AntiSemitism Polish Real Causes Moltke

Poland: An Historical Sketch, by Helmuth von Moltke, Emma Sophia Buchheim. 2013

Prussian Helmuth Moltke: In Poland, Jews Exploit Peasants

The elder Helmuth Moltke wrote this book in 1832 (p. v), at a time when Poland’s partitions, at the hands of her neighbors, had been a relatively recent development, and at a time before Prussian chauvinism and militarism had come into full bloom. Although this work corrects many misconceptions about the structure of Polish society, it is not pro-Polish. Moltke (pp. 153-155) paints a rosy picture of Prussian rule over Poland. In addition, Emma S. Buchheim, the editor and translator (in 1885), defends the dismemberment of Poland as a “historical necessity” even as she praises the struggles of all true Polish patriots. (p. vii). She also praises Moltke as a writer whose talents in this regard had become overshadowed by his military career. (p. x).

My review consists of quotations from Moltke set off by the theme (ALL CAPS) and with comments [brackets].

GROWING JEWISH NUMBERS AND POWER

As the Jews marry when they are still almost children, they are soon surrounded by a numerous progeny. (p. 134).

The small amount of trade still carried on in Poland was in the hands of the Jews. (p. 62).

The Jews had their own diet, every province sent deputies to Warsaw, where they formed a great assembly…In short, next to the nobles, the Jews formed the most influential and powerful class in the country…the Jews managed to avoid all public burdens and taxes. (p. 69).

The inns everywhere belong to the Jews. (p. 139).

The mills, distilleries, public-houses, are inexhaustible sources of wealth, and the whole produce of the estate often passes through the hands of the Jews. (p. 140).

PROTECTING PEASANTS FROM JEWISH EXPLOITATION. THE PROPINACJA (LIQUOR TRADE): EVILS OF ALCOHOL

The laws forbidding the Jews on pain of death to trade with the peasants, to keep inns, to sell brandy–laws which were passed anew in every reign–show that they never ceased to carry on these trades, so profitable for them, so ruinous for the peasant. (p. 70).

On pain of banishment they [the Jews] were forbidden to buy from the peasants the uncut corn, the unborn cattle, and the unshorn wool, which had usually been sold beforehand for drink in the public houses. (p. 142).

Even now the mere prospect of these new rights induces the greater part of the [newly emancipated] peasants to pledge their farms to the Jews, so that after being entirely lost to the owners they are placed in the hands of person who will not husband them, but who will transform them into merchandize. (p. 151).

———–

A UNIQUE FEUDAL HIERARCHY OF A LIMITED NATURE:

The nobles were in exclusive possession of all political rights; they formed the entire state. Poland was a republic made up of about 300,000 petty suzerainties, each of which was immediately connected with the state, and was subject to the whole body alone, acknowledging no kind of feudal superiority or of feudal dependence. No Polish noble was the vassal of a superior lord. Even the retainer, if a nobleman, shared the political rights of his master; the meanest of them appeared at the diet in the fully enjoyment of that power which belonged to all without distinction. It is here that we find the fundamental difference between the Polish constitution and the feudal states of the West and the despotism of the East… (p. 3).

THE EARLY ROOTS OF POLISH DEMOCRATIC THINKING, AND THAT OF HER “INDIVIDUALISM” AND EVENTUAL DOWNFALL:

The mutual relations of the nobles were based upon perfect equality among all, and as much independence for the individual as was compatible therewith. Starting from the principle that a free man cannot be taxed or governed contrary to his own declared will, the unanimous consent of all was declared for resolutions dealing with these matters, in other words, for all laws; the dissent of a few or of a single individual sufficed for the rejection of a measure. (p. 4).

PRIVILEGED CLASSES LIMITED BY NON-HEREDITARY POSITIONS:

The woiwodes [voivodes] or palatines were governors of a province or palatinate…Since the offices of palatine (which may be compared with the ducal dignity of the Teutonic races), the castellan and starost were not hereditary, it was impossible for an electorate, a peerage, or a higher nobility to exist by the side of the monarchy… (p. 7, pp. 8-9).

NON-MILITARIZED EARLY POLAND:

Poland is the only European state which down to the sixteenth century possessed no military force, except that of its armed and mounted nobles…hussars and cuirassiers. (p. 17).

PRIVILEGED CLASSES NOT WEALTH-SEEKING, NOR RANKED BY WEALTH:

An admirable peculiarity of the warlike nobility was the simplicity of their habits…The wealth which the noble obtained from his subjects returned to them again. A few benches, tables and carpets formed the furniture of the richest palatinate. (pp. 18-19).

The intercourse of the nobles was cordial and liberal, and no excessive deference was shown to the rich and powerful. (p. 21).

NOBILITY WITHOUT TITLES

When Lithuanian was joined to Poland, the Czartorysky [Czartoryski], the Sanguszko, and Wiecnowiesky [Wiszniewiecki] were the only families who, contrary to the spirit of the constitution, retained their rank as princes of the republic. (p. 21).

SECONDARY DEVELOPMENT OF INEQUALITY BASED ON WEALTH, WITH LIMITED EFFECTS

There were Polish nobles who possessed estates exceeding in extent many a kingdom of those days…contrary to the spirit of the constitution… Radziwills, …Czartorysky, …Potocki, Zamojski, Lubomirsky,… While a small number of nobles amassed unlimited wealth, the greater part lost all their property. (pp. 24-25).

Nevertheless a superior and inferior nobility was never recognized in Poland. The title of count borne by Poles of to-day would have been despised by their ancestors. Influence, honours, and wealth did not bring political privileges or rank the poorest noble did not give up a single claim because of his poverty. (p. 27).

CLASS DISTINCTIONS IN POLAND REMAINED LESS SEVERE THAN ELSEWHERE:

It was for this reason that distinctions of class, the arbitrary treatment of the inferior by his superior, did not develop in Poland as in other countries. (p. 28).

PREVIOUS PEASANT LIBERTIES, AND ONCE-LIMITED SERFDOM

But the peasant did not belong to the lord, he could not be sold. The estate might pass into other hands, but the peasant was not obliged to leave his farm. The fact that he could possess land prevented him from ever becoming a mere serf…If we sum up the condition of the peasant, as established by law and justice, we find that he enjoyed the possession of home and land, that the conditions under which he was attached to the soil were restricted, that he was liable to a reasonable amount of statute labour, and moderate state and church rates… It is remarkable that the Polish peasant enjoyed these privileges at a time when villeinage existed in all the rest of Europe. (p. 49, pp. 50-51).

WHY POLAND FELL: A SUMMARY

Among the chief causes of the fall of the republic was the continual decrease of the royal power of the state. (p. 29).

This happy state of affairs ended with the extinction of the Jagellons [Jagellonians], when the nobles increased their power at the expense of both king and peasant. (p. 51).

Another great evil from which the republic suffered was the abuse of the LIBERUM VETO, which, dangerous as it was in itself, had become law in 1652… (p. 38).

DECLINE IN PREVIOUSLY-PREVALENT RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE

For a long time no state in Europe was as tolerant as Poland…It was not until the influence of the Jesuits and foreign emissaries fanned the flames of religious discord… (p. 46).

NOBLES’ OPPRESSION OF PEASANTS A RECENT DEVELOPMENT

This relation between eleven million men and barely half a million masters is an abuse of the last two hundred years, and was preceded by one thousand years of a better state of things. (p. 48).

The kings were forced to promise that they would grant the peasant no letters of protection against his lord…Every noble was absolute master of his own estate…The utter misery of the Polish peasant is proved by statutes like that passed by the diet of 1768… (pp. 52-53).

THE OPPRESSION OF THE PEASANTRY WEAKENS POLAND, PREVENTS HER DEFENSE, AND BECOMES A TOOL OF POLAND’S ENEMIES

The result was those terrible insurrections of the peasants–the very threat of which alarmed the nobles–the ruin of landed property, and the failure of those sources from which a nation should derive its prosperity and strength. (p. 53).

To the peasant, who had nothing to lose, it was a matter of indifference whether he was subject to his territorial lord or to a foreign foe. Every promise of improvement, nay, even a mere change in his conditions offered by the enemy, was calculated to make the peasant the most terrible enemy of his master. The mere possibility of an insurrection of the peasants…prevented the noble and his household troops from undertaking the defense of the republic… (pp. 74-75).

THE MAY 3, 1791 CONSTITUTION IS TOO LATE

After their long apprenticeship with sorrow, the Poles learned to seek the foundation of a wise administration in the greater power of the crown and in its hereditary character, in the abolition of the LIBERUM VETO, in the emancipation of the middle classes, and in the granting of a certain amount of freedom to the peasants. But this effort came a hundred years too late and had no effect on the fate of country. (pp. 117-118).

IN THE END, POLAND DID NOT FALL FROM WITHIN. AGGRESSORS DESTROYED HER

Whoever attacked the country with an army intended to conquer it, and for a long time the sole obstacle to this was the mutual jealousy of neighbouring states. (p. 75).

THE WISDOM OF GRADUALLY EMANCIPATING PEASANTS, AS BY ENNOBLEMENT (MAY 3 CONSTITUTION), INSTEAD OF BY (THE FOREIGN-DECREED) ABOLITIONS OF SERFDOM BY FIAT

The immaturity of the [suddenly-freed] peasants is best seen by the laws made in their favour. No one is allowed to lend them more than three florins. No one was to give them brandy on credit. (p. 143).