Talk:Cantonist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cantonist is part of WikiProject Jewish history, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardized and up-to-date resource for all articles related to Jewish history.

If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, also consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Jewish history articles.
Project Jewish history To-do:
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Ukraine Portal
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.


Contents

[edit] Mistranslation

The correct translation of Herzen's quatation would be "Their officer complained that one third had already died" ("Беда да и только, треть осталась на дороге" -- "Былое и думы", My Past and Thoughts, end of Chapter 13). Not "two thirds" as in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.80.143 (talk • contribs)

You are correct. This is now fixed. ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:51, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tsar's watch

Cantonists' exploits are extwncively doc'ed in YPS. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Galassi (talk • contribs) 11:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] the unconverted reached the rank of colonel

Is there a proof for this: "(the unconverted could not be promoted above the rank of lieutenant, though there were some exceptions, in which the unconverted reached the rank of colonel)." This contradicts [1]. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

  • There are at least 8 full officers that were recorded, mainly from the banking families.Galassi 11:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Sources? In any case, we need to show that this was extreme rarity. Intentionally or not, your caption implies that Tsam's case was rather typical. ←Humus sapiens ну? 00:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
      • Petrovsky is the source.Galassi 07:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
        • Actually the limit was УНТЕР-ОФИЦЕР, i.e. staff-sergeant.Galassi 13:56, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
          • Do you see a problem with saying that a handful out of tens of thousands is a rarity? If not, why do you keep removing this word? To demonstrate good faith, I won't revert you right away and will give you a chance to provide a proof about 8 exceptions that you insist on inserting - the other sources say that there was only one. If there is an evidence that they were from the rich families and bribed their way up, let's say so. And for the n-th time, please WP:CITE your sources. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
            • No problems with RARITY. All info derives from YPS.Galassi 10:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] unreliable source?

Galassi deleted my edit, because, as s/he claims, Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson is an unreliable source. Please elaborate, as I have other info. to post that is historically relevant based on this source. Yehoishophot Oliver 13:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
There is a tremendous quantity of lacrimose mythology surrounding cantonism. Most of it just doesn't hold water. I have studied this ussue with Petrovsky who wrote the only reliable book on the subj.Galassi 13:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Nevertheless, a written source by a recognised scholar describing historical events is legit. according to wiki rules, no? Yehoishophot Oliver 14:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
The problem with Schn. quote is that it is simply mythopoietic. It is generally wise to stick to secular historians, for sobriety's sake.Galassi 18:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm waiting for a link to a wiki rules page to justify your specific rejection. There is no rule on wiki that religious historians may not be quoted, AFAIK, and Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson was one. And are you saying you will reject all quotes, or only those you deem "mythopoietic" (sic)? Yehoishophot Oliver 22:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
If there is a published criticism of Schn., you may quote Shn. with corresponding comment, otherwise what is your reason to dismiss it as "mytho"? `'mikka 00:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure Schn. would merit published crit.Galassi 03:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Anyone remotely familiar with his works knows that he took great pains to transmit huge amounts of historically priceless information, as recorded in his letters (Igros Kodesh) and talks (Sefer haSichos), quoting only those he felt to be reliable sources. He may not have been secular (which is apparently for some people a guarantee of legitimacy and objectivity), but he definitely qualifies as a historian. Do we have a consensus here? Yehoishophot Oliver 01:17, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree. General WP policies apply: verifiability, reliable source, no orig. research, etc. If there are notable (not WP:UNDUE) alternative opinions from reliable sources, mention them as well. ←Humus sapiens ну? 01:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
You agree with me, or Galassi? I have not seen that Schneerson's works violate the policies you mention. Yehoishophot Oliver 02:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
That's what I agree with. ←Humus sapiens ну? 02:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I am not familiar with Schneerson's work, but the paragraph cited is patent nonsense.Galassi 03:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

If you're not familiar with his work, it's unfair of you to dismiss it as an unfair source. In any case, I owe an apology. I see that that citation was not in fact from the author, but from an explanatory note of the translator. In any case, I'm waiting for explanation for why the source (not the content of the specific quote) is inherently unreliable, based on wiki rules. If no one is forthcoming, then I will post the info. I have in this work concerning the numerous activities of the Shneersons and their followers in countering the cantonist edict. Yehoishophot Oliver 04:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

My understandidng is that Sch. is a theologian, i.e. propagandist by definition, and NPOV is not expected from him, based on common sense. Hassidic mythology surrounding cantonism created many difficulties in getting a realistic pictire of cantonism. There are very few sources that are really reliable, but there are memoirs of cantonists themselves, like Viktor Nikitin (converted), who became an Inpector General of Penitentiaries. Galassi 10:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

He did write on theology, but that's irrelevant. He made a point of transmitting a great deal of history with accuracy, and if you don't know that, it only shows that you haven't studied his works. It's absurd to suggest that someone who writes on theology can't write on history, especially history that his great-grandfather Menachem Mendel Schneersohn was directly involved in (do you deny that?), and he had access to records and first-hand accounts from witnesses. Yehoishophot Oliver 11:04, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Galassi, please point us to the policy you are basing on. BTW, converted Jews often engaged in persecution of their former coreligionists, so they are hardly a neutral source. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:42, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Nikitin was sympathetic to the unconverted.Galassi 11:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Again, you are missing the point entirely. ←Humus sapiens [[User

talk:Humus sapiens|ну]]? 20:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

No source for precluding this source was forthcoming, so I've posted something from it. This is a published source from someone who transmitted a vast amount of historical information, and declared the importance of always transmitting a story accurately, and never embellishing it. And if this info. is not found in other sources, there's a simple explanation: this work was done under a veil of strict secrecy. Yehoishophot Oliver 16:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] lachrymose mythology

This seems disparaging. Shall we say that often it relied on facts as well? Obviously the policy caused a lot of suffering. Let's try to stick to NPOV. ←Humus sapiens ну? 20:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

It is a nice way of saying that a lot of lit on the subj. is simply untrue. It was the military, so it was nasty by definition. The Jews however were as miserable as everyone else, and the cantonist life was not without rewards. Some cantonists did very well in life.Galassi 20:56, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
This is the point you keep trying to make. Others (including reliable sources) tend to think that putting 8-year-olds on a practical death march with peace-time casualty rate of more that 33% was not such a blessing. It was customary to mourn the conscript as a dead person in the Jewish communities, which often was not too far from the truth. ←Humus sapiens ну? 21:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
You should get the Russian edition of YPS (available on ozone.ru) or wait for the expanded StanfordUP tome (being printed).

There were no major wars from 1827 to the Crimean. So the survival rate was "optimistic".Galassi 21:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

That's my point. There is "lachrymose mythology" around every factual human tragedy, take Trail of Tears or Gulag. Do you have an evidence that there is something particularly special about this one? Pointing us to a yet unprinted "excellent" book (in creating of which you apparently participated and are trying to promote here) is not very helpful. See WP:V, WP:CITE. ←Humus sapiens ну? 22:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
It is published, as a dissertation in English, as a book in Russian, and shortly as a book in English. I did not participate in its creation, but I have known YPS for 35 years.

There are a lot unfounded myths, such as drowning in front of the Tsar, mass baptisms in rivers, coersion by torture etc., etc.Galassi 22:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

OK. I think it's in the human nature to surround every tragedy with myths. Is there an evidence of something special about this one, warranting this being mentioned in an encyclopedia?
Also, I realize that it is a tragedy for a Catholic Christian to be forced to convert to Orthodox Christianity, but I find your claim "The Jews however were as miserable as everyone else" to be unfair if not outright offensive. ←Humus sapiens ну? 00:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
OK, they had the pressure to convert, and maltreatment occurred from time to time, naturally. That State has not been known for sensitivity.

However NO ONE was happy in cantonist schools.Galassi 03:29, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

No one claimed that it was a happy place. You are making a strawman argument. Please reread what I said. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
ОК. The armny was not initially anti-semitic (it has become later, by 1900). Aside ofrom pressures to convert (and there were excesses, complaints, investigations, policy changes+confusion of implementation) all cantonists were treated more or less equally. Cantonism was NOT a penitentiary.Galassi 10:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
We are not separating the army from the policies it was used/abused to implement. If you think that putting 8-year-old Jewish boys on death marches, eliminating their Jewish identity in many ways from forced conversion to forbidding kashrut, etc. is not antisemitic, you lost any credibility with me. Confusion is not an excuse. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't put too much value in kashrut, not being observantm but that gives me a modicum of neutrality. There is no proof that death marches were the SOP, but some were inevitable, in the pre-railroad era.Galassi 11:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
This is not about your (or mine) personality or convictions. Other than your POV, you have failed to present any evidence that mentioning "lachrymose mythology" is warranted here. Sorry, I do not accept the logic that the absence of railroads somehow made death marches inevitable. ←Humus sapiens ну? 21:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Please avoid the loaded terms "death marches" here. No one was targetting to kill or otherwise make suffer these poor boys. You are reading with bias what you want from the quotation. In fact the officer quoted by Herzen feels bad for them: "Беда да и только", meaning, "what a pity". you should have read Nikolay Pomyalovsky, "Seminary Sketches" Очерки бурсы, about the miserable life of students in Orthodox religion, future priests, of the comparable age. You fail to acknowledge that the fate of Russian peasants was hardly better. You should have read more of contemporary literature, and you would probably understand why Bolsheviks succeeded: it was no because they were nasty efficient villains: it was the life in Russia was absolutely miserable for 95% of population. `'mikka 22:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Point taken, I shouldn't have used loaded terminology. I have read those, although many years ago. Unless the clause of "lachrymose mythology" is added to articles describing the fate of Russian peasants, Bursaks, etc., etc., I don't see a particular reason for it in this article. ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another reliable source

Herzl Yankl Tsam seems notable enough to deserve an article. According to Zvi Gitelman, published by Indiana UP: "Tsam appears to have been the only Jewish officer in the Tsarist army in the nineteenth century." I've changed the caption correspondingly. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Gitelman is all wrong, both on Tsam and the #. Another full officer was a son of baron Ginzburg. Galassi 12:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, he bought his commission, but nonetheless....Lute88 17:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
      • Galassi, you have to provide a source that "Gitelman was all wrong". Wikipedia works by sources. Shlomke 17:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
        • Galassi is quite correct. The Russian edition of "Drafted into Modernity" talks about Tsam at length. I am anxious for the English version, which I believe would be expanded from the Russan one.

And what the hell did Gitelman mean by "full captain"? Anyway the rank of штабс-капитан was preceded by прапорщик, аnother full officer rank. Lute88 17:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Petrovsky-Stern

  • Евреи в русской армии: 1827 - 1914
  • Петровский-Штерн Й.
  • год издания — 2003, кол-во страниц — 556, ISBN — 5-86793-202-8, тираж — 5000, язык — русский, тип обложки — твёрд. 7Б, масса книги — 660 гр., *издательство — НЛО
  • цена:1000.00 руб
  • Формат 60x90 1/16. Бумага офсетная №1. Офсетная печать

Эта книга - о встрече традиционной еврейской общины и русской армии, о социально-политических и духовных обстоятельствах этой встречи, а также о её последствиях. Автор прослеживает историю взаимоотношений военного ведомства с евреями России и Царства Польского от первого еврейского рекрутского набора 1827 г. вплоть до начала Первой мировой войны. Исследователь рассматривает военную и национальную проблематику в широком социокультурном контексте: литературные образы еврейских солдат в русской армии, отношение военных министров и полковых командиров к этническим меньшинствам, быт воспитанников в кантонистских батальонах, думские дебаты и военные баталии. В книге использован богатейший документальный материал из российских и зарубежных архивов. ОГЛАВЛЕНИЕ От автора 7 Тема и метод 9

  • Глава I. ЕВРЕИ РОССИИ И РУССКАЯ АРМИЯ НАКАНУНЕ

И ПОСЛЕ ПРОВЕДЕНИЯ РЕКРУТЧИНЫ 19 Евреи России накануне призыва 1827 года 22 Рекрутчина: рождение замысла 31 Русская армия накануне призыва 1827 года 34 Община против рекрутчины 37 Рекрутский Устав 43 Рекрутчина в переводе на еврейский 46 Реакция на Устав 50 Николаевские наборы и кагалы 53 Община - общество - армия: новые веяния 59 Результаты встречи 66 Выводы 69

  • Глава II. ОБЩИНА В АРМИИ 71

«Обряды веры» 74 Закон и праксис 79 Раввины-капелланы 82 Солдатские молельни 86 Солдатские общины 90 Общества еврейского самоуправления 93 Еврейское образование солдатских детей 105 Выводы 109

  • Глава III. МАЛЕНЬКИЕ СОЛДАТИКИ ВЕЛИКОЙ ИМПЕРИИ:

СУДЬБА ЕВРЕЙСКИХ КАНТОНИСТОВ 111 Миссионерский замысел 116 Миссионерская компания и её результаты 118 Кантонисты из евреев среди товарищей по оружию 138 Религиозный бунт в войсках 149 Конец института военных кантонистов 164 Результат кантонистского эксперимента 167

  • Глава IV. БЕСПОЛЕЗНЫЙ СОЛДАТ: ЕВРЕЙСКИЕ НИЖНИЕ

ЧИНЫ, ВОЕННАЯ РЕФОРМА И АРМЕЙСКАЯ СТАТИСТИКА 173 Военная реформа и устав всесословной воинской повинности 176 Военная статистика 182 Уклонение от службы: коллективное преступление русских евреев 186 Профессиональное распределение еврейских солдат 196 Физические данные еврейского солдата 204 Еврейские деньги и солдатский быт 209 Котёл кошерный и котёл ротный 213 Линия поведения еврейского солдата 217 Семейное положение 220 Преступность среди нижних чинов - евреев 224 Выводы 237

  • Глава V. ДИЛЕММА 1905 ГОДА: МЕЖДУ АРМИЕЙ И РЕВОЛЮЦИЕЙ 239

Северо-западные военные округа: Бунд и армия 244 Киевский военный округ: военные комитеты социалистов-революционеров (СР) 261 Петербургский военный округ: военные комитеты СД 268 Беспартийный мятеж 278 Меж двух огней 287 Выводы 290

  • Глава VI. ПРАГМАТИКИ И ПОЛИТИКИ: ЕВРЕЙСКИЙ ВОПРОС,

ВОЕННОЕ МИНИСТЕРСТВО И РУССКАЯ УЛЬТРАПРАВАЯ 295 Круг чтения военной бюрократии: три источника 300 Интендантский департамент против товарищества Грегера, Горвица и Когана 311 «Черта осёдлости» в армии и её создатель 319 Политики против прагматиков 324 Слово и дело 332 «Союз русского народа» в армии 336 Вокруг нового Устава 1912 года 344 Попытка окончательного решения 353 Выводы 354

  • Глава VII. ПРОИСХОЖДЕНИЕ ЛЕГЕНДЫ: ОБРАЗ ЕВРЕЙСКОГО

СОЛДАТА В РУССКОЙ ЛИТЕРАТУРЕ 357 Философ-просветитель в солдатской шинели 361 Жертва маскильской критики 370 Крест шею не тянет 377 Ловчики из Гете 384 Врачу, исцелися сам 387 О сопротивлении злу искусством 392 Память и стиль 396 Одиссей среди кентавров 399 Выводы 409

  • ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЕ 413
  • Комментарии 422
  • Список сокращений 507
  • Краткий указатель источников и литературы 508
  • Предметный указатель 531
  • Географический указатель 536
  • Именной указатель 541
  • Указатель упомянутых соединений и полков русской армии 550 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Galassi (talk • contribs) 18:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Underground opposition

I have removed the 1949 Schneerson quote. It has no basis in reality, according to professional historians........Galassi 09:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Replaced. You can put in a line about their disagreement alongside the Schneerson piece (assuming they do disagree). Shlomke 20:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Are these based on a book that has not yet been published? Shlomke 18:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

It was published in 2003, see preceding talksection. I's have to revert your edit.Galassi 04:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
You pasted a bunch of Russian without any explanation in the preceding talk section. Is this book written in english? Shlomke 17:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, as a dissertation at Brandeis. Then as book in Russian, and later this year as a book in English.Are you a habadnik?Galassi 00:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
So when you point to page 92-96 where YPS discuses schneersohn, is this available in English, and if so, whats the name of the publication? Shlomke 15:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes. All dissertations are available from UMI, but you have to pay for them. Same name.Galassi 16:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I would suggest that instead of trying to present schneerson as a undocumented claim, you put in a line saying that YPS was unable to find any primary source for it. Also keep in mind that if someone was operating "underground", there may have not been as much evidence about it, compared to the image that the tzar would have liked to make it look. Shlomke 16:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
There is NO JEWISH primary source that mentions the alleged "opposition" until Schn. makes the claim in 1949. Let us know if you find anything tangible.Galassi 16:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)