William of Norwich (died c. 22 March 1144) was an apprentice who lived in the English city of Norwich. He suffered a violent death during Easter 1144. The city's French-speaking Jewish community was blamed for his death, but the crime was never solved.
William became venerated as a Christian saint in Norfolk, when the priors of Norwich Cathedral promoted stories of his death in odium fidei "out of hatred of the faith". William is the first known example of a medieval blood libel.
In his time the Jews of Norwich bought a Christian child before Easter, and tortured him with all the same tortures with which our Lord was tortured, and on Long-Friday hanged him on a cross for love of our Lord, and afterwards buried him—imagined that it would be concealed, but our Lord showed that he was a holy martyr, and the monks took him, and buried him reverently in the minster, and through our Lord he performs wonderful and manifold miracles; and he is called St. William.
Thomas of Monmouth
Since most information about William's life comes from Thomas of Monmouth, it is difficult to distinguish the facts of the case from the story of martyrdom created around it by Monmouth. Thomas of Monmouth was a Benedictine monk that lived in the Priory at Norwich Cathedral, having arrived in Norwich in around 1150. Encouraged by the bishop, he appears to have interviewed surviving witnesses of the event and claimed to have obtained inside information about Norwich's Jewish community. His account is set out in The Life and Miracles of St William of Norwich (Vita et Passione Sancti Willelmi Martyris Norwicensis).[2]
According to Thomas of Monmouth, William was born on 2 February 1132 to a local couple. He was apprenticed to a skinner and tanner, often coming into contact with members of the city's Jewish population.[3] His mother was approached by a man claiming to work for the Archdeacon of Norwich, who offered William a job in the Archdeacon's kitchens. Agreeing, she was paid three shillings to let her son go. William and the man then visited the child's aunt, who told her daughter to follow William and the man. The last time William was seen alive by his family was on Holy Tuesday, was when he and the man went into the house of a local Jew.[2]
Thomas claims William was tortured before being murdered:[4]
Having shaved his head, they stabbed it with countless thornpoints, and made the blood come horribly from the wounds they made...some of those present ad[clarification needed] judged him to be fixed to a cross in mockery of the Lord's Passion.
According to Thomas, the body was found on Holy Saturday in Thorpe Wood, north of the city.[5][6] It was seen by a nun, before a forester, Henry de Sprowston, came across William in his jacket and shoes. Henry saw that the boy had been gagged before suffering a violent death. It was decided to bury the boy in unconsecrated ground on Easter Monday. People came to look at him, and William was recognised. The body was then buried at the murder site. The following day, members of William's family, one of whom, Godwin Stuart, was a priest, confirmed him as the victim. He was then reburied following a Requiem Mass.[2]
William's family and their fellow English quickly blamed the local Jewish community for the crime and demanded justice from the ecclesiastical court of Bishop William de Turbeville. Members of the Jewish community were summoned by the Bishop to attend court and submit to trial by ordeal, but the local Norman sheriff, John de Chesney, advised them that the ecclesiastical court had no jurisdiction over them, as they were not Christians.[2]
He then took the Jews into protection in Norwich Castle. After the situation had calmed down, they returned to their homes. The issue was revived two years later, when a member of the Jewish community was murdered in an unrelated incident. King Stephen agreed to look into the matter, but later decided not to pursue it.[2]
In the meanwhile, William's body had been moved to the monastery cemetery. Bishop de Turbeville and other members of the local clergy attempted to create a cultus around him as a Christian martyr, but this plan did not succeed. There was no evidence in the initial accusations against local Jews that the murder was related to religious activity of any kind, but as the cult developed, so did a story of how and why William was killed.[5][2]
Thomas of Monmouth's account is attributed to the testimony of a monk and former Jew named Theobald of Cambridge. Theobald alleged that the murder was a human sacrifice and that the "ancient writings of his fathers" required the yearly killing of a Christian. This was allegedly for two reasons: to one day return to the Holy Land during the Messianic Age and to punish Jesus Christ for the religious persecution that the Jewish people continued to experience at the hands of his followers.[7] While there is no such commandment for human sacrifice anywhere in Jewish theology or Rabbinic literature, Theobald further alleged that William's murderers were not practitioners of conventional Orthodox Judaism. The murder was allegedly ordered at Narbonne, by a cult leader who had declared himself to be the Jewish Messiah and who had cast lots to select where in Europe his followers were to commit the murder. The lots had allegedly fallen upon Norwich and the pseudo-messiah informed his followers among the French-speaking Jewish communities of England by both messengers and letters.[7]
According to many Jewish primary sources from the period, self-appointed Messiahs and their followers were far from unusual in Europe or the Middle East during the 12th century. For example, Maimonides' 1173/4 Epistle to Yemen warns the Jewish community of Yemen against joining similarly heterodox and syncretistic cults led by pseudo-messiahs and mentions the recent violent deaths of a pseudo-messianic cult-leader and his followers in France. According to Jewish Medievalist Jacob R. Marcus, "The Crusades, which began in the eleventh century, stimulated Messianic movements all over the world. Both in Christian and Moslem lands the Jews looked forward to the coming of the Messiah and the return to the Holy Land. Persecutions at the hands of Christian Crusaders and Moslem fanatics, the Christian conquest of Palestine, the political changes in the map of Asia Minor, the oppressive taxation – all these things induced in the Jews of almost every land the hope that the day of their redemption had also come. Self-proclaimed Messiahs arose to lead the expectant masses back to Jerusalem."[8]
If Thomas of Monmouth's claims about the case were accurate, however, both Jewish and Christian records and chronicles in Southern France would have made at least some mention of a violent messianic cult based at Narbonne.
Thomas of Monmouth supported his claims by saying that a converted former member of the Messianic cult told him that there was an argument over how to dispose of the body. Monmouth also says that a Christian servant woman glimpsed the child through a chink in a door. Another man is said to have confessed on his deathbed, years after the events, that he saw a group of Jews transporting a body on a horse in the woods.[2]
Thomas of Monmouth also quoted Theobald as follows, "I was, at that time at Cambridge, a Jew among Jews, and the commission of the crime was no secret to me. But in process of time, as I became acquainted with the glorious display of miracles which the divine power carried out through the merits of the blessed martyr William, I became much afraid, and following the dictates of my conscience, I forsook Judaism, and turned to the Christian faith."[9]
Context
The Jews in Norwich
The Jewish community is thought to have been established in Norwich by 1135, only nine years before the murder, though one Jew called 'Isaac' is recorded in the Domesday Book of 1086. Most lived in a Jewish quarter or "Jewry", located in what is now the Haymarket and White Lion Street.[10] The Jews were a French-speaking community, like the recently established Anglo-Normans, and were closely associated with them. The "Jewry" was very close to the Castle, a pattern seen in other English towns where Jews were under the protection of the Normans.[11]
William and his family were of Anglo-Saxon descent and several of his relatives were married priests following local tradition.[12] Conflicts between local Anglo-Saxons and Normans may well have lent themselves to conspiracy theories regarding capital crimes by French-speaking Jews being covered up by French-speaking Normans. Tensions were particularly high during the reign of King Stephen when the murder occurred. Thomas of Monmouth alleges that the sheriff was bribed by the Norwich Jewish community to protect them.[6]
There may also have been background conflicts between the cathedral, the sheriff and local people about rights in the city and suburbs. Monmouth repeatedly invokes God as the sole source of justice for Anglo-Saxons against corrupt Norman sheriffs. He also claims that John de Chesney, the sheriff who protected the city's Jews, was later punished with internal bleeding.[13]
Cult
The site of the chapel consecrated to William on Mousehold Heath in 2010
The wish of the local clergy, in particular, of Bishop William de Turbeville, to establish a cultus may at least in part have been financially motivated. The Bishop encouraged Thomas of Monmouth to question local people and to write his book.[5]
After being buried in the monk's cemetery, the body of William was moved to progressively more prestigious places in the church, being placed in the chapter house in 1150 and close to the High Altar in 1151.[14] Monmouth devotes most of his book not to the murder, but to the evidence for William's sanctity, including mysterious lights seen around the body itself and miraculous cures effected on local devotees. Monmouth admits that some of the clergy, notably the Prior, Elias, were opposed to the cult on the grounds that there was little evidence of William's piety or martyrdom. Monmouth promoted the claims by providing evidence of visions of William and miracles.[14]
Historian Paul Dalton states that the cult of William was predominantly "protective and pacificatory" in character, having similarities to that of another child saint, Faith of Conques.[13] Despite its origins, the cult itself was not associated with the promotion of anti-Jewish activity. The cult was a minor one even at its height. There is little evidence of a flourishing cult of William in Norwich – surviving financial records listing offerings made at his shrine at Norwich Cathedral suggest that, although its fortunes waxed and waned, for much of its history there were few pilgrims, although offerings continued to be made until at least 1521.[15] A temporary boost to the shrine's popularity occurred after 1376, when William was adopted by the Norwich Peltier's Guild, whose annual service at the Cathedral included a child who played the part of William.[16] There was also a scholars' guild dedicated to St William in the Norfolk town of Bishop's Lynn.
Images of William as a martyr were created for some churches, mostly in the vicinity of Norwich. A panel of painted oak, depicting William and Agatha of Sicily, is in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London; William is shown holding a hammer and with three nails in his head. The panel was formerly part of a rood screen at the Norwich Church of St John Maddermarket. The screen was commissioned by Ralph Segrym (died 1472), a merchant who became a Member of Parliament and Mayor of Norwich.[17]
William is depicted on the rood screens of a number of other Norfolk churches: St Mary's Church, Worstead[18] and St John's Church, Garboldisham[19] depict William holding nails; the screen in Holy Trinity Church, Loddon depicts William being crucified.[18]
Aftermath
As a result of the feelings generated by the William ritual murder story and subsequent intervention by the authorities on behalf of the accused, the growing suspicion of collusion between corrupt sheriffs and nobles and Jews fuelled the general anti-Jewish and anti-Norman mood of the population. After Thomas of Monmouth's version of William's death circulated a number of other unsolved child murders were attributed to Jewish conspiracies, including Harold of Gloucester (d.1168) and Robert of Bury (d.1181).[20] The best-known of these was Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln (d.1255).[21] This became known as the blood libel.
By the reign of Richard the Lionheart attitudes towards English Jews had become less tolerant. This, in conjunction with the increase in national opinion in favour of a Crusade, and the conflation of all non-Christians in the Medieval Christian imagination, led to the Jewish deputation attending the coronation of Richard in 1189 being attacked by the crowd.[22] A widespread attack began on the Jewish population, leading to massacres of Jews at London and York.[23]
The attacks were followed by others throughout England.[24] When the Norman nobility of Norwich attempted to suppress these activities, the yeomanry and peasants revolted against the lords and attacked their supporters, especially Norwich's Jewish community. On 6 February 1190, the Jews who were found in their own houses at Norwich were killed; others had taken refuge in the castle.[25]
During the development of Chapelfield, Norwich, in 2004 a well with the remains of the remains of at least 6 adults and 11 children was discovered. Analysis showed strong affinities to living Ashkenazi Jewish groups.[26]
Map based on Jessop's and James's Map of Norwich to illustrate the story of St William (1896). The "Jewry" is in red, with the Norman quarter is shown (in green) enclosing it. The English burgh is show in purple.
The story of William's supposed martyrdom in a Jewish conspiracy persisted for many centuries. In 1853, an author attributed William's death to a conspiracy of "the Jews, then the leading doctors, merchants and scholars of the day", and that they escaped then punishment.[27]
The first analysis of the murder was written by M. R. James in 1896. Noting Thomas of Monmouth's use of testimonies to construct a consistent account, James argued that these were inventions or were unreliable, or were manipulated to fit the story. James maintained that the murder's ritual nature emerged only after a man named Theobald, keen to ingratiate himself with the Christian community, promoted the idea. James suggested other causes for William's death, including the possibility of it being an accident, or that William was killed and his murderer (or accidental killer) escaped detection by causing blame for the crime to be placed upon the Jews.[28]
The literary critic Joseph Jacobs speculated in 1897 that William's family had held a mock crucifixion over Easter, during which William fell into a cataleptic trance and died as a result of burial. Jacobs pointed out that Jews would have had to carry the body through Norwich to get to the wood.[29]
20th century – present
In 1933, historian Cecil Roth argued that a different type of mock crucifixion may have led to the accusations against Jews, because of the traditional mock execution of Haman enacted by Medieval Provençal Jews during the festival of Purim. In 1964, Marion Anderson developed this idea, suggesting that William had been told not to associate with Jews following one such masquerade; he died after being tortured by the Jews to find out why they were being ostracised.[2]
In 1984, Canadian Medievalist Gavin I. Langmuir endorsed a theory that the murder was a sex crime, probably perpetrated by the self-described "cook", noting that Thomas of Monmouth's account would imply that William's body was naked below the waist.[5] Langmuir dismissed previous theories, adding that Theobald appeared to have been in Cambridge when the murder was committed.[5] The theory that Theobald killed William was revived in 1988 by Zefirah Rokeah.[who?][citation needed] It has been suggested that the killer was an unknown sadist, while the accusation of the Jews was made by William's family, who may have been prejudiced against them, including hatred of Jews in general, hatred of the Jews for being foreigners allied with the Normans, and hopes for gaining the local Jews' wealth for themselves.[30] Raphael Langham, writing in 2005, believed that Theobald was a disturbed individual with a hatred of his own community and thus the most likely killer.[2] In The Murder of William of Norwich (2015), the medieval historian and journalist E. M. Rose points out that a botched road robbery or kidnapping, which was a frequent cause of death in the region during this period, could explain William's death.[31][lower-alpha 1]
Writing in 1938, Jacob R. Marcus commented on the legacy of William of Norwich and other alleged cases like his: "Generations have believed that no Christian child was safe in Jewish hands. Hundreds of Jews have been imprisoned, killed, or burned alive on this charge. The Papacy has frequently denounced this charge, yet it is equally true that in numerous instances the accusation of ritual murder was not made except with the vigorous support of local Church authorities. The author, Thomas of Monmouth, a monk in the Norwich Benedictine monastery, was an exceptionally credulous person. Jessop, one of the editors of Thomas's work, believes that our monkish author belongs to the class of those who are 'deceivers and being deceived'. In the specific case of William of Norwich, the evidence, critically sifted, leads one to believe that he actually existed and that his body was found after he had died a violent death. Everything beyond this, however, is in the realm of speculation."[34]
Blood libel or ritual murder libel is an antisemitic canard which falsely accuses Jews of murdering Christians in order to use their blood in the performance of religious rituals. Echoing very old myths of secret cultic practices in many prehistoric societies, the claim, as it is leveled against Jews, was rarely attested to in antiquity. According to Tertullian, it originally emerged in late antiquity as an accusation made against members of the early Christian community of the Roman Empire. Once this accusation had been dismissed, it was revived a millennium later as a Christian slander against Jews in the medieval period. The first examples of medieval blood libel emerged in England in the mid 1100s before spreading into other parts of Europe, especially France and Germany. This libel, alongside those of well poisoning and host desecration, became a major theme of the persecution of Jews in Europe from that period down to modern times.
Jews for Jesus is an international Christian missionary organization headquartered in San Francisco, California, that is affiliated with the Messianic Jewish religious movement. The group is known for its proselytism of Jews and promotes the belief that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God. It was founded in 1970 by Moishe Rosen as Hineni Ministries before being incorporated under its current name in 1973.
Messianic Judaism is a modernist and syncretic sect that considers itself Jewish. Many consider it a part of the Christian movement of evangelicalism.
Hugh of Lincoln was an English boy whose death in Lincoln was falsely attributed to Jews. He is sometimes known as Little Saint Hugh or Little Sir Hugh to distinguish him from the adult saint, Hugh of Lincoln. The boy Hugh was not formally canonised, so "Little Saint Hugh" is a misnomer.
The Messiah in Judaism is a savior and liberator figure in Jewish eschatology who is believed to be the future redeemer of the Jews. The concept of messianism originated in Judaism, and in the Hebrew Bible a messiah is a king or High Priest of Israel traditionally anointed with holy anointing oil. However, messiahs were not exclusively Jewish, as the Hebrew Bible refers to Cyrus the Great, Achaemenid Emperor, as a messiah for his decree to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple.
Sabbatai Zevi was an Ottoman Jewish mystic, and ordained rabbi from Smyrna. He was likely of Ashkenazi origin. Active throughout the Ottoman Empire, Zevi claimed to be the long-awaited Jewish Messiah and founded the Sabbatean movement.
Adherents of Judaism do not believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah nor do they believe he was the Son of God. In the Jewish perspective, it is believed that the way Christians see Jesus goes against monotheism, a belief in the absolute unity and singularity of God, which is central to Judaism; Judaism sees the worship of a person as a form of idolatry, which is forbidden. Therefore, considering Jesus divine, as “God the Son”, is forbidden. Judaism's rejection of Jesus as the Messiah is based on Jewish eschatology, which holds that the coming of the true Messiah will be associated with events that have not yet occurred, such as the rebuilding of The Temple, a Messianic Age of peace, and the ingathering of Jews to their homeland.
Messianism is the belief in the advent of a messiah who acts as the savior of a group of people. Messianism originated as a Zoroastrian religious belief and followed to Abrahamic religions, but other religions also have messianism-related concepts. Religions with a messiah concept include Judaism (Mashiach), Christianity (Christ), Islam, Druze faith, Zoroastrianism (Saoshyant), Buddhism (Maitreya), Taoism, and Bábism.
The Edict of Expulsion was a royal decree issued by Edward I on 18 July 1290 expelling all Jews from the Kingdom of England, the first time a European state is known to have permanently banned their presence. The date was most likely chosen as it was a Jewish holy day, the ninth of Ab, commemorating the destruction of Jerusalem and other disasters that the Jewish people have experienced. Edward told the sheriffs of all counties that he wanted all Jews expelled before All Saints' Day that year.
The first Jews in England arrived after the Norman Conquest of the country by William the Conqueror in 1066, and the first written record of Jewish settlement in England dates from 1070. Jews suffered massacres in 1189–90, and after a period of rising persecution, all Jews were expelled from England after the Edict of Expulsion in 1290.
Religion in Medieval England includes all forms of religious organisation, practice and belief in England, between the end of Roman authority in the fifth century and the advent of the Tudor dynasty in the late fifteenth century. The collapse of Roman authority brought about the end of formal Christian religion in the east of what is now England as Germanic settlers established paganism in the large sections of the island that they controlled. The movement towards Christianity began again in the late sixth and seventh centuries. Pope Gregory I sent a team of missionaries who gradually converted most of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, while Scots-Irish monks were active in the north of England. The process was largely complete by the end of the seventh century, but left a confusing and disparate array of local practices and religious ceremonies. The Viking invasions of the eighth and ninth centuries reintroduced paganism to North-East England, leading in turn to another wave of conversions.
Thomas of Monmouth was a Benedictine monk who lived in the Priory at Norwich Cathedral, England during the mid-twelfth century. He was the author of The Life and Miracles of St William of Norwich, a hagiography of William of Norwich that is considered the earliest example of the ritual murder libel.
Judah ben Shalom, also known as Mori (Master) Shooker Kohail II or Shukr Kuhayl II, was a Yemenite messianic claimant of the mid-19th century.
Antisemitism in the history of the Jews in the Middle Ages became increasingly prevalent in the Late Middle Ages. Early instances of pogroms against Jews are recorded in the context of the First Crusade. Expulsions of Jews from cities and instances of blood libel became increasingly common from the 13th to the 15th century. This trend only peaked after the end of the medieval period, and it only subsided with Jewish emancipation in the late 18th and 19th centuries.
"Sir Hugh", also known as "The Jew's Daughter" or "The Jew's Garden", is a traditional British folk song, Child ballad No. 155, Roud No. 73, a folkloric example of a blood libel. The original texts are not preserved, but the versions written down from the 18th century onwards show a clear relationship with the 1255 accusations of the murder of Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln by Jews in Lincoln, making it likely that the known versions derive from compositions made around that time.
Saint Robert of Bury was an English boy, allegedly murdered and found in the town of Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk in 1181. His death, which occurred at a time of rising antisemitism, was falsely blamed on local Jews. Though a hagiography of Robert was written, no copies are known, so the story of his life is now unknown beyond the few fragmentary references to it that survive. His cult continued until the English Reformation.
Harold of Gloucester was a supposed child martyr who was falsely claimed by Benedictine monks to have been ritually murdered by Jews in Gloucester, England, in 1168. The claims arose in the aftermath of the circulation of the first blood libel myth following the unsolved murder of William of Norwich. A Christian cult and veneration of Harold was briefly promoted in Gloucester, but soon died out.
The Life and Miracles of St William of Norwich or Vita et Passione Sancti Willelmi Martyris Norwicensis is a Latin hagiography of William of Norwich by the Benedictine monk Thomas of Monmouth that was written in the second half of the twelfth century. It puts forth the false claim that a young boy named William, who had been found dead in a forest, was in fact ritually murdered by Jews, and was therefore eligible for sainthood.
A cult of saints played a key part within Anglo-Saxon Christianity, a form of Roman Catholicism practised in Anglo-Saxon England from the late sixth to the mid eleventh century.
1 2 Pye, Adrian S. (2010). "Norfolk Churches". norfolkchurches.co.uk. ASPYE. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
↑ Pye, Adrian S. (2010). A photographic and historical guide to the parish churches of Central Norfolk: as defined by the 1914 deaneries of: Hingham, Holt, Humbleyard, Rockland, Sparham, Thetford and most of Depwade, Ingworth, Redenhall, Repps and Taverham and part of Breccles. [England]: ASPYE. ISBN978-0-9558797-3-9. OCLC751828243.
Cubbit, Catherine (2004). "Images of St. Peter: The Clergy and the Religious Life in Anglo-Saxon England". In Cavill, Paul (ed.). The Christian Tradition in Anglo-Saxon England: Approaches to Current Scholarship and Teaching. D.S. Brewer. ISBN978-08599-1-841-1.
Swanton, Michael (1997). The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. London: Routledge. ISBN978-0-415-92129-9.
Wallace, David (1997). Chaucerian Polity: Absolutist Lineages and Associational Forms in England and Italy. Stanford University Press. ISBN978-0-8047-2724-2.
Bennett, Gillian (2005). "William of Norwich and the Expulsion of the Jews". Folklore. 116 (3). Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of Folklore Enterprises, Ltd.: 311–314. doi:10.1080/00155870500282768. JSTOR30035298. S2CID153719625.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
