Note 55 — J

More than once, Jewish Rabbis have been appealed to on the subject of racial purity, and they have on all occasions upheld the claims of a section of the Black Jews to being Jews, and the White Jews have as often repudiated such decisions, and questioned their validity. The weight of authority, and the evidence of local facts, seem to militate against the contention of the White Jews that the Black Jews do not belong to the Israelitish community, but are the descendants of emancipated slaves and half castes. The White Jews appear to have maintained the purity of their race by declining intermarriage with the Black Jews. It must be admitted that, in the earlier centuries, the original settlers purchased numerous slaves, who have since then followed the religion of their masters. It is recorded by Stavorinus55 that “when these Jews purchase a slave, they immediately manumit him; they circumcise him and receive him as their fellow Israelite, and never treat him as a slave.” It is noted by Canter Visscher56 that “the Jews make no objection to selling their slaves who are not of their own religion to other nations, obliging them, however, when sold, to abandon the use of the Jewish cap, which they had before worn on their heads. But slaves, male or female, once fully admitted into their religion by the performance of the customary rites, can never be sold to a stranger.” The Jews are said to have had former fugitive connections with the women of these converts, and brought into existence a mixed race of Dravidians and Semitics. It would be uncharitable to infer from this that all the Black Jews are the descendants of converted slaves or half-castes, as it would be unreasonable to suppose that all of them are the descendants of the original settlers. It is noted by Mr. Adler that “the Rev. J. H. Lord quotes an interesting pronouncement on the racial purity of the Black Jews of Malabar made by Haham Bashi of Jerusalem in 1892. The Rabbi is said to have referred to the Maharikash (R. Jacob Castro, of Alexandria), whose responsum in 1610 confirmed the ‘Jichus’ or the ‘Mejuchasim’ and decided likewise. He is even said to have allowed one of his relatives to marry a Brown Jew! Nowadays, the White Jews hold aloof from the larger community, black or brown, and profess to be of another caste altogether. But one of the most intelligent of their number, who took us round the synagogues, professed to think such exclusiveness exaggerated and unfair, and admitted that their own grandfathers had lived with Black Jewesses in a more or less binding marital relation, and it is abundantly clear that, till recently, the Black and White Jews were quite friendly, and the very fact of the White Jews holding the title-deeds merely proves that they were trusted by the true owners to keep them for safe custody, as they were richer and possessed safes. In an article in the ‘Revue des Deux Mondes,’57 Pierre Loti, writing of the Black Jews, says that “le rabbin me fait d’ameres doléances sur la fierté des rivaux de la rue proche, qui ne veulent jamais consentir à contracter marriage, ni même à frayer avec ses paroissiens. Et, pour comble, me dit-il, le grand rabbin de Jérusalem, à qui on avait adressé une plainte collective, le priant d’intervenir, s’est contenté d’émettre, en réponse, cette généralité plutôt offensante: Pour nicher ensemble, il faut être des moineaux de même plumage.”