Moses Baruh Lousada #46 - early
community leader of the London Spanish and Portuguese Jewish congregation
In 1657 the
new London community
of Spanish and Portuguese Jews established a meeting place in
Creechurch Lane and the Velho (old) cemetery off Mile End Road. Hyamson (ref
6) notes that in 1660 informers attempting to
secure the destruction of the newly resettled community listed 'Moses and Jacob
(see note 5 below) Baruh or Barrow (see
note 10 below), better known as Baruh Lousada'.
But undeterred by such intrigue the congregation elected
its first formal Mahamad (governing body)
in late 1663, with Moses Baruh Lousada #46 elected Gabay (treasurer) on 18 November
1663.
The signatories to the first Code of Ascamot (synagogue
by-laws)
unsurprisingly include
him (see note 13 below). Soon enough
the first 3 members of the Mahamad had an urgent and vital task to perform - see
top left-hand image - and as noted in Bevis Marks Records I:9 this was the
first time the community had obtained an authoritative written statement which recognized the privileges
enjoyed since 1656. Then from Hyamson
we learn
that Moses returned to the Mahamad in 1668 and 1683, was a signatory of the Code of
Ascamot of 1677, and was a 'seatholder' in 1682, and as can be seen
above he signed a Mahamad order in 1696 as a yehidim (ordinary community
member).
His selection for a key early role in the community may
stem from the fact that he was a cousin of Abraham Israel Pereira a key financier of
Maunel Soeiro aka Menasseh ben Israel 1604-57, the leading advocate for Jewish
resettlement of England, whilst community leader
David Abravanel
appears to have been a brother-in-law of Menasseh ben Israel.
Moses Baruh Lousada
became a broker of the City of London in 1679 (ref
5). The payments
by Moses to the London Jewish
community put
him in the middle rank of merchants (ref
97). A key trading link was with his brother Aaron Baruh Lousada,
in Barbados
from 1659 until he died there in 1695,
but this link was in the context of a family business which
evolved as the family progressively reached Amsterdam.
Amsterdam tax payments
tell us much about the whereabouts of the family in the second half of the 17th
century. To begin with
Isaac, the uncle
of Moses Baruh Lousada was in Livorno during the 1640-60 period but reached
Amsterdam by 1662. Though as
indicated above
Moses Baruh Lousada #46 first appears in London in 1660,
he had been
an annual visitor (if not a resident)
in Amsterdam
in the period 1649-59.
Moses returned to
Amsterdam briefly
in 1663 and 1665, whilst Jacob moved
there in 1662 where he died in 1681.
His cousin
(see note 16 below)
David was
also in Barbados around 1664, having links with
Curacao and perhaps
Surinam, before he appeared in
Amsterdam in 1672.
Another
(also younger) Barbados cousin was Abraham
#45 (ref
5) though ultimately Abraham came to London (see note 9 below) from where he spent much time
in Amsterdam (see note 12 below).
Late in his life,
Moses Baruh Lousada may
have been in the diamond trade
with India (see note 2 below)
which does not seem to have successful but the family had evidently accumulated
some wealth before Moses and David died, for it owned stock in the Bank of
England late in their lives and for a period thereafter (see note 14 below).
The
name Antonio Fernandes Louzada
appears in Amsterdam records and given the handwriting (see note 15 below) we
consider this was a 1649 alias of Moses #46 who later became known in London as simply Antonio Louzada.
Before moving to Livorno where David #44 was born, the family
was probably in Madrid with
associated families. Whether
Moses ever went to Livorno with his father Abraham #2149 is unknown but he went to London via France (see note 11),
and the 1649 document suggests that the French location was Rouen.
Moses seems to have married
(at least) twice with both known wives being of the Henriques Faro family (see note 3 below). His long-term
business partner (see above) bore the Serra name used by the Montezinos family
and also the Gomes name. Perhaps because of the
prevalence of the Plague during his time in London, his
own family was small
with
only 2 sons
Abraham #1352 (see notes 4 and 9 below) and
Mordecai #66 (see note 4 below), and a daughter Sarah #257
(see note 6 below), reaching
adulthood (see also note 8
below). Mordecai left no marriage record though
may have had a son 'Moses Barrow', while Sarah in Amsterdam produced
surviving children but no grandchildren, and Abraham have produced one
surviving child
(see note 7 below) but no grandchildren.
Moses #46 died on 3 Adar 5459 (ref
98) ie 2 Feb 1699 and was buried at the Velho Cemetery.
From
Amsterdam Sarah's husband and 2 sons
(one called Moses) appeared in a London court case in 1738 between 2 branches of
the Bernal family, but it seems the line
of Moses #46 came to an end in London and Amsterdam just about the time his grand-nephew Jacob #36
arrived in London from Jamaica in 1743.
Notes:
1. Jacob Gomes Serra,
written above as
Jahacob Gomez Serra, was also
known as Antonio Gomesera. He outlasted
Moses Baruh Lousada,
dying on 4 Kislev 5467 or 10 Nov 1706. From Hyamson we learn that Gomes Serra
was Gabay in 1667 and 1674, and on the Mahamad in 1691,1697 and 1700. From
ref
37 we learn that 'in the years immediately following the Fire of London, in
addition to the da Costas, it is Michael Levy, Gomes Rodrigues, and the
partnership of Anthony Gomeserra and Moses Baruh Lousada trading as Serra &
Lousada, that are the most prominent among the Jewish importers. Linen from N.W.
Europe and sugar from Barbados and the Azores formed the bulk of their trade'.
A daughter of Jacob Gomes Serra married
Abraham Franco at
Bevis Marks in 1698 (BMR 2 #55). A customs incident at
Falmouth, involving Antonio Gomes Serra and Antonio Louzada, is well known.
Holly Snyder in her essay in ‘Atlantic Diasporas’ (ref
8) informs us that in 1680 a customs agent Samuel Hayne from Falmouth examined
the cargo of the ship Experiment only to find that the goods entered under the
name of the English Quaker captain were in fact consigned to 35 different
traders – all Jewish in Hayne’s account. She goes on to say that Hayne asserted
that the Jewish merchants were not entitled to conduct trade as English subjects
and duty was payable as the ship was en route from Barbados ultimately to
Amsterdam and did not unload at Falmouth for inspection as the law for aliens
required. Then we learn that Hayne was resisted in law by Antonio Gomez Serra
and Antonio Louzada, merchants based in London, who had been granted Patents of
Endenization from the Crown in 1672 and 1675 respectively. The jury, by some
accounts perhaps bribed, concluded that the goods belonged to Gomez Serra and
Louzada. Ref 117(p64) gives another slant - Hayne refused bribes, and pressure in London on the
authorities cost Hayne his job. This incident illustrates how the
Amsterdam/Barbados trade via England worked - London representation was required
to provide English involvement in the trade with the English colonies -
principally Surinam (until 1667), Barbados and Jamaica - and to comply with
mercantilist policies such as the Navigation Acts of 1651 and 1660 which were
aimed at the Dutch and which restricted trade of colonial goods to English
destinations. Further detail can be found in
refs 61 and 339. A connection yet to be explored is that the Serra name was one used
by the Levi Montezinos family (ref
153), with whom the Baruch Lousadas have several connections going back to
Villaflor and
Livorno. The
Gomes Serra name thus suggests
a Lamego marriage to a
Levi Montezinos since the Gomes name appears amongst
the early Lamegos.
2.
Edgar Samuel found that in 1696 Sir Francis Child a Fleet Street
goldsmith/banker and 'Jeweller in Ordinary' to King William 3 organized a
syndicate of 17 London jewelers to send £2500 out to Abraham Pluymer to buy
diamonds in Madras. Moses Barrow (Lousada) was one of the 17. In
ref 84 p144 can be found
reference to a 1700 diamond delivery to the value of £11,329 to Moses Barrow (Barukh
Lousada) and Joseph Gomes. Moses Baruh Lousada died in 1699
so it is somewhat unclear whether this shipment arrived posthumously, or whether it and perhaps even the first item of diamond business was instead
attributable to his (probable) grandson of the same name (the Bank of England
shareholder discussed
elsewhere). The name Joseph Gomes may refer to the son Joshua of Jacob Gomes
Serra (discussed in note 1 above). The second transaction was not profitable, so
perhaps the next generation was learning the ropes!
3.
In the 15 Elul 5442 circumcision record
(in
ref
96 ptIV) Moses Enriques Faro
a 'forasteiro' or
outsider (perhaps a newly-arrived Portuguese) -
was given as an uncle, and whilst this
is not certain he was probably an uncle of the wife of Moses #46. Because Abraham #1352
(estimated on the circumcision evidence to be aged about 30
years in 1682) and Sarah
#257 (born 1681) seem to have been born about 30 years
apart. Thus Moses had 2
known marriages - both to a Henriques Faro and thus Abraham
and Sarah were half-siblings.
We have illustrated
this connection which as will be
observed received strong support from
the will of Jacob Israel Pereira
for the 2nd wife Rachel was Jacob's niece. These 2
marriages of Moses Baruch Lousada #46 were not recorded as Jewish marriages in
London or Amsterdam. We have inferred that the 2nd marriage of
David #44
was a secular one probably in France, later ratified in 1673 after David arrived in Amsterdam
which he did by 1672. Perhaps Moses also had his 2 marriages in France but their location is of course related to the diaspora of the Henriques
Faro family which is not well known. However the 2nd secular marriage must have
been after Moses started his permanent residence in London (given Rachel's age).
The 1st secular marriage could have occurred before Moses first appeared in
London in 1660, for Abraham #1352 produced a son in 1682 and was probably only a
boy in 1660. Rouen is a possibility being
convenient to London and Amsterdam (see note 11 for the evidence that Moses came
to London via France).
4.
The circumcision
of a son of Abraham
#1352 (see note 3)
shows it took place
in the house of Moses Baruh Lousada
'father of
Abraham and Mordehay'.
The newborn grandson may have been the first named and hence named Moses and we suggest he became Moses
#67 of Barbados and London. Moses was given 2 sons in the
Benjamin
Barrow Lousada family tree (one with the name Moses - which raised a cautionary
note since we have found from Amsterdam marriage data that
the incidence of same-name
sons is only 2%
and indeed as just noted we conclude that Moses was Moses #67 a grandson
not a son), but we found that 6 or 7 sons
were suggested in
ref 85.
Ref 6 p27 suggested 'three of his brothers and also his two sons settled in
Barbados and Jamaica' whereas we shall see he did not have brothers
in Jamaica. However his son Abraham #1352 does
appear to have settled in
Barbados, while
Mordecai who acted as an executor of his father's affairs after 1699 as
the
family financial settlement shows, does appear
to have then been absent from London (as Moses #67 not Mordecai became the Bank
of England stockholder) and may have gone to
Jamaica.
One
daughter Sarah survived to adulthood
and was married in Bevis Marks in 1709 to cousin Solomon son of David #44 and
went to live in Amsterdam (see note 6 below) where she had 2 children (see
Amsterdam Baruch Lousadas).
5. Probably Jacob was a cousin, being a son of Isaac #42. Aaron #376 of Barbados was the son not of Isaac but David. It is
likely that Moses was also a cousin of Aaron, for there are
several reasons to
consider he was a son of Abraham #2149 who left other offspring in Livorno (the naming of
his son Abraham #1352 - see 9 below is relevant here - as is his possible role
in Terra Santa grant applications which were made during his Amsterdam
appearances in the years 1649-59). This scenario appears
here.
6.
The daughter Sarah appears in
the 1695 census lists (ref
102) where we see a Moses Barrew with wife Rachel, a bachelor Mordechai and a child Sarah who would
have been almost a generation later than her brothers Abraham and Mordecai. From
Part 2 of
Bevis Marks Records we find the marriage of Sarah on 15 Kislev 5469 or
28 Nov 1708 (to a cousin -
see family chart). The
marriage of Sarah's was also recorded in 1709 in
Amsterdam and this
latter
record reveals that
her uncle was Abraham Henriques Faro
(see note 3).
The circumcision and other birth records (part IV of
Bevis Marks
Records) show a daughter of Moses was
born 24 Sivan 5439 but not to the 2nd wife Rachel who was born in 1681. The 1679
newborn was thus probably not Sarah whom the above census data shows was a child
in 1695; almost certainly Sarah was Rachel's daughter.
7.
Mordecai
appears in the
Benjamin Barrow Lousada family tree
and was buried at the Velho Cemetery in 1721.
Another
Mordecai was buried in 1733 - and we have no basis for distinguishing them but
perhaps they were cousins as shown in
our chart of London Baruch
Lousadas.
8.
The circumcision and other birth records (part IV of
ref
96) show (for
27 Tamuz 5446) another
son of Moses though
as he does not appear in the
1695 census
he may not have survived
childhood.
9.
Confusingly both cousin
Abraham #45 and
son Abraham
#1352 were fathers in the 1680s and 1690s. Abraham
#45 was born about 1645 in Livorno and died in 1714; he was a lot younger that
Moses #46 who was born in 1629 probably in Madrid. Abraham #1352 was perhaps
born around 1655 in Rouen, so may have been only 10 years younger than Abraham
#45. We can
distinguish the 2 Abrahams by pointing to Luna's name which
echoes that of
her paternal grandmother Luna #43 making her the daughter of Abraham #45.
We therefore suggest that
it is Abraham #45 who figures in the 1695 census in
St James Duke's Place
as
Abraham Barrew (merchant) with wife Rebecca, daughter Luna
and son Aaron. The circumcision records (part IV of
Bevis Marks Records) show
(for 6 Nisan 5455 which is 22 March
1695 or thereabouts) a son of Abraham.
This son could have (just - see
ref 154) been the Aaron
who appeared in the 1695 census.
There is only one grave of
Abraham Baruh Lousada known in ref
98
(it is #428) - ignoring the Abraham de Lousada (#642 of ref
98)
who was the father-in-law and
probable brother of the NY chocolate merchant Jacob Lousada - but we suggest that it was Abraham #45 who was buried at Velho
Cemetery in 1714 - a date consistent with him appearing in the will of
Jacob Israel Pereira who died in
1707. Abraham #1352 probably went to Barbados - see
here note 12 - but
after Abraham #45 left and after Aaron #376 died there in 1695.
From Part 1 of
Bevis Marks Records we learn that a self-census of members of the
community (414
persons in total) shows an Abraham Baruch Loisada (and wife) plus Moseh Baruch Loisada (plus wife, son and daughter).
This survey was conducted
around 1680
by Abraham Israel Zagache and the relevant document was found in
Amsterdam. Zagache arrived in London in 1680 and
in Hamburg in 1684.
This evidence suggests Abraham #1352 was
recorded before the birth of the son circumcised in
1682 (see note 4 above) and that Abraham
#45 had not yet arrived from Barbados.
In addition we learn that in the London Directory of 1677 appears 'Moses
Baruch Loisada, or Louzada' entered as 'Moses Barrew' in Duke's Place
- and the absence of Abraham in this evidence suggests
that Abraham #1352 had not left his father's house and unsurprisingly confirms that Abraham #45 had
not yet arrived from Barbados.
10.
The fact that
one of his London
names was
Moses Barrow (ref
6) did not make him an ancestor of the Barrows!
Their Barrow surname arose in Barbados.
11. A Moses Baruch Lousada came to London via
France (ref
121 - this data comes from before 1676 and thus could apply to
either Moses #46 or Moses #1419). It is possible this
person came
via Rouen, which played a key role in the resettlement of Jews in England (see
ref 357) and where the Lamegos
operated a trading business for several generations in the 1617-1653 period (and
perhaps longer) before retreating to Bordeaux.
Moses #46 was first known in Amsterdam in 1649 (see
ref
322) and then regularly in Amsterdam 1649-59, but possibly not a
permanent resident as he did not pay the 'finta', and perhaps he was a regular
visitor from France until 1660 when he made a permanent move to London (from
where he continued his practice of visiting Amsterdam for as the
synagogue tax records show he
made visits to Amsterdam in 1663 and 1665). Accordingly we identify the person
in ref
121 with Moses #46 and thus consider that his probable
uncle Moses #1419 came to London just before his death in 1677 - that is, he
arrived in London after the date of the survey in ref
121, and was there only briefly before he died.
The plausible source of
Moses #1419 is that he was born in Portugal around 1586 as probably the last son of
Amador de Lousada.
12.
The 2
Abrahams - #45 and #1352 - are distinguished
in note 9 above and the
Amsterdam travel of Abraham #45 is further discussed
here (in note 6).
Abraham #45 was known in London
in the 1995 London census, but in 1698 appears to have been in
Amsterdam where he lent his name to a character reference (ref
175 #1). He had received a pass to travel to Amsterdam on 17 Apr 1696 (ref
182) the same day that his brother David and nephew Jacob/James received their
passes to travel to Barbados. It seems that Abraham went to Amsterdam to cover
for his brother while David was in Barbados presumably to rearrange the family
business in the wake of their Barbados brother Aaron's
death on 16 Sep 1695.
It was the uncle Abraham #45 who appeared in the 1703 will of Jacob Israel
Pereira (ref
141) as the last surviving Baruch Lousada cousin of his father Abraham Israel
Pereira. Both Abrahams are shown in
our chart of the
Barbados Baruch Lousadas and in our charts of the
London Baruch Lousadas.
Abraham #45 also appears in our chart of the Amsterdam Baruch Lousadas.
13. As Edgar Samuel
advised in his email of 31 Jan 2013 Moses Baruh Lousada
had been
given the task of writing the first Code of Ascamot. This task would not have been given
to a new arrival
from Portugal; indeed his uncle
Isaac #42
lived as a Jew
in Livorno
in the 1640-1660 period. Moses
was a regular visitor to Amsterdam in the 1649-59 period. He had no doubt acquired
much knowledge of
Jewish rite after leaving Madrid.
14. The
Bank of England stockholder was also named Moses Baruh Lousada. In fact there
were
3 more or less contemporaneous London people
called Moses Baruh
Lousada - one who died in 1677, Moses #46, and the Bank of England stockholder. This has caused
confusion which we have clarified
elsewhere. There, in
note 1, we see that the
Bank of England stockholder who collected dividends after 1699 (when Moses #46
died) was probably a grandson Moses #67 of Moses #46 via Abraham #1352. When
young he was probably in Barbados with his father (see
here note 12).
15.
On 14 Apr
2017 Michael Waas pointed out a 1649
notary deed (see
ref 201) from Amsterdam
Notary Archives signed by Antonio Fernandes Lousada - in a handwriting similar
to that shown in the images above. This might suggest that
Moses #46 was the son of Fernando, first son of
Amador de Lousada. Fernando's family remained in
Vinhais - which is where the Coimbra Inquisition arrested them around 1658. However Fernando's son Antonio was imprisoned by the Coimbra Inquisition in 1658.
Rather we suggest
here that Moses
#46 was the son of Abraham #2149, whom we identify
here as Antonio. Our
thinking here is that Moses may have been baptised Fernando son of Antonio, and thus in crafting
a trading alias in Rouen he seems to have used the reverse form ie Antonio Fernandes
which of course mirrors the name of Antonio Fernandes de Carvajal of Rouen and
co-founder of the London community! As the 1649 deed gives his age as 20, and as
we place the
Baruch Lousadas in Madrid in the 1630s, the
Barrow Family Tree was possibly correct in
suggesting he was born in 1629 in Spain. As we suggest (see note 11
above) Moses #46 travelled to London via France, he may not have gone to
Livorno or only briefly.
16. Our discussion of David #44 and
the family financial
settlement of 1699 - made after the death of Moses #46 and before David's death
in the same year - shows David had a probable brother Moses #1585 of
Surinam and Curacao, meaning that Moses #46 and David #44 were
not brothers of each other. Rather, David was a probable full brother of Abraham #45 of Barbados,
London and Amsterdam and Moses #1585 of Surinam and Curacao. On the other hand
Moses #46 appears to have been a son of Abraham #2149 of Livorno - the naming of
his son Abraham #1352 suggests this and there is Terra Santa evidence from
Amsterdam which is supportive - see
here note note 5.
