- See: Shah·ar, Childhood, 55–60; Atkinson, Oldest Vocation, 60–61.
- This belief appears already in the Talmud, BT Ketubbot 61a, and in medieval sources: Sefer
Or Zaru’a, 1: no. 630. For Christian society, see: Alexandre-Bidon and Closson, L’enfant à l’om-
bre des cathedrales, 121.
80.Midrash Shemot Rabbah, chapters I–XIV, ed. Avigdor Shinan (Jerusalem, 1984), 1:25.
Compare: BT Sotah 12b. - See Schultz, Knowledge of Childhood, 73, and the sources reviewed there; Orme, Medieval
Children, 11. - Berkvam, Enfance et maternité, 51; Alexandre-Bidon and Closson, L’enfant à l’ombre des
cathedrales, 112–13. - This story is cited in Fildes, Wet Nursing, 43.
- Many women nursed their own children along with a wet nurse in order to provide them-
selves with flexibility. Some noblewomen had up to four wet nurses. See ibid., 44. - McLaughlin suggests that until the eleventh century most children were nursed at home
(“Survivors and Surrogates,” 116). See also Shah·ar, Childhood, 60–69; Grieco, “Breast-Feeding,”
34–35, n. 3. - For example: R. Asher b. Yeh·iel, Shut haRosh, no. 17; Teshuvot Maimoniyot leSefer Nashim,
no. 24. The comments made about these women make it clear that these women were not always
married. The Hagahot Maimoniyot, for example, comments about a specific wet nurse: “and some
say she has a husband.” From this comment we may learn that many of the wet nurses did not have
husbands.
87.Sefer Or Zaru’a, 1: no. 657. The responsum was sent to R. H·ayim haCohen b. H·ananel, a
student of R. Tam (Rami Reiner, Rabbenu Tam: Rabbotav haZ·arfatim veTalmidav Benei Ashke-
naz, M.A. Thesis, Hebrew University (Jerusalem, 1997), 63 [in Hebrew]). This woman became
pregnant while employed as a wet nurse. According to her testimony, her employer was the father
of her next child. This source points to a practice that the Christian sources feared—sexual rela-
tions between the infant’s father and the wet nurse. On this topic in a later period, see Horowitz,
“Between Masters and Maidservants in the Jewish Society of Europe in Late Medieval and Early
Modern Times,” in Sexuality and the Family in History: Collected Essays, eds. Israel Bartal and
Isaiah Gafni (Jerusalem, 1999), 193–212 [in Hebrew]. - For an early example, see Amnon Linder, The Jews in the Legal Sources of the Early Middle
Ages(Detroit and Jerusalem, 1997), 558, doc. 100: Rouen 1074: “De Judaeis canonicalis auctori-
tas, et Beati Gregorii decretum servetur, scilicet ne Christiana mancipia habeant, nec nutrices.” - These sources were collected by Simonsohn and Grayzel: Simonsohn, The Apostolic See,
1: doc. 56 (before 1179), 79 (1205), 82 (1205), 134 (1233), 137 (1233), 171 (1244), 221 (1265–
68), 232 (1267); Solomon Grayzel, The Church and the Jews, 1: doc. 14 (1205), 18 (1205), 69
(1233), 104 (1244), Third Lateran Council (296–97) (1215), Council of Montpellier (298–99)
(1195), Council of Paris (306–307) (1213), Council of Narbonne (316–17) (1227), Regulations
of Lord William of Bley (320–23) (1229), Synod of Worcester (330–31) (1240). Simonsohn ar-
gues that this prohibition was issued frequently after the third Lateran council (1215). Grayzel ar-
gued that this prohibition was new. However, as Amnon Linder has shown, we find this warning
in the eleventh century as well (supra, n. 88). - For example, Aronius, Regesten zur Geschichte der Juden, no. 81, 168.
- Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum, 22, col. 231: “Judaei sive Sarceni nec sub alendorum puero-
rum obtentu, nec pro servitio, nec alia causa, Christiana mancipia in domibus suis permittantur
habere. Excommunicentur autem, qui cum eis praesumpserint habitare.” - Mansi, ibid., col. 357; Simonsohn, Apostolic See, doc. 56: “Quod etiam obstetricibus et nu-
tricibus eorum prohibere curetis, ne infantes Iudaeorum in eorundem domibus nutrire prae-
sumant, quoniam Iudaeorum mores et nostri in nullo concordant et ipsi de facili ob continuam
conversationem et assiduem familiaritatem, instigante humani generis inimico ad suam supersti-
tionem et perfidiam simplicium animos inclinarent.”
rick simeone
(Rick Simeone)
#1