JOSEPH JACOBS JOSEPH JACOBS (born in New South Wales in 1854), one of our leading scholars and men of letters; managing editor of the Jewish Encyclopedia; author of many authoritative books on Jewish subjects, including "Jews of Angevin England," "Studies in Jewish Statistics," "Jewish Ideals," etc. The present article is adapted from a chapter in Dr. Jacobs' forthcoming book which will deal comprehensively with the contribution of the Jew to modern progress.
THE eighteenth century was the era of the "benevolent despots," like Frederick II, Joseph II, Catherine II, who adopted the ruling principle of the Welfare-State—that the object of government should be the good of the people—but considered that it could only be carried out for the people, not by them. The weakness of the principle consisted in the difficulty of securing a heritable succession of capable benevolence, and the collapse of Prussia at Jena and of Joseph II's well-meant but unreflective reforms led, in the nineteenth century, to the triumph of the principle first enunciated in America and carried out in France—of government for the people by the people. The transition to the next stage, from religious toleration to religious liberty, is marked, as regards the Jews, by the tolerance edict of Joseph II, in 1781, which for the first time threw open service in the army to the Jews and placed them to some extent on the same level with other dissenters from the State-Church of Austria.
But this was still toleration and not liberty, and it was soon cast into the background by the full religious liberty granted by the French Revolution in 1791, in imitation of the American constitution of 1787, which entirely separated State and Church. The granting of full religious liberty to the Jews had previously been advocated by Mirabeau, and though Rousseau's influence, which was all-important in the Revolution, still retained a touch of Genevan intolerance, Jews came within his religious requirements for citizenship by their belief in Providence and in future rewards and punishment. It has to be remembered that in spirit, if not in will-power or influence, Louis XVI was of the school of the benevolent despots, and it was he who signed the edict of November 13, 1791, which for the first time in European history placed Jews on the same level as the adherents of all other creeds as regards civil and political qualifications. Holland was appropriately the first country to grant the same religious equality to its Jews.[B]
The French Revolution, from our present standpoint, is the more remarkable inasmuch as it is the only great European movement on which Jews had absolutely no influence, direct or indirect, owing to their inappreciable numbers and insecure position in the chief centers, Paris, Lyons, and Marseilles. The Revolution principles spread into the neighboring countries with the advance of the French arms. In Venice, the walls of the original Ghetto, from which all the rest received their name, fell at once on the entry of Napoleon's troops. No wonder they welcomed with fervor the victories of the French troops; we can catch, in Heine, echoes of the enthusiasm with which Napoleon was acclaimed the Liberator.
Napoleon's Recognition of the Jews
NAPOLEON'S own attitude was not so uniformly friendly to Jews. On his way back from Austerlitz in 1805 he learnt at Strassburg of the wide distress caused in Alsace by the exactions of certain Jewish usurers in that province, and on his return to Paris issued edicts directed against the Alsatian Jews, restricting their usurious activity. It is fair to add that these enactments were obviously directed against the usury of the Alsatian Jews, and not against the Jews in general, since they were specifically declared not to apply to the Jews of Bordeaux in the South or Northern Italy, then under Napoleon's control. It would indeed have been against the whole tendency of his career to have made the Jews an exception to that principle of the "carrière ouverte aux talents," which was the key-note of his whole policy, as it is logically to all war-lords. It was by no accident that similar indifference toward the creed of their soldiers, or civil servants, was shown by William the Silent, Wallenstein, Cromwell, William III, and Frederick the Great.
Napoleon's attention having thus been drawn to the Jewish Question, he proceeded with characteristic energy to solve it by summoning to Paris a representative assembly of the Jews of France, Germany and Italy, who should determine on what terms Jews could be admitted into a modern Country-State, which had been freed from the shackles of the medieval Church-State and only recognized a certain prerogative in the Church to which the majority of Frenchmen belonged (the Concordat of 1802). After summoning an assembly of Jewish Notables for a preliminary inquiry, in 1806, a more formal Sanhedrin was summoned in the following year, to which twelve test questions were submitted,—among them, whether the French Jews could regard France as their Fatherland and Frenchmen as their brothers, and the laws of the State as binding upon them. Further points were raised as to polygamy, divorce, and mixed marriages; other questions related to the position of Rabbis and the Jewish laws about usury.
All these problems were decided to the satisfaction of Napoleon, though some of them aroused much searching of heart among the more strictly orthodox. The outcome legally recognized that there was nothing in Jewish law or faith which prevented its adherents from being legitimate and full members of a modern State which, at that time, practically recognized Catholicism as the State-Church. The significance of the decision was far-reaching not alone for the Jews but for the whole European State system; it was a practical recognition that the Country, not the Faith, was the foundation of a nation and thus gave the final blow to the conception of a Church-Empire, which had upheld the contrary principle. It was not without significance that simultaneously the Emperor of Austria agreed to the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire.
Liberalism Draws the Jews to Its Ranks
BUT though the Jews had had no influence on the French Revolution and no share in Napoleon's revolutionary reorganization of West Europe, the benefit they reaped from both movements was second only to that of the serfs. For the Jews and the serfs were the two most oppressed classes under the feudal system still surviving. And so the Jews imbibed with enthusiasm the libertarian principles of the Revolution and the "open career" administration of Napoleon. They threw off with avidity most of the shackles which prevented their joining in general European culture, and Jewish parents of means immediately began giving their sons and, what is more, their daughters, the secular education which would adapt them to the careers now seemingly open to them, as publicists, lawyers, and civil servants. When the reaction came, under the Holy Alliance, with its attempt to revive the Church-State and the closed career of prerogative, Jews everywhere in Western Europe joined the Liberal forces, from whose triumph alone they could hope for a dispersal of the clouds which once more obscured the sun of liberty in which they had basked for a few short years. Jews soon ranked among the intellectual leaders of continental Liberalism, and from 1815 to 1848 exercised an appreciable influence on the course of public opinion. In particular a brilliant band of Jewish litterateurs in Germany helped to mediate between French Liberalism and German public opinion, and practically led the movement known as Young Germany, which opposed the cosmopolitan tendencies of the eighteenth century to the narrow nationalism of the Reaction and advocated the Revolution principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity, as against the revival of the claims of Authority and Privilege by the Holy Alliance. Boerne and Heine, Hartmann and Saphir, Jacoby and Karl Marx, are recognized by friends and foes alike as among the leading influences which led ultimately to the downfall of Metternich and his school.