Pariahs, Strangers and Court-Jews: A Conceptual Clarification
The terms “Pariah” and “Pariahvolk” have been introduced into the sociological vocabulary by Max Weber and used primarily to characterize the status of the Jewish people. But Max Weber has neither clarified the ideal-typical character of the concept nor demonstrated its historical applicability. Sub...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
1974
|
| In: |
Sociological analysis
Year: 1974, Volume: 35, Issue: 3, Pages: 155-166 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | The terms “Pariah” and “Pariahvolk” have been introduced into the sociological vocabulary by Max Weber and used primarily to characterize the status of the Jewish people. But Max Weber has neither clarified the ideal-typical character of the concept nor demonstrated its historical applicability. Subsequently, the term has been confounded with the term “stranger,” as used by Toennies, Brentano and especially Simmel. Recently, Lewis A. Coser has applied both terms interchangeably and subsumed them under the general title, “The Alien as a Servant of Power.” In addition, Coser has extended the latter term to an entirely non-“Pariah” population, namely, the Christian boys pressed into the Corps of the Janissaries in the Ottoman Empire. The following deliberations attempt to untangle these varied understandings of the term “Pariah” and related terms and to show that the term “stranger” retains its validity. In a final paragraph, conclusions are drawn as to the relation of Jews to governments in the changed circumstances of the post-emancipatory period. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2325-7873 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Sociological analysis
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.2307/3710646 |