Bridging the gaps between Holocaust accounts: Fieldwork evidence for compromising forms of narrative

Abstract

This research discusses whether various educational approaches can bridge the wide gaps between national narratives of the Holocaust, augmented by the Act on the IPN: 44, and the reactions that followed it in Israel, Poland, and the West. We start with a brief account of the Polish narrative of the World War II experience, and the Israeli narrative of the Holocaust. We then give an account from the field: during January and February 2020, we visited the Majdanek Concentration Camp Museum, where we met and interviewed some of the local guides; we also went to the Grodzka Gate Centre in Lublin and discussed things with their guides. For the Israeli narrative, we referred to surveys and interviews of IDF reserves officers who participated in the “Witnesses in Uniform” project of commemoration delegations to Poland. Our analyses show that in each of the two societies one can find national narratives that can create paths of compromise and conciliation. The findings indicate the existence of a spirit that can enable each group to stick to its own heritage yet at the same time to respect the narratives of others.

Full text

POLITICS | RESEARCH ARTICLE
Bridging the gaps between Holocaust accounts:
Fieldwork evidence for compromising forms of
narrative
Eyal Lewin
1
*, Slawomir Jacek Zurek
2
and Nitza Davidovitch
3
Abstract: This research discusses whether various educational approaches can
bridge the wide gaps between national narratives of the Holocaust, augmented by
the Act on the IPN: 44, and the reactions that followed it in Israel, Poland, and the
West. We start with a brief account of the Polish narrative of the World War II
experience, and the Israeli narrative of the Holocaust. We then give an account
from the field: during January and February 2020, we visited the Majdanek
Eyal Lewin
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Eyal Lewin is Professor Assistant [Senior Lecturer]
at Ariel University. He is also a research fellow at
the Kinneret Center on Peace, Security and
Society. Lewin is the author of academic papers
and monographs and editor of books focusing on
general socio-political phenomena such as patri-
otism, national resilience, national ethos, and
Israel studies. Editor in Chief of the academic
semi-annual National Resilience, Politics and
Society.
Slawomir Jacek Zurek is professor and head of
the Centre for Polish-Jewish Literature Studies, as
well as director of the International Centre for
Research of the History and Cultural Heritage of
the Central and Eastern Europe Jews at The John
Paul II Catholic University of Lublin. He has pub-
lished widely on Jewish motifs in Polish literature
and Polish-Jewish literature in Israel. He is
a member of the Polish Society for Jewish
Studies, the Council of the Polish Episcopate’s
Committee for Dialogue with Judaism, and the
Polish Council of Christians and Jews. In 2002-03,
he held a Fulbright Scholarship at the University
of Notre Dame.
Nitza Davidovitch, serves in teaching and admin-
istrative positions at Ariel University. She is cur-
rently the director of academic development &
evaluation. Her areas of research interest include
academic curriculum development, development
of academic instruction, Holocaust awareness
and Jewish identity, student exchange programs
with Germany and Poland, preservation of the
heritage of Jewish sects, and moral education.
PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
This research discusses whether various educa-
tional approaches can bridge the wide gaps
between national narratives of the Holocaust.
We concentrate on the differences in national
narratives between Israel and Poland, relying on
fieldwork in both countries. Our findings are
optimistic in essence, showing that in each of the
two societies, one can find national narratives
that are bound to create paths of compromise
and conciliation. The findings indicate the exis-
tence of a spirit that can enable each group to
stick to its own heritage yet at the same time
respect the narratives of others. This fieldwork is
part of a larger assignment that aims to decipher
the various traits of a national narrative. In the
framework of the broader project, we examine
numerous national narratives of different coun-
tries all over the world and throughout various
periods in history, to establish theoretical com-
prehensions of phenomena related to collective
narrative.
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribu-
tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on
which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in
a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
Received: 12 February 2022
Accepted: 06 October 2023
*Corresponding author: Eyal Lewin,
Department of Middle Eastern
Studies and Political Science, Ariel
University, Ariel, Israel
E-mail: Lewin1212@gmail.com
Reviewing editor:
Robert Read, Economics, University
of Lancaster, United Kingdom
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
Page 1 of 17

Concentration Camp Museum, where we met and interviewed some of the local
guides; we also went to the Grodzka Gate Centre in Lublin and discussed things with
their guides. For the Israeli narrative, we referred to surveys and interviews of IDF
reserves officers who participated in the “Witnesses in Uniform” project of com-
memoration delegations to Poland. Our analyses show that in each of the two
societies one can find national narratives that can create paths of compromise
and conciliation. The findings indicate the existence of a spirit that can enable
each group to stick to its own heritage yet at the same time to respect the
narratives of others.
Subjects: European Studies; Jewish Studies; International Politics; Heritage Management &
Conservation
Keywords: National narrative; collective remembrance; Holocaust memories; Holocaust
education; Polish-Jewish relations
1. Introduction
On 17 April 1985, two buses carrying a group of some 80 Jewish teenagers from all over the
Western world entered the gates of the Majdanek Concentration Camp commemoration site. The
busses went directly to the far end of the camp, parking as close as possible to the monument for
the victims of the 3 November 1943, Aktion Erntefest, the Nazi code name for the notorious
massacre of over 18,000 Jews in Majdanek alone in one day (Silberklang, 2013). The youngsters
descended from the busses, held a short ceremony in which they sang “I believe in complete belief
in the coming of the Messiah” to the tune that was sung by Jews as they marched to the gas
chambers. Then, the boys and girls walked to some of the barracks, and within an hour or so were
back on the buses on their way to another historical site.
These youngsters had only been informed that they were visiting a death-camp that had been
erected there to execute Jews, and that was liberated by the Red Army at the end of the war. They
could hardly have guessed that the historical facts told an altogether different story. In fact, the
camp was originally constructed for the absorption of Russian POWs. More than half of its
inhabitants at any given time were non-Jews of various European nationalities, and the Russian
army had never liberated Majdanek. Rather, Red Army troops arrived after the Germans aban-
doned the place, and for the next several months the Soviets used it for, among other things, the
headquarters of the NKVD, using methods of political repression in Poland that Stalin had taught
them long before the establishment of the Third Reich (Albats, 1994).
Our research, however, is not about historical facts. Rather, our inquiries enter the realm of
narrative, where truth is elusive, and chronicles are merely the stories that people tell themselves
about themselves.
Noteworthy, there is something of a political phantom overshadowing this study. Discrepancies
between Polish and Jewish narratives started when World War II was still in its midst and
continued immediately once the war ended (Hansen, 2015). Relations between the two peoples
had their ups and downs throughout the decades, with tight international political, economic, and
cultural contacts, particularly in the post-communist era (Horowitz, 2011; Wróbel, 1997). However,
in 2018, both houses of the Polish parliament adopted the Act on the IPN,
1
a law that effectively
banned any accusations against Poles as collaborators with the Nazi crimes that were executed on
Polish soil (Hattis-Rolef, 2018). Israeli reactions to the Polish legislation were fierce. Prime Minister
Netanyahu and some of his ministers condemned the bill and claimed that it was a form of
Holocaust denial. Yad Vashem
2
warned of the violation of free speech rights and a threat to
Holocaust survivors as well as historians. Throughout the weeks that followed, negotiations
between Israeli and Polish officials lowered the flames. It took months before Prime Minister
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 2 of 17

Benjamin Netanyahu with his Polish counterpart Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki could distri-
bute a joint declaration. However, the dispute was not settled; rather, it propelled a debate over
the moral dimension of the concession that has been achieved by the two leaders. Yehuda Bauer,
the prominent Holocaust researcher, went as far as referring to the declaration as an act of
treason. The whole affair threatened to deteriorate relations between Poland and Israel. The
diplomatic activities of officials on both sides were merely an attempt to maintain these positive
interactions and to renormalize them. These attempts, however, have not entirely rendered
success. Hence, our modest goal, in this study, was to shed light on themes of reconciliation
between contradicting national narratives of the Holocaust.
We open this paper with a brief account of the Polish narrative of the World War II experience,
and then—almost as the latter narrative’s mirror image—the Israeli narrative of the Holocaust.
The collision of those two narratives in the framework of the Act on the IPN and the consequent
international debate and diplomatic incidents led us to investigate whether, in practice, among
people who are close to this topic, bridging over narratives is practically possible.
In Israel and in Poland, different narratives of the Holocaust developed, each concentrated,
naturally, on its own victimhood and justifications for certain collective actions. This study opens
with a review of them. The Holocaust narratives—the Polish one and the Jewish-Israeli one—are
presented in detail.
We then describe our fieldwork. We chose to hold interviews in the framework of focus
groups. Interviews, particularly—semi-structured ones, are the most common research tool in
qualitative research in social sciences. They enable the researcher to reach inaccessible areas
like people’s subjective attitudes (Brinkmann, 2018; Perakyla & Ruusuvuori, 2018). Focus groups
can be practical as dialogic events where power relations between researchers and research
participants are significantly diminished. Hence, focus groups encourage open conversations
where the interviewer takes a non-directive approach and acts as the facilitator of the con-
versation (Kamberelis et al., 2018). The conversations that we held to collect testimonies took
part at the Majdanek Concentration Camp Museum, at the Brama Grodzka—Teatr NN in Lublin,
and in meetings in Israel with IDF
3
officers who have visited Poland. In the interviews, as well
as throughout the focus group sessions, the open questions that we posed referred to the way
our interviewees constructed their perceptions of historical events. They were primarily invited
to tell how they personally believed that things happened throughout WWII. Our questions
were identical in both cases, the Israeli one and the Polish one, including questions regarding
how each side viewed the other. Naturally, the interviews with the Polish guides in Majdanek
Concentration Camp Museum and in the Grodzka Gate—NN Theatre were handled by Z [full
name and affiliation will be posted here once the peer review process is completed]. His
knowledge of the Polish language as well as his acquaintance with the problematic political
contexts of our subject matter in Poland, enabled us to evade possible booby traps, so to
speak, and yet to maintain our interviewers’ frankness.
Whether to apply audio recording or just to practice handwriting to document the interviews
was also a dilemma where we had to make a methodological choice. Despite the advantages of
advanced and technological methods, such as replayability (Tessier, 2012), we chose to rely on
the practice of field notes. The cost of this choice should be pointed out clearly: potential bias,
loss of information, and consequently possible lack of reliability (Tessier, 2012). However, we
decided to put aside the many benefits of recording devices, because we suspected that the very
act of recording was bound to influence the interaction between the reviewer and the respon-
dent. One should bear in mind that the interviews and focus groups were held in challenging
times when some political observers even asserted that under the rule of the Law and Justice
Party, Poland’s legal framework no longer matched common Western democratic values (Davies,
2018). This situation could influence our interviewees, particularly considering the time of our
fieldwork in Poland, immediately after the Act on the IPN: 44 legislation (Belavusau, 2018). Hence,
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 3 of 17

to maintain the full trust of our interviewees and to assure them of confidentiality, we refrained
from using a device that could be suspected of enabling any future identification of any of them
(Rutakumwa et al., 2020).
We, therefore, relied on the advantage of being three researchers doing our fieldwork as a team,
and at any point in time, two of us would always conduct the conversation, and one would do all
the writing on a notepad.
The fact that we count on notes that we took during our conversations with Polish and
Israeli interviewees matches a decades-old methodological tradition of reliability and validity
in qualitative research (Gall et al., 1996; Hoffman, 1974; Rutakumwa et al., 2020; Wolfinger,
2002).
With the sensitivity to political matters in mind, we also guaranteed the interviewees that they
would remain anonymous (although—they knew that the place and time of the interview would be
known and would therefore enable the authorities to pinpoint them). Additionally, the participants
of our conversations in Majdanek Concentration Camp Museum and in the Grodzka Gate—NN
Theatre gave us permission to quote them provided that the publication is limited to academic
journals and scholarly literature.
Noteworthy, our research strategy was deliberately to choose individuals who were not official
representatives of any political entity, to maintain authenticity. This approach was also based on
the perception that group narratives shape individual narratives in society and vice versa; they are
intertwined and are ingrained into each other (Novac et al., 2021; Weegman, 2016, 2018).
Overall, then, we present various cases on both sides, the Polish as well as the Israeli, that can
inspire others to form narratives that would eventually lead to conciliation between Polish and
Israeli narratives on the Holocaust. Consequently, this work can establish grounds for improve-
ment in Polish-Jewish relations.
2. Word of caution concerning narratives’ complexity
Narratives form cohesive sets of beliefs about groups’ collective pasts and futures (Ashplant et al.,
2000; Verosek, 2016). National narratives, to this extent, can be viewed as the practice of political
mediating through telling and receiving stories (Groth, 2019; Shenhav, 2006). However, complexity
is an inherent trait of narratives. Stories are constantly circulated, and social agents get involved in
shaping some of their repetitive versions (Bal, 2019; Tikka & Kaipainen, 2019).
This can be illustrated, for example, by the 2018 affair that started with a book co-edited by
Grabowski and Engelking (2018). Their study concentrated on the question of Polish collaboration
with the Germans. Grabowski claimed for Polish responsibility at a certain county he took as a case
study. This was not the first time for Grabowski, a Canadian of Polish origin, to raise such
accusations (Grabowski, 2013), but this time the publication led to an open colossal debate
between historians, some of them accusing Grabowski of using unreliable sources and distorting
facts. The Polish League Against Defamation funded a civil case against Grabowski and Engelking
in Poland, brought by the 81-year-old niece of a Polish villager who was blamed in the book as
having betrayed Jews to the Germans. In February 2021, a Warsaw court ruled that Grabowski and
Engelking must apologize for their claims about the villager, yet they were not ordered to pay
compensation. However, in August 2021, an appeals court overturned that ruling and dismissed
the claims against the historians (AP and Times of Israel, 21 August 2021). This event portrays the
struggle between narratives, led by historians and often fueled by group identities and national
feelings. Hence, above all, narratives’ complexity is multi-dimensional since both historic reality as
well as its narrated representation are inherently complex phenomena (Landa, 2019, p. 414).
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 4 of 17

3. The Polish narrative of the World War II experience
Polish narrations of World War II amount to tens of thousands of books and essays, with
a complex of various attitudes (Alexiun, 2004; Pohl, 2004). However, according to scholarly
literature, five major themes of self-justification in the Polish narrative can be recognized (Behr,
2021; Blonski, 1987; Gonzalez, 2017): (1) Jewish heritage in Poland; (2) The Polish people as victims;
(3) Polish resistance; (4) The Polish church and its roles; and (5) the Polish righteous among the
nations.
3.1. Jewish heritage and history in Poland
Jews have been dwelling in Poland for more than a thousand years, and most of this time was
characterized by tolerance. Consequently, Jewish religious flourishing turned Poland into the
cultural, political, moral and religious center, where the Enlightenment and Hassidic Jewish move-
ments had developed (Davidovitch & Lewin, 2019; Karpalski, 2015; Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, 2015;
Lewin, 2018). With migration of Jewish communities and constant growth, Jewish culture enjoyed
unprecedented prosperity, until Poland was frequently counted as the Paradisus Judaeorum [Jews’
Paradise] (Gromelski, 2003).
With the 1921 Polish victory over the Red Army and the Polish-Soviet peace treaty, thousands of
Jews migrated to Poland. Many of them held occupations that were forbidden for them in the
Soviet Union, but in Poland they were immediately granted with full citizenship. By the 1930s,
Polish Jews who formed slightly above 10 percent of the population, formed about 50 percent of
the lawyers in the country, over 30 percent of all the doctors in the Capital of Warsaw, and
25 percent of the university students in Poland. This historical review establishes the claim that
the Poles incorporated Jews more than any other nation in Europe (Lewin, 2018).
3.2. The Polish people as victims
On 1 September 1939, Germany invaded Poland. For two weeks, Poland resisted the German
army’s Blitzkrieg, and 100,000 Polish soldiers died before the Polish army collapsed, locked
between the Wehrmacht and the Soviet Red Army (Kochanski, 2012). Even then, the Polish people
continued to fight individually; for example, residents of the city of Warsaw did not give up and
defended the city even after Poland ceased to exist (Starzyński, in: Ben Arieh, 1987, p. 72).
With the German violation of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact and their invasion to Russia during
Operation Barbarossa on 22 June 1941, the Polish people came overnight under the murderous
control of the Nazi regime. Their destiny for the rest of the war was life under conditions of cruel
military occupation, fear and terror. Under the German occupation, the Polish people underwent
agonizing experiences. Large numbers of Poles were exiled, and the areas they left behind became
German residence. Hundreds of thousands of Poles were deported to Germany as forced labor for
weapons production and for agricultural labor. Polish deportees often died of poor hygiene and
reduced nutrition. Throughout the war, there was a significant increase of mortality rates in Poland
due to the shortage of food, fuel, and medication. Furthermore, hundreds of thousands of Poles fell
victim to the Nazi atrocities typical for the German occupation (Lukacs, 1989; Noakes & Pridham,
1990).
The Polish elite suffered large-scale executions of landowners, traders, medical doctors, aca-
demics of all professions, not to mention former government officials. To annihilate any possible
future Polish heritage, the Germans ruined every Polish culture institute. To prevent any revival of
the Polish intelligentsia, all studies beyond elementary school were prohibited (Steinlauf, 1997).
Eventually, three million non-Jewish Poles were killed in occupied Poland, which is about 10 percent
of the non-Jewish Polish population (Lukacs, 1989; Noakes & Pridham, 1990).
The polish people did not cease to be victims even once the war ended. The admiration of the
Polish fighters in the West did not stop the Western powers from deserting them at the end of the
war. Stabbed in the back by the free world, Poland was handed straight into Stalin’s clutches at the
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 5 of 17

Yalta Conference. Hence, despite their heroic struggle, the Polish people ended up victimized also
after World War II (Michnik, 2014). It would not be untrue, then, to phrase that Poland was not
only Hitler’s great victim, not only Stalin’s victim, but also the historical prey of the unfaithful West.
3.3. Polish resistance
This theme is connected not only to the Poles’ role in the war, but also, to a large extent, to the
formation of a Polish framework for Jewish survival. Holocaust literature is rich with testimonies
about Polish citizens who ignored the Jewish cries for help as well as accumulating evidence for
the opposite phenomena of Polish people who facilitated support. Jewish Historian Emanuel
Ringelblum wrote about it almost in real-time before he was executed (Ringelblum, 1992), yet
testimonies that publicized Polish people who remained silent alongside revelations of Polish
people who acted bravely have been gathered in various books throughout decades (see, for
example, Turski, 2010). Whether or not the general claim that the Polish people assisted Jews is
exaggerated is indeed a matter in debate (Feldhay Brenner, 2019; Kermish, 1969).
The theme of Polish resistance as part and parcel of saving Jews relies on the notion that the
Polish underground organizations did not only fight Germany but also assisted Jews in saving
themselves and their families. In an anthology of the Polish nationalist underground press from
the years of Nazi occupation, written immediately after the war, Adam Doboszynski gathered
journalistic testimonies of numerous cases where Jews were assisted by various Polish under-
ground organizations (Doboszynski, 1993). Beyond those documents, blackmailing Jews and
demanding ransoms from Poles who protected them, as well as voluntarily providing the Nazi
administration with information about Jews who were hidden was treated by the underground
judiciary system like other forms of treason, collaboration, and pro-Nazi espionage. Hence, on the
individual level as well as in the eyes of the secret Polish authorities resisting Nazi occupation was
connected many times with active involvement in sheltering Jews, defending them, and allowing
their survival (Karbonski, 2004; Kochanski, 2012; Zimmerman, 2015).
In 1941, Wladyslaw Andres, a Polish General that was captured by the Soviets in 1939 and was
now released, established the Armia Andersa, a Polish force loyal to the exile government in
London. Armia Andersa joined the Western allies in the frontiers and fought successfully.
Noteworthy, Armia Andersa recruited thousands of Jews who were eager to liberate themselves
from Soviet labor camps. Consequently, their families joined them on the army’s journey to the
Middle East; upon arriving in Israel many soldiers defected and became illegal immigrants
(Kochanski, 2012; Koskodan, 2009; Redlich, 1971; Sarner, 1997).
Another platform for activity against the German occupation that went hand in hand with saving
Jews was the Polish underground organization called Armia Krajowa. This organization fought
against the German forces in Poland and helped the Jewish underground in its struggle against
the Nazis by supplying weapons and ammunition. The Armia Krajowa supported the 1943 Jewish
uprising of the Warsaw ghetto.
3.4. The Polish Church
The major activities taken by Polish pastors were hiding Jewish children in monasteries and
assisting refugees who fled the ruins of the ghettos. Catholic Poles from Jewish origin who were
trapped in ghettos kept their contacts with other Polish priests. In various cases church members
hid Jewish refugees in the churches and helped them to manage life in the Arian side; they
providing them, for that purpose, with food, fake certificates and identities. The church hid in
secret places, buildings, and in the monasteries individual Jews as well as entire families. Foster
families in Poland were organized to save Jewish children and babies.
In 1942 Żegota was founded with the help of Catholic associations as an underground organiza-
tion, part of the Polish resistance movement. Żegota was a code name, that stood for the Polish
Council to Aid Jews, and church members all over Poland joined its activities. The organization was
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 6 of 17

established particularly to save Jews and Poland was the only country conquered by the Germans
where such a government-supported underground organization existed. Estimates of the number
of Jews that Żegota saved range from several thousands to tens of thousands. In wartime Poland,
over 3,000 church members were suspected of aiding Jews and were therefore murdered.
Additionally, one should bear in mind that due to the German use of collective punishment all
members of the Catholic church were prey to suffering and persecutions (Bartoszewski, 1987;
Kermish, 1977; Mazzeo, 2016).
When seeking the origins of the narrative of the Polish Church, developed after the war, one
should bear in mind the changes that took place during the last decades. In the 1965 Second
Vatican Council Pope Paul VI called for interfaith dialog with other religions and conciliation with
Judaism (Horn, 2015; O’Mally, 2008).
In 1994 John Paul II hosted an unprecedented event: The Papal Concert to Commemorate the
Holocaust, a public happening dedicated by the Vatican to the memory of the six million Jews
murdered in World War II. Perhaps the highpoint of the efforts of John Paul II to share his
compassion concerning the Holocaust was his 2000 visit to Yad Vashem and then his prayer at
the Western Wall asking God to forgive the Christians for their crimes against the Chosen People
throughout history (Bokenkotter, 2005; Kennedy, 2011).
3.5. Polish righteous among the nations
The Yad Vashem accounts prove that Poland held the largest number of righteous among the
nations both in ultimate figures (6,992) as well as in comparison to other nations.
4
It is true that
there were more Jews in Poland in comparison to any other country; however, in Poland there was
also the largest number of non-Jews who were executed for trying to save Jews and help them to
survive (Bartoszewski & Lewin, 1969, 1970; Engelking & Michalowicz, 2016; Zubrycki, 2006, 2022).
Additionally, as earlier mentioned, Poland was unique in comparison to other countries under Nazi
Germany’s occupation by being the only Eastern European country where an underground orga-
nization – Żegota – acted with the clear aim of saving Jews. Noteworthy, there was an immediate,
actually—almost an automatic death sentence for anyone who was caught hiding Jews.
Despite the numbers of righteous among the nations, Poland was never honored for its part in
saving Jews. Since Poland was occupied by the USSR and trapped in the Warsaw Pact, its heroic
history of resistance was practically erased from the Western narrative (Wóycicka, 2021).
4. The Israeli Holocaust narrative
The Holocaust is the central event of Jewish history that defines Israeli identity, replacing even the
establishment of the State of Israel (Klar et al., 2013; Zertal, 1998, 2005). The volume of literature
based on psychological and historical studies is immense; it constantly grows and develops (Gil,
2012; Kenan, 2003; Ofer, 2009, 2013).
The heritage of the Holocaust creates a sense of unity between Israeli Jews and the victims of
the Holocaust because the link between both realities—the Holocaust and life in Israel—provides
symbolic meaning to the hardship of life in Israel. Contrasting Jewish helplessness during the war
with the possibility of Jewish self-defense guaranteed by a Jewish state mitigates the feeling of
vulnerability and makes the risks and harshness of life in Israel seem negligible by comparison
(Almog, 2000; Resnik, 2003).
According to the substantial scholarly literature, during the first decades of the State of Israel,
three major intertwined lessons, differently stressed in the Israeli state-controlled educational
system, developed the republican ethos, each logically leading to the other (Bar, 2005; Lustick,
2017; Porat, 2004; Stauber, 2007): (1) Jewish victimization by the whole world; (2) active resistance;
and (3) justification of Zionism. In recent years, a liberal theme was added: (4) Universalism.
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 7 of 17

4.1. Jewish victimization by the whole world
The Nazis were the great initiators of Jewish genocide, but they certainly were not alone. They
were aided by some enthusiastic collaborators, such as the Ukrainians and the Latvians who
enlisted in the auxiliary units of the SS. The free world, however, proved no better in terms of
moral virtue, and Jews got no help from any country. Even American and British political leaders
turned down numerous requests for the absorption of Jewish refugees during the war (Wyman,
1984, 1998). These arguments have been challenged, some of them by notable researchers
(Rubinstein, 1997), but scholarly literature notwithstanding—the feeling that Jews could have
been saved but were eventually betrayed by Western civilization forms one of the important
themes concerning the Holocaust, within the Israeli ethos (Goldberg, 2012; Nossek, 1994).
4.2. Active resistance
Well into the late 1970s, the Israeli education system viewed the extermination of entire Jewish
communities as a historical background for the portrayal of the great courage of Jewish resistance
and rebellion. The heroes of the Holocaust were the leaders of the uprisings in the ghettos, the
conscripts of the Jewish Brigade, the many Jews who had joined the Allied forces to fight against
the Wehrmacht, and the Jewish paratroopers who landed to meet their deaths in conquered
Europe towards the end of the war. The Jews who were led passively to be slaughtered were the
exilic antitheses of the proud Israeli Jew who would always struggle actively and win his wars
(Almog, 2000; Porat, 2004).
4.3. Justification of Zionism
The connection between the Holocaust and the very foundation of the State of Israel, certainly its
struggle for survival at any cost, is made clear in the Israeli Declaration of Independence. The
massacre of millions of Jews in Europe is referred to as a clear demonstration of the urgency of
establishing the Jewish State in the Land of Israel. It follows that the Holocaust is Israel’s raison
d’être. The Zionist logic conjoins two historical events − the Holocaust and Israel’s establishment −
and links them causally. According to this national logic, only a Jewish state can meet the personal
security needs of each individual Jew (Gutwein, 2009; Lewin, 2014; Resnik, 2003).
The Holocaust justifies Zionism, but it also establishes the concept that unlike any other country,
Israel is constantly at risk; if it is not strong enough, a possible military defeat might lead to
another Holocaust. Thus, the State of Israel is at the same time an insurance policy against
a future Holocaust and a vulnerable entity always under the existential threat of a second one
(Zerubavel, 1995).
4.4. Universalism
Liberal ethos proponents see the Holocaust as an opportunity to consider universal moral implica-
tions that can be drawn from the event; to consider what it means to be human and humane.
Studying the World War II events provides us with the lenses through which every society can
examine its own values (Lewin, 2014).
5. Majdanek Concentration Camp Museum
5.1. A brief account
In October 1941, about 1,500 to 2,000 Soviet prisoners were sent to the camp, before it was even
constructed. They were intended to serve as slave labor for SS economic enterprises, but in less
than three months almost all of them died of terrible living conditions, lack of basic medical care,
and murderous shootings by the camp garrison (Siwek-Ciupak & Brand, 2014).
The Camp was situated in the northeastern outskirts of Lublin, since the whole region was
designated as a supply base for special SS facilities. Lublin was intended to undergo
a Germanization process, and plans called for building SS housing along with a complex of SS
factories and warehouses dedicated to supplying the army. Majdanek was planned to function as
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 8 of 17

a labor reservoir. The total capacity of the barracks was 25,000 prisoners, with an average
population usually lower, between 10,000 to 15,000 (Siwek-Ciupak & Brand, 2014).
In order to guard Majdanek, at first highly experienced SS soldiers were brought from other concen-
tration camps. Over time, these were reinforced and replaced by Volksdeutsche,
5
mostly from Romania
and Yugoslavia. Other guards were Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians recruited from Soviet POWs
and trained at the SS camp in Trawniki. At a certain point, a Lithuanian police battalion was brought to
Majdanek to assist with watching over the camp (Siwek-Ciupak & Brand, 2014).
Altogether, approximately 150,000 people were sent to Majdanek to work from dawn to dusk in
unhuman conditions—people of many faiths, nationalities, political convictions, social classes, and
professions. About 80,000 of them perished as an outcome of the poor conditions: the primitive
wooden barracks, lack of basic sanitary facilities, shortages of water, food, clothing, and medicine,
and a monstrously punitive treatment. Jews made up the highest percentage of the mortal victims
of Majdanek. Out of about 80,000 that arrived at the camp, almost 60,000 died (Siwek-Ciupak &
Brand, 2014).
By mid-March 1944 Red Army units were on their way to Lublin, and Majdanek was evacuated.
Once the Soviets arrived, the camp was organized to contain German POWs. The NKVD took over
one of the barracks complexes to imprison and torture Polish social groups, and individuals who
were regarded as hostile to the new communist order that the conquerors were about to impose.
However, in November 1944 the museum in Majdanek started operating and thus became the
world’s first institution dedicated to commemorating the victims of Nazi atrocities (Siwek-Ciupak &
Brand, 2014).
5.2. Interviews at the museum
Five guides participated in the meeting and allowed us to take notes. One in his forties, one in his
late twenties, and the three others in their mid-thirties. All five had been guiding tours of the
museum for four to six years. Before we started, we took a long walk in the camp, where an
informal talk developed. Our questions focused on the story of the Holocaust and the way it is told
in Majdanek. The guides called what happened there Zagłada – the Polish word for annihilation. In
general, the Zagłada was introduced in a somewhat universal manner, as one of the guides put it:
Our reference is not necessarily to Holocaust in its Jewish meaning. We deal with the history
of people who have been here, suffered and died. They belonged to different groups from all
over the world. Our message should be, therefore, universal. The Jewish topic is there, it is
a part of the big story that we tell, but our point of view is one of equality.
As we were walking from the barracks back to the offices, where most of our conversation took
place, one of the guides cited a description from a book written by one of the survivors. He quoted
how on a certain night, the guards in the towers, cold and lonely, shouted to each other, in order to
communicate. Hence suddenly the night was filled with shouts in numerous languages—German,
Ukrainian, Romanian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Slovakian. This seemed to be the end of the story,
because the guide paused for a while. “You did not mention Polish” I said. “Sure,” he answered,
“this is my way to convey to our visitors that there were never any Polish auxiliary police forces
that cooperated with the Nazis.”
The guides seem to strive for objectivity as a professional standard. One of them asserted:
We are a state museum, so it is our duty to tell the general story. Of course, even if we do
not differentiate between Poles and Polish Jews – the numbers and the percentages of
deaths in every group tell the story.
Things are also not necessarily expressed in the Jewish context:
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 9 of 17

We have to be unbiased, we have to transmit an objective story, with no hidden agenda. So,
we try to tell everybody’s story. We do not stimulate any anti-German feelings, and we try to
be as honest as we can. However, we use the full name of the phenomenon: this is a Nazi-
German concentration camp!
Objectivity needs didactic tools, and the guides are well aware of that:
Our duty is to give facts, but obviously – you also have to involve emotions. In recent years
we focus more on faces, names, personal stories – not just statistics. When there are groups
of kids, they are unlikely to understand the meaning of numbers, so we are bound to tell
them about children and their destinies in the camp.
Also, there is an awareness of a certain mission, a lifetime assignment, that the guides express. As
one of them put it:
Today there are more and more groups from the West that know very little about life in
Poland during World War II. They are almost ignorant about the suffering and death of
Poles, and they know nothing about what Poland underwent during the Soviet occupation.
However, there are also Polish groups of young people who do not know anything, and it has
to do with the fact that the generation of their grandparents gradually disappears.
Regarding issues of Israeli nationality and the concept of Holocaust as solely a Jewish tragedy, one
of the guides said:
I have no problem with Israelis who come here with all their flags to march demonstratively
in Majdanek. The problem is that they do not take any of our guides. We have no chance to
meet them, and I think it is a pity—they lack a different perspective of the place. I used to
have some connections with Israeli guides who came here several times; some of them are
open minded, but there are also those who are interested solely in Jewish matters.
Another guide proclaimed:
Jews are an integral part of our heritage, and I find it very sad that Jews come here to learn
about death camps but not about how Poles and Jews had been sharing mutual life for
centuries before the war. There are Polish organizations that were constructed for this task,
but you do not hear too much about them. Instead, occasionally, there is an anti-Semitic
event that catches the headlines and puts a shadow on any attempt to revive our good
relationship.
All in all, then, the guides of Majdanek are focused mainly on universal lessons to be learned from
the Zagłada of World War II. They try to achieve objectivity in teaching history, exposing the world
to truths that until recently were concealed and to facts that tend to be forgotten as time passes.
Regarding the Poles’ relationship with Jews and Israelis, there is a feeling of uneasiness—the
Jewish-Israeli delegates that arrive in Majdanek make little contact with the museum’s manage-
ment, and they seem to be concentrated mainly on the Jewish narrative.
6. Brama Grodzka—Teatr NN in Lublin
6.1. The Gate center
Brama Grodzka—Teatr NN translates from Polish into: Grodzka Gate—NN Theatre. This is a local
government cultural institution operating in Lublin, housed in the Grodzka Gate. The Grodzka Gate
is also known as the Jewish Gate, because historically it used to be the passage between the
Christian and the Jewish parts of Lublin. After the murder of Lublin’s 43,000 Jews was completed,
the Jewish part of the town was razed to the ground by the Germans, leaving just an empty space.
The memorial center located at the gate carries out activities that are intended to commemorate
Jewish victims, collectively—as a group and on the personal level. However, in the Grodzka Gate
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 10 of 17

center, the Polish-Jewish past of Lublin and the Jewish cultural heritage serve also as a platform
for educational programs for school classes; groups of youngsters come for a one-day training
program, sponsored by the authorities (Pietrasiewicz, 2019).
The various exhibitions focus on Jewish life in Lublin throughout centuries, their destruction by
the Nazis, and the Polish Righteous-among-the-Nations who risked their lives to save Jews. There
is an archive in the center with 43,000 folders; each Jew who lived in Lublin in September 1939 has
been assigned a file containing all the information that was found about him or her, from just
a name to various pictures and personal documents (Pietrasiewicz, 2019).
The Grodzka Gate center was established in 1990, and throughout its 30 years has been granted
multiple international awards for its numerous projects. The founder and initiator of the center,
Tomasz Pietrasiewicz, who grew up in Lublin from childhood, asserted that with the burial of
Jewish buildings under a large concrete shell of a parking lot, the citizens of Lublin forgot about
their former Jewish neighbors and subsequent generations had no knowledge of their fate
(Pietrasiewicz, 2019).
6.2. Focus group at the Brama Grodzka
Our focus group was a small group of four guides who worked at the center. One of them was part
of the management and the three others were young women in their mid-thirties who, as we
noticed throughout the conversation, perceive their work at the center as an educational assign-
ment and as an endeavor of historical justice. As one of them told us:
During the Communist era it was very unpopular to speak about the Jews and for years my
mother kept asking me when I would find a better job. My grandmother too was against
working here. I never told her, but I thought it was unfair of her, because she lived near the
synagogue, and for her to meet Jews was part of her daily life. I never had the experience, so
in a way I am filling some gaps. Anyhow, I think that now both my mother and my grand-
mother are proud with my passion to the subject.
Another guide, originally a Lubliner, testified:
Throughout seventeen years of our schooling system nobody ever told me that there had
been Jews in Lublin. They did tell us about the Holocaust, education used to be nationally
managed and not by the local authorities, but we learned about the Warsaw Ghetto, nothing
about our own city. This is outrageous. You should bear in mind that for seventy years
nobody ever mentioned the existence of an Umschlagplatz
6
here in Lublin!
The managing guide, who has been working in the center for about 15 years, demonstrated his
attitude demanding a fair trial for all, so to speak, announcing that for him history is what counts,
and we should stay away from any governmental political manipulation, referring particularly to
the post-Act on the IPN atmosphere of the last couple of years:
All the Polish collaborators and murderers, just like those who saved Jews, are all together
part and parcel of one history. I am not impressed at all with the numbers of righteous
among the nations. I want to know about the Szmaltzovniks,
7
just like the French want to
know about those who led Vichy France. The problem is that during the last five years, things
are becoming difficult. Everyone is afraid these days. It is harder to collect testimonies from
witnesses, and it is harder to persuade teachers from other districts to come to our center.
These teachers do not have today the support of their local councils the way they used to
have.
The younger guides, on the other hand, are more optimistic about the future of the center’s
activities:
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 11 of 17

The reason for a different atmosphere is that there is a generational change. Now we can
ask questions that have not been asked before, and now we can raise new points of view.
We can be freer to deal with values, not just trauma, to handle discourse about the
complexity of things. There were Poles who cooperated with the Germans and there were
others who were heroes; there is not and there cannot be just one story, and yes – some of
the stories contradict each other.
In sum, the guides at the Grodzka Gate center are more outspoken and critical than their counter-
parts at the Majdanek museum, and just like them they emphasize the complexity of the events
and the difficulty in understanding the course of history. However, the Grodzka Gate guides are
certainly more connected to the Jewish story, and though stressing the fact that they are first of all
Poles—their mission is ultimately to commemorate the Jewish heritage in Poland.
7. Witnesses in Uniform—IDF reserves officers
Established in 2001, the Witnesses in Uniform program brings IDF officers to follow the paths of
Jews in Poland during the Holocaust physically and spiritually. By 2011 tens of thousands of IDF
soldiers have already taken part in the project.
In the course of a weeklong trip, the soldiers learn about Jews’ lives before the war, as well as
about Nazi ideology and Jewish resistance in the Holocaust. Each such IDF delegation includes
a Holocaust survivor, who gives explanations about the places and events from his or her personal
perspective. During the trip, soldiers visit sites of the local Jewish communities, including synago-
gues and Jewish cemeteries, as well as remnants of ghettos, labor camps, concentration camps,
and extermination camps. One of the highlights of the project is a visit to the Auschwitz-Birkenau
death camp. At some of the sites, soldiers hold military memorial services. The participants
conclude each day of the journey with a reflective discussion (Davidovitch et al., 2012; Feldman,
2008).
The trip to Poland is preceded by extensive studying and preparations by the delegation
members. These preparations include a visit to Yad Vashem and learning about Jewish history.
Throughout these preparations, as well as during the trip itself, delegation members are involved
in discussions about pre-war Poland, the Holocaust, and contemporary Jewish life (Ben-Amos &
Hoffman, 2011; Feldman, 2008).
Three reserve officers who participated in the delegation in three consecutive years (2015, 2016,
and 2017) gathered for this research in a meeting that took place in one of the military offices
where their reserve army service takes place. One of them was a 55-year-old lieutenant colonel
whose grandparents were Holocaust survivors; the second was a 41-year-old Major; and the third
was a 30-year-old female Major. The three were officers at the Home Front Corps, though in their
regular army service, they served in combat units. Coincidentally, when narrowing down their
comments and summing them up, it seems that these officers each represented a different point
of view concerning Holocaust remembrance. The elder one stated:
One never returns from this delegation the same person as he had been before. The
importance of this trip is that it is a process where officers strengthen their Jewish identity,
and I have heard them say on more than one occasion sentences like “Now I realize what
we are fighting for” or “Now I finally understand why we need a strong IDF.”
[. . .] The only sensible conclusion anyone can think of is that we should always be prepared
to fight because, without a state, we stand no chance in this world.
The major in his early forties hardly spoke about Israel’s right to exist as an outcome of the
Holocaust. Rather, his concern seems to be internal social problems in Israel, particularly divisions
over political issues:
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 12 of 17

Going to Poland to see what happened there gives you a certain sense of proportion. If
people were truly aware of what the Holocaust was all about, all the [social] cleavages [. . .]
would all vanish in a second. The most important thing is that we stop fighting with each
other because, unlike those who were in the concentration camps, we are privileged; we
must not waste this privilege, not just for us but also for their sake.
The younger officer, a woman who had left a regular army career a couple of years prior to our
meeting, stressed the importance of refraining from potential atrocities. Pointing this out, she said:
I do not see the experience in Poland as just a process of studying a certain chapter in
history. It is not about Germans and Jews, nor is it about the so-called bystanders. It is
actually about not taking our victimhood to the wrong place. We should be cautious not to
take advantage of our strength and always to remain human and moral. We should refrain
from any possibility of turning into – well, yes, turning into something like the Nazis. Whether
it is our fault or not, we are now ruling over another people, so we should be cautious!
In a way, then, the three officers express entirely different approaches to the topic of Holocaust
remembrance and education. The first one holds the classic, so to speak, attitude of the historical
event as the very raison d’être of the State of Israel. The Jews, for that matter, have earned by
victimhood their right to a state of their own. The second officer tends to take things to the
domestic arena, and speaks more about the dangerous internal controversies, and the third officer
sticks to universalism. Noteworthy, to some extent the three officers also hold different attitudes in
the ongoing debates concerning the educational objects of the Israeli youth delegations to Poland
(Feldman, 2002, 2008).
8. Conclusion
We set sail, in this study, attempting to locate premises of reconciliation between two sets of
Holocaust narratives. We investigated the Polish and Jewish contending national narratives in
quest of themes of reconciliation. On the face of it, this task is impossible. The question of whether
competing national constructions can fit together has already been answered, in a way, by the
famous African proverb: A fish and a bird may fall in love, but they cannot build a home together.
With this impossible point of departure, in this paper, we took the task of finding mutual paths for
different Polish and Israeli narratives of the World War II experience. Three different groups
showed us that indeed, a broad common denominator can be found, even within the controversy
over the Act on the IPN. The first group was The Majdanek Guides who try to shape some universal
conclusions from the Zagłada, striving for objectivity and respecting all the various nations whose
sons and daughters marched to their deaths in this specific concentration camp. The second group
counted some guides of the Grodzka Gate center who accentuate historical complexity, but in spite
of identifying as Poles, they attach themselves to a great extent to the Jewish heritage in Poland.
The third group consisted of IDF reserves officers who had participated in delegations to Poland.
Whereas one of them demonstrated loyalty to the old national ethos of Holocaust as the ultimate
justification for the State of Israel, it was rather the youngest officer who expressed some universal
thoughts about historical events. These universal thoughts are not detached from the various
liberal attitudes that are typical for the younger generations in Israeli Society (Gutwein, 2009;
Kenan & Wolff, 2022; Lewin, 2014; Wolff, 2019).
There are various reservations that must be mentioned. First—the case studies that had been
chosen for this research do not necessarily represent any specific social group—neither in the
Polish case nor in the Israeli one. Indeed, this qualitative study referred to very small and specific
groups of individuals. Moreover, this research lacks the capacity to prove that in practice, recogni-
tion, and acknowledgment of the narratives of others lead to international compromise. However,
the findings imply that there are ethics that can potentially lead to forms of narratives that can
lower flames between nations. These ethics are presented by the guides in Majdanek who, in their
interviews, testified how they were adopting a universal manner when speaking about the Zagłada,
and how they used didactic tools when striving for objectivity and for an unbiased historic story.
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 13 of 17

These ethics were also demonstrated in the focus group at the Brama Grodzka, through the group
members’ ability to cherish the Jews who inhabited Lublin for ages. These ethics were also
displayed by the group members’ courage to be critical of the Polish society of the 1940s, despite
its relatively minor part in the murder of Jews. Finally, these ethics were presented through the
Brama Grodzka focus group interviewees’ willingness of younger generations in Poland to raise
questions about the past. True, statements by IDF officers who attended the visit to Poland tended
to stress the Jewish particularistic narrative; however, also among Israeli interviewees, as earlier
quoted in this research, one can identify, alongside themes of victimhood, the buds of ethics that
highlight a universal attitude. Encouraging and developing these approaches in Poland as well as
in Israel can diminish the particularistic character of national narratives and reduce disagree-
ments. Such approaches will eventually contribute to a productive dialogue about the issues
surrounding disagreements between the two countries. Needless to mention how vital this dialo-
gue is to overcome these issues.
Looking for a key to bridge over the troubled waters of conflicting narratives, one should bear in mind
that collective memory is, to a large extent, artificial. The social group’s common recollection is
a contested ideological terrain, where different actors try to establish their interpretation of the past as
the only way in which their group should comprehend its history. In this manner, society’s historic
narrative is an ongoing process that binds the group according to ideological perceptions and common
ethics that derive from its retold history (Bloch, 1964; Durkheim, [1912] 1995; Halbwachs, 1992;
Rothstein, 2001; Russell, 2007). The name of Hobsbawm and Ranger’s edited book reflects the idea of
the artificiality of social cultures: The Invention of Traditions. Constructed versions of the past, and of the
continuity between past and present, form a social engineering mechanism with which modern societies
establish social cohesion, legitimize authority, and socialize populations into a common culture
(Hobsbaum, 1983; Hobsbaum & Ranger, 1984). Press agencies, sometimes connected with hegemonic
forces in society and at other cases opposing them, are also active agents in constructing various
narratives (Herfroy-Mischler, 2016). Late twentieth century critical scholars assert that narratives are
manipulated in national contexts, legitimizing a monopoly of administrative control. National history,
according to this attitude, can be, at times, no more than a presentation of false unity designed through
an elite’s conquest of historical awareness. These scholars also point out how national states all over the
world exploit professional historical research and shift their peoples’ centers of collective memory from
religious sets of myths to political ones relying on subjective interpretations of history − for example,
a change of public focus from the temple and its priests to the university and its professors (Duara, 1995;
Levi-Strauss, 1979; Smith, 1986).
Politicians often draw on collective comprehension of the past to mobilize remembrance as an
instrument of politics. Collective consciousness, based on group memory, often intentionally
forged, is utilized to legitimize politicians’ actions (Hayden, 1992). In their introduction to a book,
that bears the title that illustrates the phenomenon accurately, Contested Pasts: The Politics of
Memory, the editors of the book note how our comprehension of the past has its strategic, political,
and ethical consequences. Contests over the meaning of historic events are also competitions over
framing the present (Hodgkin & Radstone, 2003).
It seems, then, that the key to bridging over the troubled waters of narratives lies, perhaps, in research,
like this paper, but also within grassroots organizations. One organization, for example, is The Bridge to
Poland, that leads trips and workshops specifically for those, all over the world, who want to learn and
understand the history of others (Tec, 2021 (a)). Established by Leora Tec, an American scholar, this
organization handles speaking engagements of all kinds that take place in Poland and on air. Another
initiative is The Neshoma Project, where video conversations with non-Jewish Poles who dedicate time to
preserve Jewish memory is collected (Tec, 2021 (b)). These projects match with the words of Tomasz
Pietrasiewicz, founder of the Grodzka Gate center, in an award reception speech on 8 October 2019: To
remember the murdered Jews, you do not have to be Jewish. To remember the murdered Poles, you do
not have to be Polish (Pietrasiewicz, 2019, p. 175).
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 14 of 17

Perhaps, then, the guides in places like the Majdanek Concentration Camp Museum, as well as
their colleagues in the Brama Grodzka—Teatr NN Center − and of course, travelers from all nations
who visit those locations − will eventually construct a path of compromise and conciliation. This
spirit will enable each group to stick to its own heritage yet at the same time to recognize,
acknowledge, and respect the narratives and ethos forms of others.
Author details
Eyal Lewin
1
E-mail: Lewin1212@gmail.com
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5461-6634
Slawomir Jacek Zurek
2
Nitza Davidovitch
3
1
Department of Middle Eastern Studies and Political
Science, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel.
2
The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin Center for
Polish-Jewish Literature Studies, Lublin, Poland.
3
Department of Education, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s).
Citation information
Cite this article as: Bridging the gaps between Holocaust
accounts: Fieldwork evidence for compromising forms of
narrative, Eyal Lewin, Slawomir Jacek Zurek & Nitza
Davidovitch, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707.
Notes
1. The term used throughout this paper is short for Act on
the IPN: 44 Denunciations Insulting the Polish Nation.
2. Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Authority.
3. IDF stands for Israel Defense Forces.
4. Righteous Among the Nations is a title used by the
State of Israel to convey the highest esteem and
respect in addressing non-Jews who risked their lives
during the Holocaust to save Jews.
5. The German word translates into German-people,
relating to ethnic Germans who lived outside Germany.
6. Umschlagplatz is the German word for a reloading or
a collection place. The Nazis used this expression for
the location where Jews would be assembled for
deportation to the death camps.
7. Szmalcownik [pronounced: shmaltzovnic] was the
Polish slang from the time of the German occupation
for a person who blackmailed Jews who were in hiding
or who blackmailed Poles who secretly protected Jews.
References
Albats, Y. (1994). The State within a State: The KGB and its
hold on Russia – past, present, and future.
(C. Fitzpatrick, Eds.). Frank Cass & Co. Ltd.
Alexiun, N. (2004). Polish historiography of the
Holocaust – between silence and public debate.
German History, 22(3), 406–432. https://doi.org/10.
1191/0266355403gh316oa
Almog, O. (2000). The Sabra: The creation of a New Jew.
University of California Press.
Ashplant, T. G., Dawson, G., & Roper, M. (2000). The
Politics of commemoration: Contexts, structures, and
dynamics. In T. G. Ashplant, G. Dawson, & M. Roper
(Eds.), The politics of war memory and commemora-
tion (pp. 6–89). Routledge.
Bal, M. (2019). Narrative here-now. In M. Grishakova &
M. Poulaki (Eds.), Narrative complexity: Cognition,
embodiment, evolution (pp. 247–269). University of
Nebraska Press.
Bar, D. (2005). Holocaust commemoration in Israel during
the 1950s: The Holocaust cellar on Mount Zion.
Jewish Social Studies, 12(1), 16–38. https://doi.org/10.
2979/JSS.2005.12.1.16
Bartoszewski, W. (1987). The Warsaw Ghetto: A Christian’s
testimony. Beacon Press.
Bartoszewski, W., & Lewin, Z. (Eds.). (1969). Righteous
among the nations: How Poles helped the Jews, 1939-
1945. Earlscourt Publications.
Bartoszewski, W., & Lewin, Z. (1970). The Samaritans:
Heroes of the Holocaust. Twayne Publishers.
Behr, V. (2021). How historians got involved in memory
Politics: Patterns of the historiography of the
Polish people’s republic before and after 1989.
East European Politics and Societies, 36(3),
970–991. https://doi.org/10.1177/
08883254211018777
Belavusau, U. (2018). The rise of memory laws in Poland.
Security and Human Rights, 29(1–4), 36–54. https://
doi.org/10.1163/18750230-02901011
Ben-Amos, A., & Hoffman, T. (2011). “We came to con-
quer Majdanek:” the IDF delegations to Poland and
the military usages of Holocaust memory. Israeli
Sociology, 12(2). 331–354.
Ben Arieh, K. (1987). September 1939 Tel Aviv: Lavi
[Hebrew], 12(2).
Bloch, M. (1964). The Historian’s craft. Random House.
Blonski, J. (1987). Biedni Polacy Patrza na Getto [Poor
Poles Look at the Ghetto]. Tygodnik Powszechny, 2/
1987 [Polish].
Bokenkotter, T. (2005). A concise history of the Catholic
church. Image.
Brinkmann, S. (2018). The interview. In N. K. Zendin (Ed.),
The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp.
997–1038). SAGE.
Davidovitch, N., Haskel, A., & Soen, D. (2012). “Witnesses
in Uniform” – IDF delegations to Poland: Education or
indoctrination? In N. Davidovitch & D. Soen (Eds.), The
holocaust ethos in the 21
st Century
(pp. 316–348).
Austeria Publishing House.
Davidovitch, N., & Lewin, E. (2019, September). The polish-
jewish lethal polka dance. Journal of Education,
Culture, and Society, 2, 15–31.
Davies, C. (2018). Hostile takeover: How Law and Justice
captured Poland’s courts. Freedom House – Nations in
Transit.
Doboszynski, A. (1993). Halfway along. Pro-Log. [Polish].
Duara, P. (1995). Rescuing history from nation:
Questioning narratives of modern China. University of
Chicago Press.
Durkheim, E. ([1912] 1995). The elementary forms of reli-
gious life. The Free Press.
Engelking, B., & Michalowicz, J. (Trans.). (2016). Such
a Beautiful Sunny day . . . : Jews seeking refuge in the
countryside, 1942-1945. Yad Vashem.
Feldhay Brenner, R. (2019). Polish literature and the
Holocaust: Eyewitness testimonies, 1942-1947.
Northwestern University Press.
Feldman, J. (2002). Marking the boundaries of the
enclave: Defining the Israeli collective through the
Poland experience. Israel Studies, 7(2), 84–114.
https://doi.org/10.2979/ISR.2002.7.2.84
Feldman, J. (2008). Above the death pits, beneath the flag:
Youth voyages to Poland and the performance of
Israeli national identity. Berghan Books.
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 15 of 17

Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational
research: An Introduction. Longman.
Gil, I. (2012). The Shoah in Israeli collective memory:
Changes in meanings and protagonists. Modern
Judaism, 32(12), 76–101. https://doi.org/10.1093/mj/
kjr027
Goldberg, A. (2012). The “Jewish narrative” in the Yad
Vashem global Holocaust Museum. Journal of
Genocide Research, 14(2), 187–213. https://doi.org/
10.1080/14623528.2012.677761
Gonzalez, C. A. (2017). Loss, fatalism and choice: The
moral component in the narratives of Polish dissident
historians in the 1980s. The cases of Krystyna
Kersten and Jerzy Holzer. Acta Poloniae Historica,
116, 301–331. https://doi.org/10.12775/APH.2017.
116.11
Grabowski, J. (2013). Hunt for the Jews: Betrayal and
murder in German-occupied Poland. Indiana
University Press.
Grabowski, J., & Engelking, B. (Eds.). (2018). Night without
end: The Fates of Jews in selected counties of occu-
pied Poland. The Polish Center for Holocaust
Research.
Gromelski, T. (2003). Liberty and liberties in early modern
Poland-lithuania. In Q. Skinner & M. van Gelderen
(Eds.), Freedom and the construction of Europe (pp.
215–234). Cambridge University Press.
Groth, S. (2019). Political narratives – narration of the
political: An Introduction. Narrative Culture, 6(1),
1–18. https://doi.org/10.13110/narrcult.6.1.0001
Gutwein, D. (2009). The privatization of the Holocaust:
Memory, historiography, and politics. Israel
Studies, 14(1), 36–64. https://doi.org/10.2979/ISR.
2009.14.1.36
Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory. L. A. Coser.
eds., The University of Chicago Press.
Hansen, I. (2015). “Never Again!”: The emergence of a
symbol and the everyday life of a memorial. Wallstein
Verlag. (German).
Hattis-Rolef, S. (2018). Poland and Israel: National narra-
tives and myths. Jerusalem Post. Retrieved July 15,
2018 from https://www.jpost.com/opinion/think-
about-it-poland-and-israel-national-narratives-and-
myths-562587.
Hayden, R. M. (1992). Balancing discussion of Jasenovac
and the manipulation of history. East European
Politics and Societies, 6(2), 207–212. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0888325492006002006
Herfroy-Mischler, A. (2016). Where the past seeps into the
present: The role of Press Agencies in circulating New
historical narratives and restructuring collective
memory during and after the Holocaust transitional
justice. Journalism, 17(7), 823–844. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1464884915592406
Hobsbaum, E. (1983). Introduction: Inventing traditions.
In E. Hobsbaum & T. Ranger (Eds.), The invention of
traditions (pp. 1–14). Cambridge University Press.
Hobsbaum, E., & Ranger, T. (1984). The invention of tra-
dition. Cambridge University Press.
Hodgkin, K., & Radstone, S. (2003). Introduction. In
K. Hodgkin & S. Radstone (Eds.), Contested pasts: The
politics of memory (pp. 1–23). Routledge.
Hoffman, A. (1974). Reliability and validity in oral history.
Today’s Speech, 22, 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01463377409369125
Horn, G.-R. (2015). The spirit of Vatican II: Western
European progressive Catholicism in the long Sixties.
Oxford University Press.
Horowitz, G. (2011). The other Poland. Israel Hayom
November 27, 2011. Hebrew
Kamberelis, G., Dimitriandis, G., & Welker, A. (2018). Focus
group research and/in figured worlds. In N. K. Zendin
(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp.
1202–1239). SAGE.
Karbonski, S. (2004). Fighting Warsaw: The story of the
Polish underground State 1939-1945. Hippocrene
Books.
Karpalski, S. (2015). Amnesia, nostalgia, and reconstruc-
tion: Shifting modes of memory in Poland’s Jewish
spaces. In E. Lehrer & M. Meng (Eds.), Jewish space in
contemporary Poland (pp. 149–169). Indiana
University Press.
Kenan, O. (2003). Between memory and history: The evo-
lution of Israeli historiography of the Holocaust, 1945-
1961. Peter Lang.
Kenan, I., & Wolff, N. (2022). The representation of the
Holocaust in Israeli society and its implications on
concepts of democracy and human rights of
“others”. Genealogy, 6(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.
3390/genealogy6010018
Kennedy, P. (2011). Christianity: An Introduction.
I. B. Tauris.
Kermish, J. (1969). On the relations between Jews and
Poles. Yalkut Moreshet. 11(Hebrew). 100–107.
Kermish, J. (1977). The activities of the Council for aid to
Jews (“Żegota”) in occupied Poland. In Y. Guttman &
E. Zuroff (Eds.), Rescue attempts during the holocaust:
Proceedings of the second yad vashem international
historical conference (pp. 367–398). Jerusalem, Israel.
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. (2015). The Museum of Polish
Jews: A postwar, posy-Holocaust, post-communist
story. In E. Lehrer & M. Meng (Eds.), Jewish space in
contemporary Poland (pp. 264–279). Indiana
University Press.
Klar, Y., Schori-Eyal, N., & Klar, Y. (2013). The “never
again” State of Israel: The emergence of the
Holocaust as a core feature of Israeli identity and its
four incongruent voices. The Journal of Social Issues,
69(1), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12007
Kochanski, H. (2012). The eagle unbowed: Poland and the
Poles in the second world war. Harvard University Press.
Koskodan, K. K. (2009). No greater ally: The untold story of
Poland’s forces in world war II. Osprey.
Landa, J. A. G. (2019). In Hindsight. In M. Grishakova &
M. Poulaki (Eds.), Narrative complexity: Cognition,
embodiment, evolution (pp. 414–436). University of
Nebraska Press.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1979). Myth and meaning. Shocken.
Lewin, E. (2014). Ethos clash in Israeli society. Lexington.
Lewin, E. (2018). The Spiritual Disorder of the Jews and the
need for a Zionist Renaissance. Edwin Mellen Press.
Lukacs, R. C. (1989). Out of the inferno: Poles remember
the Holocaust. University Press of Kentucky.
Lustick, I. (2017). The Holocaust in Israeli political culture:
Four constructions and their consequences.
Contemporary Jewry, 37(1), 125–170. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12397-017-9208-7
Mazzeo, T. J. (2016). Irena’s children: A true story of
courage. Gallery Books.
Michnik, A. (2014). The trouble with history: Morality,
revolution and counterrevolution. Yale University
Press.
Noakes, J., & Pridham, G. (1990). Nazism: A history in
documents and eyewitness accounts, 1919-1945.
Schocken Books.
Nossek, H. (1994). The narrative role of the Holocaust and
the State of Israel in the coverage of salient terrorist
events in the Israeli press. Journal of Narrative and
Life History, 4(1–2), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1075/
jnlh.4.1-2.07the
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 16 of 17

Novac, A., Zahn, C., & Blinder, B. J. (2021). Identity nar-
rative, group and individual narratives and their role
in social stability: A multidisciplinary approach. Group
Analysis, 55(2), 191–212.
Ofer, D. (2009). The past that does not pass: Israelis and
Holocaust memory. Israel Studies, 14(1), 1–35.
https://doi.org/10.2979/ISR.2009.14.1.1
Ofer, D. (2013). We Israelis remember, but how? The
memory of the Holocaust and the Israeli experience.
Israel Studies, 18(2), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.2979/
israelstudies.18.2.70
O’Mally, J. (2008). What happened at Vatican II. Harvard
University Press.
Perakyla, A., & Ruusuvuori, J. (2018). Analysing talk and
text. In N. K. Zendin (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of
qualitative research (pp. 1163–1201). SAGE.
Pietrasiewicz, T. (2019). Within the circle of the Grodzka
Gate: Theatre of memory by the NN Theatre. Osrodek
Brama Grodzka Teatr NN.
Pohl, D. (2004). War, occupation, and the Holocaust in
Poland. In D. Stone (Ed.), The historiography of the
holocaust (pp. 88–119). Palgrave Macmillan.
Porat, D. A. (2004). From the scandal to the Holocaust in
Israeli education. Journal of Contemporary History, 39
(4), 619–636. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0022009404046757
Redlich, S. (1971). Jews in general Anders’ army in the
Soviet Union, 1941-1942. Soviet Jewish Affairs, 1(2),
90–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13501677108577099
Resnik, J. (2003). “Sites of memory” of the Holocaust:
Shaping national memory in the education system in
Israel. Nations and Nationalism, 9(2), 297–317.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8219.00087
Ringelblum, E. (1992). Polish-Jewish relations during
the second world war. Northwestern University
Press.
Rothstein, B. (2001). Social capital in the social democratic
welfare state. Politics & Society, 29(2), 207–241.
Rubinstein, W. D. (1997). The myth of rescue. Routledge.
Russell, M. A. (2007). Between tradition and modernity:
Aby Warburg and the public purposes of art in
Hamburg 1896-1918. Berghahn Books.
Rutakumwa, R., Mugisha, J. O., Bernays, S., Kabunga, E.,
Tumwekwase, G., Mbonye, M., & Seeley, J. (2020).
Conducting in-depth interviews with and without
voice recorders: A comparative analysis. Qualitative
Research, 20(5), 565–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1468794119884806
Sarner, H. (1997). General Anders and soldiers of
the second Polish corps. Brunswick Press.
Shenhav, S. (2006). Political narratives and political
reality. International Political Science Review, 27(3),
245–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0192512106064474
Silberklang, D. (2013). Gates of tears: The Holocaust in the
Lublin District. Yad Vashem.
Siwek-Ciupak, B., & Brand, W. (Trans.). (2014). Majdanek:
A historical outline. Majdanek Concentration Camp
Museum.
Smith, A. (1986). The ethnic origins of nations. Blackwell.
Stauber, R. (2007). The Holocaust in Israeli public debate
in the 1950s: Ideology and memory. Vallentine
Mitchell.
Steinlauf, M. C. (1997). Bondage to the dead: Poland and
the memory of the Holocaust. Syracuse University
Press.
Tec, L. (A). (2021). The Bridge to Poland. https://bridgeto
poland.com/
Tessier, S. (2012). From field notes to transcripts, to tape
recordings: Evolution or combination? International
Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11(4), 446–460.
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691201100410
Tikka, P., & Kaipainen, M. (2019). Intersubjectivity, idio-
syncrasy, and Narrative Deixis. In M. Grishakova &
M. Poulaki (Eds.), Narrative complexity: Cognition,
embodiment, evolution (pp. 314–337). University of
Nebraska Press.
Turski, M. (2010). Polish Witnesses to the shoah. Vallentine
Mitchell.
Verosek, P. J. (2016). Collective memory, Politics and the
influence of the past: The Politics of memory as
a research paradigm. Politics, Groups & Identities, 4
(3), 529–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.
2016.1167094
Weegman, M. (2016). Permission to narrate. Routledge.
Weegman, M. (2018). The world within the group.
Routledge.
Wolff, N. (2019). Severing a historical Bond: The implica-
tions of divorcing human rights from Holocaust
education. Journal of Holocaust Studies, 26(3), 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17504902.2019.1581493
Wolfinger, N. H. (2002). On writing field-notes: Collection
strategies and background expectancies. Qualitative
Research, 2(1), 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1468794102002001640
Wóycicka, Z. (2021). A global label and its local appro-
priations. Representations of the righteous among
the nations in Contemporary European Museums.
Memory Studies, 14(5), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/
17506980211017928
Wróbel, P. (1997). Double memory: Poles and Jews after
the Holocaust. East European Politics and Societies,
11(3), 560–574. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0888325497011003006
Wyman, D. S. (1984). The abandonment of the Jews:
America and the Holocaust, 1941-1945. The New
Press.
Wyman, D. S. (1998). Why Auschwitz wasn’t bombed. In
Y. Gutman & M. Berenbaum (Eds.), Anatomy of the
Auschwitz death camp (pp. 569–587). Indiana
University Press.
Zertal, I. (1998). From catastrophe to power: Holocaust
survivors and the emergence of Israel. University of
California Press.
Zertal, I. (2005). Israel’s Holocaust and the Politics of
Nationhood. Cambridge University Press.
Zerubavel, Y. (1995). Recovered roots: Collective memory
and the making of Israeli national tradition. University
of Chicago Press.
Zimmerman, J. D. (2015). The Polish underground and the
Jews, 1939-1945. Cambridge University Press.
Zubrycki, G. (2006). The crosses of Auschwitz: Nationalism
and religion in post-communist Poland. University of
Chicago Press.
Zubrycki, G. (2022). Resurrecting the Jew: Nationalism,
philosemitism, and Poland’s Jewish Revival. Princeton
University Press.
Lewin et al., Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2269707
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2269707
Page 17 of 17