The following are Acts that are missing either a full date and/or an Official source.
Displaying
275 –
300 of
742
1. Full Date of Act
1317
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
Papal Bull of Pope John XXII
3. Geography of Act
Papal States; Present-day Italy
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) “Orders Jews to wear a badge on their breasts and issues a bull against ex-Jews.”Gotthard Deutsch and Joseph Jacobs: Jewish Encyclopedia: The Popes; jewishencyclopedia.com
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1318 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Diocesan Synod of Brixen” held under Bishop Johannes von Schlackenwert
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Italy; Prince-Bishopric of Brixen [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] Jews may not appear in public among/in the company of Christians on Good Friday. Furthermore, they should distinguish themselves in their attire from Christians at all times. They should not be used as judges or in any other [public] capacity [to rule] over Christians. Nor should Christians serve them or allow them to feed their children (as wet-nurses). 42) Jews are not to build new synagogues.””
5. Source
Medieval Ashkenaz: Corpus der Quellen zur Geschichte der Juden im Spätmittlealterlichen Reich; Synoden und Konzilien 1, Nr. 11 (“Corpus of the Sources on the History of Jews in the Late Middles Ages; Synods and Councils 1, No. 11”).
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2017
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
May 1319 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Jews. [Their] conduct during Good Friday” issued by the [City] Council of Zurich
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Switzerland [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““One orders/writes to all Councils: The local Jews and Jewesses are not to be seen through windows or on the streets as soon as they hear the [church-]bells ring between [Good] Wednesday and Holy Saturday, and in their homes, they are to refrain from yelling or making loud noises […] lest they be fined by the [City] Council.” ”
5. Source
Die Zürcher Stadtbücher des XIV. und XV. Jahrhunderts. Auf Veranlassung der Antiquarischen Gesellschaft in Zürich. Herausgegeben mit Geschichtlichen Anmerkungen von H. Zeller-Werdmüller. I. Band. (City-ledger of Zurich for the 14th and 15th Century. [Complied/Printed] At the request of the Antiquarian Society in Zurich. Published with historical annotations by H. Zeller-Werdmüller. Volume I.); (Leipzig; 1899);
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2020
8. Notes
Researcher
The source dates this original writ of the City Council of Zurich as “before May 1, 1319.”
1. Full Date of Act
1320 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Jewish Ordinance to Strasbourg” issued by the City Council of Strasbourg, year 1320*
3. Geography of Act
Free Imperial City of Strasbourg; Present-day France [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] no Jew may have or inherit [land] in the city of Strasbourg or anywhere near the burg […] henceforth (‘hinnen furder’) […]” ”
5. Source
“Forschung zur Geschichte der Juden: Abteilung A: Abhandlungen: Band 2”; (“Research Regarding the History of the Jews: Section A: Treatise: Volume 2); (Hannover; 1995); Accessed Online;
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2018
8. Notes
Researcher
The exact date for this ordinance appears to have been lost; however, experts believe that it was issued in the 1320s or early 1330.
1. Full Date of Act
1321
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Jewish Dress Code” Issued by Henry II
3. Geography of Act
Castile; Present-day Spain
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) “Henry II of Castile forces […] Jews to wear the yellow badge.”Cyrus Adler, Joseph Jacobs: “BADGE;” jewishencyclopedia.com
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1321
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
Papal bull issued by Pope John XXII
3. Geography of Act
France
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) “John XXII (1316-1344), who gave his assent to the massacres of the Jews at Chignon and other places, was not alone the enemy of the Jews, but of everybody who would not buy his friendship He was too mundane to expel the Eoman Jews as he was petitioned to do, but what he dared not do through expediency he resolved to accomplish by bigotry. His sister Sangisa suborned a few priests in his favour and induced them to swear that they had seen a body of Jews in a synagogue treating a cross with disrespect. Pope John, without permitting the Jews to exculpate themselves, immediately issued a Bull ordering the banishment of the Eoman Jews from the Province (1321). Full of sorrow, the innocent men decreed a rigorous fast and assembled in their synagogues, but Count Robert of Naples proved their guiltlessness of the charge, through the confession of one of the accusatorial priests to this friend of the Jews; and a Hebrew emissary; who had been despatched to the Papal court, obtained a hearing through Robert’s influence and confuted the calumnies of the Clique. It took 20,000 golden ducats to mollify Sangisa’s asperity and after receiving this stipulated ramollescence she condoned their residence in the Church States.”
Gustav Pearlson: “Twelve centuries of Jewish persecution: a brief outline of the sufferings of the Hebrew race in Christian lands, together with some account of the different laws and specific restrictions under which they have ar various times been placed.” p. 162
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1322 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“City Law” of Strasbourg
3. Geography of Act
Present-day France; Free Imperial City of Strasbourg [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] 1) within the city of Strasbourg and its castle region (Burghanngebiets), Jews are not allowed to have possessions or inheritance. 2) Jews are entitled to only one synagogue by law, but are not permitted to use any [private] homes/houses as a synagogue**. […] 6) If a Jew holds a letter from any citizen [of Strasbourg] which has been sealed by credible sources, and he or his heirs have not demanded the repayment of that debt by law and/or have failed to prove the debt to be valid within five years of the issuance of the document – through witnesses – the debtor or his heirs can swear to the Saints that they owe nothing and be free of the debt. In such cases, the Jew and his heirs have to return the IOUs back to the debtor, and he or his heirs will no longer have the right to demand the repayment of the debt or to harass the debtor, his heirs or the guarantors in any way. […]” [Researcher’s notes: *Taking into account the codification of the city laws of Strasbourg in 1322 (VI City law) and based on the mentioning of the “four ‘[Stett-]Meistern” in the text which could have only occurred before 1333 – the above regulations regarding the Jews could have only been issued between 1322 and 1333. **The word in the original text is “schüle” which was used interchangeably for synagogues and schools in the Middle Ages.]”
5. Source
UB Straßburg 4, 2, S. 168 f. [510-515];Hegel, Recht (1871), S. 975 f. (“University Library of Strasbourg 4, 2, p. 168 f. [510-515]; Hegel, Law (1871), p. 975 f.”);
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2017
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1322
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
Expulsion by Charles IV
3. Geography of Act
France
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) “In 1322 Charles IV expelled them [the Jews] again but in 1359 they were brought back, this time with certain requested guarantees of security.”
Flannery, Edward H.: “The Anguish of the Jews.” p. 108
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1326 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Statutes” of the City of Saalfeld, year 1326
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Germany [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] 74) […] that we* give the City Council of Saalfeld (‘Salveld’) four fat goose […] which the Jews of Saalfeld [… must] submit – two in the evening of Saint Burchardi Day [October 13] and two in the evening of Saint Martin’s Day [November 10] […]” ”
5. Source
Saalfeld, StadtA, Stadtstatuten der Stadt Saalfeld, fol. 12r/v, dt. (“Saalfeld City Archive, City Statutes of the City Saalfeld, fol. 12r/v, German”);
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2018
8. Notes
Researcher
*Heinrich und Gunther, Dukes of Schwarzburg.
1. Full Date of Act
1326
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Jews required to wear a patch”
3. Geography of Act
Present-day France
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) Council of Avignon order Jews to wear a round patch but not when traveling.“The Church vs. the Jews: the second of our five sections on‘the barbarism of the R. C. Church’;”jesuswouldbefurious.org
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1328 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Jewish Oath” as issued in the “Privilege” of Duke Bolkos II
3. Geography of Act
Duchy of Silesia/House of Wettin; Present-day Germany [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…During the oath] the Jew must wear grey trousers and a grey skirt […] but no shirt […] on his head he must wear a pointed hat. […] He is to stand barefoot on a animal skin which must be wetted with lamb-blood […] The Jew is to swear […] on the Book of Moses [… and say/repeat] ‘of which I’m accused, I’m innocent, so God help me […]’” ”
5. Source
Lämmerhirt, Maike: Juden in den wettinischen Herschaftsgebieten: Recht, Verwaltung und Wirtschaft im Spätmittelalter. Veröffentlichungen der Historischen Kommission für Thüringen; Kleine Reihe Band 21; (Wien/Köln; 2007); (“Jews in the Wettinian Territories/Dominions: Law, Administration, and Economy in the late Middle Ages. Publications of the Historical Commission for Thuringia; Small Series Volume 21; (Vienna/Cologne; 2007)”);
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2018
8. Notes
Researcher
This “special” ritual was required for all disputes valued at over 50 Mark; disputes involving less than 50 Mark required of Jews a ‘shorter and simpler’ oath.
1. Full Date of Act
1329
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Extortion and Expulsion of Jews” from the City of Mutzig, Ca. 1329
3. Geography of Act
Present-day France; Free Imperial City of Strasbourg
4. Text of Act
“Comment from Additional Sources:
1) After the Bishop Berthold II of Strasboug had extorted 6,000 Mark from the Jews, the ritual murder of an eleven-year-old boy took place in Mutzig. Under torture, some Jews confessed to the deed and a judgment was issued against them based on “obvious” evidence. Three of them were killed with wheels (“wheeled”). Other, wealthy Jews who were present in Mutzig on the day of the disappearance of the boy, were exiled. […].” [The extortion of the Jews of Strasbourg took place shortly after the arrival of the bishop in the cathedral city (December 21, 1328)]”
5. Source
Strasbourg, BM, Abschr. (1870 verbrannt), lat. (Strasbourg, Media Library, Transcript (1870 bannished), Latin)
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1331 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Diocesan Synod of Breslau/Wroclaw” (‘Constitutions’) of Bishop Nanker of Breslau/Wroclaw
3. Geography of Act
Prince Bishopric of Breslau/Wroclaw; Present-day Poland [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] Also, the wretched Jews, who have been subjected to permanent bondage (servitude) by their own guilt, (continue) to refuse to distinguish themselves in their clothing from that of the Christians, because they wear hoods such as the clerics do [and] there is not distinction between Jews and Christians. It is indeed unacceptable, and of course, absurd that a blasphemer of Christ does not distinguish himself from a Christian. In order, therefore, to dampen this damnable blending (in) which is sometimes committed by them, which they believe to have an excuse for by obscuring the error, we strictly order in consent with our brothers that the rectors of the churches in the cities and places of our diocese in which Jews are present, are to hold and dispose of these Jews effectively and emphatically, and to abolish the hood (capucia/Kaputze) completely and to no longer permit their usage anymore. […] from now on, Jews are denied the fellowship of Christians under the punishment of excommunication to which all the offenders shall be subject to. […] Jews with hoods [capuciatis/Kaputze] are strictly prohibited from participating in the markets.” ”
5. Source
Medieval Ashkenaz: Corpus der Quellen zur Geschichte der Juden im Spätmittlealterlichen Reich; Synoden und Konzilien 1, Nr. 12a (Corpus of the Sources on the History of Jews in the Late Middles Ages; Synods and Councils 1, No. 12a).
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2017
8. Notes
Researcher
The “Constitutions” of the Bishop Nanker of Breslau/Wroclaw from the year 1331 contains two conditions regarding the Jews, the first of which is only partially decipherable due of a tear in the parchment paper and possibly refers to the building of a synagogue (quasi synagoga iudeorum nostra = Jews have a synagogue). Far more detailed is the second part of the text (de iudeis = of Jews) which is translated above.
1. Full Date of Act
1333
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Forced Conversion of Jews”
3. Geography of Act
Iraq
4. Text of Act
Commentary from Other Sources:
1) Forced mass conversion of Jews in Baghdad.
Avraham, Yerachmiel Ben: All in the Name of Jesus: The Murder of Millions (2016)
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1335
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Restrictions on Jewish Doctors”
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Spain
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) The Synod of Salamanca forbids employment of Jewish doctors.“Jews under Islâm & under Christendom;” lloydthomas.org; “Historical Timeline;” biblicalzionist.com
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
Jan. 17, 1340
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
Writ of Holy Roman Emperor, Louis IV
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Hungary [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““Emperor Louis forgives/absolves the Cistercian cloister in Waldsassen of all of their debts which they owed to the Jews near/at Eger.” ”
5. Source
Regesta Imperii. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur Mainz. [RI VII] Ludwig der Bayer (1314-1347) – [RI VII] H. 9 (Academie for the Sciences and Literature of Mainz. [RI VII] Louis, the Bavaria (1314-1347) – [RI VII] H. 9); http://www.regesta-imperii.de; Accessed online;
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2020
8. Notes
Researcher
The above is a translation of a German summary of a copy of the original Latin text, which has been lost. However, the pertinent excerpts were discovered in a book from the 15th Century, and can also be found in the cited source. Experts place the date of this writ somewhere between January 17 and November 24.
1. Full Date of Act
1341 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Legislation” in the Second Oath Book of the City of Cologne
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Germany; Electorate of Cologne [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] the [City] Council no longer permits a Jew or a Jewess or anyone else on their behalf to purchase any items of inheritance (inherited estates) from Christians, except with the explicit authorization of the City Council. […]””
5. Source
Akten zur Geschichte der Verfassung und Verwaltung 1, Nr. 20, S. 31 f.; Zwei Cölner Eidbücher, S. 100; Quellen zur Geschichte der Stadt Köln 1, S. 19 (“Records on the History and Constitution and Administration 1, No. 20, p. 31 f.; Two Oath Book of Cologne, p. 100; Sources on the History of the City of Cologne 1, p. 19”);
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2017
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1342 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Regulation” issued by the Councilmen of Salzwedel
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Germany; Hanseatic League [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] Jews residing in Salzwedel shall only slaughter [animals] between Walburgistag (May 1) and Martinstag/Saint Martin’s Day (November 11) which they may only do for their own use, but not for foreign Jews or for the sale at the markets. […] between Gall’s day (October 16) and St. Martin’s Day, they can slaughter [anything] and sell whatever they cannot use. [After November 11, however] no slaughtering may be done as per the guidelines of the city. Any unlawfully slaughtered [animal] shall be confiscated and sent to the sick; Jews, who act in violation of this provision, will be persecuted in court. […]””
5. Source
Salzwedel, StadtA (Salzwedel, City Archive), Rep. II, C, I, Nr/No. 6, XIII, [Innenseite des Einbands (Inside of the Cover)], Stadtbucheintrag (City-book entry), Latin.
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2017
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1343 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Regulation” of Altstadt (“Old District/City”) of Salzwedel
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Germany; Hanseatic League [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] that the Jews who reside in our city may only slaughter [animals] for their own use starting on “Dionysiustag (October 16) for four weeks but not for foreign Jews.””
5. Source
Salzwedel, StadtA (“Salzwedel, City Archive”), Rep. II, I, C, Nr./No. 3, fol. 52 v, Stadtbucheintrag (City-book entry), Latin.
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2017
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1345
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Expulsion of Jews from Kurpfalz” Issued by Ruprecht II
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Germany/France
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) Needing money to force his election and eventually coronation, the “contending King” Karl iV found himself in need of a lot of money. He considered the Jews to be the means to achieve this goal. He turned Jews into objects, considered them property and extended his claim for their taxation.Löwenstein, Leopold: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland (Band 1): Geschichte der Juden in der Kurpfalz: nach gedruckten und ungedruckten Quellen dargest. Frankfurt a. M. (1895) p. 16
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1346
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Jurisdiction over Jews”
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Germany
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) “Kaiser Ludwig pawns the empirical use of the Jews in Speier and Worms for 6 years for a total sum of 2000 Mark.”Löwenstein, Leopold: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland (Band 1): Geschichte der Juden in der Kurpfalz: nach gedruckten und ungedruckten Quellen dargest. Frankfurt a. M. (1895) p. 16
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1347
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
Law issued by the Synod at Prague
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Czech Republic
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) “Another synod held at Prague, 1347, commanded the Jews to keep away from the streets and remain in their homes.”
Paul Halsall: “Medieval Sourcebook: Ordinance of the Jews of the Crown of Aragon, 1354 CE.” (September 1999)
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1348 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
Ordinance “De solutione census per Judaeorum” issued by Carl IV
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Czech Republic [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““[…] Should a Jew receive a pledge in exchange to the debt owed to him, he may not sell it without acquiring authorisation and consent […] or be punished with disfavor and the confiscation of the pledge itself.””
5. Source
Stein, Abraham (Rabbi in Radnitz): Die Geschichte der Juden in Böhmen: Nach amtlichen gedruckten und ungedruckten Quellen Bearbeitet; (“The History of the Jews of Bohemia: Edited according to Official Printed and Unprinted Sources”); (Brünn; 1904)
6. Researcher
Ziba Shadjaani
7. Year of Research
2018
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1349
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
Order issued by the Council in Strasbourg
3. Geography of Act
France
4. Text of Act
Commentary from other sources:
1) “The Christian mobs in Europe were not carrying out a religious mandate. In fact, they were openly defying the pope and other religious leaders. They were also defying their own political leaders. For example, on February 9, 1349, the town council of Strasbourg, a city in present-day France, voted to protect local Jews from attack. That evening, the city’s guilds overthrew the council and put a new one in its place. The new councilmen promptly ordered the arrest of all Jews.”
Phyllis Goldstein: “A Convenient Hatred: The History of Antisemitism.” p. 982) “Nevertheless they tortured a number of Jews in Berne and Zofingen [Switzerland] who then admitted that they had put poison into many wells, and they also found the poison in the wells. Thereupon they burnt the Jews in many towns and wrote of this affair to Strasbourg, Freiburg, and Basel in order that they too should burn their Jews. But the leaders in these three cities in whose hands the government lay did not believe that anything ought to be done to the Jews. However in Basel the citizens marched to the city-hall and compelled the council to take an oath that they would burn the Jews, and that they would allow no Jew to enter the city for the next two hundred years. Thereupon the Jews were arrested in all these places and a conference was arranged to meet at Benfeld rAlsace, February 8, 1349. The Bishop of Strasbourg [Berthold II], all the feudal lords of Alsace, and representatives of the three above mentioned cities came there. The deputies of the city of Strasbourg were asked what they were going to do with their Jews. Thev answered and said that they knew no evil of them. Then they asked the Strasbourgers why they had closed the wells and put away the buckets, and there was a great indignation and clamor against the deputies from Strasbourg. So finally the Bishop and the lords and the Imperial Cities agreed to do away with the Jews. The result was that they were burnt in many cities, and wherever they were expelled they were caught by the peasants and stabbed to death or drowned…(The town-council of Strasbourg which wanted to save the Jews was deposed on the 9th-10th of February, and the new council gave in to the mob, who then arrested the Jews on Friday, the 13th.).”Paul Halsal: “Jewish History Sourcebook: The Black Death and the Jews 1348-1349 CE.” (July 1998)
5. Source
None
6. Researcher
None
7. Year of Research
N/A
8. Notes
None
1. Full Date of Act
1349 C.E.
2. Name of Act (or Short Description)
“Ordinance” issued by Archbishop Ernst von Pardubitz of Prague
3. Geography of Act
Present-day Czech Republic [Provisional]
4. Text of Act
““The appearance, [and] the similarity in the external appearances, which the Jews demonstrate with the Christians in [terms of] clothing, often leads to the danger that Christen men intermingle with Jewish women by mistake and Jews with Christian women. In order that such despicable incidences of such mixing on the pretext of error may no longer be excused […] we order that male Jews shall wear broad hats on their heads and not caps/hoods (‘breite Hüte und nicht Kapuzen’). The women, however, are to wear their hair over their foreheads in a high-coiffed (‘hochfrisiert’) manner under their veil. […] so that they may be distinguishable by such signs from the Christians at all times; if however, the Jews do not adopt such signs within two months of publication of these guidelines as of today, a church ban shall be placed on them and any intercourse/contact with Christians shall be forbidden to them […] and the Lord of each place who does not require such conduct from them shall be punished and the spiritual authority of the state or the village in which such Jews remain who are undistinguishable, shall impose an exclusion on them from all general religious activities until the Jews have obeyed this present order. […]””
5. Source
Steinherz: Samuel: Jahrbuch – Der Gesellschaft für Geschichte der Juden in der Cechoslovakischen Republik; III Jahrgang; (2008); (Yearbook – The Society for the History of the Jews in the Czech Republic, III Year; (2008));