Collective Memory
Communal remembering was constructed on the basis of traditional Jewish
archetypes.
By David G. Roskies
The public fast days
are an example of how collective memory is given expression in Judaism. In this
article, the author explores the Jewish mandate to remember as it was manifest
in Jewish history. Reprinted with permission of The Gale Group from Contemporary Jewish Religious Thought, edited by Arthur A. Cohen and Paul
Mendes-Flohr, Twayne Publishers.
InJudaism, memory is a collective mandate, both in
terms of what is recalled and how it is recalled. From the Deuteronomic
injunctions to "remember the days of old" (32:7) and to "remember
what Amalek did to you" (25: 17) to the persistent theme of remembering
"that you were slaves in Egypt," the content of Jewish memory has
been the collective saga as first recorded in Scripture and as later recalled
in collective, ritual settings.
Central to the meaning of the biblical past is the covenant,
Israel's guarantee that history will follow a divine plan. Thus, the tremors
that register most clearly are the breaches of covenant that Israel has been
guilty of: "Remember, never forget, how you provoked the Lord your God to
anger in the wilderness" (Deuteronomy 9:7). The destructions of the Temple
in Jerusalem, the exile from the land, and natural and national catastrophes
are all seen as the consequence of God's retribution for the backslidings of
his chosen people.
This theme of guilt, retribution, and exile is most
forcefully articulated in the two Tokhehah (literally: reproof) sections
of Scripture, Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28, which later generations
invariably returned to in times of unprecedented disaster.
After the destruction of Solomon's Temple (hurban
ha-bayit) in 586 B.C.E., the biblical Book of Lamentations and prophetic
consolation provided new forms of collective memory. The Book of Lamentations
orchestrated a documentary account of Jerusalem's siege and destruction into
individual and choral voices ideally suited for ritual mourning, while the
prophets of the exile, notably Ezekiel and Second Isaiah, viewed the exile
archetypally, in terms of visionary battles (Gog and Magog), resurrection (the
Valley of the Dry Bones), a new Temple, and a new Exodus.
This visionary impulse was carried further by Jewish
apocalyptic writers who flourished in Palestine from about 200 B.C.E. to 100
C.E. Through their pseudepigraphic approach, the apocalyptic writers projected
a vision of the imminent End of Days as shaped by an esoteric and highly mythic
reading of biblical prophecy.
Rabbinic Innovations
With the destruction of Herod's Temple in 70 C.E. and the
subsequent failure of the Bar Kokhba revolt, the rabbis of Jabneh and Usha (the
tannaim) triumphed as the sole arbiters of Jewish memory. Most of the
apocalyptic writings were excluded from the biblical canon. Even the
straightforward chronicles of the Maccabees were consigned to oblivion.
Instead the rabbis proclaimed Scripture as the blueprint of
history-past, present, and future. Through public fasts that celebrated God's
historical intervention in nature; through public sermons that sought to link
Scripture with the concrete life of the everyday; through the creation of
public rituals to commemorate the salvations and destructions of the biblical
past, the rabbis were able to canonize, codify, and ritualize historical memory
for all generations to come.
The rabbinic approach was to implode history, to cut it down
to manageable size. Events were disassembled and reassembled according to
biblical archetypes: the Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Akedah (binding of
Isaac), the Exodus, Sinai, the breaking of the tablets, the destruction of the
Temple, the Exile, the restoration of Zion. The rabbis selected, combined, and
arranged events to fit them on a continuum. Thus, the separate destructions of
both Temples (in 586 B.C.E. and 70 C.E.) were telescoped together, combined
with the capture of Bethar (in 135 C.E.) and the ploughing up of Jerusalem (ca.
130 C.E.), and all four calamities were then linked to the original day of
treason in the wilderness; described in Numbers 14 and identified as the ninth
day of Av in all cases (Babylonian Talmud, Ta'anit. 4:6).
As part of the selection process, the rabbis never treated
the individual as worthy of memorialization. There was no place for heroes
either in the commemoration of the Exodus on Passover or in the three-week
period leading up to the ninth of Av. This collective focus remained in force
throughout the Middle Ages, even in Christian Europe, with its plethora of
saints' days. Rabbi Akiva was remembered simply as one of the 10 Harugei
Malkhut, the rabbinic martyrs during the Hadrianic persecution. This
legendary construct was in turn refashioned sometime in the Byzantine period
into a mythic tale with biblical antecedents (the selling of Joseph by his
brothers), eventually to become part of the Yom Kippur liturgy (in the
commemoration of the Ten Martyrs).
Medieval Developments
Indeed, it was liturgy that became the central repository of
group memory in the Middle Ages. A number of historical chronicles were written
in the wake of the Crusades, and the Expulsion from Spain was the major
catalyst for the first serious attempts at postbiblical Jewish historiography,
yet both national calamities were commemorated mainly in synagogue ritual: in
memorial prayers for the dead, in penitential poems, in additions to the
liturgy for the ninth of Av. Fasting and feasting remained the essential ways
of recalling local events of special significance such as expulsions, plagues,
or deliverance from danger.
Thanks to a system of dating events and of choosing
representative places, it was now possible to create new linkages and
historical clusters. Thus, the Cossack uprising of 1648-49 was followed by 16
years of foreign invasion, but in Jewish memory, only Tah vetat (1648-1649)--the
period of pogroms--was recalled, while the destruction of Nemirov (May 1648)
became the stand-in for the ruin of Jewish Poland. The anniversary of Nemirov's
destruction, the 20th of the Hebrew month of Sivan, became a commemorative fast
day, linked by date to gezeirat tatkla, the martyrdom of the Jews of
Blois in 1171.
As always, it was the subjective reality, not the verifiable
facts of destruction, that set the norm and gave rise to new responses. What
was remembered and recorded was not the factual data but the meaning of the
desecration.
This meaning, in turn, was shaped and expressed by analogies
with earlier archetypes. The Hadrianic persecutions had given rise to the
archetype of kiddush ha-Shem, defined in the Talmud as the public act of
sanctifying God's name in times of persecution (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin
74). Kiddush ha-Shememerged after the Crusades in combination with two
other archetypes. The Akedah and the Temple sacrifice were enlisted by the
survivors of the First and Second Crusades in order to view as vicarious
atonement the voluntary death of those who had resisted forced conversion.
Similarly, the Marrano experience in 16th-century Spain and
Portugal was legitimated in terms of Esther hiding her identity--a pun on
Esther-hester (Hebrew for "hiding")--from King Ahasuerus. With
the spread of kabbalah [mysticism] in the 17th century and its enormous impact
on Hasidism in the 18th and 19th centuries, the spiritualization of history and
the search for archetypal structures were revived just when the modern critical
study of history began to take hold among western European Jews.
David Roskies is professor of Jewish literature at the
Jewish Theological Seminary. He is the author of Against the Apocalpypse:
Responses to Catastrophe in Jewish
History, and co-founder and editor of Prooftexts: A Journal of Jewish
Literary History.
(c) 1987 Twayne Publishers.