We find a reference to this subject in a long controversy which was published in the Franco-Jewish fortnightly Archives Israélites in 1864. One of the contributors to this magazine, M. Lazar Lévy-Bing, in a letter entitled “Rétablissement de la Nationalité Juive,” dated from Nancy, 21 Mars,[¹] and in another, “Suite d’une polémique,” Nancy, 2 Mai,[²] tells us in clear, straightforward terms, that he firmly believes in a Jewish national future, and considers it the only solution of the Jewish problem. He had strong religious convictions, and his most earnest hope was to reconcile the spirit of the age with the eternal truths of Judaism; for he held that a nation which repudiated its faith in God would abandon the very foundation of morality. He regarded union between Jews and the friends of liberty as an indispensable condition of human progress. He maintained that the Jews would best serve the universal cause of civilization by working mainly for their own commonwealth, by preparing for their own future. Obviously, he says, the minority of Jews in free countries will be chiefly concerned about the present, and their energies will be consumed in their own environments, but the majority of Jews will work in a Jewish direction. There is no incompatibility between the Restoration of Palestine promised by the prophets, and Jewish patriotism which strives for the welfare of different states.
[¹] XXVᵉ Année.— ... 15 Avril, 1864. Archives Israélites ... sous la direction de Isidore Cahen ... (1826–1902). Paris, 1864, pp. 330–335.
[²] Ibid., 15 Mai, pp. 427–432.
He was strongly supported by a series of articles entitled: Lettres sur la mission d’Israël dans l’histoire de l’humanité, signed “Maurice Hess”[¹] (1812–1875), a well-known author and distinguished Jewish nationalist. On the other hand, M. D. Nathan, Chef d’escadron d’artillerie, in a letter, “Une Question Soulevée,” dated from Toulon 21 Avril,[²] and M. Benoît Levy, in “Tentative de Conciliation,” 15 Juin,[³] denounced the idea of the restoration as a sublime and unrealizable dream. The heated controversy arose through the intervention of a Christian theologian, Dr. Abram-François Pétavel of Neuchatel, who appealed to Jews in favour of their restoration to Palestine.[⁴] He published two books,[⁵] in which he dealt with the question from a theological point of view. His letters to the Jews, however, lacked clearness. He attempted to bring about a sort of compromise, but created a bad impression. His action spurred the opposition afresh, with the result that instead of arguing ad rem it took to arguing ad hominem.
[¹] Ibid. 1ᵉʳ Janvier, pp. 14–17: 1ᵉʳ Fevrier, pp. 102–106: 15 Fevrier, pp. 145–149: 1ᵉʳ Mars, pp. 198–202: 15 Mars, pp. 240–244: 1ᵉʳ Avril, pp. 287–292: 15 Avril, pp. 336–340: 1ᵉʳ Mai, pp. 377–382: 15 Mai, pp. 432–436: 1ᵉʳ Juin, pp. 472–477.
His Rom und Jerusalem (1862) is one of the masterpieces of modern Zionist literature. Hess insists that despite all attempts on the part of the Jews the Jewish national instinct cannot be eradicated. The only solution of the Jewish question, according to him, was the colonization of Palestine; and he looked to France to make it possible. The historian Graetz was influenced by Hess’ book in the direction of Jewish nationalism.
[²] Ibid. 1ᵉʳ Mai, pp. 372–377.
[³] Ibid. 15 Juin, pp. 507–510.
[⁴] Ibid. 15 Mars, pp. 234–235. “Une brochure publiée à Genève et la reconstitution de la nationalité juive.”—Isidore Cahen.
Ibid. 1ᵉʳ Avril, pp. 273–274. “De quelques observations en réponse aux nôtres une brochure publiée à Genève”: M. Lévy-Bing, M. Pétavel.—Isidore Cahen.