Conclusion

As the examples of the Representation for Jewish Welfare, the Kiev Burial Society, and the Choral Synagogue make clear, the plutocracy's authority in Jewish communal governance in Kiev and general prominence in the Jewish community were growing, and so was dissatisfaction with that authority on the part of the city's other Jews. The accusation that the leadership of plutocrats and educated intellectuals was out of touch with its constituents and insensitive to the reality of their lives was bolstered by the thoroughgoing dissimilarity of the world they lived in: they worshiped in a different synagogue, spoke Russian in their homes, maintained a radically different attitude toward Jewish observance, and presumably did not have the constant financial worries of most Kiev Jews. The situation was exacerbated by inconsistent government policies that at times strengthened the hand of the elite while at other times encouraged the expansion of popular authority.

The 1905 Revolution and its aftermath helped abstract ideals of democracy and self-determination become real goals for many Jews in their prayer houses and in their Crown rabbinates. How would communal institutions, so long controlled by Kiev's Jewish elite, fare in the revolutionary era? This story unfolds in part 2, which will explore Jewish socioeconomic, residential, cultural, and religious patterns, as well as relations with Christians, before returning to the subjects of philanthropy and communal governance in chapters 6 and 7.

Part 2

Jewish Metropolis