Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there is no clear evidence of Jews having been present in the town of\nFraga when the Count of Barcelona Ramon Berenguer IV reconquered it in\n1149, the possibility cannot be dismissed out of hand.\nThe first documentary reference to the Jews of Fraga appears in a letter that King\nJames I of Catalonia-Aragon sent to the Jews living in the town in around 1237.\nAnother reference can be found in a document dated 8 October 1264, in which the\nking acknowledged that every aljama in Aragon had paid his eldest son, Peter, the\nannual tax for the Christmas celebrations. It should be noted that Fraga contributed\nto the coffers of Saragossa at the time in question, as did Lleida [Lérida].\nIn 1282, King Peter the Great ordered Fragas Jewish aljama to submit its\naccount books corresponding to the last 15 years for inspection in order to clear\nup a matter related to tax payment. Counting back 15 years from 1282 gives\n1267-1268 as possibly either the time at which Fragas Jewish aljama was first\nestablished or the point at which Fraga became accountable to Lleida rather\nthan to Saragossa.\nIn summary, Fragas Jewish aljama was already established in the 13th century,\nunder the jurisdiction of that of Lleida. There had been Jews in the town\nsince 1237, and a Jewish community since 1267-1268, when the Jews of both\nFraga and Lleida ceased to have ties with Saragossas Jewish community. The\nJewish aljama in Fraga spanned carrer Barranco and La Collada, encompassing\nthe present-day passageways of San Julián, Santa Irene, Aitona and Santa Margarita.\nAccessible via a gate on carrer Barranco, the Jewish quarter had a bakery,\nstores, wells or storage pits, wine cellars, workshops and shops looking out onto\nthe street. However, there are now no traces of any of them, nor of the synagogue.\nThe authorities that represented the Jewish community comprised a\nsecretary, a rabbi or teacher, a treasurer, an almoner, a town crier and a gatekeeper\nor area guard, one of whom would also have acted as a judge. The rabbi\noversaw religious celebrations and feast days. The Jews of Fraga came to enjoy\ngenuine privileges as a result of a series of decrees issued in 1328.\nThe Jews contributed to standard royal expenditure through taxes known as\nthe cena (a hospitality tax paid to the royal court) and the quèstia (an irregular\ntax usually levied in response to specific needs). Queen Maria de Luna exempted\nthem from the cena tax in 1396, but it was reinstated following restoration work on the aljama in 1436. The Jews contributions to the extraordinary\ncharges imposed by the king were unusual in that they could be made in an individual\ncapacity, i. e. directly to the Crown. The Jews made such contributions\nwhen princes and princesses married, when members of the royal family were\nborn, when kings were crowned and when funding was required for military\ncampaigns, as well as through the morabatí tax (paid to the king in exchange for\na royal promise to refrain from altering the coinage), such as that of 1397, etc.\nIn 1408, an attempt was made to reduce the size of the Jews debt corresponding\nto annual fees levied on property, at which point they owed varying amounts to Fragas\nAugustinian monastery (outstanding since 1397), to Queen Violante de Bar and\nto the priest of the Corpus Christi Chapel of the Church of Saint John of Lleida.\nThe Jewish quarter was abandoned until 1436, after which time it apparently\nmade a successful recovery. Information on the period in question is very\nscarce, however.\nThe Jews were granted many specific privileges, notably including measures\nto help them increase their earnings through sales of products such as wine\n(1309, 1322, 1324), taxes, called cises, on food products (1389, 1399, 1409)\nand a 10-year exemption from the cena tax (1400); exemption from fees, called\nlluïsme and fadiga, payable to landowners as a result of transfer of landed property\n(1384, 1389); waived debts (1389); exemption from fines and penalties\n(1399); the right not to be disturbed (1399); the privilege of not being the subject\nof accusations (1409); the right to represent themselves in court (1391);\nexemption from contributions payable upon slaughtering animals (1409); protection\nfor aljama officials involved in crimes (1453); the right to establish an\naljama with up to 100 households (1413); the right to receive pledges from\nChristians (1413); free transport of belongings (1413); the right to have a house\nin any part of the town (1436); exemption from the morabatí tax (1398, 1451);\nand the privilege of not being prosecuted by Christian courts.\nThere are no records of any deaths having occurred in Fraga in the disturbances\nthat took place in August 1391. As of that time, the town council included\ntwo representatives of the aljama. The conversion of Jews in 1414-1415\nled to more problems, possibly similar in all the aljamas along the banks of the\nCinca River. The problems in question basically consisted of the conversions \ngiving rise to a cultural change, a break with tradition and the abandonment of\nthe aljama, whose inhabitants moved to another part of the town. The neophytes\ndid not see why charges applicable to the Jews should also apply to them,\nand were forced to contribute thereto against their will. Some neophytes encountered\nproblems in terms of obtaining annual payments levied on property\ndue to them as Jews or the heirs of Jews. After 1436, the Jewish quarter was restored and its synagogue reopened, and as many as 50 families lived there until\nthe expulsion of the Jews in 1492.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".