katz jewish social history
TRANSCRIPT
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 1/10
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Jewish History.
http://www.jstor.org
On Jewish Social History: Epochal and Supra-Epochal HistoriographyAuthor(s): Jacob KatzSource: Jewish History, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Spring, 1993), pp. 89-97
Published by: SpringerStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20101145Accessed: 18-11-2015 08:57 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 2/10
Jewish
History
Volume
7,
No. 1
Spring
1993_
On Jewish Social
History:
Epochal
and
Supra-Epochal
Historiography
Jacob Katz
Back
in
the
1950s,
at
th?
outset
of
a
somewhat
belated academic
career,
when the
sum
of
my
published
research consisted of
my
doctoral
dissertation
on
the
assimilation of
German
Jews
(completed
in
Germany nearly
two
decades
before)1
and
a
handful of
journal
articles,
I
attempted
to
elucidate the
concept
of
social
history
and
its
possible
utility
for historical
research
on
Jewish
communities
in
the
Diaspora.2
My
interest
in
treating
the
topic
had
been
prompted
by
an
appointment
in
1953
to
the
staff of the
Department
of
Sociology
at
the Hebrew
University
to
teach Jewish
social
history.
Now,
after
some
forty
years
of
teaching
and
research,
I
believe
the
time
is
ripe
for
taking
a
renewed
look
at
this
question,
examining
it in
the
light
of
my
own
research
findings
and
those
of
other
scholars.
When I
initially began
to
delve
into
the
topic
four decades
ago,
perusing
and
surveying
publications
by
authors
who had
explicitly
used the
term
social
history
in
their
titles,
I
was
only
able
to
locate
a
small number who had
endeavored
to
provide
a
theoretical
underpinning
for
their utilization of the
concept.
This
was
probably
due
to
the
state
of research
in
the
field
at
the
time,
a
situation
compounded
in Jerusalem
by
the
special
circumstances in the
wake of hostilities
connected
with
the establishment
of the
State
of Israel: the
holdings
of
the
National
Library
on
Mt.
Scopus lay
in
territory
inaccessible
to
inhabitants of the
city.
So,
in
actual
fact,
all
I
had
available for orientation
were
two
studies:
G.
M.
Trevelyan's English Social History and Salo W. Baron's A Social and Religious
History of
the
Jews.7,
Thus,
I
was
forced
to
rely
for the
most
part
on
my
own
wits
and
intuition,
bolstered
by
a
background
of formal
training
in
sociology.
As is
now
evident
in
retrospect,
I arrived
at
conclusions
quite
similar
to
those
of
other
scholars
who had
engaged
in
attempts
to
shed
light
on
the
concept.4
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 3/10
90
Jacob Katz
Right
from
the
start,
it
was
clear
to
me
that
to
introduce
the notion
of
social
history
meant
to
deflate
historiographical
interest
from
its
preoccupation
with
politics;
Trevelyan's
definition
served
to
strengthen
that
perception. According
to
his classic
formulation,
Social
history
is
the
history
of
a
people
with
the
politics
left
out. 5
This
view
extended
a
buttress
to
support
my
thesis
that
social
history
-
in
contrast to
political
history
-
in
fact
possessed
certain
decided
advantages
when
it
came
to
investigating
the
Diaspora
communities. After
all,
those communities
had
in
effect
been
condemned
to
an
almost
proverbial
political
powerlessness.
Their
contribution
to
the life of the
non-Jewish
surrounding
world had been
limited
to
a
number
of
economic
functions,
and
they
remained
excluded
from
all
other
domains,
in
particular
that
of
authority
and
power.
The
internal life of
such
communities
was
played
out
in
the
nexus
of
institutions
-
family,
school,
synagogue,
voluntary
associations and
the
like
-
all
of which
remain
legitimate
objects
for social-historical
research.
Thus,
while
Trevelyan
reasoned
that
the
political
domain should
be
left
to
one
side when
examining
the
social
history
of
various
peoples
-
an
approach
beset
with
potential
problems
-
the
same
political
dimension seemed
to vanish
virtually
of its
own
accord
if
Jewish
communities
were
selected
as
the
topic
for
investigation. Indeed, such communities appeared to be almost predestined as
potential objects
for social-historical
analysis.
In
my
view
as
conceived
at
that
time, however,
social
history
is
not
only
determined
by
concrete
objects
of
research.
It
also
requires
a
method
which
differs from
that
of conventional
historiography
and
is
oriented
toward
sociology.
The
sociological analysis
of
any
institution,
past
or
present,
is
never
focused
on
the
concrete
example
of
a
phenomenon;
rather,
it
centers
on
the
collective
essential
features
of
the
given
institution.
This
is
also
the
case
when it
comes
to its
social
history.
Attention
is
not
directed
to
delineating
the
fate
of
a
concrete
example
of
some
institution
over
the
course
of
time
-
instead,
focus
is
on
the modifications
undergone
in its
collective configuration. I chose to illustrate this postulate using the example of
the
family,
and had
already
published
a
study
in
Hebrew based
on
this
method,
dealing
with
marriage
and
sexual
behavior
in
the late medieval
period.6
In
that
article,
I
described the
structure
and
function
of
the
family
in
Ashkenaz
Jewish
communities
on
the threshold of
the
modern
age.
Thus,
this did
not
entail
a
history
of
individual
families,
as
was
the
customary
practice
in
family
research;
rather,
the
objective
was
to
arrive
at
an
abstract
picture
of
the
family,
mirroring
the
salient features of
social
reality
characteristic
of
all families
during
this
period.
The
essay
argued
programmatically
for the
notion that
a
key
task
confronting
any
social
history
of Jewish
communities
in
a
specific period
was
to present all aspects of their life, including their institutions (not just the
family,
but
schools
and
synagogues,
the
rabbinate,
etc.
as
well),
described
in
this
abstract
manner.
Undoubtedly,
I
was
guided
in
my
approach
by
the
Weberian
notion
of
the ideal
type
as
an
orientational
concept
for
social-historical research.
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 4/10
On Jewish
Social
History
91
I
fulfilled the
potential
promise
of that
postulate
in
my
subsequent
study
entitled
Tradition
and
Crisis.1
The
main section
of
the
monograph
is
an
ideal-typical
portrait
of traditional
Jewish
society
in
the last
phase
of its evolvement
in
Europe
during
the
16th
to
18th
centuries.
As
in
my
earlier
article
on
the
family,
the
book's
final section sketches
the
break with
tradition and the transition
to
new
social
movements
and
formations,
a
topic
Iwill
return
to
below.
Looking
back
at
these
early
contributions
to
the
theory
and
practice
of Jewish
social
history
from
today's
vantage point,
I
believe
a
few critical
observations
are in order. Even at that time, I harbored
certain
doubts about the notion,
implicit
in
the
Trevelyan
definition,
that
political
aspects
can
be
justifiably
ignored
when
focusing
on
social
history.
In
reality,
I
suspected
that
Trevelyan
himself
had
not
overlooked
English
political
history;
on
the
contrary,
he had
presupposed
that his readers
were
already
conversant
with
its
basic
facts.8
Of
course,
the historian remains
sovereign
in
the
choice
of
his research
object.
If
he
wishes
to
describe
the
development
of
a
specific
sector
in the life of
a
society,
such
as
the
history
of
its
economy,
art
or
religion,
then
reference
to
neighboring
areas
is
only
necessary
where these
exert
a
direct
and
obvious
influence
on events
within
the domain
of the
topic
under
investigation.
But if
one's historiographie intention is to paint a comprehensive picture of a society
over
the
course
of
time
-
an
aim I had
hoped
to
achieve,
and
one
often
postulated
by
social historians
today
-
then
a
researcher
can
dare
to
ignore
the
political
dimension
only
on one
condition;
namely,
if
he
is
persuaded
that
society
remains
unaffected
by
the
prevailing
form
of
authority
and
domination,
and the
practical
exercise of
such
power.
Yet that
is
of
course
a
postulate
few if
any
historians
nowadays
would find
acceptable.
Politics
is
the
all-encompassing
agent
of
government,
a
principle
aptly
enunciated
by
Napoleon.9
Whether
one
is
actively
involved
in
political
events
or
is
only
their
passive
subject
and
victim,
they
have
an
impact
on
what
occurs
in
other
spheres.
Indeed,
the
Jewish
Diaspora
communities represent a classic example of dependence on foreign
rulers
who
determined
their fate.
No historian
writing
on a
Jewish
community
or
larger
social
unit has
failed
to
deal
in
some
manner
with
the
political
conditions
forming
the
ambience
of
their
existence.
Nor
did
1
in
Tradition
and
Crisis.
Moreover,
the
political
dimension
is also
present
as
a
factor within
the internal
life
of
the
Jewish
community
itself.
The
framework
determined
by
the
non-Jewish
ruling
powers
normally
contains
a
stipulation
granting
the
community
a
certain
degree
of
autonomy.
And that
autonomy
places
a
modicum
of coercive power - in the form of taxation prerogatives, religious and civil
discipline
and the like
-
squarely
in the hands
of
the
leaders of
the
community.
So
a
comprehensive
total
history
of
a
Diaspora
society,
along
the lines of
what
I
had
attempted
to
sketch
in
Tradition
and
Crisis,
certainly
does
not
exclude
political
aspects, despite
its overall
thrust
and
presentation
as
social
history.
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 5/10
92
Jacob
Katz
No
historian
would
dispute
the
evident
advantages
of
an
encompassing
history
treating
all
aspects
of
a
community.
Nonetheless,
such
totalizing
historiography
has
its
drawbacks
and
must remain
problematical.
Success
is
possible only
so
long
as
sights
are
focused
on
a
specific phase
of
development,
the
picture
of
a
society
at
a
definite
point
in
time in its
evolving
existence.
That
moment
need
not
be of
brief
duration,
and
can
embrace
the
expanse
of
an
entire
epoch,
if
it is
indeed
possible
to
isolate
and
pinpoint
relatively
constant
and
abiding
features
in
the
physiognomy
of
that chosen
time-segment.
In
any
event,
the
picture
delineated
portrays
society
in
a
quasi-static
state,
tending
to
neglect
that
essential
element
characteristic
of all
historiographie description, namely,
the
tracing
of
temporal change.
In
Tradition
and
Crisis,
I
did
not content
myself
with
presenting
a
momentary
snapshot,
as
it
were,
of traditional
society.
Rather,
I tried
to
augment
the
picture
by
a
description
of
the
earliest
stage
in
a
process
of
its two
metamorphoses:
in
Western
Europe,
the
phase
of
Enlightenment
guided
by
the
lights
of
rationalism,
and the
emergence
of
Hasidism oriented
toward
mystical-kabbalistic concepts
in
Eastern
Europe.
However,
a
combination
of the
two
approaches
-
a
cross-sectional
comprehensive portrayal
of
society
and
the
sketching
of its
evolvement over time
-
would have necessitated a description and analysis of
the
new
stages,
as
well
as
of traditional
society,
in terms
of
the total
complex
of
their institutions
and
functions.
Yet that
perspective
entails
a
major
complication:
since the roots
of
traditional Jewish
society
did
not
originate
in
the
late Middle
Ages,
but
dated back
to
the
ancient Talmudic
period,
my
presentation,
given
the
requirements
of its
sociological
orientation,
would
necessarily
have
had
to
take
the
Talmudic
age
as
its
point
of
departure.
Moreover,
such
an
undertaking
would
have called
for
a
causal
explanation
-
rather than
mere
description
-
to account
for
the
transitions from
stage
to
stage;
it
would have made
it
necessary
to
explicate
the
driving
force
behind
those
transitions.
The
objective
difficulties,
and indeed
practical
impossibility,
of
an
undertaking
along
these lines would
be
readily
evident. To
forego
such
an
approach
is
certainly
not
a
decision
dependent
on
the
personal
shortcomings
and
inadequacies
of
the individual
historian.
I
am
gratified
to
note
that
I
do
not
stand
alone
in
this
pessimistic
assessment. As Dieter
Groh has observed
in
his
methodological study
of
similar
problems:
The
Archimedean
point
has
not
yet
been
located
from
which
history
can
be
investigated
and
presented
as a
series
of
events
developing
over
time
[Verlaufsgeschichte]
on
the
one
hand,
and
from
which,
on
the
other,
the
structures
precipitated
by history
can
be
researched and
described. Nor will that
point
ever be found... 10 The methodological
justification
for
a
total
comprehensive
social
history
remains
undisputed
as
long
as
it
stays
within
the
bounds of
its
inherent
capacity:
the
description
and
analysis
of
a
society
inside
a
limited
time-frame.
In
contrast to
this
objective,
French
historians
have
put
forward
the
concept
of l'histoire
de la
longue
dur?e.
In
my
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 6/10
On
Jewish
Social
History
93
view,
that formulation
is
a
rather
unfortunate
terminological
choice,
since
short
and
long
are
relative
terms
that
say
nothing
about the
characteristic features of
the
specific
time-periods
being
examined.11
In
this
context,
I
would
prefer
the
expressions
epochal
and
supra-epochal
duration.
A
period
of
time
that
can
be
characterized
in terms of
constant
features
is
epochal,
while
a
phenomenon
whose
impact
stretches
over
several individual
periods
or
epochs
is
supra-epochal.
Although
these
latter
phenomena
can
be
woven
into
the
texture
of
a
totalizing comprehensive
social
history
at
various
junctures
in
their
individual
stages,
they
must
be
analyzed
as
an
independent
research
object,
extricated
from
the
general
web
of
history,
if
their
supra-epochal
character is
to
be
properly
grasped.
Let
me
illustrate
this
problem
by
reference
to
two
examples
drawn
from
my
own
research.
Tradition
and Crisis
contains
a
chapter
on
the
theoretical and
practical
relations
of
Jews
to
their
non-Jewish
environment
during
the
period
under
scrutiny
there,
i.e.,
the
16th
to
18th
centuries.12
That relation
was
partially
determined
by
the
political,
economic
and social
conditions
shaping
the
life of the
Jewish
communities
at
the
time
-
namely,
a
lack
of
political
rights,
social
isolation
and
economic
restrictions.
Yet
an
important
role
was
played
here
by
a
tradition
stemming from the Talmudic period; that traditional outlook had left itsmark on
Jewish
mentality
and
contained
concrete
rules
and
precepts
in
respect
to
Jewish
relations
with
the
surrounding
non-Jewish
world. In
a
social-historical
description
and
analysis
of
the last
phase
of
traditional
society,
these
ancient
roots
could
only
be
alluded
to;
there
was
no
possibility
for
elaboration.
In
my
book
Exclusiveness
and
Tolerance,u
I
subsequently
undertook
the
task
of
tracking
the
changes
and
modifications
within Talmudic
tradition
over
the
course
of
centuries,
limiting
myself
to
the
topic
at
hand
and
touching only
tangentially
on
its
points
of
contact
with
other
sectors,
such
as
politics,
economy
and
religion.
I faced a similar methodological problem in dealing with the history of
anti-Semitism.
The
study
Out
of
the
Ghetto
described
the fate
of
Western and
Central
European
Jewry
during
the first
generation
of their
entry
into
European
society,
1780-1815.14
This
presentation
is
framed
in
terms
of the model
of
ideal-typical
abstraction,
and
treats
the
changes
in
conditions
that facilitated the
emancipation
of
Jews from
their social isolation
-
in
particular
the
emergence
of
rationalism,
which undermined
Christian
religious
justifications
for
the
exclusion
of
Jews
from
civil
society.
One
chapter
in
the
study,
however,
pointed
to
the
phenomenon
of
lingering
opposition:
adversaries who
retained
their
misgivings
about
Jews,
justifying
their
arguments
by
the
means
and
methods of
rationalism,
and this despite the quite evident changes in the general attitudes and tenor of
thought
at
the
time.15
Here
one
could
discern
the
beginnings
of
a new
animosity
toward
the
Jews,
based
on
secularized
arguments,
one
which
appropriated
strands
of
traditional
Judeophobia,
transferring
them into the
currents
of
the
modern
period.
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 7/10
94 JacobKatz
This
focus
provided
me
with
an
occasion for
pursuing
those
developments
further;
the
product
of that research
was
a
history
of
modern
anti-Semitism.16
While
the
first
appearance
of this
variant of anti-Jewish
sentiment
is
presented
there
within
the
comprehensive
framework of
the
circumstances
prevailing
at
the
time,
its
further
evolvement,
extending
to
the ultimate
culmination
in the
Holocaust,
is
treated
in
relative isolation
-
though
with
reference,
wherever
necessary,
to
accompanying
political,
economic and intellectual historical
events.
Thus,
once
again,
we can see an
example
illustrating
the
concrete
application
of
the
supra-epochal
method.
Given
its
evident
fruitfulness,
there
can
be
little doubt about
the
utility
of
a
social
history
which
endeavors
to
comprehend
and
present
an
interconnected
picture
of
all
aspects
in
the life of
a
society
during
a
given
epoch.
But
such
a
method
should
not
be
elevated
to
the
level
of
dogma.
Only
a
critical
analysis
of
the
available historical
sources
can
serve to
substantiate
or
negate
the
applicability
of
this
approach
in
a
specific
instance.
An
instructive
example
highlighting
the
negative
findings
of
an
investigation
can
be found
in
my
article
on
the
anti-Jewish riots
of
1819.17
Quite
naturally,
historians have
sought
to
link these riots
in
causal
terms
with
the
political
and social tensions of the time. In the 1950s, Eleonore
Sterling,
a
gifted
and
insightful
historian,
initially
elaborated
this thesis
along
psychohistorical
lines
in
an
essay,
later
employing
it
as
a
connecting
thread
in
her
extensive
monographic
study
on
the
anti-Semitism
of the
period.18
Despite Sterling's
earnest
efforts,
a
critical
examination
of
her
sources
and
the
discovery
of
new
materials have served
to
disprove
her basic
thesis.
The
social
groups
and circles
responsible
for
the
social
and
political
tensions
at
the
time
did
not
take
an
active
part
in
the
anti-Jewish
disturbances.
The outbreak
of those
riots
cannot
be
accounted
for
on
the basis
of
parallel
contemporary
phenomena.
Rather,
they
were
the result
of
actualization
of
latent animosities toward
the
Jews
carried
over
from
the
past.
Both
approaches,
the
epochal
and the
supra-epochal,
have their
obvious
advantages.
But
only
the latter
orientation
can,
in
addition
to
factual
information,
provide
an
explanation
to
help
elucidate
a
segment
of the
past.
Total,
comprehensive
social
history
has
the value of
being
able
to
treat
individual
phenomena
within
the
framework
of the
living
totality
in
which
they
were
actually
embedded.
However,
this is
not
an
explanation
of their
existence;
the
simultaneity
of
events
is
not in
itself
proof
of
an
internal
bond between
them,
nor
evidence
of
their
inevitability.
Moreover,
the
supra-epochal
presentation, tracing
the
unfolding
of a
phenomenon
over a longer period of time, offers no proof to
substantiate the
thesis
that
later
phases
necessarily
had
to
follow
from earlier
stages.
However,
it
does show
that such
later
developments
would
have been
inconceivable
without
what
preceded
them.
Thus,
a
causal chain
-
necessary,
although
not
inevitable
-
is
forged
linking
earlier
with
later
stages
of
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 8/10
On
Jewish
Social
History
95
development.
Let
me
elucidate
this
problem
using
the
example
of
the
anti-Semitic
movement
in
Germany during
the
1870s. The
emergence
of
that
movement
onto
the
scene
surprised
contemporaries,
since
it
seemed
to
contradict
the
general
tendency
at
the
time,
characterized
by
a
prevailing
mood of
religious
tolerance.
Even
today,
historians
are
still
attempting
to
shed
light
on
the
roots of
this
phenomenon.19
There
are
two
possible approaches,
and both
have
been
employed.
That
movement
arose
during
one
of the
most
severe
economic crises
in
modem
German
history,
the
collapse
of
the
boom
Gr?nderjahre
economy
that
had
surged
in
the
wake
of
the establishment
of the Second
Empire
in
1871,
following the Franco-Prussian War. Simultaneous
with
this
economic
debacle,
the
emancipation
of the
Jews,
a
process
which
had
been
underway
for
generations,
was,
under
the
aegis
of
liberalism,
then
reaching
its
apogee.
Yet
liberalism
was
subsequently
discredited
as a
result
of
the economic
collapse,
a
fact
that
had
a
striking political
expression:
the
liberal
parties
ceased
to
function
as
a
pillar
of
support
for
the
governing
establishment.
Thus,
the
anti-Jewish
reaction would
appear
to
have
been
closely
bound
up
with
general
contemporary
events
and
trends,
a
partial
aspect
of
a
broader
abandonment
of
liberalism
by
society
at
large.
Correspondingly, historians have attempted to describe the susceptibility of
individual
groups, age-groups
or
strata to
the
pathology
of
anti-Semitism,
attributing
that
susceptibility
to
their
respective
inclination
to
reject
liberalism.20
Others
have discussed
the
function
of
anti-Semitism
as
a
kind
of
slogan
to
promote
in-group
identity
and
cohesion.21
All
this
falls
under the
rubric
of
what
is
customarily
labeled
the
history
of
anti-Semitism ,
though,
from
my
perspective,
with
dubious
justification.
Despite
the
significance
of their
findings,
such studies
can
be
better
conceptualized
as
contributions
to
German social
history
rather
than
the
history
of
anti-Semitism.
After
all,
one
fails
to
find
in
them
any
answer
which
could
help
to
illuminate the
preliminary question
on
which all other investigation hinges: namely, why the Jews, already considered
citizens
with
equal
rights,
again
became
the
target
of
animosity.
The
fact
that
Jewish civil
equality
was
promoted
by
liberalism,
and that
liberalism
had
forfeited
a
portion
of its
credibility,
does
not
constitute
a
sufficient
reason;
after
all,
it is
by
no means
the
case
that all
the achievements of
liberalism
were
jettisoned
wholesale
with
its
disavowal.
It
is
a
well-known fact
that
the national
movement
which
led
to
German
unification
was
originally
supported
and
propelled
by bourgeois-liberal
strata;
and
yet,
that national
movement
did
not
founder
with the demise of
liberalism.
The advent of the anti-Semitic movement did not simply involve some demand
for
a
revision
of Jewish
emancipation.
Its leaders
believed
that
they
had
in
fact
discovered
the
principal
evil of
their
time:
the
acceptance
of Jews
as
equals
within German
society.
This
is
precisely
the
underlying
notion
expressed
in
the
slogan
propagated
by
Heinrich
von
Treitschke:
Die Juden
sind
unser
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 9/10
96
Jacob
Katz
Ungl?ck. 22
Other
spokespersons
of the
movement
provided
that
catchword
with
a
concrete
interpretation
by declaring
that
German
society
had
no
need
to
worry
about its
other
vexing
problems,
such
as
the
social
question.
These,
they
argued,
would
resolve
themselves
once
the
danger
of
Jewish
predominance
was
averted.23
What is
the
origin
of
this
conception
of
the
diabolical influence of
the
Jews?
An
answer
to
that
question
can
only
be
found
via
the
path
of
supra-epochal
historiography.24
Demonic
features had
been
associated
with
Jews
since
the
earliest
period
of
Christianity.
That diabolical
element
was
intensified
throughout
the
long
centuries of strained relations between the dominant Christian
majority
and the
tolerated Jewish
minority during
the Middle
Ages.
The
modern
period
granted
that
minority,
now
endowed
with
equal
civil
rights,
an
opportunity
to
join
the
majority,
and
during
that
period
the
negative
image
of
the
Jew
appeared
to
be
fading
away.
But the
outbreak of anti-Semitism
in the
1870s
and
1880s
demonstrated
that
the old
image
had
not
been
obliterated
but
only
obscured.
To track
and sketch
this
process
in
detail
is to write
the
history
of
anti-Semitism
in
the
true sense
of
the
term.
By
contrast,
a
historian who
concentrates
solely
on
the
circumstances of the last
shift,
namely,
the transition from
latent
anti-Jewish
hostility to active anti-Semitism, could make a significant contribution to the
social
history
of
the
period
but
still
provide
no
explanation
to account
for
the
phenomenon
of
anti-Semitism.
The
history
of
anti-Semitism
is
thus
one
example
illustrating
my
thesis that
the
social-historical
approach
cannot
do
justice
to
the
entire
array
of
questions
raised
in
historiographical
research.
Alongside
this
perspective,
there
is
ample
justification
for
tracing
events
and
processes
within
a
longer
time
frame.
NOTES
Author's note:
This
paper
is
a
revised
version
of
a
paper
that
originally
appeared
in
the
Festschrift
for
Jacob
Toury:
Zur
j?dischen
Sozialgeschichte:
epochale
und
?berepochale
Geschichtsschreibung,
Tel
Aviver
Jahrbuch
fur
Deutsche
Geschichte
20
(1991):
429-36.
The
paper
has been
translated
from
the German
by
William
Templer.
1.
Jacob
Katz,
Die
Entstehung
der
Judenassimilation
in
Deutschland und deren
Ideologie
(Frankfurt/M,
1934), reprinted
in
idem,
Zur
Assimilation
und
Emanzipation
der Juden
(Darmstadt,
1982),
2-79.
2.
Jacob
Katz,
The
Concept
of
Social
History
and Its
Possible
Use
in
Jewish Historical
Research,
Scripta
Hierosolymitana
III
(Jerusalem,
1955):
292-312.
3.
G.M.
Trevelyan, English
Social
History
(London,
1946);
Baron's
work
was
the
three-volume edition
published
in
New
York
in
1937.
This content downloaded from 132.64.55.31 on Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:57:45 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/23/2019 Katz Jewish Social History
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/katz-jewish-social-history 10/10
On Jewish
Social
History
97
4.
A
good
survey
of
the
theory
and
practice
of social
history
is
contained
in
J?rgen
Kocka,
Sozialgeschichte
-
Begriff,
Entwicklung,
Probleme
(G?ttingen,
1977).
However,
there
is
no
universally
recognized terminology,
and I
will
attempt
below
to
elucidate
the
terms
employed
through
their
context.
5.
Trevelyan,
vii.
6. Jacob
Katz,
Marriage
and
Sexual Behavior
at
the
End
of
the Middle
Ages,
(Hebrew),
Zion 10
(1945):
21-54.
It
appeared
in
French translation
in
Shmuel
Trigano,
ed.,
La
Soci?t?
juive
?
travers
l'histoire
II
(Paris,
1992),
385-411. This
article
remained
without
an
echo
at the
time
of its
appearance,
suffering
the
fate of
many
publications
limited
to
a
Hebrew-reading scholarly public, although
it
anticipates
the
interest in
family-focused
research
of this
type
that
later
flourished,
esp.
in
France.
7. The Hebrew original was published in Jerusalem in 1958 and was later translated into
English
(without
the
footnotes)
as
Tradition and
Crisis
(New
York:
Free
Press, 1961),
reprinted
as
a
paperback
(New
York:
Schocken,
1971).
Schocken
is
about
to
publish
a
new
complete
translation.
8.
Katz,
The
Concept
of
Social
History
(n.
2
above),
294.
9.
Friedrich M.
Kircheisen,
Napoleon
der Denker
(Dresden,
n.d.),
32.
10. Dieter
Groh,
Strukturgeschichte
als
'totale'
Geschichte,
Vierteljahresschrift
fur
die
Sozial-
und
Wirtschaftsgeschichte
58
(
1971
):
319.
11.
This French
terminology
has been
frequently
criticized,
see
J.
H.
Hexter,
Fernand
Braudel and
the
Monde
Braudallien,
Journal
of
Modern
History
44
(1972):
506-507.
12.
Katz,
Tradition
and
Crisis
(n.
7
above),
chap.
5.
13. Jacob
Katz,
Exclusiveness
and Tolerance.
Studies
in
Jewish-Gentile
Relations
in
Medieval
and
Modern
Times
(Oxford,
1961;
paperback:
New
York,
1961).
14.
Jacob
Katz,
Out
of
the
Ghetto:
The
Social
Background
of
Jewish
Emancipation
?770-1870
(Cambridge,
Mass.,
1973).
15.
Ibid.,
chap.
6.
16.
Jacob
Katz,
From
Prejudice
to
Destruction:
Antisemitism
1700-1933
(Cambridge,
Mass.,
1980).
17.
Jacob
Katz,
The
Hep-Hep
Riots
in
Germany
of 1819:
The
Historical
Background,
Zion
38
(1973):
62-115
(Hebrew).
A
German translation is
soon
to
be
published.
18. Eleonore
Sterling's
essay
appeared
in
Historia
Judaica
XII
(1950):
105-145.
Her
book:
Er ist
wie
du:
Aus
der
Fr?hgeschichte
des
Antisemitismus in
Deutschland,
1815-1890
(Munich, 1956).
19. The literature
on
this
topic
is
voluminous,
see
the
notes
to
chaps.
20 and
21 in
Katz,
From
Prejudice
to
Destruction
(n.
16
above).
20.
An
excellent
example
of
such
an
approach
is
the
comprehensive
article
by
Werner
Jochmann,
Struktur
und
Funktion
des
deutschen
Antisemitismus,
in
Werner E.
Mosse,
ed.,
Juden
im Wilhelminischen
Deutschland 1890-1914
(T?bingen,
1976),
389-477.
21. Cf. Shulamit
Volkov,
Antisemitism
as
a
Cultural Code. Reflection
on
the
History
and
Historiography
of Antisemitism
in
Imperial
Germany,
Leo
Baeck
Institute
Year Book 23
(1978):25-46.
22.
The Jews
are
our
misfortune.
See Jacob
Katz,
'Die
Juden
sind
unser
Ungl?ck'.
Reflexionen
?ber
ein
antisemitisches
Schlagwort,
Tribune
22
(1984):
58-66.
23.
Katz,
From
Prejudice
to
Destruction
(n.
16
above),
chap.
22.
24. Leon
Poliakov
has utilized
this
method
in
his monumental
study
Die
Geschichte
des
Antisemitismus, 6 vols. (Worms, 197If.).
The Hebrew
University
of
Jerusalem
Thi t t d l d d f 132 64 55 31 W d 18 N 2015 08 57 45 UTC