Title: Menasseh ben Israel's Mission to Oliver Cromwell - Being a reprint of the Pamphlets published by MENASSEH BEN - ISRAEL to promote the Re-admission of the Jews to England - 1649-1656
Author: Israel, Manasseh ben
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.


*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Menasseh ben Israel's Mission to Oliver Cromwell - Being a reprint of the Pamphlets published by MENASSEH BEN - ISRAEL to promote the Re-admission of the Jews to England - 1649-1656" ***


                         MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL’S
                               MISSION TO
                           _OLIVER CROMWELL_


[Illustration:

  Menasseh ben Israel

  from an Etching by Rembrandt
]



                         MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL’S
                               MISSION TO
                           _OLIVER CROMWELL_

 Being a reprint of the Pamphlets published by _MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL_ to
      promote the _Re-admission of the Jews to England_ 1649–1656


                _Edited with an Introduction and Notes_
                            _By_ LUCIEN WOLF
 _Past-President and Vice-President of the Jewish Historical Society of
     England Co-Editor of the “Bibliotheca Anglo-Judaica,” &c. &c._

[Illustration: PEREGRINANDO QUAERIMUS]

                           Published for the
                 _Jewish Historical Society of England_
                 _By_ MACMILLAN & CO., LIMITED, LONDON
                                  1901



                               TO MY WIFE

------------------------------------------------------------------------



                                PREFACE


The Jewish Historical Society of England, soon after its establishment,
resolved on the publication of the present volume as a memorial of
Menasseh ben Israel, whose name must always hold the chief place on the
first page of the history of the present Anglo-Jewish community. The
Society did me the honour of entrusting me with the preparation of the
work.

Menasseh’s tracts have been printed in facsimile. They have not been
types similar to those employed in the original. Thanks to the resources
of the printing establishment of Messrs. Ballantyne, Hanson & Co. of
Edinburgh, and the taste and care they have devoted to the work, a much
finer effect has been produced than would have been possible had
photography been employed, while exact fidelity to the originals has not
been sacrificed.

To me the preparation of this volume has been a labour of love. Nothing
in the whole course of a very varied literary career, extending over
nearly thirty years, has fascinated me so much as the story of the
Return of the Jews to England. Its mysteries belong to the highest
regions of historical romance, and it forms a page of history which is a
real acquisition both to the annals of the British Empire and to that
wider and more thrilling panorama of human activities which depicts the
fortunes of my own co-religionists. I have not, however, spoken the last
word on this subject in the present volume, which is chiefly concerned
with the transaction with Oliver Cromwell in 1655–56 and its proximate
causes. I hope to tell the whole story in detail in another volume,
which I have long had in preparation for the “Jewish Library.”

The preliminary essay on the Return of the Jews to England is in no
sense a _réchauffé_ of the papers on the same subject contributed by me
to various periodicals during the last fifteen years. Those papers were
written at successive stages of an uncompleted investigation. The
present essay is a re-study in the light of all the facts, and it will
be found that some of my former judgments have been modified, and a few
even reversed.

I have to thank many friends for their assistance. Mr. Israel Abrahams
very kindly relieved me of the labour of reading the proofs of the
tracts, and made many valuable suggestions which have added to the
completeness and beauty of the volume. Mr. B. L. Abrahams was good
enough to revise my introduction, and thus saved me from not a few slips
of style and memory. The Rev. S. Levy has given me useful assistance in
preparing the annotations, and Dr. S. R. Gardiner was good enough to
place at my disposal his unrivalled knowledge of the politics of the
Commonwealth in solving some of the difficulties in the negotiations of
1655. My acknowledgments are also due to Miss S. R. Hirsch for the
excellent index she has compiled. Finally, Mme. de Novikoff kindly
obtained for me from the Hermitage Collection at St. Petersburg an
excellent photograph of the alleged portrait of Menasseh ben Israel by
Rembrandt, which I have reproduced, together with two other better known
and more authentic portraits.

                                                                   L. W.

  LONDON, _December 1900_.



                                CONTENTS


                                                                    PAGE
 INTRODUCTION                                                         xi

      THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND:—
            I. DAYS OF EXILE                                          xi
           II. THE HOPE OF ISRAEL                                  xviii
          III. CROMWELL’S POLICY                                  xxviii
           IV. THE APPEAL TO THE NATION                           xxxvii
            V. CROMWELL’S ACTION                                     lvi
           VI. THE REAL “VINDICIÆ”                                  lxix
          VII. DOCUMENTS                                          lxxvii

 “THE HOPE OF ISRAEL, WRITTEN BY MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL”(1652)            1

 “TO HIS HIGHNESSE THE LORD PROTECTOR OF THE COMMON-WEALTH OF
   ENGLAND, SCOTLAND, AND IRELAND, THE HUMBLE ADDRESSES OF
   MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL” (1655)                                        73

 “VINDICIÆ JUDÆORUM, OR A LETTER IN ANSWER TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS
   PROPOUNDED BY A NOBLE AND LEARNED GENTLEMAN, WHEREIN ALL
   OBJECTIONS ARE CANDIDLY, AND YET FULLY CLEARED, BY RABBI
   MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL” (1656)                                       105

 NOTES                                                               149

 INDEX                                                               171

 PORTRAITS                     _Frontispiece and facing pages_ 1 and 105



                              INTRODUCTION


                   THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND


                            I. DAYS OF EXILE

Shrouded in the fogs of the North Sea, the British Isles were, for two
centuries after the Great Expulsion by Edward I., little more than a
bitter memory to the Jewish people. In other lands they came and went,
but England was as securely closed against them as was the Egypt of
Danaus to the Greeks. With the exception of a few adventurous pilgrims
who trickled into the country to enjoy the hospitality of the Domus
Conversorum, they ceased gradually to think of the land which had been
so signal a scene of their mediæval prosperity and sufferings. The
Jewish chroniclers of this period, while dealing with the politics of
other European countries, have scarcely a word to say of England.

Towards the beginning of the sixteenth century the fogs began to lift,
and England once again appeared as a possible haven to the “tribe of the
wandering foot and weary breast.” The gigantic expulsions from Spain by
Ferdinand and Isabella had created a new Jewish Diaspora under
conditions of the most thrilling romance. The Jewish martyrs “trekked”
in their thousands to all the points of the compass, fringing the coasts
of the Mediterranean with a new industrious population, founding
colonies all over the Levant as far as the Mesopotamian cradle of their
race, penetrating even to Hindostan in the East, and throwing outposts
on the track of Columbus towards the fabled west. But this was only the
beginning of a more remarkable dispersion. The men and women who took up
the pilgrim’s staff at the bidding of Torquemada could only go where
Jews were tolerated, for they refused to bear false witness to their
ancient religion. They left behind them in Spain and Portugal a less
scrupulous contingent of their race—wealthy Jews who were disinclined to
make sacrifices for the faith of their fathers, and who accepted the
conditions of the Inquisition rather than abandon their rich plantations
in Andalusia and their palaces in Saragossa, Toledo, and Seville. They
embraced Christianity, but their conversion was only simulated, and for
two centuries they preserved in secret their allegiance to Judaism.
These Crypto-Jews, in their turn, gradually spread all over Europe,
penetrating in their disguise into countries and towns and even guilds
which the Church had jealously guarded against all heretical intrusion.
It was chiefly through them that the modern Anglo-Jewish community was
founded.[1]

The Iberian Crypto-Jews, or Marranos,[2] as they were called,
represented one of the strangest and most romantic movements in the
religious history of Europe. Marranism was an attempt by the Jews to
outwit the Jesuits with their own weapons. Both sides acted on the
principle that the end justified the means, and each employed the most
unscrupulous guile to defend itself against the other. The Inquisition
was ruthless in its methods to stamp out Judaism, the Marranos were
equally unprincipled in preserving their allegiance to their proscribed
religion. Abandoning their ceremonial, abandoning even the racial
limitation on marriage, the Jewish tradition was maintained by secret
conventicles chiefly composed of males, and thus Jewish blood and the
Jewish heresy became distributed all over the peninsula, and crept into
the highest ranks of the nation. The Court, the Church, the army, even
the dread tribunals of the Holy Office itself were not free from the
taint.[3] A secretary to the Spanish king, a vice-chancellor of Aragon,
nearly related to the Royal House, a Lord High Treasurer, a Court
Chamberlain, and an Archdeacon of Coimbra figure in the lists of
discovered Marranos preserved by the Inquisition.[4] At Rome the
Crypto-Jews commissioned a secret agent supplied with ample funds, who
bribed the Cardinals, intrigued against the Holy Office, and frequently
obtained the ear of the Pontiff.[5] Some idea of the social
ramifications of the Marranos is afforded by the careers of the early
members of the Amsterdam Jewish community. Many of them were men of high
distinction who had escaped from Spain and Portugal in order to throw
off the burden of their imposture. Such were the ex-monk Vicente de
Rocamora, who had been confessor to the Empress of Germany when she was
the Infanta Maria; the ex-Jesuit father, Tomas de Pinedo, one of the
leading philologists of his day; Enriquez de Paz, a captain in the army,
a Knight of San Miguel, and a famous dramatist; Colonel Nicolas de
Oliver y Fullana, poet, strategist, and royal cartographer; Don
Francesco de Silva, Marquis of Montfort, who had fought against Marshal
de Créqui under the Emperor Leopold; and Balthasar Orobio de Castro,
physician to the Spanish Court, professor at the University of
Salamanca, and a Privy Councillor.[6] It was by Jews of this class that
the congregations of Amsterdam, Hamburg, and Antwerp were founded, and
it was largely through them that those towns in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries were enabled to wrest from Spain her primacy in
the colonial trade.

At a very early epoch Marranos reached England. We hear of them, almost
immediately after the expulsion from Spain, figuring in a lawsuit in
London.[7] In 1550 a Marrano physician was discovered living in London.
Another, Roderigo Lopes, was court physician to Queen Elizabeth, and the
original of Shakespeare’s Shylock.[8] When the Earl of Essex, after the
sacking of Cadiz in 1596, brought the Spanish Resident, Alonzo de
Herrera, a prisoner to England, he turned out to be a Marrano. After his
liberation, this descendant of the great Captain Gonsalvo de Cordova
proceeded to Amsterdam, entered the synagogue, and spent his old age in
the compilation of cabalistical treatises.[9] Amador de los Rios states
that the Marranos founded secret settlements in London, Dover, and
York;[10] and it has been shown that they possessed a secret synagogue
in London early in the seventeenth century, if not before.[11] As in
Amsterdam and Antwerp, they were largely concerned in the development of
the Spanish trade, in the importation of bullion, and in the promotion
of commercial relations with the Levant and the New World.

While the people of England were unconscious of this immigration, it
could not have been altogether unknown in the continental Jewries. That
no trace of this knowledge is to be found in printed Hebrew literature
is not strange, since the keeping of the secret was a common Jewish
interest. It no doubt helped to stimulate Jewish hopes of a return to
England, which more public circumstances had already founded. The
Reformation in England first turned Jewish eyes towards the land from
which they had been so long excluded. They were especially interested by
Henry VIII.’s appeal to Jewish scholars during his conflict with the
Papacy in regard to his divorce from Catherine of Aragon.[12] Still more
deeply must their feelings have been stirred by Elizabeth’s struggle
with Spain. All over Europe, indeed, Jewish sympathies were with
Elizabeth. The secret negotiations carried on by Roderigo Lopes, through
his influential Marrano relatives, with the Grand Turk and with the
Hebrew bankers of Antwerp and Leghorn, have yet to be made public; but
it is certain that they played an important part in the story which
culminated in the confusion of the Great Armada. But it was the
increasing Hebraism of English religious thought, as represented by the
Puritan movement, which chiefly attracted the Jews. This movement sent
not a few Englishmen and Englishwomen to the continental ghettos to seek
instruction at the feet of Hebrew Rabbis, and even to obtain entrance to
the synagogue as proselytes.[13] When the Commonwealth, with its
pronounced Judaical tendencies, emerged from this movement, the Jews
could not fail to be impressed. The more mystical among them began to
dream of the Golden Age. Indeed the doctrines of the Fifth Monarchy Men,
carried to Smyrna by Puritan merchants, paved the way for the rise of
the pseudo-Messiah, Sabbethai Zevi.[14] The more practical saw that the
time had arrived when it might be reasonably hoped to obtain the
revocation of Edward I.’s edict of banishment.

Towards the end of 1655, the question of the readmission of the Jews to
England was brought to a climax by Menasseh ben Israel’s famous mission
to Oliver Cromwell. The story of this mission has been briefly narrated
by Menasseh himself in the _Vindiciæ Judæorum_, one of the tracts
printed in the present volume.[15] As my object in this preliminary
essay is to set forth the story more fully, and to endeavour to
elucidate its obscurities, I cannot do better than take as my text this
authoritative, though somewhat vague, statement by the chief actor in
the events with which I am dealing. Here is what Menasseh wrote under
date of April 10, 1656:—

  “The communication and correspondence I have held for some years
  since, with some eminent persons of _England_, was the first
  originall of my undertaking this design. For I alwayes found by
  them, a great probability of obtaining what I now request, whilst
  they affirmed that at this time the minds of men stood very well
  affected towards us, and that our entrance into this Island would be
  very acceptable and well pleasing unto them. And from this beginning
  sprang up in me a semblable affection, and desire of obtaining this
  purpose. For, for seven yeares on this behalf, I have endeavoured
  and sollicited it, by letters and other means, without any
  intervall. For I conceived that our universall dispersion was a
  necessary circumstance, to be fulfilled before all that shall be
  accomplished which the Lord hath promised to the people of the
  _Jewes_, concerning their restauration, and their returning again
  into their own land, according to those words, _Dan._ 12,7: _When we
  shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all
  these things shall be finished_. As also, that this our scattering,
  by little, and little, should be amongst all people, _from the one
  end of the earth even unto the other_, as it is written _Deut._
  28,64: I conceived that _by the end of the earth_ might be
  understood this _Island_. And I knew not, but that the Lord who
  often works by naturall meanes, might have design’d and made choice
  of me for the bringing about this work. With these proposals
  therefore, I applyed my self, in all zealous affection to the
  _English Nation_, congratulating their glorious liberty which at
  this day they enjoy; together with their prosperous peace. And I
  entituled my book named _The Hope of Israel_, to the first
  Parliament, and the Council of State. And withall declared my
  intentions. In order to which they sent me a very favorable
  passe-port. Afterwards I directed my self to the second, and they
  also sent me another. But at that juncture of time my coming was not
  presently performed, for that my kindred and friends, considering
  the checquered, and interwoven vicissitudes, and turns of things
  here below, embracing me, with pressing importunity, earnestly
  requested me not to part from them, and would not give over, till
  their love constrained me to promise, that I would yet awhile stay
  with them. But notwithstanding all this, I could not be at quiet in
  my mind (I know not but that it might be through some particular
  divine providence) till I had anew made my humble addresses to his
  Highnesse the Lord Protector (whom God preserve), and finding that
  my coming over would not be altogether unwelcome to him, with those
  great hopes which I conceived, I joyfully took my leave of my house,
  my friends, my kindred, all my advantages there, and the country
  wherein I have lived all my lifetime, under the benign protection,
  and favour of the Lords, the States Generall, and Magistrates of
  _Amsterdam_; _in fine_ (I say) I parted with them all, and took my
  voyage for _England_. Where, after my arrivall, being very
  courteously received, and treated with much respect, I presented to
  his most Serene Highnesse a petition, and some desires, which for
  the most part, were written to me by my brethren the _Jewes_, from
  severall parts of _Europe_, as your worship may better understand by
  former relations. Whereupon it pleased His Highnesse to convene an
  Assembly at _Whitehall_, of Divines, Lawyers, and Merchants, of
  different persuasions, and opinions. Whereby men’s judgements, and
  sentences were different. Insomuch, that as yet, we have had no
  finall determination from his most Serene Highnesse. Wherefore those
  few _Jewes_ that were here, despairing of our expected successe,
  departed hence. And others who desired to come hither, have quitted
  their hopes, and betaken themselves some to _Italy_, some to
  _Geneva_, where that Commonwealth hath at this time, most freely
  granted them many, and great privileges.”


                         II. THE HOPE OF ISRAEL

The first point in Menasseh’s story which needs elucidation is his
statement that he was originally induced to move in the question of the
resettlement of the Jews by the assurances of “some eminent persons of
England,” that “the minds of men stood very well affected towards us.”
How had this philo-Semitic sentiment arisen, and who were the men who
had communicated it to the Amsterdam Rabbi?

The evolution of English thought which rendered Menasseh ben Israel’s
enterprise possible is of considerable complexity, but its main features
are easily distinguishable. The idea of Religious Liberty in England was
due, in its broader aspects, to the struggle between the Baptists and
the Calvinists. The Reformation established only a restricted form of
Religious Liberty, and it was not until the Baptists found themselves
persecuted as the Reformers had been before them, that the cry arose for
a liberty of conscience which would embrace all religions. In the
Separatist Churches, founded by English refugees in Amsterdam and
Geneva, the idea grew and strengthened. The earliest noteworthy tract on
the subject—Leonard Busher’s “Religious Peace, or a Plea for Liberty of
Conscience,” published in 1614—was written under the influence of these
exiles, and it is noteworthy that already in that work the extension of
religious liberty to Jews was specifically demanded.[16] Amsterdam was
at that time the seat of a flourishing Jewish community, some of whose
members came into contact with the philo-Jewish refugees. In this way
they probably learnt to understand the political significance of the
successive rise of the Puritans and Independents, for at the very
beginning of the Civil War the Royalist spies in Holland noted that the
Jews sympathised with the Republicans, and even alleged that they had
offered them “considerable sums of money to carry on their designs.”[17]

The progress of Religious Liberty in the seventeenth century reached its
highest point, when in 1645 the Independents captured the Army under the
scheme known as the “New Model.” Meanwhile Roger Williams, the famous
Baptist, who had already founded in America a community based on
unrestricted liberty of conscience, had published his “Bloudy Tenent of
Persecution,” in which he generously pleaded for the Jews.[18] In 1646 a
reprint of Leonard Busher’s pamphlet was published in London, much to
the joy of the Separatists in Amsterdam,[19] and a year later Hugh
Peters, one of Cromwell’s Army Chaplains, wrote his “Word for the Army
and Two Words for the Kingdom,” in which he proposed that “strangers,
even Jews [be] admitted to trade and live with us.”[20] The question of
the readmission of the Jews was, however, still far from taking
practical shape. Although frequently referred to, it had only been
raised incidentally as an illustration of the advanced tendencies of the
advocates of Religious Liberty.

In December 1648, the Independents contrived the famous “Pride’s Purge,”
which put an end to the Presbyterian domination of Parliament. The hopes
of the advocates of Religious Liberty ran high, and the Jewish question
at once came to the front. The Council of Mechanics, meeting at
Whitehall, marked their sense of the meaning of the _coup d’état_ by
immediately voting “a toleration of all religions whatsoever, not
excepting Turkes, nor Papists, nor Jewes.”[21] To this the Council of
Army Officers responded with a resolution, the text of which has,
unfortunately, not been preserved, in which they favoured the widest
scheme of Religious Liberty. It was, indeed, rumoured at the time that
the Jews were specifically mentioned in the resolution.[22] However that
may be, it is certain that in the following month two Baptists of
Amsterdam, Johanna Cartwright and her son Ebenezer, were encouraged to
present a petition to Lord Fairfax and the General Council of Officers,
in which they asked that “the statute of banishment” against the Jews
might be repealed. The petition, we are told, was “favourably received,
with a promise to take it into speedy consideration when the present
more public affairs are dispatched.”[23]

Unfortunately, the “more public affairs” obstructed the triumph of
Religious Liberty, and with it the Jewish cause, for a good many years.
In the same month that Mrs. Cartwright’s petition was considered,
Charles I. was beheaded, and the chiefs of the Revolution, with a great
work of reconstruction before them, felt that they must proceed
cautiously. Toleration of the Jews meant unrestricted liberty of
conscience, and this was held by the extreme Independents to imply not
only the abolition of an Established Church, but a licence to the
multitude of sects—many of them of the maddest and most blasphemous
tendencies—which had been hatched by Laudian persecution and the
reaction of the Civil War. Cromwell and his advisers were resolved to
pursue a more conservative policy, and the toleration plans of the
Independents were accordingly shelved. For a hundred years—until,
indeed, Pelham’s “Jew Bill” in 1753—they were not heard of in this
purely secular shape again.

The cause of Religious Liberty was, however, not the only force which
was working in the country for the readmission of the Jews. The
religious fervour of the nation had been stirred to a high pitch, and
there were few men whose minds had not become influenced by Messianic
and other mystical beliefs. It is curious indeed to note that this
current of thought ran parallel with the evolution of the secular idea
of Toleration. Seven years after the first publication of Leonard
Busher’s famous Toleration pamphlet, Mr. Sergeant Finch wrote
anonymously a book entitled “The Calling of the Jewes” (1621), with a
prefatory epistle in Hebrew, in which he invited the children of Israel
to realise the prophecies by asserting their national existence in
Palestine. At the same time he called upon all Christian princes to do
homage to the Jewish nation. This early manifestation of Zionism did not
meet with much sympathy in high places, for James I. was so incensed at
it that he clapped its publisher into jail.[24] The book, however, was a
symptom, and the movement it represented only derived strength from
persecution. The gloomier the lot of the sectaries, the more intense
became their reliance on the Messianic prophecies. Even after the
triumph of the Puritan cause, the sanest Independents held to them
firmly side by side with their belief in Religious Liberty; and in the
Cartwright petition we find both views expounded. Extremists like the
Fifth Monarchy Men made them the pivots for fresh outbursts of
Sectarianism. Judaical sects arose, the members of which endeavoured to
live according to the Levitical Law, even practising circumcision.
Prosecutions for such practices may be traced back to 1624.[25] Some of
the saints, like Everard the Leveller, publicly called themselves
Jews;[26] others went to Amsterdam, and were formally received into the
synagogue.[27] Colchester was the headquarters of one of these Judaical
sects, but there were others in London and in Wales.[28] The practical
effect of this movement was not only the production of a very widespread
philo-Semitism, but a strong conviction that, inasmuch as the conversion
of the Jews was an indispensable preliminary of the Millennium, their
admission to England, where they might meet the godliest people in the
world, was urgently necessary.

It was this feeling which, on the collapse of the Toleration movement in
1649, began to make itself most loudly heard. Edward Nicholas, John
Sadler, John Dury, Henry Jessey, Roger Williams, and even Thomas Fuller,
who was far from being a mystic, urged this view on the public, and an
agitation for the Readmission of the Jews, as a religious duty outside
the problem of Religious Liberty, was set on foot. This mystical
agitation found a response in what to us must at first sight appear a
strangely inappropriate quarter. It brought forth from Amsterdam a Latin
pamphlet, entitled “Spes Israelis,” with a prefatory address “To the
Parliament, the Supreme Court of England,” the author of which was
Menasseh ben Israel, one of the Rabbis of the congregation. This
pamphlet illustrates the inception of the enterprise for the
Resettlement of the Jews in England, which its author endeavoured to
carry out six years later.

Menasseh ben Israel was the son of a Marrano of Lisbon, who had suffered
at the hands of the Inquisition, and had, as a result, taken up his
abode in Amsterdam. Menasseh was educated under the care of Rabbi Isaac
Uziel, and, at the age of eighteen, was ordained a Rabbi. He was an
indefatigable student, became a mine of learning, an accomplished
linguist, a fluent writer, and a voluble preacher. His attainments made
considerable noise in the world, at a time when public attention was
riveted on Biblical prophecy, and the question of its fulfilment through
the Jews. His voluminous writings obtained for him a high reputation as
a scholar, and the readiness with which he afforded information to all
who corresponded with him made him many influential friends, who spread
his fame far and wide. The secret of the distinction Menasseh secured
for himself, in spite of the weaknesses of his character and the
eccentricity of his mental tendency, lies in the fact that the world in
which he lived was very largely given over to philo-Semitism, and to the
special form of mysticism to which he had yielded himself. His alliance
with a scion of the Abarbanel family, in whose tradition of Davidic
descent he was a firm believer, inspired him with the idea that he was
destined to promote the coming of the Messiah; and hence the wild dreams
of the English Millenarians appealed to him with something of a personal
force. It was not, however, until the triumph of the Republican cause in
England that he resolved to throw in his lot with the Puritan mystics,
and even then he had some difficulty, as we may readily believe, in
adopting an attitude which would at once conciliate the English
Conversionists, and harmonise with his allegiance to the synagogue.[29]

At first his sympathies, like those of most of the leading members of
the Amsterdam community, seem to have been Royalist, for in 1642 we find
him extolling the queen of Charles I. in an oration.[30] In 1647 he was
still far from recognising in the Puritan revolt a movement calling for
his Messianic sympathy; for, writing to an English friend in that year,
he described the Civil War, not, as he afterwards believed it to be, as
a struggle of the godly against the ungodly, but as a Divine punishment
for the expulsion of his co-religionists from Britain in the thirteenth
century.[31] This letter is interesting as showing that his mind was
then already beginning to be exercised by the Resettlement question; but
he evidently had as yet no definite idea of taking any practical action.
In the autumn of 1649 a method of action was suggested to him by a
letter he received from the well-known English Puritan, John Dury, whose
acquaintance he had made in Amsterdam five years previously.

A friend of John Dury, one Thomas Thorowgood, was deeply interested in
the missionary labours of the famous evangelist, John Eliot, among the
American Indians; and in order to prevail upon the philo-Jewish public
to provide money for the support of the mission, had compiled a treatise
showing that the American Indians were the Lost Tribes. This work was
largely founded on the conjectures of the early Spanish missionaries,
who had up to that time a monopoly of this solution of the Ten Tribes
problem. It was written in 1648, and dedicated to the King, but the
renewal of the Civil War in that year prevented its publication.[32]
Thorowgood thereupon sent the proofs of the first part of the work to
John Dury to read. It happened that Dury, while at the Hague in 1644,
had heard some stories about the Ten Tribes which had very much
interested him. One was to the effect that a Jew, named Antonio de
Montezinos, or Aaron Levy, had, while travelling in South America, met a
race of savages in the Cordilleras, who recited the _Shema_,[33]
practised Jewish ceremonies, and were, in short, Israelites of the Tribe
of Reuben. Montezinos had related his story to Menasseh ben Israel, and
had even embodied it in an affidavit executed under oath before the
chiefs of the Amsterdam Synagogue. As soon as Dury received Thorowgood’s
treatise, he remembered this story, and at once wrote to Menasseh ben
Israel for a copy of the affidavit. The courteous Rabbi sent it to him
by return of post,[34] and it was printed for the first time as an
appendix to an instalment of Thorowgood’s treatise, which, at Dury’s
instance, was published in January 1650.[35]

This incident, coupled with some letters he received from the notorious
Millenarian, Nathaniel Holmes, came as a ray of light to Menasseh. For
five years he had had Montezinos’s narrative by him, and had not
regarded it as of sufficient importance to publish. He had, perhaps,
doubted the wisdom of publishing it, seeing that it tended to
substantiate a theory of purely Jesuitical origin, for which no sanction
could be found in Jewish records or legend. Moreover, he had no strong
views on the prophetical bearing of the question, as we may see by a
letter he addressed to Holmes as late as the previous summer, in which
he stated that he had grave doubts as to the time and manner of the
coming of the Messiah.[36] Now, however, the question began to grow
clear to him, and it dawned upon him that the long-neglected narrative
of Montezinos might be used for a better purpose than the support of
Christian missions in New England. The story was, if true, a proof of
the increasing dispersion of Israel. Daniel had foretold that the
scattering of the Holy People would be the forerunner of their
Restoration, and a verse in Deuteronomy had explained that the
scattering would be “from one end of the earth even to the other end of
the earth.” It was clear from Montezinos and other travellers that they
had already reached one end of the earth. Let them enter England and the
other end would be attained. Thus the promises of the Almighty would be
fulfilled, and the Golden Age would dawn. “I knew not,” he wrote later
on, “but that the Lord who often works by naturall meanes, might have
design’d, and made choice of me, for bringing about this work.”[37] In
this hope he wrote the famous ‏מקוה ישראל‎ which in 1650 burst on the
British public under the title of the “Hope of Israel.”

The central idea of this booklet did not occur to Menasseh immediately
on receiving John Dury’s letter. His first intention, as he explained in
a letter dated November 25, 1649, was to write a treatise on the
Dispersion of the Ten Tribes for the information of Dury and his
friends. The volume, however, grew under his pen, and a week later he
announced to Dury his larger plan. His letter gives a complete synopsis
of the work, and he finishes up by informing Dury that “I prove at large
that the day of the promised Messiah unto us doth draw near.”[38] Thus
he had already made up his mind on a question which, only a few months
before, he had assured Holmes was “uncertain,” and was intended to be
uncertain. Holmes was at the time unaware of his conversion, for, on
December 24, he wrote to him an expostulatory letter, in which,
curiously enough, he advised him to study the Danielic Prophecies.[39]
Still, Menasseh does not seem to have fully grasped the application of
his treatise to the Resettlement question, for neither in the body of
the work nor in the Spanish edition does he refer to it. It was only
when he composed the Latin edition that his scheme reached maturity. To
that edition he prefixed a dedication to the English Parliament,
eulogising its stupendous achievements, and supplicating “your favour
and good-will to our nation now scattered almost all over the earth.”

The tract produced a profound impression throughout England. That an
eminent Jewish Rabbi should bless the new Republican Government, and
should bear testimony to its having “done great things valiantly,” was
peculiarly gratifying to the whole body of Puritans. To the Millenarians
and other sectaries it was a source of still deeper satisfaction, for
their wild faith now received the sanction of one of the Chosen People,
a sage of Israel, of the Seed of the Messiah. Besides the Latin edition
which Dury distributed among all the leading Puritans, and which was
probably read in Parliament, two English editions issued anonymously by
Moses Wall were rapidly sold. Nevertheless, its effect proved
transitory. Sober politicians, who still recognised that the new-fledged
Republic had, as Fairfax said, “more public affairs” to despatch than
the Jewish question, had begun to fear lest their hands might be forced
by Menasseh’s _coup_. This feeling was strikingly reflected in a tract
by Sir Edward Spencer, one of the members of Parliament for Middlesex.
Addressing himself with feline affection “to my deare brother, Menasseh
ben Israel, the Hebrewe Philosopher,” he expressed his readiness to
agree to the admission of the Jews on twelve conditions artfully
designed to strengthen the hands of the sectaries who believed that,
besides the dispersion of the Jews, their conversion was also a
necessary condition of the Millennium.[40] Spencer’s tract was the
signal for a revulsion of feeling. Sadler, afterwards one of Menasseh’s
firmest friends, threw doubts on the authenticity of Montezinos’s
story,[41] and Fuller did not scruple to criticise the Zionist theory on
practical grounds.[42] Even the faithful Jessey held his peace in tacit
sympathy with Spencer’s scheme. As for Menasseh, he showed no
disposition to acquiesce in Spencer’s proposals. The result was that the
sensation gradually died away, though a few stalwart Tolerationists like
Hugh Peters still clamoured for unconditional Readmission.[43]

Thus both the Toleration and Messianic movements proved unavailing for
the purposes of the Jewish Restoration. There remained a third view of
the question which made less noise in the world, but which was destined
to bring about gradually and silently a real and lasting solution—the
view of Political Expediency.


                         III. CROMWELL’S POLICY

The statesmen of the Commonwealth, who knew so well how to conjure with
human enthusiasm, were essentially practical men. To imagine that they
were the slaves of the great religious revival which had enabled them to
overcome the loyalist inspiration of the cavaliers is entirely to
misconceive their character and aims. The logical outcome of that
revival, and of the triumph of the Puritan arms, would have been the
Kingdom of Saints, but Cromwell’s ambition aimed at something much more
conventional. Imperial expansion and trade ascendency filled a larger
place in his mind than the Other-worldly inspirations which had carried
him to power.

With the unrestricted Toleration principles of the Baptists he had no
sympathy, and still less with the Messianic phantasies of the Fifth
Monarchy Men which Menasseh ben Israel had virtually embraced. His ideas
on Religious Liberty were certainly large and far in advance of his
times,[44] but they were essentially the ideas of a churchman. Their
limits are illustrated by his ostentatious patronage in 1652 of Owens’
scheme of a Toleration confined to Christians.[45] Still he was not the
slave of these limits. The ingenious distinction he drew between the
Papistry of France and that of Spain, when it became necessary for him
to choose between them, and his complete disregard of the same
principles in the case of the Portuguese alliance, show how readily he
subordinated his strongest religious prejudices to political exigencies.
As for the mystics and ultra-democrats, his views were set forth very
clearly in his speech to the new Parliament in September 1651, when he
opposed the Millenarians, the Judaisers, and the Levellers by name.[46]
It is impossible for any one reading this speech side by side with
Menasseh ben Israel’s tracts to believe that the author of it had any
sympathy with the wilder motives actuating the Jewish Rabbi.

What was it, then, that brought these two different characters so
closely together? That the Readmission of the Jews to England was one of
Cromwell’s own schemes—part and parcel of that dream of Imperial
expansion which filled his latter days with its stupendous adumbration
and vanished so tragically with his early death—it is impossible to
doubt. We have no record of his views on the subject, beyond a short and
ambiguous abstract of his speech at the Whitehall Conferences, but there
is ample evidence that he was the mainspring of the whole movement, and
that Menasseh was but a puppet in his hands. His main motives are not
difficult to guess. Cromwell’s statecraft was, as I have said, not
entirely or even essentially governed by religious policy. He desired to
make England great and prosperous, as well as pious and free, and for
these purposes he had to consider the utility of his subjects even
before he weighed their orthodoxy. Now the Jews could not but appeal to
him as very desirable instruments of his colonial and commercial policy.
They controlled the Spanish and Portuguese trade; they had the Levant
trade largely in their hands; they had helped to found the Hamburg Bank,
and they were deeply interested in the Dutch East and West Indian
companies. Their command of bullion, too, was enormous, and their
interest in shipping was considerable.[47] Moreover, he knew something
personally of the Jews, for he was acquainted with some of the members
of the community of Marranos then established in London, and they had
proved exceedingly useful to him as contractors and intelligencers.[48]
There is, indeed, reason to believe that some of these Marranos had been
brought into the country by the Parliamentary Government as early as
1643 with the specific object of supplying the pecuniary necessities of
the new administration.[49]

Until the end of 1651 the Readmission question presented no elements of
urgency, because there was a chance of its favourable solution without
its being made the object of a special effort on the part of the
Government or the legislature. By the treaty of coalition proposed to
the Netherlands by the St. John mission early in 1651, the Jewish
question would have solved itself, for the Hebrew merchants of Amsterdam
would have _ipso facto_ acquired in England the same rights as they
enjoyed in Holland. That proposal, however, broke down, and as a result
the famous Navigation Act was passed. The object of that measure was to
exclude foreign nations from the colonial trade, and to dethrone the
Dutch from their supremacy in the carrying and distributing traffic of
Europe. Consequently it supplied a strong inducement to Jewish
merchants—especially those of Amsterdam who were then trading with
Jamaica and Barbados—to transfer their counting-houses to London. As
such an immigration would have well served the policy embodied in the
Navigation Act, it became desirable that some means of legalising Jewish
residence in England should be found, and hence the question of
Readmission was brought within the field of practical politics. This was
the new form in which it presented itself. It was no longer a question
of Religious Toleration or of the hastening of the Millennium, but
purely a question of political expediency.

It appears that the St. John mission, when its failure became probable,
was instructed to study the Jewish question, and probably to enter into
negotiations with leading Jews in Amsterdam. Certain it is that its
members saw a great deal of Menasseh ben Israel during their sojourn in
Holland, and that Cromwell’s benevolent intentions were conveyed to him.
Thurloe, who was secretary to the mission, had several conferences with
the Rabbi, and the Synagogue entertained the members of the mission,
notwithstanding that public opinion ran high against them.[50]
Strickland, the colleague of St. John, and formerly ambassador at the
Hague, was ever afterwards regarded as an authority on the Jewish
question, for he served on most of the Committees appointed to consider
Menasseh’s petitions. Still more significant is the fact that within a
few weeks of the return of the Embassy a letter, the text of which has
not been preserved, was received from Menasseh by the Council of State,
and an influential committee, on which Cromwell himself served, was at
once appointed to peruse and answer it.[51] Towards the end of the
following year two passes couched in flattering terms were issued to the
Rabbi to enable him to come to England.[52]

Meanwhile, the long-feared war broke out, and negotiations were perforce
suspended. From 1652 to 1654 the popular agitation for the Readmission
of the Jews spluttered weakly in pamphlets and broadsheets. In 1653
there was a debate in Parliament on the subject, but no conclusion was
arrived at.[53] In the following year, shortly after the conclusion of
peace, a new element was introduced into the question by the appearance
on the scene of a fresh petitioner from Holland, one Manuel Martinez
Dormido, a brother-in-law of Menasseh ben Israel, and afterwards well
known in England as David Abarbanel Dormido.

The mission of Dormido was clearly a continuation of Menasseh’s
enterprise, and it was probably undertaken on the direct invitation of
the Protector. With the restoration of peace on terms which rendered
persistence in the policy of the Navigation Act indispensable, Cromwell
must have been anxious to take the Jewish question seriously in hand.
The negotiations opened by Thurloe with Menasseh in 1651 were probably
resumed, and an intimation was conveyed to the Jewish Rabbi that the
time was ripe for him to come to England and lay his long-contemplated
prayer before the Government of the Commonwealth. Menasseh’s reasons for
not accepting the invitation in person are not difficult to understand.
He doubtless refers to them in the passage from the _Vindiciæ_ I have
already quoted, where he says he was entreated by his kindred and
friends, “considering the chequered and interwoven vicissitudes and
turns of things here below, not to part from them.”[54] His kindred and
friends were wise. Owing to his quarrels with his colleagues in the
Amsterdam Rabbinate his situation had become precarious, and it might
have become hopelessly and disastrously compromised had he, in the then
incensed state of Dutch feeling against England—a feeling in which the
leading Jews of the Netherlands participated—undertaken a mission to the
Protector. Hence the delegation of the work to his brother-in-law. An
indication of Menasseh’s interest in the new mission is afforded by the
fact that his only surviving son, Samuel ben Israel, was associated with
Dormido, and accompanied him to London.

Unlike his distinguished relative, Dormido had nothing to lose by
approaching Cromwell. A Marrano by birth, a native of Andalusia, where
he had enjoyed great wealth and held high public office, he had been
persecuted by the Inquisition, and compelled to fly to Holland. There he
had made a fortune in the Brazil trade, and had become a leading
merchant of Amsterdam, and one of the chiefs of the Synagogue. The
conquest of Pernambuco by the Portuguese early in 1654 had ruined him,
and he found himself compelled to begin life afresh.[55] He saw his
opportunity in the mission confided to him by Menasseh. It opened to him
the chance of a new career under the powerful protection of the greatest
personality in Christendom. Unlike his brother-in-law, he had no
Millenarian delusions. The Jewish question appealed to him in something
of the same practical fashion that it appealed to Cromwell. While the
Protector was seeking the commercial interests of the Commonwealth,
Dormido was anxious to repair his own shattered fortunes.

On the 1st September he arrived in London, and at once set about
drafting two petitions to Cromwell.[56] In the first of these documents
he recited his personal history, the story of his sufferings at the
hands of the Inquisition, and of the confiscation of his property by the
Portuguese in Pernambuco. He expressed his desire to become a resident
in England and a subject of the Commonwealth, and wound up by praying
the Protector to use his good offices with the King of Portugal for the
restitution of his fortune. The second petition was a prayer for the
Readmission of the Jewish people to England, “graunting them libertie to
come with theire famillies and estates, to bee dwellers here with the
same eaquallnese and conveniences wch yr inland borne subjects doe
enjoy.” The petition, after a violent tirade against the Inquisition and
the intolerance of the Apostolical Roman Church, pointed out that the
Readmission of the Jews would be to the advantage of trade and industry,
and would vastly increase the public revenues. These adroit appeals to
the chief motives of the Protector’s statecraft were followed by a
suggestion that in the event of the prayer being granted the petitioner
might be appointed to the control and management of the new community,
with, of course, appropriate compensation for his services.

Despite their obviously selfish motives, Cromwell received these
petitions with significant graciousness. They were at once sent to the
Council, with an endorsement, stating that “His Highnes is pleased in an
especiall manner to recommend these two annexed papers to the speedy
consideracion of the Councell, that the Peticion may receive all due
satisfacion and withall convenient speed.” It is impossible not to be
struck by the pressing nature of this recommendation, when it is
considered that the chief petition dealt with a very large and important
political question, and that its signatory was a man wholly unknown in
England. Cromwell’s action can only be explained by the theory that he
was, as I have suggested, the instigator of the whole movement. Whether
the Council were aware of this or not is impossible to say. They had as
yet no decided opinions on the subject, but they saw that it was a large
and difficult question, that its bearings were imperfectly known, and
that its decision, either one way or the other, involved a very serious
responsibility at a time when the religious element wielded so much
power in the country, and withal so capriciously. At the personal
instigation of the Protector, however, they consented to appoint a
committee to consider the petitions. A month later, taking advantage of
a meeting at which Cromwell was not present, the committee verbally
reported, and the Council resolved, that it “saw no excuse to make any
order.”[57]

That Cromwell was disappointed by this result he speedily made clear. In
regard to the Resettlement petition, he did not care to take the
responsibility of giving a decision; but on the other petition he took
immediate steps to afford satisfaction to Dormido, in spite of the
refusal of the Council to have anything to do with it. He addressed an
autograph letter to the King of Portugal, asking him as a personal
favour to restore Dormido’s property, or to make him full compensation
for his losses.[58] Seeing that Dormido was an alien, and had absolutely
no claim on the British Government, this personal intervention by
Cromwell on his behalf affords a further strong presumption of his
privity to the Jewish mission. It is also not a little significant that
a few months later the Protector granted a patent of denization to
Antonio Fernandez Carvajal, the chief of the little Marrano community in
London, and his two sons.[59]

The question was, however, not allowed to rest here. Cromwell wanted an
authoritative decision, which would enable him to do more than merely
protect individual Jews, and it was clear that this could not be
obtained unless a more important person than Dormido were induced to
take the matter in hand. The question had to be raised to a higher
level, and for this purpose it was necessary that it should make some
noise in the country. Only one European Jew had sufficient influence in
England to stimulate the popular imagination, and to justify the
Government in taking serious steps for the solution of the question.
That man was the author of the “Hope of Israel.” In May 1655 it was
decided to send Samuel ben Israel back to Amsterdam to lay the case
before his father, and persuade him to come to London.[60] There is no
mystery as to who suggested this step. Menasseh in his diplomatic way
merely tells us he was informed that his “coming over would not be
altogether unwelcome to His Highness the Lord Protector.”[61] There is,
however, a letter extant from John Sadler to Richard Cromwell, written
shortly after Oliver’s death, in which it is definitely stated that
Menasseh was invited “by some letters of your late royall father.”[62]
Sadler no doubt spoke from personal knowledge, for in 1654 he was acting
as private secretary to the Protector, and the endorsement on Dormido’s
petitions recommending them to the Council bears his signature.[63]
Under these circumstances we can well understand that Menasseh was
induced, as he says, to “conceive great hopes,” and that he resolved to
undertake the journey. In October he arrived in London with the MS. of
his famous “Humble Addresses” in his pocket.

During the five months that Menasseh was preparing for his journey,
Cromwell was not idle. Colonial questions were occupying his mind very
largely, and on these questions he was in the habit of receiving advice
from one at least of the London Marranos, Simon de Caceres, a relative
of Spinoza, and an eminent merchant who had large interests in the West
Indies, and had enjoyed the special favour of the King of Denmark and
the Queen of Sweden.[64] It was no doubt at the instigation of De
Caceres that in April 1655 Cromwell sent a Jewish physician, Abraham de
Mercado, with his son Raphael to Barbados.[65] Later in the year he was
deep in consultation with De Caceres in regard to the defences of the
newly acquired island of Jamaica, and a plan for the conquest of
Chili.[66] The most important result of these confabulations was a
scheme for colonising Surinam (which since 1650 had been a British
colony) with the Jewish fugitives from Brazil, who had been obliged to
leave Pernambuco and Recife through the Portuguese reoccupation of those
towns. The idea was, no doubt, suggested by Dormido, himself one of the
victims of the Portuguese conquest. In order to attract the Jews, they
were granted a charter in which full liberty of conscience was secured
to them, together with civil rights, a large measure of communal
autonomy, and important land grants.[67]

Thus a beginning was made in the solution of the Jewish question by
their admission as citizens to one of the colonial dependencies of Great
Britain. This was the first important step achieved by Cromwell, and it
illustrates at once his deep interest in the Jewish question, and the
practical considerations which actuated him in seeking its solution.


                      IV. THE APPEAL TO THE NATION

On his arrival in London, Menasseh, with his retinue of three
Rabbis,[68] was lodged with much ceremony in one of the houses opposite
the New Exchange, in the then fashionable Strand, the Piccadilly of its
day. These houses were frequented by distinguished strangers who desired
to be near the centre of official life at Whitehall, and the fact that
Menasseh with his slender purse took up his abode in one of them,
instead of seeking hospitality with his brother-in-law or his Marrano
co-religionists in the city, shows at once the importance with which his
mission was invested.[69] He was the guest of the Protector, bidden to
London to discuss high affairs of state, and as such it was obviously
inadmissible that he should be hidden away in some obscure address in an
East-End Alsatia.

His first task after he had settled down in his “study” in the Strand
was to print his “Humble Addresses,” in which he appealed to the
Protector and the Commonwealth to readmit the Jews, and stated the
grounds of his petition. This tract was written and translated into
English long before he left Amsterdam. It had probably been prepared
three years before, when he first received his passes for England. That
it was in existence at a time when his final mission was uncontemplated
is proved by its mention in a list of his works he sent to Felgenhauer
in February 1655 (N.S.).[70] The title is there given as _De Fidelitate
et Utilitate Judaicæ Gentis_, and it is described as _Libellus
Anglicus_. This was nine months before he arrived in London, and three
and a half months before his brother-in-law sent for him. My impression
is that the tract was prepared at the time of the St. John mission in
1651, and that Menasseh had drafted it in accordance with the advice of
Thurloe, who had pointed out that the faithfulness and profitableness of
the Jewish people were likely to weigh more with Cromwell than the
relation of their dispersion to the Messianic Age.

At any rate, the style and matter of the pamphlet are in welcome
contrast to the fantastical theories of the “Hope of Israel,” resembling
more the matter-of-fact petition of Dormido. The Danielic prophecy is,
it is true, still asserted, but only as an aside, the case for the
Readmission being argued almost exclusively on grounds of political
expediency. Incidentally certain floating calumnies against the
Jews—such as their alleged usury, the slaying of infants for the
Passover, and their conversion of Christians—are discussed and refuted.
In regard to the conversion of Christians, Menasseh had completely
changed his attitude since writing the “Hope of Israel,” for in that
work he had boasted of the conversions made by the Jews in Spain.[71]
The prudent restraints Menasseh had imposed upon himself in the
composition of this pamphlet are the more marked, since we know that he
had in no way modified his original views as expounded in the “Hope of
Israel.” This is shown by a letter he wrote to Felgenhauer early in the
year, thanking him for dedicating to him the _Bonum Nuncium Israeli_,
one of the maddest rhapsodies ever written.[72] In this letter he
reiterated all his former views, with the exception of his belief in the
imminence of the Millennium. Nor had he adopted any idea of compromising
the question of the Readmission to meet the prejudices or fears of the
various political and religious factions in England. His demand was for
absolute freedom of ingress and settlement for all Jews and the
unfettered exercise of their religion, “whiles we expect with you the
Hope of Israel to be revealed.” The necessity of such a privilege had
been the more impressed upon him by the renewal of the persecutions of
his co-religionists in Poland, which had sent a great wave of destitute
Jews westward. It was primarily for them and for the Marranos of Spain
and Portugal that he hoped to find an unrestricted asylum in
England.[73]

Until the publication of the “Humble Addresses,” there are but scanty
clues in the printed literature of the time to the frame of mind in
which Menasseh’s mission found the English public. It would seem, from
the silence of the printing-presses, that the nearer the people
approached the Readmission question as a problem of practical politics,
the less enthusiastic they became for its solution. This is not
difficult to understand. The secular Tolerationists were unable to make
headway against the dangers of unlimited sectarianism, to which their
doctrines seemed calculated to open the door. Of their chief exponents,
Roger Williams was in America, John Sadler was muzzled by the
responsibilities of office, and Hugh Peters was without an influential
following. Moreover, the prosecutions of James Naylor and Biddle were
then prominently before the public as a lesson that Toleration had yet
to triumph within the Christian pale. The Conversionists and
Millenarians, who formed the great majority of the Judeophils, and who
included all Menasseh’s own friends except Sadler, attached no
importance to the terms on which the Jews might be admitted, and were
quite willing to acquiesce in legislative restrictions provided only
they were admitted. The Economists and Political Opportunists,
represented by Cromwell, Thurloe, Blake, and Monk,[74] did not dare to
confess their true motives, since their worldly aims would on the one
hand have been condemned by all the religious partisans of the
Readmission, and on the other, would have alarmed the merchants of
London, who had no desire for the commercial competition of a privileged
colony of Hebrew traders.

This discouraging state of affairs was aggravated by foreign and
Royalist intrigues. From the moment Menasseh’s mission was thought of,
the Embassies in London and the Royalist agents set to work to defeat
it. The Embassies, especially that of Holland, opposed it on its true
grounds, as a development of the policy of the Navigation Act.[75] The
Royalists were anxious to defeat it because, as Whitelock says, “it was
a business of much importance to the Commonwealth, and the Protector was
earnestly set upon it.”[76] Moreover, they had hoped to attract the Jews
to their own cause, and they had been encouraged in this hope by the
substantial assistance already rendered to them by wealthy Hebrews, like
the Da Costas and Coronels.[77] An intercepted letter from Sir Edward
Nicholas, Secretary to the exiled King, shows that the highest Royalist
circles took a profound interest in the Jewish question, and made it
their business to be well informed as to its progress. Nicholas, indeed,
seems to have known all about the negotiations which preceded Menasseh’s
journey to England.[78]

As soon as Menasseh reached London, he found himself the object of a
host of calumnious legends, clearly designed by the Royalists and
foreign agents to disturb the public mind. The story that the Jews had
offered to buy St. Paul’s Cathedral and the Bodleian Library, which had
been circulated unheeded in 1649, was revived.[79] One of Menasseh’s
retinue was accused of wishing to identify Cromwell as the Jewish
Messiah, and it was circumstantially stated that he had investigated the
Protector’s pedigree in order to prove his Davidic descent.[80] It was
declared that Cromwell harboured a design to hand over to the Jews the
farming of the customs.[81] At the same time their character was painted
in the darkest colours.[82] One of the most insidious forms that this
campaign took was an attempt to show that the hope of converting the
Jews, by which the larger number of the friends of the Readmission were
actuated, was illusory, and that so far from becoming Christians, the
Jews would “stone Christ to death.” For this purpose the pen of a
converted Jew, named Paul Isaiah, who had served as a trooper in
Rupert’s Horse, was requisitioned.[83] It was a hazardous experiment to
employ Isaiah, for he might easily have been hailed by the
Conversionists as a proof of the convertibility of the Jews. It was,
however, notorious that he had learnt the ethics of the wilder Cavalier
swashbucklers only too well,[84] and he was consequently regarded rather
as an “awful example” of the sort of Jew who might be expected to listen
to the Gospel than as an encouragement to hope for the salvation of the
whole people.

The publication of the “Humble Addresses” only aggravated these popular
misgivings. While the clerical and commercial Anti-Semites disputed all
the propositions of Menasseh’s pamphlet, the visionaries and friends of
Israel strongly resented the “sinfulness” of its insistence on the
profitableness of the Jews. The bias of public feeling, as revealed by
the tracts to which the “Humble Addresses” gave rise, was distinctly
less favourable than in 1649, and was overwhelmingly hostile to an
unreserved acquiescence in the terms of the Jewish petition. In 1649 an
honest attempt to understand Judaism was made, as we may see by the
publication of Chilmead’s translation of Leo de Modena’s _Historia dei
riti ebraici_. There is no trace of an appeal to this or any similarly
authoritative work in 1655–56, except in a stray passage of an isolated
protest against the calumnies heaped on the Jews.[85] On the contrary,
the efforts of the new students of Judaism, like Alexander Ross, were
devoted to proving that the Jews had nothing in common with Christians,
and that their religion “is not founded on Moses and the Law, but on
idle and foolish traditions of the Rabbins”—that it was, in fact, a sort
of Paganism.[86] The historical attacks on the Jews were the most
powerful that had yet been made, while the replies to them were few and
by obscure writers.[87] What is most significant, however, is that the
chief friends of the Jews—the men who had encouraged Menasseh six years
before—were now either silent or openly in favour of restrictions which
would have rendered the Readmission a barren privilege. Sadler did not
reiterate the Judeophil teachings of his “Rights of the Kingdom”; there
was no echo of Hugh Peters’s “Good Work for a Good Magistrate,” with its
uncompromising demand for liberty of conscience; and the pseudonymous
author of “An Apology for the Honourable Nation of Jews,” which had so
strongly impressed the public in 1648, was dumb. John Dury, who had
practically started the first agitation in favour of the Jews, was now
studying Jewish disabilities at Cassel, with a view to their
introduction into England;[88] and Henry Jessey, the author of “The
Glory of Judah and Israel,” to the testimonies of which Menasseh
confidently appealed in the closing paragraph of his “Humble Addresses,”
had been won over to the necessity of restrictions.[89] Not a single
influential voice was raised in England in support of Menasseh’s
proposals, either on the ground of love for the Jews or religious
liberty. The temper of the unlettered people, especially the mercantile
classes, is sufficiently illustrated by the fact that only a few months
before a Jewish beggar had been mobbed in the city, owing to the
inflammatory conduct of a merchant, who had followed the poor stranger
about the Poultry shouting, “Give him nothing; he is a cursed Jew.”[90]

Undeterred by the inhospitable attitude of the public, Menasseh formally
opened his negotiations with the Government of the Commonwealth. His
first step was to pay a visit to Whitehall, and present copies of his
“Humble Addresses” to the Council of State. He was unfortunate in the
day he selected for this visit, for it happened to be one of the rare
occasions when Cromwell was not present at the Council’s deliberations.
The result was that, as on the similar occasion of the consideration of
the report on Dormido’s petition, the Council felt itself free to take
no action. It contented itself with instructing its clerk, Mr. Jessop,
“to go forth and receive the said books,” and then proceeded with other
business.[91]

That the Council had no desire to assume the responsibility of deciding
the thorny Jewish question soon became manifest. A fortnight after
Menasseh’s abortive visit to Whitehall, Cromwell brought down to the
Council a petition which had been handed to him by the Jewish Rabbi, in
which were set forth categorically the several “graces and favours” by
which it was proposed that the Readmission of the Jews should be
effected.[92] The Protector evidently felt none of the misgivings of his
advisers. It is probable, indeed, that in his masterful way he
misunderstood the trend of public feeling. He had convinced himself
that, as an act of policy, some concession to the Jews was desirable.
His strong instinct for religious liberty inclined him favourably to the
more academic aspects of the question, and his profound sympathy with
persecuted peoples had been stirred by the accounts Menasseh had
personally given him of the dire straits of the Jews in Poland, Sweden,
and the Holy Land, and of the cruelties inflicted on them in Spain and
Portugal.[93] Moreover, his patriotism revolted at the idea that
Protestant England should be _particeps criminis_ in a policy of
oppression which was so peculiarly identified with Papistical error.
Thus impressed, he cared little for the outcries of the pamphleteers or
the nervous scruples of his councillors, and he set himself to force on
a prompt solution. At his instance a motion was made “That the Jews
deserving it may be admitted into this nation to trade and traffic and
dwell amongst us as Providence shall give occasion,”[94] and this,
together with the petition of Menasseh and his “Humble Addresses,” was
at once referred to a Committee. At the same time it was made clear to
that body that the Protector expected an early report.[95]

So much is evident from the fact that the Committee met the same
afternoon and reported the next morning. Its task was not an easy one.
The feeling of the Council was by no means hostile to the Jews, but it
had no enthusiasm for their cause, and it probably felt that an
extension of official toleration beyond the limits of Christianity was a
hazardous experiment. On the other hand, it was no longer possible for
it to express this feeling in the same unceremonious fashion as had been
done in the case of Dormido. The Jewish question had become the question
of the day owing to Menasseh’s visit. Public feeling had been deeply
stirred by it, and Cromwell had placed it in the forefront of his
personal solicitude. Some action was necessary. The Committee seems to
have discreetly resolved that the wisest course to pursue was one which
would absolve it of responsibility, and leave Cromwell and the outside
public to fight it out between them. Accordingly it reported that it
felt itself incompetent to offer any advice to the Council, and it
suggested that the views of the nation should be ascertained by the
summoning of a Conference of representative Englishmen who might assist
it in framing a report.

This resolution was duly reported to the Council on the following day,
when Cromwell was again present. How little the Protector estimated the
difficulties in his path is shown by the fact that the Committee’s
recommendation was at once acted upon. John Lisle, Sir Charles Wolseley,
and Sir Gilbert Pickering, three members of the Committee notoriously
devoted to Cromwell, were instructed to meet the Lord President the same
afternoon, and draw up a list of the personages to be summoned to the
proposed Conference.[96] The list was duly presented to the Council on
the following morning, and, under the vigilant eye of the Protector,
approved. At the same time the terms of a circular convening the
Conference were agreed upon, and the 4th December was fixed for the
meeting.[97]

Nothing is more significant than the rapidity with which these steps
were taken. On Tuesday the 13th November Menasseh’s petition was sprung
on the reluctant Council. On the following Thursday summonses to a
National Conference were being sent out from Whitehall, the Council
having meanwhile held three meetings, at all of which the Jewish
question was discussed, and a Committee specially charged with the
question having held two further meetings. In all this we may clearly
trace the personal insistence of the Protector.

Bruited abroad through the congregations of the divines and the
constituents of the politicians and merchants to whom the summonses to
the Conference had been addressed, the question of the Readmission of
the Jews now came to the forefront of national politics. Amid
considerable popular excitement, the Conference met in the Council
Chamber at Whitehall[98] on the first Tuesday in December.

It was a notable gathering—one of the most notable in the whole history
of the Commonwealth. The statesmen present were the most eminent on the
active list of the moment. There was Henry Lawrence, the Lord President,
with four of his civilian colleagues on the Council, Sir Gilbert
Pickering, Sir Charles Wolseley, Lisle the regicide, and Francis Rous.
Close by was Walter Strickland, the diplomatist, who had represented the
Commonwealth at the Hague, and had shared with Oliver St. John the
honours and mortifications of the famous mission of 1651. In the same
inner circle were John Lambert, “the army’s darling,” and one of the
most brilliant of Cromwell’s veterans, and William Sydenham, one of the
founders of the Protectorate. The law was represented by Sir John
Glynne, Chief Justice of the Upper Bench, and William Steele, Chief
Baron of the Exchequer. Lord Chief Justice St. John had also been
invited, but he astutely stayed away. Those who knew St. John must have
regarded his absence as ominous. On behalf of the mercantile community
there appeared Alderman Dethick, the Lord Mayor of London, Alderman
Cressett of the Charterhouse, Alderman Riccards, and Sheriff Thompson.
These men were official nonentities, for the real representatives of
Commerce were Sir Christopher Pack, the late Lord Mayor and the leading
mercantile authority in the country, William Kiffen, the wealthy
merchant-parson, and the regicide Owen Rowe, now deputy-governor of the
Bermuda Company.

It was, however, on the religious side that the Conference was
strongest. Sixteen theologians and divines, the flower of Puritan piety
and learning, responded to Cromwell’s invitation. There was Dr.
Cudworth, Regius Professor of Hebrew, the philosophic opponent of
atheism, whose “Intellectual System” is an English classic. There, too,
were Dr. Owen, most famous of Independent divines and most fearless of
the champions of religious liberty, and John Caryll, the great Puritan
Bible commentator. Oxford University sent Dr. Goodwin, President of
Magdalen College, and Henry Wilkinson, Canon of Christ Church. Cambridge
appeared in the person of the learned Dr. Whitchcote, Provost of King’s.
Among the preachers were William Bridge of Yarmouth; Daniel Dyke, one of
Cromwell’s chaplains in ordinary; Henry Jessey, the Baptist Judeophil
and friend of Menasseh; Thomas Manton, mildest and most genial of
Presbyterians, “the prelate of the Commonwealth,” as Wood calls him; Dr.
Newcomen, one of the authors of “Smectymnuus”; Philip Nye, the sturdy
Independent and champion of toleration; Anthony Tuckney, one of the most
prominent divines of the Westminster Assembly, and three lesser lights,
William Benn of Dorchester, Walter Craddock of All Hallows the Great,
London, and Samuel Fairclough. John Carter, the vehement enemy of
Presbyterianism and monarchy, could not attend, for he was on his
deathbed at Norwich when the invitation reached him.[99]

It is not difficult to see that the Conference had been carefully
organised with a view to a decision favourable to the Jews. The great
majority of the members were conspicuous for their attachment to the
cause of religious toleration, while not a few of the laymen were
equally notorious for their devotion—some for their subservience—to
Cromwell. And yet its upshot proved very different from what the
Protector anticipated.[100]

The first meeting was chiefly concerned with the legal problem. After
the proposals of Menasseh ben Israel had been read, Cromwell himself
laid down the programme of the proceedings in two questions.

(1) Whether it be lawful to receive the Jews?

(2) If it be lawful, then upon what terms is it meet to receive
them?[101]

The first question was purely technical, and only the lawyers were
competent to pronounce an opinion on it. Accordingly, the two Judges
present, Glynne and Steele, were called upon to speak. After an
elaborate review of the status of the Jews in the pre-expulsion period,
and the circumstances under which they were banished in 1290, both
expressed the opinion that “there was no law which forbad the Jews’
return into England.”[102] The grounds of this decision are nowhere
stated. It was probably based on the fact that the banishment in 1290
was an exercise of the royal prerogative in regard to the personal
“chattels” of the King and not an Act of Parliament, and that the force
of the decree expired with the death of Edward I. At any rate, Cromwell
had gained his first point,[103] and he joyfully adjourned the
Conference to the following Friday, adjuring the divines meanwhile to
ponder well the second question.[104]

What happened at the two following meetings, which were held on the 7th
and 12th December,[105] we do not know in detail. The records of the
time only afford us scanty glimpses of the opinions expressed, without
any indication of the days on which they were respectively uttered. It
is clear, however, that the feeling of the clergy turned out to be on
the whole unfavourable to Menasseh’s petition. The calumnies of the
pamphleteers had done their work. The idea of public religious services
at which Christ might be blasphemed stayed the hands of the most
tolerant. Others feared that unrestricted liberty of Jewish worship
would create in the Synagogue a nucleus round which the Judaical
sectaries would rally. Dr. Newcomen drew a harrowing picture of English
converts to Judaism joining the immigrants in offering children to
Moloch.[106] The moderate majority, impressed, probably, by a weighty
and elaborate opinion drawn up by Dr. Barlow, librarian of the Bodleian,
and presented to the Conference by Dr. Goodwin,[107] were strongly in
favour of an admission under severe restrictions. Even the level-headed
Nye, who was ready to tolerate all religious follies so long as they
were peaceable, asked for “due cautions warranted by Holy
Scripture.”[108] It was in vain that Lawrence and Lambert, supported by
the learned commentator Caryll, combated these opinions.[109]

On the eve of the third meeting Cromwell sought to strengthen the
Judeophils by adding to the Conference Hugh Peters, the oldest of the
advocates of unrestricted Readmission, together with his favourite
chaplain, Peter Sterry, and Mr. Bulkeley, the Provost of Eton.[110]
This, however, did not improve matters, for Peters had meanwhile heard
something of the Marranos in London and their papistical dissimulation
of their religion, and he vigorously denounced the Jews as “a
self-seeking generation” who “made but little conscience of their own
principles.”[111] This discourse seems to have produced a considerable
impression on the Conference, for Thurloe, writing to Henry Cromwell on
the 17th, expressed the shrewd opinion that “nothing will be done.”[112]

So far, however, the essential point for which Cromwell had been
striving had not been jeopardised. He was desirous of securing the
admission of the Jews on liberal terms, but at a pinch he would no doubt
have agreed to religious and civil restrictions, provided the commercial
activity of the immigrants was not unduly fettered. Hence the terms
favoured by the majority of the clergy did not trouble him very
seriously.

At the final meeting, which was held on the 18th December,[113] the
commercial question was broached. On this occasion the doors of the
Council Chamber were, for some sinister reason, thrown open to the
public,[114] and an excited crowd, armed with copies of Prynne’s newly
published tract on the Jewish question,[115] collected to hear the
debate. The proceedings were tempestuous from the beginning, and
gradually they took the form of a vehement demonstration against the
Jews. Merchant after merchant rose and violently protested against any
concessions, declaring that the Hebrews were a mean and vicious people,
and that their admission would enrich foreigners and impoverish the
natives.[116] Even strangers took part in these tirades, and a Mr.
Lloyd, who was not a member of the Conference, distinguished himself by
a “fierce” harangue.[117] The climax was reached when Sir Christopher
Pack, the most eminent citizen of his day, and a devoted adherent of the
Protector, ranged himself with the opponents of Menasseh, in an address
which is said to have been the most impressive delivered during the
whole course of the Conference.[118]

The advocates of out-and-out exclusion were, however, as little likely
to carry the day as the champions of unrestricted admission, for the
majority of the members of the Conference were divines who were anxious
that the Jews should be converted, and for that reason desired that they
should be somehow or other brought into the country. Moreover, since the
decision of the Judges, the question was no longer whether exclusion
should be persisted in, but only on what terms admission should be
sanctioned. This was probably pointed out to the merchants, and an
attempt to arrive at a compromise was made. After some private
confabulations, Henry Jessey rose to announce the terms that had been
agreed upon. The appearance of Jessey, the profound Rabbinical student,
the friend of Menasseh, and one of the veterans of the Readmission
cause, seemed to betoken a Jewish victory. What must have been the
astonishment of his friends when he stated, with naïve satisfaction,
that the basis of the compromise was that the Jews should only be
admitted to decayed ports and towns, and that they should pay double
customs duties on their imports and exports![119]

Cromwell now saw his whole scheme crumbling to pieces. That, if put to
the vote, Jessey’s compromise would be adopted by an overwhelming
majority was patent to everybody. In that case not only would the
commercial design which Cromwell had at heart be defeated, but the
Marranos in London, who had served him so well, would be practically
banished. At all hazards a vote had to be prevented.[120] Cromwell acted
with characteristic promptness and audacity. Rising from the chair of
state, he addressed the Assembly. Ingeniously ignoring the proposed
compromise, he began his speech with a review of the differences of
opinion revealed by the various speakers. They were, he scornfully
declared, a babel of discordances. He had hoped that the Preachers would
have given him some clear and practical advice, but they had only
multiplied his doubts. Protesting that he had no engagements to the Jews
but what the Scriptures held forth, he insisted that “since there was a
promise of their conversion, means must be used to that end, which was
the preaching of the Gospel, and that could not be done unless they were
permitted to dwell where the Gospel was preached.” Then, turning to the
merchants, he harped sarcastically on the accusations they had brought
against the Jews. “You say they are the meanest and most despised of all
people. So be it. But in that case what becomes of your fears? Can you
really be afraid that this contemptible and despised people should be
able to prevail in trade and credit over the merchants of England, the
noblest and most esteemed merchants of the whole world?” It was clear,
he added sharply, that no help was to be expected from the Conference,
and that he and the Council would have to take their own course. He
hoped he should do nothing foolishly or rashly, and he asked now only
that the Conference would give him the benefit of their prayers, so that
he might be directed to act for the glory of God and the good of the
nation.[121] So saying, he vacated the chair in token that the
proceedings were at an end.

The speech was a fighting speech, delivered with great animation, and is
said to have been one of the best Cromwell ever made.[122] It achieved
its object, for the Conference broke up without a word of protest, and
the crowds dispersed in cowed silence. Cromwell left the Council Chamber
in a towering passion, and it was some days before he recovered his
equanimity.[123]

The battle was, however, not yet over. Cromwell had dismissed the
Conference, but the Committee of the Council of State had yet to report.
It could not well, in sober writing, take the view of the Protector’s
strategic speech, nor could it ignore the instruction of the Council to
which it owed its existence. Accordingly it set itself to the drafting
of a report which should express the obvious views of the Conference
without conflicting too violently with Cromwell’s equally obvious
design. The report accepted the view of the Judges that there was no law
against the Readmission, and then proceeded to set forth under six heads
the views urged by the Conference, including the view of the merchants,
that “great prejudice is likely to arise to the natives of this
Commonwealth in matters of trade.” Finally, it laid down seven
conditions, apparently borrowed from Barlow’s opinion,[124] by which the
Readmission should be governed. The Jews should have no autonomous
jurisdiction; they should be forbidden from blaspheming Christ; they
should not profane the Christian Sabbath; they should have no Christian
servants; they should be ineligible for public office; they should print
nothing against Christianity, and they should not discourage those who
might attempt to convert them, while the making of converts by them
should be prohibited. No restriction on their trading was
suggested.[125]

What became of this document is not clear. A clean copy of it, undated
and unendorsed, is preserved in the State Papers, but there is no
reference to it in the Order Book of the Council of State.[126] And yet
it is certain that the Committee presented it to the Council, for the
Conference was only a means of enlightening the Committee, and the
Council still looked to it for advice. It is probable that it was never
formally accepted by the Council. When it was in due course brought up,
Cromwell most likely objected to its presentation. After his experience
of the Conference, it was clear to him that whatever was done would have
to be done more or less unofficially. The acceptance of the report would
have involved legislation, in which case the proceedings of the
Conference would have been repeated in a form far more difficult to
control, and perhaps impossible to defeat. Gratified by the omission of
trade restrictions from the report, and feeling the necessity of
retaining the support of the Council in the further steps he might take,
the Protector probably assured them that he was in agreement with them
on most points, and that he would do nothing unwarranted by the views
they had expressed. At the same time he doubtless pointed out that many
other important questions claimed the attention of Parliament, and that
it would be well if men’s minds were not further disturbed by the Jewish
question. Accordingly he advised that the report should be ignored and
the matter allowed to drop.[127]

Here the question rested at the end of 1655. The result was not
encouraging, but at any rate one important point had been gained. The
prevailing idea that the incoming of Jews and their sojourn in the land
were illegal had been completely and finally shattered. This was the
thin end of the wedge, and it had been so securely driven in, that John
Evelyn entered in his Diary under date of December 14th: “Now were the
Jews admitted.”[128]


                          V. CROMWELL’S ACTION

Had the Diarist waited until the close of the Whitehall Conferences he
would probably have modified his opinion. Although the technical
question of the right of incoming had been decided, the cause of the
Readmission had not been materially advanced. The universal demand for
restrictions rendered it impossible for the Jews to avail themselves of
their legal right without an assurance of protection from the
Government. As late as the following April no complete settlement on
this point had been reached, for in the passage from the _Vindiciæ_
already quoted, Menasseh wrote on the 10th of that month, “As yet we
have had no finall determination from his most Serene Highnesse.”[129]

What happened after the Conferences is somewhat obscure, owing to the
reticence of the public records on the Jewish question. It is certain,
however, that before Cromwell’s death a favourable decision was arrived
at, and that an organised Jewish community came into the light of day in
London, protected by definite rights of residence, worship, and trade.
This is proved by the petitions for the re-expulsion of the Jews
presented to Charles II. on his arrival in London in 1660, and
especially by a statement in a petition of the Lord Mayor and Aldermen
of the City of London, that “in that grand Complicacon of mischeifs
brought on yo^r Ma^{ties} good subjects by y^e corrupt interest of the
late usurper _y^e admission of Jews to a free cohabition and trade in
these dominions_ was found to be a most heavy pressure on yo^r
Peticon^{rs.}”[130]

How had this free settlement been brought about? It is not altogether
impossible to reconstruct the story, although the materials are scanty
and vague.

Cromwell’s parting speech to the Whitehall Assembly, and the continued
residence of Menasseh in London, must have excited apprehension among
the extreme Judeophobes. The decision of the Judges and the Protector’s
threat that he and the Council would take their own course rendered a
formal proclamation of Readmission by no means improbable. On the other
hand, the great bulk of the nation had shown itself unfavourable to the
scheme, and there was just a chance that this might stay Cromwell’s
hand. This popular ill-feeling the anti-Semitic pamphleteers now set
themselves to inflame. It was probably hoped by this means, if not to
intimidate the Protector, at any rate to strengthen the Council in their
resistance to his original programme.

The new year had scarcely dawned when the indefatigable pen of Prynne
was again at work on an enlarged edition of his “Demurrer.” In this work
he especially devoted himself to the legal question, amplifying by some
twenty pages his argument that the expulsion by Edward I. remained
valid, and could only be reversed by an Act of Parliament. In February
he published Part II. of the “Demurrer,” containing a further instalment
of documents relating to the history of the Jews in England in the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The object of this work, which is a
monument of research, and which until a generation ago was the chief
printed source of our knowledge of the mediæval history of the English
Jews, was to show that the Jews had never lived in England except under
severe disabilities, and that they were a people of phenomenal
viciousness, clippers of coin, crucifiers of children, and the
blaspheming devotees of a ghastly blood cultus. Less learned, but not
less virulent, was Alexander Ross, whose calumnious “View of the Jewish
Religion” was published about the same time. Several anonymous
pamphleteers followed suit. The campaign does not seem to have excited
much agitation, but it probably had the effect of deciding Cromwell not
to attempt a public solution of the question in the sense of his own
private wishes and of Menasseh’s petition.

All that was urgent he had, indeed, already done. Shortly after the
termination of the Whitehall Conferences he had verbally assured the
London Marranos of his personal protection, and had given them
permission to celebrate divine worship after the Jewish fashion, on
condition that the services were held in private houses.[131] These
favours were conveyed through John Sadler, no doubt in order to avoid
any further apprehensions of a reopening of the Jewish question that
might be aroused by granting an audience to Menasseh. The restriction in
regard to the privacy of the services shows that Cromwell had definitely
resolved to adhere to his compromise with the Council and to respect the
spirit of their report. Legally the Jews were entitled to celebrate
divine worship in public, for, by the repeal of the Recusancy Acts by
the Long Parliament in 1650, the practice of every kind of religious
duty, “either of prayer, preaching, reading or expounding the
Scriptures,” had been legalised, the celebration of mass being alone
excepted.[132] It would, however, have been dangerous for the Jews to
claim this right, and Cromwell no doubt pointed out to them that, in
that case, it would be necessary to apply to Parliament for legislation,
which could only have taken the form of enacting the oppressive
recommendations of the Whitehall Conferences. Under these circumstances
the Marranos could not but acquiesce. That their desire for synagogue
services was entirely due to their Jewish piety, or was animated by a
craving for martyrdom, is, moreover, very unlikely. The outbreak of war
with Spain had rendered it impossible for them to continue, in their
guise of _Nuevos Cristianos_, to attend the services in the Spanish
Ambassador’s chapel, and as they were bound by the Act of 1650 to resort
to some place “where the service or worship of God is exercised,” they
were confronted by the necessity of either posing as pseudo-Protestants
or frankly practising Judaism. The former course was out of the
question, especially after Hugh Peters’s condemnation of their hypocrisy
at Whitehall. Hence their request to be permitted to worship as Jews. By
Cromwell’s acquiescence in this request and his promise of protection a
secret beginning in the way of Readmission had been informally
accomplished.

This arrangement was, however, not destined to endure. It was an evasion
of the will of the Whitehall Conferences—an attempt, as Graetz has well
said, to readmit the Jews “nicht durch das grosse Portal sondern durch
eine Hinterthür.”[133] It was condemned to failure, too, because its
secret could not be kept. Even before the end of 1655 Cromwell’s
intentions were known. In a scrap of a Royalist letter of intelligence,
dated December 31, and preserved in the State Papers, the writer says,
“The Jews, we hear, will be admitted by way of connivancy, though the
generality oppose.”[134] The secret arrangement with regard to divine
worship was also soon bruited abroad. In a despatch dated January 28,
1656, Salvetti, the diplomatic agent of the Grand Duke of Tuscany,
informed his master that “the affair of the Jews continues in the state
I have already described; meanwhile they may meet privately in their
houses, but they have not yet established a synagogue.”[135] In a later
despatch (February 4) he confirms this information and amplifies it. “It
is thought,” he writes, “that the Protector will not make any
declaration in their favour, but tacitly he will connive at their
holding private conventicles, which they already do, in their houses in
order to avoid public scandal.”[136]

From the Royalist spies and the diplomatists the news was quickly
conveyed to the anti-Semites in the City. Although the dangers of a
Jewish immigration _en masse_ and the scandal of a public synagogue had
been averted, the enemies of the Jews—especially their competitors in
trade—were not inclined to acquiesce without a struggle in the tacit
toleration of even a small community of Hebrew merchants. But what could
be done? As Jews the position of the intruders was legal, and any
attempt to persecute them in that capacity would probably be resented in
a disagreeable fashion by the masterful Protector. Moreover, as the most
serious evils of the Jewish problem had been provided against, and the
public mind was preoccupied with the war with Spain, it might be
difficult to enlist a large measure of support in an agitation against
the strangers. An opportunity for showing their teeth soon presented
itself to the City merchants, and they were not slow to avail themselves
of it.

Early in March 1656 a proclamation was issued by the Privy Council
declaring all Spanish monies, merchandise, and shipping to be lawful
prize. The ink of this document was scarcely dry—indeed it had not been
formally published—when, on the denunciation of an informer, the house
of Don Antonio Rodrigues Robles, a wealthy Spanish merchant and Marrano
of Duke’s Place, City, was entered by bailiffs armed with a Privy
Council warrant instructing them to “seize, secure, and keep under safe
custody all the goods and papers therein found.” On the same day the
Commissioners of Customs, acting under a similar warrant, took
possession of two ships in the Thames, the _Two Brothers_ and the
_Tobias_, which were believed to be Robles’s property.[137] On the face
of it, this action seemed to have no connection with the Jewish
question. The fact that the information on which the warrants were based
was presented to the Council by so staunch a friend of the Jews as
Thurloe suffices to show that its Jewish bearing was at first quite
unsuspected. It was apparently the private enterprise of a perfidious
scrivener named Francis Knevett, who, after obtaining the confidence of
several members of the Marrano community in his professional capacity,
had discovered that under the new proclamation he might betray them with
advantage to himself.[138] This seems also to have been the view of
Robles, for in a petition he immediately addressed to the Protector he
disputed the validity of the seizures on the purely legal ground that he
was a Portuguese and not a Spaniard, and that his rights as a Merchant
Stranger, which were consequently unaffected by the war with Spain, had
been unjustly invaded.[139] On this point the Council, to whom the
petition was referred, ordered an inquiry, and one of its members,
Colonel Jones, was deputed to take evidence.

Meanwhile some suspicion that the case was aimed at the newly acquired
privileges of the Marranos seems to have got abroad. Many of the Jews in
London were of Spanish birth, and others, though natives of Portugal,
were probably endenizened Spaniards, since in their guise of _Nuevos
Cristianos_ they had held high office under the King of Spain.[140] It
was clear, then, that if the case against Robles was established other
prosecutions would follow, and in that way the small Jewish community
would be broken up. The danger was all the greater since the protection
and privileges so recently acquired by the Jews had only been granted
verbally, and might easily be repudiated if public opinion proved too
strong for the Protector. There was, however, no immediate reason why
the leading Marranos, who had hitherto been in negotiation with
Cromwell, should take up Robles’s cudgels, for he belonged to a party in
the Synagogue which had imbibed strong Royalist sympathies in Holland
and France, and which, consequently, had kept itself aloof from
Menasseh’s Readmission campaign. They accordingly confined themselves to
the presentation of a petition to the Protector, in which they asked
that the “favours and protection” accorded to them, including the right
of worship, might be confirmed in writing. At the same time they prayed
for a license to acquire ground for a Jewish cemetery. This document was
signed by Menasseh ben Israel, Antonio Fernandez Carvajal, and five
other Marranos, but Robles was not among its signatories.[141]

Cromwell at once referred this petition to the Council, but the Lord
President, apparently recognising that the Jewish question was coming up
in a new form, held it back until the Robles case had been dealt
with.[142] The fact that Robles was a Jew had, indeed, already been
ascertained, and the belief that the prosecution was aimed at all his
co-religionists was gaining ground owing to a new outburst of activity
on the part of the anti-Semites. The anxiety of the Marranos at the
shelving of their petition became accentuated by this agitation, and
especially by the doubts which it seemed to be producing in the minds of
some of their best friends. The wavering feeling in high places was made
disagreeably manifest to them by a letter addressed to Menasseh ben
Israel by John Sadler, in which that friend of the Jews pointed out that
the charges of ritual murder and _quasi_ idolatry preferred by Prynne
and Ross were being widely discussed, and that a public answer to them
was urgently necessary.[143] Before Menasseh’s reply was written Colonel
Jones presented an interim report to the Council, from which it appeared
_inter alia_ that Knevett had filed a further information denouncing
other Marranos as Spanish subjects.[144]

It was now no longer possible to ignore the existence of an anti-Jewish
conspiracy. The first action of the Jews was to hurry forward the
publication of Menasseh’s reply to Prynne and Ross. This took the form
of the famous _Vindiciæ Judæorum_—the third tract printed in the present
volume. It was described merely as “A Letter in Answer to certain
Questions propounded by a Noble and Learned Gentleman touching the
reproaches cast on the Nation of the Jewes.” The date of its appearance,
however, fixes its relation to the Robles crisis, for it was published
ten days after Colonel Jones’s report, while the seriousness of that
crisis is strikingly illustrated by the urgent and earnest tone of the
pamphlet. Menasseh evidently felt that not only his own grandiose idea
of a new asylum for Israel was at stake, but that even the small
progress that had been achieved towards that end was threatened by a
more rigid exclusion of the Hebrew nation. He threw his whole soul into
this fresh vindication of his people and their claims. Nothing, indeed,
that had come from his facile pen had been more dignified, more
impressive, more convincing. The vanity, the superficiality, the
pretentious mysticism of his former works had gone. He was no longer
playing a part even to himself. He was merely the champion of his people
in a moment of their sore trial, writing from a heart whose every throb
was for their welfare and their honour. The simple eloquence of this
essay, its naïve garrulousness, the glimpses it yields of a pious,
gentle, self-denying character, made it one of the most effective
vindications of the Jews ever written. The best tribute to its value is
afforded by the fact that it has since been frequently reprinted in all
parts of Europe when the calumnies it denounced have been revived.

The _Vindiciæ Judæorum_ was a fitting prelude to the dénouement that
followed. With this certificate in their hands the Marranos felt that
they might risk claiming their legal rights as Jews, and thus at once
repudiate their Spanish nationality and challenge a settlement of their
status in the country. The decision was a bold one, but there was shrewd
method in its apparent rashness. If the Marranos were technically
Spanish subjects, they were in reality testimonies to the intolerance of
Spain which made that country, in Cromwell’s words, “the natural, the
providential enemy of England,”[145] and which was one of the grounds of
the war. Like the Protestant traders whose liberty of conscience had
been trampled on in Spain they also had been persecuted, though in a
worse form. They were fugitives from the Inquisition, and consequently
had a peculiar claim on the indulgence and consistency of the English
people, who at that moment were filled with righteous horror at the
religious policy of the “Popish enemy.”

In pursuance of this idea Robles now addressed a fresh petition to the
Protector, which reached the Council of State on the 15th April,[146]
five days after the publication of the _Vindiciæ_. In this document the
purely legal question of nationality was dropped, and Robles confined
himself to reciting how he and his kindred had been persecuted by the
Inquisition in Portugal and Spain, how his father had died under
torture, how his mother had been crippled for life, and other members of
his family burnt or sent to the galleys because they were Jews. He
related that he had sought refuge in England, “intending therein to
shelter himselfe from those tiranicall Proceedings and injoy those
Beneffitts and Kindnesse which this Com̄onw^{th} ever aforded to
aflicted strangers.” He appealed to Cromwell’s notorious sympathy for
“afflicted ones,” and especially “owr nation the Jews,” and skilfully
suggested that a continuance of his prosecution would be tantamount to
the introduction of the Inquisition into England. A week later
affidavits confirming the statements in this petition were signed by all
the leading Marranos and handed to Colonel Jones.[147] Thus the
Crypto-Jews threw off their disguise. In the investigations which
followed, the existence of over twenty Jewish families in London was
revealed, and it was given in evidence that many of them had resided for
years in the country.

These tactics produced dismay in the ranks of the anti-Semites. Knevett
made a last despairing effort to construct a fresh case against the Jews
by trying to bribe Robles’s servants to assist him in framing a new
information. In this he failed.[148] The case was now quickly disposed
of. On April 25th the Council of State, still anxious to avoid
responsibility for a decision, sent all the papers to the Admiralty
Commissioners, with a request for a prompt report. On May 11th the
Commissioners summoned the witnesses before them, but extracted little
else from them than that Robles was believed to be Portuguese, and that
they were all victims of the Inquisition. On May 14th the Commissioners
reported that they were unable to give a definite opinion on the
question of nationality. Two days later the Council screwed up their
courage to a decision, and, without giving any reasons, ordered all the
warrants to be discharged, and reinstated Robles in the possession of
his goods, premises, and ships.[149]

The Jewish battle was won, and nothing now remained but to secure the
fruits of victory in an inexpugnable form. What followed is, in detail,
a matter of conjecture, but the broad lines of the settlement we know
from the petition of the Corporation of the City of London, already
quoted. Rights of “cohabitation and trade in these dominions” were
formally accorded to the Jews in writing.[150] That this happened before
the end of 1656 we may gather from a statement of Cromwell’s intimate
friend, Samuel Richardson, who, in his “Plain Dealing,” published in
that year, says of the Protector, “He hath owned the poor despised
people of God, and advanced many of them to a better way and means of
living.”[151] The first steps were probably taken on the 26th June, when
the longdeferred petition of the Marranos for a license to acquire a
burial-ground and for a confirmation in writing of their rights of
residence and worship came up for consideration.[152] The Council, still
reluctant to engage their responsibility, made no entry of the
discussion in their Order Book, and it was probably arranged that
Cromwell should personally confirm the Jewish right of residence,
subject to an understanding that the spirit of the recommendations
presented to the Council after the Whitehall Conferences should be
observed. The right to acquire a cemetery was certainly granted.
Cromwell probably further engaged himself to instruct the London city
authorities to place no impediments in the way of the Jews trading on an
equality with other citizens.[153] On their side, the Marranos must have
agreed not to assist in an indiscriminate immigration of their
co-religionists, not to obtrude their worship and ceremonies on the
public, not to engage in religious controversy, and not to make
converts.[154] The restriction with regard to worshipping in private
houses was also probably revised, and the maintenance of a synagogue,
subject to the other conditions, sanctioned.[155] In February 1657
Antonio de Carvajal and another leading Marrano, Simon de Caceres,
signed the lease for a Jewish cemetery in Mile End.[156] Shortly
afterwards another result of the settlement was made public. Solomon
Dormido, a son of David Abarbanel Dormido and nephew of Menasseh ben
Israel, was admitted to the Royal Exchange as a duly licensed broker of
the City of London, the authorities waiving in his favour the
Christological oath essential to the induction of all brokers.[157] As
wholesale trading in the City was transacted exclusively through
brokers, the admission of a Jew to that limited fraternity is a
substantial proof of the acquisition of untrammelled trading rights by
the new community.

The victory, it will be observed, secured to the local Marranos all they
required, and in a measure realised the aims of Cromwell’s own policy.
To Menasseh ben Israel, however, it was no victory: it was a compromise
of a purely selfish nature, which left his idea of a proclamation of a
free asylum to the persecuted and scattered remnants of Israel as remote
as ever. We may be certain that he did not hide his grief or his
indignation. There is indeed abundant reason for believing that he
quarrelled over it with the new Jewish community. His hopes of returning
to his old position in Amsterdam were shattered, for the Dutch Jews, who
had always shared the Stuart sympathies of their Christian compatriots,
had formally abandoned him when they found they had nothing to gain from
his mission, and had opened negotiations on their own behalf with the
exiled king at Bruges.[158] He might, perhaps, have secured his future
by becoming Rabbi of the London community had he been content to abide
by the terms of the new settlement. This, however, he sturdily refused,
and although he was deserted by all his friends, and his monetary
resources were exhausted, he continued from his lodging in the Strand to
urge on Cromwell the issue of the proclamation on which he had set his
heart.

That he must have quarrelled with the London Marranos immediately after
the settlement is shown by a letter he addressed to Cromwell towards the
end of 1656, in which he asked for pecuniary help, and stated that he
(the Protector) was “the alone succourer of my life in this land of
strangers.”[159] Cromwell responded with a gift of £25, and in the
following March granted him a pension of £100 a year, dating from
February, and payable quarterly.[160] Unfortunately this pension was
never paid, and Menasseh became overwhelmed with cares.[161]
Nevertheless, for six months longer he doggedly pursued his mission. In
September 1657 his only surviving son, Samuel ben Israel, who had
remained with him in England, died.[162] Then his spirit broke. Begging
a few pounds from the Protector[163] he turned his steps homewards,
carrying with him the corpse of his son.

A broken and beggared man he met his family at Middelburg, in Zeeland.
He was now bent with premature age. The comely, good-tempered face, with
its quizzing eyes and dandyish moustache, so familiar to us in
Rembrandt’s etching, had become hollow-cheeked and hollow-eyed. From the
crow’s-feet under the temples the whiskers had grown wildly until they
formed a white patriarchal beard.[164] It was the wintering touch of the
hand of death. Two months later Menasseh died of a broken heart at the
house of his brother-in-law, Ephraim Abarbanel, in the fifty-third year
of his age.[165]


                        VI. THE REAL “VINDICIÆ”

One more question remains to be elucidated. How did the seemingly
precarious settlement of the London Jews manage to survive the wreck of
the Commonwealth?

Both Menasseh and Cromwell had builded more solidly than they knew. If
the solution of the Jewish question arrived at towards the end of 1656
was not wholly satisfactory, it was precisely in that fact that its real
strength lay. Experimental compromise is the law of English political
progress. From the strife of wills represented in its extremer forms by
Cromwell’s lofty conception of religious liberty on the one hand, and by
the intolerance of the sectaries on the other, had emerged a compromise
which conformed to this law, and which consequently made the final
solution of the question an integral part of English political
evolution. The great merit of the settlement was that while it disturbed
little, it gave the Jews a future in the country on the condition that
they were fitted to possess it.

The fact that in its initial stage it disturbed so little rendered it
easy for Charles II. to connive at it. Had Menasseh ben Israel’s idea
been realised in its entirety, the task of the restored Monarchy would
have been more difficult. London would have been overrun by destitute
Polish and Bohemian Jews driven westward by persecution, some
fanaticised by their sufferings, others plying the parasitic trades into
which commercial and industrial disabilities had driven the denizens of
the Central European Jewries.[166] Many of them would have become
identified with the wild Judaical sectaries who were the bitterest
enemies of the Stuarts, while the others would have given new life to
the tradition of Jewish usury, which for nearly four hundred years had
been only an historical reminiscence in the country. Under these
circumstances, we can well conceive that a re-expulsion of the Jews
might have been one of the first tasks of the Restoration.

From this calamity England and the Jews were saved by the restricted
character of the compromise of 1656. When the Commonwealth fell to
pieces the Jewish community of London consisted only of some forty or
fifty families of wealthy and enterprising merchants, scarcely
distinguishable in their bearing and mode of life from the best kinds of
merchant-strangers hailing from Amsterdam, Bordeaux, Lisbon, Cadiz, and
Leghorn.

Nevertheless, efforts to procure their expulsion were not wanting.
Royalists who recognised in them a relic of the hated Commonwealth,
merchants whose restricted economic science resented their activity and
success, and informers who imagined that their toleration was a
violation of English law, set to work early to denounce them. These
manœuvres began, indeed, as soon as the breath was out of Cromwell’s
body. Only a few weeks after the Protector’s death a petition was
presented to Richard Cromwell demanding the expulsion of the Jews and
the confiscation of their property.[167] At the same time, Thomas
Violet, the notorious informer and pamphleteer, made a collection of
documents bearing on the illegality of the Jewish settlement, which he
submitted to Mr. Justice Tyril, together with an application that the
law should be set in motion against the intrusive community. The worthy
Justice shrewdly suggested to Mr. Violet that in the then confused
political situation he would do well to take no action. It would, he
opined, be only prudent to await the establishment of a stable
Government before moving in so serious a matter.

A few months later Charles II. re-entered London, and the Commonwealth
was at an end. Naturally, everybody looked to the new régime to redress
the particular grievance or grievances he harboured against “the late
execrable Usurper,” and the anti-Jewish party was particularly prompt in
its representations under this head. Scarcely had Charles arrived in the
Metropolis when the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London
presented to him a humble petition, bitterly complaining of the action
of Cromwell in permitting the Jews to re-enter the land, and asking the
King “to cause the former laws made against the Jews to be put in
execution, and to recommend to your two Houses of Parliament to enact
such new ones for the expulsion of all professed Jews out of your
Majesty’s dominions, and to bar the door after them with such provisions
and penalties, as in your Majesty’s wisdom should be found most
agreeable to the benefits of religion, the honour of your Majesty, and
the good and welfare of your subjects.”[168] The long pent-up wrath of
the City found full expression in this petition, which must be read in
its entirety to be appreciated. Thomas Violet followed with another
petition, which was equally violent.[169] He declared that by law it was
a felony for any Jew to be found in England. He did not, however,
propose their expulsion, as he did not think that would be the best way
of turning them to profitable account. His suggestion was in the first
place that all their estates and properties should be confiscated, and
then that they should be cast into prison and kept there until ransomed
by their wealthy brethren abroad. A third petition, dated November 30,
1660, is preserved among the Domestic State Papers, but the names of the
authors are not given. It runs very much on the lines of the City
petition, but it admits the hypothesis of Jews residing in England under
license, provided they were heavily taxed.[170]

No direct reply to any of these petitions is recorded. The views of the
new Government are, however, no mystery. In the first place, there was
no real Jewish question in the country, inasmuch as the Jews were very
few, their character was above reproach, and the practice of their
religion was conducted with so much tact and prudence that it was
impossible in sober truth to be moved by Violet’s impassioned complaint
of “a great dishonour of Christianity and public scandal of the true
Protestant religion.”[171] Consequently the Government were free to
consider the question exclusively from the point of view of secular
politics. Once regarded in this light the conclusion could not be long
in doubt. Cromwell’s maritime and commercial policy had been adopted by
the statesmen of the Restoration, and the success of this
policy—represented by the re-enacted Navigation Act—depended to no
inconsiderable extent on toleration of the Jews.

Moreover, Charles was under personal obligations to the Jews, and had
assured them of his protection even before he came by his own. The Jews
of Amsterdam, and some of the wealthier Jews in London, had assisted him
during his exile, especially the great family of Mendez da Costa and
Augustin Coronel, the agent for Portugal and a personal friend of
Monk.[172] Shortly after the mission of Menasseh ben Israel to Cromwell
these Jews had approached Charles II. at Bruges and had assured him that
they had neither assisted nor approved the Rabbi’s negotiations.
Thereupon General Middleton had been instructed to treat with them for
their support to the Royalist cause, and Charles had promised that “they
shall find when God shall restore his Majesty that he would extend that
protection to them which they could reasonably expect, and abate that
rigour of the law which was against them in his several dominions.”[173]
That these negotiations were not without practical result is beyond
question, for the Da Costas and Coronels, as well as several other
Jewish families, were exceedingly active on Charles’s behalf during the
last few years of the Commonwealth.

It must not be imagined that this Royalist activity represented any
double-dealing on the part of the Jews. Those who, like Carvajal and De
Caceres, had fled direct from the Inquisition to England, were faithful
to Cromwell to the end. The Royalist Jews were men who had acquired
their Cavalier sympathies in France and Holland, and shared them with
their Christian fellow-citizens in those countries. None of them were
parties to the negotiations with Cromwell in 1655–56, and none had ever
affected Puritan sympathies. They probably had conscientious objections
to Republicanism, for they were of the aristocratic Sephardi branch of
Israel, with some of the bluest blood of Spain in their veins and
immense wealth in their strong-boxes. Their dissent from their Puritan
brethren was an early illustration of the falsity of the hypothesis of
Jewish political solidarity, which is to this day a cherished delusion
of the anti-Semites.

Charles II. did not confine himself to ignoring the anti-Semitic
petitions. Having made up his mind that the Jews should be protected, he
sought, like Cromwell, to throw the responsibility for his decision on
the Constitutional Government. Before the end of 1660 an Order of the
Lords in Council was sent to the House of Commons, recommending that
measures should be taken for the protection of the Jews.[174] There is
no record of any such measures having been adopted. It was probably felt
that the most convenient course to pursue was to continue the policy of
personal connivance inaugurated by Cromwell, as by that means men’s
minds would be least disturbed, and an experiment which was likely to
produce good results would not be hampered. Moreover, should the
experiment fail, it would be all the easier to deal with it if it had
not received any legislative sanction.

Accordingly, the Jews passed from the personal protection of Cromwell to
that of Charles. In 1664, when an attempt was made by the Earl of
Berkshire and Mr. Ricaut to obtain their expulsion, the King in Council
disavowed the scheme, and assured the Jews “that they may promise
themselves the effects of the same favour as formerly they have had so
long as they demean themselves peaceably and quietly with due obedience
to his Majesty’s laws and without scandal to his Government.[175]” A
similar course was taken by the Privy Council in 1673 and 1685, when
attempts were made by informers to prosecute the Jews for the exercise
of their religion.[176] Finally the King marked his personal gratitude
to the Jews by knighting Coronel soon after the Restoration, and by a
generous distribution of patents of denization among the members of the
Synagogue.[177]

Thus the Cromwellian settlement was confirmed, and the path was
definitely opened by which the Jews might win their way to the
citizenship of the United Kingdom.

How that path was successfully trodden is a story which cannot be told
in detail here. Its main feature, however, must be briefly referred to,
for it supplies the justification for the campaign which Menasseh ben
Israel and Oliver Cromwell waged so gallantly on behalf of the Hebrew
people in the first half of the seventeenth century.

The Jews won their way to English citizenship not because they remained
the _servi cameræ_, which had been their status under the Norman and
Angevin kings, and which they had practically resumed under the
Protectorate and the Restoration, but because they literally realised
the portraiture of the Hebrew citizen which Menasseh ben Israel vainly
placed before the British nation in 1655 in his tract, _De Fidelitate et
utilitate Judaicæ Gentis_. In this way they gradually substituted for
the personal protection of the Crown the sympathy and confidence of the
nation.

Their old enemies in the City of London were their first converts. The
wealth they brought into the country, and their fruitful commercial
activity, especially in the colonial trade, soon revealed them as an
indispensable element of the prosperity of the City.[178] As early as
1668 Sir Josiah Child, the millionaire governor of the East India
Company, pleaded for their naturalisation on the score of their
commercial utility.[179] For the same reason the City found itself
compelled at first to connive at their illegal representation on
’Change, and then to violate its own rules by permitting them to act as
brokers without previously taking up the Freedom.[180] At this period
they controlled more of the foreign and colonial trade than all the
other alien merchants in London put together. The momentum of their
commercial enterprise and stalwart patriotism proved irresistible. From
the Exchange to the City Council Chamber, thence to the Aldermanic
Court, and eventually to the Mayoralty itself, were inevitable stages of
an emancipation to which their large interests in the City and their
high character entitled them. Finally the City of London—not only as the
converted champion of religious liberty but as the convinced apologist
of the Jews—sent Baron Lionel de Rothschild to knock at the doors of the
unconverted House of Commons as parliamentary representative of the
first city in the world.

Jewish emancipation in England was, in short, the work of the English
democracy—almost of the same democracy which in the thirteenth century
had spued the Hebrews forth, when their kingly protectors had made their
residence in the land conditional on their acting as the usurious
instruments of the Royal Exchequer, and which in the seventeenth had
resented their readmission under the influence of deeply rooted
prejudices, inherited from that dark age. It was no mere homage to the
abstract principle of Religious Liberty like the emancipations on the
Continent which, in the name of the Rights of Man, suddenly called forth
the oppressed Jews from their Ghettos and bade them take up a new life,
from which they were sundered by centuries of mediæval seclusion.
Religious Liberty in England broadened on more cautious lines.
Dissenters, Roman Catholics, and Jews have each been taken into the
bosom of the nation by separate legislative action, and as the result of
practical demonstrations of the futility, nay, the disadvantage, of
their exclusion. The gradual emancipation of the English Jews, first
socially and then in the municipalities, enabled them to show that their
civic qualities entitled them to the fullest rights of citizenship; and
it was the realisation of this fact—not by statesmen or philosophers,
but by their neighbours and fellow-citizens themselves—that eventually
gave them the position they now enjoy.

The story of Jewish emancipation in England is the true _Vindiciæ
Judæorum_—the avenging of Menasseh’s broken heart and the vindication of
his touching trust in his people. It is something more. It is one of
many justifications of that fine conception of statecraft, deeply rooted
in infinite sympathy with human freedom, which is the secret of
Britain’s greatness, and of which Oliver Cromwell must ever be regarded
as the typical exponent in English history.


                             VII. DOCUMENTS

The following is a selection of the documents referred to in the
foregoing narrative. They have been selected chiefly on account of their
personal bearing on Menasseh’s efforts:—

1. Fragment of a letter from Menasseh ben Israel to an unknown
correspondent in London (Harl. Miscel., vol. vii. p. 623). The original
was probably in French or Latin:—

                                  “AMSTERDAM, _September 5407_ [1647].

  “_Senhor, no pueda enar!_ that is, sir, I cannot express the joy
  that I have when I read your letters, full of desires to see your
  country prosperous, which is heavily afflicted with civil wars,
  without doubt by the just judgment of God. And it should not be in
  vain to attribute it to the punishment of your predecessor’s faults,
  committed against ours; when ours being deprived of their liberty
  under deceitfulness, so many men were slain only because they kept
  close under the tenets of Moses, their legislator.”

2. Abstract of a letter relating to the “Hope of Israel” from Menasseh
ben Israel to John Dury (Thorowgood, “Jews in America,” 1650, p. xvii).
The original seems to have been in French:—

                                    “AMSTERDAM, _November 25_, [1649].

  “By the occasion of the questions you propose unto me concerning
  this adjoyned Narrative of Mr. Antonio Montezinos, I, to give you
  satisfaction, have written instead of a Letter a Treatise, which I
  shortly will publish & whereof you shall receive so many copies as
  you desire. In this Treatise I handle of the first inhabitants of
  America which I believe were of the ten Tribes; moreover that they
  are scattered also in other Countries, & that they keep their true
  Religion, as hoping to returne againe into the Holy Land in due
  time.”

3. Portion of a letter on the same subject from Menasseh ben Israel to
John Dury (Thorowgood, _ibid._). Like the foregoing, the original was in
French:—

                                      “AMSTERDAM, _December 23, 1649_.

  “[In my Treatise] I declare how that our Israelites were the first
  finders out of America; not regarding the opinions of other men,
  which I thought good to refute in few words onely; and I thinke that
  the ten Tribes live not onely there, but also in other lands
  scattered every where; these never did come backe to the second
  Temple, & they keep till this day still the Jewish Religion, seeing
  all the Prophecies which speake of their bringing backe unto their
  native soile must be fulfilled: So then at their appointed time, all
  the Tribes shall meet from all the parts of the world into two
  provinces, namely Assyria and Egypt, nor shall their kingdome be any
  more divided, but they shall have one Prince the Messiah the Sonne
  of David. I do also set forth the Inquisition of Spaine, and
  rehearse diuers of our Nation, & also of Christians, Martyrs, who in
  our times have suffered seuerall sorts of torments, & then having
  shewed with what great honours our Jews have been graced also by
  severall Princes who professe Christianity. I proue at large, that
  the day of the promised Messiah unto us doth draw neer, upon which
  occasion I explaine many Prophecies.”

4. Letter from Menasseh ben Israel to Paul Felgenhauer (_Bonum Nuncium
Israeli_, pp. 87 _et seq._):—

  “D. Paulo Felgenhauer,
      Salutem & Benedictionem, à
    Deo Israelis reprecatur,
      Menasseh Ben Israel.

  “Bonum istud, in novissimis & afflictissimis hisce temporibus populo
  Israeli à te, Vir spectatissime, allatum Nuncium, tanto fuit animo
  meo gratius, quo, post tot seculorum aerumnas & tam diu protractas
  spes nostras, flagrantius idipsum exoptare non desino; modò præ rei
  magnitudine verbis tuis fides constare possit. Siccine, Bonarum
  rerum Nuncie bone, in procinctune jam est, ut adveniat Deus noster,
  Miserator Nostrum, utque nobis Desiderium tot seculorum, Messiam
  caput nostrum, tam brevi sit missurus? Siccine tempus illud imminere
  ais, quo Deus; hactenus offensus & aversus à nobis, iterum Populum
  suum consolabitur, & redimet non solum â Captivitate hac plusquam
  Babylonicâ, à servitute plusquam Ægyptiacâ in qua jam elanguit præ
  morâ, sed & ab iniquitatibus suis, in quibus quasi consumptus est!
  Vtinam tam Verum esset, quam Bonum Nuncium tuum, tibique, tam
  Credere possem quàm vellem! Utcunque quæ ad gaudii nostri
  confirmationem ex scriptis Propheticis Signa adfers Adventus Messiæ
  (ut fatear quod res est) lubens amplector; & quo plus animo meo
  volvuntur ea, hoc magis spes mihi inde aliqua affulgere videtur.

  “Ad Primum quod attinet, apud nostros Rabbinos id signum in confesso
  est: quum enim necesse sit Imperia hujus mundi omnia corruere,
  antequam Regnum & Potestas & Magnitudo Regni detur Populo sanctorum
  Altissimi, cui omnes Reges servire & obedire oportet, inde non
  obscure sequitur, immediatè ante adventum illum Messiæ &
  Instaurationem Regni ipsius, magnas Conturbationes, Tumultus,
  seditiones, intestina & crudelissima Bella, Regnorum & Populorum
  hinc inde devastationes præcedere debere; Quæres quod brevi sit
  effectum sortitura, ex præsenti Imperiorum Mundi facie vero haud
  dissimile videtur.

  “De Elia, secundo Adventus Messiæ nostri signo, quod ais, non
  diffitemur, quin & gaudemus maxime, quod in eo nos Judæi cum
  selectissimis Christiani Nominis Viris, in unam eandemque sententiam
  concurrimus, fore illum ex nostrâ Gente oriundum. Verum enim vero
  Elias ille cum nondum comparuerit nobis, eo usque saltem suspendatur
  spes nostra necesse est: adeo ut, donec illum Deus nobis
  revelaverit, certi & indubitati quicquam de Messiæ Adventu statuere
  minus tuum videatur.

  “De Tertio isto Adventus Messiæ signo quod ais, nempe de hac Regni
  Israelis per totum Terrarum orbem prædicatione, id mihi non solum
  verisimile videtur, sed & tale quid jam in lucem prorumpere &
  effectum sortiri haud obscurè videmus: quin & Prædicatorem istorum
  haud contemnendus numerus mihi ipsi per literas innotuit, qui ex
  diversis mundi partibus ad consolandum Sionem prodierunt; inter
  alios Viros Nobilitate & Doctrinâ insignes, qui ad manum jam sunt.
  En ex Silesia habemus _Abrahamum à Frankenberg_, ex Borussiâ _Joh.
  Mochingerum_, ex Galliâ Autorem Libelli Gallico idiomate editi, _Du
  rappel des Juifs_. Ex Angliâ quos non? Nuper auctoritate publicâ
  _Nathanael Homerius_, SS. Theol. Doctor, librum in folio edidit
  anglico idiomate, de hac ipsa materiâ; & _D. Henricus Jesse_, nobis
  librum Belgico idiomate de _Gloriâ Jehudæ & Israelis_; publicè
  dedicavit. Plures allegare possem, qui instar Nubeculæ istius 1 Reg.
  18 (quam Elias ascendentem de mari vidit, & subito in tantam molem
  excrevit ut totum Cœli expansum contegeret) Indies numero & virtute
  accrescunt, donec tandem totum Terrarum ambitum prædicatione suâ
  sint completuri: Vt autē aliquod hajus rei specimen, ad testimonium
  tuum confirmandum tibi, mi Paule prebeam; selegi tibi aliquot
  Virorum istorum ad me literas, quæ jam præ manibus habebam, quas
  legere poteris, & mecum gaudere, de ijs qui dicunt nobis, _Ibimus in
  domum Domini, stabunt adhuc pedes nostri in atriis tuis Ierusalem_;
  qui ad cor Ierusalem loquuntur, prædicantes salutem & dicentes
  Sioni, _Deus tuus Regnabit_.

  “Sed præter hæc mitto quoque ad Te, Vir Doctissime, autographum
  Panegyrici cujusdam quem meo Nomini inscripsit D. _Immanuel Bocarus
  Frances y Rosales_ alias _Jacobus Rosales Hebræus_, Mathematicus &
  Medicinæ Doctor eximius, quem Imperator Nobilitatis Insignibus &
  Comitis Palatini dignitate donavit; idque eâ potissimum intentione
  mitto, ut videat Dominus exstare adhuc & discerni ad hunc usque diem
  surculos ex stirpe Davidicâ ortum ducentes. Denique ut desiderio tuo
  faciam satis, en quoque Catalogum librorum, quos vel in lucem edidi
  jam, vel edendos penes me in parato habeo, sive Latino sive
  Hispanico idiomate. Hisce te Deo Patrum nostrorum ejusque gratiæ &
  benignitati animitus commendo, Datum Amsterodami An. 1655, die 1
  Febr.”

5. Enclosures in the foregoing, being a letter from Nathaniel Holmes,
with a postscript by Henry Jessey (_Bonum Nuncium Israeli_, pp.
103–106):—

  “Nunc sequitur Clarissimi Viri, Nathanaelis Homesii SS. Theol.
  Doctoris Anglici ad me Epistolium, datum 24 Decemb. An. 1649, cum
  Subscriptione Reverendi D. Henrici Jesse ei annexâ.”


                                                  “_Decemb. 24, 1649._

  “Animus mihi fuit, citius adte scribendi, Vir egregie, otium non
  fuit, Nec hodie ita mihi vacat, ut menti meæ, tantisque tuis
  scriptis (quamvis expectatione paucioribus) satisfaciam. Nondum de
  loco decem Tribuum, ex tuis literis responsum accepi; quod in meis
  desideratum fuit; non astu, vel curiositate. Veritatem insequor, ne
  Impostores pro Ebræis nobis obstrudantur. Scripsit quidam nuperime,
  Innodos Novæ Angliæ decem Tribubus esse prognatos. Alii Tartyros
  esse contendunt. Alii alios. Discrucior animi, ne fallar, usque dum
  literas tuæ me fecerint certiorem. Delectari videris D. Nicolai
  Apologiâ. Spero (ne glorier) te plura (ne dicam majora) visurum, meo
  de Mille Annis prodeunte tractatu. Quod opus ita me tenet occupatum,
  ut meæ ad te ituræ morentur literæ. Martyres in tuis literis vox
  est; quæ, ni fallor, veteri Testamento haud innotuit. Verum sub
  Novo, viri celebres, Christum, ejusque Evangelium, ad mortem
  asserentes, primi illud nomen obtinuerunt. Facilè tamen concedo,
  quoslibet veritatis alicujus testes, Martyres Græce dictos fuisse.
  Sed (parcatur nostræ libertati Conscientiæ, quam lubentissimè tibi
  inter scribendum indulsero) nec pontificii jam post Concilium
  Tridentinum ullatenus habeantur propriè Christiani: nec Martyrium
  esse mihi videatur, pro hodiernâ Legis Mosaicæ observatione animam
  deponere. Quippe Lex illa quoad usum, ex plurimis veteris Testamenti
  suffragiis, ante hoc abolenda esset. Deut. 18, v. 18, 19. Psal. 50.
  v. 6–15, 23. Iesaiæ 66, v. 1–3. Vt olim multis jam annis transactis,
  Iudei ubi maxima indulgetur libertas non sacrificantes, vosmetipsos
  tamen vere Deum colere arbitramini, Libet tamen, non obstanti hâc
  dicendi libertate nos edoceri, dedocerique, quâ in re â veritate
  subsidimus, vel hallucinamur. Tractatum itaque quem nominas _De
  debito Christianorum erga Ebræos affectu_, mittas; ut quantum in me
  est, typis mandetur, & in publicum promoveamus. De tempore adventus
  Messiæ quod incertum pronuncias, idque incertum comprobares
  experientiâ; in promptu est responsio; Illud Danieli prius
  ignoranti, tandem revelatum est; idque ex libris illius, nobis. Et
  quamvis nonnulli (quos nominas) computando hallucinantes, in errorum
  gyris, & labyrintho sunt involuti; non tamen hâc ratione deponendæ
  sunt de eâ re (tanquam nullius usus) Prophetiæ. Quippe quod
  expectamus, Danielis more cap. 9. v. 2 & v. 21. ut jam Vesperi
  ætatem, quo propius accedunt liberationum periodi, eo clarius
  elucescant revelationes ad easdem spectantes. Ægyptii Ethnicorum
  barbariores (te teste Egregie Vir) nascendum Mosen præsentiscebant,
  nescientibus tunc Israelitis natum Liberatorem. Quidni etiam
  Christiani Scripturas amplexi, adventum vestræ Messiæ secundum
  præviderent? In cujus adventu, (pace eruditionis vestræ asserentis,
  quod stupens mirabar, _Vestram salutem in ejus Adventu non esse
  sitam_) fundatur nostra, præsertim vestra æterna salus. Si enim
  verum foret, eum nondum venisse, & posthæc illum venturum ambigitur,
  labitur omnis prophetiarum Compages, totumque veteris Testamenti
  Systema ruit. Et ita de Scripturarum veritate actum est; ut de
  salute tum nostrâ, tum vestrâ actum est. Quæ si quippiam asserere
  videantur, Christi Messiæ _passionem_ (Psal. 22. Isa. 53)
  _resurrectionem_ (Psal. 16) _ascensionem_ (Psal. 68) _sessionem ad
  dextram Patris_ (Psal. 110) _potestatem super omnia regnantem_, more
  Adami novissime creati (Psal. 2. Psal. 8) omnino asserunt. Quæ omnia
  acurate comparata, Messiæ Filii Davidis adventum, abitumque,
  reditumque, elenchicè satis demonstrant. Non novum urgeo
  Testamentum, quod æquis miraculorum portentis nobis commendatum
  fuit, ut vetus Israeli. Vobis tamen Hebræis libentissimè favemus,
  utinamque plus multò favere possemus; quamvis nec Meritum, nec pro
  merito (vox Bibliis ignota) quicquam expectamus. Merces ex gratiâ
  datur non merito. Malum possumus, qui perfecte peccamus, mereri;
  bonum in quo omnimodo deficimus. Malum itaque pro nostro, bonum pro
  Christi merito (si voce utar) nobis compensatur. Hominum (fateor)
  alter de altero mereri dicatur, ut egomet tibi (vir Candidissime)
  pro tuis literis me multum debere agnosco. Quin & universa vestræ
  Nationi, flexis genibus servire molior, ut sive Nos Vobis, Vosvè
  Nobis facti Proselytæ utrique juxta Isaiam, & Ezechielem, cæterosque
  Prophetas, in unam coeamus ecclesiam. Nec non (confido)
  dilectissimus noster Iesseus idem meditatur; cui literas communicavi
  tuas, ad me missas. Pudet multum me tamdiu siluisse, verum tibi
  rescribenti, duplâ quoad possim diligentiâ compensabitur.

                                            “_A Tui Observantissimo_,

                                                  “NATHANAELE HOMESIO.

  “Tuis hisce ex animo attestatur, assentitur, negociis à scribendo
  jam detentus, qui Sionis pulverem commiseratur, qui hæc propriâ manu
  subscripsi

                                                            H. IESSE.”

6. Original French text of Menasseh ben Israel’s demands on behalf of
the Jews presented to Oliver Cromwell (S. P., Dom. Inter., ci. 115).

  “Ce sont icy les graces et les faveurs qu’au nom de ma nation
  hebreue moy, Menasseh ben Israel, requiers a vostre serenissime
  altesse que dieu fasse prosperer et donne heureux succez en toutes
  ses entreprises comme son humble serviteur lui souhaitte et desire.

  “I. La premiere chose que je demande a vostre Altesse est que nostre
  nation hebreue sont reçeue et admise en cestee puissant republique
  sous la protection et garde de vostre altesse comme les cittoiens
  mesmes et pour plus grande securité au temps advenir je supplie
  votre altesse de faire jurer (si elle l’a pour aggréable) à tous ses
  chefs et generaux d’armes de nous deffendre en toutes occasions.

  “II. Quil plaise a vostre altesse nous permettre synagogues
  publiques non seulement en Angleterre, mais aussi en touts austres
  lieux de conqueste qui sont sous la puissance de Vostre Altesse et
  d’observer en tout nostre religion comme nous devons.

  “III. Que nous puissions avoir un lieu ou cimetiere hors la ville
  pour enterrer nos morts sans estre molestes d’aucun.

  “IV. Qu’il nos soit permis de trafiquer librement en toute sorte de
  marchandise comme les autres.

  “V. Que (afin que ceux qui vendront soyent pour l’utilité des
  citoyens et viven san porter prejudice à aucun ni donner scandale)
  vostre serenissime Altesse elise un personne de qualité pour
  informer et recevoir passeport de ceux qui entreront, les quels
  estant arrivez le faira scavoir et les obligera de jurer et garder
  fidélité a vostre Altesse en ce peix.

  “VI. Et pour n’estre point à charge aux juges du peix touchaut les
  contestations et differents qui peuvent arriver entre ceux de nostre
  nation que vostre serenissime Altesse donne licence aux chef de la
  synagogue de prendre avec soy deux ausmoniers de sa nation pour
  accorder et juger tous les differents de procez conforme à la loy
  Mosayque avec liberté toutefois d’appeler de leur sentence aux juges
  civils déposant premierement la somme à laquelle la partye aurait
  esté condamnée.

  “VII. Que si paradventure il y avait quelques loix contraires à
  nostre nation juifve que premierement et avant toutes choses elles
  soient revoquées affin que par ce moien la nous puissons demeurer
  avec plus grande securité sous la sauvegarde et protection de vostre
  serenissime Altesse.

  “Lesquelles choses nous concedant vostre serenissime Altesse nous
  demeurerons toujours les très affectionnés et obligez à prier Dieu
  pour la prospérité de vostre Altesse et de vostre illustre et très
  sage conseil. Qu’il luy plaise donner heureux succez à toutes lés
  enterprises de vostre Serenissime Altesse Amen.”

7. Circular issued by Cromwell’s Council convening the Whitehall
Conference (S.P. Dom. Inter., i. 76, 1655, pp. 378–79).

  “SIR,—His Highness the Lord Protector and the Council having
  determined of a certain number of persons (whereof yourself is one)
  to meet with a Committee of the Council on Tuesday the fourth of
  December next in ye afternoon neare the Council Chambers in
  Whitehall to the intent some proposalls made to his Highness in
  reference to the nation of the Jewes may be considered of you are
  therefore desired by his Highness & the Council to take notice
  thereof & so meet at the said time and place for the purpose
  aforesaid.

                                               Signed in the name &
                                               by order of the Council
                                               HE. LAWRENCE
                                               Presidt

  WHITEHALL,
      16 Novem. 1655.”

8. Report of the Sub-Committee of the Council of State after the
Conferences at Whitehall (S. P., Dom. Inter., ci. 118).

  “_That the Jewes deservinge it may be admitted into this nation to
  trade and trafficke and dwel amongst us as providence shall give
  occasion._[181]

  “That as to poynt of conscience we judge lawfull for the magistrate
  to admit in case such materiall and weighty considerations as
  hereafter follow be provided for, about which till we are satisfyed
  we cannot but in conscience suspend our resolution in this case.

  “1. That the motives and grounds upon which Menasseh ben Israel in
  behalfe of the rest of his nation in his booke lately printed in
  this English tongue desireth their admission in this commonwealth
  are such as we conceave to be very sinfull for this or any Christian
  state to receave them upon.

  “2. That the danger of seducinge the people of this nation by their
  admission in matters of religion is very great.

  “3. That their havinge of synagogues or any publicke meetings for
  the exercise of their worship or religion is not only evill in
  itselfe, but likewise very scandalous to other Christian churches.

  “4. That their customes and practices concerninge marriage and
  divorce are unlawfull and will be of very evill exemple amongst us.

  “5. That principles of not makinge concience of oathes made and
  injuryes done to Christians in life, chastity, goods or good name
  have bin very notoriously charged upon them by valuable testimony.

  “6. That great prejudice is like to arise to the natives of this
  commonwealth in matter of trade, which besides other dangers here
  mentioned we find very commonly suggested by the inhabitants of the
  city of London.

  “7. We humbly represent.

  “I. That they be not admitted to have any publicke Judicatoryes,
  whether civill or ecclesiasticall, which were to grant them terms
  beyond the condition of strangers.

  “II. That they be not admitted eyther to speake or doe anythinge to
  the defamation or dishonour of the name of our Lord Jesus Christ or
  of the Christian religion.

  “III. That they be not permitted to doe any worke or anythinge to
  the prophanation of the Lord’s Day or Christian sabbath.

  “IV. That they be not admitted to have Christians to dwell with them
  as their servants.

  “V. That they bear no publicke office or trust in this commonwealth.

  “VI. That they be not allowed to print anything which in the least
  opposeth the Christian religion in our language.

  “VII. That so farre as may be not suffered to discourage any of
  their owne from usinge or applyinge themselves to any which may tend
  to convince them of their error and turn them to Christianity. And
  that some severe penalty be imposed upon them who shall apostatize
  from Christianity to Judaisme.”

9. Petition of the London Marranos to Oliver Cromwell (S. P., Dom.
Inter., cxxv. 58):—

  “To His Highnesse Oliver Lord Protector of the Com̄onwelth of
  England, Scotland & Ireland & the Dominions thereof.

  “The Humble Petition of The Hebrews at Present Residing in this
  citty of London whose names ar vnderwritten

  “Humbly sheweth

  “That Acknolledging The manyfold favours and Protection yo^r
  Highnesse hath bin pleased to graunt vs in order that wee may with
  security meete priuatley in owr particular houses to our Deuosions,
  And being desirous to be favoured more by yo^r Highnesse wee pray
  with all Humblenesse y^r by the best meanes which may be such
  Protection may be graunted vs in Writting as that wee may
  therew^{th} meete at owr said priuate deuosions in owr Particular
  houses without feere of Molestation either to owr persons famillys
  or estates, owr desires Being to Liue Peacebly under yo Highnes
  Gouernement, And being wee ar all mortall wee allsoe Humbly pray
  yo^r Highnesse to graunt vs License that those which may dey of owr
  nation may be buryed in such place out of the cittye as wee shall
  thineke conuenient with the Proprietors Leaue in whose Land this
  place shall be, and soe wee shall as well in owr Lifetyme, as at owr
  death be highly fauoured by yo^r Highnesse for whose Long Lyfe and
  Prosperity wee shall continually pray To the allmighty God.”

                                              MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL.
                                              DAVID ABRABANEL.
                                              ABRAHAM ISRAEL CARUAJAL.
                                              ABRAHAM COEN GONZALES.
                                              JAHACOB DE CACERES.
                                              ABRAHAM ISRAEL DE BRITO.
                                              ISAK LOPES CHILLON.

  Oliver P.
    Wee doe referr this Peticon
          to the Consideracon of y^r Councill.
  March ^{ye} 24th
      1655⁄6.

                                                   (Endorsement)
                                                               Hebrews
                                                 ^{ye} 25 March 1656
                                               dd by the Lord Presid^t
                                                 Gentlemen ye 26
                                                   June 1656.”

10. Petition of Menasseh ben Israel to Oliver Cromwell, probably written
at the end of 1656 (S. P., Dom. Inter., cliii. 122):—

  “To his Highness the Lord Protector.

  “May it please your Highnesse, what modestie forbidds necessitie
  (that ingens telum) compells; that having bene long time very sickly
  (an expensive condition) I make my moan to your Highnesse, as the
  alone succourer of my life, in this land of strangers, to help in
  this present exigence. I shall not presume to prescribe to your
  Highnesse but havinge had great experience of your greatnesse in
  compassions as well as in majestie, I lay myselfe at your feet, that
  am your infinit obliged supplicant & servant

                                                “MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL.”

11. Further petition from Menasseh ben Israel to Oliver Cromwell. It is
endorsed “17 Sep. 1657” (S. P., Dom. Inter., clvi. 89):—

  “To his Highnesse, the Lord Protector, the humble petition of
  Menasseh Ben Israel.

  “May it please your Highnesse, my only sonne, being now dead in my
  house, who before his departure, engaged me to accompany his corps
  to Holland, & I indebted here, I know not which way to turn mee but
  (under God) to your Highnesse for help in this condition, emploring
  your bowells of compassion (which I know are great & tender) to
  supply me with three hundred pounds, & I shall surrender my pension
  seal & never trouble or charge your Highnesse any more, I am very
  sensible considering your great past kindnesse (which with all
  thankfullnesse I acknowledge) how highly-bold this my petition is,
  but the necessitie of my present exigence & my experience of your
  admirable graciousnesse to mee have layd mee prostrat at your feet,
  crying, Help, most noble prince, for God’s sake, your most humble
  supplicant

                                                 MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL.”

12. Petition on behalf of the widow of Menasseh ben Israel, addressed to
Richard Cromwell by John Sadler (S. P., Dom. Inter., cc. 8):—

  “To his Highness the Lord Protector the humble petition of John
  Sadler.

  “Sheweth that although your petitioner being often pressed to
  present petitions in behalf of the Jewes did rather dissuade their
  comming hither, yet by some letters of your late royall father &
  others of note in this nation some of their synagogs were encouraged
  to send hither one of their cheife rabbines, Menasseh Ben Israel,
  for admittance & some freedome of trade in some of these ilands. And
  when he had stayed heere so long, that he was allmost ashamed to
  returne to those that sent him or to exact their maintenance heere
  where they found so little success after so many hopes, it pleased
  his Highnes & the councell to setle on the said Menasseh a pension
  of 100£ a yeare which ere long he offered to resigne for 300£ for
  present satisfaction of debts & other pressures which lay so heavy
  on him that at length he submitted to resigne his former pension for
  a new grant of 200£ to be presently paid as the councell ordered.

  “But notwithstanding his stay & expense in procuring several seales,
  he never gott one penny of the said 200£ but at length with his
  heart ever broken with griefe on losing heer his only sonne and his
  presious time with all his hopes in this iland he got away with so
  much breath as lasted, till he came to Midleburg & then he dyed.
  Leaving a poore desolate widow (with other relations) who solemnly
  professed she had not money enough to lay him in the sepulchres of
  his fathers, but for the charity of some that lent or gave them
  money. It pleased allso your Highess late father to receive one or 2
  of the same poore widowes letters to your petitioner (whom they both
  trusted in that business) & with his owne hands to commit them to
  the especiall care of Mr. secretary Thurloe who hath also divers
  times minded the same, but your Highness exchequer is so charged
  that there is little hope of obteining it there.

  “May it please your Highnesse in compassion to the said poore widow
  & relations of a man so eminent & famous in his owne & meny other
  nations & for the honour of Christian religion with many other
  reasons, to order the said 200£ out of the contingencies for the
  councell or some other treasure where it may be speedily had and
  without fees allso if it may be according to former orders.

  “And your petitioner shall desire to pray.”

[Illustration]

  PEREGRINANDO QVÆRIMVS. MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL THEOLOGVS ET PHILOSOPHVS
                                HEBRÆVS.

  _ÆTATIS SVA
  ANNO XXXVIII_

                                                                  _ANNO
                                                                MDCXLII_

                                 Salom

             _Doctrina hic volúit volúitg Modestia pingi.
               An poterit vúltús charta referre dúos?
             Hos orúlos, hæc ora vide. Conucuit útrinque.
               Illa fúos vúltús dixit, & illa fúos._

                                                     _D.I._



                                  THE
                             HOPE OF ISRAEL

                                Written
                       By _MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL_,
                         An Hebrew Divine, and
                              Philosopher.

               Newly extant, and Printed at _Amsterdam_,
                    and Dedicated by the Author, to
              the High Court, the Parliament of _England_,
                     and to the Councell of State,


               The second Edition corrected and amended.


                          Whereunto are added,
                _In this second Edition, some Discourses
                upon the point of the Conversion of the_
                                 JEWES.


                            _By_ MOSES WALL.


                                 LONDON
      _P_rinted by _R. I._ for _Livewell Chapman_ at the Crowne in
                       _P_opes-Head Alley, 1652.

[Illustration]


                                 TO THE
               Parliament, The Supream Court of ENGLAND,
   _And to the Right Honourable the Councell of State_, Menasseh Ben
        Israel, _prayes God to give Health, and all Happinesse_:

It is not one cause alone (most renowned Fathers) which useth to move
those, who desire by their Meditations to benefit Mankind, and to make
them come forth in publique, to dedicate their Books to great Men; for
some, and those the most, are incited by Covetousnesse, that they may
get money by so doing, or some peece of Plate of gold, or Silver;
sometimes also that they may obtaine their Votes, and suffrages to get
some place for themselves, or their friends. But some are moved thereto
by meere and pure friendship, that so they may publickly testifie that
love and affection, which they bear them, whose names they prefixe to
their Books; let the one, and the other, please themselves, according as
they delight in the reason of the Dedication, whether it be good or bad;
for my part, I best like them, who do it upon this ground, that they may
not commend themselves, or theirs, but what is for publick good.

As for me (most renowned Fathers) in my dedicating this Discourse to
you, I can truly affirm, that I am induced to it upon no other ground
then this, that I may gain your favour and good will to our Nation, now
scattered almost all over the earth; neither think that I do this, as if
I were ignorant how much you have hitherto favored our Nation; for it is
made known to me, and to others of our Nation, by them who are so happy
as near at hand, to observe your apprehensions, that you do vouchsafe to
help us, not onely by your prayers; yea, this hath compelled me to speak
to you publickly, and to give you thanks for that your charitable
affection towards us, and not such thanks which come only from the
tongue, but as are conceived by a grateful mind.

Give me leave therefore (most renowned Fathers) to supplicate you, that
you would stil favor our good, and farther love us. Truly, we men doe
draw so much the nearer to Divine nature, when by how much we increase,
by so much we cherish, and defend the small, and weak ones; and with how
much diligence doe you performe this, most renowned Fathers? who though
you seem to be arrived to the highest top of felicity, yet you do not
only not despise inferior men, but you so wish well to them, that you
seem sensible of their calamity; you knowing how acceptable to God you
are by so doing, who loves to do good to them who doe good. And truly it
is from hence, that of late you have done so great things valiantly, and
by an unusuall attempt, and things much to be observed among the
Nations. The whole world stands amazed at these things, and the eies of
all are turned upon you, that they may see whither all these things do
tend, which the great Governour of all things seems to bring upon the
world by so great changes, so famously remarkable, of so many Nations;
and so all those things which God is pleased to have fore-told by the
Prophets, do, and shall obtain their accomplishment. All which things of
necessity must bee fulfilled, that so _Israel_ at last being brought
back to his owne place; peace which is promised under the Messiah, may
be restored to the world; and concord, which is the only Mother of al
good things. These things I handle more largely in this Treatise, which
I dedicate to you (most renowned Fathers) you cannot be ignorant, that
it is not only not unprofitable, but very useful for States and
Statesmen, to fore-see the issue (which yet is ever in Gods hand) of
humaine Councells, that so they may observe, and understand from Divine
truth, the events of things to come, which God hath determined by his
Spirit in his holy Prophets. I know that this my labour will not be
unacceptable to you, how mean soever it be, which I trust you will
chearfully receive, because that you love our Nation, and as part of it,
the Author of this Discourse. But I intreat you be certain, that I pour
out continual prayers to God for your happinesse. Farewell, most
renowned Fathers, and flourish most prosperously.

                                                  _Menasseh Ben Israel._

[Illustration]


            _Menasseh Ben Israel_, To the Courteous Reader.

_There are as many minds as men, about the originall of the people of_
America _and of the first Inhabitants of the new World, and of the_ West
Indyes; _for how many men soever they were or are, they came of those
two_, Adam, _and_ Eve; _and consequently of_ Noah, _after the Flood, but
that new World doth seem wholly separated from the old, therefore it
must be that some did passe thither out of one (at least) of the three
parts of the world sc._ Europe, Asia, _and_ Africa; _but the doubt is,
what people were those, and out of what place they went. Truly, the
truth of that must be gathered, partly out of the ancient Hystories, and
partly from conjectures; as their Habit, their Language, their Manners,
which yet doe vary according to mens dispositions; so that it is hard to
finde out the certainty. Almost all who have viewed those Countryes,
with great diligence, have been of different judgements: Some would have
the praise of finding out_ America, _to be due to the_ Carthaginians,
_others to the_ Phenicians, _or the_ Canaanites; _others to the_
Indians, _or people of_ China; _others to them of_ Norway, _others to
the Inhabitants of the_ Atlantick Islands, _others to the_ Tartarians,
_others to the ten Tribes. Indeed, every one grounds his opinion not
upon probable arguments, but high conjectures, as will appeare farther
by this Booke. But I having curiously examined what ever hath hitherto
been writ upon this subject doe finde no opinion more probable, nor
agreeable to reason, then that of our_ Montezinus, _who saith, that the
first inhabitants of_ America, _were the ten Tribes of the_ Israelites,
_whom the_ Tartarians _conquered, and drove away; who after that (as God
would have it) hid themselves behind the Mountaines_ Cordilleræ. _I also
shew, that as they were not driven out at once from their Country, so
also they were scattered into divers Provinces, sc. into_ America,
_into_ Tartary, _into_ China, _into_ Media, _to the Sabbaticall River,
and into_ Æthiopia. _I prove that the ten Tribes never returned to the
second Temple, that they yet keepe the Law of_ Moses, _and our sacred
Rites; and at last shall return into their Land, with the two Tribes_,
Judah, _and_ Benjamin; _and shall be governed by one Prince, who is_
Messiah _the Son of_ David; _and without doubt that time is near, which
I make appear by divers things; where, Reader, thou shalt finde divers
Histories worthy of memory, and many Prophesies of the old Prophets
opened with much study, and care. I willingly leave it to the judgement
of the godly, and learned, what happy worth there is in this my Book,
and what my own Nation owes me for my paines: It is called_, The Hope of
Israel; _which name is taken from_ Jerem. 14.8. _O the hope of Israel,
the Saviour thereof. For the scope of this Discourse is, to show, that
the hope in which we live, of the comming of the Messiah is of a future,
difficult, but infallible good, because it is grounded upon the absolute
Promise of the blessed God._

_And because I intend a continuation of_ Josephus _his History of the_
Jewes, _our famous Historian; I intreat, and beseech all Learned men, in
what part of the world soever they live (to whom I hope that shortly
this Discourse will come) that if they have any thing worthy of
posterity, that they would give me notice of it in time; for though I
have collected many Acts of the_ Jewes, _and many Hystories out of the_
Hebrewes, _the_ Arabians, _the_ Grecians, _the_ Latines, _and other
Authors of other Nations; yet I want many things for this my enterprize,
all which I am willing to performe, that I may please my Nation; but
rather to the glory of the blessed God, whose Kingdome is everlasting,
and his Word infallible_.

[Illustration]


                    _The Translator to the Reader._

This discourse of a Jew comming to my hand, and having perused it, I
thought it not inconvenient to make it speake _English_; for the benefit
of my Country-men, who wait for the redemption of _Israel_; and at the
same time of the _Gentiles_ also. That the Author is a _Jew_, ought to
be no scandall to us (though some of us Christian _Gentiles_ are
ignorant of, and scandalized at the notion of the conversion of the
_Jewes_, as the _Jewes_ of old were, concerning our being converted, and
grafted into the true Stock, as in _Acts_ 11.3.) for though God hath
rejected them, yet not for ever: _Rom._ 11.25, 26. And also the many
prophesies both in the Old, and New Testament, which concern their being
received againe to grace, gathered from their dispersion, and settled in
their own Land; and their flourishing estate under, now our, and then
their and our Prince, Jesus Christ the Messiah, who will then triumph
gloriously, and all his people with him; these and many more Promises
would want a fulfilling (which the God of Truth wil never suffer) if
there should not be the revolution of a time, in which they shall be
converted, and grace and peace be poured out upon _Jewes_ and
_Gentiles_; though first upon the _Jew_, then the _Gentile_. But besides
this, the Author expresseth so much learning that he deserveth honour of
all; so much ingenuity, and (so far as his light reacheth) so great a
measure of the knowledge and fear of God, that he may wel be set for a
pattern to us Christians, who profess much better than he, but live much
worse. One thing is very remarkable in him, that wheras many of us (like
them who canot see Wood for Trees) though inviorned with mercies in
these late revolutions, (I speake not to them who measure mercies only,
or chiefly, by plentiful tables, ful purses, rich accoutrements, and the
like; that wretched Generation is unworthy of the name of _Men_, much
more of _Christians_) yet will unthankfully cry out, What have we got by
all these troubles? and what hath been done? surely this _Jew_ shall
rise up in judgement against such unchristian Christians; for he in his
Epistle Dedicatory says, _The whole world stands amazed at what the
Parliament hath done_; besides he cordially and openly owns the
Parliament, who as far as I know never did him nor his Nation any
further good then to pray for them; (_though we hope, and pray, that
their favour may extend to realities, towards that people to whom
certainly God hath made many, and great Promises, and shortly will give
answerable performances_:) but many among us who injoy peace under them,
and many other blessings, (too many for an unthankfull Generation) doe
refuse to acknowledge them, doe curse them whom God hath blessed, and
even in their prayers to that God who cannot be deceived, or imposed
upon; doe vent themselves against this present Government, in
expressions so wilde and false, that such Language would be accounted
most unworthy, in our addresse to any considerable person, much more
then to the great God. I shall only adde this, _sc._ Do not think that I
aime by this Translation, to propagate or commend _Iudaisme_ (which its
no wonder if the Author doth so much favour, especially in his thirtieth
Section) no, through Grace I have better learned the truth, as it is in
Jesus, but to give some discovery of what apprehensions, and workings
there are at this day in the hearts of the _Jewes_; and to remove our
sinfull hatred from off that people, whose are the Promises, and who are
beloved for their Fathers sakes; and who of _Jewes_, we shall hear to
be, ere long, reall Christians.


    The Authors of other Nations, which are quoted in this Treatise.

                                   A

 _Abrahamus Ortelius_
 _Agathias_
 _Augustinus_
 _Alexis Vanegas_
 _Alfonsus Cemedro_
 _Alonsus Augustianus_
 _Alonsus de Erzilla_
 _Alonsus Venerus_
 _Arias Montanus._


                                   B

 _Baronius_
 _Berosus_
 _Boterus_
 _Bozius._


                                   C

 _Constantinus_.


                                   D

 _Diodorus Siculus_
 _Dion_
 _Duretus._


                                   E

 _Eselius Geradus_
 _Eusebius Cesariensis._


                                   F

 _Famianus Strada_
 _Franciscus de Ribera_
 _Franciscus lopez de_
 _Gomara._


                                   G

 _Garcilassus dela Vega_
 _Genebrardus_
 _Goropius_
 _Guil. Postellus_
 _Guilielmus Blawius_
 _Guil. Schilkardus._


                                   H

 _Henricus Alangre_
 _Hugo Grotius_.


                                   J

 _Jacobus Verus_
 _Joan. de Castillanos_
 _Joan. de Bairos_
 _Joan. Roman_
 _Joan. de Laet_
 _Joan. Huarte_
 _Josephus d’ Acosta_
 _Joan. Linscboten_.


                                   L

 _Lescarbotus_
 _Lucanus_.


                                   M

 _Manuel Sa._
 _Marcilius Facinus_
 _Marinus._


                                   N

 _Nicolaus Trigautius._


                                   O

 _Origines_
 _Orosius_
 _Osorius Lusitanus._


                                   P

 _Petrus de Cleza_
 _Plancius_
 _Petrus Simon_
 _Petrus Hernandes de Quiros_
 _Petrus Teixera_
 _Pineda_
 _Plato_
 _Plinius_
 _Pomarius_
 _Proclus_
 _Porphyrius_
 _Possevinus_
 _Plutarchus_
 _Picus Mirandulanus_
 _Ptolomæus._


                                   S

 _Semuel Bochardus_
 _Solinus_
 _Strabo_
 _Suetonius Tranquillus._


                                   T

 _Tacitus_
 _Thomas Malvenda_.


                                   X

 _Xenophon._


                                   Z

 _Zarate._


                   _The Hebrew Bookes, and Authors._

 Talmud Hierosolymitanum
 Talmud Babylonicum
 Paraphrasis Chaldaica
 R. Simhon ben Johay
 Seder Holam
 Rabot
 Jalkot
 Tanhuma
 Joseph ben Gurion
 R. Sehadia Gaon
 R. Moseh de Egypto
 R. Abraham Aben Ezra
 R. Selomoh Jarhi
 Eldad Danita
 R. David Kimhi
 R. Benjamin Tudelensis
 R. Moseh Gerundensis
 R. Abraham bar R. Hiya
 Don Shac Abarbanel
 R. Joseph Coen
 R. Abraham Friscoll
 R. Mordechay Japhe
 R. Mordechay Reato
 R. Hazarya a-Adomi.

[Illustration]


                                  THE
                                RELATION
                                   OF
                          _ANTONY MONTEZINUS_.

_In the 18th. of the Month of_ Elul: _the 5404 year from the Worlds
creation, and according to common compute, in 1644_. Aaron Levi,
_otherwise called_ Antonius Montezinus _came into this City_ Amsterdam,
_and related to the Sieur_ Menasseh ben Israel, _and other cheifetains
of the_ Portugal _Nation, Inhabitants of the same City, these things
which follow_.

_That it was two years and a halfe, since that he going from the Port_
Honda _in the_ West-Indies, _to the_ Papian _jurisdiction, he conducted
some Mules of a certaine_ Indian, _whose name was_ Franciscus
Castellanus, _into the Province of_ Quity, _and that there was one in
company with him and other_ Indians, _whose name was_ Francis, _who was
called by all_ Cazicus. _That it happened that as they went over the
Mountaines_ Cordilleræ, _a great tempest arose, which threw the loaden
Mules to the ground. The_ Indians _being afflicted by the sore tempest,
every one began to count his losses; yet confessing that all that and
more grievous punishments were but just, in regard of their many sins.
But_ Francis _bad them take it patiently, for that they should shortly
injoy rest: the others answered, that they were unworthy of it; yea that
the notorious cruelty used by the_ Spaniards _towards them, was sent of
God, because they had so ill treated his holy people, who wer of al
others the most innocent: now then, they determined to stay all night
upon the top of the Mountain. And_ Montezinus _tooke out of a Box some
Bread, and Cheese, and Jonkets, and gave them to_ Francis, _upbraiding
him, that he had spoken disgracefully of the_ Spaniards; _who answered,
that he had not told one halfe of the miseries and calamities inflicted
by a cruell, and inhumane people; but they should not goe unrevenged,
looking for helpe from an unknown people_.

_After this Conference_, Montezinus _went to_ Carthagenia, _a City of
the_ Indians, _where he being examined, was put in Prison; and while he
prayed to God, such words fell from him; Blessed be the name of the
Lord, that hath not made me an Idolater, a_ Barbarian, _a_
Black-a-Moore, _or an_ Indian; _but as he named_ Indian, _he was angry
with himselfe, and said, The_ Hebrewes _are_ Indians; _then he comming
to himselfe againe; confessed that he doted, and added, Can the_
Hebrewes _be_ Indians? _which hee also repeated a second, and a third
time; and he thought that it was not by chance that he had so much
mistaken himselfe_.

_He thinking farther, of what he had heard from the_ Indian, _and hoping
that he should find out the whole truth; therefore as soon as he was let
out of Prison, he sought out_ Franciscus _beleeving that hee would
repeat to him againe what he had spoken; he therefore being set at
liberty, through Gods mercy went to the Port_ Honda, _and according to
his desire, found him, who said; He remembred all that he had spoken,
when he was upon the Mountaine; whom_ Montezinus _asked, that he would
take a journy with him, offering him all courtesies, giving him three
peeces of Eight, that he might buy himselfe necessaries_.

_Now when they were got out of the City_, Montezinus _confessed himselfe
to be an_ Hebrew, _of the Tribe of_ Levi, _and that the Lord was his
God; and he told the_ Indian, _that all other gods were but mockeries;
the_ Indian _being amazed, asked him the name of his Parents; who
answered_ Abraham, Isaac, _and_ Jacob; _but said he, have you no other
Father? who answered, yes, his Fathers name was_ Ludovicus Montezinus;
_but he not being yet satisfied, I am glad (saith he) to heare you tell
this, for I was in doubt to beleeve you, while you seemed ignorant of
your Parents_: Montezinus _swearing, that he spoke the truth, the_
Indian _asked him, if he were not the Son of_ Israel, _and thereupon
began a long discourse; who when he knew that he was so, he desired him
to prosecute what he had begun, and added, that he should more fully
explaine himselfe, for that formerly he had left things so doubtfull,
that he did not seem at all assured of any thing. After that both had
sate downe together, and refreshed themselves, the_ Indian _thus began:
If you have a minde to follow me your Leader, you shall know what ever
you desire to know, only let me tell you this, whatsoever the journey
is, you must foot it, and you must eate nothing but parched_ Mayz, _and
you must omit nothing that I tell you_; Montezinus _answered that he
would doe all_.

_The next day being Munday_, Cazicus _came againe, and bid him throw
away what he had in his Knapsack to put on shooes made of linnen
packthred, and to follow him, with his staffe; whereupon_ Montezinus
_leaving his Cloake, and his Sword, and other things which he had about
him, they began the journey, the_ Indian _carrying upon his back three
measures of_ Mayz, _two ropes, one of which was full of knots, to climbe
up the Mountaine, with an hooked fork; the other was so loose, for to
passe over Marshes, and Rivers, with a little Axe, and shooes made of
linnen pack-thred. They being thus accoutred, travelled the whole weeke,
unto the Sabbath Day; on which day they resting, the day after they went
on, till Tuesday, on which day about eight a clock in the morning, they
came to a River as bigge as_ Duerus; _then the_ Indian _said, Here you
shall see your Brethren, and making a signe with the fine linnen of_
Xylus, _which they had about them instead of a Girdle; thereupon on the
other side of the River they saw a great smoke, and immediately after,
such another signe made as they had made before; a little after that,
three men, with a woman, in a little Boat came to them, which being come
neare, the woman went ashore, the rest staying in the Boat; who talking
a good while with the_ Indian, _in a Language which_ Montezinus
_understood not; she returned to the Boat, and told to the three men
what she had learned of the_ Indian; _who alwayes eying him, came
presently out of the Boat, and embraced_ Montezinus, _the woman after
their example doing the like; after which, one of them went back to the
Boat, and when the_ Indian _bowed downe to the feet of the other two,
and of the woman, they embraced him courteously, and talked a good while
with him. After that, the_ Indian _bid_ Montezinus _to be of good
courage, and not to looke that they should come a second time to him,
till he had fully learned the things which were told him at the first
time_.

_Then those two men comming on each side of_ Montezinus, _they spoke in
Hebrew, the 4th. ver. of_ Deut. 6. Semah Israel, adonai Elohenu adonai
ehad; _that is_, Heare O Israel, the Lord our God is one God.

_Then the_ Indian _Interpreter being asked, how it was in_ Spanish,
_they spoke what followes to_ Montezinus, _making a short pause between
every particular_.

1 Our Fathers are _Abraham_, _Isaac_, _Jacob_, and _Israel_, and they
signified these foure by the three fingers lifted up; then they joyned
_Reuben_, adding another finger to the former three.

2 We will bestow severall places on them who have a minde to live with
us.

3 _Joseph_ dwels in the midst of the Sea, they making a signe by two
fingers put together, and then parted them.

4 They said (speaking fast) shortly some of us will goe forth to see,
and to tread under foot; at which word they winked, and stamped with
their feet.

5 One day we shall all of us talke together, they saying, Ba, ba, ba;
and we shall come forth as issuing out of our Mother the earth.

6 A certaine Messenger shall goe forth.

7 _Franciscus_ shall tell you somewhat more of these things, they making
a signe with their finger, that much must not be spoken.

8 Suffer us that we may prepare ourselves; and they turning their hands
and faces every way, thus prayed to God, DO NOT STAY LONG.

9 Send twelve men, they making a signe, that they would have men that
had beards, and who are skilfull in writing.

_The Conference being ended, which lasted a whole day, the same men
returned on Wednesday, and Thursday, and spake the same things againe,
without adding a word; at last_ Montezinus _being weary that they did
not answer what he asked them, nor would suffer him to goe over the
river, he cast himselfe into their Boat; but he being forced out againe,
fell into the River, and was in danger to be drowned, for he could not
swim; but being got out of the water, the rest being angry, said to him;
attempt not to passe the River, nor to enquire after more then we tel
you; which the_ Indian _interpreted to him, the rest declaring the same
things both by signs, and words_.

_You must observe, that all those three dayes the Boat stayed not in the
same place, but when those foure who came went away, other foure came,
who all as with one mouth, repeated all the fore-mentioned nine
particulars, there came and went about three hundred._

_Those men are somewhat scorched by the Sun, some of them weare their
haire long, downe to their knees, other of them shorter, and others of
them much as we commonly cut it. They were comely of body, well
accoutred, having ornaments on their feet, and leggs, and their heads
were compassed about with a linnen cloath._

Montezinus _saith, that when he was about to be gone, on Thursday
evening, they shewed him very much courtesie, and brought him whatever
they thought fit for him in his journey, and they said, that themselves
were well provided with all such things_, (sc. _meats, garments, flocks,
and other things_) _which the_ Spaniards _in_ India _call their owne_.

_The same day, when they came to the place where they had rested, the
night before they came to the River_, Montezinus _said to the_ Indian;
_You remember_ Francis, _that my Brethren told me, that you should tell
me something, therefore I entreat you, that you would not thinke much to
relate it. The_ Indian _answered, I will tell you what I know, only doe
not trouble me, and you shall know the truth, as I have received it from
my fore-fathers; but if you presse me too much, as you seeme to doe, you
will make me tell you lyes; attend therefore I pray, to what I shall
tell you_.

_Thy Brethren are the Sons of_ Israel, _and brought thither by the
providence of God, who for their sake wrought many Miracles, which you
will not beleeve, if I should tell you what I have learned from my
Fathers; we_ Indians _made war upon them in that place, and used them
more hardly then we now are by the_ Spaniards; _then by the instigation
of our Magicians_ (_whom we call_ Mohanes) _we went armed to that place
where you saw your Brethren, with an intent to destroy them; but not one
of all those who went thither, came back againe; whereupon we raised a
great Army, and set upon them, but with the same successe, for againe
none escaped; which hapned also the third time, so that_ India _was
almost bereft of all inhabitants, but old men, and women, the old men
therefore: and the rest who survived, beleeving that the Magicians used
false dealing, consulted to destroy them all, and many of them being
killed those who remained promised to discover somewhat that was not
knowne; upon that they desisted from cruelty, and they declared such
things as follow_:

That the God of those Children of _Israel_ is the true God, that all
that which is engraven upon their stones is true; that about the end of
the World they shall be Lords of the world; that some shall come who
shall bring you much good, and after that they have enriched the earth
with all good things, those Children of _Israel_ going forth out of
their Country, shall subdue the whole World to them, as it was subject
to them formerly; you shall be happy if you make a League with them.

_Then five of the chiefe_ Indians (_whom they call_ Cazici) _who were my
Ancestors, having understood the Prophesie of the Magicians, which they
had learned of the Wise men of the_ Hebrewes, _went thither, and after
much entreaty, obtained their desire, having first made knowne their
minde to that woman, whom you saw to be for an Interpreter_, (_for your
Brethren will have no commerce with our_ Indians) _and whosoever of ours
doth enter the Country of your Brethren, they presently kill him; and
none of your Brethren doe passe into our Country. Now by the help of
that Woman we made this agreement with them._

1 That our five _Cazici_ should come to them, and that alone at every
seventy moneths end.

2 That he to whom secrets should be imparted, should be above the age of
three hundred Moones, or Months.

3 And that such things should be discovered to none in any place where
people are, but only in a Desart, and in the presence of the _Cazici_;
and so (said the _Indian_) we keep that secret among our selves, because
that we promise our selves great favour from them, for the good offices
which we have done to our Brethren, it is not lawfull for us to visite
them, unlesse at the seventy months end: Or if there happens any thing
new, and this fell out but thrice in my time; First, when the
_Spaniards_ came into this Land; also, when Ships came into the
Southerne Sea; and thirdly, when you came, whom they long wished for,
and expected. They did much rejoyce for those three new things, because
that they said, the Prophesies were fulfilled.

_And_ Montezinus _also said, that three other_ Cazici _were sent to him
by_ Franciscus, _to_ Honda, _yet not telling their names, till he had
said, you may speake to them freely, they are my fellowes in my Function
of whom I have told you, the fifth could not come for age, but those
three did heartily embrace him; and_ Montezinus _being asked of what
Nation he was, he answered, an_ Hebrew, _of the Tribe of_ Levi, _and
that God was his God, &c. which when they had heard, they embraced him
againe, and said: Upon a time you shall see us, and shall not know us;
We are all your Brethren, by Gods singular favour; and againe, they both
of them bidding farewell, departed, every one saying, I goe about my
businesse; therefore none but_ Franciscus _being left, who saluting_
Montezinus _as a Brother, then bade him farewell, saying, farewell my
Brother, I have other things to doe, and I goe to visite thy Brethren,
with other_ Hebrew _Cazici. As for the Country, be secure, for we rule
all the_ Indians; _after we have finished a businesse which we have with
the wicked_ Spaniards, _we will bring you out of your bondage, by Gods
help; not doubting, but he who cannot lye, will help us; according to
his Word; endeavour you in the meane while that those men may come_.

[Illustration]



                          The Hope of ISRAEL.


                               _SECT. 1._

It is hard to say what is certaine among the so many, and so uncertaine
opinions concerning the originall of the _Indians_ of the new World. If
you aske, what is my opinion upon the relation of _Montezinus_, I must
say, it is scarce possible to know it by any Art, since there is no
demonstration, which can manifest the truth of it; much lesse can you
gather it from Divine, or humane Writings; for the Scriptures doe not
tell what people first inhabited those Countries; neither was there
mention of them by any, til _Christop. Columbus_, _Americus_,
_Vespacius_, _Ferdinandus_, _Cortez_, the Marquesse _Del Valle_, and
_Franciscus Pizarrus_ went thither; and though hitherto I have been of
this minde, that I would speake only of solid, and infallible things,
(as those things are which concerne our Law) and the obscurity of the
matter, making me doubt, whether it would be worth a while for me to
attempt it; yet at last I was content to be perswaded to it, not that I
looke to get credit by it, but that my friends, and all who seeke for
truth, that have put me upon this work, may see how very desirous I am
to please them.

I shall speake somewhat in this Discourse, of the divers opinions which
have been, and shall declare in what Countries it is thought the ten
Tribes are; and I shall close, after that I have brought them into their
owne Country, which I shall prove by good reasons, following the
Revelations of the holy Prophets, who I beleeve cannot be expounded
otherwise, whatever some thinke; yet I intend not to dispute these
things, but according to my custome, shall lay down fairly, and
faithfully, the opinions of the _Jewes_ only.


                               _SECT. 2._

You must know therefore, that _Alexis Vanegas_ saith, that the first
Colonies of the _West-Indies_ were of the _Carthaginians_, who first of
all inhabited _New-Spaine_, and as they encreased, spread to the Island
_Cuba_; from thence to the continent of _America_; and after that
towards _Panama_, _New-Spaine_, and the Isle of _Peru_. And he grounds
himselfe on that reason, that as the _Carthaginians_ (who of old did
most use the Seas) so those of _Peru_, and the Inhabitants of
_New-Spaine_, did make use of Pictures instead of Letters.

But this opinion doth not satisfie, because they anciently were white
men, bearded, and civill in converse; but contrarily those of _Panama_,
St. _Martha_, and the Isles in _Cuba_, and _Barlovent_, went naked.
Further-more, who can thinke that the language which he saith, they
first spoke, should be so soone changed, that it should be wholly
another; and there is no agreement between the one and the other. The
learned _Arias Montanus_ thinkes, that the _Indians_ of _New-Spaine_,
and _Peru_, are the Off-spring of _Ophir_ the sonne of _Jokton_, the
nephew of _Heber_. And he backes his opinion, by the name _Ophir_, which
by transposition of letters, is the same with _Peru_; and he adds, that
the name _Parvaim_ in the duall number, doth signifie the _Istmus_
between _New-Spaine_ and _Peru_, which first was called _Ophir_, then
_Peru_; and that these Countries are that _Peru_, from whence King
_Solomon_ brought Gold, precious Stones, &c., as in _1 King._ _chap._ 9.
_v._ 10. & _2 Chron._ 9.21. This opinion seems more probable than the
other, and may be backed by another name of the River _Piru_, which
according to _Gomoras_, lyes in the second degree from the Equinoctiall
line, from _Panama_ 222. miles; as also by the name of the Province
_Jucatan_, which may be derived from _Joktan_ the father of _Ophir_. But
besides that this notation is somewhat farre fetcht, it crosses what
_Josephus Acosta_ affirmes in _1. Histor._ of _Jud._ _c._ 13. who saith,
that the name _Peru_ was unknowne to the _Indians_ themselves before
those _Spaniards_ gave that name. Add to this what _Garcillasso de la
Vega_ in the first part of his Commentary on _Peru_, _c._ 4. saith, that
when a certaine _Spanyard, Basco Nunnez de Balboa_, lived in that
Country, and asked a Fisher-man, what was the name of that Province, he
answered _Beru_; (which was the Fisher-mans owne name, he thinking that
was the question) and he farther said, that the name of the River where
he fished, was called _Pelu_. Hence you may see, that _Peru_ is made of
both those words; which also many _Spanyards_ besides him, we have
mentioned, doe testifie. Besides, who can thinke that _Solomon_
neglecting the _East-Indies_, a place so rich, and abounding with all
things, should send a Fleet so farre off as to the _West-Indies_. Also
we read in _1 King._ 9. that _Solomon_ made ships in _Ezion-Geber_ on
the shoare of the red Sea, which also _Jehosaphat_ did, with _Ahaziah_,
as _Ezra_ saith, in _2 Chron._ 20. and it is certaine that those of
those Countries went that ordinary way to _India_. And it will not
follow, that because the holy Scripture sometimes saith, that they went
to _Tarsis_, and sometimes; that they went to _Ophir_, that therefore
both those places are the same; since that _Tarsis_ is not, as some
thinke _Carthage_, or _Tunes_ in _Africa_ for that the Navie of
_Solomon_ did not set sayle from _Joppa_, a port of the Mediterranean,
but from _Ezion-Geber_, a Port of the red Sea, from whence they could
not sayle to _Carthage_, but to the _East-Indies_. The answer of _Isaac
Abarbanel_ to that argument, cannot be admitted, who saith, that an arme
of _Nilus_ did run into the red Sea, and another arme ran into the
Mediterranean, by _Alexandria_ in _Ægypt_; since it was never heard,
that ships of great burden, did swim in those rivers; and would not he
then have built his Navie in the Port of _Alexandria_? It is more true
that _Tarsis_ is the Ocean, or _Indian_ Sea; and because they came into
the Ocean, after that they had sayled over the red Sea, which is but
narrow, therefore the Scripture saith, _They Sayled_ to Tarsis. _Rabbi
Jonathan ben Uziel_ followes this opinion, who in his Paraphrase, for
_Tarsis_, puts (the Sea.) The same saith _Franciscus de Ribera_, in his
Comment. on _Jonah_, and also _Rabbinus Josephus Coen_, in his
_Chronology_; who ascribe the word _Tarsis_, to the _Indian_ Sea;
because that _Ophir_ is the same Country, which of old is called, _The
Golden Chersonesus_; and by _Josephus_, _The Golden Land_; and at this
day _Malacca_; from whence they brought Ivory, for the great number of
Elephants which are there; none of which are in the _West-Indies_, and
_Solomons_ Navie stayed in those Ports of _India_ three yeares, because
they traded with the Inhabitants! I know that learned _Grotius_, and
famous _de Laet_ thinke differently; as also those quoted by them; but I
shall not insist in confuting their opinions because I study brevity. I
doe like of, in part, the opinion of the _Spaniards_ who dwell in the
_Indies_, who by common consent doe affirme that the _Indians_ come of
the ten Tribes. And truly they are not altogether mistaken, because in
my opinion, _they were the first planters of the Indies_; as also other
people of the _East-Indies_ came by that Streight which is between
_India_, and the Kingdome of _Anian_. But that people, according to our
_Montezinus_, made warre upon those Inhabitants the _Israelites_, whom
they forced up unto the mountaines, and the in-land Countries, as
formerly the _Brittaines_ were driven by the _Saxons_ into _Wales_.


                               _SECT. 3._

The first ground of that opinion is taken from _2 Esdra._ 13. _v._ 40.
&c. (which we quote as ancient, though it be Apocryphall) where it’s
said, that the ten Tribes which _Salmanaster_ carried captive in the
reigne of _Hoseas_, beyond _Euphrates_, determined to goe into Countries
farre remote, in which none dwelt, whereby they might the better observe
their Law. And as they passed over some branches of _Euphrates_, God
wrought Miracles, stopping the course of the Floud, till they had passed
over; and that Country is called _Arsareth_. From whence we may gather,
that the ten Tribes went to _New-Spaine_, and _Peru_, and possessed
those two Kingdoms, till then without Inhabitants. _Genebrardus_,
quoting _Esdras_ concerning that wandring of the ten Tribes, saith, that
_Arsareth_ is _Tartaria_ the greater, and from thence they went to
_Greenland_, for that _America_ is lately found to be on that side
farther from Sea, than it is upon other sides, being almost an Island,
and they might passe from _Greenland_ by the streight of _Davis_ into
the Country _Labrador_, which is now called _India_, being fifty miles
distant from thence, as _Gomoras_ saith in his History. The same
journying of the ten Tribes into _India_, is confirmed by that which _P.
Malvenda_ reports, That _Arsareth_ is that Promontory which is neare to
_Scythia_, or _Tartary_, neare the Sea, called by _Pliny_, _Tabis_,
where _America_ is parted from the Country of _Anian_ by a narrow Sea;
which also on that side parts _China_, or _Tartary_ from _America_; so
that there might be an easie passage for the ten Tribes through
_Arsareth_, or _Tartary_ into the Kingdomes of _Anian_, and _Quivira_;
which in time might plant the new world, and firme land; which in
bignesse equals _Europe_, _Asia_, and _Africa_ put together; _Alonsus
Augustinianus_ counting from the shoare of the North Sea, from the
Country of _Labrador_ 3928 miles, and from _Sur_ 3000. miles; but
_Gomaras_ counts from _India_ by the South, and _Sur_, 9300. miles;
which space is bigge enough for the ten Tribes, that they may there
spread in places hitherto unknowne.


                               _SECT. 4._

He strengthens this opinion, that in the Isle St. _Michael_, which
belongs to the _Azores_, the _Spaniards_ found Sepulchres under ground,
with very ancient Hebrew letters, which _Genebrardus_ hath Printed, _in
lib._ _1. chro._ _p._ 159. From whence we gather, that in that
inscription there is a mistake of the letter (T.) so that the sense of
it is, _How perfect is God. Sehalbin is dead. Know God._ Unlesse you
will have them to be proper Names, and to signifie him that is dead, and
his Father, in which sense for (M) you must read (B) and then the sense
will be, _Meetabel seal, the Son of Matadel_; such names ending in (el)
are common in Scripture, as _Raphael_, _Immanuel_, and the like. Let it
suffice him who is pleased with neither of those conjectures, that
_Hebrew_ Letters were found there. And though that Island is remote from
the _West-Indies_, yet it might be by accident that they might put in
thither.


                               _SECT. 5._

That seemes to be to the purpose which _Garcillassos de la Voga_ saith
in his Comment. on _Peru_, _lib._ 3. _c._ 1. _That in_ Tiahuanacu _a
Province of_ Collai, _among other Antiquities, this is worthy of
memory_, (_being scituated at the Lake which the_ Spaniards _call
Chutuytu_) _That among the great buildings which are there, one was to
be seene of a very great pile, which hath a Court 15. fathoms broad; a
wall that compasseth it, 2 furlongs high; on one side of the Court is a
Chamber 45 foot long, and 22 broad; and the Court, the Wall, the
Pavement, the Chamber, the Roofe of it, the entrance, the posts of the 2
gates of the Chamber, and of the entrance, are made only of one stone;
the three sides of the Wall are an ell thick; the_ Indians say, _that
that House is dedicated to the Maker of the World_. I conjecture that
building to be a Synagogue, built by the _Israelites_; for the Authors
who writ about the _Indies_, tell us, that the _Indians_ never use Iron,
or Iron weapons. Also the _Indians_ were Idolaters, and therefore it
could not be that they should build an house to God. _P. Acosta in lib._
6. _Ind. histor._ _c._ 14. mentions such buildings as are in that place;
and he reports that he measured a stone which was 38. foot long, 18 foot
broad, and sixe foot thick. _Petrus Cieza_ in his first part of his
Chronicles of _Peru_, _c._ 87. relates, That in the City _Guamanga_,
which is scituated by the river _Vinaque_, there is a vast building,
which because then it seemed almost ruined by time, it therefore had
lasted many yeares. He asking the neighbouring _Indians_, Who built that
great Pile? He learnt, that it was made by a people (who were bearded,
and white as the _Spaniards_) who came thither a long time before (and
staid some time after) the _Indians_ raigned there; and the _Indians_
said, that they had received it from their Fathers by Tradition. The
same _Cieza_, _cap._ 10. 5. of the Antiquity of _Tiguanac_, saith, that
what the _Indians_ boast to be very ancient, can by no meanes be
compared with that Ancient building, and other things. From all which
you may well gather, that the first Inhabitants of that place were the
_Israelites_ of the ten Tribes, because they were white, and bearded.


                               _SECT. 6._

To this opinion adde an argument taken from what Logicians call _a
simili_; for he that will compare the Lawes and Customes of the
_Indians_ and _Hebrewes_ together, shall finde them agree in many
things; whence you may easily gather, That the _Indians_ borrowed those
of the _Hebrewes_ (who lived among them) before, or after they went to
the unknowne Mountaines. The _Indians_ of _Jucatan_, and the
_Acuzainitenses_ doe circumcise themselves. The _Totones_ of _New
Spaine_, and _Mexicans_ (as _Roman_ and _Gomaza_ in the generall History
of the _Indians_ testifie) rend their garments, if there happen any
sudden misfortune or the death of any. _Gregorius Gracias in Monarchia
Ingasonum_, an Isle of _Peru_, saith, that _Guainacapacus_ hearing that
his sonne _Atagualpa_ fled for feare of the Army of his enemy, he rent
his garments. The _Mexicans_, and _Totones_, or the _Totonacazenses_
kept continually fire upon their Altars, as God commands in _Leviticus_.
Those of _Peru_ doe the same, in their Temples dedicated to the Sun. The
_Nicaraguazenses_ doe forbid their women who were lately brought a bed,
to enter their Temples, till they are purified. The inhabitants of
_Hispaniola_ thinke those doe sin, who lye with a woman a little after
her childe-birth. And the _Indians_ of _new Spaine_ doe severely punish
Sodomie. Many of the _Indians_ doe bury their dead on the Mountaines;
which also is the _Jewish_ custome; and _Garcias_ saith, the name
_Chanan_ is found in those Countries. You may wonder at this, that the
_Indians_ doe every fifty yeares celebrate a Jubilee, with great pomp,
in _Mexico_, the Metropolis of the whole Province. Also that on the
Sabbath day all are bound to be present in the Temple, to performe their
Sacrifices, and Ceremonies. They also were divorced from their wives, if
they were not honest. The _Indians_ of _Peru_, _New-Spaine_, and
_Guatemala_ did marry the Widdowes of their dead Brethren. May not you
judge from these things, that the _Jewes_ lived in those places, and
that the _Gentiles_ learned such things of them? Adde also to what hath
been said, that the knowledge which the _Indians_ had, of the Creation
of the world, and of the universall Flood, they borrowed from the
_Israelites_.


                               _SECT. 7._

The fourth ground of this opinion is, that the _Indians_ are of a browne
colour, and without beards; but in the new world, white, and bearded men
were found, who had never commerce with the _Spaniards_; and whom you
cannot affirme to be any other than _Israelites_; because also as they
could never be overcome, so shall they never be fully knowne, as
appeares by what followes. _Petrus Simon_ a _Franciscan_, in his History
of finding out the firme Land, saith, that in the reigne of _Charles_
the fifth, he commanded one called _Philippus de Utre_ thither, to
discover, and plant those Countries; that he found them unknowne toward
the North of _America_ about five degrees, in the Province of _Omeguas_,
which is neare the Province of _Venezuela_, and now is called
_Garracas_. And he having learned of their neighbours, the greatnesse of
that people both in wealth, and in war, he determined to war upon them.
Who when they had marched a good way, at last found a rich City, full of
people, and faire buildings; and not farre off two Husband-men tilling
the ground; whom they would have made Prisoners, that they might be
their interpreters. But when they saw themselves set on, they fled apace
towards the City; but _Philippus d’Utre_ and his Souldiers followed them
hard on Horse-back, and had almost taken them; whereupon the Husband-men
stood still, and with their Speares wounded _Philip_ in the breast,
piercing through his Brest-plate made of wooll to keep off Arrowes. He
wondering at the dexterity of that people, judged it a wiser course, not
to make war upon that Province, and people so expert in warre, and who
dared to resist armed men. Therefore he retreated with his Company. And
to this day none goe to that people, neither is it knowne which way to
goe to them. It is probable that they are _Israelites_ whom God
preserves in that place against the day of redemption. _Alonsus de
Erzilla_ testifies the same thing, in 2. part. _Sua Araucaniæ._ _Cant._
27. where describing those places, he thus speakes in Spanish.

           _Some Countries there, so populous are seen,
           As one continued City; which have been
           Never as yet discovered; but unknowne
           To other Nations; have laine hid alone;
           Not found by forreigne sword, nor forreigne trade
           Doe either seeke, nor suffer to be made,
           But unacquainted live, till God shall please
           To manifest his secrets: shew us these._


                               _SECT. 8._

_Ioannes Castilianus Vicarius_ living in the City _Pampelona_ of _Nova
Granada_ in _Peru_, saith, that when _Gonzalus Pisarrus_ had revolted
from his people, he sent some to search out new Countries of the
_Indians_ who lived East-ward, whose number could never be knowne,
because that (as some say) their Country is above two thousand miles in
length, if you compute from the head of the river _Maragnon_, which runs
neare _Andes_ of _Cusco_, unto the place where it runs into the Sea,
where therefore the River began to be navigable, _Petrus d’Orsna_ being
a Captaine, went by water, and his Souldiers with him, in Vessels called
Canows; which when they were too small for the force of the streame, he
built Brigandines, on the banke of the River _Guariaga_, which washing
the Province _Chachapoyas_, runs into _Maragnon_. He was scarce gone
aboard his Brigandines, when one of his own Souldiers named _Aquirre_, a
stout man, killed him, who by common consent succeeded the slaine. When
they had gone a little way, they found a plaine without a mountaine,
where many houses stood on each side of the banke of _Maragnon_, being
built by the _Indians_. They still went on for forty eight houres
together, and saw nothing but tall, and white houses, which they feared
to goe into, because the Inhabitants were numerous, and because they
heard the noyse of Hammers; for which cause they thought the Inhabitants
to be Gold-smiths. They went on still, and now sayled in the North Sea,
but alwayes neare to the shoare of the Province of _Margareta_, where
_Aquirre_ was catcht by the Inhabitants and hanged; for they heard that
he had killed his Captaine _Petrus de Orsua_.


                               _SECT. 9._

_Caspar Bergarensis_ (whom I have oft spoke with) went from the City
_Laxa_, which is in the Province of _Quiti_ in _Peru_, and accompanied
the Colonell _Don Diego Vaca de la Vega_ going to seeke a new Country.

In the yeare 1622. they came to the Province _Jarguasongo_, which had
been discovered by Captaine _Salines_; and they passed the Mountaines
_Cordilleræ_, where the River _Maragnon_ is not above a stones cast
over. In the Province of the _Inde Mainenses_ they built a City, whose
name was St. _Franciscus de Borja_, at _Esquilache_. In his company were
one hundred _Spaniards_ in Canows. Having conquered those _Indians_, and
compelling them to sweare fealty to the King of _Spaine_; the Colonell
being instructed by the _Mainenses_, went to other places, after he had
put a Garrison into his new City. Having sailed fifty leagues in the
River (he found some Cottages of the _Indians_ which there hid
themselves) by favour of many Rivers which there run into _Maragnon_.
When they had sayled into the River _Guariaga_, where _Petrus de Orsua_
had built his Brigandines, and was killed by _Aquirre_; they asked the
_Indians_ whom they had taken (who were called _Guariaga_, from the
Rivers name) what people doe live on the Rivers side? they told the
Colonell, that five dayes journey off, there live men of tall stature,
comely in presence, and have as great beards as the _Spaniards_ have,
valiant, and warlike, who are not skilled in Canowes, though the rest of
the _Indians_ use no other; he presently returned the same way he came.


                              _SECT. 10._

In _Farnambuc_ about forty yeares since, eight _Tabaiares_ had a minde
to looke out new Countries, and to see whether the Land that was beyond,
and unknowne, were inhabited. They having spent foure moneths in
travelling Westward, they came to mountaines, to whose top they got with
difficulty, and found a plaine which a pleasant river doth compasse, by
whose banke side dwelt a people who loved commerce, they were white, and
bearded; and this five of the _Tabaires_ (for three perished by the way,
and only five returned) told to the _Brasilians_ after nine moneths.


                              _SECT. 11._

In our time, under King _Philip_ the third, Captaine _Ferdinades de
Queiros_ being returned out of _India_ (where he had spent most of his
life) to _Rome_, he shewed a Table of Lands yet undiscovered. From
thence he went to _Madrid_, and five ships were given him by the
Governour of _Panama_ (to whom he was sent) to perfect his designe. He
began his journey, and was scarcely entred the South Sea, but he found
Land, which he called, _The Isle of Solomon_, and _Hierusalem_, for
reasons which he told me. He in his course of sayling alwayes kept close
to the shoare of those Islands; he saw those Islanders of a browne
colour, and took many; others dwelt in greater Islands, and more
fruitfull; these were white, and wore long garments of silk; and the
Pilot being bid to bring his Ship neare the shoare, he split his Ship
upon a Rock, (and the Islanders running greedily to the sight) which
being sunke, the Captaine went thence, looking for the firme Land, which
he found to be forty degrees beyond; and he went three hundred miles
neare the shoare; and when he perceived the Country to be inhabited by
the smoke which he saw, and would put into a Port on the side of the
River, there ran to him many white men, of yellow haire, tall like
Giants, richly cloathed, and of long beards. But one of the Vessels
being wracked in the Havens mouth, he was forced to put out to Sea;
whereupon the Islanders sent two Chaloffi of a browne colour, (as the
inhabitants were of the first Island) with sheep, and other provisions,
and fruits, but desiring, and threatning them, if they did not depart:
The Captaine brought those Chaloffi into _Spaine_, from whom the
_Spaniards_ could learne nothing but by signes; and instead of answers,
(when they were asked) would shew their beards, as if such those were,
who were their Lords, and had sent them, and if they were asked about
Religion, they would hold up their fingers to Heaven, implying, that
they worshipped but one God. A little while after, they dyed in
_Spaine_. The Captaine returned to _Panama_, having left his two Ships
which were wracked; and when the Governour sued him, by meanes of the
Senators, who are over the _Indian_ affaires, he was dismissed, and
returned with his Ships into _Spaine_, where he abode two yeares before
his matters were dispatched. But the King created him Marquesse of the
Countries found out by him, and commanded to give him a good Army,
where-with to compasse his designes. But he scarce got to _Panama_, when
he dyed, not without suspition of being poysoned by the Governour.


                              _SECT. 12._

That which I am about to tell, shall serve for a proofe of that which I
said of the _West-Indians_. A Dutch Mariner told me, that not long since
he was with his ship in _America_, seven degrees towards the North
between _Maragnon_, and great _Para_, and he put into an Harbour in a
pleasant River, where he found some _Indians_ who understood _Spanish_,
of whom he bought Meats, and Dywood; after he had stayed there six
moneths, he understood that that River extended eighteen leagues towards
the _Carybes Indians_, as far as the ship could goe; and that the River
is divided there into three branches, and they sayling two months on the
left hand, there met them white men, and bearded, well bred, well
cloathed, and abounding with gold and silver; they dwelt in Cities
enclosed with wals, and full of people; and that some _Indians_ of
_Oronoch_ went thither, and brought home much gold, silver, and many
precious stones, Which he having understood, sent thither some Sea-men;
but the _Indian_ dyed by the way, who was their guide, and so they did
not proceed, but stayed there two months, and trucked with the _Indians_
who were sixty leagues from Sea. That Province is called _Jisbia_, and
is subject to _Zealand_; they have no commerce with the _Spaniards_, and
the inhabitants travell securely every way. I heard that story by
accident from that _Dutch_ Master of the Ship; whence some of us
guessing them to be _Israelites_, had purposed to send him againe to
enquire more fully. But he dyed suddenly the last yeare, whence it
seemes that God doth not permit that those purposes should take any
effect till the end of dayes.


                              _SECT. 13._

Yet I give more credit to our _Montezinus_, being a _Portingal_, and a
_Jew_ of our Order; borne in a City of _Portingal_, called _Villefleur_,
of honest and known Parents, a man about forty yeares old, honest, and
not ambitious. He went to the _Indies_, where he was put into the
Inquisition, as the successor of many who were borne in _Portingal_, and
descended from them, whom the King of _Portingal_, _Don Manuel_ forced
to turne Christians: (_O wicked, and unjust action_, saith _Osorius_;
and a little after, _This was done neither according to Law, nor
Religion_,) and yet to this day they privately keep their Religion,
which they had changed, being forced thereto. He being freed from the
Inquisition, very diligently sought out these things, and oft spoke with
those men, and then was not quiet till he came hither, and had told us
that good newes. He endured much in that journey, and was driven to
great want, so that no house would give him food, or give him money for
his worke. I my selfe was well acquainted with him for six months
together that he lived here; and sometimes I made him take an Oath in
the presence of honest men, that what he had told, was true. Then he
went to _Farnambuc_, where two yeares after he dyed, taking the same
Oath at his death. Which if it be so, why should not I beleeve a man
that was vertuous, and having all that which men call gaine. And who
knowes but that shortly the truth of that Prognostick may appeare, which
our _Montezinus_ learned from the _Mohanes_; answerable to that which
_Jacobus Verus_ an Astrologer of _Prague_ writ after the apparition of
the Comet in _Ann._ 1618. and dedicated to his Highnesse the Prince
_Palatine_, where he thus discourseth: The Comet going towards the
South, doth intimate that the Cities and Provinces which God doth
threaten, are those of the _West-Indies_, which shall revolt from the
King of _Spaine_, who will finde that losse greater then he imagined,
not that the _Indians_ rebell against him of themselves, but that they
are provoked to it being stirred up by others. Neither did the Comet
only fore-tell that, but the eclipse of the Sun, which was in that
Country the yeare before. Thus far the Astrologer. Our ancient Rabbins
say, though we doe not beleeve the Astrologers in all things, yet we doe
not wholly reject them, who sometimes tell truth.


                              _SECT. 14._

Thus farre of the _West-Indies_, of which _Isaiah_ may be understood
(because it lyes in the midst of the Sea, and also hath many Islands) in
_Isa._ 60.9. _The isles shall waite for me, and the ships of Tarshish
first, to bring their Sons from far, their silver and their gold with
them_, Jer. 31.10. _Heare the Word of the Lord O ye Nations, and declare
it in the isles afar off, and say, He that scattereth Israel will gather
him_, Psal. 97.1. _The Lord reigneth, let the earth rejoyce, and the
multitude of isles be glad._ Where part of the ten Tribes doe dwell
unknown to this day.


                              _SECT. 15._

You must know that all the ten Tribes were not carried away at the same
time. _Pul_ the King of _Assyria_ (as I shew in the second part of my
Reconciler) conquered, and carried away the Tribes of _Reuben_, _Gad_,
and halfe _Manasseh_, in the reigne of _Peka_, as you may see in _1
Chron._ 5.26. and _Josephus in li._ 9. _c._ 11. _Tiglahpileser_ eight
yeares after took _Ijon_, _Abel-beth-maachah_, _Hazor-Gilead_,
_Galilee_, all the land of _Naphtali_, and he carryed away all the
Captives into _Assyria_, in _2 King._ 15.29. At last _Shalmaneser_ King
of _Assyria_, nine yeares after, in the reign of _Hoshea_ the Son of
_Elah_, besieged _Samaria_ three yeares; which being taken, he carried
away. _Hoshea_, with the rest of the Tribes, in _2 King._ 17.6. Of those
three times the Prophet _Isaiah_ speakes, _Isa._ 9.1. saying, the first
captivity was gentle, if you compare it with the last, which was
grievous, and unsufferable, when the Kingdome and Monarchy of _Israel_
ceased.


                              _SECT. 16._

The ten Tribes being conquered at severall times, we must thinke they
were carried into severall places. As we beleeve they went to the
_West-Indies_ by the strait of _Anian_, so we thinke that out of
_Tartary_ they went to _China_, by that famous wall in the confines of
both. Our argument to prove it, is taken from the authority of two
Jesuites, who erected their Colledges in those Countries. _Nicholaus
Trigantius_ a Dutch-man in his discourse of the Christian expedition
under-taken by the Jesuites to _Sina_, saith, We finde that in former
time the _Jewes_ came into these Kingdomes. And when that society had
for some yeares seated it selfe in the Court of the _Pequinenses_, a
certaine _Jew_ came to _P. Matthæus Riccius_; he was borne in
_Chamfamfu_ the metropolis of the Province _Honan_, and was surnamed
_Ogay_; and now being licensed to the degree of a Doctor, he went to
_Pequin_. But when he read in a certaine Booke writ by a Doctor of
_China_, concerning the _European_ affaires, That our fathers are not
_Sarazens_, and know no God but the Lord of Heaven and Earth; and would
perswade himselfe that ours did professe the Law of _Moses_, he went
into the Church with _P. Matthæas Riccius_. On an Altar there was the
effigies of the Virgin _Mary_, and the childe Jesus, whom St. _John_ his
fore-runner worshipped with bended knees; now that day was the Holy-day
of _John_ the Baptist. The _Jew_ thinking it was the effigies of
_Rebecca_, and her two Sons, _Jacob_ and _Esau_, he bowed also to the
Image, but with this Apology, that he worshipped no Images, but that he
could not but honour these who were the Parents of our Nation. And he
asking if the foure Evangelists on both sides of the Altar, were not
foure of the twelve sons of _Jacob_; the Jesuite answered, Yes, thinking
he had asked of the twelve Apostles. But afterward the _Jew_
acknowledged to the Jesuite that he was an _Israelite_; and he found the
Kings Bible, and acknowledged the _Hebrew_ Letters, though he could not
read them. By this occasion our people learnt, that ten or twelve
families of _Israelites_ were there, and had built a very neat Synagogue
which cost ten thousand Crownes, in which they have kept the five Bookes
of _Moses_ with great veneration for six hundred yeares. He also
affirmed, that in _Hamcheu_ the Metropolis of the Province _Chequiona_,
there are farre more Families, with a Synagogue; and else-where that
many Families live without a Synagogue, because that by little and
little they are extinguished. He relating many things out of the Old
Testament, he differed but little in pronouncing those names. He said,
that some among them were not ignorant of the _Hebrew_ Tongue, but that
himselfe had neglected it, having studied the _China_ Tongue from a
Childe. For which cause he was counted almost unworthy of their society,
by the Ruler of the Synagogue. But he chiefly looked after this, that he
might get to be Doctor. Three yeares after _P. Matthæus Riccius_ sent
one of our brethren to that Metropolis, who found all those things true.
He compared the beginnings, and endings of the Bookes which the _Jewes_
keep in their Synagogue, with our Pentateuch, and saw no difference,
this only, that those had no pricks. The other Jesuite is _Alfonsus
Cimedro_, who likewise saith, that there is a great number of _Jewes_ in
the Province of _Oroensis_, on the West part of _China_, who know
nothing of the comming, and suffering of Jesus. And he from thence
gathers, that they are of the ten Tribes, (which opinion I also am of)
because those _Chineses_ observe many _Jewish_ Rites, which you may see
in a manuscript, which the noble _Jaochimus Wicofortius_ hath. And why
might not some of them saile from _China_ to _New-Spaine_, through the
streight between _China_, and _Anian_, and _Quivira_, which doe border
upon _New-Spaine_; and from thence they went to the Isles of _Panama_,
_Peru_, and those thereabouts. These in my judgement are those
_Chineses_ of whom _Isaiah_ speakes, Chap. 49. vers. 12. (treating about
_Israels_ returne to his Country.) _Behold, these shall come from
afarre, and these from the North, and from the West, and these from the
Land of Sinim._ And so _Ptolomy_ in _lib._ 7. _c._ 3. _tab._ 11. cals it
The country of _Sinim_, or _Sina_; and this is the true sense of the
words; _Aben Ezra_ therefore is mistaken, who derives it of Sene, a bush
or wood, which he placeth in _Ægypt_.


                              _SECT. 17._

I Could easily beleeve, that the ten Tribes as they increased in number,
so they spread into more Provinces before-mentioned, and into _Tartary_.
For _Abraham Ortelius_ in his Geography of the World, and Map of
_Tartary_, he notes the place of the _Danites_ which he cals the Hord,
which is the same which the Hebrew _Jerida_, signifying _A descent_. And
lower, he mentions the Hord of _Naphtali_, possessed by _Peroza_ in the
yeare 476. _Schikhardus_ in his Tarich or series of the Kings of
_Persia_, amplifies the History of this War, where _ex lib. 4. of
Agathias_, he thus saith, _A little after, when they were eased of that
Plague_, (_sc._ 7. yeares drought) _in the time of the Emperour_ Zeno,
Firuz _made a double warre with_ Naphtali, _in which at last he was
destroyed. For first of all he was brought to the streights of places
unknowne; who then sought for peace upon this condition (and obtained
it) that he should sweare that he would never after provoke them; and
that he should doe reverence to this Conquerour in token of subjection:
which afterward by the counsell of the Magicians he performed craftily,
for he bowed towards the Eastern Sun, that his owne people might thinke
that he bowed rather to the Sun (after his Country custom) then to
honour his Enemy. But he did not truly performe that first agreement,
though confirmed by Letters Patents; who because he could not digest the
disgrace of bowing to his Enemy, he prepared a new Army and went against
them; but a second time he being entrapped by the badnesse of the
Country, he lost his life; and many with him, in a Gulf which the_
Naphthalites _had prepared for him, having dressed it over with reeds,
and some earth throwne a top; they having left in the middle some high
grounds, and trees where their Scouts were, that their stratagem might
not be found, and that the_ Persians _might more confidently attempt the
ditch. Thus a rash King paid for his perfidy, he excelling more in
daring, then in counsell, as_ Agathias _saith. The patent by which peace
had been agreed, was hung upon a speare, and might be seene of him at
distance, that he might remember his Oath, repent, and desist from his
enterprise; but he cared little for that. But when by his unexpected
fall he saw he should dye, it is said that he pulled off from his right
eare a pearle of huge bignesse, and whitenesse, and least any after him
should finde it (more likely that his corps should not be knowne) he
threw it a great way off._ The same Author askes, who those
_Naphthalites_ were, and by many arguments he proves that they are the
relicks of the _Jewes_; saith he, _I doe wholly thinke that they are the
relicks of the_ Jewes _of the Tribe of_ Naphtali, _whom_ Triglath
Pilesser _the_ Assyrian _carried into those places, in_ 2 King. 15.29.
_For_ 1. _The name, in the best copies of_ Agathias, _which_
Lewenclavius _hath mended, is the same fully; in other Bookes it wants
nothing but an (h) now it is scarce possible that in a word of many
syllables that should fall out by chance_. 2. _Their countenance
discovers it, for as Procopious_ I. C. _saith, they are not blacke, or
foule in their countenance, as the_ Auns _are among whom they live, but
the only white men of that Country; that it may evidently appeare that
they came from some other place thither_. 3. _Their manners agree, for
the same Author saith, that they are not_ Nomades, _as the_ Huns _who
are unconstant in their dwelling, and eate up one place after another;
but they inhabite one certaine place. Besides, they observe Law and
equity, as the_ Romans; _and have pollicy, being well governed by their
Prince: both which is rare among their neighbour Nations. Also they doe
not lay abroad their dead, as the_ Barbarians _doe, but they decently
cover them with earth. Lastly, their jornalls doe testifie that many_
Jewes _live there, especially in the mountaines, who have searched to
the mid-land countries of East_-Asia, R. Benjamin, _f._ 23. _From
thence_ (_the coast of_ Persia) _is 28. dayes journey to the mountaines_
Nisebor, _which are neare the river_ Gozan. _The Israelites which come
from thence into_ Persia, _say, that there in the Cities of_ Nisebor,
_are four Tribes_ (_sc._ Dan, Zebulon, Asor, Naphtali,) _of the first
captivity, which_ Shalmaneser _the_ Assyrian _carried thither, as in_ 2
King. 17.6. _he brought them to_ Habor, _and_ Halah, _the river_ Gozan
_and the Mountaines of_ Media. _The compasse of that Country is twenty
dayes journey; and they possesse Cities, and Castles upon the
Mountaines, by one side of which, runs the river_ Gozan; _neither are
they subject to the Nations, but have a Governour over them, by name_ R.
Joseph Amarkela _a Levite, and there are among them some who study
wisdome. They sow, and reap; yea they wage war to the Country of_ Cuth.
_In_ the same place _Ortelius_ adds, in the Country _Tabor_, or _Tibur_
(which _Solinus_ commends, in _c._ 49.) they dwell a people, who though
they have lost the holy writings, they obey one King, who came into
_France_, in Ann. 1530. and spoke with _Francis_ the first, was burnt at
_Mantua_ by the command of the Emperour _Charles_ the fifth, because
that he did privately teach Judaism to Christian Princes, and to the
Emperour himselfe. _Boterus_ saith the same in his relations of the
farthest part of _Tartary_. But both these were deceived; for _Rabbinus
Josephus Cohon_, a man worthy to be beleeved, relates this more truly in
his Chronology, saying, that the _Jew_ who came out of that Country, was
the brother of the King of the _Israelites_, was called _David_ the
_Reubenite_; and having seene _India_ in his passage, he came to
_Portugal_, where he converted the Kings Secretary to Judaism, who fled
from thence with him, taking the name of _Selomoh Molho_; he in short
time was so well versed in the Law, yea in the _Cabala_ it selfe, that
he made all _Italy_ admire him. The Secretary together with the
_Reubenite_, endevoured to draw the Pope, _Charles_ the fifth, and
_Francis_ the first to Judaism. _Selomoh Molho_ was taken at _Mantua_,
and burnt alive, in the yeare 1540. He yet was offered his life, if he
would turne Christian. The _Reubenite_ was by _Charles_ the fifth
carried prisoner into _Spaine_, where he shortly after dyed. _Abraham
Frisol Orchotolam_ remembers the _Reubenite_, saying, Forty five years
agone _David Reubenita_, a Prince of the _Israelites_, came from
_Tabor_, a Province of _Tartary_, into _Europe_, who said that two
Tribes are there; and other Tribes a little farther, under their Kings,
and Princes, and also an unspeakable number of people. Perhaps the
Province _Tabor_ is the same that _Habor_; which is mentioned in 2 King.
17.6. that the ten Tribes were brought by _Salmaneser_ to _Habor_, and
_Halah_; now the Hebrew letters (_h_) and (_t_) are neere in fashion.
_Eldad Danita_ of the Tribe of _Dan_, came out of those Countries five
hundred yeares agone (a letter from whom, which we call _Sephar Eldad
Danita_, is kept to this day) and being examined by the Rabbins, was
found an approved man. The learned Rabbi _David Kimhi_, who lived 450.
yeares since, in _etymol. suo_ in the word _Segiah_, he saith, _Rabbi
Jonah_ writes of the name of _Rabbi Juda Aben Karis_, that he heard
_Eldad Danita_ say, &c. And so what I said is true, as appeares by the
testimonies produced.


                              _SECT. 18._

Part of the ten Tribes also live in _Ethiopia_, in the _Habyssin_
Kingdome; as divers _Habyssins_ reported at _Rome_. _Boterus_ in his
relations speakes the same thing, that two potent Nations doe live neare
_Nilus_, and that one of them is that of the _Israelites_, who are
governed by a mighty King. A Cosmographer who hath added notes to
_Ptolomyes_ tables, saith thus in his table of _New Africa_; that part
of _New Africk_ was unknowne of old, the head of _Nilus_ not being
knowne, which is in the Mountaines of the Moone, as the Ancients call
them; where there dwels a great number of _Israelites_, paying tribute
to _Prester John_. _Rabbi Abraham Frisol_ in the Book already quoted,
saith, that in his time some who had been in those Countries, reported
the same to _Hercules_ the Duke of _Ferraria_. And without question from
hence the _Habyssins_ learned Circumcision, the observation of the
Sabbath, and many more _Jewish_ rites. Of these _Isaiah_ seemes to
speake, in _Isa._ 18.1, 2. _Woe to the Land which under the shadow of
sails doth saile beyond the rivers of_ Ethiopia, _by whom_ (the Prophet
saith) _are sent Ambassadors in ships of Bulrushes_, (such as the
_Æthiopians_ use, commonly called _Almadiæ_.) _Bring back a people
driven out of their Country, and torn, and more miserable then any among
us. Gifts shal be brought to the Lord of Sebaoth, in the place where the
name of the Lord of Sebaoth is worshipped, in the mount Sion._ The
Prophet _Zephany_ saith the same, in _Zeph._ 3.9, 10. _Then will I give
to the people that they speaking a pure language, may all call upon the
name of God, whom they shall serve with reverence; from beyond the
rivers of_ Ethiopia _they shall bring to me for a gift, Hatray_ the
daughter of my dispersed ones, (that is, the Nations of _Æthiopia_.)
Which agrees with that of _Isa._ _And your Brethren_, (which are the ten
Tribes) _shall bring gifts to the Lord_.


                              _SECT. 19._

And without doubt they also dwell in _Media_; from thence they passed
_Euphrates_, whither they were first brought, as in _2 King._ 17.24 and
in the book of _Tobit_. _Josephus_ also speakes of them in the Preface
of his Book of the War of the _Jewes_, that the _Jewes_ did think that
their brethren, who dwelt beyond _Euphrates_, and farther, would rebell
against the Romans. _Agrippa_ in his Oration to the people of
_Jerusalem_, that they would not rebell against the _Romans_, speakes
thus; _What associates doe ye expect to joyne with you in your
rebellion, and war? doth not all the knowne world pay tribute to the_
Romans? _Perhaps some of ye hope to have help from them beyond_
Euphrates. And in _lib._ 2. _Antiquit._ _c._ 5. speaking of those who in
the time of _Ezra_ returned from _Babylon_ to _Jerusalem_, he saith,
_All Israel dwelt in_ Media; _for two Tribes only dwelt in_ Asia, _and_
Europe, _and lived subject to the_ Romans; _as the other ten on the
other side_ Euphrates, _where they are so many, that they cannot be
counted_. It is not therefore to be doubted, the people encreasing after
their first transportation, they sought out new places, which we have
formerly mentioned.


                              _SECT. 20._

Lastly, all thinke, that part of the ten Tribes dwell beyond the river
_Sabbathian_, or sabbaticall. _Rabbi Johanan_ the Author of the
_Jerusalem Talmud_, who lived 160. yeares after the destruction of the
second Temple, saith in his treatise of the _Sanhedrim_, _cap._ 17. That
the ten Tribes were carryed into three places, _sc._ to the Sabbaticall
river, to _Daphne_ the suburbs of _Antioch_, and thither where a cloud
comes downe and covers them: And that they shall be redeemed from those
three places; for so he opens that place of _Isa._ Cha. 49.9. _That they
may say to the Captives, Goe forth_, (_sc._ to them who are at the
Sabbaticall river) _to them that are in darknesse, shew your selves_,
(_sc._ to them who are compassed with the cloud) _and to all, they shall
be refreshed in the wayes_, (_sc._ to them who live in _Daphne_ of
_Antioch_ which is in _Syria_.) Whence you may observe, that the learned
man _l’ Empereur_ translated it ill, _at the sides of Antioch_, whereas
_Daphne_ is the proper name of a pleasant Grove near _Antioch_. _Sedar
olam_ makes mention of that cloud, and calls them _mountaines of
obscurity_, And in _Talmud tractat. Sanhedr._ _c._ 11. _R. Jonathan ben
Uziel_, who lived a hundred yeares before the destruction of the second
Temple, in _Exod._ 34.10. where the Lord saith, _I will doe wonders
before all thy people, such as was never done in the whole earth, or in
any Nation_, &c. and he refers all those things to the transportation of
the people. _He shall draw them to the rivers of Babylon: and shall
carry them to the Sabbaticall river, and shall teach them, that those
miracles were never performed to any Nation of the known world._

Our ancient Rabins in _Beresit Rabba_ (no mean book) in _Perasach_, do
say that _Tornunsus_ asking how it should appeare that the day which we
keep, is the seventh day, on which God rested after the creation of the
world; _Rabbi Aquebah_ (who lived 52 yeares after the destruction of the
second Temple) answered by an argument taken from the stones of the
Sabbatical River, which in the six dayes are tossed up and down with a
continuall motion, but do rest on the Sabbath day and move not. The same
is said in the _Babylonian Talmud, tractat. Sanhed. c._ 7. _& in Tanuh
Perasach. c._ 9. _In eodem Beresit Raba, in Perasach_ 37. _Rabbi Simon_
saith, _The ten Tribes were carried to the Sabbaticall river but Juda
and Benjamin are dispersed into all Countrys_. In _Asirim Raba_, the
last verse of the Song, its said, _Our bed is flourishing_; that it is
meant the ten Tribes, which were carryed to the Sabbaticall river; and
that river running all the week, doth cause the ten Tribes there
remaining to be shut up; for though on the seventh day the river doth
rest, yet it is forbidden by our Law to take a journey then; and for
that reason they remained there miraculously, as lost, and concealed
from us. So that of _Isa._ 49. _That they say to the prisoners, go
forth_, is interpreted of them in _Jalcut_. _R. Aquebah_ after the same
manner explains that of _Levit._ 36.38. _And ye shal perish among the
heathen._ And that of _Isa._ 27. _ult._ _And they shall come, who were
ready to perish in Assyria._ Because they are remote from the rest,
therefore another Rabbi in Bamibar _Raba Parasa_ 16. applyes to them
that of _Isaiah_ 49.12. _Behold them who come from farre_: that so all
those Authors mention that River.

The testimony of _Josephus_ is famous, _lib._ 7. _de Bel. Jud. cap._ 24.
saying, _The Emperour Titus passing between Arca, and Raphanea, Cities
of King Agrippa, he saw the wonderfull river, which though it be swift,
yet it is dry on every seventh day; and that day being past, it resumes
its ordinary course, as if it had no change; and it always observes this
order. It is called Sabbaticall; from the solemne feast of the Jews,
because it imitates their rest every seventh day._ I know some do
otherwise expound those words of _Josephus_, but they hit not his
meaning, as appears by this, that he calls the River, Sabbathio, or
sabbaticall: which word cannot be derived but from Sabbath; and who doth
not see that it ceaseth to flow, or move, on the Sabbath day; and so
_Josephus_ must be understood according to my sense. _Pliny_ also
confirms this opinion, _lib._ 1. _Nat. hist. c._ 2. he saith, _In Judea
a River lies dry every Sabbath_; yet I think _Pliny_ is deceived and ill
informed, when he saith it is a River in Judea; neither is to be found
in Judea, but in another place, where many Jewes live. _R. Selomoh
Jarchi_ who lived 540. years since mentions that River in _Comment.
Talm._ saying, The stones, and sand of that River do continually move
all the six dayes of the week, until the seventh. _R. Mardochus Japhe_
in his learned book _Jephe Thoar_ saith, The _Arabians_ derive
Sabbathion from the Sabbath, who use to adde the particle (ion) to
adjectives. The same saith, that it was told him of an hour-glasse
filled with the sand of Sabbathion, which ranne all the weeke till the
Sabbath. And I heard the same from my father; which testimony I account
as good, as if I saw it my selfe; (for fathers do not use to impose upon
their sons.) He told me that there was an Arabian at _Lisborn_, who had
such an hour-glasse; and that every Friday at evening he would walk in
the street called the new street, and shew this glasse to Jewes who
counterfeited Christianity, and say, _Ye Jewes, shut up your shops, for
now the Sabbath comes_. Another worthy of credit, told me of another
hour-glasse, which he had some years before, before the Port _Mysketa_.
The Cadi, or Judge of that place, saw him by chance passing that way,
and asked him, what it was? he commanded it to be taken away; rebuking
the Mahomitans, that by this, they did confirme the Jewish Sabbath. I
should not speak of these glasses, if the authority of such a man whom I
have alledged, did not move me; though I beleeve that God did not only
work that miracle, that he might keep part of the ten Tribes there, but
other also, as you may see in _Esdras_. _R. Moses Gerundensis_ a learned
Cabalist, and Interpreter of the Law in _Parasa Aazinu_, thinks the
River Sabbathion to be the same with Gozan, of Guz, which signifies to
snatch away, because except the seventh day, on all the other, it
carryes with it, by its swiftnesse, the very stones. Of this there is
mention in 2 _King._ whither the King of _Assyria_ led his captives; and
so relates _Benjamin Tudelensis_ in his journall, that part of the ten
Tribes dwelt at the bank of that River. But I know not where the River
Gozan is. In the year 5394, that is, 15 years agon in the City _Lubin_,
two _Polonians_ after they had travelled long, they wrot in Dutch a book
of the originiall of the Sabbaticall River, but the Senate commanded it
to be burnt at the Mart of Breslaw, by the perswasion of the Jesuites.
_Abraham Frisal_ in his Orchot Olam. _c._ 26. will have this river to be
in _India_, he saith, _The head of the Sabbaticall river is in the
country of Upper India, among the rivers of Ganges_. And a little after,
_The Sabbaticall river hath its originall from the other side of
Kalikout_ (which lyes far above the bound of _Lamik_, which he placeth
beyond the _sinus Barbaricus_) _and it parts the Indians from the
Kingdome of the Jewes, which river you may certainly find there_, Though
he takes _Gozan_ for _Ganges_, for some nearnesse of writing; yet its
not to be doubted that in that place there are many Jewes, witnesse
_Johannes de Bairos_ in his Decads. _Eldad Danita_ speaking of the four
Tribes: which he placeth at _Gozan_ saith, _The Sabbaticall river is
among them_. _Josephus_ saith, that _Titus_ saw the Sabbathion between
_Arca_ and _Raphanea_. Which testimony seems the truer, because its not
to be thought that _Josephus_ would tel a lie of him, by whom he might
be rebuked. I think that ye must look for it not far from the Caspian
Sea: and I am not alone in this opinion. What ever it be it appeares
that this river is somewhere, and that part of the ten Tribes are hid
there; and I may say with _Moses_ in _Deut._ 29.28, 29. _And the Lord
cast them out of their Land in anger, and in wrath; Secret things belong
to the Lord our God._ For it is not known when they shall return to
their Countrey; neither can it perfectly be shewed where they are, God
suffering it, as its said in _Deut._ 32.26. _I determined to cast them
forth unto the ends of the earth, and to make their remembrance cease
from among men._ As if he should say, I wil cast them unto the furthest
places of the world that none may remember them; and therefore they are
truly in Scripture called _imprisoned_, and _lost_.


                              _SECT._ 21.

Neither is there weight in the Argument which some have brought to me,
if they be in the world, why doe we not know them better? There are many
things which we know, and yet know not their original; are we not to
this day ignorant of the heads of the four Rivers, _Nilus_, _Ganges_,
_Euphrates_, and _Tegris_? also there are many unknown Countryes.
Besides, though some live in knowne and neighbour Countrys, yet they are
unknown by being behind Mountains; so it happened under the reign of
_Ferdinand_, and _Isabel_, that some Spaniards were found out by
accident, at _Batueca_, belonging to the Duke of _Alva_, which place is
distant but ten miles from _Salamanca_, and near to _Placentia_, whither
some Spaniards fled, when the _Moors_ possessed _Spaine_, and dwelt
there 800 years. If therefore a people could lie hid so long in the
middle of _Spaine_, why may we not say that those are hid, whom God will
not have any perfectly to know, before the end of days?

And these things we have gathered concerning the habitations of the ten
Tribes, who, we beleeve, do still keep the Jewish Rites, as in 2 _King._
17.26. when the Israelites were carryed captive by _Salmaneser_, and
those of _Cuthah_ came in their stead, an Israelitish Priest was sent by
the King, to teach them, because Lyons infested them, for that they were
ignorant that there was another worship used in the land: but when the
Priest saw that it was impossible to take that people wholly off from
Idolatry, he permitted them to worship divers gods, so that they would
acknowledge one, to be the mover of all things. The same is also
sufficiently proved out of all the Histories which we have alledged. And
our brethren do keep the law more zealously out of their land, then in
it, as being neither ambitious, nor contentious (which hath sometimes
happened with the family of _David_) by which means they might easily
erre in the true Religion, not acknowledge _Jerusalem_, and withdraw
that obedience, which is due to the Lord, and to his Temple.


                              _SECT._ 22.

Wee learne out of the first of _Ezra_, that none of the ten Tribes
entred the second Temple; for it is said that only some of the Tribe of
_Judah_, and some of _Benjamin_ did returne. _Ezra_ also saith the same
in the first of _Chronicles_, that _Salmaneser_ carryed the ten Tribes
to _Hala_, _Habor_, and _Hara_, and to the river _Gozan_ to this day: so
that you may gather that at that time they were there. So likewise
_Josephus in Antiq; Ind. lib._ 11. _c._ 5.

Perhaps some will say, since _Media_ and _Persia_, are near to
_Babylon_, why did they not return to _Jerusalem_ with the two Tribes? I
answer, because so few of the two neighbouring Tribes did return from
thence to _Jerusalem_, for that they were wel seated in _Babylon_; or
else because they heard the Prophets say, that they must not look for
any redemption but that which was to be at the end of dayes. How then
can we thinke that they who were more remote, and also had learnt the
same things of the Prophets, should leave their place, perhaps to suffer
new miseries, and calamities? Besides, we doe not read that _Cyrus_ gave
leave to any to return, but only to the two Tribes of _Juda_ and
_Benjamin_. And also it is probable (as some Authors affirme) that they
could not goe up from thence, because they had continually Wars with the
neighbour people.


                              _SECT._ 23.

Hitherto we have shewed that the ten Tribes are in divers places, as in
the _West-Indies_, in _Sina_; in the confines of _Tartary_, beyond the
river _Sabbathion_, and _Euphrates_, in _Media_, in the Kingdome of the
_Habyssins_; of all which the Prophet _Isaiah_ is to be understood, in
_Isa._ 11.11. _It shall come to passe in that day, that the Lord shall
set his hand the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which
shall be left from_ Assyria, _from_ Egypt, _from_ Pathros, _from_
Ethiopia, _from_ Elam, _from_ Sinear, _from_ Hamath, _and from the
Islands of the Sea_. From whence you may gather, that it is meant of
those places where the ten Tribes dwell. _Syria_ and _Ægypt_ shall be
the two places of their generall meeting; as more fully hereafter.

_Pathros_, is not _Pelusium_, nor _Petra_, but _Parthia_, neare to the
Caspian Sea, where I thinke, with many others, the Sabbaticall river is.
Although there is a _Pathros_ in _Ægypt_, as the learned _Samuel
Bochardus_ saith in his holy Geography.

_Chus_, according to common opinion, is _Æthiopia_, as is proved out of
_Jer._ 13.23. and in this place of _Jeremy_ are meant the _Israelites_,
who live in the Country of the _Abyssins_.

_Elam_, is a Province in _Persia_, as it appeares in _Dan._ 8.2. where
are desert places, in which, perhaps, the remnant of the ten Tribes is.

_Shinar_, is a Province about _Babylon_, as in _Gen._ 10.10. where
_Babel_ is said to be in _Shinar_; and _Dan._ 1.2. it is said, that
_Nebuchadnezzar_ carryed the holy Vessels to the Land of _Shinar_.

_Hamath_, there are many Hamaths mentioned in the Scripture, many
understand it of _Antioch_; but because Geographers reckon up 12 places
named _Antioch_, therefore we can affirme nothing for certain; but I
thinke, that that is meant, which is placed in _Sythia_. The seventy
Interpreters by _Hamath_, understand the Sun, from _Hamath_ the Sun; and
they translate it, From the rising of the Sun; and I thinke it is no ill
translation; for hereby all the _Israelites_ who are in greater _Asia_,
_India_, and _Sina_, may be understood.

The _Islands of the Sea_; so almost all translate it; but I thinke it is
to be rendred The Islands of the West, for (_jam_) in holy Scripture
signifies _The West_, as in _Gen._ 28.14. and in many other places; and
upon this account those _Israelites_ are implyed, who are Westward from
the Holy Land, among whom the _Americans_ are.


                              _SECT._ 24.

The Prophet adds in _Isa._ 11.12. _And he shall set up a signe for the
Nations, and he shall assemble the out-casts of_ Israel, _and gather
together the dispersed of_ Judah _from the foure quarters of the earth_.
Where he notes two things; 1. That he cals the _Israelites_ out-casts,
but the _Iewes_ scattered; and the reason is, because the ten Tribes are
not only farre off from the Holy Land, but also they live in the
extremities and ends of Countries; from whence the Prophet cals them
_cast-out_. But he doth not say, that the _Israelites_ are to be
gathered from the foure quarters of the Earth, because they are not so
dispersed through the World, as the Tribe of _Iudah_ is, which now hath
Synagogues, not only in three parts of the World, but also in _America_.
The Prophet adds in _ver._ 13, _The envy also of_ Ephraim _shall depart,
and the adversaries of_ Judah _shall be cut off_. For then there shall
be no contention between _Iudah_, and the ten Tribes, which are
comprehended under the name of _Ephraim_, because their first King
_Jeroboam_ was of that Tribe. And then, as it is in _Ezek._ 37.22. _One
King shall be King over them all, and they shall be no more two Nations,
neither shall they be divided any more into two Kingdoms._ There shall
be one King to them both, of the family of _David_. Also the Lord at
that redemption will dry up _Nilus_, and _Euphrates_, and will divide it
into seven streames (answerable to his drying up the red Sea when they
came out of _Ægypt_) perhaps that the seven Tribes, which are in those
parts, may goe over it; as they passe into their Country, as _Isaiah_
saith in ch. 27.12, 13. _And it shall be in that day, and he shall shake
off from the bank of the river_, (some understand _Euphrates_) _unto the
river of_ Egypt (_Nilus_) _and ye, O children of_ Israel, _shall be
gathered one by one_. Which was never done in the captivity of
_Babylon_.

The Prophet _Isaiah_ saith in chap. 11.11. _that he will return them the
second time_, &c. Now the redemption from _Babilon_, cannot be called
such an one, because all of them were not brought back to their Country.
But the redemption shall be universall to all the Tribes, as it was when
they went out of _Ægypt_, which redemption shall be like the first in
many things, as I shewed in the third part of my _Reconciler_; and so it
may be called the second, in reference to that first from _Ægypt_.
Whence _Jeremiah_ saith, Cha. 23.7, 8. _That then it shall not be said,
He that brought_ Israel _out of_ Egypt, _but from the North, and from
all Countries, whither he had driven them_. That they shall not mention
their departure from _Ægypt_, for the cause fore-mentioned.


                              _SECT._ 25.

The same Prophet, _sc._ _Isa._ 43.5, 6. saith, _I will bring thy seed
from the East, and will gather thee from the West: I will say to the
North, Give up; and to the South, Keep not back; bring my Sons from
farre, and my Daughters from the ends of the earth_. For _Media_,
_Persia_, and _China_, lye on the East; _Tartary_ and _Scythia_ on the
North; the Kingdome of the _Abyssins_ on the South; _Europe_ on the
West, from the Holy Land. But when he saith, _Bring ye my sons from
farre_, he understands _America_; so that in those verses he understands
all those places, in which the Tribes are detained. Also in Chap. 49.
from ver. 7. to the end of the Chapter, he saith, that that returne
shall be most happy. And in ch. 56. vers. 8. God saith, _He that gathers
the out-casts of Israel_. And the Prophet _Jeremiah_, in ch. 33. ver.
16. _In those dayes shall_ Juda _be saved, and_ Jerusalem _shall dwell
safely_. It is certaine, and _Jerome_ assents to all our Authors, that
when _Judah_ is joyned with _Israel_, by _Israel_ the ten Tribes are
meant. The same adds in _chap._ 31. _ver._ 15. in the comforting of
_Rachel_, who wept for the carrying away her sons, _Joseph_, and
_Benjamin_, the first by _Salmaneser_ into _Assyria_, the last by
_Nebuchadnezzar_ into _Babilon_, he saith, in vers. 16. _Refraine thy
voyce from weeping, and thine eyes from teares, for thy work shall be
rewarded._ And it followes in Chap. 33. ver. 7. _And I will cause the
captivity of_ Judah, _and the captivity of_ Israel _to returne, and I
will build them up as at the first_. _Ezekiel_ saith the same in Chap.
34.13. and in Chap. 37.16. under the figure of two sticks, on which were
written the names of _Judah_, and _Ephraim_, by which he proves the
gathering together of the twelve Tribes to be subject to _Messiah_ the
Son of David, in ver. 22. he saith, _And one King shall be King to them
all_; according as _Hosea_ saith in Chap. 2. So also saith _Amos_, in
chap. 9. vers. 14, 15. _And I will bring againe the captivity of my
people_ Israel, _and they shall build the wast Cities, and inhabite
them; and they shall plant vine-yards, and drink the wine thereof: they
shall make gardens, and eate the fruit of them. And they shall be no
more pulled up out of their Land, which I have given them, saith the
Lord thy God._ So also _Mica_. in cha. 2.12. _I will surely assemble_, O
Jacob, _all of thee, I will gather the remnant of_ Israel, _I will also
place him as the flock in the sheep-fold_. For that in the captivity of
_Babilon_ all were not gathered together. The Prophet _Zechariah_ in
chap. 8.7. and in chap. 10.6. and all the rest of the Prophets do
witnesse the same thing.


                              _SECT._ 26.

But which way that redemption shall be, no man can tell; but only so
farre as we may gather out of the Prophets. That at that time the ten
Tribes shall come to _Jerusalem_ under the leading of a Prince, whom
some Rabbins in the _Talmud_, and in some places of the Chaldy
Paraphrase, doe call _Messiah_ the Son of _Joseph_; and elsewhere
_Messiah_ the Son of _Ephraim_; who being slaine in the last War of
_Gog_ and _Magog_, shall shew himselfe to be _Messiah_ the sonne of
_David_, who shall be, as _Ezekiel_, and _Hosea_ say, _The everlasting
Prince of all the twelve Tribes_. Our wise men doe, in many places,
especially in the _Babilonian_ Talmud, _in tract. suca_: _c._ 5. make
mention of that _Messiah_ the sonne of _Ephraim_; where they say, that
he shall dye in the last war of _Gog_, and _Magog_; and they so expound
that of _Zach._ 12.10. _And they shall looke upon me whom they have
pierced, and they shall mourne for him, as one mourneth for his only
sonne._ They adde also, that the foure Captaines, of whom the same
Prophet speakes in chap. 11. are, _Messiah_ the son of _David_,
_Messiah_ the son of _Joseph_, the Prophet _Elias_, and the high Priest;
which foure are those dignities, which shall shew their power in that
blessed age. Observe, that sometime they call _Messiah_ the son of
_Ephraim_, sometime of _Joseph_; for he shall come out of the Tribe of
_Ephraim_, and shall be Captaine of all the ten Tribes, who gave their
name to _Ephraim_, because that their first King _Jeroboam_ was of that
Tribe. Not without cause doe they call him the son of _Joseph_, for he
was the true type of the house of _Israel_, in his imprisonment, and
future happinesse. Adde to this, that he was so long hid from his
brethren, that they did not know him: as in like manner the ten Tribes
are at this day, who are led captive, but hereafter shall come to the
top of felicity, in the same manner as _Joseph_ did. That _Messiah_ of
_Joseph_ shall dye in the battel of _Gog_, and _Magog_, and afterward
shall rise againe, that he may enjoy the dignity, not of a Kingly
Scepter, but the office only of a Vice-roy, as _Joseph_ in _Ægypt_; for
that the Empire of the house of _Israel_ fell under the reigne of
_Hosea_ the son of _Elah_; as the Prophet _Amos_ saith in chap. 5.2.
Therefore the Kingdome of the ten Tribes shall not be restored, as
_Ezekiel_ saith in Chap. 37. under the reigne of _Messiah_ the son of
_David_, who shall be everlasting; and by the death of _Messiah_ the son
of _Joseph_, the ten Tribes shall see, that God will not that they
should have more Kings then one. As its already spoken.


                              _SECT._ 27.

Those Tribes then shall be gathered from all quarters of the earth, into
Countries neare to the Holy Land; namely, into _Assyria_, and _Ægypt_;
and from thence they shall goe into their Country; of which _Isaiah_
speakes, in chap. 27.13. _And it shall be in that day, that the great
trumpet shall be blown, and they who were lost, shall come into the Land
of_ Assyria; _and they who were cast out, into_ Egypt; _and shall
worship the Lord in the holy mount at_ Jerusalem. As if he should say,
as trumpets sound, to call any army together: so they shall come
together, who were dead (that is, dispersed through all _Asia_) into
_Assyria_; and the out-casts (that is, which are in _America_) shall
come by the _Mediterranean_ Sea to _Alexandria_ of _Ægypt_; and in the
like manner those who are in _Africa_, when _Nilus_ shall be dried up,
and _Euphrates_ shall be divided; as we have already said. And because
the gathering together of the captivity, shall begin at those who are in
_America_, therefore _Isaiah_ saith, _The Islands shall trust in me, and
the ships of_ Tarsis (that is of the Ocean) _first of all, that they may
bring thy sons from farre, and with them, their silver, and gold_. They
shall then come with speed from those Countries, prostrating themselves
at the mountaine of the Lord in _Jerusalem_, as the Prophet _Hosea_
saith of that redemption in chap. 11.11. _They shall come as birds out
of_ Egypt, and as _Doves out of_ Assyria; so saith _Isaiah_ in Chap.
60.8. _Who are those that fly as a cloud, and as Doves to their nests?_
They which come first, shall also partake of this joy, to see others to
come to them every moment; for which cause the same Prophet saith, _Lift
up thine eyes round about, and behold them who gather themselves to
thee_. And because the two Countrys of _Assyria_ and _Egypt_, shall
first of all kindly receive the people of _Israel_, and shall know the
truth, first of all imbracing the Religion of the Jewes, sacrificing and
praying to God, therefore the prophet _Isaiah_ saith, in c. 19.25.
_Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the worke of my hands; but
Israel is my inheritance._ For so those words are to be understood.


                              _SECT._ 28.

All those are the sayings of the holy Prophets, from whence doth appeare
the returne of Israel into their Country. It is given to none to know
the time thereof, neither is it revealed to _Rabby Simeon ben Johay_,
the Author of the Zoar; because that God hath reserved that mystery to
himself, as _Moses_ saith. _It is hid with me._ And _Isaiah_ in ch.
63.4. _For the day of vengeance is in my heart, and the year in which
the redemption shall come._ Which the Rabbins thus interpret, _I have
reveiled it to my heart and not to Angells_: and elsewhere, _If any man
tell you when Messiah shall come, beleeve him not_. So also the Angel
saith to _Daniel_ ch. 12.9. _All things are closed up and sealed to the
time of the end._ Therefore all those, who search after that time, as
_Rabbi Seadiah_, _Moses_ _Egyptius_, _Moses Gerundensis_, _Selomoh
Jarchi_, _Abraham bar Ribi Hijah_, _Abraham Zacculo_, _Mordehai Reato_,
_and Isaac Abarbanel_, have been mistaken; for that they would go beyond
humane capacity, and reveale that, which God concealed. And even to
_Daniel_ himselfe (to whom was made knowne the secret of the change of
the four Monarchies) it was so revealed to him, that hee confessed he
did not understand it. Our Ancients did point at this from the Letter
(m) in _Isa._ 9.7. where he saith, _Of the increase of his government_:
which (m) in the Hebrew, being such an (m) which they write onely in the
end of words, and a close letter, yet is put in the middle of the word,
against common practise: because that the time of the fifth Monarchy
shall be hid, till the time when it shall begin.


                              _SECT. 29._

_Yet this I can affirm, that it shall be about the end of this age_; and
so the Prophet speaks of that age _about the end of dayes_: and that
after many labours, and a long captivity. So _Balaam_ prophesies,
_Numb._ 24.17. _I see, but not now; I behold, but not near; a Star shall
come out of Jacob._ Isa. 24.22. _They shall be cast into prison, and
they shall be visited after many daies._ And Isa. 49.14. _And Sion said,
The Lord hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me._ Hos. 3.4, 5.
_The children of Israel shall be many days without a King, and without a
Prince: And after that they shall seek the Lord their God, and David
their King._ The King and Prophet complains of that delay, in _Psa._ 44.
_Psa._ 69. _Psa._ 74. _Psa._ 77. _Psal._ 83. And after that in _Psal._
89.50.51. he thus concludes, _Remember, O God, the reproach of thy
servants, who suffer so many injuries of so many people: wherewith they
have reproached the steps of thy Messiah_. As yet at this day it is
said, that ALTHOUGH THE MESSIAH WERE LAME, HE MIGHT HAVE COME BY THIS
TIME. Though we cannot exactly shew the time of our redemption, yet we
judge it to be near. For,

1 We see many prophesies fulfilled, and others also which are
subservient to a preparation for the same redemption; and it appears by
this, that during that long and sore captivity, many calamities are
fore-told us under the four Monarchies. _David_ saith in _Psal._ 120.7.
_Lord when I speake of peace, they speake of war._ And elsewhere, _We
are slaine all the day for thy name, and are accounted for sheep which
are slain_. In Isa. 53.7. _He shall be led as a sheep to the slaughter,
and as a lamb before his shearers: he shall be dumb, and shall not open
his mouth._ O how have we seen these things in the banishments of
_England_, _France_ and _Spaine_! and how have they proved those crimes,
which most false men have said that ours did commit! Behold they have
slaine them, not for wickednesses, which they did not commit, but for
their riches which they had. O how have we seen all those things done by
divine providence, for that those misfortunes for the most part happened
on the ninth day of the month _Ab_, an ominous, and unhappy day, on
which the first, and second Temple were burnt, and the spies wept
without a cause.


                              _SECT. 30._

What shall we say of that horrible monster, the Spanish Inquisition,
what cruelty hath not daily been used against a company of miserable
ones, innocents, old men, and children, of every sex and age, who were
slaine, because they could not divine who was their secret accuser? But
let us see, why in al those places (in which that Spanish tyrannicall
Empire rules,) they were slain, who would observe the law of _Moses_;
and by how many, and how great miracles hath that law been confirmed;
and what unrighteousnesse is there in it? We daily see examples of
constancy in ours, worthy of all praise, who for the sanctifying of Gods
name, have been burnt alive. Truly many who are still living, can
witnesse all those things. In the year 1603. At _Lisbone_, _Diogo
d’Assumean_, a Monk of 24. years, was burnt alive, who defended himselfe
in the Inquisition against some, who would have reduced him to
Christianity, who was born a Christian, and made a Jew; which all wonder
at; the Inquisitors being grieved that they had published the reasons
which he had alledged, would have recalled their sentence; but it was
then too late; for it was divulged through the world, which I my selfe
have by me. Also the Lord _Lope de Veray Alacron_ deserves the praise of
Martyrdome, who being born of a noble, and eminent Family, and very
learned in the Hebrew, and Latine tongues, did imbrace our Religion;
neither thought it sufficient to be such himselfe, but discovered
himselfe to many others; thereupon in _Ann._ 1644 in the twentieth of
this age, he being imprisoned at _Valladolid_, though he lived in the
darke, yet he discovered light to many; neither could the great number
of Doctors, nor the greater affliction of his parents, move him from his
enterprise, either by tears or by promises. He circumcised himself in
prison (O strange act, and worthy of all praise!) and named himselfe
_beleeving Judas_; and at last, as a second _Isaac_, offered himselfe to
the flames, contemning life, goods, and honours, that hee might obtain
immortall life, and good things that cannot perish; in the 25^{th} yeer
of his age. Now though those were not of the family of Israel, yet they
obtained an immortall glory, which is better then this life.

Also we have many examples of our own, which did equalize them, of which
that is one, which is done in our time, and is worthy to be remembred;
_Isaac Castrensis Tartas_ (whom I knew, and spoke with) a learned young
man, and versed in the Greek, and Latine; he being but newly come to
_Fernambuc_, was taken by the _Portugese_, and carryed to _Lisbone_, and
burnt alive; he was a young man of 24. years old; scorning riches, and
honours, which were offered to him, if he would turne Christian. They
who say he was a traytor, do lye egregiously; for he did defend that
place where he was Governour, most valiantly; as ours do deport
themselves in those fortified places which are committed to their
charge. The same Martyrdom was undergone at _Lima_, by _Eli Nazarenus_,
in _Ann. 1639. Janu. 23._ who after he had lived 14 whole years in
prison, all which time hee eat no flesh, lest he should defile his
mouth; he called himselfe by that name, after he had circumcised
himselfe. Such a Martyr also, this year, was _Thomas Terbinon_ in the
City of _Mexico_.


                              _SECT. 31._

If the Lord fulfilled his word in calamities, he will fulfill it also in
felicities. Therefore _Rabbi Aquibah_ laughed, when hee saw a Fox run
out of the Temple being destroyed, though his companions wept; he
saying, Now is fulfilled that prophecy of _Jeremiah_, _Lament._ 5.18.
_And the foxes shall run therein_; and he added, and those blessings
also shall follow, which the Lord hath promised. We see all the curses
of God come to passe, which are mentioned in _Leviticus_ and
_Deuteronomy_; as well as those, which concerne our being scattered to
the ends of the earth (which is _Portugall_) and those concerning the
calamities of the Inquisition; and those of our banishments, as I have
opened in my booke, _De termino vitæ_; from whence it appears, that all
the happy prophesies shall be fulfilled. And as we have perished, so
also shall _Bozra_ (that is, _Rome_) perish. See _Isa._ 34.6.


                              _SECT. 32._

Secondly; The argument which we bring from our Constancy under so many
evills, cannot be eluded, that therefore God doth reserve us for better
things. _Moses_ in _Levit._ 26.44. saith, _Though they be in the land of
their enemies, yet I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them
to destroy them utterly, and to breake my covenant with them, for I am
the Lord their God_. And truly these things are now fulfilled, for that
in this captivity, and among the many reproaches which we Jewes suffer,
yet many of ours are honourably entertained by Princes, with a singular
affection. So _D. Ishac Abarbanel_, who comes of _Davids_ line, is
Counsellor to the King of _Spaine_, and _Portugall_. By this also he
hath got a great name, for that he composed the differences, which arose
beene the King of _Portugall_, and the Republique of _Venice_. And from
that Family of _Äbarbanel_ (which I note by the by) doe proceed my
Children, by my wives side. And in the house of his sonne, _D. Samuel
Abarbanel_, and of his wife _Benuenida_, the Lady _Leonora de Toledo_,
was brought up at _Naples_, who is the Daughter of _D. Peter de Toledo_,
the Vice-roy of _Naples_; who afterwards was married to the most eminent
Duke _Cosmus de Medicis_, and having obtained the Dukedome of _Toscani_,
she honoured _Benuenida_ with as much honour, as if she were her mother.

That peace, which the _Venetians_ made with the Emperour _Sultan Selim_,
75. yeares agone, was made, and ratified by a certaine Jew _Don Selomo
Rophe_, who was sent Ambassadour to _Venice_, and received with great
pomp, by the _Venetians_. At _Constantinople_ D. _Ben Jaese_, _Anaucas_,
and _Sonsinos_ are of great authority with the _Turk_. In _Ægypt_ the
_Jewes_ were alwayes _Saraph baxas_, and also at this day is _D. Abraham
Alholn_. Who knowes not that _D. Josephus Nassi_, otherwise called
_Joannes Michesius_, about the 66. yeare of the former age, was Duke of
_Naccia_, Lord of _Milum_, and of the seven Islands, of whom see
_Famian_. _Strada_ in _Histor. Belgic. part._ 1. _lib._ 5. He was raised
to these honours by _Sultan Selim_. As also by _Sultan Amurat_, _Jacob
Aben Jaes_, otherwise called _Alvoro Mendez_, was made Governour of
_Tyberias_; witnesse _Boterus_ in _Relation, part._ 3. _lib._ 2. in
_Barbary_, the Lords _Rutes_ were always Governours of _Sekes_, _Phes_,
and _Taradanta_. In _Ann._ 1609. _D. Samuel Palaxe_ was sent Ambassadour
to the States, by _Mulai Zidan_ the King of _Maracco_. But he dyed at
the _Haghe_ in _Anno._ 1616. And the most eminent Prince _Maurice_, and
the Nobles, were at his Funerall. In _Persia_ who knowes not of what
account they are? There, thirty years since, _Elhazar_ was second to the
King, and as it were Governour. Now _David Jan_ succeeds him, to whom
others also being joyned, they live in the Court. And that must not be
forgot, that when the most eminent Duke of _Holstein_ sent _Otto
Burchmannus_ Ambassadour to _Persia_, in _Ann._ 1635. he desired
commendatory letters from our _Jewes_ at _Hamburgh_, to them, who (as we
have already told you) doe live there in the Court, that they would make
way there, for him that was a stranger: that he might dispatch his
affaires: Which was also performed. By which means ours, who are in
_Persia_, dismissed _Burchmannus_, with rich gifts, and with Letters to
the most eminent Duke of _Holstein_, which the twelve Chuzæ, or Princes,
had subsigned. A copy of which Letters the most excellent _D. Benjamin
Mussapha_, one familiar with the Prince helped me to. Also _Claudius
Duretu en son thresor des langues_, _fol._ 302. saith, that there are
almost an infinite number of _Jewes_ in _Asia_, especially in _India_,
and that King _Cochini_ is their great favourer. Yea _Linschotes_ saith
(where he treats of _Cochini_) that they have Synagogues there, and that
some of them are of the Kings Counsell. At _Prague_, _Mordocheas Maisel_
had Armes given him by the Emperour _Matthias_, who also knighted him.
Which honour _Iacob Bathsebah_ also had, under the Reigne of
_Ferdinand_; and many other Families are graced with other honours. And
in this very captivity (who could thinke it) they are so wealthy, that
(Gods providence favouring them) they may challenge to themselves a
place among the most Noble.


                              _SECT. 33._

Who can enumerate the number of ours, who are renowned by fame, and
learning? The learned _R. Moses bar Maimon_ was Phisician to _Saladin_
the King of _Ægypt_. _Moses Amon_ to the Emperour _Sultan Bajaseth_.
_Elias Montalto_ to the most eminent Queen of France, _Loysia de
Medicis_; and was also her Counsellor. _At_ Padua _Elias Cretensis_ read
Philosophy; and _R. Abraham de Balmas_, the Hebrew Grammer. And how much
honour had _Elias Grammaticus_ at _Rome_? And almost all the Princes of
_Italy_ honoured him with all kinde of honour, _Abraham Kolorni_; as
appeares by a Letter writ to him by _Thomas Garzoni nella sua piazza
universale del mundo_. _Picus Mirandula_ (who useth to say, _That he had
but small understanding, who only looked after his owne things, and not
after other mens_) and others, had Hebrew teachers. _David de Pomis_
dedicated his Book to Pope _Sextus_ the fifth, who lovingly, and
courteously received both the Author, and work. So at this day we see
many desirous to learne the Hebrew tongue of our men. Hence may be seene
that God hath not left us; for if one persecute us, another receives us
civilly, and courteously; and if this Prince treats us ill, another
treats us well; if one banisheth us out of his country, another invites
us by a thousand priviledges; as divers Princes of _Italy_ have done,
the most eminent King of _Denmarke_, and the mighty Duke of _Savoy_ in
_Nissa_. _And doe we not see, that those Republiques doe flourish, and
much increase in Trade, which admit the Israelites?_


                              _SECT. 34._

_Moses_ saith in his last song, that God would revenge the bloud of his
people who are scattered. And _Ieremiah_ saith, in chap. 2.3. _Israel is
the Lords holy thing, the first fruits of his increase; all who devoure
him shall be found guilty; evill shall come upon them, saith the Lord._
And that the Histories of divers times, even from _Nebuchadnezzar_ to
these very times, doe testifie. Have not the Monarchies of great Princes
been destroyed? Consider with me the miserable ends of _Antiochus_, of
_Pompey_, of _Sisibuthus_, of _Philip_ the King of _France_, of
A_lonsus_ the sonne of _Iohn_ the second. And we may remember, how King
_Sebastian_ with his fourth Generation, and with all his Nobles, was
slaine in a battell of A_frica_, in that same place, in which he had
caused the _Iews_ to be banished. _Ferdinand_, and _Isabel_ were the
great Persecutors of our Nation, but how did both he, and she dye? as
for him his Son-in-law, and his owne Subjects did persecute him; and his
only sonne dyed (leaving no issue) on his Wedding-day, being seventeen
yeares old. His daughter being Heire of the Kingdome, and of her Fathers
hatred, would not marry to _Emanuel_ King of _Portugal_, unlesse he
would compell us to be banished, and change our Religion. But she dyed
in Child-birth of her Sonne _Saragoci_, and also her Son, before he was
halfe a yeare old; and the succession was devolved upon the Kingdome of
_Spaine_. It is not long since, that the _Spaniards_ exercised upon us
at _Mantua_, what ever cruelties they could invent; what shall we say of
that at _Madrid_ in the yeare 1632, was done by the Inquisition, the
King, and Princes of the Kingdome concurring; but in the very same month
dyed the Infant _Charles_, and their Kingdome declined. What wonder is
it if God hath chastised divers Kingdomes by sundry wayes: but of this I
treat farther in my History of the _Iewes_. Let us conclude therefore,
that that good, which God hath promised, will shortly come, since we see
that we have suffered those evils, which he hath threatned us with, by
the Prophets.


                              _SECT. 35._

[Sidenote: 3ly,]

The shortnesse of time (when we beleeve our redemption shall appeare) is
confirmed by this, that the Lord hath promised that he will gather the
two Tribes, _Iudah_, and _Benjamin_, out of the foure quarters of the
World, calling them _Nephussim_. From whence you may gather, that for
the fulfilling of that, they must be scattered through all the corners
of the World; as _Daniel_ saith, _Dan._ 12.7. _And when the scattering
of the holy people shall have an end, all those things shall be
fulfilled._ And this appeares now to be done, when as our Synagogues are
found in _America_.


                              _SECT. 36._

[Sidenote: 4ly,]

To these, let us adde that, which the same Prophet speakes, in ch. 12.
ver. 4. _That knowledge shall be encreased_; for then the prophecies
shall better be understood, the meaning of which we can scarce attaine
to, till they be fulfilled. So after the _Otteman_ race began to
flourish, we understood the prophesie of the two leggs of the Image of
_Nebuchadnezzar_, which is to be overthrowne by the fifth Monarchy,
which shall be in the World. So _Jeremiah_ after he had handled in Chap.
30. the redemption of _Israel_, and _Judah_, and of the war of _Gog_,
and _Magog_ (of which _Daniel_ also speakes in ch. 12.) when he treats
of the Scepter of the Messiah the son of _David_, of the ruine of the
Nations, of the restoration of _Judah_, of holy _Jerusalem_, and of the
third Temple, he adds in ver. 24. _The fierce anger of the Lord shall
not returne, till he hath executed it, and till he hath performed the
intents of his heart; in the latter dayes ye shall understand it._ From
whence followes what we have said, that the time of redemption is at
hand. And because _Jeremiah_ in that Chapter makes an abridgement of all
things that shall be, therefore it is said in ver. 2. _Write thee all
the words which I have spoken to thee in a book._ By this meane making
the Prophecie clearer, by relating in a cleare style, whatever the
Prophets had fore-told; imitating _Moses_, the last words of whose song
are, _Sing, O ye Nations, with his people_, in _Deut._ 32.43. Also the
last words which he spake, after that he had blessed the Tribes, are
these, _Happy art thou, O_ Israel: _who is like to thee, O people? saved
by the Lord, who is the sheild of thy help, and the sword of thy
excellency; and thine enemies shall be found lyars to thee, and thou
shalt tread upon their high places_, in _Deut._ 33.29. From whence it
appeares, that God will revenge the bloud of _Israel_, which had been
shed. _Joel_ confirmes the same in ch. 3.19. _Ægypt shall be a
desolation_, and _Edom shall be a filthy desert, for the violence, and
injury offered to the_ Jewes, _and because they have shed innocent bloud
in their Land_. And as they shall be punished by the just judgement of
God, who wish us evill: so also God will give blessings upon them who
favour us. And those are the trees of the field which then shall
rejoyce. So God saith to _Abraham_, in _Gen._ 12.3. _I will blesse them
who blesse thee, and curse them that curse thee._


                              _SECT. 37._

These are the things which I could gather concerning this matter, which
hath not been heretofore handled; from whence these consequences may be
deduced.

1. That the _West-Indies_, were anciently inhabited by a part of the ten
Tribes, which passed thither out of _Tartary_, by the Streight of
_Anian_.

2. That the Tribes are not in any one place, but in many; because the
Prophets have fore-told their return shall be into their Country, out of
divers places; _Isaiah_ especially saith it shall be out of eight.

3. That they did not returne to the second Temple.

4. That at this day they keep the _Jewish_ Religion.

5. That the prophecies concerning their returne to their Country, are of
necessity to be fulfilled.

6. That from all coasts of the World they shall meet in those two
places, _sc._ _Assyria_, and _Ægypt_; God preparing an easie, pleasant
way, and abounding with all things, as _Isaiah_ saith, ch. 49. and from
thence they shall flie to _Jerusalem_, as birds to their nests.

7. That their Kingdome shall be no more divided; but the twelve Tribes
shall be joyned together under one Prince, that is under _Messiah_ the
Son of _David_; and that they shall never be driven out of their Land.


                              _SECT. 38._

I returne to the relation of our _Montezinus_, which I prefer before the
opinions of all others as most true for that _Peru_ should be derived
from the name _Ophir_, as _Gulielmus Postellus_, _Goropius in Ortelius_,
_Bozius de signis Eccles._ _lib._ 2. _c._ 3. _Marinus in arca Noah_, _P.
Sa. in 3. Reg. Pomarius_ in his _Lexicon_, and _Possevinus_ _lib._ 2.
_Biblith._ _c._ 8. do think, cannot be proved; as _Pineda_ hath wel
observed, in _Job_, _c._ 28. _p._ 500. for we have said out of
_Garcilasso de la Vega_, that that name was unknown to them of _Peru_.
_Ophir_ then is _East-India_, if we beleeve _Josephus_, _lib._ 8.
_Antiquit. Judaic._ _c._ 6. & _Acosta in lib. 1. Histor. Ind._ from
whence _Solomon_ fetched gold, and precious stones. But what _Gomara in
part 1. hist. Ind._ _fol._ 120. and _Zarate in proæm. hist. Peru_, would
have, that ours did passe over that famous, and much praised Island (by
_Plato_ in _Critia_, and _Timæus_) of _Atlantis_, and so went into the
neighbour Islands of _Barlovent_, and from thence to the firm land, and
at last to the Kingdom of _Peru_, and _New-Spain_; it is deservedly
exploded as fabulous; and _Acosta_ laughs at it, _in lib. 1. hist. Ind.
c._ 22. But _Marcilius Ficinus in comment. in Timeum, c._ 4. & _Critia_,
that he might defend _Plato_, thinkes (and his Disciples, _Porphiry_,
_Origen_, and _Proclus_ doe follow him) that all that which is in
_Critia_, and in _Timæus_, is to be understood allegorically. And who
will beleeve _Lescarbotus_, who saith that they are the _Canaanites_,
who fled thither for feare of _Joshua_? For I cannot be perswaded that
they sought out Countries so far remote. They who will have them of
_Peru_ to have come out of _Norwey_, or _Spain_, may be confuted by
their very form, manners and the unlikenesse of their Languages. But
that is more false, that they are _Israelites_, who have forgot
circumcision, and their rites. For they are of a comly body, and of a
good wit, as saith Doct. _Johannes Huarte_, in his book which is called,
_Examen ingenior._ _c._ 14. But contrarily all men know that the
_Indians_ are deformed, dul, and altogether rude. And we have abundantly
shown, with how great study, and zeal, the _Israelites_ have kept their
Language, and Religion, out of their Country.


                              _SECT. 39._

_Montezinus_ then speaks most likely; that as other people forced the
_Israelites_ to betake them to the mountains: so _America_ being first
of all inhabited by the persecuting _Tartars_, they were driven to the
mountains of _Cordillere_, where at last they were hid, as God would
have it. Truly, comparing the _Israelites_ themselves, or their Laws,
with other people, I see not anything that comes nearer truth. Perhaps
also _America_ was not of old contiguous to _Asia_ on the North side. It
doth not seeme to me such an absurdity, to say, that the Israelites went
out of _Tartary_ into _America_ by land; and afterward, that God, to
preserve his, among other miracles, also wrought this, to make that a
Sea, where now is the streight of _Anian_. Yea that might be don without
a miracle, by accident, as we know that more than once, the Sea by a
violent storm hath carryed away the Land, and made Islands. _Xenophon in
suis æquivoc._ mentions the inundations of _Ægypt_, which happened in
the days of _Prometheus_, and _Hercules_. Also _Berosus in lib._ 5. and
_Diodorus li._ 6. mentions the inundation of _Attica_, in which _Athens_
stands. _Pliny in lib._ 2. _c._ 85. & _lib._ 13. _c._ 11. _Strabo in l._
1. & _l._ 12. and _Plutarch in Alexandr._ relate the drowning of the
Isle _Pharaonica_; of which _Luther_ speaks so elegantly in _lib.
ultimo._ Besides, who knows not how many, and how great Cities have at
divers times been almost wholly ruined by several earthquakes? _Sueton,
in Tiberio, c._ 48. writes, that under _Tiberius_, twelve Cities in
_Asia_ have been by this means ruined. _Orosius lib._ 7. _c._ 4. and
_Dion Cassius lib._ 57. do affirm the same, though they differ about the
time. _Tacitus in lib._ 14, and _Eusebius in Chron._ relate the
destruction of that famous and rich City of _Laodicea. Origen tom._ 28.
_in Joan_ and _Baronius tom._ 2. _Annal. Ecclesiast, Ann._ 340: do speak
of other earthquakes, which have destroyed divers, and very many men,
and Cities. And _P. Alonsus in suo manual. tempor._ relates, that the
same hath happened in our dayes; saith he, In the year 1638. _A great
Earthquake happened in the Islands of the Terceræ, but especially in St.
Michael, where the Governour dwells; for that unheard of shaking of the
earth, and houses, struck so great terror into the Inhabitants, that al
fled out of their houses & lived in the fields, a little after, two
miles from thence, they saw the Sea vomit up abundance of fiery matter,
which made a very thicke smoake, which covered the very clouds; and it
cast up many great stones which seemed like rocks; part whereof falling
downe againe, made an Island in the Sea which was halfe a mile over, and
sixty fathom high, & an hundred & fifty fathom deep. That hot exhalation
which that fiery mountain sent forth, pierced the very waters, and
stifled so many fishes, that two Indian ships could not carry them._ The
same Island two years after, was swallowed up again of the Sea.


                              _SECT. 40._

Hee that doth seriously weigh those things, may (I think) well gather,
that the Sea of the Streight of _Anian_ was an inundation. By affirming
which, this doubt may be answered, _sc._ That after the universall
Flood, man-kinde encreased againe, and all beasts, which had been
preserved in the Arke. But how could so many kinds of beasts, (which
come by propagation, and are not bred out of the earth) be found in
those Countries? Some did swim thither, some were brought thither by
some huntsmen, some were bred out of the earth, as _Austin_ thinks it
happened in the first Creation. But what Land-beast can swim over so
great a Sea? And would Huntsmen carry Lyons thither, and other such kind
of beasts, oftentimes to the great hazzard of their lives? And if God
would have created those beasts out of the earth, he would not have
commanded _Noah_ to have kept them in the Ark. I am fully perswaded,
that the beasts which are found there passed that way into _America_;
unlesse any thinks that this new world is joyned to the old, on some
other side, as _Herrera_ beleeves _Dec._ 3. _lib._ 11. _c._ 10.


                              _SECT. 41._

As for the other things in the relation of our _Montezinus_, they say
nothing which savours of falshood. For their saying that the _Semah_,
truly it is the custom of our people, in what part soever of the world
they live; and it is the abridgement of the confession and religion of
the Jewes. That revelation of the Magicians whom they call _Mohanes_, it
agrees with those things which in 2 _Esdras_ you may see, concerning the
Miracles which God wrought for the Israelites, as they passed over
_Euphrates_, concerning those conditions of not revealing secrets to
any, but such an one who hath seen three hundred Moons, (which make
twenty five years) it appeares to be true, by what the famous _De Laet_
tells in many parts of _America_, that the _Indians_ do compute their
years by Moones. That a secret must be told in the Field, doth not that
argue a _Jewish_ custome, which the ancients have observed in _Jacob_?
who being about to depart from _Laban_, he called his Wives into the
field.

I now conclude this discourse, in which this only was in my intention,
that I might briefly, and compendiously declare mine, and the Rabbies
opinion, concerning those things which I have handled. I hope that this
my indeavor will not be unacceptable, being desired by many men famous
both for Birth, and for Learning; not unprofitable, having therein
explained the relation of _Montezinus_, with what brevity I could. The
Name of God be blessed for ever. _Amen._

[Illustration]


                             CONSIDERATIONS
                         Upon the Point of the
                              _CONVERSION_
                                 OF THE
                                 JEWES:

God hath promised to doe great things in these last days, as namely, to
subdue all his Enemies, to releive his people, to destroy all Tyranny
and Oppression both civil and ecclesiasticall, and to ampliate the
Bounds of Christs Kingdom, by a plentifull pouring forth of his spirit,
and by converting the multitudes both of Jews and Gentiles. Herein he
doth what the Ruler of the Feast said to the Bridegroome in _John_ 2.10.
_he keepes the best wine till the last_; he makes the last Act, the best
part of the Comedy. Whereas the method of the Devill, and the World, is
contrary; represented by _Nebuchadnezzars image_, whose head, or
beginning, was of gold; but the feet, or ending, was of iron, and clay.
And of these great good things (we being now upon the borders of the
long-looked-for-_Canaan_) God hath given us some earnest (which is a
small proportion, with the whole for kind) a bunch of grapes; _Og_, and
the _Amorites_ subdued. For he hath in our days arrested the _Turks_
greatnesse; abated the formidablenesse of the _German-Austrian Beast_;
revealed in good measure the hypocrisie and lies of the false Prophet,
who hath his seat at _Rome_; and hath brought to light the subtilties of
Satan, who had shifted himselfe into severall dresses of pretended
Reformation. Hee is risen up like a mighty Gyant, against his enemies
among us, and elsewhere, and hath pleaded his peoples cause so signally,
that all but those whose judgement it is to be wilfully blind, will say,
_The Lord is on our side_. He hath also scattered _Light_, and _Truth_
in an unwonted measure, among all sorts of people; he hath given forth
his owne good Spirit more plentifully than formerly (except in those
extraordinary primitive times of Christianism;) and hath instated us
into liberty for our spirits; which though too many abuse, and turne
into licentiousnesse, or a liberty to sinne, yet that is no dispraise,
but a commendation to the thing; for it is a signe that liberty is
exceeding good in itselfe, seeing the corruption or abuse of it, is a
thing so bad, but so hedged in by severall Fences, as it hath pleased
God in much mercy to direct the wisdome of our State to, it is a choyse
mercy, and such as is suitable to our Principles both Humane, and
Christian; Thus we have a Day-star to tell us that day is at hand;
something prodromous concerning almost all the great things promised,
and looked for, as might be more largely showne, if that were my proper
work. But yet nothing concerning _the returning of the Shulamite_, in
_Cant._ 6. _ult._ which Mr. _Brightman_ interprets to be the _Jewes_
turning Christian, the clock of their conversion hath not yet given
warning; it is as midnight with them still, as it was a thousand yeares
agone. Upon which, some ground the hopelesnesse of their repentance, but
I dare not owne that Logick, but rather conclude thus; That therefore
their Conversion shall be the work of God (of which more anon) with whom
all difficulties are no hinderance; and though _Israel_ be bond-men in
_Ægypt_, and sealed up to it by the darknesse of a midnight, yet let but
God speake, and they are immediately at liberty, and sent away without
waiting for the comming of the day.

Now we ought much to minde their Conversion, exercising thereupon our
faith, our prayers, and also our enquiries, and that for these following
reasons:

_First_, because they have the same Humane nature with us; from this
ground we should wish well to all men, whether _Jew_, or _Gentile_;
which is the precept of the Apostle, in _2 Pet._ 1.7. _To adde love to
brotherly kindnesse_; that is, not only to love Saints, but to love Men
(though the Saints with a choyse, and peculiar love.) Yea it is Gods
owne practise, in _Mat._ 5.45. There is a φιλανθρωπία in God (as _Paul_
saith to _Titus_) a love to Man-kinde. _Plutarch_ could observe that God
is not called φίλιππος, he beares another manner of love to men, than to
horses; so ought we to doe, and even upon this generall account, to love
the _Jewish_ Nation.

_Secondly_, because of their extraction; Their root is holy, though now
the Branches be degenerate and wilde; so in _Rom._ 11. vers. 16, 17.
Some good turnes are due to the bad children of good Parents for the
Parents sake; and this _Paul_ expresly urgeth, in _Rom._ 11.28. _that
they are beloved for the Fathers sake_; yea the chief root, or head of
their Nation, _Abraham_ is mystically our substituted Father, as in
_Gal._ 4 last; _If ye be Christs, then are ye_ Abrahams _seed, and
heires according to the promise_. The _Jewes_ are children, and heires
of the flesh of _Abraham_, but we of his faith; they by the Bond-woman,
but we by the Free; but notwithstanding, _Abraham_ is our common Father,
and therefore we should love as brethren.

_Thirdly_, because Gods covenant with the _Jewes_ is not nulled, or
broken, but only suspended. It is with them as it was with
_Nebuchadnezzars_ tree, the leaves, fruit, and boughes were all
scattered and broken, yet there was a chaine of brasse upon the root, to
reserve that for future hopes; so though all true fruitfulnesse, beauty,
and symptoms of life are long since gone, yet there is a root, a seed,
which shall bring forth in Gods time; and this seemes a maine scope of
_Paul_ in _Rom._ 11. To this purpose may that be alledged of _Mat._
24.22. _Except those dayes should be shortned, no flesh should be saved,
but for the Elects sake those dayes shall be shortned_; that is, so
great shall the slaughter of the _Jewes_ be, at the destruction of
_Jerusalem_, that if those destroying dayes should last a little longer,
their whole Nation would faile, and be cut off; which shall not be,
because God hath elect ones to be borne of that People in future times.
Hence you see, that in their lowest ebbe, that is, in the midst of their
greatest guilt, and sorest punishments, God hath still an eye upon a
number of elect ones of that Nation; and Gods Covenant was never so with
them, or with any People, as to take the whole of them for his
inheritance. In _Jer._ 31.36, 37. Gods Covenant with _Israel_ is surer
than the Lawes of Nature (which we know, remaine unviolable to the
Worlds end) and he saith, that must come to passe, before he will cast
off the Seed of _Israel_, for all that they have done; yea in _Isa._
54.9, 10. God confirmes it to _Israel_, not only by the firmenesse of
the Lawes of Nature, but also by an Oath; now what God ratifies with an
Oath, is his absolute and positive Wil, that which makes the conclusion
immutable; as in _Heb._ 6.18. And in this case God is ever too strong
for all hardnesse of heart, disobedience, unbeleefe, and any impediments
that can be. See also that full place of _Levit._ 26.42. 44. and _ver._
45. for I beleeve that place Propheticall, of times, and things not yet
fulfilled.

_Fourthly_, We _Gentiles_ were gainers by their casting away, the
whirlwind of Gods wrath that threw them downe, brought us much profit,
even salvation itselfe, _Rom._ 11.12. _The fall of them becomes the
riches of the World_, ver. 15. _The casting away of them is the
reconciling of the World_; implying, that we _Gentiles_ were poore, and
miserable, till made rich, and happy by the _Jewes_ spoyles, who by this
meanes are as wretched as we formerly had been. Which consideration must
needs move an ingenuous spirit, to pitty those so undone. Our Lord saith
to a _Gentile_, in _Mark_, 7.27. _Let the Children first be filled, for
it is not meet to take the Childrens bread and to cast it to the Doggs_:
They were Children, and we were Doggs, and we Doggs have got the
Childrens meat before their bellies were full; which, as it should make
us not to be high-minded; so also to pitty them, whose bread being taken
away, and given to us, are brought to a starving condition.

_Fifthly_, We shall be gainers by their receiving againe; it should be
motive sufficient to us, that God shall be gainer by it, and that not
only by the accession of a whole Nation to him, and also of that Nation,
which is as the lost Sheep, the finding of which is a matter of great
joy, _Luke_ 15. But also because as it is said in _Psal._ 102.16. _When
the Lord shall build up_ Zion, _he shall appeare in his glory_. Now
glory is a manifestation of excellency, and at that time Gods excellency
shall shine forth, which is now much hid, and vailed; the excellency of
his mercy, of his truth and faithfulnesse, to remember an ancient
Covenant made about foure thousand yeares since, and his old friend
_Abraham_, and the Patriarks; all which have seemed to be asleep for
many Generations together. So also in _Isa._ chap. 12. compared with
chap. 11. But not only God (which might have been a distinct reason) but
we also shall receive great advantages thereby; for then there shall be
not only an enlargement of good to us _Gentiles_, as a concomitant and
synchronism with the _Jewes_ conversion (the mistake about which, hath,
and doth cause black thoughts in some) as in _Apoc._ 7.9. after the
sealing of the hundred, and forty, and foure thousand (which relates to
the time of the forty two moneths) a great multitude, and innumerable,
of all Nations, Kindred, Tongues, and people stood before the Lambe, and
were cloathed with white Robes; now these numbers of all Gentile-Nations
are to be converted at that time when the _Jewes_ are to be brought
home; for it is to be at the sounding of the seventh Trumpet. But
beside, the _Jewes_ conversion shall in some sort be the cause of it,
else what meanes the Apostle in _Rom._ 11.12. _How much more shall their
fulnesse be the riches of the Gentiles?_ and in vers. 15. _What shall
the receiving of the_ Jewes _be_ (to the _Gentiles_) _but life from the
dead_? The Apostle heightens the expression of the benefit by their
receiving, to an higher degree than what we got by their fall. It is
observable, that the Gospel did in some sense, first goe out of _Sion_,
for the Spirit who enabled the Disciples to preach and propagate it was
there given; and _Micah_ speaking of the times yet looked for, saith in
_Mic._ 4.2. _The Law shall goe forth out of_ Sion, _and the Word of the
Lord out of Jerusalem_; that is, the fulnesse of the Spirit, and
knowledge of Christ shall streame through the _Jewes_ to the _Gentiles_.
So that as it was in the first giving of the holy Spirit, he was first
given to the _Jewes_, then to the _Gentiles_; yea by the _Jewes_ to the
_Gentiles_; so shall it be in the last dayes, fulfilling what _Paul_
saith in _Rom._ 2. to the _Jew_ first, and also to the _Gentile_, When
God shall be reconciled to _Israel_, their condition wil be greatly
changed; for they who are now actually the most accursed people, then as
in _Mic._ 5.7. _The remnant of_ Jacob _shall be in the midst of many
people as dew from the Lord; as the showres upon the grasse, that tarry
not for man, nor waite for the sons of men_. Dew, and Showers in those
hot Countries are Heavens bounty, a _cornucopia_ of all good things;
such shall the _Jewes_ be to the places where they shall be, when they
shall owne the Lord Jesus.

_Sixthly_, They were Gods first Wife (as I may say); for a considerable
time they were a faithfull people; and many of them have been Martyrs
for God. And these things God will thinke on, though we may sleight
them.

They were Gods first Wife. Did God ever assay to take any Nation before
them, to be his owne people? Yea, did he take any beside them, for two
thousand yeares together? In _Isa._ 54.6. _I have called thee as a woman
forsaken, and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast
refused, saith the Lord_; and what follows, vers. 7. _For a small moment
have I forsaken thee, but with great mercies will I gather thee._ And in
verse 8. _With everlasting kindnesse will I have mercy upon thee._ We
see God forgets not, though men may, and doe.

They were a faithfull people. As great was their unfaithfulnesse; so
there were times when great was their faithfulnesse. In _Jer._ 2.2. _I
remember thee, the kindnesse of thy youth, the love of thy espousals,
when thou wentest after me in the Wildernesse, in a Land that was not
sowne._ It was something to follow God in such a Country forty years;
and for so long a time to expose themselves, wives, and children daily
to almost al sorts of deaths; and you see, God remembers it in after
times; and if he did in _Jeremiahs_ time, when those who in person had
been so faithfull, had been long dead; and that race of the _Jewes_ then
were very provoking, and corrupt; why not also now, in this present
succeeding generation of them:

They were Martyrs for God. To prove this, read the History of the
_Maccabees_, and if we like not so farre to owne what is Apocryphall,
turne to _Heb._ 11. which is a booke of the _Jewish_ Martyrs, a
Catalogue of them that suffered under _Antiochus_, and those _Syrian_
Tyrants. And they were not few that suffered, but many; nor light
punishments, but unspeakeable torments. Now God takes it so kindly that
we give up our lives to torments, and to death for his Name, that
commonly he owes that person a good turne in his posterity. And if upon
these accounts God hath an eye upon them, we also should be like minded,
and love them too.

_Seventhly_, It is a duty which we owe to Gods expresse command, for so
I take that in the literall sence, in _Isa._ 62.6, 7. _Ye that make
mention of the Lord, keep not silence, and give him no rest, till he
establish, and till he make_ Jerusalem _a praise in the earth_. This
duty the Prophet himselfe performed in vers. 1. _For_ Sions _sake I will
not hold my peace, and for_ Jerusalems _sake I will not rest, till the
righteousnesse thereof goe forth as brightnesse, &c._ And also the
Church in her affliction, _Psal._ 137.5, 6. And now that _Sion_ is in
the dust, if we that beleeve among the _Gentiles_, did pitty her, and
compassionate her in her ruines, it were an argument that God is about
to arise, and have mercy upon her; as may be urged from Psalme 102.13,
14.

_Lastly_, They minded our conversion to God. This appeares in the
writings of almost all their Prophets, especially in the Psalmes,
_Isaiah_, _Jeremiah_, _Hoseah_, _Malachi_. Now then for us to love the
notion, and in what we may, help forward their returne, what is it but
an honest and just retaliation?

Having dispatched the Reasons, two things yet remaine about their
Conversion, which I must speake somewhat to, and those are the _Time_,
and the _Manner_; as for the _time when_, the determining of that is
hard, though not impossible. I beleeve that it is punctually set downe
in Scripture, and God wil be as criticall in looking after times as
things; but all the difficulty of knowing it is from the darknesse, and
defects of our understanding, and not from a supposed uncertainty in the
thing. So that I am equally adverse as to the common practise of the
_Jewes_, who because they are unwilling to owne Gods accomplishments,
doe therefore dis-allow his computations, and expressly hold that man
accursed who busieth himselfe in that study. So to the too common
opinion of those who say, That oft in such computations God puts a
certaine number for an uncertaine. No, there is an infallibility in the
set times of Scripture; only the Well is deep, and the cord to our
Bucket is but short! yet this difficulty should not cause despondency,
but quicken our industry. All that I shall now say to it is this, I
judge the time not farre off; this present age will see those things
fulfilled which we have waited and prayed for. _R. Maimonides_ saith of
Jesus Christ, That since _Moses_ his time none so like to the Messiah as
the Christ of the Christians; so I say, since Christ, no period of time
so like to be that, in which the _Jewes_ shall be called, as this in
which we live. And perhaps it is nearer than we are aware of, being the
more comfortably perswaded of it, by that excellent Treatise called,
_The Revelation revealed_, newly published by a Gentleman of an
indefatigable Spirit for God and publick good, Mr. S. _Hartlib_, in
which Apocalypticall computations are explained the most harmoniously,
and clearly, that I have read in any discourse of that nature. He saith
positively, that at the ending of the last yeare of 1655. the seventh
Trumpet shall sound; whose effect will be as much good to Gods elected
ones, whether _Jewes_, or _Gentiles_, as our hearts can wish for. I
shall adde this, The age in which we live, hath been eyed by many
Generations past, for the time wherein the _Iewes_ shall be received to
mercy; many of their owne Writers, and also of Christian Authors have
pitched upon it; And I beleeve that God will be as gracious to them in
this their last, and greatest restauration, as he was to them in that of
their returne out of _Babylon_; now concerning that there were three
computations and epochaes of the beginning (and consequently of the
ending) of the seventy yeares of captivity; and observe, that those
seventy yeares ended, and the _Iewes_ returned, not at the latest
computation, but with the first, for there were but seventy yeares from
_Jechoniahs_ carrying to _Babylon_, (which was the first Captivity) to
the release by the Proclamation of _Cyrus_. And as God ended that
Captivity with the soonest, so I hope that he will doe this; especially
considering, that speaking of these mercies to them, in _Isa._ 60. in
verse last, he saith, _I the Lord will hasten it in its time_; which he
should not doe, if he should stay the longest calculation, and utmost
period of time. O let us be Gods Remembrancers to put him in minde of
this his promise.

For the _manner_ how, and _meanes_ whereby their conversion shall be
compassed; this also is a depth equall to the former. And as it is in
things Propheticall, the event will best determine it; yet I shall say
something to it, according to what I have attained. That of the ordinary
way of Christianizing a person, or people, seemes to me not of use here;
which hath been by Discourses, written or printed Books, Preachers, or
the will and command of a Conquerour; for all these have had their
efficacy in (at least a seeming and out-side) conversion of many
Nations. But after the application of these to the _Jewes_, for many
ages together, yet we must say as _Gehazi_ did to _Elisha_, when he had
laid his staffe on the _Shunamite_ her Son, thereby to bring him to
life; _The childe is not awaked_. I then conclude, that their conversion
shall be in an extraordinary way, it shall be the worke of our Lord
Jesus, and of his good Spirit. As _Paul_ was turned by the appearing of
Christ to him; so shall they. He will manifest himselfe to them
eminently, powerfully, and graciously, to forme them to be a people to
himselfe. Whether this his presence to them shall be personall, or only
in the Spirit, I will not now say, but leave the Reader to make a
judgement, as he sees most cause, out of the Scriptures which I bring.
Consider that of _Mat._ 23.38, 39. _Behold your house is left unto you
desolate, for I say unto you, ye shall not see me hence-forth, till ye
shall say, Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord._ Here you
have their doome fore-told, _their house shall be desolate_, the Temple
and _Jerusalem shall be destroyed_; also their conversion, in those
words, their saying, _Blessed is he that comes, &c._ the _medium_ to
compasse it, cf. _their seeing Iesus Christ; ye shall not see me_, &c.
In the order of causes, Christs discovering himselfe to them shall be
first, and shall produce their relenting towards him. And for a further
proofe, let those two places be joyned together, as bearing the same
sence; that of _Mat._ 24.30, 31. and of _Apoc._ 1.7. both which are
taken out of _Zechar._ 12.10. And all three not to be understood of
Christs appearing to Judgement; for here, saving repentance is the
effect of his appearance; but repentance will be then too late when the
Judge is come; that shall be a night to all sinners, in which no worke
can be done. Againe, there are but three grand periods mentioned in
_Mat._ 24. namely, the destruction of _Jerusalem_, Christs comming
(when, and whereby the _Jewes_ shall be converted, who though they have
resisted him, when he came in the flesh, yet they shall not, they
cannot, when he comes in the Spirit) and the end of the World. Now the
signes of the first of these are in vers. 14, 15.21, 22. Of the second
in vers. 29, 30, 31, &c. And of the last, in vers. 36, &c. So that this
of ver. 30, 31. must concerne some other thing than the end of the
World. And that the three fore-named Scriptures are properly to be
understood of the _Jews_, the texts doe show; for that of _Zechariah_,
(from whence the other two places are taken) expresly saith, _I will
poure upon the house of_ David, _and the inhabitants of_ Jerusalem,
_&c._ and other passages to the same purpose in vers. 11, 12, 13. of
_Zechar._ 12. And in the two places of _Mat._ 24. and _Apoc._ 1. it is
expresly applyed to the _Jewes_; for in _Mat._ it is, _All the Tribes of
the earth shall mourn, and see him_; that is, All the twelve Tribes
scattered upon the face of the whole earth, and these shall be gathered
by the Angels from the foure winds. And that of _Apoc._ 1.7. is clearly
to be applyed also to them, for it is said, _They that pierced him,
shall see him_; that is, the _Jewes_; and _All the Tribes_ (for so the
word φυλαὶ ought to be rendred) _of the earth shall waile_; that is, the
twelve Tribes scattered throughout all places. Now the _meane_ whereby
these _Jewes_ shall be converted, is, _And they shall see him_; that is,
Jesus Christ, for those words are in all the three Scriptures. It shall
be such a sight, as the _Israelites_ had of the Brazen Serpent in the
Wildernesse, it was healing to them. Such a sight as _Paul_ had of
Christ in Heaven, upon which he saith, that he had seene the Lord. For
particularities about this sight. I shall leave them, knowing that
_secret things doe belong to God_.

And because after that I had published in _English_, about last Autumne,
the Booke of _Menasseh Ben Israel_, called, _The Hope of Israel_, I
received a Letter from an Honourable Person, concerning that Booke, to
which I wrote an Answer, and both containe some further discourse about
the Jewes, and their Conversion; therefore I thought good to give you
them, and they are these which follow.

[Illustration]


     To the Translator of _Menasseh_; _Ben Israels spes Israelis_.

  SIR:

_I Desire to be acquainted with you, because we have both fallen upon
one Booke, with the same intentions to convert the_ Jewes, _though we
take not one way; I desire therefore to conferre with you, to see who
taketh the rightest way. You by your Translation seeme to me to prize
the learned_ Jewes _writing too much, which will beget pride, and not
humility in him, without which he will not turne, repent, and be saved.
Therefore for his good, and also for the Christians, and for the credit
of us who are Parliamentarians, I would not see them too much yeelded
unto. You justly perstringe him in his thirtieth Section, wherein he
talkes so wildly of his goodly Martyrs, and truly if you marke him in
his Discourse upon the Sabatticall River, which where it is he knownes
not, you will finde him as faulty and dangerous, if we have any of the
race of the_ Thraskytes _left among us; but Sir, in that you thinke that
the_ Jewes _shall now be called as a Nation, and not only by
particulars, and would have them have an earthly Kingdome againe; you
doe more for the ten Tribes then he would have himselfe_, Sect. 25. p.
79. 80. _and for the other two, of_ Judah, and Benjamin, _it is not so
likely they should have a second Call, seeing that Christ and his
Apostles preached to them, and all that were of the Election were then
converted, as you may see by many texts, and after their rejection of
the Gospell, their Country-men_, Paul, _and_ Peter _turned to the
Gentiles. Therefore those two Tribes who Crucified our Lord, and
persecuted his Apostles, are not so likely to be called againe as the
ten Tribes who did neither, except some few who returned into the holy
Land; neither did many of them so much as heare of it, you might see
your owne sentence fulfilled then. First, the Jew was called, and then
the Gentile. But now looke not for it, but for their single conversions,
though numbers may be called upon one day, one Sermon as they were
heretofore; but they must not exalt themselves as a Nation, for they
must be ingrafted againe upon that branch, or Vine, Christ Jesus, and we
must have one Shepheard, and be one flock._ _See_ Rom. 11. ver. 31.
_which you cite_. Through your mercy they may also obtain mercy; _I had
writ it_ (shall) _but it is only_ (may:) _see the place to which this
relates_, Isa. 59. v. 19, 20, 21. _where you shall finde that all their
hope is in eternalls, not in temporalls_; _and looke upon_ Rom. 11.24.
_concerning the engrafting, and clearly, (unlesse you be a Millenarian)
you will finde no such Nationall glory of the_ Jewes; _therefore I pray
you take heed you fall not into the same snare wherein the_ Jewes _are,
to looke for a temporall reigne, which you seeme to intimate, and too
many were, and are of that opinion. Assure your selfe that Christ will
come to such as a theife in the night, though his comming will be very
glorious, yet it will be suddaine; the learned_ Jew _can finde no text
punctuall in all his Booke, but whatsoever he citeth, the same Chapter
makes against him, and speakes not of temporallity, but of eternity, and
the new Jerusalem. I rest, desirous of your friendship_.

                                              Octob. 5. 1650.      E. S.


                              Postscript.

_I Have it from a good hand, that Master_ Jo. Dury _is the Translator of
that Booke, and I have some Arguments to beleeve it to be so, because he
seemes to be of the same minde in his Epistolicall Discourse before Mr._
Thorowgoods _pious Booke, which I have gained since I wrote this Letter.
But truly if it be so, I must move Mr._ Dury _both to amend his
Translation from grosse faults, and to make some retractions upon that
Epistle, which upon conference I shall most plainely shew him, and in
the meane time I desire him, that he will read a Booke of a most
reverend and pious man, called_, The Revelation unrevealed; _and thereby
I beleeve he will be convinced, and not looke for a fifth generall
Monarchy upon earth; for Christ reignes now, and hath so done ever since
his Ascension, and so shall to the end of the World, untill he deliver
the Kingdome to the Father_.

                                                        Octob. 25. 1650.

  _SIR_:      _The answer to the Letter._

I Received a Letter directed, _To the Translator of Spes Israelis_,
which worke thus corrected, as I here-with present to you, I confesse
mine. I left it with a friend to see it printed, my selfe going into the
Country; but his occasions called him from the City also, when it should
have been reviewed; which is the reason that though there be many
_Errata’s_ in the Booke, that they are not gathered up at the end. At my
owne reading of it, I found many, and mended those I found; and now I
know that it hath farre fewer then it had, and may passe tollerably;
though neither I, nor what I doe, can be said faultlesse. Concerning
your desire of converting the _Jewes_, it is truly Christian, and a
worke that shall not loose its reward. But you say, We disagree about
the way, that is very possible, for apprehensions are various, and men
must thinke, not as others doe, but as themselves can, taking what is
truth to them, to be their guide. But the _quære_ is, Who lights on the
best way. For my part, I pretend not to any way to convert them, for I
verily thinke that when it shall be done, it will be Gods worke, and not
mans; as much as Pauls conversion was wholly of God; which himselfe
makes the type, or patterne of the conversion of his Country-men; as Mr.
_Mede_ saith upon 1 _Tim._ 1.16. in his _Fragmenta sacra_, which I know
not whether they be in print, or no. You say, I prize the learned
_Iewes_ writing too much, and that it will beget pride in them (Sir,
pardon me, if I doe not recant till I see my errour; but then I shall
freely doe it. I confesse, I doe prize the Learned, whether _Iew_, or
_Gentile_, for though I am not σοφὸς, yet I am φιλόσοφος and I doe
beleeve the Author of _Spes Israelis_ to be a very learned man; and I
have it from those who are acquainted with him, that he is a very
ingenuous and civill man; and others there are, and have been among
them, not wanting a name for good learning. As for the fomenting their
pride) truly that vice is of evill, that I would not cherish it, neither
in myself, nor in others. But Sir, whether is a more likely way to gaine
upon men, to use them civilly, and with the spirit of meeknesse, or to
be supercilious and tart towards them? What got _Austine_ the Monke by
using the Brittaines of _Bangor_ so Lordly as he did? and (to come to
latter dayes) did Mr. _Broughton_ gaine upon a learned Rabbi, in a
Conference at _Dort_, where Mr. _Forbes_ was Moderator, by his high and
peremptory language? This he reaped, to set the _Iew_ at a greater
distance from Christianisme, and an abating of his owne esteeme, in the
judgement of wise men. As for _Menasseh’s_ Sabbaticall river, I know
many Authors have said it, but whether true, or false, that is nothing
to the Translator; and I am as farre from beleeving that story, as I am
from the wilde opinions of Mr. _Thrask_. But these are of lesse
concernment; you fall upon the maine of your judgement which relates to
them, and pardon me if I deale as roundly in my answer; for I desire to
have respect to Truth, and not to man. I doe firmly beleeve, and feare
not to professe it; That the _Jewes_ shall be called as a Nation, both
_Judah_ and _Israel_, and shall returne to their owne Land, and have an
earthly Kingdome againe. For the proofe of which, I could say much, but
shall now but little; and if possibly I cite any thing which _Menasseh
Ben Israel_ brings for himselfe, beleeve me that I have it not from him,
but from my owne observations out of Scripture, some yeares since. There
is weight in that place of _Mic._ 4.8. _The first dominion, the Kingdome
shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem_; and this is spoken of times
after Christs incarnation, and not yet performed. See that of _Zech._
10.6, 7, 8, 9, 10. there is _Judah_ and _Ephraim_ fore-told to be
brought to _Gilead_, and _Lebanon_, and they shall so encrease, that
they shall want room. Say not this was done in the returne of those now
from the Captivity of _Babylon_; for those of the ten Tribes that then
returned, were but some gleanings of them; and of _Judah_ it selfe,
there returned but about one halfe: now God doth not promise Mountaines,
and performe but Mole-hils; yea in vers. 6. _God will save and
strengthen the house of_ Judah, _and of_ Joseph, _and they shall be as
though I had not cast them off_. Which, if since that Prophesie, it hath
been made good of _Judah_, yet be sure not of _Joseph_. And in v. 7.
_They of_ Ephraim _shall be like a mighty man_, but since the captivity
of _Salmanassar_ to this day, what might hath _Ephraim_ shown? yea is he
not poore, weak, scattered, and unknowne? And in ver. 8. _I will gather
them, and they shall encrease as they have encreased_; hath this been
fulfilled of _Ephraim_? Where is his fruitfulnesse, which his name
imports? much lesse hath there been a time since their great captivity,
in which they have encreased to their numbers and strength, mentioned in
the dayes of _Moses_, _Joshua_, _David_, _Solomon_, and under their owne
Kings, after the defection from the house of _David_. See that noted
place of _Ezek._ 37.16, 17. 22.24, 25. Sir, in good earnest, hath this
Scripture been fulfilled? hath _Judah_ and _Ephraim_ been _but one stick
in Gods hand, but one Nation, so that they shall be no more two
Nations_, as in ver. 22. Surely to this day they have been from their
last dispersion not only two, but many Nations. Neither will it be an
answer to say, That now they are no Nation, therefore they are not two;
yes, Historians report them many Nations; though perhaps scarce after
the just rules of Nations. And that phrase hath not a negative, but a
positive sence, not that they should be nothing, but that they should be
one Nation. More-over, in ver. 24. _Judah_ and _Ephraim_ were so to be
one Nation, that _David_ (that is Jesus Christ) was to be King over
them: And when did _Judah_ and _Israel_ ever to this day, as a Nation
acknowledge the Soveraignty of Jesus Christ? and he to be their Prince
for ever, as in ver. 25. But I must not too much enlarge. I shall only
adde this; That as many places of the Old, so many in the New Testament
agree thereto, as _Rom._ 11. ver. 12. 15. 25, 26. 28. Though this of the
_Romans_, chiefly proves one point, _sc._ their generall or Nationall
conversion. Give me leave briefly to answer your objections. You say,
The call of _Judah_ and _Benjamin_ is not so likely, because Christ and
the Apostles preached to them already. I answer; that by their
preaching, all of those living, who were elected, were converted; but
after-ages have a new race, and God hath his number among them too; yea
the words run high, then _All Israel shall be saved_. You say, those two
Tribes who crucified Christ, not so likely to be converted. I answer, by
how much their sin is greater, by so much the greater will Gods mercy
be; _Et Dei novissima erunt optima, & maxima_. You say, Their conversion
shall be single, that is answered already; but I adde, that _Isaiah_ is
contrary to it, in _Isa._ 66.7, 8. which Chapter I doubt not but it
points to times after our Saviour. As for their being engraffed upon the
Vine Christ, or being brought to one sheep-fold, what doth that hinder
but that they may be a Nation of Converts brought to their owne Land?
You object that of _Rom._ 11.31. _That through your mercy they may
obtaine mercy._ I answer, that I beleeve the maine of their conversion
will be from Heaven, and extraordinary; though the _Gentiles_ by
provoking them to emulation, and also by their gifts and graces, may
some way be auxiliary to them. After this you are pleased to put the
term _Millenarian_ upon me; which, though for what I have writ, I need
not owne, yet I will not disclaime; they are not Names that affright me,
but reall falsities. The term _Chiliast_, as it congregates the many
odde, and false opinions of them of old, I explode; though to beleeve
those thousand yeares in _Apoc._ 20. to be yet unfulfilled, that, I
willingly owne. To put that sense upon them, as that they imply the
thousand yeares of eternity, I can thinke little lesse of it then to be
a contradiction. Againe, if the thousand yeares be the eternity in
Heaven, what meanes that in ver. 3. _Till the thousand yeares be
fulfilled, and after that he must be loosed for a little season_; I
pray, what little season is that that is after eternity? neither doth
Christs _comming suddenly in the night as a theife_, hinder, but that
when he doth come, he may stay a thousand yeares. But whether that time
be _ante_, _in_, or _post diem judicii_, is not my taske to determine,
or maintaine. As for what you adde in the Post-script, not to looke for
a fifth Monarchy, because Christ reignes now. I answer, that though he
reignes _de jure_, yet not _de facto_; for expresly in Scripture the
Devill is called κοσμοκράτωρ he is the grand Tyrant, and great Usurper,
and the whole world κεῖται ἐν πὁ πονηρῶ yet I am farre from denying to
Christ a Kingdome now in being, _sc._ Spirituall, and Invisible, but I
looke for a visible one to come. In the close (as also at the beginning)
you are pleased to desire my acquaintance; but Sir, I look not upon my
self as a Star of so considerable a magnitude, as to present my selfe to
your eyes; but if I might be so happy as to be capable to serve you
really, none should be more desirous of it (both as you are a Gentleman
of Learning, by which you have obliged the publick; and also a Member of
that House which I so much honour) than Sir,

  Novemb. 5. 1650.

                                              _Your most humble Servant_
                                                                  M. W.

  SIR:

_I doe now very highly esteeme of my interest in your conversation, and
thanke you very much for your kinde visitations, which I shal endeavour
to repay, and desire by these you will tell me where, if you be in town;
I shall continue in town till monday noone be passed, and will meet you
at the Stationers, or any where else you shall appoint; very necessary,
and too urgent occasions hindred my comming to —— untill last night. I
have somewhat thought with my self of the faire proposition of
re-printing what concernes_ Ben Israel, _the conversion and generall
call of the Jewish Nation, to which I now more perceive our serious
endeavours and hopes doe encline. But I must needs say, that_ Ben
Israels _Booke gives very small hopes of his conversion; Of which
notwithstanding neither you nor my selfe ought to despaire, for_ Saul
_the learned_ Jew _from a severe Persecutor became a_ Paul, _a holy and
remarkable Saint; I shall not at present enlarge my selfe unto you,
least I should prove troublesome, or impertinent till things be ripened
between us by a conference, but if it be necessary you should print
againe before I see you, I only desire this Letter of mine should be
printed. For I embrace your candor and ingenuity as much as you doe
mine, and I hope love and knowledge will still encrease between us, and
I shall say with the Psalmist_, Let the righteous smite me friendly, and
reprove me, but let not their precious balme breake my head; _I have no
desire to gaine applause of those who are without, or hazard their
censure in that which more learned men, but not so loving, may say, that
I write slight things, but I had rather first shew them that I can write
serious things as well as slight, by translation of some part of_ Peter
Galatine & Reuchlin, _which is now my travaile, as I in part shewed you;
I remaine_,

 Febr. 21. 1650. Your friend in the truest interest of Christian love.

                  *       *       *       *       *

                                 FINIS.

                  *       *       *       *       *


                        _Errata maximi momenti._

  In the second Epist. p. 2. l. 8. dele happy, in the 3 Epist. p. 1.
  l. 28. r. invironed, p. 2. l. 3. r. Carthagena, p. 3. l. 12. dele
  so, p. 6, l. 21. r. thy, p. 18. l. 19. r. hating, p. 19. l. 16. r.
  away Hoshea, p. 22. l. 23. r. Hunni, p. 23. l. 10. r. there, p. 26.
  l. 3. r. were, p. 40. l. 27. r. honoured _Abraham Kolorni_, with p.
  44. l. 24. r. for these, p. 46. l. 16. dele the, p. 49. l. 34. & he
  saith, those must be nulled before.



                                   TO
                             HIS HIGHNESSE
                                  THE
                             LORD PROTECTOR
                                 OF THE
                           _COMMON-WEALTH OF_
                   England, Scotland, _and_ Ireland.
                                  THE
                            HUMBLE ADDRESSES
                                   OF
MENASSEH Ben Israel, _a Divine, and Doctor of PHYSICK, in behalfe of the
                            Jewish Nation_.


[Illustration]

 _The Humble Addresses of_ Menasseh Ben Israel, _a Divine and Doctor of
               Physick, in behalf of the Iewish Nation_.


Give me leave, at such a juncture of time, to speak to your Highnesse,
in a style and manner fitting to us _Jewes_ and our condition. It is a
thing most certaine, that the great God of _Israel_, Creator of Heaven
and Earth, doth give and take away Dominions and Empires, according to
his owne pleasure; exalting some, and overthrowing others: who, seeing
he hath the hearts of Kings in his hand, he easily moves them
whithersoever himselfe pleaseth, to put in execution his Divine
Commands. This, my Lord, appeares most evidently out of those words of
_Daniel_, where he, rendring thanks unto God, for revealing unto him
that prodigious Dreame of _Nebuchadnezar_, doth say: _Thou that removest
Kings, and sets up Kings_. And else-where, _To the end the living might
know, that the Highest hath dominion in Mans Kingdome, and giveth the
same to whom he please_. Of the very same-minde are the _Thalmudists_
likewise, affirming that a good Government, or Governor, is a Heavenly
Gift, and that there is no Governor, but is first called by God unto
that dignity: and this they prove from that passage of _Exodus_: _Behold
I have called Bazale’l by name_, &c. all things being governed by Divine
Providence, God dispensing rewards unto Vertues, and punishment unto
Vices, according to his owne good Will. This the Examples of great
Monarchs make good; especially of such, who have afflicted the people of
_Israel_: For none hath ever afflicted them, who hath not been by some
ominous _Exit_, most heavily punished of God Almighty; as is manifest
from the Histories of those Kings, _Pharaoh_, _Nebuchadnezar_,
_Antiochus_, _Epiphanius_, _Pompey_, and others. And on the contrary,
none ever was a Benefactor to that people, and cherished them in their
Countries, who thereupon hath not presently begun very much to flourish.
In so much that the Oracle to _Abraham_ (_I will blesse them that blesse
thee, and curse them that curse thee_) seemeth yet daily to have its
accomplishment. Hence I, one of the least among the _Hebrews_, since by
experience I have found, that through Gods great bounty toward us, many
considerable and eminent persons both for Piety and Power, are moved
with sincere and inward pitty and compassion towards us, and do comfort
us concerning the approaching deliverance of _Israel_, could not but for
my self, and in the behalf of my Countrey men, make this my humble
addresse to your Highness, and beseech you for Gods sake, that ye would,
according to that Piety and Power wherein you are eminent beyond others,
vouchsafe to grant, that the Great and Glorious Name of the Lord our God
may be extolled, and solemnly worshiped and praised by us through all
the bounds of this Common-wealth; and to grant us place in your
Countrey, that we may have our Synagogues, and free exercise of our
Religion. I nothing doubting, but that your Clemency will easily grant
this most equitable Petition of ours. Pagans have of old, out of
reverence to the God of _Israel_; & the esteem they had to his people,
granted most willingly free liberty, even to apostated _Jewes_; as
_Onias_ the High Priest, to build another Temple in their Countrey, like
unto that at _Jerusalem_: how much more then may we, that are not
Apostate or runagate _Iewes_, hope it from your Highnesse and your
Christian Councill, since you have so great knowledge of, and adore the
same one onely God of _Israel_, together with us. Besides, it increases
our confidence of your bounty towards us, in that so soon as ever the
rumour of that most wished-for liberty, that ye were a thinking to grant
us, was made known unto our Countrey-men; I, in the name of my Nation,
the _Iewes_, that live in _Holland_, did congratulate and entertaine
their Excellencies, the Ambassadors of _England_; who were received in
our Synagogue with as great pomp and applause, Hymns and cheerfulnesse
of minde, as ever any Soveraigne Prince was. For our people did in their
owne mindes presage, that the Kingly Government being now changed into
that of a Common-wealth, the antient hatred towards them, would also be
changed into good-will: that those rigorous Laws (if any there be yet
extant, made under the Kings) against so innocent a people, would
happily be repealed. So that we hope now for better from your
gentleness, & goodness, since, from the beginning of your Government of
this Common-wealth, your Highnesse hath professed much respect, and
favour towards us. Wherefore I humbly entreat your Highnesse, that you
would with a gracious eye have regard unto us, and our Petition, and
grant unto us, as you have done unto others, free exercise of our
Religion, that we may have our Synagogues, and keep our own publick
worship, as our brethren doe in _Italy_, _Germany_, _Poland_, and many
other places, and we shall pray for the happinesse and Peace of this
your much renowned and puissant Common-wealth.

[Illustration]


                             A DECLARATION
                                 TO THE
                       Common-wealth of England,

                                   BY

  _Rabbi Menasseh Ben_ ISRAEL, shewing the Motives of his coming into
                                England.

_Having some yeares since often perceived that in this Nation, God hath
a People, that is very tender-hearted, and well-wishing to our
sore-afflicted Nation; Yea, I my selfe having some Experience thereof,
in divers Eminent persons, excelling both in Piety and Learning: I
thought with my-self, I should do no small service to my owne Nation, as
also to the People and Inhabitants of this Common-wealth, if by humble
addresses to the late Honourable Parliament, I might obtaine a
safe-Conduct once to transport my selfe thither. Which I having done,
and according to my desire, received a most kinde and satisfactory
Answer, I now am come. And to the end all Men may know the true Motives
and Intent of this my coming, I shall briefly comprehend and deliver
them in these particulars._

First and formost, _my Intention is to try, is by Gods good hand over
me, I may obtaine here for my Nation the Liberty of a free and publick
Synagogue, wherein we may daily call upon the Lord our God, that once he
may be pleased to remember his Mercies and Promises done to our Fore
fathers, forgiving our trespasses, and restoring us once againe into our
fathers Inheritance; and besides to sue also for a blessing upon this
Nation, and People of_ England, _for receiving us into their bosomes,
and comforting_ Sion _in her distresse_.

_My_ second _Motive is, because the opinion of many Christians and mine
doe concurre herein, that we both believe that the restoring time of our
Nation into their Native Countrey, is very neer at hand; I believing
more particularly, that this restauration cannot be, before these words
of_ Daniel, Chap. 12. ver. 7. _be first accomplished, when he saith_,
And when the dispersion of the Holy people shall be compleated in all
places, then shall all these things be compleated: _signifying
therewith, that before all be fulfilled, the People of God must be first
dispersed into all places & Countreyes of the World. Now we know, how
our Nation at the present is spread all about, and hath its seat and
dwelling in the most flourishing parts of all the Kingdomes, and
Countreys of the World, as well in_ America, _as in the other three
parts thereof; except onely in this considerable and mighty Island. And
therefore this remains onely in my judgement, before the_ MESSIA _come
and restore our Nation, that first we must have our seat here likewise_.

_My_ third _Motive is grounded on the profit that I conceive this Common
wealth is to reap, if it shall vouchsafe to receive us; for thence, I
hope, there will follow a great blessing from God upon them, and a very
abundant trading into, and from all parts of the World, not onely
without prejudice to the English Nation, but for their profit, both in
Importation, and Exportation of goods. Yet if any shall doubt hereof, I
trust their Charity towards the people of God, will satisfie them,
especially when they shall reade the ensuing Treatise_.

_The_ fourth _Motive of my coming hither, is, my sincere affection to
this Common wealth, by reason of so many Worthy, Learned, and Pious men
in this Nation, whose loving kindnesse and Piety I have experience of:
hoping to finde the like affection in all the People generally; the
more, because I alwayes have, both by writing and deeds, professed much
inclination to this Common-wealth; and that I perswade my selfe they
will be mindfull of that Command of the Lord our God, who so highly
recommends unto all men the_ love of strangers; _much more to those that
professe their good affection to them. For this I desire all may be
confident of, that I am not come to make any disturbance, or to move any
disputes about matters of Religion; but onely to live with my Nation in
the feare of the Lord, under the shadow of your protection, whiles we
expect with you_ the hope of Israel _to be revealed_.


              How Profitable The Nation of the Iewes are.

_Three_ things, if it please your Highnesse, there are that make a
strange _Nation_ wel-beloved amongst the Natives of a land where they
dwell: (as the defect of those _three_ things make them hatefull.) viz.
_Profit_, they may receive from them; _Fidelity_ they hold towards their
Princes; and the _Noblenes_ and purity of their blood. Now when I shall
have made good, that all _these three_ things are found in the _Iewish
Nation_, I shall certainly persuade your Highnesse, that with a
favorable eye, (Monarchy being changed into a Republicq) you shall be
pleased to receive again the Nation of the Iews, who in time past lived
in that Island: but, I know not by what false Informations, were cruelly
handled and banished.

_Profit_ is a most powerfull motive, and which all the World preferres
before all other things: and therefore we shall handle that point first.

It is a thing confirmed, that merchandizing is, as it were, the proper
profession of the Nation of the Iews. I attribute this in the first
place, to the particular Providence and mercy of God towards his people:
for having banished them from their own Country, yet not from his
Protection, he hath given them, as it were, a naturall instinct, by
which they might not onely gain what was necessary for their need, but
that they should also thrive in Riches and possessions; whereby they
should not onely become gracious to their Princes and Lords, but that
they should be invited by others to come and dwell in their Lands.

Moreover, it cannot be denyed, but that necessity stirrs up a mans
ability and industry; and that it gives him great incitement, by all
means to trie the favour of Providence.

Besides, seeing it is no wisedome for them to endeavour the gaining of
Lands and other immovable goods, and so to imprison their possessions
here, where their persons are subject to so many casualities,
banishments and peregrinations; they are forced to use marchandizing
untill that time, when they shall returne to their own Country, that
then as God hath promised by the Prophet Zachary, _Their shall be found
no more any marchant amongst them in the House of the Lord_.

From that very thing we have said, there riseth an infallible Profit,
commodity and gain to all those Princes in whose Lands they dwell above
all other strange Nations whatsoever, as experience by divers _Reasons_
doth confirme.

I. The Iews, have no oportunity to live in their own Country, to till
the Lands or other like employments, give themselves wholy unto
merchandizing, and for contriving new Inventions, no Nation almost going
beyond them. And so ’tis observed, that wheresoever they go to dwell,
there presently the Traficq begins to florish. Which may be seen in
divers places, especially in Ligorne, which having been but a very
ignoble and inconsiderable City, is at this time, by the great concourse
of people, one of the most famous places of Trafique of whole Italy.

Furthermore, the Inventor of the famous _Scala de Spalatro_ (the most
firme and solid Traficq of Venice) was a Iew, who by this his Invention
transported the Negotiation from a great part of the Levant into that
City.

Even that very same is seene likewise at this day in Nizza and in other
innumerable places more, both in Europe and Asia.

II. The Nation of the Iews is dispersed throughout the whole World, it
being a chastisement that God hath layd upon them for their Idolatries,
Deut. 28,69. Ezech. 20,23. Nehem. 1,8. Ps. 107,27. and by other their
sinnes their families suffer the same shipwrack.

Now in this dispersion our Fore-fathers flying from the Spanish
Inquisition, some of them came in Holland, others got into Italy, and
others betooke themselves into Asia; and so easily they credit one
another; and by that meanes they draw the Negotiation where-ever they
are, where with all of them marchandising and having perfect knowledge
of all the kinds of Moneys, Diamants, Cochinil, Indigo, Wines, Oyle, and
other Commodities, that serve from place to place; especially holding
correspondence with their friends and kinds-folk, whose language they
understand; they do abundantly enrich the Lands and Countrys of
strangers, where they live, not onely with what is requisite and
necessary for the life of man; but also what may serve for ornament to
his civill condition. Of which _Traficq_, there ariseth ordinarily
_Five_ important benefits.

1. The augmentation of the Publiq Tolls and Customes, at their coming
and going out of the place.

2. The transporting and bringing in of marchandises from remote
Countries.

3. The affording of Materials in great plenty for all Mechaniqs; as
Wooll, Leather, Wines; Jewels, as Diamants, Pearles, and such like
Merchandize.

4. The venting and exportation of so many kinds of Manifactures.

5. The Commerce and reciprocall Negotiation at Sea, which is the ground
of Peace between neighbour Nations, and of great profit to their own
Fellow-cittizens.

III. This reason is the more strengthened, when we see, that not onely
the Iewish Nation dwelling in Holland and Italy, trafficqs with their
own stock, but also with the riches of many others of their own Nation,
friends, kinds-men and acquaintance, which notwithstanding live in
Spaine, and send unto them their moneys and goods, which they hold in
their hands, and content themselves with a very small portion of their
estate, to the end they may be secure and free from danger that might
happen unto them, in case they should fall under the yoke of the
Inquisition; whence not onely their goods, but oftentimes also their
lives are endangered.

IV. The love that men ordinarily beare to their own Country and the
desire they have to end their lives, where they had their begining, is
the cause, that most strangers having gotten riches where they are in a
forain land, are commonly taken in a desire to returne to their native
soil, and there peaceably to enjoy their estate; so that as they were a
help to the places where they lived, and negotiated while they remained
there; so when they depart from thence, they carry all away, and spoile
them of their wealth: transporting all into their own native Country:
But with the Iews the case is farre different; for where the Iews are
once kindly receaved, they make a firm resolution never to depart from
thence, seeing they have no proper place of their own: and so they are
alwayes with their goods in the Cities where they live, a perpetuall
benefit to all payments. Which reasons do clearly proove, that it being
the property of Cittizens in populous and rich countries, to seeke their
rest and ease with buying lands and faire possession of which they live;
many of them hating commerce, aspire to Titles and Dignities: therefore
of all strangers, in whose hands ordinarily Trafique is found, there are
none so profitable and beneficiall to the place where they trade and
live, as is the Nation of the Iews. And seeing amongst the people of
Europ, the chiefest riches they possesse, som from Spain, those
neighbour Nations, where the Iews shall finde liberty to live according
to their own Iudaicall Laws, they shall most easily draw that benefit to
themselves by means of the industry of our Nation, and their mutuall
correspondance.

From hence (if it please your Highnes) it results, that the Iewish
Nation, though scattered through the whole World, are not therefore a
despisable people, but as a Plant worthy to be planted in the whole
world, and received into Populous Cities: who ought to plant them in
those places, which are most secure from danger; being trees of most
savory fruit and profit, to be alwayes most favoured with Laws and
Priviledges, or Prerogatives, secured and defended by Armes. An Example
of this we have in our times. His Majesty, the Illustrious King of
Denmark, invited them with speciall Priviledges into Geluckstadt: the
Duke of Savoy into Nisa of Provence; and the Duke of Modina in Retio,
allowing them such conditions and benefices, as like never were
presented unto them by any other Prince, as appeareth by the copy of
those Priviledges, which I have in my hands. But supposing it would be a
matter of too large extention, if I should make a relation of all the
places under whose Princes the Iews live, I will onely speake briefly of
the two Tribes Iudah and Benjamin. These in India in Cochin have 4
Synagogues, one part of these Iews being there of a white colour, and
three of a tawny; these being most favoured by the King. In the year
1640. dyed Samuel Castoel, Governour of the City, and Agent for the
King, and David Castoel his sonne succeeded in his place. In Persia
there is a great number of Iews, and they live indifferent freely: there
are also amongst them that are in favour and great respect by the King,
and who live there very bravely. Some years past, there was Elhazar
Huza, the Viceroy, and now there is David Ian; if yet he be living. In
the year 1636. the Saltan Amarat took in Bagdad, and puting all to the
sword, he commanded that they should not touch the Iews, nor their
houses, and besides that, he freed them from one half of the tribuit
they were wont to pay to the Persian.

But the chiefest place where the Iews life, is the Turkish Empire, where
some of them live in great estate, even in the Court of the Grand Turke
at Constantinople, by reason there is no Viceroy, or Governour, or
Bassa, which hath not a Iew to manage his affaires, and to take care for
his estate: Hence it cometh that in short time they grow up to be Lords
of great revenues, and they most frequently bend the minds of Great ones
to most weighty affaires in government.

The greatest Viceroy of whole Europe is the Bassa of Egypt; this Bassa
always takes to him, by order of the Kingdome, a Iew with the title of
Zaraf-Bassa (_Thresurer_) viz. of all the Revenues of that government,
who receaves purses full of money, seals them, and then sends them to
the King. This man in a short time grows very rich, for that by his
hands as being next to the Bassa, the 24 Governments of that Empire are
sould and given, and all other businesses managed. At present he that
possesseth this place, is called S^r. Abraham Alhula. The number of the
Iews living in this Kingdome of the Great Turke, is very great, and
amounts to many Millions. In Constantinople alone there are 48
Synagogues, and in Salaminque 36, and more then fourescore thousand
soules in these two Cities alone.

The first King gave them great priviledges which they enjoy untill this
day: for besides the liberty, they have every-where, of trading with
open shops, of bearing any Office and possessing of any goods, both
mooveable and immooveable, he yet graunted them power to judge all
Civill causes according to their own Laws amongst themselves. Moreover
they are exempted from going to Warres, and that souldiers should be
quartered in their houses, and that Justice should take no place upon
the death of any one that left no heir to his Estate.

In all which they are preferred before the naturall Turks themselves.
For which cause they pay in some Cittys to the King three Patacons, and
in others two and a half by the pole.

In this estate some of the Iews have grown to great fortunes; as Joseph
Nasino, unto whom Amatus Lusitanus dedicated his fifth and sixth
Centuriæ, was by Sultan Solime made Duke of Maccia, Earle of Andro,
Seignor of Millo, and the seaven Islands: And Jacob Ben-Iaes by Sultan
Amurat, was made Governour of the Tiberiades: so likewise others were
exalted to very great and Eminent Dignities: as was that Selomo Rose,
that was sent for Ambassador at Venice, where he confirmed the last
Peace with Amurat. In Germany, there lives also a great multitude of
Jews, especially at Prague, Vienna and Franckfurt, very much favoured by
the most mild and most gracious Emperours, but despised of the people,
being a Nation not very finely garnished by reason of their vile
cloathing: yet notwithstanding there is not wanting amongst them persons
of great quality. The Emperour Matthias made Noble both Mardochai
Mairel, and Ferdinando Jacob Bar Seba.

But yet a greater number of Iews are found in the Kingdome of Poland,
Prussia and Lethuania, under which Monarchy they have the Jurisdiction
to judge amongst themselves all causes, both Criminal and Civil; and
also great and famous Academies of their own. The chief Cities where the
Nation liveth, are Lublin and Cracow, where there is a Iew, called Isaac
Iecells, who built a Synagogue, which stood him in one hundred thousand
Francs, and is worth many tons of gold. There is in this place such
infinite number of Iews; that although the Cosaques in the late warres
have killed of them above one hundred and fourescore thousand; yet it is
sustained that they are yet at this day as innumerable as those were
that came out of Egypt. In that Kingdome the whole Negotiation is in the
hand of the Iews, the rest of the Christians are either all Noble-men,
or Rustiques and kept as slaves.

In Italy they are generally protected by all the Princes: their
principall residence is in the most famous City of Venice; so that in
that same City alone they possesse about 1400 Houses; and are used there
with much courtesy and clemency. Many also live in Padoa and Verona;
others in Mantua, and also many in Rome it self. Finally they are
scattered here and there in the chief places of Italy, and do live there
with many speciall priviledges.

In the Government of the great Duke of Tuscany, they are by that Prince
most graciously & bountifully dealt with, having power from him
graunted, to have their Judicatory by themselves, and to judge in all
matters, both Civill and Criminall; besides many other Priviledges,
whereof I my self have the Copies in hand. The rich and illustrious
families that flourished in these Countries are many, viz. The Thoraces,
who being three Brethren, shared betwixt them above 700 thousand Crowns.
In Ferrara were the Viles, whose stock was above 200 thousand Crowns.
The Lord Joseph de Fano, Marquis de Villependi, was a man much respected
of all the Princes in Italy, and was called by them, The Peace-maker and
appeaser of all troubles; because he, by his authority and entremise,
was used to appease all troubles and strife rising amongst them. Don
Daniel Rodrigues, because of his prudency and other good qualities, was
sent in the year 1589 from the most Excellent Senat of Venice into
Dalmatia, to appease those tumults and scandals given by the Vsquoquibs
in Clissa: which he most manly effected, and caused all the women and
children, that were kept cloose prisoners, to be set at liberty, brought
also to an happy issue many other things of great moment, for which he
was sent. Alphonso II. the Duke of Ferrara, sent also for his Ambassador
to the Imperiall Majesty, one Abraham de Bondi, to pay and discharge
Investiture of the States of Modena and Reggio. The Prince of Sasol and
the Marquis of Scandia likewise, had to their Factors men of our Nation.

In the Kingdome of Barbary, their lives also a great number of Iews,
who-ever cruelly and basely used by that Barbarous Nation, except at
Marrocco, the Court and Kings house, where they have their Naguid or
Prince that governs them, and is their Iudge, and is called at this day,
Seignor Moseh Palache: and before him was in the same Court, that Noble
family Ruthes, that had power and Iurisdiction of all kinde of
punishment, onely life and death excepted.

In the Low-Countries also, the Iews are received with great Charity and
Benevolency, and especially in this most renowned City of Amsterdam,
where there are no lesse then 400 Families; and how great a trading and
Negotiation they draw to that City, experience doth sufficiently
witness. They have there no lesse then three hundred houses of their
own, enjoy a good part of the West and East-Indian Compagnies; and
besides have yet to set forth their Trafiq such a stock, that for
setting a side, onely one duit of every pound Flemish for all kind of
commodities that enter, and again as much for all what goes out of this
town, and what besides we pay yearly of the rents we get from the
East-Indian Compagnie to the reliefe and sustenance of the poore of our
Synagogue, that very money amounts ordinarily every year, unto the summe
very neare of 12000 Franks; whereby you may easely conceive what a
mighty stock it is they trade with, and what a profit they needs must
bring into this City.

In Hambourg likewise, a most famous City of Holsace in Germany, there
lives also a hundred families, protected by the Magistrat, though
molested by the people. There resides Sir Duarte Nunes d’Acosta,
Resident for his Majesty the King of Portugal: Gabriel Gomes, Agent for
his Majesty the King of Danemarck: David de Lima, a Ieweller, for the
same his Majesty; and Emanuel Boccaro Rosales, created by the Emperour a
Noble-man and a Count Palatin.

In all these places the Iews live (in a manner) all of them Merchants,
and that without any prejudice at all to the Natives: For the Natives,
and those especially that are most rich, they build themselves houses
and Palaces, buy Lands and firme goods, aime at Titles and Dignities,
and so seek their rest and contentment that way: But as for the Iews,
they aspire at nothing, but to preferre themselves in their way of
Marchandize; and so employing their _Capitals_, they send forth the
benefit of their labour amongst many and sundry of the Natives, which
they, by the trafick of their Negotiation, do enrich. From whence it’s
easy to judge of the profit that Princes and Common-wealths do reap, by
giving liberty of Religion to the Iews, and gathering them by some
speciall priviledges into their Countries: as Trees that bring forth
such excellent fruits.

So that if one Prince, ill advised, driveth them out of his Land, yet
another invites them to his; & shews them favour; Wherein we may see the
prophecy of Iacob fulfilled in the letter: _The staffe (to support him)
shall not depart from Iacob, untill Messias shall come_. And this shall
suffice concerning the Profit of the Iewish Nation.


                             How Faithfull
                      The Nation of the Iewes are.

The Fidelity of Vassals and Subjects, is a thing that Princes most
esteem off: for there-on, both in Peace and Warre, depends the
preservation of their estates. And as for this point, in my opinion,
they owe much to the Nation of the Iews, by reason of the faithfulnesse
and loyalty they show to all Potentates that receive and protect them in
their Countries. For setting aside the Histories of the Ptolomies, Kings
of Egypt, who did not trust the Guard of their persons, nor the keeping
of their Forts, nor the most important affairs of their Kingdome to any
other Nation with greater satisfaction then to the Iews; the Wounds of
Antipater shewed to Iulius Cæsar in token of his loyalty, and the brasen
Tables of our Ancestours amongst the Romans, are evident witnesses
enough of their fidelity shewed unto them.

In Spaine the Iews of Burgos; as the Chronicles do declare, most
generously shewed the very same fidelity in the times of Don Henrique;
who having killed his Brother, the King, Don Pedro de Cruel, made
himself Lord of all his Kingdomes, and brought under his obedience all
the Grandees and people of Spaine: Only the Iews of Burgos denyed to
obey him, and fortified themselves within the City, saying, _That God
would never have it, that they should deny obedience to their Naturall
Lord Don Pedro, or to his rightfull successours_. A constancy that the
prudent King, Don Henriques, very much esteemed of, saying, that such
Vassals as those were, by Kings and great men, worthy of much account,
seeing they held greater respect to the fidelity _they ought to their
King, although conquered and dead, than to the present fortune of the
Conquerour_: And a while after, receiving _very honourable conditions,
they gave themselves over_.

In Spain also (as you may see in Mariana) many Iewes for the same
fidelity were appointed Governours of the Kingdome, and Tutors of
Noble-mens children, jointly to others of the Nobility upon the death of
their Parents.

The Chronicles of the Xarifes, dedicated to King Philip the second, King
of Spaine, alleagues for an example of great fidelity and vertue, how
the rising of the Xarifes against the Morines, their killing and
spoyling them of the Kingdome, was such a great grief unto Samuel
Alvalensi, one of those banished out of Spaine, and much favoured by the
King of Fez, descended from the house of the Morines; that joyning
himself with other Magistrates, and subjects of the Morines, arming some
ships and going himself Captain over all, he came suddenly with 400.
men, and fell by night upon the Army of the Xarifes, that were more then
3000. men, besieging Copta, and without losing one man, killed of them
above 500. and caused them to raise the siege.

Many the like Examples may be brought of times past; but for our
present; and modern times there is no Exemple so evident, as in the
besieging of Mantua for the Emperour in the year 1630, where the Iews
fought most valiantly, and rescued it from the Natives. As likewise in
the Seignory of Brasil, where the same thing was done: for one of the
same Nation, a Dutchman, having delivered the Cape unto the Portugals,
there was found in our Nation there not only loyalty, but also such
discretion, that had they taken their advise, the business had not so
proceeded.

This may be seen more clearly yet in their being banished out of
Castile, in the dayes of Ferdinand & Isabella. Their number at that time
was supposed to have been half a Milion of men, amongst whom were many
of great valour, & courage (as Don Isaac Abarbanel, a Counsellor of
State, doth relate) & yet amongst so great a number, there was not found
any one man, that undertook to raise a party to free themselves from
that most miserable banishment. An evident sign of the proper and
naturall resolution of this Nation, and their constant obedience to
their Princes.

The same affection is confirmed by the inviolable custome of all the
Iews wheresoever they live: for on every Sabbath or festivall Day, they
every where are used to pray for the safety of all Kings, Princes and
Common-wealths, under whose jurisdiction they live, of what
profession-soever: unto which duty they are bound by the Prophets and
the Talmudists; from the Law, as by Ieremie chap. 29. vers. 7. _Seek the
peace of the City unto which I have made you to wander: and pray for her
unto the Lord, for in her Peace you shall enjoy peace._ He speaks of
Babylon, where the Iews at that time were captives. From the Talmud ord.
4. tract. 4. Abodazara pereq. 1. _Pray for the peace of the Kingdome,
for unlesse there were feare of the Kingdome, men would swallow one the
other alive_, &c.

From the continuall and never broken Custome of the Iews wheresoever
they are, on the Sabbath-Day, or other solemn Feasts; at which time all
the Iews from all places come together to the Synagogue, after the
benediction of the Holy Law, before the Minister of the Synagogue
blesseth the people of the Iews; with a loud voice he blesseth the
Prince of the Country under whom they live, that all the Iews may hear
it, and say, Amen. The words he useth are these, as in the printed book
of the Iews may be seen: _He that giveth salvation unto Kings, and
dominion unto Lords, he that delivered his servant David from the sword
of the Enemy, he that made a way in the Sea, and a path in the strange
waters, blesse and keep, preserve and rescue, exalt and magnify, and
lift up higher and higher, our Lord_. [And then he names, the Pope, the
Emperour, King, Duke, or any other Prince under whom the Iews live, and
add’s:] _The King of kings defend him in his mercy, making him joyfull,
& free him from all dangers and distresse. The King of kings, for his
goodness sake, raise up and exalt his planetary star, & multiply his
dayes over his Kingdome. The King of kings for his mercies sake, put
into his heart, and into the heart of his Counsellers, & those that
attend and administer to him, that he may shew mercy unto us, & unto all
the people of Israel. In his dayes and in our dayes, let Iudah be safe,
and Israel dwell securely, and let the Redeemer come to Israel, and so
may it please God. Amen._ These are the very formalities set down word
for word, which the Iewes, by the command of God, received from the
Talmud, do use in their prayers for Princes, under whose government they
reside. And therefore wise Princes are wont to banish from their Courts
false reports. And most wise _R. Simon Ben-Iochai_, in his excellent
book called _Zoar_ in Sarasa Pecudi, relates, that _it is a Tradition
received from Heaven, that the Kings of the Nations of the world,
Princes, Governours, that protect the Iews in this world, or do them any
good, that the same shall enjoy certain degrees of glory, or eternall
reward; as on the other side, they that do to the Nation of the Iews any
harm, that they shall be punished with some particular eternal
punishment_. As appeareth also out of Esa. the last chapter.

Thus you see the Fidelity of the Iews to wards their Governours clearly
proved. Now, that no man may think that their banishment out of Spaign &
Portugal, proceeded from any suspition or faults of theirs, I shall
clearly rehearse the reason of so sudden a determination, and what the
thoughts of many Christian Princes have been there-upon. The business
was thus: Ferdinand and Isabella, Governours of Castile, having gained
the Kingdome of Granada, of which they took possession on the fifth of
Ianuary, they resolved to thrust out all the Iews that lived in their
Kingdomes, and so on the last of March, they made an Edict in the same
City, in which they expressed: _That seeing the Iews in their Countries
drew many Christians to turn Iews, and especially some Noble-men of
their Kingdome of Andaluzia, that for this cause they banished them
under most heavy penalties, &c._ So that the cause of their banishment
was not any disloyalty at all.

Now what amongst many others in all Christendom, one famous Lawyer in
Rome, and Osorius an excellent and most eloquent Historian have thought,
I shall here relate. In the year 1492 (saith the Lawyer) Ferdinand,
called the Catholick, being King of Spain, drove out of his Country all
the Iews that were living there from the time of the Babylonian and
Roman Captivity, and were very rich in houses and goods: and that upon
pain, if they went not away within the term of six moneths, that all
their houses and goods should be confiscated unto the Exchequer, which
as we have said, were very great. Whereupon they leaving the Kingdome of
Castile, they went over many of them into Portugal, as being the nearest
place. In the year 1497, there being an Alliance contracted between the
Kings of Castile and Portugal; the Jews at the request of the said King
Ferdinand, were banished out of Portugal; but it being against the will
of Emanuel, King of Portugal, to have them banished out of his Country,
he resolved to oblidge them to become Christians, promising never to
molest them, neither in Criminall matters, nor in the losse of their
goods; and exempted them from many burdens, and Tributs of the Kingdome.
This Emanuel being dead, John III, succeeded in his place in the
Kingdome of Portugal, who being excited by others, said, That what his
Father Emanuel had done, concerning the not-troubling them, was of no
valew, because they lived not as was convenient, & that without the
authority of the Pope of Rome, his father could not graunt any such
thing: for which cause he would that for those that lived amisse, they
should be proceeded against, as against the Mores in Castile: And
sending to Rome to disanull the said promises, it was not onely not
graunted to him, but moreover they reprooved his appearance there, and
praised and approoved the promises made by his Father Emanuel to the
Jewes, publishing a generall pardon to all that were taken, which were
about 1500, and they all were set free. Which Bull was graunted by
Clement VII. by the intervention of all the Consistory of Cardinals.
Afterwards the said king John sent once again to desire the former
Licence with so many replications and triplications, that at length the
Pope granted it: But a few daies after it was revoked again with a
generall Pardon to all that were taken, which were 12000, with such a
determination, that the same Licence should never be graunted, as being
against all right and reason. This troubled Don John the King very much,
and withall the Cardinal his brother, who came in these last dayes to be
King of Portugal himself. Great Paul III. of the house of Farnesia,
succeeding to Clement the VII. there was a request rendred to the Pope
for power to bring in the Inquisition into this Kingdome. The Pope would
not graunt it, saying: He could not, and that it was a thing against
reason and Iustice, but on the contrary confirmed the promises made by
the King Don Emanuel, his Father; and pardoned all the delinquents since
the time of violence unto that day. Don Iohn seeing this, sent an
Embassadour meerly for that businesse to the Pope, but could obtain
nothing at all: for which cause King Iohn resolved to entreat the
Emperour Charles the V. then passing for Rome, as Conquerour over the
Turks, having wonn Tunis and Goleta, that in this his Triumph he would
take occasion to desire this favour from the Pope, that the King of
Portugal might set up the Inquisition in his Kingdome, it being an old
custome that those that triumphed, should aske something of the Pope
that they most desired. The Emperour than having desired this, the Pope
answered him, that he could not do it by reason of the agreement made,
and the promises of the King Don Emanuel; which he had found by an
Apostolicall Nuntio in Portugal in the year 1497, at which time the
Iewes were forced and compelled to become Christians. The Emperour
replyed, Let that sinne fall on him, and the Prince his sonne, the
Apostolicall seat shall be free from it. So the Pope graunted it;
because the Emperour Charles the V. was brother in law to King Don Iohn
of Portugal; and besides they treated at that time to enter further in
affinity, and to marry their children, which since was effected. After
Paul the III. graunted this, there was a new Pardon given in generall to
all that were taken unto that time, amounting the Number unto 1800. But
the King refusing to obey the Pardon, and to free the Prisonners, the
Pope tooke it very ill, and sent for this onely businesse for his
Nuntio, one Monsegnor Monte Paliciano, who since was Cardinal of the
Church of Rome. And the King for all this not obeying, the Pope made the
Nuntio to fix the Pardon upon the doores of the Cathedrall Churches, and
the Nuntio caused the Prisons to be opened, and there were set free
about 1800 prisoners. He that sollicited this businesse at Rome was one
Seignor Duarte de Paz, a Cavallier of the Order of St. Iohn: whom to
search out there were appointed at Rome ten men disguised; these having
found him, gave him fifteen wounds, and left him for dead: thus wounded,
he was carried to the house of Seignor Philip Estrozi: This being
reported to the Pope, Paul the III. he caused him to be carried to the
Castle of S. Angelo, where he gave order to have him nobly cured. That
same Seignor was by the Pope, by all the Cardinals and the whole Court
in great respect. At the same time that this man was hurt, the Emperour
Charles the V. was at Rome with his Army. On the time when he began to
treat of this businesse with Clement the VII. seeing the Kings
importunity, he made a Bull and gave licence to all the Portugals of
that Nation of the Iews; that they might go and live in the
Church-Dominions, & whosoever will come in the said Dominions, that he
shall have freedom to live, as at the first, in his Iewish profession,
and that at no time they should be enquired into, but after the same
manner as they were wont to live in Portugal, so they should live there.
The said Bull passed all the Consistory; and being confirmed and
received by the said Portugals, they began some of them to depart to
live in Ancona, being a sea-port more commodious then others: which
being known by the King and Cardinal of Portugal, they caused to be
proclaimed in all the Kingdome, that upon paine of death, and losse of
all their goods, no man should dare depart the Kingdome. Clement being
dead, in his place succeeded (as we have said) Pope Paul the III. who
confirmed the same Priviledges: Afterwards in the year 1550. Paul the
III. died, and Julius the III. succeeded, who ratified the
fore-mentioned Priviledges given by his Predecessours, and the whole
Apostolike Seat inviolably. In those times there were many Doctors that
wrote on this matter, amongst whom the chiefest were Alciat, and the
Cardinal Parisius in _2 & 3 parte Consiliorum pro Christianis noviter
conversis_; shewing by reason and law, that considering they were forced
and not converted willingly, that they had not fallen nor do fall under
any Censure. These reasons being considered of by the Princes of Italy,
they graunted likewise the same Priviledges: viz. Cosmo the Great, Duke
of Florence, and Hercules, Duke of Ferrare, and within few years Emanuel
Felibert, Duke of Savoye; and were by all his successours confirmed. In
the year 1492, when they were banished from Castile, we read in the
Chronicles of that Kingdome, that the Lords of that place did complain
that their Cities and Towns were destroyed and dis-inhabitated; and had
they believed any such thing, that they would have opposed the Kings
decree, and would never have given their consent to it. That was the
cause, that Don Emanuel of Portugal, seeing on the one side apparent
dammage, should he let them depart his Kingdome; and on the otherside,
not being able to break his promise made to the King of Castile, he
caused them to be compelled to the Faith, upon paine of Death, that they
should not depart out of his Dominions. The Catholiq King was blamed of
all Christian Princes, and especially by the Senate of Venice, (as
Marcus Antonius Sabellicus doth write) for having banished a Nation so
profitable to the Publicq and Particular good, without any kind of
pretence. And so the Parliament of Paris likewise did extreamly wonder
at such a determination. And truely good reason there was to wonder; for
we see since, what the Senat of Venice hath done, who never deliberats
or puts into execution any thing, without great judgement: having the
advantage of all Republicqs in their Government and leaving behind them
the Romans, Carthagenians, Athenians, and most learned Lacedemonians,
and that Parliament of Paris, which in the Government of affaires was
alwayes most prudent. Most of those that were banished passed to the
Levant, who were embraced by the Ottoman-family, all the succeeding
Kings wondring at it, that the Spanjards, who make profession to be a
politiq Nation, should drive out of their kingdomes such a people.
Moreover Sultan Bajazet, and Sultan Soliman, received them exceeding
well, the coming of the Iews to them being very acceptable: and so did
likewise all their successours, considering of how great a profit and
benefit their residing in their Dominions was. And in the year 1555.
Paul the IV. being chosen Pope of Rome, who before was called Cardinal
de Chiesi, an intimate to the Cardinal of Portugal, caused the Iewes to
be held in Ancona, & other places of the Church, according to the
Priviledges graunted to them by the Popes, his Predecessours in the name
of the Apostolical Roman seat. Licurgus, Solon and Draco, and all
Founders of Commonwealths, gave counsell that strangers ought to be
loved and much made of, as in the Discourses of _Se. in 7 de Legibus de
Rep._ is amply to be seen. And by the Divine Law (as Moses commanded us)
we ought not to trouble a stranger, but he sayes, _Remember you were
strangers in the Land of Egypt_.

In summe, to the same purpose might be brought many other and more
powerfull reasons, but because they are out of our consideration, we
passe them over. And here to declare some particulars, worthy to be
known for advise and example, that befell our Nation in those bitter
banishments; part whereof Hieronymus Osorius recites more at large, in
the first of his elegant two Books de Rebus Emanuelis. The first title
he giveth to those miserable successes, is this, which he puts for a
Postil in the margent of his booke, _Iudæorum Liberi pervim ad
Christianismum pertracti_: and than rehearses, how that in the year 1496
the King decreed, that all the Iewes and Mores, that dwelt in his
Kingdome, and would not become Christians, should depart his Dominions
in a short time; which being past, all that should be found in his
Kingdome, should loose their liberty, and become slaves to the King. The
time being now at hand (as Osorius proceeds) in which the Iewes, that
would not turne Christians, were to depart the Kingdome, and all of them
as many as they were, had with all their power provided, and taken a
firme resolution to be gone: which the King seeing, and not able to
endure it, thought upon a businesse (as he saith) _facto quidem iniquam
& injustam_, which to do was really wicked and unjust, and that was to
command that all the children of the Israelites, that were not above 14
years old, should be taken out of the power of their own Parents; & when
they had them, they should force them to become Christians; a new thing
that could not be done without a wonderfull alteration of their minds:
for it was (as Osorius speaks) a horrid and miserable spectacle, to see
the tender Infants wrestled out of the arms and brests of their
lamenting mothers, to dragge along their poore fathers that held them
fast, and to give them many wounds and blows to draw them out of their
handes; to hear their cryes that ascend to heaven, their groanes,
lamentations, and complaints every-where, so that this cruelty was the
cause, that many of those distressed Fathers threw their children into
wells, and others killed themselves with their own hands, that they
might not see so bitter a thing with their eyes. The cruelty of Emanuel
ended not here, but going on with compulsion and revilings, gave cause
to his owne Chronographer to make the second title or postil, with these
words; _Vis & Dolus Iudæisillata_: That is, The force and deceit used
towards the Iewes. And so he goes on, declaring how he had promised in
the condition they had made, that he would assigne them three Ports in
his Kingdome to embarque at, viz. Lisbon, Setuval, and Puerto: and
neverthelesse he forbad them afterwards to embarque themselves in any
place but Lisbon: for which cause all the Iewes of the Kingdome came to
that City, from whence besides a thousand molestations and extortions,
he drove them (as Vasquo saith) as sheep in the stalls, and there forced
their afflicted bodies to counterfeit, that which their soules and
thoughts never meant nor approoved of. Works, of which his own
Chronologer saith, _Fuit hoc quidem neque ex Lege, neque ex religione
factum_. That is, This was done neither according to Law, nor Religion.
Let men of clear mind, and free from passion consider for Gods sake, if
such violences can work any good impression or character in men: or what
Law, either Humain or Divine, National or Modern, can bear, that the
souls of men (which the Most High hath created free) be forced to
believe what they believe not, and to love what they hate? This cruelty
was reproved and censure of many Princes of the world and learned men.
And his own Chronologer reprehends it with a new postil, and speaks
freely; _Regis in Iudæos facinorum reprehensio_. That is, A censure of
the Kings wickednesse against the Iews. Truely with just reason doth
Osorius call the works, which the King did unto us, _Iniquities and
injustices, deceitfull violences, and wicked attempts_: and so goes on,
reproving them with most elegant Reasons.

Further what happened to the Iews under other Princes in other Kingdomes
and Countries, is notorious and enough known to all the world, and
therefore not necessary here to relate. So farre concerning their
Bannishment.

Now, I will not conceale to say, but that alwayes there have bene found
some calumniators, that endeavouring to make the Nation infamous, laid
upon them _three most false reports_, as if _they were dangerous to the
Goods, the Lives_, and withall to _the very Souls of the Natives_. They
urge against them their _usuries_, the _slaying of infants_ to celebrate
their Passe-over, and the _inducing Christians to become Iews_. To all
which I shall answer briefly.

1. As for _usury_, such dealing is not the essential property of the
Iews, for though in Germany there be some indeed that practise usury;
yet the most part of them that live in Turky, Italy, Holland and
Hamburg, being come out of Spaigne, they hold it infamous to use it; and
so with a very small profit of 4. or 5. per Cent, as Christians
themselves do, they put their money ordinarily in Banco: for to lay out
their money without any profit, was commanded only toward their brethren
of the same Nation of the Iews; but not to any other Nation. And however
by this Charity is not hurt: for it stands in good reason, that every
one should gain and get some advantage with his money, to sustaine his
own life: and when any one to supply his own wants, doth take some
course of Marchandise, by which he hopes to gaine by other mens moneys
taken up on trust, ’tis no inhumanity to reckon and take from him use:
For as no man is bound to give his goods to an other; so is he not bound
to let it out, but for his own occasions and profit, and not to leave
himself destitute of the profit he could make of the monyes. Onely this
must be done with moderation, that the usury be not biting and
exorbitant, which the Christians themselves use, amongst themselves; as
even in the Mounts of Piety at Padua, Vicenza and Verona is to be seen,
where they take 6 per Cent, and elsewhere yet much more. This in no
manner can be called Robbery, but is with consent and will of the
Contracter; and the same Sacred Scripture, which allows usury with him
that is not of the same Religion, forbids absolutely the robbing of all
men, whatsoever Religion they be of. In our Law it is a greater sinne to
rob or defraud a stranger, than if I did it to one of my own profession:
because a Jew is bound to shew his charity to all men: for he hath a
precept, not to abhorre an Idumean, nor an Egyptian; and that he shall
love and protect a stranger that comes to live in his land. If
notwithstanding there be some that do contrary to this, they do it not
as Iewes simply, but as wicked Iewes, as amongst all nations there are
found generally some Usurers.

2. As for _killing of the young children of Christians_; it is an
infallible truth what is reported of the Negros of Guinea and Brazil,
that if they see any miserable man that hath escaped from the danger of
the sea, or hath fallen or suffered any kind of ill-fortune, or
Shipwrake, they persecute and vex him so much the more, saying, _God
curse thee_. And wee that live not amongst the Blacke-moors and
wild-men, but amongst the white and civilized people of the world, yet
wee find this an ordinary course, that men are very prone to hate and
despise him that hath ill fortune; and on the other side, to make much
of those whom fortune doth favour. Hereof the Christians themselves have
good experience; for during the times of their suppression and
persecution under the Roman Empire, they were falsely slandred of divers
Emperours and tyrannicall Princes. Nero accused them, that they had set
Rome on fire; Others, that they were Witches and Conjurers; and others
againe that they slew their children to celebrate their Ceremonies, as
wee find in divers Authors. Even so likewise it is with the Jewish
Nation, that now is dispersed and afflicted, though they have moneys:
There is no slander nor calumny that is not cast upon them, even the
very same ancient scandall that was cast of old upon the innocent
Christians, is now laid upon the Jews. Whereas the whole world may
easely perceive, it is but a meer slander, seeing it is known that at
this day, out of Jerusalem, no sacrifice nor blood is in any use by
them, even that blood which is found in an Egg is forbidden them, how
much more mans blood? Moreover I could produce divers memorable examples
which out in our own times in Araguza to a Jew: how he was accused of
this same wickedness, and not confessing it, how they imprisoned him
betwixt to walls, and being in that distresse, how he cited before God
all the Judges to answer there for what they did; and how within a year
after, many of the Iudges died, and those that lived, fearing the like
might befall them, and loose their lives, set him free: But I must not
be too prolix; it may suffice to say, that by the Pope himself it was
defined in full Counsell the accusation to be false; and so likewise
judged all the Princes of Italy; as also Alphonso the Wise, King of
Spain, and that it was onely a meer invention to drink the blood, and to
swallow up the goods of the harmlesse Iews.

3. As for the _third_ Point, I say, that although Ferdinand & Isabell,
giving colour to so indiscreet a determination, said, that they induced
the Nobles to become Iews, yet truely this cannot be said, but by some
false informations. For if so be, amongst those difficulties and
impossibilities, it may happen, that some of the Sect of the Papists, of
a better mind, embrace the Iewish Religion; it cannot therefore be
presumed, that they were induced thereunto by the Iews; seeing the Iews
do not entice any man to professe their Law: But if any man of his own
free-will come to them, they by their rites & Ceremonies are obliged to
make proof of them, whether they come for any temporall interest, and to
persuade them to look well to themselves what they do: that the Law unto
which they are to submit themselves, is of many precepts; and doth
oblige the transgressor to many sore punishments. And so we follow the
example of Nahomi, cited in the Sacred Scripture, who did not persuade
Ruth to go along with her; but said first to her: _Orpa thy sister
returned to her Nation and her Gods; go thou and follow her_. But Ruth
continuing constant, then at length she received her.

Besides this, the Iews indeed have reason to take care for their own
preservation; and therefore will not go about by such wayes to make
themselves odious to Princes and Common-wealths, under whose Dominions
they live.

Now, because I beleive, that with a good conscience I have discharged
our Nation of the Iews of those three slanders or calumnies, as
elsewhere I have more at large written about it; I conceive I may from
those two qualities, of Profitablenesse and Fidelity conclude, that such
a Nation ought to be well entertained, and also beloved and protected
generally of all. The more, considering they are called in the Sacred
Scriptures, the Sons of God; and ’tis said by all the Prophets, that
they who shall wrong them, shall be most severely punished; and that he
that toucheth them, toucheth the apple of Gods eye. And at least, it was
alwayes the opinion of Augustine, as he made it appear in his works
_Libr. de Doctrina Christiana cap._ 28. where he saith, _Quod omnes
homines æque diligendi sunt_. That all men are equally to be beloved.

Now, having proved the two former Points. I could adde a third, viz. of
the Nobility of the Iews: but because that Point is enough known amongst
all Christians, as lately yet it hath been most worthily and excellently
shewed and described in a certain Book, called, _The Glory of Iehudah
and Israel_, dedicated to our Nation by that worthy Christian Minister
Mr. _Henry Iessey_, (1653. in Duch) where this matter is set out at
large: And by Mr. _Edw. Nicholas_ Genleman, in his Book, called, _An
Apologie for the Honorable Nation of the Iews, and all the Sons of
Israel_ (1648. in English.) Therefore I will here forbeare, and rest on
their saying of our King Salomon, the wisest on earth, _Let another mans
mouth praise thee, and not thine own_. Which is the close of _Rabbi
Menesse Ben-Israel_, a Divine, and Doctor in Physick, in the _Strand_
over against the _New-Exchange_ in _London_.


                                 FINIS.

[Illustration:

  Menasseh ben Israel.

  from a portrait by Rembrandt, now in the Hermitage Collection, St.
    Petersburg
]



                                VINDICIÆ
                               JUDÆORUM,
                                  OR A
                                 LETTER
    In Answer to certain Questions propounded by a Noble and Learned
  Gentleman, touching the reproaches cast on the Nation of the JEVVES;
      wherein all objections are candidly, and yet fully cleared.


       _By_ Rabbi Menasseh Ben Israel _a Divine and a Physicyan_.


                  Printed by _R. D._ in the year 1656.

[Illustration]


  _Most Noble, and Learned Sir_,

I have received a letter from your worship, which was welcome to me; and
I read it, because yours, with great delight; if you will please to
allow for the unpleasantnesse of the subject. For I do assure your
worship, I never met with any thing in my life which I did more deeply
resent, for that it reflecteth upon the credit of a nation, which
amongst so many calumnies, so manifest, (and therefore shamefull) I dare
to pronounce innocent. Yet I am afraid, that whilst I answer to them, I
shall offend some, whose zeal will not permit them to consider, that
self vindication, as defensive armes, is naturall to all; but to be
wholly silent, were to acknowledge what is so falsly objected. Wherefore
that I may justifie my self to my own conscience, I have obeyed your
worships commands: for your request must not be accounted lesse, at
least by me. I presume your worship cannot expect either prolix, or
polite discourses upon so sad a subject; for who can be ambitious in his
own calamity? I have therefore dispatcht onely some concise, and brief
relations, barely exceeding the bounds of a letter; yet such as may
suffice you, to inform the Rulers of the _English_ nation, of a truth
most reall, and sincere; which I hope they will accept in good part,
according to their noble, and singular prudence and piety. For
innocencie being alwayes most free from suspecting evil, I cannot be
perswaded, that any one hath either spoken, or written against us, out
of any particular hatred that they bare us, but that they rather
supposed our coming might prove prejudiciall to their estates, and
interests; charity alwayes beginning at home. Yet notwithstanding I
propounded this matter under an argument of profit (for this hath made
us welcome in other countries) and therefore I hope I may prove what I
undertake. However, I have but small encouragement to expect the happy
attainment of any other design, but onely that truth may be justified of
her children. I shall answer in order to what your worship hath
proposed.


                           THE FIRST SECTION.

And in the first place, I cannot but weep bitterly, and with much
anguish of soul lament that strange and horrid accusation of some
Christians against the dispersed, and afflicted _Iewes_ that dwell among
them, when they say (what I tremble to write) that the _Iewes_ are wont
to celebrate the feast of unleavened bread, fermenting it with the bloud
of some Christians, whom they have for this purpose killed: when the
calumniators themselves have most barbarously and cruelly butchered some
of them. Or to speak more mildly, have found one dead, and cast the
corps, as if it had been murdered by the _Iewes_, into their houses or
yards, as lamentable experience hath proved in sundry places: and then
with unbridled rage and tumult, they accuse the innocent _Iews_, as the
committers of this most execrable fact. Which detestable wickednesse
hath been sometimes perpetrated, that they might thereby take advantage
to exercise their cruelty upon them; and sometimes to justifie, and
patronize their massacres already executed. But how farre this
accusation is from any semblable appearance of truth, your worship may
judge by these following arguments.

1. It is utterly forbid the _Iewes_ to eat any manner of bloud
whatsoever, _Levit._ Chapter 7.26. and _Deuter._ 12. where it is
expresly said ‏וכל דם‎ _And ye shall eat no manner of bloud_, and in
obedience to this command the _Iewes_ eat not the bloud of any animal.
And more then this, if they find one drop of bloud in an egge, they cast
it away as prohibited. And if in eating a piece of bread, it happens to
touch any bloud drawn from the teeth, or gummes, it must be pared, and
cleansed from the said bloud, as it evidenely appeares in _Sulhan
Haruch_ and our rituall book. Since then it is thus, how can it enter
into any mans heart to believe that they should eat humane bloud, which
is yet more detestable, there being scarce any nation now remaining upon
earth so barbarous, as to commit such wickednesse?

2. The precept in the Decalogue _Thou shalt not kill_ is of generall
extent; it is a morall command. So that the _Iewes_ are bound not onely,
not to kill one of those nations where they live, but they are also
oblig’d by the law of gratitude, to love them. They are the very words
of R. _Moses_ of _Egypt_ in _Iad a Razaka_, in his treatise of Kings,
the tenth Chapter, in the end, _Concerning the nations, the ancients
have commanded us to visit their sick and to bury their dead, as the
dead of Israel, and to relieve, and maintain their poor, as we do the
poor of Israel, because of the wayes of peace, as it is written, God is
good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works_. Psal.
145.9. And in conformity hereto, I witnesse before God blessed for ever,
that I have continually seen in _Amsterdam_ where I reside, abundance of
good correspondency, many interchanges of brotherly affection, and
sundry things of reciprocall love. I have thrice seen when some
_Flemine_ Christians have fallen into the river in our ward, called
_Flemburgh_, our nation cast themselves into the river to them, to help
them out, and to deliver their lives from death. And certainly he that
will thus hazard himself to save another, cannot harbour so much cruell
malice, as to kill the innocent, whom he ought out of the duty of
humanity to defend and protect.

3. It is forbidden _Exodus_ 21.20. to kill a stranger; _If a man smite
his servant, or his maid with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall
surely be punished, notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he
shall not be punished, for he is his money_. The text speaks of a
servant that is one of the Gentile nations, because that he onely is
said to be the _money_ of the _Iew_, who is his master, as _Aben Ezra_
well notes upon the place. And the Lord commands, that if he die under
the hand of his master, his master shall be put to death, for that as it
seems, he struck him with a murderous intent. But it is otherwise if the
servant dies afterwards, for then it appeares, that he did not strike
him with a purpose to kill him; for if so, he would have killed him out
of hand, wherefore he shall be free, and it may suffice for punishment
that he hath lost his money. If therefore a _Iew_ cannot kill his
servant, or slave that is one of the nations, according to the law, how
much lesse shall he be impowred to murder him that is not his _enemy_,
and with whom he leads a quiet and a peaceable life? and therefore how
can any good man believe that against his holy law, a _Iew_ (in a
strange countrey especially) should make himself guilty of so execrable
a fact?

4. Admit that it were lawfull (which God forbid) why should they eat the
bloud? And supposing they should eat the bloud, why should they eat it
on the Passeover? Here at this feast, every confection ought to be so
pure, as not to admit of any leaven, or any thing that may fermentate,
which certainly bloud doth.

5. If the _Iewes_ did repute, and hold this action (which is never to be
named without an epethite of horrour) necessary, they would not expose
themselves to so eminent a danger, to so cruell and more deserved
punishment, unlesse they were moved to it by some divine precept; or at
least, some constitution of their wise men. Now we challenge all those
men who entertain this dreadfull opinion of us, as obliged in point of
justice, to cite the place of Scripture, or of the Rabbins, where any
such precept, or doctrine is delivered. And untill they do so, we will
assume so much liberty, as to conclude it to be no better then a
malicious slander.

6. If a man, to save his life, may break the Sabbath, and transgresse
many of the other commands of the law, as hath been determined in the
Talmud; as also confirmed by R. _Moses_ of _Egypt_, in the fifth Chapter
of his treatise of the fundamentalls of the law; yet three are excepted,
which are, _idolatry_, _murther_, and _adultery_; life not being to be
purchased at so dear a rate, as the committing of these heinous sins: an
innocent death being infinitely to be preferred before it. Wherefore if
the killing of a Christian, as they object, were a divine precept, and
institution, (which far be it from me to conceive) it were certainly to
be null’d and rendred void, since a man cannot perform it, without
indangering his own life; and not onely so, but the life of the whole
congregation of an entire people; and yet more, since it is directly a
violation of one of these three precepts, _Thou shalt do no murder_:
which is intended universally of all men, as we have said before.

7. The Lord, blessed for ever, by his prophet _Ieremiah_ Chap. 29.7.
gives it in command to the captive Israelites that were dispersed among
the heathens, that they should continually pray for, and endeavour the
peace, welfare and prosperity of the city wherein they dwelt, and the
inhabitants thereof. This the _Iewes_ have alwayes done, and continue to
this day in all their Synagogues, with a particular blessing of the
Prince or Magistrate, under whose protection they live. And this the
Right Honourable my Lord _St. Iohn_ can testifie; who when he was
Embassadour to the Lords the States of the united Provinces, was pleased
to honour our Synagogue at _Amsterdam_ with his presence, where our
nation entertained him with musick, and all expressions of joy and
gladnesse, and also pronounced a blessing, not onely upon his honour,
then present, but upon the whole Common-wealth of _England_, for that
they were a people in league and amity; and because we conceived some
hopes that they would manifest towards us, what we ever bare towards
them, _viz._ all love and affection. But to return again to our
argument, if we are bound to study, endeavour, and sollicite, the good
and flourishing estate of the city where we live, and the inhabitants
thereof, how shall we then murder their children, who are the greatest
good, and the most flourishing blessing that this life doth indulge to
them.

8. The children of Israel are naturally mercifull, and full of
compassion. This was acknowledged by their enemies, _Kings_ 1.20, 31.
when _Benhadad_ King of _Assyria_ was discomfited in the battel, and
fled away, he became a petitioner for his life to King _Ahab_, who had
conquered him; for he understood that _the Kings of the house of Israel
were mercifull Kings_; and his own experience confirmed it, when for a
little affection that he pretended in a complement, he obtained again
his life and fortunes, from which the event of the warre had disentitled
him. And when the _Gibeonites_ made that cruell request to _David_, that
seven of _Saul’s_ sons who were innocent, should be delivered unto them,
the prophet saies, _now the Gibeonites were not of the children of
Israel_, Sam. 2.21, 2. as if he had said, in this cruelty, the piety of
the Israelites is not so much set forth, as the tyranny, and implacable
rage of the Gentiles, the _Gibeonites_. Which being so, and experience
withall declares it, _viz._ the fidelity which our nation hath
inviolably preserved towards their superiours, then most certainly it is
wholly incompatible, and inconsistent with the murdering of their
children.

9. There are some Christians, that use to insult against the _Iewes_, as
Christian homicides, that will venter to give a reason of these
pretended murtherous practises. As if the accusation were then most
infallibly true, if they can find any semblance of a reason why it might
be so. As they say, that this is practised by them in hatred and
detestation of Jesus of Nazareth. And that therefore they steal
Christian Children, buffeting them in the same manner that he was
buffetted; thereby to rub up, and revive the memory of the aforesaid
death. And likewise they imagine that the _Iewes_ secretly steal away
crosses, crucifixes, and such like graven images, which Papists
privately and carefully retein in their houses, and every day the
_Iewes_ mainly strike, and buffet, shamefully spitting on them, with
such like ceremonies of despight, and all this in hatred of Jesus. But I
admire what they really think, when they object such things as these,
laying them to our charge. For surely we cannot believe, that a people,
otherwise of sufficient prudence, and judgement, can perswade themselves
into an opinion that the _Iewes_ should commit such practises, unlesse
they could conceive they did them in honour and obedience to the God
whom they worship. And what kind of obedience is this they perform to
God blessed for ever, when they directly sin against that speciall
command _Thou shalt not kill_? Besides, this cannot be committed without
the imminent, and manifest perill of their lives and fortunes, and the
necessary exposing themselves to a just revenge. Moreover, it is an
_Anathema_ to a _Iew_ to have any graven images in his house, or any
thing of an idol, which any of the nations figuratively worship, _Deut._
7.26.

10. _Matthew Paris_ p. 532. writes, how that in the year 1240. the
_Iewes_ circumcised a Christian child at _Norwich_, and gave him the
name _Iurnin_, and reserved him to be crucified, for which cause many of
them were most cruelly put to death. The truth of this story will
evidently appear upon the consideration of its circumstances. He was
first circumcised, and this perfectly constitutes him a _Iew_. Now for a
_Iew_ to embrace a Christian in his armes, and foster him in his bosome,
is a testimony of great love and affection. But if it was intended that
shortly after this child should be crucified, to what end was he first
circumcised? If it shall be said it was out of hatred to the Christians,
it appears rather to the contrary, that it proceeded from detestation of
the _Iewes_, or of them who had newly become proselytes, to embrace the
_Iewes_ religion. Surely this supposed pranck (storied to be done in
popish times) looks more like a piece of the reall scene of the Popish
_Spaniards_ piety, who first baptiz’d the poor _Indians_, and afterwards
out of cruel pity to their souls, inhumanely butchered them; then of
strict-law-observing _Iewes_, who dare not make a sport of one of the
seales of their covenant.

11. Our captivity under the Mahumetans is farre more burdensome, and
grievous then under the Christians, and so our ancients have said, _it
is better to inhabit under Edom then Ismael_, for they are a people more
civill, and rationall, and of a better policie, as our nation have found
experimentally. For, excepting the nobler, and better sort of _Iewes_,
such as live in the Court of _Constantinople_, the vulgar people of the
_Iewes_ that are dispersed in other countries of the Mahumetan Empire,
in _Asia_ and _Africa_, are treated with abundance of contempt and
scorn. It would therefore follow, that if this sacrificing of children
be the product and result of hatred, that they should execute and
disgorge it much more upon the Mahumetans, who have reduced them to so
great calamity and misery. So that if it be necessary to the celebration
of the Passeover, why do they not as well kill a _Mahumetan_? But
although the _Iewes_ are scattered, and dispersed throughout all those
vast territories, notwithstanding all their despite against us, they
never yet to this day forged such a calumnious accusation. Wherefore it
appeares plainly, that it is nothing else but a slander, and such a one,
that considering how the scene is laid, I cannot easily determine
whether it speak more of malice, or of folly: certainly Sultan _Selim_
made himself very merry with it, when the story was related him by
_Moses Amon_ his chief Physicyan.

12. If all that which hath been said is not of sufficient force to wipe
off this accusation, because the matter on our part is purely negative,
and so cannot be cleared by evidence of witnesses, I am constrained to
use another way of argument, which the Lord, blessed for ever, hath
prescribed _Exod._ 22. which is an oath; wherefore I swear, without any
deceit or fraud, by the most high God, the creatour of heaven and earth,
who promulged his law to the people of Israel, upon mount _Sinai_, that
I never yet to this day saw any such custome among the people of Israel,
and that they doe not hold any such thing by divine precept of the law,
or any ordinance or institution of their wise men, and that they never
committed or endeavoured such wickednesse, (that I know, or have
credibly heard, or read in any Jewish Authours) and if I lie in this
matter, then let all the curses mentioned in _Leviticus_ and
_Deuteronomy_ come upon me, let me never see the blessings and
consolations of Zion, nor attain to the resurrection of the dead. By
this I hope I may have proved what I did intend, and certainly this may
suffice all the friends of truth, and all faithfull Christians to give
credit to what I have here averred. And indeed our adversaries who have
been a little more learned, and consequently a little more civill then
the vulgar, have made a halt at this imputation. _Iohn Hoornbeek_ in
that book which he lately writ against our nation, wherein he hath
objected against us, right or wrong, all that he could any wayes scrape
together, was notwithstanding ashamed to lay this at our door, in his
_Prolegomena_ pag. 26. where he sayes, _An autem verum fit quod vulgò in
historiis legatur, &c._ _i.e._ whether that be true which is commonly
read in histories, to aggravate the _Iewes_ hatred against the
Christians, or rather the Christians against the _Iewes_, that they
should annually upon the preparation of the Passeover, after a cruell
manner sacrifice a Christian child, privily stollen, in disgrace, and
contempt of Christ, whose passion, and crucifixion the Christians
celebrate, I will not assert for truth; as well knowing, how easy it was
for those times wherein these things are mentioned, to have happen’d,
(especially after the Inquisition was set up in the Popedome) to forge,
and fain; and how the histories of those ages, according to the
affection of the writers, were too too much addicted, and given unto
fables and figments. Indeed I have never yet seen any of all those
relations that hath by any certain experiment proved this fact, for they
are all founded; either upon the uncertain report of the vulgar, or else
upon the secret accusation of the Monks belonging to the inquisition,
not to mention the avarice of the informers, wickedly hanquering after
the _Iewes_ wealth, and so with ease forging any wickednesse. For in the
first book of the _Sicilian_ constitutions tit. 7. we see the Emperour
_Frederick_ saying, _Sivero Iudæus, vel Saracenus fit, in quibus prout
certò perpendimus Christianorum persecutio minus abundat ad præsens_,
but if he be a _Iew_ or a _Saracen_, against whom, as we have weighed,
the persecution of the Christians do much abound, _&c._ thus taxing the
violence of certain Christians against the _Iewes_. Or if perhaps it
hath sometimes happened, that a Christian was kill’d by a _Iew_, we must
not therefore say that in all places where they inhabit, they annually
kill a Christian Child. And for that which _Thomas Cantipratensis_ lib.
2. cap. 23. affirms, _viz._ that it is certainly known, that the _Iewes_
every year, in every province, cast lots what city or town shall afford
Christian bloud to the other cities. I can give it no more credit then
his other fictions and lies wherewith he hath stuffed his book. Thus
farre _Iohn Hoornbeek_.

13. Notwithstanding all this, there are not wanting some histories, that
relate these and the like calumnies against an afflicted people, For
which cause the Lord saith, _He that toucheth you toucheth the apple of
my eye_, Zach. 2.6. I shall cursolarily mention some passages that have
occurred in my time, whereof, I say not that I was an eye witnesse, but
onely that they were of generall report and credence, without the least
contradiction. I have faithfully noted both the names of the persons,
the places where, and the time when they happened, in my continuation of
_Flavius Josephus_, I shall be the lesse curious therefore in reciting
them here. In _Vienna_ the Metropolis of _Austria_, _Frederick_ being
Emperour, there was a pond frozen, according to the cold of those parts,
wherein three boyes (as it too frequently happens) were drowned. when
they were missed, the imputation is cast upon the _Jewes_, and they are
incontinently indicted, for murthering of them, to celebrate their
Passeover. And being imprisoned, after infinite prayers and
supplications made to no effect, three hundred of them were burnt, when
the pond thawd, these three boyes were found, and then their innocency
was clearly evinc’d although too late, after the execution of this
cruelty.

In _Araguza_ about thirty yeares ago, there was a Christian woman, into
whose house there came a little girle (of eleven yeares of age, daughter
to a neighbouring gentleman) richly adorned with jewels: this wretched
woman, not thinking of a safer way to rob her, then by killing her, cut
her throat, and hid her under her bed, the girle was presently mist, and
by information they understood that she was seen to go into that house,
they call a Magistrate to search the house, and find the girle dead, she
confest the fact, and as if she should have expiated her own guilt by
destroying a _Iew_, though never so innocent, she said, she did it at
the instigation and perswasion of one _Isaac Jeshurun_, for that the
_Jewes_ wanted bloud to celebrate their feast: she was hang’d, and the
_Jew_ was apprehended, who being six times cruelly tortur’d, they
employing their wits in inventing unheard of, and insufferable torments,
such as might gain _Perillous_ the estimation of mercifull and
compassionate, still cryes out of the falshood of the accusation,
saying, that that wickednesse which he never committed, no not so much
as in his dreams, was maliciously imputed to him, yet notwithstanding he
was condemned to remain close prisoner for twenty yeares, (though he
continued there onely three,) and to be fed there through a trough, upon
the bread and water of affliction, being close manacled, and naked,
within a four square wall, built for that purpose, that he might there
perish in his own dung. This mans brother _Joseph Jeshurun_ is now
living at this time in _Hamborough_. This miserable man calling upon
God, beseeching him to shew some signall testimony of his innocencie,
and citing before his divine tribunall the Senatours who had with no
more mercy, then justice, thus grievously and inhumanely afflicted him;
the blessed God was a just Judge, for the Prince died suddenly at a
banquet, the Sunday next ensuing the giving of the sentence, and during
the time of his imprisonment, the aforesaid Senatours by little and
little dropt away, and died, which was prudently observed by those few
that yet remain’d, wherefore they resolved to deliver themselves by
restoring him to his liberty, accounting it as a particular divine
providence: this man came out well, passed throughout all _Italy_, where
he was seen, to the admiration of all that had cognizance of his
sufferings, and died a few yeares since at _Jerusalem_.

14. The act of the faith (which is ordinarily done at _Toledo_) was done
at _Madrid, Anno 1632_, in the presence of the King of _Spain_, where
the Inquisitors did then take an oath of the King and queen, that they
should maintain and conserve the Catholick faith in their dominions. In
this act it is found printed, how that a family of our nation was burnt,
for confessing upon the wrack the truth of a certain accusation of a
maid servant, who, (provoked out of some disgust) said, that they had
scourged, and whip’t an image, which by the frequent lashes, issued
forth a great deal of bloud, and crying with an out stretched voice,
said unto them, why do you thus cruelly scourge me? the whole nobility
well understood that it was all false, but things of the inquisition all
must hush.

15. A very true story happened at _Lisbon, Anno 1631_. A certain Church
missed one night a silver pixe or box, wherein was the popish hosts. And
forasmuch as they had seen a young youth of our nation, whose name was
_Simao pires solis_, sufficiently noble, to passe by the same night, not
farre from thence, who went to visit a Lady, he was apprehended,
imprisoned, and terribly tortured. They cut off his hands, and after
they had dragged him along the streets, burnt him. One year passed over,
and a thief at the foot of the gallowes confessed how he himself had
rifled and plundered the shrine of the host, and not that poor innocent
whom they had burnt. This young mans brother was a Frier, a great
Theologist, and a preacher, he lives now a _Jew_ in _Amsterdam_, and
calls himself _Eliazar de solis_.

16. Some perhaps will say, that men are not blame worthy for imputing to
the _Jewes_, that which they themselves with their own mouthes have
confest. But surely he hath little understanding of wracks, and tortures
that speaks thus. An Earle of _Portugal_, when his Physicyan was
imprisoned for being a _Jew_, requested one of the inquisitors, by
letter, that he would cause him to be set at liberty, for that he knew
for certain that he was a very good Christian, but he not being able to
undergo the tortures inflicted on him, confessed himself a _Iew_, and
became a penitentiary. At which the Earl being much incenst, feins
himself sick, and desires the inquisitor by one of his servants, that he
would be pleased to come and visit him. when he came, he commanded him
that he should confesse that himself was a _Iew_, and further, that he
should put it down in writing with his own hand, which when he refused
to do, he charges some of his servants to put a helmet that was red hot
in the fire, (provided for this purpose) upon his head; at which, he not
being able to endure this threatned torment, takes him aside to
confesse, and also he writ with his own hand that he was a _Iew_:
whereupon the Earl takes occasion to reprove his injustice, cruelty, and
inhumanity, saying, in like manner as you have confest, did my Physicyan
confesse. Besides that, you have presently, onely out of fear, not sence
of torment, confest more. For this cause in the Israelitish Senate, no
torture was ever inflicted, but onely every person was convicted at the
testimony of two witnesses. That such like instruments of cruelty may
enforce children that have been tenderly educated, and fathers that have
lived deliciously to confesse that they have whipt an image, and been
guilty of such like criminall offences, daily experience may
demonstrate.

17. Others will perchance alledge, these are histories indeed, but they
are not sacred, nor canonicall. I answer, Love and hatred sayes
_Plutarch_, corrupt the truth of every thing, as experience sufficiently
declares it; when we see that which comes to passe, that one and the
same thing, in one and the same city, at one and the same time, is
related in different manners. I my self in my own Negotiation here have
found it. For it hath been rumoured abroad, that our nation had
purchased S. _Pauls_ Church for to make it their Synagogue,
notwithstanding that it was formerly a temple consecrated to the worship
of _Diana_. And many other things have been reported of us that never
entred into the thoughts of our nation; as I have seen a fabulous
Narrative of the proceedings of a great Council of the _Iewes_,
assembled in the plain of _Ageda_ in _Hungaria_, to determine whether
the Messiah were come or no.

18. And now, since that it is evident that it is forbidden the _Iewes_
to eat any manner of bloud, and that to kill a man is directly
prohibited by our law, and the reasons before given are consentaneous
and agreeable to every ones understanding, I know it will be inquired by
many, but especially by those who are more pious, and the friends of
truth, how this calumnie did arise, and from whence it derived its first
originall. I may answer, that this wickednesse is laid to their charge
for divers reasons.

First, _Ruffinus_ the familiar friend of S. _Hierome_ in his version of
_Iosephus_ his second book that he writ against _Apion_ the Grammarian
(for the Greek text is there wanting) tells us how _Apion_ invented this
slander to gratifie _Antiochus_, to excuse his sacriledge, and justifie
his perfidious dealing with the _Iewes_, making their estates supply his
wants. _Propheta vero aliorum est Apion_ &c. _Apion_ is become a
Prophet, and said that _Antiochus_ found in the temple, a bed, with a
man lying upon it, and a table set before him, furnished with all
dainties both of sea and land, and fowles, and that this man was
astonished at them, and presently adores the entrance of the King, as
coming to succour and relieve him, and prostrating himself at his knees,
& stretching out his right hand, he implores liberty; whereat the King
commanding him to sit down and declare who he was, why he dwelt there,
and what was the cause of this his plentifull provision? the man with
sighs and tears, lamentably weeps out his necessity: and tells him that
he is a _Grecian_, and whilst he travelled about the province to get
food, he was suddenly apprehended, and caught up by some strange men,
and brought to the temple, and there shut up, that he might be seen by
no man, but be there fatted with all manner of dainties, and that these
unexpected benefits wrought in him at the first joy, then suspicion,
after that astonishment, and last of all, advising with the Minister
that came unto him, he understood that the _Iewes_ every year, at a
certain time appointed according to their secret and _ineffable_ law,
take up some Greek stranger, and after he hath been fed delicately for
the space of a whole year, they bring him into a certain wood, and kill
him. Then according to their solem rites and ceremonies, they sacrifice
his body, and every one tasting of his intrails, in the offering up of
this Greek, they enter into a solemn oath, that they will bear an
immortall feude and hatred to the Greeks. And then they cast the
reliques of this perishing man into a certain pit. After this _Apion_
makes him to say, that onely some few dayes remained to him, before his
execution, & to desire the King that he, fearing and worshipping the
Grecian gods, would revenge the bloud of his subjects upon the _Iewes_,
and deliver him from his approaching death. This fable (saith
_Iosephus_) as it is most full of all tragedy, so it abounds with cruell
impudence, I had rather you should read the confutation of this slander
there, then I to write it in this place, you will find it in the
_Geneva_ edition of _Iosephus_, pag. 1066.

Secondly, The very same accusation and horrid wickednesse of killing
children, and eating their bloud, was of old by the ancient heathens,
charg’d upon the Christians, that thereby they might make them odious,
and incense the common people against them, as appeares by _Tertullian_
in his _Apologia contra gentes_, _Iustin Martyr in apologia 2. ad Anton.
Eusebius Cæsareensis_ l. 5. cap. 1. & 4. _Pineda_ in his _Monarchia
Ecclesiastica_ l. 11. c. 52. and many others, as is known sufficiently.
So that the imputation of this cruelty, which as to them continues onely
in memory, is to the very same purpose, at this day charged upon the
_Iewes_. And as they deny this fact, as being falsly charged upon them,
so in like manner do we deny it, and I may say perhaps with a little
more reason, forasmuch as we eat not any manner of bloud, wherein they
do not think themselves obliged.

Now the reason of this slander was alwayes the _covetous ambition_ of
some, who desiring to gain their wealth, and possesse themselves of
their estates, have forg’d and introduc’d this enormous accusation, to
colour their wickednesse, under a specious pretence of revenging their
own bloud. And to this purpose, I remember that when I reproved a Rabbi
(who came out of _Poland_ to _Amsterdam_) for the excesse of usurie in
_Germany_, and _Poland_, which they exacted of the Christians, and told
him how moderate they in _Holland_ and in _Italy_ were, he replyed, we
are of necessity constrained to do so, because they so often raise up
false witnesses against us, and levie more from us at once, then we are
able to get again by them in many yeares. And so, as experience shews,
it usually succeeds with our poor people under this pretext and colour.

19. And so it hath been divers times; men mischieving the _Iewes_ to
excuse their own wickednesse; as to instance one precedent in the time
of a certain King of _Portugal_. The Lord, blessed for ever, took away
his sleep one night, (as he did from King _Ahashuerus_) and he went up
into a belcony in the palace, from whence he could discover the whole
city, and from thence (the moon shining clear) he espyed two men
carrying a dead corps, which they cast into a _Iew’s_ yard. He presently
dispatches a couple of servants, and commands them, yet with a seeming
carelesnesse, they should trace and follow those men, and take notice of
their house; which they accordingly did. The next day there is a hurly
burly and a tumult in the city, accusing the _Iewes_ of murder.
Thereupon the King apprehends these rogues, and they confesse the truth;
and considering that this businesse was guided by a particular divine
providence, calls some of the wise men of the _Iewes_, and asks them how
they translate the 4. verse of the 121 Psalm, and they answered,
_Behold, he that keepeth Israel will neither slumber nor sleep_. The
King replied, if he will not slumber then much lesse will he sleep, you
do not say well, for the true translation is, _Behold, the Lord doth not
slumber, neither will he suffer him that keepeth Israel to sleep_. God
who hath yet a care over you, hath taken away my sleep, that I might be
an eye witnesse of that wickednesse which is this day laid to your
charge. This with many such like relations we may read in the book
called _Scebet Iehuda_, how sundry times, when our nation was at the
very brink of destruction, for such forged slanders, the truth hath
discovered it self for their deliverance.

20. This matter of bloud hath been heretofore discussed and disputed
before one of the Popes, at a full councell; where it was determined to
be nothing else but a mere calumnie: and hereupon gave liberty to the
_Iewes_ to dwell in his countryes, and gave the princes of _Italy_ to
understand the same, as also _Alfonso_ the wise King of _Spain_. And
suppose any one man had done such a thing, as I believe never any _Iew_
did so, yet this were great cruelty to punish a whole nation for one
mans wickednesse.

21. But why should I use more words about this matter, seeing all that
is come upon us, was foretold by all the prophets? _Moses_, _Deut._
28.61. _Moreover, every sicknesse and every plague which is not written
in the book of this law, them will the Lord bring upon thee, &c. because
thou hast not hearkned to the voice of the Lord thy God._ _David_ in the
44. Psalm make a dolefull complaint of those evils, and ignominious
reproaches, wherewith we are invironed round about in this captivity, as
if we were the proper center of misery, saying, _For thy sake are we
killed all the day long, we are counted as sheep for the slaughter_. The
same he speaks Psalm 74. and in other Psalms.

_Ezekiel_ more particularly mentions this calumnie; God, blessed for
ever, promising Chap. 36.13. that in time to come the devouring of men,
or the eating of mans bloud shall be no more imputed to them, according
to the true and proper exposition of the learned _Don Isaac Abarbanel_.
The blessed God, according to the multitude of his mercies, will have
compassion upon his people, and will take away the reproach of Israel
from off the earth, that it may be no more heard, as is prophesied by
_Isaiah_, and let this suffice to have spoken as to this point.


                          THE SECOND SECTION.

Your worship desired joyntly, to know what ceremony, or humiliation the
_Iewes_ use in their Synagogues, toward the book of the Law; for which
they are by some ignorantly reputed to be idolaters. I shall answer it
in Order.

First, the _Iewes_ hold themselves bound to stand up when the book of
the Law written upon parchment, is taken out of the desk, untill it is
opened on the pulpit, to shew it to the people, and afterwards to be
read. We see that observed in _Nehemias_, chap. 8.6. where it is said,
_And when he had opened it, all the people stood up_. and this they do
in reverence to the word of God, and that sacred Book.

For the same cause, when it passeth from the desk toward the pulpit, all
that it passeth by, bow down their heads a little, with reverence; which
can be no idolatry for these following reasons.

First, it is one thing _adorare_, _viz._ to _adore_, and another
_venerari_, _viz._ to _worship_. For _Adoration_ is forbidden to any
creature, whether Angelicall, or Earthly; but _Worship_ may be given to
either of them, as to men of a higher rank, commonly stiled
_worshipfull_. And so _Abraham_, who in his time rooted out vain
idolatry, humbled himself, and also prostrated himself before those
three guests, which then he entertained for _Men_. As also _Iosuah_ the
holy Captain of the people, did prostrate himself to another Angel,
which with a sword in his hand, made him afraid, at the gates of
_Iericho_. Wherefore if those were just men, and if we are obliged to
follow their example, and they were not reprehended for it, it is clear,
that to worship the Law in this manner as we do, can be no idolatry.

Secondly, The _Iewes_ are very scrupulous in such things, and fear in
the least, to _appear_ to give any honour or reverence to images. And so
it is to be seen in the _Talmud_, and in R. _Moses_ of _Egypt_ in his
Treatise of idolatry: That if by chance any Israelite should passe by a
Church, that had images on the outside, and at that time a thorn should
run into his foot, he may not stoop to pull it out, because he that
should see him, might suspect he bowed to such an image. Therefore
according to this strictnesse, if that were any appearance of idolatry
to bow to the Law, the _Iewes_ would utterly abhorre it; and since they
do it, it is an evident sign that it is none.

Thirdly, to _kisse images_ is the principall worship of idolatry, as God
saith, in the 1 of _Kings_ 19.19. _Yet I have left me seven thousand in
Israel, all the knees that have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth
that hath not kissed him._ But if that were so, it would follow, that
all men, who kisse the Testament after they are sworn, should be
idolaters. But because that is not so, since that act is but a simple
worship, by the same reason it will follow, that to bow the head, cannot
be reputed for idolatry.

Fourthly, Experience sheweth, that in all Nations the ceremonies that
men use mutually one towards another, is to bow the head; And also there
are degrees thereof, according to the quality of the person with whom
they speak; which shew that in the opinion of all nations, it is no
idolatry, and therefore much lesse, to reverence the Law with bowing of
the body.

Fifthly, In _Asia_ (and it is the same almost in all the world) the
people receiving a decree, or order of the king, they take it, and kisse
it, and set it upon the head. We owe much more to Gods word, and to his
divine Commandments.

Sixthly, _Ptolomeus Philadelphus_, receiving the 72 _Interpreters_ with
the book of the Law, into his presence, he rose from his seat, and
prostrating himself seven times, worshipped it, (as _Aristæus_ assures
us.) If a Gentile did this to a law which he thought did not oblige him,
much more do we owe reverence to that Law which was particularly given
unto us.

Seventhly, The _Israelites_ hold for the Articles of their Faith, that
there is a God; who is one in most simple unity; eternall, incorporeall;
who gave the written Law unto his people Israel, by the hand of _Moses_,
the Prince, and chief of all the Prophets; whose Providence takes care
for the world which he created; who takes notice of all mens works, and
rewardeth or punisheth them. Lastly, that one day _Messias_ shall come
to gather together the scattered Israelites, and shortly after shall be
the resurrection of the dead.

These are their Doctrines, which I believe contain not any idolatry; nor
yet in the opinion of those that are of other judgements; For, as a most
learned Christian of our time hath written, in a French book, which he
calleth the _Rappel_ of the _Iewes_ (in which he makes the King of
_France_ to be their leader, when they shall return to their country,)
the _Iewes_, saith he, shall be saved, for yet we expect a _second_
coming of the same _Messias_; and the _Iewes_ believe that that coming
is the _first_, and not the second, and by that faith they shall be
saved; for the difference consists onely in the circumstance of the
time.


                           THE THIRD SECTION.

Sir, I hope I have given satisfaction to your worship, touching those
points. I shall yet further inform you with the same sincerity,
concerning the rest. _Sixtus Senensis_ in his _Bibliothæca_, lib. 2.
_Titulo contra Talmud_, and others, as _Biatensis_, _Ordine_ 1. _Tract._
1. _Titulo_ Perachot. averre out of the _Talmud_. cap. 4. “that every
_Iew_, thrice a day, curseth all Christians, and prayeth to God to
confound, and root them out, with their Kings and Princes. And this is
especially done in the _Synagogue_, by the _Iewes_ Priests, thrice a
day.” I pray let such as love the truth, see the _Talmud_, in the quoted
place; and they shall find nothing of that which is objected: onely
there is recited in the said fourth Chapter, the daily prayer, which
speaks of _Minim_, that is, _Hereticks, ordained_ in _Tabne_, (that is a
town not farre from _Ierusalem_, between _Gath_ and _Gazim_, &c.) the
Talmud hath no more. Hence _Sixtus Senensis_ by distillation, draws
forth the foresaid calumnie, whenas, what the _Talmud_ rehearseth
briefly, to be made onely by the wise men in the said Town, he saith,
was a constitution in the _Talmud_ long after.

Now let us see what was done by those wise men in the said Town; and let
us examine, whether that may justly offend the Christians.

There is in the daily prayers a certain Chapter where it is thus
written, _la-Mumarim_, &c. that is, _For Apostates, let there be no
hope, let all Hereticks be destroyed, and all thine enemies, and all
that hate thee, let them perish. And thou shalt root out the kingdome of
pride forthwith, weaken, and put it out, and in our dayes._ This whole
Chapter speaketh nothing of Christians originally, but of the _Iewes_,
who fell in those times, to the _Zaduces_, and _Epicureans_, and to the
Gentiles, as _Moses_ of _Egypt_ saith, Tract. _Tephila._ cap. 2. For by
Apostates and Hereticks are not to be understood all men, that are of a
diverse religion, or heathens, or Gentiles, but those renegado _Iewes_,
who did abrogate the whole Law of _Moses_, or any Articles received
thence; and such are properly by us called _Hereticks_. For according to
the Law of Christians, he is not properly an Apostate, or Hereteck, who
is originally bred a scholler and a candid follower from his youth of a
diverse law, and so continueth: otherwise native _Iewes_ and _Hagarens_,
and other Nations that are no Christians, nor ever were, should be
properly called Apostates, and Hereticks in respect of Christians, which
is absurd, as it is absurd for the _Iewes_ to call the Christians
Apostates, or Hereticks. Wherefore it speaketh nothing of Christians,
but of the fugitive _Iewes_, that is, such as have deserted the
standard, or the sacred Law.

2. Lastly, neither the kingdomes, nor kings that are Christians, or
_Hagarens_, or followers of other Sects are cursed here, but namely the
kingdome of Pride. Certain it is that in that time (wherein, our wise
men added to the daily Prayers the foresaid Chapter) there was no
kingdome of Christians, what therefore that kingdome of pride was,
should any man ask, who can plainly shew it? So much as we can
conjecture by it, it is the kingdome of the _Romans_ which then
flourished, which did rule over all Nations tyrannically and proudly,
especially over the _Iewes_. For, after that, _Vespasian_, with his son
_Titus_, had dissipated all _Iudea_. And though som _Roman_ Emperours
after that became Christians, or had a good opinion of Christianity, yet
the kingdome of the _Romans_ was heathenish, and without distinction,
was proud, and tyrannicall. And however the _Iewes_ repeated the same
words of the prayer when the Prince was very good, and they lived under
a just government, that they did, onely of an ancient custome, without
any malice to the present government. And now truly in all their books
printed again, the foresaid words are wanting, lest they should now be
unjustly objected against the _Iewes_; and so for _Apostates_ and
_Hereticks_, they say, _secret accusers, or betrayers_ of the _Iewes_.
And for the _kingdome of pride_, they substitute _all Zedim_, that is,
_proud men_.

3. After this manner, to avoid scandall, did the 72 Interpreters, who
coming in _Leviticus_, to unclean beasts; in the place of _Arnebeth_
which signifies the _Hare_, they put δασύποδα, that is, _rough foot_:
leaving the Name, and keeping the sense. They would not retein the
Hebrew word _Arnebeth_, as they have done in some other appellatives,
lest the wife of _Ptolomy_ whose name was _Arnebet_, should think that
the _Iewes_ had mocked her, if they should have placed her name amongst
the unclean beasts. Neither would they render it λαγωὸν _lagoon_, or
λαγὸν _lagon_, which in the Greek language signifies a _Hare_, lest
_Ptolomy_ himself who was the son, and nephew of the _Lagi_, should be
offended, to see the name of his family registred among the creatures
that were unclean. Besides, _Plutarch_ records, how that it was deeply
resented, as a very high affront, and contempt, when one asked
_Ptolomy_, who was _Lagus_ his father, as is it scoffingly reflected
upon his obscure extraction and descent.

4. The very like calumnie fell out concerning the very same Chapter of
our Prayer, when _Mulet Zidan_ reigned in _Morocco_. A certain fugitive
_Iew_, to shew himself constant in the Mahumetan Religion, and an enemy
to his own Nation, accused the _Iewes_ before this king, saying, that
they prayed to God for his destruction, when they mention in their
prayers all _Zedim_, as though they would have all the Family of _Zidan_
destroyed. They excused themselves with the truth, and affirmed, in
praying against _Zedim_, that they prayed onely against _proud men_, (as
that word in their Hebrew language properly signifieth) and not against
his Majesty. The King admitted of their excuse; but said unto them, that
because of the equivocation of the word, they should change it for
another.

5. For certain, the _Iewes_ give no occasion, that any Prince, or
Magistrate should be offended with them; but contrariwise, as it seems
to me, they are bound to love them, to defend, and protect them. For, by
their _Law_, and _Talmud_, and the inviolable _custome_ of the dispersed
_Iewes_, every where, upon every Sabbath day, and in all yearly
solemnities, they have prayers for Kings and Princes, under whose
Government the _Iewes_ live, be they Christians, or of other Religions,
I say by their _Law_, as _Ieremiah_ ch. 29. commandeth, _viz._ _Seek ye
the peace of the city, whither I have caused you to be carried away
captives, and pray for them, unto the Lord_, &c. By the _Talmud_ ord. 4.
Tract. 4. _Abodazara._ cap. 1. _there is a prayer for the peace of the
Kingdome_, from _custome_, never intermitted of the _Iewes_. Wheresoever
they are on the Sabbath day, and their annuall solemnities, the Minister
of the Synagogue before he blesseth the people of the _Iewes_, doth with
a loud voice, blesse the Prince of the country under whom they live,
that all the _Iewes_ may hear it; and they say Amen. You have seen the
Form of the prayer in the book entitled The humble Addresses.

6. In like manner the ancients observe, that whereas God commands in
_Numbers_ 29.13. that seventy bullocks should be sacrificed upon the
seven dayes of the feast of tabernacles, that this was in respect of the
seventy nations (who shall one day come up to _Ierusalem_, year after
year, to keep this feast of tabernacles, _Zechar._ 14.16.) for whose
conservation they also sacrificed. For they say, that _all the nations
of the earth shall be blessed in Abraham, and in his seed, not onely
spiritually, and in the knowledge of the one first cause, but also that
at this time they shall enjoy temporall, and earthly blessings, by
vertue of that promise_. And so in the time of the second temple, they
offered up sacrifice for their confederate nations, as may appear by
these ensuing instances.

In _Megilat Tahanit._ cap. 9. it is reported, that when _Alexander_ the
great, at the instigation of the _Samaritans_, that inhabited mount
_Gerizim_, went with a resolution to destroy the temple, _Simeon_ the
just met him in the way, and amongst divers reasons that he urged to
divert him from his purpose, told him, _this is the place, where we pray
unto God for the welfare of your self, and of your kingdome, that it may
not be destroyed, and shall these men perswade you to destroy this
place_?

The like we find in the first book of the _Maccabees_, cap. 7.33. and in
_Iosephus_ his Antiq. _lib._ 12. _cap._ 17. when _Demetrius_ had sent
_Nicanor_ the Generall of his army against _Jerusalem_, the Priests,
with the Elders of the people went forth to salute him, and to shew him
the sacrifice which they offered up to God for the welfare of the King.

In the same history _lib._ 2.3. and in _Josephus Gorionides_ lib. 3.
cap. 16. we may read, that _Heliodorus_ Generall to _Selencus_, came to
_Jerusalem_ with the same intent, _Onias_ the High-priest, besought him,
not to destroy that place, where they prayed to God for the prosperity
of the King, and his issue, and for the conservation of his kingdome.

In the first Chapter of _Baruch_, the disciple of _Jeremiah_, we find
that the _Iewes_, who were first carried captive into _Babylon_ with
_Iechonias_, made a collection of money, according to every ones power,
and sent it to _Jerusalem_, saying, _Behold, we have sent you money,
wherewith ye shall buy offerings, and pray for the life of
Nebuchadnezzar, and for the life of Baltasar his sonne, that their dayes
may be upon earth as the dayes of heaven, and that God would give us
strength, and lighten our eyes, that we may live under their shadow,
that we may long do them service, and find favour in their sight_.

The _Iewes_ in _Asia_ did the same, as is reported by _Josephus
Gorionides_, lib. 3. cap. 4. they sent letters, with a present to
_Hircanus_ the High-priest, desiring that prayers might be made for the
life of _Augustus Cæsar_, and his companion _Marcus Antonius_.

_Philo Judæus_, in the book of his Embassage to _Caius_, making mention
of a letter which _Caius_ sent, requiring his statue to be set up in the
sacred temple, and _Agrippa’s_ answer thereupon, unto the said Emperour,
reports, that there were these words in it, _viz._ _The Iewes sacrifice
for the prosperity of your Empire, and that not onely upon their solemn
feasts, but also every day_.

The like is recorded by _Josephus_, (lib. 2. cap. 9. _De bello Judaico_)
the _Iewes_ said to _Petronius_ Generall to the Emperour _Caius_, we
_daily offer up burnt offerings unto God, for the peace of the Emperour,
and the whole people of Rome_. And in his second book against _Apion_,
he sayes, _we Hebrews have allwayes accustomed to honour Emperours with
particular sacrifices_.

Neither was this service ever entertained unthankfully, as appears by
the decree of _Cyrus_, _Ezra_ 6.3. where also _Darius_ commands, that
_of the Kings goods, even of the tribute, expences should be forth-with
given unto the Elders of the Iewes_ &c. _and that which they had need
of, both young bullocks, and rammes, and lambs for the burnt-offerings
of the Lord of heaven, and wheat, salt, wine, and oyl_, &c. _that they
might offer sacrifices of a sweet savour, unto the God of heaven, and
pray for the life of the King, and of his sonnes_.

The same also was commanded afterwards by _Artaxerxes_, who also
conferred liberally many large gifts, as well towards the building of
the temple, as the maintaining of the sacrifices. As for _Alexander_ the
great, he lighted down out of his chariot, and bowed himself at the feet
of the High-priest, desiring him to offer up sacrifice to God on his
behalf. And who can be ignorant of _Ptolomy Philadelphus_, how richly he
endowed the temple, as is recorded by _Aristeas_? Nor did _Antiochus_
king of the _Greeks_ unlike this, when by a publick edict, he forbid
_that any stranger should enter the temple, to prophane that place,
which the Hebrews had consecrated to religion, and divine worship_.
(Josephus _lib._ 12. _cap._ 3.) _Demetrius_ did the like, (_Josephus_
lib. 13. cap. 5.6.) To which may be added, that when they of _Ierusalem_
contended with them of _Samaria_, about the honour and dignity of the
temple, before _Alexander_ the great, the _Ierusalem_ Priest in his
plea, urged, _that this temple was ever had in great reverence by all
the Kings of_ Asia, _and by them enricht with sundry splendid and
magnificent gifts_. In the Second book of _Iosephus_ against _Apion_, we
read, that _Ptolomy Euergetes_, when he had conquered _Syria_, offered
up _Eucharisticall sacrifices_, not to idols, and false Gods, but to the
true God, at _Ierusalem_, according to the manner of the _Iewes_.
_Pompey_ the great, as is mentioned by _Iosephus de bello Iudaico_ (lib.
1. cap. 5.) durst not spoyl, no nor so much as touch the treasures of
the temple, not because (as _Tully_ in his Oration for _Plancius_
supposeth, to whom _Augustine_ in his book _de civitate Dei assentos_)
he feared lest he might be thought too avaritious; for this seems in
comparison, very ridiculous, and childish; for military law would soon
have acquitted him for this; but because of the reverence to the place
with which his mind was so affected. _Philo Iudæus_, (p. 102. 6.)
relates a letter of _Agrippa’s_, where he writes, that _Augustus Cæsar_
had the temple in so great reverence, that he commanded a sacrifice of
one bullock, and two lambs, to be offered up every day out of his own
revenues. And his wife _Iulia Augusta_, adorn’d it with golden cups, and
basons, and many other costly gifts. Neither did _Cleopatra_ Queen of
_Egypt_, fall short of her liberallity. _Tiberius_ throughout the 22
years of his Empire, commanded sacrifices to be offered up unto God, out
of his own tribute. The like did _Nero_, till the unadvised rashnesse of
_Eleazar_ in refusing his sacrifice, alienated the mind of the Emperour,
that he became the cause of a bloudy persecution. And by all this, we
may the better interpret that 11 verse of the 1. chap. of _Malachy_ (who
flourisht in the second temple,) The words are, _From the rising of the
sun, even unto the going down of the same, my name shall be great among
the Gentiles, and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name,
and a pure offering; for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith
the Lord of hosts_. For besides that the heathens termed the temple _the
house of the great God_, (_Ezra_ 5.8.) they and their Monarchs, and
Emperours, both of _Persia_, _Grece_, and _Rome_, desired, as we have
heard, to have sacrifices, and incense, offered for them in Gods name.

9. And let the reader be pleased further to observe, that the _Iewes_
were accustomed, not onely to offer up sacrifices, and prayers to God,
for the Emperours, their friends, confederates, and allyes, but also
generally for the whole world. It is the custome (saith _Agrippa_ to
_Caius_ according to _Philo_ p. 1035.) for the High-priest, at the day
of attonement, to make a prayer unto God, for all mankind; beseeching
him to adde unto them another year, with blessing and peace. The same
_Philo Iudæus_ in his second book of _Monarchy_ saith, _The priests of
other nations pray unto God onely for the welfare of their own
particular nations, but our High-priest prayes for the happinesse and
prosperity of the whole world_. And in his book of sacrifices, p. 836.
he saith, _Some sacrifices are offered up for our nation, and some for
all mankind. For the daily sacrifices, twice a day, viz. at morning, and
evening, are for the obtaining of those good things, which God the chief
good, grants unto them, at those two times of the day._

And in like manner, _Iosephus_ in his second book against _Apion_ saith,
_We sacrifice, and pray unto the Lord, in the first place, for the whole
world, for their prosperity, and peace, and afterwards more particularly
for our selves, forasmuch (as we conceive) that prayer which is first
extended universally, and is afterwards put up more particularly, is
very much acceptable unto God_. Which words are also related by
_Eusebius Cæsareensis_, in his _Præparatio Evangelica_, lib. 8. cap. 2.

10. ’Tis true, that no outward materiall glories are perpetuall; and so
the _temple_ had its period, and with the _paschall lamb_, all other
sacrifices ceased: But in their stead, we have at this day _prayer_, and
as _Hoseah_ speaks Cap. 14.2. For bullocks, we render _the calves of our
lips_. And three times every day, this is our humble supplication, and
request to God, _Fill the whole world, O Lord, with thy blessings; for
all creatures are the works of thy hands; as it is written, the Lord is
good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works_ Psal. 145.9.

11. Yea further, we pray for the conversion of the nations, and so we
say in these most excellent prayers, upon _Ros a sana_ and the day of
attonement, _Our God, and the God of our Fathers, reign thou over the
whole world in thy glory; and be thou exalted over all the earth, in
thine excellency; cause thy influence to descend upon all the
inhabitants of the world, in the glorious majesty of thy strength; and
let every creature know that thou hast created him; and let every thing
that is formed, understand that thou hast formed it; and let all that
have breath in their nostrills say, the Lord God of Israel reigneth, and
his kingdome is over all dominions_. And again, _Let all the inhabitants
of the earth know, and see, that unto thee every knee shall bow, and
every tongue swear; before thee, O Lord our God, let them bow, and
prostrate themselves; let them give honour to the honour of thy name,
and let them all take upon them the yoak of thy kingdome_, &c. And
again, _Put thy fear, O Lord, our God, upon all thy works, and thy dread
upon all that thou hast created; let all thy works fear thee, and let
all creatures bow down before thee and let them all make themselves one
handfull_, (that is, with joynt consent) _to do thy will with a perfect
heart_, &c. A most worthy imitation of the wise King _Solomon_, who
after he had finished the building of the Temple, in that long prayer
_King._ 1.8. was not unmindfull of the Gentiles, but v. 41. he saith,
_Moreover, concerning a stranger, that is not of thy people of Israel,
but cometh out of a farre country, for thy names sake, for they shall
hear of thy great name, and of thy strong hand, and of thy stretched-out
arm, when he shall come, and pray towards this house, hear thou in
heaven thy dwelling place, and do according to all that the stranger
calleth to thee for, that all people of the earth may know thy name, to
fear thee, as do the people of Israel, and that they may know that thy
name is called upon this house which I have builded_. Where it may be
observed, that when the Israelite comes to pray, he saith, 29. _and give
every man according to his wayes_; but upon the prayer of a stranger, he
saith, _and do according to all that the stranger calleth to thee for_.
And this distinction is made to this end, that by the evident, and
apparent return, and answer of their prayers, all Gentiles might
effectually be brought in to the truth, and knowledge, and fear of God,
as well as the Israelites.

12. Moreover, since the holy prophets made prayers, and supplications
for all men, as well for the _nations_, as the _Israelites_, how should
not we do the same, for the nations, among whom we inhabit, as ingaged
by a more especiall obligation, for that we live under their favour and
protection? In _Deuteronomy_ 23.7. God commands _Thou shalt not abhorre
an Egyptian_, notwithstanding the heavy burthens they afflicted us with,
onely _because thou wast a stranger in his land_, because that at the
first, they entertained, and received us into their country.

As on the other side, _Ezek._ 23.11. he saith, _As I live, saith the
Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the
wicked turn from his way and live_. We ought therefore to imitate his
actions, and not to hate any man, upon the mere account of religion, but
onely to pray to the Lord for his conversion; and this also, without
giving offence, or any kind of molestation. To detest, or abhorre those,
to whom we owe that prosperity which we enjoy, or who endeavour their
own salvation, is a thing very unworthy, and ill becoming; but to
abhorre their vices, and sins, is not so. It was a very excellent
observation, of a most wise, and vertuous Lady, _Beruria_, who (as it is
recorded in the _Talmud_, _Berachot_ cap. 1.) when her husband _R. Meir_
was about to pray to God, to destroy some of his perverse, and froward
neighbours, that had no lesse grievously, then maliciously vexed, and
molested him, gave him this seasonable admonition, that such a thing
_ought not to be done in Israel; but that he should rather make his
prayer, that they might return, and break off their sinnes by
repentance, alledging that text_, Psal. 104.35. _Let sin be consumed out
of the earth_; it is not said _sinners_, but _sinnes_; and then _the
wicked shall be no more_.

13. We have now in this Section shewn, that it is a mere calumnie to
imagine, that we _Iewes_ should pray to God, so as to give an offence to
the Christians, or cause scandall, by any thing in our prayers, unlesse
it be that we are not Christians, we have declared to the contrary, how
we daily pray for them. As also that during the temple, we offered up
sacrifices, for nations confederate with us, and how all Emperours
desired this. Yea, and we offered sacrifices, not onely for particular
princes, but for all mankind in generall. How, since sacrifices ceased,
with the temple, we at this day, do the same in our prayers, and how we
beseech God for their salvation, without giving any scandall, or offence
in respect of religion; and how we think our selves obliged to perform
all this, by the sacred Scripture. By all which layed together, I hope I
have sufficiently evidenced the truth, of that I have asserted.


                          THE FOURTH SECTION.

By consequence, the accusation of _Buxtorphius_, in his _Bibliotheca
Rabbinorum_, can have no appearance of truth, concerning that which he
puts upon us, _viz._ that we are _blasphemers_. I will set down the
Prayer it self.

“We are bound to praise the Lord of all things; to magnifie him, who
made the world, for that he hath not made us, as the Nations of the
earth; nor hath he placed us as the families of the earth; nor hath he
made our condition like unto theirs, nor our lot, according to all their
multitude. For they humble themselves to things of no worth, and vanity,
and make their prayers to gods that cannot save them; but we worship
before the King of kings, that is holy, and blessed; that stretched
forth the Heavens, and framed the Earth; the seat of his glory is in
heaven above, and his divine strength in the highest of the Heavens; He
is our God, and there is no other; He is truly, our King, and besides
him, there is no other; as it is written in the Law. And know this day,
and return into thine own heart, because the Lord is God, in Heaven
above, and upon the Earth beneath, there is no other.”

Truly, in my opinion, it is a very short, and most excellent prayer, and
worthy of commendation. The _Sultan Selim_, that famous conquerour, and
Emperour of the _Mahumetans_, made so much account of it, that he
commanded his Doctor _Moses Amon_, (who translated the _Pentateuch_ into
the _Arabian_ and _Persian_ languages) that he should translate our
prayers. And when he had delivered them to him in the _Turkish_ Tongue,
he said to him, what need is there of so long prayers? truly this one
might suffice, he did so highly esteem and value it. This is like an
other prayer which was made at that time, _viz._

“Blessed be our God, who created us for his honour, and separated us
from those that are in errours, and gave unto us a Law of truth, and
planted amongst us eternall life. Let him open our hearts in his law,
and put his love in our hearts, and his fear, to do his will, and to
serve him with a perfect heart, that we may not labour in vain, nor
beget children of perdition. Let it be thy will, O Lord our God, and God
of our Fathers, that we may keep thy statutes, and thy laws in this
world, and may deserve, and live, and inherit well, and that we may
attain the blessing of the world to come, that so we may sing to thy
honour, without ceasing. O Lord my God, I will praise thee for ever.”

But neither the one, nor the other is a _blasphemy_, or malediction
against any other Gods, for these reasons following.

1. It is not the manner of the _Iewes_ by their law to curse other gods
by name, though they be of the _Gentiles_. So in _Exod._ cap. 22.27.
_Thou shalt not revile the Gods._ Heb. ‏אלהום‎, that is _Gods_, or God,
as _Philo Iudæus in libro de Monarchiâ_, doth interpret, and not Judges,
as _Onkelus_ and _Ionathan_ translate in their _Chald._ Paraphr. Where
_Philo_ addes this reason, which is, lest they hearing their own Gods
blasphemed, should in a revengefull way of retaliation, blaspheme the
true God of Israel. And we have examples enough, how the idolatrous
heathen used to revile, and defame each others Gods, both in _Cicero_,
and _Iuvenal_.

And in that sense _Flavius Josephus_ in his book written against
_Apion_, saith these words: “As it is our practise to observe our own,
and not to accuse, or revile others; so neither may we deride, or
blaspheme those, which others account to be Gods. Our Law-giver plainly
forbad us that, by reason of that compellation, Gods.” According to
this, by our own religion, we dare not do that which _Buxtorsius_
chargeth us with. And upon this account the Talmudists tell us, that we
ought to honour, and reverence, not onely the Kings of Israel, but all
kings, princes, and governours, in generall, forasmuch as the holy
Scripture gives them the stile of gods, in respect of the dignity of
their office.

2. The time wherein these, as also the other prayers were composed, and
ordered, was in the dayes of _Ezras_, who, with 120 men, amongst whom
were three Prophets, _Haggai_, _Zechary_, _Malachy_, composed them, as
we have it in the _Talmud_. Wherefore he cannot say, that there is any
thing intended against honour, or reverence of Christ, who was not born
till many yeares after.

Moreover, the _Iewes_, since that calumny was first raised, (though that
was spoken of the Gentiles, and their vain gods, _humbling themselves to
things of no worth, and vanity_) because they desire to decline, and
avoid the least occasion of scandall, and offence, have left off to
print that line, and do not in some books print any part thereof. As
_John Hoornbeek_ also witnesses, in his fore-mentioned _Prolegomena_,
and _William Dorstius_, in his observations upon _R. David Gawz_, p.
269. and _Buxtorf_ in his book of _Abbreviatures_. And perhaps it will
be worthy our observation, that all these three witnesses say, that it
was first made known to them, by one _Antonius Margarita_, who was a
_Iew_, converted to the Christian faith. That this part of the prayer
was intended _Contra idola Papatus_, against the _Popish idols_, which
they therefore, as by a necessary consequence, interpret, as against
_Christ_; but how justly, let the unprejudiced and unbiased reader
judge.

3. If this be so, how can it be thought, that in their _Synagogues_,
they name him with scornfull spitting, (farre be it from us.) The Nation
of the _Iewes_ is _wise, and ingenius_. So said the Lord, _Deut._ cap.
4.6. _The Nations shall say, surely this is a wise, and an understanding
people._ Therefore, how can it be supposed, that they should be so
bruitish in a strange land, when their Religion dependeth not upon it?
Certainly, it is much contrary to the precept we spake of, to shew any
resemblance of scorn. There was never any such thing done, (as it is
well known) in _Italy_, and _Holland_, where ordinarily the _Synagogues_
are full of _Christians_; which with great attention, stand considering,
and weighing all their actions, and motions. And truly they should have
found great occasion to find fault withall, if that were so. But never
was any man heard thus to calumniate us, where ever we dwell and
inhabite, which is a reason sufficiently valid, to clear us. Wherefore,
I suppose, that I have sufficiently informed you, concerning our
prayers, in which we purpose nothing, but to praise God, and to ask
spirituall, and temporall blessings, and by our service, and worship,
implore the divine benevolence, protection, and defence.


                           THE FIFTH SECTION.

But forasmuch as it is reported, that we draw, and seduce others to our
religion, _&c._

1. Never unto this day, in any part hath this been suspected, where the
_Iewes_ are dispersed; nor can it find place here. Truly, I have held
friendship with many great men, and the wisest, and most eminent of all
_Europe_; and also they came to see me, from many places, at my house,
and I had many friendly discourses with them, yet did not this give
occasion to make us suspected of any such things. Yea, _Gaspar Barleus_,
the _Virgill_ of our time, and many others, have written many verses in
my commendations, which I mention not, for vain glory (farre be it) but
for vindication of my innocent repute.

2. By our rituall books we are clear of this seducing. For if any man
offer to become a _Iew_, of what Nation soever he be, before we receive
him, and admit him as a member of our Synagogue, we are bound to
consider, whether he be moved by necessity to do it, or if it be not for
that he is in love with some of our nation, or for any other worldly
respect. And when we find no reason to suspect him, we have yet another
obligation upon us, which is, to let him know the penalties he subjects
himself unto, if he breaketh the Sabbath, or eateth bloud, or fat, which
is forbidden _Levit._ 3.17. or disannulleth any precept of the Law, as
may be seen in the _Targum_ upon _Ruth_. And if he shew himself
constant, and zealous, then is he admitted and protected. Wherefore we
do not seduce any one, but contrarily, avoid disputing with men,
concerning religion, not for want of charity, but that we may as farre
as it is possible, avoid scandall, and hate; and for this cause we
refuse to circumcise them that come to us, because we will give no
offence. Yea, I have known some, that for this cause have circumcised
themselves. And if _Ferdinand_ and _Isabella_, King and Queen of
_Castile_ did make an order to expell the _Iewes_, because they seduced
many Christians, and some of the Nobility to become _Iewes_, this was
but a pretence, and colour for their tyranny, and onely, as it is well
known, having no other thing to object against us. Truly, I do much
commend that opinion, not onely of _Osorius, de rebus Immanuelis_, but
of our _Flavius Iosephus_, the most famous of all Historians, which he
relates in his history of his own Life.

“At that time (saith he) there came unto me, two Noble men, of the
_Trachomites_, subjects of the king; bringing with them horsemen, with
arms, and money. These, when the _Iewes_ would compell to be
circumcised, if they would live amongst them; I would not suffer them to
trouble them; maintaining that every man ought to serve God, of his own
free will, and not be forced thereto by others. For, should we do this
thing (saith he) it might make them repent, that ever they fled unto us.
And so perswading the multitude, I did abundantly afford unto these men,
their food, according to their diet.”

Truly, this was an action worthy of a noble, and wise man, and worthy of
imitation, for defending common liberty, leaving the judgement, and
determination to God alone. The _Spanish Inquisitions_, with all their
torments, and cruelties, cannot make any _Iew_, that falls into their
power, become a _Christian_. For unreasonable beasts are taught by
blowes, but men are taught by reason. Nor are men perswaded to other
opinions, by torments, but rather, on the contrary, they become more
firm, and constant in their Tenet.


                           THE SIXTH SECTION.

Having thus discussed the main exceptions, I will now proceed to smaller
matters, though lesse pertaining to my faculty, that is to businesse of
_Merchandise_. Some say, that if the _Iewes_ come to dwell here, they
will draw unto themselves the whole Negotiation, to the great damage of
the naturall Inhabitants. I answer, that it hath been my opinion
alwayes, (with submission to better judgements) that it can be no
prejudice at all to the English Nation: because, principally in
transporting their goods, they would gain much, by reason of the publick
payments of customes, excise, _&c._

Moreover, they would alwayes bring profit to the people of the land, as
well in buying of commodities, which they would transport to other
places, as in those they would trade in here. And if by accident, any
particular person should lose by it, by bringing down the price of such
a commodity, being dispersed into many hands; yet by that means the
Commonwealth would gain in buying cheaper, and procuring it at a lesser
rate.

Yea, great emolument would grow to the naturall Inhabitants, as well in
the sale of all provision, as in all things else that concern the
ornaments of the body. Yea, and the native Mechanicks also would gain by
it, (there being rarely found among us, any man that useth any such
art.)

2. Adde to this, that as our nation hath sailed into almost all parts of
the world, so they are alwayes herein profitable to a nation, in a
readinesse to give their opinions, in favour of the people amongst whom
they live. Beside that, all strangers do bring in new merchandises,
together with the knowledge of those forreign Countries wherein they
were born.

And this is so farre from damnifying the natives, that it conduces much
to their advantage; because they bring from their countryes new
commodities, with new knowledge. For the great Work-Master, and
_Creatour_ of all things, to the end, to make commerce in the earth,
gave not to every place all things, but hath parted his benefits amongst
them; by which way, he hath made them all wanting the help of others.
This may be seen in _England_, which being one of the most plentifull
countries that are in the world, yet wanteth divers things for
_shipping_; as also, wine, oyl, figs, almonds, raisins, and all the
drougs of _India_, things so necessary for the _life of man_. And
besides, they want many other commodities, which are abundant in other
countries, with more knowledge of them; though it be true, that in my
opinion, there is not in the world, a more understanding people, for
most Navigations, and more capable of all Negotiation, then the
_English_ Nation are.

3. Farther, there may be companies made of the natives, and strangers,
(where they are more acquainted) or else Factors. All which, if I be not
deceived, will amount to the profit of the natives. For which, many
reasons may be brought, though I cannot comprehend them, having alwayes
lived a sedentary life, applying my self to my studies, which are farre
remote from things of that nature.

4. Nor can it be justly objected against our Nation, that they are
deceivers; because the generality cannot in any rationall way, be
condemned for some particulars. I cannot excuse them all, nor do I
think, but there may be some deceivers amongst them, as well as amongst
all other nations and people, because poverty bringeth basenesse along
with it.

5. But if we look to that which we ought by our Religion, the morall
precept of the Decalogue, _Thou shalt not steal_, it belongs in common
to all _Iewes_, towards all _Gentiles_. As may be seen in Rab. _Moses_
of _Egypt_, Tract, _Geneba_, cap. 1. and _Gazela_, cap. 1. _It is a
sinne_, (saith he) _to rob any man, though he be a Gentile_. Nor can
that be alledged out of the sacred History, concerning the jewells and
houshold stuff, of which the _Israelites_ spoiled the _Egyptians_, as I
have heard it sometimes alledged by some, to some men; because that was
a particular dispensation, and a divine precept for that time. So it is
recorded in the _Talmud_, in the _Tract of the Sanhedrim_, cap. 11. that
in the time of _Alexander_ the great, those of _Alexandria_ accused the
_Iewes_ for being thieves, and they demanded restitution of their goods.
But _Guebia Ben Pesria_ answered them, our Fathers went down into
_Egypt_ but seventy souls, there they grew a numerous nation, above
60000. and served them in base offices, for the space of 210 yeares,
according to this, pay us for our labour, and make the accounts even,
and you shall see you are yet much in our debt. The reason satisfied
_Alexander_, and he acquitted them.

6. By consequence, the _Iewes_ are bound not to defraud, nor abuse in
their accounts, negotiation, or reckonings, any man whatsoever, as it
may be seen expresly in R. _Moses_ of _Egypt_, and R. _Moseh de Kosi_ in
_Samag._

7. Yea, they farther say, that by restitutions, there is a result to the
praise of God, and the sacred Law, whence that holy, and wise man, R.
_Simeon Ben Satah_, having bought an asse of a Gentile, the head stall
whereof was a jewell of great value, which the owner knew not of,
afterwards he found it, and freely, and for nothing, he restored it to
the seller, that knew not of it, saying, I bought the asse, but not the
jewell. Whence there did accrue honour to God, and his Law, and to the
nation of the _Iewes_, as _Midras Raba_ reports in _Parasot Hekel_.

8. After the same manner they command, that the oath which they shall
make to any other nation, must be with truth, and justice, and must be
kept in every particular. And for proof thereof, they quote the history
of _Zedekias_, whom God punished, and deprived of his kingdome, because
he kept not his word, and _oath_, made to _Nebuchadnezzar, in the name
of God_, though he were a _Gentile_, as it is said, 2 of _Chronicles_,
cap. 36.13. _And he also rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar, who made him
swear by God._

9. These are the laws and obligations which the _Iewes_ hold. So that
the Law that forbids the _Iewes_ to _kill_ any _Gentiles_, forbids them
also to _steal_ from them. Yet every one must look to it, for the world
is full of fraud in all Nations. I remember a pretty story of what
passed in _Morocco_, in the Court of the king of _Mauritania_. There was
a _Iew_ that had a sort of false stones, _&c._—He making a truck with a
_Portugal_ Christian, for some Verdigrease that he had, which was much
sofisticated, (as they are wont to do there) being all falsified with
Earth; one of the _Portugals_ friends laughed at him, saying, the _Iew_
fitted thee well; he answered, If the _Iew_ hath stoned me, I have
buried him. And so they ordinarily mock one another.

This I can affirm, that many of the _Iewes_, because they would not
break with other mens goods, were very poor at _Amsterdam_, lived very
poorly, and those that did break with other mens goods by necessity,
became so much the more miserable, that they were forced to live on
almes.

And whereas in the time of K. _Edward_ I. the _Iewes_ were accused of
clipping the Kings coin; it appears that this accusation drew its
originall mainly from the suspicion and hatred the Christians bare
against the _Iewes_, as appeares in the story, as it is set forth by Mr.
_Prynne, In his second part of a Short Demurrer to the Iewes_ &c. p. 82.
where quoting _Claus._ 7. _E._ I. _n._ 7. _De fine recipiendo à Iudæis_,
brings in the King, writing to his Judges in Latine, in these words.
_Rex dilectis, & fidelibus suis_ Stephano de Pentecester, Waltero de
Helyn. _&_ Th. de Cobham _Iusticiariis ad placita transgressionis monetæ
audienda, salutem. Quia omnes_ Judæi _nuper rectati, & per certam
suspicionem indictati de retonsura monetæ nostræ, & inde convicti cum
ultimo supplicio puniuntur; & quidam eorum eadem occasione, omnia bona,
& catalla sua satisfecerunt, & in prisona nostra liberabantur, in eadem
ad voluntatem nostram detinendi. Et cum accepimus, quod plures
Christiani ob ODIVM_ Judæorum, _propter discrepantiam fidei Christianæ,
& ritus_ Judæorum, _& diversa gratia minus per ipsos_ Judæos
_Christianis hactenus illata, postquam_ Judæos _nondum rectatos in
indictatos de transgressione monetæ, per levas, & voluntarias
accusationes accusare, & indictare de die in diem nituntur, & proponunt,
imponendas eis ad terrorem ipsorum, quod de ejusmodi transgressione
culpabiles existunt super ipsos_ Judæos _faciendæ, & sic per minas
hujusmodi accusationis, ipsis_ Judæos _metu incutiant, & pecuniam
extorqueant ab eisdem; Ita quod ipsi_ Judæi _super hoc, ad legem suam
sæpe ponuntur in vitæ suæ periculum manifestum. Volumus quod omnes_
Judæi _qui ante primum diem_ Maii _proximo præterit, indictati, vel per
certam suspicionem rectati non fuerunt de transgressione monetæ
predictæ, & qui facere voluerint finem juxta discretionem Vestram, ad
opus nostrum facere pro sic, quod non occasiorentur, &c. hujusmodi
transgressionibus factis ante primum diem_ Maii _propter novas
accusationes Christianorum post eundem diem inde factas non molestentur,
sed pacem inde habeant in futurum. Proviso, quod_ Judæi _indictati, vel
per certam suspicionem, rectati de hujusmodi transgressione ante
prædictum diem_ Maii, _Indicium subeant coram vobis, juxta formam prius
inde ordinatam & provisam. Et ideo vobis maneamus, quod fines hujusmodi
capiatis, & præmissa fieri, & observari faciatis in forma prædicto.
Teste Rege apud_ Cantuar. 8. _die_ Maii.


                          THE SEVENTH SECTION.

And now by this time, I presume (most noble Sir) I may have given
abundant satisfaction, (so farre as the nature of an epistle will
permit) to all your objections, without giving just ground of offence,
or scandall to any. And forasmuch as you are further desirous to know
somewhat, concerning the state of this my expedition, and negotiation at
present, I shall now onely say, and that briefly, that the communication
and correspondence I have held, for some yeares since, with some eminent
persons of _England_, was the first originall of my undertaking this
design. For I alwayes found by them, a great probability of obtaining
what I now request; whilst they affirmed, that at this time the minds of
men stood very well affected towards us; and that our entrance into this
Island, would be very acceptable, and well-pleasing unto them. And from
this beginning sprang up in me a semblable affection, and desire of
obtaining this purpose. For, for seven yeares on this behalf, I have
endeavoured, and sollicited it, by letters, and other means, without any
intervall. For I conceived, that our universall dispersion was a
necessary circumstance, to be fulfilled, before all that shall be
accomplished which the Lord hath promised to the people of the _Iewes_,
concerning their restauration, and their returning again into their own
land, according to those words _Dan._ 12.7. _When he shall have
accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things
shall be finished._ As also, that this our scattering, by little, and
little, should be amongst all people, from the _one end of the earth
even unto the other_; as it is written _Deut._ 28.64. I conceived that
by the _end of the earth_ might be understood this _Island_. And I knew
not, but that the Lord who often works by naturall meanes, might have
design’d, and made choice of me, for the bringing about this work. With
these proposalls therefore, I applyed my self, in all zealous affection
to the _English Nation_, congratulating their glorious liberty which at
this day they enjoy, together with their prosperous peace. And I
entituled my book named _The hope of Israel_, to the first Parliament,
and the Council of State. And withall declared my intentions. In order
to which they sent me a very favourable passe-port. Afterwards I
directed my self to the second, and they also sent me another. But at
that juncture of time my coming was not presently performed, for that my
kindred and friends, considering the checquered, and interwoven
vicissitudes, and turns of things here below, embracing me, with
pressing importunity, earnestly requested me not to part from them, and
would not give over, till their love constrained me to promise, that I
would yet a while stay with them. But notwithstanding all this, I could
not be at quiet in my mind, (I know not but that it might be through
some particular divine providence) till I had anew made my humble
addresses to his Highnesse the Lord Protector (whom God preserve.) And
finding that my coming over would not be altogether unwelcome to him,
with those great hopes which I conceived, I joyfully took my leave of my
house, my friends, my kindred, all my advantages there, and the country
wherein I have lived all my life time, under the benign protection, and
favour of the Lords, the States Generall, and Magistrates of
_Amsterdam_; _in fine_ (I say) I parted with them all, and took my
voyage for _England_. Where, after my arrivall, being very courteously
received, and treated with much respect, I presented to his most Serene
Highnesse, a petition, and some desires, which for the most part, were
written to me by my brethren the _Iewes_, from severall parts of
_Europe_, as your worship may better understand by former relations.
Whereupon it pleased his Highnesse to convene an Assembly at
_Whitehall_, of Divines, Lawyers, and Merchants, of different
perswasions, and opinions. Whereby mens judgements, and sentences were
different. Insomuch, that as yet, we have had no finall determination
from his most Serene Highnesse. Wherefore those few _Iewes_ that were
here, despairing of our expected successe, departed hence. And others
who desired to come hither, have quitted their hopes, and betaken
themselves some to _Italy_, some to _Geneva_, where that Commonwealth
hath at this time, most freely granted them many, and great priviledges.

Now, O most high God, to thee I make my prayer, even to thee, the God of
our Fathers. Thou who hast been pleased to stile thy self _the keeper of
Israel_; Thou who hast graciously promised, by thy holy Prophet
_Ieremiah_, (cap. 31.) _that thou wilt not cast off all the seed of
Israel, for all the evill that they have done_; thou who by so many
stupendious miracles, didst bring thy people out of _Egypt_, the land of
bondage, and didst lead them into the _holy land_; graciously cause thy
holy influence to descend down into the mind of the Prince, (who for no
private interest, or respect at all, but onely out of commiseration to
our affliction, hath inclined himself to protect, and shelter us, for
which extraordinary humanity, neither I my self, nor my nation, can ever
expect to be able to render him answerable, and sufficient thanks,) and
also into the minds of his most illustrious and prudent Council, that
they may determine that, which according to thine infinite wisdome, may
be best, and most expedient for us. For men (O Lord) see that which is
present, but thou in thy omnisciencie seest that which is afarre off.

And to the highly honoured nation of _England_, I make my most humble
request, that they would read over my arguments impartially, without
prejudice, and devoid of all passion, effectually recommending me to
their grace and favour, and earnestly beseeching God that he would be
pleased to hasten the time promised by _Zephaniah_, wherein we shall all
serve him _with one consent_, after the same manner, and shall be all of
the same judgement, that as his name is one, so his fear may be also
one, and that we may all see the goodnesse of the Lord, blessed for
ever, and the consolations of Zion. Amen, and Amen.

  From my study, in _London, April_ the 10, in the year from the
    creation 5416, and in the year, according to the vulgar account,
    1656.

As to give satisfaction to your worship, being desirous to know what
books have been written, and printed by me, or else are almost ready for
the presse, may you please to take the names of them in this Catalogue.


   _A Catalogue of such books as have been published by_ Menasseh Ben
                          Israel, _in_ Hebrew.

_Nismachaim_, four Books, concerning the Immortality of the soul,
wherein many notable, and pleasant Questions are discussed, and handled,
as may be seen by the Arguments of the particular Chapters, prefixed to
the book, in _Latine_, dedicated to the then Emperour _Ferdinand_ the
third.

_Pene Rabba_, upon _Rabot_, of the Ancient Rabbins, in _Latine_ and
_Spanish_.

_Conciliatoris pars prima in Pentateuchum._

_De Resurrectione mortuorum libri tres._

_Problemata de creatione._

_De termino vitæ._

_De fragilitate humana, ex lapsu_ Adami, _deque divino in bono opere
auxilio._

_Spes Israelis._ This is also in English.

_Orationes panegyricæ, quarum una ad Illustrissimum principem_,
Aurantium, _altera ad serenissimam reginam_ Sueciorum, in _Spanish_
onely.

 _Conciliator_│the second part, upon the first Prophets.
              │the third part, upon the later Prophets.
              │the fourth part upon the Hagiographa.

_Humas_, or the _Pentateuch_, with the severall precepts in the margin.

_Thesoro de los dirim_ five books of the rites and ceremonies of the
_Iewes_, in two Volumes.

_Humas_ the _Pentateuch_, with a commentarie.

_Piedra pretiosa_, of _Nebuchadnezzar’s_ image, or the fifth Monarchy.

_Laus orationes del anno_, the _Iewes_ prayers for the whole year,
translated out of the originall.


                      Books ready for the Presse.

_De cultu Imaginum contra Pontificios Latine._

_Sermois_, Sermons in the _Portugal_ tongue.

_Loci communes Omnium Midrasim_, which contains the divinity of the
ancient Rabbins, in _Hebrew_.

_Bibliotheca Rabbinica_, together with the arguments of their books, and
my judgement upon their severall editions.

_Phocylides_ in _Spanish_ verse _cum Notis_.

_Hippocratis Aphorismi_ in _Hebrew_.

_Flavius Iosephus adversus Apionem_, in _Hebrew_, _ejusdem Monarchia
rationis_ in _Hebrew_.

_Refutatio libri cui titulus Præadamitæ._

_Historia sive continuatio_ Flavii Josephi _ad hæc usque tempora_.

_De divinitate legis Mosaicæ._

_De scientia Talmudistarum, in singulis facultatibus._

_Philosophia Rabbinica._

_De disciplinis Rabbinorum._

_Nomenclator Hebraius & Arabicus._


I have also published, and printed, with my own presse, above 60 other
books, amongst which are many bibles in _Hebrew_, and _Spanish_, with
all our _Hebrew_ prayers corrected, and disposed in good order.


                                _FINIS_



                                 NOTES


                          (P = page; l = line)


                    PORTRAITS OF MENASSEH BEN ISRAEL

                   (Frontispiece, and pp. 1 and 105)

Pocock, in his biographical introduction to the English translation of
Menasseh ben Israel’s “De Termino Vitæ” (Lond., 1700), gives the
following pen-picture of the author derived from the recollections of
English Jews who remembered the days of the Whitehall Conferences:—

“He was of middle stature and inclining to fatness. He always used his
own hair, which (many years before his death) was very grey; so that his
complexion being pretty fresh, his demeanour graceful and comely, his
habit plain and decent, he commanded an awful reverence which was partly
due to so venerable a deportment. In short, he was _un homme sans
passion, sans legiereté, mais hélas! sans opulence_” (p. viii).

This description agrees with the portraits of Menasseh. Three of these
portraits are extant. Two of them are by Rembrandt, and one is by a
Jewish line-engraver, Salom Italia. Curiously enough, although far
inferior in artistic merit to the Rembrandts as a portrait, Menasseh
prized the Italia engraving highest. He sent a copy to the Silesian
mystic Frankenberg in 1643, and he writes in the _Bonum Nuncium
Israeli_:—

“Abr. à Frankenberg ... effigiem meam, aeri incisam misissem, ubi ad
symbolum meum Perigrinando Quærimus, cui ab uno latere Hominis
Peregrinantis, ab altero candelæ emblema adscriptum cum hoc dicterio ‏נר
לרגלי דברך‎ sic praefatur” (p. 92).

The shield in the left-hand corner of this portrait was used by Menasseh
as a trade-mark in his printing-office. It has for this reason been
reproduced on the title-page of the present work. Salom Italia’s
portrait is often found bound up with the first Latin version of the
“Hope of Israel,” and was roughly copied in the Spanish edition
published at Madrid in 1881.

Rembrandt belonged to the distinguished circle of Menasseh’s personal
friends. He illustrated the _Piedra Gloriosa_ published by Menasseh in
1655, and he etched one portrait of the Rabbi, and painted another. The
etching, of which a mezzotinted reproduction is presented on the
frontispiece of the present work, was produced in 1636 when Menasseh was
thirty-two years old. The painted portrait which is in the Hermitage at
St. Petersburg is of doubtful authenticity as relating to Menasseh, but
I am inclined to regard it as genuine. It represents the Rabbi at a much
more advanced age than the etching. The grey hair agrees with Pocock’s
description of his appearance in 1656, while the sorrowful expression
and full beard may be accounted for by his troubled experiences in
London, and especially by the death of his son. When he returned to
Middleburg in 1657, he was mourning for his son, and hence his beard
would be unshaved. It is not at all improbable that Rembrandt, his old
friend of twenty years, saw him at this tragical moment, and that the
portrait is a reminiscence of the prematurely aged and broken-hearted
Rabbi, then tottering on the verge of the grave.


                           THE HOPE OF ISRAEL

                               (pp. 1–72)


                          BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

The title is taken from Jeremiah xiv. 8 (see p. 7).

The first edition (pp. xiii, 126, 12mo) was in Spanish, and bore the
following title:—

‏מקוה ישראל‎ / Esto es, / Esperança / de Israel. / Obra con suma
curiosidad conpuesta / por / Menasseh Ben Israel / Theologo, y
Philosopho Hebreo. / Trata del admirable esparzimiento de los diez /
Tribus, y su infalible reduccion con los de / mas, a la patria: con
muchos puntos, / y Historias curiosas, y declara- / cion de varias
Prophecias, / por el Author rectamen- / te interpretadas. / Dirigido a
los señores Parnassim del K.K. / de Talmvd Tora. / En Amsterdam. / En la
Imprension de / Semvel Ben Israel Soeiro. / Año. 5410.

It was dedicated to the Wardens of the Theological School (Talmud
Torah), Josseph Da Costa, Ishak Jessurun, Michael Espinosa, Abraham
Enriques Faro, Gabriel de Rivas Altas, Ishak Belmonte, and Abraham
Franco. The dedication is dated Shebat 13, 5410 [= Jan. 15, 1650], and
is headed with the significant quotation in Hebrew of part of verse 1 of
Isaiah lxi.: “To preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to
bind up the broken-hearted.” This dedicatory epistle is only to be found
in the Spanish edition. In the Latin and English translations it is
replaced by an address “To the Parliament, the Supream Court of
England.”

The Latin edition (pp. xii, 111, 12mo), which was printed very shortly
after the Spanish, bore the following title:—

‏מקוה ישראל‎ / Hoc est, / Spes / Israelis / Authore / Menasseh Ben
Israel / Theologo & Philosopho Hebræo / Amstelodami / Anno 1650.

It is doubtful whether Kayserling (_Misc. Heb. Lit._, ii. p. 16 and note
76), following Castro, is correct in his conjecture that this
translation is the work of Menasseh himself. There are too many
misunderstandings of the Hebrew names and quotations to admit of this
view. The deviations from the original suggest that it was hurriedly
executed from a first draft of the Spanish version, which was afterwards
revised by the author, who omitted to perform the same service for the
Latin text.

The English version (pp. xiv, 90, 12mo) was based on the Latin, and
reproduced all its faults. It appeared in London towards the end of
1650. The title-page runs as follows:—

The / Hope of Israel: / Written / By Menasseh Ben Israel, / an Hebrew
Divine, and Philosopher. / Newly extant, and Printed in / Amsterdam, and
Dedicated by the / Author to the High Court, the / Parliament of
England, and to the / Councell of State. / Translated into English, and
/ published by Authority. / In this treatise is shewed the place where
the ten / Tribes at this present are, proved, partly by / the strange
relation of one Antony Monte- / zinus, a Jew, of what befell him as he
tra- / veiled over the Mountaines Cordillære, with / divers other
particulars about the restoration of / the Jewes, and the time when. /
Printed at London by R. I. for Hannah Allen, / at the Crown in Popeshead
/ Alley, 1650.

The only respect in which this version differs from the Latin is that it
contains on pp. xi-xiv an address from “The Translator to the Reader.”
The name of the translator is not given, but the work was subsequently
acknowledged by Moses Wall in a correspondence with E. S. (Sir Edward
Spencer); see pp. 66–72.

A second edition, “corrected and amended,” sm. 4to, was published in
1651 and reprinted in 1652. It is the latter which is reproduced in the
present volume on account of its convenient _format_, and of the
Appendices which throw light on the motives by which the publication in
England was actuated.

The following is a list of other editions and translations:—

       1659. Spanish by Jedidjah Ibn Gabbai (Smyrna). 1666. Dutch by Jan
         Bara (Amsterdam). 1691. Judeo-German by Mardochai ben Moses
         Drucker (Amsterdam). 1697. Hebrew by Eljakim ben Jacob
         (Amsterdam). 1703. _Ibid._ 1712. Judeo-German (Frankfort)
         reprint of 1691 edition. 1723. Spanish (Amsterdam) reprint of
         original edition. 1792. English by Robert Ingram (Colchester).
         1836. Hebrew (Wilna) reprint of 1703 edition. 1850. English
         (London) reprint of 1650 edition. 1881. Spanish, by Santiago
         Perez Junquera (Madrid), reprint of original edition.


                         THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY

  P. 4, l. 9. “_Not onely by your prayers._” This, no doubt, refers to
    the protection extended by the Government to the Marranos in London.
    (See Introduction, p. xxx.)


                        TO THE COURTEOUS READER

  P. 6, l. 21. “_Others to the Ten Tribes._” There is a very voluminous
    literature of the Ten Tribes, a bibliography of which has long been
    promised by Mr. Joseph Jacobs. Bancroft in his “Native Races of the
    Pacific States of North America” discusses the theory of the Hebrew
    origin of the Americans (vol. v. pp. 77–95). Santiago Perez Junquera
    in his Spanish reprint of “Esperanza de Israel” gives a bibliography
    of Spanish writers who have dealt with the problem of the Ten
    Tribes. The Jewish legends on the subject, none of which admit the
    American theory, have been summarised by Dr. A. Neubauer in the
    _Jewish Quarterly Review_ (vol. i. pp. 14, 95, 185, 408). See also
    M. Lewin, “Wo wären die Zehn Stämme Israels zu suchen” (1901).

The following selections from the vast literature of the Ten Tribes,
especially in its relation to Menasseh ben Israel, may be recommended to
investigators of this curious craze:—

  Enquiries touching the Diversity of Languages and Religions through
    the chief parts of the world, written by Edw. Brerewood. London,
    1635.

  Thos. Thorowgood—Jews in America, &c. 1650.

  John Dury—Epistolary Discourse to Mr. Thomas Thorowgood. 1650.

  Sir Hamon L’Estrange—Americans no Jews. 1652.

  Thos. Thorowgood—Jews in America [with] an accurate discourse [by] Mr.
    John Eliot. 1660.

  Theophili Spizelii—Elevatio Relationis Montezinianæ de repertis in
    America tribubus Israeliticis. Basle, 1661.

  Account of the Ten Tribes of Israel being in America, originally
    published by Menasseh Ben Israel, with observations thereon. By
    Robert Ingram, M.A. Colchester, 1792.

  The Ten Tribes of Israel historically identified with the aborigines
    of the Western Hemisphere. By Mrs. Simon. London, 1826.

  The Hope of Israel, presumptive evidence that the aborigines of the
    Western Hemisphere are descended from the ten missing tribes of
    Israel. By Barbara Anne Simon. London, 1829.

  The Remnant Found, or the place of Israel’s hiding discovered, being a
    summary of proofs showing that the Jews of Daghistan on the Caspian
    Sea are the remnant of the Ten Tribes. By the Rev. Jacob Samuel.
    London, 1841.

  The Thorn Tree, being a history of thorn worship of the Twelve Tribes
    of Israel, but more especially of the Lost Tribes and House of
    David. By Theta. London, 1863.

  Paläorama. Oceanisch-Amerikanische Untersuchungen und Aufklärungen.
    Erlangen, 1868.

  Ireland, Ur of the Chaldees. By Anna Wilkes. London, 1873.

  Ueber die Abstammung der Englischen Nation. Von D. Paulus Cassel.
    Berlin, 1880.

  P. 6, l. 29. “_Cordilleræ_,” Spanish. A mountain chain, sometimes, as
    here, applied in a specific sense to the Andes.

  P. 6, l. 32. “_The Sabbaticall River_,” or Sambation, a river
    mentioned in the Midrash as slowing during the first six days of
    every week and drying up on the Sabbath. (Neubauer, “Géographie du
    Talmud,” pp. 33–34, 299; Hamburger, “Real-Encyclopädie des
    Judenthums,” vol. ii. p. 1071; see also “Hope of Israel,” _infra_,
    p. 35.)

  P. 7, l. 15. “_I intend a continuation of Josephus._” No trace of this
    work has been found. From a passage in the _Vindiciæ_ there is
    reason to believe that it it was completed in MS. (see p. 115 and
    note thereon, _infra_, p. 167).


                   THE RELATION OF ANTONY MONTEZINUS

  P. 11. An earlier translation of this affidavit was published by
    Thomas Thorowgood in “Jewes in America,” pp. 129, 130. (See
    Introduction to present work, p. xxv.)

  P. 11, l. 13. “_Port Honda_,” now Bahia Honda, an inlet at the
    northeastern extremity of Colombia, in 12° 20′ N. and 50° W. It was
    first visited by Ojeda in 1502, and named by him Puerto de Santa
    Cruz. There is a town named Honda in the interior, and a bay of the
    same name on the northern coast of Cuba, 60 miles west of Havana.

  P. 11, l. 15. “_Province of Quity_,” modern Quito, originally a
    presidency of the Spanish viceroyalty of Peru, afterwards a division
    of the Republic of Colombia, and in 1831 organised with the
    districts of Asuay and Guayaquil into a new republic, under the name
    of Ecuador.

  P. 11, l. 17. “_Cazicus_,” modern _Cacique_ or _Cazique_, used in
    Spanish to designate an Indian chief. The word is of Haytian origin.
    An early Spanish writer derives it from the Hebrew. (Kayserling,
    “Christopher Columbus,” p. 154.)

  P. 11, l. 29. “_Jonkets_,” junket, from Italian _giuncata_, a
    cream-cheese, so called because served on rushes (_giuncoa_—a rush):

           “And beare with you both wine and _juncates_ fit
           And bid him eat.”

                                   —SPENSER, _F. Q._, V. iv. 49.

           “With stories told of many a feat,
           How faery Mab the _junkets_ eat.”

                                   —MILTON, _L’Allegro_, 172.

  P. 12, l. 3. “_Carthagenia_”: modern Cartagena, a fortified maritime
    city of the United States of Colombia, on the Caribbean Sea.

  P. 12, l. 5. “_Blessed be the name of the Lord that hath not made me
    an Idolator, a Barbarian, a Black-a-Moore, or an Indian._” This is
    an extension of a blessing said in the Hebrew morning service. The
    original blessing, however, only speaks of “idolator.” There is
    another blessing said on seeing “negroes and redskins,” and this,
    curiously enough, is discussed in the same section of the Talmud as
    that in which the recital of the blessing in regard to heathens is
    enjoined (see Schwab, “Le Talmud,” vol. i. p. 158).

  P. 13, l. 17. “_Duerus_”: the river Douro or Duero in Spain. Mr. Wall
    does not seem to have taken the trouble to delatinise the name. In
    the Spanish edition it appears, of course, “Duero.”

  P. 13, l. 18. “_Making a sign with the fine linen of Xylus._” This is
    a misunderstanding of the original Latin, which says, “factoque ex
    duabus Xyli syndonibus.” The word “Xyli” here is intended for the
    genitive of Xylon = cotton. The passage should read, “and making out
    of two pieces of cotton cloth.” The original Spanish says, “y
    haziendo vandera de dos paños de algodon.” What Montezinos and his
    companion did was to construct a flag out of their two cotton
    waistbands.

  P. 14, l. 1. Curious mistake overlooking the identity of Jacob and
    Israel.

  P. 14, l. 22. “_Mohanes_”: American-Indian medicine men. (See _infra_,
    p. 56.)


                           THE HOPE OF ISRAEL

  P. 17, l. 21. For Jewish aspects of the early voyages to America see
    Kayserling, “Christopher Columbus, and the participation of the Jews
    in the Spanish and Portuguese discoveries” (Lond., 1894); also the
    same author’s “The First Jew in America,” in the John Hopkins
    University Studies for 1892.

  P. 18, l. 32. “_Gomoras_” = Francisco Lopez de Gomara.

  P. 18, l. 18. “_Tunes_” = Tunis.

  P. 18, l. 22. “_Isaac Abarbanel_,” Jewish statesman and theologian
    (1437–1509), served Alphonso V. of Portugal, Isabella of Spain, and
    Ferdinand of Naples; author of numerous Bible commentaries and
    philosophical essays. Headed the emigration of the Spanish Jews at
    the time of the expulsion (Graetz, _Geschichte d. Juden_, vol. viii.
    pp. 316 _et seq._; Kayserling, _Juden in Portugal_, pp. 72, 100).
    The Abarbanels, whose descendants are numerous in Europe, claimed
    descent from King David. Menasseh ben Israel’s wife was an Abarbanel
    (see “Hope of Israel,” p. 39). Mr. Coningsby Disraeli is a
    descendant on his mother’s side.

  P. 19, l. 30. “_Rabbi Jonathan ben Uziel._” The author of a free
    Aramaic paraphrase (Targum) to the Hebrew Prophetical Books. His
    date is about the beginning of the Christian era. A Targum to the
    Pentateuch is wrongly ascribed to him; this is properly the Targum
    Yerushalmi or Jerusalem Targum (see Zunz, “Die Gottesdienstlichen
    Vorträge der Juden,” pp. 66 _seq._).

  P. 19, l. 33. “_Rabbinus Josephus Coen in his Chronology_” (see
    Bialloblotzky, “The Chronicles of Rabbi Joseph ben Meir the
    Sphardi,” Lond., 1835). Joseph Cohen was born 1496 and died 1575.

  P. 21, Sect. 4. The Hebrew in the first case is ‏מה טם אל שעלבין מת דע
    אל‎, the ‏ט‎ in the second word being regarded as a mistake for ‏ת‎.
    In the second case the Hebrew is ‏מהטבאל שעל בן מתדעאל‎ (see
    “Esperança de Israel,” pp. 26, 27).

  P. 21, l. 32. “_Collai_” = Callao.

  P. 22, l. 7. “_Petrus Cieza_” = Pedro Cieça de Leon.

  P. 22, l. 8. “_Guamanga_”: modern Ayacucho.

  P. 23, l. 30. “_Garracas_” = Caracas.

  P. 24, l. 9. “_Alonsus de Erzilla_” = Alonzo d’Ercilla y Zuñiga
    (1530–1595). The quotation is from “La Araucana,” the most famous of
    Spanish Epics.

  P. 24, l. 27. “_Maragnon_” = Marañon, another name for the Amazon.

  P. 24, l. 35. “_Farnambuc_” = Pernambuco.

  P. 26, l. 14. “_The Isle of Solomon and Hierusalem._”—Mendaña landed
    on Isabel Island in 1568, and named the group Solomon, and
    Bougainville rediscovered the islands in 1768. H. B. Guppy, “The
    Solomon Islands and their Natives” (Lond. 1887). C. M. Wood in
    “Proceedings R. Geog. Soc.,” 1888, pp. 351–76, and 1890, pp.
    394–418, with map (p. 444), on which are given the original Spanish
    as well as the modern names of the islands.

  P. 28, l. 7. “_To this day they privately keep their Religion._” The
    Marranos. See _supra_, pp. xii-xiv.

  P. 29, l. 9. “_My Reconciler._” “Conciliador” Seg^{da} Parte.
    Amsterdam, 1641. This work was translated into Latin by Vossius
    (1687), and into English by Lindo (1842).

  P. 29, Sect. 16. A bibliography of the Jews in China has been
    published in French by Henri Cordier. A useful summary of our
    knowledge of the Hebrew Settlements in China, brought down to the
    most recent date, has been written by Mr. Marcus Adler (_Jew. Quart.
    Rev._, vol. xiii. pp. 18–41).

  P. 33, l. 20. “_David the Reubenite._” David Reubeni, an Oriental Jew,
    who visited Europe in 1524, alleging himself to be an envoy from the
    Ten Tribes. He was received with distinction by the Pope and the
    King of Portugal, and made a great commotion among the Marranos and
    Jews (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. ix. pp. 244 _et seq._).

  P. 33, l. 23. “_Selomoh Molcho._” A Marrano disciple of David Reubeni.
    His name was originally Diogo Pires. He migrated to the East and
    became a learned Cabbalist. He died a martyr’s death in 1532
    (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. ix. pp. 251 _et seq._).

  P. 33, l. 30. “_Abraham Frisol Orchotolam._” A mistranslation for
    Abraham Frisol in his book entitled, “_Orhat Olam_.” Abraham Farisol
    or Peretsol (1451–1525) was a Hebrew geographer, author of “Orchat
    Olam” (The Path of the Universe), which was edited with a Latin
    translation by Thomas Hyde (Oxford, 1691). For life of Farisol see
    Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. ix. pp. 46 _et seq._

  P. 33, l. 38. “_The Hebrew letter (h) and (t) are neere in fashion._”
    The letters referred to are ‏ח‎ and ‏ת‎.

  P. 33, l. 39. “_Eldad Danita._” Eldad the Danite lived in the ninth
    century. His career was similar to that of David Reubeni (Epstein,
    “Eldad Ha-Dani,” Pressburg, 1891).

  P. 34, l. 2. “_Sephar Eldad Danita_,” ‏ספור אלדד הדני‎. An edition
    with a French translation was published by Carmoly (“Relation
    d’Eldad le Danite.” Paris, 1838). The best editions are those of
    Epstein and D. H. Müller.

  P. 34, l. 3. “_Rabbi David Kimhi._” Famous Hebrew exegete, grammarian,
    and lexicographer (d. 1232). The work referred to as “_etymol. suo_”
    is “The Book of Roots” (‏ספר השרשים‎).

  P. 34, l. 5. “_Of the name of Rabbi Juda Aben Karis._” Should be, “in
    the name of Rabbi Judah ben Koraisch.” Rabbi Judah (fl. _circa_
    870–900) was a Karaite philologist; lived in North-West Africa. He
    met Eldad in Morocco (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. v. p. 261).

  P. 34, l. 9. “_Part of the Ten Tribes also live in Ethiopia._” The
    Falashas of Abyssinia are here referred to (Halévy, “Travels in
    Abyssinia”; _Mis. Heb. Lit._, vol. ii. pp. 175 _et seq._ There are
    also reports on the Falashas in the Annual Reports of the Alliance
    Israelite and Anglo-Jewish Association).

  P. 35, l. 22. “_Rabbi Johanan, the Author of the Jerusalem Talmud._”
    Rabbi Jochanan, son of the Smith, was a disciple of Rabbi Judah the
    Prince, compiler of the Mishna. He was one of the most famous Hebrew
    teachers of the third century. The tradition that he was author of
    the Jerusalem Talmud rests only on the assertion of Maimonides.
    Modern critics reject it, and date the Jerusalem Talmud in the
    seventh century. (Hamburger, “Real-Encyclopädie,” _sub voc._
    “Jochanan” and “Talmud.”)

  P. 35, l. 34. “_The learned man l’Empereur._” Constantine l’Empereur,
    an Hebraist of the seventeenth century (d. 1648), who translated
    into Latin some tractates of the Mishna and other Hebrew works,
    including the Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela.

  P. 35, l. 36. “_Sedar Olam._” The name of two Hebrew Chronologies (see
    Hamburger, “Real-Encyclopädie,” sup. vol., pp. 132, 133).

  P. 35, l. 37. “_In Talmud tractat, Sanhedr._” “Sanhedrin” is the name
    of a treatise of the Talmud, the fourth in the fourth book of the
    Jerushalmi, and the fifth in the fourth book of the Babli. Excerpts
    have been translated into Latin with elaborate notes by Joh.
    Coccejus (Amsterdam 1629).

  P. 36, l. 9. “_Beresit Rabba._” The first part of the “Midrash
    Rabboth,” the chief collection of Hagadic or homiletic expositions
    of the Scriptures. As its name implies, it deals with Genesis (Zunz,
    “Gottesdienstlichen Vorträge,” pp. 184 _et seq._, 1892.)

  P. 36, l. 9. “_In Perasach_,” should be “in Parashah 11” (see original
    Spanish “Esperança,” p. 66). The misprint occurs in the Latin.
    “Parasha” means section. There are 100 sections in the _Bereshith
    Rabba_.

  P. 36, l. 10. “_Tornunsus_” = Turnus Rufus.

  P. 36, l. 12. “_Rabbi Aquebah._” One of the greatest of the Tanaim or
    compilers of the Mishna. He became an adherent of the Pseudo-Messiah
    Bar Cochba, who rebelled against the Romans during the reign of
    Hadrian, and was put to death after the fall of Bethar. His career
    has passed into legend (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. iv. pp. 53 _et
    seq._).

  P. 36, l. 20. “_Asirim Rabba_” = Shir Ha-Shirim Rabba. Midrashic
    exposition of the Song of Songs (_supra_, “Beresit Rabba”).

  P. 36, l. 27. “_Jalcut._” A collection of Midrashim covering the whole
    of the Scriptures, and compiled in the eleventh century by R. Simeon
    b. Chelbo, whence it is called the Yalkut Shimeoni (Zunz,
    “Gottesdienst,” pp. 183 and 309).

  P. 36, l. 31. “_Bamibar Rabba_”: misprint for Bamidbar Rabba, the
    Midrashic exposition of Numbers.

  P. 37, l. 12. “_R. Selomoh Jarchi._” Solomon b. Isaac of Troyes,
    called Rashi (1040–1105), the most eminent Hebrew Bible commentator
    of the Middle Ages. The name Jarchi was erroneously given to Rashi
    by Raymund Martini, Munster, and Buxtorf, who imagined that he was a
    native of Lunel (‏ירח‎ = _luna_). Menasseh ben Israel was the first
    Jewish scholar to adopt this blunder (Wolf, “Biblio. Heb.” vol. i.
    1057, &c.; Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. vi. pp. 77 _et seq._; Wolf,
    “The Treves Family in England”).

  P. 37, l. 15. “_R. Mardochus Japhe._” Bohemian Rabbi (1530–1612)
    (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. ix. pp. 465–467).

  P. 37, l. 26. “_Another worthy of credit._” In the original Spanish,
    Menasseh gives his name as Señor H. Meyr Rophé. This is omitted from
    both the Latin and English editions.

  P. 37, l. 34. “_R. Moses Gerundensis._” Moses ben Nachman (1200–1272),
    also called Nachmanides, and Ramban. Christian scholars sometimes
    speak of him as Gerundensis from his birthplace, Gerona. The
    greatest Talmudic authority of his day, author of a Bible
    commentary. His public disputation at Barcelona with Pablo
    Christiani in 1263 is famous (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. vii. pp.
    131–136, Schechter “Studies in Judaism,” art. “Nachmanides”).

  P. 38, l. 1. “_Benjamin Tudelensis_,” Benjamin b. Jonah of Tudela,
    famous Jewish traveller (see Itinerary by, translated by A. Asher.
    Lond., 1840).

  P. 38, l. 4. “_The City Lubin_”: misprint for Lublin.

  P. 45, l. 14. “_Rabby Simeon ben Johay, the author of the Zoar._”
    Rabbi Simeon was a famous doctor of the Mishna and disciple of
    Akiba. He laid the foundation of the Sifre, the Halachic, or legal
    exposition of Numbers and Deuteronomy. He figures in Jewish legend
    as the greatest master of the Cabbala. He was not the author of the
    Zohar. Internal evidence stamps that work as a product of the
    thirteenth century, and its authorship is now ascribed to Moses ben
    Shemtob de Leon (Hamburger, “Real-Encyclopädie,” arts. Simon b.
    Jochai, Sifre, and Sohar).

  P. 45, l. 22. “_Rabbi Seadiah_” = Saadja ben Joseph or Saadja Gaon
    (892–942). The most celebrated of the Geonim, who were the chiefs of
    the schools of Sura and Pumbaditha, and the ecclesiastical
    counterparts of the Exilarchs. Saadja was one of the most prolific
    and versatile writers Judaism has produced (Graetz, “Geschichte,”
    vol. v. pp. 302 _et seq._).

  P. 45, l. 23. “_Moses Egyptius_” = Moses Maimonides.

  P. 45, l. 24. “_Abraham bar Ribi Hijah_” = Abraham ben Chijah ha-Nasi
    of Barcelona (1065–1136), Jewish astronomical and geometrical
    writer; was Minister of Police during the Moorish domination in
    Spain (Graetz, “History,” vol. iii. p. 320).

  P. 45, l. 24. “_Abraham Zacculo_”: misprint for Zaccuto (d. _c._
    1515). He was a Jewish astronomer employed at the Court of Manuel of
    Portugal. His works influenced Columbus (Kayserling, “Christopher
    Columbus,” pp. 9, 13, 14, 46–51, 112, 113).

  P. 45, l. 30. “_The letter (m) in Isa._ ix. 7.” The reference is to
    the sixth verse of Isaiah ix., in the first word of which, ‏לםרבה‎,
    the second letter, which should be ‏מ‎, is written in its final form
    ‏ם‎.

  P. 47, l. 13. “_Diogo d’Assumean_”: misprint for Diogo da Asunçao
    (Graetz, “History,” vol. iv. p. 711; Kayserling, “Juden in
    Portugal,” pp. 282, 292).

  P. 47, l. 20. “_The Lord Lope de Veray Alacron_” = Don Lope de Vera y
    Alarcon. His martyrdom is the subject of a poem by Antonio Enriquez
    Gomez, “Romance al diuin Martir Juda Creyente” (Kayserling,
    “Biblioteca Española,” p. 50; Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. x. pp. 101,
    197).

  P. 47, l. 38. “_Isaac Castrensis Tartas_” = Isaac de Castro Tartas
    (Graetz, “History,” vol. v. p. 33).

  P. 48, l. 9. “_Eli Nazarenus._” His real name was Francisco Meldonado
    de Silva (“Publications of the American Jew. Hist. Soc.,” vol. iv.
    p. 113).

  P. 48, l. 13. “_Thomas Terbinon._” Doctor Thomas (Isaac) Trebiño de
    Sobremente (“Pub. Amer. Jew. Hist. Soc.,” vol. iv. pp. 124–161).

  P. 48, l. 25. “_My booke, De Termino Vitæ_” (English edition by P. T.
    [Thomas Pocock]. Lond., 1700).

  P. 49, l. 8. “_His wife Benuenida_” = Bienvenida Abravanela
    (Kayserling, “Die Jüdischen Frauen,” pp. 77 _et seq._, 111).

  P. 49, l. 16. “_Don Selomo Rophe._” Rabbi Solomon ben Nathan
    Aschkenazi, surnamed Rophe, or the Physician, was a diplomatist in
    the Turkish service who secured the election of Henry of Anjou to
    the throne of Poland. (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. ix. pp. 396, 399,
    438, 580; Levy, “Don Joseph Nasi,” pp. 8 _et seq._).

  P. 49, l. 18. “_D. Ben Jaese, Anancus, and Sonsinos, are of great
    authority with the Turk._” These are the names of Jewish families
    who played an important part in Turkey in the sixteenth century.
    This is a chapter of Jewish history on which the historians have as
    yet shed little light. The materials are chiefly in manuscript, and
    the present author proposes dealing with them in a communication to
    the Jewish Historical Society. On the Ben Jaese (Ibn Jachya) family,
    the reader may provisionally consult Carmoly, “Chronica Familiæ
    Jachya,” and on the Soncinos, Mortara, “Indice Alfabetico.”

  P. 49, l. 20. “_Abraham Alholn_”: misprint for Alhulu, treasurer to
    the Pasha of Egypt. (See _infra_, p. 86.)

  P. 49, l. 21. “_Don Josephus Nassi._” A wealthy Jew, nephew and
    son-in-law of Donna Gracia Nasi (see note, _infra_, p. 163). He was
    in the service of the Sultan, and conquered Cyprus for the Turks. In
    addition to the sources indicated by Menasseh, see Levy, “Don Joseph
    Nasi, Herzog Von Naxos” (Breslau, 1859), and Graetz, “Geschichte,”
    vol. ix. _passim_.

  P. 49, l. 25. “_Jacob Aben Jaes._” He is sometimes referred to as Don
    Solomon. He was of the Ibn Jachya family, and was uncle to Joseph
    Nasi. For a time he was in the service of Queen Elizabeth, and
    corresponded with her physician Rodrigo Lopez, to whom he was
    related. The Sultan created him Duke of Mytilene. (MS. materials.)

  P. 49, l. 29. “_D. Samuel Palaxe._” (See Henriques de Castro, “Keur
    Van Grafsteenen,” pp. 91, 94.)

  P. 50, l. 6. “_D. Benjamin Mussaphia._” Dionysius Mussaphia
    (1605–1674), physician and philologist, court physician to Christian
    IV. of Denmark, afterwards Rabbi in Amsterdam (Graetz, “Geschichte,”
    vol. x. pp. 24, 26, 202, 227, 243, 244; Kayserling, “Juden in
    Portugal,” p. 298.)

  P. 50, l. 9. “_King Cochini._” A mistranslation; should be “King of
    Cochin.” The Jews of the Malabar coast settled there in the fifth
    century. Local tradition gives the colony a much greater antiquity.
    Menasseh gives further particulars of them in his “Humbler
    Addresses,” _infra_, p. 85 (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. iv. pp.
    470–472; Satthianadhan in the _Church Missionary Intelligencer_,
    1871, pp. 365 _et seq._)

  P. 50, l. 12. “_Mardocheas Maisel._” Mordecai Meisel (1528–1601). The
    first Hebrew capitalist in Germany. Created an Imperial Councillor
    by the Emperor Rudolph. His charities were on a princely scale. He
    built two synagogues at Prague (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. ix. pp.
    477, 478.)

  P. 50, l. 14. “_Jacob Bathsebah._” Jacob Basevi Schmieles (1580–1634),
    an influential Bohemian Jew, ennobled by the Emperor Ferdinand,
    receiving the title of Von Treuenburg and a grant of arms. (Graetz,
    “Geschichte,” vol. x. pp. 41–47; Wolf, “Jewish Coats of Arms.”)

  P. 50, l. 22. “_Moses Amon_” (1490–1565). Physician to Solymon II.
    Translated the Bible and Hebrew Prayer-Book into Arabic, and was
    employed by the Sultan on diplomatic missions (Levy, “Don Joseph
    Nasi,” pp. 6–8).

  P. 50, l. 23. “_Elias Montalto._” Felipe Montalto, or Eliahu de Luna
    Montalto, brother of Amato Lusitano. Portuguese physician. Practised
    in Italy, and afterwards was appointed physician-in-ordinary to
    Maria de Medicis; died at Tours 1616, and buried in the Jewish
    Cemetery at Amsterdam (Kayserling, “Biblioteca Española,” pp. 72,
    73). Montalto was also known as Don Philipe Rodrigues. Among his
    descendants is Prof. Raphael Meldola (MS. materials).

  P. 50, l. 25. “_Elias Cretensis._” Better known as Elia del Medigo
    (1463–1498). Lectured publicly on philosophy in Padua, and
    arbitrated in a dispute between the professors and students of the
    university at the request of the Venetian Senate. Pico di Mirandola
    was one of his pupils. He was a prolific writer (Graetz,
    “Geschichte,” vol. viii. pp. 240–247).

  P. 50, l. 26. “_R. Abraham de Balmas_” (d. 1521). Physician,
    philosopher, and grammarian. Like Del Medigo, he lectured in Padua,
    and was one of the Hebraists whose teaching influenced the
    Reformation. Daniel Bomberg, the famous Venetian printer, was one of
    his pupils, and translated his poems into Latin (Graetz,
    “Geschichte,” vol. ix. p. 215).

  P. 50, l. 27. “_Elias Grammaticus._” Better known as Elia Levita
    (1498–1549). A German Rabbi who taught in Padua, Venice, and Rome,
    and who exercised a strong influence on the Hebrew studies which
    produced the Reformation. Scaliger describes him as “the greatest
    Hebrew scholar of his age.” Among his pupils were the Cardinal
    Egidio de Viterbe, the French bishop and ambassador George de Selve,
    and the theologians Münster and Fagius (Günsburg, “Masoreth
    Hamasoreth”; Karpeles, “Geschichte d. Jüd. Lit.,” pp. 855 _et
    seq._).

  P. 50, l. 33. “_David de Pomis._” Physician, lexicographer, and
    theologian (1525–1588), translated Koheleth into Italian. Author of
    “De Medico Hebræo” (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. ix. p. 483; Karpeles,
    “Gesch. Jüd. Lit.,” pp. 880–881). There is a curious tradition that
    De Pomis was residing in Hull in 1599 (Symons, “Hull in ye Olden
    Times,” Hull, 1886, pp. 82, 83).


      CONSIDERATIONS UPON THE POINT OF THE CONVERSION OF THE JEWES

  Pp. 57–72. This Appendix is, as will be seen, by the English
    translator, Moses Wall. It does not appear in the first edition, and
    it is printed here as throwing light on the motives of the English
    supporters of Menasseh ben Israel.

  P. 67, l. 21. “_E. S._” Sir Edward Spenser, M.P. for Middlesex. See
    Introduction, p. xxvii.

  P. 68, l. 36. “_Did Mr. Broughton gaine upon a learned Rabbi._” See
    Broughton, “Ovr Lordes Famile” (Amst., 1608), and “A Reqvire of
    Agreement” (1611).


                          THE HUMBLE ADDRESSES

                              (pp. 73–103)


                          BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

For the origin of this tract, and the probable date and circumstances of
its preparation, see Introduction, pp. xxxviii-xxxix.

There are two editions, neither of which bears any imprint or date. Both
are 4to, but one has 26 pp. and the other 23 pp. It is difficult to say
whether, and which, one of these two versions is a revision of the
other, as the only difference between them is that the following
sentence is added at the end of the 23 pp. text: “Which is the close of
Rabbi Menesse Ben-Israel, a Divine, and Doctor in Physick in the Strand
over against the New-Exchange in London.” The British Museum copy of
this edition is dated in MS. “Novemb. 5th (London), 1655.” This edition
must have been printed after Menasseh’s arrival in London, and it is
probable that the other is the _Libellus Anglicus_ of which he speaks in
his letter to Felgenhauer in February 1655, and which, consequently, we
may assume was printed in Amsterdam.

The latter was reprinted in Melbourne in 1868, with an introduction by
the late Rev. A. F. Ornstien:—

“To / His Highnesse / the / Lord Protector / of the / Commonwealth of /
England, Scotland and Ireland / the Humble Addresses / of / Menasseh Ben
Israel, a Divine, and / Doctor of Physic, in behalfe / of the Jewish
Nation / 1655. / Reprinted by H. T. Dwight, / Bookseller and Publisher,
Bourke Street East, Melbourne, / 1868.”

English reprints of the 23 pp. text have been published in the _Jewish
Chronicle_, Nov.-Dec. 1859, and in Kayserling’s “Life of Menasseh ben
Israel,” with annotations in 1877 (_Miscellany of Hebrew Literature_,
Second Series, pp. 35–63). According to Barbosa Machado (“Biblioteca
Lusitana,” vol. iii. p. 457) a Spanish translation was published in
London simultaneously with the first English edition. Its title is given
as follows:—

“Las Humildes suplicaciones En nombre de la Nacion de los Judios a su
Alteza el Señor Protector Oliver Cromwell de la Republica de Inglaterra,
Scocia, y Yrlandia. Traduzido del Original Ingles. En Londres, 1655.”

A copy of this translation in MS. existed in the library of Isaac da
Costa of Amsterdam (_Misc. Heb. Lit._, ii. p. 84). Kayserling first
translated the tract into German, and published it in his “Menasse ben
Israel, sein Leben und Wirken” (Berlin, 1861).

A very large number of the historical references in this tract are taken
without acknowledgment from Imanuel Aboab’s “Nomologia” (Amst., 1629)
and Daniel Levy de Barrios’s “Historia Universal Judayca.” Kayserling
has given many of the original passages in his notes to his “Life of
Menasseh ben Israel” (_Misc. Heb. Lit._, Series II.).


                         TO HIS HIGHNESSE, &c.

  P. 77, l. 9. “_The Ambassadors of England._” The St. John Mission (see
    Introduction, pp. xxx-xxxi, and _Vindiciæ_, p. 111).

  P. 81, l. 19. “_Merchandizing is ... the proper profession of the
    Nation of the Jews._” In so far as this implies that the Jews have
    an inborn genius for commerce this is a vulgar error (see Loeb, “Le
    Juif de l’Histoire et le Juif de la Legende,” pp. 7–14).

  P. 85, l. 7. “_These in India in Cochin._” See note, _supra_, pp.
    159–160.

  P. 85, l. 21. “_In the Turkish Empire._” See Nicolas de Nicolay,
    “Navigations, Peregrinations et Voyages faicts en la Turquie,”
    Anvers, 1576, pp. 243 _et seq._

  P. 86, l. 20. “_In this estate some of the Jews have grown to great
    fortunes._” The Jewish notabilities referred to in this paragraph
    are also mentioned in the “Hope of Israel.” See note, _supra_, p.
    159.

  P. 87, l. 6. “_Isaac Iecells._” Jessel or Joesel is a diminutive of
    Joseph. The person referred to is probably Asher ben Joseph of
    Cracow (see Steinschneider, “Bibl. Bodl.,” p. 751).

  P. 87, l. 9. “_The Cosaques in the late warres._” The rising of
    Chmielnicki, 1648–1649. (Graetz, “Geschichte,” vol. x. pp. 52–82.)

  P. 87, ll. 22 et seq. The references to Jewish families in this
    paragraph are taken from Aboab and De Barrios. See notes 201–204 to
    Kayserling’s “Menasseh ben Israel” (_Misc. Heb. Lit._, ii. p. 88).

  P. 88, l. 17. “_Seignor Moseh Palache._” See De Castro, “Keur Van
    Graafsteenen,” p. 93; “Cal. State Papers, Dom.,” 1654, p. 91. On the
    Jews of Morocco, see _Jew. Quart. Rev._, vol. iv. pp. 369 _et seq._

  P. 89, l. 5. “_Sir Duarte Nunes a’ Acosta._” See Da Costa, “Adellijke
    Geslachten onder de Israelieten.”

  P. 89, l. 8. “_Emanuel Boccaro Rosales._” See p. lxxx (Menasseh’s
    letter to Felgenhauer); Kayserling, “Sephardim,” p. 209; “Biblioteca
    Española-Portugueza-Judaica,” pp. 95–96.

  P. 90, l. 16. “_As the Chronicles do declare._” This paragraph is
    almost literally translated from Aboab’s “Nomologia,” p. 290. The
    story does not appear in the earlier Jewish chronicles, such as
    _Schevet Jehuda_, _Emek Habacha_, and _Zemach David_, although the
    events of the reign of Pedro the Cruel and Don Enrique so far as
    they affect the Jew are fully dealt with in them. The “Chronicle”
    referred to by Menasseh is probably that of Pedro Lopez d’Ayala,
    which is the original authority for the story.

  P. 91, l. 27. “_Don Isaac Abarbanel._” See note, _supra_, p. 154.

  P. 92, l. 1. “_They everywhere are used to pray._” See Singer, “The
    Earliest Jewish Prayers for the Sovereign” (_Jewish Chronicle_, Feb.
    22, 1901).

  P. 92, l. 18. “_He that giveth salvation unto Kings._” This is the
    first English translation of the Prayer for the Sovereign. See
    Singer, preceding note.

  P. 93, l. 3. “_R. Simon Ben-Iochai in his excellent book called
    Zoar._” See note, _supra_, p. 158.

  P. 93, l. 26. “_One famous lawyer in Rome, and Osorius._” The whole of
    this, and the following paragraphs relating to the expulsion from
    Spain, is taken from Aboab’s “Nomologia.” Osorius (Hieronymo Osorio,
    1506–1580) was author of a history of the reign of King Emanuel,
    which was translated into English by Gibbs (Lond., 1752). See notes
    to Kayserling’s “Menasseh” for parallel passages from Aboab.

  P. 99, l. 22. “_As Vasquo saith._” For Vasquo read Usque. Menasseh is
    quoting from the “Consolacam as Tribvlacoens de Ysrael,” by Samuel
    Usque (Ferrara, 1552), see pp. 198–200. Samuel Usque was one of
    three brothers, all distinguished Marranos. He fled from the
    Portuguese Inquisition and settled at Ferrara, whence he emigrated
    to the Holy Land. He was a protégé of Donna Gracia Nasi (see Note on
    “Don Josephus Nassi,” _supra_, p. 159; also Kayserling, “Jüdischen
    Frauen,” pp. 80–86).

  P. 100, l. 5. The narrative as pirated from Aboab’s “Nomologia” ends
    here. For fuller details of the Portuguese persecutions, see
    Kayserling, “Juden in Portugal,” pp. 120 _et seq._

  P. 101, l. 17. “_As for killing of the young children of Christians._”
    See _infra_, notes on “Vindiciæ Judæorum,” pp. 165–167.

  P. 102, l. 9. “_In Araguza_” = Ragusa. For a fuller version of this
    story see _infra_, “Vindiciæ Judæorum,” pp. 116–117.

  P. 102, l. 20. “_As for the third point._” Menasseh himself was
    largely responsible for the charge of proselytising, inasmuch as in
    the “Hope of Israel” (_supra_, p. 47) he had boasted of the converts
    made by the Jews in Spain. There can be no doubt that these
    conversions were very numerous, but they were probably due in a
    larger measure to the oppressive policy of the Inquisition than to
    any active proselytising on the part of the Jews.

  P. 103, l. 33. “_In the Strand._” For a full discussion of the place
    of Menasseh’s abode while in London, see _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._,
    vol. iii. pp. 144 _et seq._


                            VINDICÆ JUDÆORUM

                             (pp. 105–147)


                          BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

For the origin of this tract see Introduction, pp. lxii-lxiv.

It has often been reprinted and translated, especially on occasions of
Jewish persecution. In 1708 it reappeared in the second volume of “The
Phœnix; or a Revival of Scarce and Valuable Pieces.” In 1743 it was
reprinted as an independent pamphlet (Lond., 8vo, pp. 67). Ninety-five
years later it was again reprinted by M. Samuels in the prolegomena to
his translation of Moses Mendelssohn’s “Jerusalem” (Lond., 1838, vol. i.
pp. 1–73), together with a translation of Mendelssohn’s introduction to
the German edition (pp. 77–116).

On the Continent it was first published in 1782 in connection with the
Mendelssohnian movement for Jewish emancipation, which was participated
in by Lessing and Dohm. The fact that it should have been considered by
Moses Mendelssohn worthy to stand by the side of Lessing’s _Nathan der
Weise_ is a striking tribute to its merits. The Mendelssohnian issue is
more famous than the original English edition, for in its German form
the work became a classic of national Jewish controversy, whereas in
English it was only associated with the local history of the British
Jews. The following is the full title of the German edition (pp. lii,
64, sm. 8vo):—

Manasseh Ben Israel / Rettung der Juden / Aus dem Englischen übersetzt /
Nebst einer Vorrede / von / Moses Mendelssohn./ Als ein Anhang / zu des
/ Hrn. Kriegsraths Dohm / Abhandlung: / Ueber / die bürgerliche
Verbesserung / der Juden./ Mit Königl. Preussischer allergnädigster
Freyheit./ Berlin und Stettin / bey Friedrich Nicolai / 1782.

This translation is said to have been made by Dr. Herz, the husband of
the famous Henrietta Herz (Kayserling, “Moses Mendelssohn sein Leben und
seine Werke,” p. 354), but it was probably done by his wife, who knew
English so well that during her widowhood she was engaged to teach it to
the daughter of the Duchess of Courland. (See “Life” by Fürst, also
Jennings’s “Rahel,” pp. 19 _et seq._) The introduction supplied by Moses
Mendelssohn fills fifty-two pages, and is as famous as the _Vindiciæ_
itself.

Besides being reprinted in Mendelssohn’s collected works, the German
edition of the _Vindiciæ_ was republished in 1882, in connection with
the Anti-Semitic agitation, under the title “Gegen die Verleumder,” and
again in 1890.

The following editions have also appeared:—

 1813. Hebrew by Bloch (Vienna).

 1818. Hebrew with a preface by Moses Kunitz (Wilna).

 1837. Polish by J. Tugenhold (Warsaw).

 1842. French by Carmoly (Brussels, _Revue Orientale_, ii. pp. 491 _et
         seq._).

 1883. Italian by Nahmias (Florence).


                           THE FIRST SECTION

  P. 108, l. 11. “_The Jews are wont to celebrate the feast of
    unleavened bread, fermenting it with the blood of some Christians._”
    This accusation, now known as the Blood Accusation, has been for
    many centuries the favourite superstition of the Jew-haters. It was
    revived by Prynne and Ross during Menasseh’s sojourn in London.
    During the residence of the Jews in England previously to 1290, it
    played a conspicuous part in their persecution. (See Joseph Jacobs’
    “Little St. Hugh of Lincoln,” _Jew. Hist. Soc. Trans._, vol. i.,
    especially pp. 92–99. “The Blood Accusation, its origin and
    occurrence in the Middle Ages,” reprinted from the _Jewish
    Chronicle_, 1883.) There is a very voluminous literature of the
    Blood Accusation (see especially Zunz’s “Damaskus, ein Wort zur
    Abwehr,” Berlin, 1859), but it has not hitherto been noticed that
    during the period the Jews were banished from England (1290–1655)
    the superstition continued to haunt the public mind. We have a
    curious instance of it in 1577. When John Foxe, the martyrologist,
    baptized a Moorish Jew named Nathaniel Menda, on April 1 of that
    year, at All Hallows, Lombard Street, he adopted the Blood
    Accusation in the address he delivered to celebrate the occasion.
    “Moreover, if he (Abraham) had seene your unappeaceable disorder
    without all remorse of mercy in persecuting his (Jesus’s) disciples;
    your intolerable scorpionlike savageness, so furiously boyling
    against the innocent infants of the Christian Gentiles: ... would he
    ever accompted you for his sonnes.” To which the printer’s gloss
    runs thus: “Christen men’s children here in Englande crucified by
    the Jewes, Anno 1189 and Anno 1141 at Norwiche, &c.” (John Foxe, “A
    Sermon at the Christening of a certaine Iew at London,” London,
    1578; p. E. iii.) This sermon, originally delivered in Latin, was
    translated into English and published _in extenso_, together with
    the confession of Nathaniel Menda, in 1578. It was dedicated to Sir
    Francis Walsingham, Principal Secretary of State to Queen Elizabeth.

  Thomas Calvert, “Minister of the Word at York,” was the next to lend
    his name to the superstition, and to give vigorous expression to it
    in his “Diatraba of the Jews’ Estate.” This was a preface to “The
    Blessed Jew of Marocco; or A Blackmoor made White, by Rabbi Samuel,
    a Jew turned Christian; written first in the Arabick, after
    translated into Latin, and now Englished” (York, 1648. The British
    Museum copy is dated in MS. “July 25, 1649.”) His exact words are as
    follows:—

  “So much are they (the Jews) bent to shed the blood of Christians,
    that they say a Jew needs no repentance for murdering a Christian;
    and they add to that sinne to make it sweet and delectable that hee
    who doth it, it is as if he had offered a _Corban_ to the Lord,
    hereby making the abominable sin an acceptable sacrifice. But beyond
    all these they have a bloody thirst after the blood of Christians.
    In France and many kingdoms they have used yearly to steale a
    Christian boy and to crucifie him, fastning him to a crosse, giving
    him gall and vinegar, and running him in the end thorow with a
    spear, to rub their memories afresh into sweet thoughts of their
    crucifying Christ, the more to harden themselves against Christ and
    to shew their curst hatred to all Christians” (pp. 18–19).

  John Sadler stands out conspicuously for dissociating himself from
    this baseless prejudice. When he wrote his “Rights of the Kingdom,”
    in 1649, he summed up the matter in a happy and pithy manner: “Wee
    say, they (the Jews) crucified a child, or more. They doe deny it:
    and we prove it not” (p. 74). Undaunted by Sadler’s championship of
    the Jews, James Howell followed Calvert, and in the Epistle
    Dedicatory to his pirated edition of Morvyn’s translation of Joseph
    ben Gorion, “The wonderful and deplorable history of the latter
    times of the Jews” (London [June 2], 1652), he thus insinuated the
    truth of the charge:—

  “The first Christian Prince that expelled the Jews out of his
    territories, was that heroik King, our Edward the First, who was
    such a sore scourge also to the Scots; and it is thought divers
    families of those banished Jews fled then to Scotland, where they
    have propagated since in great numbers, witness the aversion that
    nation hath above others to hog’s flesh. Nor was this extermination
    for their Religion, but for their notorious crimes, as poysoning of
    wells, counterfeiting of coines, falsifying of seales, and
    _crucifying of Christian children_, with other villanies.”

  Sadler was not the only English contemporary of Menasseh ben Israel
    who threw doubt on the Blood Accusation. Prynne himself relates in
    the preface to his “Demurrer” that he met Mr. Nye by the garden wall
    at Whitehall, when he was on his way to the Conference on the Jewish
    Question. “I told him,” writes Prynne, “the Jews had been formerly
    clippers and forgers of money, _and had crucified three or four
    children in England at least_, which were principal causes of their
    banishment, to which he replied, that the crucifying of children was
    not fully charged on them by our historians, and would easily be
    wiped off.” (Preface, p. 4.)

  It is curious that, as Menasseh himself points out, the Jews were not
    alone at this period as sufferers from the Blood Accusation.
    (“Humble Addresses,” p. 21.) Apart from the instance quoted by
    Menasseh, a similar charge was levelled at the Quakers, who were
    accused of the ritual murder of women. An illustrated tract on the
    subject will be found in _Historia Fanaticorum_. (See “Historia von
    den Wider-Tauffern,” Cöthen, 1701.)

  The Blood Accusation did not again make a conspicuous appearance in
    Anglo-Jewish history, but it is not improbable that the Damascus
    trials in 1840 produced a serious effect in retarding the progress
    of the struggle for emancipation. On the Continent, and in the
    Levant, it has frequently reappeared during the last thirty years.

  P. 109, l. 8. “In Iad a Razaka.” Misprint for _Yad Hachazaka_ (“The
    Strong Hand”), also called _Mishneh Torah_, an exposition of Jewish
    law by Moses Maimonides, written (in Hebrew) 1170–1180.

  P. 111, l. 7. “_A particular blessing of the Prince or Magistrate._”
    See note, _supra_, p. 163.

  P. 112, l. 16. “_And every day the Jewes mainly strike._” The belief
    that Jews habitually desecrated the sacramental wafer runs parallel
    with the Blood Accusation. A curious echo of it was heard in 1822,
    and the published account of the case was illustrated by George
    Cruikshank (“The Miraculous Host tortured by the Jews,” Lond.,
    1822).

  P. 114, l. 4. “_Wherefore I swear._” This oath is famous in Jewish
    history, and has been over and over again quoted and reiterated on
    occasions of the revival of the Blood Accusation (see _e.g._ _Trans.
    Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. i. p. 38).

  P. 114, l. 20. “_John Hoornbeek in that book which he lately writ._”
    The work referred to is _De Convertendis Judæis_, 1655.

  P. 115, l. 28. “_In my continuation of Flavius Josephus._” In the
    “Hope of Israel” (_supra_, p. 7), Menasseh announced his intention
    of writing this work. From this passage it seems that he had now
    completed it, and that he had the MS. with him in London. It was
    never printed, as none of it has survived. It is curious that
    Menasseh does not mention it among his “Books ready for the Presse,”
    of which he gave a list at the end of the _Vindiciæ_ (see p. 147).

  P. 116, l. 13. “_One Isaac Jeshurun._” An account of his persecution
    was written in Hebrew by Aaron de David Cohen of Ragusa, and
    translated into Spanish under the title, _Memorable relacion de
    Yshac Jesurun_. The work is in MS.; a copy was in the Almanzi
    Library.

  P. 118, l. 30. “_That our nation had purchased S. Paul’s Church._” See
    Introduction, p. xli.

  P. 118, l. 34. “_A fabulous narrative._” Brett, “A Narrative of the
    Proceedings of a Great Councel of Jews assembled on the plain of
    Ageda” (Lond., 1655; reprinted in “The Phœnix,” 1707, the “Harleian
    Miscellany,” vol i., 1813, and in pamphlet form by Longmans & Co.,
    1876).

  P. 121, l. 27. “_The book called Scebet Iehuda_,” ‏ספר שבת יהודה‎, by
    Solomon Aben Verga, a Jewish chronicle of the sixteenth century. See
    German translation by Wiener (Hanover, 1856). The story related by
    Menasseh ben Israel will be found on pp. 77–78. It is not told of a
    “King of Portugal,” but of a King of Spain.

  P. 121, l. 32. “_Before one of the Popes, at a full Councell._” For
    Papal Bulls on the Blood Accusation see “Die Blutbeschuldigung gegen
    die Juden von Christlicher Seite beurtheilt,” Zweite Auflage
    (Vienna, 1883). Strack’s “Blutaberglaube” (several editions) is the
    classical work on the subject.


                           THE SECOND SECTION

  P. 124, l. 16. “_The Israelites hold._” This paragraph is a summary of
    the Thirteen Articles of Faith first drawn up by Moses Maimonides in
    1168, and now incorporated in the Synagogue liturgy. Menasseh’s
    summary, though admirably succinct, is not altogether perfect, and
    was apparently drafted with a view to the susceptibilities of the
    English Conversionists. A full translation of the thirteen creeds
    had, however, already appeared in England (see Chilmead’s
    translation of Leo Modena’s “The History of the Rites, Customes, and
    Manner of Life of the Present Jews,” Lond., 1650, pp. 246–249).

  P. 124, l. 28. “_A French book which he calleth the Rappel of the
    Jewes_,” Iaac la Peyrère “Rappel des Juifs.”


                           THE THIRD SECTION

The subject matter of this section, the alleged cursing of Gentiles, is,
like the Blood Accusation, an obstinate delusion of the anti-Semites. It
is the burden of a very voluminous literature. See, among recent
publications, Jellinek, “Der Talmudjude” (Vienna, 1882); Daab, “Der
Thalmud” (Leipzig, 1883); Hirsch, “Über die Beziehung des Talmuds zum
Judenthum” (Frankfort, 1884); and Hoffmann, “Der Schulchan Aruch und die
Rabbinen über das Verhältniss der Juden zu Andersgläubigen” (Berlin,
1885).

  P. 127, l. 31. “_Prayers for Kings and Princes._” See note, _supra_,
    p. 163.

  P. 128, l. 6. “_The form of prayer in the book entitled The Humble
    Addresses_,” _supra_, p. 92.

  P. 133, l. 25. “_Wise and vertuous Lady Beruria._” The most famous of
    the women mentioned in the Talmud. She was the daughter of Rabbi
    Chanina ben Tradjon, and wife of Rabbi Meir (Kayserling, “Jüdischen
    Frauen,” pp. 120–124).

  P. 133, l. 26. “_R. Meir._” A distinguished pupil of the great Rabbi
    Akiba, and one of the most famous of the authors of the Talmud. He
    lived in the second century (Levy, “Un Tanah,” Paris, 1883;
    Blumenthal, “Rabbi Meir,” Frankfurt, 1888).


                           THE FOURTH SECTION

  P. 134, l. 14. “_Buxtorphius._” Johann Buxtorf the Elder (1564–1629),
    the greatest Christian Hebraist of his day. Professor of Hebrew at
    Basle.

  P. 136, l. 22. “_R. David Gawz._” David Gans (1541–1631), a Jewish
    chronicler, mathematician, and astronomer, author of _Zemach David_.
    He lived in Prague, and was a friend of Tycho Brahe and Keppler
    (Klemperer, “David Gans’s Chronikartige Weltgeschichte,” Prague,
    1890).

  P. 136, l. 25. “_Antonius Margarita._” His name was Aaron Margalita.
    He was an ignorant Polish Jew, who became converted to Christianity
    and placed his services at the disposal of the Jew-haters (Graetz,
    “Geschichte,” vol. x. pp. 313–314).


                           THE FIFTH SECTION

  P. 137, l. 18. “_I have held friendship with many great men._”
    Menasseh’s circle of Christian friends was large and distinguished.
    His intimacy with Rembrandt has already been referred to (_supra_,
    pp. 149–150). Among his other friends were Hugo Grotius, the learned
    family of Vossius, Episcopius, Vorstius, Meursius, Cunæus, Blondel,
    Chr. Arnold, Bochart, Huet, Sobierre, Felgenhauer, Frankenberg,
    Mochinger, and Caspar Barlæus.

  P. 137, l. 23. “_Many verses in my commendations._” The poem by
    Barlæus here referred to was prefixed to Menasseh’s treatise “De
    Creatione” (Amsterdam, 1636), together with congratulatory sonnets
    by Himanuel Nehamias, Mosseh Pinto, Jona Abravanel, and Daniel
    Abravanel. It ran as follows:—

                           EPIGRAMMA,
                               IN
                           PROBLEMATA
                   _Clarissimi viri_ Manassis Ben-Israel,
                           DE CREATIONE.

           Qvæ cœlos terrasq́; manus, spatiosaq́; Nerei
             Æquora, & immẽsas, quas habet orbis opes,
           Condiderit, mersuniq́; alta caligine mundum
             Iusserit imperijs ilicet esse suis:
           Disserit Isacides. Et facta ingentia pandit;
             Et nondum exhaustum contrahit arte Deum.
           Hîc atavos patresq́; suos & verba recenset,
             Sensaq́; Thalmudicæ relligiosa Scholæ.
           Vera placẽt, placet egregijs conatibus author,
             Et pietas fidei disparis ista placet.
           Cunctorum est coluisse Deum. Non unius æví,
             Non populi unius credimus, esse pium.
           Si sapimus diversa, Deo vivamus amici,
             Doctaq́; mens precio constet ubiq́; suo.
           Hæc fidei vox summa meæ est. Hæc crede _Menasse_.
             Sic ego Christiades, sic eris Abramides.

                                                     C. BARLÆVS.


                          THE SEVENTH SECTION

  P. 144, l. 37. “_Wherefore those few Jewes that were here, despairing
    of our expected successe departed hence._” This can only refer to
    Menasseh’s companions on his mission. With two exceptions all the
    Marranos in London at the time of Menasseh’s arrival remained in the
    country.

  P. 145, l. 34. “_From my study in London._” See _Trans. Jew. Hist.
    Soc._, vol. iii. pp. 144–150.



                                 INDEX


 Abarbanel, David, lxxxvi

 Abarbanel, Ephraim, lxix

 Abarbanel family, claimed descent from King David, xxxiii, 154 (notes)

 Abarbanel, Isaac, Jewish statesman, councillor to King of Spain and
    Portugal, 19, 45, 49, 91, 154 (notes), 163 (notes), cited, 122

 Abarbanel, Samuel, 49.
   (_See also_ Abravanel)

 Abel-beth-maachah, 29

 Aben Ezra, 109

 Aben Jaes, Jacob = Alvaro Mendez, 47 (_see_ Jachya, Ibn)

 Aben Karis, Rabbi Juda, 34

 Aboab, Imanuel, cited, 162, 163 (notes)

 Abravanel, Daniel, 170 (notes)

 Abravanel, Jona, 170 (notes)

 Abravanela, Bienvenida = Benuenida, 49, 159 (notes)

 Abyssinia, Falashas of, 156 (notes)

 Abyssins, country of the, 40;
   kingdom of the, 42

 Acosta, cited, 54

 Acosta, Sir Duarte Nunes d’, 89, 163 (notes)

 Acosta, Josephus, 18

 Acosta, P., cited, 22

 Acuzainitenses, 22

 Adler, Rev. Dr. H., xxiii (cited), _n._, xxvii, _n._

 Adler, Marcus, 155 (notes)

 Admiralty Commissioners, lxv

 Africa, 6, 21, 44, 113;
   battle in, 51;
   North-West, 156 (notes)

 Agathais, cited, 32

 Ageda, 118;
   Council of Jews assembled on the Plain of, 167 (notes)

 Agrippa, 129, 130, 131;
   cities of King, 36

 Agrippa’s Oration, 35

 Akiba, Rabbi, 169 (notes)

 Alacron, Lord Lope de Veray, turned Jew, was burnt by Inquisition, 47

 Alciat, 96

 Alexander the Great, 128, 130, 140, 141

 Alexandria, 19, 44;
   people of, accuse Jews of being thieves, 40

 Alholu, D. Abraham, 49, 86, 159 (notes)

 Allen, Hannah, 151

 Almadiæ, _see_ Ethiopian ships, 34

 Alonsius, son of John II., 51

 Alonsus, P., cited, 55

 Alphonso II., Duke of Ferrara, 88

 Alphonso V., of Portugal, 154 (notes)

 Alphonso the Wise, King of Spain, declares Blood Accusation false, 102;
   gave liberty to Jews to dwell in his country, 121

 Atlas, Gabriel de Rivas, 150 (notes)

 Alva, Duke of, 39

 Alvalensi, Samuel, 91

 Amarat, Sultan, 85

 Amarkela, R. Joseph, 33

 America, lxxviii, 18, 20, 23, 27, 42, 44, 55, 56;
   first inhabitants of, 54;
   Jews in, 152 (notes), 153 (notes);
   people of, 6;
   South, xxiv;
   Synagogues in, 52;
   “Ten Tribes of Israel in, Account of,” 52 (notes);
   Williams founds community in, xix

 American Indians, xxiv

 Americans, 41;
   origin of, 152 (notes)

 Americus, 17

 Amon, Moses, physician and translator of Pentateuch into Persian and
    Arabian, 113, 135, 160 (notes)

 Amorites, 57

 Amsterdam, xiii, xxxiii, xxxvi, lxviii, lxxi, lxxvii, lxxviii, 88, 109,
    117, 120, 150 (notes), 161 (notes);
   English converts to Judaism, xxi;
   Jews of, lxxiii;
   Jewish cemetery of, 160 (notes);
   Jewish merchants of, xxx, xxxi;
   Magistrates of, xvii, 144;
   Marrano congregations, xiv;
   Menasseh becomes acquainted with Dury, xxiv;
   Menasseh’s printing office at, xxxvii _n._;
   Montezinos relates his story before Synagogue, xxv (_see_ Mussaphia),
      159 (notes);
   Rabbinate at, xxxii;
   Separatists, xviii, xix;
   “Spes Israelis,” xxii;
   Synagogue at, xxv;
   visited by Lord St. John, iii

 Amurat, Sultan, 47, 86

 “An Apologie for the Honourable Nation of Jews,” 103

 Anaucus, 49, 159 (notes)

 Ancona, 96, 98

 Andalusia (Andaluzia), xii, xxxiii, 93

 Andes of Cusco, 24

 Andro, Earl of, Joseph Nasino, 86

 Anian, 31;
   kingdom of, 20, 21;
   Sea of the Strait of, 55;
   Strait of, 29, 53, 55

 Anjou, Henry of, elected King of Poland, 159 (notes)

 Anti-Jewish Petition, lxxi, lxxii

 Anti-Semitic pamphleteers, lvii

 Anti-Semites, xlii, lx, lxii, lxv, lxxiv

 Antipater, 90

 Antioch, 40;
   Daphne of, 35

 Antiochus, 62, 76, 119, 130;
   the end of, 51

 Antonius, Marcus, 129

 Antwerp, Hebrew bankers of, xv;
   Marrano Jews of, xiv

 Apion, 120, 129, 130, 131, 135;
   and the Blood Accusation, 119

 “Apologia Contra Gentes,” 120

 Apostolical Roman Church, xxxiv

 Apostolical Roman Seat, 98

 Appeal to the English nation, xxxvii

 Aquebah, Rabbi, one of the compilers of the Mishna, 36, 157 (notes)
    (_see_ Akiba)

 Aquibah, Rabbi, 48 (_see_ Aquebah)

 Aquirre, killed Petrus d’Orsna, 24;
   killed at Margareta, 25

 Arabians, 7;
   derivation of Sabbathion, 37

 Aragon, xiii

 Aragon, Catherine of, xv

 Araguza = Ragusa, 102, 116, 164 (notes)

 “Araucana, La,” 155 (notes)

 Arca, 36, 38

 Aristæus = Aristeas, cited, 124, 130

 Armada, xv

 Arnebet, wife of Ptolomy, 127

 Arnold, Chr., 169 (notes)

 Arsareth, 20

 Artaxerxes, 120

 Aschkenazi, Rabbi Solomon ben Nathan = Don Selomo Rophe, 49, 159
    (notes)

 Asher, A., cited, 158 (notes)

 Asia, 6, 21, 35, 41, 44, 54, 55, 82, 113, 124;
   East, 32;
   Jews in, 50, 129;
   Kings of, 130

 “Asirim Rabba” = Shir Ha-Shirim Rabba, 36, 157 (notes)

 Asor, Tribe of, 32

 Assembly at Whitehall, 144

 Assumean, Diogo d’ = Diogo da Asunçao, turned Jew, burnt by
    Inquisition, 47, 158 (notes)

 Assyria, lxxviii, 29, 36, 40, 42, 44, 45, 53;
   Benhadad of, 111;
   King of, 37 (_see_ Pul, 29)

 Astrologer of Prague (_see_ Jacobus Verus), 28

 Asuay, 153 (notes)

 Asunçao, Diogo da (_see_ Assumean)

 Atagualpa, 22

 Athens, 55

 Athenians, 97

 Atlantic Islands, 6

 Atlantis, 54

 Attica, inundation of, 55

 Augusta, Julia, wife of Augustus Cæsar, 130

 Augustine, cited, 103, 130 (_see_ Austin)

 Augustinianus, Alonsus, 21

 Augustus Cæsar, 129, 130

 Auns, 32

 Austin, cited, 56

 Austine the Monk, 68

 Austria, 115

 Ayacucho = Guamanga, 155 (notes)

 Ayala, Pedro Lopez d’, 163 (notes)

 Azahel, Rabbi Jacob ben, xxxvii _n._

 Azores, 21


 “Babli, The,” Talmud, 157 (notes)

 Babylon, 35, 39, 40, 42, 64, 92;
   captivity of, 41, 43, 93;
   redemption from, 42;
   rivers of, 36

 Babylonian Talmud, cited, 36, 43, 157 (notes)

 Bagdad, 85

 Bahia Honda = Port Honda = Puerto de Santa Crus, 153 (notes)

 Bairos, Johannes de, 38

 Bajaseth, Bajazet, Sultan, 50, 97

 Baker, Richard, lxxi _n._

 Balaam, 46

 Balboa, Basco Nunez de, 19

 Balmas, R. Abraham de, 50, 160 (notes)

 Baltasar, 129

 “Bamibar Raba” = Bamidbar Rabba, 36, 157 (notes)

 Bancroft, cited, 152 (notes)

 Banishments from England, France, Spain, 46

 Baptist, John the, 30

 Baptists, xviii

 Bar Cochba, the Pseudo-Messiah, 157 (notes)

 Bara, Jan, 157 (notes)

 Barbadoes, xxxi, xxxvii

 Barbary, 49;
   Kingdom of, 88

 Barcelona, Disputation of Grundensis at, 157 (notes)

 Barleus, Gaspar, 137 = Barlæus, Caspar, 169 (notes)

 Barlovent, Isle of, 18;
   Islands of, 54

 Barlow, cited, l. liv

 Barrios, Daniel Levy de, cited, 162, 163 (notes)

 Baruch, cited, 129

 Basle, 169 (notes)

 Bathsebah, Jacob = Jacob Basevi Schmieles, received title von
    Treuenburg, 50, 160 (notes)

 Batueca, 39

 Bazalel, 75

 Beleeving Judas, 47 (_see_ Alacron)

 Belmonte, Ishak, 150 (notes)

 Benhadad, King of Assyria, 111

 Ben Jaefe, D., 49

 Benjamin, tribe of, 7, 36, 39, 40, 52, 66, 70, 85

 Benjamin, R., cited, 32

 Benjamin of Tudela, 156 (notes)

 Benn, William, xlviii

 Benuenida, wife of Samuel Abarbanel, 49, 159

 “Beresit Rabba,” 36, 157 (notes)

 Bergarensis, Caspar, 25

 Berkshire, Earl of, lxxiv

 Bermuda Company, xlvii

 Beruria, daughter of Rabbi Chanina ben Tradjon, wife of Rabbi Meir,
    133, 169 (notes)

 Bethar, 157 (notes)

 Bialloblotzky, cited, 155 (notes)

 “Bibliotheca Rabbinica,” 134, 147

 Biddle, xl

 Blake, xl

 Blood Accusation, 108, 165 (notes), 166, 167 (notes);
   the Pope declared false, in full Council, 102

 “Bloudy Tenent of Persecution,” xix

 Blumenthal, cited, 169 (notes)

 Bochardus, Samuel, 40

 Bochart, 169 (notes)

 Bodleian Library, xli

 Bohemian Jews, lxx

 Bomberg, Daniel, famous Venetian printer, 160 (notes)

 Bondel, 169 (notes)

 Bondi, Abraham de, Ambassador for Alphonso II., 88

 Bordeaux, lxxi

 Borja, St. Franciscus de, 25

 Boterus, 33;
   cited, 34, 49

 Boyle, Robert, l _n._

 Bozara, 48

 Bozius, 54

 Brahe, Tycho, 169 (notes)

 Brasil, Seignory of, 91

 Brazil, xxxiii, xxxvii;
   Negroes of, 101

 Brazilians, 26

 Brerewood, Edw., 152 (notes)

 Breslau, Mart of, 38

 Bridge, William, xlviii

 Brightman, 58

 Brito, Abraham Israel de, lxxxvi

 Brittaines of Bangor, 68

 Broughton, 68;
   cited, 161 (notes)

 Bruges, lxviii, lxxiii

 Bulkeley, l

 Bulls on the Blood Accusation, Papal, 168 (notes)

 Burchmannus, Otto, Ambassador to Persia, 49, 50

 Burgos, Jews of, 90

 Busher, Leonard, xix, xxi;
   “Religious Peace,” xviii

 Buxtorfius = Buxtorphius, 134, 136, 157, 169 (notes)


 Cabala, The, 33

 Caceres, Jahocob de = Simon de Caceres, xxxvi, xxxvii, lxvii, lxxiii,
    lxxxvi

 Cadiz, xiv, lxxi

 Cæsar, Augustus, 129, 130

 Cæsar, Julius, 90

 Cæsarensis, Eusebius, cited, 131

 Caius, Emperor, 129, 131

 Callao = Collai, 155 (notes)

 “Calling of the Jewes, The,” xxi

 Calvert, Thomas, 166 (notes)

 Calvinists, xviii

 Cambridge University, xlviii

 Canaan, 57

 Canaanites, 6, 54

 Cantipratensis, Thomas, cited, 115

 Captivity of Babylon, 41, 43;
   First, 64

 Captivity, Roman, 93

 Caracas = Garracas, 155 (notes)

 Caribbean Sea, 154 (notes)

 Carlyle, xxix _n._, lxiv _n._

 Carmoly, 156 (notes);
   cited, 159 (notes)

 Carter, John, xlviii

 Carthage, 19

 Carthaginians, 6, 18, 97

 Carthegenia = Cartagena, 12, 154 (notes)

 Cartwright, Ebenezer, xx

 Cartwright, Johanna, xx

 Cartwright Petition, xxi

 Carvajal, Antonio Fernandez = Abraham Israel Carvajal, xxxv, lxii,
    lxvii, lxxiii, lxxxvi

 Carybes Indians, 27

 Caryll, John, xlviii, l.

 Caspian Sea, 38, 40, 152 (notes)

 Cassel, D. Paulus, 153 (notes), xliii

 Cassius, Dion, cited, 55

 Castellanus, Franciscus, 11 _n._

 Castile, 91, 93, 94, 97, 138

 Castoel, David, 85

 Castoel, Samuel, 85

 Castro, Balthasar Orobio de, xiii

 Castro, de, xv _n._, xxi, 151;
   cited, 163 (notes)

 Castro, Henriques de, cited, 159 (notes)

 Catherine of Aragon, xv

 Cazici, 16;
   Hebrew, 17

 Cazicus, Francis, 11 _n._, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 153 (notes)

 Chachapoyas, Province of, 24

 Chaldy Paraphrase, 43;
   Targum (_q.v._)

 Chalossi taken to Spain by de Quiros and died there, 26

 Chamfanfu, 29

 Chanan, 23

 Chanina ben Tradjon, Rabbi (_see_ Beruria)

 Chanut, xli _n._

 Charles I., xx, xxiii

 Charles II., lxx;
   re-entered London, lxxi;
   under obligation to Jews, lxxiii, lxxiv

 Charles V., Emperor, 23, 33, 95, 96

 Charles, Infant, 51

 Chequiona, 30

 Chersonesus, the Golden, 19

 Chiefi, Cardinal de, 98

 Child, Sir Josiah, lxxv, lxxvi

 Chili, xxxvii

 Chiliast, 70

 Chillon, Isak Lopes, lxxxvi

 Chilmead, xlii;
   cited, 168 (notes)

 China, 20, 29, 31, 42;
   Hebrew settlements in, 155 (notes);
   Jews in, 155 (notes);
   people of, 6;
   tongue, 30

 Chineses, 30

 Chmielnicki, 162 (notes)

 Christiani, Pablo, 158 (notes)

 Christological Oath, lxvii

 Chudworth, xlvii

 Chus, 40

 Chutuytu, Lake, 21

 Cicero cited, 135

 Cieza, Petrus = Pedro Cieça de Leon, cited, 22, 155 (notes)

 Cimedro, Alfonsus, a Jesuit, 30

 Civil War, xxiii, xxiv

 Clement VII., 94, 96

 Cleopatra, 130

 Clissa, 88

 Cobham, 142

 Coccejus, Joh., 157 (notes)

 Cochin, 162;
   Jews in, 85

 Cochini, King = King of Cochin, 50, 159 (notes)

 Cœn, Rabbinus Josephus = Rabbi Joseph ben Meir the Sephardi = Cohon,
    33, 155 (notes)

 Cohen, Aaron de David, 168 (notes)

 Coimbra, Marrano Archdeacon of, xiii

 Colchester, xxi, 151 (notes)

 Collai = Callao, 21, 155 (notes)

 Collier, xliii _n._

 Colombia, Republic of, 153 (notes);
   United States of, 154 (notes)

 Columbus, Christopher, xii, 17, 158 (notes)

 Commonwealth of England, xv, xxxii, xli, 111;
   appeal to, in “Humble Addresses,” xxxviii;
   commercial interests of, xxxiii;
   end of, lxx, lxxi;
   notable gathering, xlvii;
   Scotland, Ireland, 162 (notes);
   declaration to the, 78

 “Conciliator,” 146

 Conference, Whitehall (_see_ Whitehall Conference)

 Constantinople, 49;
   Jews in, 85, 113;
   Synagogue of, 86

 Conversion of the Jews, considerations upon the point of the, 57, 161
    (notes)

 Conversionists, xl, xlii;
   English, xxii, 168 (notes)

 Copley, xliii _n._

 Copta, 91

 Cordier, Henri, 155 (notes)

 Cordilleras, xxiv, 6, 11 _n._, 25, 54, 153 157 (notes)

 Cordova, Gonsalvo de, xiv

 Coronel, Augustin, xli, lxxiii;
   knighted, lxxv

 Cortez, 17

 Cosaques killed Jews, 87

 Cosmo the Great, Duke of Florence, 97

 Costa, da, xiv _n._, xli, 163, cited (notes);
   Isaac, 162 (notes);
   Joseph, 150 (notes);
   Mendez, lxxiii

 Council of Army Officers, xx

 Council of Mechanics, xix

 Council of State, xxi, xxxiv, xxxv, xlv, xlvi, xlvii, liv, lv, lxi,
    lxv, lxvi, 157 (notes);
   “Hope of Israel” dedicated to, 3, 144;
   Menasseh’s petition sprung on, xlvi;
   received copies of “Humble Addresses,” xliv;
   receives Robles’s petition, lxiv

 Council of State’s report, lxxxiv

 Council of Trent, lxxxi

 Cracow, Jews in, 87

 Craddock, Walter, xlviii

 Crawford, xxix _n._

 Crequi, Marshal de, xiii

 Cressett, xlvii

 Cretensis, Elias = Elia del Medigo, 50, 160 (notes)

 Critia, Plato’s, 54

 Cromwell, Oliver, xvi, xx, xxxii, xxxiii, xxxv, xxxvi, xl, lxvi;
   action of, lii, lvi;
   adds members to the Conference, l;
   adherents of, xlviii;
   admits Jews as citizens of one of the colonial dependencies of Great
      Britain, xxxvii;
   assures London Marranos of his protection, lviii;
   best speech of, liii;
   brings petition before Council, xliv;
   campaign of, lxxv;
   dismisses conference, liv;
   favours Jewish question, xlv, xlix;
   gives monetary help to Menasseh, lxix;
   intentions of, lix;
   laid down programme of proceedings at Conference, xlviii;
   Menasseh’s mission to, lxxiii

 Cromwell, Henry, li, liv _n._

 Cromwell, Richard, lxxi, lxxxvii

 Cromwell’s Council issue invitation to Whitehall Conference, xlvi,
    lxxxiv;
   negotiations with Marranos, lxii

 Crouch, lii

 Cruikshank, George, 167 (notes)

 Crypto-Jews, lxv (_see_ Marranos)

 Cuba, 18, 153 (notes)

 Cunæus, 169 (notes)

 Cusco, Andes of, 24

 Customs, Commissioners of, lxi

 Cuthah, 39

 Cyprus conquered by Nassi for the Turks, 159 (notes)

 Cyrus, 40;
   decree of, 129;
   proclamation of, 64


 Daab, cited, 169 (notes)

 Daghistan, Jews of, 151 (notes)

 Dalmatia, 88

 Damascus trials, the, 167 (notes)

 Dan, tribe of, 32

 Danita, Eldad = Eldad the Danite, 33, 38, 156 (notes)

 Danites, 31

 Daphne of Antioch, 35

 Darius, 129

 Davis, Israel, cited, lxvii

 Davis Strait, 20

 “De Civetate Dei Assentos,” 130

 “De Cultu Imaginum contra Pontificios Latine,” 147

 “De disciplinis Rabbinorum,” 147

 “De divinitate legis Mosaicæ,” 147

 “De fragilitate humana,” 146

 “De Medico Hebræo,” 161 (notes)

 “De Resurrectione mortuorum libri tres,” 146

 “De Termino Vitæ,” 48, 146, 149 (notes), 159 (notes)

 Demetrius, 128, 130

 “Demurrer,” lvii

 Denmark, King of, xxxvi, 51, 84, 89

 Dethick, xlvii

 Diana, 118

 “Die Jüdischen Frauen,” 159 (notes) (_see_ Benuenida)

 Diodorus, cited, 55

 Disraeli, Coningsby, descendant of Abarbanels on mother’s side, 154
    (notes)

 Domus Conversorum, xi

 Dormido, David Abarbanel = Manuel Martinez Dormido, xxxii, xxxiii,
    xxxv, xxxvi, xxxvii, xliv, xlv, lxvii

 Dormido, Solomon, lxvii

 Dorstius, William, cited, 136

 Dort, Conference at, 68

 Dover, xiv

 Draco, 98

 Drucker, Mardochai ben Moses, 151 (notes)

 “Du Rappel des Juifs,” lxxx

 Duerus = Duero = Douro, 13, 154 (notes)

 Duretu, Claudius, cited, 50

 Dury, John, xxii, xxiv, xxv _n._, xxvi _n._, xliii _n._;
   at Cassel, xliii;
   distributes Latin edition of “Hope of Israel” among leading Puritans,
      xxvii;
   corresponds with Menasseh ben Israel, xxvi;
   received Thorowgood’s treatise, xxv, 67, 152 (notes)

 Dutch, xxx, xxxiii

 Dutch East India Company, xxx

 Dwight, H. T., 162 (notes)

 Dyke, Daniel, xlviii


 East India, 54

 East India Company, lxxv, lxxvi, 88

 East India Company, Dutch, xxx

 East Indies, 19, 20

 Ecuador, 153 (notes)

 Edom, 53, 113

 Edward I., xi, lvii, 142, 166 (notes);
   Edict of banishment of Jews, xv

 Edwards, author of “Gangræna,” xix

 Egypt, lxxviii, 40, 42, 44, 45, 49, 53, 87;
   inundations of, 55;
   Joseph in, 44;
   kings of, 90;
   pasha of, has Jewish treasurer (_see_ Alhulu), 159 (notes);
   river of, 41;
   Saladin, King of, 50

 Egyptian, 101

 Egyptius, Moses = Moses Maimonides, 45, 158 (notes)

 Ehrentheil, cited, xiii _n._

 Elah (_see_ Hosea or Hoshea), 29, 44

 Elam, 40

 “Eldad Ha-Dani,” 156 (notes)

 Eleazar, 130

 Elhazar, 49

 Eliezer, David ben, xxxvii _n._

 Eliot, John, xxiv, 152 (notes), 166

 Elisha, 64

 Elizabeth, Queen, xiv, xv, 159 (notes), 166 (notes)

 Emanuel, King of Portugal, 51, 94, 95, 97, 163 (notes);
   cruelty of, 99

 Embassies in London, xl;
   in Holland, xl

 “Emek Habacha,” 163 (notes)

 l’Empereur, Constantine, 35, 156 (notes)

 England, banishments of, 46

 Enrique, Don, 163 (notes)

 Ephraim, 41, 42, 69, 70;
   Tribe of, 43

 Epicureans, 125

 Epiphanius, 76

 Episcopius, 169 (notes)

 Epstein, cited, 156 (notes)

 Erzilla, Alonsus de = Alonzo d’Ercilla y Zuñiga, 24;
   cited, 155 (notes)

 “Esdras,” 37;
   cited, 56;
   quoted by Genebrardus, 20

 “Esperanza de Israel,” 152 (notes);
   cited, 155 (notes), 157 (notes)

 Espinosa, Michael, 150 (notes)

 Esquilache, 25

 Essex, Earl of, xiv

 l’Estrange, Sir Hamon, 152 (notes)

 Estrozi, Seignor Philip, 96

 Ethiopia, 6, 34, 40;
   Ten Tribes, 156 (notes);
   Ethiopian ships, 34 (_see_ Almadiæ)

 Eucharistical sacrifices, 130

 Euphrates, 20, 35, 39, 40, 41, 44, 56

 Euergetes, Ptolomy, 130

 Europe, 6, 21, 35, 42, 82;
   Menasseh has friendships with eminent men of, 137

 Eusebius, cited, 55

 Evelyn, John, lvi

 Everard the Leveller, xxi

 Expulsion of Jews, lvii, 154 (notes);
   from England, xi;
   from Spain, xiv, 163 (notes)

 Ezion-Geber, 19

 Ezra, Aben, cited, 109

 Ezras, 136


 Fagius, 161 (notes)

 Fairclough, Samuel, xlviii

 Fairfax, Lord, xx

 Falashas of Abyssinia, 156 (notes)

 Famian, 47

 Fano, Lord Joseph de, Marquis de Villependi, 87

 Farisol or Peretsol, Abraham = Abraham Frisol Orchotolam, author of
    “Orchat Olam,” 156 (notes) (_see_ Frisol)

 Farnambuc = Pernambuco, 25, 28, 48, 155 (notes) (_see_ Fernambuc)

 Farnesia (_see_ Paul III.), 94

 Faro, Abraham Enriques, 150 (notes)

 Felgenhauer, xxv, xxxviii, xxxix, lxxix, 161 (notes), 169 (notes)

 Felibert, Emanuel, Duke of Savoy, 97

 Ferdinand, xi, 51, 91, 93, 102, 138;
   King, 94;
   Bathsebah knighted under reign of, 160;
   of Naples, 154 (notes);
   Emperor, 160 (notes);
   of Spain, 39

 Ferdinandus, 17

 Ferrara = Ferrare = Ferraria, 87;
   Alphonso II., Duke of, 88;
   Hercules, Duke of, 34, 97, 163 (notes) (_see_ Usque)

 Fez, King of, 91

 Fifth Monarchy men, xv, xxi

 Finch, Sergeant, xxi

 Ficinus, Marcilius, cited, 54

 Firth, cited, xx _n._

 Firuz, 31

 “Flavius Josephus adversus Apionem,” 147

 Flemburgh, 109

 Florence, Duke of (_see_ Cosmo the Great), 97

 Forbes, 68

 Founders of the Protectorate, xlvii

 Foxe, John, 165 (notes);
   cited, 166 (notes)

 “Fragmenta Sacra,” 68

 France, xxix, lxii, lxxiii, lxxx, 33, 166 (notes);
   banishments of, 46;
   King of, 124;
   Philip of, 51;
   Loysia de Medici, 50

 Francis I. of France, 33

 Franciscus de Borgia, St., 25

 Franco, Abraham, 150 (notes)

 Frankenberg, Abraham, a Silesian mystic, lxxx, 149 (notes), 169 (notes)

 Frankfort, Franckfurt, 151 (notes);
   Jews in, 86

 Frederick, Emperor, cited, 115

 Frisol, Rabbi Abraham, cited, 34, 38 (_see_ Farisol)

 Fullana, Nicholas de Oliver y, xiii

 Fuller, xxi _n._, xxii, xxvii


 Gabbai, Jedidjah Ibn, 151 (notes)

 Gad, tribe of, 29

 Galatine, Peter, 72

 Galilee, 29

 Ganges, 38, 39

 Garcias, 23

 Gardiner, xxix, xxx, lviii, lxxxiv

 Garracas, 23

 Garzoni, Thomas, 50

 Gath, 125

 Gawz, R. David = David Gans, 136, 169 (notes)

 Gazim, 125

 Gehazi, 64

 Geluckstadt, 84

 Genebrardus, 20, 21

 Geneva, xvii, xviii;
   Jews go to, 145

 “Géographie du Talmud,” 153 (notes)

 Gerizim, Mount, 128

 German-Austrian Beast, the, 57

 Germany, Jews in, 77, 86;
   usury in, 120

 Gerona, birthplace of Gerundensis, 157 (notes)

 Gerundensis, R. Moses = Moses ben Nachman = Nachmanides = Ramban, 157
    (notes);
   cited, 37, 45

 Gibbs, 163 (notes)

 Gibeonites, the, 111

 Gilead, 69;
   Hazor-Gilead, 29

 “Glory of Iehudah and Israel, The,” lxxx, 103

 Glynne, Sir John, xlvii, xlix

 Gog, Battle of, 44;
   War of, 43, 52

 Golden Chersonesus, the, 19

 Golden Land, the, 19

 Goleta, 95

 Gomara, cited, 54 (_see_ Gomoras)

 Gomaza, 22

 Gomez, Antonio Enriquez, 158 (notes)

 Gomez, Gabriel, agent for King of Denmark, 89

 Gomoras = Francisco Lopes de Gomara, 20, 21, 154 (notes)

 Gonzales, Abraham Coen, lxxxvi

 Goodwin, xlvii, l

 Gorion, Joseph ben = Gorionides, 128, 129, 166 (notes)

 Goropius, 53

 Gozan, 37–38;
   river, 32, 33, 38, 39

 Gracias, Gregorius, 22

 Graetz, cited, xii, xiii, xiv, xxiii, xxvii, xxxvii, xxxix, lix, lxx,
    154–162 (notes), 169 (notes)

 Grammaticus, Elias = Elias Levita, 50, 160 (notes)

 Granada, 93

 Grecians, 7

 Greece, Monarch of, 131

 Greenland, 20

 Grotius, Hugo, 20, 169 (notes)

 Guainacapacus, 22

 Guamanga, 22

 Guariaga = Indians living near river of that name, 25;
   River, 24, 25

 Guatemala, Indians of, 23

 Guayaquil, 153 (notes)

 Guinea, negroes of, 101

 Günsburg, cited, 161 (notes)

 Guppy, H. B., cited, 155 (notes)

 Guz, 37


 Habor, 33, 39

 Habyssins, 34;
   kingdom of the = Abyssinia, 34, 40

 Hadrian, 157 (notes)

 Hagarens, the, 125

 Haggai, 136

 Haghe, the = Hague, the, xxiv, xxxi, 49

 Halah, 33, 39

 Halévy, cited, 156 (notes)

 Hamath, 40, 41

 Hamborough, 116

 Hamburg, 89, 100;
   Bank, xxx;
   Jews at, 49;
   Marranos founded congregations at, xiv

 Hamburger, cited, 153 (notes), 156 (notes), 158 (notes)

 Hamchen, 30

 Hara, 39

 Hartlib, Samuel, 63

 Havana, 153 (notes)

 Hazor-Gilead, 29

 Hebræus, Jacobus Rosales, lxxx

 Hebraism of English religious thought, xv

 Hebrew Cazici, 17

 Hebrew tongue, the, 47

 Hebrews, 7;
   laws and customs of the, 22

 Heliodorus, 128

 Henrique, Don, 90

 Henry VIII., xv

 Hercules, Duke of Ferraria, 34, 55, 97

 Herrera, Alonzo de, xiv;
   cited, 56

 Heschel, Rabbi Joshua ben Jacob, xxxvii _n._

 Heseah, cited, 131

 Hierome, S., 119

 Hierusalem, 26

 Hijah, Abraham bar Ribi = Abraham ben Chijahha-Nasi of Barcelona, 45,
    158 (notes)

 Hindostan, Jewish settlers in, xii

 “Hippocratis Aphorismi,” 147

 Hircanus, High Priest, 129

 Hirsch, cited, 169 (notes)

 Hispaniola, 23

 “Historia sive continuatio Flavii Josephi,” 147

 “History of the Jews,” 51

 Hoffmann, cited, 169 (notes)

 Holland, xxx, xxxi, xxxii, xxxiii, lxii, lxxiii, 82, 100, 120, 137;
   embassies in, xl;
   Jews of, 77, 83;
   Royalist spies in, xviii

 Holmes, Nathaniel, xxv, xxvi, lxxx, lxxxii

 Holstace, 89

 Holstein, Duke of, 49, 50

 Holy Land, 41, 42, 66, 163 (notes), (see _Usque_)

 Holy Mount at Jerusalem, 44

 Holy Office, Tribunals of, xiii

 Honan, 29

 Honda, 11 _n._, 12, 16;
   Port, 153 (notes) (_see_ Bahia Honda)

 Hoornbeek, John, 114;
   cited, 136, 167 (notes)

 “Hope of Israel, The,” xvii, xviii, xxvi, xxxix, lxxviii, 7, 17, 65,
    144, 149–154 (notes), 157 (notes), 164 (notes), 167 (notes);
   translated into Dutch, Spanish, Judeo-German, Hebrew, 151 (notes)

 Hord-Jerida, 31

 Hord of Naphtali, 31

 Howell, James, 166 (notes)

 Huarte, Johannes, 54

 Huet, 169 (notes)

 “Humas,” 146

 “Humble Addresses, The,” xxxvi, xxxviii, xl, xlii, xliv, xlv, 73, 75,
    128, 160, 162, 167 (notes);
   cited, 169 (notes);
   Bibliographical note, 161 (notes)

 Hungaria, 18

 Huns, 32

 Huza, Elhazar, 85

 Hyde, Thomas, 156 (notes)


 “Iad a Razaka” = “Yad Hachazaka” = Mishneh Torah, 109, 167 (notes)

 Iaes, Jacob ben, Governor of Tiberiades, 86 (_see_ Jachya, Ibn)

 Ian, David, 85

 Idumean, 101

 Iecells, Isaac = probably Asher ben Joseph of Cracow, 87, 162 (notes)

 Ijon, 29

 Inde Maienses, Province of, 25

 Independents, xix, xlviii;
   extreme, xx;
   Messianic beliefs held by, xxi;
   rise of, xviii

 India, 15, 19, 20, 21, 26, 33, 41, 50, 162 (notes);
   Jews in, 85;
   Upper, 38

 Indian, 154 (notes)

 Indian Company, West, xxx, 88

 Indian Sea, 19

 Indians, 6, 17, 22, 28, 38, 54, 56;
   American, xxiv;
   Carybes, 27;
   countries of the, 24;
   first baptized and then murdered by Spaniards, 113;
   forced to swear fealty to King of Spain, 25;
   of Guatemala, 23;
   of Jucatan, 22;
   of New Spain and Peru, 18, 23;
   of Oronoch, 27;
   of Peru, 23
   Indies, East, 19, 20;
   Inquisition in the, 28;
   Spaniards dwelling in the, 20

 Indies, West, xxxvi, 19, 40, 53;
   cities and provinces of, 28

 Ingram, Robert, 151, 152 (notes)

 Inquisition, The, xii, xxxiii, xxxiv, lxiv, lxv, lxxiii, lxxviii, 51,
    83, 94, 95, 114, 164 (notes);
   calamities of the, 48;
   in the Indies, 28;
   Portuguese, 163 (notes);
   Spanish, 47, 82, 138

 Inquisitors make King and Queen of Spain take an oath to uphold the
    Catholic faith in their dominions as an “act of the faith,” 117

 Isabel, 51

 Isabel Island = Isle of Solomon, 155 (notes)

 Isabel of Spain, 39

 Isabella, xi, 91, 93, 102, 138, 154 (notes)

 Isaiah, Paul, xlii

 Islands of the Sea, 40, 41

 Islands of the West, 41

 Ismael, 113

 Israel, 69;
   redemption of, 52;
   return of to their country, 45

 Israel, Menasseh ben (_see_ Menasseh)

 Israel, Samuel ben, lxix

 Israelites of the Tribe of Reuben, xxiv

 Israelitish Senate, 118

 Italia, Salom, Jewish line-engraver, executed portrait of Menasseh ben
    Israel, 149 (notes)

 Italy, xvii, 33, 82, 87, 100, 117, 120, 137;
   Jews go to, 145;
   Jews in, 77, 83;
   Princes of, 50, 51, 96, 121;
   Princes of Italy declare Blood Accusation false, 102


 Jachya, Ibn = Ben Jaese, 159 (notes)

 Jacob, Eliakim ben, 155 (notes)

 Jacobs, Joseph, 152 (notes), cited; 165 (notes)

 Jaes, Jacob Aben, Duke of Mytilene = Alvaro Mendez = Don Solomon, uncle
    of Joseph Nasi, 47, 159 (notes) (_see_ Jachya, Ibn)

 Jaese, D. ben, 49, 159 (notes)

 Jalcut, 36, 157 (notes)

 Jamaica, xxxi, xxxvii

 James I. imprisons publisher of “The Calling of the Jews,” xxi

 Jan, David, 49 (_see_ Ian)

 Japhe, R. Mardochus, cited, 37, 157 (notes)

 Jarchi, Selomoh = R. Solomon b. Isaac of Troyes = Rashi, cited, 37, 45,
    157 (notes)

 Jarguasongo, province of, 25

 Jechoniah, 64

 Jechonias, 129

 Jellinek, cited, 169 (notes)

 “Jephe Thoar,” 36

 Jerida = Hord, 31

 Jeroboam, King of the Tribe of Ephraim, 43

 Jerome, 42

 Jerusalem, 39, 40, 42, 43, 52, 53, 61, 62, 64, 76, 102, 125, 128, 129,
    130;
   daughter of, 69;
   destruction of, 59, 65;
   Holy Mount at, 44;
   Isaac Jeshurum died at, 117;
   New, 67;
   people of, 35 (_see_ Agrippa’s Oration)

 “Jerusalem Talmud,” 35

 “Jerusalem Targum,” 155 (notes)

 “Jerushalmi, The,” 157 (notes)

 Jeshurun, Isaac, tortured and imprisoned on Blood Accusation, 116, 150,
    168 (notes)

 Jeshurum, Joseph, brother of Isaac, 116

 Jessey, Henry, xxii, xxviii, xli, xlviii, xlix, lii, liii _n._, lxxx,
    lxxxi, 103

 Jessop, xliv

 Jesuits, xii, 38;
   erected colleges in Tartary and China, 29

 _Jewish Quarterly Review_, cited, 152, 155, 163 (notes)

 Jewish question, xxx, xxxi, xxxii, xxxiii, xlvi, li, lxix, lxxii;
   nation, 84, 101;
   nation in Holland and Italy, 83;
   Sabbath, 37

 Jews, admission of, as citizens of one of the colonial dependencies of
    Great Britain, xxxvii;
   at Hamburg, 49;
   cemetery, petition signed, lxvii;
   emigration of Spanish, 154 (notes);
   fidelity of the, 93;
   in Persia, 49, 50, 85;
   in Spain, 164 (notes);
   kingdom of the, 38;
   of Morocco, 163 (notes)

 Jisbia, 27

 Jochai, R. Simon ben, cited, 93 (_see_ Johay)

 Jochai, R. Simon ben, 163 (notes)

 Johanan, Rabbi, cited, 35, 156 (notes)

 Johay, Rabbi Simeon ben, author of “Zoar,” disciple of Akiba, 45, 158
    (notes)

 John, Don, 95

 John II., 51 (_see_ Alonsius)

 John III., 94

 John, Oliver St., xlvii, 111;
   mission, xxx, xxxi, xxxviii

 Joktan, father of Ophir, 18

 Jonah, Rabbi, 34

 Jonathan, cited, 135

 Jones, Colonel, lxi, lxiii, lxv

 Joppa, 19

 Joseph, House of, 69

 Josephus, 7, 19;
   cited, 29, 35–39, 54, 119, 120, 128–131, 135, 138

 “Josephus Flavius,” Menasseh’s continuation, 115

 Jucatan, 18;
   Indians of, 22

 Judah, House of, 69;
   tribe of, 7, 36, 29–42, 52, 66, 69, 85

 Judah, Rabbi, the Prince, 156 (notes) (_see_ Rabbi Johanan)

 Judaical Sects, xxi, xxii

 Judaisers, xxix

 Judas, Beleeving, 47 (_see_ Alacron)

 Judea, 126

 Julius III., 96

 Junquera, Santiago Perez, 151 (notes), 152 (notes)

 Iurnin, 112

 Juvenal, cited 135


 Kalikout, 38

 Karis, Rabbi Judah Aben = Rabbi Judah ben Koraisch, 34, 156 (notes)

 Karpeles, cited, 161 (notes)

 Kayserling, xiii _n._, xxiii _n._, xxvii _n._, lxix _n._;
   cited, 151, 153, 154, 158, 159, 160, 162, 163, 164, 169 (notes),
      cited

 Kiffen, William, xlvii

 Kimhi, Rabbi David, cited, 34, 156 (notes)

 Klemperer, cited, 169 (notes)

 Knevett, Francis, lxi, lxiii, lxv

 Knight of San Miguel, xiii (_see_ Marranos)

 “Koheleth,” 161 (notes)

 Kolorni, Abraham, 50, 72

 Kosi, Rabbi Moseh de, cited, 141


 “La Araucana,” 155 (notes)

 Laban, 56

 Labrador, 20, 21

 Lacedemonians, 97

 Laet, de, 20, 56

 Lagus, Ptolemy’s father, 127

 Lambert, John, xlvii, l

 Lamik, 38

 Laodicea, city of, 55

 Latins, 7

 “Laus Orationes del Anno,” 146

 Lawrence, Henry, xlvii, l, lxxxiv

 Lebanon, 70

 Lee, S. L., xiv _n._

 Leghorn, lxxi; Hebrew bankers of, xv

 Leon, Pedro Cieça = Petrus Cieza, 155 (notes)

 Leopold, Emperor, xiii

 Lescarbotus, 54

 Lethuania, Jews in, 87

 Levant, xiv, 82, 97, 167 (notes);
   Jewish settlers of, xii; trade of, xxx

 Levellers, xxi, xxix

 Levita, Elias = Elias Grammaticus, 160 (notes)

 Levy, Aaron = Antonio de Montezinos, xxiv

 Levy, cited, 159, 160, 169 (notes)

 Levy, Rev. S., cited, l _n._

 Lewenclavius, 32

 “Libellus Anglicus,” 161 (notes)

 Licurgus, 98

 Ligorne, 82

 Lima, 48

 Lima, David de, 89

 Linschotes, cited, 50

 Lisbon, lxxi, 47, 48, 99, 117

 Lisborn, 37

 Lisle, John, xlvi, xlvii

 Lloyd, li

 “Loci Communes Omnium Midrasim,” 147

 Loeb, cited, 162 (notes)

 London, xxxi;
   City authorities of, lxvii;
   Embassies in, xl;
   Jews in, lxxiii;
   Judaical sects in, xxii;
   Marranos of, xiv, xxx, xxxv, xxxvi, lviii;
   Menasseh’s arrival in, xxxvii;
   Menasseh’s son sent to persuade him to come to, 36;
   merchants of, lxxvi;
   return of Charles II. to, lxxi;
   “Vindiciæ Judæorum” written in, 145

 Lopes, Roderigo, xiv, xv, 159 (notes)

 Lord President, xlvii

 Lost Tribes, the, xxiv, 153 (notes), (_see_ “Thorn Tree”)

 Low Countries, 88

 Lubin = Lublin, 38, 158 (notes)

 Lublin, xxxvii _n._;
   Jews in, 87

 Lunel, 157 (notes)

 Lusitano, Amatus, brother of Elias Montalto, 86, 160 (notes)

 Luther, cited, 55

 Laxa, 25


 Maccabees, first book of, cited, 128;
   history of the, 62

 Maccia, Duke of = Joseph Nasino, 86

 Machado, cited, 162 (notes)

 Madrid, 26, 51, 117, 151 (notes)

 Magog, battle of, 44;
   war of, 43, 52

 Mahomitans, 37;
   Jewish captivity under the, 113

 Maimon, R. Moses bar = Maimonides, physician to Saladin of Egypt, 50;
   wrote “Yad Hachazaka,” cited, 63, 156 (notes), 167 (notes), 168
      (notes)

 Mainenses, 25

 Mairel, 86

 Maisel, Mardocheas or Mordecai, knighted by Emperor Matthias, 50, 160
    (notes)

 Malvenda, 20

 Manasseh, tribe of, 29

 Manton, Thomas, xlviii

 Mantua, 33, 51;
   the besieging of, 91;
   Jews in, 87

 Manuel, Don, King of Portingal, 28;
   of Portugal, 158 (notes)

 Maragnon = Marañon = Amazon, 24, 25, 27, 155 (notes)

 Margareta, province of, 25

 Margarita, Antonius = Aaron Margalita, 136, 169 (notes)

 Maria de Medicis, 160 (notes)

 Maria, Infanta, xiii

 Mariana, 90

 Marinus, cited, 54

 Maracco, King of, 49

 Marrocco, 88

 Marranos = New Christians or Crypto-Jews; derivation of name uncertain,
    probably a corruption of “Maranatha”; remain in Spain after
    expulsion of Jews; influence on the history of Europe, xii, xiii,
    xxxiii, xxxvi, lx, lxii, lxiii, lxiv, lxviii;
   aim against privileges of, lxi;
   London, xxxv, l, lii, lviii, lxviii;
   London Marranos’s petition, lxxxv;
   petition for burial-ground, lxvi;
   of Portugal, xxxix;
   reach England, xiv;
   sign Robles’s petition, lxv;
   of Spain, xxxix;
   some London, known to Cromwell, xxx, 152, 155, 170 (notes)

 Mart of Breslau, 38

 Martha, St., 18

 Martyr, Justin, cited, 120

 Matthias, Emperor, 50, 86

 Maurice, Prince, 49

 Mauritania, 141

 Mede, cited, 68

 Media, 6, 35, 39, 40, 42;
   mountains of, 33

 Medicis, Duke Cosmus de = Duke of Toscani, 49

 Medicis, Loysia de, Queen of France, 50

 Medicis, Maria de, 160 (notes)

 Medigo, Elia del = Elias Cretensis, 160 (notes)

 Mediterranean, 19;
   Jewish refugees on coasts of, xi;
   Sea, 44

 Meetabel, son of Matadel, 21

 Meir, R., 133, 169 (notes), (_see_ Beruria)

 Melbourne, 162 (notes)

 Meldola, Prof. Raphael, 160 (notes)

 Menasseh ben Israel, Rabbi of Amsterdam, author of “Spes Israelis” and
    other works; son of Marrano of Lisbon; educated under care of Rabbi
    Isaac Uziel; became Rabbi at age of eighteen; accomplished linguist,
    writer, and preacher; married into the Abarbanel family, xxii,
    xxiii, xxxiii, xlv, lxviii, lxxxvi, 6, 69, 71, 157 (notes), 161
    (notes), 169 (notes);
   arrives in London, xxxvii;
   campaign of, lxxv;
   catalogue of books of, 146;
   Christian friends of, 169 (notes);
   connection with members of the St. John Mission, xxxi;
   contemporary with Sadler, 167 (notes);
   death of, lxix;
   Declaration to the Commonwealth of England, 78;
   “De Creatione,” 169 (notes);
   demands presented to Cromwell, lxxxiii;
   “De Termino Vitæ,” 149 (notes);
   formally opens negotiations with the Government of the Commonwealth,
      xliv;
   “Hope of Israel,” xxvi, 65;
   dedication of “Hope of Israel” to Parliament and Council of State, 3;
   “Humble Addresses” printed, xxxviii, 73, 75, 162 (notes);
   close of “Humble Addresses,” 103;
   invited to England by Cromwell, xxxvi;
   letter, lxxvii;
   letter to Dury, lxxviii;
   letter to Felgenhauer, lxxix, 163 (notes);
   Mission to Cromwell, xvi, lxxiii;
   motives of his English supporters, 161 (notes);
   negotiations with Thurloe, xxxii;
   petition not favoured by the clergy, xlvi;
   petition sprung on Council, xlvi;
   petition to Cromwell, lxxxvi, lxxxvii;
   his portraits, 149 (notes);
   Menasseh’s proposals read, xlviii;
   Menasseh’s reply to Prynne and Ross, “Vindiciæ Judæorum,” lxiii;
   sends Dormido to England, xxxiii;
   signs petition, lxii;
   Menasseh’s sojourn in London, 165 (notes);
   Menasseh’s summary of the Thirteen Articles of Faith, 168 (notes);
   Menasseh’s “Vindiciæ Judæorum,” 105;
   wife of, 154 (notes);
   with relation to the Ten Tribes, 152 (notes)

 Menda, Nathaniel, 165 (notes), 166 (notes)

 Mendaña, 155 (notes)

 Mendez, Alvaro = Jacob Aben Jaes, 49

 Mercado, Abraham de, xxxvi, xxxvii

 Mercado, Raphael de, xxxvii

 Messiah, xxiii, xxv, xxvi, lxxviii, lxxix, 7, 45, 46, 52, 53, 63, 79,
    118, 124;
   son of David, 43, 44;
   son of Ephraim, 43;
   son of Joseph, 43, 44;
   Bar-Cochba, the Pseudo, 157 (notes)

 Messianic beliefs, xxi, xxviii

 Meursius, 169 (notes)

 Mexico, 22, 23, 48

 Michael, Isle of St., 21, 55

 Michesius, Joannes = D. Josephus Nassi, 49

 Middelburg, lxix, 150 (notes)

 Middlesex, E. S., xxvii _n._

 Middleton, General, lxxviii

 “Midras Rabba,” cited, 141

 “Midrash, The,” cited, 153 (notes)

 Millenarians, xxiii, xxv, xxvii, xxix, xl, 67, 70

 Millennium, xxxi, xxxiii

 Milum, Lord of = D. Josephus Nassi, 49

 Mirandola, Pico de, 50, 160 (notes)

 “Mishna, The,” 156 (notes)

 Mochingerius, Joh., lxxx, 169 (notes)

 Modena, Leo de, xlii, 168 (notes)

 Modena, State of, 88

 Modina, Duke of, 85

 Mohanes = magicians = American-Indian medicine men, 28, 56, 154 (notes)

 Molho, Selomoh = Diego Pires, 33, 156 (notes)

 “Monarchia Ecclesiastica,” 120

 Monarchia Ingasonum, 22

 Monarchies, The Four, 45, 46

 Monarchy Men, Fifth, xv, xxi

 Monk, xl, lxxiii

 Montalto, Elias = Felipe Montalto = Eliahu de Luna Montalto = Don
    Philipe Rodrigues, 50, 160 (notes)

 Montanas, Arias, 18

 Montezinos, Antonio de = Aaron Levy, xxiv, xxvii, 6, 12, 15, 17, 20,
    27, 28, 54, 56, 151, 153, 154 (notes);
   goes with Cazicus, 13;
   relates his story, 11

 Montezinos, Ludovicus, 12

 Montfort, Marquis of, xiii

 Moorish domination in Spain, 158 (notes)

 Moors, 39

 Mores, the, 94, 98

 Morines, 91

 Morocco, 127, 141, 156 (notes)

 Mortara, cited, 159 (notes)

 Morvyn, 166 (notes)

 Moses, R., of Egypt, 109, 110, 123, 125, 140, cited

 Münster, 157 (notes), 161 (notes)

 Mussaphia, D. Benjamin = Dionysius Mussaphia, physician and Rabbi, 50,
    159 (notes)

 Mysketa, 37


 Naccia = D. Josephus Nassi, 49

 Nachman, Moses ben, 157 (notes) (_see_ Gerundensis)

 Nahomi, 102

 Naphtali, Hord of, 31;
   war with Zeno, 31

 Naphtali, tribe of, 32

 Naphtalites, 32;
   war with Zeno, 31

 Naples, 49

 Nasi, Donna Gracia, 159, 163 (notes)

 Nassi, Don Josephus = Joannes Michesius, nephew and son-in-law of
    Bienvenide Abravanela, 49, 86, 159 (notes)

 Nation of the Jews, 90

 National Conference, xlvi

 Navigation Act, xxx, xxxi, xxxii, xli, lxxiii

 Naylor, James, xl

 Nazarenus, Eli = Francisco Meldonado de Silva, turned Jew, was burnt at
    Lima, 48, 158 (notes)

 Nebuchadnezzar, 40, 42, 51, 76, 129, 141;
   dream of, 75;
   image of, 52, 57

 Nebuchadnezzar’s tree, 59

 Nehamias, Himanuel, 170 (notes)

 Nephussim, 52

 Nero, 101, 130

 Netherlands, xxx, xxxiii

 Neubauer, Dr. A., cited, 152 (notes), 153 (notes)

 Neve, Le, lxxv

 New Africa, 34

 New Christians or Marranos, xii

 New Exchange, xxxvii

 “New Model,” xix

 New Spain, 18, 22, 31, 54;
   Indians of, 18, 23;
   Ten Tribes in, 20

 New World, xiv;
   inhabitants of, 6

 Newcomen, xlviii, xlix

 Nicanor, 128

 Nicaraguazenses, 22

 Nicholas, Sir Edward, xxii, xli;
   cited, 103

 Nicolay, Nicholas de, cited, 162 (notes)

 Nieupoort, cited, xli _n._, lx _n._

 Nile, The, 19, 34, 39, 41, 44

 Nisa, 84

 Nisebor, 32

 “Nismachaim,” 146

 Nizza, 82

 “Nomenclator Hebraius and Arabicus,” 147

 “Nomologia,” 163 (notes)

 North Sea, 21

 Norway, 6, 54

 Norwich, 112, 166 (notes)

 Nova Granada, 24

 Novæ Angliæ, lxxxi

 Nuevos Christianos (see Marranos), lix, lxi

 Nye, Philip, xlviii, xlix, l


 Og, 57

 Ogay, 29

 Ojeda, 153 (notes)

 Omeguas, 23

 Onias, the High Priest, 76, 128

 Onkelos, cited, 135

 Ophir, 19, 53, 54;
   son of Jokton, 18

 “Orationes Panegyricæ,” 146

 “Orchot Olam,” 38, 156 (notes)

 Orchotolam, Abraham Frisol = Abraham Farisol or Peretsol, author of
    “Orchot Olam,” 33, 156 (notes)

 Origen, 54;
   cited, 55

 Ornstien, Rev. A. F., 162 (notes)

 Orœnsis, 30

 Oronoch, the Indians of, 27

 Orosius, cited, 55

 Orpa, 103

 Orsna, Petrus de, killed by Aquirre, 24, 25

 Ortelius, 31;
   cited, 33, 53, 54

 Osorius, Hieronymus, 28;
   cited, 98, 99, 100, 138, 163 (notes)

 Otteman race, 52

 Ottoman family, 97

 Owen, Dr., xxix, xlviii

 Oxford University, xlviii


 Pack, Sir Christopher, xlvii, li

 Padua, 50, 160 (notes);
   Jews in, 87;
   Mounts of Piety at, 101

 Palache, Seignor Moseh, 88, 163 (notes)

 “Paläorama,” 153 (notes)

 Palatine, Prince, 28

 Palaxe, Samuel, 49, 159 (notes)

 Paliciano, Monsegnor Monte, 95

 Pampelona, 24

 Panama, 18, 31

 Para, Great, 27

 “Parasa Aazinu,” 37

 Paris, Matthew, cited, 112

 Paris, Parliament of, 97

 Parisius, Cardinal, cited, 96

 Parliament, of England, 157 (notes);
   dedication of “Hope of Israel” to, 3, 144;
   dedication of Latin edition of “Hope of Israel” to, xxvi;
   Long, lviii;
   pamphlet, probably read in, xxvii;
   of Paris, 97

 Parthia, 40

 Parvaim, 18

 Pathros, 40

 Paul III. of the House of Farnesia, 94, 95, 96

 Paul IV., Pope of Rome, 98

 Paul’s, St., Cathedral, xli;
   Church, 118

 Paz, Enriquez de, xiii

 Paz, Seignor Duarte de, 95

 Pedro the Cruel, Don, 90, 163 (notes)

 Peka, 29

 Pelham’s “Jew Bill,” xx

 Pelu, 19

 Pelusium, 40

 “Pene Rabba,” 146

 Pequin, 29

 Pequinenses, 29

 Perasach, 36

 Pernambuco, xxxiii, xxxvii

 Peroza, 31

 Persia, 32, 39, 40, 42;
   Kings of, 31;
   Monarch of, 131

 Persians, 32

 Peru, 18, 20, 22, 24, 25, 31, 53, 54, 153 (notes);
   Indians of, 23;
   chronicles of, 22

 Pesria, Guebia ben, 141

 Peters, Hugh, xix, xxviii, xl, xliii, l, lix

 Petition, for burial-ground, lxvi;
   to repeal “Statute of Banishment” against Jews, xx

 Petra, 40

 Petronius, 129

 Peyrère, Iaac la, 168 (notes)

 Pharaoh, 76

 Pharaonica, Isle, 55

 Phenicians, 6

 Phes, Governors of, 49 (_see_ Rutes)

 Philadelphus, Ptolomeus, 124, 130

 Philip II., King of Spain, 91

 Philip III., 26

 Philip, King of France, 51

 Philo, 129;
   cited, 130, 131, 135

 “Philosophia Rabbinica,” 147

 “Phocylides,” 147

 Pickering, Sir Gilbert, xlvi, xlvii

 “Piedra Gloriosa,” 149 (notes)

 “Piedra Pretiosa,” 146

 Pineda, Thomas de, Marrano Jesuit Father, xiii;
   cited, 54, 120

 Pinto, Mosseh, 170 (notes)

 Pires, Diogo (_see_ Molcho), 156 (notes)

 Pisarrus, Gonzalus, 24

 Pizarrus, Franciscus, 17

 Placentia, 39

 “Plain Dealing,” lxvi

 Plancius, 130

 Plato, 54

 Pliny, 20;
   cited, 37, 55

 Plutarch, 55, 58;
   cited, 118, 127

 Pocock, cited, 149 (notes), 159 (notes)

 Poland, xxxix;
   Jews in, xlv, lxx, 77, 87;
   King of, Henry of Anjou elected, 159 (notes);
   usury in, 120

 Polonians, 38

 Pomis, David de, 50, 160 (notes)

 Pompey, 76, 130;
   end of, 51

 Pope, the, 33, 94;
   receives Reubeni, 155 (notes);
   declares Blood Accusation false, 102;
   Paul IV., 98;
   Sextus V., 50

 Pomarius, 54

 Porphiry, 54

 Port Honda (_see_ Bahia Honda), 153 (notes)

 Portingal = Portugal, 27;
   King of, 28

 Portugal, xii, xiii, xxxvii, lxi, lxxiii, 33, 48, 94;
   banishment of Jews from, 93;
   Cardinal of, 98;
   Earle of, 117;
   Inquisition in, lxiv;
   Jews in, xlv;
   King of, xxv, xxxiv, 49, 95, 121, 168 (notes);
   King of, receives Reubeni, 155 (notes);
   King Emanuel of, 51, 97;
   trade of, xxix

 Portugals, 91, 96

 Portuguese, lxi, lxv, 48;
   alliance, xxix;
   conquer Pernambuco, xxxiii

 Possevimus, cited, 54

 Postellus, Gulielmus, 53

 Prague, xxxvii _n._, 50, 169 (notes);
   astrologer of (_see_ Verus), 28;
   Jews in, 86;
   Synagogues at, 160 (notes)

 “Prelate of the Commonwealth” (_see_ Manton)

 Presbyterians, xix

 President, Lord, lxii

 Prester John, 34

 “Pride’s Purge,” xix

 Prince of the Twelve Tribes, 43

 Privy Council, lx, lxxv

 “Problemata de Creatione,” 146

 Proclamation by Privy Council, lx

 Proclus, 54

 Procopious, cited, 32

 “Prolegomena,” 114, 136

 Prometheus, 55

 Protector, the, xvii, xxxi, xxxiv, xxxv, xxxvi, xli, xlvi, lv, lxiv,
    lxvi, 162 (notes);
   death of, lxxi;
   expects report on Menasseh’s petition, xlv;
   Menasseh guest of, xxxiii;
   petition to, from Marranos, lxii;
   receives Robles’s petition, lxi

 Protector’s speech, liii;
   threat, lvii

 Provence, 85

 Prussia, lxxx;
   Jews in, 87

 Prynne, xiii _n._, xliii _n._, xlix _n._, li, lvii, lxiii;
   cited, 142, 165 (notes)

 Pseudo-Messiah, Bar Cochba, 157 (notes);
   Sabbethai Zevi, xi

 Ptolomies, Histories of, 90

 Ptolomy, 127

 Ptolomy, Philadelphus, 124, 130

 Ptolomyes tables, 34

 Puerto, 99

 Puerto de Santa Cruz (_see_ Bahia Honda), 153 (notes)

 Pul, King of Assyria, 29

 Pumbaditha, School of (_see_ Seadiah), 158 (notes)

 Puritans gratified by Menasseh’s praise, xxvii;
   rise of, xviii


 Quakers, the, 167 (notes)

 Queiros, Ferdinades de, 26

 Quity, Province of = Quito, 11, 25, 153 (notes)

 Quivira, 21, 31


 Ragusa = Araguza, 164 (notes), 168 (notes)

 Raphanea, 36, 38

 “Rappel des Juifs,” 168 (notes)

 Raguenet, xxxvii _n._

 Readmission of the Jews, xxx, xxxi, xxxii, xxxiv, xxxix, xl, xliv,
    xlvi, lii, liv, lix

 Reato, Mordehai, 45

 “Rebus Emanuelis, de,” 98

 Recife, xxxvii

 “Reconciler,” 29, 42

 Recusancy Acts, lviii

 Red Sea, 19, 41

 Redemption from Babylon, 42

 Reformation, the, xv, xviii, 160 (notes)

 “Refutatis libri cui titulus Præadamitæ,” 147

 Reggio, State of, 88

 Religious liberty, xx, xxi, lxxvi (_see_ Cromwell’s policy, xxviii);
   progress of, xix;
   restricted form of, xviii

 Rembrandt, lxix;
   friend of Menasseh, 169 (notes);
   painted two portraits of Menasseh, 149 (notes)

 “Remnant Found, The,” 152 (notes)

 Republican Government, xix, lxxiv, xxvii;
   triumph, xxiii

 Resettlement, petition, xxxv;
   question, Holmes’s treatise on, xxvi

 Restoration, lxx;
   Cromwell’s maritime and commercial policy carried out after, lxxiii

 Retio, 85

 Reuben, tribe of, 29

 Reubenita, David, 33

 Reubenite, David the (_see_ Reubenita) = David Reubeni, 33, 155 (notes)

 Reuchlin, 72

 “Revelation Revealed, The,” 63

 “Revelation Unrevealed, The,” 67

 Revolution, xx

 Ribera, Franciscus de, 19

 Ricaut, lxxiv

 Riccards, Alderman, xlvii

 Riccius, P. Matthæus, 29, 30

 Richardson, Samuel, lxvi

 “Rights of the Kingdom,” 166 (notes)

 Rios, Amador de los, xiv

 Robles, Don Antonio Rodrigues, lx, lxi, lxii, lxiii;
   Robles’s petition to the Protector, lxiv;
   reinstated, lxvi

 Rocamora, Vicente de, xiii

 Rodrigues, Don Daniel, 88

 Rofe, Selomo, ambassador to Venice, 86 (_see_ Rophe)

 Roman, 22;
   empire, 101

 “Romance al diuin Martir Juda Creyente,” poem by Gomez, 158 (notes)

 Romans, 32, 35, 90, 97;
   Bar Cochba rebelled against the, 157 (notes);
   the kingdom of the, 126

 Rome, xiii, 26, 48, 50, 57, 95, 96, 160 (notes), 163 (notes);
   a famous lawyer of, 93;
   Habyssins at, 34;
   Jews in, 87;
   monarch of, 131;
   Paul IV. of, 98;
   people of, 129;
   Pope of, 94

 Rophé, Señor H. Meyr, 157 (notes)

 Rophe, Don Selomo (_see_ Rofe) = Rabbi Solomon ben Nathan Aschkenazi,
    49, 159 (notes)

 Rosales, Immanuel Bocarus Frances, a Count Palatin, lxxx, 89, 163
    (notes)

 Ross, Alexander, xlii, xliii, lvii, lxiii, 165 (notes)

 Rothschild, Baron Lionel de, lxxvi

 Rous, Francis, xlvii

 Rowe, Owen, xlvii

 Royalists, xl, xli, lxxi;
   letter, lix;
   spies, lx;
   spies in Holland, xviii;
   treat with Jews, lxxiii

 Rudolph, Emperor, 160 (notes)

 Ruffinus, 119

 Rupert’s Horse, xlii

 Rutes, the Lords, 49

 Ruthes, 88

 Rycaut, xv _n._, liii _n._


 Sabbath, 37;
   Jewish, 37

 Sabbathion or Sabbathian River, 35, 37, 38, 40 (_see_ Sabbatical River)

 Sabbatical River, 35–38, 66, 69, 153 (notes)

 Sabellicus, Marcus Antonius, cited, 97

 Sadler, John, contemporary of Menasseh ben Israel, xxii, xxvii, xl,
    xliii, lviii, lxii, lxiii _n._, 166, 167 (notes)

 Sagredo, xli

 Saladin, King of Egypt, 50

 Salamanca, xiv, 39

 Salaminque, Synagogues of, 86

 Salines, Captain, 25

 Salmanassar, captivity of, 69;
   Salmanaster, 20;
   Salmaneser, 33, 37, 42

 Salvetti, xli _n._, lix

 Samaria, 29, 130

 Samaritans, 128

 Sambation, 153 (notes), (_see_ Sabbatical River)

 Samuel ben Israel, xxxvi

 Samuel, Jacob, 152 (notes);
   Rabbi, 166 (notes)

 Sanhedrin, 35, 156 (notes)

 Saracen, 115

 Saragoci, grandson of Ferdinand and son of Emanuel, 51

 Saragossa, xii

 Saraph baxas, Jews as, in Egypt, 49

 Sarazens, 30

 Sasol, Prince of, 88

 Sasportas, Jacob, xxxvii _n._

 Satah, R. Simeon ben, 141

 Satthianadhan, cited, 160 (notes)

 Savoy, Duke of, 51, 84, 97 (_see_ Felibert)

 “Scala de Spalatro,” 82

 Scaliger, cited, 160 (notes)

 Scandia, Marquis of, 88

 “Scebet Jehuda,” 121, 168 (notes)

 Shemtob de Leon, Moses ben, 158 (notes)

 Schikhardus, cited, 31

 Schmieles, Jacob Basevi, 160 (notes), (_see_ Bathsebah)

 Schwab, cited, 154 (notes)

 Scythia, 20, 42

 Seadiah, Rabbi = Saadja ben Joseph = Saadja Gaon, 158 (notes)

 Seba, Fernando Jacob ben, 86

 Sebastian, King, 51

 Second Temple, 46, 53

 “Sedar Olam,” 35, 156 (notes)

 Seignor of Millo = Joseph Nasino, 86

 Sekes, Governors of, 49 (_see_ Rutes)

 Selencus, 128

 Selim, Sultan, 49, 113, 135;
   peace with Venetians, 49

 Selve, George de, 161 (notes)

 Senensis, Sixtus, cited, 125

 Separatists, xviii, xix

 “Sephar Eldad Danita,” 34, 156 (notes)

 “Sermois,” 147

 Setuval, 99

 Seven Islands, Lord of the, 49

 Seville, xii

 Sextus V., Pope, 50

 Shalmaneser, King of Assyria, 29, 32

 Shinar, 40

 “Shir Ha-Shirim Rabba” = “Asirim Rabba,” 157 (notes)

 Shulamite, 58

 Shunamite, the, 64

 “Sicilian Constitutions,” cited, 115

 “Sifre,” 158 (notes), (_see_ Johay)

 Silesia, lxxx

 Silva, Don Francesco Meldonado de = Eli Nazarenus, a Marrano (_see_
    Marquis of Montfort, 158) (notes), 159 (notes)

 Simeon the Just, 128

 Simon, Barbara Anne, 152 (notes)

 Simon, Rabbi, cited, 36

 Simon, Petrus, cited, 23

 Sina, 29, 40, 41

 Sinai, Mount, 114

 Sinear, 40

 Sinim, Land of, 31 (_see_ Sina)

 Singer, Rev. S., cited, 163 (notes)

 Sion, 46, 61, 62

 Sisibuthus, the end of, 51

 “Smectymnuus,” xlviii

 Smyrna, xv, 151 (notes)

 Sobierre, 169 (notes)

 Soeiro, Semvel ben Israel, 150 (notes) (_see_ Samuel Ben Israel)

 “Sohar” = “Zohar” = “Zoar,” 158 (notes)

 Soliman, Sultan, 97

 Solime, Sultan, 86

 Solinus, cited, 33

 Solis, Eliazar de, 117

 Solis, Simao Pires, 117

 Solomon, Isle of = Isabel Island, 115 (notes)

 Solomon and Hierusalem, 155

 Solon, 98

 Solymon II., 160 (notes)

 Sonsinos, 49, 159 (notes)

 Southern Sea, 16

 South Sea, De Queiros enters, 26

 Spain, xi, xii, xiii, 51, 54, 84, 90, 154;
   banishments of, 46;
   banishment of Jews from, 93;
   cruelties to Jews in, xlv;
   Inquisition in, lxiv;
   Indians compelled to swear fealty to King of, 25;
   Jews in, 83;
   King of, lxi, 28, 49, 91, 93, 121—_see_ Alfonso, 168 (notes);
   _see_ King Alphonso the Wise of, 102;
   King of, present at an “act of the faith” at Madrid, 117;
   Papistry of, xxix;
   struggle with Elizabeth, xv;
   trade of, xxx;
   war with, lx;
   when possessed by the Moors, 39

 Spaniards, 17, 18;
   in America, 25;
   baptized Indians and then murdered them, 113;
   cruelty of, to Indians, 11;
   dwelling in the Indies affirm that the Indians come of the Ten
      Tribes, according to Menasseh
 ben Israel, 20;
   find sepulchres, 21;
   first come to America, 16;
   found by accident, who had remained hidden eight hundred years, 39;
   in India, 13

 Spanish, cruelties, 51;
   Inquisition, 47;
   nationality, lxiv

 Spence, liii _n._

 Spencer or Spenser, Sir Edward, xxvii, xxviii, 151 (notes), 161 (notes)

 “Spes Israelis,” xxii, 68, 146

 Spinoza, xxxvi

 Spizelli, Theophili, 152 (notes)

 States General, xvii, 144

 Steele, William, xlvii, xlix

 Steinschneider, cited, 162 (notes)

 Sterry, Peter, l

 Strabo, cited, 55

 Straus, Oscar, xix _n._

 Strickland, xxxi, xlvii

 Stuarts, lxviii;
   enemies of the, lxx

 Sueton, cited, 55

 Sura, schools of (_see_ Seadiah), 158 (notes)

 Surinam, xxxvii

 Sweden, Jews in, xlv;
   Queen of, xxxvi

 Sydenham, William, xlvii

 Syria, 35, 40, 130

 Syrian tyrants, 62

 Sythia, 41


 Tabaiares, 25, 26

 Tabis, 20

 Tabne, 125

 Tabor, a province of Tartary, 33

 Tacitus, cited, 55

 Talmud, cited, 110, 125, 127;
   cited, 133;
   cited, 136;
   cited, 140, 157 (notes);
   Babylonian, cited, 36, 43;
   Jerusalem, 35;
   Rabbins in the, 43

 Talmudists, 75, 92

 Taradanta, governors of, 49 (_see_ Rutes)

 “Targum”—_see_ Onkelos, 135 (notes);
   Uziel, 155 (notes)

 “Targum upon Ruth,” cited, 138

 “Targum Yerushalmi,” 155 (notes)

 Tarshish, 28

 Tarsis, 19, 44

 Tartarians, 6

 Tartaria the Greater, 20 (_see_ Arsareth)

 Tartars, 54

 Tartary, 6, 20, 29, 31, 33, 40, 42, 53, 55

 Tartas, Isaac Castrensis = Isaac de Castro Tartas, burnt at Lisbon, 47,
    158 (notes)

 Tartyri, lxxxi

 Tegris, 39

 Temple, first, 46;
   second, 6, 36, 39, 46, 53;
   third, 52

 Ten Tribes, the, xxvi, lxxviii, 6, 20, 22, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, 38,
    40, 41, 42, 43, 66, 69, 151 (notes), 152 (notes), 155 (notes);
   habitations of the, 39;
   in Ethiopia, 156 (notes);
   in Spain, 20;
   Kingdom of the, 44

 Terbinon, Thomas = Thomas (Isaac) Trebiño de Sobremente, 48, 159
    (notes)

 Terceræ, Islands of, 55

 Tertullian, cited, 120

 “The Thorn Tree,” 153 (notes)

 “Thesoro de los dirim,” 146

 Theta, 153 (notes)

 Thompson, Sheriff, xlvii

 “Thoraces, The,” 87

 Thorowgood, Thomas, xxiv, xxv _n._, lxxviii, 67, 152 (notes), 153
    (notes);
   treatise of, xxv

 Thraskytes, the race of, 66

 Thurloe, xxxi, xxxii, xxxix _n._, xl, xli _n._, li, liv _n._, lx _n._,
    lxi, lxxxviii

 Thurloe’s advice to Menasseh, xxxviii

 Tiahuanacu, a province of Collai, 21

 Tiberiades, Governor of (_see_ Jacob Jaes), 86

 Tiberius, 55

 Tibur, 33

 Tiglah-Pileser, 29

 “Tiguanac, Antiquity of,” 22

 Timæus, Plato’s, 54

 Titus, Emperor, 36, 126

 Tobit, Book of, 35

 Toledo, xii, 117

 Toledo, Lady Leonora de, daughter of D. Peter de Toledo, 49

 Toledo, D. Peter de, Viceroy of Naples, 49

 Toleration movement, xxii;
   Owen’s scheme of, xxix;
   religious, xxxi

 Tornunfus, 36 = Turnus Rufus, 157 (notes)

 Torquemada, xii

 Toscani, Duke of = Duke Cosmus de Medicis, 49

 Totonacazenses, 22

 Totones of New Spain, 22

 Tours, 160 (notes)

 Tovey, xli

 Trachomites, the, 138

 Thrask, 69

 Trent, Council of, lxxxi

 Treuenburg, von (_see_ Bathsebah)

 Tribes, the Ten (_see_ Ten Tribes);
   the Twelve (_see_ Twelve Tribes);
   the Two (_see_ Two Tribes)

 Trigantius, Nicholaus, 29

 Triglath Pilesser, 32

 Tuckney, Anthony, xlviii

 Tudela, Benjamin of = Tudelensis, 38, 156 (notes), 158 (notes)

 Tudelensis (_see_ Tudela)

 Tully, cited, 130

 Tunes = Tunis, 19, 95, 154 (notes)

 Turk, the, 49;
   the Grand, xv;
   Jews at Court of the Grand, 85;
   kingdom of the Great, 86

 Turkish Empire, 162 (notes);
   Jews in, 85, 113

 Turks, 57;
   conquered by Emperor Charles V., 95

 Turkey, 100;
   Jewish families play important part in, 159 (notes)

 Tuscany, Grand Duke of, lix, 87

 Twelve Tribes, the, of Israel, 153 (notes), (_see_ “Thorn Tree”);
   Prince of the, 43

 Two Tribes, the, 52, 53, 70, 85

 Tyberias, Governor of (_see_ Jacob Aben Jaes), 49

 Tyril, lxxi


 Upper India, 38

 “Ur of the Chaldees,” 153 (notes)

 Usque, Samuel (_see_ Vasquo), 163 (notes)

 Utre, Philip d’, 23, 24

 Uziel, Rabbi Jonathan ben, author of “Targum,” 19, 36, 155 (notes)


 Valladolid, 47

 Valle, Marquis del, 17

 Vanega, 18

 Vasquo = Usque, 163 (notes);
   cited, 99

 Vega, Don Diego Vaca de la, 25

 Vega, Garcillasso de la, 19;
   cited, 54

 Venetian Senate, 160 (notes)

 Venetians make peace with Selim, 49

 Venezuela, 23

 Venice, 86, 87, 160 (notes);
   Republic of, 49;
   Senate of, 88, 97

 Veray, the Lord Lope de (_see_ Alacron), 158 (notes)

 Verga, Solomon Aben, 167 (notes)

 Verona, Jews in, 87;
   Mounts of Piety at, 101

 Verus, Jacobus, astrologer of Prague, 28

 Vespacius, 17

 Vespasian, 126

 Vicarius, Joannes Castilianus, 24

 Vicenza, Mounts of Piety at, 101

 Vienna, 115;
   Jews in, 86

 Villefleur, 28

 Villependi, Marquis de = Lord Joseph de Fano, 87

 Viles, the, 87

 Vinaque, River, 22

 “Vindiciæ Judæorum,” xvi, lxiii, lxiv, lxxvii, 105;
   cited, 164

 Violet, Thomas, xlii _n._, lxvii _n._, lxxi, lxxii

 Viterbe, Cardinal Egidio di, pupil of Elias Grammaticus, 160 (notes)

 Voga, Garcillassos de la; cited, 21

 Vorstius, 169 (notes)

 Vossius, the family of, 169 (notes)

 Vsquoquibs, the, 88


 Wales, Judaical sects in, xxii

 Wall, Moses, xxvii, 151 (notes), 154 (notes), 161 (notes)

 Walsingham, Sir Francis, 165 (notes)

 War of Gog and Magog, 43, 52

 Webb, lxxv _n._

 West Indian Company, xxx

 West Indians, 27

 West Indies, xxxvi, 11, 19, 21, 29;
   first Colonies of, 18;
   inhabitants of, 6

 Westminster Assembly, xlviii

 Whitchcote, xlviii

 Whitehall, xvii, xliv, xlvi, xlvii;
   meeting of Council of Mechanics at, xix

 Whitehall Assembly, xvii, lvii, 144

 Whitehall Conference, xix, xlviii, l _n._, li, lii, liii, lviii, lix,
    lxvi, lxxxiv, 149 (notes);
   adjourned, xlix;
   meeting between Nye and Prynne at, 167 (notes)

 Whitelock, xxi _n._, xli

 Wicofortius, Jaochimus, 31

 Wiener, cited, 168 (notes)

 Wilkes, Anna, 153 (notes)

 Wilkinson, Henry, xlviii

 Williams, Roger, xix, xxii, xl

 Wilna, 151 (notes)

 Wolf, Lucien, cited, xii _n._, xv _n._, xix _n._, xxxiii, xxxviii,
    lxxv, lxxvi, 157 (notes), 160 (notes)

 Wolseley, Sir Charles, xlvi, xlvii

 Wood, C. M., cited, 155 (notes)


 Xarites, 91

 Xenophon, cited, 55

 Xylus, 154 (notes)


 Yad Hachazaka = Iad a Razaka, 167 (notes)

 York, Marrano settlements in, xiv


 Zacculo, Abraham = Zaccuto, 45, 158 (notes)

 Zaduces, 125

 Zarate, cited, 54

 Zealand, 27

 Zebulon, tribe of, 32

 Zeeland, lxix

 “Zemach David,” 163 (notes), 169 (notes)

 Zeno, Emperor, 31

 Zevi, Sabbethai = Pseudo-Messiah, xv

 Zidan, Mulai or Mulet = King of Maracco, 49, 127

 Zion, 60, 114, 145

 “Zoar” = “Zohar” = “Sohar,” 45, 93, 158 (notes), (_see_ Johay), 163
    (notes)

 Zuñiga, Alonzo di Ercilla y (_see_ Erzilla), 155 (notes)

 Zunz, cited, 155 (notes), 157 (notes), 165 (notes)


                                THE END


                  Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & CO.
                           Edinburgh & London

-----

Footnote 1:

  Wolf, “Crypto-Jews under the Commonwealth” (_Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._,
  vol. i. pp. 55 _et seq._); “The Middle Age of Anglo-Jewish History”
  (_Papers read at the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition_, pp. 53–79).

Footnote 2:

  The origin of this name is obscure. There seems to be little doubt
  that it was originally a nickname, seeing that the classical name for
  the converts was _Nuevos Cristianos_, or “New Christians.” Graetz
  believes that Marrano is derived from Maran-atha, in allusion to 1
  Cor. xvi. 22, “If any man love not the Lord, let him be Anathema
  Maran-atha” (_Geschichte der Juden_, vol. viii. p. 73).

Footnote 3:

  Kayserling, _Juden in Portugal_, p. 327.

Footnote 4:

  Graetz, vol. viii. pp. 309–11; Ehrentheil, _Jüdisches Familien Buch_,
  p. 326.

Footnote 5:

  Kayserling, p. 139.

Footnote 6:

  Graetz, vol. x. pp. 195, 196, 200; Da Costa, _Israel and the
  Gentiles_, p. 408; Kayserling, p. 302.

Footnote 7:

  Graetz, vol. viii. pp. 342–43; Colonial State Papers (Spanish), vol.
  i. pp. 51, 164.

Footnote 8:

  Wolf, _Middle Age_, pp. 64, 67–70; S. L. Lee in _Gentleman’s
  Magazine_, Feb. 1880.

Footnote 9:

  Wolf, _Middle Age_, p. 68; Graetz, vol. ix. p. 494.

Footnote 10:

  _Historia de los Judios de España_, vol. iii. p. 357.

Footnote 11:

  Wolf, _Crypto-Jews_, loc. cit.

Footnote 12:

  Wolf, _Middle Age_, pp. 61–63.

Footnote 13:

  De Castro, _Auswahl von Grabsteinen_, Part I. p. 28.

Footnote 14:

  Rycaut, _History of the Turkish Empire_ (1687), vol. ii. pp. 174, _et
  seq._

Footnote 15:

  _Infra_, pp. 143–145.

Footnote 16:

  Tracts on Liberty of Conscience, 1614–1661 (Hanserd Knollys Soc.), pp.
  28, 30–31, 47, 71.

Footnote 17:

  Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. VII., MSS. of Sir F. Graham, pp. 401–403.

Footnote 18:

  See reprint by Hanserd Knollys Soc., p. 141. For Roger Williams’s
  services to the cause of Jewish Toleration, see Wolf, “American
  Elements in the Resettlement” (_Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. iii. pp.
  77–78), and Straus, “Roger Williams, the Pioneer of Religious
  Liberty,” pp. 172–178.

Footnote 19:

  Edwards, _Gangræna_, Part III. p. 103.

Footnote 20:

  Art. 10. See also his “Good Work for a Good Magistrate” (1651), pp.
  53, 90.

Footnote 21:

  _Mercurius Pragmaticus_, Dec. 19–26, 1648.

Footnote 22:

  Firth, “Notes on the History of the Jews in England, 1648–1660.”
  _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. iv.

Footnote 23:

  “The Petition of the Jews for the Repealing of the Act of Parliament
  for their Banishment out of England” (Lond., 1649).

Footnote 24:

  Fuller, “A Pisgah-sight of Palestine,” Book V. p. 194.

Footnote 25:

  Calendar State Papers, Dom. 1623–25. p. 435.

Footnote 26:

  Whitelock, “Memorials,” p. 397.

Footnote 27:

  De Castro, _Auswahl_, loc. cit.

Footnote 28:

  Edwards, _Gangræna_, i. p. 121; ii. pp. 26, 31; “Middlesex County
  Records,” vol. iii. pp. 186–87; _Anabaptisticum Pantheon_, p. 233;
  Hickes, _Peculium Dei_, pp. 19–26. There are many other scattered
  references in the literature of the period to this curious movement.

Footnote 29:

  A good life of Menasseh ben Israel has yet to be written. Short
  biographies have been published by Kayserling (English translation in
  _Miscellany of Hebrew Literature_, vol. ii.); the Rev. Dr. H. Adler,
  Chief Rabbi of the British Empire (_Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. i.);
  and Graetz (_Geschichte der Juden_, vol. x.). None of these is
  exhaustive, or based on bedrock material.

Footnote 30:

  “Gratulação ao seren. Raynha Henri. Maria, dignissima corsorte ao
  august; Carlo, Rey da Grande Britannia, Francia e Hebernia” (Amst.,
  1642).

Footnote 31:

  Harl. Misc., vol. vii. p. 623; _infra_, p. lxxvii.

Footnote 32:

  Thorowgood, “Jews in America” (1660), Postscript to the “Epistle
  Dedicatory.”

Footnote 33:

  The Declaration of the Unity of God, the fundamental teaching of
  Judaism (Deut. vi. 4–9). _Shema_ means “Hear,” and it is the first
  word of verse 4: “Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one God.”

Footnote 34:

  Dury, “Epistolary Discourse to Mr. Thomas Thorowgood” (1649).

Footnote 35:

  Thorowgood, “Jews in America” (1650), pp. 129 _et seq._

Footnote 36:

  The text of the letter has not been preserved, but its contents are
  summarised in Holmes’s reply, printed in an appendix to Felgenhauer’s
  _Bonum Nuncium Israeli_.

Footnote 37:

  _Vindiciæ Judæorum_, _infra_, pp. 143–144.

Footnote 38:

  Dury, “Epistolary Discourse.” For text of the letters, see _infra_, p.
  lxxviii.

Footnote 39:

  _Bonum Nuncium_, loc. cit.

Footnote 40:

  This tract has been the source of a curious misunderstanding.
  Kayserling, who apparently never examined more of it than the
  title-page, on which the author is described as “E. S. Middlesex,”
  ascribed it to “Lord Middlesex,” and regarded it as favourable to
  Menasseh (_Misc. Heb. Lit._, ii. p. 33). Had he looked at the Latin
  translation at the end he would have found the name of the author
  given in full. Moreover, the writer, so far from being philo-Semitic,
  expressly states that the object of his pamphlet was the “taking off
  the scandall of our too great desire of entertayning the unbeleeving
  Nation of the Jewes.” Kayserling’s errors have been adopted without
  inquiry by Graetz, Adler, and other writers.

Footnote 41:

  “Rights of the Kingdom,” p. 39.

Footnote 42:

  “Pisgah-sight of Palestine,” Book V. pp. 194 _et seq._

Footnote 43:

  “Good Work,” &c., _loc. cit._

Footnote 44:

  Writing to Crawford in 1643, says: “The State, in choosing men to
  serve it, takes no notice of their opinions; if they be willing
  faithfully to serve it—that satisfies.... Bear with men of different
  minds from yourself.” Carlyle, “Cromwell’s Letters and Speeches,” i.
  p. 148.

Footnote 45:

  Gardiner, “History of the Commonwealth,” vol. ii.

Footnote 46:

  Carlyle, “Cromwell’s Letters and Speeches,” vol. iii. pp. 23, 25, 26.

Footnote 47:

  _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. i. pp. 73–74; vol. ii. pp. 17–18; Wolf,
  “Jewish Emancipation in the City” (_Jewish Chronicle_, Nov. 30, 1894);
  Graetz, _Geschichte_, vol. x. p. 19.

Footnote 48:

  Wolf, “Cromwell’s Jewish Intelligencers” (Lond., 1891).

Footnote 49:

  S. R. Gardiner in the _Academy_, March 4, 1882.

Footnote 50:

  _Vindiciæ Judæorum_, p. 5; _infra_, p. 111; “Humble Addresses,”
  _infra_, p. 77.

Footnote 51:

  Cal. State Papers, Dom. (1651), p. 472.

Footnote 52:

  Cal. State Papers, Dom. (1651–52), p. 577; (1652–53), p. 38.

Footnote 53:

  Thurloe State Papers, vol. i. p. 387; Clarendon State Papers, vol. ii.
  p. 233.

Footnote 54:

  _Supra_, p. xvii.

Footnote 55:

  Wolf, “Resettlement of the Jews in England” (1888), p. 9.

Footnote 56:

  For text of these petitions see _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. iii.
  pp. 88–93.

Footnote 57:

  State Papers, Dom. Interregnum, i. 75 (1654), pp. 596, 620.

Footnote 58:

  Rawl. MSS., A 260, fol. 57. Text of this letter is given in _Trans.
  Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. iii. p. 93.

Footnote 59:

  _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. ii. pp. 18, 45–46.

Footnote 60:

  Cal. of State Papers, Dom., 1655, p. 585.

Footnote 61:

  _Supra_, p. xvii.

Footnote 62:

  _Infra_, p. lxxxvii.

Footnote 63:

  _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. iii. p. 90.

Footnote 64:

  Wolf, “American Elements in the Resettlement” (_Trans. Jew. Hist.
  Soc._, vol. iii. pp. 95–100); Wolf, “Cromwell’s Jewish
  Intelligencers,” 1891, pp. 11–12.

Footnote 65:

  Cal. of State Papers, Dom., 1655, p. 583.

Footnote 66:

  “Cromwell’s Jewish Intelligencers,” _loc. cit._

Footnote 67:

  _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. iii. pp. 82–86.

Footnote 68:

  Jacob Sasportas, who had acted as a “corrector” in Menasseh’s
  printing-office in Amsterdam, and was afterwards elected Chief Rabbi
  in London, was a member of the mission (Graetz, vol. x. notes, p.
  xix). Raguenet states (_Histoire d’Oliver Cromwell_, p. 290) that two
  other Rabbis accompanied it, “Rabbi Jacob ben Azahel” and “David ben
  Eliezer of Prague.” I have not been able to identify these persons,
  but tentatively I am disposed to think that “Azahel” is a corruption
  of “Heschel,” and that the person referred to is Rabbi Josua ben Jacob
  Heschel of Lublin. Menasseh’s elder son lived for some time in Lublin,
  and it is quite possible that Heschel came to London to lay the case
  of the persecuted Polish Jews before Cromwell.

Footnote 69:

  Wolf, “Menasseh ben Israel’s Study in London,” _Trans. Jew. Hist.
  Soc._, vol. iii. pp. 144 _et seq._

Footnote 70:

  Felgenhauer, _Bonum Nuncium Israeli_, p. 110.

Footnote 71:

  _Infra_, p. 47.

Footnote 72:

  _Infra_, p. lxxix.

Footnote 73:

  Graetz, _Geschichte_, vol. x. pp. 52–82; _Mercurius Politicus_, Dec.
  17, 1655; Thurloe State Papers, vol. iv. p. 333.

Footnote 74:

  “Annals of England” (1655), vol. iii. p. 31.

Footnote 75:

  The interest of the Embassies in the question is illustrated by the
  frequent reference made to it in the despatches of Chanut (Thurloe,
  vol. ii. p. 652), Nieupoort (_Ibid._, vol. iv. pp. 333, 338; “New York
  Colonial MSS.,” vol. i. pp. 579, 583), Sagredo and Salvetti (_Revue
  des Études Juives_, No. 11, pp. 103–104). Nieupoort’s view is shown by
  the assurance he extracted from Menasseh that there was no intention
  to invite Dutch Jews to England (Thurloe, vol. iv. p. 333).

Footnote 76:

  “Memorials,” p. 618.

Footnote 77:

  _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. i. pp. 70–71, 75.

Footnote 78:

  _Ibid._, p. 44.

Footnote 79:

  _Infra_, p. 118. _London News Letter_, April 2, 1649 (Cartes Letters,
  vol. i. p. 275).

Footnote 80:

  Jesse, “England under the Stuarts,” vol. ii. p. 297; Tovey, _Anglia
  Judaica_, p. 275.

Footnote 81:

  Violet, “Petition against the Jews,” p. 2.

Footnote 82:

  The violence of such tracts as Prynne’s “Demurrer,” Ross’s “View of
  the Jewish Religion,” and the anonymous “Case of the Jews Stated,” has
  no parallel in the literature of the time.

Footnote 83:

  Paul Isaiah, “The Messias of the Christians and the Jews.”

Footnote 84:

  Prynne, “Demurrer,” Part I. p. 73.

Footnote 85:

  Copley, “Case of the Jews is Altered,” p. 4.

Footnote 86:

  “View of the Jewish Religion.”

Footnote 87:

  See especially Prynne’s “Demurrers,” and “Anglo-Judæus,” by W. H. Only
  three ungrudging defences of the Jews were published—Copley’s “Case of
  the Jews,” D. L.’s “Israel’s Condition and Cause Pleaded” (a very
  feeble reply to Prynne), and Collier’s “Brief Answer.”

Footnote 88:

  Dury, “A Case of Conscience.” Harl. Misc., vol. vii. p. 256.

Footnote 89:

  “Life of Henry Jessey,” pp. 67–68.

Footnote 90:

  Philo-Judæus, “The Resurrection of Dead Bones,” p. 102.

Footnote 91:

  State Papers, Domestic. Interregnum, vol. i. 76, p. 353.

Footnote 92:

  _Ibid._, p. 374. For text of petition, see _infra_, pp. lxxxii-lxxxiv.

Footnote 93:

  Harl. Miscellany, vol. vii p. 618.

Footnote 94:

  _Infra_, p. lxxxiv.

Footnote 95:

  State Papers, Dom. Inter., i. 76, p. 374.

Footnote 96:

  State Papers, Dom. Inter., i. 76, p. 375.

Footnote 97:

  _Ibid._, pp. 378–379. For text of Circular see _infra_, p. lxxxiv.

Footnote 98:

  _Publick Intelligencer_, December 10, 1655.

Footnote 99:

  The list of members is given in State Papers, Dom. Inter., i. 76, p.
  378.

Footnote 100:

  _Publick Intelligencer_, loc. cit.

Footnote 101:

  [Henry Jessey.] “A Narrative of the late Proceedings at Whitehall
  Concerning the Jews, &c.,” Harl. Misc., vii. p. 623. See also Burton
  (_pseud._ _i.e._ Nathaniel Crouch), _Judæorum Memorabilia_.

Footnote 102:

  _Ibid._

Footnote 103:

  That the Judges’ decision was given at the first meeting of the
  Conference is clear from a statement made by Nye to Prynne on the
  morning of the second meeting (“Short Demurrer,” p. 4).

Footnote 104:

  _Publick Intelligencer_, loc. cit.

Footnote 105:

  _Ibid._

Footnote 106:

  _Judæorum Memorabilia_, p. 170.

Footnote 107:

  Barlow, “Several Miscellaneous and Weighty Cases of Conscience”
  (1692), Fifth Treatise. See also p. 1 of the Bookseller’s Preface.
  Rev. S. Levy believes (_Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, iii. p. 152) that
  this opinion was drawn up at the request of Robert Boyle. This is
  improbable, as it is clear from the resemblances between Barlow’s
  recommendations and the report ultimately drawn up by the Committee of
  the Council (_infra_, p. lxxxiv), that the opinion was submitted to
  the Whitehall Conference, and Boyle was not a member of that body.
  Goodwin, who was President of Magdalen College, is much more likely to
  have asked Barlow for the opinion, especially as we know that he was
  in favour of “due cautions” (_Jud. Mem._, p. 174).

Footnote 108:

  _Jud. Mem._, p. 174.

Footnote 109:

  _Ibid._, pp. 170, 175.

Footnote 110:

  State Papers, Dom. Inter., i. 76 (1655), p. 412.

Footnote 111:

  This is shown by two letters in the Domestic State Papers (see _Trans.
  Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. i. p. 46).

Footnote 112:

  Thurloe State Papers, vol. iv. p. 321.

Footnote 113:

  _Publick Intelligencer_, loc. cit.

Footnote 114:

  Spence’s “Anecdotes,” p. 77.

Footnote 115:

  “A Short Demurrer,” Part I. The publication of the pamphlet was
  hurried to be in time for the Conference. It was written in seven
  days, and the preface is dated December 14, four days before the last
  meeting (_cf._ Preface to “Second Demurrer,” 1656).

Footnote 116:

  _Jud. Memor._, p. 175; Burton, “Diary,” p. 309.

Footnote 117:

  Burton, _loc. cit._

Footnote 118:

  Burton, _loc. cit._

Footnote 119:

  “Life of Henry Jessey,” pp. 67–68.

Footnote 120:

  That Cromwell’s interposition took place under these circumstances is
  an inference of the present writer’s. The statements in Jessey’s
  “Life” clearly point to this conclusion.

Footnote 121:

  These fragments of Cromwell’s speech are gathered from Jessey’s
  “Narrative,” Crouch’s _Judæorum Memorabilia_, pp. 175–176, and
  Spence’s “Anecdotes,” p. 77.

Footnote 122:

  Testimony by Rycaut, who was present in the crowd (Spence’s
  “Anecdotes,” p. 77).

Footnote 123:

  Writing to Henry Cromwell about the Conference a week later, Thurloe
  says, “I doe assure you that his highness is put to exercise every day
  with the peevishness and wroth of some persons heere” (State Papers,
  vol. iv. p. 343).

Footnote 124:

  _Cf._ Conditions, ii., iii., iv., v., ix., xi., and xvii., in Barlow,
  “The Care of the Jews,” pp. 67, 68, 70, 71, and 73.

Footnote 125:

  _Infra_, p. lxxxiv-lxxxv.

Footnote 126:

  In the Calendar of State Papers, Dom. (1655–1656), p. 15, it is
  hypothetically dated November 13, the day on which Menasseh’s
  proposals were referred to the Committee. This date is absolutely
  impossible, as the Committee could not have ascertained the views it
  reported to the Council in the course of a single afternoon. If it was
  not drawn up on the 15th, it could not have been drawn up until the
  Conference was over, as the Conference was specifically summoned to
  advise the Committee.

Footnote 127:

  I have to thank Dr. Gardiner for this ingenious conjecture. It
  entirely accords with all the known facts.

Footnote 128:

  Edit. Bohn, vol. i. p. 327.

Footnote 129:

  _Supra_, p. xvii.

Footnote 130:

  Guildhall Archives. Remembrancia, vol. ix. No. 44, pp. 1–18. I printed
  the text of this petition in full in the _Jewish Chronicle_, November
  15, 1899.

Footnote 131:

  These grants are mentioned in a Jewish petition subsequently presented
  to Cromwell (_infra_, pp. lxxxv-lxxxvi).

Footnote 132:

  Gardiner, “Hist. of the Commonwealth,” vol. i. pp. 396–97.

Footnote 133:

  Graetz, _Geschichte der Juden_, vol. x. p. 122.

Footnote 134:

  Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1655–56, p. 82.

Footnote 135:

  Brit. Mus. Add. MSS. 27962. In a despatch dated January 14, Salvetti
  refers to the Jewish question, but makes no mention of the arrangement
  respecting divine worship. On the same date, too, the well-informed
  Dutch ambassador, Nieupoort, informed the States-General that it was
  generally understood that the Lord Protector would take no further
  steps (Thurloe State Papers, vol. iv. p. 328). It would seem, then,
  that the transaction took place between the 14th and the 28th January.

Footnote 136:

  _Ibid._

Footnote 137:

  State Papers, Domestic. Interregnum, cxxv., No. 38, i. 76, p. 604; i.
  112, p. 289; cxxvi., No. 105.

Footnote 138:

  _Ibid._, cxxvi., No. 105, iv.

Footnote 139:

  _Ibid._, cxxvi., No. 105.

Footnote 140:

  _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. i. p. 63.

Footnote 141:

  State Papers, Dom. Interregnum, cxxv., 58. _Infra_, p. lxxxv.

Footnote 142:

  See endorsement of the petition. _Infra_, p. lxxxvi.

Footnote 143:

  _Infra_, p. 107. The hypothesis that John Sadler was the author of the
  letter which gave rise to the _Vindiciæ Judæorum_ is based on the
  facts that he was at the time the go-between in the negotiations with
  Cromwell, that he was an intimate friend of Menasseh, and that he had
  already given some thought to the blood accusation and other charges
  against the Jews (“Rights of the Kingdom,” p. 74).

Footnote 144:

  State Papers, Dom. Inter., i. 77, April 1, 1656; cxxvi., No. 105, xi.

Footnote 145:

  Carlyle, “Cromwell’s Letters and Speeches,” vol. ii. p. 161.

Footnote 146:

  State Papers, Dom. Inter., cxxvi., No. 105, i.; i. 77, No. 11.

Footnote 147:

  State Papers, Dom. Inter., cxxvi., No. 105, ii. and iii. Most of the
  documents in the Robles case have been printed as an appendix to my
  paper on “Crypto-Jews under the Commonwealth” (_Trans. Jew. Hist.
  Soc._, vol. i. pp. 76–86).

Footnote 148:

  _Ibid._, cxxvi., No. 105, vi.

Footnote 149:

  State Papers, Dom. Inter., i. 77, pp. 44, 78; cxxvii., 21, 40; i. 77,
  No. 19.

Footnote 150:

  There is a tradition in the synagogues that written privileges were
  granted, and this conforms with all the other evidence relating to the
  campaign. The disappearance of these documents is not surprising, as
  many of the older documents belonging to the Sephardi congregation in
  London passed into private hands. Moreover, after the Restoration the
  congregations would naturally wish to destroy all evidence of their
  negotiations with the Protector. It is probable that these documents
  are referred to in the State Papers, where mention is made of “a Jew
  living in London who has produced great testimonies under the hand of
  the late Lord Protector.” (Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1659–60, p. 291.)

Footnote 151:

  “Tracts on Liberty of Conscience” (Hanserd Knollys Soc.), p. 240.

Footnote 152:

  See Endorsement of Petition, _infra_, p. lxxxvi.

Footnote 153:

  A similar course had been taken with regard to Protestant refugees in
  the city on November 13, 1655. (Guildhall Archives: Rep. lxiv. fol.
  8^b.)

Footnote 154:

  Some of these restrictions are clearly indicated by Menasseh’s
  disappointment at the settlement. The prohibition of proselytising has
  always been remembered as one of the conditions of the Readmission,
  and it was religiously observed until the Rabbinate of the present
  ecclesiastical chief of the Anglo-Jewish community. In 1752, when
  certain Ashkenazi Jews were making proselytes in London, the Parnassim
  of the Portuguese synagogue wrote to the authorities of the German
  congregation, calling their attention to this condition, and the
  proselytisers were ordered to desist from “pursuing such unlawful
  practices.” In 1760 a Jew was expelled from the synagogue and deprived
  of his burial rights for this offence. (Minute Books of the Duke’s
  Place Synagogue, 1752, 1760.)

Footnote 155:

  Violet, “The Petition Against the Jews” (1661), p. 2: “Cromwell and
  his Council did give a toleration and dispensation to a great number
  of Jews to come and live here in London, and to this day they do keep
  _public worship_ in the City of London, to the great dishonour of
  Christianity and public scandal of the true Protestant religion.”

Footnote 156:

  Abstract of lease in _Jewish Chronicle_, November 26, 1880,
  communicated by Mr. Israel Davis.

Footnote 157:

  Guildhall Archives, Rep. lxxiii. fol. 213.

Footnote 158:

  Menasseh had assured Nieupoort that he did “not desire anything for
  the Jews in Holland” (Thurloe, iv. p. 333). The negotiations with
  Charles II. are recorded in Brit. Mus. Add. MSS. 4106, fol. 253.

Footnote 159:

  _Infra_, p. lxxxvi.

Footnote 160:

  Hist. MSS. Com. Rep., viii. pp. 94–95. Fifth Rep. of Dep. Keeper of
  Public Records, App. ii. p. 253.

Footnote 161:

  _Infra_, p. lxxxviii.

Footnote 162:

  _Ibid._, p. lxxxvii.

Footnote 163:

  _Ibid._ Hist. MSS. Com. Rep., viii. p. 95.

Footnote 164:

  Compare frontispiece with portrait at p. 105.

Footnote 165:

  Kayserling, “Menasseh ben Israel.” (Misc. of Hebrew Literature, Series
  ii. pp. 68, 93.)

Footnote 166:

  For the condition of the Ashkenazi Jews at this epoch see Graetz’s
  _Geschichte_, vol. x. pp. 52–82.

Footnote 167:

  [Richard Baker], “The Marchants Humble Petition and Remonstrance”
  (London, 1659). p. 17.

Footnote 168:

  Guildhall Archives: Remembrancia, vol. ix. No. 44, pp. 1–18.

Footnote 169:

  Violet, “A Petition against the Jews” (London, 1661).

Footnote 170:

  State Papers, Dom., Charles II., vol. xxi. p. 140.

Footnote 171:

  “Petition,” p. 2.

Footnote 172:

  _Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc._, vol. i. pp. 71, 74–75.

Footnote 173:

  Brit. Mus. Add. MSS. 4106, f. 253.

Footnote 174:

  Journal of the House of Commons, December 17, 1660.

Footnote 175:

  State Papers, Dom., Chas. II., Entry Book xviii. (1664), fol. 79.

Footnote 176:

  The text of these orders in Council has been printed by Webb, “The
  Question whether a Jew may hold Lands” (Lond., 1753), pp. 38–40.

Footnote 177:

  Some of these patents are printed by Webb in an appendix to “The
  Question,” pp. 17–19. For Coronel’s knighthood see Le Neve’s
  “Pedigrees of Knights,” Harl. Soc. Pub. (1869).

Footnote 178:

  Wolf, “Jewish Emancipation in the City” (_Jew. Chron._, November 30,
  1894).

Footnote 179:

  Child, “A New Discourse of Trade” (Lond., 1668), p. 5.

Footnote 180:

  Wolf, “Jewish Emancipation,” _loc. cit._

Footnote 181:

  Dr. Gardiner has suggested to me, and I agree, that this paragraph is
  not a recommendation, but the thesis of the report. It is the text of
  the “reference” to the Sub-Committee by the Council, and the
  succeeding paragraphs constitute the report upon it. See _supra_, p.
  xlv.

------------------------------------------------------------------------



                          TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES


 1. P. xiv, changed "almost immediataly after" to "almost immediately
      after".
 2. P. xlii, changed "among it signatories" to "among its signatories".
 3. P. lxxv, "which caunot be" to "which cannot be".
 4. P. lxxxv, changed “from uisnge or applyinge” to “from usinge or
      applyinge”.
 5. P. 6, changed “veiwed those Countryes” to “viewed those Countryes”.
 6. P. 26, changed "aud when he" to "and when he".
 7. P. 36, changed "Our ancient Rabinsin" to "Our ancient Rabins in".
 8. P. 37, chaanged "the paticle (ion)" to "the particle (ion)".
 9. P. 43, changed "as Ekekiel, and" to "as Ezekiel, and".
10. P. 100, changed "every on should gain" to "every one should gain".
11. P. 101, changed "6 par Cent" to "6 per Cent".
12. P. 111, changed "Sauls sons" to "Saul’s sons".
13. P. 122, changed "Nehemias, cap. 8.6." to "Nehemias, chap. 8.6.".
14. P. 127, changed "certain fugive Iew" to "certain fugitive Iew".
15. P. 135, changed "or blaspeeme those" to "or blaspheme those".
16. P. 136, changed "thouh that was" to "though that was".
17. P. 176, changed "Pontificus Latine, 147 De disciplinus" to
      "Pontificios Latine, 147 De disciplinis".
18. P. 176, changed "Drucker, Mordechai ben" to "Drucker, Mardochai
      ben".
19. P. 176, changed “author of Gangrena” to “author of Gangræna”.
20. P. 177, changed "Eurgetes, Ptolomy" to "Euergetes, Ptolomy".
21. P. 177, changed "Finicus, Marcilius" to "Ficinus, Marcilius".
22. P. 178, changed "Geographie du Talmud" to "Géographie du Talmud".
23. P. 178, changed "Glory of Jehudah" to "Glory of Iehudah".
24. P. 180, changed "dominions at an" to "dominions as an".
25. P. 181, changed "Jurnin" to "Iurnin".
26. P. 181, changed "Kalicout" to "Kalikout".
27. P. 181, changed "Lacto, de" to "Laet, de".
28. P. 181, changed "Leon, Pedro Cieçade" to "Leon, Pedro Cieça".
29. P. 181, changed "Loet, cited" to "Loeb, cited".
30. P. 182, changed "of Elias Montalbo" to "of Elias Montalto".
31. P. 182, changed "Luxa" to "Laxa".
32. P. 182, changed "Marianus, cited" to "Marinus, cited".
33. P. 182, changed "Marracco, King of" to "Maracco, King of".
34. P. 183, changed "Diogo Pires" to "Diego Pires".
35. P. 185, changed "Ornstein, Rev. A. F." to "Ornstien, Rev. A. F."
36. P. 186, changed "Porarius" to "Pomarius".
37. P. 186, changed "Procopius, cited" to "Procopious, cited".
38. P. 186, changed "Psuedo-Messiah, Bar" to "Pseudo-Messiah, Bar".
39. P. 186, changed "Ragusa = Aragusa" to "Ragusa = Araguza".
40. P. 187, changed "Rodriques, Don Daniel" to "Rodrigues, Don Daniel".
41. P. 187, changed "Salamanque, Synagogues of" to "Salaminque,
      Synagogues of".
42. P. 188, changed "Sasal, Prince of" to "Sasol, Prince of".
43. P. 188, changed "Schemtob de Leon" to "Shemtob de Leon".
44. P. 188, changed "Sepher Eldad Danita" to "Sephar Eldad Danita".
45. P. 188, changed "Sisbuthus, the end" to "Sisibuthus, the end".
46. P. 188, changed "De Quieros enters" to "De Queiros enters".
47. P. 189, changed "Thesoro de los dinim" to "Thesoro de los dirim".
48. P. 189, changed "Tiglath-Pileser" to "Tiglah-Pileser".
49. P. 190, changed "Trask" to "Thrask".
50. P. 190, changed "Villepende, Marquis de" to "Villependi, Marquis
      de".
51. P. 190, changed "Viterbo, Cardinal Egidio" to "Viterbe, Cardinal
      Egidio".
52. All other spelling errors were uncorrected.
53. Footnotes have been re-indexed using numbers and collected together
      at the end of the last chapter.
54. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.
55. Superscripts are denoted by a caret before a single superscript
      character or a series of superscripted characters enclosed in
      curly braces, e.g. M^r. or M^{ister}.
56. Subscripts are denoted by an underscore before a series of
      subscripted characters enclosed in curly braces, e.g. H_{2}O.





*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Menasseh ben Israel's Mission to Oliver Cromwell - Being a reprint of the Pamphlets published by MENASSEH BEN - ISRAEL to promote the Re-admission of the Jews to England - 1649-1656" ***

Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.