The sentence also mentions 3 other men who were given only reprimand because they were "present, but not danced".

I am intrigued in what was the legal background for the sentence? Was it actually illegal to break the Lent, or fraternizing with Jewish peoples, or both, or only together? Was the lent observance so strict you could go to jail for breaking it? Was associating with the Jews so looked down on that it was actually illegal?

Were behaviors like these two (or five) men exhibited, breaking of the Lent rules and partying, a frequent occurrence?

---

Some context for the question. This verdict comes from the background of Martin Behaim, probably 24-years old at a time, who later traveled and spent time in Portugal where he was possibly involved in geographical and astronomical research for king Joao II. He became famous for creating map and a globe of the world for Nuremberg city council in 1490-1492.

Translation, as given, of the full verdict:

[Sentence, Saturday, Mach 1, 1483]

Item. Martin Beheim and Sebalt Deichsler are each condemned to 8 days imprisonment, partly as an act of grace, such punishment to be undergone in their person, because on Ember day last they danced with the Jews, at a wedding. Reprieved until Judica next [March 16].

But Hans Imhof, H. Frey and a maker of compasses, having been present but not having danced, are to be reprimanded. Saturday before Sunday Oculi [March 1, 1483]. (Ibidem, 1483, H. 2, f. 10'.)

Martin Beheim's reprieve is extended until fourteen days after his return from Frankfurt.

The verdict is taken from Martin Behaim, his life and his globe, by E. G. Ravenstein from 1908, page 110 with a original transcript in old German and a translation.