The Case of Izmir
The Jewish papers of Izmir also spoke of harmony among the different
groups living together in their city.
37
At the start of the year, a recently
founded Ladino journal, El Meseret, published an article describing the
cooperation and openness that abounded in Izmir. It told the story of a
38 · Julia Phillips Cohen
young man who early one morning awakened his neighbors with alarm-
ing cries. As they soon realized, he was drowning near the docks and
calling for help. “It was early in the morning,” the paper recounted,
“most people were still asleep, some were already in the synagogue re-
citing their prayers.” (The event occurred in the neighborhood of Karataş,
where many Jews lived.) “All those around responded rapidly and ran
out . . . everyone yelled to the man to approach, but as he tried he lost all
his remaining strength and began to sink. If it had not been for a Jewish
boy . . . who tied a rope around his body . . .”
38
The story, as we can surmise, ends happily and with a Jewish hero. For
the time being, however, the helpless drowning man remains unidenti-
fied. “No one knew to which religion this man belonged, or how he had
fallen into the sea,” but this did not stop them from saving him, the no-
tice furthered. As it turned out, the man was Greek. The paper proudly
pointed to this fact in order to demonstrate the level of intercommunal
respect and support present in the city: the denizens of Izmir risk their
lives for the sake of their fellow man, readers learned, without taking
note of or inquiring after his religion.
A variant of this ideal vision of interethnic “blinders” was echoed in
the columns of El Meseret on 19 February, in a piece which reminded its
audience that “our magnanimous sultan protects all of his citizens with-
out distinction of race or religion.” This time, the article described the
regular weekend promenades that residents of Izmir were known to take
in and around the city. Thankfully, the article explained, the sultan took
good care of all Ottomans: “the surveillance of the police is not wanting,
there is no reason to be afraid, and we all find safety and peace” during
the excursions.
Yet the same article which had begun with discussions of the sultan,
safety, and peace continued with a warning. Despite these near-perfect
conditions, it explained, “we Jews take our outings in such a strange
manner that we invite malicious gossip. And so it is that every year the
non-Jewish journals of our city relate at least one or two unpleasant inci-
dents . . . which, even if they do not shame our entire nation, clearly do
not bring us any honor. And why is this? It is because . . . we go walking a
la europea (in European fashion), men and women together, hand in hand,
with drinks and food. These good people believe themselves to be acting
like Europeans without understanding the European way. They go just to
Jewish Imperial Allegiance and the Greco-Ottoman War of 1897 · 39
have fun and forget that they are not at home—that they are in a public
place . . . a place which is open to all eyes.”
39
The article further detailed how “alcohol, a poor counselor,” was
leading Jews of both sexes to get drunk, sing, prance around, and shout,
which in turn spawned the laughter and ridicule of non-Jewish passers-
by. Consequently, brawls would break out, the women tried to interfere,
and in the end, the article explained, “Jewish men and women get en-
tangled with non-Jews, the public tries to intervene, and the blame is
laid upon the Jew or, better put, upon ‘the Jews.’“ The paper admonished
its readership, noting that as Jews they occupied a precarious position
and that they must maintain “serious caution in their actions and move-
ments.” In light of these comments, the paper’s earlier insistence on the
invisibility of communal boundaries can be seen more clearly for what it
was—the excessive protestations of a journal intent upon shaping both
its readers’ behavior and the way they interpreted their reality.
While the context of interethnic violence was notably different here,
the immediate solution proposed by the Ladino press of Izmir coincided
with the approach advocated within the pages of Salonica’s Jewish pa-
pers in response to the mischief of the stone-throwing Jewish and Greek
youths in that city. Noting that for years the veteran Ladino newspaper
of Izmir, La Buena Esperansa, had dedicated editorials to the unsettling
subject of the outings (and the brawls that often resulted from them), El
Meseret called upon the chief rabbi to ensure that rabbis across the city
denounce these activities once and for all by giving sermons on the mat-
ter in their synagogues. The piece further suggested that their spiritual
leader enlist the force of the police, since “it is within their power to pre-
vent these people from getting drunk in public.”
40
The moral that El Meseret’s author drew from these “scandalous ac-
tivities,” however, represents a drastic departure from the conclusions
drawn by Jewish elites in Salonica in response to the rock fights. In that
case, journalists and representatives of the Alliance alike concluded that
such exchanges were a sign of essentially “premodern,” unenlightened
behavior that could be rectified through “modern,” western-style educa-
tion. Not so here. The piece from Izmir did not treat such clashes as ves-
tiges of a disagreeable past, but rather as the result of embarrassing and
mistaken attempts among local Jews to be “modern” by aping the man-
ners of westerners. “Rather than imitate the Europeans, many of whose
40 · Julia Phillips Cohen
customs do not suit us, we would be well served to imitate the Turks, re-
moving from our midst various European customs which we enact only
awkwardly and which bring us great moral and material harm,” it ex-
plained.
41
By offering this interpretation, El Meseret used the occurrence
of regular disturbances to offer its readership a moral and political lesson:
Ottoman Jews were to be made aware, if they were not already, of their
special affinities with their Muslim neighbors and thus to consciously
strengthen these connections as a result of their reading.
42
Expressing the editors’ gratitude to those responsible, subsequent re-
ports indicated that the campaigns against the ill-advised drunken strolls
were proving successful. By March, however, a new problem had arisen,
“an even dirtier wound,” the paper reported, “worse than the earlier-
mentioned outings.” Now, apparently, the Sabbath excursions were be-
ing undertaken by “newly Europeanized Jewish youths” who rent boats
and conduct themselves in such a manner that they almost invariably
end up overturned.
43
The message was clear: those involved were told
that they were lucky to have ended up with only a bath, but that they
were behaving irresponsibly and risking their own lives as well as those
of the people who came to their aid.
Although the story itself did not sound wholly unfamiliar, in sharp
contrast to the case of the drowning Greek man saved by a Jewish youth
some months earlier, the news this time did not bring with it a message
of a city blind to communal boundaries. Now, as the tables had turned
and Jews were in need of rescue from the city’s waters, the paper’s stance
had changed radically. Not only did it acknowledge that communal di-
visions were important elements of the local landscape, the article also
declared that the shameful actions on the part of some local Jews would
have repercussions for the city’s Jewish community as a whole. The jour-
nal’s editors were attempting a balancing act, it seems, as they sought to
reinforce their ideal of intercommunal harmony as well as their sense of
obligation to respond to the reality of Izmir’s streets. Calls to halt embar-
rassing and disgraceful behavior of Izmir’s Jews continued in the follow-
ing months, evincing an underlying anxiety about the place of the small
Jewish minority within the larger social fabric of Izmir.
44
These coincided, however, with exuberant accounts of Jewish patrio-
tism and identification with the Ottoman Empire as war approached.
Jews in the city and its outlying areas held special ceremonies for their
military and prayed for its rapid and total victory. They also gave public
Jewish Imperial Allegiance and the Greco-Ottoman War of 1897 · 41
speeches in Ladino as well as Turkish emphasizing their dedication to
the cause and to their state; many donated money, clothing, or supplies
to funds created for the mostly Muslim soldiers of the Ottoman army.
In fact, this particular form of identification was made concrete through
Jewish participation in Red Crescent Society activities and other proj-
ects aimed directly at aiding Muslim populations displaced by the war,
notably those in Crete. Alignment with local and even distant Ottoman
Muslims had become an integral part of how Ottoman Jews expressed
their loyalty to the empire during the war, in Izmir as well as Salonica.
The Ottoman Jewish press praised those who undertook such patri-
otic activities and duties and called upon every community member to
make his or her contribution, however small, to the war effort. El Meseret,
for its part, began a special fund-raising campaign, announcing that half
of all income made from new subscribers would support the Ottoman
military.
45
La Buena Esperansa publicly called upon a certain “Madame
Joselin,” resident in Izmir, explaining that “during the time of the Russo-
Turkish War, she had been the president of a Jewish women’s charitable
society and at numerous times expressed her sympathy with the soldiers
of the imperial army.”
46
The author of the article, explaining that he did
not understand why Madame Joselin had failed to heed the call of duty
this time, apparently compelled her to take action: a subsequent issue
announced that she had managed to bring her society back together and
that the group had already sewn 100 shirts for the Ottoman soldiers sta-
tioned in the region.
47
As with the appeals for sermons and police surveillance to counter
displeasing behavior among the local Jewish community, here too the
paper made use of its coercive power in order to mold the behavior of
its audience. While the irresponsible actions of Jewish youths in Salonica
and Izmir had drawn severe criticism and elicited calls for harsh mea-
sures, highly respected and influential members of the community were
not immune to receiving public lessons in propriety, patriotism, or both,
through the pages of the Ladino press. Even the esteemed “Madame Jo-
selin” had been publicly singled out and scolded, however indirectly and
gently, when her activities did not match up with those which her com-
munity’s journalists had in mind for her and her philanthropic society.
Perhaps even more striking is the fact that, as in Salonica, there would
also come a moment for the Jewish community of Izmir when, in the
midst of the Greco-Ottoman conflict of 1897, the patriotism of the local
42 · Julia Phillips Cohen
Jewish population appeared to have run amok. This development posed
a challenge for the leading elites of Izmir’s Jewish community, who had
until then glibly reported upon the spectacular shows of patriotism being
performed by Jews throughout the war. Perhaps only quite by chance,
this moment arrived just a few days after the disturbance in Salonica.
The first notices of the troubling episode in Izmir came not from the
local Jewish press but rather from the pages of Ottoman journals. A rep-
resentative of the Alliance based in Istanbul noted the occurrence in his
reports back to Paris as well, although he referred to Ottoman papers as
his source. The story sounded familiar enough when it began: it told of
exuberant young Jewish men, caught up in a wave of patriotism, pre-
senting themselves as volunteers in the imperial army. But its predict-
ability stopped there. The Jewish leaders of Izmir suddenly confronted
the unforeseen and—for them—clearly negative consequences of their
community’s sometimes overly exuberant patriotism. As Jewish youths
across the empire presented themselves as volunteers for military ser-
vice, a large group of young Jewish men from Izmir reportedly came for-
ward with a new interpretation of this request: in addition to proclaiming
their desire to serve in the ranks of the Ottoman military, they also made
it known to local officials that they intended to convert to Islam.
The numbers of those who actually underwent this process vary ac-
cording to the source, yet by all counts, the conversions took place over
the space of a couple of days. The largest group was announced by the
Ottoman-language paper Sabah, which claimed that some sixty-five Jews
had converted to Islam while voluntarily enlisting in the army in a show
of total dedication to their empire.
48
The same paper soon cited another
nineteen youths who had requested and undergone the same treatment.
49
By 12 May, it noted, thirteen more were taken into the army with similar
requests and preparations made for their conversion to Islam.
50
Not surprisingly, this news, which showed up in private Jewish sources
such as the correspondence of the Alliance, did not find its way so eas-
ily to the Jewish press. Leaders within the community were no doubt
taken aback by this chain of events. While conversions were known and
in fact somewhat routine occurrences within the Jewish community, they
usually occurred on a smaller scale and for seemingly more personal rea-
sons, primarily economic ones.
51
The reality of any sort of conversion en
masse, then, was so out of the ordinary as to lead to suspicions that foul
play might have been involved or perhaps large-scale disaffection with
Jewish Imperial Allegiance and the Greco-Ottoman War of 1897 · 43
the community or some of its representatives. Yet this was not the expla-
nation offered by the sources of the time. Rather, they pointed only to the
will of these Jewish youths to serve their country and to their deep sense
of Ottoman patriotism.
52
As there seems to be no evidence of the use of
coercion at this moment, and as it is well known that Jews elsewhere in
the empire were being accepted as volunteers within the ranks of the
Ottoman army without becoming Muslims, the occurrence of such large-
scale conversions appears all the more perplexing.
53
Indeed, the leaders of the Jewish community in Izmir had great dif-
ficulty formulating either an explanation or a response to the news. Per-
haps not surprisingly, and much as the Salonican Jewish press had done,
most of the local Jewish newspapers stayed silent on the subject. La Buena
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |