Some not very light reading -- the life of Sir Moses Montefiore

Moses Montefiore: Jewish Liberator, Imperial Hero I just finished reading Moses Montefiore: Jewish Liberator, Imperial Hero byby
by Abigail Green.  This is by no means a beach book.  It spans 423 pages of densely written text followed by over a hundred pages for the notes, appendix, and index.. It is very heavy on the history and does not really get inside the head of the subject to the extent that other biographies tend to do.  That may be because Montefiore ordered so many of his papers to be burned, thereby securing his private life from coming into public view.  There are some extant letters and diary entries that she does draw upon, though, to offer some insight on the experience of this Sephardic Englishman who was so involved in historic events affecting his Jews throughout the world in his 100 year lifespan.  His wife of 50 years, Judith, was of Ashkenazic background, and her sister was married to a Rothschild.   There were fantastically rich Jews, and Montefiore was granted the title Sir by Queen Victoria just after she assumed the throne.  Still  Jews still did not have full rights in England and anti-Semitic sentiments were openly expressed.  In other parts of Europe and in the Middle East, Jews were persecuted by both Christians and Muslims.  The details of such instances that were brought to Montefiore's attention are presented through many pages of the book.

One of the parts I found most striking was the parallel between Avraham's purchase of ma'aras hamchpela and  Montefiore's purchase of land in the Holy Land. The seller would declare, "You are my friend, my brother, the apple of my eye, take possession of it [the land] at once. This land I hold as an heirloom from my ancestors.  I would not sell it to any person for thousands of pounds, but to you I give it without money . . ." but only excuses followed.  Montefiore ended up paying a full thousand pound (p. 247).   However, most of the other transactions recorded in the book -- and there are a great  many -- are not as fascinating.  There is a great deal of painstaking detail included, which shows solid research but does not make the book a real page turner.

The author does provide some speculation about what Montefiore may have wished to hide. She states almost as if it were established fact that Montefiore had children outside his marriage though she fails at producing anything concrete to substantiate it. In the instances when she presents the supposed sons rumored to be his, she then admits in the following paragraphs that their mothers were not in the vicinity of Montefiore at all at the time the child would have been conceived.     She pulls this type of thing also in a totally different context in which she recounts that Montefiore ventured on the Temple Mount during one of his historic trips to Jerusalem.  He was subsequently put in cherem [excommunicated for a religious violation].  Then a few paragraphs down she relates how the proposed schools for girls in the Holy Land was not at all well received, and that it was this proposal that prompted his excommunication
  The author does try to bring up the opposing forces of the Victorian notion of modernity, European superiority, self-sufficiency, and  progress with the rooted and networked view of Torah Jewry.  Montefiore opposed the Reform movement, felt strongly about his Jewish heritage, and seemed to keep Shabbos and kosher (though the author points out the port would not have been made of kosher wine).  He cut off relations with his brother after his defection to the Reform congregation, though some of his relations ended up marrying Christians.  Though he often wrote sifrei Torah -- the opening and closing in his hand -- he was not  truly yeshiva educated in the sense that an Eastern European observant Jew would have been.  He also would donate and raise money for Christian causes, as well as Jewish ones.  So, though he provided financial support that benefited many Jews, including the most right wing beneficiaries of the chaluka system, his life was not defined completely by the values they would have espoused. He wouldn't quite fit the standard demarcations of the strata of Orthodoxy today.

Visit my site www.kallahmagazine.com -- not just for kallahs. You can also see posts at http://www.examiner.com/x-18522-NY-Jewish-Bridal-Examiner

Comments

Lion of ZIon said…
i love montefiore. have you ever heard the yehoram gaon song about him?

"Jews still did not have full rights in England"

this statement requires such detailed qualification that to let it stand as it does leaves readers with a completely inaccurate understanding of the status of anglo jewry. in truth (and especially in context) they had it really good, minus one or two unimportant (albeit insulting) restrictions.

"he was not truly yeshiva educated in the sense that an Eastern European observant Jew would have been"

most eastern european observant jews were not yeshivah educated either. (and of course he was a patron of yeshivah study, both abroad and on his own estate)
Lion of ZIon said…
"He wouldn't quite fit the standard demarcations of the strata of Orthodoxy today"

why not (especially when referring to the later stages of his life)?
Ariella's blog said…
"Jews still did not have full rights in England" Remember, his life span was a full hundred year, so things were changing during that time. However, the book details more than one attempt to get formal emancipation for Jews passed in Parliament. Each attempt failed.
"he was not truly yeshiva educated in the sense that an Eastern European observant Jew would have been"
what I mean by this is that, though he was familiar with Torah, he would was not very well versed in Talmud. I don't mean to imply that every single Easter European man was, but there were yeshivas that produced real Talmidei Chachamim there unlike in England.

"He wouldn't quite fit the standard demarcations of the strata of Orthodoxy today" This relate to the above comment and the one you cite in your next comment. While he took a strong position against Reform and did support the Jews of Israel who were of the very RW persuasion, he also gave money to Christian causes, including local churches. He seemed to have been more educated in secular matters than in religious ones, though he started off many sifrei Torah and would walk miles to shul on Shabbos. So his sympathies and lifestyle do not neatly fit the way Jews are cegorized as RW and LW today.
Ariella's blog said…
What I say about him is not meant to be a critique but an observation. IT is difficult to imagine someone a religious Jew today supporting both a kollel of chareidim and giving money to aid church activities, as well.

Popular Posts