THE DEBTS AND HOUSES OF THE JEWS OF 

HEREFORD IN 1290. 

–––––¨–––––

By B. LIONEL ABRAHAMS. 

When the history of the Jews of England before the Expulsion comes
to be written, it will probably be found to derive its chief interest not,
like that of the mediæval Jews of southern Europe, from the literary
and philosophical importance of the period dealt with, nor, like that of
the Jews of central Europe, from stories of the daring and suffering of
martyrs who died for their faith, but rather from the comparative ful-
ness and clearness with which the historian will be able to describe
the relations of the members of the Jewish communities to the people
around them and to one another. Mr. Joseph Jacobs and Mr. M. D.
Davis have accomplished much work that will help our future historian
to do justice to his subject, and I trust that the documents which I am
now enabled to publish may serve, in some slight measure, towards
the same end.

First of all it is necessary to explain how the lists of the debts
and houses of the Jews of Hereford came into existence. When the
Jews were expelled from England, all the properly that they left be-
hind them fell into the hands of the king. It was of two kinds, firstly,
houses and tenements that they had held in fee or for a terra of years,
and secondly, bonds for money or kind tat had been executed in their
favour by Christians. Some of this property the king granted by way
of gift to his friends; some he expressed his intention of using for pious
purposes; the greater part, no doubt, he intended to keep for himself.1
But, in order that he might know the exact amount at his disposal, he
issued, a few months after the Expulsion, writs ordering the sheriffs of
the counties in which Jews had been residing to send to the Treasurer
and Barons of the Exchequer at Westminster the official chests in
which counterparts of Jewish bonds had been preserved, and to

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        Tovey, Anglia Judaica, 235. Public Record Office, Exchequer, Q. R
Miscellanea. Jews, 557. 9.

require the chirographers, or keepers of the chests, to attend at
the Exchequer in person, bringing with them any bonds or deeds
relating to the Jews which they might have in their custody, even
though the counterparts of them were not contained in the official
chests. The sheriffs were at the same time to inquire what houses
and tenements were in the possession of the Jews of each comity at
the time of the Expulsion, under what tenure they were held, and what
was the value of them to the king, now that the rights of the Jews in
them had reverted to him. When they had collected all the informa-
tion on the subject that they could get, they were on the king’s behalf
to seize the houses, to let them to new tenants on the most favourable
conditions that could be obtained, and to send to the Exchequer a full
report of their proceedings. Lastly, to ensure that nothing that had,
through the expulsion of the Jews, become the king’s property should,
fall into other hands, the sheriffs were to proclaim throughout their
counties that whoever had in his possession any goods or chattels
belonging to a Jew should bring them to the Exchequer on the same
day on which the chirographers were to appear there ; and any one
who failed to do so was to be declared liable, on conviction, to the loss
of his life, his limbs, and all his property in the kingdom.1

No doubt, in ail the counties in which Jews had lived, the king’s
orders were duly carried out, the proclamations were made, the houses
were seized by the sheriffs, and the chests were duly sent to West-
minster. At any rate, there are preserved in the Public Record Office,
at the present day, the returns concerning the houses of the Jews in many
of the towns in which they had lived, and the lists drawn up by the
officers of the Exchequer of the bonds presented by the chirographers.
The extant lists and returns relate to the following places: Bedford,
Bristol, Cambridge, Canterbury, Colchester, Devizes, Exeter, Hereford,
Ipswich, Lincoln, Northampton, Norwich, Nottingham, Oxford, South-
ampton, Stamford, Winchester, York. I have chosen for immediate
publication those which relate to Hereford, because of the Jewry of
that town, as of the others of the West of England, no connected
account has been written, though the information concerning it is, in
spite of its scantiness, of considerable historical interest. 1 do not

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

undertake to give with any completeness all that there is to say about
the Jewry of Hereford, but I wish to show, partly from the accom-
panying documents and partly from other sources, what kind of infor-
mation about its history and the lives of its inhabitants is at the
disposal of the historian.

The Jewry of Hereford seems to have come into existence at the
end of the twelfth century, There is every reason to believe that at the
accession of Richard I. it was small in numbers and of recent foundation,
if, indeed, it existed at all. For in the accounts of the attacks which
were made on the chief Jewish settlements in England at that time, it
is not once mentioned. And when, in 1194, the Jews of England had
to make a general gift to the Exchequer, the list of the contributions
from Hereford contained the names of only twenty persons, who
among them, gave £31. 3s. 10d., the amount of the whole gift being
£1,803. 7s. 7d., and the number of contributors being 271.1 The
neighbouring Jewry of Gloucester was evidently much more im-
portant, since forty-five of its members gave £237. 15s. 4d; it was
also much older, and had enjoyed as early as 1168 the distinction
of producing a boy-martyr.2

The Hereford Jewry, however, must soon have attained to a
certain importance, since, when we next hear of it, it is the subject
of an interesting quarrel between the royal power and the Bishop of
the diocese.

The Bishops of Hereford possessed from very early times
extensive jurisdiction over what was called the Bishop’s Fee, a
district including nearly half of the city and a considerable portion of
the suburbs.8 Within that district they had the right of trying
offenders, and of committing them to the episcopal prison. The Jews,
of course, being under the special protection of the king, were not
subject to any local jurisdictions; but the Bishop of Hereford,
irritated, like the authorities of many of the towns, by the existence
of a privilege which diminished his power and dignity, attempted to
exercise the same jurisdiction over the Jews as over the other

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

inhabitants of the Bishop’s Fee. What measures he took we do not
know, but in the writ which, at the beginning of the reign of
Henry III., was sent to the Sheriff of Hereford, as to the other
sheriffs of counties, ordering him to protect the Jews in his county
from violence, the king’s guardian showed their determination to
uphold the royal claim to the exercise of undivided rights over the
Jews. “You shall proclaim,” says the writ, “throughout all the
district under your charge that we have assured to the Jews our
peace. No action to the contrary taken by the Bishop of Hereford is
of any effect, for our Jews are no concern of his. . . . You shall
not permit the Jews to be impleaded in any ecclesiastical court oh
account of any debt. All these things you shall do as they were
done in the days of our father John.”1

The Jews, apparently, came to no harm from the interference-
of the Bishop. Probably the lay magnates of the neighbourhood
were their friends and sometimes took part in their business; for
though there is no extant record to prove this, there is, among the
decrees of a synod held in the neighbouring diocese of Worcester, a
denunciation by the Bishop of the conduct of those Christians who,
while not practising usury under their own name, entrusted their
money to Jews for the purpose, and acted as sleeping partners in
their business.2 The Earl of Gloucester is known to have bought
from one Jew, apparently of Gloucestershire, the right to collect the
debts due to him.3 What happened in Worcestershire and in Glouces-
tershire happened no doubt in Herefordshire as well.

At the time of the Barons’ Wars, the Jewry of Hereford, unlike
many others, escaped attack. To a certain extent, indeed, its position
must have been improved by the events of the war, for the Jewry of
Worcester, its neighbour and no doubt its rival, was attacked and
plundered in 1263, and never recovered from the loss that it suffered.4
In 1275 the staff of registrars and the chests for the deposit of bonds
which liad hitherto been maintained at Worcester, were removed by

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

the king’s orders to Hereford,1 a measure which completed the
destruction of the Worcester Jewry, by the absorption of what remained
of it in that of Hereford.

Till the end of the reign of Henry III., the richer Jews of Here-
ford were, as far as we have any means of knowing, all money-lenders,
lending occasionally to tradesmen in the city, but usually to land-
holders and farmers on the security of their land. They, no doubt,
received regular interest so long as the money due to them was unpaid,
and they had no reason to be dissatisfied with the chance of ultimate
realisation of their debts, since in default of payment they could obtain
possession of the land pledged to them as security.

But the accession to power of Edward I. completely changed this
state of things. Even before his father’s death Edward had helped to
secure the passing of a statute which imposed on Jewish money-
lenders conditions so stringent as to make it all but impossible for them
to carry on their trade; and in 1275 he carried to its natural issue
the scheme of legislation thus initiated by forbidding usury altogether.2
Some years later he revoked in part the statute of 1275, and allowed
money-lending at interest to be resumed, but again under very strict
conditions.3

The list of the Hereford bonds shows very clearly the effects of
this legislation. The bonds of the old chest, all belonging to a
period before 1277, are almost all for money lent at usury. The
greater number of those of the new chest are ostensibly for the delivery
of corn or wool. It is, of course, possible that the bonds of the latter
class all represent genuine trading transactions. In that case it would
follow that the richer Jews of Hereford took to trade when usury was
forbidden, and kept to it when, though the actual prohibtion was
removed, it was made by Edward’s legislation much less profitable

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        Papers of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, pp. 187-8.

2        See The Expulsion of the England in 1290, now appearing in
the Jewish Quarterly Review.

3        The partial revocation of the Statute of 1275 is contained in the Chapitles
tuchaunz le Gywerie, first printed by Dr. Gross in Papers of the Anglo-Jewish
Historical Exhibition, pp. 219-224. The date of it is in all probability shortly
before 1283, the year in which the new chest was opened at Hereford. New
chests wore oponed at several other towns about the same time.

and safe than it had ‘been. No doubt this really happened to a certain
extent, and the existence of some of the bonds for corn and wool is to
be explained by the supposition that the Jews, according to the
practice of the time, paid in advance for specified quantities of
produce to be delivered to them out of the yield of a future harvest.
But it will be noticed that many of these bonds were executed as
early as 1285, whereas the contracts of which they were the instru-
ments, were, as is proved by their presence in the chest after the
Expulsion, still unfulfilled in 1290. The delay seems extraordinarily
long, and therefore it may be conjectured that bonds for the delivery
of corn and wool may, in some cases, have been used as a means of
enabling Jews to lend money at interest in defiance of the conditions
imposed by the law, and that the intention of the contracting parties
was that repayment should ultimately be made in money.

Whatever may have been the nature of the business to which the
entries on our list refer, the persons who on either side were parties
to it were certainly of good position. Among the Christians we find
Miles Richard, sheriff of the county in 1300; Walter Hakelutel or
Hakluyt, sheriff in 1308; E. de Chaundos, sheriff in 1312; John le
Balun, lord of the manor of Marcle; Henry de Hereford, knight,
owner of many estates and benefactor of abbeys; William de Bliss,
knight; John le Bran, who married the heiress of the manor of
Sollers Hope; Nicholas de Trillec, bearer of the same name as a
bishop of Hereford in the fourteenth century; Eichard de Kynardesley,
whose father, Hugh de Kynardesley, had been sheriff of the county in
1240; and, in addition to these, members of the families of
de Penbrugge, de Burghill, de Sollers, Rossell, Caple, de Siptune,
de Hurtesle, le Archer, Devereux, Gernun, Elmerugge, Mucegros,
de Furches, de la Mere, all of which were of the land-holding class,
some of old descent and many of high standing in the county.1

On the other side it is evident that the creditors who are
enumerated were nearly all members of the aristocracy of the Jewry,
which, as we know, was of some importance, and had social as well as
business relations with the Christians of the city. For in 1286 one of
the chief Jewish families of the city gave a wedding feast with

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

 

“displays of silk and cloth of gold, horsemanship or an equestrian
procession, stage-playing, sports and minstrelsy,” all in so magnificent
a style as to induce many of the citizens to attend it, though Bishop
Swinfield had threatened to excommunicate any Christian who should
be so impious as to accept the hospitality of Jews.1 A glance at
our list will be enough to show how small was the Jewish aristocracy,
and how great a portion of the wealth of the Jewry was in its hands.

Now, when it is remembered that the Jewish population of
England at the time of the Expulsion was more than 16,000;2 that
the number of the towns in which Jews were living at the time was not
more than twenty, if as many; and that Hereford was, in the wealth,
and probably in the number, of its Jewish inhabitants, among those of the
first rank, it becomes clear that in all probability there was, in addition
to, and far outnumbering, the families of which we know anything, a
large class of poor Jews in Hereford. It may have been for their
protection that the king appointed in 1282 twenty-four burgesses to
act as guardians of the Jews of the city, and to make public
proclamation that none should harm them.3 But we know nothing of
the pursuits of these poor Jews. We are in the same condition of
ignorance concerning them as concerning the poor Jews of Continental
Europe in the Middle Ages. We know, for example, that there were
hundreds of thousands of Jews in Spain and France and Germany,
But when we read the chief sources of Jewish history for the period,
the martyrologies, we learn nothing about the poor. We are told of
men who met death bravely and cheerfully “for the Name’s sake,” but
they are all learned or highly placed in the Synagogue. Of other
classes nothing is said. So it is with the history of the English Jews.
Perhaps the historian of the future, if ever he looks at the Hereford
list, may be glad to be reminded by it, as he must be, of this gap in the
information at his command.

There are other points of less importance which are illustrated by
the documents now printed. One is, that priest-ridden as the

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        Roll of the Household Expenses of Bishop Swnifleld (Camden Society),
c, ci.

2        Flores Historiarum (Rolls Series), III., 70.

3        Calendar of Patent Rolls from 1281to 129, p. 15.

“displays of silk and cloth of gold, horsemanship or an equestrian
procession, stage-playing, sports and minstrelsy,” all in so magnificent
a style as to induce many of the citizens to attend it, though Bishop
Swinfield had threatened to excommunicate any Christian who should
be so impious as to accept the hospitality of Jews.1 A glance at
our list will be enough to show how small was the Jewish aristocracy,
and how great a portion of the wealth of the Jewry was in its hands.

Now, when it is remembered that the Jewish population of
England at the time of the Expulsion was more than 16,000;2 that
the number of the towns in which Jews were living at the time was not
more than twenty, if as many; and that Hereford was, in the wealth,
and probably in the number, of its Jewish inhabitants, among those of the
first rank, it becomes clear that in all probability there was, in addition
to, and far outnumbering, the families of which we know anything, a
large class of poor Jews in Hereford. It may have been for their
protection that the king appointed in 1282 twenty-four burgesses to
act as guardians of the Jews of the city, and to make public
proclamation that none should harm them.3 But we know nothing of
the pursuits of these poor Jews. We are in the same condition of
ignorance concerning them as concerning the poor Jews of Continental
Europe in the Middle Ages. We know, for example, that there were
hundreds of thousands of Jews in Spain and France and Germany,
But when we read the chief sources of Jewish history for the period,
the martyrologies, we learn nothing about the poor. We are told of
men who met death bravely and cheerfully “for the Name’s sake,” but
they are all learned or highly placed in the Synagogue. Of other
classes nothing is said. So it is with the history of the English Jews.
Perhaps the historian of the future, if ever he looks at the Hereford
list, may be glad to be reminded by it, as he must be, of this gap in the
information at his command.

There are other points of less importance which are illustrated by
the documents now printed. One is, that priest-ridden as the

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        Roll of the Household Expenses of Bishop Swnifleld (Camden Society),
c, ci.

2        Flores Historiarum (Rolls Series), III., 70.

3        Calendar of Patent Rolls from 1281to 129, p. 15.

“displays of silk and cloth of gold, horsemanship or an equestrian
procession, stage-playing, sports and minstrelsy,” all in so magnificent
a style as to induce many of the citizens to attend it, though Bishop
Swinfield had threatened to excommunicate any Christian who should
be so impious as to accept the hospitality of Jews.1 A glance at
our list will be enough to show how small was the Jewish aristocracy,
and how great a portion of the wealth of the Jewry was in its hands.

Now, when it is remembered that the Jewish population of
England at the time of the Expulsion was more than 16,000;2 that
the number of the towns in which Jews were living at the time was not
more than twenty, if as many; and that Hereford was, in the wealth,
and probably in the number, of its Jewish inhabitants, among those of the
first rank, it becomes clear that in all probability there was, in addition
to, and far outnumbering, the families of which we know anything, a
large class of poor Jews in Hereford. It may have been for their
protection that the king appointed in 1282 twenty-four burgesses to
act as guardians of the Jews of the city, and to make public
proclamation that none should harm them.3 But we know nothing of
the pursuits of these poor Jews. We are in the same condition of
ignorance concerning them as concerning the poor Jews of Continental
Europe in the Middle Ages. We know, for example, that there were
hundreds of thousands of Jews in Spain and France and Germany,
But when we read the chief sources of Jewish history for the period,
the martyrologies, we learn nothing about the poor. We are told of
men who met death bravely and cheerfully “for the Name’s sake,” but
they are all learned or highly placed in the Synagogue. Of other
classes nothing is said. So it is with the history of the English Jews.
Perhaps the historian of the future, if ever he looks at the Hereford
list, may be glad to be reminded by it, as he must be, of this gap in the
information at his command.

There are other points of less importance which are illustrated by
the documents now printed. One is, that priest-ridden as the

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        Roll of the Household Expenses of Bishop Swnifleld (Camden Society),
c, ci.

2        Flores Historiarum (Rolls Series), III., 70.

3        Calendar of Patent Rolls from 1281to 129, p. 15.

“displays of silk and cloth of gold, horsemanship or an equestrian
procession, stage-playing, sports and minstrelsy,” all in so magnificent
a style as to induce many of the citizens to attend it, though Bishop
Swinfield had threatened to excommunicate any Christian who should
be so impious as to accept the hospitality of Jews.1 A glance at
our list will be enough to show how small was the Jewish aristocracy,
and how great a portion of the wealth of the Jewry was in its hands.

Now, when it is remembered that the Jewish population of
England at the time of the Expulsion was more than 16,000;2 that
the number of the towns in which Jews were living at the time was not
more than twenty, if as many; and that Hereford was, in the wealth,
and probably in the number, of its Jewish inhabitants, among those of the
first rank, it becomes clear that in all probability there was, in addition
to, and far outnumbering, the families of which we know anything, a
large class of poor Jews in Hereford. It may have been for their
protection that the king appointed in 1282 twenty-four burgesses to
act as guardians of the Jews of the city, and to make public
proclamation that none should harm them.3 But we know nothing of
the pursuits of these poor Jews. We are in the same condition of
ignorance concerning them as concerning the poor Jews of Continental
Europe in the Middle Ages. We know, for example, that there were
hundreds of thousands of Jews in Spain and France and Germany,
But when we read the chief sources of Jewish history for the period,
the martyrologies, we learn nothing about the poor. We are told of
men who met death bravely and cheerfully “for the Name’s sake,” but
they are all learned or highly placed in the Synagogue. Of other
classes nothing is said. So it is with the history of the English Jews.
Perhaps the historian of the future, if ever he looks at the Hereford
list, may be glad to be reminded by it, as he must be, of this gap in the
information at his command.

There are other points of less importance which are illustrated by
the documents now printed. One is, that priest-ridden as the

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        Roll of the Household Expenses of Bishop Swnifleld (Camden Society),
c, ci.

2        Flores Historiarum (Rolls Series), III., 70.

3        Calendar of Patent Rolls from 1281to 129, p. 15.

Christians of the Middle Ages may have been, they were not
prevented from dealing with the Jews on Sunday and Christmas
Eve. Nor, indeed, was this a sign of great laxity, for there exists in
the Household Roll of Bishop Swinfield an entry which shows that an
archdeacon of the thirteenth century went on a Sunday to a banker
in London, there transacted some business for the see with which he
was connected, and reported his proceedings to his bishop.1 The
Jews also may, perhaps, not have been so strict in their observances
as mediaeval Jews are generally thought to have been, for one of the
Hereford bonds was executed on a Saturday.

Another striking fact concerning the list is that eight of the
creditors mentioned in it are women. This is only natural, for in the
Middle Ages women had every opportunity of carrying on business.
In London, for example, a married woman who followed a craft
without the help and interference of her husband was, according to the
regulations and customs of the City, regarded as independent of her
husband with respect to all that concerned her craft.2

A last remark that I would make is that the bonds were evidently
all drawn up in Latin, not, like those published by Mr. M. D. Davis, in
Hebrew. This is proved by the use of the Saints’ days for dates.

Both of the lists, of which abstracts are given, are contained in
the series of MSS. in the Public Record Office known as Queen’s
Remembrancer’s Miscellanea, Jews. The list of debts is No. 557/16
in the series, and the list of houses is No. 557/11 supplemented by
No. 557/9.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        Roll of Household Expenses of Bishop Swinfield, 127.

2        Munimenta Gilâhallæ Londoniensis (Rolls Series), I., 204-205; III.,
38-39.

LIST OF THE DEBTS OWING TO THE JEWS OF HEREFORD WHICH
WERE SEIZED BY EDWAED I. AT THEIR EXPULSION IN 1290.

The names of those places which. I have been able to identify are given in
their modern spelling-, the others are printed in italics and spelt as in the
Manuscript.

The price of corn, wherever it is mentioned in the list, is half a mark per
quarter.

 

 

 

 

 

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        A place called Manetune in Herefordshire is mentioned in Domesday
(Duncumb, Hereford, 1. 65), but cannot now be identified. Perhaps Mainestr’
or Mainestune was the same place, or perhaps Mainestune is the same as
Munstone.

 

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        Walter de Neyr is no doubt the same person of Walter le Blake, or black,
of Mainestune, who appears lower down as a creditor of Elias son of Aaron.

2        Perhaps Dorrington in Shropshire.

l 2

 

From the new Chest. 

 

 

 

New Chest. 

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        The name of the creditor in this case is given as Fauntynus, which is pro-
bably a way of describing Bonenfaunt, who on page 159 appears as Fauntekyn.

 

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 

1        See footnote 1, on p. 147 above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1        Perhaps “of Lugwardine.”