Introduction

Author(s):  
Adam Teller

This chapter provides an overview of the Polish–Lithuanian Jews' flight westward after 1648. Three major issues underlie the discussion as a whole. First is the nature of Jewish solidarity in those years and the fate of the Jewish refugees outside Poland–Lithuania when the religious imperative to ransom captives was not a relevant issue. Second is the policies adopted by the states of the Holy Roman Empire toward the refugees and their impact on the refugees themselves as they tried to rebuild their lives on German lands. Third is the new social and cultural formations created by the encounter of “eastern” and “western” Ashkenazim in the wake of the refugee crisis and their consequences for the development of German Jewry in both the short and long term.


Author(s):  
Adam Teller

This chapter focuses on the Jewish refugees in the Holy Roman Empire in 1648–1654. Though the vast majority of the Jews fleeing the Khmelnytsky uprising preferred to remain within the Commonwealth, there is evidence of Polish Jewish refugees in the empire from as early as 1649. There are no relevant data concerning Jewish refugees in Silesia before 1654, but it seems clear that Jewish refugees from Poland, together with displaced local Jews looking for a new home, were active in repopulating the towns in Bohemia and Moravia at that time. Since Jews had long been seen as important sources of income for their lords, there had often been power struggles for control over them between the monarch and the nobility. Thus, there was more going on than anti-Jewish legislation. In his orders of 1650, the king of Bohemia may have been continuing his efforts to put a brake on the nobility by depriving it of one of its sources of income: Jews. The chapter then considers the relationship between the Jewish refugee society and the local Jewish society. It also shows the limits of mercantilism, looking at the Polish Jews in Brandenburg.



2021 ◽  

Between the High Middle Ages and 1806, much of Central Europe was encompassed by an entity called the Holy Roman Empire (Heiliges Römisches Reich in the German spoken by most of its inhabitants). The polity’s name derived from the claims of its rulers—elected as “kings of the Romans” and sometimes subsequently crowned “Roman emperors”—to be successors of Charlemagne and ultimately of antique Rome, and to be the defenders of the Catholic Church and Christendom. Debates continue about when exactly the “Holy Roman Empire” began. Both the 9th-century Carolingian and 10th-century Ottonian realms are contenders, although the Latin term sacrum Romanum imperium did not gain widespread currency until the 13th century. In the period c. 1300–1650, the focus of this bibliography, the Empire exhibited important differences from most other realms in Europe, notably in its elective system of monarchical succession, its residual claim to universal authority (to be co-exercised, in theory, with the papacy), and its exceptional fragmentation among increasingly autonomous principalities, bishoprics, lordships, and cities (often called “territories”). It also notionally housed emerging polities in their own right, such as the Swiss Confederation and the kingdom of Bohemia; their relationship with the premodern Reich remains a contentious historiographical issue. At the same time, it shared some basic characteristics with neighboring kingdoms, being a monarchy that governed in concert with an aristocratic community of estates at emerging representative institutions (the diets, or Reichstage, as they were known by around 1500), and a polity that came increasingly to be identified with a national community (the deutsche Nation). Recent decades have therefore seen lively debates about how the Empire ought to be defined and categorized, and how its “constitution” (Reichsverfassung)—or, in another idiom, its political culture—operated. While several ambitious long-term histories of the Holy Roman Empire have attempted to synthesize the unwieldy evidence, it is important to keep in mind the challenges of generalizing about such a large entity over many centuries. As well as exhibiting considerable diversity across space, the Empire changed substantially over time in several respects. A phase of dynastic competition in high politics before 1437 gave way to a near-monopoly of control over the imperial office by the Habsburgs thereafter. A “monistic” imperial government, theoretically coordinated top-down by monarchs, developed into a “dualistic” conception of power in which the imperial estates shared in governance via collective institutions. In some regions, a landscape of utterly fragmented and intertwined jurisdictions held by myriad competing actors was gradually replaced by more clearly defined and centralized territories arranged hierarchically under princely families. Finally, the division of the estates between Catholics and various Protestant confessions in the course of the 16th and early 17th centuries contributed both to calamitous conflict (the Thirty Years’ War) and to the reshaping of the imperial constitution to manage the new confessional configuration (the 1555 “Religious and Profane Peace” of Augsburg, the 1648 Treaty of Osnabrück). The long and rich tradition of regional history (Landesgeschichte) in the German-speaking lands has enabled these changes to be studied at the local as well as the central level, and recent scholarship has made clear that both perspectives are indispensable to understanding the Holy Roman Empire’s complex structures and dynamics.



1983 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan I. Israel

Despite the wealth of published studies on individual German, Austrian, and Czech Jewish communities of the early modern era, it is remarkable how rare have been the attempts to synthesize the material and reach an overall assessment of the impact of the Thirty Years' War on Central European Jewish life. This gaping lacuna was noted some years ago by S. W. Baron, whose own general discussion of this subject is virtually unique. Immensely erudite, Baron's piece not only reveals the vast scope of the relevant material but tentatively suggests that the great European conflict was a key formative episode in the development of German Jewry, reversing earlier trends and preparing the way for the “Court Jews” of the later seventeenth century. This it undoubtedly was. Even so, Baron's evaluation is open to criticism on several counts. In particular, he fails to bring out, or make clear, just how crucial and how favorable a phase the Thirty Years' War was for the Jews of the Holy Roman Empire. Furthermore, while some effort is made in his essay to identify the key shifts of the period, such as an alleged drift of Jews from the countryside to the towns, it is arguable that this is not handled very convincingly or with sufficient precision. In any case, it is evident that a fuller, more systematic explanation is needed if we are to account for the singular fact that during this period of almost unparalleled disruption, turmoil, and suffering Christendom's perennial scapegoat fared considerably better than most of the rest of German society.



Author(s):  
Adam Teller

This chapter explores how Jewish refugees dealt with the problems involved in starting their lives afresh in the Holy Roman Empire—a dynamic and creative process whose effects were felt well beyond their immediate circle. A key issue the refugees faced in the empire was their feelings of strangeness and sometimes even alienation. Many retained warm feelings toward their previous home, and the foreign environment in which they found themselves was hard to come to terms with. The refugees' feeling of strangeness was also a result of cultural and religious difference within Jewish society. Even when they did find a place to settle down in, the refugees did not always feel at home. However, there may have been deeper issues at work. There were those who ascribed their difficulties directly to their refugee experiences. The chapter then focuses on Jewish economic activity. Most refugees seem to have found themselves in one of two professions: trade, often just peddling, or some form of religious occupation, from the lowly jobs of teachers or slaughterers to highly prestigious rabbinical posts.



Author(s):  
Adam Teller

This chapter assesses the meetings of the Polish Jewish refugees with the German Jews on the ground in the communities of the Holy Roman Empire. It begins by examining the chapbook Di bashraybung fun Ashkenaz un Polak (The Description of a German and a Polish Jew). Published in Prague sometime in the second half of the seventeenth century, it provides a satirical look at the interaction of the Polish Jewish refugees with the German Jews they met on their travels in the empire. The satirical poem presents this in two large blocks: the first gives the point of view of the Polish Jew and his complaints about his reception in the empire; the second brings the perspective of the German Jew and his opinions of the indigent refugees with whom he is faced. The chapter then determines the extent to which the chapbook was an accurate portrayal of the mid-seventeenth-century reality, considering the Jewish refugees in Frankfurt a.M. and Hamburg, as well as in Vienna.



2018 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 637-672 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Chilosi ◽  
Max-Stephan Schulze ◽  
Oliver Volckart

This article addresses two questions. First, when and to what extent did capital markets integrate north and south of the Alps? Second, how mobile was capital? Analysing a unique new dataset on pre-modern urban annuities, we find that northern markets were consistently better integrated than Italian markets. Long-term integration was driven by initially peripheral places in the Netherlands and Upper Germany integrating with the rest of the Holy Roman Empire where the distance and volume of inter-urban investments grew primarily in the sixteenth century. The institutions of the Empire contributed to stronger market integration north of the Alps.



Author(s):  
Beat Kümin

This essay surveys the long-term negotiation of religious reform in European villages. Following an account of institutional developments and popular religion in late medieval parishes, it traces the—selective—reception of the Lutheran, Zwinglian, and Calvinist messages, especially in the Holy Roman Empire, Scandinavia, the British Isles, Eastern Europe, and the Swiss Confederation, including the latter’s bi-confessional areas. Alongside personal piety, princely interests, and clerical leadership, the argument stresses the importance of political, socioeconomic, and cultural factors in determining whether peasants experienced substantial religious change. In the rare cases where rural communities could take their own decisions, some opted for Catholicism (Swiss Forest Cantons) and others for Protestantism (German imperial villages). The most thoroughly “reformed” regime emerged in early modern Scotland.



2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 134-136
Author(s):  
Charles S. Maier

To set a single agenda for German history would be a foolhardy task, but let us begin with a major generalization about the long-term development of the field. Two mega-issues have dominated the historiography and debates for a century or more, standing on the path of historical research like some huge boulders that can not be moved or even circumvented. The first concerns how the German communities of Central Europe had constructed a nation-state—Tantae molis erat Germanam condere gentem, to adapt Vergil. There was a Prussian-centered statist answer by scholars including Leopold von Ranke, Heinrich von Treitschke, and Friedrich Meinecke, and continuing through Christopher Clark'sIron Kingdom. A more decentered approach has, by contrast, stressed local experiences; liberal and participatory currents of a political or religious (often Roman Catholic in sympathy, e.g., the work of Franz Schnabel) or cultural nature; and, finally, the heritage of a federalist constitutionalism, whether instantiated in the Holy Roman Empire or in the later celebratory afterglow ofHeimat. The second mega-issue that dominated the historiography for the first generation—perhaps half-century—after World War II and the collapse of Nazism was one that I was asked about at my undergraduate oral examinations in the spring of 1960: Where did Germany go wrong? The catastrophic career of National Socialist Germany, both internally and for Europe in general, compelled my generation and later ones never to lose sight of that issue. Even those who rejected claims about long-term disabling flaws in the emergence of liberal democracy—the political original sin, so to speak—had to address that fundamental issue.



Author(s):  
Jonathan Israel

This chapter focuses on the Thirty Years War (1618–48), which marked a new phase in the interaction between Jews and European society in several respects. Especially in central Europe, the long and terrible conflict accelerated the reintegration of Jewry in progress since the 1570s, preparing the way for the ‘Court Jews’ of the later seventeenth century. While significant changes had already taken place in the period from 1570 down to the commencement of the Thirty Years War, care must be taken not to exaggerate the extent of central European Jewry's gains by 1618. The expansion of Jewish activity and communities was then still at a comparatively early stage. The first point to take into account in explaining the proliferation of Jewish communities in Germany, the Czech lands, and Alsace during the Thirty Years War is the special relationship between German Jewry and the Emperor. It had long been a fact that the chief protector of the Jews of the Holy Roman Empire was the Emperor. The chapter then looks at the role of Jacob Bassevi, the financier who was at the centre of the efforts to raise Jewish subsidies for the Emperor, during the Thirty Years War.



Author(s):  
Adam Teller

This chapter explains that it is hard to say when the influx of Jewish refugees to the Holy Roman Empire from the mid-seventeenth-century wars in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth actually came to an end. The movement of Polish Jews into the empire never really stopped; it just changed character. The large wave of refugees that began to appear around 1655 seems to have continued for about a decade, particularly if the internal migration of refugees within the empire is also taken into account. These Polish Jews were fleeing not only the violence itself but also its aftermath—poverty, disease, and intensified hostility on the part of their non-Jewish neighbors. However, at some point, perhaps in the later 1660s, the waves of refugees began to be replaced by a movement of economic migration. With their country at peace and processes of reconstruction under way, Polish Jews left the Commonwealth not under duress but in the hope of bettering themselves in the burgeoning economies of the empire.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document