What fed rage against Germany’s Jews? |

What fed rage against Germany’s Jews?

Amos Elon’s book “The Pity of It All: A Portrait of the German-Jewish Epoch, 1743-1933,” writes Steven J. Zipperstein in his 2002 New York Times review, “begins with the precocious young Moses Mendelssohn, soon to be the father of the Jewish Enlightenment, at the gates of mid-18th-century Berlin.”

Elon describes a small, sickly boy with an awkward stutter walking alone to Berlin, all but penniless, his few possessions in a satchel on his badly hunched back.

The “boy’s overall appearance ‘would have moved the cruelest heart to pity,’ claimed one contemporary,” reports Elon.

“In the fall of 1743,” writes Elon, “a fourteen-year-old boy entered Berlin at the Rosenthaler Tot, the only gate … through which Jews (and cattle) were allowed to pass.”

Explains Elon: “In 1743, the movements of Jews — many of whom were wandering peddlers — were tightly regulated and controlled. Only a limited number of rich Jews (and, occasionally, a scholar) were allowed to settle in Berlin, but peddlers were barred.”

Elon also says: “Jews requesting admission to Berlin, even for only a few days, were sternly interrogated as to their background and purpose. If temporarily admitted, they were verzollt , that is subject to a ‘commodity tax,’ as though they were merchandise, at the same rate as imported Polish oxen.”

Berlin’s gatekeepers, government documents say, were to “stop and register all incoming Jews, keep an eye on them during their stay, and expel the foreign ones.”

The gatekeepers’ log for 1743 includes this: “Today there passed six oxen, seven swine, and a Jew.”

Zipperstein describes Germany’s achievements and the upward trajectory of its Jews in the 19th century: “Jews in Germany emerged by midcentury as overwhelmingly middle class, and more so: by the early 20th century, their prominence in the arts, in literature, in psychoanalysis, in music and perhaps especially in the physical sciences meant that friends and foes alike took for granted some special Jewish penchant for intellect.”

Jews’ rising status “occurred in what was, or at least seemed by the late 19th century to be, Europe’s most cultivated, certainly its best-educated country. Germany had the world’s finest elementary school system, the highest literacy rate and the best universities; by 1913 more books were published annually in Germany than in any country in the world.”

And then, “the rapidity with which liberal Weimar was transmuted into the Third Reich.”

Those who began as hopeful and lived exemplary lives ended up mostly thwarted, or worse, murdered en masse by bigotries, avarice and resentment.

After a brief Gestapo jailing, Hannah Arendt, a German-born Jewish American political theorist, decided to leave Germany without proper travel documents. Her train out of Berlin sped south, the opposite direction taken two centuries earlier by Moses Mendelssohn on foot.

Asks Zipperstein: “What was it that existed, however unevenly beneath the surface, that fed into the murderous rage, the hunger for revenge and devastation that was Nazism?”

Ralph R. Reiland is associate professor of economics emeritus at Robert Morris University and a local restaurateur ([email protected]).

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.