A.D. 1700-1800.
THE JEWS IN GERMANY AND CENTRAL EUROPE.
The condition of the Jews in Germany, Prussia, and Austria, at
the outset of the eighteenth century, was, if we may believe the
historians of the time, an unusually wretched one. The accounts
given by the eminent German Jew, J. M. Jost, of the sufferings of
his countrymen at that period, cannot fail to move the reader’s
compassion.[201] ‘They were,’ to use his own phrase, ‘a heap of
suffering.’ Insult and wrong had, indeed, for many an age, been their
portion—a fact to which every history of them that has been written
bears melancholy witness. In many countries of Europe, however,
the period succeeding the Reformation had brought some amelioration
of their condition. But in the countries which we have now under
consideration, the Jews had sunk, if it was possible, to a lower
position than they had occupied before. Their miseries had, in truth,
endured so long, that they had become almost insensible to them. The
favourite German proverb, which was current for many centuries, may
by itself serve to show the light in which they were regarded. ‘Happy
is that town,’ was the saying, ‘in which there is neither a Jew, a
tyrant, nor a leper.’
To begin with Prussia. We have seen how, in 1670, the Jews had
been driven by Leopold I. out of Vienna, and had found a refuge in
Prussia; which the humanity of Frederick William, who, on account
of his wisdom and piety, obtained the popular title of ‘the Great
Elector,’ had accorded them. His son, Frederick I., lay under
obligations to Gompertz and Elias, two Jews who had been of great
service to him in providing him with resources in carrying on the
war in which he was engaged. When the Jews had been driven out of
Austria, they employed these two men to plead their cause; and the
result was, that a certain number of Jewish families were allowed
to establish themselves in Berlin, Potsdam, and other cities of
the Electoral State. From this permission the whole history of the
Prussian Jews may be said to date. The action of the Elector produced
considerable discontent among his subjects; but the Elector was firm,
and a few years afterwards a special body of rules for the Jews of
the electorate was drawn up and put in force. It was, on the whole,
extremely favourable to them, though they were still excluded from
all public offices, and freedom to worship according to their own
creed was not allowed them. But soon afterwards, some Jews, who were
the court jewellers, obtained permission to hold religious services
in their own private houses. This was a step towards allowing a
synagogue to be built, in which public worship was offered; but the
ritual, we are told, underwent the strictest examination, to make
sure that it did not contain anything insulting to Christianity. In
1712, the king prohibited, under severe penalties, the influx of
wandering Jews into the country—a measure which, though it might
seem to be unfriendly to the Jewish people, was in reality of the
greatest benefit to the respectable portion of them. During Frederick
William’s reign also, a splendid synagogue—the finest, it was said,
in that day in all Germany—was built and opened under the royal
sanction, notwithstanding the outcry that the concession provoked.
In 1717, King Frederick died, and was succeeded by Frederick
William, the father and predecessor of Frederick the Great. He was a
sovereign of the most despotic character, though neither cruel nor
unjust. His characteristic qualities were displayed in his dealings
with the Jews. He continued the privileges granted to them by his
father—indeed, added some others. But, on the other hand, he imposed
upon them some rather arbitrary burdens, which, however, savour more
of eccentricity than harshness. Thus, if the king at his hunting
parties killed more wild boars or stags than he could consume at his
own table, the Jews were obliged to purchase what remained. It is
said that the Jews, unable to eat up the venison themselves, made
a present of it to the public hospitals. Again, on the occasion
of any event of importance in a family, such as succession to an
inheritance, the birth of an heir, the marriage of a son, etc.,
every Jew was obliged to make purchases to the amount of three
hundred thalers at the royal porcelain factory. Towards the end of
the century, during the reign of Frederick William II., they were
released from this obligation on paying down the lump sum of four
thousand thalers.
In 1740, Frederick William died, and his son, who bears in history
the name of ‘the Great,’ succeeded to the throne. His dealings
with the Jews were very peculiar. He had no predilection for them;
indeed, whatever personal feeling he entertained for them was of an
opposite character. The friend and pupil of Voltaire, he shared
that philosopher’s prejudice against them. They were no friends of
Christianity, to be sure; but they were the religious ancestors of
the Christians, the strongest witnesses of the truth of the Gospel,
and as such odious in his eyes. On the other hand, there was a
grim sense of justice discernible even in his strange legislation
respecting them; and, independently of this, he was shrewd enough
to see that persecution of them was by no means a profitable
policy. ‘No one ever got any good by injuring that nation,’ was
his observation on one occasion. Indeed, his legislation seems to
have been designed more for the purpose of preventing the increase
of their numbers, than for exacting severe imposts or restricting
their civil privileges. Thus, in 1750, the edict he issued for the
regulation of the Jews in his dominions draws a strict distinction
between the Jews that are tolerated by inheritance and those that
are personally tolerated—where the toleration, that is to say, does
not descend to the children of the person to whom it is granted. To
the latter class belonged all those who were not directly engaged
in trade, or did not hold any post or office in a synagogue. Among
those who were tolerated by inheritance, the privilege of domicile
descended to one child only. Subsequently, in consideration of the
payment of seventy thousand thalers, the privilege was extended to
a second child, though he could only enjoy it on producing evidence
that he was in possession of a property of one thousand thalers. A
foreign Jew could not settle in Prussia, unless he paid an exorbitant
price for his admission. If the widow of a protected Jew married
one who was not so protected, she was obliged to leave the country.
Besides these burdens, and of course the ordinary taxes paid by all
the king’s subjects, there were several imposts. There was a patent
of protection whenever a child was born, a tax upon every marriage,
and upon the election of every elder of a synagogue. The Jew was
also excluded from all civil offices, from agriculture, from keeping
an inn, a brewery, or a distillery, from setting up a manufactory
of any kind, or from practising the profession of a physician or a
surgeon. All Jewish servants who wished to marry were obliged to
leave the country. Finally, the Jews were interdicted from acquiring
house property, unless they had the express permission of the king.
In no case could a Jew possess more than forty houses.
In 1786, Frederick William II., the nephew of Frederick the Great,
succeeded to his uncle’s throne. He was a wise and merciful
sovereign, and he endeavoured to ameliorate the condition of the
Jews, partly by mitigating the rigour of existing laws, partly by
enacting new ones. Since his time, the state of things has gradually
but surely improved. But the legislation of those times, as an
intelligent writer has remarked, ‘bears the stamp of the fearfully
degraded state of the Jewish population, and of the oppressive,
exclusive, and repressive measures which were thought needful to the
interests of that portion of the community.’[202]
The position of the Jews in the Austrian dominions, in the early
part of the eighteenth century, was no better than in Prussia. The
Emperor Charles VII. entertained a dislike to them, which induced him
to listen readily to any enemy who traduced them. The same was the
case to perhaps a greater extent with the Empress Maria Theresa, his
daughter. A few years after her accession she decreed the banishment
of all the Jews in her dominions, amounting, it is believed, to
two hundred thousand persons. A considerable number did take their
departure; and the rest would have had to follow, if the intercession
of the English and Dutch Governments had not induced her to forego
her purpose. Subsequently she relaxed the severity of her dealings
with them. She not only permitted their residence, but allowed
them to follow certain trades, as, for example, dealing in jewels,
or opening shops as money-changers or manufacturers. They were
permitted to carry on their services in their synagogues, though they
were strictly confined to their houses on Sundays, especially during
the hours when Christian worship was going on.
When Joseph II. came into full possession of the imperial power, by
the death of his mother in 1780, one of his first acts was to publish
an edict of toleration, by which the status of the Jews was greatly
improved. All the old prohibitive regulations were annulled. The Jews
were at liberty to take up their abode in any town throughout the
Austrian dominions, and in the country also—though, in that case,
they were required to seek the Emperor’s permission. He also opened
to them the schools and universities throughout the empire, allowing
them to take degrees as doctors in medicine, civil law, and moral
philosophy; but he obliged them to open elementary schools of their
own for the preparation of their children to enter those belonging
to the State. He allowed them to follow any trade they fancied, with
the single exception of the manufacture of gunpowder. They were
free also to attend the public markets and fairs throughout the
country, to wear what apparel they pleased, to occupy any house in
any quarter of the towns, and use the public promenades as freely as
the other inhabitants. They might also enter the army—indeed, after
a while, they became liable to the conscription—and might be made
non-commissioned officers; but as, according to the military code of
Austria, none can hold commissions who are not of noble blood, they
could rise no higher. Lastly, their children were protected against
proselytism, it being unlawful to attempt inducing them to change
their religion until they had passed their fourteenth year. This
edict may be regarded as marking a new era in Jewish history; and
whatever amelioration may have taken place in European legislation,
so far as they are concerned, in reality dates from it.
In 1781 Councillor Dohm published his famous treatise ‘on the
amendment of the political position of the Jews.’ This writer
upholds the principle of bestowing liberty and equality of rights on
the Jews, of their free admission to schools and colleges belonging
to the State, of their unfettered practice of trades and professions,
and even of their participation in public offices of trust. But he
contends that the authority of the Rabbins over their congregations,
their infliction of discipline, and, under some circumstances, of
excommunication, must be upheld by the State. The publication of the
work excited a good deal of angry feeling among the German Jews.
The renowned Moses Mendelssohn, of whom we shall speak in the next
chapter, published a letter respecting it, in which he denounced the
spiritual tyranny of the Rabbins in indignant language, which had a
very wide and important effect on his countrymen.
In Russia, during this century, the position of the Jews was fully
as miserable as in any European country. It has been already pointed
out, that by the strict law of the land their presence was not
permitted at all. And in Muscovy proper the exclusion was enforced
with stern inflexibility. Under Peter the Great a few Jews were
admitted into other portions of his dominions, the Czar having
declared—so at least popular rumour affirms—that ‘he did not fear
the presence of any Jews, for his Russians were a match for the
craftiest among them.’ But during the reign of Elizabeth (A.D. 1545)
their residence in Russia was again proscribed. They had contrived to
secure the property of certain Siberian exiles, and invested it in
foreign countries. Later in the century the policy of the emperors
towards the Jews seems to have been to drive them out of the towns
into the rural districts, with the idea, so often entertained by
one theorist or another, of inducing them to discard commerce for
agriculture. In the Ukraine, and there only, apparently, they have
adopted that mode of life.[203]
Of the Jews in Poland, which for many ages has been the country in
all Europe where the Hebrew race has found the most secure home and
the most hospitable treatment, we have not yet spoken. Their history,
during the eighteenth century, is mainly the history of religious
adventurers and rival sects. It will be better to consider these in a
separate chapter.
FOOTNOTES:
[201] J. M. Jost, a German Jew, born A.D. 1793, died 1860, a
professor first at Berlin, and afterwards at Frankfort-on-the-Maine.
He is the author of the _History of the Israelites_, in nine volumes,
published in 1820-28, and of the _History of Judaism_, in three
volumes, which appeared later. Up to the time of the appearance of H.
Graetz’s great work, _The History of the Jews_, Jost’s was the most
trustworthy authority. ‘It is the mature work,’ writes Milman, ‘of
an indefatigable and eminently fair writer. Of course, as a Jew, he
presents the doctrines and usages of his race in a favourable light,
but he always fully deserves a respectful and candid hearing’ (Milm.
_Hist. Jews_, vol. ii. p. 476 n.).
[202] _Israel and the Gentiles_ (Da Costa, p. 519), a work I have
often consulted with profit.
[203] The readiness of the Jews of the Ukraine to employ themselves
in agriculture may be accounted for by the extreme fertility of the
soil. In natural productiveness no portion of Europe surpasses, and
few can be found to equal it. Wheat, oats, and barley are raised with
scarcely any exertion of labour, and the pasture-land is rich and
luxuriant. This may account for the singular difference of habits
which the Jews of these countries exhibit, as compared with their
countrymen everywhere else. It should be added that, as there is
little trade and few manufactures, many of them, at all events, must
live by agriculture or not at all.