grief, about four hundred Jews of all ages left the town, and encamped
for several days in the villages or under tents, looking forward to a
terrible future. The persecution of the Jews in Würzburg was repeated
in Bamberg, and in almost every town of Franconia. Wherever a Jew
showed himself, he was assailed with the insulting cry of "Hep, hep!"
and ill-treated.

This persecution of the Jews in Franconia was a hint to the
Frankforters how to humble their hated fellow-citizens, who had dared
bring an action against the Senate, and were protected by the Federal
Diet. Thus a riot was re-enacted here (9th and 10th August), which
began with the cry, "Hep, hep!" and with the breaking of windows in
Jewish houses; then the mob advanced to brutality, and drove away all
Jews from the promenades with insults and outrage. Artisans, workmen,
shop assistants, secretly encouraged by their employers, as in the time
of Vincent Fettmilch, two centuries before, made violent attacks on
Jewish houses. The house of the Rothschilds in particular was selected
for attack, their wealth and political importance being a thorn in
the side of Christian patricians. In Paris at this time, all the
ambassadors and diplomatic representatives appeared at a ball given by
James Rothschild, and in Germany the Rothschilds were still treated
as peddlers. Several wealthy Jews left Frankfort after this outrage.
The storm, which became frenzy in Frankfort, the seat of the Diet,
was not an indifferent matter to the ambassadors. The moneys of the
Diet were placed in Rothschild's coffers for security. The president,
Count von Buol Schauenstein, summoned a conference of members, and it
was resolved to call out the federal troops, as the city militia could
not be trusted. The persecution of the Jews in Frankfort aroused great
attention throughout Europe, but the excitement against them continued,
in spite of the arrival of the troops. Several Jews consequently sold
their houses, and even the Rothschilds put no trust in the lull,
and had serious thoughts of leaving Frankfort; they would have had
to emigrate to France or England, as they were not safe anywhere in
Germany.

This massacre of the Jews spread like wildfire in Germany, as if the
people had everywhere waited for a sign to break out. In Darmstadt
and Bayreuth the riots were repeated (August 12). The few Jews in
Meiningen were expelled. In Carlsruhe, one morning, a placard was found
posted on the synagogue and the houses of prominent Jews--"Death and
destruction to the Jews!"

In Düsseldorf black marks and threatening placards were found on the
doors of several Jewish houses. In the territory of Baden, where Sand
had sealed the Teutomaniac folly with a murder, and the excitement
still lasted, the bitterness against the Jews was so great that not one
could appear in the streets without being maltreated. In Heidelberg a
tumult arose (beginning of September) in consequence of a vulgar scene,
which curiously illustrates German chivalry. A citizen had outraged a
Jewish maiden, and had been arrested by the police. Nearly the whole
populace immediately rushed to rescue the hero and destroy the Jewish
houses. Cries of "Hep, hep!" resounded in the streets; axes, crowbars,
tools of all sorts were collected as if to carry a place by storm. The
city guard, which ought to have dispersed the assaulting party, refused
their services. The city governor, Pfizer, instead of standing by the
persecuted, assisted their assailants. Blood would have been spilled,
had not the Heidelberg students, humanized, perhaps, by contact with
France, defended the unprotected people at their own risk, under the
leadership of two professors, Daub and Thibaut. When at length the
armed force appeared, and patrols swept through the whole province of
Baden, and every small town and village was made responsible for the
attacks of certain of their number upon the Jews, the outbreaks against
the Jews gradually subsided, but the hatred against them was only
intensified.

"From Germany the spark of Jew-hatred flew even into the capital of
the Danish state," which a few years before had extended citizenship
to the Jews, and had refused to revoke it. In Copenhagen the mob rose
up (September), and commenced by throwing stones at the Jews, and
ended with acts of violence. The government proclaimed martial law.
The citizens, in the few cities where Jews lived, stood by them, and
the preachers preached tolerance and love to them from the pulpit.
In Germany the ministers of religion did not utter a single protest
during these outrageous scenes. That no feature of the persecution of
the Jews of the Middle Ages might be wanting, a synagogue was stormed
in a small Bavarian place, and the scrolls of the Law rudely torn
to pieces. Even where actual violence could not be resorted to, the
insulting cry of "Hep, hep!" was hurled at the Jews in small and large
towns, to the amusement of the spectators. The police or military force
which appeared against the rioters and disturbers secretly took part
against the Jews, and the governments which protected them did so more
from fear, because they suspected a demagogical movement behind the
outbreaks against the Jews. Reference was afterwards made to these
outrages, as illustrating the feeling, or rather ill-feeling towards
the Jews, to withhold equal rights from them.

The zenith of Teutomaniac Jew hatred was reached by the inflammatory
pamphlet which appeared at this time of excitement, "The Mirror of
the Jews" (November, 1819). Hartwig Hundt, a man of adventurous life,
boldly advocated the slaughter of the Jews. He made most laudable
propositions, which, he flattered himself, would satisfy the "Hep, hep"
people.

    "Although I for my part hold the killing of Jews neither a sin
    nor a crime, but only a police offence, I would nevertheless
    never counsel that they be condemned and punished unheard, as
    seems to be the fashion now."

What then? His proposals were:--

    "Let the children of Israel be sold to the English, who could
    employ them in their Indian plantations instead of the blacks.
    That they may not increase, the men should be emasculated, and
    their wives and daughters be lodged in houses of shame. The
    best plan would be to purge the land entirely of this vermin,
    either by exterminating them, or as Pharaoh and the people of
    Meiningen, Würzburg, and Frankfort did, by driving them from
    the country."

The "Hep, hep" storm and Hundt's murderous lessons were the poisonous
fruit of the seeds which Fichte and Schleiermacher had sown, and which
had shot up quickly and abundantly.

Hundt's inflammatory book, in which every word is an abomination,
was as ravenously swallowed by the German reading public, as his bad
novels. Only at the request of Jews it was forbidden and confiscated
by the censorship, which had become omnipotent through the Carlsbad
regulations. In Portugal, at about the same time, a motion was brought
forward in the Cortes to re-admit the banished Jews and atone for the
crime perpetrated against them, whilst in Germany authors and statesmen
justified this crime, and wished it to be repeated in the nineteenth
century. Hundt did not stand alone in his advocacy of the extirpation
of the Jews. Who cares to enumerate all the virulent, hostile writings
against the Jews of the years of the "Hep, hep" storm? Conversation
on questions of the day, however remote from the subject of the Jews,
always ended in abuse of them. If an author glorified Sand and his
murder of Kotzebue, and praised his Christian religious spirit, he did
not fail to add that "Christian hate would call down a day of judgment
upon the Jews, the accomplices of financiers who worked the ruin of
the state, even though no writer had ever printed a syllable to the
disadvantage of the Jews."

Thus every man's hand was against them; no defender of any weight or
influence appeared for them, whose word, if it could not silence, might
at least curb the opposition. The aged Jean Paul (Friedrich Richter)
did not raise his voice for them, although he had a predilection for
the Jews; nor Varnhagen von Ense, although Rachel was his wife, and
was included in the general obloquy. Only one writer overcame his
prejudice, and defied public opinion in order to take up cudgels
on behalf of the universally despised and downtrodden Jews. This
was the comedy writer Julius von Voss, whose voice certainly had no
great weight, and whose disordered affairs roused the suspicion that
Jewish liberality encouraged his venturesomeness. Voss himself in his
comedies and novels had exposed the Jews to ridicule, but from regret
and remorse, he confessed, he desired to protect the Jews against the
"Hep, hep" insults. His words were little regarded, and even were
derided. Still less impression was created by the anonymous writings of
various freemasons in favor of the Jews, but their goodwill should be
recognized. The converted Jews conducted themselves at this juncture
in a shameful manner. Not one of them, except Börne, came forward,
in behalf of their former brethren, with that just indignation
which violence against the defenseless ought to inspire. Rachel von
Varnhagen, it is true, wrote to her brother, Ludwig Robert, who had
been a witness of the "Hep, hep" storm, in the following manner:--

    "I am intensely moved, as I have never yet been, on account of
    the Jews. They are to be preserved, but only for torture, for
    contumely, for insult, for brutal outrage. The hypocritical
    newborn love for the Christian religion (God forgive me for
    my sin!), for the Middle Ages with their art, poetry, and
    hideousness, incites the people to the only abomination to
    which, mindful of all past experiences, it can still be
    incited. It is not the action of the people, who are taught to
    cry "Hep, hep." The professors Fries and Rühs, and others, such
    as Arnim, Brentano, 'our connections,' and yet greater persons
    are filled with prejudices."

She thought that the Christian priests ought to step forward to check
the outrages of the people. "Aye, the priests." But neither Rachel, nor
her brother Robert, nor her husband Varnhagen, who elaborated their
periods for every childish folly, and had a voice in public opinion,
raised it against violence, and against the rule of oppression.

The Jews had, it is true, their own literary exponents to protect them.
In Germany alone there were nearly forty Jewish writers who could
address the German public. They possessed two Jewish organs, and the
daily journals occasionally opened their pages to them. They advanced
boldly to the battle-field to ward off the universal accusations
against their race. Even the aged David Friedländer raised his voice,
wrung his hands over the enemies of the Jews and their persecutions
in Germany in the nineteenth century, and could not conceive--he
who considered official Christianity and the State as ideal--how
these gods could wallow in so much filth. He addressed himself
to the Countess Von der Recke, and reminded her of the time when
eminent Christians conversed pleasantly with Jews, and both received
instruction from each other. This sounded like a forgotten fairy
tale from ancient days. But the Jewish combatants only threw light
missiles, and could scarcely prick the thick hide of prejudice. For
this purpose sharp and heavy harpoons were necessary. At this point the
Guide of all history, who had not abandoned the Jews, awakened for them
two avenging angels, who with fiery scourges lashed the perverseness
of the Germans. These avenging spirits, who brought the Germans more
blessings even than their guardian angels, were Ludwig Börne and
Heinrich Heine.

CHAPTER XIV.

BÖRNE AND HEINE.

  Börne and Heine--Börne's Youth--His Attitude to Judaism--His
    Love of Liberty--His Defense of the Jews--Heine: his Position
    with Regard to Judaism--The Rabbi of Bacharach--Heine's
    Thoughts upon Judaism--Influence of Börne and Heine.

1819-1830 C. E.

Why should not Börne and Heine have a page in Jewish history? Not only
did Jewish blood flow in their veins, but they were imbued with true
Jewish spirit.

The lightning darts which they flashed across Germany, now in the
colors of the rainbow, again in glaring sheets, were charged with
the electricity of Jewish Talmudism. Both Börne and Heine renounced
Judaism, but only like combatants who, appropriating the enemy's
uniform and colors, can all the more easily strike and annihilate him.
Both expressed, with a clearness which left nothing to be desired, how
much they cared for the religion of the cross, which they professed.
There is, therefore, not the slightest reason why Christianity should
count Börne and Heine as members of its flock on account of the idle
ceremony through which they passed in church. One of them, in spite
of his changing moods, at heart remained truer to Judaism than the
Friedländers who constituted themselves its representatives. These two
gifted individuals, the pride of Germany, are still greater ornaments
to Judaism. To these two Jews, the Germans owe their pure taste, their
feeling for truth, and their impulse for liberty--to these two Jews
persecuted through life by the abominable "Hep, hep." The mists of the
Middle Ages, with which the Germans artificially surrounded themselves
in order to obscure the truth, were dispersed by the flashes of wit of
Börne and Heine, and light in its purity was restored. They grafted
wit and life on German literature, and banished that clumsiness and
awkwardness which had aroused the ridicule of the neighboring nations.

In their childish spite against the Jews, the Teutomaniacs, the Rühses
and Hundts, asserted that Judaism could not produce a man of forcible
character, or gifted with a true sense of art. History at once gave
them the lie, and put them to shame. Judaism furnished forth a vigorous
apostle of liberty, with language recalling that of the prophets and
the Roman Catos, who confounded all the ideas of the Germans concerning
law; and it supplied a poet, with artistic sense characterized by a
mixture of pathos and cutting irony, who abolished all their hard and
fast rules of art. The rich, varied blossoms of the Börne-Heine mind
sprang from Jewish soil, and were only watered by European culture.
Hence the close connection between them in spite of their dissimilarity
and mutual antipathy. Not only was their wit Jewish, but also their
love of truth, their aversion to vain display, their hatred of veiling
and palliating wrongs, their contempt for official pomp, for obscuring
clouds of incense, for ringing of bells, ambrosial organ tones covering
slavery, perversion of justice, and oppression. The democratic,
freedom-loving spirit, noticeable in Börne more than in Heine, and
the analytical, Spinoza-like mode of reasoning, more characteristic
of Heine than of Börne, are Jewish to the core. Had they been born
Christians, and brought up in the atmosphere of red-tapeism, neither
of them would have developed as rescuing powers, which with laughing
mien helped to banish deeply-rooted perversions and absurdities. The
slaves became deliverers, and saved their enemies from the double yoke
of political and social inferiority. The Teutomaniacs almost deserve
thanks for having tormented the Jews with their reactionary measures.
They roused, if not Heine, certainly Börne, who was inclined to idle
speculation, and furnished him with the dart that wounded the enemy.

Ludwig Börne, or Löb Baruch (born in Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1786;
died in Paris, 1837), saw the light in the same year when it was
extinguished for Mendelssohn, as though history wished to compensate
the bereaved Jews for the loss of the sage of Berlin. Börne resembled
Mendelssohn in some respects: in his timid, bashful, somewhat awkward
bearing, in his self-control, his strength of character, and his strict
adherence to an adopted system of morality. Both became the objects
of admiration by accident, in spite of themselves. Both drew up for
themselves æsthetic rules of conduct without having been trained to do
so.

Börne despised the Jews of his time, and spoke of them as if he were
their arch-enemy. Jewish antiquity, misrepresented to him in his
youth, and still more dimmed by his Berlin and Halle friends, he
looked upon as a caricature. The ancient Jews from the day of Abraham
until the time of "wealthy Solomon" appeared to him "as if they had
wished to parody history." He did not suspect how much his inward
self, the truthfulness of his nature, owed to Judaism. The filth of
Lucinde, consecrated by Schleiermacher, so disgusted Börne at the age
of sixteen, that even a stealthy perusal of the book possessed no
charm. The sobriety with which Judaism had endowed him showed Börne
the right way of balancing his ideal nature, and avoiding too harsh a
discord with the real world. At an early age he became acquainted with
a goddess to whom he was devoted in extravagant love, and to whom he
remained faithful until his dying breath. "The true nature of virtue
may be expressed in a few words. What is virtue? Virtue is bliss. And
bliss? It is liberty. We cannot further inquire, what is liberty, for
liberty is in accord with reason, in accord with God, and in accord
with the unconditional--it explains itself." So thought Börne, and so
he wrote in his diary at the age of eighteen; and this idea governed
his inner being as long as he lived, and was the motive power of all
his actions. Virtue is liberty, and liberty is virtue; they necessitate
and produce bliss. Yet Börne limited his love of liberty; he guarded
himself from overstepping that narrow boundary at which the pursuit of
an ideal turns to madness.

May not his Jewish blood, or at any rate, the sad pages of Jewish
history, explain his worship of liberty, which influenced his body
and mind? How hard and degrading the absence of liberty was could be
felt only by a Jew, in comparison with whom an Indian or a Russian
bondsman was a free man. Frankfort, the birth-place of Börne, with its
disgraceful laws concerning the residence of Jews, effectually taught
him love of liberty. When, only a boy, he was prohibited from walking
on the footpath, and had to keep to the dusty road for vehicles, when
every ragged Christian beggar, or drunkard, was allowed to call to him,
"Mach Mores, Jud!" the thought may have struck him that the absence
of liberty was damnation and the presence of liberty salvation. "I, a
slave from my birth, love liberty more than you; yea, because I was
trained in servitude, I understand liberty better than you!" he often
said. His much admired style, his perfect, captivating manner, his
profound epigrams, recall the gnomic wisdom of Bible and Talmud. In
short, Börne owes his favorable points to Judaism. But he neither was
grateful for his gifts, nor did he acknowledge their origin, which he
estimated no more than did his Berlin friends. On one occasion, indeed,
he said:

    "I should not deserve to enjoy the light of the sun, were I,
    on account of mockery upon which I have always looked with
    contempt, ungrateful for God's great favor, in having made
    me at once a German and a Jew: for I know how to value the
    undeserved fortune of being at the same time a German and a
    Jew, to be able to strive after all the virtues of the Germans
    without participating in their faults."

He added, addressing the Germans:--

    "I pray you, do not despise my Jews. If only you were as they
    are, you were better. You have deprived the Jews of air, they
    have thus been preserved from rottenness; you have strewn the
    salt of hatred into their hearts, their hearts have thus been
    kept fresh. You have imprisoned them for the whole long winter
    in a cellar, and stopped up the cellar door with dung; but you,
    exposed to the frost, were half frozen to death. When spring
    arrives, we shall see who will blossom first, Jew or Christian."

Börne did not, however, himself believe in the endurance of the Jews,
and he gave utterance to those words only because he was vexed, or in
order to vex the Germans. He said at the same time, ironically: "You
know how my heart beats for the Jews."

Since the time when his mind began to mature, he beheld in the Jews
only money-makers, as on the Exchange at Frankfort, or deriders of
religion ashamed of their race, as in the salon of Henrietta Herz;
moreover, his education had made Judaism seem so despicable that he did
not judge it worthy of consideration. Thus Börne never understood what
was most sacred to the Jews, and he was unable to fathom the depths
of his own mind, and discriminate between what he owed to the general
state of culture and what to Judaism.

His healthy spirit, however, and love for the oppressed guarded him
from the unprincipled conduct of Rachel, of those who frequented
the salons at Berlin, and of many others who turned their backs
contemptuously upon the Jews. Even as a youth Börne hated the idea that
the word "Jew" might be insultingly cast at him.

    "And when they come and tell you that you are a Jew," he wrote
    in his diary, "how they bandy about the Jewish jargon, so that
    one must almost die of laughter.

    "Oh! when I think of that, my mind is tossed as by a storm, my
    soul would fain burst from its dwelling-place, and seek the
    body of a lion, that it might meet the villain with jaw and
    claw."

His anticipations proved correct, he was not spared the insult, and his
lion's claw was shown. While a student, he procured from the police of
Frankfort a passport, in which the spiteful police-clerk had inserted
the words: "Jew of Frankfort."

    "My blood stood still, but I could neither say nor do anything,
    for my father was present. I then swore in my heart: only wait,
    the time will come when I shall write a passport for you, a
    passport for all of you."

For a moment it seemed as if Börne would forget his oath. The Jews of
Frankfort had bought equality for half a million of money, and Börne,
who had studied law and shown himself a young man of promise, was one
of the first to receive a position in the Frankfort police department.
But if Börne was inclined to forget that he was a Jew, and remembered
only that he was a German, the people of Frankfort did not forget it,
and imprudently and brutally reminded him of his secret oath. He was
the first victim of the reaction; he was expelled from office, as soon
as the Jews of Frankfort were driven back into the Ghetto. The insolent
manner in which they were cheated out of trebly pledged freedom
revolted Börne's feeling for liberty, and he sharpened his first arrows
in defense of the members of his own race. They were directed against
the narrow-minded citizens of Frankfort, who in the nineteenth century
had restored the laws of 1616 concerning the residence of the Jews,
"that romance of malice," as Börne called them. The feelings which
agitated him during the years of ever-increasing reaction against the
Jews he put into the mouth of a Jewish officer in a novel:

    "You stole from me the pleasures of childhood, you arrant
    knaves! You threw salt into the sweet cup of my youth, you
    placed malicious slander and hateful derision in my road in
    manhood; arrest me you could not, but fatigued, vexed, without
    joyfulness, I reached my goal.... That I cannot even revenge
    myself, that I should not have the power to forgive, nor
    the weakness to chastise! They are out of my reach in their
    fox-hole!... You ask me why I shun my fatherland. I have none;
    I have never left my home. My home is in dungeons; where there
    is persecution I breathe the atmosphere of my childhood. The
    moon is as near to me as is Germany."

Instead of revenging himself for the wounds inflicted upon him and
the members of his race by German Jew-hatred, Börne undertook the
difficult task of extinguishing this hatred. In the "Waage," his organ,
he erected ideal standards, by which he measured the narrow, petty
circumstances of the Germans, and their short-sightedness.

Before Louis Baruch undertook his campaign against German faults and
prejudices, or rather before he undertook the education of the Germans,
he renounced Judaism, was baptized in Offenbach, and assumed the name
Karl Ludwig Börne (June 5, 1818). How little he cared for the Christian
faith we may judge from his remark that he "repented the money spent on
baptism." He did not wish the effect of his missiles to be lessened by
the prejudice which might arise from the fact of their being discharged
by a Jew. It is, however, difficult to excuse a man of Börne's
character for deserting, without any such struggle as Heine's with
himself, the colors of the weak and oppressed, who should have been
ennobled in his eyes by the very pain of degradation; deserting for a
cause, moreover, in which he did not believe. Germany soon discovered
that she had gained an author of Lessing's caliber. Börne's wit was
felt the more keenly, because at every turn one could perceive the
correctness of the picture and observe the genuineness and integrity
of the painter. A glance revealed that he wrote with "the blood of his
heart and the sap of his nerves," hence his words made the impression
of weighty deeds.

He could not behold in silence the folly and cruelty of the "Hep, hep"
year, and he wrote "for the Jews." "I should have said for right and
liberty; but if these terms were understood, nothing need be said." He
pointed his finger at fools, and threw light on the faces of villains.
"A sort of fatal necessity," he said, "was connected in past times
with Jew-massacres. They seem to have arisen from an indistinct,
inexplicable feeling inspired by Judaism, which, like a scoffing and
threatening spirit, like the ghost of a murdered mother, accompanied
Christianity from its cradle." Börne analyzed German Jew-hatred into
its constituents, and showed the absurdity of each. On another occasion
(1820) he told them the stern truth:

    "I pardon the German nation for its Jew-hatred, for it is a
    nation of children, and for this reason, just like an infant,
    needs a go-cart to enable it some day to stand firm, so that
    by means of the barriers to liberty it may learn to do without
    barriers. The German nation would collapse a hundred times a
    day if it were without prejudices. But individual adults I
    cannot pardon for their Jew-hatred."

Dr. Ludwig Holst, a newly-fledged Jew-hater, who had developed his
cult into a philosophical system, and who, as Börne says, sounded "a
metaphysical Hep, hep," was attacked by him with scoffs and sneers.

    "Hatred of Jews is one of the Pontine bogs which poison the
    beautiful land of our liberty. We see the hopeful friends of
    the fatherland with pale faces wandering about hopelessly.
    German minds dwell on Alpine heights, but German hearts
    pant in damp marshes. Holst wishes to kill the Jews, and if
    they resist, he turns round to his circle of onlookers, and
    says: 'Now you see that I am right in taxing the Jews with
    unparalleled insolence; they will not suffer their heads to be
    struck off ever so little, and they sulk.' ... You hate the
    Jews, not because they have earned hatred, but because they
    earn money.... What you call human rights, which, it must be
    conceded you grant Jews, are only animal rights. The right of
    seeking food, of devouring it, of sleeping, and of multiplying,
    are enjoyed also by the beasts of the field--until they are
    slain, and to the Jews you grant no more.... Men of Frankfort,
    Hamburg, Lübeck, and Bremen, answer me. You complain that Jews
    are all usurers, yet you prevent the mental development of
    those who abandon usury! I will not be turned away; I demand a
    reply. Men of Frankfort, tell me: Why should the practice of
    medicine be restricted to four Jews, and that of the law be
    allowed to none?... In the same way in which you in your free
    city now storm against the Jews, did you not twenty years ago
    storm against Catholics?... Do you doubt the arrival of the
    day which will command you to look upon Jews as your equals?
    But you wish to be _forced_! The German is deaf. You will
    not obey voluntarily; fate will have to take hold of you and
    drag you hither and thither. Shame upon you!" Börne remarks
    in conclusion: "I love neither Jew as Jew, nor Christian as
    Christian; I love them because they are human beings, and born
    to be free. Liberty shall be the soul of my pen, until it
    becomes blunted, or my hand is lamed."

But Börne wished the Jews to forget as a bad dream their history
of a thousand years, and to become Germans. He did not possess the
far-sightedness of Heine.

Heinrich Heine (born in Düsseldorf, 1799, died in Paris, 1854) in
his innermost self was infinitely more of a Jew than Börne; indeed,
he possessed to a great extent all the favorable and unfavorable
characteristics of Jews. Who can paint this "wicked favorite of the
Graces and Muses" (as he was called), this scoffing romancer and
lyrical philosopher, with his chameleon-like nature? Börne's mind
resembled transparent spring-water, which trickles over pebbles,
and foams only when attacked by winds. Heine's mind, on the other
hand, resembled a whirlpool, upon whose surface the sunbeams play in
prismatic colors, but which drags approaching vessels into its roaring
depths, and dashes them to pieces unless they are of the strongest
build. For Heine was as deep a thinker as he was an artistic poet, as
unrelenting a critic as he was an amiable scoffer, as full of original
thoughts as he was of verses. Heine had not to search for Truth; Truth
flew to Heine. She, like the Muse, revealed herself to him, jesting
and playing with him as her favorite. Behind his banter there often
was more earnest conviction than in the litany of a morose moralist.
Heine longed for ideals which his mind could revere, and because he did
not find them he scoffed at the false gods who allowed themselves to
be worshiped. He has certainly given profound solutions to problems
of history. He never sacrificed substance to form, when the former was
of greater value than the latter. It is true that he often changed his
opinions, but he did not play with his convictions. His religious views
changed also; but he did not change his mind. He never wrote or acted
against such convictions as he entertained at the time. If for a time
he was slave to the false philosophical theory which makes a god of
man, he afterwards acknowledged his error, and derided it thoroughly.
Heine was certainly no pattern of virtue, neither was he so great a
sinner as his sharp pen and tongue might lead one to suppose. He never
lost his profound, noble nature, nor his sense of the sublime; neither
did he roll in the mud of sensuality, as he would have his readers
believe. He painted himself blacker than he was. He had his share
of that acute sensitiveness which is the lot of poets, actors, and
preachers, and this morbid state was in Heine's case connected with
severe nervous suffering. In his sensitive condition he wrote things
of which his sober judgment disapproved, but which he was ashamed to
recall.

Heine had an advantage over Börne by reason of his sincere affection
for his mother. Betty von Geldern came of a respected, it is said, an
ennobled Jewish family. This educated mother, to whom he owed his bent
of mind, was a religious woman, and brought up her children in the
knowledge of the Jewish faith. The religious discord which had early
alienated Börne from Judaism was unknown to Heine, and in his youth he
strictly avoided the transgression of Jewish customs. He did not indeed
learn so much Hebrew as Börne, but because he imbibed with love the
little that he did learn, that little never left him, nor did he forget
it later in life, whilst Börne wiped Hebrew entirely from his memory.
Heine's love of Judaism, which, in spite of his mockery, was never
quite dead, and especially his deep understanding of it, sprang from
the fond memories of his youth, which remained with him like sweet,
pleasing dreams. His soul was also filled with the charm of true Jewish
family life, which gave him the proper standard by which to measure
what men call virtue and happiness.

He had a warm though vague attachment to Judaism or the Jewish race, to
its pathetic history and sacred books, and he was forcibly impressed by
the antiquity of Judaism and its continuity of existence, defying time
and myriads of obstacles. Now and again Heine felt proud of belonging
to this ancient aristocracy. He felt what he wrote late in life:

    "Now I perceive that the Greeks were only handsome youths, but
    the Jews have always been men, powerful, stubborn men, not only
    in days of yore, but even at present, in spite of eighteen
    centuries of persecution and misery. I have since learned to
    know them better, and to value them more highly, and if pride
    of descent were not always a foolish contradiction, I might
    feel proud of the fact that my progenitors were members of the
    noble house of Israel, that I am a descendant of those martyrs
    who have given a God and morality to the world, and who have
    fought and suffered on all the battle-fields of thought."

This consciousness slumbered gently in him from his youth onwards. But
he did not clearly define to himself his attitude towards Judaism.
The Jews, in whom solidity, high virtue, and morality were still to
be found, repelled him by their unæsthetic exterior and religious
ceremonies, which he did not understand. He felt his sense of beauty
wounded by the repulsive exterior of Judaism and its representatives.
His eye could not penetrate through ugly veils. The circle of more
refined Jews, which in early manhood he joined in Berlin--the older
men, Friedländer, Ben-David, Jacobson, and their young imitators--did
not cherish Judaism so deeply as to infuse into him the spirit of
sacrifice for the faith. And in the semi-Jewish circle which also
he frequented during his stay in Berlin, as in that of Rachel von
Varnhagen, at this time already baptized, he beheld only thorough
contempt for Jews and Judaism, and an enthusiastic, romantic
predilection for Christianity.

But Heine, unlike Börne, had too independent a judgment to be lured
into idolatrous worship of the intellectual idols of the day. Sophistry
could not undermine his devotion to Judaism. On the contrary, Heine
joined the society of a number of young men whose object was to promote
culture among Jews, and as one of its members, he subscribed to their
tacit vow, not to suffer themselves to be baptized for the sake of a
government appointment. The impulse by which he and the other members
were actuated was no doubt vague; but at any rate it manifests the
desire to do his share towards the improvement of his brethren. He
undertook to aid in strengthening the society and in widening its
scope. Heine's opinion even of the much-despised Polish Jews was not
utterly unfavorable, and they found a champion in him.

Heine would have espoused the cause of Judaism with heart and soul, if
Judaism itself, _i. e._, its sons, had developed powers of mind and
character, if the freshness of youth and attractive charms had been
coupled with the dignity of its old age, its purport, and calling,
and if it could have inspired respect in the educated world. In his
impatience he wished to see Judaism, like the legendary Messiah chained
at Rome, suddenly divest itself of its ragged cloak, its leprous skin,
throw off its aspect of servitude, and be transformed into a richly
adorned, blooming, commanding youth. The process of rejuvenescence
seemed to him too slow, the means employed too petty, the bearing of
those who wished to further it, especially their coquetry with the
dominant Church, seemed to him to be weak, apish, and undignified.

    Israel lacks energy. Chiropodists (David Friedländer and
    Co.) have sought to heal the body of Judaism of its fatal
    excrescences, and on account of their unskillfulness and their
    cobweb bandage of reason, Israel must bleed to death. Would
    that the delusion that impotency, privation of strength,
    one-sided negation are glorious, might soon cease.... We no
    longer have the courage to wear a beard, to fast, to hate,
    and by reason of hatred to suffer. This is the motive of our
    reformation. Those who have received their enlightenment and
    education from comedians wish to give Judaism new decorations
    and new scenes, and the prompter is to wear white bands instead
    of a beard. They wish to pour the ocean into a neat little
    hand-basin.... Others desire evangelical Christianity under
    Jewish names."... "Even I do not possess the strength of mind
    (he frankly confessed) to wear a beard, and to allow myself to
    be called, 'dirty Jew'."

We see clearly his attachment to Judaism in the case of his pardonable
hatred of the oppressor and despiser of his race, of the enemy who had
received salvation from Judaism, which he imprisoned and spat upon. In
the renewed pain of old wounds, inflicted upon the Jews by heathen and
Christian Rome, he compressed a world of boiling anger into the word
Edom. Thus he jeered in a poem to Edom:--

      "For a thousand years or longer
      We bear with each other in a brotherly way;
      Thou dost endure that I should breathe,
      I endure that thou shouldst rave.

      "Only sometimes, on dark days,
      Was thy mood a curious one,
      And thy pietistic claws
      Didst thou color with my blood.

      "Now our friendship waxeth stronger,
      And daily increaseth in strength;
      For I myself began to rave,
      And I become almost like to thee."

Still greater was Heine's hatred towards deserters, traitors, Jews who
for the sake of personal gain turned their back upon their suffering
brethren, and went over to the enemy. Heine could not believe that
a Jew ever was baptized from earnest conviction; baptism was in his
opinion self-delusion, if not a lie. The Gospel, preached in vain
to the poor of Judæa, was now, as he averred, prospering among the
rich. Heine gave vent to this hatred in his dramatic poem "Almansor"
(completed in 1823). But he found it unsuitable to introduce the
characters as Jews, to tell in glowing verses of their affliction and
the contempt in which they were held. He therefore put these verses
into the mouths of the Mussulmans of Granada, who through devilish
malice were experiencing the same cruel fate as the Jews, and who
felt a yawning chasm in their hearts at having been forced to embrace
Christianity. It is unmistakable that these verses breathe forth Jewish
suffering. The Jewish poet, however, incurred bitter enmity by this
drama.

It is proof of Heine's warm attachment to his race that when he was
deeply vexed by private and public disappointments, he proceeded to
glorify it. The enthralling psalm, once sung by a Hebrew bard at
Babel's waters, was constantly in his mind:

      "May my tongue cleave parched
      To the roof of my mouth, and my right hand
      Wither, if ever
      I forget thee, O Jerusalem."

For affronts put upon him in connection with the performance of
"Almansor," it was his intention to take thorough revenge on his
German-Christian enemies, and to hold up a mirror to them in a Jewish
novel. In the "Rabbi of Bacharach" he described vividly, as only he
could, the sad and the glorious scenes of Jewish history, and to this
end he carefully studied the Jewish chronicles, as he wished to keep
strictly to history. His imagination only illuminated facts, but did
not invent them, there being material enough at his disposal. Heine did
not shrink from ransacking the rubbish contained in old books, such as
Schudt's "Jewish Curiosities," "that memorial of Frankfort Jew-hatred";
and he succeeded in extracting something even from chaff and straw.
"The spirit of Jewish history reveals itself more and more to me, and
the pursuit of it will no doubt prove useful to me in the future."
In the course of Jewish history, outlined by acts of heroism and by
sacrifices, he beheld a connection between the plans of Providence: "In
the same year in which the Jews were expelled from Spain, the new land
of religious liberty was discovered." The golden period of mediæval
Jewish history--the history of the Spanish Jews--had greatest
charm for him. In the foreground of this stage he wished to introduce
proud Jews, who would not bow their necks beneath the yoke of German
restrictions and canonical arrogance, and who professed their religion
with pride; but this epoch was not well known at that time, and Heine
longed in vain for sources whence to draw pregnant information. Instead
of facts, those to whom he applied gave him only threshed straw. But
Heine allowed no difficulty to prevent his collecting interesting
historical material for his novel; this production was to be the child,
not of his hate, but of his love. He fairly basked in it: "Since it
proceeds from love, it will be an immortal book, an ever-burning lamp
in the palace of God--no fitful theatrical light."

Heine's romance was indeed grandly conceived. The scene of action was
laid in Germany, but the history of the Jews of Spain, their expulsion,
and enforced baptism, were to be the main incidents.

However, at the time when Heine was earnestly engaged in the study
of Judaism, and became enthusiastic for its history, and hated
Christianity most fiercely, he quietly passed over to the Christian
fold (June 28, 1825), and assumed the baptismal name of Christian
Johann Heinrich. He had fought for a long time against this temptation.
He expressed his opinion upon the question plainly:--

    "Not one of my family is opposed to it except myself. This act
    may be of importance to me, as through it I may the better
    devote myself to the cause of my unhappy co-religionists. But I
    should consider it a blot upon my dignity and honor, if I were
    to be baptized in order to obtain a post in Prussia--in dear
    Prussia!... Vexation may drive me to become a Catholic, and
    hang myself."

In spite of this declaration he became a convert, in order to obtain
a position in Prussia, and also to escape from humiliating dependence
upon his uncle. In his diary he wrote the following verses upon the
subject:--

      "And unto the cross now bendest thou low,
        To the cross that erstwhile thou didst despise;
      Which but a few short weeks ago
        Seemed so vile in thy scornful eyes."

Shortly afterwards (July 20, 1825) he passed his law examination. But
he pursued phantoms, and had made a vain sacrifice of his honor. He was
unable to procure employment, and could not dispense with his uncle's
support. Shamefaced as a girl guilty of some fault, Heine communicated
the fact of his conversion in allegorical language to his bosom friend
Moser:

    "A young Spanish Jew, at heart a Jew, who, owing to the demands
    of pleasure, had abjured his faith, corresponded with the
    youthful Judah Abrabanel, and sent him a poem translated from
    the Moorish. Perhaps he was loth to tell his friend in plain
    terms of his not very creditable performance; still he sends
    the poem.--Do not meditate about it."

Through his apostasy, Heine became only the more embittered against
Christianity, as though it were directly responsible for his
faithlessness, his loss of dignity, and his disloyalty to his better
self. "I assure you," he wrote to his intimate friend, "if the law
had permitted the stealing of silver spoons, I should not have been
baptized." When at about the same time, Edward Gans, the leader of
young Israel, founder of the Society of Culture, and one of its active
promoters, also embraced Christianity, Heine could not forgive him, for
he had not been compelled by poverty to take the step. Heine was yet
more indignant when informed that Gans had induced weak-minded Jews to
forsake their belief.

    "If he does it out of conviction, he is a fool; if out of
    hypocrisy, he is a rascal."

It also vexed him that his opponents would not forget his Jewish
origin, but, as in the case of Börne, reminded him of it at every
opportunity. To appease his conscientious scruples in a measure, he
continued to work at the romance, "The Rabbi of Bacharach." Through its
medium he desired to make known his secret attachment to the Jews, and
he wished to publish it in spite of the advice of his friend Moser, who
was not blind to the glaring contradiction between thought and act, and
the enmity it would necessarily draw down upon him.

Heine was not, however, so constituted as to allow remorse to trouble
him for any length of time. Once having turned his back upon Judaism,
he sought to lull his conscience. His pleasure-seeking after his
conversion was only a means to this end. Heine ingeniously labored to
discover faults in the Jews and Judaism, and thus to justify himself.
In this impulse originated his hostile sallies against Judaism--that
it is, for instance, "not a religion, but a misfortune." Afterwards, he
sought to make the dividing line between Judaism and Christianity very
faint; he characterized both faiths as self-torturing, monkish, and
Nazarite; he vilified them equally, disregarded both, and acknowledged
a Hellenistic religion of the "revival of the flesh." Nevertheless, it
may be said that, in bright moments, his old love of Judaism revived,
and he again showed his thoughtful conception of it. It annoyed Heine
that Shakespeare should be reckoned among the Jew-baiters because he
had created "Shylock," and he employed his brilliant eloquence to
remove this blemish from the Jews and Shakespeare.

    "Did Shakespeare aim at depicting a Jewess in Jessica?
    Certainly not. He portrayed only a daughter of Eve, one of
    those pretty birds who, as soon as they are fledged, flutter
    forth from the home-nest to their lovers.... In Jessica there
    is especially noticeable a certain timid shame which she
    cannot overcome in donning male garments. In this trait one
    may, perhaps, recognize the modesty characteristic of her
    race, which endows its daughters with so marvelous a charm.
    The chastity of the Jews is probably the consequence of the
    aversion which they felt to Oriental sensuality and the immoral
    worship which flourished among their neighbors, the Egyptians,
    Assyrians, and Babylonians, and has continued, changing only
    its outward form, to the present day. The Jews are a chaste,
    abstemious, so to speak, an abstract people, and in purity of
    morals, approach the German nations.... The Greeks and Romans
    were devoted to the soil ... the later Northern immigrants to
    the person of their chieftains ... whilst the Jews from ancient
    times were attached to the law, to abstract thought, like our
    modern cosmopolitan Republicans ... liberty and equality were
    their religion."

Advanced in years, when a severe nervous affliction had still more
cleared the mirror of his thoughts, Heine became conscious of the
superiority of morality based upon piety over beauty, and returned with
his whole heart to the love of his youth, his reverence for Judaism.
His "Confessions" (1853-54) are inspired hymns to Jewish history and
the Jewish people, and it is apparent that they are sincere. He was
always enthusiastic on behalf of the Bible.

    "The Jews may console themselves for the loss of Jerusalem
    and the Ark of the Covenant; this loss is but trifling when
    compared with the Bible, the indestructible treasure which they
    have saved.... I owe the re-awakening of my religious feelings
    to that Holy Book (the Bible), and it has become for me
    equally the source of salvation and the object of most ardent
    admiration.... I think I may flatter myself that I comprehend
    the character of Moses as revealed in the first portion of
    the sacred book (of the Old Testament). I consider his a most
    imposing figure. What a giant form! How small Sinai appears
    when Moses stands upon it! This mountain is only the pedestal
    for the feet of the man, whose head reaches up to the heavens,
    where he speaks with God.... Formerly, I felt no especial
    affection for Moses, probably because the Hellenic spirit was
    paramount in me, and I could not pardon the legislator of the
    Jews his hatred against the plastic arts. I did not see that,
    notwithstanding his hostility to art, Moses was a great artist,
    and possessed the true artistic spirit! But this spirit was
    directed by him, as by his Egyptian compatriots, to colossal
    and indestructible undertakings.... He built human pyramids,
    carved human obelisks; he took a poor shepherd family and
    created a nation from it, a great, eternal, holy people, a
    people of God, destined to outlive the centuries, and to serve
    as a pattern to all other nations, even as a prototype to the
    whole of mankind: he created Israel.... As of the artist, so
    also I have not always spoken with sufficient respect of his
    work, the Jews.... The history of the Middle Ages, and even
    of other times, seldom inscribed in its annals the names of
    these knights of the holy spirit, because they usually fought
    with closed visor. The deeds of the Jews, as well as their
    peculiar character, are little known to the world. One thinks
    one knows them, because their beards are visible, but nothing
    else has come in view; and now, as in the Middle Ages, they are
    a profound mystery, which may perhaps be revealed on the day of
    which the prophet speaks....

    "Yes, to the Jews, to whom the world owes its God, it also
    owes His Word, the Bible; they saved it from the wreck of the
    Roman Empire, and in the frantic scramble of migrating tribes
    they preserved the precious book, until Protestantism sought it
    with them, translated the discovered work into the vernacular,
    and disseminated it through the whole world.... In the North
    of Europe and America, the influence of Palestine has grown
    to be so great, that one can fancy oneself transplanted into
    the midst of Jews.... I will not speak of most of the new
    communities of the United States where the life of the Old
    Testament is pedantically imitated ... but the caricature will
    not disappear, and the real, imperishable, and true portion,
    namely, the morality of ancient Judaism, will also flourish in
    those countries as luxuriantly as in former days on the banks
    of the Jordan and upon the heights of Lebanon. No palms are
    needed for man to be good; and to be good is better than to be
    beautiful.... Judæa has always appeared to me as a piece of
    the West lost in the East. In fact, with its spiritual belief,
    its severe, pure, almost ascetic morals, its abstract inner
    life, this land and its people have ever formed a remarkable
    contrast to the surrounding countries and their inhabitants,
    who paid homage to the most licentious and infamous nature
    cults, and dissipated their existence in bacchanalian orgies.
    Israel piously sat beneath its fig-tree, and sang the praise
    of the invisible God, and practised virtue and justice;
    whilst in the temples of Babylon, Nineveh, Sidon, and Tyre,
    sanguinary and immoral rites were celebrated, the description
    of which even now strikes us with horror. When one thinks of
    its surroundings, this early greatness of Israel cannot be
    sufficiently admired. Of Israel's love of liberty, whilst
    slavery was justified not alone in its immediate vicinity but
    by all the nations of antiquity, even by philosophers--of
    this I would rather not speak, in order to avoid compromising
    the Bible with our present rulers.... Instead of wrestling with
    the impossible, instead of foolishly decreeing the abolition
    of property, Moses strove to render it moral; he endeavored to
    bring the possession of property into harmony with morality,
    with the law of reason, and this he effected by the institution
    of the Jubilee, when all alienated hereditary property,
    which amongst an agricultural people was land, reverted to
    the original owners, no matter how they had lost possession
    thereof. This ordinance offers a most decided contrast to the
    law of prescription among the Romans.... Moses did not wish
    to abolish the holding of property; his plan was that every
    one should possess some land, that no one should become a
    slave, with slavish propensities, through poverty, for freedom
    was the ultimate aim of the great emancipator, and this
    desire breathes through all his laws dealing with pauperism.
    He detested slavery immoderately, almost fiercely.... If a
    slave, however, freed by law, refused to leave the house of
    his master, Moses commanded that the incorrigible rascal be
    nailed by his ear to the door-post of his master's house.... O
    Moses, our teacher, Moshe Rabbenu, exalted enemy of serfdom, I
    pray thee furnish me with hammer and nails, that I may nail our
    willing slaves, in their liveries of black and red and gold, by
    their long ears to the Brandenburg Gate."

The spirit of the Jewish law and of Jewish history had indeed come
upon this erratic son of Israel, and revealed to him what few of
his predecessors had thoroughly grasped, and none had so luminously
delineated. Heine appreciated equally the profound wisdom displayed
in the laws and the intellectual contests in the centuries of Jewish
history, as also the precious ore of poetry, which streamed forth from
the greatest Jewish poet of the Middle Ages. Scarcely had Michael
Sachs, the preacher with the Psalmist soul and prophetic speech,
unveiled the hidden beauties of the "Religious Poetry of the Jews in
Spain," and more especially the almost forgotten glory of the poet
Jehudah Halevi Alhassan, before Heine, deeply moved, set up a memorial
to this singer and brother in race and art. With his magic wand he
invoked the shade of Jehudah Halevi from the grave, and depicted him in
his complete ideality and the full glow of his inspiration.

Until his last breath the struggle continued within Heine's breast
between the two great principles in the construction of the world's
history, the pure morality of Judaism and the symmetrical beauty of
Hellenism, both of which he reverenced, but was unable to reconcile:--

                  "The contrasts are boldly paired,
      Love of pleasure in the Greek, and the thought of God in the
                Judæan,

                Oh! this conflict will never end,
                The true must always contend with the beautiful."

He suspected that the harmonious intermingling of the two elements
was the task of European civilization; but he was unable to effect it
in himself. From this conflict his aberrations arose, and also his
impulse to dominate them by ridicule, and thus prevent their mastering
him.

The Jewish world is greatly indebted to its two apostate sons, Börne
and Heine. They did not indeed destroy all German anti-Jewish feeling,
but they at least subdued it. Referring to the absurd cry of "Hep,
hep," Heine once said, "This can never occur again, for the press is
a weapon, and there are two Jews who possess German style, the one
being myself, the other Börne." His prediction was nearly fulfilled,
for since the appearance of these two, such fierce outbreaks against
Jews have not recurred. Germany has not produced more talented, more
artistic, more refined writers than these two Jews.

Young Germany, which originated the present state of culture, and
created the Year of Liberation, 1848, is the offspring of these
two Jewish fathers. Invective, calumny, and the secret police were
perfectly correct in designating the leaders of young Germany as Jews,
because without the influence of the Jewish spirit they would not have
become the champions of freedom. Jew-haters thought that they were
inflicting disgrace on the fair-haired combatants in calling them Jews,
whilst actually they only bestowed honor upon them. But the list of
Börne's and Heine's services to Germany is not yet exhausted. They
induced the French to respect the staunchness of the German spirit.
Börne and Heine were the first to draw France and Germany together,
to unite German depth of thought with French elegance. They first
dispelled the clouds which separated these two nations, causing the
French people to ascend and the Germans to descend the mountain, meet
each other half-way, and, regardless of mutual antagonism and of
their oppressors, stretch forth their hands in brotherly union. This
Messianic time, when it arrives, will have been prepared by two Jews,
who were fulfilling their national mission.

CHAPTER XV.

REFORM AND YOUNG ISRAEL.

  Segregation of the Jews--Its Results--Secession and Obstinate
    Conservatism--Israel Jacobson--His Reforms--The Hamburg
    Reform Temple Union--Gotthold Salomon--Decay of Rabbinical
    Authority--Eleazar Libermann--Aaron Chorin--Lazarus Riesser
    --Party Strife--Isaac Bernays--His Writings--Bernays in
    Hamburg--Mannheimer--His Congregation in Vienna--Berlin
    Society for Culture--Edward Gans--His Baptism--Collapse of
    the Society for Culture.

1818-1830 C. E.

The advance of the Jews in Germany had been completed in an amazingly
short time, as appears when we contrast Mendelssohn's reticence in
touching upon religious and political conditions in Christendom with
the boldness of Börne and Heine, who displayed them in their naked
form. And mark the progress made in France! Here the Jews had become
men, dauntlessly encountering every opponent, and ready to avenge
with the sword insulting remarks on their origin. Judaism, however,
was less rapid in casting off servile forms than its followers. For
nearly two thousand years it had struggled for existence against every
new people and every new tendency which appeared on the stage of
history. With Greeks and Romans, Parthians and Neo-Persians, Goths and
Slavonic tribes, with Arabs and mediæval knights in armor, with monks
of every order and fanatic Lutherans, it had maintained ever-recurring
contests, and had of necessity become covered with disfiguring scars
and foul dust. To defend itself against the assaults of so many hostile
powers and during so long a period, Judaism had been compelled to
surround itself with an impenetrable coat of mail, to isolate itself
completely, or withdraw into a shrine of its own, every access to which
was carefully barricaded. So accustomed had the Jews become to their
heavy armor, that it seemed to have grown into their very being; nor
could it be discarded so long as new battles were imminent. Left to
its own resources, and excluded from the external world, especially
since the expulsion of its members from Spain and Portugal, and their
simultaneous banishment from many German districts, Judaism had created
a dreamland for itself. It had admitted magical formulas into its world
of thought and fancy to distract the minds of its adherents from pangs
of torture, so that they might endure them with greater ease, or forget
them entirely. Suddenly its sons were awakened from their dreams by
the dazzling sunlight, and beheld the real world, to which they were
utter strangers. At first they closed their eyes the tighter, in order
to retain the pleasant dream-pictures. In this new age, and in the new
conditions, they could not at once find their proper level, and they
feared that the altered state of affairs was a mere stratagem, a novel
method of warfare in disguise, which their ancient enemies expected to
use against Judaism.

During its long journey through the world, and its acquaintance with
many nations, Judaism, in spite of its exclusiveness, had admitted
various perverse ideas, which became as thoroughly a part of itself, as
if derived from the original stock. Memory had been weakened through
persecution and martyrdom; the power of thought had also suffered
somewhat through daily increasing afflictions. At first it was too
distracted to apply tests, to distinguish foreign and unfit elements
from native and essential parts and remove them. Among the Jews in
Germany, England, and France, the adoption of the uncultivated Polish
manner had conferred a barbarous aspect upon Judaism, and among the
Portuguese and Italian Jews, owing to Isaac Lurya and Chayim Vital, it
had assumed a Kabbalistic form. This disfigurement of Judaism existing
among the Portuguese along with external decorum, and its neglected
condition in Polish and German communities, affected every element
of religious life--divine service, sermons, marriages, interments,
in short, every ceremonial, especially those of a public nature. The
official representatives and expounders of Judaism, the rabbis and
leaders of divine service, were repulsive, either semi-barbarians or
visionaries. The foreign additions and excrescences, the fungous growth
attached to the original trunk, were regarded by these leaders of
Judaism as integral elements. The times had not yet matured men, who,
by a delicate perception of the inner kernel of Judaism (as contained
in the Bible and the Talmud), by wide vision, and clear insight, could
recognize the abuses that had accumulated in the course of time, and
separate them from the essential parts. To remove these objectionable
excrescences gradually, and with a gentle hand, without giving offense,
required profound understanding. A necessary reform, not prompted by
external considerations, had been suggested several centuries earlier
by far-sighted men; but the modern generation had no knowledge thereof.
Neither was there any adequate representative body in the Jewish world.
There was, to be sure, an organization, possessing, or in a position
easily to obtain, a sort of official character and authority, namely,
the French Synhedrion and Consistory. But the chiefs, David Sinzheim
and Abraham di Cologna, had not the needful discernment to accomplish
the ennoblement and rejuvenescence of Judaism. Sinzheim was only an
orthodox Talmudist, and Di Cologna an interesting preacher. The right
men were wanting to undertake and promote this much-needed reform,
not of the religion itself--for neither the leaders nor the rank
and file had lost any degree of morality through the deterioration of
Judaism--but of its exterior, to beautify it and remove excrescences.
No men being forthcoming, time effected the changes, and so quarrels
and contentions were produced. It was destined to be no easy work for
Judaism to cast its slough.

The changes in Judaism, like those in the Jews, began in Germany. To
the German Jews (because Mendelssohn had come from their midst) a
task was allotted similar to that achieved in earlier times by the
Alexandrian and Spanish, and in part by the Provençal Jews, that of
reconciling Judaism with culture. But when these efforts commenced,
the situation was already one of great confusion, and the method by
which they were conducted only intensified the difficulties. During
the struggles of the German Jews to secure emancipation, when every
step towards freedom was accomplished only after the most strenuous
exertions, when each advance was met with scorn and neglect, when they
were continually being hurled back into their humiliated condition and
reminded of their despised state, two equally unpleasant phenomena
manifested themselves. Those who, improved by culture and education,
swam with the stream, estranged themselves from Judaism, disowned all
connection with its official acts, and despised it as the obstacle to
their civil or social advancement. To them Judaism appeared as a mummy,
a petrifaction, or a specter, which restlessly and aimlessly flitted
through the centuries, a picture of grief beyond help. Only a few of
this educated class, like Heine in his bright moments, when not led
astray by wantonness, were clear-sighted enough to recognize life in
this mummy, capable some day of bursting its cerements and engaging in
combat with its enemies. On the other hand, the majority of the Jews,
who still bore in their hearts deep love for the wrinkled mother of
all religions, clung to those unessential forms to which from youth
they had been accustomed, because they perceived the treachery of the
opposite party, and did not wish to be classed amongst the betrayers of
Judaism. "They loved stones, and treasured dust." Theirs was no longer
the innocent piety of bygone days which had no opposition to contend
with, but an active, passionate feeling. The representatives of the
old school became anxious and suspicious about the growing weakness of
religious feeling, the loosening of all bonds of union, the manifest
symptoms of apostasy, and the contempt for their origin. Judaism seemed
a gigantic structure composed of tiny cubes, supporting each other and
the whole. They feared the downfall of the whole edifice, if a single
support became loose. They had no confidence in the permanence of the
structure, for whose maintenance they were ready to sacrifice their
lives. They would give up not even the use of their miserable jargon,
defiant of every grammatical law, in the ritual, nor their indecorous
habits, nor any particular of their disorderly system. Every sign of
yielding, any departure from the old order, appeared to them an act of
treachery to Judaism.

It seemed impossible to find a means of uniting these opposites.
Nevertheless, an attempt was made, but in a rough, unskillful manner,
the result being that the advance of Judaism was retarded for a
considerable time. The first to undertake some sort of reform was
Israel Jacobson. He was especially fitted for the leadership of a
new party by his attachment to his faith, his admiration for beauty
and external qualities, his activity, wealth, and high position.
Immediately after the Westphalian Consistory had been appointed, and
he had been placed at its head, he came forward with innovations of a
two-fold nature. From the public service in the synagogue connected
with the newly-erected school in Cassel, he removed all objectionable
and noisy features, especially the sing-song reading so much in use.
He naturally insisted upon the delivery of sermons in German. He also
introduced new forms and methods borrowed from the Church, such as
German as well as Hebrew prayers, insipid German songs by the side of
the psalms pregnant with thought, and the ceremony of confessing the
faith (Confirmation) for half-grown boys and girls--an idea without
meaning in Judaism.

Jacobson exercised such power over his associates in the Westphalian
Consistory, that they unresistingly accepted these innovations. He
then proceeded to introduce his reforms into all the communities of
Westphalia, with the threat that he would have such synagogues as
refused to adopt his regulations closed. This compulsion, however,
aroused the feelings of the orthodox party; the introduction of the
German language into divine service being particularly objectionable
to the majority. A rabbi of mild temperament, Samuel Eger of Brunswick
(died 1842), had the courage to protest against the arbitrary conduct
of the president of the consistory. He prophetically expressed the
conviction, that by employing German prayers and hymns the Hebrew
language would fall into disuse, and finally die out, and the bond
uniting the Jews dispersed throughout the world would thereby be
relaxed. Jacobson appears to have paid no heed to these warnings
and signs of opposition. The dissatisfied Jews must have lodged
complaints about him and his new schemes with King Jerome, for the
king reprimanded him for his autocratic interference in matters of
conscience and his ardor for reform.

Jacobson's glory ended with the speedy downfall of the Westphalian
kingdom. Having moved to Berlin, he furnished a room in his house as
a synagogue (1815), although he had formerly been opposed to private
synagogues, and introduced his reformed service with German prayers,
songs, and a choir. At first there was no room for an organ. Afterwards
Jacob Beer, the banker, the father of Meyer Beer, provided a large
chamber (1817), where an organ could be put up. After the victory of
the Germans over Napoleon, it became the fashion to be religious, and
it infected Jews who had previously not experienced the slightest
necessity for devotional exercises, and had been quite indifferent
to religious ceremonial. Such sentimentalists, who had no regard
for Judaism, attended the services of Jacobson, in order to "edify
themselves" and "be devout," as the new phrases ran. The "Society of
Friends" furnished members. This was the origin of a Reform party,
a tiny community within the community, which however, as could be
easily foreseen, had a future, owing to the energy displayed at the
commencement and the repulsive form of the ordinary divine service.
The great attraction in the new form of service was the German sermon,
which Jacobson usually delivered. His addresses exercised great power,
because the so-called "homiletic discourses" of the rabbis and the
Polish or Moravian itinerant preachers, were dull and unattractive.

But the private synagogue in Berlin, owing to complaints made by some
of the orthodox party, was closed by the Prussian government. The king
of Prussia, Frederick William III, was averse to all innovations, even
in Jewish circles, and hated them as being revolutionary plots. A
young preacher from the school of Jacobson thereupon betook himself to
Hamburg, having been invited to conduct a free school established by
certain rich Jews. Here he set on foot the plan of erecting a reform
temple on the model of Jacobson's.

This young minister, Kley, had brought from Jacobson's synagogue a
complete scheme, which included German hymns and prayers, sermons,
and the organ. He composed a so-called "religious song-book," in
imitation of the Protestant liturgy, an empty and feeble work, suited
only to a race of children, ignorant of the psalms, the pattern sources
of religious devotion. But there were men in Hamburg who, although
they approved of modern ideas, were yet unwilling to break entirely
with Judaism and its past, and who decidedly objected to the omission
of Hebrew in their prayers. The chiefs of this movement were M. J.
Bresselau, himself a good Hebrew stylist, and Sæckel Fränkel (died
in Hamburg, 1833), likewise a Hebrew scholar, who had retranslated
several of the Apocryphal books into the sacred language. These two
men compiled a selection from the Hebrew prayers in use, in order to
amalgamate them with the newly-adopted German songs and prayers, a
discordant medley in contents and form, which somewhat called to mind
a friendly compromise among contending parties. About fifty families
joined, and thus arose the Reform Temple Union in Hamburg. This
mongrel birth was ushered into the world without love and enthusiasm.
Its promoters were so prosaic that the anniversary of the battle of
Leipsic was chosen for the day of the consecration of the Temple
(October 18, 1818). The preacher Kley, in order to have ample material
for a discourse, had to use as a starting point the German wars of
freedom, which had caused the Jews in Germany to retrograde rather
than to advance. Young maidens sang hymns with the young men, in order
to create the sensation which the cause itself could not awaken, and
this gave great offense. Kley could not have kept the Temple community
together for long, had not the Templars, as they were called, found an
efficient preacher in Gotthold Salomon, of Dessau (died 1862), who was
well acquainted with biblical and Jewish literature, and knew how to
conceal the bareness of the new movement. On the one hand, he invested
the Temple with Protestant attributes, and on the other, by reason of
his conceit and ostentation, he gave it an aggressive character. With
Salomon the influence of the preacher among the German Jews commenced;
the pulpit took the place of the school, and from it there often
resounded the hollow phrases which conceal thought, or the lack of
thought. The Temple Union had officially given up the belief in the
Messiah, without exactly defining what position Judaism was to assume
with reference to Christianity. Some of the zealous reformers meditated
a complete rupture, and the refusal to contribute to the communal funds.

The originators and leaders were filled with the delusive idea, which
at first appeared justifiable, that the Temple, through its modern
and attractive form of service, would bring back to the fold those
alienated from Judaism. They hoped that the less stringent religious
forms would overcome the dislike felt by worldly men against everything
Jewish. In a few instances those who had fallen away from Judaism were
restrained from overstepping the threshold into the Church, but it was
not a remedy with permanent effect. Nevertheless, the achievements
of the Hamburg Temple, commonplace though its origin was, are not to
be underrated. At one stroke, without much hesitation, it banished
the rubbish of centuries from the synagogue, swept away with youthful
impetuosity the holy cobwebs which no one had ventured to touch, and
awakened a taste for a well-regulated service, for decorous behavior at
divine worship, and for order and simplicity. The injury inflicted on
Judaism by the aping of foreign customs, and the dilution of its own
strength, cannot be altogether attributed to it.

Naturally the establishment of the Hamburg Temple produced a split in
the Jewish world. Hitherto there had existed only the "old-fashioned"
and the "new-fashioned" people, as they termed each other, but no
distinct sects possessing a banner, a password, and a confession of
faith. Not even the old-fashioned orthodox section constituted a
definite party. For, although the adherents of the past, who would
not swerve a hair's breadth from former practices, were so numerous,
that even in Hamburg they might have suppressed the innovators if they
had chosen, they did not act as a body. Only the faint remonstrance
of single individuals was heard lamenting the ruin of Judaism through
its betrayers, and these oft-repeated wailings were pitiful. The old
party had no chiefs, no leaders; respect for the rabbis had vanished
in a single generation. The wretched dispute for and against Jonathan
Eibeschütz, and the satires of Hebrew writers of the period of the
Measfim, had completely undermined their authority. In the larger
German congregations the empty rabbinical chairs were permitted to
remain untenanted. They no longer wished to have rabbis from Poland,
because these could not speak the language of the land, and in Germany
there were no great rabbis of recognized authority. Berlin set the
example, which was followed by the community of Prague, after the
death of the wise Ezekiel Landau, by Hamburg after the retirement of
the zealot Raphael Cohen, and by Frankfort-on-the-Main after the death
of the ultra-orthodox (Chassidic) Pinchas Hurwitz. The assistants
(Dayanim) of the rabbis administered the rabbinical office--hybrid
creatures, too dependent to have an opinion of their own, and too weak
to oppose the demands of reckless leaders of communities.

As a result of the disregard in which the rabbis were held, the
Talmudical schools fell into decay. Gifted Jewish youths, whose
education formerly had begun with the Talmud, preferred to attend the
gymnasiums and universities, and learned to despise the Talmud and
Judaism. The most famous Talmudical academies in Prague, Frankfort,
Altona and Hamburg, Fürth, Metz, and Halberstadt, which had boasted
at least several hundred pupils (Bachurim), were gradually closed.
This desolation spread to Poland, as the Talmud students no longer
had hope of finding employment in Germany and France. They still made
their way to Germany, but with the intention of studying science
(Chochmoth), or if they remained at home, they devoted themselves to
the ensnaring mysticism of Neo-Chassidism. There were but four rabbis
of the younger generation who, on account of their profound knowledge
of the Talmud and their pure, patriarchal character, enjoyed widespread
authority: Mordecai Benet, in Nikolsburg, Jacob Lissa, Akiba Eger,
and his son-in-law, Moses Sofer, of Frankfort-on-the-Main. These four
rabbis, by their ingenious methods, kept alive the zeal for Talmudical
study. Akiba Eger, owing to his astoundingly ingenious mind and high
virtues--among which modesty was preëminent--enjoyed almost
divine reverence from the thousands of disciples who came from his
academies in Friedland and Posen. He was a quiet man, who never took
the initiative, and was averse to aggressive opposition. Moses Sofer,
on the other hand, was a fanatical zealot and an active heretic-hunter.
He possessed courage and determination which disregarded consequences.
He might have been a useful leader, but, like his companions, he was
at too great a distance from the scene of action, to take part in
the contest, or even to set up a standard. These rabbis had not the
slightest conception of the new tendency which the times and the Jews
had developed, and were therefore ignorant of the importance of the
cause which they represented. They did not know the enemy whom they
attacked, or despised him too much to be dangerous opponents. When a
serious question or a critical situation arose, they were at a loss
what to do, brought out their old rusty weapons, and damaged their
cause by revealing its weakness. This awkwardness created an impression
of feebleness and decrepitude. Thus the old orthodox party (as their
opponents, borrowing the name from Church phraseology, termed them),
or conservatives, were without a head, without a banner or a plan,
utterly without unanimity or discipline, without consciousness of their
own strength. They especially lacked eloquence, the indispensable
means by which public opinion is influenced and ruled, and its follies
and hollow emptiness are made apparent. Their utter want of education
avenged itself bitterly upon the rigidly pious party.

On the other hand, the opposing section, the ardent innovators, the
party of Jacobson, possessed what was wanting in the others: a daring
leader, unity, and especially a wealth of passwords and phrases, such
as, "spirit of the times, enlightenment," by which the thoughtless
are captivated. Their victory and ultimate success could be foreseen.
They had confidence and the courage of youth, were bold, and not
over-particular as to the means employed. Jacobson, their chief, knew
how to pursue and achieve an end, and how to utilize the means at his
disposal. He saw that the Hamburg Temple would encounter difficulties,
and would be condemned as heretical by the old rabbis. Jacobson
was in correspondence with the founders, and knew that the Senate,
instigated by the orthodox party, would, like the king of Prussia,
forbid innovations. He also saw that many of the Hamburg Templars were
too lukewarm to struggle against great difficulties. For this reason
he strove to obtain in advance the ratification of the Temple ritual.
Among the rabbis of Germany he could find no voice of approval for the
new order of service. He, therefore, connected himself--a fact which
throws no favorable light upon the cause--with a base adventurer,
who, it appears, was bribed to help him. Eleazar Libermann from
Austria, a gambler, became his apostle of reform. To characterize
the man, it suffices to note that he afterwards was baptized. At
the bidding of the reformers, Libermann traveled in Austria. From
him they learned that in Hungary and Italy there were rabbis or
would-be rabbis, willing to pronounce a favorable opinion upon the new
ritual. Jacobson addressed his inquiries to them, and his wishes were
fulfilled. The first who allowed himself to be used by Libermann was
Aaron Chorin (from Chorin), rabbi in Arad, Hungary, a tedious talker
of superficial culture and mediocre Talmudical scholarship, who was
capable of repeating absurdities in three languages--in Hebrew, German,
and the Jewish-German jargon. He was devoted to the new movement
without clearly understanding its bearings. Two Italian rabbis of low
attainments also spoke in favor of the innovations. The opinions of
all these men--not one of whom was of wholly sound mind--showed that
the introduction of the organ was not against Rabbinical law. Chorin
alone produced authorities in favor of the other reforms, and for
German prayers. Libermann collated these opinions, strengthened them
by his own pretended learning, adding the falsehood that not only all
the rabbis of Leghorn, but even those of Jerusalem, had declared it
permissible to use the organ in Jewish divine service. These opinions,
which were printed and scattered broadcast, were intended to exonerate
the Hamburg Reform Temple from blame at its very birth, and to remove
the blot of illegitimacy which, as might have been foreseen, the rabbis
of the old school would affix to it.

Whilst the reformers energetically tried to forestall every obstacle,
the conservatives remained idle, and allowed the dangers which
threatened their convictions to gather unnoticed. As already observed,
Hamburg had at this time no rabbi at its head, but a college of three
assistants (Dayanim) of little repute. Although these official
representatives of Judaism had almost the entire Hamburg community to
support them, they opposed the innovations with little vigor. Shortly
after the opening of the Temple, the college ordered a feebly-written
proclamation to be put up in the synagogues (October 26, 1818),
that the new prayer-book should not be used by Israelites of pious
sentiments, because contrary to usage essential passages had been
omitted or altered. But this declaration lost its effect, when the lay
heads of the community--whose assistance the Dayanim had not been
able to win--took it down, and rebuked the authors, because "they
had been guilty of intolerable presumption." The lay heads, at the
recommendation of the college, afterwards invited the leaders of the
Temple (November 8th) to a meeting, and requested them to discontinue
the use of the prayer-book, as it did not agree with the ritual
accepted by all Jewish communities. The Templars, however, laughed this
demand to scorn.

The Temple Union unexpectedly received moral support from a person
having great influence in Hamburg. Lazarus Riesser, the father of the
indefatigable champion for the emancipation of the Jews in Germany, had
always been reckoned one of the old orthodox party. As the son-in-law
of Rabbi Raphael Cohen and his right hand, he was absorbed in the
Talmud. He had published a Hebrew life of Raphael Cohen, in which he
eulogized not only the author, but also his rabbinical views, and
declared himself his faithful follower. How astonished, therefore, were
the Hamburg Jews of both parties when a letter from Riesser suddenly
appeared, entitled "To my Co-religionists in Hamburg" (the beginning
of 1819), applauding the Temple innovations, and sharply rebuking
the rabbinical college which had opposed them! He frankly called the
opponents "sanctimonious hypocrites" who "nourish contentions in
Israel, and bar the way of the sons desirous of returning to the favor
of their father." It appears that he wished to wreak a petty revenge
upon the members of the rabbinical college of Hamburg, by whom he
perhaps thought himself kept in the background.

The orthodox party in Hamburg, who imagined that no rabbi in the whole
of Europe would approve of the reforms, were bitterly disappointed;
owing to the activity of Jacobson and Libermann, the Jewish public
discovered that several rabbis in various districts upheld them. The
old rabbis were so listless and indolent in the matter, that they
had to be addressed twice, before they pronounced judgment against
the Temple. In the first excitement the Hamburg rabbis had unwisely
condemned the innocent and commendable customs which were introduced
into the Temple, such as the Portuguese pronunciation of Hebrew, the
omission of intoning in reading from the Bible. To rectify these
mistakes, they afterwards limited their complaints to three points--the
abridgment of the prayers, especially with reference to the omission
of Messianic passages, prayers in German, and the use of the organ.
To this programme the agreement of numerous distinguished rabbis and
rabbinates was at length secured; four in Germany (Fürth, Mayence,
Breslau, and Hanau), five in Italy (Trieste, Modena, Padua, Mantua,
and Leghorn), three in Prussian Poland (Posen, Lissa, and Rawitz), and
two in Moravia (Nikolsburg and Trietsch). Moses Sofer in Presburg,
the German rabbi in Amsterdam, and the French chief rabbis of the
consistory of Wintzenheim, also signed the document. They all declared
the reforms in the Temple to be distinctly heterodox. Libermann's
falsehoods now became apparent, as the Leghorn rabbinate had not given
its assent to the use of the organ. Samun, a would-be rabbi of Leghorn,
and Chorin of Arad, probably under moral compulsion, revoked their
former testimonials. The most zealous in their denunciations of the
Temple were Sofer of Presburg and Benet of Nikolsburg, who declared the
slightest deviation from ancient usages as heresy. But the impression
which the authors of this document had hoped for did not follow. It
had been delayed too long, more than seven months having elapsed
before sentence of heresy was promulgated; and meantime the Temple
Union had established itself. Eighteen antagonistic rabbinates (in
all forty rabbis) did not seem many; and the most eminent of all, the
Central Consistory of France, had remained silent. The signers of the
protest asserted that more opinions had been received; but this belated
statement was of no avail. The arguments adduced by the rabbis against
the Temple service were for the most part void, some were thoroughly
childish. The letter of the law spoke against them. The diversity of
opinions among rabbinical authorities of various ages and countries,
always made it possible to find reasons for and against any question.

This weakness was mercilessly exposed by M. J. Bresselau, one of the
originators of the Hamburg reform. In a Hebrew letter (1819) written in
beautiful Hebrew style and with such skillful manipulation of biblical
verses, that it seemed as though the prophets and psalmists themselves
were scourging the delusions of the obtuse rabbis, Bresselau treated
them now as ignorant boys, now as false prophets, and especially as
disturbers of the peace. Every sentence in this seemingly earnest
but bitingly satirical epistle was a dagger-thrust against the
old perversions and their defenders. The reformers also obtained
reinforcement from Poland. The old-fashioned party, on the other hand,
were unable to present a single Hebrew writer to defend their cause.
Even the Hebrew style used in the document of the opposing rabbis
was rugged and coarse. The Dayanim of Hamburg, indeed, caused the
testimonial to be in part translated into German--a concession that
betrayed the weakness of their cause--but the German version was not
calculated to create a good impression. For this they had to employ
Shalom Cohen, a turn-coat, who had formerly belonged to the ranks of
the reformers. In short, the conservatives were unfortunate, because
they were unskillful and imprudent.

It also happened that the Temple quarrel took place in the year when
the "Hep, hep!" cry was being raised, and Hamburg also participated
in it. The wealthy and worldly Jews were thereby restricted to the
society of their own people, and actively supported the banner that had
been unfurled. The Jewish merchants of Hamburg, members of the Temple
Union, who were accustomed to attend the fair at Leipsic during the
chief festivals in the spring and autumn, joined some Berlin merchants
of similar opinions, and established a branch synagogue (September 20,
1820). Meyerbeer composed the songs for the opening ceremony. They
appointed a so-called fair-preacher (Messprediger), Jacob Auerbach,
and from this gathering-place of Jews from various countries, the
innovations spread to a wider circle. The Hamburg reforms thus were
adopted in some parts; and in other communities, such as those of
Carlsruhe, Königsberg, and Breslau, where the entire programme was
not carried out, at least the rite of confirmation, imitated from the
Church, was introduced.

The first attempt to set up an opposing party, so as to dam the
overflowing stream of reform, and make it subside into a quiet bed,
commenced on account of the Temple innovations. This opposing party
was established by a man who had himself partially forsaken rabbinical
Judaism, but who strove to strengthen and vindicate it, under the
correct impression that development must take place upon its own
soil, with due regard to historical conditions, and along its peculiar
lines, and especially without aping foreign Church forms. Isaac
Bernays (born at Mayence, 1792; died at Hamburg, 1849) was the man who
intelligently opposed the prevailing flaccidity of semi-enlightened
reform and thought. In South Germany, in contradistinction to North
Germany with its love for formal statements of doctrines, which never
rose beyond the commonplaces of rationalism, a mystic philosophical
school had been established, which promoted visionary notions. In all
things, the smallest and the greatest, in nature and history, in the
grouping of things, in numbers, colors, and names, this philosophy
beheld a system, germs of ideas, the shattered ruins of a gigantic
mirror reflecting fundamental thoughts in huge size. Isaac Bernays
belonged to this school. To his vision Judaism in its literature and
historical progress revealed itself half unveiled. Bernays' mind, with
its overflowing wealth of ideas, found in all phenomena the harmonious
systemization and development of a fundamental thought, which to
manifest all its latent possibilities permeated passing events and
historical achievements, and which had developed from the beginning
of creation to the most recent fact. Bernays, much profounder than
Mendelssohn, was the first to recognize the important rôle of Judaism
in the history of the world, and at a glance to measure the range of
its literature. His fault was, perhaps, that he was too rich in ideas,
that therefore he sought out and discovered too much, and was not equal
to the task of clothing his ideas in fitting form and language. From
his superior altitude he looked with contemptuous pity upon the poverty
of thought of Jewish reformers, who desired to contract and confine the
giant spirit of Judaism (of which they had no conception) within the
narrow bounds of a catechism for big and little children. In his eyes
the followers of Friedländer were the embodiment of insipidity and
narrowness. They impressed Bernays with the idea of a rabble who dwell
in a Pyramid, and fit it up for petty household purposes.

    "They, the disciples of Mendelssohn, ashamed of their
    antiquity, prefer, as foundlings of the present day, wildly
    to overleap the unfashionable limits of the Law, instead of
    listening in the school of their race, to hear what God has
    brought about at the present day."

The train of thought by which Bernays reconstructed Judaism in his
mind from its original sources and history, is little known to us.
He preferred oral to written instruction, and was averse to put
his thoughts on paper. The "Biblical Orient," which is ascribed to
him, is, so to speak, only the foundation of the vestibule of a
reverence-inspiring temple. This work, odd as it was in form, is
distinguished for its depth and originality; it starts with the idea,
that to Judaism is allotted the task of bringing back to God men
created in His image, and that the Jewish people was to serve as a type
to mankind, showing how the lost likeness to God may be regained. The
"Biblical Orient" endeavored to establish a more thorough comprehension
of the Bible than had been effected by the Mendelssohnian school.
They had regarded it merely from its poetical side, and had failed
to see that it portrays the collision between two views of life.
Bernays believed that his criticism dethroned the Mendelssohn school,
together with its founder; for Mendelssohn himself, by his superficial
treatment of Hebrew literature, had been the first to contribute to the
enervation of Judaism.

According to the opinion of Bernays, the Hebrew cult differed from that
of the heathen, and was intended to be a contrast. Idolatry expressed
itself in plastic, Judaism in ritual, symbolism. Therefore the very
aspect of Judaism which the reformers desired to abolish as unfitting
and unworthy, should be preserved. Everything which in the course
of Jewish history had been assimilated and developed, according to
Bernays, ought to have a place assigned to it, being a necessary part
of the whole,--even Talmudism and the Kabbala.

This book contains many immature and unpolished ideas, much that
borders on the ridiculous. But if the author only succeeded in
awakening the idea that Judaism has an historical mission as an apostle
to the nations, it should suffice to procure for him a place of honor
in the records of Jewish history. Not that he could claim this as a
new discovery, for the text-book of Judaism plainly points to it. It
is the essence of the messages proclaimed by the prophets. It has
been verified by history, that European and Asiatic nations have been
delivered from their darkness by the light that came from Judaism. But
the accumulated sufferings of the Jews, and the servile form assumed by
Judaism, had caused this fact to be so entirely forgotten, that its own
sons had no idea thereof. The merit of the man who again called it to
mind is therefore of no mean degree.

The extraordinary talents and original ideas of Bernays directed the
attention of Jewish society to him. Afterwards, it is true, he denied
the authorship of the "Biblical Orient"; but if he did not actually
compose it, he might have done so, for it is flesh of his flesh, or
spirit of his spirit.

The Hamburg community, which sorely needed a power to withstand the
Temple Union, in consequence of his renown chose Bernays for their
spiritual guide. It was a good move on their part, and bore important
results. The rabbis of the old school were ill prepared for the contest
between two justifiable principles, the preservation of Judaism in its
peculiar manifestations, and the assimilation of European culture by
the Jews. Their weapons had grown rusty, and injured the owners more
than their opponents. Fresh forces were therefore required in their
cause--men cognizant of the wants of the age, who could utilize them
for the honor and purification of Judaism. The appointment of Bernays
to the Hamburg rabbinate (November, 1821) created a stir: he was the
first rabbi with a well-ordered secular education. It was a sign of
the times that he dispensed with the title of rabbi and preferred to
be called Chacham, as was customary among the Portuguese Jews: he
did not wish the despised title of rabbi to be a hindrance to his
activity. True to his aversion for slavish imitation, he eschewed all
clerical mummery in costume and gestures, to which the reform preachers
attached great importance in the pulpit. Bernays did not claim to be
the guardian of souls, only the teacher of his congregation. He also
delivered sermons, but the contents, form, and other details differed
entirely from those introduced by the Jacobson school. Owing to his
peculiar mode of thought, his addresses were not understood by the
multitude; but thoughtful hearers at least conceded to him the merit
of originality, which contrasted favorably with the insipidity of the
Temple preachers. When Heine, who at this time was still interested
practically in Judaism, was staying in Hamburg, he was induced to hear
Bernays' sermons, and to compare them with those of other preachers.
Heine understood the method and form of his thoughts, and the opinion
of the lyrical satirist ran as follows:

    "I have heard Bernays preach ..., none of the Jews understand
    him, he desires nothing for himself, and will never play any
    other part; but he is a man of mind, and has more life in him
    than Kley, Salomon, and Auerbach I and II."

By unobtrusive work, Bernays succeeded in gaining the respect, not
only of the community, but also of the rigidly pious party elsewhere.
Their suspicious natures found nothing to blame in the religious
conduct of the Chacham. The changes that he introduced, in reality
reforms, met with approval and imitation in orthodox congregations.
By his penetration and his great erudition he exercised deep influence
over the rising generation, to whom he opened up the rich treasures
of Jewish literature, then but little known. He thereby imbued his
disciples with joyous attachment to Judaism. As already stated, he did
not care for writing. If his courage had kept pace with his knowledge
and wealth of ideas, his activity would have had greater influence on
modern Jewish history.

In another quarter, an equally beneficent and elevating, though
differently constituted, personality, was at work. Isaac Noah
Mannheimer (born at Copenhagen, 1793; died at Vienna, 1864), originally
a disciple of the school of Jacobson, softened its crudities, and so
caused the offensive alterations in the divine service to be received
favorably; he struck the right note when making improvements. He may
justly be considered the incarnation of Jewish refinement--every inch
a man. In him the essential elements of peculiarly Jewish culture
were harmoniously combined with the attractive forms of European
civilization; indeed, in every respect his was a perfectly moulded
nature. Gifted with genial humor and wit, enthusiasm and discretion,
leading an ideal life, and possessing a sure practical instinct,
endowed with poetic talents and sober thought, with childlike
tenderness and cutting satire, great eloquence and earnest vigor, deep
love of Judaism and delight in modern ideas--he combined these varied
characteristics in the happiest manner. These brilliant qualities,
together with his nobility of soul and disinterestedness, devotion to
his convictions, and conscientiousness in all official duties, his
delicacy of feeling, tact, aversion to vulgarity and forbearance with
the vulgar--swiftly captivated all hearts, attracted the noble-minded,
and even filled the unworthy with respect, and thus lightened his
labors. Born and bred under the mild Danish government, which at an
early date had granted equal rights to Jews, nor, like other states,
withdrew or abridged them when circumstances changed, Mannheimer
from childhood learned to hold his head high, and to represent his
co-religionists and utter his convictions without fear even in a
country where a servile conception of the position of burgesses,
peasants, and especially of the Jews, long prevailed. Mannheimer did
not possess original ideas or deep knowledge of Jewish literature; but
he was powerfully swayed by his own convictions, which he cherished
and disseminated, not hiding them away as buried treasures. This man
of words and action was placed by destiny in a situation, where his
peculiar nature and special gifts could find scope, and ennoble wide
circles. Everyone cognizant of the state of affairs then prevailing
in Austria, and the extent to which the Austrian Jews have since
progressed, must confess that Mannheimer was providentially fitted
for his position in the Austrian capital, on the boundary-line of
semi-barbarous countries, to raise the Jews of those lands from the
moral degeneracy into which they had been plunged as much by Joseph
II's benevolent despotism as by his mother's hostility, and to repair
the harm caused by the Herz Hombergs, the Peter Beers, and the whole
troop of so-called "Normal teachers" and official religious instructors.

A chief who, in face of constant strife and danger, founds a colony
with a band of half savage men, elevates it, and trains it to be
a pattern to others, can claim no greater praise than Mannheimer
deserved in founding the congregation of Vienna. The camp of Metternich
and Francis I tolerated no Jews within its domains; only by way of
exception a few rich families with their dependents were tolerated
under various extraordinary titles. These favored families had
immigrated from various countries, were in no way connected, had no
rights as a community, could not possess a synagogue, nor appoint a
rabbi; in short, by law almost everything was forbidden to them as a
religious body. Nevertheless, certain adventurous persons amongst them
desired to introduce a German order of service, founded on the model
of the Hamburg Temple, and their efforts were alternately encouraged
and frustrated by the government. When these enlightened men in Vienna
undertook to build a Temple, they secured the aid of Mannheimer as
preacher (June, 1825), but were compelled to evade the restrictive laws
by inventing some insignificant title for him, so that he might be
allowed to reside in Vienna.

Although Mannheimer was intimate with David Friedländer, Jacobson, and
the young iconoclasts with whom destruction of the old Judaism was a
principle, and had occasionally preached in the Reform synagogues of
Berlin, Hamburg, and Leipsic, yet he was not so strongly attached to
the new system that he did not recognize its fundamental errors. His
first and his last word in his new sphere of action was that no rupture
should be caused between Jews, no sectarianism should be encouraged,
and that the old orthodox party should not be offended and repelled by
daring movements, but should gradually be won over to the new forms.
Actuated by these ideas, he carried a moderate change in the synagogue
service, in opposition to the wishes of the man who had promoted him
to his office. Mannheimer in the new synagogue removed only offensive
excrescences, making the service dignified, and animating it by his
impressive words, but he retained the Hebrew language, that strong bond
of union, and, to the regret of his former brother reformers, dispensed
with the organ and German hymns. Even more successfully than Isaac
Bernays did Isaac Mannheimer pave the way to the reconciliation of old
and new ideas.

In his pulpit eloquence, acknowledged by competent judges, Jews
and Christians, to be of high quality, his power of harmoniously
combining two apparently hostile elements was displayed. Mannheimer
had discovered a noble treasure in Jewish literature and profited
richly by it. In the Talmud and Agada--a mine of thoughtful sayings,
parables, riddles, interesting observations and witty play upon
words--he made himself thoroughly at home, discovered the golden
grain, or, to speak more accurately, knew how to extract a pleasing
meaning from the most insignificant saying, and employed the remarks
of the old Agadists as interpreters of new views and thoughts. By
utilizing the Agadic elements, his method of preaching acquired a
peculiar character, and exercised strong attraction over the pious
Jews and the rising generation. Portuguese Jews (Franks), who had
migrated from Turkey to Vienna, also listened with pleasure to this
lively and spirited preacher. The East and West were united in
Mannheimer and in the new Viennese Temple, consecrated April, 1826.
As if the congregation of this Temple were intended from the outset
to complete the work of propitiation between old and new forms, they
succeeded in securing the services of Sulzer, a skilled musician, who
with his wealth of musical resources endowed the Hebrew prayers with
almost magical expressiveness, and transformed the old objectionable
intoning into soul-stirring melodies. These melodies rendered an organ
superfluous. The soft, swelling chorals and solos of the Viennese
Temple, as also Mannheimer's sermons, proved that the old possessions
were not utterly useless, as violent reformers had represented them to
be, but only required modifying to be impressive. Pulpit and choir,
working in accord, produced great effect upon the minds of the growing
congregation of Vienna, whose affection for inherited Judaism, and
reverence for Jewish antiquity were combined with a desire to satisfy
the demands of progress. Mannheimer's personality served to strengthen
the feeling so awakened. In the pulpit, as in household and social
affairs, he appeared, not as a guardian of souls, as a clergyman, or
priest--he abominated a sanctimonious, unctuous manner--but as a tender
father, as a friend, adviser, and help. As he did not shrink from
censuring the objectionable side of old and new customs, he educated,
by word and example, a pattern community in which each individual
strove to maintain peace and suppress dissension.

It was in Vienna that the subservient humility of the Jew was first
turned into self-respect, and this in spite of the political oppression
which lasted until the year of the Revolution. The aversion felt by
the barbarous Polish Jews to civilization gradually disappeared,
giving way to a desire for self-improvement. The Viennese community
thereby obtained historical importance. The tones that resounded from
the pulpit and the choir, stirring the members of the congregation,
awoke a mighty echo in the near and remote communities of Austria.
Pesth, Prague, and smaller communities in Hungary and Bohemia followed
the impulse given by Vienna, influenced by the conciliatory manner
with which the "purified divine service" was there conducted, and the
movement commenced in Vienna extended to Galicia.

The election of Chacham Bernays as head of the Hamburg congregation,
and Mannheimer's activity in establishing the order of service in the
Vienna synagogue, gradually aroused the emulation of other German
communities. Educated rabbis were preferred, and they restored dignity
to the synagogue. The German Jews in turn made their influence felt
in France and Italy. The Franco-Jewish consistories having neglected
the favorable opportunity to be leaders, offered by French supremacy,
had to content themselves with being followers. In Italy those of the
communities that belonged to Austria also felt the impulse originating
in Germany, although sermons in the vernacular or in Spanish had been
delivered there since olden times, and the divine service, at least
outwardly, showed no signs of neglect.

How great the harm that can be done through unsoundness of mind or
nebulous theories even by distinguished men, or how, at least, they can
nullify their own efforts, was proved by a striking example in Berlin,
in most remarkable contrast to that in Vienna. At the time when the
learned mob of Germany were flinging stones at the Jews with the cry
of "Hep, hep!" three Jewish young men met together to plan a sort of
conspiracy against the incorrigible Christian state, all three filled
with earnest ideals. They pondered carefully the means to be employed
in destroying the deeply-rooted hatred against Jews in Germany. The
first of the three was Zunz who lived to grow grey in research; the
second, Edward Gans, the champion and apostle of Hegel's philosophy
and the assailant of the old ways of jurisprudence; and lastly, an
accountant who lived in a literary world, Moses Moser, Heine's most
trusted friend, whom he called, "The _édition de luxe_ of a real man,
the epilogue of Nathan the Wise." They combined (November 27, 1819) for
the purpose of founding a "Society for the Culture and Science of the
Jews." Gans, who was of a mercurial nature, and might have been the
leader of a revolution, was the chief of this movement. These three
young men secured the aid of two others similarly disposed, who were
enthusiastic for science, freedom, and idealism. The two fossilized
Mendelssohnians, Ben-David and David Friedländer, also became members
of the society, and Jacobson was ready with advice and assistance.
In all it numbered about fifty members in Berlin; in Hamburg it
owned about twenty of the supporters of the Temple Union, and a few
others scattered in one place and another. As already mentioned, Heine
afterwards attached himself to it, and worked for its success.

The first condition made by the founders was that the members were to
adhere faithfully to Judaism, to withstand bravely the allurements of
the Church, and thus give to the young generation a brilliant example
of constancy and independence. Had it remained true to this programme,
the society would have been a beneficent factor in the advancement of
Judaism, seeing that most of its members were talented, and occupied
the heights of culture. But it started from false premises, aimed at
results too far removed, and employed the wrong means to attain the
end. Practical minds were wanting in the society. The false premise
was, that if the Jews acquired solid culture, devoted themselves to
arts and science, and carried on agriculture and handicrafts instead
of trade, German anti-Semitism would vanish, the sons of Teut would
fraternally embrace the sons of Jacob, and the state would not
deny them equal privileges. Therefore the society desired--their
multitudinous wishes seem almost ludicrous--to establish schools,
seminaries, and academies for the Jews, to promote trades, arts,
agriculture, and scientific studies, and even educate them in the forms
of polite society. From the idea of founding academies, however, only
a sort of private school resulted, where the cultured members of the
society taught or caused to be instructed poor youths who had come to
Berlin principally from Poland, students of the Talmud who escaped
from its folios to learn "wisdom." The founders soon perceived that
they had built castles in the air, and that the Society for Culture,
on account of its pretentious character, met with no support. They
therefore took up a less exalted position, limiting themselves to mere
agitation, and to the promotion of the science of Judaism,--certainly
a praiseworthy enterprise and a pressing necessity. They determined to
deliver discourses in turn, and to establish a journal for the "Science
of Judaism." But the leaders themselves did not exactly know what was
meant by this term, nor how to commence their work.

Hegel, the profound thinker and great sophist, the court and church
philosopher, introduced these young Jews, ardent in the pursuit of
truth, into the labyrinths of his method, and confused their minds.
Young Israel, the founders of the Society for Culture, at first
listened to the utterances of this philosophical acrobat as to oracles.
In a parrot-like manner they repeated after him, that Judaism is
the religion of the spirit, which has given up the ghost, and that
Christianity has united in itself the whole of ancient history,
and radiates its ideas in a rejuvenated, ennobled form. They also
accustomed themselves, like their master, to walk upon stilts. The
simplest thoughts were presented in distorted forms, as though they did
not wish to be understood. How, indeed, could feeling for Judaism have
awakened in them? Edward Gans, it is true, was continually speaking
of the "unrelieved pain of Judaism," but was all the time thinking
of himself, who could not obtain a position in Prussia. What was the
aim of the science of Judaism which this Society for Culture desired
to promote? Gans expressed it in the hollow phrases of the Hegelian
jargon, and it is apparent that the leader did not know what cause his
followers were to defend.

    "The Jews cannot perish, nor can Judaism be utterly destroyed.
    But in the great movement of the whole, it is to seem to have
    perished, still it is to continue to live, as the stream lives
    on in the ocean."

The Society desired to assist in demolishing the wall of separation
dividing Jews from Christians, and the Jewish world from the European.
It wished to abolish every dissimilarity existing between the Jewish
and the universal system.

The journal of the Society for Culture testified to the uncertainty and
obscurity of its aim. Its articles consisted chiefly of indigestible
Hegelian phraseology, or of learned matter of use to an exceedingly
limited circle as material for further work. Heine, who called a spade
by its name, bluntly declared to the editor of the journal, "That the
greater part of it is useless owing to its obscure form."

    "Did I not know by chance what Marcus [one of the contributors]
    and Gans are aiming at, I should not understand anything of
    what they write.... Insist upon culture of style with your
    contributors. Without this, the other culture cannot thrive."

Yet with this farrago of nonsense the Society hoped to elevate not only
the Jews, but even Judaism, and were indignant that the former paid no
regard to their efforts. Gans, in an article giving an account of their
plans, complained that the founders were not understood. The reproach
which he cast upon the Jews in general was especially true of the
Society for Culture--

    "Enthusiasm for religion, together with the solidity of ancient
    institutions, has vanished, but no new enthusiasm has come to
    light, and no new state of affairs has established itself.
    We have not gone beyond that negative enlightenment, which
    consists in despising and contemning things as they are,
    without troubling to infuse a new spirit."

This marvel could least of all be brought about by the Society for
Culture, because it was deaf to the voice of God, which speaks in
Jewish history, in Jewish law from its very commencement, and in the
Jewish people. The Society inveighed against the whole world, and
relieved its feelings in elegiac effusions. Gans, the chief mover,
poured out his wrath over the rich men in Israel, who showed no
sympathy with his world-awakening dreams.

Great was the disappointment of the founders of the Society for
Culture. Its supporters diminished rather than increased in number. The
journal with its curiously confused language found no readers, supplies
ran short, and the members themselves forsook the standard, and in
spite of the tacit oath embraced Christianity. Edward Gans himself
secretly cherished the idea of obtaining a professorship by means of
baptism. The dissensions among the German Jews, the contemptuous tone
in which the sons of Judaism spoke of their religion, and the numerous
examples of baptism in their midst--up to the year 1823 there were no
less than 1,236 conversions in Berlin, comprising half of the members
of the community, and in other parts of Prussia there were 1,382--and
the pietism of the Prussian court, brought about the formation in
Berlin of a Society, "For the Promotion of Christianity among the
Jews," which hoped to see the whole body of the Jews enter the Church.
The election of talented Jews to academic posts was strenuously
opposed. In vain did Hardenberg, the minister, intercede for Gans,
to obtain for him the chair of historical jurisprudence, which was
his specialty. Gans considered the possibility of becoming baptized
whilst delivering long addresses before the Society for Culture. The
Society dissolved, and at length died out quietly, uncared for, and
unregretted. Gans, the chief mover, who possessed sufficient wealth to
enable him to remain true to his vow, increased the number of sceptics
and infidels professing Christianity. This so exasperated Heine,
although he himself was a convert to Christianity, that two decades
later, even after the grave had closed over him, he could not forgive
Gans.

    "The apostasy of Gans was the more revolting, because he played
    the part of agitator, and accepted the positive duties of a
    president. It is a traditional duty for the captain to be the
    last to leave the sinking ship; Gans, however, was the first to
    save himself."

Moser, the second of the triumvirate of the Society for Culture,
remained more steadfast to his views, although he doubted the
possibility of saving Judaism, and proclaimed the wholesale baptism of
the Jews. The third member of the triumvirate was the most steadfast,
and alone remained thoroughly true to his word. He was also filled with
doubts, but he did not despair of improvement. He pointed out how the
cure or the completion of the new revival must commence. "What alone
survives and is imperishable in the midst of this 'Mabul' (deluge) is
the science of Judaism; it continues to live, even though for centuries
no finger has been raised on its behalf. I confess that next to my
submission to the justice of God, my hope and support consist in the
cultivation of this science. These storms and experiences shall not
so influence me as to bring me into collision with myself. I have
done what I thought my duty. Because I saw that I was preaching in a
wilderness I ceased to preach, but not in order to be faithless to the
purport of my own words. There remains naught for the members of the
Society to do, save to remain true, each man to the work of his own
limited sphere, and leave the rest to God."

If the Society for Culture, which started on its career with high
aspirations, and ended so lamentably, succeeded in producing only
this one result, stirring up love for the science of Judaism, then
its dreams and attempts have not been entirely vain. In history not
even the slightest seed is wasted; but no plant could blossom in soil
covered with the dust cast on it by Friedländer and Jacobson in Berlin.
As if smitten with a curse, the spot where Mendelssohn began the work
so full of promise, nothing could be made to thrive or be of service in
the revival of Judaism. The rabbinical academy, which the rabbinical
assistant in Berlin, in conjunction with excellent men, desired to call
into existence, never saw the light. From another quite unexpected
quarter, however, there arose the prospect, if not of salvation, yet of
its beginning.

CHAPTER XVI.

AWAKENING OF INDEPENDENCE AND THE SCIENCE OF JUDAISM.

  Dawn of Self-respect--Research into Jewish History--Hannah
    Adams--Solomon Löwisohn--Jost--His History--The
    Revolution of July (1830)--Gabriel Riesser--His Lectures--
    Steinheim--His Works--His "Revelation"--Nachman Krochmal--
    Rapoport--Erter--His Poems--Rapoport's Writings--Zunz--
    Luzzatto--His Exegesis--Geiger--The "Nineteen Letters" of
    Ben Usiel--New School of Reform--Joel Jacoby.

1830-1840 C. E.

If for a moment fancy is allowed full play, one can imagine, not only
that the houses, utensils, and pictures excavated from the ruins of
Herculaneum and Pompeii were renewed, but also that the entombed men
were suddenly aroused from their sleep of centuries, and enabled to
collect their thoughts. If these resurrected Romans could recall
their condition when the catastrophe befell them, could conjure up
before their mind's eye the splendor of their greatness, remember
the mighty institutions which they and their ancestors called into
existence, realize the heroic power which the Roman people developed,
and if they felt the same power still stirring within them, a not
altogether unjustifiable self-esteem would seize them. This supposition
is no fantastic idea: a nation actually did arise from the darkness
of the tomb, the only example chronicled in the annals of man. This
resuscitated people, the Jewish race, endeavored at its resurrection to
collect its thoughts and memories, and recall a vision of its glorious
past; feeling itself to be at once old and young, rich in memories and
lacking in experience, chained to hoary antiquity by a perfect sequence
of events, yet seeming as if of yesterday. The Jews first examined
the monuments of their intellect, which had influenced the history of
nations, and had brought forth a wealth of peculiar products. They
served as signposts in the labyrinth of Jewish history. That is the
science of Judaism--a vivid realization of its great history, and its
peculiar doctrines. This effort of memory is not merely an amusing
game, a pleasant pastime, the satisfaction of a desire for knowledge
akin to curiosity, but an irresistible impulse of self-examination.
It aroused the dormant strength in the breast of the inquirer, and
inspired him with self-confidence to act in the future as in the past.
Self-consciousness--the consciousness of being the people of God--was
awakened in this old, resuscitated nation, and it at once entered into
competition with the young nations, to assert its peculiar powers.

But history has not yet gone so far: it only shows that self-respect
was awakened; that the Jews no longer blush for their origin and
confession; no longer hesitate when questioned about them; no longer,
from false shame and their own evil plight, take a false step,
pretending belief in a faith certainly more distasteful to them than
to those born therein. As if this feeling of self-esteem were to be
particularly favored by the generative force of history, there arose
from the midst of the Jewish nation artists of great ability--artists in
tone and color, and poets of the first rank, who by their steadfastness
secured public recognition for their race. This self-respect of
the Jews was the outcome of political maturity, the latter in turn
being due to the wonderful inventions and the increase of general
intelligence during the last decades, but it has chiefly been
awakened, strengthened, and fostered by the science of Judaism and the
achievements of talented Jews in connection therewith.

Although the history of this period is still in progression--at
many points touches the fleeting present--and its results cannot be
summed up like those of bygone days, yet the fact cannot be denied that
the aim of Jewish life has been the attainment of those two precious
acquirements--self-reliance and self-knowledge. These qualities are
intimately connected, the one completing and promoting the other.
Knowledge of their own experiences and of history enabled the Jews
to make a careful, unprejudiced study of the origin and growth of
their nationality, and of the peculiarity of their teaching, and to
hide and ignore nothing. Insight into their own doctrines increased
their self-reliance, and induced them to remove the burdens assumed
by the generations that had lived under oppression. The struggles in
which the Jews had just been engaged to secure civil, political, and
social equality and to bring about the reformation and refinement of
Judaism, stand in closest connection with these two qualities--on
the one hand, with the better appreciation of their own nature, on the
other, with their growing self-reliance--influencing them, or being
influenced by them.

Step by step the mountain heaps of obstructive rubbish had to be
cleared away, an open space cut out, new building materials procured
or collected, before it was possible, to think, not of putting the
crowning stone to the edifice, but of erecting the frame of the
structure. Unconsciously the entire generation, many members of which
are still active, set to work upon this gigantic task, which had not
been dreamed of fifty years before, still less considered in any
way practicable. Deep but almost unconscious attachment to Judaism
on the part of enthusiastic spirits enabled them to attain a goal
which must be regarded as a marvel by posterity, even though it has
itself advanced beyond it. Jewish science by laborious research and
investigations has developed three important points: the course of
Jewish history in its long chain of events and its significance,
the precious basis of Jewish teaching in all its bearings, and,
finally, the enduring faculty of the Jewish race, which defied so many
persecutions, rendered certain qualities hereditary, accomplished such
wondrous miracles of history, and was the means of bringing salvation
to the world. These three aspects, the comprehension of history, of
the tenets of Judaism, and of peculiar nationality, were developed one
after the other. Each of these branches of knowledge had to be pursued
from its commencement, and followed through a long course, and if not
brought to a conclusion, it at least reached a state in which it could
be clearly grasped and understood.

All nations desirous of asserting their independence and vitality seek
to prove their age: they interest themselves in remembrances of the
past, and bring to light their ancestral portraits and their armorial
bearings, to demonstrate that they have passed through the vicissitudes
of fortune and misfortune, the alternations of strength and weakness,
victory and defeat, that they have given evidence of intellectual
capacity, and therefore may lay claim to continued existence and
development. The Jewish people had no need to make search for their
famous exploits or the monuments of their intellectual powers; even
in their apparently servile condition these were not wanting. Each
century proclaimed this fact to the next, and it was only needful
to give ear to, or not wholly to disregard this voice amid a crowd
of selfish interests. The history of the Jews naturally bore most
eloquent testimony to the people's greatness; but it was not easy to
present it in its brilliancy. The history of the Jewish nation had been
distorted by the thousand unjust prejudices of the ages. Under the
cruel persecutions of their tormentors, the Jews could not retain the
accumulated reminiscences of their great past; they knew them only in
distorted fragments. Christian scholars, attracted by the grandeur of
the theme, had indeed formed these disjointed fragments into a picture;
but it could not be a true one, seeing that many component parts were
wanting. The bright colors had faded, and there was a preponderance
of shadow, perhaps intentionally placed there. Even to well-disposed
defenders of the Jews, like Dohm and Grégoire, who had zealously
studied the annals of Jewish history, they did not give a clear idea
of its course. More than a century had elapsed since the worthy French
Protestant clergyman, Basnage, after diligently studying Jewish
history, had given to the world his somewhat fragmentary researches,
when the wife of an American clergyman, Hannah Adams, of Boston, struck
by the marvelous fate of the Jewish nation, delineated their history
from the time of the return from Babylon to recent days. For many
reasons she was not qualified to give an intelligible outline of Jewish
history, but could only string together a number of rough sketches
without connection or sequence. This crude work, nevertheless, was good
enough for the purposes of the London Society for the Promotion of
Christianity among the Jews, which besides made several alterations in
the book in order to serve its ends. Fidelity to history and truth were
entirely disregarded in the changes.

It was high time for Jews to take away the historian's pen from the
hands of Christians who only trifled with it. However feeble might be
their first attempts, and inadequate though their conception of the
peculiarity of Jewish history was, yet it was meritorious to remove
the Christian seal, impressed upon it by unconscious forgers, in order
to claim it as the property of the Church. The first Jew who bore in
his heart the great characteristics of the history of his race, and in
part published it, deserves a place of honor. He was a talented youth
whose early death was due to insanity, so often the mark of a true
poet. Solomon Löwisohn (born in Moor, Hungary, 1789, died 1822) had
succeeded under most unfavorable circumstances in acquiring secular
culture, and thereby had qualified himself to appreciate the value of
his nation's treasures. Löwisohn had a much truer comprehension of the