Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T12:36:57.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jews, Poitevins, and the Bishop of Winchester, 1231-1234

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Nicholas C. Vincent
Nicholas C. Vincent*
Affiliation:
Peterhouse, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Amongst the many questions concerning the Jews of thirteenth-century England, by no means the least interesting turn upon the hardening of Christian-Jewish relations, the collapse of the wealth of the Jewish community, and the eventual expulsion of the Jews in 1290. Quite when and why did these processes originate and evolve? By which authority, Church or King, were they most keenly sponsored? Robert Stacey has provided answers to many of these questions, nominating the years 1240 to 1258 as ‘a watershed in Anglo-Jewish relations’ and showing the diversity of religious and financial pressures underlying Henry Ill’s attack on the Jews. Whilst in no way challenging Stacey’s basic approach, the purpose of the present essay is to extend his concept of a watershed back by a decade or so to the regime which governed England between 1232 and 1234. At the same time I shall suggest that the misfortunes of the English Jewry need to be viewed in the wider context of Jewish-Christian relations throughout northern Europe, in particular with an eye to the anti-Jewish legislation of Capetian France.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Church History , Volume 29: Christianity and Judaism , 1992 , pp. 119 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Stacey, Robert C., ‘1240-60: a watershedin Anglo-Jewish relations?’, HR, 61 (1988), pp. 135–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 See Keene, D., Survey of Medieval Wincheste-Winchester Studies, 2, 2 vols (Oxford, 1985), pp. 384–7.Google Scholar

3 In general, see Watt, J. A., ‘The English Episcopate, the State and the Jews: the evidence of the thirteenth-century conciliar decrees’ Google Scholar, in Coss, P.R. and Lloyd, S. D., eds, Thirteenth Century England, II (Woodbridge, 1988), pp. 137–47.Google Scholar

4 Powicke, S. D. and Cheney, C. R., eds, Councils and Synods with other Documents Relating to the English Church: II AD. 1205-1313, 2 vols (Oxford, 1964), I, pp. 100–1, 105–6, 120–1.Google Scholar

5 Ibid., p. 55; Lambeth Palace Library, MS 1212, fol. 129V, a papal mandate directed to Langton, dated 27 Nov. 1219.

6 Patent Rolls, 1216-2 (London, 1901) [hereafter Pat. R, 1216-23], pp. 179-80, discussed by Holt, C., Magna Carta (Cambridge, 1965), pp. 276–7.Google Scholar

7 Pat.R, 1216-2, pp. 179-81. For the question of free travel see Richardson, H. G., The English Jews under Angevin Kings (London, 1960), pp.178–9.Google Scholar For Isaac’s fine for release from prison following the tallage of 1210–11 see ibid., p. 170; Lipman, V. D., The Jews of Medieval Norwich (London, 1967), p. 104.Google Scholar For the expenditure at Dover see T. D. Hardy, ed., Rotali litlerarum clausarum [hereafter Rot.l.c], 2 vols (London, 1833-4), I, P. 459; B-E. Harris, ed., Pipe Roll 4 Henry III - Pipe Roll Society, ns 47 (1981–3), p. 59, which includes the period of the fine originally paid to des Roches.

8 Richardson, English Jews, p. 182; Powell, J. M., Anatomy of a Crusade 1213-21 (Philadelphia, 1986), pp. 21, 45.Google Scholar

9 Lipman, Jews of Norwich, pp. 111-12; Dodwell, B.. ed., The Charters of Norwich Cathedral Priory—Pipe Roll Society, ns 40 (1974), p. 241. no. 381 Google Scholar, and see Rot.l.c, i, p. 323b, where in Sept. 1217 the prior was set to guard Isaac’s Starrs and chirographs.

10 Shirley, W. W., ed., Royal and other Historical Letters Illustrative of the Reign of Henry III, 2 vols, RS (1862-6), 1, no. 28.Google Scholar Richardson, English Jews, pp. 183-4, suggests that Pandulph was lenient in his dealings with the Jews, but the evidence cited is entirely negative and Richardson him self (p. 186) recognizes that the anti-Jewish measures proposed by Hugh of Wells and Langton were vigorously adopted only in the dioceses of Lincoln and Norwich.

11 London, PRO, MSS E368/4, memb. 3d;C60/17, memb. 7;E368/6, memb. 5,060/23, memb. 4. In 1234 the fine was further reduced to 60 marks p.a.; C60/33, membs. 8, 9.

12 Winchester, Hampshire Record Office [hereafter HRO|, MS Eccles. II 159278 (Pipe Roll of the Bishopric of Winchesrer, 1224-4), memb. 12, for an Earlier Connection see Rot.l.c., i. p.181B;Norwich Canthedral Charters, i, p. 25, no. 39.

13 HRO, MS Eccles.ll 159275 (Winchester Pipe Roll, 1218-19), memb. 12d, where Benedict delivered 5 loads of herrings; Rot.l.c, 1, p. 387. For Benedict and Isaac as mutual attorneys see Cole, H., ed., Documents Illustrative of English History in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries (London, 1844), pp. 311, 312, 314, 325, 326 Google Scholar; Curia Regis Rolls of the Reigns of Richar I;John and Henry III [hereafter CRR], 16 vols (London, 1922-79), 9, pp. 153-4.

14 HRO, MSS Eccles.II 159271 (Winchester Pipe Roll, 1211-12), memb. id; 159272 (Winchester Pipe Roll, 1213-14), memb. 3; 159275 (Winchester Pipe Roll, 1218-19), memb. 3d; 159277 (Winchester Pipe Roll, 1220-1), membs 6d, 7d; 159278 (Winchester Pipe Roll, 1223-4), memb. 12; 159279 (Winchester Pipe Roll, 1224-5), memb. 3.

15 Powicke and Cheney, Councils and Synods II, pt 1, p. 131, no. 32.

16 In general, see Powicke, F. M., King Henry III and the Lord Edward, 2 vols (Oxford, 1947), pp. 178–84 Google Scholar; Painter, S., The Scourge of the Clergy: Peter of Dreux, Duke of Brittany (Baltimore, 1937), pp. 69–78.Google Scholar

17 In general, see Carpenter, D. A., ‘The Fall of Hubert de Burgh’, JBS, 19 (1980), pp. 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 H. R. Luird, ed.. Annales Monastici, 5 vols, RS (1864-9), 3 (Dunstable), p. 127.

19 PRO, MS C60/31, memb. 7. The fine was rescheduled after 1,000 marks had been paid, being reduced to 300 marks p.a. by May 1233; PRO, MSS C60/31, memb. 3;C60/32, memb. 5.

20 PRO, MSS C60/30, memb. 2; C60/32, memb. 6. Alexander died about March 1233; PRO, MSS E40/1915; E40/207 3; CIR, 1231-4, pp. 197, 201-2.

21 ClR, 1231-4, p. 128; Paient Rolls, 1225-32 (London, 1903) [hereafter Pat.R, 1225-32], pp. 465-6; Rogeri de Wendover Chronica she Flores Historiarum, ed. H. O. Coxe, 5 vols (London, 1841-4), 4, pp. 233-4.

22 Pat.R, 1225-32, pp. 466, 490, 514-15.

23 PRO, MSC60/31, memb.6.

24 CRR, 15, nos 1066, 1181; PRO, MS E159/12, memb. io, which notes that 670 marks were still owing from thejews in February 1233, to be paid within a month of Easter on pain of the release of an unidentified charter, presumably a bond detailing financial penalties, to the representative of the Italians.

25 Calendar of the Charter Rolls 1226-1257 (London, 1903) [hereafter Cal. Ch.R], pp. 163, 167.

26 CRR, 15, nos 1110-24, discussed by Michael Adler, ‘The testimony of the Londonjewry against the ministers of Henry 111’, TJHSE, 14 (1935-9), pp. 159-85. Adler describes Grimbaud as a Poitevin, but in fact his family were tenants of the honour of Huntingdon; Farrer, W., ed., Honours and Knights’ Fees, 3 vols (London, 1923–5), 2, pp. 301–7 Google Scholar; Calendar of Liberate Roils 1226-1240 (London, 1917) [hereafter Cal. Lib.R], pp. 309, 312, 315, 317; ClR, 1234-7, p. 262; Liber Feodorum. The Book of Fees commony called Testa de Nevill, 3 vols (London, 1920-31), p. 1354.

27 CPR, 1232-47, pp. 12-13, which suggests that the tallage itself had been imposed some time earlier. However, I cannot agree with Robert C. Stacey, Politics, Policy and Finance under Henry III 1216-124) (Oxford, 1987), p. 144, who attempts to redate the tallage to 1232. The 10,000-mark tallage is unmentioned in the receipt roll of the Jewry for Hilary/Easter terms 1233, which none the less refers to earlier levies of 2,000, 4,000, and 6,000 marks; PRO, MS E401/1565.

28 PRO, MS E401/10B, memb. 1; Cal.Lib.R, pp. 210-12, 239.

29 Dugdale, William, Monastkon Anglkanum, ed. Caley, J. et al., 6 vols (London, 1946), 6, p. 683 Google Scholar; Adler, Michael, Jews of Medieval England (London, 1939), pp. 279–306.Google Scholar Adler (p. 283) states incorrectly that des Roches left money to the house of converts in his will, based on a mis reading of ClR, 1242-7, p. 22. For the house’s consecration by Bishop John (of Ardfert), see PRO, MS E372/76, memb. 8d.

30 The statutes are printed by H. G. Richardson, ‘Glanville continued’, Law Quarterly Review, 215 (1938), p. 393.

31 For John’s statute see Hardy, T. D., ed., Rottili Cliartarum (London, 1837), p. 93.Google Scholar

32 ClR, 1231-4, p.551

33 CRR, 15, nos 1110-24, esp. no. 1118. For the dispatch of money from the treasury to Northampton see PRO, MS E372/78, memb. 7; CPR, 1232-47, p. 40.

34 CRR, 15, p. 257n., and see ClR, 1231-4, pp. 585-6 for inquests into the Jewries of Oxford, York, Nottingham, Northampton, and Lincoln.

35 PRO, MSC60/33, memb.4.

36 ClR, 1231-4, pp. 515-16, 592; ClR, 1234-7, p. 20. For Newcastle see PRO, MS C60/33, membs 4, 6; Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear Archives, MS 574/95.

37 ClR, 1234-7, pp. 13-14.

38 Annales Monastici, 2 (Winchester), p. 86 dates the murder to 17 Oct., which cannot be correct. For details of the case see CIR, 1231-4, p. 80; PRO, MS JUST1/775, memb. 20. In 1225 Abraham had been amongst several of the Winchester Jews implicated in the death of William fitz Richard fitz Gervase. The accusation was laid by William’s father, but Abraham was subsequently acquitted; Rot.l.c, 2, pp. 50b, 5 ib.

39 PRO, MS JUST1/775, memb. 20d; Cal.Ch.R, p. 218; CIR, 1234-7, p. 239.

40 ClR, 1227-31, p. 539; CIR, 1231-4, p. 103; W. D. Macray, ed., Charters and Documents relating to Selborne and its Priory, 2 vols, Hampshire Record Society (1891–4), 1, pp. 4, 6, ii, pp. 46, 51; Cole, ed., Documents, p. 302; Dugdale, Monasticon, 6, pp. 933-4.

41 CRR, 15, no. 1320; Lipman, Jews of Norwich, pp. 59-62.

42 CIR, 1231-4, p. 571.

43 Rotuli Chartarum, p. 93; H.-François Delaborde, ed., Recueil des actes de Philippe-Auguste, Roi de France, 3 vols (Paris, 1916-66), 2, no. 955. In general, for French legislation see Robert Chazan, Medieval Jewry in Northern France (Baltimore and London, 1973), pp. 63–153; G. Langmuir, ‘“Judei Nostri” and the beginning of Capetian legislation’, Traditio, 16 (1960), pp. 183-244.

44 Chazan, Jewry, pp. 79-80, 95; Lipman, Jews of Norwich, p. 104.

45 Chazan, Jewry, pp. 84-5.

46 Ibid., p. 78; E. Martène and U. Durand, ed., Veterum scriptorum et monumentorum historicorum, 9 vols (Paris, 1724-33), 1, cols rzz2-3.

47 Baldwin, John W., Masters, Princes and Merchants, 2 vols (Princeton, 1970), pp. 120–1.Google Scholar

48 Langmuir, ‘“Judei Nostri”’, pp. 215–27; Chazan, Jewry, pp. 100-111. “ Chazan, Jewry, p. 86.

50 Avril, Joseph, ed., Les Conciles de la Provincede Tours (Paris, 1987), pp. 130–1.Google Scholar

51 Baldwin, Masters, Princes and Merchants, chs 14 and 15, esp. pp. 296–311.

52 H. R. Luard, ed., Roberti Grossteste episcopi quondam Lincolniensis Epistolae, RS (1861), no. 5.

53 Nichols, J., The History and Antiquities of the County of Leicester, 4 Vols (London, 1795–1815)Google Scholar, 1 pt1, appendix, p. 38, no. 13, a reference I owe to John Maddicott. See also Vincent, N. C., ‘The first quarrel between Simon de Montfort and King Henry III’, in Coss, P. and Lloyd, S. D., eds, Thirteenth Century England IV (Woodbridge, 1992, forthcoming).Google Scholar

54 Grosseteste Epistolae, no. 5, as paraphrased by Southern, R. W., Robert Grosseteste: the Growth of an English Mind in Medieval Europe (Oxford, 1986), pp. 244–9.Google Scholar

55 Lipman, Jews of Norwich, p. 62.