The Velizh Affair

Home > Other > The Velizh Affair > Page 1
The Velizh Affair Page 1

by Eugene M. Avrutin




  THE VELIZH AFFAIR

  •

  ii

  THE VELIZH AFFAIR

  B

  •

  lood Libel in a Russian Town

  •

  EUGENE M. AVRUTIN

  1

  iv

  1

  Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries.

  Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

  198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

  © Oxford University Press 2018

  All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above.

  You must not circulate this work in any other form

  and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

  Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data

  Names: Avrutin, Eugene M., author.

  Title: The Velizh affair : blood libel in a Russian town / Eugene M. Avrutin.

  Description: New York, NY : Oxford University Press, [2018] |

  Includes bibliographical references and index.

  Identifiers: LCCN 2017011535 (print) | LCCN 2017012749 (ebook) |

  ISBN 9780190640538 (updf) | ISBN 9780190640545 (epub) |

  ISBN 9780190640521 (hardback : alk. paper)

  Subjects: LCSH: Blood accusation—Russia—Velizh—History—19th century. |

  Antisemitism—Russia—Velizh—History—19th century. |

  Jews—Persecutions—Russia—Velizh—History—19th century. |

  Trials (Murder)—Russia—Velizh. | Russia—Ethnic relations. |

  Velizh (Russia)—Ethnic relations.

  Classification: LCC BM585.2 (ebook) | LCC BM585.2 .A97 2017 + (print) |

  DDC 305.892/404727—dc23

  LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017011535

  1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2

  Printed by Sheridan Books, Inc., United States of America

  To Yingying and Abi

  for being there

  vi

  Contents

  •

  Preface ix

  Acknowledgments xvii

  Introduction 1

  1. Fedor Goes for a Walk 13

  2. Small- Town Life 31

  3. Tsar Alexander Pays a Visit 57

  4. The Confrontations 79

  5. Grievances 101

  6. The Investigation Widens 117

  7. Boundaries of the Law 133

  Epilogue 153

  Appendix: Jewish Prisoners Held in the Town of Velizh 161

  Notes 163

  Selected Bibliography 197

  Index 213

  vii

  vi

  PrefaCe

  •

  On the mOrning Of December 5, 1919, in revolutionary Petrograd,

  the historian Simon Dubnov walked several miles along a maze of dark

  and empty streets to a meeting of the newly inaugurated Commission

  for Investigating Blood Libel Materials.1 This was a desperate time in

  the city. The brutality and chaos of the Civil War wreaked havoc on the

  early Soviet state. In the nearly two years after the collapse of the tsar-

  ist regime in February 1917, the population of Petrograd decreased by

  50 percent. The death toll skyrocketed, as did the unemployment rate.

  Shortages of fuel, electricity, clean water, and basic food staples such as flour, eggs, bread, and potatoes meant a drastic fall in the standard of

  living for those who remained. The sudden collapse of all institutions

  of law and order resulted in an unprecedented number of petty thefts,

  muggings, robberies, and rapes. Empty apartments and boarded- up

  buildings could be found on every street corner. Rubbish littered court-

  yards and alleyways. The closure of markets, shops, factories, and restau-

  rants brought an eerie silence to one of Europe’s most dazzling cities.2

  In the early days of the revolution, Dubnov had led a modest but

  privileged existence as an academic. The beneficiary of a special schol-

  ar’s ration— consisting mainly of bread, thin soup, cabbage, and salted

  fish— the distinguished historian immersed himself in work. Like so

  many politically engaged writers, Dubnov worked tirelessly to build a

  new Jewish cultural sphere that lay dormant under the shackles of tsar-

  ist oppression.3 Dubnov converted the kitchen, the only room in the

  ix

  x

  x

  Preface

  apartment that reached a tolerable five degrees Celsius, into a makeshift

  study. He divided the time between writing his magnum opus, The

  World History of the Jewish People; lecturing at the newly established Jewish University; composing editorials for leading periodicals; and

  participating in numerous political and scholarly initiatives made pos-

  sible as a consequence of the events of 1917. For nearly three decades,

  Dubnov called on scholars and Jewish residents in the Pale of Settlement

  to collect historical materials. Ultimately, he believed, historical knowl-

  edge would help regenerate spiritual Jewish life in the tsarist empire.

  At noon sharp, Dubnov joined seven other members of the commis-

  sion in an unheated hall of the old Senate building. Centrally located on

  the embankment of the Neva River, this magnificent structure, painted

  in cadmium yellow, overlooked the Square of the Decembrists. For

  nearly ninety years, the building was home to the most extensive col-

  lection of the old regime’s records ever assembled. The Russian State

  Historical Archive, as it is known today, was formally consolidated

  shortly after the Bolsheviks came to power. Among other things, its

  holdings include the records of the most powerful administrative,

  judicial, and ministerial institutions, as well as public organizations,

  philanthropic societies, and the personal papers of leading statesmen,

  men- of- letters, artists, and composers. Since the implosion of the Soviet Union, scholars have been granted unprecedented access to the historical treasures. Scores of monographs, articles, and dissertations have been

  written in recent years— all with copious archival references. But under

  the Soviet regime, only the most privileged were permitted to read the

  files, and almost no one who was working on Jewish themes. The Soviet

  state classified Jewish records as highly confidential. Some were removed

  from archival depositories and sealed in special vaults; the most com-

  promising files were destroyed.

  For a brief moment, however, after the fall of the old regime and

  before the centralization of the new Soviet state, the possibilities were

  endless. Before the revolution, a handful of scholars wrote books and

  articles on Jewish subjects grounded in archival sources. But these p
ub-

  lications barely scratched the surface of the extraordinarily rich materi-

  als preserved in the archives. The revolution initiated an outpouring

  of new cultural, artistic, and academic projects. Taking advantage

  of the new political conditions, the Jewish Historical- Ethnographic

  Preface

  xi

  Society— an organization specializing in recovering important cul-

  tural and historical texts pertaining to Jewish life in Russia— came up

  with a bold initiative to collect and publish prerevolutionary archival

  documents. The society organized an archival commission to work

  on three particularly urgent topics: pogroms, the history of Jewish

  schools, and the blood libel. The goal was to publish all the materials

  in their entirety, without any editorial redactions, and in their proper

  chronological order.4

  The Commission for Investigating Blood Libel Materials worked

  primarily with materials in the Senate archive. As the highest judicial

  body in the Russian Empire, the Senate presided over the most con-

  troversial criminal and civil cases, many of which generated massive

  paper trails. The members of the commission were carefully chosen,

  to ensure an impartial discussion of such an emotionally charged sub-

  ject. Dubnov joined the social activist Henrikh Sliozberg, the anthro-

  pologist Lev Shternberg, and the lawyer Grigorii Krasnyi- Admoni as

  the Jewish experts, while the celebrated historian Sergei Platonov, the

  director of the Senate archive Ivan Blinov, and the scholars Lev Karsavin

  and Vasilii Druzhinin represented the Russian side. The group met for

  twelve months, usually on Tuesday afternoons, spending most of the

  time working on a sensational blood libel case that had taken place in

  Velizh, a small town located in Vitebsk province, on the northeastern

  edge of the Pale of Settlement.

  Now erased from historical memory, the Velizh affair was the longest

  ritual murder case in the modern world, and most likely in world history.

  Lasting approximately twelve years, from 1823 to 1835, the investigation

  generated a truly astonishing number of archival documents— around

  fifty thousand pages in total. All the materials are impeccably preserved

  in twenty- five bound volumes at the Russian State Historical Archive in

  St. Petersburg; an additional thirty volumes, many of which are dupli-

  cates of the St. Petersburg files, are housed in the National Historical

  Archive of Belarus in Minsk. The Velizh archive includes hundreds of

  depositions and petitions; official government correspondence, reports,

  and memos; personal letters and notes; as well as a detailed summary

  of the case of more than four hundred pages prepared by the Senate—

  known simply as the Memorandum of a Criminal Case ( Zapiska iz

  ugolovnykh del).5

  xi

  xii

  Preface

  The colossal size of the archive complicated the work, making it dif-

  ficult, as Dubnov observed in one of the first meetings, “to answer the

  question— what should we copy?”6 According to the historian’s calcula-

  tions, even if the nonessential items were omitted, they would be left

  with three- quarters of the materials, requiring at least ten thick volumes and years of hard labor. The group discussed many things: how much

  of the archive to publish, the problem of decoding and reading the

  handwriting, how to organize the introductory essay, and whether they

  should publish other blood libel cases as well. Dubnov hoped to edit

  only one volume for publication, preferably the Senate memorandum,

  but his suggestion fell on deaf ears. In the end, the commission agreed to

  publish an exhaustive account, beginning with the 1816 case in Grodno

  and then all twenty- five volumes of the Velizh case.

  Dubnov first came across the Velizh materials in 1893, while living in

  Odessa. In April, he received a letter from an antiquarian by the name

  of L. N. Etingen, who wrote that “after much hard work and a great

  deal of expense” he had obtained the Senate memorandum from an

  undisclosed source. Etingen could not have been more thrilled by his

  find. The Senate made a small number of hectographed copies of the

  memorandum for internal government use only. The document had

  immense historical value, and Etingen set his sights on Voskhod (The Dawn), the most respected thick journal in the field of Russian Jewish

  affairs. Voskhod featured a new monthly column publicizing historical discoveries. The only problem was that Etingen did not have the time

  and, more important, the expertise to carry out the scholarly work

  himself. This is why he turned to Dubnov for help. “Would you be so

  kind,” he asked, “as to whip this into shape under the following guide-

  lines?” Etingen requested that Dubnov take no longer than two or three

  months to complete the work, with the understanding that he would

  receive full credit for the publication and retain the exclusive right to

  republish the materials as he saw fit. For all this work, Etingen offered

  Dubnov the royalties from the Voskhod sales, a meager sum even under the best of circumstances.7

  Although we do not know how Dubnov responded to such an unre-

  alistic proposal, we do know that he did not pass up the opportunity

  to take a close look. Etingen sent the memorandum by special post to

  Odessa with the understanding that it be returned to him in exactly

  Preface

  xiii

  three weeks. At the time, Dubnov was working on a general history of

  Jews in Russia and Poland, while writing monthly columns for Voskhod, and was not in any hurry to accommodate the request. In May and June,

  Etingen penned two impatient letters to Dubnov, insisting that the dis-

  tinguished historian immediately return the document and complete

  the article “as soon as possible.”8 Why was Etingen in such a hurry?

  Apparently, he was not the only person intrigued by the case. Miron

  Ryvkin, an aspiring cultural critic with direct ties to Velizh, was busy

  gathering published and ethnographic sources, including oral interviews

  of survivors and their descendants, for a major publication on the topic.

  At one point, Etingen even agreed to share the memorandum with

  Ryvkin but changed his mind at the last minute, deciding to keep it a

  secret until Dubnov had completed the work.9

  Dubnov never bothered to fulfill Etingen’s request, but he did take

  advantage of the opportunity to take detailed notes. In 1894, Dubnov

  published his own essay on Velizh in the Hebrew- language almanac

  Luah Ahi’asaf (Ahiasiaf’s Register). Putting his notes to good use, as well as other fresh documentary evidence, Dubnov explored a little- known

  episode of the Velizh case as it played out in the town of Bobovne.10 In

  his memoirs, Dubnov recalled that the blood libel had come up in his

  research from time to time and that he had even published some of the

  more interesting findings in a review article about seventeenth- century

  Poland in Voskhod.11 But for reasons that remain unclear, a mysterious silence looms over Velizh, with no mention of his correspondence with

  Etingen and Ryvkin or of the Luah Ahi’asaf essay.

  Perha
ps Dubnov wished to make a claim on the case by getting there

  first? History is full of lively tales of discovery. After all, the race to uncover a lost stash of highly prized manuscripts or to publish a significant piece of research results in a type of immortality that only scientists, humanists, and explorers can truly appreciate. Whatever the reason may

  have been, after the publication of the essay, Dubnov’s name continued

  to be associated with Velizh, and every scholar who worked on the case

  turned to him for help.

  In February 1901, seven years after they first corresponded, Ryvkin

  pleaded with Dubnov to help him locate the memorandum. Ryvkin was

  busy working on several different projects about the case, and he wanted

  to convey the spirit and social conditions of the age by describing as

  xiv

  xiv

  Preface

  many realistic details as possible. To do this he desperately wanted to get his hands on the memorandum. So he rummaged through antiquarian

  bookshops, but he did not know the exact title of the book, the place

  and date of publication, or the number of copies in print. “The copy

  that was once in your possession, if only a short period of time,” Ryvkin

  explained to Dubnov, “is currently in the most unpleasant hands.” But

  try as he did, Ryvkin did not have any luck locating the memorandum.

  Eventually, he managed to collect enough materials to write a detailed

  essay about the case, based on firsthand recollections, ethnographic

  materials, and published primary sources. Ryvkin also published a suc-

  cessful historical novel that appeared in Russian in 1912 and was even-

  tually reprinted in several editions in Yiddish and Hebrew.12

  That same year, Dubnov exchanged several letters with a talented

  young historian who had just received permission from the Ministry

  of Justice to work in the Senate archive. In the prerevolutionary era, no

  other scholar of Russian Jewry had access to so many classified records

  as Iulii Gessen. “You have always been so generous with your time,”

  Gessen wrote to his mentor on February 5. “If there are any archival

 

‹ Prev