Landscape and Ideology: Reinterment of Renowned Jews in the Land of Israel (1904–1967) 9783110493788, 9783110491074

Citation preview

Doron Bar Landscape and Ideology

Israel Studies In Historical Geography

Editorial Board: Yehushua Ben Arieh, Ran Aaronsohn, Ruth Kark, Rehav (Buni) Rubin, The Department of Geography, Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Doron Bar

Landscape and Ideology Reinterment of Renowned Jews in the Land of Israel (1904–1967)

MAGNES

Published with the assistance of the James Amzalak Fund for Research in Historical Geography, which supports the series of Israel Studies in Historical Geography.

ISBN 978-3-11-049107-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-049378-8 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-049148-7 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Cover image: Crowds near the casket of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl in Tel Aviv’s Herbert Samuel Square, 16 August 1949. Photograph by Avraham Malavsky (JNFPA). Translated by Ira Moskowitz First edition published by the Hebrew University Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 2015 1967–1904 ‫ קבורתם בשנית של אנשי שם יהודים באדמת ישראל‬:‫אידאולוגיה ונוף סמלי‬ [Edeologya ve Nof Simlei: Kvoratam shel Anshey Shem Yehudiyim Badmad Eretz Yisrael 1904–1967] Typesetting: Dr. Rainer Ostermann, München Printing: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Printed on acid free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com www.magnespress.co.il

Acknowledgments During the research that led to this book I made extensive use of numerous archives that hold documents about the phenomenon of Zionist and Israeli reinterment. I warmly thank the staffs of the Central Zionist Archive, Israel State Archive, Jabotinsky Institute in Israel Archive, and others for their assistance and support. While writing the book I was helped by many teachers, colleagues, and friends. I especially want to thank Prof. Yehoshua Ben-Arieh, who helped me enormously over the past several years. This book is published with the assistance of the James Amzalak Fund for Research in Historical Geography, which supports the series of Israel Studies in Historical Geography. It was also supported by a Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies research grant, for which I thank Prof. David Golinkin, the former president of Schechter. I am also grateful to the staff of Magnes Press and especially its general manager, Hai Tzabar. The text was translated by Ira Moskowitz and edited by Prof. Linda Safran; the latter helped me avoid numerous errors and elevated the quality of the book. Most important of all are my wife, Nitzan, and our daughter, Noya. Nitzan has been a steadfast support throughout my career and helped me complete this project, and Noya provided excellent distraction at critical moments. The book is dedicated to the memory of my beloved parents, Rachel Ber (Baumgarten), sixth generation in Jerusalem, and Haim Ber, fifth generation in this city.

DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-201

Contents Acknowledgments  List of Photographs   Foreword  

 V  IX

 1

Chapter 1 Reinterment in the Zionist Narrative 

 9

Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”  Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders 

 47

Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv 

 75

Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret 

 21

 93

Chapter 6 Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild – From Paris to Ramat Hanadiv 

 110

Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky – “My remains ... may not be transferred to Palestine unless by order of that country’s eventual Jewish government”   121 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants  Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment 

 157

 196

Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel   215 Archives 

 231

VIII 

 Contents

Newspapers 

 232

Bibliography of Secondary Sources  Index 

 242

 233

List of Photographs Figure 1:

List of Photographs

The coffin of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl is removed from the family plot in the Dobling  34

cemetery, Vienna, August 1949. Unknown photographer (NPC)  Figure 2:

The casket of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl is placed on display in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building, 17 August 1949. Unknown photographer (NPC) 

Figure 3:

 38

Remains of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl being reinterred in Jerusalem, 17 August 1949. Unknown photographer (CZA) 

Figure 4:

Tomb of David Wolffsohn on Mount Herzl, July 1952. Unknown photographer (NPC) 

Figure 5:

 40

 49

Coffin of Max Nordau on display in front of Tel Aviv City Hall, 5 May 1926. Unknown photographer (CZA) 

 52

Figure 6:

Casket of Yehudah Leib Pinsker inside the National Library at The Hebrew

Figure 7:

Coffin of Yehudah Leib Pinsker and tomb of Menachem Ussishkin, both covered

University, 26 June 1934. Photograph by Zvi Oron (Oroshkess) (CZA) 

 57

with bags of dirt brought from Hebrew settlements, 3 October 1941. Photograph by Avraham Malavsky (JNFPA) 

 60

Figure 8:

Casket of Nahum Sokolow in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building

Figure 9:

Tomb of Peretz Smolenskin in the Jewish cemetery of Merano, Italy. Unknown

in Jerusalem, 24 April 1956. Photograph by Fritz Schlesinger (CZA) 

 64

 68

date, unknown photographer (CZA) Figure 10:

Casket of Zvi Herman Shapira in front of Haifa City Hall, 24 December 1953.

Figure 11:

Coffin of Naftali Herz Imber being lowered from the Tel Aviv in the port of Haifa,

Figure 12:

Casket of Haim Nahman Bialik inside Ohel Shem hall in Tel Aviv, 16 July 1934.

Photograph by Avraham Malavsky (JNFPA) 23 April 1953. Unknown photographer (CZA)  Photograph by Zvi Oron (Oroshkess) (CZA)  Figure 13:

 74  83  89

The remains of Haim Nahman Bialik are carried to their final resting place in Trumpeldor cemetery, Tel Aviv, 16 July 1934. Photograph by Zvi Oron (Oroshkess), (CZA) 

Figure 14:

 90

The tomb of Baron Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild in Père Lachaise cemetery, Paris, April 1954. Photograph by Daniel Frank Photo (JNFPA) 

Figure 15:

 114

The Rothschild coffins being lowered from the navy warship Mivtach at the dock of Haifa, 6 April 1954. Unknown photographer (CZA) 

Figure 16:

 116

The funeral of the Rothschilds in Ramat Hanadiv. Representatives from Jewish settlements carry bags of dirt to cover the couple’s caskets, 6 April 1954. Photograph by Fritz Cohn (NPC) 

Figure 17:

 118

The coffins of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky in front of Young Israel Synagogue on 91st Street, Manhattan, 6 July 1964. Unknown photographer (JIA) 

 146

X 

 List of Photographs

Figure 18:

General (Ret.) Pierre Koenig salutes the caskets of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky at Orly Airport, Paris, 7 July 1964. Photograph by Daniel Frank Photo (JNFPA) 

Figure 19:

 147

Herut leaders, led by Menachem Begin, carry the caskets of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky, 7 July 1964. Photograph by Yitzhak Friedan (JIA) 

Figure 20:

Funeral of Ze’ev Jabotinsky at the end of Allenby Street, Tel Aviv, 8 July 1964. Unknown photographer (JIA) 

Figure 21:

 151

Caskets of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky on display in Independence Park, Jerusalem, 9 July 1964. Unknown photographer (JIA) 

Figure 22:

 152

Memorial ceremony next to the tombs of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky, 29 July  155

1964. Photograph by Yitzhak Baraz (JIA) Figure 23:

 148

“Avshalom’s Palm,” where the remains of Avshalom Feinberg were found in the northern Sinai Peninsula, 10 May 1968. Photograph by Moshe Milner (NPC) 

 164

Figure 24:

Casket of Avshalom Feinberg in front of Rishon LeZion synagogue, 29 November

Figure 25:

Coffin of Hannah Szenes unloaded at the port of Haifa, 27 March 1950. Unknown

1967. Photograph by Fritz Cohn (NPC)  photographer (NPC) 

 164

 186

Figure 26:

Coffin of Hannah Szenes in Kibbutz Sdot Yam, 27 March 1950. Unknown

Figure 27:

Burial ceremony of Hannah Szenes in the military cemetery in Jerusalem.

photographer (NPC) 

 188

Standing are her mother, Katrina Szenes; David Ben Gurion; and Chief of Staff Yigal Yadin, 29 March 1950. Photograph by Fritz Schlesinger (JNFPA)  Figure 28:

Photograph by A. M. Crown (JIA)  Figure 29:

 200

Tomb of David Raziel in the Jewish cemetery in Cyprus, 25 December 1955. Unknown photographer (JIA) 

Figure 30:

 189

Tomb of David Raziel in the British cemetery in northern Iraq, 25 May 1945.

 203

Fresh grave of David Raziel in the military cemetery, Jerusalem, 17 May 1962. Unknown photographer (JIA) 

 208

Foreword

Foreword

In recent years I have visited Mount Herzl a few times each year, accompanied by my students. At the end of each tour a sense of embarrassment fills me. The site is usually vacant, and apart from a few visitors who are enjoying the well-kept garden, there is almost no one who pays tribute to Herzl in his tomb. On Sundays the situation is a bit different, as the place is usually crowded with schoolchildren, tourists, and many soldiers. They visit the different parts of the national site – Mount Herzl itself, but also the “Greats of the Nation” section, where Israeli political leaders are buried, and the military cemetery. During most days of the week and throughout the year, the tomb of Herzl is hardly visited. The Israelis – those who not so long ago saw Mount Herzl as a holy site and used to frequent it regularly – are not visiting anymore. The public has almost abandoned Mount Herzl. In contrast to the low number of visitors to Mount Herzl, many of the Jewish religious holy sites are flourishing. Millions visit the Western Wall each year; last Lag BaOmer more than four hundred thousand pilgrims visited Meron in northern Israel, praying to Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. In Netivot, in southern Israel, the Baba Sali memorial day in honor of this Moroccan tzaddik draws tens of thousands. Pilgrimage to Meron, Netivot, and other Jewish holy places is part of a growing phenomenon that sees an increasing number of Israelis frequenting traditional holy places, praying at the tombs of saints, and considering them integral and important parts of their religious identity. The comparison between Mount Herzl, the Western Wall, and Meron is not as superficial as it may seem at first glance. These sites are part of the historical map of holy sites – traditional and national – that were created and developed over a very long span of time. In addition to such ancient Jewish holy places as Rachel’s Tomb, the Cave of the Patriarchs at Hebron, or the Western Wall, the years before the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 saw the creation of many Zionist holy places. After 1948, additional holy places developed and inspired pilgrimage to places that symbolized heroism, sacrifice, and independence. Such sites as Yad Mordechai, Hanita, Sh’ar-Hagai, all sites of heroic battle during the War of Independence, became points on the Israeli symbolic and tourist map. Mount Herzl, the highest peak in western Jerusalem, should be seen as an integral part of this phenomenon. Following the reburial of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl in Jerusalem in August 1949, Mount Herzl became a prominent locus of Israeli identity. During the 1950s and 1960s, thousands visited the site every year. These pilgrims were schoolchildren, members of youth movements, Jews from the Diaspora, Israeli citizens and politicians; they visited Mount Herzl with great respect and saw it as the pinnacle of a visit to Israel and Jerusalem. Since then, however, this national site has lost its DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-001

2 

 Foreword

centrality and prominence in Israeli society. Apart from the eve of Independence Day (5 Iyar), when the ceremony that opens the annual celebrations marking national independence takes place in front of Herzl’s tomb, the site has almost no ceremonial resonance or recognition. The diminished attention accorded sites associated with the Zionist past is a result of the many changes that Israeli society has undergone in the past few decades. During the early years of nationhood there was a strong need to bind together the different communities gathered from the Diaspora, and civic holy sites were used as a powerful tool to create national empathy and forge national identity. More recently, however, as Israelis feel more secure as a society, they no longer need this artificial Zionist cult, and sites such as Mount Herzl are devoid of pilgrims. At the same time, the wide acceptance of popular Jewish holy places indicates that many Israelis feel a deep, religious need to frequent saints’ tombs, where they aspire to receive miracles and salvation. The book focuses on one aspect of the sanctification of the national sacred landscape in Israel: the reinterment of Zionist leaders and prophets, fighters, and writers when the activity at those holy sites reached it peak. Herzl, Jabotinsky, Pinsker, and the rest of the book’s heroes died in the Diaspora and, in an act of tikkun olam (repair of the world), their remains were acquired for reburial in the sacred Zionist soil of the Land of Israel.

The “Eternal Resting Place for Pioneers” In his novel The Blue Mountain (published in Hebrew as Roman Rusi), the writer Meir Shalev made the struggle over the right to be buried in the Zionist “holy land” into an impressive literary grotesque. The story takes place in an imaginary village founded by immigrants of the Second Aliyah (1904–1914). The hero of the book is Baruch Shenhar, a third-generation scion of the settlement’s founders who, instead of earning his bread by the sweat of his brow and working the lands he inherited from his grandfather, decides to turn them into a cemetery. The Eternal Resting Place for Pioneers became a thriving and lucrative business, a cemetery that was exclusively reserved for the generation of the early titans of Zionism. It was quite embarrassing that many of them arrived in coffins after emigrating from the Land of Israel and being buried abroad.1 This extraordinary cemetery invented by Shalev was viewed with outrage by the village’s residents

1 The Land of Israel (“Eretz Yisrael”) is one of several names for an area of indefinite geographical extension in the southern Levant. Related biblical, religious, and historical terms include



The “Eternal Resting Place for Pioneers” 

 3

and institutions. The buses that arrived at the site, “the wide-eyed children, the enchanted tourists who strolled agog among its freshly washed headstones and rosebushes, reading in whispers the legendary names in copper letters,” seemed sacrilegious to the local residents. “Whoever came to this country in the Second Aliyah can buy a plot here,” Baruch responded to his opponents, one of whom protested: “You mean to tell me that any little fart who came here from Russia, chucked it all after two weeks of hoeing crabgrass, and went traipsing off to America can be buried here as a pioneer?”2 Was the transfer of deceased Zionists from the Diaspora to a burial plot in Israel indeed a grotesque and marginal phenomenon, as Shalev describes? Or was it a phenomenon of Zionist and national importance? In what follows, I discuss dozens of examples of visionaries and political leaders, intellectuals and men of action, national heroes, and community leaders. What they all shared in common is the fact that they died in the Diaspora, far from the national home they worked to establish and longed for; they were buried there and later transferred for burial in the Land of Israel. Their number indicates that the phenomenon of reinterment should be accorded importance in the process of shaping Israel’s symbolic landscape.3 As I discuss in this book, the bones of Hannah Szenes were brought to the military cemetery in Jerusalem during this period (1950) and buried alongside those of fallen soldiers from the War of Independence. The ashes of Colonel Eliezer Margolin, commander of a battalion of Jewish volunteers from Palestine who fought in World War I, were brought from Australia and buried in the Rehovot cemetery (1950), while the coffin of the writer Peretz Smolenskin, who died in a resort town in northern Italy in 1885, was reinterred in 1952 in the Givat Shaul cemetery in Jerusalem, in a section that was slated to become “the nation’s pantheon.” They, together with many others, were visionaries and leaders of the Zionist moment in its infancy (including Theodor [Benjamin Ze’ev] Herzl, David Wolffsohn, Max Nordau, Nahum Sokolow, Otto Warburg), artists and writers (such as Boris Schatz, Haim Nahman Bialik, Naftali Herz Imber), famous heroes (among them Eliezer Margolin, Shalom Schwartzbard, parachutists in World War II, and those who were executed in Damascus and in Cairo).

the Land of Canaan, the Promised Land, the Holy Land, and Palestine. “Land of Israel” was part of the official Hebrew name of British Palestine during the Mandate period (1920–1948). 2 Shalev (2010), pp. 19–20. In the early 1960s the Gardens of Eternity cemetery was built near the Shimshon Junction in central Israel, designed as a burial site for American Jews. “License for the Gardens of Eternity approved,” Maariv, 13 December 1961 (Hebrew). The name of the cemetery was later changed to Eretz Hahayim (Land of the Living). 3 Gutfreund (2005), pp. 36–37, also alludes to this “industry.”

4 

 Foreword

There are enormous differences among these people, not only in their respective activities but also in their relative importance in the Zionist movement. Clearly, the biography of Theodor Herzl, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, or Ber Borochov cannot be compared to that of Siegfried Ullman, an American industrialist and philanthropist, whose coffin was also conveyed to Rehovot for burial in 1966.4 Still, all of those mentioned above, along with dozens of other figures who were regarded as exemplars of Zionism, compose a complex and fascinating picture of cemeteries and public funerals and their place in Zionist and Israeli society. Thus, while the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier became the official symbol of the nation in most European countries, a site where groups of citizens lay wreaths and foreign statesmen express their esteem for the host country, it was Herzl’s grave that became the most important civic holy place in the State of Israel. The graves of Herzl and other visionaries and leaders whose bones were brought for burial in Israel became prominent sites that served to remind the residents of those who gave their lives for the nation, whether as soldiers and heroes or as visionaries and leaders. The stories of their lives, deaths, burials, and reinterments were conveyed to the public as a heritage to remember and internalize, and their grave sites were cultivated as centers of pilgrimage. The goal of the book is to examine how and why such great effort was made to bring their remains to Israel for reinterment, and how the funerals and graves of some of the public figures became, at least for a certain period of time, state symbols and national instruments for establishing Israeli sovereignty over the land.

Questions and issues discussed in the book The discussion about second funerals conducted in Israel in the twentieth century helps frame a number of questions. When was this phenomenon of Zionist Israeli reinterment active, and was it important then for the Zionist movement and the pre-state Yishuv and the State of Israel? When did it begin? When was it strong, and when did it decline to the point of becoming a marginal phenomenon? A further question arising from the discussion of reinterment is whether there was a standard, salient, and central model for the phenomenon of reinterring Zionist leaders in the Land of Israel during most of the period when this phenomenon occurred. Did it have prominent characteristics that reappeared in the principal funerals?

4 “Body of Siegfried Ullman, US Philanthropist, Reinterred in Israel,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 4 April 1966.



Questions and issues discussed in the book  

 5

The phenomenon of reinterment has a geographic-historical implication. Therefore, we should also ask whether there was a particular destination in the homeland to which the remains of prominent Zionists were brought from the Diaspora for reinterment, Was it Jerusalem, to which Jews prayed for centuries (“your eyes will behold a far-off land,” Is. 33:17), or were they brought to new places for reburial? Was there competition among these places over the right of burial? Another issue I examine pertains to the relationship between the phenomenon of reinterment and Jewish religious law. Bringing the remains of rabbis and renowned Jews for reinterment in the Land of Israel was already practiced in late antiquity, and it continued in one form or another throughout all of the years of separation from the Land of Israel.5 Yet the main incentive for bringing deceased personages to the Land of Israel in those days was related to the holiness of the land and the desire to be there for the resurrection of the dead. At the same time, Jewish religious law prohibits the disinterment of human remains for reburial in another grave, even if it is a more “honorable” site. Was the Zionist movement continuing an earlier custom, or was this an innovation developed to meet the needs of this national movement? Examination of reinterment of public figures in the Land of Israel raises another issue related to the general phenomenon of the holiness of graves, a notion that began to develop in the State of Israel during the initial decades after the founding of the country and which includes the phenomenon of sanctifying historic graves and similar sites in its territory.6 Did the phenomenon of reinterment derive from the need to create connections among the various communities that came to Israel from different places in the world? Did it aspire to create a civic identity and not just a religious one? Is there a connection between the general phenomenon of sanctifying graves and Zionist reinterment, or are they separate phenomena, each of which stands on its own? To what extent was the Zionist reinterment examined in this book part of a general, global pattern of moving the dead from place to place for national purposes and turning their graves into national monuments and “pantheons”? Or did it have its own unique features? In recent years, researchers from various fields of knowledge have made substantial efforts to reconstruct the symbolic landscape of Israel in the decades before and after the establishment of the state in 1948. A number of studies have focused on how the memory of the fallen and the landscape of monuments were

5 Gafni (1977); Gafni (1997), pp. 79–91; Naveh (1973); Grintz (1974). 6 Bar (2007).

6 

 Foreword

shaped and designed;7 others have considered how civic holy places were developed, such as those at Modi’in, Tel Hai, Masada, and Biriya.8 These studies shed light on how the leaders of Zionism and the State of Israel made extensive, yet selective, use of the Bible and the characters and places associated with it.9 Others point to the broad symbolic place that archaeology occupied during this period and to the archeological conferences conducted in various places in Israel.10 In recent years scholars have addressed not only the sacred civic and national place but also sacred time – the way in which rituals were developed during this period, including Independence Day ceremonies, pilgrimage to national holy places, rites linked to various holidays and to civic and religious memorial days.11 All of these were tied to the development of Israeli nationalism. A subject that has not been sufficiently investigated is the place and importance of these funerals and cemeteries in shaping “Israeliness,” given the public figures interred, the mass funerals witnessed by the country’s population, and the ceremonies designed around them. The reinterment of the visionaries of the Zionist idea and the leaders of the national movement played an important role in shaping memory and forging a national consciousness that was connected with changes that occurred in the years before and after 1948. Nationalism – whose various expressions included a flag, anthem, and monuments, and which demanded for itself the status of a civic religion with its own national holidays and ceremonies – was also expressed in the reinterments in Israel of those leaders and visionaries initially buried in foreign lands.12 A number of studies have previously examined the phenomenon of reinterment in Israel and focused on the roles of the funerals. Judith Tydor Baumel focused on the remains of the pre-state Second War parachutists and showed how their memorialization was incorporated into Israeli collective memory.13 Anat Helman discussed the funerals of various notables whose remains were brought from abroad and buried in cemeteries in Tel Aviv.14 Yair Shapira devoted an article to the burial of Leo (Yehudah Leib) Pinsker in the Nicanor Cave at Hebrew University’s botanical garden and also wrote about the transfer of Nordau’s bones to Tel

7 Shamir (1989); Azaryahu (1995). 8 Yoeli (2001); Brog (2010); Azaryahu (1997); Ben-Yehuda (2002). 9 Shapira (2005); Shapira (2007). 10 Feige (1998); Feige and Shiloni (2008); Shavit (1997); Kletter (2005). 11 Handelman (1990); Splendor and Glory (2001); Azaryahu (2002); Bar (2008). 12 Liebman and Don-Yehiya (1983); Mosse (1990), pp. 9–16. 13 Baumel (2004), pp. 98–131. 14 Helman (2010), pp. 69–70.



Structure of the book 

 7

Aviv.15 The relocation of Herzl’s remains from Vienna to Jerusalem has attracted the attention of a number of scholars, who wrote about the ceremony of August 1949 and the subsequent design of Mount Herzl.16 The vicissitudes in the case of bringing Jabotinsky’s bones to Israel and fulfilling his will in 1964 have also been studied. 17 Aryeh Naor examined the third funeral of David Raziel, the Etzel (Irgun) commander, in the military cemetery in Jerusalem.18 David Ohana and Michael Feige recently discussed the funeral of David Ben-Gurion and his burial at Sde Boker, emphasizing the role of mourning ritual in the Israeli street.19 My book uses a wide range of historical sources. In various repositories, such as the Israel State Archives, Central Zionist Archives, Tel Aviv Municipal Archives, and Jabotinsky Institute Archives, I found numerous documents pertaining to the reinterred luminaries and their funerals. Many of these documents reflect the political struggles connected to the interments and the difficulties and achievements associated with them. Most of these ceremonies are described in the newspapers of the period, which I also reviewed extensively. We learn from these accounts that, whereas there was enormous public excitement surrounding some of the funerals, there was disappointment in and a lack of interest about others. Some of the funerals I discuss in the book were photographed and filmed, and these visual sources contribute greatly to understanding the place of these ceremonies in Israeli public life.

Structure of the book The book is divided into nine chapters, plus a short foreword and summary. These are ordered not chronologically but by topics, connecting various figures whose remains were brought for burial in Israel in different periods but whose reinterment was based on similar ideas. After the introductory chapter, I investigate the reinterment of the visionary of the Jewish state, Theodor (Benjamin Ze’ev) Herzl, who in his will in 1904 requested that his remains, and those of his family, be reburied in the soil of the Land of Israel, a wish only fulfilled in 1949. This serves as a launching point for the entire narrative. In Chapter 3 I discuss the reburial of other visionaries and leaders of Zionism, such as David Wolffsohn, Max Nordau,

15 Shapiro (2007); Shapiro (2010). 16 Azaryahu (2005), pp. 39–67; Yoeli (2001), pp. 9–54. 17 Nakdimon (2002). 18 Naor (1990). 19 Ohana and Feige (2010).

8 

 Foreword

and Yehudah Leib Pinsker. The fourth chapter focuses on people who lived in the pre-state Yishuv, died in the Diaspora, and were reinterred in Israel, including Boris Schatz, Itamar Ben-Avi, and Haim Nahman Bialik. Next I examine reinterment in the cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret and discuss the funerals of Otto Warburg, Nahman Syrkin, Moshe Hess, and Dov Ber Borochov, who are among the visionaries and thinkers of the Israeli Socialist movement. The sixth and seventh chapters address the burials of Baron Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild and Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the former in his private burial plot in Ramat Hanadiv, the latter on Mount Herzl alongside the visionary of the state and other national luminaries. The topic of the eighth chapter is the reinterment of such heroes as Naaman Belkind, Avshalom Feinberg, Hannah Szenes, and others, while the final chapter focuses on heroes of the political right – Etzel and Lehi fighters who were initially buried overseas and then reinterred in the State of Israel after 1948. What connects the dozens of people I discuss is the fact that these Zionist public figures – political leaders, thinkers, fighters, writers, and philanthropists – met their death outside the borders of Israel and were later reburied in its soil. The book’s summary discusses the uniqueness of the reinterment phenomenon, underscores its historical and geographical background, and considers cases in which such reinterment efforts failed.

Chapter 1 Reinterment in the Zionist Narrative The past and the present are interdependent. The “national past” is an image created in the present, and the “national present” is an image that relies on the past. Consequently, nationalism is from many perspectives a narrative, a story that tells the life history of a community in a dramatic and metaphoric way, placing it in an overall system of meaning. This is important in the general context of the development of the Zionist movement in the Land of Israel and, more specifically, in regard to the second funerals. When Yitzhak Ben-Zvi spoke in 1934 before the large crowd that participated in the funeral of Yehudah Leib Pinsker on Mount Scopus, he stated decisively, “The pantheon of Jerusalem, the Jewish pantheon of the generations of the kings of the House of David, the Hasmoneans, the prophets, the warriors of truth and freedom – this pantheon is enriched by bringing the remains of a freedom fighter who laid the foundations of the national movement.”1 His remarks emphasized above all the connection between the past and the present, from a national perspective in particular, a connection that links King David, the Hasmonean kings, and Pinsker, the author of Auto-Emancipation.

Tradition or innovation? Continuity and change in Zionist reinterment One of the important building blocks in forming Zionist-state nationalism – Israeliness – was the creation of a new national culture that reflected Israeli national rebirth. This culture was supposed to be new, indigenous, and unconnected to the traditional, religious Jewish culture that was identified as “exilic.” The founding fathers of Zionism worked hard to create an impression of national continuity of the Jewish people, with the period of “exile” from the homeland perceived as an exceptional interruption, albeit a lengthy one, in the history of a collective that returned to its land and built a country.2 The development of nationalism in the State of Israel was based on a selective deployment of Jewish history, national territory, and the Bible. The use of the Bible as a national and secular asset was central in forging a new national culture.3 This entailed the creation of a tradition

1 “Pinsker’s bones brought for interment in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 25 June 1934. 2 Dahan and Wasserman (2006). 3 Shapira (2007). DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-002

10 

 Chapter 1 Reinterment in the Zionist Narrative

that was designed to instill values and patterns of behavior by referencing the past, whether historical or mythical. But what was this tradition? How should we assess Theodor Herzl’s funeral in 1949 and the reburials that this book discusses? Was it innovative to use the grave of the state’s visionary to establish Israeli nationalism, or had Israeli nationalism existed since the kingdom of David and Solomon? And did the graves of Herzl, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, and Hannah Szenes become active and significant pilgrimage sites as part of a long historical continuum? What were Menachem Ussishkin’s intentions when he organized the burial of his mentor, Pinsker, in Jerusalem and sought to “weave the first period of our national revival into the fabric of the nation’s independent life, in a place where the gold chain of our free life was severed?”4 How should we understand the words of David Remez, standing at the door of the El Al plane that was about to transport Herzl’s casket from Vienna to the State of Israel in 1949: “Past and future are combined in bringing the leader’s bones.”?5 And what did Knesset member Shalom Zysman mean when he asked to bring the remains of the Jewish Brigade fighters from Europe for interment in Israel, explaining that, “the sages of Israel, from the rabbis of the Talmud through the later generations (Maimonides and others) would order their sons to do so,” and adding that “this continued and was sanctified ever since ... the most righteous and pious men would consider it a great privilege to be buried in the Land of Israel.”6 Eric Hobsbawm was one of the first to argue that national traditions are the fruits of invention, a manipulation that aspires to create social-communal cohesion of the nation-state’s citizenry.7 Traditions are created, according to this argument, in periods of significant social, economic, or cultural change. At such times, there is a need to maintain cohesion, political and social stability that will prevent divisiveness and rifts.8 Traditions are then attached, artificially, to events in the past; their role is to promote unity and accord legitimacy to the national movement and the nation-state. Contrasting with this view of national tradition as nothing more than political manipulation are other views contending that nationalism is not a modern phenomenon but something that has existed since ancient times. Anthony D. Smith, for example, prefers to describe the process of creating the nation in the modern

4 Gruenbaum (1958), p. 21. 5 Yosef Nadava, “From Vienna to Lod – By Air,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 August 1949. 6 ISA, HZ-2416-3, Letter from Shalom Zysman to the prime minister, 1 March 1954. 7 Hobsbawm and Ranger (1991). 8 Hobsbawm (1983), pp. 263–307.



Tradition or innovation? Continuity and change in Zionist reinterment 

 11

era as “rediscovery,” the reenactment or revival of elements that already existed in the past.9 He argues that the process of forming a national consciousness is an ongoing effort to reinterpret a narrative based on the community’s myths, memories, traditions, and symbols, and that this does not necessarily entail manipulation of the country’s citizens by the ruling elites. If we follow this argument, the fact that dozens of coffins containing the remains of exemplary figures were brought to Israel in the years before and after the state’s establishment in 1948 should be understood as part of an ongoing continuum, a revival of trends that began in antiquity. There is a close connection, then, among the children of Israel who carried Joseph’s coffin from Egypt to Shechem; “Lady Calliope from Byblos,” who died on the coast of Lebanon and was buried in Beit She’arim in late antiquity;10 and Theodor Herzl, who died and was buried in Vienna, then reinterred in West Jerusalem in 1949. It was evidently this view of continuity that led one of the participants in Syrkin’s funeral in 1951 to claim, “Moses Hess received from the history that continues from Sinai, passed it on to Nahman Syrkin, and Nahman passed it on to Berl Katznelson.”11 The organizers of second funerals not only composed new “texts” in pamphlets, newspapers, and books devoted to the important deceased notables but also developed and included them in old and new ceremonies that were invented and reinvented each time, based on Jewish tradition and Zionist ritual. These planners made an effort to create impressive symbolic backdrops, and they included such ceremonial activities as releasing pigeons, burying sacks of dirt in the ground, and placing swords or other symbols on the caskets. Although these elements were not a familiar part of traditional funerals in the past, they were considered to be authentic and “ancient.” Such invented traditions helped make the Zionist and national graves important components of the collective memory, helping to mark national, regional, or municipal spaces. They established the cemetery as part of a Zionist national pantheon and strengthened the importance of the city, kibbutz, or moshav where it was located.12

9 Smith (2000), esp. pp. 21–24. 10 Avigad (1972), p. 20. 11 “Accompanied by a large crowd, N. Syrkin’s bones brought to Kinneret for eternal rest,” Davar, 7 September 1951. 12 Zerubavel (2007).

12 

 Chapter 1 Reinterment in the Zionist Narrative

Negation of the Diaspora and the creation of collective memory The Hebrew and Israeli national consciousness is characterized by a number of salient components: a shared memory and a sense of destiny, a longing to return to the ancestral land, and a mix of religious mission and national identity. But while the national Jewish consciousness is a constant feature, the narrative needs a variable component to stimulate national desire and activism. Moreover, the Zionist narrative is teleological, featuring heroes striving for many years toward the goal of returning to the homeland from which they were torn in their “youth.” They were Herzl, Otto Warburg, and Moses Hess, who arrived in the homeland only after their death, or Szenes and Jabotinsky, unwillingly torn from the homeland but also returned to it postmortem. This phenomenon also had a spatial expression. The Zionist narrative recalled heroes who maintained their uniform and united identity despite their dispersion throughout the world, which lasted until the ingathering of the exiles finally led them to the promised land. This part of Jewish history is, therefore, the story of the uprooting from Zion and the return to it. This urge to return is dormant in some and active in others; in some it tarries and in others it hurries, but it is one of the central motivating forces in Jewish history. All roads lead to the Land of Israel, both for living olim (new immigrants) who fulfill the directive and, as we shall see, for certain dead ones as well.13 Indeed, the concept of negation of the Diaspora plays an important part in the Zionist ideology from which crucial aspects of the cultural Zionist experience were drawn.14 Jewish territorial sovereignty in Israel was seen as the return of the Jewish people to its land and as a renewal of days of yore after “two thousand years of exile.” In this historical misperception, which elides the Diaspora, the ancient past and the present are connected and the present is viewed as a renewal of sovereignty. Fulfilling the “directive” to bring the remains of the visionaries and leaders of Zionism to Israel is thus connected to the view that negates the Diaspora and emphasizes its negative sides, while stressing the importance of coming to Israel, whether to live or to be buried there. Two years after the death of Yehiel Chlenov Hapoel Hatzair wrote, “In cold and cloudy London, a grave was dug for him at a time when a new dawn was beginning to break over the hills of Judea,”15 suggesting that London was not an appropriate place to bury such an important Zionist leader. Vienna (Herzl), Asmara (Etzel and Lehi prisoners), and northern Sinai (Avshalom Feinberg) were similarly unsuitable. The second funer-

13 Ram (2006). 14 Raz-Krakotzkin (1993). 15 “Two measures (for the day of Yehiel Chlenov’s death),” Hapoel Hatzair, 6 February 1920.



Negation of the Diaspora and the creation of collective memory 

 13

als thus facilitated the unification of two perceptions of time and existence that were inherently contradictory: the “messianic” and mythical perception of time, based on a memory that unites different moments of time; and the modern, scientific perception of time that distinguishes between early and later and is based on historical events that are distinct from one another.16 This phenomenon was expressed geographically: the planners of second funerals tended to connect the ancient space of the Land of Israel – that is, “the golden ages” of Jewish presence and activity there – with the modern Zionist and Israeli activity in the same space. This double identity was reflected in the funeral ceremonies that focused on historical figures who lived and died in a concrete modern timeframe but also were linked to an ancient tradition, to Jacob, Joseph, and Nicanor (who paid for the gilding of the Temple doors). Ussishkin, speaking at the National Library on Mount Scopus with Pinsker’s coffin lying before him, clearly expressed this view when addressing the author of Auto-Emancipation: If you could see where you are this moment. If you could see that you are in a place where the evil Titus stood 1,900 years ago and catapulted rocks and destroyed our Temple and after him came Andinus [sic; Hadrianus] and declared ‘Judea capta.’ If you could see us now building our home, if you could see that we have gathered sixty to seventy thousand Jews in Jerusalem alone, you would find consolation. We are building, without despair.17

The Zionist revolution, from the outset, did not focus only on changing the material reality of the Jews in their “new” land. It also invested resources, energy, and thought in forging a new identity based partly on forming a collective memory of the past.18 Such collective memory has an important place in the activity of various political agents. The past – its perception, study, dissemination, and understanding – creates a key arena for shaping the public’s views of both the present and the past.19 Memory provides the glue, the meaning, and the legitimacy for the group’s sense of internal partnership. The sooner the shaping of collective memory begins and the more resolute the effort, the greater the advantage enjoyed by the group disseminating its interpretation of the past. Moreover, the collective memory determines which groups or individuals are entitled to be included in the category of the “founding fathers” and gives these chosen ones the right to demand a privileged political status in the future. Various groups and forces develop diverse memories, sometimes contradictory, that imagine the

16 Ben-Amos and Bet-El (1999). 17 “Pinsker’s bones brought for burial in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 25 June 1934. 18 On collective memory and national identity, see Gillis (1994); Nora and Le Goff (1985). 19 Lebel (2013).

14 

 Chapter 1 Reinterment in the Zionist Narrative

nation’s past, its traditions and heritage, its heroes and illustrious figures, in different ways. In addition, the national memory is interpreted differently by various “memory communities,” which claim ownership of it and accord it diverse meanings.20 These facts are important for understanding the process of reinterment of exemplary figures in Israel. To remember and interpret the Israelis’ past, it was necessary to formulate an authoritative version of that past. This entailed selecting what was worth remembering as well as interpreting this remembered past.21 The community sorted, selected, and refined the materials and symbols of the past and nurtured a heroic and idealized collective memory. Thus, in addition to creating a national idea, fostering a national consciousness, formulating patterns of action, and creating a movement of fulfillment, the agents of Israeli nationalism fashioned the collective memory.22 They identified heroes (Max Nordau, Pinsker, Raziel, and others) and the events associated with them that were perceived as significant milestones in consolidating the nation, and they made them part of the contemporary discourse.

The halachic question In ancient times, inhabitants of the Land of Israel would collect the bones of the dead and rebury them. Toward the end of the Roman period (first century bce– third century ce), it became common to place the bones of the deceased in special ossuaries and inter them in burial caves.23 But the idea of moving the dead from place to place was frowned upon. The Jerusalem Talmud states, “The dead and the bones should not be moved from one honorable grave to another honorable one, not from a contemptible one to a contemptible one, and not from a contemptible one to an honorable one; and it goes without saying, not from an honorable one to a contemptible one.”24 Exhuming the dead from the grave, the sages believed, defiles the dead person, violates his dignity, and troubles the souls of those who have died.25 Yet despite this disapproval from the perspective of Jewish religious law (halacha), the remains of deceased Jews have been moved from one place to

20 Gershoni (2006), pp. 34–37. 21 Bar-On (2000), p. 12. 22 On the Israeli collective memory, see Zerubavel (1995). 23 Kloner and Zissu (2007). 24 Babylonian Talmud, Mo’ed Katan, chap. D, halacha B. 25 Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, p. 154b.



The halachic question 

 15

another throughout history, including, sometimes, from the Diaspora to the Land of Israel. The fact that Jews lived outside the Land of Israel during a long period of history made the connection to the land of their forefathers and foremothers significant, whether this occurred during a person’s life or after his or her death. It was a good deed to bring the dead to the Holy Land, close to the graves of the patriarchs and matriarchs and historic cemeteries.26 The prototype for this can be found in the Bible – Jacob, before he died and was embalmed in Egypt, made his son Joseph swear that he would bury him with his fathers in the land of Canaan (Gen. 47:29–30, 50:13). Similarly, the children of Israel carried the bones of Joseph with them in their exodus from Egypt (Josh. 24:32) and buried him in the land of his birth. The vision of the dry bones in the book of Ezekiel (37:1–14), although it refers to the resurrection of the dead and the return to the Land of Israel at the end of days, could also be interpreted as a vision of bringing the deceased from the woeful Diaspora and reinterring them in Israel.27 We do not know how widespread the phenomenon of reinterment was in late antiquity and during later periods in Jewish history. In rabbinic literature there is scant evidence for this practice, and the case of Rav Huna, who died in Babylonia in the late third century and whose coffin was brought from there to the Land of Israel, stands out as unique.28 Beit She’arim was for many years understood as a burial site for people whose remains were brought from the Diaspora, yet it appears that most of those interred at the site were actually residents of the Land of Israel.29 We also do not know the scope of this phenomenon in later periods, when there was a rather small Jewish presence in the Land of Israel. The relatively few references to the custom seems to indicate that this phenomenon was uncommon and that reinterment occurred mainly in modern times and is linked to the Zionist movement.30 Indeed, Zionism served a different purpose and created other incentives for importing the remains of its deceased visionaries, heroes, and leaders for reburial in Israel. This effort was connected to the new perspective of Zionist time and space and the need to “sanctify” the land and define the Zionist Israeli territory. This effort was expressed in the desire to transform the graves and cemeteries into Zionist and national symbols and even associate them with specific move-

26 Lamm (2000); Ydit (2007). 27 For example, Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 82b. 28 Mo’ed Katan, 25a. 29 Avigad (1972), p. 20. 30 For example, Klar (1974), p. 37; Gil (1983), pp. 516–517; Cohen and Simon-Fikali (1993), p. 75; Isaac of Vienna, p. 170; Schepansky (1967), p. 189, nos. 5433–5434.

16 

 Chapter 1 Reinterment in the Zionist Narrative

ments.31 The biblical expression “gathered unto his people” (Deut. 34:5) was manifested in a new way when the founding fathers and leaders of Zionism were gathered after their death in the sacred soil of Israel. Their graves proved to be one of the salient means of defining Israeli geographic space in the wake of the War of Independence.

Zionist and national death and burial The Hebrew language contains many terms for the word cemetery. All of them include a form of the word home (beit) – beit almin, beit kvarot, beit mo’ad lechol chai, etc.).32 A cemetery is the abode of the community of the dead, and the grave is the private home of the deceased, his “tent,” where he awaits resurrection. All this is true for popular and traditional Jewish culture, but the Zionist and Israeli graves on which this book focuses served an additional role – a Zionist, and subsequently a national, one. These graves linked memory and national identity and were crucial building blocks of Israeliness.33 The living appropriated the dead, memorialized them through reinterment, and accorded Zionist Israeli meaning to the deaths of these national heroes.34 The cemeteries that held these leaders became Zionist and national sites, just like other monuments and sites of “miracles” where the past, present, and Zionist future meet. All of this changed the status of the deceased who are discussed in this book. Not only did they belong to the past but they were also an essential and active part of the Zionist and national present, where they had a vital and meaningful role. The funerals centered around the great man whose personal achievements and, in particular, his (rarely her) public, Zionist, and national accomplishments helped win the country’s independence and then strengthen it. One of the important messages that the funeral organizers wished to convey was that the homeland, because of its gratitude, was transferring the bodies of its sons to its soil with the assistance of its various organizations and agents. This gratitude was expressed by burying them there permanently. The presence of the reinterred was expressed in the landscape not only by emphasizing these cemeteries but also by naming streets, institutions, and sites

31 On the extensive use of graves as a means of shaping Israeli identity, see Weingrod (1995); Abramovitch (2015). 32 Benvenisti (1990); Abramovitch (1993). 33 For comparison, see Pippidi (1995). 34 Zartal (2002), pp. 25–26.



The martyrology and immortalization of the Great Man 

 17

after the distinguished dead. Even before their second funerals, men such as Syrkin, Warburg, or Feinberg were not mere mortals, and the stories of their life and death were not conveyed to the Zionist public in Israel and in the Diaspora as those of extraordinary people. With the transfer of their remains to Israel and their second funerals, they – like Eliezer Margolin, Naftali Herz Imber, or “Gondar Aviel” – became symbols of the country’s values, independence, and freedom. The national community leveraged the funeral as a source of power, a double rite of passage: of the deceased, whose remains were transferred now from New York, Odessa, Vienna, and elsewhere; and of the Zionist public, which gathered at the burial sites and felt itself coalescing as a collective – as a country.35

The martyrology and immortalization of the Great Man The struggle for the Zionist national revival exacted a heavy toll. The state’s sons and daughters, visionaries, leaders, and intellectuals acquired this revival and establishment of the state through sacrifice and at a steep cost of blood and souls. This engendered an attitude of reverence toward the fallen who had offered their lives on the altar of the struggle for national liberation, including those who envisioned the state but did not live to see it. The importance of the founding fathers – renowned figures, visionaries, philosophers, fighters, political leaders, as well as patriots – was already clear during their lifetime and even more so after their death and memorialization. The image, words, and memory of Herzl, David Wolffsohn, Szenes, and others, and now their coffins and graves, became a point of connection that linked the Zionist present with the community they left behind. Memorialization is a spiritual and intellectual effort to perpetuate the memory of things we hold dear. It is not only an abstract activity, however; in no less measure it is a social, political, administrative, material, and geographic endeavor.36 The past was memorialized in part by etching it into stone or metal, by building memorial statues and monuments, and by institutionalizing pantheons in cemeteries that, at least for a moment, were a focal point of Israeli nationalism. The graves and monuments served as a kind of geographic-historical road sign, tracing the Zionist struggle and the legitimacy of Israel’s sovereignty over the regions it held. They became an accumulating storehouse of collective memory

35 Ben Amos (2000), pp. 266–270; and see van Gennep (1960) for a discussion of funerals as rites of passage. 36 Maysel (2000), p. 7.

18 

 Chapter 1 Reinterment in the Zionist Narrative

and, in particular, memory of the ideal for which the deceased had fought. They served as visual reminders of the land that was sanctified with their blood and remains and of the moral commitment that arose from their sacrifice. The role of these reburied Zionists was to remind the Israeli public of the events of the past, the history that the founders sought to endow with ideological significance.37 The funeral ceremonies made direct reference to the territory of Israel, the “big place” (as coined by Aran and Gurevitch),38 the only place where the Jewish people could connect to their past. The organizers attempted to design each funeral as a broad, supranational celebration that would encompasses all parts of the sacred Zionist and Israeli space. Reinterment of the Zionist and national “holy man” in a particular place was an act of spiritual and political annexation. This is why the place of burial was so important. The reinterred body helped to consolidate and appropriate the new territory of the homeland and to redefine this territory when the grave was incorporated in a series of nationalist symbols already established in the landscape. Once the holders of power in Israeli society began to recognize the centrality of the Zionist grave and the importance of “ownership” of the graves of Zionist “holy men,” various entities began to compete for the right to bring the remains of notable figures to Israel and to bury them in places identified with them during their lives. As a result, there were sometimes conflicts over the right to reinter the famous personages in specific locales and to turn the graves into points of reference that were not only national but also regional or municipal. At the very highest level this was a matter of national pride, but there was also an element of pride linked to a particular region, city, or movement, and sometimes even an degree of family pride. When different groups and organizations vied over the right to bury a public figure in their domain, the honor of both the organization and the place was at stake, as was pride in “owning” and maintaining the grave. A salient example of local patriotic competition is the way that various entities in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa fought over the right to bury Herzl in those cities.39 A similar battle was waged over the burial sites of Nordau and Pinsker; people in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem lobbied to bring them for burial in their respective cities. Some people asserted that Feinberg should be buried where his skeleton was found, in northern Sinai, but others believed that, as one of Nili’s leaders, he should be buried near the Atlit experimental agricultural station, where much of the underground’s activity took place.

37 Almog (2000), pp. 49–51; Bar-On (2000), p. 12. 38 Aran and Gurevitch (1991). 39 Bar (2015).



The phenomenon of reinterment outside the Land of Israel 

 19

The phenomenon of reinterment outside the Land of Israel Dead bodies have long played a central role in religious and political life in different places around the world, and particularly in “Western” culture. The remains of Theseus, the national hero of Athens, were brought from the island of Skyros for reinterment in Athens, and the Spartans brought the remains of Orestes, the son of Agamemnon, to Sparta.40 In Europe, theft of the bones of saints was a veritable industry in late antiquity and the Middle Ages as Christian relics became necessary for the sanctification of altars in churches and monasteries.41 The body of Dante Alighieri was transferred back and forth between Florence and Ravenna in accordance with the mutable political forces in medieval Italy.42 Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Paine are among the many political figures who were reinterred after periods of political flux;43 others include Thomas Becket and Oliver Cromwell, whose remains were disinterred in order to desecrate them.44 This also happened to René Descartes, who was initially buried in Stockholm but was reinterred a number of times after being moved to France.45 The phenomenon became even more common in the modern era. The bones of Napoleon were transferred from the island of St. Helena and entombed in the Invalides in Paris.46 The body of Stalin was removed from its place in Lenin’s mausoleum in 1961 and reburied nearby. The same thing happened to the revolutionary Che Guevara, who was reinterred in 1997 in Santa Clara, Cuba, after his remains were located in Bolivia.47 These are only a few of the many cases in which coffins and reinterments assumed a place of honor in the lives of different nations and cultures. The phenomenon of reburying various figures and the political use made of the remains of the dead is therefore quite familiar. As nation-states formed in many places in the world, the remains of leaders and other famous persons were moved from one place to another, reinterred in the land of the newly defined country, and turned

40 Podlecki (1971). 41 Brown (1981); Geary (1978). 42 Philip Pullella, “Dante gets posthumous nose job – 700 years on,” Statesman, 12 January 2007. 43 Wokler, Rousseau; “The Paine Monument at last finds a home,” New York Times, 15 October 1905. 44 Gaunt (1996), p. 4; Scully (2000). 45 Clarke (2006). 46 Driskel (1993), p. 168. 47 “Cuba buries Che, the man, but keeps the myth alive,” New York Times, 18 October 1997.

20 

 Chapter 1 Reinterment in the Zionist Narrative

into powerful symbols. This occurred in Egypt,48 in the former Soviet bloc,49 in Germany,50 in the United States,51 and in England.52 We should also note the extraordinary case of Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar, who died in London and was reinterred on the outskirts of the Haram al-Sharif (Temple Mount) in Jerusalem in early 1931. He was associated with an effort to build a “pantheon for the Arab nation” where the leaders and “heroes” of the Arabs would be laid to rest.53 Here we must raise the question of whether the Zionist phenomenon of reinterment differed from the examples just cited. Despite its similarities with broader historical and geographic processes that occurred in other places in the world,54 did the Israeli practice also include exceptional features? It is possible to make the case that the journey to the Land of Israel, even in a coffin, was a journey to a homeland that the occupant’s forefathers were connected to for millennia. The Zionist narrative always spoke about returning to the land of the fathers, not immigration to a new country. This also applies to the phenomenon of Zionist reinterment, which had a significant role in the ideology of this movement during the most important period of its history. I examine below whether the reinterment in Israel was not just a “migration of bones” but rather a “raising” of bones back to the land of the fathers: a return to the ancient homeland.

48 Gershoni (2006). 49 Dabrowski (2004); Lampland (1993); Gal (1991); Verdery (1999); Pippidi (1995); “Jewish resistance leader in Slovakia reburied with military honors in Banska-bystrica,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 11 August 1946. 50 “Remains of two Prussian kings to be reinterred at Potsdam,” New York Times, 17 August 1991. 51 Evan (2003); Kammen (2010). See also the case of the reinterment of Orde Wingate in Arlington Cemetery: “Remains of British general who helped Haganah will be re-interred today at Arlington,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 10 November 1950; and the case of the reinterment in New York of Szmul Zygielbojm, a Polish Jew who committed suicide in London during World War II to draw attention to the destruction of the Jews: “Ashes of Jewish martyr who committed suicide brought to United States,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 28 March 1961. 52 Foster (2003), pp. 653–659. 53 “Around the funeral of Hussein,” Doar Hayom, 7 June 1931; CZA S25/3048, “Burial of Muhammad Ali in Jerusalem,” written by A. H. Cohen, classified, undated; Azaryahu and Reiter (2015). 54 Pitte (2004); Francaviglia (1971).

Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel” On 3 July 1904, Theodor (Benjamin Ze’ev) Herzl, the visionary of the Jewish state, passed away. In his last will and testament, Herzl asked for a modest funeral without eulogies. He specified: I wish to be buried in a metal coffin, in the cemetery plot next to my father, and I will lie there until the people of Israel transfer my body to the Land of Israel. The coffin of my father, the coffin of my sister Paulina who was buried in the year 1878 in Budapest, and the coffins of my family (my mother and my father) are also to be moved there ... my wife’s bones should be transferred there only if she requests this in her will.1

On 7 July, he was buried in the family plot in the Dobling cemetery in Vienna, next to his father, Jakob Herzl. Even before the establishment of the state, efforts were initiated to transfer Herzl’s coffin to the Land of Israel. It is only fitting, and certainly symbolic, that Herzl was the first Zionist figure whose remains were brought for burial in Israel after the country was founded. He was also the first Zionist leader who asked to be reinterred in the Jewish state – a model that many Zionists subsequently followed.

The debate about Herzl’s reinterment before 1948 Herzl died thirteen years before the British conquered the Land of Israel. But only in 1925, at the Fourteenth Zionist Congress in Vienna, did the president of the Zionist executive committee, Nahum Sokolow, say in a speech: We cannot part from one another before making a great vow ... Our consciences will be troubled as long as Herzl’s remains are not brought to the Land of Israel ... This is definitely in keeping with our Jewish feeling of “And you shall carry up my bones from here” [Ex. 13:19] ... Before we conclude the Congress, therefore, let us decide that the idea will not remain empty words, but will become a reality ... I believe that the time has indeed come to build a monument there, a precious monument, for the creator of our old-new land. A monument and not a tomb, a flourishing garden of hope, a portal of hope.2

1 Bein (1977), p. 409. 2 ISA, G-325/23, from the speech of Nahum Sokolow, president of the Zionist executive commitDOI 10.1515/9783110493788-003

22 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

The members of the executive committee, meeting in an expanded format in Berlin later that year, proposed choosing a site in the Land of Israel that would be “a sort of national pantheon, and there the nation’s luminaries, who devoted their lives to the work of its redemption and rejuvenation, will be buried.”3 In the following two Zionist Congresses, the decision to carry out Herzl’s will was ratified, but nothing was actually done. The Nineteenth Congress, which convened in Lucerne in 1935, was more practical; it authorized the Zionist executive committee to decide on this question.4 The discussions focused on how to bring Herzl’s remains to the Land of Israel and the location of his reburial. In the end, it was decided to move the coffin via the shortest route, from the port of Trieste to Haifa. A more prolonged process, it was argued, would insult – rather than honor – the dead by contravening Jewish tradition, and an ostentatious transfer would be contrary to Herzl’s will. There was also fear of anti-Semitic outbreaks in response to the national awakening that the encounter with the casket was expected to inspire among the Jewish public.5 The question of the place of burial in the Land of Israel was more complex. Had Herzl expressed an explicit or indirect wish to be buried in a particular location? Did he want to be buried on Mount Carmel, as some interpreted what he wrote in Altneuland? Proponents of burial on Carmel pointed to the words Herzl placed in the mouth of the hero in his utopia, Joseph Levy: “And when I die, lay me beside my dear friend Fischer, up there in the Carmel cemetery, overlooking our beloved land and sea.”6 Therefore, the “Haifa Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains” was formed and repeatedly insisted on burying the coffin in that city. In 1928, in the wake of the discussions in the Zionist congresses, the developers of the Herbert Samuel Estate proposed burying Herzl in the center of this garden neighborhood on the Carmel range, being built by the Palestine Land Development Company.7 Later, the members of the Haifa committee suggested another location: the outskirts of a new Jewish neighborhood slated to be built farther south, about five kilometers outside of Haifa. The neighborhood was designed to face Haifa Bay and encompass hundreds of dunams of gardens and

tee, chairman of the Fourteenth Zionist Congress, Vienna, 1925; “Around the Congress,” Hapoel Hatzair, 21 August 1925. “The closing of the Congress,” Haolam, 4 September 1925, p. 711. 3 “Meeting of the large executive committee in Berlin,” Haolam, 6 November 1925, p. 862. 4 CZA, S5/10412, Re: The transfer of the bones of T. Herzl of blessed memory to the Land of Israel, 1 April 1935. 5 Ibid; BGA, Record No. 20203, Meeting protocol of the Jewish Agency executive committee in the Land of Israel, 20 August 1934. 6 Herzl (1941), p. 232. 7 On the Herbert Samuel Estate, see Ben-Artzi (2004), pp. 108–41; Kahat (2014).



The debate about Herzl’s reinterment before 1948 

 23

forests to be planted around the grave site. All this was supposed to be part of an area of summer homes that would be purchased by “private people and friends and admirers of the deceased, who will value living in proximity to this place.” Members of the Haifa community proposed to make the site into a “national pantheon for the great ones of the Zionist movement who are deceased, and who deserve a dignified resting place alongside leaders such as Wolffsohn, Marmorek, Chlenov, and others.” In the same statement, they projected a “Herzl House, which will contain all of the things and objects and memorabilia that have remained and are attributed to the deceased ... a Zionist museum that will contain and preserve for the coming generations anything that serves as a reminder of the inception and development of the movement.”8 Tel Aviv also aspired to be the place of Herzl’s reinterment. Already in the 1920s, the author and journalist Aharon Wardi proposed burying Herzl there in “an atmosphere that is entirely Hebrew, near gardens and playgrounds,” and building a “Herzl Memorial” in the form of an artificial hill, with the grave of the state’s visionary situated at its peak. This hill “will be the first to which the olim will turn on their way to the homeland, and on the night of the twentieth of Tamuz [the day of Herzl’s death] the hill will be immersed in light, and the people will pass in silence at the bottom of it.”9 The mayor of Tel Aviv, Meir Dizengoff, later became an active advocate of burying Herzl in the city. Beyond the genuine desire to fulfill Herzl’s last wish, Dizengoff sought to exploit the lack of clarity on this issue in the Zionist movement and position Tel Aviv as the symbol of “Hebraism” by burying the visionary there. Thus, he began to plan a funeral, and in 1934 he proposed combining Herzl’s reinterment with the establishment of an institute in his name, as suggested by the Viennese sculptor-engineer Felix Weiss and architect Jonas Mond, who sent a model of the proposed institute. Dizengoff began to promote the idea among the Zionist leadership.10 Although the city fathers noted that the young city of Tel Aviv “had almost no right to gather unto itself the bodily remains of the leader and his archives,” they argued that the city’s principal advantage was that “we have the power to ensure excellent protection for this grave, so that it will not be desecrated, heaven forbid, by scoundrels, and so that no disaster will occur as happened with the leader’s cedar tree.” They were referring to a tree (actually a

8 JIA, P-81/6, B. Rosenblatt, Herman Struck, and S. Peli, from the Committee for Bringing Herzl’s remains to the Land of Israel to the president of the World Zionist Organization, undated. 9 Wardi (1929), pp. 78–79. 10 TAA, 1349, 3761, Mayor Dizengoff to A. Droynov, 20 March 1934; ibid., Mayor Dizengoff to S. Nussenblatt, Vienna, undated.

24 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

cypress) that Herzl himself planted in 1898 near the settlement of Motza, which was later chopped down by Arabs.11 “All of the residents of this city will stand on constant guard duty over this grave and will not allow the hand of any scoundrel or foreign authority to touch it,”12 they claimed. The institute was to be built on the coastline of Tel Aviv and feature a huge statue of Herzl that would be visible to ships making their way toward the coast.13 Ultimately this proposal failed, due in part to opposition over erecting a figural statue in the city and especially because of the Jewish Agency’s reservations about building a Herzl Institute in Tel Aviv.14 Jerusalem also competed for the right to bury Herzl, but the Zionist movement had yet to develop its stance vis-à-vis the city. Jerusalem was viewed as the holy city and the center of the Old Yishuv, but there was relatively little Zionist activity in the city. Menachem Ussishkin was almost the only Zionist leader who supported Jerusalem’s bid. In 1934 he had pushed to establish a pantheon on Mount Scopus and to bring Yehuda Leib Pinsker for reinterment in the Nicanor Cave, adjacent to the university there; and this is where he wanted to bury Herzl.15 Ussishkin gained support when the World Zionist Organization (WZO) published an official report in 1935 stating that there was no evidence that Herzl had desired burial in Haifa, and Jerusalem was selected as the site for Herzl’s interment.16 Hitler’s rise to power in Germany and the annexation of Austria in 1938 halted plans for Herzl’s transfer and made it difficult for the hundreds and sometimes thousands of Jews from Austria and other communities in Europe to continue the tradition of pilgrimage to Herzl’s grave site on the anniversary of his death.17 Nevertheless, the custom continued secretly, including memorial services and processions in the cemetery.18 Reports arrived in Palestine, however, about the Gestapo’s intention to destroy parts of the Jewish cemetery in Vienna and the

11 “Dedication of the rebuilt Arza,” Davar, 22 March 1929; Biger and Lipschitz (1992). 12 TAA, 1349, 3761, “Review of transfer of Herzl’s bones to the Land of Israel and the establishment of the Herzl Institute in the Land of Israel,” undated, no author cited. 13 Ibid., Dr. Tulo Nussenblatt, “The Herzl Institute – a monument of the Jewish people,” undated. See also a photograph of the model there, including a statue of Herzl with an upraised arm. 14 Ibid., Rabbi M. Ostrovsky to I. Rokach, Tel Aviv, 31 July 1934. 15 BGA, record number 20203, meeting protocol of the Jewish Agency executive committee for the Land of Israel, 20 August 1934; CZA, S5/10412, Re: transfer of bones of T. Herzl of blessed memory to the Land of Israel, 1 April 1935. 16 CZA, S5/429, “The committee responsible for the reburial of Herzl.” 17 “Thus we went up to the grave on every 20th of Tamuz,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 1 July 1945; Rode (1945), pp. 215–216. 18 “On Herzl’s Grave,” Davar, 25 June 1937.



The debate about Herzl’s reinterment after 1948 

 25

Nazis’ proposal – which was never carried out – to “release” Herzl’s remains in exchange for a million marks.19 At the end of World War II, the issue of reinterring Herzl’s remains arose again;20 the family grave site had survived, and the tradition of visiting was renewed.21 During the years prior to the War of Independence, officials in the Organization Department of the WZO tried to take action,22 and the Zionist executive committee prepared for an operation planned to coincide with the jubilee celebration in 1947.23 In late December 1947, the Allied authorities in Austria issued a license to transfer the remains of Herzl to the Land of Israel,24 and it appeared that the move was imminent. But then the War of Independence broke out, and the transfer was aborted.25

The debate about Herzl’s reinterment after 1948 The declaration of the State of Israel on 14 May 1948 made it possible to return with energy and determination to the suspended plan for reinterring Herzl’s remains. The provisional government of Israel, along with the Jewish Agency and the WZO, formed a joint committee on the subject with eleven representatives, chaired by minister of the interior Yitzhak Greenboim.26 As for the place of burial, the members of the committee disagreed. The leaders of the WZO continued to support Jerusalem as the location, but many harbored doubts about the future of the city and outsiders’ demands to internationalize it. At the same time, members of the Haifa Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains reasserted the plea to bury him in their city.27 Advocates of Tel Aviv proposed to bury Herzl’s coffin on a hilltop along the coast (which later became Independence Park). They promised,

19 BGA, record number 20512, meeting protocol of the Jewish Agency executive committee for the Land of Israel, 21 August 1938; CZA, S5/193, Bernard (Dov) Yosef to David Ben-Gurion, 12 December 1938; “Adolph Eichmann demanded 2 million pounds sterling for the release of Herzl’s coffin,” Maariv, 19 August 1949. 20 CZA, S25/1351, S. Eisenberg to the members of the executive committee, 11 September 1945. 21 “What is the condition of Herzl’s grave?” Davar, 27 May 1945. 22 CZA, S46/21, Organization Department of the executive committee, 21 June 1946. 23 Ibid., Leo Lauterbach to the executive committee, 16 May 1947. 24 CZA, S8/28, B. Yofe to A. Rubnik, 9 December 1947. 25 CZA, S5/10412, Organization Department of the WZO executive committee to Baruch Yofe, 23 February 1948. 26 CZA, S115/117, Organization Department of the WZO executive committee to Yosef Sprinzak, 3 January 1949. 27 CZA, S8/28, S. Kaplinsky to David Ben-Gurion, 18 September 1947.

26 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

“This site is the highest one in Tel Aviv, and above the grave of Herzl it will be possible to build a magnificent building and lighthouse for the immigrant ships approaching the ports of Tel Aviv and Jaffa.”28 The proposal to bury Herzl in Jerusalem was the most problematic. Berl Locker, the chairman of the Jewish Agency’s executive committee, thought that if the tomb were to be in Jerusalem, it should be located in front of the National Institutions Building on King George Street. Arieh Leo Lauterbach, the secretary of the Jewish Agency executive committee and WZO, proposed a secure Jewish setting such as Beit Hakerem, with a mausoleum and a garden planted around it. Greenboim suggested leaving Herzl in his metal casket for the time being and deferring a decision until the political situation stabilized.29 And so, as Yedioth Ahronoth reported, the dispute still continues between the country’s cities and towns over the honor of burying the leader’s bones in its vicinity. Haifa, the city at the foot of the Carmel, is the city of Dr. Herzl’s vision, while Tel Aviv was named after his great work, and Herzliya, after all, bears his name. And Jerusalem is the capital, and the pantheon is there.30

In the end, the Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains decided to look for a suitable site in Jerusalem, whether temporary or permanent,31 with the hope of symbolically bringing the Zionist idea full circle – the return of the Jews to the capital of their homeland from the days of King David and the burial of the state’s visionary in David’s city. Despite the weight of Jewish tradition, it appears that no one considered the possibility of burying Herzl in an existing cemetery alongside regular mortals, as was done with the bodies of other leaders who were brought to Israel. It was clear to the members of the committee that Herzl’s image required a separate grave site. The decision carried a clear political message: Jerusalem was under Israel’s sovereignty and was the capital of the nascent Jewish state. At this stage, the question was geographical: where in Jerusalem should Herzl be buried? Israeli territory in Jerusalem was limited; part of it was too close to the border demarcated in the armistice agreement with Jordan, its center was crowded, and its outskirts were roomy but isolated.

28 TAA, container 1252, file 4-3333, from Aharon Zeev Ben-Yishai to I. Rokach, 21 December 1948. 29 CZA, S5/10413, meeting protocol of the Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains, 7 January 1949. 30 “Herzl’s bones will be brought to Israel during Passover,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 14 January 1949. 31 CZA, S115/117, Arieh Leo Lauterbach to the executive committee, 9 January 1949.



The debate about Herzl’s reinterment after 1948 

 27

Several options were examined, including the center of western Jerusalem, in the garden at the top of King George Street later known as the Menorah Garden.32 Moshe Kol proposed the Sanhedrin graves in the Sanhedria neighborhood, a site being developed at that time, because of its symbolism, as a joint initiative of the Jerusalem Municipality, the Jewish Agency, and the Ministry of Religious Affairs. The idea was that Herzl would be buried where, according to tradition, the seventy-one sages of the Sanhedrin were buried. The idea of burying him, at least temporarily, adjacent to the National Institutions Building was raised again, but Rabbi Meir Berlin opposed this proposal in a letter to the Jewish Agency executive committee: [I] definitely oppose a grave site adjacent to the Jewish Agency building. This is contrary to the laws of the Torah, at the feet of Kohanim who enter and exit, and is contrary to the tradition of the Jewish people. We don’t make gods and saints of the dead in this way. Of course, we need to set up a tent [ohel] at his grave and should not call it a mausoleum, but a simple tent in keeping with the law and religion, and the place must be amidst the people and not in an isolated and special site.33

At the end of January 1949, after most of the proposals had been rejected, members of the Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains toured some of the potential sites. The last place they visited was a hill near the Bayit V’Gan neighborhood, a site that “overlooks the hills around Jerusalem, to the Mediterranean Sea on one side and the hills of Moab on the other. The city of Jerusalem spreads out ... like a rainbow, including most of its neighborhoods. The land is Jewish and the territory slated for housing is big enough to allow for its suitable development.”34 The site was not an obvious choice. It was in the far western part of Jerusalem, outside of the city’s municipal borders and the civic consciousness of the residents. Moreover, the place had no distinguished history, and its only advantage was that it was the highest place in western Jerusalem. Yet burial on a neutral hilltop in

32 CZA, memorandum on the meeting of the Joint Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains to the Land of Israel, 20 January 1949. 33 CZA, S5/10413, Meir Berlin to the Organization Department, WZO executive committee, 23 January 1949. 34 CZA, S115/117, memorandum on the meeting of the Joint Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains to the Land of Israel, 20 January 1949; CZA, S115/117, on the tour conducted on 23 January 1949 to search for a burial place for Herzl’s bones in Jerusalem; in his memoirs, Joseph Weitz claimed that he was the one who identified this hill and proposed it as a burial place for Herzl: “This is the hill I chose for his grave, and now that is its name”: J. Weitz (1965), p. 47. I found no corroboration for this in other documents.

28 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

western Jerusalem would enable “all” of the country’s citizens to see the visionary’s grave, and he could also see them. This idea was innovative and unusual. The committee now turned its attention to preparations for the burial. It was decided that the Jewish National Fund (JNF), in collaboration with the Jewish Agency’s Technical Department, would determine the exact location of the grave and prepare it; it would be a place “from which [Herzl] would no longer be moved.” The land would be expropriated and handed over to the JNF, and the chairman of the committee would negotiate with the minister of the interior to include the site – which was located outside of Jerusalem’s municipal borders – within the city’s territory.35 It was further decided that after the coffins of Herzl and his parents were disinterred and suitably placed in the Vienna cemetery, attended by an honor guard of Zionist youths, a ceremony would be conducted with the participation of representatives of the State of Israel. In Vienna, a plane from Israel would await the coffin with an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) honor guard. After landing in Haifa, city officials would take the casket to the courtyard of the Technion, where a ceremony would be conducted with representatives of the nearby Jewish settlements, who would bring bags of dirt and place them on Herzl’s coffin. On the way from Haifa to Jerusalem, the casket would stop in Hadera and Herzliya for similar ceremonies. In Tel Aviv it would be kept for safekeeping overnight in the Herzliya Hebrew Gymnasium or at the Habima Theater building, where another ceremony with bags of dirt would also be held.36 Herzl’s reburial was set for 20Tamuz, the anniversary of his death, which had been a significant date in the Zionist calendar for four decades.37 When it became known that the government of Israel and the IDF had scheduled a military parade for that date,38 tensions emerged between the government of Israel and the WZO executive committee, the two main entities executing Herzl’s will and managing the funeral procession. The latter was forced to yield to the government’s demand to find another date for the event. An additional problem pertained to the ownership of the designated grave site. It turned out that at least part of the desired hill was under Arab ownership until 1948 and included cultivated plots, fences, paths, small guard towers, and

35 Ibid., memorandum on the meeting of the Joint Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains to the Land of Israel, 10 April 1949. 36 Ibid., Moshe Kol to members of the small committee, 18 April 1949. 37 “Herzl’s bones will be brought on the 20th of Tamuz,” Hatzofeh, 26 May 1949. 38 CZA, S115/117, memorandum on the meeting of the Joint Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains to the Land of Israel, 6 June 1949; “Bringing of Herzl’s Bones Postponed. Special committee working out details of the funeral to be held after the 20th of Tamuz,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 12 June 1949.



Preparations for the funeral ceremony 

 29

the remains of buildings.39 With the encouragement of Yosef Weitz, the JNF’s representative on the Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains, an official request was submitted to the JNF to expropriate the property.40 Expropriation “solved” the problem of Arab ownership, but it proved necessary to compensate the Jews who had purchased plots of land there during the Mandate period.41

Preparations for the funeral ceremony In mid-1949, the preparations for Herzl’s funeral advanced, but its route was altered due to pressure on the organizing committee from various sources. According to the revised plan, the coffin would arrive at the Ramat David airport, pass through Haifa the following day, stay in Tel Aviv overnight, and only then be conveyed to Jerusalem. Journalists argued that, “The general public should be given the opportunity to share in welcoming Herzl. Everyone would want and need to participate – the elders who preceded Herzl, members of all of the subsequent waves of immigration, pioneers of rebirth in all of the branches, the heroes of the many bloody battles that led us to victory, the masses and the youth.”42 And indeed, it was decided that the casket should be transported slowly along the country’s roads so the crowds could stand at the roadside and pay their last respects.43 Even then, some were still advocating other burial sites. Herzl Rosenblum, the editor of Yedioth Ahronoth, suggested King David’s tomb on Mount Zion: “There are several reasons for this proposal,” he wrote in an editorial, “and the most important is that David’s Tomb is the most sacred place for our people outside of the walls of the Old City. The association with King David, the builder

39 See the aerial photograph of Mount Herzl from 16.8.1949, CZA, S5/10417. See also “Mount Herzl; topographical map,” CZA, KL5M/6873, scale 1:1000, 1949. The map notes the names of the agricultural crops, cisterns, fences, and more. 40 CZA, S5/10414, Arieh Leo Lauterbach to Granovsky, 6 June 1949; Joseph Weitz to the minister of finance, 9 June 1949. 41 Ibid., Joseph Weitz to the joint committee, 11 June 1949; CZA, S5/10415, A. Bergman, director of the Jerusalem District, to the WZO executive committee, 25 June 1949, describing the claims of the Jewish Meni family regarding the state’s expropriation of their land. “Claims regarding the land of Herzl’s grave,” Yedioth Maariv, 4 August 1949. 42 Shalom Schwartz, “Toward bringing Herzl’s bones,” Haolam, 16 June 1949. 43 IDFA, 2169/1950, 6, Proposal for the Ceremony and Arrangements by S. I. Kroytner, 29 May 1949; CZA S115/117, memorandum from the second meeting of the committee for planning the transfer of Herzl’s bones, held in Jerusalem on 6 June 1930.

30 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

of the kingdom, and Herzl, who built it from the archives of history, is apt and fitting, and we can add: It alone is apt and fitting.”44 At the beginning of July the government held a decisive meeting about the funeral, and several ministers strongly resisted the proposed plan. They preferred to conduct a funeral that would be short and limited in scope due, they said, to the IDF’s inability to deploy the military force required to guard it.45 It was clear to all that the reason for this was “the parade that didn’t parade” on the fifth of Iyar (4 May 1949) – a military parade in the streets of Tel Aviv that got stuck at the outset and became a public fiasco. It was therefore decided that the coffin would land at the airport in Lod and, at dawn, start the journey to Jerusalem, where it would be received by state dignitaries, the president, and members of the government. The burial ceremony would take place after delegations from the Jerusalem community filed past the casket. Journalists got wind of the limited and isolated format of the funeral and passed this information on to the public, stirring an uproar. The Haboker daily wrote in protest that: This funeral must be a people’s funeral that will make a mighty impression today and in the days that follow, and will be etched in the memory of this generation as a special historical privilege ... While the program planned by the committee does reflect a desire to strictly maintain order, it is lacking the level of excitement, admiration, and inspiration that this historic event, one of a kind, should stir in [our] hearts ... If the reinterment of Herzl’s bones has been delayed till today, it can be delayed a bit longer, provided that the necessary preparations are made in order to give this funeral the form it deserves.46

The general public also objected. “I read in your newspaper,” wrote one of Yedioth Ahronoth’s readers, “about the shortened funeral of Herzl and was shocked. I was raised my whole life on Zionism and dreamed that I would also participate in Herzl’s funeral, when it comes to Israel, to the liberated Jewish state.”47 At the same time, there were discussions about how to treat the space around the grave. Some called for setting up a “tent” above the tomb even before the ceremony, but it was ultimately decided just to dig a grave at that stage and defer

44 Editorial, Yedioth Ahronoth, 14 June 1949. The article also argued that “bringing Herzl’s bones for burial in David’s Tomb would reinforce our possession of Mount Zion and put an end to the Vatican’s claim on it.” 45 CZA, S115/117, memorandum from a meeting on the plan to transport Herzl’s bones in Israel, 8 July 1949; “The grand plan for Herzl’s funeral canceled because ‘we should not tire soldiers in maintaining order,’” Herut, 27 July 1949. 46 “The plan for Herzl’s funeral,” Haboker, 31 July 1949. 47 Zeev, “For Herzl’s funeral,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 28 July 1949.



Preparations for the funeral ceremony 

 31

work on the surrounding space until after the funeral. The work was assigned to the architect Yosef Klarwein, who planned to set up a “tent” afterward, but the planners decided that an architectural competition would be held to design the post-burial grave site and integrate it into a park.48 The chairman of the committee spoke at a press conference convened at the beginning of August, about two weeks before the funeral. “This is the second time since Joseph’s bones were brought up [from Egypt] that the nation brings up the bones of its leader,” Greenboim noted, and called Herzl “the creator of the period of liberation and the beginning of Israel’s redemption.”49 He said that only a few representatives from various cities, settlements, and organizations in Israel would participate in the funeral directly,50 but, to appease the citizenry, “during the time of the funeral and when a signal is given by a special siren as the coffin is lowered into the grave, the masses, each person wherever he is, will be able to participate in the great event and honor the memory of the leader.”51 Greenboim announced that representatives of the Jewish settlements would bring small bags of dirt with them to place inside the grave, and that the coffin would be taken straight from the airport to Jerusalem, accompanied by “representatives of the government and the Zionist executive committee, with an army escort.”52 But the public protested strongly. Rosenblum published another article in Yedioth Ahronoth entitled “Horrible Crime Simmering Somewhere Out There.” He claimed that “instead of preparing a ceremony, they are imposing a curfew,” and told his readers: “You’ve never seen such contempt [toward the public in Israel] in your lives as you’ll see on the day of the funeral.”53 The IDF also protested and expressed reservations about the simplicity of the ceremony: “The approach of the people responsible for conducting the ceremony lacks vision and imagination.” For example, there was a proposal to replace the command car bearing the coffin with a horse-drawn artillery cart. The head of the Training Division, Major General Haim Laskov, was asked to intervene “to change the strange and nonmilitary approach and to turn the day of the coffin’s arrival

48 CZA, S5/10416, “Bring Herzl’s bones,” summary by S. I. Kroytner, WZO Organization Department, September 1949. 49 “Schedule of Herzl’s funeral,” Davar, 1 August 1949. 50 “Herzl’s funeral,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 29 July 1949. 51 “Details set for Herzl’s funeral,” Hatzofeh, 1 August 1949. 52 “Schedule of Herzl’s funeral,” Davar, 1 August 1949. 53 H. Rosenblum, “Horrible crime simmering somewhere out there,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 25 July 1949.

32 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

into a very meaningful and impressive event, which will be etched in the memory of all the people in the state and of military personnel in particular.”54 As a result of this pressure, it was decided that the casket would be taken to Tel Aviv after all, where the Knesset would meet in a festive session followed by an opportunity for the public to file past.55 The day of the funeral was set for 17 August 1949, a day that lacked both context and symbolism. The residents of Haifa, it was decided, would be compensated for their nonparticipation by having the plane with Herzl’s coffin fly over the city, accompanied by Air Force fighter jets.56 As the funeral date drew near, there was increasing pressure from organizations and individuals to participate in the event. A special office was opened in Tel Aviv to handle the hundreds of such requests.57 In the days before the event, white cloth bags were sent to kibbutzim, moshavim, and Jewish towns and cities throughout the country, with a request to fill them with dirt from their land, write the local place name on them, and come in “festive dress and head coverings” to participate in the ceremony.58 The symbolism was clear – as Herzl’s casket was lowered into the ground, it would be covered with earth from a land sown with Jewish settlements. Several places held ceremonies to fill the bags of dirt. Representatives of the Haifa Municipality collected it from the “Technion courtyard, from the wharf at the port area from which the British Mandate authorities had expelled illegal Jewish immigrants, from Kiryat Haim, from Elijah’s Cave ... from the graves of the victims of the Patria,59 the fallen of the Arab Revolt and Israel’s war.”60 The Broza family from Motza filled a bag with dirt collected near Herzl’s famous tree,61 and

54 IDFA, 2169/1950, 6, Chaim Laskov to the chief of staff, 9 August 1949. 55 CZA, S115/117, memorandum of the meeting of the Joint Committee for Bringing Dr. Herzl’s Remains, 1 August 1949; the Haaretz newspaper estimated that over 100,000 people would be able to file past the coffin: “Herzl’s coffin will be brought to Tel Aviv prior to bringing it to Jerusalem,” Haaretz, 2 August 1949. 56 IDFA, 852/1951, 530, memorandum from the meeting held in Jerusalem regarding the reinterment of Herzl, 1 August 1949. 57 “Dirt from the land to the grave of Herzl,” Haaretz, 11 August 1949. 58 TAA, container 1252, file 4-3333, the approval regarding the bag of dirt from Tel Aviv; CZA S5/10415, draft letter from the Committee for Bringing the Remains of Dr. Herzl, 10 August 1949. One of these bags is kept in CZA TZ1/17. 59 A ship the British deployed to expel illegal Jewish immigrants from the Land of Israel. On 25 November 1940, the Haganah planted a mine designed to cause slight damage to the ship and delay the expulsion, but the detonation killed over 250 people. 60 “The soil of Haifa to the grave of Herzl,” Davar, 17 August 1949. 61 “Dirt from Herzl’s cedar brought to the grave,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 August 1949.



Disinterment from the grave in Vienna 

 33

in Netanya the bag was filled with sand from the seashore.62 The residents of the various localities then began to vie for the right to participate in the ceremony. In Degania A the residents decided to give this right to Shalom Hochbaum, “the comrade who was the first to hurl a Molotov cocktail at the Arab tank that penetrated the borders of Degania ... This mission will express a deserved recognition of valor and the affection that members of Degania feel toward him.”63 On 11 August 1949, about a week before the coffin’s arrival from Vienna, the “Law on the Reinterment of Herzl, 1949” was published.64 The legislation sought to demonstrate the commitment of the government of Israel and the Knesset to Herzl’s memory, as well as their cooperation with the JNF and the WZO, the latter the executor of the will. The law stated: The last will and testament of the visionary of the Jewish state, Theodor (Benjamin Ze’ev) Herzl of blessed memory, to bring his bones to the Land of Israel – will be fulfilled on the 22 of Av 5709 (17 August 1949) in Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jewish people and its holy city ... The government will place at the disposal of the Jewish National Fund a parcel of land in Jerusalem for a grave site, where Herzl’s bones will be brought for eternal rest.

The law was formulated in dry language, but it made reference to the Jewish and biblical heritage of the land. It cited, for instance, “the parcel of land where he pitched his tent he purchased from the children of Hamor, Shechem’s father, for a hundred pieces of silver. He set up an altar there and called it El-Elohai Yisrael” (Gen. 33:19–20). The law declared that the IDF and other state entities would assist the WZO executive committee in executing Herzl’s last will and testament.65 The newspapers reported that “as a sign of appreciation of the event, the Knesset passed the law not by a show of hands, but by standing up.”66

Disinterment from the grave in Vienna On Saturday evening, 3 August 1949, an Israeli delegation left on a special El Al flight to Vienna to retrieve the remains of Herzl, fully cognizant of the importance of conducting a significant symbolic ceremony and the desire to leverage it for

62 “Herzl St. – the main road in Netanya.” Davar, 17 August 1949. 63 Y, Beretz, “Who brings the bag of dirt,” Davar, 17 August 1949. 64 Law on the Reinterment of Herzl – 1949, meeting 67, article 12, Protocols of the Knesset, first session, Tel Aviv, 1949, pp. 1314–1315, 1324. 65 “Law on his reinterment,” Davar, 11 August 1949. 66 “The Knesset passed the law to reinter Herzl by standing up,” Haaretz, 11 August 1949.

34 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

both internal and international needs;67 after all, only a few years had passed since the destruction of Austrian Jewry. Fearing that the ceremony would arouse anger and anti-Semitism among the residents of Vienna, it was decided that the local religious institutions would open the family tomb and remove the bones of Herzl and his parents in the presence of a small honor guard. The coffins would then be transferred without fanfare to the main synagogue in Vienna, where a religious ceremony would be conducted. This plan was carried out on the following morning, 14 August.68 (The tomb had been opened several days earlier and the three coffins identified.69) Members of the Israeli delegation, who were slated to play a central role in all stages of the ceremony, did not arrive in time due to bad weather that forced the El Al plane to make stops in Rome and in Paris.70 Their absence greatly disappointed the Jews of Vienna.

Figure. 1: The coffin of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl is removed from the family plot in the Dobling cemetery, Vienna, August 1949. Unknown photographer (NPC).

67 CZA, S5/10416, letter from S. Shebdron to the WZO executive committee, 20 August 1949. 68 “Herzl’s coffin disinterred this morning,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 14 August 1949. 69 “Herzl’s grave opened and examined,” Maariv, 11 August 1949; photograph of the open tomb: CZA, PHG/1016581. 70 “The roundabout journey,” Davar, 17 August 1949.



Disinterment from the grave in Vienna 

 35

The funeral procession left the synagogue for the airport, where those accompanying the coffins had to wait for the delayed Israeli plane. When it landed, they rushed toward it in tears. The plane, which bore the name “Herzl” on its nose, stayed on the ground for about two hours in stormy weather. After reading aloud Herzl’s last will and testament and a document providing for the transfer of the coffins from Austrian Jewry to the Israeli delegation, they were loaded onto the plane. David Remez, the minister of transportation, delivered a short speech: “Past and future combine to raise up the leader’s bones. His spirit will continue to be with us and to guide the Jewish people from the eternal hills of Jerusalem.”71 Major General Yosef Avidar, the IDF representative, read a scroll of gratitude from the government, signed by Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, and the rabbi of the Israeli Navy asked Herzl’s forgiveness for disturbing his bones. Finally, in the dark of night, the plane took off for Israel.72 While it was still on its way, the country simmered with excitement. In many locations gatherings were held on the evening before the coffins’ arrival, with speeches and lectures on Herzl and his work.73 The newspapers competed in their headlines to describe enthusiastically how “tomorrow the legend will land in Israel.”74 Yedioth Ahronoth wrote, “With sacred awe and respect, the State of Israel awaits the arrival of the coffin of its visionary and creator – Dr. Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl. The plane carrying the coffin is now approaching the gates of the homeland.”75 Haaretz announced that “From the moment the plane arrives in Israel and till Wednesday, it will be ‘Herzl Day’ throughout the state. Today will not be considered a day of mourning, but a day of festivity and joy to fulfill the strong wish of Herzl – the transfer of his remains to the Land of Israel.”76 The headline in Maariv was, “And he will be buried in the City of David ... blue skies above, and a sense of awe fills the land.”77

71 Yosef Nedava, “From Vienna to Lod – by air,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 August 1949; for a photograph of the event, see CZA, PHG/1016589. 72 For the planning of the ceremony at the airport, see IDFA, 2169/1950, file 6, B. Baruch, plan for transferring the coffin of Theodor Herzl of blessed memory, 8 August 1949; “All of Vienna Jewry bid farewell to Herzl’s coffin,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 August 1949. 73 “Throughout the land,” Davar, 16 August 1949; “Herzl assemblies,” Haaretz, 16 August 1949. 74 “Tomorrow the legend will land in Israel,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 15 August 1949; “Herzl’s coffin at the gates of the homeland,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 August 1949. 75 “Herzl’s coffin at the gates of the homeland,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 August 1949. 76 “Delegation departs to bring Herzl’s coffin,” Haaretz, 14 August 1949. 77 Maariv, 17 August 1949.

36 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

The reburial ceremony In the afternoon of the festive day, the twenty-second of Av 5709 (17 August 1949), the Knesset convened in Tel Aviv.78 Members of the First Knesset, elegantly dressed, listened to Yosef Sprinzak, the first Knesset Speaker: “We have gathered for a special session of Israel’s elected officials to honor a great event in the country’s history – to honor the bringing of Benjamin Ze’ev (Theodor) Herzl from the land of the Diaspora to the homeland for eternal rest.” Ben-Gurion noted in his remarks that, “only two people in Jewish history have had the privilege of having their remains brought to Israel by their liberated nation. Joseph from Egypt and Herzl from Vienna,” and he compared Herzl to Moses, who did not get to be buried in the Land of Israel: We are glad to be transferring the bones of the visionary to the redeemed land of Israel and to be bringing them for burial in our eternal capital. Near the graves of the kings and the prophets, a memorial of stones will be built for Herzl’s bones, the remains of a mortal. The memorial of the immortal Herzl is the State of Israel, which its sons-builders will build and expand and enhance.79

At the end of these speeches, the Knesset members stood for a moment of silence in memory of Herzl, and the session concluded with the singing of “Hatikva.” At 1:30 that afternoon, the El Al plane crossed the coastline of the State of Israel. Many of the residents of Haifa stood in the streets and on the rooftops.80 The ships in the harbor sounded their horns, and “a great siren blast notified ... the residents of Haifa of the great event they had anxiously awaited the entire morning.”81 About half an hour later, the plane appeared in the sky above the Lod airport.82 After it landed, Sprinzak and Ben-Gurion approached while four fighter jets that had accompanied the plane since its entry into Israeli airspace flew overhead in perfect formation. Two rows of soldiers stood before the plane with rifles raised, and a company of soldiers marched toward it with swords drawn. Herzl’s coffin was covered with a tapestry, woven by women in Vienna in 1936, featuring

78 “‘Furious argument’ over who will speak by Herzl’s coffin,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 9 August 1949; “Holy and secular in the Knesset,” Maariv, 10 August 1949. 79 BGA, record number 204384, “On the day of reinterring the bones of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl”; S. Sveslotsky, “Vision of the resurrection of the dead in the Knesset,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 August 1949. 80 For a photograph of the residents of Haifa sending off white doves from one of the roofs as the plane passed overhead, see CZA, NKH/452142. 81 “Siren blast notified Haifa residents of coffin’s approach,” Haaretz, 17 August 1949. 82 “The plane lands at Lod,” ibid.; “The coffin arrives at Lod,” Davar, 17 August 1949.



The reburial ceremony 

 37

a Star of David in the center with a lion and a circle made of seven stars on the side.83 It was lowered from the plane, accompanied by a military honor guard armed with swords, and placed on a platform.84 The invited guests were called to file past, and then it was loaded onto a military vehicle, which embarked for Tel Aviv with a long convoy of official vehicles following behind. The other coffins were unloaded later, kept at the airport, and then transported to Jerusalem, where they were buried on 19 August separately from Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl. At the Knesset plaza in Tel Aviv, Herzl’s casket was placed on a black platform designed by the architect Abba Elhanani and surrounded by flowers, and “the body of the Jewish state’s creator lay supine in front of the Hebrew parliament.”85 The dignitaries filed past the coffin, and later an honor guard of four Air Force officers stood in front of it. Throughout the night, rabbis standing next to the coffin read portions of the Mishnah while other rabbis recited Psalms in a room in the nearby Knesset building. Their prayers were broadcast over loudspeakers.86 While the everyday life of the city continued – cafés were open, and it was a regular workday – in the vicinity of the Knesset (Herbert Samuel Square), a feeling of excitement prevailed. Spotlights were lit in the evening above the seven columns standing behind Herzl’s coffin, and they became “seven yahrzeit [memorial] candles.”87 The sight of the black platform bearing the casket with the spotlights behind it shooting beams of light into the sky was dramatic. The honor guard, composed of members of the Tel Aviv City Council, its founders, and the mayors of other towns in Israel, changed every fifteen minutes. The area of the ceremony was opened to the public; “The great square immediately filled with a large crowd.”88 The crowd continued to flow into the night and to fill the square until the coffin departed for Jerusalem at four o’clock in the morning. It was estimated that some two hundred thousand people came to view the casket that night.89

83 CZA, S115/117, letter from the Organization Department to members of the Joint Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains to the Land of Israel, 24 August 1949; photograph of removal of the cloth covering the coffin, National Library, TM 4* 87a, 1 December 1949. 84 S. Yitzhaki, “The ‘Herzl’ plane is bringing the leader’s bones to Lod,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 August 1949. 85 “State dignitaries accompany the coffin,” ibid. 86 TAA, 1252, 4-3333, “Plan to display the coffin in Tel Aviv,” undated, no author cited. 87 Davar, 17 August 1949. 88 “Tel Avivians file past the coffin,” Haaretz, 17 August 1949. 89 “Funeral procession from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 18 August 1949; CZA, S115/117, report of the Organization Department of the WZO executive committee, Reinterring Herzl, undated.

38 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

When it reached the Mikveh Yisrael agricultural school east of Tel Aviv, the coffin was greeted by a line of teachers and pupils from standing at attention. The fact that Herzl had stood at the same spot in 1898, when a convoy of the German Kaiser Wilhelm II rode by, added drama to the scene.90 The funeral procession passed through numerous locales where crowds waited anxiously. Upon entering Jerusalem, the coffin passed under an honorary arch bearing the biblical verse, “I will lift you from your graves My people and bring you to the land of Israel” (Ezek. 37:12). The procession continued toward the building on King George Street that housed the major Zionist institutions. When it arrived, it was greeted by Ben-Gurion, the IDF chief of staff, members of the Jewish Agency executive committee, the mayor of Jerusalem, and the army commanders in the city. The crowd also included Martin Buber, a former editor of Die Welt newspaper, where Herzl wrote, and Isador Shalit, who served as Herzl’s private secretary.91 The casket was placed in the center of the plaza in front of the building, again on a raised platform draped in black. The notables filed past it and then watched from the

Figure 2: The casket of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl is placed on display in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building, 17 August 1949. Unknown photographer (NPC).

90 A. Even Chen, “The people streamed after him,” Haaretz, 18 August 1949. 91 “The masses in Jerusalem file past the coffin,” ibid.



The reburial ceremony 

 39

balcony as the crowds began to pay their respects (they would be unable to do so at Mount Herzl, where the ceremony was by invitation only.)92 Meanwhile, important individuals and various delegations began to arrive at the ceremony site at the top of Mount Herzl; entry was allowed only after presenting an invitation.93 Tel Aviv was represented by nine city councilmen, three of them members of the Knesset, led by Mayor Israel Rokach.94 When the coffin reached the hill, it was lowered from the vehicle and accompanied by eight of the “first pupils” of Herzl, who had also participated in his funeral in 1904. At the hilltop, an area had already been prepared for the ceremony, with many benches placed in a semicircle around the grave site. There was an open view of West Jerusalem to the east, and in addition to forty-four flagpoles surrounding the benches, a central flagpole was situated next to the grave.95 Several IDF companies accompanied the funeral, and the honor guard raised their rifles in salute when the coffin was placed at the center of the platform, on a special device that would later lower it into the ground.96 The presidents of the burial society in Israel, Rabbi Judge Simcha Asaf and Judge Gad Fromkin, conducted the funeral, and theater director Zvi Friedland orchestrated the ceremony. A mixed chorus of women and men was originally slated to sing at the ceremony, but some religious groups objected.97 The six thousand invitees all stood while, to the sound of beating drums and trumpet blasts, Herzl’s casket was lowered into his new grave. Tense silence prevailed as the honor guard lowered its swords toward the tomb. At that moment a siren sounded in various places across the country, following a cue broadcast on the “Voice of Jerusalem,” and work came to a halt.98 As the coffin was lowered into the ground, “one group after another from the old and new settlement blocs, from the first moshavot and farmers to our youngest settlers, came up [to the grave], marching proudly, each person placing a bag of dirt from his community into the grave.”99

92 “The Jerusalem Municipality on the funeral arrangements,” Davar, 17 August 1949. 93 “To the grave site,” Davar, 18 August 1949. 94 “Distribution of tickets for Herzl’s burial ceremony,” Haaretz, 15 August 1949. 95 CZA, S5/1041, aerial photograph of Mount Herzl from 16 August 1948. 96 See the letter of Zvi Zaktser, 19 August 1949, which describes the “Bones Operation,” Herzl’s funeral ceremony from the perspective of a soldier deployed at the ceremony. I thank his daughter, Ranit Zakatser, for sharing the letter. 97 CZA, S5/10415, memorandum from a meeting in the Organization Department on reinterring Herzl, 7 August 1949. 98 “The buzz in Jerusalem,” Davar, 17 August 1949. 99 “The funeral arrangement in Jerusalem,” Davar, 17 August 1949. For photographs of people carrying bags of dirt, see the JNFPA, 245-044d; and CZA, PHPS/1337586, “Son of the valley tosses bag of dirt from his settlement into Herzl’s grave.”

40 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

Finally, the El Malei Rahamim prayer was sung for “the soul of our leader, Rav Matityahu Ze’ev, son of Yaakov, who passed away.”100

Figure 3: Remains of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl being reinterred in Jerusalem, 17 August 1949. Unknown photographer (CZA).

There was great excitement. The headlines of the newspapers printed that day in several editions announced that “the bones of the visionary were buried in the bosom of the homeland.”101 As one observer wrote, “It was not a burial ceremony – it was a coronation. The King of the Jews came to sit on his throne, and representations of the 300 localities who came to place the bags of dirt for the grave looked to me like loyal subjects coming to swear allegiance to their king.”102 Many emphasized the importance of Jerusalem as Herzl’s final resting place: “It was a political act of the first order, which turned an historical fact into a political fact. Hebrew Jerusalem, in whose soil the bones of the leader and visionary were buried, would not abandon him. And the leader who swore allegiance to Jerusa-

100 “Funeral arrangement in Jerusalem,” Davar, 17 August 1949; “The coffin was buried in the soil of Israel,” Davar, 18 August 1949; “It was a coronation ceremony,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 18 August 1949. 101 Davar, 18 August 1949. 102 “It was a coronation ceremony,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 18 August 1949.



Herzl’s grave and Mount Herzl as a national site 

 41

lem would guard Jerusalem, ensuring that it will be Hebrew and the capital of his state.”103 Two days later, Herzl’s parents, Jakob and Janet, and his sister, Pauline, were buried at the same site. Unlike in Vienna, they were allotted a separate plot about one hundred meters east of Herzl’s grave. At the end of the burial ceremonies, the WZO executive committee promptly announced that “Herzl’s last will and testament was executed. His bones were brought to the Land of Israel and buried in the bosom of its land in the hills of Jerusalem ... Herzl’s coffin was carried to eternal rest by a Yishuv united in admiration and affection for the creator of the Zionist Organization and visionary of the state. With the participation of many tens of thousands, in a wonderful line and exemplary order.”104 The JNF’s Names Committee decided to officially name the site Mount Herzl,105one of the rare times in the history of Israel that a geographic site was named for a leader. Many cities followed suit by renaming their main thoroughfares Herzl Street.106

Herzl’s grave and Mount Herzl as a national site According to estimates, more than a quarter of a million people filed past Herzl’s casket on its way from the airport to Tel Aviv and from there to Jerusalem.107 With so many visitors arriving at Mount Herzl in the weeks following the ceremony, it developed into a major pilgrimage site. It became an important stop on tours in Jerusalem; many made special trips to Mount Herzl, and others visited as part of a broader tour of the city. Although Maariv reported about a week after the ceremony that “the grave site can be marked as a holy place,”108 the sacred and the secular were now mixed. With alert entrepreneurs offering ice cream, drinks, and other products,109

103 “The connection with Jerusalem re-sanctified,” Maariv, 17 August 1949. 104 CZA, S41/14, Reinterring Herzl, 30 August 1949. 105 CZA, S5/10416, Y. A. Aricha, Names Committee of the Organization Department of the WZO, 30 August 1949; CZA, S115/117, A. L. Lauterbach to L. B. Locker, 28 August 1949. Other suggestions were “Herzl Hill” and “Herzl Peak.” 106 Azaryahu (2012), pp. 132–133; “Herzl region in the Negev,” Davar, 21 August 1949; CZA, S5/10416, chairman of the committee, Beit V’Gan, S. Halberstadt to David Ben-Gurion, 19 August 1949. 107 Y. N. Neiman, “The coffin’s journey,” Davar, 26 August 1949. 108 “Such a grave is a pilgrimage site,” Maariv, 25 August 1949; Y. N. Neiman, “The coffin’s journey,” Davar, 26 August 1949. 109 “Livelihoods,” Maariv, 12 October 1949.

42 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

the roads leading to Herzl’s grave resembled a bazaar full of vendors’ stalls. The mass of traffic, which peaked on Saturdays, stirred protests from the religious and especially the ultra-Orthodox sectors in Jerusalem. Haim Ze’ev Hirshberg, the chairman of the Public Committee for the Sabbath, complained to the mayor that: It is impossible to agree that those visiting the grave of the founder of the Zionist movement will drive in their cars up close to the grave without bothering to walk up to it, and perhaps even suffice with a glance at the site through the windows of their vehicle. Just as no one approaches the Western Wall except by foot, a similar situation must be ensured in regard to Herzl’s grave. There is no need to elaborate on the inappropriateness of the appearance of people who lick ice cream or quench their thirst while at a holy site or who exploit the sanctity of the place to do their business.110

The instructions for the guards at the site stipulated that: The public will commune with the memory of Herzl in silence and in an appropriate manner. Groups that express a desire and which are appropriate in composition and form are allowed to sing “Hatikva” or to conduct a traditional memorial service. Every request for a ceremony requires approval from the board of trustees. On the Sabbath, it is forbidden to photograph or smoke anywhere in the area. There is no smoking by the grave site at any time.111

Signs placed near the grave instructed visitors to “Remember that you are at Herzl’s grave! Act in accordance with the dignity of the site; do not violate the Sabbath; do not smoke by the grave; do not sit on the gravestones!”112 Many emphasized the political significance of burying Herzl there. “The decision to dig the grave of the visionary of the Hebrew state in the hills of Jerusalem is one of the key decisions in recent generations for the history and status of Jerusalem... . No nation would bring the bones of the visionary of its revival to a place it was not sure of,” Maariv wrote.113 Against the background of plans to internationalize Jerusalem, a ceremony was held at the site in early December 1949, in which the public swore allegiance to Jerusalem in the words of Psalm 137: “If I forget Jerusalem, may my right hand forget.”114 In addition, many Hebrew holidays were celebrated of Mount Herzl. For example, a Hanukkah torch was

110 ISA, GL-6353/26, H. Z. Hirshberg to the Prime Minister’s Office, 24 August 1949. 111 CZA, S115/117, permanent instructions for guards at Herzl’s grave, 4 July 1950. 112 Ibid., wording of the permanent signs from the site of Herzl’s grave, 4 July 1950. 113 Y. Shuchman, “Herzl’s grave in Jerusalem obligates,” Davar, 26 August 1949. 114 “Jews of Jerusalem swear: If I forget Jerusalem, may my right hand forget,” Davar, 5 December 1949.



Herzl’s grave and Mount Herzl as a national site 

 43

brought there from Modi’in, and Independence Day 1950 was celebrated there for the first time.115 The Zionist leadership decided at this stage to place Herzl’s grave in the care of a board of trustees, in collaboration with the government of Israel and the JNF. The board would be responsible for guarding the grave and handling any issues that might arise. Berl Locker was appointed chairman; other members of the board included government ministers and representatives of the WZO and JNF.116 The trustees deliberated at length about developing the site. A rumor circulated that Herzl’s memorial grave site – a mausoleum and garden spread over ten dunams of “Herzl cedars” – would be built with funds from US Jewry and with the assistance of the United Land of Israel Appeal.117 In the months before the burial ceremony, the JNF announced a campaign to plant cedar trees and appealed to Israeli citizens (both individuals and organizations) and Diaspora Jews for contributions. Large advertisements appeared in the newspapers with lists of donors118 – town councils, commercial companies, employees of various organizations and departments – which encouraged others to contribute. In March 1950, the JNF conducted an initial planting ceremony on Mount Herzl, and an eight-foot cedar tree was transplanted from Kibbutz Ma’ale Hahamisha, west of Jerusalem.119 The planting of trees fit with the ethos of that period as a national Zionist act, but the question of the design and content of the site remained open. Most of the religious public wanted to refrain from building a mausoleum, and some proposed building a prayer hall that would resemble the synagogue in which Herzl prayed during his childhood.120 The minister of religious affairs, Yehuda Leib Fishman Maimon, wrote in this context that, “we, especially among religious Jewry, are very cautious not to idolize the dead person, even someone who was the greatest of his generation. Herzl did great and wonderful things, but his

115 “Eight torches of valor will come to Jerusalem today,” Davar, 21 December 1949; Azaryahu (2005), pp. 54–60; Yarden (1998). 116 J. Weitz (1968). 117 “The bones of Herzl’s parents were transported to Jerusalem,” Davar, 19 August 1949. 118 The wording of the announced the JNF prepared was “We will plant Herzl cedars in his memory in Jerusalem,” Karnenu 26.6, Elul 5709. “With Herzl’s reinterment, we will plant cedars in his memory,” Davar, 15 August 1949. For a photograph of a “Herzl Cedar Forest” certificate, see JNFPA, d1297-012. 119 CZA, S21/14, Hakeren Hakayemet to the Zionist executive committee, 9 March 1950. 120 ISA, GL-20/14917, Rabbi Moshe Zvi Halevy to Minister of Religious Affairs Maimon, 1 May 1950.

44 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

acts are his memorials, and we do not need to make superfluous monuments and memorials around his grave.”121 Because of time pressure, the Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains had decided not to address the design of the grave site and its surroundings prior to the burial. The grave itself was designed by Klarwein, and the WZO planned to announce a design competition after the ceremony.122 In late 1949, in accord with an agreement between the Jewish Agency and the JNF, the latter took upon itself the mission of maintaining the grave site area, while the Jewish Agency installed a small temporary inscription that stated: “At this site, the tent and memorial stone will be set up for the grave of Herzl, who was brought here for eternal rest on the 22nd of Av 5709.” The memorial stone was placed in a round flowerbed surrounded by fence posts and chains, behind which the visitors stood.123 In 1950 the WZO appointed a panel of judges to formulate a plan for the design competition for Mount Herzl and to address several related issues. Already at this stage, the question of the “tent” above the grave was separated from the planning of the site. Despite considerable discussion of this matter, “there was still no decision on its dimensions and character,” and it was emphasized that “the judges must clarify the desirable solution in this matter.”124 The question of the visibility of the “mausoleum” (as it was called in the discussions) from other parts of the city was seen as crucial. In September 1950, the WZO executive committee announced a design competition with a monetary prize for designing Herzl’s grave site and Mount Herzl:125 The solution must give expression to the feeling of honor and admiration the Jewish people feel toward Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl ... It must fit into the landscape and historical background of Jerusalem ... The solution must be an expression of respect for generations, without exceeding the appropriate bounds for a popular movement like the Zionist movement, and for a young state like the State of Israel, which is in its nascent stage and engaged in the ingathering of the exiles.

121 Ibid., the chief rabbi, Y. L. Hacohen Maimon to Rabbi Moshe Halevy, 7 May 1950. In his response, Rabbi Maimon cited the words of Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, sefer Shoftim, Laws of Mourning, chap. D, paragraph D. 122 CZA, S41/34/1-2, competition to design Herzl’s grave. The entire file deals with the competition to design the grave site area. 123 CZA, KKL14/34-31, photograph of Herzl’s grave. 124 Ibid. 125 “The competition for designing Herzl’s grave site and D. Wolffsohn,” Davar, 11 September 1950.



Herzl’s grave and Mount Herzl as a national site 

 45

The judges added that while the contestant would be free to design the character of the grave site, “in designing any plastic form in the solution, he should take into account the reservations of the Israeli [Israeli, not Jewish!] tradition.”126 Announcement of the competition in several languages in diverse media – newspapers, the Voice of Israel, the Voice of Zion for the Diaspora in Hebrew, Yiddish, English, and French127 – underscored its importance. Forms for the competition were sold in Israel by the Association of Engineers and Architects in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa, and in the Diaspora by the offices of the various Zionist federations. The contestants were given a period of about ten months, and the Zionist executive committee expressed hope that on the twentieth of Tamuz 1951, the anniversary of Herzl’s death, the winner of the competition would be declared. In June 1951, the competition ended.128 More than sixty proposals were submitted by leading architects in Israel, including Munio Weinraub Gitai and Al Mansfeld, who submitted a joint proposal, and Ze’ev Rechter from Tel Aviv.129 After the judges emphasized that the subject was “extraordinary in nature,” demanding a solution for an architectural problem that was unprecedented in the history of Zionism – the burial of a Zionist leader in what was expected to become a pantheon and adapting that to the powerful Jerusalem landscape – they turned to discussion of the proposals submitted.130 First prize was awarded to Plan No. 54, by Yosef Klarwein, the only Jerusalemite among the contestants.131 Unlike the other plans, which were relatively complex, Klarwein’s was simple and modest.132 The “tent” he proposed erecting on the “cap of the hill” was a domed structure six meters high and thirty meters in diameter, supported by forty-four “ribs” (the number of Herzl’s years), with open space between them for passage and to maintain a visual connection with the landscape.133 The plan was accepted as “a basis for fulfillment,” and the judges made suggestions for changes in the domed struc-

126 CZA, S5/10429, announcement by the Zionist executive committee on the competition for designing Herzl’s grave site, September 1950. 127 CZA, S5/10431, Report No. 1, On the competition for designing Herzl’s grave site, 15 October 1950. 128 Report of mistake on “265 proposals for ‘Herzl’s grave,’” Davar, 18 April 1951. 129 CZA, S5/10437, Proposal No. 59. 130 CZA, S5/10435, Judging protocol, 23 July 1951. 131 I did not find the plan itself. It was published in the booklet Contemporary Design in Israel, 1952, CZA, A455/44. Klarwein planned many projects in Israel, including the Dagon silos in Haifa, the Faculty of Law and stadium in Givat Ram, and the grave sites of Saul Tchernichovsky in Tel Aviv and Gershon Agron in Jerusalem. For more on his work, see CZA, A455/7. 132 Elhanani (1998), pp. 88–93. 133 A. H. Elhanani, “Mount Herzl,” Davar, 8 July 1958.

46 

 Chapter 2 “The immortal Herzl, his tombstone is the State of Israel”

ture and in the general arrangement of access to the grave, stairways, paths, and roads. It was decided that the architect would decide on the revisions together with a special committee to be appointed by the WZO executive committee. For budgetary and bureaucratic reasons, the grave site remained in its initial condition during the years following the competition.134 The surroundings were enhanced, however; roads and paths were paved, and an entrance was built with seven gates, reflecting the seven stars in Herzl’s proposed flag for the Jewish state.135 As time passed there was growing opposition to building the dome above the grave, and Klarwein ultimately capitulated. On Herzl’s one-hundredth birthday, 15 July 1960, a new marker was unveiled. Representatives of Jewish communities placed their local stones in small blue-and-white bags on the tombstone. A stone was sent from the cornerstone of the Herzliya Hebrew Gymnasium in Tel Aviv, and another came from archaeological excavations conducted in Jaffa.136 One day earlier, a museum dedicated to the life and work of Herzl opened adjacent to the entrance of Mount Herzl. At the center of the exhibit was Herzl’s office with his special desk, which had been preserved until then in the National Institutions Building in downtown Jerusalem.

134 Naor and Bar (2012). 135 “‘Stage B’ of building ‘Herzl’s Grave’ is nearly done,” Davar, 11 July 1955; see also a photograph of Mount Herzl during the development work, JNFPA, d739-287. 136 “Cornerstones of Tel Aviv and Jaffa to Herzl’s grave,” Davar, 14 July 1960; “Herzl’s tomb unveiled,” Davar, 15 July 1950. For a photograph of the tombstone after its placement, see JNFPA, d739-290.

Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders In Zionist culture, a personal cult of leaders was unacceptable. Nevertheless, the visionaries of the Zionist idea and the leaders and heroes of the Zionist movement were exalted because of their efforts to establish a national home for the Jews in the Land of Israel. Their achievements were the result of sacrifice, diligence, and effort, sometimes even at the cost of their lives. This is one of the threads that connects Theodor (Benjamin Ze’ev) Herzl, the subject of the previous chapter, and the figures in this one. Their importance was widely recognized during their lifetimes and appreciated even more after their deaths. The image, ideas, and memory of Herzl, David Wolffsohn, and Zvi Herman Shapira – and now their coffins and burials, too – linked these men to the community they left behind in the Diaspora and to the past and present in Israel. As James E. Young wrote in the context of memory of the Holocaust, “Memory is never shaped in a vacuum; the motives of memory are never pure.”1 The leaders of Zionism, and later the leaders of the country, worked alongside various agents to foster collective memory and fill it with worthy historical figures. They exercised a selective mechanism, promising that the reinterred would always be remembered in the history of the nation thanks to their honorable burials, related ceremonies, and memorial services. Such was the implicit contract between the nation and its national heroes: they devoted their lives to the nation and died “sanctifying its name,” and it repaid their lofty patriotism with eternal life in the national pantheon. This was not only an act of compassion but also proof of the validity of the Zionist message, with the graves serving as ethical and pedagogical models. The citizens were to know that a person who worked to promote Zionism and the state of Israel, like these early leaders, would become part, at least symbolically, of the nation’s collective memory.2

David Wolffsohn – “Now he is gathered to his people and to his State” The reinterment in 1951 of David Wolffsohn, second president of the Zionist Congress, was a natural sequel to that of Herzl, not only because of its location

1 Young (1993), p. 2. 2 Ben Amos (1993). DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-004

48 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

on Mount Herzl but also because of the perception that emerged in that period regarding the reinterment of the leaders of Zionism. Born in Lithuania in 1855, Wolffsohn received a religious education and grew up on the ideas of Hibbat Zion (Fondness for Zion), the precursor of modern Zionism. In 1896, after reading Herzl’s book The Jewish State, he traveled to Vienna and became Herzl’s close friend and assistant. In 1898 Wolffsohn toured the Land of Israel with Herzl and grew even closer to him and his ideas. At the Seventh Zionist Congress in Basel in 1905, after Herzl’s death, Wolffsohn was elected vice chairman of the congress and chair of its executive committee. At the Eighth Zionist Congress, which convened in The Hague in 1907, he was appointed president of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), a role he filled until his death on 15 September 1914.3 Wolffsohn was buried in Cologne with this inscription on his tombstone: “David, son of Yitzhak, Wolffsohn, president of the Zionist Organization, second to Herzl. His last wish was to bring his bones to the Land of Israel.”4 In his will, Wolffsohn requested that his remains and those of his wife, Fannie Yudel, be brought to the Land of Israel and buried near the grave of the state’s visionary. He earmarked part of his wealth to fulfilling this request. This desire to imitate Herzl complicated matters for the WZO, and the lengthy, indecisive process of transferring Herzl’s coffin described in Chapter 2 also delayed the process for Wolffsohn’s. The discussion about fulfilling Wolffsohn’s final wish began prior to the founding of the state. As preparations were under way to bring Herzl’s casket to Jerusalem in August 1949, the question of whether the opportunity should also be used to fulfill the will of Herzl’s successor arose. The opinion of the legal department of the Jewish Agency was unequivocal: Wolffsohn’s will was not binding on those executing Herzl’s will.5 And so, Wolffsohn’s coffin remained in the cemetery in Cologne after Herzl’s burial in Israel, until the Jewish Agency’s executive committee decided in March 1950 to take action.6 It was clear to all that Wolffsohn should also be buried on Mount Herzl, thus establishing a pantheon there for the generation’s leading Zionists. The board of trustees for Herzl’s grave (composed of representatives of the Israeli government and of the Zionist executive committee) approved this in principle, and the Zionist committee turned to the government of Israel, its partner in administering Mount Herzl.

3 “David Wolffsohn, may he rest in peace,” Hatzfira, 4 September 1914. 4 CZA, S5/10361, the Organization Department to H. Y. Klinov, 4 June 1952. See photograph of the large tombstone at the JNFPA, d736-243, which shows a similar sentence etched under the name of Fannie Yudel. 5 CZA, S5/10362, from the department’s opinion, 14 February 1949. 6 “Bringing Wolffsohn’s bones to Israel,” Haboker, 8 March 1950.



David Wolffsohn – “Now he is gathered to his people and to his State” 

 49

In mid-1952, the mission of transferring the remains of Wolffsohn and his wife began.7 Their coffins were disinterred and sent by train to the port of Hamburg,8 where they were placed on the Israeli ship Rimon. In late July, the ship anchored in Haifa and the caskets were off-loaded and placed on a platform decorated with Israeli flags.9 The next day, they were transferred to the courtyard of the National Institutions Building in Jerusalem. At the end of the ceremony, Wolffsohn’s coffin was carried on the shoulders of pallbearers, including Joseph Sprinzak (the Knesset speaker), Berl Locker (chairman of the Jewish Agency), Moshe Smoira (president of the Supreme Court), Moshe Kol, and Ze’ev Gold (both members of the Zionist executive committee).10

Figure 4: Tomb of David Wolffsohn on Mount Herzl, July 1952. Unknown photographer (NPC).

The two graves were dug northeast of Herzl’s, next to those of his family. In the spirit of Wolffsohn’s will, eulogies were not delivered and only “Hatikva” was sung. At the opening of an exhibition devoted to Wolffsohn at the Central Zionist

7 CZA, S5/10361, the Organization Department to H. Y. Klinov, 4 June 1952. 8 “Bones of David Wolffsohn, of blessed memory, to Israel,” Haaretz, 11 June 1952. 9 CZA, S5/10361, the Organization Department to the executive committee, 25 June 1952; “Today is the funeral of David Wolffsohn and his wife on Mount Herzl,” Davar, 2 July 1952. 10 For a photograph of their coffins, see JNFPA, d237-017.

50 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

Archives, Berl Locker said that “it was very fortunate for the Zionist movement that Herzl’s grave in Vienna and Wolffsohn’s grave in Cologne were not harmed at the malicious hands of the Nazis. And we are very privileged to be able to carry out the will of Wolffsohn to bring him for burial near the grave of Herzl.”11 An editorial in Davar summarized the affair as follows: “Forty-eight years ago, when Herzl died, Wolffsohn vowed at his grave, ‘if I forget you, Jerusalem.’ Ten years later he died and, as he instructed, his last wish was etched on his tombstone on foreign soil – that his remains be brought to the Land of Israel. Now he is gathered to his people and to his state.”12

Max Nordau – “By the grave where his great spirit will reside” Max (Simon) Nordau, Herzl’s friend and colleague in the Zionist movement’s leadership, was already reinterred in Tel Aviv in 1926. An intellectual and an M.D. who wrote about various topics in society, art, and religion, Nordau became acquainted with Herzl and the ideas of Zionism in 1892. He participated in Zionist congresses, served in them as vice president, and was president of the Zionist movement from the Seventh through the Tenth congresses (1905–1911). Some regarded him as second to Herzl in importance in the Zionist movement. Nordau died on 22 January 1923 and was buried in the Montparnasse Cemetery in Paris.13 Immediately after his death, the Zionist General Council began to address the question of reinterring Nordau in the Land of Israel, but a decision was made to reinter him only in late 1925. His wife and daughter were uncertain about where that should be done. The initial idea was to bury him in Jerusalem, but, in the end, Tel Aviv was chosen. The official reason was that two neighborhoods were already named for him there, Nordia and Tel Nordau, but it seems likely that the strong and persistent lobbying of Tel Aviv’s Mayor Dizengoff played a significant role in the decision. The Zionist General Council decided to accede to the mayor’s request and proposed that the Tel Aviv Municipality assume responsibility for bringing the coffin and burying it within its jurisdiction. At the end of November 1925, the city discussed the issue and unanimously approved the proposal. When Nordau’s wife and daughter consented to transfer

11 “The funeral of David Wolffsohn and his wife in Jerusalem,” Davar, 3 July 1952. 12 “Davar Hayom,” Davar, 2 July 1952. 13 “Max Nordau is dead,” Haolam, 24 January 1923; “Dr. Max Nordau is gone,” Hadoar, 26 January 1923; “Max Nordau at his death,” Haolam, 31 January 1923.



Max Nordau – “By the grave where his great spirit will reside” 

 51

the coffin to Tel Aviv,14 Dizengoff responded with an emotional letter, telling them that Tel Aviv was awaiting “the opportunity given to us to fulfill our duty to your deceased – our great departed one – and we will consider it an honor to see his wife and his daughter among us.”15 The city took responsibility for planning the funeral and published its plan in newspapers and municipal announcements.16 A proposal to send the coffin via a ship that would anchor at the port of Jaffa was rejected due to fears of Arab opposition and concerns that the heavy casket might fall into the sea during off-loading.17 Dizengoff therefore decided that it would be shipped to Alexandria and then sent by train to Tel Aviv.18 City officials worked hard to plan the funeral procession.19 They decided that it would stop at two places of significance for the city: the municipality building, which symbolized Tel Aviv’s political independence and Jewish nationalism, and the Great Synagogue on Allenby Street, which represented the religious component.20 At the cemetery in northern Tel Aviv, a new entrance was made in the southern fence, and a burial area was prepared for the coffin in the western corner.21 In late April 1926, Nordau’s coffin was loaded onto the Lamartine in Marseille. Upon arrival at the port of Alexandria, it was received by the elders of the Jewish community and a large Jewish crowd. Pupils at the city’s Hebrew schools came to the ceremony with their teachers, and the government of Egypt sent an honor guard to accompany the casket to the train station.22 From there it continued to Kantara, where it was ferried across the Suez Canal. A special train sent by Palestine Railways took the coffin to Lod, and then a local train carried it to Tel Aviv.23 Many people waited at the city’s train station: municipal officials; leaders of the Zionist executive committee, the National Council, and various institu-

14 TAA, 1281, 3474, Anna Nordau to the Tel Aviv Municipality, 22 December 1925; “Transfer of Nordau’s bones to Tel Aviv,” Yedioth Tel Aviv 4 (1 January 1926), p. 11. 15 TAA, 1281, 3474, Meir Dizengoff to Anna Nordau, 26 January 1926. 16 Municipal announcement No. 8, Yedioth Tel Aviv 12 (2 May 1926), p. 19. 17 The shallow port of Jaffa did not allow large ships to anchor. Ships were therefore unloaded out at sea, with smaller boats taking the loads to the docks. 18 TAA, 1281, 3474, David Bloch to the consul of Egypt in Jerusalem, 19 April 1926. 19 For the funeral program, see ibid., “Welcoming Nordau’s coffin”; and To the Memory of the Transfer of the Remains of our Great Leader Max Nordau to Tel Aviv (1936). For a detailed description of the events, see Shapiro (2010). 20 CZA, S670/11, announcement by the Tel Aviv Municipality, “Ceremony for receiving the bones of our great leader Max Nordau and bringing them to burial in the cemetery in Tel Aviv,” 4 May 1926. 21 “Ready for Nordau’s bones,” Davar, 4 May 1926. 22 “Max Nordau’s coffin in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 5 May 1926. 23 Ibid.; see also the films taken at the funeral: SSJFA, VT AX48; VT AG09.

52 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

tions; and representatives of Jewish localities invited for the ceremony.24 Many students had stood since the early morning on both sides of the streets through which the funeral procession passed, from the train station to Bialik Street, and large crowds filled the sidewalks, balconies, and roofs.25 The police rode at the head of the procession, followed by bicyclists walking alongside their bicycles, and a group from the Maccabi movement. Next came numerous people bearing wreaths, and then, atop a black vehicle, the casket itself, covered with a blueand-white cloth. Members of the Nordau family, accompanied by an honor guard of representatives of the Zionist institutions, walked behind the coffin, followed by those who had received permission to participate in the procession.26 Closing out the march were groups from the Scouts and Maccabi movements, carrying their respective flags.27

Figure 5. Coffin of Max Nordau on display in front of Tel Aviv City Hall, 5 May 1926. Unknown photographer (CZA).

24 TAA, 1281, 3474, “Hebrew Colonies in Palestine”. 25  For a photograph of Allenby Street as the procession passed, see CZA, PHG/1013791. 26 For the list of invitees, see TAA, 1281, 3474, “List of invitees for the ceremony of receiving the coffin of the late Dr. Max Nordau.” 27 “Nordau’s bones in Tel Aviv,” Davar, 4 May 1926.



The burial of Leo (Yehuda Leib) Pinsker in the Nicanor Cave  

 53

The procession advanced toward the Tel Aviv municipal building on Bialik Street. The coffin was placed in the center of a pavilion erected in its front courtyard, adorned in black.28 From ten o’clock in the morning until two in the afternoon, residents of the city were able to pass before the casket, and many placed flowers on it.29 Crowds that gathered in the adjacent streets wore ribbons bearing Nordau’s picture, distributed by the Jewish National Fund (JNF). Ahad Ha’am (Asher Zvi Ginzberg, d. 1927), the founder of “cultural Zionism,” sat facing the crowd on the first-floor balcony of City Hall, despite his poor health. At 2:00 p.m., members of the Nordau family, together with a few invitees, moved to the upper balcony to deliver speeches from there.30 The route to the Beit Ha’am community center passed through streets packed with people, and it was difficult to clear a path for the funeral procession to continue as planned. The coffin was eventually placed on a stage covered in black, bedecked with wreaths and blue and white ribbons. The invited guests, in their finest attire, sat on benches facing the coffin on the sandy plaza, while a crowd gathered around it. Menachem Ussishkin began with a speech mentioning the nation’s great forefathers – Moses Hess, Yehudah Leib Pinsker, Herzl, and Nordau – whom he linked to the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the Zionist movement’s fight for freedom of immigration to the Land of Israel. Ussishkin was later one of the prominent advocates for bringing Herzl’s casket for burial in Jerusalem and supported building a pantheon there for the generation’s great leaders. At Nordau’s funeral, however, he asserted that it was commendable to bring Nordau’s bones “to Tel Aviv, our new city, and not to the ancient and eternal city of Jerusalem. This is a symbol because we still stand at the threshold of redemption and not in redemption itself. Perhaps when we have the privilege of bringing his great friend here [i.e., Herzl], complete redemption will already come.”31

The burial of Leo (Yehuda Leib) Pinsker in the Nicanor Cave Leo (Yehuda Leib) Pinsker, one of the leaders of the Hibbat Zion movement and the author of Auto-Emancipation, died on 21 December 1891, six years before the

28 CZA, PHG/1000518. 29 CZA, PHG/1001749, “Ceremony of bringing the remains of the late Nordau to Tel Aviv,” Doar Hayom, 5 May 1926. 30 For a photograph of the event, see CZA, PHG/1001748. 31 “Ussishkin’s speech,” Davar, 5 May 1926; “On his grave,” Ussishkin Book (1924), pp. 357– 359. Later, in the 1930s, Ussishkin invested considerable effort to bring Pinsker for reburial in Jerusalem.

54 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

First Zionist Congress. He would be reinterred in June 1934 in the Nicanor Cave in Jerusalem. At Pinsker’s open grave in Odessa’s old cemetery, next to the grave of his father, Pinsker had been eulogized by Zvi Belkovsky, one of the organizers of the First Zionist Congress and a member of the Young Guard of Hovevei Zion. Belkovsky promised that “when our pantheon is built one day and the people remember its great sons, your place too, Aryeh Pinsker, will not be missing.”32 This promise was apparently forgotten until Pinhas Feldman, a Jewish neurologist in Odessa, took up the cause following the city’s decision to raze its old Jewish cemetery. Feldman and his wife, Berta Drot, initiated a petition on behalf of the Jewish residents of the city to transfer Pinsker’s coffin, and the local authorities approved the request.33 While some have attributed the initiative to reinter Pinsker to Ussishkin, Feldman is the one who immigrated to the Land of Israel and sought to bring Pinsker’s remains with him, realizing “the importance of the gift he would bring to the people of Israel.”34 Feldman contacted the Odessa authorities and described Pinsker as a relative whose remains he wished to take with him when leaving the Soviet Union. At the end of a bureaucratic process, the couple succeeded in disinterring the coffin in 1934 and transferring it to the Soviet ship Franz Mehring, which sailed from Odessa to Jaffa. Undercover police from the GPU (the forerunner of the KGB) inspected the casket, suspecting that Feldman was actually representing a Zionist organization, but ultimately they allowed it to be transported. Feldman informed his family members in the Land of Israel in advance, and they turned to Ussishkin, head of the Zionist executive committee and chairman of the JNF, to organize the funeral.35 The obvious location was the Tel Aviv cemetery where Max Nordau was reinterred in 1926. Another possibility was to bury Pinsker on Jerusalem’s Mount of Olives, where just a few weeks earlier Yehuda Leib Motzkin (the second chairman of the Zionist General Council) had been buried, with Ussishkin’s blessing.36 However, in Pinsker’s case Ussishkin sought a more unique location: the Nicanor Cave on the campus of Hebrew University (Ussishkin himself would be buried there in 1941). This idea arose during a meeting with Judah Leon (Leib) Magnes, the president of the university, perhaps against the background of efforts several years earlier to bury Leopold Greenberg nearby, in the Bentwich family’s burial plot (see Chapter 4). Magnes was

32 Zvi Belkovsky, “At the grave of Y. L. Pinsker,” Haaretz, 22 June 1934. 33 “The bones of Y. L. Pinsker brought today to the Land of Israel,” Davar, 20 June 1934. 34 “How Pinsker’s bones were brought to the Land of Israel,” Davar, 21 June 1934. 35 “Pinsker’s coffin arriving,” Haaretz, 21 June 1934. 36 “The funeral of Y. L. Motzkin,” Davar, 20 April 1934.



The burial of Leo (Yehuda Leib) Pinsker in the Nicanor Cave  

 55

the one who suggested to Ussishkin the ancient burial cave from the first century ce, which was uncovered in 1902 and identified as the burial site of Nicanor of Alexandria, who paid for the gilded east gate of the Jewish Temple.37 Magnes may have hoped that proximity to Pinsker’s grave would strengthen the university; together they might become the symbolic Zionist center of Jerusalem and even of the entire Land of Israel. Ussishkin responded enthusiastically to the idea and immediately proposed turning the place into a national pantheon where other Zionist visionaries would also be buried.38 He sought to connect the contemporary Zionist experience with Jerusalem’s magnificent Jewish past of the late Second Temple period, when Diaspora Jews would come to the city to be buried. The Antiquities Department of the Mandate government gave its approval to bury Pinsker there, and excavation work began at the cave in preparation for the arrival of the coffin.39 Before the ship reached Jaffa, Ussishkin published an announcement in the newspapers in the name of the Council of Hovevei Zion in the Land of Israel, declaring, “Today is a great day for us.” He reported on the transport of Pinsker’s bones and explained that this action was taken “without publicity, for obvious reasons.” He also announced that until the day of the funeral, the coffin would remain in Tel Aviv and would then be transferred to “our eternal capital” for burial in its soil. Ussishkin called upon the entire Yishuv to come and pay final respects to Pinsker: “We hope that all of the communities and localities, all of the federations and institutions, will participate in the funeral via their special delegations.”40 After the ship anchored early Wednesday morning, Pinsker’s coffin was transferred to the Ohel Shem hall in Tel Aviv, where it stood until Sunday. Placed in the center of the hall, it was covered with blue-and-white flags and surrounded by lit candles. Guarding the casket were members of the Scouts movement and representatives of Brit Rishonim, an organization of veteran Zionist activists in the Land of Israel.41 On 24 June 1934, a Sunday, the funeral procession began. Outside Ohel Shem, elementary- and high-school pupils gathered, many of them waving flags.42 Members of the Council of Hovevei Zion, led by Ussishkin, brought

37 Dickson (1903). 38 Magnes to Norman Bentwich, 23 October 1941, quoted by Shapiro (2007), p. 457. 39 “Interment of Zionist Forerunner,” Jerusalem Post, 22 June 1934. 40 “Bringing the remains of Pinsker: ‘To our fellow Jews in the Land of Israel,’” Doar Hayom, 21 June 1934. 41 CZA, PHO/1356619; NPC, D836-074. 42 “Pinsker’s bones brought for burial in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 25 June 1934; Pinhas Feldman, “By the coffin of Y. L. Pinsker (a voice from the Russian Diaspora),” Haaretz, 26 June 1934.

56 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

the coffin out to the street, where the order of the funeral procession was maintained as planned. The marchers, including policemen, firemen, and officials from the Sanitation Department of Tel Aviv, passed through the main streets of the city,43 and the mayor, Israel Rokach, delivered a speech from the balcony of City Hall: There is something terrible and tragic in the way Pinsker’s coffin was brought to the land of the fathers ... Pinsker was brought in complete silence, and only when his coffin crossed the borders of the Hebrew city, his friends and associates breathed a sigh of relief ... Tel Aviv will not have the privilege of keeping the body of the deceased within its confines next to our illustrious Nordau and Ahad Ha’am. There, on Mount Scopus ... Pinsker’s coffin will rest for safekeeping in the arms of the eternal Jerusalem.44

The funeral procession stopped again at Mikveh Yisrael. The principal of the institution, Eliyahu Krause, along with pupils, teachers, and staff of the country’s first Jewish agricultural school, all in work clothes, lined up in two rows and waited for the coffin to enter the grounds.45 Dov Ariel Leibowitz, the first child born in the Gedera settlement, delivered a speech titled “Remnants of the Biluim [pioneers] in the Land of Israel,” and the funeral procession continued its journey. It later stopped opposite the entrance to the Arza convalescent home (near Motza), another significant Zionist landmark, where the patients and staff of the institution paid their respects to Pinsker.46 A crowd had gathered in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building in Jerusalem, where rows of high-school pupils waved flags covered in black.47 Yitzhak Ben-Zvi spoke on behalf of the Zionist General Council, emphasizing the connection between the ancient Jewish past and the present: “The pantheon of Jerusalem, the Jewish pantheon of the generations of the kings of the House of David, the Hasmoneans, the prophets, the fighters for truth and freedom – this pantheon is enriched by bringing the remains of a fighter for freedom, who laid the foundations of the national movement.”48 Pinsker’s casket was then trans-

43 See, for example, a photograph taken in front of city hall, CZA, PHO/1356627. 44 “Pinsker’s bones brought for burial in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 25 June 1934; see the criticism regarding the fact that Rokach – the owner of orchards in which “no Hebrew laborer can step foot, and whose orchard gates are closed to those who came to this land to liberate the people in light of the teachings of Pinsker’s Auto-Emancipation – delivered a speech at the funeral. “Friends write: ‘Desecrating L. Pinsker in Tel Aviv,’” Davar, 27 June 1934. 45 “Bringing the remains of Pinsker to Jerusalem,” Haaretz, 25 June 1934. 46 “Son of Bilu on Pinsker,” Davar, 25 June 1934; “Pinsker’s funeral,” Davar, 26 June 1934. 47 CZA, PHO/1356607, photograph of the coffin placed on a truck at the entrance to the building, with the eulogists in front of it. 48 “Pinsker’s bones brought to burial in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 25 June 1934.



The burial of Leo (Yehuda Leib) Pinsker in the Nicanor Cave  

 57

ferred to the hall of the National Library, Hebrew University’s most prominent and symbolic building on Mount Scopus. It was placed on a platform covered in black, and Scouts held each end of the university’s flag and the flag of the Bezalel art school, with black ribbons stretched over both.49

Figure 6: Casket of Yehudah Leib Pinsker inside the National Library at The Hebrew University, 26 June 1934. Photograph by Zvi Oron (Oroshkess) (CZA).

Ussishkin spoke first on behalf of the elders of Hovevei Zion, and talked about “our privilege in seeing the redemption of your bones and their transfer to the Land of Israel and eternal Jerusalem, and their burial on Mount Scopus, in the land of the nation, the JNF, in the courtyard of the supreme institution for our national culture.” Addressing Pinsker, he said: If you could see where you are this moment. If you could see that you are in a place where the evil Titus stood 1,900 years ago and catapulted rocks and destroyed our Temple and after him came Andinus [sic; Hadrianus] and declared “Judea capta.” If you could see us now building our home, if you could see that we have gathered sixty to seventy thousand Jews in Jerusalem alone, you would find consolation. We are building, without despair.50

49 CZA, PHO/1356611. 50 “Pinsker’s bones brought for burial in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 25 June 1934. Lord Arthur James Balfour spoke similarly at the ceremonial opening of Hebrew University on 1 April 1925.

58 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

At the end of his speech, Ussishkin turned to the university’s leaders and professors and said, “In the name of Hovevei Zion who are still alive, I present to you this holy coffin for safekeeping.”51 Magnes responded in kind, confirming that “the university today accepts this holy coffin for safekeeping and is obliged and committed to pursuing the external and internal liberation of the nation and of each individual in it. By accepting these bones, a new link is created in the ancient chain: Pinsker’s bones will be placed for safekeeping in the burial cave of Nicanor the Alexandrian.”52 After the eulogies, the coffin was carried a short distance to the burial cave on the eastern slope of Mount Scopus. Representatives of the Zionist institutions, professors, and others walked behind it, and many of them entered the cave.53 The heavy metal casket was placed on the floor, and the cave was sealed at the end of the ceremony. As in the late Second Temple period, when the remains of Nicanor and the other dead were reinterred in the cave in stone boxes known as ossuaries, Pinsker was reburied and the cave was once again a grave54. In the months following the funeral, Ussishkin began to advocate turning it into “an eternal resting place for illustrious Jews,”55 and the JNF’s board of directors decided that, since the cave was included in the land it gave to the university, the honor of deciding who would be buried there would be given to a committee composed of the president of the WZO, the president of the JNF, and the governor of the university.56

Menachem Ussishkin – Buried deep in the Nicanor Cave next to Pinsker Ussishkin died in Jerusalem on 2 October 1941.57 In his will he requested that if he were to die abroad, his coffin should be brought to the Land of Israel and be placed next to that of his mentor, Pinsker, in the Nicanor Cave. In this way he

51 “M. Ussishkin’s eulogy at the funeral of Yehuda Leib Pinsker of blessed memory,” Davar, 27 June 1934. 52 “Pinsker’s coffin in Jerusalem,” Davar, 25 June 1934. And see the explanation of E. L. Sukenik, “The cave of Nicanor the Alexandrian at Hebrew University (the burial site of Dr. Pinsker of blessed memory).” Haaretz, 22 June 1934. 53 CZA, PHO/1356617. 54 For photographs of the metal coffin placed in the cave, see CZA, NZO/642005-6. 55 See a hint of this in Gruenbaum (1958), p. 24. 56 CZA, KKL5/6083, protocol of the meeting of the JNF’s board of directors, 2 July 1934. 57 “M. M. Ussishkin is dead,” Davar, 3 October 1941; Goldstein (1992), pp. 220–221; Shapiro (2015).



Menachem Ussishkin – Buried deep in the Nicanor Cave next to Pinsker 

 59

attempted to establish the idea of turning the cave into a pantheon, which might eventually lead to the reburial of Herzl’s remains in the same place.58 Indeed, on 4 October 1941, Ussishkin was buried in the ground of the Nicanor Cave.59 The coffin of Pinsker still stood above ground there, which was problematic from the perspective of Jewish law. The chief rabbi, Yitzhak (Isaac) Halevi Herzog, consulted with other rabbis and decided to bury Pinsker’s coffin in the ground inside the cave. In late July 1942, another burial ceremony was held, and twelve holes were drilled in the bottom of the casket.60 In accordance with the rabbis’ demand, the coffins were covered with soil from outside the cave – Ussishkin’s with earth from various Hebrew settlements, and Pinsker’s with earth from the Mount of Olives.61 Ussishkin was the last person to be buried in the Nicanor Cave. Doubts arose soon afterward about “whether to build a mausoleum for the great ones of Israel or whether the Nicanor Cave would serve as a grave [only] for the two leaders,”62 especially given the university leaders’ growing reservations about turning the site into a cemetery. The armistice agreements between Israel and Jordan after the War of Independence stipulated that Mount Scopus and the Hebrew University buildings on it would remain an Israeli enclave in Jordanian territory, which left the Nicanor Cave outside the borders of Israeli West Jerusalem. Uri Kaiseri wrote in Maariv about how “fate, in its mocking way, wanted the Zionist movement to bury Ussishkin in the Nicanor Cave and then move, with all its belongings and conscience, to the capital of the coastal plain,” that is, to Tel Aviv.63 In regard to the funeral of President Chaim Weizmann, D. Lazar remarked in 1952 that, “our national pantheon in Israel is scattered and divided like the entire Jewish people. We have Mount Herzl in Jerusalem, where we brought from abroad the bones of the great visionary. And we have the Nicanor Cave, with the bones of Pinsker and Ussishkin – and they

58 M. Y. Ben-Gal, “A Jewish Pantheon,” Jerusalem Post, 16 October 1941. 59 “M. M. Ussishkin brought to burial in the Nicanor Cave,” Haboker, 5 October 1941; for a photograph of Pinsker’s metal coffin alongside Ussishkin’s grave, see JNFPA, d736-206. 60 CZA, KKL5/60074, Haim Bournstein, memorandum, 12 July 1942; ibid., memorandum, 2 August 1942; for a photograph of the two tombstones, see JNFPA, glass 48-033. 61 “Earth from 250 settlements placed on Ussishkin’s grave,” Jerusalem Post, 3 November 1941; CZA, KKL5/60074, A. Korngold, memorandum, 10 July 1942, suggests that the difference between the two tombstones would only be that, “instead of earth from the entire country on the grave of Ussishkin, of blessed memory, there would only be one type of Jerusalem earth on the grave of Pinsker, of blessed memory”; “Preparing for the ‘Voice of the Earth’ national convention: enhancing the Nicanor cave, where Pinsker and Ussishkin are buried,” Davar, 17 September 1942. 62 CZA, KKL5/60074, part of a memorandum from a meeting at JNF headquarters, April 20, 1942. 63 Uri Kaiseri, “Jerusalem took revenge upon us,” Maariv, 25 June 1948.

60 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

Figure 7: Coffin of Yehudah Leib Pinsker and tomb of Menachem Ussishkin, both covered with bags of dirt brought from Hebrew settlements, 3 October 1941. Photograph by Avraham Malavsky (JNFPA).

are held captive by the Legion.”64 Some even proposed transferring the bones of Ussishkin, even secretly, to Mount Herzl.65 In 1963, on the centennial of Ussishkin’s birth, several leaders of the Zionist movement traveled in one of the regular convoys to Mount Scopus, disguised as employees of the Hebrew University or Hadassah Hospital, and prayed at the entrance to the cave.66 After the Six-Day War and the reconstruction of the Hebrew University campus, the Nicanor Cave became part of the Mount Scopus Botanical Garden, and today many people visit the graves of Pinsker and Ussishkin.

64 D. Lazar, “The final route is short...,” Maariv, 12 November 1952. 65 CZA, KKL5/60074, A. Zung to S. Levi, 9 December 1952. 66 “Memorial ceremony for Menachem Ussishkin conducted on Mount Scopus,” Davar, 17 October 1967.



Nahum Sokolow and his burial on Mount Herzl 

 61

Nahum Sokolow and his burial on Mount Herzl – “His funeral was scheduled for the opening day of the Zionist Congress” Nahum Sokolow was the fourth president of the WZO, a writer, poet, and one of the pioneers of Hebrew journalism. He and his wife, Regina, were reinterred on Mount Herzl in April 1956. Born in Poland in 1859, Sokolow received both a religious and a secular education, and in 1884 he became a writer and columnist for the Hatzfira newspaper published in Warsaw. Following Herzl’s death, he was invited to Cologne to serve as secretary-general of the WZO. Beginning in 1906 he edited the movement’s publication, Die Welt, and at the Twelfth Zionist Congress in 1921 he was elected chairman of the Zionist executive committee, a position he held for a decade. In 1932 Sokolow was appointed president of the WZO. After yielding this title to Chaim Weizmann, he became honorary president of both the WZO and the Jewish Agency, and the president of Keren Hayesod, the Zionist organization in charge in providing financial resources for the establishment of the Jewish State. He died in 1936 in London and was buried in the cemetery in Willesden.67 The report of his death in Davar noted that, “there is a bit of consolation in the thought that Sokolow’s remains will not remain in the ground of the Willesden cemetery. In the Land of Israel, Sokolow’s soul will find its remedy.”68 Nevertheless, the process of transferring his remains took a long time. In late 1951, during a session of the Second Knesset on 13 December 1951, MK (Member of Knesset) Mordechai Nurock of the United Religious Front asked Prime Minister Ben-Gurion: “Doesn’t the honorable prime minister think it is the state’s duty to bring the bones of the founders and leaders of the WZO and exemplary individuals to Israel, people whose historic contributions to fulfilling the aspirations of our people are enormous: David Wolffsohn, Nahum Sokolow, Yehiel Chlenov, and Ze’ev Jabotinsky? Is the government of Israel working toward this?” Nurock was primarily interested in Jabotinsky, but in any case, Ben Gurion’s response was that “the State of Israel’s duty is first and foremost to bring live Jews to Israel who will build the Hebrew state and nation, and this is what the State of Israel is endeavoring to do. The reward of those who are worthy will be preserved in the heart of the people, regardless of where their bones are located.”69 BenGurion was aware of the efforts the WZO was then making to reinter Wolffsohn in

67 Davar, 18 May 1936; for a photograph of the tombstone, see CZA, PHNS/1410158 68 “Sokolow brought to rest,” Davar, 29 May 1936. 69 CZA, S5/10365, from the protocol of the sessions of the Second Knesset, 13 December 1951.

62 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

Israel, but he wanted to avoid addressing the question of Jabotinsky, so he chose to ignore that in his response. The government of Israel had allotted a plot on Mount Herzl for WZO presidents, so the transfer of Sokolow’s coffin was supposed to be relatively simple. When the press association decided in 1953 to build the Sokolow Journalists’ House in Tel Aviv, an article in Haboker noted that, “it is appropriate to recall that the bones of this leader, who stood at the head of the Zionist and cultural movement with the great ones of his generation, are still lying in a foreign land.”70 Yedioth Ahronoth also added pressure, publishing a query in 1954: For years, since the death of Nahum Sokolow, his coffin has been waiting ... to be brought to the land of the fathers, of which he dreamed and for which he labored so much and in vain. No one remembers this coffin, which does not even have a tombstone above it. Almost all of the greats of Zionism who passed away, their remains have already been brought to the earth of the homeland, and why has someone who served as president of the WZO and its executive committee been adversely treated?71

There was a basis for this complaint, because while attention was devoted to Wolffsohn’s casket already in the 1930s and he was buried on Mount Herzl in 1952, the reinterment of Sokolow was not a priority for the Zionist movement or for other authorities in the State of Israel. A joint committee, formed from the Zionist executive committee and the presidium of the General Zionist Council, was finally created in early 1956 to organize the reinterment of Sokolow. The initial idea was to send the coffins of Sokolow and his wife on an IDF warship or aircraft, but it was ultimately decided to bring them on a ship that would be renamed “the Nahum Sokolow.” The committee decided to bury the couple on Mount Herzl during the Twenty-fourth Zionist Congress and to transfer Sokolow’s literary estate – his book collection and all of the manuscripts that remained in his home in London – at the same time.72 Before the funeral, efforts were made to ensure a respectable turnout. The director-general of the Ministry of Education and Culture was asked to allow schoolchildren to participate.73 Members of the Zionist executive committee contacted Kibbutz Sde Nahum, assuming that “your kibbutz, which bears the name of the late president, would want to participate in receiving the coffin in Haifa

70 A. Kahana, “Please bring Sokolow’s bones,” Haboker, 5 May 1953. 71 “Query,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 9 November 1954. 72 CZA, S5/10369, memorandum, 4 February 1956. 73 Ibid., the Jewish Agency executive committee to the director-general of the Ministry of Education and Culture, 8 April 1956.



Nahum Sokolow and his burial on Mount Herzl 

 63

and in his funeral in Jerusalem.” The kibbutz responded, “We see it as a privilege and honor to participate in the ceremony of receiving the coffins and in the funeral to be held in Jerusalem. We will send a delegate of three members.”74 In early April 1956, the remains of Nahum Sokolow and his wife were disinterred from their place of burial in London. The caskets were loaded onto the cargo ship Gefen, and Celina Sokolow, the couple’s daughter and her father’s secretary, insisted on accompanying her parents: “I accompanied father in his lifetime and I will accompany him on his final journey.”75 When the ship reached the port of Haifa on 23 April, the coffins were placed in a reception hall and, with Sokolow family members seated beside them, many people came to pay their respects, led by Mayor Abba Khoushy.76 The event did spur great interest, but when the coffins later entered Jerusalem, there was much confusion. As Yedioth Ahronoth reported: During the days prior to the funeral, large advertisements by the Jerusalem Municipality called on the masses in Jerusalem to come to the entrance of the city and pay their last respects to the great teacher and distinguished leader on his final path to eternal rest on the heights of Mount Herzl. We came at the appointed time, but no one was at the entrance to the city. One old woman leaning on her cane, with a hunched back and wearing the latest Vienna fashion from the period of Franz Joseph, stopped the few passersby to ask: Where is the Sokolow funeral here? ... No one could provide an answer. At the side stood a bus with about a dozen children from a school named after Sokolow, and a teacher, too, looked this way and that, as if in desperation. Where is the Sokolow funeral here? Finally, a few cars arrived. Several Jewish Agency officials emerged from them, the deputy mayor of Jerusalem, the secretary of the Journalists’ Association in Tel Aviv, and others.77

The funeral itself was more impressive. The caskets were placed in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building, where the dignitaries who came to pay their respects included the president of Israel, government ministers, members of the Jewish Agency executive committee, and Chief Rabbi Herzog. Many of the partic-

74 Ibid., the Jewish Agency executive committee, Organization Department to the secretariat of Sde Nahum, 9 April 1956; ibid., letter of response from Hakibbutz Hameuchad Sde Nahum to the Jewish Agency executive committee, 13 April 1956. 75 “Sokolow’s coffin en route to Israel,” Haboker, 17 April 1956; “Coffin of Nahum Sokolow to arrive in Israel on April 23,” Davar, 20 April 1956; Menachem Barash, “The forgotten leader,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 25 April 1956. 76 “Sokolow’s bones brought to rest on Mount Herzl,” Davar, 25 April 1956. 77 Menachem Barash, “The forgotten leader,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 25 April 1956.

64 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

ipants were representatives who came to attend the Twenty-fourth Zionist Congress in Jerusalem.78 One of the journalists noted cynically: Nonetheless, the deceased Sokolow is lucky that his funeral was scheduled for the opening day of the Zionist Congress. Because if it weren’t for the congress, the funeral would have surely been conducted with the participation of ten or twenty Jews. And since there was a congress and Zionist activists and leaders came from all corners of the globe ... there were about 200 or 300 of them who briefly left the conference rooms, the various committees, and the coalitions, combinations, and calculations, and came to the courtyard of the Jewish Agency in order to pass before the coffin, and many of them even took the trouble of going up to Mount Herzl.79

Figure 8: Casket of Nahum Sokolow in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building in Jerusalem, 24 April 1956. Photograph by Fritz Schlesinger (CZA).

The funeral procession passed the Knesset building in the center of the city and continued on to the “Presidents’ Plot” (for presidents of the WZO) on Mount Herzl.

78 CZA, S5/10369, invitation to the ceremony. The ceremony was held on the opening day of the Twenty-fourth Zionist Congress, 24 April 1956. 79 Menachem Barash, “The forgotten leader,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 25 April 1956.



Yehiel Chlenov reburied in Tel Aviv 

 65

The coffins were lowered into graves dug next to Wolffsohn’s grave.80 Yedioth Ahronoth’s correspondent summarized the funeral this way: The masses did not come. Not to the entrance of the city, and not to its exits. Neither those who drank his words thirstily for a generation, nor those he trained and led on the path of redemption. Nahum Sokolow has been forgotten, forgotten from the heart, as other Zionist leaders have been forgotten. The young people, those born in Israel and the new immigrants who encountered the funeral processions, asked: “Who is this Nahum Sokolow?” Everything was done in haste. Almost in the blink of an eye, the processions moved from the entrance to the city via the side street Ruppin, to the courtyard of the Institutions ... the burial on Mount Herzl did not last longer than a few minutes. Even wreaths of flowers were only brought by a few people.81

Yehiel Chlenov reburied in Tel Aviv – “A place that suits his personality and memory” Dr. Yehiel Chlenov was born in 1863 in Ukraine. He moved to Moscow in 1876 and completed his medical studies there in 1888. Together with Menachem Ussishkin, he formed the first Zionist group in Moscow and participated in the First Zionist Congress in 1897. He was elected to the board of both the Zionist Bank and the JNF. In 1911 he joined the Executive Council of the Zionist Congress. In 1918, during one of his missions for the Zionist movement, he died in London and was buried there after his body was embalmed. Chlenov was reinterred in Tel Aviv in January 1961. Ten years earlier, Brit Rishonim had contacted the Chlenov family about transferring his remains to the State of Israel. The family members responded that Chlenov had indeed expressed interest in this several times and that their preferred location was Jerusalem.82 However, nothing happened. After a memorandum on the subject was submitted to the Twenty-fourth Zionist Congress in 1956, it was decided that “the congress assigns the Zionist General Council to adopt the necessary steps for transferring the remains of Chlenov and Jabotinsky.”83 Organizations involved in this project included the Center for Russian Immigrants in the State of Israel, the Zionists of

80 “Sokolow’s bones brought to rest on Mount Herzl,” Davar, 25 April 1956; for a photograph of the funeral on Mount Herzl, see CZA, PHPS/1339084. 81 Menachem Barash, “The forgotten leader,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 25 April 1956. 82 CZA, S5/10365, Benjamin Chlenov to Brit Rishonim, 11 November 1951. 83 CZA, S5/11306, Yitzhak Rabinowitz, chairman of the Association of Immigrants from the Soviet Union, 11 August 1960.

66 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

England, the Jewish Agency, and the WZO.84 Initial efforts were made in England and in Israel to enable the transfer. The Zionist executive committee had in mind a plot at the Har Hamenuchot cemetery in Jerusalem that had been designated a suitable burial site for such notables. In 1957 the executive committee again contacted the Chlenov family, which reiterated that “the proper burial place will be Mount Herzl, near the graves of Wolffsohn and Sokolow.”85 According to the Zionist executives, however, “Mount Herzl in Jerusalem is out of the question because its regulations stipulate that it is intended only for the burial of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl, members of his family, and two presidents of the WZO, Wolffsohn and Sokolow. After their burial, no other grave will be established at this site.”86 The only options were burial in the Har Hamenuchot cemetery (in Jerusalem) or in the old cemetery in Tel Aviv. It was decided that the Zionist executive committee would fully or partially fund the transfer of Chlenov’s remains, which would be undertaken by friends of the deceased in Israel and London under the patronage and supervision of the Zionist executives. Members of the latter explained that “this is the policy taken in similar cases and it should not be abandoned so as not to create a precedent in cases less deserving of our participation than the transfer of Chlenov’s remains.”87 In August 1959 it was decided that Chlenov would be reinterred in the cemetery in Tel Aviv and that arrangements to transport his coffin would be organized by a public committee headed by Ya’akov Klivnov, a Knesset member from the General Zionists party.88 A plot was found at the crowded cemetery, one “that suited the personality and memory of the late Zionist leader, was not yet taken, and was adjacent to the poet Shaul Tchernichovsky.”89 In January 1961 the operation began. A ceremony was held in Chlenov’s honor in London, attended by representatives of the Israeli Embassy. When the coffin reached Paris, a memorial service was conducted at the train station and prayers were recited. From there, it was transported in a special carriage of France’s national railway company to Marseille, where it was loaded onto the Theodor Herzl.90 After several days at the port of Haifa, the casket was transferred to Tel Aviv and placed on display for

84 ISA, HZ-2416/3 Yitzhak Ben Zvi to Moshe Sharett, 2 May 1956. 85 CZA, S5/11306, Benjamin Chlenov to A. L. Lauterbach, 8 May 1957. 86 Ibid., WZO executive committee to Benjamin Chlenov, 13 May 1957. 87 Ibid., A. Tzebernbaum to Zvi Luria, 19 February 1959. 88 Ibid., A. Tzebernbaum to Benjamin Chlenov, 30 October 1959; ibid., R. Eitan to the directorgeneral of the Ministry of Health, 30 October 1959. 89 Ibid., B. West to Yitzhak Rabinowitz, 6 September 1960. 90 Ibid., A. Tzebernbaum to Y. Kamenitsky, 13 January 1961; “Coffin of Dr. Chlenov,” Davar, 15 January 1961.



Peretz Smolenskin 

 67

about two hours at Habima, Israel’s national theater. An honor guard of Scouts stood alongside, and people came to pay their respects. The funeral procession stopped at the JNF building on Shapira Street.91 The grave site allotted to Tchernichovsky (d. 1943) was slightly reduced in size, and Chlenov was buried in the newly cleared space.92

Peretz Smolenskin – “May he enjoy the soil of the homeland” Peretz Smolenskin was a Hebrew writer and publicist, a member of the Jewish Enlightenment (Haskalah) movement, and later one of the leaders of the Hibbat Zion movement. He was reinterred in the Har Hamenuchot cemetery in Jerusalem in May 1952. Smolenskin had studied in Odessa and Vienna, where he published the Hebrew magazine Hashahar, which discussed the contemporary problems of the Jews. While residing in Merano, a resort and convalescent town in the South Tyrol region of Austria (now Italy), he died in 1885.93 A small, simple tombstone over his grave there bore the inscription: The Hebrew woman wails over her favorite son, ruin prevails, the creator of the language of speeches, giving hope to my nation, ascended to heaven and the earth grew dark, the light of Hashahar dimmed and the arrow strikes deep within me upon the death of the knight of Israel’s writers, Peretz, son of Moshe, Smolenskin of blessed memory, 16 Shvat 5645.94

The Zionist national project was in its infancy at that time, and no one thought about bringing Smolenskin’s remains to the Land of Israel. In 1938, however, it was reported that the local authorities planned to demolish Merano’s Jewish cemetery. At that time, the Zionist world was endeavoring to satisfy Herzl’s final wish, and awareness of the symbolic importance of Zionist graves was growing. The WZO thus contacted the Office for Eretz Yisrael in Trieste for help,95 but when the plan to raze the cemetery in Merano was postponed,96 the WZO removed this

91 TAA, 1357, 3813, memorandum of meeting on funeral arrangements for Chlenov, 3 January 1961. 92 Ibid., Abraham Broides to Abraham Wilansky, 30 December 1960; “Coffin of Dr. Chlenov buried in Tel Aviv,” Haaretz, 16 January 1961. 93 For a photograph of the tomb, see Ishai (1975), p. 101. 94 Brainin (1905), pp. 36–37. 95 CZA S5/206, Hahistadrut Department, WZO Executive to the Office of Eretz Yisrael in Trieste, 5 February 1939; ibid., Organization Department to the Executive, 26 March 1939. 96 Ibid., Hahistadrut Department, WZO Executive to the Office of Eretz Yisrael in Trieste, 29 March 1939.

68 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

Figure 9: Tomb of Peretz Smolenskin in the Jewish cemetery of Merano, Italy. Unknown date, unknown photographer (CZA).

issue from its agenda. In 1940 the remains of most of the Jews buried in the cemetery were transferred to a common grave in the same town, but Smolenskin was buried separately.97 This situation remained unchanged during World War II and the initial postwar years. In late 1950, however, David Shimoni, the chairman of the Association of Hebrew Writers, asked David Remez, the minister of education and culture, to renew efforts to retrieve Smolenskin’s remains, as well as those of

97 Ishai (1975), p. 216.



Peretz Smolenskin 

 69

Abraham Mapu, who was buried in Königsberg, Prussia.98 The speaker of the Knesset, Joseph Sprinzak, supported this idea. In 1951 Israel’s envoy in Italy, Moshe Ishai, began to take action. The honorary consul of Israel in Milan, Astora Meir, contacted the authorities in Merano and learned that it would be relative easy to disinter Smolenskin.99In November Sprinzak informed the new minister of education and culture, Ben-Zion Dinur, that he was transferring responsibility for bringing Smolenskin’s coffin to the government of Israel.100 He proposed that a decision be made on the subject, and the minister appointed a committee to discuss where the grave should be located in Jerusalem. Dinur also charged them to consider the broader question of finding a place to serve as a “pantheon for the great ones of Israel.” The committee debated between the cemetery in Sanhedria and the new Har Hamenuchot cemetery, established in 1951, and ultimately decided to recommend the latter.101 Thus, the desire for a burial site for Smolenskin was a catalyst for the decision to create a memorial site for the nation’s leaders102. In mid-May 1952, an Israeli delegation led by S. Shalom, a representative of the Association of Hebrew Writers, departed for Italy.103 When they arrived, they found that Smolenskin’s remains had already been disinterred, which the newspapers described as “shameful treatment of the memory of Peretz Smolenskin.”104

98 ISA, GL-1087/8, letter from D. Shimoni to David Remez, 22 November 1950. The attempts to transfer Mapu’s remains from Königsberg to the Land of Israel began in 1935, after the Jewish Agency received calls from various entities about the town’s plan to destroy the cemetery and use the space for other purposes. See CZA, S30/2948 , letter from Dr. Grinspoon to Eliezer Kaplan, 12 July 1935, but nothing happened. In 1938 the Association of Hebrew Writers in the Land of Israel sent an additional request on this subject to the Jewish Agency: ibid., S46/440, Dr. Shimon Ginzburg, to the Jewish Agency Executive, 24 June 1938. It seems that the local Jews began to work on this project, but the outbreak of World War II and the occupation of the area by the Germans made the efforts futile. 99 ISA, GL-1087/8, M. Ishai to J. Sprinzak, September 30, 1951; ibid., M. Ishai to J. Sprinzak, 31 October 1951. 100 Ibid., Joseph Sprinzak to the minister of education and culture, 16 November 1951. 101 See Richard Kauffmann’s plan for this new cemetery, which would have left the top of the hill empty for eventual establishment of a pantheon there. “Detailed plan No. 52 for Har Hamenuchot cemetery on Givat Shaul,” CZA, A175M/93/1, 1:1250, 1950; “Har Hamenuchot topographic map, area in part of the new cemetery,” A175M/93/4, 1:1200, updated 1952. 102 ISA, GL-1087/8, memorandum from the meeting of the public committee for reinterring Smolenskin, 6 February 1952. 103 “Smolenskin’s bones – to Har Hamenuchot,” Haboker, 16 March 1952; ibid., memorandum from the public committee for reinterring Smolenskin, 1 April 1952; “Bones of Peretz Smolenskin to be brought,” Haaretz, 27 April 1952. 104 L. Lenman, “Shameful treatment of the memory of Peretz Smolenskin,” Haboker, 24 April 1952.

70 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

The coffin was transported from Merano to Milan, where it was handed over to the Israeli delegation at the synagogue. Following a speech by Ishai, the funeral proceeded to the port city of Genoa, and on 19 May a farewell ceremony was held at the wharf in the presence of city representatives and an honor guard of local policemen. Officers from the Kedma carried the casket, covered with a blue-andwhite flag, on their shoulders to the ship.105 During the voyage to Israel it was placed on the bridge, and an honor guard of sailors and officers stood beside it throughout the trip. Smolenskin’s coffin remained on the ship at the port of Haifa for three days, and the honor guards remained alongside it. When it was lowered onto the wharf, the elder statesmen of Israeli writers, 78-year-old David Pinsky, an honorary citizen of Haifa, eulogized Smolenskin in the name of the city’s residents. The casket was placed on a raised platform in front of the Haifa city hall, and the flags were lowered to half-mast as a bugler played.106 On the way to Tel Aviv, the funeral stopped at Petah Tikva, where a short ceremony was held in the presence of a delegation of schoolchildren and teachers. In front of the Tel Aviv Municipality building, the poet David Shimoni said, “The deceased Smolenskin, whose funeral about seventy years ago at the cemetery in Merano, Italy, was not attended by ten Jews, is today being accompanied by the people in Zion, with a great crowd and royal treatment, to the place of his desires, to Jerusalem.”107 Smolenskin’s coffin was then brought to the courtyard of the Ministry of Education and Culture on Haneviim Street in Jerusalem. Schoolchildren awaited it at the entrance to the city, at the Ministry of Education, and later in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building, where Sprinzak spoke: We receive the coffin of the owner of Hashahar at the spot where three years ago we received the coffin of Theodor Herzl ... his beloved Jerusalem receives the owner of Hashahar ... we also bring the remains of the fathers of Zionism from the Diaspora. We brought Pinsker, Nordau, and Herzl. We are now bringing Smolenskin, and are obligated to bring several others from among our first leaders: A. Mapu, M. Hess, S. Mohilever, M. L. Lilienblum. The people gathered in the State of Israel will serve as an honor guard of the graves of the fathers of Zionism.108

The funeral procession continued to Har Hamenuchot, to the plot slated to become a pantheon for the nation’s great men; Smolenskin was the first to be

105 ISA, GL-1087/7, S. Shalom to H. Navon, 2 June 1952. 106 “Remains of Smolenskin brought to rest,” Davar, 29 May 1952. 107 Ibid. 108 Ibid.



Zvi Herman Shapira 

 71

buried there. But despite the effort to stir public interest, crowds in the large cities were quite small and did not meet the expectations of the organizers. While Education Ministry officials were particularly disappointed, they found some consolation. Michael Ziv, director of the Culture Division in the Ministry of Education and Culture, who led the operation, said: We did not delude ourselves into thinking that masses of people would participate in the funeral. However, it seems that the reports that appeared in the important newspapers and magazines in Israel, the books we published, the lectures and parties we organized in many places in Israel, reintroduced, among broad populations, one of the harbingers of the return to Zion and builders of the new Hebrew literature.”109

In early 1954, on the sixty-ninth anniversary of Smolenskin’s death, an unveiling ceremony was held at Har Hamenuchot. The Jewish community in Merano had sent his original tombstone together with the coffin, but the burial society opposed placing it on the new grave because of its height and the foreign language of its inscription. Some claimed that this was retaliation for Smolenskin’s negative description of Jewish funeral officials in his book A Donkey’s Burial.110 In the end, though, after Minister of Education Ben-Zion Dinur intervened, the original tombstone was erected.111 The minister read aloud the original inscription and one was added to it: “All of your days, you worked on behalf of your people, at home and abroad, you waged their fight, you were zealous for Zion. His remains were brought by the government of Israel from Merano, Italy, to Jerusalem on Wednesday, 4 Sivan 5712. May his soul be bound in the bond of life.”112

Zvi Herman Shapira: “The JNF has a great obligation to transfer Shapira’s remains to Israel” Zvi Herman Shapira, born on 4 August 1840 in Lithuania, was a professor of mathematics at Heidelberg University in Germany. He founded the Zion national Jewish association, dedicated to increasing Hebrew literacy among the Jews and fulfilling the idea of Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel. At the First Zionist Congress, Shapira raised the idea of creating a fund to purchase property in the

109 ISA, GL-1087/7, M. Ziv to various recipients, 20 June 1952. 110 Smolenskin (1925). 111 “Smolenskin’s grave unveiled,” Al Hamishmar, 21 January 1954. 112 ISA, GL-1087/7, text of the inscription on the tombstone. For photographs of the tombstone, see CZA, PHG/1019944-6.

72 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

Land of Israel. Despite an initial lack of enthusiasm, his proposal eventually led to the establishment of the Jewish National Fund. Shapira also encouraged the creation of a Hebrew university in Jerusalem, an idea that came to fruition years after his death on 8 May 1898. He was buried in the ancient cemetery in Cologne one year after the first congress convened in Basel,113 and in December 1953 he was reinterred at Har Hamenuchot in Jerusalem. Despite Shapira’s many contributions to the Zionist movement, his reinterment and memorialization was only discussed after the founding of the state. Early in 1951 the JNF considered erecting a monument to him at the port of Haifa, a replica of the Statue of Liberty in New York,114 and later that year, the Bnei Yeshurun organization in New York proposed bringing his coffin to Israel.115 Abraham Granot (Granovsky), the JNF chairman, agreed that “the JNF has a great obligation to transfer Shapira’s remains to Israel.”116 When JNF representatives in Germany began looking into the matter, however, they discovered an inconvenient fact: David Wolffsohn, the longtime president of the WZO who was also slated to be reinterred in Israel, was buried in the same cemetery in Cologne. JNF officials were afraid they would be criticized if they focused only on Shapira, so they sought to collaborate with the Zionist executive committee.117 In August 1951, the JNF’s board of directors declared that it “unanimously accepts the chairman’s proposal to transfer the remains of Prof. Zvi Shapira of blessed memory, the spiritual father of the JNF, from his place of burial in Cologne in the Diaspora of Germany to the State of Israel.118 It was clear to all that Shapira should be buried in Jerusalem. The JNF leaders secretly hoped to bury him on Mount Herzl, but they understood that there was no chance of this happening. In light of the Jerusalem Municipality’s assertion that a pantheon for “the nation’s great ones, the fathers of the liberation movement, our writers and teachers”119 would be established at the Har Hamenuchot cemetery, and because other Zionist figures were buried there, they agreed to inter Shapira there. In November 1953 the JNF discussed whether to transport the coffin by plane or by ship.120 At the outset, a decision was made to conduct a

113 Klausner (1956); for a photograph of his tombstone, see: JNFPA, d736-275. 114 CZA, KKL5/17304, Mendel N. Fischer to A. Granot, 25 January 1951. 115 Ibid., Israel Goldsteinto A. Granot, 10 April 1951. 116 Ibid., A. Granot to Israel Goldstein, 17 May 1951. 117 Ibid., D. Z. Teshartok to A. Granot, 23 May 1951. 118 Ibid., decision of the JNF board of directors on 7 August 1951; ibid., S5/10365, Organization Department to Z. Shazar, 2 January 1952. 119 CZA, KKL5/20740, letter (writer’s name not cited) to Y. Kariv, 6 October 1953. 120 Ibid., protocol of meeting conducted on 8 November 1953.



Zvi Herman Shapira 

 73

long funeral procession that would include as many symbolic locations as possible. A public committee was formed, chaired by Sprinzak, to plan the funeral. They decided that “schoolchildren will stand everywhere and will pass alongside it [the casket] so that everyone will remember this day.”121 Yet the route that was charted – Haifa, Nahalal, Tel Aviv, and then Jerusalem122 – stirred opposition. Haim Levanon, the mayor of Tel Aviv, stated that the plan is “unacceptable and liable to arouse heated criticism in the general public. It is inconceivable to drag the coffin around for four consecutive days to different places in Israel. This was not even done for Herzl’s funeral and, in our view, this even reflects lack of respect for the deceased.”123 The casket was sent to Paris and, before the flight to Israel, a ceremony was held in the presence of Israel’s envoy in France, Ya’akov Tsur; members of the local Jewish community; and representatives of the Sorbonne. On December 22, the plane landed in Lod, and the three-day funeral ceremony began the next day.124 The convoy set out for Petah Tikva, where it was welcomed by hundreds of schoolchildren from the town and the neighboring immigrant camps. A memorial prayer service was held at the Great Synagogue of Petah Tikva, where Abraham Shapira, the oldest living member of the Hashomrim (Watchmen) organization, recited the kaddish prayer.125 When the coffin arrived in Tel Aviv, it was placed in the middle of the JNF’s pavilion on Shapira Street, under a blue-and-white canopy, and a large crowd filed past it.126 From Tel Aviv, the funeral procession headed north. Near Mahane David, on the outskirts of Haifa, the honor guard from Hadera was replaced with one from Haifa – municipal officials, intellectuals, and representatives of the city’s institutions – that led the coffin to the city hall. In the afternoon it arrived in Nahalal, one of the first Zionist settlements in Palestine, and was taken to the community center. Residents of the Jezreel Valley came to pay their respects throughout the

121 Ibid. 122 CZA, KKL5/20741, memorandum on bringing the remains of Professor Zvi Herman Shapira to Israel, 2 December 1953; “Coffin of Prof. Z. Shapira – visionary of the JNF – to come to Israel,” Davar, 9 December 1953. 123 Ibid., the National Council for the JNF in the Land of Israel to JNF headquarters, 9 December 1953. 124 Kamini (1955), pp. 148–149. 125 On Shapira, see Edelstein (1929). 126 TAA, 1357, 3813, invitation, 14 December 1953; “Procession of Prof. Z. Shapira’s coffin,” Davar, 24 December 1953.

74 

 Chapter 3 The Reinterment of Zionist Leaders

night, while the honor guard changed periodically.127 The next day, Friday, the convoy turned south toward Jerusalem.

Figure 10: Casket of Zvi Herman Shapira in front of Haifa City Hall, 24 December 1953. Photograph by Avraham Malavsky (JNFPA).

Once in the city, the coffin was placed in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building, with an honor guard from Brit Rishonim and rows of schoolchildren.128 At the end of the ceremony, in the afternoon, the long funeral procession ended and the casket was interred in the “national pantheon” at Har Hamenuchot, near the grave of Smolenskin. An editorial in Zmanim asserted, “We brought to the soil of Israel the bones of Pinsker, Smolenskin, Herzl, and Wolffsohn. The Zionist movement and the state will undoubtedly fulfill this sad obligation to its other great dreamers and fighters. Indeed, history shows that the enemies of Israel are not only capable of harming living Jews but also their graves.”129

127 “Coffin of Prof. Shapira in Haifa,” Davar, 25 December 1953; for a photograph of the scene, see JNFPA, d1238-020. d 128 ISA, GL-1087/1, memorandum, procession of the coffin of Prof. Zvi Herman Shapira of blessed memory, undated; CZA, KKL5/20741, Y. Weinstock to Y. Kariv, 10 December 1953. 129 “Herman Shapira,” Zmanim, 22 December 1953.

Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv Two groups of Jews from the pre-State Yishuv died abroad and were brought for reburial in the Land of Israel, some of them shortly after their death. The first group includes Boris Schatz, the founder of the Bezalel school of art in Jerusalem; Itamar Ben-Avi, the eldest son of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda; and Naftali Herz Imber, who composed the words of “Hatikva.” They were buried in Jerusalem, Schatz and Ben-Avi on the Mount of Olives and Imber at the pantheon on Har Hamenuchot after the founding of the state. The second group includes the national poet Haim Nahman Bialik, who died in Vienna, and Israel Gruzenberg, a member of the defense team in the blood-libel trial of Menachem Mendel Beilis, who died in Nice. Both were reinterred in the Trumpeldor cemetery in Tel Aviv.

Boris Schatz – “I ask the Zionists and my friends not to bring my corpse to Jerusalem” At the Fifth Zionist Congress, Boris Schatz proposed establishing a Hebrew school of arts and crafts, and his initiative led to the inauguration of Bezalel in Jerusalem in 1906. The school was an immediate success and hosted many artists and workshops. It shut down during World War I, however, and Schatz was expelled by the Ottomans. He went to France, returning to Jerusalem at the end of the war, but he was unable to make Bezalel a success. In 1929 it closed again, this time because of financial difficulties and internal problems. Schatz tried to raise funds overseas, but died on 22 March 1932 during a visit to Denver, Colorado.1 Nahum Gutman wrote in Davar that “Schatz is now silenced. No longer will Schatz be seen soliciting institutions and people to save his life’s work,” and he suggested that “perhaps we should now think what we can do for Bezalel, so that the fruit of Schatz’s spirit will not go to waste.”2 Schatz’s body remained for some time at the morgue in Denver. Even if his family wanted to bury him in the Land of Israel, they lacked the funds to make that happen. In addition, he had left an explicit directive in his will: “I ask the Zionists and my friends not to transfer my corpse to Jerusalem. It is better for them to donate the expenses this would entail to Bezalel, which would be a

1 Shilo-Cohen (1983), p. 114. 2 Nahum Gutman, “Bringing the remains of B. Schatz,” Davar, 21 October 1932. DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-005

76 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

more important monument to my memory than any monument on the Mount of Olives.”3 The Zionist Organization of America nevertheless decided to transport his coffin to Jerusalem, and in early October 1932 it was loaded onto the Excalibur after a public memorial ceremony in New York, conducted by the Zionist leadership there. The funeral of Schatz began in Tel Aviv, primarily because municipal leaders wanted to provide an opportunity for the Zionist public to participate. About three hundred people gathered in front of the Great Synagogue on Allenby Street and escorted the coffin to the Tel Aviv Museum, then located at the home of Meir Dizengoff4 – an unusual “station” in comparison to other funerals during that period, which usually stopped at City Hall, Ohel Shem, or the Great Synagogue. Dizengoff, the driving force behind the inauguration of the museum, sought to draw attention to the artistic personality of Schatz and his contribution to local Jewish art while simultaneously highlighting the role of the new museum in the cultural life of Tel Aviv. In his speech, the mayor wondered whether “Prof. Schatz, of blessed memory, might have greater influence in his death than in his life; perhaps the miracle will occur and the public will awaken and now help the museum [Bezalel] personnel, who tell [us] to follow the lofty idea of the deceased and continue his path.” He added that, “perhaps in the presence of his bones that were brought to us, people among us will awaken and take his projects and improve them.”5 The painter Arieh Allweil read a letter of mourning on behalf of the Artists’ Association of the Land of Israel, and Prof. Yosef Klausner delivered an emotional speech on behalf of the Writers’ Association, emphasizing Schatz’s artistic works, “which all are imbued with national sentiments and problems.” He stated that “Bezalel is the orphan the deceased left behind, and a primary duty is to support the orphan so that it does not weaken.”6

3 Schatz’s last will and testament, signed in Jerusalem on 4 August 1930. I thank Mr. Jimmy Levinson for providing me with this document. Already in 1906 Schatz had expressed reservations about the Mount of Olives as a cemetery and argued that, in the future, “Our people will learn to look at the Holy Land not as a big cemetery, where everyone only wishes to be buried, but as a thriving land in which we can also live a pleasant life, and return to the distant time when the Mount of Olives was covered with olive trees and a heavenly voice responded there to the song and singing of the daughters of Zion.” Boris Schatz, “Bezalel museum,” Hashkafa, eighth year, vol. F, 30 Tishri (19 October) 1906. 4 Meir Dizengoff, “Tel Aviv’s museum,” Davar, 27 February 1931; “Coffin of Prof. B. Schatz of blessed memory to arrive,” Haaretz, 21 October 1932; “Prof. Schatz’s remains to the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 21 October 1932. 5 “Schatz’s funeral,” Haaretz, 24 October 1932. 6 “Prof. B. Schatz’s funeral,” Davar, 24 October 1932.



Boris Schatz 

 77

Upon arrival in Jerusalem, the coffin was placed on display at Bezalel, which Schatz had founded some twenty-five years earlier, and about four hundred people gathered there. The casket was wrapped in a Bezalel flag and covered with bouquets of flowers. Among the eulogists were Haim Arlosoroff, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, and Yitzhak Elisar, who exhorted the crowd to honor Schatz’s memory by “revitalizing Bezalel.” He looked toward the Bezalel building and remarked, “just a look at this building says a lot about him.” Ze’ev Raban, whose life and artistic development were intertwined with those of Schatz, eulogized the founder of Bezalel on behalf of its artists: “The nation is greatly indebted to him and will repay the debt by reviving the deceased’s handiwork, Bezalel.”7 Toward evening, the funeral procession went around the Old City and climbed to the grave site in the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives. The crowd slowly dwindled: as Haaretz wrote, “The long and winding route exhausted the [mourners] walking in the heat of the day [despite the early evening hour], and only about one hundred mourners were present in the cemetery.”8 The eulogy delivered by JNF chairman Menachem Ussishkin was harsh: “With all of my love and devotion to Jerusalem’s Jews, I must say that I am embarrassed to be its citizen. Jerusalem, with all of its rabbis and politicos, only found this handful to come and honor the memory of a man who dedicated his entire life to the people and the country, and to this holy city in particular.”9 Stung by the small crowd, which he considered an insult to Schatz, Ussishkin continued, “We should add to our prayer ‘don’t abandon me in old age’ – don’t abandon me at the last moment.”10 The burial took place after sunset, and one of the funeral participants lamented that, “for six months, they couldn’t find a thousand dollars in order to bring his body for burial.”11 A year and a half after Schatz died, several dozen people gathered at the Mount of Olives to honor his memory and unveil his tombstone.12 Designed by the sculptor Ze’ev Ben-Zvi, the following text is placed in front of the grave, between two lamps: “Here rests, till the end of days, our teacher, Professor Boris Schatz, creator of Hebrew art in the homeland, for which he agonized and fell, far from his beloved Jerusalem. Shalom.” The tombstone itself reads: “Here are buried the bones of the Hebrew sculptor Zalman-Rav Bahrar Eliyahu of blessed memory,

7 “Schatz’s funeral,” Haaretz, 24 October 1932; “Baruch Schatz on his final journey,” Doar Hayom, 24 October 1932. 8 “Schatz’s funeral,” Haaretz, 24 October 1932. 9 “Prof. B. Schatz’s funeral,” Davar, 24 October 1932. 10 “Ussishkin’s speech,” Haaretz, 24 October 1932. 11 “Following his coffin,” Doar Hayom, 25 October 1932. 12 “Unveiling of Professor Schatz’s tombstone,” Davar, 1 March 1934.

78 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

known as Professor Boris Schatz ... who founded and established Bezalel, for which he traveled and died abroad in the city of Denver, Colorado.”

Itamar Ben-Avi – “Who will remove the dust from your eyes?” Itamar Ben-Avi (Avi is a Hebrew acronym for Eliezer Ben-Yehuda) was born in Jerusalem in 1882 to Ben-Yehuda, the reviver of the Hebrew language, and his first wife, Devorah. He was known as “the first Hebrew child” – the first child born in the Land of Israel in modern times whose native tongue was Hebrew. In 1936, after an extensive career in the Yishuv, Ben-Avi traveled to the United States to solicit contributions; he settled in East Orange, New Jersey. In early 1943, while on a JNF mission in California, he responded to greetings from the Jerusalem Community Council on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday,13 but he passed away later that year. He suffered a stroke on the way to a lecture and was taken to a hospital near his home;14 he died several months later, on 8 April 1943. His wife, Lea, decided that Ben-Avi’s burial in North America would be temporary and his remains should eventually be reinterred in the Land of Israel. With the consent of local rabbis, his body was embalmed, placed in a metal casket, and kept in a mausoleum in Newark’s Jewish cemetery. Newspapers in the Yishuv reported that “his coffin will be transferred to the Land of Israel after the war [World War II]”15 and expressed remorse over the fact that Ben-Avi “died without a job, without status and position, alone, poor, depressed.” They attributed this to a lack of attention by the Zionist leadership as well as to Ben-Avi’s complex personality.16 In mid-1945, Ben-Avi’s widow returned, penniless, to the Land of Israel.17A year later, newspapers reported that Ben-Avi’s remains would soon be brought to the Land of Israel18 at the initiative of the Ben-Yehuda family and with funding by the JNF in America.19 Ben-Avi’s half-brother, Ehud Ben-Yehuda, traveled to North America to raise funds to complete publication of their father’s dictionary and for the transfer of his brother’s remains. He was authorized by Lea Ben-Avi to disin-

13 “Mr. Itamar Ben-Avi,” Jerusalem Post, 18 February 1943. 14 “Itamar Ben-Avi dead,” Jerusalem Post, 20 April 1943. 15 “Itamar Ben-Avi,” Davar, 21 April 1943. 16 “Itamar Ben-Avi,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 21 April 1943. 17 “Mrs. Lea Ben Avi,” Jerusalem Post, 24 June 1945. 18 “Itamar Ben-Avi’s remains to the Land of Israel,” Davar, 26 December 1946. 19 “Itamar Ben-Avi’s remains brought to the Land of Israel,” Hadoar, 14 March 1947.



Itamar Ben-Avi 

 79

ter the coffin, and in February 1947 it was placed on the American ship Skagway Victory, which made its way to the Land of Israel.20 The national funeral procession departed from the Rothschild Hospital in Haifa,21 where eulogies were delivered by the Freemasons (Ben-Avi was a member), representatives of the Haifa Community Council, the Bnei Hayishuv Association, and the Zevulun Association.22 On the way to Jerusalem, the pallbearers made several symbolic stops. The Netanya council decreed a work stoppage during the funeral, and residents, including schoolchildren, gathered on the main streets to view the casket as it passed through the town. A memorial ceremony was conducted in front of the Great Synagogue,23 and after the procession stopped at the Neve Itamar neighborhood, founded in 1944 and named for Ben-Avi,24 it halted again at the entrance to the Even Yehuda settlement. The coffin was welcomed by a mounted honor guard while the settlement’s residents and schoolchildren waited at Itamar Ben-Avi Park, where the chairman of the local council delivered a eulogy.25 The coffin of Ben-Avi was placed in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building in Jerusalem, and Chief Rabbi Ben-Zion Meir Hai Uziel delivered a eulogy: “Who will remove the dust from your eyes, Itamar Ben-Avi, and you roared, in your usual way, about our dire straits.” David Remez, chairman of the National Council, asserted that, “the revival of the language is one of the greatest miracles, the key to the eternal power that sustains us.”26 On the way to the Mount of Olives, the funeral participants walked up Hasolel (today Hahavatzelet) Street and paused at the former site of Ben-Avi’s newspaper, Doar Hayom. A grave was prepared for Ben-Avi next to his father, who had been buried in 1922. Eliezer Ben-Yehuda’s second wife, Hemda, was apparently the one who chose the site, which at the time was isolated and relatively distant from the other burial plots. This reflected the long years of struggle between Ben-Yehuda and the Old Yishuv, which harbored reservations about him and his Zionist activity. After the senior Ben-Yehuda’s burial in the isolated grave, a modest fence (later improved) was placed around it with a black iron grating above. Atop the gate to the eastern entrance, an inscription in ancient Hebrew script reads, “To the

20 “Coffin of Ben-Avi, of blessed memory, en route to the Land of Israel,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 21 February 1947. 21 “Itamar Ben Avi to eternal rest in the homeland,” Davar, 11 March 1947. 22 “Itamar Ben-Avi laid to rest,” Jerusalem Post, 11 March 1947. 23 “I. Ben-Avi’s coffin brought for burial,” Haaretz, 11 March 1947. 24 “Netanya: A new neighborhood on JNF land,” Davar, 8 June 1944. 25 “I. Ben-Avi’s coffin brought for burial,” Haaretz, 11 March 1947. 26 “Itamar Ben-Avi to eternal rest in the homeland,” Davar, 11 March 1947.

80 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

reviver of the language, Eliezer Ben-Yehuda.” A year later, Hemda Ben-Yehuda purchased the area near her husband’s grave to secure a place for herself and the rest of the family (Devorah Ben-Yehuda, Eliezer’s first wife and Itamar’s mother, was buried in a different part of the Mount of Olives).27 The family plot was filled only after the Six-Day War. Hemda, who died in 1951, was initially buried in the western part of Jerusalem but was reinterred on the Mount of Olives after Israel captured East Jerusalem in 1967. Itamar’s wife was buried next to him in 1982. Her tombstone reads, “The most beautiful of girls, Lea Ben-Avi (née Abushded), returns to rest alongside the knight of her youth, Itamar.” Ehud Ben-Yehuda was also buried there in 1983.

Naftali Herz Imber – “His coffin was placed in the Customs House in Haifa” Naftali Herz Imber was born in 1856 in Galicia. He started composing poetry at a young age and was attracted to the ideas of the Haskalah movement. In 1878 he wrote the poem “Tikvateinu” (Our Hope), which was later changed to “Hatikva” (The Hope). Initially associated with Hovevei Zion, the poem was later adopted as the official song of the Zionist movement and subsequently chosen as the Israeli national anthem. In late 1882 Imber arrived in the Land of Israel, visited several pioneer settlements, and began working as a secretary for Sir Laurence Oliphant, who lived in Haifa and later in Daliyat al-Carmel. In 1887 Imber returned to Europe, and in 1892 he relocated to New York, where he died on 8 October 1909.28 He was buried in the Mount Zion cemetery in Maspeth, Queens.29 The idea of reinterring Imber in the Land of Israel arose immediately after his death, in part due to the lyrics of his song “Hashvua” (The Oath), in which he expressed this apparent wish: “I made you vow, my brothers, my sisters, who heard the sound of my melodies – when God summons you, then at the end of days, bring my bones from here, spread on foreign soil. Here I go, solitary, bring my bones from here, bury me in Jerusalem, my city, where a date tree will suck salt from my kidneys.”30 Yet no real effort was made to reinter him in the Land of Israel until September 1945, when the poet’s elderly brother, Shmaryahu, orga-

27 Lang (2008), pp. 844–845. 28 On Imber’s life, see Rogel (1997). 29 Kabakoff (1991), pp. 169–170. 30 CZA, S5/10365, handwritten note, untitled, 13 April 1953.



Naftali Herz Imber 

 81

nized a committee of writers and politicians in to pursue this mission.31 They proposed to bury Naftali in Jerusalem or “in one of the settlements he loved.”32 In 1949 a plea went out again: Throughout our rocky road since the First Congress, our national poet N. H. Imber has accompanied us – not only in “Hatikva” but also in the heartfelt words of “Hashvua,” where he made us – the last generation of enslavement and the first generation of redemption – vow that on the day of reckoning we would remember to also bring his bones to the land of our forefathers. And we won’t carry out his wish?33

The Zionist publicist Julius Haber, who knew Imber from his activity in the early twentieth century in New York, advocated in the United States at the same time for the latter’s reinterment in Israel.34 In 1950 Haber reiterated his appeal from a number of platforms and also demanded from Berl Locker, chairman of the Jewish Agency, that a national public entity carry out the mission.35 Locker’s response was blunt: tell the man [Haber] that if the friends of the deceased organize his reinterment, the [Zionist] Executive will participate in the ceremony. It should be explained that there are a large number of people who occupy an important place in the history of Zionism who died and were buried in the lands of the Diaspora, and that the Zionist Executive cannot be expected to become a sort of glorious burial society, which decides on its own to transfer all of the remains to Israel.36

Nevertheless, contacts continued between the Jewish Agency, the World Zionist Organization (WZO) and Imber’s supporters in New York. In early 1951 Nahum Goldmann, on behalf of the Jewish Agency, told Morris Margolis, Imber’s relative and the secretary of the WZO in the United States, that funding for the transfer of Imber’s remains to Israel would have to be provided by his friends in the United States but that the WZO would be happy to help organize the funeral.37 Later in

31 CZA, A32/122, Shmaryahu Imber to Menashe Meirovitch, 5 September 1945; ibid., Prof. Yosef Klausner et al. to Menashe Meirovitch, Elul 1945; “Bringing the remains of the ‘Hatikva’ poet to the Land of Israel,” Davar, 20 June 1946. 32 “When will we bring the bones of ‘Hatikva’’s author to Jerusalem?” Haboker, 13 January 1952. 33 M. M. Davidson, “Bringing the remains of ‘Hatikva’’s author,” Davar, 23 May 1949. 34 Haber (1960), pp. 290–291. 35 “A letter from Julius Haber to Naftali Hertz Imber,” Jerusalem Post, 7 July 1950; CZA, S5/10365, a letter from Julius Haber to Berl Locker, 12 July 1950. 36 CZA, S5/10365, handwritten letter from Berl Locker, 20 July 1950. 37 Ibid., Nahum Goldmann to Morris Margolis, 5 February 1951.

82 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

the year, approval for transferring the coffin was obtained,38 and the Organization Department of the WZO executive committee contacted the burial society in Tel Aviv on behalf of New York Jewry: “The interested parties [Imber’s supporters in New York] believe that the old cemetery in Tel Aviv would be an appropriate place for the eternal rest of his remains.”39 Jewish Agency and WZO officials who were in contact with Margolis in New York repeatedly emphasized that the Americans would bear responsibility for handling the transfer of the coffin while a representative in Israel should be appointed to tend to the practical aspects of receiving it.40 These preparations were completed only in 1953, after Imber’s New York supporters succeeded in raising the $500 required for the transfer. As the casket was en route to the State of Israel, a funeral committee was formed, headed by the chairman of the press association in Jerusalem, Berl Coralnik.41 The committee planned the ceremony and place of burial on Har Hamenuchot, near the grave site of Smolenskin.42 Yosef Sprinzak was named an honorary member of the committee’s presidium, together with Berl Locker and Education Minister Ben-Zion Dinur.43 The Tel Aviv docked at the port of Haifa on 16 March, but Imber’s casket remained on the ship for nearly a week. Some saw symbolism in the fact that “his remains are arriving near Independence Day, when his song is sung, this time near the remains of the poet himself, at the site where he longed to be buried – in Jerusalem.”44 Many more complained, demanding to know why “the coffin was left on the deck of the ship for a full week. And the question arises: Why wasn’t the funeral held already on Sunday, the eve of Independence Day, when the singing of “Hatikva” bursts hundreds and thousands of times from the mouths of adults and youngsters, from the mouths of kindergarteners. What is the reason for this ‘laziness?’”45 Indeed, compared to other burial ceremonies of that time, Imber’s funeral procession was conducted with great modesty and without attracting much interest from the general public, the state’s leadership, or representatives

38 Ibid., approval of transfer of Imber’s remains to the State of Israel, 7 June 1951. 39 Ibid., Organization Department of the WZO Executive to Tel Aviv’s general burial society, 19 September 1951. 40 Ibid., Arieh Leo Lauterbach to Morris Margolis, 11 June 1952. See Goren (1994) and Goren (1996) on the role of funerals in the lives of America Jewry. 41 Ibid., memorandum on the transfer of Imber’s remains, 19 March 1952; ibid., A. Broides to Berl Locker, 19 March 1952. 42 Ibid., memorandum on a meeting on the transfer of Imber’s remains, 14 April 1953. 43 Ibid. 44 “The remains of N.H. Imber have arrived,” Davar, 17 April 1953. 45 “As long as in the heart,” ibid.



Naftali Herz Imber 

 83

of its institutions. The ships docked at the port sounded their sirens and work came to a halt, but some grumbled that the residents of Haifa were not given the opportunity to file past the coffin. The port’s police force carried the casket to the passenger terminal and placed it on a platform of honor; the port’s managers and representatives of the Jewish Agency’s executive committee were the only ones present.46

Figure 11. Coffin of Naftali Herz Imber being lowered from the Tel Aviv in the port of Haifa, 23 April 1953. Unknown photographer (CZA).

The coffin remained overnight at the port terminal and a ceremony was held there the next day in the presence of Mayor Abba Khoushy, members of the Imber family, and others. A police honor guard and Haifa schoolchildren stood by the coffin. One of the family members recited kaddish, and everyone sang “Hatikva.” Mounted police and motorcyclists with flags waited at the entrance to Zichron Yaa’kov and escorted the coffin to a park in front of the community council building, where more schoolchildren were waiting; work and commerce in the town came to a halt. After singing “Hatikva,” two pupils read poems by Imber and the funeral continued on to Jerusalem.47

46 “Today the remains of Imber will be brought to burial,” Davar, 23 April 1953. 47 “The remains of ‘Hatikva’’s author – to burial,” Haaretz, 24 April 1953; “With the singing of ‘Hatikva,’ Imber’s grave is sealed,” Hatzofe, 24 April 1953.

84 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

Journalist Berl Coralnik, a member of the committee that had brought Imber’s remains to Israel, officially delivered the casket to the leaders of the Zionist executive committee in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building.48 A delegation from Rishon LeZion placed a wreath of flowers on it, because “the people in Rishon were the first to [know] the poem “Hatikva,” and they would like this privilege to be remembered at this time.”49 From there, the funeral procession continued to Har Hamenuchot, where Imber’s grave was prepared in the section of the national pantheon. As the hole was filled, the small crowd that had come to pay their respects to the author of the national anthem sang “Hatikva.” The funeral upset many people. The opposition Herut newspaper criticized the ceremony: “The participants in the burial ceremony felt searing pain upon noticing the absence of government ministers.”50 Writing in his “Seventh Column,” Natan Alterman described Imber’s low-key journey to the soil of the homeland: “Yes, apparently this is the way of anthems: they start in the realm of various eccentrics and in the end, here ... suddenly or not. The parade passes today, it’s true. And a Hebrew poet is finally brought to rest, and his poem itself accompanies him, with the moaning of wind instruments and the beats of a drum, as if escorting a foreign person ... and this is beautiful and good.”51 Yaakov Orland devoted his “Poem of the Day” to Imber’s coffin waiting at Haifa’s port, and he quoted in the title an item from the newspaper reporting that “N. H. Imber’s coffin was placed at the Customs House in Haifa.” Orland wrote: In the customs hall – night and silence. A sleepy inspector walks around with a flashlight. The port police have already recorded in a notebook everything that enters and exits. A regular night at customs, the ships’ horns and the star visible from the water ... motionless, it lies at the end of the hall. A strange coffin, rough, clumsy. Okay, tomorrow it will surely budge. Tomorrow we’ll already hear “Zionist speeches” about love of country and loyalty. The man will get excited, heated, and, of course, will end up paying. Words of rebuke won’t help, whether it’s a fridge or a stove, the fellow will pay customs as required by law ... the fellow will pay, the fellow already paid ... during his lifetime, in the glory of his mysterious poem. The fellow lies in the coffin, exempt now from payment. He paid in hard currency, Zionism, which is already a sort of asset for us. He paid in the great political hope, and he is definitely exempt from paying customs.52

48 “Imber’s remains to eternal rest,” Davar, 24 April 1953. 49 “Rishonim,” Haaretz, 17 April 1953. Imber was believed to have penned his poem “Hatikva” while staying in Rishon LeZion. 50 “The writer of ‘Hatikva’ was also forgotten at the funeral ceremony in Jerusalem,” Herut, 24 April 1953. 51 Natan Alterman, “The Seventh Column: An Anthem and its Writer,” Davar, 24 April 1953. 52 Yaakov Orland, “As the coffin set forth,” Hador, 24 April 1953.



Haim Nahman Bialik 

 85

After the burial ceremony, a tombstone was placed on Imber’s grave with the inscription: “Here lies Naftali Hertz Imber, [author] of ‘Hatikva,’ born in Zolochiv on 30 Kislev 5617, died in New York on 23 Tishri 5670. Brought to eternal rest in Jerusalem on 8 Iyar 5713, because only with the last Jew does our hope end, may he rest in peace.”53 Klausner, who chaired the reinterment committee, was buried near Imber five years later, in 1958.

Haim Nahman Bialik – “Was so connected to Tel Aviv and wanted to be buried here” “The glory and genius of Israel is gone,” “The people of Israel are orphaned,” “Bialik is gone” – so the newspaper headlines announced the death of Haim Nahman Bialik on 4 July 1934.54 He had traveled to Vienna with his wife, Mania Averbuch, to receive treatments for kidney disease; he underwent two operations, but did not recover and passed away at a convalescent home.55 Doar Hayom saw symbolism in the fact that “in Vienna, Herzl’s city, thirty years after Herzl’s death, death caught up with Bialik.”56 The news of his death spread rapidly in the Diaspora, where memorial assemblies were held,57 and also in the Land of Israel. The WZO executive committee quickly released an announcement: “Since the day we lost the visionary and builder of our political revival, since the death of Herzl, Israel has not experienced a loss like that of Bialik, the visionary and builder of our literary revival ... the Hebrew flag is lowered. The nation mourns one of its greatest sons.”58 There were expressions of mourning in Jerusalem and elsewhere,59 but in Tel Aviv there was real shock. “The news of Bialik’s death struck the city like a thunderbolt. Every face was grief-stricken,” Davar reported.60 Black ribbons were attached to the flags flying at many institutions – city hall, the Hebrew Gymnasium high

53 Kabakoff (1991), p. 171. 54 “The glory and genius of Israel is gone,” Haaretz, 5 July 1934; “The people of Israel are orphaned,” Haaretz, 6 July 1934; “Bialik is gone,” Doar Hayom, 5 July 1934. 55 “Successful operation for Bialik,” Haaretz, 21 June 1934; “His illness,” Haaretz, 5 July 1934; “H. N. Bialik’s condition during his final days,” Haaretz, 6 July 1934; “How Bialik passed away,” Davar, 6 July 1934. 56 “As the Holy Ark is taken,” Doar Hayom, 6 July 1934. 57 “The mourning abroad,” Davar, 6 July 1934. 58 “The people of Israel are orphaned,” Haaretz, 6 July 1934. 59 “A day of mourning in Israel,” Doar Hayom, 6 July 1934. 60 “Mourning assemblies in Tel Aviv,” Davar, 6 July 1934.

86 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

school, Histadrut buildings, and foreign consulates. Municipal leaders quickly convened and decided to close city hall, cafés, cinemas, and places of entertainment. The Jewish Agency’s Education Department canceled school, and the banks also closed for the day. The communal bulletin boards were covered in black from the “cries of mourning” published by the city and many other entities.61 In Jerusalem, a special assembly was held in the Jewish Agency’s black-bannered auditorium, with representatives of the national institutions among those in attendance.62 Another meeting, smaller in scope, included Jewish Agency officials; representatives of the National Council; and community leaders from Jerusalem, Haifa, and Tel Aviv, and focused on the practical aspects of Bialik’s death. The meeting was chaired by David Ben-Gurion, who emphasized the urgent need to form a burial committee to handle the transfer of the coffin and the funeral. It was decided to dispatch representatives to Europe to receive Bialik’s coffin and bring it to the Land of Israel.63 Before he went to Vienna Bialik wrote a will, but the leaders of the national institutions did not wait to learn its contents; they decided to bury him in the Tel Aviv cemetery next to the grave of Ahad Ha’am. Rabbi Simcha Asaf proposed burying him in Nicanor Cave on Mount Scopus, the site of Yehuda Leib Pinsker’s reinterment less than two weeks earlier,64 thereby indicating that despite the fact that Ussishkin’s idea of turning the cave into a national pantheon had begun to take root. Ussishkin tried to pressure Bialik’s widow and those accompanying her in Vienna to support the Jerusalem option,65 but his effort failed when Shoshana Parsitz, head of the Tel Aviv Department of Education, announced that Bialik had purchased four burial plots in the Tel Aviv cemetery and his father-in-law was already buried in one of them.66 Mayor Dizengoff wasted no time. He quickly sent a condolence telegram to Bialik’s widow, asking “to transfer the coffin to the Land of Israel for burial in the first Hebrew city,”67 and requesting her approval via return telegram. The writer David Rotblum, a friend of the Bialiks, sent an affirmative response to the mayor’s request. This preempted the proposal to bury Bialik temporarily in Vienna and also undermined the idea that his burial in Tel

61 “Tel Aviv mourns,” Haaretz, 6 July 1934. 62 “A day of mourning in Israel,” Doar Hayom, 6 July 1934. 63 “The institutions’ decisions,” Haaretz, 6 July 1934. 64 “His last will and testament,” Haaretz, 6 July 1934; “The day of mourning in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 6 July 1934. 65 “The black ship,” Haaretz, 17 July 1934. 66 “The day of mourning in the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 6 July 1934. “The institutions consult on the funeral arrangements,” Davar, 6 July 1934. 67 “First letter from Vienna after the day of death,” Haaretz, 11 July 1934.



Haim Nahman Bialik 

 87

Aviv might be only temporary, until his remains could be united with those of Herzl in Jerusalem. As Haaretz wrote, “Bialik was so connected to Tel Aviv, and wanted to be buried there.”68 Bialik’s physicians convened a press conference in Tel Aviv and provided details about his illness, the reasons for his trip, and the circumstances of his death.69 The members of the committee organizing the funeral were also announced.70 The committee, chaired by Ben-Gurion, would decide on the funeral details and arrange to transport the casket after its arrival at the port of Jaffa. It was agreed that the first stop would be at Ohel Shem, where the coffin would be received by delegations from the institutions and representatives of various federations. Every locality, organization, or institution would be allowed to participate in the funeral ceremony, but the number of participants would be limited. The procession would make three stops before reaching the cemetery, where entry would be restricted to members of delegations presenting special tickets. In the afternoon, restaurants would be closed and shop windows dimmed. City residents were also asked not to use radios and musical instruments that night and “to refrain from singing inside windows that face the street.”71 At the same time, the Jewish community in Vienna planned a funeral ceremony, and because Bialik’s widow did not want any speeches, a religious ceremony was organized. In the morning hours of 9 July 1934, about three thousand local Jews gathered in Vienna’s general cemetery, including representatives of various associations and federations and the city’s elite.72 Bialik’s coffin had been kept in the burial society’s purification room at the cemetery for nearly a week since his death, surrounded the whole time by an honor guard. After an indoor ceremony, the coffin was taken outside and placed on a stage. A table was set up to display volumes of Bialik’s books, described as “the inheritance treasure of the Jewish people.”73 Some twenty thousand mourners filed past the coffin and, in the evening, six community officials, wearing traditional top hats, carried it to the hearse. It was placed in a special box, and the Italian consul in Vienna tied several strips around it and sealed them with his personal wax stamp. The casket was driven to the train station and loaded onto a night train heading south

68 “The black ship,” Haaretz, 17 July 1934. 69 “Bialik’s coffin to leave Vienna tomorrow,” Davar, 8 July 1934. 70 “Composition of the burial committee,” Haaretz, 8 July 1934. 71 “Mourning Bialik,” Doar Hayom, 15 July 1934. 72 “With Bialik’s coffin from Vienna to Trieste,” Haaretz, 16 July 1934. 73 “Vienna bids farewell to Bialik,” Davar, 16 July 1934.

88 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

to Trieste.74 There Bialik’s widow, Mania, met Ussishkin; Moshe Glickson, representative of the Jewish National Council; and the rabbi of the local community.75 The shipping company Lloyd Triestino had asked the Jewish Agency for the “privilege” of transporting the coffin to the Land of Israel. When it arrived in Trieste, the casket was transferred to the deck of the Italy, the ship on which Bialik had sailed for medical treatment in Vienna only five weeks earlier. A farewell ceremony was conducted on board in the presence of local Jews, civil authorities, and Jewish Agency representatives. There were also “hundreds of immigrant pioneers,” on their way to the Land of Israel.76 A thirteen-person delegation led by Ben-Gurion and Yitzhak Greenboim, representative of the Jewish Agency executive committee, set out to receive the coffin in Cyprus.77 Many of them burst into tears when Bialik’s widow arrived, and they hurried down to the room where the coffin was placed, covered with a blue-and-white flag and draped in black. The ship’s Jewish passengers observed the customs of mourning throughout the voyage; singing and dancing were prohibited, and honor guards composed of “the pioneers traveling to the Land of Israel, standing at attention” were stationed next to the coffin at all times. During the last night, the passengers filed past the coffin and held a symbolic ceremony,78 and in the morning the ship docked at Jaffa with its flags flying at half-mast. Representatives of the Tel Aviv Municipality, the National Council, and the Jewish Agency boarded the ship, along with members of the Bialik family, and the coffin was lowered onto the wharf. It was then loaded onto a vehicle that led it in a long convoy to Ohel Shem, where it was placed in the center of an auditorium bedecked in black. Bialik’s picture was displayed next to one of Ahad Ha’am, and a banner along the wall declared, “And the song of his life was halted in the middle.” Bialik’s books were exhibited on a table at the foot of the coffin alongside a large, dramatic lamp with seven branches.79 After his widow left, the hall was opened to the general public, and many came “from all of the various communities in the country, from the most distant parts, from ancient Jerusalem, from the somewhat isolated Safed.”80 The honor guard comprised members of the Writers’ Association who had studied “Mishnah with Bialik’s commentary and

74 “Bialik’s funeral in Vienna,” Davar, 10 July 1934. 75 “The funeral in Vienna,” Haaretz, 8 July 1934. 76 “Bialik’s coffin in Trieste,” Haaretz, 11 July 1934. 77 “Bialik’s coffin sails to the Land of Israel,” Haaretz, 12 July 1934. 78 “Representatives of the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 16 July 1934; “With the Yishuv delegation to Cyprus,” Doar Hayom, 19 July 1934. 79 CZA, PHAL/1624801. 80 “Bialik’s funeral yesterday in Tel Aviv”, Haaretz, 17 July 1934.



Haim Nahman Bialik 

 89

Figure 12: Casket of Haim Nahman Bialik inside Ohel Shem hall in Tel Aviv, 16 July 1934. Photograph by Zvi Oron (Oroshkess) (CZA).

his books of poetry.” Some thirty thousand people filed past his coffin in about six hours. Work in the city came to a halt at 3:00 p.m., as “workers came down from the scaffolds and left their other places of work in laborers’ clothing.” Hundreds of guides wearing special black-framed ribbons surrounded the auditorium and adjacent streets and directed the traffic of invitees, lined up in rows across Balfour Street. The coffin was then borne out on the shoulders of representatives of the various institutions that had participated in bringing it. Representatives of many of the country’s communities, emissaries of the Yishuv’s institutions, teachers from Hebrew University, representatives of political parties, and others walked behind the coffin. About 100,000 people lined the streets in which the funeral procession passed, with many of them wearing a “Bialik symbol,” a tag with a picture of Bialik, on their clothing. The procession stopped at the home of Yehoshua Hana Ravnitzky, Bialik’s partner in editing the Book of Legends, and at Bialik’s home, which was draped in black, as was the adjacent city hall.81 Only the first fifty rows of marchers could enter the cemetery;82 the other hundreds of delegation members had to wait outside. Bialik was buried next to the graves of Ahad Ha’am and Haim Arlosoroff, and the mourning continued for

81 “100,000 participate in funeral,” Davar, 17 July 1934. 82 For a photograph of the coffin being carried in the cemetery, see JNFPA, d736-230.

90 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

Figure 13: The remains of Haim Nahman Bialik are carried to their final resting place in Trumpeldor cemetery, Tel Aviv, 16 July 1934. Photograph by Zvi Oron (Oroshkess), (CZA).

hours. Street lamps and bus headlights were covered with black cloth, and places of entertainment, usually packed with people, were shuttered. Some of the businesses in Tel Aviv displayed pictures of Bialik in their windows.83 Bialik’s tombstone was unveiled soon after the one-year anniversary of his reinterment. A committee formed by the Jewish Agency, the National Council, and the Tel Aviv Municipality announced a competition to monumentalize the area around the grave, and artist and designer Moshe Mokady and sculptor Moshe Ziffer were chosen as the winners. Their plan included three steps leading to the grave, composed of four large stones bearing the simple inscription “H. N. Bialik.”84

83 “After Bialik’s funeral,” Davar, 17 July 1934. 84 “One-year anniversary of H. N. Bialik’s death,” Davar, 21 July 1935; for a photograph of Bialik’s tombstone, see Kroll and Linman (1940), p. 32.



Israel (Oskar) Gruzenberg 

 91

Israel (Oskar) Gruzenberg – Defense attorney in the Beilis blood-libel case Oskar Osipovich Gruzenberg was born in 1866 in what is now Dnipropetrovsk, Russia. He studied law at Kiev University and became well known for defending a Jew charged with killing a boy in Kiev in 1911. Thanks to the mobilization of various people worldwide, Menachem Mendel Beilis was acquitted of this blood libel in 1913. Gruzenberg left Russia during the 1917 revolution and lived in Berlin, Riga, and ultimately in Nice. He died there, age 74, on 27 December 1941. He and his wife were buried in zinc coffins, with the hope that their bodies would be brought to the Land of Israel for burial.85 The initiative to retrieve Gruzenberg’s remains came from his friend, attorney Yaakov Sorochowitsch of Paris, who had heard Gruzenberg express this wish. His energetic activity is an example of the power of individual initiative, in contrast to the institutional initiative behind most of the cases of reinterment described thus far. In late 1945, after the end of World War II, Sorochowitsch contacted Marc Jarblum, one of the leaders of French Jewry, to solicit his help, and also worked to obtain approval from the French government. In May 1947, Sorochowitsch proposed to the Tel Aviv Municipality that Gruzenberg be buried in the city, which had named a street for him immediately after the Beilis trial. Almost a year passed before he received a response. In April 1948 the city officials indicated that they supported this initiative, despite the difficulties of the War of Independence. Encouraged by this response, Sorochowitsch proposed appointing a committee to advance the project and expressed confidence that “the costs of transfer will be considered insignificant relative to what the deceased did for Russian Jewry.”86 He suggested that immigrants from Russia and residents of Gruzenberg Street in Tel Aviv be solicited to help fulfill the deceased’s will and also proposed appealing to the Israeli bar association, as “there are certainly some among them who remember the Beilis trial and the role of Oscar Ben Yosef Gruzenberg in it.” Reacting to the lack of response, Sorochowitsch warned, “after my death, no one will work to bring Gruzenberg’s remains or to deliver the archive and library, and it will be very insulting if their remains remain in a temporary grave.”87 He planned to transfer not only the caskets but also the documents of the Beilis trial and the extensive library that Gruzenberg had left behind.

85 “Oskar Gruzenberg,” Davar, 2 January 1941. 86 TAA, 1357, 3813, Yehuda Nedivi to J. Sorochowitsch, Paris, 6 April 1948. 87 Ibid., letter translated from Russian to Hebrew, from J. Sorochowitsch to the mayor of Tel Aviv, 12 January 1949.

92 

 Chapter 4 Prominent Figures from the Yishuv

In 1949, a public committee was formed in Tel Aviv to transport the couple’s coffins.88 The maritime company Shoham volunteered to bring the coffins, the library, and the Gruzenberg archives to Israel.89 Tel Aviv municipal officials, now involved in the preparations, insisted on “absolute identification of the bodies” to ensure that they are “indeed of the deceased and his wife,”90 and the mayor asked the managers of the Trumpeldor Street cemetery to bury Gruzenberg there, “in the area of renowned personages” and adjacent to the grave site of Judge Yitzhak Nofah, who became a judge under the British, wrote his verdicts in Hebrew, and was also reinterred in Tel Aviv in September 1929.91 The coffins arrived in Haifa via the Negba in 1950, and after several days at the local hospital they were transferred to Tel Aviv.92 The funeral procession passed through the main streets of the city to Gruzenberg Street, where members of the bar association were waiting. At city hall, the mayor delivered a speech and the mourners continued from there to the cemetery.93 The Gruzenberg estate, the Beilis trial papers, and part of his library were given to the National and University Library in Jerusalem.94 In April 1951, on the lawyer’s eighty-fifth birthday, an unveiling ceremony was held at the couple’s grave site.95

88 “Committee for the transfer of Gruzenberg’s remains,” Davar, 14 October 1949. 89 TAA, 1357, 3813, Shoham to Yehuda Nedivi, 17 March 1949. 90 Ibid., Yehuda Nedivi to the Jewish Agency for Israel, 29 March 1949. 91 Ibid., Yehuda Nedivi to the management of Tel Aviv’s Trumpeldor cemetery, Tel Aviv, 12 April 1949. 92 “O. Gruzenberg and his wife to eternal rest in Tel Aviv,” Davar, 16 May 1950. 93 “Gruzenberg brought to rest in Tel Aviv,” Haboker, 19 May 1950. 94 TAA, 1357, 3813, Yehuda Nedivi to the Hebrew University, 30 May 1950. 95 “Tel Aviv,” Davar, 20 April 1951.

Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret Five Zionist leaders were reinterred in the kibbutzim of Degania and Kinneret, two of the first pioneering settlements in the Land of Israel. Although they were located in the geographic periphery, they played a central role in the development of the labor movement and socialization in the Yishuv before 1948. Key Zionist and pioneering figures from Degania and the vicinity are buried in the kibbutz cemetery, as are others connected to the story of Socialist pioneering: Sarah Malchin, one of Degania’s first pioneers; Aharon David Gordon, a thinker and mentor for the pioneers of the Second Aliyah; and Arthur Ruppin, head of the Settlement Department of the Zionist executive committee. Two leaders of the Zionist movement were also buried at Degania during the period of the British Mandate: Leopold Jacob Greenberg, from Britain, and Otto Warburg, the third president of the World Zionist Organization. The Kinneret cemetery is located in the northern part of Tel Bet Yerah, at the southwestern edge of the Sea of Galilee. At first the cemetery had no special occupants, but eventually members of various symbolic groups were buried there: pioneers from Yemen, refugees from World War I, and members of the Third Aliyah.1 The burial of Labor Zionism founder Berl Katznelson in 1944 was a turning point,2 and Kinneret became a desirable final destination for members of the Zionist movement. In 1945, the Histadrut labor federation decided to adopt this cemetery, which had already become a sort of “holy place.” Thus, when the idea arose to reinter the fathers of Socialist Zionism in the State of Israel – Nahman Syrkin, Moshe Hess and Dov Ber Borochov – it was natural to choose Kinneret, where they would bask in the shadow of Katznelson.

1 For the history of the cemeteries, see Hadash (1992); Tsur (2009); Ron (1998). 2 “The Yishuv and the movement accompany B. Katznelson to his eternal rest,” Davar, 14 August 1944. DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-006

94 

 Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret

Leopold Jacob Greenberg, a leader of Zionism in Britain – “Burial in one of the colonies of the Land of Israel” Leopold Jacob Greenberg, a Zionist leader in Britain and editor of the Jewish Chronicle, died in November 1931.3 In his will, he stipulated that his body should be cremated and his ashes brought for burial on Mount Scopus.4 This was surprising, because cremation is not condoned by Jewish law, and it is not clear why he desired that specific location. Greenberg’s son Ivan asked representatives of the Jewish Agency in England to help fulfill the will, and they contacted the Agency’s leadership in Jerusalem. In early December 1931, approval was granted to bury Greenberg in Jerusalem, but in the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives and not on Mount Scopus.5 In mid-February 1932, however, the Zionist leadership received a letter from the central burial society in Jerusalem prohibiting Greenberg’s burial “in the holy soil of Jerusalem” because cremation is forbidden for Jews.6 The Chief Rabbinate published a letter in Doar Hayom signed by leading rabbis, including Avraham Yitzhak Hacohen Kook, Yaakov Meir, and Pesach Zvi Frank, warning against: the stumbling block of those who sin in their souls and burn their dead, and some of those wish to bury the ashes in a Jewish burial, and since this entire bad custom is an uprooting of religion and is contrary to the foundations of our holy faith, we hereby issue a severe warning to all burial societies that they beware of accepting these burnt ashes, whether locally or from overseas.7

“Cremation is in violation of Jewish law,” the Jewish Agency’s representative in London explained; “In more progressive states, the Jewish authorities are sometimes willing to turn a blind eye to this, but not in the Land of Israel.”8 As an interim solution, Jewish Agency officials in Jerusalem proposed burying Greenberg “in the part of the cemetery [on the Mount of Olives] where Jewish ‘free thinkers’ are buried.” However, this proposal also caused a stir among the religious public.9 Agudat Yisrael published a strong protest in the Kol Yisrael newspaper, arguing that this might serve “as the beginning of introducing the Greek

3 On Greenberg’s work, see Cesarani (1994); Jabotinsky (1986), pp. 287–289. 4 CZA, S25/779, letter by Ivan M. Greenberg, no addressee cited, 18 November 1931. 5 Ibid., letter to Ivan M. Greenberg, sender not cited, 24 November 1931; ibid., secretary general of the Jewish Agency to Mr. J. Linton, 12 February 1931. 6 Ibid., central burial society in Jerusalem to the Zionist Executive, 12 December 1931. 7 Ibid., “Chief Rabbinate’s letter against the cremation,” Doar Hayom, 15 December 1931. 8 CZA, S25/779, letter to Dr. Linton, sender not cited, London, 17 December 1931. 9 Ibid.



Leopold Jacob Greenberg 

 95

culture among the dead too, and the Mount of Olives, facing the Temple Mount ... will become a refuge for the cremated, for assimilated Jews who not only want to live as non-Jews but also to die and be buried like them.” Agudat Yisrael wondered “how, in the Land of Israel, in the holy land, this evil breach could occur, to bring the cremated to Jewish burial on the heights of the Mount of Olives.” They objected to “turning the Mount of Olives, a burial site of holy and pure families, into a burial place for the assimilated and for people who rebel against Judaism even in their death.”10 The rabbis’ ban on burying Greenberg’s ashes embarrassed the leaders of the Zionist organization, and they searched for a solution. Discussions in Jerusalem raised the possibility of fulfilling Greenberg’s request by using the Bentwich family’s plot, located at the foot of Hebrew University, on the slope of Mount Scopus facing the Old City.11 The Bentwiches had purchased this plot of land in the early days of the British Mandate, and after the head of the family, Herbert Bentwich, bequeathed it to the university, the plan was to build dormitories for overseas students there.12 When Herbert died in June 1932, he was buried there alongside his wife, Suzanna, who passed away in London in 1915 and was reinterred on Mount Scopus in February 1921.13 The Zionist leadership in Jerusalem and top university officials hoped to receive the family’s consent to bury Greenburg there as well. Another problem arose. The Jewish Agency was unable to obtain a permit from the Mandate’s health authorities to transfer Greenberg’s remains. According to protocol, the authorities would issue such permits after receiving approval from the local burial society. Since the Chief Rabbinate had imposed a ban, the burial society refused to submit its approval. The Greenberg family’s frustration grew as the months passed, and they finally decided to send the ashes to the Land of Israel without prior coordination. Thus, without any advance notice, a “package” arrived at the port of Jaffa aboard the African Princess. Addressed to the Jewish Agency, it contained Greenberg’s remains. After the “package” languished at the port for a long time, Ivan Greenberg angrily wrote to the Jewish Agency and threatened to contact Nahum Sokolow, president of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), and demand his intervention.14 He also sent

10 “At the threshold of hell,” Kol Yisrael, 10 December 1931. 11 CZA, S25/779, central office of the World Zionist Organization in London to N. Medzini, 15 February 1932. 12 “University students plan hostel on Mount Scopus,” Palestine Post, 6 April 1933. 13 “Funeral of the legal secretary’s mother,” Haaretz, 16 February 1921. 14 CZA, S25/779, Ivan Greenberg to the Jewish Agency, 16 February 1932.

96 

 Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret

a sarcastic letter to Zelig Brodesky, the director of the Zionist executive committee in London: I am sure the Zionist organizations in Palestine could find a number of square inches in which the remains of one who contributed so much to the Jewish people could be buried ... as the son of the deceased, I am sure Mr. Greenberg would not express opposition to having his remains buried in ‘unconsecrated’ ground. He believed that all of Palestine is sacred.15

The situation looked desperate, especially after the Customs Office in Jaffa threatened to destroy the “package.”16 Finally, in late April 1932, Haim Arlosoroff, a member of the Jewish Agency executive committee and head of its Organization Department, proposed burying Greenberg “in one of our pioneering settlements: Degania or Kinneret.” Arlosoroff was concerned that “the matter would become a battleground and that some would voice protest,” but, on the other hand, he believed that “the progressive public opinion [in the kibbutzim] would receive this proposal sympathetically ... that Greenberg would be buried in Degania, alongside Gordon and other pioneers of the new Land of Israel.”17 In mid-May, the Jewish Agency asked Degania’s secretariat to bury Leopold Greenberg, “one of the first to mobilize under the flag of Herzl and the pioneers of political Zionism in England.” The Jewish Agency explained that it was not possible to fulfill his desire to be buried in Jerusalem “because the cremation of his corpse sparked opposition from the ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox groups.” Therefore, it asked “to arrange the burial in a place that would not harm the sensibilities of the residents, while also dignifying the deceased.”18 The response arrived quickly: “We agree to bury Greenberg in the cemetery in Degania with a simple tombstone and without any distinction from the other graves, and the inscription will be in Hebrew.”19 This was consistent with the equality pursued in every aspect of life in the kibbutz, including in the cemetery.20 After consulting with the family, Ivan Greenberg agreed that “the proposal regarding burial in one of the colonies of the Land of Israel is the best one and best matches my father’s wishes.”21

15 Ibid., Ivan Greenberg to Zelig Brodetsky, 25 April 1932. 16 Ibid., Customs Office to the Jewish Agency, 18 May 1932. 17 Ibid., H. Arlosoroff to Yosef Cohen, 29 April 1932. 18 Ibid., letter to Degania Alef, sender not cited, 15 May 1932. 19 Ibid., secretary of Degania Alef to the Jewish Agency, 24 May 1932. 20 Bar Gal (2010). 21 CZA, S25/779, Ivan Greenberg to H. Arlosoroff, 30 May 1932.



Otto Warburg 

 97

On 5 June 1932, more than six months after his death, Leopold Greenberg was buried in Degania. The veteran residents of the settlement carried the coffin on their shoulders. Haim Arlosoroff eulogized Greenberg, whose remains were then buried in the same row as the Zionist ideologue A. D. Gordon and Joseph Busel, one of the founders of Degania.22 In the months that followed, there was discussion among family members, Jewish Agency officials, and members of Degania about the wording on the tombstone. The Jewish Agency proposed, “Here lie the remains of L. J. Greenberg, Herzl’s friend and partner.” The family wanted to add in English, “The Land of Israel for the people of Israel was his constant thought.” The secretary of the Jewish Agency’s Political Department explained in a letter to Degania that Greenberg’s Zionist influence was mainly among English-speaking Jews, and that if a tourist should happen to come to the cemetery who does not read Hebrew, he would not know who is buried there. The Jewish Agency recommended that Degania “accede to the family’s request and agree to the addition in English.”23 In the end, the addition was written on the tombstone – but in Hebrew.

Otto Warburg – Buried on land that he purchased in his work with the Palestine Land Development Company Eight years after Greenberg’s reinterment, Otto Warburg was buried in Degania in 1940. Warburg, the third president of the WZO (1911–1921), was one of the founders of Hachsharat Hayishuv, the Palestine Land Development Company, and also of the Institute for Agriculture and Natural Science, which became the Jewish Agency’s agricultural station in 1931. In addition, he was chair of the Botany Department at the Hebrew University. Warburg was extensively involved in political activity in the Zionist movement. After serving as deputy to David Wolffsohn, the WZO chairman, at the Seventh Zionist Congress he directed the Eretz Yisrael Committee in the WZO for many years. That committee was responsible for all of the settlement activity in the Land of Israel, including purchasing land, establishing research centers, and founding settlements. Warburg’s last visit to the Land of Israel was in spring

22 “Burial of Jewish Chronicle editor in Degania,” Haaretz, 6 June 1932; “The Late Mr. L. J. Greenberg,” Jewish Chronicle, 10 June 1932; CZA, S25/779, a letter to Ivan Greenberg, sender not cited, 6 June 1932. For a photo of the grave site, still without a tombstone, on the banks of the Jordan, see JNFPA 35-029. 23 CZA, S25/779, Ivan Greenberg to H. Arlosoroff, 12 September 1932; ibid., Jewish Agency to Kvutzat Degania Alef, 12 October 1932.

98 

 Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret

1936. His wife, Fania, died the next year, and he was already ill. As Nazi rule in Germany grew stronger, he thought about moving to his apartment in London, but on 10 January 1938 he died in Berlin, age 78. That same year, Otto’s son Edgar fled Germany and arrived in Palestine. He eventually settled in Kibbutz Kiryat Anavim, where he worked as a physician. He was probably the one who brought his father’s cremated ashes to the Land of Israel, as well as those of his mother, Hannah, and his sister, Gertrude, who had died in 1936. In doing so, Edgar Warburg fulfilled the wishes of his father, who asked that his remains be reinterred with those of his wife and daughter in the Land of Israel.24 Just as with the burial of Greenberg, the Warburg ash urns were problematic from the perspective of Jewish religious law. The challenge for the Jewish Agency was to find a burial place that would not stir resistance from the religious and rabbinical establishment, while at the same time respecting Warburg’s personality and his public, Zionist importance. Some suggested burying him in Kfar Warburg, and Ruppin, who began his Zionist work as head of the Eretz Yisrael Office under Warburg’s direction, proposed the agricultural research station in Rehovot. Because Warburg played a decisive role in developing the station, alongside Yitzhak Elazari Volcani, this was attractive,25 but then Jewish Agency officials learned that Warburg’s will called for burying the remains of his wife and daughter alongside him. They had to inform Edgar Warburg that they could not approve the reinterment within the bounds of the station “because of religious prohibitions.”26 The offer to bury Warburg in the Degania cemetery was presented to the family in June 1939.27 Sigmund Warburg, Otto’s other son, contacted Yosef Baratz, one of the founders of the kibbutz and a leader of Histadrut, and received the kibbutz’s consent. On 21 July 1940, about two and a half years after his death, Warburg’s ashes were interred in the Degania cemetery, on land he had purchased in his work for the Palestine Land Development Company.28 In a modest funeral, he was buried in a simple grave, like the other ones there, with his wife and daughter at his side. The grave site has never attracted many visitors.

24 See interview with Fania Warburg, Edgar Warburg’s wife: KKAA, no. 25.2.3. 25 CZA, A107/78, Arthur Ruppin to Joseph Hestrin, 7 June 1939. 26 Ibid., Joseph Hestrin to Edgar Warburg, Tel Aviv, 19 June 1939. 27 Ibid., Joseph Hestrin to Arthur Ruppin, 19 June 1939. 28 Thon (1948), pp. 9–10.



Nahman Syrkin 

 99

Nahman Syrkin, a leader of Poalei Zion – “There is spirit in these bones and a victory over death” Nahman Syrkin was born in 1868 in Mogilev, Belarus, then part of the Russian Empire. He left his native land for London in 1888 and later studied in Berlin. Syrkin was active in the Hovevei Zion movement and was one of the founders of Berlin’s Association of Zionist Students. After participating in the First Zionist Congress at Basel in 1897, he published his ideas in a pamphlet in German entitled “The Jewish Problem and the Socialist Jewish State.” In 1907 he relocated to the United States, joined the Poalei Zion movement, and was one of its leaders until his death. In 1924 he died in New York and was buried there.29 In late June 1951, some twenty-seven years after Syrkin’s death, Histadrut’s coordinating committee decided the time had come to bring his remains to Israel. The committee made responsible for this included key figures in the workers’ movement in the State of Israel: Yosef Sprinzak, Yitzhak Tabenkin, Meir Ya’iri, Berl Locker, Golda Meyerson (later Meir), Zalman Shazar, and others.30 They cooperated with the Yidish Natsionaler Arbeter Farband (Jewish National Workers Alliance) in the United States, and at an early stage in the discussions, Shazar’s proposal to reinter Syrkin in the Kinneret cemetery was approved. No other options were proposed.31 After receiving a permit from the Israeli Ministry of Health, Syrkin’s coffin was disinterred in New York.32 Prior to its arrival in Israel, a notice was published: “to all who cherish his memory, everywhere, are called on the day of his coffin’s arrival to remember him and publically recall his precious heritage.”33 The Haifa Workers’ Council issued a statement declaring, “The coffin of the great visionary of the Hebrew workers’ movement, the eminent teacher ... Nahman Syrkin of blessed memory, has arrived in our city.”34 Notices in Hebrew and in Yiddish at the port of Haifa announced, “The coffin of the great visionary of the Hebrew labor movement Nahman Syrkin will be lowered from the Jaffa ship on Thursday, 6 September 1951. All of the port’s workers will stop their work at 9:00 a.m. as

29 See: Syrkin (1980), pp. 151–154; “Dr. Nahman Syrkin of blessed memory,” Hadoar, 12 September 1924. 30 “Nahman Syrkin’s remains will be brought to Israel,” Davar, 25 June 1951; “Committee for reinterring N. Syrkin’s is approved,” Davar, 29 June 1951. 31 “Remains of N. Syrkin will be brought for burial at Kinneret,” Davar, 13 July 1951. 32 LILR, VI-104-94-67, “License from the Ministry of Health for the transfer of Syrkin’s coffin,” 10 July 1951. 33 “With the arrival of N. Syrkin’s remains,” Davar, 4 September 1951. 34 Advertisement in Davar, 5 September 1951.

100 

 Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret

three horns are sounded by the port administration, and they will gather by the Jaffa ship.”35 On the morning of the funeral, 6 September 1951, hundreds of workers in Haifa and the vicinity congregated at Beit Yordei Hayam, near the port, and marched in an organized way, in blue work clothes, to receive the casket. The crowd at the dock included members of the Syrkin family, led by his daughter Marie (Miriam) Syrkin, who came from North America for the event. Standing alongside them were Sprinzak, Meyerson, Haifa’s mayor Abba Khoushy, and representatives of many kibbutzim and settlements. Work at the port came to a halt at the sound of a loud siren, and the coffin was lowered as a trumpet played. It was wrapped in the flag of Israel and the red flag of the Histadrut, and “elders and representatives of the movement” escorted it to a vehicle carrying an honor guard of Hapoel members in blue shirts. The funeral procession arrived at the Workers House on Hehalutz (The Pioneer Women) Street, and many people filed past throughout the day, including delegations of workers’ councils from various places in Israel, primarily kibbutzim and moshavim. The route to Kinneret crossed the Jezreel and Harod valleys, dotted with pioneer settlements, and Histadrut announced that “the settlements along the route are paying their last respects to the great visionary-teacher of the Socialist Zionist movement.”36 Black flags flew on the Histadrut’s institutions and on buildings belonging to the workers’ council in Afula – a city of workers and “capital of the valley” – and the coffin stopped at the Workers’ Home there. “All along the Jordan Valley, tanned young people from the collective settlements stood at the side of the road and tossed bundles of flowers on the coffin,” until it reached Kinneret.37 Syrkin’s funeral at the shores of the Sea of Galilee was attended by many veterans of the labor movement, led by Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion; ministers and numerous Knesset members from Mapai (Workers’ Party of the Land of Israel) and Mapam (United Workers Party) ; and many kibbutz and moshav members. Marie Syrkin walked behind the coffin alongside Leah Katznelson-Miron, the second wife of Berl Katznelson, next to whom Syrkin would be buried. “We have brought the coffin of N. Syrkin from foreign shores to the soil of the homeland,” Shazar said, when the coffin was placed at the entrance to Katznelson’s Ohalo institution in Beit Yerah.38 As the casket was buried, a Kinneret kibbutz member

35 CZA, KRU/17134, notice from the Haifa Workers’ Council to the workers at the port of Haifa. 36 “The remains of Syrkin will be brought for burial today,” Al Hamishmar, 6 September 1951. 37 Syrkin (1980), p. 20. 38 “Eulogy by Z. Shazar,” Davar, 7 September 1951.



Moshe Hess 

 101

read the concluding verses of Syrkin’s pamphlet “The Jewish Problem and the Socialist Jewish State,” and Ben-Gurion stated at the end, “Syrkin, your vision will be realized.”39 Two years later, many of the same participants gathered for the unveiling. The inscription on the tombstone notes that his remains were brought from New York in 1951 and states, “Here lies the awakener of Socialist Zionism Nahman Ben Eliezer Syrkin.” It continues with a quote from his pamphlet: “the nation of Israel is great, beautiful, moral, Socialist in its return to itself and in recognizing itself.”40

Moshe Hess, harbinger of Socialist Zionism – “Redeeming his coffin from being forgotten on foreign soil” Over a decade after Syrkin’s burial in Kinneret, Moshe Hess was also reinterred there. Hess was born in Bonn, Germany, in 1812 and later moved to Cologne. He was one of the leaders of socialism in Germany, publishing and editing works on the subject. In 1848 he went into political exile outside Germany, and his Jewish identity awakened. His book Rome and Jerusalem: The Last National Question (1861) explained his independent Zionist doctrine and called upon Jews to settle in the Land of Israel and establish a Socialist Jewish state. The book was received with skepticism, but it influenced later generations of Socialist Zionist leaders. Hess died in Paris in 1875 and was buried there, but his remains were later reinterred in the Deutz cemetery near Cologne, next to his parents.41 There were calls to bring Hess’s remains to Israel even before the state was established. In 1935 Davar urged various entities, including the Jewish Agency executive committee, Histadrut labor federation, and Association of German Immigrants, “to appoint a committee to contact the Jewish community in Cologne and the Zionist federation in Germany in order to carry out our duty toward our great deceased.” This call came against the background of Nazi ascendance in Germany and fear that the memory of Hess would be erased through “abuse.” It was apparently this concern that led to the removal and hiding of his tombstone. Hess had no children, so it was argued that his sole heir, the local Jewish commu-

39 “As N. Syrkin’s coffin is lowered,” Davar, 10 September 1951. 40 “Assembly at Kinneret in memory of B. Katznelson and N. Syrkin,” Davar, 6 August 1953. 41 S. L. Shneiderman, “Cologne’s dreamers of Zion saved from defilement of Ashkenaz,” Hador, 29 January 1954; for a photograph of the tombstone there, see CZA, PHG/1011928.

102 

 Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret

nity, was duty-bound “to bring Moshe Hess to burial in the Land of Israel as befits the prophet of the revival and the first of the lovers of Zion in the West.”42 After the end of World War II and the establishment of the State of Israel, this advocacy resumed. Gezel Kressel, Hess’s bibliographer, suggested in 1953 that the Israeli reparations officials in Cologne should determine whether Hess’s grave had survived.43 Members of the Spinoza House in Haifa proposed reburying Hess in their city on the eightieth anniversary of his death, and they even discussed with the Haifa Municipality the need to find a suitable burial place on Mount Carmel,44 echoing recent efforts to bring Herzl’s remains to Haifa. In July 1954, however, Ben-Zion Yisraeli – a member of Kibbutz Kinneret and a Second Aliyah pioneer in the Jordan Valley – asked Berl Locker, the chairman of the Jewish Agency and a member of the Zionist executive committee, to take the lead in bringing Hess’s remains to Kinneret.45 The idea emerged after the burial of Syrkin (1951) and, earlier, of Rachel Katznelson (1934). A letter from Kinneret connected the three: “Moshe Hess – harbinger of Socialist Zionism; Syrkin – the reviver; and Berl – the fulfiller.”46 Yisraeli argued that the time had come “to redeem his [Hess’s] bones from the soil of Germany,” and he urged that Israeli reparations officials in Germany be mobilized for this mission. “On behalf of Kinneret and in the name of Berl’s Ohalo,” Yisraeli wrote to Locker proposing that Hess be buried in the Kinneret cemetery “adjacent to the graves of Berl Katznelson and Nahman Syrkin.”47 The delay in effecting the transfer was due to political struggles within the Jewish Agency executive committee and objections by various factions, including the Progressive Party and the religious parties. Of particular import was the opposition mounted by Ahdut Avodah–Poalei Zion, which refused to consider Kinneret as “the sole pantheon for the thinkers of the labor movement.”48 In 1956 the

42 P. M. Frenkel, “Bring the bones of Moshe Hess!” Davar, 22 January 1935. 43 “Bones of Moshe Hess will be brought [to Israel],” Davar, 25 June 1953. 44 CZA, S5/10365, memorandum, spring 1954, Mount Carmel; ibid, Spinoza House to WZO, 20 May 1954; “Hess’s remains to be brought [to Israel],” Maariv, 6 December 1954. In addition to Mount Carmel, proposals were made to bury Hess in Jerusalem or in Kfar Hess, an agricultural settlement named for him. 45 CZA, S5/10365, A. Tzeberbaum to Zvi Luria, 7 September 1961. 46 LILR, VI-208-1-12195, Kvutzat Kinneret to Mordechai Namir, 6 June 1956. 47 CZA, S5/10365, Ben-Zion Yisraeli to Berl Locker, 6 July 1953. 48 LILR, VI-208-1-12195, M. Hadash to Berl Locker, 26 May 1956. The opposition by Ahdut Avodah–Poalei Zion may have been ideological, stemming from tensions between branches of the Zionist left. The movement’s leaders may also have preferred to see the cemeteries of Tel Yosef and Ein Harod as their ideological focus. On Ein Harod’s cemetery see Bar Gal (2011); Bar Gal and Azaryahu (1997).



Moshe Hess 

 103

Jewish Agency resumed discussions on the matter. Chairman Nahum Goldmann reviewed the dilemmas and disagreements regarding Hess’s place of burial. He noted that “one old proposal is to bring him to Kinneret, where the graves of Berl and Syrkin are located. Since they are his pupils, it is suitable for their teacher to be buried near them,” but he also felt that Hess could be buried on Mount Herzl. Eliyahu Dubkin wanted to approve the Kinneret site because “it is not necessary to weigh down Mount Herzl with other people.” Zvi Lurie, head of the agency’s Organization Department, hoped to set a quota limiting the number of Zionist leaders brought to Israel for reinterment. He was particularly troubled in regard to Ze’ev Jabotinsky: “Imagine what would happen here,” he said; “There would be pilgrimages to Jabotinsky’s grave with ceremonies and buses.” Goldmann himself was in favor of burying Hess on Mount Herzl: “Imagine that Borochov is buried elsewhere and there is also pilgrimage there. It is inconceivable that some preeminent people, who laid the foundations of Zionism, will be in the private domain of someone.” He strongly opposed burying Hess at Kinneret, but it was finally decided, by a single vote, to reinter him in the Jordan Valley.49 In August 1961 members of Histadrut’s executive committee held a decisive meeting. They decided that Hess’s remains would arrive in Israel on 11 October and the funeral would be conducted at Kinneret the following day. Zalman Shazar and Moshe Sharett were asked to form a public committee to plan the service and organize the “educational-informational activity around it.” Mordechai Hadash, a Kinneret member and board member of Ohalo, was to travel to Cologne to arrange the transfer. It was also decided to place the tombstone on Hess’s grave before the anniversary of his death in 1962, to mark one hundred years since the publication of Rome and Jerusalem.50 In October 1961 Hess’s remains were disinterred, along with those of his parents, David and Janet. A memorial assembly was held in Cologne’s synagogue, where “the Jews of the city bid farewell to their great son Moshe Hess, and the leaders of German Social Democrats from the father of their party.” Willy Eichler, a senior member of the German Social Democratic Party, said in a speech, “Hess’s dream was fulfilled in the State of Israel, which is helping to build a Socialist society in the world.”51 In Lod, Histadrut secretary Aharon Becker and representatives of the public committee for bringing Hess’s remains received the coffin, which was wrapped

49 CZA, S5/10365, copy of the protocol of a meeting of the Jewish Agency Executive, 4 June 1956. 50 LILR, VI-208-1-12195, summary of a meeting on the reinterment of Hess’s remains, 2 August 1961. 51 “Cologne bids farewell to Moshe Hess,” Davar, 9 October 1961.

104 

 Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret

in an Israeli flag adorned with red ribbons.52 In Tel Aviv the casket was placed in the courtyard of Histadrut headquarters, where Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion paid his respects.53 Becker said in his eulogy that bringing the coffin was “an opportunity for the workers to strengthen their belief in Hess’s ideas, which became an integral part of the social and ideological doctrine of the Labor Party.” Sharett asserted that, “we are today redeeming his coffin from being forgotten on foreign soil; we integrate his grave into the systems of our movement’s past. We today add an initial link in the glorious chain of our visionaries, thinkers, path breakers, and recently – those fulfilling our Socialist movement.”54 Following the ceremony in Tel Aviv, the funeral procession set out for the Jordan Valley, making stops at several symbolic sites. Wreaths of flowers were placed on the coffin in Kfar Hess, and a representative of the moshav delivered a eulogy.55 The convoy also stopped at Tzemach, the memorial for those who fell during the War of Independence. Menachem Rolel, head of the regional council, declared, “The settlements of the Jordan Valley are proud that Hess’s bones will be buried on the banks of the Sea of Galilee ... by bringing the coffin of Moshe Hess of blessed memory to the memorial site in Tzemach, he is resting on national land saturated with the blood of those who fought for Israel’s independence.”56 The coffin arrived at Ohalo and was received by residents of Kinneret and the surrounding area. “Today the remains of a great pilot, a pilot of time, will be laid in Kinneret’s soil,”57 declared a speaker at the funeral. IDF soldiers shoveled dirt onto the grave, and local children placed wreaths of flowers on it. Hadash, a Third Aliyah immigrant and one of the founders of Degania, observed that Hess’s burial fulfilled a wish to unite “Moshe Hess, the herald of Socialist Zionism; Nahum Syrkin, the enthusiastic awakener; and Berl Katznelson, the authority for the practical fulfillment of our movement.” He also noted that the cemetery was “becoming the center for prominent figures in the nation and labor movement, not only because of our wishes and intentions but primarily as a result of their own desire and that of the entire movement, based on the essence of the connection and attitude toward the forerunners and toward Kinneret – the breeding

52 “Coffin of Moshe Hess to arrive this evening at the airport in Lod,” Davar, 9 October 1961. 53 For pictures of the ceremony and the rest of the funeral, see the pamphlet published by Histadrut, With the Reinterment of Moshe Hess (1962), p. 192. 54 “Moshe Hess was brought to eternal rest in Kvutzat Kinneret,” Davar, 11 October 1961; LILR, VI-208-1-12195, speeches delivered during Moshe Hess’s funeral, 10 October 1961. 55 “Moshe Hess’s coffin to be buried in Kinneret cemetery,” Al Hamishmar, 6 October 1961. 56 “Moshe Hess brought to eternal rest in Kvutzat Kinneret,” Davar, 11 October 1961. 57 Moshe Aram, “A great utopian,” in “With the reinterment of Moshe Hess” (1962), pp. 18–20.



Dov Ber Borochov 

 105

ground of the movement and its path.”58 Al Hamishmar wrote that, “The colorful Golan mountains, the tranquil Sea of Galilee, the cemetery shaded by the wide carob treetops, cypress and date palm trees, and the enterprises of the Socialist society being fulfilled in the Jordan Valley, constitute a symbol and historical reward for the author of Rome and Jerusalem.”59

Dov Ber Borochov – From Babi Yar to Kinneret Dov Ber Borochov was one of the most important thinkers in Socialist Zionism, and a founder and leader of the Poalei Zion party. Born in 1881 in Ukraine, then part of the Russian Empire, he joined the Russian Social Democratic Party but left for the United States after being arrested by the Russian authorities. He later returned to Russia, where he fell ill and died in December 1917, soon after the October revolution. He was buried in the Lukyanovka Jewish cemetery in Babi Yar, near Kiev. The transfer of Borochov’s remains from the Soviet Union, across the Iron Curtain, demanded extensive diplomatic efforts by the State of Israel, led by its second president, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi. In 1954, the Association of Russian Immigrants in Israel initiated a symbolic project to retrieve the remains of the leaders of Russian Zionism. A delegation met with President Ben-Zvi and asked him to urge the government to take “steps to intercede with the Soviet authorities to gain their consent for reinterring Borochov and all of the other prominent Zionist leaders who died in Russia.”60 The president agreed to help. He was particularly interested in bringing the remains of two people: his friend Dov Ber Borochov, and Yemenite poet Rabbi Shalom Shabazi61 (d. ca. 1720), in whom he was interested because of his study of Mizrachi Jewish communities and Yemenites in particular. Ben-Zvi wrote cautiously that, “according to what I know, there is no guarantee that the authorities in the Soviet Union or Yemen will consent to our requests, and thus the government’s decision on this matter is only declarative.”62

58 Shmuel Hadash, “Kinneret cemetery as an eternal resting place for leaders of the nation and the movement,” in With the Reinterment of Moshe Hess (1962), p. 30. 59 “Moshe Hess – to eternal rest, by the graves of N. Syrkin and B. Katznelson,” Al Hamishmar, 11 October 1961. 60 “Seeking to bring the bones of Jabotinsky, Borochov, and Chlenov,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 31 August 1954. 61 Yisrael Yeshayahu, “On transferring the remains of the poet Shabazi to Israel,” Haaretz, 9 June 1952. 62 ISA, N-9/2, letter from the president of the State of Israel, no addressee, 10 September 1954.

106 

 Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret

Other public figures from the left joined the campaign for Borochov’s remains. In 1954, during a cornerstone ceremony for a cultural center named for Borochov in Kibbutz Mishmar Hanegev, Yosef Sprinzak told how he had met him fifty years earlier and said, “it will be a great holiday for Israel when it becomes possible to bring Borochov’s remains to Israel and bury them in Mishmar Hanegev.”63 Sprinzak hinted that Borochov’s precise place of burial was unknown and that it was unclear how the Soviet authorities would respond to the request. Ben-Zvi learned from Jewish immigrants who arrived from the USSR that it was indeed possible to identify the grave site, but he and Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett were uncertain about “whether it would be best to approach the USSR government for a license to transfer his body.”64 In mid-1960 Ben-Zvi received information from an anonymous source that the large tombstone covering Borochov’s grave was incorrectly placed and leaning on its side.65 This information, along with growing public interest, led, Dov’s son, David, to ask for the president’s help in repairing the neglected grave.66 Ben-Zvi referred the matter to Aryeh Harel, the Israeli ambassador in Moscow,67 and several weeks later Harel responded that Israeli diplomats visiting Kiev had located the tomb and asked the guard at the cemetery to right the stone and tend to the grave. In late 1962, however, the authorities in Kiev decided to clear the Jewish cemetery to use the space for other purposes. This stirred an uproar among the families of the deceased who lived in Israel,68 but it also presented an opportunity to transfer the coffins. Ben-Zvi wrote urgently to Israel’s ambassador in the USSR, asking for advice on the best course of action. It was suggested that the Borochov family ask the Kiev authorities to permit the transfer of the casket to Israel,69 but ultimately an official request was sent by the president of Israel to the Soviet authorities. Ben-Zvi summoned the ambassador of the USSR in Israel, Mikhail Bodrov, and handed him an official request for the transfer of Borochov’s coffin on humanitarian grounds.70 The letter, in Hebrew and in Russian, was passed on

63 “Cornerstone for Borochov Culture Center,” Davar, 4 January 1954. 64 ISA, HZ-3/2416, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi to Moshe Sharett, 2 May 1956. 65 ISA, N-8/2, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi to Y. Zrubavel, 28 August 1960. For a photo of the tombstone, see Zrubavel (1964), p. 89; it was later determined that the tombstone was in the correct place, leaning against Borochov’s original grave; ISA, N-8/2, D. Bartov to Y. Zrubavel, 26 September 1960. 66 Ibid., David Borochov to Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, 8 November 1960. 67 Ibid., Yitzhak Ben-Zvi to A. Harel, 15 November 1960. 68 “Kiev cemetery,” Herut, 23 June 1963. 69 ISA, N-8/2, David Bartov to Yosef Tekoa, 12 December 1962. 70 Ibid., David Bartov to David Borochov, 13 February 1962; Carmel (1967), pp. 201–202.



Dov Ber Borochov 

 107

to Leonid Ilyich  Brezhnev, chair of the  presidium  of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, so that he could exercise his “high authority” to facilitate the transfer of Borochov’s remains.71 The letter said: My very dignified sir. According to articles published recently in the newspapers, the old cemetery in Kiev is about to be closed since its land is earmarked for the construction of housing. These articles say that the remains buried in the cemetery will be transferred in accordance with the requests of family members to the new cemetery in Kiev. This information stirred unrest and concern among the extensive family living in Israel, and in particular troubled the widow, son, and daughter of the late Dov Ber Borochov. As far as I know, there are no members of the close family living today in Kiev. Borochov’s wife, who is now 80 years old, turned to me with a poignant request to help in transferring her husband’s remains to Israel in order to bury them in the cemetery where she will presumably be laid to rest.72

In early March, the ambassador of the Soviet Union visited President Ben-Zvi and informed him that Brezhnev had approved the request.73 The two sides agreed to keep this approval secret, and when the ambassador left, the president broke into tears. Ben-Zvi did not want to turn the funeral into a political event – “there is no need to make a party ritual out of Borochov. He should be buried in Jerusalem” – and said that Borochov’s children asked to bury him in “the pantheon on Mount Herzl.”74 Nevertheless, it was ultimately decided to bury him in the heart of Socialist pioneering, in the Kinneret cemetery. Borochov’s coffin was flown from Kiev to Rome, where it was received by a special delegation from Israel, including David Borochov and Zalman Shazar.75 In early April, the plane bearing the coffin landed in Lod and was received by members of the Borochov family and many dignitaries. Wrapped in both Israeli and Histadrut flags, the casket was brought to Histadrut headquarters in Tel Aviv and attended by a series of honor guards composed of “the elders of the labor movement,” Histadrut members, and representatives of the pioneering youth movements.76 The funeral procession stopped at the Shfayim, Gan Shmuel, Ein Shemer, and Barkai kibbutzim. Near Netanya, a delegation led by Mayor Oved Ben Ami went to salute the coffin, and one from the Shomer Hatzair’s educational center

71 “Remains of Dov Ber Borochov en route from Kiev to Israel,” Davar, 29 March 1963. 72 ISA, N-8/2, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi to L. I. Brezhnev, 19 February 1963. 73 Ibid., summary, no author cited, 1 April 1963. 74 Carmel (1967), p. 168. 75 “Borochov’s coffin to arrive this evening,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 1 April 1963. 76 “Ber Borochov to eternal rest today at Kinneret,” Davar, 3 April 1963.

108 

 Chapter 5 Reinterment in the Cemeteries of Degania and Kinneret

at Kibbutz Lehavot Haviva laid a wreath “to the great teacher.” Many waited for the coffin at the Workers’ Home in Afula and also near Merhavia, Ein Harod, Tel Yosef, Geva, and Kfar Yehezkel.77 The casket arrived at Ohalo in the afternoon and was placed at the entrance to the institution with a quote from Borochov hanging above it: “Zionism is not just an historical ideal, but an urgent need for the masses of the Jewish people.” The first eulogist was Yitzhak Tabenkin, who asserted, “The voice of the late Borochov will be heard more powerfully from Kinneret than from his grave in Kiev.” After mentioning the massacre of Kiev’s Jews at Babi Yar during World War II, Tabenkin noted the symbolism of bringing the coffin from there. Shazar added that, “his grave will be a strong symbol for our brothers behind the Iron Curtain and a stronghold for Zionist loyalty. The members of Kinneret must guard this precious deposit placed in their hands for the sake of the masses who will return to the homeland and visit the grave and fulfill Borochov’s teachings.”78 Ben-Gurion scattered the first clods of dirt on the grave, adjacent to those of Katznelson, Syrkin, and Hess. Ben-Gurion’s participation in the funeral and his involvement in the entire operation (even if behind the scenes) engendered some criticism. How could someone who was strongly opposed to bringing the remains of Jews for burial in Israel (in the context of the dispute over Jabotinsky, discussed in Chapter 7) play such an active role in Borochov’s funeral and even eulogize him? “Borochov was a great Jew,” one of the leaders of the Herut opposition movement said, “but bringing his remains reminds us that when the matter depends on the good will of a foreign government – even the government of the Soviet Union – it is possible to redeem the bones of great Jews from alien soil. However, when the matter depends on the good will of the government of Israel, it is unwilling to bring the remains of Jabotinsky here.”79One of Maariv’s readers wondered, “What is this discrimination between one grave and another?” This stirred a wave of sympathetic responses that sought to leverage the success of the Borochov transfer to help bring Jabotinsky’s remains from the United States, ostensibly a much simpler mission.80 Ben-Gurion stepped down as prime minister several weeks later, transferring the reins of government to Levi Eshkol on 16 June 1963, and this political turning point led to the fulfillment of Jabotinsky’s will soon thereafter.

77 “Dov Ber Borochov’s coffin buried in Kinneret,” Al Hamishmar, 4 April 1963. 78 “Ber Borochov to eternal rest at Kinneret,” Davar, 4 April 1963. 79 “When it depends on a foreign government,” Maariv, 31 March 1963. 80 Eliyahu Glazer, “Discrimination between one grave and another,” Maariv, 3 April 1963; Moshe Bachmat, “Demand to bring the remains of Jabotinsky,” Maariv, 7 April 1963.



Dov Ber Borochov 

 109

The tombstone that had covered Borochov’s grave in the Kiev cemetery was sent to Israel separately. It was a square black stone with Borochov’s name etched in Yiddish on all four sides. The original plan was to transfer it to Kinneret,81 but there was concern that its color and “exilic” language would stand out in the uniform landscape of that cemetery and overshadow the graves of Katznelson, Syrkin, and Hess. Sculptor Moshe Ziffer planned a new tombstone, and the one from Kiev was designated for a Labor Museum that was never built.82 The unveiling on 7 December 1964 was attended by the president of Israel, and Borochov’s widow, Leova, unveiled a tombstone inscribed: “Ber Borochov, who laid the foundations of labor Zionist and its teachings, a thinker and pathfinder.”83 Yaakov Zrubavel describes how the grave had already become a pilgrimage site: “Some in a vehicle, some by bus, some in cars and others by foot, from all corners of Israel ... the masses come to the teacher’s grave.”84

81 ISA, N-8/2, notes from meeting of the public committee for erecting a tombstone at Dov Ber Borochov’s grave, 4 May 1964. 82 “Unveiling ceremony at Ber Borochov’s grave – on 47th anniversary of his death,” Davar, 11 November 1964. The tombstone was eventually placed at the Efal Educational Center, east of Tel Aviv, where it remains till today. 83 “Unveiling of B. Borochov’s tombstone today at Kinneret,” Davar, 7 December 1964. 84 Zrubavel (1964), pp. 92–93.

Chapter 6 Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild – From Paris to Ramat Hanadiv In the late nineteenth century, Baron Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild began to assist the struggling First Aliyah settlements with generous grants and support for developing an advanced agricultural economy. He also helped build new settlements and bolster local industry, and he supported work in the fields of education, religion, and the Hebrew language.1 In November 1934 Rothschild died and was buried in the famous Père Lachaise cemetery in Paris.2 He requested in his will that his remains, and those of his wife Ada (Adelheid), be brought to the Land of Israel, and he dedicated an exclusive burial plot for this on Mount Carmel, which would become a national historic site. On the first anniversary of Rothschild’s death, his eldest son, James, announced the family’s intention to fulfill the baron’s request.3 Some family members thought he should be buried in Jerusalem because, “in the holy city of Jerusalem, people will come to prostrate themselves on his grave, where his grandeur will inspire future generations.”4 In late 1935, however, the newspapers were already reporting that officials of the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association (PICA) were looking for a suitable site for the baron’s burial plot in the Zichron Ya’akov area. The plan was to build a synagogue adjacent to the grave site, where a minyan of Torah scholars would regularly conduct prayers.5 PICA’s committee included the artist Prof. Hermann Struck, a recipient of Rothschild’s generous patronage. Davar reported that, “The committee looked for a high location, with a view over the expanse of Samaria and the settlements built by the work of the great departed one.”6 James de Rothschild visited and approved the proposed grave site at Umm al-Aleq, south of Zichron Ya’akov. The newspapers reported that the site would be called “Ramat Hanadiv.” Some would later claim that the baron himself had selected this location when riding in the Hotem Hacarmel area during his last tour in the Yishuv, and that he said, “I want

1 Aaronsohn (2000). 2 “Details of Rothschild’s funeral in Paris,” Doar Hayom, 14 November 1934. 3 “Remains of Baron Rothschild to the Land of Israel,” Ha’ivri, 21 November 1935. 4 Hermoni (1926), p. 111. 5 “Reinterment of Baron Rothschild,” Davar, 18 December 1935. 6 Aryeh Samsonov, “Memorial for the father of the Yishuv,” Davar, 6 November 1939. DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-007



A state funeral 

 111

my grave site to be at this spot. Here will be my last resting place when the time comes, for me and for my wife.”7 Despite these preparations, the transfer of the coffin was delayed. On the fourth anniversary of Rothschild’s death, in 1938, the participants at a memorial gathering in the local synagogue demanded “the transfer of Baron Rothschild’s bones to Zichron Ya’akov, in accordance with his will.”8 The delay did not prevent planning for the burial site and the grave itself,9 and at a meeting in Paris, the design of architect Uriel (Otto) Schiller was chosen; he was also hired to implement the design.10 Schiller invited landscape architect Shlomo Weinberg (Aran) from Kibbutz Yagur to help him design a garden that would stretch across dozens of acres and feature “a beautiful mausoleum, with a twenty-eight-meter tower in the middle [built] of marble from the Land of Israel, with an eternal light at the top.”11 Schiller’s design was chosen because of its combination of the tomb with natural greenery, ornamental gardens, and rows of trees. In 1938, a road was paved to the site and an area of about 1,200 dunams was fenced.12 But due to the outbreak of World War II, and with the increasing tensions in the Land of Israel and, later, the War of Independence, the baron’s will was only realized after the founding of the state.

A state funeral At the end of 1953, Israeli newspapers reported that the baron’s last wishes would be fulfilled, and he would be buried in Israel’s soil in April 1954, twenty years after his death.13 This announcement came after the Rothschild family had officially requested the assistance of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. His succes-

7 “Burial site for the Famous Benefactor,” Davar, 22 March 1954. For this version, see Ziv (1988), p. 124. 8 “Remains of the Famous Benefactor to be transferred to Zichron Ya’akov,” Davar, 20 November 1938. 9 See, for example, Meir Ben-Uri’s plan for the tomb of Baron Rothschild, CZA, J15M\7215-1m-9m, 1945. 10 Aryeh Samsonov, “Memorial for the father of the Yishuv,” Davar, 6 November 1939; “Burial site for the Rothschilds,” Haaretz, 25 January 1954. 11 Ibid. 12 CZA, A466/1, “Ramat Hanadiv map,” 1:5,000; ibid., J15M/462, “Map of the baron’s tomb,” 1:5,000, 1947. 13 “Remains of the Benefactor will be brought to Israel in early April,” Haboker, 29 December 1953; A. Y. Benet, “Coffin of the Famous Benefactor will be brought to Israel,” Haboker, 21 January 1954.

112 

 Chapter 6 Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild – From Paris to Ramat Hanadiv

sor’s government decided in March 1954 that the reinterment of Rothschild would be a state project.14 PICA would assist in preparations for the funeral as the family’s representative in Israel, but would not officially participate in it.15 These announcements stirred great public interest. The head of the Zichron Ya’akov council demanded a role for the town in the funeral: Zichron Ya’akov regards itself as a principal partner in the life’s work of Baron Edmond de Rothschild and as a primary agent in guiding his initial steps and strong connection in building the country. It is clear that his wish to be buried in Zichron Ya’akov speaks for itself. Therefore, we believe that we have the right and honor to take part in carrying out the ceremony and bringing the remains of the distinguished deceased to eternal rest.16

The Shomrim (Watchmen) organization also believed it deserved to play a role: “[The Shomrim] and our president Mr. Abraham Shapira, who had the honor of accompanying the baron on all of his trips in the country as his bodyguard, hereby request to allow us to pay our final respects to the baron, of blessed memory.”17 Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Isaac Halevi Herzog insisted that no wreaths of flowers be placed during the ceremony and that a cantor and choir sing psalms to “provide all of the splendor and glory befitting the father of the Yishuv and his righteous wife, [both] of blessed memory, in Zion, their land of delight.”18 The rabbi of Zichron Ya’akov demanded that the ship carrying the coffins cast anchor and come to a halt on the Jewish Sabbath so as not to violate its sanctity.19 At this stage, in February–March 1954, the prime minister’s office was involved in the intensive planning of the funeral program. The government’s Names Committee approved the new name “Ramat Hanadiv,” replacing the Arab name Umm al-Aleq. 20Construction began on the tomb and the area around it, using local stones: “The burial site has black basalt from the Sea of Galilee area, various types of marble from the Galilee, building blocks from Samaria, and even stone from the hills of Jerusalem.”21 Before installing the coffins, a minyan blessed

14 ISA, G-6/391, T. Kollek to S. Arazi, 15 December 1953. 15 ISA, G-6/1299, Ruth Akavia to M. Avidor, 18 December 1953; the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association (PICA) was founded by Edmond James de Rothschild and was headed by his son, James Armand de Rothschild. 16 ISA, G-6/391, A. Rapaport to S. Arazi, 17 January 1954. 17 Ibid., secretary of the Hebrew Watchmen organization in Israel to PICA, 17 February 1954. 18 Ibid., Yitzhak Halevi Herzog to Max Rowe, 10 February 1954. 19 Ibid., Yekutiel Azrieli to Max Rowe, 11 February 1954. 20 ISA, G-8/291, Ben-Zion Eshel to PICA, 29 March 1954.. 21 “Burial site under construction for the ‘Famous Benefactor,’” Yedioth Ahronoth, 1 March 1954.



Paris and Marseille 

 113

Ramat Hanadiv, and the thirty-five men and women of the Zichron Ya’akov burial society circled the grave seven times.22 In the forty-six settlements built or funded by Rothschild, sacks of soil were ceremoniously filled in preparation for the funeral, as was done for the interments of Ussishkin and Herzl, and representatives of the communities brought them to the site.23 In Hadera, where the baron had helped drain the swamps, they filled a small bag with the historic “Khan” soil, where the first pioneers of Hadera had lived. In the public garden in Pardes Hanna, which Rothschild also founded, there was a ceremony of “uncovering sacks of earth” from the soil of the settlement.24 Shmuel Zanwill Kahane, the director-general of the Ministry of Religion, sent dirt from David’s Tomb on Mount Zion.25

Paris and Marseille On 21 March 1954, the navy warship Mivtach sailed for France. The dispatch of a navy ship and the participation of representatives of the State of Israel and IDF soldiers at ceremonies in France underlined the official nature of the enterprise.26 There was extensive media coverage in Israel and in France, and the entire ceremony was widely photographed and filmed.27 After several days at sea, the ship anchored at the port of Marseille.28 When the delegation arrived in Paris, the Israeli ambassador to France, Yaakov Tsur, delivered a letter from the prime minister of Israel to the leaders of the Jewish community that stated, “We have assigned our emissaries to receive from you the coffins of Baron Rothschild and his wife, which you have faithfully guarded for twenty years.”29 In the ambassador’s preliminary meetings with members of the Rothschild family, the latter

22 “Coffins of the Famous Benefactor and his wife to arrive today aboard Mivtach,” Haaretz, 5 April 1954. 23 “Soil of Israel,” Haaretz, March 28, 1954; SSJFA, VT AX48, 66. 24 “Sacks of earth from settlements in Samaria brought to grave site of the baron and his wife,” Haboker, 4 April 1954; “Three moments of silence as the baron’s coffin arrives,” Zmanim, 5 April 1954. 25 “Coffins of the Famous Benefactor and his wife,” Hatzofe, 6 April 1954. 26 ISA, HZ-3/2416, A. Gilboa to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, 17 January 1954; ibid., HZ-2/180, Zeev Shek to A. Gilboa, 1 February 1954. 27 ISA, G-6/391, “Proposal D,” 25 February 1954. 28 IDFA, 1965/55, 1200, S. Syrkin to the commander of the navy, no date; “Navy ship to bring the Famous Benefactor’s remains”, Zmanim, 21 March 1954; Ya’akov Bornstein, “Mivtach received in Marseille with 21-gun salute,” Herut, 29 March 1954. 29 ISA, G-7/391, undated draft, no author cited; Tsur (1968), pp. 57–59.

114 

 Chapter 6 Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild – From Paris to Ramat Hanadiv

asked to “minimize the publicity” surrounding the event, perhaps thinking that the transfer of a French citizen’s coffin for burial in a foreign country might stir controversy. But the Israeli ambassador told them, “Edmond de Rothschild no longer belongs to the family; he belongs to history. No one in France will question the transfer of his remains to Israel.”30 A disinterment ceremony was held at Père Lachaise cemetery. The 1,500 participants included delegates from the Academy of the Arts, where Rothschild had been a member; representatives of the Legion of Honor, in which he held the rank of commander; and researchers from the Institute for Physical and Chemical Biology, which he founded. An honor guard stood to each side of the two coffins, a row of children on one side and a row of IDF Navy soldiers on the other. The children were pupils at the Rothschild Orphanage in Paris whose parents had been killed in the death camps in Eastern Europe; they stood opposite the soldiers who would accompany the coffin to the State of Israel.31 The caskets were

Figure 14: The coffin of Baron Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild in Père Lachaise cemetery, Paris, April 1954. Photograph by Daniel Frank Photo (JNFPA).

30 ISA, HZ-3/2416, Y. Tsur to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 4 April 1954. 31 L. Lenman, “Between two crosses,” Haboker, 5 April 1954.



“Here lies Baron Edmond de Rothschild” 

 115

brought by train from Paris to Marseille, and after a religious ceremony the participants went to the dock where the warship was anchored. The remains were transferred to the Israeli Navy, and a crane placed a platform and the coffins on the deck of the ship. The sailors stood at attention and, after a siren of honor, the Rothschild family flag was raised on the mainmast.32

“Here lies Baron Edmond de Rothschild” There was great public excitement as the ship approached Israel. The Ministry of Education declared “Rothschild Month” and sent an announcement to school principals, teachers, and pupils stating that, “on the day the remains of Baron Rothschild arrive, the Yishuv will show its respect in memory of ‘its father’ at a general assembly.”33 The Jewish National Fund issued a special stamp and sent out armbands with a picture of the baron, which many people wore on the day of the funeral.34 The Mivtach set anchor at Haifa on 5 May, and the nineteen rounds fired in Rothschild’s honor marked the beginning of an impressive funeral procession replete with symbolism.35 Members of the family, government ministers, the mayor of Haifa, members of the consular corps, and invited guests assembled at the wharf.36 A crane lowered the platform with the two coffins, and four sailors stood around them. The minister of the interior, Israel Rokach, “who welcomed the first contact of the remains of the baron and his wife with the soil of Israel,”37 stated that “the people living in Zion today receive the bones of two of its dear ones, who did great things to establish the state and did not live to see its creation.”38

32 IDFA, 1955/549, 88, Protocol Department to Israeli ambassador in Paris, 2 March 1954; “Warship carrying the coffin of the Famous Benefactor sails to Israel,” Herut, 1 April 1954. 33 ISA, GL-6/1299, “Reinterment of Baron Benjamin Rothschild, of blessed memory,” 30 March 1954. 34 “JNF stamp,” Davar, 5 April 1954. 35 “Coffins of the baron and his wife arrive,” Haaretz, 6 April 1954; the funeral was documented in several films. See, for example, SSJFA, T00411, 1–3. 36 ISA, G-11/391, Operation Benefactor – appendixes for the funeral of the Famous Benefactor, 4, 21 March 1954. 37 “Coffins of the baron and his wife arrive,” Haaretz, 6 April 1954. 38 “Coffins of the Famous Benefactor and his wife to be buried today in Zichron Ya’akov,” Davar, 6 April 1954.

116 

 Chapter 6 Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild – From Paris to Ramat Hanadiv

Figure 15: The Rothschild coffins being lowered from the navy warship Mivtach at the dock of Haifa, 6 April 1954. Unknown photographer (CZA).

Police cadets, led by an officer with a drawn sword, carried the coffins to a car that was met by a police honor guard at the Haifa city hall. Delegations of students and teachers awaited with flags wrapped in black (school was canceled in Haifa that day). Youth organizations and a large crowd had gathered in front of the building. The coffins were brought in and placed on a platform adorned in black that supported candles in black-wrapped candlesticks. Pictures of the baron and the baroness were the only backdrop as about forty thousand people filed by the coffins.39 The next day, the funeral procession passed near Bat Shlomo and Shfeya and entered Zichron Yaa’kov – all settlements built and developed with the baron’s financial support.40 In Zichron Ya’akov the coffins were removed from their vehi-

39 ISA, HZ-2/180, S. Arazi to Y. Tsur, 11 March 1954. 40 ISA, G-11/391, Operation Benefactor – appendixes for the funeral of the Famous Benefactor, 4, 22 March 1954.



“Here lies Baron Edmond de Rothschild” 

 117

cles and placed in front of the central synagogue, where a short ceremony was conducted with the participation of local residents and schoolchildren; in the days leading up to this event, the pupils learned about Rothschild’s work and his contribution to establishing the Yishuv. James de Rothschild recited the kaddish prayer, and Chief Rabbi Herzog read from the Book of Psalms. In keeping with Orthodox Jewish custom, no eulogies were delivered because it was the month of Nissan.41 The climax was the burial of the couple in the new “mausoleum.” The invited guests included the state’s leaders, dignitaries, and people associated with the baron, his work, and his settlements.42 Police cadets wearing dark uniforms, white belts, and hats with white ribbons carried the coffins on their shoulders toward a raised platform with a canopy stretched above it. Each coffin was draped with a brown cloth on which five arrows were embroidered – the symbol of the Rothschild family. The procession following the coffin was led by family members and almost all of the state’s leaders, including the president, prime minister, ministers, Knesset speaker, Supreme Court president, IDF chief of staff, and David Ben-Gurion (who came from Sde Boker), as well as representatives of the diplomatic corps and other invitees, all of whom were provided seating.43 The rest of the crowd stood facing the raised platform throughout the ceremony. Following a short religious service, which included the singing of psalms by a men’s choir and a few words by Chief Rabbi Herzog, in which he asserted that Rothschild was “an instrument of Divine Providence, like Cyrus the king of Persia in his day,” James de Rothschild recited kaddish. The funeral procession then moved toward the tomb, this time led by “long rows of farmers, old and young, carrying white bags with the names of the settlements built with the baron’s support or on his land. Old-timers from Rishon LeZion and from Zichron Ya’akov, furrowed with wrinkles and white hair, walked alongside a youth from Beit Keshet, with a backpack on his shoulder and a ‘tembel’ hat.”44 The grave at Ramat Hanadiv was a unique work of architecture unprecedented in the history of Zionism and the State of Israel. It combined modesty and splendor, nature and culture, universal and Jewish elements, all adorned in black and white. The mausoleum was set low to the ground and did not tower above its surroundings, and the path leading to it was also modest. The grandeur

41 “His final path: 92 sacks of dirt will pad the resting place of Edmond de Rothschild,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 6 April 1954. 42 ISA, G-7/391, list of guests invited to the funeral. 43 ISA, G-11/391, Operation Benefactor – appendixes for the funeral of the Famous Benefactor, 11, 18 March 1954. 44 “The funeral of the baron and his wife,” Haaretz, 7 April 1954.

118 

 Chapter 6 Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild – From Paris to Ramat Hanadiv

Figure 16: The funeral of the Rothschilds in Ramat Hanadiv. Representatives from Jewish settlements carry bags of dirt to cover the couple’s caskets, 6 April 1954. Photograph by Fritz Cohn (NPC). Photograph 16

of the place became evident to the funeral participants only when they reached the monumental gate leading to the sunken garden, symmetrical and open to the skies. From the square garden, containing a cypress tree symbolic of death and remembrance, a long, curved path led to the tomb, which was carved six meters deep into the hill. The ceremonious passage to the tomb awed the visitors and cut them off from the everyday world outside. The path was intentionally winding, as if it were a natural tunnel. Immediately past the entrance to the tomb was a circular space with a perforated dome evoking the sky. The ceiling of the tomb itself bore a tiny Jewish star, sent from the Hebrew University’s collection of antiquities. At the foot of the grave, a sculpted bowl of black basalt served as a receptacle for stones that visitors would leave at the site.45 The building materials, details of the structure, and meticulous design created a majestic atmosphere and an impression of antiquity. The design of the doors, for example, was based on the doors of tombs discovered at Beit She’arim in the 1930s.

45 “Funeral of the baron and his wife,” Haaretz, 7 April 1954; Shmuel Har-Zion, “Ramat Hanadiv,” Zmanim, 5 April 1954.



“Here lies Baron Edmond de Rothschild” 

 119

Before the interment, the thousands of people participating in the ceremony were given an opportunity to file past the caskets. Only after that were the caskets buried at the end of the tomb, in a niche that journalists dubbed “the holy of holies.”46 The tombstone’s inscription reads: “Here lies Baron Edmond de Rothschild, Binyamin Ben Ze’ev Yaakov, of blessed memory, father of the Yishuv, the Famous Benefactor, 5605–5695, and his wife Baroness Adelheid de Rothschild, Ada Bat Shimon, of blessed memory, a God-fearing woman, 5613–5695.” A journalist wrote in Haboker about the ceremony that, “if the baron could have chosen a type of funeral for himself and his wife, I am sure he would have chosen the ceremony of Zichron Ya’akov.”47 Herzl Rosenblum of Yedioth Achronot compared Ramat Hanadiv to other pantheons created in the State of Israel: As we know, Nordau’s grave does not excel in any way. We’ll need someday to search for the graves of Pinsker and Ussishkin with the help of geological maps ... Weizmann’s grave [in Rehovot] – is located in a yard. Herzl’s grave might be grand – in the future. Today it is still quite neglected, and is still missing what should have been there. But the grave of the baron and his wife has splendor and thought and architecture in it. Whoever goes up to it is also uplifted from the depths of his heart.48

Ramat Hanadiv immediately became a popular site, a “holy place” to which people started to make pilgrimages or simply came to visit and enjoy the beautiful setting. The completed garden surrounding the grave incorporated many symbolic details and numerous sculptures. The iron gate installed at the entrance to Ramat Hanadiv features the Rothschild family’s coat of arms, a bronze shield flanked by a lion and a unicorn supporting three helmets with crests. On the shield itself are an eagle, a lion, and an arm with a fist clenching five arrows that represent the five sons of the founder of the dynasty, Meyer Anschel. Next to the gate, the sculptor Shoshana Traub carved a niche in the rock portraying a sun with its rays, along with clusters of grapes. A structure placed near the entrance was designed to serve as a magnificent reception room and museum devoted to Rothschild’s work, displaying pictures and objects associated with him. A large relief map was also installed, showing the more than forty settlements the baron founded or supported.49 The garden, which was intended to be open to all of the

46 “The remains of the Famous Benefactor buried in a state funeral in the Land of Israel,” Davar, 7 April 19543, 22 March 1954. 47 Shmuel Goldschmidt, “Victory ceremony,” Haboker, 7 April 1954. 48 “At the grave of the rebel millionaire,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 7 April 1954. 49 M. Ben Schachar, “At the grave site of the ‘Father of the Yishuv,’” Herut, 19 March 1954.

120 

 Chapter 6 Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild – From Paris to Ramat Hanadiv

state’s residents, included six fountains, symbolizing the founder of the dynasty and his sons.50 In 1958 the Knesset unanimously approved the Ramat Hanadiv Gardens Law. In the presence of Edmond de Rothschild, grandson of the Famous Benefactor, the minister of justice filed the law transferring ownership of the grave site and the surrounding land to the Ramat Hanadiv Gardens Company, which would be responsible for developing the memorial park around the grave site.51 The Rothschild Prizes granted to outstanding scholars by the Rothschild Foundation (Yad Hanadiv), were for a number of years awarded in a ceremony held near the baron’s grave.52 The establishment of Ramat Hanadiv as a grave site and the burial of Baron Rothschild were unique. The baron’s decision to be buried in a separate grave site created a new reality. It was both a personal and ideological choice, similar to the one made by the first president of Israel, Chaim Weizmann, who was interred at the institute that bears his name, or Ben-Gurion’s decision to be buried at Sde Boker. At a time when other notables were buried in existing cemeteries that already had a place and significance in national public life in Israel, Rothschild “designed” a grave site that became significant only because of him and would not hold anyone else after he and his wife were buried there. Unlike many other graves in this book, the managers of Ramat Hanadiv have been able to maintain its public relevance over the years, in part by combining the memorial garden around the grave with a spacious nature park, where extensive educational activities are conducted. The site attracts many people and is one of the leading tourist spots in the State of Israel.

50 “Magnificent grave site for the Famous Benefactor and his wife,” Al Hamishmar, 26 March 1954. 51 “Knesset unanimously approves the Ramat Hanadiv Gardens Law,” Davar, 26 March 1958. 52 “Rothschild Prizes go to four scholars,” Davar, 27 April 1962.

Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky – “My remains ... may not be transferred to Palestine unless by order of that country’s eventual Jewish government” Ze’ev Jabotinsky was a Zionist activist, orator, and journalist. He was born in Odessa in 1880 and raised in a middle-class Jewish family. During the First World War he co-founded the Jewish Legion of the British Army, which fought during the war. In the 1920s he became increasingly active in the new Zionist institutions formed in Palestine and was among the founders of Keren Hayesod, the Zionist fundraising body. By 1923, however, a dispute with Chaim Weizmann, president of the WZO, led him to resign from the Zionist executive committee, and he founded a new movement, the Union of Zionists-Revisionists. Both it and the New Zionist Organization (NZO) he founded in 1935 advocated for immediate establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, in contrast to the mainstream Labor Zionists, who believed in cooperating with British Mandate rule. Three principal bodies represented the movement headed by Jabotinsky in his final years: the NZO, the political branch; Beitar, the youth organization; and, eventually, the paramilitary Irgun (Irgun Tzva’i Leumi, or National Military Organization). In 1929 Jabotinsky left Palestine on a lecture tour, after which the British administration denied him re­entry into the country. He lived in the Diaspora until his death. It was during a visit in August 1940 to the Beitar camp in Hunter, New York, that he suffered a fatal heart attack. Despite Jabotinsky’s request in his will that he be buried in the Land of Israel, his wish was fulfilled only in July 1964. The delay was due to the proviso in the will that precluded transfer of the remains unless ordered by a future Jewish government. When Jabotinsky wrote this, the British ruled Palestine. But even after the Jewish state was founded, David Ben-Gurion refused to issue such a directive during all his years as prime minister. The political significance of the delay and the complex relationship of Ben-Gurion, Jabotinsky, and Menachem Begin have been studied extensively and will not be treated here.1 Instead, I discuss Jabotinsky’s reinterment in the context of the other funerals of this type.

1 Gruweis-Kovalsky (2015); Nakdimon (2002). DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-008

122 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

“Will our country become a land of graves? All of our good people should rest where they are” Jabotinsky’s funeral was held on 7 August 1940. He was buried in a bronze casket in the New Montefiore Jewish cemetery in Long Island.2 During the years following his death, his followers held annual memorial assemblies in the Land of Israel and in New York.3 The connection between his grave and the Land of Israel was maintained in various ways, including a “Jabotinsky Generation Conference” at the Maccabiah Stadium in Tel Aviv on the tenth anniversary of his death, with over twenty thousand people participating. A large wreath of “flowers of the homeland” was placed on his grave. “The wreath,” the Herut movement had declared, “will be woven from immortal flowers from every corner of the land and will be flown to the United States” together with soil from “the land of the graves of Herzl, Trumpeldor, Sarah Aaronsohn, olei hagardom [Etzel and Lehi fighters sentenced to death by the British], and victims of the revolt.”4 Symbolic “sanctity” was also transferred from New York to Israel. In July 1957, for example, a Beitar torch lit near Jabotinsky’s grave was brought by runners to the Jabotinsky House (Metzudat Ze’ev) in Tel Aviv.5 In 1960, at a memorial assembly held near the Dov Gruner monument in Ramat Gan to mark the twentieth anniversary of his death, participants buried bags of dirt brought from his grave in New York.6 In addition to the political issue – the fact that he represented the right wing of the political map when the pre-state institutions (and later those of the state) operated almost entirely under a left-wing Labor hegemony – there were questions about the correct interpretation of Jabotinsky’s will that also complicated his reinterment in Israel. The testament was written on 3 November 1935 in Paris and deposited with a notary in London, but the original handwritten will was destroyed during German bombings of the city during World War II. The only copy that survived was one handwritten by Johanna Jabotinsky, his wife, and sent to their son, Eri. The will concludes, in paragraph 5, “I want to be buried, or cremated (it is all the same to me), just wherever I happen to die, and my remains

2 For a photo of the coffin, see JIA, A-114/1/1; “Jabotinsky’s funeral in New York,” Davar, 8 August 1940. 3 For example, “Jabotinsky memorial meeting tomorrow,” Jerusalem Post, 23 July 1941; “Fifteen years since Jabotinsky’s death,” Davar, 18 July 1955. 4 CZA, KRA/6428, advertisement by the Trumpeldor Alliance in the Land of Israel, no date cited; “Tens of thousands gather to remember Z. Jabotinsky,” Maariv, 17 July 1950. 5 “Beitar’s torch,” Davar, 2 July 1958. 6 “Jabotinsky generation conference in Ramat Gan,” Davar, 25 July 1960.



“Will our country become a land of graves?” 

 123

(should I be buried outside of Palestine) may not be transferred to Palestine unless by order of that country’s eventual Jewish government.”7 One of the first to advocate fulfilling Jabotinsky’s will was Isaac Ramba, the editor of Hamashkif, who appealed to Ben-Gurion on this matter via the pages of his newspaper, the mouthpiece of the Revisionist movement, in late 1948. This call stirred a response by some of the Herut members: “Let Jabotinsky rest in distant and foreign America until a new generation arises, which from the heights of its free, complete and independent state will see the path leading to the top of the mountain. That generation will come, and it will pay the debt, and it will also atone for the sin of this generation.”8 In other words, the current government was not what Jabotinsky meant in his will, and therefore it should not be asked or expected to transfer his remains. This internal dilemma within Herut continued throughout the period. Their political isolation clashed with the wish to carry out their leader’s will and stood at the center of the dilemma. Many asked whether the party should swallow its pride and pressure the government. “It is doubtful,” Yosef Nedava believed, that Jabotinsky would “agree to be moved from his ‘Nebo’ across the sea, without being about to look out over all of Canaan, in its historical borders, as his people’s inheritance.”9 Some members of Herut hoped that even if their direct efforts to execute the will failed, public opinion would turn in that direction and the ensuing public debate would enable its fulfillment. Their leader, Menachem Begin, spoke to supporters in Jerusalem in early 1949 and stated, “We lift our eyes to the holy grave of our father Ze’ev Jabotinsky, and we swear allegiance to Hebrew Jerusalem. We also pledge that when the day comes, an order will be given by the president of Israel to bring the remains of our teacher Jabotinsky to Jerusalem.”10 Later that year Johanna Jabotinsky died and was buried next to her husband. Herut pro-

7 A handwritten copy of the will that was presented over the years by members of the Herut movement and the family is preserved at the Jabotinsky Institute, located in Jabotinsky House [Metzudat Ze’ev]. See JIA, A1-1/1/15, Yosef Lamm to Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, 7 May 1958. In 1961, as activity surrounding the transfer of Jabotinsky’s coffin to Israel heightened, Eri Jabotinsky sent the original English wording of the will to representatives of Beit Hagdudim, who tried to promote the project. In addition to the wording cited here, another version of the will states (in Hebrew), “I wish to be buried in the place of my death and please do not transfer me anywhere. I forbid the transfer of my bones to the Land of Israel unless so ordered by the president [my emphasis] of the Jewish state that is formed.” See ISA, N-9/2. 8 H. Avshalom, “The remains of the leader,” Hamashkif, 8 December 1948. 9 Nedava (1950), p. 8. “Nebo” refers to the biblical mountain from which Moses was granted a view of the Promised Land, but was not permitted to enter (Deut. 34). 10 “We will bring a new proposal to the Constituent Assembly,” Herut, 24 January 1949.

124 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

claimed that, “Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s disciples will mourn the death of Mrs. Jabotinsky, who was a loving and beloved mother for them.”11 It was clear that their coffins would remain buried together in New York until reinterred in the State of Israel. The Jewish Agency, as the executive arm of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), was apparently among the first to be lobbied on this issue. Political activists in Israel and the Diaspora pressured it to facilitate the transfer of Jabotinsky’s remains. In January 1950 the Agency’s plenum discussed the reinterment of several individuals, including Wolffsohn, Borochov, and Syrkin, and Yosef Shechtman proposed adding Jabotinsky. It was decided that the executive committee would pursue this matter with the government of Israel.12 In May 1952, during discussions of the Zionist General Council – the supreme body of the WZO – Mordechai Nurock, an MK for the Mizrahi movement, proposed retrieving the remains of several Zionist leaders, including Jabotinsky. Berl Locker, the chairman of the Jewish Agency executive committee, responded that the issue was being addressed, but he referred only to Wolffsohn.13 Later in 1952, the annual assembly of the Zionist Organization of America decided “to turn attention” to the fact that the bones of Jabotinsky were still buried in the Diaspora.14 This came in the context of pressure exerted by Zionist activists in the Diaspora. Similarly, members of the South African Zionist Federation called upon the government of Israel and the Jewish Agency to fulfill Jabotinsky’s will.15 “The question of bringing Z. Jabotinsky’s bones,” the Jewish Agency’s spokesman replied, “involves his will,” adding that the federation’s request was not brought before the Jewish Agency executive committee.16 The committee expressed “a positive attitude” toward the demand, but claimed it was unable to examine the matter in depth because it did not have access to the will.17 Over the years, a number of people attributed the delay in Jabotinsky’s reinterment to the absence

11 CZA, KRA/17172, advertisement by the Herut movement, no date cited. 12 BGA, 21380, protocol of Jewish Agency Executive meeting, 30 January 1950; CZA, correspondence between Yosef Shechtman and Leo Lauterbach, December 1951. 13 “Zionist General Council begins discussing the status,” Davar, 12 May 1952. 14 ISA, G-13/5562, decision by the Zionist Organization of America; “Remains of Jabotinsky still in the Diaspora,” Hatzofe, 1 September 1953. 15 “Johannesburg holds a huge rally in memory of Ze’ev Jabotinsky,” Herut, 18 August 1952. 16 “Jewish Agency Executive does not discuss Jabotinsky’s reinterment,” Davar, 26 September 1952. 17 “Zionist General Council decides to bring remains of Z. Jabotinsky,” Herut, 3 October 1952; “Jewish Agency Executive discusses reinterment of Jabotinsky,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 14 October 1952.



“Will our country become a land of graves?” 

 125

of a will, even though his sister, Tamar Jabotinsky Kopp, published the text of the will in the Herut newspaper in October 1952. She added that, “it is clear that my generation will not live to see this reinterment,” and advised others to wait patiently for the government’s directive.18 Another arena of activity was the Knesset. In December 1951 Nurock submitted a parliamentary query on the subject to the prime minister, asking whether he “does not think that it is the State of Israel’s obligation to bring the remains of the founders of the Zionist Organization and its leaders and outstanding individuals who deserve enormous historical credit for the realization of our people’s aspirations.” He specifically mentioned Jabotinsky’s name.19 Nurock was aware of the efforts being made to repatriate the remains of Wolffsohn, Smolenskin, and others, and he included Jabotinsky among them. Ben-Gurion responded that “the State of Israel is obligated, first and foremost, to bring live Jews in order to build the state and the Hebrew nation, and the State of Israel is indeed pursuing this. The memory of worthy individuals will remain in the hearts of the people, regardless of where their bones lie.”20 In response to a query from Prof. Benjamin Akzin, who was Jabotinsky’s secretary, Ben-Gurion wrote, “There was one person whose remains the people and the state were obligated to bring to Israel, and that was Herzl, and I’m happy this was done.”21 Nurock’s query and Ben-Gurion’s response stirred an extensive public discussion that was also conducted on the pages of newspapers, which played an important role in shaping public opinion in favor of fulfilling Jabotinsky’s will. Most journalists opposed Ben-Gurion’s position. The top personnel at Maariv – Herzl Rosenblum and others – were from the Revisionist movement, so it was no surprise that Rosenblum wrote in an article entitled “The Dead in their Struggle,” describing how: in France, leaders who once slapped the face of their “comrade” are at rest together in the cemetery. In England, those who made an entire career of opposing each other now lie in fraternity. In America, the deceased who fought each other in the War of Independence and afterwards, even to the point of shedding blood, “get along” in excellent neighborliness ... but Israel is not like the other nations.

18 Tamar Jabotinsky Kopp, “Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s will concerning his reinterment in Israel,” Herut, 1 October 1952. 19 Why Were the Remains of Zeev Jabotinsky Not Reinterred (1960), p. 3. 20 The Forty-sixth session of the Second Knesset, 23 January 1952, Knesset Protocols, 1951, p. 1081. 21 BGA, 136966, David Ben-Gurion to Benjamin Akzin, 28 August 1952; this was before the reinterment of Baron Edmond de Rothschild in 1954.

126 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

He added that despite the fact that twelve years had passed since Jabotinsky’s death and five years since the founding of the state, Jabotinsky’s will had yet to be implemented, and he noted that “in the meantime, dead people have been reinterred in Israel, and though I do not wish to rank them in a ‘political hierarchy,’ I am sure that Jabotinsky is greater than many of them. But they brought them here, and did not bring him.”22 Some of those protesting Ben-Gurion’s decision claimed that he was driven by his personal and political antipathy toward Jabotinsky. Yet Ben-Gurion’s primary considerations were evidently historical: his desire to justify his actions prior to the founding of the state, including his struggles against the views of the right and of Jabotinsky and against the secession of the Revisionists from the national authority. In August 1954 the Russian Immigrant Association tried to revive the project. They sent a delegation to the president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, and asked him to intervene. Ben-Zvi, who quickly became a key figure in this effort, agreed to chair a public committee dedicated to Jabotinsky’s reinterment in Israel, and Yedioth Ahronoth promptly contacted the Jabotinsky family to solicit its response. The family explained that, “there would be no opposition on its part [to reinterring Jabotinsky], but there would also be no pressure on the government to bring his remains.”23 The members of the family, and Jabotinsky’s son, Eri, in particular, were scarcely involved in the matter and even opposed the lobbying by Herut members and others. The dispute between the head of the movement, Menachem Begin, and Eri Jabotinsky, who resigned from the Herut faction in 1951, was also a contributing factor. The president was now in the spotlight, and he received dozens of requests from individuals and organizations.24 For example, Kalman Ben David wrote, “The Law of Return established the right of every Jew to immigrate to Israel, and the same should also apply to those who longed for Israel’s redemption but did not live to see it and died abroad.” The president responded, “The right of initiating this task is reserved for the only son of the deceased, who is his heir, and secondly, probably to the people of his movement.”25 Elchanan Samuel wrote that while he did not identify with “the political views Jabotinsky espoused ...

22 Herzl Rosenblum, “The dead in their struggle,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 14 January 1952. 23 “Requesting the reinterment of Jabotinsky, Borochov, and Chlenov,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 31 August 1954. 24 ISA, N-9/2, file with numerous appeals by Israeli citizens to the president to order the transfer of Jabotinsky’s remains to Israel. 25 Ibid., Kalman Ben David to Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, 11 April 1954; ibid., Yitzhak Ben-Zvi to Kalman Ben David, 19 April 1954.



“Will our country become a land of graves?” 

 127

[he] believes that Jabotinsky’s life’s work accords him the right to have his bodily remains transferred to the national pantheon in the liberated homeland.” He suggested burying Jabotinsky on Mount Herzl, at the feet of the visionary of Zionism.26 A citizen wondered, “As the highest authority in the state, is your excellency not entitled and not able to issue the order to bring Jabotinsky’s coffin to Israel?”27 Ben-Zvi did take an interest in bringing the remains of Dov Ber Borochov from Kiev and Rabbi Shalom Shabazi from Yemen, but in contrast to the challenges of operating in the USSR and Yemen, he regarded the case of Jabotinsky as “a more realistic matter” and recommended responding in a positive way to those who solicited his help.28 Fully aware of the explosive political implications, he was drawn into the fray unwillingly and became a sort of “safety valve” for releasing the growing public pressure. Perhaps his involvement also stemmed from the fact that the public viewed the president as the person responsible for mandating Jabotinsky’s reinterment. Another political actor involved in this matter was the minister of the interior from the General Zionists party, Israel Rokach. In June 1954 he called upon the government to discuss Jabotinsky’s reinterment,29 and he elicited applause at a convention of the General Zionists when he declared, “There is no doubt that it will not be long before Jabotinsky’s remains are transferred to Israel, and there is no doubt that the government will decide to execute this.”30 Eri Jabotinsky dampened Rokach’s enthusiasm when he wrote to him that he did not think his father “wanted me or his other friends to beg the government to bring his grave [in this way],” and he added that he wished to prevent “imbuing any family or party character to [the mission of] bringing the grave. This must be a mission of the state or it should be postponed to a later date.”31 In 1955 the cabinet reluctantly discussed the topic of retrieving the corpses of prominent people from the Diaspora and decided to “authorize the prime minister to form, in conjunction with the chairman of the Zionist executive committee in Jerusalem, a committee that will decide on a list of leaders and harbingers of the Zionist movement whose remains will be brought to Israel.32 No such committee was formed, however, and when David Ben-Gurion returned to the office of

26 ISA, N-9/2, Elchanan Samuel to the president of the State of Israel, 19 May 1954. 27 BGA, 105774, A. Kofman to the president of the State of Israel, May 7, 1956. 28 ISA, N-9/2, letter by the president of the State of Israel, 10 September 1954. 29 Ibid., G-13/5562, I. Rokach to the cabinet secretary, 15 June 1954. 30 “Interior minister proposes reinterment of Jabotinsky’s remains,” Haboker, 24 September 1954. 31 JIA, A4-2/5, Eri Jabotinsky to Israel Rokach, 11 July 1954. 32 BGA, 103491, prime minister’s office to the president’s office, 1 August 1955.

128 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

prime minister, he maintained his previous position and firmly refused to become involved in the matter. In mid-1956 he wrote to Ben-Zvi that he did not find any reason to bring the remains of the dead people who always lived in the Diaspora. I make an exception for two: Herzl and Rothschild. It was fitting to bury them in Israel. But what benefit would we derive from the many graves of people from abroad? Will we bring all of the millions of people who died throughout all of the generations in the Diaspora – including people who are no less important than those of our generation? Why? Do we need dead Jews? Will we turn our country into the land of graves? All of our good people should rest where they are – as long as millions of Jews are living in the Diaspora.33

Ben-Zvi responded that he did not “see the reinterment of individuals from among the great ones of our people as a material matter, but rather a symbolic one,” and that “there is a symbolic value in transferring the bones of exemplary individuals, especially leaders who devoted their strength to the Zionist cause, and in their lives proved their faithfulness to the Land of Israel. All the more so if this was their explicit will.”34 Ben-Gurion countered that, “Only a person’s life’s work remains after his death ... His bones are dust and ashes, and they have no connection to the person. And the land should not be turned into a graveyard. This is not an expression of an attitude toward Jabotinsky, but rather a matter of principle.”35 Ben-Gurion’s stubbornness in this regard led Menachem Begin to state that, “a foreign government [the British Mandate] kept Jabotinsky in the Diaspora when he was alive. The Hebrew government is keeping him in the Diaspora after his death. The former feared his influence. The latter adds the fear of his spirit.”36 Eri Jabotinsky recommended to leaders of the Zionist organizations in the Diaspora that “instead of worrying about transferring his [father’s] bones, they should worry about transferring their own bones to Israel.” He added, “I must say to my Israeli friends that instead of us sitting and discussing the way to receive a certificate for Ze’ev Jabotinsky from the government, we should sit and discuss

33 ISA, N-9/2, David Ben-Gurion to Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, 3 June 1956. 34 Ibid., Yitzhak Ben-Zvi to David Ben-Gurion, 15 June 1956. 35 BGA, 103209, David Ben-Gurion to Yosef Shechtman, 3 October 1956; see Shechtman’s response, noting that in addition to the remains of Herzl and Rothschild, the State of Israel brought the coffins of Sokolow, Wolffsohn, and Nordau for reinterment: JIA, P 277/4/19, Yosef Shechtman to David Ben-Gurion, 23 October 1956. 36 “We will certainly remember his coffin and bring his remains to the Land of Zion,” Herut, 6 July 1956.



“Will our country become a land of graves?” 

 129

how his disciples can take hold of the reins of government and then, inter alia, the last will and testament will be fully executed.”37

“Like the transfer of a soldier who fell in battle outside of his homeland” In late 1957 it seemed that a solution had been found. The general committee of Bnai Brith in Israel approved a proposal by District Court Judge Yosef Lamm, the vice president of Bnai Brith, to take upon itself the mission of fulfilling Jabotinsky’s will. This project was regarded as consistent with the organization’s objective to strengthen the unity of the Jewish people. Its executive committee met with Ben-Zvi, and Judge Lamm – formerly a member of Mapai, the Workers’ Party of the Land of Israel – suggested that the president of Israel advise the government to retrieve Jabotinsky’s remains. The president and his wife, Rachel Yanait, spoke favorably about Bnai Brith taking the lead in executing Jabotinsky’s will, noting that it was, “a nonpartisan organization that has no interests in this matter.” Members of the organization asked the president to “be their mouthpiece” in the government and thus prevent “dissension in Israel.”38 Ben-Zvi and the leaders of Bnai Brith urged Ben-Gurion to view Bnai Brith as a “ladder” for climbing down the “tree” of refusal he had ascended. Ben-Gurion continued strongly to oppose a directive to transfer Jabotinsky’s coffin. Perhaps this was because Bnai Brith’s proposal to assume responsibility did not solve the problem of the government’s involvement in the matter, and he must also have understood that Herut was portraying the fight for reinterment as a state concern rather than a political one.39 He therefore stated that, “Jabotinsky has no authority to give orders to the government of Israel, and the government is not obligated to carry out his directives.” Ben-Gurion wondered about Bnai Brith’s interest in the saga, but he wrote that, “if the organization sees a need to bring Jabotinsky’s remains, I know of no legal obstacle to this.” Finally, he asserted that even though he was one of Jabotinsky’s friends (after a short period of fierce dispute), he knew of “many important Jews from our time and previous periods whose bones are buried in the Diaspora, and I don’t think we are obliged

37 JIA, A4-2/5, Eri Jabotinsky, “My position regarding the problem of the reinterment of my father’s remains in Israel,” 30 June 1956. 38 BGA, 98973, Yosef Rivlin to Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, 11 October 1957. 39 “Bnai Brith willing to bring Jabotinsky’s remains if a government order is issued,” Davar, July 13, 1958.

130 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

to transfer them to Israel. But those who think otherwise – should act according to their own judgment.”40 In June 1958 the Progressive faction in the Knesset also decided to take action on Jabotinsky’s will, and the justice minister, Pinhas Rosen, was asked “to reawaken the issue in the cabinet” and demand fulfillment of Jabotinsky’s will. The National Religious Party and the right-wing parties were quick to express their support.41 Among Mapai’s leadership there were differences of opinion on this issue, but the majority supported Ben-Gurion’s view.42 As the prime minister remained entrenched in this stance, Begin told an audience of Herut members that “the jealousy, hatred, and vengeance that remain even after death are tragic proof that Ze’ev Jabotinsky did not die, but lives on.” The Herut central committee decided “to publish its opinion and ask all those who cherish the memory of Ze’ev Jabotinsky to consider its opinion – namely, that no further appeals should be made to the government about fulfilling his will as long as Mr. Ben-Gurion is prime minister.”43 Eri Jabotinsky thanked all the individuals and organizations that had tried to advance this matter and asked them “to stop their efforts to persuade the current government so as not to make this a partisan issue.”44 In a cabinet meeting on the subject in early August 1958, Rosen was a minority of one. Ben-Gurion cited Jabotinsky’s “past” and his secession from the Zionist movement. At the end, it was determined that “after the government decided to bring the remains of Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl of blessed memory, it will no longer decide to bring the remains of activists of the Zionist movement.”45 Bnai Brith again intervened and sent another letter to the cabinet secretary, demanding that the government address the issue,46 but it was too late. The die had been cast, and the Ben-Gurion government was unwilling to bring Jabotinsky’s coffin for reinterment. Even before this, Eri Jabotinsky had turned down an invitation

40 ISA, N-9/2, David Ben-Gurion to Yosef Lamm, 1 July 1958. 41 “Progressives to demand reinterment of Jabotinsky,” Davar, 18 June 1958. 42 “Two opinions in Mapai on the reinterment of Jabotinsky,” Maariv, 22 June 1958; “Mapai ministers to discuss reinterment of Jabotinsky,” Herut, 23 June 1958. 43 “Friends of Beitar are requested not to approach the government about his reinterment,” Herut, 21 July 1958. 44 “BG cannot give the order without recognizing the ideological debt,” Haboker, 13 July 1958; “Prof. E. Jabotinsky: Ben-Gurion’s intention is to erase everyone from history – except himself,” Herut, 13 July 1958. 45 ISA, G-13/5562, decision 508, bringing the remains of Z. Jabotinsky of blessed memory; “Government decides against reinterment of Jabotinsky,” Haboker, 4 August 1958; “The end of Jabotinsky,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 4 August 1958. 46 ISA, G-13/5562, Bnai Brith to Israel’s cabinet secretary, 14 September 1958; ibid., Israel’s cabinet secretary to Bnai Brith, 25 September 1958.



“Your bones are still hanging on a foul wall of exile” 

 131

from the defense minister to accept an award from the Haganah underground on behalf of his father. He said, “In my view, the prime minister should have ordered long ago that the remains of the man – whom he wishes to honor with the Haganah Ribbon – be transferred from the Diaspora and that his grave be placed on Hebrew soil.”47

“Your bones are still hanging on a foul wall of exile” In 1961, after the failed efforts of the Bnai Brith organization, the Jewish Legion Museum (Beit Hagdudim) in Moshav Avihayil entered the picture. The institution was established by veterans of the Jewish battalions that fought in World War I with the aim of telling and perpetuating their story.48 At the museum’s inauguration ceremony Ben-Gurion unveiled statues of Yosef Trumpeldor and Jabotinsky, and some saw this as a sign of possible change in the prime minister’s position on the question of Jabotinsky’s reinterment. Several weeks after the ceremony, museum officials decided to take action themselves.49 On behalf of the museum, Ze’ev Feller had several conversations with Eri Jabotinsky to understand his opinion and those of other family members. It became clear that they had never submitted an official or any other request to the government of Israel to transfer Jabotinsky’s coffin. The museum concluded that misinterpretation of Jabotinsky’s will was responsible for the delay, and that if the president and prime minister of Israel would “order” them to fulfill the wish of the deceased, Jewish Legion volunteers from the United States would assist in carrying out the arrangements there. The museum personnel hoped that Eri Jabotinsky would submit an official request to transfer his parents’ remains; the museum would then take responsibility for executing the mission, including burial in the military section on Mount Herzl.50 In November 1961 Feller asked Ben-Zvi to intervene. He simultaneously wrote to Ben-Gurion, explaining that the Jewish Legion Museum was engaged in “collecting [information on] Hebrew and Jewish fighting in the distant and recent

47 “Jabotinsky family refuses to receive the Haganah Ribbon,” Haboker, 8 June 1958. 48 “Jewish Legion Museum inaugurated in Avihayil,” Davar, 15 May 1961; Silko (2009), pp. 9–12. In July 1960, a large number of public figures gathered at the president’s residence in Jerusalem to mark the twentieth anniversary of Jabotinsky’s death. Ben-Gurion delivered remarks and spoke with Eri Jabotinsky: “Memorial gathering for Jabotinsky at the President’s House,” Davar, 25 July 1960; “Eri Jabotinsky’s conversation with D. Ben-Gurion,” Herut, 19 July 1960. 49 “Who is delaying the reinterment of Jabotinsky?” Davar, 16 January 1963. 50 ISA, N-9/2, Z. Feller to Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, 12 November 1961.

132 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

past, in the present and in the future to come,” and that he therefore “considers himself duty-bound to fulfill this right [of Jabotinsky].” He concluded by saying that “the only thing missing is a directive from the government of the State of Israel.”51 Ben-Zvi was quick to temper Feller’s enthusiasm, however. He noted that the word “order” denoted an active step by the government of Israel and that the prime minister was opposed to such action: “If the son of the deceased or a soldiers’ organization turned to the government and announced their decision to transfer [the coffin] and asked the relevant authorities for the right to dig a grave for him in the military cemetery, the government would not stand in their way. But the initiative would not come from the government.”52 And indeed, Ben-Gurion reiterated his position that “the government of Israel has no right to prevent the reinterment of any Jew or relatives of a Jew who wish to do so, and the remains of Nordau, Smolenskin, Moshe Hess, and others whose historical rights are no less than those of Jabotinsky have already been reinterred without issuing orders.53 The officials of the Jewish Legion Museum were determined to bridge the gap, so they asked Ben-Gurion to confirm that the government of Israeli viewed their initiative favorably.54 In response to their efforts to remove the bottleneck by means of legal equivocation, Ben-Gurion responded that, “the Jewish Legion Museum does not require any approval from the government of Israel for the aforementioned initiative. Any organization that wishes to bring the remains of a Jew to Israel is entitled to do so.”55 Nonetheless, the museum succeeded in extracting from Ben-Gurion the draft of a declaration stating that, “the president of the state and prime minister regard the decision by the Jewish Legion Museum to bring the remains of Jabotinsky for burial in Israel as a decision worthy of positive assessment.”56 This declaration was not sufficient for Eri Jabotinsky, however. He refused to talk to the museum officials and demanded that the Israeli cabinet decide on the transfer of the coffin in an official session and order the execution of the will.57 The failure of the contacts between the museum officials and the Jabotinsky family

51 Ibid., Z. Feller to Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, 23 November 1961. 52 Ibid., Yitzhak Ben-Zvi to Z. Feller, 24 November 1961. 53 Ibid., David Ben-Gurion to Z. Feller, 27 November 1961. 54 BGA, 52654, Z. Feller to the prime minister and the president, 8 January 1962. 55 ISA, N-9/2, David Ben-Gurion to Z. Feller, 26 June 1962. 56 Ibid., draft of a letter from the prime minister and the president to the Jewish Legion Museum, no date cited. 57 “Who is delaying the reinterment of Jabotinsky?” Davar, 16 January 1963.



“This is the day we have longed for” 

 133

was reported in the press.58 Davar wondered, “What is delaying the reinterment of Jabotinsky?,” and concluded that, were it not for Eri Jabotinsky’s refusal to send a letter of request to the Jewish Legion Museum, its representatives would “immediately” bring the remains for burial in Israel.59 Maariv published a story about the Roman general Scipio (d. 183 bce), whose tomb was allegedly inscribed, “Ungrateful fatherland, you will not even have my bones.”60 The poet Yitzhak Shalev devoted a work to Ze’ev Jabotinsky entitled “Your Bones”: Your bones are still hanging on a foul wall of exile, You, who loved a sunny homeland, Mediterranean and light – Your bones are exposed to northern dampness and cold And there are none of your brethren to summon the tribe and Take down your corpse [i.e., of King Saul] from the wall, Like the men of Jabesh Gilead, and to bury it as a king among his people, forever ... . A plane will carry it to the coastline, over Acre, you’ll see a flag flying at the fort [the British jail, located at the Ottoman citadel] saluting it so; The sound of a cannon will be heard, its thunder and lightning; The coffin will be taken in the war vehicle en route to Zion; Hebrew legions will accompany the father of the Legion; Bearing the nation’s flag first among the flags of Albion The procession will pass between the hills of Eshtaol and Tzora. Where the tribe of Dan dwelled and Philistine stretched to the sea, And the Samson-like song, clear ... The coffin will be brought to the mount and in the mount it will be buried; Among the marble graves of fighters, there is no better place; For one who took a sword in hand and defended the city.61

“This is the day we have longed for” In 1963, when Borochov’s remains were transferred from Kiev and Ben-Gurion spoke over his grave at Kinneret, some wondered whether “the noble act of bringing Borochov’s bones would serve as an opening for an additional gesture on the part of the government and its prime minister.”62 For many, the answer was “no.” This included Begin, who continued to wrangle with Ben-Gurion over this issue and mentioned it often in his speeches. At a Herut convention in early

58 “Jabotinsky’s remains to be brought to Israel,” Maariv, 15 August 1962. 59 “What is delaying the reinterment of Jabotinsky?” Davar, 16 August 1962. 60 Uri Keisari, “The Law of Return for Jabotinsky,” Maariv, 27 July 1962. 61 Yitzhak Shalev, “Your Bones,” Maariv, 27 July 1962. 62 Baruch Bracha, “Borochov and Jabotinsky,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 12 April 1963.

134 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

1963, standing in front of a giant picture of Jabotinsky, he roared, “In the fifteenth year of the existence of the Jewish state, Jabotinsky’s remains are still in the Diaspora,” and he read aloud the text of the will to counter Ben-Gurion’s claim that he had never seen it. “Jabotinsky lives on, not only in the hearts of his disciples,” Begin insisted; “he also lives in the nerves of his rivals. But this government, which renounces Jabotinsky’s will, is going to pass away. A Jewish government will yet arise in the Land of Israel that will give the order to fulfill the will.”63 That day arrived when David Ben-Gurion stepped down as prime minister on 16 June 1963 and Levi Eshkol formed a new government within a week. For Herut members who had worked for years to achieve Jabotinsky’s wish, this change in leadership was very significant. Eshkol, who was not emotionally involved in the internal political struggles during the pre-state period, was likely to bring a more open-minded and level-headed approach to the topic. Yet when he assumed the office of prime minister, Eshkol still opposed executing Jabotinsky’s will. To appeals his office replied, “the matter is still not practical” and “it is still premature.”64 When asked whether “in the framework of a general domestic reconciliation in the state” he would agree to have the government reinter Jabotinsky, Eshkol replied that he had already asked “not to be burdened with things that are essentially emotional matters. The government already decided on this question, and I would not want to address this.”65 In November 1963 his office responded to a question from journalists that, “we do not know of any promise made by Prime Minister Levi Eshkol to order the reinterment of the Revisionist leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky in Israel.”66 Despite these denials, unofficial contacts occurred between the office of the prime minister and Herut leader Begin, culminating in a secret meeting between the two on 3 March 1964. At the meeting Begin read Jabotinsky’s will to the prime minister. Eshkol was ostensibly hearing the text of the will for the first time, and this was said to have changed his approach to the issue. There is room for skepticism about this account, however, because the conflict between Ben-Gurion and Begin (and other right-wing figures) had simmered for many years; Eshkol was certainly aware of it, and he knew of Ben-Gurion’s unequivocal view on the subject of Jabotinsky’s repatriation. In any event, the prime minister consulted

63 “Herut convention opened yesterday,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 21 January 1963. 64 “More petitions for reinterment of Z. Jabotinsky in Israel,” Haboker, 24 July 1963. 65 Yeshayahu Ben Porat, “Four hours with Levi Eshkol,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 28 February 1964. 66 “No promise to reinter Jabotinsky,” Davar, 8 November 1963.



“This is the day we have longed for” 

 135

with government ministers from his party.67 It seems that over the years Mapai leaders had begun to distance themselves from Ben-Gurion’s obstinacy on this issue and found it hard to support his stance. Perhaps this was one of the stages in the Mapai movement’s dissociation from their founding father, Ben-Gurion.68 On 10 March 1964 the director-general of the prime minister’s office, Uri Lubrani, met with Begin. Lubrani explained that the prime minister would need to receive a direct request from the Jabotinsky family before the matter could be pursued. Eshkol wanted it to be clear that he was responding to a direct request from the family and not a partisan demand by Begin. Lubrani asked “that the matter not become an axe to grind from a partisan perspective.”69 Eshkol’s dramatic change in attitude toward Jabotinsky’s reinterment was part of his broader political goal to decrease tensions and clear the public air. With Eshkol’s blessing, Begin sent a secret telegram via the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to Eri Jabotinsky, head of the Faculty of Sciences at Haile Selassie University in Addis Ababa. Begin excitedly reported that Eshkol had expressed his willingness to act in accordance with Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s will and agreed to bring the subject before the cabinet for discussion. Begin asked that Eri Jabotinsky write to the prime minister and state that this was the first time the family was appealing to the government. “This time,” Begin wrote, “there is good hope that we will be able to bring the remains of the leader of Beitar in accordance with the will, this year, on the 29th of Tammuz.”70 Jabotinsky was hesitant and requested time to consider, due in part to strong opposition on the part of his daughter, Karni.71 In the end, Eri agreed to the proposal and sent a telegram to the Prime Minister’s Office: Now, according to the advice of a friend [Begin?], I bring this document [his father’s will] to your attention, hoping that indeed times have changed and the government of Israel of today will take the initiative of issuing the directive, and that the remains of my father will be brought on the 29th of Tammuz this year (9 July 1964), on the 24th anniversary of his death in the Diaspora.72

Lubrani replied in an urgent telegram, again delivered via the Israeli consulate in Ethiopia, that the matter of executing the will would be brought before the

67 ISA, G-7/6380, Dov Yosef to Uri Lubrani, 12 March 1964; on this meeting, see: Nakdimon (2002), pp. 42–44. 68 Y. Weitz (2011). 69 ISA, G-7/6380, report on meeting between Uri Lubrani and Menachem Begin, 10 March 1964. 70 Ibid., telegram from Menachem Begin to Eri Jabotinsky, 10 March 1964. 71 Ibid., telegram from Haim Dibon to Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 13 March 1964. 72 JIA, A4-2/6, Eri Jabotinsky to Levi Eshkol, no date cited; “The remains of Jabotinsky to be buried on Mount Herzl,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 March 1964.

136 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

cabinet for discussion, and suggested that Jabotinsky judiciously formulate his public announcements to the media and “refrain from personal attacks and the settling of accounts of the past.”73 Eshkol promptly convened the forum of Mapai ministers and proposed that the government agree to carry out Jabotinsky’s will.74 On 15 March 1964, the cabinet discussed the matter and Eshkol won the support of ministers Haim Moshe Shapira from the National Religious Party and Yigal Allon from Ahdut Ha’avoda–Poalei Zion. Allon set the positive tone for the short discussion that preceded the vote.75 The government decreed that: upon the request of his heirs, the family of Ze’ev Jabotinsky of blessed memory, who wish to transfer his remains for burial in Israel, but who see themselves obligated to honor to fulfill each and every letter of the deceased’s will, and in particular the section stipulating that his remains should only be brought to the Land of Israel by decision of the government of a Jewish state, the government has decided to assist the family members in bringing the deceased’s remains to Israel by issuing a directive in keeping with the deceased’s request in his will of 3 November 1935.76

Teddy Kollek, the director-general of the prime minister’s office, quickly called Ben-Gurion to inform him of the cabinet’s decision before he heard it on the radio. Pretending innocence, Ben-Gurion, asked, “Why didn’t they decide this earlier? More than once, the majority decided against the prime minister’s opinion – and the majority’s decision stood, without objection.” He described in his diary how the evening newspapers were full of descriptions of “the historical tale.”77 Various political parties in the Knesset were quick to applaud the decision,78 and there was great joy among the Herut faction in particular. Begin sent a thank-you telegram to Eshkol79 and, speaking to members of Herut in the Histadrut labor federation at the Ohel Shem auditorium, he announced, his voice choking, that, “today I have the privilege to inform his disciples [Jabotinsky’s] in the homeland and in the Diaspora, everywhere, that the government, today at about 12:15, decided to order the transfer of Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s remains.” The Herut members

73 ISA, G-7/6380, Uri Lubrani to the Israeli consulate in Addis Ababa, 14 March 1964. 74 Ibid, A-10/921, “Ministers’ forum,” 9 March 1964, p. 8. 75 Arieh Tzimuki, “The government decided to reinter Jabotinsky’s remains,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 March 19 76 JIA, H9-1/13, “Government of Israel’s decision of 15 March 1964 to reinter Ze’ev Jabotinsky.” 77 BGA, 91749, Ben Gurion’s diary, 15 March 1964; ibid., 91750, Ben Gurion’s diary, 16 March 1964. 78 “The Liberals on the reinterment of Ze’ev Jabotinsky,” Haaretz, 17 March 1964. 79 Begin’s telegram was one of many sent to the prime minister’s office, archived in ISA, G-7/6380.



“They did this half-heartedly, in a faulty and insulting way” 

 137

rose to their feet and broke out in lengthy applause. Begin continued: “God willing, on Memorial Day, the 29th of Tammuz, his remains and those of his wife will be brought here.”80 He added that he and his movement “hope to be able to go up and prostrate ourselves on Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s grave every year. This is the day we have longed for.” At the same event, it was decided to form a committee to plan the funeral in collaboration with the family. Some Beitar leaders expressed doubt about whether this sort of government decision was what Jabotinsky had intended in his will, but most gave their blessing to organize a “national, state, and popular funeral, attended by hundreds of thousands.”81

“They did this half-heartedly, in a faulty and insulting way” About two weeks after the government decision, Eri Jabotinsky arrived from Ethiopia to meet with Eshkol in order to organize the funeral and clarify who would be responsible for it. He intended to demand a state funeral and to ask Eshkol to make it very clear to the public that the government was explicitly involved in decreeing that the coffin be reinterred in Israel.82 The meeting was held in the office of the minister of defense in Tel Aviv.83 Eri argued that the government’s announcement lacked the practical and active dimension that his father stipulated in his will. He asked that a representative be appointed to act on the prime minister’s behalf and suggested Zalman Shazar or even Ben-Gurion for this role. At the end of the long discussion, Eri requested that Eshkol compose an announcement stating that in accord with the government’s decision regarding the execution of Jabotinsky’s will, the prime minister had informed the family that the decision should be interpreted as a directive to bring the deceased’s coffin to Israel. Eshkol proposed the wording: “I hereby announce that the government decision of 15 March 1964 constitutes a government directive to the executors of the will of Ze’ev Jabotinsky of blessed memory to bring his remains in accordance with the deceased’s request in his will of 3 November 1935.” This satisfied Eri Jabotinsky. Eri demanded a state funeral and proposed bringing the remains to Israel in a warship or similar vessel to endow the ceremony with a “national charac-

80 M. Begin, “This is the day we have longed for,” Herut, 16 March 1964. 81 Yosef Shofman, “With the shehecheyanu blessing,” Herut, 20 March 1964. 82 “Prof. Eri Jabotinsky arrives, will clarify arrangements for father’s reinterment,” Haaretz, 29 March 1964; “Jabotinsky confers with Eshkol on reinterring his father,” Davar, 31 March 1964. 83 This section is based on BGA, 31487 and 31488, the protocols of the two meetings held between Levi Eshkol and Eri Jabotinsky, 30–31 March 1964.

138 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

ter.” He hoped that “the coffin would be received in Israel in a full military ceremony, including rounds of cannon fire and a state funeral in the military section on Mount Herzl.”84 When Eshkol rejected this, Eri noted the precedent of David Raziel’s funeral in 1961 in the presence of a military honor guard. “Mahal [volunteers from outside the Land of Israel], Raziel, and the paratroopers [Hannah Szenes, Haviva Reik, and Rafael Reisz] were brought to burial in a full military ceremony,” it was acknowledged during the meeting. “Raziel was seen as associated with the paratroopers who parachuted beyond enemy lines during World War II,” so it was not possible to draw comparisons between the two cases.85 The military component of the funeral was also discussed in a second meeting between Eshkol and Eri Jabotinsky in which the latter stated that he did not consider himself “entitled to allow something that would result in an insult to his [father’s] memory. And in my opinion, the nonparticipation of the government in this matter, in the current circumstances, is improper.” Eshkol nevertheless rejected Eri’s request to form a public committee to organize the funeral. Jabotinsky felt torn. He had hoped to achieve a more explicit official declaration and a state funeral for his parents, but Eshkol refused. Following some deliberation, and after such figures as Israel Scheib and Hillel Kook advised him to reject the prime minister’s proposal,86 he decided to accept it. Jabotinsky declared that he considered the government decision “a great victory for the Beitar leader, as if history itself is compelling his rivals to publicly recognize him, and, by doing so, the correctness of his path. They did this half-heartedly, in a faulty and insulting way, but could not avoid it.”87 The newspapers published this and also reported that Eri’s acceptance statement omitted the words “assistance for the Jabotinsky family in transferring the coffin” from the original version of the government decision, thus emphasizing that the reinterment of Jabotinsky’s remains would be executed by government order.88

84 “Disagreement over the character of Jabotinsky’s funeral,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 31 March 1964. 85 BGA, 31487 and 31488, the protocols of the two meetings held between Levi Eshkol and Eri Jabotinsky, 30–31 March 1964. The reinterments of these individuals are discussed below, in Chapter 9. 86 Herzl Rosenblum, “Futile advice,” Yedioth Ahronoth,17 April 1964. 87 Nathan Baron, “Face to face with Prof. Eri Jabotinsky,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 2 April 1964. 88 JIA, H-9 1/11, Levi Eshkol to Eri Jabotinsky, 30 March 1964; “Eshkol: the decision means – an order to bring Jabotinsky’s remains,” Davar, 2 April 1964.



Operation “Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to the homeland” 

 139

Operation “Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to the homeland” At the beginning of April 1964, the planning of the operation began. The Herut newspaper published an “order of the day” on behalf of the Beitar youth movement: Three months [until the reinterment] will be for us months of learning and study of the writings of the Beitar leader – in the branches of the movement, in our village and frontier settlements, in the youth farm, the garin groups [military outposts that combined army service and the establishment of agricultural settlements], the seminars and course for counselors ... everyone will check his Beitar clothing, so that nothing will be missing or blemished on the day they will stand or march to show respect.89

The organizers faced a challenge: how to design a ceremony of national character when the state was not involved in it. Herut formed a “preparations committee” to plan the details and make sure it would be conducted “correctly” from both a political, Beitar perspective and a national one.90 At its first meeting the committee decided to create subcommittees, as well as an “operation-management” team and “implementation committee.”91At a subsequent meeting, the committee elected to call the operation “Ze’ev Jabotinsky Returns to the Homeland.”92 It was widely assumed that Jabotinsky would be buried in Jerusalem, but members of the movement did not want to bypass Tel Aviv as a significant stop on the funeral route. Proposed locations for displaying the caskets included Kings of Israel Square; the plaza in front of the “Culture Palace” (Hechal Hatarbut); Gan Meir; Jabotinsky House; and Herbert Samuel Square, on the seashore, where Herzl’s coffin was placed in 1949.93 The proposed sites in Jerusalem included the plaza before the International Convention Center (Binyenei HaUma), the Russian Compound (opposite the British jail where Jabotinsky was held), and Independence Park, at that time the largest open public space in the city.94 The funeral was scheduled for the twenty-ninth of Tammuz, the date of Jabotinsky’s death. In order to impart an official and national atmosphere, the operation-management team asked to include the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in the funeral and

89 David Niv, “Beitar world leadership: order of the day,” Herut, 2 April 1964. 90 Gruweis-Kovalsky (2015). 91 JIA, H-9 1/14, protocol of the first meeting of the “preparations committee” for the reinterment of Ze’ev Jabotinsky, 1 April 1964. 92 Ibid., protocol of the “operation management” team for Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s reinterment, 10 April 1964. 93 “Finding a site to place Jabotinsky’s coffin,” Lamerchav, 12 May 1964. 94 “Jabotinsky’s reinterment ceremony in final planning stages,” Herut, 7 May 1964.

140 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

held talks on this with Shimon Peres, the deputy defense minister.95 However, in light of the government decision that the funeral would be private and movement-related rather than a state ceremony, the IDF asked that its involvement be kept to a minimum. They sent a letter to commanders explaining that soldiers would be permitted to participate in the funeral, but could not march as an organized body or fill any administrative or command role in the funeral procession.96 At this stage, the discussion focused on the location of the grave. Eri had pondered this over the years, and in 1963 he even listed his preferences in a sealed letter that was only to be opened when a decision was made to reinter his father’s remains. In this letter, he wrote, “The grave must be open on the eastern side and look toward the Jordan.” Therefore, he proposed three sites: Beit Jala Hill, apparently the Gilo mountain ridge that was in Jordanian territory at the time; Mount Tabor, which Jabotinsky visited on his first trip to the Land of Israel; and the Belvoir Fortress (Kochav Hayarden), above the Jordan Valley, a site symbolically close to the Jordan River crossings where Jabotinsky fought in World War I. Eri Jabotinsky maintained that, “the burial plot must be a park (a national one, and if not, a private one) and not a cemetery; no one will be buried there besides my parents (both of them). Not me, not other members of the family, not his disciples, and not his heroes.” He proposed naming the place “Ze’ev’s Wall.”97 These early ideas had no traction in the discussions about the burial site, perhaps because Jerusalem – where everyone assumed Jabotinsky would be buried – was not included among Eri’s proposed sites. After the establishment of the State of Israel, many believed that Jabotinsky should be buried in the military cemetery in Jerusalem, at the foot of Herzl’s grave. Ministry of Defense officials checked whether it was possible to bury Jabotinsky in this cemetery, reserved for soldiers who fell after 29 November 1947, and they studied precedents in which the state was involved in the reinterment of those who died abroad, now with reference to the Military Cemeteries Law of 1950.98 While many thought that Jabotinsky’s past prior to the founding of Israel justified his burial there, the need to inter him alongside his wife made that impossible. In conversations with Eri Jabotinsky, Eshkol opposed burial on Mount Herzl itself,99 but Davar, citing an “authorized source,” reported that the government

95 JIA, H9-1/14, protocol of the operation management team for Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s reinterment, 14 May 1964. 96 IDFA, 1967/50, file 85, Zvi Goldstein to IDF units, 3 July 1964. 97 JIA, A4-2/5, Eri Jabotinsky to Eliyahu Glazer, 1 August 1963. 98 ISA, G-7/6380, “Military cemeteries,” no date or author cited; ibid., “Treatment of remains brought from overseas for burial in Israel,” no date or author cited. 99 BGA, 31488, protocol of a meeting between Levi Eshkol and Eri Jabotinsky, 31 March 1964.



Operation “Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to the homeland” 

 141

would not object to burying Ze’ev Jabotinsky in the Leaders of the Zionist Movement section if presented with such a proposal.100 This was ostensibly impossible, because burial there was reserved exclusively for chairmen of the WZO. Jabotinsky was also not entitled to be buried in the Greats of the Nation section established in 1952 with the burial of Finance Minister Eliezer Kaplan, because the site was intended for presidents, prime ministers, and Knesset speakers. It is also doubtful whether Herut leaders wanted Jabotinsky to be buried alongside these politicians, most of whom were from the left side of the political map. As time passed and no decision was made, one of the readers of Haboker called upon “those engaged in this good deed” to “bring Jabotinsky for burial anywhere in Israel, and the place will be named ‘Jabotinsky Hill,’ and thus remove this disgrace of not finding a grave for Jabotinsky in Israel.”101 After the operation-management team summarily rejected such proposals as the Trumpeldor cemetery (near Jabotinsky’s mother) in Tel Aviv, Acre (near the jail cell where the British imprisoned him), or opposite the Jordan River crossings (apparently the site Eri considered),102 it focused on Mount Herzl. In early May, the team contacted the board of trustees of Mount Herzl on Eri’s behalf, asking it to allocate a separate plot for the couple’s burial. Eshkol and Moshe Sharett, now chairman of the WZO, conducted a tour of the place, accompanied by Kollek. They were concerned primarily about the precedent being set, and they were also concerned that Jabotinsky’s grave might overshadow the graves of Herzl, the Greats of the Nation, and the WZO chairmen. Of the options proposed by the planning committee on Mount Herzl, all in proximity to Herzl’s grave,103 they chose a plot to the southwest, “overlooking Yad Vashem, Ein Kerem, and Ramat Raziel [a settlement named for the Etzel commander].”104 The operation-management team asked that the site be approved as a “family plot” for the Jabotinsky couple, with the proviso that no one else would be buried there. Here, there was also a compromise – the site was within the confines of Mount Herzl, a bit distant from Herzl’s grave but adjacent to the Greats of the Nation plot and the military cemetery.105 The Mount Herzl trustees gave its consent on the condition that they

100 “No objection to burial of Jabotinsky in leaders’ section,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 7 April 1964. 101 Menachem Gilutz, “Mount Herzl – not necessarily,” Haboker, 9 April 1964. 102 JIA, A4-2/6, ceremonies and arrangements upon transfer of remains of Ze’ev and Johanna Jabotinsky, no date cited; “Initial proposal – reinter Jabotinsky in Acre,” Hatzofe, 10 April 1964. 103 JIA, H9-6/2, summary of Mount Herzl visit in regard to locating a burial plot for Ze’ev Jabotinsky and his wife, 29 April 1964. 104 CZA, A246/976, Aharon Zvi Propes to Mount Herzl board of trustees, 10 May 1964. 105 “Sharett: Jabotinsky’s brilliant past should not be overlooked,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 27 May 1964.

142 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

would approve and erect the tombstone.106 Even before receiving this approval, the architect Yosef Klarwein, who had been involved in designing Mount Herzl since 1949, began to plan the Jabotinsky grave site.107

“All of the Ze’evas and Ze’evs named for Ze’ev Jabotinsky” In early June 1964, about a month before the funeral, the detailed plan was presented. The coffins would land in Israel after a stop in Paris, where a ceremony would be held. From the airport in Lod, they would be taken to Tel Aviv and displayed overnight at Herbert Samuel Square. The following day, the funeral procession would pass through the streets of Tel Aviv and continue to Jerusalem, where the caskets would be placed overnight in Independence Park. The next day, 8 July, they would be brought to their final resting place on Mount Herzl.108 As the date approached, the organizers sent invitations to a number of individuals to join a public committee that would “represent all of the nation’s circles, and under whose auspices the ceremonies will be conducted to honor Ze’ev Jabotinsky upon his return to the homeland.”109 Concerted effort was made to include key figures on the committee: judges, politicians, government ministers, and members of Knesset.110 Every few days, the newspapers announced the names of public officials and intellectuals who had joined,111 including Knesset Speaker Kadish Luz, Minister Yigal Allon, Moshe Sharett, and the chairman of the Jewish Agency.112 On the eve of the funeral, the committee numbered more than five hundred prominent individuals.113 The ceremony was planned as “a national-general event in which representatives of all the circles, echelons, and organizations in the nation will participate.”114

106 CZA, A246/976, S. Ginosar to Moshe Sharett, 15 May 1964; JIA, H-9, 2/6, Moshe Sharett to Aharon Zvi Propes, 16 June 1964. 107 CZA, A246/976, S. U. Nachon to S. Ginosar, 20 May 1964. 108 “Details published about funeral of Jabotinsky and his wife,” Davar, 8 June 1964. 109 CZA, S64/439, public committee to Zvi Luria, 4 June 1964. 110 ISA, N-9/2, Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to the homeland: special prayers for the day of his reinterment, 29Tammuz 1964. 111 “Joined the public committee for the reinterment of Jabotinsky,” Herut, 24 June 1964. 112 “Y. Allon joins ‘Jabotinsky Committee,’” Kol Ha’am, 23 June 1964; Foreign Minister Abba Eban refused to join the committee: ISA, G-7/6380, Abba Eban to Menachem Begin, 1 June 1964. 113 “IDF to present arms in honor of Ze’ev Jabotinsky,” Herut, June 29, 1964. 114 “Those condemned to death [under British Mandate] will carry coffins of Ze’ev Jabotinsky and his wife,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 29 June 1964.



“All of the Ze’evas and Ze’evs named for Ze’ev Jabotinsky” 

 143

The Bnai Brith building and not Jabotinsky House served as headquarters. Under pressure from Begin and others, the Knesset announced a special session of mourning the day before the burial, including a eulogy by Speaker Luz.115 This was another important step toward the Israeli consensus. Indeed, the operation’s headquarters made a great effort to give the funeral an official, national status. President Zalman Shazar, after pressure by the organizers, announced that the Israeli ambassador to the United States would be asked to represent him in ceremonies there. The president’s military adjutant would be at the reception at Lod airport, and Shazar himself would participate in the burial ceremony on Mount Herzl.116 The interior minister, Haim Shapira, at the last moment ordered the state’s flags to be lowered to half-mast on public buildings on the day of the funeral.117 Other signs of the official nature of the event included special postmarks,118 a directive from the Ministry of Education to school principals to schedule an “education hour” about Jabotinsky’s life and work, and an injunction from the Chief Rabbinate to conduct memorial ceremonies in synagogues. After lengthy deliberation, the Israel Broadcasting Service decided to provide full coverage of the funeral.119 Announcements were published daily with precise instructions about proper attire and symbols for the members of the organizations participating in the funeral.120 The organizers called upon “all of the Ze’evas and Ze’evs who bear the name of Jabotinsky to take an active part in the funeral.”121 Another announcement was addressed to those who had struggled with the British over the right to blow shofar at the Western Wall at the conclusion of Yom Kippur; they were also invited to the funeral.122 The organizers intended to ask funeral participants to wear head coverings and read verses of the Mishnah during the flight from New York to Israel, but Eri Jabotinsky strongly objected: “The idea of an airborne synagogue in which they recite psalms and sit with hats is more than ludicrous.” He demanded that there be no demonstrations of religiosity, noting that “the head of Beitar, throughout his life, ate nonkosher food and did not visit synagogues. Nor did he arrange for

115 “Knesset to pay tribute to Ze’ev Jabotinsky,” Herut, 15 June 1964. 116 “Those condemned to death [under British Mandate] will carry coffins of Ze’ev Jabotinsky and his wife,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 29 June 1964. 117 “Coffins of Ze’ev and Johanna Jabotinsky brought to Jerusalem,” Hatzofe, 9 July 1964. 118 “Stamps and postal offices in honor of Jabotinsky’s reinterment,” Haaretz, 5 July 1964. 119 ISA, G-13/6380, Y. Shapira to S. Bendor, 26 May 1964. 120 “Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to the homeland,” Herut, 8 June 1964. 121 JIA, H9-1/1, “Ze’evas and Ze’evs,” 15 June 1964. 122 “Knights of the ‘Shofar order’ to march in the funeral,” Maariv, 8 July 1964.

144 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

a bar mitzvah with a rabbi for his only son. For political reasons, he was willing to eat gefilte fish, but nothing more.”123 The religious content in the funeral was therefore kept to a minimum. It is clear that the organizers sought to create a parallel between Herzl’s funeral in 1949 and Jabotinsky’s fifteen years later. The disinterment from a grave in the Diaspora, the landing at the airport, the journey to the public square (Herbert Samuel), the procession to Jerusalem, and the burial on Mount Herzl – all created a clear mirror image. Yet differences were also evident: the mass procession was to take place in the streets of Tel Aviv instead of Jerusalem, and the plaza of the National Institutions Building, associated with the ruling party, would be replaced by Independence Park, an unaffiliated location. As the funeral day drew near, delegations filled black velvet bags with “sacred” soil. They were filled near the graves of symbolic, heroic figures such as Sarah Aaronsohn in Zichron Ya’akov, Yosef Trumpeldor in Kfar Giladi, and Shlomo Ben-Yosef (the first of the olei hagardom, Jewish fighters executed by the British) in Rosh Pina. Soil was also collected in Safed from the grave sites of the olei hagardom, in Shavei Zion from the tombs of Etzel fighters killed in the Acre prison break, and in Nahalat Yitzhak from the graves of those killed on the Altalena ship. These sites were carefully chosen to place Jabotinsky in the historical context of a chain of previous leaders like Herzl and Rothschild. There was an emphasis on heroism and sacrifice; thus, an El Al plane brought earth from the graves of Jewish Legion soldiers near Ravenna, Italy.124 Soil from the graves of Jabotinsky’s mother and sister provided the family dimension, while earth from Mount Zion and the Mount of Olives filled the national symbolic role.125 Mount Zion and David’s Tomb were the most sacred places in Israel in 1964, and the Mount of Olives – where olei hagardom Meir Feinstein and Moshe Barazani were buried – served as a link to the sacred Jewish space that was now behind enemy lines. In many of these places, local “dignitaries” signed a scroll affirming that the soil was indeed taken from a particular site.126

123 JIA, H9-1/11, Eri Jabotinsky to A. Z. Propes, 25 May 1964. 124 “Jabotinsky and his wife return to the homeland,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 7 July 1964. 125 ISA, N-9/2, details of the ceremony on Mount Herzl, 9 July 1964; “Soil from Mount of Olives on Jabotinsky’s grave,” Herut, 14 July 1964. 126 JIA, H9-1/1, A. Z. Propes to A. Hacohen, 5 June 1964; “Jabotinsky’s coffin to be flown to Israel tomorrow,” Hatzofe, 5 July 1964.



“Jabotinsky Square” 

 145

“Jabotinsky Square” In early July, the operation to reinter Ze’ev Jabotinsky and his wife began. A delegation from Israel flew to New York, including the head of the Jabotinsky Returns to the Homeland operation, Yosef Klarman, Eri Jabotinsky, and “a handful of Jabotinsky’s disciples.”127 Begin remained in Israel, waiting to receive the casket when it landed. On Friday, 3 July, Eri Jabotinsky recited kaddish at the New Montefiore cemetery as the coffins were disinterred and transferred to the Riverside Memorial Chapel on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, where they were kept for several days.128 On the previous day, a symbolic ceremony was conducted in Times Square, where the grandson of Ze’ev Jabotinsky, also named Ze’ev, unveiled the sign “Jabotinsky Square.”129 There was great excitement among many of New York’s Jews, and the police made special arrangements to enable the funeral procession to travel down Broadway, one of the city’s main arteries. Jabotinsky’s coffin was borne on a carriage drawn by four white horses. Drummers and buglers marched before it, and a procession of “Jewish veterans, former Etzel fighters, and Beitar members,” together with many New York Jews, made their way toward the Young Israel Synagogue on 91st Street, a distance of over fifteen blocks.130 The procession had a semi-military appearance due mainly to the official clothes and uniforms worn by veterans of the Zion Mule Corps, Jewish Legionnaires, and others. When the funeral cortege reached the synagogue the coffins remained in the courtyard, where the religious ceremony was held. Israel’s consul general in New York, Katriel Katz, representing the president of Israel, read the text of the government decision to fulfill Jabotinsky’s will.131 The coffins were then taken to Kennedy Airport, where a short service was conducted. The El Al plane made a stopover in Paris for a memorial service; participants included the vice president of the French National Assembly, representatives of French Jewry, and delegations of partisans who fought against the Nazis in various places in Europe. The stopover was not only for refueling purposes but also provided an opportunity for Jewish individuals and organizations in Europe to participate in the Jabotinsky funeral, thus highlighting the activity of the Revisionist movement in Paris and in France. The French Army’s participation in the ceremony

127 “Embarked to bring Jabotinsky’s coffin,” Haaretz, 1 July 1964. 128 “NYPD makes special arrangements for Jabotinsky’s funeral,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 6 July 1964. 129 “Coffins of Ze’ev Jabotinsky and his wife transported on a carriage drawn by four white horses,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 7 July 1964. 130 Ibid. 131 “Jabotinsky’s coffin to arrive today,” Haaretz, 7 July 1964.

146 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

Figure 17: The coffins of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky in front of Young Israel Synagogue on 91st Street, Manhattan, 6 July 1964. Unknown photographer (JIA).

adorned it with that military splendor that the ceremonies in Israel would lack. A French Air Force unit presented arms, and a military band played a fanfare of honor as Prime Minister Eshkol, who was on an official visit to France, stood facing the coffins.132 Eshkol had ruled out a military and state funeral for Jabotinsky in Israel, but he now found himself in just such a ceremony in France.133 The official rites began only after he left. The chief rabbi of France and General (Ret.) Pierre Koenig  delivered speeches,134 and a bag of soil from Fort Mont-Valérien, where the Nazis executed French Resistance fighters, was placed on the coffin.135 The ceremony was so impressive that Yedioth Ahronoth later wondered, “If this is how France received the late Jewish hero, how should he have been received in his own country?”136

132 “Eshkol to welcome Jabotinsky’s remains at Orly airport, en route to Israel,” Haaretz, 3 July 1964; “Jabotinsky and his wife return to the homeland,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 7 July 1964. 133 “Eshkol arrives in Paris,” Davar, 29 June 1964. 134 “France salutes the brave patriot, the fearless fighter, the loyal friend,” Herut, 17 July 1964. 135 “Ashes of the fallen heroes of the French underground to be placed on Jabotinsky’s coffin,” Herut, 7 July 1964. 136 “Ze’ev Jabotinsky,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 9 July 1964.



And I shall raise you from your graves 

 147

Figure 18: General (Ret.) Pierre Koenig salutes the caskets of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky at Orly Airport, Paris, 7 July 1964. Photograph by Daniel Frank Photo (JNFPA).

“And I shall raise you from your graves, my people, and lead you back to the soil of Israel” The plane bearing the two coffins landed at Lod airport in the afternoon. The aircraft parking area was decorated with Israeli flags, and a red carpet was laid in front of the plane. All of the MKs from Herut were there, led by Begin, along with a large welcoming delegation that included members of the groups that had organized the operation, Etzel fighters in white shirts and black berets, and Lehi veterans in similar attire. A Beitar platoon, dressed in dark blue, stood alongside a National Youth platoon in light blue uniforms. Many of those in attendance wore a Captivity Medal, a decoration awarded to those imprisoned by the British during the Mandate period.137 An honor guard composed of five Beitar members and five Etzel members lowered the coffins to the ground as the Beitar and Etzel

137 “Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to his homeland,” Maariv, 8 July 1964.

148 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

flags were lowered and the army’s representative saluted.138 Thirty pallbearers, representing the groups that participated in organizing the operation, carried the caskets to a plaza surrounded by flags and placed them on command cars in military fashion.139 Begin, standing on a platform, was the only one to deliver remarks. In a voice trembling with emotion, he announced, to the Jewish people in its land and in the Diaspora in West and East, to the freedom fighters among the world’s nations, that forty-six years after he fought ... in the hills of Ephraim and at the Jordan crossings to restore the Land of Israel to its eternal owners, and thirty-five years after he was exiled by a foreign regime because of his battle for a Hebrew state and to save his people from destruction, twenty-four years after his death ... and sixteen years after expelling the foreign regime and the revival of Israel – Ze’ev Jabotinsky has returned to the homeland.140

Figure 19: Herut leaders, led by Menachem Begin, carry the caskets of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky, 7 July 1964. Photograph by Yitzhak Friedan (JIA).

138 “Jabotinsky’s coffin brought to Israel,” Haaretz, 8 July 1964. 139 “Command cars were not military, but civilian,” Maariv, 10 July 1964. 140 “Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to his homeland,” Maariv, 8 July 1964.



The funeral procession to Jerusalem of the leader of Beitar has begun. 

 149

After Begin concluded his remarks, MK Ya’akov Meridor approached the coffin and placed upon it Jabotinsky’s sword from his service in the Jewish Legion. Rachel Ohevet Ami (Havshush), the first female Etzel fighter to be sentenced to life imprisonment, placed a wreath of white carnations on the coffin of Johanna Jabotinsky.141 A cantor read the vision of the dry bones from the Book of Ezekiel: “Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I will open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people; and I will bring you home into the Land of Israel” (Ezek. 37:12). After the singing of “Hatikva,” this part of the ceremony ended. Five veteran Etzel commanders and five young Beitar members sat on the vehicle alongside Jabotinsky’s coffin, while two female Etzel fighters, two Lehi veterans, two Maccabi members, two Beitarists, and two National Youth members accompanied that of Johanna Jabotinsky. The vehicles carrying the coffins led the convoy toward Tel Aviv. As it drew closer to Ramat Gan, more and more people were waiting along the road.142 The funeral procession crossed the city to the Dov Gruner monument; dedicated in 1954, it was a significant landmark in Herut’s landscape of commemoration and memory. A unit of Etzel veterans stood at attention there while parents of Jewish fighters executed by the British brought two wreaths from the monument to the caskets. The ribbon on one wreath read, “To the father of the rebels who is returned to the homeland, from the parents”; the message on the other was, “To Johanna Jabotinsky, the wife of the commander, from the fighters.”

“The funeral procession to Jerusalem of the leader of Beitar has begun. Forward, march!” The excitement grew as the coffins approached Herbert Samuel Square and the large crowd gathered there. The backdrop in the square was dramatic, reminiscent of Herzl’s funeral. The surrounding homes were draped in black, and the coffins were placed in the western part of the square on two pedestals made of Galilee stone. The designers made extensive use of fire and light: at the foot of the stage were two stands for eternal lights, with two additional rows of candles beyond them, in the direction of Hayarkon Street. The ceremony opened with Jabotinsky’s grandchildren, Karni and Ze’ev, who lit the candles and passed the torch to young Beitar members who lit additional candles. Seven disabled war veterans lit candles in seven black lanterns

141 “Jabotinsky and his wife return to the homeland,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 7 July 1964. 142 RGA, photos 9462–9464.

150 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

set up behind the caskets.143 The most prominent of the veterans was Siman-Tov Ganeh, who was injured in both legs during the Iraq Suweidan battle in 1948 and received the “Hero of Israel” decoration. At the end of the formalities, the crowd began to file past the coffins.144 By midnight, the police estimated that forty thousand people had already paid their respects, and the flow of people continued throughout the night.145 Every few minutes the honor guard changed, with the guards signing a special book and receiving a certificate stating that they had been “honored and ascended” to the honor guard near the coffins.146 In the early morning hours the stream of visitors swelled again. Meanwhile, the Jabotinsky family visited the cemetery on Trumpeldor Street to say prayers at the graves of Jabotinsky’s mother and sister. Begin placed a wreath of flowers on the grave of Max Nordau, and a wreath laid simultaneously at Herzl’s grave in Jerusalem bore the text “For Benjamin Ze’ev Herzl on the day of Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s return to the homeland.”147 At 11:00 a.m., the Knesset convened in special session. The hall and galleries were full for the speech by Speaker Luz. Upon the conclusion of his remarks, everyone stood to honor the memory of the deceased. Members of the Communist party, Maki, were the only ones demonstratively absent.148 At 2:00 p.m., after some two hundred thousand people had filed past the coffins, the funeral procession began. There was an air of excitement in the streets of Tel Aviv. Israeli and Beitar flags flew on some public buildings. The municipality urged merchants to close their businesses during the procession and to place pictures of Jabotinsky in their shop windows. Atop the Jabotinsky House on King George Street, long Israeli flags were hung with a gigantic picture of Jabotinsky between them. The leader of the procession, Aharon Zvi Propes – “the first Beitarist” – declared through a microphone, “The funeral procession to Jerusalem of the leader of Beitar has begun. Forward, march!”149 A Beitar “officer” led the procession, followed by the Beitar and Israeli flags, and a large wreath of flowers. An honor guard of 108 Beitar members in blue uniforms marched behind them, followed by forty flag bearers with the tattered flags of Beitar branches in Europe, many of which were liquidated during World War II. Double columns

143 “Tel Aviv receives Ze’ev Jabotinsky with a tingle of holiness,” Herut, 8 July 1964. 144 “Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to his homeland,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 8 July 1964. 145 “Jabotinsky’s coffin brought to Israel,” Haaretz, 8 July 1964. 146 See an example of this certificate in CZA, A-492/7. 147 “Jabotinsky and his wife return to the homeland,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 7 July 1964. 148 For the speech, see JIA, A4-18/27; “Knesset pays tribute to Ze’ev Jabotinsky,” Maariv, 9 July 1964. 149 “With a large crowd, Tel Aviv escorts Jabotinsky,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 9 July 1964.



The funeral procession to Jerusalem of the leader of Beitar has begun. 

 151

of members of the Jabotinsky Order – in white shirts, black ties, and gray straw hats – marched on both sides of the vehicles carrying the coffins. These columns were surrounded by additional rows of Beitar veterans dressed in similar attire. Members of the Jabotinsky family walked behind the coffins. Behind them, separated from the family, were many public figures, including about two thousand representatives of organizations and institutions. Prominent in this part of the procession were two IDF officers with the rank of major, followed in a single row by underground fighters who had been sentenced to death and pardoned by the British. Next came a group of several hundred young people named Ze’eva or Ze’ev in honor of Jabotinsky. Thousands of members of the Jabotinsky Order and Etzel veterans stood in two long rows on both sides of the funeral route, forming an honor guard for the coffins as they passed in the center of the road. The route stretched for three kilometers; about twenty-five thousand people marched in the procession and some two hundred thousand watched from the side. The procession came to a halt near the Great Synagogue,150 turned onto Herzl Street, and continued to the Givat Herzl neighborhood on the eastern outskirts of Tel Aviv.151 Buses and vehicles for the Jabotinsky family and public officials waited there to take them to Jerusalem.

Figure 20: Funeral of Ze’ev Jabotinsky at the end of Allenby Street, Tel Aviv, 8 July 1964. Unknown photographer (JIA).

150 “Twenty-five thousand march in Jabotinsky’s funeral in Tel Aviv,” Haboker, 9 July 1964. 151 “Tel Aviv citizens pay respect to Jabotinsky,” Herut, 9 July 1964.

152 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

Figure 21: Caskets of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky on display in Independence Park, Jerusalem, 9 July 1964. Unknown photographer (JIA).

“Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s wanderings ended yesterday, and his banishment ended, too” The coffins were placed on special pedestals in the northwestern part of Independence Park in Jerusalem, just below the Hechal Shlomo building (seat of the Chief Rabbinate). They faced the Old City, whose walls could be seen from there. “Now,” wrote Herut, Jabotinsky’s coffin stands in the center of eternal Jerusalem. From this spot, one can view the liberated city, bustling with life. On one side, the sovereign Knesset, on the other side the Russian Compound that was once the ‘Bevingrad’ of the repressive regime, and now is home to the Hall of Justice [the Supreme Court] of the liberated state. And only on the eastern side does the City of David still lie in captivity. An adversary and enemy still stands on its walls.152

The parents of olei hagardom Avshalom Haviv and Meir Nakar lit a torch at the foot of the coffins, and the parents of Etzel fighters who fell in Jerusalem lit seven beacons in memory of their sons. The mayor of Jerusalem, Mordechai Ish Shalom, together with nine members of the city council, stood around the coffins as an initial honor guard.153 President Zalman Shazar and his wife were the first to file past, along with Rachel Yanait Ben-Zvi, the widow of the previous president. The cordoned-off area was then opened and the Jerusalem crowd streamed to

152 “The president – the first to honor Jabotinsky,” Herut, 9 July 1964. 153 CZA, A492/7, invitation to serve in honor guard in Jerusalem’s Independence Garden.

 “Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s wanderings ended yesterday, and his banishment ended, too” 

 153

the site. The hundred thousand visitors included many public figures, ministers, MKs, jurists, and government officials, as well as faculty members from Hebrew University.154 The area was closed the following afternoon and, before heading to Mount Herzl, the assembled crowd sang the Beitar song composed by Jabotinsky. A large group of Beitar members and a group of flag bearers from Beitar branches in Israel and the Diaspora walked at the front of the procession of mourners. Although smaller than the procession in Tel Aviv, it still numbered several thousand people. They headed down King George Street and when they came to the building that then housed the Knesset, the Knesset Guard presented arms. When the procession reached the International Convention Center, the participants boarded vehicles that took them to Mount Herzl. President Shazar and Acting Prime Minister Abba Eban also joined the funeral there. After the invited guests took their places on Mount Herzl in front of the open graves, the coffins were unloaded from the cars and carried on the shoulders of two rows of uniformed Beitar members. As they arrived at the site of the ceremony, the military platoon presented arms, the Israeli and Beitar flags were lowered, and the caskets were placed next to the graves.155 They were lowered into the earth and the bags of soil were placed on them. In a pre-assigned order, starting with the president of Israel, the participants covered Jabotinsky’s coffin with dirt.156 At the end of the ceremony, wreaths of flowers from various organizations and delegations were placed nearby, including one from the IDF. After the singing of “Hatikva,” many participants went to visit the nearby grave of Herzl.157 “Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s wanderings ended yesterday, and his banishment ended too,” Yedioth Ahronoth wrote.158 In Al Hamishmar, the headline was, “Poem of the week – ‘The Ceremony’”: Everything in due time / Happy are those who remember his rightful due / and forget all he owes / and wish to bequeath to him in his death / what he did not acquire in his lifetime, and if only all poverty of action / could be glorified in ceremonies ... now he will be full of grandeur / in magnificent uniforms / and proportions and dimensions / are left for history to judge.159

154 “Jabotinsky returns to Jerusalem forever,” Maariv, 9 July 1964. 155 “Remains of Jabotinsky and his wife brought for eternal rest on Mount Herzl,” Haaretz, 10 July 1964. 156 ISA, N-9/2, details of the ceremony on Mount Herzl, 9 July 1964. 157 “Remains of Ze’ev Jabotinsky and his wife buried on Mount Herzl in widely attended funeral,” Hatzofe, 10 July 1964. 158 “Wanderings and banishment end,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 10 July 1964. 159 “The Ceremony,” Al Hamishmar, 10 July 1964.

154 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

Herzl Rosenblum headlined his article in Yedioth Ahronoth “The Electricity,” and compared Jabotinsky’s funeral to those of Pinsker, Sokolow, and Nordau. He complained that the masses had remained at home during the funerals of Chaim Weizmann, Menachem Ussishkin, and Shmaryahu Levin, “while here [at Jabotinsky’s funeral] their hearts were kindled.”160 Shmuel Schnitzer wrote sourly in Maariv about the funeral and the “unpaid debt,”161 and Uri Avnery in Haolam Hazeh fumed that the state “counted every penny of stateliness like an old miserly woman.” Avnery opined that Eshkol deliberately prolonged his stay in France to avoid participating in the event.162

Jabotinsky’s grave on Mount Herzl By request of Eri Jabotinsky, and as was the case for Herzl’s grave, a board of trustees was formed to manage the grave site of the Jabotinskys. The board was composed mainly of Herut members and people involved in the “Jabotinsky Returns to his Homeland” operation.163 It was decided to plan a tombstone that would stand at the center of the burial plot, which sprawled across the two and a half dunams allocated by the Mount Herzl Committee. In late July 1965, the tombstone was unveiled in a ceremony on Mount Herzl. On this occasion there were almost none of the national and official characteristics of the funeral held the previous year. The director-general of the prime minister’s office declined an invitation for Eshkol to participate in the ceremony, explaining that the prime minister had promised to appear that day at a parachuting display and paratroopers’ assembly, and he also had to attend a meeting of the Mapai secretariat. The IDF also declined to participate in the ceremony or send representatives.164 Klarwein had planned a two-level grave site for the Jabotinskys. The upper level was designed as a ceremonial plaza, and the tombstone itself was composed of three superimposed layers of basalt, “from the same material from which Herzl’s tombstone was built.”165 After the unveiling, a choir sang Jabotinsky’s

160 H. Rosenblum, “The Electricity,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 10 July 1964. 161 Shmuel Schnitzer, “Unpaid debt,” Maariv, 10 July 1964. 162 Uri Avnery, “The path to the mount,” Haolam Hazeh, 15 July 1964. 163 JIA, H9-1/11, Eri Jabotinsky, no date cited. 164 ISA, G-7/6380, Aviad Yaffe to Yosef Klarman, 21 July 1964; ibid., Y. Blaufeld to various military units, 30 June 1964. 165 JIA, A4-2/6, Reuven Yellin to Eri Jabotinsky, 17 February 1965; ibid., Ossip Klarwein, plan for the grave site, 8 February 1965; CZA, S113M/2750-1-12, plan for the grave site of Ze’ev and Johanna Jabotinsky.



Jabotinsky’s grave on Mount Herzl 

 155

Figure 22: Memorial ceremony next to the tombs of Johanna and Ze’ev Jabotinsky, 29 July 1964. Photograph by Yitzhak Baraz (JIA).

poem “To Die or Conquer the Hill,” and the participants then circled the graves and continued to Herzl’s tomb.166 Cinemas at that hour screened the film “Ze’ev Jabotinsky Returns to the Homeland,” and a photo album with a similar name was sold in bookstores.167 Over the next decade, Herut made a point of conducting ceremonies at Jabotinsky’s grave and encouraged its followers to visit the site. In August 1967, for example, after the Six-Day War, a memorial ceremony was held there featuring a torch brought from the Western Wall and bags of soil from Rachel’s Tomb, the Mount of Olives, the Cave of the Patriarchs, and the Jordan River crossings.168 In early June 1969, Eri Jabotinsky passed away. He left his body to science, and a year later his remains were buried with special permission near those of

166 ISA, N-9/2, unveiling ceremony of tombstone of Ze’ev and Johanna Jabotinsky on Mount Herzl, 29 July 1965. 167 JIA, VD-2/162, “Ze’ev Jabotinsky returns to the homeland”; Disenchick (1965). 168 “Bringing a torch from the Western Wall,” Hayom, 7 August 1967.

156 

 Chapter 7 Ze’ev Jabotinsky

his father.169 Many recalled his unique role in fulfilling his father’s will. Over the years, Jabotinsky’s grave site has continued to draw visitors, and various ceremonies are held there. Its prominence increased after the Right’s rise to power in 1977. In 2005, the Knesset passed the Jabotinsky Law, which stipulates that on the anniversary of his death, the twenty-ninth of Tammuz, an official state memorial ceremony is to be held at the site every year.

169 “Prof. Eri Jabotinsky – to be laid to rest,” Davar, 9 June 1969; for his will, see JIA, A4 1/14; “Eri Jabotinsky’s coffin buried on Mount Herzl,” Maariv, 25 September 1970. On 4 July 1978 Aviva Jabotinsky passed away. In accordance with her will, the government of Israel agreed to allow her to be buried next to her husband.

Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants Another group of prominent figures whose remains were brought for reburial in Israel, both before and after the establishment of the state, comprised Jewish heroes who demonstrated courage – in battle, in cunning, or in vengeance – and helped build the image of the strong, proud Jew. Among them were well-known figures such as Avshalom Feinberg, David Raziel, Eliezer Margolin, Hannah Szenes, Shalom Schwartzbard, as well as anonymous immigrants who died en route to the shores of Israel. Their courage won them the privilege of reinterment in Israel, public funerals, and inclusion in the pantheon of Israeli valor. All national movements accord a place of honor to those who sacrifice themselves in the pursuit of national objectives. The heroism of fighters on the battlefield and the use of force to achieve a just national objective are highly valued.1 Yet in addition to soldiers – whose lives and deaths, in victory and defeat, constitute prototypes and symbols of courage – history has known other types of heroes. These include gods, prophets, poets, religious leaders, intellectuals, and rulers who became national symbols.2 In Jewish Israeli society, bravery has also been expressed in other ways: religious martyrs, pioneer farmers ready to die defending their land, Israelis fighting to establish and protect their new state.3 All these and others are represented among the brave people whose burials are discussed in this chapter. Self-sacrifice is a virtue that was emphasized repeatedly in the Zionist enterprise. At the funerals of eminent individuals, the deceased were portrayed as victims who had dedicated their lives to the homeland and its sacred values. Their deaths turned them into martyrs, and this martyrology became a means of uniting Israeli Zionist society.4 A hero’s death is widely perceived as a “good” death, replete with national significance,5 and the place where the hero’s remains were buried became a bridge connecting him to the living community, securing his place in the Zionist national pantheon.

1 Zerubavel (1994). 2 Carlyle (1852). 3 Baumel (2004), pp. 7–8. 4 Zartal (2002). 5 Ben-Amos (2000). DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-009

158 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

The need for exemplary figures who symbolized Jewish valor, military power, and heroism was part of the new Israeli identity. In this context, the state made a significant effort to bring such heroes to the soil of the homeland. These included members of the Nili underground, the Yishuv’s parachutists dropped behind Nazi lines in World War II, and the clandestine immigrants of the Salvador ship. Various entities, both institutional and private, retrieved the remains of the fallen for burial in Israel in appreciation of their efforts and sacrifice and so their graves could become significant landmarks in the landscape of local memory.

The fallen of the Nili underground One of the first cases in Zionist history of reinterment in the Land of Israel involved Naaman Belkind, Yosef Lishansky, and Avshalom Feinberg. The three were members of the Nili underground, which worked against the Ottomans in the Land of Israel during World War I in an effort to establish an independent Jewish entity under British patronage.6 Belkind and Lishansky were caught by the Turks and sent to Damascus, where they were imprisoned and executed by hanging on 16 December 1917. In late 1919 their bodies were removed from the Jewish cemetery in Damascus and reinterred in Rishon LeZion. The remains of Avshalom Feinberg were discovered in 1967 near Rafah and transferred for reburial in the military cemetery in Jerusalem.

Naaman Belkind and Yosef Lishansky – “When the day comes, don’t forget to bring my bones from Damascus to Rishon LeZion” Naaman Belkind was born in Gedera in 1888 to one of the first Bilu (pioneer) families from Rishon LeZion. The Young Turks revolution of 1908 enabled minorities to enlist in the Turkish Army, and Belkind was one of the first residents of the Yishuv to do so. After completing his military service, he worked at the winery in Rishon LeZion. Inspired by his cousin, Avshalom Feinberg, he joined the anti-Turkish Nili underground. He coordinated their activity in the southern part of the country, and in September 1917 was caught and imprisoned in Beersheba after crossing the Turkish lines to find Feinberg. Belkind was sentenced to death and transferred to a prison in Damascus in which Yosef Lishansky was already incarcerated.

6 Nili is an acronym for “Netzah Yisrael Lo Yishakar” (the Eternal One of Israel will not lie; 1 Sam. 15:29), which served as the group’s password.



Naaman Belkind and Yosef Lishansky 

 159

Lishansky was born in 1890 near Kiev. After his mother and brother perished in a fire, he immigrated to the Land of Israel with his father. He tried to join the Hashomer (“The Watchman”) organization, but was not accepted. He then formed a competing defense organization named Hamagen (“The Defender”), which operated in the southern settlements without much success. When World War I began he joined Nili and in 1917 was linked, tragically, to Feinberg, when the two set off for Egypt in an effort to strengthen their relations with the British. They were attacked by Bedouins en route; Feinberg was killed, and Lishansky was taken to a hospital in Cairo. After his return to Ottoman Palestine, Lishansky resumed his Nili activities and coordinated the organization’s operations. A dark cloud hovered over him, however. Many were convinced that Lishansky had murdered Feinberg and that the story about the Bedouin attack was a fabrication. In early October 1917, when the Ottomans encircled Zichron Ya’akov in search of Nili members, Lishansky fled from one place to another. He was eventually captured by members of Hashomer, his former friends and rivals, and they decided to execute him and deliver his body to the Turks. They shot Lishansky, but he managed to escape, only to be caught by Arabs and handed over to the Turks. He was transferred to prison in Damascus and sentenced to death by hanging. In the prison, awaiting execution, Belkind and Lishansky were reunited. On the night of 15–16 December 1917, the two were taken to the gallows in the central square of Damascus. Lishansky addressed to the assembled crowd in Arabic, criticizing the Ottomans and noting that while the Turks were hanging him and Belkind in Damascus, British soldiers was conquering Jerusalem and the Turkish Army was retreating from the city without a fight.7 Belkind asked that “those who harbor some anger against me, forgive me, just as I now forgive all those who have intentionally or unintentionally wronged me, and I ask that, when the day comes, don’t forget to bring my bones from Damascus to Rishon LeZion.”8 In the early morning hours, the bodies of Lishansky and Belkind were lowered from the gallows and taken by order of the Turks for burial in the Jewish cemetery in Damascus. At the time of the hangings, Belkind’s younger brother, Eitan, was also being held in the prison in Damascus. And after managing to escape, he brought the news of the executions back to the Yishuv. Belkind’s request to reinter his remains in Rishon LeZion weighed heavily on his family. In fall 1919, during the intermediate days of the Sukkot holiday, Belkind’s father, Shimshon, his brother, Eitan, and a family friend, Avraham Rapaport, traveled from Rishon LeZion to

7 S Katz (2000). 8 JIA, K2-1/9, Naaman’s will to his family at the gallows, translated from French, 15 December 1917; also in Yaari-Poleskin (1930), pp. 206–207.

160 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

Damascus. When they arrived, they contacted the representative of the new government in the city, the British military governor, and asked his permission to transfer the remains of Belkind and Lishansky. The governor gave his consent and promised the necessary assistance. They were referred to the local rabbi, who was in charge of the Jewish cemetery, but he vehemently refused to accede to their request based on Jewish tradition that the deceased should not be moved from one place in the Land of Israel to another. In response to the family’s argument that Damascus was not part of the Land of Israel, the rabbi explained that ever since King David conquered Damascus (2 Sam. 8:5–6), the city was indeed part of the Land. During this tense conversation, Natanel Hacohen Tarab, a Hebrew teacher at the Alliance school, entered the room. He had been present at the execution of the two Nili members,9 and he told the rabbi about Belkind’s request before his death. The rabbi relented.10 The decision to disinter Lishansky’s remains as well was based on Eitan Belkind’s description of the pair’s last moments. According to his account, Belkind and Lishansky shook hands, and the latter said to Eitan that if he (Eitan) made it out of prison alive and brought his brother’s body home from Damascus, Eitan should do the same for him.11 The remains of Belkind and Lishansky were placed in separate coffins and loaded on a special railroad car. The train stopped at Lod,12 and the coffins were taken from there to Rishon LeZion by Belkind’s father and Avshalom Fein, a close friend of the Belkind family and a member of Nili. To avoid delaying the burial, a funeral was quickly organized. Shimshon Belkind eulogized his son on the steps of the synagogue but almost entirely ignored Lishansky. He talked first about the heavy sacrifice that Naaman had made: “This is our fate, the nation’s pioneers; we are all devoted to building the country, and you too, my son, dedicated yourself on the altar of the nation. You sacrificed your very blood for the holy idea – for our idea of two thousand years, of building the scattered and dispersed nation.” After this he spoke of Naaman’s cousin, Avshalom, whose place of burial was unknown: Beloved and pleasant in their lives [2 Sam. 1:23], Avshalom and Naaman loved each other wholeheartedly, and in their death were separated. Avshalom was lost in the desert, and Naaman is privileged to be buried in Rishon LeZion next to his forefathers whom he dearly loved. In your last wish, you emphasized two demands: to bury your remains in Rishon

9 Hacohen’s description appears in “The remains of Naaman Belkind and Yosef Lishansky,” Hadashot Haaretz, 30 October 1919. Hacohen was presumably the only Jewish eyewitness to the hanging. 10 JIA, K2-1/9, Eitan Belkind, “Naaman returns home,” no additional details. 11 “The final path of Naaman Belkind and Yosef Lishansky,” Hamashkif, 12 December 1942. 12 JIA, K2-1/9, the burial in Rishon LeZion.



Naaman Belkind and Yosef Lishansky 

 161

LeZion, where you were born and raised, and to educate your only son, who is two years old, in the spirit of national religious education. My son, I will fulfill your aspirations. Your bones are now in Rishon LeZion, and I will raise your beloved son according to your wishes.13

From the synagogue, the funeral continued to the cemetery. There were no more than twenty participants, due in part to the Yishuv’s boycott of Nili members. Even though the Belkinds had quickly printed mourning notices and posted them on the bulletin boards in the settlement, many refrained from joining the family funeral.14 Shimon Belkind rejected the British offer to send a military unit to the ceremony to pay respect to fighters who helped them win sovereignty over the Land of Israel; he explained that the two executed Nili members did not give their blood for the English, but rather for the Jewish people.15 Naaman was buried in the family plot near his grandparents, Meir and Shifra Belkind, while Lishansky was buried separately.16 Over the years, the Belkind family has accounted for most of the visitors at the cemetery, while only a few have come to visit his colleague’s grave. In the ensuing decades, a number of books were published on Nili and the organization’s fallen fighters. Various groups enlisted their names in the political struggles within the Zionist movement. In 1937 Uri Zvi Greenberg dedicated his poem “Rot in the House of Israel” to Lishansky: “I don’t see his face here, nor his shoulder. I only feel his tree and the grave – close to his body, present on my land – no more.”17 In general, Nili’s exploits and the fate of its heroes were ignored, excluded from public discourse and from memory. Veterans of the Hashomer organization and their heirs in the Yishuv’s leadership continued to shun Nili members and followers, while supporters and admirers arose in the right-wing political camp. In 1957, on the fortieth anniversary of Feinberg’s death, a monument was dedicated in his honor near Hadera. At the dedication ceremony, Moshe Sharett, then a Mapai MK, spoke about Feinberg’s character, but the monument was a family initiative and received no institutional assistance.18 In late 1963 the story of Nili gained wide publicity after Kol Yisrael (Israel Radio) decided to shelve the Mirdaf (Chase) documentary on Lishansky, for which Yossi Godard and Nakdimon Rogel had conducted substantial research. The

13 Ibid., the words of Shimon Belkind at the tomb of his son Naaman on the day his remains were transferred from Damascus to Rishon LeZion, 25 October 1919. 14 Yisrael Halevi Teller, “Blessed memory of Naaman Belkind and Yosef Lishansky,” Doar Hayom, 11 November 1919. 15 JIA, K2-9/1, Eitan Belkind, “Lishansky and Belkind,” 1 February 1968. 16 Belkind (1977), pp. 180–184. 17 Greenberg (1937), p. 14. 18 “Monument dedicated in honor of A. Feinberg,” Davar, 21 January 1957.

162 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

decision to cancel the broadcast followed the intervention by public figures – including Rachel Yanait Ben-Zvi, the wife of the former president and a member of the Lishansky family – who argued that the “affair was too fresh.”19 Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, whose office was responsible for the Israel Broadcasting Authority, declared that the decision was made without any external interference,20 but this appears to be untrue. In 1965 Yoram Kaniuk published a series of newspaper articles entitled “The Knight from Metula” in which he tried to explain why Lishansky’s image had been falsified by historians and journalists.21 This intensified public discussion on the subject of Nili and its heroes.

Avshalom Feinberg – “The people must go to its dead hero, and not the dead hero to the people” Late in 1967 the remains of Avshalom Feinberg were discovered in the northern Sinai Peninsula.22 After his skeleton was found by a police officer, Shlomo Ben Elkana, at his personal initiative and with almost no institutional help,23 it became clear that Lishansky had told the truth when he claimed innocence in his friend’s death. Feinberg’s remains were found thanks to a palm tree that sprouted from dates that were in his pocket when he died. The palm tree was recognized by the local Bedouins as the site of Feinberg’s murder.24 The discovery aroused public debate over whether to leave Feinberg’s remains in place or reinter them. Menachem Begin immediately proposed a state funeral,25 but the location was uncertain. The head of the Atlit local council demanded that Feinberg be buried at the experimental station in Atlit, where some of Nili’s espionage activities took place. Feinberg’s alleged fiancée, Rivka Aaronsohn, initially concurred, saying that “it is fitting for a man to be remembered by the land of his life, and the land of Samaria was in Avshalom’s heart,

19 “Who gave the order to shelve ‘Mirdaf?’” Maariv, 16 December 1963. 20 “The decision not to broadcast ‘Mirdaf’ – no outside intervention,” Davar, 18 February 1964. 21 Yoram Kaniuk, “The Knight from Metula,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 19 March 1965; 26 March 1965; 2 April 1965. 22 Uri Porat, “I’m almost certain that this is the tomb of Avshalom Feinberg,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 1 November 1967; Uri Porat and David Appel, “(Historical) truth springs from the earth,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 2 November 1967. 23 Ben Elkana (1987). 24 “Avshalom Feinberg’s grave found under a palm tree near Rafah,” Davar, 2 November 1967. 25 “Avshalom Feinberg’s remains identified by Prof. Karplus,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 3 November 1967.



Avshalom Feinberg 

 163

blood, and poems.”26 A Public Committee for Avshalom Feinberg demanded that he be buried near where he fell, in northern Sinai. This committee included Uzzi Ornan, the founder of the League Against Religious Coercion; Tzila (Feinberg) Shoham, Avshalom’s sister; Yosef Nadva, a supporter of the Greater Land of Israel; and Rivka Aaronsohn, who had changed her mind. The members of the committee mobilized supporters, including Eitan Belkind,27 and read one of Feinberg’s poems in which he ostensibly requested to be buried in the desert.28 Ornan argued that Rafah was part of the “homeland” and added: The people of Israel need heroes and historical sites of heroism. Here we have an opportunity to add Rafah to the map of Hebrew heroism, like Tel Hai. Here the best of our youth will come and be educated in the light of the legend of Avshalom Feinberg’s personality... Would anyone be willing to consider moving Trumpeldor’s remains to Mount Herzl? And Tel Hai ‘should’ also have been outside of our borders at the time. The monument at the site [probably the statue of the roaring lion at the Kfar Giladi cemetery, where Trumpeldor was buried] dismisses any thought of giving up the site.29

A spirited debate was conducted in the newspapers. Herzl Rosenblum, the editor of Yedioth Ahronoth, declared that Feinberg should be buried near Rafah so that: his admirers and those who cherish his memory among the youth and other parts of our people will visit the site where Feinberg fell. Indeed, that site is also, at long last, within the boundaries of our land, and thus there is no need to trouble the hero’s bones and move them to a place that will be more “comfortable” for them... . After all, the people must go to its dead hero, and not the dead hero to the people.30

Haim Gouri wrote in Lemerchav that: they are right, the ones who say that the new ‘Yad Avshalom’ should be built next to the palm tree that sprouted from the marrow of our distant, forgotten and banished brother at the site of his burial, in the sands of Rafah ... if he remains in his resting place ... this far-flung site will become an eternal destination for pilgrims, who will believe what their eyes see.31

26 “Demands to bury A. Feinberg in Atlit,” Davar, 19 November 1967; “Rivka Aaronsohn: bury Feinberg’s remains at Atlit experimental farm,” Haaretz, 16 November 1967. 27 “Demands to bury A. Feinberg at site where he was murdered,” Davar, 15 November 1967; Uri Porat, “He belongs to the entire nation,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 November 1967. 28 Uri Porat and David Appel, “(Historical) truth springs from the earth,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 2 November 1967. 29 “Feinberg’s grave should be in Rafah,” Maariv, 15 November 1967. 30 “For the funeral of Avshalom Feinberg, of blessed memory,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 14 November 1967; see also “Avshalom Feinberg’s grave,” Maariv, 4 November 1967. 31 Haim Gouri, “An isolated palm tree,” Lamerchav, 24 November 1967.

164 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

Figure 23: “Avshalom’s Palm,” where the remains of Avshalom Feinberg were found in the northern Sinai Peninsula, 10 May 1968. Photograph by Moshe Milner (NPC).

Figure 24: Casket of Avshalom Feinberg in front of Rishon LeZion synagogue, 29 November 1967. Photograph by Fritz Cohn (NPC).



Avshalom Feinberg 

 165

But as Eitan Belkind would later explain, “the family could not turn down the government’s proposal to have the body buried in a state ceremony in the national pantheon, on Mount Herzl,”32 and it was decided that Feinberg would be reinterred in a military funeral at the military cemetery there. On 29 November 1967 – the anniversary of the UN decision establishing the State of Israel – the funeral procession began at Founders’ Square in Rishon LeZion, opposite the Great Synagogue. Feinberg’s coffin, wrapped in an Israeli flag and adorned with a single wreath from the IDF, was placed on a black pedestal, under a blue-and-white canopy, and surrounded by lit torches. An IDF honor guard stood near the coffin as thousands filed past it. On the stairs of the Great Synagogue stood members of the Belkind and Aaronsohn families. The eulogists included Feinberg’s sister, Tzila. Eitan Belkind, who led the ceremony, turned to Feinberg’s coffin and said: Officers of the Israel Defense Forces will carry you on their shoulders, will take you to the military section, and you will be buried among the IDF soldiers you always dreamed of. The government of Israel today rectified the deeds of the Yishuv’s leaders ... From the hilltops of Zichron Ya’akov [Sarah Aaronsohn] and from the cemetery in Rishon LeZion [Belkind and Lishansky] your colleagues are watching you, and they are joyful about the great moment you have won.33

Many public figures, government ministers, and MKs participated in the funeral on Mount Herzl, and as the coffin was lowered into the grave, various representatives placed bags of soil brought from Gedera, Zichron Ya’akov, and Hadera. From Rishon LeZion came a bag filled with earth near the grave of Naaman Belkind. There was also a promise to plant shoots next to Feinberg’s grave from the date tree where his remains were found.34 Uri Keisari, writing in Maariv, noted how politically and socially charged the issue of Feinberg’s reinterment was: “During the state’s early years, it faces for the second time the general problem of bringing remains, and not only that of bringing the remains of our precious and special sons. This is an embarrassing problem – in the absence of an underlying foundation of honesty.”35 The military and state funeral conducted for Feinberg, and especially the discovery of the truth about his death in the desert, led to a public rehabilitation

32 Emanuel Bar Kedma, “Rafah should be added to the map of bravery,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 15 November 1967. 33 Belkind (1977), p. 222. 34 “The remains of Avshalom Feinberg reinterred on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem,” Davar, 30 November 1967. A shoot from the palm tree was planted next to Feinberg’s grave in May 2009. 35 “Uri Keisari, “Avshalom’s remains and Avshalom,” Maariv, 29 November 1967.

166 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

of Lishansky that enabled his family to demand the transfer of his remains from Rishon LeZion to Jerusalem so that he, too, could be recognized for his activity in the Nili underground. Yosef Nedava, a historian and editorialist, exclaimed in Maariv that “the blood of the Hebrew hero ... calls to us to clear his name.”36 Lishansky’s mother and two brothers sent a letter to the president asking him to take action on Lishansky’s behalf and also to mention Belkind and Lishansky during Feinberg’s funeral.37 The president’s office responded, “We believe that in historical matters the initiative should be left in the hands of historians and researchers.”38 The family members did not relent. At the end of 1967, they convened a press conference with members of the public committee formed to promote their cause. Members of the committee aimed to clear Lishansky’s name and “stir the people to repay the debt of honor to a faithful son, devoted fighter, and hero who died on the gallows.”39 Nedava reported the Lishansky family’s appeal to the president and added that they were hoping to reinter the remains of their loved one in Jerusalem. “Only such a military or state funeral,” he argued, “would grant Yosef complete rehabilitation.” He added that, “until a few years ago, there was a sort of shared fate of the two martyrs. Today, there is no excuse. The Belkind family moved Naaman to the family plot, and Yosef is orphaned and alone as always. He had no special connection with Rishon LeZion, and in light of the discovery of Avshalom’s remains, his place is at his side.”40 The family’s request was rejected, perhaps due to opposition from the Feinberg family, who did not wish to reopen a painful wound from the past. In early 1968, fifty years after the execution of Belkind and Lishansky in Damascus, a memorial ceremony was held in the Rishon LeZion cemetery, with Eitan Belkind and Nedava delivering remarks.41 In 1970 the Habima National Theater staged a play by Yoram Kaniuk titled The Binding of Isaac: Yosef Lishansky’s Persecution and Death, based on the series of articles Kaniuk had written and additional research he conducted.42 The play garnered media attention and reignited the public argument about Lishansky.43 At about that time, a memorial service was

36 Yosef Nedava, “Clearing the name of Yosef Lishansky,” Maariv, 7 November 1967. 37 JIA, K2-9/5, Ivriya, Rivka, and Toviah Lishansky to Levi Eshkol, 12 November 1967. 38 Ibid., Levi Eshkol to Ivriya Lishansky, 20 November 1967. 39 Ibid., press conference, 27 December 1967. 40 Ibid. 41 Advertisement, Maariv, 1 January 1968. 42 JIA, K2-9/2, Yoram Kaniuk, The Binding of Isaac: Yosef Lishansky’s Persecution and Death, Habima National Theater, 1970. 43 “Ideological War,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 6 December 1970; “The legend of Yosef Lishansky,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 14 December 1970; Nedava (1986), pp. 85–89.



Avshalom Feinberg 

 167

held for Feinberg at “Avshalom’s Palm” in the desert, which had been fenced and became a pilgrimage site.44 In 1977, with the turnover of power in the State of Israel that brought Menachem Begin to the prime minister’s office, Ivriya and Toviah Lishansky again raised the issue of reinterring their father’s remains in Jerusalem. They hoped that on the sixtieth anniversary of his hanging, “an official announcement will be issued declaring that he fell at the forefront of the people, on the altar of its national aspirations, and that a directive will be given to bring his remains to eternal rest in the eternal capital of Israel.”45 Members of the Public Committee for the Rehabilitation of Yosef Lishansky published advertisements in the newspapers calling on the government of Israel to bring “the affair of the persecuted and banished hero” to an end. The advertisements stated that “this will be done when an official decision is made declaring that Yosef Lishansky fell on the altar of our people’s struggle for redemption, and by transferring his remains from the cemetery in Rishon LeZion to Zion, to Mount Herzl, and burying them alongside the grave of Avshalom Feinberg – his comrade in the movement and in the journey in the desert.”46 In late 1978 the marker above Lishansky’s grave in Rishon LeZion was quietly replaced by a military tombstone bearing the IDF emblem, following “a directive from a very senior official in the government, who proposed this as a compromise to the family, which demands the transfer of Lishansky’s remains for burial on Mount Herzl.”47 Although Prof. Nedava believed that “placing the IDF tombstone on his grave so belatedly is at least a great victory for the truth,” the family protested strongly,48 fearing that it might harm Lishansky’s chances for reinterment on Mount Herzl.49 There were also protests from relatives of other underground fighters whose graves were not similarly honored with IDF tombstones. According to the Military Cemeteries Law of 1950, the Ministry of Defense’s Department for Memorializing Soldiers was only responsible for those who fell after 29 November 1947 – the date the UN General Assembly approved the termination of the British

44 “Avshalom’s Palm – a fenced site,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 24 November 1967; Baruch Nadal, “Avshalom’s Palm waited fifty years,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 21 January 1971. 45 JIA, K2-9/4, Ivriya and Toviah Lishansky to Menachem Begin, 28 September 1977; “Demands to transfer Lishansky’s remains to Mount Herzl,” Maariv, 10 October 1977. 46 “Cleansing the name of Yosef Lishansky,” Maariv, 16 November 1977. 47 “IDF tombstone placed on Lishansky’s grave by mistake,” Maariv, 10 January 1979. 48 Uri Porat, “Fighter’s rest,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 29 December 1978. 49 “Yosef Lishansky’s family demands burial on Mount Herzl,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 15 January 1979.

168 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

Mandate and partition of the Land of Israel, which triggered the 1948 War.50 Their spokesman declared that “under the law, the Ministry of Defense does not handle the underground fighters who fell before the establishment of the state,” and that the marker on Lishansky’s grave had been placed there as a result of a departmental error.51 Only in early 1979 did the Likud government began to discuss seriously the question of reinterring Yosef Lishansky’s remains in Jerusalem, and in April a decision was made by the Ministerial Committee on Symbols and Ceremonies. The Ministry of Defense was directed to organize a “military-state funeral, in the format and scope of Avshalom Feinberg’s funeral.” The committee recommended engraving the symbol of the Decoration of State Warriors on Lishansky’s tombstone – a decoration awarded to members of military organizations in pre-state Israel.52 In early August Lishansky’s remains were transferred to the military cemetery in Jerusalem, to a grave adjacent to Feinberg’s in the section of fighters sentenced to death. At his funeral – his third burial – Knesset Speaker Yitzhak Shamir participated, and Ariel Sharon represented the government. Ivriya Lishansky spoke above the open grave: Father. Today you were brought to eternal rest alongside the person who conceived the idea of Nili, Avshalom. Both of you gave your lives in the innocent belief that replacing the barbaric rule of the Turks with the enlightened rule of the British would bring redemption. Despite the innocence of this belief and the fact that most of the Yishuv opposed this viewpoint, it bore fruit over the years and comprised an important foundation for the establishment of the State of Israel, whose elected government recognizes its heroes and gathers the best of its fighters, men and women, to this sacred place, in the shadow of the great dreamers Herzl and Jabotinsky.53

The burial affair of Belkind, Lishansky, and Feinberg stretched over six decades and illustrates how challenging and political these questions were. What began in all three cases as a family matter, outside of the Zionist and national context, became over the years part of the internal Israeli struggle with its own past.

50 Shlomo Ben Elkana, “Lishansky’s memorial,” Davar, July 21, 1979; Shamir (2004), pp. 24–25. 51 “Military tombstone placed on Lishansky’s grave by mistake,” Davar, 10 January 1979. 52 JIA, K2-9/4, protocol of a government meeting on 5 February 1979. 53 JIA, K2-9/4, Ivriya Lishansky’s words on the reinterment day; “Yosef Lishansky buried on Mount Herzl in full state ceremony,” Davar, 9 August 1979.



Eliezer Margolin 

 169

Eliezer Margolin – a Jewish Legionnaire and his burial in Rehovot Eliezer Margolin was born in 1874 in Russia and moved with his family to Rehovot as a child. He emigrated to Australia and, with the outbreak of World War I, volunteered for the Australian Army. He was sent to Egypt, where he fought as an officer. While recuperating in London after being wounded for the third time, he heard about the formation of the Jewish Legion – hundreds of Jewish volunteers who were now part of His Majesty’s Army. He was appointed commander of the second Hebrew battalion, the 39th Battalion of Royal Fusiliers, and fought with them to conquer the Land of Israel.54 At the end of the war, when the Jewish Legion was disbanded, Margolin joined a mixed Jewish-Arab force assembled in Palestine under British command. That force broke up after Jewish Legion veterans participated in defending Tel Aviv during the Jewish-Muslim riots in 1921. Margolin returned to Perth, Australia, despite great admiration for him in the Yishuv and his symbolic image as a Jewish war hero. He died in Sydney on 2 June 1944.55 According to his wife, Hilda, Margolin asked to be buried in the Land of Israel. But this was possible only in early 1950, after the establishment of the state. The mission to retrieve his remains was organized by the Ministry of Defense in collaboration with the Association of Jewish Legion Veterans.56 The director of the Department for Special Tasks in the Ministry of Defense, Yaakov Patt, organized both the transfer of the coffin and the funeral.57 The state ceremony began on 19 January, with decorated Jewish Legion veterans gathering at the Haifa port to unload the coffin.58 The sword Margolin used during his service was placed on the casket together with his hat and medals.59

54 On the Jewish Legion, see Elam (1973). 55 Gouttman (2005); on Margolin’s biography, see “The remains of a proud Jew – to their eternal rest,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 20 January 1950. He was cremated in Australia and his ashes were later sent to Israel: “Margolin’s remains – in Haifa,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 18 January 1950. 56 “Col. Margolin to be buried here,” Palestine Post, 10 January 1950. 57 ISA, L-19/2295, Yaakov Patt, “Colonel Margolin’s reinterment ceremony,” no date cited; “Margolin’s Remains to Arrive Thursday,” Palestine Post, 17 January 1950. 58 ISA, L-19/2295, minutes of the organizing committee for Colonel Margolin’s reinterment ceremony, 18 January 1950; “Coffin of Margolin Received in Haifa,” Palestine Post, 19 January 1950; IDFA, 1951/1291, 3, Yaakov Patt, “Colonel Eliezer Margolin’s reinterment ceremony,” no date cited. 59 “Legionnaires Pay Last Respect To World War I Commander,” Palestine Post, 20 January 1950.

170 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

When the procession arrived at the Haifa city hall, pupils stood on three sides of the coffin, with two rows of policemen in front of them.60 The coffin was brought inside and Hilda Margolin, who had accompanied it from Australia, met with the mayor of Haifa, Shabtai Levy, and veterans of the Jewish Legion.61 The procession continued to Kiryat Eliyahu, where Margolin was stationed with his unit in 1917, and a short ceremony was conducted there. The next stop was Moshav Avihayil, a village founded by veterans of the Jewish Legion, where the casket was received at the central square, renamed for Margolin. Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, soon to become the second president of the Israel and a Jewish Legion veteran, delivered a eulogy on behalf of the former soldiers. Many of them, wearing their decorations from World War I, filed past the coffin at the moshav’s community center, accompanied by local teenagers.62 The procession continued on to Independence Square in Netanya, facing the sea, where Mayor Oved Ben Ami delivered a eulogy before a local crowd.63 At Ohel Shem in Tel Aviv, the coffin was placed on a black platform decorated with greenery. “A mosaic of different types, Jewish Legion veterans, soldiers who served under Colonel Margolin, medals and ribbons of honor on their chest, white hair, bent backs, and faces furrowed with wrinkles, and sparkling eyes,” filed past the coffin.64 The Australian consul, Osmond Charles William Fuhrman, who also fought in World War I under Margolin’s command, placed on the coffin a wreath of red poppies, which had long been a symbol of those who fell in World War I. The ribbon on the wreath declared, “The government and citizens of Australia remember the brave soldier.” Following the ceremony in Tel Aviv, the funeral procession proceeded to the Sarafand (Tzrifin) camp, where members of the Jewish Legion were deployed during the war, and the coffin was placed at the site where Margolin’s tent was located while IDF soldiers stood in military formation. The procession then headed toward Rehovot, where Margolin lived during his childhood and where his parents were buried.65 On the outskirts of Rehovot, an IDF platoon was waiting to lead the coffin to the front of the community center; Margolin’s comrades stood around it as an

60 ISA, L-19/2295, minutes of the organizing committee for Colonel Margolin’s reinterment ceremony, 18 January 1950. 61 “Colonel Margolin’s coffin brought for burial today in Rehovot,” Hatzofe, 19 January 1950; “Colonel Eliezer Margolin’s final path,” Davar, 20 January 1950. 62 “Colonel Eliezer Margolin’s final path,” Davar, 20 January 1950. 63 “Colonel Margolin of blessed memory brought for eternal rest in Rehovot,” Davar, 20 January 1950. 64 “Colonel Eliezer Margolin’s final path,” Davar, 20 January 1950. 65 “Legionnaires pay last respects to World War I commander,” Palestine Post, 20 January 1950.



Shalom Samuel Schwartzbard 

 171

honor guard. There were several eulogies. After the crowd filed past the casket, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion arrived and accompanied it to the cemetery, where a military funeral was held. Margolin’s grave was dug alongside his that of his parents. The poet Moshe Smilansky spoke about the deceased’s youth in Rehovot and “his burning love for human beings and for work, as an outstanding and disciplined soldier, and as a great Jew.”66 A few days later, Margolin’s sword and medals were brought to the Menorah club for discharged soldiers in Jerusalem in the presence of hundreds of people, including Ben-Gurion.67 In August 1956, an unveiling ceremony was held at his grave in Rehovot. The flags of Israel, the Jewish Legion, Australia, Canada, and Britain were raised, and President Ben-Zvi spoke about “Colonel Eliezer Margolin, who was the first Hebrew commander since the battalions of Bar Kochba, who fought 1,800 years ago.”68

Shalom Samuel Schwartzbard – “Avenger of the Jewish blood spilled in the pogroms of Ukraine” Shalom Samuel Schwartzbard, born in Bessarabia in 1886, was an anarchist and Yiddish poet with French citizenship.69 In 1926, in Paris, he assassinated Symon Petliura, a leader of the Ukrainian People’s Republic who was accused of mass killings of Jews during World War I. Schwartzbard was thus known as “the avenger.” After turning himself in, he declared that he had killed a murderer and was “prepared to die myself and sacrifice my life for the tortured Jews in Ukraine.”70 At the end of a trial before a French jury,71 he was acquitted, and the case echoed across the Jewish world. After the acquittal, Schwartzbard attempted to immigrate to the Land of Israel, but the Mandate government viewed him as dangerous and refused to issue a visa. This stirred anger against the British, “which pretends to defend the holiness of the land and prevent it from being violated, heaven forbid, by a Hebrew fighter stepping foot in it – someone who stood trial and was found inno-

66 “Colonel Eliezer Margolin’s final path,” Davar, 20 January 1950; IDFA, 1951/1291, 3, S. Mazeh to various units, 11 January 1950. 67 “Club to have custody of Margolin’s sword,” Palestine Post, 18 January 1950. 68 “Margolin’s grave,” Haboker, 23 August 1956; “President unveils Colonel Margolin’s tombstone,” Davar, 23 August 1956. 69 Schwartzbard (1921). 70 “How Petliura was killed,” Davar, 2 June 1926; Noah Klieger, “The avenger,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 May 1967. 71 Cotic (1972).

172 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

cent.”72 Already in October 1928, the Committee to Bring Schwartzbard to the Land of Israel convened a public assembly in Tel Aviv, where it inaugurated the Fund for Schwartzbard’s Immigration to Israel and worked to register him in the Jewish National Fund’s Golden Book.73 In 1937, Schwartzbard traveled to South Africa; as an emissary of the Dubnov Institution in Paris, he was engaged in fundraising for the publication of a general encyclopedia in Yiddish. In March 1938, while staying in Cape Town, he either died during a lecture or was found dead in his hotel.74 His remains were placed in a metal box in the local Jewish cemetery, with the idea that in the future they would be transferred for burial in the Land of Israel. The initiative to reinter Schwartzbard came from his wife, Anna, who visited Israel in the mid-1950s with the encouragement of Yosef Dror, a Jewish National Fund representative. During a work-related trip to Cape Town, Dror visited the cemetery and saw Schwartzbard’s tombstone. He proposed that in 1966, on the thirtieth anniversary of Schwartzbard’s death and forty years after he assassinated Petliura, “perhaps the time has come to do this” [reinter Schwartzbard’s remains]. Dror suggested that Yad Vashem take this mission upon itself.75 In mid-May 1967 the State of Israel formed a public committee to promote the project, headed by Marc Jarblum, chairman of the Zionist federation in France.76 In the atmosphere following the Six-Day War, many looked favorably upon Schwartzbard’s action, and before the arrival of his coffin the newspapers were full of descriptions of Petliura’s assassination.77 Schwartzbard’s coffin landed at the Lod airport in December 1967, accompanied by Shmuel Barkai, chair of the Haganah veterans’ organization, and David Frankfurter, who had killed the head of the Nazi party in Davos, Switzerland, in 1936 and served an eighteen-year prison sentence.78 The casket was taken to Yad Lebanim in Tel Aviv, where it was received by veterans of the Haganah, partisans, war veterans, former Etzel and Lehi fighters, members of the Jabotinsky Order, and “a representative of the vengeance troops against the Nazis.” Public and

72 D. Z., editorial, Davar, 7 March 1928. 73 JIA, P 4/282. 74 “Shalom Schwartzbard,” Davar, 4 March 1938. 75 Yosef Dror, “Shalom Schwartzbard,” Davar, 8 August 1966, including a photo of the tombstone; “Jewish Patriot,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 15 November 1967. 76 JIA, P 282/4, message from the Public Committee for the Reinterment of Shalom Schwartzbard in Israel; “‘I killed a murderer,’ said Shalom Schwartzbard after shooting Petliura,” Davar, 18 May 1967. 77 “Remains of Shalom Schwartzbard to arrive in Israel on Thursday,” Davar, 5 December 1967; G. Kressel, “With the reinterment of Shalom Schwartzbard in Israel,” ibid, 7 December 1967. 78 “David Frankfurter’s trial,” Davar, 20 December 1936.



Shalom Samuel Schwartzbard 

 173

political figures were also in attendance, including Menachem Begin, the writer Uri Zvi Greenberg, and the Yiddish poet Abraham Sutzkever. After a eulogy, the coffin was loaded onto a military command car, which stopped near the Netanya Municipality en route to Moshav Avihayil. The public recognized the role of the Jewish Legion Museum at the moshav, and it seemed natural for Schwartzbard to be buried in Avihayil’s small cemetery.79 Yet the grave was neglected, covered only with a simple wooden board, until a military-like tombstone was placed on it nearly a decade later. It was inscribed, “Shalom, son of Haya and Yitzhak Schwartzbard, avenger of the spilled blood of Jews in Ukraine pogroms.”80

The clandestine immigrants who died on the Salvador In December 1940, during World War II, the clandestine immigrant ship Salvador, carrying over 350 Jewish passengers from Bulgaria, sank in the Sea of Marmara in northwest Turkey. Due to stormy seas, the ship had anchored near Istanbul for several days, and when it set out again it was hit by a storm. On 12 December it crashed against rocky shores near Silivri, just west of Istanbul.81 More than 230 passengers, including 66 children, died, and only 124 survived.82 Some of the bodies were buried in the Jewish cemetery at Silivri.83 After the establishment of Israel, the Association of Immigrants from Bulgaria held an annual memorial ceremony with the families of the Salvador casualties. The family members asked to reinter their loved ones in Israel. Solomon Peretz, a representative of the association, was able to identify the location of the graves, which by then had become a pasture and a training ground for the Turkish army. In early 1962 the association intensified its lobbying after learning that the cemetery in Silivri was slated for demolition. The association appealed to the minister of religious affairs, Zerach Warhaftig, who sent an official request to

79 “Shalom Schwartzbard’s coffin buried in Moshav Avihayil,” Haaretz, 8 December 1967; “Remains of Shalom Schwartzbard reinterred in Avihayil in funeral attended by masses,” Davar, 8 December 1967. 80 Menachem Michelson, “Trash on the grave of a Jewish hero,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 5 November 1976. 81 CZA, S6/4289, a cable from 14 December 1940 listing the names of those who died and those who survived the shipwreck. 82 CZA, S6/4289, Jewish Agency’s Immigration Department to Association of Immigrants from Bulgaria, 17 February 1941. 83 Sozin (1998), 84–111, was one of the survivors.

174 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

the Turkish authorities. Foreign Ministry official Shaul Avigur and Israel Galili of the Ahdut Avodah party were also involved in these contacts. A committee was formed to coordinate the transfer of the remains. Chaired by the secretary of the Jewish Agency, Moshe Rivlin, the committee included representatives of the Jewish Agency, the Ministry of Religious Affairs, the prime minister’s office, and the Association of Immigrants from Bulgaria.84 It appeared that the mission would succeed. The committee members decided on a place of burial: the cemetery of Moshav Beit Hanan, home to many immigrants from Bulgaria.85 However, with the mediation of Yehoshafat Harkabi (deputy director-general of the prime minister’s office), Ben-Gurion made the extraordinary decision to authorize the burial of the clandestine immigrants in the military cemetery in Jerusalem. But the decision was not implemented. A year later, in 1963, the desperate leaders of the Association of Immigrants from Bulgaria warned the new prime minister, Levi Eshkol, that, “if this year we again fail to transfer the remains of the Salvador clandestine immigrants, it will apparently no longer be possible to do this for a simple reason: the cemetery will no longer exist.”86 In light of this pressure, Rivlin renewed his efforts. IDF Chief of Staff Zvi Zur approved the use of Air Force planes to transfer the coffins, and Moshe Sharett, head of the WZO, agreed to chair a public organizing committee, “to make the mission a great educational mission about clandestine immigration and its exploits.”87 When this was published, some argued that clandestine immigrants from other ships should also be reinterred in Israel – for example, those who were buried in Mauritius or Cyprus.88 Sharett received a request from a representative of the families of casualties from the Shabetz camp in Yugoslavia, who were en route to the Land of Israel after World War II and were buried in a mass grave in the Sephardic cemetery in Belgrade.89 A decision was needed: to continue the project of transferring the remains from Turkey, or to await the formulation of a general policy on reinterring clandestine immigrants. Yigal Allon, the minister of labor, believed that the Salvador mission should not be delayed and that “a special cemetery should be designated for clandestine immigrants and not neces-

84 CZA, S30/4158, Moshe Rivlin to B. Duvdevani, 25 July 1962. 85 “The remains of 230 Salvador clandestine immigrants – for burial in Israel,” Davar, 3 August 1962. 86 CZA, S30/4158, Robert Roubnov to Levi Eshkol, 14 August 1963. 87 Ibid., Moshe Rivlin to Levi Eshkol, 1 September 1963. 88 During the 1980s a similar demand was raised: “The remains of the Mauritius clandestine immigrants,” Davar, 6 June 1983. 89 CZA, S30/4158, Yosef Ferminger to Moshe Sharett, 9 October 1962.



The clandestine immigrants who died on the Salvador 

 175

sarily adjacent to the military cemetery,” as part of an overall plan that would not create “an opening for bitterness and feelings of discrimination.”90 It was only in early 1964 that Eshkol and Jewish Agency leaders decided to move forward, transferring the coffins from Turkey and burying the Salvador casualties on Mount Herzl. This would be the climax of a series of events planned for the “Year of Clandestine Immigration,”91 marking thirty years since the beginning of efforts to spur immigration to the Land of Israel when it was forbidden by the British Mandate.92 The plan called for the Jewish burial society in Istanbul to handle the disinterment and transfer of the remains to the port of Istanbul, where the local rabbinate would conduct the appropriate religious ceremonies.93 On 25 August 1964, the coffins of the Salvador casualties were loaded onto the Zim Ashdod.94 Rabbis and leaders of the city’s Jewish community were present at the Istanbul port, as was Israel’s consul in Turkey, Avraham Giladi.95 The assembly marking the conclusion of the Year of Clandestine Immigration and the beginning of the burial ceremony for the Salvador victims began in the late evening of 30 August at the port in Jaffa. Two illuminated barges floating near the docks served as stages. President Shazar and his wife sat on one of these, alongside the foreign minister, Golda Meir. Jaffa’s Zadikoff Choir, most of whose members were of Bulgarian origin, stood on the other stage and sang the clandestine immigrant song “In Secret, A Ship Casts About.” In the background were illuminated the symbolic sails of clandestine immigrant boats that sank en route to the Land of Israel. The coffins, wrapped in Israeli flags, were deposited on the shore in front of the crowd; on a stage above them were cantors who had emigrated from Bulgaria.96 Following a speech by Meir about the approximately two thousand clandestine immigrants who drowned on their way to the Land of Israel, the writer Aharon Megged delivered a eulogy: “The people of Israel will remember the clandestine immigrants who scorned the dangers and were prepared to fight and did not arrive.” The children of immigrants, standing on Israeli Navy boats – the “spiritual heirs of the shadow fleet of clandestine immigrant boats” – lowered five wreaths into the sea.97

90 Ibid., Yigal Allon to Moshe Rivin, 3 November 1963. 91 Ibid., S6/10271, Moshe Rivlin to Zvi Shtiasani, 27 May 1964. 92 “1964 – the year of clandestine immigration,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 19 January 1964. 93 CZA, S30/4158, A. Giladi to the Consular Department, 2 July 1964. 94 Ibid., S6/10271, S. Hamani to Yehuda Dominitz, 26 August 1964. 95 “The remains of Salvador victims loaded onto ‘Ashdod’ ship,” Davar, 26 August 1964. 96 “Impressive ceremony for Salvador victims,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 31 August 1964. 97 “Thousands pay respect to those who died on the Salvador clandestine immigrants ship,” Herut, 31 August 1964.

176 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

The ceremony continued with rabbis walking at the head of a procession, reading verses from the Mishnah, followed by military trucks bearing the coffins. Wrapped in flags, they were placed on a platform in the center of Bloomfield Stadium in Jaffa. After three children of Salvador survivors lit a memorial torch, the service began with the recitation of psalms. Many people continued to file past the coffins through the night.98 In the morning the trucks set out for Yad Vashem, where a large crowd had gathered. It was an unusual juxtaposition of the Holocaust and national revival, Yad Vashem and Mount Herzl, which shared no physical connection in those days. Sharett spoke at the ceremony: We are bringing today to a Jewish grave in the State of Israel the remains of the clandestine immigrants from the diaspora of Bulgaria ... we are accompanying them to their final rest from the slopes of this lofty hill, at whose summit rests the great visionary of our national independence ... this cemetery ... is a memorial to the bearers of the Zionist vision that is being fulfilled, to the volunteers of the World War who died as martyrs in the battle against the enemy, to the parachutists who rushed to save their brethren ... to the heroes of the War of Independence who gave their lives in the prime of their youth in order to fulfill the hope of generations for redemption ... today we designate a place of honor here for a new shared grave signifying those who died on the front of clandestine immigration.99

The crowd walked to the burial site in the military cemetery, and the dead were buried in a common grave.100 The laying of a tombstone was delayed for many years, much to the dismay of the family members of those who went down with the Salvador.101 Leon Avraham, the son of two survivors, wrote in September 1971 to Prime Minister Golda Meir that “on Mount Herzl, 104 people have been buried for over seven years already and the government has not seen fit to cover the grave.” He added that, in his opinion, this would not have happened to survivors from Poland or Russia.102 Only later in the 1970s was the grave covered with a proper stone. Architect Asher Hiram’s design for the site.103 A sign explained that the reinterment was an initiative of the government of Israel, the Jewish Agency, and the Association of Immi-

98 “I have two brothers in these coffins,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 31 August 1964. 99 “The remains of San Salvador clandestine immigrants buried on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem,” Davar, 1 September 1964. 100 “Remains of San Salvador clandestine immigrants brought for burial in Jerusalem,” Haaretz, 1 September 1964. 101 CZA, S6/10271, A. Sasson, handwritten letter, no recipient cited. 102 ISA, G-7/6380, Avraham Leon to the prime minister, 22 September 1971. 103 CZA, S113M/2760/2, plan of A. Hiram and S. Hazan for the Salvador grave.



The clandestine immigrants who died on the Salvador 

 177

grants from Bulgaria. The names of those who died on the ship are etched on another memorial sign, below the words, “Their ship was wrecked en route to the homeland, but their tragedy did not deter. After them, the masses immigrated.”104

The fallen of the Jewish Brigade – “A people that demands the bones of its fighters” The men of the Jewish Brigade formed in September 1944 were among the tens of thousands of volunteers from the Yishuv who fought in the British Army in World War II.105 Over eight hundred Jewish Brigade soldiers were killed in the war, and most were buried in British military cemeteries. Because the Brigade fought primarily in Italy at first, the dead were interred near Ancona, Florence, Rome, or Ravenna.106 In June 1946, when the Brigade’s soldiers returned to the Land of Israel, they not only left behind those who were missing in action but also their fallen comrades.107 Jewish Agency emissaries and other activists from the Yishuv who operated in Italy prior to Israel’s independence held occasional memorial ceremonies in the cemetery in Ravenna, where thirty-three Brigade soldiers were buried.108 After the newly independent state established the Department for Memorializing Soldiers in the Ministry of Defense, its staff began to take an interest in the Brigade’s fallen warriors, including those buried in Ravenna. Like other military cemeteries of the British Commonwealth of Nations, the one in Ravenna was managed by the Imperial War Graves Commission according to strict rules and regulations. In 1950, at the initiative of the Ministry of Defense, Israeli diplomats in Rome visited Ravenna and reported on the good condition of the graves and the replacement of the previous wooden Jewish stars with tombstones.109 The visit was designed in part to examine the possibility of transferring the remains to Israel, but the relatives of the dead soldiers were not satisfied. One bereaved father

104 “Clandestine immigrant ship that sank next to the island of Syrna,” Davar, 19 November 1972; “Prime minister to attend funeral of Cyprus clandestine immigrants – today,” Davar, 17 November 1970. 105 “A Jewish Brigade will be formed and will actively participate in the battle,” Haboker, 20 September 1944; “The Jewish Brigade engages in battle,” Haboker, 26 March 1945. 106 “Died on the battlefield,” Palestine Post, 1 May 1945 with a picture of the first graves in the Ravenna military cemetery. 107 “Brigade soldiers en route to the Land of Israel,” Haaretz, 12 June 1946. 108 Nisht, “At the grave site of Hebrew soldiers in Italy,” Davar, 5 February 1948. 109 IDFA, 1951/1291, 3, Z. Bar Zakai, a report on a visit to the Brigade cemetery in Ravenna, April 1950.

178 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

“dared” to wonder why no Knesset member deemed it appropriate to mention the Brigade’s fallen who were buried overseas and asked, “Why not move them here, with the befitting honor, to the land for which they fought and fell? Why do they need to remain in a foreign land?”110 The resentment of the family members stemmed in some measure from the publication of similar cases during that period, such as the reinterment of the parachutists and of two pilots, Cohen and Beurling, and their burial in Haifa in 1950. Yehuda (Leonard) Cohen and George F. Beurling  crashed in Rome on 20 May 1948 while transferring one of the planes acquired from US Army surplus in Europe for use by the Israeli Air Force in the War of Independence.111 After the crash, members of the Jewish community and representatives of the Jewish Agency in Rome handled their burials – Cohen in the Jewish cemetery of Rome and Beurling in a Christian one. Beurling’s parents, in Canada, began immediately to work to bring the body of their son to Israel and were assisted by Abraham Herman, Israel’s consul in Canada. The mission was assigned to the Israeli Air Force, which sent a plane to Italy. A priest and a rabbi conducted a religious ceremony at the Ciampino  Airport near Rome, and the coffins were reinterred in Haifa’s military cemetery.112 Beurling was buried in a section for non-Jews, among other airmen who fell in the war.113 His burial rites were conducted by a priest, and an IDF honor guard fired three rounds in salute. A similar ceremony was held at Cohen’s grave, led by an army rabbi. His father, Saul Cohen, recited kaddish, and a gun salute was fired.114 All this influenced the case of the Jewish Brigade casualties. In 1950, when the Knesset passed the Military Cemeteries Law, MK Yosef Beretz, himself a Brigade veteran, raised the issue of bringing the remains of Brigade fighters to Israel.115 The Israeli newspapers were already reporting that “the bodies of the Jewish Brigade’s fallen will be transferred from Belgium, France, Italy, and other countries for burial in the military cemetery on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem,” and that “the cemetery will become the national cemetery of the independent Israeli nation in the homeland.”116 This did not occur, however, and in 1951, at an assembly of

110 “Those who were forgotten,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 28 May 1950. 111 Beurling and Roberts (1943). 112 NPC, D743-008; ibid., D743-009. 113 Azaryahu (2005), pp. 169–170. 114 “Flight heroes’ last path,” Haaretz, 11 November 1950; Davar, 17 November 1950, with a photo from the funeral; Kohen (2004), pp. 683–684. 115 Meeting 128 of the First Knesset, 20 March 1950, Knesset Protocols, 1950, p. 1061. 116 “The remains of Brigade fighters in Europe to be transferred to Israel,” Herut, 1 September 1950; “Jewish Brigade fallen – to Mount Herzl,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 1 August 1950.

The fallen of the Jewish Brigade – “A people that demands the bones of its fighters” 

 179

the 3rd Battalion of the Jewish Brigade in Tel Aviv, Beretz again spoke about the urgent need to bring their comrades’ remains for burial in Israel.117 In fact, the Department for Memorializing Soldiers, headed by Yosef Dekel, was working on this matter and even began preparations on Mount Herzl. The reinterment of the parachutists Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss – which was completed in October 1952, with the approval of the Imperial War Graves Commission – stirred hope for the Brigade’s cause, but it turned out that the British were firmly opposed to removing the Brigade soldiers from British cemeteries.118 In late 1952, Dekel proposed a symbolic gesture – bringing a box of soil from the Ravenna cemetery and burying it in a modest ceremony, in the presence of representatives of the Brigade veterans, the Jewish Agency, and an IDF honor guard in the designated section of the cemetery in Jerusalem.119 In early 1954, for the first time, the parents of the Brigade’s fallen made a public request to bury them in the State of Israel. Their previous appeal to Ben-Gurion, who instructed the Israeli Embassy in London to look into the matter, was communicated privately and failed to yield results.120 As bitter feelings simmered, MK Haim Ben Asher submitted a public query, asking the prime minister whether he “does not believe that nearly a decade after the formation of the Brigade, the time has come to bring the remains of its fallen and their burial on Mount Herzl.”121 Shalom Zysman, an MK in the General Zionists faction, sent Prime Minister Sharett a request noting that, “the great ones of Israel, from the time of the Talmudic sages and through the later generations (Maimonides and others), ordered their children to fulfill this,” and adding, “this continued to be considered sacred ... the great righteous ones would see this as a great privilege to be buried in the Land of Israel ... ask any rabbi and any adjudicator of Jewish law – and they will say and testify to this.122 The prime minister again had to explain that the British War Office was refusing to comply because of “the British Army tradition of burying the fallen near the front where they fell.” He hinted that negotiations were being conducted,123 but he did not reveal that Israel’s represen-

117 “Demand to bring the remains of the Brigade’s fallen to Israel,” Haaretz, 4 May 1951. 118 IDFA, 220/209, 70, Yosef Dekel, 14 November 1951. 119 Ibid., Yosef Dekel to David Ben-Gurion, 15 January 1953. 120 ISA, HZ-3/2416, M. Gazit to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 8 April 1954. 121 “Brigade fallen soldiers to be buried in Israel,” Haboker, 19 February 1954; “Parliamentary query on the reinterment of the Brigade’s fallen soldiers,” Davar, 18 February 1954. 122 ISA, HZ-3/2416, Shalom Zysman to the prime minister, 1 March 1954. 123 “Negotiations on the reinterment of the Brigade’s fallen soldiers in Israel,” Davar, 3 June 1954.

180 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

tatives in London were pessimistic about the prospects of convincing the British to change their stance. At the same time, embassy personnel in London made an unsuccessful effort to transfer the coffin of Yisrael Abba Zeltzer, who also enlisted in the British Army, was murdered in Nazi captivity, and was buried in a military cemetery in Krakow. The unofficial negative response they received led them to caution against appealing to the British again in regard to the Brigade’s fallen, to avoid receiving an official rejection in writing.124 Nevertheless, Sharett, serving as both prime minister and foreign minister, wrote to the embassy in London: “I imperatively request that you make a dedicated effort on this matter, examine it with the appropriate echelon of the British War Office, and exercise every means of influence and persuasion to achieve a positive decision.” He explained that in the context of the State of Israel’s work on the graves of those who died in the War of Independence, and against the backdrop of the reinterment of the parachutists Szenes, Reik, and Reiss, “a feeling of insult and discrimination is festering among the families and comrades of the Brigade’s fallen – as if they are forgotten and have no place in the honor and admiration the people feel toward those who paved the way to redemption by sacrificing their lives.” Sharett proposed that it be explained to the British that the Brigade soldiers “volunteered, in practice, as members of an independent nation, which had a special account to settle with the enemy, and which soon after the World War acquired official independence too.”125 Ze’ev Shek, the foreign minister’s political secretary, also told the government’s representatives in London that, “we must do our utmost to lift the prohibition – or at least to demonstrate that we are not neglecting the issue, in order to avoid creating the impression that we think lightly of the mission.”126 At this stage, apparently feeling some sense of confidence, Dekel announced the preparation of a grave site for the Brigade fighters at the military cemetery in Jerusalem, adjacent to the memorial sign for the 149 Brigade soldiers who perished at sea.127 In May 1954, Israeli representatives in London met with the secretary of the Imperial Commission. They felt that the secretary did understand that this matter involved “a policy of a people demanding the transfer of the remains of its fighters, a policy steeped in religious tradition.” However, the secretary immediately explained the difficulty and cited the rejection of similar requests from

124 ISA, HZ-3/2416, M. Gazit to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 8 April 1954. 125 Ibid., foreign minister to the Israeli Embassy in London, 25 April 1954. 126 Ibid., Ze’ev Shek to G. Avner, 17 May 1954. 127 Ephraim Talmi, “Military cemeteries – pantheon of bravery,” Davar, 30 April 1952; “Brigade’s fallen soldiers,” Maariv, 3 May 1954.

The fallen of the Jewish Brigade – “A people that demands the bones of its fighters” 

 181

the United States, France, the Irish Republic, and Indonesia. He suggested to the Israeli representatives that they drop their general demand and focus on transferring only “the fallen whose families are particularly insistent.” The Israelis firmly rejected this proposal, determined to act in a uniform, official way. The secretary also suggested emphasizing the separate national character of the Brigade, which perhaps would persuade members of the Imperial Commission to permit the transfer of the fallen soldiers without creating a precedent for other nations.128 The Israeli diplomats met again with members of the Imperial Commission and presented this argument. The secretary of the commission asked to limit the operation to soldiers who were recruited in pre-state Israel and whose parents or relatives lived there currently.129 It was agreed that the Israeli Foreign Ministry would send the British Foreign Office an official letter confirming the Israeli government’s acceptance of these terms. This letter would then be sent to the Imperial Commission, and the secretary would need to obtain the consent of the various U.K. dominions to Israel’s request.130 An Israeli representative in London wrote, “Some of these terms may seem strange to you, but they stem from the commission’s experience and concern about various precedents.131 In September 1954 the transfer of the remains of the Brigade soldiers seemed imminent, until another delay ensued. Israel’s representatives in London appealed repeatedly to the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem, asking why it had not sent the requested letter affirming the terms of the agreement.132 The Foreign Ministry responded that the minister was not authorized to decide on his own and had to bring the matter before the government and the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee for approval.133 In addition, the Department for Memorializing Soldiers in the Defense Ministry was reluctant to approve funding for the mission. The deputy ambassador in London, Gershon Avner, reported in an undiplomatic tone how the State of Israel had placed him in an unpleasant position. He wondered “whether you [Shek] can finally get something moving?”134 Shek, the foreign minister’s political secretary, advised giving the British “an interim reply that the Department for Memorializing Soldiers is checking the

128 ISA, HZ-3/2416, G. Avner to Ze’ev Shek, 28 May 1954, with minutes from the meeting. 129 Ibid., G. Avner to Ze’ev Shek, 14 July 1954. 130 Ibid., Ze’ev Shek to the foreign minister, 14 August 1954. 131 Ibid., G. Avner to Ze’ev Shek, 20 August 1954; ibid., summary of a meeting between representatives of the State of Israel and members of the Imperial War Graves Commission, 16 and 20 August 1954. 132 Ibid., G. Avner to Ze’ev Shek, 8 September 1954. 133 Ibid., Ze’ev Shek to G. Avner, 14 September 1954. 134 Ibid., G. Avner to Ze’ev Shek, 16 November 1954.

182 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

matter from a practical perspective.”135 The transfer of the Jewish Brigade’s fallen soldiers now became an Israeli bureaucratic hurdle. In meetings between Dekel, representing the Ministry of Defense, and officials from the Foreign Ministry, there were discussions about budget constraints and about the absence of a list of soldiers who had served in Jewish battalions during World War II and their places of burial. Dekel contended that “the pressure from the bereaved parents is diminishing as time passes and because of a natural process of the death of many of them.” Haim Vardi, of the Foreign Ministry, said in response, “The initiative should come from the state itself, because the graves have great and important value for preserving the nation’s memories.” He added that this was “a tremendous enterprise that should be fully understood in all its details.”136 But words were one thing and actions another. The project was delayed again, and in early 1955 Avner wrote from London to Jerusalem: “I wish you would tell me already that I’m allowed to continue to pursue this by submitting the diplomatic letter.”137 After another month passed, he wrote that he would act on his own: “I can no longer maintain a situation of not responding to the Imperial Commission, after we based our arguments on the fact that the matter is ‘vital’ to the State of Israel.”138 The Ministry of Defense was now squabbling with the Foreign Ministry over the funding needed to transfer the coffins. The former believed that the latter should submit “the matter” for government approval and obtain the funding, and only then would the Department for Memorializing Soldiers be able to execute the transfer. Shek, from the Foreign Ministry, noted that whereas there were indeed doubts in Israel about “the readiness for the widespread transfer of remains in general,” he was sure that there were no reservations in regard to the Brigade soldiers. He recommended that Avner “arm himself with patience and wait for an agreement between the foreign minister and the defense minister.”139 In 1958 the Israeli newspapers reported on memorial ceremonies held in Ravenna in the presence of representatives from the IDF, an Italian veterans’ association, the military attachés of Israel and Britain, and the general consul of Israel.140 Members of the IDF’s military delegation, who participated in a confer-

135 Ibid., Ze’ev Shek to G. Avner, 18 December 1954. 136 Ibid., report on a meeting held at the Foreign Ministry on the reinterment of the Brigade’s fallen soldiers, 22 December 1954. 137 Ibid., G. Avner to Ze’ev Shek, 3 January 1955. 138 Ibid. 139 Ibid., Ze’ev Shek to G. Avner, 16 February 1955. 140 “Memorial service for the Brigade’s fallen in Italy,” Haboker, 28 April 1958.

 Parachutist Hannah Szenes – From Budapest to the military cemetery in Jerusalem 

 183

ence of Italian war veterans and representatives of the armies that fought in Italy, again reported that the “graves are well kept.”141 A memorial sign had already been erected in 1954 in the Jerusalem military cemetery for the Brigade soldiers whose ship was sunk on 1 May 1943. The names of these 149 members of the 462nd Transport Unit were etched on a stone slab.142 In March 1961 David Raziel was buried in the Brigade’s plot,143 and in 1973 a monument was unveiled there for soldiers from the Yishuv who died while volunteering in the British Army.144 The two monuments were designed by Asher Hiram, the architect of the Defense Ministry’s Department for Memorializing Soldiers, who also planned the military cemetery in Jerusalem. They were intended to serve as a place of assembly and pilgrimage for the families of soldiers whose graves remained in Europe. After the 1950s, the subject of reinterring the remains of the Jewish Brigade soldiers was seldom raised. When the IDF’s chief rabbi, Shlomo Goren, met in 1965 with members of the Imperial Council to discuss the matter, the meeting did not produce any results.145

Parachutist Hannah Szenes – From Budapest to the military cemetery in Jerusalem Hannah Szenes was born in Budapest in 1921 and immigrated to Palestine in 1939. After two years at the agricultural school in Nahalal, she joined a group of young people who founded Kibbutz Caesarea (Sdot Yam). In 1943 she joined a group of paratroopers in the British Army who trained to parachute behind Nazi lines. On 15 March 1944, Szenes parachuted into Croatia, near the Hungarian border, and she and her comrades joined local partisans. Captured in June after crossing the Hungarian border, she was imprisoned in Budapest. Szenes was interrogated under torture, tried for espionage and treason against the Hungarian homeland, and executed on 7 November 1944. She was buried in the “martyrs’ plot” in the Rákoskeresztúri Jewish cemetery in Budapest. In September 1945 the secretariat of Kibbutz Sdot Yam marked the first anniversary of Szenes’s death by holding a memorial service and publishing a book

141 “Graves of the fallen soldiers of the Brigade in Italy are well kept,” Haboker, 1 October 1958. 142 Azaryahu (2012), pp. 66–67; “Memorial for the 140 lost at sea,” Davar, 10 August 1952. 143 “David Raziel to eternal rest in Jerusalem,” Davar, 17 March 1961. 144 Shamir (1989), p. 25. 145 “No results in negotiations on reinterring remains of the Brigade’s fallen soldiers,” Maariv, 3 March 1965.

184 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

and a pamphlet about her life and death. They also decided to build a cultural center, the Hannah Szenes House, in the hope that her remains would soon be brought for burial in the kibbutz.146 Representatives of Hakibbutz Hameuchad in Hungary tried to make that happen, but the Hungarian government was firmly opposed.147 This may have been the background for an inaccurate report published in 1947 about the reinterment of Szenes and three other parachutists in the British War Heroes Cemetery in Prague.148 Davar wondered, If they have already jolted the Jewish heroes from their burial where they fell, what is the point of transferring them again to foreign soil? Are they actually British heroes? Were they not emissaries of the Yishuv, flying off from the Land of Israel? Would it not be fitting to bring them to eternal rest in the Land of Israel, for which they fell?149

The founding of the State of Israel encouraged more intensive discussions with Hungarian authorities about Szenes’s final resting place. Shaul Avigur, later head of the Nativ organization concerned with the fate of Eastern European Jewry, conducted secret talks with them.150 At first, he and other negotiators saw their mission as focusing on three parachutists (Szenes, Haviva Reik, and Rafael Reiss), but their different places of burial – Szenes in a civilian cemetery in Budapest, Reik and Reiss in the British military cemetery in Prague – meant that the reinterments of Reik and Reiss would entail a lengthy procedure, while it was possible to transfer Szenes’s remains more quickly. In early 1950 Hungary and Israel agreed on the arrangements. The Department for Memorializing Soldiers in the Ministry of Defense handled the transfer with assistance from the Foreign Ministry and Israel’s consular officials in Hungary.151 In anticipation of the event, the Hakibbutz Hemeuchad Publishing House printed a fifth edition of a book dedicated to the life, mission, and death of Hannah Szenes. The preface states: As this new and expanded edition goes to press, the final preparations are being made to bring the remains of Hannah Szenes from the soil of the Diaspora to the soil of Israel, to that mount overlooking Jerusalem the capital, a mount that has now been sanctified with the

146 Baumel (2004), p. 71; ‘“Memorial for Hannah Senesh in Caesarea,” Davar, 18 January 1946. 147 Baumel (2004), p. 102–103. 148 The three other parachutists mentioned in the report are Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss, who were indeed reinterred in Prague, and Zvi Ben-Ya’akov, who was killed in the Mauthausen concentration camp. 149 “Why not in the Land of Israel?,” Davar, 9 October 1947. 150 Avigur (1972), pp. 55–77. 151 “Hannah Senesh and the parachutists to Israel,” Davar, 5 January 1950.

 Parachutist Hannah Szenes – From Budapest to the military cemetery in Jerusalem 

 185

reinterment of Herzl, with the common grave of the Lamed Heh [35 Haganah fighters killed during a battle in Gush Etzion], and others among the nation’s chosen who will be brought to its earth. Like them, she gave her life for her people’s redemption and did not live to see the day of redemption. But no people forgets its chosen ones, its emissaries, and with the ingathering of the exiles, it also remembers and brings those whose death bequeathed new life to those who remain.152

An Israeli delegation that included Giora Szenes, Hannah’s brother; Ze’ev Pardes, a good friend from the kibbutz; and Menachem Cohen, from the Department for Memorializing Soldier, traveled to Europe to receive the coffin and accompany it to Israel. Upon arrival in Vienna, they learned that the coffin was already there; the Hungarian authorities, concerned about publicity, had already moved it. The tombstone remained in the Budapest cemetery and a sign was placed on the empty grave: “The remains were disinterred and transferred to the soil of Israel.”153 In Vienna, the coffin was placed on a small platform in the local cemetery.154 From there it was loaded onto a train to Rome, where representatives of the Jewish community awaited with a large delegation of Italian partisans holding their flags. After the chief rabbi delivered a eulogy, the coffin continued on to Naples,155 where it was loaded onto the passenger ship Kidma. Two warships escorted it when it entered Israel’s territorial waters. While still at sea, the coffin was lowered onto the deck of one of the warships, with an honor guard posted alongside.156 It was very symbolic that the warship anchored next to clandestine immigration boats that were still moored at the port of Haifa, including the Exodus. The ships sounded their horns as six members of Kibbutz Sdot Yam hoisted the coffin onto their shoulders and carried it from the ship.157 A single cannon round was fired as the honor guard shouldered their weapons and a flyover streaked through the sky.158 “Hannah Szenes, the young woman from Sdot Yam who went abroad to bring tidings to the Diaspora, landed on the soil of Israel,” Al Hamishmar wrote.159 Szenes’s mother, Katrina, was the first to approach the coffin, followed by Education Minister Zalman Aran and representatives of the Ministry of Defense, the Council of Working Women, the Kibbutz Hameuchad movement,

152 “Introduction,” in Hannah Szenes (1952). 153 CZA, PHG/1011223, for a photo of the grave in 1950. 154 “Hannah Senesh’s body on way to Israel,” Palestine Post, 20 March 1950. 155 “H. Senesh’s coffin arrives,” Hatzofe, 27 March 1950. 156 The funeral appears in several documentary films. See, for example, SSJFA, VT AX36, 536. 157 “Navy tribute to Hannah Senesh at Haifa port,” Palestine Post, 27 March 1950. 158 IDFA, 1951/1291, 3, Y. Mazeh to various units, 24 March 1950. 159 “Masses pay tribute to the hero parachutist Hannah Senesh,” Al Hamishmar, 28 March 1950.

186 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

the agricultural school at Nahalal where Szenes studied, and Palmach veterans. Colonel Shoshana Werner, the head of the Women’s Corps, represented the IDF at the ceremony.160

Figure 25: Coffin of Hannah Szenes unloaded at the port of Haifa, 27 March 1950. Unknown photographer (NPC).

The funeral procession passed through the main streets of Haifa, and traffic stopped as many stood to watch the convoy pass. An honor guard of eighth-grade pupils and soldiers with raised guns stood in front of the municipality building. The coffin was carried on the shoulders of the kibbutz members and placed at the top of a staircase.161 A group of notables, led by the education minister, stood

160 “Parachutists drop at Sdot Yam,” Palestine Post, 28 March 1950. 161 NPC, d743-015.

 Parachutist Hannah Szenes – From Budapest to the military cemetery in Jerusalem 

 187

in front. Haifa residents filed past the coffin for two hours, and then the funeral procession moved on to Kibbutz Sdot Yam.162 With great reverence, Kibbutz Caesarea received its eternal comrade Hannah Szenes yesterday ... the kibbutz members, the children, and a great crowd from all corners of the country waited, tingling with a sense of sanctity, for the arrival of the deceased’s coffin, which set out from Haifa in the afternoon,

Davar wrote, describing the moment when the coffin was transferred from the Israeli public at large to the members of the kibbutz.163 The ceremony there was planned entirely by the kibbutz.164 The casket was carried on the shoulders of kibbutz members, with members of the family following them to the Hannah Szenes House, still under construction, where kibbutz members formed an honor guard. At the entrance, flags were placed around the coffin: the Israeli flag, the red flag of socialism, and the Palmach flag. That week, a conference of retired Palmach members and commanders who “trained her and fought together in Palmach service” was held at the kibbutz. The posters for the ceremony declared, “The paratroopers honor their comrade Hannah.”165 A plane dropped a black parachute with a box dangling from it, and on a second flyover, three men parachuted from the plane, saluted the coffin, and placed wreaths on it. MK Israel Galili eulogized Szenes on behalf of the Kibbutz Meuchad movement, and Yitzhak Sadeh spoke on behalf of the Palmach.166 On its way from the kibbutz to Jerusalem, Szenes’s funeral procession stopped in Tel Aviv. A representative of the municipality spoke from a platform set up at the corner of Bialik and Allenby streets, and Beba Idelson, an MK and one of the founders of the Council of Working Women, delivered a speech from a balcony of Histadrut’s Vaad Hapoel House.167 From there the procession continued to the courtyard of the National Institutions Building in Jerusalem. Members of the Szenes family, Prime Minister Ben-Gurion, Minister of Justice Pinhas Rosen, and Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett stood on the balcony, and Sharett said in his

162 “Journey of Hannah Senesh’s coffin,” Hatzofe, 28 March 1950. 163 “The torch that was burned continues to spark hearts,” Davar, 28 March 1950. 164 “H. Senesh’s coffin to arrive in Caesarea en route to Jerusalem,” Al Hamishmar, 27 March 1950. 165 “The paratroopers pay respect to Hannah Senesh,” Haaretz, 28 March 1950. 166 “The torch that was burned continues to spark hearts,” Davar, 28 March 1950. 167 “Hannah Senesh brought to eternal rest at Mount Herzl,” Haaretz, 29 March 1950.

188 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

Figure 26: Coffin of Hannah Szenes in Kibbutz Sdot Yam, 27 March 1950. Unknown photographer (NPC).

remarks, “The people living in Zion today gathers in a beloved daughter. She was sent from this house and returns to it.”168 Zvia Katznelson from Sdot Yam stated proudly, “Our Hannah was received by Hebrew planes in the sky, by ships in the sea, and by our settlements. Thousands of new Jews met her, in border settlements and hilltops.”169 When the procession passed near the Knesset, Speaker Yosef Sprinzak and many other MKs joined to accompany the coffin to the military cemetery on Mount Herzl.170 In every way, the burial ceremony planned by the Department for Memorializing Soldiers was a military operation. The department had decided that, “A tombstone will be arranged in this cemetery [in Jerusalem] for all of the missing

168 Ibid. 169 “Remains of Hannah Senesh to eternal rest on Mount Herzl,” Davar, 29 March 1950. 170 “Hannah Senesh brought to eternal rest on Mount Herzl,” Haaretz, 29 March 1950.

 Parachutist Hannah Szenes – From Budapest to the military cemetery in Jerusalem 

 189

soldiers who have not had a proper burial. In addition, the bodies of the parachutists buried on foreign soil will also be transferred to it.” The state’s wishes were consistent with those of Szenes’s family members, who had asked that she be buried in the military cemetery in Jerusalem.171 Next to the section reserved for fallen soldiers from the War of Independence, the first grave was now dug in what would become the paratroopers’ section. The funeral halted at the entrance to the cemetery, and army units lined up opposite Szenes’s casket, which was lowered from its vehicle. The soldiers presented arms.172 After Ben-Gurion placed a wreath of flowers on the fresh grave, MKs Yehudit Simhonit, Fayge Ilanit, and Esther Raziel-Naor added their own wreaths. One of the members of the kibbutz recited the El Malei Rahamim prayer, and the grave was covered as three rounds of honor were fired.173

Figure 27: Burial ceremony of Hannah Szenes in the military cemetery in Jerusalem. Standing are her mother, Katrina Szenes; David Ben Gurion; and Chief of Staff Yigal Yadin, 29 March 1950. Photograph by Fritz Schlesinger (JNFPA).

171 IDFA, 1951/1291, 3, Y. Mazeh to various units, 21 March 1950; ibid., 220/221, 70, plan for Hannah Senesh’s funeral. 172 IDFA, 1951/1291, 3, Y. Mazeh to various units, 21 March 1950. 173 “Hannah Senesh laid to rest,” Palestine Post, 29 March 1950; NPC, d237-024.

190 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

There was now a strong bond between the grave of the state’s founder, Theodor Herzl, and Hannah Szenes, who was buried at his feet alongside the many soldiers who sacrificed their lives to achieve Israeli independence. “Now,” Davar wrote, there above, lying in eternal rest, open-eyed and wondering, the herald [Herzl] is looking around and asking: Has the burning vision already been fulfilled or is it still materializing? Has the day already come and the steps of the redeemer are hastening? And at his feet sits Hannah Szenes, with a conciliatory smile, with a sparkle in her eyes ... the match caught fire and lit flames against the darkness, and the sons blazed the path to the capital city.174

Parachutists Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss – Their burial in the military cemetery in Jerusalem The burial of Hannah Szenes in Jerusalem stirred wide public interest but also raised the question of memorializing other parachutists. “It is not good that the names of the other victims have almost been forgotten as opposed to the name of Hannah Szenes,” wrote Dov Harari, one of the World War II parachutists, only because she was “a poetess with a strong talent for expression.”175 But the delay in bringing the remains of Reik and Reiss to Israel for reinterment was primarily attributable to other, objective difficulties. Haviva Reik was born in 1914 in Slovakia and joined the Hashomer Hatzair youth movement at a young age. She arrived in Palestine in 1939 and joined Kibbutz Ma’anit. On 19 September 1944, she parachuted into Slovakia and was caught by the Nazis. Rafael (Rafi) Reiss, who shared a similar fate, was born in 1914 in Budapest and was active in the Zionist movement in Slovakia. In 1939 he was arrested on a clandestine immigration boat and imprisoned for about six months in Atlit. He later joined Kvutzat Huliot, which later became Kibbutz Sde Nehemia, where he married Naomi and their daughter, Edna, was born. On 15 September Reiss parachuted into the mountains of Slovakia, where he joined Haviva Reik. The Nazis executed them both on 20 November 1944 and buried them in a mass grave in the forests of Kremnica. After the Soviet Army entered Bratislava in April 1945, this grave – which contained about 750 bodies – was opened. The remains of Reik and Reiss were identified, and the British transferred them to the Olšany  cemetery in Prague, where they were buried in the British military

174 K. A. Bertini, “Above Mount Herzl,” Davar, 5 July 1950. 175 IDFA, 1951/1291, 3, Dov Harari to Shaul Avigur, 30 March 1950.



Parachutists Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss 

 191

section. Crosses with their name and military service number were placed on their graves.176 Family members and friends of Reik and Reiss lobbied the Ministry of Defense and the IDF to bring their remains to Israel. Members of Kibbutz Ma’anit wrote to the IDF chief of staff in August 1949 that, “with the ending of war activity [the War of Independence], the time has come to carry out this mission [reinterring Haviva Reik].177 In December 1951, the crosses in the Prague cemetery were replaced with Stars of David and the names of the parachutists were added in Hebrew, but the military cemetery set difficult conditions for effecting a transfer. It demanded approval by Czechoslovakia and the consent of the Imperial War Graves Commission, whose policy, as we have seen, was to oppose the transfer of fallen soldiers from their original place of burial. Extended efforts to conclude the matter were conducted mainly behind the scenes, through diplomatic channels. The Ministry of Defense and the Israeli consul in Bucharest, Katriel Salmon, repeatedly appealed to the British, who finally acquiesced in light of the fact that Reik and Reiss were not part of the regular British Army and because it was difficult for the family to visit their graves, which were now in a communist country.178 Once approval was obtained, at least in principle, planning for the funeral in Israel could commence.179 In early 1952 newspapers in Israel stirred public excitement by reporting that the transfer of the parachutists’ remains was imminent, but it quickly became apparent that things were not so simple.180 The Czech government feared publicity,181 and they made the disinterment conditional on conducting a modest process, without any public ceremony, and on transferring the remains by train and not by air. Israel’s Ministry of Defense and Foreign Ministry were involved in the diplomatic contacts, and in June of that year the Czechs approved the disinterment of the coffins and a military ceremony.182

176 Ofer and Ofer (2014), pp. 336–340. 177 IDFA, 1950/2169, 6, Kibbutz Ma’anit to IDF chief of staff, 2 August 1949. 178 Baumel (2004), p. 118; ISA, HZ-3/2416, Katriel Salmon to the foreign minister, 21 December 1951. 179 ISA, HZ-2/180, Foreign Ministry to the Israeli Embassy in Paris, 26 February 1952. 180 “Coffins of Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss to be brought to Israel,” Hatzofe, 18 March 1952; “Remains of the parachutists in Prague to Israel,” Davar, 26 March 1952. 181 “Prague prevents transfer of remains of H. Reik and Rafael Reiss to Israel,” Haboker, 31 March 1952. 182 “Czechs to permit transfer of remains of H. Reik and R. Reiss,” Haboker, 20 June 1952; ISA, HZ-3/2416, Y. Dekel to the foreign minister, 27 August 1952.

192 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

On September 8, an El Al plane set off to Prague. Yosef Dekel, the director of the Defense Ministry’s Department for Memorializing Soldiers, was on board with members of the Reik and Reiss families. The two coffins were quietly transferred from the British cemetery to the Jewish cemetery on the outskirts of Prague.183 The Israeli consul there, Aryeh Kubovy, said, “Haviva and Rafi, a delegation has come from the land for which you fell. It has come to take you to your final resting place on Mount Herzl.”184 The participants stood at attention and sang “Hatikva,” and the coffins were transported from the cemetery to the Josefov, the ancient Jewish quarter of Prague. Carried on the shoulders of Israeli consular officials, El Al crews, and leaders of the Jewish community, they were brought to the medieval Altneuschul (Old-New Synagogue) for a ceremony in the presence of foreign military attachés and a delegation of Czech partisans. Another service was conducted by the chief rabbi of Rome at the city’s airport, with representatives of Israel in attendance.185 Before landing at the Ramat David military airport, the plane bearing the caskets circled over the Jezreel Valley, where the parachutists had trained eight years earlier before their departure for Europe. After a military ceremony, the coffins were handed over to members of Reik’s and Reiss’s kibbutzim,186 and a three-day funeral procession that crossed many parts of Israel began. The interment of the parachutists on Mount Herzl after their journey throughout the country symbolized their return to their renewed homeland after sacrificing their lives in their original motherlands in Europe; they returned for burial in the soil to which they aspired to return in their lives.187 Many members of kibbutzim in northern Israel waited at the military gate to Ramat David, where the convoy split in two directions. Because of the geographic distance between the two kibbutzim, but especially because of their ideological distance, there was no joint ceremony.188 Al Hamishmar wrote, “One convoy with the coffin of Haviva turns to the right, toward Afula and Ma’anit. The second convoy turns to the left, and makes its way to the Upper Galilee, via

183 Ben-Nachum (1965), p. 192, with a photo of the certificate of approval of the transfer of Reik’s remains from the Prague cemetery. 184 “How the parachutists’ remains were transferred,” Davar, 8 October 1952; “The ceremony in Prague,” Al Hamishmar, 12 September 1952. 185 “The remains of Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss,” Davar, 9 September 1952; “Today: the funeral of the parachutists Reik and Reiss,” Haboker, 11 September 1952. 186 Ben-Nachum (1965), p. 192, with a photo of the ceremony. 187 “The remains of Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss,” Davar, 9 September 1952. 188 ISA, HZ-3/2416, Kibbutz Ma’anit to Moshe Sharett, no date cited.



Parachutists Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss 

 193

Yagur, Kfar Ata, Safed and Rosh Pina.”189 Waiting at the entrance to Sde Nehemia were members of the kibbutz and the Reiss family, including his nine-year-old daughter, Edna, who placed a wreath on her father’s coffin. Kibbutz members carried it to the dining hall and placed it on a platform draped in black. An honor guard of Reiss’s friends stood by the casket, along with delegations from kibbutzim in the Galilee and the Hula valley. After speeches and eulogies, the coffin was taken outside, a military unit presented arms, and it was loaded onto a pickup truck covered in black. In the afternoon the funeral procession headed south, passing Kiryat Shmona, Ayelet Hashahar, and Rosh Pina, whose residents added wreaths. A short ceremony was held in a municipal park in Tiberias, and a large delegation from the Jordan Valley settlements met the procession near the Kinneret moshava.190 Representatives from many kibbutzim also gathered in Ma’anit, where Reik’s coffin was positioned on a tall plinth wrapped in black in the center of the kibbutz. Pictures outside the dining hall showed Reik’s life, and the few personal effects found at the scene of her last battle were displayed on a small table, including the book Membership in the Kibbutz, a farewell gift from her Palmach unit.191 At the ceremony there, unlike the one in Sde Nehemia, many public figures participated, including the acting president and Knesset speaker Yosef Sprinzak. It began with the singing of “Hatikva” and the “Internationale.” Yigal Allon, the former commander of the Palmach, read some words from Yitzhak Sadeh, the current commander. Reik’s last letter, written in late October 1944 to the parachutists who had not yet left for Europe, was also read aloud. One of the kibbutz members described how difficult it was for them to accept Reik’s burial on Mount Herzl, even though they understood that her proper place was among the heroes of Israel and near the grave of her friend Hannah Szenes. An honor guard of Golani soldiers fired a three-round salute, and the Palmach anthem was sung.192 The convoy with Reiss’s coffin arrived at Ma’anit in the afternoon. With the two parachutists now reunited, the IDF resumed responsibility for the funeral. A long convoy departed for the paratroopers’ base in Tel Nof, where an honor guard stood beside the coffins throughout the night while commanders and soldiers at the base filed past them.193 The next day the caskets were placed at the foot of a

189 “Last farewell to the parachutists in the kibbutzim,” Al Hamishmar, 11 September 1952. 190 “The Yishuv pays final respects to the parachutists,” Davar, 11 September 1952. 191 Ibid. 192 Ibid. 193 IDFA, 1954/7, 63, Y. Vilk, IDF military police, reinterment ceremony of parachutists Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss, 7 September 1952.

194 

 Chapter 8 Reinterment of Fighters and Clandestine Immigrants

training tower that was wrapped in black and covered with Israeli flags.194 At the end of this ceremony, three military trucks returned to the north; one of them bore the empty, symbolic coffin of parachutist Zvi Ben-Ya’akov, who was murdered at the Mauthausen concentration camp.195 Schoolchildren from Givat Brenner, Nes Ziona, Rishon LeZion, and Holon welcomed the convoy on the way to Tel Aviv and “lowered the state’s flag to honor them and the occasion.” At the corner of Allenby and Bialik streets, the two coffins were placed on a stage, where the deputy mayor of Tel Aviv, Haim Levanon, delivered a eulogy to an audience of hundreds. The procession stopped again in front of the Vaad Hapoel (Executive Committee) building of the Histadrut in Tel Aviv, and Mordechai Namir, the secretary-general of the General Federation of Workers, spoke about how the two parachutists had met in the building behind him.196 The Haboker newspaper mused, “Does the [Histadrut] Executive Committee indeed have the official authority of a government ministry? Why didn’t the convoy stop at one of the Defense Ministry’s offices in the city? Why must the funeral have only a Histadrut-oriented character? After all, the two fallen soldiers went as emissaries of the entire people and not on behalf of a particular social class.”197 From Tel Aviv the procession continued to Jerusalem, where the coffins were placed on a blue-and-white platform in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building before being taken later to the military cemetery. An atmosphere of sadness prevailed among the participants, due in part to the presence of the widow of Ben-Ya’akov, the missing parachutist. On the day of the funeral, Yaakov Orland published in his “Poem of the Day” column a tribute to Ben-Ya’akov titled “The Third Parachutist”: Mount Herzl has fallen silent. The ceremony is over. The crowd has dispersed along a silent path Alone, unburied, still on the mountain – is the third parachutist ... He has not died. His nails claw at the foreign soil. He digs blindly, groping for the path. He will come when he completes his act, [then] he will find the soil of his country ... And we will sense the touch of his steps And we will gather at the mountain in faint, silent sobbing. And we will know: He has returned. He has been gathered unto his people – the third parachutist.198

194 Miriam Negbit, “With the reinterment in Israel,” Davar, 19 September 1952. 195 “Remains of parachutists brought for burial on Mount Herzl,” Davar, 12 September 1952. 196 “Bustle of activity for funeral of H. Reik and R. Reiss,” Haaretz, 10 September 1952. 197 “State or ‘Histadrut’ funeral?” Haboker, 10 September 1952. 198 Yaakov Orland, “The Third Parachutist,” Hador, 9 September 1952.



Parachutists Haviva Reik and Rafael Reiss 

 195

After Reik and Reiss were buried next to Szenes, a section of the military cemetery was definitively devoted to the parachutists of World War II. Davar reported how, from the heights of Mount Herzl, they will now be watching over the capital of the State of Israel – together: the great visionary of the revival of the people and the state, and those who fought to fulfill [the vision], the heroes of our liberation and our independence, including Hannah Szenes, Haviva Reik, and Rafael Reiss, whose lives and deaths are a lofty symbol of our greatest self-sacrifice.199

Two years later, in 1954, there was an unveiling ceremony in the new section. Alongside Szenes, Reik, and Reiss, symbolic tomb markers were added for Abba Berdichev, Peretz Goldstein, Enzo Sereni, and Zvi Ben-Ya’akov. They were designed in the form of a parachute pointing to the east. The image of a parachute was also incised on each of the tomb slabs, along with the IDF emblem and the name of the parachutist, place of birth, and the site where he or she fell in Europe.200

199 Editorial, Davar, 10 October 1952. 200 “Tombstones of parachutists unveiled on Mount Herzl,” Davar, 29 November 1954. For a picture of this section of the military cemetery, see CZA, NKH/428844.

Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment With the birth of Israel in 1948, Etzel veterans established the Herut party, which for many years was led by Menachem Begin, the commander of the underground organization.1 As an opposition party to the Mapai-led government, Herut sought not only to participate in shaping the symbolic landscape of heroism in the state but also to add its own interpretation.2 Its efforts to bring the remains of Herut fighters and leaders for burial in Israel after the establishment of the state, in a period of hegemonic rule by leftist parties, can be understood in this context. The reinterment of Ze’ev Jabotinsky, Etzel commander David Raziel, Gondar Aviel (Yisrael Epstein), and three prisoners from the British detention camp in Eritrea, along with Lehi fighters Eliyahu Hakim and Eliyahu Bet-Zuri, who were executed in Egypt and transferred to the military cemetery in Jerusalem in 1975 is part of the symbolic map of self-sacrifice that the political right fostered during the early years of Israeli statehood.3

Deportees killed in Africa – From Asmara to Sheikh Badr to Jerusalem In early 1946 reports arrived about an incident at the British detention camp in Sambal, Eritrea, where members of the Yishuv’s underground organizations were incarcerated after being expelled from Palestine. Two of the prisoners had been killed, and two more were injured.4 The dead were Shaul Galili and Eliyahu Halili Ezra. Galili was born in Poland, enlisted in Etzel, and later switched to Lehi. After his appointment as Lehi commander in Haifa, he was arrested and sent to Eritrea. Ezra, was born in Hebron and joined Etzel as a young teenager. He served as a guide during their attack against Hebron, then was arrested and deported to Africa with over 250 other underground fighters. The British rejected the pris-

1 Etzel is an acronym for “Irgun Tzvai Leumi” (the National Military Organization in the Land of Israel). 2 Lebel (2013), pp. 171–181; Gruweis-Kovalsky (2015). 3 Lehi is an acronym for “Lohamei Herut Israel” (Fighters for the Freedom of Israel); they were a paramilitary group also known as the Stern Gang. 4 Eliash (2006), pp. 79–92; Milman (2005), pp. 107–118. DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-010



Deportees killed in Africa – From Asmara to Sheikh Badr to Jerusalem 

 197

oners’ request to transfer their comrades’ bodies for burial in the Land of Israel, citing administrative and health reasons, and decided instead to inter them locally, in the Jewish cemetery of nearby Asmara.5 The two men were buried in durable metal coffins with the idea that they might be reinterred in the future.6 There was a wave of protest in the Yishuv, and various appeals to the High Commissioner insisted that the Mandate government immediately transfer the bodies for burial in the Land of Israel and return the injured for treatment.7 The leadership of the National Council decided at a special session “to demand a lessening of the punishment imposed on Jews – that is, their expulsion from the homeland.”8 A delegation of mothers of the prisoners in Eritrea issued a statement appealing for the return of the bodies in order “to bring them to a proper burial in the Land of Israel.” In a telegram to the High Commissioner, the mothers implored the British authorities “in the name of God and humanity, to immediately return all of the prisoners.”9 In July 1948 the detainees were repatriated from Eritrea, but the two who were buried remained behind.10 After the establishment of the state, Etzel fighters and the families of the fallen pressed the government of Israel to take action. It appealed to the authorities in Eritrea, which was now a British protectorate, and received their consent in principle.11 Following negotiations, the coffins were sent by plane to Lod on 11 September 1949, taken to the British consulate in Tel Aviv, and then handed over to the Committee of Kenya Deportees, which had organized this successful mission.12 In addition to the bodies of Ezra and Galili, the plane also brought the remains of Naftali Lubenchik, who had died at the camp of natural causes. He had moved from Etzel to Lehi, and was one of the first underground members deported by the British to Africa.

5 Eliash (2006), p. 82. 6 “Eritrea casualties buried in Asmara in aluminum coffins,” Hamashkif, 2 February 1949; “Eritrea fallen buried in Asmara,” Haboker, 3 February 1946. For a picture of the three graves, see Meridor (1950), no. 23, facing p. 304. 7 “Two Eritrea detainees killed and 12 injured in disturbances on Thursday,” Haaretz, 20 January 1946. 8 “Executive of the Jewish National Council to meet with chief secretary and demand return of the Eritrean deportees,” Hamashkif, 22 January 1946. 9 “Return Eritrean detainees!” Davar, 24 January 1946. 10 “250 of Kenya exiles on their way to Israel,” Maariv, 8 July 1948. 11 ISA, G-40/86, correspondence between the Foreign Ministry and the British Council in Haifa, November 1948. 12 “Coffins of the three deportees to be transferred tomorrow to Jerusalem,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 12 September 1949.

198 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

The plane was received in Lod by a delegation that included Ya’akov Meridor, a Herut MK and former prisoner in British detention camps in Africa, and other representatives of the Revisionist movement and of the Committee of Kenya Deportees. Herut representatives decided that the three underground fighters would be buried in Jerusalem, which had recently been declared the capital of Israel. Since there was still no permanent cemetery to replace the one on the Mount of Olives (then in Jordanian hands), a quarry near Sheikh Badr was being used as a burial ground for the city’s residents, and it was decided to inter the underground fighters there. Before bringing the coffins to Jerusalem, the public in Tel Aviv would be given the opportunity to pay their respects. The newspapers reported that the funeral procession would pass through the main streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.13 On the afternoon of 12 September, the coffins were placed on a platform in the courtyard of Tel Aviv’s Gan Rina cinema, an unusual venue for this type of event. An honor guard of Etzel and Lehi members, including some who had been imprisoned in Africa, stood alongside the coffins. Residents of the city filed past the coffins for several hours.14 The funeral procession then passed through the city streets, led by wreath bearers from Herut and Beitar. Hundreds followed former Kenya detainees, including Meridor and Ben-Zion Katzenellenbogen, who walked behind the three vehicles carrying the caskets. They paused near the entrance to the Great Synagogue on Allenby Street, and when they reached the Givat Herzl neighborhood, the crowd parted from the coffins with the singing of “Hatikva.”15 At the entrance to Jerusalem, residents of the city waited alongside members of Beitar and Herut. The coffins were transported to the Ahdut Yisrael synagogue, named for the olei hagardom (underground fighters sentenced to death). A platform for the coffins was erected in the courtyard of the synagogue, located at the Sephardi orphanage on Jaffa Road.16 An honor guard of Kenya deportees and Beitar members guarded the coffins throughout the night, and a eulogy was delivered the next morning by Rabbi Aryeh Levin, the “rabbi of the prisoners” during the Mandate period. The coffins were then taken to the cemetery in Sheikh Badr, where they were buried in a common grave.17 A former Etzel fighter eulogized the fallen: “Not far from here, there is one holy grave [Herzl’s], and we seek to rule

13 “Eritrea dead to be buried in Jerusalem,” Jerusalem Post, 13 September 1949. 14 “Public files past coffins of deportees,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 13 September 1949. 15 “Eritrea dead to be buried in Jerusalem,” Haboker, 14 September 1949. 16 “Coffins of the detention casualties brought to Jerusalem,” Herut, 14 September 1949. 17 “Funeral attended by 2,000 persons,” Jerusalem Post, 9 September 1949; Azaryahu (2005), p. 177.



David Raziel 

 199

over Jerusalem in his name. But there are no graves more sacred than the graves of fighters. These graves will determine who rules in Jerusalem.18 During the 1950s Herut officials tried to bring the remains of the three deportees to the military cemetery on Mount Herzl. This was the time when reburial arrangements were being made for many fallen fighters in Israel,19 and rightwing proponents sought to win recognition of the status of the deportees as fighters for Israel’s independence. They were not successful. After the Committee of Kenya Deportees received recognition of its members as war veterans in the early 1950s, the defense minister was asked to instruct the Department for Memorializing Soldiers to transfer the three graves to Mount Herzl.20 The request was rejected on the grounds that only those who fell after 29 November 1947 were eligible to be buried in the military cemetery there.21 After the Knesset passed a law recognizing the rights of those injured in Eritrea, the Shelah (Rehabilitating Freedom Fighters) organization again raised the demand for reinterment, but it too was rejected.22 Only in 1979, after the right wing ascended to power, were the remains of the three Eritrea casualties reburied the military cemetery in Jerusalem.

David Raziel, commander of the Etzel, and his reinterment in the military cemetery in Jerusalem David Raziel, one of Etzel’s founders, was appointed head of the organization in 1938 and assigned the code name “Ben-Anat.” In May 1939, after conducting illicit activity against the British, he was caught and imprisoned, but subsequently released. In 1941, after the anti-British uprising erupted in Iraq, he traveled there with four Etzel fighters under his command to lend assistance to the British. On 21 May, during a reconnaissance mission prior to conquering the city of Fallujah, Raziel was killed in a bombing by a German fighter plane.23 He was buried in a British military cemetery in Habbaniya. The question of Raziel’s reinterment in

18 “Remains of Eritrean freedom fighters brought for eternal rest in Jerusalem in common grave,” Herut, 15 September 1949. 19 “339 dead already exhumed from Sheikh Badr,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 28 August 1950; Shamir (2004), pp. 68–70. 20 JIA, L16-5/1, R. Yelin to Kenya Exiles Association, 26 August 1952. 21 Shamir (2004), pp. 167–170. 22 JIA, L16-5/2, B. Z. Katzenellenbogen to the Department for the Memorialization of Soldiers in the Ministry of Defense, 20 February 1955; on Shelah, see Lebel (2013), pp. 197–201. 23 Naor (1990), pp. 281–285.

200 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

the military cemetery in Jerusalem became a crucial part of Herut’s struggle to secure its place in the landscape of memorialization in Israel. The efforts to transfer Raziel’s remains from Iraq began immediately after his death. His wife, Shoshana, visited Habbaniya and tried unsuccessfully to persuade the British military authorities to release his body. In April 1942 the British relented, and approval for the transfer was issued by the health authorities of the Mandate government in Palestine. Yet for some reason the transfer was not executed.24 After a second visit to Iraq by Shoshana Raziel, the inscription on her husband’s grave was changed from “Captain Ben Moshe” to “Raziel.”25

Figure 28: Tomb of David Raziel in the British cemetery in northern Iraq, 25 May 1945. Photograph by A. M. Crown (JIA).

In response to the family’s pressure, the Mandate government sent an official request to the Iraqi government on this matter in July 1947, and it appeared that the matter was resolved. After the outbreak of the War of Independence, however, the establishment of the State of Israel and the geo-political changes in the region

24 JIA, L16-5/1, permit issued by the Department of Health, 17 April 1942. 25 Naor (1990), p. 281; for a picture of the grave from 1945, JIA, TZ-664.



David Raziel 

 201

made the repatriation effort problematic. Even before this, the British Imperial Commission responsible for military cemeteries objected to the transfer of Raziel’s remains, perhaps fearing to expose the fact that a Zionist organization was involved in the battle over Iraq, but primarily to avoid violating one of its cardinal principles – not to move the war dead from their graves. After 1948 members of the Raziel family, led by his widow, repeatedly traveled to London to pursue the matter of transferring the remains and urged Israel’s Foreign Ministry to do so on their behalf.26 The Foreign Ministry appealed to the director of British cemeteries in the Middle East, but the Iraqi authorities persisted in their refusal.27 Eventually the Foreign Ministry preferred to cede responsibility to the Raziel family.28 To overcome the problem of communicating with the Iraqi government, Shoshana hired the Thomas Cook travel company’s representatives in Haifa to handle the transfer of her husband’s remains.29 With the Shelah organization, she also turned to London attorney Max Seligman to represent her cause there, but none of these efforts bore fruit.30 Annual memorial ceremonies for Raziel conducted by Etzel members maintained hopes that his body would one day be brought to Israel.31 Until 1977, the commemoration of the organization’s fallen was held on the day of Raziel’s death, 23 Iyar, and took place at Ramat Raziel, the community in the Judean Hills founded in 1949 that bears the Etzel commander’s name.32 With the turnover of power in Israel in 1977, the Etzel and Lehi dead were recognized and their memorial ceremony was combined with that for the IDF’s fallen soldiers. In 1955 a sense of urgency arose. As the Shelah organization wrote, “The political situation in Iraq, which is about to change as the British-Iraqi contract ends, requires us to take vigorous action on this matter: because a situation might develop that leaves us with no one to turn to with this demand.” They believed that it would be impossible to transfer Raziel’s remains once the British departed from Iraq.33 His wife urgently flew to England and, aided by Jewish public figures, tried to exert pressure on the British authorities.34 She was joined there by Knesset member Esther Raziel-Naor, the sister of the deceased, who argued that

26 UKNA, FO 371/98815, with correspondence from 1952. 27 ISA, HZ A-8/2423, Aviad Yaffe to Menachem Degani, 13 June 1951. 28 ISA, HZ-3/2416, S. Kahana to the Finance Ministry, 15 March 1955. 29 JIA, L16-5/1, letter from Shoshana Raziel, no addressee cited, undated. 30 Ibid., Bezalel Amitzur to Max Seligman, 8 August 1952. 31 JIA, A4-2/5, Eri Jabotinsky, “The tomb on the hillside.” 32 Advertisement in Yedioth Ahronoth, 6 May 1953. 33 JIA, L16-5/2, B. Z. Katzenellenbogen to the Finance Ministry, 9 March 1955. 34 ISA, HZ, 3-2416, S. Kahana to the Finance Ministry, 15 March 1955.

202 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

Raziel was actually a civilian operating in Iraq and was thus not subject to the burial regulations of the British Empire. The British consented, but they proposed to transfer Raziel’s body to Cyprus,35 one of their last colonial holdings in the Middle East. This was intended to avoid the political embarrassment that would ensue if the remains were moved directly from Iraq to Israel. After the British obtained the consent of Iraq’s prime minister, Nuri as-Said, and made a written commitment to him that Raziel would be buried in Cyprus, the casket was flown there on 19 December 1955. It was buried in the Jewish cemetery in Margo, near Nicosia, where clandestine immigrants who died at the British detention camps in Cyprus were also interred.36 Foreign Ministry officials, especially Avraham Kidron, Israel’s consul in Nicosia, implored Shoshana Raziel and Shelah not to publicize the event in Israel.37 The Israelis who knew about it regarded the grave in Cyprus as a temporary measure and expected the British to agree to a transfer later,38 but the British believed that the cemetery in Cyprus would be Raziel’s final resting place. On 21 March 1956, about three months after the burial in Cyprus, the Israeli consul there appealed on behalf of Shoshana Raziel to the British governor of the island, requesting to transfer the coffin to Israel. A positive response arrived about a week later and, with Kidron’s approval, the family published a notice in the newspapers in Israel: “The remains of David Raziel, who was the commander of the Etzel and was killed during a mission on behalf of the Allied armies in World War II, will be returned to Israel from Cyprus for burial on 23Iyar.”39 Feverish preparations began in Israel. The plan was to bury Raziel in the military cemetery in Jerusalem on 23Iyar (3 May), the anniversary of his death and the day of commemoration for Etzel fighters. Preparations were completed for a powerful ceremony that would attract significant public and political attention. The Shelah organization asked IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Dayan “to instruct the commander of the navy to send one of our warships to Cyprus to carry the remains of the commander Raziel to the port of Haifa.”40 A notice was dispatched to Israel Radio to announce the arrival of the coffin, declaring that “Raziel set off in anonymity to carry out his mission outside the borders of the country... With an

35 “Terror chief surprise,” Daily Express, 23 May 1956; UKNA, FO 371/115936; FO 371/121848, with correspondence from the years 1955–1956. 36 ISA, HZ-3/2155 with documents from health authorities in Iraq and in Cyprus for the transfer of Raziel’s coffin; for a picture of Raziel’s grave in Cyprus, with no tombstone but covered with flowers and a temporary sign, see JIA, TZ-665. 37 ISA, HZ-3/2155, Avraham Kidron to M. Schneerson, 30 May 1956. 38 Ibid., M. Schneerson to Avraham Kidron, 22 November 1955. 39 “Remains of D. Raziel to be brought for burial to Israel this month,” Davar, 13 April 1956. 40 JIA, L16-1/7, B. Z. Katzenellenbogen to Moshe Dayan, 11 April 1956.



David Raziel 

 203

Figure 29: Tomb of David Raziel in the Jewish cemetery in Cyprus, 25 December 1955. Unknown photographer (JIA).

enormous crowd and glory, in a state ceremony, the commander returns to eternal rest – to the State of Israel, to Jerusalem its capital.”41 Letters were sent to families who had named their children after David Raziel – Razi and David – inviting them to participate in the funeral.42 Notices went out to the localities along the route of the funeral procession, asking their residents to participate in it.43 An announcement was prepared for publication on the day of the coffin’s arrival: “Today the commander returns to his soldiers, to his people, to the stones of Jerusalem he returns – the deceased, the founder.”44 The high hopes and tense anticipation of the Raziel family and Herut supporters were dashed, however, when a notice arrived from the administrative secretary of the Cypriot government canceling the permit to transport the coffin out of the country. The publicity surrounding the operation enraged the British, who had agreed on the condition that it remain secret.45 Among the Israeli public there

41 Ibid., B. Z. Katzenellenbogen to Israel Radio, 17 April 1956. 42 Ibid., B. Z. Katzenellenbogen to various families, 17 April 1956. 43 Ibid., Herut central committee to branches of Herut movement, 17 April 1956. 44 Ibid., for his return. 45 ISA, HZ-3/2155, M. Schneerson to G. Avner, 25 April 1956; ibid., Avraham Kidron to M. Schneer­ son, 30 May 1956.

204 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

was great disappointment. Several Etzel members proposed going to Cyprus and snatching Raziel’s coffin,46 but this was not encouraged. Raziel’s grave in Cyprus was now covered with cement and had a black tin sign attached: “Provisional. Here lies David Raziel, General Ben Anat, born on 8 Kislev 5671 1910, fell on 23 Iyar 5701 may his soul be bound in the bond of life, Cyprus, 5715.”47 Eventually, a permanent tomb marker was constructed of local stones.48 The grave became a veritable pilgrimage site for Etzel veterans and others who continued to regard it as temporary, “until it is possible for us to transfer the coffin for eternal rest in the homeland.”49 The Foreign Ministry waited about a year, and in early May 1957 they renewed diplomatic efforts with the British, this time directly with London. Gershon Avner, of the Israeli embassy in London, contacted Evelyn Shuckburgh, undersecretary for Middle East affairs at the British Foreign Office, in an attempt to win his support. The undersecretary not only replied in the negative but also accused the government of Israel and the Raziel family of violating their explicit promise to maintain secrecy. Shuckburgh complained that Israel’s representatives had tried to circumvent the commitment to London by taking direct action in Cyprus and that the entire matter could cause serious political damage to Britain, making it look deceitful in the eyes of the Iraqi government.50 Avner’s attempt to argue that the government of Israel was not party to the negotiations on transferring Raziel’s remains from Iraq, and that the state itself did not make any commitment, was unsuccessful. The State of Israel’s diplomats would raise this issue with various entities in Britain and in Cyprus for the next few years, but to no avail. The governor of Cyprus explained that the question of transferring the body was not up to him, and that only the central British government could decide.51 The Raziel family refused to accept this, and insisted that it had not consented to keep the remains of their loved one in Cyprus forever. Shoshana Raziel continued to travel to London in an effort to obtain the long-awaited permit. A turning point occurred in late 1960, when the Cypriot authorities agreed to approve the transfer request after winning independence from the British. The last British governor of Cyprus, Sir Hugh Foot, told Shoshana Raziel that “since the government in England does

46 Ibid., Avraham Kidron to M. Schneerson, 30 May 1956. 47 “Another Scoop: Irgun leader buried in Cyprus,” Cyprus Mail, 28 May 1956. 48 JIA, TZ-666, for a picture of the tomb. 49 ISA, HZ-3/2155, B. Z. Katzenellenbogen to P. Leshem, 13 March 1957. 50 Ibid, Israeli Foreign Ministry to A. Kidron, 7 May 1956. 51 Ibid., P. Leshem to M. Comay, 6 May 1959.



David Raziel 

 205

not agree to bring his remains,” he would ask Archbishop Makarios, the first president of independent Cyprus, to “do him a personal favor” and permit the transfer of Raziel’s coffin to Israel the moment he takes over the reins of government in the island.52 The process may also have been accelerated by a secret appeal to Archbishop Makarios from Menachem Begin, “as one freedom fighter to another.”53 Begin reminded the new Cypriot president that he had ordered the disinterment of Cypriot underground fighters executed by the British and their reburial in the cemetery of heroes of the Cypriot nation.54 Makarios summoned the Israeli ambassador in Cyprus, Ze’ev Levin, and confirmed that the British commitment to the Iraqi government was no longer in effect. Nevertheless, he recommended waiting for the right moment to execute the transfer of the coffin.55 News of the contacts between various Israelis and the government of Cyprus reached Israel and stirred excitement among Raziel’s admirers. Herut officials now planned to ask the government to approve an official state funeral: “This will be the first time the government approves a state ceremony for the burial of one of Etzel’s leaders,” they hoped.56 The Ministry of Defense confirmed that “David Raziel will be granted a military funeral like that of an IDF captain who fell in the line of duty.”57 On the morning of 15 March 1961, a leased Arkia plane took off for Cyprus with twenty-five passengers, including MKs Eliezer Shostak and Shimshon Unichman and several former Etzel commanders, led by Meridor. Two fighters who participated in the operation in Iraq, Ya’akov Sicka Aharoni and Yaakov Tarazi, were also among the passengers. A crowd gathered at the Sde Dov airport in Tel Aviv when the plane departed, and when it landed in Cyprus, an announcement was sent to the newspapers: “The coffin of David Raziel, General Ben-Anat, the top commander of the Etzel in the Land of Israel, was brought to the homeland.” The

52 Shlomo Nakdimon, “Mrs. S. Raziel and our ambassador in Cyprus describe the campaign to reinter his remains,” Herut, 16 March 1961. 53 “The coffin of David Raziel, Etzel commander who fell in Iraq, arrives in Israel today,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 3 March 1961. Begin’s letter is quoted in “Begin to Makarios: will we be denied even now the right to have him buried among us?” Herut, 17 March 1961. 54 Yeshayahu Aviam, “Begin’s letter to Makarios brought the approval,” Maariv, 15 March 1961. 55 Makarios’s approval of the reinterment of Raziel facilitated the transfer of the remains of Cypriot Archbishop Nikodomos from Israel to Cyprus; “Makarios to welcome the bishop’s coffin,” Maariv, 23 January 1962. The remains of another Cypriot holy man were later transferred to Cyprus: “Tomb of Cypriot saint found in Acre,” Maariv, 27 March 1962. 56 “Remains of David Raziel, Etzel commander, to be brought for state funeral in Israel,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 23 January 1961. 57 “Burial ceremony like one for a captain,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 15 March 1961.

206 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

notice listed the funeral plans and stated that Raziel would be buried the next day in the military cemetery on Mount Herzl. It also stated that the coffin would be on display in Tel Aviv in the afternoon, and the public could file past it until late at night.58 The disinterment was conducted in the presence of Shoshana Raziel, Rabbi Moshe Segal, Ben-Zion Katzenellenbogen, and a small group of Cypriot Jews.59 The delegation from Israel, in dark suits and with Etzel pins on their lapels, arrived at the cemetery, and Katzenellenbogen spoke in front of the coffin: “Five years ago, when your coffin was transferred from Habbaniya, Iraq, to Cyprus, we vowed not to remain quiet and not to rest until your remains were transferred to the homeland. Now, thanks to the devotion of your wife, Shoshana, and with the help of Israel’s ambassador in Cyprus, we have come to that day.” Ambassador Levin said, “Commander, this is your final station on a long journey. From here, you depart for the homeland, for which you fought, for which you fell. All of us were with you throughout those long years on foreign soil, and all of our emotions will accompany you en route to the homeland. Rest in peace.” The rabbi recited a prayer, and the ceremony concluded with the singing of the Beitar anthem.60 On the way to the airport, the Israeli delegation stopped at the graves of two members of the EOKA (National Organization of Cypriot Fighters) underground who were executed by the British. They placed flowers and delivered remarks at the local prison, where the two were buried.61 When the flight bearing the coffin finally took off from Cyprus, the passengers felt a great sense of relief. Raziel’s widow told a Yedioth Ahronoth reporter on the plane, “It’s an ironic feeling to bring a coffin home and to feel satisfaction.”62 At about one o’clock in the afternoon, the plane landed at Sde Dov. Menachem Begin and others, with great excitement, approached the plane and received the coffin from the members of the delegation. They hoisted it onto their shoulders as they sang the Beitar anthem and then brought to an open vehicle.63 A convoy transported the coffin to Metzudat Ze’ev (Jabotinsky House) in Tel Aviv, where it

58 CZA, KRU/17073, Raziel’s obituary notice. 59 ISA, HZ-3/2155 for pictures of the ceremony in the cemetery in Cyprus. 60 Aviezer Golan, “‘Commander, you are now leaving for the homeland,’ said the Israeli ambassador,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 March 1961; JIA, TZ-4256 for a picture of the coffin being carried from the cemetery. 61 “Etzel fighters visit grave of executed [Cypriots] in Cyprus,” Herut, 16 March 1961. 62 Aviezer Golan, “‘Commander, you are now leaving for the homeland,’ said the Israeli ambassador,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 March 1961. 63 “D. Raziel’s coffin brought to Israel,” Davar, 16 March 1961; for a picture of the coffin being unloaded from the plane, see JIA, TZ-4525.



David Raziel 

 207

remained during the night while a vigil was held, with participants sharing memories of Raziel’s exploits. The next morning there was a “farewell meeting of Beitar’s commander, staff, leadership, and commissioners” – members of the Etzel delegation and Herut activists who stood next to Raziel’s coffin. Before the start of the funeral procession, Knesset Speaker Kadish Luz, coalition chairman Akiva Guvrin, and representatives of various political parties came to pay their respects. The coffin was moved to the plaza in front of Metzudat Ze’ev, where Ya’akov Meridor, Raziel’s second-in-command, delivered a eulogy. It was then loaded onto a military vehicle and covered with wreaths of flowers; “the most prominent of them was a wreath from the IDF.”64 The “Ben-Anat procession” began, commanded by Eitan Livni. The funeral had been carefully planned by Herut, which loaded it with military and patriotic content. A major from the IDF rabbinate was assigned to preside over the ceremony in Jerusalem, and the newspapers emphasized that on David Ben-Gurion’s express orders, an honor guard of IDF officers surrounded the coffin and an IDF company fired rounds of salute. The Raziel family walked behind the casket, including David’s elderly father, Mordechai, and his sister and brother-in-law. They were followed by top Etzel commanders, all wearing white shirts, black ties, and berets with the organization’s emblem. Next in the procession were Leumi health organization nurses dressed in white, four Beitar companies, and three Etzel companies divided by regions, with delegations from Jerusalem, the Galilee, and Samaria. The Kenya deportees and others who had been incarcerated by the British also marched.65 Most of the participants, naturally, were from parties on the right side of the political spectrum, but the newspapers noted the presence of representatives from other parties, too. As in many other funerals, the procession came to a halt in front of the Great Synagogue on Allenby Street, where the chief rabbi of Tel Aviv, Isser Unterman, awaited, and Raziel’s father recited the kaddish prayer. From there the marchers continued to Hamoshavot Square, and many boarded the more than sixty buses to Jerusalem. The convoy arrived at the Russian Compound in Jerusalem, where the underground fighters – including David Raziel – were imprisoned during the Mandate. Rabbi Aryeh Levin delivered the eulogy. Many Jerusalem residents attended the service, along with such public figures as Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Nissim, the president’s military adjutant, Supreme Court President Yitzhak Olshan, and the mayor of Jerusalem. From the Russian Compound the procession continued along Jaffa

64 “David Raziel embarked on his final path,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 March 1961. 65 Notice in Herut, 16 March 1961, with details about the funeral.

208 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

Road to the Ahdut Yisrael synagogue. At Nordau Square, near the entrance to the city, the honor guard of Etzel veterans was replaced by one composed of IDF officers, marking the start of the official state funeral.66 Raziel’s elderly father asked at first to bury his son in the family plot he hoped to arrange in the Sanhedria cemetery, alongside his wife. This was her final wish – that when her son’s remains were repatriated, he would be buried next to her. Ultimately, though, Mordechai Raziel accepted the proposal by the Herut leadership to bury his son in the military cemetery on Mount Herzl. Shimon Peres, the deputy defense minister, was willing to approve the IDF’s participation in an honor guard, but burial in the military cemetery required the intervention of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. Since Raziel did not die as an IDF soldier, he was buried in the Jewish Brigade section,67 in the eastern part of the cemetery.

Figure 30: Fresh grave of David Raziel in the military cemetery, Jerusalem, 17 May 1962. Unknown photographer (JIA).

The official character of the funeral attracted attention: “Many people found it hard to believe their eyes when they saw the military adjutants of the president and the prime minister in their military uniforms, who came to represent the

66 JIA, TZ-4248–4255 for pictures of the funeral. 67 Aviezer Golan, “Journey of Raziel’s coffin lasted 21 years,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 16 March 1961.



“Gondar Aviel” (Yisrael Epstein) 

 209

state’s two highest office holders.” Chief Rabbi Nissim, IDF Chief Rabbi Goren, and Menachem Begin all spoke at the funeral, and Begin was also among the pallbearers. One of the eulogists said, “Above you – the great visionary; around you – soldiers and heroes who fell in battle; facing you – Jerusalem the capital. This is the place you deserve.”68 After the tributes the casket was lowered into the ground, and members of the burial society placed bags of dirt from grave sites in Rosh Pina and Shavei Tzion of underground fighters executed by the British. In May 1962 an unveiling ceremony was held at the military cemetery, with speeches by various figures. The inscription on the tombstone says: “Captain David Raziel ... the commander in chief of the Etzel ... fell in the line of duty in Habbaniya in Iraq on 23 Iyar 5771.”69 About forty years later, Raziel’s rank of major general in the Etzel was added to the grave marker.

“Gondar Aviel” (Yisrael Epstein) – “Our flags will lowered above his coffin, brought to Israel from foreign soil” Yisrael Epstein was born in 1914 in Vilna, Poland. In 1935, he was appointed commissioner of Beitar activity in Poland, a member of the national leadership there, and later the chief secretary of the organization in Poland. After the outbreak of World War II, Epstein was active in Vilna in the Beitar immigration organization, and he arrived in the Land of Israel with a Beitar group just before Germany and Russia went to war. In late 1943 he was a senior officer in Etzel, with the rank of “gondar” (akin to major general), and as leader of the Aviel squadron he was known as “Gondar Aviel.” He was sent to Europe to train Etzel branches and was arrested in in Rome in late October 1946, when the Etzel attacked the British consulate there. During an attempted prison escape, he was shot in the stomach and died the next day, 28 December 1946.70 Epstein was buried in the Jewish cemetery in Rome, but the Union of Italian Jewish Communities moved his remains to Milan to be interred in a common grave with other Jewish fighters.71 The Etzel organization knew there was no point in asking the Mandate authorities to transfer Epstein’s remains to Palestine,72 and it was only in early

68 “Dirt from those hanged by British buried at David Raziel’s tomb,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 March 1961. 69 JIA, TZ-662. 70 “Rome police searching for the ‘Italian leader’ of Etzel,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 10 January 1947. 71 JIA, TZ-6424, for a picture of Epstein’s coffin carried on a carriage in Rome; JIA, TZ-6426, for a picture of Epstein’s grave in Rome in late 1946, with a Beitar symbol on it. 72 JIA, CH18-2/1, an announcement from 18 December 1947.

210 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

1952 that Etzel veterans and Shelah members began to work toward this end. One of Shelah’s objectives was to memorialize pre-1948 underground fighters, thus seeking to compete with the exclusive dominance of Mapai in shaping national memory of the fallen. The activists conducted negotiations with Israeli embassy officials in Rome, who agreed to handle the matter. After checking the grave in Milan, it became clear that the process would be complicated because Aviel was buried together with others in a grave for “persecuted Jews.”73 The Shelah organization also began to address the question of where to reinter Epstein, who was not eligible for the military cemetery on Mount Herzl. They accepted the family’s request to bury him in the cemetery of the Nahalat Yitzhak neighborhood of Tel Aviv, in a plot where other Etzel veterans were buried.74 A great effort was made to stir public interest in Epstein’s funeral. “Etzel soldiers, members of the movement, Beitarists, Vilna natives, pupils of the deceased, and those who cherish his memory” were all invited to participate in the funeral procession and file past the coffin at Metzudat Ze’ev,75 and the Herut newspaper placed the funeral in the broad context of sacrifice by Etzel fighters: Mounds and mounds, wherever they collapsed and fell, the graves of Zion’s fighters are scattered in all parts of the great front ... from New York [Jabotinsky] to Habbaniya in Iraq [Raziel], and from Asmara in Eritrea [the three Etzel fighters] to Rome of Italy ... one by one they return to the bosom of the homeland, for which they gave their life ... they return as victors.76

On 23 January 1953, a Friday, the coffin, draped in an Israeli flag, was unloaded from a ship at Haifa. A mourning convoy headed toward Nahalat Jabotinsky, a moshav that later become part of Binyamina, making a short stop at Shuni, the site of Etzel’s training base during the Mandate period. The coffin was taken to the Beitar club in Nahalat Jabotinsky and, after singing the Beitar anthem, the participants dispersed. An honor guard of “Beitar Nahalat Jabotinsky” stood by the casket during the Jewish Sabbath.77 When the procession resumed, the mourners stopped at the entrance to the Nordia moshav, where they laid wreaths from moshavim in the Sharon region affiliated with the Revisionist movement. Many people gathered at the entrance

73 Ibid., L16-5/1, Z. Bar-Zakai to Avraham Drori, January 1952. 74 Ibid., B. Amitzur to Shmuel Katz, 4 July 1952. 75 “Instructions regarding Etzel commander Yisrael Epstein’s funeral,” Herut, 22 January 1953; CZA, KRU/17075. 76 “For a homeland soldier,” Herut, 24 January 1953. 77 “Y. Epstein’s coffin arrives,” Herut, 24 January 1953.



“Gondar Aviel” (Yisrael Epstein) 

 211

to the PICA school in Petah Tikva, where Epstein had studied.78 The car bearing the coffin stopped at the center of the school plaza before a picture of him, draped in black, against a blue-and-white background. The nation’s flag was lowered to half-mast, and an honor guard of pupils stood by the flagpole. After eulogies were delivered at Jabotinsky House, the funeral procession proceeded toward the cemetery, led by wreath bearers from many organizations affiliated with Herut and Beitar. An honor guard of Beitar members and Etzel veterans rode in the vehicle with the casket, holding the emblem of the “Beitar Pledge” in their hands. Members of the Epstein family walked behind the vehicle, accompanied by Menachem Begin. After a stop at the Great Synagogue, the mourners continued in cars to the cemetery in Nahalat Yitzhak. At the grave site, Begin spoke in a choked voice: “We have performed one of the most sacred deeds from time immemorial ... Here is the flag of Etzel and the revolt lowered above your clods of earth. Here are your commanders, your soldiers and your pupils standing around you and bidding farewell to your remains.”79 The mourners stood in silence in front of the grave, and then the El Malei Rahamim and kaddish prayers were recited. The ceremony concluded with the singing of “Hatikva” and the Beitar anthem. Herut was very involved in organizing the funerals of Raziel and Epstein, but sometimes the funerals of the political right were local or family initiatives. Examples include the reinterment of the “Black Prince,” Yosef Katznelson. A commander in Beitar and one of the leaders of the Brit Habirionim (Strongmen Alliance) in Jerusalem, Katznelson had fled from the Mandate police to Poland. He was injured during a German air attack on Warsaw, and in January 1940 he died of kidney disease and was buried in the Jewish cemetery there.80 His wife worked to fulfill his last wishes, and in 1957 he was buried in the Sanhedria cemetery in Jerusalem – the graveyard closest to the Mount of Olives, where he had asked to be laid to rest.81 The story of Alfred Rossi is similar. Rossi, the second commissioner of Beitar in Tunisia, served in the French Army. While deployed in Sicily in 1943 in preparation for a possible landing by the Allies, he was caught and imprisoned near the

78 “Yisrael Epstein’s coffin brought to ‘Metzudat Ze’ev,’” Herut, 26 January 1953. 79 “Thousands accompany Y. Epstein on his final journey on the soil of the homeland,” Herut, 27 January 1953. See JIA, TZ-6091, for a picture of the funeral passing through the streets of Tel Aviv. 80 On Katznelson, see Ahimeir (1983). Katznelson said to his wife on his deathbed, “Bring me to the Land of Israel or at least, according to tradition, take me with you on your way to Zion,” as quoted by Eliyahu Amikam in “Yosef Katznelson returns from his mission,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 11 August 1957. 81 “Yosef Katznelson of blessed memory buried in Jerusalem,” Herut, 12 August 1957.

212 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

island’s capital, Palermo. On 18 April 1943, he was shot in the back while trying to evade his captors.82 Rossi was initially declared missing, and only in December 1949 were his remains transferred from Sicily to Tunisia, where they were buried in a military funeral.83 In 1964 he was reinterred in Beersheba, where his widow had settled. This was a joint initiative by Rossi’s wife; and Nissim Taitou, the secretary of Herut in Beersheba; and Abraham Tiar, a Herut MK. They had formed a public committee for repatriating the remains that included representatives from the Council of Tunisian Immigrants in Israel, Herut activists, and others.84 In the case of Avraham Gelperin, it was a group of veterans from the underground movement who organized the reinterment. An Etzel activist who was incarcerated in Cyprus, Gelperin became ill and died there in September 1947. He left a letter enjoining that, “Whatever happens, I wish to reach the soil of the Land of Israel.” A task force that included members of the “Epstein” Etzel battalion worked to fulfill Gelperin’s wish, locating his grave in Cyprus and obtaining the required permits there. In mid-August 1965 he was reinterred in the Haifa cemetery, with many local members of the Beitar movement participating in the funeral.85

From Cairo to the military cemetery in Jerusalem In June 1975 the bodies of Eliyahu Hakim and Eliyahu Bet-Zuri were reinterred in the military cemetery in Jerusalem. The two had been hanged in Cairo in March 1945 after assassinating Lord Moyne, the British minister of state in the Middle East. The transfer of their remains many years after their death became possible following the interim accords signed between the governments of Israel and Egypt after the Yom Kippur War (1973). The coffins were transported across the armistice line in the Sinai Peninsula with the assistance of the Red Cross and then displayed in the Hall of Heroism in the Russian Compound in Jerusalem, which had served as a prison during the Mandate period. Hakim and Bet-Zuri were buried in a state funeral in the olei hagardom section of the military cemetery in Jerusalem,86 where Avshalom Feinberg had been buried in 1967 and where Yosef Lishansky (1979) and the two olei hagardom from the Nili underground would

82 Taitou (2004). 83 JIA, CH7 A-3/83, for a photo of the decoration awarded to Rossi. 84 “Alfred Rossi of blessed memory – for burial in Beersheba”, Haaretz, 30 April 1964. 85 “The remains of Beitar fighter Avraham Gelperin of blessed memory buried in the homeland,” Herut, 16 August 1965. 86 Eliyahu Amikam, “The martyrs return to their nation,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 26 June 1975; Aviezer Golan, “The two Eliyahus returned yesterday to the homeland,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 27 June 1975.



From Cairo to the military cemetery in Jerusalem 

 213

later join them. In April 1977 two more men were buried in the same section: Moshe Marzouk and Shmuel Azar, who were executed in Cairo for their roles in what became known as the “Disgraceful Affair” – an attempt by Israeli military intelligence in 1954 to undermine the Egyptian government through sabotage conducted by members of the local Jewish community. The failure of this mission and the capture of the operatives led to their hanging in January 1955. The reinterments of Hakim and Bet-Zuri in 1975, followed by the state funerals of the other olei hagardom mentioned above, brought to a close several decades in which numerous public figures were reburied in Israel. This was soon after the Yom Kippur War, which led to a social and political crisis and shook Israeli society deeply. Soon afterwards, in May 1977, the reins of power changed hands in Israel as the Likud, led by Menachem Begin, formed the government. The almost twenty years of Mapai rule ended, and a government with a right-wing orientation assumed leadership of the state. The national symbolic agenda changed, turning toward East Jerusalem and the territories of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). Even if unconsciously, the participants at the funeral of Hakim and Bet-Zuri could sense the imminent sociopolitical change. Even though it was a state ceremony, held in the presence of government representatives led by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, it was clearly a “holiday” for the political right and Herut. MK Yitzhak Shamir, the commander of the executed men and the one who had dispatched them on their mission to assassinate Lord Moyne, received the coffins in the Sinai immediately after they were handed over to IDF representatives. Civilians from ten settlements in the Golan (Keshet), Samaria (Ofra), Judea, and the Sinai brought bags of local soil to cover the coffins. There was a notable presence of Etzel and Lehi veterans, who came as an organized group, and prominent rightwing figures Shamir, Geula Cohen, and Israel Eldad spoke at the ceremony.87 Politicans on the right had continually pressured the government to include Hakim and Bet-Zuri in any deal to return the bodies of IDF soldiers from Egypt. This subject stirred an internal political dispute in Israel,88 and the funeral of the two men marked the entry of the right-wing’s fallen into the heart of Israeli national consensus after many years of struggle.89 In an editorial titled “Ceremonies for two Eliyahus,” Haaretz wrote, “We should not accept the view of Lehi veterans and supporters who seek to describe the honor the IDF is now bestowing upon the remains of the two olei hagardom as if it symbolizes the general public’s

87 Yechiel Limor, “The two Eliyahus buried as mourners softly sing ‘Unknown Soldiers,’” Maariv, 27 June 1975. 88 ISA, G-27/6905, Moshe Svorai to Golda Meir, 27 March 1974. 89 Goldstein (2011).

214 

 Chapter 9 Etzel and Lehi Fighters in the Landscape of Reinterment

adoption of the viewpoint of a faction.” The newspaper’s editor had reservations about including the right-wing’s fallen in the landscape of national Zionist sacrifice, and he opposed the deal to release Egyptian captives in return for the coffins of the “two Eliyahus.” He recognized, however, that “the national psychology that does not accept burial abroad (even in a proper grave), the longing for legitimacy on the part of Lehi veterans, and considerations of internal policies had together combined” to make the deal a reality.90

90 “Ceremonies for two Eliyahus,” Haaretz, 26 June 1975.

Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel Hundreds of historical sites and holy places are scattered across the Land of Israel, and the history of the land and its sacredness to three monotheistic religions have shaped a landscape full of symbols. Beginning in the late nineteenth century, Zionism and Jewish settlement of the Land of Israel began to create and develop places of national symbolic resonance . Secular sites such as Tel Hai, Modi’in, and Masada were added to the roster of religious-historical sites of symbolic significance. Following the establishment of the state, landmarks of national memory were designated throughout the country – battle sites, monuments, buildings, and graves. The reinterment in Israel’s soil of Jewish notables and exemplary figures who died and were buried overseas was part of this process. During the two or three generations between the end of Ottoman rule and the 1960s, numerous coffins containing key figures in the Zionist movement arrived in Israel and were reburied in the national territory. In most cases this reflected the desire of Israeli agents of memory to bury them in the state that arose in the Jewish homeland. Unlike the burial practice in the old Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives or in the ancient graveyards of Safed or Tiberias, however, the popular choice was to bury them near the grave of Theodor Herzl, the state’s visionary, who was also reinterred in Israel in 1949, or in other sites of national significance, such as Degania, Ramat Hanadiv, or Avihayil. Bringing these remains for burial in Israel was understood as correcting a historical anomaly. And while the Jewish funeral is usually a private ritual attended by family and friends, the public funerals of these people entailed a much broader public and a more complex objective. The World Zionist Organization (WZO), the Jewish Agency, the government of Israel, the Jewish National Fund (JNF), the Federation of Teachers, the workers’ parties, the Revisionist Party, institutions, organizations, municipalities, and other public entities sponsored the funeral ceremonies and turned them into widely attended events. Orchestrating a person’s final rite of passage as a public event is a familiar phenomenon. Yet unlike the funerals of European rulers, for example, in which the disparity between the masses and the royals were accentuated,1 the nationalist-Zionist funerals sought to bring the citizenry closer to the deceased, hoping to foster ideological identification with the dead leaders and heroes. These national public events were an essential link between the dead and the living, between the

1 Giesey (1960). DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-011

216 

 Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel

past and the nationalist-Zionist present, and they helped turn the symbolic into the tangible. In their effort to underline the connection to the State of Israel, the organizers of the reinterment ceremonies mobilized not only the image of Herzl but also his grave in Jerusalem, the capital city. Moreover, Herzl was joined by such leaders as Max Nordau, David Wolffsohn, and Ze’ev Jabotinsky, men who did not live to see the establishment of the Zionist enterprise, and by other intellectuals and exemplary figures.2 Reinterment in the soil of Israel helped keep these individuals alive in the memory of future generations of Israelis. It enabled the deceased to be transported, physically and symbolically, from the Diaspora to the Promised Land – home, to their proper place. When Nordau’s coffin arrived in the Land of Israel in April 1926, Doar Hayom wrote, “The deceased is living and considered an asset, and in building our national home in the Land of Israel we must pay attention to this and also appropriate the Diaspora communities of our deceased asset.”3

Zionist reinterment and its characteristics Reinterment activity in the Land of Israel motivated by Zionism began in the late Ottoman period and continued through the period of the British Mandate and in the State of Israel until the 1970s. The catalyst for the Zionist idea of reburial was, apparently, Herzl’s last will and testament, in which he asked to be buried in the Land of Israel. Likewise, the will of David Wolffsohn, Herzl’s successor as president of the WZO, indicated the Land of Israel as his desired place of reinterment. Nevertheless, the wills of Herzl and Wolffsohn were fulfilled only after the establishment of the state. The British conquest of the Land of Israel in 1917–1918, the Balfour Declaration in November 1917 in support of a national home for the Jewish people there, and especially the declaration’s acceptance by the League of Nations made it more germane to think about fulfilling Herzl’s will and reinterring other Zionist leaders, too. Nevertheless, Herzl’s request was not executed during the years of the British Mandate, despite extensive Zionist activity aimed at bringing deceased heroes for burial in Jewish homeland. Tel Aviv was at the center of this activity. Its energetic mayor, Meir Dizengoff, succeeded in reinterring Max Nordau in the city in 1926, followed by the reburial of other Zionist public figures, including Judge Yitzhak Nofech and Leon Reich, the president of

2 Splendor and Glory (2001), pp. 9–54. 3 “From day to day: Max Nordau’s coffin to the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 21 April 1926.



Zionist reinterment and its characteristics 

 217

the WZO in Galicia and a member of the Polish parliament. Yehuda Leib Pinsker, Leo Motzkin, and others were reinterred in Jerusalem during this period. The phenomenon expanded and became institutionalized after the founding of the state, as the remains of many others were repatriated. The realization of the idea of a Hebrew state enabled Herzl’s wish to be fulfilled, and his burial in 1949 became a seminal event. The bodies of other Zionist leaders, intellectuals, and heroes were soon to follow. After the 1960s this activity dwindled; the dreams of those who had longed to be buried in Israel were largely fulfilled. The Six-Day War and the conquest of East Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria turned the country’s attention in other directions, and second funerals for notable figures became infrequent events. The few examples include the members of Herzl’s family reinterred in Jerusalem and Rabbi Shmuel Mohilever in Mazkeret Batya.4 Despite differences in the various reinterment ceremonies, they all shared salient characteristics. Foremost among these is the great importance that the Zionist movement and the Yishuv attributed to them. The discussions and decisions by various parties; disinterment in the Diaspora and the symbolism attached to this; transporting the coffins from the Diaspora and the many related ceremonies; long funeral processions and the reasons for the selected routes; speeches and actions at the burial site: all of these indicate that these funerals were understood as public attractions and national events. After initial discussions, negotiations, and decisions to move forward with a particular case, the first requirement was the disinterment of the coffin overseas and its transfer to representatives of the Zionist movement or, later, to the State of Israel. This usually took place in an organized ceremony that included mourning processions and assemblies. In addition to the traditional religious components, they included a nationalistic and Zionist message for Diaspora Jews – the potential for a return to the land of the forefathers, even in a coffin. The symbolism of statehood was also evident in the activities that took place where the remains of the deceased touched the sacred Israeli-Zionist soil for the first time, whether at the port of Jaffa or Haifa, at a railway station, or at the airport.5 At these sites, the deceased was, in a way, introduced to the leaders and the public and exposed to the state’s achievements.

4 Vered Levy-Barzilai, “One historian’s vision fulfilled the Zionist visionary’s last wishes,” Haaretz, 15 September 2006. A tent was erected above the grave of Rabbi Shmuel Mohilever in Mazkeret Batya in 2002, and it became a center of religious activity and a pilgrimage site. A museum dedicated to the rabbi and his heritage was also built in the town: museum-mohaliver.org.il/ baudio.php. 5 See, for example, the photograph of Naftali Herz Imber’s coffin at the port of Haifa: CZA, PHG/1014906.

218 

 Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel

At this stage, whichever entity had organized the transportation of the coffin assumed responsibility for bringing it to the grave site, via a long route – both geographically and symbolically. The path and schedule of the funeral were designed to create a special public atmosphere, distinct from the everyday. This sense of festive sacrality was sometimes accompanied by a declaration that the funeral day, or part of it, was a general day of mourning, when work and studies came to a halt.6 The coffins were loaded onto various vehicles, sometimes belonging to the burial society, and they regularly stopped at sites of Zionist and national significance. For example, the funeral of Hannah Szenes paused at Kibbutz Sdot Yam, her home before her recruitment to the British Army. Similarly, many residents of the Jezreel Valley, whose lands were purchased by the JNF, came to Nahalal to pay their respects to the organization’s founder, Zvi Hermann Shapira. The routes of many funeral processions included the main streets of major cities and were designed to attract as many participants as possible. The Zionist space in general and the urban space in particular became an educational domain during the funerals, where the citizens of Israel were exposed to the sense of statehood and national order that was coalescing in those days. Because of the funerals, central Israel and the periphery were joined as one – Tel Aviv and Jerusalem with Degania, Kinneret, and Rehovot. Sites were specially prepared for the encounter between the deceased and the masses: Ohalo in the Jordan Valley and Ohel Shem, Metzudat Ze’ev, and Herbert Samuel Square in Tel Aviv. In these places, the public touched the coffin – sometimes physically, and always symbolically.7 Thus, the encounter occurred in spaces of national Zionist significance that thereby acquired a sort of holiness, at least temporarily, and were decorated to create a dramatic, theatrical atmosphere. The importance of the coffin was emphasized by placing it atop a raised platform or under a canopy (or both), with a special backdrop or lighting. The planners of the funerals sought to reinforce and prolong as much as possible the experience of state-related memory that was generated during the funerals. Photographs of the dead notables hung in the streets and speeches that quoted from the deceased created a connection between them and the living public. The funeral procession ended at the cemetery, where the burial ceremony was usually conducted according to Jewish law by the burial society and the Chief Rabbinate. This included the El Malei Rahamim prayer, psalms, and kaddish, plus

6 Ben Amos, “National funerals,” pp. 304–310. 7 See the photograph of the square in front of the Tel Aviv Municipality, where Max Nordau’s coffin was placed. A decorated canopy is above the coffin, which is surrounded by an honor guard: CZA, PHG/1001749.



Zionist reinterment and its characteristics 

 219

eulogies and speeches. Sometimes there were also rituals drawn from secular ceremonial – the crowd stood at attention, the flag was raised and lowered, drum rolls sounded, and sometimes a volley of rifle shots echoed in a gun salute. These were all part of the backdrop that combined tradition and innovation, religion and nationalism. There was no desire to introduce secular national content as an alternative to the ceremonies, or to design a different Israeli model for them; it was convenient for everyone if the burial society took responsibility for the actual interment.8 Many people did not view these ceremonies as essentially religious in essence; rather, they accepted them as part of a tradition that had no secular alternative. One newspaper account proudly described this confluence of nation and religion: “The army, all its parts and divisions, served as an honor guard. Rabbis taught passages from the Mishnah and cantors sang psalms ... an ancient tradition was combined with the symbol of heroism – as two sides of the same coin.”9 The eulogies and speeches at the ceremonies expressed the spirit of Zionist history, as embodied in the life of the deceased, who was now resurrected as part of the grand story of Zionism and Israeliness. After the coffin was placed in the ground and covered by the soil of the “holy land,” a symbolic privilege for various honored figures, the efforts to perpetuate the deceased in the national memory began. The challenge was to keep the graves and those buried in them relevant to Israeli society and to promote both the site and the individual as part of the Israel pantheon of heroes. The deceased notables, who contributed to creating a collective memory and identity, were deemed deserving of public memorialization. They were removed from their families and conscripted as “soldiers” in the service of the national objective. In addition, the nationalist, Zionist components of their personalities were underscored at the expense of their personal traits. While the outdoor events of the public reinterments were tinged with sadness, there were also elements of delight and excitement. The crowd of mourners-celebrants shared a belief in the same values, and the ceremonies ensured that the participants would continue to take part in the national enterprise. As in the theater, the participants took their places in the ceremony according to their socioeconomic status: the VIPs walked behind the coffin and participated in the intimate ceremony at the grave site, while the others watched from a distance. The funeral ceremonies were usually designed by representatives from government ministries, the Jewish Agency, the JNF, political parties, or other entities,

8 See the photograph in CZA, PHG/1014912, where a rabbi is reciting kaddish over Naftali Herz Imber’s coffin before the funeral procession embarked from the port of Haifa to Jerusalem. 9 Y. N. Neiman, “The coffin’s journey,” Davar, 26 August 1949.

220 

 Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel

reflecting the fact that they were intended to communicate a political, nationalist message: a declaration of the existence and revival of a new nation. The presence of a “master of ceremonies,” backdrops, and movements united to highlight the Zionist content and messages of the proceedings and helped impress these upon the viewers. The funeral thus became an event of national pride and contributed to a sense of harmony and unity. The participants expressed their patriotism and their commitment to the community,10 bridging, at least in those moments, the divides in Israeli society. One Israeli daily described the crowd filing past Herzl’s coffin in the courtyard of the National Institutions Building as, “an elderly laborer of Mizrahi descent, alongside an old Jewish man from Poland. Behind them, a rabbi from Morocco in a long black robe, followed by a huge crowd. The dry bones of the visionary Herzl infused them with the spirit of life.”11 In this way, Israel’s diverse communities rallied around the images of their leaders. The number of participants in the funeral procession was an indicator of success or failure. Thus, in order to attract a crowd, considerable effort was made to imbue the funeral with an educational element, aimed at instilling the tradition of nationalism in the younger generation who may not have known the deceased. The education system, youth movements, and the political movements worked hard to involve students, both as an appealing backdrop to the proceedings and because of the values they could absorb at the funeral events. The media, too, played an important role. The radio served as a conduit between the funeral and the citizenry. Propaganda films and newscasts in the theaters also contributed to emphasizing the importance of the funerals, as did the dozens of newspapers that competed to provide broad coverage of the funerals, helping to establish them as events of national importance. Since some of the newspapers were affiliated with parties or organizations, they focused on “their” funerals: Hatzofeh devoted extensive coverage to the burial of rabbis, Al Hamishmar highlighted the interments of those associated with the Socialist settlement movement, and Davar trumpeted the funerals of Mapai.

The place of burial and the ideal of a national Zionist pantheon Reinterment took place in many locations across Israel. Sometimes the site selection resulted from a competition, which is understandable in light of the

10 Ben-Amos and Bar-Tal (2004). 11 “At 3:00 p.m., the last path to Mount Herzl,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 17 August 1949; for a similar description, see A. H. Elhanani, “Jerusalem salutes,” Davar, 8 August 1949.



The place of burial and the ideal of a national Zionist pantheon 

 221

funeral organizers’ desire to turn these cemeteries into sites of national heritage beyond their significance to particular movements, organizations, or localities. This symbolic geography was manifested throughout the country: in Jerusalem, at traditional burial sites at the Mount of Olives and the Nicanor Cave on Mount Scopus; in the Hebrew city of Tel Aviv, at the Trumpeldor Street cemetery; in the Jordan Valley; in other places that sought such cemeterial distinction; and, again, in Jerusalem, where the desire to create a national Israeli-Zionist pantheon was strongly felt and resulted in new, nontraditional sites of burial. The Mount of Olives is still the most important religious and historical cemetery in the Land of Israel and in the Jewish world, a site where Jews have been buried since the fifteenth or sixteenth century. In the nineteenth century, with the growth of the Jewish population in Jerusalem, the cemetery expanded and served all of the city’s residents. During the Mandate period, when Jerusalem became a political center of the Zionist movement, a university city, and a focal point for the development of Hebrew culture, Zionist politicians, Jewish intellectuals, professors, and others were also buried on the Mount of Olives. Until the establishment of the state of Israel, the Zionist movement’s attitude toward Jerusalem was complex. On the one hand, Zionism drew its strength from “Zion,” the city’s traditional sobriquet, and situated some of the important institutions of the state-in-the-making there. On the other hand, the city symbolized the old Judaism from which Zionism sought to break away. It was a space full of religious ideology and institutions that were far from the heart of the Zionist movement. The leadership of Zionism did not place Jerusalem at the forefront of its activity.12 It is clear, therefore, why Menachem Ussishkin tried to establish a pantheon for the visionaries of the Zionist ideal at the Nicanor Cave rather than the Mount of Olives, and why Meir Dizengoff worked to put Tel Aviv on the map of Zionist symbolic venues. It was Tel Aviv, not Jerusalem, that symbolized Zionism, progress, and innovation. Founded in 1909, Tel Aviv became the center of both Zionist political-party activity and economic-cultural activity of the Yishuv. The city offered a nationalist, Zionist, secular Hebrew alternative to Jewish, religious, exilic Jerusalem. Tel Aviv was Jerusalem’s opposite, both practically and symbolically13 – a Zionist enterprise, created ex nihilo on virgin sand dunes, a new essence and emblem.14 From the outset, the city’s Trumpeldor Street cemetery became an important Zionist symbol when the casualties of the 1921 riots were buried there,

12 Lavsky, Introduction, p. 9; Golani (1992), pp. 9–18. 13 This is mentioned briefly in Helman (2010), pp. 69–70. 14 For a discussion on Jerusalem’s status in this context, see: Saposnik, Zionist Sacredness.

222 

 Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel

the author Yosef Haim Brenner among them.15 The widely attended funeral of Max Nordau in 1926 established this cemetery as “a precious and unique national asset, which contains evidence, etched in stone, of the glory days of the nation’s rebirth.”16 Many of the city’s founders, writers, and cultural figures were buried there, alongside other prominent characters in the history of the city and of the Yishuv. Because of its freedom from the weight of the antiquity and sacredness of the Mount of Olives, it was easy to build a pantheon there and turn it into a Zionist memorial site. Consequently, over the following decades, residents of the city who died overseas were reinterred in Tel Aviv, as were notable Zionist figures whose connection to the city was only posthumous. A great distance, real and symbolic, separated the cemeteries in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv from those in Degania and Kinneret, among the most important graveyards of the Socialist settlements. Yet while the cemetery at Kinneret served for many years as a showcase for pioneering settlements and Socialist Zionism, the one in Degania was secondary in importance. It was there that “outsiders” like Otto Warburg and Leopold Jacob Greenberg were buried – men who were not “kosher” for burial according to strict interpretation of Jewish religious law.17 The burial of Nahman Syrkin, Moshe Hess, and Dov Ber Borochov in the graveyard at Kinneret reflected the power of the political left during the first two decades of statehood, its need for national symbols detached from Jerusalem, and its desire to establish that cemetery as a symbolic center and pilgrimage site. As in the case of Berl Katznelson,18 the funerals of Syrkin, Hess, and Borochov set out from the center of the country – Tel Aviv and Haifa, the power base of the workers’ movement – and crossed via the Jezreel and Harod valleys to Kinneret. During the 1950s, when Mapai’s political power was at its peak and members of the Third Aliyah led the state, these graves were perceived as hallowed ground; they became objects of pilgrimage, and the cemetery became a pantheon. The burials in the Jordan Valley underscored the importance of this pioneering frontier.

15 Kroll and Linman (1940), p. XII. See also: Mann (2000). 16 Burial society files, p. 41. 17 The differences between the Degania and Kinneret cemeteries are also relevant today. Many people visit the one in Kinneret, stopping at the graves of the poet Rachel and songwriter Naomi Shemer, and the site remains in the public consciousness as the pantheon of the Socialist movement. Few visitors come to the cemetery in Degania, however, and the individuals buried there have been forgotten. For example, after a lapse of several decades, several young people decided to renew the tradition of holding a memorial service at the grave site of A. D. Gordon: Karni AmAd, “Memorial service for the man of labor values,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 28 January 2011. 18 “The Yishuv and the movement accompany B. Katznelson to his final rest,” Davar, 14 August 1944.



The place of burial and the ideal of a national Zionist pantheon 

 223

In addition to Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and the Jordan Valley, other places joined the map of reinterment in Israel – places like Haifa, Zichron Ya’akov, and Rishon LeZion – because of personal connections between the deceased and the locality. Naaman Belkind was buried in Rishon LeZion at the initiative of his family; Eliezer Margolin was reinterred in Rehovot alongside his parents: Alexander Aaronsohn was reburied in Zichron Ya’akov on 23 November 1949, his birthplace; Shneur Amiav was laid to rest in 1950 at the children’s village he founded at Givat Hamoreh; and Shalom Schwartzbard was reinterred in Moshav Avihayil, which was established by veterans of the Jewish Legion. Baron Edmond de Rothschild is especially prominent in this context; he was buried at Ramat Hanadiv, in a separate grave site devoted entirely to him and his wife. The War of Independence and the establishment of the State of Israel immediately changed the relationship between Jerusalem and the Zionist movement. The declaration of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel accorded it a unique status. The glow of the cemetery in Tel Aviv as a nationalist-Zionist symbol dimmed, and it became more of a municipal cemetery. It is true, however, that even in this period, “every centimeter of a ‘plot’ there [in the Trumpeldor cemetery] was weighed in gold,”19 and Nissan Turov,20 Abraham Leib Shalkovich (Ben Avigdor),21 and Emil Zumerstein22 were all reinterred there, but the prestige of the capital of Israel trumped Tel Aviv. The most important burial site established after 1948 was Mount Herzl. The grave of Herzl, the military cemetery, and the section reserved for the nation’s leaders combined to create an impressive symbolic site that reinforced Jerusalem’s status as the capital of Israel. David Wolffsohn, Nahum Sololow, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, and Hannah Szenes were among those buried there; all of them helped establish and reinforce the elevated, national status of Mount Herzl. Because regulations stipulated that only presidents of the WZO could be buried alongside Herzl, a proposal was made to designate a separate national burial section in Jerusalem’s new cemetery in Givat Shaul. A public committee determined that “the location of the [national] pantheon will not be on Mount Herzl, which will remain an exclusive memorial to the creator of Zionism,”23 but instead on the

19 Zvi Algat, “Life and death in the hands of the index,” Maariv, 17 January 1961. 20 TAMA, container 1357, file 3813, letter from B. Kadouri, director of the Tel Aviv Municipality’s Assets Department to various addressees, 8 May 1953; “The coffin of Dr. Nissan Turov of blessed memory was buried,” Haaretz, 13 May 1953. 21 “The bones of Ben Avigdor were buried in Tel Aviv,” Davar, 23 July 1964. 22 “Dr. Emil Zumerstein brought to eternal rest,” Davar, 13 December 1967. 23 ISA, GL-1087/8, memorandum from the meeting of the Public Committee for Reinterring Smolinsky, 6 February 1952; “I saw, I heard,” Haaretz, 2 January 1952.

224 

 Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel

hill at the western entrance to Jerusalem, where the city’s new cemetery was established.24 Most of the figures considered in this book were buried in cemeteries that previously existed. Pinsker, Herzl, and Rothschild were three exceptions who were accorded separate grave sites: Pinsker at the Nicanor Cave on Mount Scopus; Herzl on the highest hill in western Jerusalem, which was then renamed Mount Herzl; and Rothschild in a plot he purchased himself in Ramat Hanadiv. It was clear to all that a separate burial space should be designated for Herzl, who envisioned the Jewish state, even though this was an idea foreign to Jewish tradition. In Rothschild’s case, the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association (PICA) appointed a committee to find an appropriate burial location: “The committee looked for a high place, which overlooks the wide spaces of Samaria and the settlements that arose by virtue of the enterprise of the great deceased one.”25 However, even these monumental Jewish grave sites were modest in comparison to more familiar models of memorialization such as the Paris Panthéon, Westminster Abbey and St. Paul’s in London, and other such places worldwide. Even so, not everyone in State of Israel was enthusiastic about the extensive activity surrounding the burial of leaders. Haaretz harshly criticized the Ministry of Education in regard to “the sickness of grandeur that is spreading among the state’s institutions. The ingathering of the exiles has not ended, thousands of new immigrants are still sitting in tents, there are not enough schools and notebooks for children, and the Ministry of Education is busy collecting bones and building a pantheon.” The author wondered, “Are there examples of large states that, four years after winning their independence, started to build magnificent pavilions?”26 Amos Kenan wrote sarcastically about bringing the remains of Smolenskin from Italy, the project of “ingathering of the bones,” and the desire to build a pantheon in the Givat Shaul cemetery.27 This book has discussed mainly an inner circle in Zionist and Israeli society – a select few whom the establishment wished to honor, most of them Ashkenazi men,28 whose coffins were transported to Israel from Europe, the United States, Africa, and the Middle East. This reflects the political map during the formative

24 See the map of the cemetery at CZA MM/836/6. 25 “Memorial tomb for the Father of the Yishuv,” Davar, 6 November 1939. 26 Amati, “Ingathering of the bones or ingathering of the exiles,” Haaretz, 6 January 1952. 27 Uzi and Partners, “The vision of the dry bones,” Haaretz, 27 May 1952. 28 Baumel (2002) writes about this gender aspect. Rosa Kaplan, a Hadassah nurse whose bones were brought from Alexandria to Jerusalem by that organization, is, with Hannah Senesh, one of the few women who were reinterred. See “Bringing the remains of the nurse Rosa Kaplan of blessed memory to the Land of Israel,” Doar Hayom, 8 June 1928.



Failures in reinterment 

 225

years of Zionism. The project of memorialization focused on the insiders and excluded others, those who remained outside the bounds of national memory for political or social reasons. Notably, there was a long delay in fulfilling the last wishes of Jabotinsky. Mapai had a significant advantage in the process of shaping the collective memory due to its access to the public landscape, to the media, and to other means of disseminating messages and instilling values. These enabled it to maintain its political dominance and cultural hegemony. The efforts to build a pantheon succeeded in the cemeteries that created a connection between the idea and the physical space. Herzl’s grave, for example, is connected to the Greats of the Nation section and the main military cemetery of the State of Israel, in which a framework of state ceremonies developed. It is also adjacent, now, to Yad Vashem, where a tent-shaped Hall of Remembrance stands at the symbolic center and where the ashes of victims from the lands of destruction are buried in the floor.29 This connection among various components of the mount of remembrance is what endows it with power and status as “the national pantheon.”

Failures in reinterment In addition to those reinterment projects that succeeded thanks to the efforts of institutional, organizational, private, and family agents, many such initiatives were not completed.30 One example is Abraham Mapu, among the most famous Hebrew writers of the nineteenth century, whose books served as an ideological basis for the Zionist movement. In 1938 WZO officials in Germany contacted the Association of Hebrew Writers in the Land of Israel, warning that the city of Königsberg, which was already under Nazi rule, was about to clear the cemetery where Mapu had been buried in 1867. “The great dreamer of Love of Zion is deserving and worthy to be included, even if after seventy years, and to find his final rest in the soil of the land he envisioned in his sublime visions,” the Office for Hebrew Culture wrote,31 but this was never done. Efforts to transfer the remains of Adolph Stand, a leader of Zionism in Galicia, also failed. In 1936 a committee formed in the Yishuv collected money to finance

29 See Bar (2010). 30 For example, “The coffin of the Vilna Gaon will be brought to Israel,” Herut, 24 May 1960; “Neturei Karta oppose bringing the Baal Shem Tov’s bones to the ‘Zionist state,’” Herut, 31 August 1964. 31 IDF Archives S46/440, Dr. S. Kaleko, Office for Hebrew Culture of the Association of Hebrew Writers in the Land of Israel, 18 Sivan 5698 (17 June 1938).

226 

 Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel

the project, and the Lloyd Triestino company agreed to transport the coffin to prestate Israel at no charge. Representatives of the WZO in Trieste took responsibility for transferring the coffin from the train to the ship, but there was no funding to cover the cost of moving the coffin from Vienna to Trieste.32 In the 1950s efforts were made to bring the remains of other notables, including the poet and rabbi Shalom Shabazi from Yemen;33 Shmuel Mohilever from Bialystok, a rabbi and founder of the Hovivei Zion movement;34 the painter Chaim Soutine, who was buried at Montparnasse in Paris;35 and Alexander Marmorek, head of the French Zionist Federation.36 None were successful. An interesting case in this context is that of Mendele Mocher Sforim, the pseudonym of Shalom Yaakov Abramovich, one of the most important Yiddish and Hebrew writers of the modern era. In August 1954 Israel’s ambassador in Moscow sent a request to the Soviet Foreign Ministry to bring the writer’s bones from Odessa to Israel. The answer was slow in coming, and the request was finally rejected in April 1955 on the grounds that the “writers’ admirers in the Soviet Union opposed moving his remains.”37 An initiative to bring the remains of Professor Selig Brodetsky, a leader of Zionism in England who died in London in 1954, was also rejected.38 Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett responded guardedly to the request by Brodetsky’s wife: “I’ll say that the whole matter is groundless in my view.” Referring to the committee assigned to make such decisions, Sharett wrote that the number of those brought for reinterment in Israel “would clearly be very limited, and I doubt if anyone would think on his own of suggesting that Selig Brodetsky be included among the select few.” Sharett warned that “we must not turn the State of Israel into a cemetery for Zionist leaders from every country in the world, who choose to defer immigrating to Israel and settling in it until after their death.”39

32 CZA S30/88, acting general secretary for Ben-Gurion, 9 February 1936. 33 Yisrael Yeshayahu, “On bringing the poet Shabazi’s bones to Israel,” Haaretz, 9 June 1952; IDF Archives, N-2/9, president of the state, without addressee cited, 10 September 1954. 34 CZA S5/10365, Zvi Luria to Dr. R. Eitan, the Jewish Agency for Israel, 10 September 1957. 35 “To a grave in Israel,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 3 January 1956. 36 “For the sake of bringing the remains of A. Marmorek to Israel,” Haboker, 21 September 1954; “They brought the bones of Dr. Marmorek of blessed memory,” Herut, 5 May 1958. 37 ISA HetTzadik 2416-3, Z. Sheck to Ben-Zion Dinur, minister of education and culture, 11 April 1955. 38 “Brodetsky to eternal rest,” Davar, 21 May 1954; ISA HetTzadik 2416-3, Eliyahu Eilat to Moshe Sharett, 21 December 1954. 39 ISA HetTzadik 2416-3, Moshe Sharett to E. Eilat, Israel’s ambassador in London, 28 December 1954.



Failures in reinterment 

 227

The well-known Yiddish author Sholem Asch was also not reinterred in Israel. He settled in Bat Yam in 1956, but died in London during a visit there in July 1957.40 On the thirtieth day after his death, it was decided that his remains should be repatriated,41 and over the years several possible burial sites were proposed, including Ein Harod, where he wrote The Song of the Valley,42 and Bat Yam, where his home became the Beit Sholem Asch Museum.43 But this decision, for unknown reasons, was never carried out. A last example is Moshe Montefiore. In 1973 the government of Israel wanted to bring his remains and those of his wife from Ramsgate, England, for burial on Mount Herzl,44 given that he was both a religious Jew and a Zionist pioneer who purchased land and built new neighborhoods in Jerusalem.45 It had already been decided in 1969 that the Jerusalem Municipality would be responsible for this matter and that the couple would be buried on the Mount of Olives (in 1967, burial again became possible there).46 After some persuasion, the “elders of the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue” in London agreed to allow the couple’s remains to be transferred, but they made this conditional upon also relocating the mausoleum in which the two were buried, a reproduction of Rachel’s Tomb. A disagreement arose about whether Jewish law permitted Montefiore’s remains to be moved if he had not made this request in his will.47 The reinterment was scheduled to take place in 1975 to mark the hundredth anniversary of Montefiore’s first visit to the Land of Israel, but the plan was never executed.48

40 Lieberman (1954). 41 “Asch’s coffin to be brought to Israel,” Maariv, 19 August 1957. 42 Asch (1957). 43 “Beit Sholem Asch – to the Bat Yam Municipality,” Maariv, 24 December 1957; “Bones of S. Asch to be brought to Israel,” Al Hamishmar, 2 July 1958; “Bones of Sholem Asch to be buried in Ein Harod,” Davar, 1 October 1958; “Funeral of Sholem Asch’s wife today,” Maariv, 27 May 1962. 44 ISA, A-7341/14, Michael Arnon, government secretary to various addresses, August 13, 1973. 45 For example, “The uncrowned king of the Jews,” Davar, 12 August 1960. 46 ISA A-7336/4, discussion of the ministerial committee on bringing the remains of Sir Moses Montefiore and his wife, 13 April 1965; ISA SamekhTet/30, minister of police, 25 May 1969. 47 “Montefiore’s bones will be brought to Israel soon,” Yedioth Ahronoth, 12 March 1972; this is discussed in Toledano (1987). 48 ISA A-7341/14, Teddy Kollek to Mr. A. Pinkus, chairman of the Zionist Executive, 14 June 1973; ibid., Birkbeck Montague to Teddy Kollek, 4 June 1973. In recent years, the deputy mayor of Jerusalem has again raised the idea of bringing the remains of the Montefiore couple: Chen Mor, “Initiative to bring the bones of Moses Montefiore to the city,” Kol Ha’ir, 10 June 2011.

228 

 Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel

The end of the period of reinterment and the reasons for it Nahum Sokolow and Yehiel Chlenov were the final Zionist leaders reinterred in Israel. The burial of Dov Ber Borochov at Kinneret in 1963 was the last of the generation of Socialist Zionist giants, and the funerals of David Raziel and Ze’ev Jabotinsky on the Mount of Remembrance in Jerusalem in the 1960s satisfied the political desires of the Revisionist movement. The phenomenon subsequently petered out. The government of Israel, the Jewish Agency, and the other public bodies that had played such an active role were no longer engaged in this activity, and today there are almost no state initiatives for reinterment. The ceremonies described in these pages have become rare, but not altogether extinct. Prof. Israel Friedlaender, who was murdered in 1920 in Ukraine, was reinterred in 2001 in the Bentwich family plot on Mount Scopus, Jerusalem, after the Joint Distribution Committee organized the transfer of his remains to Israel. An Israeli researcher had discovered where he was buried in Ukraine.49 The ashes of Lt. Col. John Henry Patterson, a British Christian who commanded the Jewish Legion in World War I, were reinterred with those of his wife in the cemetery at Avihayil in 2014.50 Another interesting case involves the reinterment of Herzl’s children, Hans and Paulina, on 20 September 2006 in the plot where their parents were buried in 1949. While the WZO was extensively involved in this reinterment, the initiative came from an individual who was “obsessed” with this matter.51 One of the few recent state-sponsored reinterment ceremonies was held for the remains of those who died on the Egoz, which sank in the Mediterranean Sea in January 1961. More than forty Moroccan Jews who had secretly made their way to Gibraltar went down with the ship.52 In the years following, several Israeli prime ministers were in contact with the leaders of Morocco in an effort to bring to Israel the remains of twenty-two of the casualties, who were buried in the El-Huseima cemetery in Morocco. Prime Minister Menachem Begin initiated these contacts as part of his effort to strengthen the standing of Mizrahi Jews in Israeli society.

49 Jessica Steinberg, “Eight decades after his death, Zionist finally makes it to Israel,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 12 July 2001. 50 Ofer Aderet, “100 years after the war, the commander of the Jewish Legion to be buried in Israel,” Haaretz, 13 October 2014. The article quotes Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: “Lt. Col. Patterson was one of the founders of the Jewish Legion, the first Jewish military force since the Bar Kochba Revolt and the basis upon which the IDF was established.” 51 Ariel Feldstein lobbied tirelessly for the reinterment of Herzl’s children and the fulfillment of Herzl’s will, bringing this issue to the attention of the public agenda: Levy-Barzilai, “One historian’s vision,” Haaretz, 15 September 2006; Feldstein (2002). 52 “Delegation of Casablanca Jews meet with Prince Moulay Hassan,” Davar, 15 January 1961.



The end of the period of reinterment and the reasons for it 

 229

His government accorded state recognition to those who drowned on the Egoz and decreed that the date of their death would be a national commemoration of underground organizations and illegal immigration from North Africa. After Yitzhak Rabin became prime minister in 1992, relations with Morocco warmed and the project could be realized. In December 1992 the Moroccan Jews who died on the Egoz were buried in the “clandestine immigrants” section on Mount Herzl, alongside those who died in the Salvador shipwreck.53 Why did the phenomenon of Zionist reinterment wane during the period of statehood, especially after the Six-Day War? There are several possible explanations. During the first two or three generations of the Zionist movement, and during the initial phases of the state’s existence, there was a real need for symbols, places of national significance, and unifying state ceremonies that stood above the political fray. But the changes that later occurred in Israeli society and its increasingly divided nature greatly diminished this need. Both the state institutions and the public grew weary of the funerals and the reinterment “industry.”54 In addition, there were fewer people who merited such reinterment projects as the years passed. The political changes in Israel also had an impact. Many of those who were reinterred were icons as much as individuals, mobilized as instruments in the Israeli political arena. Herzl ostensibly belonged to everyone, but Motzkin, Wolffsohn, Syrkin, and Borochov represented the left, Labor side and strengthened the standing of the living leaders and their parties. The political right had almost no involvement in this phenomenon during the 1950s. Perhaps after the remains of Jabotinsky were reinterred in 1964 and the remains of two Lehi members were brought from Cairo in 1975,55 the aspirations of the Revisionist movement were fulfilled. Its motivation to reinter its people in Israel diminished as the Likud established itself as a ruling party in 1977.

53 David Landau, “Moroccans who drowned in ‘61 Are reburied on Mount Herzl,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 15 December 1992. 54 It is impossible to avoid connecting this criticism to the poem by Haim Nahman Bialik, “In the City of Slaughter,” which was written after the Kishinev pogrom in 1903. In the tenth stanza, Bialik protests against those who turn the bones of the dead into tradeable goods: “To the cemetery, beggars! Dig up the bones of your fathers and the bones of your holy brethren and fill your knapsacks and load them on your shoulder and set off on your way, to ply them as your wares at all of the fairs.” 55 Eliyahu Hakim and Eliyahu Ben-Zuri, who assassinated Lord Moyne in Cairo in 1944 and were hanged.

230 

 Summary – Ideology and Landscape in Second Burials in the Land of Israel

The “funeral enterprise” stood at the center of public attention during a critical period in Zionist and Israeli public history.56 In the last two decades of the twentieth century, a related phenomenon spread in Israeli society – bringing the remains of prominent rabbis for burial in Israel. Mizrahi Jews, and those from North Africa in particular (especially Morocco and Tunisia), began to import the remains of their religious leaders and forefathers.57 Unlike the Zionist reinterments, which carved out new geographic and symbolic centers in Israel, this more recent phenomenon focuses on the urban periphery – Kiryat Malachi, Netivot, Tirosh, and elsewhere.58 Some Israelis revere these new grave sites as holy places, such as the Baba Sali’s tomb in Netivot and historical-religious sites like the graves of Shimon bar Yochai in Meron and Jonathan Ben Uzziel in Amuqa. In recent decades, then, Israelis have largely abandoned the tombs of Herzl, Pinsker, and Syrkin and adopted those of older heroes instead. This phenomenon has clearly altered the map of Jewish holy places. Visits to formerly sacred civic sites, such as the cemeteries of Tel Aviv, Degania, and Kinneret, have been replaced by pilgrimage to burial places of biblical figures and those from the Mishnaic and Talmudic periods and the Middle Ages. This process has to do with the sociological changes in Israeli society in the past four decades. In 1977 the reins of power changed hands in Israel when the Likud, led by Menachem Begin, formed the government. Once the right wing assumed leadership, the national symbolic agenda changed, and the pantheons that were the focus of attention during the early years of Israeli statehood lost their attraction.

56 “If not them – at least their bones,” Maariv, 29 December 1953, a report on the hundreds of requests that the Ministry of Religious Affairs received from Diaspora Jews to purchase burial plots in Israel for future burial. The ministry proposed building this cemetery in Rishon LeZion near the graves of the Biluim pioneers. 57 Bilu (2005). 58 “The coffin of Rabbi Halfon Hacohen arrives in Israel today,” Arutz 7, 8 November 2005; Yaakov Klein, “The bones of the kabbalist Rabbi Moshe Azguri of blessed memory,” TOG: News and Jewish Content, 15 June 2010.

Archives BGA = Ben Gurion Archive CZA = Central Zionist Archive HHAYY = HaShomer HaTzair Archive at Yad Yaari HUJA = The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Archive IDFA = Israel Defense Forces and Defense Establishment Archives ISA = Israel State Archive KKAA = Kvutzat Kiryat Anavim Archive JIA = Jabotinsky Institute in Israel Archive JNFPA = Jewish National Fund Photo Archive LILR = Lavon Institute for Labour Research NLI = National Library of Israel NPC = National Photo Collection RGA = Ramat Gan Archive SSJFA = Steven Spielberg Jewish Film Archive TAA = Tel Aviv Archive UKNA = UK National Archives

DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-012

Newspapers Cyprus Mail Daily Express Davar Doar Hayom Haaretz Hadashot Haaretz Haivri Haboker Hadoar Hador Hamashkif Hamishmar, Al Haolam Haolam Haze Hatzofe Hatzfira Hayom Herut Jewish Chronicle Jerusalem Post Jewish Telegraphic Agency Kol Hair Kol Yisrael Lamerchav Maariv Mishmar New York Times Statesman Yediot Ahronoth Yediot Maariv Yediot Tel Aviv Zmanim

DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-013

Bibliography of Secondary Sources

Bibliography of Secondary Sources

Aaronsohn, Ran. Rothschild and Early Jewish Colonization in Palestine. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2000 [in Hebrew]. Abramovitch, Henry. The Jerusalem Funeral: An Anthropological Perspective. In Loss and Bereavement in Jewish Society in Israel, Ruth Malkinson, Simon S. Rubin, Eliezer Witztum (eds.), 181–196. Jerusalem: Kaneh, 1993 [in Hebrew].  —. More Dry Bones: The Significance of Changes in Mortuary Ritual in Contemporary Israel. In Towards an Anthropology of Nation Building and Unbuilding In Israel: Essays in Honor of Alex Weingrod, Fran Markowitz, Stephen Sharot, Moshe Shokeid (eds.), 253–269. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2015. Ahimeir, Yosef. The Black Prince: Yosef Katznelson and the National Movement in the Thirties. Tel Aviv: Jabotinsky Institute, 1983 [in Hebrew]. Almog, Oz. The Sabra: the Creation of a New Jew. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000 Aran, Gideon, and Zali Gurevitch. On Place (Israeli Anthropology). Alpayim 4 (1991): 9–44 [in Hebrew]. Asch, Sholem. Poetry of the Valley and other Land of Israel Stories. Tel Aviv: Netzach, 1957 [in Hebrew]. Avigad, Nahman. Beth She’arim III: Report on the Excavations during 1953–1958. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1972 [in Hebrew]. Avigor, Shaul. The Haganah Generation. Tel Aviv: Maa’rachot, 1972 [in Hebrew]. Azaryahu, Maoz. Architecture of Israel’s Military Cemeteries: the First Years. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 2012 [in Hebrew]. —. Innovation and Continuity: Jewish Tradition and the Shaping of Sovereignty Rites in Israel. In On Both Sides of the Bridge: Religion and State in the Early Years of Israel, Mordechai Bar-On, Zvi Zameret (eds.), 273–294. Jerusalem: Yad Yizhak Ben Zvi, 2002 [in Hebrew]. —. Mount Herzl: the Creation of Israel’s National Cemetery. Israel Studies 1 (2006): 46–74. —. The Mythic Geography of the 11th of Adar: From Tel Hai to Birya and Eilat. Horizons in Geography 46–47 (1997): 9–20 [in Hebrew]. —. Namesakes: History and Politics of Street Naming in Israel. Jerusalem: Carmel, 2012 [in Hebrew]. —. State Cults: Celebrating Independence and Commemorating the Fallen in Israel, 1948–1956. Sde Boqer: Ben Gurion Research Institute, 2005 [in Hebrew]. —. A Tale of Two Cities: Commemorating the Israeli War of Independence in Tel Aviv and Haifa. Cathedra 68 (1993): 98–125 [in Hebrew]. —. Tel Aviv – the Real City: A Historical Mythography. Beer Sheva: Ben Gurion Research Institute and Ben Gurion Universirty, 2005 [in Hebrew]. Azaryahu, Maoz, and Arnon Golan. Renaming the Landscape: The Formation of the Hebrew map of Israel 1949–1960. Journal of Historical Geography 27 (2001): 178–195. Azaryahu, Maoz, and Yitzhak Reiter. The Geopolitics of Interment: An Inquiry into the Burial of Muhammad Ali in Jerusalem, 1931. Israel Studies 20.1 (2015): 31–56. Bar, Doron. Between the Chamber of the Holocaust and Yad Vashem: Martyrs’ Ashes as a Focus of Sanctity. Yad Vashem Studies 38 (2010): 195–227. —. Reconstructing the Past: The Creation of Jewish Sacred Space in the State of Israel, 1948–1967. Israel Studies 13.3 (2008): 1–21.

DOI 10.1515/9783110493788-014

234 

 Bibliography of Secondary Sources

—. Sanctifying a Land: The Jewish Holy Places in the State of Israel, 1948–1968. Jerusalem: Ben– Gurion Institute in the Negev and Yad Yizhak Ben Zvi, 2007 [in Hebrew]. —. The Struggle between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem during the Mandate Period (1918–1948) over the Re-interment of Zionist Leaders. Israel Affairs 21 (2015): 500–515. Bar-Gal, Yoram. The Cemeteries of Kibbutz Ein Harod. In Cultural Landscape Patterns, Arnon Soffer, Yaakov Maoz, Ronit Cohen-Soffer (eds.), 63–93. Haifa: University of Haifa, 2011 [in Hebrew]. —. On a Kibbutz: Pioneers Eternal Resting Place. Protocols 18 (2010) https://zzzen.secured. co.il/sites/bezalel/home/en/1286358025 (accessed 7 January 2016) Bar-Gal, Yoram, and Maoz Azaryahu. Israeli Cemeteries and Jewish Tradition: Two Cases. In Land and Community: Geography in Jewish Studies, Harold Brodsky (ed.), 105–125. Bethesda: University Press of Maryland, 1997. Bar Levav, Avriel. Another Place: the Cemetery in Jewish Culture. Pe’amim 98–99 (2003): 5–37 [in Hebrew]. Bar-On Mordechai. To Remember and to Remind: Collective Memory and Heritage. In Patterns of Commemoration, Matityahu Mayzel, Ilana Shamir (eds.), 11–47. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 2000 [in Hebrew]. Baumel, Judith Tydor. Founding Myths and Heroic Icons: Reflections on the Funerals of Theodor Herzl and Hannah Szenes. Women’s Studies International Forum 25.6 (2002): 679–696. —. Perfect Heroes: The World War II Parachutists from Palestine and the Collective Israeli Memory. Sde Boqer: Sde Boqer and Ben-Gurion University Press, 2004 [in Hebrew]. Bein, Alex. Theodor Herzl: a Biography. Jerusalem: Zionist Library, 1977 [in Hebrew]. Belkind, Eitan. That’s How It Was: the Story of NILI. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 1977 [in Hebrew]. Ben Amos, Avner. French National Funerals in the Era of Mechanical Reproduction. In Studies in the History of Popular Culture, Benjamin Z. Kedar (ed.), 347–362. Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center for Jewish History, 1996 [in Hebrew]. —. Funerals, Politics and Memory in Modern France, 1789–1996. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. —. In the Dancing and Singing Circle: Patriotic Rituals and Celebrations in Israel’s Society. In Patriotism: Homeland Love, Avner Ben Amos, Daniel Bar-Tal (eds.), 275–315. Tel Aviv: Dyonon, 2004 [in Hebrew]. —. The Other World of Memory: National Funerals in the Third Republic in France. Zmanim 45 (1993): 20–31 [in Hebrew]. Ben-Amos, Avner, and Daniel Bar-Tal (eds.), Patriotism: Homeland Love. Tel Aviv: Dyonon, 2004 [in Hebrew]. Ben Amos, Avner, and Ilana Bet-El. Holocaust Day and Memorial Day in Israeli Schools: Ceremonies, Education and History. In Education and History: Political and Cultural Contexts, Rivka Peldhai, Immanuel Etkes (eds.), 457–479. Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar, 1999 [in Hebrew]. Ben-Artzi, Yossi. Turning the Desert into the Carmel: The Evolution of the Carmel Ridge as a Jewish Settlement Space, 1918–1948. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2004 [in Hebrew]. Ben Elkana, Shlomo. Avshalom Feiberg Returned from the Desert. Tel Aviv: Reshafim, 1987 [in Hebrew]. Ben-Nachum, Daniel (ed.). Like a Mother Sensing Rescue: The Mission of Havive Reik. Merhavia: Kibbutz Artzi, 1965 [in Hebrew]. Benvenisti, Meron. Jerusalem’s City of the Dead. Jerusalem: Keter, 1990 [in Hebrew].



Bibliography of Secondary Sources 

 235

Ben Yehuda, Nachman. Scarifying Truth: Archaeology and the Myth of Masada. Amherst, NY: Humanity Books, 2002. Beurling, George F., and Leslie Roberts. Malta Spitfire: The Story of a Fighter Pilot. New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1943. Biger, Gideon, and Nili Lipschitz. Herzl’s Tree – a Cypress or a Cedar? Teva Va’aretz 250 (1992): 36–27 [in Hebrew]. Bilu, Yoram. The Saints’ Impresarios: Dreamers, Healers, and Holy Men in Israel’s Urban Periphery. Haifa: Haifa University Press, 2005 [in Hebrew]. Brainin, Reuven. Smalenski ve-Toldotaiw. Vilna: Katzenachenbagen, 1905 [in Hebrew]. Brog, Mooli. Gymnasia Herzliya in Tel Aviv Discovers the Maccabees’ Tombs, 1907–1911: The Shaping of Collective Memory and National Identity. Iyonim Betkomat Israel 20 (2010): 169–192 [in Hebrew]. Brown, Peter. The Cult of Saints: its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981. Carlyle, Thomas. On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History. London: Chapman and Hall, 1852. Carmel, Yusef. Yitzhak Ben-Zvi: President’s House Diary. Ramat Gan: Masada, 1967 [in Hebrew]. Cesarani, David. The Jewish Chronicle and Anglo-Jewry, 1841–1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Clarke, Desmond M. Descartes: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Cohen, Amnon, and Elisheva Simon-Pikali. Jews in the Moslem Religious Court: Society, Economy and Communal Organization in the Sixteenth Century; Documents from Ottoman Jerusalem. Vol. 1. Jerusalem: Yad Yizhak Ben-Zvi, 1993 [in Hebrew]. Cohen, Avi. History of the Israeli Air Force in the War of Independence. Vol. 3. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 2004 [in Hebrew]. Cotic, Meir. The Schwartzbard Trial. Tel Aviv: Vered, 1972 [in Hebrew]. Dabrowski, Patrice M. Commemorations and the Shaping of Modern Poland. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004. Dahan, Yossi, and Henry Wasserman. Introduction. In To Invent a Nation, Yossi Dahan, Henry Wasserman (eds.), 11–28. Raanana: The Open University Press, 2006 [in Hebrew]. Don-Yehiya, Eliezer. Festivals and Political Culture: Independence Day in Israel. Medina, Mimshal Viyahasim Benleumiyim 23 (1984): 5–28 [in Hebrew]. Dikson, Gladys. The Tomb of Nicanor of Alexandria. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement (1903): 326–332. Disenchick, Ido. Ze’ev Jabotinsky Returns to the Homeland. Tel Aviv: Hadar, 1965 [in Hebrew]. Driskel, Paul. As Befits a Legend: Building a Tomb for Napoleon, 1840–1861. Kent, OH: Kent State University, 1993. Edelstein, Yehuda. Abraham Shapira (Sheikh Ibrahim Micha). Tel Aviv: Yedidim Press, 1929 [in Hebrew]. Elam, Igal. The Hebrew Regiments in the First World War. Tel Aviv: Maa’rachot, 1973 [in Hebrew]. Elchanani, Aba. The Struggle for the Independence of Israeli Architecture in the 20th Century. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 1998 [in Hebrew]. Eliash, Shulamit. Etzel and Lehi Exiles: British Detention Camps in Africa (1944–1948). Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan Press, 1996 [in Hebrew]. Evan, Thomas. John Paul Jones: Sailor, Hero, Father of the American Navy. Waterville, ME: Thorndike Press, 2003.

236 

 Bibliography of Secondary Sources

Feige, Michael. Archaeology, Anthropology and the Development Town: Constructing the Israeli Place. Zion 62 (1998): 441–459 [in Hebrew]. Feige, Michael, and Zvi Shiloni (eds.). Archaeology and Nationalism in Eretz-Israel. Sde Boqer: Ben-Gurion Research Institute, 2008 [in Hebrew]. Feldstein, Ariel. Benjamin Zeev Herzl’s Last Will. Zmanim 80 (2002): 56–62 [in Hebrew]. Foster, R. F. W. B. Yeats: A Life. Vol. 2, The Arch-Poet, 1915–1939, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Francaviglia, Richard V. The cemetery as an evolving cultural landscape. Annals, Association of American Geographers 61 (1971): 501–509. Gafni, Isaiah. Burial in the Holy Land: Beginnings and Evolution of the Practice. Cathedra 4 (1977): 113–20 [in Hebrew]. —. Land, Center and Diaspora: Jewish Constructs in Late Antiquity. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Gal, Susan. Bartók’s Funeral: Representations of Europe in Hungarian Political Rhetoric. American Ethnologist 18 (1991): 440–458. Garlick, Harry. The Final Curtain: State Funerals and the Theater of Power. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1999. Gaunt, Peter, Oliver Cromwell. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996. Geary, Patrick. Furta Sacra: Thefts of Relics in the Central Middle Ages. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978. Gennep, Arnold van. The Rites of Passage, Monika B. Vizedom, Gabrielle L. Caffee (trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960. Gershoni, Israel. Pyramid for the Nation: Memory, Commemoration and Nationalism in Egypt, 1891–2003. Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 2006 [in Hebrew]. Giesey, Ralph E. The Royal Funeral Ceremony in Renaissance France. Geneva: Librairie E. Droz, 1960. Gil, Moshe. Eretz Israel during the First Muslim Period (634–1099). Vol. 1. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1983 [in Hebrew]. Gillis, John. Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship. In Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity, John Gillis (ed.), 3–24. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. Golani, Motti. Zion in Zionism: the Zionist Policy in the Question of Jerusalem, 1937–1949. Tel Aviv: Ministry of Defense, 1992 [in Hebrew]. Goldstein, Amir. Heroism and Exclusion: The “Gallows Martyrs” and Israeli Collective Memory. Jerusalem: Yad Yizhak Ben Zvi, 2011 [in Hebrew]. Goldstein, Yossi. Ussishkin’s Biography. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2001 [in Hebrew]. Goren, Arthur Aryeh. Pageants of Sorrow, Celebration and Protest: The Public Culture of American Jews. Studies in Contemporary Jewry 12 (1996): 202–220. —. The Place of Public Funerals in the Immigrant Life of American Jews. Jewish History 8 (1994): 269–306. Gouttman, Rodney. An ANZAC-Zionist Hero: the Life of Lieutenant-Colonel Eliazar Margolin. London: Vallentine Mitchell, 2005. Greenberg, Uri Zvi. The Book of Indictment and Faith. Jerusalem: Sadan, 1937 [in Hebrew]. Grintz, Yehoshua Meir. The Giv’at Hamivtar Inscription: a Historical Interpretation. Sinai 75 (1974): 20–23 [in Hebrew]. Gruenbaum, Yitzhak. The Face of the Generation: Teachers, Friends, Rivals. Jerusalem: Zionist Library, 1958 [in Hebrew].



Bibliography of Secondary Sources 

 237

Gruweis-Kovalsky, Ofira. The Vindicated and the Persecuted: The Mythology and the Symbols of the Herut Movement, 1948–1965, Kiryat Ben Gurion: Ben Gurion Research Institute for the Study of Israel and Zionism, 2015 [in Hebrew]. Gutfreund, Amir. The World a Moment Later. Or Yehuda: Zmora-Bitan, 2005 [in Hebrew]. Haber, Julius. The Odyssey of an American Zionist. Tel Aviv: M. Neuman, 1960 [in Hebrew]. Hadash, Shmuel. Kinneret’s Cemetery Notebook. Kinneret: privately printed, 1992 [in Hebrew]. Handelman, Don. Nationalism and the Israeli State: Bureaucratic Logic in Public Events. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Hanna Szenes: Her Life, Mission and Death. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad, 1952 [in Hebrew]. Helman, Anat. Young Tel Aviv: a Tale of Two Cities. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 2010. Hermoni, Aharon. The Rothschilds. Tel Aviv: Mefitz Hasefer, 1926. Herzl, Theodor. Old-New Land (“Altneuland“), Lotta Levensohn (tr.). NewYork: Bloch, 1941. Hevra Kadisha Tel Aviv and the County: its Foundation and Development. Tel Aviv: Hevra Kadisha, 1956 [in Hebrew]. Hobsbawm, Eric. Mass-Producing Traditions: Europe, 1870–1914. In The Invention of Tradition, Eric Hobsbawm, Terence Ranger (eds.), 263–307. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Hobsbawm, Eric, and Terence Ranger (eds.). The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Hobsbawm, E. J., and John Ernest. Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Isaac of Vienna. Or Zaru’a: Hilchut Avlut. Vol. 2. Zhitomir: H”L and Y”H Shapira, 1862 [in Hebrew]. Ishai, Moshe. Sunblessed Country. Tel Aviv: Hamenora, 1975 [in Hebrew]. Jabotinsky, Zeev. The Struggles of Zionist Revisionism, Nedava Joseph (ed.). Tel Aviv: Jabotinsky Institute in Israel, 1986 [in Hebrew]. Kabakoff, Jacob. Naphtali Herz Imber “Baal Hatikvah.” Lod: Hebermann Institute for Literary Research, 1991 [in Hebrew]. Kamini, Avraham. Heart and Soul: Anthology. Jerusalem: Keren Kayemet, 1955 [in Hebrew]. Kammen, Michael. Digging up the Dead: a History of Notable American Reburials. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Katz, Shmuel. The Aaronsohn Sage. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 2000 [in Hebrew]. Katz, Yossi. Positions of the British, the UN and the Zionist Leadership in Regard to the Partition of Jerusalem. In Jerusalem and the British Mandate: Interaction and Legacy, Yehoshua Ben Arieh (ed.), 133–157. Jerusalem: Yad Yizhak Ben Zvi, 2003 [in Hebrew]. Kehat, Amira. As a Tourist in My Own Town: Houses and People in Herbert Samuel Mansion. Haifa: Association for the History of Haifa, 2014 [in Hebrew]. Klar, Benjamin. Megillat Ahimaatz. Jerusalem: Sifrei Tarshish, 1974 [in Hebrew]. Klausner, Israel. Earth and Soul: the Life of Prof. Z‘‘H Shapira. Jerusalem: Keren Kayemet and the Hebrew University, 1956 [in Hebrew]. Kletter, Raz. Just Past? The Making of Israeli Archaeology. London: Equinox Publishing, 2005. Kloner, Amos, and Boaz Zissu. The Necropolis of Jerusalem in the Second Temple Period. Leuven: Peeters, 2007. Kook, Rebecca. Changing Representations of National Identity and Political Legitimacy: Independence Day Celebrations in Israel, 1952–1998. National Identity 7 (2005): 151–171.

238 

 Bibliography of Secondary Sources

Kroll, Tzvi, and Tzadok Linman. Tel Aviv’s Old Cemetery’s Book. Tel Aviv: Dfus Sefer, 1940 [in Hebrew]. Lamm, Maurice. The Jewish Way in Death and Mourning. New York: Jonathan David Publishers, 2000. Lampland, Martha. Death of a Hero: Hungarian National Identity and the Funeral of Lajos Kossuth. Hungarian Studies 8 (1993): 29–35. Lang, Yosef. Speak Hebrew! The Life of Eliezer Ben Yehuda. Jerusalem: Yad Yizhak Ben Zvi, 2008 [in Hebrew]. Lavsky, Hagit. Introduction. In Jerusalem in Zionist Vision and Realization (Collected Essays), Hagit Lavsky (ed.), 7–13. Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar, 1989 [in Hebrew]. Lebel, Udi. Etzel, Lehi and the Politics Behind National Memory, 1949–1963. In Studies on Jewish People, Identity and Nationality, Naftali Rothenberg, Eliezer Schweid (eds.), 197–201. Tel Aviv: Van Leer and Hakibbutz Hameuchad, 2008 [in Hebrew]. —. Politics of Memory: The Israeli Underground’s Struggle for Inclusion in the National Pantheon and Military Commemoration. London: Routledge, 2013. Lieberman, Hayim. The Christianity of Sholem Asch. Tel Aviv: Netzach, 1954 [in Hebrew]. Liebman, Charles S., and Eliezer Don-Yehiya. Civil Religion in Israel: Traditional Judaism and Political Culture in the Jewish State. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983. Mann, Barbara. Modernism and the Zionist Uncanny: Reading the Old Cemetery in Tel Aviv. Representations 69 (2000): 63–95. Mayzel, Matityahu. Introduction and A Few Remarks on Commemoration. In Patterns of Commemoration, Matityahu Mayzel, Ilana Shamir (eds.), 7–10. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 2000 [in Hebrew]. Meridor, Yaakov. The Long Way to Freedom. Jerusalem: Ahiasaf, 1950 [in Hebrew]. Milman, Dov H. The Prisoners of Zion in Africa in Eritrea, Sudan and Kenya. Zichron Yaakov: Kotarot, 2005 [in Hebrew]. Mosse, George L. Fallen Soldiers: Reshaping the Memory of the World Wars. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Nakdimon, Shlomo. The Head of the Opposition Initiated and Eshkol Confessed: “I Do Not Have Another Option.” Ha-Umma 147 (2002): 34–52 [in Hebrew]. Naor, Arieh. David Raziel: The Life and Time of the Commander-in-Chief of the “Irgun” Underground in Palestine. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 1990 [in Hebrew]. Naor-Wiernik, Michal, and Doron Bar. The Competition for the Design and Development of Herzl’s Tomb and Mount Herzl, 1949–1960. Cathedra 144 (2012): 107–136 [in Hebrew]. Naveh, Yossef. A New Tomb Inscription from Giv’at ha-Mivtar. Qadmoniot 23–24 (1973): 115–118 [in Hebrew]. Nedava, Yosef. Jabotinsky. Tel Aviv: Shelach, 1950 [in Hebrew]. —. Yosef: An Epilogue of a NILI Member. Jerusalem: Hashmunai, 1986 [in Hebrew]. Nora, Pierre, and Jacques Le Goff (eds.). Constructing the Past: Essays in Historical Methodology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Ofer, Tehila, and Zeev Ofer. Haviva Reick: A Kibbutz Pioneer’s Mission and Fall Behind Nazi Lines. Bnei-Brak: Sifriyat Poalim, 2014 [in Hebrew]. Ohana, David, and Michael Feige. A Funeral at the Edge of the Cliff: Israel Parts from David Ben-Gurion. Israel 17 (2010): 25–57 [in Hebrew]. Ozouf, Mona. Festivals and the French Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991.



Bibliography of Secondary Sources 

 239

Pippidi, Andrei. Graves as Landmarks of National Identity. Budapest Review of Books 5 (1995): 102–110. Pitte, Jean Robert. A Short Cultural Geography of Death and the Dead. GeoJournal 60 (2004): 345–351. Podlecki, Anthony J. Cimon, Skyros and “Theseus‘ Bones.” Journal of Hellenic Studies 91 (1971): 141–143. Ram, Uri. Zionist Historiography and the Invention of Modern Jewish Nationhood: the Case of Ben-Zion Dinur. In To Invent a Nation, Yossi Dahan, Henry Wasserman (eds.), 217–260. Raanana: The Open University Press, 2006 [in Hebrew]. Raz-Krakotzkin, Amnon. Exile within Sovereignty: Toward a Critique of the “Negation of Exile” in Israeli Culture. Theory and Criticism 4 (1993): 23–56; 113–132 [in Hebrew]. Rode, Nissan. As a Man Returns to His Homeland. Jerusalem: Ahiasaf, 1945 [in Hebrew]. Rogel, Nakdimon. The Imber File: in the Footsteps of N. H. Imber in Eretz Israel. Jerusalem: Hasifriya Hatziyonit, 1997 [in Hebrew]. Ron, Amos. A Rachel for Everyone: the Kinneret Cemetery as a Site of Civil Pilgrimage. In Sanctity of Time and Space in Tradition and Modernity, Alberdina Houtman, Marcel J. H. M. Poorthuis, Joshua Schwartz (eds.), 349–359. Leiden: Brill, 1998. Ross, Corey. Media and the Making of Modern Germany: Mass Communications, Society, and Politics from the Empire to the Third Reich. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Saposnik, Arieh. A Secularized Zionist Sacred and the Making of the New Jew. Israel 16 (2009): 165–194 [in Hebrew]. Sarid, Isa, and Christian Bartolf. Hermann Kallenbach: Mahatma Gandhi’s Friend in South Africa; A Concise Biography. Berlin: Gandhi-Informations-Zentrum, 1997. Schepansky, Israel. Eretz Israel in the Responsa Literature: the Period of the Geonim and the Rishonim. Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook, 1967 [in Hebrew]. Schwartzbard, Scholom. The Story of My Life. Tel Aviv: Mitzpe, 1921 [in Hebrew]. Scully, Robert E. The Unmaking of a Saint: Thomas Becket and the English Reformation. Catholic Historical Review 86.4 (2000): 579–602. Shalev, Meir. The Blue Mountain, Hillel Halkin (trans.). Edinburgh: Canongate Books, 2010. Shamir, Ilana. Gal-Ed: Memorials for the Fallen in the Wars of Israel. Tel Aviv: Ministry of Defense Press, 1989 [in Hebrew]. —. The Unit for the Memorialization of Soldiers in the Ministry of Defense and the Establishment of National Commemoration. Tel Aviv: Misrad Habitachon Press, 2004 [in Hebrew]. Shapira, Anita. The Bible and Israeli Identity. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2005 [in Hebrew]. Shapira, Anita. The Bible and Israeli Identity. In Anita Shapira, Jews, Zionists and In-Between, 163–196. Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 2007 [in Hebrew]. Shapiro, Yair. Max Nordau and the Reinterment of Jewish and Zionist Leaders in the Land of Israel. MA thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2010 [in Hebrew]. —. The Nicanor Tomb Cave on Mount Scopus: A Precendent for Mount Herzl. Eretz-Israel 28 (2007): 454–462 [in Hebrew]. —. The One who Wants to be Buried Next to Pinsker. Etmol 233 (2015): 19–22 [in Hebrew]. Sharaby, Rachel. May Day Ceremonies in the State of Israel’s First Decade: From a Sectorial to a National Holiday. Megamot 44 (2005): 106–136. Shavit, Yaakov. Archaeology, Political Culture, and Culture in Israel. In The Archaeology of Israel: Constructing the Past, Interpreting the Present, Neil Asher Silberman, David Small (eds.), 48–61. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

240 

 Bibliography of Secondary Sources

—. Inventing Holidays and Ceremonies in Eretz Israel’s Yishuv. In To Invent a Nation, Yossi Dahan, Henry Wasserman (eds.), 331–350. Raanana: The Open University Press, 2006 [in Hebrew]. Shavit, Yaakov, and Shoshana Sitton. Staging and Stagers in Modern Jewish Palestine: The Creation of Festive Lore in a New Culture, 1882–1948. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2004. Shilo-Cohen, Nurit (ed.). Schatz’s Bezalel, 1906–1929. Jerusalem: Israel Museum, 1983 [in Hebrew]. Silko, Rachel. A Chain of Jewish Bravery and Volunteering: the Story of “Jewish Legions” Museum. Etmol 205 (2009): 9–12 [in Hebrew]. Sirkin, Mary. My Father Nachman Sirkin. Jerusalem: Zionist Library, 1980 [in Hebrew]. Smith, Anthony D. The Nation in History: Historiographical Debates about Ethnicity and Nationalism. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 2000. Smolenskin, Peretz. Kwurat Chamor. Tel Aviv: Ro’i, 1925 [in Hebrew]. Sozin, Zvi. Out of Choice. Dalia: Maarechet, 1998 [in Hebrew]. Splendor and Glory: Israel’s Rituals of Sovereignty, 1948–1958. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv Museum of Art, 2001 [in Hebrew]. Taitou, Nissim. Betar North Africa. Jerusalem: Menora, 2004 [in Hebrew]. Thon, Yaakov. Otto Warburg, Third President of the World Zionist Organization. In Warburg Book, 9–10. Herzliya: Masada, 1948 [in Hebrew]. Toledano, Pinchas. The Reinterment of Montifiore. Techumin 8 (1987): 382–387 [in Hebrew]. To the Memory of the Transfer of the Remains of our Great Leader Max Nordau to Tel Aviv. Tel Aviv: Ha’aretz Press, 1936 [in Hebrew]. Tsur, Jacob. An Ambassador’s Diary in Paris, 1953–1956. Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1968 [in Hebrew]. Tsur, Muki. Kinneret’s Cemetery. Ariel 135–136 (2009): 85–103 [in Hebrew]. Ussishkin Book: To Menachem Ussishkin for his 70th Jubilee. Jerusalem: Committee for Publishing the Book, 1924 [in Hebrew]. Verdery, Katherine. The Political Lives of Dead Bodies: Reburial and Postsocialist Change. New York: Colombia University Press, 1999. Wardi, Aharon. City of Wonder: Writers’ and Politicians’ Words on Tel Aviv. Tel Aviv: Lema’an Hasefer, 1929 [in Hebrew]. Weingrod, Alex. Dry Bones: Nationalism and Symbolism in Contemporary Israel. Anthropology Today 11.6 (1995): 7–12. Weitz, Joseph. Mount Herzl. Jerusalem: Committee for Mount Herzl, 1968. —. My Diary and Letters to the Children. Vol. 4. Tel Aviv: Masada, 1965 [in Hebrew]. Weitz, Yechiam. Ben-Gurion’s Final Resignation in 1963. In A State in the Making: Israeli Society in the First Decades, Anita Shapira (ed.), 73–107. Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center for Jewish History, 2011 [in Hebrew]. —. The First Step to Power: The Herut Movement, 1949–1955. Jerusalem: Yad Yizhak Ben Zvi, 2007 [in Hebrew]. Why Were the Remains of Zeev Jabotinsky Not Reinterred: Facts and Responses. Tel Aviv: Misdar Zeev Jabotinsky, 1960 [in Hebrew]. Wistrich, Robert S., and David Ohana (eds.). The Shaping of Israeli Identity: Myth, Memory and Trauma. Jerusalem: Van Leer, 1997 [in Hebrew].  With the Reinterment of Moshe Hess. Tel Aviv: Histadrut Haovdim, 1962 [in Hebrew]. Wokler, Robert. Rousseau. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. Yaari-Poleskin, Jacob. Spies or Heroes of the Nation? Tel Aviv: Shomron, 1930 [in Hebrew].



Bibliography of Secondary Sources 

 241

Yarden, Ophir. The Sanctity of Mount Herzel and Independence Day in Israel’s Civil Religion. In Sanctity of Time and Space in Tradition and Modernity, Alberdina Houtman, Marcel J. H. M. Poorthuis, Joshua Schwartz (eds.), 317–348. Leiden: Brill, 1998. Ydit, Meir. Disinterment. Encyclopaedia Judaica. Michael Berenbaum, Fred Skolnik (eds.), 5:682. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA with Keter Publishing House, 2007. Yoeli, Naumi. It Is Good to Die for Our Country. In Splendor and Glory: Israel’s Rituals of Sovereignty, 1948–1958, 81–93. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv Museum of Art, 2001 [in Hebrew]. Young, James E. The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993. Zartal, Edith. Death and the Nation: History Memory Politics. Or Yehuda: Dvir, 2002 [in Hebrew]. Zerubavel, Yael. Antiquity and the Renewal Paradigm: Strategies of Representation and Mnemonic Practices in Israeli Culture. In On Memory: An Interdisciplinary Approach, Doron Mendels (ed.), 331–348. Bern: Peter Lang, 2007. —. The Historic, the Legendary, and the Incredible: Invented Tradition and Collective Memory in Israel. In Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity, John R. Gillis (ed.), 105–123. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. —. Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995. Ziv, Yehuda. Tarmil Tzad. Jerusalem: Keter, 1988 [in Hebrew]. Zrubavel, Yaakov. A Visit to the Soviet Union. Tel Aviv: I. L. Peretz, 1964 [in Hebrew].

Index

Index

Aaronsohn, Alexander 223 Aaronsohn, Rivka 162–3 Abramovich, Shalom Yaakov 226 Acre 141 Afula 100, 108, 192 Agricultural research station (Rehovot) 98 Agudat Yisrael 94–95 Ahad Ha’am (Asher Zvi Ginzberg) 53, 56, 68, 86, 88–9 Ahdut Avodah-Poalei Zion 102 Ahdut Yisrael synagogue 198, 208 Akzin, Benjamin 125 Alexandria 51 Allon, Yigal 136, 142, 174, 193 Allweil ,Arieh 76 Alterman, Natan 84 Altneschul 192 Altneuland 22 Amiav, Shneur 223 Aran, Zalman 185 Arkia 205 Arlosoroff, Haim 77, 89, 96–97 Arza 56 Asaf, Simcha 39, 86 Asch, Shalom 227 Asmara 12, 196, 210 as-Said, Nuri 202 Association of German Immigrants 101 Association of Hebrew Writers 68–69, 76, 88, 225 Association of Immigrants from Bulgaria 173–74, 176–77 Association of Jewish Legion Veterans 169 Association of Russian Immigrants 105 Atlit 18, 162, 190 Avidar, Yosef 35 Avigur, Shaul 174, 184 Avihayil 131, 170, 173, 215, 223, 228 Avner, Gershon 181–2, 204 Avnery, Uri 154 Avraham, Leon 176 Avshalom’s Palm 162–4, 167

Barkai, Shmuel 172 Baratz, Yosef 98 Barazani, Moshe 144 Basel 48, 72, 99 Becker, Aharon 103–4 Beersheba 158, 212 Begin, Menachem 121, 123, 126, 128, 130, 133–7, 143, 145, 147–50, 162, 167, 173, 196, 205–6, 209, 211, 213, 228, 230 Beilis, Menachem Mendel 75, 91–92 Beilis trial 91–92 Beit Hagdudim (Jewish Legion Museum) 123, 131–3, 173 Beit Jala 140 Beit Keshet 117 Beit She’arim 11, 15, 118, 227 Beit Yerah 100 Beit Yordei Hayam 100 Beitar 121–2, 135, 137–9, 143, 145, 147, 149–51, 153, 161, 198, 206–7, 209–12 Belgrade 174 Belkind, Eitan 159–60, 163, 165–6 Belkind, Naaman 8, 158–61, 165–6, 168, 223 Belkind, Shimshon 159 Belkovsky, Zvi 54 Belvoir 140 Ben Ami, Oved 107, 170 Ben Asher, Haim 179 Ben Avi, Itamar 8, 75, 78–80 Ben Elkana, Shlomo 162 Ben-Gurion, David 7, 35–6, 38, 61, 86–8, 100–1, 104, 108, 111, 117, 120–1, 123, 125–37, 171, 174, 179, 187, 189, 207–8, 226 Bentwich family’s burial plot 54, 95, 228 Bentwich, Herbert 95 Bentwich, Suzanna 95 Ben-Ya’akov, Zvi 184, 194–5 Ben-Yehuda, Devorah 78, 80 Ben-Yehuda, Ehud 78, 80 Ben-Yehuda, Eliezer 75, 78–80 Ben-Yehuda, Hemda 79–80 Ben-Yehuda, Lea (Abushded) 78, 80 Ben-Zvi, Rachel Yanait 129, 152, 162

 Ben-Zvi, Yitzhak 9, 56, 77, 105–7, 126–9, 131–2, 152, 162, 170, 171 Ben-Zvi, Ze’ev 77 Beretz, Yosef 178–9 Berlin, Meir 27 Bet-Zuri, Eliyahu 196, 212–3, 229 Beurling, George F. 178 Bezalel 57, 75–8 Bialik (Averbuch), Mania 85, 88 Bialik, Haim Nahman 3, 8, 75, 85–90, 229 Bialystok 226 Bloomfield Stadium 176 Bnai Brit 129–31, 143 Bnei Hayishuv 79 Bnei Yeshurun 72 Board of Trustees for Herzl’s grave 48 Bodrov, Mikhail 106 Borochov, Ber 4, 8, 93, 103, 105–9, 124, 127, 133, 222, 228–9 Borochov, David 106 Brenner, Yosef Haim 222 Brezhnev, Leonid Ilyich 107 Brit Habirionim 211 Brit Rishonim 55, 65, 74 Britain 93, 171, 182, 204 British War Office 179–80 Broadway 145 Brodesky, Zelig 96 Buber, Martin 38 Budapest 21, 183–5, 190 Busel, Joseph 97 Cairo 3, 159, 212–3, 229 Cape Town 172 Center for Russian Immigrants in the State of Israel 65, 105 Central burial society 39, 71, 81–2, 87, 94–5, 113, 175, 209, 218–9 Chief Rabbinate 94–5, 143, 152, 218 Chlenov, Yehiel 12, 23, 61, 65–7, 228 Ciampino airport 178 Cohen, Menachem 185 Cohen, Yehuda (Leonard) 178 Cologne 48, 50, 61, 72, 101–3 Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains 26–7, 29, 44 Committee of Kenya Deportees 197–9

Index 

 243

Committee to Bring Schwartzbard to the Land of Israel 172 Coralnik, Berl 82, 84 Council of Tunisian Immigrants in Israel 212 Council of Working Women 185, 187 Cyprus 88, 174, 202–6, 212 Schwartzbard, Anna 172 Damascus 3, 158–160, 166 Davos 172 Dayan, Moshe 202 Degania 8, 33, 93–8, 104, 215, 218, 222, 230 Dekel, Yosef 179–80, 182, 192 Denver 75, 78 Deutz cemetery 101 Dinur, Ben-Zion 69, 71, 82 Dizengoff, Meir 23, 50–51, 76, 86, 216, 221 Dobling Cemetery (Vienna) 34, 87 Dov Gruner monument 122, 149 Dror, Yosef 172 Drot, Berta 54 Dubkin, Eliyahu 103 Dubnov Institution 172 East Orange 78 Eban, Abba 153 Egoz 228–9 Eichler, Willy 103 El Al 10, 33–4, 36, 144–5, 192 El Malei Rahamim 40, 189, 211, 218 Elhanani, Abba 37 El-Huseima 228 Elisar, Yitzhak 77 Epstein, Yisrael (Gundar Aviel) 17, 196, 209–12 Eritrea 196–7, 199, 210 Eshkol, Levi 108, 134–8, 140–1, 146, 154, 162, 174–5 Etzel 7, 8, 12, 122, 141, 144–5, 147, 149, 151–2, 172, 196–202, 204–14 Even Yehuda 79 Executive Council of the Zionist Congress 65 Exodus 185 Federation of Teachers 215 Fein, Avshalom 160 Feinberg, Avshalom 8, 12, 17, 18, 157–9, 161–8, 212

244 

 Index

Feinstein, Meir 144 Feldman, Pinhas 54 Feller, Ze’ev 131–2 Foot, Hugh 204 Foreign Ministry 174, 181–2, 184, 191, 201–2, 204 Frank, Pesach Zvi 94 Frankfurter, David 172 Freemasons 79 Friedlaender, Israel 228 Friedland, Zvi 39 Fromkin, Gad 39 Fuhrman, Osmond Charles William 170 Fund for Schwartzbard immigration to Israel 172 Galili, Israel 174, 187 Galili, Shaul 196–7 Galperin, Avraham 212 Gan Rina Cinema 198 Ganeh, Siman-Tov 150 Gedera 56, 158, 165 General Zionists 66, 127, 179 Genoa 70 German Social Democratic Party 103 Giladi, Avraham 175 Givat Hamoreh 223 Glickson, Moshe 88 Godard, Yossi 161 Gold, Ze’ev 49 Goldman, Nahum 81, 103 Gordon, Aharon David 93, 96, 97, 222 Goren, Shlomo 183, 209 Gouri, Haim 163 Government Name Committee 112 Granot, Avraham 72 Greats of the Nation 1, 141, 225 Greenberg, Ivan 94–96 Greenberg, Jacob Leopold 54, 93–8, 222 Greenberg, Uri Zvi 161, 173 Greenboim, Yitzhak 25–6, 31, 88 Gruzenberg, Israel (Oskar) 75, 91–2 Gutman, Nahum 75 Habbaniya 199–200, 206, 209–10 Haber, Julius 81 Habima Theater 28, 166

Hachsharat Hayishuv (Palestine Land Development Company) 22, 97–98 Hacohen, Tarab Natanel 160 Hadash, Mordechi 103–4 Hadera 28, 73, 113, 161, 165 Hagana 32, 131, 172, 185 Hagana veterans’ organization 172 Haifa 18, 22, 24, 26, 28–9, 32, 36, 45, 49, 62–3, 66, 70, 72–4, 79–80, 82–4, 86, 92, 99–100, 102, 115–6, 169–70, 178, 185–7, 196, 201–2, 210, 212, 217, 222–3 Haifa City Hall 70, 73–4, 116, 170 Haifa Committee for Bringing Herzl’s Remains 22, 25 Haifa Community Council 79 Haifa Municipality 102 Haifa Workers’ Council 99 Hakibbutz Hameuchad 184–5 Hakim, Eliyahu 196, 212–3, 229 Halili, Ezra Eliyahu 196–7 Hamagen 159 Hamburg 49 Hannah Szenes House 184, 187 Hapoel 100 Har Hamenuchot national pantheon 3, 66–7, 69–72, 74–5, 82, 84, 223–4 Harari, Dov 190 Harel, Aryeh 106 Hashomer 159, 161 Hashomer Hatzair 190 Hashomrim (watchman) organization 73 Hatikva 36, 42, 49, 75, 80–5, 149, 153, 192–3, 198, 211 Haviv, Avshalom 152 Hebrew University of Jerusalem 6, 54, 57, 59–60, 72, 89, 95, 97, 118, 153 Hechal, Shlomo 152 Herbert Samuel Estate 22 Herbert Samuel Square 37, 139, 142, 144, 149, 218 Herman, Abraham 178 Herut 108, 122–3, 126, 129–30, 133, 136, 139, 141, 147–9, 154–5, 196, 198–200, 203, 205, 207–8, 211–3, 225 Herzl, Benjamin Ze’ev 1–4, 7, 10–2, 17–8, 21–50, 53, 59, 61, 66–7, 70, 73–4, 85, 87, 96, 102, 113, 122, 125, 128, 130, 139–41,

 144, 149–50, 153–5, 163, 168, 185, 190, 198, 215–7, 220, 223–5, 229–30 Herzl, Hans 228 Herzl, Jakob 21, 41 Herzl, Janet 41 Herzl, Pauline 41, 228 Herzliya 26, 28 Herzliya Hebrew Gymnasium 28, 46, 85 Herzl’s Cedar 23, 32, 43 Herzog, Halevi Yizhak (Isaac) 59, 63, 112, 117 Hess, David 103 Hess, Janet 103 Hess, Moses 8, 11–12, 53, 70, 93, 101–5, 108–9, 132, 222 Hibbat Zion (Fondness of Zion) 48, 53, 67 Hiram, Asher 176, 183 Hirshberg, Haim Ze’ev 42 Histadrut labor federation 93, 98–101, 103–4, 107, 136, 187, 194 Hobsbawm, Eric 10 Hovevei Zion 54–5, 58, 80, 99 Idelson, Beba 187 Ilanit, Fayge 189 Imber, Naftali Herz 3, 17, 75, 80–5 Imber, Shmaryahu 80 Imperial War Graves Commission 177, 179–182, 191, 201 Independence Day 2, 6, 43, 82 Independence Park (Jerusalem) 139, 142, 144, 152 Independence Park (Tel Aviv) 25 Institute for Agriculture and Natural Science 97 Ish, Shalom Mordechai 152 Ishai, Moshe 69–70 Israel Broadcasting Service 143, 163 Israel Defense Force (IDF) 28, 30–1, 33, 35, 38–9, 62, 104, 113–4, 117, 139–40, 151, 153–4, 165, 167, 170–1, 174, 178–9, 182–3, 186, 191, 193, 195, 201–2, 205, 207–9, 213 Israel Defense Force Rabbinate 207 Istanbul 173, 175 Italian Veterans’ Association 182 Jabotinsky, Eri 122–3, 126–8, 130–3, 135, 137–8, 140–1, 143, 145, 154–155

Index 

 245

Jabotinsky, Johanna 122–3, 146–9, 152, 155 Jabotinsky, Karni 135, 149 Jabotinsky, Kopp Tamar 125 Jabotinsky Order 172 Jabotinsky, Ze’ev 2, 4, 7–8, 12, 61–2, 65, 103, 108, 121–56, 168, 196, 210, 216, 223, 225, 228–9 Jabotinsky, Ze’ev (grandchild) 149 Jacob 13, 15 Jaffa 26, 46, 51, 54–5, 87–8, 95–6, 175–6, 217 Jarblum, Marc 91, 172 Jerusalem 1, 3, 5, 7, 9–11, 13, 18, 20, 24–31, 33, 35, 37–46, 48–50, 53–59, 63–6, 67, 69–88, 92, 94–6, 101, 103, 105, 107, 110, 112, 123, 127, 139–40, 142, 144, 150–3, 159, 166–8, 171, 174, 178–80, 182–4, 187–90, 194, 196, 198–200, 202–3, 209, 211–3, 216–8, 221–224, 227–8 Jerusalem Municipality 227 Jewish Agency 24–8, 38, 44, 48–9, 61, 63–4, 66, 69, 81–3, 86, 88, 90, 94–8, 101–3, 124, 142, 172–9, 215, 219, 228 Jewish Brigade 10, 177–83, 208 Jewish Legion of the British Army 121, 131, 141, 145, 149, 169–71, 173, 223, 228 Jewish National Council 88 Jewish National Fund (JNF) 28–9, 33, 41, 43–4, 53–4, 57–8, 65, 67, 72–3, 77–8, 115, 172, 215, 218–9 Joseph 11, 13, 15, 31, 36 Kahana, Shmuel Zanwill 113 Kaniuk, Yoram 162, 166 Kantara 51 Kaplan, Eliezer 141 Katz, Katriel 145 Katzenellenbogen, Ben–Zion 198, 206 Katznelson, Berl 11, 93, 100, 102, 104, 108, 109, 222 Katznelson, Rachel 102 Katznelson, Yosef 211 Katznelson, Zvia 188 Katznelson-Miron, Leah 100 Keisari, Uri 165 Kenan, Amos 224 Kennedy Airport 145 Keren Hayesod 61, 121

246 

 Index

Kfar Hess 104 Kfar Warburg 98 Khoushy, Abba 63, 83, 100 Kidron, Avraham 202 Kiev 105–109, 127, 133, 159 King David’s Tomb 29, 113 Kinneret 8, 93, 96, 99, 100–10, 133, 193, 218, 222, 228, 230 Kiryat Anavim 98 Kiryat Eliyahu 170 Klarman, Yosef 145 Klarwein, Yosef 31, 44–6, 142, 154 Klausner, Yosef 76, 85 Klivnov, Ya’akov 66 Knesset 32–3, 36–7, 39, 61, 64, 100, 120, 125, 130, 136, 141–3, 150, 152–3, 156, 178, 199 Kol Yisrael 161 Koll, Moshe 27, 49 Kollek, Teddy 136, 141 Konigsberg 98 Kook, Hacohen Avraham Yitzhak 94 Krakow 180 Krause, Eliyahu 56 Kremnica 190 Kressel, Gezel 102 Kubovy, Aryeh 192 Lamm, Yosef 129 Laskov, Hain 31 Lauterbach, Arieh Leo 26 Law on the Reinterment of Herzl 33 Lehavot, Haviva 108 Lehi 8, 12, 122, 147, 149, 172, 196–8, 200–2, 204, 206, 213–4, 229 Leibowitz, Dov Ariel 56 Leumi health organization nurses 207 Levanon, Haim 73, 194 Levi, Shabtai 170 Levin, Aryeh 198, 207 Levin, Shmaryahu 154 Levin, Ze’ev 205 Lishansky, Ivriya 167–8 Lishansky, Toviah 167 Lishansky, Yosef 158–62, 165–8, 212 Livni, Eitan 207 Lloyd Triestino 88, 226

Locker, Berl 26, 43, 49–50, 81–2, 99, 102, 124 Lod airport 30, 36, 51, 73, 103, 107, 142–3, 147, 160, 172, 197–8 London 12, 20, 61–3, 65–6, 94–6, 98–9, 122, 169, 179–82, 201, 204, 224, 226–7 Lubenchik, Naftali 197 Lubrani, Uri 135 Lukyanovka cemetery (Babi Yar) 105 Lurie, Zvi 103 Luz, Kadish 142, 207 Ma’anit 190–3 Macabiah Stadium 122 Maccabi 52, 149 Magnes, Judah Leon (Leib) 54–5, 58 Maimon, Fishnan Yehuda Leib 43 Makarios 205 Malchin, Sara 93 Mansfeld, Al 45 Mapai 100, 129–30, 135–6, 154, 161, 196, 210, 213, 220, 222, 225 Mapam 100 Mapu, Avraham 69–70, 225 Margo 202 Margolin, Eliezer 3, 17, 157, 169–71, 223 Margolin, Hilda 169–70 Margolis, Morris 81–2 Marmorek, Alexander 23, 226 Marseille 51, 66, 113, 115 Marzouk, Moshe 213 Mauritius 174 Mazkeret Batya 217 Megged, Aharon 175 Meir, Astora 69 Meir, Yaakov 94 Menorah Club 171 Menorah Garden 27 Merano 67–71 Meridor, Ya’akov 149, 198, 205, 207 Metzudat Ze’ev (Jabotinsky House) 122–3, 139, 143, 150, 202, 207, 210–1, 218 Meyerson, Golda 99–100, 175–6 Mikveh Yisrael 38, 56 Milan 69–70, 209–10 Military Cemeteries Law 1950 167, 178 Military Cemetery (Haifa) 178

 Military Cemetery (Jerusalem) 1, 3, 7, 132, 140–1, 158, 165, 168, 174–6, 178, 180, 183, 188–9, 191, 194–6, 199–200, 202 Ministerial Committee on Symbols and Ceremonies 168 Ministry of Religious Affairs 174 Ministry of Defense’s Department for Memorializing Soldiers 167, 177, 179, 181–5, 188, 192, 199 Ministry of Defense 140, 168–9, 177, 182, 185, 191, 205 Ministry of Education and Culture 62, 70–1, 115 Miotzkin, Yehuda Leib 54, 217, 229 Mishmar Hanegev 106 Mivtach 113, 115–6 Mohilever, Shmuel 70, 217, 226 Mokady, Moshe 90 Mond, Jones 23 Montefiore, Moshe 227 Montparnasse Cemetery 50, 226 Motza 24, 32, 56 Mount Carmel 22, 102, 110 Mount Herzl 1, 2, 7–8, 39, 41, 43–4, 46, 48–9, 59, 60–6, 72, 103, 107, 127, 131, 138, 140–4, 153–4, 163, 165, 167, 175–6, 178–9, 188, 192–5, 199, 206, 208, 210, 223–4, 227, 229 Mount Herzl Committee 154 Mount of Olives 54, 59, 75–7, 79–80, 94–95, 144, 155, 198, 211, 215, 221–2, 227 Mount Scopus 9, 13, 24, 56–60, 86, 94–5, 221, 224, 228 Mount Tabor 140 Mount Zion 29, 113, 144 Mount Zion Cemetery Queens 80 Muhammad, Ali Jauhar 20 Nahalal 73, 183, 186, 218 Nahalat Jabotinsky 210 Nahalat Yitzhak 144, 210–1 Nakar, Meir 152 Namir, Mordechai 194 Naples 185 National Council 51, 79, 86, 88, 90, 197 National Institutions Building 26–7, 38, 46, 49, 56, 63–4, 70, 74, 79, 84, 144, 187, 194, 220

Index 

 247

National Library 13, 57, 92 Nation’s Pantheon 3 Natsionaler Arbeter Farband 99 Nedava, Yosef 123, 166–167 Netanya 33, 79, 170, 173 Neve Itamar 79 New Montefiore cemetery 145 New York 17, 72, 76, 80–2, 85, 99, 101, 121–2, 124, 143, 145, 210 Newark 78 Nicanor Cave 6, 13, 24, 54–55, 57–60, 86, 221, 224 Nice 75, 91 Nicosia 202 Nili 18, 158–162, 166, 168, 212 Nissim, Yitzhak 207, 209 Nofah, Yitzhak 92 Nordau, Max 3, 6–7, 14, 18, 50–4, 56, 70, 119, 132, 150, 154, 216, 222 Nordia 210 Nordia (Moshav) 210 Nordia (Tel Aviv) 50 Nurock, Mordechai 61, 124–5 Odessa 17, 54, 67, 121, 226 Office for Eretz Yisrael 67 Ohalo 100, 102–104, 108, 218 Ohel Shem 55, 76, 87–9, 136, 170, 218 Ohevet Ami (Havshush), Rachel 149 Olei hagardom 122, 144, 152, 198, 212–3 Oliphant, Laurence 80 Olšany Cemetery 190 Olshan, Yitzhak 207 Orland, Yaakov 84, 194 Ornan, Uzi 163 Palestine Jewish Colonization Association (PICA) 110, 112, 211, 224 Palmach 186–7,193 Pardes, Hanna 113 Pardes, Ze’ev 185 Paris 19, 34, 50, 66, 73, 76, 91, 101, 110–1, 113–5, 122, 142, 145, 147, 171–2, 224, 226 Parsitz, Shoshana 86 Patt, Yaakov 169 Patterson, Henry 228

248 

 Index

Pere Lachaise Cemetery 110, 114 Peres, Shimon 140, 208 Peretz, Solomon 173 Petah Tikva 70, 73, 211 Petliura, Symon 171–2 Pierre, Koenig 146 Pinsker, Yehuda Leib 2, 6, 8–10, 13–4, 18, 24, 53–60, 70, 74, 86, 119, 154, 217, 224, 230 Pinsky, David 70 Poalei Zion 99, 102, 105, 136 Prague 184, 190–2 Presidents’ Plot (Mount Herzl) 64 Press Association 62, 82 Prime Minister’s Office 174 Progressive Party 102, 130 Propes, Aharon Zvi 150 Public committee for bringing Hess’s remains 103 Public committee for the Rehabilitation of Avshalom Feinberg 163, 167 Raban, Ze’ev 77 Rabin, Yitzhak 229 Rafah 158, 163 Ramat David airport 29, 192 Ramat Hanadiv 8, 110, 112–3, 117–20, 215, 223–4 Ramat Hanadiv Gardens Company 120 Ramat Raziel 141, 201 Ramba, Isaac 123 Ramsgate 227 Rapaport, Avraham 159 Ravenna 19, 144, 177, 179, 182 Ravnitzky, Yehoshua Hana 89 Raziel, David 7, 14, 138, 157, 183, 196, 199–211, 228 Raziel, Mordechai 207–8 Raziel, Naor Esther 189, 201 Raziel, Shoshana 200–2, 204, 206 Rechter, Ze’ev 45 Rehovot 3–4, 98, 119, 169–71, 218, 223 Reich, Leon 216 Reik, Haviva 138, 179–80, 184, 190–5 Reiss, Edna 193 Reiss, Rafael 179–80, 184, 190–5 Remez, David 10, 35, 68, 79

Riverside Memorial Chapel 145 Revisionist movement 121, 123, 125–6, 134, 145, 198, 210, 215, 228–9 Rishon LeZion 84, 117, 158–61, 164–7, 194, 223, 230 Rivlin, Moshe 174 Rogel, Nakdimon 161 Rokach, Israel 39, 56, 115, 127 Rolel, Menachem 104 Rome 34, 107, 177–8, 185, 192, 209–10 Rosen, Pinhas 130, 187 Rosenblum, Harzl 29, 31, 119, 125, 154, 163 Rotblum, David 86 Rothschild, Ada (Adelheid) 110 Rothschild, Benjamin Edmond 8, 110–20, 128, 144, 223–4 Rothschild, Edmond 120 Rothschild Hospital (Haifa) 79, 92 Rothschild, James 110, 117 Ruppin, Arthur 93, 98 Russi, Alfred 211–2 Russian Compound 139, 152, 207, 212 Russian Immigrant Association 126 S. Shalom 69 Sade, Yitzhak 187, 193 Salmon, Katriel 191 Salvador 158, 173–7, 229 Sambal 196 Sanhedria cemetery 27, 69, 208, 211 Sanhedrin Graves 27, 69 Sarafand 170 Schatz, Boris 3, 8, 75–8 Scheib, Israel 138 Schiller, Uriel (Otto) 111 Schnitzer, Shmuel 154 Schwartzbard, Shalom 3, 157, 171–3, 223 Scouts 52, 55, 57, 67 Sde Dov 205–6 Sde Nahum 62 Sde Nehemia 190, 193 Sdot Yam 183, 185, 187–8, 218 Segal, Moshe 206 Seligman, Max 201 Shabazi, Shalom 105, 127, 226 Shalev, Meir 2 Shalev, Yitzhak 133

 Shalit, Isador 38 Shalkovich, Abraham Leib 223 Shamir, Yitzhak 168, 213 Shapira, Abraham 73, 112 Shapira, Haim Moshe 136 Shapira, Zvi Herman 47, 71–4, 218 Sharett, Moshe 103–4, 106, 141–2, 161, 174, 176, 179–80, 187, 226 Sharon, Ariel 168 Shazar, Zalman 99–100, 103, 107–8, 137, 143, 152–3, 175 Shbetz 174 Shechtman, Yosef 124 Sheikh Badr 198 Shek, Ze’ev 180–2 Shelah 199, 201–2, 210 Shimoni, David 68, 70 Shoham (Feinberg), Tzila 163, 165 Shoham maritime company 92 Shomrim (Watchman) organization 112 Shostak, Eliezer 205 Shuckburgh, Evelyn 204 Shuni 210 Sicka, Aharoni Ya’akov 205 Silivri 173 Simhonit, Yehudit 189 Smilansky, Moshe 171 Smith, Anthony D. 10 Smoira, Moshe 49 Smolenskin, Peretz 3, 67–71, 74, 82, 125, 132, 224 Sokolow, Celina 63 Sokolow Journalists’ House 62 Sokolow, Nahum 3, 21, 61–6, 95, 154, 228 Sokolow, Regina 61 Sorochowitsch, Yaakov 91 South African Zionist Federation 124 Soutine, Chaim 226 Soviet Union (USSR) 54, 105–8, 127, 226 Spinoza House 102 Sprinzak, Yosef 36, 49, 69–70, 73, 82, 99–100, 106, 188, 193 Stand, Adolph 225 Struck, Herman 110 Sutzkever, Abraham 173 Sydney 169 Syrkin, Marie 100

Index 

 249

Syrkin, Nahman 8, 11, 17, 93, 99–104, 108–9, 124, 222, 229, 230 Szenes, Giora 185 Szenes, Hannah 3, 8, 10, 12, 17, 138, 157, 180, 183–90, 193, 195, 218, 223 Szenes, Katrina 185, 189 Tabenkin, Yitzhak 99 Taitou, Nissim 212 Tarazi, Yaakov 205 Tchernichovsky, Shaul 66–7 Technion 28, 32 Tel Aviv 6–7, 18, 23–6, 28–30, 32, 36–9, 41, 45–6, 50–6, 59, 62–3, 65–6, 70, 73, 75–6, 82–3, 85–92, 98, 104, 107, 122, 137, 139, 141–2, 144, 149–51, 153, 169–70, 172, 179, 187, 194, 197–8, 205–7, 210, 216, 218, 221–3, 230 Tel Aviv Beit Ha’am community center 53 Tel Aviv cemetery (Trumpeldor) 51, 54, 66, 75, 86, 90, 92, 122, 131, 141, 150, 221, 223 Tel Aviv city council 37 Tel Aviv city hall 76, 85 Tel Aviv Great Synagogue 51, 76, 79, 151, 165, 198, 207, 211 Tel Aviv Municipality 50, 88, 90–2 Tel Aviv Municipality building 51, 53, 70 Tel Aviv Museum 76 Tel Nof 193 Tel Nordau 50 The Parade that didn’t parade 30 Thomas Cook travel company 201 Tiar, Abraham 212 Tiberias 193 Times Square 145 Traub, Shoshana 119 Trieste 22, 67, 88, 226 Trumpeldor, Yosef 131 Tsur, Ya’akov 73, 113 Tunisia 211–2 Turov, Nissan 223 Umm Al-Aleq 110, 112 Unichman, Shimshon 205 Union of Zionists-Revisionists 121 Unterman, Issar 207

250 

 Index

Ussishkin, Menachem 10, 13, 24, 53–5, 57–60, 65, 77, 86, 88, 113, 119, 154, 221 Uziel, Ben-Zion Meir Hai 79

World Zionist Organization (WZO) 24–6, 28, 33, 41, 43–4, 46, 48, 58, 61–2, 66–7, 72, 81–2, 85, 93, 95, 97, 121, 124, 141, 174, 215–7, 223, 225–6, 228

Vaad Hapoel 187, 194 Vardi, Haim 182 Vienna 7, 10–12, 17, 21–2, 24, 28, 33–6, 41, 48, 50, 63, 67, 75, 85–8, 185, 226 Voice of Jerusalem 39 Volcani, Yitzhak Elazari 98

Yad Lebanim 172 Yad Vashem 172, 176, 225 Yadin, Yigal 189 Ya’iri, Meir 99 Yisraeli, Ben-Zion 102 Young Israel Synagogue 145 Young, James E. 47

Warburg, Edgar 98 Warburg, Fania 98 Warburg, Gertrude 98 Warburg, Hanna 98 Warburg, Otto 3, 8, 12, 17, 93, 87–98, 222 Warburg, Sigmund 98 Wardi, Aharon 23 Warhaftig, Zerach 173 Warsaw 61, 211 Weinberg (Aran), Shlomo 111 Weinraub, Gitai Munio 45 Weiss, Felix 23 Weitz, Yosef 29 Weizmann, Chaim 59, 61, 119–21, 154 Werner, Shoshana 186 Western Wall 1, 42, 143, 155 Wilhelm II 38 Willesden 61 Wolffsohn, David 3, 7, 17, 23, 47–50, 61–2, 65–6, 72, 74, 97, 124–5, 216, 223, 229 Wolffsohn, Fannie Yudel 48 Workers House (Haifa) 100

Zadikoff Choir 175 Ze’ev Jabotinsky Returns to the Homeland 139, 155 Zeltzer, Yisrael Abba 180 Zevulun Association 79 Zichron Ya’akov 83, 110–3, 116–7, 119, 144, 159, 165, 223 Ziffer, Moshe 90, 109 Zion Mule Corps 145 Zionist executive Committee 21–2, 25, 31, 45, 48–9, 51, 54, 61–2, 66, 72, 84, 93, 96, 102, 121, 127 Zionist Federation in France 172 Zionist General Council 50, 56, 65, 124 Zionist of England 65–6 Zionist Organization of America 76, 124 Ziv, Michael 71 Zrubavel, Yaakov 109 Zumerstein, Emil 223 Zur, Zvi 174 Zysman, Shalom 10, 179