Church circles were very active in their opposition to the Jews. Many priests and directors of monasteries, who had originally come from Germany, brought to Poland the hostile traditions concerning the city-dwelling accursed Jew. As early as 1267 the Polish Church Council of Wroclaw (Breslau) outlined its anti-Jewish policy; its main aim was to isolate the Jews as far as possible from the Christians, not only from the communion of friendship and table but also to separate them in quarters surrounded by a wall or a ditch: "for as up to now the land of Poland is newly grafted on to the Christian body, it is to be feared that the Christian people will more easily be misled by the superstitions and evil habits of the Jews that live among them" (quum adhuc Terra Polonica sit in corpore christianitatis nova plantatio, ne forte eo facilius populus christianus a cohabitantium Iudeorum superstitionibus et pravis moribus inficiatur; Aronius, Regesten, 302 no. 724). With various modifications, this was restated in subsequent Church councils. In the 15th century this ecclesiastical attitude found new and influential expression. Cardinal Zbigniew Oleśnicki and the chronicler Jan Długosz were the main leaders of the anti-Jewish faction. When Jewish representatives came to King Casimir IV Jagello to obtain the ratification of their charters, Oleśnicki opposed it vehemently. He invited to Poland "the scourge of the Jews," John of Capistrano, fresh from his "success" in engineering a Host desecration libel which resulted in the burning of many Jews and expulsion of the community of Wroclaw. In vain Capistrano tried to influence the king not to ratify the Jewish charters. Oleśnicki himself wrote to the king in support of his effort: "Do not imagine that in matters touching the Christian religion you are at liberty to pass any law you please. No one is great and strong enough to put are at stake. I therefore beseech and implore your royal majesty to revoke the aforementioned privileges and liberties. Prove that you are a Catholic sovereign, and remove all occasion for disgracing your name and for worse offenses that are likely to follow" (Monumenta Mediaevi, ed. Szugski, Codex Epistolaris s. XV, T. II past posterior p. 147). As a result of this pressure the Nieszawa statute of 1454 decreed the repeal of all Jewish charters, but the repeal was short-lived. Perhaps central to the definition of the status of the Jews was the decision of King Sigismund I in 1534 that the Jews need not carry any distinguishing mark on their clothing. Despite the contrary resolution of the Sejm (Diet) of Piotrkow in 1538, the king's decision remained.
Major changes in the status of the Jews occurred throughout the 16th and 17th centuries, but they came about either through the issuance of particular writs of rights by kings for towns and communities both in favor of Jews as well as to their detriment (e.g., the privilegia de non tolerandis judaeis given to many towns in Poland) or through the action of various magnates, whose power was continuously growing in Poland in these centuries. Some of the latter, nicknamed Krolewięta ("kinglets"), granted Jews many and costly rights in the new municipal settlements they were erecting on their expansive estates the "private townships" of Poland, so-called in distinction to the old "royal townships." To a slight degree, change resulted from the new economic activity of the Jews, mainly in the east and southeast of Poland-Lithuania, and their move toward colonization there.
The foundations of the legal status of the Jews in the grand duchy of Lithuania were laid by Grand Duke Vitold in writs of law granted to the Jews of Brest-Litovsk in 1388 and to the Jews of Grodno in 1389. Though formally based on the rights of the Jews of Lvov in Poland, in letter and spirit these charters reveal an entirely different conception of the place of Jews in society. The writ for the Grodno community states that "from the above-mentioned cemetery in its present location as well as on ground that might be bought later and also from the ground of their Jewish synagogue, no taxes whatsoever will have to be given to our treasury." Not only are the Jewish place of worship and cemetery tax free a concession that indicates interest in having Jewish settlers in the town but also "what is more, we permit them to hold whatever views they please in their homes and to prepare at their homes any kind of drink and to serve drinks brought from elsewhere on the condition that they pay to our treasury a yearly tax. They may trade and buy at the market, in shops and on the streets in full equality with the citizens; they may engage in any kind of craft." Thus, in granting the Jews complete freedom to trade and engage in any craft, the grand duke gave them economic equality with the Christian citizens. He also envisaged their having agricultural or partially agricultural occupations: "As to the arable lands as well as grazing lands, those that they have now, as well as those that they will buy later, they may use in full equality with the townspeople, paying like them to our treasury." The Jews are here considered as merchants, craftsmen, and desirable settlers in the developing city. As the grand duchy merged with Poland to an ever increasing degree, in particular in the formal, legal, and social spheres, the basic concepts of the servi camerae also influenced the status of Lithuanian Jews (as was already hinted at in the formal reference to the rights and status of the Jews of Lvov). In spite of this, the general trend in Lithuanian towns and townships remained the same as that expressed in the late 16th-century charters. In 1495 the Jews were expelled from Lithuania. They were brought back in 1503: all their property was returned and opportunities for economic activity were restored.
Thus, on the threshold of the 16th century, the gradually merging grand duchy
of Lithuania and kingdom of Poland had both a fully worked out legal concept
of the status of the Jews. In Poland, the whole conception was medieval to the
core: legally and formally the attitude to the Jews remained unchanged from
their first arrival from the west and southwest. In Lithuania, on the other
hand, from the start the formal expressions reveal a conception of a Jewish
"third estate," equal in economic opportunity to the Christian
townspeople.
Particular legal enactments in Poland took cognizance of the change in the
economic
role of the Jews in Polish society. In Lithuania the formal enactments were
always suited to their economic role, and to a large extent the dynamics of
16th- and 17th-century development could be accommodated in the old legal
framework.
During all this period Jews were engaged in moneylending, some of them (e.g., Lewko Jordanis, his son Canaan, and Volchko) on a large scale. They made loans not only to private citizens but also to magnates, kings, and cities, on several occasions beyond the borders of Poland. The scope of their monetary operations at their peak may be judged by the fact that in 1428 King Ladislaus II Jagello accused one of the Cracow city counselors of appropriating the fabulous sum of 500,000 zlotys which the Jews had supplied to the royal treasury.
To an increasing extent many of the Jewish moneylenders became involved in
trade. They were considered by their lords as specialists in economic
administration.
In 1425 King Ladislaus II Jagello charged Volchko who by this time
already held
the Lvov customs lease with the colonization of a large tract of land:
"As
we have great confidence in the wisdom, carefulness, and foresight of our Lvov
customs-holder, the Jew Volchko
after the above-mentioned Jew Volchko has
turned the above-mentioned wilderness into a human settlement in the village,
it shall remain in his hands till his death." King Casimir Jagello
entrusted
to the Jew Natko both the salt mines of Drohobycz (Drogobych) and the customs
station of Grejdek, stating in 1452 that he granted it to him on account of
his "industry and wisdom so that thanks to his ability and industry we
shall bring in more income to our treasury." The same phenomenon is found
in Lithuania. By the end of the 15th century, at both ends of the economic
scale
Jews in Poland were becoming increasingly what they had been from the beginning
in Lithuania: a "third estate" in the cities. The German-polish
citizenry
quickly became aware of this. By the end of the 15th century, accusations
against
the Jews centered around unfair competition in trade and crafts more than
around
harsh usury. Not only merchants but also Jewish craftsmen are mentioned in
Polish
cities from 1460 onward. In 1485 tension in Cracow was so high that the Jewish
community was compelled to renounce formally its rights to most trades and
crafts.
Though this was done "voluntarily," Jews continued to pursue their
living in every decent way possible. This was one of the reasons for their
expulsion
from Cracow to Kazimierz in 1495. However, the end of Jewish settlement in
Cracow
was far from the end of Jewish trade there; it continued to flourish and
aggravate
the Christian townspeople, as was the case with many cities (like Lublin and
Warsaw) which had exercised their right de non tolerandis Judaeis and yet had
to see Jewish economic activity flourishing at their fairs and in their streets.
In Poland a dispute between two great scholars of the 16th century
Solomon
Luria and Moses Isserles brings to the surface elements of an earlier
rationalist
culture. Luria accuses yeshivah students of using "the prayer of
Aristotle"
and accuses Isserles of "mixing him with words of the living God
[considering]
that the words of this unclean one are precious and perfume to Jewish
sages"
(Isserles, Responsa, no. 6). Isserles replies: "All this is still a
poisonous
root in existence, the legacy from their parents from those that tended to
follow
the philosophers and tread in their steps. But I myself have never seen nor
heard up till now such a thing, and, but for your evidence, I could not have
believed that there was still a trace of these conceptions among us".
Writing around the middle of the 16th century, Isserles tells unwittingly
of a philosophizing trend prevalent in Poland many years before. A remarkable
case of how extreme rationalist conceptions gave way to more mystic ones can
be seen in Isserles' pupil, Abraham b. Shabbetai Horowitz. Around 1539 he
sharply
rebuked the rabbi of Poznan, who believed in demons and opposed Maimonides:
"As to what this ass said, that it is permissible to study Torah only,
this is truly against what the Torah says, 'Ye shall keep and do for it is your
wisdom and understanding in the eyes of the gentiles.' For even if we shall
be well versed in all the arcana of the Talmud, the gentiles will still not
consider us scholars; on the contrary, all the ideas of the Talmud, its methods
and sermons, are funny and derisible in the eyes of the gentiles. If we know
no more than the Talmud we shall not be able to explain the ideas and
exegetical
methods of the Talmud in a way that the gentiles will like this stands
to reason".
Yet this same man rewrote his rationalistic commentary
on a work by Maimonides to make it more amenable to traditionalistic and mystic
thought, declaring in the second version, "The first uproots, the last
roots." Later trends and struggles in Jewish culture in Poland and
Lithuania
are partly traceable to this early and obliterated rationalistic layer.
Polish victories over the Teutonic Order in the west and against Muscovite
and Ottoman armies in the east and southeast led to a great expansion of
Poland-Lithuania
from the second half of the 16th century. In this way Poland-Lithuania gained
a vast steppeland in the southeast, in the Ukraine, fertile but unpacified and
unreclaimed, and great stretches of arable land and virgin forest in the east,
in Belorussia. The agricultural resources in the east were linked to the center
through the river and canal systems and to the sea outlet in the west through
land routes. These successes forged a stronger link between the various strata
of the nobility (Pol. szlachta) as well as between the Polish and Lithuanian
nobility. In 1569 the Union of Lublin cemented and formalized the unity of
Poland-Lithuania,
although the crown of Poland and the grand duchy of Lithuania kept a certain
distinctness of character and law, which was also apparent in the Councils of
the Lands and in the culture of the Jews. With the union, Volhynia
and the Ukraine passed from the grand duchy to the crown. The combined might
of Poland-Lithuania brought about a growing pacification of these southeastern
districts, offering a possibility of their colonization which was eagerly
seized
upon by both nobility and peasants.
The Polish nobility, which became the dominant element in the state, was at that time a civilized and civilizing factor. Fermenting with religious thought and unrest which embraced even the most extreme anti-Trinitarians; warlike and at the same time giving rise to small groups of extreme anarchists and pacifists; more and more attracted by luxury, yet for most of the period developing rational even if often harsh methods of land and peasant exploitation; despising merchandise yet very knowledgeable about money and gain this was the nobility that, taking over the helm of state and society, developed its own estates in the old lands of Poland-Lithuania and the vast new lands in the east and southeast. Jews soon became the active and valued partners of this nobility in many enterprises. In the old "royal cities" even in central places like Cracow, which expelled the Jews in 1495, and Warsaw, which had possessed a privilegium de non tolerandis Judaeis since 1527 Jews were among the great merchants of clothing, dyes, and luxury products, in short, everything the nobility desired. Complaints from Christian merchants as early as the beginning of the 16th century, attacks by urban anti-Semites like Sebastian Miczyński and Przecław Mojecki in the 17th century, and above all internal Jewish evidence all point to the success of the Jewish merchant. The Jew prospered in trade even in places where he could not settle, thanks to his initiative, unfettered by guilds, conventions, and preconceived notions. The kesherim, the council of former office holders in the Poznan community, complain about the excessive activity of Jewish intermediaries, "who cannot stay quiet; they wait at every corner, in every place, at every shop where silk and cloth is sold, and they cause competition through influencing the buyers by their speech and leading them to other shops and other merchants." The same council complains about "those unemployed" people who sit all day long from morning till evening before the shops of gentiles of spice merchants, clothes merchants, and various other shops "and the Christian merchants complain and threaten." There was even a technical term for such men, tsuvayzer, those who point the way to a prospective seller (Pinkas Hekhsherim shel Kehillat Pozna, ed. D. Avron (1966), 187-8 no. 1105, 250 no. 1473, 51 no. 1476). Miczyłski gives a bitter description of the same phenomenon in Cracow in 1618. Large-scale Jewish trade benefited greatly from the trader's connections with their brethren both in the Ottoman Empire and in Germany and Western Europe. It was also linked to a considerable extent with the arenda system and its resulting great trade in the export of agricultural products.
Through the arenda system Jewish settlements spread over the country, especially in the southeast. Between 1503 and 1648 there were 114 Jewish communities in the Ukraine, some on the eastern side of the River Dnieper and list by S. Ettinger, in Zion, 21 (1956), 114-8); many of these were tiny. Table: Polish Jewish Settlement shows the main outlines of the dynamics of Jewish settlement in these regions of colonization.
The further the move east and southward, the greater the relative growth in numbers and population. The Jewish arenda holders, traders, and peddlers traveled and settled wherever space and opportunity offered.
Life in these districts was strenuous and often harsh. The manner of Jewish
life in the Ukraine, which as we have already seen was uncouth, was both
influenced
and channeled through Jewish participation in the defense of newly pacified
land. Meir b. Gedaliah of Lublin relates "what happened to a luckless man,
ill, and tortured by pain and suffering from epilepsy
When there was an
alarm
in Volhynia because of the Tatars as is usual in the towns of that
district when
each one is obliged to be prepared, with weapon in hand, to go to war and
battle
against them at the command of the duke and the lords; and it came to pass that
when the present man shot with his weapon, called in German
Büchse, from his
house through the window to a point marked for him on a rope in his courtyard
to try the weapon as sharpshooters are wont to do, then a man came from the
market to the above mentioned courtyard
and he was killed [by
mistake]."
The rabbi goes on to tell that a Christian, the instructor and commander of
this Jew, was standing in front of the courtyard to warn people not to enter.
The Jew was "living among the gentiles in a village" with many
children
(Meir b. Gedaliah of Lublin, Responsa, no. 43). There is reference to an
enterprising
group of Jews who went to Moscow with the armies of the Polish king during war,
selling liquor (one of them had two cartloads) and other merchandise to the
soldiers. Among the Cossack units there was a Jew about whom
his Cossack colleagues "complained to God
suddenly there jumped out
from amongst our ranks a Jew who was called Berakhah, the son of the martyr
Aaron of Cieszewiec." This Jew was not the only one in the ranks of the
Cossacks, for to allow his wife to marry one of the witnesses
says that "he
knew well that in this unit there was not another Jewish fighter who was called
Berakhah". Life in general was apt to be much more violent
than is usually supposed: even at Brest-Litovsk, when the rebbe of the
community
saw a litigant nearing his door, he seized a heavy box and barricaded himself
in for fear of harm.
Arenda did more than give a new basis to the existence of many Jewish families;
it brought the Jews into contact with village life and often combined with
aspects
of their internal organizational structure. Thus, the Jew Nahum b. Moses, as
well as renting the mills, the tavern, and the right of preparing beer and
brandy,
also rented for one year all milk produce of the livestock on the manors and
villages. Elaborate and complicated arrangements were made for payment and
collection
of these milk products (S. Inglot, in: Studja z historji społecznej i
gospodarczej poświęcone prof. Franciszkowi Bujakowi (1931), 179-82; cf. 205,
208-9). In
contact
with village life, the Jew sometimes formed a sentimental attachment to his
neighbors and his surroundings. In 1602 a council of leaders of Jewish
communities
in Volhynia tried to convince Jewish arendars to let the peasants rest on
Saturday
though the Polish nobleman would certainly have given them the right to compel
them to work: "If the villagers are obliged to work all the week through,
he should let them rest on Sabbath and the Holy Days throughout. See, while
living in exile and under the Egyptian yoke, our parents chose this Saturday
for a day of rest while they were not yet commanded about it, and heaven helped
them to make it a day of rest for ever. Therefore, where gentiles are under
their authority they are obliged to fulfill the commandment of the Torah and
the order of the sages not to come, God forbid, to be ungrateful [livot]
to the One who has given them plenty of good by means of the very plenty he
has given them. Let God's name be sanctified by them and not defiled" (H.
H. Ben-Sasson, in Zion, 21 [1956], 205).
The interests of the Jews and Polish magnates coincided and complemented
each other in one most important aspect of the economic and social activity
of the Polish-Lithuanian nobility. On their huge estates the nobles began to
establish and encourage the development of new townships, creating a network
of "private towns." Because of the nature of their relationship with
their own peasant population they were keen to attract settlers from afar, and
Jews well suited their plans. The tempo and scale of expansion were great; in
the grand duchy of Lithuania alone in the first half of the 17th century
between
770 and 900 such townships (miasteczki) existed (S. Aleksandrowicz, in:
Roczniki dziejów społecznych i gospodarczych, 27 (1965), 35-65). For their part, the
Jews, who were hard pressed by the enmity of the populace in the old royal
cities,
gladly moved to places where they sometimes became the majority, in some cases
even the whole, of the population. Since these were situated near the
hinterland
of agricultural produce and potential customers, Jewish initiative and
innovation
found a new outlet. Through charters granted by kings and magnates to
communities
and settlers in these new towns, the real legal status of the Jews gradually
changed very much for the better. By the second half of the 17th century
everywhere
in Poland Jews had become part of "the third estate" and in some
places
and in some respects the only one.
Jews continued to hold customs stations openly in Lithuania, in defiance
of the wishes of their leaders in Poland. Many custom
station ledgers were written in Hebrew script and contained Hebrew terms (R.
Mahler,
in YIVO Historishe Shriftn, 2 (1937), 180-205). Sometimes a Jew is
found with a "sleeping partner," a Pole or Armenian in whose name
the customs lease has been taken out. That some customs stations were in Jewish
hands was also of assistance to Jewish trade.
This complex structure of large-scale export and import trade, the active
and sometimes adventurous participation in the colonization of the Ukraine and
in the shaping of the "private cities," in the fulfilling of what
today we would call state economic functions, created for the first time in
the history of Ashkenazi Jewry a broad base of population, settlement
distribution,
and means of livelihood, which provided changed conditions for the cultural
and religious life of Jews. Even after the destruction wrought by the
Chmielnicki
massacres enough remained to form the nucleus of later Ashkenazi Jewry. The
later style of life in the Jewish shtetl was based on achievements and progress
made at this time.
Table of Contents "Polish Jewry" | Next Page
Ashkenaz | Designation of the first relatively compact area of settlement of Jews in N.W. Europe, initially on the banks of the Rhine. The term became identified with, and denotes in its narrower sense, Germany, German Jewry, and German Jews ("Ashkenazim"), as well as their descendants in other countries. Return | |
Khazars | A national group of general Turkic type, independent and sovereign in Eastern Europe between the seventh and tenth centuries C.E. During part of this time the leading Khazars professed Judaism. Return | |
Bohemia | Independent kingdom in Central Europe, until the beginning of the 14th century, affiliated later in the Middle Ages to the Holy Roman Empire. In 1526 it became part of the hereditary Hapsburg dominions and in 1620 lost its independence completely. From 1918 it was part of modern Czechoslovakia (from 1939 to 1945 part of the Nazi protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia), subsequently the Czech Republic. Return | |
Great Poland | Historic administrative unit of Poland-Lithuania, and a Jewish historical geographical entity within the framework of the Councils of the Lands (the central institutions of Jewish self-government in Poland and Lithuania from the middle of the 16th century until 1764). Return | |
Wloclawek | (Rus. Votslavsk): City in central Poland. Return | |
mintmasters | In the Middle Ages rulers tended to lease the right of minting coins to mintmasters or to grant and sell the right to their territorial vassals, who themselves employed such mintmasters. Jews carried out this prestigious and profitable enterprise mainly either as suppliers of precious metals for minting purposes or as distributors of coins; very rarely were they the actual craftsmen. Return | |
nagid | The head of the Jewish community in Islamic countries. Return | |
Lesser Poland | Historical region in S.W. Poland. Return | |
Magdeburg Law | Term applied to the constitutional and commercial urban law which developed in Magdeburg (German town) in the Middle Ages and became a pattern for new city constitutions in Central and Eastern Europe. Return | |
expulsions | The Jews underwent expulsions during the time of the Assyrian and Babylonian kingdoms. Return | |
Responsa | (pl. of responsum): Written opinions given to questions on aspects of Jewish law by qualified authorities; pl. collection of such queries and opinions in book form. Return | |
Kalisz | (Ger. Kalisch; Kalish): City in Poznan province, W. Poland; it had the most ancient community in Poland. Return | |
Talmud | "teaching"; compendium of discussions on the Mishnah by generations of scholars and jurists in many academies over a period of several centuries. Return | |
Sandomierz | (Rus. Sandomir): In Latin documents of the 12th century Sudomir; in early and Jewish sources Tsoyzmir or Tsuzmir), town in Kielce province, central Poland. Return | |
Poznan | (Get. Posen): City in historical Great Poland; in Prussia 1793–1807 and 1815–1919; now in Poznan province, W. Poland. One of the most ancient and leading Jewish communities of Poland-Lithuania. Return | |
Lyuboml | City in Volyn oblast, Ukraine. Jews were living in the city in 1516. Return | |
Nowy Sacz | (Pol. Nowy Sącz; Ger. Neu Sandec; in Jewish sources Zanz, Naysants), city in the province of Cracow, S. Poland. Return | |
Drohobycz | (Pol. Drohobycz): City in Ukraine, formerly in Poland and Austria. Return | |
Lewko Jordanis | (or Lewek), [d. 1395], the wealthiest Jew of Cracow (and Poland) in his time; he acted as court banker of the kings of Poland. Return | |
Sephardi | Jew(s) of Spain and Portugal and their descendants, wherever resident, as contrasted with Askhenazi(m). Return | |
Judaizers | Persons who without being Jews follow in whole or in part the Jewish religion or claim to be Jews. Return | |
Karaite | Member of a Jewish sect originating in the eighth century which rejected rabbinic (Rabbanite) Judaism and claimed to accept only Scripture as authoritative. Return | |
Solomon Luria | Luria, Solomon ben Jehiel (?1510–1574), posek [decisor; codifier or rabbinic scholar who pronounces decisions in disputes and on questions of Jewish law] and talmudic commentator (known as Rashal or Maharshal = Morenu ha-Rav Shelomo Luria). Return | |
Moses Isserles | Isserles, Moses ben Israel (1525 or 1530–1572), Polish rabbi and codifier, one of the great halakhic authorities. Return | |
Maimonides | Maimonides, Moses (Moses ben Maimon; known in rabbinical literature as "Rambam"; from the acronym Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon; 1135–1204), rabbinic authority, codifier, philosopher, and royal physician. Return | |
Councils of the Lands | The central institutions of Jewish self-government in Poland and Lithuania from the middle of the 16th century until 1764. Return | |
Sebastian Miczyński | (late 16th–early 17th century), anti-Jewish agitator and professor of philosophy at Cracow University. In 1618 Miczyński published a venomous anti-Semitic lampoon entitled Zwierciadło korony polskiej ("The Mirror of the Polish Crown"). It is a catalog of demagogic denunciations accusing the Jews of all the misfortunes that had befallen the kingdom of Poland and its people. Return | |
Przecław Mojecki |
(second half of 16th and early 17th century), Polish Catholic priest and
anti-Semitic author. His principle work, O zydowskich okrucieństwach, mordach y zabobonach ("The Cruelty, Murders, and Superstitions of the Jews"), was the first outright attack on the Jews and Judaism in Polish political writings. Return |
|
arenda | Polish term designating the lease of fixed assets or of prerogatives, such as land, mills, inns, breweries, distilleries, or of special rights, such as the collection of customs duties and taxes. The term was adopted with the same meaning in Hebrew and Yiddish from the 16th century (with the lessee, in particular the small-scale lessee, being called the arenda). The arenda system was widespread in the economy of Poland-Lithuania from the late Middle Ages. Return | |
shtetl | (pl. shtetlakh; Russ. mestechko; Pol. miasteczko;), Yiddish diminutive for shtot meaning "town" or "city," to imply a relatively small community; in Eastern Europe a unique socio-cultural communal pattern. The real criteria for the size of a shtetl were vague and ill-defined, as the actual size could vary from much less than 1,000 inhabitants to 20,000 or more. Return |