Sources on Jewish Self-Government in the Polish Lands from Its Inception to the Present 9004191364, 9789004191365

Citation preview

Sources on Jewish Self-Government in the Polish Lands from Its Inception to the Present

Sources on Jewish Self-Government in the Polish Lands from Its Inception to the Present Edited by

François Guesnet Jerzy Tomaszewski z”l

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Guesnet, François, editor. | Tomaszewski, Jerzy, 1930-2014, editor. Title: Sources on Jewish self-government in the Polish lands from its  inception to the present / edited by François Guesnet, Jerzy Tomaszewski. Description: Leiden ; Boston : Brill, [2022] | Includes index. | Summary:  “This source-reader invites you to encounter the world of one thousand  years of Jewish self-government in eastern Europe. It tells about the  beginnings in the Middle Ages, delves into the unfolding of communal  hierarchies and supra-communal representation in the early modern  period, and reflects on the impact of the partitions of the  Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and of growing state interference, as  well as on the communist and post-communist periods. Translated into  English from Hebrew, Latin, Yiddish, Polish, Russian, German, and other  languages, in most cases for the first time, the sources illustrate  communal life, the interdependence of civil and religious leadership,  the impact of state legislation, Jewish-non-Jewish encounters, reform  projects and political movements, but also Jewish resilience during the  Holocaust”—Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2021041321 (print) | LCCN 2021041322 (ebook) | ISBN  9789004191365 (hardback) | ISBN 9789004501614 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Jews—Poland—History—Sources. | Jews—Poland—Politics  and government—Sources. Classification: LCC DS134.53 .S68 2022 (print) | LCC DS134.53 (ebook) | DDC 943.8/004924—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021041321 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021041322

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. ISBN 978-90-04-19136-5 (hardback) ISBN 978-90-04-50161-4 (e-book) Copyright 2022 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Hotei, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink, Brill mentis, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Böhlau Verlag and V&R Unipress. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Requests for re-use and/or translations must be addressed to Koninklijke Brill NV via brill.com or copyright.com. Brill has made all reasonable efforts to trace all rights holders to any copyrighted material used in this work. In cases where these efforts have not been successful the publisher welcomes communications from copyright holders, so that the appropriate acknowledgements can be made in future editions, and to settle other permission matters. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

This volume is dedicated to the memory of Jacob Goldberg (1924–2011)

∵

Contents Acknowledgments ix Preface xi 1

The Medieval Period 1 Hanna Zaremska

2

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795 62 Adam Teller

3

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815 142 Cornelia Aust

4

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914 213 Michael K. Schulz

5

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914 283 Wacław Wierzbieniec

6

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915 352 Artur Markowski

7

Imperial Russia’s North-Western and South-Western Provinces, 1815–1914 422 Andrei Zamoiski

8

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939 484 Piotr Kendziorek

9

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020 556 August Grabski with Piotr Grudka

10

Epilogue: Refractions of Jewish Self-Government under German Occupation in the Second World War 627 Marcin Urynowicz



Glossary 681 Index 685

Acknowledgments Research for this volume was funded through a grant from the GerdaHenkel-Stiftung, based on discussions between two emerging scholars, Artur Markowski and Marcin Soboń, with the later project leaders and editors, François Guesnet and Jerzy Tomaszewski, on the need to provide a comprehensive assessment on the history of Jewish self-government in eastern central Europe, from their original settlement in the medieval Polish and Lithuanian lands through the age of partions, and since the reconstitution of a Polish state. Outlines of potential chapters were discussed by future authors and invited experts during a two-day workshop in October 2009 at the University of Warsaw funded by the Rothschild Foundation (Hanadiv) Europe. Among these was the late Jacob Goldberg, doyen of early modern Polish-Jewish history. His understanding of the connectedness of Polish and Jewish history and his contribution to the history of Jewish self-government has been an inspiration for this project. We are grateful to Olga Goldberg to have agreed to dedicate this volume to his memory. Jerzy Tomaszewski, who passed away in November 2014, was fully involved in the initial stages of the project, consisting in discussing the selection of sources and outlines of the introductions to the individual chapters with the authors. The editors acknowledge the central contribution of the authors. Their expertise in both extant scholarship and archival records allowed for the unique profile of this volume documenting the major developments and turning points in the history of Jewish self-government in eastern central Europe on the one hand, and the local and everyday experience of communal responsibility and administration on the other. Despite a number of common denominators in the chapters, each author offers an individual approach and understanding of the scope and impact of Jewish self-government in a given period and territory. The sources documented in this volume were translated from Hebrew, Latin, early modern and modern Polish, Yiddish, Middle High German, Russian, and German, into English, by expert translators and in frequent and close consultation with the authors, editors, and the copy-editor. Queries and comments by translators helped identify interferences in terminology and avoid errors. Anna Podolska translated those introductions originally written in Polish, and a very considerable part of the Polish sources. Her legal and historical expertise contributed significantly to this project. The editors are equally indebted to Joyce

x

Acknowledgments

Rappaport, copyeditor of the entire volume. Her experience and professionalism were instrumental in shaping a coherent whole. The editors are grateful for the advice and support by the Jewish Studies editor at Brill Academic Publishers, Katelyn Chin. They acknowledge the crucial administrative support of staff at the UCL Department of Hebrew and Jewish Studies—most notably Vanessa Richards—and of the UCL Research Administration. Zuzanna Krzemień and Ellery Weil, research students at the Department of Hebrew and Jewish Studies of University College London, kept an eye on the ever-growing number of files and translations, and liaised with authors and translators. Katharina Schramm offered much valued non-expert advice on the glossary, and helped eliminate typographical inconsistencies on the way. Tim Spence has contributed to this volume both as translator and as author of the index. Their contribution is gratefully acknowledged. Natalia Romik and Piotr Jakoweńko designed the cover—their creative input is much appreciated. Last but not least, the editors wish to thank the Gerda-Henkel-Stiftung for the generous and patient support of this project. London, June 2021

Preface

A Thousand Years of Jewish Self-government This volume offers a chronological survey of sources reflecting on forms of Jewish self-government in eastern central Europe over a period of almost a thousand years. The focus is on the Polish and Lithuanian lands, where Ashkenazic Jews from the late medieval period onwards established an evergrowing number of communities. Throughout history, borders would change and these territories would belong to a variety of commonwealths and empires, and would be ruled by kings and queens, princes and princesses, emperors and empresses, conquerors, occupiers, and dictators.1 Only for a fraction of the period under consideration did Jewish communities exist under democratically elected governments. This volume illustrates how the local Jewish community emerged as a resilient legal, political, and social entity despite these permutations. The continuity of its legal and political framework, its complex structure, its impact on Jewish political practices, its contribution in shaping religious life and self-perception, all contributed to make self-governance in this region a salient, if not the most prominent, feature of this core entity of a particular Jewish diasporic community.2 From its inception, Jewish self-governance in the Polish and Lithuanian lands integrated both non-Jewish self-governing practices as well as templates provided through the by-laws developed in the German lands in the late Middle Ages in the wake of the devastations of crusades, known as takanot shum.3 1 Individual chapters cover different territories, following the shifting borders of the Polish and Lithuanian lands. The selection of sources also followed the authors’ expertise and assessment. Thus, sources in the first chapter overall focus on the territories of the Polish Crown including Wielkopolska, Małopolska, and Mazovia, and chapter 8 has an emphasis on sources concomitant with today’s Belarus. Territories of the Russian partition which would become part of the Russian Empire and would not fall within the borders of the Second Polish Republic are not considered in the sources of chapter 9. A helpful collection of maps to follow the territorial changes of Polish and Lithuanian lands are included in Antony Polonsky, The Jews of Poland and Russia, vol. 1: 1350–1881 (Oxford, Portland, Ore., The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2010), XVI–XXX; vol. 2: 1881–1914 (2010), XIV–XXV, vol. 3: 1914–2008 (2012), XVI–L. 2 For a chronological survey of the different stages of Jewish self-government in eastern Europe see François Guesnet, Antony Polonsky: ‘Introduction’, in idem (eds.), Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, vol. 34 of Polin. Studies in Polish Jewry (London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization/Liverpool University Press, 2022), 1–38. 3 Israel M. Ta-Shma, ‘On the History of the Jews in Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Poland’, in Gershon David Hundert (ed.), Polin. Studies in Polish Jewry, vol. 10 Jews in Early Modern Poland (London, Portland, Ore.: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 1997), 287–317;

xii

Preface

Privileges and charters issued for Jewish communities by Christian rulers in central and eastern central Europe in the framework of Magdeburg law offered the essential non-Jewish legal framework for the emergence of an institutionalized Jewish community. In order to encourage Jewish settlement, Polish and Lithuanian privileges considerably expanded the scope of Jewish adjudication, beyond incentives such as economic freedom and the protection from calumnies. Natan Hanover, the chronicler of the early modern Jewish community in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, called the application of Jewish law by Jewish judges in Jewish courts the community’s the ‘Pillar of Justice’ (see source 2.21).4 It allowed the Jewish community to grow increasingly confident in establishing lasting communal structures and institutions.5 The emergence of Jewish self-government in the Polish and Lithuanian lands is the result of a dynamic entanglement of Jewish and non-Jewish legal and political traditions, and an object par excellence for histoire croisée (entangled history).6 From the late sixteenth century onwards, the local level of Jewish selfgovernance was complemented by the supra-communal level of regular meetings of delegates of Jewish communities and provinces in the Jewish councils (va’adim) in both the Polish Crown and Lithuania. Established by the authorities in order to apportion taxes to the treasury, these councils fostered communication and coordination between Jewish delegates from the entire Commonwealth. The council’s frequent meetings contributed to the emergence of an oligarchic Jewish elite which remained unchallenged until the eighteenth century, not in the least due to the close economic and political relationships between this elite on the one hand, and the Polish and Lithuanian nobility and aristocracy, the crown, and the church on the other.7 The spiritual challenge of Hasidism to the existing communal order was probably the clearest sign that despite the comparative security of Jewish communal life in the

4 5 6

7

Rainer Josef Barzen, ‘The Transfer of Tradition from West to East: The Takanot Shum between the Rhineland and Poland in the Late Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period’, in Guesnet, Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 39–53. In the following, sources are referred to by their number in the source section of each chapter, in this case: source 21 in chapter 3. Joseph Davis, ‘The Reception of the Shulkhan Arukh and the Formation of Ashkenasic Jewish Identity’, in AJS Review 26 (2002), 251–76. Michael Werner, Bénédicte Zimmermann: ‘Penser l’histoire croisée: entre empirie et réflectivité,’ in Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 58, 1 (2003), 7–36. English as eidem: ‘Beyond Comparison: Histoire croisée and the challenge of reflexivity’, in History and Theory 45 (Feb 2006), 30–50. For incisive observations about the overall consolidation of Jewish communal cohesion and governance across Europe in the early modern period see David Ruderman, Early Modern Jewry. A New Cultural History (Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press: 2010), 57–98.

xiii

Preface

Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the petrified hierarchy of the Jewish community held little promise for considerable segments of the Jewish populace. The challenge of Hasidism was a religious one (3.24, 3.34), but also one concerning community governance (3.23). The partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1772, 1793, 1795) abolished the ancien regime in eastern central Europe, and with it the constitutional foundations of the early modern Jewish community. The emergence of social elites identifying not with the traditional community but with other cultural templates such as the Enlightenment, or pursuing social and cultural integration, further challenged existing hierarchies (3.17, 3.20, 4.5, 4.17, 6.37, 7.25) and community coherence, as did the emergence of large (and often very large) Jewish communities.

…

The structure of this source reader is both chronological and regional. Each chapter is introduced by an expert author surveying the political and historical framework and the main features of Jewish self-governance for the period and region under consideration, listing the most relevant scholarship in a short bibliography and referencing pertinent scholarly editions of primary source material. The first two chapters document the incremental emergence of Jewish communal structures and hierarchies in the Middle Ages (Hanna Zaremska) and of a more complex and differentiated Jewish self-governance in the early modern period (Adam Teller). Zaremska presents the earliest features of Jewish collective organization, which were still quite rudimentary, with references to individual merchants or entrepreneurs establishing a Jewish presence in the Polish lands. Both Jewish and non-Jewish sources demonstrate that the earliest generations of Jews in this part of the world would incrementally develop institutions such as cemeteries or place of worship, and establish relations to landlords and local non-Jewish communities.8 The existing evidence does not allow us to speak of institutionalized Jewish self-government. As Zaremska writes, the famous privilege of Bolesław the Pious of Kalisz of 1264, makes ‘no mention at all of communal self-government’. The early modern period sees the emergence of a Jewish community with far-reaching prerogatives for its leadership, based on privileges by the Polish kings as well as the nobility. This leadership draws its authority on the one 8 Jürgen Heyde, ‘The Beginnings of Jewish Self-Government in Poland: A Tangled History’, in Guesnet, Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 54–69; Maria Cieśla, ‘Between the Castle and the Town Hall: The Kahal of Słuck in the Seventeenth Century’, ibid., 117–128.

xiv

Preface

hand from Jewish religious and legal traditions implemented with less nonJewish interference than in the case of most other European-Jewish diasporic communities, and on the other from the political power of the Polish crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and of noble landlords. Because the early modern period is of such fundamental significance for the emergence of the most complex system of Jewish communal self-governance in diasporic history, this chapter offers the most detailed discussion of the practices, the ideal, the transformation and beginning dismantling of Jewish autonomy in eastern central Europe, ending with the abolition of the Council of Four Lands (1764) and the first partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1772). The following chapter by Cornelia Aust focuses on the transitional period between the first partition, the destruction of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the establishment of the post-Napoleonic order (1815). In a first section, it reflects the discussions during the Four Year Sejm (1788–1792) about questions about the legal status of Jewish communities, and the ways Jewish communities joined the fray through plenipotentiaries sent to Warsaw. The sources in this chapter demonstrate that in the wake of the first partition, both Jews and non-Jews offered a wide range of views about the desirability of maintaining or dismantling the prerogatives of Jewish civil and religious leaders, and engaged with a full range of related issues: the legal standing of the individual community, the power of the community leadership, rabbinical authority, and the place of the community in the political and legal fabric of the commonwealth. In the following sections, the legal and political changes in the status of Jewish communities is discussed for the Prussian partition, the Duchy of Warsaw 1807–1815, the Austrian partition, and the Russian partition. The subsequent four chapters trace simultaneous developments in four distinct administrative entities, namely the Prussian partition (Michael Schulz), the Austrian partition (Wacław Wierzbieniec), the Kingdom of Poland (Artur Markowski), and the Russian partition (Andrei Zamoiski), between the Congress of Vienna (1815) and World War One. While each of these territories followed a different pathway through the age of partitions, there a few common features. On the level of state administration, the overall modernization of state administration brought about a new appetite for state interference in communal affairs, as did the need for the three partitioning powers to develop their strategies to integrate a large number of Jews. This new impetus is reflected very prominently in the eagerness to gather and organize knowledge about the Jews in general, the institutional set-up of their communities, income streams and expenses, administrative roles, the rabbinate in general, and rabbinical adjudication in particular. It is also the period during which central authorities issued legal frameworks for the organization and administration of a Jewish

Preface

xv

community. From a point of view of the historical documentation of Jewish self-governance, the nineteenth century brings about a multiplication of lists, charts, and tables, reflecting an attempt to grasp the nature and functioning of the community. This development was irreversible, and left its mark also on legislation during the German occupation of Polish lands in World War One (8.2) and in the Second Republic (8.3, 8.8). Between the wars, the polarization within the wider Jewish community, reflected in a number of sources in this reader, as well as continued attempts by state authorities and legislators to contain Jewish aspirations for autonomy, contributed to continued political confrontations, with local communities as their frequent arena.9 Equally, after the catastrophe of the Holocaust and the almost complete annihilation of Jewish life in eastern Europe, state authorities defined the legal framework to organize Jewish communal life (9.2, 9.12). This overall chronological order of chapters is interrupted for the period of the Second World War, and the German occupation of Polish and other eastern European lands. Already during the military campaign conquering Poland, Nazi Germany established Judenräte in order to facilitate measures of occupation and persecution. The Jews in occupied Poland, facing unheard-of brutality and persecution by the German invaders, established structures and agencies of self-help (in Warsaw known by this very term, in Yiddish aleyn-hilf), support, and education, at times with a degree of cooperation with those coerced into joining the Judenrat, or independently from it.10 Their commitment was in most cases inspired by a sense of duty and responsibility, but also by the experience of many generations of communal self-governance. Therefore, an inclusion of the period of terror, persecution, and annihilation seems legitimate. To avoid the impression that this period continued the long tradition of Jewish self-governance, and because this darkest chapter in Jewish diasporic history destroyed an entire civilization, this chapter has been placed at the end of this source reader.

9 Antony Polonsky, ‘Jewish Involvement in Local Kehilot, the Sejm, and Municipalities in Interwar Poland’, in Guesnet/Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 368–86; Szymon Rudnicki, ‘The Struggle in the Polish Parliament for Jewish Autonomy and the Nature of the Jewish Community’, ibid., 345–67; Marcos Silber, ‘“One of Them” as “One of Us”: Jewish Demands for National Autonomy as a Means to Achieve Civic Equality during the First World War’, ibid., 321–44. 10 Patterns of Jewish Leadership in Nazi Europe, 1933–45 (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1977), J.  Trunk, Judenrat: the Jewish Councils in Eastern Europe under Nazi Occupation (New York 1972); Samuel Kassow, Who Will Write Our History? Emanuel Ringelblum, the Warsaw Ghetto, and the Oyneg Shabbes Archive (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2007).

xvi

Preface

Documenting almost a millennium of Jewish–non-Jewish interaction in the Polish lands, this source reader extends an invitation to browse. The chronological organization allows it to grasp better the shifts in the functioning of Jewish self-governance. The administrative framework of the local Jewish community relied increasingly on state legislation. This framework obviously only reflects a segment of the overall Jewish experience in eastern Europe. But the religious, cultural, and social dimensions of this experience were shaped to a very significant degree, and up until the devastations of World War Two, by a strong attachment to and engagement with the local community. The following section introduces some prominent perspectives reflected in the sources which, in their vast majority, are made available in English for the first time.

…

One of the most salient features of Jewish self-governance in the Polish and Lithuanian lands is the prominence of the local Jewish community, and its administration. From the early modern period onwards, it was the very core of Jewish self-governance in the Polish and Lithuanian lands. Its individual bylaws were based in Jewish law and tasked its board to administer and oversee its membership and its assets, its relations to neighbouring non-Jewish communities, the authorities, and the government. As Hanna Zaremska explains in the first chapter, the first instance of a Jew identified as community leader is in the year 1433 – more than five generations after the privilege by Bolesław the Pious of 1264. References to ‘elders’ and sometimes Jewish ‘bishops’ or ‘scholars’ become more frequent, though it would be difficult to argue for a full-fledged, institutionalized Jewish self-government at this stage. The emerging leadership is a small group of peers recognized by the monarch and the authorities, entering into legal and other arrangements, and establishing a pattern of oligarchic rule. In exceptional circumstances, individual Jews and their families could concentrate both wealth and political power in their hands, such as Lewko (1.7), Israel and Miriam (1.17), or the prominent Fiszel family in Kraków in the late fifteenth century (1.22). The most prominent leaseholders of magnate latifundia would strive for similar, exceptionally powerful positions. The prevailing model which would emerge over time was, however, one of an oligarchic leadership, with a group of leading families vying and competing for prominence and control, and monopolizing the more powerful roles in the emerging community hierarchy. The board constituted the civil leadership of the community taking responsibility for a vast range of vital functions, such as religious life, education, charity, and administering internal taxation for communal purposes, as well

Preface

xvii

as taxes paid to the commonwealth, the landlord, or debtors (2.24) of the community. A wide range of both honorary roles and of paid functions including rabbis, slaughterers, and many more, appears throughout the long period under consideration in this volume, and illustrate the complexity of the Jewish community’s hierarchy in the Polish and Lithuanian lands, in partitioned Poland, and after the re-emergence of Poland after World War One.11 The sources in this volume demonstrate the permutations of these roles. Before the consolidation of the community board or kahal in the early modern period, relatively informal groups of ‘elders’ are documented for the medieval period (1.10, 1.17, 1.19, 1.21, 1.25), with evidence of growing institutionalization such as seals and self-definition as representatives of the entire community first appearing in an agreement of 1485 (1.24 and p. 8). Acknowledging that the authorities and nonJewish neighbours considered the Jewish community to represent all Jews, it was regularly involved in demonstrating loyalty to the Commonwealth, its values and leaders (5.2, 5.3, 8.21, 8.28–29). Several sources in this volume reflect the growing complexity of the communal hierarchy in the early modern period (2.9, 2.11, 2.14, 2.15, 2.18, 3.14, 3.22, 3.26), with community boards appointing paid officials, such as rabbis (see below), slaughterers (3.11), or synagogue beadles (4.19), and precise regulations circumscribing the responsibilities of these honorary officers and paid officials. From the mid-eighteenth century onwards, a growing interference by state authorities is perceptible. The contemporaries perceived this interference as a loss of self-governance (2.37). It seems important to bear in mind that the considerable efforts of state authorities to control individual Jewish communities, and the almost complete lack of success in establishing other, supra-communal tools of control, illustrate the continued role and prominence of the local community in the Polish and Lithuanian lands as the fulcrum of Jewish social, religious, and political life.12 This became particularly obvious in the Second 11 12

Anna Michałowska–Mycielska, The Jewish Commnity: Authority and Social Control in Poznań and Swarzędz, 1650–1793 (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego 2008); see also the introductions to the individual chapters. In this context, a comparison contrasting the Polish-Lithuanian case and central, western and southern European developments seems particularly promising; see e.g. the discussion of Jewish regional leadership without communities in late medieval and early modern Italy in Sabine Siegmund, ‘Communal Leaders and Representation of Jews as “Communities”’, in: Jack Wertheimer (ed.), Jewish Religious Leadership. Image and Reality (New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary, 2004), 333–70, here 348–51, of the constitution of a supra-local Jewish community in Moravia by Martin Borysek, ‘The Emergence of Medinat Mehren. Establishing Jewish Supra-Communal Government in Early Modern Moravia and Its Central European Context, in Guesnet/Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 70–86, but also of the role of the Landjudenschaften

xviii

Preface

Republic, when all relevant Jewish political formations, including Zionists, the (ultra-) Orthodox, and the socialists of the Algemayner Idisher Arbeter Bund considered the local community as highly relevant for their endeavours (8.4–5, 8.12–15). Several sources in this volume reflect the growing complexity of the communal hierarchy in the early modern period (2.9, 2.11, 2.14, 2.15, 2.18, 3.14, 3.22, 3.26). Paradoxically, this becomes particularly conspicuous in the early twentieth century and in the Second Republic, when the local level functions as a very prominent arena for manifestations of Jewish political activities in Galicia, the Kingdom of Poland, and the Russian Empire (5.36, 5.38, 6.37–38, 6.44; see chapter 8, passim).13 Accordingly, the sources offer insights into the rules, laws, and practices of appointing or electing members of the local Jewish leadership (2.9). While landlords could heavily weigh in on the appointment of the community board and other functions, including the rabbis, communal privileges and other regulations often emphasized that Jewish communities would act ‘without hindrance … in accordance with the old and ancient [Jewish] customs, rights and orders’, i.e. in recognition of Jewish law and without outside interference (2.27). One obvious feature of the Jewish communal hierarchy well into the twentieth century was the complete exclusion of women from any position of community governance, and their secondary status in religious and social contexts (4.34, 4.28, 4.33, 5.41). Challenges to this state of affairs are documented for the interwar period (8.5, 8.11). With the partitions, the state’s appetite to interfere into matters of Jewish representation became very apparent, and was embedded in frequent legislation on election procedures (3.21, 3.31, 4.2, 4.4, 4.18, 5.9, 5.10, 5.13, 6.3, 6.16, 6.35, 7.11, 7.13, 7.20, 8.2, 8.3, 9.9) and both Jewish (3.3) and non-Jewish (3.2) authors weighed in on the matter of electing the local community board. Examples include the attempt to introduce district rabbis in Galicia (3.21), the introduction of the ‘expert Jew’ (Russ. uchenyi evrei) in the Russian Empire (7.27), or the synagogue supervisory board in the Kingdom of Poland (see the frequent references in chapter 6).14

in the German-speaking lands, most recently by Barbara Staudinger, ‘Die niederösterreichische “Landjudenschaft”: innerjüdische Organisationsformen im regionalen Vergleich’, in: Rolf Kießling et al. (eds.), Räume und Wege. Jüdische Geschichte im Alten Reich, 1300–1800 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 2007), 145–67. 13 Scott Ury, Barricades and Banners. The Revolution of 1905 and the Transformation of Warsaw Jewry (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2012), 45–90. 14 François Guesnet: ‘“Masters of their own offerings no more”: Jewish Perceptions of the Transformation of Jewish Self-Government in the Kingdom of Poland’, in Guesnet, Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 245–60.

Preface

xix

The most prominent embodiment of the community board in the Polish and Lithuanian lands, and subsequently in the partitions, was the kahal. Its structure, prerogatives, and transformation are extensively described by Adam Teller in the introduction to the chapter on the early modern period. The kahal controlled the everyday running of the community, its funds, its relations to the local and regional authorities, and in the case of private towns, the landlord. It claimed control and oversight over the multiple religious, charitable, educational institutions and societies and professional associations (Hebr. ḥevrot or ḥavarot), and thus until the age of partition had comprehensive control over the rich communal fabric. Among its prerogatives were also all matters of community membership, including the right to settle and conduct business (2.11, 3.3, 4.17, 7.3), and control over Jews to settle in a community, or to depart from it.15 The kahal was also the sole interlocutor between the community, their non-Jewish neighbours, and their representatives, such as city councils, but also between the community and the landlord or the representative of the Crown (the governor or voivode). Its abolition occurred after the partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and was but one step in significant weakening of Jewish self-governance which had started as part of a broader, all-European process of de-corporating intermediate powers such as guilds, parliaments, and corporated communities such as the Jews. In Poland-Lithuania, the first significant step was the abolition of the Council of Four Lands (2.37) in 1764. This was followed by the demise of the kahal. The Prussian General Statute for the Jews of South and New-East Prussia of 1797 combined a rigorous limitation of self-government with a curtailing of rabbinical adjudication (3.12). The abolition of the kahal in the Free City of Kraków followed similar principles, but balanced this step by integrating representatives of the Jewish community into general municipal representation (5.1). In the Kingdom of Poland, the state legislator in 1821 introduced a new subaltern administrative body, the synagogue supervisory board, to abolish the kahal shortly afterwards, in 1822 (6.10–11). In the Russian Empire, the kahal retained most of its prerogatives until 1844, when it was abolished without the establishment of a representative body comparable to the supervisory boards (7.16). The kahal became a highly prominent form of Jewish communal self-government. The term kahal subsequently played an important role in antisemitic conspiracy theories concerning hidden centres of Jewish power (see chapter 3, p. 153), and also as a positive projection of Jewish self-rule, for

15

Guesnet, Polonsky, ‘Introduction’, ibid., 4–6, passim.

xx

Preface

example in the Zionist movement.16 The chapters on the nineteenth century and the interwar period reflect the leaders and representatives of Jewish communities – be they the Jewish delegates to municipal councils or dumas in Galicia17 and Russia (7.18, 7.12), community elders in Prussia (4.13, 4.25), or synagogue supervisory boards in the Kingdom of Poland – who acted with considerably less discretion than the oligarchic leadership of the early modern period. The prerogatives of Jewish community leaders in the lands of partitioned Poland-Lithuania were anchored in state legislation and usually spelled out in great detail (3.19, 3.31,4.6, 5.1, 5.10, 6.7, 6.10, 7.11, 8.8, 9.2, 9.3, 9.19), with the obvious intention to gain oversight of the communities’ administration. The quite consistent pushing back of rabbinical adjudication by the partitioning powers contributed significantly to reduce the possibility of imposing sanctions on insubordinate members of the community. The activities of community leaders, however, had begun before the institutionalization of the kahal, and continued after its demise in the nineteenth century. Among the communal core tasks of community leaders were matters of taxation. King Zygmunt I Stary assigning this role for Greater Poland to members of the community illustrates the way the treasury involved the Jewish leadership in this task (2.1). The assessment of the tax duties of individual community members was a sensitive matter delegated to a small group of community board members (2.28, 3.29, 4.11, 4.22, 4.39, 6.23, 7.8), though also here, challenges came from within the community (1.12, 6.5, 6.9, 8.17) and state authorities interfered more frequently after the partitions (5.11, 5.26., 7.17, 7.28, 7.43).18 The individual local community also had the sole prerogative to decide about membership, and was able to set out rules according to Jewish law (2.14, 4.17). A great number of documents in this volume reflect the way in which local Jewish communities would organize and administer their religious life and institutions (1.2, 2.4–5, 2.9, 2.16, 2.10, 2.13, 3.20, 4.16, 4.36, 5.27, 6.16, 6.28, 7.36–38, 7.40, 8.18), the care for the needy (2.15, 4.26, 4.28–29, 5.19, 5.27–28, 7.12, 7.32, 7.42, 8.16, 10.10, 10.15–18, 10.20, 10.22–23), securing a basic provision for education (5.9, 5.20, 5.34, 5.37, 7.18. 7.29, 7.44) and healthcare (4.24, 5.32, 7.1, 7.23, 7.48), and organizing support for the Jewish communities in the land of 16 17

18

Adam Teller, ‘The East European Pinkas Kahal: Form and Function’, in Guesnet, Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 87–98, here 88–89. See Hanna Kozińska-Witt, ‘Stewards of the City? Jews on Kraków City Council in the Second Half of the Nineteenth Century’, in Guesnet/Polonsky, Jewish Self–Government in Eastern Europe, 282–301, and Łukasz Tomasz Sroka, ‘Polish-Jewish Relations in Lwów City Council during the Period of Galician Autonomy, 1870–1914’, in ibid., 302–20. Artur Markowski, ‘Did Jewish Self–Government Exist in the Kingdom of Poland between 1815 and 1915?’, in ibid., 224–44.

Preface

xxi

Israel (2.20 b). Communal leaders warned others about potential threats to the community from the anti-Jewish agitation of John of Capistrano (1.11) and blood libel accusations (5.15), reined in Jewish trouble-makers (1.15 a, b), and spoke on behalf of Jewish defendants (1.26) and victims of violent riots (1.29). Similar instances are documented in chapter 9 (8.22, 8.24). The community leadership, however, never had sole responsibility in these different areas, and it often did not play the most important role. The contributions by individuals or by voluntary associations, some of them organized by professions (2.29, 3.22), complemented the often modest provisions by a local community. To grasp the full meaning of Jewish self-governance in eastern central Europe, it is essential to understand that despite the wide-ranging prerogatives of the local community, responsibility for the common good rested in a great variety of hands.19 An important aspect was the relationship of the local Jewish community leadership to voluntary associations (2.29, 3.22, 3.29), and the impact of charitable or educational institutions founded or sponsored by such associations, including alms houses and shelters, hospitals (4.24), and schools (4.26, 5.30). A quite different situation arose after the catastrophe of World War Two and the Holocaust, when the survivors’ community adapted to the unprecedented circumstances of an authoritarian one-party regime unsympathetic to the existence of Jewish religious communities. As chapter 9 illustrates, the various permutations of ‘cultural’ and ‘social’ associations, whose leadership often agreed with the regime in its negative attitude towards religious traditions, navigated a fine line of representing Jews living in the People’s Republic, without claiming a role to organize Jewish communal life. This only changed after the end of communist rule in 1989, and found expression in the 1997 law about the relationship between the state and Jewish religious communities (9.19). Ensuring burial in accordance with Jewish law and the maintenance of cemeteries are of paramount significance for any Jewish community. The privilege issued by Bolesław the Pious in 1264 guaranteed the inviolability of Jewish cemeteries (1.3), and legal arrangements for a Jewish burial ground are documented for the late thirteenth century (1.4; see also 1.9 and 1.10). From the early modern period, burial societies (Hebr. hevra/-ot kadisha) emerged across western and eastern Ashkenazic communities, institutionalizing the respective tasks and responsibilities: establishing and administering Jewish 19

The rich scholarship on this aspect of eastern European Jewish history is referenced in the individual chapters of this volume, though the pioneering impact of Isaac Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, 1772–1844 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943, 2nd ed., 1981, 3rd ed., 2020) should be acknowledged here.

xxii

Preface

burial grounds, securing the care of the seriously ill and the dying, preparing the deceased for burial, and the burial itself.20 Its members were usually adopted from among the most respected male members of the community. The by-laws of the burial society in Wilno dating back to 1670 is documented in the early modern chapter (2.23; see also 3.18, 3.32). The considerable degree of formalization – membership, responsibilities, procedures such as elections – is very similar to that of a community board. Its privileged status is reflected by the fact that it could negotiate matters pertaining to the cemetery with nonJewish stakeholders (2.34). Towards the end of the eighteenth century, the lack of accountability and transparency, in combination with the considerable concentration of authority in the hands of the members of the burial societies, prompted accusations from Jews critical of the oligarchic communal establishment (3.14, 6.4, 6.8, 6.9) often taking the form of informing non-Jewish authorities of real or alleged abuses of power, corruption, dereliction of duties, and misuse or misappropriation of funds. Burial societies remained a fixture of Jewish communities after the partitions, though their position shifted due to greater state control of Jewish communal funds, changing attitudes towards community organization, and an overall loss of communal and religious coherence. Already in 1776, in the first General Code for Galicia pertaining to the Jews, an attempt was made to wrest the administration of Jewish burial from the hevrot kadisha, and to entrust it to the local community (3.19). In the Kingdom of Poland, burial societies were banned, and their activities investigated by the authorities and the police (6.17, 6.18, 6.30, 7.2, 7.10).21 Formally recognized community representatives, rather than the burial society, reported about this important aspect of Jewish communal administration (4.16, 4.26, 4.32, 5.16, 7.14, 7.27) and would become the publicly visible caretaker of Jewish burial grounds (7.8, 8.8). An unintended consequence of forcing their religious and charitable activities underground may well have been their greater reach.22 The transformation of the traditional burial societies into charities with by-laws approved by the authorities is particularly evident in the Prussian (4.16, 4.32) and Austrian partition (5.16, 5.18). Jewish self-government was never static. Its development reflects both the internal dynamic in Jewish communities, as in competition between different religious factions in a community, but also the evolving ideas about how Jewish 20 21 22

Cornelia Aust: ‘Burying the Dead. Saving the Community. Jewish Burial Societies as Informal Centres of Jewish Self-Government’, in: Guesnet, Polonsky, Jewish Self– Government in Eastern Europe, 203–23, here 203–06. Aust, ‘Burying the Dead’, 212–14. Ibid., 217.

Preface

xxiii

communities should be run from a point of view of local or central authorities. Negotiating Jewish self-governance required spokespeople from the Jewish side and negotiation partners on the non-Jewish side, as Jewish communities never achieved full autonomy in the sense that their representatives would have been in a position to impose their understanding of a desired legal and political status for the Jewish community. Due to the considerable degree of formalization of Jewish intercession in pre-partition Poland-Lithuania, it is well reflected in the first three chapters with appointments of Jewish intercessors (2.31, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7–10, 3.13) and resolutions to secure the good-will of non-Jewish authorities (3.29).23 The agreements negotiated between local Jewish and nonJewish populations (1.18, 1.6, 1.21, 1.24–25, 1.27, 2.30, 2.34) constitute a hitherto underresearched chapter in this history of Jewish–non-Jewish relations in the Polish and Lithuanian lands.24 Institutionalized representation was still considered essential in the final years of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (3.6) and in the Duchy of Warsaw, in a proposal to establish a representative for the Jews of Warsaw (3.16). The rabbinate and rabbinical adjudication appear as essential elements of organized communal Jewish life in all chapters. The first chapter documents the gradual appearance of a communal role and office, with, at the beginning of this process, significant overlap between governing roles, religious authority, and practical roles such as those involving kosher slaughter (1.5, 1.7, 1.10). Towards the end of the medieval period, contracted communal rabbis are documented (1.13), as is their recognition through non-Jewish authorities (1.20). Jewish autonomy – in the sense of adjudicating on the basis of a separate set of laws – preceded Jewish self-governance: negotiations about the scope of rabbinical adjudication was negotiated and formalized earlier than forms of governance or representation (1.10). In the early modern period, the rabbis and the rabbinate become cornerstones of the ever more complex local and supra-communal organization of Jewish life in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. This volume documents the dynamic and at times conflictual relationship to the civil leadership of the community. While the latter appointed rabbis (2.4, 2.5, 2.9, 2.18), laid out the rules of the rabbis’ employment (2.11, 2.39), and considered them as subordinate tools to enforce communal regulations (2.10), rabbis protected their unique role as experts on Jewish law and its implementation (2.12). 23 24

Anna Michałowska-Mycielska, ‘Jewish Delegates at the Noble Sejm and Sejmiki between the Sixteenth and Eighteenth Centuries‘, in Guesnet, Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 163–80. Hanna Węgrzynek, ‘The Role of Legal Agreements in Developing Christian-Jewish Relations in Polish Towns and Cities’, in ibid., 99–116.

xxiv

Preface

Leading rabbis in the Polish lands attempted to outlaw the sale of rabbinic posts in 1640 (2.19), considered a serious threat to the prestige of the rabbinate. The structure of rabbinical courts grew ever more complex over the early modern period (2.25). On the local level, individual rabbis could embody the very identity of a Jewish congregation (2.2). Their expertise was solicited on the level of regional Jewish representation (2.36), and they played an important role in the structures of the Jewish councils of the Polish crown lands and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (2.6). As experts of Jewish law, their rulings (see e.g. 2.20 a – b) contributed to the shaping of Jewish self-governance itself. As part of the communal institutional set-up, the reach of rabbinical adjudication was carefully delineated between the Jewish community and non-Jewish centres of power (2.27) and often the object of conflicts of interest (2.32, 2.38). Of particular significance to both Jewish communities and the authorities was the declaration of a ban (Hebr. ḥerem), part of the possible communal sanctions until the curtailing of rabbinical adjudication and communal autonomy in the late eighteenth century (2.4, 3.29, 4.17, 6.33). In a few instances, the authorities threatened the imposition of a ban to encourage tax compliance even after 1815 (6.2, 6.33). The end of the ancient régime of Jewish self-government which started in the mid-eighteenth century and culminated in the partitions of the Poland-Lithuanian Commonwealth had a deep effect on the rabbinate and Jewish adjudication. The quite comprehensive, formal recognition of Jewish law in the dealings of a given Jewish community gave way to – often highly uninformed – challenges from the administrations of the partitioning powers (3.10, 3.12, 3.19, 3.21, 3.26, 3.31), from enlightened circles in the Jewish community (3.1, 3.6, 3.14, 5.7, 6.8), and from non-Jewish political commentators (3.2–3, 3.33, 6.4, 6.6, 6.9, 6.14). While the legal opinion of rabbis continued to have considerable weight in matters of family law, there were only hesitant attempts to defend a comprehensive internal Jewish adjudication (3.8, 3.9, 3.13). Now rabbis felt compelled to publicly remind their congregation to follow the law of the land (5.2). The administrative relationship between community leadership and rabbis showed considerable continuity, and the process of identifying candidates for the office of communal rabbi and their hiring reflected the continued employer-employee relationship (4.12, 4.42). Kalmann Bram, a rabbinical candidate in Danzig/Gdańsk in 1843 commented on this subordinate and ‘abysmal position’ of the rabbis, compounded by their inability to adapt to the ‘necessary demands of the times’ (4.14). In the Prussian partition, emigration added further pressure for the rabbinate, as individual holders of office had to fulfil a multitude of roles in ever-smaller communities (4.17). Also, the authorities attempted to commit rabbis to take the role as community registrar, and to keep records of marriages (5.12), though rabbis would not excel

Preface

xxv

in this role for which they were prepared neither by training nor by vocation (8.26). In the Russian partition, this task was allocated to graduates of the state-sponsored rabbinical seminaries who became known as ‘crown rabbis’ (Russ. kazyonnyi ravvin), and communities were legally bound to employ these men from 1857 onwards (7.41). In all partitions, the state established comprehensive rules defining the required qualifications of candidates for communal rabbinical office such as degrees, language skills, and political trustworthiness (5.24, 6.32, 6.40, 7.34). In the Russian Empire, rabbis for a long period gained considerable influence through their role as spokespeople of their community, both as informal or communal intercessors, but also as members of the various rabbinical commissions (7.35). After the revolution of 1905 and the controlled relaxation of some rules of local governance, an ever-larger number of community members had the right to elect their rabbi in the Kingdom of Poland and in the Russian Empire (6.42, 7.47).25 This principle was also introduced by the German administration in occupied Poland during World War One (8.1). After Poland regained independence, the law reserved the right of approval for rabbinical appointments to the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education (8.3, 8.8), but the main concerns over matters of autonomy, self-governance, and representation were now less concerned with the independence (or the lack thereof) of the rabbinate (8.4–6, 8.11), while questions of religious affiliation played a major role in communal political confrontations (8.10, 8.14, 8.18, 8.19). Also, rabbis publicly defended religious freedom when state legislation interfered with kosher slaughter (8.25). During the German occupation of Poland and the Holocaust, the rabbinate shared the atrocious fate of Jews caught up in terror, persecution, and mass murder. The express letter establishing Judenräte in September 1939 includes rabbis among those forced to join this tool of controlling the Jewish population in occupied Poland (10.1). A memoir mentions the rabbis connected to Agudat Yisrael and their work for the religious council of the Warsaw Judenrat (10.22), but most rabbinical activity happened in secret.26 After World War Two and the near total annihilation of eastern European Jewry, and in the context of the establishment of a regime under Soviet control, the rabbinate had lost significance and impact. Both authorities and survivor communities were not interested 25 26

Vladimir Levin: ‘The Synagogue in the System of Jewish Self-Government in Tsarist Russia’, in: ibid., 261–81, here 273–74. See the discussion of the case of Warsaw Ghetto by Havi Dreifuss: ‘“The Work of My Hands Is Drowning in the Sea, and You Would Offer Me Song?!” Orthodox Behaviour and Leadership’, in: Glenn Dynner, François Guesnet (eds.): Warsaw. The Jewish Metropolis. Essays in Honor of the 75th Birthday of Professor Antony Polonsky (Leiden, Boston, Mass.: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), 467–95, here 479–88.

xxvi

Preface

in re-instating a Jewish judiciary. For a brief period, rabbis were expected to register Jewish marriage, births, and deaths (9.2), though later the communist authorities actively curtailed Jewish religious activities (9.12). Throughout the communist period, the officially approved Jewish cultural associations avoided sponsoring religious content (e.g. 9.15). While the law of 1997 regulating the relationship between the state and Jewish communities in Poland offers these communities wide-ranging prerogatives in organizing Jewish religious life and establishing the necessary institutions, it refrains from defining the scope and tasks of rabbinical adjudication (9.19). Supra-communal organization and networks, and most prominently the early modern regional and commonwealth-wide Jewish councils, played a major role in the consolidation of Jewish self-governance.27 As is well known, the original raison d’être of these councils was to apportion tax duties of Jewish communities and provinces, and it was the introduction of the head tax which lead to its demise in 1764.28 The gatherings of delegates of communities and regions (Hebr. medinot) did, however, contribute significantly to a consciousness of a community which was more than the sum of its taxes. It shaped a Polish-Lithuanian Jewish elite network of both civil governance and religious leadership.29 Nathan Hanover, the chronicler of the devastations of the Cossack Uprising in 1648, described the delegates to the councils with considerable pride (while significantly exaggerating their prerogatives): ‘The leaders of the Four Lands were like a little Sanhedrin in the Chamber of Hewn Stone. They had the authority to judge all Israel in the Kingdom of Poland, to establish safeguards, to institute ordinances, and to punish each man as they saw fit’ (2.22), and Dov Ber Birkenthal of Bolechów even claimed that the partitions were divine punishment for the abolition of the Council of Four Lands: ‘It ended when the whole country was partitioned … as they had dealt with Israel, so they were dealt with’ (2.37). Several items documented in chapter 3 illustrate the Councils’ role in internal Jewish adjudication and arbitration (2.6, 2.11), in regulating the publication of Hebrew books (2.26), appointing intercessors (2.31), and regulating economic competition (2.8). In the context of regulating 27 28

29

Guesnet, Polonsky: ‘Introduction’, in Guesnet/Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 1–38, here 7–10. For the dysfunctionality of arrangements in tax collection which also contributed to the abolition of the Councils see Adam Kaźmierczyk: ‘Permanent Crisis. The Decline of Jewish Self-Government in Poland in the Seventeenth to Eighteenth Centuries’, in: ibid., 181–202. Judith Kalik, ‘Office Holders of the Council of Four Lands, 1595–1764’, in Guesnet, Polonsky, Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, 129–62.

Preface

xxvii

economic relations within the Jewish community, it is striking that despite the visibility of Jewish women as tax payers (1.19, 2.14, 2.20) and as traders (1.24), the Lithuanian Council empathetically excluded women from economic endeavours (2.25, see also 3.23). As the Council’s deliberations mostly revolved around Jewish contributions to the treasury, the latter was sending delegates as well, whose description of these gatherings offer important insights (2.33), and Polish aristocrats went at great lengths to secure the delegation of trusted and loyal Jews (2.36). After the demise of the Council of Four Lands, the appointment of Jewish provincial delegates to the Four Year Sejm (2.4) and petitions sent in the name of provincial Jewries (3.8) reflect the continued coordination of representing Jewish interests on a supra-communal level (3.8–9), including the attempt to re-create regional representative bodies (3.13).30 Bodies such as the Rabbinic Commission created in the Russian Empire in 1847 following (from afar) the template of the French consistory system were not considered to represent Jewish communities, but as an attempt by the imperial authorities to gain control of both the rabbinate and the communities (6.43, 7.35).31 Supra-communal organization again started to have an impact on the selfgovernance of Jewish communities in eastern central Europe when new types of institutional players entered the arena in the form of political movements (5.36), of supra-communal charities (6.37), of civil rights and professional interest groups (5.34), of federative bodies such as the Union of German Jewish Communities (4.30–31, 4.33) or of federations or regional congregations (4.34– 35, 4.38, 4.40, 5.40). As chapter 8 shows, such groups and movements would gain considerable momentum and significantly affect Jewish communal life in the Second Republic. This volume, however, also documents the more mundane level of the everyday dimension of Jewish communal self-governance, such as hiring a synagogue beadle (4Y.18) or slaughterer (7.9), negotiating a contract with a nonJewish builder for a ritual bath (1.16) or for the sabbath enclosure (Hebr. eruv) with sceptical authorities (4.1, 4.8, 4.9), tender leases for the income from the ritual bath (6.21), for synagogue seats (6.20), and to deal with congregational discord about them (5.41). Throughout the long period under consideration, appointing or electing the community leadership could be contentious (e.g. 4.5, 5.38, 7.6, 8.5, 8.8). More frequently, it probably was an unremarkable 30

Sustained deliberations between central authorities and individuals considered to speak on behalf of the Jews took place in the Russian Empire in the early decades after the partitions in view of establishing a legal and administrative framework; see Olga Minkina, Syny Rahili. Evreiskie deputaty v Rossiskoi Imperii (Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2011). 31 Polonsky, The Jews in Poland and Russia, vol., 274–81, here 274.

xxviii

Preface

routine procedure (4.23, 7.39). Sources documenting the subjective side of holding communal responsibilities – such as the recollections of Baer Loew Monasch from nineteenth-century Krotoszyn – are unfortunately rare (4.20). Throughout the centuries, charity was a major concern for those holding responsibility for the well-being of a Jewish community, and this reader offers a wealth of examples to illustrate the practices around this central communal concern. It also illustrates the interdependence between community, individuals, and voluntary associations and institutions distinct from the community (4.28, 4.32, 4.37, 5.6, 5.32, 5.37), the role of local government (5.28), but also the growing interference of state authorities (5.5, 5.17, 7.32). A feature that resonates across the centuries is intra-communal conflict. Sources reflecting internal confrontations are a helpful resource to understand the hierarchies and functioning of Jewish self-governance, though competition between civil and religious leaders, complaints about administrative shortcomings or ineffective governance are not an essential characteristic of Jewish communities, and occurred in similar form among their non-Jewish neighbours. Both internal regulations and privileges granted to Jewish communities usually established rules for litigation. Such rules, however, did not prevent conflicts themselves. Their reflection in the sources offers insights into power relations, factions, alliances, and cliveages in a community, or disagreements between communities. The earliest items in this volume reflecting on such conflicts (1.1, 1.11) discuss a dispute about taxes, a constant source of confrontations between community members and their leaders, between different Jewish communities, and between Jewish communities and non-Jewish authorities until the Second World War (7.17, 7.43, 8.17). Similarly, conflicts around religious preferences and identity are an equally reoccurring phenomenon (3.20, 3.24, 4.17, 6.37, 6.44, 7.25, 8.7, 8.6–7, 8.18). Already in the medieval era, conflicts arose about the status in Jewish communities of prominent Jewish families with ties to monarchs or princes (1.17, 1.22), but also about questions of internal prominence and precedence (2.13, 2.35, 4.5). Complaints and denunciations to non-Jewish rulers or authorities reflect the difficulties in both early modern and modern Jewish communities to resolve conflict (2.28, 3.3, 6.36, 7.6, 7.20, 7.47, 8.9–10). Arbitration by high-ranking non-Jews to resolve internal conflicts as well as those with non-Jewish neighbours and their communities was relevant in the medieval and early modern period (1.4, 1.6, 1.22, 3.31; as legal project: 3.16). Conflicts around burial involved both individual community members objecting to practices of the burial society, as discussed above, as well as collective complaints (6.5). The latest conflict around burial documented in this volume goes back to 1966 and communist Poland (9.13–14).

Preface

xxix

A prominent perspective of this source reader is non-Jewish legislation regulating the Jewish presence in the Polish and Lithuanian lands. It offers English translations of the most relevant documents for the development of the legal and political status of Jews in the Polish and Lithuanian lands, before and after the partitions, and into the present. These include the first privilege for Jews in the Polish lands of 1264 by Bolesław the Pious (1.3), the alleged confirmation in 1453 of a privilege by Kazimierz the Great (1.10), the nobility gaining jurisdiction over Jews in private towns in 1539 (2.3), the royal charter of 1551 granting the right of Jewish communities to appoint their rabbis (2.5), a treasury report about the proceedings of the Council of Four Lands (2.33), the General Code for the Jews in territories annexed to Galicia (1776, 3.16), Joseph’s II Edict of Toleration of 1789 (3.21), the Prussian General Patent of 1797 (3.12), as well as the earliest Russian edicts after the partitions on behalf of the Jews (3.25, 3.17–28) and the Russian Statute of 1804 establishing among others the Pale of Settlement (3.31). Of great relevance were further the Provisional Ordinance of 1833 allowing Jews in Greater Poland to be naturalized as Prussian subjects (4.2), the abolition of the autonomous Kraków kahal in 1817 (5.1), equivalent legislation in the Kingdom of Poland (6.10–11) and police investigations into burial practices (6.17–18), the Russian edict on ‘Rural and Urban Jewish communities’ of 1835 (7.11), and the abolition of the kahal in the Russian Empire in 1844 (7.16). Legislation from the period of the Second Republic and after the Holocaust has been mentioned above. The early local and general privileges for Jewish communities defined the legal basis of a Jewish presence. Rules on taxation were a very prominent feature of medieval and early modern privileges: taxes to be paid to the landlord or the treasury, taxes levied internally for local or general purposes, conflicts around the assessment and collection of taxes, debts resulting from unpaid taxes. Medieval, non-Jewish legislation in the Polish lands would not engage in any significant way with features of self-governance – this was a legal grey zone left to the Jews themselves. In this respect, the confirmation in 1453 of a privilege by Kazimierz the Great (1333–70) is quite telling (1.10). This document is widely believed to be a forgery commissioned by Jews. It defines in detail questions of adjudication among Jews and between Jews and non-Jews, and carefully establishes rules of commercial engagement. It, however, does not identify structures of communal governance, representative bodies, or details about the relationship between rabbinical adjudication and an executive branch of the community leadership – despite frequently referring to the responsibilities and prerogatives of Jewish judges. This is not to say that such structures did not exist – Jewish elders are first recorded one generation

xxx

Preface

earlier – but those who commissioned this alleged confirmation of a privilege did not consider the state to have a say on this aspect of Jewish communal life. Not much later, such details would become an important feature of privileges issued by the royal court or the nobility. From the medieval period to the twentieth century, monitoring the very presence of Jewish congregations and communities was a central exercise of administrative control over the Jewish populace. Drawn up mainly for purposes of administering taxes levied on Jewish communities – the earliest such survey documents a coronation tax levied in 1505 (1.30) –, surveys of Jewish communities reflect the existence of organized Jewish communal life and its institutions (4.3, 4.16, 4.36–37, 5.22, 5.29, 6.1, 6.24). Especially in the context of the partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and after, state authorities developed a considerable appetite to gain an increasingly precise understanding of the material set-up of Jewish communities, their institutions and assets, administrative structure, as well as their membership. Intelligence was gathered through ever-more comprehensive reports from community boards to state administrators about their budget, activities, and assets, but also by surveys conducted by government departments and their inspectors. For the nineteenth century, the sources in this volume reflect some differences in administrative curiosity across the partitions. This new reporting regime included a growing amount of quite granular detail pertaining to religious institutions and customs, often referred to by their Hebrew terms, included in reports drafted by non-Jewish administrators or Jewish communities themselves. It seems that in this respect, the authorities were more ambitious (or demanding) in the Prussian (4.7, 4.16, 4.17, 4.27, 4.32) and Austrian partition (5.4, 5.33) than in the Kingdom of Poland (6.13, 6.28, 6.34) or the Russian Empire (7.27).

…

This source reader does reflect practices of self-governance in Jewish communities in the Polish and Lithuanian lands. As was pointed out earlier, the prominence of non-Jewish legislation in this volume reflects the editors’ and authors’ reluctance to define these practices as formal Jewish autonomy, and undivided rule of Jewish law. Despite the scope of executive power of the civil community leadership, and of rabbinical adjudication, it would be impossible to describe and fully comprehend these practices independently from the non-Jewish political and legal context. The sources however do demonstrate a number of aspects which set the Polish- and Lithuanian-Jewish encounter apart. The most significant aspect seems to be the prominence of the local

xxxi

Preface

community as a source of political legitimacy, and as the arena of negotiation power and prestige, and as a full-fledged administrative structure with responsibilities for charity, education, religious life, and economic endeavours. The interdependence of political routine on the local level and through exchanges with other Jewish communities in the regional context and across the Commonwealth complemented the resilience of the local community. The very ubiquity of negotiating the community’s needs with the authorities, non-Jewish neighbours, and other Jewish communities contributed to the routinization of ‘doing Jewish politics’. The scope of rabbinical adjudication, and its significance in legal and constitutional aspects of communal self-governance, constitutes another unique feature of the eastern European Jewish encounter well into the twentieth century. It would be however misleading to reduce this to a romanticizing notion of doyigkeyt, of an emotional or cultural attachment and a source of identity, would be misleading. The individual community also represented the space to encounter hierarchies, division, deprivation, and conflict. The large and very large Jewish communities of eastern Europe thus undoubtedly offered a comprehensive experience of being Jewish. In the twentieth century, the emergence of the Jewish metropolises of North American and the founding of the Jewish State re-configurated this experience, though in both cases the significant impact of the eastern European encounter of communal governance seems obvious.

…

Transliteration The transliteration of Hebrew reflects the pronunciation prescribed for modern Hebrew. Hence, no difference in spelling indicates the distinction between alef and ayin, tet and taf, kaf and kuf, sin and samekh. The distinction between ḥet and khaf has however been retained. In the transliteration, proper names and place names are rendered in upper case. The transliteration of Yiddish follows the YIVO system. The transliteration of Russian follows the Library of Congress system with -ий, -ый and -ой rendered as -ii, yi, and oi, with soft and hard signs omitted, and without diacritics.

chapter 1

The Medieval Period Hanna Zaremska 1

Introduction

For the historian wishing to reconstruct the organization of Jewish community life in the Middle Ages, the principal sources of information are Christian in origin (from the fourteenth century onwards, chiefly court records). Such a reconstruction requires careful consideration of the meaning of the Latin terms used by the authors in their attempts to describe Jewish institutions. They used the names with which they were familiar, borrowed from those which applied in their own urban Christian communities, or to church structures. The terminology which evolved in this way was not employed with any consistency: it changed, and had local variants. An additional difficulty is that Christian sources provide information primarily about those institutions of self-government which had dealings with royal or municipal authorities and officials. They reveal very little about other aspects of self-government, such as the synagogue, education, the system of intracommunal taxation, charitable activity, or the administration of justice within the community. The scant Hebrew sources (i.e. the responsa of German rabbis to questions posed by representatives of the Jewish communal authorities in Poland) might appear to be more reliable—but they too must be used with caution. Their authors generally considered Jewish communal structures in central Europe to be identical to those in Germany. It is true that the responsa use terms which their recipients would readily have understood, and that they shed light on the problems which arose from the exercise of authority. It is, however, important to remember that the solutions proposed by the German scholars were intended to standardize communal structures throughout the Ashkenazi diaspora as comprehensively as possible. The comparative material, especially that concerning the German diaspora, undoubtedly assists our understanding of the limited information which is available and provides an insight into the range of difficulties which existed. But these sources too are problematic. They arose out of the distinctive status of the Jewish population which, to the end of the medieval period, lived almost exclusively in royal towns and was not as a rule subject to municipal legislation.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

2

Zaremska

Moreover, the historiography of these Jewish communities of the western Ashkenazi diaspora—which also draws principally on the information contained in the responsa—describes a wide variety of autonomous structures. The first Jews to arrive on Polish soil were traders. From around the middle of the seventh century, the southeastern reaches of Europe, including the western Slavic lands, became involved in the processes of economic exchange with the rest of the continent and, indirectly, with the Islamic world. Traders of Jewish, Arab, Khazar, Frankish, and Ruthenian origin arrived to use the trade routes which crisscrossed the region and which formed part of a larger network linking western Europe with the Black Sea, Crimea, the Volga delta, the Muslim lands of central Asia, and the Byzantine Empire. They transported weapons, furs, and the slaves used in Islamic countries as soldiers, domestic servants, or harem guards. The development of this trade coincided with the consolidation of state structures in central Europe. Indeed, a functioning state apparatus was a vital condition for safe transit and a prerequisite for the emergence of an aristocratic elite with an interest in trade.1 The earliest permanent Jewish settlements came into being in order to support these international traders and were located in the principal strongholds, within safe reach of the ruler’s residence: in Prague under the Přemyslid dynasty; in Ostryhom, the first seat of the Hungarian rulers of the Árpád dynasty; and in Kraków, ruled from the late tenth century by the Piast dynasty. Despite a two-hundred-year-long debate, there is still no consensus amongst historians about the origins of these Jewish settlers. Currently, those who believe them to have come from the western part of the Ashkenazi diaspora outnumber those who see their roots in Khazaria, whose rulers are generally believed to have converted to Judaism.2 From the twelfth century, organized groups of immigrants started to arrive in Poland, chiefly from Germany. Their arrival triggered the establishment of towns subject to German law, something which not only facilitated the operation of a money economy, but also determined the structure of the town’s self-government and regulated its spatial organization. The German colonization of central Europe was one element of a wider transcontinental movement of migrants. Jewish migration from the Holy Roman Empire to Bohemia, to Hungary recovering from Tartar invasions, and to Poland (first to Silesia, 1 Nora Berend, Przemysław Urbańczyk, Przemysław Wiszewski, Central Europe in the High Middle Ages. Bohemia, Hungary and Poland, c. 900–1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013); Christianisation and the Rise of Christian Monarchy. Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900–1200, ed. by Nora Berend (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007). 2 See: Jacob Litman, The Economic Role of Jews in Medieval Poland: The Contribution of Yitzhak Schipper (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America,1984), pp. 85–116.

The Medieval Period

3

perhaps via Bohemia, and then to Wielkopolska and Małopolska, undoubtedly via Silesia) was an extension of the German eastward expansion which was of such fundamental importance for the future of the region and which came about, amongst other factors, because of the region’s potential for profitable economic activity.3 The thirteenth century brought radical changes to the pattern of Jewish settlement in central Europe. In Polish lands, these changes were particularly evident in Silesia (with settlements in Wrocław, Bytom, Głogów, and probably in Legnica, Lwówek, and Świdnica). In Małopolska, Jewish presence was limited to the old settlement of Kraków. In Mazovia there was a settlement in Płock, while in Wielkopolska, the older communities in Kalisz and Gniezno (where coins with Hebrew inscriptions were struck) and probably in Poznań continued to function. The Jewish migration to the countries of central Europe in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries had a complex background. It arose essentially out of two phenomena. It was the result of the persecution of Jews in Europe and their expulsion (in particular from German lands) as well as the associated deterioration of their legal status within the Holy Roman Empire, including in Bohemia and Hungary.4 These changes did not affect Poland, and the Jews who fled east chose to settle in lands where there was less hostility towards them and where the local rulers offered them conditions of relative security. At the end of the fourteenth century, there were twelve Jewish settlements in Poland. By the late fifteenth century, there were more than one hundred. It is estimated that by the end of the medieval period, there were between 5,000 and 30,000 Jews living in Poland. The largest communities— in Poznań, Kraków, and Lwów—had between 500 and 800 members. The coronation tax of 1507 (or a register of the taxes paid by Jews on the accession of Zygmunt I [no. 30]), which is the main source of information about 3 Benedykt Zientara, ‘Socio-economic and Spatial Transformation of Polish Towns during the Period of Location’, Acta Poloniae Historica, 34 (1976), 57–83; Henryk Samsonowicz, “Lokacje, ich znaczenie, przebieg, skutki prawne” in Dzieje miast i mieszczaństwa w Polsce przedrozbiorowej, ed. by Maria Bogucka and Henryk Samsonowicz (Wrocław; Warsaw; Gdańsk; Łódź: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1986), pp. 45–89. 4 Salo Wittmayer Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews, 10 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965), pp. 3–51; 11 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1967), pp. 192– 286; Wilhelm Hanisch, ‘Die Luxemburger und die Juden’, in Die Juden in den böhmischen Ländern, ed. Ferdinand Seibt (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1983), pp. 27–35; David Abulafia, ‘The King and the Jews – the Jews in the Ruler’s Service’, in The Jews of Europe in the Middle Ages (Tenth to Fifteenth Centuries). Proceeding of the International Symposium held in Speyer, 20–25 October 2002, ed. by Christoph Cluse (Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 2004), pp. 43–53; Nora Berend, ‘Hungary: The Jews between Integration and Exclusion’, in ibid., pp. 261–68.

4

Zaremska

the number and size of medieval Jewish settlements, refers to communities in Wielkopolska, Małopolska, Mazovia (in effect the parts of it incorporated into Polish Crown territories in 1462, 1476, and 1495), and Red Rus. From the information in this and other sources, it appears that by 1507, there were 106 Jewish settlements in Poland. Wielkopolska had the highest density of Jewish settlers, while Mazovia and Red Rus also had significant numbers. With the exception of the Płock community which had been established as early as the thirteenth century, the arrival of Jews in the districts of Mazovia and Red Rus was a relatively recent phenomenon resulting from changes to the course of trade routes, the policies of the Mazovian princes, and the efforts of King Kazimierz the Great (1333–70) to integrate the newly incorporated Rus lands with Crown territories. In the first Jewish settlements in Poland, just as in the western part of the Ashkenazi diaspora, authority lay in the hands of leaders selected from among the settlements’ inhabitants. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine a community functioning without such representation. The earliest information we have about the existence of a Jewish settlement in Kraków comes from the writings of the scholar Yehuda ha-Kohen—a pupil of the well-known reformer of the Rhineland communities, Gershom—who was based in Mainz in the first half of the eleventh century [no. 1]. This material concerns a complex and somewhat obscure conflict between Jewish slavetraders who were undoubtedly from German-speaking lands and who operated on the route between the Holy Roman Empire or Bohemia to Rus. Their case culminated in a hearing before the court based in the Jewish settlement in Kraków and the material therefore demonstrates that the Kraków community had already established institutions for some form of self-government. Furthermore, the court which operated within that community considered itself competent to rule on matters affecting not just community members but also passing traders who were permanently resident elsewhere. The practice must have been familiar to those traders, since similar courts operated in their home communities. The responsum of Yehuda ha-Kohen therefore demonstrates how Jewish self-government in Poland in its earliest phases was modelled on solutions developed in the western part of the Ashkenazi diaspora. It also links the evolution of that self-government with the fact that the first Jewish settlements in Poland were created in order to cater to passing traders. Moreover, it is evident that the local Christian authorities recognized the right of settlers to govern themselves. Until the twelfth century, in other words before the influx of settlers and the establishment of towns subject to German law, the status of the Jewish

The Medieval Period

5

population was regulated by principles similar to those which applied to other groups of newcomers, and especially those ‘invitees’ who enjoyed royal or noble protection—most notably Germans, but also Walloons. With the foundation of towns, however, the hitherto similar status of Christian migrants and Jews began to diverge. Christian migrants could henceforth enjoy privileges guaranteed in the founding documents—privileges to which they were now entitled by dint of their place of residence, not their background. The Jewish population, meanwhile, retained its existing rights, those which had been set out in the 1264 charter issued in Kalisz by the Prince of Wielkopolska, Bolesław the Pious, to Jews resident in the area under his rule and which, as he observed, were consistent with earlier custom [no. 3]. The text of the 1264 charter was not entirely original. Similar, albeit not identical, documents were issued between 1244 and 1268 first by Frederick II, Duke of Austria and then by the rulers of Hungary and Bohemia, Béla IV and Přemysl Ottokar II. The charter of Bolesław the Pious was adopted at the end of the thirteenth century by the rulers of three Silesian principalities: Wrocław, Głogów, and Jawor. In the newly unified Kingdom of Poland which emerged after the era of feudal fragmentation, it was first reaffirmed in 1334 by King Kazimierz the Great (1333–70) for the Jews of Wielkopolska. In 1364, the king ratified the charter, stipulating that it applied to Jews resident in towns throughout Poland, and in 1367, the Jews of Małopolska were brought within its provisions. King Władysław Jagiełło (1387–1434) reintroduced the practice of ratifying the Kalisz charter—in 1387 he issued a document referring solely to the Jews of Lwów. King Kazimierz Jagiellończyk (1447–92) followed suit in 1453. From the late fourteenth century, the charter also applied in Lithuania [no. 8]. In terms of its content, the charter dealt with issues such as jurisdiction over the Jewish population; the rules governing Jewish engagement in moneylending and trade; and the principles applicable to relations between Jews and Christians. It guaranteed Jews freedom of worship and protected their cemeteries and synagogues. It made no mention at all of communal self-government. The prince retained jurisdiction in cases where a Christian was accused of killing a Jew or where a fatality occurred in the course of a fight between Jews. This points to the existence of some form of autonomous judicial body which dealt with other breaches of the law. It is not until the late Middle Ages that the sources reveal somewhat more of the structure of self-government in medieval Jewish settlements in Poland. The provisions of the 1453 charter of Kazimierz Jagiellończyk refer to two features of communal organization—the elders and the rabbi [no. 10]. Some historians consider this document—which purports to ratify an otherwise unknown

6

Zaremska

instrument of Kazimierz the Great—to be a fifteenth-century forgery.5 From our point of view, this has no bearing on its significance. Despite ample and credible evidence that it is not an authentic product of Kazimierz’s chancellery, it is nonetheless undoubtedly the case that it was intended to clarify existing provisions and not to alter them—and this includes, at least to some extent, those concerning communal organization. The charter confirmed the right of Jews to have cases decided by a court of elders. Disobedience towards them was punishable with a fine, part of which went to the elders and part to the voivode: an indication of the support given by the authorities to the institutions of Jewish self-government. In cases between Jews which were outside the elders’ jurisdiction, or when a Christian brought an action against a Jew, the appropriate forum was the voivodan court. This also applied to capital offences and to those punishable by confiscation. Cases in which elders were unable to reach a verdict also went to the voivodan court. It is worth noting that the wording of the charter pointed up the difficulties which such a court, made up of Christians, might encounter when asked to deal with issues pertaining to Jewish law, as the charter granted to the Jews of Warsaw by Prince Konrad in 1469 also illustrates [no. 20]. The charter of Kazimierz Jagiellończyk further provided that a Christian victim of theft who had reason to believe that the item in question had been placed in pawn with a Jew, ought to seek help in restoring his property from the elder of the ‘Jewish school’ (senior scholae), in other words the rabbi, who, with the elders’ consent, was to make enquiries about the item among Jews at the synagogue. It is safe to assume that the voivode approved the composition of the body of elders in the name of the monarch. The practice whereby rulers or their representatives formally accepted the Jewish communal authorities was common in the Middle Ages and did not arouse any significant objections on the part of Jews. In court records, information about elders is generally incidental in nature. The fifteenth-century source material relating to the community in the capital, Kraków—at the time one of the three largest communities in Poland, alongside Poznań and Lwów—refers to a Jewish elder for the first time in 1433, when Abraham Czarny is given this title in the municipal records (Abrahe Niger

5 Stanisław Kutrzeba, Historia źródeł dawnego prawa polskiego, 2 (Lviv; Warsaw; Kraków: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1925), pp. 301–02; Shalom A. Cygielman, ‘The Basic Privileges of the Jews of Great Poland as Reflected in Polish Historiography’, Polin, 2 (1987), 124–25; Hanna Zaremska, Juden im mittelalterlichen Polen und die Krakauer Judengemeinde, trans. Heidemarie Petersen (Osnabrűck: Fibre Verlag, 2013), pp. 155–67.

The Medieval Period

7

senior Judeus de Cracovia).6 By the second half of the fifteenth century, sources name the members of the body of elders of the Kraków community. In 1465, Kazimierz Jagiellończyk imposed a bond of 4,000 marks (grzywnas) between, on the one side the Jews Israel, Miriam, and their relatives and, on the other side, the elders and all other Jews (et omnes alios Judeos) [no. 17]. The names of the elders head the long list of those whom the document records as liable to pay the bond in the event that they prove responsible for any recurrence of the dispute. In 1468, twenty-five members of the Kraków community stood as guarantors that the Jew Abraham of Bochnia would appear before the regional diet in Piotrków following his release from custody. The guarantors included four elders and two women—the wives of Bieniarz and Abraham—the beadle (shames), and the whole community of Jews in Kraków (totaque communitas Judeorum de Cracovia) [no. 19]. The next list of kahal officials in Kraków dates from 1469: the settlement between the Jewish community and the canons of Kraków, the Długosz brothers, which resulted in the relocation of the city’s Jewish quarter, was signed by five elders [no. 21]. Meanwhile, six ‘dy eldisten der Juden’ (‘Jewish elders’), acting ‘in yrem und yrer ganczen gemeyne namen’ (‘in their own name and that of their entire community’) are listed in the agreement (ugoda) of 1494 between the butchers of Kraków and their Jewish counterparts [no. 25]. Present at the truce between Miriam and Israel and the rest of the community, as well as at the making of the guarantee in respect of Abraham of Bochnia, and the settlement between butchers were not just the elders but also tota communitas Iudaeorum—a phrase which appears to refer to the entire community. That is what is indicated by the text of the settlement with the Długosz brothers [no. 21], which states that it was accepted by ‘all the elders of the Jews, the middle-ranking and the lowest ranking, and everyone of the community of Jews living in Kraków’.7 Thus there are three groups which were regarded by Christians as responsible and by Jews as representative. The first group consisted of the elders; the second was made up of those who paid the highest taxes (hence the inclusion of women) and/or were community officials (hence the inclusion of the beadles); and the third comprised the community as a whole.

6 Żydzi w średniowiecznym Krakowie. Wypisy źródłowe z ksiąg miejskich krakowskich / The Jews in Mediaeval Cracow. Selected records from Cracow Municipal Books, ed. by Bożena Wyrozumska (Kraków: Polska Akademia Umiejętności, 1995), no. 302 (from year 1433). 7 In the Latin original: ‘omnes Judei mediocres, seniores et infimi et universi ex communitate Judeorum in Cracovia habitancium’.

8

Zaremska

The only document which helps determine the Hebrew equivalents of the Latin terms seniores and tota communitas is an agreement of 1485 which has survived in both Hebrew and Latin versions [no. 24]. In it, Jews renounce the right to undertake retail trade and artisanry within the city. The Latin version begins with the words: ‘We the Jewish elders of Kraków, mentioned above, state and confirm with our seal, in our own hand, that we agree voluntarily and unanimously [with the decision] of the entire community.’8 The Hebrew meanwhile has: ‘We the undersigned, elders of the holy community of Kraków, declare and confirm by the signature of our own hands that, with the agreement of all the people of the kahal….’ It would thus appear that the agreement was concluded with the consent of all members of the community. The Jewish elders, whether independently or with the approval of the whole community, pronounced on internal matters and also on issues concerning contact with Christians. It was the elders who were responsible for the efforts to create a Jewish district in the city by buying houses on the Jewish street and prohibiting their resale to Christians [no. 18]. One duty of the Jewish community authorities was to look after communal buildings and the cemetery. A community of any significance was obliged to have a synagogue, ritual baths, a kosher slaughterhouse, a cemetery of its own [no. 9], a kahal building and an almshouse appropriate to its status. The Jewish community in Kraków also had its own hospital [no. 20]. The construction of the synagogue, which required the employment of Christian architects and craftsmen, was inevitably the costliest investment but the Jewish elders were also responsible for other community buildings. A contract from 1464 between the Poznań kahal and the Christian mason Jakub concerning the erection of ritual baths provides rare evidence of this duty being discharged [no. 16]. The upkeep of cemeteries was seen by Jews as one of their principal obligations and the privileges they were granted guaranteed their security and inviolability [no. 3]. The earliest mention of a Jewish cemetery in Poland dates back to 1287 and concerns the cemetery in Kalisz: the agreement reached by the elders for the lease of the land on which to found it has survived [no. 4]. The elders were also responsible for ensuring a steady supply of kosher food for the community, which was unable to exist without regular supplies of kosher meat. It was vital, therefore, for ritual slaughter to be authorized and for the sale of non-kosher remnants to Christians to be approved. The 1264 8 In the Latin original: ‘Nos seniores Judaei de Cracovia, inferius notati, recognoscimus et testificamus cum sigillo, manus nostrae propriae, qualiter unanimi voto totius communitatis nostrae consensimus et super nos recepimus cum bona voluntate nostra, absque omni coatione.’

The Medieval Period

9

Kalisz charter referred merely to Jews having the right to trade freely in foodstuffs, although we can presume that this also included the manufacture and sale of bakery and butchers’ produce. Henryk of Wierzbno, bishop of Wrocław between 1302 and 1319, called on parish priests to condemn and counteract the ‘excesses which are taking place in the city’, namely that the ‘Jewish bishop’ (see further below) with the connivance of Christian butchers, was slaughtering Jewish-owned cattle in accordance with Jewish ritual in Jewish slaughterhouses, and that he was then freely selecting the finest specimens and leaving behind for Christians those he rejected as unclean [no. 5]. In 1333, Kazimierz the Great announced regulations concerning the practice of ritual slaughter in Kraków in a document [no. 6] issued in the presence of barons, senior Kraków butchers, and local Jews, possibly to an assembly of the whole community. According to the text, it was prompted by the losses being suffered by Christian artisans. The agreement did not cover the controversial issue of the sale by Jewish butchers of non-kosher meat to Christians. That was not dealt with until the privilege granted to Jews by Kazimierz Jagiellończyk in 1453 [no. 10] which gave Jews resident throughout Poland the right to slaughter animals for their own needs and to sell those parts which their tradition did not permit them to eat. The Kraków regulations of 1494 allowed meat to be purchased only by licensed butchers. The fine for any infringement of this regulation was payable by the whole community—tota communitas [no. 26]. The elders were in charge of the community’s finances. Their duties included ensuring that the requisite state and municipal taxes were paid, and securing sufficient funds to maintain the synagogue, lease the cemetery, purchase property, and cover loans made to the municipality, as well as bribes and gifts. These funds came, at least in part, from investments, but also from regular contributions made by community members. Business success, then as now, inexorably gave rise to tax liabilities. Taxes were levied according to residents’ income. Ownership of buildings was taken into account if they were rented out, as were profits from capital (and thus from interest-paying loans) and from trade. Business transactions had to be recorded in a special register. Investments which were not yet profitable proved controversial within the community and were the subject of scholarly dispute. Such investments also attest to the practice of negotiating the amount of tax due. Abraham, a Jew from Poznań, refused to pay his tax because of the financial losses he had incurred the previous year. He maintained that he could not afford to pay the sum demanded of him: he had no cash at his disposal because he had invested it all and had only a few books and some furniture left in his house. The communal authorities turned to the rabbis, who sought the advice of Israel Isserlein, a famous scholar residing in the Viennese Neustadt [no. 12].

10

Zaremska

The elders were also responsible for the timely payment of the ‘Jewish rent’ (Lat. census Iudaeorum—a tax payable to the state treasury) and were liable to sanctions if they failed to discharge this duty [no. 28]. Elders had the authority to refuse outsiders the right to reside in a given community (Hebr. ḥerem ha-yishuv). Settlement in a community where the ḥerem ha-yishuv was in force required the consent of its authorities and its members. The right of the elders to withhold their consent was an important means of protecting community cohesion and of tackling the threat of competition posed by newcomers. An example of this is the conflict between the Kraków kahal and the Fiszel family which, from around the time of this dispute (the late fifteenth century) until the mid-sixteenth century, held the reins of power in Kraków’s Jewish community [no. 22]. In around 1477, Mojżesz and Jakub, sons of Efraim Fiszel who had recently arrived in Kraków, found themselves involved in a bitter dispute with the local community. Sources show that the conflict resulted in their expulsion from the city (de civitatem extrusi sive relegati). In all probability, the communal authorities asked the voivodan court to expel the brothers from Kraków and their request was granted. The brothers, however, refused to accept the decision and requested in writing that the deputy mayor rehear the case. The community elders, clearly powerless in the face of this by now formidable family, suggested taking the dispute before a Christian court. The communal justice system, while autonomous, was not entirely self-sufficient. When its means of stifling dissent proved unsatisfactory, people turned to more powerful methods. Christian authorities in medieval towns had a prerogative similar to the ḥerem ha-yishuv. They were able to grant citizenship to those who wished to settle and engage in business in the town and who wanted to take advantage of local privileges. The aim was to exclude those who would be exempt from the financial obligations which derived from permanent residence in the town. However, the parallels between this and the ḥerem ha-yishuv do not necessarily indicate a causal connection between them: judicial exclusion is used in many different cultures. Both sides—Jewish and Christian—supported each other when it proved necessary to eliminate undesirable outsiders. The expulsion by the municipal council of Poznań of Jonasz of Czambor for defaming Jews and Christians took place with Jewish consent [no. 15 a) and b)]. The elders were also charged with ensuring the safety of residents in the Jewish district. In Kraków, for example, when the Jewish authorities learned of the intended arrival of the Bernardine preacher John of Capistrano, well known for his anti-Jewish views, they turned for help and advice to the participants of the synod of German Jews under way in Bingen [no. 11].

The Medieval Period

11

It was the elders who negotiated the terms for the restoration of property looted from Jewish houses in the course of disturbances; they who demanded that the authorities punish those responsible; and they who attempted to restore order in the town in the aftermath of pogroms. Following the antiJewish riots which took place during the presence of crusaders in Kraków in 1500, proceedings were brought against the councillors of Kazimierz, and Mojżesz Fiszel, then holding the post of parnas in the Kraków kahal, gave evidence against them [no. 29].9 The fundamental means of maintaining law and order in the Jewish community was the ḥerem, or ban of excommunication. In its most extreme form, it was used to exclude a particular member from the community which, by the same token, then withdrew its protection from him, including protection against persecution by Christians. The outcast was also denied access to the various amenities and privileges to which members of the community were generally entitled. A Jew who was the subject of such an excommunication was not permitted to participate in communal prayers, nor was he allowed to enter the synagogue. The practice of issuing bans gave rise to the temptation to use them as weapons in internal conflicts between kahal members [no. 23] and as a means of cracking down on rebels—hence the numerous exhortations from rabbis against their too frequent or overhasty application. This was also the reason for the requirement to make their imposition subject to approval by the elders. Overuse of the ḥerem was very dangerous: above all, it risked the excommunicated, in desperation, seeking outside help and turning to Christian courts to intervene. It is impossible to overstate the significance of the medieval ban—a successor to the ancient synagogal ban—for the internal life of the exiled Jewish communities. It was the principal form of punishment for insubordination; a powerful weapon in the hands of those who played a key role in shaping the conditions in which Jews lived; a means of reinforcing contracts; evidence of equal weight to an oath in court proceedings; and finally, the mechanism by which decisions of the authorities could be enforced.10 9 10

Compare Żydzi w średniowiecznym Krakowie, no. 871 (from year 1494), no. 939 (from year 1495). The ḥerem has survived in the Polish language to the present day in the dialect forms ‘pod hajrem’ or ‘chajrem’ (e.g. ‘przysięgąć pod chajrem’—(lit). to swear under a ban), cf. Isaac Lewin, Klątwa żydowska na Litwie w XVII i XVIII wieku (Lviv: Redakcja Pamiȩtnika Historyczno-Prawnego, 1932); Shlomo Eidelberg, Jewish Life in Austria in the XVth Century as Reflected in the Legal Writing of Rabbi Israel Isserline and His Contemporaries

12

Zaremska

Sometimes, bans were also issued by scholars from distant towns, occasionally even from other countries. An example is the anathemizing of the Prague rabbi Jakub Polak by scholars in Germany and Italy for his controversial decision in a divorce case. When he was forced to leave Prague, he found shelter in the Polish capital. In 1503, King Alexander nominated him chief rabbi of Kraków or, as some historians maintain, of the whole of Małopolska. A document issued by the Prince of Mazovia in 1469 shows that an attempt was made to prohibit the practice of issuing of bans [no. 20]. It is not until the fifteenth century that the sources describe the operation of the rabbinate in Poland’s Jewish communities. [cf. no. 2] In 1370, the Kraków municipal council, at the behest of Kazimierz the Great, granted safe passage to the Jewish banker, Lewko. The grant applied not only to members of Lewko’s family but also to Kasym, who is described in the document as a bishop (episcopus) [no. 7]. Individuals described in Christian sources as ‘Jewish bishops’ are found in Silesia and in German-speaking lands but also in the further reaches of the diaspora such as France or England. The letter, mentioned above, from Bishop Henryk of Wierzbno (1302–19) to the parish priests of Wrocław refers to the local Jewish bishop undertaking ritual slaughter—and it is possible that the term refers to a rabbi [no. 5]. The term doctor Iudaeorum features in judicial documents in the city and district court records of Kraków, Lwów, and Warsaw, and in municipal registers. It refers to the rabbi and to the dayanim, or magistrates in the Jewish kahal court, without whom, according to Jewish law, rabbis were not permitted to hear or adjudicate on cases. In the mid-fifteenth century, rabbis escaping persecution in the Holy Roman Empire began to arrive in the Jewish community in Poznań, the largest Jewish settlement in Poland at that time. Those who settled there had been educated in German yeshivas and were well versed in Jewish law and the practice of selfgovernment as exercised by the community boards of the western Ashkenazi diaspora. Their arrival started the process of moulding the rabbinate in Poland into the form which was prevalent in their places of origin. The practice developed of appointing a communal rabbi who entered into a contract with the kahal authorities. This in turn gave rise to conflicts between those who had been selected for such a contract and other local rabbis [no. 13]. The competencies of rabbis, as set out in documents from the sixteenth century (that is during the period when attempts were made to appoint ‘Jewish (Philadelphia: Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning, 1962), pp. 86–87; Eric Zimmer, Harmony and Discord. An Analysis of the Decline of Jewish Self-Government in 15th-Century Central Europe (New York: Yeshiva University Press, 1970), passim.

The Medieval Period

13

doctors’ who would be dependent on the king) and relatively well described in earlier sources, include the right to excommunicate, referred to above, and the obligation to officiate at weddings and divorces. Mojżesz Minc, who had settled in Poznań, documented the ways in which Jewish wedding ceremonies in the Polish communities differed from those in the Holy Roman Empire [no. 14]. The right of a rabbi to issue a ban was limited, since he was required to obtain the consent of the elders. This is first confirmed by sources from the early sixteenth century. The instrument nominating Michał Ezofowicz as senior of Lithuanian Jews, which was issued in 1514 by Zygmunt I (1506–48), declared that, in order to anathemize, he must first appoint a suitable ‘doctor’.11 Of course, the robustness of the autonomy practised in any given Jewish community depended on the extent to which that community was in fact able to operate without outside intervention. In large part, this was dictated by the behaviour of its own members—in other words whether, in pursuit of their own private interests, they were prepared if need be to take a case to a Christian court or to exploit the leverage of wealthy debtors or to seek royal assistance in settling internal conflicts within the community. The king certainly served to undermine the institutions of the kahal by creating groups of protégées who, thanks to the special privileges which they were granted, could if they so wished disregard the rules which applied to other members of the community. Thus from at least the mid-fourteenth century, a group of Jewish bankers in the Polish capital provided financial services to state and church dignitaries and to the monarch. During the reigns of Kazimierz the Great and Ludwik Węgierski, only residents of Kraków held office as royal factor, the most famous of them being Lewko. Under the rule of Władysław Jagiełło, Jews from Rus began to emerge as leaseholders of customs posts. Members of the Fiszel family, newly arrived in Kraków, lent money to King Kazimierz Jagiellończyk.12 The sovereign should not, however, be seen as an enemy of effective communal autonomy—quite the contrary. He had more interest than most in keeping a watchful eye on tax payers and hence also in the efficient functioning of Jewish communities [nos. 25, 27]. He defended Jews when disturbances 11 12

Sergei Aleksandrovich Bershadski, Dokumenty i Regesty k Istorii Litovskikh Yevreyev. Iz aktovikh knig Myetriki Litovskoy, 1 (St. Petersburg: 1883), no. 60. Maurycy Horn, ‘Żydzi i mieszczanie w służbie królów polskich i wielkich książąt litewskich w latach 1386–1506. Cz. I: Uwagi wstępne. Bankierzy i celnicy’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego, 1985 (3–4/135–36), 3–19; idem, “Żydzi i mieszczanie w służbie królów polskich i wielkich książąt litewskich w latach 1386–1506. Cz. II: Żupnicy, zarządcy mennic, dostawcy, rzemieślnicy i lekarze dworscy. Udział w podróżach dyplomatycznych”, ibid., 1986 (1–2/137–38), 229–42. About Lewko see: Zaremska, pp. 390–405; about the Fiszel family: ibid., pp. 405–13.

14

Zaremska

took place in the city and made sure that they were able to operate within it to his advantage. His intervention was evident principally in his support of those institutions which ensured the smooth running of the community. The medievalist who inspects any sixteenth-century source material, such as the 1595 statute of Kraków’s Jewish community, is immediately aware of how comparatively little is known about the structure of Jewish self-government in the preceding period. No doubt most of the solutions and practices described in the 1595 statute13—for example those dealing with the appointment of the communal authorities or the organization of the various bodies devoted to the upholding of the law or religious discipline—were already in use in an identical or similar form a hundred years earlier. No doubt—but no certainty either, and that is why it is crucial to pay the closest possible regard to the medieval sources. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska Bibliographic References

Primary and Secondary Sources

Agus, Irving A., Urban Civilization Pre-Crusade Europe: A Study of Organized Town-Life in Northwestern Europe during the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries Based on the Responsa Literature, vol. I–II (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 1965). Akta grodzkie i ziemskie z czasów Rzeczypospolitej z archiwum tak zwanego bernardyńskiego we Lwowie, vol. 7 (Dyplomaryusz) Lwów: Seyfarth & Czajkowski, 1878, vol. 9 (Dyplomaryusz), Lwów, 1883, vol. 11 (Najdawniejsze zapiski sądów sanockich 1423–1462), Lwów, 1886, vol. 14 (Najstarsze zapiski sądów lwowskich 1440–1456), Lwów, 1889, vol. 15 (Zapiski sądów lwowskich 1457–1500), Lwów, 1891, vol. 17 (Najstarsze zapiski sądów grodzkich przemyskich i lwowskich), Lwów, 1901, vol. 19 (Najdawniejsze zapiski sądu przeworskiego 1458–1506), Lwów, 1906. Bershadskii, Sergei A. (ed.), Dokumenty i regesty k istorii litovskich evreev. Iz aktovykh knig Metriki Litovskoi (= Russko-evreiskii arkhiv, vol. 1–3: Sankt Petersburg, 1882). Bershadskii, Sergei A., Russko-evreiskii Arkhiv. Dokumenty i Materjaly dla istorii Evreev w Rosii, vol. III. Dokumenty k istorii polskich i litewskich Evreev (1364–1569) (Sankt Petersburg: Obshchestvo dlia rasprostranieniia prosveshcheniia mezhdu evreiami v Rossii, 1903). 13

Statut krakowskiej gminy żydowskiej z roku 1595 i jego uzupełnienia ,tłumaczenie zrobione na podstawie odpisu Majera Bałabana, trans. and ed. by Anna Jakimyszyn (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 2005).

The Medieval Period

15

Bruna, Israel Mi-, Sheʾelot u-tshuvot (Jerusalem: Tiferet Ha-Torah, 1960). Codex diplomaticus Studii Generalis Universitatis Cracoviensis, vol. 1 (Kraków: Constantino Mańkowski, 1870). Czołowski, Aleksander (ed.), Pomniki dziejowe Lwowa z Archiwum Miasta, vol. 1: Najstarsza księga miejska 1382–1389 (Lwów: Nakładem miasta Lwowa z druk. W.A. Szykowskiego, 1892). Czołowski, Aleksander, Franciszek Jaworski (eds.): Pomniki dziejowe Lwowa z Archiwum Miasta, vol. 4: Księga ławnicza miasta 1441–1448 (Lwów: Nakładem Gminy Król. Stoł. Miasta Lwów, 1921). Estreicher, Stanisław (ed.), Najstarszy zbiór przywilejów i wilkierzy miasta Krakowa, (Kraków: Gebethner i Wolff, 1936). Grodziski, Stanisław, Irena Dwornicka, Wacław Uruszczak (eds.), Volumina Constitutionum, vol. 1, part 1: 1493–1529 (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, 1996); vol. 1, part 2: 1527–1549 (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, 2000). Helcel, Antoni Z. (ed.), Zapiski sądowe ziemi krakowskiej, part 2: Starodawne Prawa Polskiego Pomniki (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Komisji Historycznej Akademii Umiejętności w Krakowie, 1870). Isserlein, Israel, Sefer trumat ha-deszen, t. I —Szeelot u- tszuwot, t. II—Psakim u-ktuwim, wyd. Szmuel Awitan (Jerusalem, n.p., 1990). Kaczmarczyk, Kazimierz (ed.), Wydawnictwa Źródłowe Komisji Historycznej: Akta radzieckie Poznania, vol. I: 1434–1470, vol. 9 (Poznań: PTPN, 1948). Kapral, Miron (ed.), Privilei natsionalnych gromad miasta Lvova (XIV–XVIII ct.). Privilegium nationum civitatis leopoliensis (XIV–XVIII), (Lviv: Lvivski Istorichni Pamiatki, 2000). Krzyżanowski, Stanisław (ed.), Księgi ławnicze krakowskie 1365–1376, 1390–1397, (Kraków: Filipowski, 1904). Kupfer, Franciszek, Tadeusz Lewicki (eds.), Źródła hebrajskie do dziejów Słowian i niektórych innych ludów Środkowej i Wschodniej Europy. Wyjątki z pism religijnych i prawniczych XI–XIII w., (Wrocław, Warszawa: Zakład im. Ossolińskich, 1956). Lazutka, Stanislaw, Edwardas Gudavichius (eds.) Privilege to Jews Granted by Viatautas the Great in 1388. Privilegia evream Vitautasa Velikogo 1388 goda, (Moscow, Jerusalem: Evreiskii Universitet v Moskve, 1993/5753). Lekszycki, Jozef von (ed.), Die ältesten grosspolnischen Grodbücher, vol. 1: Posen 1386– 1399 (Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1887). Ohryzko, Jozafat (ed.), Volumina Legum. Przedruk zbioru praw staraniem XX Pijarów w Warszawie od roku 1732-do roku 1782 wydanego, vol. 1 (Sankt Petersburg: Ohryzek, 1859). Piekosiński, Franciszek (ed.), Kodeks dyplomatyczny miasta Krakowa 1257–1506, parts 1 and 2 (Kraków: Nakładem Akademii Umiejętności w Krakowie, 1879, 1882).

16

Zaremska

Piekosiński, Franciszek, and Józef Szujski (ed.), Najstarsze księgi i rachunki miasta Krakowa od r.1300 do 1400 (Kraków: Nakładem Akademii Umiejętności w Krakowie, 1878). Ptaśnik, Jan (ed.), Cracovia artificum 1300–1500, (Kraków: Nakładem Polskiej Akademii Umiejętności, 1917). Ringelblum, Emanuel, Rafael Mahler (eds.), Teksty źródłowe do nauki historyi Żydów w Polsce i we wschodniej Europie, issue 1b (Warsaw: M.J. Freid, 1930). Ulanowski, Bolesław (ed.), Najdawniejsze księgi sądowe ziemi krakowskiej, part 1–2, vol. 8: Starodawne Prawa Polskiego Pomniki (Kraków: Sumptibus Academiae Litterarum, 1886). Warschauer, Adolf (ed.), Die städtischen Archive in der Provinz Posen (Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1901). Wettstein, P.H., Kadmoniot mipinkasot jaszanim lekorot Israel bePolin (Kraków: Josef Fisher, 1890/1891). Wettstein, P.H., Dvarim atikim mipinkase ha-kahal be-kraka (Kraków: Josef Fisher, 1900). Wierzbowski, Teodor (ed.), Matricularum Regni Poloniae summaria excussio codicibus qui in charophylacio maximo Varsoviensi asservantur, vols. 1–3, (Warsaw: Kowalewski, 1907–1908). Wyrozumska, Bożena (ed.), Żydzi w średniowiecznym Krakowie. Wypisy źródłowe z ksiąg miejskich krakowskich (Kraków: Polska Akademia Umiejętności, 1995). Zakrzewski, Ignacy (ed.), Kodeks dyplomatyczny Wielkopolski, vols. 1–4, (Poznań: Nakładem Biblioteki Kórnickiej, 1877–1881).

Studies

Bałaban, Majer, Historja Żydów w Krakowie i na Kazimierzu 1304–1868, vol. 1–2 (Kraków: Nakładem Izraelickiej Gminy Wyznaniowej, 1912, 1931). Bałaban, Majer, ‘Ze studiów nad ustrojem prawnym Żydów w Polsce. Sędzia żydowski i jego kompetencje. Uwagi wstępne’, in: Pamiętnik trzydziestolecia pracy naukowej prof. dr. Przemysława Dąbkowskiego (Lwów: Gubrynowicz, 1927), pp. 246–80. Bloch, Philipp, ‘Die General- Privilegien der polnischen Judenschaft’, in: Zeitschrift der historischen Gesellschaft fȕr die Provinz Posen 6 (1891), pp. 139–74, 387–416. Cygielman, Shmuel A., ‘The Basic Privileges of the Jews of Great Poland as Reflected in Polish Historiography’, in Polin. Studies in Polish Jewry vol. 2, 1987, pp. 117–49. Grodziski, Stanisław, ‘Z dziejów krakowskiego sądownictwa wojewodzińskiego nad Żydami’, in: Andrzej Link-Lenczowski (ed.), Żydzi w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej, (Wrocław–Warsaw–Kraków: Zakład im. Ossolińskich, 1991) pp. 102–117. Horn, Maurycy, ‘Jewish Jurisdiction’s Dependence on Royal Power in Poland and Lithuania up to 1548’, in 76 (1997), Acta Poloniae Historica, pp. 5–17.

The Medieval Period

17

Kapral, Miron, ‘Legal Regulation and National (Ethnic) Differentiation in Lviv, 1350– 1600’, in Wünsch, Thomas, Andrzej Janeczek (eds.) On the Frontier of Latin Europe: Integration and Segregation in Red Ruthenia, 1350–1600 (Warsaw: Warsaw Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, 2004), pp. 212–28. Katz, Jacob, Tradition and Crisis. Jewish Society at the End of the Middle Ages, transl. Bernard Dov Cooperman (New York: Schocken, 1961, 1985). Kisch, Guido, Jewry—Law in Medieval Germany. Laws and Court Decisions Concerning Jews (New York: American Academy for Jewish Research, 1949). Kowalska, Zofia, ‘Die grosspolnischen und schlesischen Judenschutzbriefe des 13. Jahrhunderts im Verhältnis zu den Privilegien Kaiser Friedrichs II (1238) und Herzog Friedrich II. von Ősterreich (1244). Filiation der Dokumente und inhaltliche Analyse’, in: Zeitschrift fȕr Ostmitteleuropa-Forschung, 47 (1998), pp. 1–20. Kutrzeba, Stanisław, ‘Stanowisko prawne żydów w Polsce w XV wieku’, in Przewodnik Naukowy i Literacki 29 (1901), 1007–18, 1147–56. Kutrzeba, Stanisław, ‘Studya do historyi sądownictwa w Polsce. Sądownictwo nad żydami w województwie krakowskim’, in Przegląd Prawa i administracji 1901, pp. 925–944. Kutrzeba, Stanisław, ‘Szos królewski w Polsce w XIV i XV wieku’, in Przegląd Polski 135 (1900), 78–103, 270–90. Lewin, Izaak, ‘The Historical Background of the Statute of Kalisz’, in idem, The Jewish Community in Poland. Historical Essays (New York, 1985), pp. 38–56. Petersen, Heidemarie, Judengemeinde und Stadtgemeinde in Polen. Lemberg 1356–1581 (Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz Verlag, 2003). Ringelblum, Emanuel, Żydzi w Warszawie. Od czasów najdawniejszych do ich wygnania w r. 1526 (Warsaw: Towarzystwo Miłośników Historji, 1932). Rozenzweig, Bernard, Ashkenazic Jewry in Transition (Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfried Laurier University Press, Canada, 1975). Schipper, Ignacy, Studya nad stosunkami gospodarczymi Żydów wo Polsce podczas średniowiecza (Lwów: Wende, 1911). Schorr, Mojżesz, ‘Organizacja Żydów w Polsce (od najdawniejszych czasów aż do roku 1772)’, in Kwartalnik Historyczny 13, 1 (1899), pp. 482–520, 734–75. Ta-Shma, Israel M., ‘On the History of the Jews in Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Poland’, in Polin. Studies in Polish Jewry vol. 10 (1997), pp. 287–317. Teller, Adam, ‘Laicyzacja wczesnonowożytnego społeczeństwa żydowskiego: rozwój rabinatu w Polsce w XVI wieku’, in: Kwartalnik Historyczny 110, 3 (2003), pp. 21–36. Weinryb, Bernard D., The Jews of Poland. A Social and Economic History of the Jewish Community in Poland, 1100–1800 (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1973). Zachová, Jana, ‘Un privilège de Přemysl Otakar II’, in Bohemia Judaica 14 (1978), pp. 71–77.

18

Zaremska

Zaremska, Hanna, Żydzi w średniowiecznej Polsce. Gmina krakowska (Warsaw, 2011). Ziegler, Joseph, ‘Reflections on the Jewry Oath in the Middle Ages’, in Diana Wood (ed.) Christianity and Judaism (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992), pp. 209–20. Zimmer, Eric, Harmony and Discord. An Analysis of the Decline of Jewish Self-government in 15th Century Central Europe (New York: Yeshiva University Press, 1970).



Sources



No. 1 Responsum by Yehuda Ha-Cohen14 on a Conflict between Recently Settled Jewish Merchants in Kraków,15 C. 1028 r.

Published in: I. A. Agus, Urban Civilisation in Pre-Crusade Europe, vol. 1, nr 21, from Yehuda Ha-Cohen: Sefer ha-Dinim. A maintains that B had a slave, and that Z(imri) abducted that slave to Russia. Subsequently, A made preparations to go to Russia on business; B persuaded him to exert himself on his behalf, and to take slave away from Z, or obtain from him money as payment for the slave. A acted accordingly, and succeeded in collecting from Z money in payment for the slave. Z then handed the slave over to a trustee in order that the latter conduct him to Kraków, where A and Z were going. Z was afraid that B would do him mischief. When they came to Kraków, Z learned of B’s mischief, and he [?] perpetrated evil. Z therefore went to the community [leaders] and lodged with them a complaint against B and A. The [leaders of the] community ordered A to return to Z the money he had taken from him for B’s slave; they even collected from him a fine of three marks of silver, and gave it to Z. The members of the court stated that they never had heard anything like the perfidy perpetrated by B who, with the help of gentiles, took away Z’s female-slave, who was also his concubine, and abducted her to Moravia. […]. Translated from Hebrew by Joseph Citron

14 15

Yehuda Ha-Cohen (c. 980–1050)—scholar active in Mainz. Ha-Cohen was student of Gershom, the reformer of Jewish communities in the Rhineland, and author of Sefer haDinim, a collection of responsa earlier Talmudic authorities. This responsum testifies to the functioning in Kraków of a Jewish court, entitled to rule on conflicts between periodically present Jewish merchants and to collect fees from them.

The Medieval Period



19

No. 2 Letter of Eleazer of Prague16 to Yehuda the Pious17 Concerning Difficulties in Finding Torah Teachers in Poland, the Rus, and Hungary, 12th–13th c.

Published in: Źródła hebrajskie do dziejów Słowian i niektórych innych ludów Środkowej i Wschodniej Europy, s. 159, from Meir ben Baruch, Responsa, nr 112. In the majority of the places within Poland, Russia, and Hungary where a lack of Torah studies exists because of their hardships, they identify and hire for themselves a knowledgeable man, and he fulfils the function of prayer leader, righteous teacher, and teacher to their children … a responsum of R. Eliezer from Bohemia (may his righteous memory be for a blessing) to R. Judah the pious. Translated from Hebrew by Joseph Citron



No. 3 Privilege for the Jews by Bolesław the Pious, Prince of Greater Poland, Kalisz, 16 August 126418

Published in: Kodeks dyplomatyczny Wielkopolski, t. 1, nr 605.

In the name of the Lord, amen. Unless they are given life through the voice of witnesses or through the proof of documentation, the deeds of the human race swiftly pass and slip completely from memory. For this reason we, Bolesław, by the grace of God Prince of Greater Poland, are making known this document both to the people today and the people of the future to whose attention it is brought, because we have decided that the statutory rights and privileges which they have secured from us should be declared to our Jews settled throughout the jurisdiction under our rule, in the same way, word for word, as they are set out in the following set of provisions.

16 17 18

Eleazer of Prague (1150–?)—scholar, travelled in Eastern Europe, including perhaps Hungary and Poland. Yehuda the Pious (c. 1150–1217)—scholar from the Rhineland, representative of the Haside Ashkenas. The majority of rabbis known by name and active in or stemming from Poland in the 13th century were in connected to Yehuda or his students. This is not the original wording of the privilege. Between 1244 and 1268, similar privileges were issued by Frederic II of Austria (1211–1246), and later by princes in Hungary and Czech lands. The template for the original privilege by Boleslaw the Pious was a charter issued by the Czech prince Przemysl Ottokar II. The earliest known wording is known through its confirmation by Kazimierz the Great (1333–70) in 1344.

20

Zaremska

In the first place, we ordain that regarding money, or regarding any item, either a chattel or real estate, or in a criminal case which relates to the person or the substance of a Jew, let no Christian be permitted to give evidence against the Jew, except when the Christian and the Jew are present. For example, if a Christian brings a Jew to court, declaring that he has committed his security to the Jew, the Jew denies this, and the Christian is unwilling to give credence to the plain words of the Jew, if the Jew gives proof of his case by swearing under oath by a sum greater than what has been pledged to him, let him emerge from the process as an innocent party. If a Christian pledges security to a Jew, claiming that he has pledged to the Jew for a smaller amount of money than the Jew admits to, and the Jew takes an oath against an amount equal to the security pledged to him, since the Jew has proved his case by making the oath, let the Christian not refuse to pay him. Likewise, if a Jew says to a Christian that he has changed the amount to be pledged, without witnesses having been adopted, and the Christian denies this to be the case, in these circumstances the Christian will vindicate himself by his own oath alone. A Jew will be empowered to receive under the title of security everything which is owed to him, under whatever title it may be listed, with no investigation in respect of this; except for fabrics which are covered in blood or soaked with water, or religious materials, of which a Jew will in no circumstances take possession. Likewise, if a Christian should take a Jew to court on the grounds that the security which the Jew has was taken from the Christian by theft or violence, the Jew will swear against that security, that when he received it, he did not know that it had been taken by theft or by deception: this would be implicit in his oath, that he will prove by how much a security in this category had been pledged; so by eliminating it from the calculation, the Christian will pay him the capital outstanding and the interest which have accumulated at that point in the course of the loan. If, however, a Jew loses his own belongings by the hazard of a fire, or by burglary, or by violence, along with the securities on loan to him, and he proves this, and a Christian who had deposited the securities still pursues his case against him, the Jew will relieve himself of blame by his oath. Likewise, if Jews stir up disagreement or war amongst themselves about something, the judge of our city will exercise no jurisdiction against them, but we ourselves alone, or our representative, or his judge will exercise judgement. If, however, guilt points to a well-known person, this case will be reserved for judgement by ourselves. Likewise, if a Christian causes an injury to a Jew in any way, let the accused pay the penalty to ourselves and our representative, in accordance with his ability to discover our mercy, which is to be delegated to my court; and let him compensate the wounded man for the care of his wounds and his costs, as the laws of our land require and demand.

The Medieval Period

21

Likewise, if a Christian kills a Jew, let him be punished by a worthy judgement, and let all the chattels and buildings of the guilty man pass into our control. If a Christian attacks a Jew, but without drawing blood, the penalty will be required from him by my representative in accordance with the tradition of our land; let him satisfy the man who has been struck or wounded, in whatever way is the established custom in our land. But if he has no means of providing money, he will be punished for his crime as would be just. Wherever a Jew travels through our realm, no one shall place any barrier in his way nor cause him trouble or harm. But if he is carrying any goods or other property, tolls should proceed from them at all the places where tolls are levied; if a Jew himself cannot pay the toll which he owes, one of the citizens of the town in which the Jew is staying at that time should pay. If Jews in accordance with their tradition bring one of their dead from one town to another, or from province to province, or from one country to another, we desire nothing to be charged to them by our toll collectors. But if a toll collector does exact a charge, we desire that he be punished as a robber. Likewise, if a Christian in any way desecrates or goes into their cemetery, we desire him to be severely punished in accordance with the tradition and the laws of our country; all his belongings should be delivered to our court, in whoever’s name they are declared. If someone has arrogantly stirred up trouble around about the synagogues of the Jews, we desire him to pay two talents of pepper to our representative. If a Jewish defendant is found by his judge to be subject to a fine, which is called a vandil, let him pay to that judge the fine of one talent of pepper, which has been imposed since early times. If a Jew is summoned to court by an instruction from his judge, and has failed to appear the first and the second time, let him pay the fine in respect of each occasion which has been traditional since antiquity. If he does not appear at the third summons, let him pay to the aforementioned judge the fine which follows. Likewise, if a Jew wounds another Jew, he shall not refuse to pay the fine to his judge in accordance with the custom in our land. We determine that no Jew should swear according to their ‘oath on the Book of Moses’, except in major cases which extend to the limit of fifty marks of silver, beyond which he would be summoned to our presence. But in less serious cases, he ought to take an oath in front of the [Jewish] synagogues, before the entrance of the aforesaid synagogue. If a Jew were secretly killed, and it could not be established through evidence who had killed him, if after the investigation the Jews began to suspect someone, we will provide the Jews with the protection of justice against the suspected murderer of a Jew, subject to the rights of the accused.

22

Zaremska

Likewise if Christians raise a violent hand against a Jew, they will be punished according to what the law of our land demands. Likewise, let the judge of the Jews bring no case which has arisen amongst Jews to his court, unless he has been requested to do so by a complaint. And Jews must be tried in the neighbourhood of their synagogues, or where they might choose. And if a Christian retrieves his security from a Jew in circumstances where he has not paid the interest, if he hasn’t paid it within a month, let the interest be increased by this extra interest [for this period]. Further, we desire that no-one be a guest in the house of a Jew.19 If a Jew borrows money on the security of physical possessions or papers relating to buildings, and the owner of that security also provides proof of his ownership, we rule that the money and the pledged documents should be removed by legal means from the Jew. If a man or a woman takes a little boy from the Jews, we desire that he or she be convicted as a thief. If a Jew has received security from a Christian and keeps it for a year, if the value of the security does not exceed the money which has been borrowed, the Jew shall show his security to his judge; if, however, the security is not adequate, he shall show it to our representative or to his judge, or he shall be free to sell it if he shows the same security to his judge before the end of the year. If the security stays with the Jew for a year and a day, he shall not be answerable thereafter to anyone on its account. We desire that no-one should have such disrespect as to put pressure on a Jew on his Sabbath day about releasing his security. If any Christian takes his security from a Jew by force, or uses violence in the Jew’s house, he should be heavily punished as undermining our court. There should be no judicial process against a Jew except in the synagogues or where all who are judged are Jews; exceptions from this are we ourselves and our representative, who can summon them to our presence. In accordance with papal decrees in the name of our Holy Father, we strictly forbid that Jews settled in our realms should hereafter be singled out and accused of using human blood, since in accordance with the principle of the Law, all Jews have their own full share of blood. But if any Jew is accused by a Christian of killing a Christian boy, he should be convicted by three Christians and the same number of Jews; and after he has been convicted, let this Jew then be punished only with the penalty which follows for the crime he has committed. But if the afore-mentioned witnesses and his

19

This provision excuses Jews from the obligation to host travelling officials of the Duke.

The Medieval Period

23

own innocence absolve him of guilt, the Christian will deservedly suffer for his malice the punishment which the Jew would have had to undergo.20 We decree that whatever a Jew has lent, whether gold coins or silver, the same must be paid back to him or returned together with the interest owed which has accrued. We desire that Jews should accept horses of every kind, usually all horses, openly and in daylight as security. If, however, a stolen horse is found at a Jew’s house by a Christian, the Jew will clear his name speaking on his own oath: because he held this same horse as security taken openly and during the day against the amount of money he had given, and he did not believe it to have been stolen. We also prohibit that the coiners themselves, settled in our domain, without our instruction or that of our representative and without the involvement of honest citizens, should venture in any way to imprison or capture Jews with forged denarii or other assets. We resolve that if a Jew cries out, driven by a major emergency during the night, and if Christians nearby have done nothing to provide appropriate help, or responded to the cry, a Christian neighbour of his who helps should have a claim [on the Jew] of thirty solidi. We do, moreover, decree that Jews may sell and buy anything freely; they may handle bread in the same way as Christians, and we forbid that they be required to pay a fine to our representative for doing so. And to ensure that all the foregoing may continually gather strength of purpose, we are presenting this present decree to them with the signatures of witnesses as a guarantee, having strengthened it with the validation of our seal. The witnesses to this matter are: the Count Archamboldus palatinus Kalisiensis, Count Simon castellanus Gneznensis, Count Iohannes Kalisiensis, Count Mathias castellanus Lendensis, Count Cechozlaus pincerna Kalisensis, Count Derslaus venator Lendensis, with many other lords of our land. This was executed in the city of Kalisz the day after the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary [16 August], in the year 1264, on 25 August [sic]. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

20

This provision follows the template of Przemysl Ottokar II who in 1246 on the basis of papal bulls—regarding the German lands—prohibited the persecution of Jews and attacks on their synagogues and cemeteries.

24

Zaremska

No. 4 Prince Przemyśl II of Greater Poland Strengthens the Agreement between the Elders of the Community in Kalisz and Rupin, Son of Iaszko, in the Matter of a Lease of Grounds Near the Cemetery, Kalisz, 9 March 1287

Published in: Kodeks dyplomatyczny Wielkopolski, t. 1, nr 574.

In the name of the Lord, amen. We Przemyśl II, by the grace of God Prince of Poland, desire it to be known to all whom the people of today might meet, that since neither Rupin son of Iaszko nor the Jews of Kalisz could reach an agreement, meeting in our presence they have voluntarily, and of their own free will, agreed on the following: Rupin has leased to the elders of the Jews of Kalisz and to their whole community, for their burials, the mountain which he inherited on the edge of his family estate at Podgórze, and which lies among our own family lands in Lesser Dobrzec, for a permanent rent of six talents of pepper and two talents of saffron. Furthermore, the aforesaid Jews, and others who succeed them, have committed to pay the aforesaid rent on the feast of Saint Martin to the aforesaid Rupin and the owners of his inheritance, having provided security and at risk of penalty from the lord who is our representative. If they are negligent in paying the rent, the aforesaid Rupin may freely have use of his mountain without disagreement from the Jews, and no objection can stand in his way. The aforesaid parties have declared that they are bound by all this, and we have given our approval and strengthened the arrangements by this document. This was enacted in Kalisz on the Third Sunday of Lent, in 1287. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 5 Letter by Bishop Henryk from Wierzbno21 to the Chaplains about a ‘Jewish Bishop’22 Who Practises Ritual Slaughter in Christian Slaughterhouses, 1302–1319

Published in: Das Formelbuch des Domherrn Arnold von Proztan, nr 75.

Against the vile Jewish abuse of killing cattle in Christian slaughterhouses. Henryk, by the grace of God, etc. to worthy lords, my greetings in the Lord. 21 22

Bishop of Wrocław, 1302–1319. The term Jewish bishop (Latin episcopus Iudaeorum) is earliest documented in German cities ruled by a bishop which also had a Jewish community; it denotes either a rabbi or a community leader.

The Medieval Period

25

It has come to our attention that a serious and distressful new outrage on Christians has emerged from the Jews in Wrocław: to the effect that the bishop of the Jews in the city of Wrocław, at the suggestion and sponsorship of the Christian butchers in the same city, slaughters with his own hand and kills all the Jews’ cattle in the slaughterhouse or shambles of these same Christians, following the rite of the Jewish race. And when he has killed the cattle, he selects what he likes, and indeed leaves for the Christians to pick up those parts which he rejects and despises as unclean. How shocking that an abuse, no, an abomination of this kind, through which the lifestyle of the Christians is manifestly made more lowly and worthless, could not be tolerated by us as offending against the restrictions of the holy canons, nor must it be acceptable under any circumstances. This must be the most disgraceful, most disreputable, and most ridiculous thing in all the lands in which Christianity is thriving: that Christian devotion accepts the Jews and allows them to live alongside its rites, yet it is unworthy and indeed sacrilege that there should be, alongside the sharing of the sacrament and the ordinances of the canons, such a sharing with Jews through which the Christians are broadly agreed to be inferior to them, in which I would be instantly tainted, if those things which the Jews themselves spit out and avoid as unclean were to be gathered up by those who profess the Christian faith. We therefore leave to your discretion, and we instruct you in your devotion to your holy obedience and giving you strict instructions under the sanctions of our office, that you collectively and individually on the basis of our share in devotion to obedience and under the penalty of excommunication for the Christian slaughter-men in Wrocław, you prohibit this utterly, all of you collectively displaying a decree of prohibition publicly in your churches in identical terms, that because of this disgusting abuse, and because of this cohabitation which is so demeaning as is explained above, they should not admit Jews in future, as we have recently given instructions for them to be excluded in other letters of ours. In parallel, we shall proceed against the aforesaid butchers and Jews through a Church sanction to the extent that justice requires it. We do not, however, propose, just as we have no capability of doing so, to change the ceremonies and worthwhile traditions of the Jews, which they have had since antiquity until now, and of which their exercise is accepted by the Church in measures of holy law. We propose that this instruction of ours be published and explained, with the justifications in holy law set out above, both in a popular style amongst the people and in public places. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

26

Zaremska

No. 6 Kazimierz the Great Confirms a Verdict Returned in a Conflict between the Slaughterers’ Guild and the Jews of Kraków about the Number of Jewish Slaughterers, Kraków, 11 November 1333

Published in: B. Wyrozumska, Nieznany dokument Kazimierza Wielkiego, pp. 191–95.

We, Kazimierz, by the grace of God king of Poland, confirm to all relevant parties by public proclamation in these terms, that when, before ourselves and before our barons, our loyal citizens Withco and Janris, his son-in-law, on behalf of the guild of the butchers of Kraków, contested in law with the Jews of Kraków that these Jews had become accustomed to selling meat to the disadvantage of the meat markets, now finally, after this particular case had been aired very adequately this way and that, this decree and statute has emerged as a final judgement through our barons, to the effect that: henceforward, not more than six men may be butchers for the Jews or from the Jewish race. In any case, they would be required to sell the carcasses of small animals cut into only four portions, and those of large animals into eight portions and no more; so to these men let permission be given to perform in part the duties of butchers. But they and others from the Jewish community who offend against these decrees and statutes will be liable to be punished by a summons and by the confiscation of their goods. As validation of all the above our seal is attached to this proclamation. This was enacted on the Blessed Martin’s day in Kraków, in 1333. Witnesses to this were our nobles Janussius, the judge of Sandomierz; Peter, Hunting Master of Kraków; and Segneus, Vice Chancellor of our court, by whose hands this is issued. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 7 Letter of Consignment Issued by the Kraków City Council to the Jewish Agent Lewko, to His Family, and to the ‘Jewish Bishop’ at the Behest of Kazimierz the Great, Kraków 1 March 1370

Published in: B. Wyrozumska, Nieznany dokument Kazimierza Wielkiego, pp. 191–95. A letter granted to the Jews at the time of King Kazimierz: We the present councillors of Kraków, or those so appointed in the future, make it known to all to whom it relates, both now and in the future, that in response to the specific request and consent of the wonderful and most excellent prince our Lord Kazimierz, the most distinguished king of Poland, our gracious Lord, and with the support of our senior fellow-citizens, giving it their considered support and the advice of their experience, we promise in good faith, and pledge to undertake, and to undertake

The Medieval Period

27

from this moment, the defence, protection, and safekeeping on the part of ourselves and of our whole realm, down to every single one of our fellow citizens, to the distinguished man Lewko the Jew,23 his wife and his true heirs, as well as Casys his bishop, or another Jew whom they consider acceptable as a bishop as time passes, because of the ready and welcome benefits which this Lewko and his late father Jordan graciously extended over a long period of time to this city of Kraków, to ourselves and to our predecessors, and which are still being offered with the most attentive spirit for the future. By witness of this our letter, to which our seal is attached. Delivered on the sixth feast day before Quadragesima Sunday, in the year of our Lord 1370. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 8 Prince Witold24 Grants the Jews of Brześć a Privilege Following the Template of the Privilege Granted by Bolesław the Pious from 1264,25 Łuck, 1388.

Published in: Lazutka/Gudavichius: Privilege to Jews granted by Vytautas the Great in 1388, p. 56. The substance of a letter of Witold, Duke of Lithuania, granted to the Jews of Brześć in statutory form: In the name of the Lord, amen. Unless they are given life through the voice of witnesses or through the proof of documentation, the deeds of the human race swiftly pass and slip completely from memory. This is why we, Alexander, otherwise known as Witold, by God’s grace Duke of Lithuania and heir to Grodno, Brześć, Łuck, Drohobycz, Volodymyr and other lands, give notice to people now and in the future, whose attention the present letter reaches, that we have determined that to our Jews in our city of Brzese their legal privileges should be declared publicly; these they have obtained from 23

24

25

Lewko the Jew was creditor to monarchs such as Kazimierz the Great, Louis I of Hungary (1326–1382), queen Jadwiga (c. 1374–1399), and Władysław Jagiełło (c. 1352–1434), as well as to other high ranking dignitaries, and among the leaseholders of the salt mines in Wieliczka and Bochnia. The Lithuanian duke Witold was the governor of Lithuania for Władysław Jagiełło; the privilege for the Jews of Brześć issued in 1388 served as template for those issued for the Jews of Grodno, Troki, Łuck and Włodzimierz. The oldest Latin version of Witold’s privilege originates from the period of Kazimierz IV Jagiełłończyk (1440–1492), and is an entry to the Crown Records (Metryka Koronna) of ca. 1470. The original has not been preserved; its content is know from 15th and 16th century confirmations in Polish, Russian, and Latin.

28

Zaremska

us, and we have granted and given to them, word for word as they are possessed by the Jews in Lwów, as they are listed in the following code.26 Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 9 Declaration Concerning the Lease of the Grounds of the Kraków Jewish Cemetery, 14 August 1427

Published in: Żydzi w średniowiecznym Krakowie, no. 277, source: Court records.

Gregor Panak has been told that the Jew Merkil should prove that he has authority over the Jewish cemetery, which is used by all the Jews. Translated from Middle High German by François Guesnet



No. 10 Kazimierz IV Jagiellończyk confirms the privilege for the Jews of Greater Poland granted by Kazimierz the Great. Kraków, 13 August (?) 145327

Published in: B. Ulanowski, Najdawniejszy układ systematyczny prawa polskiego z XV wieku, pp. 99–111. There follow the laws governing the Jews who dwell in Greater Poland and Lancicia, and first the foreword follows. In the name of the Lord, amen. We Kasimierz, by the grace of God, king of Poland, and of the lands of Kraków, Sandomierz, Sieradz, Lancicia, and Kuyavia, Grand Duke of Lithuania, leader and hereditary ruler of Pomerania, Russia, and Prussia, etc., make a permanent record of the matter, through the contents of the present decree, by which it is appropriate for everyone, both now and for those in the future who pay attention to it, of how our Jews, assembled in the personal presence of ourselves in our greatness, from the lands of Poland, that is to say from the provinces of Poznań, Kalisz, Sieradz, Lancicia, Brześć, and Wrocław, and the counties adjoining them, brought to our attention and demonstrated that because of their distinctive features they had 26 27

Follows the privilege by Bolesław the Pious (see above, no. 3). The privilege by Kazimierz the Great is preserved in several identical copies of its confirmation through Kazimierz IV Jagiełłończyk. He revoked the privileges for the Jews of Greater Poland and Poland Minor at the request of the nobility at the gatherings of Cerekwica and Nieszawa (1454). See the introduction to this chapter, p. XXX, concerning claims of forgery of this item.

The Medieval Period

29

laws devised by our most eminent predecessor the Lord Prince Kazimierz, king of Poland of distinguished memory, which they had always used from the early times of the other kings who preceded us until the present; but at that time when our city of Poznań was destroyed by the fury of a fire at which we ourselves were present, their laws had also been reduced to ash. They were therefore humbly asking and beseeching us that we should be gracious enough towards them as to renew, ratify, and confirm the same laws following a copy of them, which they displayed in our presence. Wherefore the substance of those laws and of the copies of them follows to word by word and is as follows. The foreword follows. In the name of the Lord, amen. We, Kasimierz, by God’s grace king of Poland, and master also of the lands of Kraków, Sandomierz, Lancicia, Kuyavia and hereditary lord of Poznań, desire it to come to the notice of all, both now and in the future, that certain of our Jews from our kingdom, who have a dwelling place in Greater Poland, came to the presence of our Majesty and of the noblemen of our country, presenting the privilege they had been granted from the most magnificent Duke Bolesław, of blessed memory, who was the first to be master and lord of the lands of Poland, which contained the laws and statutes of these same Jews; our Regal Majesty, considering this privilege with its statutory provisions assisted by divine providence and the careful consideration of our barons and nobles from our lands, word for word in the order of the aforesaid privilege, and finding nothing in it which displeased our Majesty or appeared to fall short of the law in any of its articles, noting this, we gave our instruction and our commitment to renew and confirm the aforesaid privilege with the considered consent of our Majesty and of our nobles from our lands, by giving legal force to it as accepted and welcome to us: Article 1, The evidence by which is a Jew proven guilty by a Christian In the first place we decree that if a Jew is accused by a Christian in respect of any object, either a building or a chattel, or in furtherance of a criminal charge which affects the assets or human rights of Jews, such a Christian should not proceed without two good Christians and also two good Jews, all of whom should be free from doubt about their decency, and not of ill repute; and when they have been summoned, those identified as Christians should swear on the Holy Cross, in this way, ‘God so helps us and the Holy Cross’, etc., as is the custom for Christians; but the Jews will swear on the book of Moses of the Ten Commandments, following the custom of the Jews in respect of a sum of money above fifty marks of pure silver and beyond; and where it is less than the aforesaid sum of fifty marks of pure silver, the Jews should swear over the synagogue’s door handle hanging beside the stairs of the doorway following their own custom, that is by this means or oath, ‘The God so helps us who brings light and darkness, and the books

30

Zaremska

of Moses etc.’ This is how the oath of the Jews ought to be performed holding on to the ferunca, and for no reason, major or minor, can it be otherwise. A rabbi or synagogue approached about this must always make this arrangement. Article 2, Regarding Christian securities to be denied by a Jew If a Christian sues a Jew, saying that he has taken his pledged securities for his own benefit, and the Jew denies this, then if the Christian is not prepared to trust the Jew using ordinary language, the Jew will be free from the Christian by making an oath to him. Article 3, Regarding the amount to be refused above the value of the pledge If a Christian pledges a security or pawn worth less than the value of the debt, and the Jew says that the debt will be larger, and the Jew then makes his oath according to Jewish custom, that Christian has an obligation to the Jew and should separate off the amount outstanding, and to pay it with interest without delay. Article 4, The pledges which a Jew will not accept Furthermore, a Jew is empowered to accept all securities which are offered to him, under whatever names they are pledged, except for objects which are damp with blood, and holy vestments which have been consecrated to God for holy worship; he will not accept these, given the fact that he would give them to a priest to keep because he alone is not allowed to keep them. Article 5, Regarding property taken from someone by fraud or violence and pledged to a Jew If a Christian sues a Jew about a pledge the Jew holds, to the effect that it was taken from the same Christian by fraud or with violence, and the Jew swears on that security that ‘I did not know at the time when this pledge or pawn was committed to me that it had been taken by fraud or with violence, but I believed it to be a fair and just pledge’, and the Jew also swears in an oath of his own, against the same value as that of the pledged security; with justification demonstrated in this way, the Christian will be bound and required to pay to the Jew, properly and effectively, the principal of the loan, in support of which such a pledge or pawn was committed, and the interest accumulating from the time the loan was made. Article 6, Regarding defences for Jews in the case of pledges consumed by a fire or removed by force Again, as this provision may be missing: if by an unhappy chance a fire should occur, or Jews should by deception lose their goods and chattels, together with pledged securities, in those circumstances the Jew in question should complain on the evidence of

The Medieval Period

31

other Jews who are his neighbours, that his goods and chattels together with pledges committed to him have been taken from him by deception, and kept by none other than the same Christian who wants to have such pledges committed; if the Jew takes an oath according to the Jewish tradition, he will be free and have no further commitments to this Christian. If such a Jew does not commit to swearing an oath, then he will be obliged to add to the Christian’s credit as much as he gave before under the lost pledge; by doing this he will be free of commitments to this Christian. Article 7, Regarding strife between Jews among themselves If Jews quarrel or feud about some matter among themselves, or a Jew gets involved in a struggle with a Christian with blows and wounds being exchanged, then no judge of the state, nor the councilors, nor anyone else, but only the representative responsible for these Jews, or whoever is in charge in his place, shall try them, and they shall pronounce their judgement in a court which makes use of a footstool, in the presence of the Jews. Article 8, Regarding appeals in cases involving Jews If the aforesaid Jew who is in litigation with someone like those named above, and has asked that such a case be put again to our Majesty, one of my representatives, or even the judge set up in the same case, whoever was available at the time, shall take on the duty of bringing a case of this kind to me, and whatever case is being conducted between the Jews and my representative, or his alternate, should be delayed until the arrival of our Majesty, so long as the case requires this. Article 9, Regarding the contributions of the Jews None of our representatives or senior officials should collect any taxes, otherwise known as poplathky, or contributions, or dany, from the Jews, except where the Jews make voluntary donations, because we keep ourselves in reserve for our own treasure. Article 10, Regarding contractual disputes between Jews We have also decreed what should happen if someone makes his case regarding a dispute or differing interpretations between Jews: no-one but their elders may make a judgement, except that, when they cannot establish the truth amongst themselves, they should in those circumstances refer the case to their lord, my representative. Article 11, Regarding the penalty for protest by Jews If a Jew did not obey his higher authorities, then let such a person pay a fine of three marks to his lord, my representative, and likewise a fine of three marks to his higher authorities also.

32

Zaremska

Article 12, Regarding wounding and hair-pulling of a Jew by a Christian Furthermore, if a Christian gets into any kind of fight with a Jew, and if that Christian inflicts a bleeding or bruised wound on the Jew, or punches him on the jaw, or pulls out or uproots hair from his head, we grant our justice to the Jew as follows: so the aforesaid Jew who has undergone this kind of injury must swear in line with the aforesaid oath in accordance with their tradition, on the ‘ferunca’, or on the ‘kolcze’, of the doorway to the synagogue of the Jews, and the Christian in such cases, if he is subject to the Jew’s over-riding oath, shall have a binding debt to the Jew of five marks for laying a finger on his jaw, ten marks for a blow with bruising, and half his goods, both buildings and chattels, for a true bleeding wound: we retain the remaining half of his goods for ourselves and our successors and our representatives for that area. In other circumstances, we shall judge the foregoing facts as we wish; but the aforesaid Christian who has torn hair from the head of a Jew shall be required to pay the Jew in line with the decision of the lords sitting in this trial, in line with what the law states. Article 13, Regarding capital punishment for the killing of a Jew Furthermore, since there may be no existing provision, if a Christian kills one of the Jews, the Jewish next of kin to the Jew who has been killed, if he makes his over-riding oath against the Christian on the Book of Moses of the Ten Commandments according to the Jewish tradition, then we desire and decree that such a Jew should take the life of the Christian condemned by his oath, valuing a head for a head. This should not be brought about in any other way. Article 14, Regarding a fugitive murderer of a Jew If a Christian kills a Jew and escapes in some way, then since he cannot be captured or held in anyone’s custody, of the goods of this same Christian, his buildings and his chattels, whatever he has, the first half of his aforesaid goods and inheritance should be passed to the closest relatives of the murdered Jew, and the other half should be kept by our royal treasury. Article 15, Regarding the safe conduct of the murderer of a Jew If such a fugitive from killing a Jew wants to have safe conduct, it must not be given to him, except with the consent of the aforesaid near relatives of the Jew who has been killed. Article 16, Regarding kindness towards Jews among Christians We desire and decree, that if one of the Jews comes to a Christian’s house, no Christian man must place an obstacle or barrier or annoyance in his way.

The Medieval Period

33

Article 17, Regarding the Jews’ freedom to trade Any Jew is empowered to travel to or cross freely and safely from one city to another and from one province to another in our kingdom, and to ride without any obstruction or arrest, safely as is our custom, with no impairment of his freedom or arrest through all our cities or the provinces of my subject lands; and any Jew is empowered in our kingdom to transport freely and safely with him, free from all obstructions, all his belongings, and all his commercial goods, whatever he likes, or can have with him, and to sell, dispose of, or exchange them, to conjoin people he likes to his own benefit; and to stay physically in a city or town and stand freely and securely, with no obstruction or arrest, as long as he needs to in all the cities, large and small towns, and other places in our kingdom; let everyone in our kingdom accept their presence, and with safe passage, and with duty paid in the usual places, on the same basis as other Christians pay it, and not in any other way. Article 18, Regarding the charging of customs, without exemption for the corpses of dead Jews If it happens that that the Jews should, in accordance with their tradition, transport the body of a deceased Jew, male or female, from one city to another city or province, the customs collector of this place must not have the disrespect to charge any customs duty on such a deceased Jew; and if any of our customs collectors, contrary to our present laws and instructions takes customs duty from such a deceased Jew, then we decree and desire that such a customs collector must be put to trial, as a thief or robber or plunderer, and his goods, whatever they may be, must accrue to us. Article 19, Regarding the freedom of Jews to bathe in the baths of Christians We desire and ordain that any Jew is empowered freely and safely to enter the public bath of a city alongside Christians, and should pay no supplement, except as paid by inhabitants of the host city. Article 20, Regarding the slaughterhouses of Jews Wherever the Jews have dwellings in a city or town of our kingdom, they are able to slaughter sheep and cattle as meat for their use. And if anywhere meat is not what they want and like under their own tradition, in that case they may sell them so that they can do better, or it seems to them that they can. Article 21, Regarding the movement of gravestones If a Christian, in a cemetery of the Jews where he is present before a grave, forcibly throws stones aside, or removes them to other sites, or in any way damages them,

34

Zaremska

whoever acts in this way shall be obliged to surrender his buildings and chattels to the treasury of our kingdom, because we desire that this should be observed and complied with in accordance with the jurisdiction which we have granted to the Jews. Article 22, In the event of anyone throwing rubbish on their synagogue If a Christian in a foolhardy or arrogant way throws rubbish over their synagogues, as the penalty in such a case, that Christian will be obliged to pay two talents of pepper to our representative, the protector of the Jews. Article 23, Regarding the summoning of Jews If a Jew has been summoned by a judge of the Jews, and if he does not appear on the first and second occasions, whatever the case in which he was summoned, and whichever of the occasions he has missed, he shall be required to pay one talent of pepper to his judge; if, however, he is summoned a third time and does not appear, in respect of whatever asset against which he was summoned, he loses and forfeits it by this failing. Article 24, Regarding sentencing by a judge of the Jews A judge of the Jews must not give public knowledge of, nor deliver, nor determine any sentence, unless he has first obtained the consent of the Jews themselves on this particular case. Article 25, By whom a Jew is required to be summoned The judge of the Jews themselves must not try any Jew under his own law, unless such a Jew has been summoned through a summons by the synagogue and by the rabbi, and then in the first instance the judge must try the aforesaid Jew in respect of that for which he is being summoned. Article 26, Regarding pleas that Christians have been wounded If a Christian should publicly allege that wounds, whatever their nature, had been inflicted on him by a Jew, he must show them to the Solomon of the Jews themselves and also to the rabbi; the judge himself must not hold the trial, nor locate his court in such a case anywhere but around their own synagogue, or indeed where the aforesaid Jews have agreement with their judge with both parties’ consent, and have chosen or allotted a place which is acceptable for themselves; if in that place the Christian shall convince two Jews and two Christians that this same Jew gave and inflicted these same wounds, then the Jew must pay him in accordance with the custom of the region. Article 27, Regarding pawns stolen by Jews and used by them as security If any pawnable chattel is stolen by deception from a Christian while it is being held as security among the Jews, he must make inquiries of the senior person of their

The Medieval Period

35

synagogue, and the senior person of their synagogue should question them regarding such a security under the threat of their own form of excommunication; and this guardian of the synagogue must do this with the knowledge of the Jewish elders. And if, in the presence of the guardian of the synagogue and a Jewish elder, one of the Jews denies having taken such a chattel by stealth and after this it is seized in someone’s house, then because of this such a Jew would lose all the money he had lent on the basis of this security, and is required to pay to his lord, my deputy, a fine of three marks. Article 28, The deposit to be made by someone searching for stolen securities We decree and desire this to be so, that none of the Christians must search violently for any held securities, whatever they might be, in the dwellings or houses of Jews, unless one mark of pure gold has first been placed on the boundary line of that Jew’s door, which that Jew must take. Only after that should the Christian conduct his search for the security. Article 29, If the Christian makes his search without depositing the mark of gold If any Christian does not hold back, or pay regard to our statutes, but shamefully goes into a Jew’s house, searching for his things, whatever they may be, without depositing the aforementioned gold, such a Christian must be put on trial as a plunderer and robber. Article 30, A Jew must not be summoned under Church law We have passed a statute and it is our desire that no Christian must for any purpose summon any Jew to a Church court, because under whatever summons under canon law a Jew may have been charged with whatever crime, he must not and is bound not to respond before a judge in a Church court, but such a Jew shall be summoned to the presence of whoever should be my representative responsible for him at that time; and this aforesaid representative will be required, with our mayor28 at that time, to defend, protect, and give surety for the Jew against such a summons based on canon law. Article 31, How a Jew is legally permitted to sell others’ belongings held as securities We further decree that any Jew who held any security, whatever it was, and of whatever value it might have been, which has stood beyond the time for redemption of the pledge or for the sum which was borrowed, and the Jew did not wish to use that security further, and it was no longer reckoned against the loan, then the aforesaid Jew must display such a pawn, and place it before the Jews’ royal representative or of

28

I have translated capitaneus as ‘mayor’, but it may have a different meaning in the Polish context.

36

Zaremska

his deputy; then the Jew must inform this Christian via an official29 about removing this security [from the loan arrangements], and the official must allocate the aforesaid security to the Jew to use as he wishes, whenever he wishes to liquidate it. But if the aforesaid Jew has not exhibited the aforesaid pawn in the way prescribed, and has sold it, then the Jew will be obliged to pay a fine of three marks to my representative. Article 32, Regarding the loan commitments of the Jews We have decreed, through Our Majesty’s personal consent, and we desire it to be so, that any of our Jews is empowered to lend or transfer his money or goods to the noblemen of our land, whatever his material circumstances, against the security of their goods, pledged on the written seals of our fellow countrymen, or with our own written and hanging seals, and of their inherited estates, which they hold and own in the lands of our kingdom of Poland. Likewise, our aforesaid Jews, by our own favour, are empowered to lend their money to all our fellow countrymen, whatever their circumstances, and record validation in the registers of the regions, towns, cities, and royal bailiffs using the usual administration of my officials; and they are empowered to lend their money, whatever its value, against pledged securities. The Jew must not receive interest on such pledges beyond one groat a week for each mark, for the period that such securities are held among the Jews. Article 33, If a Christian holds back from repaying money lent by Jews If it should come about that one of our Jews should caution a Christian on his list of debtors, who were committed as owing money to him, either by written bonds with their seals, or records in the aforesaid registers, and if the aforesaid debtors arrogantly fail to provide full payment in exchange for the pledged securities; then, just as the debtors are bound by all the details of their loans, so we instruct you, our representatives, our mayors and our burgraves,30 and your deputies, and my other officials in post at the time, in a spirit of good faith, just as you provide the final element of justice for our Jews with their aforesaid fellow countrymen of ours, their debtors, and ensure that your subordinates do so, so you will act in respect of both the sum owed and the interest, and not in any other way. If they move towards establishing claims over our inherited estates in our lands, and our officials convey them as pledges under our royal instruction, you the above-named and any of your people must and are obliged to provide help and support to our Jews, in accordance with our system of law, guarding and defending the Jews from all injustices, and granting the Jews claims on the estates of our fellow-countrymen as described above. 29 30

I have translated ministerialis here as ‘official’. This may again mean ‘rabbi’, but this seems too trivial a task for the rabbi, and the context suggests some royal involvement. Hereditary ruler of town or castle.

The Medieval Period

37

Article 34, How the estate of a fellow countryman must be reclaimed from Jews If any Jews have been given rights over any inherited estates of our fellow countrymen through the agency of yourselves and of your subordinates, we ordain and provide in law that where some of the Jews have established claims on the estates of a fellow countryman, he, our compatriot, must offer providers of surety, with extensive holdings, whom the Jew accepts, from the same area in which his estates are located, so that our Jew in this situation could peacefully possess and quietly occupy these same hereditary estates, unencumbered by anyone, on condition that whilst this named hereditary estate brings the right to manage it, this does not undermine the legal ownership and control there. Article 35, How the estates of nobles pass permanently to Jews If it should come about that one of our fellow-countrymen, whose hereditary estates one of the Jews holds through [such] a cross-guarantee of real estate, and that countryman has not made the effort to buy back those estates within the number of years allowed in that region, we ordain that the Jew may freely sell those same hereditary estates, and, as it seems best to him, change and direct them to his own purposes. Article 36, What is the obligation of a Jew from his inherited wealth to a shared military campaign We decree, that if a Jew holds inherited estates through some kind of mortgage procedure, he is required to contribute to the cost of a general campaign, for this reason: that the Jews have been protected in our lands by virtue of our treasury. Article 37, Sons are held by a Jew to his obligations when their father dies in debt We decree, that if one of our fellow countrymen takes his leave of this world, to whom a Jew has lent a sum of money on the basis of a debt agreement or an entry in the registers, and his sons survive him and do not have years of discretion, these boys shall not slip free from the aforesaid Jew regarding this same debt during their years of boyhood, but our representatives and captains and their officials must assist the Jew in respect of his commitments, for this reason, that the Jews have to be ready with their money for our own pressing needs, as if they were our subjects. Article 38, Regarding the placing of a dead boy among the Jews and arousing suspicion against them If it should come about that any of the Christians brings a dead baby boy or youth to one of the Jews without their knowledge in order to rouse suspicion against them, such a Christian, whoever he may be, should be whipped, just like someone who was a thief.

38

Zaremska

Article 39, Regarding the accusation of a Jew of a wicked act We make this decree, in case in the future any Jew should be blamed by a Christian for the act of making it believed that the Jews need every year to use the blood of Christians, or even the sacraments of the Church of the Christians, on which the edicts and legal pronouncements of Pope Innocent instruct us that they are not blameworthy of such allegations, because it is contrary to their own law. If, nevertheless, any Christian is confident enough to make such allegations against a Jew, in such a case we grant and accord this law to them; that if such a Christian was willing to persuade and prove it on the evidence of three Jews who own estates in our kingdom, who as decent men shared his adverse opinions, and were unwavering in that belief, and of four Christians, also substantial owners of estates in our kingdom, who as decent men shared his adverse opinions and were unwavering in that belief,31 and if the Christian produced evidence such as this against the Jew, then the Jew will be liable to the death penalty, and should also be whipped; and if the Christian did not produce such evidence against the Jew who told such lies, and could not provide proof, then he alone should be condemned to death, for this reason, that [on his allegation] the Jew should have been condemned. And if our nobles of this land or citizens of our kingdom act violently towards our Jews on account of these issues, not using the legal process to defeat them, their assets must be paid to our royal treasury, and their necks to my own personal decision. Article 40, Before which judge a Jew is required to give his response If anyone of our fellow countrymen from our kingdom summons a Jew, we also make this provision, that the aforesaid Jew shall not be required to respond before a Jew, but before my representative in office at the time, and his deputy. Article 41, Regarding a security violently taken from a Jew If it were to happen that any of the Christians, wanting to retrieve their securities in pawn to one of the Jews on the Sabbath holiday of the Jews, or on some other of their feast days, on which days the Jews dare not touch money to redeem securities and note down the amount, and the Christian, with no respect for one of these rest days of theirs, whichever it might be, and desiring to repossess his security, arrogantly and violently breaks into the house of the Jews and takes away his aforesaid security, such a Christian must be judged in no way other than as a thief and robber.

31

This important article is open to different interpretations. I have translated fide immobiles as referring to the steadfastness of their views rather than their steadfast religious faith.

The Medieval Period

39

Article 42, Against what security and at what time a Jew must lend his money Jews are empowered to lend their money against the security of horses or other farm animals, but only on the basis of wholly visible evidence; nor should they do such lending at night-time. Article 43, How a Jew must be tried for counterfeiting the currency, for theft, and for any other crime We have ruled and decreed, that if a Jew should be accused by a Christian, or by anyone, in respect of any forged currency, or of a theft, or of any crime, minor or serious, since his neck or his goods are put at risk, such a Jew must not be imprisoned or judged by any official of ours in our kingdom, other than the representative responsible for the Jews themselves or whoever is acting in his place; he should be taken into custody by that same deputy and placed under the security of surety-providers; in respect of all the heads under which he has been accused, a Jew is nearer to excusing himself from such a disgrace if he has other Jews as supporters to give evidence against the man who accused him, and hence in respect of all the fines which the Christian will have to pay, and settle in full, to the Jew and to my representative, in the same way as our fellow-citizens pay in respect of the law which applies to them from their own nobility. Article 44, Regarding people who are unwilling to protect a Jew from violence during the night If moreover the question arises, that one of the Jews calls out in alarm during the night about a violent attack on him by someone, and cries out to his Christian neighbours who are staying near him in his town or city, and these neighbours hear the Jew shouting for protection from such violence, and are unwilling to come to his help, we decree and resolve that all the property of those Christian neighbours, whatever they may be, must be paid into our royal treasury, saving their necks for our own decision. Article 45, Regarding freedom for the Jews to trade We have furthermore decreed that all our Jews who stay in our kingdom are empowered to buy, provide, and trade freely and safely, and without any obstruction or arrest, all their merchandise and other goods for sale, whatever the names given to them, with the same people as is the custom for the Christians who are in our kingdom; and if any of the Christians refuses to make such rights available for Jews, or in any way obstructs them in carrying on such business, he would be doing this in contravention of all our royal laws and statutes, and will thereby provoke our profound displeasure.

40

Zaremska

Article 46, Regarding the public sale of [the Jews’] merchandise We have decreed that every trader, whoever he may be, whether he sells his goods in an annual or a weekly market, must sell on the same basis to Christians and to Jews, but that if they do otherwise, and if the Jews complain about this, their goods for sale must be handed over to ourselves and our representatives. And so that all the foregoing should derive the strength of long-lasting rigour, our own seal is appended to this present privilege. The conclusion of these statutes And so we Kazimierz, by God’s grace king as already stated, having listened to the laws relating to the aforesaid Jews, and reconsidered them together with the other advisers of our kingdom with the close attention they deserve, and having examined and balanced, one by one, the articles, conclusions and conditions in these provisions, and in a spirit of good will, so that the Jews should recognize that they have been reassured by us, during this period of our enlightened government, as a personal treasure to be preserved for us and for our kingdom; we renew, enact and confirm the laws as set out above, in respect of all the conditions, conclusions and articles now present, for the Jews in the regions of Greater Poland, that is to say those who are now present, living, and staying in the provinces of Poznań, Kalisz, Syradia, Lenčice, Brzesthensi, and Vladislav and all the counties, cities, and towns that adjoin them, as well as the others who arriving from all directions in the other territories of Greater Poland; and we determine, through the present document, that these laws shall have the strength of long-lasting durability through the witness of this written document, to which our seal is attached. Enacted at Kraków on the second feast day before the Feast of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, in the year of our Lord 1440,32 in the presence of the Honourable, noble, and diligent Luca de Gorka from Poznań; Stanislao de Ostrorog, from the province of Kalisz; Hyencza de Rogow the Castellan of Sandomierz and Vice-treasurer; Peter of Szczekoczyny, Vice-Chancellor of the kingdom of Poland; Andrea de Thanczyn; Andrea Kraska de Lubnycza, Cupbearer of Kalisz and Captain of Romensi; Creslao Woschyk de Woycza, Principal Chamberlain to His Royal Majesty; and other men worthy of trust in addition to those named. Sealed by the hands of our dearly beloved the Honourable John of Conyeczpolye, Chancellor, and the Honourable Peter de Szczekoczyno, Vice-Chancellor, of the kingdom of Poland. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

32

The date is erroneous. The Poznań fire happened in 1447.

The Medieval Period



41

No. 11 Jakub Meisterlein,33 about a Letter Sent by the Kraków Kahal to the Jewish Synod in Bingen34 in Context of the Dangers in Connection to the Planned Visit of John of Capistrano35 to Kraków, 1453

Published in: E. Zimmer, Jewish Synods in Germany during the Late Middle Ages (1286– 1603), p. 41.; Moshe Minz, Responsa no. 63 (Salonika, 1902, accessed via Hebrewbooks.org), 59a. In our days it is not appropriate, as it had been in those days, to be engrossed in lawsuits, for there has never been such a need as now for us to be united as one group (lit. ‘bundle’) in peace and harmony, for against our will we have heard what ‘the priest’ has afflicted amongst those in the Kingdom of Poland,36 the Kingdom of Kraków and its surrounding lands which had from time immemorial been a sanctuary to the exiles, and no one amongst the ‘inhabitants of the world’ could believe that such an enemy and adversary would enter the gates of Poland! Now they are trampled under the yoke of the king and his ministers, so they wrote to us to request guidance [literally: ‘help and an antidote’, note of the translator]. Translated from Hebrew by Joseph Citron



No. 12 Responsum by Israel Isserlein37 Regarding an Inquiry by the Jewish Community of Poznań about Matter of Abraham of Poznań Refusing to Pay Communal Taxes, mid-15th c.

Source: Israel Isserlein, Pesakim u Ketavim, Siman 144 (Venice, 1546, accessed via Hebrewbooks.org), 36a. May life and peace be upon you, my beloved holy community of Poznań on one side and the defendant, Reb (Mr.) Abraham Banarsh on the other. I shall reply to you in 33 34 35 36 37

Jakub Meisterlin—rabbi and communal leader in the Wiener Neustadt. Synods of German Jewish communities were convened from the 12th century. Representatives of the largest communities would issue rules considered binding in the entire Holy Roman Empire. John of Capistrano (1386–1456)—Italian friar and priest, known for his anti-Jewish incitement, involved in the court case against the Jews of Breslau/Wrocław for host desecration in 1453. Bernadine preacher John of Capistrano. Israel Isserlein (d. 1460)—educated in the Wiener Neustadt, where he was ordained rabbi and was appointed senior judge. Isserlin was author of a collection of responsa and gave advice to the Poznań community while Mojżesz Minc resided there. Aware of Jewish settlements in Kalisz, Pyzdry, and Jews living in Grodno (Grand Duchy of Lithuania).

42

Zaremska

brief regarding your claims and your (Abraham’s) response. First of all, what the defendant Reb Abraham requested: That he should be considered an exceptional case (and therefore exempt from tax liability) as a result of his request or whichever pretext, as he has had punitive losses in the matter of a business partnership. Of the many reasons that he presented for this, one was that he can split from the partnership without the knowledge of his partner, as it says in the Talmud (Chapter ‘ha gozel batra’, bBava Kama 116b) that in the case of losses one can remove oneself from assets without the knowledge of his partner. But it appears that none of these claims of the defendant are valid, for over there, regarding the case of splitting from assets without the knowledge of his partner, both Rashi,38 Or Zarua,39 and R. Asher40 write that we are dealing with a case which aims to save his half of the assets, so in this situation it is permitted, but concerning actively taking that which belongs to his partner, as in the case of our defendant, whereby through exempting himself he places his debt upon others—it transpires that they (the congregation) are thieves due to his actions! In this case it is obvious that he cannot split from them even if he incurs further losses, or even if he is in a situation beyond his control, for he still does not have the power to cause damage to others. Indeed, in Or Zarua (chapter Ha Gozel Batra), he cites a responsum of R. Simḥa expounding several reasons why it is impossible for him to remove himself from the congregation and in any aspect to be separated from their partnership. So too in the second responsa of our teacher R. Mordekhai41 (chapter Ha Gozel Batra) and in the responsa of Maimonides, that one should not request an exemption to be separated from the rest of the community in the matter of bearing the yoke of exile, and there is no need to elaborate upon this. However, regarding the main issue of contention between you, which is that you, the holy congregation, want the defendant to give of all his debts in one lump sum from his property, as is the law and custom amongst all of Israel to give from the capital as in other financial matters, and regarding the debts which are not guaranteed, the owners must give them to the congregation as a form of relinquished goods42 and his portion from them should be in accordance with the custom of the congregation, either a half, a third, or a quarter—to my understanding this what you have requested. But the defendant desires and thinks that his debt from what he owns does not obligate him to pay tax, as his property has a status of being doubtfully relinquished, as it is impossible to ascertain its precise worth.43 It is possible that it is completely lost and 38 39 40 41 42 43

Solomon b. Isaac, 1040–1105. Isaac b. Moses of Vienna, c. 1200–70. Asher b. Yehiel, 1250–1327. Mordekhai b. Hillel, 1250–98. Yeʾush is a technical legal term for property considered to have been relinquished; found frequently in the Talmud, literally translated as despair (note of the translator). As it is an investment (note of the translator).

The Medieval Period

43

much dust falls from them. Therefore, it makes no sense for his property to be considered ‘relinquished’ and given to the congregation. It is also impossible for him even to guarantee what he owns and pay its worth as with other forms of property as he has no silver nor gold, nor precious stones or rubies, and nothing is accessible from which tax could be deducted; all he has are a few books, his house, and utensils—and none of these are taxable. Therefore, he cannot pay any tax as he only has debts and nothing else—these are Abraham’s words in short. But see, you did not know that even the earlier rabbis had written that it is impossible to adjudicate the exact letter of Torah law in matters of taxation, and we must adjudicate in a manner comparable to a compromise. It therefore seems appropriate to decide for you that certainly the aforementioned defendant Reb Abraham is obligated to give tax and ‘all the world’ out of his debts, and whichever he wants to make relinquished he should give to the congregation, and their ruling should be according to their custom. For all those investments which he doesn’t want to be rendered relinquished, the capital should be calculated without interest, and the evaluation should be taxed according to the appropriate proportion, decided by the congregation. But after the defendant Reb Abraham said explicitly that he shouldn’t have to pay from his potential assets as he has no money nor money equivalent as explained above that he can sell for cash, aside from the things which are non-taxable, regarding this he must take oath in accordance with the custom of the congregation regarding ‘definite oaths’, that he has no gold, silver, previous stones, rubies, no cash, nor any other taxable items which he could sell for cash. In this oath he should explicitly state all his debts by name, the evaluation of each one, and whatever evaluation he makes he should pay from his debts, for if he is due to pay 50 ducats, he should give the congregation one bill of debt with his assurance that the capital is worth that estimate, more or less, and the congregation should have the power of discernment in all his debts to decide which they want. If this evaluation should amount to far more than he is due to pay in repaid tax, then that debt should be placed upon a faithful friend who will cover both of them, and they should endeavour that that debt be repaid from the gentile himself,44 or if they can find someone who will buy the debt. And so two should be found from amongst the congregation who are trustworthy, which they should accept upon themselves under threat of excommunication that they should not embezzle the funds upon receiving the debt from the gentile himself or waste the money from the selling of the debt, but they should treat it as their own. They should take the debt with a long date of interest, and request to receive only the capital, and the defendant should not worry that the interest become partially or fully lost, for they will have

44

The tax collector would pay the difference between the worth of the defendant’s property and the tax he is due (translator’s note).

44

Zaremska

no power to do so arbitrarily, and they should act under fear of excommunication as though it belonged to them. (Signed) The beloved, the smallest and most youthful of Israel. Translated from Hebrew by Joseph Citron



No. 13 Israel MiBruna45 Quotes a Responsum by Israel Isserlein Concerning a Disagreement Involving the Rabbinate and the Remuneration of a Rabbi in Poznań; mid-15th c.

Source: Israel of Bruna, Responsa no. 253 (Salonika, 1898 accessed through Hebrewbooks. org), 104b. This is how he46 wrote to our teacher Moses Mariel of Poznań, may God preserve him: What has been said about you, R. Moses, may God preserve you, has disturbed my spirit, that there have been several occasions where you have wasted your money greatly to spread Torah, and you have benefited from the crown of Torah in vain, even from the loss of your own pocket, but now you come to claim for yourself in the name of law and justice the attainment of a boundary47 and official ‘authority of the earth’ which is not correctly applied law in our view as I will explain in brief (end of author’s citation). [Weil] explained this issue to me and R. Anshel at length then wrote, ‘I am further astonished at the actions of R. Tabel, may God preserve him, if all this was forgotten to him, for he resides next to that community [lit. ‘boundary’] and it is very shocking that they impose authority through the Torah and its ways with temporal authority. If this is because of the benefits which some of our appointed leaders receive, we are ashamed at their appointment—these positions befell them in order to give strength and consolidate their boundaries alone! He then concluded: From the above reasons it is clear that you, R. Moses, do not have the authority to prevent R. David and R. Kashrei from having authority in the province or in your jurisdiction’. For it is written explicitly that there is no monopoly over jurisdiction based on boundary demarcations, even when it is freely given, and even though that the authority of the first scholar was accepted by the congregation as rabbi and leader. This is what our teacher, the prodigy R. Weil, wrote explicitly: Even if they already accepted the first scholar’s authority it does not matter, and he brings a proof from Or Zarua who wrote without stipulation: ‘Even if 45 46 47

Israel MiBruna (1400–80)—scholar and author of responsa active in Regensburg. Jacob Weil, c. 1380–1460. This refers to an official position as rabbinical adjudicator in a particular community (translator’s note).

The Medieval Period

45

there is another scholar in the city’, and he made no distinction about whether the city dwellers accepted upon themselves this scholar as a leader or not. Written in responsa Mahari Weil no. 155, in the rulings of our teacher R. Israel no. 126. Translated from Hebrew by Joseph Citron



No. 14 Responsum by Moshe Mintz48 about Divorce Procedures in Poznań; mid-15th c.

Source: Responsa Moshe Mintz no. 114 (Lvov, 1851 accessed via Hebrewbooks.org), 130a.

A matter came to our hands49 when I was living here in Poznań in the year 5234 [c. 1474] in the congregation of our teacher R. Judah Margolioth, who lived in the city of Luko, who assembled a bill of divorce with the husband’s permission, where the husband had the divorce bill with him and appointed a messenger to send it to his wife, and his wife was with us here in Poznań. When the messenger brought the bill of divorce with the appropriate verification of the husband, we checked carefully and found that the verification was lacking the phrase: ‘and your mouth is like my mouth’, but instead was written ‘and your hand should be like my hand and your actions should be like my actions’, but it did not contain the words ‘and your mouth like my mouth’. There were those in uproar, for it was uncertain whether the husband had said ‘your mouth like my mouth’, and so had only appointed him a messenger in the matter of the giving of the bill of divorce in silence, but had not given him the power to say anything, and was not considered his messenger to say a single word to her. If so: ‘giving’ without ‘speech’ is meaningless [talmudic dictum]! For the witnesses that signed are effectively testifying that the husband did not command the messenger to say anything, but only to give her the bill, as Reish Lakish50 said: Witnesses who sign on a document are considered like those who have been scrutinized and whose testimony is deemed trustworthy. If so, this testimony on the verification of the bill is as though the witnesses said in front of a court of law that the husband had instructed his messenger to do the action of delivering the bill specifically without words [rendering the action useless, note of the translator]. Thus, the delivery of the bill of divorce to the wife is null and void, as ‘delivery without words’ is meaningless, for the messenger is no better than the master 48 49 50

Moshe Mintz—German rabbi and author of responsa, active in Mainz, Landau, Bamberg, and Poznań. Regarding a messenger who delivered a bill of divorce, and in his hands was the written verification (from the husband) but the verification was lacking the phrase ‘and your mouth is like my mouth’, whether this verification is void or not. Rabbi from the Talmud (translator’s note).

46

Zaremska

who instructed him! For if the husband himself had given the bill of divorce to the wife without speech it would be meaningless, as is referenced in the first chapter of Tractate Kiddushin, that is when he speaks to her about matters of divorce and marriage,51 see over there,52 a proof that the husband himself has to be discussing this matter without pause or interruption, all the more so here in our case where the witnesses of verification testify that the husband has told them to say nothing—as it is a delivery without words! To verify the matter we took the witness and inquired whether the husband did in fact also say, ‘your mouth is like my mouth’, then there would be an additional factor in favour of the veracity of the bill,53 even though it is not written in the verification, nevertheless, since the husband said to the messenger, etc. The messenger replied to us that he didn’t know of this, and did not recall how the husband instructed him to deliver it; therefore, due to deficiency and absence in the verification we sent back the messenger empty handed, and he did not deliver the bill of divorce. Afterwards the husband came himself to our locale and gave the divorce to his wife from hand to hand. May God save us from mistaken judgement, [signed] The strength of Moses was occupied, Moshe Mintz Translated from Hebrew by Joseph Citron



No. 15 a) Poznań City Council with the Agreement of the Jews Expels and Deprives of His Rights Jonasz from Czambor, Who Has Calumniated Certain Jews and Christians, 11 May 1457

Published in: Akta radzieckie poznańskie, t. 1, nr. 719

Banishment of Jonasz, a Jew from Czambor. The turncoat Jonasz, a Jew from Czambor in the Russian area, has been brought before us, and has publicly condemned himself, because he himself was denouncing, railing at, and threatening in unspeakable terms certain men, both Christians and Jews, that is to say the in-laws of Slome and their sons 51 52

53

Talmudic tractate on betrothal and divorce specifying that if he gave her money (for betrothal) or a divorce without speech, it is considered to be a legally meaningless action (note of the translator). Reference to a case where the husband delivers a bill of divorce or proposes marriage, without specifying that this is what he is intending to do. The Talmud declares that if the context strongly implies the intent of his actions, then the transaction is considered to have taken place (translator’s note). As it implies that the messenger is not believed, as the witnesses (who have signed on the document) contradict him.

The Medieval Period

47

and daughters, as well as other crimes and misdemeanours for which he should have been punished, as he had never completely stopped doing this, he gave this description of himself on his own initiative, and knowingly sentenced himself as guilty and deserving a certain fine. But at the request of certain people, and now with the full and willing agreement of the Jews, we forbid and deny him [entry to] the city for ever, and he must never visit or be present inside that city or its external bounds, for example by entering its suburbs, just like someone who had been exiled [‘echtwamy’]. But if he ever broke that rule, he must be punished just as if he had been declared an exile, and he must never take his revenge against anyone by threatening or cursing them and reminding them of his disgrace. If, moreover, he should protest in his pleading, he must be punished like an exile [‘wymny’] condemned to death, as he had himself been his own willing and consenting guarantor. Delivered on the fourth feast day after the Feast of the Blessed Stanislas in the year of our Lord 1457. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 15 b) Renewed Expulsion of Jonasz from Czambor, Imprisoned by the Jews of Poznań for Unlawfully Residing in the City, 21 September 1458

Published in: Akta radzieckie poznańskie, t. 1, nr. 778.

The banishment of Jonasz. We the councillors of the city of Poznań, by the decision of those present, notify everyone by means of the entry in our records, noting an earlier entry freely made in our records regarding the turncoat Jonasz of Czambor, who was expelled from our city on account of certain excesses, to put him under more constraint there. But after that, forgetting himself, he has come boldly and shamelessly into our city. After he had been detained by the Jews at risk of the death penalty, they felt compassion for him because of his legal undertaking to exile and agreed to free him from chains, but on these terms: that he submitted himself before us, that he must not go anywhere within forty miles of Poznań; and he said he felt no blame against Slome or his in-laws, but if any sign of him were detected within the permitted distance [of Poznań], then that would be an indication that he wanted to have his revenge on the Christians and Jews, and that he would be signalling that he would be coming to harm them; so anyone who murdered him or caused his death would carry no blame, since he would suffer this rightly and with dignity and, since he willingly acceded to all these requirements. This was recorded on Thursday, the day of the Blessed Apostle Matthew. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

48

Zaremska

No. 16 Agreement about the Erection of a Ritual Bath between the Jewish Community of Poznań and a Christian Builder, 18 February 1464

Published in: Akta radziecke poznańskie, vol. I, nr. 1002.

Proceedings of the Jews. In the name of the Lord, amen. In the year 1464, on Thursday 7 March, Jacobus the builder made an agreement, as manager with us for building a bath, on the bath he must build, by the method and following the design set out below. We for our part must pay forty marks from the community’s fund to the aforesaid builder, and we must deposit the said funds with Paul the goldsmith as a safe pair of hands in the Circle; and we must pay to the aforesaid builder from the aforesaid forty marks ten marks on Ember Days as we have agreed, and in the first place ten when he begins the work, as we have agreed, then at other times as we have agreed; and Paul the goldsmith has guaranteed on behalf of Jacob the builder, that he must finish the aforesaid bath on the same terms as he starts it. But to the extent that the aforesaid Jacobus does not finish the aforesaid bath, Paul the goldsmith has pledged to complete the aforesaid bath without delay, using his own money and at his own expense. First, this same Jacob’s main task to earn his money is to dig, and to run water to the new cemetery, to the site where we shall give instructions for him to equip the bath we have described to him with stones and bricks, in fact circular round the edge; and it must be eight ells to the bottom and to the roof of the bath, which must be over the earth itself, and must likewise be two ells above the door as is the tradition. The aforesaid wall in the bath must be two-and-a-half bricks high, and from that wall he must build spiral steps from the door to the floor of the bath, two ells wide; and on the aforesaid steps he must construct a supporting rail, or ‘poręze’, two ells high from the steps; and attached to this supporting rail there must be a wall two-and-a-half ells wide, and within this great circular wall he must first dig the bath, which must be four ells deep right across the circle. That water which must be inside the bath should leave by streams, which he will open up by channelling, so that he makes that water flow out as often as is necessary, so that the water stands at its measured depth of ells. That wall, which will be in the water, must be made of stones, three bricks thick, and must make the steps go round, under the water, right to the source; and he must treat or whiten this important wall and the staircase on it with white plaster, or ‘tynkować’. Jacobus the builder must provide everything necessary for the task outlined, that is bricks, stones, plaster, and other things which are needed for the work specified, except that we undertake to provide him with timber as posts, as much as he needs. And once Jacobus begins to work,

The Medieval Period

49

he must not pause, so that he works54 for two weeks; if, however, Jacobus does not work for two weeks and is not finishing the job, then the aforesaid Paul the goldsmith is committed to us and is obliged to build the aforesaid bath with his own money and at his own expense in the way written out above, and subject to the same condition as the aforesaid Jacobus; he is not allowed to build the aforesaid bath on our festival days. Paul, the goldsmith of Poznań, has given surety for all these arrangements. Completed in Poznań. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 17 Kazimierz IV Imposes a Bond in the Conflict between the Jews, Israel and Miriam, and Their Relatives on the One Side, and the Elders of the Kraków Jewish Community on the Other, 30 December 1465

Published in: Zapiski sądowe ziemi krakowskiej, nr. 3805.

The most serene lord the King, following the officiation of the Venerable Lord George Lithvosz, Canon of Przemyśl and Notary to His Serenity, has imposed a bond of four thousand marks between the Jews, Miriam and Israel, and their relatives on the one hand, and Moyses the doctor, Jacob, Jordan, and Nathan the elders, and all the other Jews, on the other; that under the aforesaid bond they live in peace, and do not dare to threaten these two Jews, since the most serene lord the King has given them a safe conduct, as this document makes more widely known. Jacobus, Jordan, Moises, Nathan, and Jacobus Fyscher, cantores; old Scolnik, Joseph and Aaron, the three of this name; Israhel, Piskorek, Jacob, Israhel Motika, Marek Anoch, young Abraham, Abraham de Brzescze; Lazar Israhel the blacksmith; Moijses de Przemislia, the doctor; Smaya, Jonas, and the Jews and the whole of their community of Kraków, promise on oath, joining their hands together, that they must stay, and not go anywhere outside Kraków, until these Jews return, who provided a horse to his Serenity when his royal Majesty ordered it; and that they must be governed by the instruction of his Royal Highness regarding the bond of four thousand marks, which was taken into deposit under the officiation of Lord Lithvos, in the presence of all the Jews. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

54

The original reads ‘ut laboraret duas septimanas’ (translator’s note).

50

Zaremska

No. 18 Michil Baroch Buys a House on Szpiglarska Street in the Name of the Jewish Community and Pledges Never to Sell It, 29 April 1468

Published in: Żydzi w średniowiecznym Krakowie. Wypisy źródłowe z ksiąg miejskich krakowskich, no. 512 (Source: Court records). In the presence of our mayor, Mertin Hoewers and of our council members, Pawl Newburger has sold his house on the Szpiglarska Street, situated beween the houses of Jan Kyelbaeschen and Lucas the armourer, with all rights and obligations, to Michil Baroch the Jew, in the name of the entire Jewish community, to dispose of it has he wishes, according to the requirements of the city’s law. Also Michil Baroch has pledged to the entire Jewish community, as above, that neither he, nor his progeny, will never sell this above mentioned house, but will keep it with the community for all times. Translated from Middle High German by François Guesnet



No. 19 The Elders and the Entire Jewish Community of Kraków Vouch for Abraham from Bochnia, 19 July 1468

Published in: Zapiski sądowe ziemi krakowskiej, nr. 3934.

Marek Koza, Jacob Nathan, Moyses the doctor, Marek Miriane, Moises Krempel, Michael Baroch, Israel Motika, Manna Skolnik, Jacob Niger, Joseph son-in-law of Skolnik, Jacob Wagrzin, Jacob Trabincz, Jonas de Jaslo, Musca Longus, Libmann Byeniarz, with his wife Thana, Abram’s wife, Juda, Dauid Taczyk, Smoel Latossek, Paltel, Moyses Fisel, Ozar Glownya, Myethko Abram de Sandecz, Soyka de Bochnya, and the whole Jewish community of Kraków, all swear with their hands interlinked and undivided that they have committed themselves to nominating the Jew Abram, from the tower in Bochnya, at the next Council of Piotrków in the presence of His Royal Serenity. But if they do not nominate him, they will surrender five hundred Hungarian florins of pure gold to his Royal Serenity, which must be ready to be paid over. And one or two of them will be empowered to nominate him, but not all of them. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

The Medieval Period

No. 20

51

Resolution by the Prince of Masovia Konrad for the Jews of Warsaw (Second Version), 1469

Published in: Emanuel Ringelblum, Żydzi w Warsawie, aneks pp. 140–41. (Źródło: Księga ziemska i grodzka warsawska). A Jewish Case The most Serene Prince the lord and leader Conrad, aided by the Great and Eminent lords Jacob de Lupky his Marshal, and John Slanka de Glowczino, his Under-Chamberlain, has made a statute determining the situation of the Jews in Warsaw. They should mutually summon each other in cities or regions outside Warsaw with the whole range of charges and hostile representations regarding the whole range of injustices they may suffer, into whatever categories they may fall; but every one of them must and is required to deal judicially, in respect of all the injustices they suffer, with the officials of the Duke, specifically with whoever should be the Captain and Notary of Warsaw at the time, under a bond of twenty florins of the purest, heavy gold, on the same basis as they must and are required to deal with these same appointed officials for Warsaw in trials and injustices which touch on Jewish laws. If these officials do not understand the cases at issue, or their law, as it is explained to them, they must reach out among the Jews themselves to debate and adjudicate, and the Jews must admit them to their own synagogue in Warsaw, which must make a judgement through delegation of the Duke’s powers to their affairs. No doubt following this they would in no way be so bold as to litigate against each other before their own scholars in this kind of case, facing the same fine of twenty florins. On the same basis, let none of these Jews dare to bring charges or Judaic excommunications from Jews outside Warsaw or from their scholars against the Jews of Warsaw; nor if any Jew from Warsaw is cited by a Jew outside Warsaw as a witness or to provide some proofs, that Jew of Warsaw must either keep the case away from Warsaw or pay the same fine of twenty florins. Everyone must and is required to consult and value their rabbi. And they should pay him what he deserves when he delivers a fair settlement for them. Whoever of them who does not wish to reach an agreement [through him] must speak to the officials of Warsaw, so that they can on the same basis arrange through the ducal authority for them to reach an agreement on the same basis through other Jews. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

52

Zaremska

No. 21 Agreement between the Elders of the Jewish Community of Kraków and the Canons Jan Długosz the Elder and Jan Długosz the Younger in the Matter of Exchanging the Synagogue, the Shelter, and the Cemetery in the Vicinity of the Collegium Artistarum against Grounds Near Szpiglarska Street, Kraków, 20 January 146955

Source: Codex diplomaticus Studii Generalis Universitatis Cracoviensis, nr. 223.

Jan Chamyecz de Dobranoiycze, Judge, and Jan the Notary and Under-Judge of the Jews in Kraków, together with the Jewish elders of the time, namely Moyses, Iacob, Nacham, Abraham de Sandecz, and Iocob Nol, make our statement through the contents of this document, by which we make ourselves clear to all: how, coming into our presence and our view, all the elders of the Jews, the middle-ranking and the lowestranking, and everyone of the community of Jews living in Kraków have reviewed and publicly acknowledged that willingly, with good intention and careful judgement, and so as to deal with, organize, and arrange their greater benefits and profits, exchange, transfer, and in practice hand over to the Venerable lords Jan Długosz the Senior and Jan Długosz56 the Junior Canons of Kraków, and their legal successors, all the areas and districts where their old and new synagogues are with their appurtenances, and all their homes which used to be called the shelters of the Jews, which stand around the synagogue, and the cemeteries of each synagogue, just past the Collegium Artistarum and near the home of the Great Lord John de Thanczyn the Castellan of Kraków, all of which the Jews have possessed, held, and owned in full liberty and in peaceful occupation; in exchange for the house and square or lico in Spyglarska Street behind the Church of St. Stephen, where a Jewish synagogue is now located and rented. The aforesaid Lords Jan Długosz Senior and Jan Długosz Junior in their calculations value, assess, and consider this house, square, and the site of the existing synagogue at two hundred and sixty lati grossi from the mint of Prague, converted into the right number of Polish coins, calculating the sixty grossi into any Polish currency equivalent. They are handing over, exchanging, surrendering, and making arrangements for the aforesaid squares, houses, and cemeteries, not in a careless or random way, but in confident knowledge, to the Lords Jan Senior and Jan Junior Długosz, and their successors, with all the detailed support arrangements for the said synagogues, shelters, and cemeteries, retaining nothing for themselves or their own successors in them, but transferring

55 56

As a result of this agreement, the Jewish quarter was relocated within Kraków. Jan Długosz, priest, author of Annales seu Cronicae incliti Regni Poloniae.

The Medieval Period

53

every right, ownership, title, and authority relating to these synagogues, shelters, and cemeteries to these same Lords Jan Senior and Jan Junior Długosz and their successors, promising and binding themselves as a community, and in both their individual groups and collectively, to release and liberate under whatever law or rules, the Lords Jan Senior and Jan Junior Długosz, and their successors, from any obstacle by anyone at all in respect of the aforesaid synagogues, shelters, and cemeteries, including any prior rights anyone might claim. I, Jan, Judge of the Jews, and Jan Sub-Judge, and Notary of what has been recorded, with the Jewish elders already named, have agreed, accepted as valid, and given thanks, and are agreeing, accepting as valid, and giving thanks through those of us who are present, that the transfer, surrender and reorganization of the aforesaid synagogues, shelters, and cemeteries with their appurtenances have been made by the Jews of Kraków named above and their community to the aforesaid Lords Jan Senior, Jan Junior, and their successors. This page from the Register of the Law of the Jews has been extracted and rewritten, as it is clearly and simply expressed in word-forword copies. My seal is attached below as witness of this act to those present. Dated at Kraków, on the Saturday before St. Agnes Day, in the year of our Lord 1469. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 22 Agreement between the Sons of Efraim Fiszel and the Jewish Community of Kraków, 26 March 1477

Published in: Zapiski sądowe ziemi krakowskiej, nr. 4192.

Whilst long ago and in earlier times a dispute had arisen between the Elders of the Jews and their community in Kraków on the one hand, and Moyses and his late brother Jacob, known as the Ffiszlowie brothers, on the other, whereby, at the initiative of the aforementioned Elders of the Jews and their community, who alleged various reasons for their unreasonable behaviour, the brothers Moyses and the late Jacobus had been exiled or excluded indefinitely from the city of Kraków, a certain letter of Nicolai Chamiecz who was Judge of the Jews at that time sorted out the matter beyond doubt, and finally this same Chamiecz again successfully cleared Moyses Ffiszlowie’s name by his letter, that he had never been to the slightest degree offensive in the matters of which he had been accused, and because of which he had been unjustly exiled or excluded from Kraków. Finally, after many quarrels and allegations had passed between them, they have come to our presence, and declared that they had mutually established agreement and harmony, subject, however, to this reserve: that all written

54

Zaremska

documents, whether disgracing or vilifying either of the parties, whether the Jewish elders and their community, or Moyses Fiszel, seem to twist and turn, and must therefore be negated, made void, and annulled. And both parties destroyed them, made them void and annulled them, so that neither of the two parties, if in any way they had found and got possession of such papers, was permitted to make any further use of them or dared make any accusation based upon them; but none of those parties may use insults or contempt, by word or by script, either using a third party or by a dispute or disagreement being in any way recalled. But they must live and do business together in a friendly way, and harmoniously forever, rejecting disputes either collective or between individuals, subject to a fine of four hundred marks from communal funds at the regular Polish rate, the party not sustaining permanent harmony, or recalling some earlier dispute or making up a new one, to pay two hundred marks to the party maintaining perpetual harmony, and an unrecoverable further two hundred marks to the Lord Captain. The aforesaid parties have lodged the amount of the fine with a bond for paying these sums, excluding themselves from any set of laws or system of justice, or any rights and privileges of individuals which might seem to undermine or prejudice immediate proclamation or pledging by the parties. Furthermore, this record and the bond must be inserted and written into the acts of the Court of the Jews of the Representation of Kraków, with the agreement of the parties involved. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 23 Synagogue Trustee Abram Informs the Authorities that Jews from a Lwów Suburb Have Been Put under the Ban in Order to Extract Information about a Theft, 18 April 1483

Published in: Zapiski sądów lwowskich, in: Akta grodzkie i ziemskie, vol. 15, nr. 1647.

Abram Skolnyk, a Jew and a trustee of his synagogue, from the suburb of the town of Lwów, provided information that, during the period that excommunication was declared on Jews in this suburb of Lwów, Ilia, a Jew living in the suburb of Lwów gave evidence, in the presence of the synagogue trustee and other Jews, that after the death of the late Jew Meryane at the home of the Jew Channa, wife of Iagnys the Jew, a tunic was removed, although it was pledged in Meryane’s home, and Channa herself had removed it. He also said that an ornament of pearls with gold had been removed. Skolnyk testified that this same Channa had acquired from Meryane’s room drinking cups and pewter bowls for the memorial feast. Scolnyk recalled the late Meryane had lent a silver ring to Channa, which either she had given back, or the family were aware

The Medieval Period

55

of it. Alongside this declaration, the Jews Sloma and Schayn erected a memorial stone to Lucas. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 24 Agreement between Kraków Municipality and the Local Jewish Community Concerning Trade in the City, Kraków, 1485

Source: F.G. Wettstein, Dwarim atikim mi- pinkasej ha-kahal be-Kraka, Krakau 1900, pp. 69–70. Declaration of Israel to its wise men, rabbis, and leaders in Poland in general and in Kraków in particular, We the leaders of the holy congregation of Kraków acknowledge and testify with our signatures how, with the approval of all the members of the congregation, we have willingly taken upon ourselves without coercion not to engage in any trade or business—we shall abandon it entirely, we will also not be able to take any other business from other merchants to other non-Jews, except for our collateral which is overdue and whose interest has been lost—we can sell them in our houses whenever the opportunity arises. Even these collateral goods we shall not be permitted to carry and trade on the streets and markets in that town except on the two days of the week which are Tuesday and Friday, market days, and also on fair days known as yar mark. Those collateral items we are permitted to sell as we can make a biblical oath upon them, on the Ten Commandments, that they belong to us. If it happens that a man or woman decides to sell goods inside the city, new or old, and they decide to sell them on whichever day they want except the aforementioned days or on fayre days, the inhabitants of the city can take any of their goods. Further, that Jew will be placed in the stocks until he pays a fine to his master of ten marks. The poor Hebrew women can sell on any day their scarves and rags which are the products of their own hands and their labour. Let this letter be a testament and proof in the hands of the townsfolk and the people of the city to uphold and fulfil all that has been stated above without deception or exception. We have written and signed—Moses b. Ephraim, Jacob b. R. Alexandri the Levite (z’l), Joshua b. Ephraim, Mordekhai b. Jacob (z’l, may God avenge his soul). Translated from Hebrew by Joseph Citron

56

Zaremska

No. 25 Agreement on Ritual Slaughter in Kraków between the City’s Council, the Local Christian Butcher Guild, and the Jewish Slaughterers, 27 February 1494

Published in: Żydzi w średniowiecznym Krakowie. Wypisy źródłowe z ksiąg miejskich krakowskich, nr. 871 (source: Council records). Came before us Jan May, Urban, Paul the Young and Lorencz Tile, the elders of our butchers, and Moyses Fischel, Symon, Marek of Czanse, Kappelman, Joseph Vloch, Samuel, the elders of the Jews, in their and their community’s name and have declared that they have made an agreement and a resolution between them and promise to in the following manner. The Jews should not have more than four slaughterers. They should sell to the Jews in the city and in the countryside and slaughter for them, and there should not be more of them than four. They should not have labourers and the slaughterers should not slaughter more than the Jews require. And meat which is not appropriate or does not follow their custom, they should not sell but in houses in two locations. A sheep should be divided in four portions to sell, and an ox in eight, and none but the four slaughterers are allowed to sell. They should not have stalls at the gates of the city but require everyone to come to the market. The Jews may sell lambs at any time in their houses. Our butchers and their labourers shall not obstruct, strike or steal, but leave them in peace because of the above promises the Jews have pledged to keep themselves, as will their community and all their descendants. And they will pay six marks penance, three marks to our lord, the Wojewoda, and three marks to us councilmen. And should it occur that they have sell meat in more than two locations, the meat will be confiscated and the fine will be six marks. Translated from Middle High Germany by François Guesnet



No. 26 Motion by the Kraków City Council, at the Behest of the King, to Release Members of the Board of the Jewish Community and Other Jews in Custody, 19 September 149557

Published in: Żydzi w średniowiecznym Krakowie, nr. 939, (source: Council records).

Under the order of his Most Serene Lord our King, the Jews had been been assembled by Johannes Boc, Nuncio of his Serenity, to warn each other in turn against retreating 57

An arrest of the community board members was requested by an inquisitorial court, a decision however overturned because the court had no jurisdiction in matters concerning Jews.

The Medieval Period

57

or holding back from an approach by His Majesty, whether he sent for them, or issued an instruction. There had been some prisoners, that is: Jacob the rabbi,58 Moyses Fischil, Ysrahel, Marek, Samuel, Jacob Unger and Ysrahel son of Marek, the captives sent from the town. Then the other Jews were Yosue, Hessil, Yostman, Lewko, Lazer de Brega, Marcus Wolf Dewtcz, Simon, Ysaac, Glowna, Symon the cantor, Allexander, Dauid son of Yonas, Mayses the builder, Yonas Swarcz Jacobs, edem, Liberman Jacob de Bewtom, Colman, Salomon scholnik, Latossek, scholnik. All these Jews delivered cautions, each for all and all for one, that no-one must hold back and each of them must commit to the orders of His Most Serene Lord, the King, whenever he sought them out by a letter or through messengers; and if they did otherwise, they should be liable to a fine of ten thousand florins. […] Then we asked the Jews named above if anyone was accusing them of anything, so that they could be warned about what the King’s letters may say: they responded that they knew of no-one, but that they had been detained earlier by force. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 27 Prince Regent Jan Olbracht Resolves a Trade Dispute between Townsfolk and Jews of Lwów, Belz, 7 March 1488

Published in: Akta grodzkie ziemskie, t. 7, nr. 89.

In the name of the Lord, amen. We, Jan Olbracht, by the grace of God our most serene prince and lord, and eldest son by a like grace of our lord Kazimierz, King of Poland, proclaim to all whom it concerns, through the contents of this present document, how through the commission set up for the purpose in my own name by our most sublime lord, my dearest father, we called together our councillors of Lwów and the indigenous Jews of this city, so that they would appear before us, supported by the laws which apply to them, for the final decision on the dispute which has been sparked amongst them about cutting and trading of cloth by the ell; having heard the assertions of the first party and the second, and having then also investigated and scrutinized their written permissions and privileges, when the councillors showed, on the privilege of the incorporation of this city and region as part of the kingdom and of the cities of the kingdom, that they must themselves exist and enjoy that law, by which the other capital cities exist and enjoy, which give very little access to the Jews who live there to trade and cut cloth by the ell; whilst the Jews themselves do not make a separate case other than the law containing the privilege, under which they have been admitted to the 58

Jakub Polak (c. 1460–after 1532), originally from Bavaria, was appointed chief rabbi by King Alexander (1501–1506), considered the founder of the first yeshiva in Poland.

58

Zaremska

kingdom, and must act and be judged under the law, with no reference or exception referring to their situation in such an issue or argument, and that these arrangements should simply have been preserved—which the councillors did not accept—on the basis of custom; and that the councillors wanted to damage their written law and privileges, in which the King’s single law is encompassed. Under the authority granted to ourselves in this matter, as set out above, we have decided and decreed, in so far as selling cloth by the ell is concerned, that the Jews who live in Lwów must not exist or enjoy any law or license different from that which those Jews who live in Kraków or Poznań or Sandomierz observe and enjoy, especially since those councillors, through open documents written on paper, showed that the will and inclination of our most serene Lord, our father, our dearest father, is the same as mine in this dispute and that tailoring is privileged everywhere and relates to the royal treasury. This was passed in the town of Belz, in the presence of the Reverend Father in Christ and Lord Mathias Bishop of Kamenz, nominated to the church of Chelm, and the Magnificent Venceslao de Nyeborow, Castellan of Belz, the noblemen Peter Balyczsky, Master of Provisions for our court, and Derslao de Huhnow, and many other faithful and trustworthy men, on the Saturday before the fourth Sunday in Lent in the year of our Lord 1488. Our seal is attached below as validation of the above. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 28 Imprisonment of Elders of the Jewish Community in Lwów for Failing to Settle the Jewish Tax in Time, 24 December 1499

Published in: Zapiski sądów lwowskich, w: Akta grodzkie i ziemskie, vol. 15, nr. 2937.

The synagogue trustee from the Jews in Lwów reported that these tax revenues which have been received from the synagogue of the Jews, and which relate to the synagogue, held all the elders in liability with regards to their bond. They were being held in captivity in the town of Lwów by the Lord Captain against payment of twenty-four florins, which Iacubowa had been obliged to give on behalf of the group as tax or schosu to His Majesty the King. This sum had been paid from pledge with the agreement of the Jew Isaczek Markowycz, and paid off the twenty-four florins of tax to the Captain. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

The Medieval Period



59

No. 29 Testimony of Mojżesz Fiszel, Headman of the Jewish Community (of Kraków-Kazimierz), in the Court Case against Members of the Kazimierz City Council after the Anti-Jewish Riots in 1500, 28 January 1502

Published in: Ignacy Schiper, Studya nad stosunkami gospodarczymi Żydów, part 2, s. 334, source: Księga radziecka Kazimierza. Moyses Fischel the Jew freely testified at our full Council, by appointment in our chamber, that he was aware of no evil or disrepute in respect of the reputation of Councillors Johann Züntag and Bartholomow Oneczek, but testified that everything was in order, and that he saw them as good and respectable people; he declared that although he had made various allegations against them before the Magnificent Lord Kmitha, the Representative for Kraków and Marshal, he had not done so voluntarily, or with any knowledge, but on the basis of some untruthful account or speech or instigation by the plotter Stanislas, who was imprisoned in the city of Kraków and was being detained as a prisoner. Recorded in the presence of the Noble Martin Vyerzbantha and of the whole of the former Council, on the Thursday after the Conversion of St. Paul, in the year of our Lord 1502. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 30 List of Jewish Settlements from which the Coronation Tax was Levied in 150759

Source: Taxa Judeorum in civitatis et opidis Regni existentibus, Archiwum Główne Akt Dawnych (Main Archive of Old Records, Warsaw), Archiwum Skarbu Koronnego, Rachunki królewskie, nr. 38, k. 131 v. Taxes from the Jews in villages and towns in the Kingdom In Poznań 200 flor.[ins] In Gniezno 50 flor. In Inowrocław 35 flor. 59

The list includes Jewish settlements in Greater Poland (Wielkopolska), Little Poland (Małopolska), those parts of Mazovia incorporated to the Polish Crown, and the Ruś. It does not include settlements located in Podolia, Ducal and Royal Prussia, or those parts of Mazovia incorporated to the Crown in 1526.

60

Zaremska

In Kalisz 35 flor. In Międzyrzec 22 flor. In Skwierzyń 8 flor. In Brześć Kujawski 25 flor. In Płock 16 flor. In Łęczyca 15 flor. In Nowe Miasto 5 flor. In Rawa 2 flor. In Nadarzyń 3 flor. In Błonie 3 flor. In Sochaczów 5 flor. In Mława 4 flor. In Płońsk 5 flor. In Bielsk 4 flor. In Ciechanów 6 flor. In Gąbin 3 flor. In Dobrzyń 2 flor. In Szadek 5 flor. In Dybów 12 flor. In Pakość 5 flor. In Bydgoszcz 3 flor. In Nakiel 3 flor. In Łekno 2 flor. In Rogozno 3 flor. In Pyzdry 4 flor. In Wronki 4 flor. In Kurnik 2 flor. In Warta Schamai and the populace were requested to pay the total of 5 flor. In Kleczew 5 flor. In Kcynia 3 flor. In Grodzisk 5 flor. In Śrem 4 flor. In Oborniki 3 flor. In Ostroróg 2 flor. In Gniewkowo 2 flor. In Łobżenica 10 flor. In Lwów 300 flor. In Busko 40 flor. In Olesko 16 flor.

The Medieval Period In Bełz, together with the Jew Samuel in Potylicz 5 flor. In Horodło 16 flor. In Chełm 20 flor. In Szczebrzeszyn 25 flor. In Sambor 15 flor. In Lublin with Kazimierz 75 flor. In Sandomierz 24 flor. In Kraków and Tarnów 300 flor. Total 1391 flor. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

61

chapter 2

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795 Adam Teller 1

Introduction

The term Jewish autonomy was unknown in Poland—Lithuania during the early modern period (c. 1500–c. 1800). It seems to have come into vogue only at the turn of the twentieth century, when eastern European Jewry began to develop a range of new political ideas that looked to a future in which they would live as a kind of autonomous group within the multi-national empires in which they lived. To give their vision weight, those who held these views often pointed to the Jewish institutions of early modern Poland—Lithuania as models of the ‘Jewish autonomy’ they wanted. In their presentation, those bodies had run early modern Jewish society with little or no significant interference from outside. This was not the case. Polish–Lithuanian Jewish society’s administrative bodies in the early modern period, as in all other periods, had not been autonomous but had formed an integral part of the polity as a whole. The Jewish population, which in these years constituted an ever-increasing proportion of the population as a whole, had to be administered by the state, which lacked the institutions to do so. In addition, the fact that Jews began to play key roles in the economy and were an important source of taxation, made control over them of even greater significance for the non-Jewish authorities. In this situation, it was the Jewish community and regional councils, together with their leaders and officials, that provided the tools the state needed to do this. Beyond that, the fact that the Jewish bodies were acting within broader non-Jewish systems forced them to develop in ways that would make them more-or-less compatible with those systems. Of course, these Jewish administrative bodies were not created ex nihilo in the sixteenth century—by then, they had a history stretching back hundreds of years. In fact, Jewish societies in different times and places, starting with the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, if not before, had often had to develop their own institutions in order to administer the lives of their members as a separate group within non-Jewish society. The particular tradition that underlay the Polish–Lithuanian Jewish bodies examined here had developed

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

63

in High Medieval Central and Western Europe, but their form of development was characteristic of the state in which they functioned. Thus it was that the Jewish communities and councils of Poland—Lithuania were a unique combination of Jewish and non-Jewish, local and imported political traditions. Perhaps the best example of this can be found in the fact that Jewish society had to manoeuvre between two legal systems—Jewish Law (Halakhah), which regulated every aspect of Jewish life, and Polish Law, which regulated the intergroup and inter-personal relations of society as a whole. From this it should be clear that the development of Jewish administrative institutions in early modern Poland—Lithuania was deeply connected with the constitutional development of the state. A key moment in this process was the confrontation between the King and the szlachta at Nieszawa in 1454. The nobles, assembled in order to answer their feudal obligation to go to war, demanded (and received) the strengthening of their regional councils—the sejmiki. This marked the beginning of a shift in power between szlachta and king that would continue for some three centuries, leading to the reshaping of the Sejm, the elected monarchy, the Union of Lublin, and eventually the domination of the state by the noble elite—the magnates. This was also a key moment for the development of Jewish society since the szlachta forced the king to rescind the expanded privilege he had granted his Jewish subjects just a year previously. This weakened (though it did not destroy) the close relations between the monarch and his Jews, a development which would eventually allow the nobility to develop close economic relations with them. The fifteenth century saw continued Jewish immigration to Poland—mostly from Central Europe as a result of the waves of Jewish expulsions there. The vast majority of Polish Jewry had their roots in Central Europe, particularly the German-speaking lands, known in Hebrew as Ashkenaz. They retained the memory of the move, calling themselves Ashkenazim. This did not mean, however, that the processes of migration and the consequent community building were without tensions. As the second document shows, the settled (‘Polish’) Jewish community in the capital, Kraków, found itself in dispute with the immigrant community of Czech Jews who lived in the town at the beginning of the sixteenth century. The argument was over rights to the synagogue—and was only resolved by the king [no. 2]. The Jewish courts throughout the period discussed here lacked the power to enforce their decisions, which left the nonJewish authorities the ultimate arbiters, even in cases between Jews. While such tensions were presumably commonplace in the age of immigration, particularly in the communities in the west of Poland, they did not last long. By the mid-sixteenth century, all the immigrants had been absorbed into

64

Teller

the existing communal infrastructure. Unlike the situation in the Ottoman Empire, the other new centre of Jewish settlement in this period, the Jews in Poland-Lithuania did not establish separate communities for each group of immigrants, creating and maintaining a single community in each town.1 As a result, these communities grew in size and complexity until they included a whole range of both elected officials and employees. In the sixteenth century, the largest such communities were to be found in the great royal towns of western and central Poland. In Lithuania, the largest communities were to be found in Pinsk, Brześć, and Grodno. There was a large degree of uniformity in structure and functioning. As the election regulations of the Kraków community from 1595 show [no. 9], the community council was three-tiered. At the top were the Elders (called in Hebrew, parnassim2), who formed the community’s executive committee. Below them was a small group of advisers/deputies, called in Hebrew, tovim. It was their function to sit alongside the parnassim when an important decision was to be taken or to fill in if one or more of them was out of town. The third tier consisted of representatives of the slightly less wealthy members of the community, such as leading craftsmen or tradesmen. This group had various names, which differed from community to community. In Kraków, they were called kruyei ʿedah. Commonly, there were five parnassim, three tovim, and from five to fifteen kruyei ʿedah. The parnassim took turns chairing the community council on a monthly basis. Other elected community officials included judges (Heb. dayyanim) to run the community court, treasurers (Heb. gabbaim) responsible for collecting and disbursing charity, accountants (Heb. neʾemanim), tax-assessors (Heb. shama‌ʾim), and the superintendents of charitable and/or professional societies and guilds (Heb. memunim). These were elected on an annual basis. Elections were usually held in the intermediate days of the Passover holiday. In most cases, they involved a complex process in which ‘electors’ were chosen by lot, and then went on to nominate the next year’s community leaders. The Kraków community made this even more complicated by adding an additional, intermediate step, to ensure what they felt would be the best possible choice. Only the relatively few individuals wealthy enough to pay taxes to the community had the right to vote or be elected, so it was a very limited franchise. Beyond this, it worked out in practice that the parnassim and tovim 1 There seems to have been only one exception to this rule: the town of Lwów had two Jewish communities, one situated within the walls of the town, the other ‘outside the walls’ in one of the suburbs. 2 Other titles sometimes used for these officers included, alufim, roznim, katzinim, and roshim.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

65

were members of the community’s tiny socio-economic elite and were often elected to their positions year after year. Nepotism was banned, however, and even business partners were not supposed to be chosen to serve alongside each other. In addition to the elected officers, the Jewish communities also employed a number of salaried officials. First amongst these was the rabbi. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, rabbis—particular in the great royal towns—were appointed by the king, who used them as part of his tax-collecting apparatus in Jewish society. As Document 4 shows, the king could also intervene if the functioning of the rabbi was not to his satisfaction. However, as the century progressed and royal power declined, the communities began to request (and receive) the right to appoint their rabbis themselves. One of the first such documents was that granted to the Poznań community in 1551 [no. 5]. It set the tone for the future development of the rabbinate in two important ways: though the Poznań community had the right to choose its own rabbi, it also had to win the approval of the king for the appointment, perhaps in the form of a license; in addition, the rabbi’s authority was backed up by sanctions laid down by the non-Jewish authorities.3 Within the community, the rabbi served two major functions: he ran the Torah academy (Heb. yeshiva) and was president of the community court. Though his prestige often derived from the first of these, his position in society (and his income) depended much more on the second. As the rabbinic contract granted by the Wilkowyszki community in 1785 shows [no. 39], in addition to his salary, which was not large, the rabbi received considerable tax breaks, payments for rendering legal decisions, and money for providing religious services—pre-nuptial agreements, marriages, divorces, and so on. In addition, he would often be given a house to live in. Together, this provided a significant income. He also seems to have enjoyed generous gifts given him by community members, though whether they were given out of gratitude for the services he rendered or as a means of currying favour is not clear. The budget of the Poznań community from 1638 [no. 18] lists the salaries paid to all its employees. In addition to the rabbi there was a scribe, a preacher, a number of cantors, doctors, midwives, beadles, guards—and a lobbyist (in Hebrew, shtadlan; in Polish, syndyk). This last was usually a wealthy member of the community who spoke Polish and was well versed in the political structures and customs of surrounding society. His job was to represent communal 3 Document 5 stipulates the death penalty for those who disobeyed the rabbi. This extreme sanction seems to have been unique to this document, and looks never to have been enforced.

66

Teller

interests in the non-Jewish corridors of power, most often informally and through the payment of bribes. It was not only communities that employed such a figure: the Jewish councils did, too. The contract for the lobbyist of the Council of Four Lands from 1730 details the responsibilities of such a figure [no. 31]. The legal basis for the communities’ existence was a privilege. In the early sixteenth century, the so-called General Privilege, first granted to the Jews of Wielkopolska in 1264 and renewed by each successive monarch, served this function.4 However, with the decline of royal power—particularly during the reign of Zygmunt August—increasing numbers of communities requested their own specific privilege from a local nobleman or royal official. As the two privileges published here [nos. 7, 22] show, these charters determined not only the Jews’ settlement and economic rights but also their legal status and the basic rights of the community council—in the Łuck privilege, the right to grant or withdraw communal citizenship. Cases concerning community membership were recorded in the community record book (Heb. pinkas) in order to give the decisions their full weight [no. 14]. The privilege was by no means the only means of defining the status of a Jewish community. Compromises had to be reached with the town council on a range of local issues, too specific to be covered in the privilege. Such agreements could cover issues of expanding or limiting Jewish settlement, questions of economic competition, or any issue of contention between the non-Jewish and Jewish residents. The example cited here [no. 30] is a wide-ranging document from the town of Łask in 1715, demonstrating that these agreements were usually underwritten by annual payments from the community to the town council. The communities also had to be run according to Jewish law. The halakhic basis for communal organization had been laid down in previous centuries, but the rapid growth in the number of communities and the increasing sophistication of communal organization raised many problems for which there was no medieval precedent. Conflicts over issues of jurisdiction were commonplace. Community status, though local in nature, was rarely limited just to a town, but encompassed nearby small Jewish settlements. Since these settlements, called in Hebrew svivot and in Polish pryzkahałki, were subject to the community’s jurisdiction; they provided additional markets for the community’s 4 The 1264 privilege was later expanded by King Kazimierz Wielki in the mid-fourteenth century. King Kazimierz Jagiellończyk seems to have further expanded it in 1453 but was forced to retract the new privilege the next year at Nieszawa.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

67

merchants, as well an excellent means of reducing the tax burden on community members. The economic importance of such settlements was such that disputes sometimes arose between communities over control of them. As a result of their inferior situation, peripheral settlements would do whatever they could to achieve full communal status: they did so by acquiring a community privilege and the means of providing basic religious services (which meant in practice establishing a cemetery, building a synagogue, and employing a rabbi). Even then, achieving complete independence was not always an easy process. Of course, halakhah was meant to regulate not only community structure, but also every aspect of Jews’ daily lives and relations with each other. In cases of dispute—particularly in the realm of business—it was the role of the community court (Heb. bet din), presided over by the rabbi, to adjudicate. The judges (Heb. dayyanim) were communal officials, members of the educated socio-economic elite, who were elected to their posts on an annual basis. In the larger communities, there might be a number of strictly separate benches, each tasked with dealing with cases according to the financial value of the case to be tried [no. 25]. The court would also register agreements and contracts made between Jews [no. 20b]. A problem arose when it came to enforcing the court’s verdicts. As an institution entirely internal to Jewish society, the court was vested with only limited powers by the authorities. The best weapon it had at its disposal was the ḥerem (excommunication ban). However, despite the very impressive wording of the ḥerem proclamations, they do not seem to have been very effective punishments, and were largely ignored by the Jewish population [no. 12]. In order to receive an enforceable ruling, the sides had to turn to a non-Jewish court. Though such an act was frowned upon in the Jewish tradition, in practice it became very common. In fact, the Polish–Lithuanian legal system provided a special court for Jews to use. Operated by the so-called ‘Jews’ Judge’ (Latin, Judex Judaeorum), its basic purpose was to try cases between Jews and non-Jews, where a Jew was the defendant. Following the legal maxim actor sequitur forum rei, the accused had the right to be tried in his own court. Since the rabbinic court had no authority over non-Jews, the Jews’ Judge presided over a special ‘Jewish court’ to try such cases according to Polish law. In principle, the Jewish communities had the right to send their own judges to sit alongside the non-Jewish ‘Jews’ Judge,’ but such was their confidence in the system that they rarely did so [no. 27]. The official in charge of these courts was the prestigious royal governor, called the wojewoda. However, since he was usually from a prominent noble

68

Teller

family, he tended to delegate responsibility to a deputy—the podwojewoda— and the court became known as the podwojewoda’s court.5 Its function was to act as the court of first instance in cases between Jews and non-Jews, which could be appealed to the Crown Tribunal. However, though it was officially prohibited, the podwojewoda’s court also acted as the court of appeal for cases from the community courts, and increasingly as the court of first instance for cases between Jews who had lost faith in the community courts—or felt that they had a better chance of success in this other court [no. 27]. The wojewoda himself received a generous income from the Jewish community and retained a certain amount of authority over it. He had to approve rabbinic appointments, as well as results of annual elections to the community council. The Jewish communities, concerned that he might interfere in the outcome of the elections, initially devised complex strategies to retain their independence in such cases. However, as the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries progressed, this kind of intervention became more frequent and proved difficult to resist. As a royal official, the wojewoda’s authority extended only to the royal towns. Nonetheless, in the noble-owned private towns, the situation was not substantially different. The noble town-owner and his seigneurial court simply acted in much the same way as the wojewoda’s and the podwejoda’s court [nos. 10, 27, 32]. As far as the state was concerned, the Jewish community fulfilled two basic functions: it collected taxes from the Jews in its locality and helped administer the local Jewish population. For the Jews themselves, the community acted as a body of self-regulation in social, economic, and religious spheres, as well as managing group relations with non-Jewish society. These two sets of functions, vis-à-vis the state and vis-à-vis Jewish society, clearly overlapped at least to a certain extent. Tax matters were of cardinal importance. Communities were expected to collect and pay the Jewish poll tax to the state and various local taxes (including podymne, and czynsz)6 to the municipal council. Other taxes and imposts, including the czopowe on alcohol sales, needed to be paid, too. In addition, the communities had to collect money for their own needs—paying salaries, supporting the welfare system, providing upkeep on urban infrastructure, and making ‘sweetening’ payments to non-Jewish officials and churchmen. The

5 In fact, the podwojewoda, often himself a nobleman, would further delegate the responsibility to another deputy, who was sometimes even a townsman. 6 Podymne was a property tax assessed by the number of hearths in the real estate owned by the assessee. The municipal czynsz was a more general wealth tax.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

69

Poznań budget from 1638 shows a huge proportion of community outlay going towards payments to the non-Jewish authorities. The basic form of tax imposed by the Jewish community was a wealth tax. Each community member would appear before the assessors appointed to deal with his tax bracket,7 show him his books, and take an oath that he was making a full and honest disclosure [no. 28]. As the demands on the communities grew in the later seventeenth century, communities began to institute an indirect tax known as kropka. It was initially imposed on sales of kosher meat, but was later expanded to cover all financial transactions undertaken by Jews in town. Beyond their role as tax collectors, the community councils seem to have functioned in three major realms: the socio-economic life of the Jews, their religious life, and their contacts with non-Jewish authorities. These were never clearly demarcated fields of action, as there were very porous boundaries between them and great areas of overlap. The community councils rarely issued complete sets of regulations, usually making decisions on an ad-hoc basis that would function as precedents in future cases. A full ‘community constitution’ was drawn up in Kraków in 1595, and a similar (though much more limited) document in Dubno in 1717. These were, however, the exception rather than the rule. Having said that, when a particular social or economic problem became acute, formal sets of regulations would sometimes be issued to deal with it. A particular problem in the country’s eastern regions demanding that kind of attention was in the relatively new field of estate and monopoly leasing (Polish, arenda).8 Since this sector involved Jews managing economic systems in which non-Jews worked (or were the main consumers), many Jewish businessmen found it difficult to cease all activity on the Sabbath. In 1602, therefore, the Włodzimierz community issued a set of regulations concerning Sabbath observance in the fields of arenda and trade [no. 10].9 Another set of mercantile regulations emerged in Zasław in 1785, where attempts were made to prevent cut-throat competition between Jewish merchants. Particularly common were sumptuary regulations which served the dual purpose of defusing tensions between Christians and Jews caused by the latter’s ostentatious displays of wealth and solidifying socio-economic boundaries within the Jewish 7 These tax brackets consisted of a simple division into ‘poor’, ‘middling’, and ‘rich’. 8 Such a lease of an entire estate or of the incomes deriving from the estate owner’s monopoly on the production and sale of alcohol on his lands was known as an arenda. 9 The history of these regulations is not entirely clear. They may have been composed by Rabbi Meshullam Feivish of Kraków in around 1590 and only adopted (without attribution) by the Włodzimierz community years later.

70

Teller

community by stipulating the different levels of consumption permitted to each stratum in society. Another form of economic control—particularly of crafts, but in some communities trade too—was achieved through the institution of guilds (Heb. ḥevrot ba‌ʾalei mel,akhah). In structure and function, these were very similar to the Christian guilds, called in Polish cechy, with whom they often competed. In the larger towns, there might be separate ḥavarot for each type of craftsmen, as well as a merchants’ guild, while smaller towns often had only one guild for all. In some cases, Jews would instead have their own section in the Christian guild. Where they existed, these ḥavarot were often quasi-autonomous bodies within the Jewish community (some even had their own rabbi); however, the community council generally made efforts to control them, often by appointing superintendents. This was particularly important in the case of those guilds whose members provided religious services, such as slaughterers, tailors, and bakers. Many of these guilds had written regulations aimed at both organizing the way the craft was run in town, including educating apprentices, and preserving the members’ monopoly on their craft [no. 29]. As with most Jewish communal institutions, women were officially excluded from the guilds.10 In fact, the only place in which women seem to have been allowed to function as a recognized part of the communal apparatus was in collecting money for charitable purposes. The Jewish communities generally supported a very diverse form of the welfare system: it could include direct payments to the deserving poor, the maintenance of a hospital/hospice, known as a hekdesh, for the indigent (particularly for those who travelled from community to community looking for support),11 providing doctors and midwives for those unable to afford them, a school for poor boys, and a dowry fund for poor girls. Funds would be collected to help ransom Jews imprisoned by non-Jewish authorities, and also to support the Jews in the Land of Israel [nos. 15, 18, 20b, 21]. All this activity was financed in part from communities’ budgets, but the majority of the funds was collected by gabba‌ʾim, often before or after services in the synagogue. Since the male gabba‌ʾim did not have access to the women’s galleries that had become a feature of synagogue construction in this period, women treasurers (gabbaiʾot or gabbetes) were permitted to do so in their stead. These gabbetes would also visit private homes to collect money from women while their husbands were away at work. They were not permitted, 10 11

In fact, widows of members might have some standing, which would enable them to keep their husbands’ workshop operating after his death. Such itinerant paupers were generally given three-days lodging before being sent away.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

71

however, to disburse the money they had collected, but had to hand it over to the male gabba‌ʾim, who jealously guarded their right to decide who would receive the funds at their disposal [no. 15]. Similar types of gabbaiʾot could be found in the community’s burial society (known as the ḥevra kadisha). Providing a Jewish burial was, of course, a crucial aspect of the communities’ functioning—and a not-inconsiderable source of income. Since preparing dead bodies for burial was strictly separated along gender lines, women had an important role to play in the ḥevra kadisha. In the 1670 regulations of the Wilno ḥevra, the gabbaiʾot are explicitly allowed to collect money, though here too it had to be passed over to the male gabba‌ʾim for disbursement [no. 23]. An additional realm of life controlled by the community was education. Here, too, a complex web of institutions was maintained. At its peak was the Torah academy (Heb. yeshiva). Run by the rabbi, it provided advanced Jewish education for boys in their teens who had the means to pay for it. Some help was provided by community members, who would volunteer to feed the students at their own tables. Jewish society prided itself that bright students from poor backgrounds could study in these academies through advantageous marriages, but in reality mostly only children from wealthy backgrounds could afford to do so. Primary education, too, was largely private, though some of the larger communities did try to provide poor children with a basic education. Finally, the communities placed great emphasis on adult education, maintaining a range of voluntary study societies—and a study hall (Heb. bet midrash) —for community members with different educational needs [no. 21]. The community institutions were also responsible for urban infrastructure in the part of town where Jews concentrated. Most basically, they were responsible for the construction and upkeep of the communal synagogue (or synagogues).12 This was often financed by the sale of places in the men’s and women’s sections [no. 13].13 In the most crowded Jewish quarters, as in Poznań in the early seventeenth century, the community council would issue regulations to ensure that as much of the housing stock as possible would be available, and would even institute rent control to ensure that all strata of society could find a place to live [no. 16]. Physical safety would be improved by the employment of guards for the Jewish quarter and even chimney sweeps in some towns. The community would also be concerned about the purchase and upkeep of a plot of land to serve as a Jewish cemetery. 12 13

Another important communal institution was the slaughterhouse, where animals were slaughtered according to the laws of kashrut. A synagogue seat functioned much like a form of real estate in this period.

72

Teller

Another crucial aspect of the community’s role was as the representative of all the Jews under its jurisdiction. Non-Jewish society held the Jews to a standard of collective responsibility—they were all held responsible for any action undertaken by any Jew or group of Jews. On the most basic level, the Jewish community represented its members in all negotiations with the non-Jewish authority—whether it was for an agreement with the town council over settlement or economic conditions or the collection and payment of taxes. If a licence was necessary to build (or rebuild) a synagogue or to employ a rabbi, this was the community’s responsibility, too. Finally, if Jewish society as a whole or any individual Jew was brought to trial, the community would be responsible for organizing the defence. This might be in a dispute over property, as happened concerning the cemetery of the Wilno community in 1742 [no. 34], or in one of the many blood-libel cases in which Jews were arrested on charges of ritual murder. As should be clear, Jewish communal institutions formed an integral part of town life across Poland—Lithuania, as Jews formed a major part of the urban population. They not only administered Jewish society, but interacted with non-Jewish society, and even acted as an administrative branch of the state authorities. It is perhaps, therefore, little surprise that there were great similarities between the Jewish and non-Jewish institutions in the towns. In terms of both structure and functioning, the municipal councils and the Jewish community councils were very similar. As yet, there has been no comparative research to show whether the Jewish administrative bodies were more or less complex or effective than those of their neighbours. Nonetheless, both clearly faced many similar challenges and drew on common elements from the traditions of urban administration in early modern east central Europe. Much the same can be said of Polish–Lithuanian Jews’ bodies of regional and super-regional administration. Their development seemed to parallel in many ways the development of the Polish–Lithuanian administrative system. As we have seen, in the second half of the fifteenth century the regional assemblies of the nobility (Polish, sejmiki) began to assume more power, and the national assembly of the nobility (Polish, sejm) became a regularly elected body. The sejm was a bi-cameral body, with the chamber of deputies representing the mass of the nobility, and the senate (the king’s advisory body) run by the upper nobility and the magnates. Over the sixteenth century, the lower house became increasingly more powerful, constantly limiting royal power. Its principle of unanimity strengthened the nobility as every deputy’s consent was needed to pass a bill. The emboldened nobility negotiated and ratified the Union of Lublin which created the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (1569),

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

73

instituted the fully elected monarchy (1572), issued the Warsaw Declaration of religious tolerance (1573), and created a new high court, the Crown Tribunal (1578). Polish–Lithuanian Jewry created its own system of regional and supraregional administration in exactly these years, though the circumstances and motivations behind this development were quite different from those in the state as a whole. Once again, issues of taxation drove the changes. The first step seems to have occurred in 1519, when a group of newly developed communities in Wielkopolska, still officially subject to the jurisdiction of the Poznań community, attempted to lighten the burden of taxation imposed upon them. They proposed to the king that together they would collect the Jews’ taxes, thus neutralizing Poznań’s power over them [no. 1]. Once constituted into a tax-collecting body, the communal leaders began to meet together to discuss—and eventually legislate on—matters of importance for all communities of the region.14 Though records are sparse, it would seem that other regions of PolandLithuania instituted their own councils in the course of the sixteenth century. Even the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in its pre-1569 borders, which included Volhynia (Pol. Wołyn), had its own Jewish council. A fragment of legislation that has survived from this period reveals that the council saw its job as ensuring order within the Jewish communities and representing their group interests before the non-Jewish authorities. A particular concern was to help defend those Jews accused of ritual murder or similar offences [no. 6]. Later regulations show the council concerned to stop the migration of Jews from Crown Poland because they were seen both as economic competition for the local population and the bearers of plague. Issues of the rabbinate, education, and social welfare were also discussed, as was the preservation of social standards through the prohibition on playing cards and dice [no. 11]. It seems unlikely that these regulations were enforced, as was also the case with the eighteenth-century regulation prohibiting female peddling, viewed as contrary to the divinely ordained socio-economic order [no. 35]. Over time, the number of councils grew quite dramatically. At about the same time as the regional councils were developing, a new supra-regional Jewish court seems to have been forming. During the annual early spring Candlemas Fair (Pol., Gromnica) in Lublin, the rabbis of Poland’s largest communities seem to have gathered from time to time in order to act as a kind of Rabbinic High Court. This does not seem to have been a stable and 14

Such a regional council was called in Hebrew, va‌ʾad ha-galil.

74

Teller

organized body, but rather ad hoc meetings of leading rabbis to deal with cases of broader than regional significance. Such a meeting gave its imprimatur to the first printing of the Talmud in Lublin in 1559. In his elegy to the destroyed communities of Poland—Lithuania after the Chmielnicki uprising, Nathan Hanover seems to have described the functioning of this court, though he conflated it with the slightly later development of the supra-regional Council of Four Lands [no. 21]. Initially at least, the Council developed quite separately from the rabbinic high court. The impetus for its founding seems to have been the Sejm’s decision to reimpose the Jewish poll tax in order to help finance the war against Muscovy in 1580. Four Jewish businessmen, one from each of Crown Poland’s major regions (Wielkopolska, Małopolska, Rus Czerwony, and Wołyn), leased the tax from the Treasury and set about collecting it themselves.15 They did so a second time when the poll tax was imposed again two years later. In the meantime, these leaders constituted themselves into a council for all the Jews in Poland and began to issue legislation on matters of national importance. Their first regulation, aimed at reducing tensions with the nobility, forbad the Jews of central and western Poland to lease Crown incomes in those regions, since they were an important source of income for the local szlachta [no. 8]. The Council met twice a year, once at the Candlemas Fair (Gromnica) in Lublin and once in the late summer fair in Jarosław. The Council of Four Lands never received formal legal recognition in the form of a privilege, which meant that it never had coercive powers over the individual communities that did. Council legislation was only binding on a Jewish community when its leaders agreed to accept it and copy it into the communal pinkas. This seems to have been the Jewish expression of the political principle that underlay the Sejm’s policy of unanimity.16 It did not, however, stop the Council from legislating on important matters, such as the provision of credit according to Jewish law, dealing with bankruptcies and bankrupts, suppressing Sabbateanism, and matters of Jewish publishing [no. 26]. Initially at least, the Council was a lay body, separate from the rabbinic high court. The two did sometimes co-operate, drawing up the Sabbath rest regulations later adopted by the Włodzimierz community [no. 10], but this was exceptional. The rabbis were not pleased at their exclusion; Rabbi Yoel Sirkes, 15 16

Shmuel Artur Cygielman, ‘The Arenda Business of Polish Jews and their Connection with the Development of the Council of Four Lands’, Zion 47 (1982): 112–44. [Hebrew]. The Council, known to the Polish authorities as the Jewish Sejm (Sejm Żydowski) never developed anything like the Liberum Veto in the Polish–Lithuanian Sejm, by which one dissenting voice not only stopped the legislation being passed but actually led to the dissolution of the Sejm.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

75

the leading rabbi of his generation, wrote to the Council complaining about the lay leaders’ unilateral use of the ḥerem ban to back up their legislation [no. 12]. In the second half of the seventeenth century, the rabbinic court seems to have been integrated into the Council, making it a bi-cameral institution. The geographic structure of the Council changed, too. By the eighteenth century, there were sixteen Jewish bodies permanently represented—nine regional councils and seven individual communities—though the title ‘Council of Four Lands’ had by then become generic. Thus, the geographical make-up of the council differed quite significantly from Crown Poland’s administrative structure. In the mid-eighteenth century, the Council’s bi-cameral structure began to break down, with rabbis beginning to take on positions previously reserved for the lay leadership—much to the latter’s chagrin. As the number of delegates grew, the ceremonial nature of the Council’s meetings became ever more complex, reminiscent in many ways of that surrounding the meetings of the Sejm [no. 33]. This seems to have made the legislative process cumbersome and difficult. By this time, the Council was no longer engaged in leasing the Jewish poll tax, instead dividing the burden among the different communities and providing the treasury with the results of its deliberations. Since the tax revenue was used to finance the military, the tax demands for each community were given to the different army units, which collected the money themselves. As far as the king and the Sejm were concerned, the council existed only for the purposes of taxation—and for the Jews too, this was recognized as the Council’s main realm of activity [no. 37]. Taking all this into consideration, the parallels between the system of regional self-administration in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and that of Polish Jewry seem much more superficial than those between the town councils and the Jewish communities. In structural terms, the similarities stand out: both cases had a system of regional self-administration supporting a central, legislative body; a bi-cameral Sejm was matched by a bi-cameral Jewish council (at least for part of its history); both bodies worked amidst much pomp and circumstance; and both were unable to force individual representatives— noblemen in the case of the Sejm, communities in the case of the Council—to accept their decisions. There, however, the similarities end: in terms of policy goals, means of achieving them, social authority, and even geographical structure, the two were quite different. When the Council is compared to the representative bodies of other minorities, such as the Scots, the similarities seem greater, which suggests that there may have been more than one model of regional self-administration at work in the early modern Commonwealth.

76

Teller

One thing does seem clear, however: in the Polish–Lithuanian administrative system, the local authorities in the towns (i.e. the town councils) and the regional authorities (the sejmiki and the Sejm) formed two different systems which had little or no connection between them. In the Jewish case, by contrast, the communities, the regional councils, and the Council of Four Lands worked together, integrated into a single administrative system which connected the local and the national in a single network. It would seem that Jewish society had succeeded in creating a form of self-administration that was more wide-ranging and sophisticated than that of its non-Jewish neighbours. The development of Jewish regional self-administration is generally understood to have developed in the wake of—even as a result of—the growth of sophisticated Jewish communities in Poland-Lithuania. A look at the chronology suggests that this was not the case: both the local communities and the regional councils developed in parallel during the sixteenth century, reaching a more-or-less stable form in its final decades. Interestingly, this can also be seen in the growing pressures that limited the effectiveness of the Jews’ bodies of self-administration. These pressures are today usually understood to be a result of the growth in magnate power in the Commonwealth in the wake of the 1648 Chmielnicki uprising: since Jews played an important role in the economy of the great latifundia during and after the period of reconstruction, the magnate estate-owners felt the need for ever closer control of the Jewish population both as a direct source of income and as creators of wealth. However, the causes of the functional problems faced by the eighteenth-century Jewish bodies had a much longer history, stretching back to the first half of the sixteenth century. The first step came in 1539, when the nobility in the Sejm passed a law determining that Jews living on their estates would be under their sole jurisdiction and would have no recourse to the royal courts [no. 3]. This was part of a longterm legislative process of strengthening noble control over their lands, which had begun with legislation concerning the peasants some twenty years previously, and would end with legislation concerning the towns on their holdings (the so-called ‘private towns’) some thirty years later. Since the nobility was interested in immigration to its estates to encourage economic development, many Jews began to leave the royal towns and resettle in the private ones. The next step came in the late 1540s, when more and more communities began to transfer their legal basis from the General Privilege granted by the king to local, community privileges granted by the noble town owner or a powerful local official. Noble interference in the running of the communities in order to improve incomes from them was not long in coming. By the 1590s, the situation was so

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

77

worrisome that the Kraków community included in its constitution a whole contingency plan of what to do in the case of interference in communal elections [no. 9]. The granting of rabbinic licenses for money was another means for the owners of private towns to boost their income. It also led to issues of corruption within the communities, with rabbinic posts being sold to the highest bidder or to the candidate with the best connections. In 1587, the rabbinic high court in full session issued a public declaration outlawing the sale of rabbinic positions. However, it proved ineffective and so had to be renewed in 1590, 1597, and again in 1640 [no. 19]. Thus it as that by the time of the Chmielnicki uprising in 1648, the ability of the Jewish communities to administer their internal affairs without external interference was in serious doubt. As the magnates consolidated their power and Jewish economic activity became an ever more important part of their revenues in the latter part of the seventeenth and for most of the eighteenth centuries, the communities’ functional difficulties only grew. In some cases, there was simply more oversight of communal activities: annual budgets were submitted to the magnate administration for auditing and some regulations had to be translated into Polish or issued in bi-lingual form. However, direct interference in communal elections and especially rabbinic appointments became much more common [no. 32]. Since the communities also played roles within the system of regional self-government, the magnates began to interfere in the way these were run, largely in order to ensure that their communities paid less tax and so were able to pay more revenues to the individual magnate [no. 36]. With different groups and individuals within the communal and regional leadership vying for magnate patronage, tensions on the Jewish street grew and there was an increase in accusations of corruption, denunciations to the non-Jewish authorities, and even violence. Financially, too, the bodies of Jewish self-administration ran into some difficulties in the eighteenth century. The costs of patronage were so great that those leaders who relied upon noble support in their appointments as rabbi began to milk the internal taxation system in order to cover their costs. This was particularly true of rabbis who had to return their investment in paying for their licence (as well as other payments they needed to make in order to gain support for their appointment within the Jewish community). As a result, they too began to squeeze community members through hiking up the costs of their services and demanding various new forms of income [no. 38]. This, of course, only exacerbated social tensions within communities and discredited these communal institutions in the eyes of many of their members. A problem of a different sort arose in connection with community budgets. As communities began to reconstruct and grow in the aftermath of both

78

Teller

the Chmielnicki uprising and then the Great Northern War (1702–20), they began to take loans from Church institutions [no. 24]. These last seem to have viewed the communities as a secure form of investment. They invested their money in the form of a wyderkaf loan: this was in the nature of a standing loan, in which the community, in return for not having to return the capital, guaranteed to pay a fixed rate of simple interest to the creditor in perpetuity. The rate of interest on these loans was generally fixed at the low annual rate of 7 per cent and the loans were usually secured by some form of real estate (often the local synagogue). Initially, the money seems to have been earmarked for capital projects, such as the construction of new synagogues, but the easy availability and cheap price of these loans led communities to continue taking them as a means of expanding expenditure. Eventually the communities (as well as the regional councils and Council of the Four Lands which had also become involved) had run up debt burdens in the millions, and had to take further loans just to pay the interest on the existing ones. The bubble burst in 1764, when the new king of Poland, the enlightened Stanisław August Poniatowski, decided to overhaul the Commonwealth’s taxation system. One of his first actions was to renew the Jews’ poll tax, which was to be assessed not by the Jews themselves through their Council of Four Lands, but on the basis of a full census, which he ordered carried out in 1764/5. Since in the eyes of the government the sole raison d’être of the Council was the division of the poll tax, the king and the Sejm then formally abolished the Council, as well as the smaller regional councils. Though some observers felt this to be a humiliation for Polish Jewry, there does not seem to have been any broad reaction to the move [no. 37]. It was, however, deeply felt in many communities because it sparked a debt crisis. Once abolished, the councils were no longer able to service their debts to the Church institutions and found great difficulty repaying the capital. Confidence in the communities was hit, too, and demands increased for the repayment of the loans. By that time, these were so huge that the communities struggled to fulfill them, requiring extensive and long-term repayment schemes. As a result, many communities ended the eighteenth century in a much weakened economic situation. In the period of reforms which began with Stanisław August’ accession and continued through the Four Year Sejm (1788–92), various figures, Jewish and non-Jewish, made proposals to reform Jewish communities and particularly the rabbinate in the spirit of the Enlightenment, though none of them proved feasible (see next chapters). Within Jewish society itself other solutions were presented. In some communities, the prestigious ḥevra kadisha, which was generally run by the communal elite, began to take on the features

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

79

of an executive committee outside the community council, or even of a community within a community [no. 23]. Since it was ostensibly a purely religious body, it was not recognized by the non-Jewish authorities and suffered none of the loss of prestige felt by the community councils and the rabbinate. This gave it the requisite authority to run Jewish society from within existing communal institutions. In addition, in the latter part of the eighteenth century an entirely novel religious movement began to develop outside the Jews’ traditional bodies of self-administration. This was Hasidism, a new and voluntary religious movement, which presented its followers with a quite different form of spiritual leadership based on personal charisma and untainted by connection to nonJewish authorities. By the end of the century, it had succeeded not only in attracting tens of thousands of followers, but had also created a whole new range of social structures to serve them. Like the network of communities and councils, this was a decentralized system: each Hasidic leader (Heb., tsadik) maintained his own court where he met his followers in the town where he had settled. As the number of tsadikim grew, so Hasidism spread across the landscape of Eastern Europe. The Hasidic movement did not set itself up in open opposition to the Jewish communities, but preferred to exist alongside them. In economic terms, too, the movement funded itself from voluntary donations and a form of taxation imposed on its members. In this way, it kept clear of the financial problems suffered by the communities. As the movement grew stronger, it slowly began to take over key posts in the communities, using them as a means of administering and controlling Jewish society as it wanted. In this sense, it might actually be considered as having strengthened Jewish self-administration rather than weakening it. These developments are sometimes termed, ‘the eighteenth-century crisis of Jewish autonomy’.17 However, this would seem to be overstating the case. The difficulties faced by the Jewish bodies of self-administration in Poland— Lithuania cannot be termed a crisis of Jewish autonomy because the Jewish bodies had never enjoyed autonomy in the first place. They had always functioned within—and been shaped by—the broad administrative systems of the polity in which they lived. They derived their authority from the functions they provided state and nobility and the legal status that this brought them. It did 17

The discussion here follows: Gershon David Hundert, ‘The Community in Poland in the 18th Century: Various Aspects’, in: I. Bartal (ed.), Kehal Yisrael: Jewish Self-Rule Through the Ages, III, Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 2004, pp. 43–52 [Hebrew].

80

Teller

allow them a certain degree of freedom in running Jewish society, but it was always circumscribed by the needs of the non-Jewish authorities and maintained by a good degree of fancy footwork on the part of the Jewish leadership. On the other hand, the fact that the Jewish institutions played their own roles within the systems of state administration meant that, for the most part, they enjoyed the support of the non-Jewish authorities. The communities were certainly strong enough to weather all the challenges of the eighteenth century. In fact, it is particularly noticeable that the alternative administrative structures that Jewish society developed in those years in response to these challenges did not aim to replace the communities but to strengthen them from without and within. Serious changes in the structure and functioning of the communities would only come as a result of the changing demands of the new states in which Polish–Lithuanian Jewry found themselves in the nineteenth century. Bibliographic References

Primary Sources

Akty izdavaemiye vilenskoy kommissiey dlia razbora drevnikh aktov, V–XXVIII–XXIX, Vilna: A.K. Kirkor, 1871–1902. Bałaban, Majer, ‘Die Krakauer Judengemeindeordnung von 1595 und ihre Nachträge’, Jahrbuch der Jüdisch-Literarischen Gesellschaft in Frankfurt a.M. 10 (1913) [Republished with a Polish translation in: Jakimyszyn, Anna. (ed.), Statut Krakowskiej gminy żydowskiej z roku 1595 i jego uzupełnienia, Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 2005]. Bershadskii, Sergei. (ed.), Russko-Yevreiskiy Arkhiv: Dokumenty i Materialy dlia Istorii Yevreev ve Rosii, I–III, St. Petersburg: Landau, 1882–1903. Bersohn, Mathias. (ed.), Dyplomataryusz dotyczący Żydów w dawnej Polsce, Warsaw: E. Nicz, 1910. Dubnow, Shimon. (ed.), Pinkas Hamedinah, Berlin: Ayanot, 1925. Eisenbach, Artur, ‘Do kwestii walki klasowej w społeczeństwie żydowskim w Polsce w drugiej połowie XVIII w.’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego 17–18 (1956): 129–70; ibid. 19–20 (1956): 60–113. Evron, Dov (ed.), Pinkas haksherim shel kehillat Pozna (5381–5595), Jerusalem: Mekitzei nirdamim, 1967. Goldberg, Jacob (ed.), Jewish Privileges in the Polish Commonwealth: Charters of Rights Granted to Jewish Communities in Poland–Lithuania in the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries, I–III, Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 2001.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

81

Goldberg, Jacob, and Adam Wein, ‘Der pinkas fun hevre shneider in Nasielsk’, Bleter far Geshichte 15 (1962–3): 155–99. Goldberg, Jacob, and Adam Kaźmierczyk, Sejm Czterech Ziem. Źródła, Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, 2011. Halperin, Yisrael, Pinkas Va‌ʾad Arba Aratzot, Jerusalem: Mossad Bialik, 1945. Hanover, Nathan, Abyss of Despair (trans. Abraham Mesch), New York: Bloch, 1950. Isserles, Moshe, Sheʾelot vetshuvot, (ed. Asher Siev), Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 1970. Kaźmierczyk, Adam (ed.), Żydzi Polscy, 1648–1772: Źródła, Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagielloński, 2001. Kloizner, Yisrael, Korot beit-ha‌ʾalmin hayashan baVilna, Vilna: Hakehillah Haivrit, 1935. Maimon, Solomon, Solomon Maimon: An Autobiography (trans. John Clark Murray), Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2001. Margolies, Haim Zeʾev, Sefer Dubna rabati: ʿIr Dubna ugdoleiha, Warsaw: Hatzefirah, 1910. Michałowska, Anna (ed.), Gminy żydowskie w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej: Wybór tekstów źródłowych, Warsaw: Dialog, 2003. Michałowska-Mycielska, Anna, ‘Pinkas gminy żydowskiej w Bockach’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instutytu Historycznego 190 (1999): 55–97. Michałowska-Mycielska, Anna, ‘Porządek synagodze krotoskiej dany’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instutytu Historycznego 194 (2000): 222–36. Michałowska-Mycielska, Anna (ed.), Pinkas kahału swarzędzkiego (1734–1830), Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 2005. Michałowska-Mycielska, Anna, (ed.), Sejmy i sejmiki koronne wobec Żydów: Wybór tekstów źródłowych, Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2005. Nadav, Mordechai (ed.), Pinkas Kahal Tiktin, I–II, Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1997. Sirkes, Yoel, Sheʾelot vetshuvot haba‌ʾʾh hahadashot, Korzec: Anton Krieger, 1785. Vishnitzer, Mark (trans.), The Memoirs of Ber of Bolechow (1723–1805), London: Oxford University Press, 1922. Weinryb, Bernard (ed.), Texts and Studies in the Communal History of Polish Jewry, New York: The American Academy for Jewish Research, 1950. Wettstein, Faivish, Kadmoniot Mipinkasaot yeshenim, Kraków: Yosef Fischer, 1892. Wettstein, Faivish, Dvarim atikim mipinkasei hakahal beKraka, Kraków: Yosef Fischer, 1900. Wettstein, Faivish, Mipinkasei hakahal beKraka lekorot Yisrael vehakhamav, Breslau: Schottlander, 1901.

82

Teller

Secondary Literature

Assaf, Simhah, On the History of the Rabbinate (in Ashkenaz, Poland, and Lithuania), Jerusalem: Darom, 1972 [Hebrew]. Bałaban, Majer, Żydzi lwowscy na przełomie XVI-go i XVII-go wieku, Lwów: Wawelberg, 1906. Bałaban, Majer, Die Judenstadt von Lublin, Berlin: Jüdischer Verlag, 1919. Bałaban, Majer, ‘Ze studiów nad ustrojem prawnym Żydów w Polsce. Sędzia żydowski i jego kompetencje’, in: Pamiętnik ku czci Prof. Przemysława Dąbkowskiego, Lwów: Księgarnia Gubrynowicza i Syna, 1927. Bałaban, Majer, Historia Żydów w Krakówie i na Kazimierzu, 1304–1868, I–II, Kraków: Nadzieja, 1931–36. Baron, Salo, The Jewish Community: Its History and Structure to the American Revolution, I–III, Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1942. Bartal, Israel, ‘The Pinkas of the Council of the Four Lands’, in: Antony Polonsky et al., The Jews in Old Poland, 1000–1795, London–New York: I.B. Tauris, 1993, pp. 110–118. Bartal, Israel, ‘Pre-Modern Jewish Politics: The “Councils of the Lands” in Eastern Europe’ in: idem (ed.), Zionism and the Return to History: A Reappraisal, Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 1999, pp. 186–94 [Hebrew]. Ben-Sasson, Haim Hillel, ‘Statutes for the Enforcement of Sabbath Observance in Poland and their Social and Economic Significance’, Zion 21 (1956): 199–206 [Hebrew]. Ben-Sasson, Haim Hillel, ‘The Councils of the Lands in Eastern Europe’ in: I. Bartal, I. Gutman (eds.), The Broken Chain: Polish Jewry through the Ages, vol. 1 , Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 1997: 145–60 [Hebrew]. Bloch, Philip, ‘Der Streit um den Moreh des Maimonides in der Gemeinde Posen um die Mitte des 16. Jahrh.’, Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums 47 (1903): 153–69. Cohen, Benjamin, ‘The Wojewoda as Judex Judaeorum in Old Poland’, Gal-Ed 1 (1973): 1–12 [Hebrew]. Cohen, Benjamin, ‘The Wojewoda’s Jurisdiction and the Jewish Community in the 16th–18th Centuries’, Gal-Ed 3 (1976): 9–32 [Hebrew]. Cygielman, Shmuel Artur, ‘The Arenda Business of Polish Jews and their Connection with the Development of the Council of Four Lands’, Zion 47 (1982): 112–44 [Hebrew]. Davis, Joseph, ‘The Reception of the Shulhan Arukh and the Formation of Ashkenazic Jewish Identity’, AJS Review 26 (2002): 251–276. Eisenbach, Artur, The Emancipation of the Jews in Poland, 1780–1870, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1991: 62–112. Ettinger, Shmuel, ‘The Council of the Four Lands’, in: Antony Polonsky et al. (eds.), The Jews in Old Poland, 1000–1795, London–New York: I.B. Tauris, 1993, pp. 93–109.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

83

Falniowska-Gradowska, Alicja, ‘Sędziowie żydowscy w województwie Krakówskim w XVI–XVIII wieku’, in: Feliks Kiryk, Żydzi w Małopolsce: Studia z dziejów osadnictwa i życia społecznego, Przemyśl: Południowo-Wschodni Instytut Naukowy, 1991: 37–47. Fram, Edward, Ideals Face Reality: Jewish Law and Life in Poland, 1550–1655, Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1997. Fram, Edward, ‘Sumptuary Legislation in the Jewish Community of Kraków at the Turn of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’, Gal-Ed 18 (2002): 11–23 [Hebrew]. Gąsiorowski, Stefan, Chrześcijanie i Żydzi w Żółkwi w XVII i XVIII wieku, Kraków: Polska Akademia Umiejętności, 2001. Gąsiorowski, Stefan, Karaimi w Koronie i na Litwie w XV–XVIII wieku, Kraków-Budapest: Austeria, 2008. Goldberg, Jacob, ‘Jewish Retail Trade in the Polish Commonwealth in the Eighteenth Century: Regulations of Stall-keepers in Zasław and Brody and the Question of Polish–Hebrew Sources Relating to the History of Jewish Trade and Society’, in: Ezra Mendelsohn, Chone Shmeruk (eds.), Studies on Polish Jewry: Paul Glikson Memorial Volume, Jerusalem: The Hebrew University, 1987, pp. 11–64 [Hebrew]. Goldberg, Jacob, ‘Gminy żydowskie (kahały) w systemie władztwa dominalnego w szlacheckiej Rzeczypospolitej’, in: Marian Drozdowski (ed.), Między historią a teorią: refleksyje nad problematyką dziejów i wiedzy historycznej, Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1988: 152–71. Goldberg, Jacob, ‘The Jewish Sejm: Its Origins and Functions’, in: Antony Polonsky et al. (eds.), The Jews in Old Poland, 1000–1795, London-New York: I.B. Tauris, 1993, pp. 147–65. Goldberg, Jacob, Jewish Society in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 1999 [Hebrew]. Goldberg, Jacob, ‘The Role of the Jewish Community in the Socio-Political Structure of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth’, Polin 22 (2010): 142–55. Grodziski, Stanisław, ‘The Kraków “Voivode’s” Jurisdiction over the Jews’ in: Antony Polonsky et al. (eds.), The Jews in Old Poland, 1000–1795, London–New York: I.B. Tauris, 1993, pp. 147–65. Guesnet, François, ‘Agreements between Neighbours: The “Ugody” as a Source on Jewish–Christian Relations in Early Modern Poland’, Jewish History 24 (2010): 257–70. Halperin, Israel, Jews and Judaism in Eastern Europe, Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1969 [Hebrew]. Heyde, Jürgen, ‘Jüdische Eliten in Polen zu Beginn der Frühen Neuzeit’, Aschkenas 13 (2003): 117–65. Heyde, Jürgen, ‘Ewolucja zwierzchności królewskiej nad ludnością żydowską w XVI wieku’, in: Marcin Wodziński, Anna Michałowska-Mycielska (eds.), Małżeństwo z

84

Teller

rozsądku: Żydzi w społeczeństwie dawnej Rzeczypospolitej, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2007, pp. 35–48. Horn, Maurycy, ‘Jewish Jurisdiction’s Dependence on Royal Power in Poland and Lithuania up to 1548’, Acta Poloniae Historica 76 (1997): 6–17. Horn, Maurycy, Żydowskie bractwa rzemieślnicze na ziemiach polskich, litewskich, białoruskich i ukraińskich, Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 1998. Hundert, Gershon, ‘Jews, Money, and Society in the Seventeenth Century Polish– Lithuanian Commonwealth’, Jewish Social Studies 43 (1981): 25–34. Hundert, Gershon, ‘On the Jewish Community in Poland during the Seventeenth Century: Some Comparative Perspectives’, Revue des Études Juives 142 (1983), 349–72. Hundert, Gershon, ‘Discipline and Deference in Early Modern Poland–Lithuania’, in Ronald Aigen, Gershon Hundert (eds.), Community and the Individual Jew: Essays in Honour of Lavy M. Becker, Philadelphia: Reconstructionist Rabbinical College Press, 1986, pp. 148–55. Hundert, Gershon, The Jews in a Polish Private Town: The Case of Opatów in the Eighteenth Century, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992. Hundert, Gershon, ‘The Community in Poland in the 18th Century: Various Aspects’, in: Israel Bartal (ed.), Kehal Yisrael: Jewish Self-Rule Through the Ages, III, Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 2004, pp. 43–52 [Hebrew]. Hundert, Gershon, Jews in Poland–Lithuania in the Eighteenth Century: The Genealogy of Modernity, Berkeley–Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2004. Kaczor, Jacek, ‘Kahal ostrowski w XVII–XVIII wieku’ in: Waldemar Kowalski, Jadwiga Muszyńska (eds.), Żydzi wśród Chrześcijan w dobie szlacheckiej Rzeczypospolitej, Kielce: Kieleckie Towarzystwo Naukowe, 1996, pp. 63–68. Kalik, Judith, ‘Patterns of Contact between the Catholic Church and the Jews in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth: The Jewish Debts’, Scripta Hierosolomitana 38 (1998), 102–22. Kalik, Judith, ‘Deconstructing Communities: The Administrative Structure of the Rural Jewish Population in the Polish Crown Lands in the Eighteenth Century’, Gal-Ed 21 (2007): 53–76. Kalik, Judith, Scepter of Judah: The Jewish Autonomy in the Eighteenth-Century Crown Poland, Leiden: Brill 2009. Katz, Jacob, Tradition and Crisis: Jewish Society at the End of the Middle Ages (trans. Bernard Cooperman), New York: New York University Press, 1993. Kaźmierczyk, Adam, Żydzi w dobrach prywatnych w świetle sądowniczej i administracyjnej praktyki dóbr magnackich w wiekach XVI–XVIII, Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagielloński, 2002. Kloizner, Yisrael, The History of the Jewish Community in Vilna, Vilna: Hakehillah Hayehudit, 1935 [Hebrew].

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

85

Kramerówna, Perła, ‘Żydowskie cechy rzemieślnicze w dawnej Polsce’, Miesięcznik Żydowski 2 (1932): 259–98. Kremer, Moshe, ‘Jewish Artisans and Guilds in Old Poland’, Zion 2 (1937): 295–325 [Hebrew]. Krochmal, Jacek, Krzyż i menora: Żydzi i Chrześcianie w Przemyślu w latach 1559–1772, Przemyśl: Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Przjaciół Nauk, 1996. Leszczyński, Anatol, Sejm Żydów Korony, 1623–1764, Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 1994. Lewin, Isaac, Klątwa żydowska na Litwie w XVIII i XVIII wieku, Lwów: Nakładem Redakcji Ministerstwa Wyznań Religijnych, 1931. Lewin, Isaac, The Jewish Community in Poland: Historical Essays, New York: Philosophical Library, 1985. Mahler, Raphael, ‘A budzhet fun Va‌ʾad Arba Aratsot in 18-tn yorhundert’, YIVO Bleter 15 (1940): 63–86. Mahler, Raphael, A History of the Jews in Poland, Merhavia: Hakibutz Haartzi Hashomer Hatzair, 1946 [Hebrew]. Michałowska, Anna, Między demokracją a oligarchią.Władze gmin żydowskich w Poznaniu i Swarzędzu (od polowy XVII do końca XVIII wieku), Warsaw: Dialog, 2000. Michałowska, Anna [= Anna Michałowska-Mycielska], The Jewish Community: Authority and Social Control in Poznań and Swarzedz, 1650–1793, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2008]. Michałowska, Anna, ‘Charity and the Charity Society (“Khevra Kadisha”) in the Jewish Community of Swarzędz in the Eighteenth Century’, Acta Poloniae Historica 87 (2003): 77–88. Michałowska, Anna, ‘Relacje między gminą żydowską a jednostką w miastach Rzeczypospolitej w XVI–XVIII wieku’, Kwartalnik Historii Żydów 207 (2003): 373–80. Michałowska, Anna, ‘Institutions of Jewish Self-Government in Greater Poland (Wielkopolska) in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’, Kwartalnik Historii Żydów 217 (2006): 598–606. Michałowska, Anna, ‘Władza dominialna a konflikt w gminie: Wybory władz gminnych w Słucku, 1709–1711’, in: Marcin Wodziński, Anna Michałowska-Mycielska (eds.), Małżeństwo z rozsądku: Żydzi w społeczeństwie dawnej Rzeczypospolitej, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2007, pp. 59–72. Morell, Samuel, ‘The Constitutional Limits of Communal Government in Rabbinic Law’, Jewish Social Studies 33 (1971), pp. 87–119. Morgensztern, Janina, ‘Zadłużenie gmin żydowskich w Ordynacji Zamojskiej w II połowie XVII w.’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego 1/73 (1970): 47–65. Nadav, Mordechai, The Jews of Pinsk, 1506 to 1880, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2008.

86

Teller

Pazdro, Zbigniew, Organizacja i praktyka żydowskich sądow podwojewodzińskich w okresie 1740–1772 r. na podstawie lwowskich materyałów archiwalnych, Lwów: Nakład Funduszu Konkursowego, 1903. Petersen, Heidemarie, Judengemeinde und Stadtgemeinde in Polen: Lemberg, 1356–1581, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2003. Reiner, Elhanan, ‘Changes in the Polish and German Yeshivot in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries: The Polemic over Pilpul’, in: Israel Bartal et al. (eds.), According to the Polish and German Custom: A Festschrift for Chone Shmeruk, Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 1993, pp. 9–80 [Hebrew]. Reiner, Elhanan, ‘Money, Social Status, and Torah Study: The Kloiz in Eastern European Jewish Society in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’, Zion 58 (1993): 287– 328 [Hebrew]. Reiner, Elhanan, ‘The Rise of an Urban Community: Some Insights on the Transition from the Medieval Ashkenazi to the Sixteenth Century Jewish Community in Poland’, Kwartalnik Historii Żydów 207 (2003): 363–72. Ringelblum, Emanuel, Żydzi w powstaniu kościuszkowskiem, Warsaw: Księgarnia Popularna, 1938. Rosman, Moshe, The Lords’ Jews: Magnate–Jewish Relations in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth During the 18th Century, Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1990. Rosman, Moshe, ‘The Indebtedness of the Lublin Kahal in the 18th Century’, Scripta Hierosolomitana 38 (1998), pp. 166–83. Rosman, Moshe, ‘The Role of Non-Jewish Authorities in Resolving Conflicts within Jewish Communities in the Early Modern Period’, Jewish Political Studies Review 12 (2000): 53–65. Rosman, Moshe, ‘The Nature of Polish Jewry’s Autonomy’, in: I. Bartal (ed.), Kehal Yisrael: Jewish Self-Rule Through the Ages, III, Jerusalem 2004, pp. 27–42 [Hebrew]. Rosman, Moshe, ‘The Authority of the Council of Four Lands outside Poland– Lithuania’, Polin 22 (2010): 83–108. Schiper, Isaac, ‘Finantsieler khurbn fun tsentraler un prowintsieler oitonomie fun Yidn in altn Poiln’, Ekonomishe shriftn fun YIVO 2 (1932): 1–19. Schorr, Mojżesz, Organizacja Żydów w dawnej Polsce od najdawniejszych czasów aż do r. 1772, Lwów: n.p. 1899. Schorr, Mojżesz, Żydzi w Przemyślu do końca XVIII wieku, Lwów: Wawelberg, 1903. Schwarzfuchs, Shimon, A Concise History of the Rabbinate, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993. Shilo, Shmuel, ‘The Individual versus the Community in Jewish Law in Pre-Eighteenth Century Poland’, in: Antony Polonsky et al. (eds.), The Jews in Old Poland, 1000–1795, London-New York: I.B. Tauris, 1993, pp. 219–34.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

87

Shulman, Nisson, Authority and Community: Polish Jewry in the Sixteenth Century, New York: Ktav, 1986. Shulvass, Moses, Jewish Culture in Eastern Europe: The Classical Period, New York: Ktav, 1975. Siemiaticki, Mordechai, ‘Hezkat hayishuv in Poland’, Jewish Law Annual 5 (1936–1937): 45–92 [Hebrew]. Stone, Daniel, ‘Jews and the Urban Question in Late Eighteenth Century Poland’, Slavic Review 50 (1991): 531–41. Teller, Adam, ‘The Legal Status of the Jews on the Magnate Estates of Poland–Lithuania in the 18th Century’, Gal-Ed 15–16 (1997): 41–63. Teller, Adam, ‘Radziwill, Rabinowicz, and the Rabbi of Swierz: The Magnates’ Attitude towards Jewish Regional Autonomy in 18th Century Poland–Lithuania’, Scripta Hierosolomitana 38 (1998): 248–78. Teller, Adam, Living Together: The Jews in Poznań in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century, Jerusalem 2003 [Hebrew]. Teller, Adam, ‘Rabbis Without a Function? The Polish Rabbinate and the Council of Four Lands in the 16th–18th Centuries’, in: Jack Wertheimer (ed.), Jewish Religious Leadership: Image and Reality, New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 2004, pp. 371–400. Teller, Adam, Money, Power and Influence in Eighteenth Century Lithuania: The Jews on the Radziwiłł Estates, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press 2016. Teller, Adam, ‘Telling the Difference: Some Comparative Perspectives on the Jews’ Legal Status in Poland and in the Holy Roman Empire’, Polin 22 (2010), pp. 109–41. Teter, Magda, ‘ “There Should Be No Love Between Us and Them”: Social Life and the Bounds of Jewish and Canon Law in Early Modern Poland’, Polin 22 (2010): 249–70. Tollet, Daniel, ‘Ludzie u władzy w miastach królewskich w Polsce za Wazów, 1588–1668: Szkic o gminach żydowskich w Krakówie i Poznaniu’, Społeczeństwo Staropolskie 4 (1986): 179–194. Ury, Scott, ‘The “Shtadlan” of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth: Noble Advocate or Unbridled Opportunist’, Polin 15 (2002): 267–99. Weinryb, Bernard, ‘Beiträge zur Finanzgeschichte der jüdischen Gemeinden in Polen’, I, Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums 82 (1938): 248–63; II, Hebrew Union College Annual 16 (1941): 187–214. Weinryb, Bernard, ‘Outlines of the Economic and Financial History of the Jews in Polish–Lithuanian Cities in the 17th and 18th Centuries’, in: idem, Studies and Documents in Modern Jewish History, Jerusalem: Reuven Mass, 1975, pp. 68–119 [Hebrew]. Wijaczka, Jacek, ‘Ustawa dla kahału ostrowskiego z 1783 roku’ in: Waldemar Kowalski, Jadwiga Muszyńska (eds.), Żydzi wśród Chrześcian w dobie szlacheckiej Rzeczypospolitej, Kielce: Kieleckie Towarzystwo Naukowe, 1996, pp. 77–80.

88

Teller



Sources



No. 1 The King Grants the Jews of Wielkopolska the Right to Collect Their Own Taxes, 24 January 1519

Published in: S. Bershadskii (ed.), Russo-Yevreiskiy Arkhiv: Dokumenty i Materialy dlia Istorii Yevreev ve Rosii, III, St. Petersburg 1903, no. 113, pp. 139–141. Sigismund,18 by the grace of God, etc. Since, when our Jews of Greater Poland (who do not include the Jews of Poznań) had complained that they were often aggrieved at more having been squeezed out of them by our tax inspectors in our regular, annual assessment than was fair and just, and had asked that we should look after their interests in a helpful way in this matter, we, acceding to their requests and at the same time bearing in mind our costs, which we have already incurred on a sizable scale to pay for our tax collectors for this assessment, and wishing to reduce them in the future and also to leave the Jews themselves free and safe from burdens of this kind, have considered and decided that an agreement should be made with them that eleven Jews, as listed: Isaac of Międzyrzecz, Samson of Zgierz [?], Mendel of Gniezno, Byenyasch of Oborniki, Moyses of Włocławek, Calmon of Pakość, David of Brześć Kujawski, Slome of Łęcyzca, Abraam of Płock (who previously lived in Sochaczew), Usiel of Kalisz, and Salomon of Płońsk, must meet together during the current year in the city of Warsaw, on the Sabbath before the feast of St. Peter’s Chair [celebrated on 19 February in 1519]; and there they must calculate, appraise, and determine how much each Jew of Greater Poland, not including the Jews of Poznań, must pay and contribute, in the current year and in the next two following years, in line with his own means or his sound loans, to satisfy our aforesaid regular, annual assessment, retaining the flexibility and moderation needed to make sure that richer Jews make a larger contribution than poorer Jews in the assessment. In addition to the calculations of the eleven Jews already named, another five Jews, as listed: Samuel and Byenyasz of Poznań, the toll collectors Mossel of Inowłódz and Moyses of Breść, and a doctor, Iacob of Sochaczew, will carefully and loyally collect over the aforesaid three year period, through which this present appointment must uniquely apply, our annual tax of two hundred florins from every individual Jew in the lands of Greater Poland wherever it can be found, with the exception, already noted, of the Jews of Poznań; and they will send and deliver them to the treasury of our kingdom. We appoint these five Jews aforesaid, together and individually, as collectors of our assessment, and the other eleven Jews named above as assessors and inspectors of the Jews of the whole of Greater Poland, to conduct together this our tax assessment. 18

Zygmunt I Stary (ruled 1506–1548).

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

89

Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 2 The King Settles the Dispute between the Polish and the Bohemian Jews in Kraków, 1519

Published in: M. Bersohn (ed.), Dyplomataryusz dotyczący Żydów w dawnej Polsce, Warsawa 1910, no. 21a, pp. 31–32. On behalf of the synagogue of the Jews of Kraków…, because, while disputes have arisen amongst the Jews about access to their synagogue, in that the Bohemian group of the rabbi Peretz wanted to remove the old community from this synagogue, which is the group following the rabbi Ossar, whilst this old community of Jews claimed and insisted that it built and maintained this synagogue with its own buildings, and was maintaining it until the arrival of the Bohemians. That is why we, wanting to put an end to their disputes on this issue, have decided and are recording our decision through this document, that the group who form the old community, [that is those] who follow the rabbi Ossar, must stay on around the old synagogue together with their successors forever; we are taking careful restraining action, to the effect that no Jew from rabbi Peretz’s group or his successors should dare to enter this synagogue any more in the future without the personal agreement and goodwill of rabbi Ossar and his successors, that is of the old community, without paying an irredeemable fine of one hundred marks to us. Rabbi Ossar and his successors, that is to say the old community, will have the authority and full discretion to accept and to admit anyone they wish to the synagogue, as may seem pleasurable and harmonious. And none of the Bohemians from rabbi Peretz’s element shall dare by any bribe, persuasion, promise, or gift or any other means to summon or invite to themselves and their own synagogue anyone from rabbi Ossar’s group and the old community, subject to the fine already mentioned and confirmed from the time when they left the old synagogue … subject, however, to this condition, that from the moment the Jews split amongst themselves by having two synagogues, the only Jew with responsibility for giving instructions and guidance to the Jews in his synagogue will be the rabbi Ossar, and no-one but him. The old community of the Jewish rabbi Ossar must have two elders and its own teacher, or szkolnika. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall

90

Teller

No. 3 The Sejm Changes Its Policy on Jurisdiction over the Jews of Poland, 28 February 1538–20 February 1539

Published in: A. Michałowska-Mycielska (ed.), Sejmy i sejmiki koronne wobec Żydów: Wybór tekstów źródłowych, Warsaw 2005, nos. XII–XIII, pp. 32–33. Regarding the Jews: We give our consent that those noblemen who have Jews in their towns and villages may be the sole recipients of all taxes and tolls from them and may impose the law upon them by their own decision. But we do not allow those Jews from whom no revenue comes to us to make use of the law of the Jews, which was handed to them by us and by our predecessors, nor do we desire issues relating to injustices done to them to be referred to us. This means that those from whom we receive no benefit have no source of protection in us. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 4 A Royal Order Concerning Rabbi Shachna of Lublin, 23 April 1540

Published in: I. Lewin, Klątwa żydowska na Litwie w XVIII i XVIII wieku, Lwów 1931, p. 62. It has been brought to our notice by way of complaint, in the name of and on behalf of the community of our subject Jews, more particularly from Kraków, Poznań, and Lwów, how a certain Jewish rabbi, Shachna,19 who lives in the city of Lublin under the jurisdiction of Your Serenity, has been wont from time to time, especially on market days, in Lublin to stir up frequent riots and disturbances, through which he usually damages the conditions for the life and business of our other Jewish subjects, and has been in the habit of annoying them with religious exclusions and rituals contrary to their law, to their considerable shame and disbenefit. And so we instruct Your Sincerity, in our complete desire that it should happen, to forbid this rabbi Shachna in our name, from stirring up riots of this kind, about which the other Jews are complaining against him, or from annoying the Jews, as he has become accustomed to do, on the pain of a fine of a thousand marks, to be paid irredeemably to our royal treasury. Nor, subject to the same fine, may he dare again to assail any of my subject Jews either publicly or in secret, with exclusions of that kind, unless it be someone whose excommunication has 19

Shalom Shachna (c. 1495–1558). Born into wealthy family of tax-collectors, he was the student of Rabbi Jacob Pollack of Kraków. Among his students were Rabbi Moshe Isserles and Rabbi Shalom Luria.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

91

been decreed by the agreement and decision of two elders of Kraków, of Poznań, and of Lwów. We wish it to be understood and acted upon not only in the city of Lublin, but everywhere in our Kingdom, that if in the future without our knowledge this Jew Shachna obtains any documents opposing this decree, or wants to use documents he obtained previously, we rule that they will be an empty mockery, and of no import. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 5 The King Grants the Jews of Poznań the Right to Appoint Their Own Rabbi, 13 August 1551

Published in: M. Bersohn (ed.). Dyplomataryusz dotyczący Żydów w dawnej Polsce, Warszawa 1910, no. 57, pp. 50–52. The right has been granted to the Jews of Greater Poland to elect their senior rabbi to be their judge following their laws and to permit that judge to try these Jews in accordance with their tradition…. … [Since] after the death of the rabbi, it transpires that either the senior appointment or the judge’s function remains unoccupied, and many actions fail to be carried out before a successor to the office of the deceased is selected by us, it had been sought from us in their name that when a vacancy of this kind arises, these Jews from the lands of Greater Poland, of like mind in their desire and common feeling, should have the right to elect as their rabbi or judge the person who seemed most suitable to them. We have decided, in graciously agreeing with the requests of our councillors in support of what the Jews have said to us, that this right should be granted to the Jews by virtue of this our privilege. We grant through those who are present that when there is a vacancy of this kind for a rabbi or judge, there should be the full right to the Jews themselves legally to designate and appoint a senior rabbi and a judge whenever this requirement exists, and we shall give and grant him power, full and comprehensive, to try, charge, limit, and conclude legal cases in those matters which are their laws, for all the Jews who live in the lands of Greater Poland and the dukedom of Mazowsze. They shall bind them through sentences of censure and excommunication in accordance with the customary rites of their Mosaic law, and govern all other matters in the religious area; all subject to one specific proviso, that these Jews declare to us that they are fully obedient to this regime, and that if any of the Jews dares to treat with contempt any banishments or sentences of excommunication imposed upon them by the rabbi or judge, or by other Jewish elders, and has not successfully extricated himself from these within the space of one month, such a person must be handed over to us to be punished with the death penalty, and all his goods will have to be paid into our treasury. And so that this rabbi, in the circumstances of his office, can better and more

92

Teller

efficiently handle and deliver the influence and status which accompany his office, we intend by this our current letter that, through the power of every single one of our representatives, senior officials, staff, and judges and lords of our kingdom, he will be exempted from appearing and responding to every obstacle in any courts operating in their name, or in our own courts. Translated from Latin by Martin Allan Hall



No. 6 Regulations of the Lithuanian Jewish Council from before the Union of Lublin, 1569

Published in: I. Halperin, Jews and Judaism in Eastern Europe, Jerusalem, 1969 [Hebrew], pp. 49–51. Having been chosen from all the lands of Lithuania, the inhabitants of the land20— to stand in the breach, with God’s help, to aid and save from extermination and condemnation,21 to repair and restore all our cracks, and to remove obstacles from the path of our people; and behold, those who walk in darkness upon them a great light will shine22—and seeing the needs of the present hour in a time of distress, from it we will be saved,23 we accepted upon ourselves and those who join us, all the communities of the lands of Lithuania that are subject to our authority,24 and we declared by the decree of the watchers and the word of the holy ones,25 with the ban (ḥerem) of the high and low courts regarding excommunication (nidui) and ostracism (shamta), that we will carry out every resolution that shall be passed. Should there rise up a man of contention26 and malice who will not heed our regulations, all these curses shall fall upon his head and he will be a curse in the midst of the land until he repent from his evil and his sin and repair his distortion according to the heads of the land and its sages. First regulation. We have chosen nine roshim (heads) of the land and three rabbis. Three roshim, and with them one rabbi, will sit at each and every fair in Lublin to ensure the good of the people, that there should not, God forbid, be any breach and outcry27 in our streets, either from our side or, God forbid, from the side of the 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Reference is to Numbers 33:55. Piyut for Yom Kippur. Isaiah 9:1. Jeremiah 30:9. Literally: ‘that their force is bound up with us’. Draws on BT Baba Kamma 6a. Daniel 4:14. Jeremiah 15:10. Psalm 144:14.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

93

government: they will stand on guard to seek and examine the good of the people and to chastise criminals and rebellious ones, and those who steal and lie to Jews and gentiles, so that there will be no desecration of the name of heaven, God forbid. And these are the names of the people that will keep vigil. At the coming fair, which is called in their language Szymon i Juda,28 the venerable rabbi, his honour our teacher, the rabbi R. Noach Bar Pesach of Pinsk will sit in Lublin. Should he not be able to come, he will send his son-in-law, our teacher, the rabbi R. Zalman Halevi, and the three leaders, they are the teacher, our rabbi R. Eliyahu, son of Menachem of Brisk,29 and his honour our teacher, the rabbi R. Shlomo, son of the saint Rabbi Moshe of Ludmir,30 [and his honour our teacher, the rabbi] David, son of [Rabbi] Menachem of Ostróg….31 Thus it is signed and sealed. If, God forbid, a false accusation should be brought against some householder or one of his servants regarding an individual or a group, one of the three renowned false accusations—they are the blood libel, accusation of the desecration of the Host, and the accusation of missionizing—then the individual or group will have to pay a quarter of the expenses that are made on this accusation. And if a quarter of the possessions of the same individual or group is less than onequarter of the cost of the false accusation, then he will not give more than one quarter of his property […] In addition, we established that at each and every fair in Lublin these abovementioned roshim (heads) will select three rabbinical judges who will be ready to sit in judgement at hearings between their brothers, large and small; they will rule and everything will be according to their decree. They will have the power to mete out judgement to everyone who falls under their jurisdiction, regarding both large and small sums, and to force the litigants to remain in Lublin during the period of the court case. And whoever acts with evil intention, not heeding them, will be banned and excommunicated and subject to all these punishments. And the judges will have the power to announce his name in the synagogue and to punish him as they see fit and to hand him over to the gentiles. As is right in their eyes, so it will be done. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

28 29 30 31

The Saints’ Day of Simon and Judah falls on 28th October. Brześć Litewski. Włodzimierz. Since both Włodzimierz and Ostróg were annexed to the Polish Crown in the Union of Lublin in 1569, this document must predate the Union.

94

Teller

No. 7 Privilege for the Łuck Rabbanite and Karaite Communities, 1 December 1576

Published in: M. Bersohn (ed.), Dyplomataryusz dotyczący Żydów w dawnej Polsce, Warszawa 1910, no. 152, pp. 100–102. Privilege for the Jews of Łuck. Stefan,32 by the Grace of God King of Poland, etc. Some of our advisers have told us that the Jews from the Rabbinate and the Karaite33 communities of Łuck, our town, have been suffering great injustices and wrongs by various officials who have been judging [prosecuting] them despite their old privileges and customs causing the aforementioned Jews all kinds of injustices and sufferings. Therefore, by our royal grace and authority  … we command each official and dignitary that has power and authority over them [the Jews] that they judge the aforementioned Jews according to none other than the Polish laws and statutes  … first, podwojewodzi must not judge them in any other way or in any other place but with two Jewish elders [present] and in their synagogue…. And when there is a dispute between a Jew and a Christian before a village head or mayor concerning mortal or other injuries or violence, then justice must be done unto them according to Polish law…. When the Jew is to take an oath for a large sum [of money]—fifty grzywien of solid silver—he must do so in [their] synagogue and must take an oath on the Ten Commandments that were given to Moses, and when it is less than fifty grzywien, he must take an oath in front of the synagogue as is their Jewish custom. Also, as long as they pay the ordinary toll in our town, the [Łuck] Jews are allowed to trade in our entire Kingdom. They can sell [retail, by measure of] length and weight just like other Jews who live in Poland. And if, God forbid, they be met with brutality and violence on the streets, the burghers should be kind and forgiving towards them and they [the Jews] towards the burghers. Also, they must not be prosecuted on their [Jewish] festivals and Shabbat. Also, the Jews are allowed to take care of their work and trade on any day except Sundays, Easter, Christmas, the Assumption of Mary and festivals of the apostles. On the aforementioned holy days they shall follow Christian customs with regards to [the matters of] work and trade. And if any of the Jews [be guilty of any] wrongdoing by not following [the Jewish] law, they should banish them from their community with the help of our office, except 32 33

Stefan Batory (ruled,1576–1586). Karaites: a Jewish sect which rejected the rabbinic writings of the Mishnah and the Talmud and lived according to biblical precepts alone. In this text, rabbanites refers to the Jewish majority.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

95

for any Jew who wishes to join the Christian faith. Such a Jew shall not be oppressed in any way and he shall be free from everything in their Jewish community. Translated from Polish by Elżbieta Szubarczyk



No. 8 The Council of Four Lands Rules on Jewish Economic Competition with the Szlachta, 15 Kislev 5341 (22 November 1580)

Published in: Y. Halperin, Pinkas Va‌ʾad Arba Aratzot, Jerusalem 1945, p. 1.

Let it be known to all the people of the land, holy people and sons of the covenant, that the alufim and manhigim of the Four Lands, may God protect them, have agreed [upon the following]. After considering the current situation in the Lands, which needs strengthening, and being especially concerned about those who covet illegal gain and profit and desire to enrich themselves by leasing the largest and most extensive arendas, [the notables and leaders] are very concerned that this might pose a great and mighty threat to the [Jewish] public, Heaven forfend. Therefore [we have] all agreed unanimously that no Jew shall make any deal to lease the czopowe34 in Wielkopolska, Małopolska, and Mazowsze, whether [directly] from His Majesty the King, with the help of his [high] officials, or by any conceivable subterfuge. In addition, they may not lease the mint or the salt-mines in those regions and not the border customs—that is the customs of Kraków or Poznań or anything connected with them. No Jew shall lease any of the above under any circumstances, nor engage in any transaction relating to them. And whosoever determines to lease or engage in any of the above matters— his fate is decided: he shall be excommunicated and banned from both worlds;35 he shall be separated and excluded from everything the Jews hold holy; his bread shall be considered as if baked by a non-Jew; his wine as non-Jewish libation wine; any meat he may slaughter shall be considered as if slaughtered by a gentile; his intimate relations36 shall be considered illicit; he shall be denied Jewish burial; no rabbi or religious official shall perform a marriage for him, whether for his sons or his daughters, and no person shall contract to marry into his family. He will be cursed with all the curses written in the Torah and with all the curses with which Elisha cursed his servant Gehazi—may they all fall upon his head, until he abandon his evil ways and obey the words of our teachers. Translated from Hebrew by Adam Teller 34 35 36

Sales tax on alcoholic beverages. This world and the next. Sexual intercourse.

96

Teller

No. 9 How the Kraków Community Ran Its Elections, 17 Av 5355 (23 July 1595)

Published in: A. Jakimyszyn (ed.), Statut Krakowskiej gminy żydowskiej z roku 1595 i jego uzupełnienia, Kraków 2005, no. 11, pp. VII–XI. No rabbi, roshim (heads or seniors), tovim (good men), or kahal, or any other official whatsoever may be chosen anywhere except in the Jewish street. These officials shall be appointed with the agreement of the [present] roshim, tovim, and kahal, and according to the law of our Torah, [and] also the charters we have received from kings and from all ministers and governors, and also according to the oath that we swore at Mount Sinai, and that same oath we have now renewed once again. Should an individual or group, God forbid, inform and bring false accusations to his Royal Highness the King that this [election was carried out] against the law of our religion and our oaths and charters, either themselves or through representatives, whether Jewish or non-Jewish, this same sinner or sinners shall be punished with all the punishments and bans and strictures as set down in the regulations of the Five Lands.37 … Each and every year, the elections of four roshim, five tovim, the fourteen elected officials called the kruyei ʾeda, and three judicial benches … and three supervisors of the accounts [to work] with the tovim, shall take place at ḥol ha-moʿed Pesach.38 … And immediately on the first day of ḥol ha-moʿed Pesach, no one shall act as heads and leaders until they are once again elected [to these positions] by the electors according to the order of the community, as is described below. However, the old council may allow the previous roshim and tovim to act as heads for up to a further fourteen days, until such time as approval is received from his Royal Highness the King. And if they are unable, God forbid, to receive such approval within fourteen days, then the newly chosen leaders … will act as leaders in the street of the Jews, and without them no man may take any action.39 However, the previous leaders will appear before the authorities as though they are the leaders. Nonetheless, they will not take any action unless it accords with the will of the new heads and appointees and has their agreement. [To receive] the approval of the new leadership slate from his Royal Highness the King, the five electors will choose three men to act as shtadlanim [intercessors], as is good in their eyes. 37 38 39

I.e. the Council of Four Lands in session with the Lithuanian Jewish Council. I.e. the middle four days of the eight-day Passover holiday, held in the spring. On these days, many of the holiday restrictions are loosened. Literally: “raise his hand or his foot.” Genesis 41:44.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

97

The order of electing the roshim, tovim, and kahal and dayanim [judges] and overseers of the accounts on the first day of ḥol ha-moʿed Pesach shall be as follows: [the serving] roshim and tovim and kahal, shall sit and shall accept upon themselves with the faithfulness of the heavens, according to the understanding of the Omnipresent and the understanding of the people, without fraud and without cheating, that none of them has made or shall make any secret pact with anyone from the community, either individuals or groups, concerning this election. Rather, each one shall make his choice in the name of heaven and for the good of the entire community, as he has been commanded from heaven, and not for himself or out of love for another and not to cause offense, and they will choose such people who appear to them worthy and fair for the good of the community, and all this for the sake of heaven. And the new community will be elected in this way: each of the serving roshim, tovim, and kahal may nominate one person as an elector, provided he has no relation to the person who nominated him…. They may nominate a person from those currently serving on the kahal or from those outside the kahal. [The names of] the roshim shall not be placed in any urn. And the names of those who have been nominated shall be placed in an urn and the shamashim [beadles] shall draw nine names from the urn. These nine people shall be unrelated one to another according to the laws of the Torah. And immediately after the nine [names of the] men are drawn from the urn, they shall swear an oath at the opening of the holy ark before the shamashim that they will choose five people who are men of wisdom and knowledge [to be the electors]. And they [the five electors] shall choose four roshim, five tovim, fourteen kahal, three rabbinical judges for the lowest bench, three judges for the second bench, and three judges for the third bench, as well as three overseers of the accounts, for the good of the kahal, according to their will. They shall also appoint five gabbaim [treasurers] and superintendents, that is senior people, and they will also appoint those in charge of the orphans’ fund and also those responsible for the sales tax on alcoholic beverages.40 [The new officials can be chosen] both from the old kahal, and from the nine people and from outside the kahal, and from amongst themselves [i.e. the electors], as they have been commanded from heaven. However, when one of them, or someone related to them, is being discussed [as a possible appointee], they should be told to leave [the room]. Translated from Yiddish by Rebecca Wolpe

40

Czopowe.

98

Teller

No. 10 The Włodzimierz Community’s Rules on Keeping the Sabbath, 5362 (1602)

Published in: H.H. Ben-Sasson, ‘Statutes for the Enforcement of Sabbath Observance in Poland and their Social and Economic Significance’, Zion 21 (1956): 199–206 [Hebrew]. 1.

2.

3.

4.

A meeting was held of the leaders, [that is] roshim umanhigim of the Włodzimierz community, may God protect them, with those elected from all of the sub-communities in the jurisdiction of Włodzimierz to consult with our rabbi and regulate the issue of transgressions of Sabbaths and holidays. We can see an enormous breach which has brought terrible shame on the Jewish people: they have stumbled in failing to observe the Sabbath and holidays, and they have entrapped themselves in their business practices. They have allowed non-Jews to do work [for them] on the Sabbath—this is very widespread and its effects can be felt across the country. This is particularly true of those who hold arendas, wine and mead sellers, and brewers. So, we have issued enduring regulations to establish the boundaries [of Sabbath observance] and to punish with the ban or fines those who transgress these orders. [Those assembled] decided to appoint memunim [inspectors] in each community and district to ensure that [the regulations] are kept. These permanent officials will supervise these matters and warn the Jews not to transgress under threat of punishment and fines. Thus will the problem be resolved. First of all, anyone who has a brewery in which he sometimes brews beer for himself, and sometimes leases it out to other people, who brew for themselves, each one on his own day, is forbidden to lease it out to non-Jews to brew on the Sabbath and Holidays, because he would be taking a fee for working on the Sabbath…. [There are] places where there is no privately-owned brewery, but one owned by the governor [or owner of the town] which is leased by a Jew on an arenda, on condition that he allow all the townspeople to brew there one after another. [In that case] the only income that the Jewish leaseholder has is from those who do the brewing. This is considered to be like the leases on customs, in which the leaseholder leases all the Sabbaths together [as part of the overall lease]…. Those who run malting houses, where the work is done by non-Jews, it [i.e. the work] is considered as a task being done for the Jew and so he must take care not to allow the non-Jew to work on the Sabbath. Only those processes which continue automatically, such as the soaking of the grain which begins before the Sabbath [are permitted]. However, turning the grain, pouring it into the water, or drying it over a fire … are forbidden. For this reason, the Jewish leaseholder must take the key from the non-Jewish malter to prevent him from working on

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

5.

6.

7.

9.

13.

41 42

99

the Sabbath. The inspectors are to take great care to check whether the non-Jew holds the key [to the malting house] or works there for the Jewish leaseholder on the Sabbath…. Vodka distillers must take care to complete their work in good time, so that it will not continue on into the Sabbath. They must take care to stop up the mouths of the still and the kettle with clay before the beadle announces that it is time to start cooking the [Sabbath] fish.41 It should all be sealed with clay so that, apart from the vodka dripping from the still, the non-Jewish worker can do no work after the Sabbath has begun and it only remains for him to take the vessel into which the vodka has dripped. We have ruled on the question of the taverns, where on weekdays beer, mead, and vodka are sold by quantity, amount, and unit price and the money is taken from the non-Jewish [customers]. [Very often, the Jew who runs the taverns] only knows that it is forbidden to touch the money [on the Sabbath]. In those places, the Jew may not sell beer, mead, or vodka at all, particularly to non-Jews who do not know about the Sabbath, because he will inevitably sin in collecting the money, and counting it, or measuring out [the alcohol]…. Therefore, all the tavernkeepers who hang a sign outside their house during the week to announce that beer and mead are sold there, must remove it before dusk on the Sabbath or Holiday eve to stop the non-Jews coming to their house to buy drink. It is, however, permitted to sell to a Jewish customer, but only on credit without any money changing hands…. Now to those arendarze in whose town no vodka may be sold to anyone except by the arendarz himself in his home. It is possible [to continue selling there] provided the Jewish tavern keeper has, on the Sabbath or Holiday eve, sold a small barrel…. of vodka to a non-Jew…. The non-Jew must sell it entirely on his own account—with all the responsibility—profit or loss—on him alone. […] Those who lease customs may not collect them on the Sabbath or Holidays…. [The ruling is that] they should hire a non-Jew [on condition] that he pays [the Jewish arendarz] a fixed rate of a denar42 (or more) on each zloty that he collects on the Sabbath. In that way, the non-Jew is working on his own account, even if [the collection takes place] in the Jew’s house. The Jew may stand a little way away and keep an eye on the non-Jew so that he cannot put money aside illicitly and puts the customs he has collected in the money chest. […] We have also ruled that in order to close the breach concerning Sabbath violation, that each community should appoint memunim whose role is to be vigilant on all these issues and to make note every Sabbath and Holiday eve of anyone The beadle’s call to ‘cook fish’ was a warning that the Sabbath was approaching. A low-denomination coin. In Wielkopolska, 18 denars were worth one grosz.

100

Teller

who breaks even one of these regulations, fining or punishing them on the spot…. The manhigim of each community must back them up, do as they command, and [generally] support them. […] 17. The women should be warned about being alone [with men]. They should not go to [do business on] the streets and [in the] houses of the non-Jews, which Jews do not frequent, particularly if they are without a fitting and proper escort. 18. Each of us, the undersigned, must bring these regulations to his own community, where the leaders must follow them and have the regulations kept in all their details. The cantor [in the synagogue] should read out all these regulations to the whole community. […] 20. We have also ruled that in each community on the Sabbath eve, the shamash [beadle] should make an effort one hour before he calls the community to the synagogue for the afternoon prayer, to go from house to house telling the people what to do and warning them [not to break the regulations]. He should proclaim that they should make ready for the Sabbath and stop whatever work they are doing. This is a most important rule. […] 23. In addition, we have ruled that anyone who notices a Jew breaking these rules and regulations, must inform the memunim, the roshim, and the local rabbi—or the rabbi of Włodzimierz. If they are in a rural area, they must inform the nearest community, who will punish [transgressors] and so strengthen the regulations. Translated from Hebrew by Adam Teller



No. 11 Va’ad Medinat Lita Regulates Relations between Lithuanian Communities, 9 Elul 5383 (1623)

Published in: S. Dubnow (ed.), Pinkas Hamedinah, Berlin 1925, p. 10.

46. No-one from another country may settle in Lithuania without the knowledge and permission of the Lithuanian Jewish leadership, may God protect them. It goes without saying that no such man may lease any arenda anywhere in Lithuania, may God protect it. And if, despite this, he does take a lease on an arenda, he can have no monopoly over it:43 anyone may challenge him, compete with him, and take it away from him. This is true both for those who take arendas in the future and for those who already hold arendas in the different parts of

43

Heb. ḥazakah: holder’s rights. These devolve on a person who has possession of a piece of property or a market share for a period of three years.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

47.

48.

49. 50.

51.

101

Lithuania….44 The community roshim are charged to watch over and supervise the minor communities who have their own rabbis45 [to ensure] that they give support [to as many] students and younger pupils as they can. Since the plague is now raging in the Polish lands, care should be taken to send the younger pupils to rural settlements,46 even if there is no rabbi there, provided that there are Jewish householders [well-enough educated] to study with them. The same applies when there is a war in Poland. A stranger from the Polish lands who settled close to the Minsk community was persecuted without mercy and expelled from the region as stipulated in the above regulation. When a rabbi who has been hired on a term contract is not rehired when it expires, he is automatically dismissed from his rabbinical post. There is no need to give him advance notice; if he is not re-hired, he is automatically dismissed without any notice at all. Every rabbi must accept students and younger pupils from the local minor communities before taking on others from elsewhere. The rabbi may not take a fee for the marriage ceremony for a poor man who has received charity to help cover his daughter’s dowry. [However,] the hazan and the shamash will receive half of the regular amount due them according to the amount of the dowry47 from the bursars [of the charitable funds].48 Every community must take very great care that the prohibition on games of cards or dice—and any other games whatsoever—should not be broken either in the community itself or in the settlements around it. Anyone who breaks this rule should be punished on the spot … with corporal punishment and fines and should be dealt with most severely, to keep Jewish society pure.

Translated from Hebrew by Shmuel Arthur Cygielman49 and Adam Teller

44 45 46 47 48 49

At this time, Jewish Lithuania was divided into three regions, each controlled by a leading community: Brześć, Pinsk, and Grodno. Heb. sevivot: communities of secondary status that fall under the jurisdiction of a leading community. Heb. yishuvim: Jewish settlements that do not have full community status. Their pay was on a sliding scale determined by the wealth of the bride’s family as calculated from the size of her dowry. Heb. gabba‌ʾim or gabba‌ʾei tsedakah. Shmuel Arthur Cygielman, Jewish Autonomy in Poland and Lithuania until 1648 (5408), Jerusalem 1997, pp. 306–318.

102

Teller

No. 12 A Letter by Rabbi Yoel Sirkes to the Council of Four Lands Criticizing Its Use of the Ḥerem, 1623

Source: Y. Sirkes, Sheʾelot vetshuvot haba‌ʾʾh hahadashot, Korzec 1785, no. 43 and Y. Halperin, Pinkas Va‌ʾad Arba Aratzot, Jerusalem 1945, no. 110, pp. 42–45. Nobles of the land, those who make up the fence and stand in the breach,50 guarding against extermination and condemnation,51 are they not the roshim and leaders of the land who come together at the Lublin fair to strengthen and repair the cracks holding together the house of Israel.52 Their hands and their hearts are faithful to God, in their merit and their righteousness may the redemption come speedily and hastily, in their days and ours, may Judah and Israel be redeemed. Amen. So may it be. I, your servant, signed on the margins of this parchment, already came to rouse you with a small missive at the fair which was held in the month of Kislev 5422 [1621/2] regarding the excommunications, [that is, the fact] that you agreed to institute regulations which included excommunicating [transgressors]. And now, I come further to add to this, for the ear hears the voice of those crying out at being overcome53 among the camp of the Hebrews, from the Street of the Jews in Lublin, those who have been robbed and plundered by the thieves, who are joined by the empty and reckless, may their names by blotted out, and they take hold of all valuable things and much silver and gold, for our many sins. And behold, I fear and worry for the Jews, their leaders and their roshim, that they are causing damage. It distresses our soul that we have heard three times in the year, at the fairs in Lublin, that they have excommunicated individuals scattered in the villages and towns, because, as is known to all, not only do those who are excommunicated not behave according to the law of one who is ostracized and excommunicated, but also righteous and pious people are caught up in that sin [by treating them as if they were not excommunicated], some of them unwittingly. And even if unwittingly, this matter is not good, [even if done] quite by mistake. And if this were not enough, recently [the leaders have] begun to make matters worse, making excommunications in ceremonies held before the general public with seven Torah scrolls … With regard to the body of regulations concerning excommunication, we must wonder who granted you the authority to excommunicate the general populace without the agreement of the great sages? 50 51 52 53

Ezekiel 22:30. Piyut for Yom Kippur. I.e. The Council of Four Lands. Exodus 32:18.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

103

And despite the fact that you are chosen and sent from all the communities in the kingdom, from every place [to serve on the Council of Four Lands], your excommunications are almost worthless. Clear proof of this can be found in the first chapter of Bava Batra54 … and the conclusion is … that such a regulation [of excommunication] is completely invalid without the agreement of an important man, and so it is ruled in the Ḥoshen Mishpat, paragraph 231 too.55 And the definition of an important man … is that he is known by name as one the great scholars of the generation and is the leader of the city [where the ban is made]. And behold, among you is the great one of the generation, the gaon, our teacher, the rabbi R. Shmuel Segal, the head of the rabbinical court and head of the yeshiva in the holy community of Lublin, who should have been for you a giver of sweet counsel56 and advice57 about the severity of the ban that you decreed.58 Even that might not have been enough, because, in my humble opinion, such a ban which encompasses all the communities in the kingdom will not stand unless all the great scholars of the generation agree to it, at least in the large communities…. The closest refuge59 is to annul all the excommunications  … to uproot retroactively the one you made and to no longer use the punishment of the ban….60 And even though the original intention of the ban that you instituted was to increase the honour of the Torah by making an additional and harsher ruling in order to prevent the king’s rage from pouring out upon the people … you can see … that the Jews are not able to hold back and control their desire to make a good living for themselves and their families through the business of money changing, which has, for our many sins, become popular again in this generation. I am not opposed to making regulations about this [i.e. regulating money changing], because certainly all that you have ruled until now and will rule in the future is according to the needs of the times. However, you must make clear in the regulation that in so doing you are not in favor of using excommunication but will rather impose other punishments on the transgressor, that he be punished with such and

54 55 56 57 58 59 60

A tractate of the Babylonian Talmud. This is the section of the legal codices, Arba Turim and Shulḥan Arukh, dealing with economic and juridical issues. Psalm 55:15. Job 12:13. Meaning: You should have consulted with him about the severity of the ban that you decreed. Mishna Avot 4:22. This means, the best solution. Literally, ‘will not dance among us again’. This phrase is often used in reference to the devil.

104

Teller

such a monetary fine, and such and such corporal punishment, and be exiled from the kingdom or to handed over to the authorities, whatever you decide best. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 13 Places in the Żółkiew Communal Synagogue, 1625

Published in: A. Michałowska (ed.), Gminy żydowskie w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej: Wybór tekstów źródłowych, Warszawa 2003, no. 52, pp. 118–120. These are the regulations laid down by the communal council, may God protect it, so that the whole community can find its place. Due to the complaints, suits, and disputes that have arisen in the Żółkiew community in connection with the sale of seats in the synagogue and their arrangement, many people have demanded that it [i.e. the sale] be cancelled. The price of seats in the men’s [section of the] synagogue will continue to be that for which they were bought, as noted in the receipt. [It will not change] even should the Lord enrich the community and a new synagogue be built. When a new synagogue is built, with God’s help, the Żółkiew community council, may God protect it, will choose three people from the Lwów community to assess the value of each and every seat as they see fit. The Holy Ark will be moved toward the northern window, up to the edge of the row of pillars61 and the [new] seat that will be added as a result, that is, on the southeast wall, will be sold, its length being the same as that of all the other seats. The seats alongside the dais62 will not have a shelf on their eastern side. Instead, they will use the shelf attached to the bench on the eastern side of the dais…. In the woman’s [section of the] synagogue a bench will be installed lengthwise down the middle, so that the women can sit on it on both sides, front and back, and it will be fixed to the floor with pegs. All the seats in the women’s [section] are to be sold, apart from the two adjacent seats by the window owned by the honourable Moses son of Aaron, may God protect him. As gabaim for the sale of seats we have appointed the following three men: the respected Moses son-in-law of Isaac from Hrubieszów, Aaron Rebish, and Isaac son of Zelig, may God protect them. These men are empowered to act precisely as described below and will collect the payments for the aforementioned seats…. They will have a coffer63 with two locks which will be held by one of the three, with each of the other 61 62 63

Heb. petsmin. Heb. bima. Heb. teivah.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

105

two having a key. They have permission to lend out the money [they have collected] for profit, subject to their unanimous agreement. The previous regulation that no-one can buy two seats remains in force. It is forbidden to sell a seat to someone who has already bought one until he has sold the one he already owns. Translated from Hebrew by Shmuel A. Arthur Cygielman64 and Adam Teller



No. 14 Poznań Community Membership (‘Ḥezkat hayishuv’), 5369–5409 (1609–1649)

Published in: B. Weinryb (ed.), Texts and Studies in the Communal History of Polish Jewry, New York 1950, nos. 8, 14, 21, 33, pp. 6, 8, 10–11, 14. a.

b.

c.

64

The alufim of the kahal and ʿeda [i.e. the leaders of the community] came to an agreement with the lofty Boaz, son of his honour, the rabbi R. Shaul Boaz, that he will live here and join our portion of the land [i.e become a resident of our community] for two years, that it is from the New Moon of Tevet, 5409, until the New Moon of Tevet 5411. [In return, he] will give the community eighty Polish gulden in coins over two years, each year forty gulden, and will be exempt from all the [taxes] apart from the poll tax and payments for clearing the garbage. And he is permitted to leave here within the two years, whenever he so desires. And after the two years have passed, he will be as one of us [i.e. a full member of the community]. If not, he will have to make a new agreement. Concluded this day, Tuesday, eve of the New Moon of Tevet 5409. In agreement with the entire kahal, no man or woman may move away from here until the kahal has met and decided to permit it. Whoever transgresses this will be fined one hundred red gulden [czerwony złoty] or will not be allowed to [come back and] live here before three years have passed from this day, 24 Elul, 5369. His honour, Reb Yekl, the son-in-law of Avram Skotler, engages in buying stolen goods and endangers the entire community, as has become clear and apparent to the kahal through reliable witnesses. Therefore, it has been agreed by the kahal, that he shall not be seen or found among us in Poznań for two continuous years … his wife and his father-in-law are likewise obligated to uproot their residence from here, Poznań, but his wife and father-in-law are permitted to live in the [neighbouring] holy community of Swarzędz for one entire year. His honour Shmuel A. Arthur Cygielman, Jewish Autonomy in Poland and Lithuania until 1648 (5408), Jerusalem 1997, pp. 153–158.

106

d.

Teller Reb Yekl is not permitted to live in the holy community of Swarzędz, rather he must go far from here, from Poznań. Before us, the signatories below, Mrs. Brayndl, the wife of the katzin (officer) Rabbi Hirsh, head of the yeshiva, swore an oath by God that whenever the kahal will demand her presence, together with all her sons and daughters, she will be obligated immediately and at once to set out and come here with all her sons and daughters. That being the case, the above mentioned [community leaders] have allowed her to depart for the holy community of Piła.

Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 15 Charity and Welfare in Kraków, 9 Kislev 5393 (22 November 1632)

Published in: F. Wettstein, Devarim atikim mipinkasei hakahal beKraka, Kraków 1900, no. 15, pp. 11–12. We the gabbaim [superintendents], signed below, have seen plainly65 that charity which is distributed by women is not allocated according to the law and judgement of our holy Torah … therefore the alufim [here, outstanding scholarly figures], esteemed in their learning, together with the roshim and the tovim and the entire community, have chosen chose three alufim gedolim [great scholars] to join us, the gabbaim, in order to watch over and oversee the matter of how charity will be distributed. Therefore, we decided that from this day onwards and forever there will be no distribution by any woman or women whatsoever, but rather by the gabbaim themselves. That is, the parnas haḥodesh [monthly leader] of the gabbaim is obligated every Wednesday to calculate the [total charitable] allowance [for the week], and he will take this same sum and give it to the shamashim [beadles] of the gabbaim, and they will take the allowance from the parnas haḥodesh every Wednesday and divide it among the poor, men and women…. And [this should be] according to a severe oath sworn while holding a holy object…. that they will give to every poor man and poor woman privately [to walk humbly],66 in order not to shame them…. They should also swear that they are obligated to oversee and examine every week each and every individual among the poor people of our community, to determine who among them will receive more and who less. And the gabbaim who will serve from this day and forever more will have their shamashim swear a severe oath regarding all the details of the above matters every six months.

65 66

Allusion to Genesis 26:28. Micah 6:8.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

107

And regarding the coffer of the poor brides,67 we agreed to choose two householders who will go from house to house every Wednesday, collecting for the needs of the poor brides. Everything which they will collect, they will bring and count before the parnas haḥodesh of these venerable gabbaim. And the parnas haḥodesh will record the collection in the records, [that is] that they collected such and such in this week … and afterwards, once it has been written in the records, they will bring the collection to those dear women chosen by the venerable gabbaim that is Mrs. Sirka, may she have long life, the widow of our teacher, the rabbi R. Leibush Katz, may his memory be for a blessing, and Mrs. Yotl, may she have long life, widow of our teacher, the rabbi R.P. Segal, may his memory be for a blessing. And these women do not have permission to spend one penny from these monies for any poor person and for any need whatsoever, apart from giving five Polish gulden for every poor bride. And at the end of each season, these women must come before the gabbaim … to give an accounting of their income and their expenditures, and what they spent and what they received and what remains in their hand at the end of each season will be written in the records of the gabbaim. And at the end of the season, the parnas haḥodesh of the gabbaim is not permitted to relinquish his authority over the chest and the charity funds and transfer them to another gabbai before he receives an accounting from the women, and writes everything in this record book. [Thursday, 9 Kislev 5393 (22 November 1632)]. And so too, regarding the five Polish gulden. They [the women in charge of disbursing the money for the poor brides] are not empowered to give them to anyone whatsoever except by the written order of the parnas haḥodesh of the gabbaim, and in each season they will give a righteous accounting, as outlined above…. Monday, 14 Tevet 5393 (27 December 1632) Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 16 The Poznań Community and the Jewish Quarter, 5396, 5401 (1636, 1641)

Published in: B. Weinryb (ed.), Texts and Studies in the Communal History of Polish Jewry, New York 1950, nos. 42, p. 17. a. Regulations of the committee members … [regarding] matters and means of housing and those who rent out an apartment and install a tenant. 67

The fund which provided dowries for poor brides.

108

Teller

When someone sells his house, his next-door neighbour has no neighbour’s rights over it. Apart from [the case of] someone who is a part-owner of the same house itself, neighbours’ rights are [hereby] annulled. This ruling is valid and just, and no judge shall rule against it. From this day on, it is forbidden to combine two homes,68 to tear down a wall, to add a door to the heated room or the bedroom, or to create a new apartment in that way. This is all completely forbidden, in order not to reduce the number of residents [in the houses] and not to leave any apartment empty and without residents. A person who rents out an apartment [with an izba, heated room] and two extra rooms, the rent will be eighty Polish guldens; with three extra rooms the rent will be 100 guldens. For an apartment [with an izba, heated room] and four extra rooms the rent will be 120 guldens. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 17 The Poznań Community and the Jewish Quarter, 5401 (1641)

Published in: B. Weinryb (ed.), Texts and Studies in the Communal History of Polish Jewry, New York 1950, no. 43, pp. 17–18. The expenses for the kaduk69 on those houses, concerning which demands have been made upon us on behalf of His Majesty the King, has reached eighteen thousand zloty as is well known. His Majesty has also sent commissioners here and they have issued a decree concerning certain houses. Their Jewish owners are commanded to board up windows and doors and demolish certain [auxiliary] structures. Accordingly, we hereby warn those [involved] to conduct themselves in accordance with the decree as regards both the boarding up and the demolition. In addition, they may not undo in the future what they have now done by taking down the boarding and rebuilding what has been demolished but must adhere to the commissioners’ ruling permanently. We have made a proclamation to this regard in all the synagogues and given the people proper warning … Translated from Hebrew by Shmuel A. Arthur Cygielman70 and Adam Teller

68 69 70

Isaiah 5:8. A Polish law that transfers uninherited property to the Crown. Shmuel Arthur Cygielman, Jewish Autonomy in Poland and Lithuania until 1648 (5408), Jerusalem 1997, p. 190.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795



109

No. 18 The Budget of the Poznań Community, 5398 (1637/38)

Published in: B. Weinryb (ed.), Texts and Studies in the Communal History of Polish Jewry, New York 1950, no. 138, pp. 57–60. The Rabbi, 130 zł. salary, 100 zł. expenses The Darshan 156 zł., 3 zł. per week; taking from the [community] coffer about 107 zł. Physicians, [200 zł.?] Simon, Hazan, 275 zł. Leib Katz, Hazan, 200 zł. Moses, Hazan, 200 zł. For Chaim, Hazan, 120 zł. For Getz, Hazan, 30 zł. For Hertz, Hazan, 20 zł. For 3 Synagogue Shamashim, 18 zł., 10 zł., … For 3 Deputy Shamashim, 36 zł. For the Shtadlan, 300 zł. For Solomon, the Shamash, 150 zł. For Hirsh, the Shamash, [occasional presents?71] For Isaac, the Dayan, 50 zł. with an additional 25 zł. For Yozel, the Sofer, 30 zł. For Hirsh Katz, Shamash,10 zł. For two midwives, 30 zł. For the Judge’s Shamash, 12 zł. For six Jewish watchmen, 150 zł. For three non-Jewish watchmen,108 zł. in the winter; in the summer the supervisors make the payment. For allocation by the charity Gabaim, 4,000 Reichsthaler, 80 zł. For the [Gabaim’s coffer], 200 zł. Torah Study: [Donations collected on] the festivals of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles, 493 zł. 20 groszy Additional for the above Torah Study, 200 zł. Additional for the Poor, 150 zł. Additional for Etrogim,72 250 zł.

71 72

Meaning unclear. Citrons used in the prayers during the Feast of Tabernacles. Since they had to be imported, they were a major expenditure.

110

Teller

Additional for the Passover mill,73 100 zł. For brides,74 250 zł. Electors’ Expenses,75 80 zł. For the Tax Assessors, 16 zł. For Beggars and Youths, including wagon hire here and at Gniezno,76 400 zł. Expenses for the Gniezno Fair for the podwojewoda and podstarosta,77 200 zł. Gromnica Fair,78 303 zł. 20 gr. charity for poor in the Land of Israel and relatives of J.K. Expenses for the trouble at Lublin,79 200 zł. For the heirs of the late M[endel], 600 zł. to be distributed among 11 [people] Taxes and poll tax [as stipulated by the Council] of the Lands and the expenses incurred at the meeting of the Sejm, at least 12,000 zł. Buildings,80 200 zł. Expenses for the [water] pipes, 400 zł. For His Majesty the King, 200 zł. For the Wojewoda,81 2,000 zł. plus all expenses For the Podwojewoda,82 2,000 zł. plus all expenses For his Scribe 150 zł. with [expenses for] documents from the chancellery For the General, 1,000 zł. plus all expenses For his Scribe, 150 zł. plus all expenses For the Burgrave, 100 zł. plus spices and other expenses For the Surrogator, 150 plus spices and sealing expenses83 For the Bishop of Poznań, 200 zł., plus spices and other gifts For the Cathedral, 200 zł. with spices

73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

This was a mill specially prepared to grind the flour for making unleavened bread on Passover. Dowries for poor girls. In Poznań, the electors (Heb. kesherim) formed a special supervisory body. The wandering indigent were given shelter in the community for three days and then sent on to another community. Noble administrators and judges. The fair held in Lublin on Św. Matki Boskiej Gromniczej (2 February). The Council of Four Lands often met during this fair. Unclear. Perhaps the blood libel trial of 1636. Unclear. Perhaps connected with the kaduk payment. See above. The royal official with special responsibility for the Jews. The wojewoda’s deputy. He often ran the special court used when Jews were prosecuted by non-Jews. Not clear.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

111

For the [Monks in] Black,84 300 zł. plus the quarterly payments on the loan85 and spices For the Probost, 25 zł. tax For the Dominicans, 100 zł. plus spices, loans and gifts For Priests and Students, 60 zł. with taxes For the Local [Council’s] taxes, 373 zł. For the Mayor, Council Members and their Servants, 150 zł. Spices, in small amounts, 600 zł. Trials, 200 zł. Small miscellaneous expenses for the year, 3,000 zł. … Translated from Hebrew by Adam Teller



No. 19 Poland’s Leading Rabbis Outlaw the Sale of Rabbinic Posts, 1640

Published in: Y. Halperin, Pinkas Va‌ʾad Arba Aratzot, Jerusalem 1945, no. 178, pp. 62–65. In the year 5347 [1587], at the Gromnica fair in Lublin, it was decreed that no rabbi shall endeavour to obtain a rabbinical post by means of a loan or a gift, either himself or via others, nor shall he obtain his rabbinical post by means of silver and gold or any metal coins etc.86 … They are therefore once again reinforcing the same regulation that no rabbi shall obtain a rabbinic post by paying for it, either before or after the appointment, or by any other means, direct or indirect, which lead to financial benefit…. Therefore, the heads of the yeshivot of the leading communities in the Volhynia province, together with the roshim of that region, delegated by the roshim of those communities, have exerted themselves regarding this issue and ruled that in those lands the smallest detail of these regulations shall be kept. And the precept arising from their words is that all these regulations will be instituted so that the decrees and bans that they contain will apply on an equal basis to anyone involved, whether it be the one who gives or the one who receives … and there is no need to add that those who choose the rabbi shall not receive any gift or loan or derive any profit from it. In truth, neither he nor his wife, his son, his daughter, his son-in-law, or his daughter-inlaw may receive any such gift or loan. Rather, their intention [in choosing the rabbi]

84 85 86

The Jesuits. Unclear. Exodus 34:17.

112

Teller

shall be for the sake of heaven, to appoint a decent and appropriate person as befits the community or settlement. And also from this day on, Thursday, 25 Iyar in the present year, 5400 [17 May 1640], we have instituted a new regulation. When tovim and roshim shall gather to appoint borerim [electors] for a rabbi or when they want to choose a rabbi themselves or when the borerim want to do so, the ḥazan [cantor] and shamash will first read out to them all the above, from the beginning of the earlier regulations, and including this addition that we have added. And so, based on the above rules, they instituted today, Thursday 25 Iyar, a ban [about this] at the gathering of the Volhynian council … and took upon themselves and their seed after them that [at the council meeting held] every three years, according to the tradition of Volhynia, they will pronounce a ban concerning all the above in the synagogue. This is the ruling of the heads of the yeshivot of the leading holy communities of the above land, together with the [lay] heads of that land. And during the meeting [of the Council of Four Lands] held here at the fair of Jarosław in the year 5400, many heads of yeshivot and elders, together with some heads of the yeshivot from the province of Volhynia, decided that the above regulation is good from beginning to end and unanimously agreed to authorize it, keep it, and accept it, as their predecessors instituted. [The ruling] shall be firm and valid everywhere reached by the word of the King, the King of the world, blessed be He…. Translated from Yiddish by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 20 Two Rulings of the Kraków Rabbinical Court, 5406–5408 (1646–1648)

Published in: F. Wettstein, Mipinkasei hakahal beKraka lekorot Yisrael vekhahamav, Breslau 1901, no. 6, pp. VI–VII.



No. 20 a A Ruling of the Kraków Rabbinical Court on a Wife’s Responsibility for her Husband’s Debts, 5406 (1646)

There appeared before us, the bet din whose signatures appear below, the dear lady, Mistress Idel, wife of Zundel the bookseller, who said in complaint, ‘Look, my husband neither feeds me nor keeps me and has absolutely no expense [for me]. And if that is not enough trouble, his creditors come and want to take from me everything that I myself have worked for, claiming that it is his, in return for his upkeep of me. Now, this is not possible, according to the regulations of Our Sages and so I renounce his upkeep and the other of my needs which he is supposed to fulfill. He does not keep me and I do not [work on his behalf].’

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

113

After we had listened to her, and examined her testimony and found it convincing, we discussed the matter, and had the woman swear in the most severe fashion that she has not conspired with her husband or hatched any deceptions or plots with him. [We also had her swear that] she totally renounces everything he is supposed to give to fulfill her needs and does not desire it. She also explicitly included in her oath that all the work she has done until now does not amount to one-third of what she has to pay in debts and fines to her husband’s creditors in order to free him from the imprisonment in which they wanted to place him…. Following her oath, we have ruled that, from this day on, his creditors have no claim on the income from her labour and no court can rule that she should be forced to pay even one penny, because she has renounced him entirely and supports herself. Her husband, too, is exempt from feeding and keeping her…. Translated from Hebrew by Adam Teller



No. 20 b The Kraków Rabbinical Court Records a Financial Agreement Concerning Money to Be Forwarded to the Holy Land, 16 Adar 5407 (15 February 1647)

Source: F. Wettstein, Mipinkasei hakahal beKraka lekorot Yisrael vekhahamav, Breslau 1901, nos. 6, 10, pp. VI–VII, X–XI. b. The alufim, the brothers of the venerable Rabbi Baruch and the venerable Rabbi Hirtzki, the sons of the elevated aluf, the leader, our venerable teacher, the rabbi R. Shmuel Rofe Katz came before us, the undersigned, willingly and without being forced or obligated in any way. They gave full, honest, and valid confirmation that the venerable aluf, his honour the rabbi R. Pinḥas, son of Rabbi Elazar, may his memory be for a blessing, from the holy community of Nikolsburg. had lent to them in a business transaction the amount of six hundred Polish gulden. They then committed themselves to use the money to lend to non-Jews on collateral and to send the profits to him [R. Pinḥas] in the holy city of Jerusalem, may it be rebuilt speedily in our days. During the Gromnica fairs of 5408 and 5409 [1648 and 1649], they will send profits at the amount of one hundred and twenty six gulden each year to their honours, the gabbaim of the Holy Community of Lwów, who are responsible for forwarding to the Holy City the [monies] sent from all the communities. And after these two years, they will, at the same fair, send to their honours, the aforementioned gabbaim, profits to the amount of one hundred and twenty Polish gulden, continuing to do so for as long as his honour the rabbi R. Pinchas and his dear wife Mrs. Broyne, may live….

114

Teller

The above was concluded … this day, 16 Adar,87 5407. Signed by Moshe Avraham Matityahu, son of my master, my father, my teacher and rabbi, the gaon, his honour, our teacher and rabbi R. Yosef, may the memory of the just be for a blessing, Delacroit, community scribe of the holy community of Kraków. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 21 Nathan Hanover Describes the Communal Life of Polish Jewry before the Chmielnicki Uprising, 1653

Source: Nathan Hannover, Abyss of Despair (Yeven Metsulah): The Famous 17th-Century Chronicle Depicting Life in Russia and Poland During the Chmielnicki Massacres of 1648– 1649 (Translated from the Hebrew by Abraham J. Mesch), New Brunswick-London 1983, pp. 110–120. And now I will begin to describe the practices of the Jews in the Kingdom of Poland, which were founded on principles of righteousness and steadfastness. It is said in Pirkei Avot:88 Simon the Just was one of the last survivors of the Great Synagogue. He used to say: ‘Upon three things the world is based: Upon the Torah, upon Divine Service, and upon the practice of Charity.’ Rabban Simeon, the son of Gamaliel said: ‘By three things is the world preserved: by Truth, by Judgement and by Peace.’ All the six pillars upon which the world rests were in existence in the Kingdom of Poland…. The Pillar of Divine Service. At this time prayer has replaced (Temple) service, as it is written: ‘So we will render for bullocks, the offering of our lips.’89 Prayers were ‘set upon sockets of fine gold’.90 At the head was the fellowship of those who rose before dawn, called Shomrim la-Bokerʾ,91 to pray and to mourn over the destruction of the Temple. With the coming of dawn the members of the Psalm Confraternity would rise to recite Psalms for about an hour before prayers. Each week they would complete the recitation of the entire Book of Psalms. And far be it, that any man should oversleep the time of prayer in the morning and not go to the synagogue, except for unusual circumstances. When a man went to the synagogue, he would not depart thence to his business until he had heard some words of the Law expounded by a scholar  … 87 88 89 90 91

Since 5407 was a leap year, there were two months of Adar. This must refer to the first of these, since in the second Adar that year, the 16th fell on the Sabbath when no cases would have been heard. A tractate of the Mishnah known for its ethical sayings. Hosea 14:3. Song of Songs 5:15. The Morning Watch. Following Psalms 13:6.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

115

anything his heart desired to learn, for in all synagogues there were many groups of scholars who taught others in the synagogue immediately after evening and morning prayers. The Pillar of Charity. There was no measure for the dispensation of charity in the Kingdom of Poland, especially as regards hospitality. If a scholar or preacher visited a community, even one which had a system of issuing communal tickets for hospitality by a householder, he did not have to humiliate himself to obtain a ticket, but went to some community leader and stayed as he pleased…. He was then the guest of the householder for as many days as he desired. Similarly all other visitors who received tickets would be the guests of a householder, chosen by lot, for as many days as he wished. A ticket was good for at least three days. The guest was given food and drink, morning, noon, and evening. If they wished to depart they would be given provisions for the road, and they would be conveyed by horse and carriage from one community to another. If young men or boys or older men or unmarried girls came from distant places, they would immediately be furnished with garments. Those who wanted to work at a trade would be apprenticed to a tradesman, and those who wanted to be servants in a house would be assigned to serve in a house. Those who wanted to study would be provided with a teacher…. Similarly there were very praiseworthy regulations for poor unmarried girls in every province. No poor girl reached the age of eighteen without being married, and many pious women devoted themselves to this worthy deed….92 The Pillar of Justice was in the Kingdom of Poland as it was in Jerusalem before the destruction of the Temple, when courts were set up in every city, and if one person refused to be judged by the court of his own city he would go to the nearest court, and if he refused to be judged by the nearest court, he would go before the great court. For in every province there was a great court. Thus in the capital city of Ostróg there was the great court for Wołyn and Ukraine, and in the capital city of Lwów there was the great court for [Red] Ruthenia. There were thus many communities which served as great courts for their own provinces. If two important communities had a dispute between them, they would let themselves be judged by the heads of the Council of Four Lands (may God preserve them) who would be in session twice a year. One leader would be chosen from each important community; added to these were six great scholars from the land of Poland, and these were known as the Council of Four Lands. They would be in session during every fair in Lublin between Purim and Passover,93 and during every fair at Jarosław in the month of Av or Elul.94 The leaders of the Four Lands were like a

92 93 94

I.e. collecting money for a dowry. I.e. in the early spring. I.e. in the late summer.

116

Teller

little Sanhedrin95 in the Chamber of Hewn Stone.96 They had the authority to judge all Israel in the Kingdom of Poland, to establish safeguards, to institute ordinances, and to punish each man as they saw fit…. They attended to cases involving money matters. Fines, titles, and other difficult laws were brought before the leaders of the Four Lands, may God preserve them. Disputes among Jews were never brought before a gentile judge or before a nobleman, or before the king, may his glory increase…. The Pillar of Truth. Every community appointed men in charge of weights and measures, and of other business dealings, so that everything would be conducted honestly and fairly….



No. 22 Chęciny Community Privilege, 21 August 1668

Source: J. Goldberg (ed.), Jewish Privileges in the Polish Commonwealth: Charters of Rights Granted to Jewish Communities in Poland-Lithuania in the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries, I, Jerusalem 2001, pp. 70–71, ll. 47–79. Stefan Bidziński, Crown Protector97 and Starosta98 of Chęciny and Skała. In this document below, I make it clear to all and to anyone in particular, now and in future generations, that since Jews once lived in the small town of Chęciny, but were later burnt [out] and destroyed by the Swedish and Cossack invasions99—[and others] were forced to flee by the plague—they lost their right to free trade to such an extent that it must have been detrimental to the revenue from the Chęciny starostwo. [So,] taking into account the Jews’ poverty and the further ruin of the town, acknowledging [the fact] that they have been settled here since long ago, and [taking] particular [note of] the benefits which will accrue [from them], and in order that the incomes of His Royal Majesty, My Gracious Lord and Ruler of the Commonwealth100 (from which [incomes] the starostwo also benefits) should not be lost, I hereby grant them my permission and license to buy empty plots in the market square and on the streets [of the town] and develop them. They may also engage in different trades, dealing in cloth, both retail and wholesale,101 as well as engaging in all kinds of commerce, 95 96

The name of the courts during the Second Temple Period. The Chamber of Hewn Stone was the place where the Great Sanhedrin met during the Second Temple Period in the Temple in Jerusalem. 97 Pol. strażnik. 98 Royal governor. 99 This refers to Poland’s war with Sweden (1655–1660) and with Russia (1654–1667). 100 Jan Kazimierz was king of Poland until 1668. He was succeeded by Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki (1669–1673). 101 Lit. By ell and by weight.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

117

practicing the crafts permitted to other Jews and selling their products, brewing beer, distilling vodka, and selling all kinds of alcoholic beverages either by the barrel or in taverns, and all the other ways of making a living which are permitted to Jews in the nearby towns, large and small. [All this is granted] so that the town can grow to its proper size. However, should any of the Jews have previously made a contract or agreement with the burghers, he can no longer enforce it—it is worthless. Nonetheless, I preserve the rights and decrees [given by] Their Lordships, the Kings to these Jews, which form the [legal] basis for a synagogue and a cemetery. The approbation of His Royal Majesty, My Gracious Lord, must be added. Translated from Polish by Adam Teller



No. 23 The Regulations of the Wilno Ḥevra Kadisha (Burial Society), 1670

Published in: Y. Kloizner, Korot beit-ha’almin hayashan baVilna, Vilna 1935, pp. 93–107. 1. We accepted upon ourselves, every man and woman from the holy burial society, to afflict ourselves every year, forever more … on the fifteenth day of the month of Kislev and to gather to pray in a special room and to recite seliḥot.102 … And before removing the Torah scroll, to give a contribution … and after completing the prayers, to go … to the cemetery and to prostrate ourselves on the graves of the saints and pious ones…. And also to recite there seliḥot and teḥinot.103 … 2. And the men will approach the women, speaking pleasantly, so that they will also agree that the members of the society of pious women who are engaged in performing this mitsvah104 will likewise afflict themselves on this established day, as above. 3. On the evening immediately following the fast … we have established this night as a holy night, a festival for God, and there will be a seudat mitsvah.105 5. When this society meets, it will establish at its head nine people. Each one will put his note into the voting box, and the trustee will draw out two notes, and those are two of the borerim [electors] … and afterwards each male member of the society will write his note and will put it into the voting box…. Then, the appointed trustee will take from all of those notes another seven and they, in good fortune, are the remainder of the nine mevorerim [electors]…. And [these] nine persons will each place his note

102 103 104 105

Penitentiary prayers. Supplicatory prayers. Holy commandment. A customary, festive meal usually following the completion of a religious obligation of some kind, such as a bar mitzvah or a wedding.

118

Teller

into the voting box and from these the trustee will draw out five notes … and these five are the final five electors—congratulations! 6. The borerim will appoint nine people as manhigim of the burial society, that is four gabbaim, two financial secretaries, two mevorerim, and one elder…. [They must either have] been a member of the burial society for fifteen years or be older than sixty years of age. […] 17. The gabbaim will prepare two or three large fringed garments that will be ready for any calamity, may it not come upon us, to clothe an impoverished deceased person or a single man or youth. […] 21. The alufim and mevorerim who are appointed, may it be God’s will, at Pesach are obligated immediately to make rosters, as is fitting, and also to establish the correct order among the women, that is to make rosters among them. 22. The female gabba‌ʾot [superintendents] are not permitted to make any expenditure whatsoever without the knowledge of the gabaim and are also obligated to give an accounting to our financial secretaries. […] 29. The shamashim [beadles] are not permitted to remove any deceased person from his house until the expenses have been paid or some good collateral given. […] 45. The shamashim must prepare for the needs of burying the dead: tools for digging, that is to say shovels, and saws and boards for the coffin, and to prepare water, salt, and egg and small dishes for the purification of the body, and to prepare the boards upon which is written tzidduk hadin: ‘The Justification of the Divine Decree’. 48. The gabbai serving that week must stand on watch during the digging of the grave and ensure that there be no laughter or clowning among those digging. […] 60. During the placing of the deceased in the grave, the grave diggers will stand around the grave and no person, other than the gabbai or the elder whose turn it is to stand by the grave according to the roster, will utter any word whatsoever. […] 71. On Hoshana Rabba,106 the alufim, the gabbaim, and the mevorerim are obligated, together with one elder, to make order among themselves, who will be called up to the Torah first and who will be given the remainder of the honours…. 73. On all the three festivals, the gabbaim are ordered to gather the holy society in order to give a charitable contribution of their own…. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

106 The festive day at the end of the autumn Sukkot holiday.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795



119

No. 24 The Pinsk Community Borrows 1,500 złp. from the Jesuits, 20 November 1678

Source: Akty izdavaemiye vilenskoy kommissiey dlia razbora drevnikh aktov, XXIX, Vilna 1902, no. 42, pp. 53–55. I Boruch Nachmanowicz, I Man Chaymowicz, I Chemia Eziiaszewicz, I Mowsza Dawidowicz, I Leyba Jakubowicz, I Michiel Zelikowicz, I Bęiamin Juzefowicz, I Michel Jliaszowicz, I Morduchaj Moyżeszowicz, I Lezba Aronowicz, I Jcko Szymonowicz and I Jozef Moyżeszowicz, elders of the Jewish community of His Royal Majesty’s town of Pinsk—in the names of ourselves, our wives, our children, our descendants and our successors, as well as of the Jews of the Pinsk community, now and in the future— waive our jurisdiction, rights, and freedoms, and submit ourselves, our wives, our children, our descendants and our successors, as well as our whole Jewish community to this document with all its securities, conditions and obligations, that it should bind and include us all within it, in mutual responsibility for each other. In this, our freely entered into letter and imperishable document, we notify and inform anyone who might need to know now or in the future that we, the kahal and whole Jewish community of Pinsk, being in need of money, have taken into our own hands in cash from his excellency, the divine reverend Marcin Kolakowski, rector of the Pinsk Jesuit College a loan of a sum of money belonging to the Łahyszyn church of the Pinsk Jesuit College, one thousand five hundred złotys. Concerning that one thousand five hundred złotys, we—the whole community and all the Jews in His Royal Majesty’s town of Pinsk, as well as those living in all the towns, townlets, and villages belonging to our community now and in the future, including all our shuls107 as well as our houses, plots, land, our stores, goods, and money, wherever and to whomever they belong, as well as our own persons, children, descendants and successors—take upon ourselves in perpetuity to pay interest to the Łahyszyn church on that one thousand five hundred złotys the annual sum of one hundred and fifty złotys. Should we or our successors fail to pay the aforementioned interest on the sum of one thousand five hundred złotys, we give our permission to seal up our shuls, stone or wooden, and our slaughterhouses, in His Royal Majesty’s town of Pinsk and in all the towns, townlets, and villages belonging to the Pinsk community, as well as our apartments, stores, houses and plots, with no need for a court order, summons, or official instruction. We, our wives, children, descendants and successors may also be taken into custody and have our goods, homes, land, and money confiscated … and held until we pay the capital, one thousand five hundred złotys, and the interest accruing … to his honour, the rector of the Pinsk Jesuit College. Translated from Polish by Adam Teller 107 Lit. schools, i.e. synagogues.

120

Teller

No. 25 Regulations of the Przemyśl Rabbinic Court, 1689

Published in: M. Schorr, Żydzi w Przemyślu do końca XVIII wieku, Lwów 1903, no. I, pp. 280–78. Regulations for the dayanim from the year 5449 (1688/9) Until this day, the manner in which the dayanim sit [in judgement] was like a capital city without a ruler: of the two benches, sometimes everyone entered and left together, mixed up, and one bench transgressed the boundary of the other, and, as a result, disagreements sometimes arose between the benches. Therefore, today we set up clear borders, such that one bench may not deal with that which is designated for the other. For this day is the beginning of a new arrangement and we have accepted upon ourselves under threat of the punishment of ḥerem, before the rabbi, the great light, head of the rabbinical court, a mighty prince among us,108 not to transgress all the things outlined below, even in the smallest detail, and first: That it is completely and utterly forbidden to judge any case, small or large … or to accept any testimony or to receive any deposition, or even to conduct the signing [of contracts] … if it is not in the established place where the judges sit. That is the bench which that week is sitting with the rabbi, [will judge any] matter be it small or large in the rabbi’s house, and the second bench [will judge any] matter be it small or large, in the house of the head of the second bench or in the synagogue corridor. And the same bench that is [sitting] with the rabbi that week may not judge any case at the house of the head of the second bench or in the corridor. Only when the judgement concerns less than fifty guldens is it the accepted custom of our community that the defendant can plead that he does not want to disrespect the rabbi’s bench with such a small matter. Even then, however, the defendant cannot say that he wants to appear before the second bench. Rather, his case must be heard before that bench, but sitting in a different room in the rabbi’s house. Real estate cases concerning damages caused by neighbours or property encroachment must be brought before the court, even though they may sometimes concern only small [sums]. They should be heard before the bench [sitting] that week. From this day onwards, all purchases of property in our community will be conducted only according to the court and will be registered in this pinkas109 … [and it is necessary] to show the scribe of the city how it should be written, everything according to the law and rules of our holy Torah …

108 Genesis 23:6. 109 Record book.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

121

All the dayanim [judges] must sign every judgement. When the case is concluded, should the person bringing the case not wish to obey the court, then the court is authorized to excommunicate him and punish him with harsh punishments. Levirate marriages and the appointment of [three] judges [to adjudicate] divorce agreements will be made only by the bench which is [sitting] with the rabbi that week. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 26 The Council of Four Lands and Jewish Publishing, 5450, 5459 (1690, 1699)

Published in: Y. Halperin, Pinkas Va‌ʾad Arba Aratzot, Jeruslaem 1945, nos. 466, 520, pp. 220–21, 242–43. A. To you … the katzinim [officers], the roznim [rulers], the nagidim [presidents] of the land of Ashkenaz,110 may God protect them, and their kings at their heads, that is, the great luminaries, the gaonim, the rabbis of every holy community, state, and city. May this, our request,111 light up and shine before his great majesty and honour the gaon, our teacher, rabbi R. Menahem Mendel, son of  … our teacher, the rabbi R. Tzvi Hirsh, may the blessing of the righteous be for a memory…. And the hidden delight that is concealed in the beautiful and popular works that this rabbi composed … one of them entitled Lekhem Menahem, concerning the Talmud and Seder Kodashim and including his responsa, and the other called Tzintzenet Menahem, which deals with all the statements in the Talmud and the poskim [i.e. those who have ruled on its basis] that are difficult to understand. And today he desires, with God’s help, to publish [these] mysteries, to which the great luminaries, our exalted rabbis, have agreed, granting him their approbations … So, these are our words [to the leaders of German Jewry]: in every place that the rabbi [Menahem Mendel] will set foot, they should preserve his honour, decorate and adorn him with all the kinds of adornment that are fitting to a saint such as him…. [They should do all they can] to speed him on his way and bring him closer to [completing] his task, this holy duty, by providing him with all kinds of possible help with all the means at their disposal…. so that he will be able to realize his good intention speedily and easily. And in particular, we request that whichever printers his honour, this exalted rabbi should choose to print his book, will take great care when doing this holy work, to perform their task with all speed, in order that this rabbi will not be [too long] away from his students, who … will be like sheep without a shepherd, for to 110 Germany. At this time, the Holy Roman Empire. 111 Literally: ‘The request of our lips’. Psalm 21:3.

122

Teller

whom can he be compared?112 He is not to be like a client of other printers who waste a great deal of time, for this rabbi must return to his community and teach Torah to his many students, who anticipate and long for his Torah. Therefore, please let there be no delay whatsoever, but immediately, upon his arrival to whichever printer [he may choose], let them print his books with the utmost haste. These are the words of gaonim, rabbis, alufim, katzinim, roznim, and leaders of the Four Lands, this day, Wednesday, 15 Heshvan 5451 [1690] here in Jarosław. b. The obvious truths need no proof. There is no reason to elaborate on the quality of the printing house in the holy community of Żółkiew, established by the aluf, the venerable rabbi, R. Faybush, son of our teacher, R. Aaron Segal the printer.113 Great is the worth of this exalted printing house, in the beauty, ornamentation, new fonts, and high-quality paper of its books. This printing house is truly excellent and [its publications] seven times superior to all the earlier, blurred printings that were overgrown over with thistles and covered with nettles …114 Anyone who looks at [the books printed by] this press will take pleasure in them and his thirst will be quenched. Every reader will be satisfied with them … and in everything in which people find pleasure, God finds pleasure too.115 Such is Torah and such is the benefit it brings.116 We have therefore established a decree,117 with the force of the ban, excommunication, and ostracism, as well as the ban of Yehoshua bin Nun and a fine of one hundred czerwony złotys118 for anyone who transgresses it (with the fine not absolving the wrongdoer from the bans, ostracisms, and punishments). [The decree rules] that all holy books of whatever kind, large or small, written in the Holy Tongue, [especially those] that Reb Faybush has to sell, may not on any account be sent to this country by any printer from abroad. In addition, all the book sellers in business here at present as well as those who will set up in business in the future, are forbidden by all the biblical prohibitions to import [Hebrew books] from abroad. As far as books printed in la‌ʾaz, known as daytshvarg [i.e. Yiddish], are concerned, they may import [only books of] ten folios or more, no less, even though the printer, Reb Faybush, does not possess the Yiddish font. This prohibition also applies to the [Jewish] printers in Kraków and Lublin: should they print outside our land any books, large or small, and then import them, they will be liable to the above outlined punishments. Reb Faybush and his 112 Isaiah 40:25. 113 A well-known printer and publisher from Amsterdam. Born in 1623, he moved to Żółkiew in 1693, founding, under royal license, what was to be Poland—Lithuania’s major Jewish printing house for most of the eighteenth century. He died in 1715. 114 Proverbs 24:31. 115 Avot 3:10. 116 BT Menachot 29b. 117 Daniel 3:29. 118 At this time, one czerwony złoty was worth eighteen regular złoty.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

123

agents will also have the right to confiscate those books and there will be no recourse on the matter.119 And should anyone attempt to act in this way, Reb Faybush is permitted to protect his rights by suing them, even in the courts of the non-Jews, with the costs to be paid by the transgressor. This our decree is valid in every Jewish court and empowers them to support R. Faybush and his agents, heirs, and successors in all the above, without exception, as long as this document is in their possession, from now and forever more. These are the words of the alufim, the katzinim, the roznim, the leaders of the Council of the Four Lands at the holy council meeting at the time of its general assembly during the fair,120 Sunday, 26 Elul 5459 [20 September 1699] 12 signatures Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 27 The Regulations of the Wojewoda’s Court in Lwów, 21/3/1692

Source: Z. Pazdro, Organizacja i praktyka żydowskich sądów podwojewodzińskich w okresie 1740–1772 r. na podstawie lwowskich materyałów archiwalnych, Lwów 1903, pp. 176–79. Marek of Waręż and Michnów Matczyński, Wojewoda and General of Ruthenia, Starosta of Bełz, Rubieszów, Grójec, Bracław etc. I notify everyone who needs to know, in general and individually … now and in the future, that, relating to the ancient laws and customs of my predecessors, I confirm them with this document, and in endorsing those laws, I wish to make the following arrangement: 1. First of all, in order that the salary of the podwojewoda’s121 office remain in good and proper order and that the merchants incur no aggravation on that account, I leave it to the administration of the Lwów community ea cum praecustoditione seu verius praecautione,122 that they do not dare to take one shilling more than the instruction I have laid down. Therefore joining my salary from the merchants with what is owed to me from the small towns in my jurisdiction and all the income in general which is to accrue to my treasury from the community, I hereby determine that the community, both urban and suburban,123 together with the rabbis of Lwów, pay my treasury annually in legal tender four thousand Polish złotys in four instalments…. The community 119 120 121 122 123

Daniel 8:3. T.B. Megilla 2a. The podwojewoda was the wojewoda’s deputy. The Jewish Court fell within his purview. With such guardianship and serious precaution. Lwów was one of the few Polish towns to have two Jewish communities. One was situated in the Old Town, the other in a suburb outside the walls.

124

Teller

must also pay my podwojewoda … in instalments, one thousand złotys in all, on the understanding that once we have taken the above sums or installments, neither I nor the podwojewoda will have any claim to fish, spices, or any other victuals, and neither may my servants—with me or without me—claim [anything] and, of course, no expenses need be made to the podwojewoda or his servants. 2. The elders of both communities having stipulated the elections to the leadership as far as time, custom, and regulations are concerned, and without any impediment from myself or from the podwojewoda, are to hold the elections in accordance with their rights and customs, peaceably and without the slightest hindrance. These elected Jewish elders must try the local Jews of Lwów, both urban and suburban, as well as the foreign [Jews] of the entire Ruthenian województwo, faithfully and justly in accordance with the old and ancient customs, rights and orders. […] 4. My judge may not try Jewish cases in his residence but only at the legally appointed site by the synagogue. The Jewish elders should sit in trial with him and cast their vote according to their [own] understanding in the cases and trials, following the ancient custom and the laws of this community…. 6. The judge needs to hear these Jewish trials only twice a week, that is on Monday for the Jews of the urban [community], and on Thursday [for the Jews] from the suburb; these can be heard—as already mentioned—by their synagogue…. 7. All protocols—past and present—as well as the record books and documents of the wojewoda’s court should be kept locked in a chest in the court chamber; the key to this chest should be [held] by the judge … 9. When a Jew has a case with another Jew, neither the podwojewoda nor my judge should be involved. They should litigate only before the elders as is necessary. Done in Lwów, on the twenty-first day of the month of March of the year 1692. Translated from Polish by Adam Teller



No. 28 The Taxpayers’ Oath to the Community in Dubno, Eighteenth Century

Published in: H. Margolies, Sefer Dubna rabati: ʿIr Dubna ugdoleiha, Varsha 1910, pp. 88–89. Text of oath I hereby swear, without any cunning and deceit whatsoever on my part, but with the approval of the Almighty and the approval of the trustees who brought me to [make] this oath, that the note I have handed to the ne’emanim [trustees] is correct and accurate. I possess nothing more, only that which is listed in the note, beyond which I have

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

125

hidden nothing. I also include in my oath that I have no knowledge of my wife possessing any other money or collateral. I believe that she owns nothing. I myself am not concealing money in cash or in bills of exchange, or gold and jewellery—pearls, coral, opals, chains of silver and gold—or wares and debts that I am owed or owe to others. I am not hiding anything owed to me according to the regulations of the community, and I have not made any secret payments to be returned after the oath, whether as a loan or a deposit. I have not put aside for our sons or our daughters a sum of cash or jewelry and have not set aside any real estate or [anything else to pay] for the ketubah [marriage contract] or dowry of our sons and daughters, in any shape or form. All our property is written on the note which I have handed to the trustees; there is no more. Should I take this oath untruthfully, Heaven forbid, then may God not be willing to forgive me124 and all the curses and afflictions written in this book come upon me, and may He who exacted payment from the Generation of the Flood and the Generation of the Dispersion ultimately exact payment from one who does not keep his word125 so that the Jewish people as a whole will remain untainted by this sin. If my oath is true, may God continue to grant me success in my endeavours and the curses be transformed into a blessing. Amen. Translated from Yiddish by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 29 Regulations of the Przemyśl Jewish Tailors’ Guild, 24 Nissan 5464 (28 April 1704)

Published in: M. Schorr, Żydzi w Przemyślu do końca XVIII wieku, Lwów 1903, no. X, pp. 268–70. Since we have seen with our own eyes126 the [founding] parchment of the Holy Society, ‘Clothing the Naked’, which is based on the highest principles….127 However, with the passing of time, the members of this holy society have almost completely forgotten this document and the regulations [it contains], and become lax in maintaining this society…. The honorable members of this society have roused themselves to say one to another, ‘Let us be strong and be strengthened’ by following the footsteps of our predecessors. A new agreement was thus made to re-affirm the rules of this society128 … 124 125 126 127 128

Deuteronomy 29:9. Mishna Baba Metzia 4:2. Literally: ‘And it so being that our eyes [saw] and not another’s’. Job 19:27. Literally: ‘Founded upon sockets of fine gold’. Song of Songs 5:15. Literally: ‘Place the rules of the society on its mound’. Joshua 11:13.

126

Teller

So we, the below signed, were chosen at a meeting of all honorable members of this holy society, to set things in order. They bound themselves and those that come after them with a severe oath to accept our rulings and do as we say. Here is the original first ruling given in the old document, [namely] that none of the craftsmen belonging to this society may employ young men to work for them. They are only permitted to employ one young man, called a journeyman,129 who is already versed in the trade, having learned it for at least two years, and another lad who is learning the trade, who is called an apprentice,130 meaning that he has yet to complete two years since he began learning. This regulation is to be enforced with full strength and vigour at all times, except when there are craftsmen of this trade … [who make so little] that they do not pay [taxes] at all … In that case, we have eased the situation of those who do pay taxes by adding at our own initiative that they are permitted … to employ one extra lad to help with this burden, that is that they are allowed to employ two journeymen and one apprentice or two apprentices and one journeyman. Second, from the holy texts … we know of131 the great and severe punishment for transgressing the prohibition on shatnez132 … and also the holy words of this document remind us that none of the tailors who make clothes should take threads or flax … from anyone other than an authorized seller of threads and flax … The rabbi-judge of this guild has been chosen to deal with these threads of canvas and flax and no-one is permitted to buy any other thread from anyone but him…. Third, and most important of all,133 with respect to those clothes-sellers who buy clothes from non-Jews and refurbish them for re-sale to Jews but leave the sewing as it was134 … and [because] there is no-one to supervise this, Jews buy clothes from these sellers, trusting blindly [that they have checked for shatnez]…. To deal with this problem, we have instituted a complete prohibition on clothes-sellers refurbishing such garments themselves … rather, they must hand them over for refurbishing to tailors who are the members of this society. Certainly a person only sins for his own benefit,135 which refers particularly to anyone receives garments as piece-work from the clothessellers and is paid to refurbish them into clothes for Jews … [In such a case] they must bring the clothes to the gabbai of this guild, who will check thoroughly whether they contain flax threads and also whether the clothing was made properly according to this regulation….

129 130 131 132 133 134 135

Literally: labourer. Yiddish: lerin yung. Literally: ‘We have found and we have seen’. Lamentations 2:16. The combination of wool and linen in a single garment. Literally: ‘And captains over all of them.’ Exodus 14:7. I.e. without checking that there is no mixture of linen cloth and flax thread. This is a maxim in Jewish law. See e.g. BT Baba Metzia 5a.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

127

God forbid that anyone, whoever he may be, deal in selling clothes in this way, before he has formally joined this holy society … And further  … it is totally forbidden for young men before they are married to engage in this trade…. All he can do is work on a salary for a craftsman from this guild. It is also forbidden for any craftsman to employ such a young man in this craft on a daily, weekly, or a monthly basis; such employment must be on annual, or at least a semi-annual basis. It also goes without saying that such people be paid for piecework. All the above was determined by us and ratified at a meeting of the members of this holy society. These are the words of the rosh, the communal leader, rabbi-judge of this society. The day after Passover, 5464 [28 April 1704] Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 30 Agreement between the Jewish Community of Łask and the Municipal Council, 21 March 1715

Published in: J. Goldberg (ed.), Jewish Privileges in the Polish Commonwealth: Charters of Rights Granted to Jewish Communities in Poland-Lithuania in the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries, II, Jerusalem 2001, pp. 124–26. An Agreement of the Town of Łask with the Faithless Jewish Community of That Town Between the renowned citizens and townspeople on the one hand and the faithless Jewish community of Łask on the other, [this] fixed and immutable agreement was reached as described below. Though the renowned townspeople of Łask have ancient privileges granted them by their hereditary lords136 concerning the freedoms of the town and [their exclusive rights to engage in] all forms of trade, [they are now] hard pressed by various calamities, and so their houses and plots of land have become desolate and they are unable to pay the regional hearth tax, the payments for the soldiery, and extraordinary imposts of various kinds. Following mutual deliberations and the unanimous decision of the whole settlement, they have reached the following arrangement with the Jewish community, which will [henceforth] have the freedom to trade in iron items and salted goods as well as to bake bread for sale on the Jewish street; they [i.e. Jews] will be permitted to brew and sell beer only for their own consumption. In the venerable and accepted tradition, the townspeople freely agree to mount the municipal guard. In return for this concession, the Łask Jewish community takes it upon itself to raise and to pay half of the regional hearth tax, the payments for the soldiery, and other 136 At this time, the town was owned by the Wierzbowski family.

128

Teller

extraordinary imposts owed by the town at any time and without any argument. This does not include the taxes they owe on their own houses. The community has determined that it should not have to provide horses [and carts for municipal journeys] and that it should be exempt from quartering soldiers in its houses…. The [Jews] will provide two candidates, or rather electors, for the mayoral elections. Should townspeople acting out of malice set a soldier or a nobleman on a Jew, or should a Jew set one on a townsman, they are to be punished by the lord’s court. The renowned townspeople give their agreement to this [document] and, from the outset, will do nothing to prejudice the above conditions under threat of fines from the lord’s court…. Enacted in Łask on 21st March in the Year of Our Lord 1715 Translated from Polish by Adam Teller



No. 31 The Council of Four Lands Appoints a Shtadlan, 21 Elul 5490 (3 September 1730)

Published in: Y. Halperin, Pinkas Va‌ʾad Arba Aratzot, Jerusalem 1945, no. 621, pp. 311–32. With God’s help. We have taken note of the great abilities of the aluf in Torah, Rabbi Nisan, son of our esteemed teacher, Rabbi Yehuda, may his memory be for a blessing, shtadlan of the Ciechanowiec community—in his neck abideth strength,137 a man diligent in his holy task, who will stand before kings and ministers….138 Therefore it is resolved on this auspicious occasion to appoint him shtadlan of the Council of the Four Lands. He will serve as shtadlan from the current general session of the Council until another139 general session of the Council, that is, in addition to the permanent shtadlan of the Lublin community. He will take care to fulfill his holy commission,140 will carry out every task for which he is dispatched and will do all he is commanded. He will be a faithful emissary141 to those who send him, serving honestly and with integrity, and leaving no stone unturned in his quest to bring benefit and assistance to [Polish] Jewry. [He will engage in lobbying] at the Great Sejms in Warsaw and in Grodno as well as in the Sejm commissions, and will hand over every year the key to the division of

137 138 139 140 141

Job 41:14. Adapted from Proverbs 22:29. Meaning unclear. Following Numbers 18:5. Proverbs 25:13.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

129

Jews’ poll-tax for the royal treasury142 to his highness, the Chief Treasurer to the Crown, fulfilling this responsibility143 with all his strength. We have set his salary for this negotiation and lobbying144 at an annual wage [equivalent to] eight Polish złoty a week. Their honours, the rabbis, the nagidim, the trustees of the Council of the Four Lands will pay him from the Council coffers for each tax assessment [halukah], the above annual amount, to be taken from the poll-tax paid by whichever community in whichever region he determines. And with this he will gird his loins145 and gather his strength146 to set out to do battle147 for the good and benefit of all—the night will light his way like the day,148 a wise heart will guide his tongue,149 and he will bring God’s plans to fruition.150 In addition to all this, he will receive travel expenses [for his journeys] to the meetings of the honourable nobles mentioned above [i.e. the Sejm], to be paid by their honours, the trustees of the Council of Four Lands. By this document [he is given] the same authority, rights, and power of attorney as all the previous shtadlanim of the Council of the Four Lands, with respect to all legal and administrative matters. May God Almighty show mercy and support the emissaries who speak for His Jewish nation,151 as it is said, “The thoughts in man’s heart are his own but the tongue’s eloquence comes from the Lord.”152 May He preserve and cherish the house of Israel as the apple of His eye,153 and lead us soon to Zion in jubilation and to Jerusalem with everlasting joy and happiness. These are the words of the nagidim of the Council of the Four Lands, headed by the rabbi, the great guide, champion of doctors and pastors, the monthly Chair [parnas

142 Hebrew: ḥalukah. The procedure was as follows: the Treasury determined the overall amount of poll-tax to be paid by Polish Jewry. This was handed over to the Council of Four Lands, which, with the help of the Jewish regional councils, drew up a key detailing how the amount was to be divided among the different communities. This key, the ḥalukah, was brought by the Council’s shtadlan to the Chief Treasurer to the Crown for his approval. Once approval had been given, the Treasurer issued payment orders drawn on each Jewish community to various army units for collection. See: Kalik, Scepter of Judah, 17–21. 143 Lit.: lay out his prayer. This is a text from the Rosh Hashanah prayers. 144 TB Baba Kama 38b. 145 I Kings 18:46. 146 Adapted from Isaiah 11:5. 147 Numbers 32:17. 148 Psalms 139:12. 149 Proverbs 16:23. 150 Isaiah 53:10. 151 Piyut for the High Holy Days. 152 Prov. 16:1. 153 Psalms 17:8.

130

Teller

haḥodesh] of the Council of the Four Lands, given here in the holy community of Jarosław, during the Council meeting [held today,] Sunday 21 Elul 5490. 22 signatures Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 32 A Decision of the Dubno Community Council to Try to Prevent the Town Governor from Interfering in the Election of the Rabbi, 11 Heshvan 5495 (20 October 1734)

Published in: H. Margolies, Sefer Dubna rabati: ʿIr Dubna ugdoleiha, Varsha 1910, pp. 47–48. The spirit of the ruler rises up against us,154 [that is] the order of our lord, his majesty the mighty Duke, which was issued, according to the shtadlan, yesterday on the holy Sabbath. [The Duke decided] to appoint his honour, the venerable nagid, the katzin, our teacher, rabbi Yozpe, from Ostróg, as rabbi, [that is] head of the rabbinical court and head of the yeshiva in our community. So today, Sunday, the kahal, both the current and previous boards, gathered to look into the matter, because local customs should not be changed, and according to the regulations of our community a stranger may not interfere in the appointment of the roshim, roznim [rulers], nagidim, leaders of the community, new and old, together with his honour, the exalted rabbi, the nagid, the parnas and the rosh, and the nagid, our representative on the regional council. We chose two delegates from among those present at the meeting, [charging them] to approach our noble governor on this matter. Unfortunately, however, he was busy at that time. So we sent to his exalted honour, the katzin, our teacher, rabbi Yozpe, to tell him to abandon the path of innovation, that is, instituting something that has never existed in our community before, and particularly abrogating our long established regulations. In his meeting with the leaders we sent to him, he agreed to give up [on his candidacy]. However, we decided to keep our counsel until we have approached our noble governor. We therefore decided to convene a meeting of all those concerned with appointing the rabbi on Tuesday in order to make a final decision. These are the words of the leaders of the community, new and old, together with his honour, the great rabbi who is head of the region. Sunday, 11 Heshvan, 5495. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

154 Ecc. 10:4.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795



131

No. 33 The Report of the Treasury Commission on the Organization of the Council of Four Lands, 8 July 1739

Published in: Y. Halperin, Pinkas Va‌ʾad Arba Aratzot, Jerusalem 1945, no. 57 (in Polish section), pp. LV–LVIII; Goldberg and Kaźmierczyk, Sejm Czterech Ziem. Źródła, Warszawa 2011, no. 56 (57), pp. 116–120. The Congress of Crown Jewry155 took place in Jarosław, while His Honour Jan Czapski was Chief Treasurer to the Crown, beginning on March 15 and ending on July 8th, 1739. The instructions of the Jewish Congress in 1739 were made … by His Honour Działyński1, Podkomorzy of Poznań, who was appointed Commissar to the Congress by the Crown Treasury.156 1. Since disagreement often breaks out among the rabbis who come to our congresses to sit in judgement and deal with other matters, over who should take the first seat [at the congress] and chair the session, a great deal of time is wasted before they come to agreement. The delegates, tax administrators, and other elders of the Council also actively promote their own interests in these arguments, which is sometimes not helpful and even detrimental to the Council. So, in order to avoid such disputes and pointless arguments, we have made the following rule to be observed in all future [meetings]: the rabbi, in whose region the General Congress is held will take the chair; no dissent will be allowed…. 3. Great harm befalls the Council, because the less senior rabbis—the communal ones—interfere in economic matters, [as well as in] the deliberations and regulations of the Lands. Though they are chosen to be the watchmen of our religion and pay no taxes—quite the reverse, those who live beside the synagogue are paid a salary [by our communities] and live from that—yet they take what is not due to them and use various means to receive honours, such as the posts of delegate, assessor, trustee, and scribe, which are due to us as the lay leadership who bear all the [tax] burdens. So, in order to prevent this competition and greed for those posts and honours, which are unbecoming for rabbis, we have decided and decreed that no rabbi now, or in the future, should dare to stand as delegate, assessor, or trustee, upon penalty of losing rabbinic office and being banned from the [Council] table. Should any region or community put such one up for a post or elect him, then it will not only lose its representation among the 155 This refers to the Polish Jewish parliamentary body, known as the Council of Four Lands. 156 This is a copy of a text from 1739 that was created between 1750 and 1755, when Działyński was Podkomorzy of Poznań—most probably in 1753. It appears to consist largely of a Polish translation of regulations originally issued in Hebrew by the Council of Four Lands in 1739.

132

5.

7.

9.

12.

Teller Council leaders but will have to pay a fine of 500 red zł., half to the Treasury and half to the Council…. We decree that the trustees must fulfill the regulations of this Congress and keep them in every respect; our Council leader must take great care and ensure that after each division [of the poll-tax burden among the communities], the accounts with the reductions [given to various communities] are handed over to the treasury every year…. We resolve and strongly decree that that the trustees who meet each year on the division [of the poll-tax burden between the communities] will stay at the place [where they make the] division for only three, or at most four days. After this, the divisions must be sent to the regions and districts; the heads of the regional councils must have them sent and handed over to the treasury in accordance with the proclamation of His Honour the Chief Treasurer to the Crown issued on September 15th of last year…. Disasters, such as fires, often cause the Jews significant damage. In such cases, the community, town, or locality may not look for salvation from the trustees [of the Council of Four Lands], who have no authority to grant reductions. Instead, it must first turn to the heads of the regional council to which it belongs and then to the regional council itself at its annual meeting for the division of taxes, and there look for a reduction or alternation [agreement]. These should be granted in proportion to the destruction and decline [suffered by the community] by the council heads at the meeting; they must themselves sign a document to that effect. […] The trustees, of whom we have five, must all come to the Council meeting [dealing with tax] division. In order to reduce travel expenses, two will be enough when it comes to protecting [Jewish] interests at the sejms and commissions. They will be joined by the Chief Syndyk,157 who understands the politics very well, is known to the nobles involved, and has access to them. They should remain an eighth of a mile158 from the place where the sejm or commission is being held and only the Syndyk159 must be there with some quick-witted attendant he has with him in order to bring [messages] and inform the trustees which proposals will concern the community of Crown Jews […]

Translated from Polish by Adam Teller 157 The syndyk, known in Hebrew as the shtadlan, was the Council’s lobbyist at the Sejm and the royal court. 158 Just less than a kilometre. 159 I.e. the Chief Syndyk.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795



133

No. 34 Resolution of a Dispute between the Wilno Community Burial Society and the Carmelite Order over the Jews’ Rights to Their Cemetery and Freedom to Bury Their Dead There, 3 August 1742

Published in: Y. Kloizner, Korot beit-ha’almin hayashan baVilna, Vilna 1935, pp. XVI–XVIII. Language: Polish At the municipal council [of Vilnius], a Jew Lejba Józefowicz, the elder of the Jewish Burial Society of Vilnius, reported in person to me, Mikołaj Antoni Petrusewicz [and] presented the document below [for me] to file … Marcin of Kozielsk Ogiński, Wojewoda of Vitebsk, Starosta of Borysów, Wierzbowiec  (?), etc. I [hereby] inform everyone who should know that in the year 1740, on 10 August, there were complaints from the Vilnius Jews about the dispute with the Carmelite Order over the burial ground. Having consulted the Jewish documents on this matter, and having heard the arguments of the opposing side, because the documents presented [to me] by the Jews made it clear that the burial ground belongs to them and that the walls are within the borders of their land, therefore, I, the Wojewoda signed below, having approved these documents, consider it rightful that there should be no further harassment [of the Jews] regarding this burial ground by either the Carmelite Order or anyone else. This I certify through this letter of mine. And in my absence, I request that the Carmelite priests protect the aforementioned Jews from any impediments concerning this burial ground. In return [for this], every year the payments from the Jews for kolęda at Christmas and włóczebna at Easter shall reach the Carmelite priests on time. Translated from Polish by Elżbieta Szubarczyk



No. 35 Va‌ʾad Medinat Lita Regulates Women’s Economic Activity, 4th Kislev 5512 (22 November 1751)

Published in: S. Dubnow (ed.), Pinkas ha-medinah, Berlin 1925, no. 947, pp. 257–58.

The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord. Previous sages and rabbis invested a great deal of time in ruling, making added restrictions [to the law] in order to stop those women who go [unaccompanied] to the houses of non-Jews with various merchandise, as earlier councils have already noted. Now many years have gone by and generations have passed—it is almost thirty years since the Regional Council160 last 160 The Jewish Council of Lithuania.

134

Teller

met. For that reason many transgressors have appeared in all the communities and do not look after their womenfolk who make their living and support their families by doing so161—their sons are almost considered bastards.162 Moreover, their inconsiderate attitude is harming the incomes of some householders and merchants in the other communities. The local communities are unable to punish them since there is a huge number of them and they make up the vast majority of society. They also have connections with the nobility in its palaces and courts. Worse even than that, they transgress every boundary and sin by profaning the Sabbath and festivals until they are [profaning] the entire Jewish religion, as is plain to all. For that reason, we have, together with the heavenly court, come with the full force of our regulation: from today, no woman shall take any merchandise to the houses of non-Jews, or priests or noblemen—not for any reason, even in groups of two or three. And all the communities must take care to put a stop to this kind of terrible behaviour. There should no women peddlers called tendlerke in any Lithuanian community and all the settlements under their jurisdiction. All the shopkeepers should be threatened with a great ban163 if they give them any merchandise from their shops. The merchants too should not give them any merchandise. Supervisors should be appointed in all the cities wherever they [the tendlerke] are to ensure that no woman should go with any merchandise to the houses of non-Jews for any reason whatever. [This order is given] in order to uproot and destroy this evil custom, so that the name of tendlerke should be mentioned no more. The [women who act in this way] should be pushed away, expelled, and excommunicated from every Jewish community, their engagements should be stopped, and of course, [everyone should] refuse to circumcise their sons, to arrange marriages for them, and to stand close to them until they agree to give up this livelihood. It should not be possible even to mention some woman going to non-Jewish houses. And should any householder see a tendlerke, he may take her merchandise for himself without consulting any rabbi, leader, or judge, and [he may] of course cause her any harm, destroy or damage her goods in whatever way he can and however he wants. In fact, the community leaders and judges in all the communities must back him up, help and support him so he can keep the goods of the tendlerke…. Even if another householder or merchant should prove that the goods were his and that he gave them to the tendlerke, it is not a valid claim, and the goods should remain with the householder as unclaimed items.164 161 162 163 164

Selling to non-Jews without an escort. Heb. mamzerim. Heb. ḥerem. Heb. hefker.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

135

On every occasion on which the New Moon is blessed, one of the beadles should make [public] announcement that no merchant or shopkeeper should give any merchandise to a tendlerke … and every Rosh Hashanah before the shofar is blown he must proclaim in the Great Synagogue that no woman shall go to the houses of non-Jews … All this is firmly and strongly ordered by us, the leaders and commanders, Heads of the Lithuanian Land, may God protect us, Monday, 4 Kislev 5112,165 in the Holy Council of Mir, may God protect it. 12 Signatures Translated from Hebrew by Adam Teller



No. 36 Michał Kazimierz Radziwiłł Approves an Agreement between the Brody and Żółkiew Communities Appointing His Subject, Pinḥas Abramowicz, Rabbi of Świerz, Scribe to the Regional Council, 23 February 1752

Published in: A. Teller, ‘Radziwill, Rabinowicz, and the Rabbi of Świerz: The Magnates’ Attitude Towards Jewish Regional Autonomy in 18th Century Poland—Lithuania’, Scripta Hierosolomitana 38 (1998), no. 3, pp. 271–72. I notify everyone who should know about this, in particular the Jews’ rabbis, the elders of the Jewish regional councils and the Jewish communities, and all those Jews that live in the Ruthenian Voivodeship. After the passing of Iser the Jew, my subject from Żółkiew, the Marshal of [the Jewish regional council of] the Ruthenian Voivodeship, the Jewish elders of the regional council at the meeting [that took place in] Brody went against the privileges that King Jan III had bestowed upon [the Jews of] Żółkiew [and] chose two marshals that were not from that town, [even though it] has been forever honoured with the privilege [of sending a marshal to the regional council]. These new marshals, the Jews Jos Lejbowicz and Berko Rabinowicz,166 formerly elders of the regional council, came instead from Brody. [Since then], there have been constant protestations from the elders of the regional council [from my town of] Żółkiew, in particular from the Jew Pinḥas Abramowicz, rabbi of Świerz.167 Noting this violation of the rights bestowed upon this town of mine, Żółkiew, and having particular 165 22 November 1751. 166 He was a member of the very powerful Rabinowicz (in Hebrew, Ba’abad) family of Brody, some of whose members held high office in the Council of the Lands. 167 He was the son of Haim Abrahams from Lublin, a very powerful political figure in mid eighteenth-century Poland.

136

Teller

regard for the injustices and oppression [suffered by] my subjects, the Jews that live this Ruthenian Voivodeship, as a result of being over-burdened with taxes, not only did I not order my [Jewish] subjects to accept the aforementioned marshals from Brody as their current [marshals] but to that end, I decided and commanded to dispatch a summons to Radom. And now, in an agreement made in Krupce on 6 February 1752 with the elder of the regional council from Żółkiew, Pinḥas Abramowicz, rabbi of Świerz, [that was] written in Hebrew and signed by both sides, it has been decided…. Firstly, that after six years of [Jos Lejbowicz and Berko Rabinowicz] serving as marshals … this Jew, Pinḥas Abramowicz, rabbi of Świerz, elder of the regional council and my subject of Żółkiew is to be accepted as a third marshal [representing] Żółkiew…. Secondly, that after the passing of either of these marshals from Brody or if one of them goes to live in another town, he should not be replaced but rather the regional council should have [only two] marshals, one from Żółkiew and one from Brody…. Thirdly, they are to commit to legally endorse in the city of Busk without delay this agreement they have made and that I have also approved out of consideration for the betterment of my subjects. [That being so], having regard for the requests of the aforementioned Jews, Jos Lejbowicz and Berko Rabinowicz, I [hereby] recognize them as the current marshals and confirm [it] through this proclamation of mine. Translated from Polish by Elżbieta Szubarczyk



No. 37 Dov Ber Birkenthal of Bolechow Describes the 1764 Abolition of the Council of Four Lands, 1805

Published in: The Memoirs of Ber of Bolechow (1723–1805), edited and translated by Mark Vishnitzer, London: Oxford University Press 1922,142–45, 149–50. Now I will tell of the great change that happened in Poland, humiliating our people Israel and taking away from them that little honour they had enjoyed from the time they came to settle in Poland, 900 years ago,168 until King Poniatosk took the throne.169 The Polish nobles believed that the Elders of the Council of Four Lands, Leaders of Israel, who always met in Warsaw during the sessions of the Diet in connection with the poll taxes to be paid by the Jews to the Crown, were responsible for causing the [frequent] dissolution of the Sejm, convoked at great expense. Each session was attended by many deputies, Jew-baiters, who denounced the Jews for every kind of wickedness, 168 This statement is somewhat vague. The first documented appearance of Jews in Poland does not go back before the eleventh century. 169 Poniatowski: Stanisław August Poniatowski, King of Poland, 1764–95.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

137

in order to deprive them of the liberties they had always enjoyed, proposing to ban them from the profitable markets in wine, cattle and other goods. Under the constitution of Poland a single member of the Diet, that is a szlachcic,170 could stop the business of the session by declaring: ‘I do not agree to this matter.’171 The nobility believed that the Jewish leaders cut the Sejms short in this way by bribing some of the deputies. As a result, the Crown ordered that the Jewish Council should be abolished [and] that non-Jewish commissioners should be sent throughout Poland to draw up a census of the Jewish population. The Jews would have to pay taxes according to the numbers [recorded in the census], and thus all the rights we enjoyed in our lands would be abrogated. At the same time the Crown, with the consent of all the noblemen, the deputies of the Great Diet at Warsaw, decided to annul the agreement between the Elders of Four Lands and the State Treasurer concerning the Jews’ poll tax. [Under this agreement,] the Jews had to pay the State Treasurer, the Podskarbi Wielki Koronny,172 300,000 gulden annually. The Elders of the Four Lands convened delegates from all the communities of the four Polish provinces, as well as leading rabbis in order to draw up proper regulations in accordance with Jewish law so that the Jews would not need to come before the non-Jewish courts. The rabbis and Elders also made regulations to cover whatever was not made clear in the books of law; these were accepted by the communities as Torah, and were called, ‘The Books of Regulations of the Four Lands’. I saw these books printed when I was still a child.173 The rabbinic judges would always meet side by side with the Elders of the Four Lands. Every important legal matter in the Polish communities was brought before this Rabbinic High Court. This excellent institution served the Jewish communities for 800 years and more.174 For the Jews, it was a minor form of redemption and a degree of honour, proving that Almighty God in his mercy and great loving-kindness had not deserted us; as it is said in the Torah of Moses, ‘And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them; for I am the Lord their God.’175 But, on account of our many sins, when the new King, Poniatowski, ascended to the throne of Poland and was crowned in 1764, he at once ordered, in agreement with the Sejm (called the Convocation Sejm, because all the nobles were then present in 170 Nobleman. 171 This is the Liberum Veto, by which one dissenting voice to any proposed legislation would force the whole Sejm to dissolve. 172 The Crown Treasurer. 173 None of these books has survived. 174 This is incorrect. Poland’s Jewish councils came into existence during the sixteenth century. 175 Leviticus 26:44.

138

Teller

Warsaw),176 a census of the Jews [to be made] by non-Jewish commissioners, in all the regions of Poland. He also ordained that every Jew should pay two złotys every year in two instalments, one in Adar, and the other in Elul.177 After the Elders and Chiefs of the Council of Four Lands had been removed from their minor position of importance, and after this small [degree of] honour had been taken away from Israel, the words of the prophet were fulfilled: ‘For Israel has not been forsaken, nor Judah of his God, of the Lord of Hosts.’178 In that year or the next, that is in 527 (1767), the prophecy of Ezekiel, contained in chapter 25, verse 14, was fulfilled: ‘And I will lay my vengeance upon Edom by the hand of my people Israel.’ For in that year was announced the Confederation, that is, a revolt against the Crown and the Senate in Warsaw….179 The turmoil lasted for five years throughout Poland. During that time there was no law nor justice in the country, but ‘might was right’. The nobles called that period Pod Kaptur;180 it ended when the whole country was partitioned, in 1772.181 Then the Polish people and their kingdom were deprived of all of their honour on account of the Jews … that is to say, that as they had dealt with Israel, so were they dealt with. All the honour of their country was taken away from them, and they were enslaved forever. And so perish all our enemies who denounce us!



No. 38 A Complaint Against the Rabbi, Janchel Lejzerowicz, Submitted by the Orla Community to Izabella Branicka and her Commissioners, 21 November 1775

Published in: A. Eisenbach, ‘Do kwestii walki klasowej wśród ludności żydowskiej w Polsce w drugiej połowie XVIII w. (II)’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego 19–20 (1956): 70–77. Points given to her noble ladyship, our gracious benefactress,182 and to the magnificent commissarial court by the householders and the whole Orla community concerning the trouble and infernal distress caused by both the rabbi of Orla and his father, Lejzer 176 The Convocation Sejm was the name given to the Sejm summoned after the death of a King in order to convoke an election Sejm. The Sejm to which the text refers was held in May and June, 1764. 177 Adar is a month in the early spring, Elul a month in late summer. 178 Jeremiah 51:5. 179 The Confederation of Bar began on 29 February 1768, and lasted for four years. 180 Though it is not entirely clear why the term is used here, it seems to refer to the forms of administrative and judicial organization established by a confederation during an interregnum. 181 The first Partition of Poland between Austria, Prussia, and Russia in 1772. 182 Izabella z Poniatowskich Branicka (1730–1808). She was sister to the King, Stanisław August Poniatowski.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

139

Hirszowicz, as well as their whole family, on the 21st day of November in the year of Our Lord 1775. The aforementioned Lejzer was, in a decree ratified some time ago by our 1. gracious lord of blessed memory, sentenced to six weeks imprisonment, the payment of all the kahal’s financial demands, and a ban from holding kahal offices for ten years. Until today, none of this has been carried out. 2. While our gracious lord of blessed memory183 was alive, Lejzer was never able to be as haughty as he is now. As time has passed, he has exerted himself to ensure that his son Janchel should be appointed rabbi by her noble ladyship. The son has followed in the father’s footsteps…. 3. It is impossible to reach justice in his rabbinic court unless it relates to matters for his friends and his family to the second and third generation…. 7. During his rabbinate, there have been a number of bankruptcies and a few deaths. It is the custom that the rabbi be informed [of such things] and that he take control of the property and the will and divide [everything] up between the heirs and the creditors. He [Lejzer], however, takes control [of everything], but gives out [the property only] to those he favours and not to those he does not…. 10. This rabbi does not keep our religion. Our custom is that during the High Holidays in the autumn, everyone belonging to our Jewish estate must make an offering to the synagogue of wax candles; even the very poorest must give. Last year, he ordered that all the candles be taken from the synagogue and melted down [for him to sell the wax] […] 13. This rabbi, respecting no member of the community, robs them without the kahal’s knowledge. We have the custom that when anyone sins, the kahal must, following a [proper] investigation, hold a sitting and order him fined. This rabbi … orders householders to be fined without the kahal’s knowledge which is against the regulations…. 18. This rabbi has calculated that he is owed overdue salary of a few hundred złotys and demands [it of us]. There is no way that we can give it to him since the town burned down twice in a year and is terribly impoverished. And for another thing, [paying salary] is at our discretion, [to be done only] if [the rabbi] manages his affairs and behaves in a kindly fashion as a good-hearted rabbi should, always sitting with his books and praying to God as our religion demands, rather than causing trouble among the householders and interfering in kahal affairs…. We have no reason to pay overdue salary to such a destructive man…. Translated from Polish by Adam Teller

183 Jan Klemens Branicki (1689–1771).

140

Teller

No. 39 The Wilkowyszki Community Appoints Its Rabbi, 8  Kislev 5546 (10 November 1785)

Published in: A. Michalowska (ed.), Gminy żydowskie w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej: Wybór tekstów źródłowych, Warszawa 2003, no. 23, pp. 63–66. It has been agreed by all, alufim, roshim, and leaders of our community, to appoint the venerable man, the rabbi, the great luminary and stalwart fortress, who exalts the Torah, is of excellent pedigree and deserving of praise and accolades, that is his honour, our teacher Israel, may his light shine forth, son of the true gaon, our teacher David, may his memory be for the next world … and to accept him, in good fortune, as the head of the rabbinical court and moreh tzedek [preacher] and head of the yeshiva in our community and in all the surrounding villages that are subject to our jurisdiction. [He is appointed] for eleven and a half years continuously, that is the number of years written explicitly in the konsens [i.e. license] given by his eminence the Duke regarding this rabbi. He will continue [to act] in traditional rabbinic ways, changing nothing at all as is the case in all communities and will be granted respect no less than that given to any rabbi across the Jewish world. And without him no man shall take any action….184 and his throne shall be established with ḥesed [kindness]185 and he will act honestly according to the points that have been agreed upon between the leaders of the community and this rabbi, as is specified in the separate document on the following page, dated as below. And we give to this rabbi all authority and power  … and all other details, regarding both the honours to be given him and his rabbinic income, which are not specified in the clauses on the following page, will continue to be as they have been since time immemorial. All this is signed and sealed by us, the alufim and roshim and leaders of our community as well as the communal representatives, the select few, in the community council room. Signed on this day, 8 Kislev 5546 here in Wilkowyszki. 27 signatures. 1. The rabbi will receive the payment of rabbi, ḥazan, shamash186 as previously. Indeed, if the dowry payment is two hundred guldens and the rabbi does not attend the wedding, then the host of the wedding is required to give to him a third of the payment for rabbi, ḥazan, shamash, in addition to the other fees.

184 Literally, ‘no man shall lift up his foot’. Genesis 41:44. 185 Play on Proverbs 25:5. 186 Rabbi, Ḥazan, Shamash (acronym raḥash) is the name for the payments the rabbi received from members of the community in return for giving religious services.

Early Modern Poland-Lithuania, 1507–1795

141

2. The rabbi will take fifteen czerwony złotys from the community coffer as his wages and payments for his sermons, as well as his lease of a house and the kropka.187 However, we also permit the rabbi to import his own meat from outside the community and to slaughter chickens for his own use without paying the kropka…. 4. In the case of an engagement contract, the rabbi will not be able to force each side to give him more than one Polish gulden…. 6. In the case of a divorce, he will take one Ducat,188 and not more than two Ducats. For a contract of smaller value, he will take only two Reichsthaler. 7. For assessments of both real estate and moveable goods, he can collect only one … [form of currency unclear] for each Reichsthaler’s worth noted in the register. 8. With regard to a fine that the leaders of the community impose on an individual or group, the rabbi will receive no part of it. He has never previously received any part of such fines, large or small … 10. The rabbi will not judge individuals alone, only as one of three [judges], unless the suit concerns a sum of ten Reichsthaler [or less], then he is permitted to give judgement alone, if both sides deem it acceptable. 11. It is also forbidden for him to prevent the alufim of the community from excommunicating any man from the surrounding villages that fall under our jurisdiction for refusing to pay his dues, according to the rule laid down by the community leaders […] 14. The rabbi is not permitted to prevent any person from being the third judge [in cases of arbitration]. Rather, all sides are permitted to choose whoever they wish as third judge. When the rabbi, ḥazan, shamash payment exceeds two ducats, then the rabbi must give the bridegroom the title, ‘our teacher’ at no cost.189 We have also exempted the rabbi and his unmarried children from all taxes, rates, and poll-tax. Once they are married, if he is still supporting them, the rabbi will be required to pay their poll-tax. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

187 A form of sales tax. A major component of every community’s budget. 188 Hebrew, rendel. 189 The title, “Our Teacher” (moreinu) was originally an academic award signifying that a student had learned enough to serve as a rabbi. By the eighteenth century, however, it had become an honorific granted for a fee to young men on their marriage.

chapter 3

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815 Cornelia Aust 1

Introduction

The years between 1772 and 1815 constituted a period of profound transitions for the Jewish population of Poland and had major impacts on the character and developments of Jewish life in general and Jewish self-government in particular. The last years of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth saw a weakening of Jewish self-government. The last Polish king, Stanisław August Poniatowski, had primarily the centralization of his administration in mind when he abolished the two supra-communal Jewish councils in the Polish– Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Council of the Four Lands, and the Lithuanian Council at the beginning of his reign in 1764 and 1765 respectively. Though this step had no impact on Jewish self-government on the communal level and members of the councils continued to meet sporadically on the regional level until the end of the eighteenth century,1 this step anticipated further moves toward the centralization of the Polish state and of the developments that awaited Polish Jewry in the following decades. It was the three partitions of Poland in 1772, 1793, and 1795 that brought Polish Jewry successively under the rule of the three partitioning powers Prussia, Russia, and Austria. This transition from the highly decentralized Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth to absolutist regimes (at least in their selfperception) could not go without profound changes for the state of Jewish self-government. Though the three partitioning powers were occupied with assessing the new and numerous Jewish population during the first postpartition years, the political changes were slowly followed by legal, social, and economic ones. In the remaining Polish territories until the third partition of 1795 the legal position of the Jewish population, its possible emancipation, and the status of Jewish self-government were discussed vividly during the Four Year Sejm (1788–92). Though these discussions had rather little influence on the life of the Jewish population, they mirrored the influence of Enlightenment ideas on Polish statesmen and Jewish reformers. In the long term, Jews in the 1 Adam Teller, ‘Councils’, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe (2010), .

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

143

three partitioning territories experienced increasingly diverting developments in all areas of life including Jewish self-government. 2

A New Jewish Population

Though the three partitioning powers Prussia, Russia, and Austria acquired rather small pieces from the Polish–Lithuanian kingdom in the first partition in 1772, they suddenly faced a rather large number of Jews living in these territories compared to the numbers of Jews living within the borders of Prussia and Austria before the partitions and the virtual absence of Jews from Russia until 1772. This new Jewish population had grown up under the favourable legal framework of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth with royal or noble privileges for entire communities, extensive economic freedom, an own internal jurisdiction, and mostly autonomous Jewish communities on the local level and despite the 1764 measures also on the regional and trans-regional level. The three partitioning powers aimed at an integration of the new Jewish population into the existing legal framework of the respective centralized states, but it seems that the administrators often had difficulties grappling with the status Jews as individuals and their communities held in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. It was not until 1671 that Prussia joined other western and central European states in resettling Jews, driven by demographic and economic considerations, on their territories. The General Code of 1730 transferred the policy towards Jews from royal decrees—still the legal basis of Polish Jewry at the time—to state law and placed severe restrictions on Jews’ economic, religious, and personal freedom. In the second half of the eighteenth century the rights of individual Jews were based on the Revised General Code (Revidiertes Generalprivilegium und Reglement) of 1750 that again posed severe restrictions on settlement and marriage.2 Due to these legal restrictions, the number of Jews in the Prussian provinces remained very small. Moreover, the Prussian 2 Albert A. Bruer, Geschichte der Juden in Preußen (1750–1820) (Frankfurt; New York: Campus, 1991), pp. 39–44; Mordechai Breuer and Michael Graetz, German-Jewish History in Modern Times, I: Tradition and Enlightenment, 1600–1780 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), pp. 147–49; ‘The Charter Decreed by Frederick II for the Jews of Prussia’, trans. by Jacob Rader, in Jacob Rader and Marcus Saperstein, The Jew in the Medieval World: A Source Book, 315–1791, rev. edn. (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1999), pp. 97–110. For a comparison, see Adam Teller, ‘Telling the Difference: Some Comparative Perspectives on the Jews’ Legal Status in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Holy Roman Empire’, Polin, 22 (2009), 109–41.

144

Aust

state increasingly interfered with the jurisdiction of the Jewish communities, limiting internal civil jurisdiction. With the Code of 1750 the power of the rabbis was seriously limited and the application of the ban (ḥerem) was only allowed with governmental permission. Even intra-Jewish legal disputes were drawn to Prussian courts.3 When West Prussia and the Netze district became part of the Prussian state in the first partition of Poland in 1772, about 3,600 Jews in West Prussia and between 11,000 and 16,000 Jews in the Netze district (6 to 10 per cent of the population) became Prussian subjects. Legally, the 1750 Revised General Code was applied to these new territories and, thus, the privileges of the Jewish communities were theoretically abolished. Most areas of communal autonomy, however, remained untouched as the Prussian authorities were primarily concerned with the economic situation of the Jewish population. Beyond that, most administrators were unaware of the legal situation Jews had enjoyed under the Polish kings and nobles in regard to their economic freedom, communal structure, and juridical autonomy.4 Representatives of the Jewish communities sought to use these insecurities and to advocate the maintenance of their traditional juridical rights guaranteed through Polish privileges. To retain their traditional rights of intra-Jewish jurisdiction, the representatives of the Jews in West Prussia and the Netze district argued that all conflicts between Prussian Jews or between Jews from Prussia and Jews from Poland should be dealt with in rabbinical courts and based on rabbinical law [no. 8]. The positive reply of the Prussian authorities to this request [no. 9] points to the initial laxity of the Prussian state in applying the regulations of the Revised General Code. Two decades later, Prussia’s Jewish population grew by nearly another 150,000 Jews, when Prussia swallowed South Prussia in 1793 and New-East Prussia in 1795. The Revised General Code of 1750 was initially applied to these new territories. As in West Prussia representatives of the Jewish communities sought to retain their traditional rights of self-government, especially in regard to the judicial system [no. 10]. After the annexation of the eastern parts of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1772, the Russian government found itself confronted with about 30,000 Jewish subjects. Unlike in Prussia, no prior legislation concerning Jews 3 Bruer, pp. 95–96, 101–03. 4 Manfred Jehle, ‘ “Relocations” in South Prussia and New East Prussia: Prussia’s Demographic Policy towards the Jews in Occupied Poland 1772–1806’, Leo Baeck Institute Year Book, 52 (2007), 23–47; Jürgen Heyde, ‘Zwischen Polen und Preußen—Die jüdische Bevölkerung in der Zeit der Teilungen Polens’, Fremde Herrscher—fremdes Volk. Inklusions- und Exklusionsfiguren bei Herrschaftswechseln in Europa, ed. Helga Schnabel-Schüle and Andreas Gestrich (Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang, 2006), pp. 303–04.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

145

existed, with some exceptions for individual Jews living in St. Petersburg and Riga. In a time of constant expansion of the administratively weak Russian Empire, Catherine the Great promised religious freedom to all new inhabitants of Russia and the validity of all rights and privileges her new subjects had enjoyed under Polish rule [no. 25]. The Jewish community in particular retained responsibility for the collection of taxes and all communal rights and religious institutions were guaranteed, which was inconsistent with the tsarist policy of curtailing autonomous rights within the empire. At first, the administration was mostly concerned with the incorporation of the Jewish population into the merchant and urban estates.5 As did the Prussian authorities, the Russian administration sought to come to terms with the new situation and to assess the new population and its institutions. The report of M.V. Kakhovskii, governor of the Mogilev province, from 1773 was an attempt to grasp the character of the Jewish communities and its members in Russia [no. 26]. With his rather suspicious attitude towards Jews, he regarded the kahal as an oppressive element within the Jewish community. In the near future, however, the government remained true to its earlier approach and in 1776 confirmed the existence of the kehilah and its fiscal and administrative functions [no. 27]. Only in the area of judicial functions was its power limited to some extent, as cases between Jews and non-Jews were to be brought before general courts. Even though Austria gained a Jewish population of 150,000 to 200,000 Jews living in Galicia in 1772 (5 per cent of the population), the Habsburg Empire was more familiar with questions concerning the Jewish population. Though only a few tolerated Jewish families lived in Vienna at the time, numerous Jewish communities existed throughout the empire, and the number of Jews doubled with the annexation of Galicia. Maria Theresa’s (1740–80) ambivalent policy towards the Jewish population wavered between mercantilist interest in Jewish economic activities and enmity. Unlike in Prussia, where existing laws were applied to the Jewish population in the newly gained territories, and in Russia, where Jewish communities retained their autonomy, a decree concerning the new Jewish population was introduced in 1776. The General Order for the Jews of the Crown Lands of Galicia and Lodomeria [no. 19] included numerous integrative measures reaching far beyond the economic sphere. The state-recognized Jewish leadership was to be run by a national directorate 5 John Doyle Klier, Russia Gathers Her Jews: The Origins of the ‘Jewish Question’ in Russia (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1986), pp. 55–70; Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern, The Golden Age Shtetl: A New History of Jewish Life in East Europe (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2014).

146

Aust

(Generaldirektion der Judenschaft) consisting of twelve elders of whom six were located in Lemberg and one in each of Galicia’s six administrative districts. It was headed by Rabbi Aryeh Leib Bernstein of Brody, who carried the title of crown land rabbi (Landesrabbiner) of Galicia. This was an attempt somehow to continue Jewish autonomy in Galicia, though it did not fulfil the expectations of the authorities in helping the transformation of Galician Jewry and thus was abolished in 1789.6 3

Reform and Emancipation

The internal administrative debates and measures cannot be understood without a general discussion concerning the Jewish minority and their role in society across Europe. The question of reforms and of Jewish emancipation constituted one framework in which authorities acted. From the mid-eighteenth century the idea of an eventual emancipation of the Jews in Europe followed a theory of ‘civic improvement’. Proponents including John Toland in England, Christian Wilhelm von Dohm in Prussia, or Comte de Mirabeau in France argued that the oppressive legislation towards Jews was responsible for their alleged faults. An alleviation of their lot and a granting of the same rights and obligations within society would turn them into more useful members of society, especially in the economic sphere. Although one centre of the debate in the 1780s was Prussia with the circle around Moses Mendelssohn and Christian Wilhelm von Dohm in Berlin, the literary debate did not yield any practical changes for Prussian Jewry until the emancipation edict of 1812. Although Catherine the Great perceived herself as an enlightened ruler, the debate about Jewish emancipation only influenced her legislation towards the Jewish population in so far as measures to change its occupational structure were implemented. Only in Austria, debates regarding the emancipation of Jews yielded earlier results, for some exceptional communities like the Port Jews of Trieste already in the 1770s.7 General toleration edicts (Toleranz-Patente) were issued by Joseph II in 1781/82 and edged towards the direction Dohm and others had suggested, though they also were an expression of Joseph II’s general attempt at modernizing his empire. A similar patent was issued for Galicia in 1789 [no. 21].

6 Rachel Manekin, ‘Galicia’, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe (2010), . 7 Lois C. Dubin, The Port Jews of Habsburg Trieste: Absolutist Politics and Enlightenment Culture (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1999), p. 46.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

147

One of the most vivid discussions about reform measures and Jewish emancipation took place in Poland during the Four Year Sejm, though none of the proposals yielded any change in the legal status of the Jews. Although the legal status and the economic activities of the Jewish population in Poland were at the centre of these debates, the forms of Jewish self-government—the kahal, judicial institutions, and the legal power of the rabbis—made up an important part of the reform discussions. In the wake of the French revolution and the emancipation of French Jews as individuals (though not as a corporate group), these issues were behind proposals for reform by enlightened Jews and were included in Polish discussions. The radical Jewish maskil Zalkin Hourwitz, a Polish Jew living in France, established a link between the debate in France and in Poland. Together with the French priest Henri Grégoire he won a prize in a competition by the Royal Society of Arts and Learning in Metz, on the topic of improving conditions for Jews. Even though Hourwitz’s essay deals mainly with French Jewry, it was—as was Grégoire’s—translated into Polish and read by a number of members of the Four Year Sejm [no. 1]. It devotes much space to the reform of the Jewish community and the role of the rabbi, rejecting any form of Jewish autonomy or jurisdiction by the rabbinate. Though most publications from Jews in Poland and abroad published during the period of the Sejm advocated deep reforms for the internal life of the Jewish community,8 it does not mirror the general attitude of Polish Jewry. The majority of Polish Jewry would probably have preferred a continuation of the status quo and opposed the abolition of Jewish communal autonomy. Similarly, opinions were divided among Christian participants in the public debate. Many negative voices rejected any reform attempts declaring the alleged religious and national distinctiveness of the Jews as an insuperable obstacle to integration. Others, such as Hugo Kołłątaj, Deputy Chancellor of the Crown, called for the improvement of Jews before granting legal rights and argued for the abolition of any separate legal status including the power of the kehilot. The rabbinate should only retain jurisdiction in religious matters.9 Somewhat more sympathetic towards Polish Jewry were the suggestions of Mateusz Butrymowicz, a liberal member of the Four Year Sejm. In February 1789, he published a brochure entitled ‘How to Turn Polish Jews 8 Artur Eisenbach, ‘Sejm Czteroletni a Żydzi’, in Żydzi w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej: materiały z konferencji ‘Autonomia Żydów w Rzeczypospolitej Szlacheckiej’ (Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1991), pp. 180–91. 9 Antony Polonsky, The Jews in Poland and Russia, I: 1350 to 1881 (Oxford and Portland, Ore.: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2010), p. 201.

148

Aust

into Citizens Useful to the Country’, and submitted a similar proposal on the ‘Reform of the Jews’ to the Sejm later that year [no. 2]. He suggested granting Jews municipal citizenship, but regarded Jewish autonomy as a ‘state within a state’ and demanded its abolishment. Though no general representation for the Jewish population of Poland existed after the abolition of the Council of the Four Lands in 1764, Jewish communities continued to send local and regional representatives (shtadlanim) to the Sejm.10 The authorizations for communal or regional representatives [nos. 4, 5, 7] show the working of the traditional system of self-government and its funding. In a memorandum, the communal representative Szymel Wolfowicz (1755–1830) from Vilna11 argued for the abolishment of Jewish communal autonomy, claiming that Jewish self-government was flawed and at times corrupt [no. 3]. He, thus, opposed the pamphlet of Rabbi Herszel Józefowicz of Chełm, who had argued in 1789 that Jews should be allowed to retain their autonomous kehilot and their judicial system. The undated proposal of Abraham Hirszowicz, a purveyor of the last Polish king Stanisław August Poniatowski, might be placed between the two extremes of retaining or abolishing any forms of Jewish self-government [no. 6]. He suggests that rabbis are only needed in the most important communities and that a group of provincial representatives (shtadlanim) in Warsaw should mediate between individual communities and state authorities. Eventually all attempts to introduce changes to the legal situation of the Jews in Poland failed as the constitution of 3 May 1791 did not grant Jews any political rights. The debates continued until the end of the Sejm in 1792 and beyond. Although the ‘Discourse on the Jews’ by Tadeusz Czacki (1765–1813) [no. 33] was only published in 1807, it is an outgrowth of the previous controversies and shows how they stimulated the study of east European Jewish history. The statesman and historian had been a member of the Four Year Sejm and tried to base his description of Polish Jewry, including the depiction of such forms of Jewish self-government as courts and the ban, on a wide array of historical sources and Polish legal documents. Jacques Calmanson (1722– 1811), physician of the last Polish king and a proponent of the Enlightenment, published his plan for reforming Jewish life in Poland only in 1796 in French and in a Polish translation in 1797 [no. 14]. In line with many of his predecessors, 10

11

On shtadlanut, see Scott Ury, ‘The Shtadlan of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth: Noble Advocate or Unbridled Opportunist?’, Polin, 15 (2002), 267–99; François Guesnet, ‘Politik der Vormoderne—Shtadlanuth am Vorabend der polnischen Teilungen’, Jahrbuch des Simon-Dubnow-Instituts, 1 (2002), 235–55. Mordechai Zalkin, ‘Wolfowicz, Szymon’, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe (2010), .

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

149

he sharply criticized Jewish communal autonomy and the judicial power of the rabbis, especially the ban, though he and most reformers were somewhat more lenient towards Jewish confraternities like the burial society (ḥevra kadisha). Calmanson’s piece was only published after the Prussian occupation of Warsaw in 1796; he sent a copy to the Prussian provincial minister, Count Karl Georg Heinrich von Hoym, hoping to influence the legislation in the new Prussian provinces. 4

The Limitation of Jewish Self-Government

During the two decades between the first and the third partitions of Poland, Prussia’s policy towards its new Jewish population hardly changed. It was characterized by repressive measures especially against poorer Jews, but did not touch the inner life of the Jewish communities. The authorities, however, understood that transferring the Revised General Code of 1750 onto the new provinces of South- and New-East Prussia would be pointless due to the very different local conditions. In April 1797 the Prussian government issued a new General Statute for the Jews of South and New-East Prussia (General-Juden-Reglement für Süd- und Neuostpreußen) [no. 12], a mixture of reforms and regimentations, without granting political rights. If at all, Calmanson’s reform plans were only echoed in the regulations concerning Jewish self-government, which was basically abolished. Though the Statute guaranteed freedom of religion, the role of the rabbi was seriously restricted and any juridical rights abolished. The only alleviation was the repeated abolition of the privilege de non tolerandis Judaeis [no. 15] in West, South, and New-East Prussia, on which many towns in the former Polish territories insisted. The Statute of 1797, thus, constituted the end of communal autonomy following the Austrian toleration edict of 1782, though it provided some more freedom for Jewish subjects than the Revised General Code of 1750, which remained in effect in West Prussia, the Netze district, and all other Prussian provinces until the emancipation edict of 1812. Only a few of the Prussian partition territories saw some short-term changes, when Napoleon created the Duchy of Warsaw in 1807, then ruled by Napoleon’s ally King Frederick Augustus of Saxony. Although the Napoleonic Civil Code was introduced in 1807, it did not lead to emancipation of the Jewish population, even though the constitution established equality before the law. Not only was such a radical change not desired by the local population and administration, but the introduction of the anti-Jewish Infamous Decree in France in 1808 also meant a setback for Jews in the Duchy of Warsaw. The Governing Commission did not abolish the Prussian Code of 1797 and even

150

Aust

reinstituted the privilege de non tolerandis Judaeis, though both obviously contradicted the Civil Code. The mayor of Warsaw did not even recognize the administration of the city’s Jewish community, but nominated a syndyk as representative of Warsaw’s Jewry [no. 16]. Only in 1808 did the central authorities of the Duchy of Warsaw recognize the self-government of the Jewish community. Concerning their general situation, the leading members of the Warsaw community, many of whom had been involved in the debates during the Four Year Sejm, turned to King Frederick Augustus repeatedly at the end of 1808 and early 1809 and demanded that he honour the equal treatment promised in the Constitution, to no avail [no. 17]. The administration hold on to the Prussian Code of 1797 until the Russian occupation of the Duchy of Warsaw in 1813.12 Unlike the other partitioning powers and the Polish government, Austria had introduced communal reforms soon after the first partition. A number of edicts were published during the 1780s, first abolishing the Jewish directorate and the position of the crown land rabbi, originally instituted in 1776. Moreover, rabbinic courts lost their judicial authority. In 1789, a specific Jewish Ordinance for the Jews of Galicia and Lodomeria was promulgated [no. 21]. Though the most liberal in comparison with the status of Jews in other provinces, it aimed at the fast integration and Germanization of the Jewish population. The edict confirmed the abolishment of traditional Jewish self-government, introduced 141 religious communities in Galicia and two in Bukovina (Lodomeria), instead of the traditional kahal. All aspects of communal elections and the tasks of communal officials were described in detail. Rabbinical courts served only as courts of arbitration and the official district rabbis were primarily responsible for religious instruction. One needs to keep in mind, though, that the enlightened impetus of Joseph II led to similar interventions into the inner affairs of the Catholic and Protestant Church.13 Russia decreed an array of regulations towards its new Jewish population. Most regulations were concerned with the social and economic status of the Jews, while communal self-government played a rather minor role. It was the weakness of the Russian administration that made the abolition of the traditional communal structures impossible. The fiscal and administrative duties of the kehilot were repeatedly confirmed in the years after the first partition [no. 27]. Discussions concerning Jewish selfgovernment and especially the judicial system continued nevertheless. A 1782 decree shows that the Russian administration had little insight into the inner 12 13

On the Duchy of Warsaw in general, see Jarosław Czubaty, The Duchy of Warsaw, 1807–1815: A Napoleonic Outpost in Central Europe (London: Bloomsbury, 2016). Josef Karniel, ‘Das Toleranzpatent Kaiser Josephs II. für die Juden Galiziens und Lodomeriens’, Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Geschichte, 11 (1982), 65.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

151

workings of the kahal or Jewish courts [no. 28]. What followed was a gradual diminishment of communal self-government. Jewish courts were abolished in 1786 and the rights of the kehilot were limited to settling religious disputes and administering schools. But even when in 1794 the kehilot were deprived of their administrative and juridical functions and theoretically limited to the religious realm, the state did not abolish them, due to their task of tax-collecting. When the Senate requested reports from the governors of the relevant provinces at the end of the eighteenth century, the reformer I.G. Friesel, governor of the province of Lithuania, submitted a comprehensive program for the reform of Jewish life in Russia [no. 30]. Like most reformers, he was particularly concerned with the Jews’ economic status, but also harshly criticized Jewish self-government. He saw the kahal as an instrument of the wealthy in the community exploiting the Jewish masses and argued for the abolishment of any form of Jewish self-government following Prussian and Austrian examples. On the ground, the numerous decrees regarding the Jew’s legal status created insecurity and confusion. In 1801, Alexander I, a tsar with reforming zeal, ascended the throne and eventually the efforts of various reformers and committees led to the Statute of 1804 [no. 31], the first comprehensive regulation concerning the Jewish population in Russia. The most effort was put into economic reform, while it failed to abolish the traditional structure of the kahal. The Jewish community retained the right to elect a rabbi and several kahal elders. Though some restrictions were applied to the power of the kahal, its right to apportion taxes was restored.14 Until the official abolition of the kahal in 1844 (1822 in the Congress Kingdom of Poland), the communal leadership and the communal institutions retained their traditional power. 5

Continuity and Ruptures in Jewish Self-Government

Jews were intensely involved in the debates about reforms of Jewish life, many of them as reformers but also as opponents of the alteration of the traditional structure of communal life and self-government. Disputes among Jews arose also from the increasing influence of Hasidism, Hasidic leaders, and their organizational structures, which often provided an alternative to the institutions of the traditional Jewish community. In the Prussian partition territories, the regional representation of Jewish communities persisted. Since 1750 the Berlin Jewish community and its first elder presided over all regional representations. The Berlin Jewish community 14

Klier, pp. 131–36.

152

Aust

resumed this central role also in regard to the communities in the newly occupied Polish territories, where Jacob Moses functioned as representative of the Jewish population in West Prussia and the Netze district [no. 8]. These provincial Jewish councils continued to exist in Prussia into the 1790s, as meetings of representatives of the Jewish communities in South and New-East Prussia in 1797 show [no. 13]. Though the Prussian government also aimed to weaken and eventually abolish Jewish autonomy, many internal functions remained within the communal authority. The entry into the communal minute book (pinkas) of the Jewish community in Swarzędz not only shows that the community continued to keep its minutes in Hebrew, but also kept its responsibility over Jewish ritual slaughter [no. 11]. In Galicia, the situation proved more complicated. The Austrian government was much more insistent on abolishing Jewish autonomy and especially internal Jewish jurisdiction. Moreover, the different religious strands within Judaism fought over who was to maintain authority. Because Galicia was a stronghold of Hasidism, various institutions such as separate prayer houses and Hasidic courts had emerged in addition to the structures of the traditional Jewish communities. This challenged the traditional authority of the kahal. Jewish maskilim and reformers were only partly supported by the Austrian government. In the first decades of the nineteenth century, Hasidism increasingly dominated Jewish religious life in Galicia and was much less under the supervision of the state than the traditional kahal. Attempts to fight the activities of the Hasidim collided with measures of the authorities to limit communal autonomy. As in Vilna, the Hasidim were banned in the Galician town of Brody by 1772. In 1785, rabbis and communal leaders of Kraków instituted a ban against the Hasidim [no. 20]. Though Kraków only became part of the Habsburg Empire after the third partition of Poland in 1795 (until 1809), the decision also was part of the strife between Galician communities and Hasidim under Austrian rule. The attempts towards reforms or the abolition of Jewish communal autonomy were thus set within multiple conflicts. Although the government was generally interested in abolishing communal autonomy it did not fully support followers of the Haskalah and sometimes rather supported Hasidim due to their social conservatism. Under Franz II (1792–1835), some attempts towards reform were made under the influence of the maskil Joseph Perl (1773–1839), although Hasidim tried hard to avert these changes. In 1815, Menahem Mendel of Rimanov (1745–1815), one of the founders of Hasidism in Galicia, stipulated regulations against innovations in Jewish dress [no. 23], one of the fields of reform suggested by Perl. The latter accused the Hasidim of spreading ignorance and deceiving the masses and wrote numerous texts against the Hasidim. His first anti-Hasidic work Über das Wesen der Sekte

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

153

Chasidim (On the Essence of the Hasidic Sect), written between 1814 and 1816, was not published during his lifetime, according to Perl out of fear [no. 24]. Perl, however, sent it to the governor of Galicia to achieve tighter limitations against Hasidism. The contract with the Confraternity (ḥevra) of the Water Carriers from Brody shows how the traditional communities as well as other Jewish organizations continued to exist despite governmental limitations [no. 22]. In territories of the Russian partition, measures against the kahal and other forms of communal autonomy were much less consistent, and most institutions continued to exist as before the partitions. Though Iakov Brafman’s (1825–79) Kniga kagala (Minute Book) is a highly problematic source, it shows the continued existence of communal autonomy as well as the fight against the system of traditional self-government, in this case by a convert lamenting the corruption of traditional Jewish self-government [no. 29].15 The examples from the first decade of the nineteenth century—if the excerpts represent the registers of the Minsk kahal as claimed by Brafman—demonstrate a rather smooth continuation of the functions of the kahal. Another traditional institution, the ḥevra kadisha was able to increase its influence within the Jewish community when the functions of the kahal were increasingly limited by the government. The regulations of Paul I, which permitted Jews to build synagogues and maintain cemeteries without the permission of the kahal, strengthened voluntary societies and especially the growth of burial societies.16 The excerpt from the minute book of the burial society in Kamnits (Kamenets Podolskii) shows its power and influence [no. 32]. The burial society of the town of Praga, opposite Warsaw [no. 18], provides a similar picture. Founded in the 1770s, it continued to exist and to exercise power over its members and the community undisturbed in the Duchy of Warsaw; this, at least, is the impression from entries in the pinkas of the ḥevra kadisha. It not only held power over its members, but also regulated issues related to charity. In the Duchy of Warsaw, certain authority was returned to the communities primarily to collect taxes, but communities even received the power of excommunication, which had been abolished under Prussian

15 16

Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern, ‘Brafman, Iakov Aleksandrovich’, YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe (2010), . Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern, ‘Russian Legislation and Jewish Self-Governing Institutions: The Case of Kamenets-Podolskii’, Jews in Russia and Eastern Europe, 56.1 (2006), 108–09. On pinkasim as historical sources, see Israel Bartal, ‘The Pinkas: From Communal Archive to Total History’, Polin, 29 (2017), 21–40.

154

Aust

rule.17 The Hasidic petition of 1818 [no. 34], which points to the existence of the Hasidic prayer house in Płock for ten years, shows the division within the Jewish community in Polish lands, though the conflicts were somewhat less tense than in Galicia. The transitional period between the beginning of the Polish partitions, the French revolution, and the Congress of Vienna was characterized by attempts of the respective state authorities to grapple with the question of how to fit Jews into the existing social and political system and how to make them useful for the state. Out of an Enlightenment discourse, the abolishment of the autonomous institutions of Jewish self-government played an important role in the public and internal debates. In practice, however, the enforcement of measures against the Jewish self-government fell behind. While Austria and to some lesser extent Prussia sought to create alternative structures and diminish the influence of rabbis and communal elders, Russia was dependent on the kahal for administrative reasons. Certain forms of self-government continued in all partition territories, but especially in Russia. Bibliographic References Aust, Cornelia, ‘Burying the Dead, Saving the Community. Jewish Burial Societies as Informal Centres of Jewish Self-Government’, Polin, 34 (2022), pp. 203–223. Bałaban, Majer, Dzieje Żydów w Galicyi i w Rzeczpospolitej Krakowskiej 1772–1868 (Lwów: Nakł. Księgarni Polskiej B. Połonieckiego, 1914). Bartal, Israel, The Jews of Eastern Europe, 1772–1881 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002). Bartal, Israel, ‘The Pinkas: From Communal Archive to Total History’, Polin, 29 (2017), pp. 21–40. Bartal, Israel, and Antony Polonsky, ‘Introduction: The Jews of Galicia under the Habsburgs’, Polin, 12 (1999), pp. 3–24. Bershadsky, Sergey, ‘Polozhenie o evreyakh 1804 goda’, Voskhod, 15.1 (1895), pp. 82–104; 15.3 (1895), pp. 69–96; 15.4 (1895), pp. 86–96; 15.6 (1895), pp. 33–63. Bershadsky, Sergey, ed., Russko-evreiskii arkhiv: Dokumenty i materialy dlya istorii evreev v Rossii, 2 vols (St. Petersburg: Obshchestva rasprostran. prosveshch. mezhdu evreiami v Rossii, 1882).

17

Artur Eisenbach, ‘The Central Representation of the Jews in the Warsaw Duchy 1807–1815’, in The Broken Chain: Polish Jewry through the Ages, ed. Israel Bartal and Israel Gutman (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center, 1997), pp. 287–313 [Hebrew].

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

155

Bloch, Philipp, ‘Judenwesen’, in Das Jahr 1793: Urkunden und Aktenstücke zur Geschichte der Organisation Südpreussens, ed. Rodgero Prümers (Poznań: Eigenthum der Gesellschaft, 1895), pp. 591–628. Brawer, Abraham, Galicia and Her Jews: Studies in the History of Eighteenth-Century Galicia (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1965) [Hebrew]. Bruer, Albert A., Geschichte der Juden in Preußen (1750–1820) (Frankfurt a.M. and New York: Campus, 1991). Czacki, Tadeusz, Rosprawa o Żydach (Wilno: Józef Zawadzki, 1807). Czubaty, Jarosław, The Duchy of Warsaw, 1807–1815: A Napoleonic Outpost in Central Europe (London: Bloomsbury, 2016). Dynner, Glenn, Men of Silk: The Hasidic Conquest of Polish Jewish Society (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2006). Eisenbach, Artur, ‘Status prawny ludności żydowskiej w Warszawie w końcu xviii i na początku xix wieku’, BŻIH, 34 (1961), pp. 3–16. Eisenbach, Artur, The Emancipation of the Jews in Poland, 1780–1870 (Oxford and Cambridge, Mass.: Basil Blackwell, 1991). Eisenbach, Artur, ‘The Central Representation of the Jews in the Warsaw Duchy 1807–1815’, in The Broken Chain: Polish Jewry Through the Ages, ed. Israel Bartal and Israel Gutman (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center, 1997), pp. 287–313 [Hebrew]. Eisenbach, Artur, Jerzy Michalski, Emanuel Rostworowski, and Janusz Woliński, eds., Materiały do dziejów sejmu czteroletniego, VI (Wrocław: Zakład im. Ossolińskich, 1969). Fishman, David E., Russia’s First Modern Jews: The Jews of Shklov (New York: NYU Press, 1995). Goldberg, Jacob, ‘From Lobbying to Statesmanship: Community Representatives in the Time of the Four Year Sejm, 1788–1792’, in The Jewish Society in the Polish Commonwealth, ed. Jacob Goldberg (Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 1999), pp. 217–231 [Hebrew]. Greenberg, Louis, The Jews in Russia: The Struggle for Emancipation, 2 vols (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1951–1953). Grodziski, Stanisław, ‘The Jewish Question in Galicia: The Reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph II, 1772–1790’, Polin, 12 (1999), pp. 61–72. Guesnet, François, ‘Politik der Vormoderne—Shtadlanuth am Vorabend der polnischen Teilungen’, Jahrbuch des Simon-Dubnow-Instituts, 1 (2002), pp. 235–55. Guttman, Mattathias Ezekiel, Rabi Mendel mi-Rimanov: Ḥayav, peʿulato ve-torato (Tel Aviv: Mosad ha-Rav Kuk, 1953). Heyde, Jürgen, ‘Zwischen Polen und Preußen—Die jüdische Bevölkerung in der Zeit der Teilungen Polens’, in Fremde Herrscher—fremdes Volk. Inklusions- und Exklusionsfiguren bei Herrschaftswechseln in Europa, ed. Helga Schnabel-Schüle and Andreas Gestrich (Frankfurt a.M.: P. Lang, 2006), pp. 297–332.

156

Aust

Hildermeier, Manfred, ‘Die jüdische Frage im Zarenreich. Zum Problem der unterblie­ benen Emanzipation’, Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 32.2 (1984), pp. 321–57. Hundert, Gershon David, Jews in Poland–Lithuania in the Eighteenth Century: A Genealogy of Modernity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004). Jehle, Manfred, ‘ “Relocations” in South Prussia and New East Prussia: Prussia’s Demographic Policy towards the Jews in Occupied Poland 1772–1806’, Leo Baeck Institute Year Book, 52 (2007), pp. 23–47. Karniel, Josef, ‘Das Toleranzpatent Kaiser Josephs II. für die Juden Galiziens und Lodomeriens’, Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Geschichte, 11 (1982), pp. 55–71. Klier, John Doyle, Russia Gathers Her Jews: The Origins of the ‘Jewish Question’ in Russia (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1986). Levanda, Vitaly Osipovich, Polnyi khronologicheskii sbornik zakonov i polozhenii, kasaiushchikhsia evreev, ot ulozheniia tsaria Alekseia Mikhailovicha do nastoiashchego vremeni, 1649–1873: izvlechenie iz Polnykh sobranii zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii [Complete Chronological Collection of the Laws and Statutes Relating to the Jews, from the Edict of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich to Our Times, 1649–1873: Selection of the Complete Laws of the Russian Empire] (St. Petersburg: K.V. Trubnikov, 1874). Michałowska-Mycielska, Anna, Pinkas kahału swarzędzkiego (1734–1830) (Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 2005). Nadav, Mordekhai, ed., Pinkas kahal Tiktin, 1621–1806, 2 vols (Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences, 1996). Petrovsky-Shtern, Yohanan, ‘Russian Legislation and Jewish Self-Governing Institutions: The Case of Kamenets-Podolskii’, Jews in Russia and Eastern Europe, 56.1 (2006), pp. 107–130. Petrovsky-Shtern, Yohanan, The Golden Age Shtetl. A New History of Jewish Life in East Europe (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2014). Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi Imperii (PSZ) [Complete Collection of the Laws of the Russian Empire] (St. Petersburg: Gosudarstvennaya tipografiya, 1830–1916). Polonsky, Antony, The Jews in Poland and Russia, I: 1350 to 1881 (Oxford and Portland, Ore.: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2010). Rest, Matthias, Die russische Judengesetzgebung von der ersten polnischen Teilung bis zum ‘Položenie dlja Evreev’ (1804) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1970). Ringelblum, Emanuel, Projekty i próby przewarstwowienia Żydów w epoce stanisławowskiej (Warsaw: Instytut Badań Spraw Narodowościowych, 1934). Rubinstein, Abraham, ed., Yosef Perl. Al mahut kat ha-hasidim (Uiber das Wesen der Sekte Chassidim. Aus ihren eigenen Schriften gezogen, 1816) (Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences, 1977). Shokhat, Azriel, ‘Ha-hanhagah be-kehilot rusiya im bitul ha-kahal’, Zion, 42 (1977), pp. 143–233. Sinkoff, Nancy, Out of the Shtetl: Making Jews Modern in the Polish Borderlands (Providence, R.I.: Brown Judaic Studies, 2004).

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

157

Springer, Arnold, ‘Enlightened Absolutism and Jewish Reform: Prussia, Austria, and Russia’, California Slavic Studies, 11 (1980), pp. 237–67. Stanley, John, ‘The Politics of the Jewish Question in the Duchy of Warsaw, 1807–1813’, Jewish Social Studies, 44.1 (1982), pp. 47–62. Stern, Selma, Der Preussische Staat und die Juden. Dritter Teil: Die Zeit Friedrichs des Großen, IIa and IIb, (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1971). Teller, Adam, ‘Telling the Difference: Some Comparative Perspectives on the Jews’ Legal Status in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Holy Roman Empire’, Polin, 22 (2009), pp. 109–141. Wilensky, Mordekhai, Hasidim umitnaggedim: le-toldot ha-pulmus shebeineihem bashanim 1772–1815 (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1970). Wojtkowski, Andrzej, Polityka rządu pruskiego wobec Żydów polskich od r. 1793 do 1806 (Poznań: self-published, 1923).



Sources



During the Four Year Sejm



No. 1 An Apology of the Jews, November 1789

Published in: Artur Eisenbach et al., eds. Materiały do dziejów Sejmu Czteroletniego, vol. 6. Wrocław: Zakład narodowy imienia Ossolińskich, 1969, pp. 114, 116–17. A vindication of the Jews, an essay which was awarded a prize by the Royal Society of Arts and Sciences of Metz, written by Zalkind Hurwitz, a Polish Jew, and translated from the French. This essay answers the question: is there a means of making Jews happier and more useful in France. […] 7th. In order to advance that familiarity and affinity between Christians and Jews more effectively, their rabbis and syndyks must be strictly forbidden* from assuming any authority over their co-religionists except when they are in the synagogue, nor must they be allowed to bar entry to that synagogue to those who crimp their hair, who shave their beards and dress like Christians, who go to the theatre or who do not observe those customs which form no part of their religion but are merely superstitions introduced to distinguish Jews from other nations. 8th. The inhuman custom of specifying the nationality of Jewish offenders in criminal judgements should cease in all tribunals; otherwise, the crimes and transgressions of one individual cause revulsion and abuse to fall upon the entire nation.

158

Aust

9th. Although the intransigence of rabbis means that Jews are considered unfit for active military service, that should not prevent them from being employed in the militia to defend the internal security of the country. Christians could relieve them on Saturdays, while on Sundays they would replace the Christians, as is practiced in Surinam and other Dutch colonies. […] Although I have said that the Jewish nation and Christians should be reconciled, this does not mean that their kahals, whose privileges were confirmed in the last article on the edict on non-Catholics, should be abolished. Let them maintain their synagogues, hospitals, and cemeteries, and let those who wish to belong to them continue to pay all the taxes they paid before. […] * It would be a very good thing if the government were to abolish rabbis, and permanently at that, since maintaining them is very expensive and they are quite unnecessary: all they do is resolve culinary queries related to the mixing of milk and meat. NB. It is noteworthy that the author of these observations and annotations is the son of a rabbi. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 2 Mateusz Butrymowicz: Reform of the Jews, 30 November– 4 December 1789

Published in: Artur Eisenbach et al., eds. Materiały do dziejów Sejmu Czteroletniego, vol. 6. Wrocław: Zakład narodowy imienia Ossolińskich, 1969, pp. 120–22. […] 2. We abolish the authority of the kahals in civil matters such as contracting debts on behalf of the public and the community; imposing fees or taxes under any pretext whatsoever; trying any cases concerning bequests, inheritance, promissory notes, and contracts; and dividing kahals into sub-kahals and exercising civil control over them in a manner which is incompatible with the local court system. Henceforth, their jurisdiction in these matters is prohibited, so that if any kahal should presume to extend its powers in contravention of this law and use ḥerems or bans in secular matters unrelated to religion, it shall be punished for a breach of this law with a fine of 4,000 zł. Pol. subject to military enforcement for those signing any decree, order, or ban, as well as any writ or bill of exchange. Such punishment shall be imposed at the relevant noble court, on the complaint of any person, as many times as a breach of this law is proved. Moreover, any such kahal pronouncements shall be annulled and both those who issue such illegal orders and those who carry them out shall be subject to the same penalty, of which one part of the sum imposed shall be given to the complainant, one to the court, and the third part to the treasury of the policing commissions of the

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

159

voivodeship, district, or county. Only the public tax in relation to Jews, whose collection is devolved to kahals and sub-kahals in each voivodeship, district, or county and is then exacted from those kahals and sub-kahals may be apportioned and raised by the kahal authorities to ensure the stability of the public revenue. We leave to the jurisdiction of the kahal authorities only matters relating to their religion and rituals, under the sanction of a ban. The Jewish people are at liberty to elect the kahal and sub-kahal authorities, as well as rabbis, either unanimously or by a majority of votes as they see fit, always on New Year’s Day according to their calendar, and these authorities shall be subject to such election by the Jews of the kahal or sub-kahal every year. Not only should the national authorities not interfere in such Jewish elections but they should not withhold their approval or disapproval of those who have been elected. Therefore, we henceforth abolish all leasehold, rabbinical, and other payments made by Jews in this context, however they are termed and to whomsoever they are payable, and the penalty set out earlier in this article shall apply to any breach. In relation to secular cases arising either between Jews or between a Jew and a Christian, these shall all be tried in the appropriate public court, as dictated by the nature of the property they inhabit. In order that Jewish elders and religious leaders do not use religion as a pretext for meddling in civil matters, in order that they cease to exploit the poor and that they do not conceal in their pronouncements which are in any way harmful to them or to the nation by writing them in a language with which the public is unfamiliar, we desire that all synagogue declarations and kahal decrees (the authority of which may only extend to religious matters), and also all registers, contracts, bonds, bills of exchange, promissory notes, bequests, testaments, legacies, and documents of any manner or type whatsoever shall not be written or issued in any language other than Polish with effect from the first day of January of next year, 1790, and offenders shall be liable to a fine of 1,000 zł. Pol. or, in the event of insolvency, a penalty of unlimited imprisonment. Therefore, in order that the Jewish populace should perfect its knowledge of the Polish language more quickly, we forbid the importation of any Jewish books, on penalty of their confiscation, and direct the Treasury Commissions of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth to be vigilant in this regard. We shall preserve the Jewish printing houses currently operating in the country for such time as we shall choose, but we shall only permit them to print books relating to the Jewish religion, albeit they shall also be at liberty to translate and print in Polish any books which the Jews may demand. Since the requirement for all Jewish transactions to be written in the Polish language may be arduous for those who do not yet know that language, every Jew who signs any transaction which shall touch on his person or his property shall be entitled to sign and to add to his signature such conditions in his own language as he may wish, although the person recording the transaction and signature of the Jew shall immediately also write down in Polish the words which were added. Bonds, however, and other transactions requiring judicial endorsement shall

160

Aust

be drafted by Jews in the Crown lands in accordance with Polish law and in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in accordance with Lithuanian law, otherwise they shall be invalid. This exemption in respect of Jewish signatures shall only apply until the first day of January 1795, after which date we declare that a Jewish signature written in Jewish script shall have no weight. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 3 Szymel Wolfowicz, Prisoner in Nieśwież to the Sejm in Session on the Need to Reform the Jews (1790)

Published in: Artur Eisenbach et al., eds. Materiały do dziejów Sejmu Czteroletniego, vol. 6. Wrocław: Zakład narodowy imienia Ossolińskich, 1969, pp. 141, 143–45. The twenty-month period of my imprisonment in Nieśwież has been sufficient for me not only to lament my misfortune and to contemplate the harshness with which I have been treated, but also to satisfy myself of my innocence and to consider both what Jews are and the nature of the authorities which govern us. We two, plenipotentiaries of the Jewish community of Wilno, together with two Jews from the community, have borne the weight of our chains, the instruments of disgrace and punishment, for all that time, while being guilty of no offence other than that we were involved in a legal dispute with the Wilno kahal and above all that we won that case both in the Royal Courts and before the Lithuanian Treasury Commission. We are denied freedom and sanctuary when, even though universal enlightenment everywhere now speaks in defence of humanity, the supreme national authority in all its majesty fails to demand redress for this persecution of innocence. […] Ministering to the sick, the poor, and the deceased as religion requires is not done by the kahals but by the confraternities which are separate from and independent of the kahals. Almost all Jews are members of the confraternities for the sick and the deceased. The elders of the burial society set a fee from the deceased in proportion to his assets; members of that confraternity chosen by lot perform the necessary offices for the deceased; and only one-third of the money collected for funerals remains in the funds of the confraternity for their expenses and their annual great banquet, while twothirds are given to the poor fund under the management of four specially appointed head guildsmen. Significant monies for the poor are also collected in the synagogue for being called up to read from the scrolls and from the designated collection boxes installed there. The confraternity for the sick has its own funds and collection boxes, and the lighting in the synagogue is also provided, so that the kahals do not contribute financially to anything whatsoever.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

161

That is all that Jews are obliged to do in relation to religion and religious observance, and thus it is clear that the Jewish religion has no need of kahals and that neither religion nor the religious observance it engenders can be permitted to amount to a state within a state. Let us now consider the nature of Jewish civil government and how the policies of the elders and their usurpation of excessive privileges create a separate estate in Poland, whose seat is the kahal and whose bastions are the courts. I admit that I take as my guide the Wilno kahal, on the basis that all kahals are alike and if any of them has not yet reached such dominance, who is to say that it does not aim for the same degree of ambition and power or will not achieve it? The kahal is formed of fourteen persons who are subject to once-yearly elections. The synagogal or Jewish clerical court is formed of twelve persons again elected annually. The kahal passes various resolutions and, by imposing fixed taxes (which should be the prerogative solely of the national legislature), becomes master of the assets of ordinary citizens. Meanwhile it pays for its own salaries out of the money it extorts from the community and squanders and fritters away the rest as it pleases. Does this have anything to do with religion? The kahal sells ḥazaka18 rights and takes money for them and by doing so causes manifest harm to the owners of village inns and townhouses and palaces, since no other Jew can take over an inn which is subject to a ḥazaka or bid for the lease unless he first buys the ḥazaka from its owner or buys him out. In the towns, meanwhile, firstly no other Jew can be a businessman, tailor, furrier, or haberdasher unless he has a ḥazaka on the business or on its owner in person. Secondly, no Jew is able to buy anything from that business or from its owner unless he first pays for the ḥazaka. Thirdly, when a Jew lives in a house which has been sold by the kahal subject to a ḥazaka, he is obliged to pay towards the ḥazaka a third of what he pays in rent to the owner of the house, and if he were to move, he must find another Jew to take his place in order to prevent a Catholic moving in and the income from the ḥazaka being reduced. What relevance does this have to religion? […] When the kahal devises some venture which it anticipates will cause difficulties or be a nuisance, it sets a condition known as a khates-hakohel,19 through which it 18

19

Ḥazaka (or ḥazoke in Yiddish) is a Jewish legal tradition comparable to the usufruct, the right to enjoy the use and advantages of a property or a business opportunity. In the eastern European Jewish tradition, the term ḥazaka also was used to define the right of membership of a community and of settlement. Probably the Yiddish form of ḥatat ha-kahal (Lev 4:21), a sin-offering of the community, meaning here that the leadership of the Jewish community, the kahal, transfers the risk of their actions to the community as a whole. I thank Anna Michałowska-Mycielska for this and the next note.

162

Aust

provides a guarantee against any compensation and costs and losses, dissipates kahal funds, issues caragrafy20 for the kahal like bank notes, and thereby vastly increases the indebtedness of the kahal. In addition to the fixed taxes, or krobki,21 the kahal also demands the payment of various duties and enforces them on pain of a ḥerem. […] The kahal establishes monopolies on silk, gold, and silver filaments, yarn, camel hair, kosher wine, and etrogim22 and although such monopolies have been abolished by decree of the Lithuanian Treasury Commission, when the kahal prohibits all other Jews from trading in these goods under threat of a ḥerem, then decrees by the national authorities carry no weight whatsoever. Haberdashers are not even allowed, on pain of a ḥerem, to buy silk at a Christian market stall. The kahal takes a tenth of the value and price paid by a Jew for the purchase of a house, plot of land, garden, ḥazaka, etc., whether he buys it from a Jew or a Christian. The kahal demands payment from foreign Jews for permission to live in the town. The kahal takes into its coffers a tax of 6 zł. from each newly married couple, as well as 4 zł. in every 100 of dowry and 18 zł. per annum for every married couple still living with their parents. Setting aside religious charges (which have nothing to do with the kahal and which pay for the synagogue and its lighting, the ritual baths, the cemetery, the poor, the sick, the deceased, and the pipes bringing water from the spring to the courtyard of the synagogue), the kahal, despite having an annual turnover of well over a hundred thousand solely for its civil administration, was unable to clear a debt of 700,000 because it did not wish to do so, since its overriding objectives and interests lie in not just not paying off the debts incurred in relation to its civil administration but in demonstrating that those debts are constantly increasing, so that the national government, for that apparently significant reason, might take a lenient view on the extortion and intimidation of the community. Members of the Convocation Sejm were already aware in 1764 that, when collecting the general tax, Jewish elders would raise greater sums from the community than they paid the Polish–Lithuanian Treasury. They therefore abolished the global tax and established a per capita tax, thereby precluding any allocations, exactions or impositions. Was the Jewish government subject to this universal national legislation? […] 20 21 22

Probably a distorted form of the old Polish word cyrograf (chirograph) derived from Greek, meaning a handwritten document, often used to refer to multiple identical copies of a legal document. Krobka, an indirect tax imposed by Jewish communities from the middle of the seventeenth century, originally collected from the sale of kosher meat, but later expanded to other transactions in the local market. A yellow citron fruit used during the holiday of Sukkot as one of the four species, usually imported during the early modern period from Corsica or Corfu.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

163

Szymel Wolfowicz Plenipotentiary of the Jewish community in Wilno Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 4 Authorization for Jewish Plenipotentiaries at the Sejm for the Province of Wielkopolska, 6 November 1791

Published in: Artur Eisenbach et al., eds. Materiały do dziejów Sejmu Czteroletniego, vol. 6. Wrocław: Zakład narodowy imienia Ossolińskich, 1969, pp. 376–78. We, all the kahal delegates who have come from the province of Wielkopolska, have assembled in order to select suitable people to stand in the royal palace and to advocate for us before the righteous, mighty, and venerable king and the nobles who hold the foremost positions in the kingdom, for the benefit of our Jewish brothers who live under their protection. We have therefore agreed to select ten representatives who will be granted powers of attorney by us and all the kahals and they will join those appointed in Małopolska and Lithuania. Whatsoever they undertake, based on their own views and with the agreement of an absolute majority of them, for the benefit of our Jewish brothers, including in matters of finance, we shall irrevocably approve, together with their resolutions and proscriptions. Their authority shall extend to all the kahals in the province of Wielkopolska. We have all agreed that the delegate from the voivodeship of Poznań will be the honourable and learned Mr. Symcha Hakohen of Poznań, from the voivodeship of Kalisz the honourable and learned Mr Fiszel of Kalisz, from the voivodeship of Sieradz the esteemed rabbi Elimelech of Piotrków, from the voivodeship of Łęczyca the learned and honourable Mr Icchak on behalf of Łęczyca, from the voivodeship of Płock the honourable and learned Mr Hirsz of Płock, from the voivodeship of Mazovia the learned and notable Mr Henoch of Wyszogród, from the voivodeship of Rawa the learned and honourable Mr Zelig of Stawisko. We have not yet selected a delegate from the voivodeship of Kujawy since we await the appointment of delegates by kahal members in the voivodeship of Kujawy. The delegates named above will co-opt three eminent rabbis present here today, namely the esteemed rabbi of Kępno, the esteemed rabbi of Łask, and the esteemed rabbi of Grodzisk, in order to undertake whatever they consider appropriate for the benefit of our Jewish brothers. For our part, we shall categorically approve all they do and God forbid that anyone from a kahal in the provinces of Wielkopolska should challenge them or attempt to undermine [their resolutions]. If any one of those present wishes to resile from the [general] view, he is entitled to express his opinion solely to the remaining delegates or to one of them. The delegates have the right—if they consider it apt that ‘in the multitude of counsellors there is safety’—to select and co-opt whomsoever they wish. The

164

Aust

validity of matters agreed jointly by the delegates and the three above-named co-opted rabbis shall be deemed endorsed under penalty of a grand ḥerem. We and all the kahals are duty bound to give everything our categorical approval. All that which is set out above was agreed by all the delegates from the provinces of Wielkopolska here present. In confirmation of the truth of the aforesaid, we have given our signatures. 18 Cheshvan 5552. Mosze son of Icchak of Krotoszyn Szabtaj son of Benjamin of Kalisz Szlomo son of Menachem of Strzelin Icchok Icek Dawid son of Juda of Tykocin Abraham son of Jakub Eliasz son of Aron of Sierpsk Szymszon of Wyszogrod Meir of [illegible] Szymcha Kohen Szpira delegate from Poznań Cwi Hirsz of Kraków Baruch of Sochaczew Azriel son of Elimelech of [illegible] Meir of Lask Icchak Abraham Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 5 Authorization by the Kahal in Krynki for Plenipotentiaries in Warsaw, Krynki, 29 December 1791

Published in: Artur Eisenbach et al., eds. Materiały do dziejów Sejmu Czteroletniego, vol. 6. Wrocław: Zakład narodowy imienia Ossolińskich, 1969, p. 386.

We, the honourable and elder members of the kahal in the town of Krynki, hereby grant plenipotentiary powers to the learned elder, the honourable Mr Gerszon, son of Mr Zvi of the community of Amdur23 and the learned elder, the honourable Mosze, son of the esteemed rabbi Jehoszua Szapiro from the town of Zelwa and the learned elder, the honourable Mr Jankel, son of Mr Joel of the town of Skidel, who are departing for the royal city of Warsaw in order to attend to the needs and public affairs of all 23

Mistakenly transcribed as ‘Azror’ in the source. A Lithuanian Jewish community also referred to as Indura.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

165

of our Jewish brothers resident in this province and to seek to present the needs of our Jewish brothers to His Majesty the King and the noble lords. They are to use their best endeavours in relation to matters concerning our kahal in Krynki to ensure that the townspeople do not control us and they shall also make the necessary efforts in relation to other matters concerning our kahal. Their hand is our hand, their actions our actions and we shall not be able to say anything etc. [against their resolutions]. In confirmation of this we give our signatures. Today, Monday 3 Tevet 5552. Here in the town of Krynki. Pinchas, son of Icchak Josef, son of Juda Szalom, son of Arie Szmuel, son of Natan Mordechaj, son of Meir Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 6 Abraham Hirszowicz, a Plan to Reform and Improve Customs (1791/92)

Published in: Artur Eisenbach et al., eds. Materiały do dziejów Sejmu Czteroletniego, vol. 6. Wrocław: Zakład narodowy imienia Ossolińskich, 1969, pp. 522–23. […] 4. The appointment of a rabbi in every town is an act of outright oppression against Jews; estate owners are aware that it is in their interests when they instal a rabbi to extract a certain sum of money from him, but that the rabbi awards himself an amount four and more times greater and extorts it from other Jews, to the extent that the towns decline and collapse. It is of these that Micah speaks in chapter 3: ‘Hear, you heads of Jacob and rulers of the house of Israel: it is not for you to know justice; who hate the good and love the evil, who strip the skin from the people and the flesh from their bones’. ‘Hear, I pray you, O heads of Jacob, and ye princes of the house of Israel; Is it not for you to know judgement? Who hate the good, and love the evil; who pluck off their skin from off them, and their flesh from off their bones.’ It would be best if only the principal synagogues had rabbis, and not each and every one. That would serve to prevent all manner of extortion and oppression. However, in order that the nobles do not suffer, I suggest the following method: the kahal in every town should voluntarily give the relevant noble the same amount of money, in instalments, as the rabbi would have paid him. The abolition of this Jewish appointment would bring great relief to the towns, since they would no longer be subject to the rabbi’s exactions and other

166

Aust

extortions, and they would return to order; it would remove the means of fomenting endless discord, arguments, complaints, excuses, and similar sham practices involving others from which they derive income and perquisites. Moreover, a rabbi is not at all necessary for Jewish religious observance, especially since each town has its own clergy. 5. In order that every town should be free from the incessant costs and fees for travel on kahal business, each voivodeship should have one plenipotentiary agent in Warsaw, selected from amongst the wisest Jews, someone whose ability, manners, and trustworthiness are exemplary, who could advance Jewish concerns before the Crown Treasury Commission and other tribunals situated there, and thereby avoid Jews from each kahal having to travel to and fro and spend money on the most trivial matters. Such a Jew should be awarded a fixed salary paid by all the kahals in the voivodeship. He meanwhile will be responsible for advancing any interests of theirs which come about and for resolving them insofar as possible, if the need arises. He will also be required to remain in postal correspondence with the voivodeship as the situation demands. This would bar the road to Warsaw for those Jews who tramp it unnecessarily and who use various pretexts simply to busy themselves in fraudulent activity there. 6. Every kahal should have a proper hospital for its town’s poor, as well as for the infirm, for senile invalids, and the incapable. It should not be required to spend any money on the idle and on healthy beggars, for whom it is currently obliged to raise money, and whom it has to transport from one place to the next and provide with alms. Afterwards, when Jews are granted land, they could sustain themselves by ploughing, sowing, and establishing orchards and apiaries. Alternatively, if the more important inhabitants of districts and counties when putting their estates in order wished to employ them to build dams or bridges, mend roads, dry out marshland, dig canals or ditches, and clear rivers of obstructions, then the country would benefit and they would have both work and food. Thus the poor in their ever-increasing thousands need to be properly provided for, or rather a way needs to be found to make them useful to the nation by contributing to the general good. However, it is essential that the poor who work on the roads and canals should receive reliable and fair pay (as is the custom now in France) with which they could obtain adequate food, since they cannot be compelled to do this for nothing. […] Abraham Hirszowicz Agent of His Majesty the King Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815



167

No. 7 Collection to Finance the Costs of a Journey from Tykocin to Warsaw (11 Shevat 5551 [16 January 1791])

Published in: Israel Halperin, Mordechai Nadav, ed. Pinkas kahal Tiktin, 381–566: Haskamot, haḥlatot ve-takanot kefi she-heʾetikan min ha-pinkas ha-mekori she-avad ba-Shoʾah. Jerusalem: Ha-akademia ha-leʾumit ha-israelit la-mada’im, 1996, pp. 666–67. Register that was imparted for the collection [of funds to finance] the costs of a journey to Warsaw on Tuesday, 11 Shevat 5550 (1790). After a [certain] period this will be deducted from future donations or from certain contributions to the community. The monthly chairman [parnas] is hereby obligated to collect the entire register, all of it, today, and nothing should be lacking, not even one penny. And everything has been collected as is detailed below: [The document itemizes the contributions of twenty-nine community members towards the delegation to Warsaw. They include three donations of twenty gold coins, one donation of twelve gold coins, and six gold coins each from the remaining twentyfive community members.] All of the above was concluded with the agreement of the entire assembly. And I did as I was commanded, and I give my signature as evidence, at the order of the entire assembly. Words of the holy man, Shlomo Zalman, son of our lord, teacher, and rabbi, the teacher and rabbi, Rabbi Shmuel Halevi. Exemption of a Person who Travelled to Warsaw as an Emissary from Appointment as Tax Assessor (11 Shevat 5551 [16 January 1791]) The esteemed man, the rabbi, the leader and elder [nagid], our teacher and rabbi, Rabbi Yosef, son of our teacher and rabbi, Rabbi Yeruḥam Fishl, in his great generosity undertook a journey to the royal city of Warsaw for the good of the entire population without receiving any payment for this activity. Therefore, the alufim [officers], rozanim [leaders], members of the assembly declared … in this regard, that the rabbi, the head, and elder, our teacher and rabbi, this Rabbi Yosef, will no longer be appointed as tax assessor and his name will not be placed in the ballot for [choosing] tax assessors, either assessors or head-assessors, without his agreement. And I hereby sign in confirmation of this, at the command of these alufim, rozanim, elders, today, Tuesday, 11 Shevat 1790, the holy man, Shlomo Zalman Halevi. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

168

Aust

Prussian Partition No. 8 Petition of Jacob Moses,24 Representative of the Jews of West Prussia and the Netze25 District, Berlin, July 29, 1775

Source: Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, HA II, Abt. 9 Materien, Tit. LXVI, Sekt. 1, Nr. 4, Bd. 1, pp. 158–60. […] 2°) It will be the most effective way to advance and expand the commerce, which the Jews carry out in West Prussia and the districts along the Netze river to Poland and which they seek to promote with great effort, that the rabbi and the assessors will judge all disputes and legal matters among these aforementioned Jews or between them and their fellow Polish Jews according to rabbinic law. The Jews in West Prussia and in Poland are ignorant of the German language and are unable to articulate themselves in this language. Therefore they pen all their contracts, bills of exchange, handwritten documents, and mamrans26 in rabbinic language. These documents, however, cannot be translated into another language nor can their content, their liability, or their validity be understood and judged without a thorough understanding of the language and without sufficient knowledge of rabbinic law. Your Royal Majesty most graciously will deign to assess that the difficulties and ramifications, which these merchants face when deciding their disputes and legal matters, can strongly reduce the trust among them. Therefore, this also would have the most harmful influence on commerce itself and would lead to its constriction and decline. If the Jewish merchants in West Prussia or their fellow believers from Poland would have to seek and receive justice in their disputes and legal matters among each other at a regular court, this would soon appear as a great disadvantage in the commerce of West Prussian Jewry to Poland. As already mentioned, they cannot make themselves understood in the usual language of the courts, hence they likewise could not give the necessary and decreed instruction to an advocate. Even if this could be done through interpreters and translations at least to 24

25 26

Jacob Moses was one of the elders of the Berlin Jewish community and repeatedly intervened for the Jews in the new Prussian provinces. The Prussian king appointed him and Daniel Itzig as Elders of all Prussian Jews in 1775. In the same year, Jacob Moses was also appointed representative of the Jews in all districts along the Netze River. The Netze (Pol.: Noteć) River in central Poland is the largest tributary of the Warta River and the lands adjacent to it were annexed by the Kingdom of Prussia in the First Partition of Poland 1772 as the Netze District. Mamran (Heb., pl. mamranot), is a debt bill developed in fourteenth-century Poland (called membrana in Polish). Among Jews, the mamran was issued in Hebrew or Yiddish and facilitated commerce, but was less widely circulated than bills of exchange. Mamranot ceased to exist by the early nineteenth century.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

169

some degree, it would be connected with exceptional difficulties and burdens, and also with a very evident delay of the matter itself. The Jews in West Prussia and in Poland would consider this nothing else than a noticeable damage, and the faster dispute and legal matters between merchants can be decided the better it is for commerce itself. Because commerce can only flourish if it suffers no constrain or lag and delay of the merchants in their business and its progress. It needs to be added that the Jews in West Prussia and Poland were used to bowing to the judgement of the rabbi in their legal matters as they trusted his knowledge of the law and their customs for many centuries. And the rabbi is still able with the kind of spiritual force, which he exercises, and through the religious means of coercion,27 to urge Jews in the most remote provinces to follow his judgement without particular delays. […] Since Your Royal Majesty’s highest intention is directed towards the expansion of foreign trade from West Prussia to Poland in particular: This can be achieved under the given circumstances if His Highness—as I ask for most humbly in the name of the Jews in the Netze districts—permits these Jews among themselves or between them and their fellow believers in Poland to seek decisions in occurring disputes and legal matters from the rabbi and according to rabbinic law. Moreover, He will deign to stipulate this decision in the general privilege to be issued. […] Translated from German by Cornelia Aust



No. 9 Resolution for the Representative of the Jews in West Prussia and the Netze District, Jacob Moses, Berlin, 18 August 1775

Source: Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, HA II, Abt. 9 Materien, Tit. LXVI, Sekt. 1, Nr. 4, Bd. 1, p. 166. Jacob Moses, the Representative of the Jews in West Prussia and the districts along the Netze, receives the following resolution concerning his petition in the name of the Jews in West Prussia, which he submitted on the 29th of the previous month; that is: on 1. and 2. […] that disputes and legal matters among [West Prussian] Jews themselves and between them and their fellow believers in Poland might be judged by rabbi and according to rabbinical law, as far as this can be done based on the established basic principles of the Jews […]. Translated from German by Cornelia Aust 27

Jacob Moses refers to the ban (ḥerem) here that allowed Jewish authorities under certain circumstances to force Jews to social discipline.

170

Aust

No. 10 Questioning of the Syndic and the Elders of the Jews in Posen by the Judicial Authority Concerning the Authority and Custom of Their Jurisdiction, Posen, 2 and 3 July 1793

Published in: Philipp Bloch. ‘Judenwesen.’ In Das Jahr 1793: Urkunden und Aktenstücke zur Geschichte der Organisation Südpreussens. Edited by Rodgero Prümers. Posen, 1895, pp. 617–19. a) Record, Posen, 2 July 1793. The local Jews’ syndic, Isaac Wolff, turned up at the signee below following the decree of 24 June. With him we went over the privileges, which were issued partly to the Jews in Poland in general, and partly to the Jews of Posen in particular by the former Polish kings, based on a copy that was certified by the court of Posen in the year 1705 and which has been submitted sub A. The appeared stated that these privileges referred mostly to the main privilege, which was issued to all Jews in Great Poland by Duke Bolesław in 1264, and which was confirmed by King Kazimierz in 1343.28 […] Moreover, the appeared presented a small folio volume concerning a decree that had been published in 1780 in Polish due to several complaints. The marked passage on fol. 31 reads according to him in German: Only legal matters between Jews and Christians that were first decided by a Jewish court and were appealed, need to be decided in the voivode court, in accordance with the privileges. Therefore, it has been maintained continuously down to these days that any civil suit against Jews, be it from Jews or Christians, was brought to a Jewish court and its decision was then appealed to the voivode. The voivode himself executed all criminal jurisdiction, while the Jewish courts only punished minor offences. The local Jewish court consisted of the rabbi and him, the syndic. All suits brought before them were heard and recorded in the so-called minute books by year. In the minute books, he wrote down the case submitted by the complainant, the objections laid down by the defendant, and then also the decree or sentence. These hearings took place in Polish. […] b) Record, 3 July 1793. Pincus Jacob and Moses Todres, the elders of the local Jewish community, appeared and indicated that they had heard from their syndic about current negotiations concerning the Jewish jurisdiction. On behalf of the local Jewish community they want to suggest to establish a separate Jewish court for this city, comprised of a Christian judge, a Jewish beadle, who would be presented to the government for approbation beforehand, and if need be a scribe. They declared that the 28

The privilege was confirmed by King Kazimierz in 1334. It is unclear if the mistake is in the original document or if it is a typing error in the text published by Bloch. See ch. 1, source 3 of this volume.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

171

local Jewish community consists of five to six thousand families and that so few court cases occur that one person could not solely be kept occupied with this position of a judge. They therefore believe that this person simultaneously should hold another office, for example as a commissioner of justice, and should receive a modest salary of two to three hundred thaler, which the local Jewish community would be willing to raise. […] Danckelman. Pincus Jacob. Moses Todres Translated from German by Cornelia Aust



No. 11 Copy of the Letter [Contract] of the Aluf [Leader], His Honour the Rabbi Zadok, Son of Rabbi D., Ritual Slaughterer of Our Community, May Its Rock and Redeemer Protect It

Published in: Anna Michałowska-Mycielska, ed. Pinkas kahału swarzędzkiego (1734– 1830). Warsaw 2005, pp. 96–97. We, the undersigned, the respected members, the alufim, heads, parnasim [elected members of the council] and leaders of our edat yeshurun, may its rock and redeemer protect it, together with the rest of the select few [outstanding few] […]29 of our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, having gathered together, decided and agreed in unison to accept into our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, the esteemed aluf, his honour Rabbi Zadok, the son of the late scholar, our teacher David son of Rabbi Y.D., of blessed memory, as first ritual slaughterer and inspector [bodek] and second prayer leader in our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, in the ways detailed [below]. That is, his honour Rabbi Zadok will lend to the alufim of the community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, a total of 45 gulden [in speciem]30 with a promissory note signed by the alufim, parnasim, and leaders and the select few, owners of capital. And he will receive [weekly] interest from the community according to the law established by the sages, 15 gold grosze every week from the community’s treasury. And as payment [for ritual slaughter] he will receive two additional grosze for every thick beast [cow or ox] and one grosz for every thin beast [goat or sheep], and from the householders of our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, he will receive one grosz for a big goose or rooster and half a grosze or one 29 30

The Hebrew reads ‘displaced’. However, it could possibly be a reference to the Hebrew term oker harim, literally meaning ‘uprooter of mountains’, but also referring to a great sage. Reference to red złoty, gold coins. According to Anna Michałowska-Mycielska, the following word probably reads in speciem, emphasizing here that the money was given in actual gold coins and not in some other form.

172

Aust

smaller coin for a small bird, as is customary. And kaparot31 will be slaughtered on the eve of Yom Kippur without a note, as is customary. And he will receive all the rest of the income that a first slaughterer is entitled to receive from the butchers, without detracting anything whatsoever, as is customary all over the world, apart from 30 złoty that he will pay for the slaughter of fowl for himself every year. And we also give him permission to approach the alufim of the community after the end of the Sabbath each week to receive the payment to which he is entitled as second prayer leader. And beyond these amounts he must not demand any money whatsoever from the treasury of the community, may its rock and redeemer protect it. Moreover he must not demand any present or addition from the alufim of the community, may its rock and redeemer protect it. Indeed, this is completely prohibited, because we explicitly stipulated with the aluf, his honour Rabbi Zadok, that he will not receive anything beyond this whatsoever; he will receive only the payment for his work. And apart from this he is indeed as one of the members of our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, and he is permitted to engage in any trade whatsoever, but is also required to give all the contributions, both income tax or poll tax and hearth tax,32 and he is even obligated to pletin33 according to what is required of him. And so too, we explicitly stipulated that he is obligated to go to the synagogue in the morning and evening and to be one of the 10 batlanim34 who arrive first at the synagogue. This and yet another,35 he is obligated to swear with isur kolel and isur mekif36 not to slaughter either a thick beast or a thin beast or a small fowl or a big fowl before receiving the note signed by the parnasim of our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, as is customary. And when he is given a note regarding a thick beast or a thin beast, he must show it to the second ritual slaughterer, who accompanies him at the time of the slaughter, and afterwards he will tear up the note into small pieces. And regarding all this he must watch carefully that he does nothing improper,37 God forbid, and that he should not hurt his good name 31 32

33

34 35 36 37

Chickens for ritual atonement before Yom Kippur. The first tax is called bardon, an income tax; the poll tax is referred to as kop gelt; and the third term dimovi is the Yiddish term for a hearth tax (a poll tax on houses). See on these different taxations in Swarzędz: Anna Michałowska-Mycielska, The Jewish Community. Authority and Social Control in Poznań and Swarzędz 1650–1793 (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Universytetu Wrocławskiego, 2008), pp. 205, 210–11. Pletin-gest—poor guests and travellers who were invited to meals according to notes or cards that they received, directing them to community members who would provide them with meals. See Chava Turnianksy, Glikl: Memoirs 1691–1719 (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar, 2006), p. 281, note 199 [Hebrew]. Upright persons without other employment who are free to occupy themselves with community affairs and are allowed to arrive early at the synagogue. BT Sanhedrin 82a. Kinds of oath. Meaning in the slaughter of the animals.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

173

[which will cause him to] lose his job, in addition to the fine that will be imposed upon him by the alufim of the community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, if he will not explain everything appropriately, and this must be done with a thorough investigation. We agreed to all the above, and all of this cannot be changed and must be upheld for six continuous years from the day noted below. And following the completion of these six years, both parties will have the right to decide whether to continue it [the agreement] or to cancel it. Indeed, within the six years neither party can cancel the matter in any respect, in its entirety or partially, if both parties do not desire it. And should anyone cast suspicions on this contract, we, the alufim of the community, are obligated to stand at the right hand side of this aluf, his honour Rabbi Zadok. So too, the alufim of the community who will come after us, they are also obligated always to stand at his right-hand side, and all costs and damages that this man, his honour Rabbi Zadok, may incur as a result of unjust suspicion cast upon him, the alufim of the community must pay [these expenses] from the community treasury. All this was agreed to the satisfaction of the majority of our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, and the authority of this letter [contract] of acceptance is the same as that of all the letters written in [the nation of] Israel that are not as written proof and not as contracts,38 and as the authority of any act conducted by the community that does not require a purchase agreement. We, and the alufim that will come after us, must approve and uphold all the above, with all force and strength. As a sign of truth and as evidence we signed below, the alufim, heads, parnasim and leaders of our community, the holy community of Swarzędz [Schwersenz], may its rock and redeemer protect it, and with the addition of the signatories, upright witnesses, as is customary, on this day, Wednesday, 4 Elul, 5555 [1795]. Words of Ḥayim, son of Rabbi N., glory of the generation And words of Shlomo Zalman, son of Rabbi Y., of blessed memory And words of Zvi, son of Rabbi Sh., of blessed memory And words of And words of And words of Zadok son of our late teacher and rabbi, his honour Rabbi David son of R.Y.D., of blessed memory Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

38

This is a fixed wording added to contracts to indicate that the contract is not dependent on ‘any conditional commitments or promises which a person making them does not intend to keep’ and that it was written according to the opinion of the signatories and not by a scribe without their understanding of it.

174

Aust

No. 12 General Patent for the Jews of South and New-East Prussia, 17 April 1797

Published in: Ludwig von Rönne, Hinrich Simon. Die früheren und gegenwärtigen Verhältnisse der Juden in den sämtlichen Landestheilen des Preußischen Staates; eine Darstellung und Revision der gesetzlichen Bestimmungen über ihre staats- und privat­ rechtlichen Zustände. Breslau: Georg Philipp Aderholz, 1843, pp. 292, 299–301. […] Chapter IV. Concerning the religious and ritual constitution of the Jews § 1. The Jews are still to be protected during the free practice of their religion, and cannot be disturbed, either in their public or their private customs of worship. However, until now they [the Jews] have been under considerable strain and pressure from their rabbis, who were used to either buying their positions by outbidding each other at excessive sums or to leasing them. Therefore, they have been very eager to take large sums from their fellow believers not only to cover their and their families’ livelihood well but also to cover these costs. Therefore, those landowners, who have synagogues in their towns and are allowed to appoint the respective rabbis, further retain the rights to appoint a rabbi and to receive reasonable recognition, but this recognition cannot be arbitrarily high and should not have to be accepted from the highest bidder, as often has been the case until now. In the royal and ecclesiastical cities, however, the numerous synagogues are to be reduced over time. Only as many are to be kept as are required depending on the locality and the number of Jews. The respective rabbis and other necessary synagogue servants, who usually can and should consist of only a cantor and a synagogue beadle, are not only to be appointed by the Chamber without any purchase money or lease, but also are to be salaried from public funds as our sovereign’s officiants. § 2. It goes without saying that rational and righteous men, who are knowledgeable in Jewish religion and law, are to be chosen for and appointed to these positions and especially for those of the rabbis. In addition to these qualities, however, it is absolutely necessary that they be able to speak and write in German and Polish. Any substantial and well-founded objections of the Jewish community against one of those selected subjects needs to be taken into consideration. […] § 12. When their elders retire, no new ones are to be elected and presented for confirmation. Instead, one or more deputies, burgher principals, or whatever name else the representatives of the burghers of a town carry, should be appointed and adapted by the magistrate after previous confirmation by the Chamber and in the same way and with the same duties as have the Christian deputies. In addition to the task of deputies, they particularly are to do everything the magistrate requires concerning the

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

175

Jewish inhabitants and are also obliged to bring everything forward to the magistrate that concerns their collective matters. […] Translated from German by Cornelia Aust



No. 13 Meeting of the Judentag with a Statement of the Jews of South and New-East Prussia Regarding the 1797 General-Juden-Reglement

Published in: Louis Lewin. ‘Ein Judentag aus Süd- und Neuostpreussen’. Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums, NS 23,5 (1915), pp. 288–89, 291–92, 294. With God’s Help A few months ago, our gracious king, his royal highness, published the Reglement concerning uniform regulations for every district and every region in the countries of South Prussia and New East Prussia that are under his rule. And behold, we did not miss the words of truth, but rather the eyes of the blind have been opened to see in it, with the help of God, the good heart of their majesties, the king and the ministers. According to what is written in some points of this Reglement, new rules will be applied from now onwards with regard to the places in these countries under his rule in which the community of Israel has resided since long ago, and regarding the sources of their livelihood, their coming and going. Indeed this may, God forbid, bring ruin to our religion. It may, God forbid, set in motion some obstacle to our livelihood, and cause them to lose everything, God forbid. Therefore, the people of these countries decided to gather together persons from the communities of [all] the regions within these countries in order to take counsel, to seek, with God’s help, a way to approach the king and beg him for mercy, to justify to his ministers and advisors an enquiry regarding the position of Israel, with investigation and examination39 in the best possible way. And we hope that, with God’s help, they will spread the wings of their grace so that the pillars of the religion will continue to stand on their foundations and the springs that provide us with a suitable livelihood and sustenance will not be dammed. For this purpose, we gathered people in the holy community of Kleczewo, from towns close and far, from this country, endowed with sufficient power by the manhigim and parnasim of the communities, to consult together regarding how to intervene for the good of Israel, with God’s help. And all that the delegates decide, with the agreement of the members of the assembly, regarding finding a way to intervene, and who precisely will be dispatched to the courts of their majesties, the king and his ministers, and regarding funds for the expenses, so it will be. None of the methods 39

A halakhic term for the questioning of witnesses by judges. Based on the verse from Deuteronomy 13:15: ‘Then shalt thou inquire, and make search.’

176

Aust

that God will place in their hearts will be subject to change, objection, or ruination. And we, those signed below, have been chosen from all those who gathered at the holy and perfect assembly and empowered in writing by them, according to what is written in the document that they wrote and signed, that they empower us to take action in every regard. Thereby, we sat together in moderation to weigh up in balance40 in counsels and knowledge,41 these matters that we devised, with the aid of the one who graces humanity with knowledge.42 First we chose perfect, upright people to serve as faithful delegates to intervene for the good of the Jewish people in these countries. That is, from the holy community of Poznań [Posen], the rabbi, the nagid [leader], our teacher Rabbi Yakir, may his light shine, son of Rabbi Z. and the officer and the nagid, our teacher Rabbi Pinchas, may his light shine, son of Rabbi [Jacob]. However, because they made excuses that this intervention is too great for them, the assembly decided that they will choose another man from the holy community of Poznań instead of them. They accepted upon themselves, these chosen ones, that they will choose a man who is also like them, proper and fair, for this delegation and intervention. He will share the burden of the intervention with the chosen ones as long as there is a need to do so, and he will be acceptable to his colleagues, the delegates. The rabbi, the gaon, our teacher Rabbi Y., may his light shine, the head of the rabbinical court and head of the yeshiva in the holy community of Poznań [was chosen]. And from the holy community of Lissa, his honour, the great rabbi, our teacher Rabbi David, may his light shine, son of [rabbi] Landau of blessed memory…. And from the holy community of …43 his honour, the pious one, the famous nagid, our teacher Rabbi Itzik, may his light shine, son of our teacher Rabbi Sh. from the holy community of Rawicz, the great rabbi, our teacher Rabbi Yehoshua … son of the gaon, the head of the rabbinic court of Glogau [Pol.: Głogów]. From the holy community of Zaloshin [Pol.: Działoszyn], his honour, the elderly nagid, our teacher Rabbi Moshe Katz, son of our teacher Rabbi Baruch, of blessed memory. From the holy community of Grätz, his honour, the perfect one, our teacher Rabbi Issachar Ber, may his light shine, son of our teacher the Rabbi Z., of blessed memory. 2. In every single community in these countries, both big cities and small ones, they will give from the good generosity of their hearts an equal amount, that is one third of the head tax, one Polish gold coin. And they will send the funds to the faithful treasurers: his honour the great and famous rabbi, our teacher Rabbi Ts[vi] H[irsch] HaCohen, may his light shine, in the holy community of Poznań, or to the hands of 40 41 42 43

Proverbs 16:11. Proverbs 22:20. From the Amidah prayer. Page torn.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

177

the great rabbi, our teacher Rabbi Zecharia Mendel, may his light shine, son of the gaon, may the memory of the saintly be a blessing, from Lissa. And the monies that will come into the hands of one of these treasurers will be bound up under their hands until the delegates ask that they be dispatched to the holy community of Berlin, to the rabbi, the famous gaon, our teacher Rabbi Ts[vi] H[irsh], may his light shine, head of the rabbinical court and head of the yeshiva there. And they, three of the delegates from those chosen ones, will give notes to the treasurer, three coins to this gaon, and immediately the gaon will give to the delegates according to a letter of instruction from three of the delegates … 4. All the expenses that they spend, the rozanim, parnasim, and manhigim of the holy communities of Poznań and Lissa, for the good of the general population, from the past until the present day, solely from the treasuries of their communities, these will not be deducted from the value of the head tax that their communities are required to pay at this time. At a future time, this will be returned to them from all the [other] treasuries. However, what the holy community of Poznań spent at the last fair in Frankfurt an der Oder, the Tammuz market, on merchandise, due to the law of the lands made by the majestic king, this will only be deducted from the merchants coming to the next fair at Frankfurt, with God’s help. 5. Those members of the communities that did not contribute to the treasuries of the country for the general good after the meeting at Wreschen [Pol.: Września] at the above time, it is fitting that today a law be made: the new contribution required today must also be given by those who already paid what they owed at that time. Yet, it is difficult to give such a sum, which is double the amount, at once. Therefore the time for paying will be extended beyond Wednesday 8 Elul, 5557 [1797], here, in the holy community of Kleczewo. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 14 Reflections on the Present State of Polish Jews and Their Improvement, 1797

Source: Jacques Calmanson. Uwagi nad ninieyszym stanem Żydów polskich y ich wydoskonaleniem. Warsaw, 1797, pp. 28, 35–37, 39, 41–42, 46–47. The Ḥerem I believe I have given a reasonably full account of the Jewish Religion as it is observed by Jews living in Poland, and also of the various sects which have developed from it. However, this description would not be accurate if I passed over a very dangerous custom practised by them, one whose origin is lost in the mists of time. I refer to

178

Aust

the ḥerem, a sort of ban used by Jews which is more dreadful than those once used by Christians against apostates even in those unenlightened and benighted times when to discern something, to recover one’s powers of vision, and to boldly disclose the truth was considered a mortal sin. The custom, a product of the most irrational superstition, lent gravity to the ban known as the ḥerem and succeeded in branding it with the divine stamp of Religion. The ḥerem in this form was used very successfully by Jewish Doctors44 to keep the people in a state of servile dependence and to steadily reinforce the control they had acquired over their minds. In short, for the soul of a credulous Jew, the ḥerem was the most dreadful of all torments. It is fortunate for the people that out of all the countries of Europe, Poland alone has allowed this Jewish ban any degree of solemnity or authority. In all other nations the ḥerem is banned and punishable by the harshest sanctions. […] On Judges and Other Officials, Both Spiritual and Civil […] The Kahal The ruling group of this highest assembly is made up of a certain number of rabbis, presided over by the rabbi and the syndyk, and has the power to extend every form of authority to all parts of the nation. A repository of laws and an interpreter of holy judgements, this tribunal has contrived to make itself more important than either. It is called the kahal and all aspects of the political, civil, economic, and religious administration fall within its limitless jurisdiction. By the same token, its jurisdiction incorporates all sorts of despotism which it wields entirely at its own will and whim. And the thing that is of most assistance to it in consolidating the foundations on which the entire authority of this magistracy rests is the fact that, as a collective body, it has the power to impose all sorts of levies, while having no duty to provide any justification for doing so, or for spending public money. This great lawlessness, which should perturb the whole nation, seems on the contrary to be neither felt nor noticed by its oppressed people, such is the extent to which Jews have grown accustomed to all the forms of tyranny which are used to subjugate them. As long as members of the kahal act in concert, as long as they can win over the Doctors who do not belong to their assembly, they can commit all manner of transgressions without fear of punishment. And it is easy to conclude that this method is effective, since they exercise their prerogatives without any concern except that which stems from the need to preserve the credit which they have been blindly given, or which arises from the fear that the

44

Calmanson repeatedly refers to ‘the doctors’, meaning the learned, whom he considers the ruling elite of the Jewish communities.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

179

community, suddenly roused and inflamed by a righteous bitterness towards them, will one day vent its anger and its vengeance on them. […] SECTION II Reflections on a First Attempt at a Short Description of the Reform of Polish Jews […] I. The ḥerem The principal and unquestionably the most effective means of reform would be to destroy the ḥerem altogether, since it is the chief source of the tyranny of the Jewish Elders, and all the more terrible a weapon in that the Jewish Doctors use it for ill purpose. The people cannot thrive until their rights are restored. Jews will not be able to recover their rights while the authorities, triumphant in the face of their weakness and emboldened by the submissiveness of the community for so many centuries, continue to shackle them with the twin fetters of superstition and fear. […] III. On the kahal The kahal, taking as its model the supreme magistracy, consists of a certain number of rabbis and embodies and disseminates all power. This magistracy has as its principle agent or master the official who heads the police department. This man, although his position is not accorded the same respect as that accorded a rabbi or a syndyk, nevertheless in fact possesses greater powers because of the advantage conferred on him by the responsibilities of his office. And since he presides de jure et de facto over the supreme assembly, he actually constitutes the source of legislative and executive authority, since he only ostensibly shares those powers with his colleagues and in fact they are wielded by him alone. He is the one who by virtue of his office has all the means at his disposal to manage opinion as he sees fit and he who can under various pretexts contain those Doctors who might damage him. However, as recompense for his submission to a handful of people, he can also oppress and torment the public with impunity and have nothing more to fear than widespread enlightenment and indignation, both of which are difficult and in truth unattainable in a misguided nation. […] VI. On the charitable confraternity45 As is the way of the world, the charitable confraternity, in its essence a sacred and beneficial institution, has suffered the same fate as all human undertakings. Having maintained for a period the purity of spirit which had prompted its establishment, over time it has become contaminated and has strayed from the purpose set for it by those who took pity on the poor and the destitute. The principal aim of this confraternity is to gather together the sick, to care for them, to provide them with medication, in short to treat them, without reward, with that solicitude and consideration which 45

This section refers to the Burial Society (Heb. ḥevra kadisha).

180

Aust

compassion demands and which had induced our God-fearing forebears to form this worthy confraternity. Its members are also obliged to bury the dead, for money if the deceased was rich or, in the case of the poor, from its own funds, which were always generously endowed. However, because of the hard-heartedness of the synagogue’s leaders and especially the greed of its supervisors, the sums allocated to relieve the destitution and suffering of the poor are now used only for extravagance and indulgence. Despite all this, these abuses are not widely noticed: why? Because they have become almost universal in the hospitals of other nations too, where these funds, intended for the relief and rescue of the afflicted, are instead in almost every country used against them as a scourge and to speed them to their graves. This is how little love of one’s neighbour is worth today to the supervisors of these public institutions, and the service bought from them is worth even less. This confraternity, which ought to be managed by people from a variety of associations under the supervision of the synagogue, is instead controlled by a few undistinguished men of law who owe their position not to their talent or proven integrity but to the patronage which their machinations have procured, and thus their power has come to be entirely arbitrary. In order to make this Confraternity as beneficial as it ought to be, it must be restored to its original principles, and its management, together with that of the synagogue police, must be placed under the supervision of a reformed kahal, as set out in paragraph 3. In those circumstances, the members appointed to manage the society would complete a register annually, or preferably quarterly, detailing the income and expenditure of the institution, taking particular care to describe as precisely as possible the sources of the former and the reasons for the latter. The kahal should then audit these accounts and either approve them or reject them depending on whether they are accurate or false. If they are accurate, the kahal should provide the administrators of the confraternity with a receipt. If they are false, the law should require the culprits to answer for their actions by imposing both corporal and financial punishments. Perhaps the fear of such punishment would succeed in returning the supervisors to their responsibilities, something which the laws of humanity have been unable to achieve. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

181



No. 15 Repeated Directive to Abolish the Right de non tolerandis Judaeis in West, South, and New-East Prussia, Berlin, 6 February 1802 Source: Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, HA II, Abt. 10, II Generalverordnungen, Nr. 15, pp. 21–22.

[…] We, Frederick William,46 King of Prussia etc. learned that some directly and some indirectly subordinated towns of our provinces West, South, and New-East Prussia and their guilds and craftsmen refuse to accept Jews as inhabitants or to participate in their craft. They even advance judicial action to exclude them based on privileges, which they received in the past, and met with approval. However, a decision of the cabinet from 2 May 1776 has already stipulated that the old Polish constitution according to which some cities were free not to tolerate Jews within their borders, should be no further observed. Our general regulations for the Jews for the old provinces from 17 April 1750, which have been expanded first to include West Prussia and then South and New-East Prussia via the general regulations for the Jews from 17 April 1797, stipulates the following: The respective Chamber is entitled to decide at which places Jews are allowed to settle; especially in the latter, the Jews have the right to practice arts, crafts, and other urban trades everywhere in the town, and the exercise of this right is left solely to the discretion of the respective Chamber. […] 1. No consideration should be given to the privileges of the former Polish government according to which some towns and guilds in South and New-East Prussia had the right to refuse the settlement of Jews or the Jews’ participation in their trade. We, hereby, withdrew any legal power from these towns, repeal these privileges, and prohibit our dicasteries and courts, to accepts suits or to grant rights based on these privileges. […] Translated from German by Cornelia Aust



The Duchy of Warsaw (1807–1815) No. 16 Regulations Concerning the Jewish Syndyk in Warsaw, 1807

Published in: Artur Eisenbach. ‘Status prawny ludności żydowskiej w Warszawie w końcu xviii i na początku xix wieku.’ BŻIH, 34 (1961), pp. 13–15. §1. It is the responsibility of the syndyk to know about all the Jews residing in Warsaw and its surrounding areas and to establish how each one is occupied and how each 46

Frederick William III (1770–1840), King of Prussia from 1797 to 1840.

182

Aust

makes a living. If he identifies someone suspected of theft or someone who has been forbidden from being in Warsaw wandering the streets, he shall immediately order the trustees to arrest him and place him in custody at the town hall. If, however, a Jew thus suspected lives on land owned by a noble and the syndyk is not able to capture him in the street, he shall report him to the court with a description of the place where he lives and the offence of which he stands accused. §2. In order that the syndyk is aware of every decree and order instructing Jews to leave Warsaw in consequence of an offence, or imposing a sentence, he shall henceforth be notified of them by letter sent to him for that purpose by the Municipal Administration, and the syndyk shall, as with other orders he receives from the Municipal Council, record them in a book designated for that purpose. §3. Just as the syndyk should be thoroughly acquainted with the way of life of Jews staying in Warsaw and their wrongdoings, so he shall make every effort to ensure that a Jew suspected of an offence is not permitted to give evidence on oath. Indeed, if a party to proceedings were to attempt to introduce such evidence from a suspected Jew, not only must the syndyk not permit him to take the oath but he must also warn the other side of the position and present evidence substantiating the allegation. […] §5. Rabbis shall sit alongside the syndyk in the Jewish Courts and, together with him, shall pass judgement in accordance with the laws of their religion and assist him in relation to any difficult issues which arise from the Jewish religion. Meanwhile, the supervisors shall keep suspected persons under surveillance, shall endeavour to recover stolen goods, shall summon Jews to court and deliver them there, and shall faithfully report everything to the syndyk. Therefore, if any of them is shown before the syndyk to be responsible for the slightest wrongdoing or for withholding anything, the syndyk shall immediately dismiss him. […] §7. The syndyk shall be provided with an official register with numbered pages and signed at the end by the secretary of the Municipal Council confirming the number of pages. In this register the rabbi shall record all Jewish rulings, on one side of the page in the Hebrew language and on the other side in the Polish language, so that a Jewish ruling can always be extracted from the register. At the end there should be an index of rulings so that they might readily be located. §8. No case, whether before arbitration or before the Jewish Court here in Warsaw, shall be heard without leave of the President or the Municipal Council or without the knowledge of the syndyk. In the case of ordinary proceedings, it is to be presided over by the syndyk together with the rabbis. If it is in arbitration, the syndyk is to sit with arbiters when the parties require his presence. §9. Except in cases of theft, robbery, loss through forgery, counterfeiting, and similar public offences, the syndyk shall not prohibit the parties from reaching agreement if they so wish. §10. The syndyk, rabbis and supervisors shall not overcharge anyone unfairly. For this reason, the following determination is made. When Jewish religious law leaves the

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

183

question of payment following a judgement to the parties’ discretion, then the syndyk and rabbis shall not require any further gifts or gratuities other than those which the parties give them of their own accord. Sealing fees are abolished; for the requisite oath taken in the Jewish Court, the fee shall be 1 zł, for oaths taken by a witness, 1 zł; for the szkolnik assisting with that oath and holding the Torah scroll, one silver grosz. For the hearing of testimony in the Jewish Court, 1 zł 15 gr. For a copy of a decision in Hebrew and Polish duly stamped, 3 zł if the work involved is substantial, otherwise 2 zł. To the szkolnik for service of a summons on a party to attend court, 20 copper gr. if the location is distant, 1 silver gr. if it is nearby. […] §13. He shall make enquiries about any Jews who are engaged in prostitution and report them to the Municipal Police. §14. He shall not impose any taxes or fees on Jews, nor shall he collect them. If Jews wish of their own free will to give alms to the poor, this shall not come under his jurisdiction but under that of the rabbis with responsibility for the indigent and the Jewish Hospital. §.15 When, in order to counteract the large number of paupers here in Warsaw and its surrounding areas, the government issues legislation in relation to Jewish marriages, the syndyk shall be furnished with regulations governing the issuing of certificates concerning the livelihood of those wishing to marry. §16. In order to combat the continued increase in villainy and indigence, the supervisors shall be required every week to visit all the places were Jews are located in order to trace suspected persons, arrest those who are sighted or report them to the Municipal police, and also to keep a register of the poor and deliver it to the Municipal Authorities. §17. To ensure that the supervisors fulfil their obligations diligently, the syndyk shall at least once a month visit those locations as well in order to inspect and verify the supervisors’ conduct, and if it transpires that any of them have concealed a suspect, the syndyk shall remove them from their posts and substitute others, albeit always with the leave of the president. §18. The syndyk shall notify the Municipal Authorities of every change of rabbi or supervisor, the identity of their replacements, and the reasons for dismissing their predecessors and this shall also be done with leave of the president. §19. Certificates for the issuing of passports to Jews travelling within the country or abroad shall be signed by the syndyk as well as by the elders, in order to maintain proper scrutiny. Signed at the Main Town Hall of the city of Warsaw this 3rd day of June 1807 Szymon Kacperski, assessor of the Municipal Authority of Warsaw P. Bieliński, President of the City of Warsaw and the Governing Commission Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

184

Aust

No. 17 An Appeal by Warsaw Jews to Frederick Augustus, 1809

Published in: Marceli Handelsman. ‘Prośba Żydów do Fryderyka-Augusta’. Kwartalnik poświęcony badaniu przeszłości Żydów w Polsce, 1,3 (1912–1913), pp. 174–76. Your Majesty and our gracious Lord! For a long time now it has been the most fervent wish of a certain section of those who profess the Mosaic creed that the barriers which separate them from other inhabitants of a country should be brought down. Their efforts, coupled with the necessary knowledge and moral conduct, showed the means by which they could achieve this, and yet this small minority proved incapable of attaining equal rights in society. This was partly because the constitutions conferred on countries on the basis of various legislation isolated them from the inhabitants of other faiths and thus determined that they, a group which was merely tolerated, constituted a discrete and wholly separate nation, and partly because it is only in recent times that the slow spread of enlightenment has ordained that they should be viewed as equal in society. In the German lands, the actions of Frederick the Great won them a measure of change but even this was only experienced by certain people who, having been recognized as equal were then appointed to public office. Yet an act as momentous as the bestowal of equal rights of citizenship on followers of the Mosaic faith was left to the most illustrious hero of this world, the man who liberated nations from the yoke of foreign oppression and called them to a future of happiness, and at the same time gave equal rights of citizenship to those who had for so many centuries been forgotten and had no means of subsistence. Thus Old Testament believers in France and Westphalia are already beginning to experience the benefits which the lawgiver of so many countries has seen fit to bestow on them. He summoned that same people to equality in this country too, decreeing that they should enjoy equal rights of citizenship to others and although, since enlightenment among the Israelite people is still incomplete, Your Majesty deemed it necessary to postpone for a time the full implementation of the constitution granting them that equality, nonetheless the undersigned believe that, while Your Majesty in your wisdom wished by that means to convince them as quickly as possible of the true value of that beneficence, your Majesty cannot have intended to exclude everyone from it altogether. The undersigned, in their own name and in that of other German families born and settled in this city, have endeavoured, by acquiring refinement and the necessary social knowledge, by their moral conduct and by wearing the same clothing as other nations, to draw closer to the enlightened individuals of other nations who constitute civil society and their nation, and dare to presume that they will now be admitted to those rights which the constitution prescribes and that a government as enlightened as the present one will surely not preclude them from the beneficence of being

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

185

received into the ranks of citizens. For their part they can pledge that they will perform every one of their duties and make all their personal or communal sacrifices as faithfully and conscientiously as possible: they wish to submit to conscription, just as others do; they wish to pay the same taxes as other citizens; to be subject to all the laws that are prescribed in respect of other inhabitants and lastly they are prepared to make a solemn declaration in this regard and no longer be dependent on those who will not be admitted to this citizenship. In short, they want to be equal citizens in every respect. May it please you then, Your Majesty, to recognize the undersigned as citizens of this country, and you will thereby not only be the cause of their happiness but most importantly you will show to those who profess the Mosaic faith that enlightenment and the acquisition of the necessary knowledge are the quickest means of partaking in the rights granted by the constitution. The undersigned, trusting that their most humble petition will graciously be granted, remain with the deepest reverence Your Royal Majesty’s most loyal subjects: Daniel Königsberger, Isaak Landshutter, Samuel Kronenberg, Levin Salinger, Isaac Simon Rosen, Moses Eisenberg, Raphael Guttmann, Löbel Oestreicher, Wolff Lanshutter, Samuel Munchheimer, Isaak Davidsohn, Nathan Meyer Glücksberg, Leizer Selig Solmyn. In Warsaw, the 9th day of January 1809. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 18 Excerpts from the Pinkas of the Warsaw-Praga Burial Society, 1808–12

Source: Pinkas ha-Ḥevra Kadisha de-Praga, 1785–1870. Central Archives for the History of the Jewish People Jerusalem, PL4, 65–73. Today, the first day of the intermediary days of Pesach 5569 [1809] […] A regulation was also made, with the agreement of the majority of the society and together with the electors and the majority of the gabbaim, that on the new moon of Elul and the remainder of the high holy days, no person may sit beside the charity box in the cemetery in order to collect money from those arriving without the knowledge of the majority of the society and the gabbai officiating that month. All this was agreed upon by everyone, with the majority of the society. No one should dare to go to the cemetery without the knowledge of the gabbai officiating that month. Regarding the flour for Passover, it was also agreed by all of us and by most of the society that the burial society is responsible for both purchasing flour from the merchants and grinding it on the millstone. [This is] to be paid for with the monies of the burial society, in order that there should be enough flour for all the inhabitants of the town without any delay whatsoever because of us, the electors.

186

Aust

[…] We, the electors signed above, established a regulation among us. Should it be necessary to sleep in the home of a sick person, whoever is chosen [for this task] will receive a note from the gabbai officiating that month instructing him to sleep there. Should he not wish to do so or should he send another person in his stead, then he will pay the burial society a fine amounting to six gold pieces and he will not be allowed to vote in that year, until the fine will be paid. Concluded on the day written above in that year. Today, Sunday, second day of the intermediary days of Passover 5571 [1811]. On Sunday, the second day of the intermediary days of Passover, as above, R. Zanvil, son of our teacher the Rabbi Shmuel, of blessed memory, gave the vessels to the burial society of Praga: three sets of plates and three sets of knives and forks. The society must give the dishes to the trustee, so that we will make an income from the dishes to fund the needs of the town’s burial society. Once again a regulation was made at an assembly of the majority of the town’s burial society. On every new moon of Elul, the gabbai officiating that month will go himself to the cemetery each day and sit by the charity box to collect the contributions, or the gabbai officiating that month will send a faithful person every day. Any person who, according to the instructions of the gabbai officiating that month, is sent to the cemetery, he must obey and go. It is enough to be given the order; he must do it. The copy of Ma‌ʾavar Yabok47 belonging to the town’s burial society must be in the possession of the trustee responsible for the record book. It must be in his possession or in the possession of the gabbai officiating that month. […] His honour, the pious man, our teacher Rabbi Moshe of Kosov, came before us with a great complaint, saying that in the past he was a member of the town’s burial society. We searched in the record book and found that he was chosen in the ballot in the year 5568, and he was the fifth elector in that year. Therefore, we, the electors below, agreed that he is one of us in all matters as he was before. […] We, the electors, established a regulation, with the agreement of all. Should a member of the town’s burial society inform upon another member of the society, the matter will be investigated according to two upright witnesses. And [should he be found guilty] he will be barred from the local burial society forever, even after great repentance. Today, the first day of the New Moon of Iyar 5572 [1812], here in Praga. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

47

By Aaron Berehiah of Modena. First published in 1626, the work is a funerary manual and its 112 chapters include readings, laws, and customs for the sick and dying as well as burial and mourning rites.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815



187

The Austrian Partition No. 19 General Code of Regulations Concerning the Jews of the Kingdoms of Galicia and Lodomeria,48 1776

Source: Continuatio edictorum et mandatorum universalium Regnis Galiciae et Lodomeriae…, Leopoli 1801. First chapter: Concerning the authority and supervision of the Galician Jews in general First article: About the establishment and the constitution of a Jewish corporate body § I. The foundation of the current regulations concerning Jews is the concentration of the Jews in a general corporate body, because only in this way might their supervision and tutelage towards the general be best achieved. § II. This general corporate body, which needs to be established, means that all Jews will be subordinated to a general directorate. This directorate needs to take care of general Jewish matters and especially of the matters of the kahals under the supervision of the respective gubernia. § III. This future corporate body is not to abolish the kahals but only to bring them together and to subordinate them to the directorate. […] Second chapter: Concerning the Polizey49 of the Galician Jews Second article: About the communal elections of the rabbis, their tasks, emoluments, rights, and duties 1) Each kahal community is free to elect a rabbi according to its old usage as noted in the communal minute book by the communal board and those members of the community, who take part in a great session and along the stipulated modalities. In order to ensure 2) that these appointments will always be filled with god-fearing and judicious subjects, the former right of the community in this matter will be explicitly limited. Only those subjects can be appointed to rabbinical positions, whose erudition has been examined by the head rabbi, and who have received credible attestation from the head rabbi and the heads of the kahal of their domicile concerning their erudition and their good moral conduct. […] 48 49

Latinized version of Volhynia, used for the Volhynian territories that came under Habsburg rule with the first partition of Poland in 1772. The early modern term Polizey/Policey does not refer to police in the modern sense but was the entirety of measures that were to guarantee the common good, especially in the framework of personal conduct and communal life.

188

Aust

Ninth article: About the burial and the burial site […] 3) The burial of the dead and the care of the burial site will further be left with the confraternities50 that exist in most places. However, the usual fees and taxes for burials and tombstones are not to be collected by the individual heads of the confraternity, but each time according to the instruction of the elders with the involvement of the heads of the confraternity, and need to go into the communal fund right away. Each time, the following expenses are to be paid from this fund: the salaries of the necessary manpower for the burial of the dead and the guarding of the cemetery, the supply of the necessary equipment, the fencing of the cemetery, etc. This also needs to be done according to the instruction of the elders following the proper request from the responsible head of the confraternity or other Jews, who have been appointed for this task, and against receipt and future accounting. […] Thirteenth article: About the Jewish ban 1) In the future, only the head rabbi can impose a great ban and only in exceptional cases. However, even the head rabbi is not entitled to impose the ban without authorization, but needs the consent and decision of the provincial authorities in each case. 2) However, the smaller Jewish bans, which are used when giving a testimony or in general to elicit the truth, can be imposed by the communal rabbis and the communal elders also in the future. 3) However, if a Jew is to be banned as punishment for a crime he committed, the respective rabbi or the communal elders first have to obtain the insight and approval of the head rabbi or of this Jewish directorate every time before imposing the ban. […] Fifth chapter: About Jewish legal matters and their legal treatment First article: About the jurisdiction of the Jewish courts and their activity 1) The communal rabbis can only administer justice in matters of religion and money and when the property of the opposing parties is concerned. Other claims and matters fall under the jurisdiction of the communal elders of each place. 2) However, in the latter case and in crucial matters, the communal rabbi can be consulted either on request of the parties or when deemed necessary by the elders. 3) If the losing party feels burdened by the decision of the rabbinical court, it is free to appeal to the royal chamber of appeal within 14 days. At the most, it may take the appeal to the highest k.k. jurisdiction, though all legal regulations concerning matters of appeal need to be observed. […] Translated from German by Cornelia Aust

50

This refers to the burial societies (Heb. ḥevra kadisha).

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815



189

No. 20 Ban of the Rabbis of the Holy Community of Kraków and Its Leaders against the Hasidim, 29 September 1785

Published in: Wilensky, Mordekhai (ed.). Hasidim u-mitnaggedim: le-toldot ha-pulmus shebeineihem ba-shanim 1772–1815. Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1970, pp. 137–41. It is known and recognized and famed in all corners of the land and the islands, close and far, that our magnificent community has always been a faithful city,51 a metropolis of kings52 of kings of rabbis, a perfection of beauty.53 [And it is populated by] those who make up the hedge and stand in the breach,54 and who are concealed in the clods of the earth, great saints, the most outstanding scholars [gaonim]; the light of their Torah illuminates the eyes of all the exile, springs flow out from them, from which all the house of Israel drinks, their light will be eternal. All the eyes of Israel are upon them, they will not veer from their paths, [they are] sources of living water that will not fail.55 And the last of the gaonim in the recent time, the most important of all, his excellency mounted up to the heavens56 and its top was among the thick boughs,57 the rabbi of all the children of the exile, the light of our eyes, the Rabbi Moses Isserles, may the memory of the saint be a blessing, who excels them all58 in the source of the laws and the religion, upon which rest the pillars of the house of Israel, which shall not be removed, the stakes whereof shall not be plucked up.59 And all the house of Israel will believe in Moses and his Torah, and they will veer neither right nor left. A city full of sages and scribes, with good qualities, perfect in wisdom, and their most valuable asset is the fear of God, and their desire is for God’s Torah, to study goodly words60 day and night,61 and the night shineth as the day.62 And never has it been heard of or seen that one of them desired in his heart to stray from society, to build for himself an altar, to change, God forbid, some wording of the prayers that the early sages established for us, with the agreement of Rabbi Moses Isserles, may the memory of a saint be a blessing, or to alter the tunes or to pray with strange movements. And there is no remembrance

51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Isaiah 1:21. BT Megillah 6a. Lamentations 2:15. Draws on Ezekiel 22:30. Isaiah 58:11. Job 20:6. Ezekiel 31:3. Proverbs 31:29. Isaiah 33:20. Genesis 49:21. From a lament for Tisha be-Av. Psalm 139:12.

190

Aust

of them in former times,63 and also our fathers did not tell us about any person who did such a thing, changing anything or even half a thing and straying from society, God forbid. And now, because of our many sins, new ones have arisen, from nearby they came and in the sea of the Talmud their traces are unknown. [These are] young people, in the desert of their days, young in years, their hearts desired to build altars for themselves, to change the old words of the prayers, to create various prayer groups, and they gush out arrogance.64 They perform strange movements, some of them pervert65 their heads, some of them clap their hands, spread out their hands, and then bring one hand to the other. They make for themselves wings like the wings of the stork, bending down their heads as a bull rush during the act of prayer and divine service. Their voices shake the world and its foundations, and the glory of the king’s daughter [i.e. Israel] will be shamed. They say, ‘The king hath said: Come down’66 for instruction and testimony,67 [meaning] that Torah study is not the main thing, etc. [They say] that the light of the Torah will shine on a person who is plunged into a ditch and his own clothes abhor him,68 and they wash in water, to fly to the skies. They draw out their prayers until the sun is halfway through the sky, destroying the foundation of the Torah and the prayers that our holy ancestors established. Because they break through unto the Lord69 to go up on tracks that are unpaved. In so doing, the Torah will vanish, its buttresses will be thrown down, its foundations [stakes] rocked. Furthermore, they also seduce the rest of the people with their mouths and their smooth talk, [enticing them] to gather with them. And empty people, those without sensibilities, congregate around them. Who knows how far these things will go and the extent of the obstacle that can arise due to such a thing; such a thing already existed in the world, many did as the law of these people that call themselves Hasidim, and eventually they behaved as Zimri and became evil. And in order to remove this obstacle from here, our community, they gathered together, the eyes of the community, their honours the alufim [leaders], the rozanim [princes], the officers, the leaders of the community, together with the rest of the officials and at their head his honour our lord, teacher, and rabbi, the rabbi, the great and famous gaon, head of the rabbinical court and the yeshiva in our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, and together their honours of the court of justice, to look and examine with great watchfulness that this should not be an obstacle or a stumbling 63 64 65 66 67 68 69

Ecclesiastes 1:11. Psalm 94:4. Micah 3:9. 2 Kings 1:9. Isaiah 8:20. Job 9:31. Exodus 19:21.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

191

block in Israel. And the honourable assembly agreed in unison to make a hedge and to stand in the breach. They decreed with a harsh ban and the great ban of Yehoshua bin Nun that no member of our community may establish his own prayer quorum in order to pray with strange movements and with whistling of the lips [strange movements of the lips], or clapping hands or to be wretched and to move like a drunk or to change any part of the wording of the prayers that we received from our holy ancestors who lie in the clay ground,70 and the root thereof wax old in the earth.71 And with the voice of Gevini the herald72 the great ban will be announced in all the synagogues and study houses here in our community, regarding those people in our community whose hearts will desire in the future either to make their own prayer quorum in order to pray with such movements or to change something in the wording of the prayers. They will be banned and excommunicated in both worlds, this world and the world to come, and will be separated and isolated from all the holiness of Israel and will be given the burial of an ass.73 And so too, those people that support them in establishing for themselves such a prayer quorum in their house or help them, giving them aid, their sentence will be the same: they will be banned and excommunicated and separated and isolated from all the holiness of Israel, as above. And all the people will hear and see and will no longer do such a thing here in our community, and he that listens to our words will rest securely until the coming of the Messiah. They will become master at last.74 [These are the words] of their honours, the alufim, rozanim, nagidim, leaders of our community, may its rock and redeemer protect it, heads and good men, Israel the holy nation and the select few […]. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

70 71 72 73 74

2 Chronicles 4:17. Job 14:8. Mishnah Tamid 3:8. Jeremiah 22:19. Proverbs 29:21.

192

Aust

No. 21 Edict of Toleration of the Emperor Joseph II for the Jews of Galicia and Lodomeria, 1789

Published in: Josef Karniel. ‘Das Toleranzpatent Kaiser Josephs II. für die Juden Galiziens und Lodomeriens’. Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Geschichte, 11 (1982), pp. 75–76, 78–80, 83–84. Edict that Grants All Privileges and Rights of All Other Subjects to the Jews In light of the preliminary provisions that were taken concerning the Jewish population, it is right to abolish the difference, which law has made between Christian and Jewish subjects until now. This is in accordance with the generally accepted principles of toleration and to the common best. Thus, we grant all Jews living in Galicia the same privileges and rights, which the remaining subjects enjoy. […] Religion […] § 2. From now on, only one regular rabbi will be appointed in each district, either in the district town or—in case there is no community in the district town—in one of the other Jewish communities in this same district, instead of having the current local rabbis in multiple communities. The remaining Jewish communities may only have a so-called preceptor of religion or a cantor. § 3. The district rabbi supervises the preceptors of religion or cantor of the whole district and issues a proper certificate to the candidates following their examination. § 4. The duties of the district rabbi in his communities and the preceptors of religion or cantors in their communities are the following: 1. To keep the registers of births, marriages, and deaths of the Jewish community, and 2. to supervise the ritual slaughterers of the community. § 5. […] Six years after the first election, which will take place under the regulation of these edicts, knowledge of German school instruction is required and will be an essential feature to receive a rabbinical post. […] The Communal Constitution § 15. The former division of Galician Jewry into 141 communities, 143 when including Bukovina, will further be maintained. § 16. The association of Jews in communities only serves those purposes that are founded in their special nature as Jews and the related matter. Thus, they are considered just like guilds and therefore their members are not different from any other subjects in all matters not related to the above-mentioned purpose of their association. Thus,

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

193

each Jewish inhabitant belongs as subject to the respective municipality to which the remaining inhabitants of the place, be they Christians or Jews, belong. He might be elected as local head of the municipality if he has the right to vote in this election, even though he remains a member of one of the 143 communities, to which he belongs according to the aforementioned division. § 17. In each community, heads of the community are to be elected to conduct the matters of the community. Their stipulated number is three in all communities, except for the towns of Lemberg and Brody, where the stipulated number is seven due to the size of the communities. […] § 19. The duties of these heads are: to represent their community if necessary, to speak in its name, to defend its rights, to take care of the provision of the poor Jews, to raise the dues for communal expenses, to turn to the district office in the case of an unexpected new communal expense, and to take care of and to handle everything that pertains to the well-being of the community. The German language is to be used in these and all other communal matters and bills. […] § 20. The community has to honour the communal heads and to ease their office through obedience and compliance; also, the magistrates and the district offices are instructed to treat them with distinction. Each community will set an annual recompense, in money or other benefits, for the communal heads depending on the community’s strength and financial ability. The district offices have to confirm this recompense. The election taxes are to be abolished completely. § 21. In return, the communal heads will seek to fulfil their duties in a precise, faithful, and eager manner. They will abstain from any direct or indirect financial bribery and any misuse of their office. Failing this, their offences will be punished with twofold strength and in addition to the appropriate corporal punishment they will be removed from their office and expelled from the country. […] Political and Legal Institutions § 41. The Jewry is subordinate to the general authority of the land and its stipulated regime in all political matters. Thus, like any other inhabitant, a Jew has to turn with a complaint or a petition in a political matter first to his local authority, then to the district office, and last to the administration of the land. In the two latter cases, this needs to be done in German. To prove that everything was done according to this regulation, a confirmation of the

194

Aust

lower authority needs to be given to the higher authority; except for complaints against delays in a lower authority, as in this case it is impossible to add a confirmation. […] § 44. Just as the Galician Jews are subordinate to the administration of the land in political matters, they are dependent on the regular courts in legal matters. Therefore, the rabbis, whose jurisdiction has already been abolished, are prohibited to impose a great or small ban on anyone, to attach an iron collar, to impose any public penance, or to execute any other jurisdiction. This would be punished with a fine of 50 ducats. […] § 46. All litigations of Jews with Christians or among themselves in all matters are to be treated and judged by official judges of the lowest authority, meaning the local authority, the magistrate, or wherever else the matter belongs, according to the general laws of the land and the legal regime. The further appeal goes to the court of appeal. […] Translated from German by Cornelia Aust



No. 22 Contract between the New Synagogue and the Confraternity of Water Carriers, Brody, 1812

Published in: N.M. Gelber. Toldot Yehudei Brody (1584–1943), Jerusalem: Hotsa‌ʾat Mosad ha-Rav Kook, 1955, pp. 329–330. Behold,75 the structure of the new synagogue that is being built on its mound,76 here in the holy community of Brody. Unlike the great synagogue, in the building soon to be completed there are a few places in the men’s and women’s sections that as yet have no owners. These are to be sold according to the fathers of the city, are they not the alufim, the heads and leaders of our community, according to the validity of the license that was issued from the high place of their majesties the government ministers on 18 September 1807, through the official district notification issued on 4 October in that year, in November 1808. And so we, the alufim, rozanim, leaders of the local community, support the sale of a special place in the new synagogue, in the men’s section, for the members of the town’s society of water carriers. [This will be] on the bench located at the edge of the northern wall, [which extends] from the beginning of the gate through which one enters the synagogue to the first of the four pillars upon which the synagogue stands, along the entire length of the northern wall, that is from the gate to the pillar. And indeed, its breadth extends from the northern side to this 75 76

Numbers 31:16. Joshua 13:11.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

195

pillar. The rozanim of the community give all this to the town’s society of water carriers, but not all the group, because this group has not yet come to a final arrangement. Rather, four men have made an arrangement on behalf of this group, and they are: Rabbi Moshe Korn and Rabbi Leib Steinberg and Rabbi Moshe Dovid Kraviye and Rabbi M. Mohovel. They endeavoured and invested great effort to buy this special place in the new synagogue for all the water carriers listed in the society’s record book now and those to come after them. And the rozanim of the community acceded to this, and they sold this special place in the new synagogue to these four men for the payment of the price of this special place, a total of 100 gold pieces of Rheinish guilder valuta. These four men paid the alufim, the heads of the community, all the purchase money for this place, as they agreed, until it was concluded. From now on this place will be, as is fitting, at the disposal of these four men alone. It is in their possession, and it will serve as the place for all the town’s water carriers who are members of this society and those that come after them, forever and ever. And whenever the members of this society of water carriers come [to the synagogue], [they have] the right to pray, all of them or some of them, in these places that are reserved for them forever and always. However, should the present group [of four men] leave, all the members of the society are obligated to collect from the members of the society of water carriers the amount of 100 Rheinish guilders valuta and return this sum to these four men until the last penny. After this, the special place will belong to all the members of the society of water carriers and those that come after them; it will be owned by the society forever, to serve as its place, according to the order of the places, as the men, the heads of the union, arranged it. And as a sign of truth and faithful evidence in the hands of the buyers, these four men, on behalf of all members of this society of water carriers and those to come in the future, with regard to ownership forever more, we wrote and signed, we, the rozanim of the community, and the town scribe recorded the matter of the sale of this place and these purchasers in the community record book to be preserved as a sign forever more. Thus the words of their honours, the alufim, the heads, rozanim, nagidim, the leaders of the community, the Edat Yeshurun, here in the holy community of Brody. Today, Thursday, 14 Menachem Av 5575 (1815) The holy Yaakov Shaf of Brody The holy Avraham Avli, son of our late rabbi and teacher, Rabbi Leib Segal Horowitz The holy Mordechai Zvi Hirsh, son of the late nagid Yonah Bik The holy Neta Berish Mintz Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe

196

Aust

No. 23 Takanot Ḥakham [Regulations] of Rabbi Menahem Mendel of Rimanov, 1815

Published in: Mattathias Ezekiel Guttman. Mi-giborei ha-ḥasidut. Rabi Mendel miRimanov: Ḥayav, peʿulotav ve-torato. Tel Aviv: Mosad ha-Rav Kook, 1953, pp. 36–37. On this day, 27 Nissan 5575 [1815], our lord, teacher, and rabbi—Rabbi Mendel of Rimanov—commanded the holy rabbi of the community of Ropshits to hold an assembly. Behold, at the gathering of the alufim, the heads and the [members of the] court of justice and the select few [outstanding individuals] of this holy community, the holy rabbi said, ‘Behold, our lord, teacher, and rabbi has commanded me to warn you that you should accept upon yourselves his regulations as detailed below, and it will be for you a restoring of the soul.’77 And they all answered in unison, ‘We will obey and we will do.’78 And these are the regulations: 1. That women shall not wear a shterntikhl79 or a banrund.80 They should not wear any piece of clothing or even shoes in the new fashion, as people do in other places. So too, they must wear kerchiefs, as their mothers did. They should not wear a red kerchief on their head or shoes that are called sandals. 2. The unmarried women shall not wear wigs on their heads or crinoline or German gowns. 3. Women and unmarried women shall not sit in the market on sabbaths and holidays. They will not go for walks outside the city, all the more so with men. 4. Women shall not walk or travel without a guard. If women go to milk the cows without a guard, the milk will be forbidden. 5. Any tailor who sews a piece of clothing in the new fashion, the first time he does so, he will be fined. On the second occasion they will remove him [from the guild of Jewish tailors], as detailed in the record book of the society of tailors. 6. Persons will be appointed to oversee the measures and weights according to the law of the Torah.

77 78 79 80

Psalm 19:8. An inversion of the words from Exodus 24:7: ‘We will do, and we will obey.’ Shterntikhlekh (headbands)—a traditional head covering usually worn by married Jewish women in 19th-century Eastern Europe. Maybe misspelled and referring to a so-called Horband (from German Haarband), a hairribbon worn under the kupke, an everyday head cover of Jewish women in Eastern Europe. See Tamar Somogyi, Die Schejnen und die Prosten. Untersuchungen zum Schönheitsideal der Ostjuden in Bezug auf Körper und Kleidung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Chassidismus (Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag, 1982), pp. 214–15.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

197

7.

The community must ensure that no day passes without prayers being held in the synagogue. 8. The community must ensure that there will be no desecration of the Sabbath in the town. In particular, the innkeepers must be supervised, to ensure that they employ non-Jews on Sabbaths and holy days. 9. The poor and impoverished Torah students will be watched over, and also a Talmud Torah for the children of the poor will be maintained. 10. The tailors must be warned that when they sew a four-cornered garment, the four corners will reach to the knees. 11. Men will not wear collars, only circles,81 as in former times, and also they must not wear a garment in the new fashion. 12. The burial society will always hold a ballot between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur and will immediately appoint gabbaim [officials], without any delay whatsoever. 13. People shall not wear their valuables, because this increases the evilness of the non-Jews and gives power to the klipa.82 And whoever will uphold these thirteen qualities, he will be blessed with all the blessings detailed in the Torah and will merit the coming of the redemption quickly. Translated from Hebrew by Rebecca Wolpe



No. 24 Yosef Perl. On the Essence of the Hasidic Sect. Drawn from Their Own Writings, 1816

Published in: Abraham Rubinstein, ed. Josef Perl. Al mahut kat ha-ḥasidim. Jerusalem: Ha-akademia ha-leʾumit ha‌ʾisraelit le-mada‌ʾim, 1977, pp. 129–30. […] 5th. Even those, who despise it [the Hasidic sect] wholeheartedly and recognize its disgracefulness, cannot dare to stand up to it, because it does not shy away from any deed that would harm its opponents. Daily experience teaches us that its behaviour is impertinent, that it has its spies everywhere and that they send their reports surprisingly quickly; and in general every member is indebted to the tsadik to discover him everything and not to have any secrets. They move heaven and earth as soon as one of their misdeeds is discovered and reported to the government; if there is only one of some account with the administration or the officials, he has to do everything to 81 82

Yid. krais, a fringe that was worn at the shirt around the neck. It was open at the chest and closed with a small ribbon. See Somogyi, Die Schejnen, pp. 146–47. A kabbalistic concept, literally meaning shell or external covering, referring to evil forces.

198

Aust

suppress the matter. If there are any witnesses necessary in the matter, there will be some without great effort. If there is any money necessary collections are held immediately; if there is an opponent, who causes them harm, they try everything, friend and foe overwhelm him to abandon his plan. And if matters cannot be settled amicably, they resort to strict measures. The followers of the different rebis,83 who usually do not get along well, now close their ranks, and they abundantly use anonymous lampoons, secret bans, false denunciations, obstructions when carrying on his trade, slander, bringing quarrel and discord in his family, nightly assault, abuse, arson and more such like. This continues until the opponent falls and with him the threatening thunderstorm disappears. It is their peculiar strategy to pull the ordinary rabbis, whom they usually cannot stand, to their side; they freely employ honeyed words and humiliations; on the one hand they provoke the rabbis with various false rumours against their enemies, on the other hand the sect flatters the rabbis with honorary titles, eulogies, and suchlike. Using various neatly devised rumours its opponent is denounced as a heretic, atheist, and informer among the [Jewish] nation; the sects’ own case becomes suddenly God’s case, its own interest appears as the interest of religion, and then nothing stands in its way to take any kind of vengeance on its opponent. […] Translated from German by Cornelia Aust



The Russian Partition No. 25 Edict of 16 August 1772

Source: Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossijskoj Imperii (PSZ 13.850). Vol. 1,19, St. Petersburg 1830, pp. 553–56. […] Public Proclamation […] By the solemn and highest promise to each and every one to be able to worship freely and for their property to be inviolable, it is natural that Jewish communities living in towns and lands, which have been annexed to the Russian Empire, shall, too, be left untouched and preserved with all of their freedoms, which they exercise under current legislation and in line with their property rights: in as much as Her Imperial Majesty’s humanity prevents none of them from being excluded from the universal mercy and future prosperity of Her blessed Empire, provided that, for their part, as loyal subjects, through full and proper obedience, they exercise their current businesses and trades in 83

Perl uses rebis here instead of rabbis to denote the difference between Hasidic and nonHasidic rabbis.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

199

accordance with their status. Let dispensation of justice continue to be administered in its current places in the name and under the authority of Her Imperial Majesty, with the strictest observance of justice. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 26 Kakhovskii Report, 1773

Source: Gavriil R. Deržavin. Sočinenija Deržavina, vol. 7. St. Petersburg, 1872, pp. 308–14. A description of the current state of Jews living in Mogilev Province sent by the Belorussian Governor-General Count Zakhar Grigor’evich Chernyshev to Governor of Pskov Mikhail Nikitich Krechetnikov and presented by Governor of Mogilev Lieutenant-General Kakhovskii in 1773. […] In all small towns, both on private and on crown estates, Jews have their own elders, elected by themselves from among their number; they elect well-to-do people, who are also well versed in the Talmud and adept at all matters. The kahal consists of six Jews; they have their own deputies, who, when a member is recalled or ill, take their place; and these six Jews are deemed to constitute a kahal. In smaller localities, the kahal consists of five people, whilst a kahal of less than four people is unheard of anywhere. When there are six members of a kahal, courts are held every two months and, when it consists of four members, the court sits every three months; dealing not only with internal religious matters and rites, but also with civil matters between those subordinate to the kahal; and all Jews, both those living in towns and those in inns in uyezds84 are subject to a kahal court. This court imposes all kinds of taxes on those whom it judges; and collects taxes for the poor members of its community, as well as to use as payment to avoid judicial punishment in the event that the whole kahal, or one member thereof, is found guilty in court of a criminal deed. There are numerous cases in which the accused are proven by various means to have committed wrongdoing or murder; but, in the event of failure to investigate a matter to its full conclusion through the courts, or at least to reach a decision on the matter, both the accuser and the accused are dismissed from the court; the kahal has the powers during a court session to judge Jews, and those dissatisfied with a court ruling cannot lodge an appeal with a Christian court if the other party does not agree to it; in the event that such an appeal is lodged, such people are subject to ecclesiastical censure, which they call ḥerem. The kahal has the power to imprison Jews and administer corporal punishment for their crimes. The kahal accepts cases from rabbinical courts and, travelling from town to town, passes judgement; in the event that a case 84

An uyezd was an administrative territorial unit within a province.

200

Aust

concerns Talmudic matters or the clergy, the kahal sends it back to the senior rabbi in Brest or Vilna. The kahal can pass judgement on how to carry out all the rulings of the senior rabbi, and, sometimes, appeals are passed from the kahal to the synagogue. They choose the synagogue themselves with the consent of the board. If one of the kahal members stands accused, the others all rally round him with one voice and correspond with each other, in order to bring to bear every kind of assistance regarding his case. Jews living in towns with magistrates’ courts are not subject to such courts, with the exception of those who own a residence on the territory of the town: where magistrates’ courts and duties are in effect, or where they are involved in a criminal case and have debt problems with other townspeople within the town area; however, also in such instances, the Jewish judge should administer justice as prescribed by a starosta85 or territorial governor. Those living in towns subordinate to a starosta or a territorial governor and who are involved in criminal cases to be heard in religious courts, fall under the ultimate competence of magistrates’ or municipal courts. Certain large and small towns belonging to the crown enjoy privileges which ban Jews from owning houses, farms, or inns in towns, allowing them ownership of the aforementioned only in the suburbs; but notwithstanding this, they live in noblemen’s houses under the guise of overseers, which elicits complaints from the towns. Jews are tried in magistrates’ courts only if there is a criminal complaint lodged by townspeople or when a case is referred to the magistrates’ court by their owner or a petitioner. Jews in many small and large towns located on lands owned by the nobility shall be subject to a land court. Given that land courts deal with all kinds of debts and liabilities, if a Jew, who has submitted himself to the patronage of his owner, fails to pay his debt to a creditor, he is subject directly to the jurisdiction of the land court. […] Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 27 Edict of the Governing Senate on the Fiscal and Administrative Duties of the kahal, 17 October 1776

Source: Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossijskoj Imperii (PSZ 14.522), vol. 1, 20, St. Petersburg 1830, pp. 436–37. […] 1. To carry out a population census in the Belorussian provinces in accordance with established procedure and, imposing a poll tax of seven grivnas on peasants 85

A Polish nobleman who would administer a district called a starostwo.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

2.

3.

1.

86

201

living in the Russian Empire, collect one chetverik86 of flour as part of each poll tax payment; To collect from Jews a tax of one rouble per person and assign them to kahals, which should be established at the discretion of governors and as the need arises; To collect from merchants 1 rouble 20 kopecks per head and start collection of such poll tax monies from 1 February 1773; consequently, the aforementioned Field-Marshal General and Knight of the Realm should command Governors Krechetnikov and Kakhovskii of Pskov Guberniya and Mogilev Guberniya to institute a census, by which Jews should be registered in the towns, small towns, and villages where government inspectors find them, so that tax can be collected from them more reliably and appropriate order can be brought to all other matters relating to them. Kahals should be established, to which all Jews should be assigned, so that any Jew, who travels anywhere for matters of his trade, wishes to live or move somewhere or rent a property, shall receive a passport from the kahal; although such passports should be presented to Provincial Administrative Offices and registered there. The poll tax revenue should be paid by the kahal, directly to the Provincial Administrative Office; and attached to such orders there should be special instructions, which should be observed and carried out during the census, stating how to decide the tax category to which a person belongs, as well as explaining to each government inspector how Jews living in towns, small towns, large and small villages, wherever Jews might be, should be entered in the census, showing specifically where they are resident, whether it is as tenants, in inns on the estates of the landed gentry, or people practising a certain trade, so that, by collecting all such information about them, it is possible to divide them into kahals in a proper fashion; all of them should, pursuant to the Imperial Edict, be subject to a tax denominated in roubles; those amongst them who have adopted the Christian faith should be registered separately, indicating the religion they have assumed, where they live, the trades in which they are engaged, and the rights to which they are entitled, so that the appropriate kind of tax can be levied upon them. Now, His Worship the Field-Marshal General and Knight of the Realm, referring to the aforementioned instructions written by him to the Senate, presents evidence that those Jews who have assumed the Christian faith have been re-registered; and the governors have presented him with an opinion regarding how these people should be treated henceforth, suggesting the following: Poll tax should not be imposed on such people, but they should be granted the right to choose the kind of life they wish to live and where they want to live. A unit of dry measure used in the Russian Empire, equivalent to approximately 26.24 litres.

202 2.

3.

Aust Those amongst them, who wish to be registered in the merchant class, should be categorized as merchants; artists should be admitted to guilds; those performing services and jobs should be given passports, whilst those wishing to make their livelihood from farming should be allowed to stay in the place of their choice. By this, merchants shall pay duty on their capital; guildsmen, according to their location, shall pay an established duty for the receipt of a passport; and those tilling the soil shall pay monies for their lands either to the treasury or to landowners, dependent on whoever is the landlord, but none of them should be allowed under any circumstances to dispose of the lands as they please. They should not be forbidden from switching their place of residence to other towns and villages if they have the right papers; likewise, 4. they should not be prohibited from entering military or civil service and, if they choose to enter the services, they shall be governed by the established laws; and, finally, 5. all the above provisions should apply to their issue; since His Worship the Governor-General deemed this to be congruent with a resolution detailed in the Governing Senate’s decree of 1745, and since it corresponded with the opinion of the governors of the Belorussian provinces that baptised Jews, who were re-registered during the census and find themselves in the aforementioned situation, should be of some use to society, His Worship the Governor-General passed the matter to the Senate for its kind consideration and requested that the Senate issue an edict. The following order was issued: in accordance with the report made by His Worship the Field-Marshal General and Knight of the Realm, no poll tax should be levied from Jews living in the Belorussian provinces who have adopted the Christian faith: they should be given the right to choose a type of life as described in the report by His Worship the Governor-General, so that no one can by any means make serfs of any Jews who have adopted the Christian faith. It should be reported to the Senate how many such Jews there are currently and how many of them choose of their own volition to be part of the merchant class, townspeople, work in the civil service, or adopt another way of life.

Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815



203

No. 28 Edict of the Governing Senate, 16 June 1782

Source: Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossijskoj Imperii (PSZ 15.436), vol. 1, 21. St. Petersburg 1830, pp. 583–84. 16 June Senate Edict—On keeping the timing of court sessions in the Mogilev and Polotsk Regions87 in accordance with the old calendar used in Russia. The Governing Senate, having examined a copy of the decision made by the 1st Department of the Senate, directs that the following be considered: that Courts established in Belorussia, adhering to the new menologion, are 1. not complying with the times for court sessions as decreed by the Imperial Department for Administering the Provinces, resulting in sessions overrunning the prescribed time; 2. that, with the accession of Belorussia to the Russian State, to comply with the promulgated public proclamation, both before the inception of Polotsk Region and upon its inception, uyezd kahals and gubernatorial appeal kahals shall be established to decide matters arising between Jews only, with an appropriate number of judges elected by the Jews, themselves; and in matters which arise between Jews and people of another nation, the following is stipulated: claims against Jews living in towns should be submitted to a Magistrates’ Court, whilst claims against those living in villages should be submitted to a Rural Petty Sessions Court.88 In the event that Jews express dissatisfaction with the rulings of gubernatorial kahals on cases conducted between Jews only, and an appeal body has not been established, then, sometimes, the accused shall suffer innocently. A resolution has been adopted: firstly, to enjoin the Mogilev and Polotsk Regional Administrations to ensure that the times, prescribed by His Imperial Majesty’s Provincial Administrations, for sessions of the established Regional Courts, shall be observed, without fail, in accordance with the old menologion used in Russia, and this timing should not exceed the one prescribed by the old style calendar to bring matters to an end. Secondly, regarding Jewish courts, known as kahals, established in Polotsk Guberniya; since the Senate is completely unaware of privileges granting Jews their own kahals for the purpose of resolving disputes amongst their number (such knowledge could have helped one understand the principles on which kahals are established), and is 87 88

Namestnichestvo, a region governed by a governor-general. It is translated here as ‘region’, but was, more or less, synonymous with the term province (Guberniya) during the reign of Catherine the Great. Nizhniaia rasprava, a lower court in an uyezd, roughly equivalent to a rural petty sessions court.

204

Aust also unaware of the orders and instructions given by Her Imperial Majesty’s former Governor-General, Field Marshal General and Knight of the Realm Count Zakhar Grigor’evich Chernyshev, on how these kahal courts should be established and run, the Governing Senate cannot implement the aforementioned instructions; and, therefore, instructs the current Governor-General of Belorussia Lieutenant-General, Senator and Knight of the Realm Petr Bogdanovich Passek, to ascertain: whether Jews living in provinces entrusted to him enjoy any particular privileges; the grounds on which their Courts are established; and the bodies (such as Courts) to which cases heard by Provincial kahals, established for the purpose of resolving disputes between Jews, can be sent for appeal in the event of an unjust ruling. Then, he should present his opinion to the Senate. Edicts on all of the above shall be sent to the Mogilev and Polotsk Provincial Administrations; and, concerning the latter, shall be sent to the incumbent Governor-General, Lieutenant-General-Senator and Knight of the Realm Passek.

Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 29 Ordinances of the Kahal in Minsk

Source: Iakov Brafman, Kniga kagala, Vilna 1869.

Note on the Unruly Behaviour of Rabbi Gershon Tuesday, 13 Adar 5565 (1805); man of wealth, Rabbi Gershon, son of Rabbi A.V., under sentence of ḥerem pronounced by a bet din, is notified to comply with the court ruling on the case between him and man of wealth, Rabbi Khaim, son of Rabbi I.A., but the aforementioned Rabbi Gershon has contravened the ḥerem and persists with his defiant behaviour. Note: As it appears from the findings of the bet din on this case, which were submitted to the kahal, the aforementioned Rabbi Gershon, son of Rabbi A.V., has complied with the ruling of the bet din and, therefore, his former rights and privileges have been restored. On the Collection of Monies to Greet the Authorities on the Occasion of a Holiday Saturday, 21 Tevet 5562 (1802), Minsk. Given the dire need for money to cover the huge cost of providing a Christmas (koliada)89 gift for the authorities, as per our custom, members of the kahal leadership 89

A koliada is a pre-Christian Slavic winter festival, which became incorporated into Christmas as a tradition of walking from house to house greeting people and singing carols.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

205

and grand assembly resolved to use all possible means, hounding and coercion through a secret pursuer90 to collect tax interest arrears. The money collected shall be used as the current year’s koliada expenses. On a Charter for the confraternity of Tailors Saturday, Portion Bechukotai91 Regarding the wish of the local tailors’ confraternity to buy a separate prayer room for itself on the premises of the synagogue, for which the confraternity seeks the approval of members of the kahal, the kahal members, along with the general assembly of former heads, resolved to appoint five people: two of the marshals, two of the ex-heads, and one of the dayanim [judges] to draft a statute (for the new prayer room) and to take measures to protect the statute in the event of violations thereof by the brotherhood. In turn, the confraternity must, in writing and with its members’ handwritten signatures, commit itself to and carry out rigorously, to the finest detail, everything that is stipulated by the five above-mentioned authors of the statute. Only on this condition should the members of the kahal grant approval for the aforementioned brotherhood’s wish to be implemented. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 30 Report and Proposal for Reform of the Jews, by I.G. Friesel, 1800

Published in: S. Bershadsky, Polozhenie o evreiakh 1804 goda. In: Voskhod 15 (1895), pp. 76–77. On Jews […] In the opinion of the marshals, such striking distinctions in the way they dress, live, and work, and the way Jewish moral values sit uncomfortably with members of the Christian faith, are as unproductive as they are harmful, both to themselves and to the rest of society. Detaching themselves completely from other inhabitants and forming their own separate people, they maintain self-rule, under the guise of religious rule, which has virtually no connection with the main civil government. These authorities 90 91

Tainyi presledovatelʾ: according to Iakov Brafman, a Jewish court would appoint a ‘secret’ or ‘hidden’ pursuer, who would carry out the court’s rulings under oath of never revealing his identity or admitting to have been a secret pursuer. Bechukotai or Bʾhukkothai (Hebrew: ‘by my decrees’) refers to the 33rd weekly Torah portion, which constitutes Leviticus 26:3–27:34 and is read in May or early June.

206

Aust

of theirs, which they elect themselves under the name of synagogues or kahals, do not only assume religious power, but also interfere in matters of a civil nature and concerning the police; and, thus, keeping the Jews under full control, the kahals fail frequently to act upon government orders and rulings, if they anticipate that the latter might pose a challenge to their personal power. These kahals, made up of very prosperous, educated, and quick-witted people, oppress those under their governance—folk immersed in ignorance—with endless taxes, under various pretexts of piety. Not only do the kahals show indulgence towards these people in all matters, but also, out of sheer greed, they try even to hide the people’s reprehensible behaviour in order to give them new ways to earn extra income and, thus, enable them to pay more kahal taxes. Since these people until now have constituted a completely separate society, they shall, by changing the way they dress, in the opinion of the marshals, cease to be of no use to society, as they shall be forced to relinquish idleness and all of the vices in which they are immersed by their leaders. In conclusion, the marshals propose that the Jews be left only with a religious court to deal solely with religious issues and matters of conscience; and the Jews, themselves, be divided into classes, such as merchants, artisans, and farmers, with each class subordinate to its own leadership body. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 31 Statute on the Jews, 9 December 1804

Source: Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossijskoj Imperii (PSZ 21.547), vol. 1, 28, St. Petersburg 1830, pp. 731–37. 9 December. Statute Consolidated by the Imperial Court ‘On the Organization of Jews’. […] 7. Within six years of the publication of this Regulation, all accounting books and any kind of merchants’ notebooks and notes between Jews should be written in one of the following languages—Russian, Polish or German—or contain a translation on one side of the document. Without this, the documents shall not be considered at all in any lawsuit or court. […] 8. All Jews living in the Russian Empire, having complete freedom to use their own language in all matters relating to their faith, as well as to their domestic activities, are obliged from 1 January 1807 to use the Russian, Polish, or German languages in all public records, as well as in or on all kinds of covenants, promissory notes, and bonds. Without this, no such documents can be registered and considered.

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

207

[…] 10. Starting from 1812, no one may be elected or appointed to any position in either a kahal or a rabbinate unless he knows how to read and write in one of the designated languages. […] 48. In towns of the provinces and uyezds, Jews should be included in the offices of the Municipal Police and, especially, in the offices of the Town Governor92 and the Magistrates’ Courts. […] 49. In so far as a court should be common for all property lawsuits, in matters concerning promissory notes or in criminal matters, justice shall be administered in the usual government offices; therefore, it follows: 1) That landowners,93 on whose estates Jews live, shall not have the right to pass judgement on Jews in either civil lawsuits or criminal matters; 2) That, in civil lawsuits, Jews may use the Arbitration Court on the same basis as anyone else and to the full extent of the powers invested in the court by general laws. […] 50. In towns of the provinces and uyezds, Jews have the right to elect one rabbi and several kahal members, who present themselves to the Provincial Administration and assume office upon the administration’s approval. Every three years, these people are replaced if they are not re-confirmed by a new election. Likewise, Jews in small towns under the control of landowners may elect rabbis and kahal members without the involvement of the landowners, who, at the same time, are forbidden from collecting any tax for the rabbinate. […] 51. On the duties of a rabbi The duties of a rabbi are to supervise religious rites and pass judgement on all disputes relating to religion; but, in passing a judgement, rabbis are not allowed to use any methods in reaching their rulings other than reasoning and persuasion, and are forbidden from imposing any kind of punishment other than condemnation and reproof within the synagogue; rabbis and other spiritual leaders who dare to violate this rule and impose public punishment, whatever kind it might be—such as penalties banning Passover food and (kosher) meat or, moreover, anathemas and expulsions—shall be liable for all losses incurred as a result of their actions, shall also be punished on the first occasion with a fine of 50 roubles and, on the second occasion, with a fine 92 93

Gorodnichii—an official responsible for a town’s administration and law enforcement, sometimes translated as ‘mayor’. Pomeshchiki—members of the land-owning gentry.

208

Aust

of 100 roubles payable to the Department of Public Assistance, as well as deportation to Siberia; and, in all such instances, their bans and prohibitions shall have no effect whatsoever. […] 53. If, in some place or other, a division occurs resulting in sects, and the split extends to one sect not wanting to be in the same synagogue as the other; then, in such an instance, one of the sects is permitted to build its own synagogue and elect its own rabbis; however, there should be just one kahal in any individual town. 54. On the duties of kahals Kahals should ensure that crown taxes, as long as they remain as they are currently, are paid assiduously and without arrears; they should manage the monies collected from the society and entrusted to them, giving the society a report on how they are used and providing the same in Russian or Polish to the Town Governors in towns, to the District Police Chiefs in crown settlements, and to landowners in small towns on landed estates; and, in all such instances, they are subject to the courts and to punishment in all severity of the law if the reports submitted to the authorities contain anything that is not consistent with the original reports given to the society. In any case, they should not, under any pretext, impose any new taxes without the knowledge or consent of the authorities, on pain not only of having to return personally everything that is due, but also of facing legal trial and punishment. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 32 Minute Book of the Kamnits (Kamenets Podolskii) Burial Society, 1799

Published in: Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern. ‘Russian Legislation and Jewish Self-Governing Institutions: The Case of Kamenets-Podolskii’. Jews in Russia and Eastern Europe 56, 1 (2006), pp. 118–20, 123–26, 128, translated by the author. […] The Statutes (Regulations) […] Therefore we established a strict regulation: if any beadle [shamash] or a novice [tsair, lit: new society member] resorts to evil or disreputable talk, we will fine him and remove him from his position as beadle or novice; in addition to the shame, a fine will be imposed on him as we find fit. If a warden issues an order to the effect that a beadle or a novice should go and stay overnight with a sick person, and he cannot fulfil the order because he has to earn

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

209

his own living, as soon as he receives the order of the warden he should immediately appoint someone in his stead. And even if the chief beadle cannot go to the warden and present excuses for that man, still the chief beadle has to ensure that [the one on duty] should fulfil the order in his entirety. If the warden issued an order to the beadle or to a novice to pass on certain information and it is discovered that the messenger acted deceitfully and pretended to be asleep and this caused a scandal, his punishment will be like the one mentioned above or even worse, as it is said, ‘The clever liar is like death.’94 This is because the life of the wise is in his words, and if people stop trusting his words, his life is annulled and he is taken out of this world. Therefore, whoever wants to protect his soul95 should stay away from this kind of abomination. […] 9. When the deceased is taken in the coffin from the house to the cemetery, people who are not members of the society should be careful not to touch [the coffin] since this is the prerogative of the society. However, when he is being carried, anyone can [touch or carry the coffin]. If a society member does not participate in this ritual, he must pay a fine to the warden on duty, as with the four złoty fine for failing to visit the sick. […] 11. If a non-member is dozing, before he passes away the novices should inform the warden and the warden should assess the expenses96 as he finds fit according to the status of the deceased. If the new society member who stays with the sick to carry out the order of the warden does not inform the warden or the warden sends him after one of the society members and he takes advantage of his task, he is punished accordingly, as described above. The warden can make this decision at his discretion. […] 18. On Shemini Atseret, in the evening, the warden on duty at that time organizes a party in his house. If any of the society’s members do not want to attend this party, he must pay a large fine, of one rouble. The warden is allowed to take money for the party from the society’s treasury, and anyone who wants to contribute [to the expenses] may do so and will be recompensed from the bounty of earth and heaven.97 It is forbidden for anyone to stop a burial society member and ask him to leave the party for the synagogue without the permission of the warden. Members of other societies are also forbidden to go to the synagogue and enter it before the burial society members. […] 20. Society members are allowed to bring into the society their first-born married sons or their first sons-in-law if they arrange a party for this occasion according to the decision of the burial society. The only condition is that they have to be married. The other sons [of society members] are considered to be ordinary town dwellers [i.e. not members of the society]. […] 94 95 96 97

Based on Proverbs 13:14 and 14:25. Based on ibid. 16:17. See Talmud Bavli, Bava Bathra 10b and Rashi, ad loc. Based on Genesis 27:28.

210

Aust



No. 33 Tadeusz Czacki. Discourse on the Jews Source: Tadeusz Czacki. Rosprawa o Żydach, Wilna 1807, pp. 153–54, 158–63. […] On Judicial Authority I. The ordinary judicial authority among Jews in our country consists of a rabbi and elders. II. There should be an uneven number of them. III. Normally, both sides nominate one intermediary each, and these two between them select a chairman, and their decision is final. IV. In an ordinary court, a judge is debarred from sitting if he is a relative or an opponent or may have a commonality of interest. V. Those deputized to appoint a court which is not local are entitled to ensure compliance with a judgement by a financial guarantee or a ban. […] On Excommunications or Bans A ban is the exclusion of a person from the society in which he lives. I. II. A general ban is issued with a warning that if someone fails to reveal the information required or does something which is forbidden, he will thereby become subject to the ban. [Note by Czacki: The same applies in ecclesiastical law: excommunicatio de facto]. A witness is warned of a ban if he does not tell the truth; he is punished with a ban if his guilt is proven. III. There are three levels of ban: first, the niddui; second, the ḥerem; third, the schamatha. [Note by Czacki: the majority of Jewish scholars consider there to be two levels of ban, the niddui and the ḥerem. I have been guided in this matter not only by the opinions set out in Buxtorf’s Lexicon Talmudicum p. 328 and Godwin’s treatise Moses and Aaron, p. 354 of Volume III of Ugolini’s Thesaurus, but also by the research of learned rabbis. The schamatha is indeed the final and most severe form of ban.] IV. There are offences which in the general view are accursed by God himself … V. Bans of the first type are imposed for the following reasons: 1st. Showing contempt for a scholar both during his life and after his death; 2nd. Showing contempt for a court messenger; 3rd. Calling a neighbour one’s slave; 4th. Failing to appear at court; 5th. Showing contempt for holy books and the opinions of rabbis in religious matters; 6th. Not complying with a decision of the court; 7th. Being in possession of a thing which is harmful and failing to remove it, for example a savage dog or a broken ladder, etc.; 8th. Selling land to a Christian or a pagan; 9th. Testifying in a Christian court against a fellow Jew; 10th. Not

The Partitions of Poland-Lithuania, 1772–1815

VI. VII. VIII.

IX. X. XI.

XII.

XIII.

practising the separation of clean meat [Note by Czacki: In Buxtorf, this article is differently framed but our Jews interpret it as I have set it out]; 11th. Not observing holy days strictly; 12th. Working in the afternoon of the day preceding Easter;98 13th. Taking the name of God in vain; 14th. Inducing others to eat holy food in a place other than the synagogue [Note by Czacki: this rule alludes to the temple of Jerusalem]; 16th. [sic] Producing calendars other than Jewish calendars; 17th. Causing the blind to stumble; 18th. Preventing others from fulfilling their religious duties; 19th. Practicing as a butcher without the approval of the authorities; 20th. In relation to a butcher, not showing his knife to the experts to establish that it is suitable; 21st. Not wishing to study; 22nd. Separating from one’s wife and then living with her or having any form of familiarity with her; 23rd. In the case of a learned man, being of ill-repute and improper conduct; 24th. Issuing bans without justification. The niddui ban may be issued by every judicial authority. Before the ban is issued, the offender is admonished. No-one who is subject to a ban may be a witness, he may not shave, and everybody save his wife and children must remain 4 ells away from him. If he dies, a stone is placed on his body to signify that he deserves to be stoned. No mourning is permitted for anyone who dies subject to a ban. If within 30 days the subject of the ban fails to make amends, he shall be placed under a ḥerem … This ban may only be imposed by ten people, and lifted by three. A person who has been banned in this way may not teach or be a scholar. No-one is to have any dealings with him except to feed him if he is hungry. He may not enter the synagogue. The schamatha, or the ultimate level of ban, was previously announced by trumpets…, then by circular letter, and lifting such a ban was forbidden [Note by Czacki: I have seen such circular letters. The last one (as far as I know), issued by the arch-rabbi of Ostróg under August III, was translated for me. The most severe ban was the one imposed on a Jew from Tatarków for revealing agreements made for the good and benefit of the entire tribe of Israelites.] Extrajudicial bans are solely matters of conscience.

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

98

211

A reference to Passover.

212

Aust

No. 34 Hasidic Petition for the Support of Their Prayer House in Płock, 1818

Published in: Glenn Dynner. Men of Silk: The Hasidic Conquest of Polish Jewish Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006, pp. 61–62, translated by the author. The support of peaceful secondary houses of Prayer for the Supplicants, in Płock, the fifth day of May, 1818 By the local synagogue are to be found two prayer houses—a main one and a second, smaller one. In spite of this, we the undersigned under the name Men of Silk maintain a third, similar School for engaging more in other prayers and spiritual learning, which has peacefully existed already for ten years. And its existence is protected by the local Police, according to the copy of the annex attached here. Whereas it has been formed upon good religious principles and perfect spiritual, religious knowledge by especially good people, the existence of the said School, which is not only fundamentally useful, but also not harmful; whereas we, the undersigned have carried out every public obligation and burden, both Spiritual and Governmental, and all public proclamations, only differing by devoting ourselves longer in other Services and spiritual learning, for which we need separate Schools; whereas in the main and smaller Synagogue the general Jewish population—among them Artisans, Merchants, etc.—gather to hold services of short duration and we cannot manage our own devotions in such a short amount of time; and whereas on the second day of this month, the supervisor of the local police arrived and prohibited our conducting Prayer and Study in this School, we accordingly place ourselves in this petition to the wojewódstwo Commission under the highest protection and humbly request for the utmost grace, by dint of constitutionally guaranteed general tolerance and protection, to peacefully maintain our existing Schools. And because our Religion obligates us to pray publicly every day for this reason we request the most speedy gracious revolution, in the hand of Szaie Michel, professing the deepest respect. [Signatures]

chapter 4

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914 Michael K. Schulz 1

Demography and the Legal Framework

The transformation of Jewish self-government which began in the post-partition era was characterized on the one hand by increased state interference in the internal affairs of the Jewish community and on the other hand by the continuing reforms of religious, social, and cultural practice which had their roots in the Enlightenment and in the process of the legal emancipation of Jews. After 1815, the territories of the former Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, which had previously made up the voivodeships of Poznań, Gniezno, Inowrocław, and Pomorze, became part of the provinces of West Prussia and the Grand Duchy of Poznań (later renamed the Province of Poznań [Provinz Posen]). At a lower level of administration, this area was divided into the administrative regions (Regierungsbezirke) of Gdańsk, Kwidzyn, Bydgoszcz, and Poznań. According to the censuses of 1843–44, the largest Jewish communities were located in Poznań (8,000 members), Kępno and Leszno (3,500), Gdańsk (2,500), Krotoszyn and Inowrocław (2,300), and Gniezno and Rawicz (1,800). Approximately a dozen other communities had in excess of 1,000 members.1 As a result of mass emigration to the west and especially to the United States,2 the number of Jews in the Prussian partition fell by half, from 80,000 in 1825 (4.6% of the whole population of the four regions referred to above) to 40,000 in 1910 (1.1%).3 At the beginning of the twentieth century, only seven commu1 Manfred Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden Preußens in amtlichen Enquêten des Vormärz, vol. 1–3, Munich 1998; Johann Gottfried Hoffmann (ed.), Die Bevölkerung des preussischen Staats. Nach dem Ergebnisse der zu Ende des Jahres 1837 amtlich aufgenommenen Nachrichten in staatswirtschaftlicher, gewerblicher und sittlicher Beziehung, Berlin 1839, pp. 85–88. 2 Cornelia Östreich, ‘Des rauhen Winters ungeachtet …’, Die Auswanderung Posener Juden nach Amerika im 19. Jahrhundert, Hamburg 1997, pp. 78–81; Bernhard Breslauer, Die Abwanderung der Juden aus der Provinz Preußen, Berlin 1909. 3 Max Aschkewitz, Zur Geschichte der Juden in Westpreussen, Marburg 1967, pp. 6, 130; Heinrich Silbergleit, Die Bevölkerungs- und Berufsverhältnisse der Juden im Deutschen Reich, vol. 1: Freistaat Preußen, Berlin 1930, pp. 18, 23; Sophia Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim 1815–1848. Przeobrażenia w łonie żydostwa polskiego pod panowaniem pruskim, Poznań 2001, p. 62.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

214

Schulz

nities had more than 1,000 members, namely Poznań (6,000), Gdańsk (2,500), Bydgoszcz (1,500), Inowrocław (1,400), Gniezno and Leszno (1,200), and Kępno (1,100).4 There were four enactments which constituted the legal basis for Jewish selfgovernment after the partitions. The first two, the General Statute (GeneralJuden-Reglement) of 17 April 1750 and the General Statute for the Jews of South Prussia and New East Prussia of 17 April 1797, remained in force to a greater or lesser extent after 1815. In the following decades they were replaced by two further laws: the Provisional Ordinance concerning Jewish Affairs in the Grand Duchy of Poznań dated 1 June 1833 [no. 2] and the Law on Jewish Affairs dated 23 July 1847 [no. 18]. The General Statute of 1750 was initially brought into effect in both West Prussia5 and South Prussia (the greater part of which subsequently became the Grand Duchy of Poznań).6 Only the communities in the suburbs of Gdańsk were treated differently: in August 1773 they were granted their own statute, albeit one modeled on the 1750 template.7 It is clear that these laws were not always strictly observed. For example, regional authorities in Kwidzyn noted in 1843 that some provisions of the 1750 statute were no longer valid, inter alia because of new jurisdictional laws, while other sections were probably never implemented [no. 15]. The situation in the Poznań area was similarly unclear. There, provisions of the 1797 General Statute which had theoretically been suspended were in fact still being applied both in the Kingdom of Warsaw (1807–13) and after the creation of the Grand Duchy of Poznań in 1815.8 The aim of all the Prussian legislation mentioned above—those of 1750, 1797, 1833, and 1847—was to bring consistency to the law, to increase control over Jewish self-government, and to effect the so-called civic improvement of Jews (bürgerliche Verbesserung). The interference of the Prussian administration therefore extended to issues such as the organization of communities, the education of Jewish children, and occasionally even to questions of local custom (minhag) and ritual. The improvement policy referred to in the preamble to the 1833 ordinance [no. 2] was meant to transform the mentality, habits, and occupational activity of Jews. Its authors assumed that only integration and

4 5 6 7

Zeitschrift für Demographie und Statistik der Juden 1 (1905), no. 2, p. 12. M. Aschkewitz, Zur Geschichte, p. 38. S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, pp. 50–51. Samuel Echt, Die Geschichte der Juden in Danzig, Leer 1972, pp. 23–25. Full version of this document in: Archiwum Państwowe w Gdańsku [State Archive in Gdańsk], 300,92/197, pp. 17–70. 8 S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, pp. 58–59, 82–83; Manfred Jehle, ‘Die Enquêten der preußischen Regierung zu den Verhältnissen der Juden und der jüdischen Gemeinden 1842–1845’, in: idem (ed.): Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 1, p. LXII.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

215

the adoption of Christian characteristics would create the basis for complete legal equality between Jews and non-Jews.9 2

Community Membership

One manifestation of the state’s increased control over its Jewish inhabitants and the organization of their self-government was the introduction of the so-called parish principle (Parochialprinzip). This was a rule which already operated in Christian churches and which made it compulsory for every believer to be a member of the parish in his place of residence.10 In relation to Jewish communities, such a requirement already existed by virtue of the General Statute of 1750 (§31).11 It was reaffirmed in the nineteenth century by the ordinance of 1 June 1833 [no. 2] and the law of 23 July 1847 [no. 18].12 The regional authorities confirmed its de facto implementation but, at the same time, they also reported possible breaches and indicated that there was in fact freedom of choice as to where religious observance was practiced [no. 17].13 The requirement to be a member of the Jewish community in one’s place of residence remained unchanged throughout the period under discussion.14 The option of non-compliance was, however, guaranteed by the Law concerning Resignation from Jewish Communities of 28 July 1876, which permitted the renunciation of Judaism, and thereby also resignation from the local community, on condition that the decision was made on religious grounds.15 Until the 1880s, Gdańsk was in a unique position: there, after the demolition of the suburbs in 1807 and 1813, five Jewish communities existed side by side in the Old and Main Towns. They were not bound by the parish principle but instead 9

10 11 12 13 14 15

Annegret H. Brammer, Judenpolitik und Judengesetzgebung in Preußen 1812 bis 1847 mit einem Ausblick auf das Gleichberechtigungsgesetz des Norddeutschen Bundes von 1869, Berlin 1987, pp. 49–50, 178; M. Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 1, pp. 182–83. S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, pp. 125–26. Ismar Freund, Die Emanzipation der Juden in Preußen. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Gesetzes vom 11. März 1812. Ein Beitrag zur Rechtsgeschichte der Juden in Preußen, Bd. 2, Berlin 1912, pp. 52–53. Robert Liberles, ‘Emancipation and the Structure of the Jewish Community in the Nineteenth Century’, in: Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 31 (1986), pp. 61–62. M. Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 3, pp. 848–51, 925; M. Aschkewitz, Zur Geschichte, pp. 100–101, 258. Ismar Freund, Die Rechtstellung der Synagogengemeinden in Preußen und die Reichsverfassung. Ein Beitrag zur Revision der bisherigen Gesetzgebung, Berlin 1926, pp. 6, 12, 15. Ibid., pp. 15–17, 39–42.

216

Schulz

retained the arrangements which had been in place when they were still located in different parts of the city and its suburbs.16 Apart from secularization and conversion, religious differences within Judaism also had the potential to threaten the homogeneity of the communal system devised by the Prussian administration. The religious rifts which were apparent as early as the first half of the nineteenth century [no. 17]17 did not, however, ultimately lead to the formation of independent communities in the Poznań region or in West Prussia. In practice, every locality with a Jewish community brought together in it all the Jews within its bounds. Naturally, differences between the Orthodox and Reform branches of Judaism remained in evidence, for example in Poznań during rabbinical elections [no. 41], or in Gdańsk where, after the unification of its communities, the maintenance of the Orthodox synagogue was guaranteed.18 3

The Organization and Election of Communal Authorities

The original legislative provisions concerning the organization of communities—contained in the ordinance of 1833 [no. 2] and the law of 1847 [no. 18]—were expanded upon in executive regulations issued by provincial governors, the regional state administration, and the communities themselves. The instructions announced by governor Eduard Flottwell in January 1834, for instance, stipulated the maximum number of individuals to be elected to communal authorities, set out the rules governing their election, and listed some of their duties [no. 4].19 Furthermore, in July 1834 the Poznań regional administration specified the jurisdictional competence and duties of the community’s governing bodies, namely the representatives and the administrative officials, their mutual relations, and their relationship with the rest of the community [no. 6]. The community statutes—drawn up by the community board and ratified by the state—regulated communal activity at the lowest rung of the administrative ladder. Introduced by the law of 23 July 1847 [no. 18], they covered by and large the same ground as the legal regulations referred to above, and gave details only in respect of such matters as the scope of the rights and duties of community members and communal authorities, the structure of the latter and the procedures by which it operated, and the nature and number 16 17 18 19

M. Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 2, pp. 731–33, 745; Michael K. Schulz, Sozialgeschichte der Danziger Juden im 19. Jahrhundert, Berlin 2020. M. Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 3, pp. 863–64, 928–29; ibid., vol. 2, p. 737. S. Echt, Die Geschichte, p. 62; M. Schulz, Sozialgeschichte, pp. 110, 156, 208–13. S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, p. 125.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

217

of community officials [no. 25]. Specific instructions were occasionally issued for individual functionaries: one example is the official list of duties required of the shames (beadle) in the community of Trzcianka in 1847 [no. 19]. The state made clear that the division of responsibilities within the Jewish communal authorities was analogous to that which applied in municipal authorities [no. 2]. Thus, the so-called administrative officials (Verwaltungs­ beamten) appointed by virtue of the 1833 ordinance were the equivalent of the municipality and fulfilled an executive function in relation to the decisions of the assembly of Jewish representatives. This assembly was in turn the counterpart of the municipal assembly (Stadtverordnetenversammlung). Aron Heppner and Izaak Herzberg, local activists and experts in the Jewish history of the Poznań area, made reference to this analogy seventy years later when they described the organization of the kahals of their own time [no. 39]. In the event of any jurisdictional or procedural ambiguities, the Poznań regional authority in July 1842 specifically encouraged its subordinate district authorities (starostwa, Landräte) to interpret the regulations on kahal activity by analogy to the municipal authorities. This was not, however, to be taken too far: construing the Jewish communal authorities as legally equivalent to state officials [no. 13] was contrary to the law prohibiting Jews from entering the state administration.20 The law of 23 July 1847 consolidated more than twenty different pieces of legislation to which Jews in Prussia were subject at the time21 and introduced the Jewish communal authority structure which existed to the end of the period covered by this chapter.22 Although it in fact preserved separate regulations for the Province of Poznań, these mainly concerned individual relations between Jews and the state (in other words their civic status) and only had a minor bearing on community organization. The 1847 law divided the communal authorities into representatives and board. An assembly of representatives set the communal budget, was responsible for charitable activity, and oversaw the work of the board, whose function was principally executive. The type and number of community officials was determined solely by the communal authorities [no. 18]. In practice, the number of authority members and officials varied widely depending on the size, wealth, and traditions of each particular community. Especially in smaller settlements, it was common to combine the roles of rabbi, cantor, and ritual slaughterer into the hands of one person [no. 17]. 20 21 22

A. Brammer, Judenpolitik, pp. 129–35. Stefi Jersch-Wenzel, ‘Rechtslage und Emanzipation’, in: Michael A. Meyer, Michael Brenner (eds.), Deutsch-jüdische Geschichte in der Neuzeit, vol. 2, Munich 2000, p. 38. I. Freund, Die Rechtstellung, p. 5.

218

Schulz

As was the case with municipal rights and elections to the town council following the Municipal Ordinance of 17 March 1831 (§§11–23),23 eligibility to vote in the Jewish community applied to adult, financially independent men of unblemished reputation who were not in arrears with communal taxes [nos. 2, 18]. In accordance with the law of July 1847, they elected representatives, an assembly of whom appointed the communal board [no. 18]. The electoral criteria meant that a certain group of less wealthy or chronically ill Jews were always excluded from the franchise. In 1833 the number of those eligible to vote in the district of Krobia was 69 per cent of all adult male community members [no. 3], about the average for the province as a whole, which was 65 per cent.24 Initially elections were considered lawful if two-thirds of those eligible to vote did in fact do so [no. 4]. This rule was, however, soon abandoned in light of the significant numbers of those who were either indifferent or absent during elections. Thereafter, elections were deemed valid irrespective of the number of participants.25 The monitoring of elections ‘in the presence of and supervised by a state official’ [no. 2] revealed that they did not always run as smoothly as they did for example in Grodzisk Wielkopolski in 1859 [no. 23]. Particularly in the first years after the new law came into force, there were sporadic allegations of procedural irregularity or of overly close family ties between candidates.26 In Poznań, the police commissioner and the district state administrator (Landrat) Adolf Freiherr von Hohberg reported in 1834 on problems with the conduct of elections to the Jewish communal authorities [no. 5]. 4

Rabbis, Education, and the Standardization of Religious Practice

One of the changes brought about by the Prussian administration through the laws of 1750 and 1797 concerned the circumscription of rabbinical prerogative. The antipathy towards traditional kahal organization which the administration expressed in this legislation found support amongst Jewish Enlightenment thinkers critical of what they saw as the excessive authority of rabbis.27 23

24 25 26 27

Johann D.F. Rumpf (ed.), Die preußische Städteordnung vom 19ten November 1808, mit den gesetzlichen sowohl als reglementsmäßigen ergänzenden und erläuternden Bestimmungen; nebst der revidirten Städteordnung mit den dazu gehörigen Verordnungen vom 17ten März 1831, und einer Vergleichung beider, Berlin 1834, pp. 241–44. S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, p. 126. Ibid., p. 129. Ibid., pp. 126–28; M. Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 1, p. 178. Michael Graetz, ‘Jüdische Aufklärung’, in: Michael A. Meyer, Michael Brenner (eds.), Deutsch-jüdische Geschichte in der Neuzeit, vol. 1, Munich 2000, pp. 322, 330–31, 337–40;

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

219

After the abolition of court jurisdiction and the authority of rabbis to discipline community members,28 rabbinical duties comprised, for example, pronouncing on issues connected with religious practice, certifying marriages and divorces, monitoring compliance with the laws of kashrut, and supervising education.29 The terms set by the Poznań kahal for its future rabbi, Salomon Eger, stated that he was forbidden from intervening in any way whatsoever in the internal affairs of the community other than in relation to questions of religion, worship, or education. He was obliged to preach in the synagogue on the subject of morality and to provide advice and opinion when required by the communal authorities. In addition, with the agreement of the interested parties, he could adjudicate in intracommunal disputes [no. 12]. The director of the Jewish school in Gdańsk, Kalman Bram, confirmed that this was the contemporary extent of rabbinical responsibilities. He also observed that the first half of the nineteenth century had seen a significant decline in the status of rabbis in the Jewish community [no. 14], something which was in fact common in other parts of Germany as well.30 Regardless of that development, towards the end of this period, for some communities, such as that in Poznań [no. 41], the employment of a highly educated expert in Jewish law still constituted an important element in community life. Despite this, the total number of rabbis employed in more than one hundred communities in the province of Poznań in the first decade of the twentieth century was not much more than twenty (one rabbi for c.1,300 Jews). By comparison, in 1843, 123 kahals had employed 72 rabbis (one for 1,083).31 While kahals were entitled to delegate the supervision of education to rabbis, they themselves were statutorily obliged to ensure the provision of education, after compulsory education for Jews was introduced in Prussia in 1823–24.32 The Provisional Ordinance of 1833 explicitly imposed on Jewish communities

28

29 30

31 32

Andreas Gotzmann, Jüdisches Recht im kulturellen Prozeß. Die Wahrnehmung der Halacha im Deutschland des 19. Jahrhunderts, Tübingen 1997, pp. 14–16. I. Freund, Die Emanzipation, vol. 2, p. 53; Ludwig Rönne, Heinrich Simon (eds.), Die früheren und gegenwärtigen Verhältnisse der Juden in den sämtlichen Landestheilen des Preußischen Staates, Breslau 1843, pp. 299–300; Michael A. Meyer, ‘Jüdische Gemeinden im Übergang’, in: idem, M. Brenner (eds.), Deutsch-jüdische Geschichte, vol. 2, pp. 106–108. M. Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 3, pp. 926–27. Andreas Brämer, Rabbiner und Vorstand. Zur Geschichte der jüdischen Gemeinde in Deutschland und Österreich 1808–1871, Wien/Köln/Weimar 1999, pp. 15–17, 57; Ismar Schorsch, ‘Emancipation and the Crisis of Religious Authority. The Emergence of the Modern Rabbinate’, in: Werner E. Mosse, Arnold Paucker, Reinhard Rürup (eds.), Revolution and Evolution 1848 in German-Jewish History, Tübingen 1981, p. 206. M. Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 3, pp. 920–21, 930–38. Andreas Brämer, Leistung und Gegenleistung. Zur Geschichte jüdischer Religions- und Elementarlehrer in Preußen 1823/24 bis 1872, Göttingen 2006, pp. 90–91.

220

Schulz

the duty of ensuring the education of children and, if necessary, of meeting their related financial needs. Jewish schools were allowed to operate if duly authorized by the state and, in exceptional circumstances, the substitution of private teaching for school education was also permitted [no. 2]. On the basis of this law, around sixty Jewish schools had been established in the Poznań area by the end of the 1830s and their numbers rose in the subsequent decade.33 The provisions of the ordinance of 1833 were reaffirmed in similar form by the law of 23 July 1847, which inter alia regulated Jewish education in the whole of Prussia. The law asserted, just as the 1833 ordinance had done [no. 2], that support for Jewish youth should not be restricted to the provision of basic education. The kahal also had an obligation to ensure that, after leaving school, young Jews were steered towards artisanry or other ‘respectable’ occupations and away from becoming traders or peddlers. Apart from regulating communal organization or education, the state also occasionally encroached on issues of custom and religious ritual. An example of the administration’s attempts to ‘improve’ Jews by breaking their ‘reactionary’ habits was its interference in the practice of erecting an eruv in several towns in the Bydgoszcz and Kwidzyn regions.34 Broadly speaking, the concept of eruv denotes the various forms of symbolic activity which make permissible specific behaviour which would otherwise be forbidden by religious law. One of these activities is the putting up of cords or wires around the Jewish quarter for the duration of the Sabbath and of holidays. These cords (eruv) symbolize the boundary between public and private spheres and allow, for example, for the carrying of items from one building to another on the Sabbath.35 The tradition of setting up an eruv was also observed in the provinces of Poznań and West Prussia. However, the local police of several towns, together with the Bydgoszcz regional administration, declared the practice to be unacceptable for a number of reasons. Firstly, it was incompatible with state law which held that the practice of merely ‘tolerated’ religions (of which Judaism was one) could take place exclusively in private houses or in places of worship duly designated for that purpose.36 Moreover, it was felt that the eruv had a negative effect on the functionality and aesthetic appearance of the streets and reinforced Jewish separation. Thus, according to the state authorities, it struck at the heart of the politics of integration [no. 1]. 33 34 35 36

Ibid., p. 115. Joachim Schlör, Das Ich der Stadt. Debatten über Judentum und Urbanität (1822–1938), Göttingen 2005, pp. 11–14. Zvi Kaplan, ‘Eruv’, in: Michael Berenbaum, Fred Skolnik (eds.), Encyclopaedia Judaica, 2nd ed., vol. 6, Detroit 2007, pp. 484–85. ‘Allgemeines Landrecht für die Preußischen Staaten vom 1. Juni 1794’, Teil 2, Titel 11, §23, http://opinioiuris.de/quelle/1623.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

221

For a number of years the matter remained unresolved. In 1835, the Jewish communities of Wałcz, Wieleń, and Trzcianka, with the assistance of the Berlin expert in Judaism and publisher Jeremias Heinemann,37 set out their own stance based on both religious and socio-legal grounds [no. 8]. Shortly thereafter, the Prussian king gave his consent to the setting up of the eruv, on condition that the thin wires or cords used for that purpose be affixed to existing buildings, and that no posts, poles, or other devices should be allowed to cause additional obstruction to traffic on the roads [no. 9]. The demand to reform various areas of social and religious life did not, of course, come solely from the state. Apart from the regulations mentioned above, such as community statutes or instructions for individual officials, there were also the so-called synagogal ordinances (Synagogenordnungen) laid down by kahals; in the Poznań area, from the 1830s onwards. These ordinances, which ran to more than a dozen sections, gave information on the prescribed style of dress and behaviour during synagogue services and also forbade any conversation or noise which might in any way interfere with prayer [no. 21].38 5

The Funding of Communities

Perhaps the most important factor affecting the financial situation of communities in the Prussian partition was the mass emigration which began in the 1840s from the Poznań area and in the 1870s from West Prussia.39 Apart from the resulting decrease in revenue, there was the additional burden of having to repay exorbitant debts. The principal source of communal income in this period was the tax known as the korobka (krupka), levied mainly on the purchase of kosher meat.40 Other sources of revenue were fees and gifts from community members, the charges connected with religious practice, and the use of kahal assets (i.e. buildings and institutions) [nos. 7, 17]. Expenditures consisted mostly of the costs of internal administration, religious rites, charitable activity, and municipal taxes [no. 7]. Community assets usually included the buildings associated with religious practice and administration: the synagogue, the mikveh (ritual bath), 37 38 39 40

Moses Löb Bamberger, Geschichte der Juden in Schönlanke, Berlin 1912, p. 43. S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, pp. 259–65; M. Schulz, Sozialgeschichte, pp. 196–98. S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, pp. 211–22; M. Aschkewitz, Zur Geschichte, pp. 129–30; C. Östreich, ‘Des rauhen Winters ungeachtet …’, pp. 78–81. Salo Wittmayer Baron, The Jewish Community. Its History and Structure to the American Revolution, vol. 2, Westport 1972, pp. 258–59; S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, p. 140; M. Schulz, Sozialgeschichte, pp. 97–105, 123–31.

222

Schulz

the cemetery, sometimes the slaughterhouse, and other premises used by the communal authorities or the rabbi [nos. 16, 17].41 These buildings were often in very poor condition, there being insufficient funds available to pay for essential repairs. It could take years for the necessary sums to be raised—through donations, gifts, bequests, or loans [no. 27]—to allow for the restoration or construction of a synagogue [no. 20]. Another possible reason for the nonrepair of ritual facilities was the fact that, over the years, Prussian Jews made less and less use of them [no. 36]. The level of debt varied significantly between communities [no. 16] and was in general decidedly higher in the Poznań region than in the region of Bydgoszcz.42 In 1838, the communities with the largest debts were Poznań (126,250 thalers), Leszno (82,563), Krotoszyn (24,486), and Międzyrzecz (20,538).43 In comparison, the annual budget of the Leszno kahal at that time was just under 10,000 thalers [no. 7]. The state, sceptical about the ability of communities to manage their own finances, appointed special commissions to supervise negotiations between the communities and their creditors, negotiations which resulted in the drawing up of debt repayment plans.44 In practice, however, the burden of debt remained overwhelming. In Leszno, debt repayment accounted for the bulk of the expenditure of the kahal, which was at risk of losing its assets [no. 7].45 These financial burdens, coupled with dwindling membership, significantly hampered economically weaker communities in the fulfillment of their obligations, for example in relation to charitable work or education. The situation was only marginally improved by the fact that those departing from a community were required to contribute towards the repayment of its debts, in accordance with the regulations of 8 May 183746 and the law of 24 May 1869.47 Savings were sought wherever possible [no. 30] and attempts were made to resolve financial difficulties by increasing taxes payable to the community— thereby creating an additional burden on Jewish tax payers who were already exploited to a greater extent than their Christian counterparts [no. 10]. The 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, p. 141. Ibid., p. 138. Ibid., p. 137; Manfred Laubert, ‘Die Schuldenregulierung der jüdischen Korporationen in der Provinz Posen’ in: Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 68 (1924), no. 4, p. 329. S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, pp. 136–37. Louis Lewin, Geschichte der Juden in Lissa, Pinne 1904, pp. 61–63. L. Rönne, H. Simon, Die früheren und gegenwärtigen Verhältnisse, pp. 331–32; S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, p. 139. Gesetzsammlung für die Königlich-Preußischen Staaten 1869, pp. 838–39.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

223

communal board in Międzyrzecz was one of those which decided to take this step, explaining that it was necessary to increase the korobka in order to employ a rabbi [no. 22]. Kahals used various disciplinary measures to enforce the payment of tax. Although the statutes of 1750 and 1797 had removed from rabbis the authority to declare ḥerem—a religious ban, which excluded an individual from the Jewish community—or to impose other penalties for offences against religion or custom, it was still possible for such penalties to be imposed by the kahal authorities. It was essential, however, for these sanctions to be approved by the relevant state authorities. This is what happened, for example, in Sieraków in the district of Międzychód, where the local Jewish community punished its members for buying untaxed meat: the punishment was imposed by agreement with the town council [no. 11] and with the consent of the Poznań regional authorities.48 6

Jewish Confraternities, Associations, and Charitable Work

As part of Jewish self-government in its broader sense, the work of confraternities (ḥevrot) played a significant part in realizing the objectives of Jewish communities. As a result, they were able occasionally to count on financial assistance from the kahal, as was the case, for example, with the Poznań burial society [no. 32]. Many of the traditional confraternities, such as the ḥevra kadisha (burial society), the bikur ḥolim (society for visiting the sick), or the Jewish trade guilds49 operated throughout the period covered in this chapter.50 Some undertook a range of duties, while others focused on specific tasks, for example caring for the sick, providing clothes for school pupils, and burying or praying for the dead [nos. 16, 26]. In addition to the traditional confraternities and guilds, various Jewish associations emerged which set themselves new, secular goals: the modernization of education, the promotion of artisanry among their fellow Jews, the 48 49

50

Archiwum Państwowe w Poznaniu [State Archive in Poznań], Starostwo Powiatowe w Międzychodzie, no. 2123, pp. 62–66. Anna Michałowska-Mycielska, The Jewish Community. Authority and Social Control in Poznań and Swarzędz 1650–1793, Wrocław 2008, pp. 137–56; Andreas Reinke, Judentum und Wohlfahrtspflege in Deutschland. Das jüdische Krankenhaus in Breslau 1726–1944, Hannover 1999, pp. 31–42. Michael Moses Zarchin, Jews in the Province of Posen. Studies in the Communal Records of the Eighteen and Nineteenth Centuries, Philadelphia 1939.

224

Schulz

elimination of vagabondage [no. 35], or the emancipation of women [no. 34].51 The appearance and prolific growth of these associations, especially in the last decades of the nineteenth century, were bound up with modernization, emancipation (of Jews and women), secularization, the development of civil society, and also, to a certain extent, with the reluctance of non-Jews to accept Jews in mainstream society.52 Typical in the period of the German Empire was the establishment of nationwide Jewish organizations, made up of individual Jews and Jewish communities. Membership in such national organizations did not preclude participation in their provincial or regional counterparts. One example of this was the parallel activity of the Union of German Jewish Communities (Deutsch-Israelitischer Gemeindebund) and the various regional community unions established in the area discussed in this chapter.53 The Union of German Jewish Communities was formed in Leipzig in 1869 and by the end of the century included most Jewish communities from every province of the German Empire [no. 31]. Its responsibilities included supporting poorer communities by subsidizing local teachers, assisting in the renovation of public buildings, or supporting Jewish orphans and widows [no. 33].54 The final years of the nineteenth century saw the emergence in the Prussian partition of regional associations with exactly the same objectives. Rabbi Gotthilf Walter declared at the inauguration of the Union of Communities of the Bydgoszcz Region that the new organization should constitute an extension of the principle of Jewish self-help put into practice by the Union of German Jewish Communities [no. 34]. Meanwhile, one of the primary aims of the Union of Communities of the Province of Poznań, set up in the first decade of the twentieth century, was to establish a sort of regional headquarters which could gather information on 51

52

53

54

Jacob Toury, Soziale und politische Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland 1847–1871. Zwischen Revolution, Reaktion und Emanzipation, Düsseldorf 1977, pp. 216–20; Simone Lässig, Jüdische Wege ins Bürgertum. Kulturelles Kapital und sozialer Aufstieg im 19. Jahrhundert, Göttingen 2004, pp. 533–44. S. Lässig, Jüdische Wege ins Bürgertum, pp. 520–64; Andreas Reinke, ‘Wohltätige Hilfe im Verein. Das soziale Vereinswesen der deutsch-jüdischen Gemeinden im 19. und beginnenden 20. Jahrhundert’, in: idem, Stefi Jersch-Wenzel, François Guesnet, Gertrud Pickhan, Desanka Schwara (eds.), Juden und Armut in Mittel- und Osteuropa, Cologne/Weimar/ Vienna 2000, pp. 234–35, 239. Margret Heitmann, ‘Liebe zur Gemeinde erwächst erst aus dem Gefühl der Sicherheit. Der Verband der Westpreußischen Synagogengemeinden 1897–1922’, in: idem, Michael Brocke, Harald Lordick (eds.), Zur Geschichte und Kultur der Juden in Ost- und Westpreußen, Hildesheim/Zurich/New York 1999, p. 217. Michael Reuven, ‘Deutsch-Israelitischer Gemeindebund’, in: Michael Berenbaum, Fred Skolnik (eds.), Encyclopaedia Judaica, 2nd ed., vol. 5, Detroit 2007, p. 626.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

225

anti-Jewish violence [no. 40]. The struggle against antisemitism was also one of the chief aims of another nationwide organization, the Central Association of German Citizens of the Jewish Faith (Central-Verein Deutscher Staatsbürger Jüdischen Glaubens), established in 1893. A further mainstay of its activity was defence of the civil rights of Jews resident in the empire, alongside efforts to emphasize the German identity of those Jews.55 Charitable activity, too, underwent a significant transformation in the nineteenth century. Although the law of 31 December 1842 made municipal authorities responsible for the welfare of the Jewish poor, this obligation was in practice often taken on by Jewish communities, who received a lump sum payment from the municipality in return.56 This system worked so long as the local community was functioning effectively. When, however, as a result of mass emigration, the financial aid framework ceased to exist, some of its Jewish beneficiaries found themselves suddenly deprived of crucial support [nos. 28, 29, 38]. In practice, charity work was divided up between Jewish communities and local charitable institutions. Over time, the financial assistance provided by the supra-communal organizations mentioned above became more and more crucial. The modernization of society led at the turn of the century to a proliferation of new types of charitable institutions and Jewish hospitals [no. 37], their vigorous growth made possible by the social advance of the Jewish population of Germany in the nineteenth century. Participation in foundations and organizations for the public good was, especially for those Jews entering the middle class (Bürgertum), an indication of their social status.57 In the Poznań area, as in other parts of Germany,58 new charitable institutions were established entirely thanks to the support of wealthy Jewish donors: the founder of an orphanage in Inowrocław was the locally born Josef Wolfsohn, while Moritz Rohr, born in Fordon, contributed to the establishment, amongst others, of a communal shelter in Bojanów and a hospital in Poznań [no. 37]. Meanwhile, brothers Isaac and Philipp Todtmann set up a poorhouse in Rawicz.59 All of 55 56 57 58 59

Uffa Jensen, Politik und Recht, Paderborn 2014, pp. 86–91. S. Kemlein, Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim, pp. 145–47. Simone Lässig, ‘Juden und Mäzenatentum in Deutschland. Religiöses Ethos, kompensierendes Minderheitsverhalten oder genuine Bürgerlichkeit?’, in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft 46 (1998), no. 3, pp. 211–36. A. Reinke, Judentum und Wohlfahrtspflege, pp. 183–89. Aron Heppner, Isaak Herzberg, Aus Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der Juden und der jüdischen Gemeinden in den Posener Landen, Koschmin/Bromberg 1909, pp. 313–14, 489–90; Dariusz Czwojdrak, Z dziejów ludności żydowskiej w południowo-zachodniej Wielkopolsce, Grabonóg 2004, pp. 89–91; John Cohn, Geschichte der jüdischen Gemeinde Rawitsch, Berlin 1915, p. 103.

226

Schulz

these institutions had their own statutes setting out their aims, activities, and funding arrangements [no. 24]. The professionalized and integrated work of these Jewish organizations very much resembled the charitable activity of Christian organizations in this period. It was based on the reorganization of piecemeal charitable activity into socio-charitable aid, which often had the specific aim of returning those in need to the labour market if at all possible.60 7

Conclusion

The reorganization of Jewish communities in the period covered by this chapter took place not as the result of inter-Jewish discussion but was instead something forced on them by the Prussian state. By the second half of the nineteenth century, after an initial (and as yet under-researched) period of adaptation, this imposed communal structure had gained acceptance in a process directly related to the social advancement of Jews and their incorporation into the middle class. Although certain plans were put forward, for example by rabbi Heyman Joel of Skwierzyna in 1842,61 the Prussian partition did not see the formation of any supra-communal Jewish political organization which might allow for state involvement. At the supra-regional level, however, political activity developed in the context of civil society and took the form of organizations such as the Union of German Jewish Communities, or the Association of German Citizens of the Jewish Faith.62 This was the sector in which discussions about the sociopolitical situation of Jews in Germany took place and where the positions of Jews vis-à-vis the state or significant social phenomena such as antisemitism were formulated. The sector offered also financial support for poorer provinces as well as means by which they could, for example, improve the level of religious education. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska 60

61 62

Derek J. Penslar, ‘Philantropy, the “Social Question” and Jewish Identity in Imperial Germany’, in: Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 38 (1993), pp. 52–60; Christoph Sachße, Florian Tenstedt, Geschichte der Armenfürsorge in Deutschland, vol. 2: Fürsorge und Wohlfahrtspflege 1871–1929, Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln/Mainz 1988, pp. 38–41. M. Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden, vol. 1, pp. 234–41. For other projects to establish a Jewish representation across Prussia see A. Brämer, Rabbiner und Vorstand, p. 88. R. Liberles, Emancipation, pp. 63–64.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

227

Bibliographical References

Primary Sources



Secondary Literature

Jehle, Manfred, ed., Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden Preußens in amtlichen Enquêten des Vormärz (Munich: K.G. Saur, 1998), vols. 1–4. Jersch-Wenzel, Stefi, ed., Quellen zur Geschichte der Juden in polnischen Archiven. Ehemalige preußische Provinzen. Pommern, Westpreußen, Ostpreußen, Preußen, Posen, Grenzmark Posen-Westpreußen, Süd- und Neuostpreußen (vol. 1) (Munich: K.G. Saur, 2003). Rönne, Ludwig, and Heinrich Simon, eds., Die früheren und gegenwärtigen Verhältnisse der Juden in den sämtlichen Landestheilen des Preußischen Staates (Breslau: Aderholz, 1843).

Aschkewitz, Max, Zur Geschichte der Juden in Westpreussen (Marburg: JohannGottfried-Herder-Inst., 1967). Bamberger, Moses Löb, Geschichte der Juden in Schönlanke (Berlin: Lamm, 1912). Brocke, Michael, ed., Biographisches Handbuch der Rabbiner (Munich: Walter de Gruyter, 2004–2009), vols. 1–2. Brocke, Michael, Margret Heitmann, and Harald Lordick, eds., Zur Geschichte und Kultur der Juden in Ost- und Westpreußen (Hildesheim; Zürich; New York: Olms, 1999). Cohn, John, Geschichte der jüdischen Gemeinde Rawitsch (Berlin: Lamm, 1915). Czwojdrak, Dariusz, Z dziejów ludności żydowskiej w południowo-zachodniej Wielkopolsce (Grabonóg: Muzeum im. Edmunda Bojanowskiego, 2004). Echt, Samuel, Die Geschichte der Juden in Danzig (Leer: Gerhard Rautenberg, 1972); Polish translation: Dzieje Żydów gdańskich, trans. by Wojciech Łygaś (Gdańsk: Oskar, 2012). Freimann, Aron, Geschichte der israelitischen Gemeinde Ostrowo (Ostrowo: J. Haym, 1896). Freund, Ismar, Die Rechtstellung der Synagogengemeinden in Preußen und die Reichsverfassung. Ein Beitrag zur Revision der bisherigen Gesetzgebung (Berlin: Philo-Verlag und Buchhandlung, 1926). Heppner, Aron, and Isaak Herzberg, Aus Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der Juden in Hohensalza (Frankfurt am Main: Kauffmann, 1907). Heppner, Aron, Aus Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der Juden und der jüdischen Gemeinden in den Posener Landen (Koschmin; Bromberg: self-published, 1909). Herzberg, Isaak, Geschichte der Juden in Bromberg. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Juden des Landes Posen (Frankfurt am Main: Kauffmann, 1903).

228

Schulz

Kemlein, Sophia, Die Posener Juden (1815–1848). Entwicklungsprozesse einer polnischen Judenheit unter preußischer Herrschaft (Hamburg: Dölling und Galitz, 1997); Polish translation: Żydzi w Wielkim Księstwie Poznańskim 1815–1848. Przeobrażenia w łonie żydostwa polskiego pod panowaniem pruskim, trans. by Zofia Choderny-Loew (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie, 2001). Laubert, Manfred, ‘Die Schuldenregulierung der jüdischen Korporationen in der Provinz Posen’, Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 68.4 (1924), 321–331. Lewin, Louis, ‘Geschichte der Juden in Inowrazlaw’, Zeitschrift der Historischen Gesellschaft für die Provinz Posen 15 (1900), 43–94. Lewin, Louis, Aus der Vergangenheit der jüdischen Gemeinde zu Pinne (Pinne: Gundermann, 1903). Lewin, Louis, Geschichte der Juden in Lissa (Pinne: Gundermann, 1904). Posner, Akiba Baruch, The Annals of the Community of Czarnikau (Czarnkow) (Jerusalem: Erez, 1957) [Hebrew]. Posner, Akiba Baruch, The Annals of the Community of Gnesen (Gniezno) (Jerusalem: Erez, 1958) [Hebrew]. Posner, Akiba Baruch, The Annals of the Community of Rawitsch (Jerusalem: Erez, 1962) [Hebrew]. Salinger, Gerhard, Zur Erinnerung und zum Gedenken. Die einstigen jüdischen Gemeinden Westpreußens (New York: self-published, 2009), vols. 1–3. Sariel, Eliezer, ‘Tradition in Time of Crisis. The History of Rabbinic Law in the Posen Region during the First Half of the 19th Century as a Case Study of the Relationship between Modernization and the Formation of Halacha’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2010) [Hebrew]. Sariel, Eliezer, ‘ “In the East Lie My Roots; My Branches in the West”. The Distinctiveness of the Jews of Posen in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century’, Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 58 (2013), 1–18. Schulz, Michael K., Sozialgeschichte der Danziger Juden im 19. Jahrhundert (Berlin: be.bra wissenschaft, 2020). Stein, Abraham, Die Geschichte der Juden zu Danzig. Seit ihrem ersten Auftreten in dieser Stadt bis auf die neuste Zeit, 2nd edition (Danzig: Carl Bäder, 1933). Warschauer, Adolf, ‘Die Erziehung der Juden in der Provinz Posen durch das Elementarschulwesen’, Zeitschrift für die Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland 3.1 (1889), 29–63. Zarchin, Michael Moses, Jews in the Province of Posen. Studies in the Communal Records of the Eighteen and Nineteenth Centuries (Philadelphia: Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning, 1939).

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914



229

Sources

Except for source no. 20, all sources in this chapter have been translated from German by Thomas Lampert



No. 1 The Regional Administration Office in Bydgoszcz to the Ministry of the Interior Regarding Introduction of the Eruv in the Towns of Its Administrative Region, 7 December 1822

Source: Geheimes Preußisches Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz [hereafter GStA PK], I HA, Rep. 77, Tit. 30, no. 71, pp. 1–2.63 In the towns of this province inhabited in part by Jews there is an almost universal custom that they draw over the streets throughout certain endpoints of the towns lines or cords, which are attached to both sides of tall poles and represent symbolic walls. According to Mosaic religious principles, as has been reported to us, Jews may not cross beyond these lines in the town on Shabbat if they are carrying or otherwise physically transporting moveable goods of some kind. It has been proposed that these symbolic walls or gates, with which the Jews as a rule mark almost every street on which Jews reside, be removed by the police. This appears to us appropriate as well. These lines drawn over the streets and attached to the ends of poles are very numerous in some towns and are in part yet another object defacing the already unsightly poor towns. In part the affixing of these line gates on public streets should indisputably be regarded as a religious custom. However, according the provisions of the General State Law,64 Part 2, Section 11, §23, for the merely tolerated religious communities the exercise of their customs according to religious principles is to be indulged in only within those buildings specified for liturgical meetings and within the private residences of their members. Thus, according to the general laws of the state it appears even impermissible that Jews be allowed to interfere on public streets with the practice of this custom. We believe that although this custom is long established it would be unobjectionable to prohibit it in future on the basis of the aforementioned law and thereby 63 64

This document can be found—with minor transcription errors that do not affect its meaning—in Schlör: Das Ich der Stadt, pp. 11–12. The General State Law (Allgemeines Landrecht) for the Prussian States, promulgated in 1794, was a codification that encompassed several areas of law, including civil law, penal law, and church law.

230

Schulz

eliminate at the same time an object that only promotes the continued segregation of members of the Mosaic faith. A decree issued by us, however, would doubtless prompt complaints. In order to obtain certainty about the decision of higher authorities on this matter, we have deemed it necessary that Your Excellency first receive this report.



No. 2 Provisional Ordinance Concerning the Jewish Affairs in the Grand Duchy of Poznań, 1 June 1833

Source: Ludwig Rönne and Heinrich Simon (eds.), Die früheren und gegenwärtigen Verhältnisse der Juden in den sämtlichen Landestheilen des Preußischen Staates (Breslau: Georg Philipp Aderholz, 1843), pp. 305–309. We Friedrich Wilhelm, … after we became convinced of the necessity of improving the civic condition of the Jews in our Province of Poznań as quickly as possible, and even before the adoption of a law about the civic circumstances of Jews encompassing all the provinces of our monarchy, and to eliminate doubts arising from the status of the legislation about this object; to this end we issue the following preliminary decree, with the proviso of supplementing and altering it according to the future general law. §1 … The Jewry of each locality constitutes, as hitherto, a religious community that is tolerated by the state, but which has been ascribed the rights of a corporation in regard to its financial affairs. … §3. Every Jew who has his residence in a synagogue district or locality belongs to the corporation. §4. Entitled to vote in this corporation … are all those male, mature, and beyond reproach Jews who either own property, or independently operate a business, or can otherwise feed themselves on their own without external support. §5. The members of the corporation entitled to vote should, in the presence of and supervised by a state official, elect a number of representatives; and these representatives in turn elect in the same way the administrative officials, who are then confirmed by the regional state administration and serve their office without pay […] §7. The rights and duties of the representatives and the administrative officials to each other, to the corporation, and to third parties are to be judged according to the provisions contained in the Revised Municipal Ordinance of 17 March 183165 concerning the rights and duties of the municipality and the town councilors.…

65

The Municipal Ordinance [Städteordnung], which appeared on 19 November 1808, was a Prussian law that regulated municipal affairs, for instance, questions of civil rights,

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

231

§9 … The Jewish corporations, and especially their administrative officials, are duty bound to ensure that no child of school age—from the seventh to the completion of the fourteenth year—is absent from proper school instruction. They are responsible for ensuring that all children, including boys as well as girls, of this age attend the public schools as prescribed, and are at the same time obligated to provide wholly needy children with the necessary articles of clothing, school tuition, and other school necessities from the special fund existing for this purpose or, in the absence of this, from the corporation assets. §10. Under public schools are understood Christian schools as well as Jewish schools that have been organized with approval of the state with a specific curriculum and with fully qualified Jewish teachers confirmed by the regional administrative office. However, the private instruction of children can be permitted in exceptional cases with the express permission of the regional administrative office to the parents. §11. Each community is responsible for ensuring the special religious instruction of Jewish children. However, only those persons who have received permission from the state to occupy a teaching post are to be admitted as teachers of religion. §12. The teaching language during public instruction in Jewish schools is German. §13. After Jewish boys have completed their school education, the administrative authorities of the corporations are responsible for ensuring that every one of them learns some kind of useful trade or devotes himself to a higher vocation at a scientific academy and that none of them is used in a trade or peddling business.



No. 3 List of Eligible Voters of the Jewish Communities in the Krobia District, 1833

Source: Archiwum Państwowe w Poznaniu [APP], Starostwo Powiatowe w Rawiczu (District Administration Office in Rawicz), no. 137, pp. 13–15.

elections, and the responsibilities of self-governing bodies as well as municipal finances. The Revised Municipal Ordinance appeared on 17 March 1831.

232

Schulz

No. Names of the Israelite communities (…)

Number of present community members

Number of Jewish residents

Notes Number of community members eligible to vote

A. Of the towns 1. Bojanowo 2. Dubin 3. Miejska Górka 4. Gostyń 5. Jutrosin 6. Krobia Pijanowice

72 5 2 26 42 5

306 20 13 120 198 27

54 4 2 19 35 5

7. Rawicz 8. Piaski 9. Sarnowa Total A. Of the towns (…) B. Of the villages Sum total

355 47 20 574 6 580

1537 245 83 2549 17 2566

225 38 13 395 5 400



No Jews live here

No. 4 Instructions of the Provincial Governor (Oberpräsident) of the Province of Poznań from 14 January 1834 on the Implementation of the Provisional Ordinance of 1 June 1833

Source: Rönne and Simon (eds.), Die früheren und gegenwärtigen Verhältnisse, pp. 309–14. Article 2…. The heads of the synagogue [administrative officials] [are] to be called on to draw up lists of names of the independent Israelites of legal age belonging to the respective synagogues, indicating their place of residence and the members, aides, and servants belonging to each family…. Article 3. The heads of the synagogue are not only to be made personally responsible for the completeness and correctness of these lists, but can also be forced through administrative penalties to submit them by a certain deadline determined by the Royal Regional Administrative Office….

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

233

Article 5…. For first election period, the duration of which has been set at three years, for the sake of uniformity the following are to be elected: a) Representatives: in corporations with up to 300 people, at most six; with up to 1,000 people, at most nine; with up to 3,000 people, at most eighteen, and in even more numerous communities, at most thirty. b) Community administrative officials: in corporations with up to 1,000 people, one head and two assistants; in corporations with more than 1,000 people, one head and four assistants. Simultaneous with the aforementioned number of representatives, two-thirds of these are to be elected as deputies. For every head there is simultaneously a deputy who replaces him in cases of absence; and with the number of assistants, half of these are to be elected as deputies…. Article 7…. For the election of the representatives, those people eligible to vote are to be summoned by the election commissioners66 through the announcement in a circular on a specific day. As soon as two-thirds of those eligible to vote in the elections have assembled, a valid election can be held…. An absolute majority of votes at the election assembly determines the results. Only those eligible to vote are capable of being elected. The election commissions appoint two to six respected and honest Israelites as election witnesses who co-sign the protocol. The election date is to be posted in the synagogues fourteen days prior. The lists of the community members and those eligible to vote are also to be made public for the same duration in the customary Israelite community premises or in the synagogue. The election commissioners are authorized to decide on the spot about complaints against individual activities in the elections; however, these complaints cannot delay the completion of the election. The election protocols, which are to be included in the completed circular, are subject to the confirmation of the Royal Regional Administrative Office.

66

According to the Provisional Ordinance concerning Jewish Affairs in the Grand Duchy of Poznań of 1 June 1833, election commissioners were agents of the respective regional administrative office (see no. 2, §5 of this collection of source materials) or of the municipal authorities (see the signatures in no. 23).

234

Schulz

No. 5 Report by the Police Commissioner and District Administrator (Landrat) in Poznań about the Difficulties of Carrying out the Election of Representatives in the Jewish community in Poznań, 14 January 1834

Source: APP, Naczelne Prezydium Prowincji Poznańskiej (Provincial Governor of the Province of Posen), no. 9005, pp. 120–26. In accordance with the high orders referred to herewith I have conducted the procedure of the election of representatives and deputies for the Jewish communities of the town of Poznań, the town of Swarzędz, and the town of Stęszew…. The elections in Swarzędz and Stęszew proceeded smoothly and orderly. In Poznań, however, I encountered such difficulties that the already arduous business became unpalatable to me in a very provoking way and was made into a very difficult task due to several unruly persons…. I had divided the town of Poznań into two election districts so that of the designated 810 persons eligible to vote, each election district had 405…. All those eligible to vote [were] properly and punctually summoned; by High Decree of the provincial governor of the third of the past month and year and the list of those eligible to vote had been posted in the synagogue for fourteen days for everyone’s perusal so that no one complained about the latter except for the unmarried son of the widow Königsberger, named Herz Königsberger. Nevertheless, according to the assurances of the synagogue head, only a few members of the community regarded it as worth the trouble to inform themselves about the contents of these documents…. First during the elections and then afterwards on the evening of the first day, the former synagogue elder Meyer Marcuse, who received the most votes in the first district and had become a representative, was opposed by troublemakers of several insignificant community members who complained about their exclusion from the voting lists as well as about my selection of election witnesses, and in this case namely the p[raemissis praemittendis]67 Marcuse was accused of partisanship. After an investigation of the complaints I decided in favour of the complainants in that I allowed them to take part in the election and I called in the election witnesses desired by the counterparty as such for the election of the 2nd district. When the schemers’ plan did not succeed, complaints were raised about partisanship, about the secret collections of votes, and there were loud protests about the continuation of the election so that only with difficulty were the efforts of three police 67

The Latin phrase praemissis praemittendis, which means ‘passing over things that may reasonably be omitted’, was frequently used in abbreviated form especially in draft documents. In this case it stood for the title ‘synagogue elder’.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

235

constables and my exhaustive explanations able to quiet the tumult and avoid physical violence. Thus I have come to the sorrowful conviction that only a few members in this Jewish community are worthy the High law of the 1st of June of last year; for the largest part of this community, however, it has come about a century too early since only the educated Israelite is able to appreciate the sovereign boon granted to him and has steadied himself for the free election. In contrast, the common Jew,68 who composes the majority of the community, shows his coarse ignorance about the purpose of the legislation and allows himself out of selfishness to become the instrument of the intrigue of exalted Jewish persons of the higher and middle class; for this reason an election according to the desires of each one of these parties is unfeasible.



No. 6 Procedure Regulations for the Representative Assemblies of the Jewish Communities in the Administrative Region of Poznań from 1 July 183469

Source: APP, Starostwo Powiatowe w Babimoście (District Administration Office Babimost), no. 1057, pp. 25–26. §1. The representatives obtain through the election of the corporation and through the law the mandate and obligation to represent the corporation in all of its affairs according to their own conviction and conscience, without consultation with the entire corporation or with a section of it, and to make binding declarations in its name regarding the communal assets and the rights and obligations of the corporation. However, the representatives do not have the authority to make use of their lawful mandate individually, but only in their entirety through collective resolutions…. §3. The responsibilities [of the head of the representative assembly] include calling the representatives to assembly, conducting the assembly, dispensing its tasks, and also presenting the objects of consultation himself, collecting votes, and ensuring that all negotiations and resolutions are recorded in the German language and carried out by the members present. §4. It is especially his duty to see that nothing against the laws and rights of the state is undertaken and enacted in the assemblies of the representatives….

68 69

For the author of this document the term Jew had negative connotations, whereas the term Israelite was used to designate ethically and educationally progressive Jews. These two connotations were in general familiar to officials of the time. Corresponding procedure regulations for the administrative officials of the Jewish communities of the Administrative Region of Poznań were issued simultaneously on 1 July 1834; see APP, Starostwo Powiatowe w Babimoście (District Administration Office in Babimost), no. 1057, pp. 27–28.

236

Schulz

§5. The assemblies of the representatives take place as a rule every fourteen days on Tuesdays; however, exceptional sessions can also be held. §6. No corporation members other than the representatives are allowed to attend the sessions. However, every member of the corporation is entitled to present in writing opinions and proposals about anything concerning the community to the representative assembly through the organ of its head, indicating existing deficiencies and proposing improvements. §7. The assembly is authorized to pass valid resolutions only if at least two-thirds of the representatives are present…. §18. During the presentation of statements or possible objections, which each representative is entitled to make according to his discretion, that representative may not be interrupted or disturbed in his presentation by any other member of the assembly and only when he has entirely finished is a second person permitted to communicate his opinion on the matter. All members must observe strict secrecy regarding everything that is discussed or otherwise occurs during the sessions…. §21. The assembly passes its resolutions according to the absolute majority of votes and in the case of a tie the head casts the deciding vote. §22. If the object of a consultation is important or requires an inspection on site, a deputation elected by the assembly can investigate it and then present its findings to the assembly for resolution…. §26. The areas of tasks of the representative assembly include especially the following objects: a) Audit of the community debts and the establishment of a special debt repayment schedule, along with monitoring the debt account managed by administrative officials; b) Supervision of all corporation income, especially the kosher meat tax (krupka) and the communal assets, with a thorough assessment of how these can be used as advantageously as possible in future; c) Assembling the expenditure and revenue budget for the corporation; d) Inspection of the community accounts and the possible discharging by the paymaster;70 e) Supervision of the corporation administration in general and review of the administration of the communal coffers in particular; f) Supervision of poor relief and charitable private institutions, without, however, interfering with private foundations and associations for the purposes of charity; g) Repartition the corporation liabilities and services;

70

The paymaster (Rendant) was responsible for managing the community coffers. For more on this, see no. 25, §29 in this selection of documents.

237

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914 h)

Approval of extraordinary funds beyond the amount already approved in the annual budget; and finally i) The decision each time about whether in the name of the corporation trials should be conducted, or purchases, sales, settlements, and other contracts affecting the substance of corporation assets should be made. §27. Complaints about the corporation head and about other administrative officials should be addressed to the superior district administration authorities. The representative assembly has no warrant in this regard to investigate or make decisions itself. §28. All resolutions of the representative assembly that concern an alteration in the substance of corporation assets, the levying of communal taxes and charges, conducting trials, determining the corporation budget, approving salaries, or that affect the personal rights of individual members, etc., are valid and enforceable only when they have received the higher confirmation of the regional administrative office or its commissioners. The corporation head is to implement all other resolutions without further ado, if he approves of them…. §30. If a representative assembly continually neglects its duties and disintegrates into chaos and factions, it will be dissolved by the regional administrative office after an investigation and a new representation will be formed; however, those responsible will be declared unworthy of election for a certain period of time or forever.



No. 7 Budget for the Jewish Community in Leszno, 1835–36 Source: GStA PK, I HA, Rep. 77, Tit. 1021 Lissa, no. 3, n.p. Rth.a Gr.

Revenues Item I. From property 1. Rent from a room in the hospital 2. Lease from the bath 3. Lease from synagogue seats … 4. Income from graves sold 5. Income from the grass from the cemetery [Total of Item I] Item II. From religious ceremonies 1. Through the sale of privileges in the synagogue 2. Collection of alms in the synagogue on every Monday and Thursday, 1st of the month, and holidays

10 201 275 33 7 526 400 24

Pf.

238

Schulz

(cont.) Rth.a Gr. 3.

From collections for candles to illuminate the synagogue 4. Donations for being called up and reading from the Torah 5. From 2 legacies 6. From the [collection] boxes at the entrance to the synagogue 7. From the [collection] boxes at funerals 8. Income from the funeral carriage 9. Ditto from the small synagogues 10. Hire for the copper tables [Total of Item II] Item III. Extraordinary revenues 1. Income from slaughtering cattle and poultry … 2. From marriages 3. Fees for settling and departure 4. For deaths 5. Income from back dues [Total of Item III] Item IV. Ordinary revenues 1. Military recruitment taxb 2. Allotted fees to corporation members a) Communal fees—2000 Rth. b) 10 per cent of this for privileges—200 Rth. c) 10 per cent for the Easter [Pesach] meal—200 Rth. d) 7 per cent for feeding the poor on Saturdays and holidays—140 Rth. [Total of Item IV] [Total of Revenues] Expenditures Item I. Administrative costs A. For salaries 1. For kosher-meat-tax collector Elias Kalischer monthly 8 Rth. 23 Gr. 4 Pf. 2. For collector Aron Senius monthly 19 Rth. 3. For secretary Ignatz Lichtheim monthly 15 Rth., 15 Gr.

Pf.

5 4 1 13

25

8 22 60 4 543

5 20

4230 420 400 90 97 5237

10

14 14

4 4

3340 9646

14

4

105

10

800 2540

228 186

239

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914 (cont.) Rth.a Gr. … 8.

For hospital trustee Jonas Goldstein monthly 7 Rth., 95 20 Gr., 6 Pf. 9. For shomer [guardian of the dead] Wolf Bukwitz 30 monthly 2 Rth., 15 Gr. 10. For the two shomrim [guardians of the dead] Bela Latz 37 and Lea Meseritz together monthly 3 Rth., 3 Gr. … 15. For midwife Charlotte Harlmann monthly 2 Rth., 15 Gr. 30 16. For the 3 fire chiefs quarterly 3 Rth. 12 17. Ward-money for police constables on Yom Kippur 3 18. Rent for the horses for the funeral carriage 20 19. Rent for the meeting house of the representatives 25 B. For office supplies 20. For writing materials, printing, and book-binding costs 25 21. Postage and delivery fees 6 … 24. For official gazettes and Kamptz’s Annalenc 3 [Total of Item I] 1387 Item II. Expenditures for worship A. For salaries 1. For first assistant rabbi Lippmann Rawicz monthly 122 10 Rth., 5 Gr. … 6. For cantor Michel Hirsch Jaretzki monthly 14 Rth., 174 16 Gr., 8 Pf. … 8. For synagogue warden Moses Raschke monthly 8 Rth., 102 15 Gr. … 10. For the two kosher butchers Israel Schreiber and 96 Abraham Nordon together monthly 8 Rth. … B. Synagogue supplies 1. Candles to illuminate the synagogue 81 2. Oil to illuminate the synagogue 9 [Total of Item II] 1022 Item III. Poor relief and care for the sick A. Weekly allocation for the local poor 1. Abraham Stong 2. Abraham Moses Kanter … Poor women and widows

Pf.

12

6

5

15 20

20

7 20 1

5 5

6 6

240

Schulz

(cont.) Rth.a Gr. 49. Rachel Arsaderer, widow 50. Blümel Fraenkel … [Total of Item III A] B. For the Easter [Pesach] meal for the local poor … C. For feeding the poor on Shabbat and holidays … F. Infirmary 25 Rth. monthly G. The same in Frankfurt for admitting poor sick people from the local corporation during trade fairs … [Total of Item III] Item IV. School expenditures … Item V. Buildings, repairs and maintenance … Item VI. Public levies 1. Military recruitment tax in monthly rates of 77 Rth. 2 1/2 Gr. … 4. Fire insurance payments (…) [Total of Item VI] Item VII. Debt repayment … Item VIII Extraordinary expenditures 1. For legal costs 2. To cover defaults on communal levies 3. At the disposal of the corporation head [parnas] [Total of Item VIII] … [Total of expenditures]

838 260 75 300 20 1602 186 69

8 9 28

Pf. 6

28

925 16 972 4064

14

6

25 200 117 342 9646

10 10 14

4 4 4

a The coinage abbreviations stand for Reichsthaler, Groschen, and Pfenige. Reichsthaler is sometimes translated as thaler. b Military recruitment tax was paid by Jews in order to be freed from military duties. c For institutions as well as individual citizens, the Annalen der preußischen inneren Staatsverwaltung edited by Karl Albert von Kamptz, and the official gazettes published for the respective administrative regions were fundamental sources of information about the new legal regulations.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914



241

No. 8 The Heads of the Jewish Communities in Wałcz, Wieleń, and Trzcianka to Friedrich Wilhelm III Regarding Installation of the Eruv in Their Towns, 19 August 1835

Source: GStA I HA, Rep. 77, Tit. 30, no. 71, Bl. 16–17.

For followers of the Mosaic Law, the carrying of objects from one place to another on vacant places on the Shabbat is permitted only within a limited circle of four cubits and is forbidden in a wider area. In a town, however, Jews are allowed to carry objects at their discretion on Shabbat only when it is surrounded by walls or deep trenches that have exits with gates. Otherwise an indication of the boundary must be installed around the town by connecting wire or string on both sides of the upper corners of these exits. The basic law is found in Exod[us] 16.29 and in Maimonides’ explanation in Yad ha-Ḥazaka chapt[er]  12.17. The report and attest by Chief Rabbi Eger71 of Province Poznań, submitted here most subserviently as appendix A, speaks in detail about this. All of the regents whose protection Jews enjoy have for ages allowed them in the towns not surrounded by walls or trenches to affix wires or strings on the two corners of the exits in order thereby to represent a boundary, and never in the Royal Prussian States have they been prevented from doing this. Namely in the Grand Duchy of Poznań there have occasionally been towns in which streets are not equipped with gates, and everywhere Jews have been allowed to connect the two corner houses of the exits with wires or strings, for which the owners of these houses have happily given their permission. As examples among the larger towns we name Poznań and Leszno. Thus when the co-signatory Jewry of Wałcz requested this permission in 1794, it was granted them immediately by the municipality as well as by the representatives of the Royal War and Domain Chamber of Bydgoszcz,72 as can be seen in appendixes B and C.73 In 1827, however, we lost this concession due to the unexpected order of the Royal District Administrator; we turned to the Royal Provincial Governor74 of Königsberg, 71 72 73 74

Akiba Eger (1761–1837), rabbi and Talmudic authority, held the office of Province Poznań Chief Rabbi from 1815 until his death. The war and domain chambers (Kriegs- und Domänenkammer) were preceding the regional administrative offices (Regierungen). The transition occurred in 1808 on the basis of the administrative reform. The appendixes are not included in this chapter. Conceived during the administrative reform in 1808/1815, the provincial governor (Oberpräsidium) was an office that was situated between the state ministry and the regional administration offices. There was one provincial governor for each province. Between 1829 and 1878 the seat of the governor for the Province of Prussia (the combined provinces of West Prussia and East Prussia) was Königsberg.

242

Schulz

who remarked ‘that such customs were not appropriate for the current level of the culture’ and put us off with a decision by the Royal Regional Administrative Office in Kwidzyn. The latter, however, dismissed us completely. Appendixes D and E verify this. Appendix E states: ‘that in recent times in cultivated countries this custom has been completely done away with as a highly inappropriate nuisance’…. We then addressed the Royal Ministry of the Interior, which however unfortunately confirmed the decision of the Royal Regional Administrative Office, stating, as can be seen in appendix F, that ‘because the request is aimed at a police nuisance, and also the prohibition is substantiated in the regulations of the G[eneral] S[tate] L[aw] Part II, Section 11, §25’. Regarding the first reason, that of a police nuisance, the Royal Ministry doubtless imagined that the connection at the corners of the exits is massive and unsightly, as in earlier times cords or slats were not infrequently used…. Regarding the second reason, we dare to assert that the Royal Ministry has not been informed at all about the external form of this religious law and this gave rise to a misunderstanding in regard to the contents of the passage in the G[eneral] S[tate] L[aw]. The passage reads namely: ‘The tolerated religious community is not allowed to use the bells or engage in public celebrations outside of the walls of its meeting houses.’ This refers merely to the synagogue and the public, but not to a silent religious custom, at which neither prayers are held nor some kind of celebration or assembly takes place. The wires are affixed once and for all to the gables of the corner houses of the exits without any kind of ceremony, and no one has to pay it any further mind as soon as this affixture has been completed. By contrast, §48 of that part and section of the G[eneral] S[tate] L[aw] states: ‘However, the ceremonies, once recognized, also cannot be altered or abolished without approval of the state….’ This centuries-old favour should now be placed in this category, which cannot be abolished without the express approval of the state…. We enclose finally appendix G with a declaration by our Christian brothers of Wieleń who, as owners of the corner houses on which Jews have made affixtures on the exits, are very satisfied with this purpose and wish that we not be disturbed in the execution of the law. In regard to our report here, the G[eneral] S[tate] L[aw] Part I, Section 22, §55 states: ‘The right to use another’s property can be substantiated through a declaration of intent.’ The longer the interruption of this custom lasts, the more our consciences become troubled, not only for ourselves because we are no longer allowed to carry prayer books and prayer shawls over the streets on Shabbat and must neglect public worship, but also because our youth is deprived of religious worship, becomes indifferent to our

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

243

religion, and in this way indifference may soon gain the upper hand, which will ultimately have as a consequence factions and sects among the Jewry.



No. 9 Friedrich Wilhelm III to the Ministry of the Interior Regarding Installation of the Eruv, 25 November 1835

Source: GStA PK, I HA, Rep. 77, Tit. 30, no. 71, p. 21.75

Regarding your report from the 4th of t[his] m[onth] I have nothing to recall in opposition to the fact that in public streets the Jewish communities connect the corner houses located on town exits with thin wires or cords, with approval of the house owners, to depict symbolic walls necessary for their ritual laws on Shabbat, insofar as neither poles are erected nor other similar measures are made on the streets and the wires or cords are not of a conspicuous kind, but are installed high enough that passage is not obstructed in any way. Hereinafter I leave to you the further disposition as well as the notification of the Jewry of Wałcz, Wieleń and Trzcianka who submitted the inquiry in the preceding presentation.



No. 10 A List by the Municipality of the Town of Oborniki about How Much Tax Is Paid by Fifteen Christian Residents and Fifteen Jewish Residents in Different Professions, but of Approximately the Same Capacity (in Rth., Gr., Pf.), 11 April 1837 (Excerpt)

Source: APP, Naczelne Prezydium Prowincji Poznańskiej (Provincial Government of the Province of Poznań), no. 9025, pp. 178–80. A list by the municipality of the town of Obornik about how much tax is paid by 15 Christian residents und 15 Jewish residents in different professions, but of approximately the same capacity (in Rth., Gr., Pf.), 11 April 1837 (excerpt)

75

See also Schlör, Das Ich der Stadt, p. 13.

4,–,–

4,–,–

–,–,–

4,–,–

2,–,–

–,–,–

2,–,–

6,–,–

4,–,–

4,–,–

1,–,–

2,–,–

3,–,–

1,–,–

2,–,–

3,–,–

–,15,–

–,12,6

–,25,–

–,15,–

–,25,–

–,15,–

–,–,–

–,5,9

–,11,6

–,–,–

–,11,6

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,20,–

1,15,–

2,–,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,15,–

–,–,–

–,18,9

2,15,–

1,11,3

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

15 Christian residents pay 174 Rth. 6 Gr. 15 Jewish residents pay 245 Rth., 13 Gr., 6 Pf., of which 97 Rth., [28?] Gr. go to the corporation coffers Thus 71 Rth., 7 Gr., 6 Pf. more.

B. Jewish residents Gross David Qualified tradesman Schmul Qualified Meyer retail tradesman Kallmann Tailor Tuch

6,–,–

6,–,–

2,15,–

10,–,–

5,15,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,15,–

2,–,–

1,10,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

–,–,–

7,3,9

25,3,3

22,12,9

4,5,–

13,6,6

17,13,–

Sick fee For trial Military Corporation Honorary Total Their status Payment Trade School Municipal Budget costs recruit- needs rights and trade class tax tax fees treasury costs for ment tax annually fee the same period

A. Christian residents Łanowski Merchant Vincent Baer Ernst Qualified carpenter Sroczyński Shoemaker Math

First and family names

245,13,6

174, 6, –

[Total of all 15 named­ residents of one religion]

244 Schulz

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914



245

No. 11 The Jewish Community in Sieraków Sets Penalties for Violations of the Kosher Meat Tax, 29 November 1838

Source: APP, Starostwo Powiatowe w Międzychodzie (District Administration Office in Międzychód), no. 2123, pp. 64–66. The administrative officials and representatives of the local Jewish corporation appearing today were … called upon to make proposals regarding the suspension of privileges for cases of kosher meat tax fraud and to propose varying degrees of suspended privileges in cases of recurrence. These suspensions can always only occur through a resolution that will be confirmed by a district administration office and which can be appealed to the High Regional Administrative Office. Hereupon those present declare unanimously by stating: We propose that defrauders of the kosher meat tax should be punished as follows a) For the first instance: Forfeiture of privileges in the synagogue for the period of one year, including leading prayers, blessing the Torah, all public rituals with the Torah, lifting and opening the holy ark. b) For the second instance: Loss of the right to vote and eligibility to be elected for the duration of one election period, as well as the first punishment. c) For the third instance: The aforementioned punishments as well as a listing on the blackboard mounted in the synagogue until that time when the guilty party has demonstrated not only improvement, but also swears to it, and as a consequence of this pledge tendered in writing the representatives request that the punishment be waived. If unmarried women and widows should commit the offense of pp. [the aforementioned] fraud, we propose that they be punished in the following way: a) For the first instance: Listing on the blackboard for a period of six months b) For the second instance: The same for a period of one year c) For the third time The same for a period of three years We request that the punishments proposed here be approved. Read, approved, and signed The administrative officials, the representatives, the town mayor

246

Schulz

No. 12 Conditions of the Jewish Community in Poznań for the Appointment of Salomon Eger76 as Rabbi, 28 April 1839

Source: APP, Prezydium Policji w Poznaniu (Police Executive Committee in Poznań), no. 5072, pp. 114–20. §1. The rabbi is obligated to answer all inquiries, by himself and without avoidable delay, about what is permissible and impermissible according to religious rules. Only in the case of sickness or absence may the decision be turned over to a member of the Rabbinical Council. §2. When parties in a dispute submit to arbitration and would wish the rabbi to be their arbitrator, he is required to schedule an interrogation of the parties on one day of the [week], to carry out the interrogation and to [pronounce] the arbitrational decision himself. The parties who in this way seek and find a resolution to their dispute are not obligated to provide compensation for this. If they do so voluntarily, the rabbi must turn over half of the compensation to the rabbinate assessors. §3. If one of the local corporation authorities [community authorities] requests that the rabbi provide an assessment or advice in community affairs, he must submit this without delay orally or in writing, depending on how this was requested. Furthermore, if one of those authorities deems it to be in the interest of administration, he must also elucidate his judgement on the matter before their assembly. The call to assembly in the common conference hall of the corporation authorities is to follow without delay and the demand to be accorded. The rabbi will take his seat at such assemblies next to the head of one of the two administrative authorities of the corporation. He will not take part in the voting itself. §4. On the Shabbat before Easter [Pesach] and before the Day of Atonement the rabbi must hold a public Talmudic sermon in the synagogue; and every four weeks on Shabbat a sermon on morality, in the German language comprehensible to everyone. This sermon is to be held alternately in the two main synagogues in the morning before the completed religious service, namely before the Anim Zemirot prayer. §5. In none of his sermons may the rabbi make reference to personal relationships, innuendos, and such. §6. The rabbi may not engage in commercial enterprises or trade either directly or indirectly.

76

Salomon Eger (1786–1852), a rabbi and scholar, was the son of Akiba Eger. From 1839 to his death he served as Chief Rabbi of Poznań Province.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

247

§7. The length of the rabbi’s service as such is set at ten years from the day he assumes office. His service ceases after this period has expired, if he is not reappointed to a second term. §8. Neither he nor his family acquire any claim to a pension or anything else from the corporation by holding office for ten years or for a period of time longer or shorter than this. §9. Likewise, in administering his office he explicitly renounces inheritance law for his progeny, should there be any. … §11. The rabbi is barred from all interference in community affairs as far as they do not concern the exercise of liturgical and purely religious acts, unless one of the corporation authorities requests his involvement in accordance with point 1. … §13. For the administration of his office the rabbi receives an annual salary of 500 thalers, which is paid to him in quarterly instalments in advance from the corporation coffers. §14. Further he will be assigned free of charge the use of the previous rabbi’s accommodation in house no. 338 on Judenstraße. However, he may not make changes to this residence without the special approval of corporation authorities. §15. His duties include the consecration of marriages, called erusin. For every wedding that takes place in the community he can demand from those marrying a fee that may not exceed 1/3 per cent of the dowry. The corporation, however, does not guarantee the payment. §16. Each and every other charge for official acts exceeds the authority of the rabbi, and he may not demand such under any pretext. §17. The rabbi is initially obligated to make sure that he pay monthly visits, at a time of his own determination, all of the local Jewish elementary schools as well as the free schools, to ensure that he is satisfied with the religious instruction that the children in these schools receive and to scrutinize their progress in this instruction.



No. 13 The Regional Administration Office in Poznań to the Subordinate District Administration Offices about Similarities between the Organization of Jewish Communities and Municipal Self-Governing Bodies, 29 July 1842

Source: APP, Starostwo Powiatowe w Babimoście (District Administration Office Babimost), no. 1057, pp. 34–35. To clarify and elucidate several provisions of the two procedural regulations for Jewish administrative officials and representatives from the 1st of July 1834, we are herein prompted to issue the following:

248

Schulz

A. On the regulations for administrative officials: 1. Regarding §1 and § 10 Since the head of administrative officials and his assistants are to engage in the procedure of corporation administration collegially, in the future—following the analogy of the provisions issued for the municipalities in the towns participating in the Revised Municipal Ordinance [of 17 March 1831]—all clean copies and executed copies relating to the business of administrative officials are to be performed not by the head alone, but by him and at least two of his assistants or their deputies…. 2. Regarding §11 The administrative officials of the Jewish corporations [Jewish communities] are neither direct nor indirect servants of the state, although they are subordinate to the superior state authorities in terms of authority. They do not, therefore, have the rights of public officials, and accordingly [the relevant laws regarding state officials] do not apply to them. B. On the regulations for the representatives [see no. 6 in this section of documents] 1. Regarding §1 The representatives should not be regarded as authorizing parties of the administrative officials and the latter should not be regarded as mere agents of the former; rather, administrative officials and representatives co-exist independently as public authorities. … [Regarding §26] The administrative officials of the corporation are entitled to the following right ascribed to municipalities by §115 of the Revised Municipal Ordinance: to refuse their approval of those resolutions by the representatives whose implementation they believe would be disadvantageous to the common good; and if beyond this no agreement with the representatives can be reached, to report to us through the district administrator for further consideration.



No. 14 Kalman Bram77 to the Regional Administration Office in Gdańsk about the Function of the Rabbi, 1843

Source: Manfred Jehle (ed.), Die Juden und die jüdischen Gemeinden Preußens in amtlichen Enquêten des Vormärz, vol. 2 (Munich: K.G. Sauer, 1998), pp. 745–46.

77

Kalman Bram (1807–?), rabbinical candidate, and senior teacher, was co-founder and director of a Jewish school in Gdańsk in the 1830s. For more on him, see M. Schulz, Sozialgeschichte.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

249

The actual functions of the rabbi are weddings, divorces, decisions in ceremonial questions, inspection of kosher slaughterers, and the supervision of worship, and this supervision is only nominal given the formal rigidity and the disinclination of the old rabbis to bring worship in line with the necessary demands of the times…. The effectiveness of the rabbi is accordingly very limited and does little to promote the life of the community; he is isolated from the community and has only very loose connections to it. The dignity of the rabbi, however, has been in this abysmal position only for the past thirty years or so, when with the removal of the most restrictive barriers Mosaic believers entered civic life and were allowed to take part in general education. In consequence of this newly attained freedom, the communities joyfully proceeded onto the opened tracks, while the rabbis continued to move on the old rails. Thus, the greatest misunderstanding arose between the two and an abyss developed between them. The latter entirely lost their previous influence on youth education and on the family, and came to be regarded merely as functionaries for certain tasks, but not as leaders, which they also really no longer were. In this decline, however, the dignity emerged anew as the younger generation united Talmudic and rabbinical scholarship with the sciences, and in its midst a new class of rabbis arose who were close to the communities and regained the previous, so necessary influence…. The relationship between the community board and the rabbi is not one of subordination; rather, the two co-exist in the sense that each has firmly separate efficacy and there are almost never collisions between them. In this respect, however, he is dependent on the community since the greater part of his income derives from voluntary gifts for various occasions.



No. 15 The Regional Administration Office in Kwidzyn to the Ministry of the Interior about the Legal Basis for the Organization of Jewish Communities in Its Administrative Region, 31 March 1843

Source: Jehle (ed.), Die Juden, vol. 1, pp. 103–04.

According to the General Statute of 17 April 1750, which still constitutes the legal basis for the religious affairs of Jews in all parts of our administrative region, the following provisions are essentially offered about this subject: Every Jewish community should have only a certain number of ritual officials and each official requires the approval of the War and Domains Chamber78 (§3 loc. cit.). The Jewish elders should administer their office according to the instructions (unknown here, incidentally) issued to them by the state (§29 loc. cit.). No Jew is permitted to renounce the community of his residence and withdraw from the authority 78

After 1808, this role was no longer fulfilled by the War and Domains Chamber, but by a regional administration office.

250

Schulz

of the elders and the rabbi in religious and ecclesiastic matters (§31 loc. cit.). In disputes about religious matters in which the punishment consists in banishment or a fine of more than 5 thalers, the relevant municipality is responsible for the decision; for lesser violations, the rabbi is responsible along with the Jewish elders (§31 loc. cit.)…. Lists of penalties imposed must be submitted to the War and Domains Chamber every year at the end of the month of December…. The Chamber is to schedule an assembly every year in order to call Jewish elders to account for the administration of their office, to hear the complaints of community members, and to ensure that these are redressed (§32 loc. cit.)…. However, due to a change in the judiciary that has since occurred, part of these provisions have lost their practical application; and the remaining provisions … are also no longer applied since the following principle has come to be enforced in the administration: the state regards the Jewish community as merely private societies it no longer attends to and instead leaves the ordering of their religious relations and other relations to their own exclusive care. Thus, the election and appointment of ritual officials [community functionaries], the determination of their numbers and their salary at present depend solely on the approbation of the communities. The state is equally unconcerned with how the elders and rabbis administer their offices; nor does it provide communities with assistance if individuals renounce their communities and refuse to pay community levies. The rabbi and the elders no longer possess judicial authority or any power to collect community levies. This right has entirely ceased to exist and overdue levies can be collected only by legal recourse following a judicial decision. Apart from this altered position with respect to the state, however, nothing appears to have changed for the Jewish communities in the provision of religious affairs, at least according to the information we have received about this matter.



No. 16 List of the Jewish Communities in the Administrative Region of Poznań with Information about Community Assets and Debts as Well as Existing Religious and Charitable Societies, 16 January 1844 (Excerpts) Source: Jehle (ed.), Die Juden, vol. 3, pp. 868–921.

240

1569

938

Skwierzyna

Wolsztyn

The corporation owns: a) the synagogue building, b) a graveyard, c) a bath, but otherwise no assets. The corporation has no special funds or foundations; its only assets are the synagogue building and the cemetery The assets consist of: a) a synagogue with Torah scrolls, silver hangings, and other equipment, b) a garden, c) a corporation house along with a back building containing the bath, d) a hospital and schoolhouse, and e) a cemetery with house and garden

Number Community assets of people

Odolanów

Locality

7,491

1,000

900

A burial society for the purpose of sick care and supporting poor sick people, for accompanying their corpses to the cemetery and burying them. a) A sacred association (ḥevra kadisha) (…), b) the Talmudic association (Hogedath Emeth) for the purpose of supporting the poor and endowing poor girls, c) the charitable association (gemilut ḥesed) for the purpose of distributing bread and wood in the winter, d) a women’s association for the purpose of visiting poor women and supporting them, assisting the endowment of poor girls, and procuring coffins to bury poor women, e) a girls’ association, whose purpose to distribute shirts to poor people, f) a society of friends (Meginath Merain) for the purpose of clothing poor school children and assisting in cases of sudden misfortune.

None

Corporation Societies for religious and benevolent purposes debts (in Rt.)

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

251

The community assets consist of: a) the synagogue building along with the paraphernalia located inside, b) a small study house (bet midrash) in which the rabbi’s residence is located, c) a community house with the bath and a scale, d) two small houses on the churchyard, and e) a cemetery. Special funds do not exist.

Number Community assets of people

Grodzisk 1623 Wielkopolski

Locality

(cont.)

15,844

There is: 1. a society for the care and nursing of sick people and for the partial payment of medical costs, 2. a burial society that also seeks to meet the needs of all sick people (…), 3. the Malbisch Arumiro Society, whose purpose is to clothe at least 12 poor schoolchildren annually, 4. the Hakhnasat Kalah Society consisting of girls; its purpose is to give every impecunious bride an appropriate sum as a dowry, 5. the women’s association, for the purpose of distributing 30–40 blouses to women for the New Year’s celebration, 6. the Sukas Scholom Society, which has the religious purpose of reading a passage from the Mishnah in the prayer school (bet midrash) daily for the deceased who were members of this society, and 7. the Mogen Avrohom Society, which has the same purpose as the society in 6., but with the difference that a passage from the Mogen Avrohom is read.

Corporation Societies for religious and benevolent purposes debts (in Rt.)

252 Schulz

999

8034

Poznań

1. A burial society (bikur ḥolim) consisting of about 60 persons for the care of the sick and the burial of the dead…. 2. An orphanage for raising 20 orphan boys with a significant foundational capital supplied by Baron v. Kottwitz. 3. An association to provide wood for the poor. 4. The women’s association to support poor widows with rent. 5. The women’s association to support poor widows in cases of sickness, under special [female] superintendents (Gubeltes [sic]). 6. The Latz Hospital, a private institution under special superintendents. It has special statutes confirmed by the region administrative office and admits sick people for care and treatment for compensation.

1. A burial society … to care for the sick and bury the dead, 2. A women’s association for the support of the sick poor and the endowment of poor brides.

Corporation Societies for religious and benevolent purposes debts (in Rt.)

The local community owns: 1. a mas- [no debts] sive synagogue temple, 2. a residential house for the rabbis and shoḥetim, 3. A house in which the mikveh is located, 4. a graveyard with a guard’s house. In addition to the remaining paraphernalia it also owns a funeral carriage and a shed. The assets of the corporation consist 107,845 of: 1. the 4 synagogues, 2. the slaughterhouse, 3. the butcher stalls, 4. the rabbi’s residence, 5. a portion of lot no. 336/15, which is used as a treasury and for the corporation office, 6. the bath facilities and vacant plots no. 346 and no. 132, 7. the graveyard with buildings; 8. The silver objects, etc. in the synagogues are regarded as untouchable and were primarily gifts.

Number Community assets of people

Pleszewo

Locality

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

253

254

Schulz

No. 17 The Regional Administrative Office in Kwidzyn Responds to Survey Questions by the Ministry of Ecclesiastical, Educational, and Medical Affairs about Various Matters Concerning Jewish Communities in Its Administrative Region, 16 May 1844

Source: Jehle (ed.), Die Juden, vol. 2, pp. 760–75.

[Question:] In which localities do synagogues exist with the knowledge and consent of state officials … ? Are all independent Jews of legal age required to remain with their synagogue community, as is the case with compulsory membership in the Christian Church? [Answer:] Formal prayer houses or synagogues exist in this administrative region … in 31 locations. All of these prayer houses are the property of the relevant community and, as far as we have been informed, all have been approved by the state…. Jews currently engage in prayers in rented rooms in 14 localities…. The administrative region has not yet been divided into particular synagogue districts. Instead, each locality may associate as it pleases, or may also join with others for special prayers. Only where a synagogue or prayer house exists is separation of individual Jews considered impermissible, and to this extent the compulsion among Jews may be likened to parochial compulsion in the Christian Church…. [Question:] What are the conditions for membership in the community and do all members have full voting rights in community affairs? [Answer:] The conditions of membership vary in the different Jewish communities. In most places they insist on independent income, residence in the community, and paying community fees and levies; in Wałcz, Mirosławiec, Jastrowie, Człopa, and Tuczno they also include being of legal age and paying an entrance fee based on the individual’s financial circumstances; in Golub, Radzyń Chełmiński, Łasin, and Złotów only the latter condition applies. In Grudziądz the conditions for membership are the same as those for acquiring municipal rights, so that every Jew who acquires municipal rights simultaneously becomes a member of the local Jewish community. Membership in Górzno, Brodnica, Lidzbark, Chojnice, and Tuchola is conferred according to variable principles and is granted quite arbitrarily. Finally, an entirely anomalous situation exists in the present locality [Kwidzyn], where only a few people—currently 19 and originally 11, those who funded the synagogue along with the affiliated buildings and equipment with their own private means and have also paid the ongoing expenses themselves—are regarded as members of the community. However, this situation has

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

255

become so onerous for them that they recently asked us to obligate the remaining local Jews to take part in the duties and rights as well…. Incidentally, in most places all male community members without distinction have full voting rights in community affairs. However, in Kamień Pomorski, Złotów, Krajenka, … men who are poor and receive support from the community are excluded from community consultations, and in Iława, Biskupiec,  … unmarried men are excluded from them. … [Question:] How are the communities represented in regard to religious affairs…? By whom, how, and for how long are the former and the latter [the parnasim, the representatives, etc.] elected…? [Answer:] In almost everywhere in our department [the administrative region of Kwidzyn], the Jewish communities are represented externally in term of their religious affairs solely by the heads [parnasim], and not by other special representatives. Most of these communities have three heads, though several have only two; and the community in Świecie has but a single head, who however tends to consult with several of the most respected community members on important affairs. In contrast, in the towns of Złotów District special heads are appointed for the administration and other heads—so-called electors—for the more important affairs, in particular for the election of religious officials, the renting of community pertinentia, the repartition of taxes, a[nd] similar items…. The heads, as well as the deputies and the representatives, are generally elected by the communities, but are independent of them…. The election of the heads and that of the deputies and representatives [occurs] through a majority of votes in the community assemblies, assigned as a rule for 3 years, but also for 1 or 6 years. Susz, Iława, and Kisielice are exceptions, as they are elected for an indefinite period…. [Question:] Which persons are connected to religious worship? How are they elected, by whom, and for how long…? [Answer:] Most communities, especially the smaller ones of the administrative region, have only one religious official who serves simultaneously as rabbi, prayer leader, and shoḥet…. In larger and wealthier communities, the office of the prayer leader and the shoḥet are occasionally separated, but never in those localities in which there is a rabbi. No community in the local department [the administrative region of Kwidzyn] has a special circumciser; instead, this office is performed by the rabbi or shoḥet. For purely mechanical procedures such as the collection of community fees, the convocation

256

Schulz

of the community, and so on, larger communities have a special community servant (klepper). The aforementioned religious officials and rabbi are elected by a majority of votes in the community, occasionally for longer periods of time, but as a rule for quite short periods of time, 1 to 3 years…. [Question:] What are the community assets…? [Answer:] Most of the Jewish communities of the department have either no community assets at all or hold assets limited to those plots of land, buildings, and paraphernalia designated for actual religious services or connected to them…. Special funds or foundations exist only in Mirosławiec, Grudziądz, and Biskupiec, … to support and care for poor and sick community members and to have them buried…. [Question:] How and from whom are the religious costs or other community fees and debts repartitioned and collected? … [Answer:] In most Jewish communities the costs of the community are procured without any repartition, and are indeed either: a) In the form of a fee from the shoḥet, or b) From the money that accrues from reading the Torah, or c) From voluntary contributions that are collected in many communities on certain days in the synagogue. Where these revenues are absent or insufficient, the repartition of the community fees according to the financial circumstances of each contributor is conducted by the community heads or in exceptional cases also by deputies appointed especially for this duty…. State authorities intervene and supervise here in the administration of Jewish community assets only in the sense that legal recourse is available to the community as well as to individual community members…. [Question:] Does the community or the community head sit in judgement vis-à-vis individual members, and in what way?  … Are there disagreements for this reason? How are these expressed? Which party holds the numerical majority and which party, the neologic79 or the law abiding, can designate itself as ethically superior?

79

In this context, the term identifies members of a community departing from traditional religious practice.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

257

[Answer:] In most places neither the community nor the head has in recent times exercised penal law vis-à-vis individual members, and banishment is no longer practiced anywhere. Toruń District, however, is one exception: here there has occasionally been a communal resolution prohibiting individual community members from entering the prayer house due to that person’s immoral or offensive behaviour there. Another exception is found in the communities of Wałcz District, where financial contractual penalties have been agreed upon for the case in which an individual community member was absent from the election assembly without sufficient reason or refused to assume a community office. These fines have been collected by action at law. Disputes in actual religious matters are decided initially by the rabbi or the shoḥet, at times together with the community board, at times without it. The final authority, however, is the chief rabbi in Poznań or Gdańsk…. Divisions have not as yet emerged in any of the Jewish communities, except for a single case, where recently a neologue party was established as a consequence of efforts by the head. This party seeks to eliminate traditional abuses and to introduce a purified religious service, and to this end has drafted a statute and submitted it for confirmation, which the law-abiding party [Orthodox] has intractably opposed…. It cannot be determined at this time … which of the two parties is numerically larger or ethically superior.



No. 18 Law on Jewish Affairs [Gesetz über die Verhältnisse der Juden] 23 July 1847, Section II. Religious and Educational Affairs of the Jews

Source: Gesetz-Sammlung für die königlichen preußischen Staaten 1847, pp. 263–78.

… §35. The Jews should be united according to locality and population into synagogue communities (Jewries) [Jewish communities] in such a way that all Jews residing within a synagogue district belong to such a community. §36. The regional administrative offices determine the synagogue districts after consultation with those concerned…. §37. The individual synagogue communities obtain the rights of legal entities in regard to their financial circumstances. §38. Each synagogue community has a community board and an appropriate number of representatives. … §41. All male members of the synagogue community who are of legal age and have no criminal record, who can feed themselves independently and have not been in arrears in paying the levies of the synagogue community for the past three years, elect the representatives and these elect the community board for six years. An election is to be held at the same time everywhere for a corresponding number of deputies.

258

Schulz

§42. A delegate of the regional administrative office will conduct the elections…. §43. The election of the members of the community board is subject to the approval of the regional administration office, which supervises all activities of the community board and is authorized to dismiss by resolution individual members for intentional breach of duty or repeated neglect of duty following an administrative investigation. §44. The community board is the organ through which requests or complaints of the synagogue community are passed on to the state authorities. §45. The community board is entitled to elect and appoint the administrative officials [functionaries]. However, before each appointment it has to hear from the representatives about the worthiness of the candidate. §46. The representative assembly receives through its election and the law the mandate and duty to represent the synagogue community in accordance with this decree, following its own conscience and conviction, without consultation with the entire community or with sections of it, and to pass binding resolutions for the community…. The representative assembly monitors the administration of the community board. It is therefore entitled and obligated to assure itself of the execution of its resolutions and the utilization of community revenues, to consult files, to check invoices, to send reminders, and to grant discharges, etc. … §47. In all affairs concerned solely with the operating budget of the synagogue community, the community board initiates the resolutions of the representative assembly. This applies to: 1) Setting the budget; 2) Leasing, administering, and mortgaging real estate; 3) Appointing trials and concluding settlements by right or privilege of the synagogue community or by its substantial assets; 4) [Signing] Contracts that are beyond the limits of the budget and extraordinary money grants that exceed the budget. The resolutions of the representatives are generally binding for the community board, if they do not contravene existing laws. However, if the board is convinced that a resolution would be disadvantageous to the community, it must refuse to confirm it, and if subsequent attempts to reach an agreement are unsuccessful, a decision from the regional administration office should be obtained. … §50. Regarding the election and the powers of the director of the community board and the head of the representative assembly; as well as regarding the number of members of the community board and of the representative assembly, and of their deputies; and further regarding whether the election to the community board is limited to Jewish residents of the main locality of the synagogue district and what compensation for travel costs should otherwise be provided for those elected, the necessary provisions for these are to be made in a statute subject to the confirmation of the provincial governor.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

259

…  §61. The Jews must ensure that their children participate regularly in local school instruction while of legally prescribed age, insofar as they have not proved to the school authorities that their children receive regular and sufficient instruction in elementary knowledge elsewhere through home instruction or through regular attendance at another properly organized public or private educational institution. §62. Jewish children are not required to participate in Christian religious instruction. However, every synagogue community is obligated to make arrangements so that no Jewish children while of compulsory school age fail to receive the requisite religious instruction…. §64. Jews cannot as a rule demand to be separated from the regular local school. However, they are permitted in their own interest on the basis of such agreements among themselves and with the permission of the educational authorities to establish private educational institutions according to existing general regulations. If in a locality or school district there are Christian and Jewish populations of sufficient numbers and financial means to allow the Jewish residents to establish a special public school without becoming overburdened, then the separation of Jews into their own school association can be ordered at the request of the community board of the synagogue community, if the general school interests otherwise support this. … §70. After Jewish boys have completed their school education, the head of the synagogue community must ensure through counsel and admonition that every boy learns a useful trade or studies at a scientific academy and that none of them is used in a wandering business [petty trade].



No. 19 Instructions for Synagogue Beadle in the Jewish Community of Trzcianka from October 1847

Source: Moses Löb Bamberger, Geschichte der Juden in Schönlanke (Berlin: Lamm, 1912), pp. 24–25. §1. It is the duty of the synagogue servant [beadle] to take part in synagogue services twice daily. §2. He is to call on every community member at their residence to attend the services in the synagogue. §3. He opens the synagogue for religious services at the time that the rabbi has ordered and closes it after the completed services. §4. It is responsibility of the synagogue servant to keep and maintain all of the objects in the synagogue as well as to sweep the synagogue every Friday and to clean the walls and benches. §5. The synagogue servant must fulfil all corporation requirements, however only insofar as these actually hold for the corporation community or its board; to this

260

Schulz

purpose he reports once daily uncalled to the head of administration [parnas] as well as to the chair of the representatives and asks what he can do for them. §6. The synagogue servant also performs duties at the bathhouse (mikveh), or has them performed, and is responsible for its maintenance. §7. The synagogue servant is obligated to keep at his own cost the so-called Shabbat-woman to extinguish the candles on the Shabbat. §8. On Shevat holidays80 he is responsible for providing trees.



No. 20 Baer Loew Monasch’s Recollections about Holding Office in the Jewish Community in Krotoszyn, Composed between 1855 and 1871

Source: Peter Fraenkel (ed.), ‘The Memoirs of B.L. Monasch of Krotoschin’, Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 24 (1979), pp. 206–207. The year 1833 was one of the most remarkable of my life. In that year the government introduced its Reform of the State of the Jews. The new law decreed that the Jews in the Grand Duchy were to be classified either as ‘naturalized’ or as ‘tolerated or certificated’. The naturalized were granted rights equal to those of Christian citizens. I was among those who received the patent of naturalization. At the same time, the administration of the Jewish congregations [Jewish communities] was regulated by Royal Decree. The members of each corporation were made to elect fifteen representatives and an executive board of four. I was among the first elected representatives and in those days it was a great honour to be chosen to sit around the green table. I can flatter myself that my proposals for the improvement of the state of my community were always approved with greater alacrity than those of other members. Each representative was elected for a term of three years. Until 1849 I was re-elected every term. After 1849 I joined the executive committee. Our synagogue, which had been destroyed in the great fire of 1827, was to have been rebuilt in 1829. In fact, the head executive of the period managed to have the outer walls erected, up to the first-floor level. However, as a result of the reforms of 1833, the rebuilding of the synagogue was interrupted, as the settlement of other community affairs demanded much time and effort. For twelve whole years, until 1841, the unfinished walls stood exposed to wind and weather and were very nearly ruined as a result. In 1841, the representatives at last agreed to rebuild the synagogue and to raise money by selling shares. The shares offered to members were valued at sixty, forty-five and twenty-five marks and each shareholder was to receive two synagogue-places, a man’s and a woman’s, which he could use freely until such times as the shares were redeemed 80

The festival of the New Year of Trees.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

261

from the income of the synagogue…. Thus the synagogue came to be built and was solemnly inaugurated in 1845.



No. 21 Synagogal Ordinance of the Jewish Community in Toruń, 1857

Source: Neue Synagoge Berlin—Centrum Judaicum [hereafter CJA] 1, 75A Th 2, no. 38, #8710, pp. 22–26. In order to attune our minds to true devotion in the House of God and to deport ourselves as demanded by the dignity of this location, it is necessary to avoid anything that could cause a disturbance. For this reason the community board discussed and unanimously approved the following provisions for maintaining peace and order. §1. Devotions begin precisely at the time indicated on the board in the temple. §2. Everyone must come to the temple dressed as respectably as possible. On Saturdays and holidays every local person over age sixteen must wear a black hat in the temple and soldiers come with helmets. §3. When services have already begun, everyone must enter the temple as calmly and quietly as possible and proceed to their places. §4. All noise that could cause a disturbance should be strictly avoided, including especially: a) Opening and closing prayer stools loudly. b) Letting the flap fall. c) Knocking on prayer books to keep the peace. §5. It is prohibited to walk around in the temple when the prayer leader is standing at the prayer stool; if you have to leave, you must do this as quietly as you entered. … §7. It is strictly forbidden to read and sing along with the Torah or Megillah or to pre-empt the recitals of the prayer leader. Only the head is allowed to correct the prayer leader or the reader. §8…. No one is allowed to take a seat that does not belong to him by purchase or lease. Also no one is allowed to bring lights, chairs, footstools, canes, and such into the synagogue for his own comfort and thereby limit the space of others. §9. Children of both sexes under 6 years of age who are not yet capable of devotion may not under any circumstances be brought to the temple. The doorman has been ordered to enforce this provision with the utmost rigour…. §10. No one is permitted to lead prayers publicly in the temple even on the day of their parent’s death or on Saturdays and any holidays. The cantor does this on Saturdays, and on the High Holidays the prayer leaders are summoned and invited for this by the heads [parnasim/gabaim].

262

Schulz

No. 22 The Board of the Jewish Community in Międzyrzec Explains to the Local Municipality the Reasons for Raising the Kosher Meat Tax, 16 September 1858

Source: GStA PK, XVI HA, Rep. 32, no. 127, n.p.

The local rabbi position became vacant in 1856 due to the death of Rabbi Wolf and was subsequently administered by two local Jewish scholars who had earlier been trained in this subject, but later abandoned it. They served without compensation, as requested by the board members in order to be able to repay the corporation debts [communal debts] more quickly through the money saved from the rabbi’s salary. Both rabbinate locum tenentes are already advanced in years and businessmen, and although they would have continued to administer this office in the interest of the community, it nevertheless seemed right to free them from the difficulties tied to it. For this reason Rabbi Streusand has occupied the position as rabbi since the month of May of this year. He was appointed with a salary of 150 Rt. more than the previous rabbi in addition to the usual perquisites. As a consequence, however, our religious revenues have been insufficient to pay the slaughterer … who is a subordinate religious servant and must be retained. The consent of the representative assembly is required for the approval of extraordinary community expenditures, and since we had no means of covering this additional expense, we requested that the assembly resolve how the lacking funds should be raised. Hereupon the representatives passed a resolution on 1 June of t[his] y[ear] that the half of the expenditure should be covered by the levy of cattle slaughtered kosher by the butchers, and indeed 15 sgr [Silbergroschen] of beef and 3 1/2 sgr of a mutton. In this way the funds will be raised to fulfil the assumed community obligations and to allow the approved additional salary of the rabbi.



No. 23 Protocol of the Election of the Board of the Jewish Community in Grodzisk Wielkopolski, 1 July 1859

Source: APP, Akta miasta Grodzisk (Town of Grodzisk Wielkopolski), no. 338, n.p.

As the enclosed and properly certified circular indicates, according to  … Decree no. 2630 of the Royal District Administration Office in Nowy Tomyśl of the 19th of the past month concerning the election of a new corporation board here, the signatory mayor set the date for today and summoned to this the twelve representative officials acting for the local Jewish synagogue community. Present were the signatories at the end of the proceedings, including the head of the representatives.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

263

They were informed that in place of corporation head Manasse Beradt, elected and inaugurated into office in 1853, as well as the community board members elected and inaugurated at the same time: a) Meyer Koppenheim, b) Heimann Glass, c) David Jablonski, and d) Hirsch Ledermann, other members were to be elected today, noting that the aforementioned may be re-elected. If one or the other, however, should not receive the necessary number of votes, it was noted that those voting should cast their ballots in such a way that kinship relations in the board council did not result. Also the representative officials were strongly encouraged to cast their ballots only for those persons who would administer their intended office with love, prudence, and conscientiousness. Then the election commissioner appointed 1. Mr Moses Herzfeld, and 2. Mr Moritz Plasterek, as keeper of the lists and vote collector and the two were obligated in this regard by means of a handshake in lieu of oath. As a result of the voting, the following were elected: The former head Manasse Beradt was re-elected as such with 11 votes, that is, 1. unanimously; 2. The merchant Meyer Koppenheim was elected deputy to the head also with 11 votes, thus unanimously; 3. The merchant Heimann Glass was elected community board member with 11 votes, thus unanimously; … Elected as deputies were: … 7. The merchant Isaac Bergas with 11 votes, thus unanimously. The two lists composed by the secretary indicating the results of the election have been included. The representative council noted in conclusion that in the election today they had re-elected the previous head because he had completely fulfilled his obligations in all regards and had won the trust of the entire community. There was nothing further to note and hence the proceedings were read aloud, approved, … and concluded. Mąke, Mayor and Election Commissioner v. Wilczewski, Secretary



No. 24 Statute of the Salomon and Joseph Wollheim Hospital and Infirmary in Leszno, 1861

Source: Statuten des Salomon und Joseph Wollheim´schen Kranken- und Siechenhauses zu Lissa, 1861 [Freimann-Sammlung: http://sammlungen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/]. The Salomon and Joseph Wollheim Hospital and Infirmary in Leszno was endowed on 5 September 1859 by the merchant Mr Joseph Wollheim, residing in Triest, and

264

Schulz

ceremonially inaugurated on that day. A foundational charter, issued by the founder of the institution, confirmed by a court, and read in public, named the board of trustees to direct the foundation, explained the purpose of the latter, and included the conditions that the founder placed on the board, the sum of the donation, and the desire that corporate rights for the house be requested from His Majesty the King. Corporate rights were conferred on the foundation by the Supreme Cabinet Order of 12 November 1860. On 20 June 1861 the statute was definitively adopted in the following form and, after approval by the municipality here, confirmed by the Royal Regional Administrative Office in Poznań on 29 June of the same year. Section 1. Name and purpose of the institution … §2. The institution is a sanctuary: A. For decrepit and ailing members of the Jewish community of the local town of Leszno who are poor and unable to earn a living and have no relatives here who could be legally compelled to take them in. B. For the sick and indeed: 1. For local poor and sick members of the Jewish faith; 2. For sick servants of any religion, whose employers through the payment of fees to this foundation in accordance with the contents of this statute acquire the right to turn their sick servants over to the hospital for care; 3. For sick people of any religion who would like to use the services of the hospital for payment, but only insofar as available space allows. §3. Incurably sick people and deranged individuals who are a danger to the community as well as people with hereditary illnesses caused by contagious miasmas that have not yet assumed the character of a general disastrous epidemic in the town are not as a rule admitted to the hospital. §4. The poor and sick people admitted to the hospital receive free of charge medication, medical attention, care, light, and heating, everything appropriate to the conditions in which they were admitted. The board of trustees can also provide Jewish hospital patients with a small monetary subsidy for their meals. §5. The board of trustees is authorized to demand and stipulate from hospital patients monetary compensation for admission to the hospital and for its benefactions. §6. The hospital has claims to payment for the treatment of the sick who are cared for in the hospital, but not domiciled in the local town. §7. Every citizen hereabouts may acquire for payment of 1 thaler for a full year the right to turn over a particular servant in case of sickness to the hospital for medical attention. The board of trustees is authorized to deny the acquisition of the right to turn over sick servants to the hospital by refusing the payment….

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

265

§8. The admission of poor and sick people is decided by resolution of the board following a consultation with the hospital physician…. §12. The prescriptions issued on behalf of the hospital bear a hospital stamp from the current administrator, and only with stamped prescriptions may the apothecary hand out medications. The prescriptions of the local poor are paid from the poor coffers; those for the foreign sick will be requisitioned from the relevant liable communities…. Section 2. The board of trustees §17. The board of the hospital consists of six board members. The first board members have been appointed by Joseph Wollheim. In the case of the resignation of one of its members, the board is replenished by an election according to a majority of votes from the Jewish co-religionists of the local town. The municipality of the local town confirms and rejects those elected. … §19. The municipality of the local town is authorized to supervise the hospital. He is permitted at any time through a deputy to inspect the conditions of the hospital, to demand a statement of account from the board of trustees, to attend the meetings of the board of trustees, and to audit the books. He ensures that the trustees fulfil the provisions of the statute and the laws…. Section 3. The revenues of the hospital consist of: a) The support fund provided by Mr Joseph Wollheim; b) The fees paid voluntarily by local community members; c) The subscriptions mentioned in §7; d) The proceeds from the estates of the hospital patients; e) The interest from bequests; f) Gifts received; and g) The donations provided by the local municipal poor fund and the Jewish poor fund.



No. 25 Statute of the Jewish Community in Poznań, 1872

Source: Statut der Synagogen-Gemeinde zu Posen, Posen 1872 [Freimann-Sammlung: http://sammlungen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/], pp. 3–15. On the basis of the Law on Jewish Affairs from 23 July 1847 [see no. 18 of this section of documents] the following statute has been established for the synagogue community of Poznań: Section I. On the community and its members

266

Schulz

§1. The district of the synagogue community [Jewish community] of Poznań encompasses the municipal district of the city of Poznań and the localities named in the appendix.81 §2. The community recognizes as its binding obligation to support the following institutions and to provide the necessary means for their continued existence: 1. The constitution of a Rabbinical Council consisting of a rabbi (rav) and two judges (dayanim); 2. The structural upkeep of the prayer houses belonging to the community; 3. The maintaining and equipping of a ritual bath (mikveh); 4. The maintaining and equipping of a cemetery; 5. Annually providing the local Jewish poor with Easter [Pesach] bakery products (matzot); The community also recognizes as its obligation that cattle and fowl are slaughtered according to religious rules (sheḥita) monitored by the rabbinate, with the rates for slaughtering fees regulated by the administration. §3. The returns from community assets and the fees set by resolution of the community authorities for participation in its institutions will be used to cover community necessities. Insofar as these revenues are not sufficient to pay for community necessities, the individual members of the community are obligated relative to their income to provide money payments that can be collected by means of administration execution…. §5. Every community member is obligated to occupy at least one unpaid community office and to administer it for six years. Released from the obligation of assuming office are: a. Persons legally authorized to refuse guardianships; b. Those persons who have administered an unpaid office in the community for six years for the coming three years; c. Those persons who, according to the discretion of community authorities, have a claim to dispensation due to special circumstances. Only persons under the aforementioned points a. and c. are entitled to resign from an already assumed office. §6. Whoever refuses to accept or continue an unpaid office without justification according to the provisions in the preceding paragraphs as well as those persons who actually avoid the fulfilment of their official obligations can be declared through resolution of community authorities to have lost their eligibility to vote and to be elected for three to six years, and can be charged up to double the amount of fees (§3) for the same period of time. 81

These are small localities around Poznań that by the present day have largely been incorporated into it.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

267

Section II. On the representation of the community A. Representatives. §7. The assembly of representatives consists of fifteen members. The number of deputies is set at ten. §8. Every member of the community who is eligible to vote and who has belonged to the community as such for at least three years, with the exclusion of paid community officials, can be elected as a representative or deputy. … § 11. The representative assembly can pass resolutions as soon as ten of its members are present. Exceptions are defined in this statute in §§27a, 34, and 39. With the exception of the cases described in §§27a, 34, and 39, the representative assembly decides according to the absolute majority of votes. If there is an equal number of votes, the motion is considered rejected…. B. Community board §16. The community board consists of five members. The number of deputies is set at three. §17. §§8 and 9 also apply to the community board and its deputies. … §19. The community board is able to pass resolutions as soon as three of its members are present. Exceptions are defined in this statute in §§27a, 34, and 39. With the exception of the cases described in  §§27a, 34, and 39, the community board decides according to the absolute majority of votes. If there is an equal number of votes, the motion is considered rejected…. C. Relation of the community board and the representatives to each other §24. Those resolutions adopted by the community board in agreement with the representative assembly are called resolutions of the community authorities. §25. The community board is informed about the meetings of the representative assembly and their agenda at least twenty-four hours in advance and can be represented at them by delegates drawn from the board. The community board is obligated to send delegates drawn from its members if the representatives request the presence of these at their consultations. The delegates of the community board must be heard as often as they request, but must remove themselves prior to the voting. The representative assembly is also entitled in extraordinary cases to hold sessions in which no member of the community board may appear. §26. For the continuing administration or supervision of individual proceedings as well as for completing temporary commissions or for the purpose of exercising the authorized supervision by community authorities over individual charitable institutions and associations existing within the community, special standing commissions are constituted by resolution of the community authorities. These commissions are

268

Schulz

formed from members of the community board and the representative assembly, and each council elects its own members to these commissions…. §27. Apart from the matters mentioned in §47 of the law of 23 July 1847, a resolution of the community authorities (§24) is necessary: a. In the determination of new needs and the establishment of new facilities, as well as with alterations, expansions, or limitations in the already determined and existing needs and facilities; … A resolution ad a. can only be validly adopted if at least twelve members or deputies are present in the council of the representative assembly, and at least four members or deputies are present in the council of the community board; and there is at least a two-thirds voting majority for the relevant motion in each council. Section III. Of the community budget, treasury, and accounting §28. The community budget is established for three years and is submitted for assessment by the community board at the latest three months prior to the budget period of the representative assembly. If the submitted budget has not yet been approved by the supervisory authorities at the beginning of the budget period, then the old budget remains in force until the new one is approved…. §29. A salaried paymaster runs the community treasury. At the request of the community board the paymaster must stand bail. §30. Members of the community authorities generally audit the treasury every month. An audit of the depository will be performed in the same way at least once annually. The supervisory authorities reserve the right to issue a directive for extraordinary treasury audits…. Section IV. Of the paid officials of the community §33. The rights and duties of the paid officials appointed in future—administrative officials as well as religious officials—will comply with the contracts concluded with them or with the appointments and instructions issued by the community board. The contract or the appointment is required to state whether the position is for a set period of time, for termination, or for life. In each individual case a resolution of the community authorities determines these conditions (§24). §34. Religious officials are elected by resolution of the community authorities (§24). In such an election at least twelve members or deputies must be present in the council of the representative assembly and at least four members or deputies in the council of the community board. At least a two-thirds voting majority in each council is necessary for the election to be valid….

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

269

Section V. General provisions §36. The offices of the representatives as well as [those of] the members of the community board and their deputies are unpaid honorary offices. … §39. For this statute to be altered, a resolution of the community authorities (§24) is necessary before the approval of the supervisory authorities is obtained. Such a resolution can be validly adopted only if at least twelve members or deputies are present in the council of the representative assembly and at least four members or deputies are present in the council of the community board; and there is at least a two-thirds voting majority for the relevant motion in each council.



No. 26 The Regional Administration Office in Poznań to the Ministry of Ecclesiastical, Educational, and Medical Affairs about the Conferral of Corporate Rights on the Israelite Fraternal Community in Poznań, 8 February 1886

Source: GStA PK, I. HA, Rep. 76 III, Sekt. 7, Abt. XVI, no. 1, vol. 13, n.p.

A Jewish association that currently bears the name Israelite Fraternal Community has existed in this locality since 1815. In the first period of its existence this organization pursued the purpose of supporting poor, transient Jewish scholars here as well as association members affected by special misfortunes, and also of establishing acts of worship in its own prayer room under the leadership of a preacher appointed by association members. In the meantime, the association has abandoned the first purpose, the support of transient Jewish scholars, because the entire Jewish corporation here has established charitable institutions of various kinds, to which the members of the Israelite Fraternal Community have also contributed in accord with their means. By contrast, the association has built a special synagogue for its members for the purpose of religious services on plot no. 126 in the land registry of the old town of Poznań and maintains a religious school, at which the religious instruction accords with generally valid pedagogical principles. Members experiencing unforeseeable misfortunes also still receive donations from association funds. After another local Jewish association, the Association of Charitable Friends, was bestowed the rights of a juridical entity through the Highest Decree of 6 January 1879— communicated here in the High Rescript of the 23rd of the same month—the board of the Israelite Fraternal Community has recently requested from us the conferral of corporate rights.

270

Schulz

No. 27 Report by the Community Board of the Jewish Community in Rawicz about Revenues and Expenditures in Building the Synagogue, 1887–89

Source: GStA, I. HA, Rep. 76 III, Sekt. 7, Abt. XVI, no. 1, vol. 14, n.p.

… The following sum was spent: … [for builders, for carpentry work, stained-glass work, gas installation, etc.] Mark 81,334.73 The revenues amount to:

From individual collections 250.00 From the main collection 38,346.60 From the amortizable loan from the Prussian Central Land Credit 30,000.00 Company, Berlin From proceeds for the old building and lighting, etc. 3,179.05 From proceeds for felled trees 80.10 From a gift by the deceased Mr Simon Jaffé in Wrocław 5,000.00 From interest revenue 809.58 633.41 Minus 176.17 paid From the non-interest-bearing bequest from Mrs Teichmann 300.00 From the 3% interest on the bequest from B. Rosenthal in Wińsko 600.00 From the 3 1/2% interest on the bequest from Dr Eckmann 550.00 From the 3 1/2% interest on the bequest from Moses Brann 300.00 From savings in the corporation coffers 2,095.57 [Total] Rmk. 81,334.73

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914



271

No. 28 Moses Wolf of Kolmar to the District Administration Office in Czarnków, Requesting Support for the Widow of Hirsch Moses, 6 January 1892

Source: APP, Starostwo powiatowe w Czarnkowie (District Administration Office in Czarnków), no. 385, n.p. As is well known, the Israelite religious community in Gębice near Czarnków has completely dissolved. Only an innkeeper Moses and the widow of Hirsch Moses still reside in Gębice. The widow of Hirsch Moses has, as the local mayor Raketa cannot deny, been very sick for many years and is bed-ridden. She has been entirely abandoned by her antecedent and descendent relatives in Gębice who could have provided her with possible meals. And since she is a member of the Mosaic faith and cannot consume every type of food, she is almost starving to death. I am pestered almost every week with petitions to give her some food, which I have often done. However, I will not henceforth be in a position to do so. For this reason, I address the praiseworthy Royal District Administration Office in Czarnków with the request to enjoin the village community of Gębice as quickly as possible to assist with the sustenance of the widow of Hirsch Moses in Gębice. It would be safest if the widow Moses were admitted to a Jewish hospital. In this way she could be cared for according to Jewish rites, because she does not consume other food.



No. 29 The District Administration Office in Czarnków to Moses Wolf Regarding Support for the Widow of Hirsch Moses, 20 February 1892

Source: APP, Starostwo powiatowe w Czarnkowie (District Administration Office in Czarnków), no. 385, n.p. In response to your letter of 6 January of t[his] y[ear] concerning relief for the widow of Hirsch Moses in Gębice, you are hereby informed that according to official findings the p[raemissis praemittendis] Moses is still in possession of cash money and she is thus not subject to hardship for the time being. As soon as the widow Moses is in need of assistance, the community board in Gębice will provide relief in the appropriate manner.

272

Schulz

No. 30 The Jewish Community in Piaski Requests a Reduction of Fees from the Union of German Jewish Communities, 14 July 1892

Source: CJA 1, 75A Sa 4, Nr. 4, #6842, p. 20.

From the report of the sixth Community Congress as well as the communication from 1 July of this year, we have learned that through the resolution of 27 March of this year the annual fees for community membership in the union will now be at least ten marks. We feel obliged to protest against this resolution. The number of our members has declined by four since we joined the union in 1888 and half of our members have to pay almost the entire current budget of 658 marks. For this reason, we respectfully request of the high committee that it continue to allow us to pay a fee of 5 marks, as we have in the past.



No. 31 The Board of the Jewish Community in Borek Wielkopolski to the Local Representative Assembly of the Jewish Community, about Joining the Union of German Jewish Communities, 12 January 1893

Source: CJA 1, 75A Bo 6, Nr. 25, #906, p. 2.

In view of the prevailing circumstances we consider it absolutely necessary to join the Union of German Jewish Communities for an annual fee of 10 marks…. The representative assembly will please take note of the attached statutes of the Union of German Jewish Communities and resolve in a regular session to join the Union of German Jewish Communities for an annual fee of 10 marks. The issue is as important as it is urgent and thus we sincerely look forward to a corresponding representative resolution within 8 days.

273

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914



No. 32 Overview of the Revenues and Expenditures of the Israelite Society for Sick Care and Burial in Poznań, 1895

Source: GStA PK, I. HA, Rep. 77, Tit. 1021 Posen, no. 7, n.p.

No. Revenues

Cash Marks

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

1. 2.

Holdings from 1894 Support from the synagogue community Dues from society members From collections boxes Donations … Support for the sick in the Latz Hospital Reimbursement for sick care Rent from synagogue seats For burial garments For coffins Interest Additional revenues at the Beth-Schamoss celebrationb Proceeds from the sale of old paraphernalia Total Expenditures Wages for the secretary and the messengers Sick care: Marks a) Wages for orderlies 947.– b) Wages for nurses 597.35 c) Costs for the sick in the Latz 2,031.88 Hospital d) Support for sick people at 4,839.90 home e) Attention and care for sick 1,384.15 people at home f) For the transient sick 527.– g) For medicine and physi272.96 cian’s fees

Securities Pfg.

550 900 4,257 1,707 1,447 1,004 1,027 23 776 600 4,100

08 – – 67 37 30 82 50 30 – 05

199 30 16,623

37 50 96

2,283

30

89,700

89,700

274

Schulz

(cont.) No. Revenues

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

h) Repairs, equipment, 96.55 bandages Wages of the gabetes [female caretaker] for the burial of the deceased poor Holding of yahrzeitsa Writing materials, printed materials, etc. For burial garments, washing, etc. For coffins Disability and old-age insurance Gratuities from the surplus of the Beth-Schemossb celebration 1894 Ditto 1895 Holdings on 1/1/1896 Total

Cash

Securities

Marks

Pfg.

10,696

79

1,080

–

381 81 529 563 72 134

65 80 24 – 38 –

110 691 16,623

– 80 96

89,700 89,700

a Ceremony held one year after the passing of a deceased person. b Fasting days during winter; the correct spelling would be Beit Shemesh.



No. 33 The Jewish Community Board in Borek Wielkopolski to the Union of German Jewish Communities Requesting Support for the Widow of Their Deceased Rabbi, 11 September 1895

Source: CJA 1, 75A Bo 6, Nr. 25, #906, p. 22.

We would like to respectfully submit the following request to the committee. Our long-standing rabbi Mr Joseph Labaszynski died here on 1 August 1894. He was survived by his solitary, childless widow who is approximately 65 years old. In life the deceased had but a very small income from his post that only allowed him to pay for his very modest household. For this reason, he was unable to leave his widow anything substantial. The widow therefore is in need of support and this all the more so as she is not only advanced in years, but also very ill and thus unable to earn a living. Our community provided the widow rabbi with support until 1 September of this year, but is unfortunately unable to continue to grant this because we are small and not very affluent.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

275

For this reason, we would like to request very respectfully that you attend to the local rabbi widow Frau Rosalie Labaszynski … and provide her with continuous annual support quite soon.



No. 34 Speech by Rabbi Gotthilf Walter Celebrating the Establishment of the Association of Synagogue Communities in the Administrative Region of Bydgoszcz, 7 February 1897

Source: CJA 1, 75C Ge 1, Nr. 1/1, #9864, pp. 21–22.

Gentlemen! The association for whose foundation you have been summoned and invited here will not and should not, for all its independence, be something independent, but rather a continuation of what the Union of German Jewish Communities in Berlin has pursued and made its mission from the moment of its inception. The course of our history has demonstrated to us Jews again and again that no state will protect us from our own internal disintegration, that no government is concerned with our internal strengthening, that there is only one single hope for us, and that is self-help. To have drawn the consequences of this knowledge in a vigorous way, that is the achievement of the Union of German Jewish Communities. It has—of the forty synagogue communities in the administrative region of Bydgoszcz, only fifteen belong to the union, it is therefore appropriate here to touch upon its activities with a few words …—it has from the beginning constantly seen as its duty to serve as the headquarters for all common interests of the Jewish communities, and of these interests to focus especially on the promotion of religious instruction by establishing and supervising this in more than one hundred small communities that in the past had been forced to forgo such instruction completely or had been unable to provide it through appropriately trained instructors…. From Berlin, [however,] it would be and would remain impossible to recognize and judge the needs of the numerous small communities and groups of our confession dispersed throughout the entire German fatherland. The best support that can be given to the Union of Communities in this regard is for the various communities of the individual provinces and regions to join together into associations that have their headquarters in the union…. Furthermore, the focus of the association will be not merely to provide religious instruction wherever possible, but also especially to establish a monitoring of this whenever it cannot be provided by certified religious instructors. Finally, the focus of the association will also be to ensure especially that girls in small communities learn more about Judaism than in the past. They have become acquainted with it there primarily in the kitchen alone; they have learned nothing, as boys do, of its spiritual contents. In this regard we must demand the complete emancipation of the female sex.

276

Schulz

No. 35 Report on the Activities of the Executive Committee of the Association of West Prussian Synagogue Communities in the First Year of Its Work, 1897/1898

Source: CJA 1,75B Da 1, Nr. 1, #9373, pp. 2–5.

After the executive committee was constituted in Gdańsk on 4 May 1897, the committee sent a circular letter on the 6th of that month to all communities in the Province of West Prussia. This letter, which included the statute, identified as the association’s next important task to be the organization and regulation of religious instruction in small communities, calling upon the honourable community boards to join the association and to recruit as many personal members for the association as possible. This circular letter and the subsequent correspondence with the rabbis were so successful that of the fifty-three communities of the province the overwhelming majority, namely forty communities, became members…. School inspection: The executive board of the association had a broad correspondence with the members of the Association of West Prussian Rabbis,82 [through] Dr Rosenstein (Grudziądz), about initiating a regular, competent inspection of religious instruction and working diligently against the prevailing evils in this domain. After the Association of Rabbis had delineated the inspection districts, the executive board of the association was able to establish as unified a procedure as possible for the inspections…. Vagabondage: Regarding the question of how vagabondage, which has become a plague in the districts of the association [West Prussia], can be eliminated or at least significantly reduced there was a preliminary exchange of opinion in the committee, without, however, leading to any tangible results. The committee will keep its eye on this question and hopes to be able to make specific proposals at the next general assembly. Orphanage: Regarding the transformation of the Lachmann Foundation into a provincial orphanage, the executive board of the association has begun negotiations with the executor of the will, Dr Edmund Lachmann in Berlin, and these will, it is hoped, lead to a satisfactory conclusion.

82

The Association of West Prussian Rabbis was established in 1880 with the goal of improving the religious life of Jews in West Prussia. It sought to fulfill this purpose by inspecting religious instruction in schools and promoting the exchange of knowledge and experience among rabbis.

277

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914



No. 36 List of Ritual Baths (Mikva‌ʾot) in the Various Provinces of Prussia, 1906

Source: Jakob Thon, Die jüdischen Gemeinden und Vereine in Deutschland (Berlin: Verlag des Bureaus für Statistik der Juden, 1906), p. 18. The ritual immersion bath was once one of the public facilities that every Jewish community possessed. More recently, however, the usage of this bath has become increasingly rare. Most baths were built some time ago and in many cases were not fixed when they fell into disrepair. However, pious communities still make sure that they have a bath configured according to ritual rules. Thus, the existence of a large number of baths in an area indicates that these are older and more pious communities. The size of the community, however, also plays a role insofar as the poor small communities frequently do not have the necessary funds to build and maintain a mikveh….

Province, State

Number of communities with less than 100 100–300

Total

300–500

500–1000 over 1000

Jewish inhabitants who have or do not have a mikveh Have

East Prussia 6 West Prussia 2 Brandenburga 2 Pomerania 4 Poznań 6 Saxony 1 Silesia 5 Schleswig-Holstein 2 Hannover 15 Westphalia 6 Hesse-Nassau 80 Rhine Province 27 Kingdom of Prussia 156 … German Empire 373

Do Have Do Have Do Have Do Have Do Have Do not not not not not not have have have have have have 10 6 21 15 9 12 20 2 32 33 39 45 244 372

9 5 2 9 7 6 0 11 1 2 15 0 26 6 12 1 8 1 7 22 2 1 2 0 9 5 1 1 25 0 31 5 2 14 24 1 110 135 28 280 182 44

a Berlin does not seem to have been included in this table.

0 3 3 2 0 0 4 1 2 5 1 4 25 38

2 4 1 0 7 2 4 0 1 0 3 4 28 37

0 0 1 1 0 0 3 0 1 3 0 5 14 23

1 2 0 1 6 0 4 1 1 0 3 3 22 38

0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 1 3 8 13

20 15 23 16 4 36 7 33 57 15 5 22 22 49 4 5 27 40 7 68 119 46 49 81 344 426 772 628

278

Schulz

No. 37 The Most Important Jewish Charitable Institutions in Germany, 1906 (Selection of Institutions from the Provinces of Poznań and West Prussia)

Source: Thon, Die jüdischen Gemeinden, pp. 63–67.

Location

Bojanowo

Name

Israelite Old-Age Pension Institution (Rohr Foundation) Gdańsk Old People’s Home (Aschenheim Foundation) Grudziądz Casper Lachmann Provincial Orphanage Inowrocław Wolfsohn Orphanage Leszno Old-Age Pension Institution (Wolheim Foundation) Poznań Israelite Orphanage for Boys Poznań Jewish Hospital and Infirmary (Rohr Foundation) Poznań Jewish Home for Girls Poznań Ritsch Flatau Orphanage and School for Girls Toruń Israelite Old People’s Home

Year Number of Budget Assets [in established members [in marks] marks]

Number of beds / wards

1900

–

22,500

800,000

17

1897

–

37,648

207,405

20

1902

–

–

405,000

24

1896 1859

– –

–

5,000

500,000 19 125,000 20

1836

600

21,200

– 25

1895

–

–

1904 1861

200 400

– 12,700

1902

153

5,268

680,000

62

32,000 8 81,000 16

41,481

8

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914



279

No. 38 Press Release about the First Public Meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Jewish Interests in Poznań, 21 January 1908

Source: Posener Neuste Nachrichten, no. 2624, 21 January 1908.

Last Monday the Association held its first public meeting in the large hall of the Apollo Theatre. The meeting was well attended and was opened by the director Mr Victor, who said that in the few weeks of the association’s existence three hundred members had already joined…. The director said that the association’s next task would be to turn community members’ indifference towards Jewish community affairs into a lively participation in them. The association intends, he continued, to be a place where all suggestions about the social welfare institutions of the community and about the traditional preservation of worship and customs are accommodated and diligently promoted. Its duty will be to act liberally in social policy and conservatively in the cultivation of religious institutions. The speaker of the evening was the author Mr A. Klausner from Berlin, who has contributed greatly to the advancement of general Jewish affairs. Drawing on the treasure of his own experience, he expounded on the tasks of a Jewish community administration. He explained that the development of Jewish communities could not have been anticipated in the Jewish law of 23 July 1847 [see no. 18], as this actually unfolded through the convergence of the Jewish population in individual major cities. He advocated the establishment of district communities and argued that those communities in the cities that have become smaller and [less] powerful must be supported by the entire Jewish population of the state so that they are able to maintain the necessary institutions of a community without too great a burden on individual members. In contrast, he continued, the larger communities have to take the lead in important social tasks and work in an exemplary manner. For example, the duties of larger communities would include establishing a lodging house with a large hall for presentations and education, maintaining reading rooms with libraries and religious schools with history instruction, and in particular ensuring that there are model schools. Regarding the social demands on the large communities, the speaker went so far as to call for the establishment of consumer associations, through which law-abiding Jews could purchase the basic religious necessities of life according to strict ritual rules and without a large surcharge. There was a lively discussion after the talk…. Apart from Mr Werner, all of the speakers supported the purposes and goals of the association and declared themselves in agreement with Mr Klausner’s proposals. Dr Kollenscher especially recommended that the association seek to promote a truly liberal social policy in the Poznań community, as community members have already been unequally burdened because voluntary associations carry out the most central welfare arrangements in Poznań. Through

280

Schulz

these associations, he argued, the community budget has been significantly reduced; the community, however, should itself perform the charity carried out by these organizations. But this would mean that taxes would have to be significantly higher than they are now and would be paid by the wealthier circles.



No. 39 Rabbi Aron Heppner from Koźmin and Teacher Izaak Herzberg from Bydgoszcz on the Organization and Finances of the Jewish Communities in the Province of Poznań, 1909

Source: Aron Heppner and Isaak Herzberg, Aus Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der Juden und der jüdischen Gemeinden in den Posener Landen (Koschmin/Bromberg: self-published, 1909), pp. 244–46. There are independent communities in almost all towns and places, even in a series of villages—indeed 106 communities with more than 20 persons. The communities regulate their religious affairs largely according to a statute issued on the basis of the law of 13 July 1847 [typographical error; the date should be 23 July 1847, see no. 18]. They possess corporate rights. Their lawful bodies are the community board and the representative council. The number of board members and representatives depends on the size of the community. The relation of the two administrative councils to each other, especially in the larger communities, is like that of the municipality and the town councillors. They have no ties whatsoever to the community members, to whom they remain responsible, however, in the sense that they act within their powers. Jews in the Province of Poznań raise around 670,000 marks overall in taxes to pay for expenditures for religious purposes; that is, 15 marks per capita…. The levies can usually be divided into direct or indirect ones; the latter are primarily for the slaughter of large, small, and feathered livestock (krupka [kosher meat tax]). The taxes are determined in part through assessment, in part through a certain percentage surtax on the classified income tax. In the smaller communities this surtax is significantly higher than in the larger ones. Thus Poznań levies 90 per cent, Bydgoszcz 50 per cent, Inowrocław 60 per cent, whereas Kostrzyn levies 225 per cent, Książ 300 per cent, and Ryczywół even 550 per cent. Certain amounts are allocated in the budget everywhere for support of the local and transient poor, and in some places these constitute a significant portion of the annual expenditures. Furthermore, in most communities special bequests and foundations provide donations to needy people. Almost all localities also have associations that give help and support to the needy. These associations also perform beneficial work in particular by helping the bashful poor and by providing them with interest-free loans. Like male community members, the women and girls in most communities have also come together to grant help and assistance to their fellow sisters in times of need, and all of these associations are a true blessing for the needy and the poor.

The Prussian Partition, 1815–1914

281

Another consequence of the population decline in the communities and their decreased capacities is that the number of rabbinical positions has also greatly declined. While previously almost every community had a spiritual leader, there are currently only some twenty such positions in the Province of Poznań.



No. 40 Tasks of the Newly Established Provincial Association of Poznań, 1913

Source: Im deutschen Reich 1913, no. 2 (February), pp. 57–60.

We certainly recognize that in the midst of the great national and economic confrontation in our province the small House of Israel will not be capable of dictating the way forward. On the other side, we should not forget that we need a natural ally in our endeavour to secure an existence which is free of hardship and just for the Jews who are filled with genuine patriotism, and thus conserve them for our province. We almost certainly will have such a natural ally in the Prussian government itself, which in sensibly assessing the actual conditions will by no means calmly look on as reliable German elements are removed from the province in ever greater droves…. Precisely in our province it will be necessary to put aside all petty fragmentation, all internal partisan squabbling, and the formation of all groups and cliques in social and professional life since general interests must be preserved through unanimous and united cooperation. Only then will the new provincial association be in a position to do justice to its especially difficult, but also especially important task…. [It] was recognized as the special duty of the newly established provincial association to oppose with energetic and well-deliberated measures general abuses and inequities, not least the unjust and particularly insulting boycott by Christian Germans. With this justification the attorney Dr Krombach proposed the establishment of a central collection point, to which all complaints, affronts, and attacks from any side could be reported. Through the materials gathered by the collection point, the provincial association should be in a position to establish whether and what actions need to be taken, and which guidance to give to local committees….



No. 41 Councillor Placzek on the Appointment of a Rabbi in Poznań, 11 February 1914

Source: APP, Prezydium Policji w Poznaniu (Police Commissioner’s Office in Poznań), no. 5072, pp. 340–46. The community did not advertise the position because in Jewish communities, especially in those of law-abiding Jews, this is not customary and contradicts their views. The procedure is the following: once it is known that the rabbi of the community has died, a number of rabbis come forward on their own; otherwise, the community board

282

Schulz

appeals to a number of personalities known to be excellent rabbis and asks if they would be prepared to succeed the previous rabbi. The community has now received a number of notifications, several of which had to be eliminated immediately as completely unsuitable…. Following a very detailed inquiry, Rabbi Dr Unna had to be eliminated due to deafness and Rabbi Dr Schiffer due to advanced age, while Rabbi Dr Königsberger, Dr Hannover, Dr Kaatz, Dr Weill, Dr Wreschner, and Dr Levy were not considered for this position either due to insufficient rhetorical skills or due to inadequate Talmudic and rabbinical knowledge. With individual rabbis there was also the crucial consideration that they took such an extreme standpoint, even for the Orthodox community, that they could not be considered in the interest of peace in the community. … The following four gentlemen remained on the short list: Dr Klein [from] Nuremberg, 1. 2. Dr Cohn [from] Basel, 3. Dr Stein [from] Schweinfurt, 4. Dr Bamberger [from] Hanau. … The salary is doubtless such that it would mean for all of these gentlemen a significant improvement in their material situation if they accepted [the position of the rabbi]. The difficulty of finding suitable men lies in the difficulty of the position of the Poznań community and in the required rabbinical knowledge and general education that is required from a rabbi in Poznań. Under these circumstances, the community board was prompted to turn to Rabbi Dr Freimann, who is known in the broadest circles of law-abiding Judaism and beyond and whose scholarly reputation and outstanding capacity as a pulpit orator and scholar make him appear especially suited for the office of rabbi in this community…. He is a respected figure on issues of Talmudic and religious scholarship and—this is crucially important for all community members of the town of Poznań, whether they belong to the Liberal or the Orthodox community83—Rabbi Freimann is a man of mild, conciliatory character who can and will lead the opposites in the community to peace. For this reason, all of the members of the election committee and the community authorities, regardless of the tendency they adhere to, have unanimously elected Mr Freimann.84 83

84

This does not mean that two autonomous communities co-existed at the time in Poznań. Rather, there were two religious tendencies that were also in part institutionalized, for example, in the form of the Israelite Fraternal Community [no. 26], which had its own synagogue and other ritual facilities (Heppner and Herzberg, Aus Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der Juden und der jüdischen Gemeinden in den Posener Landen, p. 860). Jacob Freimann (1866–1937) was chief rabbi [Oberrabbiner] in Poznań from 1914 to 1928. He was subsequently appointed to a chief rabbi position in Berlin, which he held until his death.

chapter 5

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914 Wacław Wierzbieniec 1

Introduction

Galicia is the informal name of the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria: the part of the former Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth which during the partitions of Poland was annexed by Austria and which subsequently, following the latter’s transformation into a dual monarchy, became part of Austria-Hungary. The post-partition borders of Austria were ultimately determined in 1815 at the Congress of Vienna and remained largely unchanged until the First World War. The sole adjustment took place in 1846 when the Republic of Kraków, which had been established by the Congress of Vienna as a ‘free, independent, and strictly neutral’ state, ceased to exist and Kraków and its surrounding areas were incorporated into Austria as part of Galicia. With an eventual area of some 78.5 km², Galicia was in fact the largest province of the Austrian Empire1 and was traditionally divided into Western Galicia (west of the River San) and Eastern Galicia. Initially a governorate (gubernia) and then, from the mid-nineteenth century, a viceroyalty (namiestnictwo), it was governed from Lwów, which was also home to the greatest concentration of Jews in the province. For administrative purposes, it was divided into districts known as cyrkuły and then, from the mid-nineteenth century, into counties (powiaty), headed by a starosta. In the wake of the reforms which took place in the empire in 1867, Galicia was granted autonomy and self-governing institutions, the most important of which was the Galician Diet. Its new status was underscored by the use of Polish rather than German in schools and government offices [no. 14]. The Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria was the most densely populated part of the Austrian Empire. It was also where most of the empire’s Jews lived. Despite its economic backwardness—urbanization was weak and the economy was underdeveloped—Galicia’s population grew quickly: from fewer than 3.5 million in 1817, to more than 4.5 million in 1850, and to more than 8 million

1 Andrzej Chwalba, Historia Polski 1795–1918 (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Literackie, 2000), p. 194.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

284

Wierzbieniec

in 1910.2 The province was a veritable mosaic of ethnicities and religions. Poles were the dominant population group, Ruthenians (Ukrainians) were the second most numerous, and Jews the third—although the province also included Germans, Armenians, Karaites, as well as smaller groups of other nationalities. The register of the Jewish population in Galicia compiled in 1785 showed it to have around 215,000 Jewish residents. Meanwhile, according to data from 1843, the Republic of Kraków had more than 16,700 Jewish inhabitants, or 11.5 per cent of the total population of almost 146,000. The Jewish population increased substantially in subsequent decades: from 449,000 in 1857 to 872,000 in 1910.3 In the mid-nineteenth century, Galician Jews made up 72.3 per cent of the entire Jewish population of the Habsburg Empire; in 1900 they formed 66.2 per cent.4 Considerably more Jews lived in Eastern Galicia than in Western Galicia, a consequence of the various factors which had influenced Jewish settlement in previous centuries. In Eastern Galicia, Jews also constituted a higher proportion of the inhabitants in general: whereas in Western Galicia, that proportion was greater than 3 per cent, in Eastern Galicia it was almost 9 per cent.5 These percentages increased significantly in later decades so that by 1910 Jews made up 7.9 per cent of the total population of Western Galicia and 12.4 per cent of the population of Eastern Galicia.6 The fact that they shared a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural space had a bearing on the lives of the various ethnic groups in Galicia. It shaped their differing patterns of social behaviour and their relations with one other, and it also affected how they organized themselves. The autonomy granted to Galicia in the second half of the nineteenth century, and the political rights which 2 Jerzy Skowronek, ‘Galicja’, in Encyklopedia historii gospodarczej Polski do 1945 roku, ed. by Antoni Mączak, vol. 2 (Warsaw: Wiedza Powszechna, 1981), p. 181. 3 Artur Eisenbach, Emancypacja Żydów na ziemiach polskich 1785–1870 na tle europejskim (Warsaw: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 1988), p. 219; Żydzi w Polsce odrodzonej: działalność społeczna, gospodarcza, oświatowa i kulturalna, vol. 1, ed. by Ignacy Schiper, Aryeh Tartakower, and Aleksander Hafftka (Warsaw: Wydnawnictwo ‘Żydzi w Polsce odrodzonej’, 1936), p. 436; Jerzy Michalewicz, Elementy demografii historycznej (Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1979), p. 167. 4 Zofia Borzymińska, Dzieje Żydów w Polsce. Wybór tekstów źródłowych, XIX wiek (Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 1994), p. 14. 5 Ireneusz Ihnatowicz, ‘Od rozbiorów do pierwszej wojny światowej’, in Społeczeństwo polskie od X do XX wieku, ed. by Ireneusz Ihnatowicz, Antoni Mączak, Benedykt Zientara, and Janusz Żarnowski (Warsaw: Książka i Wiedza, 1996), p. 548. 6 Bohdan Wasiutyński, Ludność żydowska w Polsce w wiekach XIX i XX. Studium statystyczne (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Kasy im. Mianowskiego, Instytutu Popierania Nauki, 1930), p. 91; Krzysztof Zamorski, Ludność Galicji w latach 1857–1910. Informator statystyczny do dziejów społeczno-gospodarczych Galicji (Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagielloński; Polskie Towarzystwo Statystyczne, 1989), pp. 88, 106.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

285

ensued, made it possible for the region’s ethnic groups to develop their own culture and religion within the existing legal framework. However, in parallel with these opportunities came changes which not only had ramifications for Jewish self-government but which also increasingly impinged on the intercommunal harmony which had previously characterized Galician society. This was the period which saw the national awakening of the Ruthenian population and in which the process of assimilation within the Jewish population became more conspicuous [nos. 14, 36, 38]. Assimilation was vigorously opposed by the followers of several Hasidic spiritual leaders (tsadikim): a considerable part of the Jewish population of Galicia was Hasidic, and Hasidic Jews were certainly dominant in smaller towns and villages.7 From the late nineteenth century, Galician Jews were also faced with the ever more pronounced nationalism of both Poles and Ukrainians, something which inevitably widened the gap between ethnic groups.8 It also prompted Jewish self-government to adopt a more energetic stance, particularly in its relations with its non-Jewish neighbours, and to fight the antisemitism which was manifest in both Polish and Ukrainian propaganda, as well as in various aspects of public life, especially in the economic sphere [nos. 15, 41].9 2

The Legal Framework of Jewish Self-Government and the Number, Distribution, and Geographical Extent of Jewish Communities

The Austrian authorities placed significant restrictions on the autonomy of Galicia’s Jewish communities. The self-governing Jewish institutions which had existed before the partitions of Poland were reorganized in 1776, during the reign of Empress Maria Theresa and a supreme collegial body, the Jewish Directorate, took charge of Jewish affairs. Based in Lwów, it was intended to

7 Raphael Mahler, Hasidism and the Jewish Enlightenment: Their Confrontation in Galicia and Poland in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1985), passim. 8 Łucja Kapralska, Pluralizm kulturowy i etniczny a odrębność regionalna Kresów południowowschodnich w latach 1918–1939 (Kraków: Nomos, 2000), pp. 8–9. 9 Keely Stauter-Halsted, ‘Jews as Middleman Minorities in Rural Poland: Understanding the Galician Pogroms of 1898’, in Antisemitism and Its Opponents in Modern Poland, ed. by Robert Blobaum (Ithaca, N.Y.; London: Cornell University Press, 2005), pp. 39–41; Tim Buchen, Antisemitismus in Galizien. Agitation, Gewalt und Politik gegen Juden in der Habsburgemonarchie um 1900 (Berlin: Metropol, 2012), pp. 118–21, 341.

286

Wierzbieniec

oversee the work of Jewish communities and to mediate between them and the state.10 Further reforms of Jewish self-government took place under Emperor Joseph II. The Edict of 27 May 1785 abolished the Jewish Directorate and Jewish communities were placed under the control of the local district administration (cyrkuły). At the same time, the jurisdiction of the Jewish communal authorities was restricted to religious issues and the number of communities was reduced from 241 to 127.11 The next edict, dated 7 May 1789, was to have a particularly significant and long-lasting impact on the form and scope of Jewish self-government: its provisions, with a number of exceptions, remained in force until the passing of the statute of 21 March 1890 [no. 21]. The 1789 Edict established for the first time a series of rules governing the structure of the Jewish community and granted it the status of a public institution. At the same time, it weakened the standing of rabbis, whose jurisdictional prerogatives were removed and granted to secular courts, thus giving precedence to the secular community administration.12 The edict declared the Jewish community to be an autonomous institution which was confessional in nature and, as such, its role was to engage exclusively in religious activities. Other aspects of Jewish community life were placed under the supervision of the general administrative or judicial authorities. The edict increased the number of Jewish communities to 141, although boundary changes introduced at the beginning of the nineteenth century meant that by 1832 there were only 131 functioning communities in Galicia.13 As mentioned, Kraków and its surrounding towns and villages did not form part of Galicia until 1846. Before then, still as the independent Republic of Kraków, it used its own legislation to regulate Jewish self-government. For the first two years of its existence, the Kraków community was governed by

10

11 12 13

Oswald Balzer, Historia ustroju Austrii w zarysie (Lwów: K.S. Jakubowski, 1908), p. 333; Stanisław Grodziski, ‘Zabór austriacki 1772–1848’, in Historia państwa i prawa Polski, vol. 3, Od rozbiorów do uwłaszczenia, ed. by Juliusz Bardach, Monika Senkowska-Gluck (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 1981), p. 705. Josef Karniel, ‘Das Toleranzpatent Kaiser Josephs II. für die Juden Galiziens und Lodomeriens’, Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Geschichte der Universität Tel Aviv, 11 (1982), 58–60. Jerzy Michalewicz, Żydowskie okręgi metrykalne i żydowskie gminy wyznaniowe w Galicji (Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagielloński, 1995), pp. 14–15,17. Michael Stöger, Darstellung der gesetzliche Verfassung der galizischen Judenschaft, vol. 1, (Lemberg: Kuhn und Millikowski, 1833), pp. 11–16; Stanisław Grodziski, Historia ustroju społeczno-politycznego Galicji 1772–1848 (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk, 1971), pp. 108–109.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

287

an autonomous kahal, supported by several dozen community dignitaries.14 However, on 1 June 1817 a statute concerning the organization of Jews (Statut urządzający starozakonnych) was issued which defined their legal status and, through the regulations set out in its opening twelve sections, brought Jewish self-government firmly under state control. In place of the kahals it created a new Jewish administrative authority, by appointing committees in each of the two newly established districts (obwody) based in Kazimierz and Chrzanów. These committees were collegial entities made up of four members, namely a Catholic official of the Republic of Kraków as chair, a rabbi, and two elected Jewish representatives. Their remit was highly circumscribed and their work was monitored by the Kraków Senate, which had to ratify any resolutions they passed. The jurisdiction of rabbis was restricted to religious matters and, in order to supervise them more thoroughly, they were allocated special Christian scribes tasked with translating their rulings into Polish. The committees’ sole responsibility was to draw up the annual community budgets and to apportion the communal taxes, which were to be used for items such as the upkeep of the district’s Jewish buildings and facilities, and the payment of rabbis and their Christian translators15 [no. 1]. It is worth noting that, despite having numerous expenses of its own, the Jewish community nonetheless considered it important to underline its respect for Polish national tradition, for example by making a financial contribution towards the erection of a statue of the Polish hero and leader of the Polish national uprising, Tadeusz Kościuszko16 [no. 3]. The December Constitution (core legislation passed on 21 December 1867) paved the way for significant changes to the legal framework of Jewish selfgovernment. The constitution accorded Jews the same rights as the rest of the Galician population thanks to which they were able—at least in principle— to realize their aspirations in every area of public life and were entitled, like members of other faiths, to manage their own internal affairs through legally recognized religious unions.17 The authorities put in place measures enabling 14 15 16 17

Majer Bałaban, Historia Żydów w Krakowie i na Kazimierzu 1304–1868, vol. 2, 1656–1868 (Kraków: ‘Nadzieja’ Towarzystwo ku Wspieraniu Chorej Młodzieży Żydowskiej Szkół Średnich i Wyższych w Krakowie, 1936), pp. 589–90. Anna Jakimyszyn, Żydzi krakowscy w dobie Rzeczypospolitej Krakowskiej. Status prawny, przeobrażenia gminy, system edukacyjny (Kraków; Budapest: Austeria, 2008), pp. 67, 109–11. Bałaban, Historia Żydów w Krakowie i na Kazimierzu, p. 734. Stanisław Starzyński, Kodeks prawa politycznego, czyli austriackie ustawy konstytucyjne 1848–1903 (Lwów: K.S. Jakubowski, 1903), pp. 674–92; Konstanty Grzybowski, Galicja 1848–1914. Historia ustroju politycznego na tle historii ustroju Austrii (Kraków; Wrocław; Warsaw: Ossolineum, 1959), pp. 58–59. It is worth highlighting that until the demise of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, the Jewish population was formally recognized only as

288

Wierzbieniec

Jews to establish new communities and encouraged existing communities to abide by the provisions of their communal statutes. The Kraków community was the first to be granted its own statute, ratified by the viceroyalty in December 1868, before the relevant regulations had even been issued.18 The Directive of the Ministry of Religious Affairs and Education dated 28 February 1869 allowed for the creation of new faith communities, on condition that the government gave its consent in advance. Jews wishing to set up a new community were obliged to demonstrate the existence within its bounds of a synagogue, a cemetery, and ritual baths, and to confirm the availability of a teacher who would take charge of the religious education of its children. They were also required to define the geographical boundaries of the proposed community and to secure the agreement of the Jews residing there to the change in their community affiliation.19 While being encouraged to draw up their own statutes, Jewish communities were also permitted to reform their organizational structure. Guidelines on the content of statutes were published on 1 January 1872 and remained largely unchanged in subsequent years. They prescribed that statutes should identify the territorial extent of the community in question and should set out its membership criteria, its electoral regulations, the composition and jurisdiction of the communal authorities, the rules relating to the management of its assets, and the procedures for drafting budgets and schedules of the financial responsibilities of its members. Statutes were also to specify the duties of community officials, the requirements in respect of religious teaching and its supervision, the provisions governing any amendments to the statutes which might prove necessary, and the terms relating to the possible future dissolution of the community.20 As a result, the drawing up of communal statutes became widespread and individual communities were free to implement them once they had been ratified by the viceroyalty [nos. 9, 13]. There was also a significant increase in the number of Jewish communities: the Viceroyal Directive of 14 September 1876 divided Galicia into 265 local communities.21 They were

18 19 20 21

a religious group. Despite the efforts made from the late nineteenth century onwards, and in contrast to the Polish, Ruthenian (Ukrainian,) or German populations, it never attained the status of a national group. Andrzej Żbikowski, Żydzi krakowscy i ich gmina w latach 1869–1919 (Warsaw: DiG, 1994), p. 111. Jan Rudolf Kasparek, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwie Galicji i Lodomerii z Wielkim Księstwem Krakowskim obowiązujących, vol. 5, (Lwów: self-published, 1885), p. 3594; Prawnik, 40 (4 October 1871), 165–67. Kasparek, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń, pp. 3595–96. Ibid., p. 3590; Wacław Wierzbieniec, ‘Przemyska izraelicka gmina wyznaniowa w okresie autonomii Galicji’, Przemyskie Zapiski Historyczne, vols. 6–7 (Przemyśl: Polskie

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

289

able to function on a variety of legal bases: the Edict of 1789, their individual communal statutes, or, in exceptional cases, under the provisions of the Act concerning associations of 15 November 1867.22 On 21 March 1890 the emperor signed an Act concerning the external legal relations of the Israelite religious community (ustawa o urządzeniu zewnętrznych stosunków prawnych izraelickiego społeczeństwa religijnego), which was to be of great importance for the future functioning of Jewish selfgovernment [no. 21]. Its enactment invalidated any earlier legislation which was inconsistent with it. Since it was based on the premise that Jews constituted a religious community, it concerned itself solely with religious issues. By the same token, it recognized the Jewish community as a public institution, but one which was purely confessional in nature.23 The Act dealt with several key topics, namely communal organization, the status of rabbis, financial matters, and the ambit of any state interference. The government reserved the right to supervise the work of the communal authorities in order to prevent them from exceeding their jurisdiction or breaching relevant legislation. It could rescind any resolutions or directives issued by various communal bodies if they were inconsistent with the law or with the community’s statute, could dissolve its representative institutions, impose financial penalties, and apply a variety of other legal sanctions.24 As a result of the Act, the Jewish population of Galicia was divided into 252 communities [no. 22] and the geographical demarcation of these communities was to be completed by 1 January 1892.25 The number of communities fluctuated in subsequent years because new ones were established, for example in Krosno in 1900. In practice, the 1890 Act proved insufficient to effect the re-organization of Galicia’s Jewish communities. Consequently, on 6 July 1894, the Ministry of Religion and Education issued a directive which contained detailed provisions concerning the introduction of new communal statutes [no. 23]. The amendment of existing statutes or the drawing up of new ones was to be the joint responsibility of community representatives and three officials appointed from among community members by the district authorities (starostwo).

22 23 24 25

Towarzystwo Historyczne, 1990), p. 174. Małgorzata Śliż, Galicyjscy Żydzi na drodze do równouprawnienia 1848–1914. Aspekt prawny procesu emancypacji Żydów w Galicji (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 2006), pp. 82–83. Michalewicz, Żydowskie okręgi metrykalne, p. 20. Śliż, Galicyjscy Żydzi na drodze do równouprawnienia, pp. 84, 91, 93. Michał Koczyński, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwach Galicji i Lodomerii tudzież w W. Ks. Krakowskiem obowiązujących, a w czasokresie 1889–1896 wydanych (Kraków: Księgarnia Leona Frommera, 1897), pp. 374, 379; Gazeta Przemyska, 86 (25 October 1891), 2.

290

Wierzbieniec

Rabbis also participated in the drafting process by virtue of their office. Statutes were to be submitted for ratification to the Galician viceroyalty by the end of 1895. In order to standardize them and facilitate their preparation, a specimen statute was issued and its adoption encouraged. It spelled out, amongst others, the need for statutes to list all the towns and villages which formed part of the community in question and to give precise details of the fees which constituted its income [no. 25].26 Each statute had to contain detailed information on this subject, as the statute of the Jewish community in Oświęcim—which included forty-five local towns or villages—illustrates [no. 29]. By comparison, the Jewish community of Rzeszów at that time included thirty smaller towns and villages, while that in Przemyśl extended to more than one hundred.27 3

The Organization and Operation of Jewish Communities

Any given Jewish community was made up of all the Jews living within its bounds. By virtue of the 1890 Act and in accordance with the specimen statute subsequently published, membership of the community in one’s permanent place of residence was compulsory [no. 25]. Membership conferred specific rights and responsibilities, as was set out initially in the 1789 Edict and then in individual communal statutes. These also contained provisions concerning the jurisdiction of the communal authorities. The fundamental right enjoyed by community members was the right to elect its representatives, although in fact only those who paid communal taxes were eligible to vote. Initially, pursuant to the 1789 Edict, they elected a community board for a three-year term of office. These boards comprised three senior members of the community (seven in the case of Brody and Lwów) who were usually among its most affluent residents since they were financially responsible to the administrative authorities for their actions as board members.28 Later, once communities began to function under their own statutes, the community leadership consisted of an assembly and a board elected from among its members, referred to in the statutes as the 26 27 28

Śliż, Galicyjscy Żydzi na drodze do równouprawnienia, p. 93. Wierzbieniec, ‘Przemyska izraelicka gmina wyznaniowa’, pp. 176–77; idem, ‘Ustrój i organizacja rzeszowskiej gminy żydowskiej w okresie autonomii Galicji i II Rzeczypospolitej’, in Z przeszłości Rzeszowa, ed. by Małgorzata Jarosińska (Rzeszów: Mitel, 1995), p. 202. Philip Friedman, Die galizischen Juden im Kampfe um ihre Gleichberechtigung (1848–1868) (Frankfurt am Main: Kauffmann, 1929), p. 149; Stanisław Grodziski, ‘Stanowisko prawne Żydów w Galicji: Reformy Marii Teresy I Józefa II (1772–1790)’, in Lud żydowski w narodzie polskim. Materiały z sesji naukowej w Warszawie 151–6 września 1992, ed. by Jerzy Michalski (Warsaw: Instytut Historii PAN, 1994), p. 74.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

291

‘representatives’ (reprezentacja), the ‘superiors’ (przełożeństwo) or the ‘principals’ (zwierzchność), headed by a chair (the leader of the community). Only men above the age of twenty-four were allowed to vote in elections to the community assemblies, while only men above age thirty were entitled to stand in those elections. Widows who continued to pay the communal taxes previously paid by their husbands were entitled to ask male members of the community with electoral rights to vote as their proxies. Women who wished to play an active part in community life generally engaged in philanthropic work, setting up a range of cultural, educational, or charitable associations [no. 37]. In keeping with statutory requirements, elections were held every three years. Before each election, a register was drawn up of community members who were eligible to vote, listing them in descending order by the amount of tax they paid. Based on this register, three electoral circles were created by dividing the total amount of tax paid to the community into three equal parts. The first electoral circle was the smallest, since it comprised the wealthiest voters, who paid a third of all the taxes collected. The third electoral circle was the largest since its members paid the lowest amounts of tax. The incumbent community rabbi was ex officio included in the first electoral circle. Each circle, irrespective of how many voting members it had, elected the same number of delegates to the community assembly [nos. 9, 13].29 Since the right to vote was dependent on payment of communal taxes, those of modest means, who were not liable to make such payments, were effectively disenfranchised—and therefore only part of the total membership of the community was, in fact, eligible to vote. In 1910, for example, barely 10 per cent of all Galician Jews had communal voting rights.30 In principle, members of Jewish communities were obliged to comply with the legal requirement to officially register all births, marriages, and deaths [nos. 2, 12]. However, it was relatively common in Jewish communities for purely religious marriage ceremonies to be held in the presence of a rabbi, without those marriages then being registered. Any children born of such marriages were of course, according to the law, illegitimate, and this in turn gave rise to numerous legal complications, not least in relation to inheritance. In order to bring themselves within the law, some couples registered their marriage many years after their ritual wedding. Fathers were obliged to officially acknowledge paternity of their children and this was then formalized through

29 30

Wierzbieniec, ‘Przemyska izraelicka gmina wyznaniowa’, p. 178; Michalewicz, Żydowskie okręgi metrykalne, p. 26. I. Bornstein, ‘Budżety gmin wyznaniowych żydowskich w Polsce’, Kwartalnik Statystyczny, 3 (1929), 1373.

292

Wierzbieniec

an appropriate entry into the register of births [no. 39]. Meanwhile, Jews who converted ceased to be members of the community [no. 31]. From the mid-nineteenth century onwards, tensions between traditionalist and integrationist forces grew more acute, especially in larger communities. In Lwów, followers of the Haskalah became members of the community board as early as 1840 and the Reform synagogue there—Tempel—opened a few years later.31 As the integrationists gained in prominence, they often won power in larger communities, where the modernizing tendencies within Jewish society were most conspicuous. In Rzeszów, during the elections to the community board of December 1883, the battle between Orthodox Jews (who had until then had the upper hand) and Jewish liberal democrats ended with the latter winning control. Indeed, their continuing electoral success in the 1880s and 1890s meant that they were able to retain their commanding position for some time.32 Smaller Jewish communities, however, were dominated by traditionalist factions; there, rabbinical (misnagdic) and Hasidic Jews held sway [no. 38]. Despite the marked differences between communities, from the 1870s onwards, moves towards integration and the establishment of a common representative body gained pace. At the beginning of the twentieth century, these moves translated into an attempt to form a National Union of Jewish Communities in Galicia (Krajowy Związek Izraelickich Gmin Wyznaniowych w Galicji) to protect the religious, social, cultural, financial, and legal interests of Jewish communities and to promote the collective resolution of specific problems [no. 40]. In the end, the project remained unrealized: the differences between traditionalist and integrationist forces within Jewish society were simply too great.33 To enable communities to function smoothly, the Edict of 1789 had allowed them to employ rabbis, beadles, and other community officials who were not specifically listed.34 Each community was obliged to employ at least one rabbi, a requirement which was reaffirmed in the Act of 21 March 1890. It was a condition of their office that rabbis should have received appropriate secular education [nos. 21, 23]. Although their focus was on religious issues, rabbis 31

32 33

34

Piotr Wróbel, ‘Przed odzyskaniem niepodległości’, in Najnowsze dzieje Żydów w Polsce, ed. by Jerzy Tomaszewski (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 1993), p. 97; Wacław Wierzbieniec, ‘Lwów’, in Żydzi w Polsce. Dzieje i kultura. Leksykon, ed. by Jerzy Tomaszewski and Andrzej Żbikowski (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Cyklady, 2001), p. 296. Wierzbieniec, Ustrój i organizacja rzeszowskiej gminy żydowskiej, pp. 195–96. Wacław Wierzbieniec, ‘Próby integracji gmin żydowskich w Małopolsce w XIX i XX wieku’, in Żydzi i Judaizm we współczesnych badaniach polskich, vol. 2, Materiały z konferencji Kraków 24–26 XI 1998, ed. by Krzysztof Pilarczyk and Stefan Gąsiorowski (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 2000), pp. 227–49. Śliż, Galicyjscy Żydzi na drodze do równouprawnienia, pp. 72–73.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

293

sometimes expressed their views on current affairs [no. 2]. In larger communities they also catered to the religious needs of Jewish prisoners [no. 27]. On occasion, they became involved in activities quite outside their official remit. One such example was the Kraków rabbi Dov Ber Meisels who in 1848–49 served as a deputy in the Austrian parliament.35 In addition to the rabbi and the beadle, other community officials included rabbinical judges (dayanim), office staff, people employed at ritual baths, teachers in the religious schools maintained by the communities, workers at the communal cemetery, cantors, ritual slaughterers (shoḥetim), and others hired on an ad hoc basis. Their duties were set out in the statutes of individual communities [nos. 1, 9, 13, 29] and in performing those duties, they were obliged to follow certain rules which were sometimes, especially in the larger communities, set down in the form of written regulations or instructions [no. 35]. Communities were responsible for the salaries of the officials they employed [no. 33]. In addition, each community was required to pay, from its own resources, for the maintenance and management of the religiously significant buildings which it owned, including synagogues, ritual slaughterhouses, ritual baths, and cemeteries, the establishment of which required the consent of the state [no. 8]. The authorities also interfered in the interment of deceased Jews by requiring that they be buried in coffins [no. 17]. Larger communities administered other buildings which were primarily associated with the provision of social care, such as orphanages, old people’s homes, or hospitals [no. 32]. One of the more important functions of the community was to oversee the religious education of its young people. Heders operated in every community regardless of its size. They were private institutions run by melamdim paid for by the parents of the boys who attended them and their activities were regulated by the relevant legislative provisions [nos. 10, 20, 30]. In addition there were Talmud Torah schools, which were subject to community supervision. Communities were also anxious to ensure that their young people should receive an appropriate standard of education in Judaism at state schools [no. 34]. Many other Jewish organizations and institutions existed at the local level— economic, cultural, or political—and played a part in structuring Jewish community life [no. 38]. Prayer houses, found in relatively large numbers in every community, set themselves both religious and charitable objectives. They were founded by individual associations, including those comprising the followers of a particular tsadik, and were owned by Hasidic rabbis or other persons [no. 6]. These prayer houses were nonetheless obliged to secure the consent of the authorities before holding services at which the Torah was read 35

Polski słownik judaistyczny. Dzieje, kultura, religia, ludzie, vol. 2, ed. by Zofia Borzymińska and Rafał Żebrowski (Warsaw: Prószyński i S-ka, 2003), p. 125.

294

Wierzbieniec

[no. 4]. Burial societies (ḥevra kadisha), which had operated in communities for centuries, continued their work, albeit from the mid-nineteenth century they were registered as charities [nos. 16, 18]. The foundations established, usually for charitable purposes, by wealthy patrons enjoyed widespread public respect. They went some way to helping the Jewish communal authorities provide assistance to the needy, and some of them extended their activities to non-Jews [nos. 19, 28]. In 1900, forty-one community-run foundations had been registered by the state, but there were undoubtedly more charitable bodies in existence.36 In carrying out their activities, foundations and associations had to comply with the rules set out in their statutes, which in turn had to be ratified by the state. It was common for statutes to include a clause declaring that, in the event of dissolution, the assets of the institution in question were to pass to the community in which it had operated. The scope and forms of a given community’s activity were dictated by its income. More populous communities often had greater financial resources at their disposal which they could use to conduct statutory business or put towards cultural causes. In contrast, small or impoverished communities often struggled to cover the expenses necessary for the provision of religious services, and their charitable or welfare activity was relatively limited. Nevertheless, even these communities did their best to help the poor with emergency payments, the free distribution of matza flour before Pesach, or with allocations of winter fuel. Communities managed their own assets, as they were by law required to do. When communal statutes were introduced, they set out principles by which the community in question was to conduct its financial affairs [nos. 9, 13, 25, 29]. Detailed information on this matter, however, in terms of yearly incomes and expenditures, was contained in budget estimates and statements [nos. 27, 33]. The income necessary for communities to function derived from their own assets, from foundations, and from direct or indirect communal taxation [no. 5]. The latter included charges levied on the ritual slaughter of cattle and poultry (these were the principal source of communal income and the manner of their collection was the subject of detailed legislative provisions) [nos. 7, 11, 26] as well as on the lease for synagogue places, in both the male and female sections [no. 40], and on levies on matza flour for Pesach, wedding fees, funeral costs, and other items [no. 29]. Any financial difficulties which arose were mitigated in the short term by the taking out of loans, and in some years, in order to balance the books, additional funds were raised by increasing either levies on ritual slaughter or by communal taxes— although any such changes had to be approved by the state.37 36 37

Michalewicz, Żydowskie okręgi metrykalne, p. 65. Wierzbieniec, Ustrój i organizacja rzeszowskiej gminy żydowskiej, p. 199.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

4

295

Conclusions

Legally sanctioned self-government was fundamental to the manner in which the Jewish population of Galicia organized itself. The Jewish community gradually acquired the status of a religious body with its own executive and statute, whose activity was regulated by state legislation. By the second half of the nineteenth century, all Jewish communities in Galicia, as self-governing religious entities, possessed statutes which had been duly ratified by the state and which dictated their internal structure. The religious or charitable institutions and associations which operated in these communities were tailored to meet the needs of the Jewish population in a way consistent with the tenets of Judaism. Although in law the communities were subject to supervision by the state, and their mutual relationship was hedged about with a series of acts and directives, their internal structure was such that they were able to operate in accordance with the principles of the Jewish faith and Jewish tradition. Jewish self-government offered a framework for the social mobilization of the Jewish population and its participation in public life. Hence, especially at the turn of the twentieth century, when the process of Jewish emancipation and various other political movements began increasingly to transform the life of Jewish communities, [no. 36] Jewish self-government came to have a significant influence on the development of civil society. Jewish communities became the platform for cooperation and rivalry between Jewish political parties and were no longer merely a forum for assorted religious and social organizations or ad hoc interest groups. They began to function not just as a form of religious self-government, as had been intended by the state, but also as a sort of national self-government. The First World War brought dramatic impoverishment to Galicia and significantly undermined Jewish communal structures throughout the province. Indeed, Jews were very obviously its victims: political decisions and military operations which flowed from them threatened the very existence of Jewish society. The enormous deterioration in its infrastructure was aggravated by mass emigration from the territories which, in the course of military activity, had been occupied by Russia. The end of the war in 1918 heralded significant changes for Galicia’s Jewish communities which would resume their activity within the newly resurrected state of Poland. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

296

Wierzbieniec

Bibliographic References Andlauer, Teresa, Die jüdische Bevölkerung im Modernisierungsprozess Galiziens (1867– 1914) (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2001). Bałaban, Majer, Dzieje Żydów w Galicji i Rzeczpospolitej Krakowskiej 1772–1868 (Lwów: Księgarnia Polska B. Połonieckiego, 1914). Bałaban, Majer, Przegląd literatury dotyczącej żydowskich gmin wyznaniowych w Polsce (Warsaw: sine nomine, 1931). Bałaban, Majer, Historia lwowskiej synagogi postępowej (Lwów: Zarząd Synagogi Postępowej we Lwowie, 1937). Binder, Harald, ‘Eine multikulturelle Gesellschaft. Polen, Ukrainer und Juden in Galizien 1772–1918. Bericht vom gleichnamigen Workshop am 25./26. Januar 2002 am Institut für Osteuropäische Geschichte der Universität Wien’, Österreichische Osthefte, 43 (2001), pp. 425–28. Blobaum, Robert, ed., Antisemitism and Its Opponents in Modern Poland (Ithaca, N.Y.; London: Cornell University Press, 2005). Buchen, Tim, Antisemitismus in Galizien. Agitation, Gewalt und Politik gegen Juden in der Habsburgemonarchie um 1900 (Berlin: Metropol, 2012). Bussgang, Julian J., ‘The Progressive Synagogue in Lwów’, Polin, 11 (1998), pp. 127–53. Friedman, Filip, ‘Dzieje Żydów w Galicji (1772–1914)’, in Ignacy Schiper, ed., Żydzi w Polsce Odrodzonej. Działalność społeczna, gospodarcza, oświatowa i kulturalna (Warsaw: Nakład Wydawnictwa ‘Żydzi w Polsce Odrodzonej’, 1932). Friedman, Philip, Die galizischen Juden im Kampfe um ihre Gleichberechtigung (1848– 1868) (Frankfurt am Main; Łódź: J. Kauffmann, 1929). Galas, Michał, ed., Synagoga Tempel i środowisko krakowskich Żydów postępowych (Kraków; Budapest: Austeria, 2012). Gąsowski, Tomasz, Między gettem a światem. Dylematy ideowe Żydów galicyjskich na przełomie XIX i XX wieku. Rozprawa habilitacyjna (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 1996). Gelber, Nathan Michael, Toldot ha-tenu‘ah ha-tsiyonit be-Galitsyah, 1875–1918 (Jerusalem: Ha-sifriya ha-tsiyyonit, 1958). Gertner, Danek, Ich folge dem Weg von zuhause. Aus dem galizischen Stetl in die Maschinenbau-Industrie und ins buergerliche Wien. Eine Lebensgeschichte (Vienna: D. Gertne, 2004). Häusler, Wolfgang, Das galizische Judentum in der Habsburgermonarchie: im Lichte der zeitgenössischen Publizistik und Reiseliteratur von 1772–1848 (Vienna: Böhlau Auflage, 1979). Hoff, Jadwiga, ‘Nauczyciele i belfrzy żydowscy w Łańcucie na początku XX wieku (w świetle arkuszy spisowych)’, Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Pedagogicznej w Rzeszowie, 12 (1994), pp. 79–88.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

297

Holzer, Jerzy, ‘Zur Frage der Akkulturation der Juden in Galizien im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert’, Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 37.2 (1989), pp. 217–27. Hońdo, Leszek, Stary żydowski cmentarz w Krakowie. Historia cmentarza, analiza hebrajskich inskrypcji (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 1999). Jersch-Wenzel, Stefi, and François Guesnet, Gertrud Pickhan, Andreas Reinke, and Desanka Schwara, eds., Juden und Armut in Mittel- und Osteuropa (Cologne: Auftrag des Simon-Dubnow-Instituts für jüdische Geschichte und Kultur v. in Verbindung Böhlau Verlag, 2000). Kozińska-Witt, Hanna, Die Krakauer Jüdische Reformgemeinde 1864–1874 (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1999). Mahler, Raphael, Hasidism and the Jewish Enlightenment. Their Confrontation in Galicia and Poland in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1985). Małecki, Jan Marian, ‘Cracow Jews in the 19th Century: Leaving the Ghetto’, Acta Poloniae Historica, 76 (1997), pp. 85–97. Manekin, Rachel, ‘Ha-berit ha-ḥadashah: yehudim ortodoksim u-polanim katolim beGalitsyah, 1879–1883’, Tsiyon, 64.2 (1999), pp. 157–86. Manekin, Rachel, ‘Ha-ortodoksyah bi-Krakov ‘al sof ha-me’ah ha-20’, in Elchanan Reiner, ed., Krako-Kaz´imyez´-Krakov: meḥkarim be-toldot yehude Krakov (Tel Aviv: Yad Vashem, 2001), pp. 155–90. Manekin, Rachel, ‘Rules for Behavior of Jewish Teachers in the Schools of Galicia and Ludomeria’, Gal-Ed. On the History of the Jews in Poland, 20 (2006), pp. 113–24. McCagg, William O. Jr., A History of Habsburg Jews, 1670–1918 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989). Melamed, Vladimir, Evrei vo Lvove (XIII–pervaia polovina XX veka): sobytiia, obshchestvo, liudi (Lviv: Sovmestnoe Ukrainsko-amerikanskoe Predprijatie Tekop, 1994). Mendelsohn, Ezra, ‘Jewish Assimilation in Lvov. The Case of Wilhelm Feldman’, Slavic Review, 28 (1969), pp. 577–90. Michalewicz, Jerzy, Żydowskie okręgi metrykalne i żydowskie gminy wyznaniowe w Galicji doby autonomicznej (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 1995). Miller, Saul, and Leo Miller, Dobromil. Life in a Galician Shtetl, 1890–1907, vols. 1–2 (New York: Loewenthal Press, 1980). Pacholkiv, Svjatoslav, ‘Gminy żydowskie w Galicji w latach 1772–1848. Zagadnienia badawcze’, in Agnieszka Kawalec, Wacław Wierzbieniec, eds, Galicja 1772–1918, vol. 2: Problemy metodologiczne, stan i potrzeby badań (Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2011), pp. 9–27. Shanes, Joshua, Diaspora, Nationalism and Jewish Identity in Habsburg Galicia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). Sroka, Tomasz Łukasz, Żydzi w Krakowie. Studium o elicie miasta 1850–1918 (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Akademii Pedagogicznej, 2008).

298

Wierzbieniec

Stauter-Halsted, Keely, ‘Jews as Middleman Minorities in Rural Poland: Understanding the Galician Pogroms of 1898’, in Robert Blobaum, Antisemitism and Its Opponents in Modern Poland (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2005), pp. 39–59. Stillschweig, Kurt, ‘Nationalism and Autonomy among Eastern European Jewry: Origin and Historical Development up to 1939’, Historia Judaica, 6 (1944), pp. 27–68. Stöger, Michael Franz, Darstellung der gesetzlichen Verfassung der galizischen Judenschaft (Lemberg: Kuhn und Milikowski, 1833). Śliż, Małgorzata, Galicyjscy Żydzi na drodze do równouprawnienia 1848–1914. Aspekt prawny procesu emancypacji Żydów w Galicji (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 2006). Wierzbieniec, Wacław, ‘The Processes of Jewish Emancipation and Assimilation in the Multiethnic City of Lviv during the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century’, trans. by Iwona Dorota Kogut and Patrice Dabrowski, Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 24 (2000), pp. 223–50. Wynne, Suzan, The Galitzianers. The Jews of Galicia, 1772–1918 (Kensington, Md.: Wheatmark, 2006). Zineman, Jacob, ed., Almanach gmin żydowskich w Polsce, vol. 1 (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo ‘Nasze Życie’, 1939). Żbikowski, Andrzej, Żydzi krakowscy i ich gmina w latach 1869–1919 (Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 1994).



Sources

Unless stated otherwise, all sources in this chapter have been translated from Polish by Anna Podolska.



No. 1 Statute for the Jews of the Free City of Kraków and Its Surrounding District, 1 June 1817

Source: Anna Jakimyszyn, Żydzi krakowscy w dobie Rzeczypospolitej Krakowskiej. Status prawny, przeobrażenia gminy, system edukacyjny, Kraków-Budapeszt 2008, pp. 262–65. The Organizing Commission, having taken into account the present condition of the Jewish residents of Kraków and its surrounding district, and their civil relations with the Christian class of residents, and having heard from the Senate, resolves as follows:

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

299

Art. 1 With effect from the day on which this Act is published, the administrative authorities known as kahals shall be abolished and Jewish residents shall in future be subject to the supervision and authority of the mayors. Art. 2 Rabbis shall have exclusive authority in matters relating to religious ritual and worship. These rabbis shall be elected every three years by the residents of the Jewish community, in the presence of the administrative official appointed by the government for this purpose. In order for the election to be valid, it must be ratified by the Senate. Art. 3 Rabbis shall be required to maintain precise records in the Polish language of all the religious acts associated with birth, marriage, divorce, or death which take place in the community. They shall also supervise persons who teach their religion in private houses. Art. 4 After three years have elapsed, the same rabbis may be re-elected. In the event of the death of a rabbi before the end of his three-year term of office, the community shall appoint an interim replacement. Art. 5 If any Jew wishes, for his own convenience, to be granted permission to keep a (Torah) scroll at home for the purposes of prayer, he shall pay a fee of 15 złp to the Jewish hospital in his community. Art. 6 Rabbis shall not, under penalty of a fine of 1,000 złp and forfeiture of office, become officially involved in any way whatsoever in matters which fall within the jurisdiction of the administrative, judicial or police authorities. Art. 7 Rabbis shall be entitled to pass judgement in matters of a strictly religious nature. These judgements shall, however, be recorded in separate columns in the Polish and Jewish languages. To this end, the community shall at its own cost employ official Christian translators who are to translate these judgements into Polish before they are handed down, and who shall confirm by their signature the accuracy of their translation. The content as recorded in Polish shall be considered definitive. The translator shall also be required to keep the official records of the rabbi in good order, to submit

300

Wierzbieniec

to the Senate, through the mayors, a summary of the judgements given, and to inform the Senate of any abuses of power. Art. 8 The first rabbinical elections shall be held three months after the publication of this Act. Candidates for the post of rabbi must be able to prove to the administrative official presiding over the elections that they can read and write in Polish or German, and are familiar with basic arithmetic. Nine years hence, any Jew who wishes to be considered for the post of rabbi shall, in addition to proving that he can read and write in Polish and has a good knowledge of arithmetic, also be obliged to produce a certificate showing that he has completed secondary school education either locally or abroad. Art. 9 Before the beginning of every financial year, a list of annual taxes shall be drawn up by a committee consisting of a rabbi and two Jews who enjoy the confidence of the community and have been elected by its residents. The committee shall be presided over by a public official appointed by the Senate. These taxes shall be used to pay the interest due on kahal loans or to repay such loans, and also to pay the salaries of rabbis and Christian translators and to discharge other community expenses. When this list has been approved by the Senate, it shall be returned to the committee members in order that the burden of payments can be apportioned between all residents of the Jewish community in the prescribed manner. When this apportionment has been ratified by the Senate, it shall be submitted to the mayors with instructions that they levy these taxes, remit the monies accrued to the cash office, and discharge the community’s expenses. All taxes paid on the basis of this apportionment shall be received into the general government cash office. The cashier shall keep a separate register of these taxes and shall be remunerated for the additional work that this entails. Jews, through their two deputies, shall be consulted about the management of these funds, which are intended to cover the public responsibilities of the community. Thus it is not permissible for rabbis, under penalty of a fine of 1,000 złp and the forfeiture of their office, to draw up their own apportionments or to impose on the residents of the community any further levies or charges on any ground or pretext whatsoever. From 1 June 1817, the levy on alcoholic drink paid by Jews shall be lifted, unless the above mentioned committee determines that it is necessary to replace it with a similar levy, while repealing any exemptions which hitherto applied. Art. 10 If a rabbi or any other Jew should take it upon himself to require an oath or to issue a ban (ḥerem) of whatever nature against another Jew, he shall be liable to the criminal

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

301

penalty determined by law for this type of offence. A rabbi shall also be liable to criminal penalty if he discriminates against or calls upon others to discriminate against any Jew who conforms to the Christian class of residents in his dress, his habits, or his customs. Art. 11 Residents of the Mosaic faith shall be divided into two districts, that is: the district of Kazimierz near Kraków and the district of Chrzanów in the Free City area. Jews living in the suburbs of Kraków, namely communities X and XI, and those living in the communities of Kościelniki, Mogiła, Modlnica, Balice, Rybna, Czernichów, Liszki, Zwierzyniec, Pisary shall belong to the first, Kazimierz, district. Jews living in the town of Chrzanów, and in the incorporated village communities of Bobrek, Jaworzna, Kościelec, Młoszowa, Poręba, and Lipowiec i Krzeszowice shall belong to the second, Chrzanów, district. Art. 12 All communal buildings, such as synagogues, hospitals, and ritual baths, shall be under the direct supervision of the mayors of Christian communities, in accordance with the general orders issued by the Senate. The support of the sick, the frail, and the disabled in hospitals shall be entrusted to administrators of the Jewish faith, appointed by Jews and supervised by the mayors.



No. 2 Speech by Rabbi Hirsz Dawid Lewi, the Rabbi of Kazimierz, Given in the Stara Synagogue in Kraków on 3 April 1819, Calling for Compliance with the Civil Regulations Concerning Marriage

Source: Anna Jakimyszyn, Żydzi krakowscy w dobie Rzeczypospolitej Krakowskiej. Status prawny, przeobrażenia gminy, system edukacyjny, Kraków-Budapeszt 2008, pp. 84–85. Language: Polish, from Hebrew original. Look closely, dear listeners, at the laws passed by this most gracious and caring of governments, and you will see that the way is open for us to partake fully in the happiness with which everyone in this country has been blessed. […] What carelessness then has crept in among us of late that marriage vows—which, in order to be valid from a civil as well as a religious perspective, must be accompanied by certain legal, and not in the least bit arduous, formalities—are being taken in secrecy and seclusion, and with the specific and malicious intent of avoiding those formalities. Consider for yourselves, you thoughtless offenders against the laws of God and Man, how you debase this sacred act whose purpose it is to perpetuate mankind. You would surely

302

Wierzbieniec

seek to invest this act with greater sanctity if you had as your guide the true will of the Supreme Creator and not the basic instinct common to all animals. And what are the consequences of this recklessness of yours? If you have not understood them properly from the decision announced by the government, I had better explain them to you: you are excluded from any form of industry, for which you will not be granted licences. The law treats your relationships as null and void, so that any conditions or reservations under which these marriages were entered into are invalid. You yourselves lose the comfort of your offspring bearing your name and inheriting your assets. Thus you risk not only your own happiness but also that of your children, who will curse and condemn your transgression every time its consequences make themselves felt. […] Therefore renounce this impropriety, which is an affront not only to human law but to religious law as well.



No. 3 A Contribution from the Jewish38 Committee in the District of Kazimierz towards the Erection of a Statue of Tadeusz Kościuszko, 18 January 1821

Source: Majer Bałaban, Historia Żydów w Krakowie i na Kazimierzu, vol. 2: 1656–1868 Kraków 1936, p. 734. The Ruling Senate of the Free, Independent, and strictly Neutral City of Kraków and its territory, acceding to the representations of the Jewish Committee in the District of Kazimierz dated 8 January 1831, hereby authorizes the main cash office to transfer the sum of one hundred Polish złoty which has been donated by that committee on behalf of the Jewish Community towards the intended erection of a statue of Tadeusz Kościuszko, from the taxation fund of the Jewish Community in the District of Kazimierz to the fund for contributions towards the erection of that statue. The Department of Internal Affairs, the accounting office, and the committee responsible for the erection of the statue shall be duly notified.

38

The Polish term translated in this document as ‘Jewish’ is starozakonny, which means ‘of the Old Covenant’.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



303

No. 4 Decree of the Royal Chancellery Concerning Private Prayer (Minyan) at Which the Torah Is Displayed, 17 July 1823

Source: Jan Rudolf Kasparek (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwie Galicji i Lodomerii, z Wielkim Księstwem Krakowskim obowiązujących, vol. 5, Lwów 1885, pp. 3626–27. 1.

2. 3.

4.

39 40

Assemblies for the purpose of private prayer (minyan) at which the Torah is displayed shall be prohibited and shall be a punishable offence unless prior permission has been obtained from the county authorities.39 Those householders who conduct such private observance or who participate in it shall be punished with a fine or detention according to the circumstances. The circumstances which should be taken into account are: a. the number of years during which the minyan was held; b. the amount of money which the householder in whose premises the minyan was held and the participants hoped to gain by not seeking permission from the authorities; c. whether the situation of the person holding the minyan is such that permission from the authorities would not have been refused, had it been sought. In general, permission to hold a minyan may only be granted on the same conditions as those which apply when Christians are permitted to maintain a private chapel. Thus, such permission should only be granted where: a) the householder applying for permission and the named participants are known to be law-abiding persons and are not suspected of religious fanaticism; b) age, ill-health, or distance from their place of residence do not allow them to attend the synagogue.40

Such permission was subject to a fee of 20 złr under the terms of the directive dated 15 May 1834. A directive dated 9 February 1836 stated that there was no requirement for Jews to obtain permission to hold private religious services if the Torah was not displayed. However, in a directive dated 13 December 1844, it was declared that the granting of permission to hold a minyan was justified in the countryside, where Jews lived some distance away from a synagogue, but there was less need for minyans to be held in towns where their houses were within reach of a synagogue.

304

Wierzbieniec

No. 5 Provincial Directive Concerning the Community Tax (Local Tax) Designated for the Maintenance of Individual Galician Jewish Communities, 22 July 1833

Source: Jerzy Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, pp. 255–56 and idem, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 5, Lwów 1912, pp. 266–68. 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Fourteen days before the end of every year, the elders of every Jewish community, together with all members of the community board are required to prepare three copies of a financial estimate of specific local needs […] On the basis of this estimate, the elders of the community shall, with the assistance of members of the board, apportion the local taxes between individual families, taking into account their financial position, and shall submit to the authorities a signed copy of the apportionment thus compiled. The apportionment shall, in a separate section, also state the source of income and place of residence of the father of every family. It shall be submitted in three copies, with the estimate attached as corroboration. The authorities shall compare the apportionment with the approved estimate and, when assessing the apportionment, shall consider whether the provisions of the patent of 7 May 1789 (paragraph 22) have been observed when allocating the payments and whether any particular contributor has been overburdened. If no obstacles arise, they shall then approve the apportionment and shall retain one copy for their own use and shall return the other two copies, duly endorsed, to the elders of the Jewish community. The elders of the community shall publicly read out the returned estimate and the approved apportionment in the synagogue three times and bring them to general notice. They shall post one copy of the estimate and the apportionment in the synagogue for the information of all. The second copy, on which the rabbi or the beadle shall confirm that the announcement and the posting have duly taken place, shall be annexed to the accounts. Any member of the community who feels that the payment required of him is unjust may lodge a complaint against the apportionment with the authorities within fourteen days of its publication and the authorities will investigate his complaint […] On the basis of the apportionment, the elders of the community shall collect local payments quarterly in advance from every person required to make them, and shall provide appropriate receipts. At the same time, they shall strike out the relevant sum on the apportionment schedule and indicate the date on which payment was made. At the end of every quarter, the elders of the community shall submit to the authorities a list of those who are in arrears and the authorities shall sanction the enforceable collection of those arrears. It shall be the fault

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

305

of the elders of the community if by reason of their own negligence such payments are irrecoverable […]



No. 6 The Bequest of Jakub Glanzer for the Maintenance of a Prayer House in Lwów, 27 January 1843, with Supplementary Instructions from 20 December 1853

Source: Janina Badecka-Malkowa, Fundacje lwowskie. Szkic historyczny fundacyj i funduszów zarządzanych przez Gminę miasta Lwowa, Lwów, Komisja Rewizyjna Gminy Miasta Lwowa, 1939, p. 142. By bequest dated 27 January 1843 and supplementary instruction dated 20 December 1853, Jakub Glanzer allocated part of his house at No. 87 3/4 for the establishment and maintenance in perpetuity of a prayer house. At the same time, he appointed three administrators for that synagogue, with the right to co-opt further administrators in the event of the death of one of those appointed. Furthermore, the benefactor bequeathed the sum of 1,000 złr […] on condition that the income from the capital be used to improve the synagogue’s furnishings […] The annual income from this fund shall be paid to the synagogue’s administrators.



No. 7 The Battle to Abolish the Tax on Kosher Meat in Kraków, 19 May 1848

Source: Jutrzenka (No. 44, 20 May 1848] quoted after Efraim Kupfer, Adam Rutkowski, ‘Ber Meisels i jego udział w walkach wyzwoleńczych narodu polskiego (1846, 1848, 1863–1864)’, Warszawa, Żydowski Instytut Historyczny,1953, p. 138. Kraków, 19 May. The popular demonstrations which are now common in larger cities and have become a part of normal life in the Austrian capital have also at last reached us. […] Now that nations feel powerful and, having overthrown a loathsome government, are judged by the world to represent the will of God, Israel too boldly lifts its head and calls for its dignity to be restored and respected. Yesterday, a crowd of a thousand people gathered before the offices of the Jewish Committee41 as it was holding its meeting and demanded the abolition of the odious charge on kosher meat which, apart from being an onerous and singularly shameful tax, also adds poison to almost every morsel of meat eaten by Jews. From the assembled multitude, ten deputies were chosen and, at the committee members’ demand, they signed an undertaking on behalf of all the residents of Kazimierz to accept and take on an alternative tax for the maintenance of the hospital, the elementary school, the clergy, and committee officials, stipulating,

41

The term used here is Komitet Starozakonny. See fn 38.

306

Wierzbieniec

however, that this tax should not exceed 40,000 złp and that six people of all classes should be appointed to apportion it. The committee, having recommended the declaration thus drafted to its higher authorities, resolved that the charge on kosher meat be abolished and immediately dispatched a messenger to make the abolition public. And so the first demonstration in Kazimierz passed peacefully and this gives friends of the Israelites the pleasing conviction that a people which, faced with the greatest misfortune and misery, has not foundered and indeed has begun to feel the yoke of oppression, will slowly succeed in crushing the bonds of discrimination with which its persecutors have shackled it and will become fully worthy of the brotherhood of Christians and of that glorious future which the equity of nations has in store for it.



No. 8 Minutes Concerning the Establishment of a Jewish Cemetery in Bochnia, Recorded at the Local Municipal Council, 18 November 1872

Source: Archiwum Narodowe w Krakowie Oddział w Bochni, Akta Miasta Bochnia, call number 30/1/103, pp. 1–2. The subject of these minutes is the identification and designation of an appropriate site for a cemetery for Israelites. Commission members present: on behalf of the Imperial and Royal Starosta’s Office, Mr Krzystow Kappel; the Imperial and Royal Commissioner Mr Teofil Stopa; the Imperial and Royal municipal physician Konstanty Jaworski, and Antoni Christ. This commission visited the site suggested by the representatives of the Jewish kahal, a site owned by Mr Lebel Herstein, located on Krzęczków in Bochnia and measuring 1½ morgen. After a detailed examination of the site, both from the point of view of its location and from the point of view of sanitation, the commission judged it to be thoroughly suited for that purpose and designated the site as a Jewish cemetery with the proviso that until such time as the Jewish community is able to erect a boundary wall around the entire area of the cemetery, it is to build a mound and approach it from the other end of the site, that is from the road leading to the cholera cemetery. In view of the fact that the land is situated the stipulated distance away from the town and that its designation as a cemetery for Israelites poses no danger to the town, therefore those signing on behalf of the municipality can have no objections to the position […]

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



307

No. 9 Circular Issued by the Viceroyalty of Galicia Concerning the Operation of Ḥeders in Jewish Communities, 31 August 1874

Source: Jerzy Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, pp. 261–62 and idem, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 5, Lwów 1912, p. 272–73. The state is the supreme supervisory authority in respect of confessional schools and thus in respect of schools of this category. In exercising its right in this regard and in order to repair the parlous state in which these schools currently find themselves, the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Education has issued the following resolutions: a) New Talmud schools may henceforth only be established with the consent of state authorities; b) Applicants for a licence, i.e. anyone who wishes to establish, maintain, or teach children in such a school shall produce a certificate of aptitude issued by the relevant faith community; c) The state authorities shall keep detailed records in respect of all schools of this kind. It shall be the responsibility of starostas’ offices to maintain close supervision over these schools, to inspect them regularly, and to satisfy themselves as to their condition. In the event that any abuses are noted, or if the arrangements at these schools are having a detrimental effect on health, moral standards, and so on, they shall issue such orders as are necessary to eliminate that harm.42



No. 10 Statute of the Israelite Community in Przemyśl—Selected Excerpts—31 December 1874

Source: Archiwum Państwowe w Przemyślu, Teki Leopolda Hausera, sygn. 14, p. 1–30. Section 1

42

These resolutions were the subject of several reminders: circulars were issued on 19 January 1878 and 12 July 1880 and starostas’ offices were enjoined to submit periodic reports to the Viceroyalty on the state of heders, specifying a) how many heders had been operating with official permission in the previous year; b) how many had closed; c) the number of heders which, as well as teaching the Talmud, also taught subjects according to the public school curriculum. The owners of heders were not allowed to include subjects which formed part of the normal school curriculum, i.e. reading and writing in Polish or German, and arithmetic, into their teaching programme unless they had obtained special permission from the National School Council to run a private school.

308

Wierzbieniec

The Israelite Community in Przemyśl constitutes a religious association and not a political union. […] Section 5 Members of the Israelite Community have the following rights: a) The right for themselves, their wives, widows, and children to participate in all religious observances, to utilize all educational establishments, hospitals, and other communal charitable establishments and all the establishments in the Israelite community which have similar objectives, in accordance with existing principles and statutory provisions. b) In the case of men only, the personal right to vote in and stand for elections to the community board. c) The right to observe public meetings of the Israelite Community Board. This right does not apply to women. d) At the end of every year, the right to receive a review (report), which is to be issued in printed form, concerning the administration of the community. Members of the Israelite Community have the following duties: To comply with orders issued by the Israelite Community Board in accordance 1. with its statutory jurisdiction. 2. To share in the community’s financial obligations. 3. To assume and conscientiously discharge honorary functions in the community for the term of their appointment. Section 6 Income from community assets, and the proceeds of bequests, fees in respect of ritual slaughter, and charitable gifts shall be used to meet the needs of the community. In the event that this income is insufficient to cover communal needs, individual members of the community, whether male or female and whether or not they are able to pay, shall be required to make direct monetary contributions, unless their indigence is proven. […] Section 10 The community shall exercise its representative duties and the management of its affairs solely and independently through its elected bodies. These bodies are: a) The community board b) The executive committee.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

309

All posts on the community board and executive committee are honorary and unpaid. […] Section 12 The community board shall consist of twenty-four members elected from the faith community. Six deputies shall be elected to replace board members who resign or who are unable to participate in board meetings. Board members shall serve for a period of three years and at the end of their term of office may stand for re-election. […] Section 15 The community board shall elect from among its number a president and deputy president. The president or deputy president shall head the board and the executive committee and shall chair their meetings. Section 16 After the election of the president and his deputy, the remaining members of the board shall be divided into sections, each of which shall have a chairperson. Chairs and their deputies shall be elected by the board from among the members of the section in question. Section 17 The president, his deputy, and the section chairs shall constitute the community executive committee and shall be elected for a one-year term of office, after which they may stand for re-election. […] Section 21 Meetings of the community board shall be held in public, albeit only male members of the public shall be admitted. However, the public may be excluded at the motion of the chair or three board members. The public may not be excluded from meetings at which the community budget is debated. […] Section 26 The community board shall be divided into at least three sections, namely: a) a religious section. This section shall be responsible for regulating the clergy; worship; the internal administration of the synagogue and other prayer houses belonging to the community; […] seeing to the observance of the religious rites associated with the burial of the dead and management of the cemetery. b) A charity and education section. This section shall be responsible for the care of the poor and the sick; the distribution of alms; the administration of the hospital

310

c)

Wierzbieniec and the poor fund; the supervision of teaching in the relevant educational establishments; and overseeing the teaching of religion. An administrative and financial section. This section shall be responsible for book-keeping and the settlement of accounts; the communal funds; the administration of mandatory taxes and dues associated with ritual slaughter; the conduct of all the community’s financial and accounting business; setting the annual budget; management of ritual baths, the building or appointing of the community’s real property. The number of members in each section shall be determined by means of a resolution of the community board. […]

Section 38 The executive committee shall be responsible for: The preparation of agendas for board meetings and the implementation of the 1. decisions reached. 2. Management of communal establishments and foundations and the communal assets, in accordance with the resolutions of the board and existing regulations. 3. Responsibility for everyday business and the supervision and instruction of appointed bodies and officials. […] Section 46 The president shall be responsible for: Chairing meetings of the community board and executive committee. 1. 2. Calling meetings of the board and executive committee, setting agendas, and chairing their deliberations 3. Managing communal offices. […] Section 48 The following shall be regarded as paid community officials: all officials and administrators in the community office, rabbis, slaughterers, cantors (Vorbeter), teachers of religion, and in general members of those communal bodies set up by the community board. Their rights and responsibilities shall derive from the terms of their contracts or from the orders and instructions they receive. […] Section 51 All communal revenue, such as mandatory charges, the income from all establishments and endowments, fees for the use of specific communal establishments or for the ritual activities conducted by the communal bodies set up for that purpose, e.g. the fees for tending the sick, burying the dead, erecting headstones, and for ritual slaughter, as well as voluntary gifts, charitable donations, and other income of any

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

311

description deriving from community assets shall be received into communal funds. […] Endowments and bequests shall only be used for the purposes set out in their founding documents. […] Section 70 Before elections take place, the executive committee shall draw up a list of community members who are eligible to vote. This list shall comprise eligible voters who pay communal taxes and they shall be listed in the order of the amount of tax they pay, starting with the highest amount. […] Section 71 On the basis of this list of voters, three electoral circles shall be formed. The first of these shall consist of the incumbent rabbi and those voters who, according to the order in which they appear on the list, pay the first third of the total sum of taxes; those who pay the second third shall form the second circle; finally, those who pay the last third shall form the third circle. […] Section 73 Every electoral circle, regardless of the number of voting members it comprises, shall elect eight community councillors and two deputies. […] Section 75 No later than eight days before the start of elections, which shall always be held in the month of November of the year in which the electoral term ends, the executive committee shall, through public announcements and notices posted in prayer houses, set out where, on what date, and at what time each electoral circle shall convene, and the number of councillors and deputies to be elected by each circle. The executive committee shall relay this information to the county authorities. The county authorities shall ensure that the necessary preparations for the elections are undertaken at the proper time and that the new communal governing body is able to commence its duties as soon as the electoral term ends. […]

312

Wierzbieniec

No. 11 Circular Issued by the Viceroyalty of Galicia Concerning the Taxes Raised by Jewish Communities on Kosher Meat, 10 February 1876

Source: J. Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, p. 257 and idem, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 5, Lwów 1912, pp. 268–69. In accordance with the order of the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Education dated 19 January 1876, starostas’ offices shall be responsible in the first instance for deciding whether to grant permission for Israelite faith communities to levy a supplementary charge on kosher meat to be used for general religious purposes, provided that these surcharges do not exceed 50 per cent of the government consumption taxes on meat and the slaughter of cattle. However, should the charges imposed exceed the amount stated above or should these supplements be levied for specific purposes within the Israelite faith community, then the decision in this regard shall be made by the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Education or by the Ministry of Internal Affairs in consultation with the Treasury. Thus the imposition of any charges on comestible goods without leave of the appropriate authorities, or the collection of any fees for the slaughter of cattle for the purposes of the Israelite faith community shall be considered illegal, and such abuses shall be countered with the utmost severity.43

43

Permission to levy a surcharge on the consumption tax for religious purposes could only be granted in exceptional circumstances, e.g. if there were a shortfall in income from real property or other assets or if local taxes proved insufficient.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



313

No. 12 Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Issued in Consultation with the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Education Concerning the Maintenance of Jewish Birth, Marriage, and Death Registers and the Establishment in Galicia of Jewish Public Registry Districts Covering Individual Jewish Communities, Effective from 1 January 1877

Source: J.R. Kasparek (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwie Galicji i Lodomerii, z Wielkim Księstwem Krakowskim obowiązujących, vol. 5, Lwów 1885, pp. 3626–3627; J. Piwocki J. (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 2, Lwów 1899, pp. 155–66. Section 1 Registers of the births, marriages, and deaths of Israelites in Galicia shall be maintained in each district established for that purpose by a designated official who shall swear an oath of office. Section 2 […] Each district […] shall comprise a single faith community. It shall, however, be permissible in exceptional circumstances to combine several faith communities located in the same county into one public registry district, and to divide a larger faith community into several districts. […] Section 3 […] Registrars should have an excellent command of local languages and should have an occupation which will not require frequent absences from their place of residence. Section 4 Registrars shall be appointed by the Imperial and Royal starosta or by the president of Lwów or Kraków. […] In the same manner and by the same procedure, a deputy shall be appointed in every registry district to stand in for the registrar when he is prevented from performing his duties or, in the event that the post is vacant, until such time as it is filled. Section 5 The person appointed as registrar, or his deputy, shall swear on oath that he ‘is willing to and shall record in the registers with which he has been entrusted all the births, marriages, and deaths which take place in his district and of which he has been notified, strictly in accordance with legal requirements and specifically according to the

314

Wierzbieniec

instructions published with this order; that he will issue certificates of birth, marriage, and death in strict conformity with these registers; and finally that he will endeavour to preserve the security of the registers and all associated documents’. […] Section 6 The county authorities shall supervise the keeping of the registers […]44 Section 7 Every birth or death which is to be recorded in the Israelite public register shall be notified to the registrar by the person responsible for giving notice thereof within 8 days. […] The requisite notification must also be made when a child is stillborn. […] Section 11 Religious leaders (rabbis or synagogue trustees) shall record every marriage in the marriage register kept by them in the manner prescribed by law. […] If the religious leader officiating at the wedding is not the registrar for the district in which the marriage took place, then he shall provide the registrar with a copy of the relevant entry within eight days. […] Section 12 Persons who perform the circumcision of boys or who bless girls, and the superintendents of cemeteries (burial grounds) shall submit to the district registrars monthly reports of the circumcisions, naming ceremonies, and funerals held. Such reports should be submitted by the 15th day of each month in respect of the preceding month. District registrars shall compare these reports with their public registers and shall immediately inform the county authorities of any failure to give notice in the requisite manner of a birth, marriage, or death. Section 13 The position of registrar is a public office. The county authorities shall have disciplinary jurisdiction over the registrar.

44

According to the circular issued by the Viceroyalty on 9 September 1882, the starosta was to arrange for the Israelite public registers to be inspected at least once every six months and to rectify any inaccuracies identified in the course of such inspection.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



315

No. 13 The Statute of the Israelite Community in Rzeszów—Selected Excerpts—1 November 1880

Source: Archiwum Państwowe w Rzeszowie, Państwowe Biuro Notarialne, call no. 169, pp. 1–33. Section 1 General The Israelite Community in Rzeszów constitutes a religious association and not a political union. […] Section 12 The composition of the community board The community board shall consist of 15 members elected by the community. Five deputies shall be elected to replace board members who are absent or prevented from fulfilling their duties. Board members shall serve for a period of 3 years and at the end of their term of office, board members and deputies may stand for re-election. […] Section 14 Executive Committee The community board shall elect five executive officers from among its number to serve for the duration of its term of office. One of those five shall be appointed president of the community board and the executive committee, and a second shall be appointed deputy president. All five shall constitute the executive committee of the community and must reside permanently in the city of Rzeszów. […] Section 46 Budget and Taxation The budget of the community shall be ratified by a resolution of its representatives. It shall be set a year in advance and shall be ratified by a resolution of the community board no later than one month before the end of the year. The reporting year shall commence on 1 January and end on 31 December. […] The draft budget shall be publicized by posting the appropriate announcements issued by the executive committee in all prayer houses. […] Section 47 The Use of Revenue

316

Wierzbieniec

In order to meet the needs of the community, use should be made first and foremost of the proceeds of its assets and ordinary revenue such as: direct taxes, income from buildings, foundations, and establishments belonging to the community, charges for ritual activities conducted by the communal bodies set up for that purpose, e.g. charges for tending the sick, burying the dead, erecting headstones, slaughtering fees, etc., as well as voluntary charitable gifts. Section 48 Assessed Contributions In the event that the expenses set out in the annual budget cannot be met from income from the sources detailed in the preceding sections, all members of the community, with the exception of the inveterately poor, shall be required to make an assessed contribution and in order to do so shall be obliged to provide a reliable statement of their income. If any doubt arises concerning the information submitted, or if no information is submitted, an apportionment shall be drawn up which shall include all those referred to above from whom a contribution is required. These contributions shall be mandatory. The drafting of such a list of apportioned payments shall follow a resolution of the community board, which shall require the presence of at least 12 board members and a two-thirds majority of votes cast. […] Section 50 Notification On the basis of the tax lists issued by the assessment commission, the executive committee of the community shall draw up and deliver to every tax payer a notice setting out the annual tax payable by him. Section 51 Taxes shall be collected quarterly in advance and shall be enforceable 14 days after they become due. Section 52 Appeals Against Tax Assessments An appeal in writing to the community board against the assessed level of tax may be submitted to the executive committee within 8 days. An appeal against the decision of the community board may be lodged within 14 days with the Imperial and Royal county starosta’s office. In such circumstances, the county authority shall give its ruling in the prescribed course of proceedings. […]

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

317

Section 57 The Right to Vote in Elections All members of the community shall have the right to vote, subject to the following conditions: 1. That they have Austrian citizenship and have been permanently resident in the community for 2 years. The incumbent rabbi and members of the community who have academic degrees shall be entitled to vote after residing in the community for 6 months. 2. That they have an independent occupation such that they are able to support themselves, or that they own real estate or an industrial establishment located within the bounds of the community; 3. That they have one of the following attributes: a) an academic degree; b) an independent vocation, whether spiritual, scholarly, or artistic; c) the status and rank of an officer of the regular army or a retired Imperial and Royal officer resident in Rzeszów; d) the rank and status of a state, national, or community official whether working or retired; e) the payment of direct taxes to the community of at least 3 złr w.a. [Austrian currency] a year, or if no such tax is levied, payment of a voluntary contribution for the three years preceding the election of at least 3 złr a year, or finally payment of the direct state tax in the sum of at least 3 złr a year excluding surcharges. Electoral capacity based on the ownership of real property shall only give rise to a single vote regardless of the number of owners. When there are several owners, they shall exercise their right to vote through a duly authorized representative selected from their number, provided that the representative has personal capacity to vote. The electoral rights of those who lack capacity shall be exercised by their legal representatives; those of a married woman living in conjugal union by her husband; those of other women by a representative authorized for that purpose. In every other case, electoral rights may only be exercised in person. […] Section 59 Temporary Exclusions The right to vote shall be temporarily withdrawn from those who have failed to pay their taxes to the community for the previous year.

318

Wierzbieniec

However, anyone who, within the period during which complaints may be lodged, proves to the complaints commission that he has paid his arrears may require that his name be included on the electoral register. Section 60 The Right to Stand for Election With the exception of women and those who lack capacity, every member of the community has the right to stand for election to the community board and executive committee provided that his entitlement to vote is based on his personal attributes; that he is over thirty years of age; and that he is able to read and write fluently in one of the local languages. Persons who are related to each other up to and including the second degree, or are related by marriage, may not be elected to the community board at the same time. If this situation should occur, the relative or person related by marriage who received fewer votes shall withdraw. If the same number of votes was received by each, then the one who is to withdraw shall be determined by lot. […] Section 74 Qualification for the Post of Rabbi Any candidate for the post of rabbi must have: a) Austrian citizenship; b) an unblemished record of conduct; c) the legally required standard of education. Section 75 Applications If the post of rabbi should for any reason become vacant, the executive committee shall forthwith invite applications from candidates for the post. At the end of the application period, the names of all the applicants shall be made known to community members by means of notices posted at prayer houses. […] Section 78 Number of votes The person who secures the majority of votes in the election shall be deemed to have been elected as rabbi. Section 79 Assumption of office The rabbi shall take his oath at a public meeting of the community board, following which he shall be admitted to office. […]

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



319

No. 14 Introducing the Use of Polish in the Jewish Community in Lwów, 16 June 1881

Source: Ojczyzna 5 (16 June 1881), p. 2.

The Polish language is to some extent already in use in the Jewish community in Lwów. All business between the community and the local and autonomous authorities has been conducted exclusively in Polish for more than a decade; the Israelite community issues certificates either in Polish or in German, as requested; and for the last year all certifications of penury have been drawn up in Polish. For Polish to be fully established in the Israelite community, it would have to be the sole language used at board meetings, for minutes and for contact between the various parties. That is frustrated, however, by the fact that some board members know neither German, with which they are at least somewhat more familiar, nor Polish. They would not therefore be able to take part in meetings, nor would they be able to understand minutes. […] Although most members of this community do not understand Polish, nonetheless all notices, except during elections, are issued by the community board in Polish with a translation into the Jewish [Yiddish] language using Hebrew lettering. Since 1877, all the Israelite public registers in Lwów have been kept exclusively in Polish, although the use of German is also clearly acceptable.



No. 15 Copy of the Proclamation of Stefan Batory Dated 05/07/1576 Forbidding, under Penalty of Death, Allegations that Jews Were Responsible for Killing Christian Children, Distributed by the Jewish Community of Lwów to Galician Communities. Polish Version, Autumn 1882

Source: Marcin Soboń, Polacy wobec Żydów w Galicji doby autonomicznej w latach 1868– 1914, (Kraków, Wydawnictwo Verso 2011), pp. 315–16. We, Stephan, by the grace of God King of Poland, […] announce to all concerned and to everyone who ought or has reason to know: […] in accordance with our own settled belief and heeding the Council of our Senators, we proclaim that henceforth no-one shall wrongfully accuse the Jews resident in our Kingdom and lands of stealing and killing Christian children or of trading the Blessed Sacrament, since they are not guilty of either of these, nor shall anyone traduce them in respect of such things or dare to bring a complaint about them before a judge or any other official; for in fact every charge of this sort against them has proved to be untrue and they did not need blood nor did they seek to obtain the Blessed Sacrament. Thus, since this is the cause of great unrest, we desire anyone who

320

Wierzbieniec

ventures to do so, regardless of his estate, to be severely punished. Therefore: whosoever imputes such things to Jews shall be punished as a slanderer, while anyone who lays a complaint before a judge and accuses a Jew of a capital offence shall be punished poena talionis; in other words, he will pay with his head. This our decision we bring to the notice of all concerned and each individually who ought to know of it. […]



No. 16 Declaration by Jakub Schlager and Izrael Silber Made at the County Starosta’s Office in Rzeszów Concerning the Work of the Rzesów Ḥevra Kadisha Association Which They Chaired, 26 November 1883

Source: Archiwum Państwowe w Rzeszowie, Akta miasta Rzeszowa, call no. 2015, p. 25.

Jakub Schlager and Izrael Silber, summoned to the starosta’s office, state as follows: The Israelite burial fraternity ‘Ḥevra Kadisha’ has existed in Rzeszów for a long time. It deals with funerary arrangements—namely the maintenance of the cemetery and the burial of the remains of deceased Israelites. Formerly this fraternity operated autonomously and independently of the Israelite community board, and collected certain funeral charges from the relatives of the deceased which were used to maintain the cemetery, to pay the sexton, and for similar expenses. However, for the last three years, that is since the statute of the Rzeszów Israelite Community was ratified, this burial fraternity—of which we are the chairs—does not collect any funerary charges, nor does it undertake any burial functions without leave of the chair of the Israelite community, […] and the fraternity only becomes involved in the burial of the remains of deceased Israelites when it receives express permission to do so from the community board. We have no account books; we merely keep records of deceased Israelites which, at the request of the board of the Israelite community, we can at any time deliver to the community offices.



No. 17 Circular Issued by the Viceroyalty of Galicia Ordering that Deceased Jews Be Buried in Coffins, 22 June 1884

Source: J. Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 4, Lwów 1912, p. 730. It is imperative that the bodies of deceased Israelites be carried or transported from the place of death to the local cemetery in coffins which are tightly sealed, regardless of the remoteness of the cemetery, the type of illness which caused the death, and whether or not any epidemic is prevalent in the area. Any breach of this regulation shall be punished. […]

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



321

No. 18 By-laws of the Burial Society (Ḥevra Kadisha) of Rzeszów, 1 September 1886

Source: Archiwum Państwowe w Rzeszowie, Akta miasta Rzeszowa, call no. 2015, pp. 37–38. […] Article 3: Rights of members Each member has the right: a) to attend general meetings and vote; b) to take part in committee elections following the provisions cited below, and to be elected as a committee member; c) to propose motions in matters of the association. Each member has the right to give up membership with a three-months notice, in which case he will lose all rights [and] is under no further obligation as a member. §. 4. Duties of members Members of the association are obliged: a) to pay the established admission and monthly membership fees; b) to accurately fulfil the requests of the executive committee to ritually wash, dress, and escort corpses; c) to visit sick co-religionists, as requested by the executive committee. A member who does not fulfil his obligations under b) has to pay a fine of 10 kreuzer; if he is prompted on three occasions, and does not comply, this member can be excluded from the association. A member who does not fulfil his obligations under c) has to pay a fine of 25–50 kreuzer; if he is prompted on three occasions, and does not comply, the member can be excluded from the association. A member can be excluded from the association by ruling of the executive committee if he is found unworthy of membership because of failings in moral conduct, or if his actions or inactions run counter to the objectives of the association, […] and is not complying with the Articles of the association. A member can only be excluded by a ruling supported by two-thirds of the members of the executive committee and a simple majority of those present; the member does not have a right to appeal such a ruling. […] Translated from German by François Guesnet

322

Wierzbieniec

No. 19 The Establishment of the Israelite Poor Fund in Lwów, 17 October 1888

Source: Janina Badecka-Malkowa, Fundacje lwowskie. Szkic historyczny fundacyj i funduszów zarządzanych przez Gminę miasta Lwowa, Lwów (Komisja Rewizyjna Gminy Miasta Lwowa, 1939), pp. 140–41. In accordance with the provisions of the statute of the Israelite Poor Fund in Lwów, ratified by the Viceroyalty on 17/10/1888, the purpose of this charitable foundation is to support impoverished Israelites of the Lwów community who are in need of assistance. Its assets consist of endowment funds, current funds, and special funds. The foundation is administered by a special commission consisting of nine members presided over by the incumbent chair of the Israelite Community or his deputy. The involvement of the Lwów municipal authorities in the affairs of this foundation shall be restricted to the right, reserved in the founding statute, to appoint to the managing commission two delegates from the Lwów City Council and one delegate from the Lwów municipal authorities and also to keep the foundation’s endowment fund on deposit at the municipal revenue office. This endowment fund shall be listed in the registry of foundations and funds as the Endowment Fund for Impoverished Jews. […]



No. 20 Circular Issued by the Galician Viceroyalty Regulating the Grant of Licences for New Heders and the Operation of Existing Heders, 11 June 1889

Source: J. Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, pp. 262–64 and idem, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 5, Lwów 1912, pp. 274–76. 1.

A licence for a heder may only be granted if a medical officer declares in writing that the premises intended for use as the heder meet the appropriate standards of sanitation and hygiene. The most important of these standards are that: a) The premises intended for use as a heder should be situated in a building which is hygienic and habitable in terms of its location and its facilities. Specifically, the building shall be located in a salubrious environment, with ready access to fresh air, it shall be dry, adequately lit, and have a clean courtyard. […] b) The schoolroom may only be used for educational purposes and thus may not at the same time be used as living or sleeping quarters. Use of the premises for cooking or laundry is strictly forbidden and the building must not abut any industrial workshop or establishment which might have a detrimental effect on human health. The walls and floors of the

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

2.



323

schoolroom must be dry. It must have an indoor stove, adequate lighting, and high, vented windows which do not face north and which admit light from the left-hand side. The walls are to be freshly whitewashed or painted in a uniform colour. c) The size of the schoolroom must be appropriate for the number of pupils. There shall be at least 0.5m2 of space per pupil and the volume of air per pupil shall not be less than 4m3. d) It is a fundamental requirement that the schoolroom be kept clean and tidy and that it is furnished in a manner appropriate to its purpose. It must therefore contain only equipment which is necessary for school use. […] e) Outside lavatories should be conveniently accessible, suitable for use by small children, and should have proper sewerage. They should be kept clean and be periodically disinfected. The local authorities shall, through a designated medical officer, arrange for the inspection of existing heders, examine the state of each one, point out any defects identified, and require that they be remedied within a specified period of time. Any heder which has not complied with these requirements within the period specified shall without exception be closed down. […]45

No. 21 An Act Concerning the External Legal Relations of the Israelite Religious Community, 21 March 1890

Source: J. Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, pp. 235–42 and idem, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 5, Lwów 1912, pp. 251–59; Michał Koczyński (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwach Galicji i Lodomerii, tudzież W. Ks. Krakowskiem obowiązujących, a w czasokresie 1889–1899 wydanych, t. I, Kraków 1897, pp. 360–70. With the consent of both chambers of the state assembly, the following resolutions concerning the external legal relations of the Israelite religious community are published: Section 1 The community shall constitute the basis for the external legal relations of the Israelite religious association. […] 45

The regulations set out in the circular issued by the Galician Viceroyalty dated 11 June 1889 were reiterated in the Circular of the Galician Viceroyalty of 9 July 1897. In particular, starostas were reminded of the need to furnish regional school councils with lists of heders which, in addition to providing religious education and instruction in the Talmud, also taught other state school subjects, since such heders, which were in essence private schools, required authorization and supervision by the educational authorities.

324

Wierzbieniec

Section 3 Community districts shall be established within three years of the publication of this Act. […] Section 9 A board shall be appointed to manage the business of the community and to represent the community in its external relations. The further organization of the community (religious council, departments, etc.) shall be determined by statute. […] Section 10 Only Austrian citizens whose moral and civic conduct is beyond reproach may be appointed as rabbis. Section 11 Each community shall have at least one rabbi, who should be permanently resident within the bounds of the community. In exceptional circumstances, and with leave of the Minister of Religious Denominations, a rabbi may be appointed to serve two or more communities jointly. Such a rabbi shall be based at a designated permanent location. In addition to the attributes in section 10, the holder of the office of rabbi must be able to demonstrate that he has completed his general education. […] Section 19 Israelite religious dues and in particular duties and charges may only be imposed in the manner and to the extent established by statute. […] Section 25 Obstruction of the free profession of religious belief, i.e. in relation to observance, is prohibited. In accordance with section 1 above, every community shall be required to maintain a synagogue or, depending on the size of the community, several synagogues. When establishing and maintaining synagogues, regard shall be had insofar as possible to the variety of forms of observance practiced in the community. The establishment and existence of private synagogues and the organization of congregations for religious or ritual observance shall be contingent on the consent of the community and shall be subject to its supervision. […]



No. 22 Order Issued by the Ministry of Religious Denominations and

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

325

Education Concerning the Number and Distribution of Israelite Communities in Galicia, 2 April 1891

Source: Jerzy Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, pp. 244–46 and idem, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 5, Lwów 1912, pp. 261–63; Michał Koczyński (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwach Galicji i Lodomerii, tudzież W. Ks. Krakowskiem obowiązujących, a w czasokresie 1889–1899 wydanych, t. I, Kraków 1897, pp. 370–74. In execution of the Act dated 21 March 1890 concerning the external legal relations of the Israelite Religious Community, it is ordered as follows: Section 1 In the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria with the Grand Duchy of Kraków, 252 Israelite communities shall be established, namely in the political county of: Biała: The communities of 1. Lipnik (Biała), 2. Oświęcim; Bobrka: 3, Bobrka, 4. Brzozdowce, 5. Chodorów, 6. Mikołajów, 7. Strzeliska nowe; Bochnia: 8. Bochnia. 9. Wiśnicz; Bohorodczany: 10. Bohorodczany, 11. Łysiec, 12. Sołotwina; Borszczów: 13. Borszczów, 14. Jezierzany, 15. Korolówka, 16. Krzywne górne, 17. Kudryńce, 18. Mielnica, 19. Skała, 20. Uście biskupie; Brody: 21. Brody, 32. Leszniów, 23. Podkamień, 24. Łopatyn, 25. Stanisławczyk, 26. Szczurowice, 27. Toporów, 28. Załośce; Brzesko: 29. Brzesko; Brzeżany: 30. Brzeżany. 31. Kozłów, 32. Kozowa, 33. Narajów ; Brzozów: 34. Brzozów, 35. Dynów, 36. Jasienica; Buczacz: 37. Buczacz, 38. Garysz, 39. Jazłowiec, 40, Monasterzyska. 41. Potok złoty. 42. Uście zielone; Chrzanów: 43. Chrzanów, 44. Trzebinia; Cieszanów: 45. Cieszanów, 46. Lipsko, 47. Lubaczów, 48. Narol, 49. Oleszyce; Czortków: 50. Czortków, 51. Jagielnica, 52. Ułaszkowce. Dąbrowa: 53, Dąbrowa, 54. Szczucin, 55. Żabno; Dobromil: 56. Dobromil, 57. Bircza, 58. Nowemiasto, 59. Rybotycze; Dolina: 60. Bolechów, 61. Dolina. 62. Rożniatów; Drohobycz : 63. Drohobycz. Gorlice: 64. Biecz, 65. Gorlice. 66. Rzepiennik strzyżowski; Gródek: 67. Gródek, 68. Janów; Grybów; 69. Grybów, 70. Bobowa; Horodenka; 71. Chocimierz, 72. Gzernelica,. 73. Horodenka. 74. Obertyn; Husiatyn: 75. Husiatyn, 76. Chorostków, 77. Kopeczyńce; 78. Probuźna, 79. Suchostaw; Jarosław: 80. Jarosław, 81. Pruchnik, 82. Radymno, 83. Sieniawa;

326

Wierzbieniec

Jasło: 84. Frysztak, 85, Jasło, 86. Ołpiny, 87. Żmigród; Jaworów: 88. Jaworów, 89. Krakowiec, 90. Wielkieoczy; Kałusz: 91. Kałusz. 92. Wojniłów; Kamionka Strumiłowa: 93. Busk, 94. Ghołojów, 95. Dobrotwór, 96. Kamionka Strumiłowa, 97. Radziechów, 98. Slojanów. 99. Witków Nowy; Kolbuszowa: 100. Kolbuszowa, 101. Majdan. 102, Sokołów ; Kołomyja: 103. Kołomyja, 104. Gwoździec, 105. Jabłonów, 106 Peczyniżyn; Kossów: 107. Kossów, 108. Kuty, 109. Pistyń, 110. Żabie; Kraków (urban and suburban district) 111. Kraków; Krosno: 112. Dukla; 113. Korczyn; Łańcut: 114. Kańczuga, 115. Leżajsk, 116. Łańcut 117. Przeworsk, 118: Żołynia; Limanowa: 119. Limanowa, 120 Mszana dolna; Lisko: 121. Baligród, 122, Lisko, 123. Lutowiska, 124. Ustrzyki dolne, 125. Wola michowa; Lwów (urban and suburban districts) 126. Lwów, 127. Jaryczów nowy, 128. Nawarya, 129. Szczerzec; Mielec: 130. Mielec, 131. Radomyśl; Mościska: 132. Hussaków, 133. Krukienice, 134. Mościska, 135. Sądowa Wisznia; Myślenice: 136. Jordanów, 137. Myślenice; Nadwórna: 138. Nadworna, 139. Delatyn, 140. Łanczyn; Nisko: 141. Nisko, 142. Rudnik, 143. Ulanów; Nowy Sącz: 144. Nowy Sącz; Nowy Targ: 145, Krościenko, 146. Nowy Targ; Pilzno; 147. Brzostek, 148. Jodłowa, 149. Pilzno; Podhajce: 150. Podhajce, 151. Zawałów, 152. Złotniki; Przemyśl: 153. Dubiecko, 154. Przemyśl; Przemyślany: 155. Przemyślany, 156. Dunajów, 157.Gliniany, 158. Świrz; Rawa: 159. Lubycza miasteczko, 160. Magierów, 161. Niemirów, 162. Rawa, 163. Uhnów; Rohatyn: 164. Bolszowce, 165 Bukaczowce, 166. Bursztyn, 167. Knihynicze, 168. Rohatyn; Ropczyce: 169. Dębica, 170. Ropczyce, 171. Sędziszów, 172. Wielopole; Rudki: 173. Komarno, 174. Rudki; Rzeszów: 175. Rzeszów, 176. Błażowa, 177. Czudec, 178. Głogów, 179. Niebylec, 180. Strzyżów, 181. Tyczyn; Sambor: 182. Sambor; Sanok: 183. Sanok, 184. Rymanów, 185. Bukowsko, 186. Nowotaniec, 187. Tyrawa Wołoska; Skałat: 188. Grzymałów, 189. Podwoloczyska, 190. Skałat, 191. Tarnoruda, 192. Touste; Śniatyń: 193. Śniatyń, 194. Zabłotów; Sokal: 195. Bełz, 196. Krystynopol, 197. Sokal, 198. Tartaków miasteczko, 199. Waręż miasteczko: Stanisławów: 200. Stanisławów, 201. Halicz, 202. Maryampol, 203. Jezupol; Staremiasto: 204. Chyrów, 205. Staremiasto, 206. Starasól;

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

327

Stryj: 207. Stryj. 208. Skole: Tarnobrzeg: 209. Tarnobrzeg, 210. Baranów, 211. Radomyśl, 212. Rozwadów; Tarnopol: 213. Mikulińce, 214. Tarnopol; Tarnów: 215. Ryglice, 216. Tarnów, 217. Tuchów; Tłumacz: 218. Niżniów. 219. Ottynia, 220. Tłumacz, 221. Tyśmienica; Trembowla: 222. Trembowla, 223. Budzanów. 224. Janów, 225. Strussów; Turka: 226. Turka; Wadowice: 227. Andrychów, 228. Wadowice, 229. Zator; Wieliczka: 230. Klasno, 231. Podgórze; Zaleszczyki: 232. Tłuste, 233. Uścieczko, 234. Zaleszczyki Zbaraż: 235. Zbaraż; Złoczów: 236. Białykamień, 237. Gołogóry, 238. Jezierna, 239. Olesko, 240. Pomorzany, 241. Sassów, 242. Sokołówka, 243. Zborów, 244. Złoczów; Żółkiew: 245. Żółkiew, 246. Kulików, 247. Mosty Wielkie.; Żydaczów; 248. Żydaczów, 249. Rozdół, 250. Żurawno; Żywiec: 251. Milówka, 252. Zabłocie. The list annexed to this order sets out the individual localities included in each community district. Section 2 The division of Israelite communities into districts and their geographical demarcation in compliance with this order shall take effect on 1 January 1892. From that day, the 252 communities detailed in section 1 shall be deemed to have been established in accordance with the Act dated 21 March 1890. […]



No. 23 Directive of the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Education Concerning the Drafting of New Statutes or the Amendment of Existing Statutes for Israelite Communities in Galicia in Accordance with the Act of 21 March 1890 Concerning the External Legal Relations of the Israelite Religious Community, 6 July 1894

Source: Jerzy Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, p. 249; Michał Koczyński (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwach Galicji i Lodomerii, tudzież W. Ks. Krakowskiem obowiązujących, a w czasokresie 1889–1899 wydanych, vol. 1, Kraków 1897, pp. 470–71. Section 1 The drafting of new statutes or the amendment of existing statutes in accordance with the Act of 21 March 1890, […], is the responsibility of the representatives of the community. […]

328

Wierzbieniec

Section 2 The community board shall, by the end of 1895, submit the draft statute together with minutes of meetings and all relevant documents to the Imperial and Royal starosta’s office for ratification by the government. Section 3 In order to facilitate the drafting of statutes which are suitable for ratification by the government, a specimen statute for the Israelite communities of Galicia is published herewith.



No. 24 Order Issued by the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Education Concerning the Level of General Education Required to Secure a Rabbinical Appointment, 6 July 1894

Source: J. Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, pp. 250–51 and idem, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 5, Lwów 1912, p. 264; M. Koczyński (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwach Galicji i Lodomerii, tudzież W. Ks. Krakowskiem obowiązujących, a w czasokresie 1889– 1899 wydanych, vol. 3, Kraków 1899, pp. 1305–06. In accordance with s.11 of the Act dated 21 March 1890, it is ordered as follows: Section 1 In relation to their general education, candidates for the post of rabbi in the communities of: Brody, Brzeżany, Drohobycz, Jarosław, Jasło, Kołomya, Kraków, Lwów, Nowy Sącz, Podgórze, Przemyśl, Rzeszów, Sambor, Sanok, Stanisławów, Stryj, Tarnopol, Tarnów, Złoczów, and Żółkiew must demonstrate that they have satisfactorily completed at least the whole of their secondary school education. Section 2 In order to demonstrate their general education, candidates for the post of rabbi in all communities not listed in section 1 above shall submit at least a certificate in the prescribed form confirming that they have completed to an appropriate standard four years of elementary school education. […] Section 4 All other religious functionaries currently in post who independently undertake rabbinical duties, whether as rabbi or with any other title (for example, religious teacher, etc.) shall, if they wish to remain in office as rabbi in Galicia, submit the aforementioned evidence of their general education within one year of the publication of this order. […]

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



329

No. 25 Specimen Statute for Israelite Communities in Galicia Issued Further to the Directive of the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Education, 6 July 1894

Source: M. Koczyński (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych w Królestwach Galicji i Lodomerii, tudzież W. Ks. Krakowskiem obowiązujących, a w czasokresie 1889– 1899 wydanych, vol. 1, Kraków 1897, pp. 471–512. Section 1 The Israelite community in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . where the community Board is based, shall encompass the following district: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. Section 2 The role of the community is to attend to the religious needs of its members, within the bounds established by state legislation, and to maintain and support the establishments necessary for that purpose. Section 3 Every Israelite permanently resident in the area specified in s.1 shall be a member of the community of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Israelites visiting the community who are not members of it are entitled to make use of the religious, educational, and ritual establishments maintained by the community in accordance with the relevant regulations. […] Section 87 In addition to the contributions paid directly by members of the community, the community board and religious council shall be entitled to impose the following charges and fees: Fees for matza flour not exceeding … per kilogram. 1. 2. Charges for slaughter not exceeding: a. …. kreuzer per head of horned cattle b. …. kreuzer per heifer c. …. kreuzer per calf, goat, sheep d. …. kreuzer per turkey e. …. kreuzer per goose …. kreuzer per other domestic fowl f. 3. For a seat in the synagogue or other public communal prayer house, a sum not exceeding . . . . .

330

Wierzbieniec

4. Funerary fees up to a maximum of . . . . . . The community board and religious council may only apply to the relevant authority for exceptional permission to collect supplementary payments for kosher meat if the income set out in this and previous paragraphs is insufficient to cover the expenditures of the community. […]



No. 26 Circular Issued by the Viceroyalty of Galicia Concerning the Taxes Raised by Jewish Communities on Kosher Meat, 17 June 1896

Source: J. Piwocki (ed.), Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 3, Lwów 1901, p. 260 and idem, Zbiór ustaw i rozporządzeń administracyjnych, vol. 5, Lwów 1912, pp. 271–72. The setting of charges for the ritual slaughter of poultry has no effect on the revenue of the state treasury. However, in relation to the ritual slaughter of cattle, sheep, and goats, the statutes of the Israelite communities should set out a list of the maximum charges payable by category and as a percentage of the government consumption tax on meat. […] In setting the level of ritual slaughter charges in percentage terms, the amount raised must not in any circumstances exceed the total of the ritual slaughter charges, and specifically the charges for the kosher slaughter of cattle, hitherto collected with government leave, and in aggregate it may not exceed 75 per cent of the government consumption tax on the slaughter of animals. […] Since, in view of the provisions […] of the Act of 21 March 1890 […] it would not be possible to ratify Israelite community statutes which stipulate a higher maximum percentage rate for ritual slaughter charges than that given above, this fact should be brought to the immediate attention of those charged with the drafting of statutes. In addition, care should be taken to ensure that the expenditure of the community is met primarily from local dues, since the tendency to use indirect fees and charges to cover all or most of the needs of Israelite communities is inconsistent with the spirit of the Act and the specimen statute. Moreover, for the sake of the community as a whole and bearing in mind that excessive fees and indirect payments weigh heavily on the poorer classes and are an inequitable method of apportioning the community’s financial obligations, the use of such fees may also result in the statutes not being ratified. […]

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



331

No. 27 A Report on the Work of the Council of the Jewish Community in Lwów, February 1898

Source: Tsentral’nyi Derzhavnyi Istoritshnyi Arkhiv Ukraini, L’viv, collection 701/3/205, pp. 1–8. The ratification of the new statute has been a turning point in the evolution of the Lwów community. It also marks the end of the community being administered in accordance with the previous statute, which was in force for almost twenty years. […] I. Religious matters The community representatives spared no effort and took the utmost care in relation to this crucial sphere of activity, regarding the meeting of religious needs as one of their most important duties. Careful consideration was always given to the appropriateness of appointments to the rabbinate and all religious posts, and material improvements were made to the situation of all religious officials. Prayer houses were a subject of particular concern for community representatives, and significant sums were spent on the essential reconstruction and partial enhancement of synagogues and the temple. The representatives also gladly fulfilled their duty to provide subsidies to prayer houses whose financial resources were insufficient to cover their expenses. The need for ritual baths was met by establishing modern ritual baths in the second district of the city, as well as public and ritual baths in the third district, and also new baths in the city centre. In order to satisfy the religious requirement to instal so-called Sabbath wires, use was made of the telephone network and the town was encircled by 13 km of cables. In the maternity clinic of the general hospital, where Israelite children are often born and in which they were in the past unfortunately at times even christened, a ritual circumciser was appointed for the clinic and as a result no further abuses have been noted. Land was purchased in order to extend the Jewish cemetery in Lwów, and a suitable boundary wall was erected around it. Moreover, an Israelite cemetery was established using community funds in Kulparków, which is part of the community here, and the appropriate preliminary steps have been taken to establish cemeteries in Zamarstynów and Winniki. The need to have a branch of the poultry slaughterhouse in the city centre for the use of those residents who live some distance away from the general slaughterhouse was met by the establishment of such a branch in the city centre.

332

Wierzbieniec

We have made a significant annual donation to ensure religious support for prisoners in the Imperial and Royal penal institution in Lwów and have always recommended suitable clerical candidates to provide that support. […] IV. Financial matters In parallel with the highly effective work of the community board in all fields, the community budget also increased significantly so that expenditure has risen from 27,000 zł in 1879, when the previous statute was introduced, to 60,900 zł in 1898, and although we inherited communal debts from the earlier period of 30,000 zł, we reduced those debts, despite making significant investments, to the sum of 10,000 zł. Indeed, even this level of debt was incurred only recently, as a result of the repayable subsidies granted for the restoration of the temple and the synagogues. Expenditure on charitable causes, which in 1879 amounted to 4,211 zł, currently stands at 12,600 zł, while endowment funds which totaled 104,929 zł when we took them over in 1879, now amount to around 300,000 zł, not including the poor fund referred to below. In relation to this, it should be noted that while the renowned generosity and charity of the members of our community are the chief source and cause of this increase in funds, we nonetheless were obliged to exert our particular influence and powers of persuasion to achieve this appreciable increase. The poor fund, which is maintained by the most excellent municipal council of Lwów, amounted to 11,000 zł in 1879, whereas it now stands at 44,000 zł. The community tax only partially accounts for such a significant increase in our budget: when we took charge, it amounted to 16,000 zł p.a. and, despite the growth in population, the reduction in the value of money and a significant increase in all public taxes and charges, it has only risen to 21,000 zł p.a. It is true to say that our indirect charges have also increased and thus it has been possible for us to increase the salaries of all community officials and functionaries in line with existing norms and categories of pay in other divisions of public service. In general, our practice in matters relating to taxation has been consistently liberal in its objectives. Significant deductions were always made for the less well-off or for those whose circumstances had deteriorated, and efforts were made to resolve any differences by agreement, so as to minimize the use of harsh enforcement procedures against community members. […]

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



333

No. 28 Statute of the Dr Warschauer Foundation for Kraków Artisans, 18 April 1898

Source: Archiwum Narodowe w Krakowie, Akta miasta Krakowa, call no. 29/33/0/3.2.3/ Kr 8575, pp. 1–2. Section 1 The foundation shall be known as the ‘Dr Warschauer Foundation for Kraków Artisans’. Section 2 The assets of the foundation consist of 4 per cent mortgage bonds issued by the Galician Land Credit Association to a total sum of 40,000 crowns, or 20,000 złr, insured for the benefit of the foundation. Section 3 The foundation’s accounts shall be administered without charge by the Municipal Revenue Office under the direction and supervision of the Municipal Council. Section 4 Interest derived from the capital shall be used to make loans to impoverished, morally upstanding Kraków craftsmen without regard to their faith—principally for the purchase of raw material. Section 5 The granting of loans shall be the responsibility of the Treasury Section of the city council, assisted by the foundation’s trustee, the lawyer Dr Horowitz, who shall have a casting vote. After the death of Dr Horowitz, this role shall be assumed by one of the Israelite city councillors who is not a member of the Treasury Section. Section 6 A person who wishes to request a loan should attend the Treasury Department of the Municipal Council in person or submit an application to the Council. The Treasury Department, having obtained testimonials in relation to each applicant, shall submit the requests to the Treasury Section. The Municipal Council shall notify applicants of the result of their application without giving reasons. Section 7 A loan may not exceed the sum of 200 złr, and the borrower must repay the loan with interest of 2 per cent p.a. in twenty equal monthly instalments, the first of which

334

Wierzbieniec

is due 4 months after the loan was granted, with the interest on the loaned capital payable as the 21st installment. Section 8 Priority among applicants for a loan shall be given to married men, and then to those who can prove that they will use the loan to purchase the raw materials necessary for their craft. […] Section 18 Loans shall be made to applicants on the anniversary of the founder’s death, i.e. on the 10th of November each year. If, however, the funds allocated for the payment of loans shall not have been expended in full on that day, loans may also be made on other days of the year as required. […]



No. 29 Statue of the Israelite Community in Oświęcim, 7 April 1899

Source: Lucyna Filip, Żydzi w Oświęcimiu 1918–1941, Oświęcim (Wydawnictwo—Scientia, 2003), pp. 201–26. Section 1 The Israelite Community in Oświęcim, where the community board is based, shall encompass the following area: 1) Babice, 2) Bestwinka z Kaniowem, 3) Bielany, 4) Broszkowice, 5) Brzeszcze, 6) Brzezinka, 7) Bujaków, 8) Bulowice, 9) Czaniec, 10) Dankowice z Kaniowem Dańkowskim, 11) Dwory, 12) Grojec, 13) Harmęże, 14) Hecznarowice, 15) Jawiszowice, 16) Kańczuga, 17) Kaniów Stary, 18) Kęty, 19) Kobiernice, 20) Klucznikowice, 21) Kruki, 22) Łazy, 23) Łęki, 14) Malec, 25) Międzybrodzie Kobiernickie, 26) Monowice, 26) Nowa Wieś, 28) Osiek, 29) Oświęcim, 30) Pławy, 31) Pisarzowice, 32) Polanka Wielka, 33) Poręba Wielka, 34) Porąbka, 35) Przecieszyn, 36) Rajsko z Budami, 37) Skidziń, 38) Stare Stawy, 39) Stara Wieś Dolna, 40) Stara Wieś Górna, 41) Wilamowice, 42) Witkowice, 43) Wilczkowice, 44) Włosienica, 45) Zaborze. […] Section 76 The apportionment of religious contributions shall take place primarily on the basis of self-assessment. To this end, seven categories of tax payers shall be created, with taxes payable in the sum of 1 florin, 2 florins, 4 florins, 6 florins, 8 florins, 10 florins, and 12 florins. Each tax payer shall receive a summons requiring him to undertake a detailed valuation of his property and then, within a specified period, to place himself in one of these categories. In order to do this he shall receive a tax return form.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

335

Failure to complete the tax return in the time specified shall be deemed an express refusal to pay any tax whatsoever and in such a case the assessment commission shall decide whether the person who has refused is in fact required to pay tax and, if so, into which category he falls. […] Section 80 The submitted tax declarations shall be scrutinized with the utmost care by the assessment commission, which shall take into account the income, wealth, and family responsibilities of the tax payer. […] If it proves that […] the majority of tax declarations bear no relation to the actual financial situation of tax payers, the commission shall undertake an apportionment, paying the strictest regard to income, voluntary contributions, and donations to the community as well as any other material information or circumstances which might affect the level of tax payable. Section 81 The commission shall vote orally on the amount of tax payable by each tax payer. […] Section 87 In addition to the direct communal taxes for religious purposes raised from members of the community, the religious council shall be entitled to set the following charges and fees: 1) Fees for Passover matza flour of no more than 3 Kr (three kreuzer) per kilogram. The moneys thus raised may be allocated to meeting the needs of the poor at Passover. 2) Slaughters’ charges up to a maximum of: a) 1.70 florins for an ox b) 1.50 florins for a cow c) 1.00 florins for a heifer d) 0.28 florins for a calf of up to one year in age e) 0.10 florins for a goat or sheep f) 0.10 florins for a turkey g) 0.06 florins for a goose h) 0.03 florins for other poultry. 3) For a seat in the synagogue or other public prayer house, no more than 10 gulden. Places in the synagogue may be reserved for one year only and payments for such places must be made in advance. 4) For weddings which take place within the town of Oświęcim or Klucznikowice, fees are payable according to the following categories:

336 Category

I II III IV

Wierzbieniec

For the For the community rabbi

Florins 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00

Florins 20.00 15.00 10.00 3.00

For the cantor

Florins 3.00 2.00 1.50 1.00

For the beadle

For banns of marriages which are to take place:

Florins 3.00 2.00 1.50 1.00

within the community Florins 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.50

outside the community Florins 5.00 5.00 5.00 2.50

The poor, who are included in the fourth category, may on request be exempted from all charges with the exception of the charges for the rabbi set out in the second column, which are already discounted. The fees laid down for the community do not include the cost of lighting. The fees for the rabbi shall be paid to him directly. However, the remaining fees should be paid into communal funds. The classification into a particular financial category of the bride and groom or their parents shall take place on the application of the parties by the community board in accordance with the best information available to it, and its conscience. If neither of the betrothed is a member of the community, the community board may increase the classification fees by no more than 50 per cent. Female members of the community whose weddings take place outside the bounds of the community and who do not engage the services of community officials must pay them half of the fees in the relevant category. The duty to pay for minors and dependents rests with their legal guardians. Marriages which take place outside the town of Oświęcim and outside Klucznikowice and which are presided over by a rabbi must be paid for according to the rates set out in the first three categories. 5) Funeral fees shall be payable as follows […] a) the poor are exempt from any charges b) 2 florins for children under the age of 5 c) 5 florins for children aged between 5 and 14 d) 200 florins for Class I family graves e) 150 florins for Class II family graves f) 100 florins for Class III family graves g) 50 florins for Class I individual graves

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

337

h) 35 florins for Class II individual graves i) 30 florins for Class III individual graves 20 florins for Class IV individual graves j) k) 15 florins for Class V individual graves l) 10 florins for Class VI individual graves m) 5 florins for Class VII individual graves […] Payments made for reading the Torah in communal synagogues shall be allocated in the first instance for the remuneration of the cantor. […]



No. 30 Instructions for the Owners of Licenced Heders in the City of Kraków, Issued by the Council of the Metropolitan Royal City of Kraków, 15 February 1900

Source: Archiwum Narodowe w Krakowie, Akta miasta Krakowa, call no. 29/33/Kr 7227, pp. 1–3. Section 1 Any person applying for a licence to run a heder, who wishes to establish and maintain a faith school or who wishes to teach children in such a school, must demonstrate that he is of unblemished character and provide a certificate of aptitude issued by the relevant community. Section 2 Over the entrance to the property in which the heder is located, there shall be affixed a sign painted white with blue lettering in Polish giving the name of the owner of the heder. […] Section 5 The heder premises must be furnished with the appropriate school equipment, that is, a sufficient number of desks for the children, a table for the teacher, and coat hangers. Conversely, the placing of any sort of domestic furniture, for example beds, cupboards, chests of drawers, or trunks in the heder is strictly forbidden.[…] Twice a year, namely at the end of January and at the end of August, the owners of heders must submit to the municipal authorities two copies in printed form of a list of the children attending their heders. […] Section 13 The bi-annual lists must be brought by the heder owners personally to Department IV of the municipal authority, so that any defects in the individual entries on the lists

338

Wierzbieniec

can be drawn to their attention and the necessary clarifications can be obtained from them there and then. […]



No. 31 Minutes Concerning the Conversion to the Roman Catholic Faith of Debora Arimowicz of the Jewish Community in Tarnów, Recorded at the Tarnów starosta’s office, 20 October 1900

Source: Marcin Soboń, Polacy wobec Żydów w Galicji doby autonomicznej w latach 1868– 1914, (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Verso, 2011), p. 320. […] Debora Arimowicz, aged 19, a seamstress from Tarnów, attends and declares: I was born on 2 April 1881 in Tarnów and am the daughter of Sachi Arimowicz who was married in accordance with Jewish custom to my mother Zofia, née Offen. My father is deceased and my mother lives in Tarnów on Panny Maryi Street where she owns a tenement house. For several years now I have felt drawn to the Roman Catholic faith and I wish to convert to that religion. So far, however, I have not dared to take this step out of fear of my mother and my relatives. Now however, after mature consideration, and in the belief that the Catholic religion is the only true faith, I have decided to renounce the Israelite religion into which I was born and convert to Catholicism. I have taken this decision of my own volition and without any persuasion or compulsion and I ask that this decision is noted. I should add that I am concerned about the difficulties which may be caused by my mother and other relatives and I therefore ask that my decision be kept secret until I have found a place of refuge to protect myself from any assault by my co-religionists. I intend to go to a convent in Kraków and will give notice of where I have taken refuge and thus where the certification should be sent. […]



No. 32 A New Jewish Community Hospital in Lwów, Established by the Maurycy Lazarus Foundation, 1903

Source: Henryk Mehrer, Szpital Lwowskiej Gminy Wyznaniowej Izr. fundacyi Maurycego Lazarusa, zbudowany w roku 1903 według projektu prof. Jana Lewińskiego oraz zarys rozwoju szpitala żydowskiego we Lwowie, Lwów, Szpital Lwowskiej Gminy Wyznaniowej Izraelickiej, 1906, pp. 8–12. On 7  June 1903, the hospital was formally opened and turned over to the use of patients. The hospital was built, entirely from his own private resources, by Maurycy

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

339

Lazarus, the long-standing chair of the hospital board and former director of the mortgage bank, to replace the old hospital which was no longer at all compatible with the requirements of medical knowledge and developments in hygiene. All the internal furnishings were provided by his wife, the late Róża Lazarus. The hospital building is two storeys high and its long frontage faces the right hand side of Rapaport Street. The whole construction, façade, staircase, etc. is finished in the Moorish style. The left wing of the building is designated for women, the right for men. The first floor is for surgery; the ground floor is for internal medicine. The wards are positioned at the front of the building and are connected by corridors at the rear. Their windows are shaded by the magnificent old trees in the former Jewish cemetery, which has now been closed for 50 years. On the right hand side of the staircase are the outpatient areas and on the left, the board room and assembly room. On the first floor, between the two wings, there is a large operating theatre. […] In all the hospital has 100 beds […]. The medical staff consists of the director, four chief physicians, four auxiliary physicians who take turns to be on duty, and six doctors who together with the ward doctors give medical advice in the outpatient departments. On average the hospital has around 1,100 to 1,200 inpatients a year and more than 20,000 outpatients, of whom one-third are Catholics. […]



No. 33 Financial Report of the Jewish Community in Lwów for the Year 1905

Source: Sprawozdanie rachunkowe Zboru Izraelickiego we Lwowie za rok 1905, Lwów, Nakładem Zboru Izraelickiego, 1906, pp. 5–9. The board of the Israelite community has the honour hereby to make public the accounts of the Israelite community of Lwów for the year 1905. Lwów, May 1906 Dr Emil Byk Chairman Dr Szymon Schaff Deputy Chairman Dr Józef Czeszer Salomon Buber James Landau Chief Engineer Emil de Mises Jakób Beiser A) Community funds in 1905

340

Wierzbieniec

Section

Income

V VI

Reserve fund as at 1 January 1905, 1600 crowns in securities Income from real property under l.70[identification number] Rent from the B’nai Brith Association Fees for marriage banns Proceeds from the slaughter of cattle in Lwów Proceeds from the kosher slaughter of poultry in Lwów In the surrounding towns and villages a) from the slaughter of cattle b) from the slaughter of poultry

VII VIII IX X XI

A) from the synagogue on Sykstus Street B) from the prayer house Or Chodesz 70 C) from the suburban Assira association D) from the Hasidic synagogue 250 m E) from the suburban Hasidic synagogue

XII

Fees for minyanim

Section

Outgoings

A

Expenditure for religious purposes

B

Expenditure associated with the ritual slaughter of cattle and poultry in Lwów For 6 ritual slaughterers and 2 assistants, for the slaughter of cattle and poultry Lump sum remuneration for a third assistant during the period before holy days and for travel to the suburbs throughout the year

I II III IV

1 2

Per item

Total

K

h

K

h

–

–

23,377

21

–

–

142

71

– – 69,926

– – 50

49,719

20

1,660 3,716

– –

119.65 70

9,183 2,012

10 30 11,195

431 100 50 30 100

711

–

1,912

–

Per item

40

Total 20,921

22,400

–

500

–

48

341

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914 (cont.) Section 3 4 5 6 7

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8 9

10 11

12 13

Outgoings For the slaughterer in Winniki For the assistant slaughterer in Sichów For 4 porgers of kosher meat (menakrim) Supervisors’ salaries For 5 kosher meat inspectors Expenditure associated with the slaughter of cattle Premises for the porging of meat Fuel for the porging of meat Cost of sealing kosher cattle Cost of printed receipts for ritual slaughter of cattle ( jukstów) Expenditure associated with the slaughter of poultry Rent for warehouse for 1905 Cost of printed receipts for ritual slaughter of poultry (jukstów) Petty expenses To the caretaker for cleaning Fuel Joint expenditure associated with the slaughter of cattle and poultry in Lwów Remuneration and allowances for officials For the supervisory staff for work associated with slaughter on the Sabbath and holy days For the transport of officials to the new city slaughterhouse Sundry expenses incurred by slaughterers

Per item

1,787 3,520 4,300 5,640

Total

92 – – –

413

96

3,667

78

4,347

96

342

Wierzbieniec

(cont.) Section

Outgoings

Per item

Total

Expenditure associated with the ritual slaughter of cattle and poultry in the surrounding areas Rent of premises, furnishings, costs of jukstów printed receipts, and supervision costs

C

D

Maintenance of public synagogues and prayer houses For various ritual purposes […] Education A) subsidy to the school fund B) subsidy for 3 Froebel schools C) subsidy for the teacher at the school for the deaf-mute D) subsidy to the M Bernstein endowment for the maintenance of the artisans’ school E) subsidy for the Israelite rabbinical seminary in Vienna F) allowances for candidates at rabbinical schools G) subsidy to the board of the private school Chanoch L’noar

II

B A)

H) cost of maintaining the communal library I) Cost of giving sermons to high school pupils […] Ritual diet Pesach matzot and financial assistance for the poor at Pesach

4,800 2,000 600 200

1,000 130 1,000

1,196

74

530

15,059

90

50,337

47

1,118

44

1,384

50

343

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914 (cont.) Section B)

C)

D) E) F) G)

H) I)

Outgoings Expenditure on the supervision, printing, and warehousing associated with Pesach flour Expenditure on the supervision associated with the collection of the dues on Pesach flour Financial assistance for the poor in Zniesienie at Pesach Financial assistance for the poor in Winniki at Pesach Cost of providing food for Jewish soldiers at Pesach Donation to the committee charged with the distribution of potatoes to the poor at Pesach Subsidy for the Jewish public kitchen Grant to the association for the distribution of ritual food to the Jewish sick in the general hospital […]

Per item

Total

1,449

10

698

88

50

– 2,978

200 300

600

20

344

Wierzbieniec

No. 34 Request Made by the Union of Teachers of the Mosaic Faith in Galicia to the Jewish Community in Lwów for Support in Relation to the Introduction of a New Curriculum for Teaching the Mosaic Faith in Schools, and Seeking a Financial Donation, 6 January 1906

Source: Tsentral’nyi Derzhavnyi Istoritshnyi Arkhiv Ukraini, L’viv, collection 701/3/198, p. 15. To the Most Excellent Board of the Israelite community in Lwów The widespread public debate about the plan for teaching the Mosaic faith in schools of all categories prompted the Union’s Branch Office to call a rally of teachers of the Mosaic faith in order to discuss the issue. The most eminent teachers from every part of Poland attended in response to our invitation: those with a lifetime of experience as well as young, traditional rabbis as well as progressive rabbis, so that the rally represented all the groups and classes of Jews qualified to be heard on the issue of a curriculum for teaching the Mosaic faith. After two days of sober debate, witnessed by most members of the Most Excellent Board, a plan for the teaching of religion eventually took shape. After all the matters devolved by the ‘rally’ to a separate commission have been carefully considered, we shall submit a detailed plan—the fruit of our labour—to the Most Excellent Board and to the Supreme Imperial and Royal National School Council. […] However, in view of the enormous costs involved in organizing the rally, the Branch Office has no choice but to appeal to the Most Excellent Board to assist us with a subsidy of at least 100 (one hundred) crowns, since otherwise the Branch will not be in a position to carry out the resolutions passed by the rally, which are intended to regenerate and regulate the teaching of religion […] Union of Teachers of the Mosaic Faith in Galicia [signature illegible]



No. 35 Instructions for Slaughterers in the Israelite Community of Przemyśl, 22 September 1908

Source: Wacław Wierzbieniec, ‘Problem uboju rytualnego na terenie Galicji Wschodniej w świetle “Instrukcji dla rzezaków izraelickiej gminy wyznaniowej w Przemyślu” z 22 września 1908 roku’, Prace Historyczno-Archiwalne XIV (2004), pp. 163–66. §1

Slaughterers appointed by the council are obliged to slaughter cattle and poultry in the city slaughterhouse and in the communal slaughterhouse if the customer produces

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

345

a ticket46 issued by the relevant official of the community or by the leaseholder of the right to collect the tax on the slaughter of cattle or poultry. These tickets should be taken from the customer and torn at one side. They should then be returned to the community office or to the leaseholder. In the absence of a ticket, slaughterers are on no account permitted to carry out the slaughter. They are also forbidden to accept any payment for tickets. §2

Slaughterers must conduct themselves with courtesy and respect towards third parties. They must also ensure that the other parties present remain composed while the business of the slaughterhouse is taking place. Third parties are required to comply with any instructions and orders given by the slaughterers. Any complaints should be reported to the community. §3

Slaughterers are forbidden from accepting gifts or remuneration from other parties, except for: a) gifts in kind, i.e. the spleen of ritually slaughtered calves or part of the lungs of cattle (in accordance with custom); b) financial remuneration if the other party summons the slaughterer to his house on the eve of Judgement Day in order to slaughter poultry there; c) remuneration for travel by carriage to carry out slaughter in locations outside the town. […] §5

At least two slaughterers must be engaged simultaneously when cattle are slaughtered and one slaughterer when poultry is slaughtered. On the days preceding a holiday, on Thursday afternoon and Friday, two slaughterers must be simultaneously engaged in the slaughter of poultry. […] §8

In carrying out the slaughter, slaughterers must act in strict compliance with ritual regulations and shall be supervised in this regard by the rabbinate whose instructions or recommendations they must follow. […]

46

Known as a boleta, confirming that payment for the ritual slaughter has been made.

346

Wierzbieniec

§11

In order to ensure that the work of the slaughterhouse is carried out in an orderly manner, the board shall institute a rota, or a schedule showing the order in which the slaughterers are to carry out their duties. Slaughterers are to adhere strictly to this plan of activities. The written roster must always be prominently displayed in the slaughterhouse. […]



No. 36 Protest by Polish-speaking Jewish Student Members of the Association Zjednoczenie against the Granting of a Subsidy by the Jewish Community in Lwów to Establish a Hebrew Grammar School in Jerusalem, 7 February 1912

Source: Zjednoczenie 1913, February and March, no. 2–3, p. 97.

On 7 February 1912, Polish students of the Mosaic faith, members of the student association Zjednoczenie (Unity), expressed their vehement protest against the actions of the Lwów kahal which—heedless of the already notorious penury which pervades the Jewish masses, and heedless too of the fact that the kahal’s money, extracted from the Jewish masses in our country, constitutes the one and only public asset allocated to the alleviation of the penury of Poland’s Jews and to improving their economic, social, and educational situation—is using its funds to boost institutions which are alien and indeed inimical to us, Jewish Poles living in this country, and is, by the same token, assisting our own home-grown Zionists. Polish students of the Mosaic faith trust that the public, regardless of political persuasion or creed, will exclusively and unreservedly side with them in their struggle against the propagation of Zionism by the Lwów kahal.



No. 37 Report of the Ten Cent Society of Women for the Support of Schoolchildren in Lwów for the Year 1912

Source: Tsentral’nyi Derzhavnyi Istoritshnyi Arkhiv Ukraini, L’viv, collection 701/3/97, pp. 5–6. We present to the general public a report on the activities in which our association was involved in 1912. The results of our work have unfortunately been insignificant in comparison with the magnitude of the task we have undertaken—but we have tried, within the limits set by our modest income, to discharge our responsibilities as diligently as possible.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

347

Out of an income of 3,639 K. 11 h., the lion’s share of the turnover, namely 3,318 K. 20 h., was spent on fabric and the sewing of coats. We distributed 255 new coats and 206 repaired and cleaned coats. Thus in total 461 children were given warm clothing. But what is that number of coats when compared with the demand? Today even the poorest classes of society understand that they will not get so much as a slice of bread without being able to read and write. As a result, the children of the poorest classes of society are flocking to school and if we want to enable them to take advantage of regular daily education, we must provide them with winter clothing. We therefore turn to the widest possible circles of society with a fervent plea that they support our objectives either by joining the association as ordinary members or by supporting our humanitarian endeavours. We also hereby register our sincere thanks to the national head office and the board of the Israelite Community for their subsidies, and to all those who have assisted in all the activities undertaken by our association. Lwów branch: Laura Friedowa* Fanny Strohowa Deputy Chairwoman Chairwoman Director Róża Kikinisowa Fryderyka Zionowa* Secretary Treasurer Regina Elsterowa Rafaela Friedowa* Róża Herzigowa* Laura Krochowa Ema Lilienowa*

Matylda de Misesowa Sabina Pragerowa Salomea Rappoportowa Salomea Reinholdowa* Ewa Rosnerowa

Paula Schleicherowa Anna Wahlowa Salomea Wiesenbergowa Róża Zachowa

* In the Polish original, these women are given the title doktorowa or ‘doctor’s wife’

348

Wierzbieniec

No. 38 The Views of Wolf Rappaport, a Supporter of the Polonization of Jews, Concerning the Changes Which Took Place in the Jewish Community of Lwów and Other Jewish Communities in Galicia between 1880 and 1890, February–March 1913

Source: Zjednoczenie 1913, February and March, no. 2–3, p. 79.

[…] Small-town kahals never took on any significant activity. Their abiding concern was to defend the walls confining Jews and to preserve their own place outside wider society; they remained a medieval ghetto institution. At best their work was religious or philanthropic. They looked after synagogues, ritual baths, and cemeteries; they supported burial societies and, twice a year, gave financial assistance to impoverished Jews—in the winter for firewood and in the summer for Pesach matzos. At election time, they were tools of the starosta, who was able to create a kahal coterie loyal to the government in every town. There was no question of any other type of activity. The model that these kahals were supposed to follow was the Lwów Community which, for all its traditions and its achievements, was not at that time any better than the provincial kahals in terms of the type of work it did; the only difference perhaps lay in the scope of that work. The Lwów Community was in any event controlled at that time by the Lwów Jewish organization Schomer Israel, a relatively wealthy and powerful body which brought together a significant part of the plutocratic Jewish bourgeoisie of Lwów and also published the German language paper Der Israelit. The Jewish Community was not as vehemently opposed as Schomer Israel to the work of Ojczyzna. Schomer Israel was involved in Austro-German politics and better at rallying Viennese Jews than Polish Jews. Its aim was to preserve Jewish loyalty to Austria and, unfortunately, to maintain the Austrian spirit which had been prevalent 40 or even 50 years earlier. It understood equal rights to mean freedom of movement and did not consider it necessary for Jews to be educated or prepared for civic work. The entirety of Schomer’s activity was a great anachronism. In its battle against Ojczyzna, however, it displayed a risible obscurantism.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914



349

No. 39 The Jewish Community in Przemyśl—Declaration of Samuel Jekel, Acknowledging Paternity, 14 December 1913

Source: AGAD, Akta gmin wyznania mojżeszowego z Małopolski Wschodniej 1830–1942, call no. 94, pp. 1–2. Declaration The undersigned Samuel Jekel, bank runner in Przemyśl, hereby acknowledges paternity of the illegitimate children born to Syma Rywka Hauser, whom he subsequently married on 10 June 1910 in accordance with the requirements of the civil law, namely of the children entered in the district birth register and born in Bursztyn: a son Jakob Isaak, born on 18/08/1881, Bartsch Mendel, born on 07/12/1883, and a daughter Margula Ita, born on 06/12/1885. He requests that his name be recorded in the relevant registers at the above entries as the father of these children. […] Samuel Jekel



No. 40 Draft Statute of the Union of Israelite Communities in Galicia, before 1918

Source: In: YIVO Archives (New York), Poland collection, Vilna Archives, RG 28, Stanisławów 3, no page numbers. Art 1 The Israelite communities in Lwów and Kraków, in Przemyśl, Stanisławów, Stryj, Drohobycz, Jarosław, Złoczów, Rzeszów, Samborz, Sanok, Żożkiew, Gródek Jagielloński, Jaworów, Kołomyj, Krosno, and Podgórze hereby establish an association called: THE NATIONAL UNION OF ISRAELITE COMMUNITIES IN GALICIA Art 2 The Association shall be based in Lwów. The creation of sections for different parts of the country and the jurisdiction of such sections shall be determined by the Union’s regulations. Art 3 The objectives of the Association are: A) to defend the religious, cultural, social, legal and financial rights and interests of the communities which form part of the Union.

350 B) C)

D)

Wierzbieniec to maintain contact between members of the Union and to ensure mutual assistance in fulfilling their duties as defined by legislation and statute. to ensure the appropriate development and proper management of communities and their administrative autonomy, particularly in relation to charitable issues. to support the development and prosperity of the communities belonging to the Union.

These aims shall be achieved by providing members with advice, information, and plans for the holding of conferences and rallies, the formulation of motions, applications, and petitions and other similar lawful measures. Art 4 Israelite communities in Galicia may be ordinary members of the Association. Each of these communities shall become a member of the Association when its board resolves to accede to the Association and the national Union accepts its accession. […] Art 5 Ordinary members of the Association shall be entitled to participate in the Assembly of Communities, its debates and votes, and shall have the right to elect and to stand for membership of the board of the Association. This right shall be exercised by the ordinary members, i.e. the communities (Art 4) through its delegates […]



No. 41 The Appeal of Sydynia Wildstein to the Board of the Israelite Community in Lwów in Relation to the Increase in the Charges for a Seat in the Great Synagogue, August 1918

Source: Tsentral’nyi Derzhavnyi Istoritshnyi Arkhiv Ukraini, L’viv, collection 701/3/504, p. 11. To the Most Excellent Board of the Israelite community in Lwów. For a number of years my mother, the late Feiga Poch, was in possession of a seat in the women’s section of the main Synagogue in Lwów at bench 99 and every time she attended the synagogue, she would occupy this seat either herself, or one of the members of her family would occupy it on her behalf. This seat was the property of my mother, the late Feiga Poch, since she inherited it from her mother-in-law, Feiga Kornez.

Jewish Self-Government in Galicia, 1815–1914

351

After the death of my mother, the late Feiga Poch, the rights of ownership or use of this seat were bequeathed to me and my sister, Ernestyna Ehrlich née Poch and since my mother’s death in 1903, the seat has remained in our possession, so that every time my sister Ernestyna Ehrlich or I attend the synagogue, we occupy that seat. […] until it came to my notice that the Wardens of that synagogue or the board wish to remove this seat from our control. Therefore, invoking the right of ownership acquired by us in good faith and established for more than 40 years, I categorically protest both in my own name and in that of my sister Ernestyna Ehrlich, and request that the Most Excellent Board of the Israelite community in consideration of these circumstances upholds our duly acquired right to the aforementioned seat, since if our right to it is infringed, we shall be obliged to bring the matter before the courts. Sydynia Wildstein

chapter 6

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915 Artur Markowski 1

Introduction

The hundred years between 1815 and 1915 saw radical structural, organizational, and political changes to the operation of Jewish self-government in the Kingdom of Poland.1 The traditional kahal structures were officially abolished in 1822 and replaced by synagogue supervisory boards (dozory bóżnicze), which had been established the year before. The central question is whether this new institution was indeed an element of Jewish self-government, or whether it was essentially an agency of state designed to administer and control the Jewish community. The answer to that question is not straightforward. It is not enough simply to compare the jurisdiction of the two entities. It is important also to understand how they functioned in a wider context: their place both in the structure of power and in the public perception. The picture is, of course, further complicated by the various confraternities which, in addition to the kahal, were a vital ingredient of Jewish self-government before 1815. They, too, were dealt with unceremoniously by the authorities, which banned them in March 1822. All this took place against a backdrop of petitions and complaints about the behaviour of kahals and confraternities from Jews themselves—a familiar feature of the Kingdom’s early years—and of denunciations of their illegal activity which continued almost to the end of the period under consideration. Apart from that, what the institutional forms of Jewish communal leadership clearly illustrate is the increasing political empowerment of Jews who, from a position of subordination and near passivity in the face of changing circumstances, began—via synagogue supervisory boards or, in the second half

1 The Kingdom of Poland, colloquially known as ‘Kongresówka’, or Congress Poland, was established at the Congress of Vienna in 1815. It was finally incorporated into the Russian Empire and divested of any remaining political or administrative autonomy in 1867.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

353

of the nineteenth century, via the Warsaw Community Board—to participate in politics as an active and relatively powerful group.2 2

The Relationship between State Authorities and Jewish Authorities

The kahal was the only legitimate form of self-government in the Kingdom of Poland. That is was autonomous is beyond dispute, regardless of the period under discussion—although even a hundred years ago, it was plain that there was a qualitative difference between how it functioned in the pre-partition era compared to its operation in the nineteenth century.3 The Enlightenment model of the state, apparent in the Kingdom’s liberal constitution, required that its officials increase their interference in the collective life of the subjects of Alexander I. The steps which the authorities successively took were calculated to bring the various spheres of public life under the control of the central administration—not to maintain independent power structures at the local level.4 Therefore, the kahal and the confraternities, in other words all that remained of Jewish self-government after the end of the eighteenth century, constituted something of an anomaly among state structures, one which did not conform to the accepted model of government now being introduced to ever greater effect. This is all the more remarkable when we consider that, with the exception of the kahal which operated between 1815 and 1821, self-governing structures in the Kingdom of Poland (i.e. local self-government) in which all citizens irrespective of their religion could participate, only began to be established by virtue of the reforms of Alexander Wielkopolski in 1861.5 These structures were of particular interest to the Jewish community and gave its members the chance to play a part in deciding the fate of something other than their own social group.6 Of the 615 elected members of town councils, 27 (or 4.4%) were 2 The Warsaw Community Board (Zarząd Warszawskiej Gminy Starozakonnych) is the name given in the electoral regulations to Warsaw’s synagogue supervisory board. The name testifies both to the importance of the Warsaw community in comparison with other Jewish communities in the Kingdom of Poland and also to its more political character. 3 Dawid Kandel, Żydzi w dobie królestwa Kongresowego, ‘Kwartalnik Poświęcony Badaniom Przeszłości Żydów’, 1,2 (Warsaw 1912) p. 97. 4 A good example of this is Jewish conversions and government policy towards them. 5 Wojciech Witkowski, Historia administracji w Polsce 1764–1989 (Warsaw, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 2007), 150. 6 More on this in Artur Eisenbach, Emancypacja Żydów na ziemiach polskich 1785–1870 na tle europejskim (Warsaw: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 1988), 486–87.

354

Markowski

Jews. According to Artur Eisenbach, Jewish participation in elections, whether as voters or as candidates, was a key element in the process of political and social emancipation of Jews in the Kingdom of Poland and it is worth drawing attention to the fact that the town council became another institution, in addition to the synagogue supervisory boards, through which Jews could officially and lawfully influence executive decision-making. The authorities embarked on a campaign to bring kahals under their close supervision. By the early nineteenth century, interest in them had begun to grow—not just in the abstract, as an institution, but also in terms of how they operated. As early as 1816, the authorities undertook a formal assessment of the conditions of the kahals [no. 1], concentrating in particular on their fiscal function and also on the rabbinate which was quite clearly acknowledged to be a form of leadership that was more than merely spiritual.7 In the wake of this assessment came state regulations which openly interfered in the centuries-old autonomy of Jewish self-government. This interference extended to matters such as the timing and procedure for elections to the kahal authorities [nos. 3, 16, 35] and the election of rabbis [no. 42]. The regulations also defined the jurisdiction and status of the so-called kahal elders, or parnasim [no. 7]. The kahal was thus an institution at odds with post-1815 theories of government, which did not envisage power structures created from the bottom up. The administration’s attempts to impose particular solutions on the kahals are evidence of its centralizing tendencies and of its Enlightenment-style interference in society. Between 1815 and 1821, kahals increasingly came under the administrative control of voivodan commissions and religious and fiscal authorities. This coincided with complaints from the Jewish community about the oppressive behaviour of the kahal authorities, the oligarchic and undemocratic practices which are familiar from as early as the eighteenth century.8 Kahal officials were accused of financial excesses and of oppressing the poorer members of the community [no. 5].

7 This was no doubt connected to the reforms which were being planned; see Simon Dubnov, Noveshaja istoriya evreiskogo naroda. Epokha pervoi reaktsii (1815–1848) i vtoroj emantsipatsii (1848–1880) (Moscow: Mosty kul’tury, 2002), 178–79. 8 See Anna Michałowska, Między Demokracją a oligarchią. Władze gmin żydowskich w Poznaniu i Swarzędzu (Warsaw: Dialog, 2000), 201–206.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

355

Another serious problem was the absence of any Jewish representative body, following the abolition of the va’ads at the end of the eighteenth century. Christian writers and maskilim alike proposed the creation of various bodies to represent the Jewish communities en bloc—while at the same time steering Jewish society towards integration and emphasizing the primacy of the state apparatus over the self-governing kahal [no. 6]. The synagogue supervisory boards established in 1821 were strictly subordinate to the state authorities. Administrative and above all financial decisions required specific endorsement at successive levels of government—local, voivodan (later provincial), as well as by the relevant government commission. State officials sanctioned the timing of elections and the design of ballot papers [nos. 15, 16] and also approved the appointment of elected members of the synagogue supervisory board and of rabbis [nos. 22, 26], and monitored the community’s use of its traditional methods of maintaining order, in effect its jurisdiction in ritual issues. One example of this was the enquiry into the use of the religious oath in Lublin [no. 40]. In time, the role of the authorities extended to hearing appeals against alleged procedural breaches by the synagogue supervisory boards and purported irregularities in the election of their members [no. 29]. They also made determinations in relation to tax issues [no. 30]. The finishing touches to this panorama of subordination were the oaths taken by rabbis [no. 39] and members of the synagogue supervisory board [no. 40], which were, in essence, declarations of loyalty to the tsar. From as early as 1815, the Kingdom of Poland authorities increased their hold over kahals—although this was doubtless merely a continuation of earlier policy. They left the confraternities to one side as structurally more difficult to subjugate. The influence of the authorities consisted in the monitoring and assessment especially of the financial standing of kahals and the geographical reach of their jurisdiction. The synagogue supervisory boards were centrally imposed agencies of the state, unique only in that their officials had to be Jewish. The authority of the supervisory boards existed by virtue of government mandate, which explains the degree of control to which they were liable. Although their members were elected by the Jewish community, all their activity was subject to endorsement by the state. 3

The Debate and Its Consequences

In 1818, the ten-year suspension of the civil rights granted to Jews in the Duchy of Warsaw was drawing to a close and it was necessary to make far-reaching

356

Markowski

decisions about their legal status in the Kingdom of Poland.9 One of the important threads running through the ensuing public debate—a debate conducted by means of pamphlets and brochures published by various, predominantly Christian, circles—was the question of Jewish self-government.10 It was not a question new to public discourse. The same issue, with similar overtones, had already been ventilated in the pre-partition era writings of Stanisław Staszic, who had demanded the abolition of the kahal and suggested that responsibility for the Jewish community be transferred to the municipal executive and administrative authorities. Staszic saw the kahal as one reason behind the backwardness of Jews and their isolation from the rest of society. He proposed that only the rabbi, his authority restricted to religious matters, and the beadle, to safeguard the religious infrastructure, should remain. He was in effect calling for structural homogenization along Enlightenment lines or, in other words, the abolition of the administrative structure of the Jewish community.11 The period between 1817 and 1822 saw many more participants enter this debate, and it is fair to say that their attitude towards traditional forms of Jewish self-government was highly critical. Christian writers argued that the kahal, with its oligarchic power structure, was the greatest scourge of the Jewish community and the biggest obstacle to the ‘productivization’ and ‘civilization’ of Jews. It was proposed therefore immediately to abolish the Jewish authorities, dominated as they were by kahal elders, and to undertake a review of their financial administration to date. Much was made of the enormous economic 9

10

11

On the nuances of legal status in the Duchy of Warsaw, see Aleksandra Oniszczuk, ‘The Jews in the Duchy of Warsaw: The Question of Equal Rights in Administrative Theory and Practice’, Polin. Studies in Polish Jewry, vol. 27, Jews in the Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1918, ed. Glenn Dynner, Antony Polonsky, and Marcin Wodziński (Oxford, Portland, Ore.: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2015), 63–88. The debate on the status of Jews in the Kingdom of Poland is reviewed by Lidia Jerkiewicz in her not yet published doctoral thesis ‘Kwestia Żydowska w Królestwie Polskim w latach 1815–1830’ (Wrocław, 2014; typescript provided by the author). Marcin Wodziński has also written on this subject in idem, ‘ “Cywilni chrześcijanie”: Spory o reformę Żydów w Polsce 1789–1830, in Kwestia żydowska w XIX wieku. Spory o tożsamość Polaków, ed. Grażyna Borkowska and Magdalena Rudkowska (Warsaw: Cyklady 2004), 9–42. In the context of criticism of the kahals, the debate is discussed by Marcin Wodziński: ‘ “Cywilni chrześcijanie”: Spory o reformę Żydów w Polsce 1789–1830,’ in Kwestia żydowska w XIX wieku, 9–42. See also Dora Szterenkac, ‘Zniesienie Kahałów i utworzenie dozorów bóżniczych (w pierwszych latach Królestwa Polskiego)’, master’s thesis written under the supervision of Majer Bałaban, 17–25. For more on Staszic’s attitude to Jewish self-government, with excerpts from his writings, see Józef Kruszyński, Stanisław Staszic a kwestia żydowska (Krzeszowice: Ostoja, 2003), 36–37.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

357

oppression inflicted on the Jewish community by the traditional structures of self-government [nos. 8, 9, 15, 48]. Members of the Jewish community also expressed their views. Maskilim in particular considered the abolition of the kahal to be a step in the direction of reforming the Jewish community as a whole.12 Others saw it as a false step. The debate, however, failed to generate practical programmes or formulas which might cure these much highlighted problems. Apart from the various other functions which attacks on traditional Jewish self-government had in public discourse, it is worth emphasizing that they overlapped with ever-stronger opposition to kahals from the Jewish community itself. Financial and personal conflicts of various sorts came to light with increasing regularity—such as those in 1818 in the Warsaw kahal13 or in the small towns scattered around Łódź.14 This obliged the state administration to adopt an active stance, and to deal with the problem in a pragmatic manner, in keeping with its Enlightenment character. 4

The Reforms of 1821–22: Confraternities, kahals and Synagogue Supervisory Boards

The reform of Jewish self-government can be seen as a three-stage process. First, on 20 March 1821, by decree of General Józef Zajączek, Viceroy of the Kingdom of Poland, synagogue supervisory boards were established.15 Their roots, in my view, are to be found in the two-pronged public criticism of the 12 13 14

15

L. Jerkiewicz, ‘ “Kwestia Żydowska” w Królestwie Polskim w latach 1815–1830’ (unpublished doctoral dissertation), 147–48. R. Kempner, ‘Agonia kahału,’ Kwartalnik Poświęcony Badaniu Przeszłości Żydów w Polsce, 1,1 (1912/13), 71–72, J. Shatzky, Geshihte fun Jidn in Varshe (New York, Idisher Visnshaftlikher Institut YIVO, 1947), vol 1. 264–81. Filip Friedman, Dzieje Żydów w Łodzi od początków osadnictwa do roku 1863 (Łódź: Łódzki Oddział Żydowskiego Towarzystwa Krajoznawczego w Polsce, 1935), 16, 21, and more on the internal conflicts within the kahals in the nineteenth century in Szterenkac, Zniesiene, 34–46. On the circumstances, see Jacek Walicki, Dozory bóżnicze w teorii i działaniu: Polska środkowa 1821–1866, in Historia, społeczeństwo, gospodarka. Profesorowi Wiesławowi Pusiowi w czterdziestolecie pracy naukowej, ed. by Stefan Pytlas and J. Kita (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2006), 110, and W. Gliński: Reforma samorządu gminy żydowskiej w początkach Królestwa Polskiego—ustanowienie Dozorów Bóżniczych in: Studia z historii społeczno-gospodarczej XIX i XX wieku, ed. Wiesław Puś, vol. 2 (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2004), 51–67.

358

Markowski

fiscal and social policies of the kahal authorities and in the inadequacy of the kahal’s fiscal relations with the state administration. The supervisory boards were intended therefore to act as executive, organizational, and fiscal institutions. It is clear, however, from the extant sources that until the kahals were abolished, this new institution existed only on paper. That is testament to the very strong attachment of the Jewish community to its traditional methods of operation, but also to its perfectly justified fear of any curtailment of its rights and freedoms. Second, kahals were abolished in the Kingdom of Poland by the decree of Tsar Alexander I, dated 1 January 1822. At the same time, a new set of administrative procedures was formulated, so that the management and administration of Jewish communal affairs could continue to run smoothly. The powers of the kahal were distributed between local authorities (for taxation issues) and the synagogue supervisory boards (for matters of infrastructure and ritual). Particular care was taken to ensure financial transparency and the accurate, collective transfer of documentary material and money (including debts) to the newly elected supervisory boards and to the authorities. In practice, however, very few documents were handed over, numerous irregularities and infringements occurred, and the public reaction to the supervisory boards as substitutes for Jewish self-government was initially very negative. It was difficult to find willing candidates for the posts of supervisor; even in official terminology at lower administrative levels, the words kahal and kahalnik continued to be used instead of synagogue supervisory board and supervisor. The old and new structures began to merge: kahal members sometimes became supervisors and all that changed was their official title and the scope of their jurisdiction.16 The final step in the reform process was the abolition of burial societies. This was done at national level by the Government Commission for Religious Affairs and Public Education on 28 March 1822. The responsibilities of the societies were transferred to the synagogue supervisory boards [no. 21], which began to collect at least four different kinds of funeral-related payments. However, the importance of burial and Jewish attitudes towards death meant that burial societies were accorded a very prestigious position in the communal hierarchy and their attempted abolition by the state was not successful:17

16 17

F. Friedman, Dzieje Żydów, 22. François Guesnet has written extensively about this issue and about popular attitudes towards the illegal confraternities. See idem, Polnische Juden im 19. Jahrhundert.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

359

their continued operation can occasionally be glimpsed in documents created both by local officials [nos. 18, 20, 19, 22, 49] and by the Jewish community. The position of the kahals themselves was not, in fact, dissimilar: the initial mistrust of synagogue supervisory boards, and the perception of them as agencies of state and instruments of fiscal control, served to sustain their continued illegal operation. There is no contemporary research on this phenomenon, although the denunciations to the state authorities and the community minute books bear witness to its existence.18 The reform process also formalized the geographical demarcation of Jewish communities and their mutual relationships. The affiliation of Jewish communities from small towns and villages with particular synagogue supervisory boards was scrupulously delineated. The whole process of establishing socalled synagogal districts, known from the Polish as ‘Jewish parishes’, often continued until the second half of the 1820s [no 36].19 5

Synagogue Supervisory Boards and Their Jurisdiction

The jurisdictional scope of the synagogue supervisory boards was significantly narrower than that of the kahals. The supervisory boards were stripped of a series of powers relating to education and the administration of justice.20 They were left with an auxiliary role in taxation and with control over a range of issues relating to the maintenance of the religious and ritual infrastructure. This restructuring, according to Marcin Wodziński, was nothing other than a change in the function of the Jewish community from an institution with the status of an estate to a department of state administering a religious association.21 In my view, the change went even deeper than that: it meant the abolition of the autonomous system of self-government and its replacement by a state institution which catered to basic religious needs and (in theory only) represented Jewish interests to the authorities. The synagogue supervisory

18 19 20

21

Lebensbedingungen, Rechtsnormen und Organisation im Wandel (Cologne, Vienna: Böhlau-Verlag, 1998), 357–86. Dubnov, Noveshaja istoriya, 83. Atlas Historii Żydów Polskich (Warsaw: Demart, 2010), 179 (map). Jews were obliged to pay a tax for elementary schools; see Adam Penkalla, ‘Żydzi szydłowieccy w latach 1815–1914,’ in: Żydzi szydłowieccy. Materiały sesji popularnonaukowej 22 lutego 1997 r, ed. Jacek Wijaczka (Szydłowiec: Muzeum Ludowych Instrumentów Muzycznych, 1997), 58. Wodziński, Zniesienia kahałów in: Atlas Historii, 162.

360

Markowski

boards as an executive institution were not autonomous and their activity was subject to constant control and vetting at all levels of state administration. Some measure of self-government was, however, realized through the electoral regulations which posited that members of the synagogue supervisory boards would be selected from among members of the Jewish community. It is difficult, however, to be categorical about this. While the very idea of the synagogue supervisory board, combined with the extent of its dependence on the authorities, indicate that it was simply another facet of state administration, it is important to remember that board members were elected to office only for a certain term and that they were not initially looked upon as state officials—although that was to change in the second half of the nineteenth century. It is worth adding that it was not just the synagogue supervisory boards which underwent significant redefinition: the position of the confraternities (officially abolished but still operating) and the rabbinate also changed. The latter was contested for different reasons and with different objectives by integrationists, hasidic leaders, and Lithuanian misnagdim. The supervisory boards consisted of three supervisors elected for three-year periods. The right both to vote and to stand in elections was held by Jews who were permanently resident in the community in question and were taxpayers (from 1830 onwards, only if they fell within the first four of five tax categories; the fifth, and poorest, category was tax exempt) [no. 16]. Detailed electoral regulations were laid down by the administrative authorities (sometimes at local level) and in theory elections were conducted by secret ballot. In practice, however, especially in the first half of the nineteenth century when office supplies (including paper) were not at all cheap or easy for the smaller town councils to procure, various anomalies occurred—such as a commission member writing down the vote which the voter whispered into his ear [no. 29]. Elected supervisors had to be approved by the local and voivodan authorities and were eventually obliged to take an oath similar to that taken by state officials [no. 32]. Those who were elected were typically well-known, prosperous community representatives, experienced in the exercise of power. Alongside the supervisors, who had general executive powers, the synagogue supervisory boards also employed several people with responsibility for a range of religious and community issues. These were essentially hired staff, whose numbers and salary depended on the size of the supervisory board and its economic status. The rabbi and auxiliary rabbi were elected, and were paid by the supervisory board. Together with the supervisors, they were involved in management and decision-making on those issues which were of greatest importance to the community [nos. 43, 44, 46, 47]—and hence the firm control

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

361

exercised by the state authorities over the whole process of the election and approbation of rabbis. The supervisory boards also hired cantors, synagogue caretakers, officials responsible for the hospital (in reality a shelter) known as szpitalni (the equivalent of the former gabbai), beadles (general helpers), a scribe capable of keeping records in the Polish language, and occasionally also a cashier (for a period, municipal cashiers took over these duties). The job of the synagogue supervisory board was to ensure that the communal infrastructure (synagogues, prayer houses, ritual baths) remained in good condition. It also dealt with issues such as relief for the poor and the provision of articles associated with religious worship (e.g. the purchase of etrogim).22 In addition, it formally assumed the responsibilities of the burial societies, although it is difficult to establish to what extent it actually carried out those responsibilities [nos. 14, 30, 33, 41]. It would seem that the financial powers of the synagogue supervisory boards were of particular importance. The supervisors managed a budget made up of income from the tax known as the skladka klassyfikacyjna (community tax) paid by male heads of household (i.e. married men) whose income put them in the first four tax groups [no. 10].23 The supervisory boards often leased out this tax, in order to guarantee a constant source of income and also to make the collection of payments more reliable. This was not, after all, an institution with its own financial structures or law-enforcement apparatus. The supervisory boards also received payments for conducting religious rites (e.g. circumcision or marriage) and for leases (e.g. of ritual baths) [nos. 24, 25, 27]. Officially, at least four different payments levied by the supervisory boards related to burials, although of course burial societies continued to operate illegally in many places. It is impossible to establish from the sources whether they made use of the resources administered by the supervisory boards [nos. 14, 30, 33, 41]. Expenses incurred by the supervisory boards included the cost of maintaining the communal infrastructure, salaries, and articles connected to religious observance (the purchase of etrogim and flour for pesach matzos for the poor). It is important to remember, however, that the supervisory boards kept two sets of accounts. Their budgets were an administrative fiction which in many

22 23

For the Jewish Warsaw charitable institutions (Hebr., tsedaka) in Warsaw, see Szacki, Geschikhte, vol. 2, 148–49. Etrogim, in Polish rajskie jabłko, a citrus fruit used for ritual purposes during the festival of Sukkot. K. Horowitz and R. Kempner, ‘Podatek gminny w Warszawie 1903–1912,’ Kwartalnik Poświęcony Badaniu Przeszłości Żydów w Polsce, 1,3 (1913), 160–65.

362

Markowski

cases bore no relation to their actual work or their financial problems.24 An analysis of the surviving source material can only serve to answer questions about the evolution of the synagogue supervisory board as an administrative institution25 and provides no more than an approximate reflection of the community’s finances.26 Also within the financial remit of the synagogue supervisory boards were property issues. Whether the board was responsible for administering a large community and managing an extensive infrastructure of both real and personal property, or whether it was small and administering only a synagogue and the ritual baths, all of its activities in this field were strictly controlled by the state authorities.27 The supervisory boards functioned in a similar way to state institutions. Hierarchically controlled and dependent on the state administration (for example, they passed on their records to the municipal archives), they also endeavoured to adjust to the demands of the age. The Warsaw Community Board, for example, paid pensions to the widows of deceased members and employees [no. 28]. Transfers of power also took place in a wholly bureaucratic manner [no. 34]. Fiscal matters apart, one indication of the control which supervisors exercised over the activities of community members was in the procedure for issuing permits to pray outside the synagogue or prayer house in specific circumstances, for example in the case of someone who was elderly or infirm [no. 39]. The abolition of certain elements of traditional Jewish self-government also changed the position of Jewish artisans, who were deprived not only of the supervision which the kahal had afforded, but also of the structures and framework of the organizations which had protected their rights, namely the artisan guilds. In view of the fact that Christian artisan guilds were beginning to admit Jews, this did not initially seem to be particularly significant. It became more pressing only in light of the 1862 edict of emancipation and of the socio-political status of Jews which stemmed from it. Overall, it appears that Jewish artisans found themselves in a kind of void after the old institutions of self-government were abolished [no. 42].

24 25 26 27

Artur Markowski, Między Wschodem a Zachodem. Rodzina i gospodarstwo domowe Żydów suwalskich w pierwszej połowie XIX wieku (Warsaw: Neriton, 2008), 44–47. Ibid., 46–47. Joanna Janicka, Żydzi Zamojszczyzny 1864–1915 (Lublin: Norbertinum, 2007), 79–85. Walicki, Dozory bóżnicze, 117.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

363

The conduct of the synagogue supervisory boards did not escape criticism, any more than that of the kahal authorities had done. The source material contains various denunciations and complaints about the manner in which they managed property, about the financial oppression they caused, about their habit of placing their own private interests above the common good, or simply about the laziness of supervisors. Some of these documents show that an intense political battle was already underway as early as the middle of the nineteenth century [nos. 26, 35]. 6

The Synagogue Supervisory Board as a Political Arena

Despite initial difficulties in finding people willing to take up the posts of supervisor [no. 13], the supervisory boards slowly began to function as political forums. Initially, their political activities resembled the politics of the pre-partition era—in other words, they were locally oriented and for the most part involved only Jewish factions. In time, as the struggle for emancipation and for changes to the legal status of Jews intensified, and as Jewish political empowerment grew, the supervisory boards gradually became arenas for the realization of political aspirations not just at an intracommunal level but also in a broader, national, sense. It was in that context that the supervisory board emerged as an institution representing a religious association in its contacts with the authorities. As early as 1851, there were attempts to lobby and discredit candidates during the communal elections in Warsaw, in a clash whose fault lines were the divisions between followers and opponents of the Enlightenment and integration.28 In the same period, the supervisory board of the provincial town of Suwałki became a similar hotbed of conflict and politicking [nos. 23, 26]. Even earlier, hasidic Jews had become politically active at the supervisory board level. Wodziński, in setting out the various phases of the hasidic movement’s political activity, confirms that it was clearly defensive in character until the 1820s, when it became more aggressive.29 The symbolic figure here is Izaak of Warka, who at one point held the post of rabbi on several different

28 29

Guesnet, Polnische Juden, 404–405. Marcin Wodziński, Władze Królestwa Polskiego wobec chasydyzmu. Z dziejów stosunków politycznych (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2008), 176.

364

Markowski

supervisory boards.30 Similarly, hasidic Jews held office in some supervisory boards from as early as the 1840s.31 In the aftermath of the 1863 uprising, when the attitudes of the Jewish community towards integration and acculturation were particularly polarized, the synagogue supervisory boards also became, as the examples of Lublin or Warsaw show, arenas for the battle for power between supporters of traditional Jewish isolation and those who favoured cultural and social integration, the socalled assimilationists.32 The rise of Jewish political parties at the turn of the century had less of a bearing on the operation of the supervisory boards. The weakness of these parties and the limited following they generated meant that they were unable to take an active part in the struggle for power within the communities. That era would ensue in 1918 with the re-establishment of the Polish state. Meanwhile, around 1905, the attention of the divided Jewish political scene was attracted rather more by the elections to the national Duma than by the local confines of community administration.33 The informal representation of Jewish communal interests to the non-Jewish political world, traditionally known as shtadlanut, nonetheless survived albeit in altered form. Notwithstanding the progressive and rational ethos adopted by the supervisory boards, this form of lobbying remained an integral part of Jewish political activity, a testament first to its independence of the structures of Jewish self-government and second to the weakness and limited powers of the latter, regardless of its character and the era in which it operated.34

30 31 32

33

34

Ibid., 195. Ibid., 209. Robert Kuwałek, ‘Pomiędzy tradycją a asymilacją. Walka o wpływ i władzę w lubelskiej gminie żydowskiej między ortodoksami i asymilatorami w latach 1862–1915’, in Żydzi i judaizm we współczesnych badaniach polskich, Materiały z konferencji Kraków 21–23 XI 1995, ed. by K. Pilarczyk (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 1997), 227–48; Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina, 10. Scott Ury, Barricades and Banners (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2012), 172–213; François Guesnet, ‘Revolutionary Hinterland: Transformations of Jewish Associational Life in the Kingdom of Poland, 1904–1906’, in The Russian Revolution of 1905 in Transcultural Perspective. Identities: Peripheries, and the Flow of Ideas, ed. Felicitas Fischer von Weikersthal, Franziska Schedewie, Frank Grüner, and Raphael Utz (Bloomington: Slavica Publishers 2013), 105–120. Wodziński, Władze Królestwa, 240–43.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

7

365

Were the Synagogue Supervisory Boards a Form of Self-Government?

Let us return to the fundamental question: did lawfully functioning Jewish selfgovernment exist in the Kingdom of Poland after 1822? In other words, what was the real nature of the synagogue supervisory boards? Antony Polonsky, author of the most recent comprehensive study of the history of Jews in Poland and Russia, maintains that the abolition of kahals was not particularly significant for Polish Jews—something which may point to their confidence in the undiminished vigour of the officially illegal traditional kahal and confraternity structures.35 This corresponds with the view expressed a century ago by Ignacy Schiper, for whom the synagogue supervisory boards were simply kahals under another name, with no change to their working practice.36 Jacek Walicki says that the new institution cannot be called selfgovernment, rightly emphasizing the extent of the state control to which it was subject.37 Israel Bartal points out that the newly created supervisory boards were stripped of the corporate features which had undoubtedly characterized the former kahals.38 Let us summarize the three most important variables: subordination to the state authorities and independence; political significance; and the actual impact of the activity of kahals and supervisory boards—and draw some comparisons with the preceding period. In relation to the first of these, the operation of the kahal, until its abolition in 1822, was subject to a great many regulatory procedures. If it operated on privately owned land, the owner of that land had an influence over the election and endorsement of kahal authorities and officials. Communities operating in royal towns were equally accustomed to official control over their elections or indeed over kahal finances. Although the scrutiny was not quite so rigorous or multi-layered as it was, for example, in the case of the budgets set by the synagogue supervisory boards, it is important to remember that the system of power in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth was quite different to that in the Kingdom of Poland. It is true that in the nineteenth century, the synagogue supervisory board constituted 35 36 37 38

Antony Polonsky, The Jews in Poland and Russia, vol. I (Oxford, London: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2010), 292. Walicki, Dozory Bóżnicze, 121. Michałowska, Między demokracją, 251. Israel Bartal, ‘From Corporation to Nation: Jewish Autonomy in Eastern Europe, 1772–1881,’ in: Jahrbuch des Simon-Dubnow-Instituts, vol. 5 (Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht: Göttingen, 2006), 21.

366

Markowski

the only element of the organizational framework in which Jews enjoyed widespread autonomy and that it was also subject to multi-level control (especially of its finances) by the Enlightenment state authorities. However, in the prepartition era it was not just the kahal which was subject to such control: the Jewish Councils (va’adim) were as well.39 The kahal and its activity in tsarist Russia is described by Isaac Levitats and, although his analysis nominally concerns Russia, it applies equally to Jewish self-government in the Kingdom of Poland between 1815 and 1822, with all its weaknesses and its problems.40 Such dysfunctional circumstances serve to explain how and why the political role of the kahal declined, and—especially from the mid- nineteenth century—that of the supervisory boards grew. The abolition of the kahal, tainted as it was by oligarchy and nepotism, was greeted with delight both by the state authorities and by a significant proportion of Jews, so that the supervisory boards which replaced it faced an uphill struggle to build up their political standing. Until the mid-nineteenth century when the supervisory boards became political battlegrounds and, as a result of the intelligent efforts of supervisors, also realistic venues for those struggles for power to take place, it is difficult to speak of Jewish self-government from a political perspective. However, from the middle of the century, this institution, intended as yet another branch of the Enlightenment state, grew more liberal in its administration of the community. In comparison with kahals, the jurisdiction of the supervisory boards was, of course, significantly narrower, and for almost thirty years it remained unclear whether they were agencies of state integral to the system of power or self-governing entities designed to enable the Jewish community to achieve its political goals. It is important to remember in making these assessments that, in fact, the expression self-government when applied to the Jewish community never really meant full independence or sovereignty in fiscal or politico-legal matters. One argument in favour of acknowledging synagogue supervisory boards as a form of self-government is the fact of their independence from other collegiate bodies charged with the proficient ‘deciphering’ and supervision of Jewish affairs. There was, for example, no structural dependence between the 39

40

Anna Michałowska, Sejm Żydów Litewskich (1623–1764) (Warsaw: Dialog, 2014), 249–64. On the significance of the owner’s legal control over the kahal in practice see Artur Markowski, ‘Materiały do dziejów kahału zabłudowskiego z poł XVIII w.’ in: Biuletyn Historii Pogranicza 9 (2008), 65–73. Isaac Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia 1772–1844 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943).

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

367

supervisory boards and the Komitet Starozakonnych (an advisory body established in 1826).41 The supervisory boards dealt effectively with everyday issues and with meeting the basic needs of the Jewish community. Their authority stemmed from their election by the Jewish community, while their financial dependence on, and monitoring by, the state administration were part and parcel of selfgovernment as understood not just in the nineteenth century but also in the pre-partition era. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska Bibliographic References Alperin, Aron, Żydzi w Łodzi. Początki Gminy Żydowskiej 1780–1822 (Łódź: E. Neustein, 1922). Bartal, Israel, ‘From Corporation to Nation: Jewish Autonomy in Eastern Europe, 1772– 1881’, in Jahrbuch des Simon-Dubnow-Instituts, vol. 5 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006), 17–31. Corrsin, Stephen, Warsaw before the First World War: Poles Jews in the Third City of the Russian Empire 1880–1914 (Boulder: East European Monographs, 1989). Eisenbach, Artur, Emancypacja Żydów na ziemiach polskich 1785–1870 na tle europejskim (Warsaw: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 1989). Friedman, Filip, Dzieje Żydów w Łodzi od początku osadnictwa do r. 1863 (Łódź: Łódzki Oddział Żydowskiego Towarzystwa Krajoznawczego w Polsce, 1935). Galiński, W., ‘Reforma samorządu gminy żydowskiej w początkach Królestwa Polskiego—ustanowienie Dozorów Bóżniczych’, in Wiesław Puś, ed., Studia z historii społeczno-gospodarczej XIX i XX wieku, vol. 2 (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2004), pp. 51–67. Gelber, Natan, ‘Di yidn-frage in Kongres Poyln in di yorn 1815–1830’, Bleter far Geshikhte, 1, 3–4 (1948), 41–105. Guesnet, François, Lodzer Juden im 19, Jahrhundert. Ihr Ort in einer multikulturellen Staadtgesellschaft (Leipzig: Simon-Dubnow-Institut für jüdische Geschichte und Kultur, 1997). Guesnet, François, Polnische Juden im 19. Jahrhundert: Lebensbedingungen, Rechtsnormen und Organisation im Wandel (Cologne: Böhlau, 1998). 41

Dawid Kandel, ‘Komitet starozakonnych,’ in Kwartalnik poświęcony badaniu przeszłości Żydów, 1,2 (1913), 85–103.

368

Markowski

Guesnet, François, ‘Khevres and Akhedes: The Change in Jewish Self-organisation in the Kingdom of Poland before 1900 and the Bund’, in Jewish Politics in Eastern Europe: The Bund at 100 (Basingstoke: Palgrave in association with Jewish Historical Institute, Warsaw; 2001), pp. 3–13. Hessen, Julius, ‘Evreiskoe samoupravlenie’, Voskhod, 1 (1903), 3–31; 2 (1903), 30–50. Janicka, Joanna, Żydzi Zamojszczyzny 1864–1915 (Lublin: Norbertinum, 2007). Kandel, Dawid, ‘Komitet starozakonnych’, Kwartalnik poświęcony badaniu przeszłości Żydów, 1 (1912), 85–103. Kandel, Dawid, ‘Żydzi w dobie królestwa Kongresowego’, Kwartalnik poświęcony badaniu przeszłości Żydów, 1.1 (1912), 97. Kirszenbaum, B., ‘Bractwo pogrzebowe na Pradze’, Kwartalnik poświęcony badaniu przeszłości Żydów, 1 (1912), 133–46. Kirszrot, Jakub, Prawa Żydów w Królestwie Polskim. Zarys historyczny (Warsaw: Zarząd Warszawskiej Gminy Starozakonnych, 1917). Klier, John. D., ‘The Kahal in the Russian Empire: Life, Death and Afterlife of a Jewish Institution 1772–1882’, Jahrbuch des Simon-Dubnow-Instituts, vol. 5 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006), 33–50. Kuwałek, Robert, ‘Pomiędzy tradycją a asymilacją. Walka o wpływ i władzę w lubelskiej gminie żydowskiej między ortodoksami i asymilatorami w latach 1862–1915’ in Krzysztof Pilarczyk, ed., Żydzi i judaizm we współczesnych badaniach polskich. Materiały z konferencji Kraków 21–23 XI 1995 (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 1997), pp. 227–47. Kuwałek, Robert, ‘Urzędowi rabini lubelskiego Okręgu Bóżniczego 1821–1939. Przyczynek do dziejów gminy żydowskiej w Lublinie’, in Tadeusz Radzik, ed., Żydzi w Lublinie: materiały do dziejów społeczności żydowskiej Lublina (Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, 1998), pp. 27–65. Markowski, Artur, Między Wschodem a Zachodem. Rodzina i gospodarstwo domowe Żydów suwalskich w pierwszej połowie XIX wieku (Warsaw: Neriton, 2008). Markowski, Artur, ‘State Policies Concerning Jewish Conversions in the Kingdom of Poland during the First Half of the Nineteenth Century’, Gal – Ed, 25 (2017), 15–40. Markowski, Artur, ‘Did Jewish Self-Government Exist in the Kingdom of Poland between 1815–1915?’, in François Guesnet, Antony Polonsky (eds.): Jewish Self-Government in Eastern Europe, vol. 34 Polin. Studies in Polish Jewry (Liverpool, London: 2022), 224–244. Nussbaum, Hilary, Szkice historyczne z życia Żydów w Warszawie od pierwszych śladów pobytu ich w tem mieście do chwili obecnej skreślił Hilary Nussbaum (Warsaw: Druk K. Kowalewskiego, 1881).

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

369

Oniszczuk, Aleksandra, ‘The Jews in the Duchy of Warsaw: The Question of Equal Rights in Administrative Theory and Practice’, in Polin. Studies in Polish Jewry, vol. 27 (Oxford, Portland, Ore.: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2014), 63–88. Schiper, Ignacy, ‘Samorząd żydowski w Polsce na przełomie wieku 18 i 19-go (1764– 1831)’, Miesięcznik Żydowski, 1.1 (1931), 513–29. Szacki, Jakub, Geshikhte fun yidn in Varshe, vols. 1–3 (New York: YIVO, 1947–1953). Szacki, Jakub, ‘Institutional Aspects of Jewish Life in Warsaw in the Second Half of the Nineteenth Century’, YIVO Annual of Jewish Social Science, 10 (1955), 9–44. Szternkranc, Dora, ‘Zniesienie kahałów i utworzenie dozorów bóżniczych w pierwszych latach Królestwa Polskiego’ (M.A. thesis, University of Warsaw, n.d., preserved in Żydowski Instytut Historyczny). Walicki, Jacek, ‘Dozory Bóżnicze w teorii i w działaniu: Polska Środkowa 1821–1866’, in Stefan Pytlas and Jarosław Kita, eds, Historia, społeczeństwo, gospodarka. Profesorowi Wiesławowi Pusiowi w czterdziestolecie pracy naukowej (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2006). Wishnitzer, M.L., ‘Proekty reformy evreiskogo byta v Gertsogstve Varshavskom i Tsarstve Polskom’, Perezhitoe, 1 (1909), 164–221. Wodziński, Marcin, ‘ “Cywilni chrześcijanie”: Spory o reformę Żydów w Polsce 1789– 1830’, in Grażyna Borkowska and Magdalena Rudkowska, eds, Kwestia żydowska w XIX wieku. Spory o tożsamość Polaków (Warsaw: Cyklady, 2004), pp. 9–42. Wodziński, Marcin, Władze Królestwa Polskiego wobec chasydyzmu. Z dziejów stosunków politycznych (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2008). Wodziński, Marcin, ‘Reforma i wykluczenie. Wizje reformy społeczności żydowskiej u schyłku polskiego oświecenia’, Pamiętnik Literacki, 101,4 (2010), 5–21.



Sources



No. 1 A Report on the State of Kahals in the County of Warsaw, Warsaw 1816

Source: Archiwum Główne Akt Dawnych (Main Archive of Old Records, Warsaw, hereafter AGAD), Centralne Władze Wyznaniowe (Religious Affairs Department, hereafter CWW), file 1429, pp. 14–38.

370

Markowski

3. Names County Location Rabbi of the kahal community

4. His place of birth

9. Is there a sched5. His 6. How 7. By whom 8. The he was source of ule of charges for age long he has appoint­ed his income him prescribed by law or custom been a rabbi

Błonie

Mszczonów

Pinczów

40 11 years By the rabbi The krupka 80 zł per month years of Pinczów old

Ditto

Grodzisk Baruch Perł

Sochaczew

44 18 years years old

Ditto

Nadarzyn

Brzeziny Stryków

Lejb Dawidowicz

Dawid Warta Borkowicz Mojzesz Płońsk Abrahm Lichtsztejn

The krupka 32 zł per month By the owner of the Town ??? Old Testament believers 48 8 years Appointed The krupka Voluntary donayears in Ryczywół tions from the old community 60 Secyears ond old year

By the From the Synagogue innkeepers who trade in wine. There are two of them who each pay 10 zł a week.

There is a Synagogue budget which was set under the previous Government but they do not adhere to this, nor do they submit any kahal accounts.

371

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

10. What is the nature of those charges

11. Who apportions them and for what purpose

12. What are 13. Names of the kahal the prerogatives and members duties of the rabbis

14. Their place of residence

15. Are the kahal members paid by the communities which constitute the kahal district

16. What are the prerogatives and duties of kahal members

The krupka

The kahal for the rabbi

Mszczonów Ditto DItto

No ~ ~

They collect taxes and see to the administration of their community

The krupka

The kahal

They are con- Hersz Krakauer cerned only Mojzesz Goldwith religious berg services Mojsiek Nate Ditto Abrahm Cand Mossiek Lewy Manas Jakob.

Grodzisk Ditto Ditto

No ~ ~

Ditto

None

The kahal

Ditto

Nadarzyn Ditto Ditto

The nature of the charges was set out in the budget which is among the papers held by the kahal. The original was submitted to the Warsaw

Provisionally apportioned by the kahal members so that he receives 10 złp from each of the wine traders.

To give sermons, to conduct services and to deal with all matters related to the Mosaic Religion.

No ~ ~ They are not paid by the community. They support themselves by their trade.

Ditto ~ ~ To apportion the taxes imposed on the Jews of this town, albeit with the knowledge of the Mayor, and to collect these monies and account for them to the Mayor and then to collect and pay them out in accordance with the Budget mentioned above.

Treasury.

Hersz Selig Dawid Gutman Cudik Edelman Provisionally 1st Nosen Gerochim Pakier 2nd Pinkus Mojzesz Winer 3rd Hejm Gedalie Kenig 4th Abrachm Hersz Koren These have not yet been approved by the noble owner and thus have not been submitted for further endorsement.

In Stryków _ _

372

Markowski

(cont.) 3. Names Rawa

Skiernie- There is wice none

Ditto

Nowe Miasto

Ditto

Bia[…]

Stanisla- Miasto wów Radzymin

“

“

“

“

“ Not Not known There is no “ known permanent Rabbi […] only a tempor[…] who travels from Przysucha in the dep[…] of Radom Salamon Koniecpol 54 6 years By the Abram years synagogue old

Nosym Joskowicz

Ciechanowiec Miasto Nowe

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

“

_

There is no permanent source of funding but voluntary donations are made by residents of the Old Testa[…]

From alms, None that is voluntary donations made by residents of the Mosaic faith

44 6 years Appointed He supports years by the old Radzymin himself Synagogue from and the Old voluntary Test[ament payments believers] and donaresident in tions the whole county

There is no fee charged to pay the rabbi’s salary, since apart from the krupka, he supports himself solely by means of voluntary payments and donations, voluntarily made by the Old Testament believers resident in the town of Radzymin itself, a fund set per pound […]

373

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

“

“

“

1st Michel Ciwak

Skierniewice

They are not paid

2nd Boniamin Jzrael “

“

In accordance with Religion

None

There is no The obligaapportion- tion to ment conduct services in the Synagogue

All payments for the Rabbi are voluntary, i.e. for marriages, baptisms and house calls, and also the voluntary donations on the Day of Judgement

No-one makes any apportionment, since it was previously established by the […]ssors that these voluntary donations should be handed to the Rabbi himself in person.

He is authorized by all the Old Testament Believers of the whole county in relation to religious matters

They have no prerogatives. Their specific duty is to ensure that the Community acquires […] “

1st Rafał Cylich Nowe Miasto 2nd Szmuel Gdański

They receive no salary

1st Aron Franko In Białł[…] 2nd Dawid Eisman

They are not

Ditto

Old Testa [ament Believer] Jcek Abram MaszAbramowicz kowicz second, first kahal who lives on member lives the estate as a in Miasto leaseholder Radzymin Second kahal Zacharjasz member Mooszkowicz, Abram Moszscribe kowicz lives w third dobrym […] The scribe Zacharjasz Moszko lives in Radzymi[…]

No salary or charge is levied and to date no fund has been set up to remunerate them.

To comply with and carry out all government orders, to apportion public taxes […] and to pay them to the county cashiers, to maintain a school for the education of young people and to tend to the cemetery and to keep the synagogue and relig[…] in good order […] for Old Testa[ment Believer] residents […]

Jicek Abramowicz first

374

Markowski

No. 2 The Administrative Council of the Kingdom of Poland: An Excerpt from a Statement Concerning the Acceptability to the Administration of the Use of the Religious Ban as a Means of Enforcement in Fiscal Matters, 8 January 1818

Published in: Dzieje Żydów w Polsce, XIX wiek. Wybór tekstów źródłowych, Zofia Borzymińska (ed.), Warszawa 1994, p. 51. The Minister of Revenue and the Treasury, responding to the proposal submitted to him by the Government Commission for Internal Affairs and the Police, set out the need to preserve in the conditions of leasehold contracts for kosher income any terms entitling leaseholders to require Jewish elders to employ every measure permitted by their faith, such as exculpatory oaths and bans to prevent fraudulent behaviour, at least until the expiry of the contracts currently in force. The Viceroy declared that, although he found it repugnant and harmful, even from a moral perspective, to allow Jews to use these measures under any pretext whatsoever, nonetheless in order to shield the Treasury from loss in respect to one of its principal sources of income, he did not object to these methods being used until the expiry of the contracts, albeit not more extensively than the contracts themselves stipulate. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 3 Instructions from the State Authorities in the Voivodeship of Płock Concerning the Procedure for the Election of the Kahal Authorities, Płock, 16 July 1818

Source: Archiwum Państwowe Płocku (Płock State Archive, henceforth APP), Akta Miasta Płocka (Płock City Records, henceforth AMP), 199, pages 103v–104. […] In order to establish the timing of the election of kahal elders and to set a uniform procedure for that election, the Voivodan Commission decrees as follows: 1. All general Jewish communities,42 and in particular those in which kahal elders were not appointed this year, shall between 1 and 10 December elect three new kahal elders as well as three deputy elders whose role shall be in some measure to oversee the former. 2. Such an election shall take place every three years, always between 1 and 10 December of each year. 42

‘General kahal’ identifies a community board independent from any other, in contrast to boards of smaller communities dependent on larger ones (Pol. przykahalki).

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

375

3.

Elders who were elected this year and elders and deputy elders43 who will be elected in December shall hold office for three years, after which new elections shall be held in December in every kahal. 4. In those communities where kahal elders were elected this year, it is only necessary to elect deputy elders if none was elected. In relation to the election itself, the following regulations shall apply: 1st. Every kahal shall be divided into classes of Jews, in the same way as the apportionment of the recruitment tax is divided. 2nd. Each class, from the first to the last, shall select from its ranks three men of integrity who shall be known as the electors. 3rd. These electors shall, on the day set for the election, go to the town where the kahal is located and elect three of the most dependable men as elders and another three as deputy elders of the kahal, without regard to whether they are rich or poor. In order for this to be achieved in good time, the selection of electors shall take place during the entire month of November and the election of the kahal elders and deputy elders shall take place between 1 and 10 December, so that election records reach the honourable landlord by 15 December and the Voivodan Commission no later than 24 December, without fail. The electors of the elders and deputy elders shall submit confirmation of their election from their class to the honourable landlord where the kahal is located for which they were elected, and which of them is obliged to be present and keep order. During the time that the electors are selecting elders and sub-elders, no other Jew from the community shall be present. Finally, the appointment of the kahal cashier ought also to be effective and appropriate to requirements. While electing elders and deputy elders, the electors shall at the same time appoint a cashier who must always be someone who is in a position to stand surety and who is able to write in Polish, since accounts must be drawn up in the Polish and not the Jewish language. The Voivodan Commission expects to receive reports on the elections of elders and deputy elders taking place this year on 24 December. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

43

A reference to the monthly parnasim (‘elders’) and their assistants or tovim (it is difficult to be certain here).

376

Markowski

No. 4 Memorial by Ezechiel (Stanisław) Hoge44 Concerning the Supervision of Burial Societies, Warsaw, 27 August 1818

Source: AGAD, CWW, file 1723, pp. 29–35.

[…] It is a well-known truth that the chief obstacle to the Enlightenment of Polish Jews is their separation from Christians, a separation which does not derive merely from habits and customs. The reason that they [Jews—AM] have been unable to advance with the spirit of the times is that they have always been led and controlled by the most superstitious of their number who, while they not constituting an official administration, nonetheless held and continue to hold authority and power of a sort which it is difficult for a Christian to imagine and which only a Jew can comprehend. For example, although that instrument of rabbinical tyranny, the ban, has been abolished by the wise laws of the government, something similar still continues to operate in a manner which is invisible to the authorities. Consideration should be given amongst others to the following. In the Jewish community of every town there is generally a society which deals with funerals. According to a recently introduced practice, the leaders of this society are entitled to charge as much as they desire for a funeral. They make good use of this practice and always demand handsome payment for granting their consent for a funeral to take place. It is easy to establish and to verify that here in Warsaw they have often taken as much as a thousand złoty for a single funeral. Apart from this, they can also forbid outright the burial of a Jew who was educated and had lived his life wisely, or leave him unburied for a time, or bury him in a disrespectful manner and thus posthumously take the revenge which they had been unable to exact during his lifetime. There are many ways of causing such outrage to the deceased: sometimes they relate to the ceremony, sometimes to the place of burial, since Enlightened Jews who provided their children with a good education are commonly buried in the place set aside for murderers and other wrong. […] Any Jew who dares to defy this society, e.g. by taking a case against a fellow Jew to a public court and not to a Jewish one, or by doing something else of that sort, is straight away recorded as banned and not deserving of an honourable burial. The offspring and family of such a man are all the more unfortunate. The less foolish he was during his lifetime, the more they have to pay for his funeral. And this is one of the main reasons why even a rational Jew in Poland is obliged, against his will and his better judgement, to submit to all this Jewish nonsense along with everyone else: for who wants to bring poverty and disgrace upon his children. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska 44

Ezechiel (Stanisław) Hoge—social activist maskil and inventor (1791–1860).

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



377

No. 5 A Complaint by Members of the Jewish Community in Płock Concerning the Fiscal Policies and Corrupt Behaviour of the Kahal Authorities, Płock, 30 August 1818

Source: APP, AMP, file 199, pp. 98–99.

To the Commission of the Voivodeship of Płock from the Jewish community of the Płock kahal in relation to the present Kahal Elders. Having had no response to date to our earlier submissions, we consider it necessary hereby to convey to the Voivodan commission our most humble request that: that part of the kahal’s revenue which derives from the recruitment tax45 and 1. which remains in the hands of the former cashier and erstwhile kahal elder Eliasz Ber, and which was raised by him for the budgetary expenditure of the kahal, a sum of more than 1,000 Polish złoty according to the accounts received from him by Comptroller46 Natkowski, […] should be exacted from him. 2. since the kahal’s practice of levying the percentage tax known as the pardon47 in an arbitrary manner and without consulting the community council is singularly unnecessary and oppressive to the community, the Voivodan Commission should in future not merely decline to endorse such a levy but should indeed strictly forbid it since income from the krupka of up to 10,000 Polish złoty is sufficient to cover all the annual budgetary expenses of the kahal, as well as the interest on old debts incurred by the community. Meanwhile the kahal takes advantage of the government’s demands for payment of arrears48 and instead of duly transmitting those arrears, records them as disbursed from the cashier’s office and fritters away and misuses the kahal’s income. In consequence, for the current year it has set the allocation of the percentage tax at 16,000 zł and, in full view of the government, it presumes thereby to allow the community to be destroyed and authority to be abused, since even the government itself, as a constitutional government, does not have the power to set any taxes and charges

45 46 47

48

A reference to the tax paid by Jews in the Kingdom of Poland from 1812 onwards in lieu of military service, cf Kirszrot, Prawa Żydów w Królestwie Polskiem, pp. 138–45. A comptroller (in Polish, kalkulator) was the representative of the state authorities responsible for the fiscal management of various institutions. A reference to the bardon or krupka, which was initially a type of consumption tax on meat, wine, and other items but which over time was extended to cover general income-generating activity, cf A. Michałowska, Między demokracją a oligarchią. Władze gmin żydowskich w Poznaniu i Swarzędzu (od połowy XVII do XVIII wieku) (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Akademickie Dialog, 2000), pp. 215–16. A reference to the payment of kahal debts.

378

Markowski other than those decreed by the Sejm or the supreme authorities. Thus it is clear that both the setting of the percentage tax49 by the kahal and the confirmation of that tax by the Voivodan Commission should cease. The community therefore has no option but to commit itself to the care and protection of the Voivodan Commission as the tutelary authority for Communities.

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 6 The Opinions of E. Hoge, J. Lipiński, and J.U. Niemcewicz Concerning an Assembly of Jewish Deputies, Warsaw, 1819

Source: AGAD, CWW, file 1431, pp. 79–88.

A brief opinion concerning an Assembly of Jewish Deputies50 1st The Jews of each town should select two of their co-religionists, one a religious leader, the other a scholar who is fluent in at least one living European language. 2nd Deputies should have plenipotentiary powers from their communities, i.e. acceptance that they will unreservedly accede to their views. 3rd The deputies should assemble in Warsaw and appear before the commission appointed by the government for that purpose. 4th The government should encourage them by granting them greater privileges, while those who do not comply with the will of the government should be threatened with severe consequences. 5th The government should set the deputies the following questions to debate: a) Do they consider Christians to be idolaters? (a) If not, they should substantiate this by reference to their rules, and through specific rituals. b) Is it compatible with their rules for their dress to conform to that of the country in which they live? c) Is it compatible with their rules to establish schools teaching all disciplines […] E. Hoge […] has the honour to state that, having reflected on this proposal, he sees in it what both our own experience here and experience abroad has confirmed, namely that whenever a government earnestly and consistently pursues any resolution aimed at 49 50

A reference to the bardon. On proposals concerning the so-called ‘civilization’ of Jews, cf. M. Wodziński, ‘Cywilni chrześcijanie. Spory o reformę Żydów w Polsce 1789–1830’, in Kwestia żydowska w XIX wieku. Spory o tożsamość Polaków, ed. G. Borkowska and M. Rudkowska (Warsaw: Cyklady, 2004), pp. 10–43.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

379

reforming them or making them less harmful to the nation, then their ultimate tactic to ensure its realization is if not completely averted then at least postponed […] so that they gain some time, is always to propose […] to come to a voluntary agreement with the government on the matter. […] It also readily comes to mind to ask what purpose such a gathering of Jewish elders could have if their deliberations are considered unnecessary. Would such a convocation of delegates appointed by the communities not in fact resemble a National Assembly called to treat freely with the government, to accept or reject its proposals, thereby confirming Jews in that executive sovereignty and detachment which should instead be quashed? On the other hand, if this tractability of the government were to bring any hope of a favourable outcome by making this nation more useful, or rather less harmful to the country, then every means leading to that end would be good. But […] it is not easy to envisage that being the result of such an assembly. If the intention of the government is to introduce better education for Jews, to lead them out of the darkness, to set right their harmful moral principles, to root out superstition and hatred of Christians, […] to destroy that isolation and separation of the Jews from other citizens brought about by their customs, dress and language, if the aim is to abolish that autonomous state within a state in our country, then whom do we wish to ask for advice, for co-operation, for assistance with this? The elders, or the rabbis, or kahal members? Those very people whose function and interests lie in maintaining power and keeping the nation […] in darkness and thus in servile dependence on their despotic theocracy? The Commission for RWiD has evidence that the difficulties in advancing the enlightenment of Jews are caused by the kahals, the rabbis, and the elders rather than by the people themselves. While for two years the city’s president has attempted to agree with kahal members and elders to the establishment of four elementary schools in the capital, to date there has been no result, but only delays and excuses. J. Lipiński51 The Commission for Religious Denominations and Public Education accepted with earnest gratitude the request of the Jewish nation conveyed to it by the Royal Viceroy, that a group of learned rabbis be summoned to the capital to confer and take steps to improve the condition of that people. The commission, having been invited to give its opinion on this matter, will do so with all the diligence and sense of civic duty which the importance of the subject demands and which lengthy experience clearly prescribes. Above all, the following factors must be considered:

51

Józef Lipinski (1764–1828), Polish educator and author of the Enlightenment period.

380

Markowski

1.

Will a meeting of rabbis in Warsaw assure us of that public good and benefit to the country as a whole and to Jews themselves which the government has for so many years striven to achieve? 2. In what circumstances can the government give Jews the hope that it will accede to any of their demands? […] A meeting of a rabbinical synod will achieve no more than it did here in 1791 or in 1808 and other years in France. Jews continue to pursue their goals with unflagging tenacity, and when they meet an obstacle which they cannot overcome, they resort to their usual method, that is procrastination, well aware that such procrastination brings them immediate benefits and staves off the intended changes. Therefore the government, familiar as it is with these ruses and delaying tactics, could in response to these Jewish demands first declare that, before it meets their requests, it wishes to see proof that they are now worthy of them and demand of the kahals That they establish schools for their young people under the regulation 1. and supervision of the Commission of Religious Denominations and Public Education and that they abide faithfully by the commission’s regulations. 2. That they submit in all matters to the jurisdiction of the national courts and legislature. 3. That they adapt their dress, and conduct their religious services and their accounts in the native language, as is practiced in other countries. 4. That they acknowledge publicly in the synagogues that they do not regard our country as foreign and that they do not consider its inhabitants to be idolaters and enemies. 5. That they should be encouraged by promise of reward to convert that effort and industry hitherto dedicated to innkeeping to the establishment of artisans’ workshops for the production of essential items, on the strict condition that these workshops should only employ Jews. J.U. Niemcewicz52 Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

52

Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz, author and politician (1757–1841).

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



381

No. 7 Administrative Order for the Elders of Jewish Communities Formulated by the Voivodan Authorities of Płock, Płock, 10 May 1819

Source: APP, AMP, file 30, p. 230. 1.

2.

3.

4. 5. 6.

7.

53 54

The kahal elders are the representatives of the Jewish community within the bounds set for the kahal. They do not have the standing of state authorities. They are, rather, a body from whom the government is entitled to request explanations and proposals in relation to the Jewish community, and they are also responsible for those matters which the state authorities have vouchsafed to their supervision. They maintain relations with the local municipal office,53 to which they must make any submissions which concern the community as a whole, and whose orders they must discharge as instructed. They do not have authority to take any executive steps in their own name, nor to do any act based on their own will or conjecture. In particular, they must not impose new taxes on community members or involve themselves in the settling of disputes between community members, since resolving these is a matter solely for the state authorities […] They are entrusted with the supervision of communal property, that is buildings, land, capital, etc. In relation to buildings they must report any necessary repairs to the municipal office; in relation to land, they must safeguard the integrity of its borders; and in relation to capital, they must pay regard to the safety of its location. […] They are also responsible for supervising the communal income so that it is diligently administered and received into the kahal cash office. They shall supervise the hospitals for the sick and poorhouses so that, as far as funds permit, their needs […] In October of each year, they shall submit to the local municipal authorities the information necessary for the drafting of the community budget for the following year. […] In accordance with Section 2 of this order, the kahal elders are forbidden from raising any taxes from the community. However, should such taxes prove necessary, then once the Voivodan Commission has confirmed that fact, they shall be apportioned with the expertise of the municipal office by five trustees54 chosen for that purpose, one from each class of residents. When these trustees have duly The municipal office (in Polish, urząd municipalny) was the local government body in the towns of the Kingdom of Poland. In Polish, wiernik, a term used for the communal cashier, cf. Michałowska, Między demokracją, 56.

382

8.

9.

10.

11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

16. 17.

18. 19.

Markowski completed the apportionment in its entirety, they shall sign it, jointly with the municipal office, and the kahal elders shall also countersign it. […] In addition, the kahal elders do not have the authority either themselves or through proxies to be involved in the collection of taxes or to direct any expenditure from kahal funds. Instead, all authorized taxes shall be paid into kahal funds through the appointed cashier. […] The elders, mindful of the welfare of the community in general, shall consult with their deputies and the more prominent members of the community and then shall submit to the municipal office their proposals concerning the maintenance of order. […] To enable the community to function effectively, a kahal chamber shall be established in the communal premises or other private building rented for the purpose, in which all documents and papers relating to the whole community shall be kept, duly preserved under the supervision of the kahal scribe and one of the deputy elders. […] At such meetings, the elders shall have a deciding vote, while the vote of the deputy elders shall be advisory. […] The deputy elders are, by virtue of their nomination, the natural substitutes of the kahal elders. […] [sic, A.M.] The proceedings of the kahal chamber shall not be recorded in any language other than Polish. […] The accounts of the kahal cash office which are to be prepared and submitted to the Voivodan Commission for approval each year, as well as all cash books, are to be kept only in the Polish language and in accordance with the specimens and procedures employed by civic cash offices. The president and the mayor, together with two selected elders and one deputy elder, shall conduct a quarterly audit of this cash office. […] The cashier shall submit any arrears to the appropriate municipal office once a fortnight for execution, otherwise he will be personally liable for any financial execution which may become due. [sic, A.M.] It is the duty of the kahal elders to ensure that the amounts which fall to be paid by the Jewish community are regularly and punctually transferred to the appropriate cash office by the kahal cashier. […]

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



383

No. 8 Excerpt from a Pamphlet Entitled ‘An Appeal or a Vindication of the People of the Jewish Faith Resident in the Kingdom of Poland’ (Warsaw 1820)

Published as: Prośba czyli usprawiedliwienie się Ludu Wyznania Starego Tstamentu w Królestwie Polskiem zamieszkanego, Warsaw 1820, pp. 6–7, 26–29. […] Thirdly. The elders of the Confraternity and their method of dealing with the deceased. It is these infernal monsters, all of them twisted into one tight knot, who are the true cause of the misery and decline of the Jewish population and the reason why its members still remain in a state of the crudest ignorance and have not been transformed into useful people. […] This reveals only particular instances of the oppression suffered, namely those which have been the subject of multiple complaints, complaints which have nevertheless not been resolved, since the elders by their usual ploys have succeeded in suppressing and dismissing them, while at the same time squandering the tear-stained pennies extracted from the poor. All this gives the Jewish community good reason to think that the intention of the nation purportedly looking after them is not at all to improve their condition and turn them into a useful people but to leave them to their own devices until they destroy each other—something which the oppressive behaviour of the elders will undoubtedly bring about before long, if it is not contained immediately. […] The immediate and complete abolition of the administrative, policing and 1stly judicial authorities known as the kahal elders, confraternity elders, and religious leaders, along with bans and all superstitious customs. 2ndly Thorough interrogation of the elders of the kahal and confraternities and examination of accounts, under oath and accompanied by evidence. […] 4thly The abolition of the present method of raising and enforcing the recruitment tax, thereby counteracting the misappropriation which has been taking place. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

384

Markowski

No. 9 From a Pamphlet Criticising the Activity of the Kahal and Burial Society: ‘What Obstructs the Reform of Jews in Our Country and What Can Accelerate It’, Warsaw, 1820

Published as: Co powstrzymuje reformę Żydów w kraiu naszym i co ią przyspieszyć po­­ winno, Warsaw 1820, pp. 20–25. […] Let them stop extorting arbitrarily imposed taxes from the impoverished community. Let them not seek to avoid accounting for monies withdrawn on the pretext that they were used for business which ought to remain secret. Let them not extort extraordinary burial fees from grieving families for burying someone who wished to educate his children properly and sent them to a Christian school. […]55 […] I do not refer to their administration of hospitals, etc., because the government, mindful of the lot of the suffering masses, put an end to that and other excesses which required more rapid suppression. I cannot, however, omit mentioning the Burial Confraternity or Society (Beerdigungs-Gesellschaft). This Confraternity is all the more oppressive for our Jews in that its elders have independent authority on a par with that of kahal members themselves; it is all the more lawless in that sums designated for the alleviation of poverty and suffering are used for corruption and excess; and it is of universal concern since it is immediately established wherever even a few Jewish families settle. Jewish elders, having inherited from their predecessors an interest in maintaining the existing state of affairs, are staunchly resistant to any change and oppose what they know in their hearts to be true, just, and proper and thus do all they can to thwart even the most constructive plans. It is right, therefore, to hold them wholly responsible for the present disarray and poverty afflicting the majority of Jews, for striving to extend that disarray and poverty as far as possible, for generating these difficulties, and for frustrating the finest endeavours. This is where the solution to the aforementioned question is to be found. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

55

The following paragraph about the kahal quotes Calmanson’s description documented in the chapter by Cornelia Aust, section ‘The Kahal’, pp. 178–80.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



385

No. 10 Decree of the Government Commission for Religious Denominations and Public Education Concerning the Fiscal Liabilities Placed on Jews for the Maintenance of the Religious Infrastructure and the Synagogue Supervisory Board, and the Means of their Realisation and Control by the Synagogue Supervisory Board, Warsaw, 24 April 1821

Source: AGAD, CWW 1431, s. 6–9, in part previously published in Jakub Kirszrot: Prawa Żydów w Królestwie Polskim. Zarys historyczny (Warsaw: Zarząd Warszawskiej Gminy Starozakonnych, 1917), pp. 44–45. […] 1st Every Jewish community which has hitherto for religious purposes constituted a parish shall elect 3 synagogue supervisors, […]. These supervisors together with the rabbi but without the involvement of the present kahals shall, with the strictest regard to economy, formulate a budget setting out the expenditure essential for the maintenance of the synagogue, the rabbi, the hospital for the poor where it is maintained for religious reasons, and the cemetery. […] 4th Minor fees for religious services such as circumcision, the religious validation of weddings, and others which have hitherto usually been given directly to rabbis may continue to be paid to rabbis and will not constitute income for accounting purposes. […] 6th The synagogue supervisors shall record the number of heads of households making up the parish and shall divide them into four classes according to income, that is 1, 2, 3, and 4. Having divided into ten parts the outstanding funds necessary to cover parish requirements, they shall then apportion four of them for payment by the wealthy class, three for payment by the second, two by the third and one by the last. 7th However, poor Jews living on alms shall not be required to pay taxes […] 8th The supervisors together with the rabbi shall appoint a cashier, who may be one of their number or someone else who is able to write in Polish and who is suitably responsible. […] 9th This cashier shall be required to issue receipts in Polish to all Jews who pay fees; to maintain accurate written registers of income and expenditure; and to submit them no later than 10 January each year to the supervisors who shall examine them and forward them with their endorsement to the regional commissioner for presentation to the Voivodan Commission. […] 11th Cashiers shall be liable, through administrative process, to make good any [unauthorized—AM] deficit in the cashier’s funds. However if it transpires that they have extorted more from any person than was due, they shall be sent to the criminal court, charged with deception. […]

386

Markowski

15th From the date on which this decree is published, all religious taxes hitherto collected by societies or any other person and which are incompatible with these regulations shall be abolished and anyone demanding such taxes shall be liable to the strictest penalties. 16th The synagogue supervisory board shall, no later than 1 December each year, submit a budget of income and expenditures for the following year, together with a register of contributors to the district commissioners for ratification before the start of the new year. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 11 Decree Abolishing Kahals in the Kingdom of Poland, Warsaw, 2 January 1822

Source: AGAD, CWW, file 1432, pp. 32–33, published as: Dziennik Praw, vol. 7 [1822], pp. 275–78. By the grace of God We, Alexander I, Emperor of all Russia, King of Poland […] In order to stem the constant and widespread complaints from Jews about the oppression and persecution of the poor by the existing kahals, and taking into account the submissions of the government commissions concerning the need to abolish these kahals after the establishment of the synagogue supervisory boards, we have decreed and proclaim as follows: Article 1 From the date on which this decree is published, all kahals currently operating in the Jewish communities of our towns shall be dissolved. Article 2 The government commissions shall issue the relevant regulations appropriate to their jurisdiction. Article 3 The Voivodan Commission and the Municipal Authorities of the City of Warsaw shall, through their intermediate authorities, undertake the apportionment and collection of the fiscal taxes due to be paid by citizens of the Mosaic faith, in the manner prescribed by the Government Commission for Revenue and the Treasury […] To assist in this, temporary use shall be made of the synagogue supervisory boards established by the Resolution of our Viceroy dated 20 March this year.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

387

Article 4 When kahal elders relinquish their duties, they shall under threat of penalty immediately return all accounts concerning any public taxes raised and due, taxes for the needs of the kahals, reserves and kahal debts and the arrears which are due on them, interest payments, […] showing all assets and liabilities, letters, papers, deeds, and documents relating to the kahal. We hereby order the Government Commissions to execute this our Decree, which shall be included in the Journal of Laws, as appropriate to the jurisdiction of each. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 12 Appeal by Jakub Braun to the Płock Voivodan Commission to Annul His Resignation as a Synagogue supervisory board in Płock, 27 January 1823

Source: APP, AMP, file 31, p. 18.

[…] Although on the 20th inst. I submitted a request to the most excellent municipal authorities that I be released from my duties on the synagogue supervisory board, nonetheless since I know that it is the most fervent wish of the Jewish community here that I continue in my role as a synagogue supervisor, I now withdraw that earlier application and revoke completely the request made therein. Indeed I ask the most excellent municipal authorities not to proceed with discharging me from my supervisory duties […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 13 The Income and Expenditure of the Synagogue Supervisory Board in Częstochowa, 8 May 1825

Source: Archiwum Państwowe w Częstochowie (Częstochowa State Archive, henceforth APCz) Akta Miasta Częstochowy (Częstochowa City Records, henceforth AMCz), file 247, pp. 1–15. […] II. Debts A. For the year 1822 1. From the Jew Lewko Kozak for moving to the town: 4,24.56 2. Taxes from parishioners. 56

Amounts are given in Polish złoty.

388

Markowski

3. B. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. III. 1. 2. 3. IV. 1.

Recruitment tax for the synagogue in Lutomiersk.57 For the year 1823 Religious taxes from parishioners: 261,45. Fees for the leasing of seats in the Synagogue: 56. From newly arrived Jews for membership of the synagogue: 35,24. Recruitment tax paid for the town: 17,1. Repayment of loan for the Jew Rajzla Kam: 24,15. Regular income Religious taxes from parishioners: 2.259. From the leasing of the krupka:58 2.123,82. From the leasing of the kosher tax:59 112. Irregular income Voluntary donations before the Day of Judgement60 and other holidays, as specified: 43. Ordinary taxes: 85. Duties on candles on the Day of Judgment, as certified by the synagogue supervisory board: 42.8. Ordinary taxes for displaying the Torah, as specified: 56,8. From the collection box, as certified: 41. For etrogim: 21,20. From the grinding of flour for matzos in accordance with the auction record:61 196. Fees for the leasing of empty benches in the synagogue as specified: 52. From the purchase of seats close to the Torah: 6. From membership of the synagogue from newly arrived Jews, as certified: [illegible] From funerals, as specified: 39,3. From collections, as certified: 362. Extraordinary income

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. V.

57 58

59 60 61

This is likely to refer to the extraordinary tax for the building of a new synagogue (the one in Lutomiersk having burned down). The bardon, or income tax. Taxes were leased by members of the community who paid a fixed sum into the community cashier’s office and took on the responsibility to collect taxes from community members, thereby relieving the synagogue supervisory board of that duty. The tax on kosher meat, cf Kirszrot, Prawa Żydów Królestwie Polskiem, pp. 262–66. A reference to Yom Kippur. The reference is to the process of tendering for the mill which was to be used for the grinding and supply of flour for Pesach.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

389

1.

By virtue of the Order of the District High Commissioner dated 20 January 1824, No. 667, for payment of the recruitment tax deficit for the town of Lutomiersk: carriage: 41.22. 2. -”- dated 29 April 1824, No. 967, supplement to the recruitment tax deficit in respect of the victims of fire at the synagogue in Lutomiersk: 80,2. 3. Recruitment tax from Jewish servants as apportioned: 122,15. 4. From the accounts settled with the former leaseholders of the krupka for the maintenance of the rabbi for the entire period of his stay in Częstochowa less expenses in accordance with the budget of the synagogue supervisory board: 114. 5. Extraordinary donation for exemption from fasting, as certified: 13,25. Repayment of monies advanced I. Return of monies advanced, on the last day of December 1823: 2.343,4. II. Payments outstanding 1. To the Jew Józef Landau, leaseholder, the Jew Józef Gajster interest on capital loaned to the former local kahal for completion of the synagogue, with interest from 1 April 1817 to 10 April 1824 at 5%: 406. 2. Outstanding ground rent for the synagogue and cemetery for the year 1823: 600. III. On salaries 1. Salary of 200 for three synagogue supervisors: 600. 2. Salary of the rabbi from 1 January to the last day of April 1824, as receipted: 700. 3. Salary of the synagogue cashier: 300. 4. For the trustee of the synagogue: 640. 5. For synagogue and prayer house attendants: 300. 6. For the gravediggers: 100. 7. Alms for impoverished and ailing local Jews and for matzo flour for them, as certified and receipted: 738.12. 8. Salary for the synagogue cantor: 50. IV On taxes To the Treasury for ground rent for the synagogue and the Jewish cemetery: 600. 1. 2. Fire tax for the synagogue and the Jewish hospital with supplementary payment for the roadwork levy, as receipted: 199,26. 3. For the Voivodan journal for the year 1824, as receipted: 10. V. On building work and repairs. To the master builders for the restoration of the kosher slaughterhouse62 and 1. for the materials necessary for that restoration, in accordance with the invoice attached: 186.

62

In Polish koszernia, a term used interchangeably for a kosher slaughterhouse and ritual baths.

390

Markowski

VI. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

For heating and lighting For the lighting of the synagogue and school: 600. For the heating of the school: 300. For the lighting of the lamp permanently burning in the synagogue: 100. For writing materials for the synagogue supervisory board and the cashier: 200. For wax and other expenses during the fair, as certified by the synagogue supervisory board: 100. For decorating the synagogue during Pentecost [Shavuot, or Feast of Weeks] and for hay needed on the Day of Judgement as receipted: 15. For dressing poor deceased Jews and burying them, as specified: 229,3. For etrogim required in the synagogue, as receipted: 57. Unforeseen expenses The Jew Gerson Landau for the redemption of the 3 silver, gold-plated Torah scrolls pawned by the former kahal in order to pay outstanding synagogue taxes, in accordance with the assignment and receipt: 200. For payment of the recruitment tax for the town of Lutomiersk for the period 1 July to the last day of December 1823 […]: 39,27. Supplement to the recruitment tax for the town of Lutomiersk for the year 1824 […]: 78,7. For the translation of the privilege granted for the establishment of the synagogue and cemetery, and for the making of four copies of the court judgements […] in respect to the town of Częstochowa, concerning the expulsion of local inhabitants from the town, as receipted: 80.

6. 7. 8. 9. A)

B) D) F)

[…] H) To the city pharmacist for medicines for impoverished inpatients at the hospital, as receipted for the whole of 1824: 70. I) To the Jew Maier Zorecki for caring for sick inpatients in hospital, as receipted: 72. K) For the support and return of impoverished itinerant Jews in the course of the year, as certified by the synagogue supervisory board: 106,18. […] M) The cost of travel to Wieluń in connection with the supervision of the new parish of the Częstochowa synagogue and the apportioning of the recruitment tax for the year 1825: 104. N) Jankiel Lechmann to the Jewish glaziers for repairs to the windows of the synagogue, school, and ritual slaughterhouse, as receipted: 50.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

391

[…] Balance Total income: 7.682,12 Total expenditure: 10.215,17 Monies advanced: 2.533,55 Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 14 Excerpt from Włodzimierz Gadon, A Compilation of Those Rules and Observances of the Israelites Settled in the Provinces of Poland Which Require the Most Immediate Reform (Warsaw, 1835)

Published as: Zbiór ustaw i obrzędów wymagających najrychlejszej reformy izraelitów osiadłych w prowincjach do Polski należących, pp. 13–14, 38. […] I believe, however, that these ancient and harmful customs, branded with the stamp of religiosity, now constitute an impediment and can only be changed and put right by a grand religious council of worthy and truly learned men of the Jewish faith who, whether they choose to revive Napoleon’s idea of calling a Sanhedrin or prefer to appoint some other great Council of Israel, provided it is effective, might revise these earlier harmful rules and prescribe new ones. In doing so, they will perform an invaluable service to all Israelites and especially those resident in Poland. It will be their decision whether to summon their fellow Jews from every country to such a (let us call it) great Council of Israel, or whether to obtain their agreement to any resolutions and secure full powers to act on their behalf. It will similarly be a matter for them whether they wish to assemble this great Council in Poland, or in London, or Amsterdam, or Leipzig, or in Frankfurt am Main. I would merely venture that, when summoning this great Council of Israel, it would be well to advise all Jews of the critical need for such a council, for the following reasons: 1. The Philanthropic Association, which was formed in Paris and whose particular aim is the wholesale emancipation of the Jewish people scattered throughout the world, rightly needs the assistance of a great Council of Israel. 2. It would also be sensible when making known the need for such a Council and convening it, to acquaint Jews living in the former Polish lands if not with all the works of the distinguished author of ‘Ideas on Reform’63 then at least with its basic premise and intentions, which are full of philanthropic aspirations and favourable predictions for the future reform of Israelites, while recalling the words of its author (p. 35, verse 11) 63

See Artur Eisenbach, ‘Dokumentn tsu der geshikhte fun department vadim in Varshaver firshtntum’ in Bleter far Geshikhte 2 (1938), 127–49 and idem, ‘Central reprezentacje organen fun di yidn in Varshaver firshtentum’, Bleter far Geshikhte 2 (1938), 33–88. The author refered to here has not been identified.

392

Markowski

‘concerning the admission of Israelites to rights of citizenship in line with their capacity for progressive moral improvement, etc. 3. That holding this great Council of Israel is crucial even if only because Jews, scattered around the world for so many centuries, at least if we consider those who live in Europe, observe different customs and rituals in almost every country and these customs and rituals have to a greater or lesser extent now diverged from the fundamental laws of Moses and the commandments which God entrusted to that great lawgiver. Indeed among some peoples of that tribe, they are now quite divorced from true morality. […] The regulations concerning rabbis and kahals need to be amended. In relation to the manner in which these Jewish authorities in Poland have hitherto operated, whether in respect of their general business or more particularly with the collection and expenditure of the money paid by Jewish communities and squandered or, more plainly, stolen by the elders, until such time as the state authorities pass laws to prevent these excesses, an important task for the Great Council of Israel will be to introduce the necessary checks to ensure that the poor man’s penny is not put at risk. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 15 Instructions for the Conduct of Elections to the Synagogue Supervisory Board Authorities Issued by the Provincial Government in Płock Following the Irregularities Which Had Been Noted in This Respect and the Need to Invalidate the Elections Which Had Been Held in Płock, 25 January 1839

Source: APP, AMP, file 30, pages 31–33.

[…] The Provincial Government64 considers it necessary to notify all Jews in the community of Płock of the regulations which must be observed in the course of the forthcoming elections. 1. Only heads of households who pay taxes and belong to the first four classes have the right to vote in the election to the synagogue supervisory board […]; therefore, the delegate of the Provincial Government together with the President of Płock in […] shall summon them to attend at the specified place and time. 2. Each of those summoned shall attend at the specified place and time, on penalty of a fine or even administrative sanction, except in the case of illness or proven absence from Płock. 64

The Provincial Government (Rząd Gubernialny) was the regional administrative body in the Kingdom of Poland from 1835 onwards. Its jurisdiction included financial and planning matters and, after 1863, also some judicial matters.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915 3.

4.

393

Each head of household shall bring with him a sheet of paper already inscribed in the Hebrew language with the full names of his chosen three candidates for the synagogue supervisory board, who must be selected only from among those with voting rights. He shall hand this sheet of paper, duly folded, and without showing it to other voters, to the delegate when his name is called from the list. These sheets of paper shall be placed in a box designated for that purpose and when sheets have been received from every person voting, an official translator of Hebrew, in the presence of the local rabbi and two chosen and trustworthy Jews, shall read out the names of the candidates written on them. When the votes have been counted, those candidates who have received the largest number of votes shall be declared synagogue supervisors before the assembled heads of household. […] Finally, when meeting to elect the synagogue supervisory board, Jews with voting rights shall, under penalty of police sanction, behave in an orderly manner and this notice shall be made public in the synagogue by the rabbi and in the district where Jews reside by the police superintendent to the sound of a drum […].

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 16 Letter from the Częstochowa Synagogue Supervisory Board to the Local Municipal Authorities, Reporting on the Election of a Rabbi, 10 May 1839

Source: APCz, AMCz, file 448, pages 42–43.

[…] Rabbi Zachariasz Weingott, native of Kalisz, held the position of rabbi in this community from 1821 to 1824, with leave of the government and in accordance with the official licence65 granted by the Commission of the Voivodeship of Kalisz dated 18 October 1822, Nr 14,562. He carried out his duties in exemplary fashion and to the general satisfaction of the entire community. After he relinquished his post, from 1825 and for some time thereafter, the community managed without a rabbi, since its members included capable scholars who were suitably qualified to provide spiritual leadership, namely first the late Jakób Muszyn and then from 1830 until he passed away on 12 March this year, the late Mojżesz Majzel. When, after he had departed this earth, there remained no other local man capable of taking on this pastoral office, a general meeting of the community unanimously 65

An authorization to run a business or practise a vocation.

394

Markowski

authorized the synagogue supervisory board to reinstate the universally popular rabbi Zachariasz Weingot, and pay him an annual salary of 1,800 zł pol. The synagogue supervisory board, having agreed that the community’s request was just and proper in every respect, both in the light of the government regulations which state that a community should not remain without a rabbi and also because it was thoroughly persuaded of the competence, ability, character and oratory of this rabbi […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 17 Letter from the Municipal Authorities in Warka to the Chairman of the County of Kalisz Concerning the Illegal Operation of the Burial Society and the Reply to That Letter, 6 October 1843

Source: Archiwum Państwowe w Kaliszu (Kalisz State Archive, henceforth APK), Kaliski Zarząd Powiatowy (Records of the Kalisz District Administration, henceforth KZP), file 298, pp. 51–52. […] With reference to its reports dated 23 July/4 August 1843, no. 1299 and 7/19 August 1843, no. 1517, [we] have the honour to request a decision in respect of the items taken from the deceased Abraam Litensztern by the Holy, or burial, confraternity,66 and in relation to the abolition of that confraternity. [Reply:] Further to the circular dated 9 May 1822 no. 199 which communicated the decree of the Government Commission of Religious Denominations and Public Education dated 28 March 1822 no. 2586/578 ordering the dissolution of burial confraternities, known as holy confraternities67 and all similar corporations as bodies not recognized or authorized by the government, the magistrates are advised immediately upon receipt of this letter to dissolve any such confraternities still in existence and to report the result as appropriate on pain of disciplinary penalty […]. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

66 67

A reference to the burial confraternity Ḥevra kadisha. In 1822, as part of a wave of reform of Jewish self-government, burial societies were abolished.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



395

No. 18 Provincial Government of Kalisz to the Municipal Authorities in Kalisz Concerning Funeral Services and Their Financing, 13 December 1843

Source: APK, Head Office KZP, file 298, pp. 13, 13 v.

[…] Whereas the religious precepts of the Mosaic faith prohibit families of the deceased, being in a state of mourning, from attending to the burying of the body and whereas on the other hand it is inappropriate to allow two separate Jewish authorities, namely the synagogue supervisory board and the burial administration, to co-exist in one town since there would be constant disagreements between them as well as complaints and thus investigations; therefore, until such time as the appropriate orders are issued concerning the collection of funerary charges from Jews and the administration of those funds, the government commission has for the time being decreed: That each synagogue supervisory board should itself take on, together with the 1. rabbi, and through duly enlisted persons, the discharge of last offices to the deceased. 2. That there should be no separate fund for funerary administration and above all no Jew should be charged with the collection and administration of such a fund. This is to ensure the proper supervision of funeral funds, which should be collected and expended in the same manner as synagogue funds. 3. That the revenue from the funeral collection box should be counted by the supervisors and the rabbi immediately after the funeral and paid into synagogue funds. 4. That cemetery fees, fees for the chosen burial place, for the erection of headstones, etc. should also be paid into synagogue funds. 5. That in this way all funerary income and expenditure, duly recorded in the synagogue budget under a separate heading, and collected and paid in by the cashier, shall be audited alongside all the other income constituting the synagogal budget. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

396

Markowski

No. 19 Contract for the Leasing of Income Generated by the Reading of the Torah in the Częstochowa Community, 25 November 1845

Source: APCz, AMCz, file 448, pp. 271–72.

[…] §1. Abraham Tempel, having made the highest bid in the auction held by the local municipal authorities on 12/24 inst. for the lease of Torah income for a period of 3 years, that is from 1 January 1846 to the last day of December 1848, has clearly and emphatically undertaken to pay from the leasing of Torah income, the annual sum of Rs 95, Kop 30, or 635 zł 10 gr.68 […] §4. Synagogue assistants69 shall, without charge, conduct auctions on behalf of the leaseholder for priority in reading from the Torah or mitsvot, on Mondays, Thursdays, Saturdays, and holy days. §5. The leaseholder shall for the entire duration of the lease scrupulously and comprehensively record in a separate register all exemptions from fees for Torah reading, or ḥiyuvim.70 §6. The leaseholder shall be entitled to employ synagogue assistants, without payment, to collect the fees for reading from the Torah but he may do so only once a month. If he wishes to send them to collect the dues more often than once in a month, he shall be obliged to pay them for this. §7. If he meets with any resistance from debtors, he shall be entitled to submit a full account and the appropriate application to the municipal authorities for police assistance in collecting the outstanding fees, and this application shall not be refused. §8. The purchaser of mitsvot in the synagogue or school on Saturdays during Pesach, the Feast of Weeks71 and the Feast of Palms72 shall only pay half of the auction price. However at New Year,73 on the Day of Judgement, and on the final day of the Feast of Palms, the purchaser of priority for ‘Chasan Bareszys’74 and ‘Meftyr’75 shall pay the leaseholder the full amount bid. 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75

The dual monetary system was implemented in the Kingdom of Poland in 1832–41; from 1842 the official valute was the Russian rouble, but in social practice the dual system was used few years after 1842. Probably a reference to the beadle. The calling to read from the Torah. Shavuot, the holiday (May–June) connected with the giving of the Torah. Sukkot, the autumn holiday (September–October) when Jews eat meals in specially built huts. Rosh Hashanah, the holiday marking the beginning of the religious year (September– October). Chatan Bereshit—the person who reads the first parasha of the Torah. Maftir—the additional reading of the part of Torah which is specific for a given holiday.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

397

§9. If the anniversary of the death of a person’s parent falls on a Monday, Thursday, or Saturday, that person shall be allowed to hold a service with the congregation at his house and read from his Torah for a payment to the leaseholder of 18 kop. §10. The leaseholder is not permitted to auction the ‘Alios Chne’76 during services in the synagogue but always after the synagogue observances have concluded. §11. During the auction of mitsvot on Saturdays and holy days, the leaseholder is prohibited from using any dishonest means of increasing his income, such as making a fictitious bid either himself or through a second or third party. If the use of such a tactic is proved, the leaseholder shall be liable to police penalty […]. On the third occasion, apart from a fine of 60 kop, which he will accept without demur, and the forfeiture of his deposit, he shall also be required to surrender the lease and a new auction shall be announced as early as possible. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 20 Contract for the Leasing of Income from Charges for the Renting of Benches in the Synagogue in the Częstochowa Community, 20 August 1846

Source: APCz, AMCz, file 448, pp. 433–433 v.

[…] §1. Nachman Szczekacz, by virtue of the auction held by the municipal authorities on 7/19 August 1846 for the leasing of the income from synagogue seats, has undertaken by his final bid to pay into synagogue funds an annual sum of twenty-three rsr, fifty kop. […] §4. This lease covers the 50 benches or seats in both parts of the local synagogue which form part of synagogue funds, as held by the previous leaseholder, save for one seat in the women’s section for the cantor’s wife and two seats for the wives of the synagogue assistants. […] §6. The synagogue supervisory board undertakes that, if required, it will support him against those who refuse to pay the relevant fees for benches rented from him. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

76

A corrupted phonetic rendering of an unidentified term.

398

Markowski

No. 21 Contract for the Leasing of Income from Maintaining the Ritual Bathhouse in the Częstochowa Community, 22 October 1846

Source: APCz, AMCz, file 448, pp. 435–37.

[…] §3. The leaseholder shall, at his own expense, carry out all minor repairs costing up to 5 [rs] […] which are assigned to him in the inventory. […] […] §4. On the expiry of the lease, the leaseholder shall return the ritual bath premises and appurtenances in the same state as they were in when he received them, without any right of redress for the repairs and improvements effected during the period of the lease. §5. The primary duty of the leaseholder is to keep the ritual bath premises and equipment in the best possible order and cleanliness at all times so that no-one has cause to complain about their being dirty. The leaseholder shall be liable to administrative penalty for any infringement of these conditions, and also for any rude or improper behaviour towards those using the baths. §6. The charges payable by those using the baths shall be as follows: I. From every woman for a warm bath and a cold immersion: a. From a wealthy woman—9 kopeks b. From a poor woman—4 ditto II. For a warm bath and a warm immersion: c. From a wealthy woman—15 kopeks d. From a poor woman—7 ditto Note: The charges set out above apply when several people, namely at least three women, wish to bathe together. However if one person wishes to have a warm bath and a warm immersion, then without reference to her state and wealth, she may be charged 30 kopeks, or 2 zł. III. For newly married women when using the baths for the first time, charges shall be fixed according to the class to which the women belong: 1. Class I—90 kopeks or 6 złoty 2. -“—II—40 -“- or 4—“3. -“—III—30 -“- or 2—“4. -“—IV—15 -“- or 1—“IV. For the first immersion for women after confinement. 1. For a cold immersion 18 kopeks or 1 złoty 6 groszy 2. For a warm immersion, 30 or 2. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



399

No. 22 Report on the Election of the Synagogue Supervisory Board in Warsaw and Opinions on the Members Elected, Warsaw, 3 October 1851

Source: AGAD, CWW, file 1727, pp. 944–46, previously cited in Guesnet, Polnische Juden, 405–406. […] Full name: Information gathered Fainkind Mosiek: A thoroughly idle and superstitious man who only contrived 1. to get elected to become eligible for rights of citizenship. 2. Raich Szachna: A fervent hasid and thoroughly uncouth. 3. Eelich Chiel: A hasid and a devious bankrupt. 4. Epsztein Zymel: Respectable, but does not shave his beard. Newly arrived from Russia. 5. Tugenhold: A censor, does not have enough time to commit himself fully to any other business. 6. Glücksberg Jan: A very respectable and thoroughly educated man. 7. Gesundheit Izrael: An inn-keeper, a hasid and stupid. 8. Eiger Mosiek: An innkeeper, a boorish man. 9. Gesundheit Mosiek: Wholly unsuitable. 10. Lote Pinkus: Completely preoccupied with speculation by any means possible. 11. Cohn Matias: A suitable man. 12. Epsztein Józef: Would be an extremely desirable choice but does not wish to accept. 13. Rozen Mathias: Highly educated but it is not known whether he will accept. 14. Bersohn Maier: Fairly good. 15. Borowski Pinkus: Fairly good. Dear greatly esteemed General Wikiński […] ‘It is not the sound of victory or the sound of defeat, but the sound of those calling that you hear.’[…] You already graciously decreed that new elections to the Synagogue Supervisory Board in Warsaw should take place, but what happened? The whole town hall was filled with vagrants, swindlers, beggars, rogues, and hasids who cannot even write. The small number of those able to write wrote out cards for everyone and of course who was elected? Jechiel Dawid Ehrlich, who has already been bankrupt ten times and has been 1. tried for criminal offences. 2. Moszek Fainkind, a scoundrel, a sharp lad who has made a lot of money as a government supplier. A fine kind indeed. 3. Maier Szachne Raich, now a beggar […], a very decent man but a great ass.

400

Markowski

4. & 5. Jakób Glücksberg and Jakub Tugenhold. I believe that these two Jesuits, whom everyone holds in contempt, will in time be hounded out like the worthy Winiawer and Lewenberg.77 Let us consider this for a moment: The government […] selects a supervisory board to assist its efforts to educate and civilize Jews; meanwhile here we have a gathering of some 500 hasids and bearded individuals who choose three louts who can barely sign their own names and […] cannot utter a word other than in Jewish, and these are now to represent all the Israelites in our country?! General! Have mercy on the poor, order these three bearded fellows to be brought before you, speak to them […] and you will know what to expect from them if they become members of the supervisory board. There ought to be a rule that members of the supervisory board, if only for the sake of example, should be obliged not to wear beards or sidelocks, in accordance with the will of his Highness the Emperor (whose Majesty may God raise ever higher) and that they must understand Polish, German or Russian so that, if one of them has to represent the community in front of some high official, he can at least string a few words together. Therefore, General, for the love of God, do not allow such crude men to preside over us here in Warsaw, the capital of the Kingdom of Poland. The government should look into who voted and whether even a quarter of those taking part in the election were respectable people. The principal issue is that bearded Jews who do not comply even superficially with the emperor’s will should not be members of the synagogue supervisory board in Warsaw. This on its own would encourage Jews here to adapt their dress more quickly and might also prompt them to start to study a little. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 23 Letter from the Municipal Authorities in Warsaw to the Government Commission for Religious Denominations and Public Education Concerning the Award of Pensions to Widows of Supervisory Board Members, Warsaw, 3 November 1851

Source: AGAD, CWW, file 1728, pp. 7–9.

[…] At present, lifelong assistance payable from the community budget is registered in respect of: 1. Ryfka Poznańska

77

The designation of ‘Jesuit’ is used here as derogatory term.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

401

2. Ruchla Widawer, widow of auxiliary rabbi78 3. Ryfka Sztrum, 4. Ryffka Glucksberg (widows of burial society officials) 5. The son of the late Kelman Grauszeps, and finally 6. The children of the late Abraham Szor As evidence of the indigence of the widows referred to at 1, 2, 3, and 4 above and of the number of years of service of their erstwhile husbands who are laid to rest in this community, the synagogue supervisory board has submitted to the municipal authorities four certificates of penury issued in respect of each of these widows by their landlords in Warsaw and four certificates issued by the synagogue supervisory board confirming the number of years of service for: 1. Dawid Poznański—31 years 2. Falek Widawer—30 years 3. Berek Sztrum—27 years 4. Michał Glucksberg—16 years. The Municipal Authorities now forward these 8 certificates to the Government Commission for Internal and Religious Affairs for its consideration and determination. In view of the advanced age and extreme poverty of these widows, who have no other means of subsistence, they venture to request that the Government Commission should accept this evidence as sufficient and should authorize the award of financial assistance to these widows in the instalments hitherto recorded and permit them to be listed by name in future community budgets as persons in receipt of lifelong support in sums similar to those currently paid. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 24 List of Towns and Villages Constituting Selected Synagogal Districts in the County of Radom, Warsaw, 16 February 1853

Source: AGAD, CWW, file 1440, pp. 5–8.

78

The Polish term duchowny used in the source refers to a rabbinical scholar who informally would have a status similar to that of the official communal rabbi, but for the lack of state certification could not be referred to as such.

1

Radom

County

Number Name

Gmina Sarnów Czarnolas Wieś Grudek Gmina Zbuczyn Wieś Zajezerza Łęg Przywoz Wolka Gmina Sieciechów Wieś Garbatka Gmina Głuszec Miasto Gniewoszów Gmina Regów Gmina Opatkowiec Bronowiec Klikawa Pachnowole Piekorow Smogorzew

Town or village

Remarks Synagogal district which includes these towns and villages These constitute the Synagogal District of Gniewoszów and Granica

The accounts of the cashier’s office of the town of Gniewoszów and Granica relating to charges for Jewish dress for the 4th quarter of 1846 and for the years 1847–51, no. 120702/47 88543/49 885442/49 57904/51 58019/51 48594/52 have already been agreed by the Supreme Accounting Chamber.

402 Markowski

Siechiechow Wies Po[…] – Bukowiec – Wola Klasztorna – Loje – Nagornik – - Kepiec – - Czarnolas – Miasto Sieciechow – Granica

Remarks

Miasto Janowiec Gmina Janowiec – Oblasy – Przy[…] – Brzesie nad Wisłą – Łagrów – Woj […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

2

Number Name

(cont.)

The synagogal district of Janowiec

Accounts submitted for the 4th quarter of 1846 and the years 1847–51 no 49889/40 82427/51 52673/51 63606/50 58013/51 22243/52 have already been agreed.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

403

404

Markowski

No. 25 Planned Expenditure for the Synagogue Supervisory Board of Płock for 1860–62, December 1859

Source: APP, AMP, file 33, pp. 175–79. […] 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 15. 16.

To rabbi Lejzor Wólf Kohn, as per receipts, in monthly instalments: 450. To the above for heating, as per contract: 50. To the above for premises, as per contract: 75. To the assistant rabbi Abraham Mojżesz Morsztejn, as per receipts, in quarterly instalments: 100. To the auxiliary rabbi Gdalia Lejzer Stupaj, as per receipts, in quarterly instalments: 90. To the cantor, Dawid Bade, as per receipts, in quarterly instalments: 135. To the above for premises, as per contract: 30. To the beadle Nathan Mojżesz Braun, as per receipts, in quarterly instalments: 24. To the beadle Man Bałabon in quarterly instalments: 24. To the beadle Jekel Bauman in quarterly instalments: 24. To the gravedigger Lewko Markiewicz in quarterly instalments: 24. To the beadle Michał Rura, as per receipts: 12. To the warden at the new cemetery, Izrael Gąsier: 18. To the assessor79 of the section for denominations: 62 61 ½. To the town cashier responsible for collection of taxes and expenditure 5%: 102 12 ½.

[…] Section III For the payment of interest on capital 25. To the parish church in Płock on capital of 90 roubles: 4,50. 26. To the above by way of levy with the specific authority of the Provincial Government: 10,50. 27. To the educational fund a sum to the Dominican Church now paid to the Treasury: 48. 28. To the Bank of Poland for the repayment of capital in the sum of 900 roubles: 19,20. 29. To the curates, interest on 400 zł or 60 roubles: 3. 79

A reference to an official of the municipal administration responsible for dealing with the synagogue supervisory board.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

405

30. To the parish priest in Sobowo: 11,25. 31. To the church in Bonisław: ,50. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 26 Announcement by the Lublin Municipal Authorities Concerning the Election of Synagogue Supervisory Board Members in Lublin, Lublin, 31 January 1860

Source: Archiwum Państwowe w Lublinie (Lublin State Archive, henceforth APL), Akta Miasta Lublina (Lublin City Records, henceforth AML), file 2420, pp. 18–19. […] announces that the election of 4 members of the synagogue supervisory board of the Jewish Community of Lublin for 1860–62 will be held on 26 January/7 February 1860 at 1 pm in the Municipal Offices of Lublin. It also confirms that only the first four classes of residents who pay auxiliary taxes are entitled to select candidates for membership of the board and to vote for those candidates, and that candidates must be both residents and property owners. Any person of whatsoever class, even if his capacity is known and he merits the full confidence of the community, who fails to appear at the designated time, has only himself to blame and will be deemed to have relinquished his right to elect synagogue supervisory board members and no complaint about this will thereafter be entertained. This information is to be publicly proclaimed three times by separate announcements by the town crier throughout the entire Jewish district and in the suburbs of Piaski and Kalinowszczyzna. In addition, parishioners of the rabbinate whose taxes are paid in Lublin and local residents of Class I shall also be notified by separate circular letters and proof of the announcements, supported by signatures of the residents […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 27 Two Permits Issued by the Synagogue Supervisory Board in Płock for Reading from the Torah at Home, Płock, 25 January 1861

Source: APP, AMP, file 33, p. 387.

Declaration For the permit granted to me to read from the Torah in house number 8b, the residence of Chaim Neiman, with all the other residents of the house excluded, for a period of one year, that is to the day stated in the contract concluded between the government

406

Markowski

and Naftula Cohnson, I undertake to pay 4 roubles and to accept liability to administrative sanction in relation to the lease, in witness whereof I place my signature. Chaim Neiman [signature] Declaration For the permit granted to me to read from the Torah in house N in the residence of Szkło no. 258, with all the other residents of the house excluded, for a period of one year, that is to the day stated in the contract concluded between the government and Naftula Cohnsohn, I undertake to pay 4 roubles and to accept liability to administrative sanction, in witness whereof I place my signature. Stands for Icel Plancker [with signature in Hebrew script] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 28 Register of Items Belonging to the Jewish Community in Kalisz, Kalisz, 13 October 1862

Source: APK, Head Office ZPK, file 298, p. 5.

Main brick-built synagogue: 1 Brick-built mikveh or synagogue baths with copper steam apparatus for heating the mikveh and utensils belonging to the mikvah and baths: 1 3. School or brick-built small synagogue: 1 4. Wooden cemetery preburial building: 1 5. In the main synagogue: a large copper wash-stand: 1 6. -”- large brass chandeliers: 3 7. -”- smaller -”- -”-: 2 8. -”- glass -”- /girandoles/: 4 9. -”- large brass candelabrum /known as the Hanukkah candelabrum/: 1 10. -”- one pair of silver table candelabra: 1 11. -”- one pair of new silver -”-: 1 12. -”- silver sconces: 2 13. -”- Torah scrolls on parchment: 12 14. -”- Book of Esther on parchment: 1 15. Silver decorative supports for Torah scrolls: 4 16. Silver plates or tiles -”-: 3 17. Silver Torah scroll pointers -”-: 4 18. Small silver tower or spice box: 1 19. Large gold goblet: 1 20. -”- silver -”-: 1 1. 2.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

407

Silk curtains decorated with embroidered border: 22 Tablecloths -”-: 4 Horn trumpets:80 2 Large ornate chair /known as the chair of Elijah/: 1 Seals with the inscription ‘Synagogue Supervisory Board Kalisz’: 2 Funeral hearse: 1

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 29 Minutes of the Transfer of Authority to the Newly Elected Supervisors of the Synagogue Supervisory Board in Kalisz, Kalisz, 12 October 1864

Source: APK, Head Office KZP, file 298, pp. 3–3 v.

[…] In the Municipal Offices of the town of Kalisz on 30 September/12 October 1864. Further to the order of the chairman of the County of Kalisz dated 23 September/5 October 1864 no. 19.199, minutes dated 14/26 September 1864 no. 85100/29768 concerning the election of new members of the synagogue supervisory board in Kalisz, namely: Jakob Aurbach Abram Lipman Hejman Jzaak Halter were confirmed by the Provincial Government in Warsaw, which directed that those elected be duly installed and that all communal property be retrieved from the previous board members. In execution of this order the Municipal Authorities of the town of Kalisz summoned to its office both the previous and the newly elected members of the synagogue supervisory board and having first read to them the order of the County Chairman referred to above, called on the newly elected members of the supervisory board to assume their responsibilities in respect of the Jewish community and also transferred to them the communal property recovered from the previous board members, as listed herewith. It drew to the attention of the newly installed members that their primary task was to draft a budget for the synagogue cash office for the next 6 years, and that this should be done before the leasing of any income-yielding assets whose proceeds are used to supplement synagogue funds. In witness whereof, these minutes were signed by the outgoing and the incoming members of the synagogue supervisory board. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska 80

Shofar.

408

Markowski

No. 30 Police Report on the Existence of a Secret Burial Society in Radzymin, Warsaw, 4 June 1877

Source: State Archives of the City of Warsaw, Administrative Office of Warsaw Governor, file 149, pp. 1–1 v. […] For many years, a secret society going by the name of a ‘Confraternity’ has been in existence amongst the Jewish population in the town of Radimin,81 which, despite extorting money for unknown ends through its illegal activities, by issuing threats and curses, remains, nevertheless, hidden by the Jewish people due to their fanaticism. As it happens, we were able to discover that the main leaders of this group are two local Jews: Gdalia Miller and Shliama David Gingol’ts. Consequently, having identified members of the confraternity, we managed to gather information with great difficulty, and, even then, only partly, about the people from whom they took property: 250 roubles were taken in 1869 from the owner of the estate of Tlushch, the Jew, Vigdor Borenshten; and, according to the will of his late wife, who died in 1871, four silver candlesticks should have been kept permanently in the Jewish synagogue, but, instead, two of them were sold by the confraternity to an inhabitant of Radimin, the Jew, Maer Gol’dberg, for 150 roubles, and they are in his possession today, whilst the whereabouts of the remaining two candlesticks is unknown; 10 roubles from Avram Mordka Bershman from Radimin for the burial of his son, who died in 1872; 8 roubles were taken from the widow, Ryfka Gitman, from the village of Roscheni,82 for the burial of her husband Srul’, who died in 1873; which can be attested by Avram Drun’evskii; 8 roubles were taken from Iser Gokhman from Radimin for the burial of his child, who died in 1872; 8 roubles were taken from the widow, Ryfka Shteiman, from the village of Siwki, for the burial of her husband, Avram Shteiman, who died in 1873; which can be confirmed by his son, Gershon Shteiman; 12 roubles were taken from Lev Zal’tsman from Radimin, which can be witnessed by Zaivel’d Varshavskii … Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

81 82

The contemporary Russian spelling of Radzymin. Today, Russian uses “Radzymin” (Радзымин). Russian transliteration, possibly “Rosczeny” or “Rosczenia” in Polish.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



409

No. 31 Account by Hilary Nussbaum of the Abolition of Kahals and the Introduction of Synagogue Supervisory Boards

Published in: Hilary Nussbaum, Szkice historyczne z życia Żydów w Warszawie od pierwszych śladów pobytu ich w tem mieście do chwili obecnej skreslił Hilary Nussbaum (Warsaw: Druk K. Kowalewskiego, 1881), pp. 51–54. […] in all the proposals for reform which emerged, the chief obstacle to the establishment of schools and the transformation of Jewish customs, language, and dress was perceived to be the fanatical behaviour of the kahals. The local authorities therefore actively set about getting rid once and for all of this communal administration, the cause of so much harm not only to Jews but also to the whole of society. Their submissions to their superior authorities soon met with success, and kahals were abolished by Imperial Ukaze dated 20 December 1821 (1 January 1822). Following this Supreme Ukaze, on 18 January 1822 a delegation from the municipal authority made its way to the premises where the kahal had its offices, assembly room, and bursary and demanded the immediate handing over of documents and funds, as a result of which various tomes concerning the conscription of residents, the apportionment and collection of taxes, registers of debts, and all sorts of archival records were removed. In relation to cash, the incumbent cashier stated that not only was there nothing in the cash box but that in order to pay the most recent instalment of the recruitment tax, kahal members had advanced 8,000 złp from their own resources. A commission appointed ad hoc to inspect the accounts discovered a number of inconsistencies, which the kahal blamed on its predecessors, and in the cash box, instead of cash, it found promissory notes from private individuals for enormous amounts which the kahal explained had been inventoried in previous years. Since the bookkeeping and accounting were conducted in the Jewish language and thus required an official translator to clarify them, and since the interested party used every means at its disposal to try to justify itself, the inspectors, worn out by their work, lost their initial enthusiasm. Consequently, having secured around 8000 złp from the members of the abolished kahal for the Jewish Hospital, all further inquiries into this matter were postponed and then forgotten. In order to round this matter out, let us reproduce two excerpts from the contemporary Warsaw press discussing the dissolution of the kahal: The 18 January 1822 is an important turning point for Jews living in the Kingdom of Poland. The abolition of the kahal is one of the greatest blessings which they could have received from the government. Those who held us under the yoke of superstition and who constituted a state within a state have gone. We will no longer have to worry that the kahal will block our attempts to adopt the customs of civilized people by raising our taxes. No longer will there be any obstacles preventing the establishment of schools whose aim is to educate and enlighten young people of the Mosaic faith. […]

410

Markowski

On the ruins of the demolished kahal has risen the synagogue supervisory board. We say ‘on the ruins’ since many members of the former kahal have in fact joined the synagogue supervisory board. The electorate, that same backward and oafish community, without any consultation or reflection and in the absence of any prominent individuals distinguished by any civic virtue aside from a shared piety, inevitably chose candidates of the same ilk, no different to themselves in their level of education or their way of thinking. It could hardly be otherwise since such a new community, with barely 25 years existence in Warsaw behind it and with no educational establishments suited to the spirit of the times, did not yet have in its ranks any reliable representatives, any open-minded and progressive people animated by the desire or endowed with the ability to lead their brethren onto a better path. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 32 Permission from the Lublin Guberniya Government to Perform the Function of Assistant Rabbi, 27 January 1882 (Russian Calendar)

Source: APL, AML, file 540, pp. 12–12 v.

[…] By issue of an order, the Lublin Provincial Government […] has approved a proclamation pursuant to the resolution of the 4th of the month by the Head of Lublin Guberniya that Nusin Raifman and Iosif Videnberg have been granted the right to work as assistant rabbis in the city of Lublin. The former shall deal with religious matters for a salary of 150 roubles per annum, with payment starting from the day on which he was elected, i.e. 3/15 September 1881, whilst the latter shall perform wedding ceremonies and enable Jews to swear oaths at the behest of the authorities, in accordance with their official notices, without remuneration. Consequently, the Lublin Magistrate’s Court, represented by Alderman Vitolinskii, visited the administrative office of the board of trustees today along with the aforementioned newly bestowed clergymen, and, having read aloud to them the aforementioned Provincial Government order, appointed the new religious rabbis legally to their posts, as well as announcing to Nusin Raifman that he should pay the nomination duty of 15 roubles immediately using stamped paper. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



411

No. 33 Report of the Head of Lublin District to the Governor of Lublin Regarding the Alleged Censure of One of the Members of the Jewish Community, 2 October 1884

Source: APL, Government of Lublin Guberniya, file 312, pp. 12–14 Lublin.

[…] two notes in Hebrew, attached herewith, were found stuck to the walls of two synagogues in the town of Grubeshov,83 calling upon the local Jewish community to sever relations with Mordechai Pel’ts, as a man of extremely unsound morals, […] at the same time, I ordered rabbi Shia Gershenzon to announce publicly in the synagogues that the notes regarding the estrangement of Pel’ts from the community have no religious value and constitute no more than a libelous action committed by Pel’ts’s detractors. This order was carried out by two supervisory board officials on the date of the 24th. At this, the Jews who were in the synagogues voiced their dissatisfaction loudly regarding Pel’ts’s reprehensible behaviour. Since malicious talk of a so-called ḥerem being imposed on Pel’ts had not died down over the following two days, I deemed it necessary to despatch the Head of the Zemstvo Police84 to the main synagogue; and in his presence and the presence of Pel’ts, himself, the rabbi declared once again and categorically that Pel’ts had not been, and would not be, placed under any ḥerem.85 Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 34 The Budget of the Synagogue Supervisory Board in Lublin, 1892

Source: APL, AML, file 38, unpaginated.

83 84 85

Modern-day Hrubieszów in Poland. The Zemskaia strazha (‘Land Guard’) was a law-enforcing body which operated in both the countryside and in towns. Religious ban.

412 As per previous item

Markowski

Item

4188 roub. 50 kop. 200 roub.

3790

Name of income or expense

Transport

1 2

1400

3 4

150

5

400

6

250

7

254 roub.20 kop. 2496 1059 14187 roub.70 kop. As per previous item

8

Deferred to 1892/94

Specifically 425 roub.

Minor repairs to public buildings and pavements Total for Section No. 2 Section No. 3 Expenditure on charitable and educational institutions Maintenance of the hospital

625 roub.

To cover the deficit from hospital bills 984 roub. 84 kop. Maintenance of the orphanage 1400 To cover the deficit from orphanage bills Footwear and clothing for poor 150 children Healthcare for the poor in other 400 hospitals 1458 To meet medical costs owed to the hospitals of St. Iana and St. Iosif in Lublin and to other hospitals Maintenance of the burial services 254 roub.20 kop.

9 10

Maintenance of a two-class school Transport assistance for the poor

Item

Name of income or expense Section No. 1

Total 3900 roub. 91 kop. 200 roub.

6744 roub. 50 kop.

2496 13217 4265 roub.70 kop. roub.91 kop. Deferred to 1892/94 Specifically Total

413

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915 As per previous item

Item

1000 roub. 1 250 roub. 2 3 500 roub. 4 245 roub.

5

500 30 30 125 90

6 7 8 9 10

40 146

11 12

2956

13

Name of income or expense

Upkeep of the staff of the Trustees and stationery Rabbi’s salary Religious rabbi86 Second religious rabbi Clerk of the Trustees’ administrative office Two errand-boys: The first—145 roub. The second—100 roub. Cantor Cantor for chanting prayers Reader Shammes Hired employee at the Trustees’ administrative office Synagogue caretaker Provision of extra funds for the Administrative Department of the Provincial Government Remuneration for production Transport

Deferred to 1892/94

1000 roub. 300 roub. 500 roub. 245 roub.

100 30 30 125 90 150 146

2606

Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

86

This involves the distinction between a ‘spiritual’ (religious) rabbi and a ‘state’ (publicly funded) rabbi in the Russian Empire; the former had religious competence, whilst the latter had the appropriate state certification and knowledge of the Russian language.

414

Markowski

No. 35 Kalisz Provincial Administration to the Head of the Kalisz District Regarding the Admission of Jews to Artisan Guilds, 6 November 1892 (Russian Calendar)

Source: APK, KZP, file 335, pp. 22–25

A question arose in Płock Guberniya as to whether the instruction of the Government Commission for Internal Affairs and Policing of 19 March 1817 No.926/243 should apply to Jewish guild masters. The instruction follows on from the resolution of the Governor of the Kingdom of Poland, of 31 December 1816, on the organization of crafts, art, and trades, by which Jewish artisans cannot take part in gatherings of guild masters: neither can they participate in elections of guild board members, nor can they be elected to the elders. By the Imperial Edict of 24 May (5 June) 1862, Jews residing in the Polish Kingdom are granted civil rights equal to those of the rest of the population.87 Yet, the said edict fails to specify whether Jews are free to practise crafts, trade, and industry; and only Article 8 thereof entrusts the Government Council of the Kingdom of Poland to order a review of the aforementioned resolutions and provide draft amendments for Imperial approval, an action, which, however, was not implemented before the Government Council of the Kingdom of Poland was abolished. On the basis of further legal provisions adopted at different times, Jews were allowed to participate in elections for various public positions such as prefects, heads of villages and towns, petty session magistrates, positions in trial courts, etc.; but these legal provisions were adopted specifically for individual cases and are not of a general nature, and, therefore, do not resolve the issue of the rights of Jews to participate in gatherings of guild masters and to be elected as elders of guild boards, although it is only under certain conditions that they can be elected with reservations even to the abovementioned public posts. As a consequence of the aforesaid, and in accordance with the communication of the Płock Provincial Government, […] the Provincial Government humbly asks Your Honour to inform us about the current state of affairs in this regard in the uyezd under Your charge, i.e. whether Jewish artisans are permitted to participate in gatherings of guild masters and elections of elders to guild boards; and, furthermore, indicate whether they are elected as elders and approved as such, and, if approval is granted, under which legislative provisions and considerations do Jews receive such rights. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

87

This concerns the decree on the emancipation of Jews in the Kingdom of Poland.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915



415

No. 36 Complaint Concerning a Rabbi in Tyshkovtsy (Tyszkowce), Lublin Guberniya, Lublin 1897

Source: APL, AML, file 540, p. 34, Lublin 1897.

[…] The rabbi by the name of Iosif Libtses Gol’dfarb, appointed in our settlement of Tyshkovtsy, conducted himself at first in an orderly manner, but soon allowed himself to exceed his powers, ordering us to make rouble payments even for various documents. Moreover, he does not hold any religious services, but is engaged in some kind of covert foreign dealings […] If he were to be searched, something secret might be found. Moreover […] with regard to the non-fulfilment of his duties and for receiving illicit money. With this document witnessed by members of the settlement of Tyshkovtsy, Toiny Bereka, Arona Maturo, Gersh Miler, Botsel Raich, Shiia Fuke, Usher Kipershtok, and Leiba Bartse, I humbly request … Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 37 Petition from Lublin Jews to the Governor of Lublin Regarding Irregularities at the Lublin Synagogue Supervisory Board in Relation to the Conflict between Assimilationists and Traditionalists, Lublin 1898

Source: APL, Government of Lublin Guberniya, file 1909: 69, pp. 100–100 v.

[…] We, the inhabitants of the City of Lublin, are suffering a malady which can be healed only by appealing to the Head of the Guberniya. […] A group of protestants (‘progressives’) has been formed recently, consisting of people who dress in short frockcoats and keep themselves separate from our fellow believers.88 To their good fortune, a Fellowship of Sellers and Small Traders has come into existence, where they hold various meetings, make merry, hold dances, and are forming a Zionist (Palestinian) group. Most probably, Your Excellency is aware that Dr Herzl from Vienna is writing about Zionists in the newspaper Ha-Zefira, calling upon all municipalities to vote for rabbis and members who are Zionists only, so that they have influence over people to collect money and send it to Palestine. […] Only those who understand the lot of our fellow believers and render obedience to the authorities should be appointed to synagogue supervisory boards, whereas the above-named protestants wish to become lawyers, 88

This is a group of acculturated integrationist Jews, in this case also accused of harbouring Zionist sympathies.

416

Markowski

civil servants, board members, and directors. The Fellowship of Sellers has a chairman, a director, and a deputy director. They are getting many others to join them and are doing their best to become members of the synagogue supervisory board. They form a small group of several dozen people, who pay a small amount of religious tax, headed by three people. […] We hope that Your Excellency shall accept our humble request and not allow such injustice in this regard, and, further, in the event that elections take place and people from amongst these protestants happen to be elected to the synagogue supervisory board, which would serve as evidence that they were elected under the influence of these people with the above-mentioned goal in mind, we request that you appoint board members at Your discretion. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 38 Lublin Jews Inform the Provincial Government about the Improper Conduct of Elections Concerning the Synagogue Supervisory Board in Lublin

Source: APL, Lublin Guberniya Government, file 1898:89, pp. 222–222 v.

[…] By the provincial government order of 3 July 1898 […] elections were scheduled to elect members of the Jewish Board of Supervisors, whereby the relevant notices were sent out to the respective institutions on the 16th day of the month and, regardless of that, the Head of the Gendarme Department for Lublin and Ianov Uyezds and the Police Chief of the City of Lublin were informed of the timings involved. However, as no-one who pays contributions towards the upkeep of the local parish, turned out to vote, a second voting day was set for 17 August. By 5 o’clock in the afternoon on that day, 89 of the 1,597 Jews entitled to vote had turned up at the gathering and, under the chairmanship of acting city president, Alderman Pen’kovskii, elected members of the Synagogue Supervisory Board from the nine candidates on the ballot for a three-year term covering 1899, 1900, and 1901 […] Several months since the latest vote to elect members of the Lublin Jewish Board of Supervisors took place, we are humbled to announce that the elections were held inappropriately in the administrative office of the Board of Supervisors: first, elections should always be held in a magistrate’s court under the chairmanship of the City President; and, second, the majority of those who turned out to vote do not pay religious tax at all and, thus, had no right to vote—they were summoned from the street by people lacking public confidence and, therefore, we humbly beseech you to annul the vote and set new elections to take place in the Magistrate’s Court, and that all those

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

417

who exercise their vote should be members of the community who pay their religious tax, as is always the case. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 39 Oath Taken by People Elected to a Synagogue Supervisory Board, Early 20th C.

Source: APL, AML, file 540, p. 59.

[…] I, the undersigned, promise and swear before the Lord God (in the Hebrew text—Adonai), the God of Israel, with a pure heart and not by any other hidden intent, but by the intent and guidance of those witnessing my oath to want and have to serve, faithfully and without hypocrisy, His Imperial Majesty, the one and true, MOST GRACIOUS, GRAND AND WORSHIPFUL EMPEROR NIKOLAI ALEKSANDROVICH, SOVEREIGN OF ALL RUSSIA, and His Imperial Majesty’s legal heir to the All-Russian Throne, HIS IMPERIAL HIGHNESS THE WORSHIPFUL TSAREVICH and GRAND PRINCE, GEORGII ALEKSANDROVICH, and render obedience in all matters, not counting the cost to my last drop of blood, including everything relating to HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY’S Autocracy, power and authority, all appurtenant rights and privileges set in law and legalized henceforth; with the utmost understanding, strength, and ability to forewarn and defend and, at the same time, do my best in every way possible to promote everything relevant to the interests of the state and of loyal service to His Imperial Majesty; as for harm, loss, or damage to HIS MAJESTY’S interests, I shall not only inform about such instances in good time, once I am aware thereof, but also do my utmost to use all measures to avert and prevent them. I shall strictly maintain any confidentiality entrusted to me, and, in the rank accredited and assigned to me, I shall serve appropriately and fairly in accordance with this (general) oath and with instructions, regulations, and edicts issued from time to time by my superiors appointed by HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY’S authority; and I shall not act in violation of my official position or of this oath for the sake of personal profit, friendship, or enmity; and, thus, act decently and properly as a loyal subject of HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY; and I can be accountable for anything I do at any time before God. Let the Lord God help me mentally and physically. Amen. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

418

Markowski

No. 40 Oath Taken by a Rabbi Elected by Members of the Municipality, Lublin, Early 20th C.

Source: APL, Government of Lublin Guberniya, file 1909: 69, p. 117.

—I, the below named, promise and swear before Almighty God and the Holy Scripture that I wish to and should serve, faithfully and without hypocrisy, HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY, the one and true, MOST GRACIOUS, GRAND AND WORSHIPFUL EMPEROR NIKOLAI ALEKSANDROVICH, Sovereign of All-Russia, and HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY’S legal HEIR to the All-Russian Throne, and render obedience in all matters, not sparing my life to my last drop of blood, including everything relating to HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY’S Autocracy, power and authority, all appurtenant rights and privileges set in law and legalized henceforth; with the utmost understanding, strength and ability to forewarn and defend and, at the same time, do my best in every way possible to promote everything relevant to the interests of the state and of loyal service to HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY; as for harm, loss or damage to HIS MAJESTY’S interests, I shall not only inform about such instances in good time, once I am aware thereof, but also do my utmost to use all measures to avert and prevent them. I shall strictly maintain any confidentiality entrusted to me, and, in the rank accredited and assigned to me, I shall serve appropriately and fairly in accordance with this (general) oath and with instructions, regulations and edicts issued from time to time by my superiors appointed by HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY’S authority; and I shall not act in violation of my official position or of this oath for the sake of personal profit, relationship, friendship or enmity; and, thus, act decently and properly as a loyal subject of HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY; and I can be accountable for anything I do at any time before God and His fearful judgement. Let the Lord God help me mentally and physically. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 41 Announcement Regarding the Election of a Rabbi at the Lublin Synagogue Supervisory Board, and Ballot Paper, 25 August 1909

Source: APL, AML, file 540, p. 59.

[…] The Magistrate’s Court of the City of Lublin, having scheduled a ballot at its administrative office in the Magistrate’s Court building for 9 o’clock on 18 November 1909 to elect a rabbi for Lublin, invites you to come to the Magistrate’s Court at the appointed time and submit the ballot paper attached herewith, entering the name and surname of the person for whom you are voting to the post of rabbi. Receipt of this notice shall

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

419

be attested by your signature on a tear-off label. Ballot papers shall be accepted only up until 3 o’clock in the afternoon. City of Lublin, 25 August 1909. City President, Court Counsellor Shreier. Alderman of the Magistrate’s Court Nurovskii. BALLOT PAPER. Candidate for the post of rabbi: 1) Name 2) Patronymic 3) Surname … Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 42 Official Report on the Election of a Rabbi in Lublin Municipality, 18 November 1909 (Russian Calendar)

Source: APL, Government of the Lublin Guberniya, file 1909: 69, p. 64.

[…] 1,470 people have the right to vote in this district in this election. At 9 o’clock in the morning, the ballot box was stamped with the seals of the magistrate’s court and the Jewish Board of Trustees in the presence of voters, and voting began with the submission of ballot papers, which continued until 3 o’clock in the afternoon. 910 people participated in the election. At 5 o’clock in the evening, the ballot box was opened and all of the ballot papers were taken out for counting. There were 910 ballot papers. On the basis of these ballot papers, the following number of votes were received: Kliatskin Elia Gertskov 552 votes 1. 2. Libshits Khaskel’ Gilelelev 354 votes 3. Kliksberg Shmul’ Berkov 1. 27 ballot papers were sent by post, 70 ballot papers were submitted via a messenger and 2 had the name of Libshits crossed out. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

420

Markowski

No. 43 Announcement Calling for Elections of a Delegation to Attend the Jewish Congress in St. Petersburg Convened by the Russian Authorities, Lublin 1910

Source: APL, AML, file 545, p. 13.

Announcement The Minister of Internal Affairs has deemed it necessary to convene in St. Petersburg a congress of representatives of Jewish communities, in order to discuss, in collaboration with members of the Rabbinic Commission, matters closely related to the religious life of Jews living in Russia. Elections to choose five Jews to represent the provinces of the Kingdom of Poland should take place in the city of Warsaw in the form of a general congress of no more than 60 electors from the Jewish population of all ten provinces. The election of 7 electors from Lublin Guberniya should take place in the city of Lublin at a special provincial congress, which should be attended by people elected, in turn, by individual parishes. A candidate has to be elected from the Lublin parish to the aforementioned Provincial Congress, and elections of such candidates shall take place on Monday 1/1489 February 1910 between 9 o’clock in the morning and 3 o’clock in the afternoon at the administrative office of Lublin City Magistrate’s Court. All payers of the religious tax have the right to participate in the election of candidates. Upon the provision of identity papers on the day of the election, voters shall receive ballot papers on which to enter the names of their favoured candidates and to be submitted to the electoral commission. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence



No. 44 The Lublin Jewish Fellowship of Guardians Presents the Situation of the Jewish Community to the City Magistrate’s Court, Lublin, 8 November 1913

Source: APL, AML, file 545, p. 112–15

[…] The consent of 2/3 of all people with the right to discuss public issues is required. Whereas this requirement is feasible for gatherings of people living in small communities and suburbs, etc., where the number of people who have the right to discuss public issues is far from significant, in the case of a large city, it is completely unfeasible. 89

The date is given in both the old- and new-style calendars.

The Kingdom of Poland, 1815–1915

421

Lublin’s Jewish community has more than 12,000 people who pay the community contribution, which means that the consent of more than 800 people would be required to adopt a resolution on any issue; and, yet, no matter how intense the exerted effort or endeavour might be, it is impossible to bring together such a large number of people, whereby more than 800 of them agree on an issue, because a significant proportion of subscription payers in large towns are noted for their indifference to public or all sorts of other issues, which is proved further by synagogue supervisory board elections, in which no more than half of all contribution payers participate, despite occasionally intensified canvassing. Furthermore, convening such a meeting entails huge technical difficulties, because there are no venues in the city large enough to accommodate such a crowded gathering and, equally, it is impossible to clarify any particular issue comprehensively when so many people are involved. Finally, the issue of Jewish butchers needs to be subject to legislative regulation. At present, Jewish butchers are, by law, entirely independent from the Jewish community and are bound only by agreement with meat-producers. To all intents and purposes, Jews do not use meat resulting from slaughter carried out by a butcher who is not under rabbinic supervision; but, since such supervision is not established by law and a certain part of the Jewish population recognizes unofficial Hasidic rabbis/tsadikim as their religious leaders, then it is believed, as has been the case in the city of Lublin, that only butchers, whose activities have not been approved by a rabbi, are sanctioned by Hasidic religious leaders, thus giving rise to long-standing quarrels within the Jewish community. In order to get rid of such a regrettable state of affairs, one needs oathsto establish through legal provisions that Jewish butchers, who are hired by meat producers to slaughter livestock according to kosher ritual, are subject to rabbinic approval, in conjunction with the synagogue supervisory board. In so doing, the latter, i.e. the rabbis and synagogue supervisory board, shall not impose henceforth any taxes on kosher meat, in order to protect the Jewish population from any excessive rise in the price of kosher meat, and, also, shall resolve disputes between meat producers and butchers regarding the establishment of payment for the slaughter of livestock. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

chapter 7

Imperial Russia’s North-Western and South-Western Provinces, 1815–1914 Andrei Zamoiski 1

Introduction

The documents presented herewith cover various issues regarding Jewish self-government in the eastern territories of the former Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, which were annexed to the Russian Empire during the three Partitions of Poland between 1772 and 1795. They focus on the Jewish communities in the so-called north-western and south-western provinces,1 both in large provincial towns and small towns (mestechki) of the so-called Pale of Settlement: among them Vitebsk Guberniya, Vilna Guberniya, Mogilev Guberniya, Grodno Guberniya, Kovno Guberniya, Minsk Guberniya, Volyn Guberniya, and Podolsk Guberniya. As a result of the annexation of these former Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth territories, the Russian authorities were forced to deal with a large Jewish population, which enjoyed its own autonomy.2 During the reign of Alexander I, Russia’s governmental authorities accepted the continuity of Jewish laws and traditions of self-government, although a number of Russian public figures proposed measures to put Jewish life ‘in order’, believing the kahal to be a ‘state within a state’.3 From the beginning of the nineteenth century, Jewish self-government was regulated by the Statute on Jews of 1804, according to which the kahals were responsible for 1 The territory of the so-called Western Krai (Zapadnyi Krai), the former territories of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth which after partitions were directly incorporated into the Russian Empire, see Piotr Rylski and Karol Weitz, ‘The Impact of the Russian Civil Judicial Proceedings Act of 1864 on the Polish Civil Proceedings’, Russian Law Journal, 2.4 (2014), 78–90. 2 For more details see John Klier, Russia Gathers Her Jews: The Origins of the ‘Jewish Question’ in Russia, 1772–1825 (De Kalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1986); Salo W. Baron, The Russian Jews under Tsars and Soviets, 2nd ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1976), р. 100; David E. Fishman, Russia’s First Modern Jews: The Jews of Shklov (New York: New York University Press, 1995), p. 20. 3 Gavrila Derzhavin, ‘Mnenie ob otvrashhenii v Belorussii goloda i ustroistve byta evreev’, in Sochineniia Derzhavina, ed. I. Grota, 9 vols. (St. Petersburg: Izdanie Imperatorskoi Akademii Nauk, 1872), pp. 260–61.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

423

the timely payment of duties, as well as for the disposal of monies collected by the Jewish community.4 Jewish political representation in the Russian administrative system was linked to the activities of the Deputation of the Jewish People, which was subordinate to the Minister of Religious Affairs and Public Education. The Deputation became a kind of intermediary between the central Russian authorities and the Jewish population [no. 2].5 At the same time, deputies from the kahals represented people’s interests at the town level [no. 8]. The reign of Nicholas I was marked by efforts to integrate Jews more intensely into Russian society, which entailed active state intervention in the internal affairs of communities.6 According to a statue of 1835 on Jewish societies, all Jews were obliged to be registered with a municipal Jewish community, which constituted a further limitation of their rights [no. 11]. 2

How the Kahal Worked and Its Interaction with Authorities

The kahal dealt with a number of issues concerning the organization of its internal institutions, as well as interacted with the ‘outside world’, meaning the Russian authorities (provincial and municipal administrations, and so on). The management of the kahal consisted of three to five members, elected for a three-year term, on the condition that they knew the Russian language. The kahal also had its own administration (clerks) [no. 11] and enjoyed quite broad responsibilities, including, first and foremost, the resolution of matters within the Jewish community: concluding contracts with rabbis [no. 14]; presenting invitations to ritual slaughterers (shoḥetim) [no. 9]; collecting taxes; and mobilizing Jews to fulfil municipal and other local duties [no. 8]. One of the most important people was the head of the kahal, the parnas khodesh, who often wielded real authority over his fellow believers.7 The kahal dealt directly with Russian authorities over various common issues. The local 4 ‘Vysochaishe utverzhdennoe 9 dekabria 1804 goda Polozhenie “O ustroistve Evreev” ’, in Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii, vol. 28, collection no. 1 (St. Petersburg: Gosudarstvennaia Tipografiia 1830), pp. 731–37; Heinrich Friedrich von Storch, Russland unter Alexander dem Ersten: Eine historische Zeitschrift (St. Petersburg; Leipzig: Hartknoch, 1805), pp. 376–77. 5 Olga Minkina, ‘Syny Rakhili’: Evreiskie deputaty v Rossiiskoi imperii. 1772–1825 (Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2011), pp. 219–20. 6 For more details, see Michael Stanislawski, Tsar Nicholas I and the Jews: The Transformation of Jewish Society in Russia, 1825–1855 (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1983); Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern, Jews in the Russian Army, 1827–1917: Drafted into Modernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009). 7 Yekhezkel Kotik, Journey to a Nineteenth-Century Shtetl: The Memoirs of Yekhezkel Kotik, ed. David Assaf (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2002), p. 160.

424

Zamoiski

duties (povinnosti) of Jews were regulated jointly by the kahal and members of the Christian community [no. 8]. Disputes between Jewish and Christian communities in towns and settlements were not uncommon: for example, regarding land disputes (e.g. over the territory of cemeteries and gardens).8 When disasters such as fires occurred, the kahal would be the natural mouthpiece to express the interests of the Jewish community and could request a reduction of the tax burden [no. 12]. Despite enjoying a certain autonomy, the kahals had to function within a quite restrictive Russian legal framework. The Russian authorities tried to assume control of the kahals’ activities in order to ensure timely collection of taxes and execution by Jews of various duties.9 The kahal’s administration was required to enter details of all monies received and spent by kahal members into a special book [nos. 5, 6]. This task was often carried out with a large number of irregularities (e.g. documents were disorderly and contained clerical errors), which would be discovered during inspections [nos. 2, 6]. The Russian governmental authorities also tried to interfere directly in the kahals’ internal affairs, particularly regarding the redistribution of income and expenses [nos. 10, 12]. The kahals also assumed some functions of the police; thus, they had to assist the authorities with the surrender of wanted persons [no. 15]. Jews excluded from kahals were required to have special documents (cards).10 The collective responsibility of kahals required that they bore financial responsibility when, for a variety of reasons, Jews failed to fulfil duties owed to the Russian authorities. Kahals were entrusted with helping Jewish settlers, given that the Russian governmental authorities encouraged Jewish agriculture strongly, especially in areas of southern Ukraine; however, Jews did not show much enthusiasm for this duty.11 As part of their collective responsibility, kahals were expected to reimburse the costs of re-settlement [no. 7]. The abolition of the kahals in 1844 was a key stage in the development of Jewish self-government in the western provinces [no. 16]. Jewish communities came under the control of municipal authorities, leading to the end of Jewish communal autonomy. Nevertheless, the duties of Jewish communities 8

9 10 11

Problems of Jewish–Christian relations have been discussed in the following works: Ina Sorkina, Miastechki Belarusi u kantsy XVIII–pershai palove XIX st. (Vilnius: EHU, 2010); Olga Sobolevskaia, Povsednevnaia zhizn’ evreev Belarusi v konce XVIII–pervoi polovine XIX veka (Grodno: GrGU, 2012). Isaac Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, 1917–1844, vol. 1 (New York: Octagon Books, 1970), p. 51. Predpisanie ‘O snabzhenii evreev i khristian knizhechkami’, Vilenskie gubernskie vedomosti, 1 (7 January 1839), p. 1. Osip Lerner, Evrei v Novorossiiskom krae (Odessa: G.M. Levinson, 1901), p. 17.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

425

still included tax collection and procuring recruits for the Russian army. The persons responsible for ensuring that Jews fulfilled their duties, the so-called tax collector (sborshchik) and the army recruiter (sdatchik), began to play an important role in the Jewish community.12 Elements of the Jewish community’s kahal management structure existed for a while longer, before withering as a result of Russian legislation drafted under the reforms of Alexander II.13 Members of Jewish communities sat on various committees and commissions (housing, building, and others) in municipal councils.14 At the same time, Jewish representation was restricted by law, meaning that they could not constitute more than one-third of all deputies, as opposed to Christians, who constituted two-thirds of all elected members.15 A further limitation of Jewish rights occurred during the reign of Alexander III. According to the Municipal Statute of 1892, Jews were deprived of the right to sit on elected town councils and were barred as well from occupying a number of posts in municipal governments.16 Whilst limiting the rights of Jews, the Russian authorities demanded from them a demonstration of loyalty; thus, it was mandatory for all elected members of the board of synagogues to swear an oath of allegiance and to prohibit the convocation of any other assemblies [no. 37]. When making denunciations, members of Jewish communities would accuse rivals of disloyalty to the powers that be, such as through wrongdoing at public events [no. 25]. The Russian governmental authorities were also given to use force against Jewish communities and would engage soldiers for this purpose [no. 13].

12 13

14 15 16

Isaac Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, 1844–1917, vol. 2 (Jerusalem: Posner, 1981), p. 56. Eli Lederhendler, The Road to Modern Jewish Politics: Political Tradition and Political Reconstruction in the Jewish Community of Tsarist Russia (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), pp. 50–52; Eugene M. Avrutin, Jews and the Imperial State: Identification Politics in Tsarist Russia (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2010), p. 32. I. Dityatin, Gorodskoe samoupravlenie v Rossii. II: Gorodskoe samoupravlenie do 1870 goda (Yaroslavl’: 1877), р. 229. M.I. Mysh, Gorodovoe polozhenie so vsemi otnosiashchimisia k nemu uzakoneniiami, sudebnymi i pravitel’stvennymi raziasneniiami (St. Petersburg: Tipografiia N.A. Lebedeva, 1888), p. 836. I. Gimpel’son, Zakony o evreiakh: Sistematicheskii obzor deistvuiushchikh zakonopolozhenii o evreiakh, ed. L.M. Bramson, 2 vols. (Petrograd: Izdanie Tov. Iurisprudentsia, 1914–15); Iu. Gessen, O zhizni evreev v Rossii. Zapiska v Gosudarstvennuiu Dumu (St. Petersburg: Tip. t-va ‘Obshchestvennaia pol’za’, 1906), p. 96.

426 3

Zamoiski

Criticism of the Kahal’s Institutions

Infringements of rules were not uncommon and involved issues connected with the kahals’ institutions: elections, tax collection, allocation of duties, levies, provision of conscripts. In one example, the Russian authorities informed the Deputation of the Jewish People about irregularities discovered in a kahal concerning payment of excessive duties [no. 2]. Jewish discontent was also sparked by the policing functions of those responsible in the kahal for providing recruits from Jewish communities for the Russian army.17 When selecting recruits, it was common for the kahal to send the children of poor people and fathers of large families to the army, thus protecting the rich.18 It was not only individual members of the Jewish community and people from the Russian authorities who criticized the kahals: criticism about the kahals and life in Jewish communities entered the political arena whenever it was beneficial to the Russian authorities to ‘lift the veil’ and show the public what was really happening within Jewish self-government.19 The Book of the Kahal, published in 1869 by Iakov Brafman, an author and teacher who had converted from Judaism, became widely known, painting Jewish self-government in an extremely unflattering light [no. 26]. In this work Brafman referred directly to documents that were apparently in the communal record book (pinkas) from the Minsk kahal, covering the years 1794–1833. He denounced a Jewish kahal as ‘a state within a state’.20 The tendentious interpretation of sources by Brafman was met with a backlash from many commentators, who pointed out that Brafman’s claims, arguments, and conclusions were unsubstantiated and even falsified.21

17 18 19 20 21

For more details, see Petrovsky-Shtern, Jews in the Russian Army; Stanislawski, Nicholas and the Jews, pp. 29–31. Kotik, Journey to a Nineteenth-Century Shtetl, p. 176. John Klier, Imperial Russia’s Jewish Question, 1855–1881 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Verena Dohrn, Jüdische Eliten im Russischen Reich (Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2008), p. 146. For more detail on Brafman’s work and ideas, see Klier, Imperial Russia’s Jewish Question, pp. 262–79. I. Shershevskii, O knige Kagala (St. Petersburg: Tipografiia Skariatina, 1872), p. 1; Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, vol. 2, p. 71.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

4

427

Taxation

Tax issues were of the highest importance in Jewish self-government. The Russian governmental authorities attempted to take control of tax collection in Jewish communities. The kahal or communal tax (‘box tax’) illustrates how Jewish self-government worked. Funds from a so-called ‘box’ (korobka) were allocated towards various pressing needs of the Jewish community: paying community debts; the upkeep of Jewish educational establishments, synagogues, and the clergy; establishing Jewish agricultural settlements; and delegating funds for charitable purposes [nos. 2, 5]. After the abolition of the kahals, Jewish communities retained a certain autonomy in the area of tax collection [no. 16]. Consequently, a new Statute on the Kahal Tax appeared in 1844.22 The amount of the tax was established by municipal authorities in agreement with the Jewish communities.23 The specific tax rate was set by deputies from Jewish communities, who would stipulate clearly the amount to be paid for the slaughter of cattle and poultry [no. 27]. The municipal government would conclude a contract with Jewish merchants to grant them a lease to collect the communal tax of a Jewish community for a period of four years [no. 28]. The funds collected by the leaseholders would be paid to the municipal treasury. Since various facilities (synagogues, hospitals, and schools) were financed by the communal tax, it was necessary to apply directly to the municipal authorities for funds, for example to finance the upkeep of a Jewish primary school with a vocational department [no. 29] or to a synagogue [no. 30]. Deputies from a Jewish community would meet to resolve various financial issues, especially to approve expenditures which did not fall within the scope of the communal tax [no. 19]. In the Russian Empire, a tax on candles (an excise on candles lit in Jewish homes on the eve of the Sabbath and holidays) was collected from Jewish communities.24 The excise duty was paid to the Ministry of Public Education for its disposal to maintain governmentowned schools for Jewish children.25 Jews did not manifest their willingness to support government schools, and municipal councils often delayed the transfer of monies [no. 18]. Some groups of Jews were exempt from the tax. 22 23 24 25

M.I. Mysh, Rukovodstvo k russkim zakonam o evreiakh, 4th ed. (St. Petersburg: Tipografiia A. Benke, 1914), p. 586. Mikhail Morgulis, Voprosy evreiskoi zhizni. Sobranie statei (St. Petersburg: Sklad Balashova, 1903), p. 427. Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, vol. 2, p. 31. Iu. Gessen and V. Fridshtein, Sbornik zakonov o evreiakh s raziasneniiami po opredeleniiam Pravitelstvuiushchego Senata i tsirkuliaram Ministerstv (St. Petersburg: Izdanie Iuridicheskogo Knizhnogo Magazina N.K. Martynova, 1904), 1904, pp. 316–18.

428

Zamoiski

Conflicts arose between members of Jewish communities over tax collection, for example over the refusal of medical doctors to pay the candle tax [no. 17]. It was also usual for Jews to refuse to pay the candle tax if they left the Pale of Settlement [no. 43]. Some Russian officials in the Pale of Settlement proposed to eliminate these taxes completely, as they believed that the taxes brought no benefit to the Russian exchequer and only set Jews apart from the rest of the population.26 5

Rabbis and Rabbinic Committees

The work of the rabbi was very closely linked to Jewish self-government. In accordance with the Statute on Jews of 1804, Jews in the Russian Empire retained the right to elect their rabbis, but appointments had to be approved by provincial authorities.27 Members of the kahal’s establishment, including rabbis, were maintained by funds collected within the kahal from the slaughter of cattle and poultry [no. 1]. Each kahal concluded an agreement with the rabbi, stipulating his duties [no. 14]. Rabbis were elected for a three-year term and received salaries from the community.28 Their duties included keeping the register of births, marriages, and deaths; conducting weddings, burials, and circumcisions; and naming newborns [no. 14]. Dissatisfaction was sown in Jewish communities by a law which required that only graduates of rabbinic schools or general institutions of education could be elected to the post of rabbi. Many rabbis could not apply for the posts because they lacked the legally required educational qualifications [no. 34]. At the same time, many community rabbis’ lives were quite difficult because the Jewish communities paid them only modest salaries [no. 34]. A community could have two rabbis: a communal rabbi (known also as crown rabbi, rav ha-ta’am); and a spiritual (duchovnyi) one who was not approved by the authorities.29 Elections to choose communal rabbis were conducted in accordance with established rules, with candidacies having to be approved both by the synagogue’s rabbinic board and by the municipal 26 27 28 29

‘Soobrazheniia i predlozheniia; vyrabotannye, uchrezhdennoiu po Vysochaishemu poveleniiu 22 Avgusta 1881. Mogilevskoi komissiei po Evreiskomu voprosu’, in Trudy gubernskikh komissii po evreiskomu voprosu, vol. 1 (St. Petersburg, 1884), p. 35. ‘Vysochaishe utverzhdennoe 9 dekabria 1804 goda Polozhenie “O ustroistve Evreev” ’, pp. 734–36. Gessen and Fridshtein, Sbornik zakonov o evreiakh, p. 333. A learned rabbi was chosen according to the wishes of the community, but he would be under the supervision of the crown rabbi and would have to obey the latter’s executive decisions. Isaac Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, vol. 2, pp. 88–90.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

429

authorities [no. 41]. Russian officials often made decisions which were contrary to the expectations of the majority of the Jewish community, preventing the community’s chosen candidate from taking part in the election [no. 34]. Rabbis commanded authority in Jewish communities and were often trustees of charitable institutions [no. 42]. In the context of Jewish involvement in the revolutionary movement,30 the authorities would also take into account the political reliability of rabbinical candidates during candidate selection. Preference was given to those who showed particular loyalty, which included collaboration on a number of issues [no. 41]. In accordance with the Statute on Jews of 1804, rabbis were allowed to issue internal rulings (sudoproizvodstvo). The official institution for deciding issues of a religious nature was the Rabbinic Committee, which was the highest recognized body for resolving the religious affairs of Jews [no. 35]. This committee met on an irregular basis.31 Committee members would discuss issues of everyday life in Jewish community, including dissolutions of marriages and cases of polygamy.32 Jewish charities in the cities allocated funds to maintain the Rabbinic Committee, as well as to fund the posts of expert Jews working under governors-general in the western provinces [no. 27]. An ‘expert Jew’s’ (uchenyi evrei) responsibilities included carrying out assignments on issues which required the knowledge of language and Jewish traditions.33 6

The Role of Elections in Jewish Self-Government

The practice of conducting elections, which were an important part of Jewish self-government, embraced various aspects of Jewish community life. Elections of kahal representatives were important moments in the life of any Jewish community, when interests between different groups and members 30

31 32 33

For more detailed information about the involvement of Jews in the Russian revolutionary movement in Russia, see Ezra Mendelsohn, Class Struggle in the Pale: The Formative Years of the Jewish Workers’ Movement in the Tsarist Russia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970); Erich Haberer, Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995). The Rabbinical Committee was founded in 1848 and Rabbinical Committees were convened six times: in 1852, 1857, 1861, 1879, 1893, and 1910. Everyday Jewish Life in Imperial Russia Select Documents, 1772–1914, ed. ChaeRan Y. Freeze and Jay M. Harris (Waltham, Mass.: Brandeis University Press, 2013), p. 230. Gessen and Fridshtein, Sbornik zakonov o evreiakh, p. 346; for greater details on expert Jews as representatives of so-called Jewish bureaucracy, see Vassili Schedrin, Jewish Souls, Bureaucratic Minds: Jewish Bureaucracy and Policymaking in Late Imperial Russia, 1850– 1917 (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2016), p. 51.

430

Zamoiski

of different ‘parties’ clashed [no. 6]. Jews often resorted to electing such representatives as the rabbinic board of a prayer association [nos. 13, 39]; the deputies of a Jewish community who would receive monies from the communal tax [no. 31]; representatives through municipal council elections [no. 22]; the trustees of orphanages [no. 42]; or Jewish artisans to elect guild leaders [no. 20]. It was not unheard of for a charity to fail to come up with candidates and for elections to be delayed [no. 13]. Sometimes, the authoritarian methods of the kahal leadership led to uncontested elections in the kahals. This could have also had something to do with the support which members of the Russian authorities gave to particular candidates, in order to maintain calm within the kahals themselves.34 Whilst Jews had a certain freedom in the kahals to choose their candidates, lists of voters had to be approved by municipal councils and the provincial authorities after 1844. Certain Jewish voters were barred from taking part in elections for various formal reasons, including on the grounds of having tax arrears [no. 24]. In the event of absence, certain members of Jewish communities entrusted their right to vote to colleagues or partners [no. 22]. Needless to say, election results did not always satisfy the interests of all members of communities, charities, or synagogue boards. Conflicts arose and the local or, sometimes, central Russian authorities would be called upon to resolve them. The Russian authorities constantly came across denunciations and complaints of ‘unfair elections’ concerning members of communities [no. 6], guilds [no. 20], and rabbinic boards of synagogues [no. 47]. Some complaints would be rejected immediately, as complainants failed to comply with legally established procedures [no. 47]. Sometimes, denunciations from Jewish communities in the western provinces would serve as grounds for further investigation. Members of local Russian authorities would discover situations which would be difficult to solve: an official would be sent to conduct an investigation in a kahal [no. 6], or there would be a police investigation [no. 25]. In a number of cases, Jewish self-government elections became a kind of formality, since members of the Jewish community who were not permanently in situ would have a poor understanding of the genuine needs of their community [no. 43]. Many Jews actually lost touch with the communities with which they were registered and would find out about impending events through the media [no. 45]. Some members of Jewish communities expected the Russian authorities to give assistance in approving the ‘right’ candidates for elected positions [no. 41].

34

Kotik, Journey to a Nineteenth-Century Shtetl, p. 175.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

7

431

Synagogues and Rabbinic Boards

The synagogue was the centre of religious and social life in Jewish communities. The upkeep of the synagogue and its staff was financed by the kahal [no. 5] and, after 1844, through the communal tax [no. 30]. Jews often had to stand up to the authorities for their right to practise their faith. Jewish communities were not allowed to build new synagogues freely; all such matters had to be agreed upon with the Russian governmental authorities, with whom it was often difficult to find common understanding. For a variety of reasons, the Russian local authorities tried to limit the number of Jewish places of worship. Fearing the assembly of Jews, the Russian authorities also banned religious services in private homes, even on Jewish holidays [no. 38]. Furthermore, conflicts ensued with landowners over agreements to build new synagogues on their land [no. 36]. For example, Jews applied for permission to build new, stone synagogues to replace old wooden or burnt ones. To this end, the community chose highly authoritative representatives to deal with such issues [no. 40]. The synagogues had rabbinic boards which ran the synagogue, prayer houses, and charitable institutions.35 The board was elected by the members of synagogue associations (molitvennoe obschestvo), and, as a rule, consisted of three authoritative members of the Jewish community: a rabbi, a synagogue elder, and a treasurer [no. 39]. After candidates were approved by the provincial government, they were sworn in as members of the rabbinic board [no. 37]. Jewish communities did not always agree with the choice of candidates or the results of elections [no. 47]. Sometimes matters came to such a state that elections were postponed. The Russian authorities would be forced to intervene, not holding back on the use of force to speed up elections [no. 13]. Members of the rabbinic board played an important role in furthering education, in particular by initiating the opening of new schools [no. 44]. 8

Artisans and Merchants

Representatives of various groupings (social strata or professional groups), such as merchants and artisans, played an important role in Jewish selfgovernment. Merchants often became deputies in kahals [nos. 8, 11], and, after 1844, in municipal councils [no. 21] and as members of rabbinic boards

35

Gessen and Fridshtein, Sbornik zakonov o evreiakh, pp. 330–31.

432

Zamoiski

[no. 30].36 They were also leaseholders of the kahal tax, since they were the very people who were able to put up the necessary collateral [no. 28]. Artisans had a much weaker standing in Jewish communities. Sometimes members of the higher echelons of the Jewish community attempted to bar them from elections.37 With the abolition of the kahals, Jewish artisans had to protect their interests through guilds where Jews were in the majority (cobblers, tailors). In large towns and cities, the guilds were controlled by artisans’ councils (consisting of the head artisan and the elders of the guild) and were governed by the Artisans’ Statute.38 In accordance with Russian legislation, Jewish artisans could elect representatives from amongst themselves to hold certain positions in public administration [no. 20]. 9

Education

A central task of Jewish self-government was Jewish education and the maintenance of Jewish schools. The kahals collected funds for educational establishments [no. 5] but when the kahals were abolished, members of Jewish communities claimed funding for their educational institutions from municipal councils [nos. 18, 29]. It is well known that the Russian Empire made attempts to modernize Jewish education. The Committee on the Fundamental Transformation of the Jews (1840–63) proposed the creation of state-owned Jewish schools to promote the assimilation of young Jewish people.39 The education provided by these schools was free; however, Jewish communities had to pay for them through the candle tax. The development of state-owned Jewish schools met resistance from Jewish self-government [no. 18]. Growth in the activity of Jewish communities led to the development of a network of traditional and secular Jewish educational establishments.40 The kahal tax funded various Jewish institutions: vocational schools, technical secondary schools, grammar schools, Talmud Torah schools, and heders [nos. 27, 29]. A copy of a public decree on how to apply correctly to the Russian authorities to register 36 37 38 39 40

E. Kolokolov, Ukazatel’ zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii dlia kupechestva (Moscow: Univ. Tipografiia,1847), p. 288. Avraham Paperna, ‘Iz Nikolaevskoi epokhi’, in Evrei v Rossii: XIX v. (Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2000), p. 45. Mysh, Gorodovoe polozhenie, p. 836. Stanislawski, Tsar Nicholas I and the Jews, p. 123; Alexei Miller, The Romanov Empire and Nationalism (Budapest: Central European University Press, 2008), p. 106. Steven Zipperstein, The Jews of Odessa: A Cultural History, 1794–1881 (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1991), p. 129.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

433

a Jewish school was available to representatives of Jewish self-government [no. 44]. Jewish religious teachers (melamdim) played an important role in the workings of the Jewish community. The Russian authorities tried to control who could become a melamed and the rules relating to teachers changed frequently. Thus, while a law stipulated in 1875 that teachers needed to have graduated from a rabbinic school or grammar school, from 1893 onwards it was sufficient to be a certified melamed to be permitted to run a heder [no. 33].41 10

Ḥavarot and Jewish Voluntary Associations

Traditional Jewish organizations (Heb., ḥevra, plural, ḥavarot) were a fixed feature of life in Jewish communities. Russian legislation did not regulate their activities.42 There were also no provisions regarding their financial affairs, which meant that different kahals had different tax-collecting practices. The Russian authorities demanded that representatives of the Jewish community intervene when they became aware of improper practices by members of burial ḥevrot charging exorbitant duties to fellow Jews [no. 2]. Some people in the Russian governmental authorities wished to limit the size of the duties by setting fixed rates along the lines of the kahal tax [no. 10]. Gradually, new types of Jewish voluntary associations began to play an active role in the Pale of Settlement.43 These were representative organizations of Russian nationwide Jewish educational and civic associations, including the Society (Association) for the Promotion of Skilled Trades (Obshchestvo Remeslennago i Zemledelecheskago Truda Sredi Evreev v Rossii, ORT) and the Society (Association) for the Spread of Culture among the Jews of Russia (Obshchestva dlia Rasprostraneniia Prosveshcheniia Mezhdu Evreiami v Rossii, OPE) and others.44 Before the First World War, many different Jewish associations were established in the Russian Empire, reflecting various aspects of scientific, cultural, and social life.45 Often, the efforts to create these organizations 41 42 43

44 45

Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, vol. 2, p. 118; Gimpel’son, Zakony o evreiakh, p. 582. Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, vol. 2, p. 70. François Guesnet, ‘Revolutionary Hinterland: Transformations of Jewish Associational Life in the Kingdom of Poland, 1904–06’, in The Russian Revolution of 1905 in Transcultural Perspective: Identities, Peripheries, and the Flow of Ideas, ed. Felicitas Fischer von Weikersthal (Bloomington, Ind.: Slavica Publishers, 2013), p. 107. Benjamin Nathans, Beyond the Pale: The Jewish Encounter with Late Imperial Russia (Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002), pp. 173–74. Jeffrey Veidlinger, Jewish Public Culture in the Late Russian Empire: The Modern Jewish Experience (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 2009), p. 15.

434

Zamoiski

met with opposition from the Russian governmental authorities. Refusals to approve Jewish voluntary associations and trustee groups were issued on formal grounds [no. 23]. Representatives of the local authorities would seek bureaucratic reasons to refuse registration, although these refusals were often motivated politically and were above all based on a rejection of Jewish political activity and the fear of ‘Jewish revolutionaries’ in the Pale of Settlement.46 The authorities’ blunt mistrust of Jewish organizations became cause to reject an organization for fictitious reasons, especially on the grounds of concern over ‘inter-ethnic hatred’ between Jews and non-Jews [no. 46]. In these and other matters, Jewish self-government was forced to adapt to the political processes taking place in the later years of the Russian Empire.47 11

Charity and Medical Care

Jewish self-government over the course of the period in question grew more concerned with charitable matters. Jewish associations showed a gradual growth of interest in social care.48 They were bound by legislation to care for the sick, the disabled, old people, and sick Jews, as well as to prevent vagrancy.49 Self-government played an important role in furthering charitable causes, such as running Jewish hospitals and providing housing for the poor (almshouses), all of which were financed through the communal tax (korobochnyi nalog) [no. 27]. In addition, Jewish communities started paying more attention to the provision of medical assistance for fellow Jews. In the first decades of the nineteenth century, Russian authorities had to ask certain kahals to finance hospitals [no. 10], since they considered the extra cost to be a burden [no. 1]. The problem was that the number of donors (trustees) had decreased due to community members dying or moving away [no. 23]. Jewish communal support for hospitals improved considerably in the second half of the century due to the advancement of medical knowledge, the work of Jewish medical and 46

47 48 49

Yulia Funk, Evrei Belarusi v kn. XIX–nachale XX vekov (Minsk: Izd. Belnidad, 1998), p. 93. For more on radicalization, see Inna Shtakser, The Making of Jewish Revolutionaries in the Pale of Settlement: Community and Identity during the Russian Revolution and Its Aftermath, 1905–1907 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014). More detailed in Simon Rabinovitch, Jewish Rights, National Rites: Nationalism and Autonomy in Late Imperial and Revolutionary Russia (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2014). Natan Meir, Kiev, Jewish Metropolis: A History, 1859–1914 (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2010), p. 212. Mysh, Gorodovoe polozhenie, p. 836.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

435

charitable associations, and the influence of modernization on various aspects of Jewish life [no. 32]. Towards the end of the century, charitable associations became a mass phenomenon.50 There was also specialization in types of medical care given to Jews. Doctors and other members of the intelligentsia began to play a larger and more significant role in Jewish self-government [no. 48]. 12

Jewish Self-Government in Shtetls

Self-government in small towns (mestechki, shtetlekh) had its distinguishing characteristics. Jews in small towns lived in less comfort than their counterparts in cities. The budgets of Jewish communities in the shtetls could not compare with the incomes of urban Jewish communities, where people were able to run various educational and charitable establishments. The power of kahal leaders in small towns and shtetls was sometimes unlimited and corruption flourished [nos. 2, 6].51 Some Jewish communities experienced the harsh expulsions from rural settlements ordered by the Russian government.52 In shtetls, when newcomers appeared, tensions between them and local Jews increased [no. 3]. With the abolition of the kahals, Jewish charities came under the direct control of the Russian authorities and the various functions of government were concentrated in the hands of Russian officials (e.g. district police chiefs and superintendents).53 As a result of the reforms of 1870, a simplified form of administration was introduced in some small towns, which further reduced the extent of control of local Jewish communities over their affairs [no. 21]. Many voters and taxpayers were no longer in their hometowns, having moved to other populated areas [nos. 43, 45]. Many of the cities and towns absorbed by Russia as a result of the partitioning of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth were privately owned in that they stood on private land owned by Polish or Russian magnates (aristocrats).54 Relations between the owners of small towns and Jews were complicated by the fact that many rights were not established by Russian law, contracts were non-existent, and tensions arose over land and the erection of buildings [no. 4, 36]. Demographic and social change in the Pale of Settlement, and the re-settlement of part of the Jewish 50 51 52 53 54

Typographically printed statutes contained detailed descriptions of how assistance should be made and who could be a member of a charity or voluntary association, with a clear grading of members according to their level of participation. Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, vol. 1, p. 65. Stanislawski, Tsar Nicholas I and the Jews, p. 157. Paperna, ‘Iz Nikolaevskoi epokhi’, p. 52. Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern, The Golden Age Shtetl: A New History of Jewish Life in East Europe (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2014), p. 2.

436

Zamoiski

population to other districts or cities, affected the way Jewish self-government worked in small towns.55 13

Conclusion

Jewish self-government in the western provinces was transformed significantly between 1815 and 1914. The determining factor influencing this change was Russian policy regarding Jews. The kahals were a legacy of Jewish autonomy and were inherited by the Russian authorities through the partition of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. The abolition of the kahals in 1844 was a key stage in the development of Jewish self-government in the western provinces. Elimination of the kahals was supposed to encourage Jewish integration into Russian society, but simultaneously, the authorities inhibited this process through restrictive laws. The kahals were not ideal structures—they had many negative features—but they did contribute to maintaining some Jewish autonomy. The right to impose internal taxes (the kahal tax) played an important role in Jewish self-government, financing the upkeep of the Jewish communities’ social and educational structures. Jewish self-government faced a number of important issues, most notably, enabling the various spheres of Jewish society to function. On the eve of the First World War, Jewish self-government was active in all cities and many small towns (shtetls) and a network of educational and charitable establishments was set up and working. The documents provided herewith shed light on certain aspects of Jewish self-government between 1815 and 1914. All sources are presented in chronological order. Most of the selected documents are materials from the National Historical Archives of the Republic of Belarus (NIAB). The majority of the documents are little known or entirely unknown, and are introduced to the academic world for the first time. There are also excerpts of documents from the Archive of the Radziwiłł Family (Archiwum Radziwiłłów) from the Central Archives of Historical Records (AGAD) in Warsaw; the National Historical Archive of the Republic of Belarus (NIAB) in Grodno; the Russian State Historical Archive in St. Petersburg; the State Archive of the Russian Federation (GARF) in Moscow; and the Kaunas County Archive (KAA). In addition, we include items from the regional press. Translated from Russian by Tim Spence

55

Daniel Brower, The Russian City between Tradition and Modernity, 1850–1900 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), p. 83.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

437

Bibliographic References

Primary Sources



Secondary Sources

Barsov, Nikolai P., Shkoly na Volyni i Podolii v 1862 godu. Ocherk iz sovremennogo sostoianiia (St. Petersburg: Tipografiia Morskogo Ministerstva, 1863). Brafman, Iakov, Kniga kagala (St. Petersburg: Tipografіia S. Dobrodeeva, 1882). Gessen, Iu., and V. Fridshtein, Sbornik zakonov o evreiakh s raziasneniiami po opredeleniiam Pravitelstvuiushchego Senata i tsirkuliaram Ministerstv (St. Petersburg: Izdanie Iuridicheskogo Knizhnogo Magazina N.K. Martynova, 1904). Gimpel’son, I., and L.M. Bramson, eds., Zakony o evreiakh: Sistematicheskii obzor deistvuiushchikh zakonopolozhenii o evreiakh, 2 vols. (Petrograd: Izdanie Tov. Iurisprudentsia, 1914–15). Kotik, Yekhezkel, and David Assaf, eds., Journey to a Nineteenth-Century. Shtetl: The Memoirs of Yekhezkel Kotik (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2002). Mysh, M.I., Gorodovoe polozhenie so vsemi otnosiashchimisia k nemu uzakoneniiami, sudebnymi i pravitel’stvennymi raziasneniiami (St. Petersburg: Tip. N.A. Lebedeva, 1888). Mysh, M.I., Rukovodstvo k russkim zakonam o evreiakh, 4th ed. (St. Petersburg: Tipografiia A. Benke, 1914). Orshanskii, Ilya G., Russkoe zakonodatelstvo o evreiakh: Ocherki i izsledovaniia (St. Petersburg: Tipografiia A.E. Landau, 1887). Vainshel’baum, Hajm B., Spravochnaia knizhka po narodnomu obrazovaniiu evreev: posobie dlia deiatelei po evreiskomu narodnomu obrazovaniiu i uchitelei evreiskikh shkol (Kiev: Izd. Komiteta Kievskago otd-niia O-va rasprostraneniia prosveshcheniia mezhdu evreiami v Rossii, 1907).

Avrutin, Eugene M., Jews and the Imperial State: Identification Politics in Tsarist Russia (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2010). Baron, Salo W., The Russian Jews under Tsars and Soviets, 2nd ed. (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1976). Bartal, Israel, The Jews of Eastern Europe, 1772–1881 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005). Dubnow, Simon M., History of the Jews in Russia and Poland, from the Earliest Time until the Present Day, 3 vols. (Skokie, Ill.: Varda Books, 2001). Freeze, ChaeRan Y., and Jay M. Harris, eds., Everyday Jewish Life in Imperial Russia Select Documents, 1772–1914 (Waltham, Mass.: Brandeis University Press, 2013). Guesnet, François, ‘Revolutionary Hinterland: Transformations of Jewish Associational Life in the Kingdom of Poland, 1904–06’, in Felicitas Fischer von Weikersthal et al.,

438

Zamoiski

eds., The Russian Revolution of 1905 in Transcultural Perspective: Identities, Peripheries, and the Flow of Ideas (Bloomington, Ind.: Slavica Publishers, 2013), pp. 105–20. Klier, John, Imperial Russia’s Jewish Question, 1855–1881 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005). Lederhendler, Eli, The Road to Modern Jewish Politics: Political Tradition and Political Reconstruction in the Jewish Community of Tsarist Russia (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989). Levitats, Isaac, The Jewish Community in Russia, 1772–1844, vol. 1 (New York: Octagon Books, 1970); vol. 2 (Jerusalem: Posner, 1981). Mendelsohn, Ezra, Class Struggle in the Pale: The Formative Years of the Jewish Workers’ Movement in Tsarist Russia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970). Nathans, Benjamin, Beyond the Pale: The Jewish Encounter with Late Imperial Russia (Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002). Petrovsky-Shtern, Yohanan, Jews in the Russian Army, 1827–1917: Drafted into Modernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009). Petrovsky-Shtern, Yohanan, The Golden Age Shtetl: A New History of Jewish Life in East Europe (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2014). Rabinovitch, Simon, Jewish Rights, National Rites: Nationalism and Autonomy in Late Imperial and Revolutionary Russia (Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 2014). Stanislawski, Michael, Tsar Nicholas I and the Jews: The Transformation of Jewish Society in Russia, 1825–1855 (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1983). Veidlinger, Jeffrey, Jewish Public Culture in the Late Russian Empire (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2009).



Sources

Unless stated otherwise, all sources in this chapter have been translated from Russian by Tim Spence.



No. 1 Report of the Minsk Jewish Kahal to Minsk’s Chief of Police Osip Mikhailovich Narbut on Financial Difficulties Concerning the Construction of a Jewish Hospital, March 1818

Source: National Historical Archive of the Republic of Belarus (hereafter, NIAB), collection 332 (Minsk Jewish Kahal), series 1, file 55, page 4. We attach herewith the statute on setting up a Jewish hospital of 1 March last, in which your honour authorized this kahal, upon having complied with the statute, to take

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

439

action regarding sourcing monies to cover costs from Jewish community charitable funds and kahal tax revenues for the running of the hospital’s pharmacy and the financing of a medical officer, or, at least, to procure medicines from other municipal pharmacies, the choice of which should depend on the terms both of the community’s charitable funds and the kahal tax. The kahal cannot provide your honour with an annual signed statement specifying the sources from which the kahal can fund the establishment of the hospital, which requires a significant amount of money, since the community has no charitable funds, whilst the kahal tax, which currently raises for the kahal an annual income of no more than five thousand roubles in silver, is underpaid and insufficient to cover costs per capita for items for which it was designated and approved. The kahal hereby reports to your honour that the income collected from the slaughter of cattle and poultry is received by the rabbi, the slaughterer, synagogue staff, and others.



No. 2 Letter from the Deputation of the Jewish People under the Minister of Religious Affairs and Public Education to the Minsk Guberniya Kahal ‘Concerning Disorder Observed in the Affairs of One Kahal and Burial Association’, 17 March 1820

Source: NIAB, coll. 332 (Minsk Jewish Kahal), ser. 1, file 20, pp. 1–2.

In an instruction of 7 March, the Minister of Religious Affairs and Public Education deigned to notify the deputation of a certain provincial administration about the following information regarding the deliberations of one particular uyezd kahal. The kahal members are not complying with the legal procedure prescribed for the collection of duties and are trying to extort from Jews by repetitive means as much money as they can, irrespective of reminders from the administration, which has forbidden them from executing such actions. Collecting monies in this fashion, the kahal has shown that it is unable to pay the duties, since there are more than sufficient numbers of Jews who have paid the duties; yet, at the same time, when the treasury was inspected, nothing was found in the account and arrears had reached 10,000 roubles. Monies received are written down on scraps of paper in the Jewish language and receipts are not given to those who have paid money; furthermore, the kahal members have not provided any account of how the collected monies are used. In addition, the deliberations of the so-called burial association confirm that Jews are being overburdened with the highest demands for permission to bury their dead. For example, in November 1819, it demanded 50 chervontsy56 from a certain tailor for the burial of his 56

Translator’s note: a chervonets was a gold coin roughly equal to two roubles.

440

Zamoiski

wife. The body of the deceased was left unburied for three days. Finally, the association agreed to a payment of 90 roubles in silver. As, through poverty, the husband could pay only 30 roubles in silver straight away, a promissory note was taken for the remaining 60 roubles and all of his property was used as a guarantee. For this reason, the Minister instructs the Deputation to demand an explanation from the kahal and the burial association as to why such directives exist, which correspond neither with the law nor with the financial capability of their brethren, and, when reporting their response, express to His Excellency their opinion on this matter. In the meantime, we confirm to the whole kahal that it should collect fees in accordance with prescribed laws, keep accounts using the required forms, and report them to the appropriate people; whilst the burial association should refrain from excessive demands, as witnessed in the above-mentioned case. In conclusion, the Minister believes that it would not be beyond measure if the Deputation were to inform him about any such irregularities observed concerning the debts of Jews in other associations, just as a safety precaution. Consequently, the Deputation, in notifying the Minsk Jewish kahal about this, instructs the kahal as a warning that such actions, in so much as they are harmful to Jewish communities themselves and create negative attitudes towards the whole of the Jewish people, can in no way be admissible. Other Jewish communities of this guberniya should also comply with this, or, otherwise, suffer unavoidable punishment. Deputies of the Jewish People (Signatures)



No. 3 An Extract from the Pinkas of Horki Community (1824/5584)

Source: Pinkas of Horki Community (1685–1911), Jerusalem National University Library 80420, no. 331, p. 159. We, the people of Horki, gathered with the consent of the seven tovim and in the presence of all people from our community.57 As is widely known, for more than thirteen years we have suffered from the oppression and troubles caused by the landlord. As a result, the position of our community’s members has worsened. Everyone knows that we bore the expenses to cancel the expulsion decree. We were burdened with the proposed sum of money, owed to our Emperor’s treasure. Thanks to God’s mercy, the prince changed his mind and allowed us to come back and gave us the lease. The news 57

The kahal’s structure included roshim (‘heads’ or ‘seniors’), tovim (‘good men’), and alufim (‘outstanding men’). See Gershon David Hundert, Jews in Poland–Lithuania in the Eighteenth Century: A Genealogy of Modernity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008), p. 81.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

441

about that reached neighbouring towns and people thought of moving and settling in our community in Horki. It is known that to this day these people live here comfortably and peacefully, enjoying full rights. Yet the situation of our community’s members worsened because earnings decreased, as people with full rights settled down and took the livelihood of our destitute. Ruin and division happened because of these foreign people, as our rabbis say: ‘The [local] inhabitant below, the newcomer on the top.’ After consideration of that issue, we decided to repair this transgression and evil. We have decided that from now on anyone who previously had not been a member of our community would not have the right to settle here without notifying the seven tovim. Any Jew residing in Horki is forbidden to give his dwelling, either by sale or by rent, to someone who has not been a member of our community. If by any means somebody will settle in one of the townpeople’s dwellings, the trustees of the study houses [Heb. bet midrash] are forbidden to allow this person to join in prayer and they should expel him. The ritual slaughterers are forbidden to slaughter for them. Also, we, alufim and seven tovim signed below, vow to expel these people and to pursue and punish those who are in breach of this resolution. Even a father does not have the right to give his dwelling to a son or a son to a father. All of these decisions [were made] with the consent of the entire gathering, on the first day of Iyar 5584, here in Horki. [Signatures] Translated from Hebrew by Aleksandra Jakubczak



No. 4 Extract from the Proceedings of the Governing Senate in the Court Case between Townspeople of the Town of Olyka58 in Volyn Guberniya and the Chief Property Manager Responsible for Collecting Duties Imposed by Prince Anton Radziwiłł on Town Residents, 14 August 1824

Source: Central Archives of Historical Record (AGAD), the Radziwiłł Family Archive (Archiwum Radziwiłłów), box 20, file 10, pp. 40, 45–46.

By the Edict of His Imperial Majesty and of the Governing Senate, having reviewed the brief of the appeal (concerning duties imposed by Prince Anton Radziwiłł on the resident Christians and Jews of the town of Olyka) heard by the Volyn Central Court and submitted to the Chief Manager of Property Belonging to Foreign Subjects for his judgement. […] In regard to the dispute between Prince Radziwiłł and the people of Olyka, the Officer in Charge of Foreign Religions turned his attention to the following 58

Olyka is an urban-type settlement in Kivertsi District, Volyn Oblast, Ukraine.

442

Zamoiski

situations: 1) First, deals dressed as privileges create legal battles for the poor which are ruinous and of little use to Jews, whilst, on the other hand, they upset the landlords. 2) When there are no privileges, Jews complain about landlords imposing arbitrary taxes. This results in Jews being disobedient and rioting; but without any kind of deal, they are unable to protect themselves, whilst the law empowers landlords to obtain income from their land. In order to stop this iniquity, the head of the Interior Ministry was asked in 1822 for an opinion on measures to address this matter. The head of the Interior Ministry judged that, in line with the statute of 1804 between landlords and Jews, contracts should be concluded, defining the demands of the former and the obligations of the latter. Consequently, the minister presented the governing senate with the following opinion regarding the case between Prince Radziwiłł and the residents of Olyka: when contracts do not exist between owners and Jews, claims should be accepted neither from landlords in instances when Jews default on payments, nor from Jews when they have a grievance. […]



No. 5 Budget (Income and Expenditure Table) of the Shklov Kahal for 1814–17, Identified During an Inspection in August 182459 Source: NIAB, f. 1297 (Office of the Governor-General of Vitebsk, Mogilev and Smolensk), coll. 1, file 257, pp. 31–32. Accounts made by the newly elected Jewish Community of Shklov for accountants to use when questioning former members of the Shklov kahal about expenses incurred whilst they were members from 12 March 1814 to 10 August 1817.

Income

Year

Type of income

Amount

1814 1815

State duties collected from Jews State duties collected from Jews Amount received as a deposit for payment of duties from those [Jews] wishing to register in the new census as residents of the town of Shklov

12,919 roubles 78 kopecks 10,636 roub. 24 kop. 1,845 roub.

59

The document was brought to light during an inspection of documents from the Shklov kahal by a Russian official triggered by the letter of David Rabinovich (see No. 6).

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

443

(cont.) Year

Type of income

Amount

1816 1817

Duties collected Duties collected Allocated duties collected On top of monies received from various named kahal taxes, cash income received for the entire period in which the kahal members were in office Total

32,566 roub. 15 kop. 6,777 roub. 44 kop. 6,848 roub. 35 kop. 43,591 roub. 38 kop.



115,184 roub. 34 kop.

Expenditures 1814

1815

1816

Upkeep of the kahal office and other community costs necessitated by religion

3,720 roub. 25 kop.

6,427 roub. 68 kop.

2,993 roub. 687 80 kop. roub.10 kop.

Upkeep of a building used by the office for officials of the Mogilev lower land court, including, but not limited to accommodation, firewood, etc. Payments to synagogue officials and clergymen, as well as to semi-clerical staff

328 roub. 350 roub. 51 360 roub. kop. 75 kop.

2,555 roub. 25 kop.

4,230 roub. 87 kop.

1817

174 roub. 55 kop.

Total 13,828 roub. 83 kop.

1,213 roub. 81 kop.

2,887 roub. 1,678 roub. 11,351 20 kop. 30 kop. roub. 62 kop.

444

Zamoiski

(cont.) 1814

1815

Various duties paid to the treasury, as well as for provision of horses to the postal service Maintenance of military quarters before the establishment of a military housing committee in Shklov; construction of stables

12,930 roub.

32,172 roub. 27,222 50 kop. roub. 28 kop.

1,073 roub. 10 kop.

1,559 roub. 95 kop.

Upkeep of Jewish synagogues

984 roub. 131 roub. 20 310 roub. kop.

Alms and succour to people living in Shklov and arrivals from other places

1,039 roub. 65 kop.

1,064 roub. 45 kop.

1,019 roub. 209 roub. 20 kop.

Losses from changing 35 roub. money into various 75 kop. types of coinage

56 roub. 05 kop.

7 roub. 50 kop.

Total

45,993 roub. 35,883 21 kop. roub. 18 kop.

22,666 roub.

1816

1817

Total

7,855 roub. 80,179 roub. 78 kop.

1,082 roub. 64 roub. 50 3,780 45 kop. kop. roub.

66 roub.

1,491 roub. 20 kop. 3,332 roub. 30 kop.

7 roub. 50 106 roub. kop. 80 kop.

10,741 roub. 95 kop.

115,284 roub. 34 kop.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces



445

No. 6 Report of Court Counsellor Markov to Senator and Governor-General of Vitebsk, Mogilev, Smolensk, and Kaluga, Prince Nikolai Nikolaevich Khovanskii,60 on the Inspection of the Shklov Town Kahal, 6 September 182461

Source: NIAB, coll. 1297, ser. 1, file 257, pp. 7–10.

By Your Excellency’s order of 6 August, I was instructed to investigate past irregularities concerning elections of kahal members in the town of Shklov and the unaccounted-for use of public funds by the town’s kahal, as reported by the Jew, Rabinovich. In the execution of this task, I arrived in Shklov and, presenting the kahal with the order from Your Excellency’s office to provide me with information on this matter, I immediately set about inspecting the income and expenditure records of recent years and checking the amount of cash. The inspection revealed that the income and expenditure books for 1822 and 1823 were kept by former kahal members in a disorderly fashion without seal and cord; had been ‘cleansed’ in some places; and were written only in the Jewish language, without translation into Russian or Polish, as stipulated by Article 55 of the Statute on Jews, and this requirement has still not been met. Consequently, I proposed immediately to engage the services of accountants, which was duly done. The account book for the current year of 1824 is presented herewith, for the first half of the year, fully paid, as verified by treasury receipts, and there were 7,428 roubles in cash. In order to keep this sum safe, as well as any future tax income, I have restored the former, long-standing custom of attaching several locks to the community’s coffer by appointing trustees from the community. Having chosen five people for this task, all of whom were approved unanimously by the whole community, I distributed keys to them for the attached locks and made them sign the document attached herewith. Income from the Shklov Jewish community consists mostly of kahal taxes: on meat and salt. The former is leased via auction for 25,050 roubles and the latter for 6,100 roubles, on top of which there is income from the issuing of passports to members of the community who live outside town and, therefore, are not subject to kahal duties. 60

61

Prince Nikolai Nikolaevich Khovanskii (1777–1837), a Russian commander from the era of the Napoleonic wars; he was an infantry general (1828), a senator and governor-general of Vitebsk, Mogilev, Smolensk, and Kaluga (1823–1836). He was actively involved in the criminal investigation of the so-called ritual murder in the town of Velizh. More details on his role in this process and his suspicion of the Jews are found in Eugene Avrutin, The Velizh Affair: Blood Libel in a Russian Town (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), p. 58. The results of an investigation carried out to verify David Rabinovich’s letter. See Document No. 5.

446

Zamoiski

In the past, special taxes were charged to cover costs; but as duties have halved there shall be no need for such taxes for four years. Costs other than duties consist of salary payments of up to 6,000 roubles for rabbi’s assistants, village policemen, and other religious and police officials. This year, records show that the costs of the community’s affairs amount to more than 2,000 roubles. As for irregularities during the elections of kahal members, as mentioned by Rabinovich, I have taken the following actions. Having asked the Mogilev provincial leadership for the original ballot papers from those elections, I found, calculating from census records, that 16 people under the age of 25 were allowed on the ballot which is prohibited by Article 51 of the Town Statute; in addition, there was one underage person who was also registered with the Vitebsk community and 5 people who had signed for their fathers in the latter men’s absence. A list of all irregularities, citing cases over several years, is provided. […] I hereby have the honour of reporting to Your Excellency that all questioning and swearing of oaths were carried out at the shul in the presence of Rabinovich and that I informed him about everything that anyone said, so that, through his objections, I could gain a better description of the truth; however, that was not of any benefit. He seemed totally ignorant about the matter and displayed a superficiality of mind and character.



No. 7 Letter from the Office of the Ministry of Finance to the Governor-General of Vitebsk, Mogilev, and Smolensk ‘On Collecting Monies from Jews Following the Settlement of Jews in Novorossiya62 Territory’, 11 September 1824

Source: NIAB, coll. 1297 (Office of the Governor-General of Vitebsk, Mogilev and Smolensk), ser. 1, file 361, pp. 1–2. The statute of the Committee of Ministers of 16 January 1823 determined, amongst other things, that: 50 roubles shall be released from the State Exchequer to pay Jews resettling from Belorussia to Novorossiya Territory in 1823 for the initial establishment of farmsteads, whilst proposing to the Minister of Finance that he issue an instruction to collect immediately all monies from Jewish communities in Mogilev Guberniya and Vitebsk Guberniya, taking 250 roubles from each re-settled family. The Jewish families should be appraised and only those who are willing to work in agriculture should be re-settled, whilst others should be classed as townspeople. […] However, much money is owed to the Mogilev and Vitebsk treasuries for Jews re-settling in new areas and it should be collected without the slightest delay from the communities to which the 62

Literally ‘New Russia’, the historical name for the region of the Russian Empire north of the Black Sea (part of present-day Ukraine).

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

447

re-settlers belong. The amount should be in accordance with information from the trustee committee and colonists from the southern territory. […] I deem it necessary to request that Your Excellency order appropriate measures to be taken with regard to collecting the designated monies from Jewish communities in Vitebsk Guberniya and Mogilev Guberniya.63



No. 8 Resolution of the Minsk Jewish Kahal Concerning the Appointment of Deputies in Connection with a Letter from the City Leader to the Minsk Municipal Committee and the Minsk Jewish Kahal on the Imposition of Municipal Obligations on the Jewish Community for 1825, 23 December 1824

Source: NIAB, coll. 332 (Minsk Jewish Kahal), ser. 1, file 20, pp. 5–6.

On this day, 23 December, in the presence of the Minsk Chief of Police, policemen, chairmen of the Committee and the Housing Committee, members of the Christian community and the Jewish community, and in accordance with Article 42 of the City Statute, a resolution shall be issued on the compulsory fulfilment of various local duties [zemskie povinnosti] for 1825, in which the duties should be determined as monetary payments, contributions in kind, provision of carts and provision of porters, about which the Jewish kahal shall be informed. Jewish merchants and townspeople are required to appoint deputies to a joint group to work on the above-mentioned matter and to notify the council office on this day, 23 December, stipulating which persons have been appointed to serve on the group. Resolved: To appoint the following members of this kahal as deputies representing the Jewish community, in order to participate in the group to identify the municipal obligations for 1825 to be allocated to the community. […] This kahal should announce the appointees to the Committee and to the Municipal Committee by tomorrow’s date.

63

This concerns the collective responsibility of kahals and Jewish communities, in particular, regarding the problem of Jewish re-settlers avoiding taking up agriculture in their place of settlement.

448

Zamoiski

No. 9 Resolution of the Minsk Kahal on Granting a Salary to the Newly Appointed Slaughterer, Shmul’ Aronovich, 1 January 1825

Source: NIAB, coll. 332 (Minsk Jewish Kahal), ser. 1, file 39, p. 2–2 (reverse side).

By the resolution of the kahal of today, 1 January 1825, Aronovich, as a practitioner well versed in the rules of ritual slaughter (killing of livestock), has been identified as a slaughterer to replace the sacked Moisei Perel’man. As a slaughterer with one-anda-half years of experience serving the community without pay, it is proposed that, in order to improve his competence as a slaughterer, Aronovich should receive a salary, which would be commensurate with that of other slaughterers of cattle, beginning from the start of the year. Resolved: On the basis of the above resolution of the kahal, it was decided, starting from today, to pay the slaughterer, Shmul’ Aronovich, a salary commensurate with that of other slaughterers of any kind of livestock, which, according to statute, is 1 rouble 30 kopecks in silver per week. The tax collector, Gerts Pinos, shall be instructed to inform the slaughterer about this matter.



No. 10 Letter from Governor of Minsk Vintsent Gechevich to the Minsk Jewish Kahal on the Limitation of Burial Duties, Along the Lines of the Kahal Tax, 21 August 1825

Source: NIAB, coll. 332 (Minsk Jewish Kahal), ser. 1, file 35, pp. 2–3.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, after having reviewed my report on establishing a Jewish hospital and almshouse in Minsk, notified me on 26 February of this year that His Excellency had informed the Minister of Public Education and Chief Representative for the Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Religions about proposed and other ways of rendering the aforementioned institutions to a suitable condition, and, having received a response from him, forwarded it to me. Pursuant to the letter of the Minister of Public Education, His Excellency elucidated that the development of the Jewish hospital and almshouse merits government support. There is no problem using, for this purpose, income from voluntary donations or from specific internal taxes agreed by the whole of the community: (taxes) in shuls and minor kahals, and monies collected from the ḥevra kadisha and Shabekruim64 brotherhoods, bathhouses, and weddings. As can been seen from the above, according to Jewish custom, a corpse cannot be 64

Written thus in the text. The Shivea keruim (‘The Seven Summoned Men’) society or fraternity was established at the synagogue by wealthy members of the Jewish community. It assumed responsibility for the so-called Great Synagogue and other communal affairs.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

449

buried without the approval of a fraternity. Taking advantage of this rule, the fraternities set certain amounts of money for this approval at their own discretion, which relatives are unable to pay without suffering extreme hardship. To prevent abuse of this privilege, it would be helpful to impose a limit on this duty, along the lines of a known kahal tax amount. The Minister of Public Education and chief representative for the Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Religions conveys this proposal to the Minsk Guberniya kahal, so that it may inform the whole of the Jewish community that the latter should, necessarily and without delay, create a statutory rule regarding the collection of burial duties along the lines of the kahal tax, stipulating a known amount, detailing what shall be done and presenting the proposal to me for my consideration. Similarly, you are to report if there are any impediments to the community paying 50 roubles income from the meat of small livestock and up to 60 roubles from the slaughter of chickens for the constant benefit of the Jewish hospital and almshouse, since these institutions have already been identified with the consent of the kahal, primarily during the inquiry by the committee set up by me to determine which income from the Jewish community would be used to support the aforementioned hospital and almshouse.



No. 11 Extract from a Signed Edict Delivered to the Senate, ‘On Rural and Urban Jewish Communities’ from the ‘Statute on Jews’ Approved by His Imperial Majesty on 13 April 1835

Source: Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii, Second Collection, Volume X, First Section, 1835, St. Petersburg, 1836, pp. 316–18. In consideration of the well-being of Jews in Russia, a special statute on the way their lives are regulated was issued in 1804; however, when the statute came into effect, local difficulties appeared, indicating from the very beginning that certain changes were necessary. As a consequence of these difficulties and of the needs and events which have developed over time, there have been many particular and incidental rulings regarding Jews. In view of their diverse origins and subsequent impediments to their implementation, it was deemed necessary to instruct a specially formed committee, having reviewed all the rulings on Jews issued hitherto and having brought them into conformity with previous experience, to draft a general statute covering their rights and obligations, both personal and regarding property, including specific exemptions

This ḥevrah later merged its activities with the Burial Association; see Levitats, The Jewish Community in Russia, 1844–1917, vol. 1, p.186; idem, vol. 2, p. 78.

450

Zamoiski

from common laws which, by the Jews’ faith, way of life, and place of settlement, are considered mandatory. The main aim of the statute was to establish living conditions for Jews based on rules which, by opening a freer route to achieving a decent standard of living through working in agriculture or industry or gradually educating their young people, would prevent them from being idle or practising illegal trade. The draft statute, prepared by a special committee, taking the above into consideration, and having been reviewed by the state council, has received our approval and is being forwarded hereby to the governing senate. We command that instructions be issued for appropriate implementation [of the above-mentioned statute]. […] Chapter IV. On Rural and Urban Jewish Communities Article 65. Rural communities of Jewish farmers shall be established separately from country-people of other faiths; these communities shall be run along the lines of other communities of similar status. Article 66. Jews are members of the communities in towns where they are registered; however, in order to manage affairs, particularly those relating to the taxes and obligations to which Jews are subject, they shall elect from their midst between 3 and 5 authorized representatives, who constitute a kahal. Article 67. It is the kahal’s duty to ensure, with strict responsibility, that: Orders from the authorities relating specifically to local Jewish communities are 1. implemented exactly. 2. Fiscal taxes, fees, and municipal/community monies are paid regularly by each person or Jewish family. 3. Monies to be transferred to uyezd treasuries and other places are sent to whom they concern without delay. 4. Charges to be paid by a Jewish community under its [the kahal’s] authority are paid promptly. 5. Any amounts of money paid to the kahal are kept in full. To this end, money received by the kahal should be kept under the lock and key of the receiver, but under the seal of all members. Article 68. In its dealings on taxes and income, a kahal shall present an annual report to the local Jewish community and, in addition, provide detailed reports with corded books on income and expenditure to the Exchequer. Article 69. Kahal members shall be elected by the local Jewish community from members thereof who can read and write in Russian, or in the language used to deal with matters at the place in question. They shall be approved by the provincial government every three years. Responsibilities shall be divided between them by common

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

451

agreement. The kahal member entrusted with income and expenditure of monies and for keeping books and accounts, shall bear the title of treasurer. Article 70. Kahal members, while in office, shall enjoy the honorary rights of merchants of the second guild and cannot belong to a higher one; but they shall not have the right to trade under such a title without paying duties to the guild. Article 71. A kahal may employ several scribes and any necessary clergymen on a salary set by the local Jewish community. Article 72. Rural Jewish and urban Jewish communities, when paying taxes and other duties according to the number of people [souls] listed officially on the census, shall make internal tax allocations amongst themselves on the basis of a common decision consistent with each person’s situation and means. Article 73. When taxes are allotted, departed, old, crippled, and poor Jews shall be counted as members of those communities to which they belong by kinship and, if they have no relatives, their tax payments shall be distributed across all Jewish communities in the guberniya in proportion to the number of people [souls] there. Article 74. In the town where they are registered, Jewish merchants shall pay taxes and duties for townspeople, if the guild duties of these merchants are less than the salaries of townspeople which should be paid in accordance with the association’s statute, including additions for the poor. In such instances, the community shall collect from them only the amount which exceeds the guild duties they pay. Article 75. In addition to taxes and fees, which Jews are obliged to pay according to their means as urban and rural dwellers, a special tax named the kahal tax shall also be imposed on them. A special, detailed statute shall be drafted on this tax and, up until the statute is drafted, the tax shall remain governed by rules hitherto decreed for it. Article 76. Rural Jewish communities and urban Jews, in addition to the obligations listed above, should: 1) on the same basis as communities of other faiths, take care of the aged, the crippled, and the sick amongst their fellow believers. To this end, they are permitted to set up special hospitals and almshouses for these people, whilst at the same time, at the discretion of the authorities, assistance from the charitable board may be permitted; 2) take care of preventing vagrancy by establishing institutions in which the poor can find work and sustenance. Article 77. Urban Jewish communities shall take part in electing people to public office; what is more, Jews who can read and write Russian may be elected as members of town councils, magistrates’ courts, and town halls on the same basis as people of other faiths are elected to such positions.

452

Zamoiski

No. 12 Resolution of the Minsk Provincial Government Regarding a Petition Presented by the Minsk Jewish Kahal Concerning Damage Caused by a Fire, 3 September 1835

Source: NIAB, coll. 332 (Minsk Jewish Kahal), ser. 1, file 55, pp. 2–3 (reverse side).

… The Minsk Provincial Government, Having Reviewed the Petition presented to the local Governor by the Minsk Jewish kahal, hereby elucidates that the fire which occurred last year in Minsk burned not only the buildings themselves, but also almost all of the property contained therein. The homeowners, who have suffered ruin from the fire, constitute a significant part of the local Jewish community […] . The devastation caused by the fire affects not only the homeless fire victims, [but also] the incomes of the entire community, making it extremely difficult and almost impossible to collect taxes, given that almost everyone who paid taxes for themselves and for the poor, are now poor themselves. Therefore, we hereby request that those who suffered ruin from the fire be granted tax relief. At the hearing, the governor announced [that] […] payment of the community’s due taxes and arrears should be suspended. […]



No. 13 Letter from Minsk City Police Commissary Khliudzinskii and Members of the Minsk Kahal to the Commander of the Minsk Defence Battalion, Major Ozerov, on Sending Soldiers to the Kahal to Force the Jewish Community to Elect Members of the Rabbinic Board as Promptly as Possible, 1 June 1836

Source: NIAB, coll. 332 (Minsk Jewish Kahal), ser. 1, file 66, p. 32.

We request that 10 soldiers be appointed and dispatched to the kahal at 8 o’clock on the morning of 2 June to compel the Jewish Prayer Association [i.e. Jewish community] to elect members of the rabbinic board as soon as possible at local prayer houses … [given that the elections] are being delayed, they should be held in the quickest possible manner, in accordance with the Statute approved by His Imperial Majesty, as well as with numerous orders and affirmations issued by the authorities […]



No. 14 Agreement between the Minsk Kahal and Borukh Livshits, Approved as a Rabbi, 9 June 1836

Source: NIAB, coll. 332 (Minsk Jewish Kahal), ser. 1, file 66, pp. 28–29.

On 9  June 1836, pursuant to the Statute on Jews approved by His Imperial Majesty on 13 April 1835 and the instructions of His Excellency the Governor and Knight

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

453

elucidated in the Decree of the Minsk Provincial Government of 8 September this year, this Agreement has been concluded at the office of the Minsk kahal by an authorized deputy of the Jewish community and by townsman Borukh Girshevich Livshits, who has been approved by the Provincial Government to hold the post of local Jewish rabbi, stating that: 1. The rabbi is permitted to collect payments for conducting ceremonies to be entered in the official register: a) For the circumcision of a male child, 5 roubles from merchants of the first and second guilds, 3 roubles from merchants of the third guild, 2 roubles from wellto-do townspeople, and 1 rouble from people on a middle income; for naming a female child 3 roubles from merchants of the first and second guilds, 2 roubles from merchants of the third guild and from well-to-do townspeople, and 1 rouble in copper from those on a middle income. b) For marriages, 10 roubles from merchants of the first and second guilds, 3 roubles from merchants of the third guild, 5 roubles from well-to-do townspeople, 1 rouble from middle-income townspeople, and 6 kopecks in copper from people who are not entirely poor. c) For divorces, 15 roubles from merchants of the first and second guilds, 10 roubles from merchants of the third guild and well-to-do townspeople, 3 roubles from middle-income townspeople, and 1 rouble 60 kopecks in copper from people who are not entirely poor. d) For burials, 5 roubles from merchants of the first and second guilds, 2 roubles from merchants of the third guild and well-to-do townspeople, 1 rouble in copper from middle-income townspeople, 1 rouble 60 kopecks in copper from people who are not entirely poor, and nothing should be taken or demanded from people who are completely poor. e) 60 kopecks per month from schools located on synagogue grounds and 1 rouble per month from other schools in the town. The rabbi has no right to demand higher payments than these for conducting ceremonies; which is why a table of payments has been compiled in the Jewish language for the public’s general information and should be displayed in every synagogue and prayer school. 2) According to the title he bears, the rabbi shall, when performing the community’s religious services and rites, ensure that Jews follow moral obligations and comply with state laws established by the authorities: a) When performing the rites of circumcision, naming children, performing marriages, as well as recording births and conducting burials, which should all be entered into a register and presented to the authorities, he is obliged to carry out the rites in exemplary fashion and observe the prescribed rules precisely […]

454 b)

c)

3)

4)

5)

Zamoiski Informing Jews in prayer houses and synagogues about the Statute Approved by His Imperial Majesty concerning them, he shall inspire them to implement every article of the statute religiously, not by any means risk employing Christians in their service and not allowing the marriage of any Jews who have not reached the legal ages of 18 for the groom and 16 for the bride. All such ages shall be entered without fail in the official register. As ceremonies carried out by the clergy such as circumcision, the naming of a male or female child, or marriages should be held primarily in a communal prayer house or synagogue with the obligatory participation of a communal senior cantor and synagogue officials, who receive remuneration for their services, the rabbi is obliged to observe that ceremonies, which contribute to the upkeep of the synagogue, the cantor, and synagogue officials, are performed accurately by the Jewish congregation, leaving financial reward to the discretion of the hosts and not preventing the same from being done in other shuls. Due to this city’s large population and the perceived difficulty of one rabbi performing these ceremonies, local townsman Movsha Srolevich Gel’perin shall be appointed with the rabbi’s consent to provide him with help in performing ceremonies. The income, which is judged to be around at least 3 roubles 50 kopecks in silver per week, shall be allocated as follows: the rabbi, himself, shall receive a salary of 2 roubles per week and employ a clerk at his own expense, whilst the assistant shall receive 1 rouble 50 kopecks in silver per week. If the income exceeds the generally assumed amount of 3 roubles 50 kopecks per week, the excess amount shall be shared equally between the two of them. It is the duty of the Jewish community to dispense head taxes and local duties [zemskie povinnosti] to pay for the rabbi and his assistant, whilst the latter are exempted from these payments as long as they are in their posts. This agreement, both on the part of the community and on the part of the rabbi, should be adhered to in a wholehearted and an inviolable manner on the basis of the law, and the original, signed by both contracting parties and approved by the provincial authorities, shall be kept in the community’s records, whilst a copy of it witnessed by the kahal shall be given to the rabbi.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces



455

No. 15 Announcement by the Vilna Provincial Government of a Criminal Investigation of the Jews Leiba Mendelevich and Itsko Teodorovich Briant in Connection with a Ruling of the Rossienie65 Land Court [Zemskii sud] on Smuggling, 5 March 1838

Source: Vilenskie gubernskie vedomosti 1838, No. 9, 5 March, p. 43.

The Vilna Provincial Government hereby announces to the general public that if anyone knows the whereabouts of the Jews Leiba Mendelevich and Itsko Teodorovich Briant, or of any property and capital belonging to them,66 they should be brought to the Rossienie Land Court in order to punish them in accordance with the ruling of the Vilna Criminal Court of Justice of 19 November 1830 establishing a penalty for the smuggling of goods seized near Malaya Shvekshna.



No. 16 Statute on the Subordination of Jews in Towns and Uyezds to the General Government, in Connection with the Liquidation of the Jewish Kahals Approved by His Imperial Majesty on 19 December 1844

Source: Polnoe sobranie zakonov Rossiiskoi imperii, Second Collection, Volume 19, Section 1. 1844. St. Petersburg, 1845, pp. 887–90. Article 1. In all places where Jews are permitted permanent residence, they shall rely directly on the municipal or land police [zemskaia politsiia] in police-related matters, depending on their place of residence; and any matters regarding their social status, their economic or tax-related issues, shall be dealt with by the councils or town halls of the towns in which they are registered, even though some of the Jews live in small towns, villages, and settlements. Note. The provisions of this Statute do not apply to: 1) Jewish residents of Riga and towns of Courland Guberniya which enjoy special privileges; 2) Jews settled in Siberia, who are governed by a special statute; 3) Karaite Jews; and 4) Jewish farmers, to whom special regulations apply. Article 2. In towns which have neither councils nor town halls, or in uyezds of towns where Jews are denied permanent residence, management of their economic affairs shall be dealt with by councils of the nearest towns, as per convenience, with the authorization of the local governor-general. As for towns where economic matters are handled by magistrates’ courts rather than by councils and town halls, the said courts shall be in charge of Jews’ affairs, exercising the same rights as councils and town halls. 65 66

Raseiniai (Rossienie until 1917), a city in Lithuania. This information was given to the Jewish communities to stop them from hiding the wanted persons.

456

Zamoiski

Article 3. Councils, town halls and magistrates’ courts, when managing the affairs of Jews, including Jews living in the relevant town or uyezd and those registered on the basis of the previous Article, shall be governed by the general rules of the town council. These bodies’ responsibilities include, inter alia: 1. accurately maintaining lists of Jews by family and alphabetical order, military recruitment registers, tax allocation records, and corded income-andexpenditure records; 2. administering kahal tax income, as well as other taxes and charges from Jews; 3. assigning Jews to an appropriate social group, transferring and re-assigning them to other towns, and providing them with passports. For each of these actions, established rules shall be followed. Article 4. From this time forward, there should be no special form of Jewish government and, therefore, all kahals and minor kahals shall be abolished and their affairs shall be transferred without delay to the relevant town councils and town halls. Article 5. Upon the transfer of kahal matters to the competence of the town councils and town halls, the latter should maintain the following in proper condition: 1) family lists of all Jews under their jurisdiction, indicating each person’s status. When Jews move from one social group to another or change their place of residence, appropriate amendments shall be made immediately to the lists; but, in order to be able at any time to have definitive information about the Jews’ social status and places of residence, the aforementioned lists should be updated every two years; 2) alphabetical lists of the heads of Jewish families, indicating the number by which they are designated in the family lists; 3) military recruitment lists by district; 4) exact copies of census records; 5) a register of outstanding arrears: tax-related, local duties [zemskaia povinnost’] and other fees; 6) contracts to collect kahal taxes; 7) a register of community debts; and 8) payment records for taxes and the auxiliary kahal tax, with tax allotment registers, and other information required for administration and supervision. Article 6. Family and alphabetical lists of Jews shall be compiled initially by town councils and town halls from information received from the abolished kahals. In order to ensure accuracy, they shall be checked on the spot by tax collectors or by specially elected deputies from the local Jewish community, under the supervision of and, when necessary, with the assistance of the provincial administration. Consequently, to ensure that these lists are entirely accurate, the information indicated in the previous Article should be entered in a timely manner.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

457

Article 7. Each Jew and head of family shall be notified by which given name and byname he is registered in the census, entered in the family and alphabetical lists, and how he should be named in passports and legal documents. All of this shall be indicated on special cards handed out to the aforementioned Jews by the councils. Any changes to the name or byname shall be dealt with in accordance with the relevant general laws. As for councils and town halls, they should ensure that the names and nicknames of each Jew are written correctly. Article 8. Having collected detailed information on the costs incurred by Jewish communities from the maintenance of synagogues, prayer houses, almshouses, rabbis, and other objects, and indicating the extent to which these costs can be permitted and covered in each uyezd and small town by kahal taxes and local taxes, provincial governments shall compile tables of expenses for the Jewish communities in each uyezd and small town, and send these to the relevant councils or town halls, as well as to the municipal and land police for guidance when allotting communal taxes. Depending on changes in costs covered by local taxes, these tables shall be updated either annually, every three years, or when contracts to collect kahal taxes are renewed […] Article 9. Besides state taxes and local duties [zemskie povinnosti], no fees or taxes should be levied from Jews without special written permission or instruction from the provincial administration to the town council or town hall in charge of the Jews, which carries out such orders. In the event that the councils and town halls themselves envisage the need for any new taxes, they shall present them to the provincial administration for approval before they start allocating them. Article 10. Councils and town halls should be notified in a timely manner by the provincial treasury about any profit or loss concerning Jews registered under their administrative responsibility, and by the provincial government about: 1) any changes considered necessary regarding the maintenance of synagogues, prayer houses, almshouses, rabbis, and so forth; 2) any increase or decrease in costs made by the provincial administration to pay people or cover other items using the kahal tax or local taxes from Jewish communities. Article 11. Councils and town halls, using information they have about income from general and auxiliary kahal taxes, as well as information about expenses concerning Jewish communities, shall compile a cost estimate for the uyezd as a whole, as well as specifically for each small town, and, indicating how much can be assigned to the general or auxiliary kahal tax and, thus, how much should be collected from communities, they shall communicate these estimates to Jews via the local police authorities. At the same time, they shall indicate where and when the Jews should meet to allocate the taxes.

458

Zamoiski

Article 12. The allocation of taxes collected from Jews is twofold: 1) allocation of state taxes and monetary local duties, which is carried out as standard procedure; and 2) allocation of taxes to be used for the upkeep of various Jewish charitable and administrative institutions. The first category of taxes involves the entire Jewish community; whilst the second is processed through authorized representatives elected by Jewish communities, who are appointed to make just one specially assigned tax allocation and are allowed to do this only with the approval of the local head of province or region. Article 13. Observance of peace and order in such matters shall be ensured in towns by municipal police forces, whilst in small towns and settlements lacking special police authorities, it shall be ensured by land police forces or by officials specially assigned for this purpose, without, however, any interference in the matters of tax allocation itself. Article 14. For each of the two tax allocations, […] there shall be separate tax registers, which shall be signed by authorized representatives and presented by them in duplicate to the council or town hall. Article 15. If the council or town hall, when reviewing the tax allocations produced by the communities, has cause for any doubt, it shall invite the authorized representatives to its office to demand explanations from them. Genuine tax allocation registers, having been reviewed by the council and having been subject to any necessary additions or amendments, shall be corded and approved by all council members and by the council’s official seal. One copy shall be given to the tax collectors with notebooks for recording income and expenditure of taxes, and, at the end of the year, this copy shall be presented to the council by the tax collectors; whilst the second copy shall be kept at the council for reference. Article 16. Jews residing in towns and small towns shall elect tax collectors and assistants from amongst the most trustworthy members of their community. The tax collectors shall carry out the duties of the elders of townspeople’s associations and guilds, […] and their assistants shall follow instructions issued on the basis of these articles; however, neither the collectors nor the assistants have the supervision rights of the elders provided by these articles, so that those who pay for minors, the poor, and so on shall not shoulder this burden when the former come of age and if the life situations of the latter improve; all of this shall be established by the Jewish communities in the course of compiling tax allocations and reviewed by the responsible councils or town halls. Article 17. The number of tax collectors and assistants, the approval for them to serve in such posts, their work hours, and so forth are stipulated in the articles of the tax code given in the previous Article. If confusion arises from disunity in Jewish communities or for other reasons, then governors-general shall be permitted to grant

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

459

authorization in such instances, governed by the above-mentioned articles, but not allowing excesses in appointments of officials from amongst the Jews. Article 18. The collection of taxes from Jews, who shall have the right to live in communities of only a few people, in crown settlements or tenanted villages and farms, shall be entrusted firstly to rural tax collectors under the supervision of stewards or administrators and, secondly, to the landlords themselves, with both the former and the latter receiving council-issued payment sheets, tax notebooks, and tables, which should, along with the money, be presented by the collecting parties to councils or town halls. Article 19. Tax collectors are obliged to keep in good order the income and expenditure notebooks and books given to them. Taxes collected and money from the land tax shall be paid immediately to the local uyezd treasury and taxes for various Jewish items shall be paid to the council or town hall, which, like treasuries shall issue receipts immediately on receiving money from tax collectors. Article 20. The provision of Jewish tax collectors and councils or town halls with books and notebooks, determining the time and amount of payment, as well as the verification and audit thereof, the recovery of arrears from Jews and the submission of financial accounts by the councils themselves shall be completed in accordance with special rules decreed on this matter. Article 21. Monies for various items required by Jewish communities are dispensed by councils and town halls in line with special assignations made in annual costings, or, in some instances, on the instructions of civil governors. Article 22. A council shall give written orders to recruitment elders, tax collectors, and their assistants, sending the orders to such people in the uyezd through the land court by non-special delivery. Having received these packages, the land courts shall send them immediately to the relevant address via land post [zemskaia pochta]. Article 23. In addition to regular staff, a bookkeeper shall be designated to work in the administrative office of town councils and town halls in charge of Jews, with the addition of a number of scribes required either for the number of Jews under the administrative responsibility of the council or town hall, or for reporting purposes and the execution of other administrative tasks; to cover the expenses of salaries and office needs, a special tax shall be levied from Jews, which shall be included in cost estimates. It shall be the responsibility of the governors-general to determine where and to which degree a council’s administrative office should be strengthened, on the basis of local circumstances, and upon preliminary communication each time with the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

460

Zamoiski

No. 17 Report of the Minsk Medical Board to the Minsk Provincial Government Concerning the Exemption of M. Levitan, Senior Physician at the Minsk Jewish Hospital, from Paying the Communal Tax, 26 June 1849

Source: NIAB, coll. 134 (Minsk Medical Board), ser. 2, file 16, pp. 14–15.

Senior apprentice physician at the Minsk Jewish Hospital, Mordechai Davidovich Levitan, has been to the board to complain that the leaseholder of the Minsk communal tax, Getsov, is not excusing him from payment of the aforementioned tax levied on beef and poultry; and, although he was informed by the Minsk City Police about this government’s decree of 20 April of this year ruling that Getsov should not collect any tax from Levitan for kosher meat and the slaughter of poultry, he, in spite of this ruling, rejects this on the grounds that the legislation published on this matter does not contain provisions exempting serving apprentice physicians from amongst the Jewish population from payment. It transpires that a Ministry of Internal Affairs order of 18 June 1846, elucidated in a document from the Minsk Civil Governor to the board on 20 July of the same year, states consistently that properly serving apprentice physicians are exempted from paying the communal tax and poultry tax. On the issue in question, the medical board requests humbly and repeatedly that the government instruct the leaseholder of the Minsk communal tax, Getsov, to fulfil without fail the will of the authorities regarding freeing apothecary’s apprentice Levitan from payment of the communal tax on kosher meat and the slaughter of poultry, giving Levitan just satisfaction after he had been wrongly overcharged previously.



No. 18 From a Note by Inspector Nikolai Barsov67 on the State of Government-Owned Jewish Schools in Volyn and Podolia in 1862

Source: Barsov, N.P., Otchet o poezdke s pedagogicheskoiu tsel’iu na Volyni i Podolii, St. Petersburg: Tipografiia Morskogo ministerstva, 1863, pp. 38–40. […] one can highlight the following shortcomings. The schools are not maintained sufficiently. Money for the salaries of teachers and supervisors, as well as for renting the school building, is allocated, as we know, from the candle tax levied on Jews. It is 67

Nikolai Pavlovich Barsov (1839–89) was a Russian historian, journalist, and school inspector. In 1862, the Ministry of Public Education sent him on assignment to the south-western part of the Russian Empire to study the state of schools there. The note he submitted to the ministry paid special attention to Jewish schools.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

461

disbursed to the schools directly from the town council. Disbursement is not made on set dates, but according to when the candle tax is worked out. The schools suffer from this uncertainty for entire months, salaries are not paid, and teachers experience poverty; complaints about the carelessness of town councils are common in each town. […] The school, which was set up for Jews by the government, has to counter Jewish fanaticism, the Polish influence on Jews, and the novelty of the venture itself; and, no matter how carefully it has been organized and adapted to local needs, it cannot expect ever to rely on the concerns and participation of the Jews…. It should be financed by the government. […] Government-owned Jewish schools are in a state of decline, partly from inadequacies in teaching and partly because they are run by supervisors who are appointed from the Christian community and not trusted by the Jewish community. School supervisors should be appointed from within the Jewish community, preferably, with a university education and, only in situations of extreme necessity, with just a grammar school education. Salaries can be increased from the monies allocated for the upkeep of the school. […]



No. 19 Decision of the Deputies of the Minsk Jewish Community Regarding Financial Matters Unrelated to the Communal Tax, Passed and Sent for Approval (Extract from a Book of Decisions Drafted by Deputies of the Minsk Jewish Community), 14 May 1867

Source: NIAB, coll. 330 (Minsk Townspeople’s Board), ser. 1, file 55, pp. 7 (reverse side)–8.

The deputies of the Minsk Jewish Community convened in the community’s building to discuss an order from the authorities to pay for premises for an assay office and a salary for the official manning the office, as well as to discuss the need to issue a demand for a required sum of money from the community to cover in the course of this year other communal needs not related to the communal tax which would be roughly similar to the needs of last year (1866). Resolved: the establishment of the following amounts on the basis of last year and previous years, namely:

a) b) c)

Pay for a tax collector to write and keep public records For paper, tables, notebooks, and books Rent for community gatherings and premises for an office, as well as to pay for the heating and lighting thereof Total:

648 roubles 167 roubles 152 roubles 967 roubles

462

Zamoiski

In addition: d)

e) f)

To pay the treasury taxes, duties, and penalties due once additional Minsk Jews or Minsk Jews missing from the census are duly accounted for, a sum of approximately To pay for poor Minsk Jews and military recruits to use local and other hospitals, approximately To rent premises for the assay office and to pay for the office official […] Total:

300 roubles

285 roubs. 7.5 kopecks 229 roubs. 71 kopecks 814 roubs. 78.5 kopecks

This is the approved amount to be collected from the community for the current year; the amount should be allocated equally among merchants and townspeople. […] The community considers this tax allocation to be both unnecessary and very burdensome. This decision shall be presented to the town council for approval and, upon receipt of approval, monies shall be collected and used in line with the demands of the administration.



No. 20 Resolution of the Vitebsk General Board of Artisans Regarding the Complaint of the Vitebsk Jewish Cobblers’ Guild about New Elections of Guild Elders and Members of the Cobblers’ Guild, 3 November 1871

Source: NIAB, coll. 2505 (Vitebsk Board of Artisans of the Vitebsk Town Council), ser. 1, file 156, pp. 5–6. On 14 November 1871, the Vitebsk General Board of Artisans considered a petition by 15 master shoemakers, which elucidated that elections had been held at the board on 18 August, resulting in Berk Azarekh remaining as master of the Cobblers’ Guild. The board was told that: firstly, not all members of the Cobblers’ Guild were present at the elections; secondly, people who were totally unrelated to the guild took part in the elections; and, thirdly, that the elected head of the guild, Azarekh, is illiterate, which contravenes Article 57b, Point 11 [of the Artisans’ Statute]. Consequently, the Vitebsk General Board of Artisans was asked to issue an immediate instruction to hold a new election for the post of master of the Cobblers’ Guild. Having reviewed the complaint of the Association of Artisan Cobblers, the evidence therein and evidence against the complaint presented by guild master Poliakov, the Board of Artisans found that the election for the post of guild elder was conducted by Poliakov in contravention of Article 57, Point 11 of the Artisans’ Statute.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

463

The Board of Artisans has decided that the election held by guild-master Poliakov to elect a guild chairman of the Board of Cobblers should not stand and, therefore, instructs the [acting] guild chairman Poliakov to hold a new election for the post of guild chairman immediately in accordance with the law, under the stewardship of acting guild chairman Poliakov, so that, in regard to those standing for election, attention is paid to Article 54 of the Artisans’ Statute stating what is required from people standing for election to the post of guild chairman. This resolution, duly signed by the members, is to be carried out [once] the parties involved are notified.



No. 21 Extract from a Journal from the Vitebsk Province Office for Municipal Affairs Concerning the Delivery of Documents from Town Councils to Small Town Administrations Created on the Basis of the Town Statute, 5 November 1875

Source: NIAB, coll. 2506 (Vitebsk Town Council), ser. 1, file 44, p. 23.

On the basis of the State Council opinion, approved by his Imperial Majesty on 29 April 1875, and implementation of the town statute of 16 June 1870 in towns of the western provinces, the aforementioned towns are relieved from managing the affairs of small towns under their responsibility and, furthermore, small towns consisting of no less than 10 townspeople’s households shall form a special administration independent of the town.68 At present, the Ministry of Internal Affairs allows the town statute to be implemented in Vitebsk Guberniya in the towns of Vitebsk and Dinaburg, as a result of which administrations shall be established in small towns under their responsibility, in line with the above-mentioned State Council opinion, approved by his Imperial Majesty. The information available indicates that the small towns under the responsibility of Dinaburg are Dagda, Kreslavka, Presli, Vyshki, Kreizburn, Glazmanka, and Lievenhof; and those under the responsibility of Vitebsk are Yanovichi and Kolyshki. Taking into account that the transfer from town councils to small-town administrations of relevant matters, lists, books, and other written material should not be delayed and that the simultaneous opening of such administrations and town administrations in Vitebsk and Dinaburg should be possible, the provincial office has decided to: propose to both town councils that they make all the preparatory arrangements and take measures to ensure that there are no complications in transferring matters concerning small towns,

68

The spreading of the 1870 ‘Municipal Reform’ statutes to western provinces of the Russian Empire, whose aim was to improve municipal self-government; in particular, presenting town dwellers with the opportunity to elect representatives to self-governing bodies (town administration, council, and assembly).

464

Zamoiski

and other written material, from the town councils to the newly created townspeople’s administrations. This shall be implemented by the mayor of the town.



No. 22 Power of Attorney to Participate in Elections to Elect Councillors to the Vitebsk Town Council, Issued by Lepel Merchant Mikhel’ Movshovich Vainshtein to Townsman Iossel’ Zalmanovich Zhitlovskii, 13 November 1875

Source: NIAB, coll. 2506 (Vitebsk Town Council), ser. 1, file 44, p. 257.

Dear Iossel’ Zalmanov, On the occasion of my absence from town, I am unable to participate in the elections to take place in Vitebsk Town Council to elect councillors according to the new town statute and, therefore, authorize you, dear sir, to take part on my behalf in the aforementioned Vitebsk elections on 13 November 1875. This power of attorney is issued to Vitebsk townsman, Iossel’ Zalmanovich Zhitlovskii. Lepel merchant, Mikhel’ Movshovich Vainshtein.



No. 23 Petition by Members of the Vitebsk Jewish Community to Deputy Prosecutor of Vitebsk Province Pozner on the Election of Trustees of the Jewish Hospital, 25 February 1876

Source: NIAB, coll. 2506 (Vitebsk Town Council), ser. 1, file 47, pp. 2–3.

We, the undersigned members of the Vitebsk Jewish Community, have heard many accounts from poor, sick people in the Jewish hospital saying that they are suffering painfully from all kinds of shortages, but most of all from the very basic needs in terms of food and the tardy delivery of vital medications prescribed by the doctor; and, as for the attendant, her shortcomings are palpable. The reasons for such a decline lie in the incomplete composition of the board of trustees, half of whom have died, […] and the remaining members are more occupied with their commercial interests and are often away from Vitebsk, as a result of which the hospital was deprived of vital and watchful supervision, which culminated in a review of the hospital by Inspector Ponomarev, who found it in a deplorable state and communicated this, as well as the negligence and extreme lack of organization of the hospital custodian, to the esteemed trustees. We request that Your Honour eliminate further turmoil in the hospital by proposing to Vitebsk Town Council that it hold elections to fill the empty places on the board of trustees, so that they can pay their unremitting attention to the welfare of suffering human beings. Signed […]

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces



465

No. 24 Letter from the Vitebsk Governor to the Vitebsk Town Council on the Refusal to Include the Merchant Mikhael’ Shur, and Townspeople Simkha and Movsha Beilin on the Electoral List, 10 March 1876

Source: NIAB, coll. 2506 (Vitebsk Town Council), ser. 1, file 44, p. 159–159 (reverse side).

Having reviewed the list of electors for Vitebsk presented to the town council and compiled on the basis of Article 24 of the town statute of 16 June 1870, I find that it is compiled and divided into categories correctly, as well as in accordance with the provisions of the Statute and Elucidations of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. As for the statements of certain citizens which were appended to the list, it appears that the council’s refusal to include the merchant Mikhael’ Shur in the list of electors was made correctly, because he has tax arrears, about which he was warned and which he did not pay in time, as explained to the Duma in the report; and that the request of townspeople Simkha and Movsha Beilin to be included in the aforementioned list was also not granted, because it was made after the specified deadline had expired. For these reasons, all such statements are of no consequence.



No. 25 Denunciation Sent to the Ministry of Internal Affairs by Leizer Bakshtein Concerning Disturbances Supposedly Orchestrated by Horki Merchant Zalman Ginzburg in One of the Prayer Houses During a Meeting of the Horki Jewish Community, 15 December 1880

Source: The State Archive of the Russian Federation (GARF), coll. 102 (Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Empire), ser. 77, file 84, p. 4. On 19 February 1880, in commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the rule of His Majesty the Russian Emperor, which has brought prosperity and benevolence to all his subjects, the Horki Jewish Community had assembled in full in one of the prayer houses to give prayers for the health of His Majesty the Emperor, and had been solemnly and joyfully awaiting this happy day. By agreement with the community, the official rabbi had appointed Horki townsman Mordukh Movsha Aronov Goldberg as cantor to perform prayers. Then, Horki merchant of the second guild Zalman Ginzburg arrived, ran up to the altar, chased the cantor away, restraining him by the arms, and began to swear rudely at the cantor, causing a riot and preventing the prayer from being performed. The magnificent gathering of 3,000 members of the Horki community, who had come to hear prayers as part of the celebration, was very surprised that a riot could be caused at such an event and that the cantor should be prevented from performing the prayers. By informing Your Excellency of this matter, I request that an instruction be issued to send an official secretly on special assignment from

466

Zamoiski

St. Petersburg to the town of Horki in Mogilev Guberniya to discover the essence of Ginzburg’s crime against the government and to bring him legally to account. Those who were present in the prayer house at the time can verify my accusations regarding Ginzburg’s crime. […] This is what I have reported to His Imperial Majesty’s Office. Signed by townsman Yankel’ Leizerov Bakshtein.69



No. 26 Extract from Iakov Brafman’s Book of the Kahal70

Source: Iakov Brafman, Kniga kagala, izd. 2 dopolnennoe, St. Petersburg: Tipografіia S. Dobrodeeva, 1882, p. 175. The levying and, in particular, the allocation of state duties and communal taxes constitute one of the most important functions of state power and the transfer of this power into the hands of the kahal, which, from 1844 was synonymous in Russia with ‘tax collection’, mark a critical moment in the life of the Jewish community. With the transfer of this function to the kahal, the latter stands above the Jewish masses, becomes a government representing a different faith, and, at the same time, the latter is vested with vast power over the lives of the whole community and over each Jew individually. We must give justice to the fact that the Jewish kahal has used and continues to use this power to the full for exclusively Jewish national purposes. Such goals include: 1) absolute subjugation of the Jewish masses to the kahal and 2) shielding Judaism from external influences. […]



No. 27 City of Minsk Tax on Levies of the Communal [Korobochny] Tax for the Four-Year Period from 1888 to 1892 and the Itemization of Costs Incurred by the Minsk Jewish Community, as Compiled by Deputies of the Minsk Jewish Community, 22 April 1887

Source: NIAB, coll. 1 (Minsk City Administration), ser. 1, file 1731, pp. 1, 4, 5. 69

70

According to a message from the Governor of Mogilev to the National Police Department, the circumstances outlined in Bakshtein’s statement were not corroborated. The plot of intrigue by the ex-postmaster of the town of Horki, Gindoman, against Zalman Ginzburg, who had won the right to run the post office (letter from the governor of Mogilev to the MVD National Police Department, 23 March 1881, GARF, coll. 102, ser. 77, file 82, p. 3). In The Book of the Kahal, Iakov Brafman (1824–79) accused the Jews of Minsk of continuing a conspiratorial form of Jewish self-government, including activities of Jewish associations. It was published with the support of the Russian authorities; see Klier, Imperial Russia’s Jewish Question, 2005, p. 271). Brafman’s work appeared in various languages and was used in antisemitic publications, see e.g. the German edition as Jacob Brafmann, Das Buch vom Kahal, 2 Bände, Leipzig: Hammer-Verlag, 1928).

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

467

А) From a pound of meat with bone and fresh lard: Cow and bull meat Veal Sheep and goat meat All kinds of fat, specially imported For slaughter of: Bull and ox Cow Calf, sheep, billy goat, nanny goat For slaughter of: Lamb and calf Turkey cock Turkey hen Goose and gander Duck and drake Cock and hen Chick Duckling Gosling Chick (turkey)

1 kopeck 1 kopeck 1 kopeck 1 kopeck 1 rouble 75 kopecks 50 kopecks 5 kopecks 18 kopecks 13 kopecks 4 kopecks 4 kopecks 4 kopecks 2 kopecks 2 kopecks 2 kopecks 2 kopecks

This tax was compiled jointly by: deputies of Minsk Jewish Community [41 signatures] B) Itemization of costs incurred by the Minsk Jewish Community 1 2

Name of uyezds and Jewish communities Number of male Jews

3

4 5

The Jewish Community has

6

Amount of the communal tax in the four-year period from 1888 to 1892

Minsk According to the census Including minors and the poor Debts Income tax arrears

10,651 4,500

6,676 roubs. – 21,000 roubs.

468

Zamoiski

(cont.)

7* 8**

9***

10

11

12

13 14 15

16 17

18

Points 7–16. Miscellaneous expenses Paying debts and arrears For the upkeep of places of prayer, charitable associations, community’s institutions, and for burial of the dead Assistance to the community’s schools in Minsk Guberniya Grants to pupils in the community’s educational establishments and assistance for the Minsk Girls’ Grammar School For the procurement of registers for births, marriages, and deaths of Jews To pay ground rent for land under the buildings of charitable institutions For the repair of roads Levy of duties in kind For cart hire Provincial For the upkeep of the costs Rabbinic Committee in St. Petersburg For the upkeep of an expert Jew under the governor Total costs

Remainder

1,669 roubs. 13,340 roubs.

3,270 roubs.

400 roubs.

8 roubs.

55 roubs.

450 roubs. 800 roubs. 74 roubs. 50 kop. 224 roubs. 20,290 roubs. 50 kop. 709 roubs. 50 kop.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

469

Note: * 1. 2 ** 1. 2. 3 4 5 6 *** 1 2.



As marked in item 7 To pay a debt for the hospital treatment of poor Jews Other itemized arrears of the Jewish community Total As marked in item 8 For the upkeep of prayer houses For the Minsk Jewish Hospital For the Minsk Talmud Torah School For the repair of a hospital building and the public bathhouse For assistance to the poor To pay Malka Perel’man, a midwife for the poor Total As marked in item 9 Assistance to Minsk Jewish vocational school Assistance to a technical secondary school Total

In roubles 469 roubs. 1,200 roubs. 1,669 roubs. 600 roubs. 9,800 roubs. 1,900 roubs. 500 roubs. 500 roubs. 40 roubs. 13,340 roubs. 1,900 roubs. 1,370 roubs. 3,270 roubs.

No. 28 Contract between the Minsk Municipal Administration and Jewish Merchants to Grant the Latter a Four-Year Lease to Collect Communal Tax from the Minsk Jewish Community, 25 November 1887

Source: NIAB, coll. 1 (Minsk Municipal Administration), ser. 1, file 1731, pp. 13–14.

On 25 November 1887, the Minsk Municipal Administration, in accordance with the Minsk Provincial Government, concludes this contract with merchants Vul’f Ziselevich Rappoport, Khaim Orshavich Lurii, and Aron Vistorovich Liashkovskii, granting them a four-year lease to collect communal tax from the Minsk Jewish Community on the following conditions: 1) The proceeds from the Minsk communal tax from kosher beef shall be given by way of a four-year lease to the merchants Vul’f Ziselevich Rappoport, Khaim Orshavich Lurii, and Aron Vistorovich Liashkovskii, who share joint responsibility for the lease, which runs from 1 January 1888 to 1 January 1892 at an annual cost of 20 thousand 850 roubles in silver.

470

Zamoiski

2)

The lease payments should be made by the lease-holders without fail within time periods expressly established for this purpose by the Minsk Provincial Government. […] 3) The leaseholders have the right to collect the communal tax from Jews to the amount indicated in the text attached to this document and shall exceed this amount at peril of joint legal responsibility. A copy of the list of Jewish settlements covered by this lease is attached herewith. 4) To ensure that the lease is kept in proper order, a surety of […] has been received. […] 7) This contract and all the terms stipulated in the adopted conditions should be carried out meticulously in accordance with the legislation in force. The original contract is hereby submitted to the Administration, whilst a copy is issued to the lease-holders. Signed […]



No. 29 Letter from the Provincial Government to the Minsk Municipal Mayor Regarding Allotting Money from the Communal Tax to Maintain the Minsk Jewish Primary School with Vocational Department, 4 February 1888

Source: NIAB, coll. 1 (Minsk Municipal Administration), ser. 1, file 1731, p. 22.

The trustees of the Minsk Jewish Primary School with Vocational Department for Poor Boys have informed us that the aforementioned school is maintained mostly by funds allotted from the Minsk Jewish Community’s communal tax, which are disbursed by the local municipal administration six months in advance to cover the school’s needs promptly, and, therefore, solicit the municipal administration to disburse an advance sum for the first third of this year of 650 roubles as per the estimate proposed in the decision of the Minsk Jewish Community. As a consequence of this and in view of the fact that the table of costs paid from the communal tax for the four-year period from 1 January 1888 to 1 January 1892 has not been approved yet by the provincial government, I request humbly, sir, that you issue a binding instruction for the Minsk Municipal Administration to disburse money from the communal tax, as and when it is received, for the upkeep this year of the above-mentioned primary school with a vocational department for poor Jewish boys and, if possible, that it be paid for each third of the year in advance, with the amount not exceeding the sum allocated for this purpose in the previous four-year period […]

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces



471

No. 30 Report by Members of the Board of the Minsk Community Synagogue, Elder Getsov and Treasurer Kurland, to the Minsk Municipal Administration on the Disbursement of Funds, 10 August 1888

Source: NIAB, coll. 1 (Minsk Municipal Administration), ser. 1, file 1731, p. 46.

The board of the Minsk Community Synagogue requests humbly that the administration disburse 100 roubles from the Minsk communal tax to be collected in 1888 against the receipt of merchant Insel’ Kurland, the synagogue’s treasurer.



No. 31 Decision of the Minsk Jewish Community, Which Convened on 22 May 1890 to Elect Deputies to Receive Monies from the Communal Tax. The Decision Was Presented by the Chairman of the Minsk Townspeople’s Administration, Svechnikov, to the Minsk Municipal Administration, 29 May 1890

Source: NIAB, coll. 1 (Minsk Municipal Administration), ser. 1, file 1731, pp. 87–88 (reverse side). On 22 May 1890, deputies (each elected to represent five households) of the Minsk Townspeople’s Community, who attended a general meeting, heard a proposal of 17 April 1890 by chairman Aleksandr Svechnikov to the Minsk Municipal Administration to elect people to replace Likhterman and Ioles, on account of their refusal to receive from the municipal administration monies allocated from the communal tax for financial assistance and other needs. A decision on this matter, drafted as appropriate, is to be submitted to the Municipal Administration. We came to the conclusion that, for the matter in question, we should elect Vul’f Sheligauz and Meer Madel’ as deputies of our community, in addition to Aleksandr Svechnikov. We request that they assume the task of receiving from the Municipal Administration monies allocated in line with communal tax cost estimates. […] It is resolved: that the decision at which we have arrived, having been endorsed by our signatures, be handed over to our community’s governing body for authentication and presentation to the Minsk Municipal Administration. Deputies: [27 signatures]

472

Zamoiski

No. 32 Extract from the Report of the Jewish Hospital and Almshouse in Zhitomir for 1892–94.

Source: Russian State Historical Archive (RGIA), coll. 1287 (Economic Department), ser. 15, file 1460, pp. 2–3. Before the 1850s, the Zhitomir Jewish Hospital had been in a wretched state for a long time. In 1857, it was moved to a designated building accommodating 30 beds and since then it has received a certain amount from the communal tax for its upkeep. Over time, there has been a significant change in the views of the Jewish community towards the rendering of assistance to impoverished patients. The community began to realize that a sick pauper should be given appropriate help, since illnesses are incipient mostly amongst the poorer classes due to the extremely unhygienic conditions in which they have to live. Then these illnesses spread to more privileged classes and show as little mercy to them as to the poorer classes. In general, charity, as such, should be based on common sense and be appropriate; making a charitable contribution for no result does not bring anyone any benefit. Motivated by this, the Jewish community began to pay more serious attention to the development of one of the most essential and useful institutions, namely the hospital and almshouse. These bodies came under the management of honourable, influential, and more educated individuals, who tried assiduously to improve the state of the institutions, in both the administrative and the medical senses. The hospital and almshouse showed particularly remarkable progress from the early 1880s […] there were the following improvements: the medical staff grew with the recruitment of an extra physician and a medical assistant, and there was as well an increase in the number of ward attendants. Then, in view of the extremely cramped conditions in the hospital, which was housed solely in one building, and in view of the fact that the building itself did not meet modern scientific requirements, at the request of the hospital board, the government allowed and disbursed approximately 17,000 roubles from the remainder of the communal tax to expand and improve the premises of the hospital. […]



No. 33 Certificate to Work as a Melamed Issued by the Kovno Directorate for State Schools to Melamed Kalman Vul’f Fisher, 8 May 1893

Source: Kaunas County Archives (KAA), coll. I-293 (Kovno Directorate for State Schools), ser. 1, file 188, p. 14. This certificate, duly signed and officially stamped, is issued by the Kovno Directorate for State Schools to townsman of Kovno Guberniya and uyezd, melamed Kalman Vul’f

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

473

Fisher, to teach Jewish children the tenets of their faith, as well as teach them to read and write in the Jewish language, in private schools or private homes or in his own quarters over the course of the year. The money due for this certificate, amounting to three roubles, has been paid to the Kovno treasury. Handwritten resolution: Fisher is permitted to run a heder for 17 boys in Kovno in his own home at Vil’iampol’skaia Sloboda.



No. 34 Petition from Jews in the Town of Slutsk to Governor and Lieutenant-General, Prince Nikolai Trubetskoi, Regarding Approval for Slutsk Rabbi, Shapiro, to Stand for Election Again, 17 May 1893

Source: NIAB, coll. 299 (Minsk Provincial Government), ser. 2, file 16973, pp. 51–52 (reverse side). On 2 May, to the utmost regret of our community, the town’s mayor announced that, according to a telegram he had received from Your Excellency, our rabbi, Shapiro, could not stand for election to the post again. Having no alternative candidate worthy of the post of rabbi, our community found itself in a most critical situation at the Municipal Administration elections on 4 May. The officially declared candidates, Goldberg and Kaplan, were blackballed by an overwhelming majority; and, since there were no other candidates, the apothecary, Livshits, was then coaxed into standing as a candidate and was elected by a majority, although it could be assumed even during the elections that, most probably, apothecary Livshits would refuse to remain a rabbi. Shocked to the core by the removal from the ballot of Rabbi Shapiro, who has been in the post continuously for the last 33 years, we, the residents of Slutsk and signatories hereto below, can guarantee with confidence that Shapiro would be honourably elected now as a communal rabbi for a twelfth three-year term. If, as rumours suggest, Rabbi Shapiro was removed from the ballot due to alleged inconsistency with the educational eligibility requirements, then the practical knowledge and expertise acquired through his many years of service, both as a rabbi and as a teacher, including working as a teacher of the tenets of the Jewish faith at Slutsk Grammar School since 1880, gives us, without doubt, the moral right to make a plea to Your Excellency’s strict justice and great humanity in favour of Shapiro. Rabbi Shapiro, who receives an annual salary of only 150 roubles from the community and performs religious rites for poor Jews without recompense, whilst taking the smallest of fees from the wealthiest people, is also involved in the community’s charitable work and is trusted both by local leaders and the local community. […] Signatures

474

Zamoiski

No. 35 Extract from the Article ‘On the Rabbinic Committee in the Statute on the Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Religions’ (Published in 1896, Revisions in 1902)

Source: Iu. Gessen, V. Fridshtein, Sbornik zakonov o evreiakh s raz”iasneniiami Pravitel’stvuiushchego Senata i tsirkuliarami ministerstv, Sankt Peterburg. Izdanie Iuridicheskogo Knizhnogo Magazina N.K. Martynova, 1904, pp. 342–46. At the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD), there is a special rabbinic committee under the Department for Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Religions which deals with: opinions and problems concerned with the rules and rites of the Jewish faith and the work of rabbis; the dissolution of marriages in instances when rabbis encounter a lack of clarity in the law; a complaint claiming that a local rabbi has made a wrong decision; and other instructions issued by the Ministry which relate to Jewish religious matters. This committee shall function in compliance with the rules attached hereto. 1) For affairs of the Jewish faith there is a special rabbinic committee at the Department for Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Religions in the Ministry of Internal Affairs. 2) The rabbinic committee consists of a chairman and six members. 3) The opportunity to elect candidates to become chairmen and committee members shall be granted to Jewish communities in those guberniyas where Jews are permanently resident, providing that only merchants, rabbis, and the most respected Jews take part in the election, with the approval of local governorsgeneral, or in their absence, the approval of governors. At least three candidates should be elected under the guidance of each of the governors-general and, in other guberniyas, at least two from each guberniya; all of them shall be presented for approval to the Minister of Internal Affairs, accompanied by assessments from the governors-general or governors, as applicable. 4) The Minister of Internal Affairs shall appoint the chairman and members of the rabbinic committee from the candidates presented. 5) The chairman and members of the rabbinic committee shall swear an oath of allegiance to serve, according to Jewish religious custom. 6) There is no fixed term in office for members. They can leave their posts for domestic reasons, illness, or other justifiable reasons; furthermore, the Minister of Internal Affairs shall be responsible for elections to select a new member to replace one who has left, on the basis of Articles 3 and 4 of this appendix. 7) The chairman of the committee shall be changed each year; but, if it is found to be useful, he can stay in his post beyond his term. 8) In the event that the chairman be removed from his post, absent or ill, his place shall be assumed by one of the committee members, at the discretion of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces 9)

10)

11) 12) a) b)

13)

14) 15)

16) 17)

18)

19)

475

The committee’s sessions are established to last two months a year, at a time scheduled by the Minister of Internal Affairs, who, if necessary, may extend a session for longer than this period by whatever time, upon closer scrutiny, shall be necessary. The chairman and committee members shall receive from the communal tax a salary for special staff and travel allowances for trips to St. Petersburg and back at times when committee sessions are scheduled. The chairman and committee members, whilst serving their term, may engage in their usual trade or industry in their place of permanent residence. The rabbinic committee’s responsibilities include the following: Considering and resolving ideas and problems concerned with the rules and rites of the Jewish faith and the work of rabbis; Considering the dissolution of marriages in instances when rabbis encounter a lack of clarity in the law or when a complaint is made claiming that a local rabbi has made an incorrect decision. In addition, the rabbinic committee carries out other instructions, relevant to the matters in question, which the Minister of Internal Affairs deems necessary to impose on it. The rabbinic committee shall be guided by the tenets of the Jewish faith in resolving religious matters. Generally, the committee shall not make any judgements or conclusions on any matters, nor initiate any cases without orders from the Minister of Internal Affairs. Even in cases when, on the basis of its own inquiry or information obtained by its members, the committee deems it necessary to launch an investigation, the chairman of the committee is obliged to inform the Minister of Internal Affairs first and await his instructions. The committee shall handle matters collectively, with Russian as the working language. For each case, a journal is opened, containing a detailed account of the case itself, reference notes, excerpts from applicable pieces of civil legislation and Jewish religious rulings, indicating the source from which the rulings are taken. Thereafter, considerations on the benefit or harm and on the validity or invalidity of the case and/or the event in question shall be expounded, accompanied by well-grounded pieces of evidence, and, finally, the judgement itself shall be given. The originals of the journals shall remain in the committee’s files, whilst copies thereof, witnessed by the signatures of all committee members in attendance, shall be presented to the Minister of Internal Affairs. Any member who does not agree with a committee judgement should submit a dissenting opinion, which the committee shall present to the Minister of

476

Zamoiski

Internal Affairs as an original document, along with a copy from its journal and an explanation as to why the opinion was not honoured by the committee. 20) If the Minister of Internal Affairs does not agree with the committee’s submissions and settlement of the latter is under his authority, he shall either reject them or submit the matters contained therein to the committee for further review. However, when the committee’s judgements are of such a nature that the minister, himself, is unable to settle them, he shall submit the matter to the appropriate quarters. When the committee’s decisions are finally approved, the minister shall notify the governor-general who presented the issue in question and, if settlement of the matter concerns the entire Jewish population of the empire, then he shall, at his own discretion, also inform other provincial leaders in order to make Jewish prayer associations aware of such judgements via printed circulars. 21) The committee shall maintain a dedicated register for all decisions approved or rejected by the Minister of Internal Affairs, make them suitable to be used for reference, and use them for guidance when considering similar cases. 22) With all cases requiring the approval of the Minister of Internal Affairs, the committee shall approach him with reports, whereupon they shall cease to communicate with any persons, institutions, and/or government offices. If, however, when considering a case, additional material, reference notes and other information might be needed, the committee shall provide them, as well as whatever might be deemed necessary, to the Department for the Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Religions, for the latter to issue further instructions. 23) When committee sessions come to a close, the secretary, his assistant (providing he is not of the Jewish nation) and scribes shall be assigned to the Department for the Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Religions, where the committee’s files shall be deposited as well.



No. 36 Petition to the Governor of Minsk from the Attorney of Princess Światopełk-Mirska,71 Nobleman Boleslav Adamovich Tabartovskii, Regarding the Closure of the Zaval’naia Jewish Prayer School (Synagogue) in the Small Town of Mir in Nowogródek Uyezd, 17 February 1899

Source: NIAB, coll. 299 (Minsk Provincial Government), ser. 2, file 17181, p. 1.

In the summer of 1898, the Zaval’naia Jewish shul in the small town of Mir in Nowogródek Uyezd, located on land belonging to Princess Światopełk-Mirska, was 71

Princess Katherine (Katarzyna) Światopełk-Mirska (Bobrińska) (1864–1926).

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

477

completely burned to the ground. After the fire, the congregation took it upon themselves to build a new synagogue of a completely different design and size without the princess’s consent, referring to a former agreement of 1892, and, in building the shul, the congregation occupied part of the adjoining land under the tenancy of other people subordinate to Princess Światopełk-Mirska, resulting in arguments regarding the payment of land or ground rent by the neighbouring tenants. In declaring this, I request humbly that Your Excellency issue an order preventing the provincial government from opening the new synagogue, and, if permission has already been given, to stop the practice of prayer henceforth, as per the demand of Princess Światopełk-Mirska. […]



No. 37 Certificate of Oath of Members Elected to the Board of the Remeslennaia (‘Artisan’) Synagogue Located in the Small Town of Mir in Nowogródek Uyezd, 10 October 1899

Source: NIAB, coll. 299 (Minsk Provincial Government), ser. 2, file 17185, p. 16.

I, the below named, promise and swear before the Lord (Adonai in the Jewish text), the God of the Israelites, with a pure heart and with no hidden reason, other than the reason and the cognizance of those making me swear an oath, that I wish with a pure heart and sincere desire to be and shall, in the opportunity entrusted to me, be just and selfless and make every effort possible to ensure that the synagogue, occupied by our Religious Association (Russ. molitvennoe obschestvo), is dedicated exclusively and uniquely to prayer, performance of Jewish religious rites, and reading books of our law, so that no other gathering which might run counter to public peace, the instructions of the local authorities or police order shall take place and no items other than copies of the Torah sacred to Jews, scrolls, books, and ritual objects used for prayer and performance of religious rites shall be kept therein. In addition, I solemnly promise that, when administering communal prayers and at any other time, as well as in the books, rolls, and ritual objects kept therein, I shall not allow or tolerate anything which runs counter to the ordinance and rules applicable or to the supreme power of the Emperor, His Most August Court, the State, figures in authority appointed by Him and all His loyal subjects. At the same time, I bear responsibility for any negligence, abuse, or disorder in such matters and, since I am always answerable to God regarding all of the above, may the Lord help me in body and soul. Amen. This oath has been duly sworn. [Signatures]

478

Zamoiski

No. 38 Order from the Minsk Provincial Government to the Pinsk Uyezd Chief of Police to Notify Jews in the Small Town of Lubieszów that They Are Banned from Holding Religious Services in Private Homes, 4 November 1899

Source: NIAB, coll. 299 (Minsk Provincial Government), ser. 2, file 17183, p. 7.

The Provincial Government proposes to explain to townsman Movsha Rosenberg and other [Jews from the small town of Lubieszów]72 the procedure regarding the opening of prayer houses, and that they shall sign to confirm receipt of this notice announcing that religious services in private homes are improper for this purpose and cannot be allowed by the Provincial Government.



No. 39 Decision of the Synagogue Board in Wasilków, Grodno Guberniya, Regarding Election of the Board, 14 November 1901

Source: National Historical Archive of Belarus Grodno, coll. 2 (Grodno Provincial Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs), ser. 10, file 189, p. 4. We, the undersigned households of Wasilków,73 constituting the board of the old synagogue in Wasilków, having gathered together today, made a judgement regarding who should be elected for a new three-year term as scholar, treasurer, and elder. Having discussed the matter, we decided unanimously to elect the following people for a three-year term: Naftaliia Movshovich Bakhrakh as scholar; Shmuel’ Itskovich Kane as treasurer; and Naftal’ Meidlovich Kane as elder. We have nothing to add to the decision on this matter. [Signatures]



No. 40 Decision of the Deputies of Turov Townspeople’s Jewish Community Concerning the Appointment of an Attorney to Resolve Matters Regarding the Construction of a Stone Synagogue in the Town, 24 February 1902

Source: NIAB, coll. 299 (Minsk Provincial Government), ser. 2, file 17323, p. 20–20 (reverse side). We, the undersigned deputies of Turov Townspeople’s Jewish community in Mozyr’ Uyezd, having gathered today at the Turov Townspeople’s Administration for a 72 73

Lubieszów is a small town in Volyn Oblast, Ukraine. Wasilków is a town in Białystok County (Poland).

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces

479

townspeople’s meeting, discussed the following situation: there has been a proposal to build a stone synagogue in our town, Turov,74 the construction of which requires the permission of the Minsk Provincial Government; consequently, we have decided unanimously to lodge a request with the Minsk Provincial Government for permission to build a stone Jewish synagogue in Turov, and to this end we appoint Turov resident Shai Beilusov Glozman as our attorney, to whom we entrust the right to submit all kinds of petitions, notices, and so on, to lend his ear to resolutions and, in short, to do all things necessary for which we place full confidence in him and shall never contradict him. The decision drafted on the above-mentioned matter has been approved, signed and properly registered in the relevant record book. Elder, Chairman Krugman Signatures [37 names and surnames]



No. 41 Petition from the Master of a Private Jewish Boys’ School, Resident Tutor Izrael’ Peisakhov Kaplan, to the Minsk Provincial Government on the Possibility of Running for the Post of Crown Rabbi, as Well as Regarding Communication with Minsk Provincial Gendarme Headquarters, 24 May 1904

Source: NIAB, coll. 299 (Minsk Provincial Government), ser. 2, file 17457, p. 3–3 (reverse side). Having dared to submit before His Imperial Majesty a humble request for permission to be granted the right to stand for the post of official rabbi and having attached herewith notarized copies. […] I had assumed beforehand that a decision regarding my humble request would be sought from the local provincial authorities. Now my case has, indeed, been forwarded for the consideration of His Excellency the Governor of Minsk. Given that the material attached to my humble petition is still not completely adequate, I beg most respectfully to be allowed to present to the Minsk Provincial Government herewith a testimonial I have received from the Head of the Minsk Provincial Gendarme Headquarters, regarding how conscientiously, carefully, and knowledgeably I have carried out various translations and expert analyses on issues handled by the headquarters in question. I request humbly that this testimonial be submitted to His Excellency the Governor of Minsk for his gracious consideration.75 Master of a private Jewish boys’ school, Resident Tutor I. Kaplan 74 75

Turov is a town in the Gomel region (Belarus). Given his political loyalty, the master of the private Jewish boys’ school in Minsk, the teacher Izrael’ Kaplan was granted the right in September 1904 to stand for election for the post of rabbi (NIAB, Coll. 299, ser. 2, file 17457, page 7).

480

Zamoiski

No. 42 Minutes of a Meeting from 27 June 1904 of the Members of the Kovno Jewish Orphanage on the Matter of Electing Trustees

Sources: Kaunas County Archives (KAA). coll. I-61 (Kovno Municipal Administration, Kovno Guberniya), ser. 2, file 6608, p. 3. Today, members of the Kovno Orphanage named in honour of learned rabbi Yitzchak Elchanan Spektor, who donate at least 10 roubles per annum to the orphanage, attended a meeting at the invitation of the authorized representative of the founders of the orphanage in question, Doctor I. Feinberg, in order to elect, in accordance with point 5 of the Statute, a council consisting of six trustees and two candidate trustees, and elected by secret ballot (a list of those elected) […]



No. 43 A Petition to the Governor of Minsk from Nowogródek Townsman Nukhim Gershev Bendetovich, Resident in the City of Tiflis, Regarding Exemption from Paying the Candle Tax Demanded by the Nowogródek Town Minor Communal Administration, 24 January 1907

Source: NIAB, coll. 299 (Minsk Provincial Government), ser. 1, file 13720, p. 1–1 (reverse side). The Nowogródek Town Minor Communal Administration is demanding from me, through a notice of 11 December 1905 served via the Tiflis police, a candle tax of 1 rouble 50 kopecks and, in the event of non-payment, to deport me by police escort to my hometown Nowogródek. As I am 78 years old and in poor health, I should be legally exempt from all communal taxes and, furthermore, I have been granted permission from the former General Director of Civilian Matters in the Caucasus, Prince Dondukov-Korsakov, as expressed in his report to the Military Governor of Kars Region on 7 August 1884, to live freely in Kars and have a permit of 15 January 1903 from Tiflis’s Chief-of-Police allowing me to live in Tiflis. Therefore, the demand of the Nowogródek Communal Administration to deport me under police escort should be considered illegal. In view of this, I request humbly that Your Excellency issue an order to exempt me, as a 78-year-old man unfit to work, from paying any kind of communal taxes collected by the Nowogródek Communal Administration.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces



481

No. 44 Procedure for Opening Communal Talmud Torah Schools, 1907

Source: Khaim B. Vainshel’baum, Spravochnaia knizhka po narodnomu obrazovaniiu evreev (Posobie dlia deiatelei po evreiskomu narodnomu obrazovaniiu i uchitelei evreiskikh shkol), Kiev, Tipografiia ‘El’nik’, 1907, pp. 1–2. Every Jewish urban or small-town community wishing to open a communal Talmud Torah School should draft a communal decision in the presence of a representative of the local police authorities. The decision should: indicate the wish to teach children of poor parents the tenets of the Jewish faith and the Russian language; outline the reasons for the local Jewish community to open a Talmud Torah School (insufficient Jewish schools for the number of children of school age; a certain number of children have no kind of education due to a lack of Jewish schools, and so on); indicate the source of funding for the upkeep of the Talmud Torah School, such as the communal tax, membership fees, one-off donations, special funds (inheritance, income from communal property, etc.) secured by mutual guarantee. Furthermore, a plan and programme for the Talmud Torah School should be submitted. An appropriate petition, accompanied by the communal decision and plan, should be submitted to the trustee of the Educational Area [Okrug] or the director of State Schools in the relevant guberniya, or the inspector of state schools in the relevant district. The signatures on the communal decision should be certified by the administration or by the police. In order to be granted the possibility to use a certain amount from the communal tax for the upkeep of the Talmud Torah School, representatives of the local community should include this amount in the budget estimate for the forthcoming four-year period. To this end, another communal decision shall be prepared and submitted to the provincial government via the Small-Town Administration, whilst a certified copy of the decision shall be presented when the petition is submitted to the trustee of the Area. […]



No. 45 Invitation to Townspeople in the Small Town of Zhosli to Attend a Ballot to Elect Officials to the Small-Town Administration, 2 January 1910

Source: Vilenskie gubernskie vedomosti, 1910, № 1, 2 January, p. 1.

The Zhosli small town administration invites the townspeople of Zhosli to come to Zhosli by 11 o’clock on the morning of 15 February 1910 to participate in a ballot to elect officials to Zhosli’s small town administration.

482

Zamoiski

No. 46 Extract from a Journal of the Minsk Provincial Department for Matters Concerning Associations Regarding the Refusal to Register the Minsk Jewish Science, Literature, and Art Association, 18 November 1910

Source: NIAB, coll. 306 (Minsk Provincial Department for Matters Сoncerning Associations and Unions), ser. 1, file 34, p. 36–36 (reverse side). Matter considered: In line with Article 23, Part 1 of the Temporary Rules Approved by His Imperial Majesty on 4 March 1906, the governor has handed over for the consideration of the Provincial Office for Matters Concerning Associations a statement, which he received on 13 October 1910 from Faivush Manusovich Shabad, Vladimir Abramovich Khaneles, Aron Osherovich Kovarskii, Avraam Kalmanovich Mashkileison, and others, containing a draft statute for the Minsk Jewish Science, Literature, and Art Association, which they wish to create. As can be seen from the aforementioned draft Statute, the association in question aims to aid the development of scientific, literary, and artistic education of Jews in the city of Minsk. Having examined the draft statute of the Minsk Jewish Science, Literature, and Art Association, the Provincial Department for Matters Concerning Associations finds that execution of the stated aims of the association in question—propagation through public lectures, readings, discussions, reports, and so forth, of scientific, literary and artistic education exclusively amongst the Jewish population of the city of Minsk—shall, without doubt, lead to exacerbation of the ethnic isolation of the local Jewish population and discord between Jews and other ethnic groups. From this point of view and in accordance with the explanation given by the Ruling Senate […] this association should be regarded as a threat to public order and security and, hence, on the basis of Article (…) of the Law of 4 March 190676 we have ruled that the Minsk Jewish Science, Literature, and Art Association be denied registration and this should be conveyed to the founders with the return of one copy of the draft statute.77

76

77

On March 4 (17), 1906, Nicholas II issued a decree, ‘On provisional rules on societies and unions’. This document developed the ideas of the Supreme Manifesto of 17 October 1905 and was the first legislative act in the history of the Russian Empire that allowed activities of various political parties, groups, associations, etc. Prohibiting the formation of Jewish associations was very much related to the way the tsarist government responded following the suppression of the Russian Revolution between 1905 and 1907. See Abraham Ascher, The Revolution of 1905: A Short History (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2004), p. 13.

Imperial Russia ’ s North-Western and South-Western Provinces



483

No. 47 Letter from the Board of the Ashkenazim Grand Synagogue in Slutsk Suburb to the Bobruisk City Administration Requesting Approval of Elections of Representatives Authorized to Select a Communal Rabbi, 26 January 1911

Source: NIAB, coll. 299 (Minsk Provincial Government), ser. 2, file 17514, p. 112.

It has come to our knowledge that, at the elections of representatives authorized to select a communal rabbi, which were held in the aforementioned synagogue in 1910, the Administration received a complaint signed by members of the congregation, Ruvin Nius and his son-in-law Zalman Slavin, claiming that irregularities had occurred in the elections. The very fact that, contrary to the Administration’s rules on the procedure for submitting a complaint, the complainants submitted their complaint directly to the Administration, proves already quite clearly that the complaint is completely groundless, and this is why the complainants shied away from sending the complaint to the synagogue board. Consequently, we request humbly that the City Administration approve the elections as having been held properly and correctly. Members of the Board [Signatures]



No. 48 Gratitude Expressed by the Physicians of Vitebsk Jewish Hospital and Almshouse to the City’s Public for Assistance Rendered to the Hospital, 1912

Source: Meditsinskii i khoziaistvennyi otchet Vitebskoi evreiskoi bol’nitsy i bogadel’ni za 1912 god, Vitebsk, 1913, p. 16. The hospital council considers it a pleasant duty to express its gratitude to the board and members of the Hospital Aid association, as well as to the ladies’ club for broad material support and beneficial deeds; to the pharmaceutical chemist, O. Pakhman, for the chemical and bacteriological analyses she carried out for the hospital, gratis; and to I. Zelig for providing glasses from his factory free of charge for poor, sick Jews, who had received surgery in the hospital. […]

chapter 8

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939 Piotr Kendziorek 1

Introduction

1.1 Legal Status The most significant development in Jewish self-government on Polish soil during World War One occurred in November 1916, when the occupying German powers in the former Kingdom of Poland announced an Act concerning the formation of a Jewish Religious Association (Rozporządzenie o organizacji Żydowskiego Towarzystwa Religyjnego) in the General Government of Warsaw. The Act classified communities as ordinary or large (the latter consisting of more than 5,000 members), creating new structures at the county (powiat) level and a Jewish Council (Rada Żydowska) at the national level. Community membership was to be compulsory for all Jews and, for the purposes of elections to the community executive councils, voters were to be divided into two constituent colleges. In addition to their immediate religious duties, communities were to be responsible for education and welfare. These measures went some way to meeting the demands of the numerous Jewish politicians and intellectuals who advocated transforming Jewish communities into autonomous national and cultural bodies [no. 4]. The Polish administration taking shape at the end of the war was less than enthusiastic about the Act, pointing out that its terms had never been agreed upon with the Polish side. The administration was nonetheless aware of the need for change in the standing of Jewish communities and was indeed conducting its own inquiry into the issue [nos. 1, 2].1 The first piece of legislation concerning Jewish communities to be enacted after the emergence of the Polish state was the Directive of the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Public Education dated 18 January 1919, which sanctioned the activity of the existing community executive boards. On 7 February 1919, a decree of the head of state, Józef Piłsudski, amended the Act of 1916 referred to above, by removing education from the communities’

1 Compare Paweł Borecki, ‘Uwagi o statusie prawnym wyznawców judaizmu na ziemiach polskich’, Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne, 57.2 (2010), pp. 65–69.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

485

remit. It also abolished the collegial system for elections to community leadership and replaced it with a more democratic process. Only men aged twenty-five or older were entitled to vote in communal elections. In larger communities, the elected community councils appointed members of the community executive boards, which in turn nominated one of their number as chairman. Jewish communities were subject to supervision by the Polish authorities—by the starosta at local level, or the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Public Education at the national level. The Ministry called elections to the community councils and approved communal budgets. A proposed national Jewish Religious Council (Żydowska Rada Religijna), an alliance of all existing Jewish communities, was never in fact established and so the task of representing communities and coordinating their activity at the national level generally fell to the Warsaw community, both because of the number and cultural significance of its members and in view of Warsaw’s status as the seat of government. [no. 3]. For several years, the new regulations only applied to part of Poland, namely to the territory of the former Kingdom of Poland. It was not until the presidential decrees of March, June, and October 1927 that they came into effect in the former Prussian partition and in those regions of the former Russian partition which had not formed part of the Kingdom of Poland. Separate provisions, based on German law, continued to apply in the autonomous voivodeship of Silesia [no. 8].2 In 1931, an Act concerning the financial management of Jewish communities (Rozporządzenie w sprawie gospodarki finansowej gmin żydowskich) came into force. Its aim, amongst others, was to bring community budgets under the control of the Polish authorities, and thereby prevent the politicization of communities by prohibiting any expenditure inconsistent with their religious remit. Although both law and practice sanctioned spending in non-religious fields such as education, culture, or welfare, nonetheless invoking the supposedly religious nature of communal institutions made it possible to block any expenditure which might bolster those political or cultural movements (notably Zionism and the socialist Left) which were to a greater or lesser extent opposed to the prevailing social order [no. 17]. For Orthodox Jews, the requirement in the new Act that communities assume direct control over ritual slaughter and formally employ the slaughterers (and thus take charge of the associated income) was unacceptable and

2 Ibid., pp. 75–76.

486

Kendziorek

troubling.3 Their indignation stemmed from the fact that because the communal authorities were now democratically appointed, it was in principle possible for secular forces to exert their influence over religious practice—the Marxist Left, for example, was openly hostile to all forms of religious life. In fact only some communities—generally the smaller ones—took charge of ritual slaughter. In Warsaw, Orthodox Jews, together with the ritual slaughterers who supported them, managed to prevent the takeover of ritual slaughter by the communal authorities, whereas community control did take effect in Łódź, where the predominance of Orthodox Jews on the Executive made the issue less controversial. In the 1930s, the law governing the community’s role in ritual slaughter changed once again when the Polish parliament passed legislation which restricted its scale by setting cattle quotas for individual communities (see below). 2

Differing Ideological Concepts of Jewish Communal Activity

Alongside the development of new ideologies and political movements, the First World War also saw new perspectives on Jewish self-government take shape among Polish Jews, perspectives associated above all with the growth of Zionism and the Jewish workers’ movement. There were, in effect, three key competing positions on Jewish self-government in the interwar period: the religious conservative position (held by Aguda and various Hasidic groups); the nationalist Zionist position (held by General and Revisionist Zionists); and the socialist position (held by the Bund). The policy of the Marxist Zionist Left (Po’alei Zion Left and Po’alei Zion Right) combined concepts of nationalism and class; the so-called ‘Folkists’ were a secular left-wing party. Traders’ and artisans’ organizations concentrated on representing the professional interests of their members and did not have a discrete political or ideological programme. Orthodox circles subscribed to the religious-conservative view of communal responsibilities. As Gershon Bacon has aptly noted, in an increasingly modern social environment, the traditional institutions and religious practices of Polish Jews were bound to change,4 and this was particularly so in rela3 Rafał Żebrowski, ‘Rząd II Rzeczypospolitej wobec gospodarki finansowej gmin żydowskich (ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem Warszawy’, Kwartalnik Historii Żydów, 1 (2009), pp. 20–31. 4 Gershon Chaim Bacon, The Politics of Tradition: Agudat Yisrael in Poland, 1916–1939 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1996), pp. 178–82.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

487

tion to Jewish self-government, since the current communal electoral system forced the religiously Orthodox into direct conflict with those who explicitly challenged the notion that community institutions should be purely religious in nature. Similar tensions had led to the creation in 1912 of the Agudas Israel political party, whose purpose was to defend the traditional religious Jewish way of life by means of modern political strategies and cultural practices. Zionists treated Jewish communities above all as institutions which might form the mainspring of Jewish cultural and national autonomy. Their aim, therefore, was to achieve the greatest possible democratization of community life and the subordination of religion to a programme of nation-building, the purpose of which was to concentrate efforts on emigration to Palestine, to encourage the development of secular Hebrew culture, and to change the occupational structure of Jews in line with the strategy of ‘productivization’. All this constituted a fundamental challenge to the traditionally religious character of community life, which Zionists held to be an expression of clericalism and a means of perpetuating the subjection of Jews to the rule of the nations in which they lived. Meanwhile, Zionist ambitions to increase the politicization of communities and to mould them into a kind of Jewish parliament were not well received by the Polish authorities who had no intention of treating Jews as a national minority with equal rights. In this they had a powerful ally within Jewish society itself: the whole of Orthodox society was categorically opposed to the community being transformed along Zionist lines, albeit for different reasons. Jewish socialists were interested in Jewish self-government primarily because of its tangible impact on the work of cultural and educational institutions but also because it offered them the opportunity to propagate their political ideas both in the course of election campaigns and on the community councils themselves. Class was a significant factor: although socialists accepted that certain issues were of common concern to all Jews (for example, the development of Jewish culture in Yiddish or the struggle against anti-Jewish discrimination), their focus nonetheless was on the internal social divisions in the Jewish community. They therefore sought to speak for the Jewish working class and related groups such as proletarianized artisans, whose economic and political interests they portrayed as in direct competition with those of the Jewish bourgeoisie and upper middle class. Their objective was to transform Jewish communities into bodies which would help to deliver a redistribution of wealth—even if partial—so as to benefit the masses. The community was also, in their view, a channel for the development of a leftwing popular culture based on the Jewish language and a Yiddish education

488

Kendziorek

system (with the aim of achieving cultural autonomy on the model formulated by Austrian social democrats). Finally, they saw the community as a means to combat antisemitism at both the state and grassroots levels. The lack of consensus among the key players in local community politics as to their proper role meant that relations between them were generally strained, making it difficult, if not impossible, for them to present a united front to the Polish authorities in relation to many issues of crucial importance to the Jewish population. In councils where the appeal of the principal rival parties (notably Aguda and the Zionists) was evenly balanced, smaller parties which could form a coalition with either side came to play a deciding role. The parties most often in this pivotal position were the Religious Zionist Mizrachi party and the so-called People’s Party (Folkists), members of which usually stood as candidates on the electoral lists of Jewish artisan organizations. In larger communities, coalitions of this sort were often indicative of underlying political weakness, which in turn facilitated the direct or indirect interference of the state, whose primary concern was to preserve the religious nature of the Jewish communities and to ensure their continued funding of various social and educational projects, since this helped to relieve the Polish healthcare and welfare systems of the need to provide services to the Jewish population.5 3

The Main Stages in the Development of Jewish Communities

The successive stages in the evolution of Jewish communities in the interwar period are marked mainly by the amendments made to their electoral arrangements—relevant especially in the larger cities—and by the changing environment in which they operated. The shape of Jewish self-government during the First World War and the early years of the Polish Republic thus was defined by its new legal status, by the emergence of political forces which sought to take control of the communities, by the anticipation of communal elections—and then by the elections themselves, held in accordance with the democratic procedures envisaged by new German and, later, Polish legislation. Moreover, Jewish communities also had to face the challenges posed by the radical and fast-moving changes taking place in the social and political environment. These changes were precipitated by shifts in the fronts and borders of occupying forces and states, by the formation of the Polish state, and by the 5 Compare, for example, Robert Moses Shapiro, ‘Jewish Self-Government in Poland, Lodz 1914– 1939’ (Columbia University, 1987), pp. 266–410.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

489

postwar economic crisis. All these factors had a significant—and for the most part negative—impact on the Jewish population. The war and postwar years were a period of crisis in the social and economic order. In Jewish society, new ideologies and political forces emerged, in which nationalist ideas of various sorts played an important part. At the same time, the standing of assimilationists declined dramatically. In the wake of the socialist revolution in Russia (just as in the aftermath of the 1905 revolution), anti-socialist and anti-communist views—along with their attendant antisemitism—became a commonplace of Polish public opinion. The image of Jews as both instigators and beneficiaries of the revolution was magnified by the public sentiment and political propaganda which accompanied the Polish–Soviet war of 1920. In this context, the attempts made by the Jewish community to have its rights legally guaranteed by the emerging Polish state, or the aspirations of Zionists to transform Jewish communities into vehicles for national autonomy, or—in the case of the Jewish Left (the Bund and Folkists)—cultural autonomy all met with a hostile response from the majority of Poles.6 A case in point was the Provisional Jewish National Council (Tymczasowa Żydowska Rada Narodowa), formed in December 1918, whose objectives were to bring about Jewish national autonomy in Poland and to defend Jewish interests at the Paris Peace Conference. The weakness of this initiative was that the only political group willing to support it were the Zionists [no. 4]. The social and political instability which followed the war meant that the Polish authorities were for a considerable time reluctant to set a date for the communal elections due to be held under the new legislation. It is likely that this delay was prompted by concerns that once Jewish communities had full democratic legitimacy, they would be in a stronger position to press for national autonomy and effective civil rights. Meanwhile, despite various liberal declarations, constitutional regulations, and international agreements on the subject of minority rights, the conviction prevailed that Poles were to be treated as the dominant nation and Catholicism as the dominant religion—a conviction which found widespread expression in practice. This had significant consequences for the operation of Jewish self-government, since although communities had a series of social and educational responsibilities (among them the maintenance of Jewish hospitals and schools, and social welfare), 6 Compare Konrad Zieliński, Stosunki polsko-żydowskie na ziemiach Królestwa Polskiego w czasie pierwszej wojny światowej (Lublin: UMCS, 2005), pp. 330–46; Rafał Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa w Warszawie 1918–1939 (Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 2012), pp. 385–402.

490

Kendziorek

the Polish authorities were unwilling to contribute to the funding of such activities in any meaningful way. They did, on the other hand, expect Jewish communities to lend their financial support to initiatives aimed at strengthening national defence or to participate in the purchase of state loans and so on. Meanwhile, the grants made to Jewish communities by the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Public Education were so small that it was common for Jewish parliamentary deputies, as a mark of protest, to delete them from the schedule of budgetary expenses. The discrimination inherent in these grants is clear when their per capita amount is contrasted with the per capita amount of the grants made to the Catholic church in Poland.7 Apart from the issue of underfunding, the Jewish communities of this period also had to grapple with the practical problem of how to deal with the fragile legitimacy of the existing community executive boards and the resignations, or deaths, of their members. The problem of legitimacy arose partly from the fact that the boards had been appointed in a different political and legal context, and typically in a manner which was not entirely democratic, whereas now the expectation was that the leverage of the various political movements and factions required validation by public vote. Another factor was the considerable decline in the credibility and influence of assimilationists, whose policy was to solve the so-called ‘Jewish question’ by assimilating Jews into Polish culture as swiftly as possible, and who, along with traditionalist groups, still retained dominant positions in the largest Jewish communities. The principal reason behind their waning significance was the growing political and national consciousness of the Polish Jewish masses and the associated belief that assimilation was not the only path to the social modernization of the Jewish community and indeed that viewing it as such in fact made it more difficult to secure genuinely equal rights for Jews. Moreover, some of the steps taken by assimilationists in the Warsaw community resulted in a deepening of the distrust and dislike felt towards them by virtually all the remaining Jewish political factions. Their plan, put forward in late 1917, to create a separate Reform community in Warsaw was roundly condemned by Jewish public opinion, since it would have deprived the majority Orthodox community of a large part of its revenue.8 The long-awaited Jewish communal elections of 1924 aroused a great deal of interest within the public at large as well as in most Jewish organizations and political parties. The elections were of particular significance to the majority of 7 Szymon Rudnicki, Żydzi w parlamencie II Rzeczypospolitej (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, 2004), p. 244. 8 Ibid., pp. 158–59.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

491

observant Jews, whose representatives feared that the character of community institutions would be jeopardized by any growth in the influence of secular, or indeed openly atheistic, parties. All the principal Jewish parties took part in the elections, along with various religious and professional organizations. The latter included associations of Jewish traders and artisans—in other words, occupational groups that accounted for a very large proportion of the Jewish population in Poland. In subsequent years, members of the Jewish intelligentsia also stood for election on non-party platforms but, in contrast to the local strategies pursued by artisans, these attempts at breaking down the divisions in Jewish political life were largely unsuccessful. An electoral system based on proportional representation gave rise— particularly in larger towns—to a profusion of groups taking part in elections. This, together with their practice of creating electoral blocs, made it impossible for them to form stable ruling majorities. As a result, Jewish communal democracy found itself in a comparable situation to the Polish parliament in the period leading up to the coup d’état by Marshal Józef Piłsudski in 1926. The same negative consequences ensued in both cases, namely the formation of fragile ruling coalitions which operated on small majorities and often at the whim of the minor parties which held the balance of power, and which had to function in the face of the fierce antagonism which persisted between the leading political players.9 These difficulties were particularly pronounced in the two largest centres of Jewish life in Poland—Warsaw and Łódź. In the capital, the political paralysis which followed the elections meant that the new communal authorities (i.e. the presidium of the community executive board) were not fully constituted until 1926. The largest political blocs—those associated with Orthodox Jews (grouped around Aguda) and Zionists—were so riven with ideological conflict that it proved hard to reach the compromise necessary for stable government. In Warsaw, the two blocs ultimately divided the relevant posts between themselves so that the Zionist Joszua Farbstein headed the executive board, while Aguda activists dominated the presidium of the community council. Nonetheless, the community was only able to function because the executive in effect became independent of the council, to which it was theoretically accountable. Such a move was inevitable from a practical point of 9 The records of the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Public Education were destroyed during the war and, as a result, the data concerning elections to the Jewish councils for the interwar period is incomplete. Bacon gives an approximate distribution of votes at the national level, based on an analysis of press articles for the elections held in 1926, 1931, and 1936 (mainly for central Poland). Compare Bacon, pp. 197, 207, 219–21.

492

Kendziorek

view, since the council found it virtually impossible to achieve a consensus on most aspects of community business [no. 18].10 The economic crisis of 1929 led to the abrupt impoverishment of the Jewish population, its effects aggravated by the discriminatory social and economic policies of the Polish government. Jewish protests about their economic situation escalated and were in part directed at the Warsaw communal authorities. Meanwhile, the financial position of the Warsaw community was bleak, partly because of the general economic crisis but also because of the intense interparty conflict on the council. The political paralysis which resulted made it impossible to agree on a communal budget. In Łódź, a similar situation led the authorities to order new communal elections, in which the religious bloc gained a sufficient majority to enable it to govern without jeopardizing the balance of communal democracy by resorting to the solutions adopted in Warsaw.11 The effectiveness of communal democracy in the second half of the 1920s and the 1930s was determined not just by internal factors related to the distribution of political power in individual Jewish communities but also by the actions of the Polish state. These were consistently aimed at maintaining sufficient control over Jewish self-government so as to prevent the spread of Jewish nationalist aspirations or indeed any opposition to the Polish administration. The opportunity for extralegal interference increased after the 1926 coup, when the Polish authorities were less constrained by liberal democratic scrutiny. In the authoritarian system which developed in the second half of the 1920s, the parliament found itself in a subordinate role to Piłsudski, who commanded the support of the army and the state apparatus. Especially in the second half of the 1930s, the curtailment of democracy and the increased supremacy of the executive led to a decline in the influence of Jewish parliamentarians, among whom Zionists were the dominant group.12 This, in turn, increased the importance of the communities as the voice of Jewish society, through which it could articulate its needs and interests to the Polish public and the Polish government—although the fact that the communities were ostensibly religious bodies gave the authorities a convenient and legitimate pretext for restricting their attempts to do so. An example of this was the 1931 Act, which permitted the authorities to remove the names of anti-religious elements from the community election register. It was a solution which played into the hands of Orthodox Jews 10 11 12

Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa, pp. 266–71. Shapiro, Jewish Self-Government, pp. 123–74. Compare Rudnicki, pp. 363–407.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

493

whose representatives had long pointed out the logical contradiction between the religious nature of Jewish self-government and the possibility of secular parties participating in communal elections, or indeed running the community [no. 12]. However, representatives of secular groups—both Zionist and socialist—accused the Orthodox parties of acting against the interests of communal democracy and of attempting to maintain their standing in the Jewish community by invoking the support of the Polish authorities. Indeed, the Jewish press frequently expressed the view that Orthodox activists (and especially Aguda members) were behind the introduction of this legislation. This was no more than speculation, based primarily on the benefit which religious groups stood to gain from its implementation. Their opponents, however, treated it as fact and made full use of it in the struggle for political and cultural influence ‘on the Jewish street’. It was, however, the case that Jewish Orthodoxy and the Polish authorities shared a broadly similar perspective on the nature of Jewish self-government and that Orthodox Jews repeatedly demonstrated their loyalty to the prevailing political system (a system denounced as ‘authoritarian’ and ‘bourgeois’ by the Jewish Left). This convergence of views on the religious character of Jewish self-government was put to the test only in the second half of the 1930s, when new legislation threatened traditional Jewish religious practice itself. It is difficult to judge the extent to which the 1931 Act was actually used by the Polish administration to influence the electoral process in Jewish communities. Parliamentary questions posed by Zionists that year pointed to many instances of its arbitrary deployment, especially in smaller communities. In large towns, however, the practice would inevitably have triggered widespread protest within the Jewish community, which no doubt explains why it was not attempted there [nos. 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 19]. The elections to community councils which took place in 1931 confirmed the dominance of Orthodox groups and Zionist parties in Jewish political life (even though both movements were internally very diverse). The most significant shift occurred in Warsaw, where Orthodox Jews gained a majority on the executive and assumed control of the community. Eliasz Mazur, a little known Aguda activist, was elected chair—and immediately became the subject of a negative press campaign conducted by Zionist and left-wing groups, in which he was described as ‘the man from nowhere’.13 This was a demonstration of the insurmountable weaknesses inherent in the functioning of large communities,

13

Ibid., pp. 371–74, 381–86.

494

Kendziorek

and especially in the largest of them, Warsaw [nos. 6, 7].14 Community institutions were constantly being torn apart by political rifts which ran so deep that it was at times quite impossible for them to perform their statutory duties. A particularly clear expression of this was the inability of the Zionists to secure a sufficient majority on the council to pass the communal budget. In principle, this persistent inability to approve the communal budget could have, and indeed should have, provided grounds for the calling of new elections, or for the establishment by the Polish authorities of an ‘appointed administration’, whereby a commissioner nominated by them would assume control of the community. In practice, the Polish government was prepared to tolerate such failings in order to prop up the authority of the Aguda Party in Warsaw.15 Financial problems also exacerbated the already marked differences in outlook and policy between groups loyal to particular models of Jewish identity and culture [no. 10]. The first communal elections in the 1920s had already revealed profound disagreements among the various Jewish parties as to whether the principal language of community business should be Yiddish, Hebrew, or Polish [no. 20]. The community councils spent a good deal of time debating how to subsidize Jewish education: supporters of specific types of schools often entered into surprising alliances purely in order to block the funding of the educational establishments favoured by their political 14

15

The divisions between Zionist and Orthodox parties also had a significant impact on the functioning of the Jewish community in Łódź. For most of the interwar period, the two largest communities in Galicia—Lwów and Kraków—were governed by a coalition of Orthodox groups and local traders’ associations. As Jerzy Tomaszewski has written: ‘we have significantly less information about concrete instances of conflict and especially about the relations that prevailed within local Jewish communities’ Compare idem, ‘Conflict in the Jewish Community in Łuków (1924)’, Gal-Ed, 13 (1993), 101. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that local communities too were exposed to bitter political, personal, or religious conflicts. One example of this is cited in the 1926 report of the Warsaw Voivodan Office concerning Jewish communities in the province of Mazovia: ‘Serious friction within the Jewish communities has come to light in many districts. In Ciechanów, for example, a battle is underway between the Zionist and Orthodox blocs and the association of Jewish traders, on whose support the rabbi depends. The battle is economic, religious, and national in character. In Płońsk, the friction is caused by personal factors, but these have assumed such proportions that some members have stepped down from their positions in the community. In Sierpc and Raciąż, there is an ongoing feud between Zionist and Orthodox Jews, whose political influence is almost identical. In Nowy Dwór, a ferocious battle for power is in progress between the Bund fraction on the one hand and Rabbi Neufeld and the remainder of the executive board on the other’. Compare Janusz Szczepański, Społeczność żydowska Mazowsza w XIX–XX wieku (Pułtusk: Wyższa Szkoła Humanistyczna im. Aleksandra Gieysztora, 2005), p. 304. Compare Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa, pp. 342–43.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

495

opponents. The schools which suffered most as a result of these practices were the financially vulnerable and poorly organized TSYSHO (Central Yiddish School Organization) schools, affiliates of the Bund which championed secular left-wing education rooted in the Yiddish language [no. 5]. For religiously Orthodox Jews, education of this sort flew in the face of Jewish tradition and was a fundamental threat to their notion of Jewish identity.16 Meanwhile, Zionists and left-wing groups considered traditional religious education (i.e. heders) to be a relic of feudalism and a bastion of clericalism and ignorance. In the absence of adequate financial resources, it was impossible to find a solution which would satisfy everyone.17 The differences of opinion were so extreme that they sometimes escalated into public unrest. Thus in 1929, for example, when TSYSHO schools were passed over in the allocation of educational grants and their survival hung in the balance, their pupils protested by occupying and partly destroying the offices of the executive of the Warsaw community. Orthodox Jews protested just as violently in 1923 when the Zionist executive of the Warsaw community designated a plot of land near the synagogue in the district of Praga to be a Jewish hall of residence. Jewish students regularly staged demonstrations targeted at the communal authorities, demanding grants to enable them to pay their tuition fees. There were also protests from the Jewish poor demanding community support. Indeed, thanks to the economic crisis and the financial impotence of the Warsaw community, these became a relatively common occurrence—as did the protests of Warsaw community employees about delays in the payment of their wages. Similar social unrest took place in Łódź, albeit usually on a smaller scale [nos. 23, 27].18 Such were the structural problems confronting the Warsaw community that Orthodox Jews themselves were keen for the Polish supervising authorities to order new elections as soon as possible: they were well aware that, as the governing group, they were the natural target for the public odium generated by the community’s persistent inability to resolve its difficulties [no. 26]. Nonetheless, elections were not in fact held until 1936, by which time the political landscape in Poland was defined by the growing antisemitism which followed the death of Marshal Piłsudski in 1935. This also lay behind the 16 17 18

Ibid., pp. 316–18. Por. Zofia Borzymińska and Rafał Żebrowski, PO-LIN. Kultura Żydów polskich w XX wieku (Warsaw: Amarant, 1993), pp. 91–110; Joseph Marcus, Social and Political History of the Jews in Poland 1919–1939 (Berlin; New York; Amsterdam: Walter de Gruyter, 1983), pp. 145–62. Compare Rafał Żebrowski, ‘Budowa domu akademickiego i jej miejsce w dziejach warszawskiej gminy wyznaniowej’, Kwartalnik Historii Żydów, 4 (2005), pp. 467–80; idem, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa, pp. 196–208; Shapiro, Jewish Self-Government, pp. 327–63.

496

Kendziorek

relatively unexpected electoral triumph of the Bund in the two largest Jewish communities—Warsaw and Łódź. The Bund, which had never previously had any significant role in community institutions, was seen as the Jewish organization which showed the greatest determination in countering both state and popular antisemitism [no. 5]. Its strong showing in these elections demonstrates that Jewish socialists had managed to secure substantial electoral support from outside their core vote. Despite this, they were prevented from assuming control in the Łódź and Warsaw communities both by the prevailing alignment of political forces in those communities and because of the interference of the Polish authorities.19 One of the principal areas of concern for Jewish communities in the second half of the 1930s was the proposal to impose legal restrictions on ritual slaughter. It was not the first time that Polish authorities had interfered in the issue: in 1931, they had set their sights on Jewish communities taking charge of the practice. Their motivation then had been financial, in other words to increase the income of communities like Warsaw which were in a permanent state of budgetary crisis. However, in the second half of the 1930s the issue was exploited by nationalist groups as a means of attacking Jewish religious laws and thereby creating new forms of anti-Jewish discrimination. What was shocking for the Jewish community was that this became not just part of the antisemitic programme of the opposition National Democratic party or other far right groups, but that it also gradually gained widespread acceptance in the ruling camp itself [nos. 22, 24, 25].20 Rabbinical circles, with the support of individual communities, engaged in strenuous political and propaganda efforts to head off the threat of an outright ban on ritual slaughter. For example, popular pamphlets were published in Polish explaining the nature and purpose of ritual slaughter to a Polish readership; attempts were made to lobby Polish parliamentarians and officials; and petitions were submitted to the authorities. Since Jewish communities in Poland lacked a central executive structure, these activities were coordinated at regional and national conventions which were usually organized under the auspices of the larger communities and held at their offices. In general, they took place in Warsaw, but because the chairman of the Warsaw community 19

20

Compare Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa, pp. 458–522; Robert Moses Shapiro, ‘The Polish Kehillah Elections on 1936: A Revolution Re-examined’, Polin (1993); idem, ‘Wybory do władz żydowskich gmin wyznaniowych w Polsce w 1936r.’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego, 3 (1989), pp. 81–94. Compare Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa, pp. 609–725; Emanuel Melzer, No Way Out: The Politics of Polish Jewry 1935–1939 (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press,1997); Marcus, pp. 349–86.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

497

was appointed by the Polish authorities and so had to be cautious about taking part in any initiatives critical of the policies and intentions of the government, these meetings were mainly presided over by the leaders of other large communities, and in particular by Michał Ringel, chairman of the Lwów community. In 1936, Jewish efforts managed to prevent the Polish parliament from introducing a blanket ban on ritual slaughter, but its use was nonetheless restricted by the establishment of a quota system through which the Polish authorities decreed the number of cattle which could be slaughtered. The problem was that, based on the amount of kosher meat previously consumed, these quotas were set too low to meet the needs of the Jewish population. In protest, many Jews took part in strikes, eating no meat whatsoever for a fortnight. However, faced with binding statutory regulations, the only way forward for community activists and slaughterers (to whom the restrictions also posed a real economic threat) was to try to find ways of maximizing the use which could be made of the official quotas. In the largest communities, machines were bought which removed the veins from the hindquarters of the animals, a process (trybowanie) which most rabbis of necessity accepted as a means of rendering those pieces of meat kosher. In the view of Jewish intellectuals and politicians, the radicalization of antisemitic sentiment in Poland and the attempts to impose discriminatory legislation in several areas of public life were boosted in the 1930s by the example set by Nazi Germany. Jewish communities, in particular the larger ones, took part from the very beginning in anti-Nazi protests which enjoyed not just widespread popular support but were also backed by various political organizations. Members of community executives (including Warsaw’s chairman Mazur) joined the United Jewish Committee for the Battle against the Persecution of Jews in Germany (Zjednoczony Komitet Żydowski do Walki z Prześladowaniami Żydów w Niemczech).21 In the second half of the 1930s, opposition to Nazi antisemitism was no longer just a question of propaganda and symbolic acts of protest. It also became a major financial undertaking for the larger communities, given the need to provide systematic assistance to the thousands of Polish Jews who had been dispossessed and deported by Germany and who had no independent means of subsistence in Poland.22 The communities helped to organize and fund, 21 22

Compare Emanuel Melzer, ‘The Jewish Anti-German Economic Boycott in Poland, 1933– 1934’, Gal-Ed: On the History of the Jews in Poland, 6 (1983), pp. 149–66. Compare Jerzy Tomaszewski, Preludium Zagłady: Wygnanie Żydów polskich z Niemiec w 1938r. (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 1998); Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa, pp. 429–32.

498

Kendziorek

amongst others, the United Jewish Committee for the Assistance of Refugees from Germany (Zjednoczony Żydowski Komitet Niesienia Pomocy Uchodźcom z Niemiec). The victims of pogroms which took place in Poland (most notably in Przytyk in March 1936) also required support. The provision of aid in these circumstances was an enormous challenge for the impoverished Jewish public, as it was for those communities, such as Łódź, which—faced with difficult socio-economic conditions and the anti-Jewish bias of state funding—were obliged in the 1930s to allocate most of their budgets to various forms of relief and welfare payments [no. 16].23 Between 1936 and 1939, communities had the additional financial burden of subscribing to state loans intended to raise money for defence purposes. It was vital for them to take part in drives of this sort not just as a symbolic gesture—in order to demonstrate their loyalty, and thus the loyalty of the Jewish population, to the Polish state—but also for practical reasons, that is in response to the informal government pressure on various institutions to participate in nationwide campaigns to strengthen Poland’s defence capabilities. These often involved assorted patriotic public ceremonies attended by community officials on behalf of their members [nos. 21, 28].24 As relations between Poland and Germany grew tenser, the opposition of Polish Jews to the Nazis was unmistakable and universal—even if the allegiance to the Polish state exhibited by their representatives was overshadowed, as we have seen, by the antisemitic policies of the Polish government [no. 29]. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska Bibliographic References Bacon, Gershon Chaim, The Politics of Tradition: Agudat Yisrael in Poland, 1916–1939 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1996). Borecki, Paweł, ‘Uwagi o statusie prawnym wyznawców judaizmu na ziemiach polskich’, Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne, 57.2 (2010). Borzymińska, Zofia and Rafał Żebrowski, Po-lin. Kultura Żydów polskich w XX wieku. Zarys (Warsaw: Amarant, 1993).

23 24

Compare Robert Moses Shapiro, ‘Autonomia żydowskich gmin wyznaniowych w Polsce: Łódź 1914–1939’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego, 1 (1990), pp. 70–71. Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa, pp. 589–604; Shapiro, Jewish Self-Government, pp. 411–74.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

499

Hefter, Filip, Najnowsza ustawa kahalna: rozporz. z dnia 24 października 1930 (Stanisławów: A. Bodek, 1931). Grünbaum, Izaak, Der kamf far der yidisher kehile in dem oyfgelebten Poyln (Warsaw: Al Ha-mishmar, 1931). Grünbaum, Izaak, ed., Żydzi jako mniejszość narodowa, vol. 2: Żydowski samorząd gminny (Warsaw: Biuro Prasowe Organizacji Syjonistycznej w Polsce, 1919). Krüger, Zygmunt, Przepisy o gminach wyznaniowych żydowskich (Lublin: self-published, 1938). Lemkin, Raphael, Di organizatsye fun di yidishe kehiles (Warsaw: Renoma, 1928). Marcus, Joseph, Social and Political History of the Jews in Poland 1919–1939 (Berlin; New York; Amsterdam: Walter de Gruyter, 1983). Melzer, Emanuel, No Way Out: The Politics of Polish Jewry 1935–1939 (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1997). Melzer, Emanuel, ‘The Jewish Anti-German Economic Boycott In Poland, 1933–1934’, Gal-Ed: On the History of the Jews in Poland, 6 (1983). Polonsky, Antony, The Jews in Poland and Russia, vol. 3 (Oxford and Portland, Ore.: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2012). Rudnicki, Szymon, Żydzi w parlamencie II Rzeczypospolitej (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, 2004). Shapiro, Robert Moses, ‘Jewish Self-Government in Poland: Lodz 1914–1939’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1987). Shapiro, Robert Moses, ‘The Polish Kehillah Elections on 1936: A Revolution Re-examined’, Polin, 8 (1993). Szczepański, Janusz, Społeczność żydowska Mazowsza w XIX–XX wieku (Pułtusk: Wyższa Szkoła Humanistyczna im. Aleksandra Gieysztora, 2005). Tomaszewski, Jerzy, ‘Interpelacje poselskie dotyczące gmin żydowskich. Uzupełnienie’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego, 2 (1974). Tomaszewski, Jerzy, ‘Walka polityczna wewnątrz gmin żydowskich w świetle interpelacji posłów’, Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego, 1 (1973). Zieliński, Konrad, Stosunki polsko-żydowskie na ziemiach Królestwa Polskiego w czasie pierwszej wojny światowej (Lublin: Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, 2005). Zineman, Jacob, ed., Almanach gmin żydowskich w Polsce, vol. 1 (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo ‘Nasze Życie’, 1939). Żebrowski, Rafał, ‘Budowa domu akademickiego i jej miejsce w dziejach warszawskiej gminy wyznaniowej’, Kwartalnik Historii Żydów, 4 (2005). Żebrowski, Rafał, ‘Rząd II Rzeczypospolitej wobec gospodarki finansowej gmin żydowskich (ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem Warszawy)’, Kwartalnik Historii Żydów, 1 (2009). Żebrowski, Rafał, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa w Warszawie 1918–1939 (Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 2012).

500

Kendziorek

Sources

Unless stated otherwise, all sources in this chapter have been translated from Polish by Anna Podolska.



No. 1 A Brief Look at the Legislation on Jewish Communities under The Former Partitioning Powers

Source: Michał Ryngiel [Ringel], Ustawodawstwo Polski odrodzonej o gminach żydowskich, w: Żydzi w Polsce odrodzonej. Działalność społeczna, gospodarcza i kulturalna. Pod redakcją: dra Ignacego Schipera, dra A. Tartakowera, radcy Aleksandra Hafftki, t. II, Warszawa 1934, pp. 245–48.25 After the partitions of Poland, legislation concerning kahal autonomy and the organization of Jewish communities followed a different course in each of the partitioning states. […] In the former Congress Kingdom, the structure of Jewish faith communities, i.e. the ‘synagogue supervisory boards’, was based on the decree of the Viceroy dated 20 March 1821, on the order issued by the Government Commission for Religious Denominations and Public Education dated 24 April 1821 and on several subsequent supplementary orders. […] This state of affairs persisted until the World War. On 1  November 1916, the German occupying powers issued an Act concerning the formation of a ‘Jewish Religious Association’, which was announced in the Verordnungsblatt für das Generalgouvernement Warschau No. 453 (1916 item 184). In geographical terms, the Act covered the General Government of Warsaw, i.e. the present voivodeships of Warsaw and Łódź, and part of the voivodeship of Białystok. It was based on undemocratic electoral provisions and principles which were incompatible with the concept of the Jewish community as formulated in Jewish national programmes, namely that the community should be not just a religious entity but also a national and social entity. The first significant changes to the occupiers’ legislation were made by the decree of the head of state [Józef Piłsudski] dated 7 February 1919 (Dz. Praw P.P. No 14 item 175) ‘concerning changes to the organization of Jewish communities in the former Congress Kingdom’, which also extended the scope of the German Act, as amended, to the remaining parts of the former Congress Kingdom. 25

Michał Ringel (1880–after 1939) was a lawyer, Zionist activist, and journalist. He was for many years a senator in the Polish parliament and in the 1930s held the post of chairman of the Jewish community in Lwów. After 1939, he was deported to the USSR and died in a Soviet concentration camp. We open our selection of sources with this text, even though it was published in 1934, since it gives an overview of the changes to the legal position of Jewish communities in the first three decades of the twentieth century, and may therefore provide a useful context for the source material which follows.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

501

This decree placed a marked emphasis on the purely religious nature of Jewish communities, and indeed did so more forcefully than the German Act, even though the latter, as is well known, had been shaped by certain Orthodox Jewish circles in Poland and Germany which opposed any attempts to give communities a national identity. In contrast to the former Kingdom of Poland, the legal position of the Jewish faith in other parts of the former Russian partition, i.e. the Eastern Borderlands, was unregulated and chaotic. Tsarist Russia merely tolerated the Jewish religion. From 1804 onwards, however, it imposed ever greater restrictions on the autonomy of the former kahals and, in particular from 1844 onwards, it refused to grant legal personality either to the Jewish denomination as a whole or to individual communities, thereby making the organization of any social action within the Jewish population impossible. At the same time, the Russian authorities imposed fiscal and policing prerogatives on Jewish communities and their plutocratic leaders in order to levy substantial taxes payable by Jews to the state. As a result, Jewish religious establishments and institutions, even prayer houses and cemeteries, were of necessity owned by private associations, or even were registered in the names of physical persons who were put forward for that purpose. This was still the case for the first few years after the rebirth of Poland. It was not until the order of the Council of Ministers dated 28 October 1925 (Dz. U.R.P. No 114/25 item 807) that this legislative ‘vacuum’ was filled and Piłsudski’s decree was extended to cover the voivodeships of Wołyń, Polesie, and Nowogród; the counties of Grodno and Wołkowysk; and the districts of Białowieża, Suchopol, and Masiewo in the county of Bielsk in the voivodeship of Białystok as well as the Wilno administrative region. By a subsequent presidential order dated 9 March 1927 (Dz. U.R.P. No 23 item 175), it was further extended to the remaining counties of the voivodeship of Białystok, that is, to the counties of Białystok, Bielsk, and Sokółka. An executive order of the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Public Education dated 21 June 1927 then established individual community districts in the territories where the above order applied. It was only at that point that the Jewish population or the Jewish faith communities in the former Russian partition acquired legal personality. Thus since the spring of 1928, the same legislation in respect of the Jewish community has applied in every part of Poland (except the voivodeship of Silesia). […] It is clear from what has been said above that the legislative authorities in the Republic of Poland have consistently treated its Jewish inhabitants as a denominational group and continue to disregard the national aspect of the Jewish problem. According to the legislation on Jewish communities, Jews collectively form a public law ‘religious association’, made up of communities. At the apex of this structure, as the supreme body of the Jewish faith, sits the Religious Council. The communities’ jurisdiction is severely restricted, whereas state supervision is highly developed.

502

Kendziorek

This desire to extend state supervision finds its most draconian expression in the regulations governing community elections. The supervising authority can, for example, at its discretion and without providing reasons, refuse to approve the appointment of an elected member of the electoral commission. Moreover, it can do so more than once, in other words after each subsequent selection of a replacement for the member whose appointment was disapproved. Similarly, the composition of the complaints commissions, which are responsible for resolving grievances concerning the electoral register, is subject to endorsement by the supervising authority, whose decision as to the electoral register is final. This commanding influence of the state is crowned by its power to nominate a proportion of Religious Council members, over and above the elected membership. In relation to community administration, and especially its financial aspects, state supervision penetrates all the way through to individual budget items. This is clearly illustrated in the state’s right to withhold its approval of the communal budget in part or in whole, and its right to approve communal resolutions concerning taxes and fees. (The Act assigns the enforceable collection of taxes to the state authorities, whereas the taxes of ‘faith associations’ are voluntary and based on mutual agreement as regulated by civil law.) A positive feature of the legislation is that it treats all Jews in Poland as a single unit, as one Religious Association, and also that it provides for democratic elections conducted by universal, direct, equal, proportional, and secret ballot.



No. 2 An Act Concerning the Formation of a Jewish Religious Association in the General Government of Warsaw, Dated 1 November 1916

Source: Dziennik November 1916).

Rozporządzeń

dla

Jen.-Gub.

Warszawskiego,

nr

53

(15

General provisions Article 1 Jews resident in the General Government of Warsaw shall constitute a public law Religious Association which shall be composed of communities and County Communities and shall be headed by a Supreme Jewish Council. Communities, County Communities and the Religious Association shall have corporate rights and the right to possess a seal. The Jewish Community Article 2 A Jewish community shall consist of persons of the Jewish faith resident in a single political community.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

503

Notwithstanding the above, the State supervisory authority may, after consulting the Supreme Jewish Council, combine several political communities into one Jewish community, or divide a political community into several Jewish communities. The responsibilities of the Jewish community Article 3 While not infringing upon the rights and duties of the state and its local government structures, Jewish communities shall have the following responsibilities: a) maintaining religious life; 2) educating young people; 3) caring for the poor and engaging in social activity; 4) administering the community’s assets; 5) supervising all the institutions and establishments operating within the community and in particular synagogues, prayer houses, and religious associations (see Article 44 et seq) and administering Jewish foundations and voluntary associations. Jewish communities shall in particular be responsible for establishing synagogues and maintaining ritual baths and cemeteries in so far as these needs have not adequately been met by other means. They shall also attend to the provision of kosher meat. Furthermore, Jewish communities shall also see to the education of young people through the establishment of a sufficient number of schools, in so far as this need has not been appropriately dealt with by other means. The Board of the Jewish community and its election Article 4 The community board shall consist of a rabbi and four elected members. Article 5 The board shall be elected for a term of four years by a simple majority of votes cast in a secret and direct ballot. In the event that identical numbers of votes are cast, the result shall be decided by lot. The right to vote in elections shall be determined by the following factors: 1) Jewish faith; 2) at least twenty-five years of age; 3) male gender; 4) residence within the Jewish community for at least two years; 5) the ability to read and write; 6) payment of taxes to the Jewish community. Point 6) shall not apply to persons who are exempt from paying taxes by virtue of their office. […] Article 6 The right to stand for election shall, in addition to the requirements set out in Article 5, also be subject to the following: 1) at least thirty years of age; 2) have an unblemished reputation. […]

504

Kendziorek

Article 8 Each community is expected to have a rabbi, who shall be elected by a simple majority of secret and direct votes cast by members of the community with electoral rights. The administration of the Jewish community Article 9 The board shall select one of its members to act as chairman. The chairman shall be responsible for calling meetings and presiding over the board’s deliberations. If necessary, the oldest member of the board shall deputize for the chairman. Article 10 The board shall represent the community in all its legal relations […] Article 11 The board may establish commissions as appropriate in order to carry out specific duties, and may appoint to such commissions persons who are not members of the board […] Article 12 The board shall draw up a budget for each financial year, and a register of community members showing the taxes imposed on each one. Particulars of the budget and the taxes payable shall be confirmed by the National Jewish Council, although this can be delegated to the Council of the County Community board (Article 43). Article 13 The budget and register of taxes shall be available to community members for a period of eight days, and advance notice of this shall be given. After a week has elapsed, the budget and register of taxes, together with any complaints, shall be forwarded to the Council of the County Community board […] Large Jewish communities Article 14 The State Supervisory Authority may, in accordance with Articles 15–25 below, order the establishment of a special structure for the administration of Jewish communities numbering more than 5,000 Jewish residents.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

505

The National Central Authority may resolve that a particular large community should disaffiliate itself from the County Community and should operate under the direct jurisdiction of the Supreme Jewish Council […] Article 15 The community shall be administered by representatives and by an Executive Council. The State Supervisory Authority shall determine the number of representatives and members. The Executive Council shall be made up of at least five directly elected members, or eight members in the case of large communities. In addition, the State Supervisory Authority shall appoint to the Executive Council of disaffiliated large communities a further three members from among those persons who are eligible to stand for election (Article 6). Representatives and Executive Council Article 16 Representatives shall be elected by those members of the Jewish community who have electoral rights (Article 5). Article 17 Elections shall take place in two constituent colleges. Electoral rights in the first constituent college shall be held by those who have completed higher education, six years of secondary school, or a state-approved vocational, artisanal, or agricultural school, or those who have been awarded the title of rabbi by the Rabbinical Board of the Supreme Jewish Council. Article 18 Each electoral college shall select the same number of representatives. Elections in both colleges shall be based on the principle of proportional representation. All voters shall have equal voting rights in their respective colleges. Elections shall take place by secret ballot. Article 19 Representatives shall elect the Executive Council by a system of proportional representation.

506

Kendziorek

Article 20 Representatives and the Executive Council shall be elected for a four-year term of office. […] Article 23 An assembly of representatives shall be responsible for the following issues: 1) approving the budget; 2) setting taxes and issuing directives concerning the collection of taxes, fees, and other duties; 3) taking out loans; 4) extra-budgetary expenditures where the sum for the year in question exceeds 3,000 marks; 5) establishing and organizing, or significantly reforming, community institutions; 6) issuing universally binding regulations and statutes regarding community affairs; 7) making changes to the community’s real property holdings; 8) selecting the community rabbi; 9) any matters which the State Supervisory Authority or the Executive Council has specifically entrusted to the representatives. […] Article 24 The Executive Council shall have sole responsibility for the administration of the community, except where administrative duties have been conferred on representatives by virtue of the preceding paragraphs. Rabbinical districts Article 25 The Supreme Jewish Council shall be entitled, with leave of the State Supervisory Authority, to divide large communities into several rabbinical districts. Each rabbinical district must have a rabbi who shall be elected by representatives on the basis of a simple majority of votes cast. The transfer of a rabbi to a different rabbinical district against his will may only take place with leave of the Supreme Jewish Council. The Jewish County Community Article 26 All communities situated within a single county shall form a County Community, with the proviso set out in Article 14, section 2 above. […] Article 27 The County Community shall administer and maintain those institutions and establishments which serve the county’s inhabitants as a whole, and in particular: hospitals,

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

507

orphanages, and educational establishments. The County Community shall supervise the activity of local communities. It shall support communities in the county which are financially weak, and shall represent the interests of both the County Community and individual communities before the State County Authorities. Administration of the Jewish County Community Article 28 The County Community shall be administered by an Executive Council made up of eleven members of the Jewish Religious Association, of whom three shall be rabbis. Article 29 Three members of the Executive Council shall be nominated by the State Supervisory Authority. Five lay members and three clerical members shall be chosen by the electors of the County Community […] Supreme Jewish Council Article 35 The Supreme Jewish Council shall be responsible for exercising the corporate rights enjoyed by the Religious Association as a whole and shall represent its interests before the National Central Administration. It shall supervise and direct the Religious Association and all its activities without restricting the freedom of belief of individuals, communities or the Religious Unions. It may open and manage establishments for the common use of the Jews of the General Government as a whole or in its greater part. It shall also have the right to support communities which are financially weak. Article 36 The Supreme Council shall consist of 14 lay Jewish members of the Religious Association and 7 rabbis. It shall be based in Warsaw. Article 37 Four lay members and two clerical members of the Supreme Council shall be appointed by the National Central Authority. Ten lay members and five clerical members of the Supreme Council shall be chosen by the electors of the County Community and the large communities directly responsible to the Supreme Council. The electors shall be duly appointed representatives of the County Communities and the directly elected Executive Councils of disaffiliated large communities. […]

508

Kendziorek

Jewish Religious Unions Article 44 Religious Unions may be formed in each community in order to manage and maintain synagogues and other religious institutions. The formation of a Religious Union shall be subject to the approval of the State Supervisory Authority. […] Rabbis Article 49 The Supreme Jewish Council shall set out in statutory form the criteria governing eligibility for the office of rabbi. This statute shall require approval by the National Central Authority. […] Rabbis must have a good command of spoken and written Polish and spoken and written Yiddish, unless the National Central Authority states otherwise. […] Financial management Article 60 Communities, County Communities, and the Supreme Jewish Council shall be entitled to cover their costs, provided that those costs cannot be met by income from property, in particular establishments and foundations, or by special subscription, and to raise charges and taxes from members of the Jewish Religious Association and in particular income and property taxes. The introduction or alteration of charges or taxes shall be conditional on the approval of the National Central Authority. […] Executory provisions Article 70 The implementation of this Act shall be the responsibility of the head of the Civil Board of the General Government, who will issue the necessary executory provisions. Warsaw, 1 October 191626 General Governor [Hans Hartwig] von Beseler

26

The Polish version gives the date as 1 October 1916. The correct date was 1 November 1916.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939



509

No. 3 Decree Concerning Changes to the Organization of Jewish Faith Communities in the Former Congress Kingdom

Source: Dziennik Praw Państwa Polskiego, 1919, no. 14, item 175.

Article 1 Until such time as the Sejm of the Republic of Poland passes a general statute in relation to Jewish faith communities, the Act concerning the formation of a Jewish Religious Association, dated 1 November 1916, which is currently in force in the area formerly under German occupation and whose operation is, by virtue of the present decree, extended to the remaining parts of the former Congress Kingdom, shall be subject to the following amendments and supplementary provisions. Article 2 Article 1 of the Act dated 1 November 1916 shall read as follows: ‘Jews resident in that part of the Republic of Poland previously known as the Congress Kingdom shall constitute a public law religious association which shall be headed by the Religious Council of Jewish Communities. The religious association and individual communities shall have corporate rights and the right to possess a seal.’ Article 3 Throughout the Act, the words Supreme Jewish Council shall be replaced by the words Religious Council of Jewish Communities. Article 4 Article 3 of the Act shall read as follows: ‘The Jewish faith community shall be responsible for ensuring that the religious needs of community members can be met. The following matters therefore fall within the jurisdiction of the community: a) the organization and maintenance of the rabbinate; b) the establishment and maintenance of synagogues, prayer houses, ritual baths, and cemeteries; c) responsibility for the religious education of young people; d) efforts to ensure that the Jewish population is supplied with kosher meat; e) the management of communal property, the property of foundations established for the benefit of the community, and any institutions or establishments which belong to the community.’ Article 5 Article 5 of the Act shall read as follows:

510

Kendziorek

‘The Board shall be elected by universal, equal, secret, direct, and proportional ballot, for a four-year term of office. The right to vote in elections shall be determined by the following factors: a) Jewish faith; b) at least twenty-five years of age; c) male gender; d) residence within the Jewish community for a continuous period of at least one year. Electoral rights shall be suspended in the event of bankruptcy, forfeiture of citizenship rights, legal incapacity, imprisonment, and reliance on public charity.’ Article 6 Article 18 of the Act shall read as follows: ‘Elections shall take place by universal, equal, secret, direct, and proportional ballot.’ Article 7 Article 37 of the Act shall read as follows: ‘Four lay members and two clerical members of the Religious Council shall be appointed by the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education. Ten lay members and five clerical members of the Religious Council shall be chosen by the community electors. Electors shall be selected by the members of smaller community boards and the representatives in large communities. Elections to the Religious Council shall take place by secret and proportional ballot. The procedure for these elections shall be that members of the community boards in each county shall convene to select electors to the Religious Council in the county town in question. In large communities, the representatives shall select electors by a separate process. Counties and large communities with up to 50,000 Jewish inhabitants shall select one elector. Those with between 50,000 and 100,000 Jewish inhabitants shall select two electors. Election or appointment as a member of the Religious Council is open to those persons who are eligible to stand for election in their own community.’ Article 8 Article 44 of the Act shall read as follows: ‘Religious Unions may be formed in each large community in order to manage and maintain synagogues and other religious institutions. The formation of a Religious Union shall be conditional on the approval of the State Supervisory Authority. The Religious Union shall be entered in the register maintained by the Religious Council, as a result of which it shall acquire corporate rights.’

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

511

Article 9 Article 49 of the Act shall read as follows: ‘The Religious Council of Jewish communities shall set out in statutory form the criteria governing eligibility for the office of rabbi. This statute shall require the approval of the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education. Regardless of the requirements set out in the statute, eligibility for the office of rabbi shall extend to those persons who, in the opinion of the Rabbinical College recognized by the Religious Council, are competent to hold that office. Rabbis must have a good command of spoken and written Polish and spoken and written Hebrew.’ Article 10 Article 56 of the Act shall read as follows: ‘The appointment of a rabbi shall be subject to approval by the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education, made at the recommendation of the Religious Council.’ Article 11 Article 60 of the Act shall be supplemented by the following section: ‘The budgets and tax registers of both the communities and the Religious Council shall require endorsement by the supervising authority before they can be implemented. Budgets and tax registers endorsed in this way shall be legally enforceable.’ Article 12 Articles 62, 63, and 70 of the Act shall read as follows: Article 62 ‘The principal supervising authority in respect of Jewish community boards shall be the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education. The local supervising authority for individual communities shall be the County Commissioner.’ Article 63 ‘The Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education shall be responsible for issuing detailed provisions in respect of elections held by virtue of this decree.’

512

Kendziorek

Article 70 ‘The implementation of this decree shall be the responsibility of the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education, who will issue the necessary executory provisions.’ Article 13 Articles 17, 26 to 34, 43, 55, and 65 of the Act of 1 November 1916 are hereby repealed. Issued in Warsaw on 7 February 1919 Head of State Józef Piłsudski Prime Minister [Ignacy Jan] Paderewski Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education Jan Łukasiewicz



No. 4 The Demands of the Delegates of Jewish National Councils, 1919 [Probably May],27 Paris

Source: Szymon Rudnicki, Żydzi w parlamencie II Rzeczypospolitej, Warszawa 2004, pp. 419–421. The delegates of the Jewish national councils in Poland, members of the united Jewish Committee in Paris which is debating the Jewish question and the defence of the rights of Jews in individual states, have formulated their views concerning the Polish State as follows: […] II. The internal organization of the Jewish population 1. The cornerstone of Jewish organization is the local Jewish community. Elections to the community board shall take place in accordance with the six electoral principles.28 2. The jurisdiction of the community board shall encompass: a) religious matters; b) cultural affairs (schools, public education, etc.); c) charitable activities; d) social care (cooperatives, storehouses, cheap credit institutions, etc.); e) the 27 28

A memorandum for participants in the Versailles Peace Conference produced by Polish Zionists affiliated with the Jewish Delegates’ Committee at the Conference. The sixth electoral principle was the right of women to vote. (The first five electoral principles were that elections should take place by universal, equal, secret, direct, and proportional ballot).

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

3.

4.

5.



513

regulation of emigration and the settlement of Jews in Palestine; f) the representation and protection of Jews at the local level. The Jewish population of the entire Commonwealth shall periodically elect a General Jewish Assembly. These elections shall take place in accordance with the six electoral principles. The Assembly shall convene annually for a period of one to three months in the Polish capital. It shall be responsible for setting guidelines in relation to the matters listed in the previous section, passing the budget, and authorizing taxes for the purposes of Jewish organization. In addition, it shall be responsible for electing a Supreme Jewish Council, the principal representative body of the Jewish community in Poland. The Supreme Jewish Council shall be the principal executive and supervisory body for Jewish communities within the remit established by state legislation and the resolutions of the General Jewish Assembly. It shall be the sole representative body of the Jewish community in relation to its external affairs. The state or the local authority shall subsidize the Jewish budget in relation to the maintenance of those Jewish institutions whose counterparts are ordinarily maintained by the state or local government. The amount of this subsidy shall be based on the number of Jews utilizing the institutions in question. Other costs deriving from the exercise of Jewish self-government shall be met from indirect taxation imposed on Jews by the relevant Jewish organizations and from other sources of income outlined in Jewish communal statutes.

No. 5 Declaration by the Bund Central Electoral Committee Concerning the Elections to the Community Elections 1924

Source: Jewish Historical Institute, Archive, collection Ogłoszenia i plakaty dot. życia społecznego i politycznego Żydów w Polsce [Declarations and posters concerning the social and political life of Jews in Poland] 144/ 77 The General Union of Jewish Workers in Poland [Bund], Central Electoral Committee Platform for the Community Elections To the Jewish Worker masses! For the first time, Jewish society in Poland faces community elections in which not only a small group of tax payers can participate, but also a section of the Jewish masses. Not the entire populace, not all members of the community will have voting rights in these elections. From the start, the government has taken care to secure better electoral conditions for the bourgeois-rabbinical reaction. It has furthermore excluded all women from the elections. It gave voting rights to men only over the age of twenty-five, and has

514

Kendziorek

also introduced a system of electoral declarations which means a further limitation of a general vote. But despite these electoral restrictions, a share of the Jewish masses will arrive at the ballot boxes. This opens up a new battleground for the General Union of Jewish Workers against these enemies of the people, against the rule of the bourgeois-rabbinical clique over the Jewish masses. […] House of the Dead29—this is the name the Community has earned itself amongst the Jewish masses The Community Board became a house of the dead not only because it was managed by enemies of the people, but also because of the religious character of the Community. Membership in the Jewish community seems not to depend on whether one is immersed in a Jewish language and culture, or whether someone considers himself a member of the Jewish nation. Rather, it depends only on whether one might certify that one belongs to the Jewish confession, to the ‘Mosaic persuasion’. In this view, the task of the community consists exclusively in ‘satisfying the religious needs’ of the believers, [illegible] to see its members subjected to its religious ordinances, whether or not they are believers, or have ‘religious needs’. The General Union of Jewish Workers alongside socialists around the world rejects any compulsory organization of religion. We reject that anyone, whether a believer or a free-thinker, whether he requires a rabbi, a priest, or a minister, or not, should be forced to be member of a specific religious organization and should be obliged to fund the clergy with his money. […] The General Union of Jewish Workers aspires to national-cultural autonomy for the broad Jewish masses. The local Jewish masses have their own language—Yiddish—and their own Jewish culture. The Jewish masses alone have the right to administer their schools, their cultural life and [illegible] in order to safeguard their national independence; and this is the task of secular self-determination.

29

Meysim shtibl in the original—a colloquial designation of the burial building at the cemetery (translator’s note).

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

515

We will demand that the living language of the Jewish masses should be the official language of the Community Board. Its entire management should be conducted in Yiddish. Through the Community Board we will fight for an official recognition of Yiddish by the state—in schools, in the administration, in the judiciary. We will demand that the entire education system and cultural life of the Jewish masses be funded by the State just as it funds these for the Polish populace. We will demand that the Jewish secular Community Board, which is responsible for issues of Jewish education, have the status of a state institution, and, above all, the right to tax wealthy Jewish community members, in order to allow the community to satisfy the cultural needs of the Jewish masses to the greatest extent possible. We will demand adequate pay for all officials and employees of the Community as well as comprehensive pension insurance for those who have toiled in the community and its institutions. And as we publish this programme, we state with pride that the Jewish working class to this very day is the only builder and bearer of the new Jewish secular culture. With the greatest of efforts and sacrifice the Jewish working class has established a new secular Jewish school, but it confronts constant interference and obstacles not only from antisemitic Polish responses, but also from the local bourgeois and bigots, Zionists and Orthodox. They all abhor the Yiddish-secular primary school like a spider and consider it an ‘abnormal growth in the organ of the Jewish people’. They are even not embarrassed to vote against state funding for such a school, as they clearly understand that this school rears free people who will not lower their heads under the yoke of the shtreyml30 and of capitalism. What will we fight for in the Community Board? To abolish the religious community and to build secular autonomous institutions for national cultural issues of the Jewish masses: this is the goal we pursue. And until we have reached this goal, our representatives in the Community Board will endeavour to put the current communities to greater use for the Jewish masses and reduce the harm they have been doing. 30

Head gear of a range of Hasidic communities in Eastern Europe (translator’s note).

516

Kendziorek

The representatives of the General Jewish Workers’ Union on the Community Boards will fight for a just taxation which will put the weight of maintaining the community and its institutions on the shoulders of the wealthy members of the Jewish populace. The representatives of the Bund will fight to dedicate the entire communal budget to culture and education, and not to rabbis, judges, and mikvehs. We will endeavour to have the community build schools, children’s homes, and libraries, as well as to maintain the existing educational institutions for the Jewish masses, such as theatre, music, and fine arts. To the degree that today the community tasks itself with helping the destitute Jewish populace, we will endeavour to ensure that this help should not have the demoralizing and humiliating character of philanthropy, but should be productive and adequate, and should respect the human dignity of the destitute populace. We will endeavour to eradicate from the community the prevailing bourgeoispatronizing relationship to the destitute in our Jewish populace. We will fight the bureaucracy which makes individual members of the masses suffer each time they turn to the community for help. We will defend the interests of the destitute working classes of the Jewish populace on every issue, against the power-grab of the Jewish wealthy, merchants, and industrialists. We will fight any attempt to use the community and its means for Zionist purposes. We will not tolerate that the Community apparatus will be used as a means to extract money from the Jewish masses to fund their Zionist dreams. In the daily fight with shtreyml and its lackeys and helpers, we will endeavour to purify Jewish life from all the filth, darkness, and wild superstition which are the legacy of generations of the rule of clericalism and which uphold the spiritual slavery of the Jewish masses.

…

The General Jewish Workers’ Union fully recognizes that it can only attain its goals, those already close and those far away, if the broad masses of Jewish workers are behind it, and if its struggle in and around the communities is tightly connected to

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

517

the general and broad socialist struggle for liberation, which the Jewish working class can only fight hand-in-hand with the entire class-conscious proletariat in this country. The struggle of the Jewish proletariat against rabbinical and bourgeois reaction is part of the general fight against the clerical-capitalist reaction in this country and around the world. For the General Jewish Workers’ Union, elections to the Community Board are a means to reach a new position in this fight. The broad educational campaign which the Bund will lead both within and beyond the community has one objective: to extricate the broadest masses of the Jewish working people from the influence of the rabbinical-bourgeois [knufie]; to bring these masses to follow the red banner of socialism; to enlist them in the fight for an [order] which will know neither rich nor poor, neither oppressor nor oppressed, where no-one strives for other people’s superstition and ignorance, where people do not create gods for themselves who will rule over them from heaven above like earthly Cossacks. Rather, each human being will be a free master and example, and the highest principle for all people will be the happiness of all […] and the entire society. General Jewish Workers’ Union [Bund] in Poland, Central Election Committee 1924, Warsaw Translated from Yiddish by François Guesnet



No. 6 A Letter from the starosta of Łuków Concerning the Conflict in the Local Jewish Community

Source: Jerzy Tomaszewski, ‘Conflict in the Jewish Community in Łuków, 1924’, Gal-Ed XIII (1993), pp. 104–105. The starosta of Łuków L:20605/Wyz Łuków, 14 August 1924 To the Voivodan Office Presidium Department B Lublin Re: Disturbances in the Łuków synagogue I hereby inform the Voivodan Office that on 26 July, 2 August, and 9 August of this year, disturbances took place in the synagogue in Łuków, as a result of the demands

518

Kendziorek

of Mizrachists and Zionists of various complexions, as well as members of the Jewish People’s Party (Pryłucki’s group), who ignore those authorized by Rabbi Braun to lead prayers during his absence on holiday and instead commit acts of violence against them in the synagogue, so that fights break out and they oust those authorized to lead prayers from the pulpit and replace them with their own followers, who then continue the prayers. In relation to these excesses, I have ordered that the Police Command conduct an investigation into any breaches of Articles 76 and 77 of the Criminal Code, and have at the same time notified the Public Prosecutor. Finally, I wish to point out that after personally examining representatives from both sides, I am convinced that political antagonism has played a large part here, since the troublemakers are opponents of Orthodox Jews and allege that the synagogue is being used for party political purposes, while on the other hand the Board of the Jewish Community takes the view that the synagogue should not be used for any kinds of rallies or political meetings, and members of that Board state that there was a period when Bundist rallies were frequently held in the synagogue. As far as the starosta’s office is concerned, the position is that when permission was granted for meetings or rallies to be held in the synagogue, that permission always made the holding of the meeting or rally in the synagogue conditional on the agreement of the Board of the Jewish Faith Community. I should add that Orthodox Jews hold meetings of all sorts in their own premises and so the above accusation made by their opponents seems to be unfounded. So that this situation can be properly regulated, it would be desirable for there to be a categorical Order from the authorities banning the use of synagogues and prayer houses for anything other than religious worship. I enclose herewith copies of three letters from the Jewish Community Board in Łuków addressed to my office in connection with this matter. STAROSTA [signature illegible] [stamp] Delivered 17 August 1924 Voivodan Office in Lublin

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939



519

No. 7 A Letter from the Jewish Community Board in Łuków Concerning Religious Conflict in the Community

Source: Jerzy Tomaszewski, ‘Conflict in the Jewish Community in Łuków, 1924’, Gal-Ed XIII (1993), pp. 118–120. Jewish Community Board in Łuków 25 August 1924 Nr 176 To the Starosta in Łuków This is to report that on Saturday 23 August, before the time designated for prayer, Abram Żyto and his mob overran the altar and refused to allow access to the person authorized by us to lead prayers. Chaim Zelma, the son of Joel Zysz, removed the altar from its proper place. This mob therefore prevented prayer from starting and it was only after the chief of police arrived that it could continue without interruption. After prayer had finished, and before everyone had managed to leave, Żyto and his gang surrounded those few who were still praying and were a little late in leaving the synagogue, and threatened to beat them up and throw them out. These people said that they were just leaving anyway and indeed started to leave, but Żyto, as a provocation, set up an attack. He was first to give the word, and first to spit in the face of the first person to leave, namely Mr Moshek Naj, and then punched him in the face so that his mouth began to bleed. Others followed Żyto’s lead […] It is obvious that Żyto and his gang are not at all concerned about the synagogue or prayers, etc. and that what they really want is to turn the synagogue into a venue for taunts and brawls. During our normal morning prayer, no-one who simply wants to pray is thrown out but when it comes to their prayers, they think they have a monopoly on the synagogue. They refuse to allow anyone to stay behind, even for a minute, and will not let those who are late go without being beaten up. We must admit that it was a big mistake on our part to let them continue to pray. We did so in the belief that that was genuinely what they wanted. It turns out, however, that this was simply a ploy intended once again to sow havoc and cause trouble. It is all becoming clear. They have shown their hand. They want at any cost to stir up public outrage about the repeated scandals and disturbances taking place in the synagogue, and then, with the help of agitators, ascribe the blame to the Community Board. Their goal is to draw the masses into their battle against the community and to scare off peace-loving citizens who neither want nor support such scandalous behaviour, so that they can govern the community as they please. They are not succeeding. But there is a real danger of

520

Kendziorek

public harm. The fact that investigations have been delayed and that no-one has been brought to justice makes them think that what their leaders said at the outset was true, that the pronouncements of the authorities are not so alarming after all, and that there is nothing to worry about. So it is time to put a stop to this and to stamp out all this troublemaking once and for all. The most solemn holidays are approaching, namely the New Year, the Day of Atonement, and the Feast of Tabernacles. Prayers on these holy days are very sacred for us and we cannot allow them to take place in the midst of such scandal. They, on the other hand, are bent on carrying on until then, since that is when commotion and scandal will cause outrage and when religious Jews who wish to pray in peace will simply leave everything to them. They will not succeed in this either, since religion and the synagogue are our lifeblood and are far too precious for us to allow such people to trample over and defile them. That would lead to a very dangerous situation. We should point out that they will stop at nothing: even on Saturday evening, they ripped off the locks and broke the doors to the synagogue. We therefore respectfully request once again that, in order to prevent further misfortune, you use all possible means at your disposal to stop these people. […] Chairman: M Gelernter Treasurer: H Rozen Secretary: signature illegible



No. 8 Regulations Concerning the Organization of Jewish Faith Communities in the Republic of Poland Excepting the Voivodeship of Silesia. An Annex to the Decree of the President of Poland Dated 14 October 1927

Source: Dziennik Ustaw Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, 1928, no. 52, item 500; also published in: Rafał Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa w Warszawie 1918–1939, Warszawa 2012, pp. 747–58. Part I General provisions Article 1 Jews resident in the Republic of Poland, with the exception of the voivodeship of Silesia, shall constitute a public law Religious Union, made up of communities and headed by the Religious Council of Jewish Communities. The Religious Union and individual communities shall have corporate rights and the right to possess a seal.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

521

Article 2 A Jewish faith community shall consist either of the Jewish inhabitants of a single political community, if they are sufficient in number to take on the burden of maintaining communal institutions and officials, or the Jewish inhabitants of a few or more municipalities. The chief supervising authority may, after consulting the Religious Council, combine several faith communities into a single faith community or divide one faith community into several geographically distinct faith communities. A Jewish faith community formed of a single political community may not be subdivided. The boards of Jewish faith communities shall be required to keep a permanent register of community members. Article 3 The Jewish faith community shall be responsible for ensuring that the religious needs of community members can be met. The following matters therefore fall within the jurisdiction of the community: a) the organization and maintenance of the rabbinate; b) the establishment and maintenance of synagogues, prayer houses, ritual baths, and cemeteries; c) responsibility for the education of young people; d) efforts to ensure that the Jewish population is supplied with kosher meat; e) the management of communal property, the property of foundations established for the benefit of the community, and any institutions and establishments which belong to the community. In addition, and with the reservation of the rights and duties of the State and its local government bodies, the faith community shall be entitled to provide charitable assistance to the Jewish poor and to establish charitable institutions for that purpose. Part II Smaller communities Article 4 The board of the Jewish faith community shall consist of the community rabbi and eight elected members.

522

Kendziorek

The post of board member shall be honorary and unpaid. Article 5 The board shall be elected by universal, equal, secret, direct, and proportional ballot for a 4-year term of office. The right to vote in elections shall be determined by the following factors, that the person: a) be of the Jewish faith; b) be at least 25 years of age; c) be of the male gender; d) has held residence within the Jewish community for a continuous period of at least one year. Electoral rights shall be suspended in the event of bankruptcy, forfeiture of citizenship rights, legal incapacity, imprisonment, or reliance on public charity. Article 6 The right to stand for election shall, in addition to the requirements set out in Article 5, also be subject to the following: a) Polish citizenship; b) that the person be at least 30 years of age; c) that the person has an unblemished civic reputation. Article 7 Every community member with electoral rights shall be entitled to lodge a complaint with the local supervisory authority against the election of a board member in the event of a breach of the present provisions. The complaint must be lodged within 14 days of the date on which the election results are officially published. The complainant is entitled to lodge an appeal against the decision of the local supervising authority within the same set of proceedings. Such an appeal must be lodged within 14 days of the date on which the decision of the local supervising authority was handed down. The lodging of an appeal shall not prevent the elected board from taking office. Article 8 Each community shall have a rabbi and, if necessary, an assistant rabbi. In smaller communities, the rabbi and assistant rabbi shall be elected by a simple majority of votes cast in a universal, equal, secret, and direct ballot of community members with electoral rights.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

523

Article 9 The board shall select one of its members to act as chairman. The chairman shall be responsible for calling meetings and presiding over the board’s deliberations. In the event of impediment, the oldest member of the board shall deputize for the chairman. […] Article 10 The board shall represent the community in all its legal relations. Any documents which bind the community must be signed by the chairman or his deputy and by two members of the board, and bear the communal seal. […] Article 12 The community board shall draw up a budget for each financial year, and a register of community members showing the taxes shall be imposed on each one of them. Article 13 The budget and register of taxes shall be available to community members for a period of 8 days. The presentation of the budget and register of taxes shall be publicly announced in an appropriate manner. Part III Large communities […] Article 15 A large community shall be administered by the Community Council and by its executive board. The chief supervising authority shall determine the number of council members and executive board members in each community. The executive board of a large community shall be made up of at least eight members and the community rabbi. In addition, the chief supervising authority may appoint to the executive board of a large community a further three members from among those who are eligible to stand for election in their community.

524

Kendziorek

The posts of council member and executive board member shall be honorary and unpaid. Article 16 Members of the Community Council shall be elected by those members of the faith community who have electoral rights. Elections shall take place by universal, equal, secret, direct, and proportional ballot. Article 17 The Community Council shall elect the executive board by proportional ballot. Article 18 Members of the council and members of the executive board of a large community shall be elected to a 4 year term of office. […] Article 20 The Community Council and its executive board shall elect their chairmen and their chairmen’s deputies by a simple majority of votes cast. In the event that identical numbers of votes are cast, the result shall be decided by lot. The election shall be subject to approval by the chief supervising authority. If those elected fail after three attempts to have their election endorsed, the chief supervising authority shall appoint a chairmen. Article 21 The Community Council shall be responsible for the following matters: 1) approval of the budget and any amendments to it; 2) setting the level of taxes and the method by which they shall be collected, and setting fees; 3) taking out loans; 4) the creation and organization or the significant reform of communal establishments; 5) changes to the community’s real property holdings; 6) selecting the community’s rabbi and assistant rabbis; 7) any matters which the supervising authority or the executive board has specifically entrusted to the Council. Council resolutions on the above matters shall take place by virtue of motions put forward by the executive board. Resolutions shall be passed by simple majority. In the event that identical numbers of votes are cast, the motion shall be deemed to have been rejected. […]

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

525

Part IV Religious Council Article 24 The Religious Council shall be responsible for exercising the corporate rights enjoyed by the Religious Union as a whole and shall represent its interests to the State authorities. The Religious Council shall supervise and direct the Religious Union and all its activities without restricting the freedom of conscience of individuals, communities, and faith associations. The Religious Council may establish and undertake the organization of institutions for the joint use of all communities, or for communities operating within particular regions of Poland. The Religious Council shall also have the right to support communities which are financially weak. Article 25 The Religious Council shall be made up of 34 lay members of the Jewish Religious Union and 17 rabbis. Its term of office shall be 5 years. The Religious Council shall be based in Warsaw. Article 26 In addition to the members elected to the Religious Council, the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education may appoint eight lay and four clerical members. The elected members of the Religious Council are chosen by the community electors. Electors are chosen by members of the boards of smaller communities and by the members of the Councils of large communities. […] Part V Congregations Article 32 Congregations may be formed in each large community in order to manage and maintain synagogues and other religious institutions. The formation of a congregation shall

526

Kendziorek

require the consent of the chief supervising authority. A congregation should have and maintain its own cemetery. Any member of a large community who wishes to join a congregation shall notify the executive board of the large community. The congregation shall be required to keep a register of members and to submit it to the executive board of the large community at least once a year. Members of the congregation who are exempt from paying taxes to the large community (Article 36) shall not have the right to vote in elections or to stand for election to any departments of the executive board of the large community. […] Part VI Rabbis and other community officials Article 37 The Religious Council of Jewish communities shall set out in statutory form the criteria governing eligibility for the offices of rabbi and assistant rabbi. This statute shall require the approval of the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education. Notwithstanding the requirements set out in that statute, eligibility for the office of rabbi or assistant rabbi shall extend to those persons who, according to the rabbinical board recognized by the Religious Council, are competent to hold that office. Rabbis and assistant rabbis must have a good command of spoken and written Polish and must hold Polish citizenship. Article 38 The Religious Council shall maintain a list of candidates eligible for the office of rabbi and assistant rabbi. Article 39 Rabbis and assistant rabbis should, through the exemplary manner in which they carry out their duties and their otherwise irreproachable behaviour, prove worthy of the respect which their office commands. Rabbis and assistant rabbis are forbidden from conducting or participating in any commercial business activity.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

527

Article 40 The functions of rabbi and assistant rabbi may only be carried out by the rabbis or assistant rabbis of the communities and congregations in question. The Religious Council may authorize exceptions to this. […] Article 42 Preachers who have completed rabbinical training recognized by the Religious Council shall be deemed to be rabbis as defined in the present regulations. Article 43 The appointment of a rabbi or assistant rabbi shall be subject to the approval of the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education at the recommendation of the Religious Council. Article 44 The positions of rabbi and assistant rabbi of a community shall be held for life. Dismissal from office by the chief supervising authority may take place only on the motion of the Religious Council and in accordance with disciplinary regulations, 1) if the rabbi or assistant rabbi is incapable of carrying out his obligations, albeit this shall not affect his pension rights; 2) if the rabbi or assistant rabbi commits an act which is inconsistent with the dignity or obligations appropriate to his office. […] Article 46 The rabbi of a community, subject to the division of a large community into rabbinical districts, shall supervise religious institutions, teachers of religion in Jewish faith schools, ritual slaughterers, and other religious officials operating within his community. The rabbi shall have the exclusive right to preside over weddings and divorces within his community, subject to the rights of the rabbis of congregations (Article 47). Rabbis shall be required to preach on Saturdays and on religious holidays. Ritual slaughter may only be carried out by persons authorized to do so in writing by the community rabbi. Article 47 The rabbi of a congregation (Article 34) shall supervise the religious institutions and religious officials of the congregation. The same shall apply to supervision of

528

Kendziorek

the religious schools managed by the congregation, subject to the rights of the state authorities, and also to the authorization and supervision of the slaughterers employed by the congregation. The rabbi of a congregation shall have the right to preside over weddings and divorces in which the parties are members of his congregation or the children of members. The regulations concerning the registration of marriages shall be unaffected. Part VII Financial management Article 48 In order to cover their expenditure and the expenditure of the Religious Council (Article 30), faith communities may raise mandatory taxes and fees from members of the Jewish Religious Union, provided that those costs cannot be met by income from communal property and in particular from establishments, foundations, or special subscriptions. The approval of the supervising authority shall be required in respect of the budget, the setting of taxes and fees, and the manner of their collection. The Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education shall, by agreement with the Minister of Internal Affairs and the Treasury, issue an order giving details of the powers of the administrative authorities in this regard as well as the legal measures available to communities to counter any refusal by the appropriate authority to approve such resolutions. The order shall also specify the authority responsible for collecting outstanding taxes and fees. Previous regulations concerning the upper limit of taxes and the exemption of members of community boards from the payment of taxes are hereby repealed. Article 49 Congregations shall raise contributions from their members by mutual agreement. The obligation to make such payments shall be regulated by civil law. Part VIII Supervising authority Article 50 The chief supervising authority in relation to the boards of Jewish faith communities shall be the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

529

The local supervising authority in relation to individual communities shall be the general administrative authority of first instance. Article 51 Detailed regulations concerning elections held under the present regulations shall be issued by the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education. […]



No. 9 Police Investigation into the Irregularities Alleged to Have Taken Place in the Course of Elections to the Board of the Jewish Community in Włocławek

Source: Archive of the Jewish Historical Institute, Warsaw, Records of the Jewish community of the city of Włocławek, 113/12. Brześć Kujawski, 23 July 1928 On the orders of the Starosta’s Office of Włocławek dated 27 July ref V-27/22 I, Bronisław Czopp, head of station of the Polish State Police in Brześć Kujawski, have questioned the witnesses listed in the attached complaint. 1. The witness Fajbuś Kowalski testifies as follows: I confirm as true the complaint which I personally signed on 20 July 1928, and the residence records which I presented to Mayor Ciborowski at the town hall of Brześć Kujawski on 16 July 1928. I affirm that on 6 July at 18:43, I witnessed Chała Alje lodge a list of candidates for the board of the Jewish Community. This list was received by the Deputy Chairman, Majer Kuczyński, who declared that ‘you have time, another 7 minutes’, and the list was given the number 4. It is the case that Chairman Jankiel Dawid Szlajfer posted notices announcing that candidate lists were to be lodged between 26 June and 6 July inclusive and therefore he had no right to reject list number 4. Here ends my statement, which is signed by me. Read to F Kowalski […] The witness Lajb Lichtensztajn testified as follows: I am aware that on 12 July 1928, Dawid Jankiel Szlejfer tore down the notices announcing that candidate lists were to be lodged between 26 June and 6 July inclusive, and posted notices containing the same information except for the word ‘inclusive’. I am aware that on 6 July at 18:00, Chała Alje lodged a list with the deputy, Majer Kuczyński. I do not know anything

530

Kendziorek

about the complaint made by members of the Electoral Commission dated 20 July or the records dated 16 July. Here ends my statement, which is signed by me. Read to L Lichtensztajn […] The witness Icek Majer Kuczyński, deputy chairman of the Electoral Commission, testified: I am aware that notices were posted which stated that lists of candidates for the board of the Jewish Faith Community should be lodged by 6 July. The word inclusive was not used, since that was what had been decided by the electoral commission. On 6 July, there was no-one working in the room designated for the use of the Electoral Commission and lists were not being accepted on that day. The reason I was present in that room was that I had been invited by Boruch Lipszic, the cashier of the previous board, to assist him in counting his receipts. Between 19:00 and 20:00, Chała Alje came and brought the Bund list and wanted to give it to me. I did not accept it since I was not working, and no-one else was working that day either. Chała Alje then walked off with the list and no doubt went to chairman Szlajfer. What happened after that, I do not know. I point out that I was present during the voting from beginning to end and I saw that it proceeded in a satisfactory fashion. After the voting had finished, at the request of chairman Szlajfer all the members of the Electoral Commission signed a report, except for the Bund party members who threatened that the elections would be invalid anyway and that they would put up witnesses and would do as they pleased. Here ends my statement. Read to I.M. Kuczyński



No. 10 The Protest of Orthodox Jews against the Elections for the Post of Rabbi Called by the Council of the Jewish Community in Włocławek

Source: Archive of the Jewish Historical Institute, Warsaw, Records of the Jewish community of the city of Włocławek, 113/8: r. To the Jewish Community Board in Włocławek As members of the Jewish Community Board in Włocławek representing the Orthodox faction, we hereby protest in the strongest possible terms against the proposed rabbinical elections. This is both for procedural and substantive reasons.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

531

We turn first of all to the procedural irregularity which, in our view, makes it altogether impossible to hold a lawful election for the post of rabbi at present, namely: The issue of providing the local population with a spiritual leader to preside over and direct the life of the community is a matter of such importance, and an act of such grave responsibility, that the Presidium of the Community Board should have convened a plenary session of the Board, with the issue of the election of a rabbi specifically on its agenda. Only then, after comprehensive discussion of that issue, would the Board have been entitled to consider authorizing and setting a date for the rabbinical elections. The Presidium of the Board took a different course. Together with the Elders, it usurped that right and set the date for the election of the rabbi without even giving the Board the opportunity to debate the issue at a specially designated session. For substantive legal reasons, meanwhile, we are opposed to the present Community Board conducting these rabbinical elections at all since, in accordance with the order of the Ministry of Public Education and Religious Denominations, its term of office has in fact expired. Until new elections are held, it retains only a provisional right to function and to resolve immediate issues. The present Board, therefore, from a legal as well as a socio-moral point of view, should not and cannot, when it is on the threshold of leaving office, take on such a great responsibility as the election of a rabbi, an act which will affect the spiritual life of the Jewish community for many years to come. Also, taking into account that: the vast majority of the local Jewish population is firmly opposed to the notion of 1. the Community Board having conduct of the rabbinical election and is actively voicing its protests at public rallies and mass demonstrations; 2. an election for the post of rabbi which is held against the wishes of the Jewish community will inevitably arouse outrage and hatred in that community we declare ourselves to be categorically opposed to any steps being taken in this direction, since these would be contrary to the wishes and the interests of the local Jewish community. Furthermore, we assert that we will take no part in the act of electing a rabbi and renounce any responsibility in this regard. We request that this protest is included in the official records.

532

Kendziorek

Board Members: Praszkier, Kaźmierski, H. Lubiński, Ł. Żychlin Włocławek, 18 November 1928



No. 11 An Electoral Appeal from the Committee of Jewish Women’s Organizations and Groups for the Struggle for Electoral Rights in the Jewish Community

Source: Magazyn Druków Ulotnych, Dokumenty życia społecznego, National Library, Warsaw The United Committee of Jewish Women’s Organizations and Groups for the struggle for electoral rights in the community31 Warsaw [1931] Jewish women! As the hour of the community elections approaches, we turn to you with this appeal: Do you want your children to have an adequate number of schools? Do you want your infants to have sufficient nurseries, so that they don’t have to be left waiting around in courtyards, prey to unfortunate accidents while you are at work? Do you want your sick children not to perish in unlit basements or stifling garrets and to have enough summer camps? Do you want to see women in community roles defending your interests, women who know your needs and who would work to liberate the oppressed Jewish women of all classes? Then join us in demanding electoral rights for women in Jewish communities. Let your voice of protest ring out against the grave injustice of prohibiting Jewish women from working alongside men in the communities. It is not true that our religion forbids this. Urge your fathers, husbands, and brothers to vote for those parties which are prepared to help us in the struggle for equal rights.

31

The United Committee of Jewish Women’s Organizations and Groups for the struggle for electoral rights within the community’ was formed in Warsaw in connection with the communal elections of 1931. It was made up of various Jewish women’s organizations: the Union of Jewish Women, representatives of women’s academic corporations, women’s sports organizations, and activists from the left-wing Zionist organization Hitaḥdut.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

533

Down with paragraph 20! Long live the national Jewish community! Long live equality for women! Long live the emancipated Jewish woman! Come out in force to our rallies on Saturday the 23rd at 5 o’clock at ‘Wizo’, 15 Twarda St and at 7 pm at the Union of Jewish Women ‘IFO’ at 16 Święto Jerska St.



No. 12 Press Report Concerning a Dispute over the Candidacy of Socialist Leaders in the Jewish Communal Elections in Warsaw

Source: 5-ta Rano, 29 March 1931, National Library Warsaw.

The leaders of Jewish workers’ parties will not be struck off the electoral lists. A meeting of the Jewish Community’s Electoral Commission was held yesterday evening to consider the exclusion of Bund leader Mr Ehrlich and the leaders of Po’alei Zion Left Zrulawel and Lew.32 The meeting lasted from 8 pm until midnight and was exceptionally stormy. The Agudists who had written to demand the exclusion of the three men defended their motion. It was, however, opposed by other speakers who maintained that it was unjust and set a dangerous precedent which might be used to secure further exclusions. There then arose the question of whether the motion should be considered by the Electoral Commission or the Complaints Commission. Chairman Farbstein stated that he was in favour of referring it to the Complaints Commission, and Mr Seidenman, called as a legal expert, agreed. The Complaints Commission was therefore promptly assembled and rejected the motion by four votes to three. There are rumours that the Agudists, unhappy with this outcome, intend to appeal to the government inspectors. 32

Stanisław Ehrlich was, together with Wiktor Alter, leader of the Bund in Poland during the interwar period. Icchak Lew was a Po’alei Zion Left activist and its representative on the Council of the Jewish Community in Warsaw in the second half of the 1920s. The name Zrulawel given here is no doubt a distortion of the surname of the interwar leader of Po’alei Zion Left in Poland, Jaakow Zerubawel (real name Witkin).

534

Kendziorek

No. 13 Statement to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency by the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education, Sławomir Czerwiński

Source: Nasz Przegląd, 1 April 1931; also published in: Jerzy Tomaszewski, Walka polityczna wewnątrz gmin żydowskich w latach trzydziestych w świetle interpelacji posłów’, in: Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego, 1 (1973) pp. 91–92. The position of our government is the same in relation to Jewish faith communities as it is in relation to all other faith organizations, namely that we consider the introduction of political activity or bias into the religious sphere to be harmful both to the interests of the state and to the faith organizations themselves. We therefore wish to avoid the Jewish faith communities becoming agents of politicization. There were two ways in which we could achieve this: either by radically restricting their jurisdiction and subjecting them to very rigorous supervision and inspection, or by granting them greater discretion and simply giving them the means to protect themselves against becoming politicized. We chose the second of these alternatives. Of course, the present regulations will not completely eliminate every instance of political conflict from communities whose members include representatives of Orthodox or Zionist or Bundist groups. It will, however, exclude those elements which, in their policy or ideology, clearly advocate war against religion. It would, after all, be grotesque if people who consider war against religion to be one of their primary duties were to be part of a religious community. This is an important consideration for the government insofar as it too, of course, cannot tolerate a situation in which anti-state elements or organizations which are by law prohibited from participating in any organizations or appearing in any public spaces might be free to conduct their anti-state campaigns from within Jewish communities. Naturally, we are concerned here only with communist organizations, not the Bund or related organizations whose programmes do not call for a war against religion. In any event, it is the communal bodies themselves which will decide issues of community membership. […]

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939



535

No. 14 Parliamentary Question Submitted by Izaak Grünbaum and Colleagues to the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education, Janusz Jędrzejewicz on 9 October 1931, Concerning Abuses of Power in the Course of Elections to the Jewish Faith Communities in the Former Kingdom of Poland

Source: Jerzy Tomaszewski, ‘Walka polityczna wewnątrz gmin żydowskich w latach trzydziestych w świetle interpelacji posłów’, in: Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego, 1 (1973) pp. 87–95. On 25 June of this year, the Parliamentary Group of the Jewish National Council submitted a lengthy memorandum to you, setting out in detail the circumstances under which campaigning in the May elections to the community governing bodies in the former Congress Kingdom33 had taken place. The memorandum concluded with the following requests: first, that appropriate orders should be issued to enable an investigation to take place into the flagrant instances of abuse by the local supervising authorities which were set out in the memorandum; next, that in the many communities where abuses of power had determined the result of the elections, those elections should be annulled; and finally, that the representatives of the supervising authority who were responsible for the abuses should be brought to justice. To date, the Group has received no response to this memorandum. However, on the basis of information from private sources, we can safely conclude that the Ministry of Religious Denominations and Public Education, in its capacity as the supreme supervising authority, has not taken any steps whatsoever to deal with this matter. The issues we have raised will affect the shape of relations in the newly elected community boards for years to come and are too important to be simply swept aside. It is this which compels us once again to refer this matter to the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education under the provisions of Article 33 of the Constitution. On 11 March of this year, following the publication of the order of the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education dated 24 October 1930 setting out electoral regulations in relation to elections to Jewish communal bodies in Poland, we lodged a (second) motion in Parliament calling for the repeal of some of those 33

The Kingdom of Poland (1815–1915) was also known as Congress Poland; the term Congress Kingdom is a conflation of these two designations.

536

Kendziorek

regulations, and in particular: 1) paragraph 14 section 1, according to which the electoral commission in Jewish communities should consist not only of board members but also of deputy members, who are not board members but are chosen by the board to reflect the more sizeable religious groups in the community; 2) paragraph 14 section 4, according to which the composition of the electoral commission is subject to the approval of the local supervising authority; 3) the final section of paragraph 20, which entitles the electoral commission to pass a resolution excluding from the electoral roll those who take a public stand against the Jewish religion. We indicated in our motion that admitting only religious parties—a concept which is in any event utterly equivocal and fluid—to the electoral commission would inevitably encourage the emergence of various cliques which purport to be religious but whose goal is short-term electoral gain, which of course has nothing to do with religion as such. We predicted that giving the supervising authority the discretion to approve the composition of the electoral commission would enable it to secure a sympathetic majority on the commission each and every time. Finally, we expressed our concern that paragraph 20, which is a concession to the most benighted and backwards elements of the Jewish community, is open to extremely elastic and harmful interpretation. It creates an exceptionally dangerous precedent and threatens to stir up friction and conflict within the Jewish community. The Jewish community elections held in May of this year made it abundantly clear that our predictions and warnings were wholly justified. In particular, the regulations mentioned above induced both the electoral commissions and the local supervising authorities in a number of localities to manipulate the elections in such a way as to produce the results they desired. This affected various stages of the electoral process, from the establishment of electoral commissions to the timetable for producing electoral registers and submitting lists of candidates, right through to the final stages of voting and the determination of results. Especially in the smaller communities, where boards are composed predominantly of members of the clerical party Aguda, the electoral commissions were made up of Aguda representatives either exclusively (Raciąż, Rypin, Żółkiewka, Łuków, Proszowice, Lututów, and others) or predominantly (Zduńska Wola, Skierniewice, Końskie, and others). It is interesting to note that in Rypin, for example, all the members of the electoral commission bar one were illiterate. In those places where the selection of the electoral commission did not go Aguda’s way, starostas were quick to help. The starosta of Piotrków, conscious that Aguda members were in the minority on the Jewish community board in Bełchatów but in the majority on its council, ordered

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

537

that electoral commission members be chosen not by the former but by the latter. The starosta in Kalisz approved the composition of the electoral commission in Błaszki, but when Salomon Madowicz, an opponent of Aguda, was elected chairman, he withdrew his approval and told the board to select a new electoral commission. In Końskie, there were no elections to the electoral commission at all and instead the local rabbi attended a board meeting with a ready-made list of candidates for the commission. […] Evidence of the ways in which the notorious paragraph 20 has been exploited by these ‘privileged’ electoral commissions, with the influential backing of the starostas, may be found amongst others in the numerous parliamentary questions submitted by us during the last session of Parliament and by our several letters on this subject. We will not now rehearse the details of such phenomena as restricting the electoral rights of irreproachable community members for the sole reason that they read holy texts with their heads uncovered, or shave their beards, or else speak to women in the street. In an interview the then Minister gave to the directors of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, he indicated amongst others that paragraph 20 is a vital means of protecting communities from politicization and of preventing their governing bodies from being infiltrated by communists. The Minister’s statement was of little consequence. At most it may have slightly reined in the impulse of some clerical circles to completely shackle the rights of voters in the light of an alleged threat to the Jewish religion. Here are some typical figures, taken in fact quite at random, which illustrate the consequences of applying paragraph 20. In Zduńska Wola, out of a total of 2,100 eligible voters, around 700 were excluded from the electoral register. Similarly in Pabianice, where out of 2,100 voters, 400 were excluded. In Końskie, 400 out of 1,000 eligible voters were excluded, in Karysów—around 400 out of 600, in Szydłowiec—around 1,000 out of 2,000. In Kozieniece—around 200 out of 400, in Raciąż—around 200 out of 380. In Bełchatów, 250 voters were excluded from the register, in Proszowice, around 100 religious Jews with long beards were excluded, in Gostynin, around 70 mainly Bund or Po’alei Zion members. In Łozice … bachelors were excluded from the electoral register, regardless of their age. […] For the unilaterally created commissions of an ultra-Orthodox complexion, the invalidation of candidate lists proved a useful tool with which to fight their opponents. In Warka, in the county of Grójec, the electoral commission, citing the decision of the starosta, invalidated the anti-Aguda list number 6—even though it had been published within the statutory period, as required by the electoral regulations, and even though no defects in the list had been notified to the returning officer within the relevant

538

Kendziorek

period. In Łosice, all the candidate lists were invalidated—except for the Aguda list […] The voting stage merits particular consideration. In several places, veritable miracles occurred. Voters who had seen their names on the electoral register with their own eyes and who had received no notification of having been struck off by virtue of an objection, were prohibited from voting on election day because they were not on the register. This happened in Bełchatów, Góra Kalwaria, Szydłowiec, and other communities. These events confirm that even after electoral registers had been finalized, the relevant electoral commissions acted unlawfully by removing certain voters from registers and replacing them with other names. […] In these circumstances, it must be categorically stated that the Jewish communal elections in the former Congress Kingdom, held under the conditions recorded above, are in no way a true reflection of present currents and trends in the Jewish community but show instead a blatant falsification of Jewish public opinion, in no small measure caused by the magical power of the ‘famed’ paragraph 20. In light of the above, we, the undersigned, ask the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education to confirm: a) whether he is aware of the facts described; b) what orders he intends to issue to enable the investigation of the abuses of power committed by the local authorities supervising the Jewish communal bodies, and specifically what orders he intends to issue firstly to bring about the annulment of elections in those communities where the abuses had a decisive effect on the results, and secondly to bring those responsible for the abuses of power to justice.



No. 15 Reply by the Minister of Religious Denominations and Public Education, Janusz Jędrzejewicz, to the Parliamentary Question Tabled by Izaak Grünbaum and Colleagues Concerning Elections to the Jewish Faith Communities in the Former Kingdom of Poland (13 November 1931)

Source: Jerzy Tomaszewski, ‘Walka polityczna wewnątrz gmin żydowskich w latach trzydziestych w świetle interpelacji posłów’, in Biuletyn Żydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego, 1 (1973) pp. 96–97. In relation to the written question dated 12 October 1931 L.I.III. (69) W.P. from deputy Izaak Grünbaum and colleagues concerning abuses of power during the elections to

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

539

Jewish faith communities in the central voivodeships, I have the honour to state as follows: The question submitted raises a series of allegations concerning the legality of the elections to the governing bodies of the Jewish faith communities which were held in the central voivodeships in May of this year. In response to this question, I affirm that the relevant provisions of the electoral regulations describe in detail the procedure by which allegations of specific electoral malpractice—from the selection of the electoral commission and the registration of voters, to the counting of votes and the determination of election results—can be raised by interested parties. […] Furthermore, I affirm that, by virtue of the regulations governing the organization of Jewish communities, those communities are responsible for looking after the needs of their members. Therefore, it is first and foremost their members who are both competent and entitled either to seek to realize the rights accorded them by the regulations, or to defend those rights if they have been infringed. The means of achieving this are well established in law, i.e. through the legal process referred to above, by way of complaint to the Supreme Administrative Tribunal and finally by way of an application to the supervising authority for it to intervene in its supervisory capacity. I therefore declare that, in cases where the demands of affected community members, made in accordance with the relevant regulations, have not been met through the normal legal process, I am always ready, on receipt of the appropriate complaint, to examine, in my supervisory capacity, whether electoral regulations have been infringed and whether it is necessary to issue any orders in the light of those enquiries. In other cases, that is, where no complaints have been lodged by interested parties, I shall issue any necessary orders if I am persuaded that electoral regulations have been breached to the detriment of voters and in such a way as to irrefutably affect the election result. I must, however, caution against the overhasty presumption that officials of the general administrative authorities have deliberately broken the law. I hereby request that the Speaker communicates this response to the members who tabled the question.

540

Kendziorek

No. 16 Appeal by the Jewish Community in Kolno. Jewish Communities in the German Borderlands Come to the Assistance of Fire Victims

Source: Nasz Przegląd, Warsaw, 21 September 1932.

The Jewish community in Kolno, via the Jewish Telegraphic Agency [JTA], urgently appeals to all Jewish communities in Poland to come to the rescue of the victims of the conflagration in Kolno, who make up 75 per cent of its entire Jewish population. The Jewish community also appeals through the JTA to its compatriots in the United States to send donations. Kolno (JTA). In the last few days the chairman of the Jewish community in Johannesburg (East Prussia) visited Kolno and presented the committee set up to assist the fire victims with 150 marks. A number of small border towns have sent parcels of clothing for the victims, but these parcels have been held by customs. The Kolno community has called on the customs department to release these consignments. Meanwhile, the Jewish communities in the German border region have appealed to larger German communities to assist the victims of the Kolno fire as a matter of urgency […]



No. 17 The Dispute about the Principles Governing the Scale of Taxes Payable to the Jewish Community

Source: Nasz Przegląd, 19 November 1932.

Should the reform be delayed? On account of the apportionment of tax in the Jewish community. For many years, Jewish democracy has battled for the communal tax to be levied on community members according to their actual income and not on the basis of arbitrary estimates. That battle has finally ended in victory. The reasons are neither here nor there, but at long last an order has been issued stating that the communal tax should be formulated as a tax on income and should constitute a supplement of 10 per cent. It might be thought that such an intrinsically just reform would be brought into force as soon as next year. In the meantime, we learn that assessment committees, operating under the old rules, are once again being convened, while as far as the reform is concerned, the Community Board is reportedly trying to secure its deferment. It is difficult to comprehend the motives behind these efforts, which are being made without any consultation or discussion. […]

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

541

The system of arbitrary estimates has been criticized so often that we are truly loth to rehearse the all-too-familiar arguments yet again. Even Chairman Mazur himself, it seems, has come around to the view that the current system gives rise to favouritism and discrimination and so has devised and implemented certain ‘improvements’.34 These consist of not giving the assessment commission a list of the taxes previously paid, so that the assessors can start with a clean slate and make determinations which are wholly independent and tailored to current income and assets. It is difficult to see how this innovation can lead to any genuine improvement; indeed, it could be considered a backwards step. The chief defect of the present system is that it is impossible to tax someone fairly in the absence of a pre-established computational framework. Is the communal tax to be a tax on income or property, or something else? Once that has been settled, the first thing to do is to establish what percentage is due on a given amount of income or property, and only then, after the tax payer has been assessed, should the communal tax be levied. However, no charge of this sort exists and the assessors themselves don’t know what information they need to obtain or how to use that information. The way in which the taxes are set is utterly farcical. Indeed, the more conscientious assessors themselves find it laughable. A name is mentioned and voices respond: ‘He’s rich, he can pay such and such.’ Very often it transpires that this information relates to someone else altogether. The practice of not disclosing the amount of taxes previously paid makes matters worse in that, thanks to such ‘mistakes’, it is easy to impose a tax of 1,000 zł on someone who previously, on the basis of many years’ information (however cursory), paid only 50 zł. Or again, the information might be ‘Oh, he owns a tenement block, charge him 900 zł.’ But there are tenement owners who earn tens or hundreds of thousands a month and those who hardly make ends meet. In short, the earlier chaos is not set to disappear and may even escalate. It has been demonstrated time and again that in an arbitrary system, even if it cannot be definitively said that protectionism and corruption are the order of the day, there is still plenty of scope for misconduct. Systems which are rotten should not be preserved. The need to establish a rigorous system of taxation has now become so entrenched in the public consciousness that the community will not let this hard-won reform be wrested from it. A case in point is the declaration made publicly in certain company by 34

Eliasz Mazur (b. 1889; date of death unknown): an industrialist and one of the leaders of Aguda, with links to the circle of the tsadik from Góra Kalwaria. From 1931 to 1936, on behalf of Aguda, he was chairman of the Jewish Community in Warsaw. He moved to Palestine in 1940.

542

Kendziorek

a well-known social activist. He is a wealthy man who is unstintingly generous when it comes to social issues, and especially so where the community is concerned. And yet, to a member of the assessment commission he said as follows: ‘Please inform the appropriate people that if you charge me more than is due under the terms of the order, in line with the income tax I pay and which I will gladly disclose, then I will defend myself by every means at my disposal.’ If this is how a wealthy man proposes to act, then people of moderate or modest means, for whom excessive communal taxes can spell ruin, are all the more entitled to do likewise. Indeed, we have heard that activists are considering calling a series of rallies under the slogan ‘Down with arbitrary taxation. We won’t let good reforms be quashed!’ It is strange that the community board is unaware of the mood of its tax payers and the great bitterness they feel as a result of the revival of the shameful lawlessness of the previous system. The Jewish people value their community and understand its needs. But a worthy goal cannot be reached by unworthy means. This is a problem which needs to be comprehensively discussed and resolved in a way which corresponds with public opinion. S.H. [author’s initials]



No. 18 Disputes Concerning the Discharge of Religious Duties in the Jewish Community in Warsaw

Source: Nasz Przegląd, 2 June 1932.

The Opinion Mill35 Rabbis at the expense of community officials Mr Marek Turkow raises in ‘Radio’ the issue of rabbis and officials in the Jewish community. The Aguda majority plans to reduce salary payments to officials by 40,000 zł while allowing 170,000 zł for the salaries of new rabbis: ‘The rabbinate currently consists of 10 rabbis who for many long years have dealt with all the religious issues of Warsaw’s Jews. It is true that a few years ago there were three more of them who have since died. But it was the self-same Aguda board members who stopped the previous board from filling these posts, out of fear that they would go to Mizrachists. The majority resolution has provoked outrage not only among progressive Jews but also among religious Jews who are not Aguda members. All of them 35

The title of a regular column in the periodical.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

543

are asking a good question: what has today’s board done for the impoverished Jewish masses? How many new schools and orphanages have been set up for the poor children of the working classes who are not in a position to pay for education? What has the community done for artisans and traders, or for the jobless? What kind of positive work has it done for the Jews of Warsaw that, in such hard times, it can warrant spending 170,000 [zł] on 35 new rabbis, in relation to whom it has no obligation whatsoever? There is a powerful movement taking shape amongst a significant part of the Jewish population of Warsaw against the policy put forward by the majority leadership. […]’ Aguda’s position While admitting that the community budget estimate includes the cost of thirty-five rabbis (new rabbis?) and abusing the progressive press for allegedly referring to rabbis as ‘parasites’, Idishe Togblat puts the matter as follows: ‘The thrust of the resolution passed by the Warsaw community is that new rabbis should be appointed to replace those who have died in recent years. They should be representative and authoritative figures, of whom the rabbinate currently has great need. However, the other rabbinical salaries which feature in the budget are intended to remedy a blatant injustice which has been rife in Warsaw for decades and which has branded one of the largest Jewish cities with the mark of Sodom. For decades, there have been so-called unofficial rabbis in Warsaw, who serve and minister to the needs of the religious population, something which takes up all their time, energy, and expertise. These rabbis are indispensable to Jewish Warsaw, as the number of petitioners who fill their homes makes plain. However, despite the fact that these rabbis assist the Jewish population with all their religious issues, and that if they ceased to do so there would be uproar because there would be no-one to go to with a “question”—to date the community has not paid them a single penny. Is that fair, even from a proletarian point of view? If people are performing certain functions which the community ought to take care of, should they not be paid for that?’ In other words, Aguda itself admits that so far these rabbis have not been receiving salaries from the community but that the community now intends to pay them. Have they been undertaking their duties for free? Have they been living on fresh air, perhaps? Obviously to get an ‘answer’ to their ‘question’, people have been paying them from their own pockets. And there is no guarantee that they won’t carry on getting the same payments now. Is it acceptable, not just from a ‘proletarian’ point of view but even from a ‘bourgeois’ point of view, to pay someone double at a time of rampant crisis, a crisis which is at its most intense on the Jewish street? We have recently written extensively about the key issue concerning the new posts for rabbis.

544

Kendziorek

Divorce factories Unzer Ekspres, reporting the new divorce scandal which is casting a dark shadow over the illicit rabbis, links it to Aguda’s plan for these rabbis to be employed by the community: ‘A columnist for the Agudist paper has written a presumptuous piece in defence of the resolution to engage 35 new rabbis, in which he also settles scores with the Jewish press which has recently “taken to abusing the rabbinate—that bulwark of the Torah” and wants to “undermine the authority of rabbis”. The “defence” in essence is that the point of the resolution is not to engage 35 completely new rabbis but that that number includes the rabbis who have until now been functioning unofficially and whom the community now wishes to legalize as official rabbis. In other words, the aim is to sanction these divorce manufacturers and reward them for their magnificent achievements with fat salaries. And when these gentlemen of the Agudist so-called press say that Warsaw must have dozens more illicit rabbis, who are to be employed by the community and live at its expense, they simply have no idea how farcical their reasoning is and how ridiculous they appear.’



No. 19 The Dispute over the Choice of Rabbi in the Jewish Community in Radom

Source: Nasz Przegląd, 21 July 1932. The Kestenberg saga

An electoral miracle during the community elections in Radom What the outstanding German author Alfred Döblin wrote about Rabbi [Jechiel] Kestenberg in his book about his travels through Poland.36 As everyone knows, elections to the Jewish Community Council have recently taken place in Radom and have resulted in the ‘victory’ of the notorious Rabbi Kestenberg. 36

A reference to a book by the eminent German Jewish author Alfred Döblin, entitled Reise in Polen, in which he recounted his impressions of his travels through Poland in 1924. Döblin devoted a significant part of his book to depicting the world of unassimilated Polish Jews (treated as representatives of Ostjudentum and thus culturally different from Western Jewry). It was in this context that, referring to a newspaper article, he described the dispute concerning the dismissal of Jechiel Kestenberg from the post of communal rabbi in Radom, a post he had held since 1912.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

545

How are we to account for the fact that a small group of supporters of a man despised by almost the entire Jewish population of Radom managed to emerge from this election campaign ‘victorious’? The news from Radom suggests that everything that went on in Równe during the recent elections to the municipal council pales into insignificance compared to what took place in Radom during the communal elections. Suffice it to say that rabbi Kestenberg’s list ‘gained’ 13 seats as a result of the ‘elections’, whereas all the remaining lists, i.e. those put forward by the Zionists, Mizrachists, Orthodox Jews, artisans, merchants, etc. won … 4 seats. How can we explain this new electoral miracle in Radom? We will not list the whole host of unprecedented abuses which took place there during the elections. They ought to be investigated by the public prosecutor. It is enough to relate the fact that, although this rabbi is detested by the whole town, not a single one of his opponents was allowed to be present when the votes were being counted. That is enough for us to understand how it was that Rabbi Kestenberg managed to ‘burst forth’ from the ballot boxes … So who is this notorious miracle worker of Radom? It turns out that he is well known not just in Poland itself, but outside it too. News of his exploits in recent decades was broadcast around Europe by the eminent German author Alfred Döblin who devoted a whole chapter of his book on his travels around Poland to this miracle worker and his ‘activities’. […] After the end of the war, Kestenberg set his sights on obtaining an appointment from the Polish authorities. In 1920, he approached Warsaw to request one but was told that rabbis ought to be chosen by the Jewish community. And it so happened that elections for the post of rabbi were announced in Radom. A few weeks later, however, there came from Warsaw the unexpected news that the elections were being postponed. The delegation which went to see the Minister about this was told that the elections had been called off as a result of the intervention of one of the National Democrat members of the Sejm. This member had told the Minister that Kestenberg was a trustworthy candidate who was loyal to the government and that the rabbinical elections were simply a smokescreen for the revolutionary intentions of the population of Radom. In light of this information, the Minister considered it appropriate to call off the elections …

546

Kendziorek

Kestenberg had joined forces with the National Democrat member of Parliament to block the rabbinical elections, come what may. Following protests by all the Jewish political parties to the government against these unprecedented goings-on, the Ministry declared that the elections for the post of rabbi had merely been postponed until after the elections to the communal authorities. In due course, a date was set for the Jewish Community Board elections in Radom, and Kestenberg set to work on all fronts. He put forward an electoral list of his own—and suffered an ignominious defeat … Only three of his followers were chosen out of 22 representatives of the Jewish population. The Community Board then invited applications for the post of rabbi. However, Kestenberg and his three supporters were adamant that this contest should not take place and did everything they could to stop it, including enlisting the Union of Rabbis in the struggle … But the whole town was against him—they had no desire to have a rabbi foisted on them … So that is a profile of the infamous rabbi Kestenberg—after the recent elections: the miracle worker Kestenberg […] An electoral miracle brought ‘victory’ to Mr Kestenberg. It may even be that, with the help of his handful of henchmen and the support of certain elements, he will now become the rabbi of Radom…. But it is important to state categorically that if this takes place, it will be against the will of almost the entire Jewish population of Radom […] S. Wołkowicz



No. 20 The Protest of Dr. Dralicz, a Member of the Jewish Community Board in Warsaw, Concerning the Use of Hebrew in Community Business

Source: Nasz Przegląd, 13 January 1932.

Jewish Chronicle More on the latest session of the Jewish Community Board As an addendum to our account of Monday’s session of the Jewish Community Board, it is worth mentioning that the Revisionist representative on the Board, Dr. Dralicz, spoke in favour of Mr Szczerański’s motion calling for the minutes of the meetings of the various community departments to be also read out in Hebrew. Dr Dralicz declared

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

547

that it was a disgrace that Hebrew was used in the community merely for the sake of form. When Mr Leo Finkelstein’s motion that the minutes should not be read in Hebrew was passed, Dr Dralicz announced in Hebrew that in the light of such a vote, he was unable to take any further part in the meeting and, as a mark of protest, he then ostentatiously left.



No. 21 Announcement by the Jewish Community Board of Drohobycz Concerning a Synagogue Service to Be Held in Honour of the Name Day of President Mościcki

Source: Magazyn Druków Ulotnych, Dokumenty życia społecznego, National Library, Warsaw. Jewish Community Board in Drohobycz Drohobycz, 28 January 1932 Announcement On the occasion of the name day on 1 February 1932 of the President of the Republic of Poland Professor Dr Ignacy Mościcki the Board of the Jewish Faith Community in Drohobycz is to hold a ceremonial service on Monday 1 February 1932 at 8:30 am in the Prayer Room of the Home for the Elderly on Mickiewicz Street with a sermon by rabbi Dr Bernard Schrier to mark the event, to which all members of the community are invited Chairman of the Jewish Faith Board in Drohobycz Dr Tannenbaum



No. 22 Statement by the Jewish Community Board in Warsaw Concerning the Discrimination Faced by Jews Employed in Municipal and Local Government Institutions

Source: 5-ta Rano, Saturday, 20 January 1934; also published in: Rafał Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa w Warszawie 1918–1939, Warsaw 2012, p. 769. The Jewish Community Board in Warsaw protests

548

Kendziorek

The Board of the Jewish Faith Community in Warsaw protests in the strongest terms against the systematic dismissal of Jewish labourers, office workers, and doctors from their posts in municipal and local government institutions. The Jewish community has suffered a severe blow as a result of the licensing of bus transport.37 This restriction has placed thousands of Jewish families at risk of starvation. The Jewish Community Board maintains that these factors are clearly apt to strip this part of the Jewish community of its already limited means of survival. The Community Board calls on Jewish parliamentary representatives and councillors to use all the parliamentary means at their disposal to curb these antisemitic tendencies.



No. 23 Community Employees Shelve Their Work-To-Rule for a Few Days

Source: 5-ta Rano, 15 February 1935, National Library Warsaw

As we reported on page 3, a general meeting of the union of Jewish Community employees was held yesterday. The meeting, which was chaired by Professor Rafał Gutman, continued late into the evening. The participants resolved to protest against the irregular payment of salaries and to require the new board of the union of employees to continue to defend the interests of all workers. Since elections to the new board of the union of Community employees are to take place on Sunday, it was resolved to suspend the work-to-rule which began yesterday for a period of 3–4 days.38 Today the Community’s employees will go to work as normal.

37 38

In 1934, state licences were introduced for private transport enterprises in Poland. A work-to-rule (in Polish strajk włoski) involves taking as long as possible to complete individual tasks, thus bringing the normal operation of businesses or offices to a standstill.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939



549

No. 24 Sentences in the Case Concerning Antisemitic Incidents in Upper Silesia

The Jewish community in Katowice receives a symbolic award of 1 złoty. Source: 5-ta Rano, 13 February 1936, National Library Warsaw

Katowice, PAT At 1 pm yesterday, the Chairman of the Tribunal, deputy president Arzt, gave the judgement of the court in the case of the 21 members of the National Party—disbanded in Silesia—who were accused of bombing synagogues and Jewish shops.39 The court sentenced W. Jakubowski to 3 years imprisonment; Knabik and Wieczorek to 2½ years imprisonment; Musioł, Niemiec, Nalepa, Swoboda, Stokłosa, and Kloska to 2 years imprisonment. Nine of the defendants were sentenced to between 1 year 4 months and 2 years imprisonment. Three defendants were exonerated and released. Eight of the defendants who received sentences of under two years imprisonment were released on license. Immediately after passing sentence, deputy president Arzt gave brief reasons. In reaching its decision, the court had taken into account that the offences had been committed by a group of people who were a threat to public law and order. It had also taken into consideration the fact that this was an operation of significant proportions which, thanks to the security forces, had been promptly suppressed. The conduct had been capable of causing even greater moral harm and might have led to loss of life. Apart from that, the court found that the defendants’ guilt had been established through their own admissions. In sentencing, the court accepted as mitigating circumstances the previous good character of the defendants, who had been led astray by irresponsible and unscrupulous propaganda. In relation to the principal defendant Jakubowski, the court accepted as a mitigating circumstance the fact that he had a large family of seven. In relation to the civil

39

In December 1935, a number of incidents involved explosive devices being thrown at Jewish shops in Upper Silesia and at a synagogue in Chorzów. Nineteen suspects with links to the radical right, led by the barber Stanisław Jakubowski, were charged with participation in secret organizations and using explosive devices capable of causing general harm. Their trial began in the Katowice court on 12 February 1936.

550

Kendziorek

proceedings, the court awarded the Jewish community in Katowice symbolic compensation of 1 złoty. All other civil claims were dismissed.



No. 25 Rabbinical Criticism of the Bill to Restrict Ritual Slaughter

Source: Dr Gedalia Rozenman, Zagadnienie uboju rytualnego (Białystok 1936), pp. 87–88, also published in: Rafał Żebrowski, Dzieje Żydów w Polsce 1918–1939. Wybór tekstów źródłowych (Warsaw 1993), pp. 22–23.40 […] Now, in independent twentieth-century Poland, we do of course have a constitution which, true to the spirit of Polish history, guarantees us freedom of belief and of conscience. But what of it when an outrageous anti-Jewish campaign, based on ‘racist’ slogans introduced from elsewhere and quite inconsistent with Christian principles and the spirit of the Polish nation, has nonetheless gained so much ground that a bill can now be brought before the Sejm which amounts to an attack on the tenets of the—statutorily recognized—Jewish faith. And yet those who think that the Jewish population can be persuaded to infringe its religious laws are mistaken. The Jewish nation did not emerge yesterday or the day before. It arose four thousand years ago and, outlasting prehistoric paganism, then Egyptian and Babylonian polytheism, the cults of Greece and Rome, and the persecution of the Middle Ages, it has survived to this day thanks to its steadfast adherence to the religious principles and traditions of its forebears. In keeping with our eternal Book of Life and in keeping with our history, we will endure even now, under the sacred standard of our forefathers. We place our trust in God and believe that not hatred, but the knightly traditions and tolerance of the Polish nation, its traditions of unity and harmony, will win through and that, on this occasion too, justice will triumph.

40

Gedali Rozenman was the official rabbi of the Jewish community in Białystok.

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939



551

No. 26 The Regulation of Marriages and Birth Certificates in the Jewish Community

Source: Głos Gminy Żydowskiej, 7–8 (1939), p. 48, Jewish Historical Institute Warsaw. A meeting, chaired by councillor Senator J. Trokenheim, was held on 13 February 1939 to discuss the regulation of issues related to marriages and birth certificates in the Jewish population of Warsaw. The meeting was attended by rabbis S.D. Kahan, I.M. Kanał, N. Rogoźnicki, Sz. Sztokhamer, A. Wajnberg, M. Warszawiak, and J. Zylbersztejn. Councillor B. Dawidowicz and the legal adviser of the Jewish community in Warsaw, S. Seidenman, also took part in the deliberations. During the debate, in which all those present participated, it was acknowledged that in relation to Jewish marriages, it is essential to standardize the formalities for contracting legal marriages, since this has so far been handled rather chaotically. In particular, the issue of marriages among the poorer members of Jewish society lacks regulation. In most cases, these people do not have marriage certificates. As a result of the discussions, it was resolved to launch an information campaign within the Jewish community, with the aim of advising the Jewish masses of the need to comply with the formalities associated with marriage and the public register.



No. 27 An Outline of the Working Conditions of Employees of the Jewish Communities in Poland

Source: Pracownik Gminy 1 (1938), p. 5; also published in: Rafał Żebrowski, Dzieje Żydów w Polsce 1918–1939. Wybór tekstów źródłowych (Warsaw 1993), pp. 22–23. N.R. [author’s initials], The position of Jewish community employees in Poland There are various categories of employees in the Jewish community—from secretaries and white-collar workers, to religious functionaries such as rabbis and slaughterers, as well as teachers and doctors, manual labourers, gravediggers, and so on. But what all these employees, whatever their category, have in common is the wretchedness of their position. They are at the mercy of assorted big-city overlords and small-town bigwigs. They are deprived of legal protection. They are the worst paid and the most appallingly exploited, and they are dependent on ‘Mr Chairman’s’ mood….

552

Kendziorek

These employees also face an uncertain future, since every time there is a change of board, there is a ‘reform of Community arrangements’ or, to put it more plainly, the incoming leadership lays off highly regarded workers and replaces them with its own cronies…. And this has been going on for years, everywhere, from large cities to small villages. Just how alarming this situation has become is revealed by a survey we have conducted, in which 58 communities, employing 1,500 workers, took part. Of these 58 communities, 44 have elected boards and 14 have appointed boards. Workers’ wages start at 20 zł a month, and most employees (both white- and bluecollar workers) receive no more than 100 zł a month. Pay norms do not exist (except in two communities) and rates of pay are quite arbitrary and depend entirely on the whim of the chairmen and the boards. Boards do not recognize the need to set dates for the payment of wages (as introduced under Mr Mazur’s tenure in Warsaw). They pay weekly or monthly in arrears, as resources permit. In some towns, workers are paid with community tax coupons: a community employee who wishes to receive his salary goes to the paymaster and sells a coupon worth 100 zł for, say, 75 zł—and of course forfeits the rest. The Community Board in one town has been particularly enterprising and pays its cemetery workers by the ‘piece’…. Wage arrears have reached quite extraordinary proportions: they sometimes amount to several years pay. No-one believes that these arrears will be made good. They remain outstanding and, what is more, they continue to increase. Working hours and working conditions are dire, especially in smaller communities. The community employee must always be available, often to be of personal service to the chairman, for whom he must sort things out at the starosta’s office, or the tax office, or the court, and so on. An 8-hour day is out of the question. […]

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939



553

No. 28 Public Ceremony to Celebrate the 20th Anniversary of Poland’s Independence

Source: Głos Gminy Żydowskiej, 12 (1938), pp. 354–55. Jewish Historical Institute Warsaw. On Thursday 10 November 1938, a grand ceremony was held in the Judaic Library in Warsaw to mark the twentieth anniversary of the restoration of Poland’s independence. It was organized by the Metropolitan District of the Union of Jewish Participants in the Struggle for the Independence of Poland.41 The ceremony was opened by the vice chairman of the Central Board, Dymitr Lachowski, accompanied by the chairman of the Metropolitan District Stanisław Feigenblat and the chairman of the Warsaw-Białystok District, Jerzy Flaum. Mr Lachowski then invited Chairman M. Mayzel to preside over the event. Chairman Mayzel gave an address on behalf of the Jewish Community of Warsaw in which, amongst other topics, he said as follows: ‘Today we celebrate a splendid, exceptional and joyous occasion. After long years of oppression and subjugation, we mark today the 20th anniversary of the state of Poland. The occasion is all the more joyful in that it coincides with the restoration of the Zaolzie lands, which have returned to the Motherland in this jubilee year.42 However, the true and never to be forgotten hero of this anniversary, who sadly did not live to see this jubilee, is her Man of Providence, her Great Leader, Builder and Teacher, Marshall Józef Piłsudski. Although he has departed this life, his spirit will forever serve as Poland’s guiding light. It was he who resurrected Poland and built her up from her foundations; he who led her armies to victory; he whose sword carved out Poland’s borders; and he who led the Polish nation to greatness and glory. Therefore, on this illustrious day, both on behalf of the largest Jewish community in Poland, which I have the honour to represent, and also in my own name, I pay profound 41 42

In Polish, Okręg Stołeczny Związku Żydów Uczestników Walk o Niepodległość Polski. A reference to Cieszyn Silesia, which was annexed by the Polish military in October 1938, after the Munich Agreement.

554

Kendziorek

homage to his spirit, so dear to us all, and express our deepest admiration and reverence for the eternal memory of this greatest of men, the greatest Pole in the history of Poland. However, as we celebrate today’s joyful anniversary of liberation, the greatest honour we can pay to his memory is to pledge that, in accordance with his teachings and guidance, we will never cease to keep a watchful eye on everything that is happening around us—since people and states, races and nations, religions and morality are living through unprecedented times, times alien to cultures and unknown to civilizations. And that is why on this joyful day, we should vow to spare no effort in strengthening the defensive potential of the Polish State so as to advance its authority and significance as a great power. […] And the waves of hatred which are breaking across Poland’s borders will not discourage us, and the dark clouds which are striving to block out the splendour of Poland’s noble traditions will not dishearten us—for the greater part of the Polish Nation will neutralize those waves, will drive out the dark clouds and will not allow the name of Poland to be defiled. With this unshakeable faith in the chivalry and nobleness of the Polish Nation and with deep devotion and affection for the leader of the Polish State, President Professor Ignacy Mościcki, and the Commander in Chief, Śmigły Rydz, I raise the cry “Long live the Most Serene Republic of Poland and its magnificent Army!” ’



No. 29 Appeal of the Provisional Chairman of the Jewish Community Board in Warsaw, Maurycy Mayzel, in the Face of the Imminent Outbreak of War, 26 August 1939

Source: Nasz Przegląd, no. 237 (1939), p. 13; also published in: Rafał Żebrowski, Dzieje Żydów w Polsce 1918–1939. Wybór tekstów źródłowych (Warsaw 1993), pp. 22–23. To the Jewish population of the capital Jewish Citizens of Warsaw! The historic hour of trial has struck. Today, when despite the attempts of the Government of the Most Serene Republic to secure peace, the danger of international conflict looms ever more menacingly over our homeland, I turn to the Jewish

World War One and Independent Poland, 1914–1939

555

community with a heartfelt appeal. The proof of our civic maturity—aside from an unqualified readiness to sacrifice our life and our worldly possessions—is our calmness of spirit, our composure and our self-control. We therefore continue to uphold the splendid traditions of our forebears, who always stood ready to defend our country against the rapacity of its enemies. In the face of danger, our work must be done with the utmost calm and self-control. Jewish citizens! I have no doubt that, at such a critical moment, the Jewish population of Warsaw will demonstrate the civic and social maturity expected of it and will prove its devotion to our beloved homeland.

chapter 9

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020 August Grabski with Piotr Grudka 1

Introduction

Three quite distinct phases characterize the history of Jewish self-government in Poland after 1944. The first is associated with the model of Jewish national and cultural autonomy embodied by the Central Committee of Jews in Poland (Centralny Komitet Żydów w Polsce, CKŻP) established in November 1944. The second began in 1950 when the communist authorities, after their suppression of the Zionist movement, in effect restricted Jewish organizational pluralism to two structures: one socio-cultural and the other religious. The latest phase of Jewish self-government in Poland began in 1989 with the collapse of communism and the emergence of the liberal democratic order. It is important to note that the discussion which follows concerns a community whose size varied significantly after the devastation of the Second World War and the Holocaust, and as a result of the emigration of Jews from Poland and the repatriation of Polish Jews from the USSR after 1945 and 1956. In June 1946, when the number of Jews in Poland was at its postwar peak, the Jewish population was estimated to exceed 215,000. At the beginning of the 1950s it numbered approximately 70,000; at the beginning of the 1960s, about 30,000; and after 1968 only a few thousand remained. The figure currently is estimated at about 8,000.1 The map of Jewish settlement has also changed. In 1947, some 130 organized Jewish communities were active in Poland. At the beginning of the 1950s, the Jewish Social and Cultural Association (Towarzystwo Społeczno-Kulturalne

1 The data on the number of Jews in Poland after 1944, and especially after 1968, is often questionable. Compare Albert Stankowski, ‘Nowe spojrzenie na statystyki dotyczące emigracji Żydów z Polski po 1944 roku’, in Grzegorz Berendt, August Grabski, and Albert Stankowski, Studia z historii Żydów w Polsce po 1945 r. (Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny, 2000), pp. 103–51. Główny Urząd Statystyczny, Ludność. Stan i struktura demograficzno-społeczna. Narodowy Spis Powszechny Ludności i Mieszkań 2011, https://stat.gov.pl/files/gfx/portalinformacyjny/pl/defaultaktualnosci/5670/22/1/1/struktura_narodowo-etniczna.pdf.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

557

Żydów, TSKŻ) had branches in thirty-four different areas. At present, only about fifteen towns have functioning Jewish organizations.2 The formation of the CKŻP in 1944 began a particularly interesting stage in the development of Jewish self-government. The CKŻP can be viewed as the realization of the concept of Jewish non-territorial autonomy. The phenomenon of Jewish national autonomy in People’s Poland undoubtedly owed its existence in part to the fact that, since the Holocaust had taken place on Polish soil, the Polish state felt under moral obligation to support the few Jews who had survived. The protection and assistance extended to Polish Jews by the communist government certainly served to improve its image in the eyes of the more liberal sections of Western public opinion. Jewish national autonomy was also consonant with a ‘people’s democracy’, politically distinct from the Soviet model. Another crucial factor was the near total support given by Polish Jews, regardless of their political persuasions, to the Polish communist authorities, which they saw as a valuable bulwark against postwar antisemitism. Despite its wide reach, Jewish autonomy rested on rather a narrow legal basis. In legal terms, the CKŻP was merely registered as a local association, with the Warsaw Municipal Council [no. 4]: the state refused to grant it the status of an association of public importance with the exclusive nationwide prerogative to protect Jews and represent their interests. From the point of view of the Jewish population, the CKŻP was unusual both because of the scale of its activity and because of the wide range of political parties which it brought together. Never before (or since) had there been a Jewish institution which was so important in so many areas of Jewish life in Poland. Never before (or since) in the politically factious history of Polish Jews had there been such a broad ‘ruling coalition’. From the Polish perspective, it was extraordinary that the authorities agreed to allow the existence within the state of this non-territorial model of autonomy for the Jewish minority. It was a solution which had been categorically rejected by the interwar governments and which was quite alien to Leninist policy towards non-territorial minorities. Finally, the CKŻP was also unique at the international level: its jurisdiction far exceeded that granted to the Jewish minorities of every other ‘people’s democracy’. Polish governmental policy regarding national minorities shifted several times during the postwar period, usually in parallel with turning points in state policy more generally: Stalinization at the end of the 1940s; de-Stalinization 2 August Grabski and Andrzej Rykała, ‘Żydzi w Polsce 1944–2010’, in Atlas historii Żydów polskich, ed. Witold Sienkiewicz (Warsaw: Demart, 2010), pp. 393–421.

558

Grabski and Grudka

after 1956; the antisemitic propaganda campaign, which followed the prodemocracy demonstrations in 1968; the post-1980 process of liberalization; and the re-introduction, for the first time since 1926, of parliamentary democracy in 1989. There is, however, no doubt that Poland’s postwar policy towards the Jewish minority was generally more favourable than its policy towards other national minorities (and especially towards the largest of them: Ukrainians, Belorussians, and Germans), which were only allowed to form their own social and cultural organizations after the 1956 thaw.3 Despite the authoritarian nature of the Polish state, the Jewish minority—even after the abolition of the CKŻP—was able to avail itself of a wide range of opportunities, including the ability to develop its culture, to practice its religion, to maintain contact with Jewish organizations in the West, and so on. Moreover, Jewish self-government ran relatively smoothly in the sense that the leaders of the Jewish organizations enjoyed the support of the majority of their members. The TSKŻ was, of course, dominated by communists, but the overwhelming majority of the Jews who remained in Poland were in favour of a left-wing government. Similarly, there was very little internal opposition to the leadership of the Religious Union of Mosaic Faith (Związek Religijny Wyznania Mojżeszowego, ZRWM). The assumption of power by the Left in Poland in 1944 significantly boosted the strength of secular tendencies within the Jewish community. Before the war, all Jews (defined as people of the Jewish faith) were de facto compulsorily members of their local Jewish religious community (żydowska gmina wyznaniowa). After the Left took power, such compulsory membership—which bore no relation to the actual adherence of members to the requirements of Judaism—was out of the question. As a result of the abolition of the Jewish religious communities in their prewar shape, in the period before 1989 the secular current of postwar Jewish life came to dominate the religious. It also surpassed the latter in strictly numerical terms. In turn, the restoration in 1989 of the ascendency of religious institutions in the Jewish community did not mean that those institutions attracted a majority of the milieu.

3 On the policy of the People’s Republic of Poland towards national minorities, see, for example, Eugeniusz Mironowicz, Polityka narodowościowa PRL (Białystok: Białoruskie Towarzystwo Historyczne, 2000).

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

2

559

The Central Committee of Jews in Poland (CKŻP): Its Emergence, Remit, and Political Status

Given a choice between the new Polish state created by the forces of the Left and the national structures controlled by the London government-in-exile, Jewish activists both in Poland and abroad, whether immediately or gradually, declared themselves in favour of the communists. Indeed, the underground pro-communist, quasi-parliamentary Polish National Council (Krajowa Rada Narodowa, KRN, formed in Warsaw on 31 December 1944) had two left-wing Zionist members from the outset, Adolf (Abraham) Berman and Pola Elster.4 Meanwhile, Emil Sommerstein, General Zionist activist and prewar parliamentary deputy, was a member of the first Polish communist government (the Polish Committee of National Liberation, Polski Komitet Wyzwolenia Narodowego, PKWN, proclaimed in Lublin on 22 July 1944) and headed its Department for Wartime Reparations. The Office for the Assistance of the Jewish Population (Referat do Spraw Pomocy Ludności Żydowskiej), attached to the Presidium of the PKWN and headed by the Bundist Szlomo Herszenhorn, also operated from August 1944 to January 1945, providing Jewish survivors with forms of emergency relief and, above all, welfare services.5 On 4 November 1944, the Provisional Central Committee of Jews in Poland (Tymczasowy Centralny Komitet Żydów w Polsce, TCKŻP) was established in Lublin. In February 1945 it was moved to Warsaw and renamed the Central Committee of Jews in Poland, CKŻP. It was to become the key institution in the life of the Jewish community in the first years after the Holocaust. The prime mover in the creation of the TCKŻP was Bolesław Drobner, head of the PKWN’s Department for Work, Social Welfare, and Health on behalf of the Polish Socialist Party (Polska Partia Socjalistyczna, PPS), who favoured the creation of a central headquarters for the local Jewish Committees.6 In fact, the PPS had only accepted plans for Jewish cultural-national autonomy in 1937 (as part of the ‘Radom Programme’) after many years of disagreement within the socialist 4 This description of CKŻP activity is based on August Grabski, Centralny Komitet Żydów w Polsce (1944–1950). Historia polityczna (Warsaw: ŻIH, 2015). 5 Michał Szulkin, ‘Sprawozdanie z działalności Referatu do spraw Pomocy Ludności Żydowskiej przy Prezydium PKWN’, Biuletyn ŻIH 3 (1971), pp. 75–90. 6 David Engel, ‘The Reconstruction of Jewish Communal Institutions in Postwar Poland. The Origins of the Central Committee of Polish Jews 1944–1946’, East European Politics and Societies 10.1 (1996), 85–107. Between 1944 and 1945, there were more than one hundred local Jewish Committees operating in Poland. In mid-1946, there were ten voivodan Committees in: Białystok, Katowice, Kielce, Kraków, Lublin, Łódź, in Rzeszów (with its headquarters in Przemyśl), Szczecin, Warsaw, and Wrocław. Leszek Olejnik, Polityka narodowościowa Polski w latach 1944–1960 (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2003), pp. 367–68.

560

Grabski and Grudka

movement. By contrast, the Independent Socialist Labour Party (Niezależna Socjalistyczna Partia Pracy), led by Drobner in 1922–28, had consistently been in favour of such a solution.7 Emil Sommerstein was appointed chair of the TCKŻP, and its members included representatives of several of the renascent Jewish political parties: Zionist, Communist, Bundist, and members of the Union of Jewish Partisans.8 The fact that the CKŻP operated under the banner of Jewish unity and in close cooperation with the re-emerging Polish state meant that in reality it had no rivals for the leadership of Polish Jewry. In practice, very few areas of Jewish life remained outside its jurisdiction—examples include religious life (contrary to initial intentions) or the illegal emigration of Jews from Poland [no. 1]. As many as eleven Jewish political parties operated in Poland between 1944 and 1949, most of which were represented on the CKŻP. The Zionist camp consisted (from political left to right) of the communist Hashomer Hatsa’ir; the communist Po’alei Zion Left; the social democratic Po’alei Zion Right; Hitaḥdut, a party of national solidarity; the centrist Union of Zionist Democrats ‘Iḥud’; the religious Mizrachi; and the far right Revisionist Zionists. In turn, the antiZionist camp was made up of the Jewish Fraction of the Polish Workers’ Party (Polska Partia Robotnicza, PPR); the socialist Bund; the middle-class Jewish Democratic Party (Żydowskie Stronnictwo Demokratyczne, known as Folkists) and the religious Agudat Israel. Three of these parties, namely Agudat Israel, the Jewish Democratic Party, and the Revisionist Zionists, were not, despite their best efforts, formally recognized by the authorities and were therefore not represented on the CKŻP or on its subordinate local Jewish committees. Nonetheless, these parties were not (until 1949) generally subjected to any form of police repression. The CKŻP also had its representatives in Polish parliaments. The first postwar parliament after the liberation of Poland, the KRN, included the Bundist Michał Szuldenfrei as well as the Zionist deputies Emil Sommerstein and Adolf Berman. Szuldenfrei and Józef Sack (Po’alei Zion Right-Hitaḥdut) were also CKŻP members of the Legislative Parliament (Sejm Ustawodawczy) elected in 1947. In February 1947, Adolf Berman, leader of Po’alei Zion Left, became chair of the CKŻP. It was not without significance that he was the brother of Jakub Berman, one of the most influential Communist Party figures of the period 7 Compare Krystyna Kawecka, Niezależna Socjalistyczna Partia Pracy: 1921–1937 (Warsaw: Książka i Wiedza, 1969), p. 225. 8 For more on this organization, see August Grabski, Żydowski ruch kombatancki w Polsce w latach 1944–1949 (Warsaw: Trio, 2002).

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

561

1944–56. During his chairmanship, the CKŻP, with the full backing of the Polish Workers’ Party, supported the creation of the state of Israel [no. 6]. In 1945, it came to be accepted practice that all the ‘democratic’ Jewish parties were to be represented on a given local Jewish committee so long as they operated within the geographical area over which that committee had jurisdiction. On 7 June 1946, the Central Interparty Commission (Centralna Komisja Międzypartyjna), attached to the CKŻP, adopted a resolution which set out in detail the rules governing the representation of individual parties [no. 5]. As a result, the Zionists had a slim majority (of just one seat) over the anti-Zionists.9 The model of Jewish national autonomy in postwar Poland—with the CKŻP as its institutional expression—involved the representation of Jewish interests to the authorities; party pluralism; freedom of association; freedom of expression (including an extensive publishing network); educational institutions; armed self-defence (in the form of a Special Commission of the CKŻP); a healthcare system (the Society for the Protection of the Health of the Jewish People, Towarzystwo Ochrony Zdrowia Ludności Żydowskiej, TOZ);10 relative freedom of emigration; its own cooperative movement; and finally the freedom to maintain contact with Jewish organizations in the West. It is worth adding that besides the CKŻP’s educational system, there were also Hebrew and religious schools operating independently of the committees. Although the manner in which postwar Jewish communal life was organized was connected to Bundist concepts of national and cultural autonomy, it is important to note that the powers which the CKŻP assumed in relation to Jewish survivors extended much further than into purely cultural issues. The postwar renaissance of Jewish institutional life in Poland was made possible by financial assistance received from Western Jewish organizations and especially the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC). Grants from this organization made up 80 per cent of the budgets of both the CKŻP and the religious congregations. Of the aid allocated to Poland by the JDC in 1948, a total of 74 per cent went to the CKŻP, 10 per cent to Zionist organizations, and only 6 per cent to religious organizations. The remaining 10 per

9

10

On the subject of Jewish communists in Poland after the Holocaust, see August Grabski, Działalność komunistów wśród Żydów w Polsce (1944–1949) (Warsaw: ŻIH, 2004). On Zionists: Natalia Aleksiun, Dokąd dalej? Ruch syjonistyczny w Polsce (1944–1950) (Warsaw: Trio, 2002). For more on the subject of TOZ, see Ignacy Einhorn, Towarzystwo Ochrony Zdrowia Ludności Żydowskiej w Polsce w latach 1921–1950 (Toruń: Adam Marszałek, 2008).

562

Grabski and Grudka

cent went towards direct aid and administrative, organizational, and transport costs.11 The rules governing the composition of Jewish committees adopted in June 1946 remained in force for two and a half years. Jewish parties decided against holding the free elections to the committees which had been provided for by the CKŻP statute [no. 3]. At the beginning of 1949, Jewish communists expanded the committees to include those communal organizations and institutions in which they had the upper hand [no. 7]. As a result, from the end of February 1949, communists had an absolute majority on the CKŻP. At their insistence, the authorities made the decision in late 1949 to prohibit Zionist organizations, the JDC, and the Organization for the Promotion of Industrial, Artisan, and Agricultural Activities among the Jews (Organizacja Rozwoju Twórczości Przemysłowej, Rzemieślniczej i Rolniczej wśród Ludności Żydowskiej, ORT) to operate in Poland. This restriction of political pluralism in the Polish Jewish community was preluded by the withdrawal of the CKŻP from the World Jewish Congress [no. 8].12 3

Jewish Religious Life after the Holocaust

As mentioned, the CKŻP had initially also intended to minister to Jewish religious needs. Its plans in this regard, however, coming as they did from an institution dominated by the political left, were met with indignation and resistance from the religious section of the community. As a result, on 6 February 1945, the Ministry of Public Administration (Ministerstwo Administracji Publicznej, MAP) issued Circular no. 3 Concerning the Temporary Regulation of the Religious Affairs of the Jewish Population (Okólnik nr 3 o tymczasowym uregulowaniu spraw wyznaniowych ludności żydowskiej), which provided for the creation of Jewish Religious Associations (Żydowskie Zrzeszenia Religijne, ŻZR) [no. 2]. From June 1946, at the request of religious activists, these became known as Jewish Religious Congregations (Żydowskie Kongregacje Wyznaniowe, ŻKW). The Organizational Committee of the ŻKW

11 12

On the postwar activity of the JDC, see Anna Sommer Schneider, Sze’erit hapleta. Ocaleni z Zagłady. Działalność American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee w Polsce w latach 1945–1989 (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 2014). On the relationship between Polish Jews and the WJC, see, for example, Grzegorz Berendt, ‘Starania organizacji działających w Polsce o przystąpienie do Światowego Kongresu Żydowskiego (1945–1961)’, in Berendt, Grabski, and Stankowski, Studia z historii Żydów, pp. 9–66.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

563

was chaired by the Zionist rabbi Dawid Kahane, and its members included representatives of the three right-wing parties: Iḥud, Mizrachi, and Agudat. Because the CKŻP enjoyed the confidence of the authorities, it emerged as the chief architect of the changes which took place within the Jewish community in the postwar period. The religious milieu suffered from a lack of distinguished leadership, while the functioning of the religious associations, and subsequently the religious congregations, was hampered by their ill-defined legal status: the authorities refused to recognize any continuity between them and the prewar Jewish religious communities, while the MAP Department for Religious Denominations declined to settle the question of whether they had legal personality. The stance of the Polish authorities was dictated by their reluctance to countenance any claims by Jewish religious activists to property which had belonged to the prewar religious communities, a reluctance based both on the sheer scale of the damage caused by the Nazis and on their own plans for the mass nationalization of privately held property. With the exception of a few buildings allocated for use by the Jewish Religious Associations, prewar Jewish communal property was subject to the terms of the Decree of 8 March 1946 ‘concerning abandoned or formerly German property’. In practice, this meant that any issues relating to property owned by the prewar Jewish religious communities or religious organizations were left to the discretion of the state administration. The data submitted by the Organizational Committee of the ŻKW to the Central Statistical Office (Główny Urząd Statystyczny) show that at the end of 1946 there were 80 congregations in Poland concentrated in 5 districts, with headquarters in Warsaw, Łódź, Kraków, Katowice, and Wrocław. We can estimate that the religious congregations accounted for not more than one-third of the organized Jewish community as a whole. The congregations which provided data ran 38 synagogues (and even more houses of prayer); 3 yeshivas (in Kraków, Wrocław, and Szczecin); 36 elementary religious schools (Talmud Torah schools) with more than 1,000 pupils; 34 daycare centres for children; 51 kosher kitchens and canteens; 17 mikva’ot; 4 night shelters, and 68 cemeteries. The Jewish community was served by 22 rabbis, as well as 3 military rabbis. Eleven congregations failed to submit any information concerning their activities. The first General Congress of Delegates of the ŻKW in Poland, which took place in Warsaw on 9–10 August 1949, established the Religious Union of Mosaic Faith (Związek Religijny Wyznania Mojżeszowego, ZRWM). On 16 November 1949, the Minister of Public Administration, Władysław Wolski, ‘noted’ that the new religious union had been formed and recognized it as ‘existing in law’. Not long afterwards, however, the ZRWM was brought

564

Grabski and Grudka

within the provisions of the amended law governing associations—which was somewhat at odds with the Minister’s decision to recognize it. As a result, for some years (indeed, until 1961) the ZRWM was denied formal legal personality.13 4

The Jewish Community between 1950 and 1956

The late 1940s and early 1950s brought fundamental changes both to the organizational structure of Jewish life in Poland and to the way in which it was financed. In October 1950, on the initiative of Jewish communists, the communistcontrolled Jewish Cultural Association (Żydowskie Towarzystwo Kultury, formed in 1947) and the CKŻP, together with their subordinate local organizations, were dissolved and replaced by the Jewish Social and Cultural Association (TSKŻ) with the last chair of the CKŻP, the communist Grzegorz (Hersh) Smolar, at its head [no. 9]. The TSKŻ became the sole mass organization for Jews in Poland, aside from the ZRWM. In 1954, the TSKŻ had 11,640 members in 34 branches, while in 1953, the ZRWM declared its membership numbers as 8,100, grouped in 23 congregations. At the beginning of the 1950s, Poland was one of the world’s main centres for developing Jewish culture in Yiddish. This development was funded exclusively by the Polish state. (Of course, the Jewish cultural activities thus funded had to fully embrace the principles of the communist movement). The state thus subsidized the activity of the TSKŻ, the ZRWM, the State Jewish Theatre, the publishing house Yidish Bukh, the Jewish Historical Institute (Żydowski Instytut Historyczny), Yiddish press, and a network of Jewish schools. The environment in which Jewish culture developed in Poland was radically different from that which prevailed in the Soviet Union, where between 1949 and 1956 Jewish institutional activity was almost completely extinguished. Between one-third and one-half of Polish Jews came within the ambit of the TSKŻ. It reflected, first, the number of Jews who were either assimilated or who concealed their Jewish identity, and, second, the ideological hostility of various groups of Jews, including ZRWM members, to the TSKŻ.

13

Based on August Grabski and Albert Stankowski, ‘Jewish Religious Life in Poland after the Holocaust’, in Jewish Presence in Absence: The Aftermath of Holocaust in Poland, 1944–2010, ed. by Feliks Tych and Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 2014), pp. 247–82.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

565

The ZRWM operated under the strict supervision of the Office for Religious Denominations (Urząd do Spraw Wyznań), established in 1950. This supervision reached its peak between 1952 and 1956, when the ZRWM came, in effect, to be controlled by appointed administrators, described in correspondence with the Office for Religious Denominations as the ‘Presidium’. Its members were the acting chair Abraham Bankier (from Kraków), the treasurer Hersz Jabłko (from Łódź), and Rabbi Ber Percowicz (from Warsaw). However, as Ewa Waszkiewicz has observed, the first half of the 1950s also saw the Office for Religious Denominations adopted a ‘decidedly favourable’ attitude to the religious needs of the Jewish congregations, for example to their requests for allocations of wheat for the production of matzos, the importation of liturgical objects and prayer books, the printing of religious calendars, and similar items. The ZRWM also came under fire from TSKŻ propaganda, which described it as a hotbed not just of clericalism but also of Zionism and ‘profiteering elements’, a reference to those in the ZRWM who engaged in ‘private enterprise’, such as store owners. The attitude of the TSKŻ was all the more hostile since, until 1956, it did not recognize the need to celebrate Jewish holidays even in secular form, as was practiced in the case of Hanukkah, Purim, and Passover by various left-wing Jewish organizations in the West. The antagonism of the TSKŻ to the ZRWM persisted despite the fact that the attitude of both organizations towards Polish political life and towards Western Jewish circles was identical. Both organizations supported the Polish authorities; for example, both participated in the condemnation of the arms race underway in the West; both denounced the remilitarization of the Federal Republic of Germany; and both called on Jews in other countries to follow their lead.14 5

From the 1956 ‘Thaw’ to March 1968

The changes which took place in the communist movement in the aftermath of the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union also had an impact on the leadership of the TSKŻ, which moderated its hostility towards the ZRWM and began to express a more nuanced view of Israel. It 14

Based on Grabski and Stankowski, ‘Jewish Religious Life’; Ewa Waszkiewicz, Kongregacja Wyznania Mojżeszowego na Dolnym Śląsku na tle polityki wyznaniowej Polskiej Rzeczypospolitej Ludowej 1945–1968 (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 1999); and Grzegorz Berendt, ‘W cieniu PZPR. Działalność Towarzystwa Społeczno-Kulturalnego Żydów w Polsce pod rządami komunistów (1950–1989)’, in Stowarzyszenia mniejszości narodowych, etnicznych i postulowanych w Polsce po II wojnie światowej, ed. by Stefan Dudra and Bernadetta Nitschke (Kraków: Nomos, 2013), pp. 171–209.

566

Grabski and Grudka

also abandoned the practice of ostracizing former members of Zionist organizations or Bundists. For Jewish communists everywhere, the revelation by Folks-shtime15 of the crimes committed against Jewish cultural activists in the Soviet Union proved highly significant.16 The antisemitic slogans and practices employed in the course of the infighting within the Polish United Workers’ Party (Polska Zjednoczona Partia Robotnicza, PZPR) in 1956 led the Central Board of the TSKŻ to take steps to elicit public expressions from the authorities of their opposition to antisemitism. Its efforts bore fruit most notably in the condemnation of antisemitism contained in the inaugural speech to parliament of Prime Minister Józef Cyrankiewicz in February 1957 and in the publication by the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the PZPR two months later of a circular dedicated to the PZPR’s battle against antisemitism.17 Indeed, TSKŻ activists felt sufficiently powerful to consider making suggestions to the Soviet authorities about how best to manage the Jewish question in the Soviet Union [no. 11]. One sign of the thaw in Polish policy towards the Jewish minority was the authorities’ agreement in the autumn of 1957 to allow the JDC and ORT to resume their activities in Poland. The influx of donations and subsidies from these organizations led to the establishment of the Central Jewish Commission for Social Assistance (Centralna Żydowska Komisja Pomocy Społecznej, CŻKPS) and its subordinate local commissions, which distributed financial aid and whose members included activists from both the TSKŻ and the ZRWM. The improvement in relations between the TSKŻ and Western Jewish organizations also saw the opening of talks between the TSKŻ and the World Jewish Congress. The WJC was not, however, interested in granting membership to the TSKŻ on the terms the latter had set [no. 10]. By the mid-1960s, approximately one-third of all adult members of the Jewish community belonged to the TSKŻ, whose 7,000-plus members were grouped in 26 branches and 15 local circles. (In comparison, ZRWM membership at the time stood at around 5,500.) The numerous successes of the TSKŻ in the 1960s were the result of the excellent financial situation in which all Jewish institutions in Poland found themselves in that period. Not only did they 15 16 17

Between 1946 and 1956, Folks-shtime was edited by the Central Committee of the Polish Workers’ Party (after 1948 known as the Polish United Workers’ Party) and between 1956 and 1991 by the TSKŻ. On this see Grzegorz Berendt, ‘Udział Żydów polskich w walce o pamięć i rehabilitację twórców radzieckiej kultury żydowskiej—lata 1955–1956’, in Żydzi a lewica. Zbiór studiów historycznych, ed. by August Grabski (Warsaw: ŻIH, 2007), pp. 279–305. Compare August Grabski, ‘Położenie Żydów w Polsce w latach 1950–1957’, Biuletyn ŻIH 4 (2000), 504–19.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

567

benefit from the resources provided by the JDC and ORT, but, thanks to the favourable stance of the Polish authorities, they were also able to raise some funds in other ways. In 1966, the overall budget of Jewish organizations and institutions was estimated to be in excess of 72 million złoty. Of this, 58.4 million złoty came from the JDC, state grants amounted to 8.4 million złoty, and the remainder derived from independent sources. In the same year, the CŻKPS gave direct assistance to more than 10,800 people, although its work, and in particular the phenomenon of a sizeable group of unemployed people dependent on aid, provoked a good deal of criticism from state and party officials. In 1962, Lejb Domb (alias Leopold Trepper) became chair of the TSKŻ. He advocated the adoption of a more aggressive attitude towards the ZRWM, which he accused of operating outside its purely religious mandate and thus of seeking to rival the TSKŻ. In 1964, the expenditures of the ZRWM were as follows: 68–76 per cent was allocated to charitable work, 18 per cent for administration, and 5–14 per cent on matters connected to religious worship—a breakdown which to some extent substantiates the allegations made by the state authorities and Jewish communists that the ZRWM was exceeding its strictly religious remit. The Ministry of the Interior also expressed its reservations about contact between the ZRWM and Israeli diplomats. Although the position proposed by Domb met with the approval of the Nationalities Commission of the Central Committee of the PZPR, in practice the ZRWM was not placed under any more rigorous administrative control. Moreover, in the conflict between the Kraków branch of the TSKŻ and the local congregation concerning the rules governing the use of Jewish cemeteries, the Office for Religious Denominations sided with the latter [nos. 12, 13, 14]. The expansion of the ZRWM’s socio-charitable activities, which stemmed from the assistance provided by the JDC, inclined the Office for Religious Denominations to the view that it was appropriate, in this new phase, to place the supervision of the ZRWM on a more formal footing and prompted its decision to ratify the ZRWM’s internal statute. On 28 June 1961, twelve years after the formation of the ZRWM, the Office for Religious Denominations finally effected its registration. Consequently, the ZRWM, now that it had legal personality, was able to lay claim to the property which had been assigned by the Liquidation Bureaus (Urzędy Likwidacyjne) for the ŻKW to use and administer. The registration of the ZRWM did not, however, result in the restoration of property owned by the prewar Jewish religious communities. On 20 November 1966, delegates at the General Congress of the ZRWM in Warsaw unanimously approved the draft of a new statute proposed by the Office for Religious Denominations, which increased the Executive Committee’s control over local congregations and thus increased the control

568

Grabski and Grudka

of the Office for Religious Denominations, over the ZRWM.18 The unfettered interference of the Office for Religious Denominations in the management of the ZRWM—interference which invariably related to its administration, including personal and property issues, and not to religious life in the narrow sense of the term—therefore came to have a solid basis in law. The new statute remained in force until 1988.19 6

The Jewish Minority between 1968 and 1989

The events of March 1968,20 which saw antisemitic slogans openly used in the factional conflicts within the PZPR apparatus, shattered Jewish institutional life in Poland. The Polish authorities had already decided in 1967 to ban the operation of the JDC and ORT in Poland. In 1968, the publishing house Yidish Bukh and the literary monthly Yidishe shriftn were closed down. In midSeptember 1968, the publication of Folks-shtime was cut back from four issues a week to one. In the school year 1968–69, the last seven remaining Jewish schools (both elementary and secondary) were shut down. The number of posts at the TSKŻ was reduced from 97 to 43. These changes were also the consequence of the great wave of Jewish emigration from Poland, which between 1967 and 1971 encompassed more than 13,000 people. This emigration affected not just the membership of Jewish organizations but also their leadership. By the beginning of the 1970s, the seventeen still-functioning branches of the TSKŻ had only around 1,300 members (less than 20 per cent of its membership in the mid-1960s) and the Association (headed since 1968 by Edward Rajber) came under the increasingly strict supervision of the Administrative Department of the Central Committee of the PZPR and of the Social and Administrative Department of the Ministry of the Interior. It is worth stating, however, that, despite this repressive change to the conditions under which the TSKŻ operated, those conditions were still considerably better than those which applied to other minority organizations. For example, according Grzegorz Berendt, the ratio of TSKŻ staff to members was about 1:60. In other ethnic minority associations, it was 1:300–350. The TSKŻ undoubtedly rode out the traumatic events of March 1968 more successfully than the ZRWM, as is clear, for example, from the fact that the 18 19 20

According to the new statute: ‘The forms and scope of the Congregations’ religious, charitable and economic activity must be agreed by the supervising body.’ (Art. 32.2). Based on Grabski and Stankowski, ‘Jewish Religious Life’, and Berendt, ‘W cieniu PZPR’. Compare Jerzy Eisler, Polski rok 1968 (Warsaw: Instytut Pamięci Narodowej, 2006).

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

569

TSKŻ held two congresses in the course of the 1970s: the 6th and 7th in 1972 and 1977 respectively. Unlike the ZRWM, it also managed fairly swiftly (albeit to a relatively modest extent) to re-establish its youth activity. Meanwhile, membership of the ZRWM fell by over 80 per cent in comparison with the mid-1960s. In 1974, there were 16 active congregations, 24 synagogues and prayer houses, and 11 employees responsible for religious life. The congregations had a total of 1,319 members, almost none of whom were young and not many of whom were middle-aged. When Chaim Rotner stepped down as chair, he was replaced in July 1969 by engineer Izaak Frenkel. Frenkel had, since 1968, secretly collaborated with the Security Services (Służba Bezpieczeństwa, SB), who used him above all to shape the views of Jewish activists in the West concerning the situation of Jews in Poland.21 When Frenkel left for Israel in 1973, his place was taken by Mozes Finkelstein. In the 1970s, the Executive Committee of the ZRWM operated on a much reduced basis: of the nine members elected at the 1966 Congress, only two remained. Furthermore, elections were no longer held at the congregational level. Under these circumstances, the Executive Committee often described itself as ‘provisional’. Between 1966 and 1989, the ZRWM had no rabbi. Thus in the 1970s it seemed self-evident that the ZRWM had no future and served simply to gather together the last remaining group of observant Jews whose ranks would no longer be reinforced by younger generations. In 1978, the average age of ZRWM members was sixty-seven. However, by the end of the decade there emerged a slow but steady stream of people of Jewish origin born after the war who wished to learn more about Judaism. After the profound political changes brought about by the emergence of the independent trade union Solidarity in August 1980, it became increasingly common to hear antisemitic views expressed in public, both by members of the Solidarity movement and by its opponents, and in particular by a weak but vocal group called the Patriotic Union ‘Grunwald’ (Zjednoczenie Patriotyczne ‘Grunwald’).22 This obliged the Central Board of the TSKŻ to seek to enlist the help of the authorities, the party leadership, and the media in condemning and eliminating all manifestations of racism. The deepening economic crisis also led to efforts by the TSKŻ and the ZRWM to secure the return of the JDC to Poland. An agreement between the Office for 21 22

For example: Archives of IPN, BU 0365/41/5. On this organization: Przemysław Gasztold-Seń, Koncesjonowany nacjonalizm. Zjednoczenie Patriotyczne Grunwald 1980–1990 (Warsaw: IPN, 2012). See also a review of this work: August Grabski, ‘ “Grunwald”—“grupka bezpartyjnych i ludzi na uboczu partii”?’, Kwartalnik Historii Żydów 3 (2014), 627–34.

570

Grabski and Grudka

Religious Denominations, the TSKŻ, and the ZRWM providing for and regulating its return was signed on 14 December 1981, one day after the introduction of martial law in Poland. In fact, from 1967 onwards, the JDC had continued to support the ZRWM via a Swiss-registered organization, and this had been tolerated by the Polish authorities. However, the new agreement meant that the JDC could once again operate openly and on a much broader scale. As a result, in the midst of an acute economic crisis, members of Jewish organizations in Poland could count on significant levels of financial help. The leadership of both the TSKŻ and the ZRWM reacted with relief to the declaration of martial law in Poland. In turn, the government of General Wojciech Jaruzelski attached great importance to Jewish public opinion in the West. In 1983, many Western Jewish delegations attended the official commemorations of the fortieth anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. Those commemorations included the re-opening, after seven years of restoration work, of the Nożyk Synagogue in Warsaw. The completion of these protracted repairs in short time was possible thanks to the personal involvement of General Jaruzelski. The renovation of the TSKŻ holiday centre in Śródborów near Warsaw was concluded the same year.23 Also in 1983, the chair of the Central Board of the TSKŻ passed from Edward Rajber to Samuel Tenenblatt, and then, following Tenenblatt’s untimely death in 1984 and the 8th National Congress of the TSKŻ of 1985, it passed to the theatre director, Szymon Szurmiej. Of course, the Administrative Department of the Central Committee of the PZPR and the Social and Administrative Department of the Ministry of the Interior were consulted about these changes. The subsequent election of Szurmiej as a PZPR parliamentary deputy [no. 18] shows the excellent working relationship between the TSKŻ and the authorities. Szurmiej was the first Jewish deputy associated with Jewish institutional life since the end of the 1940s. He also stood as a government candidate in the first democratic elections in 1989, although he was not in fact elected. Just as in previous decades, the TSKŻ’s concern for Jewish culture went hand in hand with activities designed to express its wholehearted support for the socialist state and its solidarity with progressive traditions in Polish culture [nos. 15, 16, 17]. During the 1980s there was very little opposition within the Jewish community to the People’s Republic of Poland. Such criticism as existed was voiced chiefly by members of the generation born after the Second World War. Events such as the alternative commemorations of the anniversaries of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in 1983 and 1988, organized by Marek Edelman, were seen as inappropriate even by a large proportion of the Western 23

Based on Grabski and Stankowski, ‘Jewish Religious Life’; and Berendt, ‘W cieniu PZPR’.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

571

Jewish delegations who took part in the official commemorations supported by the Polish government. The prominent opposition leaders of Jewish origin who were associated with the Solidarity movement (such as Adam Michnik, Bronisław Geremek, or Karol Modzelewski) had no connection with the organized Jewish community.24 The attitude of the TSKŻ and ZRWM leaderships to the democratic changes of 1989 was coloured by their concern that the restoration of free speech might lead to an intensification of anti-Jewish sentiment in Polish public life. In contrast to the prevailing trend in Polish politics, there were no significant changes made to the leadership of the ZRWM or the TSKŻ in the first years of the newly democratic Republic of Poland, nor did either organization embark on any settlement of scores with activists who had been particularly loyal to the government of People’s Poland, since such loyalty was decidedly the majority position.25 7

The Jewish Community in Post-Communist Poland

The restoration of political freedom and freedom of expression in Poland in 1989 stimulated the revival of the Jewish community. Hundreds of people who had hitherto not considered themselves to be Jewish now joined Jewish organizations. The principal organizations were still the TSKŻ and the Union of Jewish Religious Communities (Związek Gmin Wyznaniowych Żydowskich, ZGWŻ, which replaced the ZRWM in 1992) but many others now sprang up, often representing different generational groups, for example, the Polish Union of Jewish Students (Polska Unia Studentów Żydowskich), which was formed in 1992 and was succeeded in 2007 by the Jewish National Youth Organization (Żydowska Ogólnopolska Organizacja Młodzieży, ŻOOM) dissolved in 2016; the Association of Jewish Combatants and Victims of World War Two (Stowarzyszenie Żydów Kombatantów i Poszkodowanych w II Wojnie Światowej); the ‘Children of the Holocaust’ Association (Stowarzyszenie ‘Dzieci Holokaustu’); and the Second Generation—Descendants of Holocaust Survivors’ Association (Stowarzyszenie Drugie Pokolenie—Potomkowie Ocalonych z Holokaustu). In addition to these, more than a dozen other organizations were either established or re-established. 24 25

On this subject, see Renata Kobylarz, Walka o pamięć. Polityczne aspekty obchodów rocz­ nicy powstania w getcie warszawskim 1944–1989 (Warsaw: IPN, 2009). On this subject, see Grzegorz Berendt, ‘Polacy-Żydzi 1918–1945–1989’, in U progu niepodległości 1918–1989, ed. by Roman Wapiński (Gdańsk: Stepan design, 1999), pp. 171–93.

572

Grabski and Grudka

According to Tamara Włodarczyk, in 2008 the various Jewish associations had a joint total membership of more than 3,600. The largest organizations were the TSKŻ, with over 1,600 members and the ZGWŻ, with over 1,200. The Association of Jewish Combatants and Victims of World War Two had 760 members, while the ‘Children of the Holocaust’ Association had 680 and ŻOOM more than 100. Of course, individuals were sometimes members of more than one organization.26 The increase in antisemitic excesses in the late 1980s and early 1990s, coupled with the possibility of obtaining redress from the German Federal Government for damages caused during the Second World War, led to a rapprochement between the TSKŻ and the ZRWM and prompted their establishment, in conjunction with other Jewish organizations and institutions, of a Coordinating Commission of Jewish Organizations (Komisja Koordynacyjna Organizacji Żydowskich). The intended integration of Jewish organizations soon failed, however, to materialize because of disagreements about the merits of recreating Jewish communities on modified prewar templates. The Act of 20 February 1997 on the Relationship between the State and Jewish Religious Communities in the Republic of Poland came into force on 11 May 1997 [no. 19]. As a result, local Jewish communities (of which there were then nine—in Bielsko-Biała, Gdańsk, Katowice, Kraków, Legnica, Łódź, Szczecin, Warsaw, Wrocław)27 were granted the right to reclaim property which had belonged to pre-Holocaust Jewish communities. The scale of this process and the huge boost to the communities’ financial standing, when ensued, meant that the influence of the ZGWŻ significantly eclipsed that of the TSKŻ. Moreover, change within the TSKŻ was impeded by a much slower generational shift in its leadership than that which had re-energized the ZGWŻ in the 1990s. Szymon Szurmiej (1923–2014) remained head of the TSKŻ until 2003, and as late as 2001, although he was not elected, won 182,833 votes when he stood for election to the Senate as a Democratic Left Alliance—Labour Union coalition candidate in the Warsaw district. The most reliable information available on the scale of the restitution process was published by the monthly Forbes magazine (Polish edition), which had gained access to the relevant, and unpublished, financial records of the ZGWŻ. Based on those records, the value of the property which had been restored was 26 27

This description of the post-1989 period is based on Grabski and Stankowski, ‘Jewish Religious Life’; and Tamara Włodarczyk, ‘Żydzi (po 1989)’, in Stowarzyszenia mniejszości narodowych, pp. 210–40. In 2020 there were eight religious communities after the subordination of the Gdansk community to the Warsaw community, the dissolution of community in Legnica in 2016, and the creation of a new community in Poznań in 2018.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

573

in excess of 205 million złoty (about 55 million USD in 2020). In addition, until the end of July 2013, the Regulatory Commission (Komisja Regulacyjna) had awarded Jewish religious organizations 82 million złoty in compensation for property which could not be restored in kind. It is not possible to determine, however, the exact number of buildings returned to the Jewish communities in 2012–13. From records of the ZGWŻ it appears that, to 2009, Jewish communities had sold recovered buildings to the value of 40 million złoty. In all, 5,544 Jewish claims were made to the Regulatory Commission for the restoration of property and, until 2013 1,064 sets of proceedings have concluded favourably for the claimants.28 Unlike under the People’s Republic of Poland, when the authorities sought to restrict the ZRWM to a purely religious role, the ZGWŻ now also endeavours to put the exercise of Jewish self-government into practice. In addition, in 1997, several other salient changes took place in the ZGWŻ: for the first time, the chair was held by a person born after the Second World War; communities accepted as members people whose mothers were not Jewish; and women became eligible to stand for election. These changes did not, however, signal a step in the direction of Reform Judaism. The ZGWŻ, on the one hand, accepted as members people who were not—by halachic standards—Jewish, while on the other, until 2009, it provided religious ministry only in the Orthodox rite. In addition, it went to great lengths to preserve its monopoly over Jewish religious life. Its chief rival has been the Beit Warsaw Jewish Cultural Association established in 1999 and, since 2003, a member of the World Union for Progressive Judaism. In 2009, the association was formally entered in the register of churches and other religious unions as the Union of Progressive Jewish Communities ‘Beit Poland’ (Związek Postępowych Gmin Żydowskich ‘Beit Polska’). At present it is active in three congregations: Warsaw, Konstancin, and Gdańsk. The ZGWŻ authorities waged a lengthy legal campaign to prevent the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration from registering Beit Poland. At issue was not just the two organizations’ differing interpretations of Judaism but also ZGWŻ’s concern about who should have the right to represent Polish religious Jews, and whether Beit Poland would lay claim to the newly restored Jewish communal assets. In an effort to weaken Beit Poland, the ZGWŻ even agreed to the creation within its own ranks of the Reform congregation Etz Chaim. Ultimately, of course, its attempts to block the registration of Beit Poland failed [no. 20]. 28

Wojciech Surmacz and Nissan Tsur, ‘Kadisz za milion dolarów’, Forbes, no. 9.2013 (27.08.2013).

574

Grabski and Grudka

In conclusion, the Jewish community in Poland is currently ordered into several, often rival, organizations and lacks an overarching structure which would cater to the majority of its members. This pluralism is no doubt a reaction to the forced ‘consolidation’ of Jewish life under the People’s Republic of Poland. Meanwhile, given a stable parliamentary democracy and the marginal nature of antisemitism in political life, this state of affairs does not cause the Jewish community any particular concern, nor are there any attempts to overturn the status quo. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska Bibliographic References Aleksiun, Natalia, Dokąd dalej? Ruch syjonistyczny w Polsce (1944–1950) (Warsaw: Trio, 2002). Berendt, Grzegorz, Życie żydowskie w Polsce w latach 1950–1956. Z dziejów Towarzystwa Społeczno-Kulturalnego Żydów w Polsce (Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, 2006). Berendt, Grzegorz, ‘W cieniu PZPR. Działalność Towarzystwa Społeczno-Kulturalnego Żydów w Polsce pod rządami komunistów (1950–1989)’, in Stefan Dudra and Bernadetta Nitschke, eds., Stowarzyszenia mniejszości narodowych, etnicznych i postulowanych w Polsce po II wojnie światowej (Kraków: Nomos, 2013), pp. 171–209. Berendt, Grzegorz, ed., Społeczność żydowska w PRL przed kampanią antysemicką lat 1967–1968 i po niej (Warsaw: Instytut Pamięci Narodowej, 2009). Berendt, Grzegorz, August Grabski, and Albert Stankowski, Studia z historii Żydów w Polsce po 1945 r. (Warsaw: ŻIH, 2000). Borecki, Paweł, and Czesław Janik, eds., Prawo wewnętrzne nierzymskokatolickich związków wyznaniowych w Polsce—wybór aktów prawnych (Warsaw: Elipsa, 2012). Brożyniak, Ryszard, and Małgorzata Winiarczyk-Kossakowska, eds., Mniejszości wyznaniowe w Polsce: Prawo wewnętrzne (statutowe): wprowadzenie, zbiór statutów, opracowanie (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, 2014). Cała, Alina, ‘An Attempt to Recover Its Voice: The Towarzystwo Społeczno-Kulturalne Żydów w Polsce, the Jewish Community, and the Polish State, 1956–1960’, Polin, 19 (2007), 557–68. Cała, Alina, and August Grabski, ‘Provincial Jewish Committee of Warsaw (1944–1949)’, in Eleonora Bergman and Olga Zienkiewicz, eds., Żydzi Warszawy. Materiały kon­ ferencji w 100. rocznicę urodzin Emanuela Ringelbluma (21 listopada 1900–7 marca 1944), Warszawa 13–15 grudnia 2000 r. (Warsaw: ŻIH, 2000), pp. 241–58.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

575

Chodakiewicz, Marek Jan, Żydzi i Polacy 1918–1955. Wspołistnienie, zagłada, komunizm (Warsaw: Fronda, 2000). Czohara, Andrzej, and Tadeusz J. Zieliński, Ustawa o stosunku państwa do gmin wyznaniowych żydowskich w Polsce. Komentarz (Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer SA, 2012). Engel, David, ‘The Reconstruction of Jewish Communal Institutions in Postwar Poland: The Origins of the Central Committee of Polish Jews 1944–1946’, East European Politics and Societies 10.1 (1996), pp. 85–107. Grabski, August, Działalność komunistów wśród Żydów w Polsce (1944–1949) (Warsaw: ŻIH, 2004). Grabski, August, Centralny Komitet Żydów w Polsce (1944–1950). Historia polityczna (Warsaw: ŻIH, 2015). Grabski, August, and Andrzej Rykała, ‘Żydzi w Polsce 1944–2010’, in Witold Sienkiewicz, ed., Atlas historii Żydów polskich (Warsaw: Demart, 2010), pp. 393–421. Mironowicz, Eugeniusz, Polityka narodowościowa PRL (Białystok: Białoruskie Towarzystwo Historyczne, 2000). Namysło, Aleksandra, Utracone nadzieje. Ludność żydowska w województwie śląskim/ katowickim w latach 1945–1970 (Katowice: Instytut Pamięci Narodowej, 2012). Olejnik, Leszek, Polityka narodowościowa Polski w latach 1944–1960 (Łódź, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2003). Pęziński, Piotr, Na rozdrożu. Młodzież żydowska w PRL 1956–1968 (Warsaw: ŻIH, 2014). Rudnicki, Szymon, and Marcos Silber, eds., Stosunki polsko-izraelskie (1945–1967). Wybór dokumentów (Warsaw: NDAP, 2009). Rykała, Andrzej, Przemiany sytuacji społeczno-politycznej mniejszości żydowskiej w Polsce po drugiej wojnie światowej (Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, 2007). Sommer Schneider, Anna, Sze’erit hapleta. Ocaleni z Zagłady. Działalność American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee w Polsce w latach 1945–1989 (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 2014). Szaynok, Bożena, Ludność żydowska na Dolnym Śląsku 1945–1950 (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2000). Szaynok, Bożena, Poland-Israel 1944–1968: In the Shadow of the Past and of the Soviet Union (Warsaw: Instytut Pamięci Narodowej, 2012). Tych, Feliks, and Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska, eds., Jewish Presence in Absence: The Aftermath of the Holocaust in Poland, 1944–2010 (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 2014). Urban, Kazimierz, Cmentarze żydowskie, synagogi i domy modlitwy w Polsce w latach 1944–1966 (wybór materiałów) (Kraków: Nomos, 2006). Urban, Kazimierz, ‘Wyznanie mojżeszowe w Polsce w latach 1945–1961 (zarys działalności)’, Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie 706 (2006), 61–80.

576

Grabski and Grudka

Urban, Kazimierz, ‘Związek Religijny Wyznania Mojżeszowego w Polsce w latach 1965– 1985 (zarys problematyki)’, Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie 749 (2007), 57–74. Waszkiewicz, Ewa, Kongregacja Wyznania Mojżeszowego na Dolnym Śląsku na tle polityki wyznaniowej Polskiej Rzeczypospolitej Ludowej 1945–1968 (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 1999). Wysoczański, Wiktor, Prawo wewnętrzne nierzymskokatolickich kościołów i wyznań w PRL (Warsaw: Odrodzenie, 1971).



Sources

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 1 The Objectives of the Provisional Central Committee of Jews in Poland (2 November 1944)

Source: ‘Biuletyn ŻAP’, 13 November 1944, published in A. Grabski, Centralny Komitet Żydów w Polsce (1944–1950). Historia polityczna, Warsaw 2015, pp. 19–20. As a result of the discussions which have taken place, the Central Committee has resolved to base its activity on the following principles: 1. A relentless battle against fascism in all its forms, whether overt or covert, since fascism is the enemy of all mankind and of Poland, and is the barbarian perpetrator of the greatest tragedy in human history: that which befell European Jewry in general and Polish Jewry in particular. 2. The full participation of Jews in the active struggle to drive all Germans out of Poland and to create an independent, free, and truly democratic Poland. 3. The productivization of Jewish survivors, and their active participation in the economic reconstruction of their country and the development of its manufacturing capability, based on equal rights in law and in practice. 4. The reconstruction of national cultural life, the revival of Jewish education, cultural institutions, writing, and all forms of art. 5. The rebuilding of Jewish communities as centres of Jewish cultural, social, and religious life. 6. The safeguarding in particular of Jewish children—the most precious treasure and the future of the nation. 7. The organization and management of social assistance for Jewish people and continued contact with Jewish organizations abroad.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.



577

The collection and publication abroad of material concerning the torture and slaughter of Jews from Poland and other countries. The collection and publication of material concerning the armed resistance of Jews and their part in the struggle against the occupier. An assessment of the total damage suffered during the war by Jewish communities, Jewish art and culture, and Jewish social organizations. The provision of legal assistance to the Jewish population in relation to regaining possession of property seized by the occupying power. Continued contact with the Organizing Committee of Polish Jews in the USSR attached to the Union of Polish Patriots.29

No. 2 Circular No. 3 Concerning the Temporary Regulation of the Religious Affairs of the Jewish Population, Dated 6 February 1945

Source: Dziennik Urzędowy Ministerstwa Administracji Publicznej, 1 IV 1945, nr 1/1945, pp. 21–22. For the attention of all citizen voivodes In view of the need to regulate the religious affairs of the Jewish population in the Republic of Poland, the Ministry of Public Administration has issued the following circular, the contents of which voivodes will wish to communicate to all starostas responsible to them, so that it can be implemented without delay. 1. Jewish Religious Communities with the terms of reference defined in the Presidential Directive dated 14 October 1927, as amended by the Directive of the Minister for Religion and Public Education dated 5 April 1928 (Dz.U.R.P. No. 52, item 500)30 shall no longer be established. 2. All real and personal property belonging to the former Jewish Religious Communities shall be administered by the state pending the enactment of legislation concerning abandoned assets. Such property shall primarily be allocated for the use of Jewish charitable or cultural associations, etc. 3. In order to enable citizens of the Jewish faith to practice their religion without impediment, as stipulated by Article 111 of the Constitution, groups of no fewer than ten citizens of the Jewish faith shall be permitted to establish Jewish Religious Associations, in order to organize, uphold, and conduct all the 29 30

The Organizing Committee of Polish Jews (Komitet Organizacyjny Żydów Polskich) was established in Moscow in July 1944. It was a politically pluralistic emanation of the more than 150,000 Polish Jews then residing in the USSR; it existed until 1946. This is a reference to the Journal of Laws of the Republic of Poland (Dziennik Ustaw Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej).

578

4. a. b. 5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11. a. b. c.

Grabski and Grudka practices of Jewish worship and religious education. There shall be no more than one Jewish Religious Association in any given locality. Each Jewish Religious Association shall be administered by a board composed of: Five members, where the Association comprises up to one hundred Jews; Eleven members, where the Association comprises more than one hundred Jews. The starosta for the relevant area shall be responsible for approving the board’s nominations for the posts of chair of the association and the chair’s deputies. The incumbent rabbi shall automatically be appointed to the board. A Provisional Supreme Religious Council shall be established to act as a consultative body in relation to issues concerning Jewish worship and religion. The council shall consist of three rabbis nominated by the Ministry of Public Administration and shall have the right to submit proposals on matters relating to Jewish religious life. Jewish Religious Associations shall submit nominations for the posts of rabbi or assistant rabbi to the Provisional Supreme Religious Council. The Ministry of Public Administration shall approve the candidates for those posts on the application of the Provisional Supreme Religious Council. In order to enable the Jewish Religious Associations to carry out the duties set out in point 3 above, starostas shall forthwith allow the board of their local association to have use of all land or buildings which were previously the property of the former Jewish Religious Communities or other Jewish associations, and which have ritual significance, for example synagogues, religious seminaries, ritual baths, and cemeteries, as well as articles associated with religious practice, namely Talmud editions and Torah scrolls, etc. In places lacking buildings which serve a purely ritual purpose, but which have other buildings that were previously the property of the former Jewish Religious Communities, starostas shall, insofar as possible, allow Jewish Religious Associations to have use of those buildings in order to enable them to carry out their responsibilities. The issue of Jewish cemeteries will be regulated by separate order. Until then, Jewish cemeteries should remain under the administration of the Jewish Religious Associations, save that no fees shall be charged for cemetery spaces, nor shall any person of Jewish nationality be refused cemetery space. In order to meet their financial obligations, Jewish Religious Associations may impose fees and charges for: birth rituals marriage ceremonies funerals and headstones

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020 12.



579

Until there be a contrary order, rabbis approved by the Ministry of Public Administration shall have the duty to maintain registers of births, marriages, and deaths.31

No. 3 The Statute of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland (May 1946)

Source: Prezydium i Sekretariat CKŻP, AŻIH, call no. 303/1. Published in: ‘Statut Centralnego Komitetu Żydów w Polsce’, Bleter far Geszichte, vol. 24 (1986), XVIII–XXI. Art. 1 Name of Institution The institution shall be known as the Central Committee of Jews in Poland. Art. 2 Headquarters and area of operation The Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall be based in Warsaw and shall operate within the Republic of Poland. Art. 3 Objectives and means of operation The responsibilities of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall include: The provision of social care for the Jewish population and the management of 1. establishments appropriate for that purpose. 2. The reconstruction of Jewish economic life after the devastation inflicted by the occupier. 3. Productivizing the Jewish population through establishing a network of courses and vocational schools; establishing and supporting manufacturing and labour cooperatives; and steering young people towards work in industry. 4. The safeguarding of children, and especially orphans, through the establishment of creches, nurseries, and orphanages. 5. The organization of a health service for the Jewish population. 6. The provision of legal assistance. 7. The granting of support to repatriates. 8. The provision of assistance to Jews in relation to emigration. 9. Meeting the religious needs of the Jewish population in Poland. 10. Supporting the development of Jewish culture through operating childcare and educational establishments and scientific or cultural institutions; through the 31

On 1 January 1946, the secular State Register Offices assumed responsibility for the official registration of births, deaths, and marriages in place of the religious communities.

580

Grabski and Grudka

publication of Jewish newspapers and other printed matter; through the management of Jewish theatre, etc. In all these endeavours, the Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall work in conjunction with: a) Local and state authorities b) Aid organizations in Poland and abroad. In relation to political issues, the Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall represent the Jewish population in Poland by agreement with existing Jewish political groups. The work of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall be financed by grants from the state, local government, and social institutions both in Poland and abroad, and by membership fees. Art. 4 Divisions The Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall comprise the following divisions: a) Voivodan b) County c) Regional and Municipal Art. 5 Legal personality The Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall have legal personality. Art. 6 Every Jew who is a Polish citizen and is permanently resident in Poland shall be entitled to membership in the appropriate local division of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland. Art. 7 The governing bodies of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall be: a) the Congress of Jewish Voivodan Delegates b) the Executive Committee c) the Audit Commission and Court Art. 8 Congress of Voivodan Delegates The supreme authority of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall be the Congress of Voivodan Delegates elected at general meetings of the Voivodan Divisions of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland. An electoral statute shall be drawn up by the Central Committee of Jews in Poland no later than 1 December 1946. Matters within

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

581

the competence of the Congress of Voivodan Delegates shall include: 1) the election for a two-year term of office of the Audit Commission, the Executive Committee and the Court, as well as decisions concerning their numerical strength; 2) approval of the balance sheets and reports of the Audit Commission and the Executive Committee; 3) resolutions to alter the statute. The jurisdiction of the Congress of Voivodan Deputies shall also extend to hearing all cases submitted to it by the Audit Commission or the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee shall convene the Congress of Delegates when necessary but not less than once a year. All matters raised at the Congress of Delegates shall be decided by a simple majority of votes cast, except in the case of amendments to the statute or to the procedure for the dissolution of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland, which shall require a qualified majority of two-thirds of the votes of the total number of delegates. Art. 9 Executive Committee The Executive Committee shall be responsible for all the affairs of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland with the exception of those matters which have been reserved to any other body of the Central Committee. Art. 10 The Executive Committee shall represent the Central Committee of Jews in Poland in its relations with the authorities, government offices, institutions, and third parties. Any obligations, agreements, and powers of attorney shall be valid only if signed by two members of the Executive Committee, namely the chair or his deputy and the general secretary or his deputy, and if they bear the official stamp of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland. Art. 11 Audit Commission The Audit Commission is a supervisory body. Its jurisdiction shall include monitoring the activity of the Executive Committee and especially its accounting practice and finances. Art. 12 The executive bodies of the territorial divisions of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall be as follows: In voivodan divisions—the boards of the Voivodan Jewish Committees 1. 2. In county divisions—the boards of the County Jewish Committees

582 3.

Grabski and Grudka In municipal and regional divisions—the boards of the Municipal or Regional Jewish Committees.

Art. 13 Detailed provisions concerning the work of the Executive Committee and the Audit Commission, the Court, and the boards of the territorial divisions shall be laid down by the Congress of Voivodan Delegates of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland. Art. 14 Until the establishment of the governing bodies provided for in this statute, the previous administration of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland and its divisions shall continue to carry out its responsibilities in accordance with the regulations drawn up by the Central Committee of Jews in Poland before the adoption of the present statute. Art. 15 The Central Committee of Jews in Poland shall operate under the supervision of the Ministry of Public Administration.



No. 4 Notification Concerning the Registration of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland, Dated 22 May 1947

Source: Monitor Polski. Dziennik Urzędowy Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, 22 May 1947.

Further to the decision of the President of the City of Warsaw no. 91 dated 29 May 1946, ref. 01 694/46, the association known as the Central Committee of Jews in Poland, based in Warsaw, has been duly entered in the Register of Associations and Unions as record no. 95. The Association shall operate within the state of Poland. The objectives of the Association are: to provide social care for the Jewish population, to reconstruct Jewish economic life, to productivize the Jewish population, to safeguard children, to organize a health service for the Jewish population, to provide legal assistance, to give support for repatriates, to provide assistance to Jews in relation to emigration, to meet the religious needs of the Jewish population in Poland, to support the development of Jewish culture. The founders of the Association are: Emil Sommerstein [General Zionist], Marek Bitter [Communist], Adolf Berman [Po’alei Zion Left], Szlomo Herszenhorn [Bund], Paweł Zelicki [Communist], Mordka Zonszajn [General Zionist], Józef Sack [Po’alei Zion Right], Icchok Cukierman [Po’alei Zion Right], Salo Fiszgrund [Bund], Stefan Grajek [Po’alei Zion Right], Mendel Kossower [General Zionist], Chaskiel Kameraz [Communist], Cywia Lubetkin [Po’alei Zion Right], Michał Mirski [Communist], Chaja Grossman [Hashomer Hatsa’ir].

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020



583

No. 5 Resolution of the Central Interparty Commission Attached to the Central Committee of Jews in Poland, Dated 7 June 1946

Source: AŻIH, Wydział Kultury i Propagandy CKŻP, call no. 177, pp. 211, 212. Published in: A. Grabski, Centralny Komitet Żydów w Polsce (1944–1950). Historia polityczna, Warsaw 2015, pp. 109–10. All voivodan, county and local Jewish Committees shall be composed of representatives of the following political parties: Iḥud, Polish Workers’ Party, Bund, Po’alei Zion Right, Po’alei Zion Left, and Hashomer Hatsa’ir, according to the ratio adopted by the Central Committee of Jews in Poland, namely Iḥud 4 [representatives], Polish Workers’ Party 6, Bund 4, Po’alei Zion Right 3, Po’alei Zion Left 3, Hashomer 1. In relation to the participation of the Jewish Combat Organization [Żydowska Organizacja Bojowa, ŻOB], Partisans, HeḤalutz, and those without party affiliation, the position which applied before 7 June 1946 shall remain unchanged until further notice. The fifth seat for Iḥud is suspended until the resolution of the Mizrachi situation.32



No. 6 Resolution of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland Concerning the Proclamation of the Jewish State of Israel, 15 May 1948

Source: AŻIH, Posiedzenie Prezydium CKŻP z 15 maja 1948 r., call no. 303/10. Published in: A. Grabski, Centralny Komitet Żydów w Polsce (1944–1950). Historia polityczna, Warsaw 2015, pp. 328–29. On the historic occasion of the proclamation of the Jewish state of Israel, the Central Committee of Jews in Poland, on behalf of the Jewish people of democratic Poland extends its warmest fraternal greetings to embattled Palestine. We greet the heroic fighters of the Haganah, who are bravely defying the attempts of imperialists and their feudal reactionary Arab allies to keep the country under their yoke. We greet all those who reject any form of capitulation. We greet all those fighting for the full implementation of the historic resolution of the United Nations Organization [UNO] concerning the partition of Palestine and the creation of a free and independent Jewish state and a free and independent Arab state. 32

Mizrachi activists initially belonged to Iḥud: a decision concerning their membership in that party was taken at a conference held in Łódź at the end of July 1945. It was clear from the outset, however, that this was a transitional phase.

584

Grabski and Grudka

The Jewish population of Poland is proud of the support given by the democratic government of the Republic of Poland in the struggle for the adoption and implementation of the UNO’s historic resolution, and in the struggle against the designs of English and American imperialism to rewrite and torpedo that resolution. Polish Jews have demonstrated their solidarity with the legitimate struggle of our brethren by their significant moral and financial support for embattled Palestine. On this historic day when the Jewish state of Israel is proclaimed, we declare, on behalf of all the Jews in Poland, our unqualified readiness to support—alongside the entire Jewish nation and with the assistance of progressive forces throughout the world—the ongoing battle against foreign invaders and the struggle for the full independence and freedom of the Jewish nation in Palestine. We consider that the continued consolidation of the Jewish community in a free and democratic Poland; the continued development and reinforcement of our economic and cultural situation; and a growing awareness and sense of responsibility within the Jewish community serve as a guarantee of further increased support for our brothers in Palestine in their struggle and in their efforts to build a Jewish state. We therefore call upon all Jews to redouble their efforts to strengthen the economic and cultural institutions of the Jewish community in Poland for the benefit of Polish Jews, the entire Jewish nation, and the Jewish state. Long live the free, independent, and democratic Jewish State of Israel! Central Committee of Jews in Poland



No. 7 Statement of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland Concerning the Restructuring of Jewish Committees (5 January 1949)

Source: ‘Komunikat CKŻP w sprawie rekonstrukcji Komitetów Żydowskich’, Mosty, 15 January 1949. Recent interparty conferences have examined the question of broadening the social base of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland and local Jewish committees by including representatives from all the Jewish economic organizations, cultural institutions, unions, and societies which have contributed to the rebuilding and development of the Jewish community in democratic People’s Poland, and which have been instrumental in the growth of Poland’s economic prosperity. As a result of these conferences, it is resolved: 1. To broaden the social base of the Central Committee, which shall in future include selected delegates from all the political parties and societies which have hitherto been represented on the Committee, and in addition selected deputies from the following organizations and institutions:

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

585

a)

the Central Board [of cooperative movement] Solidarność [Polish: Solidarity] and its branches in Wrocław, Łódź, Katowice, Szczecin, and Warsaw b) the Jewish Cultural and Artistic Association c) the Jewish Historical Institute d) the Association for the Promotion of Skilled Trades [ORT] e) the Society for the Protection of the Health of the Jewish People f) the Union of Jewish Writers and Journalists g) the Union of Jewish Artists h) the Jewish education system i) the Voivodan Jewish Committees in Lower Silesia, Łódź, Katowice, Szczecin, Kraków, and Warsaw. 2. The Presidium of the Central Committee resolves to convene in the immediate future a national congress of all Jewish committees, organizations, and institutions to assess the work carried out to date, to formulate guidelines for future activity, and to select a new Central Committee of Jews in Poland. Warsaw, 5 January 1949



No. 8 Resolution of the Plenum of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland Dated 16 May 1949 on the Subject of the World Jewish Congress [Excerpt]

Source: Biuletyn Żydowskiej Agencji Prasowej, 18 May 1949. Published in its entirety in: A. Grabski, Centralny Komitet Żydów w Polsce (1944–1950). Historia polityczna, Warsaw 2015, pp. 333–37. […] In tandem with other progressive people’s organizations affiliated with the World Jewish Congress [WJC], the Central Committee of Jews in Poland took the decision to initiate discussions with the Executive of the WJC concerning admission. As a result of the negotiations which took place in 1947, representatives of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland reached an agreement with the authorized representatives of the WJC, who acknowledged ‘as imperative the close cooperation, on democratic principles, of all Jewish communities throughout the world’. The agreement clearly emphasized the WJC’s duty to combat the resurgent imperialist cravings of German reaction (especially in relation to the western borders of Poland). The Plenum of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland which took place in December 1947 judged it possible to treat this agreement as a platform to secure the admission of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland to the WJC, and thus as a means of influencing the democratization of the WJC and of prompting it to collaborate with

586

Grabski and Grudka

the forces of peace and progress all around the world. Throughout this period, the efforts of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland were intended to further those aims. This was particularly evident in the work of the Polish delegation at the second session of the WJC in Montreux in the summer of 1948, as well as in the Central Committee’s various public addresses to the WJC and its subdivisions. 1. The bourgeois-Zionist and right-wing socialist stance of the WJC leadership was already clearly apparent during the second plenary session of the WJC in Montreux [27 June–6 July 1948] when, thanks to the efforts of the Polish delegation and delegations from other People’s Democracies and progressive workers’ organizations from Europe, America, and Israel, a bloc was formed of forces opposed to the WJC’s policy of so-called neutralism. The WJC leadership was intent on preventing the mass participation of Jews in the wider struggle of peace-loving nations against the forces of war and racial hatred. The policy of the WJC’s undemocratic leadership was exposed when it opposed and blocked the special resolution concerning the situation in Israel and the role of Anglo-Saxon imperialism. Its position was also clear from its obstruction of the general political resolution of the democratic camp, a resolution which set the course for the struggle of the Jewish popular masses against reaction and warmongering and their battle for peace and democracy. 2. At the same session, the WJC leadership was unequivocally revealed to be utterly dependent on the reactionary leadership of the Zionist movement and the Mapai33 leadership in Israel which, seduced by the machinations of Anglo-Saxon imperialists, was intent on putting a stop to the supremely selfless armed struggle of the Jewish masses. This same session also brought to light the leadership’s intention to persist with its anti-democratic and anti-popular policy in relation to the truly progressive organizations of the Jewish masses, a policy openly promoted by Jewish pro-Marshall plan elements within the American and English delegation. This policy found expression in the discriminatory attitude of the reactionary majority towards the Jewish population of Romania, the largest Jewish community [in the Eastern Bloc] outside the Soviet Union, and towards workers’ organizations in America, England, etc. Notwithstanding the political importance and extraordinary echo of the speeches made by Polish delegates and other representatives from the progressive bloc, and the extraordinary response they elicited, the Central Committee of Jews in Poland, in evaluating the tactics of our delegation, declared its firm conviction that the WJC was intrinsically anti-democratic. The reactionary nature of the WJC leadership

33

Mapai (from the Hebrew Mifleget Poalei Eretz Yisrael, the Workers’ Party of the Land of Israel), a Zionist party in Palestine/Israel operating between 1930 and 1968.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

587

became even more conspicuous when its Executive organized a reception in New York for delegates from the TSYKO34 clique and Forverts35 who were attending the ‘Culture’ Congress,36 which was itself hostile to the Soviet Union and to People’s Democracies. The WJC press in America and England shamelessly propagated feelings of hatred towards the Jewish population of the People’s Democracies generally and especially towards the Jewish community in Poland. Such a blatantly reactionary policy on the part of the WJC towards Poland’s Jewish population and towards all the progressive forces of the Jewish nation was one in which the Central Committee of Jews in Poland justifiably discerned the hand of the Anglo-Saxon imperialist warmongers. The Central Committee of Jews in Poland therefore resolved to sever all contact with the WJC press. It did so as a warning shot and as a mark of the urgent need to review the stance of our communal structure towards the WJC. 3. Mindful of the great mass struggle for peace involving more than 600 million people of all nations committed to defying the imperialist warmongers, we considered it appropriate to urge the WJC, in the interests of the Jewish nation, to join this movement and thus to assist Jewish masses everywhere in combatting the fomenters of war and peddlers of racist hatred and antisemitism. Given the serious risk of war caused by the reactionary polices of the Anglo-Saxon imperialists, we felt entitled to warn the WJC that we would view any evasive response or ‘neutral’ stance as an act of de facto collaboration with our worst enemies, the Anglo-Saxon warmongers. The appeal issued by the Central Committee of Jews in Poland to the WJC, which was read out and unanimously adopted at dozens of rallies, meetings, and conferences in Poland, also resonated strongly in France, Belgium, America, Israel, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary, as well as in the democratic organizations of other countries. In response to that appeal, a few days before the World Peace Congress in Paris,37 we received an evasive, indeed stiff, reply signed by the chair of the Executive and with it confirmation of the outright refusal of the Executive and all its branches (New York, London, Tel Aviv) to participate in the fight for peace, progress, and democracy—the 34 35 36 37

TSYKO—Tsentrale yidishe kultur-organizatsye (Yid. Central Organization of Jewish Culture). Forverts—Yiddish-language daily published in New York from 1897 onwards. In 1983, it became a weekly, in 2013—a bi-weekly, in 2016—a monthly, and since 2019 is published only online. Its politics can be characterized as moderately left-wing. The World Congress of Jewish Culture opened in New York on 16 September 1948. Its organizers barred communist sympathizers from participation. The first World Congress of the Defenders of Peace was held in Paris on 20–25 April 1949. It was an impressive event organized by USSR sympathizers and the communist movement.

588

Grabski and Grudka

fight in which the Jewish nation, so sorely tested, has such an intense interest. Its refusal to participate in the Peace Congress is openly reactionary, motivated by the view that Congress delegates representing 600 million people are merely a fraction of democratic public opinion rather than the true champions of the will and aspirations of peace-loving nations and peoples throughout the world. Faced with this state of affairs, the Plenum of the Central Committee of Jews in Poland considers that: 1. The leadership of the WJC in the postwar period has not shown the slightest intention to draw the appropriate conclusions from the experience of the Jewish nation during the Second World War, thereby ignoring the desire of the Jewish masses to engage—alongside all peace-loving nations and under the leadership of the Soviet Union—in direct conflict with the imperialist warmongers who threaten our existence. 2. The WJC leadership has sabotaged every attempt to introduce genuine democracy into the Congress and to transform it into a weapon in the struggle against national discrimination and reaction. 3. The leadership of the WJC remains an instrument of the reactionary Zionist bourgeoisie and, since the creation of the state of Israel, a pawn of the Mapai-clerical Israeli government and its policies, which are intended to betray Israel to the Anglo-Saxon imperialists and transform it into a base for attacks against the Soviet Union and the People’s Democracies. 4. Through its newspapers, the leadership of the WJC has starkly demonstrated its boundless class hatred of the Jewish masses in the People’s Democracies in general and Poland in particular, masses which are enlisted in the socialist process of reconstruction as active co-belligerents in the battle against the Anglo-Saxon warmongers in order to secure peace and democracy for the whole world. 5. The leadership of the WJC has shamefully rejected the suggestion made by the Central Committee of Jews in Poland and other Jewish organizations that it should join the organized struggle being waged against the warmongers by staunchly democratic forces. At the Paris Congress, these forces represented the wishes of peace-lovers everywhere. By refusing to participate in the Paris Peace Congress—a stance for which it had no mandate whatsoever from any national organization—the WJC openly crossed over to the side of our nation’s enemies, the side of the Anglo-Saxon warmongers. Through its refusal to take part in the Peace Congress in Paris, the leadership of the WJC has not only distanced itself from the forces of true democracy but has also done everything possible to sever relations with them. Taking the above into consideration, the Central Committee of Jews in Poland resolves: That any further contact with the leadership of the WJC is futile. 1.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

589

2.

That it will, by both spoken and written means, expose to the Jewish people the hostile stance of the WJC leadership towards them, and its integral role in the camp of our nation’s enemies—the Anglo-Saxon warmongers. 3. The Plenum of the Central Committee of the Jews in Poland considers that the present leadership of the WJC has no moral or social right or mandate to act on behalf of the Jewish masses or of Jewish communities in any part of the world. The Central Committee of Jews in Poland calls on Jewish workers in Poland and on democratic organizations throughout the world to respond to the treacherous refusal of the WJC to participate in the Paris Peace Congress by reinforcing and cementing still further a truly united front in the battle against reaction and warmongering, for the sake of peace and democracy and for the unity of the Jewish masses in alliance with the progressive, peace-loving forces of all nations, headed by the Soviet Union.



No. 9 The Statute of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland (22 March 1953) [Excerpt]

Source: Grzegorz Berendt, Życie żydowskie w Polsce w latach 1950–1956. Z dziejów Towarzystwa Społeczno-Kulturalnego Żydów w Polsce, Gdańsk 2006, pp. 350–57. As ratified on 29 October 1950 at the Joint National Conference of delegates of Jewish social organizations in Poland and subsequently amended at the Second Convention of the Association on 22 March 1953. I. NAME, HEADQUARTERS, AND AREA OF OPERATION 1. The Association shall be known as the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Association’). 2. The area of operation of the Association is the People’s Republic of Poland. 3. The head office of the Association is located in Warsaw. 4. The Association shall be entitled to establish regional branches in every voivodeship, city, or county in which members of the Jewish population in Poland are domiciled. II. NATURE, OBJECTIVES, DUTIES, AND MEANS OF OPERATION 5. The Association is a voluntary organization of the Jewish population, based on the communal activity of its members. The Association has legal personality. The objectives of the Association are as follows: a) To fully extend the operation of the National Front38 into all strata of the Jewish population, to incorporate the Jewish population into the establishment of socialism in Poland, and to involve it in the general struggle of the Polish nation 38

The National Front (in Polish: Front Narodowy) was established in 1952 and brought together those organizations which supported the Polish United Workers’ Party.

590

b) c)

d)

e) f) g)

h)

i) j)

6. a)

b) c)

Grabski and Grudka for peace and the construction of socialism. To organize the manufacturing, cultural, and social activities of the Jewish population and to strengthen its patriotic sentiments. To make the Jewish community aware of the enormous strength of the world peace camp and the leading role of the USSR and People’s Democracies in the battle for peace and democracy. To meet the cultural needs of the Jewish population through the cultivation of a Jewish culture which is national in form and socialist in content. To strengthen the bonds of fraternal co-existence with Polish workers, to familiarize Jewish workers with the progressive culture of the Polish nation, and to acquaint Polish society with the achievements of progressive Jewish culture. In its role as social agent to nurture the State Jewish Theatre, state schools teaching in the Jewish [Yiddish] language, nursery schools, youth clubs, halls of residence, and children’s homes. To support old people’s homes and homes for the disabled. To assist government departments in the selection of staff. To support Jewish writers, artists and painters in their creative endeavours in relation to the historic objectives of science and the arts in Poland. To support the academic research conducted by Jewish historians associated with the Jewish Historical Institute. To safeguard monuments and buildings of historic significance and to work with the relevant authorities to organize appropriate sections in the museums at places of mass murder (Auschwitz, Majdanek, etc.) and to tidy and maintain Jewish cemeteries. To provide assistance in resolving practical issues, in finding appropriate employment or in learning a trade in the case of those without qualifications, and to do so in collaboration with the National Councils [local state administration] and other social and professional bodies. To work alongside other institutions to fight for effective public, press, and social condemnation of all manifestations of bureaucracy and indifference in society. To work with the National Councils to maintain close contact between Jewish councillors and the Jewish population. To organize assemblies and meetings between councillors and the inhabitants of individual neighbourhoods and apartment blocks so that complaints and grievances can be raised and reports and information about the activity of the National Councils can be passed on. The Association shall realize its objectives by the following means: Campaigns to raise awareness, public talks, and propaganda initiatives adapted to suit the various strata and environments of working people, the working intelligentsia, outworkers, craftsmen, petty traders, housewives, and religious Jews. Artistic and literary events. Editing and publishing books and other material in both Yiddish and Polish.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020 d)

591

Organizing drama schools, amateur dramatic circles, orchestras, folk choirs, music schools, etc. e) Establishing libraries, reading rooms, and social clubs. f) In cooperation with the Ministry of Education, setting a syllabus for state schools teaching in the Jewish [Yiddish] language. g) Working with the National Councils to fully eliminate illiteracy and to establish adult education courses. h) Collaborating with the supervisory board of the State Jewish Theatre, pa­rents’ committees, education councils [bodies of teachers], and student selfgovernments operating in state schools teaching in the Jewish [Yiddish] language as well as in other childcare institutions. i) Conducting systematic campaigns to raise awareness among young people, through various didactic and leisure activities in social clubs, drama groups, choirs, etc. Maintaining and running a training and holiday centre based on the principles j) of self-sufficiency. k) Conducting economic activity (in the form of industry, trade, etc.) and using the profits from such activity to further the objectives of the Association. l) Any other activity which serves to advance the objectives listed in paragraph 5 above. 7. The Association shall be entitled to receive bequests and donations and to buy or sell moveable assets in accordance with the applicable regulations. 8. The Association shall use a round seal inscribed with the words ‘Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland’. III. MEMBERS 9. Membership of the Association is open to every Jewish citizen of Poland. 10. Membership shall be acquired by submitting a declaration of accession to the Association and after the approval of that declaration by the local board. 11. Members have a duty to assist in the realization of the Association’s objectives and to pay the membership fees set by the Central Board as required. 12. Members of the Association shall be entitled both to vote and to stand in [internal] elections and to use the Association’s services and facilities in a manner consistent with the regulations in force at the time. 13. Membership shall be forfeited as a result of: a) Voluntary resignation, submitted in writing to the relevant local board. b) The forfeiture of citizenship rights or the revocation of public honours [after conviction]. c) Exclusion in consequence of conduct harmful to the Association. 14. The exclusion of a member shall be effected by a resolution of the Central Board on the application of the relevant local board.

592

Grabski and Grudka

IV. 15. a) b) c) A. 16.

THE CENTRAL GOVERNING BODIES OF THE ASSOCIATION The governing bodies of the Association shall be: The National Congress. The Central Board. The Central Audit Commission. The National Congress The Association’s supreme governing body is the National Congress of delegates, which shall be convened once every two years […]



No. 10 Conditions Set by the Jewish Social and Cultural Association in Respect of Its Renewed Membership into the World Jewish Congress (9–10 November 1957)

Source: Archiwum Akt Nowych, Central Committee of the PZPR, Nationalities Commission, call no. 237/XIV-149. At the plenary session [of the Central Board] held on 9–10 November 1957, the Jewish Social and Cultural Association set a number of conditions concerning its accession to the WJC, in an eight-point policy as follows: 1. All resolutions on issues of principle shall be adopted only with the agreement of all the politico-ideological groups represented in the Congress, and there shall be no question of any such issues being decided by majority. 2. The WJC shall declare its support for an immediate end to the testing of atomic and hydrogen weapons. 3. The WJC shall oppose the reconstitution of the Wehrmacht and the revival of Nazi forces in Germany. 4. The WJC shall take a determined stand against racial hatred in general and antisemitism in particular. 5. The WJC shall declare itself in favour of the full neutrality of Israel in relation to existing and possible future conflicts in the Near East. 6. The WJC shall pursue a range of measures to support Jewish [Yiddish] culture. 7. The WJC shall call on all its sections to lay the foundations for a reconstruction of its activity on democratic principles. 8. The plenum believes that all the propositions set out above should be incorporated into a document to be signed by both parties. The plenum emphasized that the points set out (in summary) above constitute only the basic preconditions for cooperation with the World Jewish Congress and do not exclude further negotiations.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020



593

No. 11 The Jewish Social and Cultural Association’s Attempt to Shape the Revival of Jewish Cultural Life in the USSR, Dated 3 March 1958

Source: Archiwum Akt Nowych, Central Committee of the PZPR, Nationalities Commission, call no. 237/XIV-149. To The Secretariat of the Central Committee of the Polish United Workers’ Party The Polish United Workers’ Party Section of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association’s Central Board hereby requests permission to forward the attached letter to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and also asks for endorsement of the request made therein that the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union should receive a delegation from the above-mentioned Section. For the Polish United Workers’ Party Section of the Central Board of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland G[rzegorz] Smolar D[awid] Sfard Warsaw, 3 March 1958 To the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union For the attention of the First Secretary Comrade N Khrushchev Dear Comrades The Polish United Workers’ Party Section, which supervises the work of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland, invites you to receive an official visit from its delegates in order to discuss a number of key issues. These issues are, in our view, significant for the communist movement as a whole and above all for Jews resident both in socialist countries and in capitalist states. For decades, Jewish communists have battled against Jewish reactionary tendencies and Zionism of various forms, and have striven to consolidate and develop the support of the Jewish masses for the Soviet Union, the leading force of the peace movement. For a number of reasons, discussed below, this struggle has recently become infinitely more difficult. The fact is that we communists who work in the Jewish community have witnessed a crisis of confidence in the communist movement sweeps through some segments of the Jewish population. In our view, this crisis has been precipitated by the flawed handling of the Jewish problem in some socialist states. The Jewish masses, for centuries persecuted and

594

Grabski and Grudka

discriminated against twice over—both as a social group and as a nation, viewed socialism as their only chance of social and national liberation. Indeed, for Jewish workers throughout the world, the Great October Revolution opened up prospects of a kind that they could never have imagined in the thousandyear history of the Jewish nation. Jewish people were granted not just political and economic equality but also national equality. Jewish culture [in Yiddish] was given the widest possible scope for development, thanks to which it was able to reveal and maintain its rich democratic and progressive traditions. The first years after the Revolution were characterized by an extraordinary flourishing of the creative spirit of the Jewish population of the USSR. As well as the tens of thousands of Jewish workers who fought on the frontlines of the civil war to defend the new Soviet state and who later helped to fill its offices and factories, there also emerged a proliferation of talent in every sphere of art and learning, and with it a wealth of Soviet Jewish literature, Jewish theatres and academic institutions, Jewish school networks, and so on. There was a time when the Jewish masses in capitalist countries sought and found solutions to Jewish issues in the guidelines of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, as expressed in the activity and evolution of Soviet Jewish institutions and in the pronouncements of the Soviet Jewish press. The inaugural article in the Moscow Emes/Pravda39 was not merely a party directive aimed at Soviet Jewish institutions, but also served to clarify the issue for an international readership. The achievements of the Jewish Theatre in Moscow were not merely the glory of Soviet art, but were a source of pride for Jewish working masses outside the Soviet Union, a contribution to their struggle against Zionism and Jewish reaction. Unfortunately, under the cult of personality, the situation was radically transformed. We do not propose in this letter to explore these most painful episodes in any depth but wish simply to assert that in those changed circumstances the small, decimated Jewish community in Poland became the sole model for solving the Jewish question in a socialist country. The Polish United Workers’ Party’s clear-sighted nationalities policy in respect to the Jewish community meant that, despite some Zionist propaganda victories, the People’s government managed to secure the involvement of the Jewish population in the socialist building project, and it achieved this with the help of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association, whose activists are generally former members of the Polish Communist Party, now the Polish United Workers’ Party. A certain proportion of the Jewish working population became engaged in heavy industry, access to which had been forbidden to Jewish workers in prewar Poland. A further proportion found work in the state economic apparatus. However, the vast majority of the Jewish population 39

Emes (Yiddish for truth, echoing the title of the leading Soviet daily Pravda, i.e. Russian for truth), a communist daily published in Moscow between 1918 and 1939.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

595

was employed in the cooperative labour movement, since this was the branch of production which corresponded most closely with the traditional occupations of Jewish workers. In relation to national culture and community life, the achievements have been truly impressive. They have included the establishment of a network of state schools which teach in the Jewish [Yiddish] language—something which Polish democrats had striven for decades to achieve. The ER Kamińska State Jewish Theatre was established, and is now regarded as one of the finest theatres in Poland. The Jewish Historical Institute was founded during this period and now houses invaluable archive materials and conducts important academic research. Apart from this, the newspaper Folks-shtime [Yid. People’s Voice], the publishing house Yidish Bukh [Jewish Book] and the literary monthly Yidishe shriftn [Jewish Writings] are all thriving, as are dozens of artists’ circles, choirs, and so on, which are in vigorous form. The significance of what has been achieved by the Jewish population in People’s Poland extends far beyond Poland’s borders. Jewish progressive elements in capitalist countries have drawn on and continue to draw on the socio-economic, national, and cultural achievements of Poland’s Jewish population in their own political and cultural activity and in their battle against Jewish reaction and Zionism. They hold those achievements up as a model socialist solution to the Jewish question, a solution which debunks the propaganda of Jewish nationalists of various persuasions who try to peddle their petty theories about the inevitable demise of the social, national, and cultural life of the Jewish populations in socialist countries. Nonetheless, the path of progress has been strewn with countless obstacles. Zionist attacks and calls for a Jewish exodus from Poland had to be repulsed, as did attacks from all the enemies of the Soviet Union. The criminal activity of Beria’s gang40 in relation to national minorities was grist to the mill of Jewish reaction and had a disastrous effect on the work of Jewish communists not just in Poland but also further afield. It was difficult to explain why, for example, even if it was true that certain groups of writers, actors, or social activists had made mistakes, the whole of Soviet Jewish literature was being penalized. Why were Jewish words being banned? What, for example, had Sholem Aleichem41 done to deserve the fact that his works could not be published in the original? Why was Jewish theatre being closed down? It was just as difficult to explain why a religious Jew should have greater privileges than a Marxist Jew, when the former was allowed to keep his religious institutions, while the latter’s Soviet, secular Jewish culture was seized from him.

40

41

Lavrentiy Beria (1899–1953)—the People’s Commissar for Internal Affairs in the USSR from 1938 to 1945; deputy prime minister of the USSR from 1941 to 1953; and from 1946 onwards a member of the Politburo of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks). He was one of the chief architects of Stalin’s Terror. Sholem Aleichem, pseudonym of Salomon Naumovich Rabinovich (1859–1916)—one of the greatest writers of Yiddish literature.

596

Grabski and Grudka

Unfortunately, we were at a loss to provide answers to these and similar questions. The disorientation of progressive Jewish organizations and their inability to comprehend what had taken place date back to that time. The 20th Congress clarified the situation. However tragic that clarification was, it offered some hope of renewal and hundreds of thousands of Jews, working people and faithful friends of the Soviet Union, eagerly awaited that new beginning. They awaited the rehabilitation not only of authors, actors, or social activists but also of Soviet Jewish literature, Jewish theatre, and Jewish socialist culture. The fulfilment of these hopes and desires would have fortified them in their battle against Jewish reaction, in their battle for socialism. Sadly, their expectations have not so far been met. Meanwhile, a significant number of Jews have either already left Poland or are in the process of leaving. There are various reasons for this: sometimes personal—since after the extermination of more than 3 million Polish Jews, many survivors wish to be reunited with their families; sometimes moral and political, the result of new manifestations of antisemitism. The attitude of some socialist states to the Jewish problem, discussed above, has also played a part in the departure of Jews from Poland. It is a situation which helps fuel the reactionary Zionist theory that only a Jewish state, Israel, can provide national and cultural fulfilment for Jews. Even people holding a communist outlook are at risk of being taken in by this. Attacks on Jewish communists who have remained faithful to Marxism-Leninism are increasing by the day. An ideological counter-offensive requires the mobilization of organized forces. The current situation calls for a thoroughgoing assessment of the Jewish question from the perspective of the experience of Marxist-Leninist theory over the last twenty years. There needs to be an analysis not just of the various pre-existing problems, which have taken on a wider significance in the light of new historical facts, but also an analysis of a range of new issues which have arisen as a result of the Second World War and the decisive role of the Soviet Union in its victorious conclusion. A discussion of these issues cannot, in our view, take place without the counsel and guidance of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the party with the greatest experience and the spearhead of the international workers’ movement. We therefore request that you agree to receive a delegation from our Section in order to discuss in detail all aspects of the Jewish question. For the Polish United Workers’ Party Section of the Central Board of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland G[rzegorz] Smolar D[avid] Sfard Warsaw, 3 March 1958

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020



597

No. 12 Proposals of the Nationalities Commission Attached to the Administrative Department of the Central Committee of the Polish United Workers’ Party, April 1965

Source: Archiwum Akt Nowych, Urząd do Spraw Wyznań (Office for Religious Denominations), call no. 75/32. Published in its entirety in Kazimierz Urban, Cmentarze żydowskie, synagogi i domy modlitwy w Polsce w latach 1944–1966 (wybór materiałów), Kraków 2006, pp. 658–64. Proposals of the Nationalities Commission attached to the Administrative Department of the Central Committee of the Polish United Workers’ Party in relation to preventing the penetration of national minority communities and associations by the Roman Catholic clergy, the former Greek Catholic clergy, and the Jewish Religious Congregations of the Mosaic Faith. […] III. In relation to the organizational objective to regularize the statutory activity of the Jewish Religious Congregation of the Mosaic Faith and restricting its influence. In view of the Jewish Religious Congregation’s encroachment on non-religious issues, an encroachment largely sanctioned by its current statute, it is necessary to ensure that the activity of this religious union be restricted to purely religious duties, as follows. The Congregation shall maintain a sufficient number of synagogues and prayer 1. houses to secure the religious life of the faithful. 2. The Congregation shall tend to and maintain religious cemeteries, but shall not have the right to decide who can be buried in any given cemetery. 3. In communities where the Jewish faithful are able to purchase kosher meat, the refectories hitherto maintained by the Congregation shall be closed down, since they are unnecessary and have nothing to do with religious worship. 4. The Congregation may only arrange events, religious ceremonies, and other gatherings for the benefit of its statutory members and then only during recognized Jewish religious holidays. 5. The Congregation may conduct charitable activity in material, but not financial, form only in relation to its own members and after the person applying for such assistance has presented a certificate from the [local administration’s] Department of Health and Social Care confirming him to be in genuine need of assistance. 6. The Jewish Religious Congregation of the Mosaic Faith shall not be entitled to sponsor scholarships or provide financial assistance to pupils or students attending elementary or secondary schools or colleges of further education. 7. The central and local units of the Jewish Religious Congregation may not distribute religious literature or publications printed outside Poland without the

598

Grabski and Grudka

consent of the Office for Religious Denominations. Any prayer books required for the use of the faithful should be printed in Poland, with the prior leave of the Office for Religious Denominations. 8. The Religious Congregation of the Mosaic Faith may not, without leave of the Office for Religious Denominations, receive on its premises representatives of foreign Jewish organizations or diplomatic missions. 9. The economic activity of the Congregations of the Mosaic Faith shall be thoroughly reviewed and adapted to cater solely to religious requirements. 10. The Office for Religious Denominations shall take steps to regulate the whole of the Congregation’s activity on the basis of the proposals set out above, and shall submit a new draft statute for the Jewish Congregation of the Mosaic Faith by 1 July 1965. Nationalities Commission of the Administrative Department of the Central Committee of the Polish United Workers’ Party Warsaw, April 1965



No. 13 The Conflict between the Jewish Social and Cultural Association and the Religious Union of the Mosaic Faith in Kraków Concerning the Burial of Non-religious Jews (1 July 1966)

Source: Archiwum Akt Nowych, Urząd do Spraw Wyznań (Office for Religious Denominations), Religious Union of the Mosaic Faith, NK—III—18/66, vol. I, call no. 75/32. [Kraków, 1 July 1966] Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland, Kraków Branch—38 Długa St To the Central Board of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association in Warsaw We write to advise you of the recent rise in infringements by the Religious Congregation of the Mosaic Faith in Kraków of the principles of mutual toleration between religious and non-religious Jews. The latter, being atheists, wish to be buried at the Miodowa St cemetery in a secular manner. Unfortunately the Congregation will not allow this. It takes the view that, since the Miodowa St cemetery is under its management, it is a religious cemetery and Jews can only be buried there in accordance with religious custom. The Congregation’s Chair, Mr Maciej [Meir] Jakubowicz, claims to be acting in compliance with a decision issued by the Office for Religious Denominations attached to the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Warsaw. It is our firm belief that such conduct on the part of the Congregation is damaging, in that it gives rise to artificial division and friction between religious and non-religious

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

599

Jews, and thereby infringes the basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Poland. In order to achieve its objectives, the Congregation often resorts to methods which are altogether unacceptable. One notable example of this occurred during the funeral of our secretary, Comrade Manuel Rympel. We set out the circumstances by way of illustration. Comrade Manuel Rympel was a long-standing and distinguished secretary of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association in Kraków. He was a prominent activist in the labour movement during the interwar period and was well known as an atheist and freethinker in Kraków, where he fought, amongst others, for the secularity of the Miodowa St cemetery. An artist and cultural activist, he translated into Polish the well-known work Song of Songs which was staged to great acclaim by the Teatr Jednego Aktora [Pol. One Actor’s Theater] company in the old walls of the Kupa St synagogue, which was rebuilt by the National Council in Kraków and currently houses Kraków’s Judaic Museum. The piece was performed by Danuta Michałowska. The Congregation, which considered the venue to be a religious building, protested to the Jewish Social and Cultural Association about its being used for an event of this sort and there followed a sharp exchange of views between Manuel Rympel and the chair of the Congregation, Mr Jakubowicz. For the last year of his life, Manuel Rympel was seriously ill and continually in hospital. Sensing that death was near, he imparted his final request to Mrs Róża Bauminger, who looked after him to the end, namely that he wished to be buried at the Miodowa St cemetery, next to his wife, in a secular funeral. The Jewish Social and Cultural Association, in recognition of his service and in order to fulfil his dying wish, took on the organization of the funeral at its own cost. A funeral commission was duly appointed and heard from Rympel’s next of kin, namely his adopted son and his nephew, who agreed to secular burial arrangements being made, since they knew the views and wishes of the deceased. As a result, Mr Golecki, a member of the [Jewish Social and Cultural Association] Funeral Commission, contacted the chair of the Congregation, Mr [Maciej] Jakubowicz, by telephone. The latter immediately expressed his objections, insisting that the funeral could not be other than religious and that although the body could be buried in a coffin, it must be wrapped in a shroud. A majority of the Commission, however, did not agree with this and after lengthy negotiations, a decision was reached that the funeral would be secular. The Commission was therefore convinced that the secularity of the funeral was assured. Unfortunately, events proved otherwise. When his son brought the deceased’s remains from the hospital to the funeral home, he was told in no uncertain terms that the coffin would not be allowed in unless he signed an agreement consenting to a religious funeral. At the same time, he was shown a letter from the Ministry which purported to authorize them to issue such a requirement. None of the Commission members was informed of the change nor of the consent which had

600

Grabski and Grudka

been extracted from the deceased’s adopted son, and thus on the day of the funeral we were presented with a fait accompli. All that we could do was to conduct the last part of the funeral in a secular manner. The Jewish Social and Cultural Association refused, however, to cover the cost of the funeral, since it had not been secular. In summary, therefore, we declare that: 1. The dying wish of the deceased, that he should have a secular funeral, has been violated. 2. The chair of the Congregation was aware that the funeral was being arranged and paid for by the Jewish Social and Cultural Association and thus that it would inevitably be a secular funeral. He therefore had no right to force the adopted son of the deceased to agree to a religious funeral, and by the same token to mislead the Jewish Social and Cultural Association. 3. In our view, this conduct not only amounts to profanation of the dead but was an act of personal vengeance against the deceased. Unfortunately this was not an isolated incident. Over a short period of time, we have encountered further instances of intolerance, such as the funeral of Comrade [Edward] Hahn, the well-known campaigner, Polish United Workers’ Party activist, and lecturer on party training courses, who was an atheist. There is no doubt that his family too was coerced into consenting to a ritual burial. At the funeral of Mr Popławski, an employee of Polish Radio in Kraków, a choir made up of his co-workers was prohibited from singing at his graveside. At the funeral of Mr [Leopold] Goldstein [in 1965], a member of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association and chair of its Audit Commission, the chair of our Association, Mr [Maurycy] Wiener, was not permitted to make a valedictory speech. There are many similar examples, but these will suffice to demonstrate how the principle of mutual tolerance between believers and non-believers is being flouted. We wish to point out that secular funerals were held at the Miodowa St cemetery even before the war, under Marshal Piłsudski’s government. That secularity was fought for by all progressive Jews, including the late Comrade Manuel Rympel. Secular funerals have also taken place at the cemetery since the liberation, including the funeral of party activist Comrade Lew, who died under tragic circumstances in 1946. The noted labour movement activist of the interwar period, Comrade [Michał] Schuldenfrei, died recently in Warsaw. He was a prominent atheist but no obstacles were placed in the way of a secular burial taking place at the Jewish cemetery in Warsaw. Can it really be the case that different rules apply in Warsaw? We ask that you look into how the Congregation in Kraków can justify behaviour which sows such discord among the Jews of Kraków, and request that you settle the matter in a way which will guarantee equal rights for all. It is unthinkable that we should give up rights which were recognized in prewar Poland and have continued to be exercised in People’s Poland.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020 For the Party Section of the Board of the Kraków Branch of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association

601

Chairman of the Chairman of the Care Commission at the Kraków Branch of the Kraków Branch of the Jewish Social and Jewish Social and Cultural Association Cultural Association

H[enryk] Goldman S[tefan] Neuger M[aurycy] Wiener MA



No. 14 The Position of the Office for Religious Denominations in Relation to the Burial of Non-religious Jews (28 July 1966)

Source: Archiwum Akt Nowych, Urząd do Spraw Wyznań (Office for Religious Denominations), Religious Union of the Mosaic Faith, NK—III—18/66, vol. I, call no. 75/32. 28 July 1966 No. NK-8021/18/34/66 Social and Administrative Department Ministry of Internal Affairs Warsaw Further to the letter dated 1 July 1966 ref. D.396/8/XXII/66 concerning a complaint made by the Kraków Branch of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association that the board of the Congregation of the Mosaic Faith in Kraków had infringed the principle of tolerance, the Office for Religious Denominations declares as follows: By virtue of the Act concerning cemeteries and burial of the dead dated 31 January 1959 (Journal of Laws of the Republic of Poland: Dz.U. No 11, item 62), responsibility for the maintenance and management of religious cemeteries rests with the religious communities. In this particular case, the administration of the Jewish cemetery in Kraków is the responsibility of the local Congregation of the Mosaic Faith, whose board derives its powers from the aforementioned Act and from the statute of the Religious Union of the Mosaic Faith. Pursuant to Article 8 of the aforementioned Act, the administrators of religious cemeteries have a duty to accept for burial at those cemeteries the remains of nonbelievers and followers of faiths with no cemetery of their own in the locality in question only if there are no communal cemeteries in that locality. Since there is a communal cemetery in Kraków, the local Congregation of the Mosaic Faith is not obliged to accept the remains of non-believers into the cemetery which it manages although it does have discretion to consent and to deal constructively with such issues.

602

Grabski and Grudka

In relation to the alleged pressure to bury the dead in accordance with religious ritual, such conduct would constitute a breach of the provisions of the Decree concerning the protection of freedom of conscience and belief dated 5 August 1949 (Dz. U. No 45, item 334) and, were it to be substantiated and proven, would give grounds for the imposition of criminal penalties on those responsible. Under these circumstances, the Office for Religious Denominations finds no cause to intervene directly or to prevail upon the board of the Congregation of the Mosaic Faith in Kraków to comply with the last wishes of those who are not members of that congregation. p.p. Director Head of Department Serafin Kiryłowicz42



No. 15 The Programme of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland for 1977 [Excerpt]

Source: Archive of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland (no call number). The principle, set out in the resolution of the 6th Congress [of the Polish United Workers’ Party in 1971], of the close interconnection between politics, economics, and culture in the process of building a mature socialist society presupposes that cultural development is not simply a consequence of socio-economic development. Socialist culture is not a by-product of economic progress or of developments in technology or productivity. It is moulded by its creators and practitioners and by the efforts of society as a whole. In addition to creativity, cultural tradition and involvement in local community life also play an important role in the development of culture, and in the shaping of the character, attitudes, and actions of the individual. The communal cultural movement developed by various organizations and associations has an extremely important place in the party’s cultural strategy. The Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland is one of the elements of that movement, and carries out its public objectives and its statutory duties through its work within the Jewish community. The present programme sets out our proposed activities in this regard for the year 1977. 42

Serafin Kiryłowicz (1903–86)—before the war an Orthodox theologian, after the war an official at the Office for Religious Denominations, head of its Department of non-Roman Catholic Denominations (1950–59 and 1965–71), translator of Russian literature.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

603

In formulating this programme, we have taken into account the current organizational state and staffing levels of the Association as well as prevailing social conditions, since these are factors which have a significant impact on the form and scope of our work. Our cultural and educational programme shall continue to be based around those activities which have proved effective over the course of many years, namely: – public lectures – the commemoration of anniversaries – the organization of meetings with activists from various areas of cultural and sociopolitical life – literary soirées – reading groups – light entertainment, traditional and social events At the same time, we will look to adopt the cultural initiatives of other institutions with a similar profile to ours. Our public lectures will focus on the problems of contemporary life in our country. Talks on Polish literature and the cultivation of interest in film and theatre will foster a deeper attachment to Polish culture. Existing methods of propagating Jewish culture will continue to be employed, for example tours by the State Jewish Theatre company, meetings with activists from related Jewish institutions, and the dissemination by the Central Board of publications on the life and work of eminent writers. Items in our paper Folks-shtime, especially in the literary section, will be helpful for those organizing club events on Jewish cultural topics. To that end, the Central Board has also ensured that all local Jewish Social and Cultural Association groups have subscriptions to The Bulletin of the Jewish Historical Institute and to the [Yiddish Soviet] literary monthly Sovyetish heymland [Yidd: Soviet Homeland]. The commemoration of state holidays and anniversaries continues to be an important aspect of our work. Of paramount significance this year are the celebrations of the sixtieth anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution. We will join the nationwide programme of activity by publicizing the wide-ranging achievements of the Soviet Union, and its role and significance in the world. We will focus in particular on raising public awareness of the increasingly close economic cooperation between our countries and the bonds of fraternal friendship which unite them. In addition, we will observe the following commemorations: 8 March—International Women’s Day; the thirty-fourth anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising; 1 May; Education, Books, and Press Days [celebrated in

604

Grabski and Grudka May]; 22 July—National Day of [the] Rebirth [of Poland];43 Polish Armed Forces Day.44

The Presidium has commissioned essays on the following prominent artists: Y. Abramovitsh—Mendele Moykher Sforim45 on the sixtieth anniversary of his death. Sholem Asch46 on the twentieth anniversary of his death. Mordkhe Gebirtig47 on the thirty-fifth anniversary of his death. Other public figures whose anniversaries deserve to be celebrated include: Władysław Broniewski48 on the eightieth anniversary of his birth. Karol Świerczewski49 on the thirtieth anniversary of his death. Janusz Korczak50 on the thirty-fifth anniversary of his death. Dr Ludwik Zamenhof51 on the sixtieth anniversary of his death.

43

44 45 46 47 48 49

50

51

This holiday marked the anniversary of the 1944 proclamation in Lublin of the Manifesto addressed to the Polish people by the Polish Committee of National Liberation, which was in effect the first communist government. The Manifesto declared: ‘We guarantee the Jews who have been cruelly suppressed by the occupier the re-establishment of their existence as well as legal and real equal rights.’ This holiday, celebrated on 12 October between 1950 and 1990, commemorated the battle of Lenino (in Belarus) in 1943, in which soldiers of the Polish People’s Army fought alongside the Red Army against the Nazis. Sholem Yankev Abramovitsh, known as Mendele Moykher Sforim (1836–1917)—author and creator of the linguistic and stylistic bases of modern Yiddish literature. Sholem Asch (1880–1957)—novelist, dramatist, and essayist, one of the foremost Yiddish authors. Mordkhe Gebirtig, born Mordecai Markus Bertig (1877–1942)—poet, songwriter, and actor from Kraków, a carpenter by trade; associated mainly with cabaret theatre and the Bund literary group. Murdered with his wife and two daughters in the Kraków ghetto. Władysław Broniewski (1897–1962)—poet, communist, writer, amongst others, of revolutionary and socially engaged lyric poetry. Karol Świerczewski, pseudonym ‘Walter’ (1897–1947)—general, soldier during the October Revolution and the 1920 war against Poland. He commanded Soviet and international units in the Spanish Civil War, and Polish military formations established alongside the Red Army during the Second World War. He was a member of the Central Committee of the Polish Workers’ Party, deputy defence minister (1946–47), and a deputy chair in the Legislative Parliament. Janusz Korczak, born Hersz [Henryk] Goldszmit (1878 or 1879–1942)—physician, educator, writer, columnist, and social campaigner. Co-founder of orphanages in which he employed innovative educational methods based on partnership and self-government. Amongst others he established Mały Dziennik, the first newspaper to be edited predominantly by children. He was deported from the Warsaw Ghetto to the extermination camp at Treblinka, where he died alongside the children who had been in his care. Ludwik Łazarz Zamenhof, born Eliezer Levi Samenhof (1859–1917)—ophthalmologist and creator of the international language Esperanto.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

605

Jakub Zonszajn52 on the fifteenth anniversary of his death. Baruch Spinoza53 on the three hundredth anniversary of his death, commemorations of which have been announced by the World Peace Council.54 On the thirty-fourth anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, the State Jewish Theatre will stage the play On a Winter’s Night at events in Warsaw, Łódź, Wrocław, and Wałbrzych. A special ghetto programme performed by amateurs will be produced by the Katowice local group and presented at ghetto events in our clubs in Upper Silesia. […]



No. 16 Resolution of the 7th Congress of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association, 8 October 1977 [Excerpt]

Source: Archive of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland (no call number). After receiving reports from the Central Board and the Central Audit Commission, and after wide-ranging discussion, delegates at the 7th National Congress of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland have adopted the following guidelines for the work of the newly elected leadership of the Association, valid for the duration of its term of office. I. To continue to play an active role in the nationwide front for the promotion of culture and thereby to implement the resolutions of the 7th Party Congress [in 1975] and the 3rd and 4th Plenum [both in 1976] of the Central Committee of the Polish United Workers’ Party in relation to culture. This shall be achieved by means of the following: 1. The cultural, education, and social activity of the Association’s branches, with the aim of developing a socialist bond between members of the Association and its sympathizers, and integrating them into the life of the country as a whole. 2. Efforts to further stimulate the cultural and social life of each branch of our Association. Particular care should be taken to ensure that the programme of cultural activity is consistently implemented and constantly enhanced, and that it is invested with a socialist narrative which reflects the social and civilizational transformations taking place in Poland. We shall continue to promote the political and social understanding of culture and the arts.

52 53 54

Jakub Zonszajn (1914–1962)—Yiddish-language poet, novelist, essayist, and playwright. Baruch (Benedict) Spinoza (1632–1677)—one of the most important rationalist philosophers of the seventeenth century and one of the greatest thinkers of Western culture. He was born into a family of Portuguese Jews and worked in the Netherlands. The World Peace Council, established in 1950, was an international non-governmental organization with political links to the USSR. From 1966 it was based in Helsinki.

606 3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

II.

Grabski and Grudka Participation in nationwide political campaigns and anniversary commemorations. In view of the nature of our work, we shall continue to focus on the anniversaries associated with Jewish culture. Providing access to the most significant progressive cultural achievements of other countries and especially those of our fellow socialist countries. In the cultural year 1977–78, on the sixtieth anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, the Association will focus in particular on the question of cooperation and friendship with the Soviet Union and its achievements. Bearing in mind the genuine needs of the Jewish community in Poland in this regard, local groups should incorporate Jewish cultural content into their activities to a greater extent than they have to date. Traditional Jewish ceremonies should be organized, as well as social occasions offering entertainment and relaxation. A public lecture programme with speakers from specialist institutions, academic organizations, and artistic associations. People from various sections of our community who share an interest in developing a progressive Polish Jewish culture should be encouraged to participate in this effort. Use should be made of publications dealing with Jewish issues, including those concerning the involvement of Jews in the postwar reconstruction of Poland and their joint struggle for national and social liberation. We shall strive to ensure that the cultural narrative which is presented is unequivocal in its social and ideological message. A broader strategy to promote reading: organizing library collections and opening branch libraries in each local group, to be run by their social boards; expanding the work of readers’ groups, with the aim of extending and enhancing their activities and the cultural exchange between them; seeking a wider distribution of Folks-shtime, the Bulletin of the Jewish Historical Institute, and the publications issued by the Central Board of the Association; building up the number of local correspondents reporting for Folks-shtime and ensuring that they are provided with editorial support. Working with the management of the State Jewish Theatre on issues relating to regional tours, and organizing artistic units to assist local Jewish Social and Cultural Association groups in individual towns; working with the editorial team of Folks-shtime, the State Jewish Theatre, and the Jewish Historical Institute on matters related to community activity. To continue to work towards the consolidation and organizational reinforcement of the Association by recruiting additional members and maintaining close links with them.

This means:

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

607

1.

Ensuring that all sections at every level of the Association work efficiently and methodically, mobilizing collaboration between neighbouring local groups and providing assistance for the Association’s smaller branches. 2. Encouraging members of the Association to realize the social and cultural initiatives formulated by the local groups’ administrative boards; establishing social commissions as necessary and providing them with appropriate working conditions; securing the wider participation of women in the overall work of the Association.55 III. In the cultural and educational programme for 1977–78, to determine what equipment and repairs are required in the Association’s branch offices and to provide the resources necessary to improve their condition and aesthetic appearance. By the end of 1977, to conclude the essential restoration and modernization of 1. the Association’s educational and holiday centre in Śródborów [near Warsaw] and to ensure that it is properly utilized. 2. To manage the Association’s finances rationally and economically. IV. To continue to work with the appropriate party and administrative authorities to resolve any problems arising from the work of the Association. To maintain close links with the local Culture Departments [of state administration] and Cultural Institutes and to draw on the experiences of organizations similar to ours. […]



No. 17 The Programme of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland for 1985 [Excerpt]

Source: Archive of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland (no call number). Our cultural, educational, and social programme for 1985 will be based on the forms and methods of operation which have hitherto proved effective, that is: – public lectures – the celebration of public holidays, anniversaries, and traditional holidays – meetings with activists from various fields – the staging of light entertainment, concerts, and literary, traditional, and social events. 55

PZPR propaganda of the 1970s stressed the need to boost the engagement of women in public life. Between 1980 and 1985, women held 25% of the seats in the Polish parliament, a figure which was not exceeded until 2011. See e.g. Dorota Lis-Staranowicz, Kobiece oblicze wyborów parlamentarnych w Polsce. Pomiędzy przeszłością a teraźniejszością, ‘Studia wyborcze’, vol. 25, 2018, 31–44.

608

Grabski and Grudka

We will focus all our activity on the momentous occasion of the fortieth anniversary of the victory over fascism, which will be celebrated on a grand scale both in Poland and throughout the world. Our groups will actively participate in the celebrations by organizing special events, including meetings with our veterans, who played such a vital part in the struggle against the brutal enemy—German fascism—in the ranks of the Red Army and the Polish People’s Army. Former soldiers, partisans, and veterans of combat on the battlefront from Lenino to Berlin will be invited to all events celebrating the fortieth anniversary of victory. Those giving lectures or talks at the Jewish Social and Cultural Association clubs should aim to highlight the considerable role of Polish Jews in the anti-fascist war of liberation. We propose to show films relevant to this great anniversary in all our clubs, and to organize concerts both by groups of musicians and solo artists. We will undertake all the activities set out above in collaboration with specialist institutions, artistic organizations, and cultural establishments. Insofar as is practical, we will also have recourse to historians from the Jewish Historical Institute. Observances will not be limited to the commemoration of these victorious battles but will also call attention to the current international situation and the most pressing issue of all—the elimination of nuclear weapons, in the hope that the USSR and the United States will reach an agreement to secure world peace. We will set out publicly and clearly the magnitude of the threat facing humanity today, and the scale of the catastrophe which nuclear war would inevitably bring about. We wish to draw attention to the many anniversaries which fall this year, including the one hundredth anniversary of the birth of the eminent writer, poet, and essayist Alter Kacyzne, who was murdered in 1941 by Ukrainian nationalists;56 the thirtieth anniversary of death of the world-renowned scientist Albert Einstein, physicist and formulator of the famous theory of relativity;57 the sixtieth anniversary of the death of the great Polish writer Władysław Stanisław Reymont, author of the epic Chłopi [Polish: Peasants].58

56 57 58

Alter Kacyzne (1885–1941)—writer and columnist. The author of short stories, plays, and novels in Yiddish. Photographer documenting, amongst others, the everyday life of the Jewish community in interwar Poland. Albert Einstein (1879–1955)—physicist who formulated the theory of relativity. Awarded the Nobel Prize in 1921 for his explanation of the photoelectric effect. Władysław Stanisław Reymont (1867–1925)—Polish author who was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature for his novel Chłopi in 1924.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

609

There is also the seventieth anniversary of the death of the outstanding Jewish author I.L. Peretz59 and the sixtieth anniversary of the heroic death of the young twenty-year-old revolutionary Naftali Botwin,60 who was ordered by the Polish Communist Party leadership to kill the [police] agent [Józef] Cechnowski. The Jewish Rota [company], which fought with the Dąbrowski [International] Brigade in Spain against the fascist hordes of General Franco, was named after him. It is also thirty years since the death of the distinguished Soviet composer Isaak Osipovich Dunayevsky,61 who wrote the music for many popular Soviet films. At the end of 1985, there is also the anniversary of the ‘mother of Jewish theatre’, Ester Rachel Kamińska,62 after whom the [State] Jewish Theatre in Warsaw was named. On the subject of artists, we should mention that the State Jewish Theatre is celebrating the thirty-fifth anniversary of its establishment this year, and its management, together with the Ministry of Arts and Culture, will draw up detailed plans for this important occasion, about which we will find out shortly. Clubs will continue to be the focal point of the cultural and social life of members. Steps will be taken to boost their communal activity so as to benefit the local group [of the Association], the community, and the town as a whole. The programme of club events will take into account the interests and customs of members in terms of language, song, music, and Jewish traditions. The Central Commission for Culture will assist in this regard, in view of its wideranging ability to commission artistic ensembles and speakers and to secure access to films on Jewish themes. The work of reading groups, and the cultural exchanges between them, will continue. 59

60

61 62

Isaac Leib Peretz (1851–1915)—poet (known as the ‘father of Jewish poetry’), writer, playwright, and columnist (amongst others for the Bundist press and the Jewish Organization of the Polish Socialist Party), lawyer and social activist, literary and theatre critic. Considered to be one of the three finest Jewish authors, alongside Mendele Moykher Sforim and Sholem Aleichem. He worked as an official in the Warsaw Community Board. His apartment became a remarkable hub of Yiddish literary and cultural life. In the interwar period, the Jewish Section of the PEN Club in Poland awarded prizes named after him. Naftali Botwin (1905–1925)—hero of the Polish workers’ movement, member of the Union of Communist Youth in Poland and the Communist Party of Western Ukraine. On party orders, he shot a police agent who had penetrated the Communist Party of Western Ukraine, as a result of which he was sentenced to death. Isaak Osipovich Dunayevsky (1900–1955)—Russian composer and conductor. One of the most prominent figures in Soviet light music. Ester Rachel Kamińska, nee Halpern (1870–1925)—distinguished actress. The State Jewish Theatre in Warsaw was named after her in 1955.

610

Grabski and Grudka

The principal means by which members of the Association will contribute to its communal activity is through participation in the work of its various echelons and commissions. Our weekly paper Folks-shtime, the Bulletin of the Jewish Historical Institute and Sovyetish heymland have been made available to all local groups and the articles in them will assist the Commissions for Culture [of local groups] in its efforts to enhance the Jewish content of club events. We will take part in nationwide political campaigns and in the elections to the Sejm of the People’s Republic of Poland in support of the electoral manifesto of the Patriotic Movement for National Rebirth [PRON].63 We will mark the month of national remembrance by holding commemorations at our clubs.64 We will celebrate Labour Day on 1 May; the anniversary of the [Manifesto of the] Polish Committee of National Liberation; Polish People’s Armed Forces’ Day; and the anniversary of the October Revolution. Commemorations of the forty-second anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising will be accorded a prominence which reflects the deep emotional bond between the Jewish community and the heroes of the Warsaw Ghetto and which demonstrates the significance of that armed insurrection to the Polish resistance movement as a whole. Together with the Warsaw Board of the Union of Fighters for Freedom and Democracy [ZBOWiD],65 we will organize a ceremonial event at the State Jewish Theatre in Warsaw. In addition to the official part of the programme, we plan a performance by the State Jewish Theatre company of pieces appropriate to the occasion.

63

64 65

Patriotyczny Ruch Odrodzenia Narodowego (PRON)—a political organization established in July 1982 by the Polish United Workers’ Party and pro-government organizations with the aim of building widespread social support for the authorities. Its chair was the Catholic writer Jan Dobraczyński. PRON was dissolved in November 1989. At the 8th Congress of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association in March 1985, the Association incorporated into its statute a regulation asserting that one of its objectives was also ‘to encourage the Jewish population to engage in socio-political activity and to involve it, via the PRON, in the construction of a socialist People’s Republic of Poland’. Under the People’s Republic of Poland, April was designated the month of national remembrance. It commemorated, above all, prisoners of Nazi concentration camps liberated by the Allies in 1945. Związek Bojowników o Wolność i Demokrację (ZBOWiD)—a veteran’s organization formed in September 1949 as a result of the amalgamation of eleven different postwar organizations of veterans and associations of prisoners of Nazi camps. They included the Jewish Union of Former Participants in the Armed Struggle against Fascism (Związek Żydów byłych Uczestników Walki Zbrojnej z Faszyzmem). Until 1989, the ZBOWiD was politically subordinate to the Polish United Workers’ Party. In 1990, it became known as the Union of Veterans of the Republic of Poland and Former Political Prisoners (Związek Kombatantów Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej i Byłych Więźniów Politycznych).

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

611

As in previous years, the Central Board will assist local groups with organizing the artistic part of the commemorations. Folks-shtime and community workers will be required to maximize their efforts to organize the work of clubs and to recruit subscribers as effectively as possible. Presidium members from outside Warsaw will provide greater assistance in the organization of events involving centrally delegated speakers or groups. We will hold two meetings of secretaries [of local groups] and two plenary sessions [of Central Board]. The traditional training seminar for Jewish Social and Cultural Association community activists will take place towards the end of the year. It is mandatory for activists at all levels to work with local party units and administrative authorities and to seek their assistance in resolving local difficulties arising from the work of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association. The proper performance of our community activity demands that all Association activists should fully mobilize their resources and make a conscious commitment to the task ahead. In relation to the establishment of a Jewish Social and Cultural Association club in Warsaw, we believe that we will recruit new staff members to help us in the difficult but valuable work we perform for our community. […]



No. 18 Minutes of the Meeting of the Newly Elected Central Board [of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association] Held on 26 March 1985

Source: Archive of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland (no call number). A list of those present is appended to the minutes of Congress proceedings.66 Comrade Wojciech Klimek attended on behalf of the Central Committee of the Polish United Workers’ Party Administrative Department; head of department Stanisław Demianiuk and Edward Zając attended on behalf of the Social and Administrative Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The Central Committee of the Polish United Workers’ Party representative, Comrade W. Klimek, proposed the [9] members of the Presidium and suggested Comrade Szymon Szurmiej as chair of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association of Poland. The motion was carried unanimously. Comrade Szymon Szurmiej expressed his gratitude for the confidence placed in him and stated that he would make every effort to carry out his duties to the highest possible standard. 66

Fifty-three delegates from fourteen local groups participated in the 8th Congress of the Jewish Social and Cultural Association which took place in Śródborów near Warsaw on 26 March 1985.

612

Grabski and Grudka

Chaired by Szymon Szurmiej Minutes: R[óża] Król



No. 19 Act of 20 February 1997 on the Relationship between the State and Jewish Religious Communities in the Republic of Poland

[Dz.U. 1997, no 41, item 251]67

Chapter 1—General Regulations Art. 1 This Act sets out the relationship between the State and Jewish Religious 1. Communities in the Republic of Poland (hereinafter referred to as Jewish Communities), and their legal and financial position. 2. Issues concerning Jewish Communities which are not specifically regulated by this Act shall be subject to general legislative provisions. 3. The Board of the Union of Jewish Religious Communities must be consulted before any amendments to this Act are made. Art. 2 Jewish Communities shall comprise adults of the Mosaic faith who have Polish 1. citizenship and are resident in the Republic of Poland. 2. Jewish Communities shall jointly constitute the Union of Jewish Religious Communities in the Republic of Poland (hereinafter referred to as the Union of Communities). Art. 3 Jewish Communities may freely practice the Mosaic religion and manage their 1. own affairs. 2. Jewish Communities shall govern themselves in accordance with their own internal regulations, which specify their structure and are ratified by a general 67

This statute is cited in the form which has been in force since 2014 (Dz.U. RP 2014, item 1798). As at 2014 there were 196 churches and religious communities functioning in Poland, only 8 of which had over 10,000 members. There are 15 churches and religious communities whose relationship with the state is governed by separate legislation, cf. Paweł Ciecieląg, Grzegorz Gudaszewski, Mikołaj Haponiuk, Wojciech Sadłoń, Karol Sobiestański, Wioletta Zwalińska, Wyznania religijne. Stowarzyszenia narodowościowe i etniczne w Polsce, 2012–2014 (Warsaw: GUS, 2016).

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

613

meeting of the Union of Communities in consultation with the Religious Council of the Union of Communities. Art. 4 Jewish Communities and the Union of Communities shall be structurally independent of any foreign religious or secular authority. Chapter 2—Legal personality and administrative bodies Art. 5 The following have the status of legal persons: 1. 1) Jewish Communities 2) The Union of Communities 2. The administrative bodies of the legal persons referred to in s.1 are: 1) for a Jewish Community—the Community Board 2) for the Union of Communities—the Board of the Union of Communities 3. Declarations of intent on behalf of the legal persons referred to in [article 5, section 1] may be made jointly by two board members, one of whom must be the chair. Art. 6 Other administrative units may, on the application of the Board of the Union of Communities, be granted legal personality by order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration. Art. 7 The establishment of new Jewish Communities and the dissolution or reor1. ganization of existing Communities shall take place in accordance with the procedures set out in internal regulations. 2. The Board of the Union of Communities shall immediately notify the voivode for the region in which the relevant Community is based of any of the changes referred to in [article 7, section 1]. 3. Newly established Jewish Communities shall acquire legal personality as soon as written notification is provided to the appropriate voivode. A copy of the notification, bearing confirmation of receipt, shall be conclusive evidence of the grant of legal personality. 4. The notification should include information about the seat and geographical extent of the Jewish Community in question, and about the persons serving on the Community board.

614 5.

Grabski and Grudka The following shall also be notified, as appropriate: 1) The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration in the case of the appointment or dismissal of a member of the board of the Union of Communities. 2) The relevant voivode in the case of the appointment or dismissal of a member of the Community Board.

Art. 8 The legal persons referred to in Art. 5 s. 1 shall not be liable for the obligations of other persons. Chapter 3—The functions of Jewish Communities Art. 9 Jewish Communities are responsible for the organization and exercise of pub1. lic worship and for the provision of religious services, in accordance with their internal regulations. 2. In order that the right to religious observance can be realized, Jewish Communities shall ensure the provision of kosher food and shall be responsible for refectories, ritual baths, and ritual slaughter. Art. 9a Marriages which take place in accordance with the internal regulations of Jewish 1. Communities are valid in civil law, on condition that they fulfil the requirements set out in the Family and Guardianship Code. 2. The religious leader before whom marriages are formalized shall be the person specified in the internal regulations of Jewish Communities. Art. 10 Religious funeral ceremonies and memorial services may be held at communal cemeteries provided that the relevant regulations are observed. Art. 11 1. Members of Jewish Communities shall have the right to be excused from work or study for the duration of the following religious holidays, which are not public holidays: 1) New Year—two days 2) Day of Atonement—one day 3) Feast of Tabernacles—two days 4) 8th Day of Assembly—one day

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

2. 3.

615

5) Rejoicing of the Torah—one day 6) Passover—four days 7) Shavuot—two days. The dates of the holidays referred to in s.1 shall be determined in accordance with the Jewish calendar. Members of Jewish Communities shall be entitled to be excused from work or study on the Sabbath, from sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday, and on the holidays referred to in s.1 above, on the terms set out in separate regulations.

Art. 12 1. Jewish Communities shall have the right to provide religious instruction on the terms and in the manner provided for in separate regulations. 2. (deleted)68 Art. 13 Jewish Communities shall have the right to establish and manage schools and other educational and care facilities on the terms set out in separate regulations. Art. 14 Soldiers on active service shall be given the opportunity to participate, outside military premises, in religious services and activities on [Jewish] holidays, provided that the relevant military unit is stationed at a location which either has or is near a synagogue or prayer house and provided that this participation does not interfere with significant official duties. Art. 15 1. Regulations concerning the postponement of compulsory military service due to ongoing study shall apply equally to those studying at rabbinical schools, whether in Poland or abroad. 2. Rabbis and assistant rabbis shall be transferred to the reserve. They shall not be called upon to participate in military exercises in peace time, other than training, with the consent of the board of the Jewish Community, for the post of army chaplain. 3. In the event of mobilization and in time of war, those persons referred to in sections 1 and 2 above shall be assigned, according to military requirements, as follows: a) Rabbis—to the post of army chaplain 68

Deleted section: ‘Grades on Religious Education confirmed by Jewish communities will be included in the reports issued by state schools.’

616

Grabski and Grudka b)

4.

Those studying at rabbinical schools—to serve as orderlies or in civil defence In the event of mobilization and in time of war, the relevant military authorities, by agreement with the board of the Union of Communities, shall ensure that a core number of religious leaders otherwise liable for mobilization shall remain to provide pastoral services to the Jewish population.

Art. 16 Religious leaders may, in accordance with internal regulations, provide religious assistance to their co-religionists resident in educational and care facilities, healthcare establishments, community care homes, and prisons. Art. 17 Jewish religious organizations may be established on the basis of resolutions 1. passed by the board of the Union of Communities and the boards of Jewish Communities in order to further the religious, educational, voluntary care, and socio-cultural work prescribed by their mission, and in particular to preserve the traditional and cultural heritage of Jews in Poland and to promote knowledge about the history and principles of the Mosaic faith. 2. Jewish religious organizations as defined by this Act shall be subject to the law on associations, save that: 1) the board of the Union of Communities or the board of the Jewish Community is entitled to rescind the resolution referred to in s. 1 above and simultaneously apply to the court for the dissolution of the organization. 2) an application to the court for the dissolution of an association by the appropriate body as defined in the law on associations shall be made following consultation with the board of the Union of Communities. 3) in the event of the winding up of a Jewish religious organization, its assets shall pass to the Union of Communities or to the relevant Jewish Community. Art. 18 Jewish Communities and other legal persons operating by virtue of this Act may engage in charitable activity and in particular to manage childcare, educational, and healthcare facilities. Art. 19 No charges shall be levied in respect of the right of perpetual usufruct of land given over for the needs of voluntary-care institutions or of establishments providing religious education to young people.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

617

Art. 20 1. The Union of Communities shall have the right to broadcast religious services and socio-religious, religio-moral, or cultural programmes through the public media. 2. The manner in which the rights referred to in s.1 are realized shall be regulated by agreement between the appropriate public broadcasting bodies and the Union of Communities. Art. 21 State institutions, local government institutions, and religious institutions shall work together to protect, conserve, make accessible, and promote works of art and architecture and their documentation; museums and archives belonging to the Jewish Communities; and also cultural and artistic works with religious themes, on the terms set out in separate regulations. Chapter 4—Property Art. 22 The Jewish religious legal persons referred to in Art. 5 shall be entitled to acquire, 1. possess, and dispose of both real and moveable property; to acquire and dispose of other rights; and to manage their assets without interference. 2. Jewish Communities and the Union of Jewish Communities may exercise the rights referred to in s.1 either independently or through a foundation established for that purpose with the participation of other domestic physical or legal persons, foreign organizations of Jews of Polish origin, or the World Jewish Restitution Organization. Art. 23 Jewish religious cemeteries which are owned by Jewish Communities or the 1. Union of Communities shall not be liable to expropriation. 2. Cemeteries belonging to the State Treasury or to a particular local government in respect of which proceedings have been instituted in accordance with Art. 30 below shall be specifically protected by means of a prohibition on their transfer to third parties and on their use for other purposes. Art. 24 In the event of the winding up of a Jewish Community or other legal person created by virtue of this Act, the assets of that Jewish Community or other legal person shall pass to the Union of Communities.

618

Grabski and Grudka

Art. 25 1. The assets and income of Jewish Communities and the Union of Communities are subject to general taxation legislation except in the circumstances set out in sections 2 to 5 below. 2. Jewish Communities and the Union of Communities shall be exempt from property tax in respect of real property used in whole or in part for non-residential purposes, with the exception of any part allocated for business activity. 3. Real property allocated in whole or in part for the residential use of religious leaders shall be exempt from property tax provided that 1) the property is listed in the register of buildings of historical interest 2) the property provides boarding facilities for schools run by legal persons operating by virtue of this Act 3) the property constitutes the headquarters of: a) the board of any Jewish Community which was already in existence on the date that this Act came into force b) the Union of Communities. 4. The acquisition and disposal of objects and property rights by Jewish Communities or the Union of Communities, whether by way of legal proceedings, inheritance, bequest, or prescription, shall be exempt from duty provided that the objects of the rights in question are: 1) unconnected with business activity 2) printing machinery, equipment, material, and paper which have been imported from abroad. 5. The acquisition and disposal of the objects and property rights referred to in s. 4 above are exempt from court fees with the exception of administrative costs. Art. 26 Import duties will not be levied on goods designated for voluntary care or educational purposes, and goods of a cultural nature intended for use in religious worship, whether obtained for the Union of Communities or its constituent Communities. […] Art. 27 Jewish Communities and the Union of Communities shall have the right to col1. lect donations for religious purposes, for their voluntary care work, for their academic and educational activity, and for the support of their rabbis. 2. The collections referred to in s. 1 above need not be registered provided that they are held in places of worship or in locations or circumstances established by custom, in a traditionally recognized manner.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

619

Chapter 5—Transitional and terminal arrangements Art. 28 1. Jewish Communities and the Union of Jewish Religious Communities in existence on the day this Act takes effect and which have been functioning in accordance with the regulations hitherto in force shall by force of law become Jewish Communities and the Union of Communities as defined by this Act. 2. A list of the Jewish Communities referred to in s. 1 is contained in a schedule to this Act. Art. 29 Land or buildings or their parts which are held by Jewish Communities or the 1. Union of Communities on the day that this Act takes effect shall by force of law become their property. 2. Confirmation of the transfer of ownership of the property referred to in s.1 above shall take place by means of the decision of the appropriate local voivode, made on the application of the Jewish Community or the Union of Communities. Art. 30 On the application of a Jewish Community or the Union of Communities, pro1. ceedings (hereinafter referred to as ‘regulatory proceedings’) shall be instituted to effect the transfer to the Jewish Community or the Union of Communities of such land or buildings or their parts which were taken over by the State but which on 1 September 1939 had been the property of Jewish Communities or other Jewish religious legal persons operating within the Republic of Poland, provided that: 1) on that day, the property in question included Jewish cemeteries or synagogues 2) on the day that this Act takes effect, the property in question includes buildings which were formerly the headquarters of Jewish Communities or buildings which were formerly used for religious worship, educational activity, or voluntary care. 2. On the application described in s.1 above, regulatory proceedings shall also be instituted to effect the transfer of land or buildings or their parts in western and northern Poland which on 30 January 1933 were the property of synagogal communities operating under the provisions of heading II of the law on Jewish relations of 23 July 1847 (Collection of Prussian Legislation No. 30) or of other Jewish religious legal persons, or the transfer of land, buildings, or their parts whose legal status is unresolved:

620

Grabski and Grudka 1)

3.

4.

Provided that on 30 January 1933 they included Jewish cemeteries or synagogues. 2) They were formerly the headquarters of synagogal communities and are in localities in which Jewish communities have their headquarters on the day this Act comes into effect. 3) Are intended to re-establish religious worship, or educational and voluntary care activity. Land and property transferred to a Community by virtue of the Act dated 10 May 1990—Introductory provisions in relation to legislation concerning local government and local government officials. […] The regulations described in sections 1 and 2 above shall not take precedence over any rights acquired by third parties.

Art. 31 In relation to the real property described in Art. 30 s. 1, regulation may, with the 1. exception set out in s.2 below, consist of: a) the transfer of ownership of the land or property or any part thereof, b) in the event that significant obstacles arise in the transfer of ownership, the allocation of a suitable alternative property, c) the awarding of compensation in the event that it proves impossible to implement the adjustments set out in a) or b) above, such compensation to be determined in accordance with the provisions governing the expropriation of real property. 2. In relation to Jewish cemeteries and the real property defined in Art. 30 s.2, regulation may only consist of the transfer of the land or property or parts thereof. If such a transfer is impossible, proceedings shall be discontinued. Art. 32 The regulatory proceedings referred to in Art. 30 shall be conducted by the 1. Regulatory Commission for Jewish Religious Community Affairs (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commission’), comprising representatives appointed in equal number by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration and the Board of the Union of Communities. 2. In addition to the applicant, the parties to the regulatory proceedings shall include representatives of all interested state, local government, and religious units. 3. Applications to commence regulatory proceedings shall be submitted within a period of five years from the date on which this Act comes into force. Claims not declared within that period shall lapse.

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020 4.

5.

6. 7.

621

All court or administrative proceedings concerning the real property referred to in Art. 30 shall be suspended and the courts or national and local administrative bodies shall transfer their files to the Regulatory Commission. The Commission shall sit as adjudication panels comprising two members each from among those appointed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration and the Board of the Union of Communities. No fees shall be payable in respect of regulatory proceedings. The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration, in consultation with the Board of the Union of Communities, shall determine the size of the Commission, and shall specify the procedure to be followed in the regulatory proceedings and the levels of remuneration of Commission members and support staff.

Art. 33 On receipt of an application to institute regulatory proceedings, the adjudica1. tion panel shall establish whether the application is valid and shall dismiss any application which is invalid. 2. Parties to the proceedings may come to a settlement before the adjudication panel. If no settlement is reached, the panel shall make a ruling. Settlements and rulings shall be judicially enforceable. 3. Rulings in favour of the applicant and settlements reached before the adjudication panel should set out: 1) the legal status of the real property in question, 2) the obligation of the parties in relation to that status, and in particular, if the property is not within the applicant’s control, the obligation to surrender it within a specified period, 3) in the event that compensation has been awarded, the obligation to pay the amount awarded within the period specified. 4. Rulings and settlements shall serve as a basis for the appropriate entries to be made in the register of property interests and the land register. 5. Rulings of the adjudication panel shall not be subject to appeal. 6. The Council of Ministers shall determine by way of an order which state administrative units or local government units shall stand to relinquish the land or buildings to be transferred as substitute property, and which state administrative unit should be responsible for the payment of compensation. Art. 34 If the adjudication panel or the full Commission is unable to reach a decision, it 1. shall notify the parties to the regulatory proceedings in writing. 2. Parties to the proceedings may, within six months of receiving the notification referred to in s.1, apply to reopen any court or administrative proceedings or, if

622

Grabski and Grudka no such proceedings exist, may institute court proceedings, otherwise the claim shall lapse. In hearing the case, the court shall apply the principles set out in Art. 31.

Art. 35 The transfer of land or buildings or any part thereof, referred to in Arts. 29 and 30, the resulting entries in registers of property interests and the creation of those registers shall be exempt from the taxes and fees normally payable in connection with such transfers. Art. 36 The order of the President of the Republic of Poland dated 14 October 1927 concerning the reorganization of the legal position of Jewish Religious Communities in the Republic of Poland with the exception of the voivedeship of Silesia (Dz. U. 1928 No. 52, item 500 and 1945, No. 48, item 271) and all other legislation in respect of matters regulated by this Act shall cease to have effect. Art. 37 This Act shall come into force fourteen days after its publication.



No. 20 The Legal Opinion of Professor Michał Pietrzak Concerning the Legitimacy of the Registration and the Legal Status of the Union of Progressive Jewish Communities ‘Beit Poland’ (22 April 2010)

Source: Archive of the Beit Polska congregation (no call number).

Warsaw, 22 April 2010 Professor Michał Pietrzak Professor of Confessional Law Faculty of Law and Administration University of Warsaw The decision of the Minister of Internal Affairs and Administration dated 30 July 2009, ref DWRMNiE-6725-2/2/08/09/JB, to include the Union of Progressive Jewish Communities ‘Beit Poland’ in the register of churches and other religious unions is fully justified in the light of the provisions on religious denominations contained in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland dated 2 April 1997; in the light of international legislation which is binding in Poland, including the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; and in the light of the Act of 17 May 1989 on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief. […]

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

623

The registration of the Union of Progressive Jewish Communities “Beit Poland” is wholly consistent with the Act of 17 May 1989 on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief. Beit Poland is entitled to take full advantage of the rights granted by that Act to religious communities entered in the register of churches and other religious unions. The Act on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief, as the principal legislative basis for the entitlement of every citizen of the Republic of Poland to freedom of conscience and belief, makes reference at Art. 2 pt.1 to the establishment of churches and other religious unions. Registration by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration is not a constitutive act; it is merely declarative. The establishment of a religious union is determined by the will of the interested parties themselves. There is no such concept in Polish law as a ‘recognized’ or ‘non-recognized’, ‘legal’ or ‘illegal’ religion. The only relevant criterion is whether or not a particular denomination has a regulated legal status. Registration allows a religious union (and potentially also its administrative bodies) to acquire legal personality and to conduct legal transactions in the manner set out in its internal regulations. It entitles the union to exercise the specific rights which Polish law accords to officially functioning religious unions, such as the right to internal autonomy and independence. Registration also enables the union to take advantage of the legislative provisions concerning the regulation of its relationship with the state by way of an enactment based on terms agreed between the Council of Ministers and its authorized representatives, etc. A material condition of registration is that the community has the characteristics set out in Art. 2 pt. 1 of the Act on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief. The group must be religious in nature, that is, in accordance with the ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court dated 23 January 1998 (Sygn.1 SA 1065/97), its doctrine must make reference to a Supreme Being known as God, Allah etc.69 Conceptually, the tenets of faith of a church or other religious union cannot include the attainment of temporal benefit as an objective for the faithful. According to Art. 2 of the Act on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief, the group’s objective should be the profession and propagation of religious faith. Such a community should also have its own structure, doctrine, and rituals. According to its statute of 12 March 2010, the Union of Progressive Jewish Communities “Beit Poland” has all of these characteristics. Polish law does not require that the religious or moral doctrine, the organizational principles, or the forms of worship of a community seeking registration should be materially different from the doctrines of unions which already have regulated legal status. According to Art. 32, s. 2, pt. 1 of the Act on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief, it is only the name of the religious union seeking registration, as given in its statute, which must be sufficiently different to that of other organizations. This applies above all to all religious unions operating under different Acts and 69

See ONSA [Ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court] 1998/4, item 135.

624

Grabski and Grudka

those already entered by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration in the register of churches and other religious unions. The establishment of a new religious union may also take place for negative reasons: a reluctance to be affiliated with an existing denominational community. Art. 2 pt. 2a of the Act of 17 May 1989 explicitly provides that, in the exercise of the right to freedom of conscience and belief, citizens can choose whether or not to belong to a church or other religious union. The formal conditions for the registration of a religious union are set out principally in Art. 32 of the Act on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief. It is important to note that applicants for the registration of a new religious community, who must number at least one hundred persons, do not, according to the Act, have to be adherents of the religion in question; they can also include sympathizers. Applicants do not have to be permanently resident in Poland, although they must be Polish citizens with unrestricted legal capacity (but see Art. 7 of the Act of 17 May 1989). In the case of Beit Poland, the formal requirements set out above have been fulfilled. It is important to understand that the existing process for registering religious unions makes no provision for discretion or consent. If the new religious community fulfils the criteria set out in the 1989 Act, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration cannot refuse to register it. Under the Act, the authorities are not entitled to make qualitative judgements on matters of religion or beliefs. The state, as a matter of principle, has no interest in the content of the religious belief of its citizens. Pursuant to Art. 10, s. 1 of the Act, the Republic of Poland is a secular state, neutral on issues of religion and belief, and its citizens (or foreigners and stateless persons, as appropriate) have the right to remain silent in relation to their religion or beliefs (see Art. 2 pt. 5 and Art. 7). Notwithstanding the above remarks, it should be stressed that Beit Poland does differ doctrinally from the Union of Jewish Religious Communities, in that it is part of the movement for progressive Judaism. The characteristics of this branch of the Jewish faith are: 1) a broader definition of Jewish identity—namely that a Jew is anyone with a Jewish father or mother; 2) a belief that the sacred texts are of human authorship, albeit divinely inspired; a belief in the human, and not divine, provenance of ritual and institutional precepts; an acceptance that Jewish rabbinical law and ritual practice can evolve; an acceptance that significant departures from rabbinical tradition may be necessary for the sake of social justice, or in the light of new scholarship and the realities of contemporary life; 3) the notion of full gender equality, as expressed in the perception of marriage as the union of two equal persons, or through the equal rights of women to undertake religious activities or rabbinical duties. The Union of Progressive Jewish Communities is a member of the international organization the World Union for Progressive Judaism, which has around 1.7 million members in forty-two countries. It is the largest corporation in Reform Judaism. On the other hand, although neither the Act of 20 February 1997 on the Relationship between the State and Jewish Religious

Poland after the Second World War, 1944–2020

625

Communities nor the Union’s internal statute is determinative of the issue, the Union of Jewish Religious Communities is identified with Orthodox Judaism. The Chief Rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich, is of course an Orthodox rabbi. It is worth emphasizing that Beit Poland was established, in a sense, from the bottom up. It is a religious union which has developed from the genuine religious needs of its founders and current members. It is not an organization which has seceded from the Union of Jewish Religious Communities. Its formation was not contingent on the organizational structure or the assets of one of the Communities making up the Union of Jewish Religious Communities. It cannot therefore be construed as a separatist Jewish Community. It is the genuine realization of the religious freedom of Polish citizens at the collective level. The status of Beit Poland as a new religious union does not alter the fact that at present it has only one local community, in Warsaw. This is a temporary situation and not the ultimate goal as set out in its statute and accepted by the registering body. In due course, new local communities will no doubt be established. At present, Beit Poland, even though it consists of only one community, has all the characteristics of a religious union as formulated in the Act on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief. It merits acknowledgement that the members of Beit Poland did not seek to uphold a legal fiction and in their statute made specific provision for the preliminary stage of the development of their religious union. Since Beit Poland, in line with the will of its founders and thereafter the relevant authorities, is not part of the Union of Jewish Religious Communities, and moreover does not have the status of a Jewish Community, the provisions of the Act of 20 February 1997 on the Relationship between the State and Jewish Religious Communities in the Republic of Poland do not apply. In particular, Art. 7 s. 1 of the 1997 Act, which states that the formation of new Jewish Communities and the winding up or re-organization of existing Communities should take place in the manner set out in internal regulations endorsed by the Union of Jewish Religious Communities, can have no application to the establishment of a Union of Progressive Jewish Communities. This provision relates only to Communities which are being established or which already operate within the framework of the Union of Communities. A systemic interpretation of the law, which takes account of the religious provisions (Arts. 53 and 25) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and international legislation on freedom of conscience and belief, supports the view that religious unions which bring together the followers of Judaism outside the Union of Communities can be established at the will of their founders and can acquire legal personality by virtue of the Act on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief. They can also be established in any other form to which Polish law attributes legal personality, for example on the basis of the law governing associations. In the latter case, the community in question will not be able to claim formal status as a religious union.

626

Grabski and Grudka

An alternative reading of Art. 7 s. 1 of the Act of 20 February 1997 on the Relationship between the State and the Jewish Religious Communities namely that it is applicable to every future Jewish religious community, would be incompatible above all with the freedom of religion guaranteed by the key legislation of 1997, but also with freedom of association and the principle of the internal autonomy and independence of religious unions. Such a restrictive interpretation would also be inconsistent with the entire post-1989 practice in Poland of the registration of new religious unions by the appropriate central bodies for religious administration. The current legislative model of relations between the state and religious unions in Poland, and the democratic, liberal nature of the contemporary Polish state make it impossible for the authorities to countenance corporate-type religious unions, membership of which would be obligatory for adherents of the religion in question. Accordingly, the existence of any form of compulsory religious or religio-national selfgovernment in the legislative order presently in force in Poland is out of the question.

chapter 10

Epilogue: Refractions of Jewish Self-Government under German Occupation in the Second World War Marcin Urynowicz

Introduction

Shortly before the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, Polish Jews constituted a community 3.5 million strong with considerable potential for self-government. Indeed, the majority of Polish Jews aspired to national and cultural autonomy. The fact that nothing of the sort ensued was less a result of differences of opinion within the Jewish community itself than a reflection of the Polish authorities’ antipathy towards any such measures. The clearest illustration of this were the Jewish faith communities, descendants of the early-modern kahals, whose activity, while restricted by law to religious duties, in practice extended much further and encompassed political as well as cultural and social issues. Consequently, and in the absence of a national body capable of providing Polish Jews with appropriate representation, the faith communities became the true voice of the Jewish population. There were other examples, too, of the autonomous self-governing potential of the Jewish community, not least in the rich and multifaceted public life which flourished outside the Jewish communal structures. It was manifest in the activities of the numerous political parties, professional, cultural and social organizations, associations, societies, unions, and clubs of various sorts. Of great importance, too, were the diverse forms of religious life which were independent of the Jewish communities—that is, the followers of sundry religious movements, or of tsadik courts and other forms. Thus, despite receiving less than adequate state support for its needs and aspirations, and in the face of strong antisemitism, Jewish life in Poland continued to thrive. Tangible proof was the community’s increasing rate of demographic growth and the still exceptional worldwide status of Polish Jewry.1 1 Gershon Chaim Bacon, The Politics of Tradition: Agudat Israel in Poland, 1916–1939 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1996); Stephen D. Corrsin, Warsaw before the First World War: Poles and Jews in the Third City of the Russian Empire 1880–1914 (New York: East European Monographs,

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2022

628

Urynowicz

The attack by Germany and Russia on Poland in September 1939 (and the passivity of France and England never fulfilling their alliance obligations) brought all this to an end. Whereas in the Polish Republic elements of genuine Jewish self-government had remained in the hands of the Jewish community itself and had enabled it, for all the obstacles it faced, to shore up its own existence, under German rule these elements were either abolished or ceased to function, and the sham imitations of organized life imposed by the occupying powers became a destructive device serving sooner or later to realize the project known as Endlösung der Judenfrage, the ‘final solution of the Jewish Question’. That was the end to which the Germans deployed these enforced representative bodies: as a ‘transmission belt’ between perpetrators and victims. Since they took advantage of the tradition of Jewish self-government and the potential of Jewish bureaucracy, these bodies were able to play a dual role: for the Jewish population, they could continue to be Jewish entities, while for the Germans, they became a tool used by the German administrative apparatus to execute those tasks which the actual German administration could not or would not undertake.2 There were essentially three key forms of Jewish communal representation on Polish soil during the Second World War: a) the prewar Jewish community administration; b) community activists and networks of charitable organizations; and c) political parties and youth organizations. The latter remained opposed to any sort of cooperation with the occupying powers and were therefore subject to additional repression and forced to operate underground.3 Only 1989); Simon Dubnov, History of the Jews in Russia and Poland: From the Earliest Times until the Present Day (New York: Ktav Pub. House, 1975); Nahum Michael Gelber and Isaac Lewin, A History of Polish Jewry during the Revival of Poland (New York: Shengold Publishers, 1990); Ezra Mendelssohn, Jews of East Central Europe between the World Wars (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987); Robert M. Shapiro, ‘Jewish Self-Government in Poland: Lodz 1914–1939’ (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987); Studies on Polish Jewry, 1919–1939: the Interplay of Social, Economic, and Political Factors in the Struggle of a Minority for Its Existence, ed. by Joshua A. Fishman (New York: YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, 1974); Jolanta Żyndul, Państwo w państwie? Autonomia narodowo-kulturalna w Europie Środkowowschodniej w XX wieku (Warsaw: DiG, 2000); Rafał Żebrowski, Żydowska Gmina Wyznaniowa w Warszawie 1918–1939 (Warsaw: Żydowski Instytut Historyczny (ŻIH), 2012). 2 Yehuda Bauer, A History of the Holocaust (New York: F. Watts, 1982); Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jewry (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1985); Michael R. Marrus, The Holocaust in History (Hanover, N.H.: Published for Brandeis University Press by University Press of New England, 1987); Patterns of Jewish Leadership in Nazi Europe, 1933–1945: Proceedings of the Third Yad Vashem International Historical Conference, Jerusalem, April 4–7, 1977, ed. by Israel Gutman and Cynthia J. Haft (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1979); Isaiah Trunk, Judenrat: The Jewish Councils in Eastern Europe under Nazi Occupation (New York: Macmillan, 1972). 3 The chief difference between these three rests on whom the representation was primarily intended to address. The leadership of the prewar Jewish communities provided

Epilogue

629

the first of the three was envisaged and exploited by the Germans as a means of simulating ‘autonomy’. The document which served as the basis for the creation of this imitation Jewish ‘self-government’ was the secret express letter (Schnellbrief ) sent by the head of the Main Security Office of the Reich (Reichssichersheitshauptamt), Reinhard Heydrich, to the commanders of the operational groups of the security police (Einsatzgruppen) on 21 September 1939 [no. 1]. It was the first significant document on this subject and a relatively early initiative, given that military operations in Poland had not yet wholly ceased and that there was a real risk of an attack from the west by France and England. It was prompted nonetheless by a desire to pre-empt other branches of the German administration. It dealt comprehensively, although with few details, with the Jewish question and outlined the principal policy objectives, prescribing, amongst others, a differentiation between the ultimate goal (Endziel) and the stages which led to it (Abschnitten). The most important of the latter were the concentration of the Jewish population in large urban areas and the creation in every location with more than five hundred Jewish inhabitants of a twentyfour-man representative body called the Ältestenrat (Council of Elders). These councils were to be formed ‘of the more important remaining public figures and rabbis’ and were charged with ‘full responsibility’ to execute orders. ‘The harshest sanctions’ were threatened in the event of any insubordination. The Ältestenräte were thus effectively hostages, accountable for the carrying out of orders.4 They were, on the one hand, terrorized by the Germans; on the other hand, they felt responsible for the fate of the community.

representation above all in relation to the German security forces and the civil administration. Its main role was to respond to German orders and, if at all possible, to blunt their anti-Jewish thrust. In turn, community activists and charitable organizations represented the Jewish population in relation to the German administration and non-Jewish welfare organizations and they had practically no contact with the German security police. Finally, the political parties and youth organizations, which given their opposition status did not form part of the German-created self-government, maintained contact with foreign Polish Jewish representative bodies, with clandestine Polish organizations and with the Polish Government-in-Exile. As the extermination of the Jewish population reached its final phase, it was they who instigated active and armed resistance, the most famous manifestation of which was the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. 4 Indeed, their initial tasks had already been set out in the Heydrich Schnellbrief. The first was to conduct a population count and the second was to organize the evacuation of Jews from the places from which they were being expelled and to find accommodation for those who were displaced. Further tasks depended on the flow of events. Hence the subsequent ‘development’ of Jewish Councils was not uniform, but instead derived from local circumstances and the disposition of the Germans in charge of each particular area.

630

Urynowicz

The role of the security services in establishing the Ältestenräte, coupled with their complete control over the Jewish population and, most importantly, its property, led swiftly to friction with the civilian authorities, who also aspired to manage Jewish affairs. On 6 December 1939, the decree of Hans Frank, head of the German civilian authorities in the General Government (Generalgouvernement), instructed the German civil administration to create its own Jewish representative bodies, answerable to itself [no. 2]. To distinguish them from the Ältestenräte, they were to be called Judenräte (Jewish Councils). From that moment on, the establishment and continued existence of the Jewish administrative apparatus took centre stage in the conflict which flared up between the police and civil authorities. Frank appealed to Hitler himself, as did Heinrich Himmler, who had overall charge of the Reich’s security services. It was only in the spring of 1940 that an understanding was reached, the result of which was a peculiar form of diarchal control over the Jews by both the police and the civil administration. This lasted until 1942, when, with the start of Aktion Reinhardt, that is, the direct physical extermination of the Jewish population, Jewish affairs again came under the sole jurisdiction of the security forces.5 The establishment by the Germans first of the Ältestenräte and then the Judenräte—there was, in the end, no change of personnel, simply a change of name—was relatively straightforward in that they were staffed mainly by members of the prewar communal boards or by well-known community activists. Indeed, in many places Ältestenräte might have appeared to be, in effect, a continuation of the former communal leadership. A good example of this occurred in Warsaw, home to the largest Jewish population in Nazi-occupied Europe. In September 1939, Maurycy Mayzel, hitherto chair of the provisional Jewish Community Board, left Warsaw together with the Polish government.6 As his replacement, President Stefan Starzyński nominated the former city 5 The assumption of control by the police authorities did not lack its share of controversy and indeed blackmail. Heinrich Himmler managed to force Hans Frank into submission by threatening to reveal the abuses of power for personal gain perpetrated by his close associates, as well as by his wife who, amongst others, was wont to receive expensive gifts from the Warsaw ghetto. This is by no means to suggest that Frank’s views on the fate of Jews differed from Himmler’s: he repeatedly demanded the swiftest possible ‘dejudification’ of the General Government. The conflict between them stemmed solely from their struggle for power and their personal ambition. 6 Maurycy Mayzel (1872–1942)—tradesman and community worker, chairman of the Warsaw Jewish Community Board. In September 1939 left for the eastern part of Poland together with the Polish government. Mayzel stayed in Kowel (today western Ukraine), where he was killed during the liquidation of the local ghetto.

Epilogue

631

councillor and Mayzel’s fellow Jewish Community Board member, Adam Czerniaków. After the capitulation of Warsaw, the Germans ordered Czerniaków to assemble a twenty-four-man Ältestenrat to administer the Jewish community and instructed him to assume its leadership. Czerniaków, in turn, selected his colleagues from among members of the prewar Jewish authorities, and filled any vacant posts with representatives of the largest political parties so that the new authorities would be representative of the Jewish political structure as a whole. This imposition of an alien body, the Ältestenrat, onto the pre-existing self-organizing structure of the Jewish Community Board was also reflected in Czerniaków’s official title. Initially he was known as President (Der Präsident) of the Ältestenrat of the Jewish Religious Community in Warsaw and then, after the creation of the Warsaw Judenrat, he was given the additional title of Chairman (Der Obmann). In effect, until September 1941, he was officially obliged to use the two-part designation ‘Der Obmann des Judenrates und Präsident des Ältestenrates der Jüdischen Kultusgemeinde in Warschau’.7 It is typical that the security forces responsible for setting up the Ältesten­ räte were careful not to leave any written traces of their actions. Orders to Jews were always conveyed orally.8 This was characteristic of the tactics, widely used by the Nazi security forces, of saddling non-Germans with responsibility for actions in fact initiated or undertaken by the Third Reich.9 As a result, the only extant documents were created by the civil administration. Thus in Łódź, for example, the official nomination of Chaim Rumkowski by the civil authorities took place at the end of April 1940, with details surviving in a letter from the German mayor of Łódź, Franz Schiffer. In it, Schiffer ‘authorized’ the chair of the Ältestenrat to ‘implement all necessary measures to ensure that organized community life in the Jewish district is maintained’. The list of tasks 7 See Marcin Urynowicz, Adam Czerniaków. Prezes Getta Warszawskiego (Warsaw: Instytut Pamięci Narodowej (IPN), 2009), p. 179. 8 This is confirmed in the journals of Adam Czerniaków which make clear that all the orders he received from Einsatzgruppen officials were communicated verbally. This happened in each and every case, even the most important, for example the appointment of the Ältestenrat: ‘when I entered the Council building I was detained and temporarily prevented from doing anything. I was taken to Aleja Szucha and there I was informed [sic—MU] that I must select 24 people to the Community Council and become its leader’. Adama Czerniakowa dziennik getta warszawskiego, ed. by Marian Fuks (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 1983), entry from 4 October 1939, pp. 51–51. The same applied in relation to the November 1939 order to create a ‘settlement zone’, in reality a ghetto—an order which was not in the end executed because of the opposition of the military authorities: ‘We were informed about the settlement zone.’ … 9 Compare Tomasz Szarota, U progu Zagłady. Zajścia antyżydowskie i pogromy w okupowanej Europie (Warsaw: Sic!, 2000).

632

Urynowicz

with which Rumkowski was charged was extensive and covered every aspect of life, from economic issues, to the management of confiscated Jewish property (in order to transfer it to the Germans), and security [no. 3]. The same process occurred in the small town of Żyrardów, some 50 km outside Warsaw. In a letter dated 11 December 1940 to the chair of the Judenrat in Żyrardów, the Kreishauptmann10 of Sochaczew-Błonie wrote, ‘I have nominated you a Jewish Elder and chairman of the [i.e. Jewish, M.U.] residential district in Żyrardów. You are answerable to me for the proper implementation of my instructions’. In this case, the ‘nomination’ did not specify the issues for which the ‘Jewish Elder’ was responsible: there was no need for it to do so, since all he was required to do was to take note of and carry out each of the Kreishauptmann’s orders [no. 5]. The Führerprinzip, or leadership principle, cultivated in the Third Reich led to a tendency to minimize not only the number of people with whom the Germans were obliged to communicate but also the number of institutions with which they had to deal. In relation to the Judenräte, the effect was twofold. First, only their chairmen were considered suitable partners for dialogue. In the letter to Rumkowski cited above, this was expressed as follows: ‘All communication with the German authorities must take place exclusively through you or through the person officially appointed by you…. In order to obtain permission for the appointment of any further representative(s), an application must in each case be submitted in advance’ [no. 3]. Second, it resulted in the creation of a hierarchy among Judenräte, so that those presiding over the larger Jewish communities also represented smaller towns or villages. In mid-1940, the formation was mooted of a Central Jewish Council in each of the four districts of the General Government, which would pass on any orders it received and would be responsible for the conduct of all the smaller Judenräte in each locality. In turn, above those central councils there was to be a Central Jewish Council based in Kraków, to represent the Jewish population of the General Government as a whole. In the end, this plan was not put into effect. It was partly successful only in the district of Radom, where an Oberjudenrat (a Principal Jewish Council) operated, headed by Józef Diament. Similar methods were tried in the areas of Poland which had been annexed by the Reich. The Łódź ghetto served as a Gaugetto (regional or district ghetto) for the Wartheland region and was considered to be the central ghetto for that 10

Kreishauptmann—head of the local District Authority Office, in this case Starosta’s Office of the Sochaczew-Błonie district, which was one of nine composing the Warsaw District of the Generalgouvernement (GG). At that time the Head was Karl Adolf Pott (1906–1943) from Prussia.

Epilogue

633

administrative area and the one to which other ghettos were subordinate. Its president, Chaim Rumkowski, was entitled to intervene in the affairs of all the Judenräte in the region. The same applied in Upper Silesia, where Mojżesz Merin was appointed director of the central Ältestenrat for the Katowice region [no. 4].11 From the earliest months of the occupation, the demands made of the Judenräte were excessive—indeed at times impossible to fulfil, if only for financial reasons.12 To achieve the complete isolation of Jews, they were given all the responsibilities which had hitherto been within the remit of municipal or national institutions [no. 6]. These responsibilities included, for example, healthcare, staffing issues, the organization of provisions, social welfare, internal security, administrative services, housing, sanitation, and the water supply. The imposition of these duties on the Judenräte required the creation of new administrative bodies and institutions capable of carrying them out, so it was necessary to take on significant numbers of new officials, sometimes several times more than had been employed by the prewar Jewish community boards.13 The best-known institution, and one new to the ghetto, was the Jewish Ordnungsdienst (Service for the Maintenance of Order), popularly known as the ‘Jewish police’.14 This was a key organization for many Judenräte since it signaled that coercive measures could be used to counter any displays of insubordination, thus facilitating the actual exercise of power. It was not, 11

12

13

14

There were also sometimes ‘central’ Judenräte in the lesser administrative units such as counties (powiaty), for example those which operated in Chełm, Włodawa, Jędrzejów, Miechów, Radom, Przemyśl, Mielec, Rawa Ruska, Tarnopol, Jarosław, Kołomyja, Czortków, and other localities. See Trunk, pp. 36–40. Often just the costs of paying those who were forced to work for the Germans exceeded one-third of all budgetary expenditure. The costs associated with maintaining the overcrowded hospitals were even greater, to say nothing of other forms of healthcare. On occasion, the total cost of forced labour and healthcare accounted for more than 70 per cent of the entire budget. Specific areas of socio-economic life were generally handled by separate departments, each of which was further divided into a significant number of different offices. Thus, for example, in Warsaw in mid-1942 there were fourteen departments: Presidium; General; Financial and Budgetary; Administration; Public Health; Benefits and Social Welfare; Economic; Artisan Services; Employment; Supplies; Post; Real Estate; Law and Order; and Funerary. That it was not in fact a police force at all is clear not only from its name but also from its actual powers, and especially in how it differed from the Polish ‘blue police’ (the Polnische Polizei created by the Germans) and the German police. The last two groups carried firearms (Poles only to a limited extent), whereas the Ordnungsdienst was armed only with rubber or wooden truncheons.

634

Urynowicz

however, a solution devised or implemented by the Jews themselves, but rather an invention of the German authorities, who were keen to eliminate any delay in the execution of orders they made to the Judenräte. This was explicit in the letter from the Kreishauptmann of the Sochaczew-Błonie region to the Jewish Elder in Żyrardów mentioned above: ‘In order to carry out your duties, you are to establish a service for the maintenance of public order, [made up] of fifty Jews, which will be responsible to you.’ The pivotal role of the German authorities was also highlighted in the relevant report of the Warsaw Judenrat which clearly stated that, for the purpose of maintaining order in the ghetto, ‘at the behest of the authorities, a Jewish Ordnungsdienst was set up’ [no. 6]. Although the Ordnungsdienst was to acquire a highly unfavourable reputation as a result of the brutality and dishonest practices of its officers, and especially because of its participation in the deportations to concentration camps, nonetheless the original perception of it was quite different. There was, at first, an illusion that it would bring order and calm, and that the Jewish ‘policeman’ would prove fundamentally different to his Polish or German counterparts. Regulations for the Ordnungsdienst were even introduced in order to ensure appropriate ethical standards [no. 11]. Unfortunately, these expectations remained unfulfilled, mainly as a consequence of the catastrophic economic situation and the lack of adequate remuneration. The Ordnungsdienst was just one symbol of Jewish ‘self-government’ which the German authorities did their best to imitate in order to deceive the Jewish community and mislead international opinion. Other ploys of this sort included the conferring of titles and powers which were in reality quite meaningless, and the granting of consents for matters of trivial importance. One example is the permission given in the period preceding the war with Russia to formally introduce Saturday rest in Warsaw [no. 8]. As a rule, those who headed the Judenräte were accorded full authority over the ghetto, and at times there was even a degree of superficial fraternization with them, to give them the impression that their titles and positions had real significance and that they enjoyed the genuine respect of the authorities.15 Another attribute of Jewish ‘self-government’ was supposedly the Jewish press. The Gazeta Żydowska (Jewish Gazette), appeared throughout the General Government but, just like the ‘Polish’ press, it was wholly controlled 15

So, for example, in the spring of 1941, Adam Czerniaków was granted the same powers as the mayor of the Polish part of the capital. The significance of this appointment was underscored by Czerniaków’s invitation to see the district governor, Ludwig Fischer, himself. In practice, however, nothing changed. It was an empty gesture on the part of the Germans, dictated by their plans for imminent war with Russia and their desire to ensure peace behind the front line. Compare Urynowicz, pp. 235–38.

Epilogue

635

and censored by the authorities. The local ‘Gettocajtung’ (Ghetto News) was successfully published in Łódź [no. 7]. These papers, in conformity with German propaganda, wrote about the activities of the Judenräte in such a way as to make them appear self-governing and to give readers a misleading impression of the benefits which accrued from the ‘autonomy’ granted by the Germans. They wrote in lofty tones of the assemblies and meetings held by Judenrat members and pretended that their deliberations had genuine significance for the ghetto—indeed that this ‘autonomy’ which the Germans had ‘bestowed’ on Jews served the best interests of the Jewish community. Thus, for example, attempts were made to present as ‘beneficence’ the denial to Jews of the right to general, municipal, and national social welfare, in view of the efforts to establish a separate social welfare system solely for the ghetto [no. 9]. The reality, however, was very different: this was no more than a caricature or a parody of ‘self-government’ or ‘autonomy’, a caricature which was in fact quite transparent [no. 10]. Seeing no alternative, the majority of Judenräte continued to carry out German orders until the last moment. They were motivated not so much by fear of repression but above all by the hope of saving as many lives as possible. It was a hope which they nurtured until the bitter end. They were not, after all, privy to German plans and, in any event, it was impossible to imagine the extermination of an entire community. The same applied during the deportations to the mass killing centres, when it might well have seemed even more vital to rescue the young and those capable of work—the biological core of the nation, to whom the Germans themselves had promised survival and whom they employed to work for the needs of the Wehrmacht, thus underlining their importance to the Third Reich. Hence the involvement of the Judenräte in the deportations and assistance they gave the Germans in assembling successive contingents of deportees, while at the same time seeking to secure the exclusion of as many people as possible from deportation [no. 12].16 Their aim was not murder, as it was for the Germans, but the rescue of those who remained. That is how the behaviour, for example, of Chaim Rumkowski—who did not hesitate even when it came to handing over children to the Germans—must be understood. That is what motivated Jakub Gens when he decided to send members of the Ordnungsdienst from Vilno to Oszmiana to take part in the extermination of 16

Thus in Warsaw, for example, it was estimated that the list of exclusions from deportation would cover most of the population, so that, instead of nearly 400,000, only 100,000 at most would be deported. Since the expectation was that almost 300,000 people would therefore be saved, it was reasonable to speak in terms of the Judenrat’s ‘success’.

636

Urynowicz

a section of its Jewish community. If the official report is to be believed, those Jewish ‘policemen’ succeeded in negotiating a reduction in the number of victims from 1,200 to around 400 and also saw to it that it was the elderly who were murdered and not children or those in the prime of life. The price they paid was participation in murder [no. 13]. In fact, all the assurances and undertakings given by the Germans were false, and the unwitting Judenräte were essentially used as instruments of crime. In addition, of course, their members were no more likely to survive than anyone else. They might at best live a little longer, or for as long as they were useful to the Germans. Some, like Adam Czerniaków in Warsaw, decided to commit suicide. Others chose not to prolong their lives and died alongside the community they represented [no. 14]. Alongside the Judenräte, a second representative body of the Jewish community with all the hallmarks of German-imposed ‘self-government’ was the Jewish Self-Help Society (Żydowska Samopomoc Społeczna, ŻSS). This institution, like the Judenräte, was a German façade imposed on existing Jewish social welfare organizations, an imposition made easier by the fact that as early as September 1939 the principal Jewish charitable organizations had formed a joint steering committee to facilitate contact with the Polish authorities.17 In this context, too, the rivalry between an institution associated with the Nazi Party and the overall German administration played a significant part. In contrast to the Judenräte, however, the formation of the ŻSS was not planned; instead, it arose out of a particular combination of circumstances. At the beginning of 1940, the branch of the Nazi Party which dealt with social welfare, the Nationalsozialistische Volkswohlfahrt (NSV), began to take an interest in the activities of Jewish charitable institutions, which were at that time still operating under the auspices of the Coordinating Commission of Jewish Social Welfare Organizations (Komisja Koordynacyjna Żydowskich Organizacji Społecznych, KK ŻOS).18 Ultimately, the opposition of Hans Frank caused the NSV to back down, but the issue, once raised, did not escape the attention of the civil administration of the General Government. The Stadthauptmann’s 17 18

This is when the Coordinating Commission for Jewish Social Welfare Organizations (KK ŻOS) was formed. It functioned without German interference until the beginning of 1940. For three months, from September to December 1939, the activity of the KK ŻOS was in a sense invisible to the Germans. This was because the Polish organizations assembled in the Warsaw Committee for Social Welfare (Stołeczny Komitet Samopomocy Społecznej, SKSS), despite the opposition of many of their activists, officially distanced themselves from collaboration with Jewish organizations in order to avoid increased German scrutiny. Moreover the SKSS was reluctant to share with KK ŻOS the money which the Polish Government had left in September 1939 for the use of all the residents of Warsaw.

Epilogue

637

office became interested in the activity of the KK ŻOS and summoned its representative, Michał Weichert, for an interview, which turned into a series of meetings with the municipal officials responsible for monitoring the affairs of charitable institutions [no. 15]. The matter might well have remained at the level of the German municipal authorities in Warsaw had it not been for the fact that from early 1940, Polish social welfare organizations were increasingly keen to create a national representative body to work with the International Red Cross. Their aim was to force the Germans to ease the restrictions on charitable activity in Poland and above all to secure assistance from abroad. Eventually, thanks to the pressure of international, and especially American, public opinion and Nazi Germany’s short-lived desire to improve its image, such an institution, the Central Welfare Council (Rada Glówna Opiekuńcza, RGO), was established in mid-1940. It was based on a similar organization from the time of the First World War and was divided into the Polish Central Council, the Ukrainian Central Council, and the Jewish Self-Help Society (ŻSS). Its executive committee consisted of five Poles, one Ukrainian, and one Jew. At the same time, the Department for Population and Welfare, part of the Department of Internal Affairs of the General Government (Bevölkerungswesen und Fürsorge, Innere Verwaltung, known as BuF) took over the supervision of ŻSS activity. From that point, the ŻSS became the central Jewish welfare institution for all of the General Government. The activity of the ŻSS was governed by both statute and regulations. The statute dated 29 May 1940 outlined its external framework: above all, its purpose was to unite all the Jewish aid organizations, and its tasks included the provision of comprehensive compulsory, residential, and ad hoc social care and also voluntary care; obtaining the resources necessary for that provision; the distribution of gifts; the organization of voluntary care centres; and collaboration with foreign institutions (in relation to the latter, the ŻSS was reliant on the Plenipotentiary of the German Red Cross). The resources for its activities were to come from membership fees, government and community subsidies, gifts, collections, and the like. The operational year began on 1 April. The ŻSS was authorized to establish five-person Jewish Welfare Committees (Żydowskie Komitety Opiekuńcze, ŻKO) based at local government (starostwa) offices [no. 16]. The regulations meanwhile dealt with internal matters. They prescribed, inter alia, the duties of the executive committee, which was to be formed of seven members with the following roles and responsibilities: chair; deputy chair; accounts; health; employment and economic aid; food aid; organizational and personnel issues. On the 3rd through the 7th of each month there was to be an ordinary meeting of the executive to discuss current business and

638

Urynowicz

to prepare a report for the German authorities. The whole of the executive’s activity was subject to the scrutiny of the German administration, which effectively meant supervision by BuF. In certain localities, the work of the ŻSS was to be carried out by locally organized welfare committees (under the ŻKO), which were under the control not of BuF but of the local district leader (Kreishauptmann). The regulations also stipulated that all ŻSS correspondence was to be conducted in both Polish and German [no. 17]. The organizational structure of the ŻSS was relatively elaborate. At its core were the house committees, whose role was to carry out the social welfare objectives of the KK ŻOS. These committees were to be made up of selected residents, and their primary task was the care of minors and the most destitute [no. 18]. There were also district commissions, which brought together all the house committees in each region. The smallest such unit at the local level was the Delegatura, but there were also the larger civic welfare committees (Komitety Opiekuńcze Miejskie) in the municipalities and Regional Welfare Committees (Komitety Opiekuńcze Powiatowe) in regional capitals. In all, the ŻSS had about four hundred offices throughout the General Government. It is no coincidence that this figure is close to the number of ghettos, since in practice every town or village with a sizeable Jewish population, and thus necessarily a ghetto, had some measure of ŻSS representation. The success of mutual relations between the ŻSS branches and the Judenräte varied—from exemplary cooperation, to dislike and rivalry, or even to conflict and recriminations. The ŻSS was in the relatively fortunate position of not being subject to supervision by the German police authorities. It was also not obliged, unlike the Judenräte, to deal with anything other than social welfare. One example of effective collaboration took place in Mszczonów, where the Judenrat, in an effort to help its neediest residents, took the initiative to establish a local ŻSS office [no. 19]. At the highest echelons of the ŻSS, apart from the executive committee itself, were the offices of the advisers to the district leaders, posts which were held by Dr Mark Alten in the Lublin district; Józef Diamant in the Radom district; Dr Gustaw Wielikowski in the Warsaw district; Jakub Sternberg in the Kraków district, and Dr Leib Landau in the Lwów district. These men were useful, as indeed were other ŻSS offices, for maintaining contact with the local administration and in overseeing the situation generally so that, if necessary, the swiftest possible referral could be made to the central authorities in Kraków [no. 20]. Whereas the ŻSS Executive was essentially representational in character and was formally obliged to act in compliance with German directives, the organizations under the ŻSS umbrella strove—insofar as they could—to function

Epilogue

639

independently, in line with their prewar practices and contrary to German interests. On a number of occasions, this proved possible through the work of the ŻSS to bolster the clandestine activity of proscribed political parties [no. 21]. It is vital, however, in this context, to remember that, in practice, welfare activity was highly restricted. In many localities it either did not function at all or it was a sham. In the places where it did reach, it was far from sufficient, proof of which were the hundreds of thousands who died of cold and diseases caused by malnutrition. The deciding factor was above all the policy of the local German authorities, both the civil administration and especially the security forces, which were not overly concerned about directives from the Social Welfare Department of the General Government. The stance of district governors was typical: they would not so much as countenance the existence of any kind of Jewish ‘advisers’. The constant interventions of Michał Weichert at the BuF headquarters in Kraków rarely had the desired effect, while the ŻSS executive committee itself generally felt barely tolerated. Indeed, German hostility towards the ŻSS even caused it seriously to consider standing down, although it eventually acknowledged that it was better to provide some help, however minimal, than not to help at all. The only support it received came from the Polish members of the RGO, who generally tried to back the demands of their Jewish colleagues, but whose own capabilities were very limited. In these circumstances, the dissolution of the ŻSS in the summer of 1942, during the mass deportations to concentration camps, came as no surprise. However, while it appeared to signal the end of welfare activity among Jews, in fact the situation did not prove quite so clear-cut. Weichert received written instructions to dissolve the ŻSS in mid-July 1942. The ŻSS executive was not to relay this order to its branch offices but was simply to reduce staffing levels and await further instructions. An order of this type can be interpreted in only one of two ways. It was either part of the continuing deception of Jews and a means of avoiding panic, so that the deportations could proceed as smoothly as possible—or else, even at that stage, the German authorities (or at any rate the civil administration) intended to preserve the ŻSS in some form. As a result of the internal frictions within the German authorities brought about by the worsening situation on the Eastern Front, a decision was reached in the autumn of 1942 that it was essential to retain a certain number of Jewish workers who were crucial to military production. In mid-October 1942, Michał Weichert received a letter in which BuF, the same department which had notified him of the decision to dissolve the ŻSS, ordered him to re-establish it under the new name of Jüdische Unterstützungsstelle für das Generalgouvernement (Jewish Aid Office of the General Government), known for short as JUS [no. 22]. In reality, as Weichert acknowledged, work continued as before and all that changed

640

Urynowicz

was the name. Yet the German authorities altered their decision two more times, the result again, it seems, of wrangling and in-fighting between the leading factions of the Third Reich. First, at the beginning of December 1942, two BuF officials came to see Weichert with a letter announcing the irrevocable and immediate dissolution of JUS by order of the police authorities. The abolition lasted a mere three months because at the beginning of February 1943 came news that the reinstatement of JUS was proceeding to plan, and indeed, two months later, JUS staff were allowed to return to work.19 It is, even now, difficult to understand why the Germans—in the midst of exterminating the Jewish population—had any need of JUS. It was probably valued for propaganda purposes, in that it made it possible to deny that Jews were being murdered in the territories controlled by the Third Reich; that was the view, expressed even during the war, of members of the Jewish underground. On the other hand, Weichert himself, along with his colleagues, maintained that whatever the aims of German propaganda, the most important goal was to save Jewish life, and therefore that it would be a crime to terminate its activity. In the end, however, JUS did cease to operate in the spring of 1944, when secret information was received that German tolerance of it was running out and that its leader, together with his family, was to share the tragic fate of the mass of the Jewish population. Weichert went underground, where he was given help and support by the Kraków Council to Aid Jews (Rada Pomocy Żydom) and others. Public opinion in the early postwar years was harshly critical of the Jewish representative bodies and their dealings with the German authorities and, it follows, was also critical of their members. They were frequently accused of collusion and collaboration with the occupying powers, of betraying Jewish national interests for their own ends, and especially of attempting to save their own lives at the expense of the community as a whole. Proceedings were brought against their members before both state courts and communal courts (gezelshaftlekh gerikht).20 Chaim Rumkowski, who continued to carry out 19 20

Archives of ŻIH, Michał Weichert, Pamiętnik Michała Weicherta, Syg. 302/25, II, pp. 52, 67, 75A, 83, and 222. Gabriel N. Finder and Laura Jockusch, Jewish Honor Courts: Revenge, Retribution, and Reconciliation in Europe and Israel after the Holocaust (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2014); Gabriel N. Finder and Alexander V. Prusin, ‘Jewish Collaborators on Trials in Poland 1944–1956’, Polin 20 (2008), 122–48; Gabriel N. Finder, ‘The Trial of Shepsl Rotholc and the Politics of Retribution in the Aftermath of the Holocaust’, Gal-Ed: On the History and Culture of Polish Jewry, 20 (2006), 63–89; idem, “ ‘Sweep Out Evil from Your Midst”: The Jewish People’s Court in Postwar Poland’, in Beyond Camps and Forced Labour: Current International Research on Survivors of Nazi Persecution: Proceedings of the First International Multidisciplinary Conference at the Imperial War Museum, London,

Epilogue

641

German orders to the last, became an emblem of ‘collaboration’. However, those who had proved capable of saying ‘no’ to the Germans, even at the cost of their own lives, were not treated much better. One example is Adam Czerniaków, who was accused if not of betrayal, then at least of excessive weakness and incompetence; of lacking the courage to publicly stand up to the Germans; and of making his death a purely personal affair. The ŻSS faced similar accusations, as specifically did its leader, Michał Weichert. After the war he was put on trial on charges that, in defiance of calls from underground Jewish parties for him to cease, he continued the work of JUS—work from which, it was said, the Germans had the most to gain.21 The need to find a scapegoat was so strong that it was unaffected even by Weichert’s trial by the state court in Kraków and his acquittal on all counts. Dissatisfaction with that verdict eventually led to an additional trial before the Jewish People’s Court (Sąd Społeczny), at which Weichert was found guilty [no. 23]. Such courts, which operated on the premise that it was possible to refuse to hold office in the Judenräte under German occupation, were most often known as honour courts (Yid. eren-gerikht) or rehabilitation commissions (Yid. rekhabilitatsye komisye). Similar honour courts were established in many of the countries where Jewish survivors were located, above all in Germany where there were special refugee camps, for example in Bergen-Belsen (in the British Zone of Occupation) and at the Munich-based Court of Honour and Rehabilitation of the Union of Liberated Jews in the American Zone in Germany,22 as well as in Italy, for example at Rome’s Court of Honour at the Central Organization of Survivors in Italy. Israel, too, embarked upon settling wartime scores with the enactment in 1950 of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law.23

21

22 23

29–31 January 2003, ed. by Johannes-Dieter Steinert and Inge Weber-Newth (Osnabrück: Secolo Verlag, 2005), pp. 269–79. David Engel, ‘Who Is a Collaborator? The Trials of Michał Weichert’, in The Jews in Poland, II, ed. by Slawomir Kapralski (Kraków: Judaica Foundation, Center for Jewish Culture, 1999); Rafał Węgrzyniak, ‘Sprawa Michała Weicherta’, Pamiętnik Teatralny, 46:1–4 (1997), 279–314; idem, Procesy doktora Weicherta (Warsaw: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 2017). On the situation in postwar Germany, see Zeev W. Mankowitz, Life between Memory and Hope: The Survivors of the Holocaust in Occupied Germany (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002). Trunk, pp. 548–49, 572–73. The question of trials of Ordnungsdienst members who found themselves in Israel is discussed in the unpublished doctoral thesis of Rivka Brot. See Rivka Brot ‘Anashim ba-ezor ha-afor: eduyot u-piskei din be-mishpateihem shel shotrim yehudiim ve-blockälteste (rosh blok ishah) lefi ha-hok le-asiyat din ba-natzim u-veozreihem, 5710–1950’ [People in the Grey Zone—Prosecutions against Jewish Policemen and a Woman Blockälteste under the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710–1950] (Tel Aviv University, 2009). In this context, it is worth noting that the first

642

Urynowicz

All this was, however, for the most part a psychological reaction to the pain of losing loved ones and to the shock caused by such an unprecedented national catastrophe. In point of fact, no collaboration existed anywhere between the Judenräte and the Germans. The form of interaction which occurred is best described by the term collaboration d’État, parallel to that which was to be found in non-Jewish communities. Nonetheless, it was Jews who had been murdered and thus it was especially amongst Jews, unable as they were to punish the real perpetrators, that the need arose to find someone to blame, even if it was from their own ranks—and this is where the myth of the collaboration of Judenräte, and others, with the Germans has its roots. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska Bibliographic References Angrick, Andrej, ‘Judenrate: i Consigli ebraici’ in Marina Cattaruzza, ed., Storia della Shoah: la crisi dell’Europa, lo sterminio degli ebrei e la memoria del XX secolo, I (Torino: Utet, 2005). Bauer, Yehuda, with the assistance of Nili Keren, A History of the Holocaust (New York: F. Watts, 1982). Bergmann, Werner, The Jewish Council as an Intermediary System: Sociological Analysis of the Role of the Jewish Councils in Eastern Europe (Berlin: Technical University, 1988). Berman, Adolf, Vos der goyrl hot mir bashert: mit Yidn in Varshe, 1939–1942 (Tel Aviv: Beit Lohamei Hagetaot, 1980). Bernstein, Tatiana, Artur Eisenach, and Artur Rutkowski, eds., Eksterminacja Żydów na ziemiach polskich w okresie okupacji hitlerowskiej. Zbiór dokumentów (Warsaw: ŻIH, 1957) [German and Polish]. Bilsky, Leora, Transformative Justice: Israeli Identity on Trial (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2004).

work on the Jewish Ordnungsdienst was written by Aharon Weiss in a doctoral thesis presented to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in 1973. See Aharon Weiss, ‘Ha-mishtarah ha-yehudit ba-generalgouvernement u-ve-shlezyah ilit bi-tekufat ha-shoah’ [The Jewish Police in the Generalgouvernement and in Upper Silesia during the Holocaust] (Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1973). Other work discussing postwar redress include Leora Bilsky, Transformative Justice: Israeli Identity on Trial (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2004); Lawrence Douglas, The Memory of Judgment: Making Law and History in the Trials of Holocaust (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001).

Epilogue

643

Blumental, Nachman, Darko shel Judenrat: te’udot mi-geto Bialystok [Conduct and Actions of a Judenrat: Documents of the Bialystok Ghetto] (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1962) [Hebrew, English introduction]. Blumental, Nachman, Te’udot mi-getto Lublin. Judenrat lelo Derech [Documents from the Lublin Ghetto. Judenerat without direction] (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1967) [Hebrew, English introduction]. Braham, Randolph L., ‘The Role of the Jewish Council in Hungary: A Tentative Assessment’, Yad Vashem Studies 10 (1974). Brot, Rivka, ‘Anashim ba-ezor ha-afor: eduyot u-piskei din be-mishpateihem shel shotrim yehudiim ve-blockälteste (rosh blok ishah) lefi ha-hok le-asiyat din banatzim u-ve-ozreihem, 5710–1950’ [People in the Grey Zone—Prosecutions against Jewish Policemen and a Woman Blockälteste under the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710–1950] (Tel Aviv University, 2009). Cohen, Richard I., ‘Le Consistoire et l’UGIF—la situation trouble des Juifs français face à Vichy’, Revue d’Histoire de la Shoah, 169 (2000). Douglas, Lawrence, The Memory of Judgment: Making Law and History in the Trials of Holocaust (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001). Engel, David, ‘Who is a Collaborator? The Trials of Michał Weichert’, in Slawomir Kapralski, ed., The Jews in Poland, II (Cracow: Judaica Foundation, Center for Jewish Culture, 1999). Farbstein, Esther, ‘A Close-up View of Judenrat: The Memoirs of Pnina Weiss—Wife of a Member of the First Judenrat in Warsaw’, Yad Vashem Studies on the European Jewish Catastrophe and Resistance, 33 (2005). Feierstein, Daniel, ‘The Dilemma of Wittenberg: Reflections on Tactics and Ethics’, Shofar, 20.2 (2002). Fernekes, William R., The Oryx Holocaust Sourcebook (Westport, Conn.; London: Oryx Press, 2002). Finder, Gabriel N., and Alexander V. Prusin, ‘Jewish Collaborators on Trials in Poland 1944–1956’, Polin 20 (2008). Finder, Gabriel N., and Laura Jockusch, Jewish Honor Courts. Revenge, Retribution, and Reconciliation in Europe and Israel after the Holocaust (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2014). Fredj, Jacques, ‘Le Consistoire Central et la création du CRIF’, Revue d’Histoire de la Shoah, 169 (2000). Gutman, Israel, ‘The Judenrat as Leadership’, in Moshe Zimmermann, ed., On Germans and Jews under the Nazi Regime: Essays by Three Generations of Historians: a Festschrift in Honor of Otto Dov Kulka (Jerusalem: Richard Koebner Minerva Center for German History, Hebrew University of Jerusalem/Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2006).

644

Urynowicz

Gutman, Israel, and Cynthia J. Haft, eds., Patterns of Jewish Leadership in Nazi Europe, 1933–1945: Proceedings of the Third Yad Vashem International Historical Conference, Jerusalem, April 4–7, 1977 (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1979). Hilberg, Raul, The Destruction of the European Jewry (New York: Holmes & Meier, 1985), 3 vols. Hilberg, Raul, ‘The Ghetto as a Form of Government: An Analysis of the Ishaia Trunk’s Judenrat’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 450.1 (1989). Hilberg, Raul, ed., The Warsaw Diary of Adam Czerniakow: Prelude to Doom (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1999). Kopciowski, Adam, ‘Der Judenrat in Zamosc’, Theresienstädter Studien und Dokumente (2002). Meyer, Beate, ‘The Restructuring of a Jewish Gemeinde into the “Prototype” of the Judenrat’, Yad Vashem Studies, 30 (2002). Michman, Dan, ‘Why Did Heydrich Write the “Schnellbrief”? A Remark on the Reason and on its Significance’, Yad Vashem Studies, 32 (2004). Michman, Dan, The Emergence of Jewish Ghettos during the Holocaust (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). Michman, Dan, ‘Why Did Heydrich Write the “Schnellbrief”? A Remark on the Reason and on its Significance’, Yad Vashem Studies, 32 (2004). Namysło, Aleksandra, ‘Compte-rendu de la réunion organisée à l’occasion du second anniversaire de la création du Bureau central des conseils juifs des Anciens pour la Haute Silésie orientale’, Revue d’Histoire de la Shoah, 185 (2006). Piątkowski, Sebastian, ‘Organizacja i dzialalnosc Naczelnej Rady Starszych Ludnosci Zydowskiej Dystryktu Radomskiego (1939–1942)’ [The organization and activities of the Supreme Council of Elders of the Jewish Population of Radom District (1939– 1942)], BZIH, 195 (2000). Röhr, Werner, ed., Okkupation und Kollaboration (1938–1945): Beitrage zu Konzepten und Praxis der Kollaboration in der deutschen Okkupationspolitik (Berlin: Hüthig, 1994). Rozenblat, Evgenii Semenovich, ‘Yudenrati v Belarusi: problema yevreyskoy kollaboratsyi’ [Judenrats in Belarus. The Problems of Jewish Collaboration], Uroki Holokosta, 1 (2009). Trunk, Ishaiah, Judenrat: The Jewish Councils in Eastern Europe under Nazi Occupation (New York: Macmillan, 1972). Tushnet, Leonard, The Pavement of Hell (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1972). Urynowicz, Marcin, Adam Czerniaków. Prezes Getta Warszawskiego (Warsaw: Instytut Pamięci Narodowej, 2009). Wahlen, Verena, ‘Select Bibliography on Judenräte under Nazi Rule’, Yad Vashem Studies on the European Jewish Catastrophe and Resistance, 10 (1974). Weichert, Michal, Yiddishe Alaynhilf 1939–1945 (Tel Aviv: Menorah, 1962).

Epilogue

645

Weiss, Aharon, ‘Ha-mishtarah ha-yehudit ba-generalgouvernement u-ve-shlezyah ilit bi-tekufat ha-shoah’ [The Jewish Police in the Generalgouvernement and in Upper Silesia during the Holocaust] (Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1973). Wróbel, Piotr, ‘Hitler’s Helpers? The Judenräte Controversy’, in Larry V. Thompson, ed., Lessons and Legacies, IV: Reflections on Religion, Justice, Sexuality, and Genocide (Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 2003). Zylberberg, Michael, ‘The Trial of Alfred Nossig: Traitor or Victim’, Wiener Library Bulletin, 23.2–3 [15–16] (1969).



Sources



No. 1 Letter from Reinhard Heydrich (Reich Security Main Office) Dated 21 September 1939 to the Commanders of the Einsatzgruppen Regarding the Stages and Methods of the ‘Final Solution to the Jewish Question’ and the Establishment of Judenräte for Jewish Communities in the Occupied Territories

Source: ‘Dokumenty Norymberskie, PS–3363’, in: Eksterminacja Żydów na ziemiach polskich w okresie okupacji hitlerowskiej. Zbiór dokumentów, eds. T. Bernstein, A. Eisenach, A. Rutkowski, Warsaw 1957, pp. 21–25. Express letter to the commanders of all Einsatzgruppen of the Security Police. Re: Jewish question in the occupied territory With reference to today’s meeting in Berlin, I reiterate that the overall measures planned (that is, the final aim) are to be kept strictly confidential. A distinction is to be drawn between 1. The final aim (which will take a long time), and 2. The stages involved in achieving this final aim (which will be carried out in the short term). Both the technical and the economic aspects of the planned measures require meticulous advance preparation. […] The first anticipatory step towards the final aim is to concentrate the Jews from the countryside in the larger towns and cities. This step is to be implemented rapidly. […] Jewish Ältestenräte (Jewish Elders’ Councils) 1. A Jewish Ältestenrat is to be established in each Jewish community. Where possible, it is to be formed from the remaining influential individuals and rabbis. The Ältestenrat is to be composed of up to 24 male Jews (depending on the size

646

Urynowicz

of the Jewish community). It is to be fully responsible, in the literal sense of the word, for the precise and punctual implementation of all instructions that have been or will be issued. 2. Should such instructions be sabotaged, the councils are to be notified that the most severe measures will be taken. 3. The Judenräte (Jewish Councils) are to carry out a provisional census of the Jews in their local area which, where possible, will be broken down by gender (and age groups), a) up to 16, b) from 16 to 20, and c) above [this age], and according to the main occupational groups. The results of this census are to be communicated without delay. 4. The Ältestenräte are to be informed of the dates and deadlines for the evacuation [Abzug], the means available for evacuation, and, finally, the evacuation routes. As such, they are to be made personally responsible for the evacuation of Jews from the countryside. The reason to be given for concentrating Jews in the towns is that Jews have played a substantial part in the sniper attacks and looting campaigns. 5. The Ältestenräte in the towns in which Jews are to be concentrated shall be responsible for providing suitable accommodation for Jews who move there from the countryside. For general reasons of police security, the concentration of Jews in towns will probably necessitate the issuance of orders that completely prohibit Jews from entering certain parts of the town and—always, however, with due consideration for economic requirements—stipulate that they, for example, do not leave the ghetto, are not permitted to leave their homes after a certain time in the evening, etc. 6. The Ältestenräte are also to be made responsible for provisioning Jews accordingly during journeys to the towns. No objections are to be raised to the migrating Jews bringing their moveable assets with them, if this is technically possible. 7. Jews who fail to comply with the order to resettle in the towns are to be given a short extension of the deadline if there are justified grounds. They are to be notified of the most severe penalties should they also fail to meet this deadline. […] The OKH [Army High Command], the Plenipotentiary for the Four-Year Plan (for the attention of State Secretary Neumann), the Reich Ministry of the Interior (for the attention of State Secretary Stuckart), the Reich Ministry of Food and [the Reich Ministry] of Economy (for the attention of State Secretary Landfried), and the heads of the civil administration in the occupied territory have received a copy of this decree. Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce

Epilogue



647

No. 2 Kraków, 6 December 1939: Publication of the Decree Issued by Governor General Hans Frank on 28 November 1939 Concerning the Establishment of Judenräte ( Jewish Councils)

Source: Verordnungsblatt des Generalgouverneurs fur die besetzten polonischen Gebiete, Kraków, 6 (7) December 1939. The original document is typewritten in German. Pursuant to  § 5(1) of the Decree of the Führer and Reich Chancellor on the Administration of the Occupied Polish Territories, 12 October 1939 (Reichsgesetzbl. I, p. 2077), I hereby decree the following: §1 A representation of the Jews will be formed in every [Jewish] community. §2 In communities of up to 10,000 residents, this representation of Jews, known as the Judenrat, (Jewish Council) is composed of 12 Jews from the local population. In communities of more than 10,000 residents it is composed of 24 Jews. The Judenrat will be elected by the Jews from the community. Should a member of the Judenrat leave, a new member is to be elected immediately. §3 The Judenrat elects a chair and a deputy chair from among its members. §4 After these elections, which are to have taken place by 31 December 1939 at the 1. latest, the district governor (Kreishauptmann) responsible—in urban districts the city commander (Stadthautpmann)—is to be informed of the composition of the Judenrat. 2. The district commander (city commander) decides whether the announced composition of the Judenrat is acceptable. He can order that the Judenrat be composed differently. The Judenrat is obliged to accept orders from German authorities via its chair or its deputy chair. It is liable for the conscientious and complete implementation of every aspect of these orders. All male and female Jews are to obey the instructions that the council issues for the implementation of these German orders. Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce

648

Urynowicz

No. 3 Letter by Łódź City President Schiffer to Chaim Rumkowski on Obligations and Entitlements of the Chairman of the Jewish Elders in the City

Published in: Kronika Getta Łódzkiego 1941/1944, Łódź 2009, vol. V, pp. 52–53, typescript, translation from German to the Polish language. Following the instructions by the Head of Police of 8 April 1940, it is strictly forbidden for all residents to leave the grounds of the Ghetto. I am responsible for the strict enforcement of this order. In consequence and on the basis the authorisation by the Head of Government issued in Litzmannstadt on 27 April 1940, I authorise you to carry out all necessary measures required to ensure an organised communal life in the Jewish quarter. You specifically have to guarantee good order in the economic realm, subsistence, work, and health services. You are authorised to take all necessary steps, to issue orders and ensure their execution through the assistance of the Order Service subordinate to you. I authorise you to immediately introduce registration offices where the Ghetto residents have to enlist. Their registers need to provide information about religious and national affiliation. Each week, beginning with 13 May 1940, five copies of these lists have to be dispatched to me. All communication with the German authorities must take place exclusively through you or through the person officially appointed by you, and who has access to the administration on Rynek Bałucki. In order to obtain permission for the appointment of any further representatives, an application must in each case be submitted in advance. In the interest of ensuring subsistence for the Ghetto, you are entitled to impound and distribute any identified supplies. As all Jewish property has been confiscated by German instructions, any property which is not essential for immediate use (such as clothing, subsistence, and abode) needs to be recorded and secured. All general activities require before their execution my prior, written approval. In case of tasks required to avoid imminent danger, my immediate consent can occur orally, or its instruction can be requested in writing. Authorisations by the Litzmannstadt Head of Police remain unaffected by these instructions. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

Epilogue



649

No. 4 Sosnowiec, 30 September 1940: Overview of the Establishment of the Central Office of Jewish Communities in Eastern Upper Silesia. Excerpt from the Newspaper Published by the Chair of the Ältestenrate (Elders’ Councils) of Jewish Communities in Eastern Upper Silesia

Source: AŻIH, Ringelblum Archives, call no. I/5. The original document is typewritten in German. […] When the responsibilities of the chair of the committee of the Jewish Religious Community of Sosnowitz were extended to include other localities in the Dombrowa coal basin, it became necessary to organize the individual communities according to a well-thought-out and uniform plan and to run them according to common guidelines. As long as the number of communities remained relatively small, the work required of the individuals concerned was achievable, though it was bound up with considerable difficulties. Circumstances changed radically after Herr Merin was appointed head of the Council of Elders in the administrative district (Regierungsbezirk) of Katowice on 9 December 1939 and given the task of organizing, or re-organizing, all communities in this district. […] […] The Central Office [of Jewish Communities] is headed by the chair of the Ältestenrat, who represents the Central Office and the individual communities to the German authorities. He is solely accountable for all of its activities. The head has a deputy, who works with him on all aspects and assumes the duties of the head if he is absent. The committee of the Central Office supports the head in an advisory capacity. It is composed of the head’s most long-standing and dependable colleagues. The head convenes meetings of the committee as required. The secretariat, which is run by the secretary general, works with the head [of the Central Office]. The secretary general has a general supervisory function in the communities, either directly or through the county (Kreis) inspectors who work under his authority. In the framework of the aforementioned responsibilities, he also oversees the departmental activities of the Central Office. […] The Central Office currently comprises the following departments: 1. Central legal department, established 1 January 1940; 2. Central welfare department, established 1 February 1940; 3. Central department of health, established 1 February 1940 and re-organized 15 March; 4. Central provisioning department, established 16 March 1940; 5. Central department for schools, established 6 April 1940; 6. Finance and budget department, established 1 July 1940; 7. Administrative department, established

650

Urynowicz

1 August 1940; 8. Department for labour, established 1 August 1940; 9. Department for archives and statistics, established 1 September 1940 […] Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce



No. 5 Sochaczew, 11 December 1940: Letter from the District Commander (Kreishauptmann) of Sochaczów Błonie about Establishing a Jewish Elder in Żyrardów, Creating a Ghetto, and Establishing a Jewish Police Force (Ordnungsdienst)

Source: AŻIH, Ringelblum Archive, call no. I/353. The original document is typewritten in German. The District Commander of Sochaczów Błonie. To the Jewish Elder [Ältester der Juden], Baron, Żyrardów. Enclosed is the first order concerning the establishment of a residential district for the Jews in Żyrardów. You are to implement and obey this order. I appoint you as Jewish Elder and head of the residential district in Żyrardów. You are accountable to me for the proper compliance with my order. You are to set up and be in charge of an Order Service (Ordnungsdienst) of 50 Jews to assist you in completing your tasks. The members of the Order Service are to wear an additional armband, labelled ‘Order Service’. A written list of the members of the Order Service is to be sent without delay to me, to the rural commissioner (Landkommissar) in Żyrardów, and to the mayor of Żyrardów. You are to provide the rural commissioner in Żyrardów and the mayor of Żyrardów immediately with a precise list of the houses that will become vacant in the rest of the town as a result of the Jews moving into the residential district, specifying the amount and the location of these rooms. You are to allocate the apartments in the residential district. Furthermore, you are to comply strictly with the orders issued by me. p.p. [by proxy] [Illegible signature] Inspector Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce

Epilogue



651

No. 6 Warsaw, 31 December 1940: Extracts from a Report by the Warsaw Judenrat ( Jewish Council) on its Activities between 7 October 1939 and 31 December 1940

Source: AŻIH, call no. 221/1. The original document is typewritten in German.

[…] On 7 October 1939 the Security Police appointed the chair of the Judenrat and authorized him to nominate 24 council members from the Jewish Religious Community of Warsaw. These members were confirmed on 15 October 1939. The Judenrat was swiftly established and began to work on the tasks assigned to it by the Security Police. […] The first task was to carry out a census of the entire Jewish population in Warsaw, which the German authorities had scheduled for 28 October 1939. […] While working on this task, the Judenrat was presented with another, which also could not be postponed. This task was to supply the German and municipal authorities with Jewish workers. This [provision of labour] began as soon as 21 October 1939. The meeting on this matter was held 48 hours earlier in the office of the Security Police, and 360 workers were sent out on 21 October. This was how the so-called labour battalion (Arbeiterbataillon) came into being. It supplied as many as 2,395 male workers on 15 December 1939, and as time went by it supplied more and more, up to 10,000 men per day. […] As the labour battalion very soon became a fixed institution within the Jewish community, it was necessary to organize the process of conscripting Jews for whom labour was compulsory. This placed great demands on the Jews responsible. […] These two tasks alone that the community was ordered to carry out (census and labour battalion) made it clear that the Judenrat had to draw up a fixed budget for each month. The finance committee was established for this purpose. The appointment of this committee proved to be all the more essential when, in mid-December 1939, the Judenrat had to assume responsibility for a range of hospitals, homes for the elderly and orphanages that had previously been maintained by the municipal administration of Warsaw. […] In the first days of November 1939 a Security Police representative informed an ad hoc gathering of the Judenrat that a Jewish residential district was to be set up within three days and that the Jews living in the area around the planned district were to vacate their homes within this period. The maps of the town that were submitted to the chair of the Judenrat at the same time contained variable information, making it necessary to seek precise clarification from the authorities. The chair of the Judenrat was later told that the Jews living beyond certain perimeters were permitted to remain in their apartments and only those living right on the edge of the planned prohibited area had to vacate their homes. This regulation led to immense confusion among the Jewish population. However, the chair of the Judenrat managed to get the enforced move postponed for several days, and the order was subsequently entirely revoked. Jews continued to live in all

652

Urynowicz

parts of the town for ten months and while many did have to vacate their homes, most were able to stay on. On 13 March the Judenrat, through the intermediary of the labour battalion, received instructions to cordon off a number of streets with barbed wire within a few days and to set up a sentry unit, which was to guard these streets day and night. […] The Judenrat had barely managed to more or less attend to this matter when, on 12 October 1940 (the Jewish Day of Atonement), the city’s radio station announced the creation of a sealed-off Jewish district. […] As the move [into this district] was to be completed by 1 November, a mass resettlement began, akin to a population migration. The Judenrat expanded the existing accommodation office, which was in contact with the city’s accommodation office, and organized the exchange of apartments between Jews and Aryans. […] The final sealing off of the Jewish residential district with walls and fencing was carried out by the Judenrat and placed a great strain on the budget of the Jewish community. […] It was first necessary to ensure security and order in the Jewish district and for this purpose a Jewish Order Service was established on the instructions of the German authorities. An Order Detachment [Ordnungstrupp] was formed under the supervision of a special commission of the Judenrat and with the assistance of former Jewish security guards and officers. At the end of the year this detachment comprised 1,700 men, of whom 65 are on permanent guard duty and 21 serve as temporary guards. In addition, Jewish Order Service functionaries are summoned daily to provide assistance to the Polish police commissariats. […] As a next step, the chair of the Judenrat appointed a commission to provide security to the property administration. This commission dealt with the appointment of commissioners, property managers, reporting officers, and, in some cases, building caretakers. The Judenrat proposed 57 candidates to act as commissioners and 460 to act as building caretakers. Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce



No. 7 Łódź, March 1941 Excerpt from Biuletyn Kroniki Codziennej Discussing the Contents of Gettocajtung

Source: APŁ, PSŻ 1079, p.58(1), PSŻ 1080, p. 41(2). Published in: Kronika Getta Łódzkiego 1941/1944, Łódź 2009, vol. I, pp. 130–31, Polish language typescript. The second issue of Gettocajtung, the weekly produced by the Chairman of the Jewish Elders, was published on 14 March and, as with the first issue, it sold out in a matter of hours. This issue contains the following articles and information: the front page

Epilogue

653

contains a report on the second conference of workshop directors, entitled ‘Work and Thrift’; a short piece with the headline ‘Caring for the Sick’ discusses the chairman’s plans to expand the network of health centres and in particular hospitals; ‘Not Working to Schedule’ is the title of a report of a conference held by the Chairman with NIK [Supreme Audit Office] inspectors. Next, there are reports on the ceremony to mark the anniversary of the founding of the OD; on progress in relation to the establishment of the Summary Court; on issues concerning benefit payments; on Mr Józef Rumkowski’s work in connection with hospital administration over the last year; information about the opening of new bathing facilities, about a kitchen for workers and Orthodox Jews, about the preparation of baked goods for the homeless, and about the manufacture of an x-ray machine in the ghetto. The fourth and final page carries a copy of Notice no. 229 concerning the letting of vegetable allotments and Notice 232 concerning the allocation of margarine and meat. Finally, in the second issue of Gettocajtung we find an account of the case, sensational even by ghetto standards, of the managers of the carpentry workshop who were punished for corruption at an expedited trial conducted by the chairman in person. Their corrupt behaviour was uncovered by the chairman in the course of establishing the Summary Courts and the expedited hearing took place the day before the new court began to sit. As had already been reported in the Biuletyn, the racketeers were the master carpenters Markowicz and Herszkowicz, who took advantage of the fact that they were authorized to make purchases and provide estimates on behalf of the carpentry workshop and literally terrorized their suppliers and forced them to pay bribes. The chairman ordered the arrest not only of the perpetrators of these dark machinations but also of those who paid the bribes. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 8 Order of the Chairman of the Judenrat, Adam Czerniaków, Concerning the Introduction of Compulsory Saturday Rest for the Population of the Mosaic Faith, Warsaw, 15 April 1941

Source: AŻIH, ARII/135, Polish, Yiddish, and German language typescript.

Pursuant to the order of the Office of the Head of the District of Warsaw, Resettlement Division, Transfer Office dated 20 January 1941, reference Pal/FI/GF, compulsory Saturday rest is hereby introduced for Jews resident in the Jewish district of Warsaw, in place of the Sunday rest hitherto in force (Act dated 18 December 1919, Dz.U.R.P., p.2/20, para.7). The following rules shall apply: §1

654

Urynowicz

Saturday rest shall last continuously from sunset on Friday throughout the whole of Saturday. §2 During this time, all industrial, commercial, and transport establishments shall be closed, as shall other places of employment, even if not operated for profit. §3 The places of employment listed in §2 shall also be closed on the following solemn Jewish holidays: New Year (Rosh Hashanah), Day of Judgement (Yom Kippur), the first, second, eighth, and ninth day of the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot), the first, second, seventh, and eighth day of Easter (Pesach) and the first and second day of Pentecost (Shavuot), as well as on the Christian holidays listed in the directive of the Governor General dated 16 March 1940 (Dz.Rozp.G.G., Part 1, no. 21/1940), namely: 1 January (New Year), 6 January (Epiphany), Easter Sunday and Monday, Ascension Day, Sunday and Monday of Pentecost, Corpus Christi, All Saints’ Day and the two days of Christmas. §4 On Saturdays, Jewish holidays, and Christian holidays, residents may undertake that work which is essential because of its social utility and the everyday needs of the population. This applies in particular to the maintenance of the water supply, lighting, cleaning, transportation, work in pharmacies, hotels, and restaurants (to the extent necessary), in bathhouses, healthcare institutions, and those establishments which operate continuously to carry out work which, because of the technical nature of the production methods involved, cannot be interrupted. §5 On Sundays and those Christian holidays which are not listed in  §3, the places of employment listed in §2 shall be open at the times permitted by the authorities. §6 This order shall not apply to any work which, as a result of the direct or indirect instructions of the Transferstelle of the Head of the District of Warsaw and in view of circumstances, must also be undertaken on Saturdays. §7 This order shall not apply to persons who are not of the Mosaic faith. §8 The remaining provisions of the Act of 18 December 1919 concerning work times in industry and commerce (Dz.U.R.P., p.2/20, para.7) shall remain in force. §9 In accordance with art. 14 of the Act of 18 December 1919, any infringement of the terms of this order shall be punishable by means of a fine of between 200 zł and 1000 zł or by a period of custody of up to 3 months and, in the event of further infringement, by means of a period of imprisonment of between two weeks and three months. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

Epilogue



655

No. 9 Kraków, 10 August 1941 Excerpt from an Article in Gazeta Żydowska Concerning a Meeting of the Jewish Council in Warsaw

Source: Gazeta Żydowska, 10.08.1941, Biblioteka Narodowa, Polish language typescript. […] The Chairman announced the realization of a loan for the Jewish Council as an advance on the draft budget submitted to the authorities. He further informed the meeting about plans to establish an experimental kitchen to test and evaluate the products currently used to prepare meals in the public kitchens. Finally, he reported on efforts to secure for the Jewish population the benefit of their own Insurance Company, and announced a proposed order concerning the unrestricted possession of cash and a plan to engage the unemployed in the demolition of ruined buildings. The chairman of the supply office, Mr A. Gepner, presented a report on the work currently being undertaken by that department. Amongst others, he raised the issue of assistance from bodies other than the Jewish Council in the effort to provide food for the Jewish population, pointing out that such assistance was negligible. […] Councillor Engineer Sztolcman stated that as part of the subsistence programme, the Jewish population would increasingly have recourse to preserved food and other products with which it is unfamiliar. […] Councillor Rozen proposed that the bodies supervised by the council should be required to provide detailed financial reports with particular reference to the subsistence programme. In addition, he submitted that the reorganization of the Jewish Council’s Department for Social Welfare should be accelerated, to enable all resources to be integrated into a single organization. Next to be discussed were issues relating to collective production in the workshops organized by the Jewish Council. The deputy chairman of the council’s manufacturing commission, Mr Orlean, stated that the question of increasing the number of collective workshops, and thus the number of workers, was proving difficult since the cost of labour is too low in comparison with the market price of foodstuffs. […] Mr Jaszuński maintained that it was vital to increase the output of the Jewish district at all costs, even if it meant operating at a loss, since this was not a question of commercial calculation but a matter of existential necessity. […] Councillor Rozen reported on the work of the Department of Labour, citing the number of those employed in the camps and those employed in situ. Councillor Lichtenbaum reported on marketplaces and bus routes. At the conclusion of the meeting, Councillor-Attorney Zundelewicz raised the issue of provisions for prison inmates in the Jewish district and announced that a statute dealing with the care of prisoners, as recommended by the council chairman, was being drafted. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

656

Urynowicz

No. 10 Warsaw, 7 December 1941 Excerpts from Stanisław Różycki’s24 Account of His Visit to the Warsaw Ghetto Entitled ‘This Is the Ghetto! An Attempt at an Objective Look at the Condition of Jewish Institutions and a Depiction of the Grotesque Nature of the Autonomy Established in the Ghetto by the Occupier

Source, AZIH, AR, I/428, Polish language typescript.

[…] I went in! I crossed a border not only between population zones or districts but the borders of reality itself, because what I saw and experienced is completely beyond the grasp of our intellect or our senses or our imagination. […] I noticed another phenomenon. The place was full of new offices: self-government offices, community offices, Jewish offices. The Council of the Jewish Community, Commissions, Departments, Bureaus. New institutions dealing with welfare, public order, health, community affairs. And the novel, none too amusing sight of the caps of Jewish police officers bustling around the streets for no good reason. […] When Poland was independent, Jews were barred from all state institutions and offices. There were no Jewish police officers, local government officials, postal workers, prison wardens, caretakers, orderlies, couriers, etc. Ranks of the unemployed knocked in vain at the doors of state dignitaries. Now, ironically, their dreams have come true. […] ‘Ironically’ because, sadly, all this is a caricature, at once farcical and macabre. Imagine a country or a city run by an administration which has no legislation with which to regulate public behaviour, no budget, no authority, no citizenry, no executive to carry out its orders, no judiciary, and no means of enforcement; an administration moreover which at the whim of the commissar for the Jewish district can be wiped off the face of the earth! That is why, whatever harsh and negative comments can be made about these offices, it is important in all fairness to assert that any work they do under these circumstances is a miracle! […] So let us look at our authorities through the eyes of an unbiased observer. […] It is difficult to capture the legal structure of the community, the sources of its power, and the scope of its responsibilities. The chairman of the community is appointed by the commissar of the Jewish district who can at a moment’s notice have him fired, imprisoned, beaten up, sent to a camp, or even shot. His role therefore can only be compared to some sort of chief superintendent of slaves. […] He lives in a permanent state of uncertainty; he does not know whether his next move will cost him his freedom or his health or his life. On the other hand, […] he is not in any measure responsible to the Jewish community, except perhaps morally. […] He appoints members of the Assembly as he sees fit […], he appoints officials, directors, heads of department. 24

Stanisław Różycki is among the least well-known contributors to the Oyneg Shabes group in the Warsaw Ghetto, and no further details (including his life dates) are available.

Epilogue

657

Within the ambit set by the commissar, he exercises his power in the manner of a dictator. However, the Nazi authorities are not interested in ghetto life as a whole but only in a few specific aspects of it, and so once they have extracted the money and the workers, etc., they need, they leave it to the Jews to organize their own lousy, miserable lives of incarceration and slavery. […] […] The renowned and notorious ‘order guard’ is the subject of universal hatred, contempt and revulsion. […] There is no discipline whatsoever and its attempts to maintain a semblance of prestige are comic and burlesque. The ‘Commanders’ are taken up with the uniforms, distinctions, stars, and truncheons which clearly impress them so much. […] What is the actual function of the order guard? They maintain order at all offices and institutions, they guard the perimeter road exits, the walls, the exit gates and ramps, they instal tenants in accordance with the orders of the Quartermaster’s Office, they assist the Sanitary Service and above all they scuttle around the streets, intervening in every issue, poking their noses everywhere, being meddlesome, arrogant, greedy, and demoralized. Their salaries are minimal and their main income derives from […] the systematic practice of bribery. […] At the police station, while writing out a statement or filling in a form, between one line and the next, a whispered voice asks ‘Perhaps you might be interested in some soap. I have some cheap injections as well’. […] […] [There is] a relatively widespread network of public institutions which play a critical role in the provision of social welfare. […] The only institution which receives official grants from the Germans and the Poles is the JHK (Jüdisches Hilfskommitee). Their function is to distribute 100,000 portions of soup every day for no more than 70 gr each. […] This cupful of soup saves literally thousands of people from starving to death. […] ŻTOS, which was developed with the backing of the former ‘Joint’, is the most widespread and popular association and, together with TOZ and Centros, it handles almost all the care and assistance provided to the various strata of ghetto society. It must be said that the organization and development of social activity have been conceived and carried through boldly and on a grand scale. The pride of the Association is undoubtedly the division of the ghetto into cells of various sizes. The district cells come under the authority of the Central Office, while the districts themselves have expertly set up House Committees. […] These most basic building blocks of community life are flourishing. In the current changed circumstances, houses have become central to the life of all their inhabitants, providing mutual self-help, cooperation, support for orphans, help with obtaining sufficient food and clothing, emergency and medical assistance, as well as reading rooms, lectures, clubs, social evenings, entertainment of various sorts, a Women’s Association and an Association for the Support of Orphans. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

658

Urynowicz

No. 11 Warsaw, 21 May 1942 Excerpt from the Jewish Police Service Regulations

Source: AŻIH, AR, I/227, Polish language typescript.

[…] Every SP25 officer must comply with the orders and instructions of his superiors. He must be ready to assist his colleagues and must be polite to others. […] The tactful and courteous treatment of every citizen is a fundamental requirement of the office. Anyone approaching an officer of the SP for assistance wishes and is entitled to see him as his protector. […] On his daily patrols, the officer must: 1) Walk on the pavement along the side of the road (by the kerb). 2) Answer questions from members of the public courteously and as comprehensively as possible. 3) Provide assistance to everyone who needs it. 4) In order to prevent crime and especially theft, pay attention to what is happening around him. 5) Quell any disorder and if necessary detain the person responsible. 6) Report any offences to his superior officer […]. 7) When called upon to do so, assist with the removal of persons infringing legal regulations on private property or persons causing trouble in public place. 8) Record in his official notebook and report all incidents, accidents, explosions, instances of people collapsing in the street or being bitten by dogs, and any other circumstances indicative of someone’s personal liability. 9) Take note of all public property situated in or near the streets and record any damage; persons who deliberately damage such objects shall be detained. 10) If any building is at risk of collapse because of its condition, the officer should station himself nearby in order to alert passersby and at the same time cause the building’s administrators and the regional authorities to be informed. 11) Promptly report any dangerous damage to roads or pavements. 12) Immediately regulate road traffic if it has stopped for any reason. 13) If any articles are positioned in such a way as to attract thieves, he should alert the owner without delay. […] When detaining a suspect, the SP officer shall use the words: ‘I arrest you in the name of the law’ and then state the reason for the arrest. Arrest is synonymous with the use of force. However, force shall only be used to the extent necessary to prevent the escape of the person detained. The person detained shall not in any event be treated roughly or subjected to any verbal abuse. […] Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska

25

Służba Porządkowa, Polish for the Ordnungsdienst.

Epilogue



659

No. 12 Warsaw, 22 July 1942: Order Issued by the Commissioner for Operation Reinhard to the Warsaw Judenrat ( Jewish Council) on the Resettlement of the Jews of Warsaw, with Instructions for Its Implementation

Source: AŻIH, Ringelblum Archive, II/192. The original document is typewritten in German. Information and Requirements for the Judenrat. The Judenrat is hereby informed of the following: All Jewish persons living in Warsaw, irrespective of age or gender, are to be reset1. tled to the East. 2. The following are exempt from the resettlement: a) All Jewish persons who are employed by the German authorities or offices and can provide evidence of this; b) All Jewish members of the Judenrat who are employed by the Judenrat (as of the day of the publication of the order); c) All Jewish persons who are employed by Reich German firms and can provide evidence of this; d) All Jews fit for work who have not yet been called up for labour; these persons are to be quartered in barracks in the Jewish residential district; e) All Jewish persons who are on staff at the Jewish hospitals. The same applies to members of the Jewish disinfection unit; f) All Jewish persons who belong to the Jewish Order Service (Ordnungsdienst); g) All Jewish persons who are close relatives of the persons listed in a) to f). Only wives and children are classed as close relatives; h) All Jewish persons who are patients in one of the Jewish hospitals on the first day of the resettlement and cannot be discharged. The Judenrat will designate a doctor to assess whether or not patients are fit to be discharged. […] 4. A) In the course of the resettlement, the following requirements will be imposed on the Judenrat, and the lives of the members of the Judenrat depend on them following these requirements to the letter: […] The Judenrat is hereby informed that if the orders and requirements issued to it are not implemented 100% a corresponding number of the currently detained hostages will be shot. Dictated by the Commissioner for the Resettlement. Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce

660

Urynowicz

No. 13 Fragments from the Minutes of a Meeting Convened by the Head of the Jewish ‘Service of Order’, Jakub Gens, about the Role of This Agency in the Measures against the Jewish Population of Oszmiana

Minutes from the meeting, devoted to the question of the Aktion in Oszmiana, 27 October 1942 Source: Moreshet Archives, D. 1.357, typewritten in Yiddish. In Attendance: Head of the Ghetto, Mr J. Gens; Commissioner Dessler, Director of the Department of Health; Milkanowicki, substitute for the Head of the Ghetto, Fried; Mr Fishman, liaison Brojdo; Rabbi Jakubson; Mr. Kalmanowicz; Director of the Gate Guard, Mr Levas; Director of the Labor Police, Towbin; Director of the 1st Police Precinct, Ring; Natanzon, P.; and Ganiądzka, M. Mr J. Gens: Gentlemen, I invited you today so as to relate one of the most horrible tragedies in the life of the Jews—when Jews led Jews to [their] death. I would like to speak openly once more. A week ago Weiss came from the S.D. and gave us an order in the name of the S.D. to come to Oszmiana. In Oszmiana there were approximately 4,000 Jews and it was impossible to contain so many Jews in Oszmiana. Thus, it would be necessary to downsize the ghetto—select the people who were unfit for the Germans, take them out and shoot them. The first series to be taken out would be the women and children, [those] whose husbands were taken away a year ago by the ‘snatchers’. The second series would be women and children. When we received this order, we responded: ‘At your command.’ Mr Dessler and Jewish Police left for Oszmiana. After 2–3 days, the Jewish Police ascertained and reported to the Gebietskommissariat (in Vilna), that firstly, the women whose husbands were taken away last year were employed and could not be taken away, and secondly, there were no families with 4–5 children whatsoever. At most, there were families with 3 children. There were only a few with 3 children. Thus, that could also not be. (I forgot to say that we had to take away no fewer than 1,500 people.) We said that we could not present such a number. We began to bargain. When Mr Dessler arrived with the report from Oszmiana, the number dropped to 800. When I left with Weiss for Oszmiana, the number dropped again to 600. In reality, the situation was different. We bargained about the 600 and during that time, the question of women and children was meanwhile dropped, and the question of elderly people remained. In reality, in Oszmiana 406 elderly people were assembled. The elderly people were handed over. When Weiss came the first time and spoke about women and children, I told him that we should take elderly people. He responded: ‘The elderly people will in either case die during the winter, and we need to downsize the ghetto today.’

Epilogue

661

The Jewish Police saved those who had to survive. Those who had little [life] left to live were taken away, and may the elderly Jews forgive us. They were a sacrifice for our Jews—for our future. I do not want to speak about what our Jews from Vilna lived through in Oszmiana. Today, I simply regret that in Kiemieliszki and in Bystrzyca there were no Jews [present] at the Aktion. Last week they shot all the Jews there without [any] distinction. Today, 2 Jews came to me from Święciany (Old- Święciany) and asked to be saved. Jews are there from Święciany, Widze, and other surrounding towns. And today, I further pose the question to myself about what is to happen if we have to carry out a segregation [i.e. selection] once more. My duty is to tell them: Good Jews, away with you; I do not want to sully my hands and send my police to do this filthy work. Today I say that my duty is to sully my hands, because the Jewish people are now living through terrible times. When 5 million people are already gone, our duty is to save the strong and young—not only in years, but also in spirit, and not to play with sentiments. When the rabbi in Oszmiana was told that they were lacking the number of people [required] and that 5 elderly Jews were hiding out in a moline [from Pol. melina, hiding place], he said that the moline should be opened. That is a person with a strong, young spirit. […] I do not know whether everyone will understand and defend this, and whether one will defend it again after we have left the ghetto, but this is the standpoint of the police: to save all whom we can, not to look at our own good name and personal experiences. Everything that I have related is not tasteful for the soul, or secondarily, for our lives. We should not know of all this. I have drawn you into a horrible secret that must remain in our hearts. I want to show what the police did who carried out the terrible work, which segregated people and said ‘left’ and ‘right’—for example, Levas and Ring; Towbin, who guarded the Jews beside the burial grave; Dessler, who organized the entire job; Goniądzka, who recorded who was taken away, the way that one records ‘merchandise’ (how many sacks arrived); and Polia, whose job was also with the same tastefulness. This is not a tribunal. I only want people of society, people of the Gemara [i.e. the Talmud], [to know and understand] what [a] ghetto is from the other side [i.e. from the inside], what [the] police are, and what the paths upon which other Jews happen to tread are.26 26

Gens is directing his speech at the morally upright and religious Jews—quite possibly in the future—conveying that he wants them to know and understand what it meant to live inside the ghetto during the Second World War. He is imploring the more respected members of Jewish society not to judge the Jewish Police, who were faced with the terrible task of deciding who would remain inside the ghetto and who would be marched off to their deaths. In his view, it was the task of the Jewish Police to do all in their power to save those who could be saved and to limit the death toll, carrying out the tasks with which nobody else wished to be burdened. When Gens refers to ‘the paths upon which

662

Urynowicz

From you, gentlemen, I want moral support. We all want to live to leave the ghetto. Today, when we work, understand, it may be that many Jews cannot feel the full danger under which we work. Nobody from among us understands how many times daily one can go to Ponar…. It happened that I personally came to be on the battle field. I was not frightened at the time, but rather later, when I remembered it. The same thing is with us. We will live through everything well—after the ghetto. Today we just want to have strength. He who believes should say: God should help us. He who does not believe should say that the spirit of society as a whole and of Jewish patriotism should help him; to tolerate it all and to remain a human being after the ghetto for the great Jewish future. Rosenberg27 said recently that the mission of the Germans is to rout out Jewry from Europe. I do not know what he means. Were he to come to us in the ghetto, he would certainly have been frightened of us: people chased away into molines. In Ponar, those who were chased away from families, in the course of 1 year built up a new life, built up a great deal more than the Aryans—and that is Jewry: a strong spirit and belief that we will live. In order for Rosenberg’s words not to become a reality, we will fight today; and in every fight the end justifies the means, and other times the means are horrible. Unfortunately, we must fight with all means so as to combat the opponents. Jewry did not see blood for these two thousand years. We saw fire, but we did not see blood. Today the ghetto saw it. Jews came from Ponary with shot-through hands and legs. One time, 5 women lay in the hospital along with a child. They had come from Ponary. Today the Jewish people have become familiar with blood; and thereafter, one loses one’s sentiments. I would like to draw you in somewhat to life and to make clear to you what bare life, the bare fight is. For that reason, I have called upon you people, who are far removed from the police. Mr Dessler: Unfortunately, I am not a publicist or a writer. That is a shame, because my account will be very dry. We received the order. It was horrible. We are accustomed, though, to there not being any discussions. I selected the strongest policemen—30 people, and we left by automobile for Oszmiana. On the way, we stopped in a village, Miedniki. That is where they wanted to concentrate all the Jews who were driven out of Oszmiana, and to take them from there to be shot. The Oszmiana ghetto is large. It lies in the middle of the town, surrounded by wire. Thus, the first day was easy: one became acquainted with the population, handed out the positions, provided the police with places of residence and food. For me, personally,

27

other Jews happen to tread’, he is referring to the cruel tasks members of the Jewish Police were taxed in carrying out the Germans’ Aktionen. Alfred Rosenberg (1893–1946) was among the most prominent representatives of national-socialist ideology, and a leading member of the NSDAP.

Epilogue

663

this was difficult, because nobody from among my people knew why they were going. With me was a Gestapo employee. He informed the Oszmiana Judenrat that 1,200 women and children were needed for labour. The Oszmiana Judenrat asked whether we should understand this as being more than what he had demanded. The German replied that the entire Judenrat together with their families ‘was coming along’ (as per the question). We wrote this up in a motivational manner; that without the Judenrat it would be hard for us to work. He said that he was leaving us responsible for it, and that afterwards, the first rank to suffer would be the Vilna ghetto. It was difficult for me the entire time to select policemen and to go to a new town and take away peoples’ lives from them. This is difficult not only from a moral  … [Original Yiddish text incomplete] Translated from Yiddish by Rivka Schiller



No. 14 Żółkiew, 1941–1944 Excerpts from a Postwar Account of the Work of the Local Judenrat and the Duplicity of the German Authorities

Source: YVS, JM 359, Polish language typescript.

[…] The Nazi authorities are looking for people to make up the so-called Altestenrat, later renamed the Judenrat. Dr Mozes Sobel, who was ordered by the Nazis to set up this council immediately, is scurrying around trying to find people willing to take on such a great responsibility. At first they refused, but when all is said and done a council has to be formed and there is already talk of a ‘contribution’…. The Judenrat was formed of the following Jews: Chairman: Fobus Rubinfeld; Deputy Chairman: Dr Abraham Strich; Members: Engineer Wilhelm Lichtenberg, Dr Filip Czaczkes, Dr Mozes Sobel, Ozjasz Czaczkes, Dr Rubin Zimerman, Natan Apfel, Szymon Wolf, Mojżesz Rittel, Efroim Landau, and a few others. With the exception of Dr Rubinfeld and Mr Lichtenberg who resigned soon afterwards, the composition of the council remained largely unchanged throughout. Immediately after the Altestenrat had been approved by the authorities, we were blessed with a demand for a contribution of half a million roubles, 50 kg of silver and 5 kg of gold, to be paid within 48 hours. Dr M. Wachs was arrested and taken hostage. A civic commission was convened straight away and immediately began to impose levies on individual Jews. It worked all night and completed its task the following day, appealing for all levies to be paid without delay. As often happens in such situations, there were complaints from certain citizens that they were being put upon, but in general the Jews of Żółkiew passed this test with flying colours. Many gave more than the commission had required. The sense of solidarity and collective responsibility outweighed

664

Urynowicz

any self-interest. ‘Landkommissar’ Rockendorf acknowledged that the levy had been duly paid. […] 15 March 1942. On this day the Judenrat (a significant number of whom had died of typhus so that towards the end the only ones left were the chairman, Dr Rubinfeld, himself barely able to walk after a bout of typhus, N. Apfel, E. Landau, Dr Leib Fisch, and maybe two others) received an order to summon all males under 50 years of age, whether employed or not, to the Sokół sports ground the following day. It was announced that a new work camp was being established in Żółkiew and the chairman was advised in confidence that he should try to get everyone to attend because this camp meant that there would be no further round-ups!!! That was the last time Dr Rubinfeld believed anything the Gestapo said. He ordered the Jewish militia to help drag people from their houses and ensure they were washed and shaved, and then instructed his militia to escort around 600 mainly young Jews to the sports ground at 8 o’clock in the morning. They did not have long to wait because the German military police together with the Ukrainian militia soon moved in and surrounded them. Shortly afterwards Hauptsturmfuehrer Wilhans, the Commander of the Janowska Jewish labour camp, arrived from Lwów with his entourage and, having counted the number of those present, ordered all 600 to be loaded onto the waiting trucks. Even the ever zealous Jewish militia was not spared. The chairman managed with some difficulty to save a few of them, but only the older ones. It was a so-called ‘bloodless pogrom’! The following day, when I had the chance to speak to the chairman about this operation, I reproached him, saying that his zeal had cost us practically everyone. He admitted that he had made a mistake but said that if that number of people had not been present when Wilhens arrived, he would undoubtedly have hauled them out of their houses himself and the consequences might have been even worse. There is a measure of truth in that argument. 25 March 1943. Thursday. At around 5:30 am we were woken by the sound of gunfire, a sound familiar to us from the November raid. We knew what it meant. Our time was up! And it was only the previous evening that we had talked at length about there being no danger of anything happening to us before 15 April…. After all, the God of the town himself, SS-Hauptsturmführer Pappe, together with his secretary had assured us of that! […] The ‘finishing off’ in the Borek woods behind the Catholic cemetery took place as follows. The Jews who were herded there initially on foot and later in trucks were made to strip naked and kneel down in front of great pits, which, unbeknownst to anyone in the ghetto, had been dug a week earlier. Then drunken Ukrainian policemen and Gestapo officers shot them with machine guns. […] On that day, i.e. 25 March 1943, the Judenrat was ‘liquidated’ as well, together with the Jewish militia. Dr Rubinfeld and other members were driven to Borek and there they were told that they would be taken to the Janowska camp in Lwów. Some of the

Epilogue

665

militia were indeed transported there. The chairman took the view that his place was here and he had no intention of dying out in Lwów, and so the Gestapo shot him along with the rest of the Judenraters. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 15 Warsaw, 12 February 1940 Excerpt from the Account Prepared by Michał Weichert of the Discussions Held in the Stadthauptmann’s Office in the Presence of the Chairman of the Ältestenrat, Adam Czerniaków, in Relation to the Formation of the Jewish Self-Help Society and the Jewish Social Welfare Association

Source: AŻIH, AR II/1, Polish language typescript.

[…] Chairman Czerniaków presented the letter from Mr Dengel, the president of the city of Warsaw, concerning the creation of the Jewish Self-Help Society and stated that I had attended with him in my capacity as head of the Coordinating Commission of Social and Welfare Organizations, responsible for the social welfare of Jews. I added that until now we had been under the supervision of the Social Welfare Department of the District Leader, but that last Saturday Mr Graebsch28 had informed me that we would now be answerable to the President of Warsaw and thus had referred me to Dr Ilg.29 Dr Ilg responded that social welfare in Warsaw now came under the jurisdiction of the president of Warsaw and that he was the president’s clerk (Sachbearbeiter).30 He then took from his pocket a piece of paper from which he read out a few passages concerning social self-help in the General Government. […] An Auxiliary Commission (Haupthilfsausschuss) attached to the General Governor’s office was being established to act as an advisory and distributive body. It would be made up of five Poles and one representative of the Jewish population ( jüdischer Vertreter). […] Quite apart from that, a Polish Self-Help Society and a separate Jewish Self-Help Society were being set up. Each was to take charge of all voluntary social care. The creation of the ŻSS, of which the President of Warsaw had informed the Chairman of the Council of Elders, would take place in this context. […]

28 29 30

Roman Graebsch (dates unknown)—deputy head of the Nazi Social Welfare (Natzionalsozialistiche Volkswohlfahrt-NSV) which at the time controlled the Jewish Mutual Aid. Alfons Ilg (1909–1951)—according to Michał Weichert, Ilg was the head of the German Social Welfare department (Bevölkerung und Fürsorge) in the Office of the Mayor (Stadtpräsident) and a representative of the German Red Cross. German in the original, as are the two later cases in this item.

666

Urynowicz

Dr Ilg added that the activity of the Jewish Social Welfare Association should be confined to Jews, i.e. both the collection and the distribution of funds must be exclusively restricted to Jews. Apart from that, so long as the apparatus operated efficiently, he would not interfere in internal issues. […] I asked for permission to approach him if necessary, without requesting an appointment in advance. In the Department of Social Welfare of the district leader (Abteilung Volkswohlfahrt) I had been permanently allocated two days a week. I did not see the need to set specific days but I wished to have the option to present myself if the need arose. Dr Ilg agreed to this. Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 16 Kraków, 29 May 1940: Statutes of the Jewish Social Self-Help ( Jüdische Soziale Selbshilfe)

Source: AŻIH, call no. 211/1 Appendix. The original document is typewritten in German. § 1. The providers of non-statutory Jewish welfare and care will be merged into the Jewish Social Self-Help (JSS). Membership of the Jewish Social Self-Help will not influence the autonomy of these organizations, the statutes and assets of which remain inviolable in so far as the Jewish Social Self-Help is concerned. An exception applies in cases where special arrangements have been made with the authorization of the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General. § 2. The headquarters of the Jewish Social Self-Help is in Kraków. § 3. The Jewish Social Self-Help has the following tasks: 1. To run the entire system of independent and institutional Jewish welfare. 2.To merge all independent welfare organizations in the General Government into an organization that pursues uniform activities. 3.To carry out general welfare activities. 4.To adopt all measures necessary to generate the resources required to fulfil the purpose of the statutes. 5.To distribute material and cash donations among those members of the population who are in need of welfare. 6.To establish, maintain, or support welfare agencies and institutions. 7.To maintain cooperation with foreign welfare organizations through the commissioner of the German Red Cross, who acts as intermediary for the Governor General for the occupied Polish territories. § 4. The tasks of the Jewish Social Self-Help listed in § 3 are only to be carried out for the Jewish population. § 5. 1. The Jewish Social Self-Help is composed of at least 7 full members. Full members can only join with the approval of the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General. 2. Additional members, particularly non-statutory welfare organizations and associations, can join the Jewish Social Self-Help as supporting members, provided that

Epilogue

667

this is authorized by the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General. 3. A member of the Jewish Social Self-Help is only permitted to leave the organization at the end of a financial year. 4. A member can only be excluded by the board with the permission of the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General, or if corresponding instructions are issued by the Governor General. § 6. 1. The board of the Jewish Social Self-Help is composed of a chairman and a deputy chairman. 2. The board members are elected for one financial year by the full members mentioned in § 5(1). 3.The elected board members must be approved by the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General. § 7. 1. The day-to-day business of the Jewish Social Self-Help is managed by an executive director and, depending on need, additional auxiliaries, who are appointed by the board (§ 6). The department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General is to be informed without delay of any contracts of employment. 2. Existing contracts are to be rescinded immediately should instructions to do so be received from the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General. § 8. 1. The Jewish Social Self-Help is fully accountable for its activities to the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General and is obliged to provide any information required. 2. In addition, plans for the distribution of donations from foreign organizations require the permission of the commissioner of the German Red Cross at the Office of the Governor General. § 9. The board of the Jewish Social Self-Help issues rules of procedure, which must be authorized by the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General. § 10. 1. In order for the Jewish Social Self-Help to carry out its duties, its members are required to pay contributions, the amount of which is to be fixed annually for each member for one financial year. 2.The Jewish Social Self-Help can receive additional resources from state and local subsidies, cash and material donations, collections, lotteries, and other contributions from living persons or arising as a result of death. Collections may only be held at designated collection points. It is forbidden to collect donations from door to door with name lists. § 11. The financial year begins on 1 April and ends on 31 March of the following year. The first financial year ends on 31 March 1941. § 12. 1. The Jewish Social Self-Help establishes Jewish aid committees as required at the offices of the district commanders (Kreishauptleute) and city commanders (Stadthauptleute). Each committee is composed of 5 members and can only be established with the permission of the relevant district commander (Kreishauptmann) or city commander (Stadthauptmann). A member is to be dismissed should the district commander (city commander) responsible so order. 2. The aid committees fulfil the responsibilities of the Jewish Social Self-Help in their area as laid out in the statutes. § 13. The Jewish aid committees named in  § 12 act on behalf of the Jewish Social Self-Help and do not have their own rights and obligations. In addition, the Jewish

668

Urynowicz

aid committees remain subordinate and accountable to the Jewish Social Self-Help and the district commander (city commander) responsible for them, and are bound to their instructions. § 14. Amendments to these statutes are only legally valid if they are adopted unanimously at a meeting of members and approved by the department for internal affairs in the Office of the Governor General. Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce



No. 17 Kraków, 29 May 1940: Rules of Procedure of the Jewish Social Self-Help

Source: AŻIH, call no. 211/1 Appendix. The original document is typewritten in German. I. Rules of procedure of the Jewish Social Self-Help § 1. Throughout the territory of the General Government the organization shall only be called Jewish Social Self-Help (JSS). Other titles are not permitted. The aid committees shall add a corresponding supplement to the designation ‘Jewish Social Self-Help’. § 2. To ensure that the branches of the Jewish Social Self-Help can be identified from the outside, its premises and offices shall be labelled with signs. These signs will contain the words Jewish Social Self-Help in Polish and German and, if necessary, with additional information to describe the office concerned. § 3. The Jewish Social Self-Help and all of its branches are under the supervision of the department for internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. To the extent that the Jewish Social Self-Help receives donations from foreign organizations via the commissioner of the German Red Cross, the plans for distributing these donations [among the Jewish population] must also be authorized by the commissioner of the German Red Cross at the office of the Governor General. § 4. The official in charge of non-statutory welfare in the department for internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General will be delegated on a permanent basis for the purpose of ensuring cooperation between nonstatutory welfare organizations and the state welfare system. § 5. 1. The 7 full members form the committee of the Jewish Social Self-Help and each member simultaneously assumes one of the following duties: A. Chairman. B. Deputy chairman. C. Finance. D. Health. E. Labour and economic aid. F. Food aid. G. Organization and personnel matters. They are accountable to the German administration in exercising these duties. 2. Committee members are elected by the assembly of full members (§ 5(1) of the statutes) and must be approved by the department of internal affairs (population matters

Epilogue

669

and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. 3. The membership contributions are set by the committee (cf. § 10(1) of the statutes) and must be authorized by the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. 4. The executive director is responsible for management and dayto-day administration, in conjunction with additional employees, the appointment of whom is regulated in § 7 of the statutes. § 6. The conclusion of contracts regarding objects of particular significance requires the authorization of the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. The same applies to the initiation of legal proceedings in court. § 7. The establishment of independent welfare facilities requires the authorization of the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. The department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General is to be involved in all negotiations on plans for such facilities. § 8. A regular meeting of the committee is to be held in the period from the 3rd to the 7th of each month in the headquarters of the Jewish Social Self-Help. A report for the preceding months is to be presented at this meeting. § 9. The full members (§ 5(1) of the statutes) are proposed by the committee members and approved by the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. They form the board of the committee, provided that they are not members [of the committee]. They hold meetings as and when the committee deems necessary. The reports in particular are to be presented and discussed at the board meetings. § 10. The department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General is to be informed in advance about every meeting of the Jewish Social Self-Help and every committee meeting. The invitation to the respective meetings is to be sent to the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General well in advance. § 11. Minutes of every meeting or assembly are to be taken by the chair. The minutes are written in German and Polish. The department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General will be provided with the German version, whereby the German text shall have precedence. § 12. 1. By the 2nd day of each month, the Jewish Social Self-Help is to submit an activity report for the preceding month to the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. The report will cover the following: A. Important business matters. B. Planning of new projects. C. Experiences and proposals regarding the organization of non-statutory welfare in the territory of the General Government. D. Summary of the assistance granted. E. Status of assets and

670

Urynowicz

monthly accounts. 2. In the same way, an annual report is to be submitted for the previous financial year within two months of the end of a financial year. § 13. The Jewish Social Self-Help is to draw up a budget for each financial year. The budget must be authorized by the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. § 14. The Jewish Social Self-Help has an official stamp that reads: Jewish Social Self-Help (JSS). § 15. If the Jewish Social Self-Help produces a bulletin, this is to be submitted to the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General for approval prior to publication. The bulletin is thereupon to appear in Polish. A German translation is to be submitted with the application for approval of the publication of the bulletin. § 16. Announcements, clarifications, articles for the press, or appeals published in other forms require the prior authorization of the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. § 17. 1. The full members of the Jewish Social Self-Help and the aid committee will be issued with photo identification by the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. This identification document provides confirmation of activity for the Jewish Social Self-Help. 2. Misuse of this identification document will result in prosecution and disciplinary procedures. § 18. The visible identification of members of the Jewish Social Self-Help and its subdivisions with badges, armbands, and so on is forbidden. § 19. The work of the Jewish Aid Committee (JHK) is to be carried out in accordance with these rules of procedure, with the proviso that the relevant district commander (Kreishauptmann) or city commander (Stadthauptmann) is the responsible authority rather than the department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General. § 20. The task of the Aid Committee is to provide assistance to those in need in line with the resources available, but in particular: 1. In the event of natural disasters, to adopt aid measures immediately and before state aid is granted. 2. To put immediate relief measures in place for refugees and evacuees prior to their deployment in new places of work, though not on a permanent basis. 3. To place children and teenagers in orphanages or replacement families if their parents or guardians have died or if they are not receiving adequate upbringing and care, and, if need be, to award a financial subsidy for this purpose. 4. To support members of the population in need in soup kitchens through the provision of additional food products or financial contributions. 5. To support families who are in need of welfare as a result of unemployment until unemployment insurance is awarded, and to assist in finding accommodation for unemployed persons. 6. To be involved in combating prostitution. 7.To provide assistance to the relatives of prisoners of war before they are awarded state aid. 8. To

Epilogue

671

establish, maintain, or support welfare agencies and facilities that fulfil these tasks. 9. To take up collections of cash and material donations within the territory of the district (Kreis) or city command (Stadthauptmannschaft) with the authorization of the district commander. 10.To apply to the relevant agencies for the award of state and local resources to implement welfare-related tasks. II. Rules of procedure of the Jewish Social Self-Help § 1. 1. The department of internal affairs (population matters and welfare) in the Office of the Governor General is to be provided with copies of all written correspondence of the Jewish Social Self-Help on the same day that the correspondence is sent out. 2. In turn, the same applies to all correspondence between the advisors for the district head and the Aid Committee. 3. Correspondence between the Jewish Social Self-Help and the Aid Committee shall be written only in German or Polish. § 2. Contracts classified as of particular significance under § 6 of the first rules of procedure are considered to be contracts related to items of a value exceeding 2,000 złoty. § 3. The appropriate German administrative office is to be informed of journeys undertaken on the instruction of a branch of a welfare agency in connection with institutional or free welfare. Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce



No. 18 Warsaw, 1940 Directions Issued by the ŻSS to the Organizers of House Committees

Source: AŻIH, ŻSS, file ref.. 211/3, Polish language typescript.

Until further orders: 1. A House Committee is to be established in every house. The committee shall be appointed at an organizational meeting of the Jewish tenants of the house in question. a. In houses with a smaller number of Jewish families (up to ten), all residents are to participate in the organizational meeting. b. In houses with fewer than five families, the committee shall be formed of the residents of several houses. 2. The Organizational Meeting shall be convened by the person designated by the district officer of the Coordinating Commission in consultation with the chair of the District Commission. 3. Agenda for the Organizational Meeting: a) introductory remarks; b) report on the activity, structure and duties of the Coordinating Commission and the duties and objectives of the House Committees; c) discussion; d) appointment

672

4.

c.

d. e. 5.

31

Urynowicz of officers of the House Committee and designation of its headquarters; e) any other business. Objectives and duties of the House Committee a. The House Committee shall carry out all the directions issued by the Coordinating Commission in relation to social and charity matters. b. The House Committee shall be responsible for the care of children and shall see to the sanitary, material, and other needs of the residents of the house(s). It shall also be responsible for the execution of operations in relation to clothing, finance, housing, etc., as directed by the Coordinating Commission. The relevant district officer shall provide the House Committee with written authority in relation to every such operation. In the absence of such written authority from the district officer, no collections or activities may be undertaken within any house. All contact between the House Committee and the authorities, including health centres, welfare services, police headquarters, etc. shall take place solely through the district officer of the Coordinating Commission, to whom the House Committee shall refer all the needs of the house. Any collections taking place within the house shall be carried out by at least two members of the House Committee jointly. The House Committee shall use only the printed material allocated to it by the Coordinating Commission. The management of the House Committee shall consist of: a. An executive committee [made up] of three persons where the number of Jewish residents does not exceed 25; five persons where the number of Jewish residents does not exceed 50; or seven persons where the number of Jewish residents does not exceed 50.31 Roles shall be allocated as follows: chairman, deputy chairman, secretary, and officers responsible for the following matters: clothing, housing, finance, sanitation, the safeguarding of children, the provision of free accommodation for refugees and fire victims, etc. In smaller executive committees, each activity should be undertaken either by members of the presidium or else each committee member shall take on several roles. As a matter of principle, the most important activities, namely those concerning sanitation and collections, should be undertaken by the chairman himself or his deputy. b. A Supervisory Commission. A Supervisory Commission formed of 2–3 persons shall be appointed in each house. This commission shall be responsible for all the work of Probably a mistake; it should perhaps read ‘70’.

Epilogue

6.

7.

8.

673

the House Committee and in particular it shall superintend all collection operations. Meetings of the House Committee shall take place at least twice a week. Minutes shall be kept of each meeting. All minutes, reports, receipt books, collection schedules, and purchase orders relating to the House Committee must be signed by a member of the House Committee and a member of the Supervising Commission. When the House Committee has been set up, minutes of the Organizational Meeting shall be submitted to the Regional Committee in the prescribed form within three days, together with a list of Executive Committee members and the official address of the Executive Committee. A report on the activity of the House Committee shall be submitted to the Regional Committee once a month.

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 19 Mszczonów, 17 January 1941 Letter from the Presidium Jointly Appointed by the Local Jewish Council and the Local Branch of the ŻSS to the Presidium of the ŻSS in Kraków Seeking Approval of the Membership Selected at Its Meeting and Asking for Financial Assistance

Source: YVS, 06 / 494, Polish language manuscript.

We respectfully inform you that on 17 December 1940 the Council of Elders, in an effort to assist the impoverished Jewish population of Mszczonów, called an organizational meeting to set up a branch of the ŻSS. We append a copy of the minutes of the organizational meeting of the ŻSS committee and list its members: Bogucki Majer, Szaja Lejbuś, Frenkiel Jankiel, Zamość Sycha, Książnice Abram. We wish respectfully to point out that the Jewish population of Mszczonów numbers some 2,000 people, the majority of whom are victims of fire and require immediate material assistance. Minutes no. 22. Minutes of the organizational meeting held on 17 December 1940 at the premises of the Council of Elders at 22 Sienkiewicz Street in Mszczonów. Present:  1. Bogucki Majer, Chairman of the Council of Elders, 2. Szaja Lejbuś, 3. Boraglas Szyja, 4. Zamość Symcha, 5. Ertel Rafał, 6. Kordyglas Moszek, 7. Houszak Chaim, 8. Dejczer Lejzorg, 9. Frenkiel Jankiel, 10. Księżnicer Abram, 11. Ertel Sycha, 12. Jakubowicz Moszek. Chairman: Bogucki Majer. Minutes: Bogucki Luzer.

674

Urynowicz

Agenda:  1. The organization of the ŻSS and its objectives. 2. Appointment of Committee. 3. Plan of action 1. The meeting was opened by the chairman of the Council of Elders, Bogucki Majer, who explained to those present that in order to alleviate the plight of the impoverished Jewish residents of Mszczonów, the establishment of a ŻSS branch was urgently required, so that a public kitchen could be set up to coordinate a rational distribution of lunches and, where possible, breakfasts and dinners, or to provide assistance in kind, i.e. foodstuffs or fuel. Therefore, bearing in mind that the majority of the town’s inhabitants are fire victims, he appealed to those present to form a branch of the ŻSS and to set out a concrete plan of action for it. 2. The following were unanimously elected to the local ŻSS committee: Bogucki Majer, Szaja Lejbuś, Frenkiel Jankiel, Zamość Sycha, Książnicer Abram. 3. Noting that the public kitchen would be required to feed at least 450 people, a budget was passed with the following terms: Income Expenditure Membership fees 1,800 zł pm 11,250 lunches at 50 gr 5,625 zł Donations 300 zł Produce 500 zł Subsidy from the Council of for distribution 500 zł Elders 800 zł

Deficit 4,225 zł Fuel 500 7,125 zł pm 7,125 zł pm 4. In order to realize this budget, it was agreed: 1. To withdraw 800 zł from the reserves of the Council of Elders. 2. To undertake the systematic collection of donations for the public kitchen. 3. To apply to the ŻSS in Kraków for a subsidy of 4,225 zł pm.

In addition it was resolved that all income and expenditure should be effected through the accounts of the Council of Elders. Having dealt with all items on the agenda, the meeting was concluded and the minutes were read and signed. Minutes: Bogucki Luzer Chairman: Bogucki M[ajer]. The ŻSS in Mszczonów provides 450 lunches per day along with foodstuffs and, where possible, fuel. The distribution of fuel is particularly significant for refugees, of whom there are around 400 in Mszczonów living in accommodations which require heating. The ŻSS restricts its assistance to those who have no assets or means of subsistence. The clothing and foodstuffs allocated to date have been distributed but have been insufficient to cover their needs. In order to facilitate the work of the ŻSS and to meet the needs of those who urgently need its help, we respectfully request that you grant a monthly subsidy of 4,225 zł, or an equivalent amount in foodstuffs.

Epilogue

675

Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 20 Kraków, 1 April 1941 Circular no. 25 to the Advisers to the Leaders of Districts, Welfare Committees, and Delegatures Concerning Copies of Correspondence with the German Authorities

Source: ŻIH, ŻSS, file ref. 211/5, Polish-language typescript.

In accordance with the statute and regulations of the ŻSS, individual local and county welfare committees must remain in regular contact with the Department of Population and Welfare pp. Stadt- or the Kreishauptmanns through the County Welfare Commissions. Advisers to the District Leaders shall remain in direct contact with the Department of Population and Welfare District Leader. The Presidium of the ŻSS must be kept informed of developments in relations between our offices and the local authorities. It is therefore essential that the Presidium receives copies of all letters sent by advisers, welfare committees, or delegatures to the authorities as well as copies of letters received from the authorities. The advisers and some committees already forward to us copies of such correspondence, either at our request or of their own initiative. In order to standardize this practice, we ask that copies of all correspondence with the authorities, whether incoming or outgoing, be forwarded to us immediately after sending or receipt. We request that this order is carried out diligently and promptly. Respectfully Presidium of the ŻSS Translated from Polish by Anna Podolska



No. 21 Kraków, 16 October 1942: Instruction by the Deputy Head for Population Matters and Welfare (Abt. Bevölkerungswesen und Fürsorge) in the Department for Internal Affairs of the General Government, Türk, Regarding the Re-establishment of the Activities of the Jewish Social Self-Help as the Jewish Assistance Office for the General Government

Source: Eksterminacja Żydów na ziemiach polskich w okresie okupacji hitlerowskiej. Zbiór dokumentów, eds. T. Bernstein, A. Eisenach, A. Rutkowski, Warszawa 1957, pp. 317–18. In order to continue arranging the necessary Jewish welfare measures following the closure of the Jewish Social Self-Help, the following is decreed:

676

Urynowicz

1.

The Jewish Assistance Office [Germ. Jüdische Unterstützungsstelle or J.U.S.] for the General Government is established with immediate effect. 2. The tasks of the Jewish Assistance Office include, in particular: a) the management and supervision of the welfare activities of the Jewish Aid Committee, to the extent that its continued existence is still required, b) the implementation of measures to supply Jewish labour camps, if the need arises and on the basis of special orders, c) the distribution of medication and bandages, d) the distribution of donations from abroad. 3. The former chairman of the Jewish Social Self-Help, Dr Weichert, is tasked with running the Jewish Assistance Office in Kraków. 4. The Jewish Assistance Office for the General Government is based in Kraków. 5. The Jewish community shall itself provide the resources required to carry out tasks assigned to the Jewish Assistance Office for the General Government. […] 7. In carrying out its activities the Jewish Assistance Office is fully accountable to the main department of internal affairs, [sub-]department for population matters and welfare, in the General Government, and obliged to submit any information that this department may require. Copies of all correspondence are to be submitted to the department for population matters and welfare on a weekly basis, and a detailed activity report is to be submitted monthly. Additional provisions on the organization and management of the office will follow. Translated from German by Caroline M. Pearce



No. 22 Fragments from the Memoirs of Adolf Berman, Director of Centos, on the Co-operation between Religious and Non-religious Political Parties Concerning Questions of Clandestine Education on the Primary and Secondary Level Secret Medical College in the Ghetto

Source: Adolf Berman, Vos der gojrl hot mir baszert [What fate held for me] (Tel Aviv: Bet Lohame hageta’ot, 1980), pp. 163–66 i 221–23. It is once again unbelievable, but again a fact, that in the Warsaw ghetto a Jewish medical college, with conspirational medical university courses—under the pretext of fighting against epidemics—was active. One of its initiators and directors was the world-renowned bacteriologist, epidemiologist, and researcher of blood groups—Professor Ludwik Hirszfeld. He was a Polish scientist and university professor of Jewish origin, an apostate, who was as far-removed as heaven from the Jewish people and from Jewish life. The chairman of the Judenrat, Adam Czerniakow, invited him to his home and offered him an influential job in the ghetto’s health service. Hirszfeld accepted this

Epilogue

677

offer. He was designated as the chairman of the Council of Health Service in the fight against epidemics. […] But the actual director and the soul of the courses in the ghetto was my friend, the lecturer from Warsaw University, an earnest specialist in the field of histology, Dr. Juliusz Zweibaum. The third individual who actively helped create the medical college was the chairman of the Health Council in the ghetto, Dr. Israel Milajkowski. More than 30 experienced medical doctors from among the best in the ghetto participated in practical work with the students. […] I had contact both with the activists from Aguda, as well as with the activists from Mizrachi. The Mizrachi movement in the ghetto was very weak. Mizrachi’s activity was concentrated among the few schools of their school movement, Yavneh. The position of Agudat Yisrael was different. It was a weighty enough factor in the ghetto. It managed the Judenrat’s religious council. The most important rabbis in the ghetto were connected with Agudat Yisrael. At the same time, though, a series of Aguda activists were active in various sectors of the Jewish Social Self-Help. Agudat Yisrael also published its periodical, A kol in midber [A Voice in the Desert], in the […] Yiddish language. The Aguda had kosher kitchens for adults and for children. The Orthodox rabbi who was connected with Agudat Yisrael, Rabbi Shimon Huberband, was a close colleague of Dr Emanuel Ringelblum in the management of the secret ghetto archive, Oyneg Shabes. Translated from Yiddish by Rivka Schiller



No. 23 Fragments from the Recollections of Michal Weichert about the End of the Role of the Jewish Aid Office (JUS) and Postwar Accusations of Collaboration with the Germans

Source: Michal Weichert, Yidishe alaynhilf 1939–1945 [The Jewish Social Assistance Society 1939–1945] (Tel Aviv: Menoyre, 1962), pp. 356–69. Epilogue In the fall of 1943 a Polish messenger came from Warsaw from the Council to Aid Jews and demanded that we cease aid activity for camp inmates, assuring that they would hide me along with my family—as per my request—inside the country or abroad, regardless of how much it cost. According to our information, the Jewish camps were to be liquidated soon. Given that the majority of our medication, food, and clothing

678

Urynowicz

were located in the warehouses of the RG’O [i.e. Main Welfare Council], we had in mind at the last minute to take the remainder over there, and I had to disappear. But soon we—from various authoritative sources—received distressing news, that the camps would not be liquidated. We had several consultations with the members of the board—they were all in the Plaszow camp—decided to continue our activity, literally considering it a crime to leave behind the many thousands of Jews abandoned in the camps and factories. The Polish messenger had demanded self-liquidation from us several times already, so we demonstrated our broadly branched aid work, and we insisted that a Jew come to us from the underground movement, who would become familiar with our activity on the spot and meet with inmates from various camps, who used to come and pick up rations. We were certain that we would reach an agreement with him. The stubborn rejection of our suggestion thus surprised us greatly. We had not been any less surprised even earlier on by the rejection on the part of the Council to Aid Jews in Warsaw to freely accept 979 articles of clothing and underwear from us, and after renewing the activity of YU’S [i.e. the Jewish Aid Office] designated ongoing involvement in all the received medications, fortifying drugs, and colonial goods32—during a time when an article of clothing on the free market cost a treasure, and hidden children and sick people died on account of a dearth of medications and fortifying drugs. Right after liberation I was informed upon by the security forces, that ‘during the occupation in Warsaw’ I collaborated with the Gestapo and that before the uprising I fled to Kraków,* that I ‘organized a Jewish aid centre and that under that label I received huge transports of medications from overseas, which I gave away to the German hospitals’ and that I ‘befriended and became brotherly towards Gestapo people and particularly with the commandant of the Plaszow camp, Göth, taking part in meals and banquets with him.’ On 6 March 1945, I was arrested while critically ill. For nearly five weeks I was held up in the wet cellars of U’B (Ministry of Public Security) and nine more months in overflowing prisons together with Nazi criminals and Volksdeutsche. During the course of the investigation, the crude defamatory lies showed themselves to be completely fabricated. According to the guilty charge before the Polish federal court in Kraków … my only crime consisted of the fact that I had not heeded the underground organization to cease aid activity; and in this way, I had allowed myself to be used by the Germans, who had in mind for propaganda reasons to bury world opinion regarding the extermination of the Jews in Poland. On 27 and 28 October 1945 and 5 January 1946, the trial took place, and on 7 January 1946, the sentence was pronounced, which declared me not guilty. Following this sentence, I was certain that I would resume my prewar literary 32

‘Colonial goods’ is a reference to specialty shops where one could acquire exotic items from abroad, including England and the United States.

Epilogue

679

and artistic activity. I was mistaken. Certain individuals were too interested in my not raising my head. They warned me. I was not frightened. In November 1948, a high-up official from the Ministry of Justice reached an agreement with the Central Committee of the Jews in Poland that a public court be created of 7 individuals who were known within the country and abroad. […] At the same time, they led the entire provocation exclusively against me, even though all four activists at that time, along with me, following thorough deliberations, accepted the decision to cast off the request for self-liquidation, survived. In full contradiction to the presented evidence, documents, materials, and testimonials that YU’S was the direct continuation of the YS’A [i.e. Jewish Social Self-Help] and that we had to thank the International Red Cross for the success of our efforts to renew aid activity for camp inmates, the court found that YU’S was created by the Germans; that YU’S was already in its sheer premise a collaborationist organization; that ‘the mere fact of the existence of YU’S must have had a disorienting effect on the camp inmates and led to erroneous public opinion abroad’. […] In November 1957, my daughter and her child left; we were supposed to leave in January 1958. We had prepared everything. I received permission to leave from the relevant offices. Two days before the designated appointment, we received news that at Warsaw’s Main Customs Office two more successive denunciations were received: the first that I was taking out historical treasures (zabytki), the second that I bought off the Kraków customs officers. They also told us the source of the denunciations. The following morning the police seized our passports. Our situation was desperate. All of our belongings were already packed up in boxes, the apartment given up. I had quit my job … I had a heart attack. My wife and son left for Warsaw to try to get the decree repealed. Friends, however, advised them to sooner go to the Socio-Cultural Association of the Jews in Poland. They went there, and after two hours they were informed that the passports would be returned to us and that we would be able to leave. On 22 January, we flew to Israel. In those terrifying times, I was never sure of my life at any single moment. When I left—I used to leave behind my keys to the cashbox, closet, and writing table. ‘That was a dance across the abyss.’ That is how the testimony of the messenger from Warsaw, who so stubbornly demanded that we cease aid for the inmates, described my life at the trial for the federal court with regard to the accusation. […] In my ‘final word’ before the federal court I said: ‘I was and I am fortunate that I merited, according to my efforts, to contribute to the lightening during the final months of

680

Urynowicz

their life, the fate of those who died a martyr’s death, and to maintain the health and life of those who were saved. No price seems to be too high for me.’ For me the lengthening of a Jew’s life in a camp or in a hiding place—for a day, a week, a month—was an inviolable law, a categorical imperative. In accordance with the old Jewish precept, ‘Whoever saves a life of Israel, it is as if he had saved an entire world’ (Bava Batra 11). Translated from Yiddish by Rivka Schiller

Glossary This glossary explains terms which occur frequently throughout the volume. Foreign terms which occur once or very infrequently are explained in the text. Agudat Israel (Hebr.) political alliance of various observant and ultra-Orthodox Jewish religious movements, established as political party in 1912; also spelled Agudas Israel. aluf (Hebr., pl. alufim) honorary officer of an early modern Jewish community, member of the kahal, and more broadly distinguished and leading member of the community anshei kahal (Hebr.) all honorary members of an early modern Jewish community board arendarz (Pol., pl. arendarzy) leaseholder, from Pol. arenda, lease of monopoly rights Ashkenas (Hebr.) originally a biblical geographical term, used in the Middle Ages to denote German lands bet din (Hebr.) Jewish court darshan (Hebr., pl. darshanim) paid official; synagogue preacher dayan (Hebr., pl. dayanim) paid official; judge, member of a Jewish communal court doctor judaeorum (Lat.) medieval designation of a rabbi, a judge, or a distinguished learned Jew edat yeshurun (Hebr.) literally: community in exile, general designation of a Jewish community in the diaspora gabbai (Hebr., pl. gabba’im) honorary officer; trustees or treasurers in the early modern Jewish community, and of voluntary associations gaon (Hebr., pl. geonim) highly reputed Torah scholar grzywień - (Pol.) early modern Polish currency unit; also grivnas (Lith.) guberniya (Russ.) province and administrative unit in the Russian Empire Hasidism Jewish revivalist movement with mystical inclination arising in eastern borderlands of the Polish – Lithuanian Commonwealth in the 18th century; follower would be known as ḥasid (pl. ḥasidim) Haskalah (Hebr.) Jewish intellectual and cultural movement of the 18th century embracing rationalism, a follower would be known as a maskil (pl. maskilim) ḥazan (Hebr., pl. ḥazanim) cantor officiating in a Jewish place of worship; paid official heder (Hebr.) literally: room, Jewish primary school

682

glossarY

ḥerem (Hebr.) ban imposed by a Jewish court; ḥerem ha-yishuv: prohibition to settle in a given community ḥevra (Hebr., pl. ḥevrot or ḥavarot) voluntary associations or societies, confraternities ḥol ha-mo’ed (Hebr.) the intermediate days of Passover Judentag (Germ.) assembly of delegates of Jewish communities in an early modern German province kahal (Hebr.) early modern Jewish community board Karaites Jewish sect rejecting the Talmudic-Rabbinic tradition kashrut (Hebr.) Jewish dietary laws kehila (Hebr., pl. kehilot) community of Jews living in a given place Khazars Turkic nomadic people establishing a vast empire in medieval central Asia k.k. - (Germ.) abbreviation for ‘kaiser-königlich’, i.e. imperial and royal, referring to the Habsburg Empire kopeck (Russ.) Russian currency unit korobka (Russ.) literally: small box, term for taxes collected for the needs of Jewish communities in Imperial Russia and in the Kingdom of Poland, where it was known as krupka kosher (Yidd.) conforming to Jewish dietary laws krupka (Pol.) see korobka kruyei eda (Hebr.) lesser honorary members of an early modern Jewish community assembly magnate member of the Polish aristocracy, usually owners of vast latifundia Małopolska literally: Lesser Poland; western Galicia in the Habsburg Empire manhig (Hebr., pl. manhigim) Jewish communal leader of the early modern period, honorary officer and member of the kahal maskil (Hebr., pl. maskilim) a follower of the Haskalah matza (Hebr., pl. matzot) unleavened flat bread eaten during the festival of Passover Mazovia province in central Poland melamed (Hebr., pl. melamdim) instructor in an early modern and 19th-century Jewish primary school memuneh (Hebr., pl. memunim) honorary officer of the early modern Jewish community, superintendent or trustee of charitable confraternities menologion (from Greek) Russian administrative calendar mevorer (Hebr., pl. mevorerim) honorary officer of the early modern Jewish community board, electors in selecting members of the community board mikveh (Hebr., pl. mikva’ot) Jewish ritual bath minyan (Hebr., pl. minyanim) prayer quorum

glossarY

683

misnaged (Hebr., also mitnaged, pl. misnagdim, mitnagedim) literally: rabbinic opponents of hasidism mitsva (Hebr., pl. mitsvot) commandments of Jewish law, and their fulfilment; also: synagogue honours nagid (Hebr., pl. nagidim) distinguished and leading member of the early modern Jewish community ne’eman (Hebr., pl. ne’emanim) Jewish honorary communal officer, responsible for the accounts and at times the early modern communal minute book parnas (Hebr., pl. parnasim) honorary officer and head of the early modern Jewish community pinkas (Hebr., pl. pinkasim) Jewish communal minute book powiat (Pol.) county Red Rus principalities east of Polish territories in part integrated into the later Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth responsum (Lat., pl. responsa) literally: reply; commentary by a leading Torah scholar to a query concerning a matter pertaining to Jewish law rosh (Hebr. and Aramaic, pl. Aramaic: rashim) leading honorary member of an early modern Jewish community board rozen (Hebr., pl. rozanim) distinguished member of the early modern Jewish community sejm Polish diet or parliament sejmik dietine or local assemblies of the Polish nobility shama’i (Hebr., pl. shama’im) tax assessor for the early modern Jewish community, honorary officer shamash (Hebr.) see shames shames (Yidd.) or shamash (Hebr.) synagogue beadle; paid official in a Jewish community shatnez (Hebr.) prohibited combination of wool and linen in the fabric of one garmen shofar (Hebr.) a ram’s horn used for Jewish religious purposes shohet (Hebr.) slaughterer executing his profession according to the rules of kashrut shtadlan (Hebr., pl. shtadlanim) spokesman of the early modern Jewish community, usually a paid official; derived from this term: shtadlanut, Jewish intercession shul (Yidd., pl. shuls) synagogue or prayer house sofer (Hebr., pl. soferim) scribe; paid official of the early modern Jewish community starosta (Pol.) chief royal administrative officials with judicial powers syndyk (Pol.) spokesman of the early modern Jewish community, Pol. term for shtadlan; in early modern Poland, usually a paid official of the community

684

glossarY

szkolnik (Pol.) Pol. term for synagogue beadle szlachta (Pol.) nobility Talmud (Hebr.) primary source of Jewish religious law and philosophy tovim (Hebr.) from the adjectiv tov (good, distinguished) leading honorary members of an early modern Jewish communal board, ukaz (Russ.) imperial order or decree uyezd (Russ.) district uchony evrei (Russ.) literally: learned Jew; expert on Jewish matters, usually a paid official in the Russian imperial administration va’ad (Hebr., pl. va’adim) literally: council, regional or general assembly of delegates of Jewish communities and provinces Wielkopolska literally: Greater Poland; western Poland, the area around Poznań wojewoda (Pol.) Polish official representing the ruler; local or provincial governor yeshiva (Hebr., pl. yeshivot) rabbinic college zaken (pl. zekenim) literally: old man; a man respected for his erudition in the Jewish tradition złoty (Pol.) literally: golden; Polish currency unit

Index The index includes only those place names and names of persons which are mentioned in the preface, the chapter introductions, and in the source header. administrative departments 72, 649–650 Administrative Department of the Central Committee 597–598, 611 administrative districts 286, 313–314, 324–327, 649, 650, 651–652, 655, 665, 667–668 agreement (ugoda) 47, 50, 52–53, 54–55, 56, 57, 127–128, 135–136 Agudas Israel 486, 487, 491, 493–494, 533, 536–538, 541, 542–544, 677 Aid Committee 670–671 aid requests 540 Alexander I 151, 353, 358, 422 Alexander II 425 Alexander III 425 Alexander Wielkopolski 353 anniversaries 603–605, 606, 607–610 antisemitism 33, 37, 38, 39, 41, 59, 281, 319–320, 487, 496–498, 547–548, 549–550, 558, 566, 568, 576–577, 592, 627, 645–646, 660–663, 663–665 appointment 130, 167, 452–454 arbitration 24, 26, 57–58, 182 Arimowicz, Debora 338 art 482, 590, 594 artisans 55, 431–432, 462–463 associations (see also ḥevrot) 224, 281, 433–434, 482, 483 Association for the Promotion of Skilled Trades 585 Association of Synagogue Communities  275, 276 Jewish Religious Association 500–502, 507–508 Austrian partition xii Bacon, Gershon 486 ban (ḥerem, see also excommunication)  xxii, 10–12, 51, 67, 374 Batory, Stefan 319 beadle xv, xxv, 97, 118, 208–209, 217, 259–260, 292–293, 304, 336, 361, 404

Berlin 168 Berman, Adolf 560, 676 births 551 blood libel 22–23, 37, 38, 93, 110, 319–320 Board of the Jewish Faith Community 518, 529–530 Bochnia 306 Bolesław the Pious of Kalisz xi, xiv, xix, xxvii, 5 Borek Wielkopolski 272, 274 Brafman, Iakov 153, 426, 466 Bram, Kalman 248 Brześć 27 budgets 106–111, 118, 123–124, 129, 131–132, 139, 140–141, 171–172, 176–177, 195, 236–237, 237–240, 250–253, 258, 265, 309–310, 315–316, 320, 332, 333, 334–337, 339–343, 346, 350–351, 370–371, 385–386, 387–391, 392, 395, 397, 400–401, 404–405, 410, 411–413, 442–444, 461–462, 670, 674 burials 273–274, 408, 578 burial society (ḥevra kadisha) xix–xx, 71, 78, 117–118, 133, 153, 160, 179–180, 185–186, 188, 197, 208–209, 251–253, 294, 321, 358, 376, 383, 384, 394, 408, 439–440 (“burial association”), 448–449 Butrymowicz, Mateusz 147–148, 158 Bydgoszcz 214, 220, 229, 275, 280 candidates 473 Catherine the Great 145, 146 Catholicism 338 cemeteries 5, 8, 9, 21, 24, 28, 33, 52–53, 117–118, 133, 162, 185–186, 188, 209, 237, 251–253, 266, 306, 309, 314, 320, 331, 336–337, 376, 384, 385, 389, 394, 395, 406, 590, 598–600, 601, 614, 617, 619–620 census 200–202 Central Board 591–592

686 Central Committee of Jews in Poland  556–557, 559–562, 576–577, 579–582, 583, 583–584, 584–585, 585–589, 679 Central Office of Jewish Communities  649–50 certificate 472–473 charity 70, 106–107, 109–110, 114–115, 118, 160, 166, 179–180, 185–186, 225, 239–240, 263–265, 269, 271, 274–275, 276, 278, 279–280, 322, 332, 333–334, 338–339, 346–347, 348, 389–390, 412, 434–435, 451, 464, 470, 472, 480, 483, 503, 506–507, 516, 540, 597, 653 charter 5 Chęciny 116 Chief Representative for the Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Religions 448–449 citizenship 184–185 clothing 196–197 Cold War 586–588 collateral 469–470 Commissioner for the Resettlement 659 communal adjudication 18 communal core tasks xviii communal hierarchy xvi communism xxiv, 559–560, 582, 583, 587, 593–596, 597–598, 604, 605–606, 609–610 community 230–231, 235–237, 237–240, 288–295, 484–498, 564–565 community authorities 232–233, 235–237, 245, 246–247, 247–248, 257–259, 280, 290 Community Councils 523–524 community debts 250–253 community elders 304–305 community officials 246–247, 249–250, 255, 260–261, 262–263, 264–265, 267–269, 272 community location 50 community members 230–231, 254–255 community property 237, 239, 250–253, 256 community resolutions 461–462, 471, 478–479 community responsibilities 266–268 community revenues 256, 361, 439, 442–443, 452 community statute 265–269

Index complaint 483 Complaints Commission 533 concentration camps 655, 662, 664–664 conflicts 441–442, 476–477 confraternities (see also ḥevrot) 153, 194–195, 205, 223, 448–449 Congress Kingdom see Kingdom of Poland contracts 48–49, 374, 442, 452–454, 469–470 conversion 338 Cossack Uprising xxiv Council of Four Lands xii, xvii, xxiv–xxv, 66, 74–76, 78, 95, 102–104, 110, 111–112, 115, 121–123, 128–130, 131–132, 136–138, 142 Council of Israel 391–392 County Welfare Commissions 675 court-case 41–44 courts 20–22, 31, 34, 35, 51, 90–91, 91–92, 92–93, 94, 95, 96–97, 101, 102–104, 112–113, 115–116, 123–124, 131, 133, 134, 158–159, 170–171, 174–175, 182, 199–200, 203, 210, 549–550 Jewish courts 18, 105–106, 113–114, 120–121, 140–141, 176–177, 182–183, 199–200, 203–204 crime 20–23, 32, 33, 35, 38, 39, 47, 54, 57 culture 579–580, 582 customs 229–230, 241–243, 261, 277 Czacki, Tadeusz 148, 210 Czarnków 271 Czarny, Abraham 6 Czerniaków, Adam 636, 641, 665 Częstochowa 387, 393, 396, 397, 398 debts 119, 162, 200, 222, 439–440, 452 arrears 465 Delegatures 675 denunciation 425, 465–466 Departments of Health and Social Care 597 Department of Internal Affairs 302, 303 Department of Labour 655 deportation 480, 635, 639 deputies 447, 461–462, 466–469, 478 discrimination 547–548 District Leaders 675 district registrars 313–314 disturbances 439–440, 452, 465 divorce 45–46, 141

Index Domb, Leib 567 Drohobycz 547 Dubno 69 Duchy of Warsaw xii, xxi, 149–150 Edict of Toleration xxvii education xviii, 19, 71, 101, 121–122, 212, 219–220 231, 247, 259, 269, 275, 276, 307, 308–310, 322–323, 328, 337–338, 342, 344, 346–347, 376, 379–380, 384, 390, 404, 409–410, 412, 432–433, 460–461, 494–495, 503, 505, 507, 576, 579, 585, 591, 597 heders/religious schools 307, 322–323, 337–338, 432, 473 Jewish trade schools 470 religious teacher (melamed) 293, 433, 472–473 schooling 481 schools 220, 406, 453, 460–461 Talmud Torah School 293, 432, 481 Eger, Akiba 241 Eger, Salomon 246 elections 64, 96–97, 117–118, 124, 130, 176, 185–186, 187, 192–193, 199, 206, 207–208, 218, 230, 231–232, 232–233, 234–235, 235–237, 245, 257–258, 262– 263, 266–269, 282, 290–291, 299–300, 308–311, 315–316, 318, 350, 360, 374–375, 392–393, 393–394, 399–400, 405, 407, 416–417, 418, 418–419, 420, 429–430, 445–446, 450–451, 452, 462–463, 464, 465, 473, 478, 479, 480, 481, 483, 490–491, 502, 503–507, 510–511, 512– 513, 513–517, 521–526, 528, 529–530, 530–532, 532–533, 535–538, 538–539, 544–546, 548, 580–581, 647, 667 Electoral Commission 530 electoral register 465 electoral regulations 539 Jewish Community Electoral Commission  533 emigration 568, 579, 582 employment 448, 548, 551–552, 576, 579, 582 Empress Maria Theresa 285 eruv xxv, 220–221, 229–230, 241–243 everyday dimension of Jewish communal self-governance xxv

687 excommunication (see also ban) 11, 35, 92–93, 94–95, 102–104, 121, 122, 134, 141, 177–179, 188, 191, 193, 204, 210–211 executions 660–663, 664–665 executive committee 308–311 exile 41, 42, 46–47, 51, 53, 54 expenses 442–444 expulsion of Jews 441 Ezofowicz, Michał 13 fees 290, 397, 398, 406 finances 237–240, 273–274, 274–275, 278, 294, 470 community finances 262, 266–268, 270, 272, 279–280 fines 31, 35, 36, 43, 49, 51, 54, 58, 90, 101, 110, 112–113, 121, 158–159, 208–209, 257, 303, 392, 397, 415, 654 fire 424, 452, 476–477, 540 Fiszel family xiv, 10, 13 fixed rates 453–454, 466–467 Flotwell, Eduard 216 food supplies 655, 674, 677 Four Year Sejm xii, xxv, 78, 142, 147, 163–164, 164–165 Friedrich Wilhelm III 230, 241, 243 Friesel, I.G. 151, 205 fundraising 194–195, 305 funds 439 funerals 160, 180, 209, 376, 388–390, 395, 404, 407 Galicia xvi, 145–146, 150, 152, 187, 192, 283–295 Gdańsk (Danzig) xxii, 213–214, 215–216, 248 Gendarmerie 479 gender xxv, 70–71, 104, 106–107, 112–113, 118, 133–135, 196, 245, 271, 274–275, 350–351, 483, 532–533 General Code 143 Revised General Code 143–144, 149 General Code for Galicia xx General Code for the Jews of South and NewEast Prussia xvii, 149–150, 214 General Jewish Assembly 513 General Jewish Worker’s Union (Bund) xvi, 486, 496, 513–517, 518, 530, 534, 582, 583 General Patent of 1797 xxvii

688 General Statute of 1750 214, 249 Gens, Jakub 635, 660–663 German language 168, 174, 193, 206, 246, 319, 400 German Red Cross 637, 666–667 Gershom 4 Gestapo 663, 664–665, 678 ghettos 650, 651–652, 652–653, 656–657, 658, 660–663, 676–677 Łódź Ghetto 632, 648, 652–653 Warsaw Ghetto 656–657, 658, 671–673, 676–677 Glanzer, Jakub 305 Gniezno 213 Gotthilf, Walter 275 Governing Senate 200–202, 203–204, 441–442 government 466 Grand Duchy of Lithuania xxii, 73 Grodzisk Wielkopolski 218, 262 Grünbaum, Izaak 535, 538 guarantee 50 guilds 70, 181, 202, 205, 223, 414, 462–463 guild master 462–463 ha-Kohen, Yehuda 4 Hanover, Natan x–xi, xxiv, 73 Hasidim 152, 154, 285, 292, 364, 399–400, 421 Hasidism 79, 151–153, 189–191, 196–197, 197–198, 212, 363 health service 579 healthcare xviii, 434–435 Hebrew language 168, 182, 546–547 Heppner, Aron 217, 280 Herzberg, Izaak 217, 280 ḥevrot xvii, 269, 273–274, 278, 279–280 Hirszowicz, Abraham 148, 165 holidays (Jewish holidays) 94, 98–100, 109–110, 117–118, 134–135, 271, 331, 396, 565, 614–615, 654 Holocaust xix, xxiii, 572, 576–577, 590, 596, 604, 635, 645–646 Horki 440, 465 hospitals 166, 179–180, 253–265, 278, 299, 301, 308–309, 338–339, 384, 389–390, 412, 438–439, 462, 676–677, 678

Index

Jewish hospitals 8, 225, 434, 448–449, 464, 472, 483, 506, 653, 659 Hourwitz, Zalkin 147 House Committee 657, 671–673 housing 71, 107–108 Imperial and Royal Commissioner 306 impoverishment 452 Inowrocław 213–214 internal affairs 668–671 intercession 131–132, 163–164, 164–165, 165–166, 167, 175–177 intra-community conflict xxvi, 20, 31, 41–44, 49, 53–54, 89, 90–91, 189–191, 197–198, 234–235, 257, 408, 411, 415, 415–416, 430, 441, 519–520, 529–530, 530–532, 540–542, 542–544, 598–601, 601–602, 624–625, 653 investigation 445–446, 455 Israel (state) 583–584, 592 Israelite Community Board 308–311, 315–318, 319, 320, 324–327, 327–328, 329, 334, 344, 347, 350, 350–351 Israelite Poor Fund 322 Isserlein, Israel 9 Jaruzelski, Wojciech 570 Jędrzejewicz, Janusz 535, 538 Jekel, Samuel 349 Jesuits 119 Jewish Assistance Office 675–676 Jewish Community Board xv, 96–97, 104–105, 106–107, 124–125, 192–193, 249, 262–263, 267–268, 270, 271, 530–532, 540, 546, 547, 547–548, 552, 554 Jewish Community of Warsaw 553 Jewish councils (va’adim) x Jewish Cultural and Artistic Association  585 Jewish Elder 6–8, 64, 650 Council of Jewish Elders (Ältestenrat)  629–631, 633, 638, 641–642, 645–646, 649, 652, 663–665, 673–674 Jewish Historical Institute 585, 608, 610 Jewish National Council 535 Jewish national councils 512 Jewish People’s Party 517–518

Index Jewish Poor Fund 332 Jewish Religious Associations 562, 563, 567, 577–578 Jewish Religious Communities 558, 563, 567, 577–578 Jewish Religious Council 485, 509–511, 520–521, 525–528 Jewish self-defence 281 Jewish Self-Help Society 636, 637–639, 665 Jewish Social and Cultural Association 556, 564–572, 589–592, 593–596, 598–601, 602–605, 605–607, 607–611 Jewish Social Self-Help 666–668, 668–671, 671–673, 673–674, 675, 675–676, 679 Jewish Telegraphic Agency 534, 540 Jewish Social Welfare Association 665–666 John of Capistrano xix Joseph ii xxvii, 146, 192, 286 Judaic library 553 Judenrat xiii, xxiii, 484, 630–636, 638, 641–642, 645–646, 647, 651–652, 653, 655, 656, 659, 663, 663–665, 676–677 judges 170–171 jurisdiction 44–45, 138–139 kahal xv, xvii, 41, 105–106, 119, 127–128, 139, 150–151, 153, 158, 158–159, 160–162, 163–164, 164–165, 165–166, 178–180, 187, 199–200, 200–202, 203–204, 204–205, 206, 207–208, 219, 299–300, 306, 346, 348, 353–359, 365–366, 369–373, 374–375, 377–378, 379–380, 381–382, 383, 384, 385, 386–387, 391–392, 409–410, 422–426, 436, 438–439, 439–440, 442–444, 445–446, 450–451, 452, 452–454, 455–459, 466, 500–501 Kalisz 24, 394, 395, 406, 407, 447, 448 Kalisz Province 414 Kakhovskii, M.V. 145, 199 Kaplan, Izrael’ 479 Kazimierz the Great xxvii, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 13 Kępno 213–214 King Frederick Augustus 150, 184 King Kazimierz Jagiellończyk 5, 6, 7, 9, 13 King Stephan of Poland 319 Kingdom of Poland xii, xvi, xvii, 485, 500, 509 Kolno 540

689 kosher dietary laws (kashrut) 15, 219, 248, 255 kosher meat 8–9, 211, 497, 503, 509 kosher meat tax 236, 238, 245, 262, 280, 305–306, 312, 329–330, 345, 370–372, 388, 421, 460, 469 kosher slaughte xxiii, 24–25, 26, 33, 56, 171–173, 271, 305–306, 308, 310, 312, 329, 330, 331, 335, 340–342, 344–346, 389, 421, 485–486, 496–497, 527–528, 550 Kościuszko, Tadeusz 287, 302 Kovno 472, 480 Kraków xiv, 2, 4, 7, 9, 10, 18, 26–27, 41, 49–50, 52, 53–54, 55, 56, 63–64, 69, 89, 96, 106, 112, 113, 189–191, 286–287, 647, 666, 668, 675 Free City of Kraków xvii, 298, 301, 302, 303, 305, 333, 337, 338 Kraków-Kazimierz 59 Krobia 218, 231 Krotoszyn xxvi, 213, 222, 260 Krynki 164–165 Kwidzyn 214, 249, 254 land ownership 28, 50, 52–53 languages 206 Łask 66, 127–128 law 449–451 Jewish Law (Halakhah) 63, 67 Magdeburg law x Law on Jewish Affairs 214 leases 69, 396–397, 398, 406, 407, 440 legal complaints 529–530 Leszno 213–214, 222, 237, 263–264 letter of protection 26–27, 49 Lewi, Hirsch Dawid 301 literature 482, 590–591, 594–596, 602–604, 606, 607–610 Lithuania 27 Lithuanian Council 92–93, 100–101, 133–135, 142 loans 30, 35, 36, 39, 78 Łódź 648, 652, 491–492 Lubieszów 478 Lublin 90, 92–93, 404, 411, 415, 416, 418, 419, 420 Lublin Guberniya 410 Łuck 27, 66, 94

690 Łuków 519 Lwów 3, 54, 58, 292, 305, 319, 322, 331–332, 338, 339, 344, 346, 348, 350 marriages 45–46, 101, 112–113, 121, 134, 140, 14, 192, 247, 248, 301–302, 313–314, 336, 340, 410, 527–528, 551, 578–579, 624 medical doctor 460 medinot xxiv Mendel, Menahem 196 merchants 18, 202,431–432, 451, 464, 465, 469 Middle Ages xi, 1 Międzyrzecz 222, 223, 262 mikveh 48–49, 253, 260, 266, 277, 331, 398, 406, 503 military 425, 426, 553, 555, 577, 615–616 military service 158, 185, 202, 615 Ministry of Arts and Culture 609 Ministry of Ecclesiastical, Educational, and Medical Affairs 269 Ministry of Education 591 Ministry of Finance of the Russian Empire 446 Ministry of the Interior 229–230, 242, 243, 249, 312, 567 Ministry of Internal Affairs 460, 611, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration 613–614, 620–621, 623–624 Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Empire 474–476 Ministry of Public Administration 563, 577–579, 582 Ministry of Religion and Public Education 577 Ministry of Religious Affairs and Public Education 288, 423, 439–440 Ministry of Religious Denominations and Education 307, 312, 324, 327, 328, 329, 394 Ministry of Religious Denominations and Public Education xxiii, 484, 485, 490, 501, 510–512, 525–529, 531, 534, 535, 538 Minsk 438, 447, 448, 452, 460, 461, 466, 469, 470, 471, 483 Minsk Guberniya 439 Mir 476

Index Mizrachists 517, 542, 545, 677 Monasch, Baer Loew xxvi, 260 money-lender 27 monitoring xxviii Moses, Jacob 152, 168–169 Mościcki, Ignacy 547 Mszczonów 673 Municipal Council 333 municipal administrations 463–64 municipal labour service 447 municipal police 460 municipal revenue office 322 National Central Authority 505, 507–508 National Congress 589–592 National Front 589 naturalization 260 negotiating Jewish self-governance xxi newspapers 348 Nicholas I 423 Nieśwież 160 Nowogródek 480 Novorossiya Territory 446 oath of office 477 Oborniki 243 Office for Religious Denominations 565, 567–568, 570, 597–598, 601–602 Office of the Governor General 666–668, 668–671 OKH (Oberkommando des Heeres) 646 Olyka 441 Order Service (Ordnungsdienst) 633–634, 635, 650, 652, 657, 658, 659, 660–663 Organizing Commission 298 Organizing Committee of Polish Jews in the USSR 577 orphanage 480 Orthodox Judaism 625 Oświęcim 290, 334 Oszmiana 660 Palestine 583–584 Paris Peace Conference 489 Paris Peace Congress 588–589 Passover 185–186, 342–343 passports 183, 202 Paul I 153

691

Index penal regulations 245, 256–257 penalty 446–447 petition 138–139, 168–169, 184–185, 473, 476–477, 479, 480 pharmacies 439 Piaski 272 Piłsudski, Józef 484, 491, 495 Pinsk 119 Płock 4, 212, 374, 377, 381, 387, 392, 404, 405 pogroms 11 police 212, 518, 519, 529, 648 Jewish police force 650 Jewish police service regulations 658 Polish language 159–160, 174, 182, 206, 299–300, 319, 380, 382, 385, 400, 409, 508 Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth xii, xxi, 143 destruction of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth xii, xxii, 142 Polish Self-Help Society 665 political parties 582, 583 populations 232–233, 234, 283–284, 556 Poznań 3, 41, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 65, 73, 91, 105, 107, 108, 109, 213–214, 216, 221, 234–235, 246, 247, 269, 273, 279, 281 Poznań Province 229, 232, 234, 235, 250, 278 prayer 19, 303, 305 prayer house 476–477, 478 press 606, 634–635 Prince Anton Radziwiłł 441 Prince Nikolai Khovanskii 445 Prince Przemyśl II 24 printing 121–123 prison 57, 58, 59, 162 private town 138–139 privilege xi, xxvii–xxviii, 19–23, 27, 28–40, 66–67, 88, 91–92, 94–95, 116–117 General Privilege 66 Provisional Ordinance of 1833 xxvii, 214, 219, 230 Provisional Supreme Religious Council 578 Prussia 144, 151–152, 168–169, 174, 175, 181, 276, 277, 278 Prussian General Code for the Jews of South and New-East Prussia of 1797 xvii

Prussian General State Law 230–231 Prussian Municipal Ordinance 230–231 Prussian partition xii Przemyśl 290, 307–308, 344, 349 punishment 455 rabbis xv, 12–13, 19, 25, 27, 44–46, 51, 55, 57, 58, 65, 89, 90–91, 91–92, 92–93, 94, 96–97, 98–100, 101, 102–104, 105–106, 106–107, 109, 111–112, 112–113, 113–114, 114–115, 120–121, 121–123, 130, 131, 135–136, 138–139, 140–141, 157–158, 159, 163–164, 165–166, 167, 168–169, 170, 171–173, 174, 176–177, 182–183, 186, 187–188, 189–191, 192, 194, 195, 196–197, 198, 199–200, 204, 210, 218–219, 239, 246–247, 248–249, 249–250, 252–253, 255–257, 262, 266, 274–275, 276, 280–281, 281–282, 292–293, 299–301, 301–302, 310–311, 314, 317–318, 324, 328, 336, 369–373, 379–380, 384, 389, 392, 393, 393–394, 395, 404, 405, 410, 411, 413, 415, 418, 418–419, 420, 421, 428–429, 503–508, 511, 513–517, 521–528, 530–532, 542–544, 544–546, 547, 550, 551, 578–579, 615–616, 618, 624–625 crown rabbi xxiii, 146, 479 district rabbi xvi  Union of rabbis 546 rabbinate xxi, 147, 452–454, 473, 479, 483, 509 rabbinical adjudication xxi rabbinic board 428, 430, 431, 452 rabbinic law 144, 169 Rabbinic Commission xxv Rabbinic Committee 429, 474–476 Radzymin 408 Rawicz 213, 270 receipt 478 records management 463–464 recruits 462 Reform Judaism 624 Regional Administration Office 247, 248, 249, 254, 269 Regional Council 135–136 Register of Associations and Unions 582 registration 290–291, 551

692 regulations 108, 117–118, 125–127, 449–451, 474–476, 481 administrative regulations 322–323, 668–671, 671–673, 675–676 Regulatory Commission 620–621 Reich Ministry of the Interior 646 Religious Union of Mosaic Faith 558, 563–573, 597–598, 601 Religious Unions 507–508, 510, 520, 525, 528 representation 165–166, 181–183, 364, 378– 380, 391–392, 447, 471, 474–476, 481 power of attorney 464 re-settlement of Jews 446–447 responsum 1, 4, 18, 19, 41–46 restitution 577 Revised Municipal Ordinance 248 ritual 124–125 ritual slaughterer (shochet) xv, 255, 262, 441, 448, 485–486, 497 Rossienie (Raseiniai) 455 Royal National School Council 344 royal order 90–91 Rumkowski, Chaim 635, 640 Russia/Russian Empire xvi, xvii, 466 Russian language 206, 400, 423, 475 Russian partition 198 Russian Statute of 1804 xxvii Rzeszów 290, 292, 315, 320, 321 Schlager, Jakub 320 science 482 Second Republic xvi Security Police 651 sejm 72 Shabbat 98–100, 196–197 241–242, 243, 246, 653–654 Shklov 442, 445 shtetls 463 Sieraków 245 Silber, Izrael 320 Sirkes, Yoel 74, 102 Slutsk 473, 483 smuggling 455 social aid 579–580 socialism 514, 517, 533, 534 Society for the Protection of the Health of the Jewish People 585

Index Socio-Cultural Association for the Jews in Poland 679 soldiers 452 Soviet Union (USSR) 586–589, 593–596 Stalinist terror 594–595 Stanisław August Poniatowski 78, 142, 148 starosta 284, 485, 517–518 state legislation xiv, 89, 92–93, 100–101, 107–108, 123–124, 135–136, 136–138, 150, 158–160, 174–175, 175–177, 181, 184–185, 192–194, 198–199, 200–202, 203–204, 214–217, 247–248, 249–250, 256, 257–259, 285–290, 327–328, 329, 349, 374–375, 377–378, 381–382, 384, 386–387, 394, 409, 414, 417, 418, 420, 421, 484–485, 500–502, 520–529, 532, 534, 535–538, 539, 541, 548, 550, 551, 582, 612–622 acts of government 500–502 Act on Guarantees of the Freedom of Conscience and Belief 623–625 non-Jewish legislation xxvii State Jewish Theatre 610 statute 51, 307–311, 315–318, 455–459, 502–508, 509–512, 513 Statute of 1804 151, 206–208 Supra-communal organization xxiv Supreme Administrative Tribunal 539 Supreme Jewish Council 509, 513 Suwałki 363 synagogues 6, 8, 9, 11, 21, 22, 30, 32, 34, 35, 51, 52–53, 54, 58, 89, 100, 104–105, 108, 109, 114–116, 160, 162, 180, 194–195, 197, 206, 207–208, 211, 212, 232–233, 237–239, 245, 251–253, 254, 256, 259–260, 260–261, 269, 270, 273, 301, 301–302, 303, 304, 305, 309, 324, 329, 331–332, 335–337, 350–351, 380, 385–386, 388–390, 387–390, 396–397, 401–403, 404–405, 405–406, 406–407, 411, 413, 431, 443, 453–454, 471, 476–477, 478, 483, 503, 508, 509–510, 517–518, 519–520, 521, 525, 547, 549, 578, 615, 619–620 stone synagogue 478–479 synagogue supervisor 416, 417 synagogue supervisory board xvi, 352, 357–367, 386, 387, 387–391, 392–393,

693

Index 393–394, 395, 399–400, 400–401, 404–405, 407, 410, 411–413, 415–416, 418, 478 syndyk (shtadlan) 65, 148, 150, 181–183 szlachta 63 Szurmiej, Szymon 570, 572 Tarnów 338 taxation xxiv, xxvii, 33, 37, 41–44, 58, 59–60, 68–69, 88, 90, 95, 97, 99, 105, 124–125, 126, 127–128, 129, 131–132, 136–138, 141, 159, 162, 163, 167, 172, 176–177, 178, 183, 185, 193, 200–202, 206, 207–208, 236– 237, 238, 240, 243–244, 245, 256, 280, 300, 302, 303, 304, 305–306, 310–311, 312, 315–317, 329–330, 332, 334–335, 345, 371–373, 374, 375, 376, 377–378, 381–382, 383, 384, 385–386, 386–387, 387–391, 392, 404, 409, 416, 416–417, 420, 425, 427–428 439, 442–443, 448– 449, 450–451, 454, 455–459, 460–461, 461–462, 466, 466–469, 469–470, 471, 480, 501–502, 503–504, 506, 508, 511, 513, 515–516, 523–524, 526, 528, 618, 622 box tax/kahal taxes 221, 432, 439, 448–449, 451, 456–457, 460–461, 470, 471, 540–542 candle tax 432, 460–461, 480 head tax xxiv, 68, 74, 75, 78, 454 tax farming 469–470 theatre 590–591, 594–596, 599, 603–605, 606, 609–610 Toruń 261 town owner 138–139 trade 2, 5, 21, 23, 33, 39, 55, 56, 57–58, 94, 95, 98–100, 107–108, 113, 115, 116–117, 125–127, 133–135, 168–169, 172, 181, 198–199, 201–202, 206, 380, 414 traditional dress 402, 415 treasury 59–60 trials 20–22, 26, 32, 33, 34, 35, 46–47, 49, 53, 54, 59, 157, 168–169, 188, 210, 410 trustees 464, 472, 480 Trzcianka 217, 221, 241–243, 259 Turov 478 Tyszkowce 415 Union of Fighters for Freedom and Democracy 610

Union of German Jewish Communities xxv, 224, 272, 274, 275, 276 Union of Israelite Communities 349–350 Union of Jewish Artists 585 Union of Jewish Community Employees 548 Union of Jewish Participants for the Struggle of the Independence of Poland 553 Union of Jewish Religious Communities 571–573, 612–622, 624–625 Union of Jewish Women 532–533 Union of Jewish Writers and Journalists 585 Union of Progressive Jewish Communities “Beit Poland” 622–626 United Nations 583 United Committee of Jewish Women’s Organizations and Groups 532–533 Upper Silesia 549, 649 Versailles Peace Conference 512 violence 519–520 Vitebsk 462, 464, 465, 483 Vitebsk Province 463 Volhynia (Lodomeria) 187 Wałcz 221, 241 War and Domains Chamber 249–250 Warka 394 Warsaw 51, 164, 181, 184, 185, 369, 376, 385, 386, 399, 400, 401, 491–492, 502, 533, 542, 546, 547, 554, 651, 653, 655, 656, 658, 659, 665, 671 Warsaw Declaration of religious tolerance 73 Wasilków 478 Weichert, Michal 637, 639–641, 679 Welfare Committees 675 Welfare Council 678 Wieleń 221, 241–243 Wielkopolska Province 163 Wildstein, Sydynia 350–351 Wilno (Vilnius) 72 Włocławek 529, 530 Włodzimierz 74 Wodziński, Marcin 356, 359, 363, 364 wojewoda (voivode) 6, 67–68, 130, 170 Wolfowicz, Szymel 148, 160 Wollheim, Jospeh 263 Wollheim, Salomon 263, 265

694 World Jewish Congress 562, 585–589, 592 World Union for Progressive Judaism 573, 624 World War I xiii–xiv, 295, 486 World War II xiii–xiv, 627–642 Yiddish 409, 487, 495, 508, 564, 590–591, 594–595 Zajączek, Józef 357 Zhitomir 472

Index Zhosli 481 Zionism 346, 415, 485, 486–487, 516, 534, 582, 583, 586, 588, 593–596 Zionists xvi, xviii, 488, 489, 491–495, 515, 518, 545, 559–560 Żółkiew 104–105, 663 Zygmunt I 3, 13 Zygmunt I Stary xvii Zygmunt August 66 Żyrardów 632, 650