What did the Dreyfus Affair reveal about the strength of anti-Semitism in France at the time?

After the French revolution and the enlightenment, Jews were emancipated within France and ‘thought of themselves as French citizens who practiced Judaism as their religion’[1]. However, 100 years later anti-Semitism and popular resentment of Jews was still present and problematic within France. In this essay, by looking at the prominent case of the Dreyfus Affair I will attempt to analyse why, although the Jews had been emancipated for years, there was such support for popular anti-Semitism under the surface. The Dreyfus Affair demonstrates a case of popular anti-Semitism within the public eye, and to examine the Jew hatred that was present at this time of turmoil, I will concentrate on two key issues. Firstly, I will look at the racism within the French army and the way it filtered down to the every day people. Secondly, I will address how and why anti-Semitic prejudices were engrained within French society. A helpful source to look at in order to answer the question is Journalist Emile Zola’s ‘J’Accuse’ letter to the president, which was openly printed in the paper ‘L’Aurore’ in 1898 after he was ‘informed by Georges Picquart's lawyer of Dreyfus's innocence and Esterhazy's guilt in 1897’[2]. The fact that Zola wrote this controversial and dangerous document during a time of tension and divisions within France, and a time where the mass media factions were relentlessly battling against one another shows the depth of his concern for Dreyfus’ freedom.

Briefly, the Dreyfus Affair was sparked by an anonymous note to the German military which was found to be leaking French army secrets. 'Panic-stricken and spurred on by a virulent anti-Semitic press, the government names the alleged culprit...Alfred Dreyfus, a Jew’[3]. Despite the case lacking greatly in evidence, with nothing but a ‘D’ to implicate Dreyfus, France was divided brutally into the two groups, Dreyfusards and anti-Dreyfusards, both sides driven by the mass media.

There was early news coverage and publicity of the Dreyfus case which brought the issue into the public eye. It was shocking to see how quickly and openly the French citizens against Dreyfus became very anti-Semitic in their attack, and ‘His subsequent conviction was cheered by crowds shouting "Death to the Jews!"'[4], highlighting that that there was an inherent Jewish prejudice within France and people genuinely believed that the accusations of Dreyfus’s malpractice within the army related to a religious evil. Edmund Drumond’s openly anti-Semitic newspaper called ‘La Libre Parole’ was ‘well known for charges that the army was being fatally weakened by treasonous officers in its ranks, Jews prominent among them'[5] and 'On the front page of his inflammatory newspaper, the antisemite Eduoard Drummont prepares to thrust Captain Alfred Dreyfus into the sewer’[6], clearly stating the anti-Semitic political position of Drummont’s newspaper, and illustrating that Dreyfus and Jews alike should be cast off to the sewers like vermin. During the Dreyfus case, this paper represented the anti-Dreyfusards, who were the people who felt as though the Affair was a controversy which attempted to weaken France and tarnish the reputation of the army. However, there was another popular opinion within France which was represented within the ‘L’Aurore’ newspaper, which gave a voice to the Dreyfusards and eventually printed the famous ‘J’Accuse’ letter by Zola. They saw the issue as a principle of freedom of the individual, and as an opportunity to republicanise the army and place parliament in control of government. This begs the question, if people knew there were two sides to the story then why was there no immediate re-trial of Dreyfus?

Besides the inherent prejudice against Jews at this time, another key issue which can be blamed for this injustice is the racism within authoritative groups such as the army, who were supported by the Clergy.  Emile Zola stated in his letter that the Dreyfus affair was ‘set it all in motion merely by carelessness and lack of intelligence, they seem…to have given in to the religious bias of their milieu and the prejudices of their class’[7] explaining that the religious prejudices of the army toward Jews were already engrained in their nature and led to their assumption that Dreyfus was implicated with the accusations. Furthermore, Schloss argues that 'At that time, there was only one Jew on the general staff...Dreyfus'[8], so it could be argued that there was no particular empathy amongst his colleagues regarding his religious persecution. This shows an obvious apathy towards the Jewish – otherwise the involved authority figures may have been more inclined to challenge the army and support Dreyfus’ case. Society and anti-Semitism had conditioned them to be ignorant of Jewish struggle on the whole, as they were not seen as an important part of French society. Zola’s letter assists us in understanding what anti-Semitism was like within France at this period, and indicates that racism towards Jews was fraught within authoritative groups and many of the army were prejudiced against Dreyfus despite the evidence lacking greatly. For example, ‘These…are the facts that explain how this miscarriage of justice came about; The evidence of Dreyfus’s character, his affluence, the lack of motive and his continued affirmation of innocence’ and Zola explicitly states that these factors of Dreyfus’ innocence ‘combine to show that he is the victim of the lurid imagination of Major du Paty de Clam, the religious circles surrounding him, and the “dirty Jew” obsession that is the scourge of our time’ – explicitly highlighting an issue with racism against Jews within France.

---

[1] Leslie Derfler, The Dreyfus Affair, (Westport, USA, 2002), page 18

[2] Michael Burns, France and the Dreyfus affair: a documentary history, (1999), Page 200

[3] ‘The Dreyfus affair: 100 years on’ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5166904.stm accessed 18/02/13

[4] Richard.S.Levy, Antisemitism, (California, USA, 2005), page 189

[5] R.S Levy, Antisemitism, page 191

[6] R.S. Levy, Antisemitism, page 189

[7] Emile Zola

[8] Chaim Schloss, 2000 Years of Jewish History, (Jerusalem, Israel), page 259