According to the Ground Book, after his death, Simon Siebenschein left his sons Josia and Isak House No. 15 (probably each received half). In 1799 Isak S. transferred his half to his brother Josia, who became sole proprietor of the house. In 1811 the other half of the house was signed over to Josef Siebenschein. The other house (No. 16 old, 80 new) Simon Siebenschein left his son Isak, who, upon his death (1809) left it for his grandson Zodek and Josef Löbl. Siebenschein, whereas the widow of Isak, Mrs. Perl Siebenschein had the lifelong usu fructus [passing things on to the next generation] put into effect. It is possible that Josef Siebenschein was a son (perhaps his youngest) of Simon Siebenschein, or perhaps he was only a son of Abraham Siebenschein, but this question needs to be posed. We have a copy of the grave inscription translation of Josua (also known as Josia or Isius) Siebenschein:

The death was not entered into the death register at this time. In a "Register of the Familiants of sons who were left behind", that are found in the Archive of Strassnitz Castle, in 1836 under No. 28, Isius Siebenschein appeared in that lies in the Archive in Strassnitz in the year 1836 under No. 28 there is an entry of Isius Siebenschein, who never had a right of succession to the estate (or return of an estate to the guarantor or his heirs after the expiration of the grant). By this, the date of death of the grave inscription is also indirectly confirmed. The brothers Isak and Isius Siebenschein appear in the exhibition protocol of the Strassnitz on 25 February 1799 sub No. 160, since the heirs of Simon Siebenschein were requesting two debts for 657 Fl. 38xr. and 381 Fl. in order to solve the ground book debts. In the synagogue's main office ground book of the Community in Strassnitz from the year 1810 there is listed as owner of the property No. 14 "Kazin R. Jehoschua b' R' Schi ", that is the rich man Rabbi Jehoschua, son of Rabbi Simson or Schimson." The same shortening as in the grave inscription can be seen. Otherwise Josua or Isius Siebenschein appear in another in a certificate of the estimated 1824 tax with an amount of 200 Fl., wheareas other (younger) dependents from the family who have higher amounts have been noted. It seems then that he was not as independent a salesman, but rather worked together with his brother Abraham or other family members. His brother Isack also only began to be mentioned after the death of Abraham Siebenschein, on 6 February 1803 with a letter of indemnity in the documents at the War Archives. This letter of indemnity is from Leipnik, dated and completed by Isack Siebenschein et. Comp. Haass, Morav. incorporated supplier. Another writing from the same document is from Leipnik as well, from 11 March 1803, dated and completed with "Morav. Incorporated Supply Company Haas & Siebenschein." It deals with the delivery of 800 Pecks for Meseritsch, M.-Weiskirchen, Neutitschein, Fulnekk and Leipnik. Leipnik was most likely the residence of the partner Haas and there was actually a Juda Haas and a Lazar Haas on the list of Leipnik Jewish Families from the year 1800.

After this gathering of places on which Simon Siebenschein and his younger sons appeared in the documents, we will turn to the oldest or perhaps second oldest son Abraham who appears most frequently in the documents. In him we find a man who, with his strength of achievement and his enterprising spirit, almost equals the large financial geniuses of the Jews of Old-Austria, Wertheimer, Oppenheimer, Schlesinger and Sinzheim. The grand scale of his business can be looked upon as the predecessor of stock transactions, evidence of which can be found in the records of the main catering office and the Palace War Counsel, to whom the business of purveying were passed on in 1793. From these protocols we can reconstruct the book-keeping of the merchant Siebenschein, at least concerning his Army Supply Account. We can observe that great joy and success was denied this man, like many other merchants before and after him and his tremendous efforts, as witnessed by his generous activities. Even if the examination proved Abraham Siebenschein's innocence, a small, noticeable shadow would remain. Furthermore, other details about Abraham Siebenschein can be observed, how greatly he strove, not just as a commercial dealer and middleman, but also to be productive for his own property. And it is attributed to him, aside from all the romantic longing, to also implement the practice of only purchasing self-made things. Although he was not necessarily successful in overcoming the limitations put before him. One can imagine what this meant to a contemporary of Napoleon, thinking in the dimensions of the army of great power, and yet feeling so enclosed by his three Ghetto houses.

Simon Siebenschein seemed to not only have passed his business acumen on to his eldest son, but also during his lifetime to have gifted the rest of his houses to him. So we see in the Ground Book of the Strassnitz Jewish Community, Fo. 13, already in the year 1796, that House No. 2 b Abraham Siebenschein transferred ownership to his son, Joseph Siebenschein. In Fo. 19 from the same ground book that Abraham Siebenschein, already in 1793, on the occasion of the gifting of his House No. 3 to his daughter, Fegele Siebenschein Oppenheimer, that was valued at 250 Fl. and following the 31 January 1830 published will, was assigned to Fegele Siebenschein Oppenheimer and later following the assignation went to her husband, the Strassnitz Rabbi Joachim Oppenheimer. In Fo. 145 Abraham Siebenschein's, ownership of House No. 20 and 21 as well is already included in the year 1793.

In the year 1765 the directory of Strassnitz Jewish Families already showed Abraham Simon under No. 35 and under this name, as Abraham Samson he is named as godfather on a few pages of the beginning of the Strassnitz birth registry, until 8 June 1788, when he appeared for the first time as Abraham Siebenschein.

From this time on the records of the highest War authorities show us even more that Abraham Siebenschein was not a supplier who just slavishly held to the requested instruction, but confidently worked with the goods entrusted to his care and sometimes, together with understanding officials of the executive, knew ways to cheat the central offices. And because of that, it was natural that his actions often were interpreted as daring by the officials of the palace and caused them to take a position against this "business speculation."

Probably it was in consideration of the bigger size or to the larger risk that made Abraham Siebenschein to not carry on his business alone, but in partnership with other merchants. He probably did not want to always have to arrange the necessary capital, surely he was always the motivating spirit of this "Siebenschein Company", who had to battle with the state to obtain what was due them. During such a battle the Main Office of Supprt once raised the question, with which rights did Siebenschein have to be able to carry out the consignment. At the same time the Palace War Counsel asked the Hungarian Palace Counsel how the Moravian Jew Abraham Siebenschein and company had been able to get hold of a natural produce supply for the Neutra County process in Baimontz; the closeness with the Hungarian Palace Counsel had been so obvious to the Palace War Counselor that he informed the Military Support Office. A report from the Military Support Office confirmed that the Jew Siebenschein had delivered one part of what he had contractually been obligated to deliver to the storage officer of support in Kormorn, Stolz and the other part to the storage Gran.

Siebenschein also often bothered other higher places and also the State Protocol Counsel No. 822 ex 1793 deals with a request that Abraham Siebenschein and Frankl, state that they were enormously deceived by the withholding of the unpaid balance of 67866 Fl. 27xr, interest and expenses included, for which they had been asking for four years and so had not been able to engage in other supply businesses.

The Town Council replied that it depended on the highest mercy whether they would be granted the commission promised by the former Chamber Court, not according to the contract, but according to the prices of deliverance of 1789. The rest of their demands had to be claimed via litigation. Abraham Siebenschen might have been glad to get off lightly in this case.

Amongst the "Strassnitz Jews," who in the year 1787 came forth as complainants, "since they were banned from all natural produce deliveries" it was only easy to find Abraham Siebenschein, who in January 1792 had to admit that his father and he had been suppliers for 30 years. It was just shortly before, on the 11 January 1792, that the question once again arose, "how this Jew was able to find the opportunity to permeate the supplying of the country?". It was then remarked that the Jews turned to being suppliers in order to gain an advantage for the exchequer . . . ; but in the calculations, only the Brno Citizens Starek and the Strassnitz Jew Siebenschein appear in the year 1790. The known materials could, of course, happily report something better and we know that what was missing in the central authorities must have still existed in the world of the provinces, circles or local citizens.

Untiringly and persistently as we already know, Abraham Siebenschein already turned to a new possible activity in August 1792, that is a military transportation vehicle-leasing contract, and a proposal was allowed that set a condition for the contract with current account calculations pertaining to both parties hanging in the balance. He trusted in the ability to procure cheaper and better things than anyone else for the military authorities, though he was not always able to do so. Aside from him there were Simon Frankl from Hung.-Brod, Joachim Weinberg, Hung.-Hradisch, Jakob Füchsel and Falk Beer from Nikolsburg as associate partners of his trade company. Many of the documents that were mentioned show exact details of the development of the business and we actually learn from the documents that were stored in the State Archives of the ministries of Interior and Justice, which were only slightly damaged by the fire of 15 July 1927, about the presumed purchase of a piece of property through Abraham Siebenschein.

A specialty of the business acumen of Abraham Siebenschein demonstrate the previously mentioned transactions, how he showed by example various suggestions on 2 May 1795. It is a sort of time-bargain which cleverly arranges ways to avoid unnecessary costs and expenditure of time and transportation. Perhaps this signifies a quiet beginning to economic planning when he made the suggestion to immediately deliver 6000 pecks of corn etc. in Hollitsch and to transport for free to the river March (a river that runs from Czechi to Slovakia and Austria), if, in exchange, the 6000 pecks from the warehouses in Hung.-Hradisch, Hung.-Ostrau and Wessely were given to him. But really the large conception was the motive for a tobacco inspector-general in Wessely to make a report because of a curtailment of government property (or public ownership) against Abraham Siebenschein. An investigation took place and also reported by the Kaiser, but with the aforementioned result, that Abraham Siebenschein did not practice any deceptive means and only one official deemed driving negligence and the substitute of the examination costs were requested. It was determined that there were no damages to the Ärar (government property) through Abraham Siebenschein, but the trust of the official was affected for awhile and the other documents show that this man had a continuing difficult battle to proceed with his business. One had the impression that through Siebenschein's prospective of deliveries, made in advance because of the arrears, would be disturbed, but did not suspect that with this, the routine of the authorities was witness to the actual difficulties. Abraham Siebenschein stayed in the background of the bids of his trading company and relied on his partner Falk Beer to continue the outside work. But it is interesting that his method of doing business in the grain market influenced Philipp (Feibel) Bondy from Eisenstadt in the year 1800, who was aware of the precedent that had been set.

In Abraham Siebenschein, who died on 22 January 1803 in Strassnitz, we see a counterpart to Vitus Ehestamm from Prossnitz before us, who is seen in Bernhard Heilig's biographies. He often liked to check on things in Vienna to personally see the completion of his work on the spot (the fruits of his labor), and we find that many written documents were written in Vienna. The documents and reports concerning him demonstrate in their totality a look back behind the scenes of the army organization, which even the most exciting war literature could not do. They show army and administration, war and business in their most intimate connection. Whereas the example of Veit Ehrenstamm could show a battle against the already declining trade guild and the founding of a still prospering industry which is still thriving today. Abraham Siebenschein 's battle was directed against the closed system and aimed at the freedom of trade. He only had a little bit of success, and with him the connection of the Siebenschein Family as the army suppliers decreases. His brother Isak perhaps continued to have businesses liquidated and his son Joachim, who married the richest and most famous Moravian Jew, the founder of the Holleschau Bet-Hamidrash, Abraham Herz, and his daughter Fegele, who married the Strassnitz Rabbi Joachim Oppenheimer, worked hard and had accomplishments that were inspired by their father and brought them a high standard of living. The grandchildren, Abraham Herz Siebenschein in Strassnitz and Josef Siebenschein in Vienna, played a significant role during their lives, the one was manufacturer of spirits, the other soap refiner and margarine dealer. Later one finds other family members in other countries, even abroad, but we also find them in their homeland in prestigious public positions. They participate significantly in the material prosperity of Austria in the 70's and though the ascent of the Siebenscheins never climbed as high and so suddenly as that of the house of the Ehrenstamms, they never experienced such a sudden and rapid fall (as the Ehrenstamms did). A few branches of the descendants of this widely dispersed and still flourishing family show unrecognizable signs of descent, but in many descendants one still sees the old spirit of enterprise from the forefathers, whose life story I tried to depict here. And even though the Jewish erudition that these forefathers demonstrated is no longer widespread amongst the great-grandchildren of today, there is no lack of intellectuality and so even today the furthest descendant is witness to the unbroken vitality of the Jewish origin, as worthy representative of the name of their ancestor Simson.