THE NAMES GIVEN TO THE QUARTER

THE Jewish quarter in the Crown of Aragon was called by various names. In Aragon it was called judería, as in Castile and Navarre. The names judaismo and ebreismo denoting the Jewish quarter were peculiar to Aragon alone. In Catalonia, Roussillon, and Majorca its name was call. In Valencia bothjudería and call were used. Only in Lerida was the Jewish quarter known by a unique name as cuyrafa, curacia, or coiraza. Opinions among scholars differ as to the etymology of the word call. Some claim that the word comes from the Hebrew qahal; others suggest a Latin origin, the word callum.

In the Hebrew sources the Jewish quarter was referred to as shekhunat Yisrael, shekhunat ha- Yehudim, or simply shekhunah, that is ‘quarter', and migrash haYehudim or shekhunat ha-qahal.

ESTABLISHMENT AND LOCATION

Practically every Jewish settlement had its own quarter where the majority of the Jews lived. In some parts of the Crown of Aragon Jews lived in little villages in very small numbers, perhaps just three or four families living together with some Jews in their service. The question here was whether, if the number of the male Jews there amounted to ten, they could be considered as an organized community or not. In such places, there could have been no Jewish quarter.

The location of the Jewish quarter depended on many factors. In many cities of the Crown of Aragon, the Jewish quarter was in the proximity of the palace, fortress, or cathedral. Here the Jews would be under close supervision and their activities could be carefully watched; on the other hand, as they were considered the ruler's property, their protection from hostile neighbours and mob would be better achieved if they were concentrated near public buildings. The very concentration of Jews in a neighbourhood was of course a Jewish concern too. For religious, social, and security reasons the Jews preferred to live together. The Jewish quarter developed into a Jewish miniature city within a Christian city or next to it. It was in many respects similar to the Christian city or town but had parallel institutions. In principle, it was under the direct rule of the king-count. Its total independence from the city created antagonism, which the municipal authorities and citizens expressed in many forms and on many occasions.