Boundaries of the nation: “the Jew” in the Swedish press, ca. 1810–1840

ABSTRACT This article explores representations of Jews and different ways of how ‘the Jew’ was used and mediated in the Swedish press in relation to the idea of the Swedish nation during the period 1810–1840. Based on Zygmunt Bauman’s concept of ‘the conceptual Jew’, this article explores how ‘the Jew’ was used to define identities in the emerging Swedish nation. Implicitly, discussions about ‘the Jew’ often revolved around the dismantling of the estate society. Although challenged, antisemitic notions were prevailing, and a fear that Jewish emancipation would damage the Swedish economy was frequently expressed. In many ways, discourses articulated in the Swedish press mirrored ideas common across Europe. There was not one mediated ‘Jew’ in the Swedish press but a plurality: foreign, honest, and usurer are explicit in the material. Writers occasionally distinguished between Orthodoxy, which was portrayed as unassimilable, and Reform, which was described as more in line with contemporary Christian society. I conclude that differences within liberalism and ideas of national belonging were to some extent defined and discussed in relation to ‘the Jew’.


Introduction
In the Old Order, Jews were considered an estate of their own. The Enlightenment brought with it ideas of Jews being able to be included as individuals, not as a groupin line with ideas of dismantling the whole estate system. During the long nineteenth century, Jews gained and lost rights. This is known as the period of Jewish emancipation. 1 Discussions raged in Europe on whether Jews could be included in society or not, and under which conditions such an inclusion would be made, 2 and Sweden was no exception. 3 Society was changing all over Europe. Corporation-based guild societies were slowly being replaced by capitalistic and individualistic societies. As part of this major transformation, Jewish communities changed and adapted. 4 Jews had little political power to fight for emancipation. Hostility was wide-spread, and most theories of emancipation argued for a full assimilation of Jews into the Christian majority. 5 Liberals in Scandinavia turned to Germany, England, and France for inspiration. German its formulation, the 'Jewish Question' was the question of Jewish emancipation, with the concept of citizenship being constructed in relation to 'the Jew'. 15 Cultural identities, linked to citizenship, were on the rise in Europe in the early nineteenth century. 16 Different concepts of citizenship were discussed all over Europe, nationally as well as transnationally. The 'citizen' was male, well-educated, wealthy, and not the least Lutheran: 'For these reasons women, Jews, and the lower classes were thought unfit to be citizens', as Henrik Edgren puts it. 17 Frode Ulvund, Ronald Schechter and Gary Kates all argue that debates about Jews were a way to define what it meant to be a good citizen in which 'the Jew' defined what the good citizen was not -the anticitizen. 18 Unlike the contrast drawn by newspapers between Europeans/White Americans and Native Americans, the Jew and the Swede were not on opposite sides of 'civilization'. 19 It was a conflict within civilization, not between the 'civilized world' and wilderness, which made the Jew even more enigmatic. 20 In this article, I will not delve deep into the discussions about 'the Jew' (or 'jew'). Suffice it to say that there are many who, for example Zygmunt Bauman, Jean-Francois Lyotard and Jean-Luc Nancy, have written on the topic of what 'the Jew', as a figure, represents, and on the historical use of this concept. 21 Bauman suggests that the construction of a nation needs outsiders who can act as contrasts to, in this case, the 'Swede'. 22 Precisely because Bauman's 'conceptual Jew' is an empty vessel that can be charged with conflicting characteristics and elements, anyone can utilize the concept to further their own argument. 23 A fear that Jews would be indistinguishable from Christians grew, according to Bauman, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, when Jewish men cut their beards and dressed as gentiles, 24 a custom that already was common among the first Jewish settlers in Sweden. 25 Schechter utilizes Bauman's ideas in his study of the Jewish question in eighteenth century France, and as Schechter suggests, the plurality of associations made 'the Jew' a thankful stand-in for other issues. 26 For example, the Jew got to represent the negative sides of societal changes during the Swedish Jew-feud of 1815, and debaters were divided along lines of different national identities: civic or ethno-cultural, according to Edgren. Propagators for Jewish rights held a civic understanding of the 'citizen', while anti-Jewish sentiments were rooted in an ethno-cultural understanding. 27 Furthermore, Paula Hyman notes that, during the nineteenth century, 'the Jew' transformed from being a symbol of statis and obscure traditionalism into a symbol of the culture of capitalism and commerce. 28 Likewise, Julie Kalman shows how the 'Jewish Question' remained throughout the nineteenth century but transformed alongside societal changes. 29 Moreover, Benjamin Maria Baader stresses that the late nineteenth and twentieth century image of the effeminate Jew was not an issue for anti-Jewish writers during the first half of the nineteenth century; gentle manliness and the 'feminine spirit of Judaism' was not seen as a problem. 30 Bauman argues that the function of prejudices was, before emancipation, to maintain and legitimize the segregation between Jews and Christians. After emancipation, the function changed and became a tool in trying to prevent the homogenization of society. 31 Another function can be added to this: using 'the Jew' to establish and proclaiming one's (political) identity and, in line with Edgren and Ulvund, different conceptualizations of nationality. 32 Based on Bauman's idea of the conceptual Jew and contextualized through previous research, I will explore the function(s) of this utilization of 'the Jew' in the Swedish press during the period 1810-1840.
With the emergence of a more widespread press, a sense of community was starting to form. These imagined communities were the beginnings of nationalism, as Benedict Anderson has stated. The nation started to form, and a sense of belonging emerged. The press created the possibility of shared worldviews and, thus, shared worlds, which in turn created highly contested ideas on who should be included in these communities. 33 I do not intend to explore the exact process of constructing these communities, but rather utilize the term -interchangeably with nation -as a sense of belonging. If a group was included in the nation, they were seen as belonging to the community. In the process of excluding and including, 'the Jew' became an important subject to discuss. Could Jews be part of the Swedish nation? Thus, to fully utilize the concept of 'the Jew' in relation to the Swedish press, the terms imagined community and nation are applied to explain its function.
The press was part in creating a sense of community -the idea of belonging to a nation. However, different newspapers held different ideas on who belonged. The press was predominantly read by the upper and middle classes, mainly the bourgeoisie, 34 and it was in these circles ideas of national identity were formulated. Press material is thus valuable since it gives historians insight into narratives and ideas circulating at the time. 35

Material and method
This article is based on textual analysis of articles from Swedish newspapers. The material is gathered from Kungliga Biblioteket's database of Swedish newspapers. 36 The number of hits on the word Jude (Jew) alone is 1 474 during the whole period, 1810-1840. With the more inclusive search word jud*, which includes judar, judisk, and so forth, we get 11 989 hits, although at least a fourth can be dismissed as false hits. This does not include other search words, such as israel*, mosaisk*, or hebr*, which generates even more hits (in contrast, muhamed*, katolik or katol*, only get 330, 196, and 2 890 hits, respectively). Therefore, limitation in time and geography is required: the material is mainly gathered from periods when Jews were a hot topic, such as 1813-1817 and 1836-1840, with 1824-1828 included as a contrasting period; and the study is geographically restricted to newspapers from Gothenburg and Stockholm -two cities with great regional differences in which Jews were allowed to settle. The number of hits shows what Schechter, concerning eighteenth-century French encyclopaedists, phrases as 'an interest in the Jews that far exceeded their numbers and degree of power'. 37 This great interest is also obvious in the nineteenth-century Swedish press. The total number of hits extracted are 1 392, whereof 393 are for Gothenburg. They are unevenly distributed over the three periods: 1. 1813-1817, 75 for Gothenburg and 78 for Stockholm; 2. 1824-1828, 119 and 362, respectively; 3. 1836-1840, 199 and 559. The increased quantity over time is in line with larger editions, which affected the reach. 38 A majority of the hits are short notices, adverts for books about Jews or Judaism, foreign news, theatre plays, and jokes (also called anecdotes). Some are duplicates, since during this period, newspapers 'borrowed' freely from one another, without necessarily referring to the original source. It is often obvious that some articles and notices are derived from the rural press or foreign newspapers -especially from England and Germany. Since the focus is on how the press utilized 'the Jew', the focal points of the analysis are debates and longer descriptive texts. Thus, wording, adjectives, and content in relation to Jews and Judaism, combined with a contextual reading, constitutes the core of the analysis. 39 In 1810, a new, more liberal freedom of the press act was introduced, which opened for new types of public discussions, which quickly became dominated by nationalistic and patriotic language. The forming of indragningsmakten (censorship of the press) in 1812 played down radicalism. This only lasted until 1815, when newspapers once again started to propagate more radical ideas. In 1844, indragningsmakten had, since publishers circumvented censorship by renaming newspapers, lost its function and was thus abolished. The most famous example, but far from the only one, is Aftonbladet i Stockholm (henceforth Aftonbladet), which renamed itself every time it was censored -Aftonbladet the Tenth, Aftonbladet the Eleventh and so forth. 40 Furthermore, in the 1810s, the modern press had not formed in Sweden. Newspapers were still run by publicists, publishing letters written and paid for by 'ordinary' citizens (i.e. bourgeoisie) and the Old Order's elite (i.e. nobility and clergy). By the 1830s, the modern press was establishing itself. With the emergence of professionalized editors, debates between newspapers with different standpoints gradually replaced the former debates between educated citizens in the same newspapers. This change was primarily driven by liberal newspapers. 41 A new middle-class was forming, which embraced liberal ideas. These were widely discussed in the press, such as religious tolerance and individualism. All the while, conservatism was strong during the first half of the nineteenth century and the liberal press functioned as opposition to the conservative king. But as Edgren points out, liberalism was not yet fully formed and both radicals and conservatives propagated liberal ideas; the difference was mainly for or against societal reform. Approaching liberalism in the early nineteenth century with a contemporary understanding of the ideology could make for an anachronistic conclusion. 42 However, liberal ideas were spreading and gained a strong foothold in Sweden in the 1820s and liberalism's influence grew during the following decades. The designation of newspapers as 'liberal' is, therefore, neither arbitrary nor presentistic. Some were keener on propagating liberal ideas and during these decades, clearer distinctions between liberals and conservatives evolved. In the 1830s, self-proclaimed liberal newspapers, such as Aftonbladet and Göteborgs Handels-och Sjöfartstidning (GHT), emerged. First, we will investigate the dominant image of 'the Jew' in the Swedish press. Thereafter, how the press discussed Judaism as a religion during the 1810s and 1820s, and then, Blood Libel, also known as ritual murder accusation, will be scrutinized before we move on to emancipation debates with a focus on 1838. Initially, however, we need to lay out some differences between Gothenburg and Stockholm.

Gothenburg and Stockholm
Following Napoleon's defeat in 1815, Gothenburg's economy crashed. Many Jewish businesses in Gothenburg filed for bankruptcy. The crash was often blamed on Jewish traders, 43 but the crash hit them harder than the Christian traders since they lacked safety nets. The Jewish traders were closely connected through business and family bonds, many had huge loans and the bankruptcies were a direct consequence of the economic crisis. Among 'the Swedish public', as Hugo Valentin puts it, another explanation was prevalent: The Jewish traders had planned their bankruptcies as an attack against Sweden's economy due to Jewish dishonesty and hatred towards Christians. Often, reactions against the 'freethinking of the Enlightenment' bore antisemitic marks. 44 During the 1830s the consumption market in Sweden started to grow and during this period about a third of the wholesale suppliers in Gothenburg were Jewish. 45 Stockholm's economy had been stagnant for a longer period, since the 1760s, which would last well into the 1840s. 46 Stockholm, being the capital, was more influenced by bureaucracy and dominated by the nobility, which was much more present there than in Gothenburg, where the bourgeoisie had more influence. Gothenburg's location on the west coast meant import and export were important aspects of the city. The city was based on trade and commerce, while Stockholm had a wider variety in its structure. It was not only a city on the east coast where trade was important, it was the seat of power. Such factors made the cities distinctly different from each other in many ways. 47 The more international outlook of Gothenburg created an environment for liberalism to take hold while the closeness to power and bureaucracy meant that Stockholm was more dominated by conservative ideas.
From 1815 to 1840, the Jewish population in Sweden increased from 785 to 911. The Jewish population in Gothenburg almost doubled during the same period, from 215 to 415, and were greater than in Stockholm during the whole 1830s. 48 However, the general population differed -about 80 000 lived in Stockholm and 20 000 in Gothenburg. The percentage of Jews was therefore much higher in Gothenburg -about 2 per cent. Now, since we have established some differences between the two cities, we will turn to the image of 'the Jew' presented in Swedish newspapers during the period 1810-1840. We will begin with one of the most pervasive negative images of 'the Jew', namely, the usurer.

The usurer
The idea of 'the Jew' as a usurer goes back to Judas Iscariot, according to Hyam Maccoby. 49 Lars M. Andersson points out that the idea of 'the Jew' as a usurer was so well established in Sweden that, in the seventeenth century, those accused of usury were by definition called Jews. In Swedish, as in other European languages, 'Jew' became a word synonymous with usurer. 50 It was so well-established that it even had made its way into Swedish dictionaries in the nineteenth century. 51 Throughout the examined period this image of 'the Jew' as a usurer is the most obvious stereotype, and is a theme present in anecdotes/jokes, news notices, and longer articles. 'The Jew' was seen as a huckster whose travelling trade was a 'plague' in many countries. Examples are plentiful. In Aftonbladet i Götheborg it was said in 1817 that there were only two kinds of Jews, 'circumcised and baptized', and the worst usurers were the baptized ones. 52 In a letter published in Stockholmposten in 1824, diseases were linked to travelling Jewish traders: 'It is not only for their fraudulent speculative spirit and lust for profit that the Jews are harmful for a country; during their usury travels they also drag with them, and spread, all kinds of diseases'. 53 In 1825, a fake diary of an 'Extortion-Jew' was published in Aftonbladet i Götheborg, allegedly showing the crude lifestyle of a Jewish trader. 54 Even in the otherwise 'Jew-friendly' and liberal GHT a poem was published in 1838 called 'Our Hopes', describing Sweden as strong and foreign influences as unwanted. One of the last verses begins with the line: 'All Jewish usury will disappear'. 55 The Stockholm-based newspaper Freja published a telling article about Gothenburg in 1839. Freja said that there were some advantages to Gothenburg over Stockholm. For example, there were no extortionists in Gothenburg and the Jews of the city, 'who are great in numbers', were 'as fair, honest and well respected, as other traders, and it would be enough for their praise when one says, that the Mosaists here are no Jews' -implying that they were no usurers. 56 The link between Jews and usury is very explicit in the material. This link points towards a strong continuity in the Swedish image of 'the Jew'. From the sixteenth well into the twentieth century. 57 'The Jew' as a dishonest stranger and usurer who was excluded from the Swedish national identity -by liberals, conservatives, and radicals -is common during the whole period. As mentioned above, Bauman means that the construction of a nation needs 'strangers', outsiders who can act as contrasts to, in this case, the 'Swede'. 58 Jews who was not seen as usurers were no real 'Jews', they were 'Mosaists'. A link to the June Decree and the choice of words: 'Swede of the Mosaic faith'. However, it is important to note that, for example, not all jokes and anecdotes described Jews as usurers or otherwise in a negative way. A few reoccurring jokes utilized 'the Jew(ess)' to criticize noblemen or, as in a joke found throughout the period, bold men trying to flirt with women. In these cases, the Jewishness of these characters were used to imply that noblemen and bold men were pigs. 59 Still, even though the depictions were not negative, neither Jews nor Jewesses are presented as being Swedish, but, rather, foreign.
It was not only Jews as a group or as individuals that were excluded from the Swedish nation, 60 Judaism as a whole came under attack.

Judaism as the 'other' religion
A common image of Judaism was a static one. 61 Jewish religion and tradition were often characterized as inferior and archaic, and described as stagnant since the first century CE, with different factions sometimes connected to factions in ancient Judea. For example, 'the Orthodox and the Heterodox' were likened to 'Pharisees and Sadducees'. 62 Judaism played the role as the 'Other religion' to the Lutheran State Church, just as 'the Jew' was the Other to the Swede, and just like 'the Jew', Judaism was seen as dualistic: retrogressive on the one hand, on the other, a sign of progress.
As elsewhere in Europe, Jewish tradition was seen as a '"semitic" relic of the past'. 63 Orthodox Judaism, and Polish Jews, was described in negative terms, as reactionary and backwards. It is clear that the German discourse on East European Jews influenced Swedish discourse. 64 Articles and notices mentioning Jews in Poland frequently described them in negative terms. For example, Stockholmsposten published an article called 'About the Jews in Poland' in 1817, mainly derived from Tablue de La Pologne by Malte Brun, from 1807. The text declared that Jews had 'great numbers and powerful influence' in Poland. Jews were described as criminals and lazy to such a degree that they strived only to do the simplest work possible; pointing out that 'the Austrian Government's attempts to civilize the Jews have been unsuccessful' and no efforts to 'liberate' the Jews from their constraining traditions had succeeded. 65 This is just one example, but negative descriptions of Polish Jews are common. The loss of Finland, almost half of the Swedish kingdom, to Russia in 1809, increased animosity towards the East. Negative attitudes towards Tsarist Russia possibly affected the image of 'Polish Jews' and Orthodoxy. To write about foreign policies was sensitive and generally avoided, 66 which could be a reason for critiquing Eastern Europe through the use of 'the (Eastern) Jew'. However, a general animosity towards Orthodoxy was likely influenced by enlightenment ideas of Jewish tradition as being archaic and obsolete as well.
On the other hand, in the 1810s, Reform was seen as positive. However, changes in religious practice were not credited to Jewish reformers but to the 'beneficial' contact between Jews and Christians which made Jews more 'sensible': 'we consider this to be one of Christianity's most beautiful triumphs, that it cannot only prevail to enlighten itself but also next to itself'. In the same article, the writers recommended Jews in Sweden to 'closely inform themselves about their German Brethren's Reform, and [we] hope, that it will, by all those who do not persist with ridiculous religious customs and the maintaining of ignominious morals, with pleasure be tried and adopted'. It was considered a joy that the 'more enlightened members of the [Jewish] nation' had embraced 'purer' religious morals and made their worship more 'reasonable'. 67 Here, the writers revealed negative attitudes towards traditional Judaism, while reforming tradition was seen as progress in the spirit of Enlightenment. 68 The incentive behind this enlightenment, however, was credited to Christianity.
Interest in reform is most evident in the 1810s, when the reform movements in Germany accelerated. Several articles depicted changes in service and tradition. This interest suddenly disappears from the sources in the 1820s, probably due to the Prussian crackdown on the Berlin reformers in 1823. 69 In the 1830s, Jewish congregations in Sweden started to reform in earnest, 70 which seems to have gone unnoticed in the press, but an interest in conversions persisted.
Christian superiority was shown in so-called 'Jew-baptisms'. Conversion to Christianity was celebrated by many and the press often reported on 'Jew-baptisms' from all around Europe. 71 Conversion often meant gaining rights and bore with it a hope for social acceptance. 72 As Bauman puts it, baptism was 'the bait of social promotion and ultimately acceptance' that would generate citizenship. 73 In an article about a conversion in Norrköping, the person in question was described as 'worthy' of baptism due to his 'Christian temper and good conduct in general'. 74 However, one had to be worthy of Lutheranism, and in extension, citizenship -a Jew was not worthy without a 'Christian temper'. As a result, the Jew was not worthy of Swedishness as a Jew, but as a convert to Christianity.
Conversions were also linked to another topic where the Jew became a strong symbol: Jewish emancipation. 75 Jewish rights were eagerly discussed in the Swedish press. Before we delve into the topic of emancipation, we will look at a few cases of Blood Libel.

Ritual murder
Blood Libel is the myth that Jews sacrificed Christian children to obtain martyr blood to use in rituals. 76 Some readers were maybe familiar with this story, since anti-Jewish medieval texts were common in nineteenth century Sweden, even though ritual murder was not a prominent theme in such prints. 77 In 1838, Aftonbladet published, on the 21 st of February, an article that straight out claimed that a Jewish ritual murder had been committed in Düsseldorf in present day Germany. Aftonbladet wrote: Several Jews still harbour the unfortunate and abominable belief that it will bring them good fortune in trade and other businesses, and even grant them eternal bliss, to possess Christian martyr blood. Last year, the child of one Mr Pätz, was murdered in the most nefarious way possible, just outside of Düsseldorf. They found every individual body part eviscerated, the nails had been torn from fingers and toes, eyes, mouth, nose, etc., were pierced, and every artery cut open. The inhuman Jew understood to lure the child outside of the city, where he clogged its mouth and thereafter began his executioner work. Barely was the deed done, before the still warm corpse of the child was found. The manner of death left no doubt, the reason had been to acquire so-called martyr blood, and people crowded to murder all Jews in Düsseldorf. Police could only with great effort restore order. . . 78 The article claimed that many people and organizations, including 'the Jew-community', had donated money to be used as a reward for the arrest of the culprit. It even claimed that the perpetrator had been apprehended on the Dutch border and brought back to Düsseldorf. This article bears several hallmarks of a typical Blood Libel: the victim was a child, the perpetrator was a Jewish man, blood had been siphoned, and the purpose of the blood was to use it in some kind of ritual. It is typical of a nineteenth century ritual murder accusation, due to the perpetrator being an individual, not Jews as a group per se -as was the case in premodern versions of the myth. The case also bears a central theme of nineteenth century ritual murder accusations: the idea that emancipation is misguided, and Jewish tradition and religion are abominable to Christianity. 79 Even though it was republished later in the former conservative, just turned liberal, Götheborgs Dagblad on the 7 th of March the same year, 80 it did not stand unchallenged for long. In a letter to the editor, published in GHT on the 12 th of March 1838, an anonymous writer challenged the claims made in Aftonbladet's article and presented proof that it was based on false information: 'This dreadful story seems to be, by all accounts, derived from der Hanowersche Zeitung and has by now, by a newspaper based in Düsseldorf, been proven partly false and partly exaggerated'. The writer explained that a child had in fact been murdered in Düsseldorf, but with only one stab of a knife and not in the manner described in Aftonbladet. It was pointed out that the culprit was still at large as recently as the 5 th of February the same year and that 'no reason to, as both of these newspapers have told, suspect a Jew of this misdeed has been discovered during the course of the investigation'. 81 No real suspicion was needed, however, since the reason behind publishing such a story was not to find the real perpetrator, but rather to discredit Jews.
After the correction, no other newspaper republished this story, as often was the case when a story got a lot of attention. This could prove that it did not receive much notice. However, just a few months later, in June 1838, Aftonbladet published another article that told the story of how Jews in the Middle Ages crucified small Christian children. 82 The Blood Libel myth was not done for in the Swedish press. 83 As Andersson points out regarding the antisemitic tabloid-like newspaper Folkets Röst: To publish antisemitic material like this would not have been possible if it was not for an underlying antisemitic tendency in the Swedish society at the time. 84 Two years later, in 1840, Aftonbladet and the state-owned Post-och Inrikes Tidningar (PoIT) reported on the Damascus affair -the Blood Libel and ensuing Christian and Muslim pogroms, which rose to grand proportions in American, English, and French newspapers. The French consul in Damascus supported the native Christians, who blamed Jews for the murder of a monk, while the English-speaking world condemned antisemitic myths of this kind. 85 While PoIT reprinted some of the debates, 86 Aftonbladet once again published an article accusing Jews of ritual murder. The article claimed that seven Jews had confessed to the truthfulness of the accusations and the Blood Libel myth at large and described them as cowards as they supposedly tried 'to save themselves' through conversion to Islam. Aftonbladet included what could be seen as a reservation in the last paragraph of the article, commenting on the commotion 'this article' had brought among Jewish congregations in France and Germany and how they had refuted it. Still, the published article expressly states the events to be true. 87 Oppositely, PoIT followed the events, in which critique against the French consul sometimes emerged, and published short notices explaining that Blood Libel was not sanctioned in Judaism. 88 However, neither the four articles and notices Aftonbladet published nor the dozen articles and notices in PoIT sparked debate in the press to such an extent as it did in England and France.
What was the purpose of publishing ritual murder accusations? Blood Libel is a narrative claiming that Jews harbours hostile feelings towards Christianity; a narrative coherent with Aftonbladet's stance in the 'Jewish question'-debate of 1838. Publishing these kinds of negative myths augmented the necessity of keeping Jews and Christians apart through legislation. This is in line with many liberals in Europe not wanting to completely dissolve social boundaries; emancipation was not for everybody. 89 Bauman claims that modernity is the production of order, 90 but here, in its early stages of replacing the Old Order, modernity meant chaos -the upheaval of the estates and guilds. Antisemitic notions helped to maintain these boundaries that modernity threatened to dismantle. Societal fear of chaos manifested itself in 'the Jew'. Blood Libel 'proved' the inability of Jews to be included in the Swedish nation and why Jewish emancipation was misguided. We will now turn to such debates, first we will briefly touch upon the 1810s and then move forward to the important year 1838, when the Jew Ordinance established in 1782 was replaced with the June Decree.

Emancipation
Toleration did not mean all Jews gained civil rights. There were strict requirements in the form of wealth. Even so, these debates went on and on in the national assembly in France in the 1790s, 91 just as in the Swedish Riksdag: During the period 1810-1840, almost no session went by without the Jewish Question being discussed. 92 The 'French toleration' of Jews, that is, the upheaval of discriminatory laws due to Napoleon's conquests, ended after Napoleon's defeat in 1815, and resulted in a reactionary backlash. This conservative wind did not affect Jews in Sweden, since they still lived under a Jew Ordinance in the manner of the Old Order. 93 As a part of the Jew-feud of 1815, 94 Dagligt Allehanda published a speech in 1815, meant for the Nobility house of the Riksdag, in which allegations towards Jewish traders were refuted, discrediting the notion of a Jewish conspiracy against the Swedish economy. Jewish traders were contrasted to Swedish traders, who were seen as dishonest and greedy. It was argued that Jews should not be hindered in any way to contribute, with their 'capital and working capacity', to the nation, since Jews were beneficial for the state. 95 Other exceptions to the negative image of 'the Jew' subsisted, like in 1811, when Dagligt Allehanda wrote that Jews were 'famed for honour'. 96 However, even though Jews were mediated in a positive light, they were still seen as being firmly outside of the Swedish nation. Honourable or not, they were not imagined to be Swedish.
Even though debates raged in the Riksdag and in pamphlets during the 1810s, 97 discussions about Jewish rights in the Swedish press in the 1810s and 1820s were rare. However, there were a certain interest in Jewish rights abroad. Prussia is one example that gained a lot of attention, for example for the Tolerance Edict of 1812. 98 Also, the development in Denmark was covered -for instance when Jews gained civil rights in 1814. News about Jews in other countries were something of interest for the Swedish press during the period, just as it had been during the second half of the eighteenth centurywhen the press was praising tolerance and writing negatively about Jews at the same time. 99 This is not unique to the Swedish press, in most of Europe, Jewish rights abroad was a topic of interest. 100 However, discussions about Jewish rights first gained momentum in the public debate in the late 1830s in Sweden, with the abolishment of the Jew Ordinance -which was dubbed "emantsipatsion" in broken "Jew-Swedish" by the newspaper Freja in order to categorize Jews as German immigrants and not Swedish citizens. 101

The june decree of 1838
Many political discussions raged in the press and censoring was common. 1838 was particularly harsh in Sweden and during the summer, the capital experienced many riots, known as the Crusenstolpe riots. The older view of these riots as solely democratic and liberal has been nuanced by Mats Berglund, who also stresses the antisemitic incidents which occurred among this unrest. 102 . The Jew Ordinance was abolished in June and replaced with the June Decree, but this was not announced until August, due to the government's fear of enraging the public. At first, the decree was very progressive, granting the right to settle in the whole kingdom and made Jews almost equal in a civil sense, abolishing restrictions on professions -dismantling the Jewish 'trade caste'without granting political rights. The government's fear turned out to be justified, and two weeks after the proclamation new riots sprang up in the capital -this time more related to the Jewish question than the previous riots. People chanted anti-Jewish slogans and smashed windows of Jewish-owned houses in Stockholm's Old City. Fierce opposition led to the reinforcement of many of the old restrictions in September, such as the restriction of settlement. 103 Just as Schechter notes concerning France, opposition and support for Jewish rights came from the whole political spectrum, and just like in the rest of Europe, resistance against Jewish emancipation came from all different levels of society. 104 Many newspapers were censored due to their critique of the decree, such as GHT, Göthen, Norrlands-Posten, and several others. Göthen, a liberal newspaper in Gothenburg, wrote that Jews deserved rights, but the manner of how the decree came to pass was incorrect. 105 This was a common critique, and although GHT strongly supported the June Decree, it sided with the critics on this issue, since it was a royal decree and not voted on in the diet. Therefore, it was principally right and principally wrong at the same time; the liberal spirit of the decree was correct while the nature of the decree violated other principles of liberalism. 106 Belonging to the liberal press also meant opposing the conservative majority and, not the least, the conservative king. Therefore, criticizing royal decrees was paramount for a liberal identity, and consequently, Jewish emancipation came under attack. Criticizing Jewish emancipation could have stayed there -critique against the manner of the decree -but the press took it further and constructed, with the help of antisemitic rhetoric and stereotypes, an alarming scenario of what full emancipation would entail for the Swedish nation. As such, critique of royal decrees cannot explain, for example, Aftonbladet's negative stance towards Jews and Jewish emancipation.
Additionally, it is important to note that Aftonbladet would, after the worst destructions of property (owned by both Jewish and non-Jewish traders) on September 10th, lament over the fact that the attacks were directed against 'the most reputable families of their nation'. 107 Sometime later, Aftonbladet claimed to never have criticized Jews or Judaism, but only the manner of the decree, and since the newspaper had published some articles in favour of Jewish emancipation already in 1835, Aftonbladet considered itself to be consistent in its position. 108 However, this did not stop Aftonbladet from publishing other negative depictions of Jews, especially Eastern Jews, already later in the same year. 109 Now, we will discuss a theme present in the debate before September 10th.

A state within the state
As in Germany and France, the premise of inclusion was often linked to the question of to what extent Jews adapted their culture and religion to be able to participate in the nation. 110 The idea of Jewish disloyalty to the nation, due to Jews belonging to the Jewish nation, can be found sporadically throughout the period, 111 but became more pronounced in the debates following the June Decree. For example, a letter to the editor in Aftonbladet, argued that Jews had to surrender their 'Jew-hood' before a true 'amalgamation' was possible. In a long introduction, the editor explained that he denounced religious intolerance and thought Jews in Sweden deserved emancipation, if no more 'foreign' Jews would be allowed entry to the nation, they would still be confined to the four allowed cities, and that Jewish traditions which hindered assimilation would be disavowed by 'the Jews' themselves. The letter described how extortionate interest rates and usury was uncommon were no Jews lived, and how 'the nature' of their trade, 'as well as their way of life and their association between themselves' was unfair to Swedish traders, and therefore legitimized 'Jew-colonization' (i.e. restrictions on settlement). Jews were 'a foreign people' and could not cease to be strangers until they ceased to see 'us' as strangers. 112 This reasoning was based on the idea that Jews were loyal to the Israelite nation, and therefore, granting them political rights would be equal to granting any other foreign subjects -such as Russians living in Sweden -the same rights as the nation's citizens. 113 Still in 1839, Aftonbladet published an article claiming that Jews, and their mindsets, did not belong to the regions in which they lived, but to a Jewish nation. 114 'The Jew' was considered a foreign subject, no matter how long individuals had lived in the country.
A second part of the letter, published about a week later, claimed: 'the Jew [does not] become Swedish if one merely gives him the name and say that he is'. Cultural specificity meant Jews were outside of the Swedish cultural community, and therefore, were unworthy of being citizens. Jews belonged to the Jewish nation, not the Swedish. Greed was seen as deeply rooted in the Jewish 'soul', which, according to the writer, made Jews unable to belong and be loyal to the nation. If Jews were granted rights, all the wealth in Sweden would be concentrated to 'the hands of a foreign caste', within a few decades. 115 Clearly, Jews were not yet seen as 'deserving' of inclusion in the national community: they had to change to be worthy.
As often, according to antisemitic rhetoric, Jews were seen as having themselves to blame, in this case for not being equal to 'Swedes'. An article published in Aftonbladet, originally published in Spegeln -a liberal, rural newspaper, argued that Sweden's economy and businesses were unprepared for Jewish emancipation, especially if Jews would be allowed to settle in rural areas, which the first version of the June Decree allowed. 'Experience', we are told, from 'Poland, Hungary, Russia, [. . .] Germany, in Morocco and Turkey' where Jews 'swarm' in 'millions and hundreds of thousands', proved that Sweden was unable to handle a full emancipation. 116 The fear was that the romantic notion of rural Sweden, a bastion of Swedishness, would be polluted by Jews, the epitome of urban life. Once again, the Jew symbolized a threat to Swedish culture and religion: the very core of the imagined community.
Commonly used in antisemitic rhetoric in France, England, and Germany, the slogan 'nation within a nation', or 'state within a state', is frequent in the Swedish press and was employed in debates about the Jewish Question throughout Scandinavia. 117 Aftonbladet alarmingly predicted that Sweden would soon be engulfed by 'Muhammedans, Brahmins, and several other foreign cults' if Jews were allowed rights, clearly warning against an upheaval of the Old Order and the community of 'real' Swedes this order entailed. Aftonbladet also argued that Christianity was the state religion for a good reason. It obviated 'aged delusions [. . .] including the offerings of the Old Testament and the Jews' 118 -a justification of separative legislation and an echo of German romantic ideas of the nation as Christian. If Jews did not convert, they could merely be tolerated and at most be granted civil rights, not political. 119 The animosity towards Jews present in Aftonbladet cannot be explained simply by a liberal anti-royalism, but rather lies in the idea of a dissolution of Judaism and Jewish tradition which would precede full assimilation in the Christian society -an enlightenment idea propagated by many liberal Christian emancipationists 120 -combined with the notion of Jews as foreigners. Furthermore, in line with Ulvund, Aftonbladet's publishing of antisemitic material could be conceptualized as furthering the image of 'the Jew' as an anti-citizen. 121 In the same manner, the former moderate, turned liberal, Freja warned that Jews would swarm the country if given rights, and claimed that Jews wanted more rights than other citizens, abolish the State Church, and turn Swedish women into 'negresses'. GHT dismissed Freja's warnings as laughable attempts to discredit Jews and described the Jew Ordinance as 'barbaric' and argued that laws hindered Jews to become Swedes, not Judaism. Freja insisted on a collapse of Sweden in a couple of generations if Jews were allowed to prosper. GHT soon published a letter to the editor rejecting such claims: 'The Jews are people like others. They are hardworking, but more or less so, like others'. 122 As we can see, GHT tried to fight the notion that Jews were inherently different. The identity of GHT as the only 'true' liberal newspaper hung on the notion of freedom from prejudice, and thusly, on their acceptance of Jews as citizens; thus, GHT represented a minority view at the time, which gradually gained more influence, 123 and some of the first steps towards accepting the notion that Jews could be included in the Swedish nation. In 1839, more voices were raised in favour of Jewish rights, also Aftonbladet on accession. 124 Integration of Jews were seen, by liberals across Europe, as a touchstone for a liberal society. 125

Regional differences
Consistent with its self-identification as the only true liberal newspaper, GHT blamed other liberal newspapers, especially the ones in Stockholm, for forgetting one of the first principles of liberalism when they wrote about Jewish emancipation: Freedom from prejudice. The newspapers in Stockholm were, according to GHT, characterized by a 'pettiness [. . .] and a guild-spirit, more suited for the taste of Stockholm's reputable bourgeoisie'. 126 This stance was not only a positioning against prejudices against Jews, but also a positioning against the estate society and its guild-based economic sphere. When Aftonbladet and other newspapers cast blame on 'the Jew', they positioned themselves against radical changes of society -a moderate or, almost, conservative view more in line with the political climate in Stockholm. Therein lies distinctions between different kinds of liberals: radicals wanted to upheave the Old Order and therefore propagated Jewish rights, while moderate or conservative liberals preferred mild changes. As Christoph Leiska points out: Liberals in Gothenburg would, in the following decades, pride themselves on tolerating Jews. Their acceptance of Jews was used as proof that they were true liberals, even though antisemitism was still present amongst them. 127 This is also true for Aftonbladet, which proclaimed itself to be liberal and tolerant of Jews while producing and publishing antisemitic material. Liberal tolerance had its limits.
Overall, liberals from Gothenburg were more outspokenly positive towards Jewish emancipation than liberals from Stockholm. One reason for this could be the closeness to power. As mentioned above, to be a liberal meant to be in opposition to the king, therefore, as the June Decree came from above, it had to be criticized. By being liberals in the capital, they had to be even more outspokenly against the decree, and thus Jewish emancipation, to be able to prove themselves as liberals in opposition. Furthermore, the June Decree was criticized since it was perceived as a threat to the Swedish economy due to Jewish traders' role in import. In Gothenburg, being further away from power, the king was still criticized, but the liberal ideal of emancipation and the decree was praised. Traders in Gothenburg may not have perceived Jews as threatening in the same degree since they probably had a more beneficial view on import. This is a possibility to why toleration of Jews was more important in Gothenburg than full opposition to the king and therefore, the June Decree was mainly criticized for the manner it was imposed, not for its content.
Even if European and American liberals fought for equality, it was conditioned, and some restrictions of the Old Order were left intact. 128 This began to change in the 1830s and 1840s. However, in the first half of the nineteenth century, most Swedish advocates of liberalism were not ready for an extended concept of citizenship. This meant that they firmly linked citizenship to Christianity, just as many reactionary governments, such as Prussia, later did after the 1848 revolution. 129 The unknown, the future, held too much uncertainty for Jews to become citizens. Citizenship and equality did not mean equality for everybody, as in this case, not for 'the Jew', but women and the lower classes were also excluded. Liberalism became a bourgeois project, and thus, reflected bourgeois ideals. Not even newspapers propagating radical liberal ideas, such as Aftonbladet, were above stereotypization of the Jew. This would, in the 1840s, prompt a member of Judiska Intresset, Michael Warburg, to label Swedish liberals, and Aftonbladet in particular, as turncoats: 'as long as liberals do not become liberal, I have no answer'. 130 The debates in Sweden were clearly connected to discursive controversies in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, such as the Netherlands. 131 And just as in other European discourses, Jewish citizenship was seen as counterintuitive by many, and the idea that Jews needed to abandon their religion and convert was linked to romantic notions of the nation. To be a Christian meant to possess the virtues necessary for a good citizen. 132 How could Jews be considered citizens when they constituted a state within the state? How could Jews harbour Christian values? Here, we see the different identities of liberals. Depending on what kind of liberal one considered oneself to be one took different stands on the 'Jewish question'. Still, at the heart of this question was the notion of citizenship and thus, who would be included in the Swedish community.

Conclusion
At the outset, we asked how such a small percentage of the population came to be of such interest to the press. The short answer is that the symbolism of 'the Jew' is fluid. As Schechter points out, connections to Jews were seemingly endless. Therefore, 'the Jew' acted as a stand-in for other discussions and the dismantling of the estate system was debated through discussions about Jews and Jewish rights. The old societal structure of the estates was rapidly changing but the Riksdag of the Estates was left untouched until 1866 when a bicameral legislature replaced the estate system, which contributed to political emancipation in 1870. 'The Jew' was not only designated as the discursive Other but a factual Other as well, due to legislation. And just as Baader has shown in the case of Germany, in no text is the masculinity of Jews questioned or considered an issue. 133 As citizenship was under discussion, and as it was widely acknowledged that women and the poor were excluded from citizenship, the main aspect of citizenship left to discuss was the Christian component. This resulted in debates about the rights of Jews to be classified as citizens. There were other issues than masculinity which occupied the minds of anti-Jewish writers: such as greed, Blood Libel, and, especially, loyalty to the nation.
The changeability of the Jewish Question presents itself in the material under study in this article. In the 1810s and 1820s, except during the Jew feud of 1815, focus lay mainly on religion and conversion, while the Jewish Question took on more political proportions in the 1830s and became more of an identity issue and a debate about the dismantling of the estate society. There was an obvious denigration of Polish Jews and Orthodoxy on the one hand and a positive interest for Reform Judaism on the other, especially in the 1810s. This positive image of Reform changed after 1823 when the Prussian government hampered Berlin reform, which further proves the great influence the German debate and political climate held over Swedish discourse. Orthodoxy played the role of archaic, senseless tradition and simpleminded resistance to enlightenment, while Reform was seen as proof of the beneficial influence of Christianity and enlightenment upon Jews. Polish Jews were used as a warning example of granting rights to Jews. Imagery of chaotic upheaval of order and Swedishness were common in the press, especially with the upheaval of the Jew Ordinance in 1838. Interestingly, an ambivalence in newspapers such as Aftonbladet is notable: sometimes presenting rights for Swedish Jews as positive, while other times reproducing stereotypes, and fearmonger about what emancipation and 'foreign' Jews would entail for Sweden and its economy. Furthermore, Judaism -Orthodoxy in particular -played the role of the 'Other religion' to the Swedish Lutheran state church. The firm link between church and state meant that in the minds of many Swedes, Lutheranism was central in the imagining of Swedishness and a Swedish community.
Liberals and conservatives used the Jewish question to define the boundaries of the nation. When discussing the abolishing of the Jew Ordinance and the new June Decree, one of the main arguments against it from liberals was the fact that it was a royal decree, and not voted for in the Riksdag. Therefore, the decree, even though liberal in spirit, broke with liberalism. Being a liberal in the 1830s meant being in opposition to the king, and thus, the June Decree 'had' to be criticized. However, this anti-royalism only explains some aspects of liberal opposition towards Jewish emancipation. By the same logic, conservatives should be supportive of the king and the June Decree, however, they were not. Furthermore, it does not explain the amount of antisemitic material in Aftonbladet. Herein lies the construction of Jews as an anti-citizen and 'foreigner', a state within the state, which could not be fully included in the Lutheran Swedish community. 134 When it comes to differences between Stockholm and Gothenburg, the main difference was the more outspoken liberalism and argumentation for Jewish rights in the latter city, with the foremost propagator for Jewish emancipation being GHT. Thusly, the imagined community constructed in some Gothenburgian newspapers, mainly GHT, was more inclusive than the one constructed in the capital. The backlash against the June Decree was a sign of the long struggle that awaited propagators for Jewish emancipation in Sweden. In 1841, a liberal Jewish organization for Jewish rights called Samfundet I.I: Judiska Intresset was formed. The 1840s meant Jews being more active in the public debate, demanding inclusion in the Swedish community -the Swedish nation. Akin to the European context, the 1840s would be a decade when Jewish emancipation became one of the most popular topics for public political debates. 135 The history of Jewish emancipation in Sweden bares many similarities with the developments in the rest of Europe and cannot be disconnected from the grand perspective.