CHAPTER XVIII.

EVENTS PRECEDING THE REVOLUTIONS OF FEBRUARY AND MARCH, 1848, AND THE

SUBSEQUENT SOCIAL ADVANCE OF THE JEWS.

Return of Montefiore and Crémieux from the East--Patriotic

Suggestions--General Indecision--Gabriel Riesser--Michael

Creizenach--Reform Party in Frankfort--Rabbinical Assembly

--Holdheim--Reform Association--Zachariah Frankel--The

Berlin Reform Temple--Michael Sachs--His Character--His

Biblical Exegesis--Holdheim and Sachs--The Jewish German

Church--Progress of Jewish Literature--Ewald and his Works

--Enfranchisement of English Jews--The Breslau Jewish College

--Its Founders--The Mortara Case--Pope Pius IX--The

Alliance Israélite--Astruc, Cohn, Caballo, Masuel, Netter--

The American Jews--The "Union of American Hebrew Congregations"

--The Anglo-Jewish Association--Benisch, Löwy--The

"Israelitische Allianz"--Wertheimer, Goldschmidt, Kuranda--

Rapid Social Advance of the Jews--Rise of Anti-Semitism.

1840-1870 C. E.

The return from the East of the Jewish envoys, who not only had saved

a few men from death, but had rescued all Judaism from disgrace, was

a veritable triumphal procession. From Corfu to Paris and London, and

even to the depths of Poland, the Jewish communities were unanimous

in expressions of thanksgiving to the rescuers, and sought by visible

signs to evince their gratitude, and at the same time show their

patriotic sentiments for Judaism. The tributes took the form of public

orations, addresses, articles written in every European language,

naturally also in Hebrew, and both in prose and verse. Attentions

and gifts were freely bestowed upon the two chief representatives of

Judaism, to celebrate in a worthy fashion the momentous events which

had occurred in Damascus, and transmit the remembrance of these deeds

to posterity. Crémieux, who was the first to set out on the return

journey, received enthusiastic homage in Corfu, Trieste, Venice,

Vienna, Fürth, Nuremberg, Frankfort, and Mayence (November-December,

1840). The large communities through whose cities he could not

pass sent deputations and addresses. It was naïvely touching that

old-fashioned orthodox rabbis, at a loss how to show their gratitude,

bestowed upon him the title of Rabbi (Morenu), as the highest honor

in their gift. Only the Jewish community in Paris behaved in a cool

fashion, and prepared no fitting reception for their emissary, as

if fearing to wound the sensitiveness of King Louis Philippe, whose

ambiguous attitude had been striking.

Montefiore, who had remained in Constantinople a long time, in order

to obtain a favorable Firman, and who began his return journey later,

and traveled mostly by sea, did not come into contact with so many

congregations as Crémieux, hence did not receive so much public homage.

He was, however, overwhelmed with letters from all sides. By his

watchful care, continually directed to the welfare and honor of his

brethren, and without any idea of reward, he had in his simplicity put

their enemies to shame. He obtained a promise from Cardinal Rivarola,

the protector of all Capuchins in Rome, that the tombstone should be

removed which had been erected in the Capuchin church at Damascus

recording the murder of Father Tomaso by the Jews, and representing him

as a martyr. He also compelled King Louis Philippe to appear pleased

with what had occurred. At an audience obtained through the English

ambassador, Lord Granville (February 22, 1844), Montefiore handed the

king a copy of the Sultan's Firman which testified the innocence of the

Damascus Jews, and tacitly condemned the French consul. Louis Philippe

was compelled to swallow this humiliation, and assume a gracious manner

for the sake of appearances, and congratulate Montefiore on the success

of his journey and his mission. Queen Victoria thanked Montefiore all

the more sincerely, through Lord Palmerston (who was prime minister at

the time, and to whom he was presented on his return), for the succor

which he had brought his co-religionists.

The entire body of Jews in Europe were at this time engaged in

carrying out three objects: offering to their two rescuers an

enduring and striking token of gratitude, perpetuating the memory of

the deliverance effected by them, and finally, discovering, through

combined action, a means whereby to prevent the recurrence of similar

false accusations against Jews and Judaism. The leaders of the German

Jews felt themselves especially moved to put on record their interest

in the events, and their admiration for the two noble representatives

of their race. They, the very ones who had hitherto taken the lead in

advocating progress, had done little in connection with the sanguinary

events of Damascus. A prominent Jewish scholar, Zunz, had completely

refuted the alleged proofs, supposed to be drawn from the Talmud,

of the use of blood by the Jews. The Jewish newspapers had boldly

fought against anti-Jewish attacks and slanders. But this was all that

had been done in Germany towards vindicating the honor of Judaism.

Riesser might easily have joined Montefiore and Crémieux, might have

accompanied them to Egypt as the representative of the German Jews,

and used his eloquence on behalf of the sufferers; but no such idea

was even suggested. Geiger, from hatred to the Talmud, had actually

admitted that the anti-Semites were right in attributing misanthropical

expressions to the Talmud. Certain high-minded Jews in Germany felt

it the more necessary to take public action in the matter. Riesser,

together with a few friends, desired to found societies, through

which the Jews of the four chief countries of Europe were to offer

some public recognition to their two representatives. But this plan

of acknowledging their indebtedness fell through. In fact, the three

objects desired by the people were only imperfectly carried out,

because the right means to attain them were not pursued. The services

of Montefiore were, however, acknowledged with fervent enthusiasm on

his return to London by a public celebration in the synagogues, and a

piece of plate was presented to him in remembrance of his success. A

still greater distinction awaited him at the hands of Queen Victoria.

She rewarded him with an addition to his armorial bearings (June 24),

a great honor both to his race and himself. Yet more important than

this toy for adults were the words of Her Majesty that accompanied the

gracious distinction:

"Inasmuch as it was brought to our notice, that in consequence

of tidings from the East, which stated that, on account of

the accusation that they had murdered Father Tomaso, Jews in

Damascus and Rhodes had been imprisoned and tortured, that many

children had been thrown into prison and deprived of almost

all nourishment, and that many persons had been so cruelly

tortured that death ensued, ... our trusty and well-beloved Sir

Moses Montefiore, accompanied by Lady Montefiore, had quite

voluntarily journeyed to Alexandria with the view of proving

the falsehood of the charge and of conducting the affairs of

his unhappy and persecuted brethren; that he succeeded in

obtaining from the Pasha, Mehmet Ali, the honorable liberation

of the accused who were incarcerated, and the permission

for those who had fled the city to return home; that for

this purpose he procured a Firman in Constantinople from his

Imperial Majesty the Sultan Abdul Meg'id, which declared the

innocence of the Jews, and assured equal rights with all other

subjects to members of the Jewish religion under Turkish rule

--we have taken the above mentioned facts into our royal

consideration, and desire to give to Montefiore a special mark

of our royal favor, in memory of his persevering efforts on

behalf of his suffering and persecuted brethren in the East,

and of his nation in general."

It was an extract from the history of modern Jews related by the Queen

herself.

In comparison with this distinction, the proposal of certain French

congregations of the Upper Rhine to strike a medal in honor of Crémieux

appears very trivial. They shared the general idea, "that it was

important for future generations to perpetuate the memory of the events

of 1840 affecting Israelites." But Crémieux declined the medal. In

what manner these joyful, national memories were to be immortalized

was a matter concerning which there was general indecision. Crémieux

asked the French Jews and others to support the schools that he had

established in Alexandria and Cairo by their contributions. Only a

small amount, however, was subscribed: the maintenance of the Crémieux

schools in Egypt was only accidentally connected with the main

question, and was not likely to keep the exaltation of the Jews at a

high pitch. One suitable proposition was made, but no notice was taken

of it.

"It is not by ostentatious gifts, nor by clamorous

celebrations, that we can testify our gratitude. We would offer

the finest testimonial to the men who went to the rescue by

perpetuating this great historical event in a religious form

appropriate to its religious spirit. It should be commemorated

by an annual festival equal to the festivals of Chanuka and

Purim; for on those days it may be said that Israel was

delivered from bodily suffering, whilst on this day it was

delivered from spiritual servitude."

Judaism never knew a more effectual way of commemorating its liberation

and victories and arousing a spirit of emulation in posterity than by

establishing days of memorial, by means of which, time, the destroyer,

is made the protector of historical events. If that most skillful

master of the Hebrew language, Isaac Erter, had completed the narrative

of the persecution and the deliverance in Damascus, which he had

commenced in the simple biblical style, and if the heads of the Jewish

communities had resolved to commemorate the most important day in the

Damascus affair, and to read this "Scroll" (Megillah) in public, the

lasting remembrance of these occurrences would have been assured, and

at the same time a means would have been found of cementing afresh

the bonds of fellowship. The Jews of Asia and Africa and on the whole

globe would joyfully have accepted such a festival as an international

memorial. Munk, whose voice carried great weight, remarked:

"Would that the sad Damascus incident might at least serve to

make us take cognizance of our disorganized condition, which,

though mournful to contemplate, is unfortunately a fact. Would

that it might show us that in times of danger we must rely upon

ourselves, and that the bond that formerly united us might be

renewed."

Instead of unity, however, a rupture took place within German Judaism,

which, though caused by a trifling dispute that might easily have

been settled in the commencement, grew to great proportions. The

consciousness of opposition was present, and by chance it asserted

itself on this occasion; but it might equally well have shown itself

at any other time, so long as it was not allayed, or had not worn off.

The Hamburg Temple, which twenty years before had first stirred up

dissensions between the old-fashioned orthodox party and the reformers,

again brought about a quarrel, which henceforth assumed a fiercer

complexion. The congregation of the Temple had largely increased in

numbers since its foundation. The younger members of the old-fashioned

community had joined, because in the old synagogue they found no

satisfaction for their devotional cravings, and they objected to the

continual disorder that prevailed. The new congregation had already

grown to nearly eight hundred members, and included a man who in his

own person was a great attraction. After the death of Bresselau, the

secretary of the congregation, Gabriel Riesser had accepted that post.

He became closely connected with the Temple, and was elected to the

office of second warden. As his name was in extraordinary repute, owing

to his untiring zeal for the political and social emancipation of the

Jews in Germany, his adhesion to the Temple shed new luster upon it.

When the members of the Temple determined to erect a new and larger

house of prayer, the old party by complaining to the senate threw

obstacles in the way of the undertaking. The authorities of the Temple

had also caused a new prayer-book to be compiled.

The altered liturgy of the Temple was published and announced as a

general "Prayer-Book for Israelites," but was so objectionable to the

orthodox party as to be utterly rejected. The circumstance that the

new prayer-book claimed to be used by all Jews gave rise to great

annoyance. Chacham Bernays therefore renewed on a Sabbath, in the

three synagogues (Marcheshvan 1, October 16, 1841), the proclamation

against heretics which the three rabbis had issued on the foundation

of the Temple, forbidding any Israelite to use this prayer-book. In

the reasons assigned, harsh expressions were employed charging that

this prayer-book, even more than the former, gave wanton and frivolous

treatment to the religious convictions contained in the Hebrew prayers.

This denunciation naturally excited the Temple congregants, and

transported even the cautious Riesser to inordinate lengths. Whilst the

preachers regarded the insulting expression of opinion from a religious

standpoint, Riesser saw in it an encroachment upon their rights,

"because the Chacham had no authority over the Temple." The Temple

committee then published a counter-declaration (October 24), in which

Bernays was charged not alone with "arrogance, impotent partiality, and

malicious ignoring of the contents of the book," but with "ignorance of

all theological and liturgical literature." There now arose a violent

dispute, conducted with such passion, that the senate was compelled to

reprove both parties. The Chacham and the leaders of his congregation,

who sided with him, circulated thousands of copies of the sentence

of condemnation upon the prayer-book in many communities; whilst the

authorities of the Temple (November) requested rabbis and preachers

holding the same religious views to give their opinions as to the value

or worthlessness of the innovations, expecting that the decisions would

be in their favor. On this occasion, the changes which had taken place

in the German communities during two decades became evident. Whereas

formerly only three rabbis had ambiguously given their assent to the

ritual of the Temple, and many others had condemned it, at this second

discussion only the rabbi of Altona supported Bernays, whilst twelve

or thirteen others pronounced judgment adverse to him; this was at the

close of 1841, or the beginning of 1842. Then began the aggressive

stage of the reform movement. Young rabbis or clergymen, pastors (as

they preferred to be called), who had mostly drawn their wisdom from

academies, and were enthusiastic for the reform which had become the

fashion, now were at the head. The old rabbis, on the other hand, no

longer ventured to oppose them. Thus it seemed as if all the Jews of

Germany were in favor of innovations in the synagogue, and only a few

wanting in spirit struggled against this tendency.

The contest concerning the Hamburg Temple bore no results in the city

itself, as a terrible conflagration (May, 1842) transformed a great

part of the town into a mass of ruins, and distracted attention from

party interests. The flame of reform blazed up from another point, and

threatened to spread far and wide. In Frankfort-on-the-Main, for some

time past, there had been discontented persons who had broken away from

the Judaism of the day. These disturbing elements partly originated

in a school called the Philanthropin (which from small beginnings

had grown into an important institution), partly in the first Jewish

Freemasons' lodge. The managers and teachers of the school and the

members of the lodge favored a radicalism repugnant to Judaism. For a

long time Michael Creizenach (born 1789, died 1842), a teacher at the

Philanthropin, formed the center of an invisible society. Creizenach,

who was honest, judicious, but uninteresting, had published many

pamphlets combating Rabbinical Talmudical Judaism, but owing to

their temperate tone and want of depth, these writings made little

impression. By his personal influence, however, he filled the circle

of his friends and admirers with a passion for innovation and a deep

aversion to antiquity.

After his death several of his adherents endeavored to form a

congregation, and to establish a sect, even at the risk of separating

from Judaism. Their aim was in a measure to remove the pretext of

anti-Jewish politicians, who withheld equal rights from the Jews on

the score of attachment to their nationality, to the Talmud, and to

old forms, and they also desired to secure freedom of action for

themselves. They were educated laymen, who, owing to the prevailing

confusion, had lost mental balance, or they may have been misled by

false leaders. They constituted themselves a Society of the Friends

of Reform (October, 1842), and drew up a confession of faith, which

clearly proved the perplexity of the times. They refused to recognize

the Talmud as an authority. But the Bible? "They considered the Mosaic

religion capable of continual development." First of all they wished to

throw off the fetters of the dietary laws, because they "had originated

in the ancient constitution of the state," and at the present day had

lost their significance as a religious act or symbol. They definitely

gave up all hope in the Messiah, or a return to Palestine, "because

they regarded their native land as their sole fatherland."

The Creizenach Friends of Reform did not find many supporters. They

therefore sought to interest Gabriel Riesser, whose importance was

already acknowledged, and who might attract others. He was at first

inclined to join them. He appears not to have overcome the excitement

into which he had been thrown by Bernays' intervention in the affairs

of the Hamburg Temple. He did not even shrink from total secession,

although he had hitherto constantly desired to have "the shell of

Judaism respected on account of its soul." The idea of freedom, which

completely filled his mind, destroyed his emotional attachment to

existing Judaism. He was therefore eminently in favor of the paragraph

in the Creizenach or Frankfort programme which declared that it was

optional with every Jewish father to have his sons circumcised, and

that in case of the omission of this rite civil disabilities should

not be entailed. Riesser wished to combat any presumptive right of

forcing conscience. However, others who had been asked to join, took

umbrage at this very question of circumcision. The founders of the

Society of the Friends of Reform, therefore, saw themselves obliged to

relinquish this point as well as the declaration against the dietary

laws, and to adhere to only three out of the five resolutions of their

original programme: that against the Talmud, that against the Messiah,

and that enunciating the possibility of the development of the "Mosaic

religion." This abridgment and enfeebling of the original confession,

Riesser considered illogical and cowardly, and he withdrew his support.

The power of attraction was lacking in the society, and as only a

few joined, it perished at its birth. The question of circumcision

was shortly afterwards brought forward from another quarter. Several

unfortunate accidents at the circumcision of Jewish boys had induced

the health officers in Frankfort-on-the-Main to issue an order

(February 8, 1843) with the ambiguous wording, "Israelite citizens and

inhabitants, if they desire to have their children circumcised, must

employ the services of competent persons." From this it appeared that

the Frankfort Senate made it optional with Jewish parents to perform

the rite or neglect it, and did not regard it as a necessary mark of

the Jewish religion. The Senate at the same time explained that they

did not mean thereby to give untrammeled liberty to the innovators.

But the reformers seized upon the words in order to have a pretext for

abolishing the rite of circumcision. In consequence, Rabbi Solomon

Trier invited the opinions of his brother rabbis upon the subject

(1843-44) in order to dispose of the question forever. However, it

caused but a slight sensation, seeing that even young rabbis favorably

disposed to reform had decisively asserted the obligation and necessity

of circumcision. Therefore, no seceding sect was formed among the Jews

of Germany, although the elements existed, and an uneasy state of

feeling was the result.

This feeling was especially noticeable among the younger rabbis, who

were not very clear about the purpose and extent of the reforms to be

instituted, or met with continual opposition on one side or the other

in their congregations, and in their isolation were without support.

At this time the fashion of assemblies and societies had come into

vogue; railways had already been built between the great cities, and

had facilitated personal intercourse. Thus the invitation calling a

conference of rabbis met with approval. This meeting of rabbis and

preachers who were, to some extent, at one upon the subjects under

discussion, at first awakened a certain expectancy; it was a novelty,

and this always possesses a certain amount of charm. However, at the

first session only twenty-two rabbis assembled in Brunswick, the

majority coming from southern and western Germany. The remainder

waited until the resolutions of the assembly should be made known, and

according as they agreed or disagreed with them, they would decide

whether to join or to hold aloof. Few rabbis attended who adhered to

the Judaism rooted in the Talmud; most of the members had partially,

or wholly, severed themselves from the Talmud, although they did not

practically manifest this severance in their religious practices.

The first Rabbinical Assembly was dominated by a man possessing all the

qualities calculated to widen the breach and bring about a complete

separation. This was Samuel Holdheim (born at Kempen, 1806; died at

Berlin, 1860). It is a curious yet natural fact that Talmudism, which

had acquired its power and extensive range through Polish students,

should be attacked by a Pole with unsparing severity. On emerging from

boyhood Holdheim displayed not only extraordinary acquaintance with the

Talmud and Rabbinical literature, but also such remarkable versatility

in dialectics and the art of discussion that he won the admiration of

grey-bearded rabbis, and was considered a highly-skilled Talmudist.

Like Solomon Maimon, Holdheim when he already had a son began his

secular education in the academy at Prague, skipping the lower grades.

All that he heard in the philosophical lecture-rooms in this not very

distinguished university was new to him, astounded and dazzled him,

and resulted in great perturbation of mind. He quickly assimilated

such elements of knowledge as were connected with his previous

acquirements, such as Christian theology and the commonplace philosophy

tolerated in Austria under Metternich. But he had no appreciation

of solid, disciplining branches of learning, and even the subjects

which attracted him he had first to reproduce in a Talmudical form.

Holdheim's knowledge therefore was only of a fragmentary nature, and

contained numerous gaps. He was, however, sufficiently careful and

practical to devote himself to useful work, to acquire a good style,

which had been neglected in his education, and cultivate pulpit

eloquence. Owing to his poverty, he was compelled to devote himself

to professional studies, and was thus unable to spend time upon his

favorite subjects. The Bible which had hitherto been a closed book to

Holdheim, or had only been examined by him through Talmudical glasses,

he studied solely to obtain verses for his sermons. It is not granted

to everyone to possess ideals and regulate his conduct by them. There

must also exist dry, calm, doubting natures, occupied only with the

world of real things, who build themselves huts here below, and look

with contempt on all sublime and ideal sentiments as being froth and

folly. Such Mephistophelian temperaments, the incarnation of the spirit

of doubt, are as necessary in the sphere of moral life as opposition

in nature. Holdheim had this tendency, and his Talmudical culture

nourished and developed it. He knew of no enthusiasm, neither for the

calm light of pale memories, nor for the dim, cloudy dreams of the

future. The firm ground of the present was more to his taste. Since

Judaism consists of memories and hopes, Holdheim was not heart and soul

devoted to it, but sought to remodel and alter it, so that he might not

be inconvenienced.

Mecklenburg-Schwerin, where the typical brutality of the Middle Ages

had been preserved, and where mere caprice wielded the scepter, was

at this time ruled by a prince, who, instead of making his Jews free

in action, wished them to be Freethinkers. They were to cast off all

old memories and forms and remodel themselves. A superintendent was

appointed for the disciplining of the congregations, and Holdheim was

made chief rabbi (1840) to assist in reforms, and stamp innovations

with the rabbinical seal. Here he felt untrammeled, and could abolish

whatever was distasteful to him. He who formerly had had no conception

that divine service must possess dignity, now discovered that disorder

in the synagogue was unseemly, and determined to remove everything not

countenanced by the spirit of the times. As, however, a desire for

changes in the synagogue did not originate from any impulse of his own,

he looked around for patterns, and introduced the Würtemberg ritual,

undisturbed by any consideration as to whether he was forcing the

consciences of the mostly old-fashioned orthodox congregations.

But Holdheim was not to win laurels by introducing innovations into

the synagogue. He marked out a wider field for himself. He wished to

alter the whole of Judaism in its threefold form, with its Biblical,

Talmudical, and Rabbinical components, to confuse all ideas and

stultify the consciences. Since Paul of Tarsus, Judaism had not known

such an enemy in its midst, who shook the whole edifice to its very

foundations. But Holdheim possessed no original ideas to use as a

lever for overthrowing Judaism: he had only a certain ingenuity which

he had gained from the Talmud. He was therefore obliged to make use

of such thoughts of others as had become public property. His acute

intellect, however, enabled him to piece together these disjointed,

half true premises, and give them a coloring of truth. Judaism, he

said, consists of a close combination of religious and moral ideas with

national and political elements. Holdheim accepted this definition

in order to separate the religious from the national ordinances, the

latter having lost all significance since the downfall of the Jewish

state. Which laws are national and therefore temporary? Holdheim gave

a wide application to the term, calling all observances national and

political which are inconvenient, and require a certain amount of

self-denial, such as keeping the Sabbath, the Jewish laws of marriage,

and even the acquisition of the Hebrew language, which he desired to

banish from the midst of the Jewish race, because it is a national bond

of union; and still more national is a hope in the Messiah. To this

sophistry Holdheim added other quibbles. He considered every state,

however constituted, even Russian despotism, an all-devouring Moloch

which continually demands victims, and whose lust for sacrifices can

be satisfied only by the abnegation of independence, freedom, and

every religious sentiment. The culminating point of Holdheim's theory

was that Talmudical Judaism itself, in the expression "the law of the

state is law for the Jews" (in civil relations), obliges every Jew

to subordinate his religious affairs to those of the state; Judaism,

in other words, prescribes its own suicide, if the state provides

it with a silken halter. Had he lived in the time of the Maccabees,

Holdheim would have joined the renegade Menelaus in urging the Jews

to worship the Greek Zeus, because the state, which was then called

Antiochus Epiphanes, had so commanded. In the time of Hadrian, like a

second Acher, he would have lauded the cult of Jupiter of the Capitol,

and in the days of Philip of Spain and Emanuel of Portugal he would

have advocated the worship of the cross. The millions of Jewish

martyrs, according to his theory, were malefactors against the state,

inasmuch as they had opposed the laws given to them. Holdheim, the

son of the Talmud, struck down Talmudical Judaism with the weapons

which it had bestowed upon him. The authority and power which the

legislative Synhedrion had formerly possessed, or is said to have

possessed, Holdheim wished to see transferred to the Christian state,

even the right of interfering with matters of conscience. These ideas

he propounded with sophistic casuistry, unmistakably according to the

method of the Polish Rabbinical school. It was difficult for Holdheim

to decide what Judaism actually was, and what would be left of it,

after everything in any way connected with national political life had

been excluded, and when supreme authority was besides vested in each

state, to change, command, or prohibit religious practices.

The majority of the members of the first assemblage of rabbis in

Brunswick looked upon Holdheim with awe as a Talmudical scholar and

a reckless reformer, and he obtained distinct influence over the

discussions and resolutions of the meeting. Less attention was paid to

the letter and spirit of Judaism "than to the state, the exalted German

governments," and the intangible, whimsical "spirit of the age." The

Talmud was sacrificed by most of the delegates as a scapegoat. Yet the

debates and conclusions of the Brunswick conference of rabbis (June,

1844) produced but little effect. The congregations troubled themselves

as little about it as they did about the protest from seventy-seven

rabbis of Germany, Bohemia, Moravia, and Hungary, which, set on foot by

an upright, self-sacrificing, disinterested, but bigoted zealot, Hirsch

Lehren of Amsterdam, utterly condemned the assembly of Brunswick.

Events in the Christian world at about this time demonstrated more

effectually than this laboriously constructed protest, that Judaism

with its ancient confession had not yet become superfluous. The

exhibition of the pretended holy coat of Jesus in Treves, to which

more than a million Catholics from all countries made a pilgrimage

and bent the knee (August-October, 1844), showed that the "spirit

of the age" was a deceptive standard. In consequence of this excess

of mediæval superstition and credulity, there arose in Germany what

promised to be an influential anti-Catholic movement. A German Catholic

Church was established (January, 1845), and next to it, in the bosom

of Protestantism, "Communities of the Friends of Light" were formed,

who threatened Christianity, its belief in the Trinity, and the Divine

Incarnation, with imminent dissolution. Every period has its delusions,

and Jews can always be found ready to imitate strange customs. Here and

there voices were raised in favor of founding a German Jewish Church

after the pattern of the German Catholic. In Breslau the agitation for

this new scheme was only artificially kept alive, but this movement was

somewhat more energetic in Berlin. In this city a popular preacher,

Stern, had been delivering lectures upon Judaism and Jewish history,

and had characterized Jewish doctrines as a capricious system. At his

suggestion, some twenty men, whose opinions upon these topics were in

accord with his own, assembled for the purpose of establishing a sort

of Church system of a peculiar type, called the Reform Association

(April 2, 1845). They believed that the majority of German Jews had

disowned all attachment to ancient Judaism in their hearts, and would

gladly adopt a new creed. The founders of the Berlin Reform Association

therefore issued a summons to all Israel to attend a synod, in order

to establish a new Jewish religion. In their programme they naturally

tabulated only negative principles, such as the rejection of the Talmud

and of the Messianic doctrine, because they belonged with body and soul

to their Berlin home; they advocated a return to Holy Writ, not to its

literal sense, but to its spirit. The affirmative principles were: "We

desire faith, positive religion, Judaism." The confusion of ideas at

this time was as great as when the Christian communities of old were

first originated from semi-Jewish elements, and even clear heads became

affected.

The matter did not, however, result in a synod for the discussion of

reform, which would indeed have marked the Jews as slavish imitators of

the Church and of the "Friends of Light." The speeches in favor of the

movement made in various quarters proved full of hollow phrases. The

Berlin Society adhered to its programme, and as this found no favor in

the eyes of the masses, it was to be ratified by the second Rabbinical

Convention held in Frankfort (July, 1845), as being in consonance with

Judaism.

This Assembly aroused greater excitement and fiercer passion than the

first, because, on the one hand, the Berlin Reform Union participated

in it, in order to infuse their own spirit or to effect its downfall,

whilst, on the other hand, a skillful leader of the orthodox party

temporarily joined it, in order to show how Judaism should be purified,

or to throw obstacles in the way, if the Reformers should seem to rush

to reckless extremes. The orthodox leader was Zachariah Frankel (born

1801, died 1875). He somewhat resembled Holdheim. Both were profoundly

learned in the Talmud, and both acquired their secular education when

advanced in years, but their points of dissimilarity were yet more

striking. In Holdheim's character the prominent features were his

innate or acquired love of scoffing at, and his utter contempt for, the

past. In Frankel one is struck by the moral earnestness which, together

with his warm-heartedness, rendered him worthy of respect by his true

regard for inherited forms, his conscientiousness in every matter, and

his firm but somewhat peculiar character. Holdheim loved the present

and the practical, Frankel the future and the ideal: the former strove

to erase from men's memories all traces of the Talmud and Rabbinical

Judaism, if not of Judaism altogether; whilst the latter justified and

glorified the Talmud. The main aim of Frankel's scientific activity was

to demonstrate that Talmudical tradition was correct, and that another

Talmud had been known even before ours. He sought traces of this

original tradition in the ancient Greek translation of the Pentateuch,

in the compositions of the two Judæo-Greek authors, Philo and Josephus,

and especially in non-Talmudical sources. Such comprehensive studies

were possible only in a man of his marvelous intellectual power and

wonderful constitution.

Although Frankel labored to maintain the glory of the Talmud and to

prove that reverence was due to Jewish antiquity, he was not averse

to religious reforms, nor was he blind to the necessities of modern

times. However, although he would not recognize the claim of an

individual to institute reforms, he was ready to appeal to a scientific

tribunal and the voice of the people, the whole Jewish world. He

did not desire to revive obsolete forms into a semblance of life,

even though they had formerly been of importance, and was willing

to abolish such existing customs as scientific inquiry pronounced

to be unjustified or hurtful. Frankel wished to see a conference

of rabbis, or, more correctly, of notables in the foremost rank of

Jewish learning, so that the chasm between the old and the new systems

might be bridged over. He therefore joined the assembly of rabbis at

Frankfort, hoping to counteract the eager desire for reform by the

weight of his name, which, owing to his distinguished position as a

writer, was already famous, and to aid in guarding against imprudent

measures, or at least in modifying them. Like Holdheim and Geiger, who

brought their programmes of reform with them, he brought his, and in it

he endeavored to reconcile antiquity with progress.

Harassed by the contending influences of Frankel and the reformers,

the conference grew vacillating. The first motion brought forward,

which was not wholly unexpected, that the Hebrew language should,

if possible, be eradicated from the minds and memories of the whole

Jewish race, obliged Frankel to sever his connection with the assembly

publicly, and the applause that his conduct called forth revealed the

fact that the Rabbinical Convention did not represent the entire body

of the German Jews, but only a small, active party. Unconsciously the

Frankfort Assembly had lost its balance. Its members were obliged to

dissemble before the Reform Society. They had to praise its actions, or

they would have lost its support. On the other hand, they did not dare

openly to espouse its hollow views, or they would have lost favor with

the congregations. A subterfuge helped them out of this perplexity;

they promised to support the efforts of the Reform Association to the

utmost, if the latter would "agree with the principles by which they

thought reform in Judaism ought to be guided," which sounded like a

hidden reproach.

The Reform Society was not repelled by this partial condemnation;

they knew that the leaders of the conference, especially Holdheim,

sided with them, and they deceived themselves with the delusion that

they were creating an essentially new form of Judaism. They formed

themselves into a congregation of about two hundred members, and

celebrated a consecration (April 2, 1846), when Holdheim as high priest

offered up clouds of incense. The congregation and their pastor were

well fitted for each other, and however much they resisted at first,

in the end they had to embrace in friendship. Thus a "German Jewish

Church" was established with a temple, a preacher, and a ritual of

its own. It seemed as if time had gone back some seventeen centuries,

and that they were in some town of Syria, or Asia Minor, or in Rome,

when, out of the conflict of ancient Judaism with semi-Christian and

semi-pagan elements, new congregations had arisen, retaining only faint

traces of Judaism. The new customs prevailed in the Reform Temple in

Berlin. Praying with uncovered heads especially marked it as of foreign

growth, and repulsed even some who otherwise approved of reform.

Hebrew was retained only in a few prayers and in the readings from the

Pentateuch. The Reform Temple, in fact, assumed a Germanic tinge, and

threw off its Jewish cosmopolitan character. The trace of its Jewish

origin was visible only in the divine service; in their mode of living

the members could not be recognized as the descendants of Jews. Perhaps

Holdheim was even more fanatically desirous of seeing every Jewish

custom abolished than his free-thinking congregants. He disregarded

not alone Rabbinical Judaism and the Talmud, but also duties ordained

by the Holy Scripture. But even in the reform community it was evident

that Jewish self-reliance had progressed greatly since the time of

Friedländer. The reform party had completely overcome its inclination

towards Christianity. Of its constituents, who number one thousand

souls, not one member nor any of their children joined the Christian

Church. They do not desire to be considered a separate sect, but as an

integral element of the Jewish race.

The Berlin reformers, however, remained isolated, and found no

following in Europe. In their own midst, a lukewarm spirit crept in,

sooner even than their opponents had anticipated. From want of visitors

to the house of prayer, the Sabbath worship had to be transferred to

Sunday, the same change that had been made by the Jewish Christians in

the first century. The question of Sunday worship cannot be discussed

here; it belongs to the immediate present. Such lukewarmness and lack

of interest should have convinced the founders, who lived to witness

them, that they had committed some mistake. To give an account of this

blunder in its entirety cannot be attempted in this history; it would

be overstepping the bounds of a record of events. One circumstance,

however, must not be forgotten, that the Berlin Society of Reform had

an antagonist in its vicinity. This enemy, of whom it had taken no

account, was the more dangerous, as he used his incisive eloquence and

every fiber of his being to protest against the new sect founded by

the Berlin Committee. This opponent was Michael Sachs, who was born at

Glogau, 1808, and died at Berlin at the beginning of 1864.

If bountiful nature had determined to create a thorough contrast to

Holdheim, she succeeded in Sachs. Externally, mentally, in appearance,

speech, attitude, and tendency of mind, in his learning and character,

even in habits and fancies--in everything the two men were so totally

opposed, that at first sight they could hardly be recognized as members

of the same race, devotees of the same calling. If Holdheim represented

the Jewish Polish spirit, strung to the highest pitch by Talmudical

dialectics, Michael Sachs called to mind the Jewish emigrants from the

Pyrenean peninsula, ennobled by classic forms and æsthetic teachings.

He resembled the noble Isaac Cardoso, or Isaac de Pinedo, or any one

of the numerous poets and scholars of Marrano lineage in Holland and

Italy, who combined deep devotion to Judaism with taste for poetical or

philological studies.

Owing to his peculiar nature, and the twofold influence exercised

upon his mind by Hebrew and Greek literature, Sachs became an ideal

personality, like Gebirol and Jehuda Halevi, who could flourish only

upon the clear heights of existence, and felt physical disgust at

everything of a mean character. There was no equivocation in him;

feeling, thought, and action all flowed from one source. He was,

therefore, mercilessly bitter against falsehood, ambiguity, and

hypocrisy, against all ostentation and pomposity, against noisy

hollowness and vanity; he scourged them with the lash of his words and

with his striking, brilliant wit. Noble-minded and self-sacrificing

to a fault, humble before God and before man as bearing the impress

of the Divine, Sachs was proudly repellent to all who in religion,

art, science, or public life use counterfeit coin, and conceal

their own self-seeking petty interests under the veil of a general,

large purpose. If Sachs in respect to convictions, character, moral

elevation, capacity for self-denial, and devotion to duty and his

faith, was thoroughly Jewish, in his deep love of beauty he was

Hellenic, and in his person contradicted the alleged impossibility of

this dual nature, which had been asserted by Heine. Whatever was ugly,

inharmonious, or ungainly, was as repugnant to him as the immoral and

the untrue.

Judaism was dearest to his heart, for he considered it a revelation

from the God who directs mankind, and the embodiment of all that is

exalted and sacred; and he would not allow it to be subtly explained

away by the philosophy of the times. Sachs did not fail to observe the

objectionable excrescences which had arisen on its surface, but he

knew their origin, and believed that time, which had produced, would

destroy them. He hesitated, however, to lay hands upon them, for fear

of injuring the sound, whilst removing the unsound and decayed parts.

He would not trust himself, nor any one, with the task of making

innovations. This suspicion of decisive reforms originated partly

in his aversion to active measures, which was one of his failings.

As he was only human he could not be without faults. Another error,

which avenged itself upon him and the party he represented, was his

unconquerable dislike to uniting for common action even with those who

shared his opinions. Sachs would have joyfully subordinated himself to

leaders whose loftiness of mind could have inspired him with respect.

But as he found no such characters among his contemporaries, he would

not attach himself to men in no way superior to himself, or who did

not even attain to his own height. Thus he was equally unfit to be a

party-leader and a partisan.

Sachs' great qualities and small failings forced his vocation upon him:

he was destined for the pulpit. The easy stream of his eloquence, his

depth of feeling, warmth of conviction, grace of gesture, the charm

that he exercised when interpreting the prophets and Agadists, the

brilliant wit at his command, the beauty of his voice and his smooth

diction--all combined to make him unsurpassed by the best preachers

of his time, and his only equal was Mannheimer. When standing in the

pulpit, Sachs appeared to be transfigured and oblivious of himself;

it seemed as if one of the prophets of God were exhorting the people,

or encouraging the despondent by his tidings of an ideal future. Even

those of his hearers who did not share his convictions were carried

away by his eloquence, and were compelled to yield him a tribute of

praise. Sachs, however, was a persuasive speaker not only in the

pulpit, but also in ordinary conversation. His speech overflowed with

the warmth of the sentiments which filled his heart. His impressive

words, which issued from the depths of his being, attracted many

faithful adherents to Judaism. Whosoever came into contact with him was

drawn into a magic circle, and absorbed somewhat of his convictions.

His influence was the greater because he never made an effort to

persuade; he simply spoke out what was in him. Nothing was more hateful

to him than the display of official dignity, sham devotional fervor,

and the pastoral airs copied from Christian clergymen.

In Prague, where he roused the German-speaking inhabitants, both

Christians and Jews, to a high pitch of enthusiasm, a happy chance

brought him into contact with Rapoport (1840-44), one of the founders

of Jewish science. An intimate friendship sprang up between these two

men, whose education had been conducted on such different lines, and

Sachs was introduced by his friend into the rich domain of Jewish

literature, which had hitherto been only in part accessible to him, as

his attention had been concentrated on the study of the Holy Scriptures

and on classical literature. His talent of vividly perceiving the

essential and excellent elements of a subject and storing them in

his brain, soon made him master of this new material, and enabled

him to impart it to a wide circle in a refined form. But Sachs never

became fully acquainted with the dialectics of the Talmud, which

was Holdheim's strong point, and this territory remained foreign to

him. Though he deeply lamented this deficiency in his knowledge, it

was no real defect, for such studies did not accord with the Hellenic

side of his nature, and would have blighted the blossoms of his

genius. As though destined to counteract the influence of the Jewish

German Church, which was to assume form in Berlin, and to become the

opposite pole to Holdheim's endless negations, he was elected by the

congregation of Berlin as preacher and rabbi. Here, by instilling into

the minds of his congregants the same Jewish confidence with which

he was inspired, and a feeling of righteous pride in belonging to so

ancient, noble, and cultured a race, he succeeded to some extent in

curing them of their inclination to Christianity, and the evil habit

of imitation to which they had so long been subject. This change in

thought, which affected the most remote circles, weakened the antipathy

towards the Jews of Berlin, which since the time of Friedländer

had prevailed in other communities. Sachs was included among the

most distinguished personages of the Prussian capital; the cultured

Christian world lavished attentions on him, although he did not seek

them. Had he given vigorous and energetic effect to his words, and

created permanent institutions--for which plenty of opportunity would

have been given him by the liberal Berlin community--perhaps the

reform congregation might not have arisen.

He combated the reform tendency with all his strength. In Holdheim

and his allies he beheld only perverters of Judaism and false

leaders of the people, and he openly expressed this opinion, for,

as he often remarked, "Against insult and harsh words I am hardened

and indifferent." From the pulpit he wielded the scourge of his

annihilating scorn against the Jewish German Church, which had so

limited the development of Judaism, that it could be contained in

a nutshell. But even his opponents admitted that he employed only

honorable weapons, the use of others being at variance with his noble

nature. He did great harm to the Reform Temple. Persons who had heard

Sachs' sermons were wearied by those in the reform synagogue. A

comparison between Sachs and his opposite, Holdheim, who was a contrast

to him in every way, always resulted in favor of the former. Whilst

the Temple where Holdheim preached became more and more deserted, the

synagogue in which Sachs officiated became more crowded week after week.

As Sachs performed great services in elevating and strengthening Jewish

self-respect, so also he promoted Jewish knowledge. His contributions

to the latter touch the form rather than the essence. In fact, he

merely popularized Jewish subjects, and rendered them accessible

to educated Christians. Sachs did not indeed promulgate novel,

epoch-making truths, or discover new facts. Nor was he a poetical

artist who could create brilliant pictures of ideal worlds. There was

more poetry in his life and teachings than in his verses. His refined

perceptions enabled him to recognize and reproduce the slightest shades

in the beauties which other artists had created, and he idealized

what other inquirers had discovered. The most decided bent of his

intellect was towards the exegetical interpretation of Holy Writ.

His fervent love of Judaism and its ancient scriptures, his profound

knowledge of Hebrew, which was the language of his heart, and finally

his delicate æsthetic feeling for philology, were all displayed in his

exegetical work. Early in life Sachs conceived the idea, to which he

ever remained true, of restoring to the Hebrew Scriptures their pure

and original sense, and freeing them from all accretions and blemishes.

Inspired by the example of Rückert, "the poet of the East and West,

the learned master in translation and exposition," he commenced with

the Psalms, which might have been the outpourings of his own pious

heart. Afterwards, assisted by various fellow-workers, Sachs translated

several books of Holy Scripture in an admirable style to form a "Bible

for Israelites." But as he worked more with his heart than his brain,

his biblical exegesis was wanting in a firm basis. The task of opening

up new paths in this direction fell to the lot of Christian scholars.

Sachs took an active part in excavating the buried figures of the

Jewish past, cleansing them from disfiguring incrustations, and placing

them in their proper light. Three periodicals were particularly devoted

to this purpose--the "Kerem Chemed" and the "Zion" in Hebrew, and

the "Orient" in German. Young and old assisted in erecting a Jewish

temple of fame, and contributions flowed in from all parts of Europe.

The "forties" were especially prolific in the cultivation of Jewish

science. It was not pedantic scholarship, but their heart that urged

Jewish authors to bring forward clear proof that Judaism, in all its

ramifications, went hand in hand with civilization. The Judæo-Spanish

epoch exercised special attraction upon Jewish inquirers. It showed

what the Jews had accomplished, and could accomplish in wealth of

thought and beauty of form. Jewish science at the same time was to

serve as an apology to the detractors of Jews and Judaism, and as an

ideal for arousing emulation. The brilliant Spanish epoch was known

to Jewish scholars alone, and to them only in rough fragments. Sachs

undertook to reconstruct from these fragments an organic, beautiful

whole, and by his eloquent language to attract those who had no

religious interest in the subject. His "Religious Poetry of the Jews in

Spain" (1845) offers more than the title indicates. Sachs attractively

describes the series of the products of Jewish genius, from the time

"when in terrible agony the limbs were torn from the living body,"

after the destruction of the Jewish center by the Romans, until the

flourishing period of neo-Hebraic poetry in Spain. The attention of the

cultured world was directed by Sachs' work to the wealth and beauty

of Jewish literature in the Middle Ages, of which hitherto it had had

no suspicion; even Heine was seized with admiration, and employed his

golden pen in its cause.

At the same time the literature of the mediæval Jews in France and

Germany, and of the Jewish poets of Provence was treated with copious

detail, but in a style fitted for a learned audience. Zunz, the author

of this work, justly rebuked his contemporaries for their contemptuous

neglect of this branch of literature, to which Christian students of

the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries had devoted so much attention.

Continuous devotion to the literature of the Middle Ages threatened

to become too one-sided. That epoch, with its productions, was after

all only the offspring of the national activity of bygone days, and

the grandchild or great-grandchild of a still more important period.

This obscure question, the dual origin of Judaism, from the Bible

and the Talmud, was clearly illumined by the light of investigation

through Jewish science in the "forties." The Talmud lay under a ban,

and was treated with most offensive contempt. It was the scapegoat upon

which all the guilt and misery of the Jews were laid. Like a leper it

was shunned by respectable investigators. But this did not last; the

question was raised whether the very writings which had served as the

basis for Christianity had not been inter-penetrated with Talmudic

elements. The proof of the affirmative answer to this question was

boldly undertaken by Frankel. Yet more important was the fact that it

was made apparent that the strong side of the Talmud lies in its ideas

of justice and their development. The superiority of the Talmudic penal

code over the legislation of ancient times was established. The result

of a scientific treatment of the Talmud was that Judaism had no cause

to be ashamed of it.

But Judaism, together with its followers, remained an undecipherable

hieroglyphic, a dark mystery, which one century transmitted to the

other unsolved, so long as the "original rock from which it had been

hewn, the depths from which it had been hollowed" continued to be

unknown. Only a thorough knowledge of its primary sources, its sacred

scriptures, could supply the key to this riddle. Centuries had elapsed,

and the solution was not yet found. After Holy Writ, the mother of two

or three religions, had so long been deified by the masses that it was

regarded as "the all in all," and its explanations of life, nature, and

history had been eagerly accepted, it had fallen into contempt since

the middle of the eighteenth century. It shared the fate of the Jewish

race. The rationalistic school indeed paid a good deal of attention

to Hebrew sources, but only with the intention of diminishing their

value. Eichhorn, Gesenius, Von Bohlen, De Wette, and Tuch were filled

with antipathy to the Jews, and were thereby hindered from arriving at

a correct understanding of the Old Testament. The clericals Tholuck

and Hengstenberg sought vainglory therein, and what they discovered

they claimed for Christianity. In Jewish circles there were only three

men who occupied themselves in a scientific manner with the exposition

of the Scriptures, namely, Krochmal, Luzzatto, and Sachs; but they

were timid, they feared pressing too close to the borders of Sinai. A

man of childlike mind was the first to raise the veil, to comprehend

the language of the Prophets and Psalmists, and to reveal the ancient

history of the Jewish people in its true light. With the appearance

of "The Prophets of the Old Testament," and "The History of the People

of Israel" (1843-1847) by Heinrich Ewald, a new path was opened up for

the comprehension of the Hebrew genius and people. The riddle so long

obscured approached its solution by the discovery of the key.

"The nations of antiquity, the Babylonians, Indians, Egyptians,

Phoenicians, Greeks, and Romans, each under favorable

circumstances, pursued only one particular object, till

at length they reached an eminence not attained by later

generations.... The people of Israel, on the other hand, from

the beginning of its historical consciousness, has so clearly

kept in view its ultimate goal, and so strongly striven to

attain it, that it could not lose it from sight for any length

of time, and after any momentary pause it pursued it only

the more perseveringly. Its goal is perfect religion.... The

history of this ancient people is the history of true religion

showing every stage of development up to perfection."

This new promising school has, as its fundamental idea, that the race

which owed its origin to the seed of Abraham is actually and truly

a "people of God," that has given the world truths of salvation in

abundance. The unfolding of these truths is manifested in the course of

the history and in the literature of the Israelites. It is certainly a

grave error of this school, the first to unravel the artistic web, to

imagine that the last page of the history of God's people was written

eighteen centuries ago, and that since that period it has only led

a shadowy existence. Great memories bring about resurrections, and

what people has a grander or more brilliant past than the Jewish, or

Israelite, or Hebrew people? But if this people is still to accomplish

work in the world's history, its chains must be removed, not only those

which weigh down the limbs, but also those which confine the mind. The

nation had to be freed, only then was it possible to find out whether

it would continue an independent existence, or whether it would succumb

in the conflict of races.

Unexpectedly the hour of freedom for the European Jews dawned with the

revolutions of February and March (1848) in Paris, Vienna, Berlin,

in Italy, and other countries. An intoxicating desire for liberty

came over the nations of Europe, more overpowering and marvelous

even than the movement in 1830. With imperious demands the people

confronted their princes and rulers. Among the demands was that of the

emancipation of the Jews. In all popular assemblies and proclamations,

the despised Jews of yesterday were admitted into the bond of "Liberty,

Equality, and Fraternity." What the most sanguine had never ventured to

hope for suddenly took place. Jews were elected into parliaments with a

vote in the reconstruction of states. A member of the Prussian Landtag

had expressed aversion to the idea that a Jew should one day sit beside

him, and be able to vote. The following day it actually came to pass,

for Riesser and Veit took their seats next to this very man, in order

to consider the reconstruction of Germany, whilst Mannheimer, together

with Meisels, a rabbi of the old school, clad in Polish garb, helped to

reorganize Austria. An assembly of Protestant clergymen had declared

that the conversion of a Christian to Judaism was a sign of insanity or

idiocy, but within a short space of time, the laws were compelled to

concede freedom even to that creed.

During the stormy years of the Revolution and those which followed,

newly-established constitutions in Germany were plentiful as

blackberries. When, however, the first panic of terror had passed

away, and the privileges of nations had become greatly restricted, the

emancipation of the Jews was nevertheless taken as a matter of course

(even in such cases where a constitution had been forced upon the

people), as though this unqualified "Vox populi vox dei" should not be

in any way infringed.

It is probable that the partisans of the reaction, as also their

rulers, did not intend to realize those paragraphs in the conditions,

but the written words had unexpectedly worked like a magic rune.

On England alone the storm-year had no effect. The disabilities

imposed upon the Jews of that country were gradually put aside as

occasion offered. Distinguished personages were elected as aldermen

and sheriffs. But the last link in the chain, that of opposition to

their admission into Parliament, had not yet been removed. When Baron

Lionel de Rothschild was elected as representative of the City, in

London, a Bill to confirm this election was repeatedly presented (in

the years 1847-51), but after passing through the House of Commons

with a majority, it was each time thrown out by the Peers. Although

their opponents conceded that the Jews were worthy of admission to

Parliament, they were excluded by the formulary of the prescribed oath,

"on the true faith of a Christian." Great was the sensation created

when David Salomons, after having filled the office of Alderman, and

on being elected member for Greenwich, was daring enough to enter the

House, and on three occasions to take part in the debates. For this

conduct he was fined £1,500, being £500 for each breach of the law. The

absurdity of such exclusion became the more striking, when the High

Court of Appeal confirmed the heavy penalty (1852) as justifiable by

law.

From that time the Liberal party determined to effect the abolition

of the form of oath. As no prejudice prevailed in England against the

descendants of the Patriarchs, but, on the contrary, a tendency existed

in their favor, it was to be foreseen that this last limitation would

also disappear. In fact, a few years later a resolution was passed

in the House of Peers, that Jews should be admitted without taking

the prescribed oath, and this vote was immediately approved by Queen

Victoria (1858). Since that time several Jews have occupied the post of

Lord Mayor, Baron Nathaniel M. de Rothschild has been created a Peer,

and the late Sir George Jessel, Master of the Rolls.

Meanwhile Judaism has made marked progress in another direction. A home

for Jewish science was founded in Breslau (1854). It was a matter of

pressing necessity, although the want was not universally felt. The

march of progress surprised Judaism before the needful measures for

remodeling its religious life had been determined upon. Talmudical

schools, even in Russia and Hungary, had collapsed for want of

support. The rabbis were useless in this emergency. Some who adhered

to the old forms found that the congregations no longer appreciated

their importance; others who visited the universities chiefly studied

Christian theology, but were at a loss how to acquire Jewish knowledge.

This knowledge existed only in an embryonic state. There certainly were

various learned periodicals, both in Hebrew and in modern tongues,

which treated of Jewish scientific subjects, but these afforded only

fragmentary information. The teachers of Judaism needed first of all to

learn, what is Judaism? What justification is there for it in the new

phase of the world's history? They did not know, and could only grope

about blindly. They were required to teach, and had not yet acquired

the rudiments of the subject. Their precious heritage, the Scriptures,

was not sufficiently prized, and only a few specialists, Nachman

Krochmal, Michael Sachs, and Samuel David Luzzatto, occupied themselves

with this study, and even they threw light only upon certain points.

Jewish theological students, unable to drink at the pure source of the

word, listened to Christian exponents, and were led astray.

Jewish religious philosophy had still fewer representatives, viz.,

Solomon Steinheim and Solomon Munk. It is true that there existed a

species of theological seminary (which was recognized by the state)

for French-Jewish students in Metz, and for Italian-Jewish students

in Padua, but the instruction given was not based on scientific

principles. It was, therefore, an event of no mean importance when

a noble donor, Jonas Frankel, determined to supply the necessary

funds for establishing a Jewish theological college. Fortunately, the

undertaking was organized by men who stood at the summit of scientific

knowledge--Zachariah Frankel[A] (died 1875), Jacob Bernays (died

1882), and Emanuel Joel (died 1890). At first they were undecided

as to the plan of study to be pursued, and as to the division of

subjects, and the distinction to be made between the chief branches and

subsidiary matters, and they realized the saying that "one learns by

teaching." In a comparatively short space of time the chief posts in

the more important communities in Germany, Austria, and Hungary were

occupied by students from the Breslau College. So universally was the

necessity recognized of having schools, that institutions for the study

of Jewish theology were founded in Buda-Pesth, Berlin (two), Amsterdam,

Cincinnati, and, in a modified form, in London.

[A] The author of this work was, together with Frankel, one

of the original founders. (Note by the Author.)

There is no more striking example of the transformation effected

in Judaism itself than by comparing the various institutions, even

those conducted in the true orthodox spirit, with the Talmud Torah

schools (Beth ha-Midrash) in the Russian, and some in the Hungarian

communities. They contrast with each other both internally and

externally like an architectural structure with a mud-hut.[B]

[B] A Theological-Jewish Faculty, an offshoot of the

University, and a Jewish Academy are still needed. (Note

by the Author.)

The occasional recurrence of persecutions against the Jews awakened

a feeling of brotherhood unexampled in Jewish history since the

separation of Israel from Judah. The chief impulse to this feeling

arose from the action taken by Pope Pius IX.

A Christian servant living at Bologna with a Jewish family named

Mortara secretly took a sick child to be baptized. Some years later

this fact came under the cognizance of the priests. Thereupon the boy

Mortara, then six years old, was carried away from his parents, by the

officers of the papacy, and placed in a monastery (1858). All steps

taken by the father to regain possession of his son were useless.

Equally fruitless were the efforts of various governments and even of

Emperor Napoleon III, who protested against this act as one likely

to injure the papacy, if in the nineteenth century it countenanced

so barbarous a proceeding as the abduction of a child. Pius IX at a

former time had shown liberal tendencies, but he afterwards revived the

narrow-minded course of action which prevailed in the Middle Ages, and

even commanded the Roman Jews to be shut up within the dreary walls of

the Ghetto. Against all representations Pius IX obstinately maintained

his reply of "non-possumus." The boy Mortara was kept hidden away, and

brought up in the ways of Catholicism; he eventually learned to curse

his parents and his race. But the papacy reaped no advantage. The loss

of Rome, or of the so-called Papal States, followed soon.

This event and similar acts of intolerance induced six noble young

Frenchmen to establish a sort of brotherhood for bringing help to

those of their co-religionists who were oppressed and suffering. By

their united efforts they endeavored to ameliorate the condition of

Jews who lived under intolerant rulers, and to spread the advantages

of education amongst those in need of it. These men were Aristides

Astruc, collaborator to the chief rabbi of Paris; Isidore Cohn,

professor of the rabbinical college; Jules Caballo, engineer; Narcisse

Léven, lawyer; Eugene Masuel, professor at the University of Paris;

and Charles Netter, merchant, only two of whom (Astruc and Léven) are

still living. They founded an institution which bears the title of

the "Alliance Israélite Universelle" (1860), having as its motto, "All

Israelites are responsible the one for the other." This institution

met with a cordial reception, and members joined from all parts of the

globe. The accessions continued to increase, especially after Adolf

Crémieux became president, and in 1873 the number of subscribers had

attained the high figure of 12,526.

In the United States, where in the year 1775-6, after the War of

Independence, the republican form of government was adopted, the

equality of the Jews was established as a matter of course. At first

there were only a few Jewish immigrants in New York and Newport, but

owing to the facilities offered to all industrial pursuits and every

species of commercial activity, the number of American Jews rapidly

increased. They also formed themselves into a body for the protection

of their less favored brethren, under the title of the "Union of

American Hebrew Congregations." They earnestly desired to promote the

welfare of the Jewish communities, built numerous synagogues, and

still continue to take a lively interest in all that concerns their

brethren in Europe. In the year 1878 the Jewish-American population

numbered about 250,000 souls, and maintained 278 synagogues. In these

places of worship the reform ritual is chiefly followed. There being no

communal traditions to abolish, the changes which in Europe could be

brought about only after severe struggles, were easily introduced. Even

so radical a reform as that of transferring the divine service from

the Sabbath to Sunday, which had been originated by the insignificant

Reform Congregation in Berlin, was copied in various American

congregations. The warm sympathy displayed towards Judaism and the Jews

by the Americans is to be highly commended, and to such sympathy the

Union owed its origin.

The English Jews, to whom the task of leading their brethren seems to

have been allotted, were not backward in uniting for the promotion

of the well-being of their race. At the instigation of two excellent

men, Abraham Benisch, editor of the "Jewish Chronicle" (died 1878),

and Albert Löwy, one of the ministers of the Reform Congregation

in London (whose unassuming character would be wounded were he to

be praised according to his deserts), an institution was founded

(1871) in connection with the Alliance Israélite, and was called the

"Anglo-Jewish Association." Although the number of English Jews is

comparatively small (about forty thousand in London and barely thirty

thousand in other towns and the Colonies), yet the members of the

Association number four thousand. Active correspondence is maintained

through its members between Australia, Canada, India, Gibraltar, and

the parent body.

In Vienna, also, through the efforts of Joseph Wertheimer, Ignatz

Kuranda, and Moritz Goldschmidt, an association was established under

the name of the "Israelitische Allianz." Their main object was to work

hand in hand with the "Alliance," but the primary task undertaken by

them was to promote an improved condition of affairs amongst the Jews

of Galicia. The Jews living in this province of Austria, who number

about one million, are for the greater part in the lowest stage of

culture. Owing to poverty and the heavy labor required to cultivate so

barren a soil, they hardly made further progress than enables them to

learn their prayers. Even those who possess the necessary ability and

leisure to acquire European culture are kept back by the perversions of

Neo-Chassidism, which possesses many followers amongst them. To raise

them from their degraded condition is the praiseworthy object of the

Viennese Alliance. The Alliance counts about five thousand members.

This union amongst the flower of Judaism for common action, besides its

civilizing tendency, has also a defensive purpose, for the prevention

of detraction and degradation. It could not, however, have been

foreseen at the outset, that so wide a scope would have been presented

for the work undertaken.

After the Jews had been emancipated in Western Europe, as they were in

America, they labored unceasingly at their own improvement, and could

soon point out distinguished co-religionists in the highest ranks

in every profession--crown lawyers, councilors of state, members

of Parliament, musicians, authors, academicians, and in France even

generals.

The Jews of Western Europe became so amalgamated with their

surroundings, that timid minds began to fear that Israel might be

submerged in the current. But suddenly they were confronted by a bitter

enemy who endeavored to exclude and oust them from the positions to

which they had attained. This enemy all but challenged them to recall

their past, prove their own value in opposition to their detractors,

and show that though they are a peculiar people, this peculiarity is as

much an agent in the world's history, as a product of it. This enemy,

the bitterest Anti-Semitism, the offspring of delusion and falsehood,

robs rejuvenated Israel of its peace, plays an active part in the

immediate present, and unfortunately cannot as yet be relegated to the

domains of History.

THE END.

RETROSPECT.

The history of a people has here been narrated, which, dating from

primæval times, continues to possess all the vitality necessary for

its continued existence. Having entered the arena of history more than

three thousand years ago, it shows no desire to depart therefrom.

This people, then, is both old and young. In its features the traces

of hoary age remain indelibly impressed; and yet these very features

are fresh and youthful, as if they were but of recent development.

A nation, a relic of ages immemorial, which has witnessed the rise

and decay of the most ancient empires, and which still continues to

hold its place in the present day, deserves, for this fact alone, the

closest attention. It must be borne in mind that the subjects of this

History--the Hebrews, Israelites, or Jews--did not spend their

existence in seclusion and contemplative isolation. Far from it! During

all epochs they were dragged along in the fierce whirl of passing

events. They struggled much, and suffered severely. The life of the

people during more than three thousand years received many shocks and

injuries. It still bears the trace of its many wounds, while no one can

deny its right to the crown of martyrdom; and nevertheless it lives

to the present day! It has accomplished much useful work, a fact that

is gainsaid by none except pessimists and malignant cavilers. Had it

only succeeded in disillusioning the cultured portion of mankind from

those deceptions of idolatry which end in moral and social corruption,

it would deserve special attention for this alone; but it has rendered

far greater services to the human race. Whence came the high culture,

on which the enlightened modern nations pride themselves? Surely they

themselves have not originated it. They are simply the fortunate heirs

of an ancient heritage, which they have turned to good account and have

augmented.

There were but two nations of creative mind who originated this

culture and raised humanity from the slough of barbarity and savagery.

These two were the Hellenic and the Israelite people. There was

no third race of coadjutors. The Romans, indeed, introduced and

transmitted far-reaching social rules and a high degree of military

science; but only when they had attained to a servile stage did they

perform services comparable to those of the insect, which carries the

fertilizing pollen to the receptive stigma. The Greeks and the Hebrews

were the sole originators of a higher culture. If the modern Roman,

German, and Sclavonic nations, both on this side and on the other

side of the ocean, could be despoiled of what they received from the

Greeks and the Israelites, they would be utterly destitute. This idea,

however, is a mere fancy; the nations can no longer be deprived of

what they once borrowed, and what has since then become welded into

their very nature. The participation of the Greeks in the regeneration

of civilized races is conceded without a dissenting voice and without

a suspicion of envy. It is freely admitted that the Greeks scattered

abroad the budding blossoms of art, and the ripe fruits of a higher

intelligence; that they opened up the domain of the beautiful, and

diffused the brightness of Olympic ideas. It is also acknowledged

that their intellectual genius found its embodiment in their whole

literature, and that from this literature and the surviving relics of

their ideals in the fine arts, there still issues forth new life-giving

energy. These classical Greeks are now long dead, and to the departed,

after-comers are prone to be just. Jaundiced malignity and hatred are

silent at the grave of the illustrious man; his merits as enumerated

there are, in fact, as a rule overrated.

Now this aspect differs in the case of the other creative race. Just

because of their continued existence, the merits and moral attainments

of the Hebrews are not generally acknowledged, or are subjected to

cavil--their qualities are depreciated under wrong designations,

with the view of blackening their original character, or of denying

altogether the efficacy of that character, and, although candid

thinkers admit that the Hebrews introduced the monotheistic principle

amongst the nations, and a superior code of morality, yet there are

but few who appreciate the wide bearing of these admissions. Even

deep thinkers do not carefully consider how it came to pass that the

one nation died out notwithstanding its dominant master minds and its

rich talents, while the other nation, so often near unto death, still

continues to exist in the world of man, and has even succeeded in

regaining its pristine youthfulness. Notwithstanding the fascination

of the mythology of the Greeks, the loveliness of their productions in

art, and their vivifying wisdom, these qualities proved of no avail

in the troublous days when the Macedonian phalanxes and the Roman

legions, instead of allowing them to behold the joyous side of life,

caused them to experience the seamy side. Then they despaired of their

bright Olympus, and at best only retained sufficient courage to resort

to suicide. In misfortune a nation displays characteristics similar to

those of the individual. The Greeks were not gifted with the power of

living down their evil fortune, or of remaining true to themselves when

dispossessed of their territories; and whether in a foreign country or

in their own land they lost their mental balance, and became merged in

the medley of barbaric nations. What caused this total collapse? There

was a potent reason for the extinction of the Romans, the mightiest

nation of the ancient world, and likewise a reason for the extinction

of their various powerful predecessors, for all of them relied too

much on the sword. Even among nations this law of retribution holds

good, "He who relies on the sword becomes the prey of the sword." But

how was it that the Greeks succumbed to an analogous fate? The answer

is, that they had no decided and clearly defined mission. The Hebrew

people, on the other hand, had to fulfill the life-task by which it

was held together, and by which in direst misfortune it was comforted

and preserved. A nation cognizant of its mission, becomes strong and

consolidated, and forbears to spend its existence in futile dreaming

and scheming. From a national standpoint it was the mission of the

Israelites to work out their self-discipline, to overcome or regulate

their selfish desires, to gain the full force of resignation, or, to

use the words of the prophet, "to circumcise the heart." Abstinence,

regarded from a religious standpoint, induced them to exercise

self-restraint, and was combined with duties which sustained the health

of body and soul. The history of humanity bears evidence to this. All

the nations that polluted themselves by profligacy, and grew callous

through violence, were doomed to destruction. Not so with the Israelite

race. In the midst of a debauched and sinful world and amid vices with

which, in its beginnings, the Jews were also infected, they yet freed

themselves, they raised on high an exalted standard of moral purity,

and thus formed a striking contrast to other nations.

The practical theory of life amongst ancient nations was intimately

connected with their conception of the Divine; the one implied the

other. Was their perverted morality the result of perverted theology,

or its original cause? Whatever may have been the relationship between

cause and effect, the injurious consequences remained the same.

Polytheism, however poetically described, produces discord, passion,

and hate. In a council of gods, there must be strife. Even when the

objects of worship are of a dual nature, the result is an inimical

contrast--one god of creation and one of destruction, one god of

light and one of darkness. The creative divinity is usually divided

into two sexes, and is endowed with all the frailties of sex. Although

it has been said that man formed his gods according to his own image,

yet when theology was once systematized, morality was demanded from

the worshipers of the gods, who nevertheless became as sinful as the

images which they adored. The people of Israel proclaimed a God at

one with Himself, and unchangeable; a holy God, who requires holiness

from mankind, the Creator of heaven and earth, of light and darkness.

He, though mighty and exalted, is yet near to humanity, especially

protecting the poor and the oppressed, a jealous but not a vengeful

God, to whom the moral conduct of man is not a matter of indifference,

although he is a God of mercy, and regards all mankind with love as the

work of His hands. To this God evil is an abomination, for He is a God

of justice, a Father to the orphan, and a Defender of the widow. These

words of world-wide import penetrated deep into the heart of man, and,

at a later period, were the means of hurling the beautiful gods of the

heathen into the dust.

The thought and desire that men should be equal before the law as

before God, that the stranger should have equal rights with the native,

also grew from the idea of man's resemblance to the divine image, and

became established amongst the Israelites as a fundamental law of the

state. This was the first recognition of the rights of man, for, among

the nations of old, even the leaders of civilization never conceded

that right which has now become an established rule. If a stranger,

wrecked on a foreign shore, was no longer offered up as a sacrifice,

as in the earliest times, he was nevertheless placed under exceptional

laws, and only considered to be a degree higher than a slave. This

harshness towards the stranger, to the disgrace of nations, actually

survived the destruction of the ancient world.

Israel's dominant idea became of far-reaching importance in its ethical

tendency. It is by no means a matter of indifference in the moral

conduct of man, as regards both great and small things, whether the

earth, the scene of action, is governed by one Power or by several

mutually antagonistic forces. The one conception ensures unity and

peace, the other unveils a picture of dissension and discord, and

leads to barbarism. The likeness of man to God--in opposition to the

blasphemous idea of God's likeness to man--and the train of thought

arising from monotheism impresses man with self-respect and with a

regard for his fellow-man. Thereby the life of even the humblest of men

is placed under religious and moral protection.

Is the abandonment of the new-born infant by its parents a crime?

Amongst the ancients, even amongst the Greeks, it was not so regarded.

The mountains resounded with the wailings of female children, and the

rivers bore along the corpses of the little creatures, whom their

parents (finding it inconvenient to rear them) had cast into the depths

of the streams without a pang or regret. The ancients felt no prick

of conscience at sighs of a murdered infant, and still less would a

tribunal of justice demur at such crime. To kill a slave was of no more

consequence than to slay an animal in the chase. Why, then, do cultured

persons now shudder at the idea of such misdeeds? Because the people of

Israel proclaimed the law, "Thou shalt not kill, for in the image of

God has man been created. Thou shalt not take even a young life, nor

one whose existence is passed in servitude." It has been asserted that

man's intellect has made giant strides, whilst his moral culture has

remained far behind, or has progressed but little since primæval times.

But it must be remembered that the barbarous state of man declined much

later than his ignorance.

Slumbering conscience and a repugnance to crime was aroused only at a

later period, and this awakening was due to the people of Israel. Still

less did the ancient nations recognize chastity of conduct, for they

were sunk in the depths of vice and unchastity. Whilst the nations were

still at the pinnacle of their greatness the Jewish Sybilline poets

repeatedly uttered warnings that the sinful nations would be given

over to death, because of their unnatural vices, their atrocities, and

perverted worship, and the abominations which had ensued in consequence.

But they only scoffed at the warning voice, continued to pursue their

evil ways, and were destroyed. Their arts and their wisdom could not

save them from death. This shows that the Israelite nation alone

and solely effected the emancipation of man by proclaiming holiness

of life, the equal rights of aliens and home-born, and all that is

included in the term humanity. It is not superfluous to point out

that the foundation-stone of culture, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor

as thyself," was laid by this people. Who prayed that the poor might

be raised from the dust; the suffering, the orphan, and the helpless

from the dunghill? The Israelite people. Who declared that everlasting

peace was the holy ideal of the future, "when one nation should no

longer draw sword against the other, and should no longer learn the art

of war"? Israel's prophets. That people has been called a wandering

mystery, but it should rather be called a wandering revelation. It has

revealed the secret of life, and the art of all arts--how a nation

may guard itself against being given up to destruction.

This people cannot be charged with having introduced

self-mortification, self-torture, and a gloomy view of life, and as

having thus paved the way for that monkish asceticism which covers the

brightness of life with the pall of death. Quite the contrary; all the

nations of antiquity except the Israelites laid especial importance

on death, made immolations at the graves of the departed, and gave

themselves up to pious melancholy. These were the mysteries which, like

all exaggerations, passed to an opposite extreme, and ended in the

excesses of orgies. The gods themselves did not escape contact with

death; they had to make a death-journey, and here and there might be

seen the grave, or the Calvary, of some god. The Israelite conception,

which revered in God "the source of life," places so much value on

life, that it seeks to banish from the circle of holiness all that

recalls death. So little is thought of what lies within and beyond the

grave, that the Israelites have been reproached with having indulged in

the enjoyments of life. And this is true.

The prophets knew no higher ideal than that the earth should be filled

with the knowledge of God as the sea covers its bed. Life is highly

prized, but it must be a pure and holy life. Only after a long and

unhappy course of history did a gloomy and ascetic theory of life creep

in, and produce a sad and misanthropic order, which stamped out pure

gladness as a sin, and regarded the earth as a valley of tears, and to

this condition it actually became, to some extent, reduced.

The Israelite people have nothing in common with their kindred, who

are called Semites, whether in their self-torturing madness in honor

of one god, or in their dissipated excesses in honor of another god.

The Israelites were severed from the Semitic tribes by hard discipline,

and they weaned themselves from the perversions of their alien kinsmen.

It is likewise erroneous to endeavor sophistically to attribute the

peculiarities of Israel to the Semitic character, or to consider the

relationship of the two nations as that of two descendants from one

stock. The Israelites and other Orientals, through divergent causes,

are the result of a mixed union, and both have lost many traits of

their inherited nature.

The Israelites decidedly have great faults; they have greatly erred,

and have been severely punished for their shortcomings. History

describes and reveals these errors, their origin, their eventful

results, and the consequences which resulted from them. Many of these

faults were acquired, and were to some extent the effect of their

surroundings; but there were also peculiar and original features in

the character of this people. Why should they be more perfect than all

other nationalities, not one of which has ever attained to perfection

in all directions?

Those who eagerly endeavor to show the failings and shortcomings of the

Israelite people as through a magnifying glass unconsciously pay them

high honor by making greater demands upon them than upon other nations.

It is a decided defect on the part of the Israelites that they left

behind neither colossal buildings nor architectural memorials. Possibly

the race did not possess any talent for architecture; or perhaps, owing

to its ideals of equality, the kings and warriors were not so highly

esteemed that it was considered necessary to erect in their memory

stupendous palaces, pyramids, or marble monuments. The hovels of the

poor ranked higher. The Israelites did not even erect a temple to God

(Solomon's Temple being built by the Phoenicians), for the heart was

God's temple. The Israelites neither sculptured nor painted gods, for

they did not consider the Deity a subject for pleasant pastime, but

gave Him pious and earnest devotion. Nor did the Israelites excel in

artistic epics, and still less in drama or comedy. This may have been

a want in their idiosyncrasy, and is also connected with their strong

distaste for mythological births and scandals. They evinced a similar

dislike to all dramas, public games, and theatrical displays. However,

in compensation, they had poetical conceptions which adequately reflect

the ideals of life, as these are described in the Psalms and in the

poetically fashioned eloquence of the prophets. Both possess this trait

in common, that their fundamental quality is truth and not fiction,

whereby poetry instead of being a mere toy and plaything for the

imagination, became the instrument for attaining ethical culture.

Their literature, though it does not treat of the drama, is yet full

of dramatic vigor; and, if not actually humorous, is nevertheless

replete with irony, and from its ideal pedestal proudly contemplates

all delusions. The Israelite prophets and psalmists, whilst developing

a beautiful poetic form, never sacrificed the truth of the subject for

the sake of style. The Israelites also introduced a historical style

of their own, which pictured events according to the canons of truth,

and without any endeavor to excuse or hide the shortcomings of heroes,

kings, or nations. This peculiar Hebrew literature, of which no other

nation on earth can show the like (at best only an imitation), through

its excellence has achieved many moral conquests. The nations capable

of culture could not withstand the warmth and truth which pervade

these writings. If Greek literature elevated the dominion of art and

its perceptions, Hebrew literature idealized the domain of holiness

and morality. The history of a nation which has achieved so much has a

decided right to full appreciation.

Judged superficially, the course of history from the entry of the

Israelites into Canaan until far into the times of the kings may

easily give rise to misconception, for the most striking events seem

to bear a political character. Invasions, battles, and conquests,

occupy the foreground of history. We behold on the scene leaders of

nations, heroes, kings, and generals, treaties are made and broken,

whilst the prevailing intellectual activity is hardly perceptible

in the background. The hero-judges who first form the subjects of

history--Ehud, Gideon, his son Abimelech, and especially Jephthah

and Samson--evince so few of the national characteristics that they

might equally well pass for Canaanites, Philistines, or Moabites. Of

Samson it has been asserted that he is cast in the mould of the Syrian

Hercules. Most of the kings, and also their sons and courtiers, acted

as arbitrarily as if there had been no code of law to set limits to

their despotic will, and as if they had never even heard of the Ten

Commandments of Sinai.

For centuries the people wore the bonds of wild idolatry, and differed

only in a slight degree from the heathen world which surrounded it. Was

the race in its beginnings actually of no importance? Did the people

for a considerable time keep pace with its Semitic kinsmen, and only

at a given period become stamped with those peculiarities which caused

it to contrast so strongly with its neighbors? Did not Sinai illumine

its very cradle? or was this fact stated to have been the case only

in after-days and by historians? Sceptics have said as much, but the

fragments of Israelite poetry, dating from primæval times, give the lie

to this assertion. Several centuries before the inception of kingly

rule, and in the first days of the hero-judges, in the days of Deborah,

"the mother in Israel," a poet sang of the marvels of the revelation;

at Sinai he described the people of God as contrasting strikingly with

their environment, and ascribed their lapses to the fact that they

had followed "false gods," and thereby fallen away from their widely

different origin. Even if one were inclined to doubt the veracity

of history, yet credence must be given to poetry as a trustworthy

eye-witness. It is not to be denied, that the spiritual birth of the

Israelite people was simultaneous with their actual birth, and that

Sinai was the scene of the one event, as Egypt was of the other; and

that the Ark of the Covenant with the sacred Ten Commandments was its

faithful attendant from the earliest days.

The nucleus of the people's faith in God and in their mission, the

fundamental doctrine graven on the tablets of stone, were of hoary

antiquity, coeval with their representatives. Men especially chosen,

and having no connection with the work-a-day actions and turmoil of the

people, like the Cherubim at Shiloh, were to shield the sanctuary. This

sanctuary only apparently bears a religious stamp, is only apparently

theocratic, but its essence is contained in the laws of morality. God

is the origin of the doctrine, but not its end, which lies rather in

individual and communal life and its legitimate demands.

In this law God is the Holy Will, determining whatever is ethical and

good. He is the sacred Type which indicates the way, but not the cause

for which actions are to be performed, in order that some definite

advantage may accrue. The Israelite creed is, therefore, by no means

a dogmatic doctrine, but one of duty. Though a law of deliverance,

it has no mystic admixture. But this religion or law of redemption

was certainly beyond the comprehension of the people while yet in its

infantine stage, and the ideal which was intended to endow it with

significance and vitality remained for a long time an enigma to the

people. This enigma was first solved by the prophets. A considerable

period elapsed even after the prophets had spoken their burning words

of fire, before the nation became the guardian of the teachings heard

at Sinai, and before they erected a temple for it in their own hearts.

But as soon as this maturity was attained, and the "heart of stone had

become a heart of flesh," as soon as the prophetic body were able to

dispense with the intervention of the priesthood, they could depart

from the scene; they had become superfluous, for the nation itself

had attained to a complete comprehension of its own being and its own

mission. History shows how this twofold transformation was effected;

how the family of a petty sheik became the nucleus of a people; how

this small people was humiliated to the condition of a horde; how

this horde was trained to become a nation of God through the law of

self-sanctification and self-control; and how these teachings, together

with a spiritual ideal of God, became breathed into it as its soul.

This national soul likewise grew into the national body, was developed

and took the form of laws, which, though they were not subjected to the

fluctuations of time, were yet suited to the occurrences of the age.

The transformation was effected only amidst severe struggles; obstacles

from within and without had to be overcome, and errors and relapses to

be amended, before the nation's body could become a fitting organ for

the nation's soul. The hidden things had to be revealed, the obscure to

be illumined, vague notions to be brought into the light of certainty,

before that ideal Israel (as foreshadowed by the prophets in the far

distance of time, and which had been expressly distinguished by them

from Israel as it then existed with all its defects) might become a

"light unto the nations." Assuredly, there is no second people now

dwelling upon the globe, or hidden within the stream of time, which,

like Israel, has carried with it a pre-ordained law. This people

not alone possessed such a law, but also the full conviction that it

existed only on account of this law, and in order to be the exponent of

this law, and that its sole importance lay in its vocation to announce

the truths of salvation. These were to be inculcated not by violence

and compulsion, but by example, by action, and by the realization of

those ideals which as a people the Israelites were to proclaim.

The profound insight afforded by History has proved that it was the

mission of the Greeks to bring to light the ideals of art and science,

but the Greeks themselves had no knowledge of this fact.

It was otherwise with the Israelites. Not only was their task

apportioned to them, but the revelation was made to them that it was

their task, and that without it they were of no more significance

than "a drop in the pitcher, or a mote of dust in the balance." Only

on this account did the men of God call the Israelites a chosen

people. The fact of being chosen imposed on the nation heavier and

more important responsibilities, and a greater measure of duty; and

when their mission, as the exponents of a special and religious moral

conception, became clear to them, the people prized their task beyond

all things--more highly than their fatherland and nationality, and even

more than life itself. And because they sacrificed themselves, the idea

which dominated them attained to enduring existence and to immortality.

The Israelites were the first people who possessed the courage of their

own opinions, and who risked all worldly goods for their convictions.

They proved that a propaganda-making truth can be sealed only by the

blood of its martyrs. The loyalty of their convictions endowed them

with steadfastness and endurance. Their inner core cannot have been

utterly corrupt, seeing that they were enabled to bid defiance to

the destructive force of nearly four thousand years, and to a host

of enemies. The history of the Israelite nation in its beginnings is

of a decidedly changeful character. Two distinct factors determined

its elevation and decadence, one physical, the other spiritual, one

political, the other ethical. Suddenly, there gushed forth a spiritual

current, strong and foaming like the mountain spring which has been

gradually gathering whilst hidden from sight, and the existence of

which commenced only at the moment when it issued from its rocky bed.

The appearance of gifted prophets and psalmists from the days of

Amos and Isaiah resembles, in its force and fertilizing power, the

outpouring of a mountain spring. The prophets and psalmists who sowed

the seed of great and ever true thoughts in a charming and attractive

form, and who constitute the flower of the Israelite people, could not

have arisen and carried out all that they actually effected, unless the

previous conditions had been favorable to their purpose. They arose

because the soil had been spiritually fertilized for them, and they

were understood only because their exalted moral theories of life did

not announce anything novel or strange to the people, but they preached

what was already well known, in impassioned and poetically illumined

words, and were impelled by self-abnegation, zeal, and manly courage.

Even those who do not believe in wonders must admit and admire the

marvelous course of Israel's history. Is it not marvelous that just

during the untoward conditions of the Babylonian exile, in a country

"full of idols and license," and amongst a Judæan nobility who,

untaught and unconverted by their sad experience, continued their evil

ways during exile--that amid such surroundings a spiritual movement

could be developed which found vent in a peculiarly characteristic

manner? During the Babylonian exile the psalmists bewailed in touching

strains, and with poetic brilliance, their own sorrows and the national

misfortunes, and these strains resound even to-day in the high-places

of worship.

During this exile that magnificent didactic poem in semi-dramatic

form between the suffering Job and his friends was composed, a poem

consisting in dialogues on human destiny and Divine Providence, which

is almost unrivaled. During this exile the prophets once more addressed

their deaf and blind community in poetic strains. Amongst them was

that divinely-favored man, the second Isaiah, who was called the

"great unknown." His words of fire pour forth with inimitable power,

chastising like a father, yet comforting like a mother, wounding as

with a lash, yet healing as with balm. This prophet fully established

the fundamental idea for the justification of Israel's continued

existence, that, by its submission of martyrdom, it is destined to be

the servant of God, to become a light to all nations, and to carry

salvation to the ends of the earth. Is it less marvelous that Cyrus

accorded to the Babylonian exiles the permission to return to their

native land, to cultivate the deserted country, to rebuild Jerusalem

and the Temple in honor of their God, and again to enjoy a certain

amount of independence? Still more wonderful is it that prophets had

predicted with unqualified certainty the regeneration of the nation

in a single day, and that the exodus from Egypt would be succeeded by

an exodus from Babylon. Even their prophecy that the heathen would

join the Judæan people was fulfilled. Thus the Judæan nationality

became resuscitated in their own land, the people became filled with

ancient recollections and new hopes, and were determined to realize the

exhortations of the prophets. The people preserved their independence

in their own country during six hundred years. The proneness to

idolatry, which, to a great extent, had been found irresistible in the

pre-exilic period, suddenly disappeared, and with it also pagan customs

and vices. The Torah, as the law book, was to become the guiding-line

of the regenerated nation, whose "heart of stone had been changed into

a heart of flesh," and not only of the individual but of the whole

community. By periodically reading the Torah in the Synagogue--a

custom which was now introduced--and by explaining it at least in one

of the school-houses, its teachings became the common property of the

higher classes. The Torah was the "Magna Charta" of public life in the

same way as the Judæan community developed into a species of "Civitas

Dei."

The prophets could now withdraw, for the law-givers--Pharisees

(Soferim)--relieved them of their duties, and created a Synhedrion,

which also possessed a legislative function. Thus post-exilic history

received a form entirely different to that of pre-exilic times. The

tribunal of the Synhedrion was filled with painful anxiety as to the

rigid execution of pentateuchal ordinances. The teachers of the people

desired to avoid the repetition of pre-exilic conditions, of idolatry,

intercourse with the heathen, and the imitation of pagan customs.

Entire separation from the heathen world and total isolation were the

consequences. A similar state of things was also maintained against the

Samaritans, who defiantly sought to obtain equal rights of citizenship

in the "Civitas Dei." This was denied to them. As, however, they would

not be prevented from worshiping the God of Israel, they erected a

rival temple on Mount Gerizim. Thus there arose the first semi-Judæan

sect, that of the Samaritans, who assumed an inimical bearing towards

Jerusalem. This was one result of over-punctiliousness. The other

consequence was the result of the maxim, "Make a fence round the law."

Thereby everything which had formerly been permissible, and which

only touched on the fringe of what was forbidden, was interdicted. The

members of the Synhedrion, or authorized teachers of the law, on the

ground of this maxim, added fresh decisions to the pentateuchal laws.

These new sopheric laws, and the prevailing punctiliousness, did not

prevent the establishment of Jewish colonies in Alexandria, Antioch,

and other Greek centers which had been founded by Alexander of Macedon

and his successors. The Jewish colony in Egypt built a special Temple,

that of Onias, which rivaled the sanctuary at Jerusalem. There the law

was first translated into Greek, and in this language it was read in

all Greek-speaking countries. This was a turning-point in the course

of Jewish history, although, owing to the practice of reading the law

in Greek, public mourning was instituted in Jerusalem. Judaism from

this cause became, to some extent, more closely approximated to the

pagan world, and the accession of nations into the community of Abraham

was promoted. On the other hand, the Hellenizing of Judaism brought

the nation close upon the verge of destruction, and exposed it to the

persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, and also to apostasy. From these

troubles it was only delivered through the revolt of the Maccabees,

whose rising was the cause of many martyrdoms.

These victories were followed by a retrograde movement. The laws which

the Hellenist apostates had daringly broken, and on account of which so

many martyrs had fallen, even those laws which had been superadded as a

fence, were henceforth yet more zealously and scrupulously practiced.

Judaism assumed an altered Pharisaic (_i.e._, punctilious) character.

For a portion of the people, the over-scrupulous (Assidæans), even this

was not sufficient. They imagined that only by retirement from the

world could the laws be strictly followed, and therefore, under the

designation of Essenes, they separated from the rest, and followed

their particular mode of thought and peculiar observances. The more

worldly, such as the warriors and statesmen, offered sharp opposition

to such asceticism, and rejected the additional ordinances which were

not justified by the letter of the law. Hence arose the division into

Pharisees, Essenes, and Sadducees, which was one of the results of

the Maccabæan war. Internal dissensions ensued, and facilitated the

subjugation of Judæa by Pompey and the Roman legions, and the political

independence of the Judæans under their own king, which had been

maintained during a century, now came to an end.

Unfortunately, the Romans appointed their protégé, Herod, to be

king, and he instilled his venomous ideas into the hearts of the

Patriarchs. In order, to some extent, to shield the populace from

the alienation desired by the Herodians, the exclusive laws, more

particularly the ritual ordinances, were made more stringent. This was

the work of Hillel and Shammai. Further, fanatical zeal was displayed

in commemorating the liberty which had been disgracefully forfeited;

this was the work of the founder of the zealot party--Judah of

Galilee--with whom the Shammaites were to some extent connected. The

zealots incited the whole nation to wage fierce war against the Roman

conquerors of the world, but their attempt ended in the destruction of

the community and of Jerusalem, and the greatly-revered Temple was laid

waste. It is, however, a marvelous fact that the nationality and the

religion did not perish, but survived the destroyers, Vespasian, Titus,

and their successors, as they had survived Nebuchadnezzar and his

dynasty. The populace was rescued through the law, which had become its

very soul. The Synhedrial school-house now became the center, but the

law had totally changed in aspect.

Masses of new religious enactments now overlaid the law; fences,

Synhedrial enactments, customs dating from more ancient or from recent

times, which had been orally delivered, and had accumulated to an

immense extent. These oral Halachas, as they were termed, ranked, if

not higher than, certainly equal with, the written laws.

The Sadducæan opposition to these laws had ceased; young Christendom,

which had sprung from the lap of Judaism, or, to speak more correctly,

from Essenism, enhanced the value of the highly-prized and overrated

laws, and was indifferent to their origin. In contradistinction to the

Judæo-Christians, who thought that they could merge the old laws with

the new faith, the apostle Paul created the Pagan-Christian idea, which

rejected every prescription of the law as entrammeling, and proclaimed

evangelical liberty. This attack on the law, and the mystic formulas

evolved by the Gnostics from the letters of Holy Writ, caused all that

bordered upon religious precepts to become more precious and to be more

rigidly observed in Judæan circles.

The transmission of Halachic doctrines had been endangered by the

divergence of opinion between the disciples of Hillel and of Shammai

regarding their scope, limits, justification, and applicability, and

in consequence of the fatal termination of the disastrous war. Those

teachers of the law who had survived the catastrophe were the more

eager to hand down such laws, which they claimed to have transmitted

faithfully, and to rescue them from oblivion. Youths and men, now rid

of political cares, thronged to the celebrated colleges in order to

impress on their memories the traditions handed down to them. They

vied with each other in teaching and learning. But this eagerness did

not crush out zealotism and a desire to take up arms in the cause

of freedom. Fiery youths, especially the disciples of the school of

Akiba, quitted the school-house in order at an opportune moment to

carry on a bloody feud with the Roman legions--in the first instance

this occurred under Trajan, scarcely half a century after the fall of

Jerusalem, and again two decades later under Hadrian. These attempts

ended disastrously; Hadrian instituted a system of persecution directed

more against Judaism than against the Judæans, and especially against

teachers and disciples, in the hope of destroying the Law, the very

soul of the nationality, but he did not succeed in his object. The

fiery zeal for the traditional law was increased through the activity

of Akiba's disciples, who had returned from exile.

The center was, however, transferred to Galilee, as Judæa, the southern

portion of the country, had been laid waste, and was chiefly in the

possession of pagan colonists. Here was situated the Patriarchate

which represented the unity of the people, the post of Patriarch being

occupied by a descendant of Hillel, who, as it was alleged, came from

the royal house of David, and who, from the tiny territory of Galilee,

from Sepphoris and Tiberias, governed the numerous communities of the

Diaspora--beyond the land and the sea, in Egypt, Babylon, Asia Minor,

and Europe. His encyclicals, which were sent by special messengers,

were greeted with respect, and were obeyed like those of a spiritual

chief. The Mishnah, the fundamental text of the voluminous Talmud,

a collection of Halachic laws, and species of "corpus juris civilis

canonici," which was compiled by the Patriarch Judah I, owed its

universal recognition to that cause. This spiritual greatness, however,

was destroyed through Byzantium, from the time that the Roman Empire

worshiped, or was compelled to worship, Jesus instead of Jupiter, and

the fanatical persecution practiced mutually amongst the Christian

sects was visited upon the Jews.

The Byzantine emperors, Constantine, Theodosius II, and Justinian,

treated the sons of Jacob even more mercilessly than their heathen

enemies. They deprived them of their Roman rights of citizenship,

of their rights as men, and also encroached upon their freedom in

religious practices. This example was followed by the rulers in various

European countries, more especially in France and Spain.

Fortunately, there had been formed a new center in another quarter,

on the banks of the Euphrates and Tigris, where numerous Judæan

communities occupied a favorable position, and lived almost in a state

of political independence, under their own Judæan prince, the Exilarch.

The schools which were here established replaced those which had been

destroyed in the Holy Land. These schools exercised authority over

the entire Jewish community, with but few interruptions, during seven

hundred years. Here there arose the Babylonian Talmud, which was more

fortunate than its companion-work, the Palestinian or Jerusalem Talmud,

a religious code of a peculiar kind. This work with its phases of light

and shade exercised an influence in Jewish circles (which continues

to the present day), and it almost over-shadowed Holy Writ. Here also

Talmudical dialectics became developed, and endowed the Jews who

stood beneath the spell of the Talmud with peculiar characteristics,

especially imbuing them with that love of hair-splitting which

afterwards deteriorated into sophistic subtlety. The authority of the

Talmud, however, was to some extent lessened through events which

occurred on the Arabian Peninsula. Mahomet, the son of Abdallah, from

Mecca, had established the Islamite religion on the basis of various

fragments of Judaism. The Arabs at first lived on friendly terms with

the Judæans who dwelt in their land, and who were warlike, lovers of

freedom and of song, and superior to the Arabs by reason of their

possession of Holy Writ. Mahomet, however, having been derided by them,

afterwards waged war against one Judæan tribe after another, and exiled

them from Arabia, which proscription was upheld by Caliph Omar.

The exiles settled in Palestine and Babylon, where they became

acquainted with tribesmen and co-religionists, who, having followed the

Talmudical precepts, had acquired totally different habits. They found

the Talmudical restrictions incompatible with their hereditary and

unquenched thirst for liberty. This Judæo-Arabic circle declared war

against Talmudism. The contest, which in the first instance was only

of a mild character, the needful ability to sustain it being wanting,

afterwards became fiercer, when Anan, a connection of the Prince of

Captivity, eagerly joined in the fray, asserting Holy Writ to be the

sole source of religion, and the Talmud to be only the work of man.

Thus arose a new sect, the Ananites, or Karaites. Although small in

numbers, yet by their energy and combativeness they aroused the less

active minds, and stimulated the desire for a knowledge of Holy Writ,

which had hitherto fallen into neglect. The impulse given to this

study was so powerful that Saadiah, the representative of a Talmudical

school, devoted his entire attention to it. Through him a philosophical

tendency was introduced into Judæan circles. Until this time, as in

Christendom and Islam, a belief in existing authorities had caused it

to be considered heretical to speculate upon religion.

From Babylon there now emanated a spark of rational thought and

scientific inquiry, which traveled as far as the Pyrenean Peninsula.

This territory, being under Mahometan rule, was connected in spirit

with the East. A long succession of eminent personages had during two

centuries fostered and cultivated a spirit of deep research in Spain,

whilst in Christendom a fanatical desire for persecution resulted in

the destruction of the Jews, or in their banishment from the homes

which they had possessed for so long a time. The culminating point of

philosophical thought was attained by Moses Maimuni, who for centuries

was "the Guide of the Perplexed," and who also, under the sanction of

the Church, exercised a powerful influence on Dominican scholasticism.

Where there is great light there must also be much shadow. The shadows

caused by the light which had proceeded from Maimuni became embodied in

the vagaries of the Kabbala, which confused the minds of the multitude

by its forgeries, and corrupted the feelings by its excesses.

A deep gulf was created in Spain and Southern France between

the Maimunists and anti-Maimunists, between faith based upon

intellectuality, and faith based upon authority. This schism would have

given rise to sectarianism, had not the accumulated sufferings of the

people riveted their attention on what was proximate--the misery of

all. Faith in authority proved victorious, under the influence of the

Kabbala, and every scientific pursuit, excepting that of medicine,

was proscribed in Spain, as if it were intended to undermine the

continuance of Judaism. The fourteenth century ignored the tenth

century. Solomon ben Adret, who had solemnly pronounced an interdict

against philosophy, ranked Saadiah as to some extent a heretic. It

seemed as if, with the decay of knowledge, the glory of the Spanish

Jews were to be entirely extinguished.

The cup of sorrow, drained by the Jews throughout Central Europe--from

the Rhine to the Vistula, and from the Alps to the marsh-lands of the

German Ocean--in consequence of the Black Death, as if they had indeed

been poisoners, also reached the Spanish Jews. Their grandees, who

had been employed at the court as ministers of finance, diplomatists,

private secretaries, or court physicians, were powerless to protect

them, as they had formerly done.

The horrible massacre in 1391 had driven many Jews, with wild despair

in their hearts, into the arms of the Church, and they deceived

themselves with the idea that they could outwardly join the Church,

whilst remaining inwardly faithful to the God of Israel.

Thus arose the Marranos. Their fanatical persecutors, however, knew

no peace until they had succeeded in arousing the thunders of the

Inquisition against the Jews, in lighting the stake, in causing them

to be banished from Spain by hundreds of thousands, and in enforcing

compulsory baptism in Portugal. But the Inquisition and the stake in

both of these countries only awoke a deeper love for Judaism in the

hearts of the Marranos. Great as was the number of those who perished

at the autos-da-fé, or who pined away in prison, yet their offspring,

who secretly continued to cherish their own faith at the risk of their

lives, after one or two centuries sought to escape from the hell on the

Pyrenean Peninsula.

Under the guise of Spanish or Portuguese merchants, they founded large

communities in Bordeaux, Amsterdam, London, and in various parts of

Italy. From their step-fatherland they brought with them a higher

culture and an aristocratic demeanor. Consequently they did not suffer

from the contempt with which other Jews were treated in political

and social circles. In fact, the Jews of Marrano descent looked down

upon their co-religionists as gypsies, on account of their external

deterioration. With marvelous rapidity, however, did those who were

considered as gypsies regenerate and elevate themselves; and, what

was more marvelous, this change did not proceed from the aristocratic

Sephardim. The personage to whom this transformation was due sprang

from the midst of those who were so despised and contemned. He bore

no trace of culture in his youth, but was deformed, awkward, and

shy--this was Moses Mendelssohn, from the petty community of Dessau.

Had the call reached him to become the leader of his co-religionists,

he would have replied, like the great Prophet in Egypt--"Who am I?" It

is remarkable that Mendelssohn, without desiring or intending to do so,

paved the way for the emancipation of the Jews and the purification

of Judaism. The present age has given the lie to the assertion of

Jew-haters (who at the close of the eighteenth century and commencement

of the nineteenth century were numberless), that generation after

generation must pass away before any improvement could be expected in

the debased condition of the Jews.

In two decades there appeared on the canvas of History a series of

noble, if not of ennobled Jews, in Germany, France, Holland, and Italy,

and these ranked as high as if they had been of equal birth with

Christians of the aristocratic class.

The historic course of the Israelite nation not only shows, as with

other nations, the stages of growth, bloom, and decay, but it exhibits

the extraordinary phenomenon that the decay was succeeded, on three

different occasions, by a new budding and blossoming time. The history

of the crystallization of the Israelite family group into a nation,

and their entry into the land of Canaan, until the establishment of a

kingdom, constitutes the growth. The stage of bloom was in the days of

the kings David and Solomon, who raised the condition of the Israelite

people to that of a state of the first rank. The period of blossoming

was short, and was followed by loss of power and by the downfall of

the nationality. But again it gradually revived under the rule of the

Persians and Greeks, developed under the Maccabees, only to decay away

under the Romans. This decay, however, was merely superficial, and was

destined to give place to a resuscitation in another form.

One of the prophets has represented the growth of the Israelite nation

in Egypt by the picture of a deserted female child left lying in the

fields, begrimed with blood and filth, but who, notwithstanding her

desertion and misery, develops into a blooming maiden. The development

of the race in Babylon is described by another prophet under the image

of an unhappy and sorrowing widow, who has been robbed of her children,

until, on the unexpected return of her numerous offspring from all ends

and corners of the earth, she is comforted, and regains her lost youth

with them. For the third rejuvenescence of the Jewish race tradition

has likewise found a fitting picture.

At the gates of Rome there lies a human form, clothed in rags, leprous,

half dead, an object of horror and pity. Suddenly this abject figure

is touched with a staff, on which biblical sentences are inscribed. He

rises, his hideous coverings and disfigurements vanish, and he stands

erect in the beautiful glow of youth. Similes are but lame, and give no

adequate representation of a phenomenon to which there is no equal in

every-day existence. In any case, the Jewish nation is an extraordinary

phenomenon, dating as it does from hoary antiquity, but possessing

youthful vigor, having passed through numberless vicissitudes, yet

remaining ever true to itself.

INDEX.

Aaron de la Papa, rabbi in Smyrna, anti-Sabbatian, 136.

Abdul Meg'id, sultan of Turkey, 634.

and the protection of the Turkish Jews, 662.

and the Rhodes accusation, 647.

emancipates the Jews of Turkey, 641.

Abendana, Jacob, rabbi in London, 214.

Abensur, Daniel, Jewish millionaire, 205.

Aboab, Immanuel, defends Talmudical Judaism, 55.

Aboab, Isaac, de Fonseca, rabbi at Amsterdam, and Spinoza's unbelief,

92-3.

Kabbalist, 52, 54, 88.

Sabbatian, 139, 160.

Aboab, Samuel, rabbi at Venice, excommunicates Moses Chayim Luzzatto,

240-1.

Abraham Ibn-Ezra, studied by Spinoza, 88.

Abraham Vita di Cologna. See Vita, Abraham, di Cologna.

Abt, Thomas, rival of Moses Mendelssohn, 303.

Abudiente, Abraham Gideon, Sabbatian, 155.

Abulafia, Moses, arrested on the blood-accusation in Damascus, 636.

converted to Islam, 638.

Abydos, Sabbataï Zevi at, 148-9, 151.

Acosta, Gabriel. See Da Costa, Uriel.

Act of Federation for the German states, and the Jews, 518-20.

Adam Kadmon, Kabbalistic term, 121, 143.

Adams, Hannah, historian of the Jews, 593.

Adath Jeshurun, a separatist community in Amsterdam, 457.

Admission of Jews into England, the feeling about, 44-7.

Adrianople, Sabbatians at, 159.

"Advice to the Representatives of the People," by Van Swieden, 453-4.

Aguilar, de, Baron, frees the Moravian Jews from a tax, 252.

intercedes for the Austrian exiles, 253.

Ahmed Coprili, grand vizir, and the Sabbatians, 146.

imprisons Sabbataï Zevi, 148.

Aix-la-Chapelle, Congress of, and the emancipation of the Jews, 525-7.

Akiba, disciples of, enthusiasm of, 724-5.

Alenu prayer, the, attacked, 185, 191-2.

Alexander I, of Russia, and the improvement of the condition of the

Jews, 472-3, 525, 527.

Alexandria, Jews of, and the Damascus blood-accusation, 647, 660.

Algazi, Moses Joseph, rabbi at Cairo, supports Crémieux, 664.

Algazi, Solomon, anti-Sabbatian, 144.

Ali Ibn-Rahmadan, mathematician, 76.

Alliance Israélite Universelle, the, foundation of, 664, 701-2.

"Almansor," by Heine, 548-9.

Almanzi, Jewish scholar, 622.

Alsace, Jews of, appeal to Mendelssohn, 351.

attacked, 437.

discussed in the French Chamber, 524-5.

impoverished by the Revolution, 474-5.

money-lenders, 475-6.

persecuted, 349-50.

protected by the National Assembly, 446.

restrictions imposed on, 347-9.

taxed, 446.

Amigo, Abraham, Talmudist, 126.

Amschel, representative of the Frankfort Jews, 505.

Amsterdam, Portuguese community of, prosperity of, 166-7.

Sabbatians in, 138-41, 155.

theological seminary at, 700.

Anan, founder of the Karaites, 727.

Ananites, the, rise of, 727.

Andrade, Abraham, rabbi, member of the Assembly of Notables, 484, 490.

"Anglo-Jewish Association, The," 703.

Anteri, Jacob, rabbi, charged with Father Tomaso's murder, 638.

"Anti-Phædon" by John Balthasar Kölbele, 316.

Anti-Semitism, prevalence of, 704.

Anti-Talmudists. See Frankists.

Anton, Charles, apostate, defender of Eibeschütz, 267.

"Apology for the Honorable Nation of the Jews," by Edward Nicholas,

28-9.

Apostasy among the Jews of Germany, 420-22.

Arari, David, and the Damascus blood-accusation, 636, 637, 638.

"Are there means to make the Jews happier and more useful in France,"

prize essay in Metz, 434-5.

Argent, d', intercedes for Moses Mendelssohn, 304.

Arias, Joseph Szemach, translator, 113-14.

Arnstein, von, Nathan Adam, husband of Fanny Itzig, 414.

Ascarelli, Deborah, poetess, 68.

Asher, Saul, defends the Jews, 463.

Ashkenazi, Jacob, father of Chacham Zevi, Sabbatian, 150.

Ashkenazi, Jacob Emden. See Emden, Jacob.

Ashkenazi, Zevi, chacham at Amsterdam, father of Jacob Emden,

anti-Sabbatian, cause of, espoused by the European rabbis, 227.

denounces Chayon, 221-2.

excommunicated, 226.

excommunicates Chayon, 223-4.

Asiré ha-Tikwah, by Joseph Penso, 112-13.

Asser, Amsterdam deputy to the Synhedrion, 497.

Asser, Carolus and Moses, active in the emancipation of the Dutch

Jews, 453, 454.

Astruc, Aristides, founder of the Alliance Israélite Universelle, 701.

Atias, Isaac, da Costa, president of the Batavian National Assembly,

458.

Attaman, Cossack chieftain, 2.

Auerbach, Jacob, preacher at the Leipsic reform synagogue, 573.

August, of Brunswick, and Jacob Jehuda Leon, 114-15.

Augustus III, of Poland, protects the Frankists, 283.

Austria, Jews of, emancipated, 697.

establish the "Israelitische Allianz," 703.

humiliated condition of, 508-9.

legislation friendly to, 357-8.

under restrictions, 579-80.

Austrian Succession, War of the, and the Jews, 251-2.

Autobiography by Solomon Maimon, 409.

Ayllon, Solomon, Sabbatian rabbi at Amsterdam, characterization of,

214-15.

distrusted by the Portuguese Council, 222.

espouses Chayon's cause, 222-3.

loose life of, 210.

on Chacham Zevi, 221.

passes judgment on Chayon's book, 224.

repudiates Chayon, 231.

Baal-Shem (Baal-Shemtob). See Israel of Miedziboz.

Babylonian exile, the, changes during, 719-20.

Baden, Jews of, show gratitude to Riesser, 601.

the "hep, hep" persecution in, 530.

Bail, defender of the Jews, 522.

Bailly, mayor of Paris, and the emancipation of the Jews, 445.

Baki, Simon, rabbi, superstition of, 201-2.

Bamberg, Jews of, persecuted, 529.

Barebones Parliament, the, Puritan character of, 34.

Barlæus, Caspar, and Manasseh ben Israel, 22.

Barnave favors the emancipation of the Jews, 441.

Barrios, de, Daniel, historian, 202, 204.

Baruch, Jacob, father of Börne, deputy of the Frankfort Jews in

Vienna, 513.

Baruch, Löb (Louis). See Börne, Ludwig.

Basnage, Jacob, historian of the Jews, 195-97.

banishment of, 196.

Bassan, Isaiah, teacher of Moses Chayim Luzzatto, 235, 238, 239, 241.

Batavian Republic, the. See Holland.

Baudin, secretary of Ratti Menton, 637.

Bavaria, Jews of, partially emancipated, 508.

Bayonne, the Jewish community of, 436.

Bayreuth, the "hep, hep" persecution in, 530.

Beer, Jacob, private synagogue of, 563.

Beer, of Mizricz, founder of the new Chassidim, 375, 379-83.

and Solomon Maimon, 407.

death of, 392.

introduces the Portuguese ritual among the Chassidim, 386-7.

Belgium, Catholic agitation in, hostile to Jews, 655.

"Belief of the Universe, The," by Nehemiah Chayon, 219-20.

Belillos, Jacob, rabbi at Venice, pronounces against Moses Chayim

Luzzatto, 239.

"Bellerophon" by Lefrank, 471-2.

Belmonte, Manuel, Marrano poet, 113.

Belmontes, the, Jewish millionaires, 205.

Ben-David, Lazarus, lecturer on Kant's philosophy, 409-10.

member of the "Society for the Culture and Science of the Jews,"

583.

Benedictus XIV, pope, petitioned to acquit the Jews of the

blood-accusation, 282.

Benet, Mordecai, rabbi, orthodox leader, 567.

protests against the Temple innovations, 572.

Benisch, Abraham, founder of the Anglo-Jewish Association, 703.

Ben Usiel, disciple of Bernays, opposes the reform movement, 627.

Benvenisti, Chayim, rabbi at Smyrna, Sabbatian, 136, 155.

Ben-Zeeb, one of the Measfim, 400.

Berachya, son of Jacob Querido, accepted successor of Sabbataï Zevi,

211.

Berish. See Beer of Mizricz.

Berlin, Jewish physicians of, restricted, 461.

Berlin, Jews of, apply to be baptized, 421-2.

converted, 587.

petition for the repeal of anti-Jewish laws, 414-15.

under Frederick the Great, 294-5.

"Berlin religion, the," 333.

Berlin, the progressive party in, 418.

the reform movement in, 563, 683, 686-7.

Bernal, Abraham Nuñes, martyr, 92.

Bernal, Marcos da Almeyda, martyr, 92.

Bernard, Isaac, employer of Moses Mendelssohn, 296.

Bernays, Isaac, chacham of the Hamburg congregation, 574-8.

and the Mendelssohn school, 575.

as a preacher, 577.

changes introduced by, 577-8.

characterization of, 574.

denounces the Hamburg Temple liturgy, 673.

influences Steinheim, 602.

Bernays, Jacob, organizer of the Breslau seminary, 700.

Bernstorff, Danish minister, decides against Eibeschütz, 265.

Bernstorff, deputy from Holstein to the Congress of Vienna, and the

emancipation of the Jews, 519, 527.

Berr, Berr Isaac, representative of the Lorraine Jews, 431.

has the Bible translated into French, 449.

in the National Assembly, 438, 440, 490.

member of the Assembly of Notables, 482, 486, 487.

urges improvements upon the French Jews, 448-9.

Berr, Cerf, representative of the Alsatian Jews, 351, 436.

and the emancipation of the French Jews, 430-31.

spreads Dohm's Apology, 431.

spreads Mendelssohn's Pentateuch translation in France, 430.

Berr, Lipmann Cerf, addresses the Assembly of Notables, 487.

Berr, Michael, first Jewish attorney in France, champions the Jews at

the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle, 527.

fills a position in Westphalia, 500.

intercedes for the Jews with the princes of Europe, 460-61.

member of the Assembly of Notables, 482.

member of the Westphalian consistory, 501.

Bertolio, abbé, favors the emancipation of the Jews, 445.

Besht. See Israel of Miedziboz.

Beugnot, state councilor under Napoleon, friendly to the Jews, 480.

helps to frame the Westphalian constitution, 500.

Beyrout, Jews of, protected by European consuls, 641.

"Bible for Israelites, The," by Sachs, 693.

Bible, the, characterized by Heine, 553-5.

Biblical exegesis, 695-6.

"Biblical Orient, The," ascribed to Isaac Bernays, 575-6.

Biester proposes a statue to Moses Mendelssohn, 372.

Bing, Isaiah Berr, refutes the charges against the Alsatian Jews, 434.

Bloch, Matathias, emissary of Sabbataï Zevi, 133, 137.

Blood-accusation, the, at Damascus. See Chap. XVII.

Benedictus XIV petitioned to acquit the Jews of, 282.

Clement XIII acquits the Jews of, 285-6.

Blood-accusation, the, groundlessness of, asserted by Moses Germanus,

177.

by Neander, 650.

by Simon, 176.

by the rabbis of London, 654-5.

by Wagenseil, 187.

by Wülfer, 185.

Blood-accusation, the, in Jülich, 642.

in Rhodes, 640-41.

Bohemia, Jews of, banished, 252-3.

taxed heavily, 508.

under restrictions, 523.

Bonafides, character in "Nathan the Wise," 325.

Bonafoux, Daniel Israel, Sabbatian, 207, 208.

Bonald, Louis Gabriel Ambroise, hostility of, to the Jews, 477-8.

Bonifaccio, Balthasar, accuser of Sarah Sullam, 70.

Bonnet, Caspar, a Geneva author, and Moses Mendelssohn, 309, 313-314.

Bordeaux, Jews of, unrestricted, 499.

the Jewish community of, 435, 436.

the Portuguese Jewish community of, 341-2.

Börne, Ludwig, a figure in Jewish history, 536-44.

and the reaction, 541-2.

as a political leader, 556.

attitude of, towards Judaism, 538, 540.

champions the Jews, 542-4.

characterization of, 538.

compared with Heine, 544.

converted, 542.

employed in the ducal police of Frankfort, 505, 541.

in German literature, 537.

Jewish qualities of, 538-9.

publishes a journal, 542.

's love of liberty, 538-9.

's opinion of the Jews, 539-40.

style of, 556.

Bourbons, the, and the emancipation of the Jews, 596.

Brancas, de, duc, derives an income from the Jews of Metz, 348, 446.

Brandenburg, Jews settle in, 173-4.

Breidenbach, Wolff, and the abolition of the poll-tax, 466-8, 472.

Bremen, Jews of, emancipated, 507.

expelled, 520.

under restrictions, 512.

Brendel, professor at Würzburg, friendly to the Jews, 528.

Breslau, a theological seminary founded in, 699, 700.

the confirmation ceremony introduced in, 573.

the reform movement in, 682.

Bresselau, Mendel J., one of the Measfim, Hebrew stylist, 398-9, 672.

opposes the omission of Hebrew from the prayers, 564.

writes against the orthodox party, 572.

Brieli, Jehuda Leon, rabbi at Mantua, condemns Chayon, 225, 226.

culture of, 200.

Brody, culture strivings in, 612.

Broglie, de, duc, opposes the emancipation of the Jews of Alsace, 447.

Bromet, Herz, active in the emancipation of the Dutch Jews, 453, 454,

458.

Brühl, Saxon minister, and the Eibeschütz controversy, 263.

Brunswick, conference of rabbis at, 677-8, 681-2.

Jews of, under restrictions, 512.

Buchholz, a writer hostile to the Jews, 468.

Buda-Pesth, theological seminary at, 700.

Buena, David, de Mesquito, Jewish millionaire, 205.

Buol Schauenstein, von, count, president of the Diet, and the

Frankfort Jews, 530.

Buxtorf, John, senior, Hebrew scholar, 21.

Byk, Jacob Solomon, member of the Galician school, 617.

Caballo, Jules, founder of the Alliance Israélite Universelle, 701.

Caceres, de, Simon, Marrano in London, 49.

Cairo, Jewish schools opened at, 664.

Calabrese. See Vital, Chayim.

Campo Formio, peace of, and the poll-tax, 464.

"Can the Jews remain in their present condition without harm to the

state?" an anti-Jewish tract, 469-70.

Cansino family, the, dragomans in Oran, 169.

Capo d'Istrias, and the emancipation of the Jews, 527.

"Captives of Hope, The," by Joseph Penso, 112-13.

Cardoso, Abraham Michael, Sabbatian, 163-5.

announces himself as the Ephraimite Messiah, 207-8.

Cardoso, Abraham Michael, works of, forbidden, 220-21.

studied by Eibeschütz, 248.

Cardoso, Isaac (Fernando), anti-Sabbatian, 163-4.

writer, 163, 188.

Carlsruhe, the confirmation ceremony introduced in, 573.

the "hep, hep" persecution in, 530.

Carpentras, the Jewish community of, 436.

Carvajal, Fernandez, Marrano in London, 38, 49.

Castellane, de, advocates freedom of conscience in the National

Assembly, 439.

Castro, de, speaker at the London meeting in behalf of the Damascus

Jews, 653.

Castro, de, Balthasar Orobio, Marrano physician, 115-17.

Castro, de, Bendito (Baruch Nehemiah), Marrano physician, Sabbatian,

140-1, 150.

Castro, de, Isaac Orobio, writer, character of, 199-200.

refutes Spinoza's philosophy, 167.

Castro-Tartas, de, Isaac, Marrano martyr, 31-2.

Ceba, Ansaldo, friend of Sarah Sullam, 69-70.

Chacham Zevi. See Ashkenazi, Zevi.

Chages, Jacob, scholar at Jerusalem, 126.

teacher of Nathan Ghazati, 130.

threatens Sabbataï Zevi with excommunication, 132.

Chages, Moses, and Moses Chayim Luzzatto, 238-9, 241.

and Nehemiah Chayon, 222-4, 227.

excommunicated, 226.

honored in Amsterdam, 231.

opposes Eibeschütz, 249-50.

Chamiz, Joseph, disciple of Leo Modena, 67, 74.

Charles VII, emperor, in Prague, 251.

Charles, of Baden, grants civil rights to the Jews, 502-3.

Charles X, of France, and the emancipation of the Jews, 596.

Charles X, of Sweden, against Poland, 15.

Charles XI, of Sweden, and the Karaites, 182-3.

Charles XII, of Sweden, and Karaism, 184.

Chasdaï Crescas, studied by Spinoza, 88.

Chassidim, a Polish Sabbatian sect, 212.

converted to Islam and Christianity, 213.

excommunicated, 392, 394.

writings of, 393.

Chassidism, attacked, 612.

founders of, 375.

in Wilna, 391.

opposed by Elijah Wilna, 394.

opposed to secular studies, 611.

opposes Talmudism, 379, 386.

origin and description of, 374-5.

persecuted, 393-4.

pilgrimages in the system of, 383-385.

propaganda of, 383.

ritual of, 386-7.

under Beer, of Mizricz, 380-1.

Chateaubriand, and the connection between Judaism and Christianity,

427-8.

reactionary, 477, 478.

Chaumette, atheist deputy to the National Assembly, 450.

Chaves, de, Jacob, pupil of Moses Chayim Luzzatto, 242.

Chaves, de, Moses, patron of Moses Chayim Luzzatto, 242.

Chaya, daughter of Elisha Schor, a Sabbatian, 275.

Chayim of Lublin, partisan of Eibeschütz, 261, 263.

Chayon, Nehemiah Chiya, Sabbatian, 215-31.

acquitted of the charge of heresy, 225.

at Amsterdam, 221-7.

at Constantinople, 227-8.

at Prague, 218.

countenanced by the Amsterdam council, 226.

death of, 231.

excommunicated, 216, 223-4.

freed from the ban, 228.

in Europe a second time, 230-1.

influences Eibeschütz, 248.

Kabbalistic theories of, 216-17, 219-20.

son of, converted to Christianity, 231.

Chebrath Dorshe Leshon Eber, society for the promotion of the Hebrew

language, 398.

Chelebi, Raphael Joseph, follower of Sabbataï Zevi, 124-5, 127-8, 129,

145, 160.

Chinuch Nearim, free school for Jews in Berlin, 416.

Chmielnicki, Bogdan, Cossack leader, allied with the Russians, 14.

and the Jews, 7.

cruelty of, 8.

his conditions of peace, 12.

Chorin, Aaron, rabbi, and innovations in Judaism, 569, 571.

Chosen people, the, meaning of, 718.

Christian IV, of Denmark, alluded to, 115.

Christian VII, of Denmark, subscribes to Mendelssohn's Pentateuch

translation, 334.

"Christian Denunciation, The," by Wagenseil, 186.

Christians study Hebrew, 178, 184.

Christians, the, under Mehmet Ali, 634.

Christina, of Sweden, and Manasseh ben Israel, 22, 23.

and the Jews of Vienna, 171.

Hebrew scholar, 21.

Cincinnati, theological seminary at, 700.

Circumcision regulated by the Frankfort Senate, 676-7.

"Citizen's Cry against the Jews, The," anti-Jewish pamphlet, 434.

"Claims of the Jews to German Citizenship," by Rühs, 517.

Clement IX, pope, death of, 171.

Clement XIII, pope, acquits the Jews of the blood-accusation, 285-6.

Clermont-Tonnerre, count, favors the emancipation of the Jews, 440,

441.

Cochelet, French consul-general, and the Damascus affair, 647, 649.

intrigues against Montefiore, 659, 660.

Coen, David, de Lara, philologist, 115.

Coen Belmonte, Bienvenida, poetess, 203.

Cohen, Malachi, rabbi at Leghorn, partisan of Eibeschütz, 264.

Cohen, Moses Gerson. See Anton, Charles.

Cohen, Naphtali, rabbi at Prague, and Nehemiah Chayon, 217, 218, 219,

227.

Cohen, Nehemiah, Messianic prophet, and Sabbataï Zevi, 152-4.

Cohen, Nehemiah Vital, rabbi at Venice, and Moses Chayim Luzzatto,

239.

Cohen, Raphael, rabbi of the "three communities," biography of, 570.

grandfather of Gabriel Riesser, 598.

opposed to secular studies, 402.

opposes Mendelssohn's Pentateuch translation, 330, 331, 333.

Cohen, Sabbataï, and the Cossack persecutions, 13.

Cohen, Shalom, employed by the orthodox party in Hamburg, 573.

Cohn, Isidore, founder of the Alliance Israélite Universelle, 701.

Collectants. See Rhynsburgians.

Collier, Thomas, defends the Jews, 46.

Commune, the Paris, favors the emancipation of the Jews, 443-445.

"Communities of the Friends of Light," established, 682.

"Conciliador" by Manasseh ben Israel translated, 22.

Conference of rabbis at Brunswick, 677-8, 681-2.

at Frankfort, 683-4.

"Confessions" by Heine, 553-5.

Confirmation ceremony, the, in various communities, 573.

introduced by Jacobson, 562.

Conforte, David, Jewish historian, 202.

Constantine, emperor, persecutes the Jews, 725.

Constantinople, Sabbataï Zevi in, 146-8.

Conversions to Christianity, 7-8, 13, 213, 420-22, 587.

to Judaism, 177-8.

Copenhagen, the "hep, hep" persecution in, 531.

Copia, Sarah. See Sullam, Sarah.

Correa, Isabel (Rebecca), Marrano poetess, 114.

Cossacks, the, ill-treatment of, 6.

insurrections of, 6-15.

origin of, 2.

persecute the Jews, 7-11, 14, 388.

religion of, 2-3.

Creizenach, Michael, reformer, 674-675.

Crémieux, Adolf, and the Damascus blood-accusation, 644.

appealed to, by the Jews of the East, 651.

appeals to Louis Philippe in behalf of the Damascus Jews, 645.

attempts to emancipate the Egyptian Jews, 662-4.

attends London meetings in behalf of the Damascus Jews, 645, 653.

hampered by the French government, 658.

influences Mehmet Ali, 660.

influences the European consuls in favor of the Damascus Jews, 660.

medal struck in honor of, 670-1.

ovations to, 667-8.

president of the Alliance Israélite Universelle, 702.

received by Mehmet Ali, 659.

reception of, in France and Italy, 658.

's proposal to commemorate the Damascus affair, 671.

"Critical History of the Old Testament, The," by Richard Simon, 179.

Cromwell, Oliver, and Marrano merchants in London, 49.

and the Old Testament, 26-8.

favors the admission of Jews into England, 35, 42-3, 44, 45.

institutes a commission on the Jewish question, 43-5.

invites Manasseh ben Israel, 38.

Cuenqui, Abraham, biographer of Sabbataï Zevi, 212.

Czarnicki, Polish general, 15.

Da Costa, Joseph, president of the Amsterdam community, 34.

Da Costa, Uriel, and the Church, 56-7.

characterized, 84.

death of, 64.

excommunicated, 59, 62.

hostile to Judaism, 58-9.

humiliation of, 63-4.

in prison, 60.

philosophical system of, 61.

retracts, 60-2.

returns to Judaism, 57-8.

D'Aguilar, Raphael Moses, rabbi at Amsterdam, Sabbatian, 139, 160.

Dalberg, von, Karl, imperial chancellor, and the emancipation of the

Jews, 468, 504-5.

Damascus affair, the, how to celebrate, 671-2.

Damascus, Jewish women of, tormented, 637.

Damascus, Jews of, accused of the murder of Father Tomaso, 635.

antagonized by the Christians, 662.

cross-questioned and tortured, 636, 637.

Damascus prisoners, the, liberated, 660, 661.

Damascus, the blood-accusation at. See Chap. XVII.

the Jewish community of, 634.

"Danger to the Welfare and Character of the Germans through the Jews,"

by J. F. Fries, 521.

"Dangerous Courses, The," by Joseph Penso, 113.

Daniel Jehuda. See Oliver y Fullana, de, Nicolas.

Danz, Frankfort deputy to the Congress of Vienna, and the emancipation

of the Jews, 519.

Darmstadt, the "hep, hep" persecution in, 530.

Da Silva, Samuel, opponent of Uriel da Costa, 59.

Daub, professor at Heidelberg, protects the Jews, 531.

Daya, character in "Nathan the Wise," 324-5.

Dayanim, assistant rabbis, 566.

"Defense of the Rational Worshipers of God," by Hermann Samuel

Reimarus, 320-23.

Delaborde, count, on the Turkish Jews, 649.

De la Vega, Joseph Penso. See Penso, Joseph.

De Lemon, Herz, active in the emancipation of the Dutch Jews, 453-5.

deputy to the Batavian National Assembly, 458.

Delitzsch, Franz, devoted to neo-Hebraic literature, 628-9.

Della Volta, Samuel Vita, Jewish scholar, 622.

Delmedigo, Joseph Solomon, scholar, 56, 75-80, 84.

as mathematician, 76.

attacks the Talmud, 77.

defends the Kabbala, 78.

wanderings of, 76-80.

Dembowski, Nicolas, bishop of Kamieniec, and the Frankists, 278-280,

281, 282.

Descartes, inconsistency of, 90.

studied by Spinoza, 89.

Deutz, Menahem, member of the French central consistory, 502.

De Wette, Bible exegete, 695.

De Witt, John, friend of Spinoza, 107-8.

"Die Waage," journal published by Börne, 542.

Diebitsch, von, Freiherr, a defender of the Jews, 470.

Diez, Prussian ambassador to Turkey, friendly to the Jews, 358-9.

Djabar, Jews of, attacked, 641.

Dob Beer. See Beer of Mizricz.

Dohm, Christian William, military councilor, advocate of the Jews,

336.

draws up a memorial in behalf of the Alsatian Jews, 351-8.

enlists Mirabeau's sympathy for the Jews, 366.

friendship of, with Mendelssohn, 351-2.

helps to frame the Westphalian constitution, 500.

Dolmäh, the, a Sabbatian-Mahometan sect, 211.

Dominicus Haman Epiphanes, _nom de plume_ of a Jewish writer, 471.

Donmäh, the. See Dolmäh, the.

Dormido, David Abrabanel, petitions Parliament to admit Jews, 35.

Dresden, Jews of, threatened with expulsion, 344.

Dubno, Solomon, commentator on Mendelssohn's Pentateuch translation,

329-34.

Duchan, Jacob Israel, Sabbatian, 156.

Duport favors the emancipation of the Jews in the National Assembly,

441, 447-8.

Dury, John, opposes the admission of the Jews into England, 46.

Düsseldorf, the "hep, hep" persecution in, 530.

Du Vallié, Paul (Isaac), convert, hostility of, to Jews, 175.