Jüdische Migration und Diversität in Wien und Berlin 1667/71–1918. Von der Vertreibung der Wiener Juden und ihrer Wiederansiedlung in Berlin bis zum Zionismus by Ingo Haar (review)
{"title":"Jüdische Migration und Diversität in Wien und Berlin 1667/71–1918. Von der Vertreibung der Wiener Juden und ihrer Wiederansiedlung in Berlin bis zum Zionismus by Ingo Haar (review)","authors":"Barbara L. Bailin","doi":"10.1353/gsr.2023.0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Jüdische Migration und Diversität in Wien und Berlin 1667/71–1918, Ingo Haar analyzes the factors affecting Jewish migration patterns during peace and wartime. Most prominent among them were the application of social pressure to compel Berlin and Viennese Jews to assimilate and the efforts by Jews themselves to concede to the demands of the state while striving to retain their own religious community. Haar traces these factors over 250 years between Jewish emancipation (seventeenth century) and the rise of modern antisemitism (nineteenth century). He focuses on the history of the Jewish path between “cultural stigmatization and social functionalization” to understand the ambivalence of the period of Jewish emancipation that extended into modernity (12). In doing so, he builds upon the work of several earlier historians, e.g., J. Friedrich Battenberg (German Jewish emancipation in the early modern period), Tobias Brinkmann (German Jewish migrations during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries), Werner Jochmann (modern German antisemitism), and Heinz Fassmann (Austrian Jewish migration). Haar compares the complex socio-cultural processes of how Jews in Berlin and Vienna became more inclusive or more exclusive from Christian society over time. He argues, correctly in my opinion, that the history of conflict between Protestants, Catholics, and Jews can only be understood by examining the underlying events of the pre-modern period and its effect on Jewish migration and diversity patterns. By doing so, he explicitly rejects the view of other historians who debate whether the twentieth century was characterized by its radical nationalism and was built on the practices of violence of the nineteenth century (16). By focusing on Jewish social and cultural history, he argues that historic violence against and expulsion(s) of Jews because of their religious beliefs were the rule and not the exception for centuries. The continued existence of Jewish communities in Berlin and Vienna became increasingly dependent upon the whims of the ruling sovereigns and the willingness of the Christian populations to accept Jewish citizens of those cities by the late sixteenth century (490). Jewish businessmen served literally “at the pleasure” of their Christian patron(s). In a particularly striking example of the lengths to which this concept was taken, Elector Joachim II of Brandenburg appointed the “court Jew” (Hofjude) Lipman ben Juda (1530–1573) as court chamberlain responsible for managing credit transactions and the sovereign right of coinage (Münzregal). Upon the elector’s death, his successor","PeriodicalId":43954,"journal":{"name":"German Studies Review","volume":"46 1","pages":"153 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Studies Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/gsr.2023.0017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In Jüdische Migration und Diversität in Wien und Berlin 1667/71–1918, Ingo Haar analyzes the factors affecting Jewish migration patterns during peace and wartime. Most prominent among them were the application of social pressure to compel Berlin and Viennese Jews to assimilate and the efforts by Jews themselves to concede to the demands of the state while striving to retain their own religious community. Haar traces these factors over 250 years between Jewish emancipation (seventeenth century) and the rise of modern antisemitism (nineteenth century). He focuses on the history of the Jewish path between “cultural stigmatization and social functionalization” to understand the ambivalence of the period of Jewish emancipation that extended into modernity (12). In doing so, he builds upon the work of several earlier historians, e.g., J. Friedrich Battenberg (German Jewish emancipation in the early modern period), Tobias Brinkmann (German Jewish migrations during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries), Werner Jochmann (modern German antisemitism), and Heinz Fassmann (Austrian Jewish migration). Haar compares the complex socio-cultural processes of how Jews in Berlin and Vienna became more inclusive or more exclusive from Christian society over time. He argues, correctly in my opinion, that the history of conflict between Protestants, Catholics, and Jews can only be understood by examining the underlying events of the pre-modern period and its effect on Jewish migration and diversity patterns. By doing so, he explicitly rejects the view of other historians who debate whether the twentieth century was characterized by its radical nationalism and was built on the practices of violence of the nineteenth century (16). By focusing on Jewish social and cultural history, he argues that historic violence against and expulsion(s) of Jews because of their religious beliefs were the rule and not the exception for centuries. The continued existence of Jewish communities in Berlin and Vienna became increasingly dependent upon the whims of the ruling sovereigns and the willingness of the Christian populations to accept Jewish citizens of those cities by the late sixteenth century (490). Jewish businessmen served literally “at the pleasure” of their Christian patron(s). In a particularly striking example of the lengths to which this concept was taken, Elector Joachim II of Brandenburg appointed the “court Jew” (Hofjude) Lipman ben Juda (1530–1573) as court chamberlain responsible for managing credit transactions and the sovereign right of coinage (Münzregal). Upon the elector’s death, his successor
在《j dische Migration und Diversität In Wien und Berlin In 1667/71-1918》一书中,Ingo Haar分析了影响和平时期和战时犹太人迁移模式的因素。其中最突出的是施加社会压力,迫使柏林和维也纳的犹太人被同化,以及犹太人自己努力向国家的要求让步,同时努力保留自己的宗教团体。哈尔追溯了犹太人解放(17世纪)和现代反犹主义兴起(19世纪)之间250多年的这些因素。他关注犹太人在“文化污名化和社会功能化”之间的道路,以理解犹太人解放时期延伸到现代性的矛盾心理(12)。在此过程中,他以几位早期历史学家的工作为基础,例如,J.弗里德里希·巴滕伯格(近代早期德国犹太人解放),托拜厄斯·布林克曼(19世纪和20世纪德国犹太人移民),沃纳·约赫曼(现代德国反犹主义)和海因茨·法斯曼(奥地利犹太人移民)。Haar比较了柏林和维也纳的犹太人如何随着时间的推移变得更包容或更排斥基督教社会的复杂社会文化过程。他认为,新教徒、天主教徒和犹太人之间的冲突历史只能通过考察前现代时期的潜在事件及其对犹太移民和多样性模式的影响来理解,我认为这是正确的。通过这样做,他明确地拒绝了其他历史学家的观点,他们争论20世纪是否以激进的民族主义为特征,是否建立在19世纪的暴力实践之上。通过关注犹太人的社会和文化史,他认为历史上因为犹太人的宗教信仰而对他们的暴力和驱逐是几个世纪以来的惯例,而不是例外。到16世纪晚期,柏林和维也纳的犹太社区的持续存在越来越依赖于统治君主的异想天开和基督教人口接受这些城市的犹太公民的意愿。犹太商人确实为他们的基督教赞助人“高兴”服务。勃兰登堡选侯约阿希姆二世(Joachim II of Brandenburg)任命“宫廷犹太人”(Hofjude)利普曼·本·犹大(Lipman ben Juda, 1530-1573)为宫廷侍从,负责管理信贷交易和铸币主权(m zregal),这是一个特别引人注目的例子。选帝侯死后,他的继任者