Between Oct. 14, 2014, and May 21, 2015, Pew Research Center, with generous funding from The Pew Charitable Trusts and the Neubauer Family Foundation, completed 5,601 face-to-face interviews with non-institutionalized adults ages 18 and older living in Israel.

The survey sampling plan was based on six districts defined in the 2008 Israeli census. In addition, Jewish residents of West Bank (Judea and Samaria) were included.

The sample includes interviews with 3,789 respondents defined as Jews, 871 Muslims, 468 Christians and 439 Druze. An additional 34 respondents belong to other religions or are religiously unaffiliated. Five groups were oversampled as part of the survey design: Jews living in the West Bank, Haredim, Christian Arabs, Arabs living in East Jerusalem and Druze.

Interviews were conducted under the direction of Public Opinion and Marketing Research of Israel (PORI). Surveys were administered through face-to-face, paper and pencil interviews conducted at the respondent's place of residence. Sampling was conducted through a multi-stage stratified area probability sampling design based on national population data available through the Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics' 2008 census.

The questionnaire was designed by Pew Research Center staff in consultation with subject matter experts and advisers to the project. The questionnaire was translated into Hebrew, Russian and Arabic, independently verified by professional linguists conversant in regional dialects and pretested prior to fieldwork.

The questionnaire was divided into four sections. All respondents who took the survey in Russian or Hebrew were branched into the Jewish questionnaire (Questionnaire A). Arabic-speaking respondents were branched into the Muslim (Questionnaire B), Christian (Questionnaire C) or Druze questionnaire (D) based on their response to the religious identification question. For the full question wording and exact order of questions, please see the questionnaire.

Note that not all respondents who took the questionnaire in Hebrew or Russian are classified as Jews in this study. For further details on how respondents were classified as Jews, Muslims, Christians and Druze in the study, please see sidebar in the report titled "http://www.pewforum.org/2016/03/08/israels-religiously-divided-society/" Target="_blank">"How Religious are Defined".

Following fieldwork, survey performance was assessed by comparing the results for key demographic variables with population statistics available through the census. Data were weighted to account for different probabilities of selection among respondents. Where appropriate, data also were weighted through an iterative procedure to more closely align the samples with official population figures for gender, age and education. The reported margins of sampling error and the statistical tests of significance used in the analysis take into account the design effects due to weighting and sample design.

In addition to sampling error and other practical difficulties, one should bear in mind that question wording also can have an impact on the findings of opinion polls.

Dataset from the Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism (ISCA) at Indiana University:

The Social Media & Hate research lab at the Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism compiled this dataset using an annotation portal (Jikeli, Soemer, and Karali 2024), which was used to label tweets as either antisemitic or non-antisemitic, among other labels. Note that annotation was done on live data, including images and context, such as threads. All data was annotated by two experts, and all discrepancies were discussed (Jikeli et al. 2023).

Content:

This dataset contains 11311 tweets covering a wide range of topics common in conversations about Jews, Israel, and antisemitism between January 2019 and April 2023. The dataset consists of random samples of relevant keywords during this time period. 1,953 tweets (17%) are antisemitic according to the IHRA definition of antisemitism.

The distribution of tweets by year is as follows: 1499 (13%) from 2019, 3712 (33%) from 2020, 2591 (23%) from 2021, 2644 from 2022 (23%) and 865 (8%) from 2023. 6365 (56%) contain the keyword "Jews," 4134 (37%) include "Israel," 529 (5%) feature the derogatory term "ZioNazi*," and 283 (3%) use the slur "K---s." Some tweets may contain multiple keywords.

725 out of the 6365 tweets with the keyword "Jews" (11%) and 664 out of the 4134 tweets with the keyword "Israel" (16%) were classified as antisemitic. 97 out of the 283 tweets using the antisemitic slur "K---s" (34%) are antisemitic. Interestingly, many tweets featuring the slur "K---s" actually call out its use. In contrast, the majority of tweets using the derogatory term "ZioNazi*" are antisemitic, with 467 out of 529 (88%) being classified as such.

File Description:

The dataset is provided in a csv file format, with each row representing a single message, including replies, quotes, and retweets. The file contains the following columns:

‘ID’: Represents the tweet ID.

‘Username’: Represents the username that posted the tweet.

‘Text’: Represents the full text of the tweet (not pre-processed).

‘CreateDate’: Represents the date on which the tweet was created.

‘Biased’: Represents the label given by our annotations as to whether the tweet is antisemitic or not.

‘Keyword’: Represents the keyword that was used in the query. The keyword can be in the text, including hashtags, mentioned users, or the username itself.

Licences

Data is published under the terms of the "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International" licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the support of Indiana University’s Observatory on Social Media (OSoMe) (Davis et al. 2016) and the contributions and annotations of all team members in our Social Media & Hate Research Lab at Indiana University’s Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism, especially Grace Bland, Elisha S. Breton, Kathryn Cooper, Robin Forstenhäusler, Sophie von Máriássy, Mabel Poindexter, Jenna Solomon, Clara Schilling, and Victor Tschiskale.

This work used Jetstream2 at Indiana University through allocation HUM200003 from the Advanced Cyberinfrastructure Coordination Ecosystem: Services & Support (ACCESS) program, which is supported by National Science Foundation grants #2138259, #2138286, #2138307, #2137603, and #2138296.

The first purpose of this study was to collect information of the types, severity and frequency of life-events and difficulties in orthodox Anglo-Jewish women and men. 2. Secondly, to study the relations between depression, anxiety and provoking agents (severe events and major difficulties), and to elucidate some vunerability factors, in orthodox, Anglo-Jewish women and men. 3. Thirdly, to compare the sub-groups - men and women, middle- and strictly-orthodox, on the factors assessed (psychiatric symptoms, events, difficulties etc.), and to examine each group and sub-group separately for specific aetiological and maintenance factors. 4. Finally, to collect data on the prevalence of depression and anxiety in orthodox Anglo-Jews.

Version 2 (18 March 2025) includes a further 356 service itineraries. In addition, 41 entries from the previous version were updated or expanded. Currently the database covers a total of 1,858 Jewish soldiers, 421 wives and 83 children.

ORIGINAL VERSION 1 (18 September 2024)

With more than 1,500 individual entries, this is the inaugural instalment of my research database collated in the framework of the Project Forgotten Soldiers: Jewish Military Experience in the Habsburg Monarchy. This is an open access database, and everyone is welcome to use it according to their own scholarly and personal interests. In 1,189 cases we have official documented records confirming the soldiers were Jewish. In another 313 entries I was able to identify likely Jewish soldiers based on circumstantial evidence cross-referencing names and places of birth, with the presence of confirmed Jewish soldiers drafted into the same units as part of the same recruitment drive. This dataset further includes evidence for 156 spouses and 47 children. While military records do mentions these, their number suggests that the Habsburg army preferred to enlist unmarried men.

The database is structured in a similar way to an official individual entry in the Habsburg military records. These were arranged in tables, with soldiers listed by seniority. Name, place and land of birth are followed by age and religion. This latter rubric allows identifying the bulk of the Jewish soldiers. Also included in the record is marital status, profession (if any), number, names and ages of children (if any), followed by a short summary text of the soldier’s service itinerary. While not always consistent in detail, these texts mention enlistment dates, transfers between units, promotions, desertions, periods as prisoner of war and military awards (if any). I have taken the material from the personal records and added several additional parameters:

The soldiers are entered into the database according to their date of enlistment. This is followed by a colour-coded table showing their years of service. To see the meaning of the different colours employed, scroll to the legend at the end of the dataset.

Following the years of service, we see the date when the soldier left service (final year in service for incomplete service records). When known, the reason the soldier left the army is given (discharge/ death/ desertion etc).

Then come the three most important columns within the table: service record, primary sources and units. At first glance, these columns have only a few letters and numbers, but bring your mouse courser onto the relevant field marked with red triangles. An additional window will then open:

a. Service Record: Shows the entire service record of the soldier arranged by date. I use original German as it appears in the archival records. If you see spelling differences with modern German – they are there for a reason.

b. Primary Sources: Provides the information on all the archival records consulted to reconstruct the service itinerary. The number in the field denotes the number of the archival cartons consulted.

c. Units: Number of units in which a soldier serves. Bringing the cursor on to the field will open their list. Most Jewish soldiers served in the line infantry (IR) and the Military Transport Corps (MFWK or MFK). However, there were also Jewish sharpshooters, cavalrymen, gunners and even a few members of the nascent Austrian Navy.

The next two columns provide entries of the soldier’s conduct and medical condition, which in Habsburg military jargon was referred to rather callously as Defekten. I note the original medical diagnoses verbatim. When possible to identify, I note the modern medical term.

General database-wide parameters are then noted in the next part of the table. Among others, it provides information on enlistment type (conscript/ volunteer?), main branches of service (such as Infantry/ Cavalry/ Artillery), and roles within the military (such as non-commissioned officers/ drummers/ medics).

Concluding this part of the table are columns covering desertions, periods as prisoner of war and awards of the army cannon cross (for veterans of 1813-14) and other military awards.

The last column provides the original German outtake rubric as to how the soldier left service. In special cases, additional service notes are provides on the right.

How to use this dataset

This depends on what you are looking for. Firstly, download the dataset on to your computer via the link provided below. It is a simple Excel file which is easy to work with. If you wish to find out whether one of your ancestors served in the Habsburg army, use a simple keyword search. Please note that in our period there was no single accepted orthography meaning that some letters were used interchangeably (for instance B/P; D/T). There were also various patronymic suffices used in different parts of the monarchy (-witz in German/ -wicz in Polish/ -vits in Hungarian). Habsburg military clerks were mostly German speakers who often recorded the name phonetically. For instance, Jankel/ Jankl/ Jacob/ Jacobus all denote the same name. A Jewish teenager who identified himself as Moische when first reporting to duty, may have stayed so in the military records for decades, even if he was already a non-commissioned officer whose subordinates referred to as Herr Corporal.

If you study the history of concrete Jewish communities, use the keyword search and the filter option to find entries in the database where this locality is mentioned. Some places like Prague and Lublin could be identified effortlessly. In other cases (and see the above point on German-speaking clerks), place names were recorded phonetically. The military authority usually stuck to official Polish names in Galicia, and Hungarian in the Lands of the Crown of St. Stephan. In reality, a Jewish recruit from Transcarpathian Ruthenia could have his place of birth recorded in Hungarian, Romanian or Rusin. When I could not identify the place in question, I marked it with italics. Do you think you identified something I could not? Excellent! Then please write me, and I will correct the entry in the next instalment of this database.

I should stress that, currently, the database is not statistically representative. I have worked chronologically, meaning that there are disproportionally more entries for Jewish soldiers from the Turkish War, the first two Coalition Wars, and the Wars of 1805 and 1809. If you look at some of my other databases (for instance, that of the 1st Line Infantry Regiment 'Kaiser'), you will find least as many Jews who served in the wars of 1813-15. I will cover these in due course. This said, using the filter option of the Excel sheet, you can already make some individual queries. For instance, did Jewish grenadiers meet the minimal height requirement to be eligible for transfer into the elite infantry? (Hint: they did not!) If you are interested in the historical study of nutritional standards, compare the height of the soldiers with their year and place of birth. In my other project, I made calculations of the average height of Habsburg soldiers and I can already reveal that Jewish conscripts were, on average, several centimetres smaller than their non-Jewish comrades drafted in the same annual intake. Whatever stereotypes said, most Jews in the Habsburg Monarchy around 1800 were very poor and the sad fact of malnutrition as a child is reflected in their height as adults.

I should stress that this is a cumulative database. ZENODO has an excellent feature allowing updated versions to supersede earlier files while retaining the same DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and metadata. As my research progresses, I plan to upload new versions of this database bi-annually. This includes not only adding new entries, but also expanding and correcting existing ones. It might well be that the service record of a soldier covered up to 1806 will be brought to a later date, possibly even to his discharge from the army. If you have not found whom you are looking for, or if you want to work with larger samples for your research, visit this page again in a few months’ time. And if you do use this database for scholarly research (by all means, please do), do not forget to cite it as you would cite any other item in your bibliography! If you are a museum professional and you want to employ material from your database to illustrate your exhibitions, you are welcome, but please cite this resource for others to learn. Links to this database will also be appreciated.

Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism (ISCA) at Indiana University Dataset on bias against Asians, Blacks, Jews, Latines, and Muslims

The ISCA project compiled this dataset using an annotation portal, which was used to label tweets as either biased or non-biased, among other labels. Note that the annotation was done on live data, including images and context, such as threads. The original data comes from annotationportal.com. They include representative samples of live tweets from the years 2020 and 2021 with the keywords "Asians, Blacks, Jews, Latinos, and Muslims". A random sample of 600 tweets per year was drawn for each of the keywords. This includes retweets. Due to a sampling error, the sample for the year 2021 for the keyword "Jews" has only 453 tweets from 2021 and 147 from the first eight months of 2022 and it includes some tweets from the query with the keyword "Israel." The tweets were divided into six samples of 100 tweets, which were then annotated by three to seven students in the class "Researching White Supremacism and Antisemitism on Social Media" taught by Gunther Jikeli, Elisha S. Breton, and Seth Moller at Indiana University in the fall of 2022, see this report. Annotators used a scale from 1 to 5 (confident not biased, probably not biased, don't know, probably biased, confident biased). The definitions of bias against each minority group used for annotation are also included in the report. If a tweet called out or denounced bias against the minority in question, it was labeled as "calling out bias." The labels of whether a tweet is biased or calls out bias are based on a 75% majority vote. We considered "probably biased" and "confident biased" as biased and "confident not biased," "probably not biased," and "don't know" as not biased.
The types of stereotypes vary widely across the different categories of prejudice. While about a third of all biased tweets were classified as "hate" against the minority, the stereotypes in the tweets often matched common stereotypes about the minority. Asians were blamed for the Covid pandemic. Blacks were seen as inferior and associated with crime. Jews were seen as powerful and held collectively responsible for the actions of the State of Israel. Some tweets denied the Holocaust. Hispanics/Latines were portrayed as being in the country illegally and as "invaders," in addition to stereotypical accusations of being lazy, stupid, or having too many children. Muslims, on the other hand, were often collectively blamed for terrorism and violence, though often in conversations about Muslims in India.

Content:

This dataset contains 5880 tweets that cover a wide range of topics common in conversations about Asians, Blacks, Jews, Latines, and Muslims. 357 tweets (6.1 %) are labeled as biased and 5523 (93.9 %) are labeled as not biased. 1365 tweets (23.2 %) are labeled as calling out or denouncing bias. 1180 out of 5880 tweets (20.1 %) contain the keyword "Asians," 590 were posted in 2020 and 590 in 2021. 39 tweets (3.3 %) are biased against Asian people. 370 tweets (31,4 %) call out bias against Asians. 1160 out of 5880 tweets (19.7%) contain the keyword "Blacks," 578 were posted in 2020 and 582 in 2021. 101 tweets (8.7 %) are biased against Black people. 334 tweets (28.8 %) call out bias against Blacks. 1189 out of 5880 tweets (20.2 %) contain the keyword "Jews," 592 were posted in 2020, 451 in 2021, and ––as mentioned above––146 tweets from 2022. 83 tweets (7 %) are biased against Jewish people. 220 tweets (18.5 %) call out bias against Jews. 1169 out of 5880 tweets (19.9 %) contain the keyword "Latinos," 584 were posted in 2020 and 585 in 2021. 29 tweets (2.5 %) are biased against Latines. 181 tweets (15.5 %) call out bias against Latines. 1182 out of 5880 tweets (20.1 %) contain the keyword "Muslims," 593 were posted in 2020 and 589 in 2021. 105 tweets (8.9 %) are biased against Muslims. 260 tweets (22 %) call out bias against Muslims.

File Description:

The dataset is provided in a csv file format, with each row representing a single message, including replies, quotes, and retweets. The file contains the following columns:
'TweetID': Represents the tweet ID.
'Username': Represents the username who published the tweet (if it is a retweet, it will be the user who retweetet the original tweet.
'Text': Represents the full text of the tweet (not pre-processed). 'CreateDate': Represents the date the tweet was created.
'Biased': Represents the labeled by our annotators if the tweet is biased (1) or not (0). 'Calling_Out': Represents the label by our annotators if the tweet is calling out bias against minority groups (1) or not (0). 'Keyword': Represents the keyword that was used in the query. The keyword can be in the text, including mentioned names, or the username.

Licences

Data is published under the terms of the "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International" licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the technical collaboration with Indiana University's Observatory on Social Media (OSoMe). We thank all class participants for the annotations and contributions, including Kate Baba, Eleni Ballis, Garrett Banuelos, Savannah Benjamin, Luke Bianco, Zoe Bogan, Elisha S. Breton, Aidan Calderaro, Anaye Caldron, Olivia Cozzi, Daj Crisler, Jenna Eidson, Ella Fanning, Victoria Ford, Jess Gruettner, Ronan Hancock, Isabel Hawes, Brennan Hensler, Kyra Horton, Maxwell Idczak, Sanjana Iyer, Jacob Joffe, Katie Johnson, Allison Jones, Kassidy Keltner, Sophia Knoll, Jillian Kolesky, Emily Lowrey, Rachael Morara, Benjamin Nadolne, Rachel Neglia, Seungmin Oh, Kirsten Pecsenye, Sophia Perkovich, Joey Philpott, Katelin Ray, Kaleb Samuels, Chloe Sherman, Rachel Weber, Molly Winkeljohn, Ally Wolfgang, Rowan Wolke, Michael Wong, Jane Woods, Kaleb Woodworth, and Aurora Young. This work used Jetstream2 at Indiana University through allocation HUM200003 from the Advanced Cyberinfrastructure Coordination Ecosystem: Services & Support (ACCESS) program, which is supported by National Science Foundation grants #2138259, #2138286, #2138307, #2137603, and #2138296.

The data reported here are from the 2000 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion, sponsored by the American Jewish Committee, detailing the views of American Jews about a broad range of subjects. Among the topics covered in the present survey are the Israel-Arab peace process, the attachment of American Jews to Israel, political and social issues in the United States, Jewish perceptions of anti-Semitism, Jewish opinion about various countries, and Jewish identity concerns. Some of the questions appearing in the survey are new; others are drawn from previous American Jewish Committee surveys, including the 1997, 1998, and 1999 Annual Surveys of American Jewish Opinion. The 2000 survey was conducted for the American Jewish Committee by Market Facts, Inc., a leading survey-research organization. Respondents were interviewed by telephone during September 14-28, 2000; no interviewing took place on the Sabbath. The sample consisted of 1,010 self-identified Jewish respondents selected from the Market Facts consumer mail panel. The respondents are demographically representative of the United States adult Jewish population on a variety of measures. (AJC 3/4/2015).

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research at https://doi.org/10.25940/ROPER-31094161. We highly recommend using the Roper Center version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

Compared to other Jewish communities in Greece, the community of Volos had much less Holocaust victims. This is mainly due to the fact that many Jewish families fled and found shelter at the mountainous villages of Pelion. This research, during which 9 testimonies were recorded, sought to record their experience while they were in "self-exile" at Pelion and upon their return back to the city.

Among the topics covered are the war against terrorism and Iraq; the Israel-Arab conflict; the attachment of American Jews to Israel; transatlantic relations; political and social issues in the United States; Jewish perceptions of anti-Semitism; and Jewish identity concerns. Some of the questions appearing in the survey are new, others are drawn from previous AJC surveys conducted annually since 1997. The 2003 survey was conducted for AJC by Market Facts, a leading survey-research organization. Respondents were interviewed by telephone between November 25 and December 11. The sample consisted of 1,000 self-identifying Jewish respondents selected from the Market Facts consumer mail panel. The respondents are demographically representative of the U.S. adult Jewish population on a variety of measures. (AJC 3/4/2015)

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research at https://doi.org/10.25940/ROPER-31094163. We highly recommend using the Roper Center version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

Among the topics covered in the present survey are the consequences of the September 11 terrorist attack on the United States, the Israel-Arab peace process, the attachment of American Jews to Israel, political and social issues in the United States, Jewish perceptions of anti-Semitism, Jewish opinion about various countries, and Jewish identity concerns. Some of the questions appearing in the survey are new; others are drawn from previous American Jewish Committee surveys, including the Annual Surveys of American Jewish Opinion carried out in 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000. The 2001 survey was conducted for the American Jewish Committee by Market Facts, Inc., a leading survey-research organization. Respondents were interviewed by telephone during November 19 - December 4, 2001; no interviewing took place on the Sabbath. The sample consisted of 1,015 self-identified Jewish respondents selected from the Market Facts consumer mail panel. The respondents are demographically representative of the United States adult Jewish population on a variety of measures. (AJC 3/4/2015)

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research at https://doi.org/10.25940/ROPER-31094162. We highly recommend using the Roper Center version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

With more than 1,500 individual entries, this is the inaugural instalment of my research database collated in the framework of the Project Forgotten Soldiers: Jewish Military Experience in the Habsburg Monarchy. This is an open access database, and everyone is welcome to use it according to their own scholarly and personal interests. In 1,189 cases we have official documented records confirming the soldiers were Jewish. In another 313 entries I was able to identify likely Jewish soldiers based on circumstantial evidence cross-referencing names and places of birth, with the presence of confirmed Jewish soldiers drafted into the same units as part of the same recruitment drive. This dataset further includes evidence for 156 spouses and 47 children. While military records do mentions these, their number suggests that the Habsburg army preferred to enlist unmarried men.

The database is structured in a similar way to an official individual entry in the Habsburg military records. These were arranged in tables, with soldiers listed by seniority. Name, place and land of birth are followed by age and religion. This latter rubric allows identifying the bulk of the Jewish soldiers. Also included in the record is marital status, profession (if any), number, names and ages of children (if any), followed by a short summary text of the soldier’s service itinerary. While not always consistent in detail, these texts mention enlistment dates, transfers between units, promotions, desertions, periods as prisoner of war and military awards (if any). I have taken the material from the personal records and added several additional parameters:

• The soldiers are entered into the database according to their date of enlistment. This is followed by a colour-coded table showing their years of service. To see the meaning of the different colours employed, scroll to the legend at the end of the dataset.
• Following the years of service, we see the date when the soldier left service (final year in service for incomplete service records). When known, the reason the soldier left the army is given (discharge/ death/ desertion etc).
• Then come the three most important columns within the table: service record, primary sources and units. At first glance, these columns have only a few letters and numbers, but bring your mouse courser onto the relevant field marked with red triangles. An additional window will then open:

a. Service Record: Shows the entire service record of the soldier arranged by date. I use original German as it appears in the archival records. If you see spelling differences with modern German – they are there for a reason.

b. Primary Sources: Provides the information on all the archival records consulted to reconstruct the service itinerary. The number in the field denotes the number of the archival cartons consulted.

c. Units: Number of units in which a soldier serves. Bringing the cursor on to the field will open their list. Most Jewish soldiers served in the line infantry (IR) and the Military Transport Corps (MFWK or MFK). However, there were also Jewish sharpshooters, cavalrymen, gunners and even a few members of the nascent Austrian Navy.

• The next two columns provide entries of the soldier’s conduct and medical condition, which in Habsburg military jargon was referred to rather callously as Defekten. I note the original medical diagnoses verbatim. When possible to identify, I note the modern medical term.
• General database-wide parameters are then noted in the next part of the table. Among others, it provides information on enlistment type (conscript/ volunteer?), main branches of service (such as Infantry/ Cavalry/ Artillery), and roles within the military (such as non-commissioned officers/ drummers/ medics).
• Concluding this part of the table are columns covering desertions, periods as prisoner of war and awards of the army cannon cross (for veterans of 1813-14) and other military awards.
• The last column provides the original German outtake rubric as to how the soldier left service. In special cases, additional service notes are provides on the right.

How to use this dataset

This depends on what you are looking for. Firstly, download the dataset on to your computer via the link provided below. It is a simple Excel file which is easy to work with. If you wish to find out whether one of your ancestors served in the Habsburg army, use a simple keyword search. Please note that in our period there was no single accepted orthography meaning that some letters were used interchangeably (for instance B/P; D/T). There were also various patronymic suffices used in different parts of the monarchy (-witz in German/ -wicz in Polish/ -vits in Hungarian). Habsburg military clerks were mostly German speakers who often recorded the name phonetically. For instance, Jankel/ Jankl/ Jacob/ Jacobus all denote the same name. A Jewish teenager who identified himself as Moische when first reporting to duty, may have stayed so in the military records for decades, even if he was already a non-commissioned officer whose subordinates referred to as Herr Corporal.

If you study the history of concrete Jewish communities, use the keyword search and the filter option to find entries in the database where this locality is mentioned. Some places like Prague and Lublin could be identified effortlessly. In other cases (and see the above point on German-speaking clerks), place names were recorded phonetically. The military authority usually stuck to official Polish names in Galicia, and Hungarian in the Lands of the Crown of St. Stephan. In reality, a Jewish recruit from Transcarpathian Ruthenia could have his place of birth recorded in Hungarian, Romanian or Rusin. When I could not identify the place in question, I marked it with italics. Do you think you identified something I could not? Excellent! Then please write me, and I will correct the entry in the next instalment of this database.

I should stress that, currently, the database is not statistically representative. I have worked chronologically, meaning that there are disproportionally more entries for Jewish soldiers from the Turkish War, the first two Coalition Wars, and the Wars of 1805 and 1809. If you look at some of my other databases (for instance, that of the 1st Line Infantry Regiment 'Kaiser'), you will find least as many Jews who served in the wars of 1813-15. I will cover these in due course. This said, using the filter option of the Excel sheet, you can already make some individual queries. For instance, did Jewish grenadiers meet the minimal height requirement to be eligible for transfer into the elite infantry? (Hint: they did not!) If you are interested in the historical study of nutritional standards, compare the height of the soldiers with their year and place of birth. In my other project, I made calculations of the average height of Habsburg soldiers and I can already reveal that Jewish conscripts were, on average, several centimetres smaller than their non-Jewish comrades drafted in the same annual intake. Whatever stereotypes said, most Jews in the Habsburg Monarchy around 1800 were very poor and the sad fact of malnutrition as a child is reflected in their height as adults.

I should stress that this is a cumulative database. ZENODO has an excellent feature allowing updated versions to supersede earlier files while retaining the same DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and metadata. As my research progresses, I plan to upload new versions of this database bi-annually. This includes not only adding new entries, but also expanding and correcting existing ones. It might well be that the service record of a soldier covered up to 1806 will be brought to a later date, possibly even to his discharge from the army. If you have not found whom you are looking for, or if you want to work with larger samples for your research, visit this page again in a few months’ time. And if you do use this database for scholarly research (by all means, please do), do not forget to cite it as you would cite any other item in your bibliography! If you are a museum professional and you want to employ material from your database to illustrate your exhibitions, you are welcome, but please cite this resource for others to learn. Links to this database will also be appreciated.

This dataset comes from Footprints: Jewish Books Through Time and Place. Data includes provenance data (names, dates, locations) related to editions (title, publication date, publication place, standard identifier) of specific works (title, author) and related notes. The hierarchy for the dataset is composed of "footprints" which are found in "copies" of "imprints" of "literary works," with "footprint being the most specific data point and "literary work" being the most general. Wherever possible, the standard identifier for imprints is the Bibliography of the Hebrew Book. Downloaded on July 1, 2022.

Further information can be found on the Jewish Communities and Records 1851 Anglo-Jewry Database webpage.

The Freikorps Grün Loudon started as a German mercenary formation raised in spring 1790 to provide the Habsburg army with a light infantry force against the short-lived Brabant Republic. The Freikorps continued to serve during the First Coalition War against Revolutionary France (1792-97). As the conflict dragged on, the Rhineland, which served as its primary recruitment area was occupied by the enemy. As a result, the Freikorps shifted its main recruitment efforts to the Habsburg province of Galicia where a large Jewish population lived. The first Jews volunteers were enlisted in spring 1796. Within a year, Jewish soldiers comprised more than one per cent of the unit's strength. This proportion was kept until the Freikorps was disbanded in summer 1798. With a total number of 27 individual entries, this dataset covers every single Jewish soldier who served in the unit. In addition to basic bibliographical information, the dataset includes reconstructions of complete service itineraries. Some of these are so detailed that the whereabouts and doings of individual soldiers could be traced month after months. After Freikorps Grün Loudon was disbanded, 22 surviving Jewish veterans were transferred to the 3rd and 4th Light Infantry Battalions. Their subsequent service and eventual fates are covered as well. In the dataset includes partial information about three spouses and two children, whose their existence can be discerned from soldiers' personal records. In terms of their service experiences, the Jewish members of the Freikorps Grün Loudon did not differ much from other mercenary soldiers of that period. As implied by their name, Freikorps units did not form part of the standing army. Manned by foreign renegades and local volunteers, their soldiers were considered more expandable, and Freikorps used to suffer high combat losses. Tactically, Freikorps were often divided into small raiding detachments, which meant their soldiers often remained outside of the direct supervision of their officers. This resulted in high desertion rates. At the same time, the Freikorps also had a committed core of highly-dedicated professional soldiers. Among the veterans of the Freikorps Grün Loudon was Samuel Prager – one of the first documented Jewish soldiers in modern history to rise to the rank of Company Sergeant Major. For more information on the Freikorps Grün Loudon, see: Alfons von Wrede, Geschichte der k. und k. Wehrmacht, 5 Vols., (Vienna: Seidel, 1898–1905), Vol. 2, pp. 445-6. For more information how to identify Jewish soldiers in Habsburg military records, see: Ilya Berkovich, 'Nachweis von Konfession und Religion in habsburgischen Militärmatriken', Die Habsburgermonarchie: Fragen, Quellen und Ergebnisee zur Geschichte der Neuzeit (Blog), (10 January 2020).

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The aims of the project were to examine alcohol- and suicide-related beliefs among UK Protestants and Jews, both men and women, to investigate the so-called alcohol-suicide-depression hypothesis. This hypothesis suggests that attitudes to alcohol use and suicide will be more favourable among Protestants than Jews, and among men more than women. Questionnaire measures of alcohol- and suicide-related beliefs and behaviour assessed the dependent variables in an analysis of covariance design. The independent variables were cultural-religious group (Protestant vs. Jewish background or affiliation). Covariates, assessed by questionnaire measures, were religiosity, depression, anxiety, and (a new measure of) tolerance for depression. Main Topics: The data cover: demographics - participant's age, other demographic factors, religious practice; alcohol - consumption, beliefs about alcoholism, expectations about alcohol's effects, attitudes to alcohol use; suicide - attempts, ideation, reasons for living; tolerance for depression; depression, anxiety. Standard Measures Reasons for Living inventory (RFL): Linehan, M. M. et al (1983) 'Reasons for staying alive when you are thinking of killing yourself: the Reasons for Living inventory' Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 52, pp.276-286. Religious Activity Measure, from: Loewenthal, K. M., Macleod, A. K. and Cinnirella, M. (2001) 'Are women more religious than men? Gender differences in religious activity among different religious groups in the UK' Personality and Individual Differences. Biphasic Alcohol Effects Scale (BAES): Martin, C. S. et al (1993) 'Development and validation of the Biphasic Alcohol Effects Scale' Alcoholism - Clinical and Experimental Research, 17, pp.140-146. Alcohol consumption, from: Weiss, S. and Moore, M. (1992) 'Perception of alcoholism among Jewish, Moslem and Christian teachers in Israel' Journal of Drug Education, 22, pp.253-260. Suicide ideation and attempts, from the Present State Examination: Wing, J. K., Cooper, J. E. and Sartorius, N. (1973) The measurement and classification of psychiatric symptoms, London: Cambridge University Press. Anxiety, depression: Zigmond, A. S. and Snaith, R. P. (1993) 'The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale' Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavia, 67, pp.361-370.

Using whole exome sequencing (WES), we identified homozygosity for a missense variant, VPS11: c.2536T>G (p.C846G), as the genetic cause of a leukoencephalopathy syndrome in two individuals from two unrelated Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) families. Both patients exhibited highly concordant disease progression characterized by infantile onset leukoencephalopathy with brain white matter abnormalities, severe motor impairment, cortical blindness, intellectual disability, and seizures.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The 1851 Anglo-Jewry Database is a prosopographic resource with entries on the great majority of Jews resident in the British Isles in 1851. The collation of available data on their births, marriages, and deaths, on the children they had and their faith affiliations, along with decade-by-decade data on their residence and occupations, provides a basis for analysing their migrations, social mobility, fertility, mortality, and similar themes, and affords some scope for comparison with parallel populations.Latest edition informationFor the third edition (August 2020) an expanded and updated version of the database was deposited. The existing data have been significantly enriched and cleaned and 155 additional entries have been added. The documentation has been updated accordingly.Further information can be found on the Jewish Communities and Records 1851 Anglo-Jewry Database webpage.

Historical Dataset of Ida Jew Academies is provided by PublicSchoolReview and contain statistics on metrics:Total Students Trends Over Years (1993-2023),Total Classroom Teachers Trends Over Years (1995-2023),Distribution of Students By Grade Trends,Student-Teacher Ratio Comparison Over Years (1995-2023),American Indian Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1994-2014),Asian Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1993-2023),Hispanic Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1993-2023),Black Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1993-2023),White Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (1994-2022),Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2011-2013),Two or More Races Student Percentage Comparison Over Years (2009-2023),Diversity Score Comparison Over Years (1993-2023),Free Lunch Eligibility Comparison Over Years (1995-2023),Reduced-Price Lunch Eligibility Comparison Over Years (2002-2023),Reading and Language Arts Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2010-2022),Math Proficiency Comparison Over Years (2010-2023),Overall School Rank Trends Over Years (2010-2022)

In 1808, as it was preparing for a major new war against Napoleonic France, the armed forces of the Habsburg Monarchy were augmented by two additional recruitment systems. In parallel to the creation of a trained reserve, which significantly increased the manpower available to the regular army, a popular levy was raised in the Austro-Bohemian crown lands. With a strength of nearly 150 battalions, the Landwehr was intended primarily for national defence. Its individual battalions were formed on a strictly territorial basis, ensuring men from the same area would serve together. In March 1809, when general mobilisation was declared, members of the Landwehr were asked to offer themselves as war volunteers. In the Kingdom of Bohemia, six battalions of such volunteers were drawn out of a total of 50 Landwehr battalions. To emphasise that they were wartime formations and not part of the standing army, these volunteer battalions were formally designated either as Freikorps or as Freiwillige. The Bohemian Freikorps was named Legion Erzherzog Carl in honour of the Austrian commander-in-chief, Generalissimo Archduke Charles. Unlike the regular army and the Landwehr, the bulk of the Legion was made of genuine volunteers. The unit sustained heavy combat casualties, but relatively few of its soldiers were taken prisoner, deserted, or went missing. Despite the defeat of the Austrian army, the Legion's battalions maintained their combat effectiveness to the very end of the war.

Based on all available manpower reports preserved in the Austrian State Archives, this database covers all 16 documented Jewish soldiers of the Legion EH Carl. Apart from one veteran non-commissioned officer who was transferred from the regular army, the remaining Jewish soldiers volunteered from their respective Landwehr battalions or were exempt civilians who signed up directly into the unit. The detailed monthly tables enable the reconstruction of their entire service itineraries, almost on a daily basis. When considered together, the Jewish soldiers of the Legion appear to have been enthusiastic fighters. By the end of the war, half of them had either become casualties or had been promoted to non-commissioned officers. Contrary to many regular army and Landwehr units, the EH Carl Legion did not experience disciplinary disintegration. It was, therefore, able to retain most of its men during the retreats from Bavaria and from the Battle of Wagram. Hence, most of its Jewish soldiers survived the war and were honourably discharged when the Legion was dissolved in January 1810.

The remaining 25 entries cover all the documented Jewish soldiers who served in other volunteer formations of the Austrian army during the 1809 War. Similar to Bohemia, volunteers were raised from the 24 Landwehr Battalions of Moravia and Silesia. The service record of the Mährische-Schlesische Freiwillige was similar to that the Legion EH Carl. Its three battalions fought well, as did its eight Jewish soldiers. Very different was the experience of the three Free Battalions from Galicia where not enough local volunteers came forward. After failing to reach the desired strength at the start of the war, these units first took foreign mercenaries and deserters and then, when many of these ran away, had to resort to conscripts. The fifteen Jewish soldiers of the Galician battalions were just that - a combination of transferees from the regular army, foreigners (including a deserter from the French army), and later in the war, conscripts. Almost half of them had deserted before the battalions were disbanded. The Bukovina Freikorps actually had two stages: a popular levy, which was badly defeated by the advancing Poles and which was subsequently re-organised as an army-run Freikorps manned primarily by second echelon troops: border guards, garrison troops, and members of the deserter cordon. Each of these formations had a Jewish soldier. Both were volunteers, and one of them even came with his own horse.

It should be made clear that the 41 individual entries in this dataset cannot give a full picture of the Jewish presence in volunteer formations in 1809. Unusually, the enlistment papers of the six battalions of the Wiener Freiwillige, by far the best-known volunteer formation of the Austrian army, did not record the religion of the recruits. Any Jew who served in that unit would not be known to us. Furthermore, the experience of the Jewish members of the volunteer formations should be seen in wider context. It was colourful but unrepresentative. There were probably hundreds of Jews in the Landwehr and several thousands in the regular army. Collective enthusiasm to volunteer pro-actively for military service to prove a point, which occurred in Jewish communities of the Habsburg Monarchy later on and particular during the First World War, was still very far away.

For more information on the Austrian Volunteer Formations during the 1809 War, see:

Alfons von Wrede, Geschichte der k. und k. Wehrmacht, 5 Vols., (Vienna: Seidel, 1898–1905), Vol. 2, pp. 459-66.

For more information on the Legion EH Carl, see:

Anton Ernstberger, Böhmens Freiwilliger Kriegseinsatz gegen Napoleon 1809, Veröffentlichen des Collegium Carolinum 14, (Munich: Robert Lerche, 1963), pp. 9-55.

Background Increased BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation rates have been reported in Ashkenazi Jewish women in North America, Europe and Israel, and have been mentioned as possibly related to a higher incidence of breast and ovarian cancer among these communities. The present study was carried out with the aim of obtaining evidence on the magnitude of breast cancer as a cause of death among Ashkenazi women in Brazil. Methods We reviewed all death certificates archived in the Jewish Burial Societies of São Paulo (1971-1997) and Porto Alegre (1948-1997), two of the main and oldest Jewish communities in Brazil. Breast cancer observed deaths were compared with expected deaths according to breast cancer mortality in the general population. Results The observed ratios were approximately quite close to unity, suggesting a similar breast cancer mortality pattern among the Ashkenazi population and the general population in both cities. These results maintain similar behavior regardless of whether analyzed before or after the mid-1980s, when mammography came to be increasingly performed in Brazil. Cancer proportional mortality ratios were 1.04 (0.83-1.29) in São Paulo and 1.16 (0.84-1.57) in Porto Alegre before 1985, and 1.17 (1.00-1.44) and 1.21 (0.81-1.79), respectively, between 1985 and 1997. Some evidence of the maintenance of protective risk factors such as high parity has been observed among Ashkenazi women in São Paulo. Conclusion A quite similar breast cancer mortality pattern was observed between Ashkenazi Jewish women and the general population in São Paulo and Porto Alegre, Brazil. These results may suggest an environmental role on germ mutation expression reported in this ethnic group.

This is the first attempt to record the Jewish soldiers who became casualties in the numerous Wars between the Habsburg Monarchy and Revolutionary and Napoleonic France. Jewish military service in the Austrian and Austro-Hungarian army from the mid-19th century onwards, especially during the First World War, is well known and documented. By contrast, nothing comparable has been done for the very first Jewish soldiers in modern history. The time has come to set the record straight!

The current database was compiled from the personal records of the War Archive (Kriegsarchiv) of the Austrian State Archives. At that time, the Habsburg army did not publish casualty lists other than mentioning the names of the most senior officers. To find individual Jewish soldiers who became casualties, one must identify serving Jewish soldiers in the regular musters and revision papers. Those found so far can be seen in the database Jewish Soldiers of the Habsburg Army (1788-1820), which should be used in parallel with this one. The current database offers an outtake with a separate list of Jewish soldiers who were killed, wounded, missing in action, or taken prisoner. The first version has 253 entries. These are arranged chronologically based on the date the soldier first became a casualty. The name of the battle or the action shows at the top of the table. Under each such action, up to four sub-categories are given:

1. K/KIA (Killed in Action) – Soldier killed outright in combat. Readers might be surprised how few such cases appear in the database. There are several possible reasons. Firstly, since 1781 the Habsburg manpower reports began to omit the rubric Vor Feind geblieben (left in front of the enemy) denoting soldiers killed in battle. This was part of a broader rationalisation of military records in the early days of Joseph II’s rule. Whichever was the cause of their death, all fatalities were now perceived as irrecoverable manpower wastage. Soldiers who died in service were now simply marked as gestorben. Identifying combat deaths is only possible by looking at monthly reports called Standes- und Diensttabellen. Even then, the number of combat deaths remains extraordinarily low. It appears that the Habsburg army formally recorded a soldier as ‘killed in action’ only if the body was identified. For this to happen, the army had to remain in control of the battlefield – in other words, the battle had to be won. For much of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic period, this was rarely the case on the Austrian side. It appears that most combat deaths in the period landed in the rubric as ‘missing-in-action’.

2. W/WIA (Wounded in Action) – Muster rolls did not record wounds at all. Monthly tables did so very rarely. The latter were intended primarily as financial documents to record the source of the men’s pay. When a soldier entered hospital, his pay was issued from the hospital fund whose accounts were later reimbursed by the man’s regiment. While dates of hospitalisation were meticulously recorded, the cause of hospitalisation was not mentioned. In most cases, identifying wounded soldiers can only be done indirectly. When dozens or hundreds of men from the same unit were hospitalised on the same day directly after a major battle, it can be reasonably assumed that these were combat casualties. A sure way of identifying a wounded soldier was through the medical evaluation papers (Superarbitrierungs-Liste), which were filed for men no longer fit for wartime service. These papers always mentioned combat wounds, as this was a major argument in favour of making the soldier eligible for admission into the invalids. Unfortunately, the survival rate of these documents is variable and the majority simply do not exist. This database employs two categories for wounded soldiers. When medical papers or hospitalisation date allows clear identification, a soldier is entered into the database as a certain case. When broader context allows (such as wartime service and numerous other hospitalisations from the same company on the same day, suggesting a skirmish), such men are entered as probable cases.

3. P/POW (Prisoner of War) – Unlike the previous two rubrics, the Habsburg military records usually mentioned soldiers taken prisoner (Kriegsgefangen/ In Kriegsgefangenschaft gefallen). The reason was again financial. Firstly, returning men had to be issued with backpay. Secondly, from the Third Coalition War onwards, reciprocal wartime prisoner swaps (Cartel) were discontinued, but the system remained in place to ensure that mutual settlement of accounts between two belligerent armies could happen after the war. This is not the only reason why prisoners make the largest single category in our database. For much of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic period, entire Austrian army corps were forced to surrender (for instance in Ulm in 1805). This happened so often that musters from 1806 and 1811 sometimes blankly omitted case of POWs, based on the assumption that nearly every soldier fell prisoner in the previous war. Therefore, for regiments who fought in Germany and Austerlitz in 1805, and in Bavaria and Deutsch-Wagram in 1809, one must also consult the monthly tables.

4. M/MIA (Missing in Action) – Recorded as Vor Feind vermisst or vermisst for short, this category denotes men who were missing when the battle ended. Anything could have happened to them. Some were dead (see rubric one), but others were taken prisoner, were lost, or deserted. The army recorded such missing men for the same reason as prisoners of war – to settle their backpay in future if necessary.

The total for each category of casualties is given at the bottom of the table for every war fought by the Habsburg army from 1792 to 1815. At the right hand side of the table are the grand totals for each category marked in red. At the end of every personal record are fields showing what happened to the soldier after he became a casualty. Wounded could recover or perish in hospital, while the prisoners and the missing could return. The same soldier could appear in the database more than once as he could be taken prisoner, be wounded or go missing several times. Only for those killed in action could the record be closed. For those who survived, the final fate was noted where known: discharge (including sub category), invaliding, desertion, or non-combat death. Men still in service when last mentioned in the documents are noted as ‘serves’. Whether complete or not, a detailed service record for each soldier as as I could reconstruct it from the sources is available in the database Jewish Soldiers of the Habsburg Army (1788-1820).