Devin E. Naar. Jewish Salonica: Between the Ottoman Empire and Modern . Stanford Studies in Jewish History and Culture Series. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2016. 400 pp. $85.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-8047-9887-7.

Reviewed by Sakis Gekas

Published on H-Nationalism (June, 2018)

Commissioned by Cristian Cercel (Ruhr University Bochum)

Jewish Salonica by Devin E. Naar, Isaac Al‐ shows how the strategies of the Jewish communi‐ hadef Professor in Sephardic Studies at the Uni‐ ty complemented the state’s policies to induce al‐ versity of Washington, is a very important new legiance from a supposedly “suspect” community addition to the history of Sephardic Jews and the toward the project of Hellenization. The second transition of Salonica from the Ottoman Empire to chapter narrates the debates and eforts to fnd a the Greek state, a history of “Jewish Salonica” as suitable religious and political leader, a chief rab‐ the title suggests. Winner of the 2016 National bi. The search revealed the tensions among the Jewish Book Award in the category of Writing three main groups among the Salonica Jewish Based on Archival Material, sponsored by the Jew‐ elite—Zionists, assimilationists, and socialists—as ish Book Council, and more recently winner of the they disagreed about the qualifcations and char‐ 2017 Edmund Keeley Book Prize, sponsored by acteristics of the candidates for the position and the Modern Greek Studies Association (MGSA), the the image of Jewish Salonica each would repre‐ book is already a hit. Navigating the choppy wa‐ sent. The third chapter focuses on the schools for ters of Greek nationalism and Jewish identities, Jewish children, both Jewish and Greek-state the book is divided into fve distinct chapters (one schools, that became the sites that transformed published as an article in the past) that altogether “the children of the last generation of Ottoman and each one individually demonstrate the transi‐ Jews into thefrst generation of Hellenic Jews” (p. tion from a religious, self-governed community in 33); the chapter supports most convincingly the the late Ottoman Empire to the status of religious author’s argument about the Hellenization of Sa‐ minority that the Salonica Jews acquired from the lonica Jews, a process that many of them en‐ 1920 onward. It is a signifcant book that will dorsed and one that has not been acknowledged make a lasting contribution to the history of Jews by the growing historiography on Greek Jewish in Salonica/. history. The chapter hints on the possibilities of The individual chapters “trace key dilemmas these groups to have participated in the profes‐ confronted by Salonica’s Jews that refect their at‐ sional and civic life of their city and their country tempts to navigate the transition from the Ot‐ had the catastrophic Nazi occupation not oc‐ toman Empire to modern Greece, from the 1880s curred. The fourth chapter shows clearly how Sa‐ until World War II” (p. 33). The frst chapter lonican Jewish intellectuals produced histories of H-Net Reviews their community, seeking to defne their history “between the Ottoman Empire and modern and image in the turbulent world of the 1930s; Greece,” as the subtitle suggests. The community, their contribution did indeed shape the image of the rabbis, the schools, and the historians are the Salonica as “Jerusalem of the Balkans” (p. 282), as main focus of each of the four chapters; even in the author convincingly argues. Lastly, the ffth the last chapter, which deals with the centuries- chapter retells, but in its own original way, the old cemetery and its fate, Naar hardly mentions fairly well known by now history of the construc‐ the lower classes, the everyday life of Jewish Sa‐ tion of the University of Thessaloniki that was lonicans, and their interactions with non-Jews. built on the vast Jewish cemetery, the largest Jew‐ This, in a way, is the distinct characteristic of the ish burial ground in Europe. The chapter delves book, because it difers signifcantly from the sev‐ into the murky history of the burial ground that eral works about late Ottoman cities that came after decades of silence has been acknowledged out in the two previous decades and stressed—al‐ with a plaque since 2014. Naar argues that the most naively sometimes—a perceived conviviality plaque text seems to be “exculpating the local au‐ between diferent religious and ethnic groups un‐ thorities” by placing responsibility solely on the der the watchful supervision of the sultan’s court, German occupation, ignoring the role of Greek as the Ottoman Empire went through the Young government at the time (p. 240). The issue is not Turk revolution and eventually its Turkifcation simply one of whitewashing however; there are during the First World War with dire conse‐ many other reasons why the collaborationist gov‐ quences for the Armenians and Greeks in the em‐ ernments of 1941-44 have been—rightly so—dis‐ pire. Thessaloniki was spared from the carnage of credited by ofcial discourse, and it is under‐ the First World War but experienced a massive standable that the Greek-state authorities would transformation because it formed the base of the prefer to distance themselves from any acts of Army of the Orient of the French and British those governments that have stained national his‐ troops battling the Central powers in the Balkans. tory. What is interesting is how the author tells The city also served as the temporary capital of the story of the destruction that started well be‐ the Venizelos camp during the national schism, in fore the arrival of the Nazi occupiers. The Jewish 1916-17, when the country was divided and found community fended of attempts to expropriate itself on the brink of civil war; such a calamity part of the burial ground when the city’s topogra‐ was averted only when the British and French phy changed dramatically, frst following the cata‐ governments forced the Germanophile King Kon‐ strophic fre of 1917 and then following the ar‐ stantine to leave the country and Greece entered rival of hundreds of thousands of destitute Greek the war on the side of the Entente, with irre‐ Orthodox refugees in 1923-24 after the population versible consequences, not least for Thessaloniki. exchange with Turkey. It is telling that the inten‐ When Greece was defeated in the war with Kemal tions and arguments for preserving the cemetery Atatürk’s Turkish independence army in 1922, the were successful until the 1940s, revealing the ne‐ Lausanne Treaty arranged the exchange of Mus‐ gotiating power that the Jewish community held. lim with Christian populations, which resulted in Historians and those among the general pub‐ the uprooting of almost a million Christians from lic looking for a social/urban history of the city Asia Minor. Many of them arrived in Thessaloniki, and its Jewish past in Salonica, however, will not changing the city’s history forever; the event had fnd much. The author makes it clear from the or‐ a direct impact on the history of Jewish Salonica ganization of the chapters and their content that nonetheless, as tensions between the thousands of the book is mainly about the history of elite insti‐ refugees and the Jewish population emerged. tutions in the city as they navigated their course Scholars of modern Greece will have no difculty

2 H-Net Reviews relating Naar’s account to these events, but non- have ofered (pp. 24-25). Several similar argu‐ Greek history specialists will probably encounter ments regarding the Greek nationalist project are some difculties. Key points in the chronology of also exaggerated; few Greek historians believe, those events are not mentioned nor discussed in for example, that the Great Idea project “aspired any meaningful detail or depth to situate the his‐ to transform Greece into a new empire” and tory of Jewish Salonica in a broader—Greek na‐ therefore Salonica Jews stood in the way of such a tional—context after 1912. project (p. 27). Hence the Salonica Jews emerged The impact of the period 1912-23 is generally as a “neo-millet,” a neologism ofered by the au‐ absent from the book and it could have served as thor to depict the status of Jews in Greece after a transition for the period from the late Ottoman 1920. This argument is the most convincing of the era to the incorporation of Thessaloniki to the book: the Jewish communal authorities adjusted Greek state, as it was in fact crucial for the history their status from a religious community to a reli‐ of the city. Other parts of the history of Jewish Sa‐ gious minority following the Lausanne Treaty. lonica and the city in general deserve more atten‐ Equally important for the history of the city tion. The 1917 fre and its consequences are men‐ in the interwar period are the so-called Campbell tioned a few times but only insofar as the reloca‐ riots. It would have been helpful if the author had tion of the thousands of Jews who lost their ofered an interpretation for the reasons of the homes, businesses, and synagogues is discussed. outbreak of riots in the Campbell district. There is How did the rebuilding of the city center take only one brief mention in the chapter on the place and how did the Jewish elite and subaltern cemetery, a hint that some university professors groups promote their interests? What were the and students stirred or even started the riots, but conficts over properties? How did the devastating surely a history of Jewish Salonica deserves a fre shape power relations and the balance of more extensive discussion of the only incident class relations among the Jewish population and that tested Greek Orthodox-Greek Jewish rela‐ with city and state authorities? We learn in the tions. The lack of Greek sources, besides the occa‐ conclusion that by the end of the 1930s the com‐ sional Greek newspaper of Thessaloniki and the munal council had devised plans to move its main sporadic use of some documents from the Min‐ building back to the city center but not much else istry of Foreign Afairs in —not the most about the challenges of the Jewish residents who appropriate for the study of Greek Salonica moved out of the center following the devastating (post-1912)—compromises the ability for the book fre. to engage meaningfully with the information that There is also a misunderstanding of some can be found in sources produced by the Greek turning points in the history of the city in relation state and other similar documents. Such sources to key developments in the history of the country; would have revealed the perspective of the Greek a lot changed between 1912, when Salonica be‐ Orthodox elite groups and institutions but, to be came Greek, and 1919, when the occupation of the fair, would also have turned the book into a dif‐ territory around Izmir brought the vision of the ferent project. More engaged conversation with “Great Idea” (the vision to include all Greek Or‐ books that are central in any analysis of modern thodox people in the same state, at the expense of Greece, by Thomas W. Gallant (Modern Greece the Ottoman Empire) closer, with a catastrophic [2016]), Richard Clogg (A Short History of Modern outcome in 1922. This was a “stepping stone en- Greece [2013]), and others, on the Greek history of route to Asia Minor” only in retrospect and ac‐ the city such as that of Vassilis Kolonas (Thessa‐ cording to the narrative that Greek historians loniki beyond the Walls [in Greek, 2012]) would have been fruitful. There is also a notable absence

3 H-Net Reviews of a detailed engagement with Mark Mazower’s Jewish population (the inability to appoint a chief book on Salonica, Salonica, City of Ghosts: Chris‐ rabbi) and the production of key historical works tians, Muslims and Jews, 1430-1950 (2004), even by Jewish Salonicans that shaped the history and though that book deals with a much longer period memory of the city as “mother of Israel” is not (1300-1950) and the focus of Jewish Salonica is that obvious, as the author argues. It is not entire‐ much more limited to the late nineteenth century ly clear how this chapter fts the argument about and the interwar period. Other works, such as the the Hellenization of the city and its Jewish popula‐ dissertation by Paris Papamichos-Chronakis, also tion, except perhaps from the point of view of two have contributed signifcantly to the history of in‐ historians who over time changed their narrative terwar Thessaloniki.[1] There is also little discus‐ to set the beginnings of Jewish presence in the sion of the historiography on other Greek Jewish city from the settlement of Jews from Spain and communities, in cities with much smaller popula‐ Portugal during Ottoman times to antiquity, once tions than Thessaloniki obviously, that neverthe‐ the city became Greek, to emphasize the millen‐ less provided a testing ground for the Greek state nia-old Greek-Jewish relations. and its relationship with religious minorities. The chapter on the cemetery systematically Athens, Halkida, and especially , the city depicts the relentless eforts of Jewish authorities with the second largest Jewish population in to save their burial ground from expropriation. Greece, which became part of the Greek state in While by 1929 the concerted eforts of Jewish in‐ 1864, could have provided an interesting compari‐ stitutions and intellectuals both in Greece and son and complemented Katherine Fleming’s book abroad secured the pledge of liberal prime minis‐ Greece: A Jewish History (2008). Issues of political ter Eleftherios Venizelos that the cemetery would rights, communal representation, and the interna‐ remain intact, the economic crisis of 1932 (also tional dimensions of local afairs that involved hardly discussed in the book) and especially the Christian-Jewish relations were not entirely new coming to power of dictator Ioannis Metaxas in 1912 when Salonica became part of the Greek threw the issue again out in the open. The pres‐ state; it was in Corfu after all that in 1891 in one sure this time was overwhelming and the destruc‐ of the most serious outbreaks of anti-Semitic vio‐ tion started (even partially) during the late 1930s, lence the Greek authorities were forced to inter‐ that is before the German Nazi occupation vene after intense pressure from foreign govern‐ (1941-44). Here, too, problems with sources can be ments. Salonica/Thessaloniki however was indeed found; a Greek newspaper headline that advocat‐ exceptional, both in its demographic characteris‐ ed for a solution reads: “The space of Jewish mon‐ tics of the Jewish population and especially the uments must be given as quickly as possible to the way this population was perceived and managed city and the university” is translated in the book by the Greek state. Naar is defnitely convincing as “The space of Jewish monuments will be given when he argues that we should avoid seeing histo‐ as quickly as possible” (p. 260). Given the debates ry as teleology, and invites us to rethink and surrounding the fate of the cemetery the transla‐ reconceptualize the history of Jewish Salonica be‐ tion is crucial in relation to the argument about yond the catastrophic Nazi occupation and the shaping public opinion. Another point emphasiz‐ end of the city as “mother of Israel.” ing the exceptionalism of Thessaloniki is the dis‐ The fourth chapter stands slightly apart from cussion of the Sunday holiday, which although the others; it is a chapter about the Jewish histori‐ was implemented by law in 1909 and gradually ans Salonica produced in the interwar period. The introduced in a number of Greek cities between connection between the period that constituted 1910 and 1914, was introduced, as the author ar‐ one of the most severe institutional crises for the

4 H-Net Reviews gues, in 1924 as a measure against the Jews of Thessaloniki.[2] The chapter on Jewish historians and the book overall cautiously deconstructs the myth of Jewish Salonica. It is clear also that now we have an excellent account of how the Jews of Salonica despite of or perhaps because of their diferences as Zionists, socialists, and moderates were becom‐ ing not Greeks but Greek Jews during the inter‐ war period. Christians and Jews could not inter‐ marry as civil weddings were not permitted in Greece (unlike in many other countries in Eu‐ rope), a model to follow for the non-mixing of Jews and “Aryans” as Nazis sinisterly thought af‐ ter they took over Greece. The Greek Orthodox in Thessaloniki were generally hostile to the Hell‐ enization project that more and more Jews were becoming part of.[3] Even if most monuments of Jewish history are gone, the rehabilitation of memory is now more feasible with the publica‐ tion of Jewish Salonica, a book that is already a classic in the history of the city, its Ottoman Jew‐ ish past, and its Greek Jewish present. Notes [1]. Paris Papamichos Chronakis, “The Jewish, Greek, Muslim and Donme Merchants of Salonica, 1882-1919: Class and Ethnic Transformations in the Course of Hellenization” (in Greek) (PhD diss., University of , 2011). [2]. See also Nikos Potamianos, “Regulation and the Retailing Community: The Struggle over the Establishment of the Holiday of Sunday in Greece, 1872-1925,” History of Retailing and Con‐ sumption 3 (2017): 1-16. [3]. See also Vassilis Kolonas, H Thessaloniki ektos ton teichon (Thessaloniki outside its walls) (Thessaloniki: University Studio Press, 2012).

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-nationalism

5 H-Net Reviews

Citation: Sakis Gekas. Review of Naar, Devin E. Jewish Salonica: Between the Ottoman Empire and Modern Greece. H-Nationalism, H-Net Reviews. June, 2018.

URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=49217

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

6