Pat Sloane asked about perceptions that Jews had all the money in the MAs
and were associated with usury. In the theologians of Peter the Chanter's
circle [late12th and ea13thc], their main criticisms are actually directed
towards Christian usurers, who they see as the root of many of the
problems of their day. Jewish usurers come in as a side-line almost, as a
complaint that Christian usurers are 'worse than Jews'. They call upon
the prince to repress both Christian and Jewish usurers (largely b/c the
second category was entirely out of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and the
both were extremely useful to lay lords as potential sources for
loans, whether forced or voluntary). In this sense, Fourth Lateran is
atypical in that it seems to be focusing entirely on Jewish usury.
HOwever, one should remember the extensive third lateran legislation on
Christian usurers, to which 4LC refers. What I am suggesting is that
perhaps historians have fallen prey to the very stereotype of usurers
being primarily Jewish in that I know of few works which deal exclusively
with the question of the Christian usurer. A very good work on a king's
treatment of Jews is William Jordan's work on Philip Augustus. [I hope
this is coherent, as I am rather conferenced out, and would be happy to
clarify this in a day or so, after I am finished moving....]
Jessalynn Bird
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|