Protocols of the Elders of Zion

American historian and political scientist Walter Lucker notes that the Protocols had historical prototypes. Among them, he calls the pamphlet of the German publicist Wilhelm Marr , who in 1879 predicts the victory of Jewry over Germanism and the revolution in Russia, the pamphlet The Speech of the Chief Rabbi by the writer , published under the pseudonym “Sir John Ratcliffe” and the work of the Romanian adventurer Millin , written under the pseudonym "Major Osman Bay Kibrizli-zade." The works of Gadshe and Milliner, accusing the Jews of conspiring to seize power in the world, were very successful in Russia ^[7] .

French historian believes that the goals of the creators of the protocols were not to create an all-planet myth of the 20th century. Their task was much more modest. Tagieff writes that the task of the falsifiers was to discredit any attempt to modernize the Russian Empire by presenting it as a “Jewish project”. In fact, the “Protocols” were a tool that could allow convincing the tsar to get rid of Finance Minister Sergei Witte . A number of researchers suggest that the satirical text of Witte Ilya Zion, the then famous zealous opponent, could be stolen and used for this. Only after 1917, this fake began to be perceived as the idea of ​​a worldwide Jewish conspiracy ^[2] .

One of the most common versions says that the Protocols is a plagiarism of a little-known pamphlet from the mid- 19th century directed against Napoleon III ^[8] . The pamphlet was entitled , its author was a French lawyer and satirist Maurice Joli ^[2] . Immediately after printing in 1864, the pamphlet was banned in France. The text of the Protocols mainly uses Machiavelli replicas from the Dialogue, although borrowings from Montesquieu's replicas are also found. The textual coincidences were so great that the fact of plagiarism is completely obvious.

Leonid Katsis , professor of the Russian-American educational and scientific center for biblical studies and Jewish studies of the Russian State Humanitarian University , noted that "There was a whole series of similar mystical-conspiracy theological texts that borrowed ideas, pieces and so on from each other." And therefore, in his opinion, “there is simply no sense in talking about authenticity or authorship” ^[9] .

The origin of the documents by different people and in different publications was indicated differently, often different interpretations were in conflict with each other.

There are a number of versions about the origin of the Protocols. Supporters of the theory of authenticity of the “Protocols” do not give an exact answer to this question. So, Sergey Nilus cites in different publications three different versions of his receipt of protocols, differing from each other in different statements about the origin of the texts ^[10] . Nikolai Markov claims, without citing sources, that “the original manuscript of the Protocols was seized in 1897 during the Zionist congress in Switzerland from the portfolio of the Zionist leader Theodor Herzl ”, and the “secret” agent made the “seizure” ^[11] .

One of the publishers of the Protocols, Georgy Butmi, insists that it is impossible to identify the “Zionist sages” with representatives of the Zionist movement ^[10] .

Some supporters of the authenticity of the “Protocols” (for example, Yuri Begunov and Oleg Platonov ) rely on a document (note) written in 1927 by an emigrant Filip Petrovich Stepanov , a former public prosecutor of the Moscow Synodal Office, chamberlain and real state adviser ^{[12] [13 ] [13 ] ]}

In 1895, my neighbor on the estate of the Tula province, retired Major Alexei Nikolaevich Sukhotin handed me a handwritten copy of the “Protocols of the Sions of Zion”. He told me that one of his acquaintances, a lady (didn’t call me), who lived in Paris , found them from her friend (apparently from the Jews) and, before leaving Paris, secretly transferred them from him and brought this translation to one copy, to Russia and handed over this copy to him - Sukhotin.

At first I printed it in a hundred copies on a hectograph , but this publication was difficult to read, and I decided to print it in some printing house, without indicating the time, city and printing house; Arkady Ippolitovich Kellepovsky, who was then an official of special assignments under the Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich , helped me to do this; he let them print the Provincial Printing House; it was in 1897 . S. A. Nilus reprinted these protocols completely in his essay, with his comments.

Currently, this document is stored in the archives of Holy Trinity Monastery ( Jordanville , USA ). There is no actual evidence of Stepanov’s words, the publications he mentioned have not yet been discovered. Stepanov’s statement is considered one of the important documents on the history of the “Protocols” both by supporters of authenticity and critics ^[14] .

Scientists and researchers also do not agree on the time and place of the appearance of the Protocols. So, Norman Cohn dates their compilation between 1897 and 1899 in France in French by Russian agents ^[15] . Pierre-Andre Tagieff believes that, most likely, they were compiled in 1900-1901, according to the place and authorship, he agrees with the version of Cohn ^[2] . Cesare J. De Miquelis believes that they were created in Russian between April 1902 and August 1903. Michael Hagemeister says that the witnesses Sliozberg and Tikhomirov, who claimed that the protocols existed in handwritten form and even went to Russia at the turn of the century, are credible, but he himself concludes that the question “by whom, when and for what purpose was this text created - remains open ” ^[14] .

The authorship of the Protocols is a matter of separate discussion.

In studies devoted to this problem, the name most often referred to as the author is Matvey Golovinsky , a journalist who lived in Paris and collaborated with Russian intelligence. It is believed that it was Golovinsky who drafted the Protocols, working under the leadership of police official Pyotr Rachkovsky . The version of Golovinsky’s authorship was originally based on the testimony of the Polish-French writer Katarzyna Rzhevuska-Radziwill and the American Henrietta Herblat. This version was criticized both by supporters of the authenticity of the “Protocols” (for example, by General A. D. Nechvolodov ), and by those who were sure of their falsity - in particular, Vladimir Burtsev and Boris Nikolaevsky . Burtsev pointed out that Golovinsky left Paris much earlier than the Radziwill version and Herblat worked on the creation of the Protocols ^[16] .

On November 16, 1999, St. Petersburg historian Mikhail Lepyokhin published materials in the French journal Express , which prove that Golovinsky was the author of the Protocols ^[17] . According to Lepekhin’s findings, Golovinsky worked in Paris at Figaro with Charles Joli (1860-1905), apparently ^[18] , the son of Maurice Joli . According to Lepyokhin, at the beginning of 1902, Charles Joli traveled as a correspondent for Figaro in St. Petersburg, where the Protocols were first mentioned publicly in April of that year. Vadim Skuratovsky , refuting Burtsev’s argument about Golovinsky’s absence in Paris, claims that he visited France later and had a residence there. Skuratovsky supports the version of Golovinsky's authorship, based on a textual comparative analysis ^[19] .

Cesare de Miquelis, relying on the publication of the Protocols in the newspaper Znamya in 1903, believes that the creators of this text were famous Russian nationalists and anti-Semites Pavel Krushevan and George Butmi. According to Mikelis, they translated and finalized the "Dialogues" of Joli. In support of his version, de Miquelis cites many Ukrainisms in a version of the “Protocols” published in the newspaper Krushevan ^[20] .

For the first time in the general press, the existence of protocols was mentioned by Mikhail Menshikov in an article entitled “Conspiracies Against Humanity” published in the newspaper Novoye Vremya (St. Petersburg) on April 7 (20), 1902 . Menshikov wrote that a certain secular lady suggested that he familiarize himself with the “Protocols of the Zion of the Wise Men.” He doubted the authenticity of the “Protocols” and called their distributors “people with fever” ^[21] . In the future, many contemporaries evaluated the Protocols as falsification. In particular, in 1938, the philosopher Nikolai Berdyaev wrote ^[22] :

I consider it below my dignity to refute the “protocols of the Zion of the wise.” It is clear to anyone who has not lost an elementary psychological instinct when reading this base document that it represents the brazen falsification of haters of Jewry.

The Protocols was first published in Russia in 1903 , in abbreviated form, by the St. Petersburg newspaper Znamya, entitled The Jewish Conquest of the World Program. The editor of the newspaper was Pavel Krushevan , known for anti-Semitic views. Krushevan claimed that this was a translation of a document received from France ^{[15] [23]} .

In 1905, Sergei Nilus first published the full text containing 24 protocols. Nilus himself was confident in the authenticity of the protocols, although he admitted that he had no tangible evidence of their authenticity. According to Nilus, a protocol was passed on to him by a close person named Alexei in 1901. According to Nilus, from this year until 1905 he unsuccessfully tried to print the “Protocols” ^[24] . Nilus reprinted his book in 1911 and in 1917.

Almost simultaneously with Nilus, “Protocols” was published in 1905 by Georgy Butmi . In a short time, Butmi published a series of pamphlets under the heading “Accusatory speeches,” which he solemnly dedicated to the Union of Russian People . The book Enemies of the Human Race appeared in this series, in which the Protocols are framed by an extensive introduction and conclusion by the publisher. Within two years, he reprinted this book at least four times ^[25] .

Later, “Protocols” were published repeatedly in different countries. “Protocols” have become one of the tools of anti-Jewish propaganda; they have been used for this purpose by anti-Semites around the world, sometimes they are remembered in our time.

When the right-wing camp leaders proposed a project for the widespread use of the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” for political struggle, the chairman of the Council of Ministers, P. A. Stolypin, ordered a secret investigation and reported to the emperor about the results testifying to the forgery. Nicholas II wrote a resolution on the report: “Leave the Protocols.” You can’t do a clean thing with dirty methods ” ^[8] .

In 1920, Henry Ford sponsored the publication of the Protocols in the United States with a circulation of 500 thousand copies, also published in 1920-1922. in his newspaper The Dearborn Independent, a series of anti-Semitic articles entitled International Jewry. The most important problem of the world . " In 1921 he wrote: “... Protocols fit into what is happening. They are 16 years old, and up to now they have corresponded to the world situation ” ^[26] .

In a May 8, 1920 issue of The Times , the London newspaper published an article on the Protocols, describing them as a genuine document and calling for an investigation into the "Jewish conspiracy." However, later, on August 18, 1921, The Times published an article by its Istanbul correspondent F. Graves, in which he reported that the Protocols was a plagiarism of the pamphlet Dialogue in Hell between Montesquieu and Machiavelli by Maurice Joli . Doctor of Historical Sciences Oleg Budnitsky writes that this sensational exposure at that time allowed critics of the “Protocols” to switch from logical arguments to textology ^[27] . Later, some researchers suggested that the “Protocols” were possibly fabricated from the “Dialogue” in the early 1890s in France .

The first translation of the “Protocols of the Sages of Zion” into German under the pseudonym Gottfried zur Beek was published in 1919 by Müller von Hausen; the second - in 1920 carried out T. Fritsch. Further publications were supported by Alfred Rosenberg . Publications contributed to the explosion of anti-Jewish sentiments and provoked the assassination of Walter Rathenau , who was declared one of the “Zion wise men” ^[28] .

After the Nazis came to power in Germany, Nazi organizations, both in Germany and outside it, began to actively disseminate anti-Semitic literature. The Protocols and the myth of the worldwide Jewish conspiracy played a significant role ^[15] . The Völkicher Beobacher newspaper constantly reminded them, and Julius Streicher 's Der Der Sürmer weekly published excerpts from the Protocols, adding stories of the ritual murders of German children by Jews, stories of German girls raped by Jews, thereby inciting anti-Semitism in German society. The consequences of Der Stürmer’s activities were especially dire since this newspaper had a circulation of almost half a million copies — one of the largest in Germany, and also because it was hung on special stands in cities and villages across the country. “Der Sturmer” and, therefore, “Protocols” were studied in German schools ^[15] .

In 1938, the Protocols were published in Italy with a preface by Julius Evola , in which he defended their authenticity and supplemented with a set of prevailing slander at that time ^[29] .

Bern process

In Switzerland, Jewish organizations opposed the publication of the Protocols by a local Nazi organization and sued the publishers. At the trial , which took place in Bern in October 1934 and May 1935 , an investigation was conducted into the origin of the Protocols. The process aroused great interest throughout the world, and was attended by numerous journalists. Among the witnesses were called, among others, Russian emigrants who had contacts at the end of the 19th century with workers in the Paris bureau of the Russian Security Department . According to the testimony of Catherine Radziwill, the Protocols were fabricated at the direction of the head of the Paris branch of the secret police, Peter Rachkovsky . Catherine Radziwill claimed that the Russian journalist Matvey Golovinsky showed her at her Paris residence a copy of the “Protocols,” which he wrote in 1904-1905 with the help of Rachkovsky and Manuilov . (Subsequently, the version of Golovinsky’s authorship was confirmed by other researchers ^{[18] [17]} .) This version, however, contradicts the fact that the first version of the “Protocols” appeared in print in 1903 in the journal Znamya. One of the coordinators of the Berne process, the historian-archivist Boris Nikolayevsky wrote in a private letter that “Rachkovsky could under no circumstances be involved in the preparation of the protocols,” however, he did not express his opinion in court, since “it would be a stab in the back for Russian experts would objectively disorganize the campaign against Hitler. ” ^{[30] [31]} The Court, by its decision, recognized that the “Protocols” were falsification and plagiarism, and thus this work fell within the scope of the Berne Law on “Obscene Literature” ^[14] . However, due to an inaccurate interpretation of the word “obscene” by the Berne court, the sentence was partially canceled by the court of appeal in Zurich in November 1937. At the same time, the court of appeal denied the defendants damages, and in the final speech the judges confirmed the fabricated nature of the “Protocols” ^[32] . One of the witnesses at the Berne process of 1934-1935 “Protocols” Vladimir Burtsev published a book “Protocols of the Zion of the Sages. The proven forgery ”, where he again cited evidence that the“ Protocols ”are fabricated falsifications and have no historical authenticity ^[33] .

Leonid Katsis points out that the statement by the supporters of the authenticity of the “Protocols of the Zion of the Sages” that the decision of the court in Bern, which established their authenticity, as if it had been canceled by a higher court, is untrue. He claims that only 1 point out of 11 was canceled - on the ban on their distribution. ^[9]

Estonia

In 1995, the Protocols, issued in 600 copies in Estonia, were destroyed by court order as inciting hatred towards the Jewish people ^[34] .

Russia

In Russia in January 2006, members of the Public Chamber and human rights defenders advocated amending the legislation to create a list of extremist literature prohibited from distribution in Russia, which would include “Protocols” ^[35] . However, when the Federal List of Extremist Materials appeared in 2007, it initially consisted of 14 items, which were not included in the Protocols. The brochure with them was included in this list much later.

By the decision of the Leninsky district court of the city of Orenburg dated July 26, 2010, the brochure “Protocols of the Zion of the Wise Men” was considered an extremist publication. However, the court did not prohibit the work itself, but the brochure itself . According to the national standard of the Russian Federation GOST 7.60-2003, a “brochure” is understood to mean a “book publication with a volume of over 4, but no more than 48 pages.” According to GOST 7.60-2003, a “book edition” is a “publication in the form of a block of sheets of printed material fastened in a spine of any format in a cover or binding. A sheet of printed material means a sheet of paper or its synthetic substitute, cardboard, fabric, the surface of which contains an imprint ” ^[36] .

In March 2011, the Russian human rights public political movement " For Human Rights " and a member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation Alla Gerber appealed to the prosecutor's office of the Northern District of Moscow with a request to stop the dissemination of the "Protocols of the Zion of Sages", but were refused. In the response of the prosecutor’s office, it was stated: “The Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences conducted a psycholinguistic, socio-psychological examination. According to the conclusions of experts, the book “Zion Protocols” has a critical historical and educational and political-educational orientation. The information prompting actions against other nationalities, social and religious groups or individuals, as its representatives, is absent in the book ” ^[37] .

In April 2011, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation placed an order for “delivery to the diplomatic missions of the Russian Federation of sets of spiritual and moral literature”, which included S. Nilus ’s book “The Great in the Small” ^[38] , which includes the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” and other anti-Semitic publications, which caused a public outcry ^{[39] [40] [41]} .

In November 2012, an entry under number 1496 was added to the Federal List of Extremist Materials : “Brochure“ Protocols of the Zion of the Wise Men ”(decision of the Leninsky District Court of Orenburg on 07.26.2010)” ^{[42] [43]} .

The essence of the content of the 24 protocols is the conspiracy of a group of people with the aim of creating a world-wide monarchy centered in Europe (the 15th protocol), which will be led by the “Tsar Despot of Zion blood” (3rd protocol). The main enemies of the coming Jewish monarchy were declared the "Russian Autocracy " and " Papacy " (15th protocol). Freemasonry was called the main instrument of coming to power, especially its password “ freedom, equality, fraternity ” (1, 9th protocol). The destructive role is also given to " underground underground pipes" (9th protocol). However, Freemasonry separates itself from Jewry, as the “goyim of the Masons” are mentioned (Protocol 15). The protocols also describe various methods of deceiving the “ goy peoples ”, including the well-known Panama scandal (protocol 10). It is interesting that the author of the protocols practically does not use hebraisms (except for the words goy and kagal ), but refers as an example to the Hindu deity Vishnu (17th protocol). Also, the practice of writing the word Gd, habitual in the Jewish environment, is absent. The main topics of the protocols are given in the table:

The first publication to shed light on plagiarism was a series of articles in The Times , published by Irish journalist Philip Graves, who proved the hoax of the Protocols. ^[5] Sections 1–19 of the “Protocols of the Zion of the Sages” correspond to the “Dialogues” 1–17 of Maurice Joli. For example:

Существуют многочисленные сторонники мнения, что содержание «Протоколов» соответствует действительности. Различные публикаторы представляли «Протоколы» как документы всемирного еврейского заговора. Мнения о подлинности «Протоколов» придерживаются многие арабские и мусульманские правительства и политические лидеры ^[44] . Так отсылка к «Протоколам» как к реальному документу о еврейском заговоре включено в Хартию мусульманского движения ХАМАС . В 2005 году ссылки на Протоколы как реальный документ «сионистской истории» были обнаружены в школьных учебниках Палестинской национальной администрации ^[45] , выдержки из Протоколов использовались в школьном образовании в Иордании ^[44] .

В антисемитски настроенных кругах пользуются популярностью тексты ^[46] и видеозаписи ^[47] , содержащие рассуждения Ю. К. Бегунова на тему происхождения «Протоколов». Бегунов пытается создать доказательную базу для подтверждения подлинности «Протоколов» и существования всемирного заговора. Историк литературы А. И. Рейтблат считает, что статья Бегунова «Тайные силы в истории России», посвящённая обстоятельствам создания и публикации «Протоколов», не имеет научной ценности ^[48] .

Обстоятельства создания «Протоколов» были беллетризованы Умберто Эко в бестселлере « Пражское кладбище » (2010). По мнению Умберто Эко ^[49] , памфлет Мориса Жоли, в свою очередь, содержит плагиат из романов Эжена Сю «Тайны одного народа» (об иезуитах ) и «Парижские тайны». Причём масонскую программу, которую Сю приписал иезуитам, в свою очередь придумал Дюма .

«Протоколы» анализируются и в других книгах Эко — в романе « Маятник Фуко » и в сборнике лекций « Шесть прогулок в литературных лесах ».

• Издание «Протоколов» С. Нилуса, напечатанное в типографии Свято-Троицкой Сергиевой Лавры в 1911 году ( архивная версия ).
• Яков Кротов. Текст «Протоколов» в библиотеке Якова Кротова ( архивная версия )
• Maurice Joly. Dialogue aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu (оригинальный текст памфлета Мориса Жоли) в Библиотеке проекта «Гутенберг»
• Скан берлинского издания 1922 года в PDF на archive.org

• Завещание Петра Великого
• План Даллеса

• Антонян Ю. М. Тоталитарная преступность и коллективное бессознательное // Lex Russica . — М. : МГЮУ , 2015. — № 9 . — С. 32—49 . — ISSN 1729-5920 .
• Аронов Л., Баран Х. , Зубарев Д. К предыстории «Протоколов Сионских мудрецов»: Ю. Д. Глинка и её письмо императору Александру III . // New literary review . — 2006. — № 82.
• Аронов Л., Баран Х., Зубарев Д. Княгиня Екатерина Радзивилл и «Протоколы сионских мудрецов»: мистификация как образ жизни. // Новое литературное обозрение . — 2009. — № 96 . Архивировано 18 мая 2012 года.
• Бен-Итто Х. . Ложь, которая не хочет умирать / пер. с иврита. — М. : Рудомино, 2001. — 479 с.
• Боган С. Антиеврейская ложь, которая не хочет умирать // The Times . — 2.3.2005.
• Бурцев В. Л. . «Протоколы сионских мудрецов». Доказанный подлог — Париж, 1938.
• Де Микелис Ч. Дж. . «Протоколы сионских мудрецов». Несуществующий манускрипт, или Подлог века = Il manoscritto inesistente. «I Protocolli dei savi di Sion: un apocrifo del XX secolo» / пер. with it. Г. Ротенберг. — М. : Ковчег, МЕТ, 2006. — 528 с. — (Правда i вымысел). - 2000 copies. — ISBN 985-436-527-1 .
• Кацис Л. Ф. Текстология «Протоколов сионских мудрецов» (Рец. на кн.: De Michelis CG The non-existed manuscript: A study of the «Protocols of the Sages of Zion». Lincoln; London, 2004) // Новое литературное обозрение. — 2006. — № 2 (78).
• Кон Н. Благословение на геноцид: миф о всемирном заговоре евреев и «Протоколах сионских мудрецов» = Warrant for Genocide: The Myth of the Jewish World Conspiracy and the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion / пер. с англ. С. С. Бычкова ^{[прим. 1]} ; общая ред. и посл. Т. А. Карасовой и Д. А. Черняховского . — М. : Прогресс , 1990. — 248 с. — 25 000 экз.
• Лакер У. Чёрная сотня: происхождение русского фашизма. — М. : Текст, 1999. — 432 с. — ISBN 5-7516-0001-0 .
• Рейтблат, А. И. Нилус и «Протоколы сионских мудрецов» (Обзор публикаций последних лет) // Новое литературное обозрение. — 2006. — № 2 (78).
• Скосырев В. А. Назван автор «Протоколов сионских мудрецов» // Известия : газета. — 20.11.1999.
• Скуратовский В. Л. Проблема авторства «Протоколов сионских мудрецов». — К. : Дух и литера , 2001. — 241 с. — (Библиотека Института иудаики). — ISBN 966-72-73-12-1 .
• Тагиефф П.-А. . Протоколы сионских мудрецов. Фальшивка и её использование / пер. Г. А. Абрамов. — Мосты культуры / Гешарим , 2011. — 740 с. — (Тень еврейского народа). — ISBN 9785457405905 .

Сторонники версии о реальности протоколов

• Бегунов Ю. К. Бернское дело «сионских мудрецов» (неопр.) . rus-sky.com. Дата обращения 30 марта 2012. Архивировано 18 мая 2012 года.
• Платонов О. А. Загадка Сионских протоколов. — М. : Алгоритм , 2004. — 832 с. — ISBN 5-9265-0149-0

• Столетие первой публикации так называемых «Протоколов сионских мудрецов» // « Радио Свобода »
• Почему не умирает ложь, или ещё раз о «Протоколах сионских мудрецов»