1. The work has been reissued in German combined with Dohm's second part discussed below: Über die bürgerliche Verbesserung der Juden (Hildesheim, 1973)Google Scholar. References to the initial treatise are from the English translation: Dohm, Christian, Concerning the Amelioration of the Civil Status of the Jews, trans. Lederer, Helen (Cincinnati, 1957).Google Scholar

2. See especially, Altmann, Alexander, Moses Mendelssohn (University, Alabama, 1973).Google Scholar

3. The earlier biography was written shortly after Dohm's death in 1820, Gronau, W., Christian Wilhelm von Dohm (Lemgo, 1824)Google Scholar. A newer biography placing Dohm in a broader context is Dambacher, Ilsegret, Christian Wilhelm von Dohm (Frankfurt, 1974)Google Scholar. For more on Dohm's life and the publication of the treatise, see also Liberles, Robert, “Dohm's Treatise on the Jews: A Defense of the Enlightenment,” Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 33 (1988): 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Dambacher listed several works which had dealt with the question of the legal status of the Jews, dated 1739, 1745, and 1763. Dambacher, Dohm, 177, n. 4. See also Priebatsch, Felix, “Die Judenpolitik des fürsthchen Absolutismus im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert,” Forschungen und Versuche zur Geschichte des Mittelalters und der Neuzeit: Festschrift Dietrich Schaefer (Jena, 1915), 620–23.Google Scholar

5. Eichstädt listed three relevant references during the intervening years, dated 1757, 1759, and 1761. I have so far been unable to locate these essays. Eichstädt, Volkmar, Bibliographie zur Geschichte der Judenfrage, 1 (Hamburg, 1938): 6–7.Google Scholar

6. Der Teutsche Merkur (1775). Drittes Vierteljahr, 213–20.

7. “Bitte an die Grossen wegen der Juden zu Verhütung trauriger Folgen in den Staaten,” Ephemeriden der Menschheit (1776), St. 10, 41–47.

8. For the two critiques and an editorial response, see Ephemeriden der Menschheit (1777), St. 2, 31–44.

9. Cranz, August Friedrich, Charlatanerien, 4th ed. (Berlin, 1783), 1:72–76Google Scholar. The first edition appeared in 1780. Cranz did not elaborate here on which rights he had in mind, but earlier, in 1779, Cranz had apparently called more explicitly for naturalization of the Jews and for closer ties with them. I have not yet been able to secure this work, referred to in Eichstüadt's bibliography, 1: 7, entry 84.

10. Versuch über die Frage: Ob die Juden zu einer reichsschlussmäsigen Toleranz unter gewissen Bedingnissen gelangen können (Regensburg, 1780).Google Scholar

11. Ibid., 5–6.

12. Ibid., 101–2, 109–10.

13. Ibid., 116–21.

14. Ibid., 124–28.

15. Allgemeine deutsche Bibliothek, Bd. 45 (1781), 609–11.

16. Dambacher, Dohm, 26–28, and Altmann, Moses Mendelssohn, 653–56.

17. Altmann, Mendelssohn, 449–61.

18. On the episode in question, see Szajkowski, Zosa, The Economic Status of the Jews in Alsace, Metz, and Lorraine (New York, 1954), 123–40.Google Scholar

19. Dohm, Concerning the Amelioration of the Civil Status of the Jews, 19.

20. Ibid., 20.

21. Ibid., 14.

22. On the opposition to this part of Dohm's program even by Mendelssohn and on the connection between Mendelssohn and Dohm's works in general, see Altmann, Moses Mendelssohn, 461–74.

23. Some 200 copies of the book were sold immediately, and an additional 750 copies in the bookstores within six months, selling out the first edition. Geiger, Ludwig, “Aus Briefen Dohms an Nicolai,” Zeitschrift für die Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland 5 (1890): 77–79.Google Scholar

Several important reviews were reprinted in Dohm, , Über die bürgerliche Verbesserung der Juden, 2d ed. (Berlin, 1783), pt. 11, 31–150Google Scholar. Several other reviews were discussed on pp. 349–62. Also important was the discussion in Reuss, Franz, Christian Wilhelm Dohm's Schrift “Über die bürgerliche Verbesserung der Juden” und deren Einwirkung auf die gebildeten Stände Deutschlands (Kaiserslautern, 1891), 37–75.Google Scholar

24. Altmann, Mendelssohn, 454. The review appeared in Wöchentliche Nachrichten von neuen Landcharten, geographischen, statistischen und historischen Büchern und Schriften, 9 (1781), 299–302Google Scholar, 319–20, 331–35. On Dohm's relations with Büsching see Liberles, “Dohm's Treatise on the Jews,” 31–32.

25. On Eisenmenger, see Katz, Jacob, From Prejudice to Destruction: Anti-Semitism, 1700–1933 (Cambridge, Mass., 1980), 13–22.Google Scholar

26. Büsching, D. Anton Friedrich, Geschichte der jüdischen Religion (Berlin, 1779), 204.Google Scholar

27. H. F. Diez, a philosopher and legal scholar, wrote several responses, expressing general agreement with Dohm's proposals. In fact, Diez went further than Dohm by calling for total equality including the right of Jews to hold public offices. Nevertheless, Diez was also more skeptical on the religious question and maintained that Jews would not make as good citizens as Christians because of their religious practices. Diez's review was discussed in Dohm, Verbesserung, pt. II, 349–53, and Reuss, Dohm's Schrift, 37–39.

28. The review was reprinted in Dohm, Verbesserung, pt. II, 37–71.

29. Ibid., 33.

30. Ibid., 37.

31. Ibid., 40–43.

32. Ibid., 43–44. The German reads: “Die Macht des Staats beruhet nicht blos auf Gold und Silber, sondern zur weit grössern Hälfte auf Arm und Bein, auf Soldaten, und die Kann man aus dem jüdischen Volk, so lange es nicht seine jetzigen Religionsgedanken geändert hat, nicht haben.”

33. Ibid., 44–46

34. Ibid., 51.

35. Ibid., 52–53.

36. Ibid., 56–64.

37. Ibid., 89–111.

38. Ibid., 98.

39. Ibid., 99.

40. Ibid., 101–3

41. Ibid., 104–8

42. Ibid., 111

43. Epstein, Klaus, The Genesis of German Conservatism (Princeton, 1966), 33 and 490Google Scholar. On Schlözer, see Van Horn Melton, James, “From Enlightenment to Revolution: Hertzberg, Schlözer, and the Problem of Despotism in the Late Aufklärung,” Central European History 12 (1979): 103–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

44. The review, dated 20 Oct. 1781 with the note that it had been received by the publisher only on 7 Dec., appeared in Briefwechsel meist historischen und politischen Inhalts, Th. 10 (1782), 250–55. Dohm's response, “Über die Juden Tolerance,” was printed on 279–83.

45. On the contribution of Achenwall and Schlözer to the study of statistics, see John, V., Geschichte der Statistik (Stuttgart, 1884), 74–114Google Scholar, and Walker, Helen, Studies in the History of Statistical Method (Baltimore, 1929)Google Scholar. Schlözer's extension of the field of statistical study is discussed in Handwörterbuch der Sozialwissenschaften 10 (1959): 31.Google Scholar

46. On Büsching and the differences in approach, see John, Statistik 90–95.

47. Liberles, “Dohm's Treatise on the Jews,” 31–32. On the dispute, see esp. Deutsches Museum (1776), 835–51 and (1777), 159–73, and the references there to Schlözer's publications. A reference to Büsching is on (1776), 845. The disagreement with Schlözer is discussed in Dambacher, Dohm, 41–43.

48. Briefwechsel, Th. 10 (1782), 280–81.

49. Physickalisch-ökonomische Bibliothek XII, 124–29; the review appeared in 1782.

50. Göttingen gelehrten Anzeigen (1781), 753–63. References are to pp. 753 and 756.

51. In addition to Schwager, these issues were raised in the Ephemeriden d. Menschheit, discussed in Reuss, Dohm's Schrift, 52–55; in the review by Hissmann, Reuss, 67–70; and in the review of the Allgemeine deutsche Bibliothek, Reuss, 39–42.

52. Dohm, Verhesserung, pt. II, 23–24.

53. Ibid., 153.

54. Ibid. See also p. 10.

55. Ibid., 6.

56. That Dohm was primarily addressing an audience of fellow Enlightenment adherents is underscored by his argument that implementation of his program would eventually bring the Jew to join the adherents of natural religion, thus greatly increasing their numbers to the point where they would be able to organize local church societies. Ibid., 181–87.

57. Ibid., 21–22.

58. Indeed, this was the purpose of Thomas Perry's study which approached the controversy from the perspective of English political history. Perry's is the fullest study of the Jew Bill and its controversy: Perry, Thomas W., Public Opinion, Propaganda, and Politics in Eighteenth Century England (Cambridge, Mass., 1962)Google Scholar. A necessary corrective regarding Perry's interpretation can be found in Endelman, Todd, The Jews of Georgian England (Philadelphia, 1979), p. 60n.Google Scholar

59. Salvador's petition is in Anglo-Jewish Letters, ed. Roth, Cecil (London, 1938), 128–30Google Scholar. On Salvador, see Woolf, Maurice, “Joseph Salvador,” Jewish Historical Society of England Transactions, 21 (1968): 104–37.Google Scholar

60. Elsewhere, I have argued that this was not the exclusive purpose of the Jewish initiative. See my “The Jews and their Bill—Jewish Motivations in the Controversy of 1753,” Jewish History (1987), issue 2, pp. 29–36.

61. Perry, Public Opinion, 80.

62. Ibid., 81–83.

63. The Jew in the Modern World, ed. , Mendes-Flohr and Reinharz, (New York, 1980), 105.Google Scholar

64. Hertzberg, Arthur, The French Enlightenment and the Jews (New York, 1968), esp. 294, 334.Google Scholar

65. On Dohm's economic thinking, see Rapaport, Mordechai W., Christian W. Dohm: Der Gegner der Physiokratie und seine Thesen (Berlin, 1908)Google Scholar, passim; Dambacher, Dohm, for example, 99–106 and 133–40; and Liberles, “Dohm's Treatise,’ 37–38.

66. Schleunes, Karl A., “Enlightenment, Reform, Reaction: The Schooling Revolution in Prussia,” Central European History 12 (1979): 315–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

67. Ibid., 317–18.

68. Ibid., 319–20.

69. Melton, James Van Horn, Absolutism and the Eighteenth-Century Origins of Compulsory Schooling in Prussia and Austria (Cambridge, 1988), esp. 176–79, 193–99, and 231ff.Google Scholar

70. On the struggle to improve the lot and status of the peasant in Germany, see Gagliardo, John G., From Pariah to Patriot: The Changing Image of the German Peasant 1770–1840 (Lexington, Kentucky, 1969).Google Scholar

71. Ibid., 50–57. Gagliardo also described at length support for the cause of the peasants from anti-Enlightenment sources as will be discussed below. Cameralist support was emphasized by Melton, Absolutism and Compulsory Schooling, 109–68.

72. Melton, Absolutism and Compulsory Schooling, 157.

73. Gagliardo, 66–69.

74. Ibid., 77. On Möser's social thought in general with some emphasis on his attitudes toward cities, see Walker, Mack, German Home Towns (Ithaca, N.Y., 1971), 170–84.Google Scholar

75. A useful and critical review of the literature on this point can be found in the editor's introduction to Peasants and Lords in Modern Germany, ed. Moeller, Robert G. (Boston, 1986), 1–23Google Scholar. While many assumptions on the subject are brought into question in this volume, one is not: “Although the contributions in this volume thus shake one central pillar of standard accounts—the assertion of German agriculture's economic backwardness—they do not topple the other—the historical fact of the political conservatism of German agrarians” (p. 12).

76. See the list in Eichstädt, Bibliographie zur Geschichte der Judenfrage, 1: 8–15Google Scholar, and the comment in Dohm, , Denkwürdigkeiten meiner Zeit (Lemgo, 1814–1819), 2: 284n.Google Scholar

77. On the discussion in France during the 1780s, particularly the essay competition sponsored by the Royal Society of Metz and the governmental commission headed by Malesherbes, see Hertzberg, French Enlightenment and the Jews, and Malino, Frances, The Sephardic Jews of Bordeaux (University, Alabama, 1978).Google Scholar

78. Weinryb essentially follows Mahler's estimates. Mahler, , A History of Modern Jewry 1780–1815 (London, 1971), 279Google Scholar; Weinryb, , The Jews of Poland (Philadelphia, 1973), 116, 351, n. 14Google Scholar, and the discussion on 318–20.

79. Toury, Jacob, Prolegomena to the Entrance of Jews into German Citizenry (Tel Aviv, 1972), 11 (Hebrew).Google Scholar

80. N. M. Gelber has placed the number of Jews acquired by Prussia with the first partition at a rather precise 29,782. William Hagan estimated the Jewish population in these areas at a round 29,500, with 24,000 in Netze and 5,500 in West Prussia, but Hagan in his text placed the number of Jews acquired by Prussia at “some 25,000 Jews.” Küster presented a figure of 13,600 Jews in Netze—a figure adopted by both Mahler and Silbergleit among others. According to Küster, the total West Prussian territory acquired by Prussia with the first partition included 18,100 Jews.

Gelber, N. M. in Beit Israel b'Polin (Jerusalem, 1948), 124 (Hebrew)Google Scholar; William Hagan, Germans, Poles, and Jews, 15, 46. Küster's figures are given in Silbergleit, Heinrich, Die Bevölkerungs- und Berufsverhältnisse der Juden im Deutschen Reich (Berlin, 1930), 5Google Scholar. In general, see the important discussion there, 2–10, and in Mahler, Raphael, History of the Jewish People in Modern Times 1, pt. 2 (Merhavya, Israel, 1954): 333–36 (Hebrew).Google Scholar

At the same time, Austria received approximately 225,000 Jews, mostly in Galicia, from the first partition. On the other hand, Russia received the vast majority of its Polish Jews only in the 1790s. See Klier, John, Russia Gathers Her Jews (Dekalb, Illinois, 1986)Google Scholar and Springer, Arnold, “Enlightened Absolutism and Jewish Reform,” California Slavic Studies 11 (1980): 237–67.Google Scholar

81. On Prussia, see Melton, Absolutism and Compulsory Schooling, 197.

82. An early study on Prussian policies with material on the Jews is Bär, Max, Westpreussen unter Friedrich dem Grossen, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1909)Google Scholar. Related archival materials are to be found in the Jacobson Collection, Archives of the Leo Baeck Institute, New York.

83. See n. 7 above.