Mr. Pepys’ Outrageous Outing

Mr. Pepys’ Outrageous Outing

by Eliez­er Segal

On Wednes­day evening, Octo­ber 14, 1663, for rea­sons that he did not record, the famous diarist Samuel Pepys, along with his wife and a com­pan­ion, decid­ed to pay a vis­it to a Lon­don syn­a­gogue. What he observed there was bizarre and, in some respects, abhor­rent to him.

Though he did not always under­stand the objects and activ­i­ties that he was describ­ing, those of us with greater famil­iar­i­ty with Jew­ish prac­tice can eas­i­ly deci­pher his cryp­tic nar­ra­tive.

Thus, when he writes of the men and boys in their vayles, it is obvi­ous that the ref­er­ence is to the prayer shawls worn by male wor­ship­pers. The ref­er­ence to the women behind a lat­tice out of sight was also a com­mon fea­ture of tra­di­tion­al syn­a­gogues. When Pepys writes some things stand up…in a press to which all com­ing in do bow, he is cor­rect in sur­mis­ing that those stand­ing things were scrolls of the Law, the Torah, to which the con­gre­ga­tion bowed in rev­er­ence. They were housed in the typ­i­cal Sepharadic cas­ing that allowed them to be placed upright on the read­ing table. In a sim­i­lar man­ner, he accu­rate­ly describes the words, incom­pre­hen­si­ble to him, that the men recit­ed when they donned their vayles–referring to the Hebrew bless­ings, of course–and the respons­es of amen and of kiss­ing the fab­ric of the shawls.

Not­ing that their ser­vice was all in a singing way, and in Hebrew, Pepys relat­ed that the wor­ship­pers removed the Torah scrolls from their cas­es, and sev­er­al men car­ried them around the room a num­ber of times to the accom­pa­ni­ment of con­gre­ga­tion­al singing. And in the end they had a prayer for the King, which they pro­nounced his name in Por­tu­gall; but the prayer, like the rest, in Hebrew. That is to say, though the Hebrew bless­ing was for the wel­fare of the reign­ing British monarch, Charles II, the wor­ship­pers’ pro­nun­ci­a­tion of His Majesty’s name revealed their Span­ish or Por­tuguese ori­gins.

Up to this point, Pepys sounds bemused, per­haps even impressed, at stum­bling upon an enclave of quaint ori­en­tal rit­u­al in the heart of con­ven­tion­al Lon­don. Hence­forth, how­ev­er, his sym­pa­thies under­go a decid­ed dete­ri­o­ra­tion: But, Lord! to see the dis­or­der, laugh­ing, sport­ing, and no atten­tion, but con­fu­sion in all their ser­vice, more like brutes than peo­ple know­ing the true God, would make a man for­swear ever see­ing them more and indeed I nev­er did see so much, or could have imag­ined there had been any reli­gion in the whole world so absurd­ly per­formed as this. In a state of intense men­tal agi­ta­tion, he elect­ed to leave the build­ing.

It is pos­si­ble that the staid Pepys would have been shocked by any reli­gious ser­vice that was for­eign to his famil­iar Angli­can sen­si­bil­i­ties. How­ev­er, the shock lev­el was com­pound­ed here by the fact that he chose to sched­ule his syn­a­gogue vis­it not to coin­cide with a nor­mal week­day ser­vice, nor even with the solemn Sab­bath prayers–but on the fes­ti­val of Simhat Torah. Even if we were not oth­er­wise aware that the Julian date Octo­ber 14 1663 coin­cid­ed with the Hebrew date 23 Tishri 5424, we would have been able to fig­ure it out from the fact that the Torah scrolls were being tak­en out at night and car­ried in joy­ous pro­ces­sions around the sanc­tu­ary. I rather doubt that those Sephardic con­gre­gants would have been real­ly rau­cous by our stan­dards, but the Eng­lish High Church litur­gy prid­ed itself in a deco­rous respectabil­i­ty that did not look kind­ly on any expres­sions of phys­i­cal activ­i­ty or spon­ta­neous song in a house of wor­ship.

Indeed, a cen­tu­ry or two lat­er, when Jews on the con­ti­nent were offered entry into Euro­pean soci­ety, one of the first pri­or­i­ties they set for them­selves was to impose deco­rum on the syn­a­gogue ser­vices, lest their uncouth behav­iour embar­rass them in the eyes of dig­ni­fied vis­i­tors from the church­es down the street.

 

The Simhat Torah ser­vice attend­ed by Samuel Pepys was, indeed, a remark­able his­tor­i­cal mile­stone.

Jews had been for­bid­den to reside in Eng­land since the Edict of Expul­sion of 1290. A tiny com­mu­ni­ty of Sephardic mer­chants had only recent­ly allowed itself to recom­mence its com­mu­nal life in Lon­don, fol­low­ing Oliv­er Cromwell’s loos­en­ing of the restric­tions. Though it is com­mon to speak of a for­mal edict in 1656 read­mit­ting the Jews to Eng­land, his­to­ri­ans have been unable to locate that edict. It is true that Cromwell was eager to attract Sephardic Jew­ish mer­chants from Ams­ter­dam, who held promi­nent posi­tions in the world of inter­na­tion­al com­merce; and it is equal­ly true that the renowned Jew­ish vision­ary Menasseh ben Israel had been allowed to set foot on British soil to lob­by for the read­mis­sion. Menasse­h’s con­fer­ence with Cromwell even gave rise to a con­fer­ence in White­hall where the mat­ter was dis­cussed. In the end, how­ev­er, no for­mal leg­is­la­tion is known to have result­ed from this flur­ry of activ­i­ty and good inten­tions.

The syn­a­gogue that Pepys vis­it­ed was estab­lished qui­et­ly dur­ing this same time peri­od. By the end of 1656, there were enough Jews dwelling in Lon­don to require a per­ma­nent place to wor­ship, and that could be pur­sued open­ly only now, though not nec­es­sar­i­ly legal­ly. The com­mu­ni­ty’s rep­re­sen­ta­tives acquired one storey of a build­ing in Creechurch Lane to serve as Eng­land’s first func­tion­ing syn­a­gogue in almost four cen­turies.

The actu­al founder of the Creechurch Land syn­a­gogue was Anto­nio Fer­nan­dez Car­va­jal, a suc­cess­ful Jew­ish mer­chant of Por­tuguese birth whose busi­ness deal­ings led him to set­tle in Lon­don, where he held lucra­tive con­tracts for procur­ing var­i­ous com­modi­ties for the Eng­lish gov­ern­ment. Dur­ing the ear­ly years of his res­i­dence in Eng­land, he con­tin­ued to mas­quer­ade as a Catholic. In 1645, the lax­i­ty of his obser­vance led to an accu­sa­tion of illic­it reli­gious activ­i­ty, but he was suf­fi­cient­ly well con­nect­ed to have the charges dis­missed by the House of Lords. His con­tri­bu­tion to the war effort against Spain brought him a legal per­mit of res­i­den­cy in Eng­land, and Cromwell him­self arranged to have his prop­er­ty trans­port­ed from the Canary Islands.

As the first Jew to be admit­ted to Eng­land since the expul­sion, Car­va­jal sup­port­ed Menasseh ben Israel’s peti­tion to Par­lia­ment to read­mit the Jews, and he was instru­men­tal in obtain­ing Cromwell’s good will on that mat­ter. Nev­er­the­less, Car­va­jal and his com­rades refused to appoint Menasseh as their com­mu­ni­ty’s rab­bi, choos­ing instead a rel­a­tive from Ham­burg, Rab­bi Moses Athias. Rab­bi Athias may well have been pre­sid­ing over that Simhat Torah ser­vice dur­ing Pepys’ vis­it.

Dur­ing the years lead­ing up to Pepys’ vis­it, the fate of Lon­don’s nascent Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ty was not clear. In spite of the encour­age­ment of Cromwell and oth­er high-placed fig­ures, there was no short­age of anti­semites who were urg­ing the enforce­ment of the expul­sion edict. One of the most vocal of these was the alder­man Thomas Vio­let, who in 1659 cam­paigned to have Cromwell’s edict declared ille­gal. Impa­tient with the judge’s pro­cras­ti­na­tion, he devised a sting oper­a­tion in which one of his agents would plant a pack­et of coun­ter­feit coins on Rab­bi Athias. When the agent con­fessed to the con­spir­a­cy, Vio­let pro­ceed­ed in 1660 to peti­tion the Privy Coun­cil that all Jew­ish prop­er­ty be impound­ed and the Jews impris­oned, to be ran­somed by their brethren in Europe. Oth­er agi­ta­tors, includ­ing the author­i­ties of the City of Lon­don (some things, appar­ent­ly, nev­er change), went as high as Par­lia­ment itself to ini­ti­ate a debate on the ban­ish­ment of the Jews. How­ev­er, a roy­al mes­sage was pre­sent­ed before the House request­ing, instead, that they con­sid­er the ques­tion of grant­i­ng pro­tec­tion to the Jews of the realm.

From this point onwards, notwith­stand­ing some minor obsta­cles, the rights of Eng­land’s Jews remained rel­a­tive­ly secure.

That sense of relief might well have con­tributed to the bois­ter­ous ela­tion that offend­ed Samuel Pepys dur­ing his Simhat Torah vis­it to the Creechurch Lane syn­a­gogue.


  • First Pub­li­ca­tion:
    • The Jew­ish Free Press, Cal­gary, Sep­tem­ber 28, 2007, p. 13.
  • For fur­ther read­ing:
    • Wolf, Lucien. The Reset­tle­ment of the Jews in Eng­land: A Paper Read before the Jews’ Col­lege Lit­er­ary Soci­ety, Novem­ber 27th, 1887. Lon­don: Jew­ish Chron­i­cle, 1888.
    • Roth, Cecil. A His­to­ry of the Jews in Eng­land. 3rd ed. Oxford: Claren­don Press, 1978.
    • Katz, David S. The Jews in the His­to­ry of Eng­land, 1485–1850. Oxford and New York: Claren­don Press, 1994.
    • ________. Phi­lo-Semi­tism and the Read­mis­sion of the Jews to Eng­land 1603–1655 Oxford His­tor­i­cal Mono­graphs. Oxford: Claren­don Press, 1982.
    • Hyam­son, Albert Mon­te­fiore. A His­to­ry of the Jews in Eng­land. Lon­don: Chat­to, 1908.

My email address is: [email protected]

Prof. Eliez­er Segal

 

Scholarship about Judaism and other religious traditions