The Ashkenazic Application of the Principle
The smaller and more compact Ashkenazic communities of early Central Europe were unwilling to go so far and saw all but the most necessary compliance with royal decree as a violation of Jewish law. If a choice between Jewish law and the king’s law existed, then Jewish law was to be followed. Although they agreed with the Tosafists, who considered that the king’s power stemmed from his ownership of the land which he ruled and recognized the principle that any litigants could decide whether to use the non-Jewish or Jewish courts, it was strongly discouraged,” although it continued to be reported frequently.
These Ashkenazic as well as some Sephardic authorities sought to place restrictions on the effect of Samuel’s law and to limit the king’s law, but that was a procedure of doubtful value and seemed intended more for internal consumption.”” An effort was also made to restrict impositions and taxes of the king to those placed on all citizens, not Jews alone; although this was a nice thought, it could often not be carried into practice.”® Some sought to limit dina demalkhuta dina to new ordinances which were in the spirit of earlier ones; others were considered invalid.” Of course even these authorities understood the royal need for additional revenue®
The Ashkenazic community faced the same problem as the Sephardim of royal appointees to positions of communal leadership or to the communal rabbinate, but they fought it with partial success through takanot.*' The smaller size of the community and their compact nature made this possible. The appointee might not be removed and his power of taxation remained, but otherwise, no one paid any attention to him. In fact unfit individuals regularly applied to the king for such positions and then had to be accepted by the communities. The practice of recognizing the power of the government to appoint continued and we find individuals from Isserles to the nineteenth century Hatam