Thread 18137054

ITT: I will post the four surviving contemporary accounts of the murder of Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln, who, according to these accounts, was viciously tortured and crucified in 1255 by the Jews of Lincoln as part of a ritual murder.

The accounts differ from each other in some respects, but key elements remain the same. Little Saint Hugh became the subject of a popular British folk song, which was popular until the late 19th century. Variants recorded by Francis Child can be read here:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_English_and_Scottish_Popular_Ballads/Part_5/Chapter_155

First, the account given by Matthew Paris in his Chronica Majora:
>Of the cruel treatment of the Jews for having crucified a boy.

>In this same year, about the time of the festival of the apostles Peter and Paul, the Jews of Lincoln stole a boy of eight years of age, whose name was Hugh ; and, having shut him up in a room quite out of the way, where they fed him on milk and other childish nourishment, they sent to almost all the cities of England where the Jews lived, and summoned some of their sect from each city to be present at a sacrifice to take place at Lincoln ; for they had, as they stated, a boy hidden for the purpose of being crucified. In accordance with the summons, a great many of them came to Lincoln, and on assembling, they at once appointed a Jew of Lincoln as judge, to take the place of Pilate, by whose sentence, and with the concurrence of all, the boy was subjected to divers tortures. They beat him till blood flowed and he was quite livid, they crowned him with thorns, derided him, and spat upon him. Moreover, he was pierced by each of them with a wood knife, was made to drink gall, was overwhelmed with approaches and blasphemies, and was repeatedly called Jesus the false prophet by his tormentors, who surrounded him, grinding and gnashing their teeth. After tormenting him in divers ways, they crucified him, and pierced him to the heart with a lance.

>"When the king, on his return from the north of England, was informed of this occurrence, he reproached John for having promised life and limb to such a wicked being ; which he had no right to do ; for a blasphemer and murderer like him deserved to die many times over. When the guilty man saw that unavoidable punishment was impending over him, he said, " My death is imminent, nor can John aid, or save me from perishing : now I will tell all of you the truth. Almost all the Jews of England agreed to the murder of this boy, of which they (the Jews) are accused ; and from almost every city of England in which Jews dwell, some of that sect were selected and summoned to be present at the sacrifice of him, as at a paschal offering." After he had given utterance to these words and to other ravings, he was tied to a horse's tail and dragged to the gallows, where he was delivered over body and soul to the evil spirits of the air. The rest of the Jews who had participated in this crime, to the number of ninety-one, were carried to London in carts, and consigned to close imprisonment ; and if they were perchance pitied by any Christians, they did not excite any tears of compassion amongst the Caursins, their rivals.

>How eighteen Jews were dragged to the gallows and hung.

>Afterwards, on an inquisition made by the king's justiciaries, it was discovered and decided that the Jews of England had by common consent crucified and put to death an innocent boy, after having flagellated him for several days : but for this offence, on the mother of the aforesaid boy making an appeal to the king against them for the said murder, God, the Lord of vengeance, visited them with retribution according to their deserts. For on St. Clement's day, eighteen of the richer and higher order of Jews of the city of Lincoln were dragged to new gibbets, erected especially for the purpose, and were hung up, an offering to the winds.

>More than eighty others also were kept in close confinement in the Tower of London, awaiting a similar fate.

>Of the scandal originated by the Minors.

>About this same time, some infamous Jews, to the number of seventy-one, who had been condemned to death by a jury of twenty-five knights, for the murder of the wretched boy crucified at Lincoln, were detained in prison at London to be hung, and as their enemies state, they sent messengers privately to the Minor brethren, begging them to intercede on their behalf, that they might be released from prison and saved from death, although they were deserving of a most disgraceful one. The brethren then (as the world reports, if in such a case the world is to be believed), influenced by bribes, interceded for these Jews, and by their prayers released them from prison and saved them from the death they had deserved ; but I think that we ought in propriety to believe that they were influenced by the spirit of piety ; for as long as any one is treading the path of life in tins world he has a right to entertain his own opinion ; he can be saved, and hopes ought to be entertained of hini ; but as for the devil, or those manifestly condemned, we cannot have hopes for them, nor need they be prayed for, as there is no hope for them. Death and a definitive sentence enshackled these Jews irrevocably ; and this argument could not excuse the Minors, or prevent scandal from defaming them, guiltless as they were ; and the lower classes of people withheld their charity, and would not bestow alms on them as formerly. Thus the devotion of the London people towards the Minors grew lukewarm, in the same way as the charity of the Parisians had been chilled towards the Preacher brethren for having endeavoured to invalidate the ancient and approved customs of the community.

>Of the release of the Jewish prisoners.

>On the 15th of May in this year, thirty-five of the Jews accused of the crucifixion of St. Hugh, the Lincoln boy, and who had been detained prisoners in the Tower of London, were dismissed from that prison and set at liberty. But these Jews, I say, were found guilty on their trial by jury, from the statement made by the Jew who was hung at Lincoln, in the first place.
— Paris, Matthew (1852). Giles, John Allen (ed.). Matthew Paris's English history : from the year 1235 to 1273 Vol III, p. 138-141, 163-164

Next, the account given in the Annals of Waverly by an anonymous author (translated by AI):
>1255. The Jews, enemies of the Christian religion, afflicting a certain boy named Hugh in Lincoln with many and varied tortures, miserably, at last, affixed him to a cross in scorn and contempt of the name of Christ, and slew him by a cruel death. Afterwards, desiring that so great a crime should surely be hidden from Christians, they took the glorious body down from the cross's gallows and cast it into a certain river to be drowned; but that water, not tolerating such an injury to its Creator, immediately exposed it upon dry ground. Seeing this, the enemies of Christ, vainly supposing it would be hidden more safely and secretly under the earth, straightway committed it to burial. But on the morrow, they found the body of the blessed martyr placed upon the earth, just as before. As a result, greatly amazed by the novelty of so great a thing (and not undeservedly, nearly driven to madness), and destitute of all counsel and help, they were completely ignorant of what to do or where to turn. At last, using what they thought was a higher plan, they cast it into a certain well containing drinking water.

>But even there, Divine mercy was not absent, having no little compassion for its boy so cruelly afflicted and slain for its sake; for the splendor of so great a light immediately shone down from heaven, and so great a fragrance of wondrous odor filled that whole place, that it was clearly given to all to understand that something holy and miraculous was contained in that well. Therefore, Christians, aroused by these signs, hastened to flock to that well in competition, and seeing the venerable body floating upon the water, they immediately began to extract it from there with the utmost devotion of heart. Moreover, with his hands and feet pierced, his head also bloodied in the manner of a crown by the points of various punctures, and other wounds evident everywhere over the whole body, it was now manifest to all that the detestable Jews had been the authors of so great a crime. When they carried the body of the blessed martyr to the church, in procession with joyful voices and great veneration, a certain blind woman devoutly touched the bier, and immediately deserved to recover the desired sight, which she had lacked for seven years, through the merits of blessed Hugh; and hearing this, a certain man afflicted with dropsy also stayed awake in the church that same night near the most sacred body for the sake of obtaining salvation, and he obtained the salvation he sought, with all undue swelling being expelled. Many other benefits were also performed there, to strengthen the faith and hope of Christians, and for the confusion and opprobrium of the Jews; eighteen of whom, having been convicted of so great a crime afterwards, and having confessed with their own mouth, were dragged by horses through the middle of the city of London and hanged with ropes.

— Annales monastici, edit. Luard, II., p. 346

Third, the account given in the Annals of Burton by an anonymous author, also translated by AI:
>Concerning the Boy Crucified by the Jews at Lincoln

>At the same time, the greater Jews from the whole kingdom having been called together at Lincoln, on the vigil of Saint Peter which is called "ad Vincula" (in Chains), a certain Jew of that same city named Jopinus, by means of snares set for him, secretly stole Saint Hugh, a small boy of nine years, the only son of a certain poor woman, a scholar, from the games and dances of his countrymen and peers, just as the sun was setting. Having been stolen, he concealed him in a very secret chamber of his own house for twenty-six days, and afflicted him with such starvation and thirst that he could scarcely form his voice into words.

>Then, all the Jews, both local and foreign, who were in that city having been gathered into one place, the high priests and chief priests took counsel to deliver the innocent boy to death. Therefore, when he was brought in and placed in their midst, like a lamb among wolves, blinded and senseless, wishing to fulfill the desire of their father (of whom it is written, "You are of your father the devil")—to the shame of the passion of Jesus Christ, Who suffers in His saints through the mercy of compassion—they surrounded the innocent boy, stripped him, beat him with scourges, and spat in his face. They cut off the cartilage of his nose with the upper lip, breaking the main upper teeth.

>Then, raising him onto the cross, they insulted him with their voices and gnashed their teeth at him. Oh, how incomprehensible are your judgments, O Lord! But you have made everything in wisdom. The little boy smiled at the whole spirit of malice raging against him, and neither murmur nor complaint sounded from his mouth. Indeed, filled with the grace of the Holy Spirit, he remained with a cheerful countenance, as if suffering nothing.

>And, what is wonderful to say, being established at such a tender age, he emitted neither a voice nor a groan.

>At last, the ministers of the devil, to provoke the King of Glory—our Redeemer, Whom their fathers denied before the face of Pilati, saying, "We have no king but Caesar," and to confound His members, that is, Christians, with detestable and horrific cruelty—pierced the very tender body of the said boy from the sole of the foot to the top of the head with so many sharp and tiny points, that with his whole body bloodied by wounds, the wounds inflicted made his body resemble the skin of a hedgehog. Finally, his side having been pierced with a lance, with his head bowed, he breathed out his spirit into the hands of the Lord.

>The woman, the mother of this saint, when she saw that he did not return home in his usual manner, was immediately terrified, and quickly sought him out through acquaintances, neighbors, and friends. When he was not found, the testimony of the children with whom he was accustomed to playing, showing the time of day and the place where they last saw and left him, raised a vehement suspicion among the Christians that he had been stolen and killed by the Jews. Their opinion took its argument from this, that diverse Jews from all provinces and cities of the kingdom of England had then convened in the same city, and were applauding one another more than usual.

>When also cunningly questioned by certain Christians familiar with them as to why they had convened thus and remained there so long, they replied that they had called together the chiefs and most powerful men of their nation from diverse provinces for the sake of celebrating wedding solemnities, and that the invited guests had made a longer stay because a matrimonial bond was about to be contracted between the very wealthy and those pre-eminent above the rest in nobleness of birth, thus wishing to conceal what they had wickedly committed.

>But the truth of the deed gradually becoming clear over the days, the aforesaid woman, the mother of the aforementioned boy, with weeping and groaning, in labor and the sweat of her face, set out to the lord King in Scotland, where he was then staying, and, having thrown herself at his feet, shouting and wailing, she laid down her complaint about this matter.

>Meanwhile, the Jews, knowing that an inquiry would be made into this matter, and that when the truth became known they would justly be condemned to a sharper punishment according to their deserts, frozen and dismayed, with conscience inwardly tormenting them, secretly took the lifeless body in the silence of the deep night, cast it into a certain well, and secretly departed. Whereupon, when an inquiry into this matter was later made by royal command, he was found, betrayed by Him Whose footsteps he had followed in his passion, and Who also deigned to change that which had been committed by the wicked Jews to the ignominy of His Name and the derision, contempt, and reproach of the Christian faith, to His Own glory and the exaltation of the Christian faith.

>For, he having been thus found, and now extracted from the well with his clothes, a concourse of people was made from all sides, crying out with a loud voice and saying, "Thanks to you, Lord Jesus Christ, Who "even in modern times has deigned to call tender boys to the heavenly kingdoms by the palm of martyrdom."

>>18137054 (OP)
Are one of these accounts from the 19th century antiquarians who dug up the body and found it hadn't been mutilated after all?

>And while all who were present moistened their breasts with pious tears, and both greater and lesser of both sexes hastened to this spectacle, behold, a woman who had been deprived of the light of both eyes for fifteen years, and who had dearly loved the infant before, was brought there and approached closer, and with faith touched the body, thus exclaiming, "Alas, alas, my sweetest little Hugh, that "this has thus happened!" and withdrawing the hand which she had placed upon the body, she anointed her blind eyes with the moisture of the bloody body, and immediately recovered her sight completely. But astonished by the newness of the miracle, she cried out to all standing by with loud voices, "Rejoice with me all "you who love God, and see the miracles which He has "wrought in your presence."

>And when they fixed their gaze upon her, and ascertained for certain that she was the woman who had been blind for so long, all and singular, astonished and amazed, raised a great shout to the heavens, "This was done by the Lord, and it is wonderful "in our eyes; blessed be God who does not forsake "those who hope in Him, and who, by renewing ancient miracles, excites His people to the fear and love of His Name, "and strengthens and confirms them in the faith."

>Therefore, the city was filled with immense joy, and his sweetest passion sounded in the mouth of all. Indeed, the people rushed in crowds, desiring to see what miracles Almighty God was working through him. For whoever, at that time, sick or weak, approached his most holy body, whatever ailment he suffered from, returned to his home rejoicing and cheerful, having recovered his health.

>Therefore, having heard of so many miracles, and the clamor of the people or the fame having been spread everywhere, the Dean and Canons of the Cathedral Church of that same city, together with their Vicars, the clergy and people associated with them, went in solemn procession to the body of the holy martyr.

>Lifting it up, with candles, crosses, and censers preceding, and everything else properly arranged and organized, they carried it to the major monastery of the Blessed Virgin, singing and weeping, and praising God with a sweet-sounding voice in the organ of their hearts; though a certain fellow canon of the same college, in whose parish the same little boy had been tenderly brought up from his mother's womb until his martyrdom, appealed boldly and strongly protested, lest the body should be carried outside his parish by anyone's rash presumption, to the prejudice of his prebend.

>But the aforementioned Dean and Canons, not yielding to this kind of appeal, solemnly celebrating the funeral rites of the triumphant martyr, all things having been duly completed, they committed the earthly remains of the holy body to a very fitting burial next to the tomb of the most holy father Robert, Bishop of the same place.

>Conclusion of the Account

>And so, at the same time, Richard, Earl of Cornwall, brother of King Henry, arrived at the same city for the sake of a pilgrimage to Saint Robert (Grosseteste); in whose presence divine mercy deigned to work various miracles. Afterwards, however, the business for which the lord King had set out to Scotland being completed, he returned to the same city around the Feast of Saint Michael, and with him the Lady Queen and many other bishops and magnates of the kingdom.

>Therefore, the matter being examined, and the truth of the thing concerning the passion of this boy diligently inquired into, it became known to all, clearer than light, that the event had proceeded in the pre-described manner and order.

>For when, by royal decree, bailiffs and others went out to capture the Jews (who, piling crime upon crime, drew their name in affection and deed not from Judah, son of Jacob, nor from Judas Maccabaeus, son of Mattathias, but from Judas the treacherous betrayer, the son of perdition), they tried to defend themselves by closing their doors with bolts thrown and bars, supposing that they could resist the royal power and decree.

>But the bailiffs and other ministers of the lord King sent there by command of the lord King, exasperated by their obstinacy and provoked to anger, breaking down the gates, tearing out the bolts, and smashing the bars, entered through back doors, windows, and main doors, rushing upon them, and binding as many as they could find with tight chains, led them ignominiously and disgracefully with them to the court.

>And when they were examined in various ways concerning the progress of this deed, by command of the lord King, John of Lessington, his steward and privy counselor, a prudent and discreet man, and skilled in both laws, namely canon and civil, summoned Joppin the Jew, the chief and high priest of the same, by whose counsel, it is asserted, the sacrilegious crime was perpetrated by the wicked and treacherous, and promised to give him counsel and aid so that he would not be handed over to death, if he would tell him the truth of the matter.

>Therefore, rejoicing in the promise of such a great man, and supposing that he and the other Jews could be redeemed by a monetary gift, he confessed absolutely everything. Thus, his confession was written down and recited in the presence of the lord King and the magnates of the kingdom who were present there, the Jew himself relating it.

>And because it seemed to redound to the infamy of the crown's rule and majesty if such a murderer were not punished with due penalty, the perpetrator and author of so great a crime was tied alive by judicial sentence by his own feet to the tail of a living horse; upon which a certain young man immediately mounted, and applying spurs, quickly urged it into a run, and dragged the wicked man miserably but deservedly through the streets and squares of the same city, with the people watching. There was praise and exultation for the Christians, and horror and confusion for the Jews. And when, having been dragged for a long time through the winding streets, stones, and rocks, wood and pavement, his body now lacerated piece by piece, he was hanged upon the gallows, his wretched soul, violently cast out from his accursed body, was sent to the infernal regions by perpetual punishment. The aforesaid friars, however, at London, although they had applied great diligence to free the bodies of the treacherous from the danger of death due to them, as has already been said, they nevertheless accomplished nothing.

>At last, when the lord King arrived with the magnates of the kingdom at Reading, it was provided that all the Jews of the whole kingdom who had given their assent to this deed, and especially those who were present, namely seventy-one who were held in chains at London, should die just as Joppin perished, lest if perchance those who had committed this crime could in any way escape, they should become more prone to commit a similar or greater crime. For impunity of offenders provides audacity for offending.

>Hearing this, Richard, Earl of Cornwall, the king's brother, by interposing his authority and power, freed those who had been sentenced to death from the danger of death, because he had taken all the Jews of England from his brother the King for a term as a pledge for a very large sum of money, and because of the immense sum of money he had received from the Jews to save them. Nor was there anyone who might resist or contradict him in this deed. Thus, thus were those who did the injury justified for the sake of money, and the guilty ones were acquitted without satisfaction.

>Therefore, the aforesaid holy little boy was secretly stolen by the Jews, as we have already said, on the second day before the Kalends of August (July 31st), namely on the vigil of Saint Peter which is called "ad Vincula," and was crucified on the sixth day before the Kalends of September (August 27th), namely on a Friday, and found and extracted from the well on the fourth day before the Kalends of the same month (August 29th), namely on a Sunday, reigning our Lord Jesus Christ, Who lives and reigns, etc.

— Annales monastici, edit. Luard, I., p. 340

Finally, a translation of an Anglo-Norman poem written as a passio, a story of Christian martyrdom. This poem was composed somewhere between 1255 (the year of Hugh's death) and 1272 (the year of Henry III's death), as the author alludes to Henry as though he were alive several times. It survives in a manuscript of Anglo-Norman religious verse in Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF) MS fr. 902. The following translation by Roger Dahood makes no attempt at rhyme:

>Hugh of Lincoln

>Hear now a fine song
>Of the Jews of Lincoln, who by treachery
>Committed the cruel murder
>Of a child named Hugh

>In Lincoln the noble city,
>Right in the Dernstall, the child was born;
>He was seized by Petevin the Jew
>One evening at the beginning of August.

>Surely no sooner was the child taken
>Than his mother knew
>That her child was lost:
>She went searching for him in many places.

>She went crying out all evening long
>Until the ringing of curfew:
>“I have lost my dear child
>Whom I have always loved so much.”

>The mother slept very little that night,
>She spent very little time in bed,
>She very much prayed God that if it pleased him
>By his mercy she might recover him.

>As soon as she had said her prayer,
>She had a great suspicion
>That her son had been seized
>By Jews and treachery.

>At the very break of day
>The woman went crying
>Through the Jewry, asking
>At the doors of the Jews: “Where is my child?”

>The door where the child had entered
>I have no doubt had been so tightly shut
>That no Christian of woman born
>Could find out their secret there.

>The rumor soon was spread throughout the city
>That the child had been stolen.
>But no one knew the truth
>Except Jesus Christ and the impious ones.

>On account of the suspicion that she had
>Of the Jews of Lincoln, as pleased God,
>She hardly stopped all night,
>Until she came to the court.

>When the woman had gone
>Out of the city of Lincoln,
>Happy indeed were those
>Who had seized the child.

>Indeed, they thought that she had fled
>Out of Lincoln for fear of her life,
>So great were her cries.
>You will hear more, don’t doubt it at all.

>When she came before King Henry
>—May God protect him and save his life!—
>At his feet she fell at once
>And piteously cried him mercy:

>“Sire, if you please, listen: my son was taken
>One evening by the Jews of Lincoln;
>Take heed, if you please, for mercy.”

>The king gave his true promise thus:
>“By God’s pity! If it is such
>As you have said,
>The Jews will die without mercy!

>And if you have lied
>About the Jews concerning such a crime,
>By St. Edward, have no doubt
>The same fate will befall you.”

>The woman answered very softly:
>“May Jesus Christ almighty
>On Doomsday grant
>That you might know the truth at last!

>Soon after the child was taken,
>The Jews of Lincoln convened in great assembly
>Of the richest Jews in England,
>As had been planned earlier.

>The child was brought before them
>Bound with a rope by Jopin the Jew.
>At once they stripped the child naked
>Just as the Jews had done to Jesus.

>All the Jews who were there
>Made great joy, every one of them,
>That they saw the child completely naked;
>They felt scarcely any pity for him.

>At once Jopin the Jew spoke,
>Who fancied to speak very well:
>“The child must be sold
>For thirty pennies, as Jesus was.”

>Hagin the Jew replied:
>“Give me that child
>For thirty pennies of good weight.
>See them, here, now!

>But I want him sentenced
>To death and handed over to me,
>So that I may do my will,
>Because I have bought him.”

>The response of the Jews was very harsh,
>And they soon gave their decision:
>Let Hagin have him—nothing is wrong with that—
>But let the child be put to death at once.”

>And then even harsher words spoke
>The evil Jews of Lincoln,
>All crying out with one voice,
>“Let the child be put on the cross!”

>The Jews of Lincoln now
>Brought forth a cross.
>The child was trembling a great deal then.
>He said nothing at all.

>The child was speedily untied
>And soon hung on the cross
>Villainously, as Jesus was,
>That He might die for our gain.

>Now hear the great merit through suffering—
>Thanks to God!—what dread
>The young child at this hour had
>When he was set on the cross!

>His arms were stretched
>On the cross. While they were thus bound,
>Pierced by the hands of the Jew
>Were his feet, his hands, with sharp nails.

>Thus the hands and feet
>Of this child were attached
>To the cross, as you have heard,
>And fully alive he was crucified.

>Now hear the great suffering of the child
>When Hagin the Jew stepped forward,
>On account of the words he spoke:
>“Now the child will die!”

>Hagin the Jew grasps his knife
>And pierces the side of the innocent,
>And then he cleaves his heart in two.
>The evil people smiled then.

>The child cried out
>When his soul left his body,
>He cried out for his mother and said:
>“Pray for me to Jesus Christ.”

>The good soul of this child
>Was carried immediately
>By the angels of heaven all singing
>Before God almighty.

>When this child was dead
>On the cross, then said
>The evil Jews of Lincoln:
>“Let the body be carried out the door!

>Let it be buried deep in the ground,
>So that Christian man born of woman
>May neither see where it is buried
>Nor know our secret.”

>When the body was buried,
>A Jew said scornfully:
>“Now may his mother make
>Great rejoicing for him today.”

>On the next morning
>Jews passed by where he had been buried.
>On top of the ground they found him;
>They were greatly terrified then.

>The Jews of Lincoln, when they heard
>Of the great marvel that the others saw,
>The same day they assembled,
>And agreed in council to a plan

>So that the child’s body
>Was immediately thrown
>Into a stinking privy.
>They were great fools and miscreants.

>Therefore the Jews full of treason
>Found the body the next morning
>Outside the doorstep of the latrine;
>All that they had done was in vain.

>The Jews of Lincoln were filled
>With grief and dread
>When they could not at any time
>Hide the body, night or day.

>A Jew came and said:
>“Let the body of the child be carried
>Outside of the city at once,
>Because soon it will stink!

>Indeed, a woman whom I have, a close friend,
>Was my nurse,
>And for bribes she has agreed
>To carry away the body secretly.

>But before it is carried
>Outside the city of Lincoln
>All the wounds must be filled
>With yellow wax boiled well.”

>By the ill-starred nurse
>At night the body was carried;
>It was thrown into a well
>Behind the castle of the city.

>The woman was thought a Christian;
>For this reason she feared nothing;
>She expected to escape handily.
>Afterwards she would be held more despicable than a dog.

>Another woman came in the morning
>To draw water at the well.
>She found the body, but she hardly
>Dared touch it with her hand

>Because it was so soiled
>By filth from the privy.
>The woman was much amazed
>To find such a body there.

>Soon she recalled
>The rumor of the stolen child;
>She went into Lincoln
>To the Dernstall, where the child was born.

>When she came to the house,
>To the step-father of the child Hugh,
>To the worthy man she said at once:
>“Listen now to me:

>I have found the body of a child
>Outside Lincoln,
>On top of a well in the morning.
>I advise you to examine it.

>Speedily the worthy man agreed
>Because of the great suspicion
>He had that the abduction
>Was the work of Jews by treason.

>Throughout the city the woman went crying:
>“In a well I have found a child
>Lying all naked behind the castle.
>Let examination be made at once!”

>Those who heard the woman’s cry
>All ran to the well;
>There they found the child’s body.
>They all prayed for his soul.

>No sooner were the coroners
>Of the city summoned
>Than they came willingly
>To view the body dutifully.

>When the body had been examined,
>It was known to all;
>And everyone said: “Today
>Let the body be carried to where he was born!”

>Right away the body was carried
>To the Dernstall, where he was born;
>Because the body was so filthy,
>It could not be attended to by the priest.

>A woman came at this time
>Who long ago had lost
>Her sight in one eye, as it happened,
>As our Lord God willed.

>The woman immediately said:
>“Alas! Little Hugh, young child
>Who was so beautiful before,
>Why are you lying here?”

>With her hands she caressed the body.
>Afterwards, she touched the eye she had lost.
>God showed her his grace.
>He gave her the sight in her eye.

>When the woman perceived
>The grace and miracle
>That had been sent to her,
>“Thank God!” she said; “I have my sight.”

>All the people who were there
>Saw the great miracle;
>All gave thanks to God;
>So did everyone who heard.

>At this time a convert
>Came forward and said:
>“Do you want to know straightway
>How this child died?

>Let his body that is filthy
>Be washed with hot water!
>I indeed believe it will be discovered
>How the child was tortured.”

>No sooner was the body washed
>Than the convert understood what had happened;
>Then he revealed to them the treason
>That was done through the Jewish plot.

>The same wounds with which God was afflicted
>Were found on the child.
>Through the city of Lincoln
>The news went quickly.

>Those of the cathedral heard
>God’s miracle that the others had seen.
>They all ran to the blessed body.
>They forcibly carried him away.

>In the center of Lincoln in the cathedral,
>Where bodies of saints of the past were,
>With great joy he was entombed:
>They did very well, it seems to me.

>In all the city there was no canon
>Who did not come in procession
>To the body of Hugh.
>With great devotion he was entombed.

>Soon afterwards the mother came
>From the court with a sad face,
>Because she could not see the body
>Of her dear son, whom she loved.

>Because the rumor that was so great
>Of the murder of this child,
>And concerning the Jews so much was said,
>The Jews were seized at once.

>When the Jews of Lincoln had been seized,
>They were quickly put into a strong prison.
>Therefore the Jews spoke their belief:
>“We have been betrayed by treachery.”

>The Jews of Lincoln, each one,
>Remained in prison, frightened;
>Women, children were let free
>By deliberation and pure mercy.

>In the morning on which King Henry
>—May God protect him and save his life!—
>Came to Lincoln with his retinue
>As God willed (Thanks be to His mercy!),

>The Jews were summoned
>All bound up before the king
>For inquiry into the truth
>Whether the child had been crucified.

>A wise man who was there
>Spoke at once in the king’s presence:
>“The Jew who will now reveal
>The truth to the king shall have life.

>At once Jopin the Jew stepped forward,
>Who earlier had committed all that treason:
>“In which house all was done
>You will know today.

>He was seized by Petevin the Jew
>One evening at the beginning of August;
>When he had entered within my door
>The child was tied with strong ropes.

>He was imprisoned within my house;
>When the Jews of England
>All knew this secret,
>All said that he should be crucified.

>There was no Jew in all England
>Who was not there or did not give his advice.
>By common consent he was hung
>On the cross, as Jesus was.

>Then came Hagin the Jew,
>To whom the child was sold,
>As was Jesus, for thirty pennies,
>Which I received into my own hands.

>With his knife he slew the child
>While he hung on the cross;
>The child endured great suffering
>When his soul left his body.

>The child could not be buried
>In the house or in secret,
>So that we were amazed
>And very sorely frightened.

>The child was carried at night
>By a Jew’s nurse
>Who was thought to be a Christian
>To a well, I very well know where,

>Behind the castle toward the west.
>I very well know that it is deep.
>There he was dropped head first.
>Now judge as you please.”

>When Jopin the Jew had spoken,
>In the king’s presence it was written out;
>King Henry immediately said:
>“For Christ’s pity!
>It is a great crime that he murdered him.”

>The Jews at once withdrew
>To their assembly and deliberated:
>They sentenced Jopin the Jew to death,
>And at once turned him over to the sergeants of the court.

>“Let the body of Jopin be dragged
>Through the city of Lincoln
>By horses strong and well shod
>Until he is dead!

>And then let him be hanged shamefully
>Immediately as a traitor and thief
>So that all the people may see
>Why he is hanged, for what reason.

>When the verdict had been handed down,
>The body of Jopin the Jew was dragged
>By strong horses and then hanged
>Outside Lincoln, I know exactly where.

>On the flank of Canwick, on the high hill
>Where people are hanged
>Who commit larceny or treason:
>Much to the shame of the Jews.

>Here ends the martyrdom of the boy Hugh of Lincoln

>>18137084
That'll be a no then.

>>18137084
This didn't happen. In 1791, during renovations, a skeleton which was presumed to belong to Little Saint Hugh was discovered in Lincoln Cathedral, and was then reburied in an undisclosed location. The skeleton was drawn, but no autopsy was performed. Nobody ever determined that the boy had not been mutilated, or had even attempted a forensic examination.

Your insinuation seems to originate in an article written by the Jew Joseph Jacobs, who commented that no extreme skeletal trauma was visible in drawings of the presumed skeleton of Little Saint Hugh.

If you believe you can determine that the boy was not mutilated in the ways described by accounts by simply looking at the drawing posted in the OP, as this is the only evidence for your insinuation, then go ahead. But that would be stupid, as none of the injuries inflicted upon Hugh in these accounts are inconsistent with the skeletal remains of the boy discovered. However, the remains actually are consistent with the account given in the Annals of Burton, where his upper teeth were broken.

>jews 3000 years ago: murder and exploit children
>jews 1000 years ago: murder and exploit children
>jews 500 years ago: murder and exploit children
>jews 100 years ago: murder and exploit children
>jews 30 years ago: murder and exploit children
>jews today : murder and exploit children

Surely its pure coincidence and blood libel from jealous goys

>>18137478
I look like this

>>18137237
>it didn't happen
>but the guy who did it was a JEW

>>18137526
Thats not what anon said you liar

>>18137526
>point out that the author has a vested interest in reaching a certain conclusion
>throw a hasidic bitch fit and pretend it's crazy to draw that connection
nta but his post is completely reasonable

>>18137552
>>18137578
>This didn't happen
>an article written by the Jew Joseph Jacobs

>>18137588
deceitful, stupid, or both?
>19th century antiquarians who dug up the body
>and found it hadn't been mutilated after all?
anon said that Joseph Jacobs didn't dig up the body, he wrote an article on the basis of what he could observe from a drawing. so no, the "19th century antiquarians who dug up the body" didn't comment on that

>>18137596
And how did they get to the body to draw a picture of it?

>>18137588
The claim was that antiquarians had dug up the body and found no evidence of mutilation. The truth is they did dig it up and made a drawing of it as posted in the OP, with no actual study of the veracity of the report.

You made the supposition that antiquarians had looked for evidence that mutilation had taken place and found that there was none. The only person with academic authority (Joesph Jacobs) who had claimed the antiquarians had found no evidence was not actually quoting the findings of their discovery directly but rather supposing that they must not have because the drawing (posted in the OP and also his only source for his claim) said it didn’t match the mutilation described completely in historical accounts.

>>18137237
This poster had argued against that Mr Jacob’s had made the argument that no evidence was present because 1. A lack of evidence is hard to determine from a drawing of a post-funeral 600 year-old corpse and 2: he would have a vested and biased self-interest in the story given that he himself was jewish.
I am glad we could clear up this confusion.

>>18137628
>he made it up because he's a JEW

>>18137642
If a white guy said that no blacks were ever harmed during slavery you dont think his race might show a vested bias?

>>18137642
It is possible he jumped to an unreasonable conclusion because of that, yes. Particularly because I can see the entire source of his evidence in a jpg in the OP, and find that conclusion presumptuous myself using the exact same source he did.

>>18137650
>it's unreasonable because he's a JEW

>>18137661
It’s unreasonable because he’s saying he can’t see mutilations on a body when the body is almost completely rotted away + the front teeth do seem to be missing, which is consistent with the first story, at least. And this is all using only the evidence that he himself was using.

>>18137719
>seem to

>>18137054 (OP)
It's an interesting tale, for sure. I've noticed that any martyr who was canonised after being killed by Jews is often now referred to as evidence of 'blood libel', and their story treated as myth.

Interestingly, however, we take at face value any recounting of Norse, pagan or Muslim martyrdom of Christian men, women and children. I wonder why the Catholic church and the Church of England take a different approach to hagiographies that lay blame at the feet of Judaism, especially when compared to other faiths.

>>18137722
Yes? That is literally the only evidence, either for or against this, that you would ever be able to extract from this drawing. And this is the only thing cited by Jacobs.

>>18137729
What does Jacobs actually say?

>>18137729
Dont even say seem to, just say they are missing. Dont give your enemies an opening based on lack of conviction

>>18137736
>teeth are missing in a 500 year old body
And that's your proof is it?

>>18137738
Its more proof that mutilation did occur than it didnt, so i dont know how jacobs came to the conclusion there was no mutilation when there are signs of nutilation. Including the dislocated jaw and deformed skull

>>18137742
You know the jaw is dislocated and the skull deformed, how?

>>18137749
Looks like it from the drawing

>https://youtube.com/watch?v=e_hCl8LCKFo
>Raaaiiiinnn, all the rain comes down, all the clouds are flying

>>18137765
>looks like it

>>18137621
You idiot, Joseph Jacobs didn't draw the picture. It was drawn (very crudely I might add) in 1791, more than 100 years before he wrote about the matter (1893). Man I thought jews were supposed to be smart, no wonder you neurotic inbreds made everyone in America hate you in the span of like 2 years.

>>18137771
Hey, worked for that jew jacobs

>>18137789
Where did I say Jacobs drew the picture?

>>18137738
if your proof that no torture occurred is the fact that a vague drawing doesn't show his skeleton smashed into pieces, you have no right to ask for a higher standard of evidence

>>18137795
>19th century antiquarians who dug up the body and found it hadn't been mutilated after all

>>18137805
He says, as his proof of torture is the same vague drawing of a skeleton.

>>18137808
Where does that say Jacobs drew the picture?

This may (or may not) have actually taken place but I’m certain that poor Hugh did not have to take anything close to the absolute raping that >>18137084 has taken in this thread holy shit.

>>18137882
Post the mutilation they found then?

>>18137809
First of all, I'm not the anon who made that argument. Second of all, the proof is the testimony provided by contemporary authors like Matthew Paris. The drawing wasn't a factor in judging their veracity until you insisted.
>>18137813
Your claim:
>19th century antiquarians who dug up the body said it hadn't been mutilated
Anon(s) respond:
>No one involved in the exhumation commented on whether it had been mutilated, and no subsequent autopsy which could answer that was performed.
>Only Joseph Jacobs expressed that view on the basis of a (not particularly detailed) drawing 100 years later.
So either you're insinuating that Jacobs was among the "19th century antiquarians who dug up the body" (actually it was 18th century antiquarians), or that a 700 year old skeleton's vague sketch is proof enough to say whether Hugh had been tortured in life. That would be especially retarded because you already dismissed an anon for suggesting that its missing front teeth corroborate part of Paris' account. Neither Jacobs' nor anon's conjecture is more grounded, you can't criticize one but not the other.

>>18137588
Jacobs was Jewish and stood to benefit from dispelling a story which had been used to justify the persecution of people like him. This is relevant because it could explain why he felt compelled to draw that conclusion despite the weakness of his supporting evidence. Does that clear it up for you?

>>18137919
>the drawing had no impact
>other anons absolute best argument is "seems" and "looks like" based on the same vague sketch

>>18137957
Whatever kike

>>18137730
Here is the relevant section of the article written by Jacobs, which was published in the journal of the Jewish Historical Society of England:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/29777550

Presumably, this is what you confused with an 'account from a 19th century antiquarian who dug up the body', because nobody ever performed a forensic examination on the skeleton, and Jacobs was the only person making a vaguely similar claim to what you asserted:
>So much for what history has to say or conjecture as to the fate of Hugh of Lincoln, and the still worse fate of the Jews accused of his death. Let us, if we can, obtain any further light from that handmaid to history, archaeology, which deals with the physical remains of man's activity upon the earth. Can we, for example, find any signs of the existence of Hugh? For it by no means follows that in a medieval case of this kind, when a Jew was accused of murder, there should necessarily exist anybody who had been murdered. The late M. Isidore Loeb, whose loss for Jewish history is almost irreparable, studied carefully a Spanish case very analogous to that of Hugh of Lincoln.3D When I was at Toledo I was struck with a fresco on the cathedral walls, which I was informed dealt with the fate of El Nino de la Guardia. The picture represented a little lad transfixed on a cross, and around him a crowd of scoffing Jews. Well, M. Loeb went carefully into this case, of which the records are very voluminous and detailed, giving an account of the torment and punishment of several open and secret Jews who were implicated in the so-called crime. He came to the conclusion, for which he gives well-founded reasons, that the little lad of la Guardia never existed at all, and that the Jews were accused and punished for the murder of a nonexistent corpse.

>>18138370
>and can English justice in the thirteenth century have been so hasty and unjust as to punish for crimes without any evidence of a corpus delicti?
i mean it was the Middle Ages. there was no such thing as human rights or rule of law back then. if the king or church said you were guilty of a crime, you were guilty.