Appendix: a symposium on Simon de Montfort, the Jews and the politics of naming

Why do we publish a mini-symposium in Jewish Culture and History about Simon de Montfort, Sixth Earl of Leicester, a thirteenth century ‘English’ (actually French) Nobleman? If this was the Journal of Medieval History there would be no need for any such justification, or even the English Historical Review, given the importance of de Montfort in domestic history, and especially that of the evolution of parliament. But in a Jewish studies journal, especially one that prides itself on interdisciplinarity and a deep chronological and geographical range? In terms of the history of English antisemitism, de Montfort would earn his keep for inclusion as an innovator (expelling Jews from a particular town, a precursor for the world first of expulsion from a whole kingdom which happened in 1290), and as someone whose religiously inspired hatred for nonChristians (and some Christians as well), was especially profound. Ideology and power were a murderous mix in his case, one that was exceptional even in thirteenth century England. His antisemitism, however, would not quite perhaps be enough to merit the minisymposium in this journal. There is a wider significance and first it concerns the relationship between history and representation and the growing ‘memory wars’ that are being used to justify racial intolerance and populist extremism in the western world. Slow burning in the case of Leicester, there has been an awareness since at least the early 1990s, that the naming not just of its second university, but his memorial presence in the whole of the city, was problematic and offensive to the local Jewish community and beyond. The summer of 2020, the murder of George Floyd, and the new momentum behind the Black Lives Matter movement, gave a global focus to heritage that commemorated racists of both the distant and recent past. There was a renewed consideration of the naming of De Montfort University, especially from its student union, which believed it was incompatible with the claims to equality and diversity policies made by this higher education institute. An online symposium was organised to discuss the issue. A cynical view would be that the management of the university believed that calling a small event where inevitably views would be complex and competing, would take the sting out of the issue. It would be expensive and messy to rename a university, especially unwelcome at a time of Covid related financial stringency. Readers of the diverse views expressed in this