Jewish Philanthropy and Enlightenment in Late-Tsarist Russia

Postscript

Postscript T he OPE played a critical role as a catalyst for the transformation of Russian Jewry. Beginning as a quasi-arm of the government, it ended by helping the provinces help themselves. In fact, the influence passed both ways. Just as the St. Petersburg center facilitated change in the Pale of Settlement, so too the Pale put pressure on the center, encouraging the society to modify its organizational structure and central goals. Whereas St. Petersburg professionals are often seen as having lost political and social influence after 1882, when post-Enlightenment solutions gained dominance, my research shows that OPE leaders invented new roles to continue their own relevance. They radically expanded the OPE educational program while initiating additional cultural programs, such as sending lecturers to the Pale and creating a network of affiliated libraries. In 1913, the budget of the St. Petersburg center was 100,000 rubles. Prior to World War I, 10,000 students attended OPE-sponsored schools. During the war, that number increased to 25,000. The historical work begun under the aegis of the OPE enjoyed success, culminating in a variety of scholarly institutions and achievements, including the sixteen-volume Jewish Encyclopedia, published in St. Petersburg between 1907 and 1913, and the formation of the Jewish HistoricalEthnographic Society with its quarterly journal, Jewish Antiquities (Evreiskaia starina). The many lectures on Jewish history, economics, politics, ethnography , and education, held under the auspices of the OPE, galvanized a 223 feeling of pride among secular Jews in St. Petersburg. Other branches, such as those in Kiev, Odessa, Moscow, and Riga, established their own historical commissions. OPE activities facilitated the emergence of such prominent historians as Simon Dubnov, Yuly Gessen, Sergei Tsinberg, Shaul Ginzburg, Israel Sosis, Sergei Borovoi, and Mark Vishnitser. It is a fact that the OPE attracted some of the finest intellectuals in contemporary Russian Jewry. Mentioning individuals who played important roles during the 1905 revolution, such as Maxim Vinaver, Henrik Sliozberg, I. V. Gessen, Mark Ratner, Boris and Yuly Brutskus, and Leon Bramson, one recalls that at some point, they were all leaders in the OPE. Arguably, the organization’s obsession with designing a modern Jewish school spurred experiments in thinking about Russian Jewry that had an impact on politics , as well. Through the goal of promoting enlightenment, OPE leaders, with the help of their well-heeled patrons, envisioned new relations between the center and the periphery, the rich and the less well-off, eventually arriving at new understandings of Jewish identity. OPE leaders perceived Jews as a separate nation that had its own national needs, in addition to the needs of individual “citizens.”1 It is clear that Russia’s Jews modernized rapidly in the fifty years leading up to 1917, becoming less strict about religion and better organized politically, especially after 1897—the year of the establishment of the Bund and the first Zionist Congress in Basel. Whether the OPE should take credit for some of these changes is less clear. Certainly external influences such as the demands of a modern economy and the rewards of education played a large role in propelling modernization. Additionally, pressures within the Jewish community itself, including overcrowding in certain economically less-developed areas such as the northwest, the dramatic emigration abroad, 224 Postscript Medal commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Society for the Promotion of Enlightenment among the Jews of Russia. Source: Michael Beizer, Evrei Leningrada , 1917–1939, Natsional’naia zhizn’ i sovetizatsiia (Jerusalem: Gesharim, 1999). Published with permission of the author. and internal migration of Jews from towns to cities, all contributed to change. Furthermore, pogroms, governmental anti-Jewish legislation, and anti-Semitism also affected the ways in which Jews acted and perceived their lives. It is true, however, that despite all its efforts to win the trust of the masses, the OPE never succeeded in becoming a mass movement. Attempts to lower dues with the goal of encouraging more provincial members to join were only partially successful. Even educational reform, such as the adoption of an extensive curriculum of Jewish subjects in OPE schools, did not produce increased student attendance. Why was this the case? Even when parents decided to give their children modern schooling, as many did, they preferred Russian institutions to OPE schools. Evidence shows that some parents were afraid of the lack of religious piety in OPE programs, while others felt that it was shameful to abandon the heder. Perhaps the main...