Richard of Devizes and the Alleged Martyrdom of a Boy at Winchester

<plain_text><page sequence="1">Richard of Devizes and the Alleged Martyrdom of a Boy at Winchester PATRICIA ALLIN Richard of Devizes, a monk of the Benedictine Priory of St Swithun at Winchester, is remembered chiefly as the author of the Chronicle of the Reign of Richard the First It is unfortunate that almost nothing else is known about him, for his humour, caustic wit and sense of the ridiculous permeate almost every event he records. The Chronicle con? tains an abundance of classical quotation and satire disguised as fact, yet provides a valuable source for the history of the period.1 The scant information about Richard comes from his own pen. In the Chronicle he describes himself as 'Richard called of Devizes', so he presumably came from that area of Wiltshire.2 His writing betrays an opinionated, though well-educated man, with an enquiring mind, who took every opportunity of making his own judgments, although his opinion of the Jews was based on a strong belief in his Church's teaching that all Jews, whether dead or living, were responsible for the death of Jesus and for the other 'crimes' of Judaism. This was tempered a little by canon 26 adopted by the third Lateran Council, according to which 'Jews ought to be subject to Christians, and treated kindly by them only out of humane considerations.'3 Richard held strong opinions on money-lending, especially if the Church was the borrower, for he scathingly reports on the activities of his bishop, Godfrey de Lucy of Winchester, who 'mindful of his position' secretly gave the king ?3000 to obtain judgment on the Church's claim to two manors, to secure his patrimony as sheriff of Hampshire and to have custody of the castles of Winchester and Portchester. 'When the time for him to pay so much money drew near, since he could not go beyond the day fixed for the payment without risking the whole undertaking, and since he could find no nearer help under Heaven, he reluctantly put his hand into the treasure of his church.'4 Richard of Devizes did not hesitate sarcastically to reprimand Godfrey, 'the circumspect man', for seeking worldly rather than spiritual advancement and for borrowing the money to pay for the achievement of his ambitions. And it is difficult to believe that Richard of Devizes was unaware that his own prior borrowed from the Jews: Robert fitz Henry, at some date before 1191, had pledged a convent cup (cyphum) to Abraham son of Samuel of Winchester for ten marks.5 There is evidence of other borrowings by St Swithun's Priory from Jews, because in 1205 King John ordered the sheriffs of Dorset, Hampshire and Wiltshire to aid the prior and monks of St Swithun's to make peace of all pleas of Jewish debts and to help free houses and lands in their bailiwicks to acquit these debts.6 These outstanding loans appear to have been incurred late in the 12th century and to have involved a substantial amount of money. Richard was probably aware of the Church's financial liabilities and these could, in part, be responsible for his hostility towards the Jews. By the mid-12th century the population of Winchester was more than 8000 persons,7 of whom the Jews at the time of the Chronicle num? bered at most about ninety including women and children. The 1148 survey of Winchester8 records the names of two Jews living in Scowrtenestret - 'Shoemakers Street', the present Jewry Street. Urse? lin and Deulecreisse and their families were soon joined by other Jewish families who also settled in the same street, one of which was the family of Isaac and Fluria of Beverley, who had purchased a house from Aaron of Lincoln,9 and Solomon of Beverley.10 Aaron owned other properties in the same street.11 A guide to the wealth of the Winchester community is provided from monies contributed by the eleven Jewish communities of England in 1159. Hamp? shire (Winchester?) made the fourth-largest contri? bution.12 A receipt roll of 1194 names seventeen Winchester and Hampshire Jews who paid f84.15s.7d., the eighth-largest sum of tax assessed on the twenty-one Jewish communities of Eng? land.13 Undoubtedly, Winchester housed poor Jews, whose names have gone unrecorded, but Richard of Devizes would probably have been aware of the one or two wealthy families, because of the Convent's borrowings. 32</page><page sequence="2">Richard of Devizes and the Alleged Winchester Martyrdom ^ ^ Various factors could have provided the original impetus for the Jewish settlement in Winchester. The main road from the midlands passed through the city to Southamptom, and the road from London to Exeter and beyond also passed through it.14 Winchester was the administrative centre for Hampshire, with a royal castle situated in the southwest corner of the walled area not far from Scowrtenestret which was the king's residence when in Winchester. Other reasons are economic. Twelfth-century Winchester was a prosperous city, a commercial and financial centre, with a wide variety of trades and manufactures.15 Since trade was in the hands of the gild merchant at this period, it would have been very difficult for Jews to trade in the city, but fairs and markets were open to them. One of the great fairs of England was the Winches? ter St Giles Fair.16 Trade could be carried on there by all inhabitants, whether gild members or not, while strangers and travelling merchants were welcomed for their wares,17 and it is likely that Jews from various communities had shops to sell their unredeemed pledges and to negotiate loans.18 Other Hampshire towns where business could be conducted on market days were easily within a day's ride of the city, and the cathedral and monastic houses drew people to Winchester, there? by providing more business opportunities of all kinds. It is doubtful if the churchmen in Winchester adversely affected the Jewish community, for they were the 'king's Jews', and if one was harmed the malefactor was answerable directly to the king. But from the scanty 12th-century evidence available for Winchester, it would appear the community lived in peace with their Christian neighbours, and relying on their fellow citizens to supply many of their daily necessities, from food supplies to building materials and various skills. As Richard himself says, one family employed a Christian servant. Before discussing Richard of Devizes' account of the alleged murder of a Christian boy by the Winchester Jews, his story of the 'coronation riot' needs examination, as this provides an example of Richard's hyperbolic style. The version he gives of events following the London coronation of Richard I bears little resemblance to the accounts of contem? porary chroniclers such as Benedict of Peterbor? ough, William of Newburgh and Roger of Hoveden, for he distorted the incident to convey his own attitudes towards relations between Jews and Chris? tians. The facts were that the Jews were forbidden to attend the coronation of Richard I but, while the king was dining after the ceremony, a few leading members of the Jewish communities entered the hall to offer gifts. They were immediately seized, beaten and ejected. One of them, said to be Benedict of York, was so badly injured he agreed to accept baptism. When the Londoners heard how the courtiers had raged against the Jews, they attacked the Jews of the city, slew many and set fire to their houses. According to Benedict of Peterborough, some escaped to the Tower of London and others found refuge in friends' houses. The next day King Richard had the malefactors arrested and sent messengers and letters through all the counties of England, commanding that the Jews should suffer no forfeiture and that they be left in peace. The part of the account which Richard of Devizes seems to have used, concerns the baptized Jew, Benedict of York, whom the king commanded to be brought before him. He asked him if he were a real Christian, whereupon Benedict answered no, but that in order to escape death he had allowed the Christians to do with him what they pleased. The king asked Baldwin, the Archbishop of Canterbury, what was to be done with him, to which he replied: Tf he will not be a God's man, let him be the devil's man'.19 But Richard's account of the event reads: On that same coronation day, at about the hour of that solemnity in which the Son was immolated to the Father, they began in the city of London to immolate the Jews to their father, the devil. It took them so long to celebrate this mystery that the holocaust was barely completed on the second day. The other towns and cities of the country emulated the faith of the Londoners, and with equal devotion they despatched their blood-suckers bloodily to hell. One can see how Richard seized on Baldwin's reply - let him be the devil's man' - to elaborate his version. He did not believe the Londoners timed the onset of the massacre to coincide with the hour of Jesus' death, but was convinced that all Jews were culpable for the Passion. He continues by describing the Jews as 'the incorrigible people'. Perhaps he was indeed acquainted with one or two Winchester Jews, and had become aware that nothing would persuade them to convert to Chris</page><page sequence="3">34 Patricia Allin tianity or change their ways and, even as Benedict of York had been baptized and 'he who had been a Christian returned to the Jewish Law', so would other Jews, despite constant attacks, harassment and persecution, remain true to the faith of their fathers. But he also claims that: 'Winchester alone spared its worms'. If Richard really believed that, he was indeed ill-informed, for most of the English Jewries escaped the horrors of London and the massacre of York. He continues, moreover, to mock the citizens of Winchester: 'They were a prudent and far sighted people and a city that always behaved in a civilized manner. They never did anything over hastily, for fear they might repent of it later, and they looked to the end of things rather than to the beginning.' Richard of Devizes may mock, but he acknowledges that the men of the city were aware of the king's retribution meted out to those found guilty of attacking the London and York Jewries, which is why they refrained from destroying the 'undigested mass', who, he implies, could never hope to be integrated into a Christian society. Although the Winchester citizens were urged to attack the Jews, they were not prepared to do so 'until at an opportune time for remedies they could cast out all the morbid matter once and for all',20 which may mean that they maintained good relationships with the local Jews, for Richard's assumption that they hid their dislike of them seems inherently unlikely. Gerald of Wales was possibly one of the sources from which Richard gathered information, because his statements about 'worms', 'opportune time' and 'morbid matter' indicate a knowledge of the story recounted of Sir Roger de Estreby, a Lincolnshire knight. Sir Roger claimed that St Peter and the Archangel Gabriel had called on him to go to King Henry II and convey a warning, to which the knight responded that he could not possibly go because he had pledged a coat of mail to Aaron the Jew of Lincoln, which could not be redeemed until his crop had been sold. The voices then replied, 'but you have it; it lies at the foot of your bed', and they again enjoined Roger to go to Henry and warn him of his methods of government and to tell him to fulfil seven commandments, which, if he obeyed and went on a crusade for seven years, would secure him seven more years of life. If, however, Henry failed to comply he would die miserably within only four years.21 Roger eventually did as the voices bid, but with little effect because Henry, although contrite, procrastinated so long that nothing was done. The aspect of this to which Richard of Devizes appears to be referring is the seventh command? ment quoted by Gerald of Wales: 'Concerning the Jews: that they should be expelled from his domains with only enough money to pay their fare and support their families, after their securities and title deeds had been taken from them and restored to their owners.'22 Perhaps Richard of Devizes hoped King Richard would put into effect what his father had failed to do. It is indeed possible that he knew personally this Aaron of Lincoln to whom Gerald of Wales refers, for Aaron had lent money to several Winchester citizens and owned property in Scowr tenestret. In view of Richard's plagiaristic embellishment of contemporary chroniclers' accounts of the after? math of Richard's coronation, it is essential to look critically at his story of the 'martyrdom' at Win? chester (see the appendix). His source in this case would appear to be Thomas of Monmouth's account of the finding of a dead Christian boy, William, who had been apprenticed to a Norwich skinner, and of whose murder the Jews of Norwich were accused. William was alleged to have had frequent dealings with the Jews ofthat city and they were said to regard him with special favour. Thomas says the boy was received kindly by the Jews on the first and second days of Passover but, after synagogue service on the third day, the boy was ritually murdered. On Good Friday when, according to Thomas, the Jews did not normally leave their houses, the body was taken by two Jews to Thorpe Wood, where it was found on Easter Eve, 24 March.23 Saint William of Norwich was the first such 'martyr' recorded in Europe, but other allega? tions of ritual murder followed in England during the 12th century. None of these charges appear to have had serious consequences for the Jewish communities. Winchester, however, can claim the distinction of accusing a Jew of murdering a boy whose body was never produced, and presumably not found. Richard of Devizes makes absolutely no reference to the finding of a corpse but says that the apprentice's friend accused the Jewish master of having crucified the missing boy, cut his throat and</page><page sequence="4">Richard of Devizes and the Alleged Winchester Martyrdom 3 5 presumably eaten him too. The latter charge would certainly account for the absence of a body. The apprentice's companion had spent several days searching every corner of the town for the missing child, without success. In the absence of other records of the incident, Richard of Devizes' story of the martyrdom cannot be confirmed or denied. It is quite possible that a Winchester Jew was accused of murdering a boy, and because a corpse was not found the case was dismissed. It is doubtful if Richard himself believed the story because he insistently impugned the honesty of his sources: The Jews of Winchester . . . brought upon themselves, according to the testi? mony of many people, the widely known reputation of having made a martyr of a boy in Winchester'; and another clue is provided by Richard in the French Jew's advice to the boy before he left for England: 'There is one vice there and one alone, which is by custom greatly indulged in. I would say, with all due respect to the learned men and to the Jews, that the people of Winchester lie like sentries. Indeed, nowhere else under heaven are so many false rumours made up so easily as there.'24 But despite Richard of Devizes' disbelief in the incident he devoted a good deal of thought and space in his Chronicle to the event and placed it firmly in the contemporary Winchester Jewry. According to Richard, the boy and his com? panion were apprentices to the cobbler's art. It is possible that one of the Jewish residents of Scowr tenestret was a cobbler, but it is far more likely that Richard is making a moral point: that it would be far better for the souls of the Jews if they desisted from money-lending and became shoemakers. In? deed, while Richard was writing his Chronicle, the outstanding debts of Aaron of Lincoln were still being collected in Winchester. Aaron had' sold houses to the Beverley family in Scowrtenestret, and to Moses son of Abraham.25 Another financier, Abraham son of Samuel, who had lent money to the cathedral priory, probably lived nearby. It would thus appear that Richard of Devizes was subtly suggesting the Jews should adopt a trade; although there was already at least one Jewish shop in the street, because on the day of his disappear? ance the apprentice had been working in a Jew's shop. Thomas of Monmouth, the Benedictine monk who recorded the story of the death of William of Norwich, made the point that the Jews did not stir abroad on a Good Friday. Richard does not imply this, however, so either the Winchester Jews were confident they would not be molested by Christians on that holy day and were prepared to employ a Christian on Good Friday, or Richard of Devizes chose Good Friday as the date of the boy's disap? pearance to lend weight to his views on the perfidy of the Jews. It is doubtful, indeed, if a Jew would have allowed a Christian who was not a resident of his house to work for him on a Good Friday, no matter how good Judeo-Christian relations were in the city. For every Jew would have been aware of the violent anti-Jewish hatred which swept through Christendom at this period, and would have taken care not to provoke the Christian community in any way. Moreover, when Richard of Devizes wrote that: 'The Jews of Winchester [were] zealous after the Jewish fashion, for the honour of their city. . . ', he implied that the Winchester community did take care to maintain good relationships with their Christian neighbours and by their demeanour endeavoured not to arouse animosity. Richard of Devizes appeared to have a good knowledge not only of Judaism, but of the daily life-style of the Winchester Jews. He knew the English Jews maintained relations with their French brethren, hence the apprentices being sent from France by a French Jew to a Winchester Jew. He also knew at least a few of the Winchester Jews had a good command of Norman French because the boy was advised: 'In Durham, Norwich and Lincoln there are very few people of your sort amongst the powerful and you will hear almost no one speaking French.' The language they shared could have been one of the reasons for the boy spending a good deal of his time at the Jew's house, for it is doubtful if many, or any, of the boy's own class among the Winchester Christians would have been French speakers. The apprentice appears to have been directed to a Winchester man of some substance, who could afford to employ a resident nurse for his children, and lived in a well-built house which boasted a cellar or underground storeroom. The boy worked many months in Winchester for the same Jew and was paid more money for little work than he would</page><page sequence="5">36 Patricia Allin have received elsewhere for much work. So it would appear that the Winchester Jews were prepared to pay higher rates and provide better working hours and conditions for the services of Christians than their fellow citizens. The apprentice seems to have been happy with his terms of service because Richard wrote 'he freely frequented the Jew's house'.26 Was the boy apprenticed to more than one master? According to Richard he did not work solely for the Jew and therefore must have had more than one master. It is known that Scowrtenestret was not inhabited solely by lews, and Jewish households were probably in a minority. So when the missing boy's companion accused the Jewish employer, Jewish and Christian neighbours, hear? ing the shouting coming from the Jew's house, ran to see what was amiss. This story by Richard of Devizes, of the martyred boy at Winchester, bears comparison with Thomas of Monmouth's The Life and Miracles of St William of Norwich. It appears that Richard was acquainted with the work, or perhaps had heard of the Norwich martyrdom from a brother Benedictine monk from the Norwich priory, and had decided to write his version of the alleged martyrdom of the boy at Winchester. Thomas of Monmouth recounts that a ritual murder was annually carried out in a town picked by lot by leading Spanish Jews at Narbonne, and in 1144 Norwich was chosen.27 Richard asserts that the apprentice was not allowed to work con? tinuously for the Winchester Jew, nor to finish anything big at one time, precisely 'lest his dwelling there should later point to his murder, which was already planned'. Richard further implies that it was the French Jew who chose the victim for the murder at Winchester and that he had placed his hands on the boy's head, as if he were a scapegoat, groaned deeply and prayed silently, 'certain already of the victim.' The Winchester monk made much of the letter written in Hebrew to the Winchester Jew, possibly implying that it was deliberately written in 'the secret language' rather than in French, since fewer Jews would be likely to translate the contents to the boy. The Winchester boy 'freely frequented the devil's house, seduced by his gifts and wiles';28 William of Norwich was also alleged to have had frequent dealings with the local Jews, whom he visited and who regarded him with favour.29 The apprentice's companion was terrified by strange dreams;30 the aunt of William of Norwich had a vision warning her against the Jews.31 At Norwich, William's cousin saw him enter a Jew's house, the door was shut and William was never seen alive again,32 and a Christian maidservant, employed by a Norwich Jew, said she caught a glimpse of a boy fastened to a post in her employer's house;33 at Winchester the apprentice's companion said his friend was last seen in the Jew's house, and the Christian woman who took care of the accused Jew's children swore she had seen the boy go down into their master's storeroom without returning. Her evidence was disallowed because, contrary to the canons, she worked for a Jew, 'which made her infamous'; yet the Norwich maid's evidence was accepted, despite her employer's religion. Richard appears to have disapproved of the acceptance of the Norwich woman's testimony and may have dismissed the Winchester servant's evidence as a veiled warning to all Christians in the employ of Jews. This warning gains some support from advice Richard gave elsewhere in the narrative: T fear nothing for you unless you live with evil companions - for manners are formed by association.'34 Richard of Devizes was referring here to canon 26 of the third Lateran Council, summoned in 1179 by Pope Alexander III. The Canon was concerned with relations between Jews and Christians, and prohibited Jews from having Christian servants, while any Christian who served them was to be excommunicated.35 Richard further embellished his story with the popular caricature that all Jews suffered from a speech impediment, for when the boys arrived at Winchester 'horrible sweetness and lisping kind? ness were their comfort'. Richard of Devizes shared the Church's intolerance for the 'crimes' of Judaism and the belief that the Jews had been responsible for the sufferings and death of Jesus. He also shared the perennial preoccupation of ecclesiastics to discour? age Christians from being friendly with Jews. Those of Winchester were not to be trusted as employers, friends or associates, implying that the city could then become a 'Jerusalem of the Jews' where no Christian would be safe. This may suggest that it was common practice for the Winchester Jews to employ Christians, but we have no further evidence of this.</page><page sequence="6">Patricia Allin 3 7 If Richard of Devizes' story was disseminated in Winchester, as it probably was, it would have been a tale to frighten and warn the children and their parents against the perfidious Jews, especially at the Passover and Eastertide, which often coincide. 'In each locality there are some good men, but there are fewer by far in all of them put together than in one city, Winchester. That city is in those parts, the Jerusalem of the Jews; in that city alone do they enjoy perpetual peace.' If we understand this correctly, Richard of Devizes describes the Church as doing its utmost to urge the 'prudent' citizens of Winchester to assault the local Jews after the coronation of Richard. The people, however, had absolutely no wish to comply, probably for the best of reasons, yet Richard wrote, in their mitigation, of the hatred he felt sure they really reserved for the Jews: 'They hid it in their bowels, modestly dissimu? lating their disgust meanwhile In conclusion, Richard of Devizes' subtle version of the Winchester charge, in stark contrast to his virulent and overt condemnation of the Jews when he recorded the aftermath of King Richard's cor? onation, was composed to convey the author's opinion of both parties in Judeo-Christian relations. In the concluding lines of his tale the Jew offers a bribe to his Christian judges, who accepted it and dismiss the case. Richard of Devizes not only castigates the Jew for proffering the money, but also the Christians for accepting it. Similarly, he did not hesitate to reprimand his bishop for paying for the advancement of his wordly position; and is even more explicit in his statement that: 'Winchester alone spared its worms', in implying that the Jews, by lending money at interest, were feeding on the rotten corpse of Christianity. But most ambiguous of all is the description by the French Jew of the virtuous inhabitants of Winchester, which ends: 'for a little I would go there myself and be a Christian among such Christians'.36 This seems to be aimed at both Jew and Christian, for if the Jews would convert to Christianity and desist from money-lending they could freely share the delights of the city, yet only if the people was as virtuous as Richard's mouthpiece describes them would they be inclined to wish to be Christians 'among such Christians'. Richard shared his Church's intolerance for the 'crimes' of Judaism, but was also intolerant of the un-Christian behaviour of Christians. It is note? worthy that he implied that the conduct of many Christians was little better than that of those 'incorrigible people'. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My grateful thanks to Colin Platt who has so patiently and constructively guided me, and to Derek Keene for his comments. The appendix to this paper, The Chronicle of Richard of Devizes of the Time of Richard the First, edited by John T. Appleby (Oxford Medieval Texts series), is repro? duced by kind permission of the Oxford University Press. APPENDIX The Chronicle of Richard of Devizes of the Time of Richard the First, edited by John T. Appleby, Oxford, pp. 64-9. 1192 Because Winchester should not be deprived of its just praise for having kept peace with the Jews .. . the Jews of Winchester, zealous after the Jewish fashion, for the honour of their city (although what was done greatly lessened it), brought upon themselves, according to the testi? mony of many people, the widely known reputation of having made a martyr of a boy in Winchester. The case was thus. A certain Jew took into the bosom of his family as a helper a certain lad who was an apprentice to the cobbler's art. He did not work there continuously, nor was he allowed to finish anything big at one time, lest his dwelling there should later point to his murder, which was already planned. Since he was better paid there for a little work than for a great deal of work elsewhere, he freely frequented the devil's house, seduced by his gifts and wiles. He was French by race, a minor and an orphan, of low condition and of extreme poverty. When he had bitterly bewailed these miseries in France, a certain French Jew persuaded him by frequent exhortations to go to England, a land flowing with milk and honey. He declared that the English were generous and had an abundance of all good things; there no-one who strove to make an honest living would die poor. The lad, prompt, as is natural to Frenchmen, to try anything you please, took with him a companion of his own age and country... He said farewell to his Jewish friend who said to him: 'Go forth manfully. May the</page><page sequence="7">38 Patricia Allin God of my fathers lead you as I desire.' He put his hands on his head, as if he were a scapegoat, and, after several deep groans and silent prayers, certain already of the victim, he said: Be of stout heart; forget your people and your native land ... When you reach England, if you come to London, pass through it quickly for I do not at all like that city ... I fear nothing for you, unless you live with evil com? panions, for manners are formed by association ... I do not speak against learned or religious men, or against Jews: however, because of their living amidst evil people, I believe they are less perfect there than elsewhere ... In each locality there are some good men, but there are fewer by far in all of them put together than in one city, Winchester. That city is in those parts the Jerusalem of the Jews; in that city alone do they enjoy perpetual peace. That city is a school for those who want to live and fare well. There they breed men; there you can have plenty of bread and wine for nothing. Monks are there of such mercifulness and gentleness, clerks of such wisdom and frankness, citizens of such courteousness and good faith, women of such beauty and modesty, that for a little I would go there myself and be a Christian among such Christians. I send you to that city, the city of cities, the mother of all and better than all others. There is one vice there and one alone, which is by custom greatly indulged in. I would say, with all due respect to the learned men and to the Jews, that the people of Winchester lie like sentries. Indeed, nowhere else under heaven are so many false rumours made up so easily as there; otherwise they are truthful in all things. I had many other things to tell you concerning my affairs, too, but lest perhaps you might not understand, or forget, I put this letter to a Jewish friend of mine into your hands, for I believe that some time you will be rewarded by him. The short letter was in Hebrew. The Jew finished his advice, and the lad, who took everything in good sense, arrived at Winchester. Their awls were sufficient to secure the necessities of life for him and his companion, and, thanks to the Jew's letter, horrible sweetness and lisping kindness were their comfort. Wherever these poor lads worked or ate away from each other by day, every night they slept together in the same bed in the same old hut of a poor old woman. Day followed day and month followed month; and for our lad, whom we have so carefully brought thus far, time has? tened on, whether he was present or absent. The day of the Adored Cross [Good Friday] came and the lad, working that day at his Jew's shop, did not appear [that night], however he had been kept out of the way. It was to be sure, near the Pasch, a holy day of the Jews. His companion, wondering at his absence when he did not return to his bedroom that evening, was terrified that same night by many dreams. When he did not find him after having looked for several days in every corner of the town, in his simplicity he went to the Jew [to ask him] if he had sent his friend anywhere. He was greeted with extraordinary harshness in place of yesterday's kindness. Noticing the change in the Jew's words and looks, he became inflamed against him. Since he was of a sharp voice and wonderful eloquence, he burst into a quarrel, accusing him with loud cries of having done away with his companion. 'You son of a dirty whore,' he said, 'you thief, you traitor, you devil, you have crucified my friend! Alas why haven't I the strength of a man? I would tear you to pieces with my hands!' The cries of the lad shouting in the room were heard in the streets, and Jews and Christians ran up from all directions. The lad insisted, and, already surer of himself because of the crowd, he addressed those present and began to plead for his companion. '0 you men who gather together,' he said, 'see if there is a grief like unto my grief.' This Jew is a devil; this man has torn the heart out of my breast; this man has cut the throat of my only friend, and I presume he has eaten him too. A certain son of the devil, a French Jew -1 do not understand or know what it is all about - that Jew gave my companion a fatal letter to this man. He came to this city, led or, rather, misled by him. He often worked for this Jew here, and he was last seen in his house. He had a witness to some of this, for a Christian woman who, contrary to the canons, took care of some Jewish children in that same house, stead? fastly swore that she had seen the lad go down into the Jew's storeroom without returning. The Jew denied the story, and the matter was referred to the Judges. The accusers failed; the boy because he was under age; the woman because her being employed by Jews made her infamous. The Jew offered to clear his conscience by oath concerning the infamy. Gold won the judges' favour. Phineas gave it and pleased them, and the matter was dropped. NOTES 1 Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II &amp; Richard I, (Rolls Series, 82, iii, ed. R. Howlett, 1884-9) p. LXVII. 2 Ibid.y and DNB XLVII p. 197.</page><page sequence="8">Richard of Devizes and the Alleged Winchester Martyrdom 39 3 Encyclopaedia Judaica X pp. 1445-6. 4 The Chronicle of Richard of Devizes of the Time of Richard the First (ed. John T. Appleby) pp.8, 58. The relevant parts are reprinted as an appendix to this paper, by kind permission of Oxford University Press. 5 Pipe Roll 3 Ric. I, p.90, and Ibid., 4 Ric. I, p.299 (ed. Doris M. Stenton, Pipe Roll Society, XL, 1926). 6 Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum in turris Londinensi asservati (ed. T. D. Hardy) 1833-4,1. P.26. 7 Frank Barlow, Martin Biddle, Olof von Feilitzen and D. J. Keene (ed. Martin Biddle), Winchester in the Early Middle Ages: an edition and discussion of the Winton Domesday (Oxford 1976) pp.440-1. 8 Ibid., p. 101, 443-4. 9 Pipe Roll 3 Ric. L, p.90, and Ibid., 4 Ric. I, p.299. 10 Misc. JHSE I (1925) p.lxiii. 11 Rotuli de oblatis et Finibus ... I John (ed. T. D. Hardy) 1835, pp.44-5; and Rotuli Chartarum ... I John (ed. T. D. Hardy) 1837,1. P-55 12 H. G. Richardson, English Jewry under the Angevin Kings (London i960) p.9. 13 Misc. JHSE op. cit. and V. D. Lipman, Jews of Medieval Norwich (London 1967) p.6. 14 F. M. Stenton, Preparatory to Anglo-Saxon England. Being the Collected Papers of F. M. Stenton, ed. Doris M. Stenton (Oxford 1970) p.237. 15 Barlow, Biddle, von Feilitzen and Keene op. cit. pp. 2 8 6-8, 427-39 16 Ibid., p.287. 17 Victoria County History, V p.417. 18 Plea Rolls of the Exchequer of the Jews. Calendar . . . vol. III, ed. Hilary Jenkinson (1929) pp. 151-2. In 12 76 Philip of Micheldever acknowledged he owed Benedict of Winchester 16 lbs of pepper, arrears of an annual rent of a pound of pepper for Philip's tenement in Micheldever. The pepper was payable to Benedict at the Fair of St Giles, Winchester. 19 S. Singer, 'Jews and Coronations', Trans. JHSE V (1908) pp. 80-2. 20 Appleby op. cit. pp.3-4. 21 Giraldi Cambrensis Opera viii (Rolls Series XXI, ed. G. F. Warner, 1891) pp.183-6, and Joseph Jacobs, 'Aaron of Lincoln', Trans. JHSE III (1899) p. 166. 22 Ibid., and W. L. Warren, King John (Harmondsworth 1966) p.198. 23 V. D. Lipman op. cit. pp.49-5 7, also Augustus Jessop and M. R. James, Life &amp; Miracles of St William of Norwich by Thomas of Monmouth (Cambridge 1896). 24 Appleby op. cit. pp.64-9. 25 See note 9. 26 Appleby op. cit. pp.64-6. 2 7 Jessop and James op. cit. p.LXXI. 28 Appleby op. cit. p.64. 29 Lipman op. cit. p. 50. 30 Appleby op. cit. p.68. 31 Lipman op. cit. p.52. 32 Jessop and James op. cit. p.LXVI. 3 3 Lipman op. cit. p. 51. 34 Appleby op. cit. p.69. 35 See note 3. 36 Appleby op. cit. pp.3-4, 64-9.</page></plain_text>