Issuu

DISSERTATIONS REPRESENTATIONS OF JEWS AND JEWISHNESS IN ENGLISH PAINTING 1887-1914 BY PETER GROSS

PHD Dissertation by the same title submitted at the University of Leeds DATE 2004 SOURCE Courtesy of the Author

EXPLORE MORE DISSERTATIONS AT BENURI.ORG

REPRESENTATIONS OF JEWS AND JEWISHNESS IN ENGLISH PAINTING 1887-1914 Vol. 1: Text

by Peter Gross Submittedposthumouslyin accordancewith the requirementsfor the degreeof

Ph.D.

The University of Leeds

Centre for Jewish Studies, School of Fine Art, History of Art and Cultural Studies Work completed August 2003 [submitted September 2004]

The candidate's supervisor confirms that the work submittedis the late candidate'sown and that been has been has has This the to made work of others. copy appropriate credit given where reference been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may

be published without proper acknowledgement.

Representationsof Jews and Jewishnessin English Painting 1887-1914 by Peter Gross, University of Leeds

Abstract (abstract by Supervisor Dr Eva Frojmovic, Centre for Jewish Studies)

This thesis concerns itself with pictorial representationsof Jewish subjects in the period between the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition on 1887 and the Twentieth Century Art Exhibition at the Whitechapel in 1914, on the eve of the First World War. It is organised in two parts. Its beginning and end, so the introductory first chapter be in argues, can glimpsed Barraud's celebratory painting of Lord Lionel Rothschild being sworn into parliament (painted 1872,25 years after the event) and the alienated Jewish subjects of the East End hauntingly captured by Mark Gertler in the years immediately preceding World War I. The first part is devoted to the analysis of what the author identifies as an AngloJewish artistic discourse. Its defining characteristics emerge, so the author argues,in the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition held in honour of Queen Victoria's golden jubilee at the Albert Hall in 1887. These characteristics include a deliberate attempt to visualise the Jewish community as a well-integrated part of middle / upper-class English society, sharing with the latter a past, a present and a future. This present and future include also the civilising mission of empire. By contrast, the immigrant East End of London is emphatically not part of this discourse. After a detailed reading of the Exhibition, two case studies are presented in this part of the thesis: the painters Solomon J. Solomon and John Singer Sargent, the former being an observant yet London Jew and the latter being a non-Jewish American painter then acculturated in London. Their discussed here span the end of the 19thand the works resident beginning of the 20thcentury. The chapter on Solomon J. Solomon is presentedwith a focus on a number of paintings that can be seento thematise an Anglo-Jewish discourse. Among these are single and group portraits that show Jewish sitters as

successful members of English society. Especially noteworthy are "mixed" groups that show Jewish and Gentile sitters together in a semi-neutral space of middle and upperclass sociability and civic ritual. Solomon's monumentally sized Allegory of the relationship between the Old and the New Testament, while offering an ostensibly harmonising vision, is perhaps Solomon's more daring and problematic work, since it re-inscribes the supersessionof Judaism by Christianity. The chapter on Sargent's portraits of Jewish sitters revisits the thesis that Sargent's images encode anti-Semitic stereotypes.The author proposes to read these paintings from the point of view of their contemporary reception. The documents adduced are interpreted to show that while some of Sargent's paintings did sometimes play to deeply embedded anti-Semitic stereotypesamong his critics, they were just as often openly admired as masterpieces of character depiction. Thus emerges a style of heightened characterisation that could stop short of caricature in some cases,but that could also capture qualities that the painter admired in sitters some of whom, such as the Wertheimers, he considered friends. The second part of the thesis is titled An Offer of Integration. In parallel to the first part, it begins with a detailed reading of an exhibition, the Exhibition of Jewish Arts Art Gallery in Antiquities held Whitechapel 1906. The the and at author arguesthat this show, with its significant location now in the heart of the East End, representedan immigrant At integration East End. the same the the towards communities of offer of time, it could be seen as a responseto the Aliens Act of 1905 which brought immigration from Eastern Europe largely to an end. The author arguesthat the show it, Anglification: the a as author names constituted a part of an active programme of, immigrants into Englishmen transforming at cultural and educational project aimed (and -women). In relation to this programme, the author places three chapters on three decades first in in East End the the and second modernist painters who painted scenes Gertler. William Alfred Mark 20th Rothenstein, Wolmark the century: and of Rothenstein "discovered" the "aliens" of the East End in ca. 1905 and produced in Carrying the two next years, culminating several paintings of religious subjects over the Law. The author posits that Rothenstein, an acculturated Jewish man of GermanJewish background from Bradford, painted scenesof Jewish prayer and study in a

broadly Rembrandtesque, late impressionist mode and sought to foreground their spiritual depth and nobility, rejecting the picturesque and anecdotal genre established in more conservative painters such as Pilichowski. Especially in Jews mourning in detail (synagogue furniture, books) have been synagogue, almost all narrative scrolls, it's for the painting relies a/effect entirely on the antique effect of the eliminated and full-length prayershawls (typical of Eastern European Jews - Anglo-Jews preferred the interiority the scarf shaped small prayershawls) on of the praying men. The emphasis black-and interiority the the archaic white on and spirituality, and exploitation of for full-length to the a number of aesthetic of prayershawl, was set a precedent Jacob Kramer. By Jewish contrast subjects, such as modernist painters engaging with different Alfred Wolmark Rothenstein, took the position a so author argues, with towards his "Jewish paintings". Again, this representsa relatively short phase in his (1903), Ezra his Days Rabbi Ben In Last The of colourist phase. oeuvre, preceding Wolmärk undertook to translate Robert Browning's well-known poem into the artistic idiom of a Rembrandtesque Eastern European Jewry. As a conclusion, the epilogue revisits the 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition to trace how discourse Anglo-Jewish the was. enduring

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract

OF VOL. 1

ii ..................................................................................................................

List of Figures

vi ........................................................................................................

Prologue: A place of memory

1 ................................................................................

Part I: An Anglo-Jewish Discourse

7 .......................................................................

Chapter 1: Introduction: Looking back to the present; looking forward to the past Chapter 2: Defining an Anglo-Jewish Discourse: The Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition of 1887 Chapter 3: The Importance of Being Solomon

....................................

.................................................

....................................................

Chapter 4: The Dangerous Mr Sargent 142 .................................................................. Part II: An Offer of Integration

215 ..............................................................................

Chapter 5: The Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition of 1906: An Anglo-Jewish U-turn 216 ........................................................................................ Chapter 6: The Lachrymose Mr Rothenstein

261 ........................................................

Chapter 7: Alfred Wolmark, the Painter of the Ghetto Appendix 1: Biographical Glossary

.........................................

319

363 ......................................................................

368 Appendix 2: Pictorial References .......................................................................... Appendix 3: Population statistics for Chapter 5 Bibliography

...................................................

375

376 ...........................................................................................................

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Solomon J. Solomon, Laus Deo, Oil on canvas, c1899,236.5 x 173 cm, Private 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

collection Solomon J Solomon, Your Health, Oil on canvas, 1893,240 x 142.5 cm, location unknown Solomon J Solomon, A Dinner Given by Sir H. Thompsonfor Mr Ernest Hart, Oil on canvas, No date, 71.1 x 102.9 cm, Wellcome Foundation, London Solomon J Solomon, Mr Ernest Hart, Oil on board, No date, 35 x 26 cm, Wellcome Foundation, London Solomon J Solomon, On the Threshold of the City, 22 June 1897, Oil on 1898,236 172 Location canvas, x cm, unknown Solomon J Solomon, High Tea in the Sukkah, Ink, graphite and gouache on paper, 1906,39.6 x 29.2 cm, The Jewish Museum, New York

7. Solomon J Solomon, The Commons Petitioning Queen Elizabeth to Marry, Canvas on plaster, 1911,442 x 249 cm, Houses of Parliament, London

8. Solomon J Solomon, An Allegory, Oil on canvas, 1904,269 x 150, Harris Museum & Gallery, Preston 9.

Solomon J Solomon, Sir George Faudel Phillips, Oil on canvas, 1897,145.0 105.5 Private collection x cm,

10. John Singer Sargent, Lady Faudel Phillips, Oil on canvas, 1898,144.8 x 94 Collection Private cm, 11. Max Beerbohm, Tite Street, drawing, 1908, Private collection 12. John Singer Sargent, Synagogue, Oil on canvas, Installed 1919,164 cms Boston Public Library wide, 13. John Singer Sargent, Lord Ribblesdale, Oil on canvas, 1902,254.2 x 148.6 Tate London Britain, cm, 14. John Singer Sargent, Sir George Lewis, Oil on Canvas, 1896,80 x 59.6 cm, Private collection

15. John Singer Sargent, Mrs Carl Meyer and her children, Oil on Canvas, 1896, 201.4 x 134 cm, Private collection 16. John Singer Sargent, Mrs Flora Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1898,147.5 x 95.2 cm, New Orleans Museum of Art 17. John Singer Sargent, Mr Asher Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1898,147.5 x 97.8 cm, Tate Britain, London 18. John Singer Sargent, Asher Wertheimer, Graphite on woven paper, 1898,24 x 15.1 cm, Fogg Museum, Harvard University Museums, Gift of Mrs Francis Ormond 19. John Singer Sargent, The Daughters of Mr Asher Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1901,190.5 x 130.8 cm, Tate Britain, London 20. Thomas Lawrence, Daughters of Col. Thomas Cartaret Hardy, Oil on Ohio Art, Cleveland Museum 1801,161 135 of cm, x canvas, 21. John Singer Sargent, Mrs Ralph Curtis, Oil on canvas, 1898,219.3 x 104.8 Cleveland Ohio. Museum Art, of cm, 22. John Singer Sargent, Mr Alfred Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1901,163.2 x 114.9 cm, Tate Britain, London

vii

32. William Rothenstein, In the Corner of the Talmud School, Oil on canvas, 1904,89.5 x 70.5 cm, Gallery Oldham 33. William Rothenstein, Aliens at Prayer, Oil on canvas, 1905,127.4 x 105.5 Gallery National cm, of Victoria, Melbourne

34. William Rothenstein, The Talmud School, Oil on canvas, 1904/5,83.8 x 94.9 Sternberg Centre, London cm, 35. William Rothenstein, Jews Mourning in a Synagogue, Oil on canvas, 1906, 127.5 x 115.5 cm, Tate Gallery, London 36. William Rothenstein, Reading the Book of Esther, Oil on canvas, 1907,87 x 106 cm, Manchester City Art Gallery 37. William Rothenstein, Carrying the Law, Oil on canvas, 1908,160 x 188 cm, Johannesburg Art Gallery

38. William Rothenstein, Carrying the Law, Oil on canvas, 1907, Cartwright Hall, Bradford 39. Max Beerbohm, A Quiet Morning in the Tate Gallery, Pencil, pen and Gallery, 32 London Tate 1907,37 cm, x watercolour on paper,

40. Simeon Solomon, Coptic Baptismal Procession, Watercolour, Gouache & Gum Arabic, 1865,25.9 x 42.4 cm, Cecil Higgins Art Gallery, Bedford 41. Alfred Wolmark, Waiting for the Tenth (aka The Rabbis), 1900, Oil on Collection Private 226 166 cm, x canvas,

42. Alfred Wolmark, Reading the Talmud/The Loner, ca. 1907, Oil on canvas, 61 London Trees Ltd, Six 73.7 cm, x 43. Alfred Wolmark, The Last Days of Rabbi Ben Ezra, 1903, Oil on canvas, 184.2 x 320 cm, The Jewish Museum, New York 44. Alfred Wolmark, In the Synagogue, dated 1897 (?), Oil on canvas, 85 x 69 Gallery, Art London Uri Ben cm, 45. Alfred Wolmark, Young Rabbi with a Beard (aka Young Rabbi with a Book), 1898, Oil on canvas, 53.3 x 45.7 cm, Private Collection 46. Alfred Wolmark, In a Synagogue, Oil on canvas, 67cm x 88.3 cm, 1906, Private collection (Gitl and Marton Braun) 47. Alfred Wolmark, Sabbath afternoon, ca. 1910, Oil on Canvas, 73.6 cm x 61cm, Gill and Marton Braun

viii

48. Alfred Wolmark, Succoth, 1909, Oil on canvas, 121.9 x 121.9 cms, Private collection

Prologue -A Place of Memory What characterizes a member of a minority group is that he is forced to see himself as both exceptional and insignificant, marvellous and awful, good and evil What characterizes the sensation of being a member of is that one's emotions are forever a minority group locked in chains of ambivalence the expression of an emotion forever releasing its opposite...

Norman Mailer, Cannibals and Christians, 1966

"The end is where we start from. " T. S.Eliot, Little Gidding

All cemeteries are, by their very nature, places of memory - both on the individual personal,

level and for the communities they serve. The country

" Great history Village tell the the the of and churchyard, whose gravestones House", is not just the stuff of novels. The churchyard and its records are often the most complete chronicle of the history of a particular small area. Larger historical legacies, but they are often urban cemeteries may contain even richer different fragments disparate, less focussed tell of many and may rather more histories.

The United Synagogue Cemetery, opened in Willesden in 1873, provides it from the Jewish London's information moved as community, about a wealth of City and the East End in the latter part of the 19thcentury and developed over the 100 years. next

It also became a very surprising starting point for me as it changed from not simply a place of personal memory to one that provides an almost complete

2 backdrop to the time and place of this study. My grandfathers died within a week of each other in 1943 and both were buried in Willesden, where, over the been joined by have they years, other members of my family. Visiting this particular cemetery has thus been a part of my life for as long as I can remember.

My maternal grandparents were typical of the immigrant waves from Russia that flooded into London's East End in the last two decades of the it, have first Family that nineteenth century. myth would my grandfather's name, Kiva, may have had more to do with Kiev, his claimed place of origin, and his inability on arrival to speak English to the immigration authorities than with his, "Akkiba" Hebrew that explanation certainly an was name possibly adopted, forebears in forms in families, different Jewish arrived at whose many repeated ' this time. My paternal grandparents belonged to an earlier wave of immigration from Germany. My great grandparents were born into the then tiny Jewish in involved had been Grandfather knew I Leeds. that a my always community of "photograph to painting" business. But it was not until reviewing the catalogue in 1984, Gallery Uri held Ben Reassessed the Kramer Jacob the at exhibition, of in latter father, Kramer's he had the discovered I arrived that when employed Leeds in 1900.

in insignificant, in the but important, To these, personally players reality key the Willesden Jewish added many of population, research at story of the figures in the development of the history of Anglo-Jewry.

3 Lionel de Rothschild, the first Jew to serve as an MP, is buried at Willesden together with many of his contemporary family and his succeeding generations. His imposing gravestone with its Hebrew and English texts would surely have seemed very alien to his Grandfather, the founder of the dynasty, whose grave in Frankfurt, Germany, is marked by a much simpler, all Hebrew, headstone. Close by are the graves of many of the Montagus, his business rivals and contenders for leadership of the Jewish community. The Samuel family, the Cohens, the Waleys and the Waley-Cohens, Jessels, the first Jewish Master of the Rolls are all to be found here. Nathan and Herman Adler, the father and son who as Chief Rabbis dominated the religious life of Anglo Jewry for more than 60 years, and the Reverend Simeon Singer, whose version of the United Synagogue Prayer Book served the Jewish community as the standard text for almost a century, are buried in Willesden, together with Moses Angel, head master of the Jews Free School in the East End (once the largest school of any kind in the British Empire).

From the world of art and art dealing, Willesden is the final resting place both of Jacob Duveen, whose benefactions were so important to the Tate, and Asher Wertheimer, all of whose family were painted by Sargent (the pictures donated being to the Tate). Other Sargent sitters at Willesden subsequently also include Carl Mayer's family.

The most interesting artistic trio in Willesden are

Simeon Solomon, Solomon J. Solomon and Mark Gertler. Ironically their destinies. died destitute, Simeon, to their seem reflect separate gravestones who has a gravestone that is now broken beyond recognition. Solomon J.'s grave is ' Just such a problem is reputed to account for the renaming of Max to Mark Gertler, one

4 marked with all the Edwardian pomp and respectability that reflect the man and his life. Gertler's grave is tucked away in a far corner of the cemetery marked by only a very simple stone.

What is significant

about Willesden in terms of this project? An

list annotated of names, even a full one rather than this very shortened version, be interest but of itself seems at first glance to tell us little. may of passing

Willesden is important because it would seem to represent the triumph of a markedly anglicised version -of Judaism in the face of all of the pressures and potential schisms of the period between 1880 and 1914. The old - original section of Willesden is almost indistinguishable from many Christian graveyards of the same period. The broken columns and covered urns so beloved of Victorian monumental masons are to be found in abundance here. If there is an absence of angels and crucifixes,

there is an almost equal absence of obvious

Judaica. In part this may have been a result of practical necessity. With a relatively small community to serve prior to the 1880s, Jewish monumental it few have been Christian to and masons were may often easier employ masons, who would adapt their standard models. But the examples of "English" Victorian frequent in it this the that section of gravestones are so cemetery one suspects lettering fashion deliberate Hebrew and choice. was often a matter of occasionally seemed to present a serious problem even to the most experienced illustrate inter-war by Gill, Eric There this tombstones which are period carvers. in Indeed, None Hebrew. the tombstones of are exclusively problem vividly.

in key this the study. artists of

5 many of them only have a bare minimum of Hebrew with most of the text in English. This even applies to the tombstones of Singer, the Adlers, and many of the other Rabbis buried in Willesden. This is a marked contrast to Alderney Road, the first Ashkenazi cemetery established in the East End shortly after the in the 17th century, where almost all of the tombstones are readmission in Hebrew and their style is much simpler. exclusively

There are other Jewish cemeteries in London. The original Sephardi in Mile End Road in 1637. The Federation Synagogues, cemetery was opened importance immigrant to the which were of special part of

community

at the

first in in 19th 1890 Edmonton the their century, opened and close of cemetery this site continued to receive new graves until 1937. The Reform Synagogue had its first cemetery in Balls Pond Road in 1840, which was then replaced by the Joint Synagogues Cemetery (with the Sephardis) in 1897. These sites tell other

However, Jewish London's the as the principal population. of story parts of United Synagogue cemetery in London for almost one hundred years, the in is Willesden Jewishness Judaism significant reflected and anglicised vision of developed. Jewish how the the community majority of evidence of

Willesden is more like the country churchyard, to which I alluded at the large the It like of segment than a very an urban cemetery. encompasses outset, history of the whole Jewish community. It seems to demonstrate an underlying business, Whatever their fundamental cohesiveness within that community. the Dukes; lie Grand the Dukes leadership Grand rich and rivalries, near social or lapsed, infamous, devout the famous the the the established the and and poor,

6 immigrants of earlier generations and the East Enders, who had begun to move upwards (socially) and outwards (geographically), are all buried together in Willesden. Whatever the splits and social divides, they did not lead to a splintering of the community with the consequent establishment of many, much burial latter In the smaller places. part of the late 19thand the early 20th century there were really only three fully functioning cemeteries of different branches of Judaism serving London at any one time. Although the grip of the Cousinhood dramatically AngloFirst World War, to the the was weaken vision of - after Judaism that they espoused was to be a dominant strand for the 20tß'century. It is with this, as a significant element of the total social, cultural and religious background, that the pictorial representations included in this study need to be seen.

PART

AN ANGLO-JEWISH

DISCOURSE

8 CHAPTER 1 Introduction: Looking back to the present; looking forward to the past.

Aims, Hypotheses and Methodology To see oursels as others see us. R. Bums, To a Louse

This study investigates Visual Representation of the Jew over a sixty-year period from 1860 to just after the end of the First World War. Its aims are to assess individual images tell us about how Jews saw themselves and how others saw what them. It is hoped that we will thereby obtain a deeper comprehension of the meaning of the construct "the Jew", as it was understood in geographic and social terms, how it developed during the period under review. gauge

Post-colonial discourse, the concept of nationhood and the consequent assimilation/ colonisation or exclusion of others and the concepts of alterity and of ambivalence are central to the analytical method I shall adopt. This study moves from the particular to the general. It examines individual representations and the in build that their to conditions surrounded creation order up an understanding of the different readings of the construct "the Jew". It works from the bottom up rather than deconstructing more generalised views from the top down.

The main arguments underpinning this study are based on the following set of hypotheses: During the period under review, the Jewish population of England and the practice of Judaism there were largely controlled by a dominant ideology, that of Anglo-Jewry

9 from Anglo-Judaism. flowed down knit, ideology inter-related group This or a close families, dominated increasingly Jewish of affairs, claimed representation of who that community throughout the second half of the 19thcentury and continued to do so (Throughout World War. First this study, I shall reserve the use of the the until after term Anglo-Jewry to apply to this dominant group). This dominant ideology assumed that Jews could, should and would be accepted into and by English society as English. It is important to emphasise that this aim was not universal among all Jews, but was a central plank of Anglo-Jewry's policy. The key to such acceptance was believed to lay in acculturation by Jews and in the adoption of the cultural norms of English behaviour.

Assimilation,

in the sense of total absorption, of a complete

Jewish leaders by identity the loss the of of was not regarded suborning or host for The to was society acceptance. such community as an a priori necessity Jewish limits by the the community, which would acculturated setting of accept permit them to retain

1 "transmissible distinctiveness". Judaism aimed to be regarded

identity. dissension, form not a separateracial of acceptable religious as another

Anglo-Jewry regarded itself as having acquired the right to be an integral part of in for the battle Jewish it As middle the English society. emancipation political won interest the largely to (which very 19th any of the and was affected only century of the improve it the to of Jewish position levels the community), so sought of upper Anglo-Jews between boundaries be to If there Jewish were still population. entire Angloin be the boundaries of eyes host regarded should the such communities, and both flexible sides. Jewry as permeable and on

limits imposed to England: in Victorian ' I. Finestein, `Jewish emancipationists self

10 Notwithstanding polarities of opinion and struggles for leadership and power within the ranks of the leaders of Anglo-Jewry, there was a broad consensus this on ideology and the methods for achieving its

Until the 1880s, this ideology and aims.

its practical manifestations were broadly unchallenged among English Jews. The ideology also received a significant though by no means universal measure of acceptance within the host community. Anti-Semitism was present, as a continuing strand of belief/attitude within certain parts of the English population, at this time. However it was only rarely during this period a factor of central importance in English politics. Although it may have informed the behaviour of

certain segmentsof

the host population, its appearance as significant was localised in time and place.2 It did not in this period manifest itself with the long term and more deep seated pervasiveness that it achieved in Germany nor the intensity that characterised its 3 in France. Notwithstanding this hypothesis about anti-Semitism, sporadic outbursts it is also apparent that there was an underlying feeling about the "stranger" status of the Jew as "multi-faceted, contradictory, belonging and not belonging. ,4

The immigrant waves of the late 19thand very early 20th century severely tested the dominance of this ideology within the Jewish community. They also created circumstances within the host community that upset the carefully constructed balance of acceptance and gave rise to outbreaks of anti-Semitism. Nevertheless, I would ideology its dominance broad that the that the posit retained and measure of

in Assimilation Community, 38. Frankel Zipperstein p. and ed., and assimilation', 2 An interesting confirmation of the change in the climate from the 18thto the 19`hcentury discussing interpretations in Felsenstein, Anti-Semitic 184: Stereotypes, of p. emerges Shylock, he argues that `Kean's Shylock was far more in tune with a more liberal age, even though his interpretation fell well short of the "sympathetic" Shylock of Henry Irving later in the century'.

3 The Dreyfus Affair in France is part of general European historical Marconi Affair in England is a topic for specialists.

knowledge. The

11 acceptance of the position of Jews within the host community remained unaltered despite these localised and sporadic problems. The

arrival, after 1880, of a very

different kind of Jew (the Eastern European immigrant),

who outnumbered the native

Jewish population, threatened the ability of Anglo-Jewry to retain its position of "belonging"

in English society. Their efforts to anglicise the immigrants were

simultaneously coupled with a distancing from them. Jews who had struggled to shake off the brand of "other" were faced with identifying within their own ranks a new "other".

This

"other"

not only

challenged Anglo-Jewry's

comfortable

perceptions of its own identity, but raised the very real possibility that the host community would come to equate all Jews with this new underclass5 rather than making any distinctions between the quasi indigenous Anglo-Jews and their newly 6 arrived co-religionists. These immigrant Jews had to be labelled in

some way as to

distinguish them from the quasi-indigenous Jewish community, until they could be changed, concealed or moved on.

In terms of visual representation, which is the primary focus of this study, this line of argument in turn provides a further set of working hypotheses. 1 would propose that although the use of visual stereotyping remained a "shorthand" for representations of the Jew in cartoon and pastiche and in the illustration of literature, it in its in declined where was support of an author's view, use academic art throughout the latter part of the 19thcentury. I will argue that as artists emerged from 4 Finestein, p. 136.

5 As H. Maccoby perceptively argues of reactions to parallel groups of Chassidim `They distaste believe Their them. to shuddering combined evil of with a willingness evoke rather a idiosyncratic style of dress is construed as ostentation and their separateness as hatred of People, 109. Pariah ' p. mankind.

6 This was not an attitude confined to Anglo-Jewry. On the other side of the world, Australia's established Jewish community evidenced the same reaction to their immigrant influx in the last two decadesof the 19thcentury.

12 the new generations of Jewish immigrants, they may consciously or otherwise have drawn on artistic heritages from Russia and Eastern Europe that were alien or unavailable to English artists and earlier generations of English/Jewish artists. Artists from the immigrant generation may also have drawn from a seam of specifically Jewish artistic practice that encompassed certain styles of synagogue decoration liturgical

and

ornamentation as well as visual representation. The encounter with

modernity and avantgarde practice that occurred among some of the younger artists covered in this study in the final decade and a half of the period under review provided new ways of depicting their subjects. Thus some representations of the Jew further distancing from the conventional and/or stereotypical approaches underwent a adopted in the middle and latter part of the 19thcentury.

A Framework of Reference

Just as each of the images reviewed in this study was produced within a framework this study as a whole requires a specific set of conditions, so of reference it locate For to the explanatory purposes what within which analysis undertakes. immediately follows adopts an approach based on individual disciplines. However this is done in order to establish a multi-disciplinary throughout

this

study,

rather to

draw to approach on which

individually suggest

isolated

avenues of

investigation.

From a Jewish perspective, the history of the English Jewry in this period has

become an arena of heated debate among contemporary historians. After the

13 Lipman, the extent and degree of antioundbreaking of views on work early 0Semitism in England have come almost full circle. The quasi-hagiographic work of Roth gave way to the more balanced views of historians such as Black and Endelman. These in their turn have been challenged by the writers, such as Kushner, far tend towards who a more anti-Semitic reading of events within English society. Rubinstein has presented a more recent revisionist view of this same period finding his (or that suggesting some of reds anti-Semites) contemporaries are wilfully under every bed. This spectrum of opinion provides one series of polarities within locate to visual representation. which

I have proposed that Anglo-Judaism, which might be defined as a version of "what the Rothschilds wanted", was the dominant ideology for Judaism in England in this period. Although this was a dynamic rather than a static concept, until at least in for "norm" it War First World the end of the representation cultural provided one just in England the Jewry However, official version of not comprised practice. United Synagogue orthodoxy, but included other significant strands of belief and These European/Federation). Eastern Reform (Sephardi, variants and and practice "the Jew", had the histories inherent which construct their other understandings of therefore influence and inform representation.

Body Jew's The based Gilman's psychologically and physiologically work on his the in theories of of support provides a wealth of material and visual examples during in Germany he how Jew the mainly regarded was and male of particularity Talmud Conduct, in Unheroic Boyarin, Daniel provides a especially the 19thcentury. invokes he The Jewish that tradition obliges based alternative reading of sexuality.

14 one to consider yet another set of representative and interpretative possibilities based "edelkayt" (delicacy/gentleness/nobleness of soul), in place of the dominating on male hero, who emerges as an iconic figure in much of Western art.

The processes of assimilation and acculturation both as matters of historical opinion and also as sociological phenomena require very detailed consideration in the context of this study. In his writings on the sociological theory of assimilation, Bauman draws on experiences in England and Germany both within and after the in this study. In Modernity and Ambivalence, he analyses the Jew as period covered the archetype of Sartre's le visquieux, "an entity ineradicably ambivalent sitting barricade... blurring boundary line for the construction of a particular astride a a vital 7 The order". concept

of the Jew as outsider, as "other", which Bauman, among many

investigates in his work is a theme which both provides locus for and can be others, tested by the experience of visual representation. His work is, within the terms of this by interpretations historians the such as Lunn and Holmes, study, complemented of investigate during It Englishness this the period. concepts of and of nationhood who is also complemented by the work of writers such as Hyman and Sorkin. Their detailed analyses of subsets of the Jewish community provide an invaluable for different different that the experience process of assimilation was a affirmation interpretations different These Jews times. macro and micro sociological at groups of in be further this to work, considered of contexts series of assimilation are yet a the to absence, presence and nature of about questions pose which compel one in in depicted it is is this (or considered works not) assimilation and acculturation as study. Bauman, Modernity and Ambivalence, p. 61.

This period was also one of ferment in artistic practice. The upheaval

Impressionism was rapidly followed by a plethora of other movements PostImpressionism, Pointillism, Expressionism, Fauvism, Futurism and Cubism in each their turn (and in some cases overlapping one another) challenging old verities and opening up alternative avenues. Artistic practice in England lagged behind the avantgarde of Paris, but was eventually challenged and altered by it. This history provides dimension for investigation as the encounter with modernity and new yet another modes of artistic practice provided artists with fresh ways and new sources of representation.

As with the wider general history, within general art history there is a Jewish dimension that is relevant for this study. The potential links to earlier examples of Jewish art and the possible importance of Russian art (primitive,

realist and

factors that will be considered and utilised as part of the analytical avantgarde) are framework. During the period from the mass emigration from Russia in the 1880s to the Russian Revolution some 40 years later major Jewish artists emerged. They in both Russia and worked

Ecole in Western Europe and America and established the

Juive in Paris after the First World War. I have argued elsewhere, that there was also a proto-Jewish

8 School in London just before that War.

The literature on the specific topic of this study is quite scant. Much of it either predates the newer historical perspectives and theoretical discussions of the past ten to have I does topics the therefore fifteen years and primary not address some of 'A Loss of Identity, Unpublished MA dissertation, London 1995.

16 9 10 issue focus outlined earlier. It does not closely on the of Jewishness. It is narrowly framed and case specific and does not seek the wider perspective which is my ultimate aim.

As far as specific artists are concerned

from the apart references made -

is little there above recently published work on Solomon J. Solomon or William Rothenstein and virtually nothing on either Wolmark or Kramer or on some of the minor figures such as Amshewitz and Rosenberg, whose work I will be considering.

The Geffrye Museum's 1985 Exhibition of the Solomon family and Colin Cruse's work on Simeon Solomon provide helpful background and insights into his l l be investigating later. I Jewish themes, on work specifically which shall

The significance of stereotypes is of particular importance in any discussion in Felsenstein's the Jew this the the on seminal work period. representation of of from to between 1830 1680 which point starting a provides valuable and period investigate the relevance of stereotypes in the period of this study - not just in that but models employed as consciously or unconsciously cartoons and pastiches inform the work of any artist seeking to represent the Jew.

Nochlin, Adler and Cohen have all dealt with areas that directly relate to this however, Levy, Alphonse Cohen's concerned are not Nochlin's on works and study. is fully Wertheimer Sargent's investigation Adler's within portraits England. of with 9 This is for example true of Woodeson's otherwise highly informative biography of Gertler. 10For example Richard Cork's 1987 study of David Bomberg.

17 the area I propose to cover. However, as my hypotheses indicate and as I

shall try to

demonstrate later, I feel her readings of anti-Semitism may be overplayed.

Juliet Steyn has published a number of articles relating to exhibitions

at the

Whitechapel that featured the work of the artists I will be considering. Her focus is, however, more on the exhibitions themselves; their reception and

what they tell us

about attitudes to Jews and the tensions she detects within the overall Jewish community. My focus is more artist centred and I have taken issue with her 12 her elsewhere over some of conclusions.

In this chapter I wish to start the study of visual representation of Jews by

concentrating on an examination of two principal pictures and some allied images, which seem to illustrate polar opposites at the beginning and end of this period, but which upon examination may be more closely linked. These need however to be placed within a historical/political

context, which I shall now outline.

A Period of Change In a progressive country change is constant. B. Disraeli, Edinburgh 29 Oct 1867

In 1887, as part of the Queen Victoria Golden Jubilee celebrations, an AngloJewish Historical Exhibition was held at the Royal Albert Hall in London. As a tool in its project to be regarded part of English society or perhaps in the belief that it

"'Versions

of the Annunciation', in After the Pre-Raphaelites. Art and Aestheticism in Victorian England, ed. Liz Prettejohn, Manchester University Press, 1999, and Jewish Quarterly (Autumn 1998).

12The Whitechapel Art Gallery unpublished MA Essay, London 1994.

18 already was, Anglo-Jewry felt it appropriate to record its own membership of the English community. The exhibition, which celebrated more than 200 years of the history of Jews in England, was intended to achieve this. Item 14 in the

catalogue,

"Aaron, son of the Devil, " an entry from the Forest Roll Essex 1277, of of was believed to be one of the earliest images of a Jew in Public Records. The inclusion

item in the 1887 Exhibition is perhaps surprising. It tells us much about the such an confidence that the organisers and backers of the Exhibition must have felt about the position of Jews in turn of the century Victorian society. It could be included as a curious memento of the past that in no way reflected the contemporary situation; something at which the organisers believed that Jew and non Jew could look as a historical relic without feeling it had any relevance to the contemporary situation.

The period covered by this study was one of calm and equipoise followed by a subsequent time of seismic change for Jewry in England. Following its readmission in 1656, the Jewish community (at first largely composed of Sephardim) gradually increased in size - partly as a result of natural growth and partly by a process of trickling immigration from Western Europe. This immigration brought in increasing numbers of Ashkenazi Jews, who gradually came to dominate what by the middle of the 19th century was a 30-40,000 strong community. At its head emerged a small financial had increasingly lead families, to them to was success and group of whose from influence Intermarriage the country as a whole. within positions of power and Grand Cousinhood in in 19th the the the the or so-called rise of century resulted early Dukes - the families, whose wealth and social standing allowed them to adopt leaders. Although this that members of community's natural some positions as dated in Cromwell's England hierarchy their to time, arrival others, notably emerging

19 for example the Rothschilds, were relative newcomers to England and English society.

The struggle for political emancipation for the Jews was one of the long running sagas of English parliamentary history of the period. It is an area of particular relevance to this study. An understanding of the basic facts and of the main is the therefore vital to an appreciation of their importance in strands of argument defining the position of Jews in England, just before the tidal wave of immigration called this apparent balance into question.

The July 30th 1847 issue of the Jewish Chronicle announced (under what for that publication at that time amounted to a banner headline). [quote missing]

City of London Election

THREE LIBERAL

CITY

LONDON

ELECTION

CANDIDTES RETURNED

RETURN

OF BARON

LIONEL

ROTHSCHILD

At length, principle has triumphed, and truth has worked its victory. The citizens of London, with an overwhelming voice, have declared the equal rights of all Britishborn subjects. No longer will conscience suffer for obeying its true dictates. No more final last The justice this the and country. of will exclusive sectarian privileges stain blow has been struck against the prejudices, against the narrow policy of the past...

Those, who are so eminently skilful in the management of their own interests, in the be of a nation affairs over watching a share with entrusted safely may is Rothschild Baron into legislature its the a and election of that adopts them 13 great triumph of enlightened principle.

13Punch, July 1847, p. 41.

20 However as O'Conell,

champion of the Irish and Catholic causes, was

presciently to warn Goldsmid "You ought not to confide in English liberality. It is a 14 plant not genial to British soil". On July 26th 1858, eleven years after he had first been elected, Baron Lionel de Rothschild was finally able to take his seat without having to swear an oath on "the faith of a true Christian".

In 19th century England, nationality was based on one's place of birth. Jews born in England were by definition English. Taking a seat in the House of Commons did not therefore require any form of positive naturalisation legislation, but rather the removal of what might have been regarded as relatively minor obstacles. The House of Commons had defined itself not just as a Christian body, but as an institution based on the Church of England. However, with the passage of enabling legislation for Protestant Dissenters in 1828 and for Roman Catholics in 1829, the stage could have been set for the Jews to follow. Legislation was first presented to the Commons in 1830. For lack of Government support it failed that year. Although the Bill was passed in the Commons thirteen times in succeeding years, it was, until the Lucan by 1858, thrown time the Lords. What started out as an almost solution of out each theoretical exercise in political emancipation became a fight about political realities in by Hamlets Tower 1847 Rothschild the the and electors of return of with Salomons by those of Greenwich in 1851. What commenced with the consideration look began to Jews the across a wide spectrum of political roles potential place of of With focussed for fight typically like a exclusion. very narrowly a more and more legislation, deliberate blend English obfuscation, cynical manipulation and partial of Jewish to facto/jure to de municipal and mayoral positions were ceded the rights

14Quoted in M. C. N. Salbstein, The Emancipation of the Jews in Britain, p. 123.

21 incumbents. The absurdity of Parliament's opposition to Jewish members

was most

clearly demonstrated when Salomons, still fighting for a place in the House, was elected Lord Mayor of London in 1855. The Lucan compromise, which finally permitted its resolution, consisted in allowing each Chamber to decide on its own 15 induction. Throughout this tortuous process there was continued oath process at and very real opposition in both Chambers. Even at the end of the battle, while accepting the Lucan compromise and passing the Bill into Law, Lord Derby (whose 16 have Jews been his typical of many of views on may class at this time) and their Lordships also sent back to the Commons their reasons for dissenting in respect of their own Chamber. The final legislation was theoretically time limited and it was before the position was fully tidied up and made a permanent feature of some years the political landscape. There was opposition in the Commons as well. Even when all the relevant acts had received assent and Rothschild was presented for an investiture that was a fait accompli, the matter went to debate and in final division of the 106 in debate 37 Hansard that the members present still voted against. all of the records dissenting members were eager to point out, as had they and their predecessors in by Rothschild debates, to they that as an were not motivated opposition earlier individual, or to the Jews as a race. Their opposition, as they all declared, was purely Christian Assembly Commons therefore the that the not a and was a grounds on than they for Most Jews. their now convincing sound no more arguments of place did then. probably

's The weight of historical opinion would seem to indicate that Lucan's formula had little or face do legislation breakthrough to do with a everything and to emancipatory with nothing had knot Parliament large into increasingly Gordian tied for which an cutting saving solution itself. 16In a debate of 10 July 1857, Derby argued that the Jews `are among us but not with us'. See Finestein, p. 167.

22 Some historians have presented the later stages of this struggle purely in terms of a power conflict between the powers of the Commons and the Lords almost abstracted from the Jewish dimension. However this ignores the very real opposition outlined above. It does however seem reasonable to propose that the arguments over emancipation in the 19th century never created the furore that accompanied the attempted passage and subsequent repeal of the 1753 Jew Bill. Felsenstein tentatively characterised that as "the last full blown embodiment of those attitudes to the Jews that we have earlier been able to trace to the late Middle Ages".

The religious question was a highly complex and emotive one, encompassing as it did many different, sometimes conflicting, sometimes complementary strands of for Christians Judaism argument. many at one and the same time the religion was that rejected the Messiah/killed Christ and the source from which Christianity derived. Maccoby argues that this inherent polarity is one of the wellsprings of anti"Demonising semitism.

ideological anti-semitism is confined to populations adhering

18 to religions derived from Judaism". Judaism was not a proselytising religion19 and therefore did not challenge the accepted order, but it was an exclusive religion that would not willingly

let outsiders in -a reverse "otherness" from which the apparent

host was excluded. Although Jewish numbers were small and in themselves not have levelled them Jews Judaism charges of against threatening, could and

17Felsenstein, Anti-Semitic Stereotypes, p. 187. 18Maccoby, Pariah People, p. 46. 19 ` proselytising was contrary to the terms of the Resettlement Agreement of 1656. They Ashkenazim the Sephardim) this to tried and certainly among the policy enforce sic had the support of the Rabbi of the Great Synagogue, Tevele Schiff, who refused to England, Georgian The Jews in Endelman, 1787'. Gordon George Lord of convert 109. Jerusalem, in Building in `Eden Albion', Sharman Kaddish, in p. quoted as

23 2° ultramontanism,

in some ways similar to those levelled at the which were

Catholics. The question of potentially divided loyalties and allegiances

on religious

and on other grounds was a critical strand in the opposition to Jews in this period. Perhaps these very conflicts exacerbated the sense of unease felt by the host community.

As noted earlier, numerically the Jews were insignificant even in London. Outside it they were all but invisible. However, the very success that had catapulted figures such as Montefiore of the earlier generation and Rothschild and Salomons to the forefront of English society made them figures not just of envy but also of fear. The Rothschilds, both in London and via their banking network throughout Europe, largest forerunners Victorian the that them the wielded supranational power made of hated feared. just To them today and admit and as of multi-national corporations of to the House might not just consolidate a base for the few, but also lead to a flood of Jews, who, it was suspected, might follow.

Similar enmity does not appear to have been felt about the Quakers. They too had in industry for leadership themselves established parallel positions of eminence and far than the banking in joint rarefied activities visible publicly more stock and in their Rothschilds finance international the more of many and which world of it Perhaps the perceived of combination was moved. successful co-religionists fear the been this have the of rejection and difference and real power may root of at House Cohen The Arthur be by its a proselytising religion' `Judaism is not and nature cannot 174. in Finestein, 1853 Jews Lords the p. quoted and of

Disraeli Jewry British that, in Modern Alderman and 20 Thus, for example, while argues for Jews influence the leaders of exerted considerable and successful Anglo-Jewry's had it 1870s, Crisis the in Balkan Danube the sombre the of Bulgaria, Roumania and

24 Jews. The affirmation formula used by the Quaker, Joseph Pease, the first of his religion to be admitted to the House in 1833, was not allowed to serve as a precedent in 1857 for the Jews. Strange Bedfellows 1857) commenting on this situation

Punch (27 June well-known cartoon -a

is in Rothschild, remarkable stereotyping -

depicting Pease, the Quaker, in a neutral light. Rothschild in this flashy clothes, the swarthy complexion and the hooked He is wearing three hats

while

cartoon has the

nose of the stereotypical Jew.

21 to the trade Although the an allusion of clothes peddler. -

satirical work often resorts to these stereotype conventions, their use and the acceptance of it by all sides are very revealing indicators of the climate of the day.

It is important to note that there was by no means unanimity within the Jewish

itself community either on the tactics for gaining emancipation or indeed on the desirability of the very goal itself. "How would they satisfy both themselves and the gentile majority in reconciling expectations of due conformity with the retention of dignified distinctiveness". 22 Hard line religious leaders such as Crooll fought for separatism. "The Jews as a separatenation must ever be wary of sinking roots among 23 in their hosts the lands of the Galuth". This, of course, played into the hands of the Christian anti-emancipationists. Secular leaders, for example, Goldsmid argued that their possession of land conferred rights and privileges, but that these privileges were being denied to the Jews. Although emancipation had vital long-term implications for Jews in England, it may be argued that at the time it was an issue of little interest

foregrounding Jewish Disraeli's the the of sentiment and emergence of anti with overtones ethnic origins.

21Although this trade was very closely linked with Jews in the early part of the 19thcentury, it was declining in importance as Jewish clothes peddlers became clothes manufacturers. But have be to time to accurate. stereotyping seems not 22M. C. N. Salbstein, The Emancipation of the Jews in Britain, p. 42. 23Ibid. p. 81.

25 to any but the upper echelons.24 Shmueli has proposed a mindset which he

refers to

as Emancipationist Culture, that is "a Jewish culture whose material and spiritual endeavours seek to accommodate secular needs

by the desire to end the animated ...

25 the exile and mentality associated with the exile". This seems to encapsulate very well many of Anglo-Jewry's motivations throughout this period.

A triangular illustration of the socio-economic class structure of the Jewish population of England early in the 19thcentury would have had a very wide base of lower classes. Jewish pauperism, although primarily

dealt with from within the

community, was a very real problem. However, as the century progressed, a prosperous Jewish middle class emerged quite rapidly. Any discussion of Jewry in England has to recognise its diversity and changing nature; it was a heterogeneous its internal dynamics and tensions. Although it is tempting to entity with own characterise the subsequent clash between the host Jewish community and the new immigrants if homogeneous waves of as each were groupings, that would be an oversimplification.

The community was largely centred in London within a few tightly defined insignificant it Relative to total the population, was a statistically geographic areas. it 1% London 1880s, Prior the than to the more of even never constituted minority. displacement by domination Thus, threat the or some numerically of population. large alien horde was hardly a credible reason for anti-Jewish feeling, except perhaps in very small pockets of the capital and at particular moments in time. 24 `The degree of interest in the campaign was proportionate to the extent of comfort and 114. Finestein, p. affluence'.

25Shmueli, SevenJewish Cultures, p. 168.

By the outbreak of the First World War, successive waves of immigration commencing about 1880 and peaking just after the turn of the century had resulted in a quadrupling of the Jewish community and the introduction of a new phenomenon 26 the East European Jew. Economic depression, anti-Jewish legislation and active anti-Semitism, brutally manifested by the pogroms, which received encouragement from the very highest levels, made the lives of Russian and East European Jews increasingly intolerable. It is estimated that more than 2 million of them left the Pale Settlement by first decade the of of the 20th century. The overwhelming majority of these migrants found their way to the U. S. Approximately 150-200,000 made their illiterate, homes in Often England. non-English speaking, sometimes usually new from far Judaism the that were removed very poor, professing versions of orthodox indigenous Jewish community, the anglicised practices of

this new element

threatened the balance that had been so painstakingly created over the generations, both within the Jewish community itself and of its relations with the host population. The tensions and schisms resulting from this immigration form an essential part of the fabric of this study.

in Jews in discussions is the The term assimilation position of of often used be its to is It used ability this period. a term that needs very careful consideration as Applied lack lead to clarity. and both in of precision a active and passive modes can it host true to from the from the seems community, its in standpoint of and positive 26All Jewish population figures for this time are little more than educated guesstimateson figures for 19th the for figure base the the nor century mid their neither as authors the part of

27 argue that there was never a project of assimilating the Jews. They were simply there to be rejected or accepted almost on an individual basis. From the standpoint of Anglo-Jewry it is equally true to say that as a body they too never sought to be assimilated. As a body they sought acceptance by acculturation, with the ability to maintain their own form of religious dissension. Individual cases are perhaps more revealing than any attempt at a homogenising theory of group behaviour. Thus at one end the poet David Sassoon seems to have been prepared to shed all of his Jewish past to gain acceptance. The Rothschilds seem to have regarded acceptance at the highest levels very of English Society as a right, while continuing to practice their own religion. Montague, who, as we shall discuss later, championed the cause of a much more traditional form of Judaism, represented a more "Jewish" wing of AngloJewry.

Anglo-Jewry's project, when faced with the influx of Eastern European Jews, was to anglicise them as thoroughly and as quickly as possible. Their motives for so doing were many and mixed. On the positive side the programme of positive immigrants be that to the seen genuine acculturation may as a attempt ensure new for by host to the society as quickly and easily as possible were adapted and adopted their own benefit. It is also clear that this project of Anglicisation, combined with itself, London dispersal London to the to ghettos out of or out of ensure moves in (to US the to transmigration countries or even repatriation encourage onward first being in discouraging the place was also emigration which an active policy of had less Anglo-Jewry), by altruistic motives. waged

based data. However, the orders of magnitude immigration on reliable statistical Jewish are

28 The leadership of Anglo-Jewry and the more affluent Jewish middle class were anxious not be seen in English eyes as part of this alien horde. They did not want to risk upsetting the carefully created balance that had been achieved over so long and that had so recently been crowned by Rothschild's

into the House of entry

Commons on his own terms. Anglicisation may be viewed least the as aggressive form of a disappearing trick that the host Jewish community

sought to play on/with

the new arrivals. Just as the emerging definition of Englishness depended on the exclusion or colonisation

"others", definition the of so

of Anglo-Jewishness

depended on the exclusion or colonisation of its own "others", the new immigrants. Anglo-Jewry neither sought to assimilate or be assimilated by the immigrant Jews. The tactics referred to above would however have had the effect of rendering them more assimilable by others. There would seem to be no evidence to suggest that this type of assimilation programme was a positive, conscious Anglo-Jewish strategy. However, it may have been a possible consequence of the various individual tactics employed; a consequence of which at least some of the leaders were aware.

Lower down the social scale, even the poorer Jewish population had little further to the reason welcome overcrowding and economic competition that the new immigrants caused. The only exceptions were those, more ruthlessly enterprising, immigrants disparagingly in "the Greeners", these raw, unaware were who saw as known, a source of ready income to be exploited by anything, from the fast had deprived little to their they that them tricks almost of on arrival what confidence in in labour be "sweated" to makeshift appalling conditions use a source of cheap workshops.

are generally accepted as correct.

Looking back to the present I think that it is the best club in London. C. Dickens, Our Mutual Friend

Just as there was an 11 year gap between Rothschild's election and his into the House of Commons, so there was coincidentally an even eventual entry longer gap between that event and its commemoration in painting.

His investiture was depicted in a painting by Henry Barraud dated 1872.27 This work has been misdated in exhibition catalogues as having been painted in 1874. However, research with the Rothschild Archive confirms it as having been it dating is because This two significant, provides a plausible painted years earlier. explanation

for the timing

of the commission.

Following

his own instructions,

Lionel's personal papers were destroyed after his death, and there appears to be no its However, information the the this place within painting. of on genesis specific Rothschild collections and the subject matter suggest that it may have been presented (as being M. P. 16 his family by him to would to an years of celebrate not members of th his 25 have been the case with the 1874 dating) but rather the anniversary of in later General (Ironically in the 1847. House two the years original election to Election he was to lose his seat for the last time).

Chair Rothschild, Speaker's in is the as In this picture the viewer placed is by Abel-Smith, his left Mr by Sir Russell John to his presented flanked to and right

30 to the House at 4.20pm. On the left, bathed in the afternoon sunlight, sit his fellow Liberals. To the right, in the gloom, sit the Tories

for Rothschild's personal - save

by and friend now supporter Disraeli, who is picked out in light from another source.

The symbolism of those who saw the light and those who were in darkness is more than a little heavy handed. Close inspection reveals that at this historic moment, few, if any, of the members are actually looking at Rothschild or the Speaker. In attempting to recreate a recent historical event it would seem that Barraud painted the bodies and imposed on them heads/faces guided by other contemporary sources some have been heads do not fit or In the of which may even semi-caricatures. some cases are placed at extremely awkward angles. This might explain why so few are actually looking in appropriate directions. 28 Rothschild himself, placed in the centre of the is looks He middle ground, more sympathetically and accurately portrayed. actually like a younger version of the man portrayed in 1879 shortly before his death in a by "W. F. H" picture

Despite the central positioning of Rothschild, it is not unreasonable to suggest that in its Palace institution Parliament is the the the subject of setting and of as much Westminster as the investiture of its new member. That would certainly accord with Rothschild's

publicly

He his during the candidature. period of stated views

(and House deferral the to the of will of modest stance a public adopted consistently it. be his for hard long to fighting Law), a part of right and while of the

27Barraud was a London based painter best known then for his sporting, portrait and genre horses brother his for if of is pictures on He with working at all, remembered, now pictures. Rothschild. M. N. is in The the of collection painting animals. other and 28Barraud used a similar `technique' in a contemporaneouspicture 90 members of the MCC (Museum London). Lords Pavilion front of at in of the

31 The

importance

this

painting,

for

this

study,

lies

not

its

technical/painterly merits or demerits but as an historical document. It looked back from the `present' comfort of the Rothschilds in the early 1870's to the `past' struggle and to the triumph that placed one of their number (and after him an increasing number of other distinguished Jews) at the very heart of power in England and gained for them acceptance in that most august of Gentlemen's Clubs - the House of Commons. For Rothschild it was intended to be the final seal of his acceptance as an Englishman.

Rothschild was not merely a figurehead for upper class Jewish interests in the for full struggle emancipation but a very active participant in his own elections. However, once elected there is only one reference to him in Hansard as a participant in debate - in 16 almost uninterrupted years as an M. P. Perhaps his tactic was to extend the power he already wielded from his offices in New Court to the private lobbies, Committee Westminster the rather than the venues of rooms and corridors of itself. House This the contrasts sharply with the parliamentary career public arena of Salomons Salomons. his Sir David was even more politically of near contemporary he At his House. in the was elected one stage, after membership of promoting active in 1851, he even refused the Oath but insisted on voting and was in consequence fined £500. Once finally admitted in 1859, he was a frequent speaker both on financial matters and in relation to Jewish affairs - subjects on which the House leader Rothschild's the have of acknowledged as generally views welcomed might

both.

32 What was important to Rothschild was his right as an upper class Englishman to participate in the affairs of the House rather than the public exercise of that right. Lionel's mother "inculcated her sons with a sense of national identity and pride... " "A seat in parliament was part of the birthright of the wealthy English gentleman and they (Lionel and Mayer) were determined Jewish gentlemen should share it. "29 Their desire for English gentlemen status found expression in an earlier painting by Sir Francis Grant, a leading society painter of the period, who in 1855 depicted the four brothers hunting in their estatesin the Vale of Aylesbury. 30This was a far cry, in two from in home Grandfather Judengasse Mayer Frankfurt, the the their generations, of Amschel, founder of the dynasty. This picture was almost certainly commissioned in it, for family for English to the their that confirm all saw status within an order and leaders knew Jewish hierarchy. family The they the of were accepted gentleman's into by English financial fought for What this they and was acceptance worlds. and his Siegfried Sassoon, family, leading Jewish The called scion of another world. biographical recollections Memories of a Fox Hunting Man. This pastime, as much life English the to the the typified which upper echelons gentleman of as any other, Anglo-Jewry aspired. of

But this very position of an English Gentleman was a Victorian construct, 31 by itself Englishness in a settled means no the was evolution. of process which was in this period. concept

Bauman has argued that in the process of assimilation the

final chalice is always dashed from the lips of the would-be assimilee as the rules of

29Wilson, p. 142.

30`The term Goyim Naches (sic, Gentile Pleasures) refers to violent physical activity such as Unheroic despise': Boyarin, Jews traditionally hunting, duelling or wars - all of which Conduct, p. 42.

33 engagement/ assimilation are altered. The very process of seeking admission to the inside confirms the status and locus of the outsider. In this

context Rothschild was

seeking to define himself in such a way as to merge into a construct of Englishness that was itself in flux. Englishness needed concepts of "otherness" (amongst them Jewishness) as part of its mechanism of self-definition.

In contrast to this Rothschildian view of events, there were four cartoons in Punch in this period that graphically illustrate not only some of the concerns of the anti-emancipation lobby, but perhaps also how the Jews were viewed by other segments of the population.

The House of Commons according

to Mr Disraeli 's

by John in Leech Punch, April is 10 1847, interesting views particularly as a starting figures both The point. on sides of the House, with the notable exception of Disraeli himself, are almost all "Jewish"32

Lord is Russell figure even a corpulent with a -

hooked nose. An almost textbook range of Jewish signifiers is deployed

Jewish the -

beard, Jewish the swarthy complexion, the pendulous lip, the jewellery. the nose, There are even two figures wearing yarmulkes and with the long side curls of the figures hats Three Jew the the of are wearing multiple very religious. as peddler. Punch July 24 1858 depicted a very shabbily dressed Jew, probably intended to be Rothschild, with a huge hooked nose, kicking his three peddler's hats in the air in is later, Rothschild final A his a more respectably attired admission. week glee at lampooned assessing the value of the Mace. If Punch satirised him on the one hand, the accompanying text spoke approvingly of his admission and disapprovingly of

31`The last quarter of the nineteenth century and the first decade of the twentieth was a " Canadine in Hobsbawm Ranger The Invention `invented traditions. and eds, golden age of 8. 13 Tradition, p. of

32A close parallel to this can be found in The Times (03/09/1852) report on the opening of did `It homogeneous Synagogue. the Great not need much scrutiny of varied yet the

34 those who opposed it. Punch, February 19 1859, illustrated the fears of a Jewish stampede, with perhaps its most graphically stereotyped depiction of Rothschild forcing his way into the Chamber

by his Salbstein that Punch nose. argues overall -

was even handed in its treatment of the Jews and their opponents, and if one takes into account the textual as well as illustrated material, this may be a defensible Cartoons position. and especially political cartoons require that visual shorthand that will enable the point of the illustration to be grasped instantly by the reader - hence the use of stereotyping and exaggeration of readily recognisable features in cartoons in However, the context of this study it is important to recognise that of all periods. in all of these cartoons the imagery of the Jew is negative

back to the we are same -

imagery 600 Aaron, visual as used almost years earlier with son of the Devil.

The cartoons illustrate very clearly that even when the apparent final goal of into by Rothschild House the the transformed was not was achieved, acceptance in into Englishman; Punch the the cartoonist and those of some of process an eyes of his fellow MPs, he remained a hooked nosed Jew.

Looking forward to the Past The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there. L. P.Hartley, The Go-Between

The event depicted in the Barraud painting of Rothschild may be said to A Gertler's Mark English Anglo-Jewry's society. rise within represent the apogee of Jewish Family, painted in 1913, confronts the viewer with everything, which

distinct Look in that to the race... a convince you you were among place physiognomy 15. faces least ' Finestein, European English. the p. not at were or not would you where

35 Rothschild and the leadership of Anglo- Jewry had been striving to

eliminate in the

33 1881 post period.

Mark Gertler was born in the East End in 1891 of immigrant

(from parents

Przemysl in Galicia in the Polish part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire). Within months of his birth they returned there - assisted in their passage by the London Board of Jewish Guardians; a working

example of the repatriation policies

mentioned earlier. However, they came back to England in 1897. Around 1910 Gertler was at the Slade, to which he had gone with a loan from the Jewish Educational Aid Committee and the endorsement and personal backing of William Rothenstein.

In response to the active encouragement of his Professors34to paint Jewish 35 Gertler began to paint among other topics pictures of his family. Two of subjects, these, The Artist's Family painted in 1910/11 and Family Group of 1913, are helpful in understanding The Jewish Family. The first might be regarded as a point of departure and the second as a progress marker against which to measure the far more in final image 1913 this the the chapter. of studied style and content nature radical of

At this time, Gertler wrote in a letter to Carrington: Just one of the things that makes me so happy, that is my nice friends nicer Ends I East They than the the rough are so much upper class. amongst 36 am used to.

33Tate Gallery, London. 34JEAC Archives. Mark Gertler. 20 June 1910. 35'The subject is one that I am devoting myself to with some assiduity', Jewish Chronicle 9 February 1912. 36Carrington p. 62.

36 Reading the early life sections of Woodeson's biography

of Gertler and the artist's

own correspondence, one encounters a young artist struggling to reconcile many probably

irreconcilable

conflicts

of class, wealth and religion.

One of the

propositions Gertler seemed perhaps have wanted others to believe was that he was the "poor struggling artist from the crowded tenements of the East End". While this may have been true of the early days, it seems less likely to have been an accurate description of the world in which he subsequently grew up. The struggles with and his background Jewish against own were clearly genuine ones, which informed

much

his As of work. we shall see the ties of religion were in his case further complicated by his very close relationship with his Mother. The illusion he sought to create

of the

penurious East Ender is one that needs to be qualified, if one is to take account of his background in assessinghis work.

The Artist's Family is of a family group at home about to play an affectionate joke on their sleeping Mother. The subjects are located at 14 Spital Square in the East End, which served both as a family home and as a base for his father Louis' fur business. In the fourteen years between their return and the painting of this picture the Gertlers had progressed from sharing one room at the home of a friend on their in four homes the East End to reach the respectability through arrival, a succession of have his former homes in Spital Square. A Mark to could walked of nostalgic all of fifteen minutes, as they were located within less than half a mile of one another. Economically and socially, they had progressed far since their return in 1896, but End. This Jewish East their the tiny the world was still area was of geographically families in far from being Jewish However, this era. some not untypical of many home, Spital Square "... End East retained an air of seclusion and rough

37 respectability in the 18th and 19th centuries being gated and set with bollards to prevent through traffic...

Spital Square featured the finest of all the early Georgian

houses of Spitalfields". 37

The apparently comfortable, middle class environment that would seem to have been the reality of Spital Square in 1909 hardly accords with the "artist starving in his garret" image that Gertler may have tried to cultivate. Although I have been locate to unable any photos of No 14, the neighbouring houses are all large and of interiors considerable standing; some with which are a tribute to the taste and wealth of their owners at that time. They had originally been the homes of the grand silk four immigration. had No 14 Huguenot the the success stories of earlier merchants basement. frontage Its a was approximately storeys and

25 ft with

four large

if, is floors. Even the as possible, there were other main upper windows on each of families living at No 14, all the available evidence points to its being among the best housing available in the neighbourhood.

The room in which the family is seated is larger than one might first judge from the clutter of furniture and people. Its breadth can be gauged by the line of the the to longue, the table, most of the occupy which would seem armchair and chaise be door, the the horizontal space. From the width of the wallboards and room might fraction the Since ft 18 on one window of we can only see a wide. estimated at about in the two know artist/viewer there room, hand each probably were we side and right foreshortened. been has The the located the be perspective room. of middle near must heighten device the to sense of that this to used was a It is reasonable surmise features is this the that composition. of of one intimacy and close physical contact 12. Catalogue Exhibition Anniversary 2 1St Trust 37The Spitalfields p.

LIBRARY UNIVERSITY EEL ..

38 But it is also Possible that there was an element of deliberate `impoverishing'. The non-descript floor coverings, the simply painted wall, the clothes left hanging over the chair and the banister in the landing outside and the at first sight apparently cramped environment may have been used to disguise a more comfortable reality. Perhaps Gertler was as much ill at ease at coming from a prospering middle class environment as with being Jewish. This discomfort may be referred to another statement by Mark Gertler, made to Carrington at this time: The worst kind of person is the rich English Jew !!! Ugh those patronizing horrors. 38

The picture shows Mark's elder brothers, Jack and Harry and the younger of his two sisters, Sophie, playing with their Mother. One of the most noticeable features of the image is the warmth and affection of the family for one another, which it so clearly brothers intentional, The have shows. and sister all physical contact with one another. There is a clear linkage of the figures in a cohesive family group. A very strong horizontal line is created just above the middle of the picture from Harry's hand on Jack's left shoulder at the right of the picture across the latter to Sophie's extended A Golda. is Mother, tickle their to taper, the slightly with which she about arm and left knee (on longue, Jack's is by line formed the the which of chaise weaker parallel Sophie's hand is resting), Sophie's knees, the open book and Golda's clasped arms. The light wall in the background and the lighter flooring in the foreground, the strong its door frame to by the formed the the to the picture and right of window verticals left (almost leading on to the table edge) serve to cocoon the family group in the centre of the canvas.

31Carrington p. 54.

While they are dressed respectably and in the case of Sophie, perhaps stylishly, the sleeping Mother is dressed in a heavy black dress - typical of if not indeed the same dress as Gertler painted her wearing many times in this period. Her forearms hands exposed and are thick and pudgy and there is little sign of jewellery or adornment. This is not a lady born to the middle class but rather a working woman, who has arrived here after years of struggle. She is both physically and "historically"

separated from the next generation of her family. The contrast is so

acute that one of Gertler's fellow students described the picture as "the interior of Gertler's comfortable, bourgeois kitchen with his family cook sitting dozing by the table on which a glass of diluted tea meant to represent wine and

Gertler's brothers ...

39 intemperance". her does but lemon The the tea, mocking glass squeezed on contain the table reveals that there was no pretence about this being alcohol; this is the way a Jewish lady of this time and age might have taken her tea.

In terms of an Anglo-Jewish project to anglicise immigrants, this picture depicts something of a success story. The Gertlers were by 1910 of or very close to being in the middle class. They had moved up the ladder towards a degree of in degree their living They own style comfort and of with a were acculturation. home. They could also afford to have one son studying at art school and not from far income. This family's the 20, to the a cry the was age of contributing, at in Galicia. behind left have to innkeeper they are supposed world of the unsuccessful 39Woodeson p. 78.

40 The fact that they had not moved out of the East End may, one suspects, could have been as much a matter of personal choice as of economic ability. 40

In the three years that separate this image from Family Group and The Jewish Family, Gertler was subject to a variety of social, personal and cultural influences, interplayed impact to which with one another on his artistic practice.

Almost as soon as he came into contact with the non Jewish world and from then on throughout his life, Gertler struggled with what he saw as a polarity between his own Jewishness and this new Gentile environment. His efforts to make himself part of the latter were always hampered by his own very strong roots in the former - and in his Carrington by his Letters Mother. testify to this to to particular attachment tension: powerful I shall be neither Jew nor Christian". 41 By my ambition I am cut of from my own family and class and by them I have been raised to be equal to a class I hate! They do not understandme nor I them. So I am an outcast".42

The possibility and extent of his Jewish self-hatred is a topic to which I shall be returning.

The waves of immigration, of which the Gertlers were a part, peaked around (passed tide Act 1905 Aliens to belated curtail a the the of the turn of century and However, the their repetition. that was already ebbing) prevented a possibility of far the War the more the of passing towards and of outbreak period running up 40Their initial choice of Spital Square and continued residence there may possibly also have Spital 10/11 Square German 1884 from the by at the presence onwards of been influenced Square. 41Carrington p. 35.

41 draconian Aliens Restriction and Defence of the Realm Acts

of 1914, was one of

social tension - especially in the East End, where the Gertlers and the majority of the immigrant Jewish population still lived. Currents of least at anti-alienism and at worst anti-Semitism became stronger. No one as sensitively attuned to these feelings as Gertler, to whom they must have seemed very disorienting. In trying to cut himself loose from the ties of his traditional Jewish upbringing, he found himself attempting to move into a world that seemed less and less inclined to accept him.

On a personal level, these feelings of divided loyalties and not belonging were further fuelled by his infatuation with Dora Carrington, whom he met at the Slade. Carrington might be viewed as the embodiment of his struggle with and against his background. She represented for him the antithesis of his upbringing and the ideal of his future ambitions. The fact that this infatuation was never to be slaked by a fully realised relationship could only have increased Gertler's senseof not belonging.

On a more positive note, his artistic career was flourishing. In 1911 he exhibited at the Friday Club and at the New English Art Club (NEAC) and won a British Institute Scholarship. He left the Slade in the following year, set up a studio in his brother Harry's home at 32 Elder Street (again only within the half mile circle) lionised his fellow by Gertler, NEAC. of many students and was elected a member of figure Slade, his by highly the teachers was emerging as a of at many of regarded and in his London in the awareness of and growing contemporary art world of some note own abilities.

42ibid p. 49.

42 In terms of artistic influences, this immediate pre-War period was also the time in which he made the first of many trips to Paris and saw at source some of the revolutionary

being that new work was created there. In July 1912, he was

introduced for the first time to Egyptian Art at the British Museum by his fellow Jewish artist Jacob Epstein - thus perhaps widening his perspective to achievements and practices of much earlier cultures. But possibly one of the most important influences on his art at this time his the work of many of young - and on Fry's contemporaries - were exhibitions of of Post-Impressionism at the Grafton Galleries in 1910 and 1912. These exhibitions were hated by many of the critics, much of the public and most of the artistic Establishment, whose tastes were not attuned to the challenges of these avant-garde art forms. As Nash, then one of Gertler's fellow students at the Slade, observed "How much better pleased he (Tonks) would be if we did not risk contamination and today's

standards, the size and scope of Fry's

43 by Even stayed away".

1910 Manet and the Post

Impressionists exhibition would be classified as a blockbuster. The catalogue records 186 paintings (apparently many more were actually exhibited), which read like a roll call of the period.

44 To young artists like Gertler, just starting out on their artistic

Picasso Gogh, Manet Gauguin, Van by Cezanne, impact the and of works careers, from figures Tonks' less host to must, stellar, of other, only slightly mention a not in his fears justified their fully terms have perspective of widening viewpoint, beyond the narrower framework of Slade teaching orthodoxy. Although the 1912 Second Post Impressionist Exhibition may not have had quite the first time shock by Matisse (including 21 its 147 French its and paintings works predecessor, value of 43Reynolds, The Slade. 44Robins, Modern Art in Britain 1910-14, pp. 181-186.

43 12 by Picasso) and 33 Russian works

51 by together British with some pictures -

45 failed have have latter ff. left 0 to contemporaries - cannot continued where the

Some of these Russian paintings may have had particular importance for this For English Jewish artists of Eastern European origin, these paintings may study. have had resonance that could be appropriated into their own work as a quasi-private form of primitivism not so readily accessible to their English contemporaries.

The Gertler who painted The Artist's Family in 1910 was a different person from the man who had undertaken Family Group and The Jewish Family some three his Ann. In depicts his Group Harry, to later. Family contrast and wife, child years the setting of The Artist's Family, Gertler has made no attempt to locate his subjects in a convivial environment. They are isolated in a room that has none of the comforts background floorboards just furniture, home, and an undecorated scuffed no of a 46 The man and woman are two separated figures with no actual or even wall. diffidently inviting be The to an very man seems potential physical contact. is that The to look left figure the to similar to the gesture child. woman and at unseen but in his Grandchild in Rabbi the The Gertler same year, of and employed which Neither these involve them. does it of physical contact with this case quite clearly not Artist's Family. The to light that have touch the adds such charm playful paintings

break barely is a The woman almost reduced to a single vertical column with hip her by left her jutting the tilt little right her of by or side a on out elbow caused 45`The best known of these were Natalia Goncharova... and Mikhail Larionov. Both of these by their characteristically which work examples of neo-primitivist artists were represented

44 supporting the weight of the child. This is all the more remarkable when one notes 47 Ann her that Overpainting to the time right would seem to indicate was at pregnant. that originally Gertler had thought in terms of a different position for the arm, but had then changed it to hug her side closely and so create this column like effect. The verticality of these two figures and their very real separation is emphasised and by the vertical brushwork in the rear wall. Even the child held close is echoed struggling to break away. While this is not an unnatural action for an infant, Gertler could have depicted the child at rest on the shoulder rather than struggling to independence. establish personal

The only visual link between the figures seems to be the red apple Harry is holding, which echoes the dress and cap of the woman. There is no eye contact between the subjects or with the viewer. Harry is looking down and away, Ann's look eyes are almost closed and also away and the child's eyes are reduced to mere have because it I this slits. emphasised sense of separateness, contrasts so strongly demonstrate it because feelings I 1910 the the appearsto of picture and as shall with Family. The the to the point way even more radical ruptures of Jewish

Stylistically, Family Group would seem to have been influenced by some of the Post Impressionist and other modernist paintings that Gertler could by then have figures flat in intimations Manet There the the placing of of are seen and absorbed. background. There inherently neutral are perhaps similarities with some of against an the figures in Picassso's Blue and Rose period painting. There are possible echoes of

drew upon examples of Russian folk craft, children's art, lubok, hand-coloured popular Russian 1910-14, ' Robins, Art Britain 105. Modern in cartoons. p. cartoons and especially 461 would suggest that this may have been executed in his new studio in Harry's home.

45 La Vie in the position of the woman and child and the awkward hand gesture of the There in the the composition. man and are also similarities very strong verticals of Harlequin in Saltimbanques 1900s Picasso's the and with some of paintings of early the overall composition. But what is as important are not compositional or stylistic formulae, but a similar feeling in the Gertler of the subjects not belonging to "normal" society, of being in some way apart from it and defying the norms of bourgeois respectability. Whereas The Artist's Family were obviously a unit rooted in their home and part of the society in which they lived and worked, the Family Group, like Picasso's figures, are outsiders, lone figures.

The flat expanses of bright colour (possibly an influence from Gauguin, Exhibition in 1910 Post-Impressionist Fry's Gertler and probably saw whose works dress), head for the inspiration Breton have been the the use of of style who may also Ann, face the Harry's that limited to crude, almost of and confined modelling only "primitive"

despair have those hands who among caused must and arms styling of

had taught Gertler and rated his drawing talents equal to those of Augustus John. However, when, as I shall show later, one relates this to other contemporaneous in his innovations Gertler, by technical are these practice artistic paintings executed he Gertler travelling forward as Modernist was the which along road evidence of looked back at the past.

image. is in the same year an even more complex The Jewish Family painted is Who to is family in this whom? related at all? a Firstly, one must ask: what sense Is husband the far the the and wife? right older woman on Are the old man and 47Conversation with Luke Gertler May 1999.

younger woman their daughter and the child their grandchild, and if so, where is her husband/the child's father? This picture is capable of many different readings, some of which are mutually reinforcing while others may conflict. I have attempted to examine a number of different interpretations in order to expose the multiple layers of meaning which I believe it contains.

There is a possible line of interpretation based on Gertler's family. The older be Golda, his mother; the peasant figure and particularly the red woman could headscarf are the Golda motifs to which I referred earlier. However, the resemblance to Golda is not strong and this would be very unusual as his Golda oeuvre is instantly otherwise almost recognisable. The male figure could be his father, who was a very religious man and had a beard. However, the only visual evidence I have been able to find of him does not support the long beard ending in two points and this figure is of a much older man. Gertler's father is largely conspicuous by his absence in his work. But then, since he was totally absent for much of Mark's infancy and is this young childhood, perhaps not altogether surprising. Following the Gertler family theme, one might surmise that the younger woman could be one of his sisters or perhaps Celia, Harry's wife. This last explanation could make the child hers - but this would create an age break between this figure and that of the infant in the Family Group referred to above and painted in the same year. The absence of a ring on her finger, while not conclusive proof that she was not married, does not provide us with the contrary positive evidence that its presence would have. Is the child perhaps Mark himself, the six year old, on his return to England? There are references in Woodeson to an orange leather coat that Mark was given as a child about the time of from departure been Przemsyl. important have It to family's seems a very second the

47 gift and he may have been recalling this in the orange/yellow `robe' the child is wearing. Although I believe there are allusions to his family and his past, I believe it is too simplistic and overstraining the bounds of interpretation to see them all just as members of Gertler's family, even allowing for some playing with time within the composition.

Before examining each figure closely, I want to pose some questions of between this and the earlier Artist's Family. In my discussion of the latter I contrast in detail to the location of the work, to the very strong senseof family referred some unity it portrayed and to a feeling of belonging. Where are the figures in The Jewish Family located? They are not in any defined location; they are not even, like the Family Group, in a room of some kind. Are they new arrivals waiting by some quayside to be met by a family member or friend? Are they standing in a street having been thrown out of their home? Gertler has created a feeling of rootlessnessboth in the sense of having been uprooted and also not having put down roots. They both dispossessed belong feelings The They to are nowhere. and unpossessing. seem in image displacement hark back this to earlier expressions of of and marginalisation Baudelairean modernity such as Manet's Le Vieux Musicien. But even that paradigm in locale; its in displacement that case one subjects a potentially recognisable of sites Parisian destruction Hausmann's by the the rebuilding of of open spaces caused Anglois, that This the very antithesis of all of course, rootlessness programme. Jewry was seeking to achieve with its policies of integration, acculturation and Anglicisation. Jews were supposed to be part of English society, not outside it.

48 In my discussion of The Artist's Family, I alluded to the almost continuous and very strong, physical contact between each of the subjects. In The Jewish Family, there is no physical contact at all, not even any eye contact. Each of the figures is separate and alone. The younger woman and the child look

out to the

but the former seems wrapped up in her own thoughts. There is no sense viewer

between the figures, of family bonding, there is just isolation. The cohesion or unity older woman on the right of the picture is facing away from the other figures. The set her of shoulder and the angle of her hip suggest disinterest in and even outright rejection of them. There is a hint that her unseen hands - out of frame - maybe busy with some other task that is of greater concern to her. Her red headscarf - one of only two patches of strong bright colour in the picture - is an interesting signifier on many levels. Orthodox Jewish married women were obliged to wear a wig or in its place a head scarf. Thus in his own Jewish terms by employing this device Gertler is perhaps signalling the religion of the woman. At the same time by emphasising this he is denying Jewish Anglicisation. tradition to adherence a also acculturation and The headscarf and the coarse clothing she is wearing mark out the older woman as I poor and working class, possibly a peasant. mentioned earlier the use of the red headscarf as a possible Golda motif, even though the figure herself bears little other headscarf in for Golda. The the the to many of the colour red choice of resemblance "Golda as peasant series" may simply have reflected her own real life choice. But it is possible that is has additional significance. In an article entitled `Judas's Red Hair discusses Mellinkoff the tradition the Jews', of use of the of an artistic possibility and 48 been have Gertler Jews. While I depict that hair must to am not suggesting red in he had impossible lineage, it is that this some way of not aware consciously 48R. Mellinkoff,

`Judas' red hair and the Jews', Journal of Jewish Art vol. 9,1982. Boyarin

49 absorbed it. Mane-Katz, a contemporary of Gertler in terms of age, who first arrived in Paris from the Ukraine in 1913 (and subsequently

settled there after the War) used

red hair as a signifier of Jews in many of his pictures. It was also used by Chagall. Gertler may have been using a similar colour code

or have been subconsciously

by affected similar images and usages.

Steyn suggests that the two women `are joined together' and questions whether they represent the good and the bad, the ugly and the beautiful. 49 I have indicated that I feel the older woman is actively turned away from the others already individual isolation and separatenessis one of the key themes of this that their and 50 work. The younger woman looks out to the viewer, but at the same time seemslost in a reverie of her own. She is painted in a primitive fashion. The forearms and hands are deliberately heavy and almost clumsy. The face has mask like qualities. The eyes are reduced almost to black holes with deep shadows around them. The modelling around the nose is severe and the shadow cast across the side of her face emphasises this mask like appearance - as does the high forehead and the tight bunching of the hair. Gertler may, as a result of his trip to Paris and his awarenessof current trends, have known of the incorporation of so-called primitive art into modern works.

does in Anti-Semitic Stereotypes. in Conduct, Felsenstein Unheroic to this as also alludes 49Mark Gentler: Paintings and Drawings, Camden Arts Centre, 1992, p. 17.

50 There is

Steyn's Perhaps in towards position. come some way which one could a sense Gertler was playing with time in this picture. The older woman might be Golda as she was in 1913 and the younger one, Golda as Gertler imagined she might have been, when she first but interpretation, is 1891 27. It in England in the possible strand of again a at age of arrived I feel that to overemphasise this kind of linkage is to stretch the interpretation beyond its limits. natural

50 Steyn relates the old man in this work to the Rabbi in a contemporaneous work by Gertler

51 his Grandchild. The Rabbi and However, taken on his own, the

Rabbi in that picture has a certain melancholy dignity (and there are sexual undertones to that image to which I shall return later). The figure in Jewish Family is much sadder and older. He is far more akin to the paradigm of the gentle wise old man/rabbi, which Boyarin seeks to establish. Once again Gertler resorts to a deliberately heavy, crude `primitive' style.

In `Judas's Red Hair and the Jews', Mellinkoff also refers an artistic tradition 52 links between the Judas of yellow robe, money purse, and the Jews. This would provide another, alternative reading to the interpretation I offered earlier that the painting records Max's orange coat from Przemysl. Here again, I am not positing actual knowledge or awareness on the part of Gertler, but simply the possibility of some perhaps subconscious awareness that may have prompted the use of this particular colour code.

The use of a primitive style in this work is, I believe, a stylistic choice intended to emphasise the `otherness' of the figures it depicts. It is most important to is `otherness' being depicted Jewish the this the that within project work recognise is called a Jewish Family. But Gertler does not resort to stereotypes to make this "Jewishness" (the beard, fits into figure Only the the the norms of of old man point. in deployed long However, these the a stereotypical are not even robe). yarmulke, fashion. In 1910, Gertler was seeking to present cohesion and a senseof belonging in

s' Mark Gertler: Paintings and Drawings, Camden Arts Centre, 1992, p. 16. Southampton Art Gallery. 52Once again echoed by Felsenstein in his discussion of Shylock in Anti-Semitic Stereotypes.

51 a particular time/space continuum. In 1913 alienation and marginalisation were his chosen themes. By then, his own internal struggles were emerging and are reflected in this work. In it, the subjects are set apart from the host society. They are also isolated one from another. This is not about present reality but

about psychological

alterity. Rothschild may have achieved the outward manifestations of acceptance 60 almost years earlier, and in his wake even the immigrant generation (which included the Gertlers) was making its way in this society. But Gertler is asking his viewer to look at the internal struggle that he felt still existed and to the sense of displacement that nourished it. It is in his harking back to his own roots, and using primitive motifs as part of this encounter with the problems of modernity, that Gertler was looking forward to the past.

In his review of the Twentieth Century Art Exhibition at the Whitechapel in 1914, the critic of the Jewish Chronicle said of The Jewish Family: "there is real insight feeling, Mr Gertler has here succeeded in conveying an psychological and inexpressible sense of homeliness (sic !) and there is a fine spiritualism in the picture that will make it stand out as one of the best in the collection. " Correcting what I homelessness for by homeliness substituting assume was a proof reader's error high indeed in It the this praise would make comment an accurate appraisal. was also decidedly The tone this anti-modernist to the point of overall was review. context of being scathing in its condemnation of works by, amongst others, Bomberg, Nadelman and Modigliani. The reviewer was clearly far more at home with a more traditional, academic approach. We should have been better pleased had there been a more satisfactory for Snowman Messrs Rothenstein, Amschewitz, surely and a representation, dozen last half have been idle these not altogether years or good many others so.

52 Gertler may have been willing to tackle themes of exclusion and `otherness', but Anglo Jewish opinion, as expressed by its sometime house organ, the Jewish Chronicle, was not comfortable to be reminded of differences. The paper was heritage Cesarani that, the working within as parameters of a creation of argues, was 53 look for based. Jewish furthermore It to that success wanted success stories, stories in forms be be literary they that visual, or real were couched could readily by beliefs. Gertler their their accepted confirming was readers as understood and integral from failure as and rejection another agenda; one which confronted working his heritage. parts of

53Kushner (ed) The Jewish Heritage in British History Dual Heritage or a Duel of Heritages.

CHAPTER 2 Defining an Anglo-Jewish Discourse: The Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition of 1887 Introduction The Soiree at the Albert Hall on Saturday night, given by Mr F. D. Mocatta, Chairman of the Committee, was a brilliant opening to a rare and exceptional Exhibition ... The occasion is unique. You may have exhibitions often, but a Jewish exhibition is not an everyday affair... It would be impossible to give a complete list of all Mr Mocatta's guests. It will suffice to say that practically the whole of the official portion of the Jewish community attended the soiree ... There were also a number of distinguished Christian visitors The gathering was in every ... respect as representative as is the list of the Committee of the Exhibition. '

The Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition of 1887, which ran from April 2 to July 2, was, if measured by the number and range of its exhibits, a major cultural offering. Its catalogue contained 2954 entries; given, however, the use of single headings for multiple items, the actual number of exhibits was even greater. It was Albert Hall with satellite displays at the Public Record Office, the the presented at British Museum and the South Kensington Museum. ' A programme of lectures, ' Exhibition. the musical and cultural events accompanied

'Jewish Chronicle, 8 April 1887, Supplement pp. 1-2. 2 The catalogue itemised 2626 entries at the Albert Hall, 51 at the Public Records Office, 19 in Museum. These Museum 258 Kings British Library Kensington South the the the at and at latter institutions were used because the items they displayed could not be released for display elsewhere.

3 Papers read at the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, published by Jewish Chronicle, T nndn-n 1988. .

Ma 5 May 12

Jose h Jacobs Lucien Wolf

The London Jewry 1290 The Middle Age of Anglo-Jewish History

May 16 May 26

Rev F Cohen Walter Rye

The rise and development of Synagogue Music The Persecution of the Jews

June 2

Rev A Lowy

Hebrew Literature in England

In the weeks following the opening, both the Jewish Chronicle and the Jewish World published series of articles and supplements, the detailed which would

indicate that they, like the Exhibition,

explanatory style of

were aimed beyond an

exclusively Jewish audience. The scale and scope of this Exhibition would alone provide sufficient reason to examine both the generality of the representation of `the Jew' presented therein (as evidenced by range, type and dating of the objects displayed) and the particularity of the choice and images of those individual Jews included.

This chapter reviews the 1887 Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition (the 1887 Exhibition),

the version of the history of the Jews in England it posited, the

positioning of Jews in contemporary English society it sought to map out and, within this, the nature of the hegemony assumed by the leaders of Anglo-Jewry over the Jewish community of that time. It focuses particularly on the visual representations of Jews that the Exhibition offered. It proposes that, in part formative of and in part formed by the creation of and reception for the 1887 Exhibition, there emerged a discourse about the place of Jews in England, which I shall term the Anglo-Jewish discourse and which set terms for it that were to survive for Jews in England without history in Jewish the that through substantial change all of upheavals characterised the first half of the twentieth century. It became the dominant ideology of AngloJewry within or against which cultural practice by and/or about Jews had to function throughout the period under review in this study and long beyond. (In the final

June 9 June 16 June 23

Dr C Gross Dr Graetz Dr Gaster

The Exchequer of the Jews in the Middle Ages Historic Parallels in Anglo-Jewish History Jewish sourcesof the Arthur and Merlin legends

55 chapter of this dissertation, I will review the 1956 Exhibition of Anglo-Jewish Art and History - in commemoration of the Tercentenary of the Resettlement in the British Isles in order to demonstrate how the presentation

of the Jews

of the Jew that it

offered and its underlying discourse was some seventy years later still indebted to informed by the seminal importance and

of this earlier Exhibition). I will argue that

central to comprehension of the discourse is an understanding that one of the aims

those involved in the 1887 Exhibition was to prove a shared identity

identity based on shared language, shared history an

its hosts with

and shared culture. In order to

establish such a position, the Exhibition was perforce obliged to jettison any part of image foreignness that might taint other's views. As I an of

demonstrate this will

helps to explain many of the main lines of choice of exhibits positioning

- references

to Jews in the Doomsday Book, however fleeting, spoke to a shared history, whereas religious artefacts from recent immigrants would have spoken of an alien culture.

The naming of an Exhibition Hinging around a hyphen

In common with any undertaking of this magnitude, the rationales underlying the conception of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition of 1887 were many and varied, as were the reasons, both theoretical and pragmatic, which led to the final it first in it discussed When the selection of exhibits. press, was referred to as an was Anglo-Jewish Archaeological Exhibition. ' Although the Exhibition's final remit was far removed from the constraints implied by that classification, it did retain more of have been The the to than case. response might otherwise nature an archaeological for led for to the need previously exhibits exceeded expectations and requests 4 Jewish Chronicle, 30 April 1886, referring back to a letter from Isidore Spielmann, which it had published 23 April 1886.

56 unforeseen curatorial decisions. 1 would, however, argue that, perhaps from the very outset, and certainly as the project evolved, a definite agenda regarding the place of `the Jew' in England emerged.

To understand what this involved, one might best by start examining the actual words used in the title to define the Exhibition. These, I suggest, reveal two significant strands of argument - one relating to its Anglo-Jewishness and the other to its Historical status.

This was first and foremost an `Anglo-Jewish' event. The choice and order of words, positioned around this hyphen, remains critical to a proper appreciation of the agenda on offer. There are several ways of interpreting this ordering of adjectives. From a 21Stcentury perspective this might be read as exposing potential uncertainty Englishness the about of these Jews and an emphasis on their Jewishness. Taking a 19th century stance I believe that Anglo-Jewry adopted its order for the opposite its Englishness. it It to reason - so as emphasise was not, as might have been, a Judaeo-English Exhibition. That could have opened up the possibility of a reading, from host Jews Whilst the on outside. a community standpoint, the which placed Jews would have been viewed at most as marginal to, if not indeed outside, any inclusive understanding of Englishness, this was not the reading that the organisers described how Anglo-Jewish The those Exhibition term to this confirm. sought of English Exhibition for themselves, the society within as a group viewed responsible host the them to how the equality an of they with view community wished and double identity. A in their Jewish the edged, English and perception of elements almost contemporary

by Jews England hint for in A the the persecution of cartoon,

57 du Maurier, which appeared in Punch in 1883 is indicative

just how far a journey of

they still had to travel in the eyes of some.5 The text reads: Dramatis Personnae; Reginald Front-de-Boeuf 19th Earl of Torquilstone (a lineal descent of the famous Baron immortalised in "Ivanhoe"), Viscount Front-de Boeuf, his son), Alderman Isaac (descended from Isaac York), of Rebecca (daughter of the Alderman)

Scene The old Torture dungeon in Torquilstone Castle, recently restored. The Earl: `Hearken thou son of Israel, unlike knightly I my ancestor, covet , not thy money bags, hard-up though I be. T'is thy fair, wise Daughter Rebecca I would fain have, to wed my big booby of a Son, yonder, not indeed for her dowry's sake, princely as thou mayest deem fit to make it, but in order that by mixing our degenerate Blood with thine, oh worthy scion of an Irrepressible Race, the noble and comely but idiotic breed of Front-de Boeuf (which biddeth fair to be snuffed out in the struggle for existence) may survive to hold its own once more! Nay, and thou consentest not, Sir Jew, then by my halidome I'll... [Torture must be left to the Reader's invention]'

The English aristocracy might by then have been intermarrying with Anglo-Jewry, but as the cartoon makes clear, both visually and textually, its motives for so doing its and view of those with whom negotiations for such intermarriages were conducted were clear.

The desire for a linkage with an English as opposed to a British identity is also revealing. At a time when the power and influence of the British Empire was its have been deemed more Britishness the reaching peak, wider association of might valuable.

Perhaps an insistence on `Anglo',

for the key adjectival definition,

indicated a desire, by those making that choice, to place themselves at what they distance being English. This them the specifically would perceived as epicentre from others within the Union - the Welsh, Scots and particularly the Irish, whose by by then earlier acts of emancipation, so overcome religious exclusion, although, by the the problems encountered of socio-religious uncomfortably paralleled some in disposed based Anglo-Jewry London to think terms leaders The Jews. and of were

'Drawing for Punch, 28 July 1883, p. 42.

58 of England (or indeed London) rather Britain. For many, the City, in its narrow financial sense, was the focus of their daily lives. Their day-to-day social

and cultural

dealings would have been far more closely linked to society in London and the Home Counties than to that part of the English aristocracy/society, which was based in the Country. Their world metaphorically and literally was a cab ride away from the Exhibition either across Hyde Park or into the City.

For those active in Jewish affairs at the time of the Exhibition the phrase Anglo-Jewish

had also acquired a very specific meaning. The Anglo-Jewish

Association came into existence in 1871 and inter alia provided those families associated with the Reform Synagogue (created in 1842) with a forum from which they were once again able to play a fuller and more formal role in the affairs of the Jewish community. ' The General Committee of the 1887 Exhibition, which drew its included from leadership, Jewish members religious and secular a wide spectrum of lay its those affiliations within this, among whose socio/religious number several of Jewish English, the the most anglicised and acculturated, wing of perhaps community.

The desire for an Anglo-Jewish identity was very much a class issue. As we have seen earlier, the mid-nineteenth battle for Jewish political emancipation, which the of very concern a primarily was comment, contemporary much so engendered AngloSimilarly, the Jewish the the community. of echelons upper at small group Jewish Historical

Exhibition

fostering down the 1887 top project, was a of

6 By 1878 it was already meeting with the Board of Deputies to discuss the creation of conjoint

Chronicle, 11 January, 1878. Jewish committees.

59 aspirations of those at the apogee of the Jewish establishment. How it was that this small group at the head of a numerically insignificant minority felt they had the right to lay claim to a place in contemporary English society and to link themselves back as part of English history? Statistical data on the size and growth of the Jewish population of England at this time based on an official census are unavailable. One is obliged to rely on estimates based on extrapolation from different sources. In an dated 7 June 1878, the Jewish Chronicle published one such estimate. This article calculated the total Jewish population of the United Kingdom in 1877 at 68,300, of whom 53,900 resided in London. ' Although both the absolute totals and the bias towards London are higher than other more widely propagated estimates, even if one accepts this estimate, it still leaves the total Jewish community

as a tiny minority

relative to the nation as a whole or indeed just to London - perhaps one percent. Absolute numbers, however, only tell a fraction of the story about the importance and visibility

of the Jewish community of this time. The Introduction has outlined

key in Jewish Victorian Britain the some of aspects of political emancipation mid influence in late Victorian society of the the to to and mid rise positions of power and leaders of Anglo-Jewry. Certain events indicate just how much further Jews had had how decades by last things the the much nineteenth century and of progressed from 1848 de to Rothschild's Lionel onwards struggle year eleven changed, since into Parliament Member his transform a seatedreality. of election as a

both Jewish 1880 the In politics, candidates representing saw elections of by the of several of controversy, unremarked any anti-Jewish return, and parties main them in London and provincial

' Jewish Chronicle, 7 June 1878, p. 12.

by in the some cases aided constituencies -

60 willingness of the competent authorities to alter polling days to avoid clashes with a Jewish religious holiday. ' Socially, the most significant mark of acceptance was the attendance and active participation of the Prince of Wales at the marriage of Leopold de Rothschild in 188 1.9 Focusing on the world of art, which is of special

relevance

to this study, one might contrast the remarks made by Sir William Collins (17881847) when introducing his family to Solomon Hart (1806-1881) after the latter had been elected as a Royal Academician in 1840, `Mr Hart is a Jew and the Jewscrucified Saviour, but he is a very good man for all that, and we shall see something more of him our

now' with the attendance at Hart's funeral in June 1881 of Sir Frederic Leighton, then President of the Royal Academy, and fellow academicians Poynter, Richmond, Alma-Tadema

1° facts have Prinsep. Individually little these and any one of might

more than anecdotal significance, taken cumulatively with many other similar degree by by they to the examples, point a one side and acculturation of acceptance its justified Anglo-Jewry's that to manifest status and position through other efforts 1887 Exhibition. the such ventures as

As its title makes clear, the organisers of the 1887 Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition also wanted it to be regarded as `historical' in scope. In order for the Exhibition to act as a vehicle for assuring the current and future position of AngloJewry, it looked back to the past, proposing a shared history with a network of being issues At of nationhood were actively a moment when common references.

'Jewish Chronicle, 9 April 1880. 9 The Prince was present both at the formal ceremony at the Central Synagogue and at the he law), brother in bride's home Sassoon, Arthur (at the the where breakfast of wedding 1881. January 21 Chronicle, bridal Jewish the to toast couple. the proposed

11, 74. 1862, Arts, London, Academy Sandby, Royal 10 From A History of the p. vol of Jews Devon in The 1806-1881', Hart RA Alexander `Solomon Weiner, Julia of in Quoted 41-50, 2000, Bristol: Hidden Foundation, Legacy Friedlander, E. esp. pp. Cornwall, ed., and 1881. Chronicle, June in Jewish 17 Funeral Hart's Attendees 45. at p.

61 debated and indeed constituted, the promoters were of

course aware of the work of

the French historian and philologist Ernest Renan (1823-1892) whose Qu 'est

'une qu

nation? lecture of 1882 was of particular significance for the 1887 Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition. " Anglo-Jewry was seeking to affirm itself as English rather than to be identified as part of an alien race. Renan provided arguments against the idea of a nation based on race. He suggested that the `nation is

a soul' and that

nationhood was to be found in the possession of shared past and on `present day 1consent' . If Anglo-Jewry could, via instruments such as the Exhibition of 1887, establish a shared past, it could argue that it had already achieved or should be accorded the latter. Renan's theoretical model was, I would suggest, one of the bases for the 1887 Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition and his place on conceptual the General Committee perhaps a manifestation of this philosophical debt.

In her analysis of the ways in which Jews presented themselves through the medium of Exhibitions between 1851 and 1940, Barbara Kirschenblatt-Gimblett suggests three possible positions for Jews: as identifiable only by religion and inassimilable immutable indistinguishable; otherwise as an race with characteristics; 13 history This Exhibition the was neither of a separate and as a nation within a nation. It the was rather a proposal of a race nor celebration of a nation within a nation. by distinguishable by hundred for history than only a group years more six sharing of intended by form dissent. being This the that not of was acceptable an religion and `the Jew' Exhibition `otherness'. To be that the to as extent an about promoters Other was present, he was an historic figure, who should be viewed in that context by " Renan's lecture was delivered at the Sorbonne on 11t'' March 1882. The text quoted is a in 21. by 8Thom Nation Narration, H. Bhabha, Martin by and ed. pp. translation 12Ibid. 13Barbara Kirschenblatt-Gimblett, Destination Culture, University of California Press, 1998, 80. p.

62 4us' encompassing both Gentile and Jewish Englishmen alike. The Other Jew, the immigrant in the East End, was in the context of the Exhibition ignored by a Committee which set its face resolutely westwards towards the English community. Although either directly as individuals or as part of the hegemonic group within the Jewish community in England, the members of the General Committee for the 1887 Exhibition were involved in many initiatives relating to the immigrants, so far as the Exhibition itself was concerned, the immigrant Jew was a presence denied.

Sir Isidore Spielmann was acknowledged `from its inception to its end [as] the leading spirit of the undertaking'. 14He wished it to be regarded as the AngloJewish contribution to the Golden Jubilee celebrations marking Queen Victoria's Spielmann's it 15 initiatives, that Like efforts would seem other similar accession. its Anglo-Jewry heightened position about within consciousness a part of were in (1856-1939) Gaster Wolf, Moses Lucien 1885 Society. In English who within Leopold Sephardi (Chief Rabbi the Haham 1887 was named congregation) and of Chronicle, Jewish become the in 1907 Greenberg (1861-193 1) who editor of was to had worked together successfully

Synagogue, Marks Bevis the that to ensure

in time, London that landmark not Jewish was famous at the most certainly but Jewish Marks as Bevis not as exclusively demolished. Their strategy presented two " This years heritage. extensively English used was stratagem part of the general later in the 1887 Exhibition.

Members the Report D. Mocatta, 1. F. to the App. Note of Biographical 14For Spielmann, see See 2. 1887, September 29 Exhibition, Historical Anglo-Jewish p. the Committee of General 4. Endnote Chronicle, Jewish also, AngloCatalogue 1886; the Spring Chronicle, Jewish of 15 Cohen, Jewish Icons, p. 194; Exhibition Historical pp. xxv. Jewish 23,1994. AJA Review, Task', Monumental `A vol 16Sh. Kaddish,

63 Lucien Wolf and Dr Joseph Jacobs (1854-1916), who were both the General Committee and of the various sub-committees,

members of

were responsible for most

of the main catalogue and played key roles in the physical creation of the 1887 Exhibition. "

F.D. Mocatta

chaired the General Committee, which

included

representatives of almost all of the important Jewish families. " Apart from the practical need to ensure their financial support and influence, this was probably by desire to ensure solidarity internally and to demonstrate prompted a

a unified front

externally. It was a measure of the position of religion within the total spectrum of Anglo-Jewish affairs that its leading members could happily co-exist on bodies like this, despite what would otherwise have seemed to an outsider, often strongly held opposing religious views. Jewish religious leadership was represented by most of its figures: the Chief Rabbi Nathan Adler (1802-1890) and his son Hermann principal Adler (1839-1911), by then Delegate Chief Rabbi; Dr. Moses Easter; the Reverend Professor D. W. Marks (1811-1909), Chief Minister of the West London Reform Synagogue; as well as by Zadoc Kahn (1839-1905), Grand Rabbi of Paris. Among

leading Jewish lay figures was Sir John Simon MP. 19 The General Committee was however, not, exclusively Jewish. It included the Dean of Westminster from whose items 400 than official collection more of historical interest were included, the writer Sir Walter Besant (1836-1901) and other eminent Victorians. "

17 For Wolf and Jacobs, see Biographical Notes App. 1. 18 Mocatta Biographical Note App 1. Among the General Committee members were Rothschilds, Samuels, Montagus, Montefiores, the the the the the of representatives Goldsmids, the Sassoons, the Cohens and the Davis families. A comparison of this list with the memberships of the Council of the United Synagogue and the Anglo-Jewish Association (See for Chronicle how Jewish 8 April 1887, 10) just time the example p. reveals same at families leading involved in Anglo-Jewish these were all aspects affairs. same of closely 19Simon. Biographical Note App. 1. 20 Other Committee members included: Francis Galton (1822-1911) the eugenicist; James Glaisher (1809-1903), Chairman of the Palestine Exploration Fund; Holman Hunt (182719 10), the painter; and Robert Browning, the poet (1812 -1891).

64 The Albert Hall, the principal venue, was a major cultural centre with very obvious connections with the Queen. By definition, it should therefore have offered the potential to ensure a place for an Exhibition relating to Anglo-Jewry both the mainstream of English culture and as part of the loyal celebrations

within

of the Jubilee.

The locations for the subsidiary displays, although forced on the organisers for practical reasons, were also within the mainstream of the London exhibition world. The organizers were no doubt aware of the underpinning for their intentions that

such

locations ought to have brought.

It is prima facie tempting to read the 1887 Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition as an affirmation of the settled position of Jews in late Victorian Britain. This was, if not the belief, certainly the aspiration of those organising it. The Jubilee Leader in the Jewish Chronicle of 17 June 1887 explored in hagiographic terms the

twin themes of the progress made by the Jews during Victoria's reign and the Britishness/Englishness of the nation's Jews, albeit that it was less than clear as to (British) which set or sub set (English) Jews owed their allegiance: For it is impossible to imagine another space of fifty years working a in Jews the the equally condition revolution vast of of this country and more it is not truly causing a people that walked in darkness to see a great light ... because we can admit for one moment that there is any possibility of from his fellow by hairbreadth Jew British the the rest of a single separating longer is English Jew No in the the an alien general rejoicing ... subjects 2' integral now an part of the nation.

However, such a reading ignores a counter series of events and positions for Anglo-Jewry by The Exhibition. be had the to major problem negotiated which begun had Russia from East Europe Jews to immigration reach the which and of was flow 1887 1881. By this the the time pogroms of of very significant proportions at had assumed proportions that were inter alia exacerbating the arguments about 21 Jewish Chronicle, 17 June 1887.

65 limitations on such entry and were a factor in the rise in anti-alien feeling in what for was other reasons already a fraught situation. The suggestion that immigration should be restricted first arose as one response to the massive unemployment and riots that marked London 22 1880's. in the mid winters

The circle of wealth and privilege of Anglo-Jewry in the second half of the little handful families than the century comprised nineteenth of more a of main at the top of the Jewish population. From the mid-century, a Jewish middle class had begun to emerge. This was gradually providing a counter balance to those at the lowest end in dispersion for less the of wealth and poverty of economic scale and making a acute the demographics of the Jewish population. Once, however, immigration from Eastern Europe and Russia began in earnest after 1881, the economic distribution downwards. Prior dramatically the to this skewed population was again pattern of 1880s, Anglo-Jewry might plausibly have looked forward to the gradual social in Jew its the burgeoning vision of middle-class as part of enfranchisement of a England by creeping Anglicisation; a reactive process, in which integration would immigration 1881 However, by the radically post passive osmosis. occur almost impact Europe Eastern their in Russia The close and that and events possibly. altered those End East the of members hand the very of agenda the on were to of streets on is, however, It 1887 Exhibition. in involved Anglo-Jewry who were promoting the had to this by yet 1887 the greater part of explosion fair to argue, that population English the immigrants, of segment the growing rapidly that a although occur and however, Significantly, they total the picture. Jewish population, were only a part of were

but I Exhibition in 1887 by the would scant reference not simply marginalized

argue totally,

Exhibition it. 1887 by The in deliberately, and overlooked and

Angl©Modern Making The in Cesarani, English', Being of 22 Feldman, `The Importance of Jewry, p. 58.

66 excluded virtually any depiction or discussion of the Jewish poverty either in the medieval past or by reference to the contemporary immigrants. Poverty in London had been documented as early as Mayhew's seminal London Labour and London Poor, 1851. This had inter alia catalogued the extent and nature of the Jewish dimension of this problem. Although Booth's Life and Labour of the People of London, based on research undertaken between 1886 and 1903, was not first published in 1889, there was frequent comment in the press, which again shed light on specifically Jewish aspects of the poverty problem. As Gertrude Himmelfarb has argued with reference to the early period: The London poor seemedto be afflicted with a kind of poverty in extremis; a poverty that made them not so much a class apart or even a nation apart (as in the two nations image) but a `race' apart.23

It was almost as if the Jewish immigrants were simultaneously members of two rejected races.

Much as some of Anglo-Jewry's leaders might have wanted to present the 1887 Anglo-Exhibition

it as a statement of achieved status, was in reality more of a plea

for confirmation of a position still being acquired; a plea, which was to be proved by the weight of evidence presented. At a time when the nature of Englishness was itself being created and transformed, Anglo-Jewry was ambitiously seeking to define a set for itself landscape identity, but Stuart has Hall this place as within of national argued:

Cultural identities transformation they are subject to constant undergo ... ... the continuous play of history culture and power.24

The discourse which emerged in and from the 1887 Exhibition was to be a seminal influence on Jewish thought and attitudes. I would suggest that throughout the period

23G. Himmelfarb, The Idea of Poverty, London: Faber & Faber, 1984, p. 311. 24 Hall, `Cultural Identity and Diaspora' in Identity: community, culture, difference, ed. J Rutherford, p. 223.

67 of this study and, indeed, until the latter part of the twentieth century as evidenced by the 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition, this 1887 model with its seemingly uncritically liberal reading of the progress achieved by and acceptance of Jews in England since the Cromwellian era, became an accepted standard with reference to which other views were obliged to position themselves. Paradoxically, just as Anglo-Jewry was define its to place in English society with recourse to this carefully judged seeking balance around a hyphen, the underlying realities were already moving inexorably in delicate Angloto this that ways would create unforeseeable challenges placing. Jewry could not, in 1887, have appreciated the disruptive potential and long-term impact of the new immigration. Although, as we shall see, less than twenty years later the defining discourse might have remained the same, those promoting the Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition of 1906 at the Whitechapel Art Gallery could immigrant longer ignore the the community. presence of no

A particular vision -a shared experience 4arich legacy of memories'25

From the outset, the organisers of the 1887 Exhibition entertained very ambitious illustrating the bring '... together to for intentions all objects the event which was highly 26 To in England'. this Jews comprehensive aim was history of the already Jewish Art Ecclesiastical Jewish displaying and of task the examples of added that Such the from England from response was overseas. Antiquities both and within As a to Exhibition offered. everything the present were unable the organisers of

Narration, Nation in Thom, by Martin Lecture, translation and 25 Renan, 1882 Bhabha, pp. 8-21 1887, Exhibition, Historical Anglo-Jewish p. vii. 26 Catalogue of the

H. ed.

68 result, the curatorial choices made by the Literary and Arts Committee sometimes strayed from a strictly Anglo-Jewish criterion. It is a reflection of the bias of the Exhibition that, despite its title, this Committee was composed of those from the historical and academic worlds rather than those literature

active in the practice of the arts or

though even such expertise was already present on the General and other -

Committees. 27The most notable inclusion of items from

outside the realm of Anglo-

Jewish experience was the material from the Strauss collection

of Judaica, which had

first been displayed in Paris in 1878. This led at least one correspondent to the Jewish Chronicle to question the accuracy of the Exhibition's title and its capacity to 28 its achieve own mission.

The stated aims of the final version of the Exhibition seem to have been perhaps more limited, though ultimately more achievable. It defined itself as: An Exhibition illustrating Anglo-Jewish History and Jewish Ecclesiastical Art, at the Royal Albert Hall, Kensington, with the following objects: -

1. To promote a knowledge of Anglo-Jewish History; to create a deeper interest in its records and relics, and to aid in their preservation.

2. To determine the extent of the materials, which exist for the compilation 29 History in Jews England. the of a of

However,

the sub-text of these objectives was more significant. The

Exhibition clearly sought to locate the Jewish community firmly within the long run

27 The curatorial role of the Literary and Arts Committee is described in Mocatta's Report (see endnote 14?). The composition of that Committee is listed in the 1887 Exhibition catalogue, p. x). 28 "I endeavoured to show that if the original object of the Exhibition had been carried out in have been it thorough might a means of acquiring more manner, a more concentrated and has in history idea Exhibition The Anglo-Jewish the to of a great original matter relating ... be Anglo-Jewish Historical". it is to been therefore called not entitled shut out and measure Signed, A Student of Anglo-Jewish History, Jewish Chronicle, 6 May 1887. 29 Catalogue of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, p. vii.

69 of a shared history of England. 3° It aimed to demonstrate that, notwithstanding a period of expulsion from 1290 to 1656, Jews had over a considerable period and increasingly in more recent times, contributed to the welfare of the realm, and to position the current generations of Anglo-Jewry as incontrovertibly English albeit dissenting " of a religious persuasion. Their call was for Jews to be part of a national unity that respected religious diversity. It was this version of Anglo-Jewish history discourse the that informed it, which was to persist well into the twentieth and century.

The Exhibition

Albert Hall was divided into four main sections the at

Historic Records and Relics, Jewish Ecclesiastical Art, Antiquities and covering Coins and Medals.

The supplementary Exhibitions

covered Documents, Religious

Items and Jewellery, MSS, Engravings and Printed Books respectively.

The catalogue introduction to the Historic Records section comprised a largely hagiographic review of the Jewish experience in England. In terms of items Conquest. Norman Dr display, Exhibition the time the the of commenced around on Gaster's lecture on Jewish sources of the Arthur and Merlin legends sought to extend the idea of shared history back into English historical mythology. The treatment of the Jews in this pre-expulsion period was largely explained in terms of roles and forces. by The that the imposed them catalogue suggested external on positions lending, for Jews that the which was era was money of primary area of activity 30 It was probably no coincidence that the first lecture given in conjunction with the Exhibition was entitled "The London Jewry 1290". 31 This was echoed by the Jewish Chronicle in its Jubilee Leader (17 June 1887) which British Methodists, British Jews, British loyal feeling among the of equality stressed highlight to the The Quakers. British serve and mine are emphases Catholics and Chronicle Jewish discussed As the dissenters above, persuasions. religious of all of grouping its in English British been than have outlook. to more seems

70 explained (and sub-textually excused) as being the result of the need for a nonChristian group to act as a conduit for an activity, barred to

others by Canon Law. 32

Jewish money- lenders were located within the nexus of Royal finances. The catalogue, adopting a Victorian, Anglo-Jewish position, took for granted a desire on the part of their mediaeval co-religionists to assimilate. Their inability to achieve this goal was attributed primarily to the fact that they were prevented from so doing because `... citizenship involved spiritual communion `

...

' and only secondarily to

the hatred with which they were regarded as the arch-enemies of the Church'. "

The accusations of ritual child murder, a contributory overt reason for the Expulsion, dismissed were summarily

itself included Exhibition items though the even which -

related to such purported incidents. The significance of exhibits relating to this early period is to be found in the way in which they further the aim of presenting a shared history stretching almost as far back in time as the written history of England itself. The gap of two hundred and fifty years between expulsion and re-admittance was in but the observant visitor/reader to ignore to passed over such a way as permit all its obvious significance. Although the Exhibition itself may have been silent on this in including `The lectures Wolf's the the accompanying programme, period, some of Middle Age of Anglo-Jewish History' dealt with it in some detail and also referred to the research that had already been published by others.

The double bind for Anglo-Jewry was that in order to validate a claim of both back look thus the Exhibition history, to the recalling past, at needed shared links and events during periods of persecution. The connection with the past and the 32 `They thus formed a kind of sponge which first drained the country dry owing to the be by Canon Law, then them transactions could squeezed and given capitalist monopoly of 1. Exhibition, Historical Anglo-Jewish Catalogue Treasury'. the p. of into the Royal 33 Ibid., p. 2.

71 Holy Land brought into the debate the potential for latent or even overt antiSemitism within the Christian Church. Recalling a shared

past also foregrounded the

existence of concepts of the meaning of the term `Jew' that were derived from accumulated reception of received opinions and teachings rather than actual lived experience. As Zygmunt Bauman has suggested: the age of modernity inherited `the Jew' already firmly separatedfrom the .. Jewish men and women who inhabited its towns and villages. 34

References to history opened the possibility of a debate between present reality and a received past and had the dangerous potential of allowing the latter to overshadow the former.

The history of the post re-admittance period, as presented in the Catalogue, in terms of the Jew as just another religious dissenter. Within that was couched framework, the so-called external history of the Jews in terms of their relationship host the with community and their struggle for emancipation was recounted as an albeit uneven but almost inevitably successful upward trajectory towards full by internal history The the acceptance and equality mid nineteenth century. of the Jewish community was characterised as having been continuous and peaceful.35The having dismissed in Synagogue 1840/1 Reform the was as stirred up creation of 36 long had The but feelings the time since abated. which of conflict at exaggerated its City base it from Synagogue United to serve the the tensions within as expanded in London the and suburbs went unmentioned, as emerging communities elsewhere

34 Z. Baumann, Modernity and Ambivalence, p. 39. 35 Catalogue of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, p. 6.

36 This was a much understated version of a potential schism, which in religious terms led to be It for letters to the formal was almost new community. of excommunication the issue of This Synagogue. Reform Chief Rabbi in 1905 before the 20 was on a entered years another funeral. Mocatta's F. D. the occasion of

72 did arguments involving the role of the provincial Jewish communities and their relationship to the centre. Items relating to several of these communities were displayed in this section as evidence of the implied

peaceful spread of the Jewish

population throughout England. No reference was made to the problems that had to be faced by the arrival of immigrants with a very different set of socio-religious beliefs. This omission was made notwithstanding the presence on the General Committee of figures who were only too well aware of these Canon Samuel Barnett (1834

rising tensions such as:

in the who played a major role religious and -1913),

cultural life of the East End from 1873 onwards; the Reverend Brooke Lambert (1834-1901), Vicar of St Marks in Whitechapel; and Samuel Montagu whose active participation was central to political and Jewish life in the East End.3'

Mapping the locations of the Jewish members of the various Committees involved in the Exhibition and the lenders thereto graphically proves a social, if not a financial, bias away from the City and certainly its easterly environs. Anglo-Jewish history for this Exhibition meant the history of a Jewish establishment, by then living in London's West End and the neighbouring areas, physically and socio-culturally from its from in East End. This Jewish the the population separated own past and Exhibition was about that acculturated Jewish establishment. It looked outwards and host For Exhibition that set comprehensivenessas the to an community. westwards from the this its distinguishing the more glaring. are all gaps resulting criteria, one of In taking the 1887 Exhibition of 1887 as a starting point for an investigation into the before in `the Jew' English the the turn century, one of art of visual representation has to be aware that it was a very particular presentation. It was mediated by the

17For Barnett and Samuel, seeBiographical Notes App. 1.

73 aspirations of Anglo-Jewry

intentionally and

despite its protestations of not,

comprehensiveness, an unalloyed reading of its subject.

There were socio-political as well as cultural-religious problems inherent in involving, at this early date, the immigrant communities on the other side of London in the East End. As this immigrant community increased in numbers and

visibility, so

the leaders of Anglo-Jewry adopted policies aimed at dealing with what it perceived as a problem with the propensity to destabilize its own position. Given that among the underlying aims of the Exhibition was a confirmation of the place for AngloJewry within

the mainstream of English life,

it would

have been almost

inconceivable for the organisers to have celebrated this alien culture as part of their version of Anglo-Jewish history.

Theirs was a culture shared with the English

community and not one, which they the Anglo-Jews shared with aliens - albeit fellow Jews. It would have been problematic to have included the culture of the immigrant community. The mass arrivals were at that time still of relatively recent heritage their cultural was clearly outside the terms of reference of the origin and 1887 Exhibition.

One way in which a definition of identity can be expressed is in terms of what that definition

Anglo-Jewry's excludes.

immigrant the excluded

project

self-identification

Jewish community. By writing

deliberately

the new immigrant

it did Anglo-Jewry that Exhibition initio, the not signalled ab of out community Here be immigrants topic the to again consideration. the under of part a consider for hand, On double bind. in itself the found concern one Anglo-Jewry an awkward in Jews behalf as an regarded was countries other persecuted of on and action

74 undeniable obligation for Anglo-Jewry. Sir Moses Montefiore (1784-1885) was a 38 in but On by hand, this the the prime, mover respect. only, other no means such action inevitably linked Anglo-Jewry to an alien culture and fuelled the arguments of those who argued about the Englishness of Jews and their true allegiances. In 1878 in in 1881 the pages of the Nineteenth Century, Professor Goldwin Smith and again had argued on this issue with the Rev Hermann Adler

latter's the responseswere -

39 in Jewish Chronicle. Professor Goldwin Smith contended that the republished impossible for because, is Jews `Their the their race, patriotism was only country 40 is Adler lengthy their which one with religion'. refutations of this charge published and of Goldwin Smith's alternative postulation that Jews who were patriotic could be Jews. true not

As details of the pogroms in Russia emerged, the Jewish Chronicle reported it however, In Jewish this their the period, co-religionists. plight of almost weekly on be `over to there' addressed at source with aid problem, which needed remained an Fund House Relief Mansion here. from One the such response was and assistance Appeal which elicited support from beyond just the Jewish community and the formation in 1882 of a more permanent successor,the Russo-Jewish Committee. But in Southern Russia Jews for the and the of plight concern utmost expressing while 9 Chronicle in Jewish leader the to their to of the aid, a rally community exhorting blend that typical of of December 1881 was careful to retain an attitude, perhaps it in Victorian the the typified that advice era, pragmatism and moral rectitude destination the dispersion such emigrants. of to the aid and of such as proffered As for the class of men who should be assisted to emigrate, those who for living themselves be likely clearly receive should to to a earn able are be in time haven a short of safety will preference ... those who reach a " For Montefiore, see Biographical Note App. 1. 1878; 4, July 1878; May April 3, Century, Nineteenth vol. '9 See Goldwin Smith, and vol. Chronicle, Jewish Adler, See 1882. 12, November 1881; December October vol. 10, and vol. 9. 1881, 21 October 11; 1881, October 10; 7 1878, p. April 19 12; p. p. April, 12 p.

4° Quoted in, Jewish Chronicle, 19 April 1878, p. 10.

75 kindred their to to without appealing of many outside aid ... assist enabled brethren [are] be he [Mr to to our are on where sense sent sound practical ... A Kushkedt of the New York Committee] advocates Bosnia in addition to America while others give the preference to Palestine. We see no reason " in why the three schemesshould any way clash.

Even before the mass immigration in the last decade of the nineteenth century brought into sharp focus for the London world the figure of the impoverished Jew from Eastern Europe, articles in the Jewish Chronicle were already voicing concern leader 30 issues indicated in January Thus that a of a separatist culture. over a growth 1880, while overtly condemning the existence of Chedarim (privately run single by instruction for Hebrew teacher or run a religious religious and classrooms Melamed) on health and safety grounds, writing that, `[they are] nothing less literally fundamentally in its figuratively than more exercised midst', was a plague spot and by the need to abolish institutions (including, in a passing reference, the Chevroth, immigrant by the local groups of places of worship established usually small, isolation the `Whatever difference: tends to perpetuate communities) that perpetuated its dangerous be to immigrants] [the the must this community of element of full its to journal the turned 42 1881, February On 4 the attention same welfare'. institutions their local (Chevroth), owed those which Synagogues `Minor' religious existence

defined (often geographically) to their specific appeals to very narrowly

institutions defined them whose immigrant as and the community, segments of Judaism' in English the and tendency age is the of to `whole spirit general opposed `stand out as embodiments which continued existence and concern

by implied their " loss The isolation'. of control of

in its Jews the host community viewing all over the

explanations two Judaism possible other among are light of these manifestations of

41Jewish Chronicle, 9 December 1881. 42Jewish Chronicle, 30 January 1880, p. 4.

February 1881, pp. 9-10. 43Jewish Chronicle ,4

76 for such strong language applied to what was in reality, at least

at that time, such a

limited threat.

As we shall investigate at length with reference to the 1906 Whitechapel Exhibition,

Anglo-Jewry felt that the immigrants needed to be reconstructed as

English and to accept the shared vision in order to be allowed to be part of this Throughout this discussion the term ànglify' rather than ànglicise' has been project. describe to this process because of the former's more active connotations. This used motive would explain why the emerging Yiddish culture of the East End of London had be denied. It was the antithesis of Anglo-Jewry's shared culture to was and project. It was a denial of the English self-image that Anglo-Jewry was seeking to affirm. Yiddish culture was grounded in the concepts and beliefs of the Ostjuden the immigrant Jews from Eastern Europe and Russia - and included unfamiliar have it language Furthermore, that cultural values. employed a would not normally been understood by others even within the Anglo-Jewish community and which its Anglo-Jewry Yiddish For this culture was not about marked users as outsiders. Jew it It the out as otherness. marked sign of was a sharing common ground, different. To incorporate this vision of Jewishness into the discourse of the 1887 Exhibition risked blurring the lines between the acculturated, èstablished' English between distinction Anglo-Jewry immigrant. the For the Jewish Jew and the alien difference have the proposition of such two groups may seemed obvious and intellectually

tenable. It clearly, however, risked posing serious questions of

host least the on in community the of the segments some at very eyes of credibility be lost. For the Jew between Jew definitions fine some, easily might and such whom from difference the Jews and perhaps easier another, a claimed of more one group

77 more justifiable it might be to treat them all as one and to reject or brand them as 'other'.

Just as the leaders of the indigenous Anglo-Jewish community were unwilling to accept the immigrants in their unreconstructed form, so segments of the immigrant community,

the heterogeneity of which must be recognised, had their own

reservations.

The cultural values and, perhaps more significantly for some, the

religious practices of their Anglo-Jewish hosts were divorced from those the immigrants brought with them. Some rejected the putative authority of the Chief Rabbi over their own religious leaders. Whatever the motivation for or explanation of the exclusion of these segments of the Jewish population, their absences are as important as other presences in understanding the representation of the Jew on offer by discourse. Exhibition this this at and

The Historic Records section of the Exhibition covered a very wide range of from dating the to documents the pre-expulsion and pictures objects and artefacts, first been have the This to occasion anywhere on would seem contemporary period. bring been had together to large a such made attempt scale such a which host Jewish community. existence within another comprehensive record of

Contracts, building title deeds, pictures and plans were selected to provide the Jewish long-standing presence. evidence of days from here date the long We have been too our settlement accustomed to during the ignore to reign Protector Lord our residence the altogether and of 44 Kings. Angevin Norman the and of in 1887; April 15 Synagogue, Bayswater Adler H. by Dr reported Rev " Sermon preached at 1887. April 22 Chronicle, the Jewish

It sought to prove both by their individual importance (which varied in degree) and by their aggregation how such Jewish threads formed part of the whole fabric of English history. It would seem that the organisers were following

a Victorian

proposition that equated replication and aggregation with `scientific' proof. Perhaps the most important historical `fact' demonstrated by the display of old contracts was the linkage between these documents (or shetar in Hebrew) and the Star Chamber in mediaeval English history.

Quite what any but the most avid and expert viewer

have would made of the sheer number of documents and fragments of documents included is hard to judge. The placement of the Exhibition itself (as opposed to its Gala event), which was in rooms on the uter corridor rather than the main body of the Hall, must have dictated a very crowded display. "

The Pictures and Plans of Jewish Buildings sub-section included details of the infant hospitals, (schools, institutions Jewish Synagogues ther asylums), and earliest thus demonstrating more than two hundred years of religious worship and active London the the and across geographic spread outside presence and substantiating how buildings, demonstrating interpreted be This as presentation might also country. day, by them `Jewish' those every passed who as unremarked perhaps previously English landscape their counterparts. the as urban shared were as much a part of

Jews historical the long documents record of traced a Personal records and Records Historic The section also host dealings the community. their with and

Hall, Albert the body the in actual held the of 45 Although the opening party was main ft by 60 20 measuring four each the in area, housed perimeter around rooms Exhibition was ft.

79 included the Portrait sub-section of the Exhibition and the Newman Collection of Prints. This is examined in more detail after this overview

of the Catalogue. In

addition to these, this part of the Exhibition had two sub-sections, which merit comment.

The life of Sir Moses Montefiore, who had died at the age of almost one hundred and one eighteen months prior to the Exhibition, was celebrated in a separate section of "Montefioriana".

He was presented as a paradigmatic figure

Anglo-Jewry for the wider community of that time -a religious man, who within and achieved financial success at an early age and devoted himself to the cause of worldfor Jewry wide which he received international recognition at the highest levels. Notwithstanding the greater (financial) power of other families, it was Sir Moses, his with established status within the English socio-political establishment, who was in however, in less Sir Moses this than obvious singled out was, many ways a way. have deeply held informed His to religious convictions chosen. quasi-role model for less His his than the ardent support views on wider, secular matters. many of due his in the to Jewish concern about part was emancipation political cause of lessening of rabbinical authority that he feared would inevitably result therefrom.

This segment also contained a sub section featuring a collection of items relating to the Beni-Israel, the Jewish community of India, which, the catalogue stated, could in Year Jubilee the AD. This Exhibition, took 490 its place which trace roots there to been had that there deliberately, to India, out point Empress sought perhaps the of of in British that the rule that of arrival predated substantially Jewish very presence a Jewish between linkage the A community of creating motive similar part of world.

80 and the British Empire of Queen Victoria could have explained the inclusion of items relating to the Jewish communities in Australia and South Africa and a map of the British Empire showing past and present Jewish congregations.46These items would seem to have been intended to create an association between the British Empire and Jewish presence in its farthest outposts within an Exhibition relating to Anglo-Jewish history and could be interpreted as seeking to strengthen the bonds between the two intertwined. inextricably be to the they point where might communities viewed as

The Introduction to the Ecclesiastical Art section was apologetic in tone in its Jewish in field failure to the the of visual art create of efforts opening remarks about Commandment Second it the the to and strictures of variously ascribed style, which the effects of the Diaspora. deficient is the of artistic normally consciousness by Biblical dulled in has been the it this respect sympathies, or whether interesting images, (sic) questions upon are on graven command anent be limited historic to the dilate Our must survey which we need not ... Hebrew the the people, that, of normal artistic capacities whatever remark by the if transformed, have been they must altogether not strongly affected, 47 Dispersion stupendous catastrophe of the ...

Whether

Hebrew

detail in dwelt the 1887 April 8 on Chronicle's greater Jewish The supplement of latter. the consequences of Nevertheless as a consequence to the dispersion and their contingent have follows they that it disappearance as a coherent nation, necessarily the be termed art a national be to to express what might rightly able ceased ... the Art of Ecclesiastical character Jewish rather assumes term collective .. in by Jews accordance Ecclesiastical Art as applied and presents variations 48 have Jews different settled. the wherein countries the of schools with

Great 549 to the Item Exhibition, relates 46 Catalogue of the Anglo-Jewish Historical 552 Item in 1853, Synagogue Melbourne 551 the Item to 1845, in Sydney relates Synagogue, 900 to Item 1881 in of map Synagogue a Fields relates Diamond and Kimberly the to relates Empire. British the

47Ibid., p. 83.

3. 1887, 8 April Chronicle, Jewish p. 48 Supplement,

81 Far from making an appeal for recognition of a separate Jewish Art, this

comment

must be interpreted as valorising the concept of local adaptation.

One of the underlying characteristics of this Exhibition was its didactic nature. The Ecclesiastical Art section was, perhaps, less concerned with the artistic beauty of the items on display than with explaining and demystifying their

use. The

employment of ornamentation and finery was explained as being in the glory of G*d have been that by Catholic Church High position should readily understood and -a visitors. The section was broken down into specific groups of objects following what Barbara Kirschenblatt-Gimblett has referred to as `the Jewish plan', with each group being headed by an explanatory text outlining the purpose of the items and of objects their role in Jewish practice. 49The Delegate Chief Rabbi, the Reverend Dr Hermann Adler, a member of the General Committee and its Executive, had addressed this topic in his sermon at Bayswater Synagogue. Had there been less mystery about our religious observance, there would freedom from foul have been less prejudice, certainly greater perhaps Exhibition It is this to remove the of object of one section aspersions. '0 something of the mysteriousness ...

The Jewish Chronicle dated 8 April 1887 reiterated this point. The Exhibition is of an educational character. It is calculated to remove in the the that the of outside mind somehow seems mystery something of " is Jewish. world to environ all that

Two sets of items that might have aroused contentious comment - the instruments for circumcision and the knives for kosher slaughtering - were only five in Exhibition; in there the this were section or elsewhere minimally represented

by 86 "objects 49 Kirschenblatt-Gimblett, ritual setting p. were arranged ... namely (life home cycle events)". and person synagogue, 50Sermon preached by Rev Dr H. Adler at Bayswater Synagogue, 15 April 1887; reported in 1887. 22 April Chronicle, Jewish the

SlJewish Chronicle, 8 April 1887, p. 10.

82 items for the former and four for the latter, accompanied by two comments on the efforts made to ensure that such slaughter was achieved as painlessly as possible. Given the interest that was to focus

briefly kosher the that albeit on possibility -

in in knives Ripper Murders 1888 the this minimal display slaughtering used were was perhaps fortunate. One may legitimately surmise that this quasi-omission might have been motivated by a desire to pass over items such as these which demonstrated differences host Christian the the real with practices of community, and to emphasise familiar (candelabra) items(scrolls Old Testament). the more or easily explained of The Jew represented by this discourse was similar rather than different.

Mention has already been made of the inclusion of items from the Strauss items display Exhibition Insofar to this of provided an opportunity as collection. interest to a Jewish or pro-Jewish gentile audience, there is some logic in their inclusion. At their first public showing at the Exposition Universelle at the Palais du Trocadero in Paris these items were referred to as `objets d'art religieux hebraiques'. 52 This placed them within the categories of ancient/oriental/Old Testament religion but outside the realm of Western Europe. Although their presence have 1887 Exhibition the an assisted may the and of quality undoubtedly augmented Jewish increased have of Jewish appreciation an and ritual of understanding Anglo-Jewish theme. linkage the there with was no ecclesiastical art,

the third the Antiquities of section major The collection of which comprised Anglo-Jewish

definition

since

Exhibition

inevitably

Antiquities

introduction, The hardly Anglo-Jewish existed. nature of a purely

moved outside a rigid

52Kirschenblatt-Gimblett, p. 82.

83 perhaps reverting to the original nomenclature of the Exhibition, claimed that Jewish Antiquities which

`ranged over the whole field of historic archaeology'. 53This section,

included

from items Palestine, locate Anglo-Jewish to sought many

experience within the much broader base of Jewish history and its Antiquities. Perhaps the importance of this section to the Anglo-Jewish discourse is the linkage it provided between contemporary Jewry and the Judaism of the Old Testament and the Holy Land. The inclusion of items discovered by inter alia the Palestine Exploration Fund which, as has already been noted, numbered several of its leading figures demonstrated Exhibition's General Committee, the the the amongst membership of between Anglo-Jewish Victorian the connection community, current archaeological endeavour and Palestine as the Holy Land.

Unsurprisingly, given the underlying discourse of the Exhibition, Jewishness identity was not explored as a topic among the exhibits as a separate racial or ethnic 1280], [Catag Item Composite Photograph Jewish for one startling exception. - save lent by Committee member, Francis Galton, was included with an explanatory in Catalogue. the quotation A number of photographs of Jewish lads being taken; these were imposed the the only ultimately gave which plate, same sensitive one on another on faces the thus features the nearest gives and various of common 54 Jewish type that science can afford. to the approximation

but to Exhibition Within an emphasise similarities and eliminate all which sought his Jew English between difference dissent the gentile and legitimate religious as the fashionable item inclusion the scientific of albeit of such an English counterpart, interest -

by be indeed Jewish If type even established a could perverse. seems

53Catalogue of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, p. 133. saCFG Journal, the Anthropological Institute, November 1885.

84 other perhaps more scientific means than those employed in the Galton loan - it would

have immediately

destroyed much of the argument so painstakingly

constructed by the rest of the Exhibition. There are several possible explanations for its inclusion ranging from the pragmatic to the theoretical/scientific. 55It might be for included that those the item, the Jews it displayed were deviant from argued who the English Jew, who was the true focus.

It would then follow that Anglo-Jewry

believed that these deviant Jews could then be anglified and/or eventually changed by "breeding of the right sort of man" in some process of Social Darwinism. " Without a belief in the potential for such a change, the inclusion of this item would have severely undermined one major line of the Exhibition's

argument about the

indistinguishability of the English Jew from his fellow Englishman.

As the introduction to the Numismatic Section admitted, the Exhibition could Anglo-Jewish is did to that coinage. that say specific not exist which not show it by that for the Nevertheless, relevance the subject was sought once again claim helped to place Anglo-Jewish history within a wider context.

in its historical Catalogue chronology The Portrait sub-section of the adopted an birth date by the listed items commentaries the with subject of of were presentation lives. facts dates their of and on the salient

been have the a professional the of result may committee of membership loan In the an of Jacobs. these suggestion or a of offer circumstances, association with leading from Exhibition the to the topic scientist a had of connections apparent exhibit which Jewish Jacobs Galton, the discussion fuller For be hardly and of a day rejected. could of the 64 Body, Jew's The Gilman, p. et seq. Composite, see in Z. 1900/1914, Britain Politics in Eugenics Searle, quoted 56 Beatrice Webb in and 34. Ambivalence, Modernity p. and Baumann, 55 Galton's

85 The section opened with five images of Menasseh ben Israel (1604-1657) his intercession with Cromwell which led to the re-admission

and

of the Jews in 1656.

Although attributions to Rembrandt (1606-1669) and Solomon Hart (1806-1881) are given for three of the five works in this particular group, most of the works displayed elsewhere were either unattributed or by artists who are less well known today. A feature of the catalogue is that throughout far greater prominence is

given to lenders

than to artists. This was an Exhibition about Anglo-Jewish history and not about individual artists. The owner/collector was deemed to be more important than the creator. The main works by Jewish artists in this section of the Exhibition included a self-portrait by Solomon Hart, two portraits by Abraham Solomon (1823-1862) and a portrait of Sir Anthony de Rothschild by Rebecca Solomon (1832-1886), Abraham's sister.

The third member of the Solomon family,

Simeon (1840-1905) was

represented by photos of his drawings of Jewish Ceremonials which were included among the Miscellaneous Prints, Photographs and Drawings sub-section. Of the one hundred and ninety eight images in the Portrait sub-section, more than one third are of rabbis or of persons connected with Jewish religious worship learning. in by Throughout the these and period covered exhibits and especially the in history is large Anglo-Jewry that the measure earlier portion of chronology, of Sasportas (1618 its leaders from Yacob the through religious recounted -1698), first Chief Rabbi of the Jews of England after the Resettlement, to the Adlers, father Great Chief Britain Rabbi Delegate Chief Rabbi then the of and current and son, by is in difference The titles their and revealing of changing attitudes respectively-" hundred during in English two this Jews their year period. society position and about Whereas Sasportas was referred to as the Chief Rabbi of the Jews in England -a 57Cat. reference items 952,1075,1117.

86 distinctly identified separate group in the case of the Adlers, the absence of a reference to Jews in their titles might be read as the Jews taking and/or seeking to have others take Jewish presence in England for granted. Examining

some of the

individual representations used in this part of the Exhibition, one is struck by the absence of Judaica surrounding the figures. The portrait of Aaron Hart might be read being as of a Jew, more because his wearing of a yarmulke and the Hebrew inscription on the book on which he is leaning than because of some possibly assumed Jewish features in his physiognomy. " There is little else in the image that would mark out the sitter from any other clergyman of the period. The Frederick Barlin (active in the early 19th century) portrait of Rabbi Meldola and the Slater portrait of Rabbi Hirschell are also both devoid of any Judaica apart from Hebrew text on the spines of books. Neither is wearing anything that would mark him out as a Rabbi and although one might perhaps surmise from their general physiognomy that these were not of Anglo-Saxon origin, there is little to suggest positively from their 59 dress Jews. The selection of individual images seemsto that they appearance or are have been done with some care for the interpretation that might emerge and perhaps images, Jewish for to the whose neutrality, as ethnicity of their subjects, with an eye lines Anglo-Jewish have the positioning. of an main supported would Predictably, given the composition of the General Committee and the project in which they were involved in promoting this Exhibition, one of the two remaining be the to into the members of related gathered might portraits which groupings Cousinhood -

Anglolate leadership inter-married to century nineteenth the of mid

Sephardi the This forebears. Jewry and their started with early members of s$Cat. reference 959. s9 Cat. references 985 and 1004. Hirschell was also depicted in an engraving by W. Holl, This 1012). (Item in 1808, the Slater, by engraving exhibition used published after a painting foot illustration. the the Hebrew text of includes at

87 `aristocracy', predecessors of the Montefiores, Levy Barent Cohen (1747-1808) many of whose descendants were involved in the Cousinhood's inter-marriages, Isaac D' Israel (1776-1848), father of Benjamin Disraeli and the first generation of the Rothschilds. It then moved towards the contemporary members of the AngloJewish leadership. Inevitably given the business interests of the majority of AngloJewry's main families, many of the subjects of these portraits came from the world of finance. However, the organisers were apparently conscious of a need to project a included. image Here the wider and politicians and members of professions were also (1772-1823) Economist, David Ricardo the the the again examples of portraits of Quaker the to and not mentioned, conversion was marriage a and subsequent whose Member of Parliament, Ralph Bernal (1784-1854) give no visual clues as to the in in have Jewish a group showing any way stood out sitters' origins - neither would 6Q their periods . of eminent person of The last and in some instances less predictable and more interesting grouping These from these Jews included spheres. outside either of prominent was that which included actors and musicians (including some from the world of popular culture), leading figures from the worlds of secular learning and academe,prominent converts by the Exhibition 61 Once the of way Jewish again, revisiting affairs. and supporters of interpretations displayed, seems the items possible about that care same were actual Bland Mrs and for the of in representations been of have choice taken example to 6oCat. references 1024 and 1025.

Leoni, Lyon Myer aka 61Moses Mendes (d. 1758), poet and author of musical comediettas; (1792Nathan Isaac (1769-1810), Bland Mrs actress and singer; Opera singer and composer; (1774-1856), Braham composer; and John singer opera 1864), composer and song writer; de Jacob 1728), (d. Mendez Ferdinando physician; (b. 1813), Russell, writer; song Henry (1779-1859) Gompertz Benjamin mathematician; (1691-1762), physician; Castro Sarmento (1829-1873) Deutsch Emanuel linguist; orientalist; (c1800-1869) Nathan Benmohel, lawyer (1824-1883), Jessel George Sir lawyer (d. 1874) Waley J. and economist; Professor George Lord lawyer; (1812-1884), Benjamin Judah and Rolls; statesman the Master of and (1773-1843). Sussex Of Duke The Gordon (1750-1793);

88 John Braham. Although the Conde image

Mrs Bland is a mixture of the ingenue of

and the risquee actress with the almost revealing decolletage, she

could hardly be

interpreted as a dangerous `belle Juive' figure. 62Braham was represented in full

stage

costume in an 1802 cartoon by Dighton (1752-1814), in the Newman collection section, but an engraving by Cardon (1772-1813) shows a young man

with no

apparent hint of Jewish origins. 63Without overstating the case, a pattern of awareness about the potential for English as opposed to Jewish readings of images seems to have been present in some of the choices of individuals

64 and their representations.

Perhaps the most interesting and surprising inclusion

was that of a group of Jewish

boxers.65It is tempting to suggest that the inclusion

of this particular sub-group might

suggest that more than a decade before Max Nordau (1849-1923) was to promote `muscular Jewry' as part of the Zionist movement, the organisers of the 1887 Exhibition had recognised value in promoting this aspect of Jewish achievement alongside the more traditionally recognised and frequently deployed figures of religious

learning,

civic

financial worthiness and

success. Mendoza was a

particularly interesting subject to include, because, as the catalogue noted, he was the `the founder of the so-called elegant or scientific school of Boxing' and was during his career introduced to the Prince of Wales." His inclusion might therefore be interpreted as a demonstration of how Jewish influence could transform even raw fighting into scientific pugilism. It seemsmore likely, however, that these sportsmen 62Cat. reference 1023. 63Cat. reference 1035.

64In some casesthe importance of the subject or practical availability of an item may have dictated its selection.

65 The Exhibition

following: Catag Daniel Mendoza the reference contained pictures of 1019. Biographical Note App. 2; Dutch Sam (1775-1816), Catag. Reference 1029; Aby Belasco (1797-1824), Catag. reference 1074; Barney Aaron (c1800-1859), Catag. Reference 1074; and Young Dutch Sam (1801-1843) Catag. Reference 1029. 66 Catalogue of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, p. 55. Catag. reference 1019. Biographical Note App. 1.

89 included linked Englishness that were nineteenth century Anglo-Jewry as a mark of with eighteenth and early nineteenth century English `Sporting Life' traditions. In adopting the value sets inherent in either `muscular Jewry' or the `Sporting Life' Anglo-Jewry, it may be argued that this was going against the values of its own culture and what Daniel Boyarin has proposed is a deep seated reverence for Edelkayt - the nobility

of the gentle scholar, the respect for control and inner

67 As Boyarin argues: spirituality. The term goyim naches refers to violent physical activity such as hunting, duelling or wars all of which Jews traditionally despised, for which they in turn were despised 68 .

The Muscular Jew is the antithesis of the idea of the gentle scholar." The inclusion beyond discussion this the the of significance of argument extends specific its inherent its desire boxers Anglo-Jewish In Jewish to past. prove as part of an of

Englishness, Anglo-Jewry may in 1887 have fallen into the paradox so clearly by Bauman. articulated The harder you try to assimilate the more you emphasise the power of those be by to the whom you wish group with whom you would assimilate, of 7° accepted.

Women were conspicuous by their absence from this male gendered version Only discourse. informing thirteen its history portraits of solo Anglo-Jewish and of Mrs Bland, but these, in were included this of one all and selection women were families leading in within of their or wives mothers as roles portrayals of women importance in described the terms of Anglo-Jewry. Catherine da Costa Villareale was husbands her the two England', even Bank `Director the and father, of her of of 67Daniel Boyarin, Unheroic Conduct, p. 8 et seq. 68Ibid. p. 42. 69Ibid. p. 70. 70Z. Bauman, Modernity and Ambivalence, p. 70.

90 reference to her daughter only recorded the fact that she became Viscountess Galaway. " Ester Hana Montefiore was described as the Grandmother

Sir Moses of

and the daughter of a Leghorn coral merchant - the only achievement listed for her was that she bore eighteen children! " Judith Levy was described with reference to her father, Moses Hart, and her husband, Elias Levy; though she was credited with £4,000 to the rebuilding of the Great Synagogue.73Only as the records subscribing move towards contemporary figures do more balanced attributions appear. Lady Montefiore, wife of Sir Moses, was at least credited with having `assisted him in all his communal labours'

balance her her that the to albeit entry related of writings of -

`Private Journals'. 74 Hannah, Baroness de Rothschild, fared better - aside from her father, her Levi Cohen, husband, Barent N. M. Rothschild, mention of she and 75 `an in Anglo-Jewish Similarly, the was characterised as active worker community'. devoted `was life de Lionel's Charlotte Rothschild, to told that the wife of we are `wife her daughters, for Evelina, Leonora but the to the of/ revert and entries charity', have " This type owed as of attribution and commentary may mother of model. Jewish the those Victorian to to community. of values and attitudes as mid/late much

The Portrait sub-section was followed by one devoted to the Newman Collection of Portraits and Prints. " Of the one hundred and twenty nine catalogue in featured the individuals, previous of whom most of entries, sixty-eight were 71Cat. reference Item 967. 72Cat. reference 971. 73Cat. reference 981. 74Cat. reference 1053. 75Cat. reference ? 76Cat. references 1105,1115,1116. Committees the of present An (1851-1887). " `Alfred Newman several of member active brought he together history, remarkable Anglo-Jewish a in interested Deeply Exhibition. He bearing the started and subject. on books, portraits and pamphlets, of collection Marks, in Bevis Synagogue demolition the the ancient of against organised a movement 67. Exhibition, Historical Anglo-Jewish p. 1885'. Catalogue of the

91 portrait section, and a further twenty seven were of synagogues and of homes and places of Jewish interest. As in the Portrait section, women were all but ignored.

The remaining exhibits comprised caricatures, cartoons and other similar items, in some of which poor Jews made their only entry into this Exhibition. The images often presented stereotypes such as the ubiquitous Jewish second-hand dealer; clothes even though, as Mayhew had shown thirty years earlier, such figures were on the decline even in his time. No attempt was made to present the more recent status of the poor Jew, let alone to include such presence as a line of investigation in the overall project `...to promote a knowledge of Anglo-Jewish history'. 78 The inclusion of cartoons that took the stereotype of the Jew as the butt of their humour was explained by organisers and contemporary Jewish commentators as being a relic of past prejudice now all but expunged. As the Jewish Chronicle, 8 April 1887 noted:

Perhaps one of the most striking pieces of instruction for the Christian is by Committee the the the that visitor caricatures of past which conveyed have had the courage and good senseto exhibit. They represent a phase of English opinion that in its cruder forms is now past but survivals of which be The Gentile linger in talk. ashamedof these visitor will still on popular his be his Exhibition is The to a credit... shame will representations and honourable by dint conduct, a of remarkable record of prejudices outlived but has be England Jews of which may proud, record of which not only 74 be proud. reason also to

The congratulatory note of this comment might be read as containing faint helping English behaviour Jews the the Jewish of superiority undertones of it. is held It those who overcome an unwarranted prejudice which was unworthy of demonstrate desire how to the may interesting a shared culture of example also an have better if it to include was have induced the organisers to anti-Jewish material; as England history/culture of portrayed negatively been part of the cartoon albeit it. by ignored than 78 Catalogue of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, p. vii. 79 Jewish Chronicle, 8 April 1887.

The promoters presented Judaism as an ancient

religion, as Christianity's

precursor in the Holy Land. Its rituals were displayed as modes of worship, which could be understood by any visitor to an Exhibition of this kind Jew and Gentile alike - and in such a way as to counter any preconceived notion that they were an inexplicable series of mysteries, which could only have meaning for the initiated insider. The profusion of religious artefacts was intended to

elucidate and demystify

Judaism and to display it as another legitimate and unthreatening form of dissenting religious practice within Victorian English society. The Judaism that defined `the Jew' in the context of this Exhibition, although rooted in the past, was presented or shown as aspiring to be of everyday relevance to Victorian society and to co-exist with other religions within this wider context.

The Jew in England was not to be viewed as a recent immigrant or an but outsider, as one who could trace his ancestry back almost one thousand years in a life had he to the country and culture of which contributed and within whose society he had long been accepted. He was above all a subject of the Monarch like any other Englishman.

The Anglo-Jew was defined by an acceptance of those standards of

behaviour established by the leadership; a leadership that presented a united front both internally and externally and admitted of no significant dissension from its host its believed those the Anglo-Jewry nation and of codes accorded with codes. freedom loss degree that that religious without of of mutual assimilation permitted its history. in There Anglo-Jewish was a very strong construct of was a main plank it image Jew in the to the this of sought presentation and overall class sense of Anglo-Jewry's establish.

leaders regarded themselves having, as of right, a place

93 among the upper echelons of English society and anything that vitiated

against such a

reading was largely ignored by the Exhibition. " Although the Exhibition inevitably focused on the lives of the leading Jewish figures during its

period, there was little of

a Disraelian sense of celebration of the unique contribution of the Jewish race. Indeed, it would seem that the organisers went out of their way to avoid such a reading. The question has been raised, is it wise for our community thus to thrust itself upon public notice? Does not our strength and wisdom lie in dignified reserve, in the absence of all ostentation? Now I may aver on behalf of the zealous originator of the project, and indeed on behalf of all those who laboured with him, that they view with aversion everything that savours of flaunt and ostentation. 81

Contemporary Critical Reception

Looking back on the Exhibition as it closed, the Jewish Chronicle was almost in its unstinting praising success. Tomorrow the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition closes. Except, perhaps, financially it has been in every way an unqualified success...... Altogether the Exhibition has more than fulfilled the expectations that were raised by it. Mr Isidore Spielman and his fellow 82 have be labours. to workers every reason satisfied with the results of their

This praise may seem a little overdone, in the light of the attendance which had totalled little more than 12,000 in a three week run -a

low figure for an very

in Although this this the General Committee included, as we exhibition of size era. have noted, a significant non-Jewish element, including minor aristocracy, members liberal Parliament, the the the professions, many of the of clergy, army, academe and by from it late Victorian figures their society were conspicuous absence or of major 80One of the more revealing, although perhaps inadvertent, examples of this class bias is the in Catalogue by School Outfitters. Charles Baker-Boys This the and placed advertisement be Exhibition Jew Gentile that to the the assumed visitors or would of clearly company the of population. segment school private ß1Sermon preached by Rev Dr H. Adler at Bayswater Synagogue, 15 April 1887; reported in April 1887. 22 Chronicle, Jewish the 82Jewish Chronicle, ?.

94 from attendance at the Exhibition. Queen Victoria was in Cannes at the time of the opening, but did not, on her return, pay it a visit although a month later, in May 1887, she journeyed to the East End to open the first completed section of the People's Palace (the eponymous Queen's Hall) accompanied by Walter Besant.

The non-Jewish press was generally sparing in its coverage of the event. The Times published a short piece on the Exhibition which focused on some of its older items - the cartoon of Aaron from the Essex Rolls, the Bodleian Ewer and the linkage between the Hebrew contracts and the Star Chamber

the well as as use of -

images of actors and boxers. 83The Daily Telegraph 's more comprehensive review was concerned about the manner in which the Exhibition over reached its more limited title and aim, an opinion similar to that expressed by `a Student of Anglo84 is Jewish History' whose views in his letter to the Jewish Chronicle noted above. Far transcending the scope indicated by the title, the exhibition of objects illustrating Jewish life and thought arranged at the Royal Albert Hall is a is branch Semitic alone of which archaeology one complete collection of by designation Anglo-Jewish, the all the rest serving to throw an covered in history light Judaism the the of parts of various whole on extended if Anglo-Jewish Portraits the the element only chief not are perhaps world. . . be fresh history Judaism In to written of short were a properly speaking.... the to the community of material advance moral and with special reference in England the materials might be sought with great success in this 85 Exhibition. admirably complete

Although during the month of April the Illustrated London News mentioned other Connoisseur Art Journal it the the Exhibitions every week, neither nor made any nor Exhibition. Historical Anglo-Jewish the mention of

In terms of what I have

described as

83The Times, 6 April 1887. 84`A Student of Anglo-Jewish History', Jewish Chronicle, 6 May 1887. 85The Daily Telegraph, 4 April 1887.

95 its underlying aim and discourse, perhaps the most damning-with-faint-praise

review

of the Exhibition was that of the Athenaeum. No visitor whether Jew or Gentile who has had an opportunity of visiting the being Exhibition held at the Royal Albert Hall can fail to be above now interested in the numerous objects there on view connected with the Jewish 86 cult.

The idea of an `interesting' separate `Jewish cult' was of course precisely what the promoters of the 1887 Exhibition were seeking to avoid. The problem of mounting an Exhibition

of this kind, one aim of which was to prove a shared

is that the act of so doing emphasises- as we have noted with various of the position, individual exhibits but disruption. It not only points of conjunction, also of can indeed alert others to the points of dissimilarity. As Baumann suggests: One cannot knock on a door unless one is outside; and it is the act of knocking which alerts residents to the fact that he who knocks is 87 outside.

Notwithstanding a less than enthusiastic reaction by most of the non-Jewish have its failure I to proposed was the seeming or unwillingness accept what press and in discourse later discourse Exhibition, 1887 the that gathered strength of underlying Anglo-Jewry As years.

increasing by the the problems posed ever confronted

immigrant Jews, the discourse established by its Exhibition provided the vision of the it it in to to the England `the Jew' to offer which was and adhered which place of immigrants and their succeeding generations.

86Athenaeum, ? 87Z. Baumann, Modernity and Ambivalence, p. 78.

CHAPTER 3 The Importance of being Solomon

Solomon J Solomon by his reputation in his art, his loyalty to his race, his popularity and his ' the youth was very man.

Introduction From a twenty-first century standpoint, Solomon J. Solomon may, perhaps justifiably, be regarded as a relatively minor figure in the pantheon of late Victorian and early Edwardian art; little more than a portraitist of some distinction and a contributor to the War effort through his work on camouflage. Such a judgement 2 his minimises achievements. It would ignore the positive assessmentby his peers in 3 English the art world. It would disregard the view of his contemporaries both

within

the Anglo-Jewish community and abroad, for whom he was almost the portrait 4 painter of choice. It

would overlook the major part he played in the development of

' H. Cohen,

personal notes on the appointment of Solomon J. Solomon as first President of the Maccabeans, quoted in Olga Phillips, Solomon J. Solomon, p. 57. 2 The Solomon J. Solomon is included directly or by reference in many of the work of studies and exhibitions of late Victorian/early Edwardian Art - as for example most recently in Exposed. The Victorian Nude, Tate Britain, London 2002 and in Art in the Age of Queen Victoria, Royal Academy Travelling Exhibition, 1999-2001. In terms of solo exhibitions or monographic academic studies, he has been largely ignored for some time. The most recent solo exhibition of his work was held at the Ben Uri Gallery: Solomon J. Solomon RA, Ben Uri Art Society ; London: Ben Uri Art Gallery, 1990. This owed its genesis as much to his former President of that organisation (1924-6) as to any sudden rediscovery of position as a a long undervalued talent. Jenny Perry's extended catalogue essay for that Exhibition

represents the most recent publicly available study of the artist. Prior to that, Olga Phillips' 1933 biography Solomon J. Solomon remains the only published study. I am indebted to Irit Miller of the University of Haifa for her co-operation in providing me with information on the artist based on her research for an as yet unpublished doctoral thesis. ' He was a founder member of the New English Art Club in 1886 and of the Society of Portrait Painters in 1891. In 1896 he was elected an Associate Member of the Royal Academy and in 1906 he became a Full Member. In 1918 he was elected President of the Royal Society of British Painters.

4 In 1903 his work was discussed, together with that of Israels, Ury, Lilien, Liebermann and Epstein, in Martin Buber, Jüdische Künstler, Berlin: Jüdischer Verlag, 1903. S. L. Bensusan, who wrote the chapter on Solomon, pp. 140-153, was a member of the later in this chapter) from 1892 to 1905, during the period of (discussed Maccabeans

97 the succeeding generations of talented young Jewish level and through his work

artists both on a direct personal

with the Jewish Educational Aid Society. Finally, it

would fail to take into account his role within Anglo-Jewish society, of whose intellectual and cultural elite he was

leading a member.

This chapter does not seek a twenty first century

rehabilitation of Solomon's

artistic reputation, but rather aims to assessthe contribution he made in terms of visual representation to the Anglo-Jewish discourse established for and by the 1887 Anglo-Jewish Exhibition. The analysis starts with an examination of the extent to which Judaism and Jewishness influenced the life and work of the artist during the period of this study. A brief overview of his contribution to portraiture is followed by discussion a of his role as a painter of English myth and history. This is of particular importance because it provided Solomon with a priori authenticity and credibility as interpreter a visual of Englishness as he produced pictures which reflected the English aspirations of Anglo-Jewry. The chapter discusses selected images which, it be will argued, provide visual affirmation of facets of the discourse emerging from the 1887 Exhibition and, in particular, those which relate to a shared present and a shared past.

A Jewish upbringing

Solomon's Presidency of that organisation. His generally favourable assessmentexamined Solomon as a portrait painter of distinction - hinting at a greater facility with male as `Vielleicht ist Porträtkunst in Bildnissen female to subjects: männlichen seine opposed literary his historical in the treatment of erfolgreicher als weiblichen' - and addressed 1907, Solomon's Group. Family November/December two In the of works works. -A Painting (Tate Papa Gallery, London) and In the Field (Ben Uri Artist's wife and children:

98 Solomon J. Solomon, the fourth son in a family

of twelve children, was born

in 1860 in Borough in South London. 5 His father, Joseph,

was clearly a man of some

financial standing; Solomon was able to enjoy a lengthy period of privately funded art training without the burden of contributing to the family coffers the unlike scions of other, later immigrant families. Jewish education and observance formed

integral part of his upbringing. Each weekend the Borough Synagogue Rabbi, Simeon Singer, taught Solomon and his siblings Hebrew in the choir at the Borough Synagogue, sang

6 and German. Solomon also

which, as contemporary records and

illustrations show, was an imposing edifice of a kind likely to lasting make a impression on a person, who, according to his biographer, `had

a certain sympathy

7 formality with and etiquette'. When in 1877 he went to art school in Paris, particular 8 for him Jewish family. to arrangements were made stay with a

The economic circumstances of his birth and his own professional successas an artist assured Solomon's personal and professional entree into the higher echelons 9 Anglo-Jewish of society. In 1897 he married Ella Montagu, daughter of Hyman Montagu, who was the curator of the numismatic section of the 1887 Exhibition. Because of an earlier intermarriage between second cousins, this then linked

Gallery, London) were exhibited at the Ausstellung jüdischer Künstler, Galerie für alte und neue Kunst, Berlin. 5 For fuller details of his early upbringing and life see Olga Phillips, Solomon I Solomon. 6 Biographical reference App. 1.

Olga Phillips, Solomon J. Solomon, p. 82. g Ibid., p. 34. 9 By 1905 he had a home in London and one in Birchington, Kent. "At about the time of for he being between £350 £150 family was these paid and a single portrait nd... was moves, less £1,000 This than time not a year and probably considerably more. was earning at that family households Solomon I Jenny Perry, two to and comfortably". support a enough Solomon RA, Ben Uri Art Gallery Catalogue, 1990, p. 10. Correspondence regarding the £ 1,260 in Mr J Allegory 1904. Letter Hamilton, An to price confirms a of purchase of Gallery 10 Art May 1904, Preston. Harris Museum Archives Preston the Chairman of

99 Solomon to the Beddingtons, another leading family within

the Anglo-Jewish

community - Alfred Beddington was a member of the General Committee of the 1887 Exhibition. laws) further

Patronage from Samuel Montagu (no relative of Solomon's in-

enhanced and advanced his career. In 1897 Samuel Montagu

commissioned a mural by Solomon for the Royal Exchange, Charles I demanding the Five members at the Guildhall 1641-2.10Solomon's Lily sister who was also an artist was married to the architect Delissa Joseph (1859-1927) who designed several of the l l built in this period. synagogues

This emphasis on the importance of Judaism and a Jewish heritage within Solomon's early upbringing is particularly relevant in the context of this study. Solomon remained, throughout his life, a committed Jew

both in religious and -

social terms. He was conscious of what he regarded as the obligations that this imposed on him. His writings include a major lecture/article (examined later in this chapter), in which he articulated his belief that the continued existence of an identifiable Jewish people was dependent on an underlying foundation of Orthodox Judaism. His version of orthodoxy was defined largely within the terms of that espoused by the United Synagogue of his day and not those more traditional/radical introduced late by immigrant into Victorian England Jews from the versions, some of Eastern Europe and Russia. Judaism and a sense of his own Jewishness influenced his daily life and attitudes. He did not paint on the Sabbath and was a regular it his home is from Birchington Synagogue country recorded, attendee at - walking, 10Royal Exchange, London. 11Including Hammersmith (1890), Dennington Park-Hampstead (1892) for which Solomon J. Solomon designed stained glass windows, South Hackney (1897), Finsbury Park 1901,

100 to neighbouring Westgate for Sabbath services in a private Synagogue of a friend. 12 Demonstrating his awareness of the obligations imposed on him because of his religion and his place within Anglo-Jewry at the time of his nomination for the Presidency of the Royal Society of British Artists in 1918, Solomon reputedly said, `I feel ought to accept the Presidency, because I am a Jew'. 13 This personal did however, Judaism inform his work in quite the same overt to commitment not, later. Subjects I the manner as some other of such as artists whose work will review Jews at prayer, genre pictures of Jewish life, scenes in the Jewish East End did not figure in his oeuvre. He was a painter of the Anglo-Jewish world. He was, of course, into As East End. immigrant flooding Jews the the the we shall situation of aware of William Solomon's it the in later Chapter, young relatives who was one of a see Rothenstein claimed was responsible for introducing him to the Machzike Hadass, knew Solomon for his Whitechapel and worked the venue series of paintings. own bith professionally as an illustrator and publicly on various Jewish committees with Israel in in England this figure Jewish literary key period, the community of the End East had him have Zangwill, who could such a need existed - of aware made Jewish 14 the links direct that his had however, part of with Jewry. Solomon, own his it from through Jewish the emerging artists young of many with and community As Society. Aid Educational Jewish see, shall we Maccabeans the the and work with Exhibition Antiquities Arts Jewish in figure key the and he was a subsequently also a at

like Solomon's Despite this, vision, in 1906. artistic Gallery all of Whitechapel the

in his all case discourse, westwards set resolutely Anglo-Jewish remained that of the Tynesider London: London, Synagogues Lost The Renton, A. 1904. of London East South 182 2000, p. Publishing,

12Phillips, Solomon J. Solomon, p. 97.

15 Uri Ben RA, Solomon J. p. 13Perry, Solomon catalogue,

101 of his life. His Jewish subjects whether in portraits or thematically were those

of the

Anglo-Jewish community. It would be hard to divine the turmoil within English Jewry in the late nineteenth and early twentieth

century from a review of Solomon's

oeuvre. There is no sense in his work of a conflict between his Jewishness and his Englishness, no questioning of his belonging

being or an outsider, no unresolved

ambivalences between different sets of values. He seems to have been comfortable his Anglo-Jewish identity Englishman with Mosaic the This an of persuasion. be interpreted as meaning that he ignored his socio-religious heritage. should not Awareness of what Jewishness and Judaism meant to him was an essential underlying factor which, as I shall seek to prove, was present both in his painting and in his public pronouncements and writings.

A choice of style and a choice of subjects

In 1876 Solomon went to Heatherlys, a private art school, and in the following year to the Royal Academy Schools. In 1879 he studied at the Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris under Alexandre Cabanel (1823-89), one of the most successful fierce in latter in France the the nineteenth century and a part of opponent of painters Impressionism. This was followed by a brief period at the Academy in Munich before Solomon embarked on two years of travel with his friend and fellow artist Arthur Hacker (1858-1919) to Spain, Morocco, Italy, Germany and Holland. He returned to Paris where, for a further nine months, in 1882-3 he again worked with Cabanel. His in The Judgement Paris, is Cabanel debt to such early works as of evident stylistic 14Biographical Note. App. 1.

102 The Birth of Love and Eve. 15Thus, Solomon although was in Paris as a student and then as a young, practicing artist during the period his personal artistic preferences lay might have followed

of the Impressionist movement,

elsewhere. Solomon, at just that age when he

an avant-garde line, demonstrated a closer allegiance to

contemporaneous academic practice rather than to the experiments of emerging modernity. This decision by the then twenty two year old painter may in some ways account both for his popularity among his contemporaries and its subsequentdecline.

Success and recognition of his talent and industry came early. In 1881 he had his first painting hung at a Royal Academy Summer Exhibition

-a

singular

achievement at a time when this Exhibition was the main art-selling event of the 16 year. Thereafter, he became a regular contributor at the Royal Academy exhibitions exhibiting in what became known as `Solomon's corner' every year but three until his death in 1927.

Solomon's importance as a portrait painter in late Victorian England should not be underestimated. His paintings included King George V, Queen Mary and the have Queen from life had He Victoria Prince Wales. painted young of would she not '7 died before he could commence the commission. In 1914 he took over the for George Queen King V Mary Coronation Luncheon The to and paint commission

15Solomon J Solomon, The judgement of Paris, Oil on canvas, 1891, dimensions and 1896,254 Oil The Love, Birth Solomon J Solomon, x on canvas, of whereabouts unknown; 127, whereabouts unknown; Solomon J Solomon, Eve, Oil on canvas, 1908,310 x 142, Ealing Public Library, London. The Studio, Vol VIII, 1896, p. 10, reviewing The Birth of his `... it Exhibition, 1896 Academy Royal to typical the of as Love as part of referred French academic style (he studied under Cabanel). '

16Portrait of a Gentleman. Details unknown.

17His 1904 portrait of Queen Victoria, based on photography, was presented by the Earl King Edward VII. to Cadogan of

103 18 (1865 Bacon death John He after the of the original artist, also painted -1914). members of the English aristocracy and many of the leading politicians of his day. In 1909 he painted Prime Minister Asquith (1852-1928) and in 1910 Prime Minister Ramsey Macdonald (1866-1937). 19 Working at this level not only made him an increasingly obvious choice for commissions by leading Anglo-Jewish figures, but also gave those portraits reflected weight within an integrationist dialogue between Anglo-Jewry and the host community.

Solomon's role as portraitist of the Anglo-Jewish community is demonstrated by Summer Academy his Royal the most clearly an examination of annual exhibits at Show and the Exhibitions of the Society of Portrait Painters. From 1885 until his death in 1927 he usually included among his exhibits at the Royal Academy at least 20 The Anglo-Jewish the role call community. a prominent member of one portrait of in his to the Anglo-Jewish annual contributions marked was equally subjects of Exhibitions

Solomon Of Painters. Society Portrait the thirty pictures of of the

1914, 1891 its inaugural between there, eighteen were of and exhibition of exhibited 21 Jewish sitters. Solomon was also invited to undertake specially commissioned historian Heinrich German Jewish included These the Jewish notables. of portraits Anglo-Jewish for 1887 London the latter's to Graetz at the time of the visit

181914- 1922,? x 226 cm, Guildhall, London.

is Asquith was Prime Minister from 1908 to 1916 and Macdonald was Prime Minister in Oil Minister, Prime Asquith, H. H. Hon. Rt. 1931. The 1929 on to 1924 and again from Oil P., M. MacDonald Ramsay Club, London; Liberal National on 90, 1909,120 x canvas, London. Gallery, Portrait National 72.4, 1910,90.2 x canvas, 20Including Mrs Ludwig Messell (1885), Israel Zangwill (1894 and 1905), Sir Benjamin J Levy J. Phillips Franklin, (1900), Ellis Tuck Adolph (1889), Simon and John Sir Cohen and Dr (1904), his daughter] [and (1903) Seligman Albert Sebag-Montefiore Joseph Sir (1901), (1913). Salaman Nina (1910), Mosenthal George Jessel Albert (1907), and Adler Hermann Acc 3489/21/22/23/24/25. Archives, Metropolitan London Painters, Portrait 21Society of

104 Exhibition, 22 two portraits of Lord Mayor Faudel-Phillips (see below) during his 1897 mayoralty and, in 1906, Dr Herman Adler, Chief Rabbi. 23 These portraits, in in exhibited public spaces, contributed visual terms to the integration of those individuals by particular and, extension, albeit to a lesser degree, of the Anglo-Jewish community as a whole within English contemporary society. It would take another decade and a quasi-generation before Solomon's successors attempted to include the lower and immigrant echelons of English Jewry in similar public exhibitions.

The exploration of the medieval was a theme that had played a significant in English cultural and artistic practice in the mid nineteenth century and in the part formation of Englishness in the latter part of the nineteenth century. The public fascination with the middle ages continued into the Edwardian deeply levels. legacy Gothic The Revival the was so of age on many ingrained in British society that many forms of medievalism had become by from the the exemplified gothic architecture part of national character, the Houses of Parliament to the chivalric code of conduct of the British 24 gentleman.

There are examples of this in the work

Solomon's

predecessors and

Belle Dame Dicksee's 1871 Errant, Knight including Millais' and contemporaries sans merci.

25It was a theme which attracted Solomon and featured often in his pre-

1914 oeuvre. But, as we shall see, it was not just the visual representation of scenes idea The Solomon. interested of a code of from stories of knightly endeavour which importance to the hero/Englishman of was behaviour to which the true submit would

22This was shown at the Royal Society of British Artists Exhibition that year. 23This was shown at the Royal Academy Exhibition of that year.

24Michael Lacy, Students of Arms: a survey of arms and armour study in Great in Britain Reading, University D. Ph. War, World First thesis, of from the eighteenth century to the ff. 312 6, 1999, ch. pp.

Art Bristol City 1902, Oil Merci, Sans Dame of 25Sir Frank Dicksee, La Belle on canvas, Gallery, Bristol.

105 artist. It paralleled his personally held beliefs about the importance of the code of conduct that should guide the life of the practising Jew. The conflation of knightly conduct with that of Jewish ethics presents us with an interesting paradox. The figure of the Knight is the paradigm of Boyarin's concept of goyim naches, discussed in the earlier chapter on the 1887 Exhibition and, by extension, the antithesis of the gentle scholar of the Jewish code. I would, however, suggest that Solomon might not have been aware of or overly concerned about such a potential clash since his views

Judaism were probably far more influenced by contemporary Orthodoxy as practised by his class and circle in late Victorian Britain than by a perhaps more rigorous Hassidic view of Jewish virtue.

Solomon's Laus Deo (Fig. 1), exhibited at Royal Academy Exhibition of 1899, was praised by the critics of the Magazine of Art, who commented that its `execution and handling are very able' and the Art Journal, who referred to its, `fine feeling of movement and action'.

26The image, which explored the world of Knight

Errantry, had long cultural antecedents which one might trace back to Arthurian 27 legend or Spenser's Faerie Queene. It is also open to more contemporary readings. For the critic of the Art Journal, the links were with the medieval world at one knight Solomon's Although, the Pre-Raphaelites. critic remarked, as remove via the Burnethe `is quite evidently no relation to any of sad eyed and ascetic warriors of

26The Magazine ofArt, May 1899, p. 391. The Art Journal, May 1899, p. 162. Isidore in Universelle Exposition it to highly of the work and wished exhibit at Spielmann thought by it then demurred that but Solomon the an was following grounds on Paris the year Ref Archive, Albert Museum Victoria Art Library, National and `unrepresentative work'. 2227. MSL/1999/2/2226 5 and CXIV

1590. in first Queene Faerie Parts (1552-1599) the 27Edmund Spenser published were of -

106 Jones'. 28He was a powerful hero figure

literally knight in the quite shining armour. -

The image is, however, more than the depiction of the heroic knight figure singing to boost his spirits as he leaves what the Art Journal critic described as `the enchanted 29 This glade'.

critic went on to question whether the figure behind the Knight,

helmet had been by the the Laurel Leaves of Victory, was carrying which replaced 30 `guardian but `the fairest temptress of them all'. This touched not a angel', perhaps in Solomon's this theme thought and work - this idea of a higher code recurrent on humankind if it is defeat to to temptation and achieve of conduct which must adhere its full potential. In Laus Deo that code is enshrined in the positive edicts of chivalry. The critic of the Jewish Chronicle writing on 5 May 1899 suggested a less in hovering fact in figure Knight the the was which above complicated reading 31 `... Fame to guard and direct' Here the linkage could have been between the .

Queen heroic to main subject and possibly a contemporary reference chivalric, Victoria; the building to the left and rear of the middle ground echoes the shape of the Rotunda of Windsor Castle, a place by then already enshrined in English history for more than 800 years.

Solomon's 1906 Diploma work for the Royal Academy took as its subject the quintessential story of medieval/mythological

32 England, St George (Fig. 2).

Saint George, knight in was image the The shining armour, particularly of in be Empire to the seen and was increasingly used as a symbol of 33 discipline books virtue. martial and extolling and posters monument, 28See Art Journal, May 1899. 29See Art Journal, May 1899.

SeeArt Journal, May 1899. 31Jewish Chronicle, 5 May 1899, p. 14. 32St George, Oil on canvas, 1906,212.1 x 105.4, Royal Academy. 1999, Reading, University Ph. D thesis, Arms, of 33Michael Lacy, Students of unpublished ff. 312 6, Chapter pp.

107

Solomon presented St George to the viewer as the heroic knight

- sharing

many of the physical attributes of the subject of Laus Deo. St George is the victorious hero defeating Evil in the form of the impaled dragon. As

a work of art, the critics

less were convinced. The reviewer in The Speaker, 19 May 1899,

it to referred as `a

34 quaint conception'. Marion Spielmann, reviewing the exhibition for The Graphic of 12 May 1899, described this work as: Another piece of classical mythology is that of Mr Solomon `St George' -a carrying off the lady - more admirable in composition of line than 35 in convincing arrangement.

The battling Saint, however, seems less to be `carrying the lady' or even rescuing her by slaying the dragon, than to be ensnared by her. One must question whether Evil is only limited to the dragon, which is demoted to a position of relative focal obscurity foot the at of the picture. As with the reading of Laus Deo by the critic of the Art Journal which identified the figure at the Knight's head as the `fairest temptress', I would suggest that, in St George, Evil is in fact also personified in the form of the damsel, coiled around him. The serpentine manner in which she entwines herself can be read as a deliberate visualisation of such temptation. Solomon is surely prompting lay in demonstrated that the not simply path of righteousness a reading which but in its Evil, the subtler and more resisting conquering obvious expressions of dangerous manifestations.

In both of these works, one should also note the care and attention that As Lacy by his heroes. Michael lavished the Solomon actual suits of armour worn on

3aThe Speaker, 19 May 1899, p. 160. 15The Graphic 12 May 1899, pp. 612

108 has argued, by the turn of the century armour had moved from being the subject

archaeological and historical research into being regarded as a fine art object in its own right. The view of medieval arms and armour as objects of applied, or even fine, further art was reinforced with the opening of the Wallace Collection to the in 1900.36 public

Recognition of Solomon as a valid interlocutor and contributor to this pantheon of romanticised English heroes and to the discourse and formation of Englishness served to make him even more important to the cause of the AngloJewish discourse. The more Solomon became recognised through works such as these, as an artist, who understood the qualities of Englishness, as the English would like to perceive them, the more his depictions of Anglo-Jews might be accepted as indeed them. that shared with past was and a part of a present

Solomon and the Maccabeans

Within the Jewish community, Solomon was a major figure in the wider in 1891 he life. At thirty intellectual the elected Jewish was one of age sphere of his Founding President of the Maccabeans, a position which when combined with important to be of to a series springboard a proved painter, continued success as a Jewish the community. roles within

the for Jewish object with professional gentlemen, The Maccabeans, `a club bringing of

literature, in interested or artistic science, Jews together who are

professional

Wanderers `the formal less in its had grouping a antecedents pursuits',

109 37 Kilburn' The Maccabeans started out as a quasi-social dining of discussion and . group, meeting about six times a year, furthering the interests of Jews by the promotion and support of professional, learned and charitable activities. Its early members included many of the leading Jewish intelligentsia of the period Spielmann, Meldola, Delissa Joseph, Singer

Zangwill, -

as well as such non-Jewish notables as -

Canon Barnett who was a very early member.38 In 1896

some of the philanthropic

aims of the Maccabeans and their supporters found a new outlet Jewish the Educational Aid Society (JEAS). This organisation, funds the and of which it disposed, sought to provide assistancefor secondary in cases of exceptional need'. Solomon may not

education `for exceptional talent

always have been the most forward-

thinking member of the Arts Section of the JEAS. He turned down the first application from Mark Gertler who then only obtained JEAS funding for his training at the Slade School of Art thanks to the intervention of William Rothenstein. As we later, Rothenstein himself benefited from the support and influence of shall see Solomon. Solomon's presence and influence, however, contributed greatly to the credibility of the JEAS and enabled it to achieve much in his area of activity 39 for support art students.

Among his friends (and portrait subjects) were both his own contemporaries figures like Sir (see below). Arthur Hacker, Henry Thompson such as as well as older

36Michael Lacy, Students of Arms, unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of Reading, 1999, Chapter 6, pp. 312 ff.

37For background on the Wanderers, see The Jewish Dickens. Exhibition and catalogue, London: The Jewish Museum, 1999, p. 8.

38Mocatta Archive, University of Southampton, MS 126/ AJ 17.1.1.1 ff. 39For a fuller discussion of the JEAS see Tickner Modern Life and Modern Subjects, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000, pp. 149-153 and also Tickner and Gross, Art' in The Ben War British Uri Aid Society Pre-First World Education Jewish `The and Story, London, 2001, pp. 59-65.

110 He was, as we have already noted, a friend of fellow Jewish intellectuals such as Israel Zangwill and non-Jews like the writer and humorist, Jerome K. Jerome (18591927). Perhaps it was this apparently ready ability to mix across such a wide spectrum of English society, as well as within the middle and upper echelons of Jewish society, that made his selection as President of the Maccabeans so appropriate.

In 1901 Solomon, by then a successful, established and mature artist presented a paper to the Maccabeans entitled `Art and Judaism', which is as revealing about his views on Judaism as it is about art and the links between the religion and art. The paper is a vital component in contextualising Solomon's work as it sheds light on his personal conceptual and philosophical outlook. 40

The twin themes of Solomon's dissertation were the contrast between and effects on art of Hellenism and Hebraism and the negative role played in the development of art practice among Jews by the edict of the Second Commandment. `Art and Judaism' did not emerge just at the turn of the century as an autonomous intellectual. formed It longer by Jewish part a painter and of and wider production a debate within contemporary writing and discussion on these issues both in England intellectuals in both Jewish Europe the mid and non-Jewish among and continental literary English From the late milieu, cultural/ within nineteenth century. and Solomon's interest and thoughts would almost certainly been influenced by the in 1869, Anarchy, Culture Arnold Mathew published and whose seminal work of

40The paper was delivered to the Maccabeans, London 28 April 1901and published in the 553-566. 1901, July Review, Quarterly pp. Jewish

111 devoted an entire chapter to a discussion of the influences of Hellenism and Hebraism on historical and contemporaneous religious thought. 41Finestein observed in his assessment of this chapter and of Arnold's view that `rabbinic Judaism tended by its nature to be out of accord with aesthetic values' but perceptively noted that: Beneath, not always expressed, is the suggestion that what might be called the Jewish spirit has a restlessly creative quality which is distinctive of it. 42

It is probable that Solomon was also aware of the writings on these subjects of, for example, Heine (1796-1856), who was specifically mentioned by Arnold, Graetz and in the wider context Ernst Renan.43

Solomon's lecture revealed a profound appreciation of what he saw as the He dangers Orthodox Judaism the extolled of assimilation. potential and values of it, Arnold the laws `a Jewish the put as or, excellence' aiming at moral code as set of `strictness of conscience' which was at the core of his interpretation of Hebraism, Israelites' in the `obtained to prevent a people so assimilative every respect as which

from taking on the mores of their host communities. Solomon understood the dilemma posed by a need to keep rigidly to the letter of the law `religious enthusiasm ...

had the fanaticism' degree though adherence such even of partakes of a certain

potential

but from just non-Jews to alienate those who adopted such a posture not

44 his felt He that the comajority of from the majority of their co-religionists. Jews indulgent' to that such fact `grossly in and self and material religionists were

41For Arnold, see Biographical Note App. 1. in in Anglo-Jewry Arnold' `Mathew Finestein, Israel 42For a fuller duscusssion see 1999. London Mitchell, Vallentine Times, Changing Jew Artless The Bland, Kalman 43For a fuller discussion of these topics see - especially 37-58. 2, Chapter pp. 44Jewish Quarterly Review, July 1901, pp. 553-566.

112 `Judaism does not appeal with adequate force'. 45He was, however,

uncompromising

in his rejection of reform as a solution. the reformed section, the whole Jewish service, both at home, where with ... it hardly exists, and in the Synagogue, has been de-characterised beyond recognition, let down in fact to the level of a patronizing Gentile approval.46

Solomon rejected the notion that pre-Diaspora Jews had had artistic talent

`It is clear that the artistic craftsmen engaged in building the first temple were non Israelites' - and argued unequivocally that since `... reproduction of natural forms, more particularly the human form, was forbidden to the Jews. Art in such conditions 47 flourish' could not

In his discussion of the influence that Hebraism, standing in opposition to Hellenism, had had on artistic practice, Solomon contrasted the Greek ideal of the idealization human form Hebraic the perfected with of `the purity of the conception of

48 his G*d'. His argument

linked Hellenism with propounded an equation, which

Paganism and then with Catholicism: the numerous saints savour of Paganism. The service and its practices ... in largely to warrant one asserting that the sensuous as generally are so 49 is Church Pagan. spirit of this

Solomon contrasted this linkage with that between the Hebraic tradition and Northern European Protestantism: `The strict English Sunday is in spirit the Hebrew 5° Sabbath'. Kalman Bland points out that Solomon ignored in his article David Kaufmann's contribution to the Jewish Quarterly of 1897 on paintings and sculpture

45ibid. 46ibid. 47ibid. 48ibid. 49ibid. soibid.

113 in early modern Italian synagogues.51The explanation for this may lie in a rejection by Solomon of specifically religious art both by and for Jews. In his writing, Solomon argued that this Hebraic influence on Northern Protestantism had affected the types of artistic practice most commonly seen - `Portraiture, landscape and genre 52 Of is Solomon's the themes. there main are religious art not much'. artistic output fell into the former categories and it would thus have been intellectually consistent (if him ignored for have Kaufmann's evidence, as perhaps to not academically rigorous) being a minor aberration to his own general rule. In terms of his own definitions and Hebraist. Solomon, the as might artist, categories one classify

Solomon portrays Anglo-Jewry

In the introduction, Solomon's central role as a portrait painter within and of in detailed The the Anglo-Jewish analysis, the paintings community was outlined. demonstrate because been have they follows, most vividly aspectsof selected, which in the debate and past the Anglo-Jewish sharing of concept the which ways and by the artist. represented present were visually

Mr Hart is invited to dine

I was born a Jew, I am living as a Jew and I the die great and glorious of a member as shall " Israel. House of

in Health Your Exhibition Academy which Royal the In 1893 Solomon exhibited at 1897, 1894 between Some 3). time (Fig. and Mr Ernest Hart was the principal subject

51Bland, The Artless Jew, p. 37. 11Jewish Quarterly Review, July 1901, pp. 553-566.

114 as a testimonial to Hart, its President, the Medical Sickness and Accident Society commissioned Solomon J. Solomon to paint A dinner given by Sir H. Thompsonfor Mr Ernest Hart (Fig. 4). 54Given his reputation

as a portrait painter of contemporary

Victorian society and his then recent election Associate as an of the Royal Academy, Solomon would in his own right have been a

potential contender for this commission.

Thompson and Hart may also have played a

part in his selection. Hart and Solomon

had met at a Maccabean dinner in 1892 and by 1893 Solomon had

painted the dinner

55 Hart's scene at mentioned above.

53Hart's electoral address as reported in the Jewish Chronicle 14 Januaryl 898. 54A dinner given by Sir H. Thompson for Mr Ernest Hart, Oil on canvas, No date, 71.1 x 102.9 cm, Wellcome Foundation, London. There has been some confusion between these two works and the second has been variously titled: A Welcome Home Dinner at Sir Henry Thompson 's; An Octave for Mr Ernest Hart; A Dinner Party Mr Ernest Hart's. The at confusion may date from 1928. The unillustrated Royal Academy Winter Exhibition catalogue for that year used two titles, Your Health and Dinner Party at Mr Ernest Hart's in reference to Exhibit 288, p. 64. The size given corresponds to that of the later image by then in the Wellcome collection and not to the earlier Your Health Your Health was exhibited in the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition of 1893 and is unlikely ever to have been entitled A Welcome Home Dinner at Sir Henry Thompson's, as Hart did not return from his trip to America until November 1893. See C. A. Earnshaw, Letter to the Director of Wellcome Historical Medical Museum, 10 May 1951, Wellcome Library Archive, London, S. J. Solomon Departmental Papers. The Wellcome Foundation has owned A Dinner given by Sir H Thompson for Mr Ernest Hart (as it is now titled by the Wellcome Library) since 1909. The work is undated but the British Medical Journal, 29 May 1897 reporting on the affairs of the Medical Sickness and Accident Society stated, "We may mention that the testimonial in recognition of the work of the founder and President [Ernest Hart] on his retirement [Hart but Chairman in 1894 the position of President was created for him and he held retired as this until his death in 1898] has been expended in the commissioning of Mr Solomon J. Solomon, A. R. A., to execute a portrait picture of a dinner at which were present many of the leaders of the profession to welcome Mr Ernest Hart on his return from America". The depicted, from States if United Hart's the to the trip to would place event a reference return 1893. The Solomon itself, the to towards the end reference of somewhat earlier not work later date for 1896-7 however, A. the the A. R. execution actual of a suggest as an would, did 1896. It Academy Solomon's the to seems unlikely not occur until election picture, since that the work was painted after mid 1897. In September of that year Hart's diabetes had does in his leg. Hart The this in the not composition portrayed amputation of resulted later. die less The ill, than to terminally six months amputee, who was obviously resemble a British Medical Journal article continued by identifying several of the other figures in the later work, who correspond to the subjects subsequently named on a key plate attached to in 1928. Exhibition Academy Winter in Royal it the the image when was exhibited ssHart spoke at a Maccabean Dinner in October 1892. The Jewish Chronicle obituary for Maccabeans friendship his 1898 the January to 14 and with members of Hart on refers According to the extant records of the Maccabeans, Hart does not, Council. its especially

115

Ernest Hart was born in London in 1835 into

a middle class, professional,

Jewish family; his father Septimus Hart was a dentist. Ernest City of London School where he crowned

was educated at the

a highly successful scholastic career by

gaining a Scholarship to Queens' College, Cambridge. 56 In practical terms, this opportunity was closed to Hart because, although entry was not denied to Jews, he could not at that time, have graduated without having to profess his faith as a Christian. 57Hart, therefore, applied to

use the scholarship to pursue medical studies

in London. He did so first at St Mary's and then

at St George's Hospitals. He devoted

his life to medicine in three distinct, though sometimes

overlapping, fields. He was

appointed House Surgeon at St Mary's in 1856. After holding several other surgical posts there he was, from 1863 to 1869, Dean of the Medical School. From 1866 onwards he became very active in matters of public health and served on numerous enquiries and committees for the rest of life; thereby making significant contributions to the national welfare. In the same year he took up the post of Editor of the British Medical Journal

he held his death in 1898. He Chairman which until also served as -

Parliamentary Bills Committee of the British Medical Association and was the of Chairman and then President of Medical Sickness and Accident Society.58 This led to financial security. He simultaneously had homes in professional success London's West End and in Totteridge and was a noted collector of Japaneseart. Hart being for importance he Jewish; to to the as example at the attached publicly attested

however, appear to have been a member of that organization. Mocatta Archive, University ff. AJ 17.1.1 Library. MS 126/ Southampton of 56He was school captain and won the Chamberlain Scott Prize. 57This disability was not formally removed until the passing of the Universities Tests Acts of 1871.

116 time of the 1885 General Election, when contesting the End as a Radical (see the quotation at the head

parliamentary seat of Mile

of this section). He was willing to use

his editorial position at the British Medical Journal to

publish papers in the 1870s

and 1880s in defence of `shechita' (kosher slaughtering). 59The Jewish Chronicle in its 14 January 1898 obituary for Hart had

no qualms about asserting that:

It need hardly be said that Ernest Hart was an enthusiast in all matters 6o Jewish to the relating race.

Perhaps, however, one should look more closely at the differences between Hart's acknowledgement of his Jewish origins and the degree of his commitment to Judaism per se in his life. Hart's first wife, Rosetta Levy, was Jewish. Hart subsequently remarried in Notwithstanding

1872 but his second wife,

Alice

Rowland, was not Jewish.

Hart's public declaration that he would die a Jew, his funeral

held service was at the Marylebone Parish Church in Paddington and was conducted by Canon Samuel Barnett and the Reverend Brooke Lambert. 61The Jewish Chronicle was silent on the details of Hart's funeral, even though this obliged it to pass over the opportunity to quote from Barnett's eulogy, The sick poor are better cared for, children are safer from harm, national health is more considered and the medical profession is now honoured becauseErnest 62 lived. Hart

Your Health (Fig. 3), the first of the two canvasesin which Hart was depicted in its by Magazine Art favourably The Royal dinner of received was guest, a principal

58It is measure of the esteem in which he was held and the importance of his role in the a BMA that his death was marked by the publication of a ten page, double column obituary. 59Israel Finestein, `Mathew Arnold', in Idem, Anglo-Jewry in Changing Times, London 1999. p. 230.

6oJewish Chronicle, 14 January 1898. 61In memoriam, Ernest Hart, British Medical Association, British Medical Journal London, 15 January 1898.

62ibid.

117 Academy review of 1893.63The Jewish Chronicle,

reviewing this work on 5 May

spoke of thirteen guests - with perhaps another or indeed others hidden by the table decorations. This review, combined with comments in Bensusan's chapter on Solomon in Jüdische Künstler (see above),

make it possible to identify almost all of

64 the guests. Although Hart, in his own home, is clearly the subject of the toast, he is shown with his back to the viewer and only in half profile, somewhat obscured for the central figure. Solomon seemed at least as concerned foreground: with the trio of ladies to Hart's left

with other guests in the

and right and in particular with the

standing lady proposing the toast. There is a sense within the work of Hart being in some way an outsider; not as a Jew in what was predominantly non-Jewish company, but to the arts world within which many of his young guests lived and worked. Although he was the focus of attention for the assembled company, he was at the same time visually set apart from them. 63'Mr S. J. Solomon, who has left the classics for a while, has tackled one of the most difficult of all problems lights dinner That the contending and reflected at modern a party. heads are successful portraits of persons in society is little to the critic, but it is a good deal that a work of so much danger and so full of pitfalls to the artist should have been as cleverly brought to completion. The picture would be better for a little more work. The light hardly appears to be of the right colour and the painting seems somewhat dry; but it is the handling of the subject, which has earned the victory its instructive reticence and knowledge and taste. ' Magazine of Art, vol. 16, May 1893, London Paris and Melbourne: Cassell & Co Ltd, p. 298. 64'Is it in defiance of conventional superstition that Mr. Solomon had arranged just thirteen guests at the table, or is it possible that the square shade of the lamp conceals a fourteenth The faces the glasses, and all visitor? servants move about noiselessly refilling are turned toward the host, Dr. Ernest Hart, who in the picture is seen from the back but the profile and the characteristic head render recognition of the gifted medical authority an easy task. It is faces festive board. difficult fit Mr the to the to other round names gathered not either Jerome K. Jerome surveys the scene through his glasses as he stands in the rear, from beneath the lamp Mrs. J. Solomon, mother of the artist, directs a smiling glance at the host: Mr. Arthur Hacker, the artist, is not far from Signor Tosti [the opera singer]; Sir Benjamin Baker, Mr. Forbes Robertson [actor] whose clear cut features come out particularly well, Mrs. Arthur Raphael, Prince Troubetzkoy and his gifted fiancee Miss Ethel Wright and indebted Ms Chronicle, May 1893. ' Jewish 5 I I the to to am complete group. others serve Miller of Haifa for bringing this review to my notice. Bensusan's work (see n. 4 above) included [the Sir John Tenniel Illustrator the that possibly artist guests and other suggests -

118

The setting of the table and the clothes of the participants would prima facie seem to point to this being a formal event. However, the generally relaxed demeanour of the guests and the fact that a lady was proposing the toast (a break with formal Victorian etiquette) would point to a more intimate, personal occasion

the as would -

presence of a dog by Hart's side.

The conviviality of the party at Hart's contrasted sharply with the formality of a somewhat similar occasion, A Summer Dinner Party painted by Chevalier Tayler (1862-1925) in the same Royal Academy Exhibition. 65The four seated,male figures pass the port after the ladies had retired, a marked difference to the presenceof ladies in the Solomon work discussed above. Even at this supposedly more relaxed moment in the evening's proceedings the stiff postures of the subjects and the almost military bearing of the serving staff in the background, whose clothing was used to illustrate a hierarchy, to the defined household relaxed a counterpoint offered all rigid and well intimacy of the work by Solomon. Whereas Solomon brought the viewer close to the keeps Tayler the filled the viewer at an the table and guests, whole canvas with in Tayler the is distance. There a senseof spaciousnessand of calm almost respectful in dinners both Although Solomon. feature a were is the of clearly not a which far by by Tayler depicted more a governed clearly was the occasion private setting, Solomon. by in is the work formal code of behaviour than that which obtained

Tenniel)] Archive/ Gallery/ Portrait left (see National first male figure to Hart's immediate the Illustrator) (caricaturist guests Furniss among also were Harry and . and

90, 1893,120 Oil dinner A Summer's whereabouts x 65Chevalier Tayler, on canvas, party, included dinner his for became at Tayler which Chevalier pictures, party noted unknown. Diners Dinners (1894), Queen The Gentlemen, Exhibitions, and Academy Royal other (1909). Anniversary The (1902) and

119

In terms of the Anglo-Jewish discourse on one level Solomon's painting can justifiably be interpreted as responding in its main lines to concepts of belonging and his being feted in Hart of acculturation. was own home by leading figures from the world of Victorian arts and culture. This acceptance was not, however, by the hauthis the monde of cultural elite; some of guests on this occasion might have been from being the younger, not quite establishment tier of that world. characterised as

A dinner given by Sir H Thompson for Mr Ernest Hart suffers from no such

is foursquare interpretation. Hart In this at the very work, potential nuancing of invitees fellow host His British the were all among and medical profession. apogee of the leading professionals of their day. This combination of one of Anglo-Jewry's leading medical professionals painted by Anglo-Jewry's leading artist has a potential importance that merits exploration in both socio-historic as well asjust artistic terms. Hart's life and career, the circumstances surrounding the commissioning of this illustrated it depicted the other participants and painting, the nature of the occasion the of this representation visual an almost paradigmatic all combined to make late in Anglo-Jewry the nineteenth century integrationist aspirations of contemporary details this Examination the work, Exhibition. 1887 of of discourse the of and the Jew, in voluntarily this apparently acculturated however, also reveal the ways which or otherwise,

Society in English his he way negotiated trimmed his Jewish sails, as

and the medical profession.

the that than tighter image of 1897 seems much The composition of this earlier

(Hart, in the figures guest all A eleven dinner of number 1893 smaller party.

120 of honour, the eight other invitees, their host, Sir Henry, and his Butler, Newman) are all contained within a more confined visual space. The informality that characterised the earlier work are here replaced by a more earnest, masculine atmosphere albeit a less militarily

rigid one that that which characterised the Chevalier Tayler. The

significance of the tight composition of this later work is not simply of interest as a matter of artistic technique. It opens the way to a reading of the work as revealing how closely Hart was incorporated into the highest levels of the British medical Solomon has depicted Hart as an integral member of a group that community. comprised leading medical figures of his day. He was seated in a place of honour by the side of his host, facing out towards the viewer from a central position within the in between foreground figures (latterly Sir) Mr the composition and clearly visible of 66 Victor Horsley and Dr (latterly Sir) George Anderson Critchett. Both the final work fashionably him his Hart the attired as own show on and preparatory oil sketch of dandy Dundeary side-whiskers and an orchid with prominent perhaps something of a 67 in his buttonhole. There is nothing either in the appearance of the man or his demeanour that would mark him apart or different from any of the other guests around the table.

66From left to right the picture shows Sir Richard Quain Bt (1816-898) Physician; Sir James (1815-1916), KB Horsley Victor (Sir) Mr Pathologist; Surgeon Paget Bt (1814-1899) and (1820-1904), Bt Thompson (Sir) Henry Mr Surgeon, pathologist and physiologist; Ophthalmic (1845-1925) Critchett Anderson George (Sir) Dr Urologist; Mr Ernest Hart; Sir William Surgeon; Gynaecological (1818-1897) Bt Wells Spencer Thomas Sir surgeon; Surgeon (1824-1907) Bt Fayrer (Sir) Joseph Mr Physician; Broadbent Bt (1835-1907) (1844-1916), Bt Brunton Lauder (Sir) Thomas Dr Service; General, Indian Medical Archive, Library Wellcome 1928, Exhibition, Winter Academy Physician; Key Plate Royal Papers. Departmental Solomon J. S. London,

Wellcome 26 date, 35 board, No Oil Hart, Ernest cm, x 67Solomon J Solomon, Mr on Foundation, London.

121 The picture should also be read as demonstrating

not just professional but

social acceptance at the highest level. Sir Henry Thompson's Octave dinners, of which this may have been one, were socially important gatherings of the `great 68 the good'. He held them in his

and

home 35 Wimpole Street, London. Invitees own at

to these dinners were by no means limited to the medical profession. An indication

the place of the host within English Society and the standing of his dinners may be from the fact that among the guests on other gauged

such occasions were the then

Prince of Wales (later King Edward VII), HRH Prince George (later King George V), Prime Minister Asquith, the writers Conan Doyle and Charles Dickens, and the 69 Alma-Tadema. The significance of an invitation to and a quasi-formal painter honouring by such a gathering should not, therefore, be underestimated. It

only adds

to the acceptance of Hart to record that in fact it is also likely that Thompson and Hart, `lifelong friends', dined at each other's homes in Wimpole Street on other, 70 less formal perhaps occasions.

6' The location

dinner Thompson's 35 Wimpole Street home has been confirmed this of at by Sir Henry's family. Wellcome Library Archive, London, S.J.Solomon Departmental Papers. Whether this was an Octave Dinner is, however, open to question. Thompson's Octave's (always male only) were so called because eight guests were invited at 8pm to Sir Henry's inspiration for this partake of eight courses served with eight wines. have increased known by is Sir Henry this to number excluding arrangement was musical. himself as `one of the notes of the Octave' and regarding himself as `the staff (sic) that held them together' Quoted in Z. Cope, The Versatile Victorian. Being the Life of Sir Henry Thompson Bt., 1820-1904, London: Harvey & Blythe, 1951, pp. 92 ff. For this to have been for figures from leading dinner Octave the party medical simply a not and an as considered his have Guest Thompson it honour Hart, to in not count of required would also of world Honour as one of the eight -a detail that might not have easily been accepted by one details. fastidious about such apparently so 69W. D. Dunsmuir and R. S. Kirby, Journal of Medical Biography, 1995, London, pp. 187 ff.

70Jewish Chronicle, 14 January 1898. The article also noted that Hart had in fact moved to funeral. Hart's Thompson before Thompson. the Street pallbearers at Wimpole was one of London, Medical Journal, British Association, Medical Hart, British Ernest In memoriam 15 January 1898.

122 Hart may indeed have been proud of his Jewish heritage but, on occasions like this, it would seem he wore its religious obligations lightly. Reminiscing

on the

genesis of these dinners, Sir Henry alluded to the food served at these and similar 71 included dishes intrinsically occasions, which several which were unkosher. It seems reasonable to suggest that loss of or disregard for kashrut at events like this was part of the price that Hart and others like him paid for their entree into English 72 Society. Anglo-Jews

could be invited to share in the pleasures of English society

and its traditions, albeit that some, like Sir Henry's Dinners, were recent of invention. It would, however, appear that, even when the entitlement to such participation was based on the most unimpeachable of credentials as were Hart's in the medical world, for all but the highest placed and most profoundly religious, a marked Jewish identity left door hat fact This the that Hart, the subject, and was at with one's and coat. was a Solomon, the painter, understood and accepted.

This picture provides a further dimension when read against both of the discussed Although three discussed pictures one can place all above. earlier works dinner Thompson the to the public arena, above within a private context as opposed The being be better social setting. a quasi-institutional within as read could perhaps formulaic dinners, the Octave their Thompson's approach importance of regularity, to the seem would host guests by of the standing the professional/social and adopted that London fabric the albeit society of have conferred on them such a status within -

71Z. Cope, The Versatile Victorian. Being the Life of Sir Henry Thompson Bt., 1820- 1904, describing is Hutchison, Robert Sir with a menu ff. One 92 quoted 1951, guest, London, pp. " ham his later "... speciality and starter a oysters as ...

by that adopted many other 72Hart's version of Jewish Orthodoxy, which accorded with head him did to and covering England, any Victorian wear late in require not Anglo-Jews fashion than religion. rather of statement a his side whiskers are clearly

123

such status was personal to Sir Henry rather than to any office he held. The nature of the occasion and the common profession of the invitees provide another strand in this proposal of an institutional dimension. The dinner was a formal celebration in Hart's honour by the institution of the English medical profession as by represented a group its leading of practitioners. This institutional recognition is

of particular significance

to the argument I am positing about Solomon's visual representations of the place of Anglo-Jewry within English society.73Both this and the earlier Your health are visual representations of a shared present within that society. Furthermore, this sharing was unencumbered by any apparent anxiety on the part of the main subject about either his Jewishness or his Englishness.

As a footnote one must observe that, notwithstanding Hart's considerable in stature the medical world, as an editor, as a significant contributor to the status and financial welfare of the medical profession and as a pioneer in the field of public health, unlike every other guest at Sir Henry's dinner, Hart's work was never marked

by recognition in the form of an Official Honour. Recognition and acceptanceat that level was, at that time, perhaps not so readily available to the middle order of AngloJewry, whatever the contribution to the common good.

The Lord Mayor of London

74 historical This is historical art of value.

Queen Victoria's Jubilee Diamond of In 1897, the country celebrated the accession

(1840-1923), Jew, Faudel-Phillips George a to the throne. The election of

investigation. line for this Gilman Sander of 731 am indebted to Professor suggesting

124 as Lord Mayor, for this particular year, was a measure of the formal acceptanceof the Jews into the upper echelons of English social and governance structure. It

was also a

mark of the man that this election was universally hailed in the press and that the only comments on his Jewishness were observations of fact rather than expressions 75 of opinion. The election of a Jew as Lord Mayor was not, as we have already

noted,

a unique event. It was not the power or importance of the office itself that was so significant as much as the Mayor's role was, by the end of the nineteenth century, but ceremonial, rather the high profile held by the incumbent in a year of international celebrations that marks it out as being of interest. In a year when attention was more than ever focussed on London, the City was represented by a Jew;

a matter that leaders of that community were not slow to recognise. Nothing could therefore be more apposite than that an honoured brother in faith should be the first to welcome her Majesty as she enters her most loyal city Tuesday next.76 Of even equal importance in terms of this study is the linkage the office provides

between Anglo-Jewry and an historically significant institution, the creation of which in 1210 predated the expulsion of the Jews. It provided an opportunity to claim not just a shared present but, through the history of the office itself, a shared past. The diplomatic successesof Montefiore on behalf of his fellow Jews provided one avenue into the highest realms of English society. The financial power of several of the leading Jewish dynasties, most notably of course the Rothschilds, provided another. integration demonstrated City the at Faudel-Phillips' career within the governance of 74Magazine of Art, May 1897-8, Review of the Royal Academy Exhibition, p. 468.

75For example, The Torch, 14 November 1896, `... a member of the Jewish persuasion Asylum Jewish Orphan's in interest deepest the has and Alderman Phillips ever taken the Guildhall Library. 1896-1897, Blind', Press for Relief the the cuttings of the Jewish Society 76Rev. Herman Adler, Diamond Jubilee Sermon, Great Synagogue, London, Sunday 20 Routledge, George Sermons, Jewish Anglo H. Adler, memories and other June 1897. in

125 the very highest levels of this most traditional area of London life and a remarkable degree of acceptance of Jews within its ranks.77

George Faudel-Phillips born in 1840, was the second son of Sir Benjamin Phillips, who had been Lord Mayor of London in 1865. Educated at University College School, London and then in Paris and Berlin, in 1867 George married Helen Levy daughter of JM

Levy, proprietor of the Daily Telegraph. He first became

involved in the governance of the City of London in 1884 upon his election as Alderman for Farringdon Within

held by his father. At position also previously -a

the time of his election as Lord Mayor, he was Chairman of a Corporation of the City of London Committee that had been charged with `preserving the Corporation of London with all its ancient rights and privileges' - thus providing him with a key role in assuring the continued position of one of historic institutions of London life. 78He director his City involved in the the of mayoralty and was a after affairs of remained De Beers. In 1900-1 he was High Sheriff of

79 Hertford.

He played a major and, by all accounts, highly successful role in the Jubilee has Mayor `No Lord his Mayoralty. dominated ever celebrations which, of course been more popular than the present holder of that office'.

80 There was, therefore,

baronetcy Queen on a the conferred subsequently when widespread public approval

London 1909.

His London. Mayor Lord were fourth Jewish predecessors of the was 1889. Isaacs Henry 1865 Phillips father Benjamin and David Salomons 1855, his " Faudel-Phillips

Library. Guildhall 1896-1897, 78Drapery World, 19 September 1896. Press cuttings Mayor. Lord his 1891 from as Society Irish election Governor until the He was also of Master St Bartholomews; Governor a of 79He was an Almoner of Christ's Hospital and a of hence Hertford, Park Balls home near His Company. at Makers was country the Spectacle Gentleman's English Reform, that of the most He of that was a member area. the link with clubs.

126 him. ß1 Notwithstanding Faudel-Phillips

the pressure of events surrounding these celebrations,

also played major roles in events from the purely local to the

international level. 82In tandem with non-denominational interventions, he

showed no

hesitation in using his office to further the interests of the Jewish community, paralleling Hart's willingness to use his position in the British Medical Journal to defend Jewish kashrut. One of his earliest actions as Lord Mayor

was to open the

Jews Soup Kitchen in Fashion Street for the winter of 1896 with the full panoply of his office and he continued to use both his position and his official residence for Jewish causes and events.83

During

the course of Faudel-Phillips'

mayoralty,

Solomon painted two

him, portraits of one commemorating the official reception of the Queen at one of the City Gates, the other a formal portrait which I shall discuss in the following chapter.

Both works were exhibited at the Royal Academy Exhibition in 1898.

For the Jubilee itself, Solomon painted the Lord Mayor and his entourage in full ceremonial robes at the entrance to the City at Temple Bar waiting to welcome

80Christian Commonwealth, 8 April 1897. Press cuttings 1896-1897 Guildhall Library 81`Needles to say the baronetcy conferred upon our excellent Lord Mayor, who with Mrs Faudel-Phillips, has discharged his duties so ably is quite one of the most popular of the 3 July Lady's Pictorial, ' The honours Jubilee's meeting with great and popular approbation. 1897. Press cuttings 1896-1897 Guildhall Library. 82`Thus, close to home he acted with speedand decision in raising money (in July 1897) for the destroyed flooding their disastrous given was and farmers, crops the Essex after figure in key he his in From was a mayoralty Freedom of the City of Colchester. very early Grand Knight being his in for India, made famine which resulted relief the City's appeal for Library. Guildhall 1896-1897 ' Press Empire. cuttings Commander of the Indian 83An illustrated article in The Graphic, 16 December 1896 reported on the Lord Mayor and Bearer Mace Bearer the Sword Marshall, arriving City the by and the his wife accompanied The Library. Guildhall 1896-1897, Press cuttings for the inter opening of the Soup Kitchen; for House Mansion held the 1897 that at April 2 a reception was Chronicle, reported Jewish Library. Guildhall 1896-1897, Press Society; Dumb Deaf cuttings Jewish and the

127 the arrival of the Queen

84 On Threshold City the (Fig. 6). The Magazine of the -

Art, commenting favourably on this work, the argument about historical continuity

noted a theme of particular relevance to

the glorification of the office of the Lord -

Mayor and the Corporation. 85 Within the visual representation of such an historic institution, the presence of a Jew as holder of that office assumesspecial importance within the terms of the 1887 Anglo-Jewish discourse. The Athenaeum also talked of the historical value of the work, tempering a generally positive `It is true that a canvas one quarter as large 86 work on a nobler theme'. The

assessmentby ending,

might have sufficed for an even greater

composition placed the Lord Mayor as the central

figure among a group of mounted and standing dignitaries

awaiting the Monarch's

87 arrival. The positioning of the Lord Mayor, the tricorn he is wearing, the white fur and red velvet of his robe and the ceremonial sword he is holding all combine to focus our attention on him. 88By depicting the mounted figure to the right of the Lord

84On the threshold of the City 22 June 1897, Oil on canvas, 1898,236 x 172 cm, whereabouts unknown. Records in private family archives indicate that in 1910 the work was presented to Bethlehem Hospital, London. A sum of £200 is noted by this work, which bought from it the artist or a third party for this presentation. may mean was 85`Mr Solomon's representation of the scene at Temple Bar on the occasion of the Jubilee, while it does not entirely escape from the characteristics of a portrait group, aims less at being a record of the Jubilee than a glorification of the Lord Mayor and the Corporation of the City of London. Considering the difficulty of his task Mr Solomon has succeeded in presenting the scene as well as an accurate record of atmospheric conditions even though the decorations of the City are necessarily flattered as to harmony of colour. ' `Review of the Royal Academy Exhibition, ' in The Magazine of Art, May 1897-8, p. 468. 86`Although really a group of life size equestrian portraits of the members of the Corporation Mr Solomon's immense work On the threshold of the City is on account of the its document. historical The the theme moderness suit and of a sort subject represented has history he from incidents better the than with which classical powers of the artist much hitherto striven so courageously. The brightness of the effect - sunlight in a City street - the in humour the the the the expressions of well satisfied evinced costumes and splendour of Aldermen are highly acceptable in an exhibition where these qualities are not common and 1898, 762. 11 June in Athenaeum, indeed', is last p. the very rare 87These included to his left and right immediately behind him the Sheriffs Ritchie and Rogers. 88Solomon was able to take advantage of a ceremonial usage which dictated that in lieu of Mayor Lord black the Mayoral was provided with special red velvet his own and gold robes Lord Mayor's fact in Sword the The for part of not was occasions. such robes and ermine

128 Mayor bending his head in apparent conversation with a standing figure at the extreme right edge of the canvas, Solomon ensured that pictorially no one had physical dominance over the Lord Mayor himself. The reality of this ceremony and its circumstances reveal some interesting artistic

choices. According to both the

official instructions for the occasion and an illustrated report of the event, the Lord Mayor and his Deputation met the Queen on foot. 89They mounted their horses

after,

in accordance with the ceremony, the Monarch had returned the Pearl Sword to the Lord Mayor and was ready to be led into the City. 90

Amidst the bunting that fluttered from the buildings behind the Lord Mayor was the escutcheon of the City of London which is based on the Cross of St George, that most potent symbol of Englishness and early English Christianity, surrounded by banners bearing the royal emblem almost directly behind his head. This placement his link Mayor direct between Lord traditions the the of and visual created a in Cross St George history England the the of and of embodied centuries' old office, the Pearl Sword, and the current monarchy. At its most direct level, one can therefore decode the image as a visual representation of the integration and acceptance of a City London leader the the titular Jewish of and of community as member of the in the the in offices public holder prestigious oldest and most succession of one of here in is than demonstrated Jew even more clearly land. Institutional acceptance of a the case of Hart as argued above. been have Sword used Pearl originally City's may and the is to It as referred regalia. Graphic, 14 Daily The 1570. in Exchange Royal 1Stat the Elizabeth Queen by ceremonially Library. Guildhall 1896-1897, Press May 1897. cuttings Graphic, 23 June The 1897. June 18 Office, 89Ceremonial Instructions, The Remembrancer Library. Guildhall 1896-1897, 1897, Press cuttings

129

The pageant of the occasion inevitably draws the viewer into

a presentation of

the past. Pageantry and tradition, whether actually based in the long distant

past or as

with some of the ceremonies of the Victorian era of more recent invention, rely for part of their impact on a real or assumed link with history. By presenting FaudelPhillips at the Gates of the City awaiting his Sovereign in his ceremonial robes and bearing a ceremonial sword, Solomon was calling

on and, at the same time adding to,

the accumulated historical memory of his viewers. He inserts into that memory the image of a contemporary Jew who then becomes part of that shared perhaps more importantly,

present and,

the shared past that was the theme of the 1887 Exhibition.

Anyone for tea? `... everything

English with the old jewish 91 5 customs peeping through...

The foregoing images have been examined regarding the manner in which

Jews were represented as being part of the shared present and sharedpast of England. In 1906 Solomon painted a formal portrait of Dr Hermann Adler, the Chief Rabbi, Academy Exhibition Royal the the also a and watercolour of at which was exhibited 92 Election of the Chief Rabbi. It is, however, a less formal work of the same year that I wish to examine. High

Tea in the Sukkah is a remarkable record of the

illustrated (Fig. festival 7.93 It Jewish even religious anglicification of a traditional

90Although Faudel-Phillips was apparently an excellent horseman, the decision to depict been have he fact by that dictated been the have and would was very short him mounted may in by composition a standing others overshadowed physically 91Theodore Herzl on a dinner at the home of Rev Hermann Adler.

92Solomon J Solomon, The election of the Chief Rabbi, Hermann Adler, Watercolour on York. New Museum, Jewish 37.9 The 1906,30.5 cm, x paper,

1906, Ink, Sukkah, High tea in the graphite and gouache on paper, Solomon J Solomon, for image this The New York. Museum, would media used 39.6 x 29.2 cm, The Jewish

130 more clearly than the clerical garb of the formal portrait, the degree of acculturation that had permeated Jewish religious orthodoxy and it raises interesting questions integration about and acculturation. At first sight the Sukkah has been faithfully rendered by Solomon with an abundance of fruit and foliage on the walls, the ceiling and on the table. The lulav is clearly in evidence at the right knee of the seatedmale in the foreground. However, if one examines the image more closely, the building in question was certainly not a temporary shelter of biblical derivation. It was definitely a more permanent structure and may even be rather a beautifully decorated conservatory. There were regularly spaced windows. The ceiling looked more permanent than might be anticipated, although one assumes it would have had the if to the the building were to be used as a Sukkah, and a obligatory opening sky is hanging have been picture on what must almost certainly a solid wall at the right

hand side of canvas.

However, more remarkable is the meal being consumed and the religious figure in attendance. Depictions of meals in a Sukkah, the partaking of which is one by Moriz from that festival, injunctions key the such as earlier eras of positive of the Familienleben dem his from Bilder in 1867 series Openheim altjüdischen aus 94 in focus is There this the such no observance. concentrate on the religious aspect of is Tea it High As the title makes clear -a work.

Into English the mealtime. very

the though for been intended have elsewhere, it reproduction that might perhaps suggest harvest the to Jewish equivalent holding institution has no such information. Succoth, the For Year. New the Holidays, High at in commences the which is festival, of season one Succoth booths in live roofs with biblically to simple Jews days commanded were seven for Jews the of This to fruits. decorated reminder a as act was with the and to stars open during the At Egypt. flightfrom habitation services the after their lack of permananent from branches the palm, willow lulav is of combination festival ceremonial use made of a -a Israel). (a to native plant ctrus ertrog an and myrtle and York. New Museum, Jewish 55.9 64.8 91Grisaille, cms, cms x

131 centre of what might otherwise be read as a totally secular, social secular event Solomon has placed, in the role of host, no less a figure than the Chief Rabbi, Hermann Adler himself. Of the five male figures in the

picture he was the only one

wearing any head covering. The simple booth erected in commemoration of the flight from Egypt and the serving of meals within a specific religious context has been replaced by a far more solid structure in which fashionable society seem to chatter over tea and sandwiches.

Jewish Orthodoxy for many early twentieth century Anglo-Jews in the West End and its neighbouring areas meant something very different from that which guided the lives of the religously observant in their own midst or among the immigrant community. Hart and Faudel-Phillips might have felt at ease in such a Sukkah gathering, but it was small wonder that many of the immigrant poor, who by 1906 made up the majority of the Jewish population, had difficulty reconciling their be to these religious observances or views as what should and the role of a rabbi with those of this Chief Rabbi. Indeed, given the views expressedby Solomon in his 1901 lecture, one might ponder his feelings as he rendered `so assimilative' a Chief Rabbi holiday. Sharing Jewish in the this this particualr of version anglified such an as in Anglo-Jewry been to have to was prepared which street a one way present seems tailor its observances to correspond to the social mores of the Edwardian age. This by integration be the mimicry. to phenomenon of of an example seem would

The Jews in the Court of Queen Elizabeth

132 In 1912, following his earlier Guildhall precedent, Sir Samuel Montagu made a similar presentation of a mural to the House of Commons, which Commons petitioning

Queen Elizabeth

Exchange mural, this later presentation

to marry

was entitled The

(Fig. 8). 95 As with the Royal

was one in a series of works by different

artists presented by different donors to adorn the walls of quasi-public/public in the Palace of Westminster with scenes drawn from England's history.

spaces

In the light

of the struggle for Jewish political emancipation which had only been successfully little concluded more than half a century earlier within these same Houses of Parliament, it is interesting to examine how this historical

scenewas created.

Earlier works that had been commissioned for the Houses

of Parliament were

for paid out of the public purse and could therefore legitimately be

made the subject

by of scrutiny a specially appointed Committee, whose approval was only gained when, inter alia, there was satisfaction as to the historical verisimilitude and accuracy of the work. The Montagu/Solomon mural, was one of a series of privately commissioned and funded works which made it more difficult for the House to degree the exercise same of control.

The figure of the Queen was based on a professional model. In keeping with a long tradition of artistic patronage, Montagu himself (by then ennobled) appearedin the work - the figure in profile on the extreme left of the foreground. Some of the figures figures based foreground the twentieth of on current early century were other

9s Solomon J. Solomon, The Commons petitioning Queen Elizabeth to marry, Canvas on London. The 249 Houses Parliament, the 1911,442 subtitle work carries cm, of x plaster, "The Queen, enthroned and surrounded by her faithful Commons, holds up a ring and says `With this ring I was wedded to the realm"'.

133 96 political scene. Three of the background figures were, however, members of the 97 family. At first sight, there is nothing remarkable artist's Montagu himself was part of the composition, he had

about this. Clearly, since

no objections to this device.

However, one may legitimately question whether, not just on the grounds of historical

verisimilitude,

an earlier House Committee would knowingly

have

sanctioned the inclusion of Jews - even as models in a work to be placed at the heart of the Palace of Westminster within

a scene representing Queen Elizabeth. In

taking this route, Solomon's representation simultaneously included Jews literally in the centre of English democracy of the present and figuratively in her historical

past

in the Court of Queen Elizabeth, at a time when, following the Expulsion of 1290, there were in theory no Jews in England and indeed in practice very few.

What is interesting is not the stratagem, but the silence with which it was greeted. Rothschild

had fought for eleven years for the right to sit as a Jew in the

Commons little more than fifty years before. The Aliens Act had become law only five years earlier. Once again there was mounting unrest involving the Jews in the East End during this period. It would, however, seem that even those who were involved in anti-immigrant movements such as the British Brotherhood did actively in Jews this of placement of a work not question or could make no public capital out by I by Jew another. am not suggesting any and painted one professing commissioned introduce Montagu, by Solomon, to the collusion of with or without covert action 96According to a key prepared in 1948 following a Parliamentary Question, the identities of Viscount Mr John Bums, Ilbert, Courtenay Sir Ullswater, listed Viscount the sitters were as Seymour King Graham, Sir Henry Cunningham Nolan, Mr R John Colonel Harcourt, and Drawings, Paintings, A Catalogue Asquith. Walker, R. J. B. Oxford Earl of the and of Public The Ministry Part IV, Westminster, Palace Engravings in the of Sculpture and of Works, London, 1962, p. 87.

134 quasi-Marranos into the Court of Elizabeth. I am simply pointing to the

change of

climate that made it possible for Solomon, following countless artists before him, to use family members, who were easily available as models, in a work of this kind without it apparently raising any controversy. 98

The only possible clue to any covert

resistance may be found in the placing of

the work. It was not in the main public areasor corridors, but

overlooking the landing

of a staircase leading up to the Committee Rooms. For a work whose theme is one

historical interest, this was a very obscure positioning such and one that might possibly have reflected otherwise unvoiced objections.

An Allegory ` What the exact purport of his picture may be '99 he has left to the fancy of the beholder.

The previous examples of Solomon's representation of the 1887 AngloJewish discourse are all quite specific in terms of subject and presentation. In 1904 Solomon displayed as one of his five exhibits at the Royal Academy, An Allegory (Fig. 9), a work in which it would appear that the artist was attempting to representin '°° form key his lecture 1901 the `Art themes Judaism'. visual of and article and Solomon

combined

elements of

classical mythology,

paganism, Hellenism,

Judaism/Hebraism and Christianity. At the time of its acquisition from the Exhibition Solomon explained the work thus: 97His son, Dorian, his daughter Iris and his brother David. Source; As above. 98It might be argued that since the key to the work was not prepared until 1948 these inclusions might not have been known. Given, however, its general location and potential depiction Queen however, information have Elizabeth, of a such could sensitivities over been elicited from the relevant Commons office by anyone minded to investigate. 99Morning Post, 30 April 1904, Archives Harris Museum and Gallery, Preston. gooAn allegory, Oil on canvas, 1904,269 x 150, Harris Museum & Gallery, Preston. This directly from letter from 1904. See Solomon Exhibition in May the to acquired was painting Mr. J. C. Hamilton, Chairman of the Committee. 10 May 1904, Archives Harris Museum and

Gallery, Preston.

135

The Subject of An Allegory is the conflict between the biblical and Pagan influences. A recumbent figure of Christ borne along by two winged figures reposing on the knees of the lawgiver in the centre group. Above are the Greek Dieties [sic]. Mars with horse and chariot. A group of Bacchus pouring down wine and Venus throwing down roses on a Ship below (humanity) which is wrecked against the rocks on which recline singing sirens [sic] (the fatal and elusive attractions). The central group is closely followed by a mass of cupids (the emissaries of Venus) who are scattering flowers on the waters.""

In order to understand its implications fully I suggest it is helpful to imagine a division of the work which abstracts from its centre the figures of the lawgiver and Christ. This will enable us to examine, as it were separately, those themes and ideas which relate to the areas of mythology and overt paganism and those which relate specifically to the Judaeo-Christian concepts. The former themes, as described by Solomon in the second part of the above be familiar Victorian extract, provide what might characterised as a recital of moral in values set quasi-classical times

frailty in face the the temptation of man of and -

the mocking of the pagan, mythological gods. The positioning of the figures involved in this segment of An Allegory on the periphery of the main subjects and painted in a ideas indicate less focussed these to that manner would seem subdued palette and a Taken importance their to the on own, such a whole. work as were not of central to the have had ideas their to raise execution painterly on rely might subjects and in historical theme, terms The style and of the precedents art mundane. above work Alma-Tadema Solomon's in found been have the seniors, of works might practice Heliogabulus, The Roses former's The (1836-1919). Poynter (1836-1912) and of in feasting the depicts middle twenty of scenes which years earlier, painted some

101Letter dated 13 May 1904 to Mr. J.C. Hamilton, Chairman of the Committee, Archives Harris Museum and Gallery, Preston.

136 ground and the strewing of petals onto figures drowning among them in the foreground is a possible antecedent for parts of the Solomon work. 102Similarly, Poynter's almost contemporary Cave of the Storm Nymphs combined both those elements of naked sirens and the depiction of a storm at sea which are features of the An Allegory. 103Both of these works, like the Solomon, were on a grand

scale and

probably destined for exhibition or public display.

The central figures of Moses and of Christ focus on the primary implication Solomon's of vision. Solomon was particularly emphatic about the importance of the 104 Not surprisingly therefore this is its most highly colour composition of this work. illuminated and clearly focussed passagewithin the total composition.

This part of the work is based on the link between the Old Testament - as in form lawgiver New Testament Moses the the the as and presented of however, by is Judaeo-Christian Christ. This a rendition of a not, represented from illustrates Church the wreckage of triumphant the emerging progression which Chapter, Sargent in briefly As the used next we shall see an older and outdated past. that concept and its artistic precedents in his Boston Public Library mural series The Triumph of Religion.

102Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, The Roses of Heliogabulus,, Oil on canvas, 1888,132.1 x 213.7 cm, Private collection.

103Sir Edward Poynter, The caves of the Storm Nymphs, Oil on canvas, 1903,145.9 x 110.4 cm, Private collection.

104Letter dated 13 May 1904 to Mr. J.C. Hamilton, Chairman of the Committee, Archives Preston. Gallery, Museum Harris and

137 In this Solomon presentation the Old Testament is represented by the figure of the lawgiver. Although the recumbent figure knees, Moses

stern

of Christ draped on the latter's

Tablets the looks Law the clasping of ahead as much as down at the -

recumbent figure. This is not the Moses of a tired, old and perhaps overtaken religion but rather the lawgiver whose vision is focussed forward,

whose G*d has given laws

limits to be obeyed. setting

The figure of Christ is clearly based on the Pieta of Michelangelo

although -

close inspection indicates that Solomon, the Jew, could or would not permit himself to include stigmata in his rendition. The shock of a transposition of the Christ figure from the knees of the Madonna to those of Moses forces Solomon's audience to take different juxtaposition between Judaism and Christianity. In this the a very view of is Judaism force, it is text, visual not a spent potent and driving. Although concepts of gendered and psychological decoding of visual imagery would have seemed firmly Victorian/Edwardian values of Solomon, the relative positioning to the strange of the two subjects suggest that the figure of Moses might be interpreted as birth figure to the symbolically giving of Christ. Life and the values of the Judaism in by Law Moses' Old Tablets Testament, the the of arms at as exemplified and Christ's head, flow from the lawgiver to the recumbent Christ symbolising the New Testament and Church.

Given Solomon's views on the linkage between Hellenism, paganism and Catholicism on the one hand, and Judaism and Northern Protestantism on the other, be high England bid for to be the An Allegory might ground of religious read as a by its Hellenistic/pagan Catholicism by the or undertones with of values not occupied

138 High Church Anglicanism, but rather by the values of Judaism in the form of its direct descendant English Protestantism. In setting this agenda for the painting, Solomon was not therefore presenting a seemingly obscure and perhaps unfocussed ideas collection of about past values cloaked in more or less clearly understood pagan mythology. He was rather making a claim for the importance of Judaism at the very heart of the value system of late Victorian/early Edwardian England

Judaism the as -

still active progenitor and wellspring of English Protestantism. This reading would An Allegory put at the apogee of those works within the Solomon ceuvre,which relate to the acceptance of the Anglo-Jewish discourse and the place of the Jew within English Society. The painting is not as its title implies just an allegorical rendering of a religious/philosophical

Solomon's but own perhaps a statement of argument

feelings about the importance of Judaism.

Whatever its importance in a subsequent assessmentof Solomon's works and beliefs, the work was accorded scant comment in the reviews of that year's Summer Magazine Burlington the by the Exhibition. It was not mentioned reviewers of either Exhibition, Academy Royal Art the of Magazine The Athenaeum. The of review of or May 1904, simply recorded: in is scholarly Mr Solomon's Allegory most accomplished as an exercise los draughtsmanship and colour arrangement.

by his 1904 article seemed more exercised The critic of the Art Journal's May apparently erroneous for a price

high `a for £1500, bought been had the that work understanding

interpretations by which work, a of than possible non commissioned work'

the dismissed note: with was

105The Magazine of Art, May 1904, p. 364.

139 by Allegory Mr S. have J. Solomon, rather cryptic a we which at any rate ... has the merit of dignified colour and arrangement and is not aggressive.106

Vanity Fair, 12 May 1904 was equally bemused by its meaning: Less significant is Mr Solomon J. Solomon's Allegory, though painted finely, one cannot quite comprehend the meaning of the dead Christ borne "' by away angels.

The more potentially more partisan Jewish press also had problems interpreting the its Chronicle, The Jewish 6 May 1904 painterly work. simply concentrated on qualities: Mr Solomon J Solomon has nearly come into his own this year with his `Allegory' to which the post of honour in the great gallery is accorded.The is is the the allegory not meaning of composition somewhat confused and figures is in but the grand style and the the principal painting of very clear 108 reminiscent of the old masters

Only the critic of the Jewish World, writing on the same date, attempted an interpretation which ended near the mark suggestedearlier: The work of Mr Solomon, which will attract most attention, is `An Allegory', which has a fine central position on the line in Gallery III. As the this does critic every the picture, remarkable of meaning explain not artist borne being is Christ dead body The his the in aloft it of way. own will read be he [sic] to West East by two angels representing the would seem and and tablets two the time, Moses, the in grasps the arms of same who, at reposing have "Thou Hebrew in inscribed no law shalt characters the are on which of Bacchus background In before pagan other the and are me". other gods Christianity dogmatic intend that as well to divinities. Does the artist signify teachings to the of monotheistic succumb ultimately as paganism must 109 Sinai?

It would seem

had least familiar referred with or at that none of these critics were

this is the work. of lecture that genesis back to the 1901 so clearly

Solomon, the An lgo-Jew

1°6Art Journal, May 1904, p. 239. 107Vanity Fair, 12 May 1904, p. 595.

posJewish Chronicle, 6 May 1904, p. 22. '09Jewish World, p. 119.

140 Solomon returned in 1903 to some of the themes

`Art Judaism' in a of and

notice he wrote for The Magazine of Art: Art and paganism go hand in hand, Israel's ideal existence is a grappling with that paganism till not a vestige is left. "o

The subject of the note was not, however, a further discussion

issues. It was these of

about the Austrian painter Ephraim Moses Lilien (1874-1925). If from no other Solomon source, would presumably have been aware of Lilien's work becausein the same year they were featured together in Buber's Jüdische Künstler (see above). What is particularly self-revealing in this piece is the role Solomon felt might be by Lilien. played human suffering to which the wandering race are no although pathos and .. strangers lie beneath the pigments of a Josef Israels, the hopes and ideals especially characteristic of the race, embodied in its literature and life might furnish for themes well enough one capable of giving them adequateartistic A expression. young Galician, Ephraim Lilien, the subject of this notice is "' first his to make this task perhaps the own.

Although the note gave no examples of the Lilien work which Solomon may have been citing, the young Galician born artist's work and his perhaps more positive

in issues Ost in be found West, Judaism time that to of and und around were view of 112 Lilien was also his illustrations for Juda, Gesänge and in Lieder des Ghetto. "3 Solomon's Zionist from the movement. emerging very early with associated his Lilien fill for this to of as a suggestion role and someone suggestion of a need introduction Buber in book to linked Buber's the been have to which candidate may towards to from to which and a sky `a spring which national art needs a soil stated: rise ...

it for from homogeneous grows and which society a needs art a national

110The Magazine of Art, pp. 240 ff. "' The Magazine of Art, pp. 240 ff.

Lattmann, 1900; F. A. Verlag Goslar: Gesänge, Juda. Münchhaussen, 112Freiherr Börries von 1902. S. Calvary, Verlag Berlin: des Ghetto. Lieder Morris Rosenfeld,

141 which it exists'. As Margaret Olin has pointed out, Lilien in part responded to this challenge as he `supplied the Bezalel [School in Jerusalem] with its seal and a Jugendstil look that it maintained well into the 192ßs.114

Solomon was at the time forty three years old, a very successful painter, an Associate of the Royal Academy and numbered among the cultural elite of English Jewry. I would suggest that it might not simply have been a sense of reticence or him that to propose Lilien as a candidate for this task of depicting modesty prompted the positive aspirations of the Jewish race and thereby to disregard his own potential claims. I argued earlier that Solomon was comfortable with his Anglo-Jewish identity. He might, I believe, have regarded this far closer identification with some by Buber Jewishness the the as a sort of essential and with aspirations articulated did his He for being not want clearly personal realm. precondition such art as outside to accept the role of being the painterly equivalent of his literary friend Israel Zangwill or some of the latter's East European contemporaries, even though, as this Solomon for that he to was an space. someone occupy saw a need piece makes clear, Anglo-Jew whose attachment to the Anglo-Jewish discourse of 1887 does not seem Jewry English the to in despite the have prior the of to circumstances changes altered for Lilien he have would taken up the wider challenge proposed First World War. To `race' Jewish this than identification the acculturated have involved a closer with Jewish Englishman seemed willing to adopt.

Buber Congress Zionist Fifth an and organised with 113In 1901 Lilien took part in the Jewish painters. of exhibition 114Margaret Olin, The Nation without Art, p. 44.

142 CHAPTER 4

The dangerous Mr Sargent

`It is positively dangerousto sit to Sargent. It's taking your face in your hands,' said a timid aspirant; and many stood shivering on the brink waiting for more adventurous spirits to make the plunge.

W. Graham Robertson. '

Introduction

John Singer Sargent (1856-1925), the American-born during the decades either side of the turn of the twentieth

artist, lived in London

century, where he enjoyed

great success and was regarded by many there and in his native Boston as the leading 2 portrait painter of the period. Even before his death, however, his

reputation waned,

and although he has been re-assessedin recent exhibitions, he has never regained that high peak. His portraits of this twenty to twenty five year period might be said to

document and reflect the changing nature of English Society, and in particular help

to understand the position of the newly emerging Jewish haute-bourgeoisie.

The task of this chapter is narrowly defined to provide a critical examination of the contemporary

reception of the artist's portraits of English-Jewish

sitters and the

1W. Graham Robertson, Time Was: The Graham W. Robertson, Hamish reminiscences of Hamilton, London, 1931, p. 233. 2 The literature on John Singer Sargent is very extensive. The sources and texts relevant to this key is The Catalogue Raisonne of this the throughout source study are quoted chapter. Sargent's work, Ormond and Kilmurray John Singer Sargent; Portraits of the 1890s, Complete Paintings Vol. 2, Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art, New Haven & London, 2002. Other key texts with which I engage in this chapter are Trevor Fairbrother, John Singer Sargent; The Sensualist; Sally Promey, Painting Religion In Public and Kathleen Adler, John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family, in The Jew in the Text Eds. Linda Nochlin and Tamar Garb. This is the text used for reference in this chapter. Adler's discussion was recently re-presented as John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer

142

143 readings thereof. This chapter is not intended as a challenge to the validity of interpretations based on events

or receptions which occurred outside this timeframe,

but proposes that a more nuanced

reading of the works is, in the light of the

contemporary reception, more appropriate. The reception of these works in the between 1890 and 1910 both reflected

period

and informed the cultural climate of that period

findings these and may therefore also serve as a source for its

re-assessmentin a wider

cultural context than the largely art-centred focus of this study.

No study of the representation of the Jew in English be complete without

during this period could art

an engagement with Sargent's series of paintings of the

Wertheimer Family, a commission that was eventually to 3 group portraits. This territory has been comments on individual

result in twelve separateand

in analysed depth by Kathleen Adler, whose

aspects of particular paintings will be covered in the

chronological review which follows. It is, however, appropriate to outline the main her discussion strands of at the outset. Adler argues that: The commission representeda challenge to long established codes for grand manner portraiture in a variety of ways, not only in its subject and its display, but also in being so overtly a series of representations of "the Jew". The portraits signal the aspirations of a middle class Jewish family to be regarded in the same light as the aristocracy, and Wertheimer's intention that the majority of them be exhibited in a public space marks a further breach with the conventions surrounding family portraits. 4

Family in the catalogue of the exhibition of the same name edited by Norman Kleeblatt and by the Jewish Museum of New York, 1999. published 3 Asher Wertheimer (1844-1913) was the son of SamsonWertheimer, a German born bronze maker and art dealer who came to England in 1830. Asher Wertheimer married Flora Joseph, daughter of antiques dealer Edward Joseph,in 1873. They had ten children. Unlike his brother Charles, who dealt in a wide range of collectables, Asher specialised in Old Master Paintings he himself leading had d'art'. By `objets the turn the the as one of of established century and dealers in London, acting on behalf of the Rothschilds and owning homes in Connaught Place (next-door to F.D. Mocatta) to the north of Hyde Park and in Henley. Notwithstanding his his field, he fringe in than the of chosen was still on rather acceptedwithin undoubted success he 1887 Anglo-Jewry Exhibition thus the the time the upper echelons of at of was a Guarantor but not a member of the General Committee or any of the subsidiary Committees. 4 Kathleen Adler, John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family, in TheJew in the Text, eds Linda Nochlin and Tamar Garb, p. 83. 143

144

Adler contextualises the Wertheimer portraits within a period that was at one and the same time a Golden Age for the Jewish people in Britain and an era of overt 5 and covert anti-Semitism. This reaction

was prompted by a perception of excessive

influence wealth and at one end of the social scale and excessive presence and poverty at the other. What resulted was adverse oral and written comment, localised social unrest and the passage of legislation aimed at halting further economic and political immigration of Jews from Eastern Europe and Russia.6

Adler's discussion of the portraits of `the Jew' as represented by Asher Wertheimer, and more particularly of `the Jewess' as representedby selectedportraits his daughters Almina, deals Ena, Betty and of with what she contends are problematic images, containing elements of "anti-Semitic stereotypes" that skirted close to caricature

and challenged accepted canons of

female portraiture,

but that

simultaneously were truthful to the sitters and reflected the warmth of the relationship between the artist, his patron and the latter's family.? In her review of the reception of later immediate to from Adler events and these works, contemporary sources moves individual her discussed, be together observations on with commentary which will 8 in later this chapter. paintings, aspects of particular

By the turn of the century, academic portrait painting was a territory under practice, artistic avant-garde and the Photography modernity of challenges and siege. Jew in The in Family, the Wertheimer Portraits the 5 Kathleen Adler, John Singer Sargent's of Garb Tamar Nochlin Linda Text, eds and The Jew in in Family, the Wertheimer Portraits the Sargent's 6 Kathleen Adler, John Singer of `Decline Rubinstein, W. D. 10. of 313, Garb, Tamar Nochlin endnote Linda p. Text, eds and 73. 1972), (January 34 Studies Social Jewish p. Age', Golden the Jew in The in Family, the Wertheimer Portraits Sargent's the Singer John of Kathleen Adler, Garb. Tamar Nochlin Linda and Text, eds

144

145 fuelled by writings such as Baudelaire's seminal reviews

of the Paris Salons of 1846

and 1859 and his essay The Painter of Modern Life, written in 1859-60 and published in 1863, led to what Heather McPherson has described

as `an identity crisis [in the]

shifting representative function of the modern portrait'. 9 Sargent was aware of these new trends and directions to which he had been exposed during his time in Paris. Most of his sitters were not the once all-powerful established landed aristocracy, the subjects of grand portraiture in early ages. They were rather the products of the modern era of industry and finance. Although Sargent could not, therefore, simply rely on the signifiers of rank and privilege that were the currency of earlier portraits and had to find new ways of expressing the wealth and position of his sitters, he did so within a traditional framework.

The portrait work of, for example, Courbet, Cezanne and Van Gogh and the early experiments of photographic portraiture provided the genesis for new directions for decline frame Within the the time and ultimate of grand-manner portraiture. and

locus of this study, however, one would be hard-pressed to detect such a decline. Reviews of the Royal Academy Summer Exhibitions and of other major general There inevitably the were still portrait with portraits. opened exhibitions almost lived well and enjoyed considerable status. painters who

Contemporary reviews of the annual Royal Academy Exhibitions regularly bemoaned the standard of much of the work displayed. One is, however, struck by the

8 Kathleen Adler, John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family, in The Jew in the Garb. Tamar Nochlin Linda and Text, eds 9 Heather McPherson, The Modern Portrait in Nineteenth-Century France, Cambridge 145. 2001, Cambridge, Press, p. University

145

146 regularity with which Sargent's work received praise (except in 1903, by common accord a failure for him), though the praise was sometimes grudgingly conceded: Mr Sargent is again brilliantly predominant. One is tempted to think Mr Sargent is almost too predominant for now that Mr Furse has gone there is lo Mr Shannon him to only compete with ...

Royal Cortissoz suggested that Sargent's pre-eminence led others to

resent him:

For some years he tyrannised over the Royal Academy in a way calculated to make a great many mediocrities hate the sight of his productions.''

If this was true, one needs to bear it in mind when interpreting critical assessmentsof his work. If Sargent was felt to be unassailable, perhaps he might be indirectly attacked through criticism of his sitters.

The Vanity Fair review, of 10 May 1906, of the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition suggested a depth to Sargent's work sometimes unrecognised by others: The day is past when we might think him a mere master of a splendid `trick'; the very truth is that there is no trick at all. What we see is the real thing - so frames After their to that strikingly real people step out of and speak us. know have for long known him Sargent the to to seeing a we seem subject 12 him friend. and to understand as we understand an old

Solomon, Sargent and Sir George and Lady Faudel-Phillips

The previous Chapter on Solomon J. Solomon investigated how the Englishness of some of his

discourse, I Anglo-Jewish his the which, argued, emerged position as a portraitist of work validated from the Anglo-Jewish

Historical Exhibition of 1887. The contrast between Solomon and Sargent is

bridge ideal to by across which an offers which portraits, a pair of almost contemporaneous provided different in their positions. our consideration of move

In 1898 Sir George Faudel-Phillips

by Mr in `a painted oils, portrait was presented with

his brilliant End Jews East A, mayoralty' A. R. the of appreciation of Solomon J. Solomon, as a mark of

10The Speaker, 6 May 1905, p. 141.

220. 1914, New York, & Elder, London Smith, Sense, Common Art p. " Royal Cortissoz, and

146

147 (Fig. 10). 13The Jewish Chronicle's 6 May 1898 review of the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition 1898 confined its comments on this work to an approving, albeit very

short note: `Sir George is painted

in his official robes and full justice is done in the finely modelled face of his

ever-youthful features.'''

The painting is a competent, but not particularly outstanding, example

of the

plethora of mayoral and other official portraits produced of other sitters by other during this period. Its interest lies in the presentation of the subject in full painters ceremonial robes -a choice rejected by, for example, Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema in his 1901 portrait of Sir Max Waechter, High Sheriff of Surrey. 15Solomon was identifying his sitter's contemporary position and simultaneously creating that link with the past, which was integral to the sharedhistory project and was a main strand in the Anglo-Jewish

discourse. Faudel-Phillips'

mayoral robe rises from the low

foreground of the picture, to be surmounted by an ermine cape with two large in his is both This their turn epaulettes which retain chain of office. a painting about the office of Lord Mayor and a depiction of its then incumbent. This presentation State, the the not portrait, an a realm of official, although perhaps places portrait within institutionalised has is `an Andrew Wilton pomp, assertion of suggested which 16 [which] subordinates individual characteristics.'

Whatever the Faudel-Phillips' personal reactions to this work, Solomon was following the Portrait the Presentation at year the exhibited painter of a second not is by Sargent 11) (Fig. Faudel-Phillips Lady Exhibition. Summer a Royal Academy her its the than of portrait anodyne subject of exposition much more searching 12Vanity Fair, 10 May 1906, p. 599. "Jewish Chronicle, 7 January 1898, p. 22. 14Jewish Chronicle, 7 January 1898, p. 10.

Oil (Present Waechter, Sir Max on 1sLawrence Alma-Tadema, whereabouts unknown), 116.9 1901,91.5 cm. x canvas,

147

148 husband. 17Sir George may have been content with a portrait by Solomon, the safe

pair

of hands of the Anglo-Jewish world, but for Lady Faudel-Phillips the choice was a portrait by the more fashionable - albeit potentially more dangerous - Sargent. The involved in sitting to Sargent were described graphically in a later observation by risks Wilfrid Blunt: ' 9 Sargent has a genius for seeing and reproducing the base passions of his sitters; here is Cromer with bloated cheeks, dull eyes, ruby nose and gouty hands, half torpid, having lunched heavily. Truly my quarrel with him is avenged. The newspaperscomplain that instead of our "glorious Pro-Consul", Sargent has given them nothing but a full-fed obstinate Indian official. 19

Given Blunt's very active `anti-British rule in Egypt' stance, it is hardly surprising that he seized upon this opportunity to see Cromer, then British Agent in 20 Egypt, belittled; however, this diary note of reactions, his own and those of the press, to Sargent's 1902 portrait of the Earl of Cromer, displayed at the Royal Academy Exhibition of 1903, indicates clearly just how far the artist was prepared to deviate from common perceptions and expectations - even when depicting one who was at the heart English the establishment. of very

Reviewing the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition of 1899, the critic on 5 May 1899 in the Jewish Chronicle observed of the portrait of Lady Faudel-Phillips: It is not a very refined picture, and the sitter seems to be rather overweighted by the amount of jewellery she wears, prominent amongst which is the Jubilee the hair is lady's However, and effect, the great with rendered white medal. 2 is

portrait

an amazingly clever piece of work .1

16Andrew Wilton, The Swagger Portait, Tate Gallery, London, 1992, p. 19.

" Lady Faudel Phillips, 1898 (Private Collection), Oil on canvas, 144.8 x 94 cm. 18For Blunt, see Biographical note App. 1. 96.5 146.1 Oil London), Gallery, cm. x 19Earl of Cromer, 1902 (National Portrait on canvas, 1903. May 16 469, 1932, London, Secker, Martin Diairies, My entry p. Blunt, Scawen Wilfrid 1. App. Biographical note For Cromer, see May 16 469, 1932, London, Secker Martin entry p. 20Wilfrid Scawen Blunt, My Diairies, 21Jewish Chronicle, 5 May 1899, p. 14.

148

149 Henry Strachey, cousin of the writer and Bloomsbury leader Lytton Strachey, 22 6 May 1899: was even more direct in The Spectator on In Lady Faudel-Phillips bravura is used with the power of a satire by Pope. Hard merciless wit without caricature is the general impression produced by this picture. The power wielded by the painter of this portrait has something 23 it. terrible about

What was it that Strachey felt was being satirised? In the light of subsequentdebates about the anti-Semitic potential and reception of some of Sargent's portraits of Jewish sitters, examined later, one might speculate that the critic is referring to the attempt by have he husband's in her someone whom may regarded as unsuitable, spite of rank and is, for into by English This wealth, acceptance society. of course, the antithesis of and the Anglo-Jewish discourse which I have posited emerged from the 1887 Exhibition. As we shall see, however, when so moved, Strachey was prone to use stronger and his have been direct this main or only mark. may not vocabulary, so more Perhaps Strachey was suggesting that Sargent was satirising a middle-aged lady beyond her prime by portraying her in the same style as he used for younger details body, her Her the thick to The age. artist certainly made no concession sitters. hands her the forearm her physical signs of middle show all and of upper right arm and 24Her face is unsmiling and her make-up age with no attempt at concealment. the Her her upright uncomfortably on verges pose severe. eyes especially around lap. in her dog her seems almost precariously poised

22Henry Strachey, The Spectator, 6 May 1899, p. 641. For Strachey, seeBiographical note App. 1. Sargent's this Singer John by at work frequently 23The word bravura was used reviewers of brilliance daring at an attempt display `a execution; of or then of was time and its meaning Maw, Dr Martin indebted I to 1888. I, am brilliance'. The Oxford English Dictionary, vol. definition, details for acknowledged Press of this University other Oxford and Archivist of the using reviewers when There OED. occasions see, shall we were, as throughout these notes as brilliance. daring failed hinting and been of have attempts at the word may

149

150 This picture is not a benignly disposed, formal Solomon portrayal of Sir George. Sargent

portrait in the mode of the

provides a pictorially searching examination

his of sitter which did not disguise visual truths. C.J. Holmes writing in the The Burlington Magazine in 1905 remarked of

another work that it posed:

those one Mr of John Singer problems Sargent with had made us which ... familiar, the turning of an amazing sitter into a fine picture by accepting and insisting on awkward facts 25 .

It was this willingness to take on the challenges of such potentially uncomfortable encounters and produce from them "amazingly clever piece[s] of work" that characterises some of the most rewarding of Sargent's portraiture. 26

Such an approach, while elevating these works above the run of the mill sometimes left the artist open to charges of caricature. Max Beerbohm took the elements of physical size, white hair and the bejewelled feather head piece as the key descriptive signals for what I suggest must have been Lady Faudel-Phillips in his 27 Tite Street (Fig. 12). This and other works by Sargent which I contemporary cartoon will

review

demonstrate that the line between character and caricature was

occasionally perilously thin. Thus the Vanity Fair critic remarked in his 10 May 1906

review of the Royal Academy Exhibition of 1906: There are about these two pictures [Mrs Guest and Maud Coates] a peculiar less grace and charm and of that brutality, which made his enemiesin thepast hint at the caricature. 28(author's italics)

24Photographs of Lady Faudel Phillips at the time of her husband's mayoralty indicate that she hair. Lady's Pictorial, 7 November 1896, heavy lady tightly curled white set with was a short, Frontispiece. The Sketch, 11 November 1896, p. 115: Press Cuttings 1896-7 Guildhall Library. 25C. J. Holmes, `Notes on some recently exhibited pictures of the British School', The Burlington Magazine, vol. VII, April to September 1905, p. 324. 26C. J. Holmes, `Notes on some recently exhibited pictures of the British School', The Burlington Magazine, vol. VII, April to September 1905, p. 324. 27Beerbohm, Biographical note App. 1. Cartoon reproduced in Evan Charteris, John Singer Sargent, Scribners, New York, 1927, facing p. 160.

28Vanity Fair, 10 May 1906, p. 599.

150

151 This potential towards caricature and his willingness to be `truthful'

sometimes

at the expense of his sitters are just two of the features of `Sargentness' which I will be seeking out.

Re-evaluating Sargent in the 1920s

Although this study concentrates on the period ending in 1914, discussion

the possibility of an anti-Semitic dimension in Sargent's works or in their reception and interpretation is complicated by certain later events, which, I contend, may have created a referential framework applied retrospectively as a basis for interpretation of earlier material.

The Boston Public Library Murals

The Triumph of Religion, a mural series for the Boston Public Library, was a

long-term project, begun in 1890 but terminated by Sargent in 1919. Allegations of levelled The Frieze the anti-Semitism were not at mural's early sections of the Prophets - or the lunette Israel and the Law. Indeed, when the latter was exhibited at the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition of 1909, the Jewish art critic, Marion Spielmann, wrote in The Graphic on 8 May 1909: Seldom has so majestic a design been seen in this country... It is a quiet it is design decoration simple magnificent pure and a as severely restrained .... 29 harmonious to the nobility. of point and stately -

(Fig. Synagogue 13) final its by which The controversy raised elements, one of Public, Religion in in Painting by Sally Promey merits has been analysed exhaustively

29Vanity Fair, 10 May 1906, p. 606.

151

152 mention because this reception may have coloured some subsequent readings of earlier works. She notes that: "The five year debate surrounding the image of Synagogue began within days of the 5th October [1919] unveiling". 30Although Sargent defended his depiction of Synagogue and its companion

piece Church by

reference to medieval iconography and the art-historical precedent of Rheims and Strasbourg Cathedrals, this was not a dispute to be confined within such narrow, quasi-academic parameters. Promey has detailed the progress of this argument as it grew from local indignation to a campaign which involved not just leaders of American Jewry but protagonists from many sides of American society. 31It was finally resolved only when the Massachusetts House of Representatives in March 1924 passed a Bill repealing earlier measures which had called for removal of the 32 It because it this offending panel. was of controversy would seem, that Sargent final in 1919, the the abruptly ceased work on never painting portion, The project Sermon on the Mount.

Promey notes that the charges of anti-Semitism levelled against Sargent during this

five-year

controversy

"surprised

Sargent's and shocked

friends

and

33 families. She leading Jewish his because close associations with of acquaintances" argues: The problematic juxtaposition of Synagogue and Church in Triumph of Religion represented, on Sargent's part, not a unique personal prejudice largely but Jews cultural of a wider appropriation unexamined a against Renan both Sargent The reflected and promoted and work of ambivalence ... both philosemitism and this pervasive cultural ambivalence; elements of 34 in their found be cultures. respective and author artist, can antisemitism

176. Princeton, Press, Univ. Princeton Public, p. 3oS Promey, Painting Religion in 31S Promey, Painting Religion in Public, pp. 176-193. 32S Promey, Painting Religion in Public, pp. 176-193? 33S Promey, Painting Religion in Public, pp. 176-193? 34S Promey, Painting Religion in Public, pp. 207-209.

152

153 This would seem to put the painter and his work, and indeed Renan, in what Artur Sandauer would term the `allosemitic' camp, which overarches

a simple pro- or anti-

stance and places "Jews apart as people radically different from all others, needing 35 describe to separate concepts and comprehend them". This chapter will investigate the extent to which such an ambivalent attitude was recognised by and commented in the contemporary reception of Sargent's portraits of English Jews upon

and how

helpful it is to an understanding of these works.

The Wertheimer Bequest

Whether Sargent was, or should have been, aware of the risk he was potentially courting in his interpretation of Synagogue, the controversy that arose between 1923 and 1926 when nine of his portraits of the Wertheimer family were gifted to the Nation his Although was not of making. again outside the timeframe of this study, this debate has been interpreted as demonstrating antagonistic feelings in some quarters about the in I Jews their thus paintings, may, would argue, particular subjects and general and have influenced in hindsight some subsequentreadings of these works.

Asher Wertheimer met Sargent in 1897 and commissioned portraits of himself These 25th his Flora their to were exhibited at wedding anniversary. celebrate and wife 1908 Thereafter 1898. the Summer Exhibition Academy Royal artist the until of Wertheimer the ten children, many of which, as we shall see,were portraits of painted Exhibitions Summer Academy Royal and at contemporaneously also exhibited bequeath intention these his to Wertheimer 1916 of In nine made public elsewhere. his the death his Gallery, that National was whichever wife, of or the to upon portraits 3sFor a full discussion of Sandauer's concept of Allosemitism, see Zygmunt Bauman, 'the Jew', Culture in Modernity, Postmodern', Modern, eds Premodern, and `Allosemitism:

153

154 later. Collins Baker, Director of the National Gallery, recorded that institution's gratitude for `an offer so important and munificent' (their 1920 insurance value was set at £20,000) and informed Wertheimer that, in a break with normal procedure, the then current Board would ensure acceptance by its successors,

whenever the bequest

became operative. 36Although Wertheimer expressed the wish that the paintings be hung together in the National Gallery, this was not

37 his a condition precedent of will.

The family gave the nine paintings to the National Gallery on Flora Wertheimer's death in 1922, despite the discovery of a then still

valid and potentially over-riding

1871 settlement by Asher Wertheimer, forgotten or regarded by him

as no longer

38 bequeathed his them to operative), which children.

At first the pictures were hung together in the National Gallery in accordance with Wertheimer's

wishes. Initial press comment was favourable: The Times

commented on `a munificent gift' of a `magnificent collection of family portraits', and the Morning Post referred to `the great Wertheimer gift'. 39There were, however, also negative reactions as evidenced by what was in fact a very brief but now notorious in the context of Sargent's Wertheimer oeuvre, exchange during Oral Answers in the House of Commons on 8 March 1923.40Sir John Butcher enquired as to the conditions

Cheyette and Marcus, p. 143.

36`With

for forma kind is Board Trustees it to this that they a of state pro offers of customary cannot guarantee the action of any future Board: but in the case of an offer so important and so its feels it Board that an expression not only of must make explicit munificent as yours my but to also of its recommendation that this group of pictures shall great sense of obligation you, be accepted by whatever Board may be in office whenever your bequest takes effect'. Letter from Collins Baker to Wertheimer, 28 June 1916, National Gallery Archive S996, Bequest Alfred Wertheimer, Tate 3705. 37`I DESIRE but without imposing or intending to impose any binding legal obligation on keep in in the them together trustees the them that one room said portraits and exhibit shall said National Gallery. ' Extract from Asher Wertheimer Will 08/02/1918. Author's italics. National Gallery Archive, ibid. 38Legal correspondence National Gallery Archive ibid. A tenth painting, A viele gonfie, was bequeathed to the Tate in 1996. 39Morning Post, 27 December 1922; The Times, 6 January 1922.

40The report on this occupied less than half a page out of 21 on Oral Answers and

154

155 of the bequest. Baldwin, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, noting that "the Trustees highly appreciated the generosity of the gift", replied that there were no formal conditions to the bequest, nor had the Trustees given any undertaking as to display, and that in the past 60 years there

permanent

were precedents for the display of works by

living artists 41Butcher's supplementary to there question as whether was a room for . so many pictures went unanswered. Sir Charles Oman's request that "these clever but extremely repulsive pictures should be placed in a special chamber of horrors and not between the brilliant examples of the art of Turner" 42 also went unanswered. Adler comments on the `senseof disquiet, even revulsion and above all senseof otherness' in Oman's remarks. 43Although they seem clearly to reflect his position, one might 44 how question representative they were of others' views. The Times of 9 March 1923

reported that, `The end of the sentence [by Oman] was lost in cheers and laughter', but there was no such observation in Hansard's official report. 45What is significant and supportive of Adler's comments is that The Times deemed such a brief exchangeto be of sufficient interest and importance to record in its Parliamentary page.

Sir Joseph Duveen (1869-1939), another Jewish art dealer, funded a Sargent Gallery within the Tate Gallery in 1924. The Wertheimer Portraits were moved there

though not without some prior objections from the family voiced by Asher's son Conway. In an `off the record' response, Collins Baker, whilst reiterating that with its initial hang the National Gallery had `paid this respect to your father's wishes and this honour to Sargent very willingly',

it Gallery's to the right act as wished and asserted

216 reporting the days proceedings as a whole. See Hansard 161 HC Deb 5s, p. 726. 4' Hansard 161 HC Deb 5s, p. 726.

42Sir Charles Oman, ? 4' Kathleen Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in Tamar Garb, Nochlin 83. Linda Text, and p. the eds

155

156 observed that its original hang had `given rise to a considerable amount

of antagonistic

feeling and criticism in certain 46 artistic quarters'. Perhaps significantly, the word `artistic' was a handwritten addendum to the typed

copy letter, this being indexed in

this text by the use of italics. In the light of the earlier Parliamentary

comments, one

wonders whether Collins Baker was deliberately diplomatic about wider disquiet. This would add weight to Adler's comments about general unease. Ironically, included amongst the works displayed in the new Sargent Gallery with the Wertheimer family portraits was Sargent's Lord Ribblesdale, the quintessential portrayal of an English `milord' (Fig. 14) Oman had in he demanded a `special not what mind when chamber of horrors. '47

By commissioning the pair of twenty fifth wedding anniversary portraits, Asher Wertheimer was, perhaps, influenced by his brother Charles, commissioned

a portrait

himself of

Wertheimer met William Orpen (1878

by Millais

(1829-1896).

in 1888 had who

In 1897 Charles

latter's the from time the at of move -1931)

Dublin and commissioned portraits by him in 1904 of himself, his wife Jessie, his solicitor and his riding instructor and in 1908 of himself, all of which were exhibited in 48 Royal Academy Summer the Exhibitions of those years.

asKathleen Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Text, eds Linda Nochlin and Tamar Garb, p. 95.

asThe Times, p. 7; Hansard 161 HC Deb 5s, pp. 726.

46Letter from Collins Baker to Conway J Conway, 11 April 1924, National Gallery Archive S996, Bequest Alfred Wertheimer, Tate 3705. 47Lord Ribblesdale, 1902, Oil on canvas, (Tate Britain, London) 254.2 x 148.6 cm. William Howe Downes, John Singer Sargent: His Life and Work, Little Brown, Boston, 1925, p. 48. 48Bruce Arnold, Orpen: Mirror to an Age, Jonathan Cape, London, 1981, p. 219. The Royal Academy listings were Exhibit 421 in 1904 and 687 in 1908, but they give no details of the works.

156

157 Michelle Lapine has supplemented Adler's arguments about the impact of the series and their eventual destination, focusing attention on a possible reading of the commissions and their eventual bequest as Asher's attempt to acquire status: Through this gesture, Asher Wertheimer was forcibly inserting himself and his entire family into the "gallery of worthies" as an important collector, 49 British patron and member of elite society.

Whatever the possible validity

of this particular

line of speculative

interpretation, I feel it overlooks certain basic facts about Wertheimer, which might provide a complementary and more nuanced, alternative reading. As an art dealer, Asher Wertheimer had every incentive to ensure that his Sargent collection achieved maximum value; not just for financial reasons,but also as a reflection of his astuteness dealer his have He thereby to the as a encouraging others use services. would seen benefit accruing to his business from the link between it and his family as subjects of by leading day. There are the the an ongoing series of portraits portrait painter of

from financial In 1898-9, that this series an early arrangement. suggestions resulted been have Charles Mount, to reached under a commercial agreement may according for family Wertheimer's Sargent as payment which would execute portraits of 50 is dealer/agent. It in by Asher the unclear capacity of acting commissions obtained how many of the Wertheimer family were so covered. Bruce Arnold referring to this 51 Orpen. If had Charles Wertheimer such an a similar relationship with suggests that for further the have it did indeed regular reason provided would exist, agreement between the to display of these works at major exhibitions arrangement underwrite felt have the that Wertheimer advance and portraits also may artist and agent/dealer.

49Lapine, `Mixing Business with Pleasure', in John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the 51. 1999, York, New Museum, Jewish Kleeblatt, p. Wertheimer Family, ed. Norman 187. 1957, London, Press, Cresset Sargent, Singer p. 50Charles Mount, John 219. 1981, Cape, Jonathan Age, London: Mirror p. 51Bruce Arnold, Orpen: to an

157

158 notice of his intention to bequeath most of them to the Nation would enhance his standing, at least within Anglo-Jewish society in his own lifetime.

Gifts of paintings to the Nation were not unusual at that time. Wertheimer's gift seemsto have attracted attention becauseof the status of the donor and its size and nature. Sargent had already painted eight portraits of the Vickers family mainly in 1884 and added a ninth in 1896. These, however, were not the subject

of a single gift to

the Nation, the generosity of which seemsparadoxically to have been a point of issue with Wertheimer.

The

1920s objectors,

and subsequent commentators,

ignored

an earlier

by the Constantine Ionides, head of the London branch of a Greek precedent set family, who, together with other of its members, was a major patron of British artists in the second half of the nineteenth century. Between 1834 and 1880 G.F.Watts (1817-1904) painted an estimated fifty-five portraits of members of five generationsof 52 On his death in 1900, Ionides bequeathed more than one the lonides family. thousand paintings to the Victoria and Albert Museum, including ten of these Watts family portraits. 53The Times report of 23 July 1900 noted that "There have been few by "Mr Ionides lonides", late Mr the taste ending so catholic as collectors of Greek that the it England the to animates sentiment proves once more presenting

52Based on a list compiled by Dorothea Butterworth. Other artists who painted portraits of (1828Rosetti (1837-1911), Legros (1833-1898), Burne-Jones include the Ionides family Guildford, Museum, Watts Archive (1834-1903). Whistler (1859-1921) 1882), Strang and Surrey.

s3The gift comprised around 90 paintings, 300 drawings and watercolours and over 700 prints. Albert by Victoria in 1904 the Bequest and A separate catalogue of the was published CAI items Collection Albert Victoria in identified the as and Museum. The Watts portraits are Gallery National his the 17 to donated Watts 1897 own works of 1139 to CAI 1148. In further donated he 1902 1899 between family a lonides and the and portraits though none of 5, National Gallery Archive.

158

159 colony, which has made its home in this country". 54Unlike Wertheimer, lonides it a condition precedent of his gift that his

collection should be held together and so

identified. 55Whatever Wertheimer's intentions

initial and press and public reaction,

subsequent reception seems to have been less favourable than might been anticipated. Perhaps what militated

made

reasonably have

against him and the reception of his gift is

best encapsulated in The Times phrase `Greek

colony'. The Greeks were regarded as a

self contained group, whereas the Jews were regarded as pervasive

levels all at of -

society - `blurring a boundary line vital to the construction of a particular social 56 order.

Roger Fry revisits the Wertheimer Portraits Another Parnassus -

In 1923 the hang of the Wertheimer bequest at the National Gallery provided Roger Fry with the opportunity to review these pictures as a group for The New Statesman and to air his views both on Wertheimer and Sargent.57

Within

the context of this study, the article is most often deployed for its

Sargent's in his lay that argument genius ability to enhance the social status of his future to transmit to them this generations; but an extended extract of sitters and enable the original text indicates the argument is more complex, ironic and critical in tone: A rich man has need of a lawyer's skill to enable him to secure the transmission of his wealth to posterity, and a rich man, if he have the intelligence of Sir [sic] Asher Wertheimer and the luck to meet a Sargent,can by the latter's skill, transmit his fame to posterity. And as we must supposethat it is in the interests of society that a rich man's his heirs, Sir Asher be duly that transmitted to may admit so we wealth should 54The Times, 23 July 1900, p. 9. ssC.A. Ionides' will of 31/08/1899 required that the bequest be kept as one separate distributed be the Collection, to lonides Constantine be over the not to called collection Art Library, National Museum, Albert Victoria lent for Exhibitions. be Museum nor to and Ionides Bequest.

56Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and Ambivalence, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1991, p. 61.

57Roger Fry, `The Wertheimer Portraits', in TheNew Statesman, 13 January 1923,pp. 429-30.

159

160 Wertheimer was likewise conferring a benefit on society, both now and in centuries to come, by transmitting his personality and his entourage. I seethat this record of the life of a successfulbusinessman the of close of ... the Nineteenth Century has a profound historical interest.58

Although this idea of the social upgrading potential

of a Sargent portrait may

have gained purchase in English art critical and historical thought in

from this part

almost certainly ironic comment by Fry, it is possible that in his turn he picked the idea from up a far more explicit, and potentially overtly anti-Semitic version, in an unidentified Boston newspaper of 5 March 1899 at the time of the exhibition of Mrs Carl Meyer as part of a Sargent one man show in Boston: $10,000 was not much for a multi-millionaire

Israelite to pay to secure social recognition for his family.

59 This

in the American press, fits closely with similarly oriented comment, although made remarks made in other contexts about Jews in the pre-War period and quoted by 60 Adler. Fry's

comments on the importance of Asher Wertheimer

feel, intentionally I were,

exaggerated and his incorrect attribution of a knighthood on him, repeated three times, might also have been deliberate. Fry's tone might be interpreted as implying that he did not believe that Wertheimer's fame and status merited the posthumous recognition which he charged Sargent of conferring on him and his family any more than he deserved a knighthood - an honour, I suggest, that probably Fry and almost been had Fry knew he his his given. continues: not readers editor and possibly some of certainly

It was a new thing in the history of civilisation that such a man should venture family his the himself have the portrayed on to numerous of members and ducal family I Mr that the and see or circumstances of a royal scale and with his both doing for has Sargent patron and what quite peculiar and unique gifts brilliant Mr Sargent him For ambassador was a posterity required of ... " between Sir Asher Wertheimer and posterity.

S8This has been corrected from that usually quoted. Roger Fry, `The Wertheimer Portraits', in 429-30. 1923, 13 January Statesman, pp. The New Centre Mellon Paul 1890s, Portraits Sargent: the s9Ormond and Kilmurray, John Singer of 109. 2002, London, & Haven Art, New p. for Studies in British in The Jew Family', Wertheimer Portraits Sargent's the Singer 60See Kathleen Adler, `John of 85. Garb, Tamar Nochlin Linda p. Text, and in the eds 429-30. 1923, January 13 Statesman, New in The pp. 61Roger Fry, `The Wertheimer Portraits',

160

161 What has been omitted from most uses of this article is that its

main target is

not Wertheimer or perhaps even Sargent's role as a conferrer of status, but Sargent's position as an artist. Fry's key argument turns on his distinction between pure artists

of whom Sargent was not in Fry's opinion one, and applied artists, the category into which Fry believed Sargent should be placed: `I had used the term "practitioner in paint' as a term of abuse, comparing it with the honourable title of painter. "62 It also introduced a new line into Fry's argument, which surprisingly he did not overtly acknowledge. If Sargent was indeed merely a `practitioner in paint' then his work would have neither the status not the longevity of that produced by a `pure' artist 63 his be lived. `Sir Asher Wertheimer', and any status conferred on sitters would short perhaps viewed as a counterfeit celebrity by Fry would have acquired counterfeit coin, in the form of a collection of portraits, which would never enjoy the status of great art for dealer fate fine history that the galling a art and one subsequentexhibition and -a bear these to seem works would out. reception of

For Fry, Sargent should not, as some of his fellow critics would have him, be `but Parnassus, Mount high on another mountain which on an artistic placed 64 it'. Fry sardonically commented that those who frequently gets confused with far higher `ten the times branches' to `applied salary and the entitled were professed beauty'. love by truth the and of honours than those who are obsessed

65 This

important Sargent in Fry's downgrading an possibly was of eyes positioning and importance. its his influence on succeeding evaluations of work and

429-30. 1923, January 13 Statesman, New The pp. 62Roger Fry, `The Wertheimer Portraits', in 429-30. 1923, January 13 Statesman, New pp. in The 63Roger Fry, `The Wertheimer Portraits', 429-30. 1923, January 13 Statesman, New pp. The in 64Roger Fry, `The Wertheimer Portraits',

161

162 I would argue that these three post 1914 events the Boston Murals debate,the House of Commons question and the Fry review

have been gradually conflated so as -

to create a negative, potentially anti-Semitic climate of opinion which may have influenced subsequent readings of Sargent's pre-First World War

portraiture and the

interpretation of their contemporaneous reception. The combination of post-War anti-German sentiment with a continuation of pre-War anti-Semitic attitudes - as evident among some parts of the ruling elite as within the more directly affected populations of the East End - made Jews with obviously foreign names such as `Wertheimer' potential targets, especially when their actions made them stand out. To the extent that the Boston Mural controversy had any impact on attitudes in England at the time, it would probably have exacerbated negative sentiments, allowing some to argue that wealthy American Jews were reacting in an oversensitive and inappropriate Similarly, its Fry's Adler had long tail as manner. re-evaluation, which points out, own far forward as John Russell's writings in 1964, although perhaps mainly of interest to 66 those in and around the art world, further added to this revisionist climate. For Sargent to have been able to work the trick of confirming social upgrading for his this them to transfer to Jewish then those enabling and of origin sitters - especially future generations, it would have been vital for him not to be regarded `as a painter of Jews' at an early date. If this had been the common perception, the illusion would have been almost impossible to create. In fact, this comment used by Adler and others and Blunt, William dairies from derived been then the have of unpublished to which seems was

Sargent's Blunt's 1907 of critique in fact part of as see shall we as made until not

Sassoon. Lady portrait of

429-30. 1923, 13 January Statesman, New in The Portraits', pp. 65Roger Fry, `The Wertheimer 1964, 333, London, S Nowell-Smith, England, p. Edwardian "Art" in 66John Russell, ed in Nochlin and Garb, p. 85. Adler by quoted

162

163

John Singer Sargent paints English Jewry In London his warmest admirers were the wealthy Jews. Sir William Rothenstein.67

This section examines Sargent's portraits of Jewish sitters in the chronological in order which they were exhibited and reviewed at the Royal Academy Summer Exhibitions and elsewhere. It includes all of the Wertheimer family portraits, whether so exhibited or not, together with other Jewish sitters painted by Sargent during this It period. revisits, where appropriate, Adler's analysis of the works selected in her focus is Its commentary. primary contemporary critical reception as being formative informed by demonstrate It to that this of and general public opinion. will seek in fact, largely reception was, positive. Those commentators who were on occasions negative were often not consistently so throughout their reviews of works, nor were those whose anti-Semitic views were known from other writings. In a period that included close to its start the Dreyfus Affair of 1898 and shortly before its conclusion it is is is in Act 1905, that Aliens the passing of the possible to what remarkable not find some overtly anti-Semitic comments on or contemporary readings of some of these pictures but that such references seem to have been in the minority.

1892 Mrs George Lewis68

be by Sargent first Jewish to the sitter In 1893 this portrait, possibly of a have been Gallery. New It the or commission a may at exhibited was publicly shown,

1931, March heaven', Atlantic, Boston, be in `When to p. 67William Rothenstein, young was 323. 136 77.5 Collection), Oil (Private 1892, Lewis cm. x on canvas, 68Mrs George

163

164 `painted in gratitude for the settlement of a [legal] case' by the sitter's husband for the 69 painter. The work is also of interest in the context of this study because, together with Sargent's 1896 portrait of her husband and 1906 portrait of her daughter Katherine, it forms what would seem to be the only series of a Jewish family, apart from the Wertheimers, to be painted by Sargent in England. As we shall see later, Sargent leading ladies, husbands did Anglo-Jewry's their although painted many of not

him. to sit

1896 Sir George Lewis

Ironically, in the light of the later controversy, Sargent's first Royal Academy for decoration the lunette the Jewish theme ceiling and part of was a exhibit with a Boston Public Library project, shown in 1894. Four years after his New Gallery her his in 1896 Sargent George Lewis, Mrs debut Jewish portrait of exhibited with 7° Arthur Mr Sargent's (Fig. 15). Academy husband at the Royal subsequent portrait in its depicted lawyer Jewish below) (see Cohen sitter a morning coat with a of another wing collar and tie -

Sir David 1899 Sargent's portrait perhaps as a scholar or aesthete.

legal depicted both these Killowen Russell Richmond and his 1902 portrait Lord of his Richmond though position as combined figures in their ceremonial robes - even been have business therefore in leading and might role Lord Provost of Glasgow with a him involved legal George, Sir In practice whose contrast, marked otherwise attired-71 heavy is Wales, Prince shown wearing a coat with a of in matters concerning even the

Mellon Paul 1890s, Sargent: Portraits John Singer E., the of 69Ormond, F. and Kilmurray, 59. 2002, & London, Haven New Art, in British p. Studies for Centre

59.6 80 Canvas, Oil (Private 1896 cm,. x on collection), 70Sir George Lewis, 134.6 243.6 Oil Gallery) Art & Museums (Glasgow x on canvas, 71Sir David Richmond, 1899 85.1 Oil London) Gallery, Portrait (National 1902 x on canvas, Killowen, Russell of Lord cm; 71.1 cm. 164

165 fur collar and

a pearl pin in his tie - nothing marks him out as a lawyer rather than a

wealthy businessman. The image has more in common with Asher Wertheimer than Arthur Cohen.

1897 Mrs Carl Meyer

His next portrait of a Jewish sitter was that of Mrs Carl Meyer (Fig. 16), exhibited in 1897.72 If Mrs Lewis attracted little critical comment or particular attention, Mrs Carl Meyer was to prove a very different case.

Although originally catalogued asMrs Carl Meyer, this work includes her two children, Frank and Elsie. This is a frothy confection of a painting, `captivating in its Gallic lightness'. 73The artist seems to revel in the apparent luxury of its setting

even

though it was in reality a studio portrait, in the sheer opulence of its principal sitter's dress and in the perhaps exotic appearanceof her two children. Elaine Kilmurray has Madame de Pompadour by Boucher (1703-1770) as a possible referential suggested

antecedent; the sitter is attired in a similar voluminously skirted dresswith her tiny feet 74 from beneath peeping out and a discarded book in her lap. It is perhaps an example of Anne has Hollander what referred to as `Woman as Dress

-a

woman wearing an

75 is if dress had her'. by dress, Status Mrs Meyer the created elegant as conferred on her clothes rather than her inherent rank. When luxury is dwelt on for its own sake as it is here, the way is opened for charges of excessive self-indulgence on the part of the

72Mrs Carl Meyer and her children, 1896 (Private Collection), Oil on Canvas, 201.4 x 134 cm. 73Royal Cortissoz, Art and Common Sense, p. 234. 74Francois Boucher, Madame de Pompadour, 1758 (Victoria and Albert Museum, London) See Ormond, 57. F. Kilmurray, John Singer Sargent: E. Portraits 72.5 and x Oil on canvas, of for in Studies British London, Centre Art, New Haven & 2002, 81. Mellon Paul 1890s, p. the 75Fabric of Vision, Exhibition Catalogue, National Gallery London, 2002, p. 165.

165

166 sitter. In a period in which one of the arguments mounted by those of an anti-Jewish persuasion concerned excessive wealth, the depiction of such luxury becomes potentially dangerous self-justifying ground for such an attack.

Vanity Fair, in its review on 6 May 1897 of the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition of 1897, was impressed by the work: Mr John Singer Sargent literally sweeps the board with a painting [Mrs Meyer], which will probably causea greater flutter than his Mrs Hammersley, hangs temporarily in the Guildhall. This picture will be which now historical. 76

The comparison with Mrs Hammersley, one of Sargent's successes at the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition of 1893, is particularly apposite.77The depiction of the focus their wealthy and wealth was a of Sargent's portrait painting in this period - and indeed of many contemporary artists working in England. Such sitters were of course illustrated Jewish. Hammersley Mrs similar not exclusively or even preponderantly `props', perspective, and pose to those used in Mrs Carl Meyer, and also seemedto letter John Hay its In in to the a private non-Jewish sitter. rejoice show of wealth of 78 ley: dated 18 October 1893, Henry Adams attacked Sargent and Mrs Hammers Was it in defiance or an insult to our society, or a rendering in good faith of English French to art, or an and our civilisation, or a conscious snub female despair the the of reconciliation with artist's unconscious revelation of 79 gold-bug?

in be disparaged to display trait Excessive general and not exclusively of wealth was a in feelings did Adams Interestingly Jews. a in similar express not the case of applied later letter about Mrs Carl Meyer:

76Vanity Fair, 6 May 1897, p. 306. 205.7 Oil York) New Museum, (Metropolitan Art x 7' Mrs Hammersley, 1892/3 on canvas, , 114.9 cm.

78Biographical

1. App. note

for Centre Mellon Paul 1890s, Sargent: Portraits Singer the John 79Ormond and Kilmurray, of 64 2002, London, & Haven New Art, p. British Studies in

166

167 Mrs Meyer is a sprightly Jewess who did us the favour to stand under her day to show that she is as good as her picture. the private opening portrait on Decidedly this time Sargent has done it. The art of portrait painting of Jewesses and their children may be varied but it cannot be further perfected. 80

Although this letter did not adopt an overtly anti-Semitic stance, there were perhaps covert hints in the manner in which it clearly singled out `the Jewess' as different and, in a sense, outside Society as Adams understood it. This setting apart of `the Jew' was certainly not uncommon in the period. In the introduction to her 1903 Sargent, Alice Meynell observed that the artist "had a keen sight for the signs work on of races" and went on to speak of, for example, "the Spanishness of El Jalelo, the `subtly English' quality of Mrs Charles Hunter, the "pure French" of Mme. Gautreau before observing that "the Hebrew portraits present more obviously, but no less subtly 81 the characters of race". This positioning `as a race apart' was antithetical to the aims in discussed in line discourse Anglo-Jewish It the with the of earlier chapters. was thinking behind what Brian Cheyette has referred to as "the contradictions and liberalism" be found in Belloc Edwardian the to and of writings ambivalences within Chesterton, which in their turn were the step before the overt and egregious literature in found be this the to period. of of some anti-Semitism

The Jewish Chronicle, usually sensitive to and vigilant in its detection of May Its 7 in the this exhibition portrait. nature of nothing observed anti-Semitism, is Sargent's "it Mr but Jewish and year" ended exhibitors on review concentrated praised the painting:

g'0Letter by Henry Adams, 2 May 1897 quoted in Mount, John Singer Sargent, p. 185. For 1. App. Biographical note Adams, see

81Alice Meynell, The work of John S Sargent, William Heinemann, London 1903, introduction. unpaginated 82Cheyette, Constructions of `theJew' in English literature and society, Cambridge 150. 1993, Cambridge, Press, p. University 83Jewish Chronicle, 7 May 1893, p. 12.

167

168 "Mrs Carl Meyer" is, without doubt, the best portrait, which has been ... last decade, during belongs in the this to the very country and produced in it Painted by the its Velasquezgrand style of art. captivates quintessence like veracity, its strength and its harmony of colour.... we commend this 84 Jewish masterpiece to the earnest study of our artists .

The `Velasquez-like veracity' of the work is significant in the search for the qualities that make up `Sargentness'. Comparisons between the artists and in particular on their insistence on veracity are a recurring theme encountered in many reviews.

Henry Strachey in The Spectator of 22 May 1893 clearly disliked both the its by I to the referred earlier, which work and subjects and, prompted overindulgence wrote: Mr John Singer Sargent has had recourse again to his `Empire' sofa of which it is possible to get a little wearied, especially as it is always slipping down the floor in acute perspective. Mrs Carl Meyer and her children all dressed in happy doubt finance haute with this are no great splendour and with an air of kind of furniture. Even Mr John Singer Sargent's skill has not succeeded in feel We Orientals. European that these these over civilised making attractive 85 biscuits. ices bed live in to and wafer satin and upon people must go

Sargent's sofa and the extreme perspective he employed had been lampooned in a Punch cartoon on 8 May 1897 with the tag line "The Perils of Steep Perspective. `Hold 86 They this like it's Mother; the critic with a served also switchback"'. only up invective the launch from over-pampered to against visceral an almost which platform disapprobation double finance" "haute Use of negative term the a up sets of rich. land inherited through is implicitly finance as a route to wealth contrasted with wealth German foreignness the implies of actually the French albeit subjects of the use of and 87This is reinforced by the term `European Orientals', which may have been a origin. West-end `East European' thereby wealthy conflating saying of euphemistic way

84Jewish Chronicle, 7 May 1893, p. 12.

85Henry Strachey, The Spectator, 22 May 1893, p. 732. Portraits Sargent: Singer the John Kilmurray, Ormond 227. of 1897, 86Punch, 8 May and p. 109. 2002, & London, Haven Art, New British in for Studies p. Centre Mellon Paul 1890s, 732. May 1893, 22 Spectator, The p. 87Henry Strachey,

168

169 Jews from West European with the immigrant poor, who

were by then so much in

88 in London's East-end. The use of the adjective `European',mistakenly evidence omitted

in Downes'

original

transcription

of the review and its subsequent

89 does little to attenuate the tone. The implication of `otherness' re-quotation,

and the

phrase "these people" are clearly exclusionary in terms of entry into English Society;90 luxurious overindulgence contravenes the reserve expected of the

well-bred English.

Similar furniture and signs of the pampered rich were just as evident in Sargent's Mrs Cazalet and her children (Royal Academy Summer Exhibition 1901) in Mrs Knowles and her children of 1902.91Neither of these later works, however, and elicited the same negative reaction to their depiction of wealth. Spielmann in The Magazine of Art, May 1901 concentrated on the painterly aspects of Mrs Cazalet: larger full invention - and that much a and more showy work, of original ... perhaps not of the most felicitous. The lady is beautiful and beautifully 92 rendered.

The critic of The Graphic, 18 May 1901, was disappointed with what it dismissed as "a frank inspiration from Lawrence and in so far uninteresting". 93In The Spectator, 25 May 1901, Henry Strachey was more positive about the painting but is he low the that portrait and maybe an example of the even ended on a note remarking failure of bravura to which is referred to earlier: is his bravura It in this and once more. very wonderful style artist shows ... leaves but it have done it, time the one same at perhaps no one else could 94 cold. 88Henry Strachey, The Spectator, 22 May 1893, p. 732. 89This adjective is omitted between the original text and the Downes source used by Adler. Adler, in Nochlin and Garb, p. 86 & p. 313. 90Henry Strachey, The Spectator, 22 May 1893, p. 732. 91Mrs Cazalet & her children, c. 1900 (Private collection) Oil on canvas, 254 x 165; Mrs , (Butler Oil 182.9 Ohio) 1902 Art Institute, Youngstown, her & on canvas, x Knowles children, 151.1. 92Spielmann, The Magazine of Art, May 1901, p. 390.

93The Graphic, 18 May 1901, p. 274. Sir Thomas Lawrence R.A., 1769-1830. 94Henry Strachey, The Spectator, 25 May 1901, p. 768.

169

170

1898 Mr Asher Wertheimer; Mrs Asher (Flora) Wertheimer; Mr Arthur Cohen

In 1898 Sargent exhibited the first two in the series of the Wertheimer family, the individual portraits of Asher and his wife Flora, commissioned to celebrate their twenty fifth wedding anniversary.

The portrait Mrs Asher Wertheimer (Fig. 17) elicited little critical comment.95 The Jewish Chronicle's critic's review of the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition of 1898 dated 6 May 1898 in somewhat self-contradictory mode felt that, compared with her husband, Mrs Wertheimer had: been a more difficult model as a certain lack of spontaneity evidently ... betrays. Mrs Wertheimer is represented standing clad in white satin trimmed lace how lace Sargent her Mr with old well paints old and wearing 96 is fine full life. It well-known pearls. a portrait and of

Even Robert Ross in his largely hagiographic review of the Wertheimer series in the Art Journal, January 1911 could manage nothing more positive than the comment that the portrait "lacks not the character of the sitter but of

97 the artist".

The portrait Mr Asher Wertheimer (Fig. 18) evoked far more reaction - both 98 is "Happy Athenaeum's judgement The the bad. Next to the man, critic, of good and Adams' Henry been has thus", comment: one might set painted whose portrait "Sargent has just completed another Jew. Wertheimer, a worse crucifixion than history

95Mrs Flora Wertheimer, 1898 (New Orleans Museum of Art) Oil on canvas, 147.5 x 95.2. 96Jewish Chronicle, 6 May 1898, p. 10.

1911, January ff. Journal, 1, Art Ross, 97Robert p. 98Mr Asher Wertheimer, 1898 (Tate Britain, London) Oil on canvas, 1 47.5 x 97.8.

170

171 tells us of". 99Of note, however, is the fact that the latter remark, letter rather than published in any contemporary journal,

in made a private

would seem to have been a

personal reaction and not a reasoned critique.

Vanity Fair's review dated 5 May 1898 was limited to the enigmatic and ' 00 `a Judaism, type in cryptic comment very The writer of startling truth'.

was perhaps

using this quasi-shorthand to invite readers to draw on their personal repositories of images visual of Jews, in order to understand what the portrait was seeking to reveal in its `startling truth'. These, I would suggest, might have been negative stereotypes. If this is correct, this note comes closest - albeit covertly and in a coded form

to an -

anti-Semitic reading of the work in the contemporary press.

In The Jewish Chronicle's review, quoted above, its critic perceptively drew Sargent's to attention unwillingness to compromise in the face of a difficult subject: It cannot be described as an attractive picture, but as a work of art it may be be finest during the to the last twenty years... The said male portrait painted impression the picture conveys is that the painter has painted what he saw with unyielding force and truth to life. It is certainly the most important picture in the present exhibition and the more it is studied the more nearly it is found to approach Velasquez at his best 'o' .

In The Spectator dated 7 May 1898, Henry Strachey, so critical of Mrs Carl Meyer as a painting and a subject two years earlier and of Lady Faudel-Phillips in this Exhibition, was more restrained in his language and perhaps more favourably inclined to the artist and his sitter: More astonishing by its cleverness though not so beautiful or so dignified is Mr John Singer Sargent's portrait of Mr Asher Wertheimer Esq. With a 99Henry Adams, letter to Charles Milnes Gaskell, 28 November 1897, The Letters of Henry Cambridge, C. Levenson Harvard University Press, 1989, J. Mass: IV, et. al., ed. Adams, vol. 1898, 762. June 11 Athenaeum, p. 497. p.

100Vanity Fair, 5 May 1898, p. 290. 101Jewish Chronicle, 6 May 1898, p. 10.

171

172 palette as restricted and as moderate a scale of light and shadeas in the picture just described, Mr John Singer Sargent scores a successas great, though of a totally different kind. Instead of old age enthroned in its high backed armchair, the man of the world stands, cigar in hand, about to make acute remarks on man and things. The actual painting is of a kind which might be described as witty and in the poodle dog, whose head just comes over the frame, Mr Sargenthas allowed himself the amusementof illusion, for the pink tongue seemsto palpitate. 102

One must be aware of the class and social undertones that

underlie this, and must not

overlook the writer's allusions to a lesser dignity and the socially less desirable `man of the worldliness' quality of Mr Wertheimer when compared with academic renown ' 03 Francis Penrose, by the Strachey. One might also query of other subject referred to whether the epithet of "cleverness" applied to Sargent as the painter of this portrait was double-edged, being applied in a negative sense not just to the artist but to the sitter 104 his being `clever' who owed wealth to a and astute art dealer.

In her comments on these Wertheimer portraits, Adler selects certain specific features which seem to influence both her reading of this particular image and '°5 thereafter of the three others in the group with which she engages. In the light of the in details by Strachey the reviews already quoted particular picked out - and of other in it is her by Adler, to to commentaries referred appropriate review comments some depth. Contemporary photographs of Asher Wertheimer would seem to indicate that 106 he was quite short and had strongly defined facial features. In a preliminary sketch for the portrait (Fig. 19), Sargent largely ignores these. He foregrounds his subject and 102Henry Strachey, The Spectator, 7 May 1898. The comparisons in this extract are with the immediate focus. Strachey's Penrose, was prior which portrait of

103Francis Penrose, 1897 (RIBA, London), Oil on canvas, 143.5.1 x 95.3. Biographical note App. 1.

104Henry Strachey, The Spectator, 7 May 1898. 105K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds

172

173 cuts the image off just below the waist. Wertheimer looks directly

at the viewer. His

cigar and dog are absent and the position of his right hand is unclear. In the final version the subject has been moved slightly backwards and to the right and the

portrait

extended below his knees, thus perhaps visually compensating for actual physical shortness. This repositioning leaves a void in the lower left quadrant. The introduction of Noble, the family dog, into this space may, in part, have been a response to this compositional necessity.

In contrast to a traditional art-historical interpretation of the iconography dog as a symbol of fidelity, Adler talks of the displacement

of Jewish sexuality on to

the animal and continues by discussing concepts of control, constraint as evidenced, inter alia, by its clipping and pedigree associated with this particular breed.' 07This would seem to be somewhat internally contradictory - the (unbridled) lust of the (socially marginal) Jew is linked with selective interbreeding and control and restraint. A canine encyclopaedia of that time asserted that the Poodle "... is commonly acknowledged to be the most wisely intelligent of all members of the canine race. He is a scholar and a gentleman. ,108The "slavering tongue" which seemsto trouble Adler being "suggestive of passion and sexuality", could be both the simple reflection of as 109 canine physiology and a response to another pictorial need. Against the sombre

106John Singer Sargent: Portraits of the Wertheimer Family, Jewish Museum, New York, p. 10 and p. 13.

10'According to the Kennel Club, to which I am indebted, the poodle was used as a hunting dog in its native France. Clipping, which was then and always had been a feature of the have breed, in to to the the may originated assist animal move more easily rough grooming of keeping joints, heart terrain and water while and lungs protected from cold. In England at this less bow hair Continent. The in both kept the than the the severe time clipping was much on by different hunter's identified dog from the and, use of colours, one animal's vision clear another's. posL. Crouch, Cassells New Book of the Dog, The Waverly Book Company, London, 1907, 128. 1, p. vol. 109K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds

173

174 background of the work, a black dog would disappear almost

completely without the

colour provided by his tongue, which also balanced pictorially with the flesh tones of Asher's hand and face. I am not suggesting that either Wertheimer

or Sargent were

necessarily aware of or motivated by all or indeed any of this information. It does, however, suggest the potential for neutral or even positive readings of Noble's inclusion to set against the negative reading proposed by Adler.

The inclusion of Noble and of a variety of other animals, who, as we will see, in appeared other portraits in this series, was perhaps a record of a pet-loving household and may have been no more than a measure of relaxed familiarity between Received sitters and painter. opinion suggests that there was a warm relationship between Sargent and the Wertheimer family - especially Asher and his daughter, Ena. Whatever the terms of any financial agreement, regular social visits to Connaught Place and the Wertheimer country residence at Temple near Henley were clearly no burden on Sargent who continued to paint the family even after his 1907 declaration `I 110 If the Adler reading of Noble were correct, one hate doing Paughtraits [sic]. ' feet beribboned the interpret how the to poodle slumped at presence of a pink wonders dandy illustrator in Sargent's Graham Robertson the and young author, portrait of of insistence the on artist's especially given

III ll his inclusion.

112 in The Holmes Chronicle's Jewish both As the reviewer specifically and in his difficulties 113 from did Sargent implied not shy away Burlington as a generality,

110Quoted in Mount, John Singer Sargent, p. 243.

"' Robertson indicated his pet, Mouton, was included at Sargent's behest: Time Was: The 233. Robertson, Graham W. p. of reminiscences 112Jewish Chronicle, 6 May 1898, p. 10. The School', British the `Notes 13 C.J. Holmes, on some recently exhibited pictures of September 324. 1905, April VII, to Magazine, p. vol. Burlington 174

175 pictures. The inclusion of elements of what, from the photographic evidence available, would seem to have been features of Asher Wertheimer's physiognomy may have been more a reflection of such basic integrity, rather than, as Adler has proposed, the incorporation of "many of the elements beloved of anti-Semitic caricature". 114The is in subject not, as the preliminary sketch, looking directly at the viewer but slightly to 115 Adler 1 would propose that one one side. suggests that this "hints at furtiveness"; in discern fact hint is his features. This than more might a of a smile on a much warmer foreshadowed by than that the earlier sketch. portrayal In 1894 George du Maurier published Trilby introducing Svengali, the non 116 "one It Jewish the the of most widely read of all anti-Semitic was of gaze. plus ultra best "is in Victorian the the greatest generally considered period", representations 1894 from July January in Harpers to seller of the century", and was serialised by illustrations by 112 the author. accompanied

' 17Although I have no direct evidence

he this it, it that Sargent of unaware was to seems unlikely actually read as whether fictional figure and probably had seen how the author visualised Svengali's mesmeric have Sargent bearded Jew, depicting may Faced the small, a of challenge with stare. by `Jewish depicting the gaze' felt it appropriate to find a solution to the problem of This Svengali-like Wertheimer's reading. a circumnavigating so and stare averting Sargent to that an the made concession only the perhaps gaze was averting of in the One the work of reviews earliest of portrait. otherwise very uncompromising Cromwell "a Sargent would 1898 April to as painter as The Times dated 30 referred Cooper Samuel heart have loved, a painter after the of the man, who roughly ordered Jew in The in Family', the Wertheimer Portraits Sargent's the 114K Adler, `John Singer of Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds

in The Jew in Family', the Wertheimer Portraits the Sargent's Singer 115K Adler, `John of Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds 1894. Tauchnitz, Bernhard Leipzig, Trilby, Maurier, 116George du

Jew', `the Culture in de Modernity, Siecle', Fin eds and 117Daniel Pick, `Svengali and the

175

176 118 Robert Ross, in his 1911 Art Journal to paint him as he was disguising nothing". retrospective, regarded it as "the only modern picture which challenges the Doria Velasquez in Rome". 119This evaluation did not just place Sargent at the peak of European portraiture but also emphasised the character revealing nature of the work. The portrait of Innocent X, 1655, regarded as one of the examples of great portraiture does not conceal the physical appearance of one whose face was described by a 120 Even born deformed "the the among men". most ever observer as contemporary Pope himself is reputed to have said that this portrait was "troppo vero", a comment, been have applied to that of which might equally

'21 Asher Wertheimer.

in his in the Sargent's tendency towards caricature some of work, particularly have Wertheimer Asher been has may mentioned and, although already earlier period, 7 Punch he Sargent, hands the fate on cartoon of a the this subject was of at escaped his his Jewishness his and May 1898 which replaces cigar with coins and emphasises 122The caption reads: "What only this monish for that shplendid dog. My tear, wealth. Sutherland Sir Thomas Sargent's and it is ridic'lush. " On the same page, portraits of barber's in if latter chair a the gowned as Francis Penrose were also satirised 123 Asher Sargent's Contrasting the "Not too whiskers, please". of much requesting Adler the that Hamilton, Ian Colonel notes Wertheimer with his contemporaneous former comes "perilously

his "focuses latter the on to whilst caricature" close

106. Marcus, p. Cheyette and

18 The Times, 30 April 1898, p. 14.

ff. 1 1911, January London, Journal, pp. 119Robert Ross, Art 120 121

122Punch, 7 May 1898, p. 205.

Portraits Sargente Singer the John Kilmurray, Ormond of 205. 1898, and 123Punch, 7 May p. 132. 2002, & London, Haven New Art, in British for Studies p. Centre Mellon 1890s, Paul

176

177 dignified stance and profile". 124Hamilton, however, was also caricatured three years later by Spy in Vanity Fair, striking a somewhat similar pose, albeit with a highly '25 Some contemporary reviewers wrote complimentary accompanying commentary. positively of the Hamilton: The nervous energy of the sitter has seemingly stimulated the `eye' of the artist. The tall, lithe, sinewy, alert figure of the officer springs tense from the grey background. His nervous hands almost twist on his sword hilt. The contours of his head and face are eloquent with the quick intelligence and sensitive vitality beneath. The execution matches and reveals this insight. 126

I would, however, argue that in contrast to the character-full portrait of Wertheimer, the portrait of Hamilton with its concentration on `the details of his is, by uniform' comparison, somewhat lifeless. To adapt Hollander it might be classed as `Man as Uniform' -a device that, as Adler had noted earlier, though in other terms, Sargent used for several of his portraits of leading Englishmen who sat to him. As with Hamilton, Sargent's portrait of Lord Ribblesdale identified its subject in terms of a `uniform' - his hunting suit complete with his riding top hat being worn indoors. Unlike

Sargent's study of Coventry Patmore (1823-1896)

indeed Asher or

Wertheimer which were character-based, in these works it was the Uniform that defined the man. Other examples of the importance of Uniform as the signifier of the defined Sargent's the this that coat period are all enveloping subject within oeuvreof the dandy in W Graham Robertson and the uniform and colonial paraphernalia with in Sir Frank Swettenham the the the subject status of which artist signified (1850-1946), a portrait painted at the end of the latter's tenure as Governor of the

124K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the (Tate Colonel Ian Hamilton, Oil 1898,138.4 78.7, Garb. Nochlin on canvas, x Text, eds and Britain, London).

125Vanity Fair, 2 May 1901, p. 309. 126HTP

Boston Transcript, quoted in Mount, details p. 436

177

178 Straits Settlements (1901-1904). 127Other options were in each case open both to subject and painter but the choice was made to use the Uniform.

Adler argues that "His [Wertheimer's] cigar indicates not only wealth but also 128 Avoiding a Freudian discussion of the psychological vulgarity and sexuality". implications of cigar smoking at the turn of the century, smoking (particularly of cigars), although frowned upon by Queen Victoria, was fashionable at the very highest levels of English Society. Asher Wertheimer and his brother Charles not only shared this habit with the Prince of Wales who is reputed to have said at the end of the first State Banquet after his accession `Gentlemen, you may smoke', but, like their father 129 from future King. Samson, purchased their cigars the same merchant as the Numerous photographs, cartoons and sketches of the period depict persons, from '3° Prince Edward downwards, smoking. Although smoking was less evident in more formal oil portraits, the National Portrait Gallery's collection has portraits by Tissot (1836-1902) and Wortley (1849-1905) in which the subjects, respectively the soldier, Burnaby and the writers, Besant and Rice are smoking cigarettes, and a portrait by Louis Kolitz

(1845-1914) of the art historian and diplomat Sir Joseph Crowe

127W. Graham Robertson, 1894 (Tate Britain, London) Oil on canvas, 230.5 x 118.7; Sir Frank Swettenham, 1904 (Singapore History Museum) Oil on canvas, 258 x 142.5. in insisted this Sargent the Singer the John indicate coat that use of Robertson's memoirs on discussion ff. 233 For Robertson, Graham W. of a Was: Time p. the of reminiscences picture: Ormond John Kilmurray Swettenham in the and portrait see the `paraphernalia' of office Singer Sargent, Tate Gallery Catalogue, pp. 167.

128K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Text, eds Nochlin and Garb. 129The ledgers of J.J. Fox and Robert Lewis, now of St James,London, for the period 1880 to Victoria's Queen (with Wales The Prince three more of of 1905 list as customers not only leading but large the Wertheimer and Asher aristocracy of numbers also children) and London Spectator), The Strachey the St Loe John (including principal of Society members of Messes. Regimental the Clubs and many of Gentleman's

by Furniss Harry illustrations includes inter Gallery's Portrait 130The National alia collection dealer Sir Agnew, Sir William the and art the magnate, Burnham, newspaper of Baron Henry Irving the actor all smoking cigars.

178

179 (1825-1896) holding a partially smoked cigar. 131The 1908 Orpen Wertheimer showed him looking obliquely away from the

portrait of Charles

viewer with a lit cigar in his

hand. Sargent was also a cigar smoker and was photographed right

smoking as he

worked. The inclusion of a cigar in the Asher Wertheimer portrait may therefore have been simply acknowledgement of a pleasure shared not just by

sitter and painter, but

by also many in the upper echelons of society. It is also possible that it intentionally

was an

audacious move on the part of the artist displaying the commonly

accepted, though perhaps still somewhat overtly frowned upon, habit of cigar smoking as a reference back to Gilbert Stuart's socially transgressive depiction of Sir Joshua Reynolds snuff box in hand in 1784, at a time when that habit was not to be openly 132 portrayed.

The evidence I have presented in relation to Asher Wertheimer and the have based I it arguments upon are not posited as an outright rejection of Adler's 133 They are intended to demonstrate the breadth and, in many cases,positive reading. reactions to the work among contemporary critics and from this to suggestthat a more nuanced reading of this and, as I will show below, of other Sargent portraits of Jewish is sitters more appropriate - especially within the context of their own time-frame.

Adler

(1861-1942) by Blanche Jacques-Emile the on comment quotes

Sargent's portrait of Asher Wertheimer as "the father whom Rembrandt would have

13' Louis Kollitz,

Sir Joseph Crowe, 1877 (National Portrait Gallery, London) Oil on canvas,

78.1 x66cm,.

132Gilbert Stuart, Sir Joshua Reynolds, Oil on canvas, 1784. SeeRichard Wendorf, Sir Joshua Cambridge, Mass., 1998, Harvard University Press, Society, in Painter The pp. Reynolds: 40-1. 133K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds

179

180 134 Such a comment merits attention since according to Heather painted with a turban". McPherson, "Blanche's multifaceted, overlapping activities as portraitist, critic and 135 fin-de-siecle him the chronicler placed In a epicentre of at cultural production". senseRembrandt had done just this in his self-portrait The Artist in Oriental Costume with a Poodle, which may have been a point of reference for the Asher Wertheimer 136 Awareness of this could have been available not just to the painter but to his portrait. dealt in Rembrandt's works. sitter who

The transaction between any artist and any sitter involves an element of the theatrical; posing is a deliberate act of scene setting. For Sargent there were occasions when theatricality was not simply just part of such a transaction but a positive element for Comparing, Sargent. It `Sargentness' the the example, the was part of of of work. images of Flora and Asher Wertheimer, this emerges quite clearly. The portrait of Flora Wertheimer is a head on image with the light coming from the left hand side. The The is lighting Asher Wertheimer theatrical. much more overtly of positioning and if by Noble is face is looking the a spotlight; captured as subject whose up at viewer if but Strachey just be the as over stage suggested, of canvas as peering out not might from is the dramatic dynamic has footlights. The work missing which quality and a Flora. portrayal of

Jew in The in Family', the Wertheimer Portraits Sargent's the 134K Adler, `John Singer of 91. Garb, Nochlin p. and Text, eds

University Cambridge France, Nineteenth-Century Portrait in Modern 135H McPherson, The 145. Cambridge, p. Press,

Musee (Petit Palais, 1631 Poodle, Costume Oriental Artist in The with 136Rembrandt van Rijn, 52 66.5 Oil de Paris) la Ville de cm. Arts panel, x on Beaux des 180

181 In the same year Sargent also produced a portrait of Arthur Cohen, the New Gallery. 137This would seem to be one of the only portraits

exhibited at

of a Jewish male

subject - other than a Wertheimer - painted in and exhibited in London during this period. In a family memoir Cohen's daughter indicated concern that her father's portrait would look dull by comparison with Asher Wertheimer, whose portrait she assertswas "intensely clever and withal entertaining", but concluded by noting that `it [the portrait of her father] is one of the portraits of Sargent that

presents no quality that

138 be one would not wish to presented. Sargent was clearly not dangerous for all of his sitters and on this occasion showed his subject as an elegant and distinguished Victorian with little to indicate that he was of the Mosaic persuasion. Albeit using a negative verbal formulation, there is a senseof relief in his daughter's final evaluation 139 it "clever" her the father in of work that was not and presented a positive light.

1901 The Daughters of A Wertheimer; Hylda Wertheimer

If Sargent's portrait of Asher Wertheimer is for Adler a quintessential example identity in Jewish Ena Betty the this the problems of male period, portrait of of and Wertheimer, Royal Academy Summer Exhibition in 1901 (Fig. 20), is Adler's starting `the Jewess', issues for the with which specifically associated point an examination of 140 is extended to two other works in the Wertheimer series.

137Mr Arthur Cohen, 1897 (Private collection) Oil on canvas, 75 x 63.5. For Cohen, see Biographical note App. 1. 138L Cohen, Arthur Cohen: A Memoir by His Daughter for his Descendants, London, 1919, p. 1890s, Sargent: Portraits Kilmurray, E., John Singer F. Ormond, the in 149, quoted of and 130. 2002, & London, for Studies in British Art, New Haven Centre p. Paul Mellon 139Cohen, L., Arthur Cohen: A Memoir by His Daughter for his Descendants, London 1919, 1890s, Sargent: Portraits Kilmurray, E., John Singer F. Ormond, the in of and 149, quoted pp. 130. Art, & London, 2002, for in British New Haven Studies Centre p. Paul Mellon

140K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the (Tate 1901 Britain, Mr Asher Wertheimer, The Daughters Garb. Nochlin of and Text, eds 130.8 190.5 Oil cm,. x on canvas, London),

181

182

The Graphic of 1897 (quoted above) suggested the work of Sir Thomas Lawrence as an antecedent to Sargent's Mrs Cazalet and her children. It is possible that the latter's portrait of the Daughters of Colonel Thomas Cartaret Hardy (Fig. 21) was a reference for Sargent's portrait of the Wertheimer Sisters. 14' Although held in private collections, the Lawrence double portrait of the Hardy Sisters was exhibited

at the Royal Academy in 1888 and at Agnew's

in 1897, and featured in

contemporary literature on the artist, thus providing Sargent with opportunities to have seen it. 142In the

Lawrence portrait the sisters are posed in close proximity, with similar physical contact betweenthem as in the later Sargent depiction of the Wertheimer sisters.The right-hand, taller figure is also dressedin white, in contrast to the darker red colouring of her sister's dress.The sitters in both works have `off the face' hairstyles and wear little jewellery.

If this were indeed the precedent, although the pose is

different, it would seem that Sargentmay consciously have been placing the Wertheimer sisterswithin an English tradition. It would provide a link for both Sargent's picture and his sitters into a shared history of the kind espoused in the Anglo-Jewish discourse.

As Adler remarks, the Sargent portrait picture is notable for its almost overpowering "vivacity" -a quality that struck a strong chord among contemporary 143There may have been in in tongue cheek criticism reviewers. an element of perhaps Vanity Fair's comment on 9 May 1901: the Daughters of Mr Asher Wertheimer is the most remarkable and the ... John Singer full Indeed Mr is It of marvellous vitality. most startling. Sargent's pictures ought to have a room to themselves for they effectively dolls by look like them, simpering other portraits eclipse anything put near 144 live before daughters Mr Wertheimer's to their side one. seem ...

141Thomas Lawrence, The Daughters of Colonel Thomas Cartaret Hardy, 1801 (Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio) Oil on canvas, 161 x 135 cm. Charlotte (1782-1850 latterly Mrs Ralph Price) and Sarah (1780-1808 latterly Mrs Daniel Lysons) were daughters of Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas Carteret-Hardy of the York Fusiliers. I am indebted to the double Lawrence information for this this the Museum portrait. Cleveland on succeeding and 142The picture passed from family ownership (Daniel Lysons) in 1887 to Mr Camillo Roth. (No 1888 21), Old Masters Works Exhibition Academy, the the Royal of Exhibited at of (No Mentioned 1897. 3rd 9) English School, Masterpieces 20 the series Agnew's, London, of 135. Cole 1900, T. London, Sir Thomas Lawrence, Gower, Sutherland and p. in: Lord Ronald facing by 167. Cole, New York, 1902, Masters, English Old p. Dyck, woodcut J. C. van

143K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds 144Vanity Fair, 9 May 1901, p. 299.

182

183 The Athenaeum's review, 11 May 1901, although positive in

general, was not

without a note of implied criticism in its appraisal of the portrayal of Ena: This is in its way a masterpiece. The poses of the figures are full of spontaneity and verve and the contrast between the leaning figure of the younger girl and the almost exaggerated robustness of her sister is entirely felicitous. 145

"Almost exaggerated robustness" would seem to imply that Sargent himself was teetering on the brink of excess and `robust', though perhaps appropriate for Ena, was hardly an adjective normally applied to Society ladies. 146

The Graphic, in its review of 18 May 1901, similarly remarked on the `life' in the picture: In vigorous contrast [to Sargent's portrait of Mrs Charles Russell, shown at the same time] stands The Daughters of Mr Asher Wertheimer. It is perhaps the artist's most brilliant work of his career - original in grouping, incisive in character and sharply compared, as the girls stand in close contact intensely 147 almost preternaturally - alive.

But it noted - referring to exhibits by Alma Tadema, Dicksee (1853-1928) and Fildes (1844-1927) - that: It is almost a relief to turn from the oppression of this astonishing ability, from the inevitable unrest of the bravura performance to the quiet dignity of purely English painting. 148

There is a double bind in interpreting such comments on Sargent's portraits of Jewish in One be to to perceived excesses the sitters. needs conscious of overt reactions in implied his it is Although the subjects. possibility of excesses painter's style and is being is "bravura it the that that contrasted with the artist's performance" probable "quiet dignity" of English painting, one cannot escapethe possibility that the remarks in form between being be to the the applied coded overpowering contrast might also

145The Athenaeum, 11 May 1901, p. 601. 146The Athenaeum, 11 May 1901, p. 601. 147The Graphic, 18 May 1901. 148The Graphic, 18 May 1901, p. 674.

183

184 Wertheimer sisters and the polite restraint of other English

149 sitters. D. S. MacColl

reflected this in his Saturday Review article, 18 May 1901: I should say that rarely in the history of paintings have its engines discharged a portrait so emphatically, so undistractedly contrived. The woman is there, hardly with vitality matched since Rubens, the race, the social type, the 150 person.

He was alluding overtly, though without any further comment, to the

social standing

and race - rather than religious affiliation - of the sitter and marking her out as different. The sometimes negatively inclined Henry Strachey writing in The Spectator on 25 May 1901 praised the work, although one sensesan undertone of `Sargent is too by half in the review: clever/too good The portrait of the Daughters of A. Wertheimer is the picture which is the most obviously clever of the seven sent in by Mr Sargent. It is a marvellous tour de force of execution. The artist seemsto have felt it was expectedof him that he should astonish and he has done so. There is a suspicion of humorous "' in is appreciation the picture and the skill extraordinary.

Spielmann, writing for The Magazine of Art in May, was more negative than others, suggesting that the vivacity of the sitters was so overpowering and their depiction so stripped to essentials that Sargent had in fact lost both a quality of decorative illusion, and that `surface', which enables an artist to reveal true character: The vivacity - especially in the case of the two young ladies - is almost both daughters Frankly& Mrs Wertheimer Mr that their and painful. now have been painted by the young master - what is the cumulative result? For living, four like live in I these to almost a room with my part, should not breathing faces looking at me from the walls, interesting as they are. It was Velasquez. They Titian thus that thus stopped short of a painted, not not degree of illusion that almost annihilates the fine decorative quality of the background is in invention, The in "Daughters" the creation a canvases. taste and appropriateness; yet we have eyes for nothing but the defiant ladies. in The is its in the of picture original grouping, admirable vivacity daring in its line, faces the while appear tell tale of the charactersof colour, the sitters Ah! - but the real characters- are they given here? Surely it is too

149The Graphic, 18 May 1901, p. 674. 150D. S. MacColl, Saturday Review, 18 May 1901, p. 632. McColl's use of `contrived' bears likely is Its have the today. that time did connotation negative meanings at not probably `arranged OED. thought `well as a and also composition'. out' were 151Henry Strachey, The Spectator, 25 May 1901, p. 767. 184

185 have for The to that. removed the glazing of Nature and artist seems obvious left his picture "skinned". 152 Spielmann felt that by stripping his subjects down, as we might say today, to their `bare bones'

and

concentrating on just their major characterlines, Sargenthad lost those nuancesthat serveto define the whole and the true.

In the same review Spielmann contrasted this with Sargent's portrait of Mrs Charles Russell: though low in tone and in parts not in the painter's happiest colour, [it] .. speaks to us in a truer note. Mr Sargent has looked much deeper here, and 153 he face is interesting tells us of this pathetic what very and very sad. The lower keys - emotional and painterly - of the latter seem to respond more to Spielmann's view of

the role of this portrait as almost an internal revelation of character in contrast to the far bolder, brash double portrait.

As McColl

[the in `.. Saturday Review the to article referred above remarked

154 is forward [while] Wertheimers} come the other all retreat'. almost romping...

The more detailed review in the Art Journal of June 1901 was perhaps the had his implication by how Sargent just far sitters, and, perhaps clearest statement of boundaries the of portraiture: conventionally accepted pushed None will arouse so much discussion as Mr John Singer Sargent's group in the central gallery. It represents the two daughters of Mr A Wertheimer, in two the Interest the taller in of centres shadow. standing against a wall is low dress left, in for the to of red velvet, relatively, and mark one she sisters, figure In the inanimate. the second portrayal of says relatively, limit. It furore intent the to has been utmost of carried with a characterisation is as if Mr John Singer Sargent had determined that not a thought, not an With the around arm right emotion, not an experience should passunrevealed. head large thrown left her slightly vase, oriental on a resting sister, waist of back, lips parted, she stands as though hurling defiance at the world. Every figure the in brush this the challenges overwhelmingly vital stroke of dress, in inch, the the whether academic proprieties; almost every square The bust, is face hair, jet-black the searchingly analytical. and neck and in figure is far the this a vice; as spectator grips concerned, as so picture, it is he to to again and return will acquiesce, one compelled whether or not 152Spielmann, The Magazine of Art, May, p3 85.

(Private 1900 Russell, 390. Mrs Charles May, Magazine 153Spielmann, The p. ofArt, Oil on canvas, 104.8 x 73.7 cm. collection)

632. 18 May 1901, Review, Saturday p. 154D. S. MacColl,

185

186 dispel, if to were that possible, the oppressivenessof forceful only again, is To that the say work pleasant........... this would be characterisation. "' uncritical.

In its focus on Ena, the Art Journal was careful though perhaps overly insistent, to underline that the challenge to propriety was to academic rather than social 156 standards. He seems, however, to use his own words, to have been driven into a 157 "furore". Dismissing the portrayal of Betty as "relatively, and mark one says inanimate" he describes Ena in highly charged, emotive terms, as if in fact relatively her pose "head thrown slightly back, lips parted hurling defiance at the world" ... 158 license free In this context, one wonders spoke as much of overt sexual as of spirit. daring Mrs Ralph have Sargent's these portrait of made of what some of critics might Curtis (Fig. 22), painted as a wedding present for the couple. Even the artist's friend Henry James disapproved of it: "I didn't like the portrait of Mrs Ralph at all! and don't take it as worthy of anyone concerned".

159

The contravention of the convention that a lady was never depicted showing her teeth seems to have been a starting point for this critic's outpourings on the Sargent's however, the depiction Ena of one only the not, was who of of excesses 160 facial Ena's that However, in female sitters to be shown this way. one must admit

155Art Journal, June 1901, pp. 99-100. '56Art Journal, June 1901, pp. 99-100. 157Art Journal, June 1901, pp. 99-100. issArt Journal, June 1901, pp. 99-100.

159Mrs Ralph Curtis, 1898 (Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio), Oil on canvas, 219/3 x 104.8 Paul 1890s, Portraits Sargent: Singer the John Kilmurray, of Ormond See and also cm,. 143. 2002, & London, Haven New Art, British in Studies p. for Mellon Centre Museum, Gardner (Isabella Stewart 1888 Gardner, Stewart 160Others included Isabella Art, Museum (Metropolitan 1894/5 Ada Rehan, 81.3; 189.9 of x Boston, Mass), Oil on canvas, Oil 1896, Aldringen, Clary Countes 127.3; 236.2 canvas, on Oil x New York) on canvas, Oil York) New Galleries, Adler (Hirschl & 1897, Stokes, on Phelps Mrs & Mr 228.5 x 122,; Sisters, 1902 Acheson The York; New Art, Museum Metropolitan 103, of 214.6 x canvas, Portland, Duchess 198.1; 269.2 Oil Chatsworth) of x Collection, on canvas, (Devonshire 113. 228.6 Oil 1902), x canvas, on Collection Private

186

187 expression is closer to that of Mrs George Batten, painted by Sargent in the act of singing, rather than to the more genteel half smiles of some of those cited above.161

Earlier, in reviewing Mrs Carl Meyer, I referred to Holllander's concept of `Woman as Dress' and her discussion of "women's nude bodies as if they had been formed by modish clothing". 162Betty's body is concealed beneath the heavy fabric

her dark dress. The drapery of Ena's dress, however, hints overtly at the body beneath her fold in fabric level thigh; breaks knee the particularly the right a at waist at behind which Betty's left hand is tucked. It was perhaps this combination of signals, consciously observed or not, that fuelled the Art Journal 's reaction.

Adler comments that the two sitters were "daringly dressed" in contrast to the 163 covered up style with an abundance of trimmings, the fashion of the time. The Duchess of Portland's

dress, in an almost contemporaneous portrait, was indeed

lady decollete less the though therefore wearer a married of rank and somewhat was however, be One to also observe more conservative. should, perhaps socially obliged that the titled English lady was wearing considerably more jewellery than the supposedly ostentatious, wealthy young socialites.

Adler also refers to cleaning that has revealed repositioning of a strap on Betty's dress thus invoking Sargent's most notorious portraits,

164 that of Madame X

161Mrs George Batten, 1897 (Glagow Art Gallery & Museum, Kelvingrove), Oil on canvas, 88.9 x 43.2. 162Fabric of Vision, Exhibition

Catalogue, National Gallery London, 2002, p. 165.

163K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds

164K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the (Metropolitan (Mme Pierre Gautreau), 1883/4 Museum X Mme Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds 208.6 109.9. Oil York) x New on canvas, Art, of

187

188 Jacqueline Ridge and Joyce Townsend referred to a contemporary observation

changes to the portrait: Sargent's Wertheimer girls are all changed, both appear to have been painted I in has He them the saw all over since studio. painted out a marble slab, put in ' 65 large lightened here a vase and parts and there.

This indicates that the shoulder strap over-painting was only part of more extensive alterations to a then unfinished studio version. It would be unfair to accuse even the let painter, alone the sitters, of exceeding the bounds of public taste on the basis of a After furore Gautreau Madame the the subsequently reworked canvas. surrounding portrait and whatever the state of the painting at this early stage, it seemsunlikely that Sargent would have again courted public opprobrium or the disapproval of a major by in faux final the client repeating at another exhibition same shoulder strap pas version of this earlier work.

Ridge and Townsend's reference originates in a letter by the American, 166 It was preceded William Cushing Loring (1879-1959) studying in Paris at the time. by a report on an earlier studio visit:

167

I finest two the ever saw. girls of painting an easel was me on opposite ... Wertheimer's daughters, it is the strongest and most beautiful arrangementI have ever seen. The picture dealer Wertheimer has ordered portraits of all of his children - ten in all. 168One portrait of a young man -a Wertheimer - was looking bit Sargent then talked said, abruptly a a noble piece of construction.

165`John Singer Sargent's later portraits', Apollo, September 1998, p. 25.

166The Loring family were Boston based friends of Sargent. His 1890 portrait Mrs Augustus in 1899 Society Copley the the Peabody Loring was exhibited at artist's one man show at - see Mellon Paul 1890s, Sargent; Portraits Singer E., John the Kilmurray, of Ormond, F. and his 47, 2002, Haven & London, Art, New British in portraits p. painted and Centre for Studies family. the of members of

167The `report' was dated 10 February 1901 and the letter 29 May 1901. These dateswould tie Art American Archives Royal Academy Exhibition. 1901 the to of in with a studio visit prior found Smithsonian be in 18. Loring's the 1984, correspondencecan p. Journal vol. XXIV, John Singer Sargent Reference Archives. a6d2 za371 Institution . (born in 1872) and Sarah had Wertheimer twelve two 168Asher and Flora children, of whom infancy. in died 1886) (born Lizzie

188

189 do "What the two the at girls, painting of you think of it? Isn't it stunning of the taller girl? Don't you think she is handsome?"169

If Loring's information was correct, as early as 1901, Wertheimer and Sargent had agreed to embark on this most ambitious cycle of family portraits.

In the same year John Singer Sargent also painted a portrait of Hylda Wertheimer, the sixth of Asher and Flora's children. 170This does not appear to have been publicly exhibited during this period; it was, however, part of the Wertheimer Bequest. As I shall discuss again later, Hylda may have considered herself or been considered by the family less suited as a subject for such public display than some of her sisters. She may have been shyer by nature; in both this and a later triple portrait her gaze is averted from the viewer and there is a senseof discomfort, as if the sitter is ill at easewith the process of being painted or displayed.

The picture indicates perhaps even more clearly than that of her two elder sisters, the wealth of the family and the luxury of their home. Hylda's dress, like Ena's, however, dress both fully In this the shoulders was worn with revealed. case, was not is body it it by beneath This than the concealed rather revealed. contrast modelled by by Adler in the some contemporary critics, context of comments made significant implications dress Ena daring Betty the the of sexuality allied and and styles of about to the concept of the belle Juive. I would suggest that female sexuality was explored from by in Sargent the this period, aside of portraits sometimes more obviously - other has Curtis, daring Gautreau Mrs Ralph to the Madame which reference and notorious

169Sargent's use of the word `handsome' may strike a dissonant, perhaps masculine, chord to description lady. had, however, It the first more positive of a as a ears twenty century lady Ena's In to this time. this and particularly a of context when referring at connotations looking'. OED. day `fine be the it equivalent of present height, might 170Hylda Wertheimer, 1901 (Tate Britain, London) Oil on canvas, 214.6 x 143.5,.

189

190 already been made. Lady Agnew is at first glance the very essence of the young, demure, aristocratic wife, furthermore she was convalescing when painted by Sargent. 171Closer inspection, however, obliges the viewer to accept the artist's insistence on corporeality; on the body under the dress directly revealed by her upper arm through the gauze of her sleeve, the brushwork and colour accent, which her knee, between her breasts flower thigh the the emphasise and pendant nestled and held in her lap. The positioning of her left arm, which hints at an arching of the body, the suggestion of a smile, and her direct gaze make this a far more sexual enigmatic body first Similar the that revealed characteristics of suspect. one might at portrayal 172 beneath the dress are to be found in the Wyndham Sisters. Although contemporary in these have works, allusions such noticed mentioned - nor perhaps critics may not the fact that they run as a common thread in portraits of both Jewish and non-Jewish female Singer Sargent for John the that revelation of concealed sitters would suggest features the issue but the Jewish of of another sexuality was not a specifically has it the Perhaps Sargent. `Sargentness' of veracity, which was again an example of his best been work. suggested as a characteristic of already

1902 Mr Alfred

Wertheimer; The Children of Asher Wertheimer; Mr Edward

Wertheimer, Mrs Leopold Hirsch

that Loring certainly to almost referred was The portrait of a young man which Exhibition, Summer Academy Royal 23) (Fig. the Wertheimer, at Alfred shown of

Oil Edinburgh), Scotland, Gallery (National 1892/3 on canvas, of 171Lady Agnew ofLochnaw, 125.7 x 100.3. Oil New York), Art, Museum (Metropolitan 1899 on canvas, of 172The Wyndham Sisters, 292.1 x 213.7,.

190

191 1902.173Alfred, the Wertheimer's fourth child, died in South Africa in the same that the picture was executed. Even by his own standards, 1902 was

year

an outstanding

in terms of the works Sargent exhibited; in addition to A4(red Wertheimer, Lord year Ribblesdale, The Acheson Sisters and The Duchess of Portland to

which references

have already been made, his contribution included, The Misses Hunter and Mrs 174 Leopold Hirsch. He also exhibited his triple portrait of Essie, Ruby and Ferdinand, Children ofAsher Wertheimer (Fig. 24) in London's New Gallery. '75

The Art Journal 's review of the New Gallery Exhibition of 1902 focused on what its critic perceived as the orientalism of the triple portrait: Decoratively

it is a triumph; it satisfies, too, as a revelation of the several characters. . .Mr John Singer Sargent has never painted a child [Essie], perhaps we should hardly say more winsome, but instead, more bewitching. In her is concentrated that mysterious orientalism which inspires the beauty of the 176 group.

Strachey in the Spectator put it even more strongly: `The moral atmosphereof 177 has been before have ' He to an opulent and exotic society seized and put seems us. been inviting his readers to substitute the seraglio for the sitting room in which this have family to their more pets would appear group of adolescents whose portrait with 178 in common with the mood of Sargent's earlier Misses Vickers. The subjects in fourteen thirteen twenty two, the time the and years only of painting, question were, at for family been friend had by than the then the more a of artist and old respectively four years. They were, therefore, perhaps not the most obvious starting points for an in light Oriental However, this the of and other comments morals. of examination 13 Mr Alfred Wertheimer, 1901 (Tate Britain, London), Oil on canvas, 163.2 x 114.9. 174Mrs Leopold Hirsch, 1902, (Tate Britain, London), Oil on canvas, 144.8 x 92.7; The Misses Oil 229.2 229.9. London) Britain, (Tate 1902 on canvas, x Hunter, 175Essie, Ruby & Ferdinand, The Children of Asher Wertheimer, 1902 (Tate Britain, London), 193.7. 161 x Oil on canvas, 176Review of the New Gallery Exhibition, Art Journal, 1902. 177Strachey, Spectator, 1902.

191

192 about this painting and about Sargent's later portrait of Almina Wertheimer, one must keep an open mind as to the underlying thrust of this comment and the possible intentions of the artist. Perhaps Strachey was struck by the

similarity between the

portrayals of Frank Meyer and Ferdinand Wertheimer and transferred his negativity about the former portrait to this later work.

The portrait of Mrs Leopold Hirsch (nee Frances Mathilde Seligman) was felt by Vanity Fair to be "a somewhat exotic presentation". 179Although her dress

was an

elaborate ensemble in pink with a deep lace collar and insets, this is perhaps a questionable reading, at least from a twenty first century standpoint, of one who seems timidly to be avoiding eye contact with the viewer. In 1905 Sargent was to paint Mrs Adolph Hirsch (nee Georgette Seligman), thus demonstrating his links with other parts Hirsch family the of and with the Anglo-Jewish hierarchy.

In contrast to the potentially exclusionary comments made about the triple portrait of the younger children, the reviewers placed the picture of Alfred Wertheimer in into key Sargent's English the unequivocally an works world alongside one of him Lord Ribblesdale thus this making a part of a shared present. oeuvreof period -

Strachey in the Spectator, 3 May 1902, was restrained but without a negative note: Much more interesting is the same painter's portrait of A Wertheimer ....... face is There thoughtful the colouring. something very and sombre with head dreamy is the this the picture; quality of so admirably attractive about l8o carried out.

17&The Misses Vickers, 1884 (Graves Art Gallery, Sheffield) Oil on canvas, 137.2 x 182.9. 179Vanity Fair, 8 May 1902, p. 325.

180Spectator, 3 May 1902, p. 637

192

193 Given that this and the portrait of Mrs Hirsch were the sixth and seventh portraits of Jewish sitters to be exhibited at the Royal Academy by Sargent since his Jewish debut with Mrs Carl Meyer and one of the third group in the Wertheimer sequence, there can have been no question as to awareness of Alfred's heredity, religion or social standing. Nevertheless, when The Graphic, Vanity Fair, and The Magazine of Art each judged the Alfred Wertheimer portrait against that of Lord Ribblesdale, in none of them does the former come off the

poorer for the comparison:

Mr Sargent's portrait of young Mr A Wertheimer, a scientific student ... apparently, and a veritable masterpiece of character painting. Yet it is almost surpassed by the wonderful full length of Lord Ribblesdale - at the opposite corner - where the ex-Master of the Horse stands with the quaint old 18' him in fashion. worldliness of caught and realised surprising To my thinking, however, by far his best work is in the portraits of Mr Alfred Wertheimer Esq. and Lord Ribblesdale...... there is character in every line of the first from the intelligent, thoughtful face to the thin hand pressing on a pile of manuscripts - no accessories distract the eye. So too in the case of Lord Ribblesdale He be before to quite remarkable performance. seems alive -a 182 his his hat in his you, clothes and sharing vitality.

two superb male portraits... the one thoughtful and full of character A and .. Wertheimer Esq. and the other of the Lord Ribblesdale infused with that 183 dress in informs lord. the quaint old-world spirit and manner which noble

In spite of a social gap that would have been unbridgeable by almost any of Anglo-Jewry's luminaries, let alone the son of a first generation art dealer whose own by Sargent had been by portrait negatively received some, the portrait of Alfred into but hint the accolades without a of anti-Semitism creeping received nothing reviews of the time.

The problems of post 1923 readings, to which I referred earlier, are clearly demonstrated in a two-sided comment by Hamilton Minchin published in 1925: tenderness is exceedingly rare. It is present, however, in the beautiful ... died Alfred Wertheimer, his the of scientist, who young; relation to portrait 181The Graphic, 3 May 1902, p. 595. 182Vanity Fair, 8 May 1902, p. 325. 183The Magazine of Art, May 1902, p. 356.

193

194 Wertheimer pere is one of those mysteries of heredity, like Shelley his and father, which surprise us sometimes.184

In 1902 Sargent also started a portrait of the Wertheimer's but due to the sitter's death that year it was

eldest son, Edward,

185 never completed. It was, however, part

of the subsequent Wertheimer Bequest. Its size and the right facing pose of the subject would suggest that it may have been intended as a companion piece to the left facing, identically sized portrait of Alfred.

1904 Mrs Asher Wertheimer

In 1904 Sargent exhibited a second portrait of Mrs Asher Wertheimer at the Royal Academy (Fig. 25). 186Whether, as suggestedby Lapine, this was prompted by dissatisfaction with the 1898 portrait or whether, after the deaths of her sons, Alfred 187 Edward, formal felt is documented. and a more portrait was appropriate not Although six years separatethe two pictures, the sitter's appearancehas changed from early to mature middle age. This picture is characterised by a senseof dignity. Unlike Lady Faudel Phillips, whose bare arms and excessive jewellery seem an attempt to defy or disguise the reality of her own age, Mrs Wertheimer is a figure of restraint. Her is leans forward looking directly The the pose controlled as she at viewer. slightly style her her dress her jewellery to position, age and seems entirely appropriate of and personal situation.

184Hamilton Minchin, Some early recollections of John Singer Sargent, Garden City Press, Letchworth, 1925. 185Mr Edward Wertheimer, 1902 (Tate Britain, London), Oil on canvas, 163.2 x 114.9. '86Mrs Flora Wertheimer, 1904 (Tate Britain, London), Oil on canvas, 163.2 x 107.9. 187Lapine, `Mixing business with Pleasure', in John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Norman Kleeblatt, The Jewish Museum, New York: 1999, 53 Family, ed. p. Wertheimer included in 1922, Wertheimer Bequest The the 20. of earlier portrait was not Endnote later version was the preferred choice of the family. the that suggesting

194

195 If the comment in the Jewish Chronicle on 6 May 1902 had been made just a few years later, one might suspect the writer or Wertheimer or both of attempting press manipulation, so prescient is it of the final outcome for the series: Mrs Asher Wertheimer forms one of that celebrated series of family portraits that Mr John Singer Sargent has executed for the great connoisseur, Mr Wertheimer, a series any art gallery in the world might be proud to possess. Assuredly Velasquez painted as fine, but no better, a portrait than this beautiful lady in her black dress adorned by a necklace of wonderful pearls 188 in seated an armchair.

In its review, The Jewish World, 6 May 1904, although admiring the work, took advantage of the occasion to cast an unflattering backward glance at an earlier work: Mr Sargent's clever portrait of Mrs Wertheimer claims first notice for the like Singer Sargent's it is Mr John that too work, some of not clever reason 189 Wertheimer. his Mr notably portrait some years ago of

The Athenaeum, perhaps emboldened by Sargent's fall from grace in 1903, but its dated 21 May 1904, in in its the also review portrait appreciation of was positive his it backward itself earlier assessmentof what now saw as occupied with a critical, failings: Mrs Wertheimer is a more searching study of character and is an admirably by is Sargent Mr discreet any means a great not arrangement. sober and low for toned late those he has but preference very wise a shown of colourist, is harmony least in indefinite within an agreeable schemes, which at and lights brilliant has the with and startling reflected avoided reach, and 19o he flesh, in to half the tones affect. used which unpleasant greenish

191 Asher Children Conway, Almina Hylda, Raphael; of 1905 Mrs Ernest and Wertheimer; A Vele Gonfie

May 1902. 6 Chronicle, 188 Jewish 1904, May 6 World, p. 119. 189The Jewish 190The Athenaeum, 21 May 1904, p. 662. 114.3 163.8 Oil (Private Collection) 1905 Raphael, cros. ems x on canvas, 191Mrs Ernest 195

196 Sargent's 1905 portrait of Mrs Ernest Raphael (nee Flora Cecilia Sassoon), exhibited at the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition, was one of three paintings of the wives of the Raphael family which the artist undertook between 1900 and 1906.192At its showing in the New Gallery in May 1905, Mrs Ernest Raphael prompted The Graphic to write: but it [Sir Frank Swettenham] yields in perfection to the Mrs wonderful ... Ernest Raphael, a lady in black decollette [sic] decked with pearls and seated beside a cabinet all of which, alike in arrangement, force, quality and life, is 193 fine. amazingly The Raphael family, although not of English stock, were also not recent arrivals. The three descendants of the founder of the London branch of the eponymous family bank in 1787,

cousins,

each married

members of the Anglo-Jewish hierarchy. The significance of both of these series of the Raphael and Hirsch family paintings and the earlier portrait of Mrs Carl Meyer in relation to the concerns of this study is manifold. The families

highly concernedwere placed within Anglo-Jewry and the Raphaelscould trace `English' ancestryback for one hundred years or more. They did not need Sargent to assist in the process of confirming their

places within the Jewish haute bourgeoisie or the financial world. If, however, they went to Sargentto acquire the substanceor at least the veneer of that social acceptability which came naturally and as of right to those such as Ribblesdale and Hamilton, they chose an unusual course of action. With the exceptions of, for example, the male Wertheimers, Mr Arthur Cohen, the musician Sir George Henschel (1850-1934) who sat to him in 1889, and Sir George Lewis, Sargent painted few portraits of the leading Jewish men of his day in England. 194The Sargent representations of the Meyer, Hirsch and Raphael families were all of their womenfolk. Perhaps this was, in part, a preference on the part of the artist Rothenstein claimed Sargent "admired and thoroughly enjoyed painting the energetic features of the 195 been decision by husbands have It Semitic their taken the race". may a who either shied women of

have less flamboyant, they from as might regarded portraiture altogether or chose others who away

192The others being: Mrs Louis Raphael [nee Henriette Goldschmidt] and Mrs William George Raphael [nee Margherita Goldsmid]. 193The Graphic, 6 May 1905, p. 534. 194Sir George Henschel, 1899 (Private Collection), Oil on canvas, 65.3 x 53.3. The work is friend Henschel'. ' to (upper my inscribed right) '95 William

Rothenstein, `When to be young was heaven', Atlantic, Boston, March 1931, p.

196

197 controversial or expensive for their own portraits. Sargent may have established a reputation as the `painter of the Jews' by the

first decade of the twentieth century, but it was Solomon J. the end of

Solomon, who was painting many of its leading male figures; including

as we have seen in the previous

chapter some of the husbands or relatives of those ladies, who sat to Sargent. Indeed Sir Samuel Montagu, although a patron of Solomon J. Solomon, had his portrait executed in 1904 by William Orchardson (1832/5-1910). These decisions by potential patrons, ran counter to the

commission pattern

that emerges from an analysis of the range of Sargent's portraiture. Although

Sargent's popular

reputation is as a painter of society ladies, the SIRIS index identifies almost as many portraits of males by Sargent (379) as it does of females (440). 196The English aristocracy, including

many of the husbands

ladies of who sat to Sargent, many of its military High Command (some during or after the First World War) and its intelligentsia sat to Sargent, but the men of the Anglo-Jewish hierarchy who sought by a variety

of other means to assure integration

into English

Society for themselves and their

co-religionists, abjured this particular route.

Hylda, Almina and Conway, Children of Asher Wertheimer197

This group portrait was painted as if outside the family home - the view of the background perhaps indicating nearby Hyde Park or Temple at Henley (Fig. 26). The less has feel 1902 the the work of the younger children composition of of ensemble lacking both in is degree in the that the of and many ways most pedestrian of series, in finish Sargent's best insight the of work. and places character analysis and

The bespectacled Hylda, whose light perhaps springtime attire seems at odds looking from is the the mood, portrayed away autumnal again general with in informal dog, ill Even this she seems as setting, cradling a pet at painter/viewer.

323. 196Smithsonian Institution ResearchInformation System. 197Hylda, Almina & Conway, Children of A. Wertheimer, 1905 (Tate Britain), London, Oil on 133,4. 188 x canvas,

197

198 ease as in the earlier formal portrait. Although the senior of the siblings in this picture, she is compositionally positioned at the base of the family triangle. In contrast to the poses of her brother and sister, which suggest action, Hylda is caught in a contemplative, still moment, uncomfortable with the process of being painted.

Conway, who, following the deaths of two of his brothers in 1902, was the older of the surviving Wertheimer sons, is positioned at the apex of the triangle. He is in portrayed casual attire perhaps out walking another of the family dogs. Although he at first seems to be looking back at the viewer, closer inspection suggests a marginal deflection of vision, in some ways reminiscent of his father's gaze in the earlier Sargent portrait.

Although Almina was a slighter figure than her older sister Ena, the way in which she looks directly at the viewer, her high colouring and her riding attire suggest that she may have shared the same active, high-spirited attitude. She is the dominant figure in this composition. Portraits of Ena and Almina were exhibited together in 1910 at the International Society's Fair Women Exhibition at the Grafton Gallery, London.

A vele gonfie

199

Reflecting on how viewers 100 years later might view Sargent's portrait of the 199 Academy Royal his Carter's Family, A. R. the Marlborough Duke of review of and in "Or A 1905 to the Exhibition rejoice again Summer added about vele gonfie: of 19'A vele gonfie, 1905 (Tate Britain, London), Oil on canvas, 163.2 x 107.9.

198

199 200 A vele gonfie was in many ways the most elusive grace of the hoyden in full sail". interesting of Sargent's Wertheimer family portraits (Fig. 27). Carter's juxtaposition of comments on this portrait of Ena with those on Duke of Marlborough may have been flattering to the former, but his description of her as a "hoyden", while perhaps accurate of her effusive personality and physically commanding presence, was 201 describe both English lady. Perhaps to no certainly way an painter and subject were less concerned with such social niceties and more concerned with capturing a moment. Visiting Sargent, Ena swept into his studio and he was immediately attracted by her billowing cloak

have Some he her to record. commentators about which sought

behind by left her that a outfit was composed of studio props, perhaps suggested family Adler her Basing suggests evidence, proposition on such previous male sitter. 202 that the outfit was that of a male soldier and a broomstick was used as a prop. This transgression for her the and the role male/female one of as work reading of way opens for her to raise issues of witchcraft linked with Jewish female identity. Adler, however, husband, Ena's to it which, that gift a wedding subsequently was points out also

family the that its despite Adler's reservations as to appropriateness, would suggest did not see it in such a light.

203

it is it that was not an Given such readings of the work, perhaps surprising Exhibition Academy Royal the of by the of reviewers many of object of comment Women Fair Society's International it 1910 1905 or those who reviewed at the

199Duke of Marlborough Family, 1905 (Duke of Marlborough Private Collection, Blenheim 238.8 332.7 Oil ems. ems x on canvas, Palace, Oxfordshire), 200A. R. Carter, Art Journal, 1905, p. 168. 201A. R. Carter, Art Journal, 1905, p. 168. Jew The in in Family', the Wertheimer Portraits Sargent's the Singer 202K Adler, `John of Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds Jew in The in Family', the Wertheimer Portraits the Sargent's Singer 203K Adler, `John of Garb. Nochlin and Text, eds

199

200 Exhibition. 204Critical acclaim was not, however, totally wanting. John Collier in his contemporaneous The Art of Portrait Painting referred to it as: the chief ornaments of the Academy of 1905. The sweep of the one of ... drapery, the swing of the figure, and the extraordinary animation of the expression make this portrait one of Mr John Singer Sargent's masterpieces. Its vitality is astounding.205

Once again vitality is the key feature in an assessmentof a portrait

Ena. Robert Ross of

interesting line for interpretation in his 1911 survey of Sargent's provided an Wertheimer portraits :206 this harmony in black, white grey and gold was painted when Mr Sargent ... was at work on his portrait of Lord Londonderry, some of whose belongings have been utilised, I imagine, for the only fantastic and in many ways the most inspired of all the Wertheimer Sargents.207

The key word seems to be "fantastic" This is a work of fantasy in which the painter has tried to `freeze frame' movement in an intensely theatrical style. The points of focus are not the swirling cloak but the arm, upper chest and face of the subject. These features, painted almost entirely in white against the sombre colour of the cloak, are in caught as a theatre spotlight. This work owes a debt to Sargent's earlier El Jalelo 208 its frozen it As formal Society beauty, motion. portrait of a with vivid gestures and a breaks all of the accepted codes - indeed my theatrical hypothesis with its Spanish dancer linkage only exacerbatessuch ruptures. As an attempt to capture the energy and `inspired' indeed been it have its the the series. of most may spirit of subject,

1907 Lady Sassoon

204The work was exhibited in 1910 at the International Society of Sculptors, Painters and 1910. 31 July 26 May Gallery, London, Grafton to Exhibition, Women Fair Gravers Third 20$The Hon. John Collier, TheArt of Portrait Painting, Cassell, London, Paris, New York and Melbourne, 1905, p. 75.

206Robert Ross, Wertheimer's John Singer Sargents, January 1911, p. 1 ff.

207The reference to Lord Londonderry, although linked with the family memoirs cited by dated 1902-04. latter the time, was portrait since Adler, seems somewhat out of 208El Jalelo, 1882 (Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston, Mass), Oil on canvas,237 x 352.

200

201

The Royal Academy Summer Exhibition of 1907 included Sargent's portrait of Lady Sassoon (Fig. 28). 209This late work is significant because of the sitter's social position. The marriage of Aline, daughter of Baron Gustave de Rothschild, to Sir Edward Sassoon united the most powerful with one of the most anglicised families in Anglo-Jewry. Lady Sassoon was a very influential society hostess and part of the `Jewish court' of Edward, Prince of Wales.

Perhaps influenced as much by the importance of the sitter as by the quality of the painting, the Jewish Chronicle, 10 May 1907, claimed that: The outstanding picture of the Academy is Mr Sargent's masterly Lady Sassoon.... one of the great pictures of the world. Velasquez never did 210 better. anything

The Jewish World, 17 May 1907, felt it was in its likeness, vivacity and wonderful a as work, wonderful a wonderful .. life, in arrangement, colour and brushwork, brimful of the genius of brilliancy. 211

Spielmann in The Graphic, 25 May 1907, wrote: To say that Mr Sargent's portrait of Lady Sassoon is masterly is to employ an inadequate term to express the quality of this superb picture. All the old lady Jewish here in the is bravura this rendering of refined, aristocratic things the brilliant time the soundest of the one same and at most perhaps ... 212 brush. that ever came from Sargent's

in is to the Rothschild/Sassoon contrast flattering marked This appraisal of a three the that Meyer, Carl Mrs of all wealth notwithstanding of made earlier comments former by 1907 finance'; the `haute families was derived from the same world of Meyers by been the had a that reached not had families achieved social standing illuminating and an the comments Perhaps and amusing more of one decade earlier. 105.4. 161.3 Oil (Private 1907 x 209Lady Aline Sassoon, on canvas, collection) 210Jewish Chronicle, 10 May 1907. 211Jewish World, 17 May 1907. 212The Graphic, 25 May 1907.

201

202 apparent source of Sargent's reputation as a painter of Jews is to found in a note

on this

Sassoon portrait in the diary of Wilfrid Blunt: The ladies he paints, according to Meynell, generally bore him so that he is obliged to retire every now and then behind a screen and refresh himself by his tongue out at them. He has made an exception, however, to this putting practice in the case of Mrs [sic] Sassoon... He paints nothing but Jews and Jewessesnow and says he prefers them as they have more life and movement than our English women.213

This reputed preference for Jewish subjects it is not borne

by the mix of his out

portraits of this period or even by those he publicly exhibited. It was perhaps rather a reflection of a xenophobic attitude on the part of certain reviewers.

1908 Betty Wertheimer; Almina Wertheimer

In 1908 John Singer Sargent concluded his series of formal oil portraits of the Wertheimer family with individual pictures of Betty and Almina.

Betty Wertheimer 214

The portrait of Betty, possibly posed on a balcony, is, by the standards of the best of Sargent's Wertheimer series, a disappointing piece. The Art Journal's review double the of portrait of Betty and Ena said that relative to that of Ena the figure of Betty lacked animation. Measured against the excitement generated in A vele gonfie, this too is a somewhat inanimate portrait. The oblique angle of the sitter's head is less full-face her than the complimentary perspective of the earlier nose emphasising displayed its did it form This the time at execution nor of work was neither picture.

213Wilfrid

Scawen Blunt, My Diaries, p. 585.

214Betty Wertheimer, 1908 (National Museum of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, 100.1 Oval. 128.9 Oil x on canvas, Washington),

202

203 part of the subsequent Wertheimer Bequest and from Ross' review it would appear that it hung apart from the others in the family home.215

Almina Wertheimer216

Sargent's 1908 portrait of the then twenty two year old Almina Wertheimer (Fig. 29) dangerous to territory Mr. Sargent. As a portrayal of a young, would the the returns of be Society lady, it transgressed generally accepted codes and norms to an even greater degree than A vele gonfie. Adler has argued that Almina Wertheimer "plays to notions of excess and deviance (for it is a man's costume that she wears)", and that the portrait "embraces the stereotype of the `beautiful Jewess"', a stereotype that places Jewish women with other mid-Eastern Orientals "but never of course with `English 217 These arguments provide excellent starting points from which to unpick women"'. its key the this elements of some of work and reception.

My research indicates that the costume may have been a female outfit from 218 Anatolia. The authentic, original version would have comprised an outer dress (entari),

fitting loose dress (gomlek) and an under

Micklewright

trousers (salvar). Nancy

indicates that although this outfit underwent stylistic changes between

215`Wertheimer's John Singer Sargents', Art Journal, January 1911, p. 1 ff. 216This work was also exhibited in 1910 at the International Exhibition with A vele gonfie.

Society's Third Fair Women

217K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Garb. Nochlin Text, eds and

218I am indebted to Tim Stanley, Curator, Middle East Section, Asian Department, Victoria for detailed is Nancy for his The Museum comments guidance. source Albert and Balkans', 1500 Anatolia 3(v)(b): Dress § VI, Art the `Islamic and after: c. and Micklewright, 461 462. Grove Inc, 1996, New York: Dictionaries 16, Art, pp. and vol. The Dictionary of

203

204 the 16th and 19th centuries, its basic composition remained the same.219Almina's outfit, especially the headdress, was in all probability a composite of studio props. If correct, this would suggest that Sargent was at pains to attenuate some of the more extreme potentials of the real outfit. In, for example, Delacroix's Women of Algiers in their Apartments, two of the three principal subjects are wearing what might be entaris 220 blouse tops and their trousers. In Ingres' without the under-dress concealing their Odalisque with Slave, suggested by Kilmurarry as possible reference for the Sargent portrait, the servant girl, playing a stringed instrument for her mistress, is wearing a is her breast is but her that the version of same costume, so arranged entari 221Sargent also reduced the coded sexual symbolism of the musical uncovered. instrument, which should be held and played in a near vertical position as in the Ingres lap. In in it below horizontal by the the the to context of sitter's angling referred above, depictions of females playing stringed instruments, it is possible that Sargent and/or Asher Wertheimer may also have had in mind paintings by Terborch; Asher Wertheimer had been involved in the earlier sale of that artist's A Lesson on the 222 by her Only in Boston. Museum the Gardner Stewart Isabella Theorbo to the melon feet serves openly, as Adler has pointed out, to remind us of the sitter's burgeoning sexuality.

223

The portrayal of a lady attired in an Oriental costume was certainly an unusual if dangerous the England gambit 20th in and was an even more century early choice 2'9Nancy Micklewright, `Islamic Art § VI, 3(v)(b): Dress c. 1500 and after: Anatolia and the 461 1996, Inc, Dictionaries Grove York: New 16, and pp. Balkans', The Dictionary ofArt, vol. 462.

220Eugene Delacroix, Women of Algiers in their Apartments, 1834 (Musee du Louvre, Paris), Oil on canvas, 180 x 229.

169. 1998, Catalogue, Gallery Sargent, Tate Singer John p. Ormond, 221Kilmurray and

Sargent's Portraits Singer John in Singer John Pleasure', business of 222Lapine, `Mixing with Archive this Museum Gardner Stewart The Isabella 52. Family, confirms p. the Wertheimer Colnaghi by Rembrandt through and two being other paintings with arranged as purchase Wertheimer in 1898.

204

205 sitter was a Jewess since it would play to those very prejudices about foreignness which were present in English society and which, as we have seen, occurred in some reviews of Sargent's portraits. The image of Almina has been linked to that of Lady Shirley by Van Dyck; this, however, does little to integrate Almina into English 224 because Lady Shirley in fact Circassian. society Kilmurray has suggestedthat was Sargent might also have been influenced by the Charles Jervas (1675-1739)

portrait of

Lady Wortley Montagu (1689-1962) in Turkish costume.225This precedent is not helpful in limiting the transgressive potentiality of the Sargent portrait, particularly is the since costume she wearing is by no means as `native' as that worn by Almina, the subject with her Ambassador husband had travelled in and had often written about Turkey. The portrait of Almina was a private commission and was not initially its Thus, publicly exhibited. appropriateness or otherwise, was a personal/family matter and not for open debate. There would seemto be no evidence to suggestthat the Wertheimers had qualms in accepting the work, subsequently including it for public display or in making it a part of the eventual bequest to the Nation.

Surprisingly, in the light of Adler's readings, when the work was included in the International Society's 3rdFair Women Exhibition with A vele gonfie (catalogued Athenaeum The 's Mrs Mathias), Robert neither elicited any particular comment. as development. Sargent's Sargent's overall stylistic other review concentrated on formal Lady Ian Hamilton Lady Exhibition 1910 the portraits of and were exhibits at Eden and I have no found evidence of disapproving shock on the part of these sitters or juxtapositions. the critics at such 223K Adler, `John Singer Sargent's Portraits of the Wertheimer Family', in The Jew in the Garb. Nochlin Text, eds and 224For reference to Lady Shirley, see The Swagger Portrait, p.202.

205

206

Towards a re-positioning of Sargent

The period covered by Sargent's portraits of Jewish sitters corresponds, as

in shall see somewhat more detail in the next chapter, almost exactly to the time during which publicly expressed concerns about the flood of Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe and Russia were reaching their peak. The investigations of the Royal Commission which led to the passageof the Aliens Act, formed one part of the social legislative background to many of these portraits. Throughout this time Sargent and include figures from to the Anglo-Jewish world among his annual continued both Academy Summer Royal Exhibitions and at other London to the submissions venues. Sitters from the same milieu were a major part of the publicly exhibited oeuvre is is Solomon Solomon. J. In these surprising not that there of circumstances what were the occasional, usually covert or coded, remarks or articles which read these images in a negative, anti-Semitic light, but that in fact there were so few such is by in back the Looking this the one struck chapter, comments quoted over examples. for in Sargent times special painting of a wish sitter was singled out which a number of Exhibition, best for the described the a of work example as praise and attention, was favourably Velasquez held to for time, and others, or up was all masterpiece, a work for other artists. was cited as a model

difference is to however, does, What emerge an accumulation of references the tone the allusions of of some as anti-Semitic as overt not whilst which and excess,

225Charles Jervas, Lady Wortley-Montague, 127cm. 210 x canvas, on

1720s (National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin), Oil

206

207 of the period, does indicate the presence of an undercurrent of feeling into which

some

critics on occasions tapped. Within the context of the study, G.K. Chesterton's Art Journal review of the 1908 Royal Academy Exhibition is one of the most interesting contemporary readings of Sargent's portraits of Jewish sitters; one made all the more intriguing because 1908 was one of the few years

his `Jewish debut' of 1897, in after

which Sargent did not include a Jewish sitter among his exhibits. 226It would seemthat Chesterton took this opportunity to expose his feelings

had though they even no -

direct relevance to the Sargent output in that year. Chesterton's initial focus on Sargent in 1908 was the portrait of Balfour. 227He started by discussing Sargent as a satirist -

but of a special kind: It is often said of Mr Sargent that he sees only evil in everybody; but even when this is so, he does not seethe evil which everybody sees... Mr. Sargent discovers sometimes strange sins in his sitters, which even their enemieshave 228 discovered. not

This leads into his comments on other of Sargent's paintings in which the writer appeared to ascribe to the painter his own feelings: For instance, Mr Sargent has painted several pictures which might serve M. Drumont as posters and cartoons of anti-Semitism. But the weakness he in is Jew the satirises which not that of the common theatrical caricature of him; it is not mere avarice or mere cunning; the eye that glitters at the sight of hand the that clutches it. Jews are seldom purely avaricious, and gold, miserly hardly ever misers. The weak spot Mr Sargent picks out is what the European describe can only as the shamelessness of the Oriental; the tropical stare, the lavish familiar the offensive and gestures, way with money and compliments, the insolence of dress or undress, as in some glaring Paradise of Mahomet. In he half-tones, lack the of verecundia, of reticence and of a word spots 229 reverence and modesty .

Chesterton took for granted that his readers would recognise avarice, cunning and Sargent's had Jew. He that talent the traits pointed out special of greed as character been to pick out the "lack of modesty" which Chesterton found so unacceptable. In the Solomon his J. Solomon's Birth Venus, to turning attention which was of same review,

226G.K. Chestertof, Art Journal, June 1908, p. 161. 227Arthur Balfour, 1908 (National Portrait Gallery, London) Oil on canvas, 256.5 x 147.3. 228G. K. Chesterton, Art Journal, June 1908, p. 161. 229G. K. Chesterton, Art Journal, June 1908, p. 161. For Drumont, see Biographical note App. 2

207

208 exhibited that year, Chesterton, while praising the picture, used his commentary to pick out what he believed was another failing in Jews: And yet there is something in the treatment of the whole thing that seems unsatisfactory in being so satisfactory. For a long time I thought that nothing could express this subconscious something, which is not a fault in Mr Solomon but is simply an absence in him, an absence which could never become apparent but for his striking and triumphant talent in every other respect. I suddenly realised what I had missed in him when my eye fell on Mr Waterhouse's Apollo and Daphne. It was that indescribable thing that was the Middle Ages; the gothic which mixed the saintly with the grotesque, the coloured windows which depend on the light beyond, the double meaning of things, the irony of the Universe. The great Jews of the Middle Ages were outside this quaintness and complexity with the full weight of their excellent intellects they despised it; Renan, who admired them, speaks of `positivisme Juive'.... I have remarked that Jews are never misers and when I come to think of it the reason they are never misers is because they are never 230 mystics.

Jews, Chesterton felt, were too much "of this world" and lacked an understanding of 231 the mystical and the spiritual.

Adopting this stance, it is indeed possible to construct an argument for readings that support the existence of an anti-Semitic strand in some of Sargent's luxury Jewish The portraits of sitters. excessive of Mrs Carl Meyer, the over indulgence of Lady Faudel Phillips, the sly man of the worldliness of Asher Wertheimer and the transgressive nature of the portrayals of Ena and Almina Wertheimer might all be said to reveal characteristics of painter and subject cited by Chesterton. Even Strachey, however, who was ready to point out `Jewish' traits where he found them, did not create such a continuous line through all of Sargent's portraits faults, Chestertonian Against in the these Jewish this set one must period. of sitters Wertheimer, Mrs dignity 1904 the Wertheimer, the Alfred the portrait of grace of Sassoon. Lady bearing of aristocratic

230G.K. Chesterton, Art Journal, June 1908, p. 161. For Drumont, seeBiographical note App. 2 23' G.K. Chesterton, Art Journal, June 1908,p. 161. For Drumont, seeBiographical note App. 2

208

209 The danger of such an over-simplified approach is demonstrated by the way in which if one were seeking to establish an Anglophobic strand in Sargent's work, one could claim that the portraits of for example Sir Ian Hamilton, Lord Dalhousie, Lord Ribblesdale and Sir Frank Swettenham all shared a sense of self-assured superiority if and swaggering self-confidence - as the subjects are almost sneering at those who do `assumed' importance is This their and position. not to say that such a strand not share in harboured Sargent's indeed the that such any or all of sitters work or actually existed Sargent's but demonstrate the to that more often work some of rather sentiments, leave images to themselves such open considered and carefully constructed interpretations. The anti-Semitic line chosenby Chesterton to support his own feelings I was, would suggest, only one such option.

Sargent was himself in many ways the perennial outsider. His American his domiciles Boston Paris, London European probable and and education, parentage, feeling have to homosexuality of not a contributed may though undeclared belonging, of being different, however much he was lionised as a painter and as a its At higher might one into extreme, most the society. of echelons result accepted `other' to the his Anglo-Jewish Sargent if as sitters viewed therefore argue that even but his part, on strategy exclusionary this an was not necessarily mainstream, less A fact. him radical have to a self-evident seemed acceptance of what might interpretation of the allo-semitic suggest

in this might chapter earlier mentioned positioning

Sargent less to his Jewishness relevant was the in sitters of that cases many

he however, When, whose his subject, a encountered critics. than it was to some of identity his/her without incontrovertible character, and/or of part Jewishness was an to caricature resorting facts as he saw

from those the recording artist would not shrink or stereotype,

Fry Wertheimer Sargent's argued portraits, them. In his 1923 review of 209

210 that contrary to his own earlier opinions there was no trace of irony in Sargent's

work:

"he is too detached, too much without parti pris for that. "232Fairbrother, however, adopted a contrary position with his comment on Asher Wertheimer: Asher Wertheimer is one of Wertheimer's finest portraits, because, like Madame X the artist did not hedge his attraction to the personality. Wertheimer's Jewishness, masculine self confidence, entrepreneurial power and sensuousness all radiate from the picture. It is arguable whether Sargent's likeness consciously or unconsciously projects the prevailing stereotypes of Jewish features and behaviour. The artist did not hide his fascination with Wertheimer's barrelling, rather sexy swagger, which argues for admiring response rather than a cruel caricature.... if one looks closely at the face in the picture, the tender expression in the eyes and the mouth shows the warmth of deep friendship between artist and sitter. 233

As I have suggested, the same was indeed true of his paintings of other, non-Jewish sitters whose differences or individuality struck a chord with Sargent.

If one reviews the totality of Sargent's oeuvrein this period, one can understand despite brought him, he tired of painting the they why, wealth and acclaim `Paughtraits' and why Beerbohm's cartoon of his Tite Street studio was so 234Wealthy ladies, flocked him. Although to and gentlemen, some of their penetrating. is there the the an period, pictures are outstanding examples of portraiture of inescapable feeling,

when viewing

them en masse, that some are almost

interchangeable with others. There is a feeling of a production line - albeit of high in images dresses. ladies in The those that which stand out are often quality - of white Sargent adopts a setting apart stance. Such a strategy does not only apply to his Jewish involving it high is its however, the In risk strategy, a use, sitters. most examples of in Graham Robertson the to danger to opening quote and which referred which sort of he himself was subject in his portrait by Sargent.

232Roger Fry, `The Wertheimer Portraits', The New Statesman, 13 January 1923, pp. 429-30. 233Trevor Fairbrother, John Singer John Singer Sargent. The Sensualist, p. 83.

210

211 Trevor Fairbrother has suggested that: `The staging of a portrait

often may

have been more of a creative challenge for Sargent than the 235 This execution'. concern with the mis-en-scene of his work reveals the importance of theatricality

in -

the positive sense in his portraiture an attribute which we have traced throughout this chapter. This applies not only to the obvious Ellen Terry as Lady Macbeth, but 236 his to The first portrait exhibited by Sargent at a also other of works of this period. Royal Academy Summer Exhibition was Dr Pozzi at Home (Fig. 30) in 1882.237On close inspection, one of the striking aspectsof this work is not simply the wonderfully rich robe worn by the subject, but the exaggeratedhand gestures, the manner in which the light is concentrated on his face and the drawn back curtain in the upper left background - Dr Pozzi is `on stage'. One might draw parallels between this and the 1882 portrait of The Children of Edward Darley Boit. 238This is an extraordinarily complex work which defied the conventions of child portraiture. Within the context of this discussion, one of its most interesting characteristics is its potential to be read theatrically with the two younger children `on stage' and their older sisters lurking upstage, perhaps about to make their entry.

Moving from these early works to those that have been reviewed in the find This theatrical approach. similar was not use of previous section, one can it Lord Sargent his Jewish to the to natures patrician of reveal sitters, used confined Dalhousie's jeunesse d'oree and Lord Ribblesdale's noblesse oblige. The colonial 234

235Trevor Frairbrother, John Singer John Singer Sargent. The Sensualist, p. 81. 236Ellen Terry as Lady Macbeth, 1889 (Tate Britain, London), Oil on canvas, 221 x 114.3,. 237Dr Pozzi at home, 1881 (The Armand Hammer Museum UCLA, Los Angeles), Oil on (Exhibit in Although 239) Royal 102.2. the the 202.9 subject was unidentified x canvas, Catalogue it Kilmurray Exhibition that that Summer of year, states was Dr Pozzi. Academy John Singer E. Sargent, 1, 96. Kilmurray, F. Ormond, vol. p. See and 238The Children of Edward Darley Boit, 1882 (Museum of Fine Art, Boston) Oil on canvas, 221.9 x 222.6 cm.

211

212 paraphernalia surrounding Sir Frank Swettenham provided a theatrical background to his portrait. Sargent also found theatricality in the pose of Mrs Carl Meyer, in the lighting of Mr Asher Wertheimer, in the vivacity of the Ena

and Betty, in the `frozen'

energy of Ena in A vele gonfie, and the oriental world of Almina. What perhaps distinguished his oeuvreof Jewish sitters was the number

of occasions on which he was

able to use such an approach for them and the willingness on their part to let him portray them in such fashion. Chesterton would have argued that this willingness derived precisely from their lack of verecundia. The same would, however,

clearly not

have been true in his eyes of those English sitters who permitted themselves to be portrayed and revealed in a similar way. Theatricality was not, I would suggest, a function of a lack of modesty or reserve but the product of confidence

-a confidence

that was shared, albeit for different reasons,by the patrician English and the successful Anglo-Jew.

Chesterton suggested that the Jews lacked mysticism. 239One could not argue in Sargent's has been the this this with on evidence of work period - or as already in the work of Solomon J. Solomon. Contemporaneously with Sargent's later noted in however, Rothenstein the East End of London on a series of portraits, was working immigrant Sargent in Jew. that the the was aware works world of examined spirituality of this and even offered advice to the younger painter: Oddly enough when later I [Rothenstein] was painting Jews in the East End he [Sargent] thought I was aiming at too abstract a representation and wanted interiors in Petticoat Lane the to paint scenes or of tailors shops, as me life. intimate Jewish the more side of showing

Despite Sargent's own visits to Palestine and the Middle East and his in in East End be depth later, Rothenstein's the work which will analysed awareness of 239 G

1908, Journal, June 161. Art Chesterton, K. p.

212

213 he never actually joined him there "Sargent wanted to join me in Whitechapel, but he never found time", thus perhaps losing an opportunity to find and portray that 241 Chesterton that to mysticism and spirituality was claim was missing among Jews. Aside from the pressures of work, Sargent's decision may in part have been prompted by

financial

Notwithstanding considerations.

his own boredom at painting

`paughtraits', uncommissioned work of this kind would have been unlikely to provide the same income. Furthermore, had he painted the Jews of the East End, it would have devalued his reputation as a society painter the especially among wealthy Anglo-Jews, seeking to distance themselves from these co-religionists. Painting the aristocracy could only enhance his value as a social arbiter, painting Arabs or others in far off lands was an exotic and perhaps interesting exercise. Painting the poor Jews of Whitechapel was too close to hand and uncomfortable for the salons of Mayfair and Marble Arch.

Although starting from a different position to that of Solomon J. Solomon and in Sargent the higher assisted and artistic spheres, social position within occupying a into by bringing for his Jewish the them sitters process of creating a shared present in different Sargent, Jewish For English an the sitters were aristocracy. world of in his differences felt He pictures no compunction at recording such allo-semitic way. because this was not a judgemental process of better or worse. Jewish sitters provided it because full, for his to the true talents him with opportunities to exercise portrayal hide behind inclined less that to of reserve which mask they were would seem is It English like a positive reflection virtue. Chesterton and minded others prized as an into fell few the that so this reveals reactions that contemporary of reading time the on

240Rothenstein, `When to be young was Heaven', Atlantic, March 1931, p. 324. 24' Rothenstein, Men and Memories, vol. 2, Faber & Faber, London, pp. 35-6.

213

214 trap of misinterpreting

Sargent's celebration of difference for a revelation of

anti-Semitism.

214

215

PART II

AN OFFER OF INTEGRATION

216

CHAPTER 5 The Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition of 1906 An Anglo Jewish U turn Identity only becomes an issue when it is in crisis '.

Introduction On August 11t1',1905, after two decades of public pressure and parliamentary investigation and debate, the Aliens Act became Law with effect from January 1St, 1906 and hitherto unrestricted immigration came to an end. This law had, as intended by some of the new legislation's most active promoters, particularly marked for Jewish migration from Eastern Europe2. consequences

On November 7th, 1906 the Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition

opened at

the Whitechapel Art Gallery in the very heart of London's East End, the epicentre of Jewish immigration and the contested territory of the Aliens Act. Unless one were to be satisfied with a reading of this Exhibition as an isolated cultural event, it is essential 3 juxtaposition background to understand the to this apparently paradoxical of events.

The terms of reference of the Royal Commission, which preceded the Act, inter investigate, `the to character and extent of the evils which are attributed alia, were to the unrestricted immigration of Aliens especially in the Metropolis', which, as one

' Kobena Mercer, "Welcome to the Jungle", in Identity: Community, Culture, Difference Lawrence & Wishart 1990. London: Rutherford, J. ed.

25 EDW. 7 [Ch. 13].

3 Juliet Steyn has written the key texts for an examination of the 1906 Exhibition in the context her fit have `Cutting I the the to the Jewish its of cloth: used version argument suit content. of 1906 Whitechapel Gallery exhibition', in her book The Jew: Assumptions in the assimilation background A. Kushner K. Lunn, The to the For period see and general Identity. more of A. The Jewish Heritage History; C. Kushner, British Holmes, in Marginality; Politics of For Society. Radical Movement W. British treatment the in specific of see Anti-Semitism 1875 Radicals Jewish End East Fishman, -1914.

217 its of early observations

its to relating own period of investigation remarked, `may be

said to have begun about 1880 and is drawn mainly from the Jewish inhabitants Eastern Europe'

facie link thus between making a prima these two negative -

phenomena.

Despite the fact that the leadership of Anglo-Jewry

have had some might

influence to the outcome in other directions, it accepted the Act without serious ability Although Lord Rothschild, a member of the Commission, entered a opposition. minority dissenting opinion - (asserting that there was no need for legislation and that overcrowding could `be remedied.. by less drastic measures'), he had also, in 1900, . supported the parliamentary candidacy of Evans-Gordon, one of the legislation's prime movers, and, together with Sir Francis Montefiore, that of Dewar, who defeated the Liberal Straus, a Jewish candidate, for the seat of St George's-in-the-Field. 5 Other Jewish MPs - Samuel (Limehouse), Sinclair (Romford) and Cohen (Islington)

- also

6 in favour voted of the legislation. Among the factors that may have influenced this On two the positive side the Act seemed to accord with attitude, reasons stand out. for Anglo-Jewish immigrants. It permitted entry to the persecuted, both stated aims banning Some the political as well as religious, while economic migrant. of the in had be harsh Act their application; thus the creation the the to provisions of potential

4 Royal Commission on Alien Immigration (Royal Commision), His Majesty's Government, London 1903, vol. 1, pp. 1 and 3, par. 20. 5 For Lord Rothschild and Evans-Gordon, see Biographical Notes. App. 2; Minority Opinion: Royal Commission p. 52; see Fishman, East End Jewish Radicals p. 90. Although Evans Gordon is cast as a supporter of the anti-alien movement, he was not unsympathetic to the he first hand he in Russia, Jews to the which saw and about gave evidence at which plight of hard Chaim Weitzmann `our Commission Royal subsequently people were rather wrote the . Aliens Bill in The England, Gordon]... the [Evans him and movement which grew up on immigration in though it my on phenomena views naturally were sharp natural were around ... friendly discussed in ' his, these problems quite objective a and even way. we conflict with & Brothers, 1949 90-91. Harper York: New Error, pp. Trial and

6 Alderman, The Federation of Synagogue,p. 5.

218 of a power to issue Expulsion Orders for certain classes for felony, dependenceon a set level of parochial relief, vagrancy or `living under unsanitary conditions due to overcrowding' (a provision that could in theory have emptied much of Stepney of its immigrant population). Yet in practice such powers were not used

and the final version

Act the of was less draconian than some of the recommendations of the Commission. On a more negative note, Anglo-Jewry's leadership had its own concerns about immigration, because of the effect that it might have on attitudes towards all unfettered Jews or more particularly Anglo-Jewry itself.

Recent historical writings on the 1880 to 1914 period have abandonedthe older view that characterised England as largely liberal, benign and accepting of the Jews, have introduced indicates the presence of a overt as well as covert and research which 7 different levels of English society. It is not the anti-semitism pervasive at many intention of this chapter, which will primarily focus on the 1906 Exhibition, to enter into those debates, but rather to highlight some of their key features, so as better to inform the subsequent reading of that Exhibition. This contextualisation will look at the immigrants, the actions and reactions of Anglo-Jewry and the opposition within English Society that led to the passageof the 1905 Aliens Act.

In their simplest form, discussions about the position of Jewry in England during the thirty five year period from the start of the `immigrant waves' in 1880-1, be War I, World Aliens Act the to the can reduced outbreak of through the passage of body), (taken homogenous to by Anglo-Jewry descriptions ruling an as to of attempts in face (taken homogenous Jews the Immigrant of group) deal with the as another

' Seen. 3.

219 varying degrees of anti-alien or anti-semitic feeling and action by the English (taken

a third homogenous group). Although this approach clarifies some of the central issues, by ignoring the heterogeneity of the main participants, it

conceals many of the

complexities of the developing situation.

The Growth of the Jewish Population

Immigrants, Transmigrants Transients and -

Reliable statistics on the Jewish population of England are difficult to obtain, in the absence of officially

information gathered

by religious affiliation.

The

Population Data Table set out in Appendix 3 summarises some of the key figures. The national population grew by more than 18% between 1881 and 1901 - of whom 135,640 or 0.4% were classified as "aliens" at the earlier date and 286,925 or 0.7% by 1901 -a growth of I11 %. Between 1877 and 1914 the Jewish population of the United Kingdom increased, based on the highest estimates I have found, from 68,300 (of whom 53,900 were in London) to 270,000 (of whom 160,000 lived in London). This increase suggests a population of 200,000, largely made up of immigrants, numbering 8 up to three times the `indigenous base'. Although the

quadrupling of the Jewish

far population outstripped population growth rates achieved nationally, within London its in for Aliens, the point as a whole or even overall classification of minimal starting Jews that, remained a very even after such explosive growth, absolute numbers meant London, Inner the the their of greatest of whole even within area small proportion 8 Jewish Chronicle, 7 June 1878; Jewish Encyclopaedia, London: Methuen & Co., 1914; Israel the website Cohen, Jewish Life in Modern Times, excerpts can be found on html. in Israel Cohen's the ibiblio. estimate, as set out org/yiddish/Book/Cohen/icohen. www. Jewish Encyclopaedia, was explained thus: `This estimate is arrived at by adding together the figures of the Jewish population in all the towns of the United Kingdom, as given in the Jewish families (where the the population is so stated) by for 1914, number of Year-Book multiplying 30 for for figure towns population of with a synagogue 5, and assuming a minimum which no

220 concentration, they accounted for around 1.5% of the population in 1880 and perhaps no more than 3.3% by 1900. Between 1881 and 1901 the total population of Inner London grew by 706,000 and it is plausible to suggest that

a very large proportion of

the increase of 100,000 in the Jewish population was concentrated in that

area. Thus, it

have been that as many as one in every seven `new' Inner Londoners may

was a new

Jewish immigrant. This increase occurred in an area of high and increasing

population

density. By 1901 the population density of Inner London had, in twenty by 18% to reach 38,476 inhabitants per square mile

years, grown

figure ten times the almost of -

3,912 recorded for the outer London suburbs. Although the total population of Stepney, the centre of Jewish immigrant concentration, only grew by 13,500 from 1891 to 1901

increase 4.7% increase 16.8% for London an of versus an of as a whole -

density increased from the 103,578 108,581 inhabitants this to population of area per square mile - more than two and a half times the Inner London average. In 1887 Arnold White, a leading supporter of anti-alien and anti-semitic causes,wrote: The pressure caused by the immigration of foreign Jews, especially into Whitechapel, Spitalfields and St Georges in the East is another cause of overcrowding.... it would not be surprising to witness a jüdenhetze in the heart of London. Temperate in his habits, and with a low standard of comfort, the poor foreigner evades all taxation in England in the struggle for existence why ... England should remain content to act as rubbish-heap passesall understanding ... England will ceaseto be, if our rulers do not show that they love the English ... 9. foreigner frugal, more than the unlovable

Even more research-based rather than overtly biased comment could not ignore this indicated by (defined 1901 `overcrowding' Commission Royal The that as problem. `more than two persons living night and day in one room') had reached on average 33.3% in Stepney, within this 55.1% in the district of Whitechapel and within 13 of

London is (the 160,000' Jewish The estimated at estimate of Joseph is given. population of Encyclopedia, Jewish 174). 150,000, 1902 for p. vol. viii. Jacobs was 9 Arnold White, Problems of a Great City, London: Remington And Co, 1887, pp. 142 ff.

221 the sub-districts of that area was as high as 85.5% 10. Among the pictures accompanying an article by Evans Gordon on the Aliens Bill and Jewish immigration to the East End in the Illustrated London News of 30 April 1904 was one by H. H Flere which graphically illustrates the twin evils of overcrowding and sweated labour; in the popular press, perception may have outstripped reality, but the evidence would suggest the gap was not so wide.

This almost literally cheek by jowl existence was bound to exacerbate the for potential negative reactions to new arrivals

- particularly when such arrivals were

perceived as so different from the large sections of the indigenous population among

whom they settled. This was rendered even more serious becauseof the pressuresthey labour the exerted on market and the housing stock. In the labour marked, they were prepared to work for lower wages. Housing stock was being diminished locally by building railway and slum clearance; and the immigrants were prepared to buy into this diminishing housing stock through the use of `key money'. Although the census do returns not classify the population by religion, the classification for Russians and Poles was, however, taken to mean primarily Jews by the Royal Commission; a device that has been followed by many of the subsequent historians of this period. In 1901, in lived Stepney, Poles 80% London's Russians where they accounted and almost of for almost one in seven of its inhabitants. Given that the district was already heavily inhabited with

Jews prior to 1880, this Jewish presence must have seemed

focus further If this the the to of non-Jewish population. one sharpens overwhelming investigation to an examination of individual neighbourhoods in the East End, the became dominant. in This Jewish population certain areaswas or rapidly numerically

'('Royal Commission par. 154-160, pp. 24-5.

222 is most graphically demonstrated by the Map of Jewish East London based on data gathered in 1899 by C. Russell and H. S. Lewis and published in The Jew in London in 1901.11

The phenomenon of overcrowding brought with it the attendant, real or danger health to perceived, potential public

issue in that to an was raised evidence -

the Royal Commission. Their final report was in fact quite positive about the medical immigrants both in the their condition of general cleanliness on arrival and and about had had to travel and relative to the the they situ - given conditions under which 12 however, in lived. did This the they not, stop anti-alienists standards of areas which like Evans Gordon from claiming Small pox and scarlet fever have unquestionably been introduced by aliens been being have favus..... disease trachoma, and are and a contagious and ... ... introduced by these aliens. 13

It was not, however, simply the net increase in the size of the Jewish immigrant the but location, the its the manner and waves nature of also community nor in which the Jewish population was `churned' by the effects of transmigration, which demonstrates total the Evans that by Nicholas Research whereas was of significance. five 100,000 twenty the by increased have year Jewish population may over about period

from leaving all to 1902, the number of migrants and transmigrants arriving and

11C. Russell and H. S. Lewis, The Jew In London: a study of racial character and present-day by introduction Trustees; for Toynbee the an with being two prepared essays conditions, 1901. Unwin, T. Fisher London: Bryce, James Hon. Right by The Canon Barnett and a preface Dr Williams Commission his the In to 10-1. 12Royal Commission par. 67-73, pp. evidence from Libau immigrants dealing favourable with when to report generally a made an exception 73. - par. 13Hansard 2 May 1905.

223 14 ports was perhaps fifteen to twenty times that number. Wherever possible in Evans' data, transmigrants are classified as those arriving with prior onward destination documents as opposed to migrants, who despite their subsequent intentions or actions had no such documents. This methodology has one critical problem; in the returns for the Port of London, the classification was managed much less accurately than elsewhere, thus making this distinction far more difficult to track. Grimsby and Hull, the primary points for arrival and transmigration, handled over one million such during figures for 27 1905. The Port London the to the persons year period of Over the same period, the numbers arriving totalled classified all arrivals as migrants. increased by fraction Given 400,000. Jewish that the total of a population only almost that number, it is clear that most of these were, in fact, immediate or eventual transmigrants. Commentators, whether or not of an anti-alien, anti-semitic bent, were justified in remarking on the sheer scale of this movement. Arrival at one place and departure from another made it a viable presentational strategy for those so minded to focus negatively on the inflows and conveniently ignore the largely simultaneous in London, to This where as we relation was a particularly critical problem outflows. have seen migrant flows were very high - right on the doorstep of Parliament and the London press.

Act, 1905 the the immediately the numbers of Almost of passage after from dropping 1906 in latter the London Port into of part the collapsed of migrants With below 5000. the hovering in 1907 more 6,143 thereafter in at 1905 to 41,577 and accurate

London, Port the into the of transmigrant out of and movement of recording

from derived Nicholas in this this chapter are 'a All date on migration statitics used section of 1836-1914, Britain, European through transmigration Aliens en route. Evans' Ph. D. thesis discussions from the in author. Hull, with and progress, University of

224 figures rose from the incorrectly recorded levels of no more than

several hundred per

year to between 8,000 and 10,000 after 1906 and until 1914. At Hull and Grimsby, transmigrants continued to flow through England in largely unabated numbers between 80,000 and 120,000 per year between the two ports varying

Contrasting perceptions, opposing realities

until the War.

Mosaic the mosaic of persuasion -a

Popular culture's retrospective image of the immigrant alien as a poverty deeply stricken, religious and traditional figure driven with his fellow Jews from their tiny rural village (shtetl) by the pogroms of religious persecution has some grounding in historical reality, but it only applies to a part of the emigrant population. Although pauperization was certainly common to most of the emigrants, in many other ways they were at least as heterogeneous as the indigenous populations into which they moved. Many were from towns or even cities into which some had been born before legislation confined Jews to rural communities. Most were literate, albeit on arrival Sarah has in As Stein Russian Yiddish. their tongues noted of only native of and/or Russian Jews in Russia at the turn of the century Jewish rates of literacy, in Yiddish, Russian and, to a lesser extent Hebrew, in 1897,97% Jews high. Russian According the the to the census of of were five declared Yiddish their percent of mother-tongue, and nearly sixty empire Jewish men and over 35% of Jewish women over the age of ten were literate

in a non-Russian language (which meant, in almost every case,

Yiddish)

Not all were religious and not all without some skills that could be used in an urban environment.

15Sarah Stein, "Divining the Secular in the Yiddish Popular Press", paper presented at the hcoming Illinois, 2002. February Fort `Divining University Conference, Stories of as Sacred

225 Initial perceptions of the immigrants were not aided by their location in the East End of London, an area that was, long before their arrival, associated with extreme poverty and high crime rates. Even though projects of urban renewal and improvement had removed some of the most deprived and criminal locales, the reputation survived and was only fuelled by, as the most extreme event, incidents such as the murders by Jack the Ripper of 1888.

Those among Anglo-Jewry who concerned themselves with the fate of the Jews in Russia and Eastern Europe emphasised the pogroms and the religious persecution as being the main reason behind the outflow from these areas. This was both a positive strategy in the battle to garner the widest possible public support and a concealing strategy to shift the focus away from the much larger flows of economic migrants, who were less desirable per se and whose pauperisation could make onward transmigration more difficult to achieve; such migrants would be no more welcome in other ports of entry than they were in England. While one should not ignore the push factors of persecution, the post 1880 pogroms and harsh legislation, many of the 16 from emigrants were regions whose economies were chronically depressed. Many, drawn by factor to who were unable or unwilling survive such conditions, were a pull to the Goldene Medina, the perceived prosperity of America, to South Africa and to the countries of Western Europe. Within this pattern, Great Britain was for long the key, first destination for such movement, because of the hold its shipping companies had and for many years maintained over the Baltic and Atlantic shipping routes. These factors set up three by no means mutually exclusive groups among the new Jewish

Yiddish in Sacred Stories: ' Religion Culture Russian in in the popular press, Secular and the Coleman Mark Steinberg. Heather Russia, and Imperial eds

16A fact not lost on the Royal Commission seepar. 23, p. 4.

226 population - economic migrants, those fleeing religious persecution and a smaller but, as we shall see, from both host nation and Anglo-Jewish standpoints even less desirable group

- politically radical refugees.

Many of the economic migrants, having left behind conditions of extreme deprivation, poverty and were prepared to make whatever sacrifices were necessaryto better life in home. fact This the their that they were already and achieve a new for harsh to their, albeit reluctant, accustomed extremely circumstances may account for lower difficult harder, to wages than their conditions, work willingness under more indigenous counterparts, as they sought to establish and then improve their economic ties to Those this and social whose religious within group and social positions. Judaism were already weak in their places of origin, were less bound by the need for or demands of a religious infrastructure, and thus demonstrated a propensity for social their economic circumstances permitted. as and when mobility, and geographic

Those seeking freedom from religious persecution needed to recreate the based. This their that lives institutions their meant were around which religious by to being limited, far access of ease circumscribed more geographic mobility was by highlighted the that This infrastructure. was was another phenomenon such an failing immigrant Jews to the investigated Commission, Royal allegations of which assimilate and

17 Jews ' For distinct `a forming such intermarry and so colony. solid and

being but being of actually it was not simply a question of resistant to change, confrontational

is be to best this beliefs. Perhaps the in support of their example of

Jewish largest Hadass, Machzike the history the single of found in the early

6. (9), 37 17Royal Commission par. p.

227 congregation in the East End. The community which spawned the Machzike Hadass had from the outset been a centre of opposition to that

version of Jewish Orthodoxy that

prevailed among Anglo-Jewry in England at the turn of the century. In 1891, the community, then under the leadership of Rabbi Werner, broke with the Chief Rabbi, Herman Adler (1839-1911), over the standards of slaughtering and kosher sale of 18 Adler (thereby tacitly admitting his own weakness) was obliged to meat.

make an

appeal to an outside authority, Rabbi Spektor of Kovno, in an attempt to bring the Machzike Hadass into line. 19In 1896, the Machzike Hadass took over a former Huguenot Chapel in Brick Lane in London's East End, where in 1898 Rabbi Werner officiated at the opening of the Machzike Hadass Synagogue. In its observanceof East European Orthodox rituals, its use of Yiddish as the language of religious instruction its insistence on its own arrangements for such matters as kosher and, as already noted, it slaughtering, was an overt challenge to the religious authority of the Chief Rabbi and by extension to the integrationist projects of Anglo-Jewry.

Formal recognition of this other, largely East European version, of Jewish Orthodoxy came in October/November 1887, when, under the leadership of Samuel Montagu, a key figure in the Anglo-Jewish hierarchy and then MP for Whitechapel, the Federation of Minor Synagogues was created with fourteen founding member

18Ostensibly this argument may have appeared to be doctrinally based, but it also had a by dimension. United Synagogue The Board Shechita, financial the established of significant by levy Synagogues kosher to oversee a on and communities, slaughtering, was supported between back fact Adler The them. the that this then amongst argument and shared which was Machzike Hadass was not solely doctrinal in no way lessens the importance of the challenge it Werner, For Biographical Note App. 2. former's see authority. posed to the 19Englander, A Documentary History of Jewish Immigrants in Britain 1840-1920, p. 204. It is between English difference East European the the the and perceptions of a measure of Orthodox Judaism Chief Rabbi England titular that the their of versions of rabbinate within his Rabbi Kovno his to to only nominally and was of owed eminence who one was appealing For Spektor, see Biographical Note App. 2. learning. religious

228 20 organisations. Montagu, himself a deeply religious man and a member of the United Synagogue, recognized the particular religious needs of the immigrant

community.

His initiative was intended simultaneously to cater for those needs and to provide an organizational structure that, although it was (and remains today) outside the ambit of the United Synagogue, served to prevent a schismatic splintering of religious practice within English Judaism. Significantly, in 1905 the Machzike Hadass became a member of the Federation, thus bringing

it within

the wider compass and

Anglo-Jewish control.

One of the popular views of the new immigrants is their alleged wide-spread imported Orthodox Judaism. to to their adherence religion and specifically versions of But the spectrum of immigrant subcultures reached from strict orthodoxy to complete 1902-3 In Richard Mudie-Smith secularism.

completed a census of religious worship,

21 in order to quantify the problem of `missing worshippers' in Lodnon. This census, his farious Christian denominations, that the on census revealed primarily geared at days (a series of Sundays from November 1902 to November 1903) 1,003,361 people in London attended one or more religious services of one denomination or another % 825,051,18 Smith Mudie deduction `twicers', of calculated net attendeesat of after from deductions further A the London22. County the total population of the series of of total population, to eliminate those in institutions, too young, too old, too sick or too busy (sic) to attend, allowed Mudie Smith to suggest that those actually attending have for those third attended. of who might one accounted

20For Montagu, see Biographical Note App. 2. The original federation actually included six 1881 immigrant the origin. of post arrivals, and eight institutions which predated 21R. Mudie Smith, The Religious Life of London, London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1904. 221bid. p. 271.

229 Jewish attendance was measured on one single census day

first day the of -

Passover 1903, which coincided with Easter Sunday. The number of Jews attending services was 26,612 or only just under 18% of the Jewish population. Among the facts emerging from the detailed data about Jewish participation and worship, two seem of special relevance. On the one hand, in terms of individual synagogues, attendancewas highest in the East End at the Machzike Hadass

it 60% its than where was greater -

nearest rival23. Analysis of the overall results, however, indicates that attendance in those Synagogues visited in Stepney (excluding the Hambro, one of the founding United Synagogue) the members of was marginally less than that in the United Synagogues and in the other institutions of English Judaism in the rest of London

12,298 versus 14,314. Although due to the semi-formal nature and sei-private location fully been have East End the this of some of smaller congregations, survey may not have the size of such missing congregations would not significantly comprehensive, figures If to guesstimates of the sub sets of the these the one relates altered results. Jewish populations from which the two groups of worshippers were drawn - perhaps 130,000 in the East End - principally in Stepney - and less than 30,000 elsewhere in London, a much lower percentage (10%) of the Stepney Jewish community attended Jewish balance London from derived day the the that than the of census services on in East European Jews is Eastern the That high 50%). (perhaps to say, as as community End were less likely

to attend synagogue than their West End Anglo-Jewish

far further, discussion is It to more specific research or open conjectural counterparts! be for factors Mudie-Smith's how non-attendance should to determine application of just lower the this result was two proportion the and whether to communities applied is factors. It that also social a combination of and other or circumstances of economic

23Ibid. p. 265.

230 possible that attendance on an ordinary Sabbath, as opposed to a specific holiday, might have been relatively higher in the East End than in the rest of London. Nevertheless, however one modifies these data, the gap is so wide as to leave the belief that religious observance was stronger among the immigrants than among English Jews open to serious question. Indeed, two years earlier Russell and Lewis had already noted: It is generally recognised that the foreigners themselves are less strict 24 observers of their religion than was the case ten years ago

Alderman has argued that In all, the Federation at that time [1911] represented about 6,500 male (which Synagogue United then had, the It therefore, overtaken members. had about 5,200 male seatholdersin membership) and could claim to be the 25 largest synagogal body in the United Kingdom.

Once again if one applies the same approximate sizes of community, this would seem End East 5% the indicate male than were via that population, to of more no London for the Synagogue, the of remainder whereas a with associated membership, been have This been 17%. have too figure may Jewish population the equivalent may Whatever dues. the to the pay synagogue ability the result of economic circumstances be that the it early based balance remembered also must on membership, statistical survival

dependent the heavily continued on Federation the remained movement of

Synagogue. United directly the through and financial support of Anglo-Jewry acting

Synagogues in Federation The mode of Jewish orthodoxy practiced emphasised and

time its Russo-Polish when a at origins the of particularity preserved

The this. to Anglo-Jewish eliminate was policies of strands the drive various the of

96. London, Jew in The Lewis, S. H. p. 24C. Russell and 25. Synagogues, Federation The p. of 25Alderman,

231 tendency of subgroups of immigrants to form their own places of worship, Chevrot or 26 religious associations, based on previous geographic affiliations, or on self help or religious purposes or aims

by importance this the exacerbated retaining of -

sometimes very localised foreign identities and loyalties instead of an all subsuming 28 identity. English These chevrot were not simply places of worship but venues for instruction, bases for dispensation of study religious and general meeting places and help and support. In their preservation of an immigrant culture they cut across the integration for those these new segments of the Jewish population. who sought grain of

The Yiddish culture of the Ostjuden

What did unite many of the strands of difference on which I have so far focussed was the emergence in the East End of a Yiddish culture, based on the largely lived Ostjuden there, and which was traditions and values of the who now this franca, Yiddish. Emphasis lingua the in of their and origin nature on expressed largely new phenomenon within English Jewry is necessary in order to provide a degree of precision in the understanding of the term Yiddish and to avoid the potential for circularity of thought that would come from simply translating it as meaning Jewish -a

Yiddish Anglo-Jewry. to as a concern great of was confusion which

from immigrants between all the regions of language was the means of communication East Europe and Russia and its use in fact long survived the anglifying educational daily from disappearing later discussed be use really only will programmes which with

it Yiddish brought was simultaneously over. the demise of the generation which

26Grodno (Spital St.) and Kovno (Catherine Wheel Alley) are examples. (Old Pious Community the Society (Hope St) the Society the of 27Covenant Friendly of or Monatgu St) are examples. 12. Synagogues, Federation The p. 2$Alderman, of

232 the language of the immigrant community's

binding institutions; it was most

employed in religious instruction and I will discuss below its use in social, political and art cultural contexts. Yiddish attracted fierce opposition from those seeking to integrate this new and rapidly overwhelming segment of the Jewish population.

Although Yiddish culture had taken root in the East End from the early 1880s, the Jewish Chronicle steadfastly ignored its manifestations until the end of the decade and then treated it with contempt.29

Such action could have been defended on the grounds that Yiddish culture was of no bastion to the that relevance readership of of English Jewry, the Jewish Chronicle; however the paper was gradually obliged to alter this position. Perhaps three of the important behind between Yiddish this the connection more reasons opposition were: linkage Alien; Yiddish the the and of culture with elements of radical politics on the below) (to hand Zionist the the which we shall return other or alternative on one leaders; integrationist Anglo-Jewry's the agendas of neither of which accorded with debased. But Yiddish that the a romantic culture was retrograde and perception and from late began, 1880s, just in to Paradoxically the the too. wane shtetl as recovery set began Jews Western in Europe, in life Eastern the Jewish so views of many as a reality being its Ostjudentum traditions direction in as the other to swing and and to valorise in 1901, When life Judaism. Jewish as part of the the authentic wellsprings of true and language Government by the Yiddish of as a was recognised official census procedure, it `admit finally had Chronicle to Jewish immigrant for the was voters, explanation fighting a

30 losing battle'.

29Cesarani, The Jewish Chronicle and Anglo-Jewry 1841-1991, p. 78. 30Cesarani, The Jewish Chronicle and Anglo-Jewry 1841 -1991, p. 78.

233 The Yiddish Press

Although, as Leonard Prager has shown, there were Yiddish newspapers in London prior to the immigrant arrivals in the 1880s, after that date their growth was 31 Of explosive. more than 100 titles listed by Prager as appearing during the period of this study, some lasted little more than a year, virtually all were published in London, though there were titles in Leeds, Liverpool and Manchester, and many were political in Zionist longer Among lasting the communist, socialist, anarchist or nature. publications were Der poylisher yidl, which later became Tsukunft, whose founders included Morris

Winchevsky,

the socialist poet, and Der Arbayter Fraynd, whose

32 figure Rudolf German Rocker, a Yiddish speaking, Catholic. In addition central was to its main publication, Der Arbayter Fraynd produced a weekly literary supplement leading Other publishers/promoters with and also a special younger persons' edition. (Di Ovend included Myer Morris tsayt, their titles to noyes) and names multiple Moishe Brill

(Hashulmis, Dos noye yidishe

tageblat). The politicisation

immigrantsihrough the Yiddish press, which was now about class, raised serious belonged leaders Anglo-Jewry's to integrationist for the who aspirations of problem the upper middle or upper classes. Political agitation and action drew attention to the Jews of the East End at a time when Anglo-Jewry was seeking to make them less visible.

Their

high profile own predecessors'

struggles to achieve political

forgotten. half a century earlier were conveniently emancipation

31Leonard Prager, `A Bibliography of Yiddish Periodicals in Great Britain 1867 - 1967', 1. Spring 1969, No IX, Booklore, Bibliography vol. and Studies in 32For Winchevsky,

2. Note App. Biographical Note App. 2. For Rocker, Biographical see see

234 Politicisation also took on another form that was, if anything, potentially even more damaging to the integrationist aspirations of Anglo-Jewry

Zionism. Whether in -

its political form, which espousedthe creation of Jewish homeland, its a or religious or cultural forms, Zionism could be interpreted as playing into the hands of those who, for very different and negative reasons, were also emphasising Jewish difference

and

the need for Jews to be domiciled elsewhere. With the support of Israel Zangwill, Theodore Herzl (1860-1904), the founder of Zionism, spoke in the East End in 1896

part of his Zionist campaign. In August 1900 the 4th Zionist Congress was held in London, having been specifically moved from Basle, the site of its predecessors,to garner support from this quarter. Zionism offered a new political alternative to immigrant Jews

both in ideological terms practical and -

but was simultaneously -

seemingly proof of the anti-semitic/alienist views that Jews indeed owed their allegiance elsewhere.

Not all of the Yiddish press was, however, political in tone. There were several titles of more general appeal - news, sciences, humour and literature. A review of Prager's work would suggest that, rather than being backward looking and concerned with retrospective yearning for the lost world of the shtetl or exclusively concerned issues dealt these current related to publications with with radical politics, some of daily living in London - or the provincial centres in which they were published. Thus, although politicisation

through the Yiddish press may have raised problems for

Anglo-Jewry, the emergence of the Yiddish press was also indicative of a modernity in immigrant attitudes, which is sometimes overlooked.

235 The Yiddish Arts

Another example of this emerging Yiddish culture is to be found in the Yiddish Theatre. Imported by the immigrants from Poland and Russia, initially in the form of amateur performances, the start of the professional Yiddish Theatre in the East End be dated to the arrival in 1883 of Jacob Adler, doyen of the Yiddish actors, with his can company, and the short lived Hebrew Dramatic Club, which was opened in 1886 but destroyed by fire six months later. 33At least three other theatres featured Yiddish in the pre World War I era performances

including Standard Pavillion, the the and -

two of London's largest theatres of that time. As a contemporary cartoon illustration indicates, performances in the working men's clubs were not uncommon. Productions included both works by Yiddish authors and translations of English classics, including Shakespeare.Although the Yiddish theatre was originally rooted in Eastern European traditions both in content and style, in an interview for the Jewish Chronicle, Jacob Adler said about the preferences of his audiences that they demanded works

bringing before them vividly the past glories of our people, or plays dealing ... by It latter life the tendency that the would seem preference. with every-day 3a is more towards realism

At the same time as this hybrid example of Yiddish culture was emerging in the in interested is that that to East End, there and community was suggest evidence belonging burgeoning to fostered initiatives that of sense a to and enhanced receptive in Anglo-Jewish be the these projects English examined as will the community and following section.

Theatre London, Yiddish in David Mazower Theatre, Yiddish 33For a discussion of the see 1987. End, East Museum the Jewish The of London:

29. 1906, August 10 34Jewish Chronicle, p.

236

The detailed focus on the 1906 Exhibition and on the work of William Rothenstein and Alfred Wolmark, which comprises the latter half of this chapter and the next two chapters, provide an opportunity to examine in detail the extent to which Englishness Yiddishness and was represented in the visual imagery of Jewish subjects in this period.

The role of An lo-Jewry

Although the heads of those intermarried Jewish families who constituted the Cousinhood and its immediate circle directed the affairs of English Jewry certainly up the outbreak of the War in 1914, it is important to re-emphasise the manner in which such control was exercised. In contrast to the externally imposed and legislatively its in, for framework between State Jews that the classified and characterised relations few Germany France, Anglo-Jewry `ruled' through a combination of a example, and legally recognised bodies, a network of self-elected institutions of governance, Jewish initiatives large Victorian paternalism. measure of and a charitable and educational Thus whereas the Board of Deputies of British Jews could trace its origins back to the body, key its Synagogue, United the was only religious mid eighteenth century, in Act 1870. To Synagogues terms therefore, by Jewish talk, the of of established identifiable formally if Anglo-Jewry, there by as was a single, or policies of actions because belies But the those the the true at number of situation. and organised entity institutions in the that Jewry this English many of was small, period very apogee of different Jewish dealt with combinations of the same affairs were composed of

237 individuals or their families. Thus broad consensus

on major issues was often reached

as much by a process of social osmosis as in formal meetings.

During this period Anglo-Jewry not only had to manage the perception problems for English Jewry exacerbatedby the Jewish immigrants, but had to confront continued opposition to their own integrationist aspirations from within the upper classes. This was not an exclusively Anglo-Jewish problem. The old landed aristocracy was fighting a rear guard action to defend its position of power and influence in the face of declining economic status and the encroachment of the newly moneyed, whose wealth was industry or trade based. Anglo-Jewry was identified as part of this problem. Indeed Anglo-Jews were perceived as being among the most extreme examples of the problem - nouveaux riches, who could be viewed as different, foreign and Jewish. Even the Rothschilds were not exempt from such Contemporary attitudes. writers such as Escottt in the Fortnightly Review referred to their property purchases as `...the Israelitish annexation of Buckinghamshire' and Surtees rechristened the Vale of Aylesbury Jewdea'. 35Although numerically those families who comprised Anglo-Jewry's

leadership were small in number, their

financial muscle and their high visibility at the Court of the Prince of Wales, latterly King Edward VII, and among the upper echelons of English Society often engendered resentment rather than approval. English society, once ruled by an aristocracy is now dominated by a 36 in large Hebraic is And to this composition. extent plutocracy plutocracy.

hands in `new the that the of Notwithstanding such opposition, money' reality was its into bastions found the of the old aristocracy. way Jews or others gradually social 35Quoted in Mordaunt Crook, The Rise of the Nouveaux Riches, p. 63. 36 T.

Escott,

ibid.

238 Estates were acquired from the

old aristocracy, membership to such clubs as Whites

and the Carlton were granted and intermarriages were made.

William Rubinstein's research into the number of estatesin excessof £100,000 left in the period between 1809 and 1909 indicates that from those who were possibly Jews

a mere 4 left by Jews (or

defined by Rubinstein) in 217 as total the out of a of -

first decade, in the final decade of his period that

number had risen to a possible 136

37 2728 out of or almost 5%. Rubinstein enters the significant caveat that the

capital

value of land was excluded, thereby exaggerating Jewish wealth as a percentageof the total. By the turn of the century, the value of land had fallen, and some of the new wealthy - Jewish and gentile alike - had themselves become significant landowners. Even if such calculations reduce by some measure Jewish participation in the ranks of the rich, it is still astonishing to recognize that its proportion was achieved from a segment of the population that in its entirety accounted for less than 0.5% of the total.

At the same time, Anglo-Jewry also had to cope with the effects of an influx of immigrants,

whose easily identifiable

differences and overwhelming

numbers

threatened from below to destroy the delicate balance that had been created. Anglo-Jewry's

Anglification in host English the the may, of programmes of eyes

desired. Rather than have to the that opposite result community, achieved exactly linkages it have differences, and raised the spectre of specious emphasised may clarify distinctions and special pleading for the recognition of what in the eyes of the host homogeneous largely These shadings within whole. a community were merely in Chronicle Jewish 1881: a article as early as problems were recognized

239 Our fair fame and fortune is bound up with theirs; the outside world is not capable of making minute distinctions between Jew and Jew, and forms its opinion of Jews in general as much, if not more, from them than from the Anglicized portion of the community. 38

Furthermore, to the extent that action succeeded in

establishing any acceptance of

difference, it would have had the consequence of justifying

and exacerbating

anti-Jewish/alien feeling by provoking the question "If their own people reject them, why should we accept them"? So Anglo-Jewry's leaders set about a series of projects with a common aim: It is tolerably clear what we wish to do with our foreign poor. We may be not able to make them rich; but we may hope to render them English in feeling and conduct. 39 While emphasising once again the absence of a truly centralised body that be defined as Anglo-Jewry and the degree to which what are sometimes referred might to as general policies were in fact initiatives by individuals or small groups, certain actions and strategies emerged, which on an ex post facto basis may conveniently be described as constituting the Anglo-Jewish responseto the Jewish immigrant question. Overall Anglo-Jewry sought to make as large a portion of the immigrants effectively "disappear" as quickly as possible. This started at the very points of departure, where instigation Board Guardians for Jewish the the advertisements at of of example before discourage England the would-be to to emigration appeared, which sought 40 discourage decisions On left home. had to taken tactical were arrival, migrant immigrants from staying by encouraging them to return to their native lands or to financial for by This aid when was achieved example withholding move on elsewhere.

37W. D. Rubinstein, `Jewish Top Wealth Holders in Britain 1809-1909', Transactions of the 37,2002, ff. England, 133 Society Historical vol. Jewish of pp. 38Jewish Chronicle 12 August 1881. Quoted in Cesarani p. 76, which sets out a detailed immigrant Anglo-Jewry's Jewish towards the attitudes community. concerning argument 39Ibid. 40Royal Commission, Par. 64 p. 19.

240 it might most be needed in the first six months after arrival. 41Attempts were made to disperse them from the high visibility of London's East End to the provinces, where it was hoped they would attract less attention and, in their smaller numbers, be less conspicuous. Research into the Jewish population of Leeds indicates that between 1881 and 1901 their numbers grew more than fourfold to reach 13,858

total out of a -

42 428,968 3.2 %. But in their population of tendency to congregate the quasi-ghettos of Leylands and then Chapeltown in Leeds (and Red Bank and Strangeways then Cheetham in Manchester), where small indigenous Jewish populations were already growing as a result of direct immigration, rendered at least the latter part of this tactic less than successful.

By far the most productive tactic was that of Anglification. The primary locus for such Anglification

be found in to the education programmes, which turned was

immigrant Jewish children into young English men and women

and created pressure -

43 by example for their parents to attend night school programmes. The bulk of Jewish According Board schools. children were educated at ordinary

to the Jewish

Encyclopaedia of the time, in London some 8000 were educated in Jewish schools. By far the most important of these was the Jews Free School in Stepney, with some three in institution British largest it (making half the the thousand educational pupils and a Empire), which was highly praised in all quarters for the quality of its teaching.

Samuel Montagu, whose actions on the religious front in the East End have the the been also active among men of area, creating as was working noted, already 41 Ibid.

42Murray Freedman, Leeds Jews in the 1901 Census, Leeds 2002.

241 early as 1874 the Jewish Working Men's Club modelled on and closely allied to The Working Men's Club and Institute Union and in 1881 founding the Jewish Tailors' Machinists Society. In the former case, Montagu used a Victorian template to define the activities of his model and in the latter case it would seem he probably

used a

similar stratagem as he had employed with the Federation of Synagogues, in his attempt to head off a more aggressive manifestation of Union activity. In 1895 Colonel A. Goldsmid founded the Jewish Lad's Brigade, again drawing on a secular model from the host community, with the stated aim `to instil into the rising generation from their earliest years habits of orderliness, cleanliness, and honor (sic), so that in learning to respect themselves they will do credit to their community. ' 44 Both of these examples demonstrate the ways in which, in managing the immigrants, the leaders of Anglo-Jewry employed existing English forms. The success and popularity of these institutions is indication and other similar an of the degree to which the immigrant community was ready to accept these new mores.

The Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition of 1906 Those responsible for the conduct of Whitechapel Art Gallery have hit upon a days. few for in Jewish idea Exhibition, the a art and which opens capital for Mr have in East End the thousands and appeal a special antiquities must Campbell Ross has securedthe co-operation of a number of influential artists 45 divines. collectors, scholars and

Introduction When it staged the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition at the Royal Albert Hall in 1887, Anglo-Jewry may have felt able to direct it towards the host English

43 `Free evening classes organised for that purpose by the Russo-Jewish Committee appear to be increasingly effective. In 1896/7 there were 57,864 individual attendances'. The Jew in London, p. 23.

44Jewish Encyclopaedia, 1906. 45Art Journal, November 1906, p. 350.

242 community, and in making a bid for acceptance as an established part of English society, they were able to ignore the presence of its immigrant co-religionists in the East End. By 1905/6, however, this was no longer an option either for external

reasons

relating to the host community or for internal reasons relating to changes within the English, Jewish community. Anglo-Jewry was obliged to turn its attention eastwards and to focus on the immigrant community, now in mass numbers in London's East End.

in Chapter 2 suggest that the Anglo-Jewish Historical arguments

Exhibition of 1887 could be characterised as being cut by one hand from whole cloth. This product of Anglo-Jewry was aimed at the upper levels of English society and was informed by an Anglo-Jewish discourse, which, in order to assure a future place for acculturated Englishmen of the Mosaic persuasion, sought to prove a shared past and present.

In contrast to the possibility of a unified reading of the 1887 Exhibition, even a by indicates it inspection 1906 Exhibition that the was created catalogue of cursory decades fashion. in The hands the two symbolic as well as and a piecemeal several Albert Hall Royal the distance the the that on at exhibition earlier separate geographic Art Whitechapel its from 1906 the Park Hyde successor at south-western edge of Gallery in the very heart of the Jewish East End were, as I have outlined, characterised by radical changes in the size, nature and culture of Jewry in England. With the in legislative in Act 1905 the Aliens changes similarly crystallised passing of the bore in 1906 Exhibition Jews England The the framework within which operated. two least two amalgam of or arguably of organisers and was an groups at of marks

243 three separate Exhibitions brought together in one place and time. The Whitechapel Art Gallery evidently played the major role in general selection, Anglo-Jewry re-presented parts of the 1887 Exhibition, and it seems that a small group from the Jewish art world had a de facto curatorial role in respect of selections

of works by

Jewish artists.

The major difference between the 1906 Exhibition and its 1887 predecessor was their respective target audiences. Although the 1906 Exhibition was in part informed by the same Anglo-Jewish discourse as that of the 1887 Exhibition, I contend that in 1906 Anglo-Jewry turned its focus 180 degrees,in order to present its vision of the place of the Jew in English society as an assuredfait accompli not westwards to the indigenous English Gentile population but eastwards as an offer the upper echelons of to the immigrant Jewish community. This volte face offered a recontextualisation of displayed interpret in to them objects and an opportunity a different light. Dr Juliet

Steyn, in her closely argued analysis of this Exhibition, has argued that the 1906 Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition presented a view of Jewishness purged of its 46 Yiddish element. The arguments I set out in Chapter 3 on the formation and longevity of the Anglo-Jewish discourse indicate that in broad terms I am in agreement in detail. devil is, however, A Steyn's The the closer with some of position. examination of what was actually presented and the nature of this new target audience "purging is look it this to that of at a more nuanced reading of correct suggests

Yiddish".

46Steyn, `Cutting the suit to fit the cloth', in The Jew: Asumptions of Identity, pp. 79-97.

244 Twenty years earlier the focus of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition had been westwards to the English Society and its discourse

evolved around a presentation

of sharing not with other Jews but with the English. It was the result of an integrated, single vision of the place of the Jew. The Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition of 1906 did not work from a similar starting point. It should be interpreted

hybrid, as

combining separate elements brought together to satisfy the aspirations of the various parties involved in the presentation. The Anglo-Jewish offer within this Exhibition was not, this time, a two-way process through which the presenters were seeking, as in 1887, to prove their place among those to whom it was presented. In 1906 what was on offer was a one-way opportunity. The Anglo-Jewish offer was for the immigrant audience to accept their vision of Jewry's place in England. Shifting the target for audience an exhibition and part of its underlying premise has, however, the potential to recontextualise the objects displayed and thereby their interpretation. This, I will argue, was one of the consequencesof the re-presentation of those parts of the 1887 Exhibition that were used in 1906. The addition of other related or fresh material, of course, requires its own analysis. Michael Baxendall has suggested that `Arts are influenced is he rewrites his art's history a time positional games and each an artist 47 little. ' So I believe it

influenced 1906 Although Exhibition. the was with and

informed by its 1887 predecessor, it must be seen in its own terms. It is the changesin the whole rather than just the inclusion of a number of new items of more or less direct London, East End Ostjuden, Yiddish the the the to of which of community relevance 1906 Yiddishness to the the the re-assess of opportunity and necessity provides presentation.

47Baxandall, Patterns of Intention, New Haven, London: Yale University Press, 1985, p. 60. 48These included a view of Dachau (Cat. Item 8), an engraving of Polish Jewish children, (Cat. in Yiddish item 908) by Jewish Pentateuch 206), item (Cat. and a gold cap worn a (Cat. item 1340a - lent by Alfred Wolmark). Poland in women

245

The planning of the 1906 Exhibition

The idea for what was eventually to emerge as the Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition of 1906 was first discussed in 1905 by `various Jewish literary societies, the Maccabeans and the Jewish Historical Society

instigation founder the the the at of of -

49 Whitechapel Art Gallery, Canon Barnett. ' It was originally

envisaged that a

Committee formed from those organisations would use the Whitechapel Art Gallery as the venue to present Show which would be on the same lines a cosmopolitan and representative ... '0 held in Anglo-Jewish Exhibition Albert Hall 1887. as the memorable at the

The evidence, however, would suggest that date clashes made this first scheme impossible and there was then discussion surrounding the staging of a much larger 51 in in London This the event the to too and put one side project was event central . Exhibition was moved on to 1906 and back to the Whitechapel Art Gallery.

Notwithstanding disclaimers about the scope of the final presentation that `it it is limited' held, for be our space very '52 will a very much smaller exhibition then

items 2000 1700 catalogue entries with around was a major undertaking of almost displayed. The organisers were certainly not reticent about the expected quality of the be In be better it `in items displayed: pictures we shall show... a some respects will 53 very strong' .

Antiquities 1906, Arts Jewish September 28 Chronicle, and and Jewish iii. 1906, November 9 p. Supplement, Antiquities, 1. Art "Exhibition Jewish p. and of '

Exhibition

sl ibid and interview with Campbell Ross, Jewish Chronicle, 28 September 1906, p. XX. 52Jewish Chronicle, 28 September 1906.

246 The final version of the 1906 Exhibition was run under the auspices the of Whitechapel Art Gallery and in particular its Secretary, Mr Campbell Ross.54It was supported by an Advisory Committee, which included among its members Sir Isidore Spielmann, whose role in the conception of the 1887 Exhibition had been so central, his brother Marion Spielmann, who in 1906 was the President of the Maccabeans

and

Lucien Wolf, who was one of the two key organisers of the earlier event. Solomon J. Solomon, who was elected to full Royal Academy membership in 1906, was

also on

this Advisory Committee and played a significant part in the art selection for this Exhibition, William

as did Marion Spielmann, who wrote one of the Introductions, and

Rothenstein (although he was not on the Advisory Committee). 55 The

Committee numbered among its members many key religious figures and leading lay 56 Jewish representatives of the community.

Revisiting the 1906 Exhibition

For the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition of 1887 the precise title was, as I have argued, a vital element in understanding what was on offer. The emphasiswas on Anglo-Jewishness and History, which accorded with an aim of demonstrating a shared Art host In 1906, Jewish the to the emphasis was switched and community. past with Antiquities. The hyphenated view of the past was replaced by a presentation of a far more specific

Within segment of artistic practice.

this seemingly restricted

53Ibid. 54Apart from Campbell Ross, the Whitechapel Art Gallery was representedby Canon and Mrs Barnett, Mr Howard Batten, Mr Henry Ward and Mr Charles Aitken (the Gallery Director). Exhibition of Jewish Art and Antiquities. ss 'Among those who have given valuable help may be named Mr Solomon J Solomon (RA Chosen People in Whitechapel Rothenstein, the the Will Mr masterly whose studies of elect), fame to him. ' Art Journal, November 1906, p. 350. bought have neighbourhood

247 classification, there was, however, room for much diversity of subject and aim. The 1906 Exhibition Catalogue presented 1698 entries half the its 1887 about number of predecessor. It

divided

the exhibits under four main headings: Synagogue

Appurtenances, Manuscripts and Books, Portraits and Prints

relating to the History of

the Jewish community in England, and works of Art by Jewish Artists. 57

Assuming the ordering of the catalogue reflected the ordering of the Exhibition,

the actual presentation was far more intermingled. It started with a

selection of some sixty engravings, which included images by Jews about Jews, The Maker ofPhylacteries (Catalogue item 34) by Alphonse Levy, or about Old Testament Biblical subjects, Woodcutsfrom the Books of Ruth and Esther (Cat. item 4) by Lucien Pissarro, and images by Jews of non-Jewish subjects, Echo and Narcissus (Cat. item 25) by Solomon J. Solomon, The Fisherwoman (Cat. item 45) by Josef Israels. This was not just the random selection of available images that it may at first seemto be. It demonstrated a West European breadth of vision that was to characterise many of the other visual art sub-sections.

The exhibition then focussed on its re-presentation of the themes and some of the actual material and the texts used in 1887 for its depiction of the history of the English Jewish community. The selection repeated either directly or with similar images many of the items presented in the portrait and associated sections of the 1887 Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition. The same leading rabbinical figures featured figures by from images time this supplemented of similarly positioned once again -

56Including inter alia the Chief Rabbi, the Haham of the Sephardi congregation, The Rev A. A. Green, Walter Sassoon. Rev Rothschild David The Gollancz, Professor and 57Exhibition of Jewish Art and Antiquities, pp. 1-2.

248 58 Dutch, the German French and within communities. Thereafter, the Exhibition alternated between a range of items broadly grouped as Ecclesiastical Art and an even wider range of visual images of historical or artistic interest. So far as Ecclesiastical Art was concerned, Campbell Ross had few doubts about the quality of what

be would

on offer. We shall have a great many things that were exhibited there [the Albert Hall in 1887]... though it [Jewish ecclesiastical art] will be on a smaller scale it may be 59 information. to arranged give as much

It is in this part of the 1906 Exhibition that the issue of recontextulisation emerges most significantly. As we have already seen, one of the ways in which Ecclesiastical Art was to be read and was therefore presented in the 1887 Exhibition in didactic was a manner to eliminate doubt or misconceptions about such items for a viewer unfamiliar with their use and significance. This would clearly not have been the for immigrant Jews 1906 Exhibition. didactic While the the the texts case visiting just from convenience, I to the survived - perhaps educate unfamiliar visitor or maybe in demonstrate 1906 to to the an attempt would suggest a new motive was present immigrant community that Judaism in England was not so far removed from that details been differences in have Although there they of style may which practised. between West and East European JudaIca, detectable to the expert, I would suggest that to the Jewish viewer there was a marked level of potential recognition of the from While he those pauperised rural or or she was presented. objects with which from have Judaica the those this quality, of seen semi-rural environments may not have been larger in have the synagogues, could well attended services cities, who may 5'8With little apparent logic for inclusion in such a section, two engravings of Rabbis from displayed (1717-1767), Norbert Grund Czech/Austro-Hungarian by artist, were the works been have Jewish Immigrant than the to because they of more appeal visitor, might perhaps item 116, item 115, The Discussion Cat. Cat. Rabbis the and of some of the other exhibits. Rabbis reflecting.

249 familiar with such objects. Although this strategy may not have been

sufficient to sway

the opinions of attendees from the Machzike Hadass or other ultra-orthodox Chevrot of an acceptable degree of similarity, it may have been enough to convince the less involved but still practising Jew that the differences were perhaps

not as great as may

have been thought. By presenting a wide range of familiar religious artefacts to this target audience, Anglo-Jewry was at least posing a question about and injecting doubt into any debate about differences between English and East European Judaism and an facto ex post assertion that the Exhibition was purged of its Yiddishness rests somewhat more precariously - on a narrow definition of that term.

One might also fairly enquire from where the organisers might have been able to borrow East European Judaica for their Exhibition. All the loans that comprised the Exhibition came from collections within the United Kingdom. Given the opposition that still characterised relations between the United Synagogue and the Federation, loans from the latter source to an Exhibition that involved the former were unlikely to have been forthcoming. In addition, to Eastern European Orthodox Jews such items importance. daily Having than almost certainly artistic were of religious use rather leaders homeland, from bring these the their them to of religious struggled in lend likely hardly them to to a an art exhibition - especially communities were Gallery closely associated with a leading Christian cleric, Canon Barnett. There is indeed evidence to suggest that William Rothenstein was refused even the loan of in depictions for in his Jews Machzike Hadass from the the of use synagogal silver in following be the that chapter. analysed will series of pictures

59Mr Campbell Ross, in the Jewish Chronicle, 28 September 1906.

250 There were some seven hundred pictorial items in various media in the 1906 Exhibition

Ross' justifying Campbell thus `In that pre-opening assertion pictures we -

60 be shall very strong' . The catalogue, reflecting the physical organization of the Exhibition, made no attempt to classify and discuss all of these under one heading, save for the watercolours and pastels in the Small Gallery and so-called Jewish Art, in the Upper Gallery -a total of 184 works. The remaining 500 items were a mixture of those items included within an historical context and items included for their artistic 61 between the two. We will return to some of these with some significance cross over latter items in the discussion of the visual art content of the exhibition, which follows. On the historical side, we once again find ourselves confronted with a re-presentation from in 1887 Exhibition Rabbinical the the to the and additions material seen of figures mentioned earlier and others, to Jewish civil worthies, scholars and even the find boxers (Mendoza). We the also ourselves confronted with actors and one of figures from the wider Western European context, the most famous of whom were Mendelsohn and Spinoza (Cat. items 405 and 408). The intention in this section would Jewish Exhibition 1887 followed that have the trajectory the to of presenting of seem life in England as interwoven into that history and not a strand apart - and added a Western European dimension.

in Gallery, in hung Upper Art, Jewish the The section entitled was preceded the Catalogue by Marion Spielmann's introduction, a short but wide ranging piece, which Although in Exhibition62. the the in fact had relevance to some of art elsewhere

6°Ibid.

61In terms of the catalogue the first and one of the most striking of the cross over items item 123, Catag. European history to an was context a wider relating and and embracing art Jewish Cemetery (sic) (1628-1682) Ruysdael's the Blotelingh by of painting van of engraving Dresden. is in Gemäldegalerie, The 1665/60. the original now Amsterdam(sic) near

62Exhibition of Jewish Art and Antiquities, pp. 84-5.

251 Spielmann started by denying the relevance of the Second Commandment to the practice of art by Jews, his text went on to use this and `ever existent harrying and persecution' as explanations for the paucity of art by Jews before the nineteenth century. After touching on very early Jewish painters and craftsmen, Spielmann mentioned, in a little more detail, the three key Jewish painters in English Art in the early and mid nineteenth century - Solomon Hart, Abraham Solomon and his younger brother, Simeon Solomon.

Hart's work was praised by Spielmann, who, interestingly for one so linked to the Anglo-Jewish community, talked of Hart's most powerful works as being those that dealt in `essentially Jewish subjects' from which the writer selected Elevation of 63 item 210) as an example. This image would have been viewed with the Law (Cat. few if any problems of interpretation by an immigrant Jewish audience - albeit that its Synagogues Polish have been to which they the than somewhat grander setting may were accustomed.

Both Abraham Solomon (1824-1862) and his sister Rebecca Solomon (1832-1886) were featured in a section of their own (as well as elsewhere in the body (or thereof) 28 their the engravings works of of exhibition), which contained - almost images Jewish been have to content. with no genre all of which would seem

Immediately after his death in penury in 1905, Simeon Solomon was the featured Gallery Baillie's prominently also and was at retrospective major a subject of

63This would seem to have been an engraving of a work by Hart originally given to the been Tate 1847. had in By 1906 Vernon the transferred to this Robert by National Gallery 1 Ch for App 5. held. Pictorial is the it picture. reference original now where collection,

252 in the following year at the Royal Academy. 64Spielmann's positive appraisal of his work as being `of infinitely greater merit' marked another phase in the posthumous rehabilitation of one whose career had been blighted by his arrest on charges of public homosexuality in 1873. The presentation of his work included in the 1906 Exhibition is interesting for many reasons. The loan list indicates that a wide range of owners held during by Simeon despite lengthy he Solomon, the period which was publicly works Old Jewish Testament The or selection comprised a number of works with shunned. themes such as Hosanna (Cat. item 962), A Rabbi (Cat. item 964) and Isaac and Rebecca (Cat. item 975) as well as some of his erotic works, Love Bound and Wounded (Cat. item 970), his mystical paintings such as The Sleepers and One that Keeps Watch (Cat. item 973) and even some of his works based on the New Testament The Prodigal Son (Cat. item 978). For an exhibition with a focus on Jewish Art, illustrations Jewish include did it the of series of any of not perhaps surprisingly, Customs reproduced in the Leisure Hour (1866) and other similar publications, which had, as noted earlier, been part of the 1887 Exhibition.

Spielmann Israels, Josef to but highly After a passing acclamatory reference School, British he the discussion to his within as referred of what continued with in foreign by `a he artists of examples number also covered category which overall ... Jewish be the artists idea among existing activity of that the conveyed may some order 65Spielmann's contention was that, although the full range of artistic practice abroad'. `from the "Victorian" painter to the ultra-impressionist' was represented and although 4some of

by into the their infuse to work figure-painters racial passion may choose the

his 16 Baillie's. in included the works of 64122 of his works were retrospective exhibition at Deceased Old Masters Works Exhibition Winter 37ffi mastersof and in of of the included were Academy. Royal the School at the British 65Exhibition of Jewish Art and Antiquities, pp. 84-5.

253 treatment of essentially Jewish subjects the majority, identifying themselves ... entirely with their adopted country trace of distinctive thought or show no ... differentiation'

he by future development to and referring ended which he felt would

lead to `continual assimilation, with the single object, in this country,

of advancing the

honour and glory of the British school'. 66This assertion, covering as it did such

a wide

range of exhibits with relevance, resonance and appeal to a wide audience, was a clear statement of the integrationist aims of the Anglo-Jewish discourse.

The

Jewish

Chronicle's Supplement of 9 November 1906, which concentrated

on what it termed `Modern Art', explored the visual art content of the Exhibition under the headings

`Foreign

Artists',

`Religious

Worship

and Study',

`The

Judenschmerz', `Portraiture', `DeceasedArtists' and `Miscellanea'. In the discussion that follows I will examine the extent to which some of the works included under these headings were purged of or informed by a senseof Yiddishness and if so how that term defined. be might

The Jewish Chronicle's review of `Foreign Artists' was preceded by an from funding loans for Exhibition difficulties `insuperable' this the of explanation of list: it by in to the perhaps artists went on absence of works overseas, which resulted the most important of whom from a 21Stcentury perspective were the painter Moritz Oppenheimer (sic)(1800-1882) and the sculptor Marc Antakolsky (1843-1902); and Kaufmann Gottlieb (1856-1879) Isidore Maurycy the most significant omissions and (1853-1921), the absence of neither of whom was deemed worthy of mention. The its in Josef Israels this the Chronicle work of Jewish attention section on concentrated

66Ibid.

254 (1824-1911), the best known and most prolifically exhibited of the foreign artists the at 1906 Exhibition

(who together with Solomon J. Solomon was made a Royal

Academician in that year)

it identified two images although only out of seventeen as -

being Jewish in theme. The water colour In the ghetto (Cat. item 11), which the Jewish Chronicle referred to as being designated The old clothes shop by the artist, depicts a poor Jewish merchant, seated with his son in front of his meagre display of goods -a scene that would have been familiar to anyone who knew London's East End or the 67 poor quarters of the towns and cities of Eastern Europe. The other Josef Israels 68 directly Jewish painting of a subject was The Jewish Wedding. As the Jewish Chronicle observed, although painted quite recently, it depicted an earlier marriage bridal Once the than tallith practice of covering rather a canopy. again, couple with a this was an image with which any Jew visiting the Exhibition might have been familiar; in an interview with the Jewish Chronicle some two years earlier, Israels himself had referred back to Oppenheim's use of the tallith as a bridal canopy in his 69 Pictures of Jewish Life series.

Other `foreign'

Camille heading included this artists mentioned under

(1830-1903) and Lucien Pissarro (1963-1944) - despite the fact that Lucien had lived in England since 1890; Leo Mielzner (1869-1935) - possibly for his subjects (Zangwill and Herzl); Leopold Pillichowski (1866-1933), also now established in England. The latter was singled out in this section for Holiday, even though this work, 67The work was in fact probably a water colour variously entitled The old curiosity shop/Son by in 1888 have been that believed to People year Ancient and sold executed around of an It 1906 Catalogue. in the Drucker the J. version C. earlier was an J. of record Goupil to owner Jewish Museum Groningen in 1889. Josef Israels latter and painted the name of of an oil App. 2 Ch. 5. 1999, 326. Pictorial Amsterdam, Museum p. reference Historical

68 Josef Israels, Son of the Chosen People, Watercolour, 1888,56 x 43, Rijksmuseum, 148, Historical Wedding, Oil 1903,137 Jewish Jewish Israels, Josef on canvas, x Amsterdam; from Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam. loan the Amsterdam on Museum,

255 which depicted a man studying the lulav used in the Succoth ceremony, could have featured in the section of `Religious Worship and Study' with others by the same

artist.

The work of Max Lieberman (1837-1945) was given no more than passing acknowledgement and the French artist Edouard Brandon (1831-1897) was not included in this commentary, even though all three examples of his work on display depicted Jewish themes and one was a loan from the Chief Rabbi.

In its coverage of works depicting Religious Worship and Study, the Jewish Chronicle review opened with a critique of the works of Rothenstein and Wolmark, in in be in depth this the next whose works and other contexts will separately examined two chapters. Rothenstein was represented here by a selection of his series depicting Jewish worship and study at the Machzike Hadass, and Wolmark, a Polish born and East End raised young

by artist, works

during there or executed either

in These Poland. the to grounded area and were works contemporaneous visits is both its In there every reason to supposethat cases religious practice. reflective of the images would have been familiar to the 1906 immigrant audience - some of whom I Although, by have the the as shall analyse artists. sitters used recognised might even in the next two chapters, there were differences in approach between the two artists Yiddish these ignore the portrayals. of content very obvious one cannot Snowman (1863-1947) was mentioned

this

by the context

Jewish

Isaac

Chronicle's

item (Cat. 788), Talmud difficult A his four the for passage of works. of reviewer item 1402) (Cat. Chevra item 1398) Purim (Cat. in the each Morning Devotions and been have his Jewish East End depicted scenes of which almost all of viewers would Wailing The their that locations in and worship, places of or represented were aware,

69Jewish Chronicle, 15 May 1903, p. 11.

256 Wall, Jerusalem (Cat. item 69/Upper Gallery) was a representation

of one of the most

70 archetypal moments of aspirational worship. Although not singled out in this review, I would draw attention to Silver Candlesticks by Lily Delissa Joseph (1863-1940), which I believe may be a painting now known as Self Portrait with Candles (Catag. Item 26/Upper Gallery)

depiction lady the of artist as a young carrying candles, -a

perhaps to the Sabbath table (now Ben Uri Gallery). The works of Rothenstein and Wolmark, those of Snowman and Delissa Joseph and images by Mark Zangwill

and

Louis Conrad, also mentioned in the Jewish Chronicle review, call into doubt the assertion that the 1906 Exhibition was devoid of Yiddish references. Indeed the Jewish Chronicle reviewer went out of his way to assert that those artists (excluding Delissa Joseph in his commentary) be regarded as the founders of a new Jewish school in this country. They all may ... treat the same subject - the alien at worship and study - and treat it from the same point of view. Their pictures are intensely Jewish, revealing the Jewish soul at its finest and best. "

Although as late as 1906, the paper could apparently still not bring itself to dispense with the distinction between English Jews and the alien, given its record of resistance to matters Yiddish, it is important to underline how it praised the intensity of the Jewishness as an expression of all that is `finest and best' in the Jewish soul and saw this revealed in pictures of the alien at prayer. The shift in opinion from one which had begun look in light Ostjude to to to that the a purely negative which regarded Eastern Europe as the font of true Judaism had, it would seem, influenced the writer's thoughts and position.

70A difficult Passage of the Talmud and The Wailing Wall were both reproduced in the 1898; 26 March News, London see Anne and Roger Cowen, Victorian Jews Illustrated 189-190. Eyes British pp. through 71Supplement, 9 November, p. iv.

257 If the Jewish Chronicle and visitors to the 1906 Exhibition were able to find resonance of Yiddish culture in works defined as belonging to the previous grouping, how much more was this the case in the classification Judenschmerz, which `treated

the sorrows of modern Israel. '72 Although the reviewer found much to praise in the work

Samuel Samuel, Amy

Drucker

(1873-1951)

and John Amshewitz

(1882-1942), he reserved his highest accolades for the paintings of Moses Maimon (1860- 1924) and Leopold Pillichowski. The former, a Russian born artist, was singled out for Homecoming from War (Cat. item 72 Upper Gallery) a narrative painting dealt both the conscription of young Jews into the Russian Army and the which with results of a pogrom. The experienced, or reported, awareness of such events would have been chillingly familiar to many of those looking at this picture. The samewould for (Cat. by Wohin? have been Maimon the true praise other work singled out also of item 114 Upper Gallery), which the reviewer regarded as the best of the several `wandering Jew' paintings on display, and Pillichowski's, nearly as highly praised, On the way of Exile

(Catag. item 12 /Upper Gallery). These images, offering

in direct immigrants, left behind by life to the the the contrast stand representations of insistence later the Anglo-Jewry to that time on absenceof and of assimilating offer of Yiddish culture or influence in the 1906 Exhibition.

Inevitably

the portraiture

far section was

heavily

biased to

The European leaders Western Anglo-Jewry's their counterparts. or representations of (by Lords House being in the Rothschild image of Lord of as a member of sworn Marks -

Cat. (by Richardson lithograph 787), item taken Cat. with an earlier when -

Commons being in House Lionel Baron the father his as the of accepted item 229) of

72 Ibid

258 first Jewish MP without swearing `on his true faith of a Christian', encapsulatedthe aspirations and success of Anglo-Jewry in its struggle for full political emancipation. Sir George Faudel-Phillips, who had, as we have seen, been portrayed by Solomon J. Solomon, during his Lord Mayoralty, lent an earlier portrait of his father as Lord Mayor (Cat. item 195) (by an unnamed artist), thus underling the shared past project, to which reference has been made earlier. Solomon J. Solomon's portraits included one of the Chief Rabbi (Cat. item 196) and another of Hermann Graetz (Cat. item 197), the German-Jewish historian, who had given a keynote speech at the 1887 Exhibition. Perhaps the reviewer's most interesting comment in the context of this dissertation (Cat. item Solomon's Mr Franklin 87/Upper Ellis to the reference was portrait of 73 Gallery) as a `perfectly satisfying picture of a benevolent English gentleman". This Anglo-Jewish integrationist faultless the the of nature expression of was, of course, a discourse.

Other contemporary Anglo-Jewish notables highlighted in this section were Professor Gollancz painted by Wolmark (Cat. item 48/Upper Gallery), the Reverend Simeon Singer by Flora Marks (Cat. item 24/Upper Gallery), Mme Darmestester's portrait

Gallery) item 44/Upper (Cat. Hartog father, Professor her and of

Pillichowski's rendition of Zadoc Kahn (Cat. item 194). Taken as a whole, this section by informed Yiddish images the the Anglo-Jewish obverse of provides portraits of immigrant They to the discussed community offered were earlier. were culture, which in 1906. integrationist the the offer on project of success the of embodiment as

73Supplement, 9 November, p. iv.

259 The 1906 Exhibition was not a re-run of the 1887 Exhibition, in which the immigrant

Jew was neither targeted as a potential viewer nor a subject for

representation or discussion. For the organisers from the Whitechapel Art Gallery, the 1906 Exhibition had a more artistic and less didactic remit. For Anglo-Jewry it offered the opportunity to present its discourse to another audience of now far more immediate importance than that at which the 1887 Exhibition had been aimed. By retargeting the for its display of Judaica, the 1906 Exhibition offered the potential for a audience re-intepretation of the balance between English and East European Judaism. The inclusion of an albeit limited range of objects and pictures of direct relevance to the immigrant strengthened the argument for a more inclusive view of the gap between Anglo, English and Yiddish Judaism and Jewish life. While the Anglo-Jewish discourse of 1887 informed much of what was selected and how it was presented,the 1906 Exhibition cannot be regarded as stripped of a Yiddish nature. This time the immigrant, his culture and his aspirations formed a presence acknowledged. In 1887 Exhibition, the reported to the the contrast minimal numbers who attended 74 its bear 1906 Exhibition 150,000 testimony to the ample appeal. visiting audience of Given the location of the Whitechapel Art Gallery in the centre of the Jewish East End, it seems reasonable to propose that the immigrant community must have comprised a large However to the large those make were allowance one visitors. proportion of very for attendance by visitors from outside the East End, or from other East End have been the the this of appeal result certainly success would almost communities, Those for immigrant had Jewish the Exhibition of extreme community. that the clearly by have been to attracted or convinced religious or perhaps social views might not however, 1906 Exhibition The that the so stripped of was assertion, offer. on was what 74Trustees Report, Whitechapel Art Gallery, London 1906, p. 9, quoted in Juliet Steyn The

260 a Yiddish element as to be of no interest or relevance to the immigrant community does not seem to accord with either its own content, context or intention or with the realities of East End life as it was being lived by immigrant Jews in 1906. Although immigrants have Yiddish to some sought equate may culture solely with a set of traditional religious and social values and practices imported from elsewhere for in preservation a quasi-time warp in a new land, this ignores the inevitable changes is forces to undergone when such a culture subject new and influences in a new in Yiddish England environment. culture was a vibrant and changing phenomenon not but by The the new generations. very act of shaped experiences of simply shaping leaving the shtetl, in both the geographic and symbolic sense,would inexorably lead to interpretations. for I its the new way value system and would open a re-assessment of by lived being the Yiddish that the that enjoyed and was culture would contend had from different that 1906 Exhibition the which was majority of those visiting I While 25 immigrant first Jewish am not the years earlier. waves some arrived with the Yiddishness between the of part on of sense a new positing perfect synchronicity immigrant community and a possibly modified understanding of what it meant to be Jewish at the turn of the century by the Anglo-Jewish community, the presentation of less than the Exhibition that for 1906 might wide the gap was suggests and reception be acknowledged. This time the immigrants, their aspirations and their culture were no longer a presence denied.

96 3. Identity, endnote p. Jew: Assumptions of

261 CHAPTER 6 The lachrymose Mr Rothenstein

the defining moment of alterity is visual. .. It comes in the exchange of looks from face to face, from artist to spectator that creates a movement in which the passive observer is forced to make a choice and becomes a witness. N. Mirzoeffl

A Chance Encounter in the East End

William Rothenstein's autobiography Men and Memories, published 1931/2, contains a passage relating to the genesis of a series of eight works of Jewish subjects first in Whitechapel and then in his Hampstead studio between which were executed 1904 1908.2 Although this series occupies only a very small place approximately and within Rothenstein's oeuvre, it and the circumstances of its production are central to this study. Having business in the city with a solicitor, a brother of Solomon J. Solomon, and on his asking whether I chanced to know the Spitalfields Synagogue in Brick Lane (a curious sight he assured me, well worth find him My I to the place there. surprise was great seeing), accompanied dark-panelled in draped in Jews while a prayer shawls; crowded with bending bearded over great men with strange side-locks, room sat old books and rocking their bodies as they read; others stood, muttering Hebrew prayers, their faces to the walls, enveloped from head to foot in black bordered shawls. Here were subjects Rembrandt would have have like had I indeed, thought to the painted of which never painted had in London. I no-one told me of this was very much excited; why seen draw in here. Somehow But I to to a must arrange work wonderful place? Law. The I told, the the was out of question, was against synagogue, was Jews here, I saw, were suspicious of strangers; they had lately come from the ghettos of Russia and Galicia, and were fanatically strict; so strict that

1A reference to Levinas on alterity: Nicholas Mirzoff `Pissarro's Passage', in Diaspora and Visual Culture, p. 64. 2 Men and Memories, London: Faber & Faber, 1931-2.

262 they rejected the authority of the Chief Rabbi who, in their eyes, was unorthodox. I was suspected,since I was ignorant alike of Hebrew and of being ceremonial, of a missionary from a society for the conversion of the Jews. They believed that if I painted them, I would sell the pictures to churches. Now and then a few good-for-nothing rogues were converted for a handsome price, I was told. The simple but narrow-minded Russian and Galician Jews could not be tempted to leave what was almost a ghetto, for the ghetto is almost as much a Jewish as a Gentile arrangement. Determined not to waste a subject so precious, I took a by in Spital Square, where at last I persuaded 3 or 4 room close men to sit. Here I worked for two years, painting eight pictures in all. Whitechapel has a vigorous life of its own. I haunted the Jewish quarter, where one observes astonishing types of men and women. The orthodox Jews from Russia and Galicia never shave, and some of the younger men put me in mind of portraits of Titian; for beards give breadth and radiance to a face. The old gray-bearded men, noble in mien if ignoble in dress, wear the pathetic look of Rembrandt's rabbis. It was the time of the Russian Pogroms and my heart went out to these men of a despised race, from which I too had sprung, though regarded as a stranger among them. The men, who sat to me, emigrants from Russian ghettos, were rigidly orthodox, extremely poor and feckless; but their children would, belike, get on in the world, for they in no wise follow the ways of their fathers. Though the men were small, some of their daughters were magnificent creatures. No wonder Sargent admired the women of the race; though when Sargent went to Palestine he was little impressed, a decadent generation he thought. But this was before the Zionist Colonies. Sargent wanted to join me in Whitechapel, but he never found time. '

Men and Memories was published some 25 years after the completion of the series of paintings that are the subject of this chapter. So it may not be a reliable record of the however, fairly it is We the time. that artist's reactions at may, earlier assume an looking back from the the this accurate reflection of context within which painter, later date, wanted his readers to view these works. This chapter will be devoted to an examination of the series within the contexts of the changing circumstances of English Jewry at the turn of the century and the 1906 Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition discussed in the previous Chapter. Before embarking on such analysis, I background brief the the of catalogue works and an examination of artist's start with a their time the to execution. of up

263 Although the main purpose of this listing is descriptive, in order to in assist the later discussion, I draw attention to two threads of analysis. The first is the distinction between works that may be characterised as people centred, with the primary emphasis on the individual subjects, and those that I would suggest are ritual centred where the focus is on a religious ritual/performance being enacted more than those performing it - accepting that almost all of the works have elements of both. The second is the almost hermetically sealed environment in which the subjects are enclosed. It is only in the last of the pictures that a visible source of outside light obtrudes. This I believe is a reflection of the artist's sense of penetrating another world, a subject to which I shall return.

In the Spitalfields Synagogue (Fig. ) of 1904 would seem to be the earliest 4 works in this series. A (presumably earlier) pastel study entitled Praying Jews depicts two elderly figures (Fig. ). 5 The foreground figure, turning sharply to his side, is slightly hunched. His bare forearm protrudes well below the cuff of his evidently too small jacket and his bushy beard verges on the unkempt. His companion slumps forward, his chin on his hands. Neither figure looks at the other, as they ponder or later during be break during In the talk, oil, perhaps a what could a service. Rothenstein placed two more figures in a deeper background, which pushes the figure The to the main seems now more comfortably original pair closer viewer. fitting. His less better His though still worn, are perhaps shabby, seated. clothes, (probably The the alert and same models), more attentive. rear pair colleague seems is foreground, in the those the sterner of ninety-degree configuration of mirroring 3Men and Memories, vol. 2 pp. 35/6. 4 1904, Hugh Lane Municipal Musem of Art, Dublin. 5National Gallery of Canada, Ontario.

264 mien. Rothenstein declares the Jewish religious practice of his subjects by their Tallithot (prayer shawls) and Kippot (skullcaps). Their Peyot (side curls) have been tucked behind their ears or blended into their beards. As we shall see later, this minimisation of specific items of Judaca or Jewish religious practice was a deliberate strategy on the part of the artist.

This is clearly a people centred work. Notwithstanding the pastel study's title, the positioning of the two sets of figures would seem to deny that this a moment of is it Neither is there to prayer. any evidence suggest one of study -a subject treated by Rothenstein elsewhere in this series. Chapter 5 discussed the role of some East End Synagogues as centres for the community. Perhaps the subject of this early work is a depiction of the Synagogue as a place for discussion and rest - albeit a more friend by Israel described Rothenstein's than that restrained and respectful one Zangwill in Children of the Ghetto: This synagogue was all of the luxury many of its Sons could boast. It was their salon and their lecture-hall. It supplied them not only with their letters, but their politics and their public their art and religion, Almighty's home It the their and on as well as was amusements. 6 little Him. familiar, vulgar with and even a occasions they were

The change of title from the pastel to the oil, if it were Rothenstein's choice or made for this his suggested reading. validation offer some would with agreement,

An Exposition of the Talmud (Fig. ) of 1904 continues in the same vein of Rothenstein the that typified early several of close observation and study of character Whitechapel. in works

It was possibly the first in the series to explore Talmudic

6Zangwill, Children of the Ghetto, 1892, p. 111. Boston. Arts, Fine Museum of

265 study, `...the quintessential performance of Jewish maleness.'8 The picture moves from prayer to study Talmud Torah

functions Machzike the the Hadass its another of of and -

is is but it It is being too is people-centred. the not what studied nor -

performance of the act of teaching the subject of this work, it is rather those who are studying, who are Rothenstein's focus. Four listening figures face a teacher. Their forward leaning postures emphasise their close attention to his exposition. Although light permeates from the right, there is, I would argue, a sense of observing a private world.

In the Corner of the Talmud School (Fig. ), also of 1904, seemsto reflect this 9 intimacy falls from Light sense of and privacy even more strongly. an unseen source book held by figure foreground the the on and on the Tallit enshrouded face of a is drawn inexorably figure. is `over This The the shoulder' second a closed world. eye to the space created by the triangle of the prayer shawl and the edges of the book, an learning. Although key Talmudic the the work element of area, which encompasses the subjects are placed in the middle ground and the work still contains elements of I character study,

would

posit

that this work

being towards veers more

ritual/performance oriented rather than people centred.

In Aliens at Prayer (Fig. ) of 1905, the soft, side-light and warm palette of In the Spitalfields Synagogue of 1904 have been replaced by a cooler light and the palette 1° front figures blues the The to the has moved towards of press close and greys. in the than their seem clothes more paintings obvious earlier poverty composition, 8Daniel Boyarin, Unheroic Conduct, pp. 143/4. 'Gallery Oldham. 10National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne.

266 shabbier, their Tallitot more soiled, their faces more care worn and lined and their beards (most notably that of the standing figure) more unkempt. The contrast is especially noticeable in the central figure in this work, the same model used in the first 1904 work. The pictorial composition obliges the viewer to confront each of the individually. The face of central figure is anchored at the intersection of an subjects left line the to axis; right running down the picture along the edges of his Tallit and that of the standing figure; the other running left to right is formed by the Yarmulke, the left shoulder and upper arm of the seated figure. Although not apparently actively involved in prayer, this central figure is paying intense and, I would suggest, devout his is This to to attention something/one slightly right. reflected in his posture and in the way in which his hands are not simply resting on the book, but grasp it firmly. The face of the other seated figure is framed between his splayed fingers and his forearm. His focus and concentration follow that of his seated colleague. The face of the standing figure (the same model as this second seated figure) is framed the Tallit draped over his head. The deep shadows cast by this cowl effect render his face his directly focus is that His to than of right, unlike ahead rather gaunt. cadaverously his companions. He is perhaps involved in his own order of prayers -a possibility that is not uncommon in Jewish practice. Although it would be fair to surmise that the Rothenstein following provides us with no sight of some part of a service, subjects are Synagogue Spitalfields the In Aliens Prayer be. the that shares with at might what being feature than ritual centred. people rather of common

its involving figure ) four (Fig. 1904/5 School at The Talmud composition of a from In bespectacled), faced (this the the time viewer who the model same centre its depiction Talmud devices School Talmud of makes use of similar Corner of the -

267 " study. Candle light illuminates the subjects as they study different books. The placing of the subjects and the texts they are studying in the upper half of the composition and the positioning of those texts creates a sense of exclusion and of penetrating a private domain. This is reinforced by the pose of the left hand figure, facing away from the viewer, that of the right hand figure with his shoulder turned towards the viewer and the cowl of the Tallit over the head of the central figure. Although three books are being studied, only one is angled so as to permit it to be by the outside viewer. The two right hand figures in the composition are so seen posed as to make any reading of them as individual characters impossible. This falls into my suggested category of being ritual/performance rather than picture As people centred. with In the Corner of the Talmud School there is, I would suggest, this sense of privacy is reinforced by the absence of any external source of light. The light flames has the the that use of candle and suggest a room absolute verticality of direct no accessto the outside world.

Jews Mourning in a Synagogue (Fig. ) 1906 is, I would suggest, a key work in this series in relation to issues of a centring that is based on people as opposed to 12The work reveals its studio execution more obviously than other ritual/performance. images in the series - the brocade curtain and the edge of a picture on the background What I Synagogue. in Hadass been Machzike have the out of place wall would believe to be a preliminary sketch shows a group of seven men face on rather than at 13 image. Although this is static in composition and unresolved, final the angle of the had some version of this treatment been adopted for the final work, it might have

11Sternberg Centre, London. 12Tate Gallery, London.

268 allowed the artist more scope to continue with that detailed examination of his subjects that characterised In the Spitalfields Synagogue and Aliens at Prayer. Instead, Rothenstein opted for a diagonal placement of the seven figures

- with an

figure hinted at by a part of a Tallit to the extreme right hand edge of the eighth This treatment sacrifices some exploration of character for examination canvas.

ritual - the act of prayer.

Although each of the individual figures is motionless, the jagged peaks and troughs of their heads, which is echoed (in a more rhythmically, regular fashion) at their feet by the draping of their Tallitot, create a sense of movement within the 14 The composition.

prayer shawls, which served as signifiers of Jewishness in the

become the central means for the creation of this rhythm, which earlier works, also typifies the Jew at prayer as he sways and bends. Four of the figures in this composition create cowls by covering their heads with a prayer shawl enabling the further to emphasise these peaks and troughs of assumedmotion. artist

In Reading the Book of Esther (Fig. ), the scene has been shifted from instance in `reading' this to those must congregants at prayer or studying officiating be understood as referring to a public reading during the service rather than reading as in a moment of study. 15The work is closely foregrounded by the compositional tactic height. In it lectern figures the the a at waist and surrounding of cutting off from figures in located the three the are middle ground, reading preliminary sketch, 13Jews Mourning in a Synagogue, Charcoal on paper, 1906,43.2 x 50.8 cm, Cartwright Hall, Bradford. 14This picture may have been a seminal work for Jacob Kramer's The Day of Atonement, Oil 1919, Leeds 121.9 City Art Gallery. 99 cros, x ems on canvas, 15Manchester City Art Gallery.

269 the text placed on a lectern which is indicated as extending down to mid-calf 16The work concentrates on a small number of figures rather than taking the opportunity of including the congregation in front of whom this reading was presumably

meant to be

taking place.

In two of the early works in which study is depicted, the texts being read were partially revealed to the viewer. In Reading the Book of Esther the text is concealed. The artist/viewer is cut off by the draped front of the lectern on which the scroll is by the edges of the prayer shawls of the outer figures. This is presented as placed and for Jews and entry for the viewer/outsider precluded. The upward tilt of the a ritual lectern and the cave like shelter created by the three cowled figures create an area inside which the text being studied is open to them. (One would suggest that the lectern he used was a studio prop, probably of secular origin, since that used in a Synagogue is normally much wider and larger) As a result the text is hidden and from the viewer, who can only to observe the ritual and those who perhaps protected involved it. The absence of an obvious light source, when combined with the tightness of the composition, emphasise the closed nature of this observed world.

Unlike the 1905 works, in which consideration of ritual entailed some sacrifice of the Esther, Book School), Reading individual (such The Talmud the the as examination of however, returns to that close study of the participants that characterized the earliest both thus a people and a ritual/performance centred combining elements of works key however, the the that In this case, was one of observation of poverty work. 16Tate Gallery Ref T 290. Catalogued as Jews in Mourning, however given its subject and Book Reading Esther is the this the of oil of almost certainly a mistitling. similarity with

270 features of the earlier works ceded place to an examination of tropes of age, wisdom handed down traditions. and

There is an interesting contrast in accuracy, which perhaps indicates some of the problems which Rothenstein encountered, when trying to depict scenes from a Synagogue within his own studio. Within Jewish religious practice readings from the Old Testament are normally made from a parchment scroll mounted on two staves. There are, however, five biblical extracts or Megilloth - Esther, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations and the Song of Songs, each read in conjunction with the service on a is holiday. Megillah Jewish The customarily either parchment of each particular When Reading is in kept a cylinder or mounted on a single stave. simply rolled and it Reading in 1907, NEAC Book Esther the the was called was originally shown at Megillah a more accurate and, I would argue, more revealing title. Not only did Rothenstein render this accurately in the picture, he also used a correct Hebraic title, in Exhibition totally to the nonalmost an a secular public work when presenting Jewish audience. Whether this Hebrew knowledge was acquired from his upbringing is less Hadass, than Machzike he the from significant, those worked at with whom or from is It for Hebrew the decision title one, whose to use the a marked shift the work. first he Judaism to when so marginal, was allegiance and of stated awareness happened upon the Machzike Hadass..

) 1908, (Fig. Carrying Law in final the this would seem The of series, work be totally to work". centred ritual a categorisation my suggested the of context within is Scroll the Law the the and among of carried around It represents a moment when 17Johannesburg Art Gallery.

271 worshippers. The stripes of the Tallitot act as a visual fence, which makes the viewer an observer of a private domain. Simultaneously, they are a focussing device, forcing look to us at veneration of the Scroll, the subject of the work. The left hand

side

figures together with the candle and the main column form

vertical axes. The sixth

figure on that side inclines inwards towards the centre. The

columns of the building

define the vertical axes to the right. The stripes of Tallitot on the figures this at side incline inward towards the act of devotion. Those of the two central figures

sweep

upwards to meet at the hand of the congregant, who touches the Scroll as bending he kisses it. The enclosed sense of the work is reinforced by the horizontals of the balcony and the overhead candelabra. For the first time in this series there is an light from in background. One the the obvious source of windows right might suggest that this, however, provides for light to come in rather than, at the same time, to provide access to the outside. The feeling that one is located within a closed environment remains.

Artistic influences are discussed at some length later in this chapter, however, at this juncture it is apposite to compare this work with Solomon Hart's 1850 The Feast of 18 (Fig. ). Drawing on Sephardi the Rejoicing of the Law at the Synagogue in Leghorn

in its Rothenstein. is in Italy than the treatment this more orientalised and exotic ritual Although Hart's the principal subjects are also distanced, the viewer has open ground to negotiate as a would-be participant in this joyful parade. An earlier Rothenstein oil study -

depicts for it bears this title the a of procession work since same presumably -

19 (Fig. it is Scroll ). is The figures three setting somewhat vague probably carrying a is figures The to Synagogue in perhaps and simply seem a studio study. would a not 18Jewish Museum, New York.

272 be of a higher social standing than those depicted in earlier works. In

particular the

middle figure, who in such a procession could be the Rabbi is wearing a frock coat and tie, which might more usually associate him with cleric from an Anglo-Jewish or Reform

Synagogue rather than the Rabbi of a poor, ultra-orthodox

Jewish

community. Although this work was almost certainly executed in London as part of the Whitechapel series, one wonders whether it harks back to Strauss and the Bradford's

Reform

Synagogue, which

as we shall see, were influences in

Rothenstein's early life. Another preliminary work Study of Jewish Rabbis carrying the "Law" combines the leading figure of the Bradford oil with the figure kissing the in final in the scroll version a study that had the potential to be far more people 20 in `spiritual' feeling. centred and

To what extent was Rothenstein quite the surprised visitor to the East End and its Jewish community

that he implied in 1903? Earlier in his autobiography

Rothenstein wrote of connections with that area as early as 1888/9, of links with some of the East End's key figures and institutions and in terms, which demonstrate a his description his later discovery to this mind-set, which paralleled of of the reaction Spitalfields Synagogue of the Machzike Hadass community. 21 by I Canon Barnett. I went often to Toynbee Hall, where was welcomed ... The Barnetts were also beginning to organise exhibitions of paintings with the warm support of Watts [1817-1904], Burne-Jones [1833-1898] and I also spent an evening each week in a boys Holman Hunt [1827-1910]. ... drawing I in Leman Street, Whittington Club, taught the and where club

19Cartwright Hall, Bradford. 20William Rothenstein, Two Jewish Rabbis carrying the "Law", Chalk on blue paper, 1907, 36.5 x 23.5 cm, City of Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery. 21Toynbee Hall, 28 Commercial Street, El opened in 1884. It was a radical responseto the first became It University dealing the there. the poverty with was settlement and problems of followed. The (initially from University elite Wadham for that those young and a model Arnold (1852-1881), Toynbee [the the Oxford historian and Colleges Balliol alma mater of for lived for the for there the working classes]) worked and paid and education campaigner Barnett, see Biographical Note App 1. Samuel For privilege.

273 22 become To modelling. a worker in Whitechapel seemed an adventure, the East End was a part of London remote and of ill repute, which needed missionaries it appearedand it flattered my self esteemto be one of these23.

This earlier link with and work in the East End, although pre-dating the the Machzike Hadass Synagogue, placed Rothenstein in the heart of an

opening of

area of high

Jewish concentration on a regular basis just as the immigrants were arriving in substantial numbers. Rothenstein clearly wanted to regard himself and have others see him as one of these young elite missionaries bringing relief to the poor. This

was,

however, certainly not part of the ethos of selfless service, which Barnett and his

co-

founders were seeking to promote. His characterization of himself as a missionary in this early encounter duplicates his use of the same term, when describing the reaction of the members of the Spitalfields Synagogue to him at the later date - perhaps as much a projection of his own earlier self image as an attempt to understand their feelings.

His observations on the remoteness of the area, in which he was working, as we have already seen, echoed generally held opinions. Many Victorian and early twentieth century Londoners (regardless of their religious affiliation), regarded the East End almost as another country. The underclass living there was held by some to be no part of English society; it was as if it was physically located elsewhere. Jack 22The Post Office Directory lists a Whittington Club at 86, Leman Street in 1886 under the (Blue) Mr William London Tourell. East Tourell the also managed management of a Shoeblack Society there. Prior to that date the premises were listed as housing the East London Certified Industrial School. There was an earlier Whittington Club formed in 1846, in the Holborn area until 1873. This would not, however, appear to have any link the Club in Leman Street. See Christopher Kent, `The Whittington Club; A Whittington Bohemian experiment in middle class social reform', Victorian Studies, vol. XIX, September 1974, pp. 31 ff.

23Men and Memories, vol. 1 pp. 29/30.

274 London in People of the Abyss, published in 1902 just before Rothenstein started to paint, referred famously to the `unknown' East End; O Thomas Cook & Son instantly, with ease and unhesitatingly and ..... celerity, could you send me to Darkest Africa or Innermost Thibet (sic), but to the East End of London, barely a stone's throw distant from Ludgate 24 know not the way! circus, you

The reference to "darkest Africa" is telling. The titles of several of the contemporary 25 in East End works on the and on the poor general use the same or similar epithets. The arrival of the immigrant Jews from Russia and Eastern Europe in the final two decades of the t 9th century could only have served to exacerbate this pre-existing it did dimensions the of as whole area as an outsider community, adding perception of by language in different some, who were part now populated culture and a genuinely Jewish is It the English to to understand why visiting easy ways. accept unwilling indeed have been to in End East the another a as voyage seen could community This backwardness. interpreted be foreignness immigrants' the as might country; why different, this unmannered and unsophisticated was a community as perception of in Rothenstein's work. significant element

been have it End, East direct the his Even without would contacts with early its lack existence and difficult for Rothenstein to sustain a professed of awareness of for both featured had forms In they subjects as its Jewish various community. of from 1838 literature such as Dickens Oliver Twist of and as objects of scientific study Mayhew's

1861 Poor London Labour London the of and seminal

from been, have body, indeed the Jews of London as a congregated ... `settlement' institute to their a the times when numbers were sufficient 24Jack London, People of the Abyss, p. 17. 25William C. Preston, The bitter cry of outcast London. An inquiry into the condition of the General 1890; London darkest London, John 1883; Law, In Clarke, J. London: abject poor, [ 1890]. Army, London: Salvation England, the darkest way out, and Booth, In

275 or `colony, ' peculiar to themselves, always resident in the eastern 26 quarter of the metropolis.

to the later work of Charles Booth just before the turn of the century.

Rothenstein also had a personal acquaintanceship from as early

as the early

1890s with Israel Zangwill, who sat to him in 1894. Correspondence between them his confirms awareness of the latter's book, Children of the Ghetto, which was based in Whitechapel and described, as we have already seen, scenes similar to those Rothenstein was to encounter some ten years later. (Zangwill's book indeed made the same argument about the rejection of the authority of the Chief Rabbi)27. By that time, however, alleged distinctions between the world of the East End and that of Anglo-Jewry were a matter of open public discussion. The life depicted in Zangwill's novels is not properly speaking Anglo-Jewish life and the characters appear as exotic to Jews, who have been here for one 28. Christian Englishmen or two generations, as to

The chronologically earlier extract from his own autobiography and his concurrent beyond doubt Zangwill that Rothenstein was to relationship with would seem prove familiar with the East End and its Jewish community well before his purported first have in Rothenstein Synagogue 1903. Hadass Machzike the may seen encounter with have described `these Rembrandtian he old men' on the streets of the as what might East End, if not in their places of worship, before 1903 and may indeed have already Portrait Society Rabbi 1900, Rothenstein Head In the them. of at exhibited of a painted

26Henry Mayhew, London Labour and London Poor Jewish Labour and Jewish poor 1851, Anglo-Jewish Miscellanies, Jeffrey Maynard, 2000. 27 Children of the Ghetto, published 1892. Rothenstein refers to Children of the Ghetto in be 204. Contemporary between two Memories, the Men and may voll p. correspondence bMS Eng (1657) 1148 University Harvard Houghton Library, inter found under alia Libraries.

28Jewish World, July 1897 quoted in Finestein, Jewish Society in Victorian England, p. 184.

276 Painters. This indicates at least some prior interest in Jewish 29 subject matter. One

commentator observed: The people here are different. Some of the men wear long gabardines and black hats, have long beards and ringlets of greased hair hanging over their 30 ears.

As we have seen, in the previous Chapter, the Royal Commission,

perhaps

reflecting more widely held views, recorded the immigrants tendency to group together. This may have been a mark of their desire to retain their difference

perhaps as an exclusionary tactic. It may have been a defensive strategy in the face of hostile reactions. It may also have been a result of genuine religious necessity.

A childhood in Bradford I have never known anyone whose own childhood so manifestly and so decisively 31 his shaped character.

William's

father Moritz Rothenstein was born in Grohnde near Hamelin in

1836 and worked as an apprentice in the textile industry in Hildesheim, near 32 Hannover. In 1859, he moved to England to work in the Bradford woollen trade. In 29 Second Exhibition 1900 New Gallery, London. No further details of the work are have been lack This the available. may a portrait commission, although of identified subject belies this. Archive the Society of Portrait Painters. London Metropolitan Archives Acc 3489 212/3/4/5. -

30J. White, Rothschild Buildings, pp. 2/3. 31Sir John Rothenstein, Modern English Painters, 1976 ed., p. 121. 32Son of Daniel and Fanny Rothenstein, born 1 December 1836, died 5December 1914. See Bradford Jewish Cemetery Records and Bradford Archives, Ref 24/D00 and Sir William Rothenstein; Centenary Exhibition Catalogue Notes.

277 June 1865, he married Bertha Dux, daughter of a Hildesheim merchant

financier, and

William Dux. 33In 1867, Moritz became a naturalised British citizen. 34

Although there were Jewish families in Bradford in the mid-19tß' century, before 1873 there were no Jewish institutions or a formal congregation.35 Such Jewish people as lived there were at best apathetic to the initial efforts of the Chief Rabbi to establish religious Jewish practice in Bradford. In 1873, however,

with the

approval of the Chief Rabbi, the Bradford Jewish community appointed Joseph Strauss, a German born and educated, Reform Rabbi, who subsequently played major roles both in Braford's religious life and in the Yorkshire intellectual/academic 36 The first Synagogue in Bradford was opened in Bowland Street in community. 1881; the inaugural address was given by Rabbi Lowry of the West London Synagogue (confirming its links with the Reform movement despite the initial urging 37 Orthodox Chief Rabbi for its creation). of the

Robert Speaight's biography of William Rothenstein states that, although throughout her life his mother retained her Jewish religious beliefs, Moritz converted 38 The to Unitarianism.

for Chapel Bradford Unitarian this the principal records of

is he baptism. do list for It Moritz that was a adult possible period not as applying 33Daughter of William and Henrietta (nee Ellrock) Dux, born 5 May 1844; died 15 July 1912. See Bradford Jewish Cemetery Records; Bradford Archives Ref 24/D00; Hildesheim Archives Best. 102 Nr 322.

34Sir William Rothenstein; Centenary Exhibition Catalogue Notes. 35 Endelmann, Jewish Apostasy in the Modern World, p. 65. Prior to the opening of the Synagogue, services, notably for the main Jewish festivals, were held by visiting Rabbis in Church Halls (the Unitarian Channing Hall was one such location, possibly a principal one) Synagogue Bradford Records Archives Ref 24/D00. Rooms. Bradford Connaught at or the

36Bradford Synagogue Records at Bradford Archives Ref 24/D00. Biographical Note App. 1. 37Bradford Synagogue Records at Bradford Archive Ref 24/D00. 38Speaight, William Rothenstein. The Portrait of an Artist in his time, p. 5.

278

member of the Unitarian community without undergoing conversion and while retaining his Jewish religious affiliations. Bradford Jewry certainly did have close practical associations with the Bradford Unitarian movement. Prior to the opening of the Bowland Street Synagogue, the Unitarian movement was one of the organizations which provided the nascent Jewish community with places of worship. John Rothenstein, one of William's sons, presented a lithograph of Moritz Rothenstein to the Bradford Unitarian Chapel in recognition of this early assistance.

It is possible that Mortiz Rothenstein had links with and allegiances to the Unitarian movement that were prompted by other than religious motives. According to Todd Endelmann, Unitarianism was the example of choice for the German Jewish immigrant community which settled in this part of England around this time. 39As a member of the emigre German community, Moritz Rothenstein could possibly have found personal and commercial associates among the Unitarian community, which form for have led to of quasisome may a close personal affiliation and a motive secular membership as opposed to religious conversion.

There is substantial evidence of very active involvement in Jewish religious 4° Blanche, 1898 The by both William's institutional life of marriage parents. of and 39Endelmann Jewish Apostasy in the Modern World, p. 67: `The elite to whom the recent deportment for looked in Germany from and with style and of matters guidance arrivals Anglican industrial-mercantile, Unitarian and to not merge was and whom they sought landed. ' 40The records of the Anglo-Jewish Association for 1886 and 1887 show that Moritz University branch. Archive, its Mocatta Bradford to of Rothenstein was a subscriber "We 1912 Synagogue Report MS126/AJ/95/150/9. The Library. states of Southampton that Mrs Rothenstein loss feel and members" the one of our oldest and esteemed of sincerely founders demise but the to ".. the of our announce ... of one of for 1914 states sudden regret Mr Rothenstein to the true condolences offering our sincerest supporter congregation, a booklet formation Synagogue 100th The the the family". noted anniversary of of bereaved

279 William's

in accordance sister, was

41 with Jewish practice. Bertha,

characterized by

Speaight as the bastion of Jewish religious influence in the Rothenstein family, predeceased Moritz. Her ashes were interred in the Bradford Jewish Cemetery in 1912, and in 1914 Moritz was also cremated and his ashes interred next to hers.42It have been possible from a Unitarian standpoint for Moritz Rothenstein, as a might member, to have retained his Jewish affiliations and played a continuing role in the administrative affairs of the Bradford Synagogue. However, it would have stretched the tolerance of both religious institutions for him to be as actively involved in the Synagogue and in Jewish practice as these records suggest, while simultaneously demonstrating any meaningful allegiance as an actual convert to a new faith. It would involved just both Bertha William's that were conscious of and parents and not seem in Judaism and the affairs of the Bradford Jewish community.

William

into born this comfortably was

middle-class, provincial

and

few Lane, just in Manningham 1872, Jewish within a off environment seemingly hundred yards of where the new Synagogue was subsequently built. Perhaps as a by beach baptised Speaight, the William, to on was according child's act of rebellion, However in Scarborough. holiday during Oxford a summer evangelist a young barmitzvah. he 13 have the this, taken was age of the at may child young seriously for he left home lived School Grammar until He was educated at Bradford at and London some three years later in 1888. Ground. for Burial five the trustees Rothenstein was appointed one of that in 1883, Moritz 24/D000. Bradford Archive Ref Records Synagogue Bradford at

41The officiating Minister at Blanche's marriage to Max Schwabe was Rabbi Strauss. See 1908. April 30 Observer, The Bradford 42 The Bradford Jewish Synagogue Archive records both of their interments. Bradford burial in Moritz' for is Jewish Since there will, one could 24/D000. no request a Archive Ref his his that burial in Jewish of and/or that wish cemetery was either a reasonably assume

280

The Education of an Artist He had always been serious, always industrious, but in the course of the early nineteen hundreds he became increasingly ruled by an extra-ordinary earnestness and 43 seriousness.

From the Spring of 1888 to the Autumn of 1889, Rothenstein Slade School of Art in London under Alphonse Legros,

studied at the

a significant figure both in his

early artistic life and in the wider art world of the time. 44 In 1889, William Rothenstein met Solomon J. Solomon, who urged him to study in Paris, [... as] he was all for French methods and thought little of the teaching they 45 Slade. gave at the

Solomon wrote to William's

father to ensure that this happened. For the next four

years, until 1893, Rothenstein worked in Paris, first studying at the Academie Julian. Although Rothenstein boasted that the Julian was `after the Beaux Arts the largest and A6 Schools, he also expressed the view that its tuition most renowned of the Paris faculty less than optimal: methods and were I went to Paris, and worked at Julian's, virtually under no one, as none of the Professors there appealedto my undisciplined imagination47.

surviving family and in any case the natural course of events for a member of a Jewish dated is The 1870, in Bradford Archive Ref 10D76/2/46/21/46. will, congregation. 43Sir John Rothenstein, Modern English Painters, 1976 ed., p. 127. 44Biographical Note App. 1. 45Men and Memories, vol. I p. 35. Although I have been unable to trace this item of fact Solomon in involved William's that the was aware of perhaps plans and correspondence, for Paris is evidenced by his letter of 25 February 1889: `I am glad to seeyour father assents to your going to Paris'; it goes on to discuss the Academie Julian. Rothenstein Archive, Houghton Library, Harvard University Libraries, Ref bMS Eng 1148 (1393). 46Men and Memories, vol. 1 p. 39.

47Letter to Roger Fry (30 September 1909), quoted in Lago, Max and Will, p 9. At the time leading its Julian, the teacher was Bougereau (1825- 1905), and among Rothenstein was at his teachers were Jules Lefebvre (1836-1912), Benjamin Constant (1846-1902) and Lucien Doucet (1856- 1895).

281 Rothenstein may have been disparaging about the Julian, but its distinguished list

alumni must have formed one of the bases for the network of contacts and friendships that he established during his time in Paris.48

Rothenstein's first public exhibition was held in 1892 in Paris jointly with Charles Conder (1868-1909). 49His work brought in Rothenstein to the attracted press and considerable attention ... the attention of Camille Pissarro, D whom he was introduced at the Degas... by Rothenstein Camille's Lucien. that sent exhibition word son, 5° him. should call on

During this time and on subsequent visits to Paris, he came to know many of the leading avant-garde writers, cultural figures and painters of his day.51Far from being in backwater English and parochial painter working some relative a provincial, hand, `few best this time, the trends that new were emerging at absorbing, at second 52 decade. have known deeply France that the great of painters can so

In 1894, shortly after his return to England, Rothenstein held his first London became (1863-1937). He Shannon Gallery Dutch the a member of with exhibition at the New English Art Club (NEAC) in 1895 and was a founding member of the

before in Academie the the and around those who studied at period shortly (1852-1944), (Sir) Clausen George (1865-1962), Adler Jules Rothenstein's time there were (1860-1939), Mucha Alphone (1870-1943), Denis Maurice (1867-1947), Pierre Bonnard Henri Matisse (1869-1954). 48 Among

49March 1892 at Pere Thomas, 13 rue Malesherbes. Toulouse Lautrec (1864-1901) played a Cross Post Impressionism. dealer this to currents the in mount exhibition. persuading role in European Painting p. ? 50 Post-Impressionism; Cross currents in European painting, eds House, John; Stevens, Art, 1979 Academy Royal London: p. of Mary Anne, 51Including, according to his autobiography and some extant correspondence, among many (1854-1900), Toulouse-Lautrec (1844-1896), Wilde Verlaine (1840-1902), Zola others Men (1868-1940): (1824 Vuillard de Chavannes and Puvis and (1864-1901), -1898) Memories passim. 52John Russell, in The Studio, vol. 129,1945, p. 50.

282 Fitzroy Street Group that formed around Sickert (1860-1942) in 1907.53Some his of NEAC and Fitzroy colleagues were featured in his group portraits McColl, Furse, Berbohm, Wilson Steer and Sickert of 1894 and Sargent, Wilson Steer

and Tonks of

1903. His wide circle of friends and acquaintances put him at the very centre of events and ideas. His

lifelong

friend Max

Beerbohm (1872-1956) satirised

Rothenstein and his circle in an 1895 cartoon, and at the start of Enoch Soames (written in 1914/15, but looking back to earlier times), he describes the impact of the arrival of Rothenstein on Oxford, when the latter arrived to paint his series of Oxford Portraits (1896) for John Lane. In the Summer Term of '93 a bolt from the blue flashed down on Oxford. It drove itself deep in the soil. Dons and undergraduates stood around, rather discussing but it. Whence came it, this meteorite? From Paris. pale, nothing Its name? William Rothenstein...... He was a wit. He was brimful of ideas. He knew Whistler. He knew Edmond de Goncourt. He knew everyone in Paris. He knew them all by heart. He was Paris in Oxford. 54

While Beerbohm was certainly indulging in his own brand of ironic exaggeration - he had done used a very similar introduction to describe the entrance of Zuleika Dobson (in his eponymous 1911 novel) - other accounts of the young Rothenstein and his is deal in He indicate truth the that there passage. of also a good own correspondence did have a very wide network of contacts and friendships in Paris as well as London. In 1896, John Lane published Oxford Characters, the portfolio of sketches of Oxford Beerbohm Oxford to the the which visit purpose of academics and other notables, A later, his Doll's 24. Four Rothenstein time that painting years was only referred; at 53NEAC was founded in 1886; its initial members included John Singer Sargent (1856(1856(1852-1942), Lavery John (1860-1942), George Clausen Steer Wilson 1925), Phillip (1860-1927) Theodore Roussel (1851-1941), Solomon J Solomon Brown Fred and 1941), Pissarro Lucien Street Group leading Fitzroy Other the (1847-1926). were members of Gilman (1867-1949) Harold (1878-1914) Gore Walter Russell Spencer and (1863-1944) (1876-1919). 54Beerbohm Biographical Note App. 1. Quoted in David Cecil, Max, p. 64.

283 House was selected as part of the English exhibition

at the l 900 Exposition

Universelle in Paris. 55

Investigating the Whitechapel Paintings

In the extended passage quoted at the outset of this chapter, Rothenstein described the Jews he encountered in the East End. He spoke

of the `Titian' like

possibilities of some of the young men he saw. He praised some of the younger `magnificent women as creatures' and spoke of their suitability as subjects for Sargent. But Rothenstein chose to depict the old men of the Machzike Hadass 56 congregation. One

needs therefore to unpick the strands of this choice and to

respond to the questions it poses.

Exactly what and who did Rothenstein encounter in the Machzike Hadass in 1903? Rothenstein's own comments would suggest that he felt he had come face to face with a throwback to the past, to forms of Jewish practice which he regarded as having remained largely unchanged for generations. But was this actually the case? Both William Fishman and Michael Silber have argued that ultra-orthodoxy emerged in Eastern Europe and Russia in the first half of the nineteenth century as one among drive from to their the to them turn them attempts out or away a number of responses ssTate Gallery, London. 56 By working

Machzike Hadass have Rothenstein the community, would ruled out within depicting in Even though of women. women could participate almost any possibility less 5% Passover in they than the the comprised of congregation worship, synagogue Machzike Hadass Synagogue on the Mudie-Smith census day to which reference was made in the previous chapter.

284 57 existing practices. Silber contends that in Hungary, Ultra-Orthodoxy

began to

emerge in the 1840s in the face of a rising tide of nationalism that would only Judaism within

an overarching Hungarian framework. Fishman suggests that in

Russia, because of a series of measures enacted during the

reign of Czar Nicolas 1St

aimed at emptying Russia of its Jews, `the result was a consolidation of Jewish identity by way of rigid adherence to orthodoxy. ' 58Such

reactions were not confined

to the poor and supposedly ignorant in times of oppression and in far off lands. As shown earlier in Chapter 2, Sir Moses Montefiore's

limited support for Jewish

political emancipation in England was in measure prompted by his concern for its potential to diminish rabbinical authority and Jewish identity. Thus it might be argued that what Rothenstein encountered was not traditional an unchanged and unchanging remnant of pre-modern, ... but society as much a child of modernity and change as any of its "modem" 59 rivals.

In order to understand some of the influences that may have informed Rothenstein's approach to the series of paintings, one needs to look a little more his closely at attitudes towards Judaism and Jews at this time. The sixty year old Rothenstein of Men & Memories would seem by that time to have moved far away in from his he In 1899 Christian Jewish terms religious and social upbringing. married a 60 Alice Christians. In 1945, Knewstub, their and children were raised as actress, William was buried at St. Bartholomews, Oakridge in Gloucestershire, close to where he had had a home from 1912.

57Fishman, East End Radicals; Silber, `The Emergence of Ultra Orthodoxy The Invention The Uses Tradition. Wertheimer in Tradition' ed., of of a 58Fishman, East End Radicals, p. 10. 59Silber, `The Emergence of Ultra Orthodoxy', p. 24. 60Knewstub worked under the stagename of Alice Kingsley. Her father Walter had been a Rossetti (1828-1882). Gallery (1819-1900) Tate Archive Notes Ruskin and on of pupil William Rothenstein.

285

By 1903, the young Rothenstein had forged for himself a place within English society and the international art world. When confronted, almost on his own doorstep, with a radically Orthodox version of the faith in the Reform version of which he had been raised, but which he had by then left behind, Rothenstein in his autobiography described it as almost totally foreign to him. He suggested that, particularly since he spoke neither Hebrew nor Yiddish, those he was seeking to paint must have seenhim as an outsider - perhaps even a missionary. In this situation, Rothenstein may indeed have regarded himself in a similar light - as Other; not vis-a-vis the English world of he but he felt in Jewish this which was a part, vis-a-vis world, which, albeit a much less fundamental version, had informed his past. Although his own religious German Bradford Reform Jewish the was very community of upbringing within different from the Machzike Hadass, he may have perhaps been exaggerating his own lack of knowledge of the ceremonies he witnessed (possibly deliberately distancing himself from his Jewish ancestry). While Orthodox Jewish synagogue ritual may have been strange to him and memories of religious occasions of his youth only hazily Judaism Rothenstein's I that was an general awareness of would argue recalled, important informing

1906 in Judaica the Like the recontextualisation of source.

Exhibition, specifics may have been different but generalities were not.

Although

Rothenstein had clearly moved away from the Judaism and

had he far how this path along Jewishness of his childhood, we need to examine joining his in the is Although there by time. about this writing nothing progressed described Rothenstein 1906 15 June Chronicle Jewish Hadass, article of Machzike a

286 as `a member of the Machzike Hadass Synagogue.'61 Given his Reform Jewish upbringing and his marriage to a gentile, religious adoption of and by an extreme Orthodox sect at this juncture would seem to be totally out of character

for both -

parties. It may have been, as perhaps with his father's association with Unitarianism, that William was obliged to become a member of the Machzike Hadass to gain access to the Synagogue and the Talmud Torah for his work.

Rothenstein may have sought to distance himself from his own Jewish

past

and from those he was painting in Whitechapel, but others still clearly regarded him as a Jew. Once again Beerbohm seems to have delighted in satirising his Jewish during Whitechapel the friend period: Will arrived on his bicycle but sternly refused to cross the threshold probably because of some Jewish feast or fast, the threshold was unleavened or there ought to have been blood on the lintel or something of that kind, 62 Will in. anyhow would not come

There is a certain irony in Rothenstein's apparent pleasure in recording in his autobiography a comment by Sickert `Degas asked affectionately after you... even though it was followed by `..in spite of his Judenhetze monomania. '63Lytton Strachey direct in his in letter: was even more characterisation, remarking a The dinner was remarkable chiefly because Rothenstein and his wife were 64 there. It was the Rothenstein - very Jewish and small and monkey-like.

61P. 34. The records of that institution for this period are no longer available for verification. While Rothenstein used the same article to refute the idea that his decision not to exhibit at the Royal Academy implied any quarrel, there is no evidence suggesting he made any pre- or his Machzike Hadass. to the to the alter reference of membership post- publication effort 62Beerbohm to Alice Rothenstein, October 1905. Lago, Max and Will, p. 51 n. 63Men and Memories, vol. 1 p. 341. 64Letter to Duncan Grant, May 13th 1907 quoted in Michael Holroyd, Lytton Strachey p. 166.

287 One might also ask why Rothenstein chose to work within tropes of representation that conflated the religious Jew with the old and with the poor lachrymose view of Judaism. The historical age of the Jewish

the -

religion and references

thereto makes its juxtaposition with older rather than younger subjects apposite. It would,

however, seem that if the trope existed within

the realm of visual

representation, it may have come more from the artist and from representations within a pre-existing canon, as for example Dore's Mendiant Juif a Londres, than from the actuality of everyday depictions6s

Anne and Roger Cowen's Victorian Jews through British Eyes presents images of Jews from some of the period's leading illustrated magazines, whose readers were of course overwhelmingly non-Jews and who were far more likely to encounter Jews on those pages than to meet them in their everyday lives. Thus one cannot underestimate their

importance in providing

a visual

(and in the

accompanying texts a written) repertoire of representations of the Jew for the host be bias in is Although Cowens' the there there community. may editorial selection, is images. The overall selection therefore a valuable point of absence of anti-Semitic depicted in how Jews departure for the popular press an appreciation of reference and this period.

The conflation of Jew equals old and poor is often evident in their selection. While these were obviously influential in creating the visual repertory of the Jew in look for That their section must evidence. one also other pictorial the eyes of readers, Jewish draws dealing the that illustrations with material reports current elite on of 6sFrom Gustave Dore (1832-1883) and Blanchard Jerrold (1826-1884)'s London: a

288 events - visits by/with Royalty, society weddings, Synagogue inaugurations and should prima facie be more concerned with representing actual participants rather than selecting images that matched an illustrator's or writer's personal predilections or prejudices. Broadly speaking this seems to have been the case. There is little evidence of a deliberate conflation that equate Jews with old age.

Even when one reviews those sections which concentrate on the indigent immigrant, either in an English setting or in reports from abroad on other Jewish migrants, there is little evidence of an unbalanced focus on the old. This is not to say that the old did not form a segment of those depicted, but simply that the existence of a trope equating Jews with old men, drawn from the contemporary popular press, cannot be substantiated.

Rothenstein's choice of older rather than younger subjects may have been a personal preference. An autobiographical mention of his childhood refers to an he occasion when saw Ernest Sichel (1862-1941), a Bradford artist, painting Sir Jacob Berhens (1806 to 1889), the Bradford textile magnate. He wrote `I longed to 66 paint old men, youth excited me much less.' This attraction to the old may have been nurtured during his time at the Slade under Legros, whose portrayals of old men Old St. head, Jerome Study Head Man and are particularly such as of an of a full Oxford Portraits, In the to the of older subjects are above, referred evocative67. blades bland by the young comparison, as seem and anodyne character, whereas Pilgrimage, London: Grant & Co, 1872. 66Men and Memories, vol. 1 p. 20. Find Notes re Sichel and Behrens. 67Alphonse Legros, Study of a head, Oil on canvas laid down on panel, C1879,58.3 x 45.2, Alphonse Legros, Gallery; Head Old Man, Oil 1881, Art City of an Manchester on canvas, Art Gallery; City Alphonse Legros, St Jerome, Oil on canvas, 1881, Manchester 50.7, 61.3 x Art Gallery. City Manchester 107.6, 176.4 x

289 Zangwill remarked to Rothenstein in a letter `... I think your old men are better than your

young.

68 '

The poor also seemed to hold a fascination for him. Some 10

years before he

embarked on the Whitechapel paintings, Rothenstein travelled in Morocco and Spain. This trip led to an interest in Goya, about whom he

book, wrote a published in 1900.

He produced paintings of Spanish dancing in Seville. 69His

comments on the latter are

revealing: dancing, not in the regulation mantilla and bright there we saw chulas ... swinging skirt, such as Carmencita wore, but in shabby old gowns, ill made and ill fitting. They looked heavy and dull to my eyes as they sat round the room, but the moment they rose to begin their dance, they shed their in flash ennui a 70 dress forgotten. their and was

There are two aspects to this quote which are relevant to the Whitechapel works. The first is the way in which the old and the poor were not only of interest as subjects to the young artist, but also provided him with an opportunity to imbue them with higher 71 is This in his 1913 Eli The Thatcher. The qualities. perfectly expressed picture subject, a country artisan, dominates the composition and while one would never his misunderstand position within the society of his time, there is nevertheless also no mistaking the respect the artist accords to him. It is my conviction that the Yorkshire landscape, its dour smoke blackened buildings, yes and the stubborn unsmiling people, strong in their frankness, and in the conscious rectitude, nurtured the most fruitful as well as the most 72 in his enduring element work. 68Zangwill

to Rothenstein, letter dated 14 July 1894, in Speaight Notes vol. III pp. 121/2, National Art Library Archive, Victoria and Albert Museum. 69 Goya, London: At the Sign of the Unicorn, 1900. For example Rothenstein's Hablant Espagnol, Oil on canvas, 1895,81.3 x 45.7, Private collection. 70Men and Memories, vol. 1 p. 223, quoted in the Catalogue of the Barbican Art Gallery Exhibition Impressionism in Britain, 1995. La Carmencita, John Singer Sargent's portrait of 1892 during Paris Salon, dancer, the Rothenstein's there time Spanish at was shown and a before his trip to Spain (Musee d'Orsay, Paris, France).

71Manchester City Art Gallery. 72John Rothenstein, Modern English Painters, p. 122.

290

I would argue that in the old men of Whitechapel, William found a similar sincerity and uncompromising rectitude.

The autobiographical passage also reveals the manner in felt a quintessential act

which Rothenstein

in dancing this transformed earlier case these subjects. -

Similar factors may have been at work in the Whitechapel paintings. Rothenstein chose to represent the shabby, old and poor male congregants of a Jewish community, but to suggest a revelation of their dignity in transforming moments

of prayer and

religious study.

In all but the last in the series, Rothenstein deliberately simplified or omitted almost all of the ritual and liturgical trappings which might have added an exotic dimension and picturesque appeal to the works. In a contemporaneous interview published by the Jewish Chronicle, he said: People have asked me why I have not painted a particular service, or a scene in the synagogue. Those persons, I am afraid, do not understand my purpose. It is not the picturesque possibilities of Tallisim (sic) and phylacteries that appeal to me. I have even left them out where I should have painted them. What appeals to me is the devotion of the Jew. It is that that I have endeavoured to put on canvas - the spirit of Israel that animates the " worshippers, not the outward trappings of the ritual.

The most obviously important point in this quote is the statement of his aim: depicting the spirit rather than merely looking for the picturesque. Religious devotion did key his Not Jews. be these the to only attribute of old portrayals of was Rothenstein strip the trappings of religious practice down to a bare minimum, he also

73Jewish Chronicle, 15h June 1906. It must be recalled that in part this decision may have for by Machzike him its him lend Judaica Hadass the the to forced been refusal of any of on Chapter 5. in this project - see use

291

avoided almost any other obvious visual references. In his discussion on the emergence of the ultra-orthodox Hungarian communities, to which reference was made above, Silber argues that such items of everyday Jewish life as dress (typically including the fur hat and the long coat), custom and speech invested were with a religious value in their own right. Although similar clothing, similarly invested with religious value, might also have been worn by some members of the Machzike Hadass, no such visual clues (of identity, religion or origin) are in evidence in Rothenstein's painting. This strategy sometimes results in a masking of potential readings. The elision of religious appurtenances in Jews Mourning in a Synagogue it difficult to decipher from the image why they are in fact in mourning. makes

It is not over-reading this text to suggest that there is also a possible implication that he knew from his just first from time perhaps own past not and observation or the comments of others - what ought to have been included for a factually accurate rendition. He tended to use only prayershawls and skullcaps as his primary markers of Jewishness. Furthermore, the prayershawls were almost always the full-length, all-enveloping type, in contrast to the perhaps more discrete, smaller 74 in If by Jewish the the markers were communities. more anglicised some ones worn to be minimised in number, they would at least be unmistakable.

By identifying his Jewish subjects as old, poor and possibly downtrodden within

Rothenstein lachrymose tradition a adopting was of representation a -

less dominance sophisticated `colonial' stance; one of and assumed superiority over a folk, whose strange customs were to be depicted before they were consigned to

292 oblivion by Anglicification?

If one takes as the starting point the Men and Memories

text, such an interpretation is possible. Although the text is peppered

with epithets

that speak of superiority ('men of a despised race

but simple ...

narrow minded

...

ignoble in dress

...

A curious sight

feckless'), the actual extremely poor and ...

images speak more of an inherent dignity within their poverty,

which belies such a

colonial stance in their execution.

The encounter with the Jews of the East End was, I would postulate, a defining moment of alterity for the young Rothenstein; one which posed

a challenge

that he was ultimately to refuse. As a young man seeking to integrate himself into what he regarded as a higher niche in society, Rothenstein would appear to have 75 simultaneously rejected and embraced his past In 1902, when visiting an exhibition . his Schulte Gallery in Berlin, Rothenstein travelled to Hildesheim the of own work at 76 least three works there. His account mentions meetings with the and completed at painters Max Liebermann (1847-1935) and Adolf von Menzel (1815-1905) and with the writer Gerhard Hauptmann (1862-1946). Liebermann introduced him to the Dutch painter Josef Israels (1824-1911), whose work including The Old Rabbi (which will be discussed later) was concurrently being exhibited by Paul Cassirer (1871-1926) family's in his leading figure The Berlin to the then art world. excursion who was a 77 in do fit facts however, This that not mentioned. elision of place of origin was not, intellectual, image English the to the moving easily among of artist and with or add 74See for example The Feast of Tabernacles, in Anne and Roger Cowen, Victorian Jews 112. British through eyes, p.

75 Benjamin Braude, `The Heine-Disraeli Syndrome among the Palgraves of Victorian ff. Apostasy 110 Jewish in Endelmann in the England', ed., modern world pp 76The Old Houses, The Golden Angel in Hildesheim (Cartwright Hall, Inaugural Exhibition 1904. Bradford City Art Galleries Archive) and Street in Hildesheim, Manchester City Art Gallery.

293 the cultural elite of Europe, seems typical of the representation of himself that Rothenstein constructs throughout his autobiography. It accords with the patterns of behaviour in other aspects of his life at this time. Rothenstein, the quasi-apostateJew, 78 dinners by but Maccabeans, formally joined. the He was attended never given briefly

Jewish Territorial the a member of

Organization during the period of

79 Zangwill's Presidency of the British Branch. He actively assisted in the work on the Jewish Educational Aid Society (championing in particular the young Mark Gertler), but moved away from depicting Jewish subjects in his work.

As the Whitechapel series progressed one can suggest a way in which the from to that (and the observer/quasi-participant role of close viewer) retreats painter Synagogue, Spitalfields the In The the and composition of of uninvolved spectator. in invites the in to bench the the participate viewer particular, open area of seating on direct Prayer Aliens Although foreground discussion of the offers no such at pair. for it hard to the frontality the viewer this the make earlier work and of participation, is little foregrounded there The or and strongly very are subjects remain uninvolved. This them. to deny closeness physical the to access visual/physical viewer nothing between subject. and intimacy the painter/viewer rapport of possibility suggests and the the is of Talmud, shoulder the In Exposition of the placed almost on viewer the towards follows inexorably the participants' foreground figure and one's eye highlighted figure of the teacher. He Hildesheim. his fact to trip in " Men and Memories vol. 2 pp. 12 ff. This was second 11. Speaight 1884, in there his p. see cousin visited Josef Israels. honour of 78 On 12 May 1903, Rothenstein attended a Maccabean dinner in he join, him for to invitation never Although 49. there Will, was a standing p, Lago, Max and Jewish in Dinner Maccabeans Solomon J. Solomon the by reported at (Speech did so 1903) May 15 Chronicle,

Art National 121/2 III Speaight Notes, 1906, pp. 79 7 November 1905 to 30 January vol. Museum Albert Victoria and Library Archive,

294

By contrast, in The Talmud School one observes the first indications of physical retreat. The figures are set into the background of the composition, and the cloth, rather than inviting quasi-participation at the free end of a table, presents a barrier

but The one may observe not participate. same is broadly true of In the

corner of the Talmud School. Although, as I have suggested earlier, the viewer has clear sight of the main subject (the text and its study), the bulk of the body of the inward facing foreground figure, like the cloth in the

previous work, act as a barrier.

If, in this light, one compares Jews Mourning in a Synagogue with Aliens

at Prayer,

the intimate contact of the latter has been replaced by a more distanced and perhaps cooler observation. Reading the Book of Esther uses a similar device - this time the embroidered cloth over the top of the pulpit - as in The Talmud School. This cloth creates a visual barrier between viewer and subjects in a composition, which invites but observation not participation.

The final version of Carrying the Law is exclusionary rather than inclusive; the viewer is positioned as observer. There is movement away from possible identification (by the artist and for the viewer) with the subjects towards observation distancing but is from This the not merely a physical of an event edge as an outsider. Judaism His towards the the and artist. ambivalence part of a psychological one on Jewishness is resolved not by acceptance but by rejection - the potential participant becomes the spectator.

But it is not just participation that is missing from this work. In what was in in have been intended be final the series, the time to the the fact and may at work

295 spirituality that had imbued the earlier works is far less in evidence. The empathy that Rothenstein felt towards his earlier subjects seems missing. Rothenstein replaces personal identification with his subjects with ecclesiastical trappings. There is more of the paraphernalia of Jewish worship openly in evidence in this work than in any of the others. As noted earlier, the work is quite clearly to be read as being located in a recognizable Synagogue. Rothenstein provides the viewer with a cleverly constructed work that brings together the themes of the earlier works, but the simple spirituality of those earlier works is missing. Perhaps this is the result of his more overt use of a moment of transformation. In Aliens at Prayer or An Exposition of the Talmud, the source of this transformation is internalised within the subjects - and perhaps the imagination of the viewer. If there is a significant religious moment in the former, it is happening in the sight of the subjects but not of the viewer. In this final work, the kissing depiction the the that the actual congregant externalisation of moment of Scroll - diminishes rather than augments its impact.

Aliens at Prayer opens up the debate about the meaning of the word Alien in this period. This is a picture of three poor, old men praying or watching someone else in be kippot, they Without their tallithot and accordance with praying could praying. is There time. in the that poor, and almost at any admitted any place ritual, any almost 80 have in For immigrant Aliens. little to mark them out as some ways one who might been anxious to distance himself from such foreigners, Rothenstein simultaneously do to been the to similarities have emphasise opposite, exactly to at pains seems foetor infamous filth does the the 80Even their shabbiness associated with not evoke greasy Self Jewish Gilman, Sander in image See Jew. the the of Judaicus, an important marker

296 rather than differences. Did his title for the work then perhaps have undertones of the question - Aliens(? ) at prayer? Was there a note of irony in the title of the painting? Referring to the investigations of the Royal Commission, Juliet Steyn has

argued that

at this time and in this context the words "destitute Alien" meant Jew.81The title and the understatement of the religious identifiers might be read as an a priori challenge to such a codification of the term Alien that automatically equalled Jew.

Why was the work titled Aliens rather than Jews at Prayer? Rothenstein never denied the essential Jewishness of his subjects. The simplest explanation could be based on attributing to Rothenstein a desire to be in tune with the mood of the times. This work was executed two years after the publication of Sir William EvansGordon's The Alien Immigrant and in the same year as the debate, which was to lead Aliens Bill. It was a time when many in the by then would-be to the the up passing of indigenous, established Anglo-Jewish

community

in London were seeking to

differences impoverished between immigrant their the themselves emphasise and coby So Rothenstein this the term. religionists. perhaps was what understood

Could Rothenstein's use of the word

`Alien'

have been a shorthand

formulation of "Jew but different from me/us"? This leads to the discussion about distinction, formulation to the The this homogeneity. whole applied of assumed immigrant community, would imply a tacit assumption that all immigrant Jews shared have the Judaism/Jewishness, was not seen, already which as we the same version of but Hadass the Machzike of strand only The not one, congregation represented case. Jew, interpretations fuller the the the For 175. physicality of examination of of hatred p. a Body. Jew's The Gilman see 81Steyn, The Jew. Assumptions of Identity, p. 35.

297 ultra-orthodoxy in the East End at this time. Nor was ultra-orthodoxy the only strand of Jewish religious practice within the Jewish East End. There were those whose Jewishness was based on more mainstream versions

of East European practice.

Indeed, as the Mudie-Smith data quoted in Chapter 5 indicate, the majority, although nominally Jewish, did not actively participate in religious practice. Although it can be expected that the immigrant Jews of Rothschild Buildings were generally more observant than London Jewry as a whole, there can be little doubt that only a minority of men went frequently and regularly to shul. Similarly, it was a minority of families, who observed the whole range of Jewish religious ritual. 92

The same also holds true for factions within the quasi-indigenous, host English Jewish community, whose sub-groups brought different nuances of Jewish practice, and within

these, coalescing or splitting

groups represented every shade of

observance from devout to nominal. In his introduction to Jewries at the Frontier, Sander Gilman discusses the concept of the `centring' of Judaism. Notwithstanding the contemporaneous, early activities of the Zionist movement, in Rothenstein's time, Judaism for English Jews was still located around an imagined, textually based centre -'Torah

as the symbolic topography of the missing

83 ' center.

In the simplest formulation of this very complex situation, for Anglo-Jewry in the mid 19thcentury England/Englishness (however defined) had been the desired centre, and Jews (again however defined) were on the periphery, striving to approach this centre by eliminating any connotation of being alien. Some 50 years later, when faced with denying in the the Jews their power of ghetto perhaps self-imposed this new group of less leader than they Rabbi, of unchallenged a religious Chief as regarded whom following from their them imposed customs, ways and and own outside, on authority 82White, Rothschild Buildings, p. 86.

298 surely Rothenstein must have felt himself the outsider, the Alien straying into others' land.

The term Alien becomes even more problematic, when viewed from the English community standpoint. The key question in this context is not "does Alien but Jew" "does Jew equal Alien"? For Anglo-Jewry, the establishment equal rather and maintenance of a negative answer to this latter formulation was the bedrock of their policy,

which

sought simultaneously to maintain a distinction between

themselves and the immigrant Jews until their strategies of Anglicification

would

render the immigrants invisible and the problem academic. A picture which purports to represent Aliens has to negotiate all of these cross currents. But if this is the case, how to we need ask: are we or were Rothenstein's contemporary viewers to know that these were indeed Aliens and/or Jews? Rothenstein made use of none of the in Jewishness terms of exaggerated physical attributes. His stereotypical signifiers of friend Beerbohm, however, pointed out exactly what Rothenstein had avoided in his 84 1907 cartoon at the same time as homing in on its underlying intention (Fig. ). In the back' figures been `given have Rothenstein's the exaggerated semitic caricature, features that the painter had avoided.

Interpreting Aliens at Prayer not in isolation, but within the context and as it is Whitechapel lines the the more series, of principal of some of representative The to than leave these ambivalences open rather helpful to seek a single resolution. English (including immigrant the Jewish society and segment) the community painter, 83Gilman, Jewries at the Frontier, pp. 1 ff. 84Max Beerbohm, A quiet morning in the Tate Gallery, Pencil, pen and watercolour on London. Gallery Tate 32, 1907,37 x paper,

299 were in a state of flux during the period immediately before the World War One,

and

the co-existence of potentially antithetical positions within a series of paintings such as this reflects that.

Jews Mourning in a Synagogue is, I would suggest, a key work in this series in relation to issues of a centring that is based on people as opposed to ritual. There is in fact little evidence to indicate why this particular

group is in mourning. The absence

Tefillin (phylacteries) of would suggest it was not part of a normal morning service, when these would be worn, nor obviously in the Memorial segment of a High Holiday service, when even the most religious would have the appropriate prayer books to hand. The combination of Rothenstein's customary minimisation of Judaica and the inclusion of studio elements, to which earlier reference has been made, obliges the viewer to rely on the title alone. Perhaps this was caused by the artist's desire to move in his towards more ritual search for the `spirit of Israel'. Certainly Max Beerbohm 85 have been in his 1907 cartoon (Fig. ): seems to aware of this A quiet morning in the Tate Gallery. The Curator trying to expound to one of the Trustees the spiritual fineness of Mr William Rothenstein's `Jews Morning in a Synagogue'.

The comic satire - the non Jewish curator, D. S. MacColl, expounding on a Jewish Alfred de (1842-1918) Rothschild Trustee, Jewish Lord the to subject a -and in in Rothenstein inherent Beerbohm the the painting and version of contradictions 86 his text, serve to bring out two points. On the one hand, the cartoon representation it did for its impact comic on stereotypes, showed precisely of the painting, relying as figures depicted by Beerbohm's Jews to those the types painter. of the opposite 85See previous note. 86For D. S. MacCoil, see Biographical reference App. 1.

300 including Rothschild

large, have have exaggeratedly protuberant all noses and some -

fleshy lips. This deliberate cartoonist's device or any more painterly version thereof was eschewed by Rothenstein. On the other hand, the cartoon's text homes in unerringly, albeit ironically, on the essential theme of this picture and indeed of all the paintings in this series - the "spiritual fineness" of the subjects.

There is little of early 20th century England in this work by Rothenstein; indeed the seated figure at the rear of the picture could have come directly from a Bible scene by Rembrandt. By shrouding all of the figures from head to toe in tallithot and by deliberately blurring any clues as a to specific site for this scene, Rothenstein has replaced a temporal or geographical locus with an allusion to the in Jewish time Judaism to and any place. elders at prayer at any and continuity of

Artistic influences Although for many in the English Art World, first hand experience of the 1910 the hnpressionism innovations of Post groundbreaking was not obtained until Exhibitions Post-Impressionist 1912 and

(1866-1934), Fry by Roger mounted

in been to these works earlier and Rothenstein had worked in Paris and exposed its because 87 in of his this attention Indeed, depth. attracted period work greater stylistic

Rothenstein 88 in the his Given the range of art world, innovation. contacts

1911, January 1910 to November Galleries, Grafton 87Manet and the Post Impressionists, 1912. October Galleries, Grafton Exhibition, Impressionist Post Second and board, (Pastel,

chalk and paint on 88In her commentary on Rothenstein's Parting at Morning Post Exhibition in family the catalogue Rothenstein 48, collection) 1891,127 x `Degas, Robins Grutzner Anna Painting, European in states: Cross currents Impressionism; intrigued by the unusual combination of chalk and gold paint as well as been have who must figure, form flat, the draughtsmanship the sent of the simplified and linearity of the rhythmic him. ' on call Rothenstein should that word

301 could have drawn from an unusually wide range of potential sources. Yet when confronted with this particular set of subjects, only a small number of possible sources seem of central importance. As we shall see, the most significant may have been historical rather than contemporary.

In the extended extract autobiographical Rothenstein twice mentioned Rembrandt's paintings of Jews as being a key reference. In a 1909 letter to Fry, Rothenstein, referring to his own work of 1898/9, said: I believe at the time I was perhaps more under the influence of Rembrandt than Goya - you remember there was a great exhibition of his work in Amsterdam a little before, but I expect Spain was still fresh in my mind. 89

Rembrandt's works had been included in exhibitions at the British Institution throughout the first half of the 19thcentury and at Royal Academy Exhibitions in the latter half. There were also Exhibitions, which included his work at the Burlington, as in in In 1898, Guildhall below the the provinces. and at several major cities noted during the inauguration of Queen Wilhelmina, the City of Amsterdam mounted a first Stedelijk Museum Rembrandt's the the solely work at major exhibition of devoted to him or indeed to any old master - ever

90 to be held in Holland. This

lithographs. drawings Three included 123 points and paintings, as well as exhibition from Dutch the interest to this exhibition catalogue. study emerge of particular Although this was an exhibition of a Dutch painter in Holland, 41 paintings came from collections in the United Kingdom - indicating the high degree of interest here in Rembrandt. Five of the paintings were catalogued with specifically

8930 September 1909.

91 Jewish titles.

9oP. J. van Thiel, Bulletin van het Ryksmuseum, vol. 40,1992, p. 123. 91 Toilet of a young girl; called the Jewish Fiancee, 1632; The Rabbi, 1635 (Earl of Derby's The (Duke Devonshire's 1636 Rabbi turban, The collection); of with a white Collection); 1665. Bride, Jewish The 1642; black, Rabbi in

302 Rothenstein was listed as lending (a) drawing(s) to the

exhibition. A version of this

exhibition with 102 paintings was presented at the Royal Academy in 1899 with, unsurprisingly, an even larger proportion of works from British collections (although Rothenstein's Rembrandt drawing was not included). Between 1890

1903, five and

exhibitions were mounted at the Guildhall in which Dutch Art was either the main focus or one of the main areas examined, and in which the work of Rembrandt

was

92 featured. In 1904, the Whitechapel Gallery held an exhibition of Dutch Art to which Rothenstein was a lender.

The two public institutions easiest of access for him

National Gallery the -

both British had Museum holdings the Rembrandt, and of some of which were 93 in books before Rembrandt that were published reproduced on or around this time. Rothenstein had ample opportunity to study Rembrandt, and on the evidence of his interest he in before had Dutch 1903. the personal collection master well a personal

At the time of the Rembrandt tercentenary celebrations in Holland, an article in the Jewish Chronicle of 15 July 1906 made three observations which could equally 94 Commenting on have been applied to Rothenstein's Whitechapel paintings. Rembrandt's treatment of biblical subjects, the author Dr Grunwald argued: `He divests them of their traditional glory and converts them into the humanly natural. ' He continued by noting that it was accepted that Rembrandt's Jewish Brides were not, 92Flemish and Dutch Art, 1890; Flemish, Dutch, Italian and British Art, 1892; Dutch and British Art, 1894; Dutch Art, 1895; Dutch Art, 1903.

93 These included Joseph Cundall, Rembrandt 's Etchings, London, 1867; Charles Blanc, 1889; London, Etchings, 1873; Charles Curtis, Paris, Rembrandt's de Rembrandt, L'Oeuvre 1892; Malcom Gutekunst, Rijn, London: Deprez Rembrandt Works and van of The Original his Rembrandt, London, August 1899; Breal, Rijn a critical work, and Bell, Rembrandt van London, 1902; Wilhelm Bode, The Black, Clementine of works complete trans. essay, last in 1906. 8 the in of which appeared vols, Rembrandt,

303 in fact, Jewish,

and therefore that within this part of his oeuvre `the female type is

entirely lacking. ' Finally,

he focused on what he suggested was Rembrandt's

preference for older subjects: `His twelve `Rabbis' with their extremely expressive features equally demonstrate this partiality for aged types. '

As awareness of Rembrandt gathered pace in the first quarter

of the twentieth

century, Rothenstein would have been exposed to even more of his work and this may have further coloured his later recollections and writings. However, on the evidence here it is presented clear that Rothenstein, when working in the East End, was already familiar very with Rembrandt's paintings of Jewish sitters as they were understood at the time. By citing Rembrandt and the specific part of the latter's oeuvre which dealt purportedly with Jewish subjects, Rothenstein was doing several things. He was acknowledging

a stylistic

debt, evident in some of the earlier works of the

Whitechapel series. He was also acknowledging thematic debts. In the 1906 Jewish Chronicle interview, quoted earlier, the artist emphasised his aim of depicting `the Israel'. spirit of

In discussing Rembrandt's work and the attitudes of Dutch

Protestant/Calvinist culture, Simon Schama notes a parallel sensibility: It was also a matter of what got stripped away: icons, attributes, legends - the 95 Catholic representation. entire ancient theological clutter of

I would suggest that Rothenstein found in Rembrandt both the spirituality he was his break from legitimised the that more to and also a simplification convey seeking Finally, by Jews other artists. of exoticised renderings

by citing Rembrandt,

inviting by his to Rothenstein was seeking comparison with that elevate own work master

his historical for precedent own choice of subject. and to establish art

94Dr Max Grunwald, 'Rembrandt's Neighbours', p. 38.

304

Although unacknowledged as a source by Rothenstein, I suggest that Josef Israels was also a significant influence. Israels enjoyed enormous popularity and acclaim not just in his native Holland, but internationally. Around the turn of the century, he was known as the `Jewish Rembrandt'

-a

title that owed more to his

religion than his choice of subject - Jews and Jewish subjects formed only

a tiny

proportion of his output. Israels' work was regularly exhibited outside his native Holland from the early 1850s onwards, both in

private galleries and as a part of loan

exhibitions of Dutch Art. Rothenstein might have seen Israels' work in major exhibitions in Paris during his period there - Israels also had two works in the 1900 Exposition Universelle in Paris, at which Rothenstein was also

96 an exhibitor. Israels

was the artist with the most works exhibited at the Guildhall 1903 Dutch Art Exhibition. Among the 24 of his works on display were The Old Rabbi, Son the of Chosen People and A Jewish Wedding, the last two of which were, as mentioned in the previous Chapter, also exhibited in the 1906 Jewish Arts and Antiquities 97 Exhibition. At the Whitechapel Dutch Art Exhibition

in 1904, Israels was

represented, too. Two of the major collectors of Israels' works at this time, James Staats Forbes (1823-1904) and J. C J. Drucker (1862-1940), lived in England and did much to promote and display his work publicly. Israels' works were also widely 9s S. Schama, Rembrandt's Eyes, Allen Lane, The Penguin Press, p. 273 96The Universal Exhibition of 1889, the Salons of 1890,1891,1892 and 1893. Dekkers, Jozef Israels, pp. 3 75/6.

97Josef Israels, The Old Rabbi, Watercolour, 1883,50 x 34, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam; Josef Israels, Son of the Chosen People, Watercolour, 1888,56 x 43, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam; Josef Israels, Jewish Wedding, Oil on canvas, 1903,137 x 148, Jewish Historical Museum, Amsterdam on loan from the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam. The dimension The Guildhall known Curiosity The the the at are the same as work as exhibited work of Shop and subsequently as Son of the Ancient People or Son of the Chosen People. This is larger have the to major oil painting of the same title (see Dekkers, Jozef preceded thought Israels, p. 326). The title variation in this catalogue is not believed to be of significance.

305 circulated in a variety of reproduction media. Rothenstein therefore had many opportunities to familiarise himself with it during his own pre-Whitechapel period.

Israels' paintings of Jewish subjects may also have been seminal works both for Rothenstein and Wolmark, who is the subject of the next chapter, depicting as they did themes and tropes which both of the younger artists were to deploy in their own work. Israels' paintings of Jewish subjects concentrated on the old and the poor and 98 were principally of male subjects. Even in the Jewish Wedding, the young bride is marrying a considerably older man and to her right stands an elderly male figure leaning on a walking stick. This is in marked contrast to the rest of his oeuvre, which balanced including female. his In treatment of the the showed a more mix, young and Jewish subjects, Israels also adopted what I have suggested was the lachrymose in The Rothenstein's Whitechapel that works paintings. early standpoint characterised the Whitechapel Series are reminiscent of Israels' Son of an Ancient People. The faces figures, Rothenstein's their their careworn and shabby clothes, seated poses of lined hands are physical features they share with the protagonists of Israel's paintings his However, Israels is There Jewish themes. places also a similar sense of pathos. on By to for distance to the pity. perhaps contemplate and viewer subject at a slight have his I Israel', for `spirit the Rothenstein's what of use of search contrast, his devotion, the and and transforming prayer the of act of nature was suggested (in his foregrounding the early subjects aggressively of almost compositional strategy for from lifting interpreted be them sympathy objects as Whitechapel paintings) might into figures of dignity and gravitas. Josef 98In addition to the works already mentioned, one might also cite examples such as Josef London; Gallery, National 1894,65 54.6, Oil and x on canvas, Israels, The Philospher,

306

Stylistically, in the use of chiaroscuro, in the foregrounding his of subjects

particularly in the Jewish Wedding - and in the subdued palette, there are very strong echoes of Israels in Rothenstein's works of a year or so later. The problem with such stylistic arguments is unravelling Rembrandt as an influence on Israels from Israels as influence Rothenstein; for example, in an on

a note on The Curiosity Shop/Son of an

Ancient People, Rivka Weiss-Block has suggested a link between Israels' image

and

Jacob and Benjamin by Rembrandt. 99

Rothenstein's exploration of religious spirituality among the poor in his immigrant Jews of London's East End was a theme common to many the case in latter the artists part of the nineteenth century. Breton Women at prayer had been for used as subjects such representations by Paul Gauguin (1848-1903) and the Realist Pascal Dagnan-Bouveret (1852-1929) - with both of whom Rothenstein loo direct indirect is between There their claimed or contact. a meaningful parallel discoveries among the supposedly unsophisticated peasantry of rural France and his discoveries among the supposedly backward immigrant communities of the darkest East End. Notwithstanding the obvious differences of geography, in both casesurban sophistication apparently encountered traditional religiosity and ritual piety.

The examination of the socio-economic environment of Brittany in the last Michael Orton by Fred Griselda Pollock and and quarter of the nineteenth century Museum, Oil 151, Kroller-Müller 1902,108 Scribe, Jewish The on canvas, Israels, x Oterloo. 99Dekkers, Jozef Israels, p. 326. Rembrandt, Jacob and Benjamin, c 1637, Etching and Het Museum Rembrandthuis, Amsterdam. 8.9 11.6cm cm, drypoint, x 100For Gauguin, see Men and Memories, vol. 1 p. 69; for Dagnan-Bouveret, see Men and 42 1 Memories, vol. p.

307 Orwicz's examination of conflicting contemporary critical receptions of works on the same theme by Dagnan-Bouveret, discussed below, provide wider contexts within which to understand what was actually being depicted. 101 Investigation of the region's economic development and in particular its tourist status demonstrates another dimension in the paintings: the extent to which such images in this rural community were not simply the recording of factual reality but also a product of a manufactured illusion (in which both artist and subject may have colluded).

Rothenstein was aware of this part of Gauguin's oeuvre and of his fellow 102 in Pont-Aven, had artists and probably seen The Vision after the Sermon. Although this might have provided a thematic influence, the Whitechapel series was clearly uninfluenced by the quasi-folk painting artistic language of Pont Aven.

Indeed, as Debora Silverman has postulated, the search for religiosity was to be found as a recurring theme in not just Gauguin's Breton paintings but before during and after his period of collaboration with Van Gogh in Arles: At the heart of the analysis - an art story more than a personal story - are two contending approaches to pictorial practice with a paradoxical shared goal: to achieve spiritual ends through the plastic means of pigment, canvas, Arles Gogh Van the challenges of a midreclaims in and primer. ... "modem Dutch theology" that placed special emphasis nineteenth-century by divinity. Gauguin, immanent forms of an on the arts as evocative is contrast, presented as an ambivalent pýnitent, or penitent sensualist, who turns to painting as a new site to pose and interrogate the fundamental and irresolvable question of the Catholic catechism - "Why are we here on dialectic 1888 " of visionary ascent and and after, a earth? - and explores, in 'O' carnal affliction.

'0' Pollock and Orton, 'Les Donnees Bretonnantes', Art History, September 1980. Orwicz, Art Journal, Republic', Early Third Brittany the Represeantations of in 'Criticism and Winter 1987. 1021888, National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh.

308 In 1889, Rothenstein

met Dagnan-Bouveret, whose images of Breton Women were

enjoying success both critically and financially. 104Here again it was Rothenstein's thematic repertoire rather than his stylistic approach that

may have been extended by

and called upon at a later date by his probable familiarity with such works as The Pardon in Brittany and Les Bretonnes au Pardon. 105There is no hint of the almost photographic realism of Dagnan-Bouveret in Rothensteins's Whitechapel paintings, but there is a similar examination of religiosity,

spirituality and traditional ritual.

The search for a combination of style and content among Rothenstein's

near

contemporaries might also lead to The Calvary by his teacher, Legros, which like Dagnan-Bouveret dealt with the theme of religious spirituality in some seemingly remote region of France, but in a style that was closer to that to be deployed later by 1 06 Rothenstein. It is (1823-1891),

also possible that Rothenstein saw At the Sermon by Ribot

exhibited at the Salon of 1890.107 Although

in not mentioned

Rothenstein's autobiography, Ribot was a founder with Legros of the Salon du Champs de Mars and so Rotehnstein's attention might have been drawn to the work through this mutual link. The use of chiaroscuro by Ribot is stylistically closer to Rembrandt's earlier and Rothenstein's later images than the almost photographic foregrounded Dagnan-Bouveret Dagnan-Bouveret. Both Ribot their realism of and been by have Rothenstein. in to that employed subsequently a way seems subjects Legros, Dagnan-Bouveret and Ribot (and indeed Gauguin), however, all depicted

10'Silverman, Van Gogh and Gauguin; The Searchfor Sacred Art, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2000, Introduction. 104According to the New York Times 18 May 1889: 'Dagnan Bouveret's Salon success, $6,000'. has been for Pardon, sold Bretonnes au ... "' Pascal Dagnan-Bouveret, The Pardon in Brittany, Oil on canvas, 1886,114.6 x 84.8, New Art, York; Pascal Dagnan-Bouveret, Bretonnes Les Museum of Metropolitan au 141, 1887,125 Museu Calouste Gulbenkenian, Lisbon. Oil x canvas, Pardon, on 106Alphonse Legros, The Calvary, Oil on canvas, 1874,91.5 x 72.8, Musee d'Orsay, Pans.

309 women at prayer either exclusively or predominantly,

a precedent Rothenstein did

not follow in the East End.

Earlier analysis of what I characterised in the Whitechapel series as a shift from people centred to ritual centred

work was discussed by Roger Fry in an article in

The Nation (11 June 1910) in somewhat different terms,

concentrating on stylistic

issues: Mr Rothenstein's Jew pictures began as studies of character, seen in chiaroscuro, but as he went on, he found that what he wanted to say, the particular view of life he wanted to express, the effect of what is enduring, monumental and resistant in common things, needed a clearer, more linear presentment of form, a greater purity and a more intellectual appreciation of 108 than colour chiaroscuro allowed.

Fry suggested Giotto (1267-1337) as a potential general influence, and his Bardi Chapel Trial by Fire might have been a possible example for the final Carrying of the Law. Rothenstein's composition is rather friezelike and there is a resonance with the Giotto image in the way in which the drapery in the Trial by Fire and the tallithim in Carrying the Law are used to create both focus and motion. A more contemporary have been found by Rothenstein in the work of Simeon Solomon reference may (1840-1905).

1865 Solomon

produced

Coptic

Baptismal

Procession,

which

frieze-like device falling drapery draws the the the employs same style; once again of 109 figure. attention to the central 107Theodule Ribot, At the Sermon, Oil on canvas, 1890,55.5 x 46.5, Musee d'Orsay, Paris. '0' The Nation p. Quoted in Speaight, p. 163 109[Watercolour, Cecil Higgins Art Gallery, Bedford, which served for the illustrations of Lady Duff Gordon's Lettersfrom Egypt, 1865. As the Bedford gallery description points out, by from Carrying Scrolls Law the Jewish the the the coptic procession was preceded of Ceremonies Series, 1862, published as photographs by Coundall, Downes & Co; seeR. Outcast Prodigy Simeon Solomon - Pre Raphaelite Artist, 200 1, p. 19, From ), to (ed. Burman for believe Solomon's Reading Laws, the I This the 18]. was model one of subsequent repr. p. his series of illustrations of Jewish ecclesiastical themes, which appearedin 1866 in the

310

Public reception at home and overseas

Despite their limited number and Rothenstein's disinclination to follow

Whitechapel series with a larger corpus of work on the

up the

subject, thesepaintings were

generally well received and rapidly found their way into major collections.

In the previous chapter, reference was made to those

works by Rothenstein

that were included in the 1906 Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition: An Exposition Talmud, The Talmud School and Jews Mourning the of

110 Synagogue. in a Before

discussing their individual histories and contemporary receptions, it is appropriate to how they were viewed in that particular setting. The Jewish Chronicle in its 1906 see review of the artist, quoted earlier, had said: There is no living painter of whom as a community we may be more proud his reputation has been gained through the than Will Rothenstem ... ... medium of Jewish paintings ... works which have prompted those capable of pronouncing judgement to declare that Rothenstein has dared to challenge comparison with Rembrandt ... and has emerged from the ordeal with something more than a claim to respect.

For a journal that espoused the cause of Anglo-Jewry, it is perhaps somewhat idea find it the to of Jewish paintings - especially surprising championing so ardently Ostjuden. Given to this term the works which were evidently of was applied when his its Jewish hardly is it the that therefore at review of works surprising standpoint

further Hour. This Leisure then to the The include paraphernalia of was adapted magazine Succot and renamed Carrying the Scrolls of the Law in the Synagogue at Genoa dated 1871. 110The Talmud School was exhibited at NEAC in the Summer Exhibitions of 1904 and 1905. by bought friends Redcliffe Salaman, Rothenstein, Nina that, Shortly after of and was and it family. An Exposition Winter Law NEAC the in the their exhibited at in of was it remained Bury Public Gallery 1907. Art It remained within 1905 the and at in Exhibition of donated in it Fine 1950. Museum Arts Boston family to the was of in until Rothenstein's

311

Arts and Antiquities Exhibition five Listing them under the

months later should have been equally positive.

heading general of 'Religious Work and Study', the

reviewer

observed: They are fine types of men that he has

chosen; picturesque figures with nothing whatever of the commonplace about them; their attitude is one of rapt attention, when they are at prayer, their faces alight with Socratic intelligence, as they argue together some knotty point of Talmud. "'

This may perhaps be interpreted as evidence of the

reconciliation between the

paper and Yiddish culture to which referencewas made in the previous Chapter.The paintings themselves, and the review, might be regarded as attempting to bridge the gap between the aspirations of Anglo-Jewry in presenting the Exhibition as part of the Anglo-Jewish Machzike

discourse, and the immigrant community. Figures from the

Hadass were contextualised by the reviewer so as to make them

simultaneously part of acceptable English Jewry and its imaginary. Although Rothenstein denied the use of the epithet 'picturesque' in reference to his aims, he would have had no quarrel with terms of `rapt devotion' and even `Socratic intelligence';

these accorded with the search for the underlying 'spirit of Israel'

he declared his which was aim for the series.

As early as 1904, In the Spita4i'elds Synagogue was acquired by Hugh Lane Gallery in became Municipal 1908 the the of of newly opened part of collection and Art

112 This work in Dublin.

have been in to selected preference to seems

Rothenstein's own The Browning Readers, which had been on display as part of the

Jews Mourning in the Synagogue was exhibited in the NEAC Exhibition of 1906 and was Gallery National in 1907. donated to the subsequently "1 Jewish Chronicle, 9 November 1906, Supplement p. iv. 112Biographical

1. App. note

312

initial loan collection of the newly formed Bradford AA Gallery Lane's decision was in all probability a personal one

' 13 Cartwright Hall. at

rather than prompted by any

pressure or assistance from Ireland's Jews. Even after some spill over immigration from Russia and Eastern Europe (via England) in and after the 1880s, the Jewish

population of

Ireland hasbeen estimatedat 3,000 out of a total of 3.2 million in 1901.

Aliens at Prayer was generally well received by the critics in England,

when

1 14 exhibited at Agnews. The critic of the Art Journal referring to it thus: Among the pictures of real importance were Mr Will Rothenstein's deeply "' 'Aliens best Prayer' he has the thing sought at given us.

The Athenaeum critic responded in several ways exactly as Rothenstein (at least the

Rothenstein of Men and Memories) would have wanted. Unlike the critic of the Jewish Chronicle, he recognized that the artist was seeking to avoid '... a picturesque corner ...

' and drew the Rembrandt connections. 'Aliens at Prayer' by Mr Rothenstein, who surely has here surpassed all former efforts. This is not a clever study of praying Jews by someone interested ftom the outside in a picturesque comer of actual life. The artist has sunk himself in his subject as Rembrandt did and the actual theme his by but Mr Rothenstein that proves not affinity suggests master; by light but his Rembrandtesque texture effect of or of pigment reproducing a has dignity, design he The interpretation the of what sees. sincere and serious drawing character and emphasiswithout a single forced note! 16

In 1906, having been turned down for acquisition by the Tate via the Chantrey Bequest, this work was acquired through the Felton Bequest for the National Gallery "' The Browning Readers was exhibited at NEAC in the Summer of 1903. On 31 October The Gallery, Director that Butler-Wood, the to 1904, Rothenstein wrote requesting of by Moritz 1911 Cartwright Hall (subsequently to Readers in Browning presented he 1904 2 November for Dublin be to Rothenstein) consideration as an acquisition; on sent Archive Bradfordhis had been instruction, purchased. of as another works that cancelled Ref 68/D88/6/7e. 114 1906. Agnews, London Art Today, Independent the of Some Examples of 115 118. 1906, Journal, p. Art 116 1906. February 17 Athenaeum,

313

of Victoria in Melbourne by Clausen, its overseas adviser for that 1 17 year. The Museum archives contain information no about any specific policy guidance or rationale for this particular acquisition. It may have been an extension

of an earlier

po icy of acquiring Victorian works of art. ' 18Although Clausen, perhaps, it saw as a way of compensating Rothenstein for the earlier adverse decision of the Tate, in

all

it probability may simply have been a case of availability of a work, well regarded by contemporary London critics and being available for the right price (000) at the right ' 19 Frank Gibson, in time.

a generally favourable review of all Clausen choices for the

Felton in 1906, said: William Rothenstein is one of the strongest figure painters in the New English Art Club, and after some heroic struggles, always in the right direction, has undoubtedly found his true avocation, his figure piece Aliens at Prayer, which was painted in the east end of London, is a genuine success 120 (sic) full fine drawing a national composition of and character painting.

In sharp contrast, however, Blamire Young (1862-1935), an artist and art critic, in an damned Clausen and almost all of his Felton selections for 1906, felt that article otherwise: 117Allegedly by [(Sir) Edward] Poynter (1836- 919) on the grounds that the index finger of the right hand was 'carelessly executed'; Rothenstein argued that was in fact missing: Men left by 2 9 1. Chantrey Memories, The Bequest Sir Francis Chantrey on his and vol. p. was death in 1841 'for the encouragement of British Fine Art in Painting and Sculpture only'. The Chantrey collection was a major part of the Tate Gallery collection when it opened in 1897 and was used to 'champion Victorian values far into the 20th century'. Lambourne, Victorian Painting, p. 41. The Felton Bequest was established in 1904 for the benefit of the National Gallery of Victoria by the Will of Arthur Felton (1831-1904) "for the purchase of five A committee of and an overseasadviser works of art ancient or modem or antiquities". have be "that to artistic and educational value and shall considered could authorise purchases be calculated to raise or improve public taste". The Bequest was subsequently been used to Old both Modem Masters. and acquire works "' Julian Treuherz (ed.), Hard Times. Social realism in Victorian Art, London: Lund Humphries in association with Manchester City Art Gallery, 1987, p. 12: 'The list of social by long. Australia ' early galleries and museums in is remarkably realist paintings acquired 119Clausen, 6 June 1906: Spealght, Manuscript Notes - Material for a life of William National 121/2 Art Library, Victoria and Albert Museum. III PP. Rothenstein, vol. 120For Gibson, see Biographical reference App. 1. The Melbourne Argus 13 October 1906. from following Melbourne Argus from Newspaper the the extracts are This and all of

314 But the picture by Will Rothenstein, called Aliens

at Prayer I will write down with all seriousness as quite the worst picture in our gallery, and that Is saying a good deal. There are number of students in the life classesthat can paint better figures than these. The picture contains three figures, but so tired was the artist, that he painted them from two models. Positively I cannot find a single good word to say of it. It is bad in design, bad in drawing, and in tone and colour beneath contempt. It contains not one single brush stroke to redeem it from this charge of utter worthlessness. Away with it! We will not find houseroom for this kind of pot-boiler, even if it be presented to us for 1'1 nothing.

The controversy over the entire matter of the Clausen

selection continued in letters to

the paper for several weeks. The Editor came out among those criticising the selections and a meeting of the Trustees convened to discuss the public dissatisfaction that Clausen was made to shoulder. 122

What was the situation of Jews in Australia at this time? Jews had been among the first convicts sent to Australia in 1788.123In that early period, the place of Other was occupie

indigenous distinguishable Aborigines. Australia's the y and easily

early Jewish population was regarded as part of the white community. By the second

half of the 1gth century, the question of the Other turned around the threat posedby the influx of cheap Chinese labour - again another easily identified group. This influx however came to an abrupt end with the passing of hnmigration Laws in 1901. Having thus been a part of the first white settlers, Jews were not initially regarded in the same light as their co-religionists elsewhere [in England, for example, where their in into identity the this time], their and participation at called question was racial

Gallery Victoria 5, Public Library, Museum National the to . vol. of and cutti ngs relating Melbourne, Library Council of Victoria, 1987 Ref LTM 92. 121Melbourne Argus, 1 December 1906, Newspaper cuttings. vol. 5 p. 173 122Melbourne Argus, 7 December 1906, Newspaper cuttings. vol. 5 p. 175, and 18 December 1906 p. 176. 123According to Paul Bartrop, 'Living within the Frontier', in Gilman and Shain eds, Jews first least Australia included 8 1, Jews. 9 to the Frontier, ships convict arrive in at p. at the

315 population around 1901 - as few as 15,000 out of a total of 3.2 million meant they

were statistically insignificant. However, it hasbeen suggestedthat During the nineteenth century there was an undertow of everyday anti-Jewish feeling feeding on European stereotypesof Jews.124

Certainly in the latter part of the 19th century, as Jewish immigrants began to from Eastern Europe and Russia, this feeling intensified. Even the

arrive

rumour that Baron

de Hirsch had a plan to settle 500,000 Russian Jews in Australia causedan uproar both Jewish among non and Jewish Australians

latter fearing for the the presumably -

loss same of position and merging of identity as their Anglo-Jewish counterparts in England in the same period. 125A cartoon from the Australian magazine The Bulletin 1891 encapsulates these cross currents, satirising the negative reaction to the news of

by two Jewish Australians, who themselvesbear all the hallmarks of the negative in depictions. is, however, significant It stereotypes so often used anti-Semitic cartoon to observe that the attention of the Policeman behind the protagonists has been drawn to a Chinese immigrant in a coolie hat - suggesting that he, rather than the Jews, was "Other" the of greater concern. still

Following

its exhibition at the Whitechapel in 1906, at the instigation of

Canon Barnett, Jacob Moser, a leading member of the Bradford community, in Given 1907.126 Gallery Synagogue National Mourningin to the Jews a presented

Rothenstein's ambivalence about both his Jewishnessand, albeit to a lesser extent, his be Whitechapel it is ironic it that his of one should origins, provincial about 124Jon Stratton, 'Jews, Race and the White Australian Policy,, in Gilman and Shain eds, 319. Frontier, p. Jews at the 12'For de Hirsch, see Biographical Note App. 1. Stratton, ibid. p. 320. 126For Moser, Biographical Note App. 1. The picture was accepted by the National Gallery dated 1907. from Cannon Barnett 17 February formal offer following a

316

paintings and his Bradford Jewish connectionsthat won him the distinction being of the first member of NEAC to have a work in the National

collection.

Reading the Book of Esther stayed within the Rothenstein family donated to the Manchester City Art Gallery as

it until was

part of the Charles Rutherston Gift of

1925.

In 1910, Carrying the Law was acquired by Sir Lionel Phillips, probably with the help of Sir Hugh Lane, for the Johannesburg Art Gallery. Phillips was one of the Randlords who played a major part in founding the Gallery in the formation of its 1910 foundation core collection.

As a percentage of the total white South African population, Jews were a small minority:

38,101 out of a total of 1,116,806 in 1904.127It was less their

presence as an immigrant minority, and more the perceived power and influence by those at the very apogee of the community, that sparked resentment. wielded Milton Shain quotes Hobson, Manchester Guardian correspondent in Johannesburg, inordinate focused forraing frequent the on power and articles opinion whose influence of the Johannesburg Jews. The entire mining industry, with the partial exception of Consolidated Gold Fields, is in their hands, the Dynamite Monopoly, the illicit liquor trade are theirs, they and Rhodes own or control the press, manipulate the stock business in Johannesburg the and chief commercial market, and run 128 Pretoria.

Shain goes on to argue: 127A. A. Dubb, The Jewish Population ofSouth Africa: The 1991 Sociodemographic Survey Studies Research), Capetown: UCT, 1994, 7. for Jewish Centre and p. (Kaplan

317 By the outbreak of the Anglo-Boer War in October 1899, a decidedly ambivalent image of the Jew had been constructed on the diamond fields, the hinterland and on the Witwatersrand. On the hand, Jews were praised for one their loyalty, initiative and enterprise; on the other hand, Jewish fortuneseekers and traders were depicted as exploitative and dishonest. an even ... more sinister image was that of the South African Jew as part of a network of 129 international finance

Within the first few years of the 20th century, both Daniel. C. Boonzaier (1865-1950) with the character Hoggenheimer, and Heinrich Egsdorfer (1853-1915) with his semitically featured "Goldbugs" viciously satirised Jewish financiers in The Owl, a weekly magazine, and virulently attacked the arrival of Jewish immigrants.

My previous analysis has highlighted possible readings of Rothenstein's Whitechapel series, which emphasise the spirituality and dignity of the subjects. In Rothenstein's writings and interviews his attitude towards Judaism was ambivalent. Even in the 1906 Jewish Chronicle interview, there were hints of detachment, of a identify himself his being to reluctance at one with as subjects. But Rothenstein was a is in it fonner be looking for this that than area should painter rather a writer and we

just for brief hand, in On this the these period -, when paintings - and evidence. one held he found deeply Jewish the convictions a pictorial actuality of confronted with language that enabled him not only to express the dignity of those beliefs but to avoid ignoring hand, by On the or the trap of either sentimentality or stereotype. other Jew the the the of characteristics racial visual, supposed suppressing many of hooked nose, the fleshy lips - and minimising the social or religious dress code, At been indulging in his Anglicisation. have one and Rothenstein may own version of 128'Imperialist Judaism in Africa' The Anglo-Boer War and the image of the Jew in South Spring 1999 No 3. 54 Johannesburg, Affairs, Jewish vol. Africa', 129 Ibid.

318

the sametime he acknowledgedthe difference of his subjectsbut de-emphasisedtheir alleged distinctiveness. He may have been attempting to depict Englishmen, albeit very poor Englishmen, of the Mosaic persuasion.

Rothenstein's

Whitechapel

series sought to resolve several conflicting

positions. Perhaps the most important was the attempt to invest a specific minority religion - Judaism - with a universal spirituality to combat the inherent hostility of Christianity towards it. The series also attempted to present the distinctive Jewish in ritual a way that would be neither picturesque nor orientalised, with the possible effect that such representation might minimise the charges of alienism levelled against Jews in England at this time. Rothenstein tried to merge specificity of place the East End of London - with a geographic universalism and the specificity of the is he Judaism. It the timelessness the period within which was working with of inherent tension created by trying to resolve these many polarities that makes this set investigationof important in "the Jew". images the representation of an so of

319 Chapter 7 Mr Wolmark, The Painter of the Ghetto The first major British artist to emerge from the migrant Jewish community. CharlesSpenserI

At the height of his fame

in the the twentieth early part of century -

Wolmark was a leading figure of the English

Alfred -

avant-garde.

By 1912, when he held his second one man show at the Goupil Gallery, Alfred Wolmark's work was as advanced as that of any painter in England, with this difference that he could already show a surprisingly large body of work astonishing both in the audacity of its colour and the diversity of its execution .2

By the time of his death some fifty years later in 1961, his early work was seen as less significant and his creative powers were deemed by critics to have lessened significantly. His output in the first decade of the twentieth century is, however, of particular importance to this study. For Rothenstein the Jewish East End, the locus inspiration for his Whitechapel paintings, was external and foreign to his and life his beliefs. For the young Wolmark it was his home and its everyday and inhabitants were not just subjects for his art, but were his neighbours. This chapter his 'insider' Wolmark that that argue will was an and understanding of and approach to his subjects was radically different to that of Rothenstein. Both Wolmark's early life and his trips as a young man to Cracow combined to provide him with a unique in have Chapter 6, As End Jewry. East at the turn of the seen we perspective on in its heterogeneous The Jewish East End the composition. was so-called century immigrant community was confined within a small, densely populated area. This Russia from different Europe immigrants Eastern to for it and regions of made easy In that the live terms together. of parts might suggest socio-religious one and regroup ' C. Spencer, in S. Turnarkin Goodman ed., The Immigrant Generations, p. 48.

320

the environment within which Wolmark lived

as a teenagermay not have been that

different from that which he encountered his two extendedtrips to Cracow. The on similarities may have been as important as the differences.

Alfred Aaron Wolmark came to England as a young child and subsequently spent several years in the East End - hence his positioning by Spenser and others as the forerunner of the pre-First World War group of Jewish immigrant (or first generation) artists, who were subseqtiently to emerge from that part of London.

Wolmark and these successorssharedand were influenced by some or

all of a series

of common traits in their early childhood and education. They were either born in Eastern Europe/Russia, where they spent their early infancy, or in England to recently

arrived

immigrant

parents. They were educated in schools, where

Anglicisation through education was the order of the day. They were in varying degrees affected by the clash between socio-religious values, brought from Eastern Europe and Russia and subsequently retained by their parents, and the different value systems of both the indigenous Jewish community and the host English community.

From Eastem Europe to the East End and back agai ' this am very much a product of country.

Notwithstanding Wolmark's views on his Englishness as he looked back from old his have by East European life been his to seems as much marked early age, background. Wolmark was born in Warsaw in December 1876.' His autobiographical

2 A. D'Offay, Aýfred Wolmark, Fine Art Society Catalogue, London, 26 October - 13 November 1970. 3 Alfred Wolmark, The Times, (1961). * debted to the 41For some of the background information contained in th*s section I am in his by (henceforth for MSS Risdon Wolmark Peter unpublished on undertaken research

321

remarks indicate that in 1883 his family moved to England and settled Devon.' Most Jewish immigrants arriving in London least initially in the East End. Those who at

somewherein

in the post-1880 period settled

arrived at the Northern ports and did not

make their way to London tended to settle along the corridor from Hull/Grimsby

the main portsof entry to Liverpool the main port for transmigration to America. The Wolmarks' decision to settle in the South West of England, though unusual in terms of these wider settlement patterns, was not totally aberrant. There had been

recorded Jewish presence in that area for more than one hundred and fifty years.' Whatever the social, economic and/or personal motives for the Wolmark family's from Poland to South West England, it would seem possible that Alfred's move father, who is reputed to have been a religious man, would have found a Synagogue environment within which to worship that might have been broadly familiar to him.

There is no definitive evidence pinpointing the date of the family's subsequent move to the East End of London. At the latest it must have been in 1894, when the family address is known to have been 65 Hanbury Street in the heart of London's Jewish East End. ' Between 1894 and 1900 Alfred and his family seem to have led

Risdon), with whom I worked and shared information for the period to 1914. [The latest Modernism, British by Rediscovering Wolmark: the a pioneer of author, exhibition, planned Ben Uri Gallery and Hull, Ferens Art Gallery, 2004, includes a catalogue of most of the (the important here, discussed the supervisor)] most ones. and colour illustrations of works 'Wolmark, op. cit. 6 The Plymouth Synagogue, which opened in 1762, is the oldest, still functioning Ashkenazi Synagogue in England. (There are records referring to the establishment of a Jewish Burial Ground as early as 1744). Other Synagogueswere opened in Exeter (1763), Falmouth (1766) fully-fledged Further (1768). Penzance synagogues or smaller places of worship and 19'h Cemetery in flourished these the towns records of century. in some emerged and by discovered indications Truro to the provided including those relating one corroborate in in dating back least South West to the early Jewish the at presence certainly Plymouth of a leading The Synagogues the 18th these that records of reveal many of decades of the century. Evelyn German Polish these congregations origin. or were of Ministers and officials of Cornwall, Jews The and passim. ofDevon Friedlander, 7 Peyton Skipworth, Dictionary ofNational Biography (DNB) pp. I 100/ 1101.

322 that somewhat nomadic existence in the

area that was typical of many immigrants:

they are recorded living at four different addresses. ' Between 1899 and 1900 Alfred moved to Kilburn

in North West London, returning in 1900 to live with his family in

Tredegar Square, Bow, a somewhat more affluent neighbourhood outside the area of

mass concentration of immigrant Jews. By 1903 Alfred was again working from a in Kilbum. ' In July of that year he studio

went to Cracow, where he remained until

March 1905. " On his return he moved into Claremont Studios, Paddington, the address quoted for his Royal Academy exhibits for that and subsequent years to 1908. He made a second trip to Poland from October 1905 to February 1906."

What emerges from this information is the relatively short time that Wolmark have may actually spent in the East End

little (based perhaps as as six years on -

known addresses) and no more than sixteen years (assuming the move from Devon came a year after the family's arrival there). This evidence is presented not to refute the potentially

important influence that the East End - as a particular cultural

environment/moment - had on his work, but rather to indicate for how long and from directly Alfred what geographic vantage point was a part of it. It was not just the length of time he may have spent in the East End but the combination of that with his Polish background and, as we will examine later, his return there that provided the in his background Wolmark to early work. was mine so effectively which ostjUdisch

' It would seem, that the Wolmark family resided at 3 Fisher's Alley from July 1895 (Royal Academy Schools Archives; Record no 1062) and then from 1896 to 1899 at 63 Leman St family 1900, 7 Risdon). In Library Whitechapel ticket the to (according to a moved Lewis' East London 1899, Tredegar Jewish In Russell Bow. Square, of and map of Tredegar Square was only just within the area surveyed, positioned well to the north east of the area of having between 5% 25%. Jewish It as of and a population classified mass concentration. was 92 Brondesbury Villas, Willesden. Royal Academy Exhibition records. 10Risdon.

323

One of the most significant events in this

early period of Wolmark's life was

his meeting in 1898 with Anna Wilmersdoerffer,

a wealthy German emigree,whose

patronage and friendship he enjoyed until 1910/1911." Born in Augsburg in 1859, Anna came with her younger brothers and sister to join their father in England in 1878. Although

she spent more than thirty years in England, she was never

naturalised and in 1915 she and her sister chose to be repatriated.

Anna Wilmersdoerffer

was Alfred's

early mentor. She provided him with

funds, commissions and sales, assisted in his education,

was probably involved in his

first move from the East End to Kilbum, arranged his first one man exhibition at the Bruton Gallery in 1905 and on his return from Poland provided him with his Paddington studio, very close to where she lived with her sister. She also promoted his work and reputation by writing 'articles for journals in praise of him, both in Gennan and English'. " One of these was an extended and illustrated article in October 1908, Ost und West." This was of particular significance because of the importance of the journal in which it appeared. The editorial policy of Ost und West was to Jewish "assimilation" Western by Europe reverse in and central constructing an ethnic-national identity that included East European or Eastern forms of 15 Jewishness.

In order to achieve this, much of its effort - especially in its early years - was directed at presenting a counterbalancing positive image of Ostjuden and

" Risdon. 12 4A Memory of Anna Wilmersdoerffer', in Aýfred Wolmark 1877-1961, (Kingston upon Hull: Ferens Art Gallery, 1975), unpaginated. This article was unsigned but it is believed to have been written by her nephew, Joseph (Risdon). " Ibid. 14 The magazine Ost und West, illustrierte Monatschrift für modernes Judentum was between 1901 and 1923. Germany in published

324 prior to Buber's translations of Hasidic tales, Ost und Westwas the largest transmitter of Eastern Jewish literature, art, folklore and folk song to the Western Jewish public. "

The early editions included features on specific Jewish

artists - Ury (1861-1931) in

February, Lilien (1874-1925) in July and Kichienewsky in August 1901. In February 1902 Martin Buber and Lesser Ury wrote on the question 'Is Jewish a art possible today'. In 1904 Georg Herman reviewed the work of Camille Pissarro (1830-1903) illustrated with works from the Cassirer Gallery in Berlin, Herman Struck's (18761944) work was reviewed in September and that of Isaac Snowman in October. In the winter of 1905 Ilya Gunzburg discussed Jewish National Art. In December 1907 Alfred Nossig's catalogue introduction to the Austellung ffidischer Kfinstler was in Ost West illustrations 22 together reproduced und with of works from the Exhibition. " In the January 1908 edition of Ost und West Kutna reviewed this Exhibition

at length - with a further 13 illustrations. His piece was followed by

from in (primarily German Berlin) press. The exhibition was, the extracts reviews its to according organizers, an attempt to answer the perennial question about the it by bringing Jewish together one to art -a question sought elucidate specificity of hundred and forty-seven paintings by sixty Jewish painters (all but seven of whom of " The time the the organizers stressed exhibition). of whom were alive and working at that their aim was not to suggest a difference based on religious but rather on for included " The historical-cultural some, range of artists grounds. ethnographic and

15D. Brenner, Marketing Identities, p. 15. This work contains a full discussion of the history Ostjuden. the West view of alternative Ost promotion of an and its role in und of 16Brenner, Market ing Identities, p. 45. Martin Buber (1878-1965) Jewish philosopher and Organization Welt, Zionist Die . the the of and co-founder paper of of editor theologian, was house. Verlag publishing the Ridischer 17Galerie für alte und neue Kunst. Berlin November-December 1907. 18 4Oder keimt vielleicht hier oder dort, bewusst oder unbewusst, eine spezifisch jüdische 1907, Künstler, Ausstellungjüdischer p. vi. Kunst? ' 19G. Kutna, Ost und West, (January 1908), p. 19.

325 example Camille pissarro (1830-1903), whose Jewish origins little or no impact on their

appeared to have had

work, and others, such Moritz Oppenheim (to whom we

shall be returning in more detail later), for whom Jewish themes were

a central part

of their total oeuvre. Forty-five of the artists represented were listed as being based in Western Europe and fifteen in Eastern Europe (if

one includes Vienna in that rubric

and Jerusalem as it was at the time the home of the Polish born Samuel Hirszenberg [1866-1908]). Extreme caution needs to be exercised if one seeks to use such a simple and perforce crude geographic classification to shed light on underlying differences between the representations of the Jew in western Jewish

culture when

compared with representations within an ostjiidisch culture. In his seminal article 'In

Quest of the Jewish Style in the Era of the Russian Revolution', Avram Kampf discusses the issue of a Jewish style within Russian artistic practice in the latter half of the nineteenth century and some of these arguments may be applied in some " Wolmark. Kampf s article also outlines the very to the measure early work of by in Stassov important role played positively encouraging Jewish art around that time and details the importance of the ethnographic and similar expeditions in focussing attention on folk art and especially Jewish folk art in the early twentieth " importance in for Jewish Kampf themes the the work of some of of century. argues the younger Russian artists and although evidence of the use of Jewish themes and Jewish folklore motifs may not be sufficient to permit us to talk of a Jewish school, it is strong enough to point to the emergence of some common traits and subjects

however, be One to by this careful painters of period. must, ostjddisch shared some for treatment tradition interpreting of past a and a quasi-folkloric nostalgia avoid

20Journal ofJewish Art, vol. 5 (1978) pp. 48-75. 21Biographical Note App. 2.

326 subjects as being exclusively part of an ostjiidisch discourse. Alphonse Levy (18451918), the French Jewish painter

and illustrator, who

his reputation and it was a considerable made in one France in the latter ... part of the nineteenth century as a purveyor of Jewish customs and folklore [Levy] was best known for his lithographs illustrations and of ... Jewish family life and religious practice in Alsace, scenesalready oldfashioned and replete with nostalgia 22 he them. when made

Similarly,

looking for a distinction between west and east based on style or

treatment/mood needs to be handled with extreme caution. For every pair of

contrasts

between say the emotion laden Hear 0 Israel by the Polish Pilichowski

and the

much more restrained work of the English Rothenstein, there are pairings, where the differences are far less obvious

for Jewish Heder by French the example artist -

Edouard Brandon (1831-1897) and In the Beth Hamidrash by the Viennese artist

Isidor Kauftnann, whose works on Ostjuden are discussedbelow." However, we can in theorise tenus of a westiItidisch - acculturated acculturating, inclusive usefully

discourse (as exemplified by the Anglicisation projects of Anglo-Jewry) and an ostjUdisch - traditional, unassimilated, exclusive - discourse. By using the different by these two positions when reading the works of different vantage points offered insight further into location their one artists can obtain within the cultural spectrum distinction An between Eastern and this the period. of appreciation of potential Western European Jewish artists is important to the reception of Wolmark's depiction of Jews in the first decade of the twentieth century. I would propose that his representations - whether they depicted Polish Jews painted during his extended immigrant in Jews East London's End in that or more readily are country stays -

if discourse this than one relies ostjiidisch comprehensiblewith an understandingof " Linda Nochlin, 'Starting with the Self in L. Nochlin and T. Garb eds, The Jew in the , Text, P. 13. 23 Ch. 7. I App. Pictorial references

327 solely on the Anglo-Jewish Although

Wolmark

discourse that seems appropriate for Rothenstein.

came from Warsaw and not some tiny village within the

hinterland of Eastern Europe, he

his family might legitimately be classified and

Ostjuden, when compared with the Anglo-German background This would therefore have been a very

of the Rothensteins.

potent point of reference for the young artist

and one which must have been reinforced by - if not indeed as some commentators have suggested have been the motive for

his " Poland. This to visits point was -

perceptively picked up by the art critic of the Jewish World when he said that Wolmark's The Disputation represented 'a mixed atmosphere of Poland, the Pale and Whitechapel. 25

In 1908 Anna Wilmersdoerffer wrote an extended, illustrated article on Alfred Wolmark for Ost und West under the pseudonym A. May and it was she who said of him and his work that 'he is one of the soul prophets of the ghetto'. 26 This hagiographic piece took as its starting point the 1906 Jewish Arts and Antiquities Exhibition and then ranged over much of the artist's oeuvre up to and beyond that date. Given the place of this journal at this time within the realms of European Jewish culture, such an article could only have enhanced the reputation of her however, One just his taking off. must, remember to protege as career was

journal its the the this and editorial policy of exposure within contextualise Germanophone readership; it was outside the mainstream of the Anglo-Jewish discourse.

24'He returned to Poland in 1903 and lived there for three years to steep himseýfstillfurther Muriel Charles Spenser, Vivian Lipmann (This and emphasis). writer's in the old ways'. 48. Goodman The Immigrant Generations, Turnarkin S. in ed., p. Emanuel, 25Jewish World (10 May 1907) p. 12. 26cEr geh6rt zu den SeelenkUnderndes Ghettos.' Ost und West, 8th year of publication, Issue Anna Wilmersdoerffer Risdon's the that 599-606. confirms was writer of research 10, pp. this piece.

328

Although the relationship betweenAlfred

and Anna founderedin 1910,around

the time that Alfred met and married Bessie Tapper, there

would appearto be no

evidence to suggest that the two events were connected. The breakdown was

attributed to differences of opinion as to his artistic direction and a need for Alfred, who was by then in his early thirties, to establish his independence." In order to ensure that her family continued in their support, Anna kept any word of the

breakdown with Alfred from them and it would seem

kept in she contact with him

and his wife at least until her departure from England in 1915."

Wolmark's initial artistic training could not have been further removed from the 'foreign' influences of his early life. The records of the Royal Academy Schools indicate that he enrolled in July 1895 at the age of 17 and left in July 1900.'9 In 1896 he won a Silver Medal First Prize (in the section 'drawing of a statue or group

5). 30

this time the Royal Academy, presided over by Lord Leighton (1830-1896), was the high in Victorianism centre of art with many of the Holland Park set playing an in died in he first When Leighton 1896 the teaching there. active role was succeeded by Sir John Everett Millais (1829-1896) and then on the latter's death a few months later in the same year by Sir Edward Poynter (1836-1919). Alfred's early formal figures from leading The by that the training era. many of was overseen artistic Professor of Painting during his time at the Schools was Sir William Richmond (1842-192 1), best known for his portraiture and for his mosaics for the ceiling of St in Annual listed (short Visitors Among the teachers) the term Cathedral. Paul's

"'A Memory of Anna Wilmersdoerffer' op. cit. 28Anna Wilmersdoerffer died in Munich in March 1919. 29Record no 1062, Royal Academy Schools Archives.

329

Reports of the Keeper of the Schools during the

period of Wolmark's studentship

were some of the key names of the Victorian art establishment." Solomon J Solomon, who as we have seen in the previous

chapter was an early mentor to

William Rothenstein, was a Visitor in 1896, the year in which he was elected as an ARA, and William Rothenstein's friend Charles Shannon (1863-1937) was a Visitor in 1898 and 1899.

In looking for artistic resources that had a bearing on Wolmark's early output, both contemporary critics and the artist himself towards the end of his life talked of the importance of Rembrandt. His youthful pictures were dark in tone and influenced by Rembrandt, the 32 he had influenced him. only painter remarked who ever

Whilst Wolmark did not, like Rothenstein, have a personal collection of D'a

he have had to the access same public collections and works, would Rembrandt's

books on the Dutch Master as were discussed in the previous chapter. There is in Rembrandt indicating he Amsterdam 1898 the to to that view went evidence Exhibition

" family. Perhaps Wilmersdoerffer funds the most the provided with

important work in Wolmark's early oeuvre to demonstrate this link with Rembrandt (No in (Fig. 1900 43) for Tenth RabbislWaiting The the and exhibited painted was 663) at the Royal Academy in 1903." The Rabbis depicts a group of nine, mainly it draped An tallith table. Jews across with a chair empty a around gathered elderly,

'0 The record indicates that the award was made to Aaron Wolmark. The young artist had not first his Alfred name. preferred as adopted yet " William Orchardon (1832-1910), Lawrence Alma-Tadema (1836-1912), Val Prinsep (1840Stone in 1900), Marcus Painting Professor Richmond as of (1838-1904, succeeded (1849John Waterhouse (1848-1920) Gow Andrew (1844-1927), and 1921), Luke Fildes 1917). 32 Wolmark, op. cit. 33cA Memory of Anna Wilmersdoerffer', op.cit. 2 Ch. 7. App. 34pIctorial reference

330

might indicate that a tenth person had left or was awaited

hence the sub-title -

sometimesattachedto the work Waitingfor the Tenth (ten being the required number in Jewish practice to make up a formal congregation for prayers). The Jewish

Chronicle, reviewing this work as part

its of critique of the Jewish Arts and

Antiquities Exhibition of 1906,interpretedit thus: It shows the interior of a Beth Hamidrash. A number of Rabbis are seated round a table, some poring over Talmudic tones, others discussing some difficult question of Jewish law. The faces these devoted, of old-fashioned students are typical, their figures are drawn with force and distinction. They habited in Polish gabardines.The red tallis (sic) bags lying about on the are table and the tallis thrown over one of the chairs, suggestthat the morning service has been concluded. On the raised reading desk at the far end of the hall the lights are still burning. "

Whatever the narrative explanation for the use of the device of the missing it does participant, give a senseof tension to the work. Notwithstanding the main title

and the Jewish Chronicle's comment, there is no reason why all of the subjects have been would rabbis

indeed it be for have been (In this to the would rare case. -

reality, of course, the subjects were almost certainly poor Jews from the East End, dress in Jewish to who were paid religious attire). Inspection suggests that there may have been no more than five models used in the group. (The seated figure on the left, fifth left in from different the who anchors composition, also reappears a pose. The in figure The Rabbi a single which same model was also used composition entitled in illustrations in featured 1911 Wolmark's the a short review of work was one of 16AIthough bearded, four figures the them West. the possibly all all of are und U'S--t -

in Wolmark this than the not, even much younger was others. are same model Jewish Chronicle, (9 November 1906) Supplement p. iv. 36There are possibly three versions of work by Wolmark with this title - one of these was (June 1911) dating West, 525. The Ost p. illustrated in on the painting is unclear and und figure in date '09. The depictions '99 the the be earlier same or would place of as read could in However, if it 1909 time. tie the that different might close version were paintings the two

331

somewhat traditional work with its heavy emphasison tied to the linkage 'Jews at prayer equals

study and the written word,

old men'. Unlike some of Wolmark's later

works from this period, which will be reviewed below, this

is, like the paintings work

by Rothenstein discussed in the previous chapter, located within the closed environment individual

of a Synagogue. The overall composition, the treatment of the

subjects and its tonal values are all suggestive of a Rembrandtian

influence. The work was well

received by the Magazine of Art in its May review of

that year's Royal Academy Exhibition. In this category [religious painting] should be named the large work called the Rabbis by Mr Alfred Wolmark. It is a great group of foreign Jewish worshippers imbued with such religious fervour as to carry conviction and realised with as skill so strong in character, drawing and composition as to ensure attention in the future".

Both this and the Jewish Chronicle review quoted earlier make references to

the foreign-ness of the subjects. Since this work pre-dated Wolmarks' visits to Poland, these comments would seem to be based on a West End perception of East End Jews. Wolmark was seen as having depicted subjects, who were different from 'us'.

the Anglo-Jews.

Wolmark denied any other major influences apart from Rembrandt (indeed in far his 1961 Times 'discovery' to the that going so as claim article own of colour Paris Fry however, both 1910 There to the nothing owed or around exhibitions). are, in his 'related' traits that thematic to work point another artist as an early stylistic and influence. The presence and importance in the turn of the century world of Jewish Israels discussed in Josef Wolmark the was previous chapter. as a culture and art of

'a Wolmark's in Berlin to the article recent exhibition the in of art work a reference with in gallery'. 37 Magazine ofArt, (May 1903) p. 387.

332 young student and then practising artist would have had ample

the exhibitions in London at which the latter's work

opportunity to visit

displayed. He may also was

have seen it during his time in Europe

and especially during his visit to Amsterdam

in 1898. As I indicated in the previous

it chapter, is difficult to distinguish between

the direct influences of Rembrandt, those of Rembrandt via Israels Israels himself

and those of

However, there is one pair of paintings comparison of which

demonstratesthe possibility of this linkage and might establishthe argumentnot just in this specific case but in the wider context. In 1883 Josef Israels

painted nen One

Grows Old. " Despite initial negative reception in some quarters, it became

his one of

most widely exhibited and discussed works. Probably between 1903 and 1905 Wolmark also painted Reading the Talmud (Fig. 44). " The poses of the figures in the two works, their placement in front of a fire framed by the right hand upright and high over-mantel of the fireplace, the disposition of articles around that fireplace, the

stone floors, with a cloth rag under the feet of the woman and the rug under the foot of the Rabbi, and the palette used in both works are all featureswhich could lead one to suggest that the young English painter may have aware of this Dutch piece as he is her his Although in hands over a Israels' the work warming created own. woman

low fire and the Rabbi in the Wolmark is holding his handsover what may be a book feeling is there about the two pieces and also a commonality of of study or prayer, the sympathetic examination of the physical frailty of old age. There is also a very human note in the Wolmark - close inspection suggests that the Rabbi may not be

" Pictorial reference App. 1 Ch. 7. '9 Pictorial reference App. 1 Ch.7. in by Chronicle, Fealdman, Jewish Barry the an article on This title was quoted art critic of th (June 18 1982). It Chronicle Wolmarks, Jewish 'lost' five the is possible discovery in the of Art Jewish fact A Reading Whitechapel Rabbi the and exhibited in that this work was in family. loan from Wilmersdoerfer 1906 Ernest Wilmers the Exhibition on of of Antiquities had been Wolmark's latter the title at this exhibited one man show earlier at A work with (sic)'. Krakow 'recently 1905, executed in which presented works Bruton Gallery in

333 reading, but may have fallen asleep. This almost gently humorous touch recurs in

other of Wolmark's works and is a point of contrast with the earnestintensity of Rothenstein. It seemsto demonstratethe degreeto Wolmark felt at one with which his subjects, in contrast to the outsider position that imbues Rothenstein's

works.

This familiarity with and comfort in the milieu is a key quality in Wolmark's work to which we shall return in the analyses that follow. Although the palette remains resolutely Rembrandtian, unlike The Rabbis, which was set within a closed area, the light source for this work is a small window located in the extreme upper right hand comer. The use of clearly defined sources of light from windows and by implication links to the outside world is another feature of Wolmark's

handling, which

distinguishes it from Rothenstein's use of the closed environment and which we will follow in the subsequent analysis.

Wolmark's English art training was counter-balanced by his two extended trips to Poland. The first of these began in 1903 when Alfred went not to Warsaw, the city in The Poland. leading but Cracow, the birth, time his that to art centre perhaps at of

during list do Wolmark Art Fine Cracow School as attending not of records of the in himself he indicate not as a student need this time, which would seemto regarded his light In the but formal upbringing ftirther early of trading artist. practising as a of Cracow, I that his to London two argue would in the East End of visits and better is in this understood with an ostjUdisch rather Wolmark's oeuvre early period than a purely Anglo-Jewish perspective.

the a with artist the turn young the provided century, of Cracow, just after to outside resources artistic exposure well as as environment complex socio-religious

334

the range of his previous Royal Academy training

or the WesternEuropeanresources

we have discussed.There had been Jews in Cracow and the then neighbounng town of Kazimierz from as early as the twelfth century. Although in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Church regulations

required the absolute separation of Jewish

Christian dwellings, the Jews of Cracow and

were not forced into a fort-nal ghetto. At

the end of the fifteenth century, the Jews of Cracow were made to move to Kazimierz,

where, domiciled

within

the historical

Jewish quarter, they then

comprised more than 20% of the total population. Notwithstanding this enforced few Jews remained in Cracow and the enlarged Jewish community of move a Kazimierz retained very close trading links with that city. In 1800 Kazimierz was incorporated into Cracow and gradually the restrictions on Jewish places of dwelling were relaxed, culminating in 1867 with the granting of equal civil rights to the Jews by the then ruling Austro-Hungarian monarchy. Thus, although the old Jewish life by Cracow, Jewish Kazimierz the the time centre of in quarter of was still Wolmark arrived just after the turn of the century he could have encountered and

lived among Jews in other areas."

In religious tenns, the Jews of Cracow were not formed into one single Orthodoxy. In the the nineteenth century of version same community all practising

Hassidic by the trends the and Jewish observancethere was influence of conflicting in Cracow functioning Synagogues Of at the the Reform movements. seven principal Old Synagogue, longest the the established was the turn of the twentieth century the fifteenth the beginning the the most recent Kazimierz and century of at in erected Wilmersdoerffer Anna Wolmark's based correspondence with on Risdon's research, for (10 Starowi§lna) in Kazimierz Wolmark his nine about stayed arrival that on indicates (In City to 9 Rynek the to ulica and subsequently centre) He then moved months.

335

Reform Synagogue, which

inaugurated was in 1862. There

were also numerous

smaller prayer houses dotted around the city.

It has been suggested that Wolmark 'returned to Poland in 1903

for three years to steephimself still further in the

lived there and

" old ways'. If this was indeedhis

motivation, he undertook it in the sophisticated,urban environment of a University city, whose heterogeneous Jewish population was already partially integrated. This was not a return to the shtetl of popular tradition.

In looking for artistic resources that Wolmark might have discovered

as a result

of his time in Cracow and which may have had a bearing on his subsequentoutput, I would suggest three main areas merit investigation - Jewish folk art, Jan Matejko his immediate and successors at the Cracow School of Fine Art and the works of Moritz Oppenheim, Isidor Kaufinann and Maurycy Gottlieb.

In 1912 the Russian writer Shloime AnSki (1863-1920) organised the first Jewish ethnographic expedition into the towns and villages of Volhynia and Podolia.

In 1916, spurred on by AnSki's successfuldiscoveries and financed by the Jewish Ethnographic Society, the Jewish artists Isaac Ryback (1897-1935) and El Lissitzky (1890-1941) started to explore synagogue art and architecture along the Dnieper River, again returning with evidence of a major treasure trove of folk art. Neither AnSki's work nor that of Ryback and Lissitzky could themselves have been an influence on the early Wolmark, as he had completed the Jewish subject period of his he first (19 South his Wolska) the On the stayed second visit on side of city Mikolajska. (23 Vistula Studencka). back the over before moving

336 output and was back in England long before AnSki even left on his first trip.

However, what is important is that they had

uncovered,for a wider public, evidence

of pre-existing artistic activity among the ostjUdisch shtetl communities. This would

of coursehave been known to those Jewswho had family links with such areas,were raised there or had visited them. There are no records to indicate that the Warsawbom Alfred Wolmark ventured into the isolated areas to the East his followers. His Bruton Gallery Exhibition of 1905

by AnSki visited or

included seven works noted as

being linked with the Tatras, which indicates the possibility of a visit to that region to

the south of Cracow. His correspondencewith Anna Wihnersdoerffer, however, makes no allusions to such a trip. Nevertheless, it is possible that during his time in Cracow Wolmark may have been exposed to work similar to that uncovered by AnSki and others and that such work may have become, during his 1903-06 period in Poland, part of his personal artistic heritage.

Jan Matejko (1838-1893) was one of the most influential artists working in Poland in the latter half of the nineteenth century. After his initial art training at the Cracow School of Fine Arts, Matejko spent two years in Munich and Vienna before he in 1873 based Cracow. In his life the was appointed rest of returning to spend Director of the School, a post which he held until his death twenty years later. Despite this long tenn residence in Cracow, Matejko received recognition and is life. his This the Europe when one throughout more remarkable all awards across

famous he for his on concentrated the most was that which oeuvre part of considers depiction his Poland the through to of native historical paintings that sought glorify Tribute The Prussian Typical her and of such works are past. key moments in York: (New Generations The Immigrant Goodman S. Turkman in ed., 41Muriel Emanuel, 48. Museum) p The Jewish

337

KoS"ciuszkoat Raclawice both of which were in the possessionof the National Gallery of Cracow before Wolmark's arrival." Painted on a very large scale these multi-figure

compositions were intended to create and reinforce a feeling of Polish

identity and nationality. Matejko was a major influence on the generations of Polish

artists who were his contemporariesand successors. Gottlieb's biographers all concur that the turning point in the young artist's career was his encounter with the works of Matejko in 1873.43

Gottlieb forms part of an artistic trio of potential influence on the young Wolmark, which also included the German Moritz Oppenheim and the Austrian Isidor Kaufmann. I am not suggesting that these three should be viewed as representing any sort of artistic continuum, but rather that they may be taken as in development lineage in Jewish the of painters nineteenthpoints of reference of a have impacted in different Europe. Their century works may ways on the artistic development of Alfred Wolmark and it seems likely that he would have had more for ftom tum-of-the-century them the to point of vantage exposure opportunity

Cracow than from London.

Moritz Oppenheim, who was bom in the Judengasse in Hannau in 1800 and died in 1882, is sometimes referred to as the 'first Jewish painter'. Both as a painter

in interest he Testament Old from the revealed an and as a portraitist of scenes including his day figures leading Jewish He the of Jewish subjects. painted many of for Jewish (1797-1856), Heine two the main protagonists of and the poet Heinrich Riesser Gabriel Dr (1786-1837) Bbme Ludwig Germany, and in emancipation known best is, the however, he As a painter of as (1806-1863). a portraitist

42Pictonial references App. 1 Ch. 7. Guralnik (ed), in In Nehama A Polish Perspective', Gottlieb: 'Maurycy 43Jerzy Malinowski, 95. Art, 199 1), Museum Aviv (Tel Youth, p. of Flower of the

338

Rothschilds. He also acted as family

an art adviser and dealer to various membersof the

from 1855 1863 he his to suborned own artistic

production to that role." For

the young Jewish artists who followed, the Oppenheim/Rothschild link demonstrated the possibility

of finding financial stability and artistic support from within the

Jewish community.

Oppenheim's reputation as the 'first Jewish painter' rests, however, not on these biblical scenes or portraits, but on his Jewish genre paintings brought together in his magnum opus, his Bilder aus dem alyfidischen Familienleben. This series of illustrations was first produced as a set of six in 1866. The artist added to these in

successiveeditions, so that in its final 1882 state it comprised twenty plates. These images the they contained were very publications enjoyed great popularity and in in both lifetime the thereafter widely promulgated and a wide variety of artist's decorations from to media ranging single sheets post cards and as on china plates and it is It that this make possible very popularity and easy availability similar objects. that the young Wolmark became familiar with at least this part of Oppenheim's his Poland. during time in oeuvre

The representation of Jewish ritual was by no means an innovation created by Oppenheim and Heinrich Keller, the Frankfurt publisher who originally suggested (London, Bible Dictionary Calmet's include the Earlier of the project. examples 1734), (Nuremberg, Ceremoniel Adisches Kirchner's Christian and 1732), Paul

` Annette Weber, 'Moritz Daniel Oppenheim and the Rothschilds', in Georg Heuberger and des Oppenheim. Die Entdeckung jüdischen Daniel Moritz (eds), Merck Anton 173. 2000), (Frankfurt: Museum, Jüdisches Kunst, der in p. Selbstbewussteins

339 Bodenschatz' Kirchliche

Verfassung der Juden, (Erlangen, 1748)." Many of the

earlier series were executed by non-Jewish artists and presented Jewish rituals in the context of depictions of 'other' religions that deviated from an assumed norm of Christianity. In contrast the Opperiheim works form an autonomous series created by Jew a and accompanied by an explanatory text by Leopold Stein,

a former Chief

Rabbi of Frankfurt. Andreas Gotzmannhas arguedthat the seriesshould not be taken ca as more or less realistic portrayal of Jewish life

the a nostalgic glorification of ...

but past' rather as 'part of an internal search for Jewish identity on the construction of an honourable past as a guarantee for the future'. " Taking a lead from Richard Cohen he goes on to suggest that the more limited, but thematically similar, series by the English artist Simeon Solomon may have provided the impetus for the " in Oppenheim's Solomon first The the 9 publication of work. series appeared August 1862 edition of Once a Week and then again in 1866 (on an individual basis) in The Leisure Hour, 'a family j oumal of instruction and recreation' published by the Religious Tract Society. It is possible that Keller knew of the 1862 publication, but it footsteps following in he likely the the that of of some earlier was seems more

described above. examples

What is important about both of these series for Wolmark is not so much the images themselves but the fact that their publication made such subjects legitimate in figures historical/Biblical Whereas Jewish the some for succeeding almost artists. derive (as images their in Wolmark see) shall we Rothenstein's early works and of 45 Copies of these illustrations and fuller details are contained in Alfred Rubens, Jewish London. Museum, Jewish the konography at 46 Andreas Gotzmann, 'Traditional Jewish Life Revisited: Moritz Daniel Oppenheim's Daniel (eds), Moritz Anton Merck Georg Heuberger Jewry', Modem and in Vision of (Frankfurt: der Kunst, des Selbstbewussteins in ffidischen Entdeckung Oppenheim. Die ff. 232 2000), Museum, pp. JUdisches

340 artistic legitimacy from Rembrandt, it is difficult to conceive of some of the later Wolmark works, which will be discussed further in this section, existing without the

examples quoted above.

Isidor Kaufinann (18 53 1) born in Arad (now in Rumania), was and moved -192 to Vienna in 1875. Because of his long-term residence there and his membership of the Wiener Kiinstlerhaus from 1888 until his death, he is regarded as a Viennese aurtist. Given the popularity of Kaufmann's work within European Jewish circles Wolmark might well have become acquainted with it during his time in Poland. What makes this more likely is the fact that for several years from 1894 Kaufmann travelled and worked extensively in Eastern Europe and is for example known to have spent time in Cracow in 1896." Many of Kaufinann's portrayals of Eastern European Jews were sanitized, romanticised and sentimentalised representations of the shtetl that masked the real poverty and deprivation of so much of real life in such in from Eastern Europe Kauftnann times those very parts of communities. was at for fleeing in Jews thousands their politico-religious reasons not simply were which but to escape from their extreme economic deprivation. Yet little of this appears in Kaufmann's work. The world he depicts often seemsto have been inhabited by clean Talmud), (A Passage in Difficult the tidy expensively clad congregants children and " (Sabbath There Day). in Dead), (Mourning the teachers well ordered surroundings his Kauftnann disorder is little evidence of poverty, viewers presented and squalor.

from be 'old that the idealised afar regarded could one world', of picture with an traditional the of of virtues set as an example up and even with warm nostalgia 47 Wolinark,

160-62. Cohen, Jewish kons, to pp. op. cit., referring

4' G. Tobias Natter, Bilder des Wiener Malers. Isidor Kaufmann (Vienna: Ridisches 341 1995) et seq pp. Museum,

341

Jewish practice to be

contrasted with westernised, so-called orthodoxy or its even

more iconoclastic offspring Reform Judaism. Kaufmann's Eastern Europe fit in

precisely with the aims of Ost und West,providing models of

Jews and Jewish practice to be

Kaufinann's

representations from

emulatedrather than denigrated.

works from this period were exhibited in the annual Wiener

Kiinstlerhaus Exhibitions as well as being reproduced in Ost West, in und connection with the 1907 Ausstellung jüdischer Künstler. Kaufinann's expeditions among the Ostjuden and his sympathetic portrayals provide another resource for Wolmark to incorporate in his own work among the Jews of Cracow during his time there

and

among the immigrant Ostjuden of the East End to whom he was to return after 1906.

Maurycy Gottlieb (1856-1879) was bom in Drohobycz, Poland (which was also the birthplace of Samuel Hirszenberg (1866-1908) and E. M. Lilien) and his in Lemberg, Vienna, Cracow and Munich. One of the training received artistic main features of his limited output was his concern with Polish and Jewish themes

and his desire to link the two. In 1876 he began painting on Jewish themes with Ahasuerus, Shylock and Jessica and commenced his illustrations for Nathan the Wise, in the following year he painted Uriel D Acosta and Judith van Straaten and in 1878 he executed one of his best known works, Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur. " Alfred

Wolmark knew, and indeed painted, Maurycy's younger

brother Leopold Gottlieb (1883-1934). This family connection and his own time in Cracow could therefore have provided him with opportunities to become familiar

49pictorial references App. I Ch. 7. 51plctorial references App. I Ch. 7.

342

with Maurycy Gottlieb's Work.5' Although, as we have already Wolmark was defiantly his Polish roots as

observed,the older

proud of his Englishness,his birth, upbringing and return to

a young artist all point to the potential importance of the Polish

strain in his self-identification at this time. If this is a correct hypothesis,it is

easyto

see why the figure of Gottlieb striving to reconcile Polish nationality and Jewish religious and ethnic roots would have been of singular significance to him. Some

Gottlieb's now better-known works historicize their D'Acosta, paintings

subjects - as for example the

for them illustrations for Nathan or exoticise the as example -

the Wise. However, some of the lesser known works (and the sketchesfor them) Jews in the Synagogue, Rabbi's Blessing and Jews Praying

have could provided -

precedents for subsequent images by Wolmark both in terms of their themes and their treatment.

Although Wolmark's second major work, The Last Days of Rabbi Ben Ezra (Fig. 45), painted in 1903 in Poland, is indebted to Rembrandt, I would suggest that its conception in Cracow was not simply coincidental. " Just as Gottlieb, inspired by

Matejko, sought to combine his Polish and Jewish identities, so Wolmark, influenced by the historical canvasesof Matejko and the Jewish themes of Gottlieb, may have his his Polishness, Jewishness and his Englishness in this work. to sought reconcile Stylistically, the size and scope of this painting and its use of an historical theme its have Jewish Polish In the treatment to echoes of subject master. of a would seem

" At least two of Maurycy Gottlieb's works Ahasuerus and Portrait of Ignacy Kuranda National during Museum Wolmark's Cracow the time the of collection in in were already largest family the Beres The probably of the early patrons of Gottlieb's work were also there. this time. Cracow at in resident 52 I Ch. App. 7. Pictorial references 5' Abraham ben Meir Aben (or Ibn) Ezra 1092-1167.. November 9th 1906 Chronicle Jewish of contained a picture of the young artist with a The him at work in his studio in Cracow on studies for this work. describing caption

343

it may have been influenced by had been the subject

the works of Gottlieb. By choosing a subject who

of a major poem by Browning -a quote from which (Tet age

speak the truth and give us peace at last') was used in the Bruton Gallery 1905 Exhibition of his works he English was also providing an almost contemporary " reference. Perhaps he also knew that the Hebrew

believed have to sage was visited

England during his travels.

Norman Kleeblatt has discussed this work in terms of its importance as 'both an act of cultural identity and a defense of his [Wolmark's]

people' and the

significance of the subject, based on a poem by Browning, 'a well known Hebraicist " Jewish and champion of causes'. Kleeblatt refers to the twin themes of Eastern European scholarship and the spiritual generosity of the Jews that are united in this in depicts have The the taken the twelfth scene which painting place work. would in instance link However, to the the to this reference provides a century. scholarship idea (and its Ostjuden the and positive connotations, among which was concept of indeed the reality) that Eastern Europe was the source of traditional Jewish religious instance his Englishness, that Wolmark's the Despite cultural identity on wisdom.

this picture also declaresis that of an Ostjude.

Wolmark's Jewish World Poland5the Pale and Whitechapel TheJewish World"

be believed is to Jewish Wohnark's Although much of subjects early work on

is far it indicate has that to more extensive a survived lost or untraced, sufficient 54oil Paintings; Recently executed in Krakow by Alfred A Wolmark. 55N. Kleeblatt, 'Master Narratives/Minority Artists', Art Journal Fall, 1998.

344

body of work than that familiarity

Rothenstein. Wolmark's work is characterisedby a of

and apparent ease with his subject matter. Far from denying his

Jewishness in these early

works, Wolmark positively rejoiced in it. In an undated but

contemporary (to the period of this study) lecture given to the Jewish Association

Arts and Science on The Jew in Art Wolmark staked out a position that is diametrically opposite that to which Rothenstein would have laid claim. " I speak as a Jew to Jews. I aim to show what the Jew Art is and in was, ... ought to be. ... If we Jews want to produce great works of art we must do so as Jews not as Englishmen, Frenchmen or any other men. We may become English or French in time if we like but not great men; but we can become great English-men, French-men or any other men if we try to do what we I am afraid the Jew can as Jews; only as Jews can we produce the great. ... has forgotten himself in modem times; he has forgotten to think like a Jew. He has been trying hard for years to be anything but himself and the sad results are only too evident. ... It is not the Jewish picture not the Jewish story that makes Jewish Art. Again it is the Jewishnessthat is lacking in the is It be English, French or German or anything but itself trying to work. ... to the artists here. You will seethat right through my paper I insist on Jewishness in Art. Individuality of your Race expressedin your art.

Whereas Rothenstein strove to anglicise himself and to find a universal spirituality in his representations of the Jew, Wohnark

sought to celebrate their essential

Jewishness. Because they were working contemporaneously, may have used some of the same models and both exhibited works depicting East End Jews at the 1906 Whitechapel Gallery Jewish Art and Antiquities Exhibition, it is appealing to accept the assertion that these two young artists in fact worked together. However, there Neither be this. to to artist mentions support no corroborating evidence would seem

is indeed documents letters in there would the other and such evidence as or other " The to the possibility of active collaboration. seem to pose serious questions as

56May 10'h 1907. The critic's review of The Disputation (see below) referred to it as being a Whitechapel. Pale the Poland, and mixture of 57Tate Gallery Wolmark Archive Records. Probably c1915/6. The JAAS seemsto have had MSS. Risdon a very short existence. 51 Charles Spencer in his notes to The Immigrant Generations (New York: Jewish Museum, based his is Rothenstein This Wolmark together. that 29) and on worked states 1983, p.

345

fundamental differences in

philosophy described above would have made them

strange studio companions and adds to my scepticism about this co-operation.

In the Synagogue (Fig. 46) depicts two Jews tefillin (phylacteries)

probably - given their wearing of

" In images de-emphasise at morning to that prayers. contrast -

the Jewishness of the subject, this work presents us with a close and detailed study, which omits nothing. Both of the figures are wearing tefillin, which are shown not

just on their headsand hands,but in the caseof the foreground figure of the pair

with

the leather strap along his forearm. There is no attempt to attenuate this part of the liturgy or to conceal it within a project of Anglicisation or as part of a universal spirituality. This is Orthodox Judaism as actually practised. The forearm is a first point of focus, because its flesh colour contrasts with the more muted tones that it. is The surround viewer almost thrust against it physically and obliged to examine the seven fold winding of the strap (signifying the days of the week) and the interlacing across the hand which form v, the first letter of the Hebrew for Almighty.

is latter Whilst Wolmark, there to the no reason an old man. when was with conversations doubt that Wolmark himself made such a claim, there would equally seem to be no evidence in the contemporaneous records of either artist to support it. Mary Lago states that Rothenstein 'asked Alfred Wolmark, one of East London's first Jewish artists, to arrange for him to paint local types there [in Spitalfields]' (footnote to a Rothenstein letter of December 7th 1903 Max and Will, p5 1). However, she also produces no documentary corroboration. In , the letter to which this note is appendedRothenstein refers only to 'getting into a new room at dated letter life"'. Similarly Jewish "scenes I to Spitalfields, where am preparing paint in a of January 2nd 1902 to Butler-Wood, Director of Cartwright Hall, Bradford, inviting him for a I having in Spitalfields, "a to while Rothenstein stay usually where refers workroom visit, Wolmark to (Bradford Archive 68/D88/6/7e) Ref daylight" allusion and makes no there is had left Wolmark 1903 By July that particular endeavour. sharing or even playing any role in for what was to be almost two years in Poland. Not long after, Rothenstein's models were for Jewish day bicycle longer ('I his Hampstead him my every studios no need to at coming Memories, Men Hampstead'. W. Rothenstem, to to vol. and come willing now were models joint for direct artistic contact or actual any prolonged, 2, p. 94). Thus the opportunities key Jewish during Rothenstein's the seem subjects on period of work working relationship few indeed. " Pictorial Reference App. 2 Ch. 7. The dating of In the Synagogue among Wolmark's early Ben from frame based label back is the the to the Jewish on a of attached subjects works on date. 1897 as its Uri Gallery, quoting

346

Notwithstanding the title, prayers are not being said in some large synagogue, but in a small room that has been decked

out for the purpose - possibly a room in a

private home or perhaps the more permanent arrangement of a chevrah. The congregation may be assumed to be crowded together in front of the makeshift

pulpit, with a book and two candles,just visible between the two figures. Another version of this scene (reproduced in the 1908 Ost und West article on Wolmark) Praying Jews - depicting three figures, shows even more clearly the improvised nature of the room, with a curtain created by a tacked up fabric and the board at the back of the pulpit with a Hebrew inscription. "

The main figure in both compositions is a heavy set, early middle-aged man. This is a marked departure from those images which all depicted elderly men - in the tradition of an ancient religion to be represented by the old. This representation owes far more to, say, the example of Simeon Solomon's A Bearded Rabbi than it does to the subjects of the Whitechapel series by Rothenstein or even to the gentlemanly figures in the works of Oppenheim." His positioning in both works might be read as him; figures, is he the the that who accompany more elderly protector of suggesting thus identifying an alternative way of presenting the Jew.

in frequent is Jews This use of young and middle-aged occurrence the work a (Fig. in 47), 1898 Book His Young Rabbi in this Wolmark executed with a period. of both (1904) (Simchas Torah) Law later Rejoicing in the present the somewhat and the viewer

boy in latter figures the a young case with adult and smiling younger, with

60Ost und West, (October 1908) pp. 620 ff. No details of this work are available.

347

as a worshipper 6' Theseworks are a far cry from the depictions of older subjectsthat . typified images in the lachrymosetradition.

Just as Wohnark's Rejoicing in the Law presents

a very different aspect of and

attitude to worship when compared with Rothenstein's work on this theme, so his Two Rabbis presents a less formal depiction of Talmud

" study. The two subjects are

by face table seated a and outwards towards what is hinted at as

a window, through

light is streaming thus providing a two way link with the outside world. which Although both figures are engrossed in their study the atmosphere is without the intensity which pervades Rothenstein's work on the same subject and there is no A sense of enclosure. stylistically and thematically linked work The Learned Ones takes this respectful but non-reverential attitude on the part of the artist a stage

further." The picture would seemto be located in the sameroom as that used for the Two Rabbis - the table, brass chandelier and window (more clearly defined) are by in hinted frame the the the former apparently same; only a picture at edge of a in depicted in is latter. In this the missing picture seven male subjects are study work

left figures face but discussion. All towards the to the the window one of seven out or his is the own outstretched artn of composition and one actually slumped asleep on dating The that by the two lulled the the suggests of works sun. wannth of perhaps included in in Cracow the been have they though they may were not painted and of Bruton Gallery Exhibition of that year. Just as images of Devon, perhaps worked up

" Pictorial reference App. 1 Ch. 7. 62 Law, App. Ch. 8. Rejoicing Book Pictorial I in the Rabbi oil on Young reference with a dimensions and whereabouts unknown. Exhi 1 at the Royal Academy 1904, dated canvas in Ost in Gallery Exhibition 1905. Reproduced Cracow Pictures Bruton the of 1904 at and in 526. 11, 19 West, p. und 63Pictorial reference App. I Chap.7. 64Reproduced in Ost und West (October 1908) p. 617, whereabouts and details unknown. 1905. dated image The is

348

in a studio from

sketchesthe artist took with him to Cracow, were included in the

Bruton Gallery Exhibition,

so theseimagesmay have been executedin London based

on earlier sketchesfrom elsewhere.

Not all of Wolmark's Jewish works share this combination of reverence and warmth. In a Synagogue is a far stemer work (Fig. 48). " The subject of the work, once again a young man, is isolated, in front of the almost deserted pews of what, judging by the title, the artist wishes the viewer to take as Synagogue. The four a disposed figures in the background are not linked to him in any way. The variously closest, sitting behind what would appear to be a table in front of his pew, is deeply engrossed in prayer or study. The figure behind him, leaning over the pew in a pose reminiscent of that adopted by one of the two foreground figures in Rothenstein's In the SpitaUlields Synagogue, looks out towards the viewer. To the left of the main in between further figures the two subject an aisle seating are

judging one child, a -

by his height compared to that of the pews. The summary nature of their technical indicate intended to that they execution would seem were as very much subsidiary to the main figure. The works by Wolmark previously discussed all depict potentially in his Although this the work, subject of real moments of subjects at prayer or study. flowing tallith, might be praying, the absence of a prayer book, his positioning in a his physical attitude are all more suggestive of a quasi-theatrical stage space and

in deliberately located has been that a vague study of contemplation and meditation in be found is Although to in fashion such open space often a place of worship. by front in it be layout the a single Synagogue of occupied pews, would not congregant

his be bearing The literally to subject seems almost or minister at prayer.

65oil on canvas, 60.7 cm x 88.3 cm, 1906, Private collection.

349

own troubles - or perhapsthose of his race on his shoulders.This work falls within the genre described by the Jewish Chronicle reviewer of the 1906 Exhibition

as a

depiction of Judenschmerz.

The Disputation was probably intended to depict a location in a Talmud School or a room of a Synagogue." A window to the left of the composition is clearly in evidence - providing not just the source of light but also the link to the world is It outside. a work that combines the depiction of serious religious study with a leavening of humour. A young man would appear to be expounding to or being questioned by his elders on a point of Jewish law or doctrine. The other main in this debate, the red bearded seated figure, leans on his hand smiling. protagonist Notwithstanding the title, this is not presented as an intense religious dispute but been its lighter have is discussion Wolmark to that seems side. not without rather as a

in his The depict in to therefore this subjects relaxed vein. able at ease world and in figures interesting. All is the the the are placed of work very composition of by front bottom defined table in the the the and at of edge at an area middle ground framed bottom the by formed the by line to the the edge of the top right and shelf a

base by defined is table the the in Within triangle there this same text the centre. a define From figure this the head is the one can rear. at standing of edge. Its apex the his back to the head down the the of man young seated of over running one side as figure the head to down the the seated of the over side as running other and chair figure is inner from Excluded triangle his this a standing arm. upper right and along is he least four the texts, there person Although only open at other are the to right.

1907, Pnvate 139.7 107.9 cm, collection. cm x Oil on canvas,

350 actually studying one. As its title implies, perhaps the key to this work is the

depiction of disputation,

of actual discussion,rather than the study of text.

Judging by the presence of a painting

of a cockerel and a miniature portrait on

the wall behind the subjects of The Elders (or The Ghetto Conference as it is

sometimes called) it is probably fair to assumethat this sceneis located outsidethe body main of a Synagogue or Talmud Torah, where

such decoration - and indeed

where the smoking of a pipe - would have been inappropriate. " There is a similarity between theme this picture and the earlier The Disputation. of

Once again a

discussion is being held between a younger figure and his elders. Although none

the figures are depicted actually speaking, the young man, attired perhaps in street

clothes, would seemto be the intended focus of attention for the other three - much figures older and the viewer. The centre line of the work is clearly defined, running down to the right hand edge of the framed picture and the stem of the pipe in the hands of the figure clad in black. The young man, who occupies all of the fore and

left-hand is the the middle ground of side of composition counterposedwith the other three and pictorially balanced by the juxtaposition of his light coloured outer gannent figure book The the the tallith to the the that he right of composition. with white of

holds in his left hand just below his knee might be read as indicating that he has The just textual their response. central, comment and now awaits made perhaps its (the European figure origins) style of whose pipe reveals middle/eastern smoking, intently, figures the the to the two the man right of whereas younger studies in be This the the thought. old more wrapped and mixing of young seem composition

67Oil on canvas, 105.4 cm x 134.6 cm, 1908, Private collection. Also entitled The Ghetto (October Ost West in 1908) 601-02. und pp. Conference, reproduced

351 and the possibility of a location outside the closed walls of the Synagogue stand in

marked contrast to the world depictedby Rothenstein.

At the outset of this section I referred to the

pivotal position of Wolmark in

terms of his position as a link between the previous generation of Anglo-Jewish artists and the so-called immigrant generation. There is however another sense in Wolmark which occupied a pivotal position. Whereas much of Rothenstein's Jewish oeuvre was produced within what might be termed traditional academic practice with debts and references to past masters, Wolmark embraced modernity in his artistic practice within the final phase of his painting of Jewish subjects.

Wolmark's Sabbath Afternoon (Fig. 49), which depicts a man and a woman in (a engrossed study mitzvah [blessed act] often carried out in Orthodox Jewish

homes on the Sabbathafternoon),presentsa seriesof shifts from the works discussed nu

aDOVe.

far less focussed on an examination of its subjects as individuals.

Technically the work has areas of scumbled impasto painting -a practice that was is its heart in The the two the composition not of previous works. not in evidence depicting brightly but figures the the of painting passage coloured very studying 1920s) (to Wolmark's 1910 From the oeuvre mid/late approximately outside world. believe daring I bright by the that the colour. often and use of was characterised

"Sabbath afternoon, ca. 1910, Oil on Canvas, 73.6 cm x 61cm, Gitl and Marton Braun. Thereis uncertaintyasto the datingof this work, which wasnot datedby Wolmark list describes A by this its the composition a of prepared time artist work the execution. of at be having been done 63.5 1900. This (size 76.2 cm x cm) as may or may not reliable in lapse. In 1983 a work on the sametheme,with the same time the information given (73.6 Museum Jewish 61 the of size similar cm cm) shown very x was at of and composition been having Generations Exhibition Immigrant in the and was cataloguedas New York hassubsequently had The then the 10. the 19 in current owner and re-stretched work painted larger than thosegiven above,are quotedin the appendix. dimensions,which are slightly later date to the for aresetout in the maintext. Thereasons my attTibution

352 central portion of this composition foreshadows

or may indeed be an example of this

phase of Wolmark's work. This, and the other changes to which I referred, leads me to suggest that the picture was painted at or towards the 1900. This view is reinforced by its

end of the decade rather than

stylistic similarities with some of Sickert's work

of this time - for example Mornington

Crescent Nude, Contre-Jour

'9 1907. The of

representation of the outside world from the window through which light is flooding into the interior and the use of a scumbled impasto effect is common to both works.

The difference in attitude between Wolmark as the insider and Rothenstein as the outsider is perhaps most vividly illustrated in their depictions of Torah study and religious

discussion. Rothenstein's representations were characterized by their

imbues his Whitechapel In Wolmark's that gravitas -a quality all of contrast, works. have far more relaxed - sometimes representations of similar scenes are, as we seen, Sabbath his Inspection humour of within compositions. even revealing moments of

Afternoon reveals the presenceof two balls of wool on the floor. In one sensethese however, Sabbath; be for be the the that such work cannot carried out on may ciphers is the feeling of relaxation as opposed to intense study, one might almost anticipate the arrival of a family cat.

Portrayals of the Sabbath afternoon, during which families relax together least Jewish by two Synagogue, the at were executed after the morning service in Moritz familiar. been have Wolmark the may young painters, with whose work dem image, in his Sabbath Bilder Rest included altjfidischen aus such an Oppenheim

69Oil on canvas, 50.8 cm x61.1 cm, 1907, Art Gallery of South Australia, Adelaide.

353 Familienleben series. The Polish born Samuel Hirszenberg (1866-1908) addressed this theme, somewhat more

contemporaneously to Wolmark in his monumental The

Sabbath Rest, a multi-figure

composition in which three generations of a family

listen to one of their

" number reading. Although I have been unable to uncover

evidence to suggest that Wolmark had seen this work, the similarity between it and Wolmark's composition is not simply thematic. Hirszenberg's work also employs light from large window located almost at its centre and the scene through that window is similar both in the view it presents and the colours. Both pictures also include the presence of women (and in Hirszenberg's case children) to emphasisethe familial nature of Judaism within the home.

The figure of a studying woman within the context of art production by or t.. n

Jews be found frequently in i to the iidisch than seems more works ost artists of about

in those of the West. In addition to the work of Hirszenberg cited above, Gottlieb's Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur includes the female congregants and Kauftnann's

Young Woman in Synagogue provides the viewer with a radically

different viewpoint of the Jewish woman at prayer than for example his more traditional Friday Evening. " The inclusion of a woman in Sabbath Afternoon may

therefore be evidence of Wolmark's debt to his excursionsto Cracow.

Succoth, another undated work, was also probably produced about 1910 (Fig. 50). " Although the composition only includes six figures, the manner in which they full is Synagogue depicted over of one another suggestive of a very crowding as are " Oil on canvas, 151 cm x 208 cm, 1894, Ben Uri Gallery, London. 72Pic refs for Gottlieb I and Kaufmann 2 Oil on wood, 72.4 cm x 90.2 cm, undated, the York. New Museum, Jewish

354 congregants attending the particularly joyous festival in the Jewish religious calendar. It depicts a scene during a religious service

-a

theme similar to that of

earlier works - and may even have involved someof the samemodels,but combines them in a new and original fashion. Although the subject of the

painting -a Succoth

service in a synagogue - can be easily read from the presence of the lulav, it is almost less important than the overall harmony of colour and texture. The use of bright colour, though hinted at in earlier works, emerges here as a key

attribute. The

scumbled impasto effect, while not eliminating the readability of the figures represented, suggests that the artist attributed as much importance to surface and There is insistence linearity, pattern. an on as evidenced by the furniture, the stripes head the tallithot, the of pieces of the Torah and the lulav. These are characteristics that have more in common with some of the artistic practices of emerging

backward than modernism with a referenceto older precedents.

A significant indication of contemporary recognition of his move to the

is fact be found in Wolmark the that to was the only member of the earlier modem in for be Epstein/Bomberg Jewish to the selection artists represented generation of the Jewish Section of the Twentieth Century Art Exhibition at the Whitechapel in 1914, which will be examined in detail in the next chapter. The iconoclastic young in Wolmark's dissonance Bomberg David work placing apparently saw no rebel in his Gertler, Meninsky, Rosenberg, his that contemporaries of own and alongside Nadelman from Slade Kisling, School Art the End East and of and the and he had brought back from for For Exhibition. Paris the this Modigliani, whose work

73 Oil

245 Private 245 cm, undated, cm x collection. on canvas,

355

Jewish Chronicle reviewer

of the Exhibition Wolmark's' work was one of the few

highlights. Mr Wolmark's Portrait of Himseýf deserves considerable credit for the fine vigour and directness of its touch. There is a strength and certainty about the brush work, which would go a long way to make the artist's reputation, even if his work were not so well known and appreciated."

As we shall see when we return to this review in the context of some of the other artists, this was praise indeed.

1914). May (I 5h Chronicle 74jewish

356

CHAPTER 8 Epilogue

The Tercentenary Exhibition of 1956 No Englishman could look at it without a certain pride that it was this country, which had offered tolerance and hospitality to a persecutedminority '.

In 1956, an Exhibition of Anglo-Jewish Art & History in commemoration of the Tercentenary of the Resettlement of the Jews in the British Isles took place at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London and was seen by its promoters as one part of a year-long celebration of that event'. The initial impetus for this came from the Spanish & Portuguese Synagogue, the oldest surviving, formal institution of the Jewish community in England, and that which had been most directly involved in the Resettlement '. Implementation moved to the Jewish Historical Society of England its driving forces historian, Jewish Cecil Roth, Richard the and principal were Barnett, Head of the near Eastem Antiquities Department of the British Museum,

Committee, Alfred Chairman Exhibition Rubens, the of and who acted as who was Honorary Secretary'. The Exhibition was opened by Viscount Samuel, Chain-nanof tb Chronicle 13 January Committee, Jewish the Tercentenary recorded, of who, as the & Albert Museum director Victoria by Laver, the James the with of was greeted interest Samuel Lord 'We of not as a representative of any sectional welcome words be but Englishman'. This that positive to the community as a great would seem discourse in Jews English the the the of of position society, which of confirmation had Exhibition Historical Anglo-Jewish sought to establish so many years earlier.

357 Apart from a readily `F

comprehensible desire to celebrate three hundred years

of Jewish presence in the United Kingdom, there were other motives underlying this project - coming, as it did, so soon after the then recently concluded Second World War. It was, and is still, open to a reading as a re-confirmation of the fteedom from oppression for so long enjoyed by Jews in England. It was, however, also a reminder host to the for Jewish to the community, community as a whole and yet another, new refugee Jewish community - of the terms under which this freedom had been

is how little is What therefore to the obtained and maintained. observe significant terms of reference for this Exhibition and its underlying discourse had changed in the Albert Anglo-Jewish held Royal Historical Exhibition the the seventy years, since at Hall in 1887. The debt to the 1887 Exhibition as its 'true predecessor' was overtly Exhibition immediately first 1956 Tercentenary in the the acknowledged page of and Catalogue and by the format adopted for the early segments of the Exhibition itself.

Notwithstanding

its formal title, the 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition in fact

began its story not in 1656, but about four hundred years earlier in the period prior to Exhibition. The for 1887 the 1290 Expulsion the the chosen point same starting of 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition, taking its lead from 1887, cast the Jews of Mediaeval England as inter alia the financial instruments of Royalty. In tenns of exhibits the 1656 from 1290 to Historical Exhibition Anglo-Jewish 1887 moved seamlessly virtually

ignoring the issue of any Jewish presence during the period from the

dwelt, Exhibition In 1956 Tercentenary the contrast Expulsion to Re-admittance. intervening 366 in in history Jews England the the the briefly, of of aspects on albeit its interest. Historical to since research before main periods of on moving years, 1887, some

figure in key initiated by have Lucien Wolf, seen a as we of which was

358 the 1887 Amglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition,

and inter alia by subsequent members

of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Society made it inaccurate to continue to suggest that there was no such Jewish

presence in this period.

A cursory examination of the catalogue

reveals acknowledgement of little

more than a handful of Exhibits common to both Exhibitions the perhaps most famous of which would have been the Bodleian Ewer '. However,

detailed a more

investigation indicates that the direct debt of the later Exhibition to its Victorian predecessor was far more pervasive. In terins of visual representation more than fifty items displayed in 1956 had also been exhibited in 1887 and, in addition, the

same

topic or person was sometimes displayed by use of an alternative image or item '. The two Exhibitions were in reality much closer than one might at first suspect. This congruity applied not just to artefacts of historical interest and to the choice of

individuals, through whom the Jewish community was historically and visually but importantly to a common underlying discourse. represented, more

Almost inevitably any Exhibition that celebrates the presence of a minority larger host be draw to group within a community will obliged on the same relatively limited repository of leading individuals. The 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition would

therefore have been inconceivable without representationof such major figures as, for example, Benjamin Disraeli,

Sir Moses Montefiore

and members of the

Rothschild family. These, however, are less significant as support to my argument

than the inclusion of a much wider range of representations that indicate the by the two Exhibitions. The deployment, at one end of the discourse shared figures from leading the rabbinical seventeenth century onwards of spectrum,

359

revealed a continued use of such tropes as the ancient religion, 'the Jew' as old, the wisdom of the venerable religious leader. Predictably Jewish civic leaders, political and financial, members of the professions and scholars, occupied the middle ground of the presentation. However, interestingly, at what one might characterise as the other end of the spectrum, the 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition also displayed the same

groups of eighteenth and nineteenthcentury theatrical stars and boxers, who had also appeared seventy years earlier. During the inter-War period another group of successful Jewish boxers had emerged from the East End as had a similar group of Music Hall and theatrical figures, but, although they might have been better known to a 1956 audience than their earlier counterparts, their existence went unrecorded in the 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition. This, I would suggest, indicates that for the organisers of that Exhibition the inclusion of the earlier boxers was linked, once again, to images of 'the Jew' as part of the 'Sporting Life'

late scene of

eighteenth/early nineteenth century England rather than to any celebration of 6muscular Jewry' or athletic prowess, just as the inclusion of earlier theatrical stars deliberate 'beau-monde' It recalled a of an earlier era. might also suggest a perhaps decision not draw a link between potentially romanticised figures of a distant past impoverished inter-War from fighters the the and actors and more prosaic realities of East End. Finally, the use of these eighteenth and nineteenth century figures also ties in with the concept of the presentation of the Jew as a part of a history shared with involved. been in had Jewish host the actively the population community, one which interhave bias. however, As had, the This view a strong class sought after seen we its into history had located English been Jew the almost exclusIvely at weaving of from lower The contemporary not of equivalents would social strata use end. upper That framework leadership that said within to a civic of religious and need. respond

360 achievement, the diversity, range and depth of the Jewish contribution to heritage was clearly

an English

still felt to be an issue worth exploring and celebrating in 1956.

Like its 1887 predecessor, the 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition

excluded

virtually any depiction or discussion of the Jewish poverty in the medieval past, among the immigrants of the late nineteenth century or the refugees of the inter- and post-War periods. The exclusion by the 1887 Exhibition

of the presence and

continuing growth of the indigent, immigrant community might perhaps have been excused on the grounds that at that time its full impact was only just occurring and from the writings of Booth and others being documented. By 1956 it was far more a matter of established historical fact. Where the 1956 Tercentenary Exhibition did

immigration in it it in to did the the refer mass and manner which was managed, so terms that were clearly favourable to the Jewish establishmentof that earlier time and in ways that would certainly not have garnered the agreement either of those outside that circle, who were contemporary to the events, or of recent revisionist historians of

this penod. The community was thus prepared to meet the new problems, which it from from 1881 onwards, when great numbers of refugees gladly shouldered Tzarist persecution in Russia arrived, strengthening Anglo-Jewry not only but The older communities of and intellectually. also spiritually numerically the country were reinforced and some - eg Manchester, Leeds, Glasgow be little had been to of numerical significance, came previously of which importance'. major

The concept of the immigrant flow as a benign, welcome and mutually strengthening influence ignores the problems of splits and divisions within the community over ideas' 'socialist the the concerns and real over of very importation religious practice, led the the the to to in of provincial rise communities opposition which manner Synagogue. United the London and of power

361

Sensitive to the events of the immediate past and the need to ensure depiction of a Jewry that

internally was unified and externally accepted, the 1956

Tercentenary Exhibition clung to the discourse of an earlier age and, if anything, Roth heightened the rosy hue of its depiction of a trouble free and long

established

Jewish history in England. This desire to insist on the benign nature of English acceptance might also explain why anti-Jewish cartoons, which the 1887 Committee

had felt able to exhibit as, in their eyes, residual examples of a by then almost defunct prejudice, were also conspicuous by their absence. Nothing, save the seven hundred year old caricature of Aaron, Son of the Devil, from the Forest Rolls of Essex was to be allowed to interfere with this discourse of a mutual acceptance by hand bodies. its Anglo-Jewry the guided of and exemplary executive munificent As the Catalogue insisted, The organization of Anglo-Jewry was perfected at this time by the for COLLEGE institutions JEWS the training of the as establishment of such Ministers of Religion (1885), of the London JEWISH BOARD OF GUARDIANS which became one of the most notable of British charitable body inter-congregational the model metropolitan organizations-(1859); of the UNITED SYNAGOGUE!

One has little doubt that overall the Jewish members of General Committee of the 1887 Exhibition,

many of whom were also active within

the aforementioned

1956 In have their this institutions would works and aims. evaluation of agreed with

Jewish behaviour the the community and of the terms of reference, which guided defined immigrants from Nazi to the in it still were turn persecution, offered which Angloby fonned been had the by those concepts of a shared past and present which late the discourse nineteenth century. of Jewish

362

'Jewish Chronicle January13'h1956 ' From January6 to February29. Other eventsincluded an Exhibition at the Whi1techapelArt Gallery Jewish Artists in England 1656-1956,8 November to 9 December 1956, and a TercentenaryBanquet held in the Guildhall in the presenceof the Duke of Edinburgh,who proposed the toast to the Jewish Community. The Prime Minister, Sir Anthony Eden, also spoke. ' The first meting 1952 brought held 29 July togetherthe Spanish& Portuguese and on was Synagogue,The Board of Deputies, the Anglo Jewish Association, the Jewish Historical Society, the Jewish Museum,the United Synagogueand the JewishChronicle 4 Roth Biographical Note App. 1. The Rubenscollection of imagesrelating to the Jewish people was published as Anglo Jewish Portraits, Jewish konography (1954) and A History ofJewish Costume(1967). His collection is held at the JewishMuseum,London. 'A bronze Ewer found in Suffolk in 1696. It passedeventually into the collection of the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford. For a full description, see Catalogue of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, Item 1. p. 7. 6A listing of the principal duplicateditems will be found in App. 3. 7 1956 TercentenaryCatalogue,pp. 6 and 7. 8ibid p. 6. The emphasisis mine and intendedto draw attentionto the anglicisedand key Cecil Roth, to these the institutions. ascribed writer, assimilatedroles, which

363 Appendix 1

Biographical Notes

Adams, Henry 1838 1918 Boston born scion of one of the leading political families in the US ( Both his great grandfather and his grandfather were Presidents and his father was a Congressman) Adams was an academic, a writer (on the administrations of Jefferson and Madison) and an avid traveller. Arnold, Matthew (1822-1888) Writer, poet and literary critic. Arnold was Professor of Poetry Oxford, in at and active the field of education in England Baudelaire, Charles 1821- 1867 French poet, (Les Fleurs du Mal 1857) translator (of the works of Edgar Allan Poe), literary and artistic critic. Baudelaire's work and his personal life were full of controversy Until long after his death he was regarded by many as a prime example of the vice and depravity of the period, although he is now regarded as one of the key figures of that avant garde movement. Beerbohm, Max 1872-1956 Writer and caricaturist. Much of Beerbohm's writing was confined to parody (most notably Zuleika Dobson 1911) and criticism (he succeeded G.B. Shaw as drama critic of the Saturday Review in 1898 and his artistic output was primarily collections of caricatures. Nevertheless, he was at the centre of English cultural society at the turn of the twentieth century, until he left for Italy in 1910. On his return in 1939 he was knighted. Barnett, The Revd Samuel Barnett (1844-1913) Oxford-trained curate at St Mary's, Bryanston Square, London. In 1873 he was its St described by bishop in Jude's, Whitechapel, to the the appointed parish of worst as the diocese. He and his wife Henrietta believed in education and childcare for the poor, behind Toynbee Hall, benefits This the thinking the earliest of the culture. was of and behind in brought to the slums, and young graduates work university settlements which the Whitechapel Art Gallery in which they were both actively involved. Samuel left St Jude's in 1894 on becoming a canon of Bristol, and later was canon and then sub-deanof Westminster Abbey. Besant, Sir Walter 1836- 1901 1836-1901, English novelist and humanitarian. Secretary of the Palestiane Exploration Fund and a prime mover in the opening of the People's Palace in Mile End, graduate of Christ's College, Cambridge, 1859. He taught at the Royal College of Mauritius from 1861 to 1867. After his return to England he devoted himself to writing and to various include The laws. improvement His the the them novels of copyright causes, among Golden Butterfly (1876) and Ready-Money Mortiboy (1872). Some of Besant's novels (1882) Conditions Men All Sorts them dealt with social problems; among of were and (1886). Besant Gibeon the the Children of read novelists was one most widely of of and late 19th cent. He was knighted in 1895. 1840-1922 Scawen Wilfrid Blunt, 1858 diplomatic British 1872 the writer. political entered English poet and service. diplomatic service; he began a career of travel (particularly in the fromthe retired

364 Middle East) and political crusading (he opposed British rule in Egypt and championed home rule for Ireland). His includes The Love Sonnets of Proteus (18 80) and The poetry Wind and the Whirlwind (1883). Cohen, Arthur (1829-1914) A member of the Monteflore family on his mother's side, Arthur Cohen was the firs professing Jew to graduate from Cambridge. He went on to enjoy a highly successful legal career anf for seven years from 1880 was MP for Southwark. Cromer, Lord; Evelyn Baring 1841-1917 1858 joined the Royal Artillery. 1872 Private Secretary to his cousin Lord Northbrook, Viceroy of India. From 1883 British Agent in Egypt, where he was responsible for the constitutional reform of that country and for the reorganisation of all of its principal instruments of Government. In 1907 on his retirement due to ill health Cromer who by then had been made an Earl was voted f 50,000 by the British Parliament in recognition his 'eminent services' to Egypt. of Drumont, Edouard (1844-1917). French j ournalist, whose writings in the periodical La Libre Parole and in his book La France Juive (1886) made him one of the leading anti-Semitic commentators on the Dreyfus Affair. Evans Gordon, William Eden (1857-1913) Educated at Cheltenham and Sandhurst. Served in the Indian Staff Corps from 1876 to 1897. Conservative MP for the Stepney Division of Tower Hamlets from 1900 to 1907. Author The Alien Immigrant. Knighted in 1905. Jacobs, Joseph, (1854-1916). Jewish writer, historian, and folklorist Born in Australia, Jacobs. lived in England until 1900, when he went to the United States to edit a revision of The Jewish Encyclopedia. He was later a teacher at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City. Gib son, Frank (18 65 -19 0 1) An Australian bom, Slade School trained, artist, writer and curator. From 1908 to 1914 Gibson was adviser to the Felton bequest and at the time of his death was referred to in The Times (23/02/193 1) as Art Adviser to the Commonwealth of Australia. Goldwin Smith (1823-1910) Educated at Oxford Goldwin Smith was an educator, historian, and journalist and became a professor of modem history there. In 1868, he moved to the United States as Cornell literature history University. English at and constitutional professor of Graetz, Heinrich 1817-1891. German -Jewish historian. His II volume Geschichte der Aiden von den altesten Zeiten (6 English 1856 1876 Gegenwart der translated bis auf condensed vol) a was into 1898 1891between version edition de (1831 1896). Maurice Baron Hirsch, benefactor financier to Jewish causes, Gen-nan and philanthropist, who was a major Colonisation Organization, Jewish the resettlement which established of organiser from Russia and Eastern Europe. Jewish for emigrants programmes

365

Lane, (Sir)Hugh, 1877-1915 A highly successful London based art dealer with an extensive personal art collection. Campaigned for the creation of the Modem Art Gallery in Dublin which opened in 1908. Was also involved in art puchaes on behalf of the JohannesbergArt Gallery. Legros, Alphonse (18 37- 1911). A disciple of Courbet (1819-1877), Legros came to London in 1863 and taught etching at South Kensington. Although not an Impressionist, Legros was invited by Degas (1834-1917) to exhibit at the 2ndImpressionist Exhibition (1876) and was a source of Impressionist ideas for London from Paris. In 1876 he was appointed Slade Professor of Fine Art. McColl, Dugald S (1859-1948) Artist, Author and Art Critic. Art Critic of the Spectator (1890-1895) and Editor of the Architectural Review (1901-1905). Keeper of the Tate Gallery 1906- 1911 and of the Wallace Collection 911-1924. Supporter of the French hnpressionists and of several young British painters such as Wilson Steer, Sickert, Bearsdley and John.

Mendoza, Daniel (1764-1836). Born a Sephardi Jew. Though essentially a middleweight, Mendoza worked out a series heavier became heavy him techniques to take the of opponents and which enabled on by boxing England. His the noticed successes were champion of continued weight Prince of Wales, and he was the first boxer to be accorded royal patronage. Mocatta, Frederic (1828-1905), Head of one of those Sephardi families in England, which could date its arrival to the Cromwell era, was a leading figure of Anglo-Jewry and a noted philanthropist Montagu, Sir Samuel 1832-1911 Educated in Liverpool, Montagu set up in banking and finance in 1852 and became the in 1885 Parliament leader He to the and was was elected silver market. of undisputed founding in Jewish in 1907. He the Swaythling Lord affairs, active very was created Jewish Working Men's Club in 1870 and the Federation of Synagogues in 1887 and was President of the Russo-Jewish Committee from 1896 to 1909. He was created a Baronet by Gladstone in 1894. Monteflore, Sir Moses (1784-1885) 12 became in He London. the brought Italy, Montefiore in Leghorn, one of Bom up was Cohen, Judith Montefiore 1812, in City In London. brokers" the "Jew married of in business from He brother-in-law. Mayer Rothschild's Nathan him retired making Montefiore his devoted time to 1824 and and resources community and civic affairs. He Victoria. by Queen 1837-1838, knighted London, a received Sheriff and was of was He Jews. behalf the in his humanitarian 1846 in of baronetcy efforts on recognition of brief from 1835-1874, British Board Deputies the one with of of was president in his he did the Despite emancipation role interruption. position, prominent not play a help Jewish to oppressed abroad. communities preferrmg struggle,

(B 1839) Jacob Moserl

366 Born in Kappeln, Schleswig, then part of Denmark, Moser moved to England in 1863 and became a successful businessman. In 1873 he was one of the founders of the Bradford Reform Synagogue. In 1896 he was elected as an Independent candidate for the Manningham Ward of Bradford and in 1910 was elected Lord Mayor. Penrose, Francis Cranmer (1817-1903) Arhcitect, Archaeologist, designer and Director of the British School in Athens. President of RIBA from 1894 to 1896. Rocker, Rudolf (1873-1958) Born in Mainz into a Catholic family. Socialist in his youth Rocker moved towards anarchism in the 1890s and became its leading proponent. Settled in England in 1895 in 1898 edited Dos Fraye Vort in Leeds before becoming editor of Der Arbayter and Fraynt and in 1900 of Germinal London based, Yiddish publications of the anarchist , Interned movement. as an alien in 1914 he was deported in 1918 and after some 15 in Germany years emigrated to USA to escapeNazi persecution. Rothschild, Lionel de (1808 - 1879) Son of Nathan Meyer. Senior partner of Rothschild's London. Elected MP for Tower Hamlets in 1847, a seat he did not occupy until 1858. Leading figure of the AngloJewish community within which he occupied the position of Chairman or President of Great Board Deputies President the the the many of main institutions of and of of Synagogue. Rothschild, Lord Nathaniel Mayer de (1840 - 1915) Eldest son off Lionel de Rothschild. Active as a philanthropist in many of the leading institutions of Anglo-Jewry; as a banker, when he took over the senior partnership of the London House of Rothschild in 1879 and as a politician, when he became Liberal MP for Aylesbury in 1865. In 1885 he became the fist Jewish peer Roth, Cecil (1899-1970) Jewish historian. Professor of Jewish Studies at Oxford University. Roth was editor of Art.. Jewish History Judaka Encyclopaedia the and and wrote extensively on aspects of Simon, Sir John 1818-1897 Studied at University College, London, Was appointed Seýeant at Law in 1864 and for He Dewsbury. MP became Liberal he in QC 1868, was a also when made a foundermember of the Anglo-Jewish Association in 1871. He was knighted in 1886. Singer, Simeon (1848-1906) in 1867. He its St in Synagogue Heygate New Borough was opening Rabbi of the at His the Bayswater. Synagogue, New West End Rabbi the of version at subsequently for Synagogue United became book congregations daily prayer standard usage among twentieth the century. much of (1817-1896) Elhanan Isaac Spektor, in Rabbi towns his father Was Rabbi. Grodno of Rosh, a number in where was a Born his death. he held in 1864, Rabbi Kovno until of a position which before being named as in foremost Russia. the rabbinical authority He built up a reputation as (1854 1925) Isidore Sir Spielmann, -

367 Honorary Secretary of the 1887 Anglo-Jewish Exhibition. Honorary Secretary and Director of the of the British section of the Brussels Exhibition in 1897, of the British fine art section of the Paris Exhibition (1900), the Glasgow Exhibition (1901), and the St. Louis Exposition (1904). In recognition of these services he knighted was in 1905. President of the Jewish Historical Society of England 1902 to 1904 Strachey, Henry. Art critic of the Spectator from 1896 to 1904 and from 1905 to 1910- His elder brother John St Loe Strachey (1860-1927) was owner of the Spectator from 1897 to 1925 and Editor from 1898 (Source; Spectator Archives). They were cousins of Lytton Strachey (1880-1932 ) the author and leading member of the Bloomsbury set. Strauss, Joseph (1844-1922) Born in Berlichingen in 1844 and educated at Wurzburg and Tubingen, where he obtained a Doctorate in Divinity, Philosophy and Medicine. Rabbi in Heidelburg and Stuttgart before Bradford. Notwithstanding his Reform background, he assisted in the formation of the Orthodox Synagogue in Bradford in 1906. He was a member of the Bradford Athenaeum Club ftorn 1884 and its President in 1921/2. He was Professor of Sernitics at the Yorkshire College. Strauss Family Records and Bradford Archives Ref 62D85/1/2. Werner, Abraham (1837-1912) Born in Tels, Kovno, where he subsequently succeededhis father as the Rabbi. Became Chief Rabbi of Finland before being elected as Robbi of Machzike Hadass in London. In 1901 he settled in Palestine, where he died. Winchevsky, Morris (1856-1932) Born Bentsion Novkhovitch in Lithunia. Active from early age in Jewish socialist in Der became involved London he to poylisher yidl. came movement and after Emigrated to America in 1894 wjere he remained active in socialism and was a noted Yiddish poet. Wolf, Lucien (18 57-193 0) in for He for Jewish diplomat the Journalist and a number of publications wrote cause. for leader-writer Jewish He the Jewish and national press. worked as a sub-editor and he 1912-1914 Between 1906-1908 later Editor there, was World, 1874-1893, and was freedom". This for the Russia: was a "Darkest struggle the editor of a weekly record of Government Russian directed the particularly concerned and against propaganda paper Committee Conjoint Foreign leading the He of Jewish of member a was rights. with British Jews.

Zangwill, Israel (1864-1926) School Free Jews Zangwill the Israel and subsequently East-End born was educated at late 1880s in full the his time He turned to writing as occupation became a teacher there. became He End. in East Ghetto Children the a the 1892 in set of published and including Jewish in figure as affairs literary of range wide active a and was significant Zionism of champion early an

368 Appendix 2 Pictorial References This appendix provides details of all works referred to in the text. Those works that are illustrated are indicated by the use of bold print and their referencenumber within the Chapterin which they appear. Pictures are listed in the order in which they first appearin the main text.

Chapter 3 Defining an Anglo-Jewish Discourse: The Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition of 1887 Artist

Title

Medium

Date

James MacArdell

Aaron Hart

Mezzotint engraving

1751

Engraving by Joshua Lopez After by painting by F.Barlin F Barlin

Raphael Meldola (1754-1838)

Oil on canvas

1806

Solomon Hirschell 42) David Ricardo

Oil on canvas

1808

Engraving by W. Holl. After painting by T Phillips Engraving by Thomson

Size HxW

Rubens Collection Anglo Jewish Portraits Jewish Museum, London _ National Portrait Gallery, London

127 x 101.6

National Portrait Gallery, London National Portrait Gallery, London

National Portrait Gallery, London

1822

Ralph Bernal

Location

Chapter 4 The importance of being Solomon Artist

Title

Medium

Date

Size Hx W

Location

Solomon J Solomon

The family group. Artist's wife and children. Papa painting In the Field

Oil on canvas

1905

161 x 175

Tate Britain, London

Oil on canvas

1906

Ben Uri Gallery, London

Charles I demanding the five members at the Guildhall 1641/2 The judgement of Paris The Birth of Love

Mural

1897

184 x 146 548 x 366

Oil on canvas

1891

Unknown

Oil on canvas

1896

254 x

Unknown

Solomon J Solomon Solomon J Solomon

Solomon J Solomon Solomon J

Royal Exchange, London

369 Solomon Solomon J Solomon Solomon J Solomon

Solomon J Solomon Solomon J Solomon Sir John Everett Millais Sir Frank Dicksee Solomon J Solomon Sis 1 Solomon J Solomon SJS 2 Solomon J Solomon SJS 3

Solomon J Solomon SJS 4 Chevallier Tayler SJS 5 Solomon J Solomon SJS 6 Solomon J Solomon SJS 7 Solomon J Solomon Solomon J Solomon SJS 8 Solomon J Solomon Sis 9 Solomon J Solomon Sis 10 Solomon J Solomon Sis 11 Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema _ Sir Edward

Eve

Oil on canvas

1908

The Coronation Luncheon given in the Guildhall to their Majesties King George V Mary The Rt. Hon. H. H. Asquith, Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald M. P. The Knight Errant

Oil on canvas

1914-1922

127 310x 142 ??? x 226

Oil on canvas

1909

120 x 90

National Liberal Club, London

Oil on canvas

1910

Oil on canvas

1870

National Portrait Gallery, London Tate Gallery, London

La Belle Dame Sans Merci Laus deo

Oil on canvas

1902

90.2 x 72.4 184 x 136 Xxx

Oil on canvas

C 1899

St George

Oil on canvas

1906

212.1 x 105.4

Royal Academy

Your health

Oil on canvas

1893

240 x 142.5

Unknown

A dinner given by Sir H. Thompson for Mr Ernest Hart A Summer's dinner party

Oil on canvas

No date

71.1 x 102.9

Wellcome Foundation, London

Oil on canvas

1893

120 x 90

Unknown

Mr Ernest Hart

Oil on board

No date

35 x 26

Wellcome Foundation, London

On the threshold of the City 22 June1897 Rev H Adler

Oil on canvas

1898

236 x 172

Unknown

Oil on canvas

1906

The election of the Chief Rabbi, Hermann Adler

Watercolour on paper,

1906

3 0.5 x 37.9

The Jewish Museum, New York.

High tea in the Sukkah

Ink, graphite and gouache on paper

1906

39.6 x 29.2

The Jewish Museum, New York

The Commons

Canvas on plaster

1911

petitioning Queen Elizabeth to marry An allegory

442 x 249

Houses of Parliament, London

Oil on canvas

1904

269 x 150

Harris Museum & Gallery, Preston

Oil on canvas,

1888

Private collection

on canvas,

1903

132.1 x 213.7 145.9 x

The Roses of Heliogabulus, The caves of the

-Oil

xxxx 236.5 x 173

Ealing Public Library, London Guildhall. London

City of Bristol Art I Gallery, Bristol Private collection

Unknown

Private collection

370

Chapter 5 The dangerousMr Sargent Artist

Title

Medium

Date

Size CMS

H by W 145.0 x 105.5 91.5 x 116.9 144.8 x 94

Location

Solomon J Solomon III I_ Lawrence Alma-Tadema John Singer Sargent 1112 John Singer Sargent Max Beerbohm 1113 John Singer Sargent

Sir George Faudel Phillips Sir Max Waechter

Oil on canvas

1897

Oil on canvas

1901

Lady Faudel Phillips

Oil on canvas

1898

Earl of Cromer

Oil on canvas

1902

146.1 x 96.5

National Portrait Gallery, London Private collection

Oil on canvas with

Installed 1895

213 x 673

Boston Public Library

John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 1114 John Singer Sargent

Israel & the Law

John Singer Sargent 1115 John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 1116 John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 1117 Frangois Boucher John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 1118 John Singer Sargent 1119 John Singer Sarizent

Tite Street

Frieze of Prophets

central panel relief of gilded plaster and papier-mach6

Unknown Private Collection

Boston Public Library

Installed 1916 Installed 1919

164 cms wide

Boston Public Library

Synagogue

Oil on canvas

Church

Installed 1919

164 cms wide

Boston Public Library

Lord Ribblesdale

Oil and gilded plaster or papiermach6 Oil on canvas

1902

254.2 x 148.6

Tate Britain, London

Mrs George Lewis

Oil on canvas

1892

Private Collection

Sir George Lewis

Oil on Canvas

1896

Sir David Richmond

Oil on canvas

1899

Lord Russell of Killowen Mrs Carl Meyer

Oil on canvas

1902

Oil on Canvas

1896

Madame de PoLnpadour Mrs Hammersley

Oil on canvas

1758

136 x 77.5 80 x 59.6 243.6 x 134.6 85.1 x 71.1 201.4 x 134 72.5 x 57

Oil on canvas

1892/3

Mrs Cazalet & her

Oil on canvas

C1900

children Mrs Knowles & her

Oil on canvas

1902

Oil on canvas

1898

Oil on canvas

1898

Oil on canvas

1897

children Mrs Flora Wertheimer Mr Asher Wertheimer Francis Penrose I

Private collection

205.7 x 114.9 254 x 165 182.9 x 151.1 147.5 x 95.2 147.5 x 97.8 143.5.1 x 95.3

Private collection Glasgow Museums & Art Gallery National Portrait Gallery, London Private Collection Victoria and Albert Museum, London Metropolitan Art Museum, New York Private collection Butler Art institute, Youngstown, Ohio New Orleans Museum of Art Tate Britain, London RIBA, London

371

John Singer Sargent III 10

Asher Wertheimer

Graphite

on woven paper

1898

24 x 15.1

Diego Velasquez John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent Louis Kollitz

Innocent X

Oil on canvas

C 1650

Colonel Ian Hamilton

Oil on canvas

1898

Coventry Patmore

Oil on canvas

1894

W Graham Robertson Sir Frank Swettenharn Sir Joseph Crowe

Oil on canvas

1894

Oil on canvas

1904

Oil on canvas

1877

140 x 120 138.4 x 78.7 91.4 x 61.0 230.5 x 118.7 258 x 142.5 78.1 x 66

Gilbert Stuart Rembrandt van Rijn

Sir Josliua Reynolds The artist in oriental costume with poodle

Oil on canvas Oil on panel

1784 1631

66.5 x 52

John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 11111

Mr Arthur Cohen

Oil on canvas

1897

75 x 63.5

The Daughters of Mr Asher Wertheimer Daughters of Col. Thomas Cartaret Hardy Mrs Ralph Curtis

Oil on canvas

1901

190.5 X 130.8

Tate Britain, London

Oil on canvas

1801

161 x 135

Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio

Oil on canvas

1898

Isabella Stewart Gardner Ada Rehan

Oil on canvas

1888

Oil on canvas

1894/5

Oil on canvas

1896

Oil on canvas

1897

Oil on canvas

1902

219/3 x 104.8 189.9 x 81.3 236.2 x 127.3 228.5 x 122 214.6 x 103 269.2 x 198.1

Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio. Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston, Mass Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Hirschl & Adler Galleries, New York Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. ' Devonshire Coll.

228.6 x 113 88.9 x 43.2 104.8 x 73.7 208.6 x 109.9 214.6 x 143.5 125.7 x 100.3 292.1 x 213.7 163.2 x 114.9 144.8 x 92.7 229.2 x_

Private collection

Thomas Lawrence 11112 John Singer Sargent 11113 John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 11114 John Singer Sargent John Singer

Countes Clary Aldringen Mr & Mrs Phelps Stokes The Acheson Sisters Duchess of Portland

Oil on canvas

1902

Mrs George Batten

Oil on canvas

1897

Mrs Charles Russell

Oil on canvas

1900

Mme X (Mme Pierre Gautreau. Hylda Wertheimer

Oil on canvas

1883/4

Oil on canvas

1901

Oil on canvas

1892/3

Oil on canvas

1899

Oil on canvas

1901

Oil on canvas

1902

Oil on canvas

1902

Lady Agnew of Lochnaw The Wyndham Sisters Mr Alfred Wertheimer - Leopold Hirsch KTrs The Misses Hunter

Fogg Museum, Harvard University Museums, Gift of Mrs Francis Ormond Galleria Doria-Pamphili, Rome Tate Britain, London Uknown Tate Britain, London Singapore History Museum National Portrait Gallery

Petit Palais, Mus&e des Beaux Arts de la Ville de Paris Private collection

Chatsworth.

Glasgow Art Gallery & Museum, Kelvingrove Private collection Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Tate Britain, London National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York Tate Britain, London Tate Britain, London Tate Britain, London

372 Sargent John Singer Sargent 11115

John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent][1116 John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 11117 John Singer Sargent 11118 John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 11119 John Singer Sargent

229.9 161 x 193.7

Essie, Ruby & Ferdinand, the Children of Asher Wertheimer The Misses Vickers

Oil on canvas

1902

Oil on canvas

1884

Mr Edward Wertheimer Mrs Flora Wertheimer Mrs Leopold Hirsch

Oil on canvas

1902

Oil on canvas

1904

Oil on canvas

1902

Mrs William George Raphael Sir George Henschel

Oil on canvas

1906

Oil on canvas

1899

HyIda, Almina & Conway, Children of A. Wertheimer A vele gonfle

Oil on canvas

1905

Oil on canvas

1905

El Jalelo

Oil on canvas

1882

Charles Stewart 6th Marquess of Londonderry The Duke of Marlborough and his family

Oil on canvas

1902/4

Oil on canvas

1905

332.7 x 238.8

Blenheim Palace, London

Lady Aline Sassoon

Oil on canvas

1907

Private collection

Betty Wertheimer

Oil on canvas

1908

161.3 x 105.4 128.9 x 100.1

Tate Britain, London

137.2 x 182.9 163.2 x 114.9 163.2 x 107.9 145 x 90

Graves Art Gallery, Sheffield Tate Britain, London

142.2 x 104.1 65.3 x 53.3 188 x 133,4

Private Collection

163.2 x 107.9 237 x 352 287 x 195.6

oval

Tate Britain, London Tate Britain, London

Private Collection Tate Britain, London

Tate Britain, London Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston, Mass. Collection of Henry R Kravis

National Museum of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington

Oil on canvas

1908

134 x 101

Tate Britain, London

Eugene Delacroix J-A-D Ingres

Almina Wertheimer Women of Algiers in their Apartments Odalisque with Slave

Oil on canvas

1834

Mus6e du Louvre, Paris

Oil on canvas

1839

180 x 229 72 x 100

A van Dyck

Lady Shirley

Oil on canvas

1622

Charles Jervas

Lady WortleyMontague Arthur Balfour

Oil on canvas

1720s

Oil on canvas

1908

Lord Dalhousie

Oil on canvas

1900

Ellen Terry as Lady Macbeth Dr Pozzi at home

Oil on canvas

1889

Oil on canvas

1881

Oil on canvas

1882

John Singer Sargent 11120

John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent John Singer Sargent 11121 John Singer Sargent

The Children of Edward Darley Boit

200 x 133.4 210 x 127 256.5 x 147.3 152.4 x 101.6 221 x 114.3 202.9 x 102.2 221.9 x 222.6

Fogg Art Museum, Harvard Museums of Art, Cambridge, Mass National Trust, Petworth House, Sussex National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin National Portrait Gallery, London Private Collection Tate Britain, London The Armand Hammer Museum UCLA, Los Angeles. Museum of Fine Art, Boston, Mass

373

Chapter 7 The lachrymose Mr Rothenstein Artist William Rothenstein Ch 7 1111 William Rothenstein Ch 7 1112 William Rothenstein Ch 7 1113 William Rothenstein Ch 7 1114 William Rothenstein Ch 7 1115 William Rothenstein Ch 7 1116 William Rothenstein Ch 7 1117 William Rothenstein William Rothenstein Ch 71118 William Rothenstein Ch 71119 Solomon Hart Ch 7 11110

William Rothenstein Ch 7 11111 William Rothenstein William Rothenstein Gustave Doi-6 Alphonse Legros Alphonse Legros Alphonse Legros William Rothenstein John Singer

Title

Medium

Date

Size CMS

Location

H by W 76.2 x 96.5

Hugh Lane Municipal Musem of Art, Dublin

In the Spitalfields Synagogue

Oil on canvas

1904

Praying Jews

Pastel on flock

1904

24.5 x 29.2

National Gallery of Canada, Ontario

woven paper An exposition of the Talmud

Oil on canvas

1904

114.8 x 145.2

Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

In the corner of the Talmud School

Oil on canvas

1904

89.5 x 70.5

Gallery, Oldham

Aliens at Prayer

Oil on canvas

1905

127.4 x 105.5

National Gallery of Victoria. Melbourne

The Talmud School

Oil on canvas

1904/5

83.8 x 94.9

Sternberg Centre, London

Jews Mourning Synagogue

Oil on canvas

1906

127.5 x 115.5

Tate Gallery, London

Jews Mourning in a Synagogue Reading the Book of Esther

Charcoal on paper

1906

Oil on canvas

1907

43.2 x 50.8 87 x 106

Cartwright Hall, Bradford Manchester City Art Gallery

Carrying the Law

Oil on canvas

1908

160 x 188

Johannesburg Art Gallery

The Feat of the Rejoicing of the Law at the Synagoguein Italy Leghor Carrying the Law

Oil on canvas

1850

141.3 x 174.6

Oil on canvas

1907

The Jewish Museum of new York, under the auspicies of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America Cartwright Hall, Bradford

Chalk on blue

1907

paper Oil on canvas

1899/1900

36.5 x 23.5 88.9 x 61

City o Bimun am Museum & Art Gallery Tate Gallery, London

Drawing

C 1869

Unknown

C1879

Head of an Old Man

Oil on canvas laid down on panel Oil on canvas

St Jerome

Oil on canvas

1881

Hablant EsPagnol

Oil on canvas

1895

La Carmencita

Oil on canvas

1890

25,6 x 17.5 58.3 x 45.2 61.3 x 50.7 176.4 x 107.6 81.3 x 45.7 232 x

in a

Two Jewish Rabbis "Law" the carrying A Dolls House Mendiant Juif h Londres Study of a head

1881

Manchester City Art Gallery Manchester City Art Gallery Manchester City Art GaIIM Private collection Mus6e d'Orsay, Pari

374 Sargent William Rothenstein William Rothenstein Max Beerbohm Ch 7 11112 Alphonse Legros Th6odule Ribot

Eli The Thatcher

Oil on canvas

1913

Street in Hildesheim

1902 1907

37 x 32

The Calvary

Pastel and chalk on grey paper Pencil, pen and watercolour on paper Oil on canvas

142 76.5 x 63.3 40 x 27

1874

At the Sermon

Oil on canvas

1890

91.5 x 72.8 55.5 x 46.5

Giotto

Trail by Fire Fresco

Fresco

1315/1320

Simeon Solomon Ch 7 11113 William Rothenstein Josef Israels

Coptic Baptismal Procession

Watercolour, Gouache & Gum Arabic Pastel, chalk and paint on board Watercolour

1865

25.9 x 42.4

Cecil Higgins Art Gallery, Bedford

1891

127 x 48

Rothenstein family

1883

50 x 34

Watercolour

1888

56 x 43

Josef Israels

Son of the Chosen People Jewish Wedding

Oil on canvas

1903

137 x 148

Josef Israels Josef Israels

The Philospher The Jewish Scribe

Oil on canvas Oil on canvas

1894 1902

Paul Gauguin

The Vision after the Sermon or Jacob wrestling with the Angel The Pardon in Brittany Les Bretonnes au Pardon The Browning Readers

Oil on canvas

1888

65 x 54.6 108 x 151 73 x 92

Oil on canvas

1886

Oil on canvas

1887

Oil on canvas

1900

Josef Israels

Pascal DagnanBouveret Pascal DagnanBouveret William Rothenstein

A quiet morning in the Tate Gallery

Parting at Morning The Old Rabbi

Manchester City Art Gallery Manchester City Art Gallery Tate Gallery London

Mus6e d'Orsay, Paris Mus6e d'Orsay, Paris Bardi Chapel, Santa Croce, Florence

114.6 x 84.8 125 x 141 77.5 x 97.2

collection Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam Jewish Historical Museum, Amsterdam on loan from the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam National Gallery, London Kroller-Milller Museum, Oterloo National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York Museu Calouste Gulbenkenian, Lisbon Cartwright Hall, Bradford

375 Chapter 5 Table 1 Population Fieures 1000

Total Population of Great Britain Total Jewish Pop Total London Pop

1877 Es.t b

1881 POP. Official Census (pop Density Isq mile) 35,206

1891 POP. Official Census

1901 Pop. Official Census (pop Density Isq mile

37,880

41,609

68.3

1902 Est .

200 est 4,713

5,571

1911 POP. Official Census (POP. Density Isq mile

270 d

6,507

3,8306 4,228 4,536 Total Inner London (32,488) (38,476) Pop London/ 53.9 150 c Total Jewish Pop. 135.4 153.1 60.2 95.0 London Tot Foreigners 63.2 53.5 36.7 London Tot. Russian/Polish 298.6 282.7 285.1 Stepney a Population 53.1 54.3 16.0 32.3 Stepney Tot. Foreigners 43.7 42.0 Stepney Tot. Russian/Polish This table is based primarily on the decennial Census Reports, except where noted below Notes St Town), Ratcliff, (New & Old Mile End (North & South), Limehouse Stepney comprised; a George in the East, Shadwell, Spitalfields (East & West), The Tower, Whitechapel b Jewish Chronicle 1878 ff. 155 19011906 Jewish Encyclopaedia "London", Joseph Jacobs, pp c d 1.Cohen Jewish Life in Modern Times'.

'London: Methuen & Co., 1914 www. ibiblio. org/yiddisb/Book/Cohen/icohen.html by is 'This thus. adding at arrived his estimate Cohen explained method of calculation Kingdom, United the the towns in as given Jewish figures the of together the all population of is (where the families the population for 1914, number of in the Jewish Year-Book multiplying for for 30 towns synagogue a with by 5, of population minimum a and assuming so stated) (the 160,000 is London at Jewish The estimated is figure of population given. which no 174)'. Encyclopedia, Jewish 150,000, p. viii. for 1902 vol. Jacobs Joseph was estimate of

376 Bibliography A. Books Alderman, Geofftey. The Jewish Community in British Politics. Oxford: Clarendon, 1983. The Federation of Synagogues 1887-1987. London: The Federation of London Synagogues. 1987 Modern British Jewry. Oxford: Clarendon, 1992. ---. Amschewitz, Sarah. The Paintings ofJH. Amschewitz. London: Batsford, 1951 Arnold, Bruce. Orpen: mirror to an age, London: Cape, 1981 Bauman, Zygmunt. Modernity and the Holocaust. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1989. Ambivalence. Cambridge: 199 1. Modernity Polity Press, and ---. Belting, Hans. Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era ofArt. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1994 The Ben Uri storyfrom art society to museum: and the influence ofAnglo-Jewish Gallery; Art Jewish / [by] Uri Ben British the movement modern artists on Museum (London, England), 2001 Berkowitz, Michael. Zionist Culture and WestEuropean Jewry before the First World War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Berlin, Isaiah. Against the Current. Ed. Henry Hardy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981. Bermant, Chaim. Point ofArrival.

London: Eyre Methuen, 1975.

1995. Routledge, London: Narration. Nation Homi, Bhabha, and ed. 1997. Routledge, London: Culture. Location The of ---. Blackwell, Oxford: 1880-1920. Jewry Social Politics Black, Eugene. The ofAnglo 1988. Press, University Princeton Oxford: Artless Princeton Jew. Bland, Kalman. The and 2000. 1998. Phaidon, Chagall. London: Monica. Bohm-Duchen, Invention Conduct: Rise the The Unheroic of ofHeterosexuality and Boyarin, Daniel. 1997. Press, California University London: Berkeley Man. of and the Jewish

377 Boyarin, Jonathan. Storm from Paradise. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1992. Boyarin, Jonathan and Daniel Boyarin. Jews Other Differences. Minneapolis: and University of Minnesota Press, 1997.

Buber, Martin. Jüdische Künstler, Berlin: JüdischerVerlag, 1903. Brenner, David. Marketing Identities: The Invention ofJewish Ethnicity in Ost und West. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1998. Burman, Rickie (ed.), From Prodigy to Outcast: Simeon Solomon: Pre-Raphaelite Artist, London: Jewish Museum, 2001. Cantor, Nonnan. The Sacred Chain. London: HarperCollins, 1994. Cesarani, David. The Making ofModern Anglo-Jewry. Oxford: Blackwell, 1990. The Jewish Chronicle and Anglo Jewry 1841 1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Cheyette, Bryan. Constructions of 'the Jew' in English Literature and Society: Racial Representations, 1875-1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. and Laura Marcus. Modernity, Culture and 'the Jew. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998. Clifford, James. The Predicament of Culture. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1988. Cohen, Israel. Jewish Life in Modern Times. London: Methuen, 1914. Cohen, Richard. Jewish kons: Art and Society in Modern Europe. Berkley: University of California Press, 1998. Cortissoz, Royal. Art and Common Sense,London; New York: Smith, Elder & Co., 1914 Cowen, Anne and Roger Cowen. Victorian Jews through British Eyes. London: Littman Library of Jewish Civilisation, 1998. Conrad, Peter. Modern Times.- Life and Art in the 20th Century. London: Thames and Hudson, 1998. Cecil, David. Max. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1965. Cork, Richard. David Bomberg. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1987.

378 Crook, J. Mordaunt. The

rise of the nouveaux riches : style and status in Victorian and Edwardian architecture, London: Murray, 1999

David, Richard. Masks ofDifference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Dieuwertje Dekkers, Jozef Isra6ls, 1824-1911, Zwolle Uitgeverij Waanders, 1999, : 2000. Dyer, Richard. "ite.

London and New York: Routledge, 1997.

Endelman, Todd. Jewish Apostasy in the Modern World. New York and London: Holmes and Meier, 1987. Englander, David. A Documentary History ofJewish Immigrants in Britain: 18401920. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1994. Fairbrother, Trevor. John Singer Sargent.- The Sensualist. Seattle: Seattle Art Museum; New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000. Feldman, David. Englishmen and Jews. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1994. Gareth Stedman Jones. Metropolis London. London: Routledge, 1989. and ---, Felsenstein, Frank. Anti-Semitic Stereotypes: A Paradigm of Otherness in English Popular Culture 1660-1830. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press, 1995. Finestein, Israel. Jewish Society in Victorian England. London and Portland, Oregon: Valentine Mitchell, 1993. Anglo-Jewry in Changing Times. London and Portland, Oregon: Valentine Mitchell, 1999. Fishman, William J. East End Jewish Radicals.- 18 75-1914. London: Duckworth, 1975. T, -

1988. 1888. Duckworth, End London: East Frankel,, Jonathan, and Steven Zipperstein. Assimilation and Community: The Jews in 19th Century Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Freedman, Murray. Leeds Jews in the 1901 Census :a demographic portrait of an immigrant community, Leeds: Freedman, 2002. Friedlander, Evelyn ed. The Jews ofDevon and Cornwall: essaysand exhibition Bristol: Published for by The Hidden Foundation Legacy catalogue, Redcliffe Press, 2000

379

Gilman, Sander.Jewish SeýfHatred: anti-semitism hidden languageof the the and Jews. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press,1986 The Jew'S Body. London New York: Routledge, 1991. ---. and Smart Jews.- the construction of the image ofJewish superior intelligence. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1996. Gilroy, Paul. There Ain't No Black in the Union Jack. London: Hutchinson, 1987.

The Black Atlantic. London New York: Verso, 1993. and ---. Gidley, Mick, ed. RepresentingOthers: white views of indigenous peoples.Exeter: University of Exeter Press,1992. Gittelman, Sol. From Shted to Suburbia. Boston: Beacon Press, 1978. Gutwein, Daniel. The Divided Elite: economics, politics, and Anglo-lewry, 18821917. Leiden: Brill, 1992. Harris, Jose. Private Lives, Public Spirit. - Britain 1870-1914. London: Penguin, 1994. Harrison, Charles. English Art and Modernism, 1900-1939. New Haven and London: Paul Mellon Centre, Yale University Press, 1994. Hart, Mitchell B. Social Science and the Politics o Modern Jewish Identity. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000.

Hobsbawm, Eric, and TerenceRanger,eds. TheInvention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1983. Holmes, Colin. Anti-Semitism in British Society, 1876-1939. London: Edward Arnold, 1979. Holroyd, Michael. Lytton Strachey. London: Chatto and Windus, 1994. Homa, Bernard. The Machzike Hadass.- A Fortress in Anglo-Jewry. London: Shapiro Vallentine, 1953. Hyman, Paula. Gender and Assimilation in Modern Jewish History. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1995. Hyamson, Albert. The Sephardim ofEngland. London: Methuen, 1951. Kadish, Shannan. Building Jerusalem: Jewish Architecture in Britain. London: Valentine Mitchell, 1996. Kirschenblatt-Gimblett, Barbara. Destination Culture: Tourism, Museums and Heritage. Berkley: University of California Press, 1998.

380 Kleeblatt, Norman. The Dreyfus Affair: Art, Truth and Justice. Berkley: University of California Press, 1987. Kramer, Millie. Jacob Kramer: A Memorial Volume. Leeds: E. J. Amold, 1969. Kushner, Tony. The Jewish Heritage in British History: Englishness and Jewishness. London: Frank Cass, 1992. Kenneth Lunn. The Politics ofMarginality. and ,

London: Frank Cass, 1990.

Lacy, Michael Students ofArms: a survey of arms and armour study in Great in Britainfrom the eighteenth century to the First World War, Ph.D. thesis, University of Reading, 1999 Lago, Mary M., and Karl Beckson. Max and Will. London: John Murray, 1975. Larnbourne, Lionel. The Aesthetic Movement. London: Phaidon, 1996. Victorian Painting. London: Phaidon, 1999. Landsberger, Franz. Rembrandt, the Jews and the Bible. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1946. Lebow, Richard Ned. "ite Britain and Black Ireland. Philadelphia: Institute for Study of Human Issues, 1976. Lichtenstein, Rachel and lain Sinclair. Ro,dinsky's Room. London: Granta, 2000. London, Jack. People of the Abyss. London: Acro Publishing, 1963. Maccoby, Hyam. A Pariah People.- An Anthropology ofAnti-Semitism. London: Constable, 1988.

Mazower, David. Yiddish Theatre in London, London: The Jewish Museum of the East End, 1987. McPherson, Heather. The Modern Portrait in Nineteenth Century France. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Society. Jewish Modern Visual Image in The Uses: Art Ezra. its Mendelsohn, and Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Jews, Africans Culture: Visual Diaspora Nicholas and Mirzoeff, representing ed. and London: Routledge, 2000 1957 Cresset Press, Sargent, John Singer London: Charles. Mount, Hodder London: The Religious Life Richard. and Mudie-Smith, ofLondon. Stoughton, 1904.

381

Nochlin, Linda, and Tamar Garb. TheJew in the Text. London: Thames and Hudson, 1995. Newman, Aubrey. The United Synagogue 1870-1920. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1976. The Jewish East End 1840-1939. London: Jewish Historical Society of England, 1981. Olin, Margaret. The Nation without Art: examining modern discourses on Jewish art. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 2001. Olsen, Stanley. John Singer Sargent: His Portrait. London: Barrie and Jenkins, 1989. Oppenheim, Moritz. Erinnerungen. Frankfurt: Frankfurter Verlag, 1924. Ormond, Richard, and Elaine Kilmurray. John Singer Sargent: Complete Paintings. Vol. 2. Portraits of the 1890s. New Haven and London: Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art/Yale University Press, 2002. Panayi, Panikos. Immigration, Ethnicity and Racism in Britain 1815-1945. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1994. Phillips, Olga Somech. Solomon J Solomon. London: Herbert Johnson, 1933. Piechotka, Maria, and Kazimierz Piechotka. Wooden Synagogues. Warsaw: Arkady, 1959. Promey, Sally M. Painting Religion in Public. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999. Ratcliff, Carter. John Singer Sargent. New York, London and Paris: Artabras, 1990. Renton, Andrew. The Lost Synagogues ofLondon, London: Tynesider Publishing, 2000 Roberts, J. D. The Kramer Documents. Valencia: Private Press, 1983. Graham Robertson, W. The Was: Time Robertson, Graham W. reminiscences of London: Hamish Hamilton, 1931 Jane's, Macdonald 1, London: Painters, Modern English John. and Rothenstein, vol. 1976 (first publ. 1952 1931-32. Faber, London: 2 Men Memories. William. vols. Rothenstein, and 1994. Publishers, Oxford: Modernity. Blackwell Judaism and Rose, Gillian. Jew In London: The S. Lewis, H. a study of racial character and C. Russell and Trustees; for being Toynbee the two essaysprepared present-day conditions,

382 Canon by by Barnett The introduction Right Hon. preface and a with an James Bryce, London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1901. Russell-Taylor, John. Bernard Meninsky. London: Redcliffe Press, 1990. Rubinstein, W. D. A History of the Jews in the English World: Great -Speaking Britain. London: Macmillan, 1996. Russell C., and H. S. Lewis. The Jew in London: A Study ofRacial Character and Present-Day Conditions. London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1901.

Salbstein,M. C. N. The Emancipation of the Jews in Britain: The Questionof the Admission of the Jews to Parliament 1828-1860.East Brunswick, N. J.: Associated University Presses,1982. Sassoon, Siegfried. Memoirs of a Fox-Hunting Man. London: Faber, 1999.

Schama,Simon. Rembrandt'SEyes,London: Allen Lane, 1999 Shmueli, Eftaim. Seven Jewish Cultures: A Reinterpretation ofJewish History and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Sed-Rajna, Gabrielle. Jewish Art. New York: Harry N. Abrams Inc., 1997. Shapiro, James. Shakespeare and the Jews. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996. New York: Gauguin Gogh Van Debora. the Silverman, art, sacred searchfor and .Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2000 University Berkley: Art History. Modern Identity in Jewish Catherine, Soussloff, ed. 1999. Press, California of London: Time. His Artist in Portrait The Speaight, Robert. William Rothenstein.of an Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1962. Cassell, York: New London and Steyn, Juliet. The Jew: Assumptions of1dentity. 1999. 2001. Press, Bay Thunder San Diego: Sargent. Swinglehurst, Edmund. John Singer Yale London: Haven New Subjects. Modern and Tickner, Lisa. Modern Life and University Press, 2000. Oxford Oxford: 1789-1939. Europe Jews Apart. The in A People David. Vital, University Press, 1999. University Oxford Oxford: York New Strangers. Unwelcome Jack. and Wertheimer, Press, 1987.

383 Uses of Tradition. - Jewish Continuity in the Modern Era. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992. White, Jerry. Rothschild Buildings: Life in an East End TenementBlock 1887-1920. London, Boston and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980. Woodeson, John. Mark Gertler: Biography of a Painter, 1891-1939. London: Sidgwick and Jackson, 1972. Young, Robert. White Mythologies. London: Routledge, 1991. Zangwi 1, Israel. Children of the Ghetto. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1977. B. Exhibition

Catalogues

A4fred Wolmark, London, Fine Art Society, 1970 Aýfred Wolmark 1877-1961, Hull, Ferens Art Gallery, 1975

Anglo-Jewish Art and History Tercentenary Exhibition. London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1956. Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition. London: Royal Albert Hall, 1887. Ausstellungjüdischer Künstler. Berlin: Galerie für alte und neue Kunst, 1907. Barre, Jean-Luc. Mýmoires et culturesjuives, 1939-1945 Montreuil: La Communaute juive dans la tourmente. Musee de Mistoire; Montreuil: Vivante, 1989. Belinfante, Judith, and Igor Dubow. Leben in Russischen Schtetl: Auf den Spuren von An-Ski. Amsterdam: Joods Historisch Museum, 1993. Brilliant, Richard. Facing the New World Jewish Portraits in Colonial and Federal America. New York: Jewish Museum, 1997. Congress. Basel, des Zionisten Kunst-Ausstellung Lilien. E. M. Martin, Buber, and 1901. Anniversary 21st Trust: Spitaýflelds The Kennedy. Marianna Andrew Byrne, and Exhibition. London, 1998 The Jerusalem: Painter. Jewish First The Oppenheim: Morits Cohen, Elisheva. Israel Museum,, 1983. 1985. Museum, Geffrye London: A Family ofPainters. Daniels, J. Solomon.1999. Publishers, Waanders Zwolle: 1824-1911, JozefIsraels Dekkers, Dieuwertje.

384 Kampf, Avram. Chagall to Kitaj: Jewish Experience in Twentieth Century Art. London: Barbican Art Gallery, 1990. Kleeblatt, Norman (ed). The Dreyfus Affair: Art, Truth & Justice. University of California Press, 1987. Friedlander, Evelyn (ed). The Jews ofDevon and Cornwall: The Hidden Legacy Found. Bristol: Redcliffe Press, 2000. Girouard, M., D. Cruicksank and R. Samuel. Saving of Spitaýfields. London: Spitalfields Historic Buildings Trust, 1989. Goodman, Susan Tumarkin. Immigrant Generations: Jewish Artists in Britain 19001945. New York: The Jewish Museum, 1983. Gray, V., and M. Aspey. The Life & Times ofN. M. Rothschild 1777-1836. London: Museum of London, 1998. Guralnik, Nehama (ed). Maurycy Gottlieb: In the Flower of Youth. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv Museum of A-rt; Dvir, 1991 Heuberger Georg (ed). Die Rothschilds. Gennany: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 1994. desffidischen Anton Oppenheim. Merck. Daniel Die Entdeckung Moritz and , Selbstbewussteins in der Kunst. Frankfurt: Ridisches Museum, 2000. Hollander, Anne. Fabric of Vision. London: National Gallery, 2000. Hoshen, Sarah Harel. Treasures ofJewish Galicia. Tel Aviv: Beth Hatefutsoth Nahum Goldmann Museum of the Jewish Diaspora, 1994. Jacob Kramer Reassessed.London: Ben Uri Art Gallery, 1984. dankel Adler, Mark Gertler and Bernard Meninsky. London: Ben Uri Art Gallery, 1957. Kilmurray, Elaine, and Richard Onnond. Sargent. London: Tate Gallery, 1998. Kleeblatt, Norman. John Singer Sargent: Portraits of the Wertheimer Family. New York: Jewish Museum, 1999. Mane Katz. Ferrero, 196 1; Geneva, 1965. Art Gallery, Un Ben London: Years. Late Early Years The Gertler: the Mark and 1982. Art Gallery, Uri Ben London: & Drawings. Exhibition Gertler: Mark ofPaintings 1944. 1992 Drawings. Paintings Gertler: Mark and

385

Natter, G. Tobias. Isidor Kaufmann. Vienna: Jüdisches Museum der Stadt Wien, 1995. Perry, Jenny. Solomon J Solomon R.A. London: Ben Uri Art Gallery, 1990. Post-Impressionism: Cross currents in European Painting. London: Royal Academy, 1979-1980 Robins, Anna Gruetzner. Modern Art in Britain 1910-1914. London: Barbican Art Galleries, 1997. Schwab, W., and J. Weiner. Ben Uri Collection. London: Ben Uri Society, 1994. Siegel, Carol. Jewish Dickens: Israel Zangwill and the Wanderers ofKilburn. London: The Jewish Museum, 1999. Silver, K., and Golan, R (eds). Circle ofMontparnasse: The Artists in Paris 1905-45. New York: Jewish Museum, 1985. Solomon J Solomon RA and Lily Delissa Joseph: A Loan Exhibition of Paintings. London: Ben Uri Art Gallery, 1946. Spencer, Charles. Aýfred Wolmark. Kingston Upon Hull: Ferens Art Gallery, 1975. Treuherz Julian. Hard Times: Social Realism in Victorian Art. Manchester City Art , Gallery; London: Lund Humphries, 1987.

Valentine, Helen. Art in the Age of QueenVictoria. London: Royal Academy of Arts, 1999. Weinberg, Barbara, and Stephanie Hedrich. John Singer Sargent in the Metropolitan Museum ofArt. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000. Wilton, Andrew. The Swagger Portrait. London: Tate Gallery, 1992. Symbolism Watts: in Burne-Jones Agae The Upstone. Robert and ofRossetti, and Britain, 1860-1910. London: Tate Gallery, 1998.

C. Articles in The ' Family, Wertheimer Portraits Sargent's the Singer 'John Adler, Kathleen. of Jew in the Text: Modernity and the Construction ofIdentity, ed. L. Nochlin 83-96. 1995, & Hudson, Thames Garb, London: T. pp. and 5 Art, ' Journal In-Jokes. Thagall's Jewish Ziva. vol. ofJewish Amishai-Maisels, (1978), pp 76-93. ---.

84-104. (1982), Art 9 Vol. 'Journal Jesus. pp. 'Jewish ofJewish

386

Bauman, Zygmunt. 'Strangers: The Social Construction Universality of and Particularity. ' Telos Vol. 78 (1988-89), pp. 1-36. 'Allosemitism: Premodern, Modem, Postmodem', in Modernity, Culture and 'the Jew', ed. B. Cheyette and L. Marcus, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998, pp. 143-56 Bohm-Duchen, Monica. 'Marc Chagall: Wandering Jew or Citizen of the World. ' Jewish Quarterly.

'The Solomon Family. ' Jewish Quarterly (1985). 'The Tribal Passion.' Jewish Quarterly (Summer 1992). Braude, Benjamin. 'The Heine-Disraeli Syndrome among the Palgraves of Victorian England. ' In Jewish Apostasy in the Modern World. Ed. Todd Endelmann pp. 110 ff. Cruise, Colin. 'Versions of the Annunciation. ' In, After the Pre-Raphaelites: Art and Aestheticism in Victorian England. Ed. Liz Prettejohn. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999, pp. 167-187. Heyd, Milly. 'Lilien and Beardsley: To the Pure All Things Are Pure.' Journal of Jewish Art Vol. 7 (1980), pp. 58-69.

Fabian-Miller, Naomi. 'The Life of Mark Gertler.' Jewish Quarterly (Summer 1992). Feldman, David. 'The Importance of Being English. ' In The Making ofModern Anglo-Jewry. Ed. David Cesarani. Oxford: Blackwell, 1990. 'Matthew Arnold. ' In Anglo-Jewry in Changing Times. By Finestein. Vallentine Mitchell.: London, 1999. Finestein, Israel. 'Jewish Emancipationists in Victorian England: Self Imposed Limits to Assimilation. ' In Assimilation and Community: the Jews in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Ed. J. Frankel and Zipperstein. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Some Works Sources Art Popular Russian 'Icon Painting of Friedman, Mira. as and by Chagall. ' Journal ofJewish Art Vol. 5 (1978), pp. 94-107. 429-30. 1923, 13 January Statesman, New The Portraits', 'The Wertheimer pp. Fry, Roger. in

10 5 No. Artists, Art ' Wolmark. 'The Resurrection Maurice. vol. Gordon, and of (1971), pp. 20-23. Culture, Community, ' Identity: In Diaspora. Identity 'Cultural Hall, Stuart. and Difference. Ed. Jonathan Rutherford. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1990.

387 Itkina, Elena 1. 'The Jewish Theme in Russian Graphic Art

of the 18th and 19th Centuries. ' Journal ofJewish Art Vol. 21/22 (1995/96), pp. 6-19.

Kaddish, Sharman. 'A Monumental Task. 'AJA Review, Vol. 23,1994.

Kampf, Avram. 'In Quest of the Jewish Style in the Era of the RussianRevolution.' Journal ofJewish Art Vol. 5 (1978), pp. 48-75, Kazovsky, Hillel.

'Jewish Artists in Russia at the Turn of the Century: Issues of national self-ident1fication in art. 'Journal ofJewish Art Vol. 21/22 (1995/96), pp. 20-39.

Kleeblatt, Norman. 'Master Narratives/Minority Artists: Art Journal vol. 57, no. 3, (fall 1998), p. 29-35. Klosteren, Steven. 'Simeon Solomon: and the Song of Songs.' Journal ofJewish Art Vol. 11 (1985), pp. 47-59. TIP,

Florian. "Ta belle Juive": Cunning in the Men and Beauty in the Women. ' Krobb, Jewish Quarterly (Autumn 1992). --

May, A. (pseudonym of Anna Wilmersdoerffer), 'Alfred Wolmark, Ein Maler des Judentums', Ost und West, 1908, cols. 600-606. Mellinkoff, Ruth. 'Judas's Red Hair and the Jews.' Journal ofJewish Art Vol. 9 (1982), pp. 31-46. Mercer, Kobena. 'Welcome to the Jungle'. In Identity Community, Culture, Difference. Ed. by Jonathan Rutherford. London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1990. Mirzoeff, Nicholas. 'Pissarro's passage:The sensation of Caribbean Jewishnessin Diaspora', in Diaspora and Visual Culture: representing Africans and Jews, ed. Nicholas Mirzoeff, London: Routledge, 200, pp. 57-75. Daniel Pick, 'Powers of Suggestion: Svengali and the Fin-de-Siecle', in Modernity, Culture and 'the Jew'. eds Cheyette and Marcus, Stanford, 1998, pp. 105-25. Prager, Leonard. 'A Bibliography of Yiddish Periodicals in Great Britain 18671967. ' Studies in Bibliography and Booklore Vol. 9, No. 1 (Spring 1969). Rajner, Miýarn- 'The Awakening of Jewish National Art in Russia.' Journal of Jewish Art Vol. 16 (1990-91), pp. 98-121. Ridge, Jacqueline, and Joyce Townsend. 'John Singer Sargent's Later Portraits, ' Apollo vol. 148, no. 439, (September 1998) pp. 23-30. Rothenstein, William. 'When to be young was Heaven', Atlantic, March 1931

388 Rubinstein, William D. 'Decline of the Golden Age. ' Jewish Social Studies No. 34 (January 1972) pp. 73ff 'Jewish Top Wealth Holders in Britain 1809-1909'. Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society ofEngland Vol. 37 (2002) pp. 133 ff. Shain, Milton. 'Imperialist Judaism in Africa: The Anglo-Boer War and the linage of the Jew in South Aftica. ' Jewish Affairs Vol. 54, No. 3 (Spring 1999). Silber, 'The Emergence of Ultra Orthodoxy The Invention of a Tradition. ' In The Uses of Tradition: Jewish Continuity in the Modern Era. Ed. Wertheimer, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992. Solomon, Solomon J. 'Art and Judaism.' Jewish Quarterly Review (July 1901) pp. 553-566. Spencer, Charles. 'Wolmark: The Doyen of Anglo-Jewish Painters.' Menorah Journal. Vol 45 (Autumn/Winter 1957), pp. 61-5 and 4 unnumbered, figures. unpaginated ' Sacred In Press. Popular in Yiddish Russian Secular 'Divining the Stein, Sarah. the Stories: Religion and Culture in Imperial Russia. Ed. Heather Coleman and Mark Steinberg, forthcoming. Jews The L' In 1806-188 RA Hart Alexander 'Solomon ofDevon and Julia. Weiner, 2000. Foundation, Legacy Hidden Bristol: pp. Friedlander. Cornwall. Ed. E. 41-50.

D. Archives Consulted Bishopsgate Institute, London Bradford Archive Cartwright Hall, Bradford City of Leeds Art Gallery London Metropolitan Archive

Museum of London Gallery Portrait National Royal Academy London Monuments Historical the of Royal Commission on

Slade School

389

Tate Gallery Journals Scanned The Independent The Jewish Chronicle

Ost und West Punch The Times

REPRESENTATIONS OF JEWS AND JEWISHNESS IN ENGLISH PAINTING 1887-1914 Vol. 2: Illustrations

by Peter Gross Submittedposthumouslyin accordancewith the requirementsfor the degreeof

Ph.D.

The University of Leeds

Centre for Jewish Studies, School of Fine Art, History of Art and Cultural Studies Work completed August 2003 [submitted September2004]

The candidate's supervisorconfinns that the work submittedis the late candidate'sown and that appropriatecredit has been given where referencehasbeenmade to the work of others.This copy has been supplied on the understandingthat it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesismay be published without proper acknowledgement.

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Solomon J. Solomon, LausDeo, Oil on canvas, c1899,236.5 x 173 cm, Private collection 2. Solomon J Solomon, Your Health, Oil on canvas, 1893,240 x 142.5 cm, location unknown 3. Solomon J Solomon, A Dinner Given by Sir H. Thompsonfor Mr Ernest Hart, Oil on canvas, No date, 71.1 x 102.9 cm, Wellcome Foundation, London 4. Solomon J Solomon, Mr Ernest Hart, Oil on board, No date, 35 x 26 cm, Wellcome Foundation, London 5. Solomon J Solomon, On the Threshold of the City, 22 June 1897, Oil on canvas, 1898,236 x 172 cm, Location unknown 6. Solomon J Solomon, High Tea in the Sukkah, Ink, graphite and gouache on paper, 1906,39.6 x 29.2 cm, The Jewish Museum, New York 7. Solomon J Solomon, The Commons Petitioning Queen Elizabeth to Marry, Canvas on plaster, 1911,442 x 249 cm, Houses of Parliament, London 8. Solomon J Solomon, An Allegory, Oil on canvas, 1904,269 x 150, Harris Museum & Gallery, Preston 9. Solomon J Solomon, Sir George Faudel Phillips, Oil on canvas, 1897,145.0 105.5 Private x cm, collection 10. John Singer Sargent, Lady Faudel Ph illips, Oil on canvas, 1898,144.8 x 94 Collection Private cm, 11. Max Beerbohm, Tite Street, drawing, 1908, Private collection 12. John Singer Sargent, Synagogue, Oil on canvas, Installed 1919,164 cms Boston Public Library wide, 13. John Singer Sargent, Lord Ribblesdale, Oil on canvas, 1902,254.2 x 148.6 cm, Tate Britain, London 14. John Singer Sargent, Sir George Lewis, Oil on Canvas, 1896,80 x 59.6 cm, Private collection 15. John Singer Sargent, Mrs Carl Meyer and her children, Oil on Canvas, 1896, 201.4 x 134 cm, Private collection 16. John Singer Sargent, Mrs Flora Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1898,147.5 x 95.2 cm, New Orleans Museum of Art 17. John Singer Sargent, Mr Asher Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1898,147.5 x 97.8 cm, Tate Britain, London 18. John Singer Sargent, Asher Wertheimer, Graphite on woven paper, 1898,24 x 15.1 cm, Fogg Museum, Harvard University Museums, Gift of Mrs Francis Ormond 19. John Singer Sargent, The Daughters ofMr Asher Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1901ý 190.5 x 130.8 cm, Tate Britain, London 20. Thomas Lawrence, Daughters of Col. Thomas Cartaret Hardy, Oil on 1801,161 canvas, x 135 cm, Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio 21. John Singer Sargent, Mrs Ralph Curtis, Oil on canvas, 1898,219.3 x 104.8 cm, Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio. 22. John Singer Sargent, Mr Aýfred Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1901 163.2 x ý 114.9 cm, Tate Britain, London

23. John Singer Sargent, Essie, Ruby and Ferdinand, the Children ofAsher Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1902,161 x 193.7 cm, Tate Britain, London 24. John Singer Sargent, Mrs Flora Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1904,163.2 x 107.9 cm, Tate Britain, London 25. John Singer Sargent, HyIda, Almina and Conway, Children qfA. Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1905,188 x 133.4 cm, Tate Britain, London 26. John Singer Sargent, A vele gonfle, Oil on canvas, 1905,163.2 x 107.9 cm, Tate Britain, London 27. John Singer Sargent, Lady Aline Sassoon, Oil on canvas, 1907,161.3 x 105.4 Private cm, collection 28. John Singer Sargent, Almina Wertheimer, Oil on canvas, 1908,134 x 101 cm, Tate Britain, London 29. John Singer Sargent, Dr Pozzi at Home, Oil on canvas, 1881,202.9 x 102.2 The Armand Hammer Museum UCLA, Los Angeles. cm, 30. William Rothenstein, In the Spitafflelds Synagogue, Oil on canvas, 1904,76.2 96.5 Hugh Art, Lane Municipal Musem Dublin x cm, of 3 1. William Rothenstein, An Exposition of the Talmud, Oil on canvas, 1904, 114.8 x 145.2 cm, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston 32. William Rothenstein, In the Corner of the Talmud School, Oil on canvas, 1904989.5 x 70.5 cm, Gallery Oldham 33. William Rothenstein, Aliens at Prayer, Oil on canvas, 1905,127.4 x 105.5 National Gallery cm, of Victoria, Melbourne 34. William Rothenstein, The Talmud School, Oil on canvas, 1904/5,83.8 x 94.9 Sternberg Centre, London cm, 35. William Rothenstein, Jews Mourning in a Synagogue, Oil on canvas, 1906, 127.5 x 115.5 cm, Tate Gallery, London 36. William Rothenstein, Reading the Book ofEsther, Oil on canvas, 1907,87 x 106 cm, Manchester City Art Gallery 37. William Rothenstein, Carrying the Law, Oil on canvas, 1908,160 x 188 cm, Johannesburg Art Gallery 38. William Rothenstein, Carrying the Law, Oil on canvas, 1907, Cartwright Hall, Bradford 39. Max Beerbohm, A Quiet Morning in the Tate Gallery, Pencil, pen and Gallery, 1907,37 32 London Tate paper, cm, on x watercolour 40. Simeon Solomon, Coptic Baptismal Procession, Watercolour, Gouache & Gum Arabic, 1865,25.9 x 42.4 cm, Cecil Higgins Art Gallery, Bedford 4 1. Alfred Wolmark, Waitingfor the Tenth (aka The Rabbis), 1900, Oil on 226 Collection 166 Private canvas, x cm, 42. Alfred Wolmark, Reading the Talmud/The Loner, ca. 1907, Oil on canvas, 61 x 73.7 cm, Six Trees Ltd, London 43. Alfred Wolmark, The Last Days ofRabbi Ben Ezra, 1903, Oil on canvas, 184.2 x 320 cm, The Jewish Museum, New York 44. Alfred Wolmark, In the Synagogue, dated 1897 (?), Oil on canvas, 85 x 69 Art Ben Uri Gallery, London cm, 45. Alfred Wolmark, Young Rabbi with a Beard (aka Young Rabbi with a Book), 1898, Oil on canvas, 53.3 x 45.7 cm, Private Collection 46. Alfred Wolmark, In a Synagogue, Oil on canvas, 67cm.x 88.3 cm, 1906, Private collection (Gitl and Marton Braun) 47. Alfred Wolmark, Sabbath afternoon, ca. 1910, Oil on Canvas, 73.6 cm x 61cm, Gitl and Marton Braun

48. Alfred Wolmark, Succoth, 1909, Oil on canvas, 121.9 x 121.9 cms, Private

collection

At-

-/ 7

Solomon J. Solomon, A dinner given by Sir H. Thompson for Mr Ernest Hart, no date, London, The Wellcome Foundation

Solomon J. Solomon, Mr Ernest Hart, no date, London, The Wellcome Foundation

7ý

,,., -"-

1'ý

ilor

1-f,

om ilk

ft 1-0 .

------z

-1

:;: I

///

/2: 7 7/ //

-xv

.01

Iiii--

S-

Solomon J. Solomon, Sir George Faudel Phillips, 1897, Private Collection

T-HE

LATE

T--,,DY

FA(--DEI,

-PHTLLIP--II

--L

--.

---

---v-

I-

----

:T -

----

'Týý \

1,11ý

Fig. 22 J. S. Sargent, Alfred Wertheimer

Fig. 23 J. S. Sargent, Essle, Ruby and Ferdinand Wertheimer

Fig. 24 J. S. Sargent, Mrs Flora Wertheimer, 1904

Fig. 25 J. S. Sargent, Hylda, Almina and Conway Wertheimer

Fig. 26 J. S. Sargent, A Vele Gonfie

Sassoon Aline Lady Sargent, S. J. 27 Fig.

Fig. 28 J. S. Sargent, Almina Wertheimer

Fig. 29 J. S. Sargent, Dr Pozzi at Home, 1881

CH/

/ tj

"ý t, -T-0 1,

Alý-

T-, : 1,ý, ,

'131

fI--

-'I

f. "1

---

/7-!

-/-

(

C:; i

(

I's /

"Ni

'1ý

UNNERSITY LIBRARY LEEDS

't,

/. I

"-:

-J

'I. %-

ftý

N"4pvll

r, )

z C C C

(JD

z C

TIME .;v.

IýI

T(,

i6maom 0.7

ý.

Lf2

1-I

W>---v

tol,

-1ýý, -ý

.. 4

--i--.,

',.,

Ajý '

4Al -1K

V4ý

7 :9