THE BOYCOTT of the port of Ancona in 1556 was an unparalleled event in early modern Jewish history, the only attempt before the twentieth century to organize Jewish economic pressure and to wield it in the arena of international affairs for the benefit of Jews persecuted in other lands. Powerful forces converged in this event. There were the political configurations, the towering personalities of Suleiman the Magnificent, Pope Paul IV, and Guidobaldo II, duke of Urbino, confronting and defying each other. There were the fortunes and livelihoods of merchants and traders, Gentiles as well as Jews, in Italy and throughout the Ottoman empire. There were sociological forces: the sense of solidarity among Jews transcending political boundaries and the special sense of cohesiveness among the subgroup of Portuguese Marrano exiles. There were psychological pressures generated by the outrage over the humiliation of Jews once more burned at the stake, pressures released and channelled into an expression of revenge. There were also important legal questions that had to be resolved within the framework of Jewish halakhah. Not the least fascinating aspect of this boycott is that what began as a confrontation between the Jewish and the Christian worlds —an effort to unite Jews in order to punish Christians for the persecution of former Marranos—soon revealed deep fissures within the various Jewish communities themselves.

The most important sources for this dramatic episode are the responsa of the Ottoman rabbis. These responsa contain far more than juridical arguments based on subtle distinctions in the interpretation of classical texts. Properly analysed, they yield a vivid picture of rabbinic leadership on a tumultuous issue, of rabbis subjected to fearful pressures by colleagues and other co-religionists, torn by conflicting loyalties, grappling to reconcile their understanding of traditional legal principles with their perception of immediate needs. They also reveal how competing narratives of the core events could rupture an initially unified public opinion to the point where consensus was no longer possible. It is hoped that the present study succeeds in demonstrating the value of these responsa as sources for Jewish social and communal history while reconstructing, insofar as is possible from the literary sources, the events surrounding the boycott and the forces that led to the ultimate failure of a rather noble effort.