-
A Return to Oratory
July 10, 2012 | 37 comments
-
Our Queen
June 2, 2012 | 0 comments
-
A Great and Wonderful Experiment
November 21, 2011 | 21 comments
-
While America Slept
February 9, 2010 | 89 comments
-
Victory is the Only Option
August 16, 2007 | 1 comment
Buy the Book
Profiles in Courage
A history of English philosemitism, by the distinguished Gertrude Himmelfarb.
The People of the Book: Philosemitism in England, from Cromwell
to Churchill
By Gertrude Himmelfarb
(Encounter Books, 183 pages, $23.95)
At a time when physical attacks on synagogues, cemeteries, and individual Jews have been increasing exponentially year-on-year across the United Kingdom, it is heartening to hear from one of America’s foremost intellectuals that it was not always thus. When Jewish history is almost constantly—and understandably—written in the context of anti-Semitism, that foul bacillus that finds its origins in all that is most repulsive in the fetid recesses of human nature, it is rather wonderful occasionally to read an extended essay on its antithesis: philosemitism. I fear that the reason that this book is only 155 pages long, however, is that Professor Himmelfarb had simply too few significant Britons to praise for their philosemitism, despite casting her historical net as wide as the three centuries that separated Oliver Cromwell from Winston Churchill. A Briton’s sole consolation might be that the histories of philosemitism in France, Germany, Russia, and elsewhere would be even shorter.
Certainly, no one could be better qualified to write this book that Gertrude Himmelfarb, the most distinguished living historian of Victorian English culture and society, which allows her to write with utter authority of the philosemitism of such key literary figures as George Eliot, Sir Walter Scott, and Benjamin Disraeli. In her seminal works The Victorian Mind (1968) and The Idea of Poverty (1984), she demonstrated her mastery of mid-19th century British intellectual life, and her recent The Jewish Odyssey of George Eliot (2009) allowed her fascinating insights into philosemitic novels such as Daniel Deronda that this book explores further. Professor Himmelfarb is one of the few public intellectuals to be elected both a Fellow of the British Academy and of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and in 2004 she received the National Endowment for the Humanities Medal. We are therefore in the best possible hands when it comes to understanding how the best of Britons’ minds worked when they embraced the Jews at a time when so many of their countrymen were rejecting them. (An admiring word is also due to Encounter Books, a young and small imprint that is nonetheless publishing very many of our culture’s most thought-provoking tracts for troubled times.)
When one looks for the worst anti-Semitic stereotypes in literature, it is of course not to Joseph Goebbels’ foul representations that one goes, because none were memorable and the political bias was so obvious. Instead it is to Geoffrey Chaucer’s “Prioress’s Tale,” William Shakespeare’s Shylock in The Merchant of Venice, and Charles Dickens’ Fagin in Oliver Twist. Even the 20th century saw another great English poet, T.S. Eliot, employing anti-Semitic imagery. How can it be that generally liberal, humanist writers of acknowledged talent—even genius—could create Jewish figures of such repulsiveness? When Al Pacino played Shylock in Central Park two summers ago, American theater-goers were reminded of how flimsy the stock answers—that Shakespeare was only trying to make us confront our own prejudices, that Shylock wasn’t meant to be representative of his race, etc.—truly are in the face of the merchant’s constant, vicious, but eloquent demands for a pound of Christian flesh. How can it be that Englishmen created worse and longer-lasting stereotypes of grasping, amoral Jews even than the Nazis?
Himmelfarb explains that in Chaucer and Shakespeare’s time there were no practicing Jews living in England, and that Dickens tried to atone in later years both by softening Fagin’s image in Oliver Twist’s later editions by making him less conspicuously, or at least specifically, Jewish, and by introducing the “old Jewish man” Riah into Our Mutual Friend, who was “a gentle Jew” and contrasted totally with “his Christian master” Fledgeby, who was “the meanest cur existing.”
Twenty-six years separate Oliver Twist (1838) from Our Mutual Friend (1864), and in the meantime Parliament had repealed the requirement by which MPs had to take an oath of allegiance to the sovereign “on the true faith of a Christian.” By the 1830s, Jews were the only religion still discriminated against, as the Nonconformists and Roman Catholics had been allowed to enter Parliament in 1828 and 1829 respectively. When the great Whig historian Thomas Babington (later Lord) Macaulay was elected in 1830, it was on the repeal of Jewish civil disabilities that he decided to dedicate his maiden speech, traditionally a signal of what freshmen MPs consider most important to them. At that time there were only between 30,000 and 40,000 Jews in Britain, as opposed to about a quarter of a million today.
In that debate, the Tory MP for Oxford, Robert Inglis, used the ancient argument—which often resurfaces in anti-Semitic literature today—that Jews were mere aliens who felt no true allegiance to the country of their residence, but only to their race. “The Jews of London had more sympathy with the Jews resident in Berlin or Vienna than with the Christians among whom they resided,” Inglis claimed, “to this day they called themselves a people, and they might avail themselves of their political influence for objects connected with their own aggrandizement.” (Compare Inglis’ remark to that of the Labour MP Paul Flynn, who on December 1, 2011, said of Britain’s first Jewish ambassador to Israel, the fourth-generation Briton Matthew Gould, “What Britain needs in Israel is someone with roots in the U.K,” who “can’t be accused of having Jewish loyalty.”)
Of course the same despicable argument that Inglis and Flynn made had been used unsuccessfully to try to prevent Catholics being permitted to sit in Parliament—that “the papists” owed their ultimate allegiance to the Pope rather than the Crown—and it gave the 30-year-old Macaulay his opportunity to draw comparisons between the Catholic Emancipation bill and the measure known as “the Jew Bill.” Despite Macaulay’s eloquence—and Himmelfarb quotes some of his scintillating speech—the Bill failed by 228 to 165, and it was not until 1858 that Lionel de Rothschild finally took the seat in the House of Commons for which he had been twice elected but from which he had hitherto been barred. Gladstone, Disraeli, William Hazlitt, and some others come out well from the story, but several others one might have expected to be enlightened, such as Lord Shaftesbury and John Stuart Mill, either vacillated or were hardly to be seen in the struggle. Himmelfarb argues that “Philosemitism has a rich history in English society, politics, diplomacy and literature,” yet it was not rich enough to allow Jews into Parliament before 1858, although of course that was five years earlier than the United States abolished slavery.
Himmelfarb also reminds us that England was the first country to instigate a blood libel legal case—that Christian children’s blood was used in Jewish religious rituals—in 1144, and the first to expel the Jews, in 1290, two centuries before even the Spanish Inquisition. (As Winston Churchill pointed out, “Exception was made for certain physicians without whose skill persons of consequence might have lacked due attention.”) Thenceforth it was not until Oliver Cromwell’s rule in the mid-17th century that Jews were allowed to return. (Or as Churchill put it equally succinctly: “It was left to a Calvinist dictator to remove the ban which a Catholic king had imposed.”)
It is worth notice that the title of Himmelfarb’s book is specific to England, rather than the whole of the British Isles. Despite there only being 4,000 Jews, the spring of 1904 saw a pogrom in the Irish town of Limerick against the few who had managed to emigrate there from eastern Europe. Whipped up by the vilely anti-Semitic preachings of the Catholic priest Fr. John Creagh, Limerick Catholics started a boycott of Jewish businesses and soon Jews were being hissed at by crowds in the street, and mud thrown at them. They were then physically attacked, with cries of “Down with the Jews!” “Death to the Jews!” and “We must hunt them out!” When Rabbi Levin of Limerick begged the local Catholic bishop to denounce what was happening, no public statement was made. Soon Jews in Limerick were being refused service in shops and by April twenty of the city’s 35 Jewish families had been put out of business. Assaults on them continued, and the boycott went on into the autumn. By 1905, not surprisingly, virtually the entire Jewish community of the city had left. Small wonder that Ireland has won only one Nobel Prize for Physics, and none at all for Chemistry, Economics, or Medicine.
“We owe to the Jews in the Christian revelation,” wrote the noted philosemite Winston Churchill in an article entitled “Zionism versus Bolshevism,” “a system of ethics which, even if it were entirely separated from the supernatural, would be incomparably the most precious possession of Mankind, worth in fact the fruits of all other wisdom and learning put together.” A Victorian duke’s grandson born in a palace might easily have adopted the thoughtless “social” or “club” anti-Semitism of so many of his class, age, and background, but the fact that Winston Churchill—whom many see as the greatest Englishman since Cromwell—did not is just yet another testament to his greatness. If only there had been more like him.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (24) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Andrew Roberts
More Articles From Buy the Book
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/28/profiles-in-courage
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi.| 3.28.12 @ 7:30AM
Gertrude Himmelfarb greatest mistake was in mothering a certain person named William Kristol and being married to a certain old Trotskyite and inventer of the name Neoconservative, named Irving.
More nonsense in this article is that the Spanish Inquisition was the one who expelled the Jews of Spain. It was the rulers of Spain, Ferdinand and Isabella, who wanted to unite their country after 700 years of rule by the Muslims and their Jewish middle men. They offered their Muslim and Jewish subjects the option of converting or leaving peacefully with their property. The Jews were never subject to the Inquistion, which was for Christians.
Now maybe our Jewish friends here should look in the mirror and ask why the hell we have been booted out of so many countries. Maybe it is that some of your own actions caused some of the problems you have been having the past 2000 years.
Now as to the Jews in Ireland. I don't know the whole story about Limerick but 2 Jews have been elected Lord Mayor of Dublin, a father and son. One of their cousins used to work for me.
Cromulent| 3.28.12 @ 9:48AM
Ha! Do you actually contend the Jews had it good in Spain under Muslim rule?
Jack in Wi.| 3.28.12 @ 12:22PM
Most Muslims and Sephardic Jews to this day claim that when they were in control of Spain it was a great place of tolerance. When the Muslims conquered Spain, beside them rode their North African Jewish allies. They were welcomed with open arms by the native Jewish population, which hated the Christians. For 700 years they were the middle men for the Muslims in the control of Spain.
I think Ferdinand and Isabella offered them a great deal considering all the history involved. When the expulsion order was issued the 3 richest Jews in the kingdom figured they could bribe the king with huge pile of gold. They went to see him and offered him a deal to pull the order. He told them that he was with the queen on this and rejected their offer. The queen then joined the group and she imploredthem to convert and that they would be most welcome in the kingdom. 2 of the top Jews converted on the spot and were baptised, with the king ond queen as sponsors. Then about between 25% and 75% of the other Jews converted as well. Those new Christians or conversos were then subject to the Inquisition. Many other Jews had converted over the centuries and some of the great saints in Spanish history had Jewish backgrounds.
Occam's Tool| 3.28.12 @ 4:53PM
Bullshit, Jack. It was worse under Isabella, but it was not good. You would think Ferdinand offered them a good deal. I simply note that with the Jews out of the kingdom of Spain, Spain went rapidly downhill and has never recovered.
But what's an asshole like you commenting on philosemitism for?
Jack in Wi.| 3.28.12 @ 7:47PM
Occam is nothing but a name calling zio nazi spiller of hate and genocide. I got the story of Ferdinand and Israbella and the 3 rich Jews, who I believe were rabbis from the book on Ferdinand and Isabella by Lord Hugh Thomas. You will notice that the name callers here are all uneducated and historically illiterate slobs. I could do a lot more on this subject but I have to go to the wake of a fine and charitable lady who did a lot of good in her life.
Allan Brooks| 3.28.12 @ 9:47PM
Occam wont admit he was wrong about Ashcanistan and Bush.
His pride is too fragile.
Jack in Wi.| 3.28.12 @ 11:40PM
To the historically illiterate Occam. Within a month of the expulsion of the Jews, Columbus sailed for the new world and gave Spain a worldwide empire which lasted for 400 years. Spanish culture and religion were spread over the planet. They brought the Holy Catholic Faith to the new World and Asia including Japan, China, the Philipinnes and India. Half the Catholic population in the world came out of Spain and her empire. I think the saintly Isabella was one of the greatest women in history.
One thing is damn sure is if Isabella had not financed Columbus, none of us would be here. The discovery of Colubus was such an earth shattering event that the whole world would look different if he wasn't the one to discover America. There would certainly be people here, but not us.
Vox populi| 3.28.12 @ 11:45PM
You are compltely ignorant
(as if we didn't know that already). The Missionary effort in China, Japan and India was by Potugal, not Spain.
JP| 3.28.12 @ 3:11PM
There was a period when they had it better in Spain than they did in England. Heck, read the lives of Theresea of Avilia and John of the Cross - and they were clerics.
Occam's Tool| 3.28.12 @ 4:58PM
Nice. But the history of Ireland since, say, 1940 has been a vile history of philonazism and antisemitism.
RCV| 3.28.12 @ 8:12PM
I'd rather dwell on the remark famously attributed to Yogi Berra who, when asked what he thought of the election of a Jew as Lord Mayor of Dublin, replied, "Only in America!"
Clint| 3.28.12 @ 9:00PM
WTF ?
"The Jewish population of Ireland reached around 5,500 in the late 1940s, but has since (2008) declined to around 2,000, mainly through emigration to larger Jewish communities such as those in the United States, England and Israel. The Republic of Ireland currently has four synagogues: three in Dublin, one in Cork. There is a further synagogue in Belfast in Northern Ireland.
he original Irish Constitution of 1937 specifically gave constitutional protection to Jews. This was considered to be a necessary component to the constitution by Éamon de Valera because of the treatment of Jews elsewhere in Europe at the time. The Blueshirts were suppressed by the government. In Rome, T.J. Kiernan, the Irish Minister to the Vatican, and his wife, Delia Murphy (a noted traditional ballad singer), worked with the Irish priest Hugh O'Flaherty to save many Jews and escaped prisoners of war. Jews conducted religious services in the church of San Clemente of the ‘Collegium Hiberniae Dominicanae’, which had Irish diplomatic protection.
The reference to the Jewish Congregations in the Irish Constitution was removed in 1973 with the Fifth Amendment. The same amendment removed the 'special position' of the Catholic Church, as well as references to the Church of Ireland, the Presbyterian Church, the Methodist Church, and the Religious Society of Friends."
Alan Brooks | 3.28.12 @ 7:21PM
"Cromulent"?
Oliver Cromwell + virulent? or is it corpulent?
BTW, the greatest concentration of antisemites in america are probably in the South:
take a guess where this organisation is located,
http://www.strormfront.org
Alan Brooks | 3.28.12 @ 7:24PM
http://www.stormfront.org
Do a site-search on "Jews" and see how many entries appear and how many are negative. Its headquarters is in W. Virginia.
WVWisdom| 3.28.12 @ 9:32AM
I hope Ms. Himmelfarb's book is more sophisticated than this review. That last paragraph about Churchill was laughable. Read the essay Mr. Roberts mentions, available at http://library.flawlesslogic.com/ish.htm. Churchill believed, in brief: 1) the best thing about Jews was that they gave us Christianity 2) they were also great sources of funding for political campaigns 3) they were also responsible for communism, and they should be given Israel to keep them from spreading communism. Sounds ridiculous, of course, but Churchill's writings and speeches are clear about all of this.
Jack in Wi.| 3.28.12 @ 12:28PM
Wisdom: Short and to the point. Churchhill was under the control of the zionists from at least the end of the 1st World War. He lived a lavish life style and they kept him in funds when he was on the financial ropes. That is why he was made Colonial Secretary when the Zionist experiment began after WW1. Like most important gentile supporters of the Zionists he was bought and paid for.
Jim | 3.28.12 @ 1:42PM
Why don't you come right out and say it, Jack, instead of being a coward. You hate Jews for nothing more than their being Jewish, and all the rest of your "justifications" are puerile crap. Or at least provide evidence for your puerile crap, given your non-historian, undereducated...oh, wait, now I am being just like you - insults without evidence. Oh, wait...we do have evidence - see your comments above. Think before you post, or in your case, before you excrete.
Jack in Wi.| 3.28.12 @ 3:15PM
I don't hate Jews or anyone else. It is against my religion. My God told me to love all my neighbors as myself. Hate consumes a person. My God also tells me that the truth wiill set me free. I am dedicated to 2 things peace and truth.
Occam's Tool| 3.28.12 @ 4:56PM
Jack--you hate the Jews, and Israel. Isableea and her asswipe husband did not offer the Jews a good "deal," lackwit.
I don't hate you, Jack; I merely think you are a child molestation advocating, cowardly, yellowstained gutless treasonous jihadist fellating vermin whose finest action would be to leave this planet. You disgust me beyond measure, and you are a moral maggot who I would not allow within 100 miles of my children because you are a foul piece of subhuman filth, but you are not important enough to hate.
Occam's Tool| 3.28.12 @ 4:57PM
Sorry: "Isabella"
RCV| 3.28.12 @ 8:13PM
Jack is a disgusting antisemite of the worst sort. We know it, and he knows that we know it.
Vox populi| 3.28.12 @ 11:48PM
Go squirt your pus somewhere else.
Vox populi| 3.28.12 @ 12:04PM
Another excellent article by Andrew Roberts. But T. S. Eliot made up for his early anti-Semitic references (probably made under the influence of Ezra Pound) by actively working for Jews in World War II.
Occam's Tool| 3.28.12 @ 5:00PM
Jack also has no clue as to how countries win Nobels in Medicine, Physics, or Chemistry. As he told me when I mentioned FIVE Jews had won Nobels in the hard sciences in 2011 ALONE; "it is best when the Jews keep quiet."
In addition to being a pustule on the rectum of Satan, Jack is also a lying scumbag.