Abstract

The turmoil of the ancien régime in Europe, the Revolution in France and the Napoleonic wars left no kehillah untouched. The Anglo-Jewish community combined its patriotism with aloofness from overt political activity in its own specific interest. Anglo Jewry would fight not for the rights of man but for the less politically loaded rights of Englishmen. A very rare if not unique example of political initiative was Abraham Tang’s pamphlet of 1770 in defence of John Wilkes and democracy, A Discourse Addressed to the Minority. The lasting memory of the délêle over the ‘Jew Bill’ of 1753 (see above, p. 156) and the anti-alien agitation of the 1790s combined to still any overt pressure on the part of the leaders.1 This quiescence certainly did not inhibit intervention on behalf of Jews abroad (for example at the Congress of Vienna). But not until 1829 did communal leaders prepare a petition calling for some relief from the Jews’ civil and political disabilities. It was then suggested (by Nathan Mayer Rothschild) that their petition should also call for full protection in holding and conveying of Landed Property’. 2 This may well be interpreted as a step towards political emancipation, for if a man who possesses a stake in the country cannot share in its government, then who can? This was the rationale that justified attaching financial conditions to the franchise. In Prussia any notion of political activity in response to the French model would have to overcome the suspicious taint of revolution.3KeywordsJewish CommunityJewish PopulationCredit TradeCommunal AutonomyJewish LeaderThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call