cemetery in Prague or at a secret conclave during the 1897 Zionist Congress in Basel to hatch their scheme. Along with their slavish subordinates, the Freemasons, these "evil Jews" planned to create a chaos ofwars and revolutions, from which they would emerge as the string-pulling masters. Secondly, the Protocols is legendary in the sense that it has appeared and continues to appear in many differing versions; though clearly based on one another, they often are re-written to fit the agenda ofthe particular antisemites who publish them and the historical context of the publication. First published in 1903, it was convincingly proven to be an utterly fraudulent forgery in the early 1920s, and yet it continues to reemerge in...