This chapter investigates British sack atrocities to civilians during the Napoleonic era. It analyses how British soldiers represented this violence in their memoirs, especially through the lens of sensationalist gothic horror; and the challenges of estimating the scale of atrocities. It adopts a multi-contextual and multi-causal framework for understanding these atrocities, from situational rage and the brutalising experiences of war to the cultural and political contexts in which sack violence could operate. Whilst most British soldiers participated in the plundering of stormed towns, the murder and rape of civilians during sacks was perpetrated by only a minority. Across soldiers’ writings, we find horror, shame, and moral outrage at such acts; empathy towards the suffering civilian; and a moral duty to bear witness. And despite lamenting the inevitability of such atrocities, this did not prevent individuals, especially officers, from intervening to protect civilians, especially women, acts framed by chivalric and humanitarian ideals.

Storming the breaches of a fortress was the most perilous of military undertakings. After setting out the operational nature and challenges of British sieges in the Peninsular War, this chapter explores the cultural and emotional history of the British storming of besieged fortress-towns in the Napoleonic era, especially in Spain, revealing a cult and spectacle of storm that took hold in this epoch, borne of a reinvigoration of martial honour codes, ideals of heroic and patriotic self-sacrifice, and romantic and sublime sensibilities. British soldiers’ writings on their motivation for storming reveal a complex and interactive mix of remunerative incentives of promotion and plunder on the one hand, and bravery, esteem, honour and patriotism, on the other, with soldiers driven by both individual and collective values and loyalties. Further, this chapter analyses how soldiers managed fear and emotion in the impending eye of the storm, and the importance of sentimental culture in how they responded to the trauma and devastating loss of comrades in the aftermath.

This chapter spans the history of European siege warfare across the long eighteenth century, from the age of Louis XIV to the Napoleonic Wars. It lays out the key thematic groundwork and siege case studies explored in later chapters. The first half outlines the nature of ‘the siege’ as the classic form of old-regime positional warfare – its operational forms, temporal and spatial dimensions, and rituals and customary laws of war – and charts the relative historic decline of breach assaults and siege related massacres of garrisons and civilians in the eighteenth century. The second half shifts to the Revolutionary-Napoleonic era. It identifies the continuing importance of siege operations beyond their earlier high point in European military affairs; the regional and chronological shifts in sieges across the Napoleonic Wars; the nature of British siege operations in Continental Europe and the colonial sphere (India and South America); and ends with an overview of British and French sieges in the Peninsular War – the epicentre of Napoleonic siege warfare and of the storming and sack of besieged towns.

At the heart of most sacks – in terms of motivation, behaviour and the broad participation of common soldiers – lay plunder. This chapter explores British sack plunder in the Napoleonic era from multiple perspectives: the broad campaign and siege contexts in which it occurred; the dynamics and rituals of plunder on the ground; and the attitudes and practices of officers. Most British rank and file participated in the plunder of stormed towns, borne of customary right, the catharsis of passing through the breaches, and opportunism. Despite the seeming chaos, this plunder had its own distinct rituals, conventions and carnivalesque dimensions. Some officers were complicit, too, in tolerating plunder, or indulging themselves; and in India, given the traditions of Company plunder and profit-taking, officers were only too eager to enjoy the official spoils of distributed prize. Yet, whilst there was a general resignation that it was next to impossible to prevent the plunder of stormed towns, most officers, and some men from the ranks, were highly critical of troops doing so, on military and moral grounds, drawing particular attention to the drunkenness, destruction and violence that accompanied it.

This chapter expands upon Chapter 1 by examining whether those who were appointed at the helm of the ‘Jewish Councils’ constituted a continuation or discontinuation of pre-war structures. It sets the conduct of the organisations’ leaders in the pre-war and wartime social contexts, and demonstrates the wide social variation in the organisations’ central board membership. The Germans were keen to appoint Jews who already held a leading role in the communities. This proved more difficult in Belgium and France than in the Netherlands. It is argued that the relatively well-integrated pre-war position of the Dutch Council leadership in combination with a relatively stable Jewish community resulted in a more confident self-perception of their role compared with that of their Belgian and French counterparts. In addition to examining how far Jewish leaders (felt they) represented the Jewish communities, this chapter also contextualises their acceptance by these communities. The Jewish leaders’ confidence, or lack thereof, determined their choices at later stages. These different attitudes help to explain organisational divergences, including why some of the leaders in Belgium and France were replaced, while the Dutch leadership remained in place until the Jewish Council was dismantled in 1943.

The last chapter deals with how the ‘Jewish Councils’ were connected to organised resistance groups and other forms of opposition. It assesses two central themes. First, it examines how the JR, the AJB, the UGIF-Nord and the UGIF-Sud were wittingly and unwittingly used by others as cloaks for clandestine activities. Overall, the very presence of these bodies in all three countries facilitated, to varying degrees, clandestine activities that would never have been possible without their existence. It is argued that the connections between official Jewish bodies and illegal subversive groups in Belgium and France were complex, manifold and fluid. Second, the chapter examines the active engagement of the organisations’ leadership and membership in these activities, and explains why the JR’s leadership’s absence of engagement in such activities is distinct from the situation in Belgium and France. The central aim is to explore the concepts of opposition and resistance in relation to the legal character of these bodies. Existing scholarship has focussed primarily on individuals who crossed the line between legality and illegality, outwardly conforming while also working outside the legal organisations. This chapter takes the analysis one step further and investigates whether and how the ‘Jewish Councils’ were used for clandestine activities in ways that extended beyond this individual level.

This chapter explores the structure of society and the composition of the Jewish communities in the Netherlands, Belgium and France from the late nineteenth century until 1941 (when the ‘Jewish Councils’ were established). It highlights the similarities and differences between the three countries’ social structures in this period. These include the number and outlook of (Eastern European) Jewish immigrants, the presence of official religious Jewish representation and Jewish integration in non-Jewish society in each case. Central themes are the level of integration of Jews into the non-Jewish communities, the position of immigrant Jews vis-à-vis the longstanding Jewish population, the level of religious adherence, the influence of Zionist thinking, the role of religious institutions and the organisational structure of the Jewish communities. This chapter also examines the institution of Jewish refugee organisations in the 1930s, and the position of the later chairmen of the “Jewish Councils” in Western Europe in these pre-war refugee aid organisations. Moreover, it addresses the establishment of so-called Coordinating Committees in 1940, either by German demand, or by initiative of Jewish community members, which aimed to oversee all Jewish philanthropic work and sought to unite the various Jewish communities. It argues that the supposed failures of these committees served as the springboard for establishing the ‘Jewish Councils’.

This chapter explores how the Germans judged the effectiveness of the ‘Jewish Councils’ in Western Europe throughout the course of the war. Throughout the occupation, the German (and Vichy) departments involved in Jewish affairs increasingly wanted to consolidate their control over the Jewish bodies, either to gain more power at the cost of their rival institutions or to speed up the process of anti-Jewish legislation and persecution. This is important for our understanding of the ways in which these organisations interacted with their German (or Vichy) overseers – including the SiPo-SD, the Commissariat Général aux Questions Juives (in France), the Military Administration (in Belgium and France) and the Civil Administration (in the Netherlands) – and sheds light on the broader dynamics of occupation in each of the three countries. The chapter demonstrates that whereas the Germans were reasonably satisfied with the organisational effectiveness of the Dutch Jewish Council, they took issue with how its Belgian and French counterparts functioned. It is argued that this difference is primarily caused by (limited) cooperation of individual leaders, the (lack of) leaders’ absolute power and the existence of powerful alternative representations in Belgium and France.

This chapter explores the structure of society and the composition of the Jewish communities in the Netherlands, Belgium and France from the late nineteenth century until 1941 (when the ‘Jewish Councils’ were established). It highlights the similarities and differences between the three countries’ social structures in this period. These include the number and outlook of (Eastern European) Jewish immigrants, the presence of official religious Jewish representation and Jewish integration in non-Jewish society in each case. Central themes are the level of integration of Jews into the non-Jewish communities, the position of immigrant Jews vis-à-vis the longstanding Jewish population, the level of religious adherence, the influence of Zionist thinking, the role of religious institutions and the organisational structure of the Jewish communities. This chapter also examines the institution of Jewish refugee organisations in the 1930s, and the position of the later chairmen of the “Jewish Councils” in Western Europe in these pre-war refugee aid organisations. Moreover, it addresses the establishment of so-called Coordinating Committees in 1940, either by German demand, or by initiative of Jewish community members, which aimed to oversee all Jewish philanthropic work and sought to unite the various Jewish communities. It argues that the supposed failures of these committees served as the springboard for establishing the ‘Jewish Councils’.

This chapter deals with the establishment histories of the JR, the AJB, the UGIF-Nord and the UGIF-Sud (the ‘Jewish Councils’ in Western Europe) in 1941. It shows that German officials improvised and copied blueprints from elsewhere, and that rivalry between the various German institutions involved in Jewish affairs affected the form and function of these organisations in Western Europe. It furthermore demonstrates that various German institutions interpreted the exact remit of each of the Jewish organisations differently. As a result, the Jewish organisations in Western Europe were all organised in different ways and all functioned differently, despite the strong German desire to unify anti-Jewish policies. The chapter furthermore examines the impact of the rivalry between the various German institutions on the Jewish organisations, arguing that the increasing influence of the SiPo-SD in the Netherlands, together with an overlap of functions, resulted in a rapid succession of anti-Jewish measures in this country. In Belgium and France, by contrast, institutional rivalry not only hampered the establishment of the AJB and the UGIF, but it also resulted in postponements and, from the German perspective, in a looser grip on the Jewish organisations.

This is the first comprehensive, comparative study of the ‘Jewish Councils’ in the Netherlands, Belgium and France during Nazi rule. In the post-war period, there was extensive focus on these organisations’ controversial role as facilitators of the Holocaust. They were seen as instruments of Nazi oppression, aiding the process of isolating and deporting the Jews they were ostensibly representing. As a result, they have chiefly been remembered as forms of collaboration. Using a wide range of sources including personal testimonies, diaries, administrative documents and trial records, Laurien Vastenhout demonstrates that the nature of the Nazi regime, and its outlook on these bodies, was far more complex. She sets the conduct of the Councils’ leaders in their pre-war and wartime social and situational contexts and provides a thorough understanding of their personal contacts with the Germans and clandestine organisations. Between Community and Collaboration reveals what German intentions with these organisations were during the course of the occupation and allows for a deeper understanding of the different ways in which the Holocaust unfolded in each of these countries.