The ritual murder accusation in Britain*

Abstract

Expressions of anti-Semitic hostility possess considerable tenacity. If there are those who doubt this, they have only to consider the history of the ritual murder accusation to be disabused of their opinions. The charge, which flourished in medieval times, was significantly revived in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and indeed it still continues to be heard. In the present discussion, in order to provide a detailed account of this particular strand of anti-Semitism , attention is focused upon opinion in Britain, with special reference to the years between 1880 and 1939. But before engaging in an historical analysis of this kind, it is necessary to discuss and define the nature of the charge. In effect the accusation covers a number of different claims, which have been grouped together under the term 'ritual murder'. The origins of the charge would seem to stem from the years of Antiochus Epiphanes, ruler of Syria between 175 and 164 BC, who desecrated the Temple in 170 BC. Following this his supporters initiated a campaign of vilification against the Jewish community to justify the action, and in his defence Apion later claimed that it was the custom of Jews to kidnap a Greek foreigner, fatten him up for a year and then convey him to a wood where he was slain. His killers, it was alleged, then proceeded to sacrifice his body in ritual fashion, eat his flesh and swear an oath of hostility towards the Greeks. In this particular allegation there were three important components: ritual murder involved an expression of hostility towards an enemy people, the specifically ritual element was of secondary importance, and the blood motif, present in later accusations, was absent from the picture.1 Later, in the twelfth century, the charge assumed other characteristics. For instance, it came to be alleged that Jews were required to crucify Christian children, usually during Passion week, to re-enact the crucifixion of Jesus and mock the Christian faith. None of this made reference to the extraction of blood. In fact, it was not until the thirteenth century that the emphasis on the ritual use of the victim's blood seeped into the story. It was first mentioned in 1235, when it was suggested that Jews needed Christian blood for a Jewish celebration of Easter. Gradually, however, from the first half of the thirteenth century, although the connect