Menasseh ben Israel's Mission to Oliver Cromwell: Being a reprint of the pamphlets published by Menasseh ben Israel to promote the re-admission of the Jews to England, 1649-1656 — John Shaqi
Menasseh ben Israel's Mission to Oliver Cromwell: Being a reprint of the pamphlets published by Menasseh ben Israel to promote the re-admission of the Jews to England, 1649-1656Manasseh ben Israel
History
Menasseh ben Israel's Mission to Oliver Cromwell: Being a reprint of the pamphlets published by Menasseh ben Israel to promote the re-admission of the Jews to England, 1649-1656
Manasseh ben Israel
Jews -- Great Britain
The publication of the “Humble Addresses” only aggravated these popular
misgivings. While the clerical and commercial Anti-Semites disputed all
the propositions of Menasseh’s pamphlet, the visionaries and friends of
Israel strongly resented the “sinfulness” of its insistence on the
profitableness of the Jews. The bias of public feeling, as revealed by
the tracts to which the “Humble Addresses” gave rise, was distinctly
less favourable than in 1649, and was overwhelmingly hostile to an
unreserved acquiescence in the terms of the Jewish petition. In 1649 an
honest attempt to understand Judaism was made, as we may see by the
publication of Chilmead’s translation of Leo de Modena’s _Historia dei
riti ebraici_. There is no trace of an appeal to this or any similarly
authoritative work in 1655–56, except in a stray passage of an isolated
protest against the calumnies heaped on the Jews.[85] On the contrary,
the efforts of the new students of Judaism, like Alexander Ross, were
devoted to proving that the Jews had nothing in common with Christians,
and that their religion “is not founded on Moses and the Law, but on
idle and foolish traditions of the Rabbins”—that it was, in fact, a sort
of Paganism.[86] The historical attacks on the Jews were the most
powerful that had yet been made, while the replies to them were few and
by obscure writers.[87] What is most significant, however, is that the
chief friends of the Jews—the men who had encouraged Menasseh six years
before—were now either silent or openly in favour of restrictions which
would have rendered the Readmission a barren privilege. Sadler did not
reiterate the Judeophil teachings of his “Rights of the Kingdom”; there
was no echo of Hugh Peters’s “Good Work for a Good Magistrate,” with its
uncompromising demand for liberty of conscience; and the pseudonymous
author of “An Apology for the Honourable Nation of Jews,” which had so
strongly impressed the public in 1648, was dumb. John Dury, who had
practically started the first agitation in favour of the Jews, was now
studying Jewish disabilities at Cassel, with a view to their
introduction into England;[88] and Henry Jessey, the author of “The
Glory of Judah and Israel,” to the testimonies of which Menasseh
confidently appealed in the closing paragraph of his “Humble Addresses,”
had been won over to the necessity of restrictions.[89] Not a single
influential voice was raised in England in support of Menasseh’s
proposals, either on the ground of love for the Jews or religious
liberty. The temper of the unlettered people, especially the mercantile
classes, is sufficiently illustrated by the fact that only a few months
before a Jewish beggar had been mobbed in the city, owing to the
inflammatory conduct of a merchant, who had followed the poor stranger
about the Poultry shouting, “Give him nothing; he is a cursed Jew.”[90]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account