Czytaj książkę: «History of the Jews, Vol. 4 (of 6)», strona 38

A deputation of the Jews of Rome waited upon the newly-chosen pope to do homage to him, and described in touching words the sorrows which his predecessors had brought upon them. Pius IV promised them relief, and issued a bull for the Jews of the Papal States (February 27th, 1562), which was certainly to their advantage, but the milder regulations only made the restrictions still remaining appear the harsher. The introduction to the bull is interesting, because it brings to light the hypocrisy of the papal curia:

"The precepts for your conduct issued by my highly venerated predecessor, out of his zeal for religion, have (as we are told) served some who coveted your goods as a pretext for false accusations against you, and have been interpreted contrary to the intention of my predecessor, thus causing you to be vexed and disquieted. Therefore, we decree, in consideration that Holy Mother Church grants and concedes much to Jews in order that the remnant of them may be saved, and in accordance with the example of our predecessors," etc.

All that the new pope conceded, however, was that Jews of the Roman dominions beyond the city be allowed to doff their distinguishing mark, the yellow cap, acquire land to the value of 1,500 ducats, trade in other things besides old clothes, and hold intercourse with Christians, but not to keep Christian servants. This was about all that one of the best popes granted, or dared grant. More important to the Jews of Rome was the point that the accusations of transgressing the harsh laws of Paul IV were not heard, as well as the charge of misdemeanor against those who had not given up their copies of the Talmud. The Italian Jews also made an effort to obtain from the pope the remission of the interdict against the Talmud. But this question was in the hands of the cardinals and bishops sitting in the council of Trent, and to carry out their object the Italian communities chose two deputies (October, 1563). As the council only approved the list of forbidden books previously made out in the papal office, the opinion of the pope and those who surrounded him served as a guide in the treatment of Jewish writings. The decision of this point was left to the pope, who afterwards issued a bull to the effect that the Talmud was indeed accursed – like all humanistic literature, including Reuchlin's "Augenspiegel and Kabbalistic writings" – but that it would be allowed to appear if the name Talmud were omitted, and if before its publication the passages inimical to Christianity were excised, that is to say, if it were submitted to censorship (March 24th, 1564). Strange, indeed, that the pope should have allowed the thing, and forbidden its name! He was afraid of public opinion, which would have considered the contradiction too great between one pope, who had sought out and burnt the Talmud, and the next, who was allowing it to go untouched. At all events, there was now a prospect that this written memorial, so indispensable to all Jews, would once more be permitted to see the light, although in a maimed condition. The printing of the Talmud was in fact undertaken a few years later at Basle.

But even this slight concession was withdrawn from the Jews of the Papal States when Pius IV was succeeded by a pope who held gloomy, monkish, intolerant institutions in higher esteem than human happiness and human life, and who carried the ecclesiastical aims of Caraffa and his colleagues to their extreme consequence. Pius V (1566–1572) outdid his pattern, Paul IV, in love of persecution and cruelty. This pope hated Jews no less than he hated Swiss Calvinists and French Huguenots. They soon felt the severity of the new ecclesiasticism. Three months after his enthronement (April 19th, 1566), Pius V confirmed in every respect the restrictions which Paul IV had imposed on Jews; he even increased their severity, and disregarded the ameliorations of his predecessor as if they had never been granted. The former regulations, then, were enforced: exclusion from intercourse with Christians, prohibition to own lands, or to carry on any business except the trade in old clothes, compulsion to wear the distinctive Jew badge, and the refusal to permit more than one synagogue. But these edicts were not issued against the Jews in the Papal States only; they extended throughout the whole Catholic world. For at that day, in a period of spiteful reaction against Protestantism, the decrees of the pope made a far different impression from what they had produced previously, and found willing executors. Thus days of sorrow were again beginning for the Jews of Catholic countries.

Once more Joseph Cohen had to enter trials in his "Annals of Persecution," once more to collect the tears of his people in his "Vale of Weeping" (Emek ha-Bacha). The ecclesiastical tyrant, Pius V, often gave the opportunity. Under the pretext that the Jews of the Papal States had infringed his canonical laws, he caused a number of them to be thrown into prison, and their books to be collected and burnt. The prosperous community of Bologna was visited with especial severity, the blow being aimed at their property. In order to have a legal reason for robbery, confusing questions upon Christianity were put at a formal hearing before the tribunal of the Inquisition; for example, whether the Jews regarded Catholics as idolaters; whether the forms of imprecation against the Minæans, and the "Kingdom of Sin" in the prayers referred to Christians and the papacy, and especially whether the story, in a work but little read, about a "Bastard, the Son of an Outcast," was intended to refer to Jesus.

A baptized Jew, named Alexander, had drawn up the points of accusation, and the prisoners were questioned upon them, under application of torture. Some of them succumbed to the pain, and confessed everything that the bloody tribunal asked them. Only the rabbi of Bologna, Ishmael Chanina, had the courage to declare even under torture, that if he should confess anything during the unconsciousness which might ensue from his sufferings, such confession would be null and void. As others, however, had confessed to slanders uttered by Jews against Christians, the papal curia had an excuse for its robberies. The rich and the upper classes were forbidden under the severest penalties to leave the town. But this foolish prohibition awakened in the minds of the Jews of Bologna the idea of leaving the place entirely and forever. By bribing the gatekeeper, they succeeded in escaping, with their wives and children, from the net spread for them, and fled to Ferrara. Pope Pius V was so incensed against the Jews for this act, that he informed the college of cardinals that all Jews were to be expelled from the Papal States. In vain some of the church dignitaries protested, showing how the Jews had been protected by the chair of St. Peter from time immemorial, that it had indeed pledged itself to shield the remainder of the Jews, in the hope that they might be saved. In vain did the commercial world of Ancona entreat the pope not to ruin by his own deed the commercial prosperity of the Papal States; his hatred of Jews stifled the voice of common sense, of justice, and of interest. The bull was issued (February 26th, 1569), that all Jews in the Papal States, except those of Rome and Ancona, should depart within three months; those who remained were to be reduced to slavery, and undergo even severer punishment.

There were at that time about 1,000 Jewish families and 72 synagogues in the Papal States, excluding Rome, Ancona, and Bologna. In spite of the misery which threatened them, almost all included in this decree decided upon emigration, and only very few became Christians. The exiles also suffered loss of property, because they had not time to sell their estates, and collect the debts owing to them. The historian Gedalya Ibn-Yachya alone lost over 10,000 ducats by his debtors in Ravenna. The exiles dispersed, and sought protection in the neighboring little states of Pesaro, Urbino, Ferrara, Mantua, and Milan. The Jews of Avignon and Venaissin, the only communities remaining on French territory since the expulsion of the Jews from France two hundred years previously, were also ordered to leave. The reactionary princes of the church had long cast malicious glances upon them, for they had been particularly favored by the officials of the Papal States under the humanistic popes, Leo X, Clement VII, and especially Paul III. The curia received its only income from this district through their commerce. The Jews of Avignon, Carpentras, and other towns, owned great wealth and property of all kinds, and held lands.

Most of the Jews of the Italian and French ecclesiastical territories, like all expelled from Christian countries, went to Turkey, and there met with the kindest reception, if they were able to get so far without being attacked and maltreated by the robber-knights of the Order of Malta. It seemed almost as if there were to be an end of Jews in Christian Europe. Hatred, persecution, and banishment reigned everywhere. In Catholic dominions the fanaticism of the papacy prevailed, and in Protestant countries the narrowness of Lutheranism, sunk from its former height to the level of a child's quarrel.

Both seemed to desire the enforcement of the oft expressed thought of the arch-enemies of the Jews, that Jews have no right to dwell in the West.

CHAPTER XVII.
THE JEWS IN TURKEY. DON JOSEPH NASSI

Joseph Nassi's Favor with Sultan Solyman – His Friendship for Prince Selim – Hostility of Venice and France to Nassi – Joseph Nassi restores Tiberias, and is created Duke of Naxos – The Vizir Mahomet Sokolli – The Turks, at the Instigation of Nassi, conquer Cyprus – Rebellion against Philip II in the Netherlands – Solomon Ashkenazi – Election of Henry of Anjou as King of Poland – Ashkenazi negotiates a Peace between Venice and Turkey – Gedalya Ibn-Yachya and Jewish Literature in Turkey – Joseph Karo compiles the "Shulchan Aruch" – Azarya del Rossi – Isaac Lurya – The Jewish "Dark Age" – Spread of the Kabbala – Lurya's Disciple, Chayim Vital Calabrese – Death of Joseph Nassi – Esther Kiera and the Influence of Jewish Women in Turkey.

1566–160 °C.E

Again, as often before, the threads in the web of universal history were so involved that it was impossible to annihilate the Jews of Christendom even by systematic persecution. The sun, obscured on the Jewish horizon by gloomy clouds in the West, again rose bright in the East. Through a favorable turn of affairs a time was beginning in Turkey which, to the superficial observer, may seem a brilliant epoch. A Jew, who would have been burnt at the stake without ceremony in the countries of the cross, occupied a very influential position in the land of the crescent, rose to the rank of duke, and ruled over many Christians. All the Jews in Turkey, amounting to millions in number, rose with and by him to a free and honorable station, the envy of their despised and less numerous brethren in Christian Europe. With rage the Jew-hating Christian potentates saw their plans here and there frustrated by Jewish hands, and their internal complications rendered more and more involved and entangled. The down-trodden worm might yet become an annoyance to its tormentors. Joseph Nassi, or João Miques, the outlawed Marrano of Portugal, caused anxious hours to many a Christian ruler and diplomatist, who were obliged to flatter him in an abject manner, though they would have struck him dead like a dog if he had been in their power. The illustrious republic of Venice, the mighty kingdom of Spain, the conceited government of France, and even the haughty papacy, all saw themselves endangered by him.

João Miques, or Don Joseph Nassi, who had been well recommended to the Turkish court by French statesmen when first he entered Turkey, had become yet more popular by his agreeable presence, his inventive genius, his experience, and his knowledge of the Christian countries of Europe and their political situation. Sultan Solyman, who understood men well, soon took him into favor. He formed extensive plans for beginning a war with Spain and aiding the Mahometans on the coast of Africa against those who fed the stake. Joseph Nassi, through his riches, and through the attachment of his fellow-believers in Christian countries, was kept well informed as to what was going on in Christian courts, and could tell the sultan the state of political and military affairs, relieving the latter of the necessity of employing spies, or of permitting himself to be deceived by the Christian ambassadors at his court. Don Joseph could assist him with wise counsel, and thus as a Frankish bey soon became a very important person in Constantinople and was able to render material service to those of his own religion. His importance increased still more by a fortunate chance. Hatred and jealousy prevailed among the sons of Solyman, and the father preferred the younger on account of his military inclinations. The courtiers kept themselves aloof from the disregarded prince, Selim, and did not intercede with his father on his behalf. Only Joseph Nassi pressed Selim's claims warmly on his father, and when the latter wished to show his favor to his son by making him a handsome present of 50,000 ducats in cash, and 30,000 in valuables, he chose his Jewish favorite as the bearer of the gift to Selim's residence in Asia Minor. The prince, overjoyed both at the gift and at this proof of favor, from that moment became very friendly towards the messenger, and assured him of his life-long gratitude. He made a favorite and confidant of the Jewish bey, and appointed him a member of the life-guard (Mutafarrica), an honor to which even the sons of Christian princes eagerly aspired, and to which a large salary was attached.

The ambassadors from Christian courts saw with vexation the growing influence of a Jewish favorite, acquainted with all their plots, upon the future sultan, and promulgated the falsest rumors about him. They reported to their courts that Joseph Nassi was leading the prince into all kinds of orgies and excesses, and was ruining him. The ambassadors of Venice and of France were most hostile, because he saw through their artful designs against the Turkish court, and was able to frustrate them, and especially because he had private quarrels with them. The government of Venice had imprisoned his mother-in-law, deprived her of some of her property, and also had treated him scornfully; the French court owed an immense sum (150,000 ducats) to the house of Mendes-Nassi, and did not think of repaying it. The French ambassador was, therefore, very eager for Joseph's ruin; he wrote to Henry II, that he should inform Sultan Solyman that Joseph Nassi made it his business to acquaint the enemies of France with all the negotiations carried on at the Turkish court, and that being a Spaniard he did this in the interest of Spain. But so far from punishing him, Prince Selim and the reigning sultan took up Joseph's cause, and urgently insisted that the court of France pay the debt owing their Jewish favorite. Henry II and his successor raised an objection to Joseph's well-founded demand, characteristic of the – shall we say, Christian? – morality of the time. They averred that both law and religion forbade the king to repay the debt to his Jewish creditor, because it was altogether prohibited for Jews to have business dealings in France, and that all their goods could be confiscated by the king. The sultan and his son did not, of course, recognize this code of morals, and insisted with a half-threat that Joseph Nassi should be satisfied. Joseph Nassi rose so high in favor with Sultan Solyman, that the latter gave him a tract of land in Palestine, on the Sea of Tiberias, to restore the city of Tiberias under his own rule, with the express privilege that only Jews should dwell therein. The deed of gift was signed by the reigning sultan, by Selim, the heir to the throne, and by his son Murad, so as to render it valid in the future, and not liable to dispute. Selim proposed to his father to reward Joseph's services still further, and to make him sovereign lord over Naxos and some other islands. But the vizir, Mahomet Sokolli, a Christian renegade, who watched the growing power of the Jewish favorite with jealous eyes, seems to have worked against this and to have upset the plan.

After Solyman's death, when Selim II entered his capital to receive the homage of his subjects (1566), and Joseph also presented himself to swear allegiance to the new sovereign, he created him on the spot Duke of Naxos, and of the Cyclades, Andro, Paro, Antiparo, Milo, twelve islands in all, which he gave him one after the other, and for which he had to pay but a small tribute. He also granted him the collection of the duties paid in the Black Sea on imported wines.

Thus a Jew was able to issue his commands in the following grandiose style: "We, Duke of the Ægean Sea, Lord of Andro." Joseph did not reside in the capital of his duchy, where he would have been too far away from the center of affairs, but remained in his handsome palace Belvedere near Constantinople, and deputed the government of the islands to a Spanish nobleman, a Christian named Coronello, whose father had been governor of Segovia. Jealously as the Christian princes regarded this Jewish duke, placed upon an equality with them, European affairs were in such a condition that they were forced not only to recognize, but even to flatter him. If they wished to gain anything at the Turkish court, they dared not ignore him, knowing how high he stood in Selim's favor, and of how much weight his opinion was in the divan. When an Austrian embassy from Emperor Ferdinand I arrived in Constantinople (after fresh victories gained by the Turks in Hungary) to sue for peace, and win the great dignitaries by gifts and annual subsidies, it was charged to make terms also with Joseph of Naxos. His bitterest enemies were obliged to dissemble their hatred. The two states which set themselves most to oppose him, namely, France and Venice, felt the power of the Jewish duke severely.

The king of France declined to pay the debt contracted with the Marrano house of Mendes and transferred to Joseph. The latter easily procured a firman from the sultan, by virtue of which he was allowed to seize all ships carrying the French flag which entered any Turkish harbor. Joseph of Naxos sent privateers as far as Algiers to make a raid upon French merchant vessels. At last he succeeded in getting possession of several vessels in the port of Alexandria, captured all the merchandise on board, and sold it to pay the debt owing to him (1569). The court of France raised a clamor, protested, stormed, but all in vain; Selim protected his favorite. A coolness arose in consequence in the diplomatic relations of the two countries, which was more injurious to France than to Turkey.

The French ambassador at the Porte was, therefore, very desirous to bring about the overthrow of Joseph of Naxos. Not only was his own honor concerned, but that of the French crown also. The French had often boasted in the European cabinets that their word had the greatest weight and influence at the Turkish court, and that they were in a position to lead the divan to determine upon war or peace at will. And now it was proved that a gross insult had been shown to the French flag by this very court, and that France was not even in a position to demand satisfaction from a Jew, the originator of the insult. The French ambassador, therefore, directed his efforts to turning this overthrow into triumph by compassing the fall of the influential Jew. An opportunity soon presented itself in the discontent of one of Joseph's agents. A Jewish physician, named David or Daud, one of the physicians in ordinary at the Turkish court, and also in the service of the duke, considered himself slighted and wronged by his superior, and a quarrel arose between them. As soon as the French ambassador got wind of this, he tried to fan the flame of dissension, promised Daud a sum of money and a place as interpreter at the French embassy with a yearly salary, and then entered into relations with him in order to obtain secret information about Joseph of Naxos. In his irritation Daud allowed himself to be led into hasty expressions. He promised to furnish the French ambassador with full proofs that Joseph of Naxos had carried on a correspondence traitorous to the Porte. He undertook to produce documents to prove that Joseph sent daily information to the pope, the king of Spain, the duke of Florence, the Genoese republic, in short, to all the enemies of the sultan, and kept them acquainted with every thing that went on at the Porte. Delighted at the opportunity of overthrowing the Jewish duke, he informed the king of France and the crafty queen-mother, Catherine de Medici, in cipher, that he would soon be in a position to bring the powerful enemy of French influence at the Turkish court to the scaffold (October, 1569).

The Jewish duke was placed in a position of the greatest danger, and with him probably all the Jews in the Turkish empire. If Daud had been able to push his hatred to the point of an open accusation, if French money could have supported the intrigue, and if the grand vizir, Mahomet Sokolli, the deadly enemy of Joseph, could have taken the matter in hand, the latter would have been lost. But the French ambassador thought it wise to treat the matter as a secret for a time.

In spite of this secrecy, the intrigues of Daud and the French ambassador were betrayed to Joseph of Naxos, and he was able to be beforehand with them. It was not difficult for him to convince Sultan Selim that he had always served him faithfully, and that of all his courtiers, he had been most sincerely attached to him. He obtained a decree from the sultan by which the traitor Daud was banished for life to Rhodes, the criminal colony of the Turkish empire. Either at the instigation of Don Joseph, or by their own impulse, all the rabbis and communities of Constantinople pronounced the severest form of excommunication upon Daud and two of his accomplices. The rabbinical colleges of the largest Turkish communities, Joseph Karo at their head, in servile flattery joined them, without first having convinced themselves of Daud's innocence or guilt. The extraordinary efforts of the French ambassador and court to procure the overthrow of Joseph were thus a complete failure, and left in the mind of the latter a feeling of only too justifiable bitterness, which induced him to strive the more to hinder and frustrate the diplomatic schemes of France.

Joseph of Naxos dealt even more severely with the state of Venice. Secret enmity prevailed between the Jewish duke and the republic, which both tried in vain to conceal by compliments. Independently of the ill-treatment which his mother-in-law had undergone at the hands of the Venetian government, it had refused Joseph's request for a safe conduct through its dominions for himself and his brother. Selim, not very well disposed towards the Venetians, was often urged by his Jewish favorite to put an end to the long-existing peace between them, and to set about the conquest of the Venetian island of Cyprus. In spite of the disinclination of Mahomet Sokolli, the first vizir, who was favorable to the Venetians, the war was undertaken.

The sultan is said to have promised Joseph that he should become king of Cyprus, if the enterprise proved successful, and the duke of Naxos is said to have kept a banner ready in his house, with the inscription, "Joseph, King of Cyprus." His European alliances made this undertaking easy. Whilst Mahomet Sokolli was still raising difficulties about consenting to a naval war of this character, Joseph received the news that the arsenal in Venice had been destroyed by an explosion. Joseph and the party in the divan which he had gained over for war took advantage of the embarrassment thus caused to the Republic of Venice, and persuaded the sultan to allow the attacking fleet to sail at once. Nicosia, one of the chief towns of Cyprus, fell at the first assault, and the other, Famagusta, was closely besieged.

In this instance, as often before, all Jews were made answerable for the action of one. That the Venetian government, at the outbreak of the war, imprisoned all the Levantine merchants in Venice, for the most part Jews, and seized their goods, was only natural in the barbarous state of intercourse between one state and another. But that the senate, at the instigation of the hostile doge, Luis Mocenigo, came to the resolve (December, 1571) to expel all Jews from Venice, as fellow-conspirators of Joseph Nassi and of the Turkish empire, was a result of the race-hatred encouraged by Christianity. Happily, things did not go so far. Notwithstanding the endeavors of the fanatical pope, Pius V, to bring about a league of the Christian states against Turkey, to organize a crusade against the so-called unbelievers, and to drive the Turkish fleet from the waters of Cyprus, the town of Famagusta was obliged to yield to the Turkish commander, and so the whole island fell into the hands of Turkey. The Venetians were compelled to sue for peace, and they placed their whole hope of obtaining it upon an influential Jew, who was to negotiate it. In spite of the solemn determination of the Venetian senate that no one should venture to say a word in favor of Jews, they had to be tolerated, because it dared not quite break with the Jews in Turkey.

The power of the latter was, indeed, so great that they, generally the suppliants, were entreated for aid by Christians. A serious rebellion had arisen in the Netherlands against Spain and the morose king, Philip II, who wished to introduce the bloody tribunal of the Inquisition. The barbarous Alva was trying to suppress apostasy and to lead back the erring into the bosom of the Catholic church by hecatombs of human beings. The block was to support the cross. In this extremity, the rebels turned to Joseph of Naxos, who had dealings with some of the nobility of Flanders from the time of his residence there. Prince William of Orange, the moving spirit of the rebellion, sent a private messenger to Joseph of Naxos, entreating him to persuade the sultan to declare war against Spain, which would necessitate the withdrawal of the Spanish troops from the Netherlands. The Austrian emperor, Ferdinand, also condescended to address an autograph letter to the Jewish duke in order to obtain the favor of the Porte, increasing the grand vizir's envy. Sigismund Augustus, king of Poland, who was hoping for an important service from the Porte, also addressed him, gave him the title of "Serene Highness," and, what was of greater importance, promised favorable conditions to the Jews in his country, to ensure Joseph's approval of his plans.

We may almost say that the divan, or Turkish council of state, under Sultan Selim consisted of two parties trying to checkmate each other: the Christian party, represented by the first vizir, and the Jewish, headed by Joseph of Naxos. Through and besides him there were other Jews who, though only in subordinate positions, exercised influence – the men on the holders of office, the women on the ladies of the harem. Sultan Selim's goodwill towards Jews was so evident that a story became current that by birth he was a Jew, foisted into the harem as a prince, when he was a child. Even the grand vizir, Mahomet Sokolli, although an enemy of Joseph of Naxos and of Jewish influence, was forced to employ a Jewish negotiator and to intrust him with important commissions. The Venetian envoy, ordered to work secretly against the Jews at the Turkish court, himself assisted such a man in obtaining influence.

Solomon ben Nathan Ashkenazi, who conducted the diplomatic affairs of Turkey with Christian courts for nearly thirty years, and who supplanted Nassi, was an unknown personage in Constantinople at the period when the duke of Naxos had a powerful voice in the divan. Descended from a German family of Udine, he began to travel early in life, and went to Poland, where he rose to be first physician to the king. On his removal to the Turkish capital, he placed himself as a subject of the Venetian republic under the protection of the diplomatic agents of Venice. Solomon Ashkenazi understood the Talmud, and was called rabbi, but displayed greatest intelligence and skill in the niceties of diplomatic technicalities, the disentanglement of knotty questions, in negotiations, settlements, and compromises. For these qualities he had been esteemed by successive Venetian agents in Constantinople. The first minister of the Turkish court recognized his diplomatic skill, attached him to his service, and trusted him to the end of his life with such commissions as required tact, wisdom, and discernment in their fulfillment. Whilst the Turkish arms were raised against the Venetians, Solomon Ashkenazi was beginning to weave the web for the future treaty of peace.

Christian cabinets did not suspect that the course of events which compelled them to side with one party or the other was set in motion by a Jewish hand. This was especially the case at the election of the Polish king. The death (July, 1572) of the last Polish king of the Jagellon family, Sigismund Augustus, who left no heir, necessitated a genuine election from an indefinite number of candidates, and this put the whole of Europe, at all events the cabinets and diplomatic circles, into the utmost excitement. The German emperor, Maximilian II, and the Russian ruler, Ivan the Cruel, were most intimately concerned in the election, as neighbors of Poland. The former did everything that he could to insure the choice of his own son, and the latter boasted that he or his son would be chosen king. The pope plotted for a Catholic prince to be placed on the throne of Poland; otherwise it was to be feared that the choice of a king in favor of the Reformation, already on the increase among the nobles and the townspeople of Poland, would strengthen the movement, and that the country would free itself from the papacy. On the other hand, the Protestant countries of Germany and England, and, above all, the adherents of the various sects of the new church in Poland itself, felt the greatest interest in securing the election of a sovereign of their own faith, or at least of one not an aggressive Catholic. To this was added the personal ambition of a powerful French queen, who interfered with a deft hand. The widowed queen, Catherine de Medici, as clever as false, who believed in astrology, and to whom it had been announced that each of her sons should wear a crown, wished to procure a foreign throne for her son, Henry of Anjou, so that the astrological prophecy might not be fulfilled by the death of her reigning son, Charles IX. She and her son, the king of France, therefore, set every lever in motion to place Anjou on the throne of Poland. Turkey also had important interests and a powerful voice in the election of the king of Poland. A tangle of cabals and intrigues was developed by the election. Each candidate sought to gain a strong party among the higher and lesser nobility of Poland, and also to gain the favor of the Porte. Henry of Anjou seemed at first to have some prospect of success, but this was imperiled by the bloody massacre of St. Bartholomew, in France, in which, at a hint from the king and the queen-mother, a hundred thousand Huguenots, great and small – men, women and children – were attacked, and murdered (August 26th, 1572). Such barbarity, planned and carried out in cold blood, had been unheard of in European history since the murderous attack made on the Albigenses in the thirteenth century by papal command. The Lutherans and other adherents of the Reformation in every country were completely stunned by this blow. The candidates for the throne of Poland sought to make capital out of it against Anjou. So much the more the French candidate, his mother, and his brother, were compelled to endeavor to gain over the Porte to their side. An ambassador extraordinary was dispatched to Constantinople with this object. So the choice of a king of Poland rested with a Jew who was in the background, for Solomon Ashkenazi governed the grand vizir completely, and ruled his will, and he managed foreign affairs in the sultan's name. Solomon decided in favor of Henry of Anjou, and won over the grand vizir to his side. When Henry of Anjou, by a combination of favorable circumstances, was at last chosen almost unanimously (May, 1573), the French ambassador boasted that he had not been one of the last in bringing about this election. But Solomon Ashkenazi ventured to write as follows to the king of Poland, afterwards king of France under the name of Henry III: "I have rendered your majesty most important service in securing your election; I have effected all that was done here" (at the Porte).