166 Popes and Jews, 1095–1291
For we have heard that the Jews, whom the kindness of princes has admitted into their
territories, have become so insolent that they hurl unbridled insults at the Christian
Faith, insults which it is an abomination not only to utter but even to keep in mind.
Thus, whenever it happens that on the day of the lord’s resurrection (Easter) the
Christian women who are nurses for the children of Jews, take in the body and blood
of Jesus Christ, the Jews make these women pour their milk into the latrine for three
days before they again give suck to their children. Besides, they perform other detest-
able and unheard of things against the Catholic faith, as a result of which the faithful
should fear that they are incurring divine wrath when they permit the Jews to perpet-
rate unpunished such deeds as bring confusion upon our Faith.9lack of other corroborating primary sources means it is impossible to substantiate
whether this allegation was true, but if Jews in France were acting in this way it was
presumably because they considered, in accordance with Talmudic precepts, that the
Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ was idolatrous and therefore unclean.10
Hence it is difficult to know what to make of these allegations—particularly
whether Jews in parts of France were openly insulting their Christian neighbours
at times of Christian festivals. If true—and some may have been—it would suggest
great foolhardiness on the part of certain Jewish communities: they were a tiny
minority and such actions were likely to arouse extreme Christian ire.
Yet Innocent was not the only pope to express acute concern at the idea of Jews
mocking Christians. His predecessor Alexander III had already insisted that Jews
must be compelled to keep their doors and windows shut on Good Friday in case
they disturb this Christian solemnity,11 and curfews during Holy Week became
enshrined in canon law.12 Innocent’s obvious horror at the idea of Jews mocking
Christians is also apparent in his letter ‘Etsi non displiceat’ of 1205 to Philip
Augustus in which he complained:
What is even worse, blaspheming against God’s name, they [the Jews] publicly insult
Christians by saying that they (Christians) believe in a peasant who had been hung by
the Jewish people.... Also on Good Friday the Jews, contrary to old custom, publicly
run to and fro over the towns and streets, and everywhere laugh, as is their wont, at
the Christians because they adore the Crucified one on the Cross, and, through their
improprieties, attempt to dissuade them from their worship.139 Innocent III, ‘Etsi Judeos quos’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.114; Simonsohn, p.87: ‘Accepimus autem,
quod Judei, quos gratia principum in suis terris admisit, adeo facti sunt insolentes, ut illos committant
excessus in contumeliam fidei Christiane, quos non tantum dicere, sed etiam nefandum cogitare.
Faciunt enim Christianas filiorum suorum nutrices, cum in die ressurectionis Dominice illas recipere
corpus et sanguinem Jesu Christi contingit, per triduum; antequam eos lactent, lac effundere in latri-
nam. Alia insuper contra fidem catholicam detestabilia et inaudita committunt, propter que fidelibus
est verendum, ne divinam indigationem incurrant, cum eos perpetrare patiuntur impune que fidei
nostre confusionem inducunt.’
10 Hanan Yuval, ‘“They Tell lies: You Ate the Man”: Jewish reactions to ritual Murder Charges’,
in Religious Violence between Christians and Jews: Medieval Roots, Modern Perspectives, ed. A. S. Abulafia
(Basingstoke, 2002), pp.96–7.
11 Alexander III, ‘Quia super his’, Simonsohn, p.50.
12 Simonsohn, The Apostolic See and the Jews. History, pp.130–3.
13 Innocent III, ‘Etsi non displiceat’ (16 January 1205), Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.104–8; Simonsohn,
pp.82–4; See Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.106–8; Simonsohn, p.83: ‘Quinimmo, nomen Domini blaspheman-
tes, publice Christianis insultant, quod credant in rusticum quemdam suspensum a populo