Zombori István (szerk.): A SZEGEDI ZSIDÓ POLGÁRSÁG EMLÉKEZETE (Szeged, 1990)

Marjanucz László: Zsidó bérlők és kereskedők Kiskundorozsmán a reformkorban

17. Simon László im: 13. p. 18. Protocollum Currentale 1830. (főkapitányi rendelet) 19. Protocollum Currentale 1836. 20. Kiskundorozsma község tanácsülési jegyzőkönyveinek mutatója 1805. 21. Protocollum Currentale 1836. 22. Uo. 23. Molnár Erzsébet: A jászkun kerület társadalma és közigazgatása 1745—1848. 9- 15. p. (kézirat) 24. Uo. 11. p. 25. Kiskundorozsma község tanácsülési jegyzőkönyveinek mulatója 1810. 26. Molnár Erzsébet im: 17. p. 27. Protocollum Currentale 1832. febr. 9. 28. Uo. 1824. július 24. 29. Uo. 1836. június 20. 30. Uo. 1836./1528. 31. Uo. A nádori vélemény részletes ismertetése. 32. Molnár Erzsébet im: 12. p. 33. Protocollum Currentale 1837. március 16. 34. Kiskundorozsma község tanácsülési jegyzőkönyveinek mutatója 1800 - 1825. 35. Uo. László Marjanucz: JEWISH TENANTS AND TRADESMEN IN KISKUNDOROZSMA IN THE REFORM ERA The censuses and surveys carried out at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries provide few data on the Jews living in Dorozsma, so it is only from the minutes of council meetings that it is possible to deduce on the basis of individual cases on what terms and in what manner strangers without rights tried to find their place in ihe society of the privileged community. Many data indicate that, in spite of the prohibitions, many Jews lived in the village. In the Reform Era a considerable number of Jews were able to organize themselves into large groups under the protection of landlords, but there was no possibility for them to do so in Dorozsma because here the landlord was formally represented by the entire settlement, in fact a restricted community of wealthy élite citizens. The reason was that itinerant trading rose to real significance here. As long as private authority offered protection to the wandering Jew (if he fulfilled correctly the terms of the lease of the royal lax) in opposition to the county and ihe agricultural town authorities, there was no possibility of this conflict in Dorozsma because of the privileged common rule status. So much depended on the goodwill or the current interests of the collective nobility, in other words the residents and the magistrates. The existence of a class organization strictly ensured by special rights and duties makes it understandable that the only really mobile social group in Dorozsma was the