Jewish
Identity and Crypto-Judaism: The emergence of a community
Seth
Ward, University of Wyoming
This article about identity and Crypto-Judaism, primarily in the southwestern USA, discusses the history and significance of the emergence of the community in the past thirty years. Much of the story is tied to the career of Stan Hordes, a historian whose work on genealogy and genetics, the canon of evidence, and the expression of identity, has been central to any understanding of the phenomenon in the United States, which often reflects very different realities than those in Israel. The research and the emergence of this identity in North America complement the work of Casa Shalom in Spain, Israel and throughout the world. It is based on remarks offered earlier this year at an event honoring Stan Hordes in Albuquerque NM, USA, at the Leslie and Gloria Mound Library in Netanya, and in a faculty seminar at the University of Shanghai.
Stan
Hordes, the leading researcher about contemporary Crypto-Judaism in the Southwestern
U.S., often recounts how people came to him quietly after lectures about
Spanish Inquisition records of 16th--17th -century “Judaizing”
practices such as lighting candles, large meals on Friday evenings, and avoiding
pork. They told him this was their own story too--the practices described
matched unusual family practices they had always wondered about.
In
the US, Hispanics wondered about Judaism and remarked on perceived similarities
as they heard lectures, or came in contact with Jewish families as domestics,
college roommates or army buddies, Especially from the 1980s, anti-Semitism was
falling among Hispanics born in the United States, and many quested to
understand and appreciate a Jewish component to their heritage.
Slowly,
a consistent picture emerged, and many Hispanics identified in various ways as
Jews or “Crypto-Jews.” Hordes’ historical research work provided a sound basis
for interpreting family practices sometimes associated with crypto-Judaism, and
familiarity with genealogical records sometimes enabled him to find that such families
had known Jewish ancestors. He and others worked to understand whether reported
practices are explicable either as evidence of survival of Jewish rituals, or
converso responses to fear of accusation of Judaizing.
Yet
he also emphasized critical research standards, the need for sensitivity and privacy,
and the pitfalls of over-interpretation, for example, proving that the
prevalence of certain names in this population is significant only for some names
and some decades, otherwise having no correlation to Jewish heritage, and
arguing that artifacts purported to evidence hidden Jewish heritage attest to
the way people interpret them, not necessarily to the actual history of the
object, and have limited utility in “proving” Jewish ancestry.
Hordes’
most important role was the publication and dissemination of research in
scholarly articles, documentaries, exhibits and more, greatly facilitating the
emergence of a community of Hispanic ancestry who identify in some way as
Crypto-Jews. Journalistic reports and
academic research have a more direct influence in the USA than in Israel. Without
the Law of Return, Israel population registry, state-religious schools, and the
Chief Rabbinate, there is no government and little mainstream Rabbinic
involvement in determining Jewish identity. Some converso descendants have joined
the Jewish mainstream, but many chose no affiliation (in this way resembling a
large portion of American Jews), or are drawn to groups or Rabbis outside the
Jewish mainstream. As a result, the work of scholars (such as Hordes) and
journalists, reporting real or imagined research, and of supposed validation
via names, genetics or artifacts, plays a more crucial role than any formal
authority.
The
first inklings of the development of an American Crypto-Jewish identity began
to emerge in the 1970s and 1980s (well after reports began to emerge in Mexico
and elsewhere), with references to contemporary Hispanic families who
identified as Jews. Carlos Llaralde’s PhD dissertation studied members of his
own family in the Brownsville area in Texas, near the Mexican border, and there
was talk about Tejano (Texan)-Jewish identity in places such as San Antonio. Memoires
were written in those days, but not published, perhaps out of fear of rejection
in the largely-Catholic worlds in which the writers lived. This began to change
radically in the mid-1980s. There were a few publications around 1985, and
Hordes and Tomas Atencio published a detailed prospectus in 1987. A number of
histories of New Mexico written in the late 1980s mentioned some telling
details. Hordes was a standard-bearer for this change: he was interviewed by the
American Public Broadcasting Service and
was featured in documentaries, wrote articles in professional journals and newspapers,
co-founded professional historical societies for Crypto-Jewish Studies and New
Mexico Jewish history, and worked with the Smithsonian Institution on an
exhibition. Some of the impetus to this development in the late 1980s was the
500th anniversary of the Expulsion from Spain. I well remember
interest expressed to me in the mainstream Jewish community about such issues
as whether Spain would use the occasion to welcome the Jews back to Spain—and
what this would mean to people of Spanish ancestry who had lost this part of
their heritage.
I’ve
argued that discussion of Crypto-Judaism should focus on three rubrics: the canon
of evidence, the question of genealogy, and the expression of
identity.
The
“canon of evidence” has many problematic elements, such as the argument from
names and artifacts mentioned above. Hordes’ genealogical research into a group
of families showed that this argument holds up for a generation or two in the 19th
century, otherwise is unconvincing. Regarding artifacts—items supposedly used
as mezuzot, holy books, etc., or symbols held to be Jewish--research demonstrated
that artifact or symbol descriptions often reflect the value assigned them by
the describer rather than the artifact’s original purpose. Yet these
descriptions themselves give important testimony to how such items are
understood today.
Another
type of evidence is family tradition, for example, a tradition handed down that
somos
judaeos “we are Jews,” or that some other family was Jewish. Again,
this is not as convincing as some think: for example, accusations of Judaism might
reflect anti-Semitic slurs applied to people with no actual Jewish ancestry,
perhaps even adopted by them as a point of pride.
While
critical analysis may question individual items in the canon of evidence, a
strong pattern of practices, artifacts and traditions recur often among
American Crypto-Jews and help define their identity.
The
“question of genealogy” is likewise problematic in many ways. In a general
sense, all American hispanos are likely to have some Jews among their
ancestors: even low estimates of medieval Iberian demography, intermarriage and
migration suggest it’s statistically unlikely that any American Hispanos today
lack any Jewish ancestors. Specific Jewish ancestry can only be demonstrated by
patient genealogical work (Hordes has been a leader in this area), not
shortcuts based on personal names, places or spellings. “Genetic essentialism”
often plagues popular treatments of this phenomenon. Conclusions drawn from DNA
evidence often do not stand up under scrutiny, or are irrelevant to the point
being made. For example, while there is a higher than expected probability that
Jews identifying as Kohanim have the “Cohen Modal Haplotype” Y chromosome
pattern, a random person with the haplotype has a low probability of being
Jewish, and no genetic pattern implies preservation of Jewish beliefs, practice
or identity. (For example, former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s
four grandparents were all Jews, yet she is not considered Jewish). Unfortunately, many popular discussions,
conference presentations and individual crypto-Jews assert such flawed genetic
essentialism—here too, often testifying to the way these data are understood by
those who cite them and use them to understand their own identity.
To my
mind, the best use of genetic genealogy relates to the medical sphere: one may
quibble about the interpretation of an allele or gene, but the identification
of diseases and disorders worth testing among a given subset of the population
saves lives. Hordes has been active in promoting medical population genetics,
and a more critical approach to the whole issue.
----------------------
To my
mind, the most important component is the expression of identity. Prof. Kunin’s
book Juggling
Identities is based on numerous interviews in
the area, leading to understand the expression of crypto-Jewish identities.
Indeed, as I have argued above, the evidence and genealogy adduced are best
understood in the context of identity. Indeed, the most striking aspect is not
the evidence and genealogy, but the way attitudes towards Judaism have changed
in this community.
An
informal community of American Hispanos claiming their ancestors were forced to
become Catholics has emerged in the past three decades, largely but not
entirely with roots in the Southwestern U.S. What are the components of this
community? I like to use categories of “believing, behaving and belonging” to
discuss religious phenomena, and they shape the discussion here.
As
with mainstream American Jews, there is little uniformity of traditional
religious belief among U.S. Crypto-Jews: some fervently believe in God and some
don’t, some express beliefs that would be familiar to anyone in the mainstream Jewish
community; most do not. But most believe in the value of the continuity of
their Jewish identity, at least in a hidden form: a belief that they and their
ancestors have always been Jewish in at least some sense (rather than just
having some Jewish ancestors or choosing to identify as Jews).
As for
“behaving:” Some people in this community follow very traditional Jewish
rituals, but most do not. Most talk about rituals and practices they believe
their ancestors followed: lighting candles on Friday nights –similar to the
Jewish practice, but in a hidden area in the house, or baking pan de Semita at
Easter time—but few follow these rituals either. They assert that Purim is
highly meaningful to Crypto-Jews and talk of Esther with pride for maintaining Jewish
identity in secret while married to the King and living in the royal palace —but
few participate in normative Purim activities.
Practice is more
likely to involve participation in various groups and forums, conferences and
travel. They seek DNA confirmation of their heritage (perhaps this is a kind of
ritual). They consult rabbis and cheer various organizations that validate their
beliefs about the continuity of their Jewish identity and the nature of that
identity, while wary of total identification with Jewish mainstream—a cause of
the complexity of their relation with it). “Belonging” to a Crypto-Jewish or
Sephardic community (often not the mainstream Jewish community!) is more
important than traditional beliefs and behaviors.
As we saw with
belief in “Jewish continuity” (rather than God), this style of “Jewish
practice” in which there is often only a small religious content, emphasizing non-religious
community institutions and ethnic practices, also mirrors a large portion of
the American Jewish mainstream.
It may be
instructive to compare American Hispanic Crypto-Jews and African American
Muslims. Both groups share a foundation narrative asserting a unique heritage,
including the survival of a small trace even if completely hidden or nearly
destroyed. Neither community has simply folded into its religious mainstream,
maintaining a complex relationship with their “former identities” and often
marginalized by many who question whether these groups are authentic enough or
meet religious standards.
The Crypto-Jews
remind us that adopting a religious heritage can be very complex, and part of a
multiple set of identities. There is no single pattern; if anything, the
Crypto-Jews seem to behave more like American secular Jews than traditional Jews.
Crypto-Jews assert they are maintaining a religious tradition but often it is
the essentialist genetic (i.e. racial) component that is most important to them.
It’s often difficult for them to relate to mainstream Jewish community concerns
such as Israel, educating the next generation, and deepening Jewish
identification among a population that considers Judaism elective. Yet if the
way they handle genealogy, evidence and identity is unique, and their
relationship with the Jewish mainstream complex, their patterns and priorities
of believing, behaving and belonging fit
into an American pattern, and underscore the importance of national models in
understanding crypto-Judaic phenomena around the world.
Finally, a word about
“Standard Bearers.” Integration into urban and especially suburban areas with
large Jewish populations, shared experiences in World War II, the decline of anti-Semitism
all were necessary for hispano openness and desire to express a Jewish identity.
But I do not think they were sufficient:
people like Stan Hordes worked to help give this phenomenon a voice. Although Hordes for example, has often been
called a “booster” he is more of a “standard bearer”—both as in carrying the
flag (i.e. the ‘standard’) but also of setting the standard: combining commitment
to this community with research and critical thinking. The leadership of
committed individuals such as Stan Hordes with solid research credentials is
crucial to the emergence and stability of this community.
