i started my new-found self-employed consulting status about 5 weeks ago, and have learned a great deal about how challenging this type of work is going to be for me.
if anyone who has worked from home has any true and tested tips to help me
- actually get work done.
- not lose my sanity and start muttering to myself on public transit. and/or
- not allow work and non-work to blend into one unholy seamless web.
please do share!
i put home in quotes because i am more likely than not working from coffee shop, or working from the vancouver public library, or working from the parking lot of a grocery store on the sunshine coast because of an unsecured wifi connection.
ack! it was hard not working, but now it's hard getting motivated to work in a non-office type work environment.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
sidewalk rage!
thanks to m.r. for forwarding this article to me from the wall street journal.
Get Out of My Way, You Jerk!
Researchers Study 'Sidewalk Rage,' Seeking Insights on Anger's Origins and Coping Techniques
by Shirley S. Wang
You don't need a car to get road rage.
For many people, few things are more infuriating than slow walkers—those seemingly inconsiderate people who clog up sidewalks, grocery aisles and airport hallways while others fume behind them.
Researchers say the concept of "sidewalk rage" is real. One scientist has even developed a Pedestrian Aggressiveness Syndrome Scale to map out how people express their fury. At its most extreme, sidewalk rage can signal a psychiatric condition known as "intermittent explosive disorder," researchers say. On Facebook, there's a group called "I Secretly Want to Punch Slow Walking People in the Back of the Head" that boasts nearly 15,000 members.
Some researchers are even studying the dynamics that trigger such rage and why some people remain calm in hopes of improving anger-management treatments and gaining insights into how emotions influence decision making, attention and self control.
"We're trying to understand what makes people angry, what that experience is like," says Jerry Deffenbacher, a professor at Colorado State University who studies anger and road rage. "For those for whom anger is a personal problem, we're trying to develop and evaluate ways of helping them."
Signs of a sidewalk rager include muttering or bumping into others; uncaringly hogging a walking lane; and acting in a hostile manner by staring, giving a "mean face" or approaching others too closely, says Leon James, a psychology professor at the University of Hawaii who studies pedestrian and driver aggression.
For the cool-headed, sidewalk rage may seem incomprehensible. After all, it seems simple enough to just go around the slow individual. Why then are some people, even those who greet other obstacles with equanimity, so infuriated by unhurried fellow pedestrians?
How one interprets the situation is key, researchers say. Ragers tend to have a strong sense of how other people should behave. Their code: Slower people keep to the right. Step aside to take a picture. And the left side of an escalator should be, of course, kept free for anyone wanting to walk up.
"A lot of us have 'shoulds' in our head," says Dr. Deffenbacher. Ragers tend to think people should do things their way, and get angry because the slow walkers are breaking the rules of civility. It's unclear exactly why some people harbor such beliefs, Dr. Deffenbacher says. Such ways of thinking are generally learned from family, friends or the media, he adds.
Ragers' thoughts tend to be overly negative, over-generalized and blown out of proportion, leaving them fuming about how they can't stand the situation, how late they are going to be, and how this always comes up, Dr. Deffenbacher says. In contrast, someone blissfully free of sidewalk rage may still be frustrated, but thinks more accepting thoughts such as, "this is the way life is sometimes" or, "I wish that slow person wasn't in front of me," he says.
Some ragers say that thinking insulting thoughts about other pedestrians serves as "mental venting"—and makes them feel better. Even if it does provide some momentary relief, such thinking rehearses bad behavior and can make anger a more automatic reaction to these situations, says Dr. James.
"When you're emotionally upset, you're impaired," says Dr. James.
He should know. He used to be a very aggressive walker as he vied with swarms of tourists for space on the crowded streets of Honolulu, he says. He would square his shoulders and walk straight ahead, bumping into people and thinking it was his right; he was the one walking properly.
But his wife repeatedly called him an aggressive walker, he says. Finally, she convinced him. Now he tries to walk around people rather than into them, he says. And he says he feels guilty when he does succumb to the urge to barge through.
Psychologists say that the best thing for a rager to do is to calm down. Anger, after all, is associated with a host of negative health consequences, including heart problems and high blood pressure.
But calming down isn't always easy. Those at the extreme end of the rage continuum, sidewalk or otherwise, may have intermittent explosive disorder, a condition characterized by an inability to inhibit aggressive impulses that lead to assault or destruction of property, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, psychiatry's bible of diagnoses.
If friends or family comment on your anger, or you think you need to tell someone how to walk—however politely—you may have a problem, says Dr. James, who devised the Pedestrian Aggressiveness Syndrome Scale. It outlines 15 bad pedestrian behaviors featured in Dr. James's research based on questionnaires and interviews. Although the scale hasn't been statistically verified, he says anyone who engages in one of these behaviors regularly may give in to the others as well.
Many anger-management treatments haven't been studied thoroughly enough to show whether they work. One type shown to be effective, cognitive-behavioral therapy, seeks to alter thoughts and actions by coming up with alternative ways to view a situation.
For instance, instead of thinking about how much of an idiot the pedestrian is and how he shouldn't be allowed on the sidewalk, imagine the person is lost or confused, or simply doesn't see you, says Eric Dahlen, a psychology professor at the University of Southern Mississippi in Hattiesburg who researches anger, aggression and traffic psychology.
Developing strategies to quell the rage may be wise: Sidewalks aren't getting any less crowded, and pedestrian speeds, research shows, are slipping as the population ages.
In addition, most people on a sidewalk are in groups, and they tend to walk side-by-side or in an outward-opening V-shape, impeding the flow of foot traffic, according to an article published recently in PLoS One, a Public Library of Science journal.
People slow down when distracted by other activities, too. A 2006 study by the City of New York and the NYC Department of City Planning showed smokers walk 2.3% slower than the average walker's 4.27 feet per second. Tourists creep along at an 11% more-leisurely rate than the average walker, while cellphone talkers walk 1.6% slower, according to the study. Headphone wearers, by contrast, clipped along at a 9% faster rate than average.
A series of studies by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign using a virtual-reality simulator found that walkers consistently slow down when they talk on their phones, and that kids and older adults are more likely to get hit by cars while on the phone compared with those who weren't on the phone.
So, how best to navigate around speed-challenged strollers?
Most people tend to look down as they walk. That's a mistake, says Mehdi Moussaid, a cognitive scientist at the University of Toulouse who models walkers' behavior on public sidewalks and was an author of the PLoS One study. Some of his advice: Look up and take a wide-angle view to catch openings and slip through.
—Sarah Nassauer contributed to this article
Get Out of My Way, You Jerk!
Researchers Study 'Sidewalk Rage,' Seeking Insights on Anger's Origins and Coping Techniques
by Shirley S. Wang
You don't need a car to get road rage.
For many people, few things are more infuriating than slow walkers—those seemingly inconsiderate people who clog up sidewalks, grocery aisles and airport hallways while others fume behind them.
Researchers say the concept of "sidewalk rage" is real. One scientist has even developed a Pedestrian Aggressiveness Syndrome Scale to map out how people express their fury. At its most extreme, sidewalk rage can signal a psychiatric condition known as "intermittent explosive disorder," researchers say. On Facebook, there's a group called "I Secretly Want to Punch Slow Walking People in the Back of the Head" that boasts nearly 15,000 members.
Some researchers are even studying the dynamics that trigger such rage and why some people remain calm in hopes of improving anger-management treatments and gaining insights into how emotions influence decision making, attention and self control.
"We're trying to understand what makes people angry, what that experience is like," says Jerry Deffenbacher, a professor at Colorado State University who studies anger and road rage. "For those for whom anger is a personal problem, we're trying to develop and evaluate ways of helping them."
Signs of a sidewalk rager include muttering or bumping into others; uncaringly hogging a walking lane; and acting in a hostile manner by staring, giving a "mean face" or approaching others too closely, says Leon James, a psychology professor at the University of Hawaii who studies pedestrian and driver aggression.
For the cool-headed, sidewalk rage may seem incomprehensible. After all, it seems simple enough to just go around the slow individual. Why then are some people, even those who greet other obstacles with equanimity, so infuriated by unhurried fellow pedestrians?
How one interprets the situation is key, researchers say. Ragers tend to have a strong sense of how other people should behave. Their code: Slower people keep to the right. Step aside to take a picture. And the left side of an escalator should be, of course, kept free for anyone wanting to walk up.
"A lot of us have 'shoulds' in our head," says Dr. Deffenbacher. Ragers tend to think people should do things their way, and get angry because the slow walkers are breaking the rules of civility. It's unclear exactly why some people harbor such beliefs, Dr. Deffenbacher says. Such ways of thinking are generally learned from family, friends or the media, he adds.
Ragers' thoughts tend to be overly negative, over-generalized and blown out of proportion, leaving them fuming about how they can't stand the situation, how late they are going to be, and how this always comes up, Dr. Deffenbacher says. In contrast, someone blissfully free of sidewalk rage may still be frustrated, but thinks more accepting thoughts such as, "this is the way life is sometimes" or, "I wish that slow person wasn't in front of me," he says.
Some ragers say that thinking insulting thoughts about other pedestrians serves as "mental venting"—and makes them feel better. Even if it does provide some momentary relief, such thinking rehearses bad behavior and can make anger a more automatic reaction to these situations, says Dr. James.
"When you're emotionally upset, you're impaired," says Dr. James.
He should know. He used to be a very aggressive walker as he vied with swarms of tourists for space on the crowded streets of Honolulu, he says. He would square his shoulders and walk straight ahead, bumping into people and thinking it was his right; he was the one walking properly.
But his wife repeatedly called him an aggressive walker, he says. Finally, she convinced him. Now he tries to walk around people rather than into them, he says. And he says he feels guilty when he does succumb to the urge to barge through.
Psychologists say that the best thing for a rager to do is to calm down. Anger, after all, is associated with a host of negative health consequences, including heart problems and high blood pressure.
But calming down isn't always easy. Those at the extreme end of the rage continuum, sidewalk or otherwise, may have intermittent explosive disorder, a condition characterized by an inability to inhibit aggressive impulses that lead to assault or destruction of property, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, psychiatry's bible of diagnoses.
If friends or family comment on your anger, or you think you need to tell someone how to walk—however politely—you may have a problem, says Dr. James, who devised the Pedestrian Aggressiveness Syndrome Scale. It outlines 15 bad pedestrian behaviors featured in Dr. James's research based on questionnaires and interviews. Although the scale hasn't been statistically verified, he says anyone who engages in one of these behaviors regularly may give in to the others as well.
Many anger-management treatments haven't been studied thoroughly enough to show whether they work. One type shown to be effective, cognitive-behavioral therapy, seeks to alter thoughts and actions by coming up with alternative ways to view a situation.
For instance, instead of thinking about how much of an idiot the pedestrian is and how he shouldn't be allowed on the sidewalk, imagine the person is lost or confused, or simply doesn't see you, says Eric Dahlen, a psychology professor at the University of Southern Mississippi in Hattiesburg who researches anger, aggression and traffic psychology.
Developing strategies to quell the rage may be wise: Sidewalks aren't getting any less crowded, and pedestrian speeds, research shows, are slipping as the population ages.
In addition, most people on a sidewalk are in groups, and they tend to walk side-by-side or in an outward-opening V-shape, impeding the flow of foot traffic, according to an article published recently in PLoS One, a Public Library of Science journal.
People slow down when distracted by other activities, too. A 2006 study by the City of New York and the NYC Department of City Planning showed smokers walk 2.3% slower than the average walker's 4.27 feet per second. Tourists creep along at an 11% more-leisurely rate than the average walker, while cellphone talkers walk 1.6% slower, according to the study. Headphone wearers, by contrast, clipped along at a 9% faster rate than average.
A series of studies by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign using a virtual-reality simulator found that walkers consistently slow down when they talk on their phones, and that kids and older adults are more likely to get hit by cars while on the phone compared with those who weren't on the phone.
So, how best to navigate around speed-challenged strollers?
Most people tend to look down as they walk. That's a mistake, says Mehdi Moussaid, a cognitive scientist at the University of Toulouse who models walkers' behavior on public sidewalks and was an author of the PLoS One study. Some of his advice: Look up and take a wide-angle view to catch openings and slip through.
—Sarah Nassauer contributed to this article
Thursday, February 3, 2011
but first, a mattress
i am slowly moving into my new place. m.r., my roomie, has been here since january 1, while i camped out at my parents' place while they were away. they are now back and my motivation to properly move in has hit an all-time high. i love my parents. i just love them more from afar.
while my belongings continue to collect dust on atlantic avenue, due to my own procrastination and anxiety about moving, i am living like a refugee in my new room. courtesy of friends of d.b.'s in victoria, i have a table. courtesy of r.g., i have an air mattress & sleeping bag.
but soon (hopefully as soon as later this morning), i will have a proper mattress. step one to really moving in. this mattress can't arrive soon enough since i didn't get any sleep last night on the air mattress. and it's a decent one, too. but an air mattress is an air mattress, and possibly i was too giddy with excitement about my real mattress.
i have a meeting with the canadian border services agency today to go over the list of things i want to move back to vancouver. k.r. is going to take my couch. i will miss that couch, but it is one less thing to worry about. although what's one more thing when you have 58 boxes. i am frankly perplexed as to where this stuff will go when it arrives. whenever that will be. though going to the csba is step one of the process of moving it back, i still do have to actually set up the move. given my foot-dragging on this task over the many, many, many months preceding this one, i have no real reason to think i will do anything about moving my stuff until long after it makes any sense to move it. if i haven't already hit that point.
ah.
but, at least i am working. yes! i started a consulting / contract gig with a small US-based non-governmental organization that does work in india. i am not going to make my first million doing this, but if i can eat, sleep and clothe myself somewhat fashionably, then perhaps that will be enough. the one thing i will miss more than anything else is the luxury of having disposal income for travel. i have been gone from law firm life for almost 2 years (it'll be 2 years in april). i miss not having to budget for travel or forgo travel altogether. now i have more time than ever, but no $ to spend.
unless i win the lottery!
while my belongings continue to collect dust on atlantic avenue, due to my own procrastination and anxiety about moving, i am living like a refugee in my new room. courtesy of friends of d.b.'s in victoria, i have a table. courtesy of r.g., i have an air mattress & sleeping bag.
but soon (hopefully as soon as later this morning), i will have a proper mattress. step one to really moving in. this mattress can't arrive soon enough since i didn't get any sleep last night on the air mattress. and it's a decent one, too. but an air mattress is an air mattress, and possibly i was too giddy with excitement about my real mattress.
i have a meeting with the canadian border services agency today to go over the list of things i want to move back to vancouver. k.r. is going to take my couch. i will miss that couch, but it is one less thing to worry about. although what's one more thing when you have 58 boxes. i am frankly perplexed as to where this stuff will go when it arrives. whenever that will be. though going to the csba is step one of the process of moving it back, i still do have to actually set up the move. given my foot-dragging on this task over the many, many, many months preceding this one, i have no real reason to think i will do anything about moving my stuff until long after it makes any sense to move it. if i haven't already hit that point.
ah.
but, at least i am working. yes! i started a consulting / contract gig with a small US-based non-governmental organization that does work in india. i am not going to make my first million doing this, but if i can eat, sleep and clothe myself somewhat fashionably, then perhaps that will be enough. the one thing i will miss more than anything else is the luxury of having disposal income for travel. i have been gone from law firm life for almost 2 years (it'll be 2 years in april). i miss not having to budget for travel or forgo travel altogether. now i have more time than ever, but no $ to spend.
unless i win the lottery!
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Mile End, Brooklyn
i don't usually do restaurant reviews. but i wrote back in may 2010 or so about how montreal bagels were now available in brooklyn at a new montreal deli restaurant that opened, called "mile end." i finally got to go to "mile end" when i was in new york for my extended visit. and by finally getting to dine there, i don't mean once or twice. i was sucking back poutine, smoked meat, bagels and lox as frequently as i could afford to (and frankly, my gut really couldn't afford it, but oh well.) one day i had lunch and dinner there! what could i do, the latkes were only on for dinner!? anyway, this place is amazing. and i'm not just saying that because i am a nostalgia-phile, but also because the food is delicious. the downside is the wait. there are very few tables, so the waits are ridiculous. worth the wait? i would say so. the only thing that would have made "mile end" better was if i ran into leonard cohen dining there.
adventures in storage
[i'm going to pretend that i've been blogging regularly and just launch into it again.]
i spent way too much time in my storage facility in brooklyn this past november and december. way too much time. but i did my inventory and counted up my things. 58 boxes! of things i've never allowed to buy again, tote bags top the list. no matter how cute, no matter how indispensable they seem. i have boxes of tote bags. it's ridiculous!
i did sell books though -- boxes and boxes of books. i never thought i'd ever sell a book. gift, give-away, loan, donate, sure. but sell. i always had some sort of irrational opposition to selling my books. but i got over that fast! a musty roomful of boxes that you have to move in and out of the room every day for over a week will shake the irrational out of your brain. so i sold a bunch of books. well, i didn't. j.h. took them to the strand and i got nearly $200 from his efforts. yay! j.h. also took a stack that he would try to sell online. hopefully, we get good money for them. apart from the big bucks, this whole ordeal has marked a new way of thinking about books. but, even though i did get rid of a lot of books, i still held on to a whole bunch of books. the criterion for a book to stay in my storage room was whether it fit into any of the following: (1) a book i have read and reread or that i can honestly say i will reread; (2) a book written by a friend or by someone i know; (3) a gift with sentimental value (sorry, bro, that hardcover grisham you gave me for christmas didn't make the cut); (4) an art book; (5) books i haven't read yet, or have read only parts of; and (6) certain reference books (but not ages old law textbooks). so, i'm going to try to keep that method alive as i accumulate new books.
my other book-related new thing is that i have been writing down which books i've read. this came about when i realized that i forgot i had already read "the fourth man" by k.o. dahl and i re-read it, not once but twice! each time realizing part-way through the first half of the book that i had already read it. i am shaking my head writing this down. but yes, that is why i decided i would write down the names of books i have read. i started keeping track this summer, shortly after the second re-read of "the fourth man".
keep book recommendations coming because i am always looking for new books to read.
i spent way too much time in my storage facility in brooklyn this past november and december. way too much time. but i did my inventory and counted up my things. 58 boxes! of things i've never allowed to buy again, tote bags top the list. no matter how cute, no matter how indispensable they seem. i have boxes of tote bags. it's ridiculous!
i did sell books though -- boxes and boxes of books. i never thought i'd ever sell a book. gift, give-away, loan, donate, sure. but sell. i always had some sort of irrational opposition to selling my books. but i got over that fast! a musty roomful of boxes that you have to move in and out of the room every day for over a week will shake the irrational out of your brain. so i sold a bunch of books. well, i didn't. j.h. took them to the strand and i got nearly $200 from his efforts. yay! j.h. also took a stack that he would try to sell online. hopefully, we get good money for them. apart from the big bucks, this whole ordeal has marked a new way of thinking about books. but, even though i did get rid of a lot of books, i still held on to a whole bunch of books. the criterion for a book to stay in my storage room was whether it fit into any of the following: (1) a book i have read and reread or that i can honestly say i will reread; (2) a book written by a friend or by someone i know; (3) a gift with sentimental value (sorry, bro, that hardcover grisham you gave me for christmas didn't make the cut); (4) an art book; (5) books i haven't read yet, or have read only parts of; and (6) certain reference books (but not ages old law textbooks). so, i'm going to try to keep that method alive as i accumulate new books.
my other book-related new thing is that i have been writing down which books i've read. this came about when i realized that i forgot i had already read "the fourth man" by k.o. dahl and i re-read it, not once but twice! each time realizing part-way through the first half of the book that i had already read it. i am shaking my head writing this down. but yes, that is why i decided i would write down the names of books i have read. i started keeping track this summer, shortly after the second re-read of "the fourth man".
keep book recommendations coming because i am always looking for new books to read.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
a tourist lane in NYC!
i wish i had thought of this! again, kept back by my own lack of initiative.
From "The Gothamist"
Everyone complains about waddling gangs of tourists blocking the sidewalks of this fair city, but nobody ever does anything about it (beyond unleashing the occasional barnyard noise or cane swipe). Until NOW. As you can see from this photo, taken at 22nd Street and Fifth Avenue, some disgruntled local pedestrian has taken bold action to separate those of us taking care of business in this town from those who just come to marvel, slack-jawed and staggering, at our panicked, bug-eyed dynamism. Now we just need a lane for strollers and people who text while walking, and we'll be all set.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
historical london continues
Jews in London: Expulsion & Resettlement
One of the places I wanted to visit in London but didn't get a chance to is London's Jewish Museum. It re-opened in March 2010 after having been closed for 2 years for renovations. Nevertheless, I learned a lot about the history of the Jews in England, much of which was completely new to me. Apparently, there are about 300,000 Jews in England now (I'm not entirely sure how this number was arrived at, but it's been repeated in a few reputable places, so I take it at face value). The history of Jews in England goes back to the Norman Conquest and is a history of violent persecution, long-standing struggle and ultimate success.
The first written records of Jewish settlement in England date from the time of William the Conqueror in 1066, but Peter Ackroyd notes that "there were Jews, Africans and representatives of most of the European races, at the time of the Roman settlement." Documentary evidence for a specific Jewish quarter in the City of London emerges in 1128, although Jewish refugees from the pogrom in Rouen, France (the ancient capital of Normandy) arrived in London in 1096. According to Ackroyd's research, Jews were not permitted to engage in ordinary commerce but were allowed to lend money, the "usury" from which Christian merchants were barred. Later Jews came to be blamed or hated for the very trade imposed upon them by the civic authorities.
The Jewish presence in London was marred by violence and brutality from the earliest times. There was an assault upon Jewish quarters in 1189 when, 'the houses were besieged by the roaring people … because the madmen had not tools, fire was thrown on the roof, and a terrible fire quickly broke out’. Many families were burned alive, while others fleeing into the narrow thoroughfares of Old Jewry and Gresham Street were clubbed or beaten to death. This violence was the result of a rumour that spread from Westminster to the City of London. Richard I had taken the cross before his coronation (he would be going on a crusade after the coronation) and a number of the principal Jews of England presented themselves at Westminster to do homage to the new King. There appears to have been some sort of superstition against Jews being admitted to such a holy ceremony and the Jews who came to pay homage were removed during the banquet after the coronation. This removal from the banquet quickly turned into a rumour that the new King had ordered a massacre of the Jews. Attacks on Jews spread outside London and also occurred in a number of other towns and villages throughout England in 1189-1190.
There was another pogrom in 1215, and on certain occasions the Jews took refuge in the Tower in order to escape the depredations of the mob. Jews suffered from the noble families who were indebted to them. And, in awful foreshadowing of later events, Jews were obliged to wear a sign upon their clothes in recognition of their race. It was not the Star of David, but a tabula or depiction of the stone tablets upon which the Ten Commandments were supposed to have been miraculously inscribed.
The value of the Jewish community to the royal treasury had become considerably lessened during the 13th Century because (1) the king's income from other sources had continually increased, and (2) the contributions of the Jews had decreased both absolutely and relatively. Besides this, the king had found other sources from which to obtain loans. Italian merchants, "pope's usurers" as they were called, supplied him with money, at times on the security of the Jewry. By the middle of the thirteenth century the Jews of England, like those of the Continent, had become chattels of the king. There appeared to be no limit to the exactions he could impose upon them, though it was obviously against his own interest to deprive them entirely of capital, without which they could not gain interest for the King's coffers.
Further prejudice had been raised against the Jews around this time by the revival of the blood libel, a charge of ritual murder. The king had sold the Jewish community to his brother Richard of Cornwall in February 1255 for 5,000 marks, and had lost all rights over it for a year. But in the following August a number of the chief Jews who had assembled at Lincoln to celebrate a marriage were seized on a charge of having murdered a boy named Hugh. Ninety-one were sent to London to the Tower, eighteen were executed for refusal to plead, and the rest were kept in prison till the expiry of Richard's control over their property.
The Jewish presence in England continued until King Edward I's Edict of Expulsion in 1290. All Jews were expelled, beaten, spat upon or killed in a mass exodus from the City. After the expulsion, there was no Jewish community in England, apart from isolated individuals who practiced Judaism secretly. Some Jews returned to London, quietly and almost invisibly, over the next two or three centuries under the guise of Christians. Between the expulsion of the Jews in 1290 and their formal return in 1655, there is no official trace of Jews on English soil except in connection with the Domus Conversorum (House of the Converts; built for Jews who had converted to Christianity).
In the 1650s, Menasseh Ben Israel, a rabbi and leader of the Dutch Jewish community, approached Oliver Cromwell with the proposition that Jews should at long-last be readmitted to England. Cromwell agreed, and although he could not compel a council called for the purpose in December 1655 to consent formally to readmission, he made it clear that the ban on Jews would no longer be enforced. In the years 1655–56, the controversy over the readmission of Jews was fought out in a pamphlet war. The issue divided religious radicals and more conservative elements within society. In the end, Jews were readmitted in 1655, and, by 1690, about 3,000 Jews had settled in England.
The Jewish Naturalisation Act of 1753 was an attempt to legalize the Jewish presence in England. This legislation was essentially a way to reward Jews for their loyalty to the government during the Jacobite rising of 1745 (Jacobitism was the political movement dedicated to the restoration of the Stuart kings to the thrones of England, Scotland, and Kingdom of Ireland. The movement took its name from the Latin form Jacobus of the name of King James II and VII.). The Jews' chief financier, Samson Gideon, had strengthened the stock market, and several of the younger members of the Jewish community had volunteered in the corps raised to defend London. Possibly as a reward, Henry Pelham in 1753 brought in the Jew Bill of 1753, which allowed Jews to become naturalized by application to Parliament. It passed the Lords without much opposition, but on being brought down to the House of Commons, the Tories made a great outcry against this "abandonment of Christianity", as they called it. The Whigs, however, persisted in carrying out at least one part of their general policy of religious toleration, and the bill was passed and received the royal assent in July of 1753. It remained in force for only a few months however, as it was repealed in 1754 due to widespread opposition to its provisions.
Historians commonly date Jewish Emancipation to 1858 when Jews were finally allowed to sit in Parliament. Catholic Emancipation took place in 1829 and the first step for the Jews was taken in 1830 when a petition signed by 2,000 people in Liverpool was presented seeking similar emancipation for the Jews. This was followed by a bill presented to Parliament later that year, which was destined to engage Parliament in the issue for the next 30 years or so.
In 1837, Queen Victoria knighted Moses Haim Montefiore. Four years later, Isaac Lyon Goldsmid was made baronet, and he became the first Jew to receive a hereditary title. The first Jewish Lord Mayor of London, Sir David Salomons, was elected in 1855, followed by the 1858 emancipation of the Jews. On July 26, 1858, Lionel de Rothschild was finally allowed to sit in the British House of Commons when the law restricting the oath of office to Christians was changed. Benjamin Disraeli, a baptised Christian of Jewish parentage, was already an MP. In 1868, Disraeli became Prime Minister having earlier been Chancellor of the Exchequer. In 1884, Nathan Mayer Rothschild, the 1st Baron Rothschild, became the first Jewish member of the British House of Lords. (Disraeli was already a member; Though born a Jew, Disraeli's baptism as a child qualified him as eligible for political aspirations, presenting no restrictions regarding a mandated Christian oath of office.)
Since 1858, the English Parliament has never been without Jewish members.
One of the places I wanted to visit in London but didn't get a chance to is London's Jewish Museum. It re-opened in March 2010 after having been closed for 2 years for renovations. Nevertheless, I learned a lot about the history of the Jews in England, much of which was completely new to me. Apparently, there are about 300,000 Jews in England now (I'm not entirely sure how this number was arrived at, but it's been repeated in a few reputable places, so I take it at face value). The history of Jews in England goes back to the Norman Conquest and is a history of violent persecution, long-standing struggle and ultimate success.
The first written records of Jewish settlement in England date from the time of William the Conqueror in 1066, but Peter Ackroyd notes that "there were Jews, Africans and representatives of most of the European races, at the time of the Roman settlement." Documentary evidence for a specific Jewish quarter in the City of London emerges in 1128, although Jewish refugees from the pogrom in Rouen, France (the ancient capital of Normandy) arrived in London in 1096. According to Ackroyd's research, Jews were not permitted to engage in ordinary commerce but were allowed to lend money, the "usury" from which Christian merchants were barred. Later Jews came to be blamed or hated for the very trade imposed upon them by the civic authorities.
The Jewish presence in London was marred by violence and brutality from the earliest times. There was an assault upon Jewish quarters in 1189 when, 'the houses were besieged by the roaring people … because the madmen had not tools, fire was thrown on the roof, and a terrible fire quickly broke out’. Many families were burned alive, while others fleeing into the narrow thoroughfares of Old Jewry and Gresham Street were clubbed or beaten to death. This violence was the result of a rumour that spread from Westminster to the City of London. Richard I had taken the cross before his coronation (he would be going on a crusade after the coronation) and a number of the principal Jews of England presented themselves at Westminster to do homage to the new King. There appears to have been some sort of superstition against Jews being admitted to such a holy ceremony and the Jews who came to pay homage were removed during the banquet after the coronation. This removal from the banquet quickly turned into a rumour that the new King had ordered a massacre of the Jews. Attacks on Jews spread outside London and also occurred in a number of other towns and villages throughout England in 1189-1190.
There was another pogrom in 1215, and on certain occasions the Jews took refuge in the Tower in order to escape the depredations of the mob. Jews suffered from the noble families who were indebted to them. And, in awful foreshadowing of later events, Jews were obliged to wear a sign upon their clothes in recognition of their race. It was not the Star of David, but a tabula or depiction of the stone tablets upon which the Ten Commandments were supposed to have been miraculously inscribed.
The value of the Jewish community to the royal treasury had become considerably lessened during the 13th Century because (1) the king's income from other sources had continually increased, and (2) the contributions of the Jews had decreased both absolutely and relatively. Besides this, the king had found other sources from which to obtain loans. Italian merchants, "pope's usurers" as they were called, supplied him with money, at times on the security of the Jewry. By the middle of the thirteenth century the Jews of England, like those of the Continent, had become chattels of the king. There appeared to be no limit to the exactions he could impose upon them, though it was obviously against his own interest to deprive them entirely of capital, without which they could not gain interest for the King's coffers.
Further prejudice had been raised against the Jews around this time by the revival of the blood libel, a charge of ritual murder. The king had sold the Jewish community to his brother Richard of Cornwall in February 1255 for 5,000 marks, and had lost all rights over it for a year. But in the following August a number of the chief Jews who had assembled at Lincoln to celebrate a marriage were seized on a charge of having murdered a boy named Hugh. Ninety-one were sent to London to the Tower, eighteen were executed for refusal to plead, and the rest were kept in prison till the expiry of Richard's control over their property.
The Jewish presence in England continued until King Edward I's Edict of Expulsion in 1290. All Jews were expelled, beaten, spat upon or killed in a mass exodus from the City. After the expulsion, there was no Jewish community in England, apart from isolated individuals who practiced Judaism secretly. Some Jews returned to London, quietly and almost invisibly, over the next two or three centuries under the guise of Christians. Between the expulsion of the Jews in 1290 and their formal return in 1655, there is no official trace of Jews on English soil except in connection with the Domus Conversorum (House of the Converts; built for Jews who had converted to Christianity).
In the 1650s, Menasseh Ben Israel, a rabbi and leader of the Dutch Jewish community, approached Oliver Cromwell with the proposition that Jews should at long-last be readmitted to England. Cromwell agreed, and although he could not compel a council called for the purpose in December 1655 to consent formally to readmission, he made it clear that the ban on Jews would no longer be enforced. In the years 1655–56, the controversy over the readmission of Jews was fought out in a pamphlet war. The issue divided religious radicals and more conservative elements within society. In the end, Jews were readmitted in 1655, and, by 1690, about 3,000 Jews had settled in England.
The Jewish Naturalisation Act of 1753 was an attempt to legalize the Jewish presence in England. This legislation was essentially a way to reward Jews for their loyalty to the government during the Jacobite rising of 1745 (Jacobitism was the political movement dedicated to the restoration of the Stuart kings to the thrones of England, Scotland, and Kingdom of Ireland. The movement took its name from the Latin form Jacobus of the name of King James II and VII.). The Jews' chief financier, Samson Gideon, had strengthened the stock market, and several of the younger members of the Jewish community had volunteered in the corps raised to defend London. Possibly as a reward, Henry Pelham in 1753 brought in the Jew Bill of 1753, which allowed Jews to become naturalized by application to Parliament. It passed the Lords without much opposition, but on being brought down to the House of Commons, the Tories made a great outcry against this "abandonment of Christianity", as they called it. The Whigs, however, persisted in carrying out at least one part of their general policy of religious toleration, and the bill was passed and received the royal assent in July of 1753. It remained in force for only a few months however, as it was repealed in 1754 due to widespread opposition to its provisions.
Historians commonly date Jewish Emancipation to 1858 when Jews were finally allowed to sit in Parliament. Catholic Emancipation took place in 1829 and the first step for the Jews was taken in 1830 when a petition signed by 2,000 people in Liverpool was presented seeking similar emancipation for the Jews. This was followed by a bill presented to Parliament later that year, which was destined to engage Parliament in the issue for the next 30 years or so.
In 1837, Queen Victoria knighted Moses Haim Montefiore. Four years later, Isaac Lyon Goldsmid was made baronet, and he became the first Jew to receive a hereditary title. The first Jewish Lord Mayor of London, Sir David Salomons, was elected in 1855, followed by the 1858 emancipation of the Jews. On July 26, 1858, Lionel de Rothschild was finally allowed to sit in the British House of Commons when the law restricting the oath of office to Christians was changed. Benjamin Disraeli, a baptised Christian of Jewish parentage, was already an MP. In 1868, Disraeli became Prime Minister having earlier been Chancellor of the Exchequer. In 1884, Nathan Mayer Rothschild, the 1st Baron Rothschild, became the first Jewish member of the British House of Lords. (Disraeli was already a member; Though born a Jew, Disraeli's baptism as a child qualified him as eligible for political aspirations, presenting no restrictions regarding a mandated Christian oath of office.)
Since 1858, the English Parliament has never been without Jewish members.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
