Analysis Of The Massacre Of Jews At Kishinev

1613 Words4 Pages

The history of the Jews in Russia has been in a state of despair. As critical historians, the value and worth of an article can only work by assessing the article in relation to the overall subject/topic. By analyzing the primary source document as a critical historian, “The Massacre of Jews at Kishinev” by N. Tchaykovsky, the value and worth of the article can be achieved.
The article, “The Massacre of Jews at Kishinev,” describes the violent pogrom that occurred in Kishinev, Russia in the year 1903. The overall meaning of the document was a means to further detail the horrors and atrocities being committed by Russia on the Jews.
The historical context of this pogrom can be traced back to the beginnings of Jews living in Russia. In the beginning …show more content…

This policy is outlined in the document “Statues Regarding the Military Service of Jews,” mentions how “The objective of this system was to alienate the Jewish youth from their families and religion (forbidden to practice Judaism and Yiddish, obliged to attend classes in Christian dogma and ritual). Needless to say, this institution weakened the moral authority of the traditional leadership—precisely what the government desired” (Mendes-Flohr and Reinharz 353). This quote exemplifies the length Nicholas I went to weaken the core of the Russian Jewish community in order to forcibly control assimilating the Jews into Russian …show more content…

In “Delineation of the Pale of Settlement,” passed by Nicholas I in 1835, it “clearly defined the boundaries of the Pale of Settlement” (Mendes-Flohr and Reinharz 354). In the “May Laws,” passed by Alexander III in 1882, was based from “a commission to investigate the cause of the disturbances. In its report the commission underscored the alleged failure of the liberal policies of Alexander II and pointed to ‘Jewish exploitation’ as the principal cause of the pogroms. Based on this report, the Temporary Laws were promulgated in May 1882….In effect they constituted a contradiction of the Pale of Settlement” (Mendes-Flohr and Reinharz 356). These two quotes exploited the Jews through the defined boundaries of the Pale of Settlement. The second quote contradicts the first, and ultimately incriminates the Jews—first by separating Jews from non-Jews and secondly, putting blame on the Jews for the recent

Open Document