Trudy Gold
Napoleon and the Jews, Part 1

Trudy Gold - Napoleon and the Jews, Part 1

- Thank you everyone for my weather forecast. It makes me feel less isolated. Anyway, Napoleon Bonaparte, and of course William gave a brilliant lecture yesterday, and of course, quite a contentious lecture. Why? Because Napoleon Bonaparte is one of the most divisive, contentious figures in history. But what is important? And today and on Thursday, I’m talking about Napoleon and the Jews. Now, let me say, at the outset, the same thing I said with the French Revolution. The French Revolution, the Jews were pretty irrelevant, and they’re pretty irrelevant to Napoleon Bonaparte as well. But the point about Napoleon Bonaparte is he is absolutely vital to any understanding of Jewish history. If you understand the ideas of the enlightenment, the ideas behind the French Revolution and the American Revolution, and then the work of Napoleon, you’re going to understand really the path of the Jew into the modern world, because Napoleon Bonaparte isn’t just important for an understanding of the Jews of France. Don’t forget, he is a conqueror. And wherever he conquers, he breaks down the ghetto wars. So that is why Napoleon is absolutely critical to any understanding of Jewish history. So what can we say about Napoleon? He was a genius. He believed, above all else, in the central authority of the state. He was a pragmatist. He reestablished the Catholic church in France in 1801. He signed a deal with the church, the Concord Act.

Even though he was madly in love with Josephine, because she couldn’t give him a child, he divorced her to marry the daughter of the emperor of Austria. He controlled all the church appointments. He surrounded himself with advisors who were not from the aristocracy and men that were completely loyal to him. He had huge self-belief, that’s obvious. And he also must have had the most incredible charisma. And yet, what happened to him? The old adage that power has to corrupt. And of course, in the end, his huge self-belief and his huge charisma turned, I think, into almost megalomania. And don’t forget those terrible wars that he was involved in. Don’t forget that when those of us in England who studied history would’ve studied Napoleon, particularly at a level, not when you get to university, it’s a bit more advanced and rarefied, excuse me, going to sneeze, excuse me, but Napoleon, of course, defeated by Wellington at the Battle of Waterloo. And of course, Nelson’s Column, the Battle of Trafalgar. So it’s a very, very important motif in English history. The English, of course, are the great power that defeats Napoleon. So as I said, in order to understand Jewish history, let’s try and understand Napoleon and the Jews. And from the outset, having spent a lot of time investigating various areas of Napoleon, what I would say is that he did exhibit many of the prejudices of the age, but on the other hand, and I think he uses his Jewish community, but on the other hand, there is still a streak of idealism within him.

As I said, I find him totally complicated but actually, very absolutely fascinating. We know that his first contact with Jews would’ve come in 1797 during his Italian campaign. And according to an anonymous Hebrew commentator, the Jewish community in a ghetto was in danger from the reactionary population in advance of the French soldiers. You can imagine the Italians, the French are now advancing. So of course, the ultimate scapegoats are under threat. So the the chronicler mentions the command Chelek tov, a good part Bonaparte, he’s good, he’ll be good to the Jews. So the notion already is that Bonaparte will be good to the Jews. And as I’ve already mentioned, his troops break down the ghetto walls. They pulled off the late yellow badges the Jews had to wear. They took away just as the French Revolution said, “No more restrictions.” The same thing happened to the Jews, wherever Napoleon conquered. And don’t forget, it’s not just Italy, it’s the Rhineland. And in the Rhineland, he’s going to come into contact with a fascinating group of Jews including, for example, the Marx family who were rabbis going back many generations. And in fact, the Elder Marx, Herschel Marx changes his name to Heinrich under Napoleon. And when Napoleon is defeated, the forces of reaction are going to set in. Heinrich’s family was from that part of the world, as was Moses, he’s really one of the most important forerunners of Zionism.

They’re going to be plunged into modernity. But the tragedy is, after Napoleon’s defeat, many of the German princes who had been forced to award under Napoleon, they take it all back. So you’re going to have this terrible dilemma that faces Jews, that they’re given a taste of modernity, and then it’s taken away. And we all know, of course, what happened to Heinrich Marx’s family, he baptised his children. So many in the areas occupied by Napoleon, they made that choice. And that’s something that we’ll be dealing with in quite a lot of debt, both when we deal with France and when we deal with Germany next term, because this is really the nub of Jewish identity. And we know that when Napoleon was in Milan, a group of Jews from Ancona came to visit him and thank him. And evidently, he has reported to have said, “You are free men. You are free men. I shall maintain your freedom.” Now, there’s also a story about his Egyptian campaign, and I’m sure Adrian Wolfe knows a lot about this, but how reliable are the records? We know that in 1798, according to one source, he appointed two high priests of the Jewish nation. This is the title he had given to the spiritual leaders of the Cairo community. In the Paris monitor, on the 2nd of May, 1799, this is Bonaparte, he publishes a leaflet in which he invites the Jews of Africa and Asia to gather under his flag to reestablish ancient Jerusalem. Now, some scholars see it as total propaganda. Some see it as a forerunner of political Zionism. It’s actually strengthened by a letter that was sent to Barras, one of the figures of the revolution. He was a member of the directory, and it was sent to him by an Irishman, an Irish patriot who served in the French Army, a man called Thomas Cubitt.

You’ve got to remember a lot of Irish who dream of freedom from England fought for the French just as Frenchmen, who dreamt of freedom for the Americans fought in the American campaign. In fact, one of the problems that Louis XVI faced, one of the reasons he was bankrupt and had to assemble the estates, was because he had no money. And according to this letter, this was the letter. This is evidently a letter that Napoleon sent. “You are scattered all over the world, maybe as a nation, vilified, degraded by bigoted governments and insulted by the population.” And he invites Jews, according to this letter, to join the French Army. we don’t know the veracity of it. We don’t even know if this letter reached Barras. And there’s another oddity. A document was discovered, a German translation of a letter addressed to the Jewish nation from the French commander in chief, which must have been Napoleon, addressed to Rabbi Aaron of Jerusalem. It’s said to have been translated in 1799. He said, “All men who are capable of bearing arms should come to rebuild Jerusalem.” This is part of his campaign in the Middle East. How true is it? But later on, he’s going to become a very, very important figure in Jewish history.

So some stories, other stories. So I think the jury is still out. There’s another story that I think I should recount, that when he is involved in his campaign in Poland, of course Poland is the heartland of the Jewish world, now living under Russia. And of course, the Russian czars with their terribly punitive measures, he passes a synagogue on Tisha B'Av, and he sends one of his aides to find out what’s going on because he hears the lamenting in the synagogue. And the aide comes back and says, “They are mourning the loss of their temple and the loss of Jerusalem.” And he said, “Any people that will do this, will mourn for so long, one day they will have their own country.” So who knows? They’re lovely stories. We also know that some of the rabbis, and I mentioned this to you last week, the Eastern European rabbis were terrified of Napoleon Bonaparte and modernity. And if you remember the quote of Zalman of Liadi from last week, when he says, “I would rather my people be persecuted and suffer under the czars than live in peace under Napoleon.”

Because Napoleon will be the end of the Jewish people, because he’s going to put at their feet all the complexities of modern identity. So let’s, as we say, get onto a little bit of TAC List. Now in 1791, the Jews of France are now liberated. If you remember, it’s the Sephardim first who managed to prove they had letters patent, the Sephardim of Bayonne and of Bordeaux, who already had letters patent from various monarchs, which gave them certain rights. So that is ratified in 1790. And it takes until 1791 that finally the Jews of Alsace. Alsace, the German Jewish community who had their own kind of dialect, their own kind of language, taken from France by Louis XIV. Alsace, Lauren always in conflict between the Borderlands, France and Germany, going to be lost again in 1871 in the Franco-Prussian War. But at this period, it’s under French rule. The 30,000 German-Jews, the Jews living in Bordeaux were sophisticated, they were wine merchants, they were traders. They were useful to the French state. But in Alsace, the 30,000 Jews of our Alsace, they’re peddlers, they’re money lenders. They eek out a living and they are very, very unpopular. But from 1791 onwards until the period, I’m going to be talking about 1805 and 1806, the Jews are now entitled to become part of French society. Now what does that mean? We already know there were Jews living in France.

The emancipation meant that you could live where you chose. It meant you could enter any trade or profession you wanted. Remember, the French Revolution is secular or the old religious guilds are now smashed. And not only that, Napoleon set up a system. Remember, he centralises the power of the state. He came, remember from Corsica only newly acquired by France. Quite often, people who live in the outlying regions become more patriotic than those at the centre. All you have to do is think of the Austrian-Germans or the Jews of Breslov, for example. If you are not part of it, you dream to be part of it. Not only did he centralise education, he wanted the education of gifted children on the state. So many Jews benefited. But important to remember this. By 1880, there were only 100,000 Jews in France, out of a population of about 38 million. At this stage, there are only 40,000. They are a pinprick. But now they can go to Paris. If they’re clever, the sons can now go to the Somborn This is a choice. Because what would’ve happened particularly to the Jews of Alsace?

In Bordeaux, they’re far more integrated. But in our Alsace, if you have a clever son, what do you dream of with that clever son? You don’t dream of the Somborn before this, it’s beyond imagination. You dream of Yeshiva, you live according to the old ways. But now with the French Revolution, despite the reign of terror, despite the horror, nevertheless, in theory, Jews can live where they choose, educators they choose, they have freedom to go into various trades and professions. So that’s the theory. However, now let’s come to the but. Can we see the next slide, please? The Battle of Austerlitz, December 1805. As Napoleon Bonaparte is returning from Austerlitz, he passes through Alsace, and he is met by some of the burghers of Alsace who are very worried about the Jews living there. They say, “We’re all in debt to the Jews.” And more than that, the deputy, can we see the next picture please, Judi. Jean Francois Rewbell, who is a deputy in the assembly. He is a lawyer. He’s a brilliant lawyer. He was, I think William was saying the other day, “A disproportionate number of members of the legislature.” Of course, who were lawyers just as they are today in the British Parliament. I’m not making any other comments. He was elected a deputy to the estates general by the Third Estate.

He was a brilliant orator. And during the revolution, he was very zealous at the trial of Louis XVI. He was a member of the directory by 1795, and he was one of those who engineered the annexation of the Rhineland, which of course brought into France people like the Marx family. He kept a low profile in the Reign of Terror. But as the Reign of Terror petered out, he actually became president of the Republic. Now he is going to oppose citizens’ rights for Alsatian Jews. He’s a powerful man, and he is against it. Can we see the quote, please? This is what he said. He had spoken out against Jewish emancipation. “It is necessary to defend a numerous, industrious and honest class of my unfortunate compatriots who are oppressed and ground down by those cruel hoards of Africans who have infested our region.” Now, what is Napoleon going to do about it? He has a very disturbing situation in Strasbourg. He’s been given this anti-Jewish petition, claiming that whole class of his subjects are being ruined by their Jewish creditors. So because after the French Revolution, the peasants had been given the opportunity to acquire land previously owned by the nobility. But in many cases, the loans had been financed by Jewish money lenders, and there’d been a series of crop failures combined with the conscription of so many men into the French Revolutionary armies.

So by 1806, the peasants have fallen into terrible debt. So Napoleon has to solve the problem. And Napoleon, remember, the central power of the state, “I am master of my own state. I want to know everything that’s happening in my state.” So he declares a one year moratorium on all the debts owed to Jews. So in a way, this undercuts all the principles of equality. But what Napoleon decides to do, he is going to convene an Assembly of Notables. He wants to find out exactly what is happening with the Jews of France. And the man, can we come on to, let’s have a look at some of Napoleon’s. Now, Napoleon discusses the Jews, and it’s important that you see these quotes. This is in a council of state. “The Jews are a state within a state, and the keys of France, [Alsace],” remember, it’s borderland, “must not be allowed to fall into a nation of spies.” You see, this is a problem. He doesn’t know if the Jews can ever be part of France. Can we see another quote, please? So what he’s going to do, sorry, he convenes an Assembly of Notables. Can we go on Judi?

Now this is a man called Abraham Furtado. He is going to be the head of the assembly. So if you remember when we looked last week, the Malesherbes commission, he was one of the leaders of that. He was a Sephardi Jew. The rabbis from Alsace said the problem with him is he understood his Bible through Voltaire. Who was he? You can see he’s a sophisticated Frenchman. He’d been born in London. He came from a very wealthy family of traders. He’d been born in London in 1756. His family were Portuguese conversos. He was born posthumously because his father had been killed in the terrible Lisbon earthquake. His mother then moved to Bayonne and then to Bordeaux. And outwardly, she begins to practise Judaism. Now, he has a very good mercantile career. I’ve already mentioned how so many of the Jews living in Bordeaux were sophisticated merchants. He was very financially secure. So consequently, he pursues intellectual interests. He’s fascinated by the new sciences. He’s fascinated by philosophy. He’s a wealthy man and he is welcomed at the salons in Paris and in Bordeaux. So he’s very much part of the intellectual life of France. Don’t forget, those of you who come from Anglo-Saxon countries, the French and the Germans are far more interested in public intellectuals, I’d suggest to this day, the Anglos are.

So he was exiled in 1793. He didn’t want to be involved in the revolution. He returns after the Reign of Terror. And when the assembly, when Napoleon calls his Assembly of Notables, he was elected president. He’s going to act as a speaker, and he’s going to draw up the resolutions. He knew Napoleon personally and had actually intervened with Napoleon to help Jews in trouble. So he’s a very, very powerful individual. But when Napoleon caused this Assembly of Notables, can you just imagine, can we go back to the picture of the Assembly of Notables, please, Judi, if you don’t mind? Because think about it, it’s convened by the emperor of the French. Napoleon is now emperor. He is calling the Jews, not just from France, but from the countries he has conquered. So Jews would come from Alsace, they’d come from the Rhineland, they’d come from the Italian states. There would’ve been rabbis, but there would also have been wealthier people, community leaders. And there must have been an incredible sense of entitlement that the emperor of the French, the great Napoleon has now noticed us. What happened to Furtado? Because I may as well tell you now. After Napoleon returned from Elba, he refused the appoint. He was made vice mayor of Bordeaux, but he didn’t want to be involved. But when Louis XVIII is restored in 1818, he respects that and he becomes vice mayor of Bordeaux. So he was a royalist, but he felt Napoleon had gone too far. So Napoleon convenes the Assembly of Notables.

And who is the person who is his main man who’s going to control the assembly? It’s a man called Count Louis-Mathieu Mole. Now he’s a very important figure. He is basically Napoleon’s man on Jewish affairs, so an important figure. He was heavily involved with the assembly and later on involved with the French, Sanhedrin. And initially he was very wary about Jewish emancipation but developed a good friendship with Abraham Furtado which influenced him. He goes on to be Minister of Justice in 1813. He had a very high profile. And now Louis XVIII, he managed to ride the world. His father had been, giving him a bit of family background, his father was president of parliament, actually was executed in the Reign of Terror. And his mother took him to England and to Switzerland. Remember, he’s an aristocrat. He returned to France. He’s part of the Paris Salons. He was clever. And when he was a young man, remember Napoleon had met Josephine at one of these salons.

A volume of his essays attracted Napoleon’s attention. Remember, Napoleon was a genius, and he joined his staff on the Council of State. So he’s already Napoleon’s advisor on Jewish affairs. Later on, he becomes Minister of Justice. Ironically, he survives Napoleon’s downfall. And Louis XVIII confirmed his appointment as Director General and made him a peer of France. So in 1830, don’t forget that one of the issues we’re going to have to deal with with France, which both William and I will be spending a lot of time on, is the French could not make up their minds in the 19th century whether they wanted a monarchy or a republic, and it kept on changing. So these kind of characters are going to have to be incredibly wary and incredibly smart and slippery to survive. In 1830, he becomes minister of foreign affairs. In 1839, he becomes prime minister of France, 1836, I beg your pardon. And in 1839, he becomes a member of the academy for say, very important, the most prestigious intellectual organisation in France, the 40 Immortals. So he dies on his family estate in 1850. What we can say about him, he is the supreme survivor. He’s absolutely brilliant at it.

Now, so Napoleon already, we know he has certain prejudices. But what happens is this. On Saturday, July the 26th, 1806, on a Saturday, 112 notables including 15 rabbis meet and they convene at the Hotel Deville in Paris. As I said, Furtado is president. And I’m quoting now from a man called Pasque who was one of Napoleon’s three commissioners there, and he records in his memoirs, “It soon became clear that the Portuguese Jews were suspect to all their co-religionists who considered them as apostates.” It’s because obviously the sophisticated Jews of Bordeaux. And he says, “Furtado was more suspect than anyone else.” The rabbis of Alsace and those of the former contact of Avignon whose knowledge brought ‘em to the forefront said with their president again, “He had only learned the Bible in Voltaire.” So what the assembly have to do is to actually answer 12 questions. These are the famous 12 questions. And Count Mole, what he actually says. He actually says to the Jews, “To the Jews as individuals, everything; to corporeal Israel, nothing.” So what Count Mole sets out in these 12 questions, can a Jew be loyal to the state? And fascinating, because these 12 questions, they really are the rules of citizenship.

And remember, Napoleon also said, “To expel the Jews would be a sign of weakness. To reform them, a sign of strength.” But really the notion is if you don’t give me the answers I want, what will our fate be? And remember, they’ve already had freedom in France. So this is heady wine. This is very heady wine for the Jews of France. So the first question. Now, I really want you to be able to answer this yourselves. Should be able to, you know, I’m sure many of you can. Is it lawful for Jews to marry several women? Now, important to remember that they had already been, both in our Alsace and in Bordeaux, divorces, court cases, where Jews had come before, particularly Jewish women had come, not many, but a few cases where they’d come before the civil authorities. Remember, we now have secular civil authorities in France to try and get divorces. So Napoleon now needs to find out what he really wants to know. Is there anything in Jewish religious practise which stops you being loyal to France? Is there anything that takes away from me as the leader of France?

So the first question, can a Jew have more than one wife? Is it lawful for Jews to marry several women? Now, please don’t forget that there are 15 rabbis on the assembly, and they want to make sure that the questions are answered carefully. Abraham Furtado who is totally enruptured by Napoleon, he wants Napoleon to have the answers that will give them France. Got to remember, for the Sephardim in particular, they’re walking the world now. The wealthy Sephardim can go to the salons of Paris. There are no more restrictions on their Jewishness. This is heady wine. And one of the issues, and I find this a fascinating one if you think back over Jewish history, if you think back, particularly in the Christian world, the humiliations, the fact that Jews had been pushed into artificial occupation patterns. The fact that they’d lived that separate lives, they still would’ve been pretty sure that their culture was supreme. But when they emerged in the modern world, has that world passed them by? And I often think this when I wander the streets of Berlin or Paris or Vienna. And of course, is there one of us who hasn’t visited Paris, who doesn’t believe in the seduction of Paris?

Can you just imagine what it must have been like? Jews coming up from our Alsace, coming up from Bordeaux, seeing the arts, the architecture, the music. Look, they’re a tiny percentage of the population, but the other problem, and that is going to become a problem. They’re going to explode into modernity. Just as they do in Vienna, just as they do in Berlin, so they do in Paris. They’re at the forefront of modernity. But the thing you need to know as we go through this, the 19th century in France, is that France is not one nation, it’s two nations. Remember republic, monarchy. And that nation is divided in two ways. There is still the dream of the republic, and the ideas of the enlightenment and liberalism. But on the other side there is the Catholic church, there is the monarchy, there is the army, and there is conservatism. The Jews are going to be seen as the arbiters of modernity. And also the Catholic church is going to have a terrible problem with Jewish emancipation. So let’s go back to the question, is it lawful for Jews to marry several women? Well, you should all be able to answer this. We know that when certain Jews from Yemen and Aiden came to Israel in 1948, there were a few who did have more than one wife, but the answer they can give Rabbi Gershom’s degree, if you remember Rabbi Gershom, they can say quite openly that since Rabbi Gershom and the Synod of Vehm, they are going to have the practise of European society, Jews can only have one wife.

Now, Rabbi Gershom’s decision is considered by many to be the only instance when biblical law or an established custom deriving from the Bible has been reversed by a rabbinic ruling, which is fascinating. Now, and I’m sure we’ve got some Bible scholars onboard who might be able to give more information on that. Question two, is divorce allowed by the Jewish religion? Is divorce valid when not pronounced by courts of justice and by virtue of laws that contradict the French code? Okay, can anyone answer that for me? I’m giving you a minute to get going. You don’t have to, I’ll read the answers. Okay, “Repudiation is the answer,” and they say, “is allowed by the law of Moses, but it’s not valid if not previously pronounced by the French code.” This is a bit of a fudge because, of course, we know that, I mean, for example, in England, when you marry in a synagogue, you of course automatically are married according to English law. But there’s still a problem on divorce because if a husband refuses to give a religious woman a divorce, she still has a problem even if she has a divorce civilly.

But the answer they give, “Repudiation is allowed by the law of Moses, but it’s not valid if not previously pronounced by the French code.” And they go on to say, “In the eyes of every Israelite, without exception, submission to the prince is the first of duties. It is a principle generally acknowledged among them that in everything relating to civil or political interests, the law of the state is the supreme law. Before they were admitted in France to share the rights of all citizens, and when they lived under a particular legislation which set them at liberty to follow their religious customs, they had the ability to divorce their wives but is extremely rare to see it put into practise. Since the revolution, they have acknowledged no other laws on this head but those of the empire. At this epoch, when they were admitted to the rank of citizens, the rabbis and the principal Jews appeared before the municipalities of their respective places of abode and took an oath to conform in everything to the laws and to acknowledge no other rule on civil marriage.” So basically they give Napoleon the answer he wants. Third question, interesting question. Can a Jewess marry a Christian or a Christian woman, a Jew, or can the Jews only marry amongst themselves? Now this is an absolutely critical question, bearing in mind there are rabbis present, but see how it’s framed. Can a Jewess marry a Christian or a Christian woman, a Jew? Don’t forget there is civil marriage in France.

So yes they can, they can. But would a rabbi sanction a union? And in this one, the rabbis came out quite strongly. So I’m going to give you the full answer, which starts off in a rather interesting way. “The law does not say that a Jewess cannot marry a Christian nor a Jew, a Christian woman, nor does it state that the Jews can only marry amongst themselves. The only marriage is expressly forbidden by the law are those with the seven Canaanite relations with Ammon and Moab and with the Egyptians. The prohibition is absolute concern in the seven Canaanite nations. With regard to Ammon and Moab, it is limited according to many Talmudist, to the men of those nations and does not extend to the women. It is even thought that these last would’ve embraced the Jewish religion. As to Egyptians, the prohibition is limited to the third generation. This prohibition generally applies only to nations in idolatry.” Now, by this time, I would imagine the commissioner’s present, taking the minutes, would’ve wanted to shoot themselves because frankly, how many Moabites and Ammonites were there in Paris? But I like the way they began the argument. This is pure Talmudic. “The prohibition, in general, only applies to nations in idolatry. The Talmud declares formally that modern nations are not to be considered as such since they worship like us, the God of heaven and earth.”

Now this is quite complicated, and I’m going to raise a very, very difficult issue. Is Christianity a religion of idolatry? I’m not going to go any further on that. There has been a big debate, but of course today the majority of rabbanim would agree that it is not a religion of idolatry. But it is a contentious issue if you think about the worship of the Trinity and also the idolization of the Virgin Mary, and the way churches are decorated. So it’s always good to be slightly controversial. “Accordingly,” they go on to say, “there’ve been several periods intermarriages between Jews and Christians in France, in Spain and Germany. These marriages were sometimes tolerated and sometimes forbidden by the laws of those sovereigns. Unions of this kind are still found in France, but we cannot deny that the opinion of the rabbis is against these marriages.”

According to their doctrine, “Although the religion of Moses has not forbidden the Jews from intermarrying with nations not of their religion, yet is marriage, according to the Talmud, requires religious ceremonies called, 'Kedoshim’ with a benediction used in such cases, no marriage can be religiously valid unless these ceremonies have been performed. This could not be done towards persons who would not both of them consider these marriages as sacred. And in that case, the married couple could separate without the religious divorce, they would then be considered as married civilly, but not religiously, such as the opinion of the rabbis members of this assembly. In general, they will be no more inclined to bless the union of a Jewess with a Christian or a Jew with a Christian woman. Then Catholic priests themselves would be disposed to sanction unions of this kind. The rabbis acknowledge, however, the Jew who marries a Christian woman does not cease to be considered as a Jew by his brethren.” So they give an answer. And this time I think you would agree that the rabbis held their ground on this particularly difficult one. Could we go on to the second section please, Judi? Ah, this is wonderful. “In the eyes of Jews, are Frenchmen considered as brothers or strangers?” “Love ye therefore, the strangers,” said the Israelites, “for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. Respect and benevolence towards strangers are enforced by Moses, not as an exhalation to the practise of social morality only but as an obligation imposed by God himself.” And basically, of course, I believe “love ye the stranger because he was strangers in the land of Egypt,” maybe someone knows the answer to this. I believe that Robert Wistrich’s told me, and I have never counted, I admit it that it appears 36 times, but I could be wrong. I’d be awfully grateful if you can let me know that, somebody could let me know.

They go on to say, “A religion which makes the duty of loving the stranger, which enforces the practise of social virtues, must surely require its followers should consider their fellow citizens of brethren.” And basically they go on to say, “How could they not consider them otherwise? There, exists even between the Jew and Christian. A tie which abundantly compensates for religion. It is the tie of gratitude. This sentiment was first excited us by the mere grant of toleration. It has been increased these 18 years by new favours. Yes, France is our country, all Frenchmen are our brothers. And this glorious title, by raising a son to our own esteem becomes a short pledge that we shall never cease to be worthy of it.” You see, they’re now saying, “We are Frenchmen of the Jewish religion.” What this means is they are giving up all notions of nationhood. Question five is quite easy. Frenchmen are their brothers. So it’s got to be exactly the same. Question six, do the Jews born in France and treated by the law as French citizens acknowledge France as their country? Are they bound to defend it? Are they bound to obey its laws and to follow all the provisions of the civil code?

That is a wonderful question, isn’t it? That is the citizenship question. Now, and the answer in this way. Basically Jeremiah 29, when he exhorts the Jews who live in Babylon to treat Babylon as their own country, although they were only to remain in its 70 years, he tells them, and I’m quoting now, “He exhorts them to till the ground, to build houses, to sow and to plant.” His recommendation was so much attended to that Ezra says that when Cyrus allowed them to return, only 42,000 left, and that number was mostly composed of the poor.“ So basically, we know only about 10% went back. Could you go back Judi to the, thank you. And they go on to say, and I want you to listen to this very carefully. "The love of the country is in the heart of Jews, a sentiment so natural, so powerful, and so consonant to their religious opinions that a French Jew considered himself in England as amongst strangers, even though he may be amongst Jews, and the same is the case with English Jews in France. To such a pitch is this sentiment carried out amongst them that during the last war, French Jews have been seen fighting desperately against other Jews, the subjects of countries then at war with France.” This is the crux. “We are Frenchmen, we are more at home with other Frenchmen than we are with Jews living in England, Jews living anywhere else.”

So that is the answer they give. Can we go on Judi, please? Now this is all about Napoleon and power. He wants to know who appoints the rabbis, what police jurisdiction do the rabbis have, what judicial power do they exert. And other forms of this election requested by the law or sanctioned by custom. Now, of course this is very easy. The rabbis, it’s different methods depending on communities and they say, of course, they exercise no police jurisdiction, which isn’t strictly true because we know that in Poland, there were certain occasions when a harem, not only harem, but Jews would have the ability to imprison. If you remember, the Council of the Four Lands under the Polish kings had an incredible amounts of power, and Jews were imprisoned by other Jews. And are these forms of election requested by their law? No, it’s custom. So that was easy. Now let’s go to the next one. Are the professions, which are provision, forbidden by law? There are none. And the answer given, this is from the Talmud. “The father who does not teach a profession to his child raise him up to be a villain.” Does the law of the Jews forbid them to take usury from their brothers?

They talk about this. The Hebrew word “Neshek” has been improperly translated by the word usury. In the Hebrew language, it means interests of any kind and not usurious interest. It cannot then be taken in the meaning now given to the word usury. Question 12, does it forbid to more allow them to take usury from strangers? This is completely irrelevant now. Why? Because we are all brothers. So Napoleon gets the answers he wants, and then what he decides to do, and bearing in mind at the same time that he is going to be involved in the wars with Russia. And if you think cynically about this, the Jews live to the west of Russia in the Pale of Settlement, what becomes known as the Pale of Settlement, they control much of the lines of supply. Is it going to be in Napoleon’s interest to do something that is extraordinary? And that is to create a Grand Sanhedrin. When was the Grand Sanhedrin last thought of? The Grand Sanhedrin was last thought about when? Before the destruction of the Second Temple. This is so evocative. Here you have the emperor of the French actually saying, “I am going to convene a Grand Sanhedrin. I’m going to invite all the Jews in.

I’m going to allow you to ratify your decisions under French law.” They sent shockwaves, and also they were told to spread the news of the Grand Sanhedrin, and he wanted 70 elders to be there like the old Grand Sanhedrin, the homework had be done brilliantly. And this is Count Mole summoning the convention. And he says, “The Jews exposed to the contempt of nations, and not infrequently to the adverse of princes, have never as yet been treated with justice. Their customs and their practises kept them apart from society. Now we are going to change that. They have always attributed the ill conduct and the vices laid to the humiliating laws that oppress them.” And he goes on to say, “The Great Sanhedrin, according to ancient custom, will be composed of 70 members, exclusive of the President. Two thirds shall be rabbis. And among them, in the first place, those among you who have approved the answers.” So the rabbis, the Assembly of Notables gives Napoleon the answers he wants. Count Mole is not too sure about it, but it’s good enough. And consequently, as a response, the Grand Sanhedrin, and we are going to see, I want to now read what Abraham Furtado thought about it because he was over the moon about it. “Blessed be forever by the name of the Lord God of Israel, who was placed on the throne of France on the kingdom of Italy, a prince after his heart.”

And they go on to say that this is everything to them, that they’re going to be scissors of France, they’re going to give their loyalty to France, and it’s going to be absolutely extraordinary. So basically our talk on Thursday about the Grand Sanhedrin on what happens as a response to that because Napoleon is then going to squeeze. He’s going to give and then he is going to take away, and he’s going to issue what’s known as the infamous decree, which is not going to be repealed until 1818, but more about that on Thursday. So really this is the beginnings of the real plunging of Jews into European society. Just as back in the time of The Fronde, dear old Henry IV said Paris was worth a mass. Many Jews are going to be desperate to become Frenchmen. We’re going to see a lot of conversions just as we will see in Germany to try and remove the stain. And of course, I think it’s very difficult in the light of what we know happens to understand. And I think we have to make that, we have to make that leap because it must have been heady wine. Remember, they are being emancipated under the ideas of the enlightenment. Inverted commas, “The pariah people now have a chance to be part of France.”

So shall we have a look at the questions, Judi?

Q&A and Comments:

Martin says, “Power attempts to corrupt an absolute power.” He thinks it’s a letter to Bishop Creighton.

Q: This is Shelly. “Why didn’t people like Marx’s father convert before Napoleon, wouldn’t have got the same entry to educational professions early?”

A: No, because it’s Napoleon that breaks down the ghetto wars. You know, before that, Jews were in ghettos. And besides, they would’ve been pretty sure their culture was superior. If you look at the Marx family, both Karl Marx’s parents, his mother was the daughter of a rabbi, the granddaughter of a rabbi. His father was from a rabbinic tradition going all the way back to Poland in the 1500s. And his mother’s family were fascinating. Another one of her family in Holland set up the Phillips Empire. So the point was, Heinrich Marx’s brother was the rabbi of Trier, so no.

This is from Adrian. “In his dictated ache, Napoleon fled to a ship without elite and didn’t look back, and didn’t look after his troops. Some troops arrived in Jaffa suffering from the Black Plague.” Thanks for that, Adrian. He’s always a mine of information.

This is from Peter. “The Enlightenment created new issues of identity. Societies can be based on shared ideologies. With the development of empiricism, people increasingly considered idealism a flawed form of reasoning and many can no longer base their identity on ideology. They identify with empiricism, a way of thinking, not a set of beliefs.”

This is interesting, very interesting. “Many of my ancestors stopped seeing themselves as Jews because they considered Judaism a religious ideology. They soon learned, many considered Judaism a race, not a religion. Many of my ancestors who were victims of the Holocaust did not consider themselves Jews. Identity becomes more complex and conflicted. I consider myself racially Jewish, but an atheist. I see atheism as much as a fact of my heritage as my Jewish race. I do not strongly identify with my race because it involves no effort or choice. Not a crime or an accomplishment. I choose to identify with empiricism. Being a Jew in the 21st century is more complex and conflicted than being a Jew before The Enlightenment.” Totally agree with you, Peter. Totally agree with you. I mean, I think the word “Jew” is such a complex identity today. Look, before The Enlightenment, they knew what they were. They were a nation in exile. They wouldn’t even have used that term. The word race was imposed on Jews in the 19th century as a reaction to a success story by people who suffered as a result of modernity. There was another group towards the end of the 19th century in the Maine who had tried acculturation, and they looked at the rise of anti-Semitism, which is a modern racial term and said, “Hold on a minute, we are a nation. This is the birth of Zionism.”

For many Jews, it’s a cultural affiliation. I know when I have my Seder, all sorts of people come. Many of them are not in the least bit religious, but they see themselves as culturally Jewish. They are atheists or agnostic. I always prefer the term agnostic. And they see themselves just as culturally Jewish, and they like the smell of chicken soup. Is it cultural? Is it peoplehood? If I was asked to identify the term “Christian,” I think it’s much more simple. It means you believe in Jesus. The term Jew is complicated, and we will argue about it for a long time. I mean, in the end, as you tragically say in your comments, many of your ancestors are victim of the Holocaust who didn’t consider themselves Jews. You see, Hitler believed in blood and race. So consequently, something like a half a million people who were murdered in the shoa as Jews were not locally Jewish anyway. And many of them, not only, I mean one of the interesting cases is Edith Stein, who the Catholic church beatified and wanted to canonise because they considered her as a Catholic martyr. She was actually murdered because she was a Jew. Her parents were Jewish. She converted to Catholicism and became a nun. But she was murdered because she had Jewish blood. This is the problem.

Q: “How can Rewbell described Jews as Africans?”

A: He’s using language that we would not use today because they come from the Middle East. And of course, Africa isn’t the Middle East. So basically, that is the language he used. Much of the language of the 18th and 19th century is unacceptable.

Yes, Rita is complimenting Peter Paige, as did I.

Q: Excellent, Peter. “Were the Assembly of Notables in Paris?”

A: Yes, they were called to Paris, Markaryd. You can imagine what that did for them. It made them feel incredibly important. The emperor of the French. And it was much panoply. And of course, there’s portraits of the assembly of notables, you know, and for the first time, Jews are going to the salons and they can discuss the kind of ideas that Peter’s talking about. And many of them did become philosophers, and they became business people. Never forget that the Gallery Lafayette was created by Jews as was Monoprix. It’s fascinating if you, actually by the son-in-law of the chap who created the Gallery Lafayette. Later on, they’re all Aryanized. And then of course, even in the car business, Citroen, a third of the bankers. Look, they’re a tiny percent of the population, but a third of the bankers were Jewish. They plunk. You know, we will spend so much time trying to work out why you had this incredible success story. I like Isaiah Berlin’s explanation, which I’ve mentioned to you many times. The outsiders, it’s always the outsiders in society if they come from a strong cultural tradition. In Britain, the Hindu community are doing incredibly well now. But please don’t forget, the period I’m talking about, the only non-Christian minority of any number were Jews. There were very few Muslims, unless they were ambassadors. Africans who’d been brought over as slaves, they were converted to Christianity. So this is the non-Christian minority.

Q: “In Alexandria, 2000 years ago, women were allowed to divorce.”

A: Now that’s interesting, Mike. Were they influenced by by Greek law? I would imagine by hedonist thought. Yes?

Q: “Why did the assembly meet on Saturday?”

A: I’ve got to find out an answer to that.

Q: “Is divorce okay under Napoleon?”

A: Yes, Shelly. It wouldn’t have been allowed by the Catholic church. You’ve got to remember, the French Revolution was secular. You had civil marriage and civil divorce. They started a new calendar. It’s Napoleon who signs a deal with the church, the Concord Act. He understands power, Napoleon. But he pays all the priests, he’s going to control them. So of course, one of the whole issues in France is how powerful should the church be? And one of the problems was that, for much of the 19th century, from 1845 to 1878, you had one of the most reactionary popes in history. Pious IX on the papal throne. And he’s the man who came up with doctrine of Immaculate Conception, that the Virgin Mary herself was born without sex and sin because they’re fighting liberalism, they’re fighting The Enlightenment, they’re fighting the forces of modernity. It’s this movement to hold it back. Racism, you know that the antisemitism, it’s to hold back modernity. Think Wagner, think the contents of his operas. A lot of people suffered as a result of modernity. The Jews in the main, they took like ducks to water.

Q: Who do you think were the main exponents of modern art?

A: There were some practitioners, but the majority of them, they were the art gallery owners. Modern music? Jews. They’re outside the tradition. We’ll be spending a lot of time on these ideas.

This is Mike Dehan. “Both the men in Christianity in our religion, after the Romans restricted woman’s rights, Rabbi Gershom also states head covering worn when praying, learning and eating. When men went to abroad on business, they normally made a statement that the wife was free after a terminal time if they didn’t return.” That is very interesting. Oh, I do love lockdown. There are always people on it who know so much. Thank you, Mike.

Q: “Which Christianity, Russian, Greek Orthodox or Roman Catholic?

A: Some worship icons although they use statues as symbol or means of communicating.” It’s complicated. Look, Judaism does say that Christianity is not a religion of idolatry. And presumably that would apply to all. But there are some rabbis and in fact, Nachmanides is very interesting on this in the disputation.

Q: “Was Russian orthodoxy?”

A: I am not a scholar of this, so it’s all second-hand sources I’m reading. It’s very interesting though.

Oh, this is Caroline. “Yes it is 36 times.” Thank you. I gave it to her. Thank you.

“So Wistrich was right.” He usually was.

“Esau is the progenitor of the Christian world, Edomites, so we are fuss brothers.” Thanks Rose. Thank you, Sharon. “

Q: Did France ask such questions of any other minority?”

A: There was no sizable other minority. They’d already emancipated the Huguenots, the Protestants. So it was for the Jews.

This is from Mary. “My mother’s family was from Alsace and some of them still live there.”

Q: “Why, if the Jews are given rights under Napoleon, do they need to convert afterwards?”

A: It’s a very, very important question, Shelly. In the areas that Napoleon had conquered, once that is taken back by the reactionary princes, all the rights or everything awarded by Napoleon is taken away. In France, the rights awarded by Napoleon, I’m going to talk about it on Thursday. They’re going to be changed somewhat by him, but it’s never stopped. But many of them fell so in love with France. They wanted to take the final step.

Q: “If there had been a Jewish state, do you think the questions and answered would’ve been different?”

A: That is such an important question, Donny. I think the tragedy was that for the majority of Jews, they fell in love with Europe. And what happened in Russia that where the largest number of Ashkenazi Jews lived? In the end, when things became so bad under the czars, between 1881 and 1914, the majority of them did not go to Palestine. Where did they go? The majority went to America followed by England. And about 150,000 went to France, by the way. Another 150,000 went to Germany. Only between 1881 and 1914 in the first and second Aliyah, 65,000 went to Palestine. They were ideological. So nationalism, Jewish nationhood. And don’t forget, many of the rabbonim were against the notion of reconstituted Palestine as a Jewish state. Why? Because only the mashiah. You can make the case, and this is a very complicated one, that the rabbonim actually excised messianism. Because what happened with Bar Kokhba? Led to destruction. We are such a complicated people. Now, the majority of Jews do live in the Jewish state. There are more Jews living in Israel today than in America. Of the 14 million Jews in the world, I think it’s about 8 million in Israel now, 8 million Jews. Of course there are also the Arab citizens of Israel, but I believe it’s about 8 million of Jews live there. So, but why? You know, there’s another very deep and painful argument that it was the shoah. The Shoah was the final change in Jewish identity. Not just what happened in the shoah but what happened in years 45 to 48. And also what the world did not do to save Jews. So it’s an important question.

“Define culturally Jewish.” Shelly, I wish I could. Culturally Jewish, you take on aspects of Jewish culture, Jewish music, Jewish literature, every aspect of Jew being a Jew. If it’s even just Jewish cooking, you have some sort of affiliation. My mother used to say, she was a cardiac Jew, she felt it. Bless her.

Now Elliot’s saying something interesting. He said, “The definition Christian has certainly changed in the 21st century.” He said it’s more cultural than theological.

That’s interesting. Now this is interesting. Bill is being quite strong. “Judaism is a belief. I’m a Jew because I believe in the tenets of Judaism.” What about those Jews who are Zionists, who live in Israel but are atheists, are they not Jews? It’s complex, Bill. I don’t come down on the side of anything. I’m just saying there are lots and lots of identities.

This is from Abigail. “Sadly, many Jews have no awareness of the richness of the Jewish tradition that covers almost every aspect of knowledge and psychology. A good Yeshiva education will arrive at any university education for this reason.” Abigail, look, all I can tell you is the most rounded individuals I’ve known in my life are those who’ve been to Yeshiva and then to secular universities. I think the three cleverest people I’ve ever known have that kind of background. But it’s a complicated story, isn’t it?

And oh, this is from Jonathan, “The Mirage fighter plane, which arguably won the six day war of Israel was developed by converted Jew Marcel Bloch who changed his name to Dassault.” Yeah.

Ellan Cowe. “On the issue of a Jew, he says it’s uncomplicated answer. There’s Judaism’s reform Orthodox conservative.” The problem is, Ellan, the other definition that was put on us in the 19th and 20th century, race. I have no trust with it, but a lot of people see us as a racial group. And don’t forget antisemitism today. How do they see us? They see us as an international community with loyalty to each other. So I agree with you on one level and never be defined by your enemies. But I think there is nationalism, and there also is peoplehood.

This is Abigail. “My nieces and nephews now participate in Yeshiva education before they attend university. That gives them an excellent grounding.”

Q: “What would’ve happened if Napoleon had not been satisfied with the answers?”

A: Very important question, Malcolm. Count Mole believed it was that they’d given him the answers he wanted. But Napoleon, remember what he said? “To expel the Jews was a sign of weakness. To reform them is a sign of strength.” So he intended and they knew that, he intended.

Oh, Avin, thank you. “There are 6,500,000 Jews in Israel now.” So it’s overtaken America. But if there are 14 million Jews in the world, then there are still a few more living in the diaspora.

“Wikipedia says 6.8 million in Israel, but 7.6 in America.” I believe that’s changed, Mark. Maybe someone could check that for me.

Oh, I like that from Josie. The last comment, “It’s in the DNA.”

And Jeremy said, “In the herring in Decembers.” I love it. Anyway, I will thank you very much, Judi.

• [Judi] Yeah.

• God bless everyone.