25. CHARTERS OF LIBERTIES BEFORE MAGNA CARTA: KING JOHN AND THE JEWS (1201)
INTRODUCTION
The idea of documentation of the “liberties” granted to a particular group or organization was not original to the Great Charter of 1215. Kings in England had routinely, if not consistently, included such stipulations in coronation oaths since the ninth century, with particular standouts being those of King Henry I in 1100 and King Henry II in 1155. Kings also stipulated such liberties when incorporating cities and towns with royal charters: the city of London received such guarantees in writing as early as 1067, when King William I confirmed the city’s “ancient” liberties.
Written stipulations of liberties and the legal guarantees accompanying them operated as a form of protection for both the grantor and the receivers of the grant. The grantor outlines the rights and privileges he or she is presenting to the receiver, while the receiver acknowledges the obligations such rights and privileges carry with them. This is particularly the case with King John’s charter of “liberties” which he granted in 1201 to the Jews living in England. Although they were granted the privilege of living under the protection of the king, the Jewish communities were under no illusions that the king—especially one like John—would not use the opportunity of lordship to exploit them at will. Nevertheless, the provisions in this charter, which states that these are merely reiterations and clarifications of earlier charters of liberties enjoyed by the Jewish community in England, clarify the relationship between the king and the Jews as subjects, as well as between Jews and Christians coexisting in the kingdom. Moreover, the prestige of the witnesses—which include some of the most prominent men of the kingdom—attests to the importance of the charter.
KEEP IN MIND AS YOU READ
Although the charter of liberties outlines specific protections of Jews in England, there were few opportunities for Jews to defend themselves on the basis of the charter. In part, the dilemma faced by Jews had to do with their status vis-à-vis the Crown: Jews were considered to be, if not villeins (as in some kingdoms where they were considered royal serfs), then persons of not quite free status whose actions were limited by royal fiat. The establishment, during the reign of King John, of the Court of Exchequer of the Jews was designed to expand upon the jurisdictional issues raised in the charter that no Jew was permitted to engage in a suit except before the king or his justices.
Document 1: Charter of Liberties Confirmed to the Jews of England in the Second Year of the Reign of King John (10 April 1201)
John, by the grace of God etc. Know that We have granted to all Jews of England and Normandy that they reside in freedom and honor in our land, and hold of Us all that they held of King Henry [I], our father’s grandfather, and all that they now rightfully hold in lands, fees, gages and purchases, and that they have all their franchises and customs, as they had them in the time of the said King Henry, our father’s grandfather, in better and more peaceful and honorable enjoyment. . . .
And when a Jew be dead, let not his body be detained above ground [the body should not be prevented from being buried within the Judaic legal 24 hour limit], but let his heir have his money and his debts; so that thereof he may have peace if he have an heir to answer for him and to do right touching his debts and his forfeiture.
And be it lawful for Jews … to receive and buy all things brought to them, except those which pertain to the Church and bloodstained cloth.
And if a Jew be appealed by any without witness, he shall be quit [acquitted] of that appeal by his bare oath upon his Book [the Torah]. And in like manner he shall be quit of an appeal touching those things that pertain unto our Crown by his bare oath upon his Roll [a Torah scroll].
And as often as there shall be dispute between Christian and Jew touching a loan of money, the Jew shall prove his principal and the Christian the interest.
And be it lawful for the Jew quietly to sell his gage when it shall be certain that he has held it for a full year and a day.
And Jews shall not enter into pleas save before Us, or before those who have ward of our castles, in whose bailiwicks Jews dwell.
And wherever Jews be, be it lawful for them to go wheresoever they will with all their chattels, as our proper goods, and be it unlawful for any to delay or forbid them.
And We ordain, that throughout the whole of England and Normandy they be quit of all customs and tolls and prisage of wine as our proper chattel. And We command you and ordain, that you have them in ward and guard and countenance.
And we forbid any to implead them of the said matters against this Charter, on pain of forfeiture, as to the Charter of our father, King Henry, rightfully witnesses.
Witness: Geoffrey FitzPeter, Earl of Essex; William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke; Henry de Bohun, Earl of Hereford; Robert de Turnham; William Briwere, etc. Given by the hand of Simon, Archdeacon of Wells, at Marlborough, on the tenth day of April in the second year of our reign.
Source: Select Pleas, Starrs, and Other Records from the Rolls of the Exchequer of the Jews A. D. 1220–1284. Edited by J. M. Rigg. London: Selden Society, 1902. Pp. 1–2.
AFTERMATH
It is unclear whether the charter of liberties presented to the Jews by King John was able to be enforced in any systematic way. There is evidence, however, that baronial resentment of the protection of the Jews—as well as the appropriation of Christian debts to the Jews by the king—grew over the course of King John’s reign. In the 1215 Great Charter, chapters specifying problems concerning debts owed to Jewish bankers stipulate that heirs and widows of deceased people who owed debts to Jewish bankers were not to be charged interest on the debt after the debtor had died, and the debt had to be paid only out of the cash and movable property assets of the deceased. The purpose behind those statements in Magna Carta had to do with protecting landed estates from exploitation by the king: Jews who acquired land as collateral for unpaid debts were not permitted to retain it but instead had to hand it over to their “lord”—the king. This was perceived as a form of exploitation not only of Jews, who lost the value of the collateral to the king, but also of Christian debtors, whose lands were in the hands of someone who was aversive about returning it. As discussed in Section 3, Economic Life, the royal exploitation of the Jewish communities did not abate but rather grew more demanding. By the reign of King Edward I, the ability of Jews to protect themselves through providing windfalls for the continuously cash-strapped Crown had ceased. This situation was one of the reasons why the Jews were expelled from England in 1290.
ASK YOURSELF
In what ways did the charter of Jewish liberties protect Jews living in England? In what ways did the charter privilege the Christian majority?
Why would the baronage have resented the protections afforded the Jews by this charter?
Why would the king decide to produce a charter protecting a minority population such as the Jews?
TOPICS TO CONSIDER
Imagine yourself a Jew in early thirteenth-century England. Consider some of the ways in which your life would be affected by both friendships and professional associations and the exploitative practices of the Crown and Church.
Consider the connections between political and economic attitudes toward and policies concerning the Jewish population in the medieval British Isles.
Further Information
Brand, Paul. “Jews and the Law in England, 1275–90.” The English Historical Review 115, no. 464 (2000): 1138–1158.
Dobson, R. B. “The Jews of Medieval Cambridge.” Jewish Historical Studies 32 (1990–1992): 1–24.
Lipman, Vivian D. “Jews and Castles in Medieval England.” Transactions & Miscellanies (Jewish Historical Society of England) 28 (1981–1982): 1–19.