The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes 9786155211232

Citation preview

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes by Marianna D. Birnbaum

Central European University Press Budapest New York

© 2003 by Marianna D. Birnbaum Published in 2003 by Central European University Press

An imprint of the Central European University Share Company Nádor utca 11, H-1051 Budapest, Hungary Tel: +36-1-327-3138 or 327-3000 Fax: +36-1-327-3183 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.ceupress.com 400 West 59th Street, New York NY 10019, USA Tel: +1-212-547-6932 Fax: +1-212-548-4607 E-mail: [email protected]

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the permission of the Publisher. ISBN 963 9241 67 9 Cloth

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Birnbaum, Marianna D. The long journey of Gracia Mendes / by Marianna D. Birnbaum. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN (cloth) 1. Nasi, Gracia, ca. 1510-1569. 2. Marranos—Portugal—Biography. 3. Jews—Portugal—Biography. 4. Sephardim—Portugal—Biography. 5. Jewish women—Portugal—Biography. 6. Jews—Europe—Social conditions— 16th century. 7. Jews—Europe—Economic conditions—16th century. 8. Europe—Ethnic relations. I. Title. DS135.P8N373 2003 946.9’004924’0092—dc21 2003009770 Printed in Hungary by Akaprint Nyomda

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vii

Chapter 1 INTRODUCING THE FAMILY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

Chapter 2 A SHORT HISTORY OF THE CONVERSOS . . . . . . . 5 Inquisition in Spain and Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 The Assimilation of Conversos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 New Attitudes Toward Conversos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 The Special Status of the Rich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Changing Places– Changing Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Chapter 3 LIFE IN SIXTEENTH-CENTURY ANTWERP . . . . . . Converso Life in Lisbon and Antwerp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Family Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pepper and the Mendes Wealth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Move to Antwerp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gracia’s Official Entry into the Family Business . . . . . . . . Diogo and the Accusation of Judaizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Emperor’s Blackmail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Emperor’s Matchmaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15 18 20 24 26 27 29 31 32

Chapter 4 GRACIA IN VENICE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conditions in Ferrara and Mantua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Sisters’ Quarrel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Alleged Kidnapping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inquisition by Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Costa’s Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Brianda Before the Inquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36 41 42 46 48 50 52

Chapter 5 GRACIA AND JEWISH PATRONAGE IN SIXTEENTH-CENTURY FERRARA . . . . . . . . . . . 54 The Ferrara Bible . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Meeting an Old Friend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 The Medal Controversy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 The Growing Intolerance in Ferrara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Table of Contents

Chapter 6 IN BUSINESS WITH RAGUSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Jews in Ragusa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 The Ragusan Deal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Chapter 7 THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND THE JEWS . . . . . . . The Legal Status of Jews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Life and Customs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Western View of Levantine Jews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gracia’s Arrival in the Ottoman Empire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Who is a Jew? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Mendes-Nasi Enterprise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Crises in Ancona and Pesaro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Leading the Boycott Against Ancona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . New Faces in Constantinople . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gracia and the Resettling of Safed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jewish Patronage in the Ottoman Empire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Decline of the House of Mendes-Nasi . . . . . . . . . . . .

75 76 81 82 87 89 90 93 98 103 106 108 110

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Appendices Money, Prices, Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . From Dubrovnik to Constantinople . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Select Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Picture Credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Index .............................................. Index of Places . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Index of Persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

121 125 128 141 142 142 144

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many years ago, when I was writing about the Fuggers, a famous German banking family, I came across a statement made by one of their business agents, Hans Dernschwam, who traveled widely in the Ottoman Empire (1553–55). Dernschwam noted that Jews enjoyed a privileged position under Turkish rule; in particular, the head of one family, a “Portuguese woman,” dared to dress and behave like a European aristocrat, surrounding herself with luxuries and servants. I made a mental note to return to that passage and look further into the subject, but I forgot all about it until several years later when I attended a lecture on Renaissance medals. The lecturer pointed out that on one medal appeared the profile of an elegant young woman. Encircling her relief were Hebrew letters and her name was transliterated as “Gratsia Luna.” Could this be the same Portuguese woman whom Hans Dernschwam had mentioned in his diary? Only much later still did I discover that the medal depicts not her, but her niece, who had the same name. The lecturer had erroneously confused the two women and identified the portrait as that of the older one. By that point, however, I was smitten. Who was that mysterious Señora whom Dernschwam had so viciously disparaged? How did her niece come to have her portrait positioned on the medal? How could the lecturer on medals have made such a major error? This book is the result of my inquiry into the life and times of that remarkable woman, Señora Gracia Mendes (Luna), who commanded one of the most powerful positions in European trade in the sixteenth century, despite virulent anti-Semitic sentiments that had helped fuel the Spanish Inquisition and that eventually forced her to move with many in her family from Portugal to Turkey. I am grateful to the Center of Medieval and Renaissance Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, for having provided me generously with qualified and enthusiastic research assistants. I also wish to thank my many friends, who patiently listened and thoughtfully commented, when I kept bombarding them with those fascinating details I had unearthed about my heroine’s long and arduous journey from Lisbon to Constantinople. I hereby want to thank Professors Sima Cˇirkovic´ and Barisˇa Krekic´ for

Acknowledgments

providing me with information on the trade routes frequented by sixteenthcentury travelers in the Balkans. I am very grateful to Professor Jascha Kessler for his many stylistic improvements and to Professor Gabriel Piterberg for his expert comments regarding the Ottoman Empire. My special thanks go to Dr. G. Patton Wright who helped shape this volume with his many invaluable suggestions. The story of Gracia Mendes is dedicated to my late husband Henrik Birnbaum.

MDB January 15, 2003 Los Angeles, CA

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCING THE FAMILY

This book is about Señora Gracia Mendes (Luna), the wealthy sixteenth-century widow of Portuguese origin who, for many decades, while a practicing Christian, remained a secret Jew. Her career and that of her family spanned the map of Europe, from the Iberian Peninsula to Italy (where she later openly embraced Judaism) to Turkey and to Ottoman-ruled Palestine. Part of Gracia’s family arrived in the mid-1490s in Portugal, where she was born in 1510 and where, at the age of eighteen, she married another secret Jew, Francisco Mendes, a wealthy businessman. The two families were most probably related. The couple had a daughter whom they named Reyna. Following her husband’s death in 1536, Gracia moved her daughter and other members of her family out of Portugal, and after a long and perilous journey, reached safety in Turkey.* Whereas much is known about Gracia’s life, her family’s genealogy is less well documented. Although it is generally accepted that her parents arrived in Portugal from Aragon, neither their places of birth, nor their residence in Spain can be assigned to a definite locality. In all probability the name “Luna” represents the mother’s side of Gracia’s family. It can be found as a last name in Illueca where in the fifteenth century Christians, Jews, and Moors lived together.1 Located on the northern slopes of the “Sierra de la Virgen,” on the River Aranda in the vicinity of Gotor, Illueca lies 48 kilometers from Zaragoza and 45 kilometers from Calatayud. In the fifteenth century, the village belonged to the Baronate of the de Lunas who also owned the village Arandig and several other smaller settlements. Probably it was Juan Martinez de Luna IV under whom the Luna ancestors of Gracia lived. * Since contemporary European sources referred to the Ottoman Empire as “Turquie,” I am using both names. 1 For more on Illueca, see Encarnacion Marin Padilla, “La villa de Illueca, del señorio de los Martinez de Luna, el en siglo XV: sus judios,” Sefarad 56 (1996): 1:87–126, 2:233–75. Padilla’s study was based on notary deeds kept in the archives of notarial protocols of Zaragoza, Calatayud, and La Almunia de Doña Godina. In his marriage with Deanira de Lanuza, Don Pedro Martinez de Luna had two sons: Don Juan and Don Jaime. After the death of Juan, his son became the owner of the region.

2

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

In 1450, there were 21 Jewish families living in Illueca. The number of Jews decreased during the 1460s and 1470s, but increased later to around 30. The community had a rabbi, who also acted as notary. There are no records of a hospital or a Jewish cemetery. In 1453, a Jewish butcher shop, Carniceria de los judios, opened whose owner, among his many other duties, also performed circumcisions. Between 1450 and 1470, an active Jewish congregation developed, with a synagogue and organized tax collecting. Although Illueca had a number of Jews, few conversos—those Jews who during the Inquisition had been forced to accept Christianity—can be found with evidence regarding their earlier Jewish names. During the baptismal ceremonies the converso’s Jewish name was dropped. Frequently, the so-called New Christian received the name of one of the señores of the region, who stood as the New Christian’s sponsor. A record from 1432 mentions a certain Jaime de Luna, a man from Illueca, and his daughter, Beatriz de Luna.2 It is possible that Jaime de Luna, a converso from the vicinity of Zaragoza, and his daughter, who later married Jaime Ram, a Zaragozan, had lived in the same “señorio” as Gracia’s family. Hence, the shared name. In addition, a record of 1412 mentions a Doña Brianda de Luna, the widow of Don Luis Cornel.3 These two converso girls, Beatriz (Gracia) and Brianda (Reyna) Luna, were the younger sisters of Doctor Agostinho Miques (formerly Samuel Micas). The royal physician, who taught medicine at the University of Lisbon, Miques was also called “Nasi” or prince. The latter appellation must have been attached to the family name, denoting the social status he had enjoyed among his coreligionists before his baptism. At least one historian believed that Gracia’s and Brianda’s brother remained in Portugal and lived as a Christian.4

2 “Es posible que el corredor cenverso y vecino de Zaragossa, Jaime de Luna, y su hija Beatriz de Luna, criada “a soldada” del tambien corredor zaragozano Jaime Ram, procedieran del señorio de los Martinez de Luna, dado su apellido” (Padilla, p. 374, footnote 274, referring to the year 1432.) Jaime de Luna’s name appears for the last time in 1492. The best-known man by the name of Luna was Alvaro de Luna, royal constable, in 1449. For more on him, see N. Round, The Greatest Man Uncrowned: A Study of the Fall of Don Alvaro de Luna (London, 1986). 3 Padilla, p. 91. 4 See Herman Kellenbenz, “I Mendes i Rodriques d’Evora e i Ximenes nei lore rapporti commerciali con Venezia,” Gli Ebrei e Venezia, secoli XIV–XVII, ed. Gaetano Cozzi (Milan, 1987), p. 152. There are also records regarding a Mendes family in Evora. In Venice, during a hearing at the office of the Inquisition, Brianda Mendes claimed that she had been forcibly baptized. There was a small community in Aragon, close to Eje, also called Luna. It does show a Jewish settlement during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. See Haim Bernart, Atlas of Medieval Jewish History (New York, London, 1992), map 42.

Introducing the Family

3

Most probably, Gracia’s own family was distantly related to the Benvenistes. Based on the information in The Jews in the Crown of Aragon, the name Benvenist, or its variants, was popular in Jewish and converso circles throughout the Iberian Peninsula.5 The Benvenists lived in Barcelona, Zaragosa, Valencia, and in smaller places such as Morvedre or Lerida. There were Benvenists living in Perpignan and Villafranca. Moreover, there were also Benvenistes living in the Illueca area.6 The Benvenistes of Aragon were an old and respected Jewish family. In the twelfth century, Nasi Isaac Benveniste, was the physician of the king of Aragon. He transmitted his title to his son Seshet. In the fourteenth century, Joseph Benveniste, a member of the same family was the counselor of Alphonso XI of Castile. The most revered member of the family was Abraham Benveniste (1406–54), “court rabbi” in Castile, who restored John II’s

5 See especially vols. 1–2. Nov. 17, 1299 (37) Barcelona: Benvenist Avenbenvist of Zaragoza. No date, 1302 (97) Aljama de Valencia/Barcelona. Benvenist (no date) his “genre” and his “fill.” Feb. 1314 (163) Valencia: Jusef Benvenist and Benvenist Issac Rossel of Barcelona. Aug. 10, 1324 (290) Barcelona: Jusef Benvenist of Montblanch. Nov. 2, 1324 (302) Lerida: Benvenist Cofe and his mother, of Morvedre. No date (494) Vilafranca del Penedes[?], Benvenist Izmel of Villafranca, to change residence to Barcelona with his son Samuel. Oct. 20, 1328 (601) Barcelona: Benvenist Ismael, physician -dead. Oct. 20, 1328 (602) Barcelona: Samuel Benvenist, son of the physician. Jan. 24, 1329 (617) Tarazona: Benvenist ca Porta of Tortosa. Aug. 3, 1340 (937) Barcelona: Issach Benvenist dead, left a widow and a son, also named Issach. Apr. 13, 1341 (957) Barcelona: Benvenist Bionjuha de Caballeria of Barcelona. Oct. 24, 1359 (1126) Cervera: Benvenist Bonjuha. Aug. 11, 1369 (1135) Barcelona: Heirs of Samuel Bonjuha of Cervera, son Bonjuha of Besalu. Aug. 9, 1375 (1146) Barcelona: widow of Samuel Benvenist, called “Bi Benvenist” of Barcelona. Aug. 23, 1389 (1202) Monzon: Benvenist de la Caballeria. May 27, 1390 (1206) Perpignan: Benvenist Bonet and Bonjuha Bonet. Dec. 20, 1457 (1344) Tortosa: Benvenist Bubo. 6 A Bienbenist Abenpessat was functioning as “adelantado” (the head of the Jewish community). He is probably the same man who is referred to as “el judio de Illueca Bienbenist Abenpessat” under the lordship of Jaime Martinez de Luna (Padilla, p. 108 and p. 354). He is mentioned in 1451, in connection with a contract. Still on March 17, 1488, a man named Mosse testified in Illueca to having seen Fernando Lopes, a converso, and his father, eating meat “degollada de judios” (slaughtered in the Jewish manner) in the house of Bienbenist Abenpessat.

4

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

shaky fiscal administration. He acted as tax farmer general of the realm. As “Rab de la Corte,” he was chief justice of the Jews, appointed by the king.7 Most probably, it was his direct descendant who chose to migrate to Portugal where he and his sons converted to Christianity. Semah, the older son, took the name Francisco Mendes, and his younger brother, Meir, became Diogo Mendes.8 A. A. Marques de Almeida calls the Mendes family “uma importante familia judaica de Aragão que se refugion em Portugal em 1492.”9 Just how important they were will be demonstrated in the following chapters.

7 For more on Abraham Benveniste see, Encyclopedia Judaica (Jerusalem, 1971), 4.555. 8 Roth suspected that their father converted at a different time and received the name Henrique Núñez at his baptism. He is not identical with the informer of the same name in Cecil Roth’s Doña Gracia of the House of Nasi (Philadelphia, 1948), p.10. 9 Capitais e capitalistas no comércio de espeçiaria: o eixo-Lisboa-Antuérpia (1501-1549): Aproximacão a um Estudo de Geofinança (Lisboa, 1993), p. 23 and p. 29, respectively. A man by the name of Mendes, who might have been related to Francisco’s family, is Alvaro Mendes, a mapmaker of John III. He emigrated to Turkey in 1585 and, allegedly changed his name to Abraham Suseyet, or Solomon Abenaes, or Abenaish. See Encyclopedia Judaica, 2.63ff.

CHAPTER 2

A SHORT HISTORY OF THE CONVERSOS

The beginnings of Gracia’s story go back to Spain, to the times of the Expulsion, and even before. Most of the ills of Spanish history, such as the lack of a bourgeoisie and industry, have been attributed to the expulsion of the Jews. Scholars have disagreed on the number of expellees from as few as 150,000 to a barely imaginable 1 million.10 More recent research contends that the urban population of Spanish cities had been smaller than previously considered and that prior to the Expulsion there were no more than 10,000 Jews living in Aragon. In 1492, the majority probably converted rather than left, and those who left chose Portugal or Italy as their new haven. Just a minority of the Jewish population fled to Muslim-ruled regions, and even those moved slowly, in well-prepared stages.11 Shortly before his death in 1254, Pope Innocent IV established the Inquisition, an organization that from its beginnings until the Enlightenment was responsible for the torture and death of many thousands. As the

10 Ben-Zion Netanyahu estimates the number at 600,000 or as high as 1 million. See The Marranos of Spain from the Late XIVth to the Early XVIth Century (New York, 1966). Salo W. Baron claims that between 1391 and 1412 about 200,000 Jews were baptized. See The Social and Religious History of the Jews, 2nd ed. (New York, 1952–80), esp. vols. 9-10. For more on this issue, see Henry Kamen, “The Mediterranean and the Expulsion of Spanish Jews in 1492,” Past and Present, 119 (1988): 30–55. The majority of Spanish Jews lived in Castile. Some scholars have estimated 30,000 families, which would mean approximately 130,000 people. More realistic scholars believe that the kingdom’s total population, Jewish and non-Jewish, was about 200,000 (see Haim Beinart, Atlas of Medieval Jewish History (New York, 1992). 11 Of those thousands who, when forced to choose between conversion or flight, had chosen the latter, a large number perished during the flight. Later about 70,000 were forcibly baptized in Portugal. See Jonathan I. Israel, European Jewry in the Age of Mercantilism: 1550–1750 (Oxford, 1985), p. 7, note 1. By 1552, in addition to the Italian and the Levantine Jews, there were about 100 Portuguese Jewish families living in Ancona on the Adriatic Sea (Israel, p. 17). Since the Vatican has recently opened up its holdings of material pertaining to the Inquisition for the perusal of scholars, more precise figures may be available in the near future.

6

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Inquisition spread its power, conversions everywhere drew increasingly large numbers. However, those Jews who embraced the cross—the conversos, or New Christians—and who had chosen to stay on the Iberian Peninsula remained under constant suspicion and had to fear secret denunciation and the omnipresent spies of the Holy Office. In 1449, during the rule of João of Castile, the first outbreak of hostility was directed against the New Christians of Toledo, primarily because some of them had achieved high positions at the royal court. Among them was Don Alvaro de Luna, a financial advisor to the king. He was executed a few years later. The Christians referred to the newly converted Jews by many names. The terms used for the group, such as “conversos,” “confesos,” or “christianos nuevos,” underwent semantic changes during the decades after the Expulsion, and began to mark an “inherited status,” gaining a connotation of “suspect,” or a crypto-Jew. In Spain, but also in Italy, a Portuguese converso became virtually synonymous with “judaizer,” that is, one who practiced Mosaic rites in secret.

INQUISITION IN SPAIN AND PORTUGAL The organized beginnings of the Inquisition in Spain were directly connected with an event in Seville. During a royal visit in 1477, the hosting monks complained to the royal couple about the “conversos,” claiming that they judaized. Indeed, a year later, Sixtus IV agreed to set up the Inquisition in Spain. Established in 1478, the Holy Office began its work in 1480, in Seville, under the leadership of Frater Morillo and Frater San Martin. Ultimately it totaled fifteen tribunals, including one in Palma, Majorca. Madrid, Seville, and Toledo were the most active because the largest number of New Christians lived in those cities. Between 1481 and 1488, 700 people were burned at the stake. In 1484, Tomás de Torquemada became Grand Inquisitor of Spain, holding that position until his death in 1498. Torquemada, whose name has been identified with the essence of the Inquisition, belonged to the first seven Inquisitors appointed. But at that stage in the history of the Holy Office, the pope still had the last word and could extend his mercy.12 In 1488, the Inquisition moved south, to Toledo, Saragossa, and Valladolid where, especially in Toledo, Jews and Moslems were forced to inform 12 Robert Lemm, Die Spanische Inquisition: Geschichte und Legende, trans. Walter Kumpman (Munich, 1966), pp. 66 –7. Diego de Deza, who followed Torquemada, introduced further rules, as well as the censorship of books.

A Short History of the Conversos

7

on the New Christians. The “crypto-Jews” became the targets of the Dominicans and the Franciscans. Ironically, until 1492, the unconverted Jews of Spain enjoyed more freedoms than the conversos, or their coreligionists, living in continental Europe. Yet their importance to the Crown decreased when the New Christians began to perform the same functions and services that had been entrusted earlier to Jews. Also, after the fall of Granada, there was less need for Jewish capital to help wage the war. In 1492, all Jews had to choose either to convert or to leave Spain. Those who refused to convert, and had liquid assets, moved to Portugal, where they were permitted to stay, until the Inquisition began to operate there too. Gracia’s family belonged to that group. Already the 1391 pogrom in Sevilla’s Jewish quarter had forced many survivors to escape to Portugal. Some remained but others later returned to Spain. For example, Isaac Abrabanel’s grandfather escaped, but his grandson returned in 1485, and became the financial advisor of Ferdinand and Isabel. When Manuel married the Spanish princess Isabella in 1497, he promised his bride to clear Portugal of Jews. Although the wealthy could resist the edict for a while, the plague of 1506, for which the mob blamed the Jews, led to a bloodbath in Lisbon. Faced with the choice, more Jews chose conversion. The number of conversions was higher in Portugal even than in Spain, since Portugal had been the last refuge for Jews on the Iberian Peninsula. Compelled to seek exile rather than undergo the forced conversion, on March 19, 1497, about 700 Jews fled to Morocco and other parts of North Africa. An even larger number of Jews emigrated to Italy, and some moved to Avignon. The Holy Land, conquered by the Turks (1517), also attracted them, especially Salonika, where each immigrant group had its congregation, its “Kahal Kadosh.” Portugal was eager to copy Spain. Thus, owing to the mass conversions, the Inquisition, activated in Portugal 40 years after that of Spain, had many more thousands of suspects to investigate among the New Christians.

THE ASSIMILATION OF CONVERSOS Christian attitudes underwent major changes during the fifteenth century. Before the activation of the Inquisition, the sincere convert was distinguished from the “crypto-Jew,” and the distinction was made along religious lines only. Just before the introduction of the Inquisition in Spain, however, a virulent attack, the work of Alonso de Espina (1412–1495) appeared by the title Fortalitium fidei contra judeos, sarracenos aliosque christianae

8

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

fidei inimicos, calling them beasts endangering the Faith. This work, primarily anti-Jewish, also repeated the charge of deicide and helped to whip up violent sentiments against the New Christians.13 The conversos, who in many cases had successfully penetrated the highest echelons of society, shared the lives of the social and economic elite. But by holding important offices in the government, they crossed a set of social boundaries that provoked hostile responses. Excesses such as the 1449 Toledo riots against the conversos became common in the decades preceding the Edict of Expulsion. The Spanish Inquisition is entirely intertwined with the politics and religion of the country. It protected Roman Catholics. With the expulsion or conversion of many Jews, and the conversion of others as well as the forced baptism of the Muslims, the Inquisition relied on the surviving dream of the Spanish nobility to live in a purely Christian country. In 1492, the Reconquista promised to fulfill those dreams. However, the end result was precisely the opposite: the many conversions made Spain a suspect country for the Inquisition. To the Church, Spain seemed to be crawling with cryptoJews and fake Christians.14 There was also a slow but continuous change in the conversos’ selfimage. By the end of the fourteenth century, the new converts began to turn away from Judaism and ceased to observe Jewish laws. It is a persistent yet highly romanticized view to claim either that most converts were forced to embrace Catholicism or that they remained secret Jews. The majority of them, in fact, did not feel guilty of having committed a disgraceful act. As the number of converts grew, it became ever easier to join their ranks, and feel comfortable about having done so. By the mid-fifteenth century, there were relatively few crypto-Jews; rather there were small groups or families secretly practicing some Jewish rites. Converso medical doctors were permitted to study scientific books in Hebrew, and some of those also studied the Talmud, since the gentiles did not distinguish between the two kinds of literature.15 The fact that the Inqui13 Lemm, p. 47. See also Y. Baer, History of the Jews in Spain (Philadelphia, 1961), originally Juden im Christlichen Spanien (Berlin, 1929–36), vol. 1, trans. Louis Schoffman. See also Netanyahu’s work in note 1. 14 This charge was not entirely wrong. Secret family transmission created a subculture of extraordinary longevity. 15 Jerome Reznik, Le Duc Joseph de Naxos (Paris, 1936), p. 28. It is possible that scholars, among them Amatus Lusitanus, acquired their knowledge of Hebrew that way. Joachim Prinz assumes that the prayer “Kol Nidre” was possibly written for the conversos. See The Secret Jews (New York, 1973), p. 171. Carl Gebhard defined the converso as a “Catholic without belief and a Jew without knowledge, but in will a Jew.” See Die Schriften des Uriel da Costa (Amsterdam, 1922), xix, quoted by Miriam Bodian, “Men

A Short History of the Conversos

9

sition questioned many conversos about a large number of secret practices (about which our knowledge comes mainly from the Inquisition’s own records) does not mean that the secret Jews practiced all or even some of them. The New Christians were mostly ignorant of what to practice and mainly of the accusations leveled against them The overwhelming majority of converts did not want to return to their previous religion. Most conversos were not only not Jewish in their faith or in their deeds but by and large assimilated and alienated from Judaism: “semigentilized.”16 Therefore it is impossible to speculate as to what percentage of the New Christians could still be considered Jewish, according to Mosaic laws. Uncircumcised conversos were eo ipso sons of apostates. The rabbis considered such a male a “gentile proselyte,” misled by his parents, “born in heresy,” who had to be discounted as a Jew.17 It was the Inquisition in Aragon that judaized the conversos and brought them closer to the selfdeclared Jews, who had at that point little sympathy for them. In fact, the Jews were better off during the first decades of the fifteenth century than the conversos whose situation deteriorated after 1449 because of the Inquisition. The Church persecuted the New Christians for those “transgressions” that the Jews could openly practice as part of their faith. Some Jewish preachers regarded that as divine justice. In Portugal too, the Inquisition soon developed from a religious into a political institution, supporting the Habsburg state. Philip II, the son of Charles V, made the Inquisition into an independent ministry, and the inquisitors, earlier theologians, were from then on, mostly lawyers.18

NEW ATTITUDES TOWARD CONVERSOS Many Catholic authors distinguished between New Christians and Marranos, always considering the latter crypto-Jews. The term “Marrano” was usually applied to Spanish and Portuguese Jews as well as to Italian converts.19 The New Christians never used the epithet “Marrano” as a self-definition. There are a few exceptions from the fifteenth century, when in Spanish poetry, of the Nation: the Shaping of the Identity in Early Modern Europe,” Past and Present 143 (May, 1994): 50. The New Christian communities, mostly merchant colonies “were unique in one respect. They were established as Jewish communities of earlier ‘conversos,’ seeking to re-attach themselves to the world of rabbinical Judaism” (Bodian, p. 49). 16 Netanyahu, p. 207. 17 For more on this designation, see chapter 7, “The Ottoman Empire and the Jews.” 18 Lemm, p. 75, and passim. 19 Bodian, p. 52. I have culled much of the following from Bodian’s study.

10

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

written by forced converts competing for jobs and favors at the Court, one convert in referring to another would claim that although he pretended and ate a lot of pork, he still remained a “Marrano.”20 In any such combination, the converso was called dishonest and duplicitous. There was some truth in that charge, since his experiences had taught the converso that, footless in his surroundings, for the sake of his survival, each thought had to be followed by a second, each plan had to be backed up by an alternative. The lives of most conversos between 1391, when the first wave of forced conversions commenced, and the latter part of the sixteenth century were as varied and changing as the world around them. The manner in which shortly after 1391 the converts mixed with the local, gentile population was different from what came to pass a century later, and again different in Spain or Portugal from what it was in Italy or the Low Countries. By the mid-sixteenth century, new terms were coined in Spain: gente de linaje, esta gente, esta generacion, esta raza. By then the estatutos de limpieze de sangre, statutes on racial grounds, were ubiquitous.21 Limpieza, the pure blood statute, was first introduced in 1449. By the second half of the sixteenth century, Toledo had blood statutes in two important institutions: in the cathedral chapter, imposed by the archbishop in 1547, and in the City Council, so ordered by the Crown, in 1560.22 Cervantes has Sancho Panza boast that he has neither Jewish nor Moorish blood.23 In Portugal, too, the “purity blood statute” was adopted. Soon such phrases gente da naçao or homens da naçao, even without the adjective “Hebrew” were used in reference to the conversos.24 For many decades in international business, homens de negoçios (men of commerce) meant conversos. By the seventeenth century, homens de negoçios was a synonym for Jews, but the phrase was recorded as early as 1516.25 During the first years of the Inquisition, the Church did not torture its victims. It actually took over the torture from the secular authorities 20 Professor Moshe Lazar’s verbal communication. Professor Lazar—of The University of Southern California—is an internationally known expert on the Sefardim. 21 Bodian, p. 52. 22 This law was a sixteenth-century precursor to the infamous Nuremberg Laws, introduced by the Nazis. For more of its implementation, see Linda Martz, “Pure Blood Statutes in Sixteenth-Century Toledo: Implementation as Opposed to Adaptation,” Sefarad 54.1 (1994): 83–107. 23 Quoted by Prinz, p. 17. 24 Bodian, p. 57. 25 Quoted by Yizhak Almeid. Les juifs et la vie économique, 72, and note 17, respectively. Almeid demonstrates that, from Amsterdam to New York, the actual founders of the commercial metropolises were conversos or Jews.

A Short History of the Conversos

11

because of the excesses they committed. However, burning the guilty at the stake was considered to follow the teachings of Christ.26 According to John 15: 6–7, Christ had said: ”Whoever does not remain in Me is thrown away as a branch and withers; people gather such branches, throw them into the fire and they are burned.” The guilty that were brought before the Inquisition were considered heretics, and heresy, according to the Church, destroyed the individual and society. The soul could still be redeemed if the person admitted his or her guilt before death, but if the defendant refused, the Church “washed its hands in innocence.” 27 It should be remembered that the defendants could choose a lawyer only from among those appointed by the Inquisition, and they were never permitted to learn the names of their accusers or meet them face-to-face. Since the Church’s task was to win souls, to attack the Church was considered a crime greater than murder. In 1528, Charles V became the first Spanish ruler to attend an auto-da-fé, which was staged in his honor in Valencia.28 The Inquisition spied on its victims and nurtured a matching mentality on the side of the lay population. Denunciations and anonymous incriminations became virtues. Marginalized by society, most conversos carried a stigma of disrepute and social inferiority. At each encounter with the “old” Christian population, their honor was questioned. If Jews were not “grounded” in the social and cultural life of any of the Western countries, which here and there temporarily tolerated them, the crypto-Jews became even more footloose. The outward guise got reversed: rather than looking like a “Jew” whose cloak disguised the “person” for the uninformed, the converso looked like a “person” for the uninformed, but under his cloak of “gentility,” he himself knew that he was an unprotected, trembling Jew, whom any accuser could incriminate and destroy. The conversos were frequently charged with having amassed fortunes at the expense of the Christians. Even those accusations carried a grain of truth, because money was the only tool of empowerment, for Jews and conversos alike. With money they could bribe officials and save themselves. Without the possible clout of money, nothing in their existence was deter-

26 Lemm, p. 42. 27 John 15 : 6–7. The auto-da-fé could be either “particular,” (i.e., one person burned), or “general.” Several of the latter were “publico,” held in public squares. Although the Moriscos too were persecuted, at the 1529 auto-da-fé of Granada, only three were sentenced, against the 78 New Christians accused (see also Inquisicion Española y mentalidad inquisitorial, ed. A. Alcalà et al. (Barcelona, 1984). 28 William Monter, The Spanish Inquisition from the Basque Lands to Sicily (Cambridge, 1990), p. 27.

12

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

mined on an individual basis, not to mention their chances to prove their innocence in the face of vicious, anonymous accusations. The story of Gracia Luna unfolds against such a background.

THE SPECIAL STATUS OF THE RICH Although the general climate of fear and uncertainty affected everyone, a more nuanced portrait must be drawn in the case of Gracia Mendes (Luna). The small, and exceptionally opulent class of Portuguese Jews and New Christians to whom Gracia belonged constituted a special entity. Her social equals never behaved as uprooted and lonely; they always and everywhere remained a tightly cohesive group. The fact that in Portugal even the wealthy conversos were excluded from honors and public offices generated not just resentment but also a separate identity, a caste within the system, which remained with the New Christians even after they had left Portugal. Thus these prosperous conversos from the Iberian Peninsula, instead of having no identity, had a sense of dual commitment. In addition to their shared religion, there was their own concept of the “naçion,” always meaning the descendants of baptized Jews from that particular region. This denotation was later expanded to include all Mediterranean Jews: “He hates our sacred nation,” says Shylock about Antonio in Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice (I.iii.48). The Portuguese emigrants frequently clung more to their nationalities than to their creed. Gracia Mendes too chose to remain a Portuguese subject, not just for the sake of moving her fortune in greater security. It is not an accident that in Turkey, where Jews from each region of Europe could freely practice their religion, the various national groups remained separated. Not just the Ashkenazi and the Sephardi Jews kept to themselves; there were separate Portuguese and Spanish synagogues, although the ancestors of the Portuguese congregation had arrived in Portugal from Spain. The conversos remained loyal to their Iberian roots to the point that even in Salonika they called their synagogues Castile, Aragon, Portugal, Catalonia, Evora, or Lisbon, and their tombstones were embellished with the arms of “hidalgos.”29 When in the seventeenth century, as some of them returned to Castile, they were distinguished from the native conversos as “portuguese de la naçion (hebrea).”30

29 Brian Pullan, Rich and Poor in Renaissance Venice: The Social Institutions of a Catholic State to 1620 (Oxford and Cambridge, Mass., 1971), p. 205. 30 Bodian, p. 59.

A Short History of the Conversos

13

While they suffered from discrimination by the Christians, the wealthy Iberian conversos considered themselves the nobility of commerce and banking. Persecution held them together, but even more so, their shared cultural experience created a profound bond. In Turkey, there was an emigration of unprecedented numbers, and they aspired to stay together, live and worship together, and aid their less fortunate fellow Jews.31 Unlike the Ashkenazim, the Iberian Jews did not mingle with Jews from different countries. They considered their encounters with non-Iberian Jews as strange as their meetings with non-Iberian Gentiles. The Iberian immigrants in Turkey were different from the Levantine Jews, not just in terms of wealth, but also of superior education, custom, and ritual. They were, in fact, alien to traditional Judaism as practiced in western and northern Europe. “A new, collective, ethos emerged” under the pressure of those encounters.32 The Spanish and Portuguese Jews tightened their ranks and segregated themselves from the Ashkenazim, in their living quarters, synagogues, even in their cemeteries.

CHANGING PLACES—CHANGING NAMES During the sixteenth century, being Jewish or New Christian entailed a multiplicity of behaviors, which determined people’s creeds, nationalities, and even their choices of names for themselves. Depending on where they lived, the New Christians used different names, and in the process of their adjustment to a new place of exile, they often had to create entirely new identities and personalities for themselves. At different stages of their lives, and in the various countries they lived, Gracia Mendes and her relatives used a variety of names not merely in their business ventures, but also in their private lives. Because of her immense wealth and her influence, Gracia’s life story cannot be raised to general significance. Therefore, her life story remains a peerless episode, even within the Portuguese converso experience of the rich, which by its own example illuminates a short and extraordinary period of Jewish history.

31 The only similar mass emigration of Jews had been from the Soviet Union to Israel where, by the strength of numbers and shared cultural ties, they too remained together, and recently founded a political party to represent their interests. 32 Bodian, p. 66.

14

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Gracia’s achievements are unique: she was a widow, a secret Jew, living in a violently anti-Jewish century, who overcame every imaginable obstacle contemporary society imposed on her, and successfully met every challenge, every boundary, her gender and religion forced upon her. Having crossed the Continent, escaping the wrath of the Habsburgs against all odds, she reached safety in Turkey. There she became a powerful leader of her community and helped create a new haven for Jews, practically the only refuge they found in those turbulent decades.

CHAPTER 3

LIFE IN SIXTEENTH-CENTURY ANTWERP

In the summer of 1540, a lavish wedding was celebrated in the Onze Lieve Vrouwekathedral (Our Lady’s Cathedral) of Antwerp. The pride of the city and site of its most important events, the cathedral had a gigantic spire, which rose to nearly four hundred feet and was topped by bronze bells. The church, completed in 1521, had taken more than two centuries to build and remained the largest gothic structure in the Low Countries. If not for a fire in 1533, chances are that construction of a new cathedral with nine naves would have been underway at this wedding; however, all available resources had to be allocated to the restoration of the existing structure. On that day, Diogo Mendes, the famous banker and spice king, married a young and enchanting Portuguese woman, Brianda Luna, the younger sister of Beatrix (Gracia) Luna Mendes, the rich widow of Diogo’s older brother. Who was this elder sister who had closed her home in one country to undertake a dangerous journey to relocate with her family in another? And how is her (and her family’s) story, unique as it is, important for the understanding of early modern Jewish–Christian relations, the dynamics of early modern trade, the construction (and reconstruction) of Jewish self-identities, and of women’s history? To begin to answer these questions, one must consider the role of Antwerp in the trade and geopolitics of the time. Antwerp’s principal asset, then and now, remains its location at the estuary of the river Scheldt, about fifty miles from the open sea. Already occupied in Roman times, Antwerp was sacked by the Vikings in 836 C.E. While Ghent and Bruges (at the Swin estuary) had been the major trading centers during the Middle Ages, by the fifteenth century Antwerp, which earlier had traded primarily with Brabant, rose to prominence as Bruges declined. England could no longer satisfy the growing market for fine wool, which was needed in Bruges. Meanwhile Antwerp took over the spice trade, organized by the Portuguese, who had found a seaway to India. The first Portuguese ship, laden with exotic cargo, reached Antwerp in

16

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

1501.33 Typical shipments included pepper, cinnamon, mace, nutmeg, cloves, pimento, and medicinal spices such as ginger, as well as sandalwood, galbanum, and ivory. In the 1520s, vessels from Lisbon ported in Antwerp almost daily. In favorable weather, it took ten days for the boats to make the trip between the two cities. Primarily a river harbor at first, Antwerp accommodated small vessels at its Great Wharf, near the “Steen,” where a network of canals permitted passage of ships for loading and unloading. As the port became a trade center for cheap wool, cloth, linen, tapestries from the Low Countries, spices, English cloth, and German copper, the town began manufacturing silk products, imitating Italian ware. Diamond cutting, printing, and the publishing of books and maps further increased Antwerp’s commercial activity and importance. In the city, traders bartered for copper and silver, needed in Africa and India, with South German traders like the Fuggers, the Welsers, and the Hochstetters, entrepreneurs of the ore trade and veritable billionaires of the times. The Spaniards purchased the goods with silver from the Peruvian mines of the New World. Antwerp later took advantage of the growing need for cheaper cloth (woven with Spanish wool), thereby forcing the English out of competition. Having covered the market, the textile industry of the Netherlands boomed. Netherlandish farmers grew flax, which they wove into linen and marketed in Antwerp, now an international metropolis whose population had increased from 40,000 to 100,000 in 50 years.34 Along with the cloth industry, guilds also prospered, evident in the architectural splendor of Butchers’ Hall (Vleeshuis, built 1501–4), designed by Domien (Domenicus) and Herman de Waghemaekere, as well as in the more modest courtyard of the leatherworkers on the Bontwerkersplaats (on Wolstraat), whose smallish, early fifteenth-century dwellings had originally housed only the furriers’ guild. Domenicus de Waghemaekere also designed the first rebuilt Stock Exchange. Since 1485, there had been a “gemeyne Borze” in Antwerp, but in 1515, pillars of natural stone replaced the old, wooden structure to become a courtyard with a gallery. However, by about 1526, the merchants found this Old Exchange (Oude Beurs) too small and petitioned the City Magistrate for a larger area.35 By the middle of the six-

33 Antwerp’s Golden Age: The Metropolis of the West in the 16th and 17th Centuries, an exhibition organized by the City of Antwerp (Antwerp, 1973–75), p. 11. However, Roth claims that the first shipment arrived in 1503. See Cecil Roth, Doña Gracia Luna of the House of Nasi (Philadelphia, 1948), p. 21. 34 Antwerp’s Golden Age, p. 12. 35 The building was closed in 1533, and the so-called Old Exchange, extant today, was built in 1616.

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

17

teenth century, the city truly merited the epithet “Antverpia Mercatorum Emporium.” This prosperity, however, came to an end during the reign of Philip II (Habsburg, 1555–1598). A victim of the political and religious upheavals of the Eighty Years War (1566–1648), Antwerp lost its position of commercial supremacy to Amsterdam after 1580. Still, until the 1585 capitulation, the city thrived and continued as a center for the southern Netherlands, albeit with a much reduced population. Even before the war, crises in the stock market occurred. The years 1521–1522, 1530–1531, and 1545–1546 marked times of financial insecurity.36 These economic lows necessitated the importation of wheat, barley, rye, and oats from the Baltics. Despite the economic fluctuations of the first half of the sixteenth century, until 1588, prices seem to have risen less in Antwerp than in other places, thanks to its relatively easy accessibility to sea and rivers. Transportation was ten times more expensive on land than on water. Butter and cheese prices also changed little. Spice prices, however, could vary capriciously, although they increased less in the sixteenth century than other products. Working hours (12–14 hours per day) kept the labor market even. Between 1504 and 1546, the purchasing value slowly decreased, whereas between 1546 and 1586, both purchasing value and prices rose.37 During the war the value of gold and silver had dropped 70 percent, a result not of the war alone, but also of changes in worker wages and budgets. On October 7, 1531, an ordinance by Emperor Charles V, designed to avoid a fundamental monetary devaluation after the crisis of 1530–1531, readjusted wages and falling bread prices. However, by 1532, the prices climbed back to their previous level.38 Later, the crisis of 1545–1546 actually heralded a boom of building and rebuilding in Antwerp, followed by a project of urbanization.39 In the first half of the sixteenth century, many famous typographers were active in Antwerp, such as Michel Hillen van Hoochstraten, Willem Vorsterman and Jan Grapheus. In the second half, after Gracia had already gone, the city could boast of Christopher Plantin. 36 See E. Scholliers, De levensstandaard in de XVe en XV1e eeuw te Antwerpen (Antwerp, 1960), pp. 263–64. 37 Scholliers, p. 269. 38 Scholliers, p. 272. But while the textile industry grew throughout economic fluctuations, social and religious unrest also kept pace, attested by twenty executions of dissenters between 1551 and 1553. 39 The building of the cathedral of Our Lady was completed; the churches of St. James and St. Andrews too were consecrated in the early sixteenth century. The Butchers’ Hall was built during the same period.

18

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

In addition to being a cartographic center, the city was known for printing Bibles and religious works. In 1540, a Flemish translation of the Psalms was published.40 Also, De Bijbel, in the Dutch translation of Jakob van Liesvelt, appeared in 1542, while Gracia was still in Antwerp. Liesvelt was beheaded in the same year, perhaps, because of his translation. None of those works are connected with the Mendes family. By the time Antwerp became a metropolis for the arts, Gracia and her family had already left. Although Dürer stayed in Antwerp in 1519/21, no record survives of any commission to him from the millionaire Diogo Mendes. The Mendes family, their immense fortune notwithstanding, were merchant bankers. But unlike the Fuggers, their wealth served a single purpose: to achieve security. They avoided ostentation and almost certainly always paid for protection.

CONVERSO LIFE IN LISBON AND ANTWERP During the boom, Antwerp, a transit center of foreign commodities, became essential for Jewish and New Christian traders, among them the family of the Mendes brothers. The townspeople of Antwerp liked to refer to themselves as “sinjoren” as if they proudly identified themselves with the Spanish overlords. However, the New Christians—or as they were pejoratively called, the Marranos—from Spain and Portugal also used that title; in fact, to the end of her life Gracia Mendes was called “la Señora.” It remains unclear which group of Antwerp’s residents first appropriated that statusconscious designation. Bloody events, going back to late fourteenth-century Spain, preceded the settling of the New Christians in Antwerp. Foremost was the violence perpetrated against Jews in Seville on Ash Wednesday of 1391, and their subsequent forced conversion.41 The Edict of Expulsion of March 31, 1492, whereby all professing Jews had to leave the Spanish realm within four months, also terrified the New Christians, of whom many thousands had sincerely practiced their new faith, but had nevertheless remained suspect in the eyes of the Church. Jews were not new to the Netherlands. There were Jews in Huy already in the tenth century. By 1044, Jews lived in Liège, and in the thirteenth century in Brussels. Henri III expelled them in 1260, but some remained, their

40 Souterliedeken ghemaekt ter eeren Gods op alle die Psalmen Davids, (Antwerp: Simon Cock, June 12, 1540). 41 There is a vast literature on the subject; therefore anything but a summary of the events is beyond the scope of this book.

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

19

activities limited to trade: no money lending was permitted. The Jews also sought out the Lowlands after their expulsion from England. In 1370, the Duke of Brabant banned them, but by the end of the century, ever-larger numbers arrived from the Iberian Peninsula and other parts of Europe. Portugal admitted Jewish refugees from Spain and granted an eightmonth stay for those able to pay eight cruzados for each adult.42 About thirty prominent families were allowed to settle in Oporto, and about 600 families, among them most probably the Mendeses and their relatives, the Benvenistes, who paid 100 cruzados apiece, were permitted to establish residence in the towns of their choice. The relative tranquility Jews enjoyed in Portugal, however, ended with the marriage of King Manuel to Isabella, whose nuptial contract, signed on November 29, 1494, stipulated that the country be “purified” of Jews. A week later Jews were officially banished from Portugal and given a tenmonth deadline to leave the country. Not wanting to lose royal income, King Manuel issued a new order on March 19, 1497, mandating that on the following Sunday all Jews between the ages of four and fourteen had to appear in church for baptism. Actual enforcement often included other members of the families, such as parents whose baptism “of their own will” was motivated more than anything else by the desire to keep the family together. Since only about 20,000 Jews had left Portugal, the earlier refugees from Spain, too exhausted to move on yet again into another new region full of dangers and insecurities, will have constituted the majority of these new converts. With baptism, these new Christians also relinquished their Jewish names for those of their Christian sponsors, who often belonged to the nobility and who considered the enforced conversion a supreme spiritual triumph since it saved souls once destined for eternal damnation. It must have been even before this time that the Mendes and Luna families, both descendents from common Benveniste ancestors, changed their names to Mendes/Miques and Luna, respectively.43 With new names and a new religion, Portugal permitted them to remain in Lisbon and prosper.

42 According to Roth’s calculation, about 100,000 refugees arrived in Portugal at that time. Their total number is still under discussion, as is the actual number of expellees from Portugal in 1498. See also Lucien Wolf, Essays in Jewish History, especially the chapter, ”The Marranos of Portugal,” first published in London, in 1926. 43 In the Ferrara safe conduct (more on this in chapter 4), Gracia’s name appears as “Gracia ibn Veniste.” This is also how she is referred to in a letter to Rabbi Soncino (Roth, 16), whereas her daughter Reyna is called the “daughter of Francisco Mendes Bemveniste.” [sic.] Gracia’s name, “Luna,” might be of earlier origin, still dating back to Spain.

20

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Originally prominent and respected dealers in precious stones in the business world of Portugal, the Mendes family had increased its banking activities by the turn of the century. They became involved in the acquisition and sale of commodities, both at home and abroad, and with the transfer of payments. Indeed, they dealt in “commodities” (in the modern sense of the word) in that they transmitted clients’ money from country to country and negotiated exchanges for profit. They also loaned money on a large scale, even to royalty, accepted valuables for safe custody, and extended their services both to private individuals and to governments. To do so effectively, they had to be adept at difficult international rates and methods of exchange, including bullion, in order to gain a secure profit. During the second half of the sixteenth century, the Mendes family (by then also called Nasi) handled the largest share of the pepper and spice trade that extended to Italy, France, Germany, and England. With consignments of 600,000 to 1,200,000 ducats annually from their spice holdings, they also controlled the stock market in a number of countries.44

THE FAMILY BUSINESS It is more than likely that the Lisbon massacre made the family decide on an alternate business center. By sending Diogo (1493/4?–1542/3?) to Antwerp, the family began to expand its business to the North. One of the earliest arrivals from the Portuguese converso colony, Diogo Mendes settled in Antwerp in 1512, a year after the city magistrate had given the Portuguese “nation” a splendid building on the Kingdorp to use as a center for trade activities.45 The city offered great opportunities. The hub of the spice trade, Antwerp was part of the Spanish Empire, yet eluded the interminable surveillance of the Inquisition and thereby attracted many prominent and prosperous New Christian families, among whom the young Diogo Mendes soon became the unchallenged king of the pepper monopoly.46 44 See Roth, p. 27, for annual consignment yields. For more information and statistics, see A. A. Marques de Almeida, Capitais e Capitalistas no comércio de espeçiaria: o eixo Lisbon-Antuérpia (1501–1549). Aproximação a um Estudo de Geofinança (Lisbon, 1993). 45 Roth, p. 23. 46 On a number of graphic charts, Braudel convincingly demonstrates the principal economic and financial activities of Antwerp in the first half of the sixteenth century. See Ferdinand Braudel, “Les emprunts de Charles-Quint sur le place d’Anvers,” Charles Quint et son temps: Colloques internationaux du centre national de la recherche scientifique (Paris, 1972), pp.191–201. In that survey, however, some years are missing, e.g. 1550–53, and had to be reconstructed. There was a Rui Mendes, first appearing in

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

21

Diogo, the younger brother of Francisco, had been delegated to found a branch of the Mendes enterprise at a fortuitous moment when international trade happened to be at its liveliest in the Low Countries. The young man proved to be an entrepreneurial genius: being in the right place at the right time, he created a gigantic business on an international scale. By the 1530s Antwerp was the true “metropolis of the West.” In addition to an ever-strengthening trade, there was a vigorous stock market, in whose hallways languages spoken from the entire world rang out. All the great banking houses, such as the Fuggers and the Welsers, had branches in Antwerp. While Francisco and his parents were probably converted in Portugal, it is likely that Diogo was born Christian. In 1540 “Diogo’s old nurse,” Bianca Fernandez, then 75, arrived in Antwerp from Lisbon to join the family.47 Given her age at that time, she could not have nursed Diogo in Lisbon much later than in the early 1490s. Therefore, one may assume that Diogo was born shortly after the family arrived in Portugal and converted to Catholicism. Ample material survives on Diogo’s business activities in Antwerp, along with numerous rabbinical records (a product of later litigations between Gracia and Diogo’s widow) to shed light on Diogo’s wealth. He must have had at his disposal what today would amount to between $500 million and $1 billion. Unlike today, during his lifetime, only a few burghers controlled such vast wealth. Instead of moving on to the Ottoman Empire where he could have freely practiced Judaism, if indeed that had been his wish, or from whence he could have aided Jewish refugees from the Iberian Peninsula, Diogo probably remained in Antwerp because of the millions he was able to amass there.48

Antwerp in 1504, and from then on, for four years he is listed as one of the investors for the Armada. His name also appears as Rui Mendes de Brito. He must have been well off, because at one time, he alone donated to the Armada, while later he also represented the Welsers. Was he another Mendes brother who was first active in England (hence Diogo’s connections?), but who subsequently moved to Antwerp where he died, and whose role was taken over by Diogo? Or was he just another converso, with the same original sponsors in his family, who happened to be Antwerp, and in the same business of shipping? 47 See J. A. Goris, Études sur marchandes méridionales (portuguais, espagnols, italiens) à Anvers de 1488 à 1567 (Louvain, 1025), p. 653. The nurse’s and her travel companions’ arrival caused great difficulties for Diogo who, already in trouble, undertook to help them to safety. 48 Roth’s contention (p. 30) that Diogo remained in Antwerp in order to secretly help resettle the refugees cannot be verified.

22

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Although the rabbis had proclaimed that any secret Jew should move to where he could declare his Judaism, in Diogo’s case they agreed that he had committed no sin by remaining in Antwerp, despite the necessity there to conceal his faith.49 For all practical purposes, the Mendes enterprise was a modern supercompany: a private profit-seeking organization operating several lines of business in very large volume in multiple, widespread locations through a network of permanent branches. Located in Lisbon and Antwerp respectively, the Mendes brothers also created temporary partnerships with other merchants, among them the Affaittati.50 Diogo’s Antwerp operations extended to Italy, France, Germany, and England, where “factors,” or agents, represented the Mendes firm. Diogo also diversified his capital and often collaborated with the Fuggers or served as their trustee. His understanding of the potential gains of cash loans to monarchs in exchange for various farming and export rights, along with the recycling of the routes of merchandise as well as the loans, enabled his company to weather the political and fiscal crises in the various countries. As is known, he once lent 200,000 florins to the Portuguese factor of the Fuggers. In fact, Diogo lent the sum to the king of Portugal, who, in turn, forwarded it to the Emperor to use in the war against the Turks. The transaction is particularly noteworthy, since at that time the Sultanate provided asylum for the Jews of Europe, who had been relentlessly persecuted by the Habsburgs.

49 This issue was thoroughly discussed by the rabbis in connection with the legal case between Gracia and her sister. See chapter 7 dealing with Gracia’s life in Turkey. 50 “Los Affaittati”(Juan Bautista y Juan Carlos) son de Cremona; estableçidos en Amberes desde 1498: En los primeros del XVI pasa Juan Bautista a Lisboa, atraido por el viaje de Vasco de Gama, alli se relaçiona con Francisco y Diego Mendes en negoçios de la espeçiari’a.” Ramon Carande, “Maria de Hungria en el Mercado Amberes,” Karl der Kaiser und seine Zeit, Kölner Colloquium, 23–29 November, 1958 (Köln, 1960), p. 40. Affaidati, also called Jean Charles Affaidati, was a patron of Italian and Flemish authors. See Paul Grunebaum-Ballin, Joseph Naci duc de Naxos (Paris and The Hague, 1968), p. 28. École Pratique des Hautes Études. Études juives, 13. In connection with the same affiliations, Goris (pp. 562–67) claims that Diogo disappeared in 1540, was again mentioned in 1553. However, that reference must have been made regarding his heirs. (AGR Chambre de Comptes, Reg. No. 2347, fol. 68, Archives Générales de Royaume, Bruxelles). For more on the definition of super companies see Edwin Hunt, The Medieval Super-Companies: A Study of the Peruzzi Company in Florence (Cambridge, 1994), p. 38. See also Letters of Medieval Jewish Traders trans. and ed. by S. D. Goitein (Princeton, 1973), p. 296. Giovanni Carlo (Juan Carlos) Affaidati, a close friend of Diogo, was later used by Brianda to furnish an affidavit regarding Gracia la Chica’s legitimacy. He gave a statement on February 20, 1554, in Antwerp, which was forwarded to Brianda in Venice. That declaration was the basis for dating the girl’s birth to 1540.

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

23

Medieval trade, especially the organization of that overseas, was made effective largely through partnerships of countless kinds. These included one-time, quasi-partners as well as permanent employees in the countries of designation who were responsible for the effective and honest handling of affairs. It was not just convenient, but necessary to choose coreligionists for such partnerships among whom some were known from home, or for whom local coreligionists had vouched in faraway lands. In the long run, merchant communities were always multi-ethnic and multi-religious, and often when larger ventures were at stake, there was considerable cooperation among the different ethnic and religious groups. Among the conversos, as in the royal houses, where in addition to trust in business there was a question of private, personal trust, business and friendship was also cemented by marriages. The family business was the natural form of association, in which not only fathers and sons, but also sons-in-law, participated. Commercial agents —often chosen from among members of the more remote family—also belonged to the business and were privy to confidential knowledge of its operations. Brokers and the office of representatives completed the enterprise. During the Renaissance, in Italy and especially in the Levant, the various consuls provided additional protection. A sophisticated bookkeeping (from 1000 C.E. on) was the sine qua non of every business. Those records, however, did not include bankers’ charges or interests received. Many of Diogo’s Portuguese colleagues were New Christians. With the marriage of Philip and Juana the Mad, and with the Low Countries now under Charles V, immigration gradually increased. But, at the same time, so did the danger of the Holy Inquisition. The contradictory role of the Church in funding Charles V further highlights the complexities of the time. Since the estates opposed relinquishing any public funds to Charles, the emperor’s chancellor, Mercurio de Gattimara proposed creating a “reserve,” fed by contributions from the Church and overseas territories, to be put at the emperor’s disposal in case of need.51 Ironically, the fund to support Christian wars was administered by two Jews, Alonso Gutierrez and Juan de Bozmediano.52

51 Mercurio de Gattimara, 1465–1530, cardinal, chancellor from 1518 to his death. 52 Otto von Habsburg, Charles V (London, 1970), p. 111, based on Karl Brandi’s classic, Kaiser Karl V... (Munich, 1937).

24

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

PEPPER AND THE MENDES WEALTH The New Christians were more than an important asset in the commercial life of Antwerp. They also proved to be loyal citizens in times of need, contributing measurably to the prosperity and safety of the city, as well as to its cultural climate.53 Added to the merchant bankers, the Portuguese colony also boasted such scholars as the famed physician Amatus Lusitanus and the humanist poet Diogo Pires of Evora, who wrote Latin verse under the name of Pyrrhus Lusitanus and later resumed his Jewish name, Isaiah Cohen. Another remarkable man living in Antwerp, Daniel Bomberg, who was a Christian, worked as middleman in the secret transfer of crypto-Jewish wealth to Italy and the reconsignment of assets handled by the Mendes banks. He was also a printer of Hebrew books.54 Pepper, the prime commodity, was the monopoly of the king of Portugal, with the Mendes family holding virtual control over the pepper trade in the Low Countries. The monopoly provided the Portuguese Crown with one fourth of its Indies revenues.55 Moving the merchandise became easier and cheaper from port to port: the distance between Antwerp and Lisbon was 10 days “por barco,” compared to 39 “por um correio.” Not surprisingly, the kingdom of Portugal soon depended on the House of Mendes, the head of a veritable syndicate directly beneficial to the king. Emperor Charles V, by ruling over an assemblage of states and principalities, was involved in several budgets and the ensuing financial complexities. In February, 153l, however, Diogo and three others were arrested on suspicion of heresy, the easiest and most dangerous charge that could be leveled against the New Christians. Fortunately, the accused were released the same day because of an earlier safe conduct by the Emperor. But in July of 1532, Diogo was arrested again, charged with judaizing and contact with the Jews in Turkey, specifically with aiding New Christians to escape to Salonika.56 He was also charged with lèse majesté against God and the emperor. Diogo admitted only to trading with the Ottoman Empire and to sending goods, but not people, to Ancona and Venice. He contended that the Adriatic ports were not Salonika.57 He maintained that, although of Jewish origin, he had always lived as a good Christian. 53 During the sixteenth century, the conversos made great advances everywhere in the commercial world. A colony of them requested and received permission to settle in Cromwell’s England in 1656. 54 Roth, p. 31. 55 Roth, p. 23. 56 For details see Roth, p. 33. 57 See Goris, pp. 526–27.

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

25

At this juncture, the crucial role of the Mendes family in international commerce became clear. Their fall would have caused a dangerous economic chain reaction. The Portuguese consul protested that, with Mendes in jail, his king could not pay 200,000 gold ducats to the Fuggers on the emperor’s account. Simultaneously, the consuls of Spain, Genoa, Florence, and Lucca intervened on Diogo’s behalf. So did the city magistrate of Antwerp, who cited the “Charter of Privileges.” Also several merchants pleaded Diogo’s value to the city in a letter to the government, in which they referred to possible malevolence against the family “from the side of inferior competitors.”58 The merchants were keenly aware of the profits the town derived from the presence of such a family, which “fait d’abonder la place et bourse d’Anvers.”59 Their letter emphasized the honor and reputation of the New Christians in their business dealings. Thus, much more was at stake than Diogo’s spiritual relapse. The records report that in September of 1532, after seven weeks, Diogo was set free against a 50,000 ducats bail.60 Finally, the case against him was dropped, the main accusations were not pressed, and Diogo was a free man. During the first indictments against Diogo, Francisco was still alive but there are no surviving records of the Lisbon family’s knowledge or involvement in attempts to free Diogo. Was Francisco advised about his brother’s precarious situation, and if so, by whom? Did Francisco contact the Portuguese king to ask for his help, or did the consul act on his own? No records survive of the Lisbon family’s knowledge or involvement in the attempts to free Diogo. Francisco himself faced difficult times, since a Bull issued on December 17, 1531, established the Inquisition in Portugal. On May 23, 1536, Charles V repealed the previous bulls confirming the establishment of the Office of the Inquisition. The New Christians again succeeded in securing reprieves; but they all knew they were merely buying time. Although the first auto-da-fé was held in Lisbon in 1540, crypto-Judaism flourished not just in the Portuguese capital, but also in Evora, Coimbra, Thoma, Lamego, and Oporto.

58 See Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 42. 59 Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 42. 60 Bulletin d’ Archives d’ Anvers, 7: 263. According to Goris (p. 283), he had to pay less.

26

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

THE MOVE TO ANTWERP Most probably, it was still Francisco Mendes who began preparations for the move to Antwerp, the Inquisition having launched its activities during that time in Portugal. All the New Christians felt the approaching menace. Gracia’s move to Antwerp was caused not just by her husband’s death, but also by the deterioration of the family’s situation in Lisbon. The anti-Jewish Lisbon riot in 1506 claimed hundreds of lives. In 1515, when the king applied for the introduction of the Inquisition in Portugal, in order to avoid the worst, the New Christians tried to negotiate with the Church. Again, the Inquisition threatened in 1535 to move in on the Portuguese. At that time the papal nuncio, Marco della Rovere, bishop of Senigallia, offered to arrange that for a payment of 30,000 ducats the Pope would prohibit the Inquisition’s activities in Portugal. The deal fell through because the wealthy Portuguese New Christians, whom Rovere visited, among them the Mendes family, could not agree upon each family’s contribution. The immediate danger probably made Francisco and Gracia consider the transfer to Antwerp. On May 23, 1536, the Holy Office of Inquisition was established in Portugal, based on the Spanish model. The fact that Gracia left Portugal soon after Francisco’s passing supports the view that Francisco himself had initiated the move. Plans were under way at the time of his death. The fiasco suffered in the negotiations gave the immediate impetus for Gracia to leave. She did so, in the company of her daughter, sister, and probably two nephews, João and Bernard, although the boys might have arrived later. João (Zuan) Miykas (Miques), later known as Joseph Nasi, was the son of Gracia’s brother, the noted physician. He became the most important partner in Gracia’s enterprise. Joseph Nasi was probably born in 1524; his brother, a couple of years later. Francisco wanted to save his family and his fortune from the grasp of the Holy Office, but died before he could realize his plans. After his brother’s death, Diogo arranged passage to Antwerp and safe conduct through England for Gracia, her young daughter, Reyna, and her sister, Brianda. The safe conduct does not name the nephews. Whether the family indeed made a stop in England, or for what duration, cannot be firmly established.61 At any rate, they must have used one of the traditional routes from Lisbon. Most New Christians traveled to Antwerp by boat, either stopping in England, or in an effort to avoid suspicion, sailing by way of Madeira. A letter from the mayor of Antwerp dated August 61 Although Lucien Wolf claimed in Essays in Jewish History [(London, 1934), p. 76] that the family did stop in England, neither Roth (Doña Gracia, p. 196) nor other scholars could find any documentation to that effect.

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

27

14, 1537, addressed to Cromwell, contained the request for safe conduct of the Mendes women through England.62 A friend of Diogo, John Husee, would have been in charge of the women during their stay in England. By the time Gracia joined Diogo in Antwerp, the situation of the Lusitanian immigrants was at its best. In 1537, the New Christians from Portugal received full rights to resettle in Antwerp and were even offered protection from charges leveled against them originating elsewhere. By July, 1549, however, Charles V changed his tactics and revoked the privileges of those New Christians who had resided in the Lowlands for less than six months and ordered them to leave within a month. An ordinance of May 30, 1550, which reiterated the same, proved that the first one was not successfully executed.

GRACIA’S OFFICIAL ENTRY INTO THE FAMILY BUSINESS Gracia brought her own and her daughter’s inheritance to the family business and immediately began to participate in the firm’s activities. Through Francisco’s will, his fortune was divided between Reyna, whom Gracia represented, and Diogo. While the will mirrored Christian traditions, it also contained details that suggest secret sums spent on non-Christian causes. The spirit expressed in Vives’s De subventione pauperum had been practiced by Jews long before. Gracia’s entrepreneurial talents, clearly acknowledged by Diogo, prove that she had acquired ample experience in Lisbon. She probably had managed Francisco’s business affairs during his illness and after his premature death. Since it was not unusual for sixteenth-century women to engage in trading and money-lending, even if not on the scale of the Mendeses, it is not out of the question that she was involved in business affairs even earlier. After the death of Francisco, the nuclear family and the extended one merged in Antwerp. But having moved to Antwerp did not make Gracia a ward of her brother-in-law. Here, too, family played a double role, “stemming both from its patriarchal structure and from its power as a social field for placing people.”63

62 The letter is addressed to Thomas Cromwell, privy counselor of Henry VIII. The Mendes widows’ request for safe conduct through England is similar to the situation of fleeing Jews, during the Nazi persecution, who requested and acquired visas that they finally could not, or did not use. 63 Natalie Davies, “Boundaries and the Sense of Self,” Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality and the Self in Western Thought, ed. Thomas C. Heller (Stanford, 1986), p. 54.

28

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

According to Jewish custom, after the death of Francisco, Diogo should have married his brother’s widow. This ancient practice was especially honored and continued among the rich converso families. Beyond the pious wish to carry on the bloodline, there was also the desire to keep the family wealth together. Yet, as it turned out, Diogo chose to espouse Brianda, Gracia’s younger sister. In fact, Sephardic Jewish law would not obligate Diogo to marry Gracia, since the widow already had a living offspring.64 One may surmise that at the age of twenty-six Gracia was either considered too old to bear a child for Diogo, or that the prettier and younger Brianda simply crossed Gracia’s plans and got herself married to their rich relative. There is, however, a third possibility, namely that Gracia arranged the marriage herself. Assuming that she spoke for her young sister, Gracia would have remained in control even after her marriage to Diogo. In any case, if there was any friction between the two sisters over the marriage, it erupted into an open clash between them only much later. The reconstructed Mendes household represented two lineages, Gracia’s and Diogo’s, and had therefore a dual nucleus. But the conjugal family of Diogo did not dominate, especially not after his passing. As Diogo’s executor, Gracia became the sole authority, ruling over the entire commercial and banking network, and she probably felt a double obligation, as elder sister and executor. She not only remained involved in the entire business and made executive decisions in the large, earlier common ventures but integrated her cousins as apprentices into the firm. Eventually João became the prime force of that firm, developing it into one of the greatest of foreign operations. Although these brothers had been employed earlier in the Mendes partnership, only after the death of Diogo did Joseph Miques assume a truly significant position. In terms of Renaissance “self-fashioning,” the importance of keeping the family together cannot be overestimated. This was especially true for those New Christians who, as secret Jews, could feel safe only among their own kind. The economic bonds connecting the brothers to the sisters underscored the bonds carried by the ties of kinship. This was true even for the intricate relationship of Gracia and Brianda, whose later financial disagreements seemed to have originated with Brianda’s marrying Diogo. Brianda’s daughter from her marriage to Diogo was named Beatrice— or Gracia la Chica—confirming that, at least on the surface, the sisters 64 Francisco’s will is referred to in letter 314, J. D. Ford, Letters of the Court of John III (1521–1557) (Cambridge, Mass., 1931), p. 344, where there is mention of Francisco Mendes and his daughter “Reinha.” No other child is mentioned. Regarding remarriage, see the relevant decisions of the Salonika rabbis in chapter 7 (on the Ottoman Empire).

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

29

remained devoted to each other. Their conflict erupted with the reading of Diogo’s will and Brianda’s subsequent anger over her “disenfranchisement.” Contrary to Ashkenazi tradition, Sephardic Jews were permitted to name their children after living relatives. Gracia la Chica was named for her aunt, as Reyna was named for Brianda whose Jewish name “Reina” appears in the women’s safe conduct issued in Ferrara. It was customary to translate Hebrew names into their European variants. “Gracia” is the Latin equivalent of “Hanna.”

DIOGO AND THE ACCUSATION OF JUDAIZING The Mendes family belonged to the social elite of Antwerp, outside the aristocracy, but with access to the court. By 1539, however, the Holy Office of the Inquisition was activated in parts of Charles’s realm. Diogo began to consider a move to safer regions, especially since in 1540 a new wave of persecution was set in motion. Gaspar Lopes, a kinsman and agent of Diogo, turned informer in Italy in order to save himself from charges of judaizing. There, he charged Diogo with the same, and the subsequent uproar reached Emperor Charles. Diogo faced a new confrontation with the authorities, but this time the magistrates intervened on his behalf. During his lifetime no further proceedings were initiated against him; nonetheless, he allegedly disappeared from view sometime in 1540. This claim is surprising and uncertain, because in that very year he celebrated the baptism of his daughter in the same cathedral where he had married Brianda. Also, his testament is dated July 12, 1540.65 After the death of Diogo, João was trained to take over the part of the family business that involved travel to trading cities, especially Lyons. The contents of Diogo’s testament surfaced in connection with a certain Jean Charles’s affidavit for the courts (February, 1554). Written in Latin, that testimony was used in the Italian court to provide Brianda with proof of her daughter’s legitimacy. The document was deposited in Ferrara at the time when Brianda formally challenged Gracia’s authority over her own fortune and her daughter’s inheritance. Diogo’s public testament was written in French; the private one, in Spanish. As expected of a Christian man of his station, he left money to the

65 See Goris, pp. 343 – 44, 651, who lists the sequence of events as follows: accused of judaizing July 19,1531; freed upon payment of 43,000 florins; fugitive in 1540; his property (“biens”) confiscated in 1540.

30

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

city of Antwerp: 1,600 Flemish pounds along with 100 pounds from their allotment to the poor, for charity, needy prisoners, the clothing of the naked, and dowries for orphaned girls.66 Diogo’s private testament stated that half of the family fortune belonged to Gracia (and Reyna), while the other half, although inherited by Diogo’s widow and daughter, was to be administered by Gracia, his sister-in-law and business partner.67 Brianda could thus dispose of her own dowry only. Diogo’s last decision soon became the cause of major animosity between the sisters and led to calamities, including incarceration. It is certain that Diogo consulted Gracia about his testament and the disposition of his property. It is not clear, however, whether it was Brianda’s youth or Gracia’s superior intelligence (or both) that made Diogo decide that Gracia should be made responsible for the management of his entire fortune. While Diogo appointed Augustin Enriquez and Abraham Benveniste to work together with Gracia, Brianda’s name was not mentioned.68 Although understandably disappointed with her secondary role, Brianda should have been grateful for Gracia’s unrelenting efforts to retain the family’s good investments and capital. After the death of Diogo, Gracia single-handedly averted the greatest danger to his heirs. Proceedings were opened against Diogo posthumously, designed to enable the Crown to confiscate the family’s economic resources. Although she achieved only a partial victory, Gracia saved the family fortune by lending 100,000 ducats to Charles without interest. Some scholars believe in João Miques’ patrilineal relation to the family. Had that been the case, João would have become Gracia la Chica’s guardian, since children were usually placed under the authority of the patrilineal kin. Also the fact that the brothers were not mentioned in Diogo’s will casts doubts on the claim of blood–relationship.69

66 Bulletin des archives d’Anvers, 7, pp. 252–23. Roth (p. 40) mentions that the above were the primary social obligations among Jews, after the promotion of study. 67 In his will, Diogo appointed two other relatives, Abraham Benveniste and Agostino (Augustin) Enriquez, to assist Gracia. 68 When the testament was later contested, it turned out that their identities were hidden under fictitious names. M. M. A. Levy identified them as they were used in the rabbinical decisions of Joseph Karo (Caro). See Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 34, note 3. 69 Diogo’s will was published by Goris (p. 272). João is mentioned as Gracia’s nephew, “su mismo sobrino,” thus her blood relative. Brianda was publicly known by that name only, probably because it was a Christian and a Jewish name as well. In general, Jewish names of women are less frequently known than those of men.

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

31

THE EMPEROR’S BLACKMAIL When on December 16, 1540, Charles V ordered the magistrates of Antwerp to investigate “all persons living as Jews,” as well as those who kept company with them or received Jews in the city, he created a new vehicle for blackmail whereby the emperor himself expected to receive money from the threatened Jewish merchants.70 Whoever was able, fled. On December 29, 1540, a large group of men, women, and children, accused of judaizing, left Antwerp only to be arrested and detained, in Milan and Pavia, among other places. According to Francesco Contarini, the Venetian envoy, the edict was to bring at least 100,000 crowns of bribery money to the Emperor.71 The regent, Mary of Hungary, also plagued by permanent financial problems, repeatedly pressed the merchants for funds.72 In July of 1542, Charles wrote to the “Margrave of Antwerp” that his sister would not tolerate the presence of the delinquents.73 It has been calculated that before Charles’s decree there were about 500 New Christian families in Flanders. Of those about 300 moved to Venice with some 4,000,000 ducats in gold. (The poor were less welcome.) After 1549, many more Jews left for the Signoria because Charles had decided to expel all those who had arrived in the Low Countries after 1542.74 Diogo died in late 1542 or early 1543, just before the family could have completed preparations for relocation. In addition to blackmailing them as “relapsers,” Charles V had an even more reprehensible scheme by which he hoped to fill his imperial coffers with converso money.

70 Charles’s decree regarding Antwerp and its “Judaizers” can be found in Salomon Ullmann, Histoire des Juifs en Belgique jusq’au XVIIIe siècle; notes et documents (Anvers, n.d.), pp. 38–39, and in Ernest Ginsburger, “Marie de Hongrie, Charles Quint, les veuves Mendes, et les neo-Chrétiens,” Revue des études juives 89 (1930): 179. 71 See the letter of November 1540, from Contarini to the Signoria, in Norman Rosenblatt, “Joseph Nasi. Court Favorite of Selim II,” Diss. University of Pennsylvania, 1957, p. 9. See also Ginsburger, 179–88. 72 See Ramón Garande, “Maria de Hungria en mercado de Amberes,” Karl V, der Kaiser und seine Zeit. Kölner Collegium, 26-29 November 1958, (Köln, 1960), pp. 38– 50. 73 Ginsburger, p. 179. 74 Brian Pullan, Rich and Poor in Renaissance Venice: the Social Institutions of a Catholic State to 1620 (Oxford, 1971), pp. 172–73.

32

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

THE EMPEROR’S MATCHMAKING The next turn of events belongs more to the plot of an opera than to historical records of royalty. It is scarcely imaginable, yet true, that the ruler of half the world, and his sister as his partner, should be embroiled (for the sake of a percentage) in matchmaking between a New Christian girl and a Spanish nobleman. Charles urged Mary of Hungary in several letters to persuade Gracia Mendes to favor Don Fernando de Aragon, the son of a man named Núño Manuel and an illegitimate descendant of the House of Aragon as prospective son-in-law. The Spanish grandee, an elderly gentleman, had offered Charles V 200,000 ducats if the emperor could arrange a match between himself and Gracia’s daughter Reyna.75 In a letter dated April 28, 1544, the Holy Roman Emperor even urged his sister to travel to Antwerp and negotiate personally with the widow Mendes. Charles neglected to mention to his sister that he had been offered a large sum for his services.76 At this point, however, Mary resisted: “Je n’ay jamais entendu ny desirez que assistez en cette affaire synon avec dehu honesté et sans user de nulle espèce de contraincte des raisonables” (May 25, 1544). Mary’s response was based less on her feelings of propriety than on a prudent judgment not to press the merchant class that far on personal matters, since it could have led to an economic backlash. Instead, she recommended negotiating further loans from the widow in lieu of the marriage plans. Alert to the danger, when Charles requested that Gracia pay a visit to his sister, the suspicious widow firmly declined, claiming “débilité et maladie.” The royal siblings believed that after Diogo’s death the House of Mendes would fall to them as their prey.77 In a communication of September 9, 1545, reference was made even to Diogo’s daughter, a mere child, claiming that at the time of her marriage, she would be given a dowry of 400,000 ducats.78 The emperor’s promoting the marriage of Reyna to Don Francisco was just one avenue by which the Habsburgs tried to lay their hands on the Mendes fortune. The vigorously-prepared posthumous trial planned for Diogo was another of their common ventures to the same end. One of the

75 Ginsburger (p. 80) wrongly claims that she was Diogo’s daughter. 76 Alice Fernand-Halphen, “Une grande dame juive de la Renaissance,” Revue de Paris 36:17 (1929): 148–65. 77 Some authors, among them Alexandre Henne, assumed that the Mendes business had suffered great losses and was going down after Diogo’s death. See his Histoire du règne de Charles Quint en Belgique (Bruxelles and Leipzig, 1858–60), 9.106. 78 Rosenblatt, p. 13.

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

33

claims was based on rumors circulated during Diogo’s lifetime that the Mendes were expending large sums of money to remove the Inquisition from Antwerp and to help Jews escape to the Orient.79 Cornered by the Emperor and the Regent, by late 1544 Gracia realized she could no longer postpone the family’s flight. Taking only a fraction of their belongings, the sisters and their daughters left for Aix-la-Chapelle (Aachen), ostensibly to enjoy the waters. From there, they secretly set out on a long and dangerous voyage to Venice. Records show that it took approximately six months before the Mendes sisters’ disappearance from Antwerp became public knowledge. The Emperor and Mary were advised much earlier however; they summoned João Miques to Mary’s court at Chimay, to demand that the women immediately return from Venice, face the Council of Brabant, and stand trial as judaizers. João, who had earlier made his own entrance into the glittering world of the Habsburgs, this time appeared in Chimay to defend the sisters’ fortune. One must remember that the Sephardim of the sixteenth century were a culturally diverse group. Those who came to the Ottoman Empire from Africa had an entirely different educational background from those who, often as Christians, had attended excellent European universities before deciding to move to the Empire. The best examples are the Nasi brothers: João Miques who, by the name of Dominus Johannes Micas graduated on September 1, 1542, from the University of Louvain, and his brother, who, appearing as Dominus Bernardus Micas in the roster, graduated on April 1540, from the same institution. Joseph, probably born in 1524, studied in Louvain, together with Prince Maximilian (1527–1576). During his years in Antwerp, João, this dapper young man of impeccable manners, had become a close friend and drinking companion of Maximilian, later Holy Roman Emperor. He also knew Charles and had entry to Mary’s court. On this occasion, however, the audience was anything but amicable. When the women refused to return, Charles and Mary placed an embargo on their properties, including 40 coffers filled with their valuables, which

79 Much has been written about a veritable “underground railway,” an enterprise by which Gracia and Diogo paid for the safe transfer of many hundreds of Jews and secret Jews from the danger of the Inquisition to regions of relative safety, such as the territories of the Ottoman Empire. While, by and large, this was true, most authors, writing shortly after the Holocaust, exaggerated those tales, influenced by their feelings of frustration in the face of that tragedy. Later, Gracia indeed became involved in a largescale project to move Italian Jews to Safed, but that became, for various reasons, a controversial project. For more on this subject, see chapter 7.

34

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

they had left for safekeeping in Antwerp. Three more coffers—containing pearls, jewels, and precious stones, found in Füssen, Germany—were also seized. The royal authorities claimed that such seizures compensated for the fact that when leaving Antwerp, Gracia and Brianda had left their mansion stripped, with less than 10,000 écus’ worth of furniture and other items for confiscation. Their escape caused fury at the court, which was apprehensive that such a brazen act would serve as a model for future flights from the New Christian community. João appeared in Chimay during the first days of April 1546. It is his first recorded public role representing the Mendes family. Just how much João had participated in the preparations leading to their flight remains unknown. At the meeting he pleaded ignorance of the widows’ plan and presented himself not as relative, but as agent of the sisters. The Regent insisted on impounding the goods of “those heretics.” Since that was not possible without a hearing before the Council of Brabant, she wanted to force the women to return. In a letter written to Charles on April 6, 1546, Mary describes the young man’s visit. Represented by João, Gracia and her sister filed counter claims. Declaring themselves Portuguese subjects, they contended that the actions against them in Antwerp were illegal. They refused to take the dangerous journey back over the Alps, but stated that they could be vouched for as good Christians in Venice. In addition, João argued that the widows owned only 15,000 écus each, the rest of the wealth belonging to their daughters, too young to be charged. Since Charles still owed 100,000 ducats to the widows from 1543, Miques first offered another 200,000 for a year, free of interest, in return for a final settlement. Not just the merchants of Antwerp, but the Fuggers of Augsburg supported Charles, forcefully.80 The Mendes House used to loan money without interest to the Emperor, but in their case the reason was primarily fear, the desire to accommodate

80 Regarding the asientos (loan contracts), the clearest correlation is shown between wars and the mounting of “floating debts” (see note 14 above). At the colloquium referred to in note 14, responding to a rhetorical question: “Who loaned without interest?” Braudel answered: “Little people and people who sought advantages and honor.” The Mendes family is not mentioned, although many others—the Fuggers, the Florentine Filippo Gualterotti, George Van der Donch, and Christopher Herwart (also of Augsburg)—were discussed. Rarely did Christian bankers lend money without interest. It is worth mentioning that in Castile, under Alfonso X, Jews could extend loans to Christians to the maximum interest of 33 and 1/3 percent.

Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

35

the ruler, or in other words, bribe him.81 The fact is, however, that Jewish and New Christian merchants were frequently forced to give loans without interest for two or three years, whereas the usual terms were for three to six months.82 Having met with João in Regensburg, in the end, Charles accepted 30,000 écus for each woman, instead of the 100,000 ducats he had originally demanded. Mary of Hungary, however, refused to return their coffers, claiming that her brother had no right to finalize the deal without her.83 João negotiated with both Mary and Charles for approximately two years about the widows’ assets. Yet, when he finally left Antwerp, he departed without a written pardon, although he offered to lend Mary 150,000 écus without interest and 24,000 pounds—which Mary had used up anyway. At least, the charges of judaizing were dropped. Meanwhile João continued to look after his own financial interests. Alone or also representing Gracia, during 1543–44, Miques—together with the Affaittati brothers, the Quintanadmenas, and other traders— hada flourishing import business with France, where the investors shared the profits, presumably on an equal basis.84 When João left for Venice on March 10, 1548,85 he stopped for a while in Lyons, where he is mentioned as a “banker.”86 João’s stay in Lyons had a great effect on his later plans. Among his subsequent business ventures in Turkey, he undertook to import and domesticate silkworms to imitate and compete with the silk industry of Lyons. Prior to their clandestine move, Gracia already established strong business ties with Italy. In 1543, the “Mendes, héritiers de Diego” are listed as exporters to Italy.87 At the same time one “J. B. Nazi” is recorded as such.88 The clandestine move to Venice brought the Mendes family one step closer to their final destination. 81 At the colloquium mentioned above, responding to a question posed by Prof. Lapeyre (during the Q/A period) whether the loans could have been forced, Braudel said that the “good grace” was most probably an illusion. See p. 201. 82 This was not mentioned by Braudel, nor was it brought up during the Q/A period. 83 In Jerome Reznik’s book, Le Duc Joseph de Naxos, (Paris, 1936), copies of the letters are reproduced in the appendix. Mary hoped to get 200,000 ducats for the crown. It seems from the records that Charles even paid 3,766 ducats, a small fraction of his debts, to the widows in January, 1546. 84 Goris, p. 251. 85 Rosenblatt, p. 18. 86 Samuele Romanin, Storia documentata di Venezia (Venice, 1857), 6.272. 87 Goris, p. 272. 88 Goris, p. 272. Could the initial “B” stand for Benveniste? Nazi or Nasi will be João’s name in Turkey, but it appears already in the same form on the records with the Affaittati. See also Letters of Medieval Jewish Traders, trans. and ed. S. D. Goitein (Princeton, 1973), p. 296.

CHAPTER 4

GRACIA IN VENICE

Brussels, Aix-la-Chapelle, and Lyons were the stations that, one by one, led the widows and their entourage to the Alps, which they had to cross to reach Italy. In order to avoid the usual trade routes via Augsburg, they probably passed through Milan where a small converso community was known to give assistance to such travelers. Gracia and Brianda arrived in Venice, “La Serenissima,” early in 1546. Venice had an ancient Jewish community, both German and Oriental, and a large New Christian settlement made up of those who arrived in the late fifteenth and in the first decades of the sixteenth century. The relationship among Venetians and Jews, however, was not as harmonious as many scholars have claimed. Early Jewish immigration brought about anti-Jewish legislation. For instance, as early as 945, Jews were forbidden to use Venetian boats. In 1424, during the late Middle Ages, Jews were forbidden to own real estate and, lawmakers forbade Jews to have sexual relations with Christians. Jewish dance and music schools were banned in 1443, and so was gambling in 1457, and then again in 1506. Yet, by 1464, legislation concerned with Jews’ settling in “La Serenissima” acknowledges a Jewish presence. The year 1480 witnessed an auto-da-fé, the burning of three Jews who allegedly had been involved in the ritual murder case in Trent of 1475. Still, emotions must have quieted down. In 1492, there is mention of a Jewish “congregation.” In 1496, most probably as an anti-Judaic response to increasing, post-Expulsion emigration, Jews were ordered to wear yellow hats (in 1500, without any explanation, the legislation mandated red hats instead of yellow). Therefore, it is no accident that in 1497, the first guidelines appeared on how to identify “Marranos,” and what degree of Jewish consanguinity constituted a real Jew. In 1503 and 1511, respectively, various attempts were made to expel the New Christians. It is, however, important to remember that while Judaism was not in itself a heresy, New Christians who returned to Judaism were considered the worst of apostates. A change of attitude appears in 1516, with the establishment of the

Gracia in Venice

37

“Ghetto Nuovo.”89 As the Jews began to live within the walls of the ghetto, they achieved a quasi-permanence. In the years 1528–29, the Scuola Grand Tedesca, the first synagogue, is opened in the Ghetto. There was security in that new type of segregation. It carried a virtual entitlement that also brought about a change in Jewish mentality, owing to their sedentary, urbanized lives. Jews saw Christians as the “others,” just as they themselves had been considered the “others” by the Christian world. While viewed with contempt, local and foreign Jews participated fully in Venice’s daily life. Earlier, northern merchants had used local Jews from the “Fondaco” to represent them in their commercial affairs vis-à-vis Christian traders. That kind of inconsistency extended to other activities. Jewish and converted physicians were sought after, even while their licenses were periodically revoked, only to be granted again. “There are many Portuguese Jews with their red hats in the Ghetto who in Portugal were Christian priests,” alleged a Venetian ecclesiastic before the local tribunal.90 Levantine Jews began settling in Venice mostly after the Turkish war of 1537–40. They usually stayed in the Ghetto Vecchio (established in 1541) where they received first a 4-month, and some years later, a 24-month permit to stay. By 1550, Jewish moneylenders too were permitted to settle, for a limited time. There was lively, if not always friendly, interchange between Christians and Jews in Venice during that time. For example, in 1567, Salomon Usque (Salusque Lusitano, 1530–96) translated Petrarch into Spanish and dedicated the work to Alessandro Farnese, Prince of Parma. He wrote the play Esther (co-authored with Lorenzo Gracian), which was performed in the ghetto theater in Venice.91 Until the Renaissance, few Jews were interested in the worldview of the surrounding Christian communities. But as Christian culture turned toward the antique world, and to such sources as the Bible in Hebrew, Jews 89 See Roberto Bonfil, Tra due mondi: Cultura ebraica e cultura christiana nel Medieoevo (Naples, 1997); ibid., Jewish Life in Renaissance Italy (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London, 1994). Bonfil brings mostly Hebrew and Italian texts under scrutiny. He does not believe that acculturation was necessarily good and isolation bad. The ghetto provided a stable condition. 90 Quoted by Cecil Roth, A History of the Marranos (New York, 1974), p. 67. For a general description, see Ibid., A History of the Jews in Venice (Philadelphia, 1930), Jewish Communities Series. It contains, however some misinformation about Gracia and her family. For example, Roth (p. 83) claims that “Juan Miquez” arrived in Antwerp with his mother, the widow of the Portuguese king’s physician, sister-in-law of Gracia. The younger son is not mentioned. 91 He is not the same as Duarte Gomes, as Roth (p. 293) believed.

38

The The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

in the ghettoes became a readily available fountain of information. Many humanists visited the ghettos and even participated in Talmud studies. This was especially true for Venice where the local scholars carried on dialogues with Jewish sages and rabbis. The philosophy of Plato, spread by refugees from Constantinople, reflected a tolerance vis-à-vis all religions, and the universal features connecting religions were also investigated by some Jewish scholars. New Jewish confraternities inquired into religious concepts and opened up to modern ideas. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Marsilio Ficino, and Franceso Zozi (the latter an expert on things Jewish) even appeared before the Senate, discussing some common issues. Also, local humanists used the library-collections of Jews. According to his diary of April 3, 1531, Mario Sanuto, the Venetian statesman and chronicler, in the company of other Christians, participated in performances in the ghetto much before Usque’s piece was shown. Sanuto writes that “in geto fu fato tra zudei una bellissima comedia, ne vi pote’ intrar alcun cristiano di ordine di Cai di X, et la compitano a hore 8 di notte.” 92 The characterization and depiction of Jews and “Marranos” in contemporary Italian comedies, which abound with stereotypes from all walks of life, provide insight into the prevalent attitudes toward Jews. In theatrical performances the word “ebreo” was always an insult, and a “Marrano” invariably symbolized dishonesty and duplicity. Jewish or converso bankers usually appeared in the plots in connection with “a poor young nobleman,” who, owing to the stinginess of his father, must put himself at their mercy.93 However, within the genre, the story of Jewish anguish also surfaces. The anonymous Comedia sine Nomine, printed in Florence at Giundis in 1574, relates the danger-filled flight of a “Marrano” family from Barcelona to Florence, revealing also much about the conditions of that city-state.94 It is important to note that while prejudice ran rampant against “contemporary” Jews, characters clearly based on Biblical Jews received admiration and respect. In short, Old Testament Jews were revered, whereas actual Jewish or New Christian residents were reviled. (This is also true for England, where the population was not supposed to have known Jews until

92 Marino Sanuto is mainly known for his diaries, chronicling the years 1496– 1533. His Diarii, comprising 58 volumes, were first published in Venice, 1872–1902. 93 For more on this, see Robert C. Melzi, “Ebrei e Marrani in Italia in la Commedia Rinascimentale,” Sefarad 55.2 (1995): 316. The plot in which the city is the spoiler, ruining the naïve young nobleman, is a topos of Renaissance drama. A typical example is Marin Drzˇ ic´’s Dundo Maroje (1551), playing in Ragusa. See also the relevant section in Peter Burke, The Historical Anthropology of Early Modern Italy (Cambridge, 1987), p. 23, and passim, as well as Il Teatro italiano del Rinascimento (Milan, 1980). 94 Melzi, pp. 317–25.

Gracia in Venice

39

Cromwell’s rule, and where the audience created their image of the Jew more from literature than from experience or memory.95) When on July 23, 1550, a new edict of expulsion was promulgated in Venice, ordering the conversos to leave within two months, the French ambassador, de Morvilliers, explained that “peggio che gli hebrei perche non sono ne christiani ne giudei.”96 In retrospect, it seems that the edict caused more panic than created a real turning point in Venetian policy. It is imperative to remember that attempts to expel the conversos were actually torpedoed by Christian merchants. It became clear that if local magistrates and merchants wanted to trade with the Levant, they had to consider the Jewish and converso businessmen and traders, who both held central positions in the Eastern Mediterranean and enjoyed the support of the Porte. In 1552, the Jewish community in Venice included 902 members, who were permitted to practice their faith in relative freedom. The first publication of the Talmud in Venice is dated to 1551, but even in 1553, the work was still publicly burned. The liberal attitude was over. The fear, however, of Protestantism (especially of Anabaptism) contributed to the burnings of Jewish holy books in Venice and in a number of other Italian city-states. A papal bull of 1555, Cum nimis absurdum, segregated and confined all Jews to the ghetto.97 95 Cf. such plays as Marlowe’s The Jew of Malta and Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice. Among the large number of works dealing with that issue, of the more recent studies, see Peter Berek, “The Renaissance Jew,” Renaissance Quarterly 61.1 (Spring, 1998): 128-62. He contends that “the form in which Jewish characters appear after Marlowe is far more indebted to theater than to history” (p. 131). Jews were officially banished in 1290, during the reign of Edward I. Apparently there were some Jews in England, but they were forced to disguise themselves and their religious beliefs. 96 Processi del S. Ufficio di Venezia contro ebrei e giudaizzanti (1548–1560): Cura di Pier Cesare Ioly Zorrattini (Florence, 1980), p. 29. There is no need to recapitulate the vast literature on the Inquisition, nor shall I enter into the ongoing debate whether statements made under duress should be disregarded by scholars altogether (as in the much-argued contemporary case regarding the potential medical benefits of the experiments performed on inmates in the Nazi death camps). According to Brian Pullan, the collapse of the Priuli bank was directly linked to the decree of expulsion issued against the conversos. See “A Ship with Two Rudders: Righetto Marrano and the Inquisition in Venice,” The Historical Journal 20 (1977): 25–58. 97 Allegedly, at the time of the 1550 Venetian edict of expulsion, João asked the Senate to give them an island where “the Jews” could live: “Ibi ausus com Senatu agere de attribuenda Iudais sede in aliqua insularum Venetius adjacientum.” See Famiano Strada, …Excerpta ex decade prima & secunda Historia de bello belgico… (Oxoniae, 1662), p. 241. See also David Kaufmann, “Die Vertreibung der Marranen aus Venedig im Jahre 1550,” Jewish Quarterly Review 13 (1901): 32-52. As is known, the 1570–73 war against Turkey resulted in a new expulsion of the Jews, but the edict was withdrawn after the peace treaty of 1573.

40

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

The Mendes widows must have arrived in Venice before July 1546, because it was from there they sent 18,000 écus to João to facilitate the negotiations he was conducting with Charles V. On their way to Venice, Gracia and her sister spent a short time in Lyons, the silk capital of Europe, where, it seems, Gracia discussed a loan with King Francis I and informed herself about the Mendes enterprises, set up there earlier by her nephew. Almost two years later, on his way to Venice, João stopped in Lyons and revisited his and Gracia’s business partners. The sisters received a safe conduct from the Council of Ten on March 22, 1544, which permitted them to settle in Venice: “Le Mendes ottenero fin dal 22 marzo del 1544 un salvacondotta del Consiglio dei Dieci che garantira a loro e al loro seguito per un massimo di trenta persone … salve, libere et secure si le persone com gli beni e trattate alla stregna degli altri abitanti della città.”98 By the time the Mendes widows settled in Venice, most Jews were living in the Ghetto, whereas the Rialto area was the domain of the New Christians. Arriving from Antwerp, with a furious emperor left behind, Gracia and Brianda lived a luxurious but endangered existence as New Christian ladies under the sharp eyes of the Inquisition. The clergy did not trust the New Christians any more than it trusted the Jews, about whom Cardinal Priuli said, “The fraudulent treachery of the Jews must be feared more because these are domestic enemies who can have dealings with every simple and unaware person.”99 A few years later, another statement pointedly expresses Venetian sentiments regarding the New Christians in general and targets the Mendes family in particular: “All those who descend from Jewish fathers are called New-Christians. In the time of King Don Emanuel they were forced to become Christians. From them, for the most part, come the people in Italy, we call Marranos. The towns of Italy are full of them, and the rascal Joaõ Miquez comes from this accursed and fickle people.”100 The Inquisition, revived in Venice in the 1540s, was redesigned to accommodate three different powers engaged in stamping out heresy. The nuncio, the Inquisitor, and his deputies represented the central authority within the Church; the patriarch of Venice (and his vicar) held the authority of the diocese; and three nobles upheld the State’s interest. The collabora98 Consiglio X, Secrete filza 9, cc.n.n. 21 marzo 1544 e 22 marzo 1544, quoted in Processi, 30. 99 Pullan, A Ship with Two Rudders, p. 72. 100 Relazioni degli ambasciatori veneti al Senato, ed. E. Albieri (Florence, 1839), 1.211, as quoted by Brian Pullan, The Jews and the Inquisition of Venice, 1550–1670 (Oxford, 1983), p. 171.

Gracia in Venice

41

tion between the Inquisition and the State is shown by the fact that the nuncio and his colleagues accepted the lay assistenti. In the eyes of the Orthodox, the Venetians themselves were not overly committed to their religion. “Semo Veneziani e poi Christiani” was the saying among the Greek refugees who had settled in Venice.101 Perhaps that was an additional reason for the Church to involve laymen in the Inquisitional work. Those three sets of authorities, otherwise competitors, of whom the laymen displayed the most fervor, collaborated against the heretics.

CONDITIONS IN FERRARA AND MANTUA Whereas Venice merely tolerated Jews, Ferrara and Mantua were even hospitable. There are indications that Jews resided in Ferrara as early as 1088, but the first documentary evidence of legal immunities granted to Jews in the Este territories is dated 1275.102 A Jewish cemetery existed since 1452, and Jews were generally not harassed in Ferrara. The court frequently tempered and curtailed anti-Judaic preaching, although banking services the Jews provided to the dukes here were probably the same as where they had received no protection. In 1492, Spanish Jews found asylum in Ferrara and even set up a synagogue. In 1538, asylum was extended to New Christians from Portugal, and in 1540, to those from Milan. In Ferrara, explicit privileges were granted to Spanish and Portuguese Jews. Venice “was a place were they paused and dissembled, living still as Christians, but slowly winding up their affairs in Europe and building up new and profitable connections within Jewry.”103 Therefore, a transfer from Venice to Ferrara would be logical and attractive, and a step on the way to the Levant. Many Jews who had moved to Ferrara visited Venice for business. It seems, however, that for a while, Gracia and Brianda did the reverse: They were living in Venice as Christians and traveling to Ferrara on business. Even if “already a great part of the family property had been transferred” to Turkey, it would have taken at least a couple of years to prepare such a

101 Stephanos Antoniou Xanthoudides, “Venetian Crete,” Crete, Past and Present, ed. Michael Nicholas Elliadi (London, 1933), p. 156. At the same time, many Roman Catholics in Venice considered the Greek Church worse than the synagogue: “pezo che se fussino zudei.” Quoted by Deur Geanakoplos, Byzantine East and Latin West: Two Worlds in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Studies in Ecclesiastical Culture (Oxford, 1976 [1966]), p. 67. 102 Werner L. Gundersheimer, Ferrara: The Style of a Renaissance Despotism (Princeton, 1973), pp. 124–5. 103 Pullan, The Jews of Europe and the Inquisition of Venice, 1560–1670, p. 168.

42

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

move.104 Therefore, the time span from August, 1549 to August, 1552, when Gracia finally left for the Ottoman Empire, seems quite reasonable. In Venice, Gracia used the name “Beatrice de Luna.”105 It is possible that the prominent Mendes business name in conjunction with the notoriety incurred by their flight from Antwerp influenced the widows’ decision to revert to their maiden names. In her correspondence with Ragusa, both local officials and her own agents refer to Gracia as “Beatrice [or Beatrix] de Luna.” This might explain why she kept the name Luna even after she left Venice and was on her way to Constantinople via Ragusa. One may assume that “de Luna” was the name Gracia used in her “Christian context” and that she retained it in her “Balkan” dealings, even after she had declared herself a Jew and began to refer to herself as Gracia Mendes or Gracia Nasi.106 The Mendes family’s business contacts remained international even after the two women left Antwerp. While living in Venice, Gracia also actively engaged in trade that included Florence, probably through the merchant, Luca degli Albizzi, with whom she had corresponded.107 Albizzi was known to act as middleman for Levantine Jews. In La Serenissima, Gracia was also involved with the Priuli family. At the time when Antonio Priuli went bankrupt and had to close his bank, his son Girolamo owed Gracia 30,000 scudi.

A SISTERS’ QUARREL Gracia’s slow and careful preparations for a final relocation to Turkey were interrupted by the fateful clash with Brianda. The quarrel over money hastened Gracia’s decision to leave Venice and had grave consequences for both women. In Venice, Brianda decided that she finally wanted to administer her own and her daughter’s assets. Her sister’s guardianship was an old sore, festering since the opening of Diogo’s will in Antwerp. It is possible that Gracia’s secret plan to move to Constantinople gave special urgency to Brianda’s demands. Although not enjoying good health, Brianda led a pleasant and satisfying existence in Venice, and she was not eager to follow

104 Roth, p. 81. There are no records quoted in Roth’s work on earlier transfer of money. 105 That is how her name appears later in the protocols of Odoardo Gomes’s trial. Processi, p. 226. 106 The Mendes brothers’ Jewish name, Bemvenist (Benvenist) appeared on the women’s safe conduct received from Ferrara. 107 Roth, pp. 178–80.

Gracia in Venice

43

her sister in a new, uncertain venture. While Brianda wanted autonomy regarding her share of the inheritance, Gracia wanted to transfer their assets and move to Turkey. That disagreement aggravated the conflict between them. Unexpectedly, Brianda took a dangerous path. Hoping to recover the guardianship of her daughter from Gracia, she chose to exploit anti-Jewish sentiments and denounced her sister officially as a secret judaizer planning to leave for Turkey.108 Brianda’s accusation led to Gracia’s arrest and an embargo placed on their assets. In this connection, a problem remains unresolved: Why would the Inquisition imprison Gracia when the usual punishment for suspicious or scandalous foreigners was to withdraw safe conduct, as happened later to Brianda, who had enjoyed the same safe conduct as her older sister? Most probably the reason was again the family’s wealth that the Venetian government hoped to confiscate. Gracia’s imprisonment must have set an unusual precedent. Brianda too must have aroused suspicion, since both her daughter and Gracia’s were forcibly placed in a convent by the papal legate. Meanwhile, Brianda tried to move her Venetian assets to Lyons “or some other French commercial center.”109 In order to make sure that Gracia could not interfere there either, Brianda hired a Christian agent through whom Gracia was denounced in France. While she managed to have Gracia’s possessions placed under embargo in Lyons, Brianda’s tactics backfired. The agent turned rapacious and denounced Brianda as well, claiming that she too was a judaizer. Accordingly, Brianda’s money was also sequestered. Again, various governments and the Church cooperated in an attempt to confiscate the widows’ fortunes under the pretext of defending the Faith. Needless to say, the relationship between the sisters worsened under those pressures, and their case went to court. For all practical purposes, Gracia lost. Two separate verdicts were brought in the case of the inheritance: one by the tribune charged with judging civil cases among resident foreigners (“Giudici al forestieri”); the other by the court. Both sentences (one promulgated on September 15, 1547; the other on December 15, 1548) were brought against Gracia. She was ordered to deposit half of the family fortune at the Zecca—the public treasury of Venice—until her niece and ward, Brianda’s daughter, reached her eighteenth birthday (a decision that made Gracia la Chica one of the best matches in Europe!). Meanwhile Brianda

108 Kaufmann treats Brianda’s case. Kaufmann, David. “Die Vertreibung Der Marranen aus Venedig im Jahre 1550,” Jewish Quarterly Review 13 (1901 (pp. 32–52). 109 Norman Rosenblatt, “Joseph Nasi: Court Favorite of Selim II,” diss., University of Pennsylvania, p. 20.

44

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

demanded her own share. In response, Gracia dispatched her agents to guard their foreign assets in Lyons and elsewhere, and asked those towns to disregard the verdicts against her. Unable to do business in Venice, Gracia secretly moved to Ferrara with Reyna. There, Ercole II Este, as had his grandfather and father as well as his wife, Renée of France, the daughter of Francis I, welcomed Jews and conversos. Most probably, even earlier, but clearly in Venice, a discreet reversion to Judaism took place in Gracia’s life. Hence it was logical that in Venice, in her need for protection, Gracia turned to Turkey. It is possible, however, that her immediate dangers were economic rather than personal. A treaty of 1524 decreed that Ottoman subjects were entitled to trade—that is, to transport goods between Venice and the Balkans. Such an opportunity would not have been overlooked by such an astute businesswoman as Gracia was. That treaty also implied that if Gracia moved to Turkey, she could safeguard her wealth by transporting it with her. In Venice, for the same reason (as well as for fear of being returned to Antwerp), Gracia had insisted on calling herself a Portuguese subject. Beccadelli, then papal nuncio, was appalled by “the damage to Christianity, if such a fortune, made among us, was borne off into the hands of the infidels.”110 The nuncio correctly gauged the true sentiments of the Christian leaders: whenever they pursued the Mendes fortune, the Christian states gave their enterprise a religious character. Henri II, Charles V, and the Venetian Inquisition all shared the same goal: the fortune of “the heirs of Francis and Diogo Mendes.”111 Gracia probably approached the sultan indirectly and in great secrecy. Therefore, an envoy’s arrival to assist her move generated intense speculations. The appearance of Sı-nan “Chaus” (Chaus was the title of a messenger in the Ottoman army), inopportunely timed, harmed rather than helped Gracia’s case. Allegedly, she tried to forestall his arrival and even sent messages to that effect to Constantinople; but the envoy was already on his way. The Mendes family was used to arranging their affairs less publicly: they always found a way to buy their privileges through business or bribery, but always privately and secretly. This time they did not succeed. Probably at the behest of Moses Hamon, first physician of the sultan, the “Grand Turk” declared that the Mendes sisters were his subjects and, under his protection. Most likely, this was not the first time the sultan had heard about Gracia or

110 Pullan, The Jews of Europe and the Inquisition of Venice, 1560–1670, p. 179. 111 A reference made to the two women on July 2, 1545. See Rosenblatt, p. 12.

Gracia in Venice

45

even about her wish to emigrate. It is equally plausible that Hamon had made it clear that moving the Mendes fortune to Turkey would be of great benefit to the country’s trade and economy.112 According to de Morvilliers, the ambassador of Venice, the Turkish envoy had one charge only: to conduct Gracia and her daughter to Constantinople.113 For whatever reason Sı-nan Chaus had come to Venice, Gracia and Reyna were no longer there, having moved to Ferrara. Their move must have been close to flight because their safe-conduct from Ferrara (which as a matter of fact also included Brianda) is dated from February 12, 1550 only.114 At that point, Brianda refused to join her sister either in Ferrara or on her journey to Constantinople. As long as he was there, Sı-nan Chaus offered to mediate between the sisters. On June 12, 1552, there was an agreement drawn before the notary Paolo Leoncini, at which Nicolas de Molino, a procurator of San Marco, represented Gracia, whereas Andrea Contartini spoke for Brianda. The sisters signed the agreement (Brianda did so in the name of her daughter). A few days later the document was ratified by the Senate. One hundred thousand gold ducats were deposited at the Zecca, set aside for Gracia junior, expiring on March 29, 1553. This date is remarkable as it is much before the girl’s eighteenth birthday, which occurred in 1558. Brianda received 18,123.5 Italian gold écus for her dowry, and the interest it had accrued, for the education of her daughter, as long as she was still a minor. In return, Brianda was to terminate all demands against her sister, against João Miques, and their agents in Lyons, as well as in Paris, Venice, and Florence. She also had to acknowledge that Gracia and her daughter were free to move wherever they wished.115

112 Roth, p. 57. 113 The letter is dated July 12, 1549. See Roth, p. 58. 114 Based on the same dispatch, quoted above, Gracia and Reyna departed for Ferrara, some months before the chaus had arrived. 115 Remarkably, in Venice, and later also in Constantinople, Brianda was referred to as “Madonna Brianda,” a title customary for aristocratic ladies who participated in the running of charitable organizations for women. For more on at least one such organization, see Monica Chojnacka, “Women, Charity and Community in Early Modern Venice: The Casa Delle Zitadelle,” Renaissance Quarterly 51.1 (Spring, 1998): 68–91. As a rule, a “Madre” or a “Madonna” lived in the building that housed the women, but it is possible that the title was also conferred upon women who were known as patrons of such establishments, not just for those who were chosen at a young age to be trained for that vocation.

46

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

THE ALLEGED KIDNAPPING In addition to the court case, a most improbable interlude played out among the members of the family, an event that belongs to farce. According to records, in January 1553, João kidnapped or lured away Gracia la Chica, the thirteen-year-old daughter of Brianda. After a Catholic wedding, performed in secret, the two ran away, allegedly planning to reach Rome.116 A more probable scenario of the kidnapping story unfolds as follows: Gracia as well as her factors, Agostino Enriques and Odoardo Gomes, whom Diogo appointed as co-executors, were against Gracia the younger’s staying in Venice and marrying any other than a New Christian. A young Venetian aristocrat had already appeared to court the girl. Gracia’s agents first tried to convince Brianda to move to Turkey and pressured her to make up her mind. They also tried to annul an agreement whereby Gracia la Chica would receive her dowry of 100,000 ducats after her fifteenth (!) birthday. Finally, they hoped to have her wedding to the Venetian fop postponed; but before that was negotiated, João decided to kidnap the girl, and “con consensu della donzella,” escaped on a barge toward Ferrara. The couple and their accessories had to cross the papal state. They were arrested in Faenza and taken to Ravenna. There at the hearing, João claimed that the marriage had been consummated. Thanks to his connections, João and his brother, who had accompanied the couple, ultimately remained free. The groom immediately fled, abandoning the young bride in the village inn, guarded by the local authority. The Venetian nobles were furious when they heard the news. On January 21, 1553, posters appeared in squares, and notices were hung on public buildings to inform the entire city about the kidnapping of the girl and the names of the culprits. On the next day, the courier of the Signoria arrived with a papal authorization to deliver the kidnapper and his victim, abducted from a “desperate mother.” Details of the scandal circulated in Venice, in all of Italy, and in France. On March 15, the Council of Ten met officially and opened the case “contra João Miquez Portugais absent mais legitiment cité.”117 João and his fellow defendants were sentenced to death in absentia; at the same time, the Council promised a generous reward for those who helped capture the fugitives. A reward of 2,000 ducats was offered for João’s capture, 1,500 for the proof of his death, and a 200-ducat annual pension for life to his captor or killer. Since João was out of reach of the Council, a ruling was passed to

116 Processi, p. 31. 117 Paul Grunebaum-Ballin, Joseph Naci, duc de Naxos (Paris, 1968), p. 53.

Gracia in Venice

47

cover the eventuality that he would not be caught: he was banned forever from Venice, if ever he returned, he was to be hanged between the two columns of San Marco. A second reward of 2,000 ducats was offered for the apprehension of his brother, Bernardo (Samuel) Miques, charged with abetting his crime. Rodrigo Núñes, an agent of Brianda, was also sentenced in absentia to the gallows, allegedly, for helping the kidnappers. He was to be hanged, decapitated, and quartered. The same reward of 2,000 ducats was offered to anyone leading the Council to his hiding place. Less important offenders, such as Aleandro Calado and Fernando Rodriguez, were ordered to pay 500 ducats each. The penalties, as well as the rewards, were to be taken from the money confiscated from the defendant and his family.118 There are many details in this affair that defy reason. One of them is a letter, dated March 18, 1553, written to the emperor. In it, reference is made to Brianda who declared that, although she wanted to stay in Venice and live as a good Christian, she would hesitate to give her daughter’s hand in marriage to João Miques, that great gentleman, “mucho hidalgo y rico y que esta ciudad vivia de cabalerro,” or to the son of a Venetian patrician. This information is included in a long communication of Ambassador Dominique de Gaztelù. Gaztelù also seems to have known that the young Gracia’s wedding was celebrated and consummated in Ravenna and that the young bride pleaded with the Count of Rome to have her wedding accepted as valid.

118 Minutes of the trial involving the Nasi family were found in the Venetian archives for 1553. They were identified by Constance H. Rose, ”Information on the Life of Joseph Nasi, Duke of Naxos: the Venetian Phase,” The Jewish Quarterly Review, 60 (1969–70): 342–4. The discovery of this fascinating information, unfortunately, led Rose to a very unlikely conclusion: she believes that João actually kidnapped not Gracia the younger but Gracia herself, in a plot to get the older woman out of Venice! The subject of that kidnapping seems to confuse and worry a number of Mendes/Nasi biographers. Roth proposes an even more curious plot: First, he predates the event to the family’s flight from Antwerp to Venice and claims that the protagonists were João and Reyna. He, too, considers their elopement a plot to mislead the authorities, but one carried out with the knowledge and blessing of Gracia. He claims, “Current rumor added spice to the story. It was said that João Miquez and Beatrice’s young daughter had fallen in love, and that he had seized the opportunity to elope with her to Venice, the mother following them in pursuit” (Roth, p. 51, passim). Roth assumes that the story was simply put out to provide a pretext for the family’s sudden disappearance from Antwerp. However, in Roth’s dating, the event would have taken place several years before the kidnapping charges were filed against João (i.e., during January–March, 1553), and with another Mendes daughter as its heroine to boot. A large number of documents were found by scholars, years after Roth’s biography appeared. For the source on which I have based my presentation, see Benjamin Ravid, “Money, Love and Politics in Sixteenth-Century Venice: The Perpetual Banishment and Subsequent Pardon of Joseph Nasi,” Italia Judaica (Rome, 1983), p. 159. Nasi was banished in 1553 and pardoned in 1567.

48

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Perceptively, Gaztelù noted that the Council of Ten had refused to wait for the young woman’s interrogation to end, as much in haste to seize her dowry, as in moral outrage.119 Meanwhile, João Miques, who allegedly stayed in Rome until 1553, kept petitioning the pope to validate his marriage. In 1565, the Venetians refer to his already being in Turkey at the time of his banishment. However, the process against João and the family Mendes continued until 1555.120 It grew even more convoluted when Tristaõ da Costa, Brianda’s agent, accused Duarte (Odoardo) Gomes and Agostino Enriquez, Gracia’s agents, of judaizing. Owing to their connection with many areas of Venetian life, Duarte (Odoardo) Gomes, a sometime physician of Gracia, who handled much of her business dealings in Venice, and his partner, Agostino Enriques, heard that they were the subjects of secret inquiries by the Holy Office. Taking the initiative, they presented themselves before the Inquisition in order to proclaim their innocence.121

INQUISITION BY PROXY The process of the Inquisition required that directions be given in Latin (this was usually followed), describing the particulars related to the defendant and to the witnesses. Distinctions were made to identify information given voluntarily as opposed to that derived from responses to questions. Trivia were also recorded: e.g., when did sweat break out on the forehead of the interrogated, or what curses were uttered during the proceedings?122 Gomes produced his own witnesses to testify to his observant Christianity. (The names of the two defendants in the Protocols appear as Odoardo Gomez and Augustinus Enriches.) Witnesses were called from various citystates. Among them, “doctor Fernando Mendez” of Florence, described as “auditor de Rota e christiano Porthogese,” gave testimony in Gomes’s favor.123 Another of the pro-Gomes witnesses claimed that 119 Grunebaum-Ballin, pp. 52–53, passim. 120 Processi, p. 32. 121 They hoped that by this gesture their trustworthiness would increase in the eyes of their interrogators. 122 Nicolau Eimeri, Directorium inquisitorium. A helpful text to familiarize the modern reader with the proceedings is the abridged French translation: Le manuel des inquisiteurs, ed. Luis Sala-Molins, (Paris and The Hague, 1973) (Savoir historique, 8). A Spanish translation by Francisco Martin appeared in Barcelona in 1996. 123 From the confession of Duarte (Odoardo) Gomes [Gomez]. Processi, 231: 190–2.

Gracia in Venice

49

Odoardo had lit a candle before the image of the Virgin on holidays and on Saturdays.124 Enriquez produced witnesses from Ferrara who swore that in his home he had “pictures of the Savior, Mary and other Christian paintings.” We learn that Gomes had three brothers, one of whom, Thomaso, was an agent of Gracia, and also functioned as Ferraran ambassador to Venice (as of July 2, 1550). However, at the time of Gomes’s trial, all three brothers were living in Constantinople under their Hebrew names: Abraham, Ioseffo, and Iona.125 It was recorded in the Protocols that Gomes and Enriquez lived “contra’ de Santa Maria Formosa al ponte del Anzelo,” and it was reported to the Inquisition that Jews had been seen visiting their lodgings. In connection with the interrogation, it was stated that before Gracia’s leaving Venice, her family lived in a “Gritti palace” (not the one that is so well known today). They were referred to as “spagnoli mercanti,” showing that although the family claimed Portuguese citizenship, the Inquisition was aware of their Spanish-Jewish ancestry. In the popular vernacular of the period, “mercanti” was another word for Jews.126 On August 3, 1555, in the course of the interrogations, Gomes declared that his father Gonsalvo, although born a Jew, had been a convert. A humanist and allegedly a trained rabbi, Gomes claimed to have studied in Salamanca. He earned his “baccelierato in artibus et philosophia,” and received his doctoral title in the Lisbon cathedral in 1534. He stated that on the day of the interrogation, he was forty-five years, a month, and a day old.127 During the process, Enriquez lay sick in Ferrara and was not questioned in person. Gomes and Enriquez were first called to the Inquisition in 1555 and acquitted by the secular criminal court of the Quarantia in 1557. Settled safely in Turkey, Gracia did not let herself be intimidated, even by proxy. In June 1555, Tristan (Tristão) da Costa was denounced to the Officio della Heresia as a judaizer. Since he was not just Brianda’s factor but also her confidant, the pair believed that Agostino Enriquez and Odoardo Gomes were his denouncers. 124 Pullan, The Jews of Europe, p. 125. No matter how absurd, such accusations were extremely dangerous. For example, on June 22, 1486, Nicolaus de Nasis, a freedman in Malta, declared under oath that he secretly witnessed, nine days before Passion Week, how Jews with their heads covered had “tortured a cat, in contempt of the Catholic faith, as if flogging Christ at a column.” See Godfrey Wettinger, The Jews of Malta in the Middle Ages (Malta, 1985), p. 60 (Maltese Studies, 6). It has been suggested that Christopher Marlowe used Joseph Nasi as his model when writing The Jew of Malta, sometime after 1588. 125 Processi, 230:151–55. 126 Processi, April 8, 1555, 230:154. 127 Processi, 229: 245r–145v.

50

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

COSTA’S DEFENSE Costa was arrested and forced to appear before the Inquisition and the Council of Ten. At 58, he presented himself “clothed in a foreign garb with a long gray beard.” He stated that he was born in Viana, Portugal, and his father’s name was Odoardo da Costa. When asked what his Hebrew name was, he responded, “Isaac.” He affirmed that he had studied in Salamanca. According to his testimony, he was baptized at the age of two, but he had been circumcised as an infant. His father and his brother were forced into baptism. His mother died unbaptized, when he was still a toddler. Tristão admitted never having attended Mass. He claimed that he had been married for 17 years to a “Marrano” woman, Francesca Perera. They had five children, three sons and two daughters, all baptized, but all his children had Jewish names, in addition to their Christian ones. Costa did not deny that his sons had been circumcised, but he claimed that the ritual had been arranged by his wife and had been performed while he was away from home. Costa further admitted to his having married according to both Christian and Jewish rites. He conceded that he left Portugal only after he was able to sell his assets. To the question: “What was more important, your religion or your goods?” he responded: “Religion, but I have to live off my assets.” Costa refused to give a direct answer to the question whether he was a Jew or a Christian. He, however, stated that he did not pray in Hebrew or participate in Jewish ceremonies. He also claimed that he never pretended to be a Christian while in Venice. “Nobody asked,” he contended. He asserted that he had never taken an oath at a contractual occasion; thus never borne false witness. As to his residence in Venice, Costa gave the house of Brianda “on San Marcula, in the home of the Gritti.” It was duly recorded that he lived in the house of “Brianda de luna marrana.”128 Since Gomes in his testimony claimed that in Venice he had lived in Gracia’s house and gave the same place as his address, the two sisters must have shared a household.129 Not so much the answers to the questions as the questions themselves have to be scrutinized. They reflect the attitude of the Inquisition and the Holy Office’s assumption as to what constituted judaizing. The interrogation to which Gracia’s and Brianda’s agents were exposed sheds light upon alleged crypto-Jewish practices—not necessarily theirs, but others’. Tristão da Costa’s testimony makes it clear that the Inquisition had a lively interest in Brianda’s affairs and tried to entrap her through her agent.

128 Processi, 227:84. 129 Other documents show that in Venice, Gracia lived in the Confinio San Paolo whereas Brianda lived in the Confinio Santa Catarina. See Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 52.

Gracia in Venice

51

Asked how Brianda lived, he responded, “As a Christian.” While Costa admitted to eat only meat bought at the Jewish butcher, he stated that Brianda did not shop there, but owing to her health problems, was permitted by a special dispensation from her confessor to eat meat even on Fridays and during Lent. He claimed that he ate only fish and eggs in Brianda’s household. When pressured further, however, Costa admitted that Brianda knew that he was living openly as a Jew in Ferrara, using his father’s name, Abraham Habibi. Thus, in Ferrara, when acting as Brianda’s factor, he was known as Isaac Habibi. The main charge against Costa was that wherever he went, he changed his religious affiliation.130 During that period of the questioning, Costa admitted that except for his time in Ferrara he had lived “outside a Christian, inside a Jew.”131 To the question whether he knew why he had been arrested, Costa responded that he assumed that his enemies—Enriquez, Gomes, Hyeronymas Vaes, Emmanuel Fregoso, and an Austrian, called Pancho—had denounced him. According to Costa, they all came from Ferrara to have him banished from Venice as a Jew, thus forcing Brianda to move to Turkey. By that statement Costa intimated that the men acted on Gracia’s behest. He informed his interrogators that his denouncers had lived earlier as Christians but now lived as Jews in Ferrara. “That’s what they say throughout the Rialto,” he added, but he refused to name names.132 The interrogation was suspended until July 15, when, unexpectedly, Costa changed his earlier statements and claimed that it must have been the Molino family that had denounced him because of a sugar and pepper deal and other commodities that belonged to Beatrice de Luna. He suggested that Gracia’s entire entourage was out to get him and Brianda. Nothing is known about that alleged pepper deal. Costa might have dreamt it up for the interrogators. He believed, however, that his accusers wanted to separate him from Brianda, and by pressing her for the money deposited at the Zecca, to force Brianda to leave for Turkey. Indeed, Costa’s unshakable loyalty to Brianda might have worried the rest of the family. His intimate knowledge of Brianda’s private problems proved that Tristão was more than her agent: he was Brianda’s trusted friend, if not more. Throughout his interrogation, Costa remained protective of Brianda and emphatically asserted that in her home everyone lived a Christian life, participated in prayer, and ate differently than he. The council’s questions regarding Brianda were precisely the ones asked those suspected of judaiz-

130 Processi, 228:81–98. 131 Ibid. 132 Ibid.

52

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

ing: Did she have Christian images in her house? Costa responded in the affirmative, and mentioned the image of the Virgin. He confirmed that Brianda’s entire household knelt in prayer when it rang for Ave Maria, stating that he himself had seen them kneel. To the question whether Brianda had Mass said in her home, Costa responded that he assumed so, although he had not witnessed it. He added that he knew that her father confessor was a Spaniard. The details of his testimony show that Costa was very careful not to perjure himself, while he tried his best to keep Brianda out of danger. Costa also stated that in the home of Brianda, and whenever in Venice, he always wore Christian clothing.

BRIANDA BEFORE THE INQUISITION When later interrogated in person, Brianda bitterly complained about her sister and offered 10,000 ducats to free Costa.133 Sometime between August 21 and 23, 1555, Brianda indeed obtained Costa’s freedom with the stipulation that he leave Venice within fifteen days, never to return.134 Prior to the judgment, Gracia la Chica, also testified. At that juncture, she categorically stated that she wanted to live a Christian life and enter a convent. Mother and daughter were admonished by the inquisitors to remain good Christians, and as proof of her credibility, Brianda was notified that her assets, seized and kept at the Zecca, were again at her disposal. However, on August 23, Brianda and her daughter appeared separately before the head of the Council. Brianda bemoaned her fate, claiming that she lost the peace she had been seeking when she came to live in Venice. Unsolicited, she suddenly confessed to belonging to those who had been forcibly baptized (!), and that in her heart she had remained a Jew. Independently, Gracia la Chica announced that she wanted to follow her mother’s religion and also live as a Jew. When Brianda and her daughter declared their intention to openly confess to Judaism (“l’Ebraismo”), the Council and the Doge decided that the women had to leave Venice “entro brevo tempo,” which was then determined to be a period of one month. Petitioning for an extension to take care of her

133 Grunebaum-Ballin renders the French translation of the Italian in extenso. See Grunebaum-Ballin, pp. 55–62. (“Consilio Dieci, parti secrete,” recorded on July 27, 1555). Rightly or wrongly, Gracia assumed that da Costa exerted undue influence over Brianda. Based on what followed, it is even conceivable that Brianda confessed to Judaism to be able to follow Odoardo da Costa to Ferrara, or at least, not to remain alone in Venice. 134 See also, Pullan, The Jews, pp. 213–4.

Gracia in Venice

53

affairs, Brianda declared her willingness to move into the Ghetto until she could leave Venice. The Council, which earlier had released her assets and was embarrassed by that misguided judgment, remained inflexible. Immediately informed about the happenings, Pope Paul IV received the news of Brianda’s expulsion “with great pleasure.”135 It seems that even the French king’s intervention was rejected. Nevertheless, the women were still in Venice as of January 1556. Ferrara again offered Brianda asylum since on December 23, 1555, Ercole II confirmed on Portuguese and Spanish Jews all privileges granted by Pope Paul III and Pope Julius III to their co-religionists in Ancona. Shortly thereafter, Brianda and her daughter indeed moved to Ferrara. The reasons for Brianda’s decision will never be known; it is plausible that she was not only in frail health, but also mentally unstable. Indeed, her mental instability, long recognized by Diogo and Gracia, might have been foremost in her husband’s mind when he composed his will. Whether Brianda suddenly regretted her earlier behavior or was simply too scared to stay alone in Venice remains obscure. Be that as it may, she settled in Ferrara as a Jew and remained there until she and her family were permitted to join Gracia in Constantinople. The kidnapping scandal and her testimony at the Inquisition were the two, recorded, public appearances of Gracia la Chica until her betrothal to Bernardo (Samuel) Nasi, João’s younger brother, in Ferrara, in 1558. The two nuptials following the trials—João’s to Reyna in Constantinople, and Gracia junior’s to Samuel in Ferrara—demonstrate that the marriage between João and the then thirteen-year-old girl was either annulled because it took place without the endorsement of her guardian, or simply disregarded since the Mendes family, having openly re-embraced Judaism, would consider a Christian wedding invalid. It is difficult to believe that João’s and Gracia la Chica’s marriage was indeed consummated (practically in the presence of her future husband). Later, in a new constellation, the two young couples would have remained closely-knit family members. Therefore, their story cannot be accepted beyond some remaining doubt, unless the girls had no say in their own lives and were pawns in the hands of their mothers.136 There is no direct information regarding the young Gracia’s life, after her wedding to Samuel at the age of eighteen, with the exception of a copper medal celebrating that event. The story of that medal and the controversy surrounding it are part of the investigation taken up in chapter 5. 135 Letter of the Venetian ambassador to France, September 13, 1555, cited in Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 63. 136 For more on this subject, see chapter 7 on the Ottoman Empire. Roth’s idea (p. 61) that the entire quarrel and the kidnapping were a scheme by which the sisters plotted to move their fortune out of Christian jurisdiction, seems too far-fetched.

CHAPTER 5

GRACIA AND JEWISH PATRONAGE IN SIXTEENTHCENTURY FERRARA

Beginning in February 1493, when Ercole I Este admitted 21 SpanishJewish families, until the state fell under the direct dominion of the Church a century later, many European Jews found a haven in Ferrara.137 The Jewish community developed rapidly under the dukes, who needed credit from moneylenders, the first Jews to have been admitted. Later, Jewish residents participated actively in community life as manufacturers, traders, and retailers. In order to cover the expense of his lavish lifestyle, Ercole frequently borrowed from Jewish bankers.138 Similarly, the Estes welcomed Portuguese Jews in the hope that through their trade with the colonies and India, Ferrara’s commerce would flourish. Yet, under Ercole I, Jews had to participate in public “religious disputations” with monks, and in 1507, a “monte di pietà” was established to counteract Jewish banking. Also, Alfonso I decreed that Jews had to wear a badge, an “O” with an orange-yellow stripe “as wide as a palm.” That order was never fully enforced. It wasn’t until 1626 that Jews were confined to a ghetto, although the “ghetto initiative” dated from 1624. While the Jews had autonomy to live wherever they wished, most of them chose to inhabit a section of neighboring streets. The locals called the area “La Zuecca.” Most probably the area designated as ghetto coincided with the already established Jewish neighborhood: right behind the cathedral. Thus a paradox emerged, as in all cities which had mandated ghettos for the Jews: while Jews were socially marginalized, physically they lived in the very center of town, a situation that profoundly changed the configuration of a number of cities as it did in Ferrara.139 Above all, instead of the dreaded expulsion, in Ferrara too, the ghetto promised Jews permanent residency. 137 Curiously, one of the families’ name was Franco. 138 Werner L. Gundersheimer, Ferrara: The Style of a Renaissance Despotism (Princeton, 1973), p. 202. 139 This formulation is based on Bonfil’s observations. See Roberto Bonfil, Jewish Life in Renaissance Italy (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London, 1994), pp. 71–75, and passim.

Gracia and Jewish Patronage in Sixteenth-Century Ferrara

55

In the mid-sixteenth century, Ferrara had a population of about 10,000. Beatrix (Beatrice) de Luna, alias Gracia Mendes, or as it later turned out, Gracia Benveniste, arrived there a prosperous newcomer, with Reyna, in late 1549. On February 12, 1550, Ercole II proclaimed a general safe conduct for Spanish and Portuguese Jews (“natione hebraica, lusitana et spagnola”). Gracia received a special brief that permitted her and those accompanying her “venire, habitare, conversare, haver synagoga particulare per sua comodità, negotiare ed esercitar suoi trafichi et mercanzie … securi e senza impedimento.”140 The brief marks the first public use of their Jewish names. The document was issued in the names of “Donna Vellida (wife) of Don Semer Benveniste and Donna Reina (wife) of Don Meir Benveniste, with all their families and households.”141 These names notwithstanding, she might have already also been known as Nasi, as is clear from a book dedicated to her in Ferrara.142 According to the ducal safe conduct, the women and their families were permitted to practice Judaism freely and to keep slaves. In case the privileges were withdrawn, they would have eighteen months to leave and carry away their assets, duty-free.143 Although she had frequented sophisticated circles in Antwerp and in Venice and had even visited royalty, until her arrival in Ferrara Gracia had never thought to follow the example of her Christian acquaintances and become a patron of the arts. It is known from inventories that the Mendes households were luxuriously appointed. Yet, there are no identified artists or artisans who worked for them, nor has any book collection been recognized among the belongings seized after their flight from Antwerp. As international traders, the Mendeses should have supported cartographers, and it

140 Maria Guiseppina Muzzarelli, “Ferrara, ovvero un porto placido e sicuro ta XV e XVI secolo,” Vita e cultura Ebraica nello stato Estense. Atti del I convegno internazionale di studi Nonantolana 16–17 maggio 1991, ed. Euride Fregni e Mauro Perani (Bologna, 1992), esp. p.252. The text distinguishes Hebrews, Portuguese and Spaniards. It promises the immigrants to prosper, and practice their religion, and national customs in freedom, without any impediment. 141 Cecil Roth, Doña Gracia of the House of Nasi (Philadelphia, 1948), pp. 63–4. The fact that Brianda’s Hebrew name is recorded as Reyna proves that the sisters “crossnamed” their daughters. 142 In addition, when in 1556, Thomas Fernandes was accused of Judaizing in Bristol, England, and charged by the Lisbon Inquisition, he referred to the book Consolaçam, but mixed up the names, claiming that it was dedicated to “Beatrix de Luna, wife of Diogo [sic] Mendes,” although that name does not appear in the book that refers only to Gracia Nasi. 143 Roth, p. 64.

56

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

is probable that they had maps made for them; yet there are no extant extant showing their name. In Antwerp, Gracia entertained rich merchants and aristocrats from the Low Countries. In Ferrara, however, she began to move openly in Jewish circles. She became a popular hostess, and her house was patronized by Jewish scholars and Talmudists. Ferrara was to be Gracia’s “intellectual birthplace.”

THE FERRARA BIBLE Gracia’s name appears in the dedication of two important works. One is the famous Ferrara Bible, published on March 1, 1553, printed by Abraham Usque, a Portuguese who had moved to Italy, where was known by his Christian name, Duarte Piñel or Pinhel. Abraham Usque began to call himself by his Jewish name after his arrival in Ferrara (1543), and the person who founded a printing press and printed Judeo-Spanish as well as Portuguese texts, is known as Abraham Usque. Between 1551 and 1557 he published twenty-seven titles, but after much harassment limited his publication to Hebrew works. The Ferrara Bible, Biblia en Lengua Española traducita palabra por palabra de la verdad Hebrayca por muy excellentes letrados vista y examinada por el officio de la Inquisicion. Con privilegio del yllustrissimo Señor duque de Ferrara, was his most important production. The Ferrara Bible was published in two versions: one dedicated to Duke Ercole, the other to Gracia. On the verso of the front page, two names appear, those of Yom Tob Atias and Abraham Usque, along with the dedication to Gracia, which dedication suggests that she supported, at least partially, the expense of the “Jewish” publication.144 Both editions received ducal permission and the “fiat” from the Inquisition’s censor. It was earlier believed that with the exception of the dedications, the translations differed little. For instance, words such as “virgin” in the Christian edition appear as “maiden” in the Jewish one. The Christian variant is dated March 1, 1553, whereas the “Jewish” version bears a Hebrew date: 14 Adar 5313. Other features distinguishing the two editions have been identified recently.145 On the

144 See note 9 below. The volume I consulted contains marginal notes by an unidentified hand, marking where an idea or a name occurs more than once in the text, or when a name appears in more than one form, e.g., “Samuel” and “Semuel.” For more on the subject see Introduccion a la Biblia de Ferrara. Actas del Simposio Internacional sobre la Biblia de Ferrara (Madrid, 1994). 145 In a recent article, Aron di Leone Leoni called attention to a number of details, unnoticed before (11a). Even prior to Leoni’s findings, Uriel Macias Kapon identified

Gracia and Jewish Patronage in Sixteenth-Century Ferrara

57

front-page, a watercolor drawing of a sailboat is depicted with a broken mast, tossed on a choppy sea—perhaps a symbol of the fate of the Jews or of the New Christians?146 This Bible was not, by any means, the first Jewish publication from that region. In addition to a large number of manuscripts and books now housed in the Estensi library in Modena, Italian archives hold thousands of earlier Hebrew manuscript fragments taken from registers and bindings. As Jewish gravestones were appropriated to pave streets, so were Jewish manuscripts re-used in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries—dismantled and fragmented for bindings and linings.147 A secular volume, published during the same year, points even more significantly to Gracia’s patronage: in Samuel Usque’s dedication of his great opus to Gracia. Consolaçam as Tribulaçoes de Israel (Consolation for the Tribulation of Israel).148

two insertions in the so-called “Jewish” version: two folios with the “Tabla de las haphataroth de todo el año” (11a), (“La Biblia de Ferrara en bibliotecas y bibliografias españolas” in Introduccion a la Biblia Ferrara, pp. 473–502). Also, Yerushalmi expressed doubt regarding the identification of Abraham Usque with Duarte Piñel (Pinhel) and of Jeronimo de Vargas with Jom Tob Atias. See A Jewish Classic in the Portuguese Language: Introduction to Samuel Usque’s Consolaçam as Tribulaçoes de Israel, reprint ed. (Lisbon, 1989), pp. 86–87. Leoni found a copy of a l556 notary deed that made it clear that Yom Tob Atias’s Christian name was Alvaro Vargas and that he was not identical with Jeronimo, but was the man’s father. See “New Information on Jom Tob Atias (alias Alvaro Vargas), Co-Publisher of the Ferrara Bible,” Sefarad. 57, fasc. 2 (1997): 271–76. Earlier scholarship relied heavily on Cecil Roth’s “The Marrano Press at Ferrara, 1552–1555,” Modern Language Review 38 (1943). 146 I consulted that copy and a beautifully restored second copy in Lisbon. 147 For more on this appropriation, see Vita e Cultura Ebraica nello stato Estense. Atti del I convegno internazionale di studi Nonantolana. 16-17 maggio, 1991. See also Cecil Roth, “The Marrano Press at Ferrara, 1552–1555,” Modern Language Review, 38 (1943). 148 The first edition was published in 1553, but most copies were destroyed by the Inquisition shortly after publication. Ordered by Julius III, a large number of Talmuds, Hebrew works, and other publications were burned in the middle of the Campo di Fiori, Some fifty years later, Giordano Bruno was burned alive on the same spot. The second edition appeared in Amsterdam, in 1599. Although Samuel Usque’s work was published by Abraham Usque, one cannot demonstrate that the two men were closely related. There are three men named Usque active during that period, connected with the same patrons. Abraham Usque the liturgical author in Hebrew and printer, Solomon Usque the playwright and translator of Petrarch, and Samuel Usque the author of Consolaçam. Quotations here are from the English translation of Martin A. Cohen (Philadelphia, 1965). Usque’s exact dates are not known; in 1577 he is referred to as having died. He claimed that his ancestors came from Spain to Portugal and were forcibly baptized in 1497, possibly at the same time as the Mendeses and the Benvenistes.

58

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

As the title suggests, Samuel Usque’s book examines the trials and misfortunes of the Jewish people. A typical Renaissance pastoral, it is written in the form of a dialogue, three patriarchs presenting the issues. Icabo (Jacob), who appears as a shepherd and is the alter ego of the author, bemoans the fate of his children. The other protagonists are the patriarchs Numeo (Nahum) and Zicareo (Zecharia). A possible connection is that the Book of Zecharia contains a section (chapters 9–14) in which a contemporary recounts the terrible experience of the Jews after the exile in Babylon. In Zecharia also is the construction of the Temple (the rebuilding). The dialogues speak of its destruction. The Book of Nahum recounts events about a century earlier—the destruction of Nineveh. In the Ferrara Bible the first dialogues chronicle the destruction of the Second Temple and Jewish suffering under the Romans. The third section, in which the author describes through 37 chronological segments the martyrdom of the Jews in the Diaspora (France, Spain, Persia, Italy, England, and Portugal), also includes the story of their expulsion from the Iberian Peninsula. All three patriarchs offer consolation derived from the Bible. Most of the sixteenth-century Jewish chroniclers came from Spanish and Portuguese expellees and their descendants. Especially after the Expulsion, Jewish historians tried to explain Jewish sufferings throughout the centuries, focusing mainly on the catastrophe that had uprooted them and their families from the Iberian Peninsula. A religious allegory, Usque’s description of the contemporary situation is more realistic than that of the overzealous rabbis. As is clear from his oeuvre, Usque, a poet and historian, was thoroughly versed in the Bible. He wrote elegant Portuguese, knew Spanish and Latin, had read Plato, Ovid, and Lucan, and was familiar with contemporary philosophy.149 Samuel Usque must have known French as well as Italian. Where he acquired his Hebrew is a puzzle, since Jews were not supposed to own Hebrew texts, except for medical books. He might have studied in Lisbon or in Coimbra; his description of the 1506 massacre there

149 Perhaps influenced by Samuel Usque, João Baptista d’Este wrote Consolaçao christae, e luz para poyo hebreo in 1616. It should be mentioned here that information transmitted in the form of conversation, was one of the preferred genres during the Renaissance. Benedictus Kuripesˇic´ of Slavonia, who in 1530–32 served as interpreter to Ferdinand‘s envoy, produced a highly sophisticated piece of fiction, written in the form of a dialogue between two stable boys, discussing the military, political, and moral state of the Ottoman Empire. For more on this, see Marianna D. Birnbaum, Croatian and Hungarian Latinity in the Sixteenth Century (Zagreb and Dubrovnik, 1993), pp. 335– 336, and passim.

Gracia and Jewish Patronage in Sixteenth-Century Ferrara

59

seems based on first hand experience.150 He moved to Ferrara via England, France, and Germany, crossed the Alps, and wound up in Naples, where he befriended the Abravanels who preceded him into Ferrara by a decade. Samuel Usque’s intended readers were the converses. The recurring charges against the Jews depicted in his history could only remind the New Christians of their own fate. One of Usque’s messages is that the Jews were enslaved by the very peoples they tried to emulate. Yet, when he speaks about “one of the chief gates” through which God’s compassion reaches the world, his tone seems more Christian than Jewish. Usque’s purpose is to urge New Christians to return to Judaism. One may read him as the first modern writer on Jewish history.151 Samuel Usque’s dedication to Gracia abounds in praise of her virtues; he calls her “the heart in the body of her people.” Moreover, her existence counts among the major consolations of the Jews in exile. He claims that she has inherited Miriam’s innate compassion, Deborah’s prudence, and Esther’s boundless virtues. Her chastity and generosity are compared to Judith’s: “The Lord has sent you such a woman in our own days from the supreme choir of His hosts. He has treasured all these virtues in a single soul. To your happy fortune, He chose to infuse them in the delicate and chaste person of the blessed Jewess (Gracia) Nasi.” One passage—“What you have done and still do to bring to the light the fruits of those plants that are buried there in darkness”—may refer to Gracia’s efforts to bring back New Christians, like herself, from crypto- to open Judaism.152 The vigorous intellectual and social ambience of Ferrara certainly affected Gracia’s attitudes. One person, in particular, served as her immediate intellectual and spiritual model: Benvenida (Bienvenida) Abravanel, wife and later widow of Samuel, the younger son of the famed Jewish

150 It was believed that, still in Lisbon and using the name of Duarte Piñel, Usque wrote a Latin grammar, Latinae grammaticae compendium tractatus de calendis (Lisbon, 1543). Meyr Kayserling claimed that Piñel was Usque’s Christian name (Geschichte der Juden im Portugal [Leipzig, 1967], p. 268.) Several scholars accepted his view. 151 For more, see the volume L’Ebreu au Temps de la Renaissance, ed. Ilana Zinguer (Leiden, 1992) (Brill’s Series of Jewish Studies, 4), which includes a translation of a Hebrew text into Ladino by converso scholars situated in Ferrara in the middle of the sixteenth century. See also the seminal paper by Aron Di Leone Leoni,” “Gli ebrei sefarditi a Ferrara da Ercole I à Ercole II. Nuove richerche e interpretazioni,” La rassegna mensile di Israel 52 (1987): 407–46. 152 See pp. 37 and 230. Some scholars, following Roth’s romantic reading, believe that this statement alluded to Gracia’s helping Marranos secretly escape from Spain and Portugal. The translation is from Roth (p. 76). See the relevant page, in Cohen’s translation, in the Appendix.

60

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

philosopher Isaac Abravanel. Like Gracia’s, that family, too, was of Spanish background, originally from Seville. In 1391, Samuel’s grandfather converted, changing his name to Juan de Sevilla, but shortly thereafter he returned to Judaism. His son, Isaac, Samuel’s father, became a leading intellectual among the Portuguese émigrés in Italy.153 Benvenida, one of the most popular Jewish women of her time, was praised for her religious devotion, wisdom, and benevolence. She was celebrated by Immanuel Aboab, her family’s chronicler, as “one of the noble and high-spirited matrons who have existed in Israel since the time of our dispersion … [a] pattern of chastity, of piety, of prudence and of valor.”154 This text so echoes Usque’s eulogy that Gracia’s name could easily by substituted for Benvenida’s. While the Abravanels resided in Naples, Samuel served as the financial advisor of Viceroy Don Pedro. Welcomed at the court, Benvenida befriended Lenora, Don Pedro’s daughter, and even after Lenora married Cosimo Medici, she remained in touch with Benvenida, calling her a second mother. Allegedly, when Charles V wanted to expel the Jews from Naples, Benvenida, supported by her friend Lenora and other ladies of the local aristocracy, appeared before the emperor and pleaded for her co-religionists.155 When Charles V ordered the Jews either to wear a “Jew badge” or to leave Naples, Benvenida and her husband moved to Ferrara. Unlike the Mendes-Nasi family, the Abravanels were not only wealthy but also famously learned. Their home became a meeting place of Jewish and Christian scholars, including visitors to Ferrara such as the German humanist Johann Albrecht von Widdmanstadt (1506–57), but also of the poor and the orphaned.156 153 The family’s name is also spelled Abrabanel, and in some sources, Benvenida’s name is found as Bienvenida. Called Isacco Abarbanello, he is praised by Antonio Frizzi for his commentaries to the Prophet Daniel, which were published in “Lingua e caratteri ebraici si stampo in Ferrara,” Memorie per la storia di Ferrara, 4.323 in the 1847–58 Bologna edition. The first publication of this five-volume work was 1791–1809, and there exists a 1975 reprint of the Bologna edition. He was involved in contemporary issues such as the discussion regarding the ideal form of government. Using the Bible as the basis of his arguments, Abravanel claimed that the Venetian republic reflected the perfect Mosaic concept. For the most complete assessment of his life, see Benzion Netanyahu, Don Isaac Abravanel: Statesman and Philosopher (Philadelphia, 1968). 154 See Pnina Nave Levinson, Was wurde aus Saras Töchtern? Frauen im Judentum (Gutersloh, 1989), p. 112. 155 Meyr Kayserling, Die jüdischen Frauen in der Geschichte, Literatur und Kunst (New York, 1980 [Leipzig, 1879]), pp. 76–9. 156 Widdmanstadt was an expert on Syriac, but also knew Greek and Hebrew. He met Charles V in Italy and visited the emperor in the Low Countries. Although most scholars accept Samuel’s death date as 1551, Amatus Lusitanus puts it at 1547. (Dioscorides, 4.171).

Gracia and Jewish Patronage in Sixteenth-Century Ferrara

61

Benvenida died in 1554, surviving her husband by three years. During those three years after her husband’s death, Benvenida managed the family business on an even grander scale than Gracia had hers. She also maintained the role her husband had played in scholarship and patronage. Her friendship with Gracia is documented. In addition to the general ambience of Ferrara, the direct influence of the much-admired Benvenida motivated Gracia to become a patroness of literature. Two other Jewish women in Ferrara, Pomona and Bathsheba of the Modena family, were versed in Jewish studies, although not in the arts. At that point in her life Gracia was however not actively studying Talmud or cabbala. New information points to the Mendes family’s deeper involvement in publishing than was known earlier. In addition to the publications in Ferrara (all Jewish, except for one), the Mendeses were at the same time involved in non-Jewish printing in Venice. In 1552, an exiled Spaniard, Alonso Núñez de Reinoso, dedicated a volume of poetry and prose, “Al muy magnifico Juan Micas.” The same author’s Clareo y Florisea, a roman à clef, figures Doña Gracia.157 The volume, published in Venice, by the Gabriel Giolito de Farrari Press in 1552, consists of a novel and poetry. Both, separately paginated, were dedicated to “Juan Micas.” The first is in a form of a letter, dated January 24, 1552. Núñez knew both Gracia and João, and it is possible that he was for a time employed by the family as tutor.158 Ortensio Lando’s Due Panegyrici (1552) bears two dedications: one to “Gioan Michas,” the other to his brother, Bernardo.159 Lando dedicated yet another work to “Beatriz de Luna” (and to Ruscelli) in which he claims that

157 See Constance H. Rose, “New Information on the Life of Joseph Nasi, Duke of Naxos; The Venetian Phase,” The Jewish Quarterly Review 60 (1969–70): 336. For more on Núñez, see ibid. The Life and Work of Alonso Núñez de Reinoso: The Lament of a Sixteenth-Century Exile (Rutheford, 197l). 158 He could have been one of those who as refugees received help from the Mendeses. Núñez was probably born in Guadalajara, and studied in Alcalà. He completed his degree in 1545. His stay in Portugal can only be culled from indirect evidence. He reached Italy before 1550. In the novel he uses the guise “Isea” for himself, and refers to tutoring the two sisters. These can be either Reyna and the younger Gracia, or (as a gender reversal) it could have been the Nasi brothers, in which case Núñez had to be with the family already in Antwerp. Rose mistakenly assumes that João had two brothers. She refers to “two or three nephews” leaving Portugal with Gracia (p.332). Bernardo was the Christian name of Samuel. Her claim that Nasi’s patronage was due to his desire, “to leave behind respected Italians for future need,” is unconvincing. 159 It seems that Lando was introduced to the Mendes household by Núñez.

62

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Gracia was born in Venice.160 He also stated that one of the two richest families were the “Mendesi.” In a letter to “S. Giovanni Michas a Vinegia,” praising Charles V, Lando refers to João’s friendship with the emperor. There is a third work worth mentioning, written by the poet and courtier Bernardim Ribeiro (1482–1552). His novel Suadades, better known as Hystoria de Menina e Moça (1554), was the only Portuguese language fiction published in the sixteenth century. Its first publication occurred in Ferrara, in 1554, by Abraham Usque. Menina e Moça is of a mixed genre, showing the influence of the chivalric romances and the pastoral novel. Since there are some notable similarities between Suadades and Consolaçam, it has been conjectured that the same person wrote both works. By the time the book was completed, Gracia was already living as a Jew in Ferrara. Dedicating it to João, who was still a Christian in Venice, would therefore have been less suspicious. In the novel a self-portrait of the converso emerges, a man divided in life, memories and loyalties.

MEETING AN OLD FRIEND In Ferrara, Gracia encountered again Amatus Lusitanus, a scholar whom she had met earlier in Antwerp. No record exists of her patronage of Amatus in Antwerp, but after they reestablished their relationship in Ferrara, their paths often crossed.161 This famous man was born in Castello Branco in 1511 as Don Ioão Roderigues. He studied in Salamanca, where he practiced medicine at the age of eighteen, from whence he moved to Santerem and later to Lisbon. In order to avoid persecution, his friend Didacus Pyrrhus and he first went north to Antwerp, where he had met Jewish merchants from Ragusa. He did not relocate there immediately after he left Antwerp, but moved to Italy, first to Venice (where he declared himself a Jew); thereafter to Ferrara and Florence; later to Rome, Ancona, and thence to Pesaro.162

160 Rose, p. 337. Rose assumes that Núñez de Reinoso could have denounced João, because among the Inquisitional records of Venice she found his name as “João Miches” in the file, as one of “Ebrei anonimi”, for the year 1550. She thought to have recognized Núñez de Reinoso’s style in the text of the denunciation, as similar to the beginning of his own novel. She deciphered the name as “Alphonsus spanuolo.” Rose claims that the charge was not followed up because of João’s connections. See Rose, p. 336. 161 See more on his life in Maximiano Lemos, Amato Lusitano: A sua vida e a sua obra (Porto, 1907). 162 See more on him in chapter 7.

Gracia and Jewish Patronage in Sixteenth-Century Ferrara

63

Amatus allegedly received a secret Jewish education from his parents. He knew Hebrew, and early in his career he was translating from Hebrew into Latin. He quoted frequently from the Torah and cited examples from Jewish history and the Halakah. Although he was officially still a Christian when he took his medical oath, he recorded the date according to the Hebrew calendar: 5319.163 When he published his most famous work, Curationum Medicinalium Amati Lusitani Medici Physici praestantissimi Centuriae (Florence, 1551), he dedicated the first “Centuria” to Cosimo Medici.164 Amatus also wrote Latin commentaries on Avicenna and translated The History of Utopia into Spanish.165 He was Gracia’s doctor and was known to have treated many members of the Italian aristocracy. Modern scholarship credits Amatus with the first research on blood circulation. He was also a passionate botanist, using herbs and spices to heal specific, primarily gastric, ailments. Amatus was a highly respected physician who counted among his patients the widows Mendes, as well as such dignitaries like Jacoba de Monte, the sister of Pope Julius III. He translated the five books of Dioscorides’s De Materia Medica, a work that had remained for 1,500 years the authority in botany. Amatus’s integrity vouches for his truthfulness in his expression his high regard for Gracia.

THE MEDAL CONTROVERSY With all the praise heaped upon Gracia Mendes, it is noteworthy that none of her contemporaries mentioned her beauty. Perhaps this too explains why Diogo married her younger sister. While there is no identifiable depiction of Gracia, a medal exists, struck in Ferrara in 1558, which for a long time was 163 Maren Frejdenberg, Zˇidovi na Balkanu na isteku srednjeg vijeka (Zagreb, 2000), p. 113, and Jorjo Tadic´, Jevreji u Dubrovniku do polovine XVII stoljec´a (Sarajevo, 1937). 164 Centuriae became a genuine bestseller. Three editions were published in Venice in the sixteenth century (1552, 1557, 1560), and the Basel (1556) and Leyden editions (1560 and 1570) followed soon thereafter. 165 Elias Hiam Lindo, History of the Jews in Spain (London, 1848), pp. 359–60. He was also appreciated by the Iberian Christian world: J. Lucio D’Azevedo in his Historia de Christaos Novos Portogueses (Lisbon, 1921) writes that “famoso Amato Lusitano, João Rodrigues de Castello Branco medico por Salamanca e um dos mais notaveis de suo tempo.” Quoted by Jaroslav Sˇik, Die jüdischen Ärzte in Jugoslawien (Zagreb, 1931), p. 11. Maximiano Lemos calls Amatus an excellent clinician, an important theoretician and practical healer of high quality, with a great knowledge of anatomy, diagnostics; a man who used rational methods of treatment.

64

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

mistakenly thought to have been her portrait. The uniface bronze medal portrays a beautiful member of her family, her niece, Gracia la Chica, at the time of her engagement to Samuel. Gracia probably arranged that marriage either before leaving Ferrara for Constantinople, or already from the Empire, employing one of her agents. The medal is further proof of a relatively peaceful symbiosis of Christians and Jews in sixteenth-century Ferrara. A minority of scholars claim that Giovanni Paolo Poggini designed the medal; attribution should however be given to Pastorino di Pastorini. Pastorino di Pastorini (1508–1572) worked as painter, glass painter, and stucco artist, and as coin and medal engraver. Although he lived in Siena, during Ercole II’s rule he was active in Ferrara. Vasari would later hail him for his portrait medals in painted stucco. Some early scholars mistook the impression for Gracia’s profile and became involved in complicated calculations to account for the fact that the medal was struck several years after Gracia left Ferrara, or that in 1558 Gracia would not have been eighteen but about forty-eight years old.166 Here the identity of the model is less important than the fact that the likeness of a young Jewish woman appears on a medal, wearing the same elegant, lace-trimmed costume, hairstyle, and jewelry as that worn by aristocratic Christian ladies of the period. The text surrounding the portrait is in both Hebrew and Latin. It is possible that even the Hebrew letters were done by Pastorino. A transliteration reads “Gratzia Nasi” in keeping with the Hebrew letter “tzadi” instead of a “c.” The artist would not need to know the Hebrew alphabet; he could merely have copied it from a sample, as was the habit of many Renaissance painters of biblical scenes. The existence of the medal is remarkable since Judaism did not permit the depiction of human images. Yet it is known that Jews who had been Christians earlier, incorporated some Christian rites in their services. This practice resulted in part from their ignorance of the Mosaic laws, but also because of the prestige of their Christian surroundings. One may claim that Gracia and her family’s new-found Judaism was influenced not only by the vigorous Jewish community of Ferrara, but also permitted by the lively cultural life of the Renaissance city to which they had free access.

166 Regarding Gracia the elder as the alleged model, the claim is entirely without merit, and therefore there is no need to refer to a bibliography on the subject. For the best treatment of the topic, see Daniel M. Friedenberg, Jewish Medals From the Renaissance to the Fall of Napoleon: 1503–1815 (New York, 1970), pp. 43–45 and 128, respectively. Pastorino’s signature “p” usually appeared on the garb. Some scholars claim to have found it also on the “Gratsia Luna” medal.

Gracia and Jewish Patronage in Sixteenth-Century Ferrara

65

THE GROWING INTOLERANCE IN FERRARA After the wedding, Samuel had to wait for a safe conduct to leave Ferrara with his family. First he had to obtain safe transit from Venice, where he had been banished for having participated in the kidnap of his— by then—own wife. João made most of the arrangements for him from Constantinople. Finally, on March 6, 1558, Samuel, his wife, and household were permitted to leave. But Ferrara remained in debt to the family; it took years to recover the 40,000 crown lent to the late duke.167 At this time, Gracia got entangled in a long and unpleasant business quarrel with Agostino Enriques, who had retained some of her money, claiming that he had needed it to bribe Ferraran officials in order to secure freedom for Samuel and his family. In 1553, the Inquisition was again permitted to function in Ferrara; the Talmud and rabbinical texts were publicly burned. Later, Pope Paul IV prevailed upon Ercole II to introduce new anti-Jewish legislation. During his papacy Paul IV reorganized and expanded the activities of the Inquisition.168 Having seen the handwriting on the wall, Gracia accepted the repeated invitations of the Porte, and continued her patronage of Jews and Jewish studies from the safety of Constantinople. In mid-August, 1552, Sı- nan Chaus put Gracia, Reyna and their entourage on elegant galleys bound for Ragusa, a most important stopover for Gracia’s future business dealings.

167 See Norman Rosenblatt, “Joseph Nasi: Court Favorite of Selim II,” Diss. University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1957), p. 31. 168 See the sub-chapter “The Crises in Ancona and Pesaro.”

CHAPTER 6

IN BUSINESS WITH RAGUSA

Gracia and her daughter arrived in Ragusa (Dubrovnik) on their way to Constantinople. Although she spent but a short time there, the city government extended special privileges to her. The Ragusans’ generous reception of Gracia shows her as the most important woman-entrepreneur in the Mediterranean region.169 Why was the brief stop in Ragusa so significant for Gracia’s later business ventures, which she directed from the Ottoman Empire? Ragusa’s great success in the sixteenth century lay in its having maintained neutrality between the Christian and the Ottoman worlds. Its additional function as an “information center” was appreciated even by the Papal state.170 Through skilled diplomacy, the city republic even gained papal permission to trade with the infidels. After 1442 (with the exception of the years 1444–58), Ragusa paid tribute to the Turkish sultan until 1808.171 It is an undisputed fact that Ragusa profited greatly from its role mediating between the West and the Ottoman Empire. As a consequence of that diplomacy, Ragusa accumulated enough wealth to guarantee its independence. The Ragusans themselves, aware of their special situation, avoided possible areas of conflict with either side.172 Even their poets tempered their writings

169 I am primarily relying on Jorjo Tadic´, Jevreji u Dubrovniku do polovine XVII stoljec´a (Sarajevo, 1937), the most important piece of research on the subject to date. I am grateful to Professor Ivana Burdelez, who generously provided me with copies of the relevant archival materials. 170 Albrecht Edelgard, Das Türkenbild in der ragusanisch-dalmatinischen Literatur des XVI. Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1965), esp. pp. 128–31. 171 For more on Ragusa and the Ottoman world, see Maren M. Freidenberg (Frejdenberg), Dubrovnik i Osmanskaia imperia, 2d ed. (Moscow, 1989); and ibid., Evrei na Balkanakh, (Moscow, 1996), as well as its updated Croatian translation, Zˇidovi na Balkanu na isteku srenjeg vijeka (Zagreb, 2000). See also, Barisˇa Krekic´, Dubrovnik: A Mediterranean Society, 1300-1600 (Variorum Collected Studies, 581), (1997), especially “Gli ebrei [sic] a Ragusa nel Cinquecento,” pp. 835–44. It first appeared in 1987. See footnote 6. 172 Even before the Turkish occupation of Hungary (1526), Ragusans advised the Hungarian court about the progress of the enemy. For example, in 1458, Ragusa notified

In Business with Ragusa

67

on both Christian and Muslim victories. It is a remarkable fact that the greatest Renaissance poet of Ragusa, Marin Drzˇic´ (1508–67), who had visited Constantinople as the interpreter of Count Christoph von Roggendorf, has left no notes regarding that journey.173 In contrast to the sparse information that reached the general public, Ragusan government records abound with material, maintained with precision and safeguarded throughout the perils of historical change. The first record of a Jewish presence in Ragusa dates from the late thirteenth century and relates, most probably, to a man from Durazzo (today Albania) who in 1281 stayed there. In 1324, another Jew, “magister Judeus physicus,” was soon followed by several of his co-religionists who came from Malta, Cyprus, and Provence. Ragusa was a favored port of Jewish emigrants from the Iberian Peninsula after 1492. There, refugees could hire transport and continue to their final destination, the Ottoman Empire. The Jews first lived at Plocˇ e, as their temporary residence. Their number remained small throughout the fifteenth century.174 The Ottoman victories and especially the radical changes in their lives following the Edict of Expulsion increased Jewish activities in Ragusa. Most Jews arrived by boat in Spalato (Split) and Ragusa via Venice and Ancona. From 1501, Jewish refugees traveled to Salonika and Skopje through the city republic. On land, caravans took the travelers to Salonika, which by this time hosted a large and lively Jewish population, with emigrants from all over Europe. The caravans usually used the old Roman Road, the Via Egnatia. Information regarding the transactions between the travelers and their guides was registered and can still be found among the documents housed in the Dubrovnik Archives. The caravans carrying travelers across the Balkan

King Matthias Corvinus about conditions in Turkey: “Mercatores nostri, qui in Turcos fuere, circa principium istius mensis rediere, Turcorum dominum ad loca Uschopie ex Achaia venisse ferunt, exercitus magna parte febribus et inedia absumpto [sic]; ipsum denique Turcorum dominum magno terrore teneri, et nihil magis per maiestatis vestre impetum formidare.” And, added to the above information: “Ex Italia in presenciarum nihil apud nos est significatu dignum.” József Gelchich and Lajos Thallóczy, Diplomatarium relationum reipublicae Ragusanae cum regno Hungariae. Raguza és Magyarország összeköttetéseinek oklevéltára (Budapest, 1887), p. 612, no. 364 173 Contrary to Carter’s claim, Drzˇic´ did not go to Venice “as a count’s valet,” but as his interpreter. See Francis W. Carter, Dubrovnik (Ragusa): A Classical City-State (London and New York, 1972), p. 505. See also Edelgard, p. 132. 174 Barisˇ a Krekic´, “Gli ebrei [sic] a Ragusa nel Cinquecento,” Gli Ebrei e Venezia, secoli XIV-XVIII, Atti del Convegno internazionale organizzato dall’Istituto di storia della società e dello stato veneziano della Fondazione Giorgio Cini. Venezia, Isola di San Giorgio Maggiore 5–10 giugno 1983, ed. Gaetano Cozzi (Milan, 1987), p. 835.

68

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Peninsula were relatively large, probably including at least 200 people and 160 horses.175 Safety lay in numbers. Often refugees were attacked by robbers or pirates; their cargo was sacked on land and sea. The Ragusan government interceded on their behalf many times to protect them and their cargoes.176 Although there are records of Jewish activities in the fifteenth century, it was during the sixteenth that Jews became a part of Ragusa’s permanent population, while remaining in close private and commercial contact with Sephardic communities in various Mediterranean countries. Their merchants and traders easily fit into the city, whose non-Jewish residents engaged in the same commercial activities. Records of 1572 demonstrate the intensity of Jewish participation in Ragusan trade, where of the 50 commercial agents (factors, or sensali), 30 were Jews.177 The city’s firm contacts with the Ottoman world made Ragusa a choice center for Westerners to trade with the economically less developed East.

JEWS IN RAGUSA The active Jewish presence in Ragusa also gave rise to lively anti-Judaic feelings among local merchant-patricians who began viewing the newcomers as dangerous competitors. That perception, rather than the vigorous antiJewish propaganda of the Ragusan Church, was responsible for an edict of expulsion on May 4, 1515. Probably Christian merchants had urged its promulgation, which was meant to preclude even the notion of Jewish families settling in Ragusa. The edict clearly targets families who had made Ragusa home. There were stipulations for single merchants who would stay, for a limited time, on business. In the light of a new wave of persecution in Europe, Ragusans were probably apprehensive of a genuine invasion of Jews looking for a safe haven in their city republic. With cultivated self-interest, the government exempted Jewish physicians. And, as usual with such laws, they were never fully enforced, nor were they to last long. Already in 1538, sanitation laws regarding the

175 Krekic´, “Gli ebrei,” p. 837. 176 While many merchants and traders used Ragusa only as a port from which to travel into Balkan Ottoman territory, some remained in the city, creating a colony that lasted until the Nazi occupation. See Barisˇa Krekic´, Dubrovnik in the 14th and 15th Centuries: A City between East and West (Norman, 1972), p. 30. 177 Ivana Burdelez, “The Role of Ragusan Jews in the History of Mediterranean Countries,” Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Mediterranean World after 1492, ed. Alisa Meyuhas Ginio (London, 1992), p. 192.

In Business with Ragusa

69

Jewish presence in Plocˇ e point to a more or less permanent Jewish residence there.178 By April, 1540, at least half a dozen houses were designated Jewish dwellings. This grouping could be considered the nucleus of a Jewish ghetto that was indeed set up in February, 1546, on Loijarska Street, later called Zˇudioska.179 That area included houses with storage-space and a synagogue.180 The street was walled in on both ends, and a gate was built into one wall. Residents had to be inside the walls at night when the gate was locked. As in most cases in Europe, the ghetto had to pay for its own maintenance. It was administered by an elected head, the “Consul Hebreorum.” Again, not even the ghettoization of the Ragusan Jews was carried out in toto: there were always wealthy Jews who lived in the town. In 1553, on arrival in Ragusa, Gracia Mendes and her household joined that privileged group. Even before Gracia’s disembarking in Ragusa, the Mendes family had maintained strong economic contacts with the city, where two of her factors, Abner Agfarin and Isaac Ergas, represented her business interests. Through them, on November 22, 1552, Gracia applied to the government of Ragusa for special tariffs and a reduction of customs duties.181 Gracia was to play an important role as an intermediary between Ragusa and the Porte. When in early 1553, her galleys docked in Ragusa, she was received with pomp and lavish ceremonies. She must have made the impression of a traveling princess: that had been the effect of her sailing off from Venice, as indicated by documents in the archives there. It is recorded that a throng of spectators watched the boats leave the port. That there is no similar archival documentation about her arrival in Ragusa seems odd, considering the otherwise scrupulously kept records on locals and foreigners alike. Materials preserved in the Historical Archives, however, contain her requests to the government and include the resolutions

178 Krekic´, “Gli ebrei,” p. 839. The Senate’s unanimous decision was, as quoted by most scholars on this issue, “de dando libertatem domino rectori et Consilio quod pro congreganda Hebreos in unum ad habitandum possint eligere quinque aut sex domos pro sua habitatione et eo plures sicuti fuerit necessarium, et domos inventos referre debeant ad presens Consilium, et quod precipi faciant dictis Hebreis ut ferant signa quibus destinguantur a christianis” [April 22, 1540]. 179 The street still exists in the heart of the Old Town. The synagogue, damaged by a Serbian rocket attack on December 6, 1991, was restored and reopened for the Jewish High Holidays in September, 1997. 180 According to the records of the Consilium Rogatorum (47, 249), the ghetto was established and completed by February 25, 1546. The ghetto’s buildings, however, remained the city’s property with the Jews as tenants. 181 Tadic´, p. 322. Both the Major Council and the Minor Council of Ragusa participated in those decisions.

70

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

of the Senate. Her name also appears in the Compendium under “Lettere e Commissioni (Lettere di Levante).”182 Gracia was not forced to live in the ghetto, but received permission to remain freely in Ragusa for six months. This concession also applied to her family members and to her entourage of several dozen employees and servants. Considering the changes in the city after the great earthquake in 1667, it is not easy to determine where Gracia resided during her stay. She probably rented lodgings relatively close to the center, in the vicinity of the Plocˇ e Gate. Her warehouses would have been outside the city wall, possibly even south of the main harbor and not far from the area later designated as the Jewish cemetery.183 It is possible that Doña Gracia also had access to the port of Cavtat, where recently-found information establishes the presence of Jewish-owned trading boats.184 Even after Gracia’s departure, her agents lived outside the ghetto walls. On April 28, 1558, according to archival material, Alfarin and Ergas petitioned the government to waive the rental fees for their families in the ghetto, since, by permission of the government they did not reside there, but in a house outside of the wall. Most remarkably, in 1558, Gracia’s agents offered to pay the fees for the entire ghetto: 60 scudi annually per household.185 It was stipulated that the amount excluded their own dwelling costs, but included expenses for the government’s guards, whose charge it was to keep the ghetto gate secure. There must have been other than friendly preliminaries to this petition, because in it the agents also asked the government to return personal items, among them their wives’ jewelry, which were, presumably, sequestered for delinquency in payment. The two men reminded the government of Ragusa’s important contacts with their employer. Indeed, their petition was granted, and thus the ghetto was turned over to Gracia’s agents on rental.

182 Quoted by Orfali, as he claimed, “for the first time.” Moise Orfali, “Newly Published Documents Regarding Commercial Activities between Doña Gracia Mendes and the Ragusan Republic,” unpublished version of a conference paper, courtesy of Professor Burdelez. The relevant documents appear on pp. 18–22. I was unable to obtain a published version of this paper. As mentioned in the body of this work, the name used by Gracia was “de Luna.” Tadic´—who first published a large number of the above-mentioned documents—refers to her as “Gracija Mendez” and “de Luna,” calling the latter her “Christian name” (p. 315). Cf. the Appendix for a facsimile regarding her negotiations. 183 Near the current location of the Hotel Excelsior. 184 Personal communication from Professor Burdelez (September, 1997). This is a significant claim: if it turns out to be correct, it means that Gracia had access to more than one port in the region. 185 Orfali, p. 12, quoting Tadic´.

In Business with Ragusa

71

THE RAGUSAN DEAL A year after her arrival in Turkey, Gracia wrote to the Ragusan government regarding her trade with Italy, and in that connection she mentioned her stay in the city and the splendid welcome she had received.186 Then in a bold request addressed to the Senate, she asked for a long-term docking, stowing, and shipping contract. The legislators’ favorable decision made it obvious that Ragusa considered “Beatrice de Luna,” as she referred to herself in all her correspondence with the city, an exceptionally important business partner. Although Gracia did not use the names Mendes or Nasi, as she had in Ferrara, the Ragusan government was certainly aware of the immensity of the Mendes fortune. Gracia also offered proper securities for the first six months, while the duties would be paid at the end of that period; the privileges would be in force for five years, before renegotiation. In addition, she requested permission to lease a warehouse in the harbor for that period, a space that she would not have to share with any other traders. She also wanted the agreement to stipulate that after she paid the customs fees on merchandise from Italian ports, those goods could be transported to their final destinations without any additional wharfage. Gracia pledged to pay 500 ducats in customs fees in case she did not use the Ragusan ferry during those five years, and she offered secure guarantees—in Ragusa or in Ancona—depending on the Ragusan government’s choice. Moreover, her Ragusan agents promised the government to encourage their business friends to use the Ragusan port and thus increase the profits of the republic. Although it is not clear whether it is for an actual shipment or a future one, an inventory was appended to the request. The contract, which involved a large quantity of merchandise, was approved by the Minor Council on November 9, 1554, by a vote of 30 to 7. The “nays” reflected some council members’ objection to the five-year duration of the contract, requested by Gracia. Indeed, the terms of agreement remained valid for five years and were renewed on August 7, 1557, and once again on July 4, 1562. On that occasion her agents requested a reduction of the deposit on pending customs fees to a third of the sum stipulated earlier. When that too was approved, Gracia was granted a privilege previously reserved for Ragusan citizens. The importance of her business for Ragusa emerges in the fact that the city accepted both her and (later) her nephew’s signature without a declared guarantor.187

186 Tadic´, p. 323, footnote 7. 187 Tadic´, p. 324, footnote 10. The same rules of signature applied to Gracia’s business deals in Turkey.

72

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

A circumspect businesswoman, Gracia also expressed concern about the safety of her people and goods in Ragusa. She asked the government to protect them should her merchandise be confiscated during transfer. She also requested a writ of immunity for her goods and her agents during their passage through Ragusa’s port, adding that in the absence of such a commitment she would have to find another port of transfer. Gracia reassured Ragusa that she would pay unlimited compensation to those who would file suit against her. Such oblique references probably alluded to her precarious situation in and departure from Venice. The letter included a statement whereby Gracia would be willing to test her case in the Turkish courts against anyone’s claims and asserted that she was sufficiently wealthy to pay an even larger amount if judgment were rendered against her.188 Subsequently, Gracia and her agents conducted their business with Italy, Hungary, Poland, and other countries in Europe from Constantinople via Ragusa. She always received special consideration because the city was aware of her status and influence at the Ottoman court, and because the Ragusans took advantage of that influence on numerous occasions. The relationship was symbiotic. Gracia used Ragusa to send wool, pepper, and grain to Venice and other Italian ports. She imported wool and linen fabrics to Turkey in exchange for raw material from the East.189 Ragusa profited greatly from its business with the House of Mendes. Records show that in addition to the 500 ducats in storage fees, for every crate of silk the city received an additional four and a half ducats, two ducats for each bale of wool and linen, and one ducat for a bundle of cotton cloth or skins. The city also received one percent of the value of goods that passed through from the Levant.190 Above all, Ragusa used Gracia’s good offices to transfer funds securely outside the republic. The government transmitted 20 zecchinos (gold coins) to its envoys at the Porte in 1555. In 1556 and 1557, Gracia’s factors transferred funds for Ragusa to Ferrara.191 In a letter dated July 24, 1557, Gracia 188 It remains unclear from her communication whether the French or Charles V threatened her merchandise, on the bases of earlier claims. 189 Orfali, p. 7, footnote 11. 190 Orfali, p. 13. With minor differences, the information appears in Tadic´, who states that “for each trunk of silk clothing, regardless of whose ship brought them to Dubrovnik, 4,5 ducats were paid...[but] for a bale of cloth and any other merchandise from Italy 1 ducat, for a bale of goat skins 1 ducat...for merchandise from the Levant 1% of the assessed value was charged” [p. 323, footnote 7]. Statistics, cited in Chapter 9 of Carter’s book (pp. 349–98), should be compared by economic historians with contracts offered by Ragusa’s competitors. See footnote 5 above. 191 Indeed, it was at most times impossible to send money from one country to another, be it from Spain to the Netherlands or to the Levant. For more on this subject,

In Business with Ragusa

73

was asked to lend 3,100 ducats to the Ragusan envoys because it was considered too dangerous to send them money directly. At least twice, the government wanted to reimburse Gracia’s agents, but they refused the responsibility and suggested that the debt stay with Ragusa until Gracia gave directions where to deposit it. This method of transfer was used for the sum of 1,000 ducats in 1559, and again on November 21, 1560, when 400 ducats were turned over to Ragusa’s own agents who were active at the Porte. Moreover, the House of Mendes helped Ragusa to overcome its nagging grain shortages. As the local harvest could hardly satisfy a fraction of the demand, Gracia’s agents helped relieve the shortage through shipments from the Ottoman Empire, primarily from Volos, but also from Valona, in Albania.192 The commercial concessions Gracia acquired in Ragusa were later passed on to her nephew and son-in-law, Joseph Nasi. The fact that her name appears together with Nasi’s on the official documents proves that Ragusa accepted their association.193 Contemporary diplomatic messages frequently depicted João Miques, by then Joseph Nasi, as a spy for the Muslims; more recent records reveal that he probably was a double agent—at least by proxy—using his men to carry information to both sides. Ragusa, always at the forefront of international espionage, must have heard rumors about Nasi, but chose either to ignore them or take advantage of them when it suited. “The fundamental assumption was that the two of them [i.e., Gracia and her son-in-law] served as preferred tax farmers to the Sublime Porte and therefore no one would dare to harm them.”194 As a postscript to Jewish life in Ragusa and the privileges granted to the Mendes–Nasi family, it should be mentioned that the situation changed shortly after Gracia’s death. While the change was not caused by her passing, that event gave Ragusa the opportunity to renegotiate the conditions of the contract, which was about to expire. The primary reason for renegotiation was the war of Cyprus in 1570. It was widely believed that Nasi, an ex-

see Geoffrey Parker, The Army of Flanders and the Spanish Road, 1567–1659: The Logistics of Spanish Victory and Defeat in the Low Countries’ Wars, rev. ed. (Cambridge, 1990), p. 146 and passim. 192 Orfali published Gracia’s instruction to her agents regarding the purchase of 3,000 bushels of grain from either Volosa or Valona. Lettere di Levante 18, 252, (19-20 in his text). 193 Braudel referred to Joseph Nasi as playing the role of a small-scale Fugger at the Porte. See Fernand Braudel, La Méditerranée et le monde méditerranéen a l’époque de Philippe II (Paris, 1949), p. 880. 194 Orfali, p. 14.

74

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Christian, had conspired with the sultan and sold out the Christian world. The loss of Cyprus fostered a general belief in “Marrano conspiracy,” in the revival of the concept of “periculum proditionis.”195 It is no coincidence that in 1570 the Council of Ten in Venice handed over Enriques Núñes (called Abraham Righetto), allegedly a relative of Nasi, to the Inquisition. He was charged with judaizing and with planning to leave secretly for the Levant.196 It is also known that at the same time the Mendes factors too were vulnerable to danger and persecution in Ragusa. But as before, economic expediency prevailed. From 1570, there was a concentration on shortening trade routes, as well as a new focus on the Adriatic and the Balkans, leading to further exploitation of land routes from the Dalmatian harbors. The New Christians, living in Dalmatian ports, were of great service in that process, and many became minor partners of Venice in the post-Cyprus Levantine trade.

195 For more on this, see chapter 7 on the Ottoman Empire. 196 As it happened, Righetto had excellent contacts in Venice, and although he spent a long time incarcerated, he was secretly advised about the contents of his process, including the names of his accusers. Finally with the aid of some corruptible officials, he escaped from prison. For more on him see Brian Pullan, The Jews of Europe and the Inquisition of Venice, 1560–1670 (Oxford, 1983), p. 112 and passim. Righetto’s contacts with Nasi will be described in chapter 7.

CHAPTER 7

THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND THE JEWS With ships of Tarshish in the lead To bring your sons from afar And their silver and gold as well For the name of the Lord your God, For the Holy One of Israel, who has glorified you. —Isaiah 60:9 In a section of his Consolaçam, Samuel Usque describes the Ottoman Empire as the great consolation of the Jews because there the gates of freedom are open and Judaism can be freely practiced.197 Life there is said to restore the human character. Here, the Jew can return to his ancient practices, abandoning the religion that has been forced upon him by those among whom he has wandered. In that section of his work, Usque refers to the “double life” the conversos have to lead in Christian Europe. He emphasizes the toll it takes on their conscience. Usque’s claim expresses the consensus of the Jews and conversos who have chosen the Ottoman Empire as their new home.198 Yet the Ottoman Empire did not differ principally from other countries because, as everywhere, the Jewish presence was tolerated as an act of magnanimity by the ruler; however, in the Ottoman Empire, Jews were accorded a special status. Spanish and Portuguese Jews could revive a consciousness lost because of the Expulsion, and the social fabric of a vanished Iberian life was reconstituted under relatively felicitous circumstances. Most important, in the sixteenth century, the Ottoman Empire was one of the most advanced and best-administered states in the world, and modern * Since I write about the Ottoman Empire from the European stance, I refer to its capital as Constantinople and to its inhabitants as Turks (as they appear in sixteenth-century western sources). 197 As a trained humanist, Usque used his native language elegantly. Fidelino de Figueiredo writes about Consolaçam: “E uma obra nobilissima, que honra a lingua Portuguesa.” Historia da literature clasica, vol. 1 (Lisbon, 1922), p. 297 (quoted in Usque’s English translation, 33). 198 In the sixteenth century, Iberian Jews thought of the Ottoman Empire as East European Jews thought of America in the nineteenth: a haven from persecution. For a useful compendium on the subject, see Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of a Plural Society, 2 vols., ed. Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis (New York, 1982).

76

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

in meritocracy and tolerance. Each social class and all sources of wealth were regarded as obliged to preserve and promote the ruler; hence all types of economic activities were regulated by the state alone.199 The cities were multi-ethnic. Originally the leadership was non-Muslim, and not Ottoman. While the former soon changed, many important posts remained filled by Balkan Slavs who had converted to Islam. In the Arabic speaking lands, the Ottoman conquest did not much change the daily life of the population. They merely exchanged one Muslim power for another. However, for the Jews, newly arriving from different parts of Europe, the change in lifestyle was monumental. Socially, they were less integrated than their local co-religionists, although earlier those too had been expelled from their homes and had undergone forced transfers. As in most European countries, in the Ottoman Empire capital was created by commerce, handicrafts, and agriculture. The Jews, as members of the rising merchant class, could fit well into the ideals of Istanbul society, where they were supported by the sultan, especially during Grand Vizir Rustam’s and Sı¯nan Pasha’s time, who, as well as his advisors, promoted the case of Jewish merchants.200 Their privileged position brought some local hostility against them; the guilds had viewed Jews as their enemy, but competition for business cut through all religions. In Bursa, Italian agents as well as Jewish traders waited eagerly for the caravans and competed aggressively for the goods arriving from Persia.

THE LEGAL STATUS OF JEWS The foreign trade in which Jewish merchants were involved was conducted mainly with Italy, primarily with Venice, Ancona, and Pesaro, often by way of the Adriatic. Ancona was also the base for trade with Florence. Regarding England and France, in the beginning the Jews served merely as brokers, however, they actively participated in the trade between Constantinople, Salonika, Ragusa, Valona, Venice, Seville, and Lisbon, up to Amsterdam, and through the Balkans to Austria, and later with Poland and Russia. During the sixteenth century, Jewish merchants competed in shipping mer-

199 Halil Inalcik, The Ottoman Empire: Conquest, Organization and Economy (London, 1978), p. 98. (Variorum Reprints). For details, see especially chapter 12: “Capital Formation in the Ottoman Empire.” See also Mark Alan Epstein, The Ottoman Jewish Communities and Their Role in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries (Freiburg, 1980). (Islamische Untersuchungen, 56). 200 Inalcik, p. 102.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

77

chandise to Italy or to the shores of the Black Sea and the Danube, whereas the Islamic merchants traded primarily in Moscow and in Poland. There was also local industry in Bursa. Silks coming from the looms in private dwellings sold well in Europe; some Bursa weavers became quite wealthy. This source too was tapped by most of the traders. Unlike the most advanced European countries, sixteenth-century Turkey had few up-to-date network of roads. Trade and commuting were carried on by caravans, and the roads that the traders used developed into a chain of “highways” with inns or caravanserais and related supporting systems. Those roads were used especially for intrastate travel, whereas most major international trade was conducted on the seas. However, in some parts of the empire, bridges and roads built during the medieval period, or as far back as the Roman period, were used. The Ottoman army, however, proved excellent using roads and highways in warfare. The legal status of a Jewish subject in the empire was determined by Islamic rulings. As opposed to the Muslims, in the Ottoman Empire the Jews belonged to the “dhimma,” that is, non-Muslim subjects of the Muslim state, protected persons, enjoying a considerable measure of freedom, even if their inferiority was stressed in the rulings. The Jews paid property and poll taxes (cizye), as well as customs duties, all of which went to the government. Therefore, the dhimmi—although separated by faith—were a part of the Muslim order.201 Within the Jewish community, the memunim, also called the parnasim, were appointed offices. Men of distinction, the memunim fulfilled bureaucratic functions. They were responsible for the collection of taxes, often having to advance the sums until they were gathered.202 Like the rabbis, they held religious authority and were backed by the Ottoman government. As go-betweens, they helped to enforce the laws.

201 Minna Rozen, “Strangers in a Strange Land: the Extraterritorial Status of Jews in Italy and in the Ottoman Empire in the Sixteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries,” Ottoman and Turkish Jewry, ed. Aron Rodrigue (Indiana University, Turkish Studies, 12) (Bloomington, 1992), pp. 135–36. Bernard Lewis paints a much less benign picture of the “dhimma.” See The Jews of Islam (Princeton, 1984), pp. 14–16, 21–22, 40–44, and passim. 202 For more on this function, see Leah Bornstein-Makovetsky, “Jewish Lay Leadership and Ottoman Authorities during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries,” Ottoman and Turkish Jewry, ed. Aron Rodrigue (Bloomington, 1992), pp. 88–121. See also ibid., “Structure, Organization and Spiritual Life of the Sephardi Communities in the Ottoman Empire from the Sixteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries,” The Sephardi Heritage, v. 2 (Grendon, 1989), pp. 314–48. It is interesting to compare the situation with that of Spain: In Aragon, the Castilian Jews had a “Rab de la Corte,” a chief justice appointed by the king. The “collecta” was regionally organized by tax districts.

78

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Some of them were Jewish “courtiers,” who ever since the rule of Murad II in the fifteenth century filled diplomatic positions and acted as economic advisors to the sultans. They were also physicians, businessmen, and suppliers of goods, and held great power and influence over their coreligionists. Outside Constantinople, Jewish communities frequently sent their emissaries to the Imperial court. For example, Rabbi Moshe Almosnino received the renewal and expansion of privileges for the Salonika Jews during his 1576 visit to the palace.203 It is from their correspondence that foreign legates had to bribe the grand vizir, the commander of the palace police, or the head eunuch to get to see the sultan. The same applied to the Jewish emissaries. The Jewish lay leaders also had contacts—based on bribery—with the muftis of Constantinople and Jerusalem. Jews in the Ottoman Empire were treated differently from those in the Christian countries of the West, as indicated by the Porte’s support while they did business in Europe. The sultans saw the Jews as a dynamic and productive urban element. Their loyalty was proven, and in turn the Ottoman government always stood up for the traveling Jewish merchants, to the great displeasure of Venice. The bilateral treaty signed between Venice and the Porte at the conclusion of the war of 1537–40 (October 3, 1540) clarifies and records those concessions.204 The Venetians distinguished between Christian, Jewish, and Muslim Levantines. During the war of 1570–73, when Venetians were trapped in the empire, and in retribution the Venetian government imprisoned the Levantine merchants on their territory, the Christian traders were exempt. During the negotiations of 1571, the Ottomans declared that the Venetians would receive their sequestered merchandise only after the Jews too had their goods returned to them.205 When traveling for the Empire to places such as Venice, the Jewish diplomat or merchant would carry a safe conduct (aman), entitling him to freedom of trade and movement.206

203 Rabbi Moses ben Baruch Almosnino lived in Salonika during Süleyman’s rule when the city’s population was largely Jewish. For his major works see footnote 26 below. Almosnino was the first rabbi in Salonika’s congregation, “Livyat Hen,” allegedly appointed to that post by Joseph Nasi. The “Chaplet of Grace” was destroyed by a fire in 1917. 204 Minna Rozen, p. 131. The Porte also intervened on the behalf of individuals, for example in 1566–7, in the case Aaron di Segure, a relation of Gracia and Joseph (Rose, p. 137). 205 This happened, possibly, at Joseph Nasi’s instigation and insistence. 206 In Venice, the Ghetto Vecchio, established in 1541, provided living space for the Levantine merchants.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

79

In the Ottoman Empire a sharp distinction was drawn between Muslim and non-Muslim subjects. Jews were left not merely to their own religion, but to their own laws and administration in matters that did not concern the Muslims. Greeks, Armenians, and Jews were permitted to trade, and travel unhindered. They shared the same status with all non-Muslims, and they were protected by the ahl-al-dhimma, the special law, which made them feel safe in the empire. They were considered more loyal than Christians, since no enemy of the empire supported them. Even if the Jews were ordered to wear certain colors and not build or renovate their houses of worship, such regulations were seldom enforced. When it came to the rich, their trespasses were generally overlooked. Their representative, the kahya, a Turkish-speaking fellow Jew, was respected in both communities. Their kehalim (congregations), supported by members such as the Kahal of Lisbon or the Kahal of Portugal, remained in close contact with their former communities. In the same sancˇak (administrative region), the larger kahals had more influence, and rabbis and the beit din (religious court) handled their litigations. Cases involving non-Jews were adjudicated by Muslim courts. By ancient privilege, confirmed by each sultan, Armenians and Jews were exempt from blood tribute, devshirme (the training of children to become janissaries), and military service. After the fall of Byzantium (1453), Jews living in the provinces were also affected by the sürgün (the expulsion of individuals or entire groups); thousands of them were transferred to Constantinople. Jewish families from Egypt, as well as those originally from Europe, were forced to move. Yet, they felt relatively safe because the order of eviction did not apply to them as Jews: they shared the fate of non-Muslims.207 The sürgün continued into the sixteenth century. In 1522, Süleyman exiled the Salonika Jews to Rhodes. Although 150 families were moved there, they constituted but five percent of the population. They were active, rich, respected; they developed Rhodes. It seems from the records that community leaders could influence decisions affecting certain individuals, although they could not change decisions regarding categories.208 After the Ottoman conquest of Cyprus in 1571, 1,000 Jewish families were transported from Safed to Cyprus as the result of a decree issued in 1576. A second decree would have resulted in the removal of another 500 families; however, it was not enforced, owing to Jewish appeal and the 207 For more on this subject, see Joseph R. Hacker, “The Sürgün System and Jewish Society in the Ottoman Empire,” Ottoman and Turkish Jewry: Community and Leadership, ed. Rodrigue, pp. 1–65. 208 After the Turkish victory at Mohács (1526), 60 Hungarian-Jewish families were moved to Sofia; they made up over half of the town’s Jews.

80

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

intervention of the kadi of Safed, who explained that such a ruling would lead to the ruin of imperial revenues and the collapse of Safed. Instead, 100 Jews who had wished to move from Salonika to Safed were resettled in Cyprus against their will. The sürgün was Mehmed the Conqueror’s policy; it was applied across the board, to all inhabitants of the Empire, not only to Jews. Despite such displacement, the Jewish population of the victorious Ottoman Empire grew steadily. By 1477, the Jews of Constantinople registered 1,647 households—eleven percent of the city’s inhabitants.209 The sürgün notwithstanding, most Jews saw the Christian world as the one that had expelled them, whereas the Islamic world welcomed them. Indeed, even the sürgün, although affecting them, had a special purpose: considered a productive, city-building element in the empire, the Jews for that very reason became sürgüns. They were “imported” foreigners, chosen to rebuild Constantinople into an Ottoman capital. Before 1453, a small Romaniot Ashkenazi community lived in Byzantium, and the meeting of the two Jewish populations was not without conflict. The Ashkenazim and the Sephardim disagreed on many legal and social matters, such as family law, the treatment of the conversos, the kashrut (Jewish dietary law) and other customs. The Sephardim later absorbed the Romaniot community. In Salonika, where the Romaniot Jews were moved by the sürgün, a Sephardic dominance was created during the sixteenth century. The experience of European Jewish and converso immigrants was useful for the development of the less-urbanized regions, in effect, making the Jews reluctant colonizers of sorts. Thus, in addition to the principal Jewish centers such as Constantinople and Salonika, Edirne, Safed, and Izmir developed as important sub-communities. Izmir became the main port city in the late sixteenth century. By 1515, Salonika turned into an active cultural center. It had a Hebrew printing press that served the needs of an evergrowing Jewish population.210 In 1517, there were 3,143 Jewish households and 930 tax-paying bachelors on its books. The sürgün system even had its

209 Avigdor Levy, The Sephardim in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton, 1992), p. 7. By 1540, there were 1,542 Greek, 777 Armenian, and 1,490 Jewish households in Constantinople (Levy, p.46). See also Amnon Cohen, Jewish Life under Islam: Jerusalem in the Sixteenth Century (Cambridge, Mass., 1984). According to the compilations of Barkan, only four cities: Constantinople, Salonika, Edirne, and Tricala, had more than 150 Jewish families during the first quarter of the sixteenth century (Hacker, p. 27). 210 Levy, p. 6. Arba’ah Tuvim, a code of Jewish law, compiled by Jacob ben Asher (c. 1270–1340), was the first Hebrew book ever printed in the Ottoman Empire. It left the press in Constantinople, during 1493–4.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

81

Jewish defenders. Originally from Crete, Rabbi Elyah Kapsali (1420–96/97?), when describing the fall of Byzantium, rejoiced over the defeat of the Greeks and welcomed the conquering Turks as God’s just punishment.211 He referred to the sürgün as a voluntary resettlement and minimized Bayezid’s tough policies regarding the religious minorities. Kapsali’s Seder Eliyahu Zuta displays strong pro-Muslim bias, the author avoiding criticism of the emperors rather emphasizing their sympathy for the suffering of the Jews, in Spain and Portugal.212

SOCIAL LIFE AND CUSTOMS Information about sixteenth-century Jewish life in the Ottoman Empire can be culled from several sources. In addition to their own records and those of the Ottoman state, information has come down to us that reflected a Christian point of view. Texts and illustrations published by contemporary European travelers enable us to visualize Jews on the streets of the capital, as well as in their homes and places of worship, and in their conduct of business.213 Jews living in the Ottoman Empire adjusted well to local customs. Mehmed II the “Conqueror,” invited the Jews in 1453 into the empire. In his Divan, Grand Rabbi Moise Capsali represented the Jewish community in the Diaspora. Already Rabbi Capsali had prohibited Jews to wear Sabbath headgear, a native habit to the Spanish Jews, but not in Constantinople. The 211 Seder Eliyahu Zuta. Published in Jerusalem, 1976. Quoted by Hacker, p. 23. 212 Sometimes influential Jews were able to use the sürgün system for their own purposes. For example, after their quarrel, Joseph Nasi got David Fasi exiled from Constantinople. See Roth, The House of Nasi: Duke of Naxos (Philadelphia, 1947), pp. 204–12. 213 Among the most important are Nicolas de Nicolay’s drawings made in the Ottoman Empire in 1568, in which a Jewish merchant (266), a physician (185), and Jewish women and girls are depicted (295 and 296, respectively). The physician wears a tall red hat. The draper’s head is covered by a yellow turban. (Quatre premiers livres des navigations et pérégrinations orientales [Antwerp, 1578]). I also used Lyons, 1567 and the 1580 Venice editions (Les navigationi et viaggi…). For more, see Esther Juhasz, ed., Sephardi Jews in the Ottoman Empire (Jerusalem, 1989), volume prepared for the exhibit, plate 15. The influence of Turkish art is displayed on the embroideries of roses and tulips, but those were more prevalent in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. At some point, in the late sixteenth century, allegedly all Jews had to wear red hats, as shown in Juhasz, plates 22–23. For more information regarding dress codes for Jews, see Avram (Abraham) Galanté, Documents officiels turcs concernant les juifs de Turquie (Istanbul, 1931). Jews were, in principle, forbidden to ride horses (VII). Galanté devotes pages 183–6 to Gracia and quotes several documents regarding Joseph Nasi (187–94).

82

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

style in clothing of the Ottoman Jews was influenced by Persian and Chinese fashion, but also included elements from European trends. While not consistently, Muslims wore yellow leather shoes. The rest of the population was expected to wear black or other dark colors. In principle, non-Muslims were forbidden to wear fine fabrics or expensive furs such as ermine or sable; instead they wore smaller turbans made of less fabric than the Muslims wore, and never white ones, the sacred color of Islam. Jewish dress code therefore was guided not merely by the need to preserve tradition or to distinguish themselves from the Muslims or the Christians. Jews had to be careful not to dress more luxuriously than the Muslims, who were forbidden by their own laws to display wealth on their clothing. Cautious not to cause envy, most Jews followed those rules. Jews also wore Italian birettas or square caps. Urban women had indoor and outdoor clothing of great variety, and the rich followed the Italian fashion of wearing dark colors. There was no distinction between textiles used by the different Jewish communities, but the Sephardic Jews retained some distinctive features on their clothing. Naturally, very little information can be accepted with certainty since the garments, as well as the Jews themselves, were stereotyped. Christian travelers from Europe were astonished to find the Jews, so much despised by them, in leading positions in the Ottoman world. Jewish religious life was also allowed to flourish. The restrictions imposed by Bayezid II were lifted, and Jews were again permitted to build new synagogues.

THE WESTERN VIEW OF LEVANTINE JEWS In the second half of the sixteenth century, in the eyes of Europeans, Ottoman economy was dominated by conversos and Jews. Christian prejudices are pointedly expressed in Nicholas de Nicolay’s report on his 1551 voyage to the Ottoman Empire. He wrote, “The Jews are full of malice, fraude, deceit and subtill dealing … [T]o the great detriment and damage of Christendom, [they] have taught the Turk several inventions, artifices and machines of war, such as how to make artillery, arquebuses, gunpowder, cannonballs and other weapons. They have in their hands the most and greatest traffic of merchandise and ready money that is in the Levant.”214 European Christians remained hostile, unimpressed by the Jews’ suc-

214 Nicholas de Nicolay, 1567 Lyons edition, quoted by Halil Inalcik, Jews in the Ottoman Economy and Finances, 1450–1550 (Princeton, 1989), pp. 121 and 246.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

83

cess among the Ottomans, perpetually insisting on their “treacherous” nature. In Thomas Goffe’s “The Raging Turke (or Baiazed the Second),” at Selim’s request the sly Jewish doctor undertakes to kill the ailing Bayezid.215 Hans Dernschwam was an unsympathetic if astute observer of Jewish life in the Ottoman Empire. He left for posterity a treasure trove of information.216 About the local Jews he wrote as follows: A countless number of Jews live in Turkey, who differ in nationality and language, but irrespective of their mother tongues, they stick together. And regardless from which country they have been expelled, they all gather in Turkey, in a heap, like vermin. They speak German, French, Czech, Polish, Greek, Turkish, Assyrian, Chaldaic—but also other languages. Each is wearing his clothes according to his own tradition—in general, long ones— the kind the Italians and Turks wear, namely a caftan, which is like an overcoat, worn over a finely woven material or silk robe, tied with a belt. The Turks wear white turbans, the Jews wear yellow; some foreign Jews wear Italian birettas, and those among them who claim to be physicians or surgeons, wear elongated red caps (“piretlen”) with pointed tips. They almost fill Constantinople: they swarm like ants. The Jews themselves talk about how many they are. In the past year, in 1553, Jewish taxpayers numbered fifteen thousand and thirty-five (that is, without counting women and children). At the same time the Christians, who had to pay the poll taxes, called hracˇ— namely the Greeks, the Armenians, and the Karamans—were six thousand seven hundred and eighty-five.217 Neither number seems accurate, but the claim reflects Dernschwam’s prejudice. During the sixteenth century, the Christian population was calculated larger than the Jewish. According to Dernschwam, the Jews met with just as much contempt

215 “A Tragedy written by Thomas Goffe, Master of Arts, and Student of ChristChurch in Oxford, and Acted by the students of the same house” (Oxford, 1968 and 1974). In a strange misprint, “Hamon, Beiazets Physician, Jewish Monke,” appears in Act I, Scene 9, by the name: “Haman.” For more on the Hamons, see H. Gross “La famille juive des Hamon,” Revue des études juives, 56 (1908): 19–20. Moses Hamon was patronized by Sultan Süleyman. In 1550, Hamon was granted permission to sell foreigners 308 tons of wheat, grown on his “arpalik” estate (Inalcik, p. 120). 216 Hans Dernschwam’s Tagebuch einer Reise nach Konstantinopel und Kleinasien (1553/55), ed. Franz Babinger, after the original published by the Fugger Archives (Munich and Leipzig, 1923), esp. pp. 107–17. The English translation is mine. For more on Dernschwam’s journey, see Marianna D. Birnbaum, ”The Fuggers, Hans Dernschwam and the Ottoman Empire,” Südostforschungen 50 (1991): 119–44. 217 Dernschwam, pp. 106–7.

84

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

in the Ottoman Empire as in other parts of the world. He says that Jews owned no livestock; instead they possessed a large number of houses, entire streets, even whole sections: They do not live there, however; they use it as additional income. They live in the houses of others and pay rent. Those houses are mostly owned by the clergy or by Turkish mosques. If those houses burn down, the clergy has to rebuild them. They [i.e. the Jews] live in miserable houses, squeezed, one upon the other, close to the sea, in the lower part of the city, where not without reason, the plague breaks out every year.218 Not far from Adrianople, on the shore of the Aegean, there is a town called Salonika. Here, as it is said, more Jews live than in Constantinople, allegedly twenty thousand. Many are engaged in weaving broadcloth; their merchandize is available all over Turkey. It is situated opposite to Valona, a town under Venetian rule, between them a large bay, just like between Sicily and Africa [sic]. There are many Jews in Alexandria, in Cairo, Aleppo, Antioch, Syria, and Jerusalem. When the Jews get old, and if they have the money, they visit the Holy Land and Jerusalem, still hoping that they will meet there from all the countries of the world and get [the city] under their control. The rich Jews support these Jerusalemites, because there one cannot earn any money; there is no money there, at all. Just as earlier, here too, they have different sects. The common Jews, who are called Israelites, can be found in every country. They have many literate men among them, whom they call rabbis. They adhere to the five books of Moses, to the prophets and to other earlier writings, and they follow the Ten Commandments. Dernschwam also mentions the Jews’ “ancestry,” their eating habits, the kosher laws, as well as some special Jewish holidays: There are some among them who claim that they derive from Aaron’s clan, they are—one may say—the high priests, the Cohens. They do not wear special garb … Some Jews claim to be the descendants of Levi; they are the priests … There are at least forty-two synagogues in Constantinople and each Jew attends the synagogue of his nation.219

218 Dernschwam, p. 107. 219 Dernschwam, p.107 and 109. (“Juden schulen sollen zw Constantinopel in 42 sein oder mer, ein jede nation geth in ihre schule,” p. 109).

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

85

The Jews don’t lend to the Turks; they don’t trust them. In Turkey, Jews can go wherever they want, to Egypt, to Cairo, to Alexandria, Aleppo, Armenia, to the Tartars … they may even go to Persia, India, Russia, Poland, and Hungary. There is no corner of the world from where Jews would not have come to Constantinople, and there is no merchandise with which the Jews would not deal or trade. As soon as a foreign ship arrives from Alexandria, Kaffa, or Venice, they are the first to show up on the docks. They bring precious stones from India, which come through Persia to Constantinople; some stones bring in 200 florins even if they are not worth more than a single florin... The Jews tease us, because the Turks cannot arrest them or carry them off as slaves and sell them. But they consider it a miracle that after the fall of Buda, the local Jews were moved here by the Turks, and instead of being sold as slaves, they were let go free; all they had to do was pay taxes. Had they sold the Jews of Buda, it would have caused the total financial collapse of the Turkish Jews, because they—according to tradition—would have had to ransom their coreligionists. For example, recently a Turkish boat was captured, with many Jews on board. The ship was taken to Malta and those Jews were ransomed by the Jews of Constantinople.220 Although Dernschwam had seen and talked to Christian galley slaves who had waited to be ransomed for years, he has no praise for the Jew, who considers it his foremost duty to free his coreligionists from slavery. Luigi Bassano, originally from Zara, and for a while a paid spy of the king of Portugal, passed the years 1532–40 in Turkey. He also comments about the freedom Jews enjoyed, pointing out that in Constantinople, Salonika, and Bursa, Jews were permitted to have their own schools, were brazen in their public dealings, and had palaces and openly conducted services in their synagogues and at their burials.221 However, Rabbi Almosnino of Salonika drew a less idealized picture of

220 Dernschwam, pp. 109–10. Another German traveler, Salomon Schweigger, who arrived much later in Constantinople, complains in 1578, about favors Jews can buy themselves from the pashas, getting away with insulting Christians. See Ein newe Reyssbeschreibung auss Teutschland nach Constantinopel und Jerusalem (Graz, 1964) (first published in 1604). 221 Luigi Bassano, Costumi e modi particolari della vita de’Turchi (Rome, 1545), 7.113; rpt., ed. Franz Babinger (Munich, 1963), There are records in the Archivo General de Simancas in Valladolid, according to which on January 28, 1552, Bassano was paid for services rendered (Estado leg.1320.f.100). For more on Bassano, see Marianna D. Birnbaum, Croatian and Hungarian Latinity in the Sixteenth Century (Zagreb and Dubrovnik, 1993), pp. 342–6 and passim.

86

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

contemporary Jewish life in the empire.222 In a number of critical remarks, the sage also complained about the lack of a civilized life. As he put it, “Except for conversation, there is not much to do.”223 Although by the 1560s the Christian population in Jerusalem exceeded that of the Jews, the opposite was true earlier. During 1553–4, their numbers were 11% and 10%, respectively, while by 1650, only 8% of Jerusalem’s population were Jews.224 There were no Christian or Jewish quarters in Jerusalem; but the Jews kept moving closer to the Temple Mount, probably, as always, for reasons of common religious practice and safety.225 There were Jewish butchers serving Jews only. The population included Jewish physicians, goldsmiths, tailors, as well as moneylenders, who dealt with the entire population. Jews did own property, which they were also permitted to sell. While socially distinct from the majority, they were solidly incorporated into Jerusalem’s Ottoman society, economy, and administration. The rebuilding of Jerusalem during the rule of Süleyman the Magnificent did not fail to impress the Jews of the Diaspora. Their immigration was promoted. The Turks saw in the Jews not just a dynamic and productive urban element, but a minority more loyal to the sultanate than the local Christians. Although the professed dream of the exiled was to “return to Jerusalem,” Gracia too picked Constantinople, because after the fall of Byzantium, Jews were concentrated there, engaged in commerce and trade, under Ottoman rule.226

222 Moses ben Baruch Almosnino, Extremos y grandezas de Constantinopla (Madrid, 1638). The original preface to the work, by Fr. Geronimo de La Cruz, was written a century earlier, in 1536. First recorded in Ladino, Extremos was transcribed into Spanish by Jacob Consino, a Jew from Oran. The second volume of the work is devoted to Süleyman’s campaign against “Seguitvar” (Szigetvár, Hungary, 1566), and to the death of the sultan. Almosnino showed detailed knowledge of southern Hungary, its waterways, and described the building of a Turkish bridge during the campaign. Some scholars believe that he had accompanied Süleyman to Hungary. Almosnino was also the author of Dreams, Their Origin and True Nature, trans. Leon Elmaleh (Philadelphia, 1934), a work he dedicated in 1565 to Nasi. For more on Almosnino, see Birnbaum, pp. 338–39. 223 Almosnino, p. 14. It should be noted that the first Ottoman survey of 1478 does not show Jews, because they left Salonika during Venetian rule. For more on this, see Bernard Lewis, The Jews of Islam (Princeton, 1984). 224 Amnon Cohen, “On the Realities of the Millet System: Jerusalem in the 16th Century,” Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire, (Cambridge, Mass., 1982), 2.16 225 Cohen, 2.18. 226 Jacob Reznik believed that Gracia always wanted to go to Palestine “like all the Jews.” See Le Duc Joseph de Nasi. Contribution à l’histoire juive du XVIe siècle. (Paris, 1936), p. 30.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

87

GRACIA’S ARRIVAL IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE Since the spice trade was in the hands of the Ottoman Empire, the Mendes family’s move there was not merely religious, but also a business decision. Very little is known about Gracia’s travel from the Republic of Ragusa to Constantinople. Since there was an established “Ragusan Road,” it is likely that the Mendes family followed it. A journey made by two travelers from Constantinople to Dubrovnik took seventeen days. Reversing their path, we can establish the probable route Gracia and her party took.227 Gracia and Reyna traveled with a large number of servants, handmaids and other members of their household. Inexperienced travelers, they are likely to have prolonged their journey to as many as 30 days. However long it took their route would have been similar to Kosˇaric´’s. 228 Having rejected Jerusalem as her new home, Gracia could have chosen Salonika as her place of refuge. Although the city was called the “second Jerusalem,” it had more Jews and a more lively economic life than Jerusalem offered. During Roman times there was already a Jewish colony there; during the fourteenth century, learned Byzantines maintained communication with Jewish scholars. By the end of the fifteenth century, Salonika also had a small Ashkenasi community, refugees from German territories, France, and Hungary. There were a greater number of educated men and respected scholars in Salonika than in Constantinople, where mostly rich traders lived. Because of the influence of the rabbinate, Salonika was considered the spiritual center of Jews in the empire, although historically wherever Jews settled centers of learning had been established. The greatest attraction of Constantinople was that it was a new capital. It had a population of close to 250.000 and was the center of large-scale enterprises and financial dealing. The latter included lending to the state, a tradition in Gracia’s family, as well as the lucrative business of tax farming and supplying the imperial palace and army. By the middle of the sixteenth century, Jews numbered about fifty thousand and were involved in domestic and foreign trade.

227 A. Urosˇ evic´, “Putovanje Vlatka Kosˇ aric´a iz Carigrad u Dubrovnik u 16 veku,” Glasnik Geografsˇkog Drustva, 22 (1936): 86–9. For more information on trade routes used in the sixteenth century, see Appendix. 228 In principle, the entire journey could have been made by boat. As early as 1270, the first Ragusan boats are mentioned on the Black Sea. See Francis W. Carter, Dubrovnik (Ragusa): A Classical City State (London and New York, 1972), p. 167. As other historians have done, Carter records the journey from Constantinople to Ragusa outlined above (pp.140–142).

88

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Religious life flourished relatively freely. The restrictions imposed by Bayezid II had been lifted, and Jews were permitted to build new houses of worship. The capital boasted 44 synagogues, not the 42 Dernschwam claimed. Concessions on food, wine, cotton, wax, and other goods were sold by the State. Only those who were licensed and lived close to the source could deal in those items. Proximity to the palace helped in obtaining licenses. As in Europe, monopolies were established and individuals with connections to the palace held trading concessions in essential commodities. Little is known of Gracia’s first impression of her new place of residence. On November 11, 1553, Don Alphonso de Lancastre, ambassador extraordinary of John III of Portugal (1502–57), claimed in his report to the king that “Gracia was sorry to have come to Turkey,” and would gladly return to a Christian country. Gossip has it that she was discouraged and tried to obtain a safe conduct to France. The ambassador wrote that Gracia was still a Christian, and her daughter was still free to marry..229 Whatever she may have thought of her new homeland, the next years were the most successful and prosperous in Gracia’s life. Gracia’s wealth seems to have elicited the envy of the powerful. The sultan allegedly demanded annually 10,000 ducats for her residence permit, to be paid through Rustam Pasha. As it turned out, instead of Gracia’s returning to Europe, in November of 1553, “Jehan Miquez” embarked from Ancona for Constantinople, planning at the time to return in three months. Earlier, Miques tried desperately, and in vain, to get a pontifical ruling to validate his marriage to Gracia la Chica, so as to remove “his wife” and her assets from Christian Europe. This request, of course, could have been merely a ruse to quell suspicion regarding his real plans. He would not have decided to stay in Constantinople against the will of Gracia, who had arranged for his trip by way of Ancona, where a janissary waited for him with a letter of safe conduct from Prince Selim, the future sultan. Having settled in Constantinople, Nasi was circumcised in April 1554. By this ritual he publicly reentered the Jewish community. Two months later, he married his first cousin, Reyna. According to Dernschwam, the great wedding party included illustrious guests, including Michel de Codignac, the French ambassador, who left his Pera residence to participate in the festivities.230 229 Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 68. The letter that carried this story was from March of 1553, but was attached to another one from April 15, 1555. 230 Dernschwam, p. 116. Pera, today Beyoglu, is north of the Golden Horn. The text is also quoted by Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 70. Michel de Codignac became a staunch supporter of Nasi in Europe. Many European Christians thought he was bought by the Mendes-Nasi enterprise.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

89

WHO IS A JEW? The rabbis in the Ottoman Empire had the difficult task of sorting out Jews from the thousands of New Christians, or rather New Jews, in their midst. Among the many rabbinical decisions, several had to address the reasons for a person’s or a family’s history of conversion. The rabbis distinguished the anusim, or forced converts, from meshumadim, or apostates. In Spain, the rabbinical courts established several guidelines regarding the anusim and the Jewish community. According to their ruling, secret Jews were those who were unable to leave for another country. They violated Jewish law, but were not gentiles. Only those who freely worshiped as Christians and violated the Sabbath were no longer considered Jews.231 As time went by, however, the line of division did not remain rigid. Anusim even within a single generation could turn into meshumadim. The rabbis also had to rule over levirate marriage. According to tradition, supported by Biblical teaching, a widow had to marry her deceased husband’s brother. Such marriages tightened the bond to family and community, not to mention preserving wealth. Salonika rabbinical decisions between 1499 and 1514 refer to the particular status of the conversos of Portugal. By 1497, the rabbis considered marriage contracted after a conversion null and void. Any woman was free to remarry; if her converso husband died without issue, his widow was under no obligation to marry his brother, chiefly because conversos were considered apostates, not victims.232 In January of 1514, however, the second Salonika ruling of the rabbis was adopted, according to which a childless widow was bound under the levirate law to her husband’s brother, even if the latter was a convert and lived in the land of persecution. The ruling was a tacit acknowledgment of the fact that most conversos moved from the Iberian Peninsula to a Christian land rather than to the Ottoman Empire, where they could have freely followed the faith of their forefathers.233 By the time Gracia lost her husband, she had a daughter. Even by the later Salonika ruling, she was not obliged to remarry. The seemingly curious decision of Gracia’s not marrying her brother-in-law could have been based on the ruling promulgated in Salonika. According to Jewish law, if Nasi indeed was married to Gracia la Chica, 231 Benzion Netanyahu, The Marranos of Spain from the Late XIVth to the Late XVIth Century according to Contemporary Hebrew Sources (New York, 1966), p. 28. 232 Netanyahu, pp. 211–13. According to the rabbis of Salonika, ever since 1492 Iberian Jews had a choice between conversion and emigration (as opposed to the fate of those Spanish Jews who in 1391 converted under the direct threat of death). 233 Netanyahu, p. 39, quoting Simon ben Zemah Duran.

90

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

that marriage had to be dissolved before he could marry Reyna. Was it possible simply to disregard a supposedly consummated marriage between two conversos? With regard to Christian countries, according to Simon ben Zemah Duran, “a marriage is valid if cohabitation of the married couple took place in a locality where Jews, qualified to testify, were available at the time, and where it was brought to their knowledge.”234 Rabbinical decisions in Salonika disqualifying New Christian marriages followed the same policy. Since their vows were not exchanged before Jewish witnesses, nor were any Jews notified about the event, Joseph Nasi’s marriage to the younger Gracia was not binding. For kidnapping Gracia la Chica (March 15, 1553), Joseph Nasi did not win a pardon until April 9, 1567. The motion to pardon passed unanimously, with 26 members of the Council voting favorably, as reported by the nuncio to Venice, Michele Bonelli, in a letter to Rome on April 12, 1567. Prior to that date, Nasi repeatedly offered his services to the Republic.

THE MENDES-NASI ENTERPRISE Among the prosperous Jewish merchants, the Mendes-Nasi family was probably the richest. In the 1550s, its wealth was estimated at as much as 400,000 ducats. Sultans trusted and supported the family, which had increased trade for the entire empire by using the sophisticated methods and practices they had acquired and refined during their European past. The area of Ottoman rule was larger than the Habsburg territories and its military was superior to the opposing Christian armies. Yet, the technological superiority of Europe, especially in the conduct of trade, was apparent. Carts and carriages were superior to camels; European ships were better built and the art of navigation more advanced. The sultanate could only benefit from the experienced and worldly Mendes-Nasi family. Gracia and Joseph Nasi were able to move into tax farming (collecting various taxes for the Porte) because they had the wealth to make large cash advances to the treasury. Their familiarity with European political affairs and their strategic placement of agents in the major economic centers of Europe made the family invaluable for the Porte. They soon established themselves as leaders of the Portuguese-Jewish community. Owing to the

234 Cited by Netanyahu quoting ben Zemah Duran (Netanyahu, p. 121). In Portugal, as well as in the Low Countries, converso marriages were frequently double ceremonies: A public Christian wedding was followed by a private Jewish one. However, in the case of João Miques and Gracia la Chica, there was no Jewish ceremony.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

91

family’s previously held Christian faith and some quaint religious customs, their activities came into question among the rabbis. During the mid-sixteenth century, the Mendes-Nasi family members were the most conspicuous Jewish traders in the Empire. Their immense wealth, their exceptional influence and grandiose lifestyle caught the attention of Christian visitors to the Porte. Dernschwam devotes several pages to Gracia Mendes, in which hatred is mixed with grudging admiration: In 1553, an old Portuguese woman arrived from Venice in Constantinople with her daughter and entourage. The Jews give different versions about her husband. According to some, his name was Diego Mendes, and his brother was Francisco from Antwerp. It is said that after the death of her husband, she escaped with her sizeable treasures from Venice, where she still has a sister, who should have followed, but was retained for some reason. The Jews show off with her, calling her Señora. She behaves like one, amidst pomp and luxury and maidservants, two of whom are from the Low Countries. They say that she was a Marrano woman who became again a Jew. She lives in Constantinople, not among the Jew, but in Galata, in a luxurious villa, surrounded by gardens, which she rents for a ducat a day. The Venetians had her arrested and wanted to keep her, but she made secret arrangements with the emperor’s physician, who hoped to have his son marry the daughter of the Portuguese woman, and the Venetians had to let her go.235 Gossip had it that Moses Hamon (1490–1554), physician to Süleyman and Selim II, helped Gracia move to Constantinople, hoping that as a reward his son would get to marry the fabulously rich Reyna.236 Be that as it may, Hamon remained Gracia’s friend, even if his son did not marry either of the Mendes daughters. It is even believed that instead of being offended, he was against a marriage between his son and a reconverted converso from Antwerp, who unaware of rabbinical standards could unexpectedly have a relapse and observe some Christian rites. He wanted his son to marry a Jewish daughter of Jewish parents. Considering that Dernschwam worked for many years as a Fugger agent, and that Diogo Mendes had frequent business dealings with the Fuggers of

235 Dernschwam, p. 115. 236 Hieronimus Jeruffino’s letter of January 1552, to the Duke of Ferrara, also quoted by Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 71. In addition, see footnote 19.

92

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Augsburg, he seems surprisingly ignorant about Gracia and her family, relying mainly on local gossip. Dernschwam faithfully reports whatever he heard in the streets, especially from Jews, as is suggested by the following observation: Allegedly, her husband was a Marrano, and as he lay dying, he asked her to have his body removed from that Christian country and have it sent to be buried in Jerusalem, which she actually did in 1554, paying him all respect to which Jews there are entitled. She is a smart and efficient [geschwidtz] woman, like Barbara of Cologne,237 she conducts huge overseas business in wool, pepper and grain with Venice, and with the whole of Italy. She promised her daughter to a Spaniard or Portuguese who served the Roman emperor, one whom the local captives had known personally. He is, allegedly, none other than the son of her sister.238 His name, although the Jews are permanently swarming around him, is always given differently, in order to make it difficult to identify the scoundrel. He is called, allegedly, Juan Miquez, or Six, and he is the son of a physician, by name of Samuel.239 Although his pen was poisonous, posterity may be grateful to Dernschwam for a detailed portrait of Joseph Nasi. As he claims: The aforementioned scoundrel arrived in Constantinople in 1554, with about twenty well-dressed servants, who follow him as though he were a prince. He wears silk clothing, with sable lining. According to Turkish custom, two janissaries precede him, in order that no harm should come to him. In 1554, he had himself circumcised. Thereafter, he married the daughter … 240 The above-mentioned Señora and her son-in-law maintain a luxurious household, befitting a prince. Each day, they set the table for eighty. Many people could have been poisoned that way; something is not right with them. 237 Dernschwam, p. 115. Except for Dernschwam’s statement, and of those who had quoted him, there is no record of Francisco’s burial in Jerusalem. His grave was never found. The identity of “Barbara” is uncertain. There was a Barbara von Blomberg (1527–97), not in Cologne, but in Regensburg, a mistress of Charles V. Allegedly, she was the daughter of a simple artisan with questionable morals. Her son became Don Juan of Austria. She might have been the Barbara in Dernschwam’s description. 238 Dernschwam, pp. 115–16. Several scholars accepted this misinformation as a fact, although it would have meant that in his first marriage, Joseph was married to his own sister, unless Gracia had a third sister. Given the family’s prominence, it is unlikely that a member would escape all notice, however! 239 Dernschwam, p. 116. Samuel was Gracia’s and Brianda’s brother. 240 Dernschwam, p. 116.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

93

She claims that she had left a great fortune in Europe that will soon reach her here. But with their expenses, it will soon shrink, since she richly pays the pashas, and has given several thousands of ducats to the Jewish hospital, and has distributed money among the poor.241 Dernschwam admits to Nasi’s good looks, describing him as a ”tall man with a closely-cropped beard” (that is, the Portuguese type), yet, he cannot forgive Nasi his following the fashion of the European nobility, arranging tournaments and theatrical performances in his garden.242 Although Andreas Laguna takes most of his information from Dernschwam, his tone is less hostile. In his novel Viaje de Turquia, “Don Juan Micas” arrives in Turkey as a distinguished foreigner, has himself circumcised, “and now he calls himself Joseph Nasi.”243

THE CRISES IN ANCONA AND PESARO In Constantinople, Gracia practically held court in her palatial home, where she entertained the leading Jewish scholars and members of the sultan’s family. Both she and Joseph were known and honored for their philanthrop241 Dernschwam, p. 116. I established earlier that Dernschwam was a spy, or at least an “information gatherer,” for the West. (See footnote 20). He recorded unusually detailed descriptions about individuals, and the type of information (regarding physiognomy, behavior, habits) reveals the approach of a detective. It is interesting that he could give some credit to Gracia’s achievements, but was unable to find anything praiseworthy in Joseph, because each facet of Joseph’s personality in which he imitated the Christian world, was offensive to Dernschwam. He was also sharply critical about Gracia’s dressing like a western aristocrat. One could draw a psycho-portrait of Dernschwam on the basis of his critique of the Mendes-Nasi family. 242 His contemporaries found Nasi very good-looking. Even when Nasi was in his fifties, Gerlach, a German chaplain at the Imperial Embassy, referred to him as ”ein schöner Jüngling,” whom much younger women would find still attractive (quoted by Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 152). 243 Viaje de Turquia: La odisea de Pedro de Urdemalas, ed. Fernando Garcia Salinero, (Madrid, 1980), p. 452. The author seemed to have known that Nasi’s father was named Samuel, and that he was Gracia’s brother. He even knew that he had been a physician. The discussion regarding the identity of “Dr. Laguna” falls outside the scope of this book, although I tend to agree with Marcel Battalion who contended that he was not Cristobal de Villalon. Laguna also informed his readers about Gracia (p. 131). In 1564, an Italian cleric talked about “Madonna Brianda, a wealthy Portuguese woman.” Roth (p. 121) thought that he had meant Gracia. It should be remembered that ”Nasi” means “prince” in Hebrew. Only after he became Duke of Naxos, in 1566, did his name and his title coincide. Before his arrival in Constantinople, Nasi was known by a number of names, such as Miykas, Miques, Migues, and Six or Sixs.

94

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

ic works. She also renewed her contact with a number of secret Jews she had met in Ferrara and Venice, some of whom settled in Salonika, some in imperial Constantinople.244 An unforeseen event however was suddenly to change her secure and happy condition. On September 21, 1532, a day after Clement VII completed the papal takeover of Ancona, a charter was issued guaranteeing the security and free passage of merchants, singling out those “from Portugal and Spain, together with their wives, children, families, servants and goods.”245 The charter reconfirmed the rights of Western merchants to leave for the Levant if they wished, permitting them to take along their families and wealth. Those rights were practically the same as those granted Levantine merchants who between 1514 and 1518 had received individual trading privileges from Ancona. Ancona was the first Western port to extend such formal rights to merchants from the Levant. It is noteworthy that the Porte was aware of and involved in those grants. The merchants included Orthodox Christians, Moslems, and Jews who began settling in the city, enjoying a quasi-resident status. These new arrivals were distinct from the local infideli, for the Levantine Jews did not have to wear the “O” sign, which was forced upon locals. One condition of the charter of 1532 was that Levantine traders were obliged to deal exclusively with Ancona. Step by step, the Iberian newcomers received the same privileges as their Levantine competitors, a group that included several former conversos who had fled to the Ottoman Empire. In 1533, hoping to make their departure for the Levant unnecessary, Clement VII declared that those forcibly baptized should not be considered members of the Church. Florence and Ferrara followed the papal dictum, since it served their own economic interest. On December 23, 1534, during the papacy of Paul III, an official safe conduct to foreign merchants allotted trading rights to Turks, Jews, and “other infideli.”246 Unlike Venice, where traders, allowed as temporary residents, had to leave from time to time, Ancona was, despite its clause pro

244 Gracia did not expect to see Amatus Lusitanus arriving as a penniless refuge in Salonika. 245 Bernard Dov Cooperman, “Portuguese Conversos in Ancona: Jewish Political Activity in Early Modern Italy,” Iberia and Beyond: Hispanic Jews between Cultures. Proceedings of a Symposium to Mark the 500th Anniversary of the Expulsion of Spanish Jewry (Newark, 1998), pp. 297–352. The quotation is taken from p. 302. I have greatly benefited from this conference volume. 246 Cooperman, p. 303.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

95

tempore commoranti, open-ended. In addition, conversos were to receive a four-months’ grace period in the event the charter was cancelled. The Anconan traders, aware of their special situation, hoped even to improve on it by acquiring direct papal protection in order to avoid potentially hostile measures from the secular administration, such as sequestration of property pending payments of debts in other lands. In 1544, Ancona granted the Levantine Jews (listed among “Turks, Greeks, and other Levantines”) the right to have their own synagogue.247 These generous concessions encouraged New Christians to settle as Jews and base their businesses in Ancona.248 In any question of heresy, the city promised that they would be subject only to the pope himself and would be exempt from religious persecution and charges arising from their former Christian lives prior to their arrival in Ancona. The city had an old, indigenous Jewish population. When Paul III declared the city a free port, the rights of non-Christians were guaranteed, including exemption from special taxation and obligatory display of a badge on their clothing. Ancona’s rise occurred with that of other ports, “as widely dispersed as London, Antwerp, Ragusa (Dubrovnik), and Constantinople.”249 The city flourished thanks to the outsiders who directed their merchandise through its harbor. Native Anconans, benefiting from the boom, encouraged and enticed merchants with low customs fees (sometimes as low as one percent). Until the end of the fifteenth century, Ancona maintained ties primarily within the Adriatic, with the exception of a few annual ships voyaging to the eastern Mediterranean, principally to Constantinople and Alexandria. Like Ragusa, Ancona mediated between the Islamic and the Christian economic world. Her political, and diplomatic role was however much more limited. In the 1520s the cloth trade of Ancona became important; it extended to Lyons in the west and the Ottoman Empire in the east. Even Florence used Ancona, because the city had developed a market within its walls, selling directly to foreign merchants. Weakened politically and militarily, Venice could no longer dominate Adriatic trade. In Ancona, Italian merchants sold textiles from Antwerp to traders in the eastern Mediterranean. Jews, Turks,

247 Cooperman, pp. 305–10. Since a regular site for the synagogue was disputed in the city, the Jews were willing to worship in a “moveable” temple. Levantine Jews were permitted to notify the Ottoman consul in criminal cases, and they were promised to have capital cases sent directly to Rome. Levantines would not have to pay taxes imposed on local Jews. Absolution from all past crimes was also stipulated. 248 Brian Pullan, The Jews of Europe and the Inquisition of Venice, 1550–1650 (Oxford, 1983), p. 173. 249 Peter Earle, “The Commercial Development of Ancona, 1479–1551,” The Economic History Review, ser. 2, 22 (1969): 28–44.

96

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

and Greeks participated in that trade. The most powerful was the new group of Levantine/Portuguese merchants, who also played an important role in the animal hide trade.250 Among this group, many were permitted to reside in the port city. Prior to the unforeseen catastrophe, a large number of conversos more or less openly reverted to normative Judaism. Papal toleration preceded that of the Italian rulers because the Vatican recognized the shifting pattern of world trade and adjusted to it. The most significant document, signaling a turning point in papal policy, was its safe conduct to “Ponentine” Jews, signed on February 21, 1547, inviting “each and every person of either sex from the Kingdoms of Portugal and Algarve … including New Christians” to Ancona.251 In his brief, the pope encouraged the “New Christians … stemming from the Jewish nation” to settle there. As everywhere else where they enjoyed a degree of safety, the Ancona Jews manifested their distinctive ethnicity. Although not protected from the Inquisition, they did not worry about the Holy Office. In this relatively relaxed prosperity of 1549, some 35 Portuguese converso families decided to form a bank.252 As the city agreed to their conditions, an ambassador was sent to Rome for papal approval. The Portuguese asked for the same terms the local Jewish bankers enjoyed, showing that they had become economic competition for the Italian Jews of Ancona.253 After banking privileges were approved, the Portuguese became as favored as the powerful Bonaventura banking house, with identical conditions—a challenge to the “Italian monopoly.”254 But after the death of Pope Paul III on November 10, 1549, papal commissioners immediately opposed the request that the pope should personally judge conversos in cases of heresy. The envoy himself—a Christian Anconan, one Rafaele Graziani—sharply criticized the demand: “What do they want: to live as Jews or as Christians?” Knowing that the Portuguese conversos wanted to have it both ways, he added, “senza ordine et timor di justicia.”255 The new pope, Julius III (1487–1555), having first reconfirmed the

250 Earle, p. 37. 251 Cooperman, p. 311. 252 Cooperman, p. 313. 253 For more on this aspect, see Viviana Bonazzoli, “Ebrei italiani, portoghesi, levantini sull piazza commerciale di Ancona intorno alla metà del cinquecento,” Gli Ebrei e Venezia, secoli XIV-XVIII, ed. Gaetano Cozzi (Milan, 1987), p. 272, quoting Ariel Toaff. 254 Cooperman, p. 314. In 1543, members of the Abravanel family opened a bank in Ancona with a papal license, which was renewed ten years later! 255 Cooperman, p. 315.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

97

earlier papal concessions, complained on March 22, 1552, that the Portuguese were not paying for their privileges. Moreover, he charged that many Jews were engaged in money lending without license, not paying the “vigesima,” the usual Jewish tax. His charges were baseless. The Portuguese had been exempted from those taxes, but the pope did not want to lose that income. Finally, a compromise was reached. The Portuguese bankers were to pay 1,000 scudi annually to the papal treasury and grant 1,800 scudi on “loan” (of which 1,000 would be returned after four years). According to a special bull, the bankers were exempted from all other taxes, except for their part in the 300,000 ducats general customs levy that the townspeople had to share equally. Even the 1,000 scudi the bankers had to pay for concessions was to be applied to those general payments. However, converso interest rates were limited to 25 percent. Frequently the banks had to provide interest below market rate to the city. Therefore, the banks offered bribes, as they did in Venice, where Jewish bankers put their banks to use for settlement privileges, often at a loss. More importantly, however, the papal indulgences purchased for Ancona were used later elsewhere “as a much larger effort on the part of the nation—the Portuguese conversos—to combat the Portuguese Holy Office with any available tool.”256 The evidence of papal tolerance in Ancona created a model “according to which an individual’s religious behavior could be ignored by the state.”257 The Anconan precedent soon emulated in Italy and even in France. Meanwhile, as New Christians proliferated in Europe, a proper regulatory policy became top priority for the Church. Reorganized in 1536, the Inquisition was supposed to deal with that problem, even if some governments decided to welcome the “cristaos novos” into their realms. The ascension to the papal throne of Paul IV (Giovanni Pietro Caraffa, 1476–1559), a well-known anti-Jewish zealot, instigated major change. Paul IV is remembered for nepotism on a grand scale; as a reorganizer of the Inquisition, and a fierce opponent of Elizabeth I of England as well as the Lutherans. His favorite target was, however, the New Christians. Even before his papal election, as the head of the Roman Inquisition, Caraffa had urged Julius III to turn against the Portuguese converts. In terms of Ancona’s Jewish and converso history, he was the cause of the greatest tragedy to befall them. In 1556–57, Paul IV ended the papal toleration of Jews and conversos. He revoked the previous safe conduct granted to Portuguese Jews. Persecution mounted and even resulted in auto-da-fés.

256 Cooperman, p. 327. 257 Cooperman, p. 299. See also pp. 298–301.

98

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Initially, Paul IV reconfirmed their safe conduct, a possible strategy to keep them off guard. In 1555, when the Ancona conversos were arrested, 24 of them dying at the stake, the suddenness of the events raised a shock wave that reached even to Constantinople. Paul IV appointed as apostolic commissioner a well-known Jew-baiter. His trusted man, Giovanni Vincenzo Fallongonio of Naples, was to deal with the Anconan New Christians. Immunity could no longer be bought as in the past. Many conversos were imprisoned; many sold to Malta as galley slaves. Ultimately, about 30 managed to escape, because Fallongonio was not averse to bribery.258 Amatus Lusitanus, the famous physician and a friend of the Mendes family since their common stay in Antwerp, was forewarned; he was fortunate to reach safety in Pesaro, where he arrived with only the clothes on his back.259 Those “reverted” Christians, who had escaped from Ancona to Pesaro, were welcomed by Duke Guidobaldo II della Rovere. The duke hoped to use them in his plans to develop international commerce and move his capital from Urbino to Pesaro. In Pesaro, the refugees from Ancona joined a small Portuguese community that had migrated there after the 1551 plague in Ferrara, where they had been accused of poisoning the wells. Thus Pesaro became a haven, and a commercial power, competing with Ancona.

LEADING THE BOYCOTT AGAINST ANCONA Jews and conversos in Europe, as well as those of the Levant held different and conflicting views regarding the prospects afforded by the new turn of events. When the Pesarans asked for a boycott against Ancona, the world of Jewish and converso trade fell into turmoil. The rumors of the arrests of some of her own agents in Ancona reached Gracia in the fall of 1555. She knew many of the victims personally: one, Mosso, was her factor. When the Pesaro conversos first approached Gracia, during the time the first auto-da-fés were performed, she and her son-in-law persuaded the sultan to intervene in Rome. Gracia asked for and received an audience

258 In the end Fallongonio fled to Genoa, with 300,000 ducats in his pocket, but the next commissioner turned out to be just as cruel as he had been (Roth, p. 141.) While most Christians had opposed the tolerance of Julius III, even after the Church openly withdrew approval of converso settlements during Paul IV’s papacy, they continued to tolerate converso trade. 259 For more on Lusitanus, see footnotes 79 and 80.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

99

from Sultan Süleyman who promised to investigate her charges. The family thus began its well-organized and well-financed boycott of Ancona in support of Pesaro. Although this was not the first economic boycott of early modern trade, it was the first one organized by Jews, let alone a Jewish woman. Gracia wanted to know about the fate of her agents, as well as six of her employees who had been murdered at sea on their way to Vidin. Probably at her instigation, on March 9, 1556, Süleyman wrote to the pope and demanded the release of the men, whom he called his subjects. The sultan also requested the release of their confiscated goods.260 The papal response of June 1, 1556, was curt: those who had never professed to be Christians were free to leave with their assets. But to the sultan’s claim that the Portuguese were his subjects, the pope contended that the defendants had never been in the Levant and were merely heretics. For those Portuguese who had been baptized, which was the case of Yacobo Mosso, and who in Ancona had returned openly to Judaism and refused to repent, there was no mercy. It was public knowledge that at least part of Mosso’s goods belonged to the Mendes-Nasi enterprise. On June 13, 1556, Mosso was burned at the stake; his assets, however, were returned to his employers.261 During the spring and the summer of 1556, several auto-da-fés were held in the Campo della Mostra. Those who refused to be penitent were strangled and then burned. Some 25 were killed. One committed suicide by jumping into the flames, another by leaping from the window of his prison cell. Allegedly, those burned at the stake loudly prayed the “Shma Yisroel, while engulfed by flame.”262 By the mid-sixteenth century, about 50,000 Jews lived in Constantinople. Representing strong economic power, they were prepared to show their clout. The decision to support an economic boycott against Ancona was Gracia’s. Seeking legal support for her plan, she instructed Rabbi Juda Faraj, the spokes-

260 In Lettere di Principi, ed. Girolamo Ruscelli (Venice, 1581). Ruscelli, a friend of Duarte Gomes, the converso poet, includes the sultan’s letter to the pope (1.177–8). It is not known, how the letter came into Ruscelli’s possession. The letter, also published by Roth (pp. 151–2), was dated March 9, 1556 (964 in the Muslim calendar). 261 Rosenblatt, p. 30. Gracia had four factors working for the family business in Ancona: Yacobo Mosso, Aman and Azim Cohen, and Abraham Mus. 262 Commemorated by Joseph Ha-Cohen, in his Emek Habakha (Valley of Tears), p.131. For more on this, see Avram (Abraham) Galanté, “Deux nouveaux documents sur Doña Gracia Nassy,” Revue des études juives 65 (191): 153–6. To my knowledge, the records of the trials are not extant.

100

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

man of Pesaro, to persuade the chief rabbis of Constantinople (Rabbis Joseph ibn Lev, Abraham Yerushalmi, Solomon Bilia, and Abraham Saba) to support the boycott and to talk their congregations into following it. Rabbi Faraj received the signatures of the leading rabbis and took them, as commanded by Gracia, to Rabbi Joshua Soncino, one of the most respected rabbis of the empire, a supporter of Ancona. The rabbi refused to sign, despite the signatures of his illustrious colleagues, because he believed that in addition to increased external persecution, his support of the boycott would also increase internal conflict among Jews. The best sources for evaluating the severity of the strife among Jews of the towns involved in mutual enmity are the responsa of the Ottoman rabbis, which also shed the clearest light on Jewish social and communal history for that period. “The legal question asked of rabbis in the great cities of the Ottoman Empire provides important background material, revealing the patterns of trade between these cities and those of the Adriatic Coast of Italy, in which Jews, and especially the conversos of the Portuguese Diaspora played a leading role.”263 Some rabbis believed that since two popes had granted rights to Portuguese conversos to practice Judaism, Pope Paul IV’s decrees were not “the legitimate and binding law of the land,” ignored by the conversos; instead, the pope himself disregarded the established law.264 Those rabbis concluded that the papal decrees therefore had more to do with the Church’s desire to confiscate Jewish property again. The Pesaro faction claimed that Duke Guidobaldo III accepted them (thereby going against the will of the pope), only on the condition that they divert trade from Ancona to Pesaro through a boycott organized by Jewish merchants of the Ottoman Empire.265 They insisted that only a full boycott of the Ancona port could guarantee the safety of the Pesaro conversos. Concerned about their own interests and futures, the remaining Jews of Ancona vehemently opposed the boycott. They claimed that it threatened the old Jewish population of Ancona with reprisals directed against them. For example, Rabbi Moses Bassola wrote to the Ottoman rabbis and asked, in a circular letter, that they reconsider the boycott or, at least, permit

263 Marc Saperstein, “Martyrs, Merchants and Rabbis: Jewish Communal Conflict as Reflected in the Responsa on the Boycott of Ancona,” Jewish Social Studies, 43 (1981): 215–6. 264 Saperstein, p. 216. 265 The pope indeed removed the Duke of Urbino from his position as captaingeneral of the papal army, but that action had to do more with the previous pope’s demise than with the duke’s commercial decisions.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

101

each city’s Jewish inhabitants to decide for themselves. The papal decrees and the ensuing boycott indeed hurt Ancona, as seen in the city council’s petition to the pope, asking him to move the inquisitorial proceedings away from Ancona because they were antagonizing Oriental merchants and “adversely affecting the city’s commerce.”266 Already at the start of the boycott, local merchants claimed that the city had become abandoned and derelict. They complained that Turkish Jews and non-Jews took their ships to Venice. The pope, however, denied their petition. Thus Gracia, the moving spirit behind the Levantine retaliatory boycott, was satisfied because, at least in the beginning, it contributed to a sharp decline in Ancona’s trade. Meanwhile, the Anconans reminded the rabbis living in the empire that the duke’s brother and his cronies had earlier entered the synagogue of Pesaro, dragged out the Torah scrolls, torn them up, and wrapped them around a pig, which was then carried into the ducal palace amidst great merry-making.267 Therefore, it was incorrect to claim that the Jews would be better off in Pesaro. They should have all left for the Ottoman Empire that had granted them religious freedom.268 The Anconan Jews argued that no harm would befall the Pesaro conversos if the boycott were abandoned; and that by their selfish actions the Pesarans themselves jeopardized the safety of all Jews in the Papal States. Supporting the views of the Anconans, Rabbi Joshua Soncino of Constantinople first voted against the boycott, and then in four separate answers considered the possible scenarios and dangers to Jewish communities. He circulated his views and conclusions throughout the Levant and was promptly joined by the non-Spanish rabbis, whose congregations had no vested interest in the boycott. Since they had a chance to live openly as Jews in the Ottoman Empire but chose to stay in a Christian land, Rabbi Soncino made the Iberian Jews of Ancona responsible for their own fate: not to be mourned and not to be avenged. The rabbi was particularly offended by any Jew who left Salonika and returned to Italy in order to do business there as a mercante levantino.269 Summoned by Nasi to the family palace, Rabbi Soncino conditionally

266 Saperstein, p. 220. 267 Samuel Usque described the event in Consolaçam, for the year 1553. 268 Indeed, Rabbi Bassola died in Safed in 1560. 269 Roth, p. 148. Rabbi Soncino, a man of Italian background and great learning, died in 1569. His responsa were published by his grandson in a work called Nahalah liYehoshua. For more on his responsa, see Aryeh Shmuelevitz, The Jews of the Ottoman Empire in the Late Fifteenth and the Sixteenth Centuries: Administrative, Economic, Legal and Social Relations as Reflected in the Responsa (Leiden, 1984).

102

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

gave his signature to the boycott, but proposed to send an envoy at his own expense to secure the opinions of the Jews of Venice and Padua. In turn, Gracia sent her special messenger to the Ancona merchants, threatening them with economic reprisals. Nasi applied financial pressure of his own, threatening to terminate support for those rabbis who did not follow the family’s resolutions. The Ashkenazi and the Romaniot communities finally acquiesced to the Mendes pressure; nevertheless, the most vocal opposition, led by Rabbi Soncino, was strong enough to make the boycott unworkable. Not all Levantine merchants were Jews, and not all Levantine Jews traded with Portuguese conversos. Regarding various attitudes toward the boycott, documents show clearly that individual communities’ responses were based primarily on their own economic interest. Most Jews in Salonika were artisans or weavers, making, among other items, uniform headgear of cloth for the janissaries. The city limited its import of cheaper materials from Ancona. Therefore, Salonika was ready to participate because it had been competing with Ancona in the textile industry — especially if Constantinople, Adrianople, Bursa, and Avlona were to follow suit. Deciding on its own participation, Constantinople pledged to maintain the boycott until the following Passover, which was eight months away. It would then stop, unless the rest of the cities went on with it. Adrianople supported the plan, but only with a barely-achieved majority vote, whereas Bursa rejected the idea outright, calling it nothing else but a selfseeking plot of the Pesaro conversos. Even before Passover of 1557, the boycott was either not fully observed or secretly circumvented. Both sides bombarded the various Ottoman Jewish communities with requests for support. When Gracia first approached the rabbis of the empire, she assumed that she could carry out her plan because of her family’s power. She wanted excommunication for those who broke the boycott.270 Rabbi Joseph Caro, author of Shulhan Arukh, and his son-in-law, another scholar from Safed, backed the boycott because they had been supported by the Nasi family. In addition, Joseph Nasi successfully pressed the German synagogue to proclaim the boycott. It is obvious that personal financial losses added to Gracia’s moral out-

270 See also Paul Grunebaum-Ballin, “Un épisode de l’histoire des juifs d’Ancone,” Revue des études juives 28 (1984): 145–6; and David Kaufmann, “Les Marranes de Pesaro,” Revue des études juives 16 (1888): 61. For a recent assessment of the Jews of Salonika, see Gunnar Hering, “Die Juden von Salonika,” Südostforschungen 58 (1999): 23–39.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

103

rage and desire to avenge the cruelty committed against the conversos in Ancona. The Porte also claimed to have suffered financially. Having convinced Rustam Pasha, Gracia achieved the recall of the consul and informed him the empire had sustained a direct loss of 400,000 ducats. The release of Turkish employees and residents was also demanded because they had been merely visiting Ancona. The Mendes-Nasi family had strong ties in Ancona with the Portuguese conversos. The Jewish businessmen, represented by Soncino’s faction, were not, however, their trading partners. The Portuguese conversos of Ancona were killed, expelled, or moved to Pesaro. Over and above their moral indignation, the Mendes-Nasi family members were spurred by their own economic interest when they insisted on supporting Pesaro, whereto their surviving business partners had fled. Compelled by similar economic motivations, Salonika immediately backed the boycott. Among the Ashkenazim and the Romaniots, of whom only a few traded with the Portuguese conversos, the vote was more symbolic, for the disturbances did not cut into their business. Therefore, through lack of unified support, a bold and impressive idea ultimately came to naught for the usual reason: the special interest groups won out. Gracia was defeated; trade with Ancona revived, and in 1558, the disappointed duke, perhaps seeking his way back into the pope’s good graces, banished all conversos from Pesaro. Even after the Ancona fiasco, Gracia’s relationship with the Porte remained cordial. In 1565, almost ten years later, Gracia asked for an audience with Süleyman, in the course of which she complained about pirates who seized a ship in the port of Santorini with goods belonging to her agents and sold the merchandize in Naxos. On January 20, 1565, Süleyman ordered the Bey of Naxos, Santorini, and Paros to return the property.

NEW FACES IN CONSTANTINOPLE Expelled from Venice in early 1556, during the Ancona affair, Brianda, Gracia la Chica, and her fiancé, Samuel (Bernardo) Nasi, lived in Ferrara where they found refuge. However, when they decided to join the rest of the family in Constantinople, the duke created numerous difficulties. Selim (the future sultan, and at that time influential with Süleyman) sent Hassan, Rustam Pasha’s envoy, in early 1556 with horses and other gifts to the Duke of Este. He arrived via Ragusa, and asked, also in the name of Joseph Nasi, for the release of Gracia the younger and her “husband.” The request took a long time to be granted. Gracia la Chica and Samuel, who had earlier declared himself a Jew, were married still in Ferrara, in 1558, when the bride turned

104

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

eighteen. They celebrated a Jewish wedding. It is generally assumed that the famous medal was Gracia’s gift to the newlyweds.271 The pope and the emperor resisted letting the couple emigrate. A major fortune that affected several countries was involved. Also, Agostino Enriquez and Duarte Gomes, who had testified before the Inquisition, were still in Europe. After the explosion of events in Ancona, their situation worsened; in 1557, both Gomes and Enriquez were again denounced, although later released.272 On March 6, 1558, Rustam Pasha was advised that the duke, who had first refused to let Samuel go, had “permitted the Jew, brother of Zuan Miches,” to leave with his safe conduct from Constantinople. Bernardo’s long, uphill battle to leave, ended on May 2, 1558 (recorded on May 31), when a Venetian safe conduct was issued to him and his wife, valid for a single transit and subject to regular customs payment. Since Gracia la Chica’s marriage happened at the last moment before the Grand Inquisitor, Cardinal Ghislieri, began his campaign against the “Marranos,” the ducal permission must have cost a fortune. At least that was what Enriquez later claimed when he refused to transfer to the Ottoman Empire much of the money Gracia had invested in Ferrara.273 Rabbi Soncino proved his integrity when in 1562, he was asked to adjudicate that case. Soncino judged against Enriquez, who by then was calling himself Abraham Benveniste, in Gracia’s favor.274 The rabbi’s argument is most revealing of how Jews and conversos dealt with one another. According to his ruling, Gracia was not obliged to renegotiate with a Jew a transaction she had agreed upon with a Christian.

271 There exists a similar medal from the same period, possibly by Pastorini, portraying an older woman in profile. She wears the same outfit as the younger Gracia. That medal has no Hebrew lettering, and neither the artist nor the sitter has been identified. It is possible that Gracia commissioned the piece, but left Ferrara before it was completed. 272 See chapter 4, esp. the section, “Inquisition by Proxy.” 273 According to Grunebaum-Ballin, Gracia la Chica and Samuel were still in Ferrara on November 1, 1560. In his dating, the duke responded in June, 1561, promising that their case would be handled properly. Gracia’s business deals reached from Constantinople back to Venice. There, Girolamo Priuli, a senior patrician was elected Bailo in Constantinople, in January 1575. Although years after Gracia’s death, he wrote about his father’s famous case in Venice, owing 300,000 ducats “to that Mendes lady who later gave her daughter in marriage to Zuan Miches.” The diplomat claimed that Nasi, “capo e guide de tutti hebrei i marrani” (chief and leader of all Jews and Marranos) also made claims for expenses and interest, which his father allegedly paid. The allegation affected Jews, conversos, and Turks. For more on this scandal, see Benjamin Arbel, Trading Nations, Jews and Venetians in the Early Modern Eastern Mediterranean (Leiden, 1995), esp. p. 157 and passim. 274 Roth, p. 118.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

105

After Cardinal Ghislieri broke up the humanist circle of New Christians in Ferrara (1558), Abraham Usque, the printer, disappeared from view. He appeared later with his son and assistant to open a press in Constantinople. Usque even headed a Hebrew printing house and served the Nasi family by traveling for them between the Empire and Italy. Another old friend of Gracia’s to arrive in Constantinople was Amatus Lusitanus, who from Ancona moved to Ragusa, thence to the sultanate. Amatus had been the object of vicious attacks in Ancona. He hoped to work in peace in Ragusa without having to disguise himself as a Christian. He did not remain long in the Ragusan Republic, but during the three years he served the city, he remained a Jew, and ultimately followed those Jews and conversos who decided to settle in the Ottoman Empire.275 The year 1558 found Amatus in Salonika, where he arrived with the help of the Mendes family, especially Joseph Nasi. Showing his gratitude, Amatus dedicated his Centuria Curat Ionum to Nasi. The Portuguese physician settled in Salonika, where he practiced among Jews and Muslims until he died in 1568, victim of an epidemic of plague.276

275 He came to a decision to move on, when his hopes to get an official position in Ragusa were frustrated. Amatus’s treatment was not affected by his religion, because after his departure, the town hired another Jew, Abraham, the surgeon, who then worked in Ragusa for 32 years. 276 His grave, unlike so many Jewish graves, was not destroyed by the Nazis, or postwar reconstruction. It disappeared much earlier. In 1930, Sˇik looked for it in vain. See Jaroslav Sˇik, Die jüdischen Ärzte in Jugoslawien (Zagreb, 1931), pp. 9–20. Diego Pires of Evora (b. 1517, also called Diego or Jacobus Plavius), Amatus’s close friend and companion in many of his places of exile, did not follow him to Salonika. Diego wrote excellent poetry under the Latin name Didacus Pyrrhus Lusitanus. He too received his Jewish education at home and later re-embraced Judaism, choosing the name Isaiah Cohen. Diego retained his Jewish identity throughout his stay in Ragusa, using his Jewish name in his correspondence and in his testament. See Maren Frejdenberg, Zˇidovi na Balkanu na isteku srednjeg vijeka (Zagreb, 2000), pp. 122–124. Diego practiced medicine with Amatus in Antwerp and in Ferrara. Diego also followed Amatus to Ragusa, where he remained for 40 years, until his death (Frejdenberg, pp. 114–5). While living in Ragusa, he was said to have taught in the local school. There is no evidence to support this claim, and it seems unlikely that the Ragusans would have been so tolerant as to permit a Jew to teach their children. However, it is possible that as a poet he was in touch with the student population of Ragusa. Since he lived in the ghetto, he possibly taught Jewish children. Didacus’s volume of poetry appeared in Cracow, but since it was dedicated to the Ragusan Senate, he received 15 ducats from the Ragusan government. Allegedly, Diego was buried at Hercegnovi (Ragusa had no Jewish cemetery at that time). His grave too has disappeared. His life story was recorded by Gjuro Koerber (Rad, v. 216), and by Jorjo Tadic´, “Didak Pir,” Zbornik, 1. 239–53.

106

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

GRACIA AND THE RESETTLING OF SAFED Very early, Süleyman realized that protection of the Mendes-Nasi families met the increased need of the empire for ready money. Nasi’s close contacts with the Porte are proven by the fact that between 1562 and 1565, the sultan sent several firmans (the firman is an edict baring the sultan’s signature) to the king of France demanding that he pay without delay the 150,000 scudi due Nasi. When his message went unheeded, the sultan sequestered French merchants calling on Levantine ports.277 Petromol, the French ambassador, was convinced that Nasi wanted to become the king of a Jewish state in Tiberias and was therefore demanding his money from France.278 Whether Gracia or Joseph actually received the gift of Tiberias and the surrounding land remains an unsettled question. By 1560, Gracia obtained a concession from the sultan, which was confirmed and extended to Joseph Nasi, in 1561, to rebuild the town of Safed and resettle it with Jews. However, Ha-Cohen wrote, “Joseph Nasi found grace in the eyes of Süleyman who gave him the ruins of Tiberias, with seven villages.” He stated that the sultan’s message to the pasha of Safed was: “Whatever this man wants, do it.”279 It was rumored that Süleyman gave that land to Nasi in the fall of 1563, as a reward for his support of Prince Selim against Prince Bayezid. Yet in a number of contemporary works discussing Safed, Gracia is mentioned as the spiritus rector of the renewal. Fuhrer ab Heimendorf wrote that Gracia had the authorization of the sultan to build up Tiberias, which he claimed had 40,000 inhabitants, mostly Jews who had been expelled from

277 Inalcik, p. 123. Antoine Geuffroy, a merchant traveling for the Fuggers, drew a positive picture of Süleyman, calling him a man of honor who guards the law and loves peace. See Briefve descriptio de la Court du Grand Turc. Et ung sommaire du règne des Ottomans Avec ung abrégé de leur folles supertitions. His original work, Aulae Turcicae… Part II. Solymanni XII & Selim XIII…, (Basiliae, 1577), was republished by Nicholas Honiger. For more modern works about Süleyman and his times, see A. L. Lybyer, The Government of the Ottoman Empire in the Time of Süleyman the Magnificent (Cambridge, Mass. 1913, Harvard Historical Studies, 1913); and Andre Clot, Suleiman the Magnificent: The Man, His Life, His Epoch (London, 1992), a translation of his Soliman le Magnifique (Paris, 1989). 278 See his letter to the French court of September 13, 1563, published by Ernest Charrière, Negotiations de la France dans le Levant; ou correspondences, memoires et actes diplomatiques des ambassadeurs de France à Constantinople, envoyes ou residents à divers titres à Venise, Raguse, Malte et Jerusalem… [dans la collection de documents inedits sur l’histoire de France] (Paris, 1848–60), 4 vols. Ser. I. Histoire politique …, 2:735. 279 Quoted by Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 78.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

107

Spain and Portugal.280 The priest Giovanni di Calaorra complained that no intervention could succeed, because she had the support of Grand Vizir Rustam, and of Ali Pasha.281 The gift included the towns of Tiberias and Safed, and several villages. Whoever was the original recipient of the imperial favor, both Gracia and Joseph were involved in the project. Nasi ordered the restoration of the walls around Tiberias and the rehabilitation of the town. Rabbi Joseph ben Ardut, who had been enlisted by Nasi to help oversee the work, arrived in 1564. By imperial order, all skilled workers in mortar and masonry had to help reconstruct the walls. Some Muslim laborers, believing that when the walls stood again, the rule of Mohammed would end, abandoned the site and went into hiding. Others attacked the local Jews. After the execution of two rebel leaders, the work on the walls was completed by 1565. Earlier biographers of Gracia assumed that while Joseph had agriculture and trade on his mind, Gracia was interested in Safed for spiritual reasons. Considering Gracia’s astute attention to profit, perhaps new business opportunities offered by an invigorated region were not so far from her mind either.282 Nasi, who first had grandiose plans for Safed, had mulberry trees planted there in the hope of starting a silkworm farm, as if he were intent on repeating his business in Lyon. This plan demonstrates Nasi’s fine sense for new investment. Owing to an increased demand for silks in Europe, there was a steadily growing interest regarding the methods and rewards of sericulture.283 In the face of local animosity, Nasi later abandoned the development of Safed. Solomon Abenaes (Ibn Yaish), another Portuguese Jew who succeeded him at the court, continued some of his planning. Many Jews in Italy, primarily from Core, were disappointed in their hope to resettle in Safed after Nasi gave up the idea and reneged on his promise.284 During the second half of the sixteenth century, several towns were revitalized, among them Safed, which developed as a major textile 280 Voyage en Palestine, cited by Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 79. 281 Grunebaum-Ballin, p. 79. 282 Some scholars claim that, originally, Nasi wanted to prevent the establishment of any Talmudic academy or other religious institution in Tiberias. For more on this subject, see Rivkin’s review of Roth’s Nasi biography, Jewish Quarterly Review 40 (194950): 205–7. 283 An example is the work of the Elizabethan physician and entomologist, Thomas Moffet, The Silkwormes and their Flies (1599), facsim., ed. Victor Houliston, 1899. (Renaissance English Text Society). 284 Alice Fernand-Halphen, “Une grande dame juive de la Renaissance,” Revue de Paris (September, 1929): 164–165.

108

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

center. By 1565, however, had Nasi lost interest in Tiberias; after 1566 he began to focus on Naxos. In general, Jewish life in Safed was different from what Jews and conversos living in the Diaspora had dreamt. Arab jealousy flared up; Druz and Bedouin gangs repeatedly attacked the Jewish settlers, especially after the death of Nasi.

JEWISH PATRONAGE IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE In Jewish circles, the Mendes-Nasi family was widely known for its patronage and philanthropic activities. Even its enemies recognized the contributions the family made (within the Ottoman concept, patronage was not a particularly Jewish feature; the patron–client relationship was a broadly pervasive Ottoman social pattern). Nasi was credited for example with the building of new synagogues, among them the “Della Señora,” (“Geveret”) in Izmir and a new yeshiva, headed by Rabbi Joseph ibn Lev. The rabbi, earlier active in Bursa and Salonika, was of Spanish parentage. He fled Salonika after the plague and arrived in Constantinople in 1545, where he was to head the Academy for many years. His successor was Yom-tob-Cohen.285 Nasi supported Rabbi Almosnino and his Salonika congregation. During his trips to Constantinople, Almosnino stayed at Joseph’s palace. It is known that Nasi intervened with the sultan at least once on his behalf. Gracia, who venerated rabbis and scholarship, supported the founding of a Talmudic academy in Tiberias. With income from various properties in Salonika, she founded and supported a Midrash school (Bet Midrash) for the study of rabbinical literature. For the first head of the foundation, she chose Rabbi Samuel de Medina, the great Talmudist, whom Rabbi Almosnino calls “erudite in both sacred and profane literatures, and author of both types of texts.”286 The Midrash was run like a modern home for visiting scholars. The visitors pursued their studies under the supervision of the principal, who was elected on a rotating basis. Patronizing such institutions was a sign of piety, as well as wealth. 285 Geveret was destroyed in the fire of 1660, which also swept through entire districts. Rabbi Yom-tob-Cohen’s passing was commemorated by Saadiah Lungo (Longo?), who also eulogized Nasi. For more on that poet and his eulogy over Nasi, see Israel S. Emmanuel, Histoire des Israelites de Salonique (Paris, 1936), p. 219. 286 Quoted by Abraham Danon, “La communité juive de Salonique au XVIème siècle,” Revue des études juives 41 (1900): 98–117. In this article the author includes biographies of rabbis and the titles of their works. See also Joseph Nehama, Histoire des Israélites de Salonique, III. L’Age d’Or du Sefaradisme Salonicien (1536–1593), prem. fasc. (Salonique, 1936), pp. 201–8, and passim.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

109

Doctor Moses Hamon too established and supported a yeshivah in Constantinople and brought Rabbi Jacob ben Joseph Tawus to the institution, a respected scholar who translated the Pentateuch into Persian. At his own expense, Hamon had Tawus’s work printed with an Aramaic and an Arabic translation.287 Even in a merchant society, where the majority of people spoke several languages, Hamon was hailed as a famous polyglot. He knew Greek, Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew, and was familiar with standard Latin works.288 The Viaje de Turquia states that Hamon’s books were valued at 5,000 ducats. Allegedly, he had spent 8,000 ducats on his manuscripts.289 Nasi, who also owned a large collection of books and manuscripts, is credited with the founding of a printing press, which must have been considered an important event since it caught the attention of M. de Petromol, the French ambassador, who reported it to his king.290 After Nasi’s death, Reyna continued to publish Hebrew works.291 Although printing gave the authors a much larger reading public than a single patron could supply, even later printers still did much of their work for noble patrons. In many cases a book bore the statement that it had been written at the request of a certain person. In this respect too, Nasi assumed the patron’s role played by European aristocrats. In addition to his printing press, Nasi employed scribes and converted a room in his villa into a workshop for illuminating manuscripts and books. He enjoyed his library and published colloquies with Christian scholars, as recorded by Isaac Onkeneira.292 Nasi also gathered his friends and important acquaintances for theatrical and musical performances in his home. After a show the guests were invited to lavish suppers. Stephan Gerlach, a German preacher who func287 Heinrich Graetz, Geschichte der Juden, 3d ed. (Leipzig, 1891), pp. 28–9. Doctor Hamon might have been the model of the portrait in Nicolas de Nicolay’s gravure “Medicin juif.” (Plate III) 288 He was probably related to Isaac Hamon of Granada, physician to one of the last Muslim rulers there, and who is believed to have immigrated to the empire about 1493. For more on Moses Hamon, see Uriel Heyd, “Moses Hamon, Chief Jewish Physician to Süleyman the Magnificent,” Oriens, 16 (1963): 152–70. 289 His copy of Dioscorides, or De materia medica, as it was known by its Latin title, presently housed in the National Library in Vienna, contains many marginal notes in Hebrew, possibly in his hand. 290 Charrière, p. 779. 291 Eliakim Carmoly, Don Josef duc de Naxos (Brussels, 1855), pp. 11–13, lists the titles Reyna published. As a comparison, it is worth noting that in England, after the printer Roman Redman died in 1540, Elizabeth, his widow, ran the printing house under her own name until her own death 22 years later. British scholars still consider this achievement unique. 292 Roth, The House of Nasi, p. 191.

110

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

tioned as chaplain at the Imperial Embassy in Constantinople, describes the feast in Nasi’s residence with its priceless furniture made by French and local artisans.293 In a journal entry dated March 7–8, 1574, Gerlach records that he attended a performance about the story of Esther, “und hernach mit etlichen Venedigen bey seinem Hoffmeister Francisco zu Nacht gegessen.”294 Nasi also owned an orchestra, a sine qua non of European aristocracy.

THE DECLINE OF THE HOUSE OF MENDES-NASI After Selim II’s death, Nasi’s influence waned at court.295 While Gracia seemed to retain the respect of her contemporaries until her death, Joseph Nasi became increasingly unpopular, not just because people envied him for the power he wielded, and coveted his great fortune, but also because they feared his deep involvement in the politics of the empire. Nasi participated in the negotiation between the Ottoman Empire and Poland (1562) from which the family business profited greatly. He also played a leading role in a prospective settlement between the empire and Moldavia, speaking for Alexandru Lapusneanu, who hoped to reinstate the sovereignty of that province.296 Historians have assumed that Nasi instigated the Dutch to rise against Spain, promising them Ottoman support. This involvement too would have served directly his business interests.297 Nasi had monopolized the wine trade, from which he was thought to earn about 15,000 ducats each year. He exported wine to Poland from Crete, where he acquired as many as 1,000 barrels. He also acquired a monopoly of the Polish wax trade. He allegedly loaned the Polish king 150,000 ducats for the concession on beeswax. By 1567, Nasi’s agents had received all privileges for five years as favored merchants in Lvov.298 His commercial activities caused great anxiety among the Lvov merchants. 293 Stephan Gerlach, Tage-Buch (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1674), pp. 89–90. 294 Gerlach, p. 90. “And thereafter, in the company of several Venetians, I ate supper in the house of his major domo, Francisco.” 295 In the power struggle, Nasi and his group (Lala Mustafa Pasha, Hocˇa Sı¯nan, and Pı¯ale Pasha) lost to Sokullu Mehmet Pasha, a brilliant strategist and politician who became Murad III’s chief adviser. 296 Avram (Abraham) Galanté, Histoire des juifs de Turquie (Istanbul, 1985), 9.60. 297 For more on the subject, see Geoffrey Parker, The Army of Flanders and the Spanish Road 1567–1569, The Dutch Revolt (Cambridge, 1972), who addresses the logistics of Spanish victory and ultimate defeat in the Low Countries. 298 Lvov was the only city to receive a toll from those Jewish traders for any merchandise carried into Poland.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

111

Nasi’s variegated business and political dealings were carefully monitored by the European courts. Stories about him also found their way into literature and popular culture. As mentioned before, it has been long suspected that Christopher Marlowe modeled his Jew of Malta on Joseph Nasi. During Süleyman’s rule, in palace politics he consistently supported the future Selim II, under whose rule (1566–74) Nasi reached the zenith of his career, becoming ruler over the Cycladic Islands. As long as Selim II was alive, Nasi retained his privileged position. Christians around the palace spread rumors that Nasi provided Selim with alcohol, forbidden to Muslims. The rumors were based on the received stereotype: as a ”true Jew,” Nasi destroyed him.299 Nasi also served the sultan, although not always well, in foreign affairs. His earlier friendship with Maximilian helped him to facilitate a truce in 1568 between the emperor and Selim. This truce turned out to be particularly advantageous to Austria. Maximilian sent him old drinking vessels; the Polish king called him his beloved friend, and some scholars believe that Nasi perhaps contributed to Sigismund Augustus’s benevolent treatment of Jews.300 Even Süleyman wrote at least three letters on Nasi’s behalf to the King of France, helping Nasi collect money he had lent the French ambassador.301 Nasi made wars and peace in Europe. In 1570, he gained for the Turks the island of Cyprus, which had been ruled by Venice since 1487.302 It has been claimed that Nasi aided the revolt of the Netherlands against Spain, “as an act of personal revenge for the expulsion of the Marranos.”303 This is absurd; Nasi’s career demonstrates that his every venture was premised on the hope of an immediate personal or economic gain. However, a similar charge of seeking personal revenge surfaced against him during the war following the Turkish annexation of Cyprus. 299 Another piece of improbable gossip—spread by local Christians—refers to Selim’s parentage. According to rumor, Selim II was not Süleyman’s son, but a Jewish doctor’s son. Selim’s mother Roxelane wanted to give the sultan a son but gave birth to a daughter instead. Allegedly, at the child’s birth, she exchanged her daughter for the doctor’s son. 300 Rosenblatt, p. 157. After the death of Sigismund Augustus (July 7, 1572), Nasi lost his monopoly on a number of items. 301 See Philip Mansel, Constantinople: City of the World’s Desire, 1453–1924 (New York, 1998 [1996]), p. 126. 302 Earlier, the Venetians paid tribute to Süleyman in order to avoid a Turkish takeover. But in the spring of 1570, Pı¯ale Pasha with a fleet of fifty thousand, passed through the Dardanelles and took Cyprus. Mehmed Sokullu Pasha consistently advocated against taking Cyprus: he wanted to obtain the island by negotiation. 303 Daniel Friedenberg, Jewish Medals From the Renaissance to the Fall of Napoleon (1503–1815) (New York, 1970), p. 44.

112

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Nasi’s power diminished under Murad III’s rule (1574–95). In his quest for influence in Europe, he had even poorer luck. Among the Venetians, he remained forever suspect. During the Venetian–Turkish war of 1570–73, there was a new outbreak of anti-Jewish and anti-converso sentiment. Allegedly, Venice refused to give up Cyprus in order to prevent Nasi from building a Jewish colony there.304 Assuming that contemporary Jews seriously believed that they were forbidden to exercise sovereignty before the arrival of the Messiah, this assertion cannot be valid. The paradigm for Jews in the Diaspora was to live peacefully and unobtrusively among their hosts. Venice suspected that Nasi had a hand in the burning of the Arsenal in 1569, a punishment for the city’s discriminating against him when he resided there. Investigation of the suspicious fire led the Venetians to the Ottoman Empire and to Nasi. In 1567, a Hebrew letter addressed to the Venetian Jews, urging them to plot against the Serenissima, was intercepted. The incriminating letter was traced back to Nasi’s group, although there is no direct evidence that Nasi was responsible for it. Because of the Arsenal fire, Venetian shipbuilding suffered and its fleet was weakened. During the ensuing war, Venice was at the mercy of the Ottoman Empire for grain, until the Holy League came to her rescue.305 Venice blamed Nasi, but Jews and New Christians as well, for the war, calling them agents in the service of Turkish interests, “la faccia della terra, spie dei Turchi e nemici interni.”306 In October of 1571, the combined fleets of Spain, Venice, and the Papacy destroyed the Ottoman naval forces at Lepanto. The victory was hailed by Christian nations as the greatest day’s work for centuries and celebrated in all the arts. Historians of later periods took a different view, considering it a somewhat anachronistic event: a battle fought with obsolete arms at immense

304 “Die venezianische Regierung lehnte die Forderung des Sultans ab, ihn die venezianische Insel Zypern zu überlassen, damit der aus Venedig nach Konstantinopel geflohene Marrano Joseph Nassi dort eine jüdische Kolonie gründen könne.” See Steinbach, p. 57. 305 Showing gratitude to the Holy See, Venice expelled the Jews in 1571. Ragusa, following the change in the balance of power allegedly, executed a Nasi relative. The city abolished the special concessions granted to Gracia Mendes in 1552, which had been extended every fifth year. 306 For Venetian attitudes toward Nasi, see Paul F. Grendler, “The Destruction of Hebrew Books in Venice, 1568,” Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 45 (1978): 16. Maria Gracia Sandri and Paolo Alazraki claim that there was always a Jewish element in Turkish commercial and diplomatic affairs. They use Nasi’s alleged involvement in the Battle of Lepanto, as an example. See Arte e vita ebraica a Venezia 1516-1797 (Florence, 1971), p. 31. It is beyond the scope of this book to comment upon Nasi’s possible involvement in the Battle of Lepanto.

The Ottoman Empire and the Jews

113

cost. In fact, the achievements of October 7, 1571, were at most temporary. The victors barely recovered from their conquest, although it excited Europe and raised hope of the final expulsion of Muslims from Europe paying scant attention to Turkish efforts in the east and the south. Meanwhile, the Ottomans reorganized: their fleet was rebuilt by 1574, and the Turks retook Tunisia. In 1573, a separate peace treaty was signed between Murad III and Venice without Nasi, but with the help of Solomon Ashkenasi, a Jewish trader in the empire. Thereafter a period of “reconciliation” followed between Venice and the Jews.307 Having lost power at the Turkish court, Nasi tried in the end to pave his way back to Europe. He wrote to Augustin Manuel, a Jew who from Constantinople returned to Spain (and to Christianity), and whose brother was in Nasi’s employment. In the letter Nasi claimed that “only unexpected events in his life” forced him to become a Jew.308 This letter became soon known in diplomatic circles in Italy and Spain, though not in Constantinople. Nasi’s proposal was to receive a safe conduct from Spain for himself and seventy members of his household, and his possessions; a pardon for his apostasy; freedom from the Inquisition; free passage through all the customs’ barriers to Spain; and a promise that Philip would adjudicate all pending cases and disputes arising from Nasi’s previous business deals. In exchange, he offered his services to the Spanish Crown, claiming that his economic empire and his political power would guarantee his words.309 This offer was not Nasi’s first attempt to build a relationship with the Spanish court. When a group of diplomats arrived representing the Habsburgs, on September 11, 1567, Nasi met with them in Adrianople and offered to mediate between Philip II, Maximilian II, and the sultan. This was an entirely private initiative, because Nasi was never invited to attend any of the official meetings. The envoys negotiated only with Grand Vizir Mehmed Sokollu, a brilliant military tactician of Serbian origin (1507–1581), who by then had beaten Nasi in the struggle for Sultan Murad’s trust.310 307 Solomon Ashkenasi (1520-1601) studied medicine in Padua, lived in Venice, later moved to Poland, and finally, in 1564, settled in Constantinople. He was a trusted man of the sultans and the Venetian ambassador. Possibly because of Ashkenazi’s services to Venice, the doge financed Ashkenazi’s son’s medical education in Padua. See Steinbach, p. 105. 308 Norman Rosenblatt, “Joseph Nasi. Court Favorite of Selim II,” Diss. University of Pennsylvania, 1957, p. 112. 309 For more on this, see Augustin Arce, “Espionaje y ultima aventura de Jose Nasi (1569–1574),” Sefarad 13 (1953): 278. For more on Philip II’s domestic and foreign policy, see Geoffrey Parker, The Grand Strategy of Philip II (New Haven and London, 1998). 310 Fernand Braudel, Le Méditerranée et le monde méditerranéen à l’époque de Phillippe II (Paris, 1949), p. 881.

114

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

On December 28, 1567, Nasi again volunteered his services, this time offering to represent Philip II. At that point, Sokollu requested that the king send his own envoys. In a letter of February 28, 1568, Chatonay, the Spanish ambassador, advised his ruler against using Nasi. Conditions for peace were agreed upon without his mediation and the Austrian envoys departed.311 A year later, the Turks attacked Cyprus. The Venetians blamed Nasi for the siege. It is plausible that even without an official appointment, Nasi delivered secret intelligence information to Philip II; still his hope of participating in the peace negotiations came to naught. So did his bold plans to return to Europe. In 1578, Chaplain Schweigger, describing Galata, claimed: “Ich hab nie Kein Juden daselbst wohnhaft gesehen, aber zu Constantinopel wohnen irer viel, wie man meint bei 20,000.”312 Nasi is not mentioned. The prince of all Jews had become a man whose advice was no longer sought and whose consent no longer mattered. When on August 2, 1579 Joseph Nasi died of “mal de pierre,” he was still rich, but without influence and without heirs.

311 S. Kohn, “Österreich-ungarisch Gesandschaftsberichte über Don Joseph Nasi,” Monatschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 28 (1879): 114–15, and 119, respectively. See also Marianna D. Birnbaum, Humanists in a Shattered World: Croatian and Hungarian Latinity in the Sixteenth Century (Columbus, Ohio, 1986), esp. pp. 213–40. 312 Schweigger, p. 175.

CONCLUSION

When Jews moved to towns in the nineteenth century, they participated in the social rise of their entire generation, regardless of faith. But in the sixteenth century, if a Jew displayed a competitive attitude and a kind of success that led him or her into the society of the gentile burghers of the Renaissance, something unusual, even unnatural happened. Gracia stepped out of her own circle and adopted a lifestyle meant for Christians only. Living beyond the Golden Horn, she had a European, aristocratic household, with imported furniture, silks, and brocades. Her family and her servants wore European clothes, and the family members were addressed as Don and Señora. They corresponded in Spanish and Italian, not in Turkish or Persian. Their way of life had little to do with that of the Jews in Byzantium: it mirrored solely the style of Habsburg Europe. Their foreign habits notwithstanding, in the Ottoman Empire Gracia and her coreligionists thrived, whereas in Europe they could not penetrate the wall of obstacles created by the Christian society that loathed and feared them at the same time. Although scholars have speculated about it, there is absolutely no documentation to support the frequently voiced claim that Messianic ideas spurred either Gracia or Joseph to reestablish the Jewish settlement of Safed. Messianism that permeated Sephardi society in the early modern period was obviously known to both. Of people Gracia had admired, Isaac Abravanel was a Messianist; so were many Jews in Salonika, forming a separate community there. In 1516, when the Ottomans took Palestine, there was an upsurge of acute Messianic expectation that enjoyed mass as well as some rabbinical support. Sixteenth-century Spain had many mystical authors who were avidly read by the secret Jews. A letter from the township of Badajoz—written on March 30, 1528, in Spanish, but with many Portuguesisms, and signed by the local Inquisitor, Doctor Laya—deals with Messianic movements in that region. The Inquisitor refers to “infestation of the faith and the offence to

116

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

the Catholic Kings.”313 Nevertheless, there is no real evidence to connect Gracia’s strong Jewish commitments to any literature she might have read. Several authors—primarily Cecil Roth—sought to establish that connection without reliable proof of their claim. Revelations and visions were reported, and some Messianist leaders performed public healings, using non-Jews as witnesses. But these were limited to the region. The most devoted Messianists settled in Jerusalem, not Safed. There is no record to prove that Gracia ever moved to Safed “in order to die there.” On the contrary, the eulogies point to her death and burial in Constantinople in 1568 at the age of fifty-eight. Rabbis and scholars, beneficiaries of her generosity, admirers of the nobility of her manner and her courage, showered Gracia with praise. In his oration, Rabbi Soncino, her earlier adversary, claimed: “She was not merely the most serene princess and the glory of Israel, a splendid flower in exile, who honored her home by its purity and sanctity. She protected the poor and helped the afflicted … to make them happy in this world and to have them welcomed in the next.”314 He praised her for building the House of Israel, with her purity, wealth, and treasure. Emanuel (Immanuel) Aboab also spoke of her with appreciation, extolling her excellent virtues and noble deeds, “about which many books could be written.”315 Amatus Lusitanus called her “a woman adorned by all virtues,” and Rabbi Almosnino referred to her as “crown of the glory of goodly women.” Gracia’s earthly presence was called a ”divine compassion in human form.”316 Centuries of Jewish persecution, climaxing in the Holocaust, animated some modern scholars to view Gracia’s life in an anachronistic light, even claiming that she was an early Zionist, who assisted a Jewish and converso flight out of danger and helped establish an “Underground Railroad” to bring them to a safe haven. This term, borrowed from anti-slavery litera-

313 For more on this subject, see Uriel Heyd, Ottoman Documents on Palestine, 1552–1615 (Oxford, 1960). The inquisitor’s claim was published by Carlos Carrete Perrondo and Yolanda Moreno Koch, “Movimiento Mesianico hispano–portugues: Badajoz 1552,” Sefarad 52 (1992): 65–68. 314 Fernand-Halphen, p. 164; Roth, p. 132. 315 Roth, p. 132. 316 Fernand-Halphen, p. 161. 317 Roth, p. 31. See Merry E. Wierner, Women and Gender in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge, 1993), p. 21.

Conclusion

117

ture, was first used by Cecil Roth, but it recently reappeared in a feminist text.317 Indeed, some documents do record the number of Iberian families reaching relatively safe destinations in Europe. For example, an old nurse of the Nasi family landed in the Low Countries. Yet except for allusions and ambiguous mention in eulogies after Gracia’s death, nothing proves that the Mendes family actually participated in an organized action to save Jews and conversos. More likely, they secretly financed some flights and helped refugees after they had reached safety. In the Ottoman Empire, any open knowledge of such activities would have jeopardized the family’s business dealings with Christian countries and, while still in Europe, such intelligence would have put their lives at risk. Therefore, even if necessary secrecy is responsible for the lack of evidence, a caveat must be added to the discussion. Also, calling Gracia a Zionist displays dangerously anachronistic thinking because it transfers a modern concept to a period when no one would have entertained the idea of creating a secular Jewish state in the Holy Land, where a sizeable portion of the population waited for the immediate arrival of the Messiah to rebuild the Temple and usher in a new age of sanctity and peace.318 Gracia and her son-in-law wanted to establish a Jewish economic center in Safed that would aid Jewish employment and self-sufficiency and at the same time help increase the family’s wealth. As shrewd as they were when it involved their business affairs, Gracia and Joseph had a commitment to human (and humanist) values. They pursued a wide range of goals in order to help the poor. In the end, those generous efforts saved them from estrangement from their impecunious coreligionists. It is evident that Gracia’s story cannot be taken as representative. Hers was an exceptional life. Gracia’s accomplishments were unique, and hers alone. Her achievements did not become path breaking. Her unusual talents notwithstanding, she succeeded because she had the support of an immense

318 Some scholars, following Roth, interpreted Samuel Usque’s statement in Consolaçam: “[Y]ou have done more than all of them to bring forth into the light the fruit of the plants that lie buried in its darkness” (p. 37) to mean that she helped Jews escape from Christian Europe. I believe Usque meant that Gracia brought back conversos to embrace Judaism openly.

118

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

family fortune to back her efforts. Her life was too singular to offer more than a glancing insight into the lives of her less fortunate contemporaries. Nor did Gracia’s powerful figure bring about a change in the fortune of her fellow Jews; even less so into the lives of Jewish women. Their treatment, depending on the momentary whims and interests of rulers, remained as arbitrary as ever.319 There are no extant records in which Gracia directly expressed her political ideas or religious feelings, and I do not speculate about them. I have faithfully chronicled her private and public activities, and her role as a mater familias, supported by the available documents. Those facts alone should prove beyond doubt that Gracia was a woman of singular intelligence, imagination, and perseverance, whose actions were ennobled by her unyielding faith and spiritual grace. She knew how to dream without boundaries and had the courage to make her dreams come true, regardless of the limits forced upon her by her faith and gender. An independent thinker, Gracia presents a life that affirms the fundamental importance of human dignity for centuries to come.

Los Angeles, December 31, 2001.

319 In 1568, Selim II, his friendship with Joseph notwithstanding, ordered all Jews to wear distinctive clothing that would set them apart from the Muslims. In the Habsburg lands, in 1572, Maximilian II, Joseph’s friend from his youth, expelled all Jews from his empire; in 1576, Murad III ordered a hundred Jews who wanted to settle in Safed to be deported to Cyprus.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1

MONEY, PRICES, VALUES The discovery of America became the monetary salvation of Europe. The imports of precious metals (first gold, followed by silver) also increased the home production. “The silver mining in the Saxon Harz, in Bohemia, and the Tyrol, had received a strong impulse towards the close of the fifteenth century, whereas gold was obtained during the same period in appreciably greater quantities in the archbishopric of Salzburg, and in Hungary, as well as from Africa.” 1 Owing to the depreciation of silver, in Venice the silver grosso was abolished as a coin and the new silver coin, the lira (first valued at 20 soldi) was introduced. By 1578, the scudo was rated at 7 lire.2 Earlier the petty coins (quatrini and the like) were used to pay for menial labor and in the retail trade of small scale. Workers were paid with small coins but the big merchants and traders were selling their ware for gold and frequently refused payment in small coins. However, during the sixteenth century there was a general increase of wages and prices, and the gold scudi and ducati as well as the large silver ducatoni appeared even in local and small transactions. The gold coins lost their character of “aristocratic money.”3 The value of currency fluctuated: between 1517 and 1594 the relationship between the ducat and the lira changed considerably. As the following chart shows: 1517 ducat (always 100 soldi)= 6 lire 10 soldi 1520 ducat= 6 lire 16 soldi 1529 ducat = 7 lire 10 soldi 1562 ducat = 8 lire 1573 ducat = 8 lire 12 soldi 1594 ducat = 10 lire4 1 William Arthur Shaw, History of Currency: 1252 to 1894 (New York, 1896), p. 62. 2 Shaw, p. 313. 3 Carlo M. Cipolla, Money, Prices, and Civilization in the Mediterranean World: Fifth to Seventeenth Century (New York, 1967), p. 37. 4 Based on Shaw, p. 316.

122

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Much of the Mendes family’s business dealings were conducted in écus. The écu was a gold coin. In 1423 50 écus equaled 68 livres (silver), 75 sous (copper) and 6 deniers (dinars). The same year new écus were minted and the old ones became more valuable. 4 old écus were fixed as equaling 7 livres.5 A gold solidus equaled 3 and 1/3 silver solidi. Solidi (the silver coins) were also used in Castile.6 (The maravedi, originally a gold coin of the finest quality—weighing about 56 grams—was first introduced after the conquest of Toledo, designating the sueldo d’oro. It soon degenerated in value, and became a silver coin of the lowest denomination.)7 In mid sixteenth-century Italy, the scudo equaled 8 (silver) fiorini; a fiorino = 12 grossi; a grosso= 4 quarti.8 In Florence, Jews were permitted to charge 25 percent interest, but actually the percentage fluctuated between 17 to 50 percent.9 In Venice, the coining of gold began under Doge Giovannni Dandolo (1280–90).10 In 1284, the first gold ducat or sequin (zecchino) was valued at 18 grossi. By the sixteenth century, the Venetian ducat equaled 75 grossi. Antwerp’s grossi fiamminghi and Southampton’s corone were exchanged in Venice. In 1496, 135 corone equaled 100 Venetian ducats, whereas 80 grossi were worth 1 ducat. In England, 40 silver denars equaled 1 ducat. 70 ducats equaled 434 lire.11 In Venice, the principal coin was the lira di piccioli, which endured from the tenth century until 1806 (the year in which the decimal was introduced). The lira di grossi was used for four hundred years; it was introduced in the thirteen century and abandoned by the end of the sixteenth. 5 Philip Lardin, “La crise monétaire de 1420–1422 en Normandie,” L”argent en Moyen Age: XXVIIIe Congrès de la Société des Historien Médiévistes de L’Enseignement Superieur Public (Paris, 1988), p.105, footnote 16 and p. 106, footnote 19, respectively. 6 For a useful work regarding Spanish economical life prior to 1492, see Miguel Gual Camarena, Vocabulario del comercio medieval: Coleccion de aranceles aduaneros de la Corona de Aragon (Siglos XIII y XIV) (Barcelona, 1976). Biblioteca de historia hispanica monografias. Serie minor, 1. 7 Shaw, 322. 8 Luciano Allegra, La città verticale: usurai, mercanti e tessitori nella chieri de cinquecento (Milan, 1987), front chart. 9 Allegra, p. 72. See also Jonathan I. Israel, Europan Jewry in the Age of Mercantilism: 1550–1750 (Oxford, 1985). 10 For a recent biography of the eleventh doge, see Karl-Hartmann Necker, Dandolo: Venedigs kühnster Doge (Wien, 1999). 11 Ugo Tucci, Mercanti, navi, monete nel Cinquecento veneziano (Bologna, 1921), pp. 200–201.

Money, Prices, Values

123

The Medici accounts during the fifteenth century show that a fiorino largo, a large gold first appeared about 1450. The fiorino largo grossi, a large florin of groats (grotes), was a money account for silver. The fiorino largo d’oro in oro, a large gold coin, was used from ca. 1482 –1530. It was 19 percent more valuable than the fiorino largo di grossi. 1 petty lira (lira di piccioli) = 20 petty soldi = 240 petty denari. 1 lira a fiorino = 20 soldi a fiorino = 240 denari a fiorino. Any gold florin = 29 soldi a fiorino = 348 denari a fiorino. Any gold florin = 20 soldi a oro = 240 denari a oro. 1 quattrino equaled 4 denari. 1 grosso equaled 1/24th of a gold florin (although that was variable.12 Most businesses kept a “memoriale,” a daybook in which accounts were entered. Debits and credits were usually entered in separate sections of the book. The Medici and the Fugger account books were especially sophisticated but all larger enterprises relied on a meticulous bookkeeping. The mere fact that the Mendes family had business dealings with royalty testifies to their wealth and influence. However, to gain an insight into the immensity of their assets, it should be noted that while Diogo lent 200 thousand ducats to the emperor, a well-to-do merchant in sixteenth-century Aragon had 10-50 thousand sueldos (gold) capital.13 There were also silver sueldos. Under Philip II the equivalence of gold coins was increased but the silver money was left unchanged.14 In Venice, a reputable merchant had about 100 thousand ducats but for an initial investment 500–1,000 ducats were considered sufficient.15 A scribe/ secretary received 30 ducats for his services during a sea voyage from Alexandria to Syria. The same job, from Flanders to Syria, earned him the double.16 In a recent work, Professor Sevket Pamuk provides us with the exchange ´ rate of some European coins expressed in akçes (1477–1482): in 1479, a Venetian gold ducat equaled 45–46 akçes, whereas a Hungarian gold ducat was worth 42–43 akçes. By the third quarter of the next century (1582) their value increased to 60 and 58 akçes, respectively.17 12 Florence Edler, Glossary of Medieval Terms of Business: Italian Series 1200–1600 (Cambridge, Mass., 1934), p. 317. 13 Jose Ignazio Gomez Zorraquino, La burguesia mercantile en el Aragon de los siglos XVI y XVII (1516–1562) (Zaragosa, 1987), p. 109 and passim. 14 By the ordinance of November 23, 1566. 15 Tucci, pp. 62ü63. At that time 1 ducat = 6 lire 4 soldi, 1 lira di grossi = 10 ducats, 124 lire = 20 ducats, 99:4 lire = 16 ducats (Tucci, pp. 186 and 199). 16 Tucci, p. 199. 17 Sevket Pamuk, The Monetary History of the Ottoman Empire (Cambridge, ´ 200), p.64. I am grateful to Professor Gabriel Piterberg for having called my attention to this work.

124

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

One must not forget that the total number of millionaires in early modern times was much smaller than it is today. The Mendes family took advantage of those years when the center of European monetary exchanges passed from Italy to the Netherlands, when Antwerp took the place of Venice and Florence. Later, with excellent timing, they moved their wealth to the Ottoman Empire but retained all their contacts with European trade. Yet, after the death of Joseph Nasi, who passed away without immediate heirs, in less than 20 years, the Mendes-Nasi business empire disappeared without a trace.

APPENDIX 2

FROM DUBROVNIK TO CONSTANTINOPLE: ROUTES USED BY TRAVELERS IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY.* Lacking direct evidence regarding the route Gracia took, the reader can be helped by learning about the probable and most frequented routes. However, as Prof. Sima Cˇ irkovic´ stated, it does not mean much to construct an “ideal route chronology,” because even two, chronologically close, travels may differ in their choice of resting places or for crossing a river etc. In. P. Matkovic´’s Putovanja po Balkanskom polustrvu, there is a survey of travelers from the 16th century. Only a few had started or completed their travel in Dubrovnik. (Rad JAZU 42(1878), 49 (1879), 55 (1881), 56 (1881), 62 (1882), 71 (1884), 84 (1887), 100(1890), 105 (1891), 112 (1892), 116(1893), 124(1895), 129 (1896), 130 (1897), 136 (1898). But three Frenchman, Jaques Gassot (1547), Phillippe du Fresne-Caney (1573), and Pierre Lescalopier (1574), started out in Dubrovnik, heading for Constantinople. The second of them went to Skoplje, and then on to Custendil, the two others traveled through Nisˇ and Sofia. They are commented upon in M. Dini’, “Tri francuska putopisc´a XVI veka o nasˇim zemljama,” Godisˇnjica Nikole Cˇupic´a 49 (1940), 85–118. Another record, regarding sixteenth-century travels in the region, is of Martino Segono di Novo Brdo vescovo di Dulcigno. Un umanista serbo– dalmat del tardo Quattrocento, ed. A. Pertusi, Roma 1981, p. 87: Prima via superior ex traiectu Belgradi per superiorem partem Mysiae et Rhodopem versus Thraciam dirigens...p. 89: progresso fluvio Nisava a quo denominatur magnaque venalium copia rerum inter alios Mysiae et Triballorum pagos censetur preclara. Abest haec a traiectu Belgradi CCCXX milibus passuum. Exea postea ascendendo ad viam Pyrothy situm in montanis peragrato vasto montis Cunovicae iugo arduo atque difficili, … accessus per Sophiam metropolim Triballorum, emporium nostris saeculis memorandum … p. 90. Altera via inferior quae ex eodem Belgrado per Dardanos et Triballos montem Haemum transgressa prope Hebrum cum superiori via coniungitur … circa Ostervizae oppidum et Ravanicense monasterium adducit primo ad Moravam olim Moschium dictum ad latus arcis Crusevac fluentem … dehinc ad Basilicam Albam (= Bele Crkve, Kursumlija) et montes Mysiam inicem separantes … p. 91: Pertransitis itaque montibus

126

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

sequitur campus Dubozicae frequenter undique inhabitatum; sed dimisso aliquantisper ad laevam tramite qui ad villam magnam Procopiae et Nisum dirigit, non procul offert se vallis Cosoviza cum Labo flumine per medium eius decurrente procedens ad latissimum Cosovum campum … p.93: Huius campi planities protenditur circa LXX milia passuum usque ad vicum Cazanici et fauces Clisurae, quae ad Scopia ducit … Ima i krak od Kosova prema istoku doulivanja u Carigradski drum. The above text was attributed to Feliks Petancˇic´ (Felix Petantius) A real itinerary from 1533, is “Missions diplomatiques de Corneille Duplicius de Schepper dit Sceperus de 1523-55” (ed. M. le Bon de Saint Genois - G. A. Yssel de Scepper, Memoires de l’Academie royale des sciences, des lettres et des beaux arts, 30 (1857). The author lists places and geographic details (p. 195). He and his party descended from “Kinorwitza” in the “ville de Nissa” (p. 196). Then they crossed the river “Murana” and went along that river through part of Serbia called “Toplitza.” There is mention of the village “Rosine,” the small river “Dracowitza, bourg Pritnoritze,” a pretty village “Gerghebir” (Grgure) (p. 197), left on the left side “ville de Scopia” and arrived in the “contree Saplana.” They spent the night in the village “Jerecain” (Djerekare), arrived in the village that belongs to the sandjak of “Zwonick” (Zvornik) and descended toward the river Ibar (p. 198). They reached the fortress “Zwelfa” (Zvecˇ an), passed the village “Terboutzine” (Trbusˇine) and spent the night in tents. They crossed the river “Pinchia” (Pnucha) and arrived in the town of “Nomoposar” (Novi Pazar) and then in the province of “Cinitza” (Sjenica). The “bourg” is called “Zynitze” and the little river “Cina” (p. 199), the monastery of St. Sava (Milesˇova) is mentioned. They traveled to the “ville de Prepolye”(Prijepolje), crossed the river “Lym” on a wooden bridge and went to the “bourg Plenie” (Pljevlja) where they spent the night (p. 200). They proceded to a place called “Brachobb” (Pracha) and raised their tents there. Afterwards they crossed a small river “Thichotina,” arrived in “Gotza ou Hotza” and crossed the “Drinus” (p. 201). They then crossed the river “Bistriza” in the valley of Zagora, where is located the “bourg Zagoria” (p. 202). They crossed the river “Vissina” (Visheva), spent the night in the “bourg Postulyam” and continued on a plain to “Novipasar de Hertzegovina” (Mostar), reached the town of “Powsitel” (Pochitelj) on the Neretva and crossed on the bridge at “Vidnareca” (Vidova Reka). The group arrived in “Gabelle de Narenta” (Drijeva) where they encountered some Ragusans (Blasius de Sorgo). They then took a ship to Dubrovnik and from there to Zadar

From Dubrovnik to Constantinople

127

(I am most grateful to Academician, Prof. Dr. Sima Cˇirkovic´ who has provided me with the above information.) For further information the reader can also consult C. Jirecˇek, “Handelsstrassen und Bergwerke von Serbien und Bosnien während des Mittelalters.” Historisch-geographische Studien, (Prag, 1879), pp. 73–78, describing the road from Dubrovnik to Nisˇ. Although Urosˇ evic´ too describes an “inverse” itinerary, the journey he presents is yet another route leading to and from Constantinople in the sixteenth century.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albièri, Eugenio. See Relazioni degli Ambasciatori veneti al Senato. Albrecht, Edelgard. Das Türkenbild in der ragusanischen — dalmatinischen Literatur des XVI. Jahrhunderts. München, 1965. (Slawistische Beiträge 15). Almeid, Yizhak. Les juifs et la vie économique. (n.p.n.d.) Almeida, A. A., Marques de. Capitais e capitalistas no comércio de espeçiaria: o eixo Lisboa – Antuérpia (1501–1549). Aproximação a um Estudio de Geofinança. Lisboa, 1993. Almosnino, Moses ben Baruch. Extremos y grandezas de Constantinopla. Madrid, 1638. Almosnino, Moses ben Baruch. Dreams, Their Origin and True Nature. Trans. Leon Elmaleh, Philadelphia, 1934. Altman, Arthur. The Bullion Flow Between Europe and the East. 1000–1750. Göteborg, 1980. Amador De Los Rios, José. Historia social, politica y religiosa de los judeos de España y Portugal. Madrid, 1960. 3 vols. And, Metin. Istanbul in the Sixteenth Century. Istanbul, 1994. Angelini, Werter. “Gli Ebrei di Ferrara nel Settecento. I Coen e altri mercanti nel rapporto con le pubblicche autorità.” Studi storici. Urbino, 1973. Ankori, Zvi. See Mi-Lisbon le-Saloniki. Anselmi, Sergio. Venezia, Ragusa, Ancona, tra Cinque e Seicento. Un momento della storia mercantile di Medio Adriatico. Ancona, 1969. Antwerp’s Golden Age: The Metropolis of the West in the 16th and 17th Centuries. Antwerp, 1973–1975. Aramand, Alfred. Les Médailleurs italiens des quinzième et seizième siècles. Paris 1883–87. 3 vols. Arbel, Benjamin. Trading Nations, Jews and Venetians in the Early Modern Eastern Mediterranean. Leiden, New York, Cologne, 1995. Arbel, Benjamin. See The Mediterranean and the Jews. Arce, Augustin. “Espionaje y última aventura de José Nasi (1569–1574).” Sefarad 13 (1953). Assis, Yom Tov (ed.). See Jews in the Crown of Aragon. Atil, Esin. The Age of Suleyman. New York, 1987. Austro-Turcica 1541–1552. Diplomatische Akten… In Verbindung mit Matthias Bernath herausgegeben von Karl Nehring. München, 1995. Baer,Yitzhak Fritz. History of the Jews in Christian Spain. Philadelphia, 1961. 2 vols. Vol. 1 translated by Louis Schoffman from the German original: Juden im christlichen Spanien. Berlin, 1929. Balletti, Andrea. “Gli Ebrei e gli Estensi,” Atti e Memorie della Deputazione di Storia Patria per la Antiche Provincie Modenesi con l’aggiunta di il tempio maggiore izraelitico e lettere del rabbino maggiore Jacob Israele Carmi. Bologna, 1969 (reprint from the 1913 ed. of vol. VII, pp.11–13). Ballif, Philipp. Putevi u srednovekovnoi Srbii. Belgrade, 1974. Barkan, Ömer Lûfti. “Les deportations comme méthode de peuplement et de coloni-

Select Bibliography

129

sation dans l’Empire Ottoman.” Revue de la Faculté des Siences Économiques de l’Université d’Istanbul XI (1949–50): 67–131. Baron, Salo W. The Social and Religious History of the Jews. 2nd Rev. Ed. New York, 1952–1980, esp. vols. IX and X. Basilewsky, Moses. Don’ Iosif’ Nasi. Gercog’ Naksoskij. Odessa,1895 (Nasha starina, 12). (On microfilm) Bassano, Luigi. Costumi e i modi particolari della vita de’ Turchi. Ed. Franz Babinger. Munich, 1963, (reprint of Roma, 1545). Bataillon, Marcel M. Alonso Núñez de Reinos et les Marranes portugais en Italie. Lisbon, 1957. Bayerle, Gustav. Ottoman Diplomacy in Hungary; Letters from the Pashas of Buda, 1590–1593. Bloomington, 1972. Bayerle, Gustav. Pashas, Begs, and Effendis; a Historical Dictionary of Titles and Terms in the Ottoman Empire. Istanbul, 1997. Beinart, Haim. Atlas of Medieval Jewish History. New York, London, 1992. Benbassa, Esther. See Ottoman and Turkish Jewry. Community and Leadership. Ed. A. Rodrigue. Bloomington, 1992. Benbassa, Esther. See Sephardi Jewry. A History of the Judeo-Spanish Community in 14th–20th Centuries. Ed. Esther Benbassa and Aron Rodrigue. Bennasar, Bartolomé, “L’Espace européen ou la mesure des différences,” L’Ouverture du Monde XIV–XVIe siècles. Ed. Pierre Leon. Paris, 1977. Berek, Peter. “The Renaissance Jew.” Renaissance Quarterly 61, 1 (Spring 1998): 128–162. Bernard, Yvelise. “L’Orient du XVIe siècle à travers les récits de voyageurs français regards portés sur la société musulmane.” Ph.D. Thesis. Université Lyon II, 1988. Biblia de Ferrara. Edición y prólogo de Moshe Lazar. Madrid, 1996. Biblia en lengua española: traduzida palabra por palabra dela verdad hebrayca por muy exelentes letrados vista y examinada por el officio de la Inquisiçión. Con privilegio del illustrissimo señor Duque de Ferrara. Amsterdam, 1629/30? Biegman, Nicholas. The Turco-Ragusan Relationship. The Hague and Paris, 1967. Binswanger, Karl. Untersuchungen zum Status der Nichtmüslime im Osmanischen Reich des 16. Jahrhunderts mit einer Neudefinition des Begriffes “Dima.” Monaco, 1977. Birnbaum, Marianna D. “The Fuggers, Hans Dernschwam and the Ottoman Empire.” Südostforschungen 50 (1991): 119–144. Birnbaum, Marianna D. Croatian and Hungarian Latinity in the Sixteenth Century. Zagreb, 1993. Blom, J.C.H. et al., The History of the Jews in the Netherlands. (n.p.n.d.) Bodian, Miriam. “Men of the Nation: The Shaping of the Converso Identity in Early Modern Europe.” Past and Present 143 (May, 1994). Bonazzoli, Viviana. “Ebrei italieni, portoghesi, levantini sull piazza commerciale di Ancona intorno alla metà del cinquecento.” Gli Ebrei e Venezia (secoli XIV– XVIII). Atti del Convegno internazionale organizzato dall’Istituto di storia della società e dello stato veneziano della Fondazione Giorgio Cini. Venezia, Isola di San Giorgio Maggiore, 5–10 giugno 1983. Ed. Gaetano Cozzi, Milano, 1987, pp.727–770. Bonfil, Roberto. Jewish Life in Renaissance Italy. Berkeley, 1994. Bonfil, Roberto. Tra due mondi. Cultura ebraica e cultura cristiana nel medio evo. Napoli, 1997.

130

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Bornstein-Makovetsky, Leah. “Structure, Organization and Spiritual Life of the Sephardi Communities in the Ottoman Empire from the Sixteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries.” The Sephardi Heritage, vol. 2, (Ed. Grendon), 1989, pp. 314– 348. Bornstein-Makovetsky, Leah. “Jewish Lay Leadership and Ottoman Authorities during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.” Ottoman and Turkish Jewry, Ed. Aron Rodrigue, Bloomington, 1992, pp. 88–121. Boyden, James M. The Courtier and the King. Ruy Gómez de Silva, Philip II. and the Court of Spain. Berkeley, 1995. Bradford, William. Correspondence of the Emperor Charles V and his Ambassadors at the Court of England and France. London, 1850. Brandes, Francesca. See Venice and Environs. Jewish Itineraries; Places, history and art. Brandi, Karl. Kaiser Karl V. Munich, 1937. Braude, Benjamin [and] Bernard Lewis. (eds.). Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire. New York, 1982. 2 vols. Braude, Benjamin. “Community and Conflict in the Economy of the Ottoman Balkans, 1500–1650.” Ph.D. Thesis. Harvard University, 1977. Braudel, Ferdinand. La Méditerranée et le monde méditerrainéen à l’époque de Philippe II. Paris, 1949. Braudel, Ferdinand. “Les emprunts de Charles-Quint sur le place d’Anvers.” Charles Quint et son temps: Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Paris, 1972. Braudel, Fernand. See Welt [Die] des Mittelmeeres. Bulletin des Archives d’Anvers. Burdelez, Ivana. “The Role of Ragusan Jews in the History of Mediterranean Countries.” Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Mediterranean World after 1492. Ed. Alisa Meyuhas Ginio, London, 1992. Burke, Peter. The Historical Anthropology of Early Modern Italy. Cambridge, 1987 (Oxford, 1986). Burke, Peter. The Italian Renaissance Culture. Oxford, 1987. Busbecq, Oghier (Augier) Ghisland de. Legationis Turcicae Epistolae Quatuor. 1589. Letter 3. Carande, Ramón. “Maria de Hungria en el Mercado de Amberes.” Karl der Kaiser und seine Zeit, Kölner Colloquium, 23-29 November, 1958. Cologne, 1960. Carande, Ramón. Carlos V y sus banqueros. La vida economica en Castilla (1516– 1556). Madrid, 1949–68, 3 vols. Carmoly, Eliakim. Don Josef duc de Naxos. Brussels, 1855. Carmoly, Eliakim. Don Josef Nassy duc de Naxos. 2nd. ed. Frankfurt, 1868. Carter, Francis W. Dubrovnik (Ragusa): A Classical City State. London, New York, 1972. Centuriae, Venice, 1552, 1557, 1560, Basel, 1556, Leyden, 1560, 1570. Charrière, Ernest. Négotiations de la France dans le Levant; ou, Correspondences, mémoires et actes diplomatiques des ambassadeurs de la France à Constantinople, envoyés ou residents a divers titres à Venise, Raguse, Malte et Jérusalem… (dans la Collection des Documents inédits sur l’Histoire de France). Paris, 1848–1860, 4 vols. Ser. I., Histoire politique. Chojnacka, Monica. “Women, Charity and Community in Early Modern Venice: The Casa Delle Zitadelle.” Renaissance Quarterly 51, 1 (Spring, 1998): 68–91.

Select Bibliography

131

Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of a Plural Society. Eds. Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis, New York, 1982, 2 vols. Cipolla, Carlo M. Money, Prices, and Civilization in the Mediterranean World. Fifth to Seventeenth Century. New York, 1967. Clot, André. Suleiman the Magnificent: The Man, His Life, His Epoch, London, 1992 (trans. of André Clot of Soliman le Magnifique, Paris, 1989). Cohen, Amnon. “On the Realities of the Millet System: Jerusalem in the 16th Century.” Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire. Cambridge, Mass., 1982, 2 vols. Cohen, Amnon. Jewish Life under Islam: Jerusalem in the Sixteenth Century. Cambridge, Mass., 1984. Cohen, Amnon [and] Bernard Lewis. Population and Revenue in the Towns of Palestine in the Sixteenth Century. Princeton, 1978. Cohen, Julie-Marthe. See Ghetto [The] in Venice. Ponentini, Levantini e Tedeschi 1516–1797. Cohen, Julie Marthe. See Joden onder de islam; een cultuur in historisch perspectief. Jews under Islam. A Culture in Historical Perspective. Cooperman, Bernard Dov. “Portuguese Conversos in Ancona: Jewish Political Activity in Early Modern Italy.” Iberia and Beyond: Hispanic Jews between Cultures. Proceedings of a Symposium to Mark the 500th Anniversary of the Expulsion of Spanish Jewry. Newark, 1998, pp. 297–352. Cracco Ruggini, Lelie. “Note sugli ebrei in Italia dal IV al XVI seccolo.” Rivista storica italiana 76 (1961). Culture and Identity in early Modern Europe (1500–1800). Essays in Honor of Natalie Zemon Davis. Eds. Barbara B. Diegenfeld and Carla Hesse. Ann Arbor, 1996. Danon, Abraham. “La communauté juive de Salonique au XVIème siècle.” Revue des études juives 41 (1900): 98–117. Davies, Natalie. “Boundaries and the Sense of Self.” See Reconstructing Individualism, ed. by Heller et al. D’Azevedo, J. Lucio. Historia de Christãos Novos Portogueses, Lisbon, 1921. Dernschwam, Hans. Tagebuch einer Reise nach Konstantinopel und Kleinasien (1553/55). Nach der Urschrift im Fugger Archiv herausgegeben und erläutert von Franz Babinger. München, Leipzig, 1923. D’Este, João Baptista. Consolação christão, e Luz parà o povo hebreo. 1616. De Figueiredo, Fidelino. Historia da literature clasica. I, Lisbon, 1922. De Mira, Matias Ferreira. Historia de medicina portuguesa. Lisbon, 1948. Diegenfeld, Barbara D. See Culture and Identity in Early Modern Europe (1500– 1800). Earle, Peter. “The Commercial Development of Ancona, 1479–1551.” The Economic History Review. Ser. 2, 22 (1969): 28–44. Ebreu [L’] au temps de la Renaissance. Ed. Ilana Zinguer. Leiden, 1992 (Brill Series of Jewish Studies, 4). Eder de Rover, Florence. “The Market for Spices in Antwerp, 1538–1544.” Revue belge de philology et d’histoire XVII (1938). Eimeric, Nicolau. Directorium inquisitorium. French trans., Le manuel des inquisiteurs. Ed. Luis Sala-Molins. Paris, The Hague, 1973 (Savoir historique, 8). Spanish trans. by Francisco Martin, Barcelona, 1996. Emmanuel, Israel S. Histoire des Israélites de Salonique. Paris, 1936.

132

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Endelman, Todd M, The Jews of Britain, 1656–2000. Berkeley, 2002 (Jewish Communities in the Modern World, 3). Epstein, Mark Alan. The Ottoman Jewish Communities and their Role in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries. Freiburg, 1980 (Islamische Untersuchungen, 56). Eskenazi, E. See Evreiski izvori. Farley-Hills, D. L. “Was Marlowe’s Malta ‘Malta’?” Malta University. Journal of the Faculty of Arts 3:1(l965). Fernand-Halphen, Alice. “Une grande dame juive de la Renaissance.” Revue de Paris. September, 1929. Ferrara [The] Bible. See Biblia de Ferrara and Biblia en lengua española. Franco,Moïse. Essai sur l’histoire des Israélites de l’Empire ottoman, depuis les origins jusqué à nos jours. Paris, 1897. Freidenberg (Frejdenberg), Maren M. Dubrovnik i Osmanskaia imperia. 2nd Ed. Moscow, 1989. Freidenberg (Frejdenberg), Maren M. Evrei na Balkanakh. Moscow, 1996. Croatian Ed. Zidovi na Balkanu na isteku srenjeg vijeka. Zagreb, 2000. Friedenberg, Daniel M. Jewish Medals From the Renaissance to the Fall of Napoleon (1503–1815). New York, 1970. Friedenwald, Harry. The Jews and Medicine. Baltimore, 1955. 2 vols. Frizzi, Antonio. Memorie per la storie di Ferrara. Ferrara, 1791–1809 (reprinted in Bologna, 1975). Fuhrer ab Heimendorf. Voyage en Palestine (n.p.n.d.). Galanté, Abraham. “Deux nouveaux documents sur Dona Gracia Nassy.” Revue des études juives 65 (19?1) Galanté, Avram (Abraham). Documents officiels turcs concernant les juifs de Turquie. Stamboul, 1931. Galanté, Avram (Abraham). Histoire des Juifs de Turquie. Istanbul, 1985, vol. 9. Galanté, Avram (Abraham). Hommes et choses juifs Portugais en Orient. Constantinople, 1927. Galanté, Avram (Abraham). Médicins juifs au service de la Turqie. Istanbul, 1938. Gallana, C. Il ghetto degli ebrei in Este. Este, 1974. Geanakoplos, Deur. Byzantine East and Latin West: Two Worlds in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Studies in Ecclesiastical Culture. Oxford, 1976 (1966). Gebhard, Carl. Die Schriften des Uriel da Costa. Amsterdam, 1922. Gelchich, József and Lajos Thallóczy. Diplomatarium relationum reipublicae Ragusanae cum regno Hungariae. Raguza és Magyarország összeköttetéseinek oklevéltára. Budapest, 1887. Gerber, Haim. “Jewish Tax-Farmers in the Ottoman Empire in the 16th and 17th Centuries.” Journal of Turkish Studies 10 (1986): 143–54. Geremek, Bronislaw. “Der Aussenseiter.” Der Mensch des Mittelalters. Ed. Jaques Le Goff. Frankfurt, 1989. Geuffroy, Antoine. Aulae Turcicae… Othomanique Imperii Descriptio… pars II, Solymanni XII & Selim XIII… Basiliae 1577. Geuffroy, Antoine. Briefve descriptio de la Court du Grand Turc. Et ung sommaire du règne des Ottomans Avec ung abrège de leur folles superstitions (n.p.n.d.). Ghetto [The] in Venice. Ponentini, Levantini e Tedeschi 1516–1797. Ed. by JulieMarthe Cohen. Gravenhage, 1990 [and] Zwolle, 1993. Göllner, Carl. Turcica: Die Europäischen Türkendrucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts. Bukures¸ti, 1961–78. 3 vols.

Select Bibliography

133

Ginsburger, Ernest, “Marie de Hongrie, Charles Quint, les veuves Mendes, et les neo-Chrétiens.” Revue des études Juives LXXXIX (1930). Goffe, Thomas. A Tragedy written by Thomas Goffe, Master of Arts, and Student of Christ-Church in Oxford, and Acted by the students of the same house. Oxford, 1974 (1968). Goffman, Daniel. “Ottoman Millets in the Early Seventeenth Century.” New Perspectives on Turkey 11(1994), 135–158. Goitein, Shelomoh Dov. See Letters of Medieval Jewish Traders. Goodblatt, Morris. S. Jewish Life in Turkey in the Sixteenth Century as Reflected in the Legal Writings of Samuel Medina. New York, 1952. Goris, Jan-Albert. Études sur marchandes méridionales (portugais, espagnols, italiens) à Anvers de 1488 à 1567. Louivain, 1925. Graetz, Heinrich. Geschichte der Juden, 3rd Ed. Leipzig, 1891. Grendler, Paul F. “The Destruction of Hebrew Books in Venice, 1568.” Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 45 (1978). Gross, H. “La famille juive des Hamon.” Revue des études juives 56 (1908). Grunebaum-Ballin, Paul. Joseph Nasi duc de Naxos. Paris and The Hague, 1968. Grunebaum-Ballin, Paul. “Un épisode de l’histoire des juifs d’Ancone.” Revue des études juives 28 (1984). Gundersheimer, Werner L. Ferrara: The Style of a Renaissance Despotism. Princeton, 1973. Ha-Cohen, Joseph [and the Anonymous Corrector]. Emek Habacha (Valley of Tears). Ed. and trans. H.S. May. The Hague, 1971. Habsburg, Otto, von. Charles V. London, 1970. Hacker, Joseph R. “The Jewish Communities of Salonika from the Fifteenth to the Sixteenth Century.” Ph.D. Thesis. Jerusalem, Hebrew University, 1978. Hacker, Joseph R. “The Surgun System and Jewish Society in the Ottoman Empire.” Ottoman and Turkish Jewry: Community and Leadership. Ed. Aron Rodrigue, Bloomington, 1992, pp. 1–65 (Indiana University, Turkish Studies, 12). Hananel, A., E. Eskenazi [and] N. Todorov. Evreiski izvori. Fontes hebraici ad res oeconomicas socialesque terrarum balcanicarum saeculo XVI. pertinentes. Sofia, 1958–60. 2 vols. Heller, Thomas et al. Reconstructing Individualism. Palo Alto, 1986. Henne, Alexandre. Histoire du règne de Charles Quint en Belgique. Brussels and Leipzig, 1859. Hering, Gunnar. “Die Juden von Salonika.” Südostforschungen 58 (1999): 23–39. Heyd, Uriel. “Moses Hamon, Chief Jewish Physician to Süleyman the Magnificent.” Oriens 16 (1963): 152–170. Heyd, Uriel. “Ottoman Documents on the Jews of Safed.” Ottoman Documents on Palestine. 1552–1615, Oxford, 1960. Heyd, Uriel, “Turkish Documents on the Building of Tiberias in the 16th century.” Defunot 10 (1966), 195–210 (in Hebrew). History of Jews in the Islamic Countries. Ed. S. Ettinger. Jerusalem. Vol I (1986): 73–118. History of the Jews in the Netherlands. Ed.J.C.H. Blom et al. Tulane, 2002. Holzknecht, Karl Julius. “Literary patronage in the Middle Ages.” Ph.D. Thesis, Philadelphia, 1923. Hunt, Edwin. The Medieval Super-Companies: A Study of the Peruzzi Company in Florence. Cambridge, 1994.

134

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Inalcik, Halil. Jews in the Ottoman Economy and Finances; 1450–1550. Princeton, 1989. Inalcik, Halil. The Ottoman Empire: Conquest, Organization and Economy. London, 1978 (Variorum Reprints). Inalcik, Halil. The Ottoman Empire: the Classical Age, 1300-1600. Princeton, 1973. Inalcik, Halil. “The Turkish Impact on the Development of Modern Europe.” The Ottoman State and its Place in World History. Ed. By Kemal.H. Karpat. Leiden, 1974. Inquisicion Española y mentalidad inquisitorial, Ed. A. Alcalà [et al]. Barcelona, 1984. Introduction a la Biblia de Ferrara: Actas del Simposio Internacional sobre la Biblia de Ferrara. Madrid, 1994. Israel, Jonathan I. European Jewry in the Age of Mercantilism, 1550–1750. Oxford, 1985. Islamic [The] World from classical to Modern Times. Essays in Honor of Bernard Lewis. Ed. C.E. Bosworth [et al]. Princeton, New York, 1989. Jaffé, Franz. Don Joseph Nassi, Herzog von Naxos. Wien, 1931 (Menorah Jahrbücher, 9). Jardine, Lisa. Worldly Goods. A New History of the Renaissance. New York, 2000. Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Mediterranean World after 1492. Ed. Alisa Meguhas Ginio. New York, 1992. Jews [The] in the Crown of Aragon. Regesta of the “Cartas Reales,” in the Archivio de la Corona de Aragón. Ed. Yom Tov Assis. Jerusalem, 1993–95. Part I: 1066– 1327. Pt. II: 1328–1493. Jirecˇek, K. Die Bedeutung von Ragusa in der Handelsgeschichte des Mittelalters. 1899. Joden onder de islam; een cultuur in historisch perspectief. Jews under Islam. A Culture in Historical Perspective. Ed. Julie-Marthe Cohen. Amsterdam, 1993. Jones-Davies, M.T. See Mariage au temps de la Renaissance. Kamen, Henry. “The Mediterranean and the Expulsion of Spanish Jews in 1492.” Past and Present 119 (1988), 30–55. Kaufmann, David. “Die Vertreibung der Marranen aus Venedig im Jahre 1550.” Jewish Quarterly Review 13 (1901): 32–52. Kaufmann, David. “Les Marranes de Pesaro.” Revue des études juives 16 (1991) Kayserling, Meyer. Die jüdischen Frauen in der Geschichte, Literatur und Kunst. New York, 1980 (Leipzig, 1879). Kayserling, Meyer. Geschichte der Juden im Portugal. Leipzig, 1867. Kellenbenz, Herman, “I Mendes, I Rodrigues d’Evora e i Ximenes nei lore rapporti commerciali con Venezia.” Gli Ebrei e Venezia (secoli XIV–XVIII). Atti del Convegno internazionale organizzato dall’Istituto di storia della società e dello stato veneziano della Fondazione Giorgio Cini. Venezia, Isola di San Giorgio Maggiore, 5–10 giugno 1983. Ed. Gaetano Cozzi, Milano, 1987. Kisch, Guido, “The Yellow Badge in History.” Historia Judaica XIX (1959). Klausner, Joseph. Don Joseph Nasi. Jaffa, 1914 (in Hebrew). Kohn, S. “Österreich–ungarischen Gesandschaftsberichte über Don Joseph Nasi.” Monatschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 28 (1879). Körbler, Djuro. “Zˇ ivot i rad humanista Didaka Potugalca, napose u Dubrovniku.” Rad 216 (1917): 1–169. Krekic´, Barisˇa. Dubrovnik: A Mediterranean Society, 1300–1600 (Variorum Collected Studies, 581), 1997.

Select Bibliography

135

Krekic´, Barisˇa. Dubrovnik in the 14th and 15th Centuries: A City Between East and West. Norman, 1972. Krekic´, Barisˇa. “Gli ebrei (sic) a Ragusa nel Cinquecento.” Gli Ebrei e Venezia (secoli XIV–XVIII). Atti del Convegno internazionale organizzato dall’Istituto di storia della societá e dello stato veneziano della Fondazione Giorgio Cini. Venezia, Isola di San Giorgio Maggiore, 5–10 giugno 1983. Ed. Gaetano Cozzi, Milano, 1987. Lamdan, R. “The Boycott of Ancona: Viewing the Other Side of the Coin.” From Lisbon to Salonika and Constantinople. 2nd Ed. Ankori, Tel Aviv, 1988 (in Hebrew). Lane, Frederic. The Mediterranean Spice Trade: Further Evidence of Its Revival in the Sixteenth Century. Batimore, 1996. Le Goff, Jacques. See Geremek, Bronislaw. Le Goff, Jacques. Kaufleute und Bankiers im Mittelalter. Frankfurt, 1993. Le Goff, Jacques. Marchands et Banquiers du Moyen Âge. Paris, 1956 (“Que SaisJe,” 699). Lemm, Robert. Die Spanische Inquisition: Geschichte und Legende. Trans. from Dutch by Walter Kumpman, Munich, 1966. Lemos, Maximiano. Amato Lusitano: A sua vida e a sua obra. Porto, 1907. Leoni, Aron Di Leone. “Gli ebrei sefarditi a Ferrara da Ercole I a Ercole II: Nuove richerche e Interpretazioni.” La rassegna mensile di Israel 52 (1987): 407–446. Leoni, Aron Di Leone “New Information on Jom Tob Atias (alias Alvaro Vargas), Co-Publisher of the Ferrara Bible.” Sefarad 57. Fasc. 2 (1997): 271–276. Lettere di Principi. Ed. Girolamo Ruscelli, Venice, 1581, Vol. 1. Letters of Medieval Jewish Traders. Trans. and ed. S. D. Goitein, Princeton, 1973. Levinson, Pnina Nave. Was wurde aus Saras Töchtern? Frauen im Judentum. Gutersloh, 1989. Levy, Avigdor. The Sephardim in the Ottoman Empire. Princeton, 1992. Levy, M. A. Don Joseph Nasi, Herzog von Naxos. Breslau, 1859. Lewis, Bernard. The Jews of Islam. Princeton, 1984. Lewis, Bernard. Studies in Classical and Ottoman Islam (7th –16th Centuries. London, 1976 (Variorum Reprints). Lindo, Elias Hiam. History of the Jews in Spain. London, 1848. Lindo, Elias Hiam. The History of the Jews in Spain and Portugal. New York, 1970. “Lingua e caratteri ebraici si stampo in Ferrara.” Memorie per la storia di Ferrara. vol. 4, Bologna, 1847–1858. First edition: 1791–1809. There exists a 1975 reprint of the Bologna edition. Logan, Oliver. Culture and Society in Venice 1470–1790. London, 1972. Lopes, J. M. Les Portugais à Anvers au XVe siècle. Antwerp. 1895. Lybyer, Albert Howe. The Government of the Ottoman Empire in the Time of Suleiman the Magnificent, Cambridge, Mass., 1913 (Harvard Historical Studies 18). Lytle, E.G. F. [and] S. Orgel. See Patronage in the Renaissance. Maghalès Godinho, V. L’Empire portugais au XVe et XVIe siècles. Paris, 1969. Mansel, Philip. Constantinople: City of the World’s Desire, 1453–1924. New York, 1998 (1996). Mantran, Robert. La vie quotidienne à Constantinople au temps de Soliman le Magnifique et des successeurs. Paris, 1965. Mantran, Robert. “Règlements fiscaux ottomans: la police des marchés de Stamboul au début du XVIe siècle.” Cahiers de Tunisie 14 (1965): 238–60.

136

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Mariage au temps de la Renaissance. Ed. By M.T. Jones-Davies. Paris, 1973. Marini, Lino. Lo stato Estense. Torino, 1987. Markrich, W. L. “The ‘Viaje de Turquia’: A Study of its Sources, Authorship and Historical background.” Ph.D. Thesis. University of California, Berkeley, 1955 (microfilm copy). Martz, Linda. “Pure Blood Statutes in Sixteenth-Century Toledo: Implementation as Opposed to Adaptation.” Sefarad 54, 1 (1994): 83–107. Mediterranean [The] and the Jews: Finance and International Trade, 16th–18th Centuries. Eds. Ariel Toaff and Simon Schwarzfuchs. Leiden, 1980. Melzi, Robert C. “Ebrei e Marrani in Italia in la Commedia Rinascimentale.” Sefarad 55, 2 (1995): 314–25. Metzger, Thérèse [and] Mendel Metzger. Jewish life in the Middle Ages. Illuminated Hebrew manuscrips of the Thirteenth to the Sixteenth Centuries. Hong Kong, 1982. Mi-Lisbon le-Saloniki. From Lisbon to Saloniki. Ed. Zvi Ankori. Tel Aviv, 1988 (in Hebrew). Milano, Attilio. Storia degli Ebrei in Italia. Torino, 1963. Miozzi, Eugenio. Venezia nel secoli. Venice, 1957–69. 4 vols (Vol. 3 only). Mira, Matias Ferreira de. Historia da medicina portuguesa. Lisbon, 1948. Mitchell, Bonner. Italian Civic Pageantry in the High Renaissance: A Descriptive Bibliography… Florence, 1979. Moffet, Thomas. The Silkwormes and their Flies. 1599, Facsim. Ed. Victor Houliston, 1899 (Renaissance English Text Society). Monter, William. The Spanish Inquisition from the Basque Lands to Sicily. Cambridge, 1990. Münch, Ernst Hermann Joseph. Über der Türkenkriege, namentlich des sechzenten Jahrhunderts. Zürich, 1821. Muzzarelli, Maria Guiseppina. “Ferrara, ovvero un porto placido e sicuro tra XV e XVI secolo.” Vita e cultura Ebraica nello stato Estense. Atti del I convegno internazionale di studi Nonantolana 16–17 maggio 1991. Ed. Euride Fregni and Mauro Perani, Bologna, 1992. Muzzarelli, Maria Giuseppina. “Beatrice de Luna, vedove Mendes, alias Donna Gracia Nasi, un ‘ebrea’ influente (1510–1569ca).” Rinascimento al femminile. Ed. O. Niccoli. Roma, Bari, 1991, pp. 83–116. Narín Padilla, Encarnacion, “La villa de Illueca, del Señorio de los Martinez de Luna, en siglo XV: sus judiós.” Sefarad 56, 2 (1996): 333–375. Nehama, Joseph. Histoire des Israélites de Salonique, III. L’Age d’Or du Sefardisme Salonicien (1536–1593). Prem. Fasc., Salonique, 1936. Nehama, Joseph. “Le médicines juifs à Salonique.” Revue d’histoire de la médicine hébraique VIII (1931). Netanyahu, Benzion. Don Isaac Abravanel, Statesman and Philosopher. 3rd Ed. Philadelphia, 1972. Netanyahu, Benzion. The Marranos of Spain from the Late XIVth to the Early XVIth Century. New York, 1966. Nicolay, Nicholas de. Discours et histoire véritable des navigations, pérégrinations et voyages faicts en la Turquie. Antwerp, 1586. Nicolay, Nicholas de. Quatre premiers livres des navigations et pérégrinations orientales. Antwerp, 1578. Also Lyons, 1567, Venice, 1580. Novak, G. Zˇ idovi na Splitu. Split, 1920.

Select Bibliography

137

Núñez de Reinoso, Alonso. Historia de los Amores de Clareo y Florisea y de los trabajos de Isea. Venezia, 1552. Nuova luce sui marrani di Ancona. Studi sull’ ebraismo in memoria di Cecil Roth. Ed. Ariel Toaff. Roma, 1974. Orfali, Moses. “Newly Published Documents regarding Commercial Activities Between Doña Gracia Mendes and the Ragusan Republic” (unpublished paper). Ottoman and Turkish Jewry. Community and Leadership. Ed. A. Rodrigue. Bloomington, 1992. Pamuk, Sevker. A Monetary History of the Ottoman Empire. Cambridge, 2000. Parker, Geoffrey. The Army of Flanders and the Spanish Road 1567–1569. The Dutch Revolt. Cambridge, 1972. Parker, Geoffrey. The Army of Flanders and the Spanish Road, 1567–1659: The Logistics of Spanish Victory and Defeat in the Low Countries’ Wars. Rev. Ed. Cambridge, 1990. Parker, Geoffrey. The Grand Strategy of Philip II. New Haven, London, 1998. Patronage in the Renaissance. Ed. E.G.F. Lytle and S. Orgel. Princeton, 1981. Pedani, Fabris Maria Pia. In nome del Gran Signore: inviati ottomani a Venezia dalla caduta di Constantinopoli alla Guerra di Candia. Venezia, 1994. Perrondo, Carlos Carrete, and Yolanda Moreno Koch. “Movimiento Mesianico hispano-portugues: Badajoz 1552.” Sefarad 52 (1992). Pesaro, Abramo. Memorie storiche della communità israelitica di Ferrara (with an Appendix). Ferrara, 1978 (reprinted in 1967, from the 1880 Ferrara ed.). Piñel (Pinhel), Duarte. Latinae grammaticae compendium tractatus de calendis. Lisbon, 1543. Pohl, Hans. “Die Portugiesen in Antwerpen (1560–1648). Zur Geschichte einer Minderheit.” Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial-und Wirtschaftsgeschichte. Suppl. 63 (1977). Preto, Paolo. “La Guerra segreta, spionaggio, sabotaggi, attentati.” Venezia e la difesa del Levante: Da Lepanto a Candia 1570–1670. Ed. Maddalena Redolfi. Venezia, 1986. Prinz, Joachim. The Secret Jews, New York, 1973. Processi del S.Ufficio di Venezia contro ebrei e guidaizzanti (1548–1560). Ed. Pier Cesare Ioly Zorrattini, Firenze, 1980. Pullan, Brian. The Jews of Europe and the Inquisition of Venice, 1560–1670. Oxford, 1983. Pullan, Brian. Rich and Poor in Renaissance Venice: The Social Institutions of a Catholic State to 1620. Oxford and Cambridge, Mass., 1971. Pullan, Brian. “A Ship with Two Rudders: Righetto Marrano and the Inquisition in Venice.” The Historical Journal 20 (1977). Ravid, Benjamin. “The Legal Status of Jewish Merchants of Venice, 1541–1638.” Journal of Economic History 35 (1975). Ravid, Benjamin. “Money, Love and Politics in Sixteenth-Century Venice: The Perpetual Banishment and Subsequent Pardon of Joseph Nasi.” Italia Judaica (Atti de I Convegno Internazionale Bari, 18–22 Maggio 1981.) Rome, 1983. Ravid, Benjamin. “A tale of Three Cities and their Raison d’Etat: Ancona, Venice, Livorno, and the Competition for Jewish Merchants in the Sixteenth Century.” Mediterranean Historical Review 6 (1991): 138–62. Régné, Véase, J. “History of the Jews in Aragon.” Hispania Judaica 1 (1978). Relazioni degli ambasciatori veneti al Senato. Ed. Eugenio Albieri. Vol. I. Firenze, 1839.

138

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Renaissance Medals from the Samuel H. Kress Collection at the National Gallery of Art. Coll. By G.F. Hill. Rev. and Enl. Ed. Graham Pollard. London, 1967. Reznik, Jacob. Le Duc Joseph de Nasi: Contribution à l’Histoire Juive du XVIe siècle. Paris, 1936. Rivkin, Ellis. “Review of Cecil Roth’s The House of Nasi, Duke of Naxos.” Jewish Quarterly Review 40 (1949–50): 205–207. Rodrigue, Aron. See Ottoman and Turkish Jewry. Community and Leadership. Rodrigue, Aron. See Sephardi Jewry. Romanin, Samuele. Storia documentata di Venezia. Venice, 1857. 10. Vols. Vol. 4. Rose, Constance Hubbard. “Information on the Life of Joseph Nasi, Duke of Naxos: The Venetian Phase.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 60 (1969–1970): 342–344. Rose, Constance Hubbard. The Life and Work of Alonso Núñez de Reinoso: The Lament of a Sixteenth-Century Exile. Rutherford, 1971. Rosenberg, H. (Rabbi) “Alcuni documenti riguardanti i Marrani Porthogesi in Ancona.” Città di Castello. 1935, pp. 15–20. Rosenblatt, Norman. “Joseph Nasi. Court Favorite of Selim II.” Ph.D. Thesis. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1957. Roth, Cecil. Venice. Philadelphia, 1930. Roth, Cecil. “The Marrano Press at Ferrara, 1552–1555.” The Modern Language Review 38 (1943). Roth, Cecil. The House of Nasi, Duke of Naxos. Philadelphia, 1947. Roth, Cecil. Doña Gracia of the House of Nasi. Philadelphia, 1948. Roth, Cecil. A History of the Marranos. New York, 1974. Roth, Cecil. The Spanish Inquisition. New York, 1996 Round, Nicholas Grenville. The Greatest Man Uncrowned. A Study of the Fall of don Álvaro de Luna. London, 1986. Rozen, Minna. “Strangers in a Strange Land: The Extraterritorial Status of Jews in Italy and in the Ottoman Empire in the Sixteenth to the Eighteenth centuries.” Ottoman and Turkish Jewry. Ed. Aron Rodrigue, Bloomington, 1992 (Indiana University, Turkish Studies, 12). Sandri, Maria Gracia [and] Paolo Alazraki. Arte e vita ebraica a Venezia 1516– 1797. Firenze, 1971. Sanuto, Marino. Diarii. 58 volumes, 1872–1902. Saperstein, Marc. “Martyrs, Merchants and Rabbis: Jewish Communal Conflict as Reflected in the Responsa on the Boycott of Ancona.” Jewish Social Studies 43 (1981): 215–28. Schechter, Solomon. “Safed in the Sixteenth Century. A City of Legists and Mystics.” Studies in Judaism 1938 (Reprint of 2nd Ser. Philadelphia, 1908). Schmidt, Ephraim. Geschiedenis van de Joden in Antwerpen. Antwerp, 1963. Scholliers, E. De levensstandaard in de XVe en XVIe eeuw te Antwerpen; loonarbeid en honger. Antwerpen, 1960. Schweigger, Salomon. Ein newe Reyssbeschreibung auss Teutschland Nach Constantinopel und Jerusalem. Graz, 1964 (first published in 1604). Segre, Renate. “Nuovi documenti sui marrani d’Ancona (1555–1559).” Minerva 9 (1955): 130–233. Sephardi Jewry. A History of the Judeo-Spanish Community in 14th–20th Centuries. Eds. Esther Benbassa and Aron Rodrigue. Berkeley, 2000. Sephardi Jews in the Ottoman Empire. Ed. Esther Juhasz, Jerusalem, 1989 (catalogue of the eponymic exhibit).

Select Bibliography

139

Shapiro, James. Shakespeare and the Jews. New York, 1996. Shaw, Stanford. History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. New York, 1976–77. Shaw, Stanford. The Jews of the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic. New York, 1991. Shaw, William Arthur. History of Currency: 1252–1894. New York, 1896. Shmuelevitz, Aryeh. The Jews of the Ottoman Empire in the Late Fifteenth and the Sixteenth Centuries: Administrative, Economic, Legal and Social Relations as Reflected in the Responsa. Leiden, 1984. Sicker, Martin. The Political Culture of Judaism. Westport, Conn., 2001. Sˇ ik, Jaroslav. Die jüdischen Ärzte in Jugoslawien, Zagreb, 1931. Simonson, Shlomo. “Marranos in Ancona, under Papal Protection.” Michael 9 (1985), pp. 233–267. Sˇ krivanic´, Gavro. Römische Strassen in Bosnien und der Hercegovina. Wien, 1893. Stavrianos, Leften Stavros. The Balkans Since 1453. Hinsdale, Ill., 1958. Steinbach, Marion. Juden in Venedig; 1516–1797. Zwischen Isolation und Integration. Frankfurt, 1992 (Europäische Hochschulschriften. Reihe IX, Bd.2). Stengers, Jean. Les Juifs dans les Pays-Bas au Moyen Age. Bruxelles, 1950. Strada, Famiano. … Excerpta ex decade prima et secunda Historia de bello belgico… Oxoniae, 1662. Stulli, Bernard. Zˇidovi u Dubrovniku. Dubrovnik, 1987. Suleymanname: The illustrated History of Suleyman the Magnificent. Ed. Esin Stil. Washigton, 1986. Tadic´, Jorjo. “Didak Pir.” Zbornik, I, pp. 239–253. Tadic´, Jorjo. Jevreji u Dubrovniku do polovine XVII stoljeca. Sarajevo, 1937. Tadic´, Jorjo, “Le Port de Raguse et sa flotte au XVIe siècle. Le navire et l’économie…” Travaux de Second Colloque International d’Histoire Maritime. Paris (1959): 1–21. Teatro [Il] italiano del Rinascimento. Milano, 1980. Toaff, Ariel. See Mediterranean [The] and the Jews. Toaff, Ariel. See Nuova luce sui marrani did Ancona. Studi sull’ ebraismo in memoria di Cecil Roth. Tobi, Joseph. See Toldot ha-Yehudim be artsot ha-Islam. Jews in Islam. Todorov, N. See Hannanel, A. Toldot ha-Yehudim be artsot ha-Islam. Jews in Islam. Eds. Joseph Tobi and Shemuel Ettinger [et al]. Toros, Taha. Turco-Polish Relations in History. Istanbul, 1983. Turba, Gustav. See Venezianische Depeschen vom Kaiserhof (1540–1576). Ullmann, Salomon. Histoire des Juifs en Belgique jusq’au XVIIIe siècle: notes et documents, Anvers, n.d., 38–39. Urban Life in the Renaissance. Eds. Susan Zimmerman and Ronald F.E. Weissmann. Newark, 1988. Urosˇevic´, A. “Putovanje Vlatka Kosˇaric´a iz Carigrad u Dubrovnik u 16 veku.” Glasnik Geografsˇkog Drustva. v. 22, Belgrade, 1936. Usque, Abraham. See Biblia en lengua española. Usque, Samuel. Consolaçam às tribulaçions de Israel. Rev. with a preface by Mendes dos Remedios. Coimbra, 1906–8. 3 vols. Usque, Samuel. Consolation for the Tribulations of Israel. Trans. Martin A. Cohen. Philadelphia, 1965.

140

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Van der Wee, Herman. The Growth of the Antwerp Market and the European Economy (XIX–XVI Centuries). London, 1963. 3 vols. Vaughan, Dorothy. Europe and the Turk: A Pattern of Alliances 1350–1700. Liverpool, 1954. Venezianische Depeschen vom Kaiserhof (1540–1576). Dispacci di Germania. Wien, 1889–95. Vol. 1–4. Ed. Gustav Turba. Venice and Environs. Jewish Itineraries; Places, History and Art. Ed. Francesca Brandes. Trans. from the Italian by Gus Barker. New York, 1997. Viaje de Turquia (La odisea de Pedro de Urdemalas). Ed. Fernando Garcia Salinero, Madrid, 1980. Vita e Cultura Ebraica nello stato Estense: Atti del I convegno internazionale di studi Nonantolana. 16–17 maggio, 1991. Welt [Die] des Mittelmeeres. Zur Geschichte und Geographie kultureller Lebensformen. Ed. Fernand Braudel [et al]. Franfurt, 1987. Wettinger, Godfrey. The Jews of Malta in the Late Middle Ages. Malta, 1985 (Maltese Studies, 6). Wierner, Merry E. Women and Gender in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge, 1993. Wills, Gary. Venice: Lion City. The Religion of Empire. New York, 2001. Wolf, Lucien. Essays in Jewish History. London, 1934. Xanthoudides, Stephanos Antoniou. “Venetian Crete.” Crete, Past and Present. Ed. Michael Nicholas Elliadi, London, 1933. Yerushalmi, Yosef Haym. From Spanish Court to Italian Ghetto: Isaac Cardoso, a Study in Seventeenth-Century Marranism and Jewish Apologetics. 2nd Ed. New York, 1971, 3 vols. Yerushalmi, Yosef Haym. “A Jewish Classic in the Portugese Language.” Introduction to Samuel Usque’s Consolaçam as Tribulaçoes de Israel. Reprint ed. Lisbon, 1989. Zimmerman, Susan [and] Ronald F.E. Weissmann. See Urban Life in the Renaissance. Zinguer, Ilana. See L’Ebreu au temps de la Renaissance. Zorrattini, Pier Cesare Ioly. See Processi del S.Ufficio di Venezi contro ebrei e guidaizzanti (1548–1560).

PICTURE CREDITS

2. J. P. Getty Museum. 3–4. Szépmûvészeti Múzeum (Museum of Fine Arts), Budapest. 5. Tadic´, J. Jevreji u Dubrovniku do polovine XVII stoljeca. Sarajevo, 1937. 6. Biblia en lengua española… Amsterdam, 1629/30? 7. Skirball Museum (Item 36.108). 8. Freidenberg, Daniel M. Jewish Medals from the Renaissance to the Fall of Napoleon (1503–1815). New York, 1970. 9–10. Usque, Samuel. Consolation for the Tribulations of Israel. Trans. Martin A. Cohen. Philadelphia, 1965. 11. Metzger, T and M. Metzger. Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, Hong Kong, 1982. 12. Picture postcard, published in Dubrovnik. 13. Dubrovnik Archives. 14. Lewis, B. Jews of Islam. Princeton University Press, 1984. 15. Cohen, J-M. (ed.) Jews under Islam. Amsterdam, 1993. 16–17. Nicolay, Nicholas de. Quatre premiers livres des navigations et pérégrinations orientales. Antwerp, 1578. (also Lyons, 1567, Venice, 1580).

INDEX OF PLACES

Adrianople (Edirne) 80, 84, 102, 113 Aix-la-Chapelle (Aachen) 33, 36 Aleppo 84, 85 Alexandria 84, 85, 95 Amsterdam 17, 57 (n. 148), 76 Ancona 24, 53, 62, 67, 71, 76, 88, 93–103, 105 Antioch 84 Aragon 1, 5, 9, 12 Armenia 85 Augsburg 36, 92 Austria 76 Avignon 7 Avlona 102 Badajoz 115 Barcelona 3 Bontwerkersplaats 16 Brabant 15, 33 Bruges 15 Brussels 18, 36 Buda 85 Bursa 76, 77, 85, 102, 108 Cairo 84, 85 Campo della Mostra 99 Castello Branco 62 Castile 12, 34 (n.80) Catalonia 12 Cavtat (Ragusa Vecchia) 70 Chimay 33 Coimbra 25, 58 Cologne 92 Constantinople 38, 42, 44, 45, 49, 53, 64, 67, 72, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 92, 93, 94, 95, 98, 102, 103, 104, 105, 108, 109, 110, 113, 114, 116, 125–7 Core 107 Cracow 105 (n. 276)

Crete 81, 110 Cycladic Islands 111 Cyprus 67, 73, 74, 79, 80, 111, 112, 114, 118 (n. 319) Este territories 55 Evora 12, 25 Faenza 46 Ferrara 29, 41, 44, 45, 46, 49, 51, 53, 54–65, 71, 72, 94, 103, 105 Flanders 31 Florence 25, 38, 42, 45, 48, 62, 76, 94, 95, 122 Füssen 34 Galata 91, 114 Genoa 25 Ghent 15 Ghetto Vecchio (Venice) 37, 53 Golden Horn 88 (n. 230) Granada 7, 11 Guadalajara 61 Hercegnovi 105 (n. 276) Huy 18 Izmir 80, 108 Jerusalem 78, 84, 86, 87, 92 (n. 237), 116 Kaffa 85 Lamego 25 Lepanto 112 Liège 18 Lisbon 7, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 49, 58, 59 (n. 150), 62, 76, 79 Loijarska Street (Zˇudioska ulica), Ragusa 69

Index of Places

Louvain 33 Lucca 25 Lvov 110 Lyons 29, 35, 36, 40, 43, 44, 45, 95, 107 Madeira 26 Madrid 6 Majorca 6 Malta 49 (n. 124), 67, 85, 98 Mantua 41 Milan 31, 36, 41 Modena 57 Mohács 79 (n. 208) Morocco 7 Moscow 77 Naples 59, 60 Naxos 103 Novi Pazar 126 Novo Brdo 126 Old Exchange (Antwerp) 16 (n. 33) Onze Lieve Vrouwekathedral (Our Lady’s Cathedral), Antwerp 15 Oporto 19, 25 Oran 86 (n. 222) Palestine 86 (n. 226) Palma 6 Papal State 96, 101, 112 Paros 103 Pavia 31 Pera (Beyoglu, Turkey) 88 Pesaro 62, 76, 93–103 Plevlja 126 Plocˇe 67 Prisˇtina 126 Provence 67 Ragusa (Dubrovnik) 38 (n. 93), 42, 62, 65, 66–74, 76, 87, 95, 103, 105, 125–7 Ravenna 46, 47 Regensburg 35, 92 (n. 237) Rhodes 79

143

Rialto (Venice) 40, 51 Rome 46, 48, 62, 96, 98 Safed 33 (n. 79), 79, 80, 101 (n. 268), 106–8, 115, 116, 117, 118 (n. 319) Salamanca 49, 50, 62 Salonika 12, 24, 67, 76, 78, 79, 80, 84, 85, 86 (n. 223), 87, 89, 90, 94, 101, 102, 105, 108, 115 San Marco (Venice) 45 Santerem 62 Santorini 103 Scuola Grand Tedesca (Venice) 37 Senigallia 26 Serenissima 42, 112 Seville 6, 7, 18, 60, 76 Siena 64 Signoria 31 Skopje 67 Spalato (Split) 67 Syria 84 Temple Mount (Jerusalem) 86 Thoma 25 Tiberias 106, 107 Toledo 6, 8, 10 Tricalá 80 (n. 209) Tunisia 113 Urbino 98 Valladolid 6, 85 (n. 221) Valona 72, 76, 84 Venice 24, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36–53, 55, 61, 62, 65, 67, 69, 72, 74, 76, 78, 85, 90, 91, 94, 95, 97, 101, 102, 103, 111, 112, 113, 114, 121, 122 Viana 50 Vidin 99 Vleeshuis (Butchers’ Hall), Antwerp 16 Volos 72 Zara 85 Zecca 43, 45

INDEX OF PERSONS

Abarbanello, Isacco (see Abravanel, Isaac) 60 Abenaes, Solomon (Ibn Yaish) 107 Aboab, Immanuel 60, 116 Abraham the Surgeon 105 (n. 275) Abravanel (Avravanel) family 7, 59, 60, 96 (n. 254) Abravanel, Isaac 60, 115 Affaittati, Jean Charles 22 (n. 50) Affaittati (merchant bankers) 22, 35 Agfarin, Abner 69, 70 Alfonso I, King of Aragon 54 Ali Pasha 107 Almosnino, Rabbi Moshe 78, 85, 108 Aragon, Don Fernando de 32 Ashkenasi, Solomon 113 Atias, Yom Tob 56, 57 (n. 145) Bassano, Luigi 85 Bassola, Rabbi Moses 100, 101 (n. 268) Bayezid II, Turkish emperor 81, 82, 83, 88, 106 Beccadelli, Antonio 44 ben Ardut, Joseph 107 ben Joseph Tawus, Rabbi Jacob 109 Benveniste, Abraham 3, 30 Benveniste, Don Semer 55 Benveniste (Bemvenist) family 3, 19, 35 (n. 88) Bilia, Rabbi Solomon 100 Blomberg, Barbara von 92 (n. 237) Bomberg, Daniel 24 Bonelli, Michele 90 Bozmediano, Juan de 23 Calado, Aleandro 47 Calaorra, Giovanni di 107 Capsali, Grand Rabbi Moise 81 Caro, (Karo) Rabbi Joseph 30 (n. 68), 102

Cervantes Saavedra, Miguel de 10 Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor 9, 11, 17, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 40, 44, 60, 62, 72 (n. 188), 92 (n. 237) Charles, Jean 29 Chatonay, Spanish ambassador 114 Clement VII, Pope 94 Codignac, Michel de 88 Cohen, Aman 99 (n. 261) Cohen, Azim 99 (n. 261) Contartini, Andrea 45 Contarini, Francesco 31 Corvinus, Matthias, King of Hungary 66–67 (n. 172) Costa, Odoardo da 50, 52 (n. 133) Costa, Tristan (Tristão) 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 Cromwell, Oliver 24 (n. 53), 27, 38, 39 Deborah (Biblical figure) 59 De la Cruz, Geronimo 86 (n. 222) Degli Albizzi, Luca 42 della Rovere, Marco Guidobaldo II, Duke 26, 98 di Segure, Aaron Dernschwam, Hans ix, 83–85, 88, 91–3, Dioscorides, Pedanius 63 Drzˇic´, Marin 38 (n. 93), 67 Dürer, Albrecht 18 Duke of Brabant 19 Duran, Simon ben Zemah 89 (n. 233), 90 Elizabeth I, Queen of England 97 Emanuel (see Manuel, King of Portugal) Enriquez, Agostino 30, 46, 48, 49, 51, 65, 104 Ergas, Isaac 69, 70

Index of Persons

145

Espiña, Alonso de 7–8 Este, Ercole I Duke of 54 Este, Ercole II Duke of 44, 53, 55, 56, 64, 65, 103 Este, João Baptista d’ 58 (n. 149) Esther (Biblical figure) 59, 110

Hoschstetters (merchant bankers) 16 Husee, John 27

Fallongonio, Giovanni Vincenzo 98 Faraj, Rabbi Juda 99–100 Farnese, Allessandro (see Paul III, Pope) Farrari, Gabriel Giolito de 61 Fasi, David 81 (n. 212) Fernandez, Bianca 21 Fernandez, Thomas 55 (n. 142) Ficino, Marsilio 38 Francis I, King of France 44 Fregoso, Emmanuel 51 Fuggers (merchant bankers) ix, 16, 18, 21, 22, 25, 34, 91, 106 (n. 277), 123

John III, King of Portugal 88 Juan de Austris (aka as Don John, or John of Austria) Juana the Mad 23 Judeus physicus (magister) 67 Judith (Biblical figure) 59 Julius III, Pope 53, 57 (n. 148), 63, 96–7

Gattimara, Mercurio de 23 Gaztelù, Dominique de 47, 48 Gerlach, Stephan 109–110 Geuffroy, Antoine de 106 (n. 277) Ghislieri, Cardinal 104, 105 Goffe, Thomas 83 Gomes, Duarte (Odoardo) 37 (n. 91), 42 (n. 105), 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 99 (n. 260), 104 Gomes, Gonsalvo 49 Gomes, Thomaso 49 Grapheus, Jan 17 Graziani, Rafaele 96 Gritti family 50 Gualterotti, Filippo 34 (n. 80) Gutierrez, Alonso 23 Habibi, Isaac (see Costa, Odoardo) Habsburg, House of 14, 32, 113 Hamon, Isaac 109 (n. 288) Hamon, Moses 44, 45, 83 (n. 215), 91, 109 Heimendorf, Fuhrer ab 106 Henri II, King of France 44 Henri III, King of France 18 Herwart, Christopher 34 (n. 80)

ibn Lev, Rabbi Joseph 100, 108 Innocent IV, Pope 5 Isabella I, Queen of Castile 7, 19

Kapsali, Rabbi Elyah 81 Kuripesˇic´, Benedictus 58 (n. 149) Laguna, Andreas 93 Lala Mustafa Pasha 110 (n. 295) Lancastre, Don Alphonso de 88 Lando, Ortensio 61, 62 Lapusneanu, Alexandru 110 Laya, Doctor 115 Lenora 60 Leoncini, Paolo 45 Lopes, Gaspar 29 Lucan 58 Luna, Don Alvaro de 2, 6 Lusitanus, Amatus 8, 24, 62, 63, 94 (n. 244), 98, 105, 116 Manuel I, King of Portugal (aka as Emanuel or Manoel) 7, 19 Manuel, Núño 32 Margrave of Antwerp 31 Marlowe, Christopher 39 (n. 95), 49 (n. 124), 111 Mary, Queen of Hungary 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 Maximilian, Prince (same as Maximilian II, Holy Roman emperor) Maximilian II, Holy Roman emperor 33, 111, 113, 118 (n. 319) Medici, Cosimo, Duke (“Cosimo the Great”) 60, 63

146

The Long Journey of Gracia Mendes

Medina, Samuel de 108 Mehmed II (Turkish sultan) 80, 81 Mendes banks 22, 34 Mendes, Brianda (aka as Brianda Benveniste) 15, 22, 26, 28, 29, 30, 34, 36, 40, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 103 Mendes, Diogo 4, 15, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 46, 53, 63, 91, 123 Mendes family 4, 7, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 34, 35, 40, 42, 48, 53, 55, 60, 61, 62, 69, 70, 73, 87, 90–93, 98, 103, 105, 106, 108, 110, 115, 117, 122, 123, 124 Mendes, Francisco 1, 4, 21, 25, 26, 27, 91, 92 Mendes, Gracia (aka as Beatrix de Luna, or Gracia Nasi, or Gracia Benveniste) ix, 12, 13, 14, 18, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 (n. 90), 40, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 (n. 133), 53, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 78 (n. 204), 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93–94, 98–100, 101, 102–3, 104, 106, 107, 110, 115, 116, 117–8, 125 Mendes, Gracia La Chica 28, 29, 30, 32, 43, 46, 47, 52, 64, 65, 88, 89–90, 103–4 Mendes, Reyna (aka as Reyna Nasi)1, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 43, 44, 45, 47 (n. 118), 53, 55, 66, 87, 88, 90, 91, 109 Mendes, Rui 20–1 Mendez, Fernando 48 Miques, Bernardo (Samuel) 33, 47, 53, 61, 64, 65, 103–4 Modena, Bathsheba 61 Modena, Pomona 61 Moffet, Thomas 107 (n. 283) Mehmed II the Conqueror Molino, Nicolas de 45 Molino family 51 Monte, Jacoba de 63 Morvilliers, de (French envoy) 39, 45 Mosso, Yacobo 98, 99 Murad II, Turkish sultan 78

Murad III, Turkish sultan 110 (n. 295), 112, 113 118 (n. 319) Mus, Abraham 99 (n. 261) Nasi family 47 (n. 118), 60, 73, 90–93, 102, 103, 105, 106, 108, 110, 117 Nasi (Nassi), Joseph (aka as João Miykas, Zuan Miques,Juan Sixs) 26, 28, 29, 30, 33, 34, 35, 37 (n. 90), 39 (n. 97), 40, 45, 46, 47 (n. 18), 48, 53, 61, 62, 65, 73, 78 (n. 205), 81 (n. 212), 88, 89–90, 92–93, 98, 101, 102, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110–114, 115, 117, 124 Nasis, Nicolaus de 49 (n. 124) Nicolay, Nicholas de 81 (n. 213), 82, 109 (n. 287) Núñes, Enriquez (aka Abraham Righetto) 74 Núñes, Rodrigo 47 Onkeneira, Isaac 109 Ovid (Ovidius Publius Naso) 58 Pastorini, Pastorino di 64, 104 (n. 271) Paul III, Pope 37, 94, 95, 96 Paul IV, Pope (aka Giovanni Pietro Caraffa) 53, 65, 97–8, 100, 101, 104 Perera, Francesca 50 Petrarch (Francesco Petrarca) 37 Petromol, French envoy 106, 109 Philip II, King of Spain 9, 17, 23, 113, 114 Piale Pasha 110 fn 295, 111 (n. 302) Pico della Mirandola, Count Giovanni 38 Piñel, Duarte 56, 57 (n. 145), 59 (n. 150) Pires, Diogo (aka Pyrrhus Lusitanus, and Isaiah Cohen) 24, 105 (n. 276) Plantin, Christopher 17 Plato 58 Poggini, Giovanni Paolo 64 Priuli, Antonio 42 Priuli, Cardinal 40 Priuli family 42 Priuli, Girolamo 42, 104 (n. 273) Pyrrhus, Didacus 62

Index of Persons

Quintanadmenas family 35 Redman, Roman 109 (n. 291) Reinoso, Alonso Núñez de 61 Renée of France (wife of Ercole d’Este) 44 Ribeiro, Bernardim 62 Rodriguez, Fernando 47 Roggendorf, Christoph von 67 Roxelane (mother of Selim II) 111 (n. 299) Ruscelli, Girolamo 99 (n. 260) Rustam, Grand Vizir 76, 88, 103, 104, 107 Saba, Rabbi Abraham 100 Sanuto, Mario 38 Schweigger, Salomon 85 (n. 220), 114 Segure, Aaron di 78 Selim, Prince (same as Selim II, Turkish sultan) 83, 88, 91, 103, 106, 110, 111, 113, 118 (n. 319) Sevilla, Juan de 60 Shakespeare, William 12, 39 (n. 95) Sigismund Augustus, King of Poland 111 Sı¯nan Chaus 44, 45, 65 Sı¯nan Pasha 76 Sı¯nan, HoËa 110 (n. 295) Sixtus IV, Pope 6 Sokollu Mehmet, Grand Vizir 110 (n. 295), 111 (n. 302), 113, 114 Soncino, Rabbi Joshua 100, 101–2, 103, 104, 116

147

Süleyman the Magnificent (Turkish sultan) 78, 79, 86, 91, 99, 103, 106, 111 Tadic´, Jorjo 63 (n. 163), 66 (n. 169), 69 (n. 181), 70 (n. 182), 71 (n. 186, 167), 72 (n. 190), 105 (n. 276) Torquemada, Tomás 6 Usque, Abraham 56, 57 (n. 148), 62, 105 Usque, Salomon (aka Salusque Lusitanus) 37, 38 Usque, Samuel 57, 58, 59, 60, 75, 117 (n. 318) Vaes, Hyeronymas 51 Van der Donch, George 34 (n. 80) Van Hoochstraten, Michel Hillen 17 Van Liesvelt, Jakob 18 Vargas, Alvaro 57 (n. 145) Vargas, Jeronimo de 57 (n. 145) Vasari, Giorgio 64 Villalon, Cristobal de 93 (n. 243) Vorsterman, Willem 17 Waghemaekere, Domien (Domenicus) de 16 Waghemaekere, Herman de 16 Welser banking house 16, 21 Widdmanstadt, Johann Albrecht von 60 Yerushalmi, Rabbi Abraham 100 Zozi, Francesco 38

1

FAM I LY TREE

Bernard (Samuel) Miques (Nasi) (d. 1569)

João (Joseph) Miques (Nasi) (c. 1520 –1579)

married 1559 ?

married 1554

Gracia la Chica (1540 –1599 ?)

Reyna (d. 1599 ?)

Brianda (Reyna)

married1540 Diogo (d. 1542)

Beatrice (Gracia) (c. 1510 –1568)

married 1528 Francisco (Semer/Semah ?) (d. 1536)

father of Diogo and Francisco

Miques Luna (parents of Gracia))

Rabbi Abraham Benveniste (grandfather)

MENDES–BENVENISTE FAMILY

1 The Family Tree.

Dr. Miques (Nasi) (d. 1525)

3

4

3 – 4 Portraits of Charles V and his sister, Queen Mary of Hungary, Regent of the Low Countries. 5 Portrait of Amatus Lusitanus.

5

9

10

9 –10 From the English translation of Consolaçam. 11 Jewish wedding.

11

12

12 Dubrovnik before the 1667 earthquake. 13 Reference to Beatrice di Luna in the records of the Ragusan Council (November 24, 1552).

13

14

14 View of Constantinople, 1553. 15 Portrait of Süleyman.

15

16

17

16 Portrait of a Jewish physician, possibly of Doctor Moses Hamon. 17 Portrait of a Jewish merchant.