JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

estrictions as are in force according to existing laws – shall
be abolished.” The first article of the decree enumerated in
nine subsections the categories of restrictions to be abolished
– both those in force throughout Russia and those
limited to localities or regions. In six articles (2–7), the decree
specified in great detail, giving dates of publication and numbers
in the legal codes, all the numerous laws discriminating
against Jews and members of other religions and nations.
Article 8 declared invalid all prior administrative orders issued
by civil or military authorities “which contained restrictions
in rights because of affiliation with any faith, religion, or
nation.” Inclusion of an itemization of anti-Jewish legislation
in the equality decree, reflecting the extent of Russian
discrimination and the struggle for emancipation, resulted
from the initiative and counsel of the Jewish Political Committee
(delegates of the Jewish parties and Jewish representatives
in the Duma), which provided this material for the
government. The policy of the antisemitic czarist Russian
govern-ment had compelled the Jews to act for themselves
in every sphere of life: legal defense, self-defense against pogroms,
founding schools and educating the masses, mutual
credit, professional training, emigration arrangements, and
political organization. The resulting “strengthening” of the
Jews’ ability to solve the problems of everyday life, together
with the widespread appeal of the Zionist movement, increased
Jewish cohesion to the point where it became a powerful
instrument in the fight for survival. A basic political demand
of Jewish political parties was “national *autonomy,”
expressing the collective character of Russian Jewry’s struggle
for emancipation.
THE BALTIC STATES. *Finland, *Estonia, *Latvia, and *Lithuania,
which all became independent after World War I, included
Jewish civic equality in their constitutions, because
the *League of Nations accepted them as members only after
committing themselves to providing for minority rights.
On Jan. 12, 1918, by granting emancipation in its constitution,
Finland abolished the prohibition against Jewish settlement
in force from 1806. This prohibition had been relaxed
only for a few Jewish soldiers, whose other rights were nevertheless
restricted, after their demobilization in 1865. The constitution
permitted all Jews living in the country for at least
five years prior to 1918 to become naturalized citizens.
Estonia’s constitution of 1919 promised the Jews full
equality. The law concerning cultural autonomy (Feb. 5, 1925)
granted the Jews the right to elect a national council to administer
their own schools, provide for their cultural needs,
and supervise the communal organizations.
In Latvia civic equality was promised in its constitution.
A special law on minorities (Oct. 8, 1919) granted the Jews,
among other minorities, extensive cultural autonomy. An official
appointed by the minority group was placed at the head
of its school network. With the abrogation of the constitution
in May 1934, the autonomous institutions of minorities were
also dissolved.
emancipation
The leader of the Lithuanian Paris peace delegation, Prof.
Voldemaras, informed the *Comité des Délégations, in a letter
of Aug. 5, 1919, that Lithuania would now promise the Jews
representation in the country’s legislative institutions, complete
autonomy in their internal affairs, legal status for their
autonomous institutions, recognition of the right to use their
mother tongue, and the appointment of a special minister for
Jewish affairs. The promises were ratified in the constitution
of 1922 and, to a large extent, in the constitution of 1928, even
though autonomous Jewish institutions in the meantime were
dissolved. With the dissolution of the Jewish National Council
and the Jewish Ministry in 1924, the Jewish community again
became merely a religious community.
MuSLiM STATES. In the Islamic world there was no emancipation
in the Western sense, neither as a public movement to
which was linked the Jewish desire for civic equality and participation
in the life of the state, nor as a reform movement
holding civic equality to be a sign of a new order. To a certain
extent, however, the civic equality granted to the Jews in the
Ottoman Empire may be considered “emancipation.” During
the 19th century the sultan twice, in 1839 and 1856, proclaimed
the civic equality of Jews and Christians, which represented
a great change in the attitude of the Islamic countries toward
“infidels.” The revolution incited by the Young Turks in 1908
resulted in the ratification of this equality. The number of Jews
who participated in the organizations of the Young Turks, and
in the political life of Turkey, was not inconsiderable. After
World I, Turkey signed a minorities treaty (1923), but, in the
letter of the Jewish notables to *Kemal Pasha of Feb. 6, 1926,
the Jews officially waived these rights for fear that they be accused
of separatism. *Yemen, which won its independence
between the two World Wars, never granted legal emancipation
to Jews. Other Arab states (*Egypt, *Iraq, *Syria, *Libya,
*Morocco, *Algeria, *Tunisia) granted Jewish emancipation
officially, but took it away in reality after the Israel War of Independence
through restrictions, persecutions, and humiliations
as Jew-hatred became part of the fight against Zionism
and Israel.
Bibliography: Graetz, Hist; Dubnow, Hist; J. Katz, Jewish
Emancipation and Self-Emancipation (1986); idem, Out of the Ghetto:
The Social Background of Jewish Emancipation, 1770–1870 (1973); S.W.
Baron, The Modern Age, in: L. Schwarz (ed.), Great Ages and Ideas of
the Jewish People (1956), 315–484; Baron, Social, 2 and 3 (1937); idem,
Die Judenfrage auf dem Wiener Kongress (1920); idem, in: Journal of
Modern History, 10 (1938); idem, in: Diogenes, 29 (1960), 56–81; R.
Mahler, Jewish Emancipation – A Selection of Documents (1941); B.
Dinur, Be-Mifneh ha-Dorot (1955), 9–68, 231–354; H.M. Sachar, Course
of Modern Jewish History (1958); D. Rudavsky, Emancipation and Adjustment
(1967); M.A. Meyer, The Origins of the Modern Jew (1967); S.
Ettinger, in: Scripta Hierosolymitana, 7 (1961), 193–219; idem, in: H.H.
Ben-Sasson (ed.), Toledot Am Yisrael, 3 (1969), 30–51, 86–110, 157–77,
223–72, 297–302, 340–53; A. Gorali, She’elat ha-Mi’ut ha-Yehudi be-
Ḥevver ha-Le’ummim (1952); E. Silberner, Ha-Soẓyalizm ha-Ma’aravi
u-She’elat ha-Yehudim (1956); Y. Toury, Mehumah u-Mevukhah be-
Mahpekhat 1848 (1968); M.U. Schappes (ed.), Documentary History
of the Jews in the United States 1654–1875 (1950); J.L. Blau and S.W.
ENCYCLOPAEDIA JUDAICA, Second Edition, Volume 6 385