This article attempts to analyse the causes behind the anti-Jewish rioting which occurred in Warsaw in 1790. More generally, it also tries to answer the question why, and in what circumstances, the moods of a particular social group - in this case Warsaw artisans or commoners (pospólstwo) and the group directly linked with them, though placed lower in the urban hierarchy, the ordinary ‘townsfolk’ (plebs)-were brought to such a peak of hostility that they gave vent to a collective outbreak of hate and aggression towards another social group, namely the large Jewish community in the centre of Warsaw.

The Warsaw riot, referred to first as the ‘tumult’ and later more frequently as ‘bunt’ (revolt), represents a rather isolated episode in 18th century Poland, and as such would probably not merit the further attention of any historian. However, I believe that facts revealed in certain previously unknown historical records predating 1790 justify a more detailed look at these events. They show that the Warsaw riot was in essence, a link in a long chain of alliances and conflicts which involved three sides: the szlachta, the Christian townspeople and the Jews.

In order to analyze the relationship between differently organized social groups, the most useful method still seems to be to investigate what is generally referred to as the struggle over the distribution of income, power and prestige. To these classic features defining the position of social groups and individuals (and their subjective views of their social position) can be added, especially in the analysis of rigidly structured societies (such as those with orders and corporations), the need for maintaining the stability of one's position within the particular group to which one belongs, the assurance of continuity for that sector of society in which one participates, continuity of its values, traditions, religious faith and even the structure of its daily life. This need I will refer to as the need for cultural security.

Almost all theories of social conflict agree that a threat to the social status of some group, whether it is real or simply strongly felt to be real, leads in specific conditions to social tension and rebellious tendencies.