Medieval London - I think I'd prefer Paris (for more than one reason)

Dr. Eleanor Janega gives a good tour of London with comment on the Medieval sites of same places and their uses:

Life and Death in Medieval London With Dr Eleanor Janega
31st Jan. 2022 | History Hit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmyCnA7xC4A

First ten minutes, I am only enjoying instruction, but the things to comment on come too:

12:51 This seems to be a difference between HRE and England.

St. Thomas mentioned people not being put into captivity of slavery because of debt, according to the "laws of the Emperors" ... in Paris, he was certainly under a King, but I wonder if he didn't kind of count Two Sicilies (where he was from) as part of Holy Roman Empire ...

An indebted artisan would be put under some kind of constraints on what he could do with his money, and how big portion of it he had to use for payments, but he was basically required to stay in business until he had paid back.

When he didn't, the cessio bonorum (corresponds to getting broke) was at the request he put to the creditors and up to them to grant or refuse it, but they couldn't take the initiative.

Obviously, for a man who had done cessio bonorum instead of full payment, it was harder to start a new business than now after going broke.

21:59 "most cities" [were not self ruled or electing officials] - perhaps true for England, but very far from the truth in Holy Roman Empire or France

22:57 It so happens, election circumscriptions in the early XXth C. were still guild based in London.

Hilaire Belloc was part of the brewers' guild for elective purposes ... perhaps his favourite one, as it certainly would have been Chesterton's (and actually nearly was my grandfather's, though "brewers and distillers" in Sweden was actually a trade union) ...

24:32 Technically, the law [of Moses] said Jews could take interest from "goyim" - especially Babylonians and Canaaneans.

It's not clear they could also have taken interest from Egyptians and Edomites. These were in a nearby passage called "brothers" of Israel - Edomites, as Edom-Esau was the actual twin brother of Jacob-Israel, father of twelve patriarchs among whom Judah, and Egyptians, because they had stayed among them (mostly peacefully) while expanding from Beduin tribe to nation.

And that they considered they could take interest from Christians therefore means, they were viewing Christians as lower than Egyptians and Edomites.

Interest free loans - you borrow a bottle of wine, you give back a bottle of wine, no fee for the loan, you borrow 5 shillings (Medieval currency) you give back 5 shillings, also no fee for the loan, were obviously not forbidden, but these had to come from people having other sources of income than money-lending and were therefore rarer. Less easy to get by.

25:41 You said Jews were "accused" ... and I suppose you mean baselessly.

[confirmed by 25:50]

Take a look at what happened when a synagogue was besieged, I think in York. Adult Jews, from the Christians' side, could get out if they accepted baptism. The other ones, one intended to kill, but baptise their children.

There were adults who tried to get out, and they were killed. If you ask me, by the Jews inside, for "treason" ... but those were not the only killings, they also killed first women and children and then each other, Masada style.

Take a look at whether St. Richard of Norwich or Little St. Hugh of Lincoln could be of part Jewish descent, among great-grand-parents, and the child killings could be a kind of "execution for following strange gods" (counting Christianity as not worship of The Lord, on their part).

For St. Andrew of Rinn, I have a case for exonerating Jews, the uncle is a more probable culprit, but for St. Simon of Trent, the small Jewish community could have been one of the most bitterly Antichristian ones ... a doctor looked at the throat, the slit matched that of a Jewish butcher bleeding a sheep through the throat.

25:50 As to the "Artist's Impression of Jewish Blood Libel" - it seems to be the childkilling in Bethlehem, after Holy Family had fled - are Gospel narratives now also part of the "Blood Libel" to you?

26:39 It is interesting you say that Jews were only allowed to stay if they lent money ... this was not the case everywhere.

I suppose you refer to the Jew charter of William the Conqueror.

St. Lewis IX of France at a certain point expelled Jewish money lenders, but not Jews generally. He also expelled money-lenders from ... Piemonte? not sure, but some part of Italy. However, he couldn't do that to those of Cahors, as that was within his kingdom, they weren't foreigners.

In Carpentras, near Avignon, the Jewry clearly had something like parallel guilds to the Christians, they were basically a parallel and roughly complete economy, there were plenty of things to do even if you were not a money-lender. Leather-workers had their guilds? If so, they had two guilds in Carpentras, a Christian and a Jewish one ... one for the city, one for the Jewry. Or perhaps just one, in the Jewry, for both.

32:09 Ah, a sex worker could not pay tithe while still in business, though she could do so retroactively when out of it, but (near London) she could pay rent to that bishop .... just checked, no, the bishop of Winchester was on board with Henry VIII, it was the one of Rochester who died a Catholic martyr ...

It may be mentioned, in Paris, sex workers had their brothels in private houses, they weren't renting ground from the bishop of Paris - they didn't have to stay outside the city, but they did have to stay away from Churches (perhaps two blocks away?) and were obviously forbidden contraception.

"Here, it is the hairy hole that's beaten" according to one of the publicities outside a brothel.

I suppose, retiring from this business was more common in Paris than for the Winchester geese, poor gals ...