Blood libel in a multi‐confessional society: the case of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

Abstract

In the context of co‐existence with the Jews in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (hereinafter: GDL) the image of the Jew and knowledge about the Jews were important factors, even with regard that the myths which circulated in this society were imported from out of it. In the second half of the sixteenth century the myth of blood libel accusation was disseminating in the GDL, and along with the concept of Jewish harm for society it turned to mass phobia. In that way ritual murder was actualized as an epitome of that harm, the will of Jews to physically annihilate Christians. From the second half of the seventeenth century explanations about the use of Christian blood by Jews as a motivation of ritual murder began to develop in Lithuania, which is in fact another and more focalized version of the idea of Jewish harmfulness. The situation in Lithuania was specific, because the aim of the annihilation of the Christians was not only ascribed to rabbinic Jews, but also to Karaites and Tatars‐Muslims. Notwithstanding this, representatives of the aforementioned communities acted in accord with the society in accusation of the Jews of ritual murder. Besides the mentioned specifics, the article discusses other peculiarities of the myth (like age and sex of assumed victims, images of dynamics and ways of use of blood, descriptions of supposed “killing”, and the structure of the myth’s fibula) which spread in the GDL in comparison to classical blood libel versions spread in Western European societies. The article is based on archive and published documents from the end of the sixteenth to the eighteenth century, and old printed books.

Keywords:

• blood libel accusation
• Jews and Christians
• Grand Duchy of Lithuania

Notes

1. Langmuir, Toward a Definition of Antisemitism.

2. Langmuir, “Thomas of Monmouth,” 3–40.

3. See Rubin, Gentile Tales, for an extremely suggestive exploration of the evolution of the host desecration charge. See also Stacey, “From Ritual Crucifixion to Host Desecration,” 11–28.

4. Clergymen’s fears of possible host profanation can be illustrated by the complaint of Miletij Chrebtowicz, Bishop of Wladimir, against Jewish boys accused of casting stones at a religious procession accompanied by the Holy Sacrament in the town. In Arkhiv Iugo zapadnoi Rossii, part 1, vol. 1, 265–7.

5. Bershadskii, Russko‐Evreiskii Arkhiv, vol. 2, 240.

6. Lazutka and Gudavichuz, Privilegia evreiam, statute 30.

7. Bershadskii, Russko‐Evreiskii Arkhiv, vol. 2, 240.

8. Skarga, Źywoty Świętych Starego i Nowego Zakonu na kazdy dzien przez caly rok.

9. Ibid., 275–7. Skarga’s account was preceded by that of Albert Stanislaus Radziwiłł, who, in the late seventeenth century, in his own Lives of the Saints, had offered readers an accoun of Simon’s martyrdom. See Radziwiłł, Źywoty Świętych z naukami doktorów koścelnych.

10. Skarga, Źywoty Świętych Starego i Nowego Zakonu na kazdy dzien przez caly rok, 277. It is worth noting the dates of the Trent and Punia affairs; the juxtaposition of the second and third digits of 1475 gives 1574. Notable are the dates of alleged murders in Trident and Punia: 1475 and 1574.

11. On ritual murder in Poland see Węgrzynek, Czarna legenda’ Źydów; Bershadskii, “Starinnoe sredtsvo.”

12. For this event see: Czyźewski, Alfurkan Tatarski prawdziwy na czterdziestu częsci, 71; Żuchowski, Process kriminalny o niewinne dziecię Jerzego Krasnowskiego. Węgrzynek, on the basis of Sebastian Śleszkowsky’s works, dates this event to 1614. Węgrzynek, Czarna legenda, 190.

13. See Bershadskii, “Starinnoe sredtsvo,” 4, 20.

14. Ibid., c.448–9.

15. Lukauskas, Pamokslai, 162.

16. For this incident, see Klienman, “Karaimskii;” Bałaban, Studia historyczne, 79–81. Some of the documents relating to this affair are found in the Archive of the Lithuanian Karaite Community, Fonds 301–74, housed in the Manuscript Department of the Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences.

17. Czyźewski, Alfurkan Tatarski, 70–2. The author, Piotr Czyźewski, has variously been identified as a nobleman and a Roman Catholic priest.

18. Aktyi, izdavaemye vilenskogo arkheograficheskoiu kommisieiu, vol. 10, 448–9.

19. Ibid., vol. 29, document no. 85.

20. Befestigung im Glauben von Rabbi Jizchak Sohn Abraham neu herausgegeben, 255–8.

21. This, as noted, was the admitted motive of the Tatar Achmat. The hatred of the burghers towards Jews is demonstrated by the servant of the arendator Brodawka, who was a subject of the process on ritual murder in Narwa: Bershadskii, Russko‐Evreiskii Arkhiv, vol. 2, no. 199. Attempting to convince Marina Janovaja to accuse the Jews for the death of her son Demyan, the burghers assured her, “don’t be afraid, you will not suffer, but it is because of the Jews that we, Christians, are not able to make a living, the city of Voin is theirs, not ours;” see Aktyi, izdavaemye vilenskogo arkheograficheskoiu kommisieiu, vol. 28, no. 318. As late as the middle of the eighteenth century, Solomon Maimon, the philosopher and harbinger of the Haskalah in Eastern Europe, in his autobiography describes the accusation of ritual murder as an act of vengeance. He relates the accusation made by a Russian Orthodox priest against his grandfather, the Radziwiłłs’ leaseholder (arendar). See Maimon, An Autobiography, 15–17.

22. Kuz’min, Materialyi ob obvinenuiakh, no. 13. It might be noted that this conspiratorial motif is encountered in one of the very first Blood Libels, Thomas of Monmouth’s accusation against the Jews of Norwich. See Langmuir, “Thomas of Monmouth.”

23. See Po‐Chia Hsia, Trent 1475.

24. For example, in 1577 a “victim” of the Jews – a child – was buried in Voin Orthodox (or Uniate?) church. See Kuz’min, Materialyi ob obvinenuiakh, no. 17.

25. Ibid., no. 34.

26. Ibid., 17.

27. Ibid., no. 49.

28. The full title of the book was Miscellanea rerum ad Statum Ecclesiasticum in Magno Litvaniae Ducatu pertinentiur, collecta ab Alberto Wiiuk Koialowicz, Vilnius, Typis Academicis, 1650.

29. Kosman, Reformacja i kontrreformacja, 200.

30. Radziwiłł, Źywoty Świętych z naukami doktorów koścelnych, 520–1.

31. Arkheograficheskii sbornik, vol. 4, no. 56.

32. See Trachtenberg, The Devil and the Jews.

33. Istoriko‐iuridicheskie materialyi, 448–9.

34. See the story of Serafinowicz in Pikulski, Źłość źydowska przeciwko Bogu y blizniemu. We use here excerpts published by Kuz’min, Materialyi, 268–9. A version was supposedly first published in 1710, but disappeared when it was bought up and destroyed by the Jews. Pikulski, a Roman Catholic priest, published his first edition in 1758, before the more popular version of 1760.

35. If the first version was indeed published in 1710, there could have been no Frankist link, save the renewed interest in the charge in the 1760s.

36. Although not further elaborated in the source, it might be noted that Lithuanian folklore has the tradition of using a blood‐soaked piece of cloth in magical rituals. See Anglickienė, “Žydas pasakojamojoje tautosakoje,” 48–52.

37. Żuchowski, Process kriminalny o niewinne dziecię Jerzego Krasnowskiego, 111–12. Serafinonowicz’s book did not survive; there are suggestions that this edition might have been destroyed. Nevertheless, other authors of eighteenth‐century anti‐Jewish literature made reference to this book on a large scale (G. Pikulski, S. Zuchowski). The aforementioned S. Zuchowski’s book was one of those that referred to the work of Serafinowicz.

38. Ibid.

39. Kuz’min, Materialyi, 54.