Introductory: The Antecedents of Crypto-Judaism

INTRODUCTORY

The Antecedents of Crypto-Judaism

CRYPTO-JUDAISM, in one form or another, is as old as the Jew himself. In Hellenistic days, some weaklings endeavored to conceal their origin in order to escape ridicule when participating in the athletic exercises. Under the Roman rule, there was wide-spread subterfuge to avoid the payment of the special Jewish tax, the Fiscus Judaicus, which had been instituted after the fall of Jerusalem; and the historian Suetonius gives a vivid account of the indignities inflicted upon an old man of ninety in order to discover whether or no he was a Jew. The official attitude, as crystallized in the dicta of the Rabbis, was plain. A man might, and should, save his life if the occasion demanded it, by any means—murder, incest, or idolatry alone excepted. Only when the alternative was to commit one of these three offences against divine and human law was death to be preferred. However, this aphorism applied exclusively to cases where positive action was demanded: the concealment of Judaism, unaccompanied by any formality, was another matter. Rigorists indeed insisted that a man should refuse even to make a change in his garments, if it were demanded as a measure of religious oppression. Yet such stern devotion to principle could not be expected from all persons. Traditional Jewish law, in fact, made special provision for cases when observance of ceremonial practices became impossible because of compulsion

(Ones), or in time of persecution (She‘at ha-Shemad). The theory was put to the test in late Talmudic times, in the fifth century, during the Zoroastrian persecution in Persia. This consisted, however, in enforced neglect of traditional observance rather than positive conformity to the dominant religion. Judaism was thus driven to some extent underground, regaining complete freedom only some years later.

A fresh phase in Jewish life had been entered with the growth of Christianity, which became supreme in Europe in the fourth century. The new faith, which claimed exclusive possession of religious truth, inevitably regarded proselytization as one of the greatest of moral obligations. The Church, indeed, officially condemned conversion by forcible means. It specifically disapproved of the application of such methods even to the laudable object of saving the souls of Jews. Baptisms so effected were generally held to be invalid. Thus Pope Gregory the Great (590–604), who set the example subsequently followed by the Catholic Church in its policy towards the stubborn adherents of the older faith, repeatedly condemned forcible conversions, although he eagerly welcomed proselytes secured by any other means. In this attitude, he was faithfully imitated by the majority of his successors. However, the papal injunctions were not infrequently disregarded. The theory, that conversion by force was uncanonical, was not indeed disputed. Instead, the Jews would be threatened with death or with expulsion, it being clearly understood that baptism would save them. It occasionally happened that they bowed to necessity, their acceptance of Christianity under such circumstances being regard-

ed as spontaneous. There had been a famous case of mass forced conversion at Magona (Mahon) in the island of Minorca, under the auspices of Bishop Severus, in 418. A similar episode took place at Clermont, in Auvergne, on the morrow of Ascension Day, 576; and, notwithstanding the intense disapproval of Pope Gregory, the example was followed elsewhere in France in the ensuing period. Fired by this example, in 629 King Dagobert ordered all the Jews of the country to accept baptism under pain of banishment. Almost immediately afterwards, his measure was imitated in the kingdom of Lombardy.

It is self-evident that conversions effected by such means must be insincere. Inevitably, the victims continued wherever possible to practice Judaism in secret, and took the first opportunity of reverting to their ancestral faith; there was a notable instance at the time of the persecutions in the Byzantine Empire, under Leo the Isaurian, in 723. The Church itself was fully conscious of this, doing all it could to prevent the continuance of relations between professing Jews and their renegade brethren, by whatever means their conversion had been secured. The Rabbis on their side were not behind-hand in recognizing the fact. They called these reluctant apostates anusim (“forced ones”), treating them very differently from deliberate renegades. One of the earliest utterances of rabbinic scholarship in Europe is a regulation of Gershom of Mayence, “The Light of the Exile” (c. 1000), prohibiting unkind treatment of forced converts who returned to the Jewish fold. His own son, indeed, had been among the victims of persecution; and, though he died a professing Christian, was mourned by

his father just as if he had remained a steadfast Jew. In the service of the Synagogue a special prayer found its way imploring the divine protection for all the House of Israel and the “Forced Ones” of Israel who were in peril by land and sea, not differentiating between the two categories. When the age of martyrdom began for medieval Jewry, with the Rhineland massacres at the period of the first Crusade (1096), many persons saved their lives by accepting baptism. Subsequently, with the sedulous encouragement and protection of Solomon ben Isaac of Troyes (“Rashi”), the great Franco-Jewish scholar, many of them returned to Judaism; though the ecclesiastical authorities looked black at the loss of these precious souls which had been won for the Church.1

The phenomenon of Marranism is more, however, than the commonplace occurrence of forcible conversion, followed frequently by the practice of Judaism in secret. Its essential element is that this clandestine religion is passed on from generation to generation. This is by no means a unique occurrence. Among the reasons given for the expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290 was that they persisted in seducing recent converts to return to the “vomit of Judaism.” Ancient Jewish authorities add that many children were kidnaped and sent to the northern part of the country, where they long continued their ancestral religious practices. To this fact, reports one chronicler, was due the readiness of the English to accept the Reformation, as well as their predilection for biblical names and certain dietetic peculiarities obtaining in Scotland. The tale is not quite so improbable as might appear on the surface: and it is interesting as an indication of how the phenomenon of the crypto-Jew

may sometimes appear in the most unlikely places. Similarly, for two hundred years at least after the expulsion of the Jews from the South of France, spiteful antiquaries were able to trace, in some outstanding noble families (which, they said, still practiced Judaism in the privacy of their homes), the blood of those who had preferred to remain in the country as professing Catholics.2

There are other parallels to the phenomenon of the Marrano which are even closer. The most remarkable of all is the story of the neofiti (neophytes) of Apulia, only recently brought to light after many centuries of oblivion. At the close of the thirteenth century, the Angevin rulers of the kingdom of Naples brought about a general conversion of the Jews in their dominions, centered about the city of Trani. Under the name of neofiti, these continued a crypto-Jewish existence for three centuries or more afterwards. Their secret fidelity to Judaism was one of the problems which led to the activity of the Inquisition in the kingdom of Naples in the sixteenth century. In February 1572, several were burned at the stake in Rome, including Teofilo Panarelli, a savant of some reputation. Others succeeded in escaping to the Balkans, where they joined the existing Jewish communities. Certain vague recollections of Judaism persist amongst their descendants in southern Italy down to the present day.

The phenomenon was by no means confined to the Christian world. Even now, there are communities of crypto-Jews of many centuries’ standing to be found in several parts of the Moslem world. The Daggatun of the Sahara continued Jewish practices long after their formal conversion to Islam, and traces of this have not

entirely died out among their offspring. The Donmeh of Salonica3 were the descendants of those adherents of the pseudo-Messiah, Sabbatai Zevi, who followed him into apostasy; and, while ostensibly conforming Moslems, they practice a Messianic Judaism in their homes. Further East, there are yet closer parallels. The religious persecutions in Persia in the seventeenth century and after left in the country, particularly at Meshed, many families who are punctiliously scrupulous in Jewish observance in private while outwardly devout adherents to the dominant faith. Many have fled to Afghanistan, Turkestan, and especially to Palestine: but a remnant still remains, numbering some hundreds of families, and known as Jedidim. Although they bear Moslem names, their real identity is an open secret. Regular bribery of the officials secures them freedom from molestation. Marriages before the Kadi according to Mohammedan law are repeated according to the Jewish ceremonial at home. Similarly, there are double funeral rites. Since they cannot maintain their own butchers, all of them are familiar with the method of slaughtering animals according to the traditional Jewish rite. They have underground prayer-houses, the entrances to which are guarded by women to prevent disturbance. They have no alternative but to keep their shops open on the Sabbath: but they avoid doing business by putting in charge a small child, who will say that his father is away, or else by asking such exorbitant prices that the purchaser will be discouraged. Near Khorasan there is another body of Jedid al-Islam, whose history is identical. Similar to them are the Tschola of Bokhara, officially converted

to Mohammedanism in the last century, but still largely Jewish in practice, and wholly so by descent.

The classical land of crypto-Judaism, however, is Spain. Here, the tradition was so protracted, and so general, that one almost suspects some predisposition to it in the very atmosphere of the country. As far back as the Roman period, the Jews of the Peninsula had been numerous and influential. Many of them, indeed, claimed to trace their descent from the aristocracy of Jerusalem, who had been carried into exile by Titus, or even by earlier conquerors. After the Barbarian invasions, in the fifth century, their position at first ameliorated; for the Visigoths embraced the Arian form of Christianity, and tended to favor the Jews both as strict monotheists and as an influential minority, whose support was worth conciliating. However, upon their conversion to Catholicism, they began to show the traditional zeal of the neophyte. The Jews were the first to suffer. In 589, with the accession of Reccared to the throne, the current ecclesiastical legislation began to be rigorously enforced against them in every detail. His immediate successors were not so intolerant; but from the accession of King Sisebut (612–620), a spirit of the utmost fanaticism prevailed. In 616, possibly at the instigation of the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, he issued an edict ordering the baptism of all the Jews of his kingdom, under the pain of banishment and the loss of all their property. According to Catholic authorities, ninety thousand embraced Christianity at this time. This cataclysm, known to the Jewish chroniclers of a later period as the “First Evil,” was the earliest of the great

disasters which punctuated the history of the Jews of Spain.

Down to the reign of Roderic, “the last of the Visigoths,” the tradition of persecution continued consistently, save for brief intermissions. Over a large part of the period, the practice of Judaism was utterly proscribed. Nevertheless, the moment governmental vigilance was relaxed, the recent converts seized the opportunity to revert to their ancestral religion. Successive Councils of Toledo, from the fourth to the eighteenth, devoted their energies to devising fresh methods to prevent backsliding. The association of neophytes with their former coreligionists was prohibited. The children of suspects were to be seized, to be brought up in an uncontaminated Christian atmosphere. The recent converts were forced to sign a declaration binding themselves to observe no Jewish rite in future; though they made an exception with respect to eating the flesh of the pig, which, they said, it was physically impossible for them to touch. In spite of all these provisions, the notorious infidelity of the recent converts and their descendants remained one of the great problems of Visigothic statesmanship down to the period of the Arab invasion in 711. The number of the Jews found in the country by the latter proves the utter failure of the conversionist attempts. The tradition of Marranism in the Peninsula had already emerged.4

With the coming of the Arabs, a Golden Age was initiated for the Jews of Spain; first in the Caliphate of Cordova, and after its fall (1012) in the minor kingdoms which sprang up on its ruins. The strength of Judaism in the Peninsula became immensely reinforced.

Its communities exceeded in numbers, in culture, and in wealth, those of any other country in the whole of the western world. The long tradition of tolerance was interrupted with the invasion of the Almoravides, at the beginning of the twelfth century. When the puritan Almohades, a North African sect, were summoned to the Peninsula in 1148 to check the threatening advance of the Christian powers, the reaction became drastic.5 The new rulers introduced to Spain the intolerance which they had already shown in Africa. The practice of Judaism or of Christianity was proscribed throughout those provinces which were still subject to Moslem rule, Most of the Jews fled to the Christian kingdoms of the north: and it is from this period that the hegemony of the communities of Christian Spain may be said to date. Large numbers were put to the sword or sold into slavery. A minority, however, followed the example set a few years previously by their brethren in northern Africa, outwardly embracing the religion of Islam. Yet in their hearts they remained steadfast. Once more, large parts of the Peninsula knew the phenomenon of insincere proselytes, paying lip service to the dominant faith, but in the privacy of their homes faithful to the traditions of Judaism. Their infidelity was notorious. In the African possessions at least of the Almohades, the recent converts were compelled to wear a distinguishing sign. One of the most distinguished Arab poets of the period, Abu-Ishak Ibrahim ibn Sahl of Seville, was of Jewish extraction, and returned to the religion of his fathers when his native city was recaptured by the Christians.6 Among the victims of the Almohadan persecution was Rabbi Maimon, son of Joseph, who left Cordova with

his family and, after a considerable period of wandering, found refuge in Fez. Here, Maimon wrote his famous Letter of Consolation to comfort his coreligionists in this time of affliction. However, it was possible to live in Morocco at this time only under the outward guise of Moslems; and it would appear that Maimon ben Joseph’s family, under the stress of circumstances, had to bow to necessity and do likewise. When, some little time later, a foreign rabbi replied in the negative to the inquiry of some Moroccan Jews as to whether it was permissible for them assume Islam in order to save their lives, he was rebuffed in a lengthy epistle by Maimonas famous son, Moses.7 In a closely reasoned torrent of invective, the latter demonstrated not only that such procedure was permissible, but also that for a man to imperil his life by acting otherwise would be a grievous sin; for the Moslems, unlike the Christians, required in such cases merely a formal declaration of conformity, without insisting upon the neglect of Jewish practices or the performance of any idolatrous act. This is not the place to discuss the ethical or the legal aspect of the problem. So much, however, may perhaps be said. A contemporary French or German Jew would not have spoken in this fashion. To the north of the Pyrenees, a spirit of greater fortitude prevailed. The Jews of the Rhineland, who “sanctified the name of God” to a man rather than abjure their faith, were more heroic, if less picturesque, than their Andalusian brethren.