The Royal Treasure:
Muslim Communities Under the Crown of Aragon
in the Fourteenth Century

John Boswell

Chapter 1

The Mudéjar Population: Its Constituents and Rulers

[30] Nonetheless, the persons of Muslims -- male and female -- in regard to any of the things so far mentioned, may not be held by any lord or any person except with the consent of the king or his bailiffs, because it is certain that all Muslims, wherever they reside, belong to the king, except for slaves and those whom the lord may bring to dwell on his lands from areas which are not under the jurisdiction of the Crown, in which case such Muslims and their descendants should by law belong to the lord and his family. Fueros of Aragón: VII.277.
Although for the sake of convenience Mudéjares are frequently spoken of as being either the king's Muslims, or a noble's Muslims, or subject to ecclesiastical jurisdiction, these designations do not correspond to any clear distinction in the reality of fourteenth-century life. All Muslims were in a sense royal Muslims: the Crown of Aragon claimed ultimate jurisdiction over every Muslim living in lands under its rule, and described them as "our royal treasure," "subject to our whim," "servants of our household."(1) There was, in fact, a constant tension between lords and ecclesiastics who exercized immediate, local control over large segments of the Mudéjar population and a monarchy which saw itself as the protector and lord of all Muslims living in its domains.

Since it was the Crown which had contracted with falling Muslim governments for surrender and co-existence, there were substantial grounds for its claims to ultimate authority over all Mudéjares. Individual monarchs, however, displayed a general tendency to alienate these rights by granting away financial or judicial prerogatives [31] over aljamas and individuals either as rewards, bribes, or payment of debts, and eventually a large segment of the Muslim population had passed out of direct royal control into the hands of nobles and churchmen.

Precisely what authority was delegated and what authority was inalienably royal remained a perplexing question throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and was further aggravated by the importation of Muslims from areas still under Muslim control, who thus had no clear relation to the Aragonese monarchy. A welter of conflicting claims and jurisdictions resulted, and there was no static reality at any moment which can be accurately described. Instead, there was a variegated pattern of constantly shifting authority and jurisdiction, in which the figure of the Crown assumed more or less importance as royal power waxed or waned, but which ultimately resolved by the development of absolute monarchical power. The consolidation (or re-consolidation) of royal control overer Mudéjares can be seen most clearly during the reign of Peter the Ceremonious, and particularly during the disruptive era of the war with Castile when the Crown seized upon the opportunity to extend wartime powers, taxations, and judicial arrangements and make them permanent, and when Mudéjar aljamas which were conquered or defected to the King of Castile came back into Aragon as vassals of the king, regardless of whose vassals they had been previously(see p.166).

A more detailed discussion of the effects of the war with Castile and the resulting changes in Mudéjar lifestyles comprises [32] part of the final chapter of this study. What is at issue here is the general meaning of a Muslim's being subject to the king as opposed to nobles or churchmen. Given that the reality was fluid, certain general observations can nevertheless be offered. All Muslims, no matter how effective local rule or control might be, had recourse to royal officials for notarial services and for final appeal in criminal cases.(2) Most, if not all, taxes were collected from all Mudéjares, regardless of their relation to a lord other than the king. On the other hand, there was separate legislation for "royal" Muslims, i.e., those living under no authority except that of the king: an example of such legislation in regard to minor criminal penalties is produced in the Appendix of Documents at C 898:222, where the king prescribes in minute detail what fines and punishments are to be exacted for various offenses committed by Muslims in his aljama at Ricla. Where the king did not enjoy sole jurisdiction, he might still set or prescribe the penalties, but did not usually receive the entire fine collected, so that, for instance, Mudéjares under the jurisdiction of the monastery of Roda paid part of any fines to the monastery, even though subject ultimately to royal justice.(3)

Muslims subject to the king received much lighter fines for violating dress codes (a privilege which nobles could sometimes purchase for their Muslims), but were also subject to taxes, such [33] as the besant, which other Muslims did not regularly pay, so it is questionable whether they were significantly better off economically.(4) They were generally free to transfer to areas subject to clerics or nobles,(5) but no gross trends in such mobility are discernible during the fourteenth century, except a slight shift away from lands held by clerics or orders towards those of the king. There was, however, no theoretical fluidity of property: Mudájares who changed lords lost all real property and all but personal movable goods. When the king sold property to which his Muslims were bound, they were transferred with the property.(6) The property of Muslims subject to the king who died could not be inherited by Muslims living under noble or ecclesiastical jurisdiction, nor could royal Mudéjares inherit from the latter.(7)

Obviously, the looseness of the system would create problems in adjudicating disputes about such matters as inheritance; the complexities involved were enormous. No one seems to have been certain, for instance, whether the Muslim aljama of Algar (in Valencia) was royally or ecclesiastically ruled, neither the Muslims, who claimed to be but could not prove that they were royal, nor the monastery of Arguinis, which asserted but could not establish conclusive [34] lordship, nor the king, who finally foisted the whole matter off on subordinate officials.(8) The issue was further complicated by three subsidiary points of confusion: various towns legislated on the matter independently of the king and sometimes in conflict with him;(9) some towns had two or more separate aljamas;(10) some Muslims appear to have fallen under no jurisdiction.(11) From 1359 on, moreover, the position of royal aljamas became even more confused due to the transfer of numerous aljamas to the queen's household, which is discussed at some length under Chapter VI. This very important fact has been overlooked by many historians, especially in regard to the fifteenth century.(12) It probably made relatively little difference to the Mudéjares themselves, since they were still "royal," but it made bookkeeping enormously more intricate for the Crown, and left records for the historian which [35] often confusing and misleading.(13)

The primary distinction between noble and royal Muslims as, in the long run, the fact that the former owed their feudal(14)
service -- i.e., specified term of seigneurial labor, some military duties, and certain agricultural taxes -- to the lord rather than the king. Even in these matters the lord's jurisdiction was not supreme: while there is no doubt that he could demand some military service Muslim dependents,(15) the right of Muslims to bear arms was regulated by the Crown, and the king could demand service from any Mudéjar in the country when he wished. The right to collect major [36] taxes, such as the peyta, was enjoyed by the lord of an aljama only when specifically granted him by the monarchy,(16) and all efforts by lords -- even the powerful counts of Trastámara(17) -- to obtain criminal jurisdiction over their Muslim vassals failed utterly. Even in matters where all agreed that the lord enjoyed theoretical authority, such as the regulation of mobility of Muslim vassals, the actual exercise of such authority was dependent on the king's will, since he could not only ignore such privileges by virtue of superior might, but was also the final arbiter of any disagreement about them.

The king could also simply confiscate any Mudéjares he wished to have, by right of ultimate judicial authority. The entire Muslim populace of many areas of the kingdoms came under direct royal control when the King of Castile occupied and then abandoned such areas: the King of Aragon was then able to grant them back as a sort of largesse to those (previous) owners who had been faithful to him during the war.

Although both for the castle of Artana and for your own persons you have submitted to us and sworn fealty and homage to our noble and beloved counsellor and majordomo, the knight En Gilabert de Cencelles [=Scintilles], acting in our stead, acknowledging that you are our men and our own vassals,.. .nevertheless, since in the Corts we recently convoked among the Valencians we agreed to return to them those castles and places which were seized by the King of Castile and since among others we have ordered returned to our noble and beloved knight, En Rodrigo Diaç, the said castle and valley of Artana, we therefore absolve you of all homage and duties of fealty which you have sworn to us.... We direct and command you that henceforth you have as lord the said En Rodrigo Diaç, and that you do homage to him and [render to him] such other things as you were liable for before the castle was occupied. by the King of Castile.(18)
Mudéjares as individuals or in communities came under ecclesiastical authority in various ways. Many clerics in the Middle Ages were, of course, feudal lords in their own right, and as such might have Muslim serfs as well as Christian ones. Military orders were often granted Mudéjar communities in areas which they conquered or defended. Orders of all types obtained Muslim slaves through confiscation for violation of laws or dress codes, either directly in their own jurisdiction (though this was rare and of dubious legality ),(19) or indirectly through royal concession.(20) Orders also frequently bought slaves.(21) The most common method of acquiring Mudéjares as serfs, vassals, or slaves was undoubtedly through bequest of the faithful, although there seems to have been a marked tendency on the part of the Aragonese faithful to bequeath only a portion of Mudéjares [38] or their holdings rather than their whole interest; so that, for example, one finds the Fratres Minores with one-third interest in Muslim vineyards, the monastery of St. Peter being the lord of a portion of the Muslim population of Calatayud, the queen and the Sorores Minores sharing equally the rights over the Mudéjares of Bartaxell and Xirillent, and the monastery of San Cugat del Valles owning one-half of a Muslim whose other half was unclaimed (res vacans)(22) It is probably accurate, in fact, to say that the majority of cases of ecclesiastical jurisdiction over Muslims overlapped with some other type of authority and. that in relatively few cases -- such as the Hospitallers in Monzón, Ripoll, and Puig(23)-- did they have sole authority.(24)
Muslims living under the authority of a secular bishop appear to have come under the delegated authority of local priests by virtue of this arrangement, although this was occasionally disputed.(25)

As with the Muslims subject to nobles, there were no hard and fast rules about fiscal obligations of those subject to clerics. Most clerical holders of Mudéjares received some income from the Muslims, [39] but there was enormous variation.(26) Mudéjares belonging to the Hospitallers, for example, were exempt from war taxes, while those belonging to the Order of Calatrava were not.(27)

Macho y Ortega considered that Mudéjares "almost always preferred clerical lords,"(28) and it is true that some clerics, such as the Archbishop of Zaragoza, were traditionally patrons and protectors of Muslims in general, as well as those under their immediate control,(29) but it is equally common to find prelates who made it a habit to harass and oppress Mudéjares: the Bishop of Tortosa, who had Muslim dependents as far away as Eslida,(30) tried to force Muslims to pay tithes in defiance of established practice to the contrary, was involved in the illegal enslavement of more than thirty Muslims whom he had personally pardoned, and tortured and extorted money from Mudéjar officials.(31) The Bishop of Valencia was best [40] known to the Muslim population there by his jail, in which very large numbers of Muslims were kept awaiting trial or sale as slaves.(32) The convent of St. Clare, also in Valencia, invoked royal authority to prevent the Muslims from building a new meat market, since the nuns owned the sole rights over the existing one.(33)

There seems, in fact, to have been a tendency for Mudéjares to flee ecclesiastical jurisdiction when possible: the Muslim vassals of the Abbot of Valldigna, including the officials of the aljama, defected en masse to surrounding nobles in 1365, and repeated letters by the king threatening harsher and harsher penalties against the Muslims and those who harbored them failed to get them back.(34) This may have been due to the fact that while the monarchy was anxious to intervene against and override nobles who abused their Mudéjar dependents, it displayed considerable reluctance to meddle in the affairs of the Church and its Muslim vassals and serfs; the queen flatly refused, for instance, to force the Bishop of Valencia to act against the rector of the church at Seta, who was abusing the Muslim serfs of the parish.(35)

Although the term exaricus is generally employed in Spanish documents to designate Muslims in land-holding servitude, it [41] should not be understood as indicating a distinction in status between Mudéjar serfs and Christian ones.(36) For the most part the exarici occupied positions of traditional servitude: they passed with the land when it was alienated or sold, their servitude was hereditary, and they were mentioned in documents in the same terms as Christian serfs. The distinction drawn by Burns and others between free farmers as exarici and those in servitude is not apparent in the documents of the fourteenth century, when the (very few) Muslims not in some form of servitude were ambiguously called "franchi."(37)

As Burns points out, during the thirteenth century free Muslim farmers lived under conditions generally similar to those they had known under the weak and shifting Muslim rule of the previous century, and the maintenance of a prosperous class of free farmers was still possible. The Aragonese monarchy, however, was markedly more stable and its power more consolidated and better exercised than that of the crumbling Almohad dynasty which had preceded it in Valencia, and it was not long before the untidy remnants of the "free" Mudéjar population were swept aside into one category or [42] another of feudal servitude. Lords, kings, and clergy collaborated in this effort, and the hapless Muslims were in no position to resist. Intricate codes of dress and behavior were established which they might violate, thereby becoming slaves or incurring ruinous fines. The fines themselves could lead to loss of freedom, since a Mudéjar who could not pay might either be confiscated by the Crown or be forced to put himself into the service of a lord to gain protection from creditors. The Crown and local nobles, moreover, made servitude as attractive as possible by offering free land, remissions of taxes and rents, and protection from creditors or legal penalties to those who would inhabit their lands. Even other Muslims conspired against Mudéjar liberty, as the insolvent aljamas, pressed by the king to meet steadily increasing tax payments, reached further and further into the hinterlands to establish their tax base and used royal power to constrain "free" Muslims to contribute with the aljama.

By the mid-fourteenth century, a large class of free farmers was a fond memory. In the cities, Mudéjares were gathered into morerías, where they could be easily taxed and regulated by local and royal officials. The only Mudéjares who enjoyed anything like broad personal liberty were foreign mercenaries and the wealthy élite in the king's service. The class of Muslim military aristocracy described by Burns for the thirteenth century had vanished without a trace. Only a prosperous commercial class survived in the cities, and, at the very top of the Mudéjar social scale, the civil service.

[43]Although it is possible to detect the presence of an élite stratum of Mudéjar civil servants in the king's employ, only a few personalities emerge with clarity: Abraham Abenxoa, meneschal of Queen Eleanor, envoy to Granada, and qadi of Játiva, Elche, Crevillente, Seta, Granadell, Bartaxell, and Xirillent; his cousin, also Abraham Abenxoa, meneschal of the queen's son, Alfonse; Ali Abencomixa, ambassador to Morocco and Granada; Çaat Alcafaç, purveyor to the Crown and qadi of the kingdom's largest aljama; the Ballistarius family, masters of the work on the royal residence in Zaragoza.(38)

Undoubtedly the most powerful Mudéjares under the Crown of Aragon were the Belvis family. Faraig de Belvis(39) had been intimately [44] associated with Peter the Ceremonious since well before the accession of the latter to the throne of Aragon.(40) His brother, Jahia de Belvis, was a wealthy and prominent Mudéjar in Castile,(41) and his son Ovechar was a member of the household of Peter's eldest son, John.(42) Faraig himself was married to Fatima Fuster, the daughter of one of the wealthiest merchants in Valencia and widow of another prominent Muslim, Ali Alasrach, a relative of the Abenxoas mentioned previously.(43)

Faraig was extremely wealthy in his own right. He frequently lent the Crown large sums of cash, for which he received various privileges or land-grants: a female Muslim slave in 1364, l0,000s worth of property in 1365.(44) He also maintained at his own expense [45] a number of horses in the royal cavalry; since he was ultimately reimbursed for this outlay (nearly 1,000s in 1365 alone) by the Crown, it must have been a type of indirect loan rather than a service.(45) He apparently displayed his wealth in his clothing: five Valencian Christians went to an inordinate amount of trouble (drilling a hole through one building to another) to steal his wardrobe from an inn where he was staying in Monzón.(46) The source of his wealth is not apparent; undoubtedly he earned considerable money in fees from his various judicial posts -- l,050s from one case in Daroca(47) and the king occasionally granted him some income from the royal revenues. From 1336 on he received 300s annually from the cena of Borja, which was to belong to his son Ovechar after his death, and which was still collected when Borja changed lords in 1366.(48) This is a rather modest income, however; the bulk of the Belvis fortune must have been inherited or derived from rents and salaries. Although Faraig's father-in-law, Maymo Fuster, was a merchant, there is no indication of any member of Faraig's own family engaging in commerce.

The Belvis were specifically exempted from codes regulating Muslim appearance, and from all feudal duties of hospitality, even to the royal family.(49) Royal officials and even officials of [46] religious orders were instructed by King Peter to favor the affairs of the Belvis family "so that they may praise you and your kindness [to them], since in this you will give us pleasure and service, and since the contrary would displease us greatly."(50) The king, moreover, personally oversaw the well-being of Faraig and his family. When a procurator mismanaged Faraig's Borja property, the king personally appointed a prominent Mudéjar judge from Zaragoza to handle the case;(51) when Faraig was unable, as qadi, to bring charges against the present lieutenant-qadi and former qadi of Valencia regarding property belonging to his wife Fatima, the king placed Çaat Alcafaç in charge of the case and granted him the full vices of the Crown.(52) During the war with Castile, the Crown issued a safe-conduct for the Castilian fiancée of Ovechar de Belvis and her party, and when the bride-to-be hesitated before the final plans were made, actually forbade her to marry anyone else.(53) When she defied him, he had her sequestered and ordered the qadi of Brea to decide what should be done about the promised dowry, but thought better of this and decided to rule on the case himself, taking the qadi as counsel.(54)

[47] Faraig united in his person an astounding number of official positions in the most important aljamas of Aragon and Valencia. In Borja he was the faqi (from 1339), royal notary, and çabiçala (=imâm, or prayer leader).(55)In Huesca he occupied the positions of qadi, amin, royal notary, and cavalquinus, the latter three for life.(56) He was the qadi of Játiva and Valencia -- the first and second largest aljamas of the kingdom -- for life, and the royal notary of Játiva, as well.(57) He held all of these offices in absentia, appointing substitutes to do the actual business. While this was not unusual in itself, it did cause problems in some areas, such as Valencia, where the king had to intervene almost constantly to protect Faraig's interest against encroachment by his substitutes and others.(58) There is, moreover, evidence that Faraig sometimes obtained these positions through somewhat dubious means. In 1365 Faraig bluntly asked the king for the offices of qadi and notary of Játiva, which the monarch had only recently granted another Mudéjar notable, Çaat Alcafaç.(59) Casting about for some pretext to eject Alcafaç, the king decreed that if Acafaç was not actually resident in Játiva he would grant the offices to Faraig on grounds of being "more competent." Alcafaç, in fact, lived in Valencia, so Faraig [48] was granted the office a month later. Faraig -- who naturally exercised the office in absentia himself -- then appointed. Alcafaç as his deputy. It is difficult to understand how this maneuver was justified to the Muslim population of Játiva, which was already upset about having incompetent or absent qadis appointed for it.(60)

Faraig de Belvis was also the "alcaydus sarracenorum totius regni Aragonie," i.e., qadi of all the Muslims of Aragon.(61) The exact prerogatives of this position are never specified, but it seems likely that it was principally the ultimate appeals court for Aragonese Mudéjares. There is evidence of this in the fact that Faraig regularly heard cases in localities where he occupied no official judicial position, such as Lérida and Borja, and that cases could be removed from his jurisdiction only by the king himself, and usually only at Faraig's own request.(62) Macho y Ortega describes such a position in fifteenth-century Aragon as well, noting that the post was still associated with the Belvis family. He termed the office the "tribunal del alcadi general de los reinos de Aragón y Valencia y principado de Cataluña."(63) In Valencia Faraig exercised this authority under the simple designation alcadius regis,(64) as did his fifteenth-century descendants, who inherited the life-time position along with the name.(65)

At the opposite end of the social scale of Muslims living under the Crown of Aragon in the fourteenth century was the slave. Because excellent studies of slavery in general, and of Aragonese Mudéjar slavery in particular, already exist, no attempt will be made here to examine the question in great detail.(66) Certain aspects of the enslavement of Moors during the particular years covered by this study, however, deserve mention, and one or two findings which conflict with those of earlier scholars cannot be [50]passed over.

Slaves were extremely numerous in the lands under the Aragonese monarchy during the fourteenth century; so numerous, in fact, that the Crown felt constrained to limit their number during the latter half of the century, when individuals were known to hold as many as sixty male slaves in their households.(67) It is impossible to determine with accuracy the provenance of such large numbers of slaves. From Muslim times there had been a thriving slave trade throughout eastern Spain, and this trade simply changed hands when Christians reconquered coastal cities. In 1356 all foreign Muslims except subjects of the King of Granada were considered de bona guerra, i.e., fair game for slave traders.(68) In 1360 the subjects of the King of Tunisia were put "off limits" by virtue of a treaty signed by the Aragonese Crown with that king, but other Muslims remained legally enslavable..(69)

Verlinden believed that "the enslavement of free nationals within the realm was no longer encountered" in the fourteenth century,(70) but this was manifestly not the case. Any Muslim found by Christians who could not or would not identify his lord or owner was automatically [51] enslaved by the Crown:

....a certain Saracen captive called Abdulla was seized by some pilgrims in our realm and detained for a long time in the village of Aqualet by the local bailiff as an unclaimed object and a lordless person. During this time, although a public announcement was made, no one came forward to claim any rights over him, as a consequence of which he belongs to us and to our Court as an unclaimed object or lordless person...(71)
Even a free Mudéjar who was not an "unclaimed object" could be slaved for violating laws or dress codes.(72) This sort of enslavement was so regular that, as Verlinden himself notes,(73) it was common practice to grant to a favorite "the next Saracen confiscated to the Crown" for such-and-such a reason:
...we therefore direct and command you to grant and release to the said Stephen one of the first female Saracens to be confiscated by you for our Court in the manner mentioned before, with which Saracen he may do as he wishes...(74)
[52] At least 59 Mudéjares can be shown to have been enslaved for no stated reason between October of 1355 and October of 1365, in all three kingdoms and by all classes of society.(75) While it is true that in one instance the king fined a number of Christians very heavily for illegally selling into slavery in Ibiza two free Valencian Mudéjares, his attitude was far from clear-cut on the issue, and there is some reason to believe that after the captors and their collaborators in this case had paid fines in excess of 600s at least one of the enslaved Muslims was not released.(76)

The king did have a certain interest in the freeing of slaves, since freedmen paid an annual tax of 5s in Catalonia, and a sort of licensing fee called the dobla in Valencia (see below, pp.202-203), [53] but Roca Traver's contention that all slave-related legislation reflects "the Crown's preoccupation with fomenting the personal liberty of his Mudéjar subjects" is unconvincing.(77) Not only the Crown's actions (as described above) but the economic facts as well argue indisputably against this. The prices for Muslim slaves rose steadily throughout the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. For thirteenth-century prices, Verlinden suggests a range of from 45s to 340s, and for the fourteenth century from 260s-400s at the opening of the century to 600s-800s at the end.(78) Chancery documents for the period 1355-1365 indicate an average price for a Muslim slave of about 552s. (Male slaves were more valuable than females, the former averaging about 649s as opposed to 516s for the latter. )(79)Considering that the monarchy received at the very least one-fifth of the sale price of every Saracen sold, and in many cases the whole value, it was obviously in the king's interest to see as many Muslims possible confiscated and enslaved.

In view of the rising value of such slaves, it seems, in fact, [54] remarkable that they had any opportunity at all to become free, but it is certain that very many Muslim slaves were allowed to buy their freedom, either by working or begging alms, and that free Mudéjares considered it their pious duty to give money to those trying to gain freedom through begging.(80) Escape was relatively common, and even though aiding or abetting runaways was often severely punished, very prominent Mudéjares and even some Christians did cooperate with escaping slaves,(81) possibly preferring Deuteronomic law ("Non trades servum domino suo qui ad te confugerit" 23:15) to Aragonese ordinances.

Verlinden was convinced that Mudéjares could not themselves own slaves, either Muslim or Christian, and criticized Roca Traver for implying the reverse. None of Roca Traver's documents, he averred, demonstrated the existence of slaves owned by Mudéjares, and several of the Valencian Furs specifically prohibited this.(82) In fact, however, the particular Furs adduced by Verlinden (1.8.1-2) only prohibited Muslims' owning Christian slaves, and said nothing about their possessing non-Christians. This was generally the case with medieval Spanish law codes: the Costums of Tortosa, for instance, prohibit absolutely Jews and Muslims having Christian slaves or servants (I.9.1), but strongly imply that Muslims might own other [55] Muslims (VI.1.18) The earliest Aragonese and Catalan treaties laws (e.g., those of Afonso with Tudela, or of Ramón Berenguer with Tortosa) proscribed Jews owning Muslims, but were silent or ambiguous about Muslims owning Muslims.

In fact, though Verlinden attempted to explain away one document he published which cast doubt on his theory (p 317, n 264), he unwittingly used another document which categorically disproved his assertion: on pp 863-4 he reproduced a grant by the Aragonese Crown of a Muslim slave to Faraig de Belvis, apparently unaware that Faraig de Belvis was himself a Muslim (this fact is, indeed, often excluded from Chancery materials relating to the Belvis family: see p46, n50).(83)

Several members of the Belvis family owned Muslim slaves: Faraig's brother, Jahia, who was in the service of the King of Castile, purchased a Muslim slave in Daroca for the exorbitant price of 700 morabetíns and used him extensively to conduct his business affairs in lands under the Aragonese Crown. When this slave was captured by Christians and illegally sold again in Barcelona, Faraig intervened, and -- with the help of royal officials -- had the slave returned to his brother in Castille.(84) Faraig himself was granted another female Muslim as a slave by the king in 1364,(85) and the king even granted a Jewish favorite in Valencia a Muslim slave.(86) Foreign dignitaries [56] from Muslim countries often purchased Muslim slaves in Barcelona, and sometimes Muslims captured by pirates had slaves with them whom they had themselves bought from pirates.(87) There is, in short, no doubt at all that Muslims under the Crown of Aragon not only could but did possess other Muslims as slaves.(88)

In addition to civil service, local government, and butchering,(89) Mudéjares appear to have engaged in every possible profession except the priesthood. Outside the aljama most were farmers and/or serfs. In Valencia they raised mostly grain and fruits, generally for sale. In Aragon and Catalonia they were subsistence farmers. Within the aljamas in all three kingdoms a thriving urban culture demanded craftsmen, laborers, and professionals of all types.(90)[57] The table appended to this chapter presents the occupations most frequently encountered in the documentation for this study. Its variety speaks for itself and for the economic sophistication of the aljama. No document contains specific figures relating to the percentage of Mudéjares who engaged in any profession or trade. Nevertheless, cautious inferences can be drawn from wide reading a archival material. The most common occupation of all aljama Muslims was retail merchandizing. Second to it, in Valencia, was the pottery industry, which was wholly run by the Muslim community.(91) In Aragon the second most common occupation was probably construction. The aljaferia (royal residence) of Zaragoza was a converted Muslim stronghold, and it was built and maintained entirely by Mudéjar craftsmen, stonemasons, carpenters, laborerers, etc. Artistic consistency was probably not the only motivation for some reason Muslims dominated the construction industry in Aragon. The adverse effects of the war on the Mudéjar population, in fact, created a critical shortage of construction workers, and hence, of housing.(92) Muslims were crucial in other areas also: they were major arms-makers in Aragon, and were forcibly recruited during the war years to ply [58] their trade.(93) Aragon also depended on Muslims for the importation of salt, so much so that the king protected the personal safety of the Mudéjares involved in the trade.(94) Valencia depended on Mudéjar skill and labor for grain, salt, and, of course, the maintenance of the systems of irrigation developed (if not invented) by the Muslims. The paper the royal Chancery used was provided by Valencian Muslims exclusively.(95)

Muslims formed "companies" recognized by the Crown, and it was not at all uncommon for Christians and Muslims to co-operate in business ventures as equal partners.(96)

Muslims and Jews seem to have played an important -- perhaps disproportionate -- role in the practice of medicine under the Crown of Aragon in the fourteenth century. The practice of medicine was strictly regulated by the Crown and Curia. Physicians were required to have studied medicine for three years, and to display a thorough knowledge of standard medical textbooks ("libros ordinarios scientie medicine"). Christian aspirants to the profession were examined by a board of Christian physicians to make certain they met these requirements.

Jewish and Saracen physicians, however, are to be examined by physicians of their own law and sect, if any are available, but with one Christian physician present at their examination. In the absence of physicians of their own law and religion they shall be examined by two Christian physicians; after this examination, [59] if they are found acceptable, they shall have to swear publicly to practice well and legally before they are admitted to the profession.(97)
Though the provisions of this edict appear to place Muslim physicians on a slightly lower plane than Christian ones (a Christian must be present at examination of Muslims and Jews), such was manifestly not the case, and some purely religious concern must have prompted the disparity in procedure. Muslims were permitted to treat Christians on an equal footing with Christian physicians, even though foreign (Christian) physicians were not,(98) and both the king and queen had Muslim physicians in their households, in the case of the former a noted eyesurgeon.(99)

[60] Mudéjares also seem to have been disproportionately represented in the entertainment industry of the northern lands: the royal household employed Moorish jongleurs, dancers, and musicians; Muslims were used on board ships as trumpeters, jongleurs, and jesters; references to Muslim troubadors, musicians, and jesters of both sexes and all conditions abound.(100) Possibly the Christian majority found such positions unappealing and gladly left them for the Mudéjares.


The following table lists occupation found in various Chancery, documents of the fourteenth century. Beside the occupation is a letter corresponding to the kingdom in which the trade or profession was practiced: i.e., "A" for Aragon, "C" for Catalonia, "V" for Valencia; the number represents the document in which the reference is found. Previously published documents are included only where they shed some light on the material in unpublished ones: the list is intended to be indicative rather than exhaustive. Only one reference is given a particular occupation, even when there are many in the registers. Second or third references indicate information about different aspects of the trade, not the frequency of its occurrence in charters and letters. Civil servants are included only where the evidence indicates civil service was their profession rather than a civic duty or a temporary position. Nearly all Mudéjares outside the morería were farmers, and this profession is listed only as a reminder of this fact.
accountant (A) C 1170:62
archer (A-C-V) C 688:91, 905:972, 908:79
arms maker (A) C 1075:91
bailiff (V) C 702:59
brick maker (A-V) C 692:205, RP 1708:50
cableman (C) C 1402:153
carpenter (A) C 899:195
civil servant (A) C 986:48, 1203:135
contracter (A) C 687:7
cooper (A) C 982:55
dyer: general cloth (V) RP 1710: 47-8
     silk (V) Verlinden, L'Esclavage, p. 877.
farmer (A-C-V) C 686:218, 721:135, 1573:148
inn-keeper (A) C 711:194
ironworker (A) C 702:195, 713:160
jester (C) C 1402:154
jongleur (A-C-V) C 1402:154, Gonzalez Hurtebise, Libros, p. 233
kiln owner and operator (C)  RP 994:40
"machine maker" (A) C 1069:5, 55
merchant: general (V) C 714:165
     grain (V) C 714:965
     leather (A) C 688:160
     salt (A) C 1402: 147
paper miller (V) RP 1708:18
potter (V) Roca Traver, "Un Siglo," p. 54
sheep shearer (A) C 908:233
shoemaker (A) C 688:160
silversmith (V) RP 1706:18
stonemason (A) C 1069:5, 55
surgeon: general (A-C) C 909:154, 985:70, 1573:29
     eye (C) see note 99, above
tambourine player (A-C-V) C 1402:154
tanner (A) C 702:195
tax collector (A) C 703:12
transporter (C-V) RP 1711:34
trumpeter (A) C 1402:154, Gonzalez Hurtebise, Libros, p. 402
vintner (A) C 684:196

Notes for Chapter One

1. ". . .thesauri regii speciales.. ." C 913:33 (Sept.16, 1366); "...son nuestro tresoro e estan a nuestro voler. .." C 1210:83 (Apr. 24, 1365); ". . .judei et sarraceni servi sunt camere nostre..." C 699:161 (Feb.11, 1360). Cf. for later in the century C 1239:73 (July 21, 1376): ". . .fur d'Arago diu generalment que los corsos de los moros son nostres propris...."

2. C 698:50 (Apr. 7, 1362). Cf. C 1073:95 (July 8, 1361) and 1068; 56 (Dec. 4, 1355).

3. C 687:84 (July 12, 1356).

4. On the besant, see C 1209:41 (1365); on dress codes, see Chapter VII, pp.330ss.

5. Or viceversa, subject to general limitations on mobility, for which see Chapter VI, pp.286ss.

6. C 694:127 (May 8, 1358).

7. See Chapter VI, pp.273ss.

8. C 713:182 (Mar.6, 1363).

9. E.g., from the Fuero of Calatayud (1131): "Et vicino de Calataiub qui poterit tenere homines in suo solare, christianos aut mauros, aut iudeos, ad illo respondeant, et non ad nullo alio seniore" J.M. Ramos y Loscertales, "Documentos para la historia del derecho español: Fuero concedido a Calatayud por Alfonso I de Aragón en 1131," AHDE, I (l924), p.410. Cf. the early fourteenth-century edict of Valls prohibiting change of jurisdiction, in Francesch Carreras y Candi, "Ordinacions urbanes de bon govern a Catalunya," BRABL, XII (1926), p.370.

10. E.g., Cuarte and Cuadrete, which each had two (Macho y Ortega, "Condición," p.157).

11. They were sometimes called "franchi," although this had other connotations as well: see C 683:114 (Feb.24, 1356).

12. Macho y Ortega, for example, completely ignores it in his treatment of fifteenth-century royal aljamas, although he publishes in two of his studies documents which clearly allude to the transfer ("Condición," p.166, n.l, and. "Documentos," pp.148, 156).

13. This fact might explain, for instance, the otherwise bewildering sequence of events described in Macho y Ortega, "Condición," pp. 166-8. When the same author lists, moreover, Zaragoza, Huesca, Teruel, Daroca, Calatayud, Borja, Belchite, and Tarazona as the only aljamas remaining to the king in the fifteenth century, one wonders whether he is excluding from the royal patrimony Sagunto, Alcira, Morella, Montblanc, Tarrega, Villagrassa, Torella, Burriana, etc., simply because they do not appear in records for the king's household, though they might be listed for the queen.

14. I am conscious of the looseness with which the words "feudal," serf," "vassal," etc., are used in this chapter, and that some historians may find this objectionable. One of the aims of this study, in fact, is to determine the extent to which such terms can be applied Muslims. Refraining from using the words themselves until a rigid definition of them in context could be devised might well defer disccussion of the place of Mudéjares in feudal society indefinitely, and there is urgent need for some guidelines in the area, however general they may have to be at first. It is well to bear in mind, moreover, that -- especially in Spain -- fourteenth-century feudalism was not a rigid concept, but a flexible reality, and one simply cannot find enough spaces in modern paradigms to accommodate neatly every class of fourteenth-century person. In general, the term "serf" as used in regard to Mudéjares should be understood by the reader as connoting what it would in relation to a medieval Christian. This discussed in greater detail, below.

15. C 1402:147 (Feb. 1, 1359) Cf p 181.

16. See, for instance, C 1205:68 (April. 2, 1365); cf. Chapter V.

17. C 938:188 (Feb. 20, 1359).

18. C 986:143 (Sept.10, 1365), addressed to the Muslims of Artana; text in Appendix. It was not at all unusual for even minor knights to have Muslim vassals: Francesch Desplugues, described merely as miles, was lord of Muslims in Ondara, Verger, Real, Beniharb, Eig (=Ejea), Miraflor, Pamies, and Vinyals (C 720:145 [Sept.25, 1365]). For other cases of property being returned to its pre-war owner, see C 720:89 (Eslida, Ahin, Veyó), C 12014:88 (Alfara), and C 1206:117 (Xinguer), all from 1365, For noble vs. royal aljamas and Mudéjar individuals in the fifteenth century, see Macho y Ortega, "Documentos," p.153, and "Condición," pp.191-3, 228. Macho y Ortega was somewhat confused by the lack of concrete distinctions between the types of Muslims, but concluded that royal power became increasingly extensive in the fifteenth century.

19. In C 1149:23 (Nov.12, 1356) the king upholds this right, but this cannot have been typical.

20. E.g., C 983:24 (Dec.20, 1358), C 1070:23 (under Chapter VII, p.348, and note 79), and C 1209:114 (May 21, 1365).

21. E.g., C 720:45 (Sept.14, 1365).

22. C 684:196 (Apr.2, 1356); C 700:144 (Jan.30, 1360); C 1567:124 (Sept.10, 1359); C 688:64 (Sept.16, 1356): the "unclaimed" half in this case was granted to a favorite of the Crown, who was then obliged to buy the monastery's half.

23. C 695:82 (Apr.l, 1359).

24. Cases of overlapping authority: C 982:33 (Mar.21, 1357); C 983:5 (Dec.3, 1358); C 1073:95 (July 8, 1361); C 1183:124 (Nov.21, 1362); C 1209:25 (Mar.14, 1365); C 1381:34 (June 22, 1357).

25. C 713:182 (Mar.6, 1363) and C 1209:108 (May 13, 1365).

26. The monastery of St Peter in Terrer, for instance, received the lezda and pedagium of the Muslims (C 862:214 [Sept.5, 1337]); that of Sta Gratia received annually 800s from taxes on the Múdéjares of Carçre (C 1068:139 [June 6, 1356]). Cf. RP 990:13 (1357), EP 992:15 (1359), and succeeding entries for Catalan equivalents.

27. Hospitallers: C 695:82 (Apr.l, 1359); Calatrava: C l40l:60 (Apr.10, 1355).

28. "Condición," p.180: ". . .los moros preferían casi siempre a los investidos del sacerdocio...."

29. C 900:42 (Mar.7, 1358), C 1205:68 (Apr.2, 1365). The Archbishop of Zaragoza was still seen as a Mudéjar patron in the fifteenth century: see Macho y Ortega, "Condición," p.l80. The Hospitallers of Jabut interceded for Muslims over whom they had no jurisdiction in 1361: see C 705:68 in the Appendix; it was an official of an Order who saw to the protecting of the rights of Faraig de Belvis against local Christians in Nabal (C 1206:44 [Aug.20, 1365]).

30. C 1210:46 (July 6, 1365).

31. C 711:161 (Feb 27, 1363), C 986:13 (Aug 23, 1365),. C 1208 78 (Sept.6, 1365).

32. C 724:157 (Jan.20, 1365), C 986:121 (Oct.17, 1365), and. C 720:77, in the Appendix.

33. C 1189:212 (July 13, 1363); cf. C 683:5 (Oct.27, 1355).

34. This included publishing a list of the names of the Muslims, offering them for sale, and threatening a penalty of 7,000s for harboring them: see C 986:93 (Oct.3, 1365 [repeat of order of July 13, 1364]), and C 1207:145 (same date).

35. C 1209:108 (May 13, 1365); cf. C 704:51 (July 7, 1360).

36. The etymology of the word is uncertain, though it probably derives from the Arabic sharika, "to share." On the meaning of the term in Catalan law, see Costums of Tortosa, IV.26.33. For a more general discussion, see Burns, Islam, pp.l02-14.

37. See above, note 11, for "franchi." On the general status of exarici see the long dispute (beginning in 1250) chronicled in C S :905:219 and C 905:231 (both of 1361) concerning the hereditary status of a "free" Muslim and his family. On the equality of Christian and Muslim serfs, see, for example, C 912:142 (Apr.20, 1366). In the fifteenth century the term exaricus was applied to Christians, too: see Macho y Ortega, "Condición," p.150, note.

38. Abraham (or Abrafim) Abenxoa (1363) was allowed by the king to have two wives: one in Onda and one in Valencia. A law in Valencia prohibited anyone not residing in the city from inheriting the property of deceased Muslims, but when Abenxoa died the Crown came to an agreement with the wife in Onda over a fair share of the estate for her and her child. This unusual concession is clear demonstration of the high regard the king held for his Mudéjar employees (RP 1719:25 [1363]). For other material on Abenxoa the qadi, see C 905:177 (May 31, 1361), C 966:139 (Nov.11, 1363), C 1208:85 (Sept.12,1365), C 1569:82 (Feb.16, 1363), and under Chapter II, pp.8lss. For his cousin, see C 1208:85, ut supra. For Abencomixa, see C 1211:41 (Apr.14, 1365) and C 1404:53 (Feb.17, 1365). For the Ballistarii, see C 1205:69 (Apr.7, 1365), and below, Chapter V, pp.214-216. Alcafaç's career suffered as a result of charges brought against him by other royal favorites (C 700:60 [Nov.15, 1359],and below), but he retained some power in Valencia: see RP 1708 and 1709, passim.

39. Faraig was the surname of a prominent Mudéjar family in Borja (C 692:205 [Sept.16, 1357]), where F. de Belvis held his first official post. I infer from this that he came from Borja, but there is no further evidence. The name Belvis belonged to Mudéjar families south of Valencia, but there is no certain connection with the Aragonese family, and numerous Christians also bore the name, including the lieutenant-procurator of the southernmost Valencian province in 1284 (Roca Traver, "Un Siglo," p.84, n.l6), and at least one other member of the royal household of Peter himself (González Hurtebise, Libros, p.24 and passim). It was such a common Christian name, in fact, that Verlinden failed to recognize it as belonging to a Mudéjar in a document relating to Faraig himself: see below, p.52. The fact that Faraig's brother lived in northern Castile also militates to some extent against linking the family with the Valencian Belvis.

40. C 575:149 (June 1, 1332).

41. C 685:44, in Appendix.

42. C 1183:124 (Nov.21, 1362).

43. For Faraig's marriage to Fatima, see C 1204:86 (Apr.24, 1365); for her relation to Alasrach, C 693:100 (Jan.22, 1358) (two documents); for her relation (through her first husband) to the Abenxoas, see C 1204:86, ut supra, C 1206:84 (Sept.12, 1365), C 1208:85 (Sept.12, 1365). It was a second marriage for Faraig as well: his first wife was Mahometi d'Alazera. Since there is no clear indication that Mahometi died between the last mention of her (C 904:232 [Nov.13, 1360]) and the first mention of Fatima (1365), it is conceivable that Faraig had more than one wife at a time; Jews were frequently allowed to take more than one wife, as was a Mudéjar relative of Faraig himself: note 38, above.

44. The slave (one of several the Crown gave the Belvis) is mentioned in C 1203:178 (Aug.20, 1364) as being worth 300s. The property, granted in C 1210:85 (Apr.25, 1365), was seized from Muslim traitors in Daroca. Faraig rented it out, since he travelled with the Court, end it was twice seized by local Christians (C 1206:44 [Aug. 20, 1365], C 723:158 [Dec.20, 1365]), who ejected the Muslim renter.

45. (May 30, 1365),RP 1710:47 (1365).

46. C 711:194 (Mar.14, 1363).

47. C 1183:118 (Nov 18, 1362).

48. C 1518:6 (June 30, 1366); cf. C 1168:129 (Jan.8, 1360).

49. C 981:22 (Feb.12, 1355); C 904:232 (Nov.13, 1360).

50. " guisa que ellos se puedan loar de vos et de vuestras favores, sabiendo que en esto nos faredes plazer e servitio, e el contrario nos desplazeria muyto.. ." C 1183:1214 (Nov.21, 1362). Note that in this document, as in the vast majority of those dealing with Faraig and his family, there is no mention whatever of their being Muslims.

51. C 692:182 (Aug.18, 1357). This judge is the only Mudéjar addressed in any royal letter as "vos."

52. C 1204:86, 1206:84, 1208:85, as above, note 43.

53. C 901:288 (Feb.16, 1358), C 700:188 (Mar.6, 1360).

54. C 700:214 (Apr.8, 1360), C 699:207 (Apr.ll,1360).

55. C 965:233 (May 8, 1354),C 966:104 (Aug.20, 1357). See pp.510-1l.

56. C 968:37 (Nov.28, 1360), C 715:56 (Oct.15, 1363).

57. C 966:138 (Dec.28, 1363).

58. C 685:61 (Oct.16, 1355), C 1183:119 (Nov.18, 1362), C 711:161 (Feb.27, 1363).

59. This sequence of events is recorded in C 1209:106 (May 11, 1365).

60. See Chapter II, pp.85ss.

61. C 1068:56 (Dec.14, 1355).

62. E.g., C 699:131 (June 13, 1360), C 703:43 (Jan.13, 1360). For other examples, consult the table under Chapter III, p. 149.

63. "Condición," p.178. Macho y Ortega describes the Belvis family as being from Zaragoza, but does not support this, and I am inclined to believe he is mistaken: there is as much reason to believe the family lived in Valencia in the fifteenth century as in Zaragoza.

64. C 685:61 (Oct 16, 1355).

65. E.g. , Ali de Belvis: Piles Ros, Estudio, p 157, #150 (1424), p 238, #501 (1432), p 241, #516 (1433).

66. In particular, the reader is referred to Charles Verlinden, L'Esclavage dans l'Europe médiévale (Brugge, 1955), I, and José María Ramos y Loscertales, El cautiverio en la Corona de Aragón durante los siglos xiii, xiv, y xv (Zaragoza, 1915). The study by Ramos y Loscertales is, unfortunately, only concerned with prisoners of war, and is therefore of more limited value than it might have been had the author applied his considerable talents to considering servitude in general. It is nonetheless extremely useful, despite this limitation and a rather disproportionate reliance on the Costums of Tortosa. Verlinden's study, too, relies generally on laws rather than indications of actual practices which undoubtedly accounts for some of the differences between his findings and my own. Verlinden was, of course, covering an enormously broader area -- both geographically and temporally -- than the present enquiry, and could hardly be expected to consider the question with the same degree of detail. It is nevertheless a bit disappointing that his comments on the fourteenth century are so limited, and based entirely on judiciary and published documents. The fifteenth-century material is largely derived from primary sources, but these are predominantly from the Balearics, which were, by Verlinden's own admission, atypical in their extraordinary dependence on slaves The most disappointing aspect of this indispensable study is the author's grouping of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries together and treating them as a whole, skipping back arid forth through two hundred years as if there were no important historical trends intervening.

67. Verlinden, L'Esclavage, p.434. Slaves were most numerous in Majorca and Catalonia.

68. C 1403:6 (undated, presumably 1356).

69. C 703:25 (May 28, 1360). Some recently sold slaves were even sent back to Tunisia in fulfillment of the terms of this treaty.

70. L'Esclavage, p.426.

71. "Attendentes quidam [sic] sarracenum captiuum vocatum Abdaylla in dominio nostro per quosdam peregrinos captum fuisse, et in villa Aqualate per baiulum eiusdem ville tamquam rem vaccantem [sic] et sine domino per longum tempus detentum extitisse, infra quod licet preconitzatum extiterit, nullus comparuit ius habere asserens in eodem, et per consequens nobis et curie nostre tamquam rem vaccantem et sine domino ut prefertur pertinere. . ." C 899:68 (July 15, 1356). Other Moors confiscated as res vaccantes are mentioned at C 688:64 (Sept.16, 1356), and C 1068:147 (July 12, 1356).

72. E.g., for violation of dress code: C 7O3:55 (1360) (cf. Chapter VII) ; for failure to pay back a debt: C 901:260 (1358); for hiding Muslims accused of some crime: C 1154:56 (1356); for rebellion: C 1205:91 (1365); for an unspecified crime: C 1569:26 (1359).

73. L'Esclavage, p.423, adduces two instances in the early 1330's; cf. note 720.

74. "Ideo vobis dicimus et mandamus quatenus unam de primis sarracenabus per vos ut premittitur nostre curie confiscandis detis et liberetis Stephano predicto, de qua suas proprias voluntates facere :yaleat" C 1183:159 (Dec.l, 1362). Cf. Chapter VII, pp.346ss.

75. By order of documentation: one Muslim by a noble in Valencia, C 683:114 (Feb.24, 1356); one by peasants in Aragon, C 685:144 (Oct.14, 1355); one by a noble in Valencia, C 703:241 (Dec.24, 1360); ten by a noble in Valencia, C 708:37 (Oct.13, 1361); one by an official in Aragon, C 908:154 (Mar.23, 1363); thirty-odd by a noble in Catalonia, C 986:13 (Aug.23, 1365); one by knights in Valencia, C 1188:30 (Oct.3, 1363); two by unspecified Christians in Valencia, C 1208:95 (Sept.18, 1365); two by mercenaries in Valencia, C 1208:150 (Oct.14, 1365); seven by "townsmen" in Aragon, C 1537:66 (Dec.7, 1363); cf. RP 1710:21 (1365).

76. The men who actually captured and sold them were fined 1,100s jointly; the merchant who bought them was fined 660s; various collaborators were fined amounts of 110s and 220s; the man who transported them to Ibiza paid 110s (RP 1710:21 [1365], cf. C 1208:95). Because entries in the Real Patrimonio are not dated by month, and because the corresponding entry in the Chancery register was sent long after the event, it is impossible to be certain exactly when this incident took place. In July of 1365, however, a Valencian Mudéjar woman was given permission by the Crown to remarry because her husband, a slave in Ibiza, was effectively "dead" (C 1207:124). Since the most likely date for the enslavement of the two Muslims was the summer of 1365, it seems possible that the woman's husband was one of the two, and that he was thus allowed to be kept by the new owner. Ibizans had been granted a special commission to enslave persons of any religion who were at war with Aragon on a "no-questions-asked" basis: C 1413: 11 (Mar.10, 1349), published in López de Meneses, Documentos, p 55.

77. "Un Siglo," p.59. For the Catalan tax, see RP 994:13 (1363); or the dobla, see RP 1711:11 (1366).

78. For the thirteenth century, see Verlinden, L'Esclavage, pp.282-4 and cf. prices given in Roca Traver, "Un Siglo," p.58, n.l60; p.63, n.186; and p.83, n.l4. For the fourteenth century, see L'Esclavage, 449.

79. A sampling of such prices, in order of documentation: C 685:44 (1355): a male sold for 700 morabetins C 697:141 (1359); a female sold for £33; C 703:211 (1360): a black male sold for 52s; C 903:107 (1359): a male sold for £37; C 986:59 (1365): a male sold for £60. By way of perspective it seems worth noting that horses were often worth more than Muslim slaves: see C 720:53 (Sept.8, 1365), where trade is effected to the disadvantage of the party receiving the Muslim slave ("estimatio facta de dicto equo est major precio dicti sarraceni....

80. E.g., C 688:97 (Dec.17, 1356); RP 1708:18 (1362).

81. E.g., the faqi of Borja: C 705:150 (June 26, 1361). For Christians, see C 720:45 (Sept.14, 1365). Twelve Mudéjares were pardoned for helping runaways in 1365: see C 1209:l7Q (Jun3 17). Cf. C 983: 214 (Dec.20, 1358).

82. See L'Esclavage, pp.317, n.2614 533; 534, n.l003. The Furs are published in Roca Traver, "Un Siglo," p.45, n 114.

83. This document is C 575:149 (June 1, 1332); the Muslim woman had been confiscated for sleeping with a Christian.

84. C 685:44 (Oct.14, 1355),. in Appendix.

85. C 1203:178 (Aug.20, 1364), in Appendix.

86. C 907:61 (Apr 10, 1362) "Cum nos in excambium et permutationem Salamoneti Abbu, iudei civitatis Valentie, et ad quorundam familiarum nostrorum supplicationem, qui pro infrascriptis nobis humiliter intercesserunt, dari et tribui concesserimus Jacob Abbu, iudeo Valentie, Abdalla Alminxar, sarracenum regni Castelle, ipso Jacob dante et solvente precium pro quo emerunt [illuin] illi penes quos erat dictus sarracenus."

87. RP 1002:40 (1360) ("...Na Axa, que compra Scidi Boltaciin, moro missatger del Rey de Tuniç, qui le s'en mena..."); C 698:128 (Oct.2, 1359).

88. Cf. EP 997:68 (1366). Athough in the early fifteenth century Muslims could still own Muslim slaves (see Piles Ros, Estudio, p.243, #523), this was absolutely prohibited shortly before the close of the century (ibid., p.285, #730).

89. See Chapter II, pp.95ss.

90. These professionals apparently organized guilds comparable to those common among medieval Christian merchants and skilled craftsmen, with obligations to oversee the burial of members, etc.: "... collectores illius juris quod exigitur et levatur in dicta civitate [Valentie] ab omnibus confratriis ipsius civitatis in auxilium guerre Castelle. . . compallere nituntur dictam aljamain et singulares eiusdem ad solvendum certum jus confratrie, vigore cuiusdam ordinationis et statuti inter sarracenos facti quo cavetur in efectu quod siquis sarracenus menestralis ipsius civitatis decessenit, per alios sarracenos, qui sunt illius officii quo utebatur dictus decedens dum vivebat, haberi sepeliri sub incursu certarum penarum. .." C 714:115 (Aug 29, 1363).

91. Roca Traver, "Un Siglo," pp. 54ss.

92. C 1069:55 (cf 5) (Jan 20, 1357) In the fifteenth century, Aragonese Muslims travelled as far as Granada to do construction no one else could (or would?) do: see the safe-conduct issued by the General Bailiff of Valencia to 28 Aragonese Mudéjares who were on their way to repair the Alhambra of Granada in 1492 (Piles Ros, Estudio, p.314).

93. C 1075:91 (Feb.15, 1363); cf. C 1170:160 (May 9, 1360).

94. C 1402:147 (Feb. l, 1359).

95. RP 1709:50; 1719:60; 2469:58; see also the table on occupations p.62, under "paper miller."

96. RP 1711:34 (1366); cf. C 1170:160 (1363).

97. C 985:70 (Mar.8, 1363). "Judei autem et sarraceni medici examinari habeant per medicos eiusdem legis vel secte, siqui fuerint, uno tamen medico in eorum examine adhibito christiano Et medicis eiusdem legis vel secte non existentibus, habeant per duos medicos christianos, qua exaininatione habita, si sufficientes reperti fuerint, iurare publice habeant bene et legaliter practicare, antequem ad praticam admittantur."

98. C 909:154 (1364). On foreigners not being allowed to practice medicine, see Lopez de Meneses, Documentos, pp.14-l5. On equality before the law, see also the regulations about Christian, Jewish, and Muslim physicians in the ordinances of Valls, in Carreras y Candi, "Ordinacions," XII, pp.202 and 281. The Bishop of Moncada had inveighed against Christians who employed Muslim or Jewish physicians in the late thirteenth century (Villanueva, Viage, V, pp.314-15), but there was in general no official opposition to this form of convivencia.

99. "Ad supplicationis instantiam aliquoruin domesticorum et faimiliarum nostrorum cum presenti carta nostra recipimus te, Abdarramen Muhameti, sarracenum cirurgicuin, in familiare nostrum, et aliorum familiarum et domesticorum nostrorum consortio liberaliter agregamus. Volentes et tibi specialiter concedentes ut illis de cetero honoribus et favoribus gaudeas, quibus alii domestici et familiares nostri potiri vel perfrui dinoscuntur. Ceterum quare te ut cirurgicus [sic] ad diversas mundi partes et loca declinare contigit..." (ordinary safe-conduct for members of royal household follows) C 1573:29 (May 1, 1364). Note that Abdarramen is to continue his regular practice. On the king's eye surgeon, see J. Rius, "Mes documents sobre la cultura catalana medieval," Estudis universitaris catalans, XIII (1928), p.162. The king also had a Jewish physician, Master Boniuda, who attended his soldiers and knights (C 683:240 [Aug.8, 1356]). For fifteenth-century Muslim medicine, see Piles Ros, Estudio, pp.172, 184, 226 (n.b. the Muslim here described as "moro negro"), and passim.

100.C 1402:153-4 (1359); C l958:22 and 25 (June 11 and Sept.9,1389); González Hurtebise, Libros, pp.233, 402; Macho y Ortega, "Condición," pp 308-309.