The Jews of Stühlingen

2-6

Ralph

December 21, 2016

¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Figure 3. Number of Records per Decade

¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 The process yielded 4826 dated records, ex­trac­ted from 209 sour­ce do­cu­ments and bro­ken down fur­ther in­to 10,040 in­di­vi­dual events, that is, da­ted items lin­ked to a spe­ci­fic mo­ni­ker. Events do not co­ver the pe­riod from 1600 to 1750 even­ly (see fig. 3).

¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 Undoubtedly, many of the event at­tri­bu­tions to spe­ci­fic per­sons are in­cor­rect, and 22% of events la­cking an at­t­ri­bu­tion is dis­appoin­ting. With a mas­sive ex­pen­di­ture of ef­fort it should be pos­si­ble to im­prove these de­fi­cien­cies. But is it worth it? It might pro­vide us with a few more in­te­res­ting de­tails, but it is un­li­ke­ly to chan­ge the over­all pic­ture.

¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 Unfortunately, primary sources mentioned males almost exclusively. Nevertheless, it was possible to identify some 46 wives and daughters either by name or at least by that of both husband and father.

¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 Despite the large number of events processed, a final yield of 190 identified men and 46 women appears paltry (see table 1). Never the less, it is reassuring that almost 80% of the 10’042 identifies events could be allocated to identified persons.

¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 Table 1. Allocation of events.

¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 The method employed resulted both in high redundancy and blind spots. Women, children, and other dependents remain largely invisible. Rabbis, cantors, teachers, and ritual slaughterers were rarely covered by a protection list and were captured in this study only if people engaged in business or fell afoul of the law. Family names started to appear in 1649 for Weil/Weyl, 1662 for Meyer, 1679 for Gu­ge­num/Gu­genheimb, 1680 for Bickert/Pickert, 1692 for Bloch/Blokh, and 1704 for Bernheimb. These names could then be assigned retrospectively to patrilineal ancestors and their other descendants in turn. For thirty-six out of the 190 individuals no family name could be identified.