Архитектура Аудит Военная наука Иностранные языки Медицина Металлургия Метрология
Образование Политология Производство Психология Стандартизация Технологии


Ivanhoe was too good a Catholic to retain the same class of feelings towards a Jewess. This



Rebecca had foreseen, and for this very purpose she had hastened to mention her father’s

name and lineage; yet —for the fair and wise daughter of Isaac was not without a touch of

female weakness— she could not but sigh internally when the glance of respectful admira-

tion, not altogether unmixed with tenderness, with which Ivanhoe had hitherto regarded his

unknown benefactress, was exchanged at once for a manner cold, composed, and collected,

and fraught with no deeper feeling than that which expressed a grateful sense of courtesy

received from an unexpected quarter, and from one of an inferior race. It was not that Ivan-

hoe’s former carriage expressed more than that general devotional homage which youth

always pays to beauty; yet it was mortifying that one word should operate as a spell to

remove poor Rebecca, who could not be supposed altogether ignorant of her title to such

homage, into a degraded class, to whom it could not be honourably rendered.

 

In this confrontation between ethnic types, Scott strikes the emotional quick with his

choice of words: epithet, class, race, title, respect, inferiority, degradation. That his

descriptions of Ivanhoe and Rebecca were intended for modern readers (and indeed for

all time) is evident from his ironic remark about “more civilized days.”

 

Let us glance briefly at Scott’s portrayal of Templars, another theme of When

Scotland Was Jewish, before drawing some conclusions about his notion of British his-

tory and Judaism. These characters tend to fall either into the “good Templar” or

“bad Templar” mold, with a few tortured souls in between. The Grand Master Lucas

Beaumanoir, for instance, is described as an “ascetic bigot” (p. 325). Front-de-Boeuf is

a man “more willing to swallow three manors... than disgorge one of them” (p. 117). He

tortures Isaac with all the grisly instruments of the Inquisition, attended by “black slaves

... stripped of their gorgeous apparel, and attired in jerkins and trowsers of coarse linen,

their sleeves being tucked up above the elbow, like those of butchers when about to exer-

cise their function in the slaughter-house” (pp. 187-88). He utters speeches like this

(P- 193) —

 

“Dog of an infidel, ” said Front-de-Boeuf, with sparkling eyes, and not sorry, perhaps, to seize

a pretext for working himself into a passion, “blaspheme not the Holy Order of the Temple

of Zion, but take thought instead to pay me the ransom thou hast promised, or woe betide

thy Jewish throat! ”

 

— only to meet his just deserts, on page 274, when he is sealed into a fiery tomb by Ulrica

the witch and dragged off to hell.

 

Bois-Guilbert, Rebecca’s captor, alone has any redeeming qualities. Yielding to her

sophisticated arguments, which are based on subtleties in the Templar rule and the Latin

law of the land as well as the Cabala, alchemy, and Muslim logicians, he does not rape

her. Instead, he straps her across his horse and takes her to Templestow, where he con-

tinues to woo her:

 

“Listen to me, Rebecca, ” he said, again softening his tone; “England — Europe — is not the

world. There are spheres in which we may act, ample anought even for my ambition. We will

go to Palestine... and league ourselves [rather with Islam] than endure the scorn of the big-

ots whom we condemn... thou shalt be a queen, Rebecca: on Mount Carmel shall we pitch

the throne which my valour will gain for you [p. 368],

 

Her Christian lover, of course, attempts to convert her, but Rebecca insists with pride

on the glory and grandeur of her people:

 

“Thou hast spoken the Jew [sic], ” said Rebecca, “as the persecution of such as thou art has

made him. Heaven in ire has driven him from his country, but industry has opened to him

the only road to power and to influence, which oppression has left unbarred. Read the

ancient history of the people of God, and tell me if those by whom Jehovah wrought such

marvels among the nations were then a people of misers and of usurers! And know, proud

knight, we number names amongst us to which boasted northern nobility is as the gourd

compared with the cedar - names that ascend far back to those high times when the Divine

Presence shook the mercy-seat between the cherubim, and which derive their splendour

from no earthly prince, but from the awful Voice which bade their fathers be nearest of the

congregation to the Vision. Such were the princes of the House of Jacob” [pp. 369-70],

 

We have quoted Rebecca’s apologia at length in order to capture some of its double mean-

ings. It cannot have been lost on Scott s readers that the children of Israel described in

her passionate apologia bore the same name as the Jacobites of popular parlance, the

Scots, with their Davidic kings, the Stuarts. “Sons of Jacob thus reinforces the novel s

subtext valorizing Scots nationality.

 

The climax of the tale unwinds as Rebecca is condemned to be burnt at the stake as

a witch. Rebecca’s response to the Grand Master’s question, “Who will be the champion

of a Jewess?, ” is ironic:

 

“It cannot be that in merry England, the hospitable, the generous, the free, where so many

are ready to peril their lives for honour, there will not be found one to fight for justice’

 

[p. 423-24],

 

Then it is that the wounded Ivanhoe finds a horse, rides to the lists and becomes her cham-

pion. His adversary Bois-Guilbert dies a “victim of his own contending passions”; Ivan-

hoe is excused from killing him, thus preserving the moral integrity of both men, and

King Richard comes on stage as the Black Knight and restores order out of chaos. All is

right with the world. Right?

 

Wrong. Rowena, now “The Lady of Ivanhoe, ” receives a visit from Rebecca, who

kisses the hem of her gown and offers thanks for her champion. She blesses the marriage

of Rowena and Wilfred. But when she says, in effect, “I’ll be going now, ” Rowena attempts

to change her mind. Rowena tells Rebecca how well protected her people are in England.

 

“Lady, ” said Rebecca, “I doubt it not; but the people of England are a fierce race, quarrelling

ever with their neighbours or among themselves, and ready to plunge the sword into the

bowels of each other. Such is no safe abode for the children of my people.

 

Rowena then tries to tempt the Jewess to conversion, but Rebecca answers that she may

not change the faith of my fathers like a garment unsuited to the climate in which I seek

to dwell; and unhappy, lady, I will not be” (p. 431). Rebecca then departs, nearly missing

the boat that conveys her to relatives in Moorish Spain. Ivanhoe and his lady live hap-

pily ever after, though “it would be inquiring too curiously to ask whether the recollec-

tion of Rebecca’s beauty and magnanimity did not recur to his mind more frequently

than the fair descendant of Alfred [Rowena] might altogether have approved” (p. 432).

 

We see that the figure of Rebecca the Jewess corresponds to an element of resolu-

tion in the ethnic conflict of the novel. “Scott’s history of happily mixed racial origins

 [cannot] be entirely congenial, if English Jews such as Rebecca and her father are left out

of the game of national belonging” (Wee 1997, p. 203). Jewish culture (not necessarily

the same as the religion) is thus presented as Britain’s secret gift; it is also the country’s

secret shame, its national guilt.

 

As for the Jewish characters, Isaac teeters between love of his shekels and love of his

daughter; he is a latter-day Shylock. We have already noted how Rebecca is the surprise

heroine. She heals Ivanhoe, brings peace, and even softens the hard heart of a proud

Templar. But she cannot prevail as long as the “one word” clings to her. In the reading

of critics, Scott raises “the Jewish question” as one of conversion and resistance to con-

version. “The trope of conversion becomes a crucial figure used by writers of English his-

tory to construct, regulate, maintain, and erase different racial and national identities”

(Ragussis 1995, p. 93). In the rhetoric of Imperial England over the course of the nine-

teenth century, it was to become an absorbing and ultimately futile mission.

 

 

Closing Thoughts

 

Too often, it seems, the story of the Jews has been told solely in terms of their per-

secution. From this myopic perspective, Jewish history becomes nothing more than the

barren chronicle of anti-Semitism (a word only invented in Victorian times). Following

the extermination of German Jewry under Hitler, there was a rush to demonstrate that

this or that British author — Matthew Arnold, Shakespeare, Dickens, Joyce, Eliot, even

Chaucer — was anti-Semitic. A spate of academic articles took up the hue and cry, and

the poor figure of Shylock was hounded through the canon of English and American lit-

erature. Disagreements became rancorous. Some claimed Eliot was more anti-Semitic

than Pound; others the opposite. An apt parallel is Native American studies, where the

plight of the Indian is the central issue. The main events in the background are a series

of treaties, removals, and extinctions. The subject is treated more like an involved legal

docket than the biography of a people.

 

If Judaic studies have turned into the nearly exclusive preserve of what Scott once

called the Reverend Dr. Dryasdusts, it is not surprising that “no one noticed” Scots Jews.

They weren’t on the cultural agenda. In the past 1, 500 years, the only religious conflicts

in Scotland have been between Christians. Anti-Semitism is not to be found in either

Scots history or literature. On the contrary, philo-Semitism is a strong theme, as we have

seen in Ivanhoe— its characters are a sublimated vision of the national pedigree.

 

As recent anthropological studies remind us in the case of the Jewish African Lemba

tribe and other “rediscovered” ancestries (Hall and du Gay 1996, Brodwin 2002, Elliott

and Brodwin 2002), ethnic identity in public discourse often provokes a debate between

the essentialists and the existentialists— between those who believe that ethnicity is a

fixed attribute largely deterministic of our behavior and our predispositions, on the one

hand, and those who would argue that it derives rather from individuals’ crafting of their

own identity through social performance, from group belonging, and from the political

and economic struggle of classes. Emerging knowledge of a people’s roots can cut both

ways, just as tracing genetic identity can lead to more problems than it solves (Elliott and

Brodwin). It can confirm or dispel differences, unite and divide. One controversy turns

on the question of who gets to decide who is Jewish, who is African, who is Native Amer-

ican, and for what purposes? Who gets to determine new claims of nationality or eth-

nicity? How authoritative is the voice of science, and how binding are government rules

or religious guidelines? What are the stakes and vested interests involved, and who benefits

from the decisions?

 

Without siding with either the essentialists or existentialists, we believe that Scott

wove such questions into the subplot of Ivanhoe. His reinvention of British ethnicity did

occur at a fortuitous time, nor was it without relevance for him to include the Jewish

people in the British national consciousness. It was a moment in history when Crypto-

Jewish families and individuals, long hidden, could crystallize into what they truly were.

Lord Gordon, for instance, chose solidarity with other Jews, while others opted to assim-

ilate into a sort of studied conformity, blend into society, sublimate, or adopt any num-

ber of stances and custom identities, including ambiguity and anonymity.

 

With many Scottish Jews, this novel social opportunity must have been confusing.

“Some Jews, ” we read, “ceased to practice the rites of Judaism altogether, without nec-

essarily abandoning their identity as Jews— that is, without converting or intermarry-

ing, and without developing an intellectual justification for their break with the past.

Many others came to adopt an attitude toward the mitzvot that was casual and selective,

continuing to observe some mitzvot and ignoring others. An individual might close his

business on the Sabbath, but eat nonkosher food when visiting Christian friends. He

might attend synagogue on one Sabbath and stay at home on the next. No doubt the

vagaries of personality... were among the decisive factors in each case (Endelman 1979,

p. 132). The case of a Scottish butcher in London is particularly poignant:

 

In 1783, John Watson, a Jewish butcher, astonished an English judge by being sworn on a

New Testament and then, when resworn on a Hebrew Bible, by not covering his head. The

judge found his behavior incomprehensible, as the following exchange reveals:

 

Court: What do you mean by taking the oath as you did?

 

J.W.: I never took an oath in my life...

 

Court: Pray friend, do not you know when people of your profession take an oath they

always put on their hats?

 

J.W.: I work among Englishmen, and I was always among Christians.

 

Court: Do you mean to take the oath as a Jew or as a Christian?

 

J.W.: I can call myself a Christian, because I am never among the Jews.

 

Court: What do you call yourself, are you Jew or Christian?

 

J.W.: I do not know, please your honour; whatever you please to call me.

 

Court: I wish you would understand that it is an exceeding indecent thing in you, or any

man, to come here to trifle with any religion in the sort of way you do.

 

J.W.: I follow more the Christian ways, than I do the Jews.

 

Court: You are a good-for-nothing fellow, I dare say, whatever you are. Stand down

[Endelman 1979, pp. 141-42].

 

If religious identities were confusing to individuals themselves, and if even contem-

porary judicial officers could not determine the affiliation of a Crypto-Jew, as Watson

certainly appears to have been, how are we to decide at a remove of hundreds of years?

 

The answer lies in assembling and evaluating all the evidence, including genetic

clues, as well as crediting vestiges of living traditions that do survive, however under-

ground. “The rediscovery of the breadth and depth of the English interest in the Jews is

now generating a rewriting of English literary and cultural history from the early mod-

ern period through the beginning of the twentieth century, ” says one critic (Ragussis

1997, p. 289). “This rediscovery is first and foremost an act of recovery — that is, an

archival recovery of documents and events that have been neglected in understanding

the development of English history, culture, and literature.” We hope that our book has

contributed to this recovery and rediscovery for Scotland and her Jews.

 

Appendix A

 

Raw Scores for

Participants in Melungeon

DNA Surname Project

 

Rare Viking type

 

Native American

 

 

Blevins I

 

 

Welsh, Levite

 

Blevins II

 

 

Welsh, Levite

 

Adkins

 

Rib

 

“fr. Aachen/ Aix”

 

3085

 

Gordon III

 

Clan, Davidic

 

Carter

 

Rib

 

Norman

 

 

Newberry

 

Lumbee, Norman

 

Tankersley

 

Viking, Cherokee

 

Bruce I

 

Rib

 

Scottish Clan

 

 

Bruce II

Levite

 

E3b

 

Ashkenazi Levite

 

Israelite, France

 

 

*Yates was previously misreported as Cooper (and vice versa). Because of an undetected error at the original lab, Yates

was retested a number of times and his scores confirmed by three other laboratories. It was also the only sample that was

actually SNP tested, being reported as R by Trace Genetics. In the YHRD, Yates had 5 exact matches, with Switzerland

being the modal response (2 — the others were Ireland, Central Portugal and Greenland ). At Ysearch, Yates produced an

18/25 marker match with a descendant of Henry Whitney ( 1621-1673, England).

 

 

Raw Scores for Participants in Melungeon DNA Surname Project

 

Source: Family Tree DNA, Houston, Texas. Note that the markers labeled 385a, 385b and 439 are considered fast-mutating. Matching on these sites is not essential and close matches may indicate branches of the same family, all other things being equal. Shaded portion shows one-off and two-off matches with Caldwell-Cooper- Ramey-Stewart haplotype (Rib), thought to be originally southern French/northern Spanish. Nos. 36-42 are exact matches to each other.

 

 

Appendix B

 

 

Naming and Jewish Priest-Kings

 

 

When Bernard of Clairvaux integrated the Celtic church into the Cistercian order and

Scotland got its first Templar king, David I (1124-1153), a peculiar tradition became fixed in

the royal genealogies: the eldest son was invariably named after his grandfather. The pattern

can also be seen in the house of William the Conqueror, where Robert and William alternate

in the lineage of the dukes of Normandy. By alternating Malcolms and Davids, David of Scot-

land clearly wanted to put the stamp of a dynasty on his house.

 

David’s first-born, Malcolm, was murdered, and his second son, Henry, died before he

could assume the throne. Thus Henry’s son Malcolm (known as “the Maiden”) became king

at the age of eleven. That preserved the rules of primogeniture and also ensured the succes-

sion of a prince with the right name.

 

With the Stewarts we see a careful preservation of this tradition, all the way down to

King James I of England, who named his heir-apparent, Henry, after his father, Henry Stew-

art, Lord Darnley, husband of Mary Queen of Scots (the name Frederick came from Henry’s

other grandfather, Frederick II of Denmark):

 

Family Tree of James VI King of Scotland ( James I King of England)

 

1. James I d. 1437

. 2. James II d. 1460

.... 3. James III d. 1488

 

4. James IV d. 1513

 

5. James V d. 1542

 

6. Mary Queen of Scots d. 1587

 

+Henry Stewart Lord Darnley

 

7. James VI (James I of England) d. 1625

 

8. Henry Frederick Prince of Wales

 

Note: Died of typhoid 1612

 

This pattern had been established before the Stewarts had come to Scotland, when they

were known as Stewards (Lat. Dapifer, Flemish Flaald) of Dol in Brittany. For centuries we

can trace the alternation of Walters and Alans, Fitz- Walters and Fitz-Alans, until King Robert

II Stewart, 7th High Steward of Scotland, grandson of Robert I Bruce, founded the royal

House of Stewart with his coronation in Scone Abbey in 1371.

 

Naming and Jewish Priest-Kings

 

The High Stewards of Scotland

 

1. Walter Thane of Lochaber, b. ca. 1045

. 2. Alan of Lochaber, ca. 1088-1153

 

.... 3. Walter Fitz Alan, 1st High Steward of Scotland, d. 1177

 

4. Alan Fitz Walter, 2nd High Steward of Scotland, d. 1204

5. Walter Stewart, 3rd High Steward of Scotland, d. 1214

 

The practice of alternating names goes back to the ancient Jewish custom of the high-

priestly family of Zadok in Jerusalem, whose members were named alternately Onias and

Simon from 332 to 165 b.c.e. This signature of spiritual sovereignty was imitated by the Has-

monaean rulers that followed them, as well as by the heirs of Herod (37-4 b.c.e.). Later, it

was used by the Hillelites, with the names Gamaliel and Judah succeeding each other (with

an occasional occurrence of Simon and Hillel [Jacobs 1906-1911]). About this time, the prac-

tice of double names for the same person began to be adopted, another Jewish trait revived

by the Stewarts (e.g. “James Edward Stuart”).

 

Thus the “stewards” of an obscure fiefdom in Brittany began to see themselves as stew-

ards of the kingdom of heaven on earth. By virtue of their Templar heritage, moreover, the

Scots royal line comprised not only Priest Kings but Knight Priest Kings (Gardiner 2001, p.

226).

 

Appendix C

 

Early Jewish Names

in France and England

 

According to Eleazar ha-Levi, * three rules were applied in naming Jewish children

throughout the medieval period and, even, up to the present time: the Talmud, kinnui

(secular) versus shem ha kadosh (sacred) names, and the role of the female in Jewish ritual

practice.

 

He goes on to list the basic progression of a Jewish name:

 

Joseph ben (son of) Simon

 

Joseph ben Simon ben Moshe

 

Joseph ben Simon ben Moshe of London

 

Joseph ben Simon ben Moshe the Kohane (priestly family) of London

 

According to Jacobs (1893), the most frequent male names are Isaac (59 men), Joseph

(55), Abraham (49 ), Berachiyah and its Latinized form Benedict (45), Jacob (40), Moses (38),

Samuel (37), Hayyim and its Latin equivalent Vives (23), Elias (19), Aaron (18), Deulecresse

(Solomon or Gedaliah) (17), Manesser (17), Samson (16), and Solomon (15). Place-names

appear in the records to be the most common descriptions and were used alone (e.g., Joseph

of London) about as often as “son” or “daughter” of. Some forty-eight separate towns are

included in the “master lists” in The Jews of Angevin England, with London (110 names),

Lincoln (82), Norwich (42), Gloucester (40), Northampton (39), Winchester (36), Cam-

bridge (32), Oxford (22), Bristol (18), Colchester (16), Chichester (14) Bedford and York

(13 each), Canterbury and Worchester (12 each), and Hertford (11) all having ten or more

entries.

 

In some cases, a male is listed with his mother’s rather than his father’s name; e.g. Moysses

fil Sarae (Moses ben Sarah). The most likely explanation is that the mother was simply bet-

ter known. As is well known, Jewish women were allowed to own property and enter into

business on their own. Several became well-known financiers, such as Licoricia, widow of

Isaac of York, who maintained the business after his death, and Mildegod of Oxford, who

was a prominent innkeeper (ha-Levi).

 

*“ Jewish Naming Convention in Angevin England, ” Society for Creative Anachronism, <

http: //www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/names/jewish.html. >

 

 

Greenlaw*

 

 

Melrose

 

Moffat

 

Scottish West March

 

Dumfries

 

 

Annan

 

 

Gretna Q*

 

 

Cobrend

 

Carlisle

English West At

 

 

Scottish Borders area exhibiting high modern-day levels of Mediterranean and Semitic DNA halo-

types. Map by Donald N. Yates.

 

As evidenced in Roth (1937), two other descriptors used by medieval (and modern) Jews

are ha-Levi and ha-Kohane, denoting descent from the class of Levites and priestly caste of

the ancient Hebrews.

 

Since the word rabbi means “teacher, ” it was sometimes translated as Magister or Master.

“Cantor” may appear as le Prestre (the priest). Parnas, the head of the synagogue or of the com-

munity, and gabbai, synagogue (or community) treasurer are also found. Throughout much

of medieval Europe, the Jews had a great deal of autonomy over their own affairs, even to hav-

ing their own local courts of Jewish law. Jacobs (1893) explains the descriptor Episcopi (“of the

bishop”) which occurs several times as referring to the judge of one of these courts. The Hebrew

term is dyan, which has become a modern Jewish family name.

 

 

Appendix C

 

 

Several kings, starting with Richard I, appointed what amounted to a “King’s Minister or

Liaison for Jewish Affairs, ” a prominent member of the community and often a rabbi; these

are remembered as the Judeus Presbyter. The term was first translated as a sort of high priest,

although the role was secular. The term “presbyter” appears several times on the [Roth] list

and may well refer to these men (there were about a half dozen). One of the assistants, the

chirographer [scribe, or clerk], is also mentioned on the list [ha-Levi].

 

Other descriptors referring to professions are aurifaber (goldsmith), medicus (physician),

and miles (soldier, or perhaps, knight). The Hebrew translation of medicus was ha-rophe

which can mean both “the physician” and “the leach.” A “furmager” or “fermager” is a tax

“farmer, ” paying the king a fee for the right to collect the tax in a given area. He kept the

taxes for himself with all monies above the original fee being his profit for the venture. “Scrip-

tor, ” scribe, generally referred to a sophar, a writer of religious texts, a busy man in a com-

munity whose religion emphasized literacy. “The Pointer” refers to two grammarians, students

of the Hebrew language.

 

Jewish custom calls for the use of two separate names. The shem ha-kodesh or religious

name is used during Jewish ritual such when one is being called up to read a portion of the

Torah. The common name, kinnui, was used in everyday affairs. It could be formed in sev-

eral ways: (1) the shem ha-kodesh could be translated into the vernacular. Thus, Berichiyah,

“blessing, ” becomes Benedict; Obediah, “servant of G-d, ” Norman French Serfdieu. (2) A

name similar in sound to— or using some of the letters in — the shem ha-kodesh could be

used; thus, Robert for Reuben, George for Gershom. (3) A nickname could be made from the

shem ha-kodesh.

 

Hebrew nicknames go back to the days of the Bible. Numbers 13: 4-15 lists the names of

the spies Moses sent into the land of Canaan, giving several with a nickname as well. Josce,

Hok, and Copin were common period English nicknames for Joseph [Isaac, and Jacob] (Heb

Yos-eph, Ytz-hok and Ya-a-kov, respectively). Biket was used for Rebeccah. Even kinnui were

not exempt. Deulecresse, the translation given for both Gadaliah and Solomon, is often abbre-

viated to Crease.

 

Sometimes, a name that in some way referred to shem ha-kodesh (or the individual) could

be used. A common practice was to take the references made by Jacob on his deathbed (Gen-

esis 49) or Moses in his final oration to the Children of Israel (Deuteronomy 33). Thus, Judah

became Leon (‘Judah is a lion’s whelp, ’ Genesis 49.9). Other times, a more obscure reference

was used. Jacobs suggests that Jornet, coming from the word ‘jerkin’ (jacket) was a kinnui for

Joseph. And, in what seems to be a rare instance, the name Belaset was derived from bella

assez (fair to look upon) and applied to Rachel (Genesis 29: 17, ‘Rachel was fair to look upon’)

Bonevent (good day) referred to a child born on a holiday, especially Passover (ha-Levi)....

 

Parents of Jewish girls, says ha-Levi, had more leeway in naming them. Some Biblical

or Hebrew names were used — Abigail, Zipporah, Esther, Anna or Hanna, Judith, Miriam and

Sarah. More common, however, were vernacular names: flowers (Fleur de liz, Fleur, Rose);

things of value (Almonda, Chera (Greek: Iekara, precious stone), Licoricia); desirable traits:

Bona (good), Belia (pretty), Genta (gentle), or terms of endearment: Columbia (dove),

Comitessa (countess), Pucella (little girl); or simply the names their neighbors used (Elfid,

Auntera, Margaret, Sweetecote).

 

 

Female and Male Jewish Names from Medieval England

 

 

Fleur de Liz

 

 

Flora

 

Floria, Fluria, Flurie

 

Gentil, Gentilia

 

Female

 

Miriam

 

Maria, Miriana

 

 

In 1292, just two years after the expulsion of the Jews from Angevin England, and shortly

before their banishment from the He de France and French-ruled areas, a census was made

by the royal authorities in Paris. Jews were marked with the letter J. These entries are shown

below, with our comments.

 

 

From Brabant (town in Flanders)

 

Appendix C

 

At the time this list was made, France was at war with England (and would be for another

hundred years). Many Jews in Paris were clearly regarded as ex-nationals of England. Their

association with Jews from Brabant, Brugges, Ghent, Soissons and Meux can be read as a sign

that some Jews expelled by Edward I took refuge with Flemish relatives and business part-

ners, likely retracing their steps in coming to England with the Normans. Here they also min-

gled with Jews from the Rhineland, Iberia and southern France, Prague, Palestine and Babylon.

 

 

Appendix D

 

 

Davidic Jewish Genealogies

 

 

Arthur Benveniste is one of the founders of America s Society for Crypto Judaic Stud

ies. He traces his Ladino family back to twelfth century Catalonia and Narbonne and ties it

to the Shealtiel, Gracian and Luna families of Sephardic Spain, all of whom claim Davidic

descent. Of the name itself, he writes that it belongs to an old, rich, and scholarly family of

Narbonne, the numerous branches of which were found all over Spain and the Provence, as

well as at various places in the Orient.” It is still borne, he notes, by certain families in Bul-

garia, Serbia, and Vienna, and until World War II it was also found in Salonika, Izmir and

Rhodes. His sketch of family history includes extensive biographical notes on leading related

rabbinical families through the ages.* * * §

 

In an online article titled “Can We Claim Descent from David? Moshe Shaltiel-Gracian

discusses Shealtiel Family Davidic Descent.t He responds to the article “Can We Prove Descent

from King David? ” by David Einsiedler, who points out that whereas a great many families

claim descent legitimately from Rashi, the most famous Talmudic scholar, others have gone

farther and claimed descent through Rashi to King David. t According to these authors, one

of the earliest claims to descent from King David is found in the genealogy Mishpachat Luna,

discussed by Abraham Epstein (Vienna, 1901). This source states that before his death, Yehiel

Luria told his nephew, Moses Enosh, that he had a yichus brief (pedigree scroll) going back

to Johanan Ha-Sandlar. Johanan Ha-Sandlar lived in the second century c.e., was a Tannah

(sage) of the Mishnah, and was considered a descendant of King David. According to Epstein,

this record “was lost in the Swiss War, and Johanan Luria mourned the loss of his yichus brief

more than the material goods he was robbed of. Einsiedler notes, moreover,

 

In Seder Ha-Dorot (The Order of Generations) (Zhitomir, 1867), R. Jehiel Heilprin claims

descent from Jehiel, the father of Solomon Luria (MaHaRaSHaL), § from Rashi, and from the

Tannah Johanan Ha-Sandlar. This claim is made on the title page; in Part II, page 201, under

the entry “Rabbi Johanan Ha-Sandlar” and again in the section on books under “Lulaot

Ha-Shir” (page 60). He gives no details. More detailed references are found in Maalot

Ha-Yuchsin (Degrees of Descent), by R. Ephraim Zalman Margolioth of Brody (Lemberg,

1900). It includes a fractional genealogy “from the Tannah Johanan Ha-Sandlar to Rashi to

 

* Arthur Benveniste, http: //home.earthlink.net/~benven/.

 

Sassoon and Ab Ravanel

 

The Sassoon family is often also referred to as being of Davidic descent. In The Sassoons

(New York, 1968) Stanley Jackson writes:

 

Small colonies (of Jews) have settled from antiquity in India and China, but Baghdad

remained the nerve center of the exiled. Over 40, 000 were living in the city by the 12th

century, and the Sassoons were among an elite who claimed their pedigree from King David

himself.... Among their ancestors were the Ibn Shoshans, princes of the community in

Toledo, Spain.... As early as the 17th century, a scholar and mystic of Venice, Abraham

Sason, proudly claimed descent from Shephatiah, the fifth son of King David.... The first

member of the family of whom there is any significant documentary evidence was Sason

ben Saleh, born in Baghdad in 1750, who was the Chief Banker and had the honorary title

of Sheikh, and became in 1778 Nassi (Prince of the Captivity) of the Jewish community.

 

However, as Einsiedler remarks (qtd. in Shaltiel), Davidic descent is not mentioned in either

Chaim Bermant’s The Cousinhood (MC, 1972) or Cecil Roth’s The Sassoon Dynasty (London,

1941).

 

The Ab ravanel / Abarbanel family of Spain is frequently characterized as of Davidic

descent. The Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalem, 1972) reports that the family, first mentioned in 1300, attained distinction in Spain in the 15th century.... Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1509), finance minister to the Kings of Portugal, then Spain, then Naples, wrote in his memoirs: “All my forebears, descended from King David, son of Jesse

of Bethlehem, were worthy leaders of our people” [Volume II, page 102].

 

But Shaltiel quotes Einsiedler as rejecting these claims, for the latter says, “I have not

found sources going far enough back to support the claim of Davidic descent.” Shaltiel

concludes,

 

The bottom line is: King David had a number of wives and concubines, and about two

dozen children are mentioned in the Bible. King Solomon “had seven hundred royal wives

and three hundred concubines” (I Kings 11: 3). One can only imagine how many children

he had. After nearly 3, 000 years, there may be an untold number of their descendants.

 

There is a fair possibility that you and I may be among them. All we need is good evidence

and records that go back that far and [to] give convincing proof of our claim. So far, avail-

able records cannot do it. Some individuals rely on tradition and faith to back their claim.

More power to them. The rest of us may have to wait for that promised descendant — the

Messiah.

 

We agree with this rebuttal and propose that these Sephardic families very likely con-

verted to Judaism around 750-900 c.e. in France, together with several families who subse-

quently moved to Scotland (e.g., the Stewarts, Davidsons). In all these cases, we suggest that

because they were converted by a Davidic descendant at the Jewish Academy in Narbonne,

they came to believe that they therefore descended from King David themselves, in accor-

dance with the generational myth-making process described by Zerubavel (2003). Note that

virtually all these “Davidic pedigrees” begin around 900-1100.

 

Notably also, DNA from over 10 descendants of the Sisson family in the United States

matched the Caldwell-Yates-Ramey- Stewart haplotype and is Rib Sephardic, but not Semitic.

 

 

Appendix E

 

 

Border Reiver DNA

 

 

Since completing When Scotland Was Jewish, the authors became aware of a large col-

laborative project called Border Reiver Families DNA Study (available at http: //freepages.

genealogy.rootsweb.com/~donegalstrongs/reiver_families. htm). The Borderlands separating

England from Scotland are notable as the traditional stronghold of several important Scot-

tish clans and septs, including Scott, Burns, Tait/Tate, Forster, Beatty, Rutledge, Graham,

Armstrong, Elliot, Johnston, Kerr, Kay, Gray, Hume, Bell, Davidson, Storey, Robinson, Crow,

Langley, Heron, Hunt, Lindsay, Jackson, Taggart, Bold, Reade, Young, Oliver, Brown, Watts,

Turner, Taylor, Chamberlain, and Maxwell. Members of these families emigrated in high

numbers to America during the Scots-Irish migration of the eighteenth century and crop up

among the Melungeons.

 

The interpretive results of this study will be years in coming, but it is evident at a glance

that the leading families who controlled this region have a similar mixture of DNA lines as

the Scots investigated in our book, with Iberian-centered Rib forming the overwhelming

majority of male lineages. Some surprises that tend to corroborate our thesis include Hall,

Moorish (E); Liddell and Armstrong (J2); numerous Hungarian names*; and Elliott (C).t

 

 

* Tentatively; we note Carruthers, Carr/Kerr (swordsman), Carnaby, Darby (D’Arby), Armstrong, Strange, Strong, Brown

(through translations of Hungarian words like kar, nagy and barnaj. Bell (Bela? ), Selby fcsel “deceive”), Taggart (mem-

ber) and perhaps Heron (white, blonde), Irvin/Erwin and Beatty (fearless). Carnegie (“big czar”) has already been dis-

cussed.

 

t About this lineage, the author of the Clan Elliott subsheet speculates: “The top five hits in YHRDfell in Gotland, China, Iran, Spain, Venice and among the Iraqi Kurds.... this haplotype may be Hunnish or Indo-Iranian in origin, and could have come to Britain with the Sarmatians in the Roman Army, or with Norman invaders of Alanic or Visigothic [empha- sis added] descent.... these Elliotts (or Eliots) were reputedly descended from a Norman knight surnamed ‘Aliot.’” We have suggested above that Elliot comes from Judeo-Arabic and means “those who go up” (i.e., who are called up for serv- ice, or make an aliyah, who become distinguished). The famous poet and man of letters, Thomas Stearns Eliot (1888-

1965), has Anglo-French Jewish ancestry in both his maternal and paternal lines, a fact which sheds light on his efforts to help Jewish refuges and alleged anti-Semitism; see R.F. Fleissner, “T.S. Eliot and Anti-Semitism, ” Contemporary Review (Dec. 1999).

 

Chapter Notes

 

 

Chapter 1

 

1. Scotland even lacks an agreed-upon history of

its place-names. As has been pointed out, its land-

scape, glacial and volcanic at once, with marine fos-

sils in the Grampian Mountains, and some of the

deepest lakes in the world, was so bewildering that

the modern science of geology had to be created to

explain it (by James Hutton and Sir Charles Lyell;

see Magnusson 2000, pp. 2-3). Two archeological

marvels are distinctively Scottish, the brochs (stone

towers) and crannogs (lake fortresses), while all

Scotland’s major rivers and firths show evidence of

having been bridged with a network of highways

prior to the Roman arrival. Modern-day attempts to

etymologize many of Scotland’s oldest place-names,

however, are conflicting because no consensus has

emerged on the country’s underlying chronology of

settlement. Does the name Douglas derive from

“dark stranger, ” “black water, ” or “one from Gaul”?

It depends on what you believe was the original lan-

guage — Scottish Gaelic, some other Gaelic: English,

or French. Does the name for Tiree, one of the islands

of the Inner Hebrides, come from Gaelic Tir-iodh

“Land of Corn, ” or Tir fo Thuinn “Land Below the

Waves”? Or was the original name something else, in

a different language? Curiously, most of Scotland’s

islands bear names that were apparently given in the

Greek language: Hebrides = Hebrew Islands;

Orkneys = Islands of the Whales; Skye = Island of

the Scythians; Iona = Jonah’s Island; Tiree = Island

of the Phoenician Sea Goddess Tyre; Mull = Island

of Black Lead (Greek ^oXu^dop. Yet no Greek-speak-

ing inhabitants have ever been documented, much

less proposed, in Scotland’s entire history.

 

2. “Piets” (“painted people”) was the name given

by Romans to the indigenous people they found

when they conquered Britain in the first century.

Their language is presumed to have been Celtic, a

distant cousin of Latin and major branch of the

Indo-European language group. In the 18th century,

historians discovered evidence of a link between


Поделиться:



Последнее изменение этой страницы: 2019-05-04; Просмотров: 247; Нарушение авторского права страницы


lektsia.com 2007 - 2024 год. Все материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления читателями и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав! (0.523 с.)
Главная | Случайная страница | Обратная связь