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.”

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 ???? ????? 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 Comonw^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 manoeuvres 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:—

“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:—

“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:—

“[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.):—

“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  Captivitate hac plusquam BabylonicÂ, À servitute plusquam Ægyptiac 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 nostr 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 & Doctrin insignes, qui ad manum jam sunt. En ex Silesia habemus Abrahamum À Frankenberg, ex Borussi Joh. Mochingerum, ex Galli Autorem Libelli Gallico idiomate editi, Du rappel des Juifs. Ex Angli quos non? Nuper auctoritate public Nathanael Homerius, SS. Theol. Doctor, librum in folio edidit anglico idiomate, de hac ipsa materiÂ; & D. Henricus Jesse, nobis librum Belgico idiomate de Glori 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 Coeli expansum contegeret) Indies numero & virtute accrescunt, donec tandem totum Terrarum ambitum prÆdicatione su sint completuri: Vt aute 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 e potissimum intentione mitto, ut videat Dominus exstare adhuc & discerni ad hunc usque diem surculos ex stirpe Davidic 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.”

“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 hodiern 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, qu in re  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 e 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 vestr 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 grati 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, dupl quoad possim diligenti compensabitur.

“Tuis hisce ex animo attestatur, assentitur, negociis À scribendo jam detentus, qui Sionis pulverem commiseratur, qui hÆc propri manu subscripsi

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.

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 Comonwelth 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.”

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

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

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.”

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.

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.

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.

• 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.

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.