A romantic 19th century vision of Godfrey and leaders of the First Crusade

Assuring Jewish physical security meant, first and foremost, standing by the Jews at points of duress, when Jewish life and property were threatened. As noted, the first significant explosion of popular anti-Jewish violence took place in 1096, as an offshoot of the papal call to the First Crusade. While we know mostly about the failed efforts ofthe Rhineland authorities to protect their Jews, the fact that anti-Jewish atrocities are not reported elsewhere is—at least in some measure—a tribute to more effective protection by other lay authorities. In subsequent crusades, the authorities were better prepared for anti-Jewish agitation and thus more effective at providing requisite protection.

As the traditional imagery of historic Jewish enmity to Christ and Christianity was superseded by the growing sense of here-and-now Jewish hostility, combating the new canards became a concern of both ecclesiastical and lay leadership. Major lay authorities—like King Louis VII of France, Emperor Frederick II of the Holy Roman Empire, and King James I of Aragon—all resolutely dismissed the new allegations. The case of Emperor Frederick II is especially striking in that he empanelled a commission ofconverts from Judaism—who would be knowledgeable, but hardly inclined to be overly sympathetic to their former co-religionists—to investigate the allegation of Jewish use of Christian blood. The negative conclusion of this commission enabled the emperor to dismiss the new charge categorically.

Secondary Literature

1. S. W. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews (2 nd ed.; 18 vols.;New York- Columbia University Press, 1952-83), 11-22-55.
2. R. Chazan, European Jewry and the First Crusade (Berkeley- University of California Press, 1987), 85-99.
3. R. Chazan, “Emperor Frederick I, the Third Crusade, and the Jews,” Viator, VIII (1977)- 83-93.

Videos

1. How did the authorities react to anti-Jewish violence? Prof. Robert Chazan.