Visual Aspects of Scribal Culture in Ashkenaz: Shaping the 'Small Book of Commandments' (SeMaK) [Illustrated] 3110569388, 9783110569384

Table of contents :
A note of thanks
Contents
Abbreviations, transliteration and translation
1. Introduction
2. The historical context
3. The SeMaK as a book
4. The manuscripts in their entirety
5. The scribes
6. Five manuscripts in detail
7. Conclusion
Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK
Bibliography
List of the manuscripts mentioned in this study
Figures
Index

Citation preview

Ingrid M. Kaufmann Visual Aspects of Scribal Culture in Ashkenaz

Studia Judaica

Forschungen zur Wissenschaft des Judentums Begründet von Ernst Ludwig Ehrlich Herausgegeben von Günter Stemberger, Charlotte Fonrobert, Elisabeth Hollender, Alexander Samely und Irene Zwiep

Band 103

Ingrid M. Kaufmann

Visual Aspects of Scribal Culture in Ashkenaz Shaping the Small Book of Commandments (SeMaK)

ISBN 978-3-11-056938-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-057441-8 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-057362-6 ISSN 0585-5306 Library of Congress Control Number: 2019910010 Bibliographic Information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; Detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Typesetting: Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd. Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com

A note of thanks This study is based on a lightly revised version of my PhD thesis, Neben dem Text: Kommentierung, Dekoration, Kritzelei – Der SeMaK (Das kleine Buch der Gebote) als Zeugnis der visuellen Schreiberkultur in Ashkenaz, which the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at The University of Lucerne accepted after its submission in 2016. It was Professor Katrin Kogman-Appel who gave me the idea of publishing the German thesis in English. I am very grateful to her for doing so and for making so many valuable suggestions about this work as well. My sincere thanks to Carl Carter from Amper Translation Service for translating my thesis into English with such care and enthusiasm. I would also like to express my gratitude to Professor Günter Stemberger and Professor Charlotte Fonrobert for their critical appraisals of the study and for including it in the Studia Judaica series. Many thanks to Dr Sophie Wagenhofer and Dr Eva Frantz at De Gruyter for the help they both provided in finding solutions to issues I encountered during the process of publishing this book. And last but not least, I would like to thank my family and my friends Sheila Briand, Andrea Gemma Sommaruga, Susanne Hess, Anita Moré and Christian Widmer – you have all been a wonderful help and support to me.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-201

Contents A note of thanks 

 V

Abbreviations, transliteration and translation  1

2

3

 1 Introduction  1.1 Topics and structure   1 1.2 The aims of this book   2 1.3 The current state of research  1.4 Methodological approaches 

 IX

 6  17

 21 The historical context  2.1 Zarfat   21 2.2 Jews in the regnum Teutonicum   25 2.3 Contacts between Zarfat and Ashkenaz  2.4 Italy   32  35 The SeMaK as a book  3.1 Works preceding the SeMaK   35 3.2 Isaac of Corbeil’s intention   37 3.3 How the SeMaK was received   39 3.4 The contents and structure of the SeMaK 

 30

 41

4

 45 The manuscripts in their entirety  4.1 Overview: number, geographic distribution and distribution over time   45 4.2 How the manuscripts changed: from the North French Hebrew Miscellany to the Zurich SeMaK   47 4.3 The visual presentation of SeMaK manuscripts   55

5

 61 The scribes  5.1 Production conditions and technical aspects   61 5.2 Scribes and patrons   65 5.3 Producing manuscripts for personal use and how this shaped individual copies   69

6

 73 Five manuscripts in detail  6.1 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, Ashkenaz  6.2 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, Worms (?), 1317 

 73  86

VIII 

 Contents

6.3 6.4 6.5 7

Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, Ingolstadt 1347   96 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92   106 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy   151

Conclusion 

 181

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK  Bibliography 

 203

List of the manuscripts mentioned in this study  Figures  Index 

 223  227

 217

 185

Abbreviations, transliteration and translation Libraries BAV BL BNF BOD BPP BRAG BSB HLuHB JNUL JTS KB ÖNB RSL SBB SUB ZB

Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican City British Library, London Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris Bodleian Library, Oxford Biblioteca Palatina, Parma Braginsky Collection, Zurich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich Hessische Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek, Darmstadt Jewish National and University Library, Jerusalem Jewish Theological Seminary, New York Det Kongelige Bibliotek (The Royal Library), Copenhagen Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna (Austrian National Library) Russian State Library, Moscow Staatsbibliothek (Preussischer Kulturbesitz) Berlin Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Hamburg (Hamburg State and University Library) Zentralbibliothek, Zurich (The Central Library, Zurich)

Manuscripts Add. Arch. Seld. fol. Mich. r Opp. v

BL: Additional manuscripts; KB: Additamenta BOD: the Selden Archives folio BOD: The Michael Collection recto BOD: The Oppenheimer Collection verso

Rabbinic works b DEZ MekhY SeMaG SeMaK Tashbez

Talmud Bavli Derekh Erez Zuta Mekhilta de Rabbi Yishmaʿel Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, ‘The Great Book of Commandments’ by Moshe of Coucy Sefer Mitzvot Katan, ‘The Small Book of Commandments’ by Isaac of Corbeil Teshuvot Samson bar Zadok, responsa by Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-202

X 

 Abbreviations, transliteration and translation

Transliteration (based on the Encyclopaedia Judaica’s transliteration rules) ‫א‬ ‫ב‬ ‫ג‬ ‫ד‬ ‫ה‬ ‫ו‬ ‫ז‬ ‫ח‬

ʼ [ʼa, ʼe, ʼi, ʼo, ʼu] b, v G D H w, o, u Z ḥ

‫ט‬ ‫י‬ ‫כ‬ ‫ל‬ ‫מ‬ ‫נ‬ ‫ס‬ ‫ע‬

t y, i K, kh l m n s [‘a, ‘e, ‘i, ‘o, ‘u]

‫פ‬ ‫צ‬ ‫ק‬ ‫ר‬ ‫ׁש‬ ‫ׂש‬ ‫ת‬

f, p ṣ q r sh s t

English translations of primary sources NJPS (Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures: The New JPS Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text) Mishnah Philip Blackman, Mishnayoth (London: Mishna Press, 1953) Talmud Bavli The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, based on Adin Steinsaltz; Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, Koren Talmud Bavli (Jerusalem: Sefaria, 2012), https://www.sefaria.org/texts/Talmud, accessed on 1/11/2017. Bible

1 Introduction 1.1 Topics and structure This work is concerned with the origin, nature and circulation of the manuscripts of the ‫( ספר מצות קטן‬Sefer Mitzvot Katan, or SeMaK for short) in 14th-century Ashkenaz.1 The Sefer Mitzvot Katan is a halakhic work written by Rabbi Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil in the second half of the 13th century. A concise volume of commandments, it came to enjoy considerable popularity among the Jewish communities of Zarfat and Ashkenaz. At least 229 whole or fragmented SeMaK manuscripts have survived to this day,2 most of which were produced in the Ashkenazi region in the 14th and 15th century. A number of SeMaK manuscripts from this area will be presented here, taking their particular evolutionary paths into account along with local conventions to which the scribes’ work was subject. This study focuses on the book as an artefact, i.e. a man-made object, and looks at particular manuscripts in some detail. The focus of my attention is their materiality, artistic design and the personal amendments that various scribes made to them. Consequently, an analysis of the actual text and questions of a halakhic nature are only of secondary importance here. They become more central at times, however, namely whenever the relationship between the form and content of the manuscripts is examined. My analysis of the visual elements is not just limited to the ‘message’ they contain and the iconographic aspects they possess, though, as technical and stylistic factors play a central role in the geographic, temporal and social classification of the manuscripts. Particular attention has been paid to the planning and design work carried out by the individual scribes: the page layout, font design, marginal drawings and even tiny graphic details can reveal how these came to exist in relation to the texts that the scribes copied. The relationship between pictures and texts varies from manuscript to manuscript. Indeed, there is often no uniformity in it even in individual SeMaK manuscripts.

1 The place name ‘Ashkenaz’ refers to the area of Germany where Jews lived and ‘Zarfat’ refers to the area of France they populated. 2 Database of The National Library of Israel, http://aleph.nli.org.il/F/?func=file&file_name= find-b&local_base=nnlmss, accessed on 8/3/2019. (Since the details are not recorded in a uniform manner, various searches need to be made.) A list of all the SeMaK manuscripts can be found in the Appendix. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-001

2 

 1 Introduction

While this first chapter presents the purpose, state of research and methodology of my study, the second one provides a brief historical summary of the life of the Jews in the most important areas where copies of the SeMaK were known to have existed. My starting point here was the situation of the Jews living in Zarfat, with particular emphasis being placed on the 13th century, the time when the SeMaK was first written. The historical conditions of Jewish life in Germany are subsequently examined, as the SeMaK was soon in widespread use there as well. The intellectual exchange between French and German Jews is covered in a separate section since this had a major impact on the adoption of the SeMaK in the regnum Teutonicum. The history of the SeMaK has always been connected with the persecution and expulsion of Jews living in these areas. Thus, the work appeared in Italy as a result of Ashkenazi Jews emigrating there. The last part of the historical overview in this study is dedicated to this region. The subject of Chapter 3 is the SeMaK as a work of religious law and its significance for the Jewish community over the course of time. The goals that its author, Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil, associated with the book not only shaped the content and structure of the SeMaK, but also had a great influence on its popularity and distribution. The fourth chapter provides an overview of the existing SeMaK manuscripts produced between the 13th and 16th century and shows how their volume and content changed over time. It also reveals the place of SeMaK manuscripts in Ashkenazi manuscript production. Chapter 5 concerns the scribes who copied the work and the parties who commissioned them. Besides covering the conditions and technical aspects of SeMaK production, it will give readers some insights into the creative work that the scribes also performed. The sixth and last chapter lies at the heart of this study. Five selected SeMaK manuscripts are presented, analysed and put into a historical context. These manuscripts contain pictures and decorative elements which may be assumed to have been added by the scribes themselves. The manuscripts, which are presented in chronological order, cover over a hundred years of Jewish life in Ashkenaz and Italy from the eve of the 14th century onwards. The reader is shown how the scribes approached the text and each one gave it a character of its own.

1.2 The aims of this book Jewish book production in the Middle Ages was performed by individual people rather than institutions, unlike books produced in the surrounding Christian

1.2 The aims of this book 

 3

culture. Books were mainly copied for personal use.3 In this study, the SeMaK has been used to investigate the extent to which the individualistic circumstances of book production gave the scribes more freedom than otherwise regarding design issues. In view of the lack of uniformity that can be seen in the relationship between pictures and the texts they refer to, I also examine whether the illustrations tend to be ‘doodles’ drawn randomly in the manuscripts or whether they were added deliberately and thoughtfully. It may be the case that they can even be seen in a larger context. There were also limits to the freedom that individual scribes enjoyed, however. Being a halakhic work, the SeMaK related to the Jewish community as a collective unit divided off from the surrounding Christian culture. Despite the individual differences that existed, this led to a certain degree of uniformity in the way the manuscripts of it were designed. Jewish manuscripts were not created in a vacuum, though; the production of Jewish books was always linked to the production of books in the surrounding culture – from the making of parchment to the artistic embellishment of written works.4 Jewish scribes and their patrons often worked very closely with Christian artists, so it is not always obvious today whether a Jewish book was embellished by a Jewish or a Christian hand.5 This question will only be touched on here as the focus in this study is on manuscripts decorated by the Jewish scribes themselves. However, one can find pointers to the majority culture in such manuscripts. These range from the overall quality of the artisanship and matching styles of design to the direct adoption of iconographic elements from Christian sources. Occasionally, the surrounding Christian environment was even represented graphically in polemic illustrations. By pointing out the many links to elements of design in Christian culture, I intended to deepen the reader’s understanding of Jewish–Christian co-existence in the Middle Ages. Details about the way Jews lived in their environment can be discerned from some of the pictorial representations, and these, in turn, give rise to various questions about their daily life. The depictions of buildings, clothes 3 Malachi Beit-Arié, Unveiled Faces of Medieval Hebrew Books: The Evolution of Manuscript Production – Progression or Regression? (Jerusalem: Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2003), 61–62. Among other things, Chapter 1.3 outlines codicological and palaeographical research that sheds some light on the relationship between Jewish and Christian book production. 4 As Colette Sirat says, ‘L’utilisation des mêmes matériaux, le même instrument, la même posture et les mêmes préférences esthétiques ont fait que l’écriture hébraïque de type gothique ressemble de manière globale à l’écriture latine gothique’; Colette Sirat, Du scribe au livre. Les manuscrits hébreux au Moyen Age (Paris: CNRS éditions, 1994), 115. 5 I shall discuss a SeMaK manuscript that was the result of this kind of co-operation in Chapter 6.4 (Vienna, ÖNB, Hebr. 75, ‘A hunting scene on fol. 40v’).

4 

 1 Introduction

and objects of daily use are valuable testimonies to Jewish culture in Ashkenaz. My reason for juxtaposing these representations with other artefacts was to uncover more about the history of the material culture of medieval Jews.6 Furthermore, the illustrations shed light on values, ideals, intra-Jewish controversies and eschatological notions. The assessment of these pictures will provide the reader with some insights into Jewish life in medieval Ashkenaz. First and foremost, however, this study is intended to provide an insight into the vitality and diversity of Jewish book culture in the Middle Ages, a culture in which scribes were far more than just copyists. With the act of writing a text and decorating it, they ‘appropriated’ the text, so to speak, giving it a character of its very own. They drew on a visual language in the process – or rather, on visual languages, which occupy a special place between pure writing culture and pure painting culture. It was in this area ‘in between’ that spontaneous creations arose, influencing the physical arrangement of the text (mise-en-page), but also including drawings in the margins and even doodles in some cases. These ‘personal touches’ to manuscripts, which are part of both cultures, are hard to classify in a traditional way; at best, they could be described as ‘visual paratexts’ in the sense used by Gérard Genette.7 Such spontaneous expressions of a visual writing culture are rare in illuminated manuscripts and are consequently of little 6 ‘Material culture’ is not just understood as ‘the sum of all the individual objects with a cultural meaning’ (see Andreas Ludwig, ‘Materielle Kultur’, version 1.0, http://docupedia.de/zg/Materielle_Kultur?oldid=106448, accessed on 20/2/2016), but rather as the relationship between men and their deeds as Fernand Braudel sees it: ‘La vie matérielle, ce sont des hommes et des choses, des choses et des hommes’; see Fernand Braudel, Civilisation matérielle, économie et capitalisme: XVe–XVIIIe siècle (Paris: Poche, 1979), 15. What’s more, a material culture is always influenced by factors to do with people’s personalities and own experience of life, such as wishes or memories, which Harry Kühnel has called ‘the key to understanding medieval society’; see Harry Kühnel, ‘Mentalitätswandel und Sachkultur. Zur Entstehung der Mode im 14. Jahrhundert’, in Menschen, Dinge und Umwelt in der Geschichte: Neue Fragen der Geschichtswissenschaft an die Vergangenheit, ed. Ulf Dirlmeier and Gerhard Fouquet (St. Katharinen: Scripta-Mercaturae-Verlag, 1989): 102–27, particularly p. 102 in this connection. 7 The technical term ‘paratext’ was first introduced by the French literary scholar Gérard Genette and includes everything that makes a book what it is besides the main body of text it contains. This means ‘[…] a title, a subtitle, intertitles; prefaces, postfaces, notices, forewords, etc.; marginal, infrapaginal, terminal notes; epigraphs, illustrations; […]’; see Gérard Genette, Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree (Lincoln/London: University of Nebraska Press, 1997), 3; ‘[…] the paratext is what enables a text to become a book and to be offered as such to its readers and, more generally, to the public. More than a boundary or a sealed border, the paratext is, rather a threshold, or – a word Borges used apropos of a preface – a “vestibule” that offers the world at large the possibility of either stepping inside or turning back. It is an “undefined zone” between the inside and the outside, a zone without any hard and fast boundary on either the inward side (turned toward the text) or the outward side (turned toward the world’s discourse about the text),

1.2 The aims of this book 

 5

interest to art historians, particularly as they tend to be found in manuscripts that are undecorated. With it being a work of law and a reference book containing explanatory glosses, the SeMaK belongs to this particular group of manuscripts. Of the 229 SeMaK manuscripts that can be found in the online catalogue of the Israeli National Library, only 37 are described as illustrated or decorated.8 Most of these are testimonies to a visual writing culture, as there are hardly any copies of SeMaK manuscripts that can be described as being illuminated.9 To discover more about the visual writing culture that existed in the Middle Ages, it makes sense to examine a single work in detail. The SeMaK is particularly suitable for such an analysis because of its wide distribution and the fact that its design frequently varied. Five Ashkenazi manuscripts from the German and Northern Italian area were chosen for this purpose, the design of which stands out in a special way and which each reflect the circumstances in which they were created in their own manner: 1. Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6: With a size of just 117 × 70 mm, this is the smallest SeMaK manuscript in the world. It was copied by at least three scribes and contains a number of rather clumsy, hastily scribbled drawings. 2. Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17: A multiple-text manuscript written and elegantly decorated by a professional scribe, this work was subjected to a process of modernisation while it was still being copied. 3. Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339: This is a manuscript produced by a private scribe for private use. It stands out because of its complex page structure and the colourful illustrations it contains. 4. London, BL, Add. 18684: A Zurich SeMaK with numerous comments and pictures in the margin that contain narrative elements and some unique references to the text.10 5. Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51: A jauntily decorated North Italian manuscript in Ashkenazi script that is partly framed by a siddur in line with the Ashkenazic rite. It reflects the migration of German Jews to Italy. [...]’; Gérard Genette, Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 1–2. 8 Not all of these manuscripts contain a decorated version of the SeMaK, however. The multiple-text manuscript Vatikan, BAV, ebr. 324 contains a richly decorated siddur, but the SeMaK itself has not been embellished at all. 9 Of the 45 or so manuscripts that I have inspected in their original form or a digital version of it, the only one that can be called illuminated is the Viennese manuscript referred to as ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75. 10 Text references in pictures are rare in other SeMaK manuscripts and seem to appear randomly. One case in point is an illustrated catchword found in Vatikan, BAV, ebr. 147 on fol. 56v.

6 

 1 Introduction

Manuscripts without any pictures or decoration have not been included in the selection above, nor has Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75, a manuscript with magnificent initial-word panels, but no illustrations by the scribe whatsoever. Although I have repeatedly mentioned Jewish scribes’ interaction with the surrounding culture in this analysis, it is not actually a comparative study of Hebrew and Latin book production. For this reason, the next chapter will also refer the reader to scholarly papers that are explicitly concerned with the relationship between Latin and Ashkenazi manuscripts.

1.3 The current state of research Codicology and palaeography The study of medieval Hebrew manuscripts was of central importance to those historians and philologists representative of the Wissenschaft des Judentums (‘science of Judaism’) founded by Leopold Zunz in the 19th century. Criticism of existing catalogues of manuscripts grew as a result of this interest. Zunz, for example, wrote the following about Rossi’s catalogue of the works kept in the Biblioteca Palatina in Parma, Italy: ‘[…] man vermisst die Angaben über die Stärke oder Blattzahl der Codices, die Bezeichnung des Blattes, wo die Einzelschriften anfangen und endigen, die Anfangs- und Schlussworte derselben, die Wiedergabe von Orts- und seltenen Personennamen im Original […]’ (English translation: ‘[...] information on the size or number of leaves in the codices is missing, on the type of leaf [used], where the individual texts begin and end, their initial and final words, the reproduction of place names and rare names of people [used] in the original [...]’).11

The systematic study of Hebrew codicology and palaeography was meant to remedy such shortcomings. In 1897, Moritz Steinschneider published a pioneering work entitled Vorlesungen über die Kunde hebräischer Handschriften (‘Lectures on the Study of Hebrew Manuscripts’), in which he paid particular attention to the material nature of the manuscripts he recorded.12 Steinschneider’s palaeographic approach, in which he differentiated between square script, cursive script and

11 Leopold Zunz, Die hebräischen Handschriften in Italien. Ein Mahnruf des Rechts und der Wissenschaft (Berlin: W. Adolf & Co., 1864), 9. 12 Moritz Steinschneider, Vorlesungen über die Kunde hebräischer Handschriften, deren Sammlungen und Verzeichnisse (Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1897).

1.3 The current state of research 

 7

rabbinic cursive script, was largely adopted by subsequent scholars.13 Salomo A. Birnbaum made a number of much broader distinctions in his own work entitled The Hebrew Scripts, which was published after the Second World War.14 His systematic study of Hebrew palaeography was intended to help Hebrew codicology and palaeography gain recognition as an independent scholarly discipline, just as Steinschneider had hoped.15 The breakthrough occurred in 1965 when the Hebrew Palaeography Project was set up by the Israeli Academy of Sciences and Humanities, building on an idea proposed by Colette Sirat and Malachi Beit-Arié. The aim of the project was to systematically record the entire corpus of dated manuscripts in Hebrew and thus create a basis for dating and localising manuscripts in general.16 Malachi Beit-Arié presented this quantitative approach to the geo-cultural and historical positioning of manuscripts in 1976.17 The foundation stone for the SfarData database was laid with the adoption of computer-based data acquisition. Today, this database contains records of around 5,000 manuscripts, and data can be called up from it from anywhere over the internet.18 Demonstrating the connection between Hebrew book production and that of the surrounding cultures is an integral part of Hebrew codicology and palaeography. Not only technical aspects play a role here, but aesthetic ones do, too. The relationship between Ashkenazi book production and book production in France and Germany has been researched time and again, and is still being examined today, in fact. Colette Sirat pointed out the close relationship between Hebrew and Latin manuscript design as far back as 1976 and documented this with a novel photomontage in which she combined a Gothic initial with Ashkenazic lettering and a Hebrew initial word with Latin lettering.19 The aesthetic encounter between Latin and Hebrew book production was repeatedly the subject of her writing.20

13 Emile G. L. Schrijver, Towards a Supplementary Catalogue of Hebrew Manuscripts in the Bibliotheca Rosenthaliana: Theory and Practice, PhD thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam, 1993, (Amsterdam: edited by Emile G. L. Schrijver, 1993) 11. 14 Salomo Asher Birnbaum, The Hebrew Scripts (Leiden: Brill, 1954–1971). 15 Steinschneider, 1897, 4–5. 16 Judith Olszowy-Schlanger and De Lange, Nicholas R.  M., “Introduction,” in Manuscrits hébreux et arabes. Mélanges en l’honneur de Colette Sirat, ed. Nicholas R. M. De Lange and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger (Turnhout: Brepols, 2014): 9–14; see p. 10 in particular. 17 Malachi Beit-Arié, Hebrew Codicology: Tentative Typology of Technical Practices Employed in Hebrew Dated Medieval Manuscripts (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1976), 12–13. 18 sfardata.nli.org.il, accessed on 1/3/2016. 19 Colette Sirat and Michèle Dukan, Ecriture et civilisations (Paris: CNRS, 1976), 17. 20 Colette Sirat, “Le livre hébreu: Rencontre de la tradition juive et de l’esthétique française,” in Rashi et la culture juive en France du Nord au moyen âge, ed. Gilbert Dahan et al. (Paris: Peeters,

8 

 1 Introduction

In her essay ‘Between France and Germany. Gothic Characteristics in Ashkenazi Script’, palaeographer Edna Engel showed how the development of Hebrew script was influenced by Gothic script.21 Finally, Justine Isserles presented a comparative study in 2014 which focuses on the mise-en-page of handwritten pages as well as the layout of the texts themselves.22

Illumination In a comprehensive illustrated book entitled Jewish Life in the Middle Ages – Illuminated Hebrew Manuscripts of the Thirteenth to the Sixteenth Centuries, art historians Thérèse and Mendel Metzger attempted to reconstruct the lives of medieval Jews by means of pictures.23 Elliott Horowitz has pointed out that the heavy dependence on using pictures as primary sources of information has a number of methodological weaknesses, however: [...] a methodological flaw common not only in the Metzgers’ volume but in other recent writings in the field of medieval Hebrew manuscript illumination. Scholars trained in the history of art have not recognized that the Halakha, too, has its own history, and as a result they have often telescoped backward later developments, or superimposed a notion of uniformity upon a situation in which diversity prevailed.24

In recent years, the illumination of Jewish books in the Middle Ages has been put  in its historical and social context, drawing on halakhic and liturgical 1997) : 243–59; Colette Sirat, “En vision globale: les juifs médiévaux et les livres latins,” Bibliologia 20 (2003) : 15–23 and Colette Sirat, “Looking at Latin Books, Understanding Latin Texts : Different Attitudes in Different Jewish Communities,” in Hebrew to Latin, Latin to Hebrew. The Mirroring of Two Cultures in the Age of Humanism. Colloquium held at the Warburg Institute, London, October 2004, ed. Giulio Busi (Turin: N. Aragno, 2006): 7–24. 21 Edna Engel, “Script, History of Development,” in Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, eds. Geoffrey Khan et al. (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2013): 485–502; see particularly pp.  493–94 here and Edna Engel, “Between France and Germany: Gothic Characteristics in Ashkenazi Script,” in Manuscrits hébreux et arabes. Mélanges en l’honneur de Colette Sirat, ed. Nicholas R. M. De Lange and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger (Turnhout: Brepols, 2014) : 197–219. 22 Justine Isserles, “Les parallèles esthétiques des manuscrits hébreux ashkenazes de type liturgico-légal et des manuscrits latins et vernaculaires médiévaux,” in Manuscrits hébreux et arabes. Mélanges en l’honneur de Colette Sirat, ed. Nicholas R. M. De Lange and Judith OlszowySchlanger (Turnhout: Brepols, 2014): 77–113. 23 Thérèse Metzger and Mendel Metzger, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages. Illuminated Hebrew Manuscripts of the Thirteenth to the Sixteenth Centuries (New York: Alpine Fine Arts Collection, 1982). 24 Elliott Horowitz, “The Way We Were: Jewish Life in the Middle Ages,” Jewish History 1 (1986): 75–90; 78 here.

1.3 The current state of research 

 9

sources in the process. Marc Michael Epstein has found numerous pointers to Jewish–Christian interaction and polemics in the iconographic analysis of medieval Jewish art,25 while Sarit Shalev-Eyni has contrasted iconographic and stylistic details of Jewish book illumination with contemporary artefacts and objects of Christian art, drawing conclusions about everyday Jewish life and Jewish-Christian co-existence in the Upper Rhine region in the 14th century.26 The relationship between illustrations in Hebrew manuscripts and the texts they contain has been the subject of increasing attention over the last few years. Interpreting the similarities and differences between texts and images makes it possible for researchers to get more insights into medieval Jewish culture and history. In her interdisciplinary monograph on the Leipzig Maḥzor entitled ‘A Mahzor from Worms’,27 art historian Katrin Kogman-Appel describes what functions the pictures had for those who viewed them in the Middle Ages. She describes the way in which the maḥzor was used in rituals and reveals some insights into the mentality of the Jewish community of Worms. The regional classification of the manuscript does not make it dependent on the stylistic analysis of the illuminations, which seem to originate from the Upper Rhine area, and takes the fact into account that they were done by itinerant artists.28 Very few SeMaK manuscripts have been decorated artistically, which is why practically no studies of them have been conducted by art historians to date. Sarit Shalev-Eyni’s analysis of Jewish book illumination in the region around Lake Constance in Germany is an exception, however.29 In this work, she shows the reader that Jews and Christians must have worked together closely to create Hebrew manuscripts with an artistic appearance. To illustrate this point, the author presents a SeMaK manuscript that is now kept in Vienna,30 the illuminations of which bear a close resemblance to the style of book illumination employed in the Gradual of St Katharinental, a Gothic work of art produced at a Dominican nunnery in Switzerland.

25 Marc Michael Epstein, Dreams of Subversion in Medieval Jewish Art and Literature (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997) and Marc Michael Epstein, The Medieval Haggadah. Art, Narrative, and Religious Imagination (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010). 26 Sarit Shalev-Eyni, Jews Among Christians. Hebrew Book Illumination from Lake Constance (London: Harvey Miller Publishers, 2010). 27 Katrin Kogman-Appel, A Mahzor from Worms: Art and Religion in a Medieval Jewish Community (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012). 28 Ibid., 3. 29 Shalev-Eyni, 2010. 30 Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75.

10 

 1 Introduction

While illuminations in the richly illustrated Haggadot, Maḥzorim and halakhic works such as Mishneh Torah have repeatedly caught art historians’ attention, much more modestly ornamented manuscripts that scribes embellished themselves have hardly ever been the subject of their interest. Palaeographers such as Malachi Beit-Arié and Colette Sirat have occasionally mentioned the drawings and doodles that scribes scribbled or sketched in the margin, but these specialists have tended to be more interested in technical aspects of scribes’ work than in iconographic issues.

Marginalia Most of the illustrations that scribes produced were drawn in the margins and count as marginalia. Marginalia in Gothic manuscripts were first documented systematically by Lilian Randall in 1966. In her comprehensive work Images in the Margins of Gothic Manuscripts, she divided pictures drawn in the margins into four different groups based on ‘religious sources, secular literature, everyday life and parody’.31 In Randall’s eyes (and those of earlier scholars as well32), the margins of manuscripts were places where scribes were able to be creative and enjoy a little artistic freedom: […] the margins afforded an opportunity for more spontaneous individualistic expression, whether in the realm of sacred imagery, social commentary, or fantastic invention.33

Randall became interested in the origin and meaning of individual motifs drawn in the margins of manuscripts early on in her career34 and discovered more and more about them by taking an interdisciplinary approach to the subject, drawing on information about the historical circumstances of their creation as well as on profound knowledge about the texts the scribes penned. Building on Randall’s work, Michael Camille developed his own theories on the use of marginal areas of works in medieval art. He was less interested in the 31 Lilian M.  C. Randall, Images in the Margins of Gothic Manuscripts (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966), 15. 32 This was the case as early as 1947: cf. Meyer Schapiro, “On the Aesthetic Attitude in Romanesque Art,” in Romanesque Art (New York: Braziller, 1977): 1–27 (esp. p.  1), and H.  W. Janson, Apes and Ape-Lore in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (London: Warburg Institute, 1952), 42. 33 Randall, 1966, 20. 34 See for instance Lilian M. C. Randall, “Exempla as a Source of Gothic Marginal Illumination,” The Art Bulletin 39 (1957): 97–107 and Lilian M. C. Randall, “The Snail in Gothic Marginal Warfare,” Speculum 37 (1962): 358–67.

1.3 The current state of research 

 11

individual motifs used in pictures in the margins than in ‘their function as components of the whole page, the text, object or space in which they are anchored’.35 In his view, marginalia are located in borderline areas where artists are able to respond freely to the written word: [...] but on the edge he was free to read the words for himself and make what he wanted of them. In this respect, marginal images are conscious usurpations, perhaps even political statements about diffusing the power of the text through its unravelling [...].36

Camille tends to exaggerate the significance of pictures drawn in the margin. He has no doubt at all that they were closely related to the main text and that they added an extra dimension to it despite its centrality. In fact, he even says that ‘the centre is [...] dependent upon the margins for its continued existence’.37 Camille was instrumental in introducing new methodological approaches to the study of marginalia, but his rather one-sided approach has also been considered problematic. Peter Klein, for example, criticises the fact that ‘the close linking of marginal images to the main text’ ignores aspects of them ‘that have no pictorial or textual counterpart’ and connect text and marginal images in speculative relationships that ‘do not stand up to serious examination’.38 Lucy Freeman Sandler refrains from providing an explanation that overgeneralises. Basing her own view on a detailed examination of marginal images in individual manuscripts, she pleads for a multifaceted interpretation of marginalia: All generalizations about the meaning of marginal imagery may seem inadequate when we confront a particular manuscript. For each book I think there are questions we must ask in relation to the particular circumstances of its production – who wanted it made, for whom was it made, who made it and how. Answering these questions manuscript by manuscript may clarify the meaning of the marginalia of each particular book and enhance our understanding of marginal imagery in a more general way.39

35 Michael Camille, Image on the Edge: The Margins of Medieval Art (London: Reaktion Books, 1992), 9. 36 Ibid., 42. 37 Ibid., 10. 38 Peter Klein, “Rand- oder Schwellenphänomen? Zur Deutung der Randbilder in der mittelalterlichen Kunst,“ in Grenze und Grenzüberschreitung im Mittelalter. 11. Symposium des Mediävistenverbandes vom 14. bis 17. März 2005 in Frankfurt an der Oder, ed. Ulrich Knefelkamp and Kristian Bosselmann-Cyran (Munich: Akademie Verlag, 2010): 166–87; see esp. p. 174. 39 Lucy Freeman Sandler, “The Study of Marginal Imagery: Past, Present, and Future,” in Studies in Iconography 18 (1997): 1–49; see p. 36 in particular.

12 

 1 Introduction

This flexible approach allows different patterns of interpretation to be incorporated, irrespective of whether marginal images are regarded as visualised puns, humorous afterthoughts, pictorial glosses or mnemonic aids.40 The pictures drawn in the margins of Jewish manuscripts have not been researched systematically yet. The systematic study of general marginalia in Jewish manuscripts was first addressed in 2001 in an article by Susan Nashman Fraiman called ‘The Marginal Images of a Marginal People’.41 She distinguishes here between three different ways of using margins: 1) as a place for the main text (like the bas-de-page in the Bird’s Head Haggadah), 2) as a place for separate parallel narratives, and 3) as a place for drolleries and scenes that have no relation to the text. In addition to these, she also classifies centrally positioned pictures as marginalia if they do not seem to be related to the text at all. Pictures and doodles in the margins of a manuscript can be interpreted in various ways. Nashman mentions humorous text illustrations, visualised vox memorialis42 and liturgical instructions that supplement the main text. She describes her work merely as ‘a preliminary study’, though, and stresses the importance of conducting further research on this subject. Inspired by Camille, Marc Michael Epstein points out that pictures drawn in the margins are not necessarily of secondary importance in Jewish art, but can have a meaning that goes beyond them just being decorative elements.43

40 A good overview of the various approaches has been provided by Laura Kendrick in her paper “Making Sense of Marginalized Images in Manuscripts and Religious Architecture,” in A Companion to Medieval Art. Romanesque and Gothic in Northern Europe, ed. Conrad Rudolph et al. (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006): 274–94. 41 Susan Nashman Fraiman, “The Marginal Images of a Marginal People,” in The Metamorphosis of Marginal Images: From Antiquity to Present Time, ed. Nurith Kenaan-Kedar and Asher Ovadiah (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 2001): 103–18. 42 Miller and Schlosser pointed this out at the end of the 19th century: ‘Die vox memorialis JKNHZ wurde in Deutschland von den Juden “Jag ’n Has” gesprochen und in Folge dessen finden sich zur Illustration dieser Vox Hasenjagden in den Handschriften und Drucken abgebildet’ [‘The vox memorialis “JKNHZ” was pronounced “yakenhaz” by the Jews in Germany (which means “Hunt the hare” in German), and consequently, illustrations of hunts are to be found in the[ir] manuscripts and printed works’]; see David Heinrich von Müller and Julius von Schlosser, ‘Die Bilderhaggaden der europäischen Sammlungen’, in Die Haggadah von Sarajevo: Eine spanisch-jüdische Bilderhandschrift des Mittelalters: Nebst einem Anhange von Prof. Dr. David Kaufmann in Budapest, ed. David Heinrich von Müller and Julius von Schlosser (Vienna: Alfred Hölder, 1898): 93–210; see p. 134 in particular. 43 Epstein 1997, 9–10.

1.3 The current state of research 

 13

According to Epstein, ‘commentary iconography’ developed in marginal spaces traditionally used for comments: I would argue that, particularly in medieval Hebrew manuscripts, by placing symbols traditionally used for sociopolitical commentary in such locations – traditionally the “commentary space” – artists devised an ideal shelter for sentiments they might feel the need to occlude in an environment of persecution, but that would still be accessible to “trustworthy and intelligent readers.” When “commentary iconography” appears in the “commentary space” it should command our attention as careful readers.44

The margins of the manuscript are a place where things can be expressed that have not been said (yet). However, the emotional component addressed by Epstein does not necessarily have to be limited to the persecution of the Jews and the polemical dispute associated with it. This is especially true of the SeMaK, a halakhic work that refers to many aspects of daily life. All of the above lines of thinking can play a role when investigating the marginalia of a visual scribal writing culture, regardless of whether iconographic or everyday cultural meanings are being investigated or the function that an image has for the entire page. Centrally placed images that do not relate to the text can also be included here.

An investigation of the SeMaK It was the library catalogues listing and describing the Hebrew manuscripts created in the 19th century that made it possible for scholars to view SeMaK manuscripts in a comparative way for the first time; Giovanni Bernardo De Rossi (1742–1831) catalogued and briefly described no less than 18 SeMaK manuscripts in the possession of the Biblioteca Palatina, for instance.45 More detailed descriptions can be found in George Margoliouth’s (1853–1924) Catalogue of the Hebrew and Samaritan Manuscripts in the British Museum46 and the catalogues that

44 Ibid., 11. 45 Rossi, Giovanni Bernardo de, Mss. Codices hebraici Biblioth. Bibliothecae: Descripti et illustrati / accedit appendix qua continentur mss. codices reliqui al. linguarum, vol. III (Parma: Ex Publico Typographeo, 1803), 53, 113, 121, 147; ibid., 35, 79–80, 89, 94, 152, 179–80, 192; ibid., 26, 108, 135, 145. 46 George Margoliouth, Catalogue of the Hebrew and Samaritan Manuscripts in the British Museum (London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1899–1935).

14 

 1 Introduction

Moritz Steinschneider (1816–1907) produced for the collections of manuscripts in Oxford,47 Munich,48 Hamburg49 and Berlin.50 All this scholarly interest in the SeMaK caused the work to be studied in a systematic way in a number of areas by examining the manuscripts directly. These studies treat the SeMaK as a book, covering aspects like its codicology and palaeography, its structure, contents and the differences between the contents of different manuscripts of it as well as its circulation and impact. A first step in this direction was taken by Leopold Zunz (1794–1886) in 1859: in an essay on the Zurich SeMaK, he introduced various manuscripts, discussing their content and origin.51 His essay marked the starting point for further contributions to the subject that were to follow in the 20th century.52 Another important contribution was made in 1877 when R. Samuel Kohn published a treatise on the Hebrew manuscripts housed at the Hungarian National Museum.53 The SeMaK has been used as a primary source of knowledge on the history of medieval Jewish mentality and law ever since the 19th century. Scholars such as Moritz Güdemann54 and Abraham Berliner55 found pointers to the lifestyle and ethical ideas of medieval Jews in the SeMaK. Even now, the work is an important source of information to scholars researching the history of the Halakhah and the thinking of Ashkenazi Jews. Studies written by Haym Soloveitchik,56 David 47 Moritz Steinschneider, Catalogus librorum Hebraeorum in Bibliotheca Bodleiana (Berolini: Friedlaender, 1852–1860), 1103. 48 Moritz Steinschneider, Die hebräischen Handschriften der K. Hof- und Staatsbibliothek in München (Munich: Palm’sche Hofbuchhandlung, 1875), 81. 49 Moritz Steinschneider, Catalog der hebräischen Handschriften in der Stadtbibliothek zu Hamburg und der sich anschliessenden in anderen Sprachen (Hamburg: O. Meissner, 1878), 66–69. 50 Moritz Steinschneider, Verzeichniss der hebraeischen Handschriften (Berlin: Asher, 1897), 8, 17–18. 51 Leopold Zunz, Die Ritus des synagogalen Gottesdienstes, geschichtlich entwickelt (Berlin: J. Springer, 1859), 211–21. 52 Chaim Lauer, “Zur Geschichte des ‘Zürcher Semak’,” Jahrbuch der Jüdisch-Literarischen Gesellschaft 12 (1918): 1–36; Jitzchak S. Lange, “ ‫לענין הסמ"ק מציריך‬,” ‫ – עלי ספר‬Ale sefer (1976/77): 178–79; Jitzchak S. Lange,“ Zur rechtlichen Stellung des jüdischen Lehrers in Zürich vor 600 Jahren,” in 25 Jahre Jüdische Schule Zürich: Festschrift, ed. Leo Levy (Jerusalem: Koren, 1980): 108–122. 53 Samuel Kohn, “Die hebräischen Handschriften des ungarischen Nationalmuseums zu Budapest, ” Magazin für die Wissenschaft des Judenthums 4 (1877): 76–104, esp. 82–98 here. 54 Moritz Güdemann, Geschichte des Erziehungswesens und der Cultur der Juden in Frankreich und Deutschland: Von der Begründung der jüdischen Wissenschaft in diesen Ländern bis zur Vertreibung der Juden aus Frankreich; (X.–XIV. Jahrhundert) (Vienna: Hölder, 1880). 55 Abraham Berliner, Aus dem Leben der deutschen Juden im Mittelalter: Zugleich als Beitrag für deutsche Culturgeschichte (Berlin: Poppelauer, 1900). 56 Haym Soloveitchik, “Religious Law and Change: The Medieval Ashkenazic Example,” AJS Review 12 (1987): 205–21 and Haym Soloveitchik, “Halakhah, Hermeneutics, and Martyrdom in Medieval Ashkenaz,” Part I of II, The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series 94 (2004): 77–108.

1.3 The current state of research 

 15

Malkiel57 and Abraham Gross58 on voluntary martyrdom – ‫( קידוש השם‬Kiddush haShem) – for example all cite the SeMaK, and the Zurich SeMaK in particular. Ephraim Kanarfogel’s work, which is also based on manuscript studies, includes an detailed analysis of the SeMaK and its links to the pietistic thinking of the Ḥaside Ashkenaz.59 None of these erudite works would probably have been written if Ephraim Urbach had not published his epochal study on the Tosafists in 1955. Using original sources, he presented Tosafist literature in terms of its historical and geocultural context and shed some light on the methodical approach the Tosafists took to it. In doing this, Urbach also presented the SeMaK in its contemporary intellectual context and provided an outline of its contents and purpose.60 In his book, which covers the Tosafist period and therefore only goes up to the end of the 13th century, the subsequent development of SeMaK manuscripts is only touched on lightly.61 Israel Ta-Shema’s studies on medieval rabbinical literature not only made a contribution to Jewish social and intellectual history, but shifted the history of the Hebrew book into the limelight for the very first time, turning it into a discipline of its own. Ta-Shema, who wrote the article about Isaac of Corbeil in the Encyclopaedia Judaica, was a deeply knowledgeable scholar when it came to the SeMaK, a fact that is also apparent in his introduction to the new edition of ‫קיצור הסמ"ג‬ (the abridged version of the SeMaG, or Sefer Mitzvot Gadol).62 He did not write anything that mainly focused on the SeMaK, however.

57 David Malkiel, “Destruction or Conversion: Intention and Reaction, Crusaders and Jews, in 1096,” Jewish History 15 (2001): 257–80. 58 Abraham Gross, Struggling with Tradition. Reservations about Active Martyrdom in the Middle Ages (Leiden: Brill, 2004). 59 Ephraim Kanarfogel, “German Pietism in Northern France: The Case of R. Isaac of Corbeil,” in Hazon Nahum: Studies in Jewish Law, Thought, and History, presented to Dr. Norman Lamm on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, eds Norman Lamm and Jeffrey S. Gurock (New York: Michael Scharf Publication Trust, Yeshiva University Press, 1997): 207–27 and Ephraim Kanarfogel, ‘Peering through the Lattices’: Mystical, Magical, and Pietistic Dimensions in the Tosafist Period (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2000): 81–92. 60 Ephraim Elimelech Urbach, ‫ שיטתם‬,‫ חיבוריהם‬,‫ תולדותיהם‬.‫בעלי התוספות‬: The Tosaphot: Their History, Writings and Methods (Jerusalem: Mossad Bialik, 1980, second edition), 571–75. 61 The Zurich SeMaK is only mentioned briefly, for example (ibid., 574–75); regarding this point, see Israel Ta-Shema, “‫ על קיצור הסמ"ג ועל ספרות הקיצורים‬,‫דברים על הסמ"ג‬,” in .‫קיצור ספר מצוות גדול‬ ‫ההדיר והוסיף מבוא והערות יהושע הורוביץ‬, Kitzur Semag, ed. Avraham ben Ephraim, (Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 2004): 13–21; see p. 17 in particular. 62 Ibid.

16 

 1 Introduction

Although an increasing amount of research has been conducted on the SeMaK in recent years, no-one has published a monograph yet that solely focuses on this work. Ta-Shema’s investigations into Tosafist book culture were continued by Simcha Emanuel. In his monograph entitled ‫ ספרים אבודים‬.‫שברי לוחות‬ ‫( של בעלי התוספות‬Fragments of the Tablets – Lost Books of the Tosaphists), he writes about the legal decisions formulated by R. Isaac and R. Perez of Corbeil and refers to particular SeMaK manuscripts.63 In an essay published in 2012/13, Emanuel addresses changes in the language of the SeMaK that copyists made as they reproduced the exemplar of the work in front of them. The oldest surviving manuscript64 and the Zurich SeMaK are mentioned, among others.65 One scholar who has studied the SeMaK in detail is Judah D. Galinsky. He has focused on it repeatedly in talks and lectures in recent years – at the World Congress of Jewish Studies in Jerusalem in 2009, for example,66 held at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem in 2011,67 and at the Oxford Centre for Hebrew and at the World Congress of Jewish Studies in Jerusalem in 2017, to name only a few venues.68 Whenever he speaks about the SeMaK, he reveals what intentions and approaches led to the creation and dissemination of the work and analyses the demands Isaac of Corbeil made on his own readers. Galinsky’s work is based on a comparison of different manuscripts combined with text analysis. Pinpointing the halakhic and historical context leads to a greater understanding of rabbinical approaches and debates on numerous issues concerning Jewish life in the Middle Ages. Galinsky also gives his audience an insight into Jewish book culture at the same time, which is the aim of my own study as well. However, while Galinsky is concerned with texts and their creation, the focus of this particular piece of research is on non-linguistic statements.

63 Simcha Emanuel, ‫ ספרים אבודים של בעלי התוספות‬.‫שברי לוחות‬, Fragments of the Tablets – Lost Books of the Tosaphists (Jerusalem: Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2006), 198–205. 64 BL, Add. 11639. 65 Simcha Emanuel, “‫ פרק בתרבות הכתיבה באשכנז בימי הביניים‬.‫מגוף ראשון לגוף שלישי‬, From First to Third Person: A Study in the Culture of Writing in Medieval Ashkenaz,” ‫ תרביץ‬81 (2013/2012): 431–57; see pp. 444–45 here. 66 Judah D. Galinsky, ‫ ייחודה של ספרות ההלכה של צפון צרפת במאה היג‬.‫על הלכה וחברה‬, lecture on 5/8/2009, (Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2009), https://youtu.be/DPD3nGFqSAA?t=1h13m4s, accessed on 4/3/2019. 67 Judah D. Galinsky, ‫קורות חיים‬, Bar-Ilan, 2012; http://talmud.biu.ac.il/node/243, accessed on 24/2/2016. 68 Judah D. Galinsky, Piety for the People: Pietism in Isaac of Corbeil’s Amude Golah (Semak), lecture on 10/8/2017, Jerusalem; https://youtu.be/g-RBM3MQIf8?t=1612, accessed on 4/1/2019.

1.4 Methodological approaches 

 17

1.4 Methodological approaches This book was designed as a study crossing the boundaries of several disciplines. Since the material nature and design of Jewish codices are the focus of attention here, approaches are used that are familiar from codicology, palaeography and art history. SfarData, the codicological database created by Malachi Beit-Arié, was a great resource that helped me classify the various manuscripts in historical and regional terms.69 Of the 200+ SeMaK manuscripts that still exist today, 92 have been classified in SfarData and can be called up and partially viewed in it. The data on the SeMaK manuscripts required for this study was obtained from the database of the National Library of Israel70 and was compared with data from SfarData for my quantitative assessment. The methods employed in Hebrew codicology and palaeography today, which Malachi Beit-Arié and Colette Sirat are responsible for introducing, are not only important for dating purposes and regional classification, but also help researchers look at the idiosyncrasies scribes added in terms of page design. Furthermore, by taking an art historian’s approach to the analysis, it is possible to discover how Jewish culture adapted to the predominant society around it, which was Christian, and how the scribes’ patrons, the scribes themselves and other artists they worked together with contributed to this transfer of culture. Participating in the visual culture of their non-Jewish environment was not a case of Jews passively adapting, but of them actively making decisions, as Katrin Kogman-Appel has pointed out.71 While stylistic analyses can help us say where and when a Jewish manuscript was produced and discover links to the surrounding culture,72 iconographic analyses are rather more complex. On the one hand, these give us insights into the knowledge that copyists had of the texts they were working on and how they actually went about the task of copying them, while on the other hand, these analyses reflect what influence art production in the surrounding Christian culture was having on them at the time. In this case, a detailed study of the iconographic details borrowed from the non-Jewish world is called for to discover the extent to which they acquired a specifically Jewish significance in Hebrew manuscripts. Christian iconography was reinterpreted

69 http://sfardata.nli.org.il/sfardataweb/home.aspx, accessed on 20/2/2016. 70 http://aleph.nli.org.il/, accessed on 20/2/2016. 71 Katrin Kogman-Appel, “Jewish Art and Cultural Exchange: Theoretical Perspectives,” in Confronting the Borders of Medieval Art, ed. Jill Caskey, Adam S. Cohen and Linda Safran (Leiden/ Boston: Brill, 2011): 1–26; see p. 18 in particular. 72 Gabrielle Sed-Rajna, ‘Filigree Ornaments in 14th-Century Hebrew Manuscripts of the Upper Rhine’, Jewish Art 13 (1987): 45–54.

18 

 1 Introduction

and – as Kogman-Appel writes – Jewish artists filled it quite consciously with information relating to the Jewish way of life: In the visual arts, unlike in other areas, where cultural interchange was often bi-directional, the interaction with host cultures moves mostly in one direction alone, as is eloquently witnessed by Jewish art’s reliance on non-Jewish pictorial sources and its use of the visual languages of the non-Jewish environment. However, Jewish artists did not merely take up and use a foreign idiom; they translated it into a visual language of their own, directed to the Jewish beholder. As such, Jewish art appears as a channel for acculturation, and through the translation process it turned into a means of cultural self-identification.73

In this sense, the pictures in the SeMaK should also be interpreted as the outcome of a process of change and the method of comparative iconography used, drawing on Jewish sources. However, my interest in research topics goes well beyond classic art history. Marginalia, doodles and clumsy sketches and drawings in Jewish manuscripts have not been studied systematically very much up till now. My own treatment of marginalia in this book is partly based on Michael Camille’s thinking, for whom the margins of medieval manuscripts are places where artists took liberties and were able to make subversive comments on the main passages of the works they were copying.74 At the same time, though, this thesis needs to be put into perspective, as the pictures we find in the margins of manuscripts are not always related to the main text. Pictures of this kind cannot be categorised in a simple way because they actually have a range of functions: they can (a) structure individual pages (and, indeed, an entire book), (b) comment on the text in a visual way, (c) illustrate it or (d) serve the reader as an instructive link or prop to help them remember something better. Besides using pictures, scribes also availed themselves of a wide range of other design aids in order to lend a text extra weight, such as different styles of lettering, different page designs and different kinds of work performed on a manuscript. As regards the treatment of marginalia here, I have followed the flexible approach that Lucy Freeman Sandler advocates.75 The length and structure of the texts contained in the individual manuscripts I have looked at are compared to each other in order to classify them more accurately in terms of their time and place of origin. Since the text in the SeMaK is not

73 Katrin Kogman-Appel, “Jewish Art and non-Jewish Culture: The Dynamics of Artistic Borrowing in Medieval Hebrew Manuscript Illumination,” Jewish History 15 (2001): 187–234; see p. 188 in this case. 74 Camille 1992, 9. 75 Freeman Sandler 1997, 36.

1.4 Methodological approaches 

 19

the centre of attention here, though, its philological treatment is only intended to put it in its historical context and shed some light on the scribes’ intentions. To be able to understand just how scribes related to the SeMaK, it is necessary to take a look at a number of individual texts and their halakhic content. This study is based on the approach taken by Haym Soloveitchik, which entails putting halakhic texts in their proper historical context. This can give us better insights into everyday Jewish life in the Middle Ages than chronicles and annals are able to.76 This is particularly the case for the responsa literature that Soloveitchik has studied, but hardly so for legal texts that were passed down from one generation to the next. As far as these are concerned, it is the differences between the individual versions and contemporary glosses and notes that tend to give us a glimpse of daily life. The relationship between the pictures in the SeMaK and the main body of text it contains will be examined by performing an image/text analysis. This will also involve studying certain elements outside the main work. As Michael Curschmann has found, what pictures show can relate more closely to the scribe’s own world ‘than a written comment, which focuses on understanding the [main] text’.77 By focusing on the visual elements in SeMaK manuscripts, one can discover more about the circumstances in which they were written and the way in which the SeMaK was read, used and adapted.

76 Haym Soloveitchik, ‫שו'ת כמקור היסטורי‬, The Use of Responsa as a Historical Source: A Methodological Introduction (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center for Jewish History, 1990), 11. 77 Michael Curschmann, ‘Wort – Schrift – Bild: Zum Verhältnis von volkssprachigem Schrifttum und bildender Kunst vom 12. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert’, in Mittelalter und frühe Neuzeit. Übergänge, Umbrüche und Neuansätze, ed. Walter Haug (Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1999): 378–470; see p. 380 here.

2 The historical context 2.1 Zarfat Jews settled down and built up communities of their own continuously from Roman times until well into the Middle Ages in an area called Zarfat in medieval Hebrew,78 which was partly on territory now in France.79 Their settlements there and in Ashkenaz further east grew denser from the 9th and 10th century and communal Jewish organisations also arose that became a standard feature of them.80 The Jews still played an important role in long-distance trade in Carolingian times. They also owned property, including fields, orchards, vineyards and mills, and concentrated on producing wine in certain areas, such as the valleys of the River Rhône and River Saône together with the region around Paris.81 In the 11th century, Jewish money-lenders played a major role in the growth of developing towns and cities, and lending money to Gentiles became one of their most important lines of business along with local trade.82 Due to the ban on usury among Christians passed by the Second Lateran Council in 1139, Jews came to play a central role as money-lenders in medieval commerce. As a result, loans from Jewish merchants became an indispensable source of money for society, which was growing quickly.83 This economic collaboration led to a lively cultural and social exchange between Jews and Christians for a while, but came to a dramatic halt towards the end of the 11th century when Jews were subjected to increasing violence again. The First Crusade in 1096 with its many massacres and forced baptisms, which the Jewish communities in the Rhineland suffered as well as the Jews of Rouen,84 badly damaged the relationship between Christians and Jews across

78 Zarfat was to the north and east of the River Loire. 79 Avraham Grossman, Rashi (Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2012), 3. 80 Jörg R. Müller, “Juden im Westen des Reiches: Einflüsse, Eigenständigkeiten und Wirkungen im hohen und späten Mittelalter,” in Zwischen Maas und Rhein: Beziehungen, Begegnungen und Konflikte in einem europäischen Kernraum von der Spätantike bis zum 19. Jahrhundert, ed. Franz Irsigler (Trier: Kliomedia, 2006): 403–34; see p. 405 in particular. 81 Esther Benbassa, The Jews of France: A History from Antiquity to the Present (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), 11. 82 Grossman 2012, 4. 83 Robert Chazan, The Jews of Medieval Western Christendom, 1000–1500 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 58–59 and 133. 84 Anna Sapir Abulafia, Christian-Jewish Relations, 1000–1300. Jews in the Service of Medieval Christendom (New York: Pearson Longman, 2011), 141–42. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-002

22 

 2 The historical context

the whole of Central and Western Europe.85 In France, the Jewish community suffered another shocking blow in 1171 when 30 Jews from the town of Blois on the Loire were burnt at the stake after being accused of killing a Christian child in a ritual murder.86 The demonisation of the Jews continued to increase after that and accusations of ritual murder and ‘desecrating the Eucharist’ were even used as ‘a political means of disciplining the Jewish community’ in the 13th century.87 Control over the Jews and their income was a major economic factor for the Capetian dynasty, which successively expanded its own sphere of control. In the course of the 13th century, Jews increasingly became the subject of commercial exploitation. As a young king, Philip II (1165–1223), who became ruler of France in 1180, had the prosperous Jews of Paris imprisoned in 1181 and only freed them in return for a high ransom. After that, he issued a royal decree that freed Christian debtors of all their debts to Jews.88 In 1182, Philip went on to order the expulsion of all the Jews living in French Crown lands in order to appropriate their houses and vineyards.89 Unlike later persecutions, though, only Jews living in the Île-deFrance region were affected by this step.90 From 1198 onwards, Jews were allowed to return to France again, but those who came back remained under the strict fiscal control of the French kings. King Louis IX of France, who governed the country from 1226 to 1270, was a religious zealot. He led two crusades abroad and fought against heretics and people of other faiths in his own country as well. Under his rule, the anti-Jewish resolutions made by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 were implemented earlier than in the German Empire. The Lateran Council forbade Jews to engage in ‘profiteering’ and 85 Friedrich Battenberg, Das europäische Zeitalter der Juden: Zur Entwicklung einer Minderheit in der nichtjüdischen Umwelt Europas (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1990), 83; David Nirenberg, “The Rhineland Massacres of Jews in the First Crusade: Memories Medieval and Modern,” in Medieval Concepts of the Past. Ritual: Memory, Historiography, ed. Gerd Althoff et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002): 279–310; see p. 296 in particular. 86 Kirsten Anne Fudeman, Vernacular Voices. Language and Identity in Medieval French Jewish Communities (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010), 60–88. 87 Battenberg 1990, 90. 88 William Chester Jordan, The French Monarchy and the Jews: From Philip Augustus to the Last Capetians (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989), 30–31. 89 Battenberg 1990, 84–85; on the Jewish expulsions as a source of money, see David Nirenberg, “Warum der König die Juden beschützen musste, und warum er sie verfolgen musste,” in Die Macht des Königs. Herrschaft in Europa vom Frühmittelalter bis in die Neuzeit, ed. Bernhard Jussen (Munich: Beck, 2005): 225–40 and 390–92; see p. 238 here. 90 It was not till later that all French Jews were driven out of the country; this happened in 1306 when the royal family’s area of sovereignty was extended to the whole of France. See Sapir Abulafia, 2011, 61.

2.1 Zarfat 

 23

ordered Jewish money-lending to be restricted. Besides that, it was decided that Jews and Saracens should wear different clothing to Christians, the aim being to prevent men and women from different faiths from getting to know each other ‘by mistake’. 91 Furthermore, rulings were renewed that had been issued earlier, in the Merovingian period. In one such case, Jews were not allowed to be given a public office of any kind,92 and as the First Council of Orléans decided in the year 511,93 Jews were not permitted to appear in public on the days leading up to Easter, especially not on Good Friday. The Jews who were permitted to return to France in 1198 subsequently developed a wide range of intellectual activities. The Tosafist school that had been established by Rashi’s grandson Rabbenu Tam (Jacob ben Meir Tam, who died in 1171) was reanimated and Paris became the most important place for Tosafist studies (indeed, the centre of activity in this field).94 Paris was also a centre of Christian scholarship at the time and an optimistic atmosphere of intellectual renewal predominated there. Exchanges between Jews and Christians took place early on in such a potentially fruitful intellectual climate.95 Scholastics and Christians with an interest in philology appreciated the detailed knowledge of Bible studies and the classical philosophers of Antiquity that Jewish scholars possessed.96 Christian theologians took a great interest in Jews’ interpretations of the Bible, which were received very positively in many cases (take Hugh of Saint-Victor, for example, a Christian theologian who died in 1141).97 Parallel to this development, however, a negative one also arose among certain other theologians, which was manifested in hateful accusations against the Jewish people. Peter the Venerable (Petrus Venerabilis, d. 1156) compared

91 Josef Wohlmuth, ed., Dekrete der ökumenischen Konzilien: Vol. 2. Konzilien des Mittelalters (Paderborn/Zurich: Schöningh, 2000), 265–67. 92 Paul Mikat, Die Judengesetzgebung der merowingisch-fränkischen Konzilien (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1995), 25–36; Amnon Linder, The Jews in the Legal Sources of the Early Middle Ages (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1997), 470, no. 816. 93 Miklat 1995, 37–39; Linder, 1997, 471, no. 818. 94 Müller 2006, 416. 95 Aryeh Grabois, “The Hebraica Veritas and Jewish-Christian Intellectual Relations in the Twelfth Century,” Speculum 50 (1975): 613–34; see p. 619 here. 96 Ibid. 97 Rebecca Moore, Jews and Christians in the Life and Thought of Hugh of St. Victor, PhD thesis, Marquette University (Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1998), 77–93; Hugo de S. Victore, Adnotationes elucidatoriae in Pentateuchon, Patrologia Latina Database, 175 Col. 29A–86D, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1996–2017, http://pld.chadwyck.co.uk/all/fulltext?action=byid&id=Z500113440, accessed on 1/11/2017.

24 

 2 The historical context

the Jews to animals and accused them of distorting the meaning of the Bible’s words.98 In addition to that, he was one of the first Christian theologians to polemicise against the Talmud.99 Jehiel ben Joseph of Paris (died c. 1264), who was Isaac of Corbeil’s father-inlaw and a rabbi himself, was also head of the Paris Yeshivah.100 Approximately 300 pupils attended R. Jehiel’s college of Talmudic study, including Isaac and Perez of Corbeil and Meir of Rothenburg (c. 1215–1293).101 The leading rabbinic scholar was commissioned with a difficult task in 1240 when he and Rabbi Moshe ben Jacob of Coucy102 had to defend the Talmud at a public tribunal. Nicholas Donin, a Jewish convert to Christianity, had submitted charges against the Talmud to Pope Gregory IX and claimed that the Virgin Mary and Jesus were slandered in it.103 The trial ended with the Talmud being condemned as blasphemous, and two years later 24 wagonloads of Talmudic works were collected and burnt in Paris. The burning of the Talmud had far-reaching consequences and the Talmud itself remained banned for generations to come.104 Rabbi Jehiel decided to emigrate to Eretz Israel, and a student of his, Meir of Rothenburg, who also witnessed the burning of the religious work, attempted to emigrate as well a number of years later. The burning of the Talmud in 1242 signalled the end of an era for the Tosafist school in Paris, but it did not create an intellectual vacuum.105 The accusations of blasphemy in the Talmud did not cause intellectual life to grind to a halt, but they did result in Jewish scholars being more prudent when writing new articles.106 The centres of Tosafist scholarship moved to Corbeil, a town about 40 kilometres

98 Petrus Venerabilis, Adversus Iudaeos, ed. Yvonne Friedman (Turnhout: Brepols, 1985), 125. 99 Martin H. Jung, Christen und Juden. Die Geschichte ihrer Beziehungen (Darmstadt: wbg Academic, 2008), 77. 100 Israel Ta-Shema, “Rabbi Yéhiel de Paris: L’homme et l’oeuvre, religion et société (XIIIe siècle),” Annuaire – École pratique des hautes études, Section des sciences religieuses 99 (1990–1991): 215–19. 101 Israel Ta-Shema, “Jehiel ben Joseph of Paris,” in Encyclopaedia Judaica, second edition, ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik (Detroit: Macmillan, 2007): vol. 11, 103. 102 On Moshe of Coucy and the Talmud trial, see Jeffrey R. Woolf, “Some Polemical Emphases in the ’Sefer Miṣwot Gadol’ of Rabbi Moses of Coucy,” The Jewish Quarterly Review 89 (July – Oct. 1998): 81–100; see pp. 86–93 here. 103 Robert Chazan, John Friedman and Jean Connell Hoff, The Trial of the Talmud. Paris, 1240 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2012), 25. 104 Ibid., 83. 105 Haym Soloveitchik, “Catastrophe and Halakhic Creativity: Ashkenaz – 1096, 1242, 1306 and 1298,” in Jewish History 12 (1998): 71–85; see p. 75 in particular. 106 Chazan, Friedman and Hoff 2012, 86.

2.2 Jews in the regnum Teutonicum 

 25

south of Paris,107 and into the Talmud schools in Évreux, Touques and Falaise in Normandy.108 The history of the Jews in 14th-century France was distinguished by repeated expulsions. They had already been driven out of a number of regions of France in 1289 and in 1306 they were forced to leave the whole country. They were allowed to return in 1315, but had to leave the kingdom yet again in 1321–1323. The Jews in the western part of Alsace-Lorraine and in Champagne were also affected by the expulsions from the French Crown lands. When the Jews were permitted to return again in the middle of the 14th century, only a few of them chose to do so. They were driven out of France once and for all in 1394.109

2.2 Jews in the regnum Teutonicum The Jewish population in the medieval German empire, which was limited to just nine communities from the 9th to the 11th century,110 saw strong growth over the next two centuries and reached an overall figure of approximately 100,000 people roughly by the year 1300.111 The kind of work Jews engaged in also changed dramatically during this period. Local Jewish merchants who had been sidelined by the Christian merchants’ guilds increasingly turned to money-lending as a way of earning a living. The Jewish money-lenders who had become an indispensable part of the medieval economy mainly chose to live in towns and cities. Despite growing hostility towards Jews in general, Jewish money-traders and doctors were encouraged to move to the towns and cities, and they actually came to make up a considerable portion of the urban population in some places, as in Erfurt and Nuremberg.112 After the devastating persecution of the Jews that had taken place in the Rhineland in 1096 during the First Crusade, Henry IV (1050–1106) had put the Jews under his special protection in 1103.113 Earlier on in 1090, he had granted the Jews of Worms a privilege guaranteeing that their lives and possessions would 107 Henri Gross, Gallia Judaica: Dictionnaire géographique de la France d’après les sources rabbiniques (Paris: Librairie Léopold Cerf, 1897), 559–73. 108 Sapir Abulafia 2011, 76. 109 Léon Poliakov, “Das Zeitalter der Verteufelung und des Ghettos,” in Geschichte des Antisemitismus, vol. 2 (Frankfurt a. M.: Athenäum, 1979–1989); see pp. 17–18 here. 110 Michael Toch, The Economic History of European Jews: Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 72. 111 Michael Toch, Die Juden im mittelalterlichen Reich (Munich: Oldenbourg Verlag, 1998), 10. 112 Ibid., 11. 113 Battenberg 1990, 64–65.

26 

 2 The historical context

remain protected. It also granted them the freedom to practise their own religion and allowed them to engage in commercial activities. In many places, the Jews were permitted to set up civic authorities with their own jurisdiction. The autonomy they had been promised in handling their internal affairs was institutionalised by the Jewish communities in the Rhineland. Those in Speyer, Worms and Mainz formed a joint administrative body from the 12th century onwards known as the Kehillot ShUM (ShUM is an acronym standing for the Jewish names of the three towns, Shpira Wormaissa and Magenza). Meetings were held that were attended by the leading halakhic authorities in Ashkenaz. These learned men issued legal statutes in 1220 and 1223 – the Takkanot Kehillot ShUM – which were binding for the whole Ashkenazi community.114 Building on the Privilege of Worms from 1090, Emperor Frederick II put his seal on a decree concerning the servi camerae regis (a Latin term meaning ‘servants of the Royal Chamber’) in 1236.115 As a result of this, the Jews in his realm were subordinated to the Imperial Treasury and had to pay a special tax (‘Judensteuer’) as well.116 Although these provisions contained the seed to weaken their position further in future and allow them to be exploited even more financially, they had ‘a stabilising effect as well’, as Friedrich Battenberg writes. He adds: ‘The people affected by the tax knew they would have to pay it and included it in their business planning as an additional cost factor to consider’.117 At the end of the 13th century, the rights that protected the Jews were passed into the hands of individual territorial rulers. This exposed the Jews to even greater commercial exploitation. In 1286, King Rudolf of Habsburg (1273–1291) forbade Jews living in his realm to leave it without his permission as they were his chamber servants and therefore belonged to him personally along with all their property.118 Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg fell victim to this policy just as he was about to emigrate to Jerusalem; he was imprisoned and spent the rest of his life in a dungeon.119 114 Rainer Josef Barzen, “Die SchUM-Gemeinden und ihre Rechtssatzungen: Geschichte und Wirkungsgeschichte, ” in Die SchUM-Gemeinden Speyer – Worms – Mainz. Auf dem Weg zum Welterbe, ed. Pia Heberer and Ursula Reuter (Regensburg: Schnell & Steiner, 2012): 23–36. 115 Battenberg 1990, 109. 116 Ibid., 97. 117 Ibid., 97–98. 118 Patschovksy, Alexander, “Das Rechtsverhältnis der Juden zum deutschen König (9.–14. Jahrhundert): Ein europäischer Vergleich,” in Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Germanistische Abteilung 110 (1993): 331–71; see pp. 344–45 here. 119 Barbara Mattes, Jüdisches Alltagsleben in einer mittelalterlichen Stadt: Responsa des Rabbi Meir von Rothenburg, PhD thesis, Duisburg University 2001; (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003), 25–26.

2.2 Jews in the regnum Teutonicum 

 27

Up to the persecutions at the end of the 13th century, the living conditions of Jews in the German-speaking part of Europe tended to be better than those of Jews in France. The discriminatory resolutions that the Fourth Lateran Council passed were only implemented after a delay, and persecutions and massacres carried out against the Jews for religious reasons also occurred somewhat later than in France. In spite of the persecutions that took place in Ashkenaz, Jews and Christians did interact and co-operate with each other, so they had some cultural contact.120 Nonetheless, it is evident that the legal position of the Jews worsened steadily as time went on.121 As the status of the Jews gradually weakened, accusations that were made against them began to have a much more serious effect. In the course of the 13th century, word started to spread that the Jews, who were regarded as the true murderers of Jesus, had committed various evil acts and consequently had blood on their hands. The first time the accusation was heard in the German Empire that Jews had kidnapped Christians and murdered them in a ritual was in 1235/36. Wandering preachers and mendicant monks claimed that Jews in Fulda had butchered some children to get Christian blood to use in their rituals.122 Neither the Emperor nor the Church approved of the fatal attacks on Jews that followed these ‘relevations’. Frederick II (1194–1250), for example, had a special committee set up to examine the incidents, which came to the conclusion that the accusations were completely unfounded – in view of the fact that the Bible says Jews

120 Hans-Jörg Gilomen has shown how normative sources produced a distorted image of Jewish– Christian relations: Hans-Jörg Gilomen, “Kooperation und Konfrontation: Juden und Christen in den spätmittelalterlichen Städten im Gebiet der heutigen Schweiz, ” in Juden in ihrer Umwelt. Akkulturation des Judentums in Antike und Mittelalter, eds. Matthias Konradt and Simone Haeberli (Basle: Schwabe, 2009): 157–228; see p. 153 in particular. David Malkiel also points out ‘[…] that the social and cultural ties linking Jews and Christians as partners in the European experience are no less important than the episodes marking ruptures of these neighbourly relations’; see David Malkiel, Reconstructing Ashkenaz. The Human Face of Franco-German Jewry, 1000– 1250 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2009), 202. Now that medieval murals have been discovered in a Jewish town house in Zurich, we also have proof that Jews played a part in Christian upper-class culture in the 14th century to some extent. Cf. Dölf Wild and Böhmer Roland, Die spätmittelalterlichen Wandmalereien im Haus “Zum Brunnenhof” in Zürich und ihre jüdischen Auftraggeber, a publication originally published in the report Zürcher Denkmalpflege, Stadt Zürich, 1995/1996, Zurich: F0-Publishing, 1997; Joseph Shatzmiller, Cultural Exchange: Jews, Christians, and Art in the Medieval Marketplace (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013), 61–72. 121 Christine Magin, ‘Wie es umb der iuden recht stet’: Der Status der Juden in spätmittelalterlichen deutschen Rechtsbüchern, PhD thesis, University of Göttingen, 1995; (Göttingen: Wallstein-Verlag, 1999), 39. 122 Chazan 2006, 192.

28 

 2 The historical context

are not allowed to consume blood. Upon hearing this verdict, Frederick issued a decree forbidding anyone to accuse them of spilling human blood in future.123 At the end of the 13th century, the accusation of Jews desecrating the Host reached the German-speaking lands from the west. The consecrated Host had been regarded as Christ’s Real Presence ever since 1215 when the Lateran Council declared transubstantiation part of Christian dogma. This fuelled the legend of the Jews’ desecration of the Host as ‘a reconstruction of the murder of God committed by the[ir] fathers’.124 In 1298, a rumour went round in the little North Bavarian town of Röttingen ob der Tauber claiming that Jews had stolen the Host, pierced it and made it bleed. Believing he had been chosen to take divine revenge upon the Jews, the local butcher – a man aptly called Rintfleisch (the German word for ‘beef’) – gathered a crowd of angry followers and led the mob on to massacre all the Jews in Röttingen. In the raids that followed in Franconia and Bavaria, 146 Jewish communities fell victim to the thugs and more than 3,000 Jews were killed.125 While the pogroms still seemed to be ‘no more’ than excesses that occurred against the will of those in power in the 13th century, financial interests came to play an increasingly important role in them in the 14th century and even individual town councils tried to benefit from the killings. In 1338, when a gang of murderers led by a man they called ‘King Armleder’ killed the entire Jewish community of Deggendorf, a town in Bavaria, the ones who profited directly from these killings were the Christian citizens who had owed the Jews money; now they were free of their debts for good. In the case of the ‘Armleder persecutions’, as they came to be known, public anger had also been triggered by a rumour about Jews desecrating the Host, but what was new here was the alliances that were formed between the various perpetrators. This was the prelude to the organised killing of Jews that took place when the Black Death struck in Europe.126 The worst catastrophe of all that medieval Jewry suffered, however, occurred during the persecutions that took place in 1348–1350 in conjunction with the Plague. This was when the majority of Jews who lived in the German Empire met

123 Joop van Banning, “Der Vatikan und der Ritualmord,” in Ritualmord: Legenden in der europäischen Geschichte, ed. Susanna Buttaroni and Stanislaw Musial (Vienna: Böhlau, 2003): 61–84, esp. p. 64. 124 Stefan Rohrbacher, “Frömmigkeit und Gewalt,” in Judenbilder. Kulturgeschichte antijüdischer Mythen und antisemitischer Vorurteile, by Stefan Rohrbacher and Michael Schmidt (Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1991): 141–368; see p. 291 in particular. 125 Miri Rubin, Gentile Tales: The Narrative Assault on Late Medieval Jews (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 53. 126 Battenberg 1990, 120.

2.2 Jews in the regnum Teutonicum 

 29

their death. At least 400 Jewish communities were destroyed127 – the only one to be left untouched was the community in Regensburg.128 The Plague, which originally developed in Central Asia, was brought to Europe by Genoese galleys and affected at least a third of the population here. The reason why it developed was unclear at the time and the subject of much speculation: all kinds of guesses were made, ranging from people’s depravity, which had provoked God’s anger, to stellar constellations and pollution of the air and water. The idea that drinking water might be poisoned prevailed. At first, no-one claimed wells had been poisoned by the Jews: beggars and poor people were accused of having put a pestilent poison in drinking water in Narbonne, Carcassonne and Avignon in the spring of 1348,129 but nevertheless, the Jews were turned into the guilty party within a very short time. That autumn, the suspicion that they were the ones who had caused the Plague was voiced in Savoy. At Chillon Castle, Jewish men were tortured for such a long time that a Jewish doctor eventually ‘confessed’ to having poisoned a well. That marked the beginning of a wave of pogroms that surged out from the towns of Solothurn, Zofingen and Berne, gathering strength as it headed for the towns and cities of the German Empire.130 The persecutions that took place up to 1350 were no longer spontaneous reactions by fanatical crowds or attacks by lawless gangs, but were now acts of violence carefully planned by the town councils. In some areas, the killings took place up to half a year before the Plague broke out; the Jews of Zurich were burnt to death in February 1349,131 for example, but the disease did not reach the city until September.132 The Jewish communities never fully recovered from the ‘Black Death persecutions’, even though most of them formed again afterwards.133 The financial security of the Jews had worsened further even before the Plague broke out. In 1342, Louis IV (r.  1314–1347), who was also known as ‘the Bavarian’, introduced the ‘Goldener Opferpfennig’, a personal tax on Jews, which went directly to him (the Emperor) and was upheld by Charles IV (1316–1378) when he became Emperor himself in 1347. Charles knew how to draw the greatest financial benefit possible from the murder of Jews that took place during the Black Death 127 Toch 1998, 61. 128 Rohrbacher 1991, 199. 129 Ibid., 197. 130 František Graus, Pest, Geissler, Judenmorde. Das 14. Jahrhundert als Krisenzeit (Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, second edition, 1987), 161. 131 Johannes Dierauer, ed., Chronik der Stadt Zürich: Mit Fortsetzungen (Basle: A. Geering, 1900), 46, no. 45. 132 Karl Lechner, Das grosse Sterben in Deutschland in den Jahren 1348–51 und die folgenden Pestepidemien bis zum Schlusse des 14. Jahrhunderts (Innsbruck: Wagner, 1884), 28. 133 Battenberg 1990, 121–22.

30 

 2 The historical context

pogroms.134 Once the Plague was over, the rights protecting the Jews were passed on to territorial rulers. ‘Judenregalien’ (special rights the Emperor held over all the Jews in his realm, including the right to tax wealthy merchants) were regarded as good sources of money in addition to various other types of income. In the Golden Bull, an important decree issued by Charles IV in 1356, for instance, it states that the prince-electors (Kurfürsten) were permitted to own all ‘rights to Jews’ (Judenrechte) as well as the rights to income from mines and customs activities.135 The unscrupulous financial exploitation of the Jews conducted by the Frankish kings 200 years earlier was repeated in the Holy Roman Empire during the rule of King Wenceslas (1361–1419) when he first reduced and then completely annulled large debts that Christian citizens owed Jewish money-lenders. In 1385 and 1390, the Jews were ordered to submit all of the borrower’s notes in their possession and the debts were declared expunged along with any interest due. The Jews’ ability to provide capital and pay taxes was so weak after the annulment of 1390 that they hardly did any other money-lending at all in the 15th century other than pawnbroking and providing farmers with small loans.136

2.3 Contacts between Zarfat and Ashkenaz Close connections existed between Jews in Zarfat and Ashkenaz up to the middle of the 13th century.137 The thinking of Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac (1064–1105), the famous French exegete better known as Rashi, was influenced by the time he spent in Mainz and Worms as a student, for example.138 After the Crusade pogroms, the intellectual centres in Germany lost importance, whereas the schools that Rashi and his successors ran in Champagne developed a great reputation. It was at the Talmud school run by Rashi’s grandson Rabbenu Tam (died in 1171) and his brother Samuel (Rashbam) that the Tosafot were developed – novel commentaries on the Talmud based on analyses, discussions and disputes. A number of Jewish scholars travelled to the school from Germany while Rabbenu Tam was still alive to familiarise themselves with the new method of interpreting the Talmud.139 The traditionally minded communities of the Rhineland resisted

134 Graus 1987, 240. 135 Battenberg 1990, 137. 136 Ibid., 149–50. 137 Müller 2006, 411. 138 Grossman 2012, 15. 139 Avraham (Rami) Reiner, “Von Rabbenu Tam zu R. Isaak von Wien: Die Hegemonie der französischen Schule der Talmudwissenschaft im 12. Jahrhundert,” in Europas Juden im Mittelalter.

2.3 Contacts between Zarfat and Ashkenaz 

 31

the new French practice, and Tosafist thinking was only able to gain a foothold in Regensburg initially. But towards the end of the century, more and more Ashkenazic scholars adopted the dialectical approach taken by the Tosafists, which led to a major change in traditional teaching.140 The French and German Jews had developed two different legal traditions: while halakhic decisions were based on conclusions drawn from text analyses of the Babylonian Talmud in Zarfat, they were made according to traditional custom in Ashkenaz.141 The contact that French and German Jews had with each other led to a lively intellectual exchange, and slowly but surely the two ‘poles’ came closer together with time. By the early 13th century, the dividing line between the two cultural centres had largely disappeared.142 This intellectual influence not only came from Jews in France, but also went in the opposite direction in the 13th century. In the 12th to 13th century, the piety movement of the Ḥaside Ashkenaz had formed in the ShUM cities and Regensburg. The Ḥaside Ashkenaz, whose doctrine of piety included ethical and esoteric elements, sharply criticised what they felt was the exaggerated use of the new dialectical method.143 Their own legal decisions were not based on written sources as much, but rather were ‘the expression of spontaneous emotions’, as Jacob Katz has put it.144 The Ḥaside Ashkenaz put a great deal of emphasis on promoting the study of practical Halakhah.145 The French Tosafists started hearing about the intellectual world of these pious German-speaking Jews in the course of the 13th century. In fact, the Talmud Academy at Évreux adopted several teachings stemming from the Ḥaside Ashkenaz.146 According to Ephraim Kanarfogel, Moshe of Coucy, whose views about remorse, repentance and conduct towards non-Jews are astonishingly similar to those of Ḥaside Ashkenaz, is said to have been influenced by the German pietists.147 Haym Soloveitchik denies this, however: he says it was only a generation later – with the arrival of R. Isaac of Corbeil – that there is any proof of such influence.148

Beiträge des internationalen Symposiums in Speyer vom 20. bis 25. Oktober 2002, ed. Christoph Cluse (Trier: Kliomedia, 2004): 301–10; see p. 304 in particular. 140 Müller 2006, 415. 141 Reiner 2004, 302. 142 Ibid., 303. 143 Kanarfogel 1997, 207. 144 Jacob Katz, Exclusiveness and Tolerance. Studies in Jewish-Gentile Relations in Medieval and Modern Times (New York/Toronto: Edwin Mellen Press, 1983), 95. 145 Kanarfogel 1997, 210. 146 Ibid. 147 Ibid., 209. 148 Haym Soloveitchik, “Piety, Pietism and German Pietism: ‘Sefer Ḥasidim I’ and the Influence of Ḥasidei Ashkenaz,” The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series 92 (2002): 455–93, especially p.  470.

32 

 2 The historical context

2.4 Italy Jews had been living on the Italian peninsula ever since ancient times. They enjoyed a long tradition of settlement in Rome, a city from which they had not been expelled since Late Antiquity.149 Up to the 9th century, the most important sectors of the economy in which Jews were active were land ownership (e.g. vineyards), crafts and trade.150 In addition to these fields, a considerable number of Jews were employed as physicians.151 Dealing in money was another area that became popular among Jewish men, so much so that it came to predominate in Northern Italy in the late Middle Ages.152 This trend began in the 13th century when the self-governing cities of Northern and Central Italy attracted money traders from Rome and Ashkenaz.153 The structure of the Jewish population changed in the Renaissance period. Jews from Ashkenaz and Sepharad joined the existing group of Jews in Italy, who were known as Italkim.154 Ashkenazic communities had actually been living around Venice for a while before 1300, but in the 14th century there were such large waves of immigration from Germany that the Ashkenazim came to constitute the largest group of Jewish immigrants in the whole of Italy.155 The Black Death persecutions of 1348–1350 had particularly led to mass flight from Germany. Ashkenazim mainly settled in towns and cities in Northern Italy to which they had been invited to set up pawnbroking businesses.156 The expulsion of the Jews from France in 1394 caused yet another wave of immigration. Immigration from Spain had steadily increased since the persecutions of 1391 and reached its peak in 1492 with the expulsion of the Jews from Spain once and for all.157 The Italian Jews and the Ashkenazim had affinities with each other, which made it possible for Ashkenazi Jews to attend Italkim synagogues.158

149 Moses Avigdor Shulvass, Between the Rhine and the Bosporus. Studies and Essays in European Jewish History (Chicago: College of Jewish Studies Press, 1964), 192. 150 Toch 2013, 49. 151 Ibid., 52. 152 Ibid., 60. 153 Eli Barnavi, Frank Stern and Denis Charbit, Universalgeschichte der Juden: Von den Ursprüngen bis zur Gegenwart; ein historischer Atlas (Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 2004), 126. 154 Moses Avigdor Shulvass, The Jews in the World of the Renaissance (Brill: Leiden, 1973), 2. 155 Ibid., 5 and Shulvass 1964, 160–61. 156 Ibid. 157 Shulvass 1964, 134. 158 Shulvass 1973, 56–57.

2.4 Italy 

 33

Jews were not only active in the financial sector, but were also in great demand as doctors. Some of them were even able to study at Christian universities.159 In the Renaissance, Jews also made significant contributions to cultural life in Italy in fields such as art, literature or translation work from Arabic or Hebrew. Christian scholars also took Hebrew lessons from Jews.160 As a result of this, more people started taking an interest in Jewish philosophy and mysticism. Jewish-Christian exchanges primarily took place among humanists, such as the philosopher and philo-Semite Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463–1494) and the Jewish scholar Yohanan Alemanno (who died sometime after 1504). The Jewish universal scholar Abraham Farissol (c. 1451–1525) is also said to have written his polemical work ‫מגן‬ ‫( אברהם‬Magen Avraham, ‘The Shield of Abraham’) at the suggestion of Christian friends.161 Farissol earned his living as a cantor and copyist of precious books. (There was a great demand for copied books.) Around 450 names of professional Jewish scribes have been handed down who were active in the period from 1300 to 1500, but there will have been many more than that in reality.162 Farissol, a native of Avignon, is an example of an immigrant copyist/writer who came to play an important role in socio-cultural life in Italy.163 In the 15th century, the business that Jews conducted with interest rates was increasingly attacked by preachers of the mendicant orders. From 1462, non-profit banks known as the Monti di Pietà were founded to push Jewish money-lenders out of the market. As a result, many Jewish pawnshops had to close down. In some cases, the sermons of the mendicants also led to persecution. With the closure of the Jewish pawnshops in Florence, for instance, the Jews were also expelled from the city.164

159 Paul Oskar Kristeller, “Jewish Contributions to Italian Renaissance Culture,” in Studies in Renaissance Thought and Letters, ed. Paul Oskar Kristeller (Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1996): 215–26; p. 217 in particular. 160 Ibid., 217–21. 161 Shulvass 1973, 347; up till then, only extracts of Magen Avraham were printed; cf. David Samuel Löwinger; Abraham ben Mordecai Farissol,“‫ליקוטים מספר מגן אברהם‬: Likutim Misefer Magen Avraham,” Hazofeh 12 (1928): 277–97. 162 Ibid., 154. 163 Edna Engel, “Immigrant Scribes Handwriting in Northern Italy from the Late Thirteenth to the Mid-Sixteenth Century: Sephardi and Ashkenazi Attitudes toward the Italian Script,” in The Late Medieval Hebrew Book in the Western Mediterranean: Hebrew Manuscripts and Incunabula in Context, ed. Javier del Barco (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2015): 28–45; p. 35 here. 164 Ibid., 119.

34 

 2 The historical context

There were never such planned, large-scale persecutions of Jews in Italy as there were in Ashkenaz, however.165 As Italy was fragmented into numerous political units, the Jews expelled from the cities could easily settle in neighbouring towns.166 The worst persecution took place in 1475 when the Jews of Trento were accused of committing a ritual murder.167 All in all, 22 of the accused Jews succumbed to torture or were sentenced to death. The rest of the community was expelled.168 The trial was followed by a huge propaganda campaign thanks to the newly introduced technique of printing, causing the ritual murder allegedly committed in Trento to become known across Europe.169 While attacks on the Jews were still a local phenomenon up to the 15th century, the Jews’ exclusion became more widespread in the century after that. Thus the Ghetto of Venice was erected in 1516, the Talmud was burnt in 1555 and the Jews were expelled from the Papal States in 1569.

165 Moritz Güdemann, Geschichte des Erziehungswesens und der Cultur der Juden in Italien während des Mittelalters (Vienna: A. Hölder, 1884), 2. 166 Shulvass 1973, 3. 167 Rohrbacher 1991, 283. 168 Shlomo Simonsohn, “Trent,” in Encyclopaedia Judaica, second edition, ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik (Detroit: Macmillan, 2007): vol. 20, 131. 169 Wolfgang Treue, Der Trienter Judenprozess: Voraussetzungen – Abläufe – Auswirkungen (1475–1588), PhD thesis, University of Trier, 1994; (Hanover: Hahnsche Buchhandlungen, 1996), 285–318.

3 The SeMaK as a book 3.1 Works preceding the SeMaK In the Middle Ages, the need arose to make rabbinical law systematic and present it in a clearer manner. A number of significant works were written as early as the Geonic era, such as the ‫( הלכות גדולות‬Halakhot Gedolot, i.e. ‘Great Halakhot’), which is commonly attributed to Simeon Kayyara and in which the 613 precepts of Judaism mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud were listed in detail. Isaac ben Jacob Alfasi, a North African scholar (1013–1103), wrote a work called ‫ספר ההלכות‬ (Sefer ha-Halakhot), which was based on the Halakhot Gedolot, but only listed those mitzvot that the author felt were still valid in his day and age. Besides including these, he also added some Aggadah texts to the work. Maimonides, who finalised a collection of laws in 1180 that he called ‫משנה‬ ‫( תורה‬Mishneh Torah, i.e. ‘Repetition of the Law’), believed his comprehensive work was a legitimate substitute for the Talmud. In the preface to it, he wrote that it contained the entire Halakhah, so his readers would no longer require any other books.170 Maimonides used a strictly logical system to structure his work and chose not to mention any specific rabbinical discussions or sources. This deliberate omission of the sources of his information met with criticism, as did the philosophical passages in which he attempted to explain the divine commandments in a rational way.171 In addition to this, the Ashkenazi scholars, who were strongly influenced by the dialectical thinking they had encountered among the Tosafists and were used to debating issues at length, took umbrage at Maimonides’ claim to absolute authority.172 One major bone of contention was his thinking, which was strongly influenced by Aristotelian rationalism and was expressed particularly clearly in his philosophical work Guide for the Perplexed.173

170 Mishneh Torah, Introduction; translation in English: Moshe ben Maimon. ‫ספר משנה תורה‬ ‫יד החזקה‬. Book of Mishnah Torah Yod Ha-Hazakah, trans. Simon Glazer. (New York: Maimonides Pub. Co., 1927), 18. 171 Isadore Twersky, Introduction to the Code of Maimonides (Mishneh Torah) (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980), 102–4. 172 Jeffrey R. Woolf, “Admiration and Apathy. Maimonides’ ‘Mishneh Torah’ in High and Late Medieval Ashkenaz,” in Be'erot Yitzhak. Studies in Memory of Isadore Twersky, ed. Jay Michael Harris (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Center for Jewish Studies, 2005): 427–53; see pp. 432–33 in particular. 173 Moshe Ben Maimon, The Guide of the Perplexed, trans. by Shlomo Pines (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-003

36 

 3 The SeMaK as a book

A dispute broke out over Maimonides that kept on flaring up again until the early 14th century.174 Basing his work on Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, R. Moshe ben Jacob of Coucy wrote the Sefer Mitzvot Gadol (‘Great Book of Commandments’, or ‫סמ"ג‬, SeMaG, for short). In 1240, Moshe of Coucy was involved in the ‘Trial of the Talmud’ in Paris, to where he had been called in order to defend the central text of rabbinical law. In view of the subsequent burning of the Talmud, Moshe must have felt it was imperative to produce a halakhic work that was able to fill the gap that had arisen. In his Great Book of the Commandments, R. Moshe of Coucy cited Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, but supplemented the text with rabbinical sources and explanations of his own. What’s more, Moshe gave his work a different structure by putting the 613 mitzvot in a new order. He listed all the prohibitions in one volume and all the positive commandments in another. Moshe of Coucy, himself a Tosafist, quoted the different opinions of the Tosafists, who mainly came from Northern France, as he went through the precepts of the Talmud one by one. This enabled him to create a unique link between the opus magnum that Maimonides had produced and Tosafist thought. Moshe completed his book around 1247. It was to become the most influential halakhic work of the entire Middle Ages.175 The volume that Moshe of Coucy wrote is actually the direct predecessor of the SeMaK, which is a kind of summary of the Great Book of Commandments. The SeMaK was not the first book to be presented as an abridged version of the SeMaG, however. Shortly before R. Isaac of Corbeil finished writing his work, around the year 1270, R. Abraham bar Ephraim published a book of his own entitled ‫( קיצור ספר מצוות גדול‬Kizzur Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, i.e. ‘Condensed Version of the Great Book of Commandments’).176 This work had no influence on the SeMaK whatsoever and was well and truly sidelined by it, as the latter had a special structure which made it possible to spread the task of learning texts by heart over each day of the week.177 Apart from the SeMaG, there is also another work that influenced the SeMaK – a collection of laws entitled ‫( ספר היראים‬Sefer haYere’im, i.e. ‘The Book of the

174 Jeffrey R. Woolf, “Maimonides Revised: The Case of the Sefer Miṣwot Gadol,” Harvard Theological Review 90 (1997): 175–203; see pp. 177–78 here. 175 Judah D. Galinsky, “The Significance of Form: R. Moses of Coucy’s Reading Audience and his Sefer ha-Mizvot,” AJS Review 35 (2011): 293–321. 176 Avraham ben Ephraim, ed., ‫ ההדיר והוסיף מבוא והערות יהושע הורוביץ‬.‫קיצור ספר מצוות גדול‬, Kitzur Semag (Jerusalem: Mezike Nirdamim, 2004). 177 Ta-Shema 2004, 19.

3.2 Isaac of Corbeil’s intention 

 37

God-Fearing’), which was written by R. Eliezer ben Samuel of Metz between 1171 and 1179. This contains a list of the 613 precepts based on the Halakhot Gedolot. The aim that R. Eliezer had in mind when writing it was to spread knowledge of the divine laws and reinforce the reader’s fear of God. Consequently, his work was more of a guide to morality than a systematically structured compendium of Halakhah.178 The Sefer Yere’im is divided into seven chapters which the author referred to as ‘pillars’. R. Isaac of Corbeil adopted this structure for his SeMaK, although the latter obviously contained other subjects as well.179

3.2 Isaac of Corbeil’s intention In publishing his work on Jewish law, R. Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil was attempting to achieve an ambitious goal: he wanted the Halakhah to be accessible to the widest audience possible and be understood by people – meaning men and women alike – who were not as familiar with it as rabbinical scholars were. As Ephraim Kanarfogel has shown, this intention reflects the strong influence that the German piety movement Ḥaside Ashkenaz had on R. Isaac of Corbeil. Like the Ḥaside Ashkenaz, he also felt it was important to spread the word about practical Halakhah.180 According to Ephraim Urbach, R. Isaac wanted to reach ‘ordinary people’ with his work,181 but Judah Galinsky sees things slightly differently: even if they were able to read, ordinary people would still have been unable to understand halakhic texts in his opinion. R. Isaac’s target audience was actually ‘middle-class’ Jews, a social group that had gradually formed during the 13th century. They were people who had received enough education to understand simple halakhic texts, but who had not had the opportunity to study the Talmud and tosafot intensively.182 Readers of the SeMaK were expected to have some basic religious knowledge, which can be seen from the abbreviated references and quotations included in the individual mitzvot; passages of the Bible, Mishnah and Talmud are only referred to by the first few words in them, but are not mentioned in any more detail than that. In his open letter to the French and German Jewish communities, which is a standard part of many SeMaK manuscripts these days, we learn what intentions 178 Galinsky 2011, 306. 179 Urbach 1980, 572. 180 Kanarfogel 1997, 210. 181 Urbach 1980, 571. 182 Galinsky, 2009, minute 1:33:00 to 1:40:10, https://youtu.be/DPD3nGFqSAA?t=1h13m4s. Accessed on 23/2/2016.

38 

 3 The SeMaK as a book

Rabbi Isaac pursued with his work and about the unique way in which he went about promoting his book: Every leader of a synagogue in every town and city is commanded to make a written copy of these mitzvot […] and anyone who wishes to make a copy of it or learn from it is to be lent it […]. And if a delegate [from another community] needs to stay in town for a while in order to copy the mitzvot, they should pay him a fee of six small Turnose a day from community funds and provide him with board and lodging as well […].183

R. Isaac specifically addressed women in his open letter as well: Accuracy when reading and studying [the mitzvot] is just as useful for them [i.e. women] as study is for men. […] 184

Behind his call for the individual communities to provide financial support for reproducing the SeMaK we can see Isaac’s wish to get his book out to readers as quickly as possible and yet in a controlled way.185 This was a unique request in a community in which book production and book trading practically only occurred if an individual took the initiative.186 It was Rabbi Isaac’s wish that the texts in his book should be read and learnt by heart every day.187 This notion of his also influenced the structure of the book. R. Isaac wrote the following on this point: Since our teachings are being forgotten in this day and age and I fear that most people today are unfamiliar with the explanations of the mitzvot imposed on us, I have written down the commandments imposed on us nowadays [in the form of] seven pillars corresponding to the seven days of the week. And I ask each and every person to read a pillar a day so they can profit from it […].188 183 Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil, 1935, CD Responsa Project, Bar Ilan, 2007. 184 Ibid. 185 Beit-Arié, Malachi, Hebrew Codicology. Historical and Comparative Typology of Hebrew Medieval Codices based on the Documentation of the Extant Dated Manuscripts Using a Quantitative Approach, Preprint internet English version 0.2+ (November 2018), (Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities 2018); http://web.nli.org.il/sites/NLI/English/collections/ manuscripts/hebrewcodicology, accessed on 6/1/2019, p. 101. 186 Malachi Beit-Arié, "‫האם היו ספריות 'ציבוריות' יהודיות בימי הביניים? הצביון האינדיווידואלי של הפקת‬ ‫ "הספר העברי וצריכתו‬Zion 65 (2000): 441–45; see p. 445. 187 In a recent essay, Judah Galinsky has shown that these daily readings were a ritualised recitation of the list of commandments preceding the SeMaK. Unlike a modern table of contents, which provides an overview of all the chapters in a work, the list was not intended to serve this purpose, but to help readers recall God’s commmandments. See Judah D. Galinsky, “Rabbis, Readers, and the Paris Book Trade: Understanding French Halakhic Literature in the Thirteenth Century,” in Entangled Histories: Knowledge, Authority, and Jewish Culture in the Thirteenth Century, eds. Elisheva. Baumgarten, R. M. Karras and K. Mesler (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016): 73–89, particularly pp. 81–82. 188 Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil, 1935, CD Responsa Project, Bar Ilan 2007.

3.3 How the SeMaK was received 

 39

Influenced by the Ḥaside Ashkenaz, this was the most important concern of all for R. Isaac of Corbeil, who dearly wanted the Jewish community to become more devout. His Pillars of Exile was an educational work, the nature of which was far from Talmudic dialectics and cleansed of any elements that ran contrary to his own ideas about practical Halakhah.189

3.3 How the SeMaK was received The large number of SeMaK manuscripts still existing today is a sign that R. Isaac’s wishes regarding the circulation of his work were fulfilled to a considerable extent. The SeMaK turned out to be particularly popular among Jews in the German-speaking regions. R. Meir of Rothenburg (d. in 1293) encouraged the work to be distributed widely at a relatively early point in time by telling his students they should copy everything in it, as it was ‘true and enduring, correct and valid’.190 Since the SeMaK was not always easy to understand because of its brevity, explanatory glosses were added quite soon. It may be the case that one of Isaac’s students, R. Perez ben Elia of Corbeil (d. in 1297/1299),191 added various notes and sources to it while the author was still alive. In the first half of the 14th century, R. Moshe of Zurich supplemented the SeMaK with numerous glosses and extracts from works written by other authors, thereby creating a new book that was much more comprehensive: the Zurich SeMaK.192 This larger work was read by people up to the first half of the 15th century, in particular, but then it was forgotten for hundreds of years until being rediscovered by Leopold Zunz (1794–1886), who took a scientific approach to it.193 The Zurich SeMaK was only printed for the first time in 1975.194 The editor, Jitzchak Jakob Har-Shoshanim (Rosenberg), used the London manuscript BL, Add. 18684 for reference purposes, but no other exemplars of it.

189 Soloveitchik 1998, 75. 190 Urbach, 1980, 573 and Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil: ‫ ספר עמודי גולה‬: Sefer ʻAmude ha-Golah, (Constantinople, unknown publisher, 1509), fol. 1v. 191 On the year of R. Perez’s death, see Benjamin Richler, "‫על כתבי היד של 'ספר היראה' המיוחס‬ ‫"לרבינו יונה גירונדי‬, Ale Sefer 8 (1979/80). 51–59. See p. 58 in this case. 192 Around 15 manuscripts of the Zurich SeMaK have survived. 193 Leopold Zunz, Der Zürcher Semak. Beilage V [Supplement 5], in Leopold Zunz, Die Ritus des synagogalen Gottesdienstes, geschichtlich entwickelt (Berlin: J. Springer, 1859), 211–21. 194 Isaac of Corbeil, Perez of Corbeil and Moshe of Zurich, ‫הסמ"ק מצוריך‬, Ha‘Semak mi-Zurich, ed. Isaac Jacob Har-Shoshanim-Rosenberg (Jerusalem: Ha‘Mahadir, 1980–1988).

40 

 3 The SeMaK as a book

Ashkenazi authorities referred to the SeMaK or the Zurich SeMaK in the 15th century, one example being the Rhineland author of the ‫ספר מנהגי מהרי"ל‬ (Maharil’s Book of Customs), R. Jacob ben Moshe haLevi Molin (aka the Maharil, d. in 1427).195 The North Italian legal scholar Joseph Colon ben Solomon Trabotto (Maharik, d. in 1480), who was born in France, drew heavily on the SeMaK and the glosses that R. Perez of Corbeil had added to it when he wrote his responsa.196 The introduction of mechanical printing techniques meant the end of the SeMaK’s great popularity, albeit only gradually. On the one hand, it was not necessary to produce personal copies any more, and on the other, the SeMaK had competition from another work from 1565 onwards: the ‫שולחן ערוך‬ (Shulḥan Arukh).197 Like the SeMaK, this collection of Jewish laws, which Josef Karo (d. in 1575) compiled in Safed, was intended for a relatively wide readership and was designed to be read and learnt off by heart every day. Following production of the first prints of the SeMaK in Constantinople in 1509 and Cremona in 1556, the editing was moved to Eastern Europe and continued from there. After publishing an abridged version of the SeMaK in Cracow in 1578 called ‫( קיצור עמודי גולה‬Condensed Version of the Pillars of Exile), Karo went on to print a complete edition of it in 1596. Further editions appeared in Belarus in the 19th century, namely in Ljady in 1805 and Kopys in 1820. The latter edition contains commentaries added by the Russian Talmud scholar Joshua Zeitlin (1742–1822). While the SeMaK is only of marginal importance these days, the Shulḥan Arukh is still binding. Individual elements of the SeMaK have been incorporated in the Shulḥan Arukh indirectly, however, the reason being that commentaries written by Moses Isserles (d. in 1572) in Cracow needed to be added to it to ensure that the book, which was originally written with Sephardic Jews in mind, would also be regarded as binding by the Ashkenazim. Isserles cited numerous Ashkenazi experts in it, including Isaac of Corbeil and his SeMaK.

195 However, as Judah Galinsky has stressed, the Maharil had strong reservations whenever the SeMaK was used by laymen. Judah D. Galinsky, “Between Ashkenaz (Germany and Tsarfat (France): Two Approaches toward Popularizing Jewish Law,” in Jews and Christians in Thirteenth-Century France, eds. Elisheva Baumgarten and Judah D. Galinsky (New York: Palgrave, 2015): 77–92, esp. pp. 77–78. 196 Jeffrey R. Woolf, “French Halakhic Tradition in the Late Middle Ages,” Jewish History 27 (2013): 1–20; see p. 6 in this particular case. 197 Josef Karo, Josef Isserles and Zvi Preisler, ‫שלחן ערוך‬, Shulḥan Arukh (Jerusalem: Hotsaʼat Ketuvim, 1993).

3.4 The contents and structure of the SeMaK 

 41

3.4 The contents and structure of the SeMaK Unlike its predecessors, the Sefer Mitzvot Gadol by Moshe of Coucy and the Mishneh Torah by Maimonides, the SeMaK does not contain all 613 commandments. It leaves out the commandments on making sacrifices and on ritual purity when worshipping at the Temple; only those important for Jews in the diaspora are mentioned. This is why the original title of the book was ‫( עמודי הגולה‬Amude haGola, i.e. The Pillars of Exile). In the SeMaK, around 300 precepts198 are presented in seven chapters (‘pillars’), corresponding to the seven days of the week. There are further subdivisions within the individual chapters, which vary from one chapter to the next. Various principles were used parallel to each other when it came to ordering the subject matter: a distinction was generally made between all the commandments by putting the positive ones at the beginning of a chapter or passage, for example. It was not just logical criteria that were paramount in structuring the SeMaK, however, but associations and feelings were as well. This can be seen in the way the author divided the work into meaningful units – not only do the seven chapters correspond to the days of the week, but they also represent the first six commandments of the Decalogue. The following is a brief overview based on the explanations on subtitling the individual chapters. The numbers of the respective commandments are taken from the printed edition of the Zurich SeMaK.199 – Sunday – [First Commandment: ‘I am the Lord, thy God’]200 Mitzvot on the heart: 1–25 Mitzvot on the ears: 26–28 Mitzvot on the eyes: 29–37, below which these mitzvot are particularly highlighted: Mitzvot on making clothes: 32–34 – Monday – Second Commandment: ‘Thou shalt have no other gods before me’ Mitzvot on the body: 38–101 – Tuesday – Third Commandment: ‘Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image’

198 There are some minor differences regarding the amount of commandments listed and how they are numbered. The version printed in Cremona contains 318 commandments, for example, whereas only 292 are listed in the Zurich SeMaK contained in the manuscripts known as Parma. BPP, MS parm 3158 and the printed edition by Har-Shoshanim. 199 Isaac of Corbeil, Perez of Corbeil, Moshe of Zurich, 1980–1988. 200 Subtitles were not added to this chapter, but on the basis of section 1 and the names of the other chapters, one may assume that the First Commandment is meant here.

42 

– –

– –

 3 The SeMaK as a book

Mitzvot on the mouth: 102–148 (below which there is a mitzvah prohibiting magical spells that are mostly said out loud) Wednesday – Fourth Commandment: ‘Remember the Sabbath day’ Mitzvot on the hands: 149–194 Thursday – Fifth Commandment: ‘Honour thy father and thy mother’ Mitzvot on food (since one is morally obliged to feed one’s parents) and the rule on complying with the principles of law: 195–238 Friday – Sixth Commandment: ‘Thou shalt not kill’ Mitzvot on money (since most murders occur because of that): 239–277 Saturday – (Shabbat) Mitzvot on Shabbat and sexuality: 278–292.

An additional ordering principle defines the sequence of the commandments in the majority of the chapters: 1. Positive commandments that come from the Torah (‘de-oraita’) 2. Negative commandments that come from the Torah 3. Positive commandments from the sages (‘de-rabbanan’) 4. Negative commandments from the sages. This internal structure for the chapters is not maintained consistently, however, as it sometimes collides with the principles of classification mentioned above.201 The structure of the SeMaK is rather difficult for readers to understand today. The commandments are not arranged as a list of topics based on subject areas, but based on the human body and the activities associated with parts of it. Consequently, the prohibitions concerning idolatry are not only found in the second chapter, but throughout the work wherever they are relevant to the specific part of the body being dealt with. In the first chapter, the following prohibitions are listed among the mitzvot of the heart: ‘Not to fear the words of lying prophets’ and ‘Not to love an inciter [who calls on people to believe in other gods]’. In the section on mitzvot on the ear, it says one should not listen to anything a heretic says, nor should one listen to anyone who prophesies in the name of an idol. In the section on the commandments on the eye, there is a negative commandment about merely looking at graven images. In the section on the commandments on the human body in the second chapter, there is a positive one that calls upon the reader to destroy any altars, memorials and instruments relating to idolatry, and the negative commandments include setting up idols, worshipping them and

201 Consistent use of this principle can be seen in Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 and London, BL, Add. 18685.

3.4 The contents and structure of the SeMaK 

 43

profiting from idolatry. Underneath that there is a negative commandment forbidding Jews to erect statues. The chapter ends with a ban on redeeming inciters. In the third chapter, the commandments on the mouth include one that says not to prophesy in the name of an idol or speak in favour of an inciter. What’s more, anyone who does speak for an inciter should be contradicted. In the fourth chapter, which lists commandments on the hand, the reader is forbidden to make or set up any statues or pictures in order to worship an idol. The SeMaK has been criticised by some people because of its unconventional structure. The Talmud scholar Chaim Tchernowitz took a hard look at the SeMaK in his monograph on the history of Jewish law, ‫‘( תולדות הפוסקים‬History of the Jewish Codes’), which was published in Hebrew in 1946/47. The way the SeMaK was divided up by its author was ‘entirely the fruit of his imagination’ and not based on the Torah or Talmud in any way whatsoever, he complained.202 Its chaotic classification system made it completely unsuitable for studying, and it was not a work about halakhic decision-making either, he said.203 In view of the lack of logic underlying its structure, it seemed very odd that the SeMaK had been recognised as a halakhic work.204 The SeMaK is not designed to be a reference work; its structure is not thematic, but ‘organic’, as it were. This kind of order may have served medieval readers as a sort of aide mémoire, as the way in which the commandments have been associated with the human body makes them easier to remember. Imagery of this kind can be recalled even if the book does not happen to be nearby and someone is talking about the commandments. According to Jan Assmann, the way in which ‘figures of memory’ are treated is already defined in Deuteronomy, where important sites in the history of the Israelites ‘were now transferred from the exterior to the interior and from the material to the imaginary’.205 Assmann says ‘learning by and taking to heart’ is the first way of achieving a ‘culturally formed memory’.206 The fact that Isaac of Corbeil began his book with the mitzvot of the heart was therefore not a random decision; rather, he was drawing on a memorised image that was deeply rooted in Jewish tradition.

202 Chaim Tchernowitz,‫ תכונת חבוריהם ויסודי שיטותיהם בדרכי‬,‫ כולל שלשלת הפוסקים‬.‫תולדות הפוסקים‬ ‫ההוראה מתקופת הגאונים עד השלחן ערוך ונושאי כליו‬: Toledoth Ha-Poskim (New York: Jubilee Committee, 1946/47), 93. 203 "‫"הסידור של הספר מבולבל מאד ואינו לא ספר לימוד ולא ספר פסקני‬, ibid., 94. 204 Ibid., 95. 205 Jan Assmann, Cultural Memory and Early Civilization. Writing, Remembrance, and Political Imagination (Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 191. 206 Ibid., 196.

44 

 3 The SeMaK as a book

Training one’s ability to remember things by visualising them is also a medieval memorisation technique. Thomas of Aquin (1225–1274), who also used the ancient art of mnemotechnics for learning purposes, said there was clearly a need to create images that people could remember: ‘Now the reason for the necessity of finding these illustrations or images is that simple and spiritual intentions easily slip away from the mind, unless they be tied as it were to some corporeal image, because human knowledge has a greater hold on sensible objects’.207 The system of ordering subjects in terms of days of the week, parts of the body and positive and negative commandments will seem very strange to readers these days, but it will have been helpful to medieval readers familiar with Jewish tradition, who were used to memorising information and learning it off by heart. The structure of the SeMaK, which is illogical from today’s perspective, was actually one of the very reasons why the book became so popular in the Middle Ages.

207 Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica. Vol. II, Part II (New York: Cosimo, 2007), Q 49, Art. 1, 1396.

4 The manuscripts in their entirety 4.1 Overview: number, geographic distribution and distribution over time A total of 229 SeMaK manuscripts located in archives, libraries and private collections all over the world can be called up using the National Library of Israel’s special electronic portal.208 These items include 60 individual pages and fragments of manuscripts consisting of up to 20 folios. The remaining manuscripts contain up to 427 folios,209 but are often incomplete. The exposed pages at the beginning and end of the works are frequently missing because they were damaged or worn, for example. Surprisingly, though, more than a quarter of the manuscripts include a colophon, which mentions the names of the scribe(s) and the people who commissioned the work along with dates and in some cases even the names of the place where the work was done. It is amazing how many different kinds of SeMaK manuscripts there are. Countless formats exist, ranging from the tiny Copenhagen manuscript called Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, the pages of which are just 70 mm × 115 mm in size, to the much bigger Viennese SeMaK known as Cod. hebr. 12a, which was created in 1402 and is 280 × 380 mm in size. The manuscripts are mostly made of parchment, but individual exemplars from the 15th century and later were occasionally made of paper. In 64 cases, the SeMaK is part of a manuscript containing several different texts – a composite volume, in other words. Combining it with a siddur was particularly popular (we know of 24 such copies today). Another combination also found frequently contained rabbinical works from the Middle Ages, such as the ‫( תשב"ץ‬Tashbeẓ) by R. Simson b. Zadoq and the ‫( שערי דורא‬Sha’are Dura), the ritual codex produced by Isaac of Düren. Furthermore, the SeMaK sometimes appears in other works as a marginal text. In one case, it was copied in the margins of an Ashkenazi siddur.210 The vast majority of manuscripts (193 of them in all) come from Ashkenaz, i.e. the region spanning from Northern France and Germany to Bohemia in the east. Our knowledge of places where the manuscripts were in use gives us an

208 http://aleph.nli.org.il, accessed on 17/2/2016. The number of manuscripts listed has grown enormously in recent years, not least because newly discovered fragments of book covers have been added. 209 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 341, 14th–15th century. 210 Oxford, BOD, Mich. 200, 13th–14th century. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-004

46 

 4 The manuscripts in their entirety

impression of just how mobile medieval Jews were. At least five Ashkenazi SeMaK manuscripts were produced in Italy, for example,211 whereas one of the Sephardic manuscripts was copied in Ashkenaz.212 Figure 1 shows the origin of the manuscripts examined for this study: 250

200

150

100

193

50

0

Ashkenazic

14

11

3

2

6

Italian

Sephardic

Byzantine

Provencçal

?

Figure 1: SeMaK manuscripts by origin.

Most of the SeMaK manuscripts can be dated to the 14th century very clearly (cf. Figure 2). The oldest preserved manuscripts were made in France in the 13th century. It did not take long before the SeMaK reached the German-speaking lands, however; the oldest dated ‘German’ manuscript was written in 1309 in Plauen, Saxony.213 The introduction of mechanical printing techniques put an end to the production of SeMaK manuscripts. The most recent manuscript to have been dated was written in Italy in 1527.214 By this point in time, the first printed versions of it were already in circulation, having been made in Constantinople since 1509/10. 211 Cambridge, University Library, Add. 2580 (1397); Parma, BPP, Cod. Parm. 676 (1409); Modena, Estense e universitaria, a.Q.9.23 (1456); Oxford, BOD, Opp. Add. fol. 40, (15th c.), Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51. 212 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 336, 1394. 213 Oxford, BOD, MS Opp. 342, 1309. 214 London, Montefiore Library 122, 1527.

4.2 How the manuscripts changed: from the North French Hebrew Miscellany 

 47

140 120 100 80 119

60 40 20 0

10

15

32

37

13th c 13th–14th c 14th c 14th–15th c 15th c

4 16th c

13 ?

Figure 2: SeMaK manuscripts by date of origin.

4.2 How the manuscripts changed: from the North French Hebrew Miscellany to the Zurich SeMaK The SeMaK in the North French Hebrew Miscellany The oldest known edition of the SeMaK is part of the North French Hebrew Miscellany (London, BL, Add. 11639)215 and was copied while the author of the work – R. Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil – was still alive, namely in 1279/80, only three years after he had finished writing it.216 It differs from the later SeMaK manuscripts in a number of important respects. The North French Hebrew Miscellany is an extremely lavish multiple-text manuscript that includes a complete Pentateuch and a prayer book for the whole year, among other things. Written on finest parchment, it contains 60 different main texts and 24 marginal ones, which have been decorated with numerous illuminations. The texts were written down by a single scribe, Benjamin, possibly in Metz

215 Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil, “‫ספר מצות קטן‬,” in The North French Hebrew Miscellany: (British Library Add. MS 11639), ed. Jeremy Schonfield (London: Facsimile Editions, 2003): fols. 546b–640b. 216 Emanuel 2006, 198.

48 

 4 The manuscripts in their entirety

or another town in the surrounding area, while the illuminations were produced in Saint-Omer (around 40 kilometres east of Boulogne), Paris and the Champagne area.217 This simply designed version of the SeMaK spans two columns in each case and is written in Ashkenazi semi-cursive script (cf. Figure 3). The individual commandments are indicated by the initial words being written in square script. Apart from the edges containing texts written in brown ink in the margin, the legislative text in black ink does not contain any decorative elements at all. The first thing that strikes the reader upon seeing this SeMaK is how short it is – the small composite volume (160 × 120 mm) only contains folios 546v–640r.218 This version of the SeMaK, which is how it appears in the North French Hebrew Miscellany, is the one that is probably most likely to have corresponded to Isaac of Corbeil’s wishes about his book. A knowledgeable reader may well have been able to read a ‘pillar’ a day, seeing as the way the text was divided up over the various chapters was relatively balanced.219 It was theoretically possible to do as the author said and read a chapter every day, not least because of its modest size, but it is hard to imagine someone being able to do this with the later editions of the SeMaK, which were much longer, being supplemented with detailed commentaries. The brevity of the SeMaK in this manuscript is due to a number of factors. For one thing, the open letter that R. Isaac of Corbeil wrote to advertise his new book, which preceded most of the other SeMaK manuscripts, is not part of the SeMaK included in the North French Hebrew Miscellany. Secondly, it does not contain any of the commentaries made by R. Perez ben Elia of Corbeil,220 and the writing in

217 Jeremy Schonfield, “Introduction,” in The North French Hebrew Miscellany: Companion Volume to an Illuminated Manuscript from Thirteenth-Century France in Facsimile, ed. Jeremy Schonfield (London: Facsimile Editions, 2003): 15–25; pp. 16–17 here. 218 The SeMaK in the North French Hebrew Miscellany bears the title ‫ספר התרומה‬, which is unusual. It is strange because the author expressly calls it ‫ עמודי גולה‬in the epilogue on fol. 639v. ‫ספר‬ ‫ התרומה‬is the title of the earlier work written by Baruch ben Isaac of Worms and is not linked to Isaac of Corbeil’s manuscript in any way. Margoliouth ruled out that the title ‫ ספר התרומה‬preceded the introduction of the name ‫ספר מצות קטן‬. Margoliouth, 1899–1935, 414f. 219 The first chapter covers 31 mitzvot, the second 48 of them, the third 43, the fourth 28, the fifth 36, the sixth 28 and the seventh chapter deals with just eight. 220 No other SeMaK manuscripts exist in which R. Perez of Corbeil’s remarks are absent as far as I am aware.

4.2 How the manuscripts changed: from the North French Hebrew Miscellany 

Figure 3: First page of the SeMaK. London, BL, Add. 11639, fol. 546v.

 49

50 

 4 The manuscripts in their entirety

the margin is not connected with the SeMaK at all.221 The number of mitzvot that are listed is much lower than in later manuscripts.222 No other additions were intended to be made in the mise-en-page of the SeMaK. As mentioned above, the writing in the margins has no relationship whatsoever to the contents of the SeMaK. Could this be an indication that the SeMaK was regarded as a finished work that did not need anything else added at all? A work of perfection that did not require any commentaries and explanations? Or was this simply an expression of respect for the author, who was still alive? In his open letter, R. Isaac of Corbeil did not call on his readers to correct the work or supplement it; all he did was ask them to only teach from it once it had been corrected by scholars familiar with Jewish law. This wish was possibly an attempt to keep his book readable and maintain a degree of control over it as far as later additions were concerned. When the SeMaK was included in the North French Hebrew Miscellany, the former was still a relatively new work and the commentaries that R. Perez ben Elia of Corbeil added may not have been written yet. Apart from that, the extremely opulent North French Hebrew Miscellany was presumably not produced for the purpose of studying it, but as a miniature library in itself in which the texts were presented as if they were treasures; later additions were simply not intended in this luxury volume. As is usually the case, the work is divided up into seven chapters corresponding to the seven days of the week. The division is slightly different to the one used in the later manuscripts, not least because individual mitzvot are missing: – 1st day: 546v–551v, beginning with the commandment ‫‘( לידע‬To know or to realise that…’)

221 From 546v–593v there is an explanation about the vocalisation system of biblical Hebrew, from 594r–599v an explanation about the accentuation systems encountered in the Hebrew Bible, from 600r–609v there is a summary of all the previous explanations on pronunciation, from 609v–612v a piyyut about the accents in the biblical text, from 612v–614v a text about unusual letters in the Pentateuch, and from 615r–635r there are various texts concerning numerical equivalents (gematria). In between those last folios, there is a mathematical puzzle on 634v and a text on the stones on the ephod, the eschatological reward and the humiliation of Esau on 635v. On 636r–636v there is an excerpt from the Babylonian Talmud (Bechorot 8b), from 637r–638v a summary of the rabbinical traditions, and 639r–663r contain an alphabetical list of rabbis’ names. For further details, see Raphael Loewe, “Description of the Texts,” in The North French Hebrew Miscellan:. Companion Volume to an Illuminated Manuscript from Thirteenth-Century France in Facsimile, ed. Jeremy Schonfield (London: Facsimile Editions, 2003): 193–284, particularly pp. 279–82. 222 According to my own count, 218 precepts are mentioned, only the first fifty of which are numbered.

4.2 How the manuscripts changed: from the North French Hebrew Miscellany 

– – – – – –

 51

2nd day: 551v–564r, beginning with the commandment ‫לאבד ע״ז‬223 (‘Destroy idolatry’) 3rd day: 564r–573v, beginning with the commandment ‫‘( לקדש בכור‬Sanctify the first-born’) 4th day: 573v–590r, beginning with the commandment ‫‘( לעשות מעקה‬Make a guard-rail) 5th day: 590r–606v, beginning with the commandment ‫‘( לשחוט‬Slaughter [an animal]’) 6th day: 606v–619r, beginning with the commandment ‫‘( להשמט כספים‬Cancel debts’)224 7th day: 619r–639v, beginning with the words ‫תניא אין לי אלא בלילה ביום מנין‬225 (‘It was taught [in a baraita]: I know of nothing else than the night [for saying the blessing]. How am I to know that it is also [meant to be said] during the day?’)

Epilogue by the writer, 639v–640r, beginning with ‫ברוך יוצרי אשר זיכני לגמור‬ (‘Praised be my maker, who has given me the privilege to finish [this work]’). Identifying the individual chapters is not always easy, the reason being that, apart from the first word of the first commandment, ‫לידע‬, which was written in slightly larger letters, the beginning of each chapter is not indicated by conventional means – neither by letters and numbers nor by visual elements. Unfortunately, the subheadings written in a smaller size do not always make it clear what belongs where. Before the second chapter starts, for instance, it merely says that these are the positive commandments concerning the body. No mention is made of the days of the week or which chapter it is, though. The subheadings only contain unmistakable details about the days of the week between the second and third chapter, the third and fourth and the fifth and sixth one.226 There is a confusing remark between the sixth and seventh chapter that the mitzvot for 223 Loewe suggests that the commandment ‫ לקדש השם‬begins the chapter. This does not quite make sense, as unlike ‫לאבד ע"ז‬, this commandment does not have a title above it and the second chapter in the other SeMaK editions always starts with ‫לאבד ע"ז‬. Ibid., 265. 224 All the other SeMaK manuscripts begin the sixth chapter with a commandment that is not mentioned in the North French Hebrew Miscellany: ‫‘( לתת נבלה לגר תושב‬Give a carcass to a ger toshav [a foreign resident]’). 225 In Loewe’s opinion, the prohibition ‫ שלא לעשות מלאכה ביום השבת‬is what begins the chapter. In the subheading that comes before this negative commandment, no information is provided about the days of the week, and it is not like the structure of the SeMaK to begin the chapter with negative mitzvot either. Ibid. 226 Loewe does not mention the subheadings between the fourth and fifth and fifth and sixth chapters. Ibid.

52 

 4 The manuscripts in their entirety

the sixth day of the week are now finished and those for the fourth day will now begin.227 The words that introduce the seventh chapter, or rather the commandments on Shabbat, cannot be called an explicit commandment. It is the reproduction of a passage from the Mekhilta by R. Ishmael that relates to the kiddush on Shabbat.228 This includes a certain degree of vagueness and possibly contributed to the lack of uniformity in the beginnings of the chapters in the case of the seventh chapter in later SeMaK manuscripts. In most of the SeMaK manuscripts, the chapter begins with the commandment ‫‘ =( לעשות קידוש בשבת‬Sanctify the Shabbat’).229 In a manuscript from 1309 from the town of Plauen and in the Ingolstadt manuscript BOD, Opp. 339 from 1347, however, the chapter begins with the commandment ‫‘ =( להדליק נר בערב שבת‬Light the Shabbat candles’).230 Since none of the manuscripts that have been mentioned begin the seventh chapter the way it is done in the SeMaK in the North French Hebrew Miscellany, we can presume that this manuscript was not used as a master copy. Nonetheless, since it is the earliest manuscript we have, it is essential as a means of comparison for manuscripts that were produced later.

The manuscripts’ growth in size No other SeMaK manuscripts have managed to survive that were written before the 1290s. One manuscript that is now part of the Günzburg Collection in Moscow does contain the year 1282 in the writ of divorce (‘get’),231 but it is doubtful whether this date is actually correct, as Saturday was written as the day of the week for 8 Elul 5042 (21/08/1282) rather than Friday. Besides that, the name of the commentator, R. Perez of Corbeil, is supplemented by a blessing for the dead in this manuscript.232 R. Perez actually died around 16 years later, though.233

227 This may not be just a slip of the pen at all, as the mitzvot for the fourth day also refer to Shabbat. 228 MekhY Bahodesh 7; Hajim Saul Horovitz and Israel A. Rabin, eds., Mechilta d’Rabbi Ismael: Cum variis lectionibus et adnotationibus (Frankfurt am Main: J. Kauffmann, 1931), 229. 229 This was the case in the early French manuscript Paris, BNF, hébreu 643, fol. 138v and also in the Zurich SeMaK: Isaac of Corbeil, Perez of Corbeil, Moshe of Zurich, 1980–1988, vol. 3, 350. 230 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 342, s. 289 and BOD, Opp. 339, fols. 69r–69v. 231 Moscow, RSL Guenzburg 1374, fol. 49b. 232 The details are from the SfarData database, http://sfardata.nli.org.il/, key: ZR079, accessed on 7/1/2019. 233 See footnote 191.

4.2 How the manuscripts changed: from the North French Hebrew Miscellany 

 53

SeMaK manuscripts written while R. Perez was still alive are a rarity. One of them was copied in 1297 by a student of his, Zechariah ben Moshe, who had direct access to his master’s copy. Zechariah quoted his teacher in a colophon he wrote at the end of his manuscript: It is best to write down everything that is mentioned briefly on a piece of parchment and then look it up afterwards in the SeMaG, Alfasi’s [Sefer ha-Halakhot] and other books; you should also take a look at each commandment in detail in the SeMaG regarding any question that calls for a decisive legal ruling. It is also appropriate to study the references I make in my unwritten remarks [on the SeMaK].234

It is apparent from these comments that in the form in which it was available to R. Perez, the SeMaK was not enough of an authority for halakhic decisions to be made, so the rabbi encouraged his students to make notes and take a look at other sources as well. It seems that R. Perez taught his students using the SeMaK, adding oral commentaries that they noted down as they listened. This would explain why slightly different versions of the SeMaK were produced relatively early. In addition to these, the manuscripts of the SeMaK that were written down after the North French Hebrew Miscellany are much thicker volumes. They all contain commentaries made by R. Perez of Corbeil, and the number of commandments included is also larger.235 A surviving copy of the SeMaK from 1297 that was produced in Loches-sur-Indre in France already contains 293 precepts.236 Different versions started to appear early on and were copied independently of one another in the course of the 14th century. In one of these, a number of prohibitions were included at the end of the book on the subject of sexuality. While the SeMaK in the North French Hebrew Miscellany and most of the other manuscripts ends with the prohibition ‫‘ =( שלא לבא על אשה נידה‬Do not have relations with a menstruating woman’), some manuscripts include a varying number of prohibitions about sexual acts after this one. A total of 13 extra prohibitions are listed in a manuscript from 1309 (Oxford, BOD, Opp. 342) and six more have been added to the Viennese siddur/SeMaK (Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75). The addition 234 Parma, BPP, Cod. Parm. 1940, fol. 252r; also see Norman Golb, “The De Rossi Collection of Hebrew Manuscripts at the Biblioteca Palatina in Parma and its Importance for Jewish History,” Paper delivered at the 7th Congress of the European Association of Jewish Studies (Amsterdam, 21–25 July 2002), https://oi.uchicago.edu/sites/oi.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/shared/docs/ Parma.pdf, accessed on 20/2/2016. 235 According to an examination of 27 manuscripts I conducted, the number of negative mitzvot increased in particular (+80%), while the number of positive ones only rose moderately in comparison (+24%). 236 Oxford, BOD, Mich 41. Again, the references to R. Perez in this copy do not indicate that he had already passed away at the time of writing.

54 

 4 The manuscripts in their entirety

of individual paragraphs did not follow a steady line of development over time; rather, we are dealing with different exemplars of the same work here, which were produced relatively early on. This can be seen quite clearly in the case of the Viennese siddur/SeMaK: the manuscript, which has been dated to the first quarter of the 14th century, has as many as 329 mitzvot, making it one of the largest copies of the book to have survived. In contrast, a large number of manuscripts from the late 14th century contain fewer than 300 mitzvot.

The Zurich SeMaK The Zurich SeMaK is a comprehensive work written in Zurich in the first half of the 14th century:237 R. Moshe of Zurich enriched an existing copy of the SeMaK with so many legal commentaries by other rabbinical authorities that it more or less tripled in size. Besides containing texts from both Talmuds and the Tosefta (‘Supplement’), the Zurich SeMaK includes extracts of medieval works by R. Isaac ben Jacob Alfasi (1013–1103, also known by the acronym of RIF), Rashi (1040–1105) and relatively ‘new’ authors such as R. Meir of Rothenburg (died in 1293) and Mordechai b. Hillel ha-Kohen (died in 1298). A Zurich SeMaK is defined by the combination of glosses and commentaries it contains and not by the place name mentioned in the get. Nonetheless, there are a few Zurich SeMaKs that state the place where they were written, namely as follows: ‘Here in Zurich […] at the River Lindemage (Limmat) and at the River Sihl’.238 Slightly more than a dozen SeMaK manuscripts are regarded as ‘Zurichs’ today. Although the order of the paragraphs was only changed a little, this still had a significant impact on the text’s meaning.239 The commandments ‫‘ =( לקדש השם‬Sanctify the Holy Name’) and ‫‘ =( לדבק בשם‬Cleave to the Holy Name’) are in the first chapter,240 assigned to the 237 On the Zurich SeMaK and Jewish life in Zurich, see Ingrid Kaufmann, “Jüdisches Leben im Spiegel des Zürcher SeMa“Q: Kleiderordnungen als Beispiel für die jüdisch-christliche Auseinandersetzung, ” Judaica 67 (2011): 146–177, particularly 151–59. 238 Take London, BL, Add. 26982, fol. 64v for example. 239 Parma, BPP, Cod. Parm. 3158; London, BL, Add. 18684; Berlin, SBB, Or. Qu. 3; Oxford, BOD, Opp. 341; Oxford, BOD Opp. Add. fol. 40. This order can also be found in Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 89. This manuscript, which contains a Zurich get dated to 5 Kislev 5104 (23/01/1343), has not been regarded as a Zurich SeMaK yet, as the characteristic Zurich glosses seem to be missing. An initial examination revealed that the Hamburg codex was trimmed very closely and most of the comments added in the margins cut off. Parts of a number of glosses written by R. Moshe of Zurich have been fully preserved, however. Closer scrutiny of this manuscript, which is possibly the oldest surviving edition of the Zurich SeMaK, may be able to shed more light on the subject. 240 See paras. 6 and 7.

4.3 The visual presentation of SeMaK manuscripts 

 55

commandments on the heart, whereas they are part of the second chapter in all the other SeMaK manuscripts, which is devoted to warding off idolatry. A change within the first chapter of the SeMaK is an exceptional occurrence. Admittedly, numerous differences exist between the various SeMaK manuscripts, but the first chapter is not affected by them as a rule. The commandment ‘Sanctify the Holy Name’, ‫קידוש השם‬ (Kiddush haShem), which addresses the subject of voluntary martyrdom in order to honour God’s name, is given a prominent position in the manuscript and quickly catches the reader’s attention.241 The changes to which the SeMaK was subject continued to have an effect after the Zurich SeMaK had been written, and yet none of the manuscripts that followed managed to match the huge size of the work. It is a striking contrast to the SeMaK in the North French Hebrew Miscellany, which has no commentaries in it whatsoever.

4.3 The visual presentation of SeMaK manuscripts In general, most SeMaK manuscripts were only illustrated or decorated sparsely, if at all. This does not mean they were not based on any aesthetic concepts, though. By designing the pages of a book a certain way, the scribe defined what purpose the book was meant to have and influenced how it would be read as well. His work began with its lineation, on which the proportions of the scripts and the division of the pages into columns depended, and continued with the scribe choosing various types and sizes of scripts to use, deliberately including gaps in places, adding titles, emphasising initial words and using different kinds of coloured ink. These activities were preceded by the act of interpreting the text, as Malachi Beit-Arié has said: ‘[…] they interpreted and gave shape to the hierarchical construction of the texts being copied’.242 The page design not only influences the reader’s approach to the text, but it turns the book into a visual experience. This is also the case for the SeMaK in the North French Hebrew Miscellany, which was not decorated, but nevertheless has a strict sense of aesthetics: on opening the work, the reader is presented with

241 A gloss relating to the commandment ‘Sanctify the Holy Name’ in the Zurich SeMaK has received more and more attention among researchers in recent years, as it explicitly refers to the killing of one’s own children. For more on this, see Soloveitchik 1987, 205–21 and Soloveitchik 2004, 103–5, Malkiel 2001, 279–80 and Ephraim Kanarfogel, “Halakhah and Metziut (Realia) in Medieval Ashkenaz: Surveying the Parameters and Defining the Limits,” The Jewish Law Annual (2003): 193–224, particularly 211–12 here; Gross 2004, 33–35. 242 Beit-Arié, 2003, 50.

56 

 4 The manuscripts in their entirety

four equal-sized columns of text written in graceful semi-cursive lettering. The scribe was meticulous in ensuring that the margin to the left of the columns was a uniform size. The main text, which is written in black ink, is framed by blocks of other texts in light brown ink in the margins. The wide margins were not used for annotations, but generously left blank – a sign of luxury in view of the high price of parchment and indicative of the book’s representative function. Copies of the SeMaK were decorated more often from the 14th century onwards. As already said above, the visual appearance of SeMaK manuscripts is not the same for every single one – each exemplar was written and embellished with different intentions and designs in mind. A whole range of highly artistic design work can be found in them, from splendid works that were specially commissioned and included professional illuminations to much simpler, plainer copies. Scribbles and doodles are also in them, which occur randomly. So the visual elements sometimes served different purposes, depending on what kind of manuscript it was and exactly where the elements were added to it. In the Viennese siddur/SeMaK known as ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75, which was produced sometime in the first three decades of the 14th century, the design elements that always appear at the beginning of a chapter give the text a clear visual structure. Where the two main parts begin, for example (the siddur and the SeMaK), the whole page is filled by a picture containing no other words than the first one, which is decorated. The initial words and the miniatures surrounding them, with which all the other sections begin, fill around 40 per cent of the page (cf. Figure 4). In the richly illustrated SeMaK manuscript created by the scribe – a man called Joseph Leroy243 – which was produced between 1288 and 1306244 in the area around Paris (Paris, BNF, hébreu 643), the pictures and decorative elements have a host of different functions. Chapter headings accompanied by pictures and decorated paragraph numbers help to structure the text, for instance. What’s more, there are a number of spontaneous creations in it that illustrate or comment on the text, but some of them have no relation to it whatsoever (cf. Figure 5). Leroy deliberately used red ink to give the text some structure. He emphasised the initial words with it, for example, and he marked the beginning and end of the comments made by R. Perez, adding the abbreviation ‫( מרפ״א‬i.e. ‫מורנו‬ ‫רבנו פרץ [בן] אליהו‬, ‘our teacher and rabbi Perez [ben] Elijahu’). The decorations 243 In the colophon on 155r, he refers to himself as ‫‘( יוסף המכונה מלך‬Joseph, called King’), while in other places (14v, 45v, 87r), he calls himself ‘Joseph the king’. I adopted the term ‘Joseph Leroy’ from Colette Sirat; cf. Colette Sirat, Hebrew Manuscripts of the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 164. 244 The date is according to SfarData, the palaeographic database.

4.3 The visual presentation of SeMaK manuscripts 

Figure 4: Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75, 214v.

 57

58 

 4 The manuscripts in their entirety

Figure 5: Paris, BNF, hébreu 643, fol. 45r.

4.3 The visual presentation of SeMaK manuscripts 

 59

around the chapter numbers are written in red as well, whereas the drawings vary in colour, being red, dark brown or two different colours. Catchwords were intended to help the bookbinder bind the individual quires together in the correct order; there is a catchword at the end of each quire, which states the first word mentioned in the following one, thereby anticipating it. Catchwords have been shown to exist in Hebrew manuscripts ever since the 11th century and soon began to be decorated by scribes.245 The decoration of catchwords is the most frequent kind of artistic work that scribes performed. In 15 per cent of the Hebrew manuscripts that have been dated so far,246 the catchwords have been decorated with simple drawings. Even scribes who were not very artistic enhanced catchwords with simplistic forms of ornamentation. The purpose of this was simply to make the catchwords stand out. As for the bookbinders whose task it was to bind the correct quires of parchment together, these markings were only of limited use, as the visual emphasis of the catchword is missing at the beginning of the next quire. In most cases, the decoration consisted of simple shapes that the scribe was able to draw relatively quickly using a quill (see Figures 6, 7 and 8, for instance). In contrast, however, one can also find elaborately designed catchwords that were decorated very imaginatively, which must have taken the person a long time to do (see Figure 9, for example). Regrettably, many of the catchwords originally visible in the bottom margin were cut back or even cut off altogether by later bookbinders. Here are some illustrated catchwords taken from four different SeMaK manuscripts:

Figure 6: Oxford, BOD, MS Opp. 340, fol. 124v.

Figure 7: London, BL, Figure 8: Oxford, Add. 18685, fol. 8v BOD, MS Opp. 337, 1st half of the 14th c. fol. 127v 1382.

Figure 9: Oxford, BOD, MS Opp. 339, fol. 70v 1347.

Apart from abstract shapes, figures of various kinds were also used as motifs with which to decorate catchwords. Animals occur particularly often. 245 Beit-Arié, 2018, 338. 246 Out of the 2,777 Hebrew manuscripts dated to 1540 and earlier, 361 come from Ashkenaz, 989 from Italy and 598 from Sepharad. Cf. Malachi Beit-Arié, 2018, 68.

60 

 4 The manuscripts in their entirety

It is rarely obvious how drawings of this type in the margins relate to the main text, if at all. One major exception here is the decorated catchwords in the London manuscript known as BL, Add. 18684, which I shall cover in more detail in Chapter 6. All sorts of questions come to mind whenever relations to the text are apparent. These may be simple illustrations of a subject that is mentioned in it or merely a single word. Pictures may also be understood as visual comments that refer to the interpretation of what has been written down. Sometimes the statements made get reduced by the decorated catchwords and are given a new interpretation. Although the visual presentation of texts was also bound by aesthetic conventions in Jewish book production, the scribes who copied the SeMaK were able to take considerable liberties since Jewish books were generally intended for personal use or were especially commissioned by private individuals. Consequently, the scribes unconsciously – and sometimes quite deliberately – influenced the way in which readers read and interpreted the SeMaK.

5 The scribes 5.1 Production conditions and technical aspects In the Middle Ages, Jews were involved in every single step of the book-production process. To meet religious requirements, the parchment used for Torah scrolls had to be kosher, was not permitted to be from unclean animals and needed to be processed in a very specific way. The technical aspects of producing Torah scrolls are laid down in precise terms in ‘The Tractate of the Scribes’ – the ‫מסכת‬ ‫( סופרים‬Massekhet Soferim), which is from the 6th to 8th century.247 There was considerable interest in the production of codices in medieval times, stemming from the continuous Jewish tradition of manufacturing Torah scrolls. Subsequently, Jews were engaged in trading with parchment in the Middle Ages and played a role in their production as well.248 In the South German town of Esslingen, they were even allowed to become members of the local guild of tanners and parchment-makers (leathergaͤ rwen and bermitter respectively) in 1331.249 In the sorrowful poem ‫‘ =( אשת חיל‬Woman of Strength’), Eleazar ben Yehuda of Worms (who died in the second quarter of the 13th century) paid a moving tribute to his wife Dolce, whose entrepreneurial work producing parchment had fed them both as well as their children:250 [...] She supplied provisions for her household and bread to the boys. How her hands worked the distaff to spin thread for books. Vigorous in everything, she spun threads for phylacteries, and [prepared] sinews [to bind together] scrolls and books; she was as swift as a deer to cook for the young men and to fulfil the needs of the students. She girded herself with strength and stitched together forty Torah scrolls. […]251

247 Michael Higger, ed., Seven Minor Treatises: Sefer Torah; Mezuzah; Tefillin; Ẓiẓit; ‘Abadim; Kutim; Gerim. And Treatise Soferim II (New York: Bloch, 1930). 248 Wilhelm Wattenbach, Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter (Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1875, 2nd ed.), 106–7. 249 http://www.medieval-ashkenaz.org/SR01/CP1-c1-014j.html, accessed on 17/2/2016. 250 Eleazar of Worms, ‫ספר רקח‬: Sefer Rokeach (New York: Ely Rosenfeld, 2000), 13. 251 Ibid., 13–14, Judith R. Baskin, “Dolce of Worms: The Lives and Deaths of an Exemplary Medieval Jewish Woman and Her Daughters,” in Judaism in Practice. From the Middle Ages through the Early Modern Period, ed. Lawrence Fine (Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2001): 429–37, particularly p. 435. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-005

62 

 5 The scribes

The pieces of parchment were prepared for writing on in the way that was customary in the surrounding culture.252 In Ashkenaz, parchment was scraped so finely from c. 1270 onwards that it is impossible to tell the difference between the hair side and the flesh side.253 This is especially the case for parchment produced in Germany, whereas in France this technique was only partly adopted.254 In general, the scribes drew lines on the parchment themselves.255 The technique employed to rule pages changed in the course of the 13th century. The old method consisted of pricking along the outer margins of the folios and ruling the lines with a hard point. From the second half of the 13th century, the inner and outer margins were pricked and a lead pencil was used for ruling. Admittedly, this method took longer to perform, but by employing it, it was possible to create a new layout leaf by leaf. Commentaries in which the glosses were written in separate columns (as in Latin codices) needed to be designed in a flexible way in view of their complex layout.256 This technique was fully adopted in Germany and France alike.257 Ashkenazi codices were written using a goose quill and dark brown ink that was almost black in most cases. Writing with a quill influenced the way in which the Ashkenazic script was written (it is very different to the Sephardic script written with a reed pen). The Ashkenazic square script first appears in 12th-century manuscripts and developed numerous complex variants with serifs and decorative elements under the influence of the Gothic Latin script in the 13th century.258 The appearance of the German square script differs from the French one in that it has a more uniform appearance overall and an elegance achieved by scribes cutting the nib of the quill with great precision in the 14th century.259 Writing in square script was very time-consuming, as the scribe had to move his quill onto the parchment and take it off it again several times for each

252 Leila Avrin, Scribes, Script, and Books: The Book Arts from Antiquity to the Renaissance (Chicago: American Library Association, 1991), 124. 253 Beit-Arié, 2018, 229. 254 Malachi Beit-Arié, Hebrew Codicology: Tentative Typology of Technical Practices Employed in Hebrew Dated Medieval Manuscripts (Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1981), 25. 255 Sirat, 2002, 123–4. 256 Ibid., 127–9. 257 Beit-Arié, 1981, 25–26. 258 Ada Yardeni, The Book of Hebrew Script: History, Palaeography, Script Styles, Calligraphy & Design (London: The British Library, 2002), 227. 259 Edna Engel, “Calamus or Chisel: On the History of the Ashkenazic Script,” in Genizat Germania: Hebrew and Aramaic Binding Fragments from Germany in Context, ed. Andreas Lehnardt (Leiden: Brill, 2010): 183–97, especially pp. 189–92.

5.1 Production conditions and technical aspects 

 63

letter. It was easier and faster for him to write in semi-cursive script, which was more fluent. The Ashkenazi semi-cursive script also developed in the course of the 13th century, under the influence of the Gothic Latin script.260 The speed at which scribes wrote varied enormously, partly depending on what style of lettering was being used. Anything between six and sixteen pages of a book were written per day as a rule.261 In SeMaK manuscripts, the scribes used two main scripts, square and semi-cursive; SeMaK manuscripts in which the entire text was written down in square script are quite rare.262 What was used most frequently was actually a hybrid of the two: the main body of the SeMaK was in semi-cursive script, while the title and initial words were written using square script. The scribe Yehoshua ben Abraham ha-Levi recorded the exact amount of time he had spent copying the SeMaK in the colophon of his manuscript: from 3 June to 10 August 1404. If he worked on the manuscript every day but Shabbat, he would have managed just over four pages a day on average over this ten-week period.263 In rare cases, a book was copied by a number of scribes. An assessment of Hebrew manuscripts dated to 1540 or earlier revealed that only nine per cent of them were written in several hands, with anywhere between two and seven scribes being involved in these cases (three in most of them). It cannot be said that they were written in commercial writing rooms or workshops, however, as books that were the work of more than one scribe were not regarded as highly as those made by a single person, especially in Ashkenaz. Books that were copied by several scribes were mainly created by members of a family or by students who practised their writing skills under the supervision of a scholarly master.264 It is often hard to tell which scribes wrote which parts of a manuscript book, the reason being that trainee scribes not only copied their teacher’s style of writing as closely as possible,265 but they also experimented with different styles in one and the same manuscript.266 Colophons sometimes reveal details about the personal circumstances in which scribes conducted their work. Some of the copyists complained about not having enough time to copy a book, and in another case the scribe said the

260 Yardeni, 2002, 87. 261 Avrin, 1991, 127. 262 One example is Munich, Bayrische Staatsbibliothek, Cod. Hebr. 135. 263 Parma, BPP, Cod. Parm. 2767, fol. 132v; for codicological details on this manuscript, see http://sfardata.nli.org.il, key 0E494 (accessed on 20/2/2016). 264 Beit-Arié, 2018, 159. 265 Sirat, 2002, 204–5. 266 Ibid., 210.

64 

 5 The scribes

mistakes he had made were due to him not having a particular place to work in. In another case, the scribe said he had made some mistakes while copying because he had had to look after his son, who was ill.267 The scribe Abraham ben Salomon de Bagnoles tells us in his colophon written in 1390 that he wrote his copy of the SeMaK while in prison in Paris.268 This sheds some revealing light on the precarious position in which the Jews found themselves in France; in fact, they were expelled from the kingdom once and for all just a few years later, in 1394. Sometimes a scribe’s efforts at writing are implied gently by the blessing ‫‘ =( ברוך הנותן ליעף כח‬Blessed be the one who gives the exhausted more strength).269, 270 References such as this one can also be found in other places, not just in colophons. A French scribe who worked on a SeMaK manuscript wrote the following exclamation of relief at the end of one quire: ‘I have finished the fourth quire. May God my shepherd bless me!’ (see Figure 10).271

Figure 10: Oxford, BOD, MS Mich. 502, fol. 32v.

267 Malachi Beit-Arié, “Transmissions of texts by scribes and copyists: Unconscious and critical interferences.” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 75 (1993): 33–52; see 43–47 in particular. 268 New York, JTS, 8227, fol. 117v. 269 This is related to Isaiah 40:29, which says: ‘He giveth power to the faint; and to him that hath no might He increaseth strength’. 270 This is found in London, BL, Add. 11639, fol. 113v; Paris, BNF, hébreu 380, fol. 194v; Oxford, BOD. Opp 339, fol. 85v. 271 Oxford, BOD, Mich. 502, fol. 32v.

5.2 Scribes and patrons 

 65

5.2 Scribes and patrons Rabbi Isaac requested that every community should lend those who were interested in his work a copy of it to read and that copyists who were representatives of other communities should be paid for their work. This was a unique initiative with the aim of publicly funding a Jewish book, but it was hardly taken seriously by anyone.272 The production of Jewish books was not institutionalised in the Middle Ages – even the maḥzorim used at synagogue services were paid for and provided by private benefactors.273 Unlike Latin codices, which were created in monasteries and scriptoria, more than half of the books written in Hebrew were written by private individuals, as Beit-Arié has said: Medieval Hebrew books were not produced by the intellectual establishments, or upon their initiative, whether in religious, academic or secular institutional copying centers, but privately and individually.274

So the production of the SeMaK was a private affair. My assessment of the 92 SeMaK manuscripts listed in the SfarData repository revealed that 28 of them were specially commissioned and 24 were intended for personal use (two of these were meant for a relative). In forty cases, it could not be determined whether the manuscripts had been specially commissioned or not. Although the colophons do not always say who a book was written for, we may assume that the SeMaK was mainly copied for personal use, as was customary in Jewish book production. Malachi Beit-Arié writes the following on this point: Though only about a quarter of the colophons state categorically or imply that the manuscript was made for personal use, it is most likely that the great majority of the colophoned manuscripts not containing any indication of their destination (namely, one-third of the colophoned codices) were also user-produced, since it is inconceivable that a hired scribe would refrain from mentioning in his colophon the person who commissioned the book, while it is only natural that someone copying for himself would not necessarily state that.275

The names of scribes and their patrons are mentioned in colophons, in particular. Many scribes also highlighted their own names in the texts they were copying. They did this in various ways. Sometimes if the scribe’s own name was mentioned

272 Beit-Arié, 2000, 445. 273 Eva Frojmovic, “Early Ashkenazic prayer books and their Christian illuminators,” in Crossing Borders. Hebrew Manuscripts as a Meeting-Place of Cultures, ed. Piet van Boxel and Sabine Arndt (Oxford: The Bodleian Library, 2010): 45–56; see pp. 47–48 in particular. 274 Beit-Arié, 1993, 38. 275 Beit-Arié, 2003, 62.

66 

 5 The scribes

in the text, then it was decorated or highlighted in coloured ink. In other cases, individual letters were marked with little strokes that produced their name as an acrostic when the strokes were all read together. This practice, which was widely employed in Ashkenaz, was criticised harshly in the ‫( ספר חסידים‬Sefer Ḥasidim):276 Some copyists of books and commentaries sometimes intentionally write their acrostics and names and sin. It is possible that they omit words or transpose them in order to disclose their name? And for this, it is said, ‘The name of the wicked shall be erased’ [Prov. 10:7] and ‘You have blotted out their name for ever and ever’ [Ps. 9:6] so they shall know what he does to those who write.277

The scribes concerned were not particularly impressed by this verdict. Let us look briefly at one who wrote a composite manuscript, which contains a Sefer Ḥasidim as well as the Short Book of Commandments. Moshe ben Isaac produced this work for private use in 1299 (probably in France)278 and recorded the following words in its colophon: ‘I, Moshe bar Isaac, have finished the Book of the Commandments, which contains comments by R. Rabbi Perez, our teacher and rabbi – his ‘keepsake’ [to remind us of] life in the world to come! […]’279

Moshe could have left it at that, of course, modestly mentioning his own name in the colophon, but he actually decided to emphasise his name in all kinds of places in the text he had copied, as the following figures show:

Figure 11: Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fol. 47v.

Figure 12: Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fol. 48r.

Figure 13: Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fol. 67r.

Figure 14: Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fol. 67r.

276 Malachi Beit-Arié, “How scribes disclosed their names in Hebrew manuscripts,” in Omnia in Eo. Studies on Jewish Books and Libraries in Honour of Adri Offenberg: Celebrating the 125th Anniversary of the Bibliotheca Rosenthaliana in Amsterdam, ed. Irene Zwiep (Leuven: Peeters, 2006): 144–57; see p. 144 in this case. 277 Ibid., p. 144. 278 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340. 279 Ibid., fol. 151r.

5.2 Scribes and patrons 

 67

Moshe had a particularly creative idea when he came to the commandment ‫‘ =( לכתוב ספר תורה‬Write a Torah scroll’): he added his own name to the little drawings that explain the correct layout to be used when writing Torah scrolls instead of drawing various graphical elements to fill the words in, which is what other scribes generally did.280 Moshe bar Isaac was not the only scribe to leave a monument to himself in the principal part of the work he produced either. Actually, it made sense for a scribe to emphasise his own name in a text he was copying if he was working on the manuscript together with a number of other scribes, since the one who wrote the colophon often ‘forgot’ to mention he had only copied part of the book himself.281 However, many scribes highlighted their names anyway, even if a colophon existed and no other scribes had been involved in copying the manuscript, meaning that it was not necessary to mark their own name at all.282 Hannah bat Menahem Zion, one of the few female scribes to copy books in Hebrew, also highlighted her own name deliberately in a display of self-confidence. She copied a SeMaK in 1386 (presumably in Cologne)283 and wrote the following in the colophon: ‘I, Hannah, daughter of Menahem Zion, completed this book on the eleventh day of the month of Tammuz in year 146 of the sixth millennium [10 June 1386]. May God lead His people to freedom and spare them worry and distress. And may He hurry to send them help. Amen. Be quick!’284

Besides this, she drew a red line around her name and decorated it in the commandment ‫‘ =( להתפלל בכונה‬Pray with devotion’), as we can see in Figure 15:285

Figure 15: Amsterdam, Rosenthaliana, ROS 558, fol. 13r.

280 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fols. 47v–48r. 281 Sirat, 2002, 209. 282 Beit-Arié, 2006, 153–54. 283 According to the get: Amsterdam, Rosenthaliana, ROS 558, fol. 122r. 284 Amsterdam, Bibliotheca Rosenthaliana, Special Collections of the University of Amsterdam, ROS 558, fol. 272r. 285 Kanarfogel (1997, 216) has already looked at this in some detail.

68 

 5 The scribes

Apart from manuscripts being produced for personal use, wealthy patrons sometimes commissioned professional scribes to make specific manuscripts for them, too. These copyists tended to have a rather low status in medieval Jewish society.286 They were paid a relatively modest fee for their work, but in some cases they were invited to live in their patron’s home as well, where they were provided with all the writing tools they required.287 It was not unusual for composite manuscripts and books of a representative character to be ordered from professional scribes. Unfortunately, it is only possible for us to discover more about the patrons that the scribes mentioned in the colophons in a few cases. One of these exceptions is R. Meir ben Asher ha-Levi, who commissioned an illuminated siddur and a copy of the SeMaK.288 The manuscript he ordered contains the following colophon: I have finished the prayers for the whole year and the Book of Commandments with the prayers for Rabbi Meir ben Asher HaLevi. May the Eternal One find him, his descendants and their own descendants worthy till all the generations come to an end. Amen, amen, amen, selah. – Be strong and we shall be brave. Nothing should harm Menahem ben Rabbi Eliezer, the scribe – neither today nor any other time until a donkey climbs up the ladder.289

In 1999, Michal Sternthal linked Meir ben R. Asher ha-Levi, who was mentioned in the colophon, to Rabbi Meir ben R. Asher HaLevi (aka Aenseli), who was involved in the sale of a vineyard in Überlingen in 1332.290 This sale was a forced one, as 300–400 Jews from Überlingen were burnt to death approximately half a year earlier after being accused of spilling Christian blood (the ‘blood libel’).291 Meir 286 Beit-Arié, 1993, 40. 287 Avrin, 1991, 127. 288 Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75. 289 Ibid., fol. 141r; the scribes’ set phrase ‫ עד שיעלה חמור‬,‫ לא היום ולא לעולם‬,‫ הסופר לא יוזק‬,‫חזק ונתחזק‬ ‫ אשר יעקב אבינו חלם‬,‫ בסולם‬was particularly popular in Ashkenaz from the last third of the 13th century. According to Berliner, the formula originally comes from a midrash in which it is said to be impossible to get a donkey to climb up a ladder. This is meant to mean that the scribe should never suffer any harm; Abraham Berliner, Gesammelte Schriften (Frankfurt am Main: Georg Olms Verlag, 1918), 16–18. 290 Michal Sternthal, “Hebrew Illuminated Manuscripts in the Austrian National Library of Vienna.” Adapted from a lecture presented by Michal Sternthal, Expedition Head, at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem, December 13, 1999’; http://cja.huji.ac.il/Publications/NL15/NL15-vienna. html, accessed on 20/2/2016. 291 Moritz Stern, Die israelitische Bevölkerung der deutschen Städte: Ein Beitrag zur deutschen Städtegeschichte; mit Benutzung archivalischer Quellen (Überlingen/Frankfurt am Main: J. Kauffmann, 1890), 3–5; L.Rosenthal, “Überlingen,“ in Germania Judaica. Regional- und Lokalgeschichte, vol. 2, ed. Zvi Avneri (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1968): 838–42; see p. 839 in this particular case.

5.3 Producing manuscripts for personal use and how this shaped individual copies 

 69

ben R. Asher HaLevi, who put his seal on the sale together with two other Jews,292 possibly played a role in lending money to finance vineyard activities.293 The book he commissioned shows that he must have been wealthy and shared the taste of the surrounding culture, as he had it illuminated in a renowned Christian workshop.

5.3 Producing manuscripts for personal use and how this shaped individual copies The fact that a high proportion of manuscripts were made for private use had an effect on SeMaK manuscripts. The scribes who copied the books for personal use were often well-educated men who felt it was their duty to correct the text in front of them or add explanatory notes to it wherever necessary. Although basically the same text can be found in all the SeMaK manuscripts, the scribes made minor modifications to it despite sticking closely to the wording of the original copies; after all, the SeMaK was not a divine text that could not possibly be changed in any way. So individual parts of it were altered and even its structure got changed occasionally. One particular characteristic of SeMaK manuscripts is that they differ widely in terms of the comments and notes they contain. The rabbinical scholar Ḥaim Joseph David Azulai, who was born in Jerusalem (d. 1806), noticed this in the 18th century when he was travelling through Europe. While he was looking through a number of manuscripts of the SeMaK, it struck him that the Ashkenazic manuscripts, in particular, contained unique glosses that had no equivalent in any other SeMaK manuscripts.294 The notes that the scribe made himself are relatively simple to find if they look different to the other texts and start with the words ‘I, the scribe, …’.295 However, one can never say for certain whether a remark of this kind was simply copied from an earlier exemplar of the SeMaK. This is the reason why it is practically impossible to find out which preferences individual scribes had regarding the texts they chose or the way they divided the book into chapters.

292 His seal is printed in Karl Heinz Burmeister, Medinat Bodase. Zur Geschichte der Juden am Bodensee 1200–1349, vol. 1 (Constance: UVK, 1994–2001), 45. 293 Sarit Shalev-Eyni, Kunst als Geschichte: Zur Buchmalerei hebräischer Handschriften aus dem Bodenseeraum; 13. Arye Maimon-Vortrag an der Universität Trier, 3. November 2010 (Trier: Kliomedia, 2011), 18–19. 294 Chaim Joseph David Azulai, ‫שם הגדולים‬, Shem ha-gedolim (Krotoschin: Monasch, 1843); see p. 204 in particular. 295 As in Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 144r and Oxford, Bod., Opp. 339, fol. 64r.

70 

 5 The scribes

The scribes’ personal preferences are easier to spot when it comes to the SeMaK’s visual presentation, particularly if the page design differs from other manuscripts or if drawings have been added as a way of commenting on passages in the text. The scribe Joseph Leroy added a number of unusual drawings to his SeMaK,296 not all of which are easy to understand, but which could all refer to the text in some way. He supplemented the negative precept ‫‘ =( שלא לאכול אבר מן החי‬Do not eat any limbs of an animal that is still alive’) with an illustration of an ugly little monster biting a ram (?) in the tail (see Figure 16). The picture of the terrified ram, which has run up to the mountain top in vain, actually looks quite funny and was probably drawn to entertain the reader more than anything.

Figure 16: Paris, BNF, hébreu 643, fol. 101r.

Humorous remarks that scribes added can also shed some light on their own personality. In 1350, Moshe ben Jehiel, who lived in Ashkenaz, produced a manuscript containing several different texts,297 namely the Sha’arei Dura, the Tashbeẓ and a siddur as well as a copy of the SeMaK. In the colophon of the latter work,

296 Paris, BNF, hébreu 643. 297 Parma, BPP, Cod. Parm. 3161.

5.3 Producing manuscripts for personal use and how this shaped individual copies 

Figure 17: Parma, BBP, Cod. Parm. 3158, fol. 92r.

 71

72 

 5 The scribes

which is on fol. 122v, he used the popular phrase ‫הסופר לא יוזק לא היום ולא לעולם‬ ‫‘ =( עד שיעלה חמור בסולם‬Nothing should harm the scribe – neither today nor any other time until a donkey climbs up the ladder’).298 In his second colophon on fol. 171r, which he wrote for the Tashbeẓ, he expanded his zoological repertoire by declaring: ‫הסופר לא יוזק לא היום ולא לעולם עד שיעלה הכלב והחמור והסוס והחתול יחד‬ ‫‘ =( בסולם‬Nothing should harm the scribe – neither today nor any other time until the dog and the donkey and the horse and the cat all climb up the ladder together’). This unconventional remark was no doubt a product of Moshe’s lively imagination and was probably a personal touch added just as a bit of fun. This also makes it seem likely the manuscript was not a work that was specially commissioned. Thirty years later, the Ashkenazi scribe Menahem ben Jacob Shalit copied a Zurich SeMaK that was intended for his own personal use.299 This is a large manuscript in which the reader can lose his bearings quite easily, the reason being that the glosses that R. Perez wrote and the countless annotations and crossreferences that R. Moshe of Zurich added have not only been put in the margins of the pages, but even form independent blocks of text within the main work itself in some cases. Menahem ben Jacob wrote the book relatively quickly in a running hand and chose not to decorate it at all. This makes it all the more surprising that it contains an amusing addition, as it was probably only intended for straightforward, practical use. The names of those who witnessed a divorce where listed on fol. 92r underneath the sample of a letter of divorce (a ‫גט‬, ‘get’). The scribe inserted the following names there in a mixture of Hebrew and German: ‫‘ דוב בן בער‬Dov [Hebrew for ‘bear’], son of the Bär [German for “bear”]’ and ‫‘ אווז בן גנש‬Avas [Hebrew for ‘goose’], son of the Gans [German for “goose”]’ (see Figure 17). The HebrewGerman pun on the names ‘bear’ and ‘goose’ not only show that the scribe had a sense of humour, but he was also familiar with the German language, which makes it likely the manuscript was created in a German-speaking part of Europe.

298 See footnote 290. 299 Parma, BPP, Cod. Parm. 3158.

6 Five manuscripts in detail 6.1 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, Ashkenaz The codex Codicology The Copenhagen SeMaK is a fascinating book in many respects, but it has hardly been documented yet. Since the colophon is missing, we have no concrete evidence of the date and place of its production. The details on Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 provided in the National Library of Israel’s online catalogue300 are quite rudimentary and there is no entry on it at all in the SfarData database. The most detailed description of it was provided by Moritz Steinschneider in 1863 when the manuscript was put up for sale.301 As Ephraim Urbach has already pointed out, the book is the smallest manuscript of the SeMaK we know of today.302 The cover is just 117 × 70 mm in size, making the work small enough to hold quite easily in one hand. The pages are only slightly smaller than the cover, 111–112 mm high and 70 mm wide. The manuscript contains 254 folios, but is no longer complete. The material on which it is written is parchment, and the hair and flesh sides of it are easy to distinguish from one another. Relatively large holes, rough stitching and one incomplete leaf reveal that the cost of production was kept as low as possible. Small pricks were made on the outer edges of the pages so that lines for writing could be drawn. Following those, ruled lines were made by tracing them with a metal instrument. The text on fol. 1r begins in the middle of the 157th paragraph and breaks off on fol. 252v shortly before the original end of the codex. A few individual folios are also missing – between fols. 242 and 243 and between fols. 248 and 249, for example. The quires start with the hair side, which is common in most geo-cultural areas of Jewish book production.303 All in all, 28 quires can be distinguished. The structure of the quires is not a uniform one: sexternions, quinternions, quaternions and ternions can all be found in the manuscript:

300 http://aleph.nli.org.il:80/F/?func=direct&doc_number=000095172&local_base=NNLMSS, accessed on 20/2/2016. 301 Moritz Steinschneider, “Verkäufliche Handschriften,“ Zeitschrift für hebräische Bibliographie 6 (1863): 92–96; see pp. 95–96 in particular. 302 Urbach, 1980, 573. 303 Sirat, 2002, 121. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-006

74 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Quires 1–7 Quires 8–9 Quires 10–11 Quire 12 Quires 13–15 Quire 16 Quires 17–18 Quire 19 Quires 20–26 Quire 27 Quire 28

(fols. 1–84) (fols. 85–104) (fols. 105–120) (fols. 121–126) (fols. 127–150) (fols. 151–160) (fols. 161–176) (fols. 177–186) (fols. 187–242) (fols. 243–248) (fols. 249–254)

= seven sexternions = two quinternions = two quaternions = a ternion = three quaternions = a quinternion = two quaternions = a quinternion = seven quaternions = an incomplete quaternion304 = a ternion

Although the book was trimmed several times in the course of the centuries, the catchword at the end of each quire was always left intact.305 These individual words were written horizontally in Ashkenazi semi-cursive script and a number of them were decorated. Writing and scribal hands The one-column space for writing is 78–79 × 37–38 mm in size. The manuscript was copied by a number of scribes – at least three of them worked on it.306 Their names are unknown to us, however, as there is no colophon and none of them immortalised themselves by emphasising their name in the text. Scribe A copied the first 84 leaves. Folios 85 to 248 may all have been written by scribe B, but there are considerable irregularities in the text, which makes one think that other scribes may have worked on the manuscript between folio 85 and 248. Scribe C copied folios 249 to 254. The three blocks of text mentioned can be easily distinguished from one another. As Steinschneider noted, the hand used by scribe A has a ‘more of a Gothic character’.307 His record is on the only sexternions in the book. These show no signs of damage other than traces of wear. Each of the pages that scribe A copied has exactly 19 lines. The scribe used a dark-coloured ink and wrote the text vigorously in Ashkenazi semi-cursive. The initial words are in square script. The letters tend to link up with one another, and the writing slants slightly to the right. Although

304 The outer bifolio is missing, which accounts for the missing leaves between fol. 242 and 243 and fol. 248 and 249. 305 The only exceptions here are on fols. 234v, 248v and 254v. 306 Steinschneider only recognised two hands, though. Cf. Steinschneider, 1863, 95. 307 Ibid.

6.1 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, Ashkenaz 

 75

the scribe clearly tried to keep the left-hand edge of the column straight, most of it is not actually flush. The copyist used a number of techniques to do this: elongating letters, using abbreviations, and in one case (fol. 47r) even adding a graphic element to fill the available space. On some of the pages, scribe A drew plunging descenders for some of the letters on the bottom line, which are up to ten times the length of the letters themselves. The catchwords that the first scribe wrote down are each in a surrounding frame and are easy to see, as they have been put a few centimetres above the margin at the bottom of each page (as in Figure 18). The numbers of the individual paragraphs that scribe A inserted have also been preserved, whereas those of the other scribes have been cut off, either partly or completely.

Figure 18: Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6; on the left, fol. 85r (by scribe B), on the right, fol. 84v (by scribe A).

The quires in part B do not have a uniform structure. This section contains low-quality parchment, which partly forced the scribe to put the text right next to the holes and thick stitches in some cases. On average, each page contains 21

76 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

lines, but the actual number varies from 19 to 23. The letters in part B are more angular than those written by scribe A; they are vertical and are hardly connected to one another at all. The lettering appears to be rigid and uniform, but is not any the clearer. The left edge of the column has generally been kept more flush than in scribe A’s case. Balancing out the edges of the columns was done by lengthening particular letters and using abbreviations where appropriate, and by adding a Z-shaped filler element on fol. 89v.308 The initial words, which were written in square script first of all, are only written in semi-cursive script from fol. 105 onwards. The vertical descenders lengthening some of the letters on the bottom line are written in a plain manner and are up to three times the size that the letters would normally be. Scribe C wrote in light brown ink, systematically adding 20 lines of text to each page. The letters he wrote have different proportions to those of his predecessors. The ones that have been stretched vertically make the writing seem rather narrow and crowded, but the style in which the scribe wrote them down was obviously quite dynamic. He paid more attention to writing up to the edge of the left-hand column than the other scribes did. In addition to that, he employed another layout by creating special text fields for the glosses, which he separated from the main text by drawing double lines between the two. The scribe emphasised certain letters on the bottom line by curving the descenders to the left. Individual scribes used different abbreviations for the same terms. Scribe A introduced the glosses that R. Perez of Corbeil had written by the overlined word ‫ הגהה‬in bold ink (hagahah, i.e. ‘commentary’, ‘explanation’ or ‘gloss’). We find the abbreviation ’‫ הג‬in part B of the text, though. Besides this, now and then an attempt was made to make the glosses stand out from the text that followed them by drawing a vertical stroke over two lines. Scribe C introduced the glosses in his text with an overlined ‫הגה‬. As mentioned above, he was the one who designed the pages best in terms of making the glosses stand out from the main text. The formulaic expression ‫צריך עיון בסמ״ג‬: used repeatedly in the glosses (= ‘This needs to be examined in more detail in the Large Book of Commandments’) has also been shortened in various ways. Scribe A wrote ‫ צ״ע בס״ג‬and scribe B ‫צ״ע‬ ‫בסמ״ג‬, for example.309

308 This page, which is written in a lighter ink than the others, may have been copied by another scribe, as the lettering is slightly different. One characteristic feature of this writing is the way the letter lamed has been written – it tends to ‘lean over’ the letters that follow. 309 The few folios that scribe C copied do not contain any remarks of this kind.

6.1 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, Ashkenaz 

 77

Figure 19: Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 250r (scribe C’s work?).

Time and place of creation Since Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 does not contain a colophon and the get on fol. 31v makes no mention of a particular place or time either, the manuscript can only be classified on the grounds of codicological and palaeographic insights. The rough processing of parchment and ruling by hard point are techniques that were practically no longer used in Ashkenaz from 1260 onwards, meaning

78 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

that Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 must be a very old manuscript indeed.310 Malachi Beit-Arié and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger both agree that it must be an old manuscript that was originally produced in Germany, but differ slightly in their opinion of its age: Beit-Arié reckons the book cannot have been made after 1300, whereas OlszowySchlanger is inclined to extend the time frame by a decade.311 So all in all, the manuscript is likely to have originated within quite a narrow span of time. The glossarist of the SeMaK, Rabbi Perez of Corbeil, was no longer alive when Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 was written, as his name is mentioned in a number of places along with the blessing ‫זכר צדיק לברכה( זצ"ל‬, i.e. ‘May the memory of the just be a blessing’).312 Since Rabbi Perez died sometime between 1297 and 1299, the book cannot have been produced any earlier than this.313

Special aspects of the contents of Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 An unusual detail strikes the reader upon opening this particular manuscript: the commandment ‫‘( להניח תפילין של ראש‬Put a prayer strap upon your head’) is written on fol. 1r, where it is listed as no. 158. This precept is not included in most of the manuscripts and prints, but is part of the commandment ‫לקשור תפילין של יד‬ (‘Bind a prayer strap round your hand’).314 One possible explanation of this is that it may reflect an old difference of opinion among the rabbis about the number of blessings that should be said while prayer straps are put on.315 In the Middle Ages, German Jews such as R. Meir of Rothenburg followed the custom of saying two blessings, one for the prayer straps for the person’s head and one for those for their hand. French Jews, in contrast, simply said one blessing that covered both acts. Samuel of Evreux, who was one of Isaac of Corbeil’s teachers, believed it was better to say just one blessing, the reason being one would not risk committing a sin on the grounds of saying a blessing that was unnecessary. This issue was the subject of a responsum by R. Asher ben Jehiel (aka ROSH, 1250–1327), who had initially only said one blessing due to the French influence, but later adopted the 310 Beit-Arié, 1981, 70. 311 From a personal talk during a conference in Hamburg in October 2014 (the event was called ‘Research on Hebrew Manuscripts – Status quaestionis’). 312 On fols. 133v and 148r, for instance. 313 See n. 192. 314 At least three more Ashkenazi manuscripts list the commandment about putting prayer straps on one’s head separately: Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17; London, BL, Add. 18685; and Zurich, BRAG, Brag 115. 315 See Aaron Amit, “The Curious Case of Tefillin: A Study in Ritual Blessings,” Jewish Studies Quarterly 15 (2008): 269–88.

6.1 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, Ashkenaz 

 79

practice customary in Germany instead.316 Consequently, this question was still the subject of discussion at the beginning of the 14th century. The emphasis of the commandment about putting prayer straps on one’s head that we can find in a number of SeMaK manuscripts may therefore have served to underline the practice customary in Germany of saying two blessings rather than one. Steinschneider also noticed the ‘strange order’ that exists in Cod. Hebr. Add. 6.317 This concerns the sequence the commandments are in within the individual chapters. In Chapter 4 there are two significant differences: while the laws on marriage in most of the SeMaK manuscripts come after the rabbinical rule about washing one’s hands, they precede it in the Copenhagen manuscript, appearing at the beginning of the chapter along with the positive commandments, de-oraita.318 In addition to that, the commandment ‫ליטול לולב בסוכות‬ (= ‘Take a palm leaf [‘lulav’] on the Feast of Tabernacles’) comes at the end of the chapter in the Copenhagen manuscript, unlike most other SeMaK manuscripts.319 It is preceded by the prohibitions about working on Passover and additional feast days. These negative precepts are absent in most of the manuscripts, but they do appear in an Oxford manuscript from the year 1299,320 which proves that this version was in use quite early on.321 A rare difference can be found in Chapter 5.322 A host of dietary rules are listed there, including details about what food from Gentiles should not be eaten or drunk (cooked food, milk, cheese and wine). In the prints and almost all the manuscripts, these items come at the very end of the dietary rules (after the commandment not to eat anything fermented or leavened on Passover) and are followed by positive and negative commandments regarding jurisdiction. In the Copenhagen manuscript, the prohibitions on sharing Gentiles’ food and wine are given particular importance. They have been separated from the other dietary rules and put at the end of the chapter to conclude it. The principle of placing the negative commandments at the end of a chapter was easier to maintain this way. At the

316 Meshulam Salman b. Ahron, ed, ‫תלמוד בבלי‬: Talmud Bavli – Roter Schas (Sulzbach: Aharon ben Meshulam Zalman, 1761), 41. 317 Steinschneider, 1863, 95. 318 This difference can also be found in Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17; London, BL, Add. 18685; and Zurich, BRAG, Brag 115. 319 This is also the case in Zurich, BRAG, Brag 115. 320 Oxford, Bod, Opp. 340, fol. 67r. 321 Some other examples: Oxford, Bod, Opp. 342 and Opp. 339; London, BL, Add. 18685; and Zurich, BRAG, Brag 115. 322 I was only able to find this in one other manuscript: London, BL, Add. 18685.

80 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

same time, a connection was made to the first paragraph of the next chapter, ‫לתת‬ ‫‘ =( נבילה לגר תושב‬Give a carcass to a ger toshav’323). In Chapter 6, there is a unique case where the order of the individual commandments is different. The commandments ‫‘ =( להדליק נר בערב שבת בשמן טוב‬Light the Shabbat candles with good oil’)324 and ‫‘ =( להדליק נר של חנוכה‬Light the Hanukkah candles’)325 are normally at the end of this chapter, but are near the front of it here, after the mitzvot de-oraita (biblical commandments), and bear the title ‫( מצות דרבנן‬mitzvot de-rabbanan). It is impossible to tell whether this is the original wording in a very earlier version of the SeMaK or a revision made sometime later. What is clear, though, is that lighting the candles comes at the end of the chapter in the oldest manuscript, the North French Hebrew Miscellany, and leads the reader on to the next chapter, which is dedicated to the day of Shabbat.326

The scribes Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 is one of the few Hebrew manuscripts written by a number of scribes. It turned out to be very heterogeneous and is therefore hardly likely to have been a work that was specially commissioned. A patron would scarcely have been satisfied with the cheap parchment that was used for it, the alternating design of the sections, the different scripts used and the way abbreviations were used inconsistently. Since the SeMaK is a relatively short work that can be copied in just a few weeks, a professional copyist is unlikely to have involved any other scribes in producing it. At one point in the manuscript, the scribe made a comment that indicates it was made for his own use: on fol. 144r it says '‫אין הג' זאת ממו' הרב אלא אני הכותב הג‬ (= ‘This gloss was not written by my teacher, the rabbi, but I, the scribe, made the comment’). This passage may have been copied from an older exemplar, however, as it is hard to imagine such a work being produced within a single family in view of the considerable stylistic differences that exist in the book. Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 was presumably produced in a yeshivah. Since the Jewish school system was not an institutionalised one, very young pupils attended it as well as young adults.327 The yeshivot were relatively small; no more than 15 323 Deut 14:21. 324 Fol. 185r. 325 Fol. 185v. 326 London, BL, Add.MS 11639, fols. 618v and 619r. 327 Ephraim Kanarfogel, Jewish Education and Society in the High Middle Ages (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1992), 18.

6.1 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, Ashkenaz 

 81

students attended the Jewish school run by R. Meir of Rothenburg, for instance. Yeshivot did not serve as scriptoria and the books produced there tended to be unique works with an individual touch.328 Just as young children had to bring their own books along to primary school,329 the more advanced students at yeshivot will also have had to provide their own books. The students in one of these schools possibly had the task of copying parts of the SeMaK as a way of studying it. Parchment of moderate quality may have been all that was required for this purpose. The heterogeneous nature of Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 may be explained by the fact that the students who worked on it came from different families and towns where they had acquired their own techniques and styles of writing. Hardly anything can be discovered about which preferences the individual scribes had. Scribe B occasionally drew some little dots above the text, but we cannot say why he did so. An example can be seen on fol. 103v (Figure 20): ‫ואם‬ .‫‘( חתול נכנס בעדר עם בהמות ושותק והם צועקות חישינן‬And if a cat joined the herd along with the livestock and is silent and they cry out, then we will have an idea why’).

Figure 20: Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 103v.

The sentence relates to a passage on fol. 52b in Ḥulin, the tractate in the Talmud on the laws of slaughter and meat consumption, and is concerned with the question of whether or not a small farm animal was bitten or clawed by a cat and injured as a result. If it was, then it would have become unkosher and no longer fit for consumption. Perhaps scribe B intended to cover this problem in more detail, but he may also have seen something amusing in it, taken out of context.

Illustrated catchwords Fourteen of the catchwords are decorated with drawings in ink that were made by a rather childlike hand. The paleness of the light-brown ink, which has

328 Malachi Beit-Arié, “The individual nature of Hebrew book production and consumption,” in Manuscrits hébreux et arabes. Mélanges en l’honneur de Colette Sirat, eds. Nicholas R. M. de Lange and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger (Turnhout: Brepols, 2014): 17–28; see p. 27 in this case. 329 Ibid., 22.

82 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

faded in some places, differs from the writing that the first scribe added, which has retained its intensity over the centuries. We can therefore assume that the drawings came later. Perhaps they were made by the second scribe, although we cannot be certain of this either. Apart from containing a picture that is no longer recognisable (on fol. 12v), it shows some ordinary animals and a sphinxlike creature: A few of the figures are merely outlines with limbs attached to them. Others were drawn with short lines all over their bodies, which are presumably fur or feathers. All of the figures’ heads are shown from the side. A circular eye is in the middle of each one. This is sometimes lower than the nose or snout and is much too close to the ears to be realistic. Almost all the figures are moving or looking to the left and are consequently following the direction of the writing and guide the reader’s eyes to the next page. The pictures were obviously drawn very quickly and seem quite amateurish; the missing body and the position of the eyes, which are too far back, are telltale signs of an illustrator without much practice. Even in the pictures of the lions on fols. 24v and 210v, which were obviously drawn with the model of a lion on a coat of arms in mind, the animals’ eyes are in the same position, although the schematic depiction makes one think a copy of an original picture must have been made. Perhaps a German coin known as a ‘Löwenpfennig’ (‘lion penny’) was used (Figure 23); that would explain the lack of detail in the picture of the lion in the Copenhagen manuscript – a ‘Löwenpfennig’ depicted a lion on its hind legs (‘lion passant’). Coins of this type were issued by various rulers and had been in circulation ever since the middle of the 12th century.330 The only scenic depiction is also based on a model: on fol. 202v there is a hunting scene in which a panting dog is chasing a hare, which is jumping up into a tree for safety (Figure 24). This picture follows a tradition that had already existed for some time in Jewish book illumination. The dog and hare are moving from the right to the left, like the direction of the Hebrew writing, and the fleeing hare is desperately trying to escape by jumping up, as in the Worms Maḥzor331 and the David Bar Pesach Maḥzor.332 The illustrator was probably inspired by a depiction of this type, but does not seem to have noted which context it was drawn in.

330 Winfried Baumann and Xenja von Ertzdorff, Die Romane von dem Ritter mit dem Löwen (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1994), 174. 331 Jerusalem, JNUL, hebr. 4, 781, fol. 130v. 332 New York, Public Library, Heb. 224, fol. 333v.

6.1 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, Ashkenaz 

Figure 21: Catchwords in Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fols. 36v, 60v, 84v, 168v, 194v, 226v.

 83

84 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 22: Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 210v.

Figure 23: ‘Löwenpfennig’, 1250/1300, Habsburg Mint.

Figure 24: Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 202v.

Figure 25: New York, Public Library, MS Heb. 224, fol. 333v.

Many of the hunting scenes in Hebrew manuscripts can be understood as allegories about the persecution of the People of Israel. They were an expression of eschatological hopes at the time, but also a hidden polemic against the

6.1 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, Ashkenaz 

 85

Jews’ Christian persecutors.333 The hunting scene in Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 cannot be interpreted this way, though. This is the decorative image provided for the catchword, viz. ‫פרוש רש"י =( פרש"י‬, i.e. ‘Talmud commentary by Rashi’), and the text surrounding it is the negative precept ‫‘ =( שלא למנוע שאר‬Do not withhold food from [your wife]’). Financial obligations towards married women, children and widows are outlined here; there is no link whatsoever to the hunting scene. This applies to the other pictures in Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 as well. The person who illustrated the catchwords used the motifs available to him randomly and did not make any effort to establish a thematic link between his pictures and the text. Consequently, these drawings are merely decorative elements and cannot be analysed in iconographic terms.

Prominent characteristics and comments The little Copenhagen SeMaK is puzzling in a number of respects. From a codicological perspective, it must have been produced in the 13th century, but it was actually written after Rabbi Perez of Corbeil had died, which means in 1297 or 1298 at the earliest. The handwriting and a particular feature in the text of the SeMaK indicate that the manuscript is of German origin. By listing the commandment ‘Put prayer straps on your head’ separately, more emphasis was given to the German Jewish practice of saying two blessings when putting prayer straps on. The structure of the chapters differs from the one used in the majority of SeMaK manuscripts. The individual precepts were divided up more consistently, for instance, according to the principle of whether they came from the Bible or from the sages. It is impossible to tell whether or not this was done by a later editor. The purpose of this little handbook can only be determined by a process of elimination. Since the material used for it was of low quality and at least three scribes were involved in writing it, each of whom was influenced by a different scribal tradition, we can assume that it was neither a commercial assignment nor a manuscript produced by members of a single family. It may be the case that it was created in a yeshivah, where the manuscript was then employed for the purpose of study. That would explain the simple drawings in the margins, which may have been added by a very young person.

333 I shall take a closer look at hunting scenes again in Chapter 6.4 (in the hunting scene on fol. 40v).

86 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

6.2 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, Worms (?), 1317 The codex Codicology and palaeography The codex is 340 × 248 mm in size and contains 280 folios. Cod. Hebr. 17 is a collection of manuscripts that consists of four parts: a prayer book, an anonymous commentary about prayers for feast days, and tables of contents for the two works that follow: R. Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil’s SeMaK and Simson ben Zadoq’s Tashbeẓ. This structure was planned right from the beginning, which is clear from the way the quires are arranged, as they do not separate the individual texts from each other. 1. Quire 1 (fols. 1–4) = binion (prayers) 2. Quires 2–23 (fols. 5–181) = 22 quaternions (prayers up to 5r, prayer commentaries on fols. 5v–178v, table of contents for the SeMaK from fol. 179r onwards) 3. Quire 24 (fols. 182–186) = binion with an individual leaf in front of it (table of contents for the SeMaK up to 182v, table of contents for the Tashbeẓ from 182v–185r) 4. Quires 25–35 (fols. 187–274) = 11 quaternions (SeMaK 187r–260v, Tashbeẓ from 260v onwards) 5. Quire 36 (fols. 275–280) = ternion (Tashbeẓ up to 279r, colophon on 279r). Originally, the manuscript, which has 36 quires in all, only contained quaternions. Apart from the first and last quires, whose quaternions have been reduced by wear and tear, the 24th one catches the reader’s eye: the leaves are completely blank from fol. 185v to 186v and unlike the other ends of the quires, there is no catchword on them either. Consequently, individual folios must have been taken out at a later date. The parchment on which the manuscript is written was scraped so finely that the hair and flesh sides both look exactly the same. This was how Hebrew manuscripts generally looked that were produced in Germany from the 1260s onwards. Prick-marks used to rule the parchment are visible on the outer and inner margins of the pages. This ruling technique is traceable to the last third of the 13th century in Ashkenaz. The layout of the book is uniform. The pages contain margins that have been generously left blank. The space for writing is 218 × 163 mm in size and the texts themselves run across the page in three columns each containing 44 lines. This underlying structure remains the same even when additional columns have been added. Various methods were used to ensure that the edges of the columns on the left-hand page did not vary in position, primarily by using abbreviations and lengthening individual words. The main text is written in Ashkenazi semi-cursive script, while the title and initial words are in square script. The writing has a distinct Gothic character throughout and is reminiscent of Latin codices from that period.

6.2 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, Worms (?), 1317 

 87

Catchwords positioned horizontally can be seen on the last few verso pages of the quires at the bottom left of each page. These were highlighted with drawings in dotted lines added in ink. Sometimes they are in geometric shapes such as triangles, but specific contemporary motifs like French lilies (as on fol. 194v) are a rarity. The SeMaK was paginated completely. A minor mistake in the way the individual paragraphs were numbered reveals how the scribe went about his work: two numbers are missing on fol. 191r (Figure 26). At this point, the mitzvoth ‫שלא‬ ‫‘ =( להסתכל בצלמים‬Do not look at any graven images’), ‫‘ =( להסתכל בציצת‬Look at fringes’) and ‫‘ =( שלא לתור אחר העין‬Do not give in to the lust of your eyes’) are listed close to one another, but only the one in the middle is numbered. This mistake occurred because the scribe wrote down the main text first, leaving spaces for coloured initial words, and then he numbered each mitzvah, after which he went back and added the missing initial words. In the case of the three mitzvot on fol. 191r (Figure 26 below), just one large blank space was left for the initial words, which made the right-hand side of the column vary and not stay flush. The initial words of the individual mitzvot are hard to see for this reason, and the scribe inadvertently missed out two numbers.

Figure 26: Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fol. 191r.

The SeMaK as part of a composite manuscript Isaac of Corbeil’s work includes folios 179 to 260, beginning with the two tables of contents for the SeMaK (fols. 179r to 182v) and Tashbeẓ. Since the SeMaK’s table of contents starts in the middle of the 23rd quire, it is clear that the handwritten

88 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

copy of Isaac of Corbeil’s book was not intended to be an independent codex, but part of a larger, composite manuscript. In the introduction to the first edition printed in Constantinople in 1509, an explanation is provided as to why the SeMaK was combined with a prayer book from an early stage: ‘When people in France realised how modest and devout he [R. Isaac of Corbeil] was, they wrote these mitzvot down in their siddurim to say them every day’.334 Although referring specifically to the manuscript Paris, BNF, hebr. 643, Colette Sirat has called the practice of combining the SeMaK with a prayer book a phenomenon typical of France.335 However, there are also a number of cases where the Small Book of Commandments was combined with a prayer book in the German-speaking region as well.336

The date and place of completion According to the colophon on fol. 279r, the manuscript was finished on 14 Marḥeshvan 5078 (21 October 1317). No place of production is mentioned here, but one is stated in the sample form for the letter of divorce on fol. 218r where it says ‫‘ =( כאן בוורמשא מתא דיתא על נהר רינוס‬Here in Worms on the River Rhine’). The date written on the letter of divorce is 25 Av 5077 (12 August 1317). The place names and dates mentioned in letters of divorce enclosed with SeMaK manuscripts need to be regarded critically, however, as the scribes did not always write down the correct date and name of their home town. In fact, letters of divorce found in older manuscripts were often copied verbatim, i.e. along with the dates and place names in them. This was particularly the case whenever such documents were deliberately left unchanged to honour respected people of authority, so a place name like ‘Corbeil’ or ‘Paris’ is practically useless to researchers who are trying to determine exactly where a French manuscript was produced, for example. Since there are only two months between the date of the get and the completion of Cod. Hebr. 17, though, we may assume that the scribe wrote down the actual date of completion and the place name ‘Worms’ was of direct relevance, either to him or his patron. At the time the manuscript was produced, living conditions were highly favourable for the Jews of that city. The Jewish community of Worms had been one of the most respected communities in Ashkenaz ever since the 11th century 334 Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil 1509, fol. 1r. 335 This manuscript, which is mentioned in Chapter 3 and 4, contains a Tashbeẓ, just like the Hamburg codex. See Sirat 1997, 245. 336 One example is Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75 (see Chapter 4.3).

6.2 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, Worms (?), 1317 

 89

and played a prominent role in religious, intellectual, commercial and political affairs.337 Various agreements between the Cathedral Chapter, the Bishop and the Jewish community ensured the latter’s safety and continuity. Jews and Christians practically had the same rights and duties according to a council resolution passed in 1300. Like Christians, Jews were able to acquire civil rights, but had to take a civic oath in return. The continuity of peaceful co-existence was interrupted in 1349 when a disastrous pogrom took place in connection with the Plague. 338

The scribe and his patron The colophon of the manuscript339 only states the patron’s name, R. Yehuda, the son of the scholar R. Abraham; the scribe’s own name is not mentioned at all. It does say ‘I, Kalonymus the scribe, son of Menahem’ on fol. 279v, but this text was written down much later and cannot possibly be the scribe’s own work.340 The names ‘Abraham’ and ‘Jacob’ are frequently marked with little dots throughout the codex.341 The name of the scribe may therefore have been Abraham ben Jacob.342 In addition, the scribe was presumably a priestly descendent of Aaron, as the term ‫( כהן‬kohen, i.e. ‘priest’) was also highlighted on fols. 159r and 200r (the highlighting on fol. 200r is particularly noticeable). The word kohen has been ‘decorated’ with an eye-catching shape on this particular leaf (see Figure 27). Ernst Roth, who examined the comment about the feast-day prayers in Cod. Hebr. 17, said the scribe may have been called Abraham ben Jacob HaKohen.343 On closer examination, however, we see that the emphasis was achieved using brown ink, 337 Gerold Bönnen, “Die Stadtgemeinde und das jüdische Worms im späten Mittelalter, ” in Jüdische Gemeinden und ihr christlicher Kontext in kulturräumlich vergleichender Betrachtung: Von der Spätantike bis zum 18. Jahrhundert, ed. Christoph Cluse et al. (Hanover: Verlag Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 2003): 309–40, esp. p. 309. 338 Ibid., 318–19. 339 Fol. 279r. 340 Ernst Roth, ed., Cod. Hebr. 17 = Nr. 152. Kommentar zu den poetischen Gebetstexten (geschrieben 1317); Cod. Hebr. 61 = Nr. 153 Kommentar zum Gebetbuch und Machsor, Rabbi Elieser ben Nathan aus Mainz (12. Jh) zugeschrieben beide in der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg (Jerusalem: unknown publisher, 1980), ‫ח‬. 341 There are 55 cases where ‘Abraham’ was emphasised and 40 for ‘Jakob’. 342 See http://sfardata.nli.org.il, key: 0G153, accessed on 20/2/2016 and Irina Wandrey, “Codex hebraicus 17,” in Manuscript Cultures 6. Ausstellungskatalog “Tora, Talmud, Siddur”, anlässlich der Ausstellung “Tora – Talmud – Siddur. Hebräische Handschriften der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg” in der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg vom 18. September bis 26. Oktober 2014, ed. Irina Wandrey, (Hamburg: SFB 950, 2014): 63–67, esp. p. 64. 343 Roth, 1980, p. ‫ח‬.

90 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

which differed from the ink otherwise used and was not employed for any other purpose. In other words, the decoration may have been added at a later date.

Figure 27: A decorative element in Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fol. 200r.

Contents The SeMaK in Cod. Hebr. 17 is complete and contains 292 positive and negative commandments.344 The first mitzvah ‫לידע שאותו שברא שמים וארץ הוא לבדו מושל‬ (= ‘to realise that the One who created Heaven and Earth is the only one who rules above’) is on fol. 187r, and the negative commandment ‫‘ =( שלא לבא על אשה נידה‬Do not have relations with a menstruating woman’) concludes the SeMaK on fol. 259v. In the colophon, the scribe explicitly said that he had copied the Small Book of Commandments along with all the commentaries in it. The comments that R. Perez of Corbeil added are part of the main piece of writing right from the outset and are introduced using the abbreviation ‫מורנו רבנו פרץ ]בן[ אליהו =( מרפ"א‬, ‘our teacher and rabbi Perez [ben] Eliyahu’).345 The order of the various elements changes as of fol. 227r: the rabbi’s comments are no longer incorporated in the main text, but are in columns of their own.346 This is a radical change in the layout of the book, which is uniform up to this point. The rabbi’s comments, which are in smaller handwriting, now form sub-columns within the existing columns. Consequently, instead of each page having three columns, up to nine appear on them now, as we can see on fol. 234r. We cannot say whether the scribe made this change in response to instructions from his patron or simply because he started copying from a different manuscript. 344 Even though the manuscript ends with section no. 290, the number of positive and negative precepts that have been written down does actually tally with the table of contents. 345 On fol. 192r and fol. 193r, for example. 346 Steinschneider overlooked the comments and commentaries that R. Perez wrote directly in the text. Cf. Steinschneider 1878, 58.

6.2 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, Worms (?), 1317 

 91

As of Chapter 2, there are some minor differences in the way the commandments are listed compared to most of the other editions of the SeMaK. Mitzvot 44 to 50 appear earlier in this chapter, for example. The commandments ‘To mourn for Jerusalem’, ‘To mourn for one’s close relatives’, ‘Look for something leavened [before Passover]’, ‘Do not seclude yourself with a woman’, ‘Do not seclude yourself with Gentiles’, ‘That a woman shall not wean the child of a Gentile woman’ and ‘That a woman shall not deliver the child of a Gentile woman’ directly follow the mitzvah ‘Sanctify the Holy Name’ and ‘Hold fast to the Holy Name’, but they appear at the end of the chapter in the printed editions347 and most of the other manuscripts. These are all precepts that are not taken straight from the Torah, but from the sages, a fact that was explicitly stated as early as 1279/80: ‘[This is where] the mitzvot end that come from the Torah and are bound to [specific events in] time. The mitzvot of the body now begin, which come from the sages’.348 This principle of ordering the precepts was not just ignored in the Hamburg manuscript either – the same order as the one in Cod. Hebr. 17 can be found in a number of other SeMaK manuscripts as well.349 Another difference is also striking: on fol. 211v , the commandment ‫להניח‬ ‫‘ =( תפילין של ראש‬Put prayer straps on your head’) is listed separately, as in the Copenhagen manuscript Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 discussed above.350

Ornamentation of the book Cod. Hebr. 17 is one of the rare cases of a SeMaK codex that has been decorated elaborately.351 Moritz Steinschneider, who tended to be rather harsh in his judgement of codices’ aesthetics, wrote that the ‘colour and decoration are not without taste’.352

347 The printed edition based on the version included in the Responsa Project run by Bar Ilan University (http://www.responsaa.co.il) should be mentioned here as a reference work (Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil, 1935). 348 London, BL, Add. 11638, fol. 559v. 349 Currently, I am aware of the following examples: London, David Sofer, Lon Sofer 7 (13th–14th c.); London, BL, Add. 18828 (1343); London. BL, Add. 18685, (1301–1350); Zurich, Braginsky Collection, Brag 115 (14th–15th c.); Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica, Ebr. 324 (1395–1398); Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51 (15th c.). 350 I shall take a closer look at this precept in Chapter 6.1 when I deal with special aspects of the SeMaK’s contents. 351 Paris, BNF, heb. 643, Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Heb. 75 and Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51 are three outstanding examples. 352 Steinschneider, 1878, 56.

92 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

The book was uniformly decorated using red and blue ink. The scribe alternated between red and blue ink when he wrote down the initial words and the numbers of the individual mitzvot, and he also used a different colour within the initial words themselves. Finely drawn decorative elements were added in red and blue ink, which reminds one of fleuronnée ornamentation used in monastic book illumination and numerous secular codices.353 Although fleuronnée can mostly be found within initials in Latin manuscripts, in this case the initial words are enclosed by floral decorations, which grow from a leaf tendril bearing palmettes. Without the strokes of letters to grasp hold of, the leafy strands weave their way in between the words instead. They form tendrils with branches and offshoots and twist and turn, transforming into a tangle of foliage that climbs up and down at the edges of the column on the right. The strands extend in hook-like threads at the top end, while the bottom end is often formed by a palmette with scalloped leaves. The strands bearing half-palmettes at the edges seem to be very much alive, but the range of shapes and motifs is actually relatively limited and is repeated time and again. The plant decoration is not geometrical and displays no symmetry whatsoever. As a consequence, the rigid page layout is broken up, gaining a certain lightness. The embellishment of the manuscript does not include any figures or even narrative elements, and links to the text are not easy to spot. It is not apparent which criteria were used to add decoration or leave it out, either. It gets broken off right in the middle of the 25th quire (fol. 192r), for instance, and only starts again in the 30th one (on fol. 235r). The 32nd quire just contains one decoration, which is also the final one (on fol. 250r), as the last ten folios of the SeMaK were not decorated at all. The first initial word of the SeMaK, ‫‘ =( לידע‬to know or to realise that…’), seems to be in a slightly larger square script and is decorated particularly elaborately. Finely drawn reddish-blue tendrils come out of the letters like flames and rise up to form seven pillars, which can be taken as a reference to the name and contents of the work itself, since it is divided up into seven ‘pillars’ (chapters) representing the seven days of the week. The beginning of the other chapters was not emphasised by any ornamentation, however; it is only distinguishable by the last few sentences of the preceding chapter, which were written in smaller letters. The fleuronnée decoration in 14th-century Ashkenazi manuscripts was first discussed by Gabrielle Sed-Rajna in 1987.354 In her book, she explained how the surrounding Christian culture influenced the ornamental design of Jewish books,

353 In the second part of the St Gall manuscript MS 302, for example, which was made in Zurich around the year 1300 and is now part of the Vadian Collection at the Canton Library of St Gall. 354 Sed-Rajna, 1987.

6.2 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, Worms (?), 1317 

Figure 28: Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fol. 187r.

 93

94 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

even though these were generally decorated by Jewish artists. In her view, for example, the visual layout of a Talmud commentary dated to 1372/73 (Budapest, National Széchényi Library, MS Fol. Hebr. 1) was entirely a product of the Jewish scribe’s own creativity.355 Nowadays it is considered a proven fact that Christian workshops were used for illustrating Jewish books in many cases. Regarding the Talmud commentary just mentioned, for instance, researchers have been able to show that various flourishers worked on it.356 Unlike the highly professional fleuronnée panels found in Hebrew manuscripts, we may assume the decoration of Cod. Hebr. 17 was carried out by the scribe himself or someone in close contact with him, as the limited range of shapes used and the absence of any geometrical design are not typical of the style of work produced by professional workshops in that period. Leaf tendrils that climb up or crawl down the edges of the columns (as in Figures 28 and 30) are rarely found in Ashkenazi manuscripts. One exception to this rule is a London manuscript of a Tashbeẓ written by Simson ben Zadoq in 1309 (see Figure 29).357 Even though it has a certain similarity with the way in which the margins of Cod. Hebr. 17 have been designed, there are a number of obvious differences between the two. The decorations in that manuscript are of another kind – they are neither playful nor filigree in nature, which is what characterises the Hamburg manuscript.

Prominent characteristics and comments The SeMaK in Cod. Hebr. 17 is clearly an Ashkenazi manuscript from Germany; the way the parchment is processed, the structure of the quires and the writing are all telltale signs. Due to the reference to Worms in the letter of divorce, the scribe or his patron presumably had a link of some kind to that city. Its ‘splendid’ appearance (as Moritz Steinschneider said himself)358 makes the SeMaK in Cod. Hebr. 17 one of the few exemplars to have been decorated opulently. The luxurious manuscript with its generous blank margins is a specially commissioned work copied and decorated by a professional scribe. This skilled artist made a considerable effort to produce a work with a uniform 355 Ibid., 54. 356 Andreas Fingernagel and Alois Haidinger, “Neue Zeugen des ‚Niederösterreichischen Randleistenstils‘ in hebräischen, deutschen und lateinischen Handschriften, ” Codices Manuscripti 39/40 (2002): 15–44, esp. p. 17. 357 London, BL, Add. 18424. 358 Steinschneider, 1878, 56.

6.2 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, Worms (?), 1317 

 95

design and appearance, which makes the radical change he introduced when he copied Rabbi Perez’ explanatory notes all the more surprising. Exactly what made him do that is likely to remain unclear. R. Yehuda, his patron, granted the scribe some freedom in designing the manuscript, but we cannot say whether or not he went as far as allowing him to rearrange the actual contents of the book. Inserting some new columns made the commentaries more visible, for one thing. From fol. 227r onwards, the SeMaK seems more like a work consisting of commentaries inspired by Latin manuscripts. This change in its appearance ‘modernised’ the book and improved its functionality, but at the same time, it was simply accepted that the existing aesthetic concept for its design needed to be abandoned gradually.359

Figure 29: London, BL, Add. 18424, fol. 38v, detail.

Figure 30: Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fol. 191r, detail.

359 This chapter is based on my study entitled “The ‘Pillars of Exile’ by R. Yiṣḥaq of Corbeil. The Small Book of Commandments in Codex hebraicus 17, State and University Library Hamburg,” in Jewish Manuscript Cultures.: Perspectives from Palaeography, Codicology, Provenance History, Material Analysis and Art History, ed. Irina Wandrey (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017): 422–442.

96 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

6.3 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, Ingolstadt 1347 The codex Codicology and palaeography Opp. 339 from the Bodleian Library in Oxford contains a total of 113 folios, which includes a Tashbeẓ360 and ten chapters of the Sha‘arei Dura in addition to the SeMaK that R. Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil authored and R. Perez of Corbeil supplemented with glosses.361 The book is relatively small and compact, with a height of 254 mm and a width of 193–194.7 mm. The pages have been cut back quite harshly, which is why some of the glosses in the margins and various illustrated catchwords at the bottom of the verso pages are missing. If the folios were all numbered, which might have been the case once, then this numbering may also have been lost when the pages were reduced in size. Codicological and palaeographic examinations have revealed that Opp. 339 is a typical Ashkenazi book that follows the rules of contemporary manuscript production in Latin. As was customary in Ashkenaz, the writing material consists of very finely processed parchment, the surface of which still feels velvety. There is no obvious difference between the flesh and hair sides – not even the hair follicles are visible. The structure of the quires, consisting of quaternions (four bifolios), indicates that the book was produced in Ashkenaz. A set of lines has been drawn on every single folio. To do this, dots were pricked in each quire of parchment on the outer and inner margin starting on the first recto side and then lines were scored with a sharp instrument on every leaf on the verso side.362 If the ruling on the recto side was not visible enough, it was repeated using a graphite pencil.363 Opp. 339 was mainly written in Ashkenazi semi-cursive script and the initial words are in Ashkenazi square script. The letters were lengthened, making them look rather like the Gothic writing used for Latin manuscripts.364 As is common in Jewish manuscripts from this region, the scribe avoided writing beyond the end of the lines, and he managed to create a straight, uniform edge in the left-hand column of each folio by adding graphical elements and letter-like shapes wherever gaps occurred in the lines.

360 Simson bar Zadok, ‫ספר תשב"ץ‬: Sefer Tashbeṣ (Lemberg: D. H. Schrenzel, 1858). 361 Isaac ben Meir Dueren, ‫שערי דורא השלם‬: Shaʻare Dura ha-shalem (Jerusalem: Yerid hasefarim, 2003–2004). 362 This is clearly visible on fol. 66. 363 This is clearly visible on fol. 31r. 364 Colette Sirat, “Écriture sur pierre et écriture sur parchemin : Les Juifs de Paris au XIIIe siècle,” La revue du Louvre et des Musées de France 4 (1983): 249–54; see p. 253 in particular.

6.3 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, Ingolstadt 1347 

 97

Figure 31: Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fols. 233v–234r.

The SeMaK In this particular manuscript, the SeMaK is incomplete; it does not have a table of contents and Isaac of Corbeil’s letter is also missing. The individual paragraphs have not been numbered either. The SeMaK begins on fol. 1r in the middle of the commandment ‫‘ =( לבדוק חמץ‬Look for something leavened’). In other words, the first 94 to 98 commandments are absent, depending on how they are counted. The SeMaK ends with a colophon by Yehuda bar Moshe Ari on fol. 85v. The main text of the SeMaK is in a single column that basically runs over the whole page, apart from numerous interruptions caused by commentaries. A page generally contains 28 to 29 lines. The comments and commentaries in small handwriting were added in various ways. They take up an entire column of space on fol. 1r (and an extra comment was even inserted within that as well, separated by a coloured line). Some comments were also written directly in the main text. As mentioned above, the SeMaK is divided into seven ‘pillars’, or chapters, one for each day of the week. The third day of the week starts on fol. 2r with the commandment ‫‘ =( לקדש בכור‬Sanctify the first-born’), the fourth day on fol. 13v with ‫‘ =( לעשות מעקה‬Make a guard-rail’), the fifth day on fol. 35v with ‫‘ =( לשחוט‬Slaughter [an animal]’) and the sixth day on fol. 56r with ‫‘ =( לתת נבלה לגר תושב‬Give a carcass to a ger toshav [foreign resident]’). This division follows the one that is

98 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

generally included in most SeMaK manuscripts. As for the seventh day, however (the Shabbat), there is a difference here: it starts on fol. 69v with the commandment ‫‘ =( להדליק נר בערב שבת‬Light candles on the eve of Shabbat’) instead of ‫לעשות קידוש‬ (= ‘Perform the Shabbat Kiddush’) and follows BOD Opp. 342 in doing this. Even so, Opp. 339 is not dependent on that manuscript as far as other aspects are concerned.

Yehuda Bar Moshe Ari and the design of his book No other historical sources exist today concerning the scribe Yehuda bar Moshe Ari. When he completed his copy of the Sefer Mitzvot Katan in 1347, around 30 Jewish families were living in Ingolstadt. As in many other towns and cities in the German empire at that time, the Jews of Ingolstadt made a living from money-lending. They were driven out of the city in 1349 during the Black Death persecutions. Some of them may have found refuge in the free imperial city of Regensburg.365 We can discover a great deal about Yehuda’s life and personality by taking a close look at his manuscript. Opp. 339 was a SeMaK that was not specially commissioned as such; rather, it was intended for the scribe’s personal use. In the colophon on fol. 85v it says: ‘I, Yehuda bar Moshe Ari, copied this book of commandments for myself and finished it on 11 Iyar 5107’ (i.e. 30 April 1347). The colophon does not state a place of production, but the town of Ingolstadt (‫ )אינגולפשטט‬is mentioned in the get dated 7 Shevat 5107 (= 27 January 1347), which is on fol. 26r. Although the place names written in gets frequently do not tally with the places where the respective manuscripts were actually produced, in this case the name does seem to be correct. Unlike Corbeil or Paris, for example, Ingolstadt is not a place that any rabbinical authority came from. Consequently, the name ‘Ingolstadt’ cannot have been added to honour an earlier rabbinical sage. What’s more, we may assume that the term ‘Ingolstadt’ was not just copied from a master copy, since the date of the get, 7 Shevat 5107, is actually very close to the date when the manuscript was first made. Colette Sirat366 and Malachi Beit-Arié367 are also both of the opinion that the book was made in Ingolstadt. As in many Ashkenazi manuscripts, the name of the scribe – Yehuda – is also highlighted in the main text. The first eleven characters in the first sentence on fol. 1v, which starts with the words ‫‘ =( אמר רב יהודה המוצא חמץ ביום טוב‬And Rav Yehuda said: 365 Aron Friedmann, “Zur Geschichte der Juden in Ingolstadt,” Bayerische israelitische Gemeindezeitung 6 (1926): 167–68; see p. 168 in particular. 366 Sirat, 1983, 253 and Sirat, 2002, 72. 367 Malachi Beit-Arié, “Palaeographical identification of Hebrew manuscripts: Methodology and practice,” Jewish Art 12–13 (1987): 15–44, esp. p. 19.

6.3 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, Ingolstadt 1347 

 99

the person who finds something leavened on a holy day…’), are written in red ink, for instance, and the name ‘Yehuda’ is crowned with a little floral object on fol. 2v. Three fictitious witnesses for a divorce have been added on fol. 27v: Yehuda bar Moshe, Joseph bar Moshe and Shmuel bar Moshe. Presumably, the scribe wrote down his brothers’ names here as well as his own.368 Yehuda bar Moshe Ari was no doubt a wealthy man, as he was able to afford parchment of the finest quality. Besides that, he must have had a good education because he took the liberty of adding a few remarks of his own to the SeMaK (fol. 64r). Yehuda had a great sense of aesthetics, and the appearance of the book was very important to him. The layout of the complex folios, which were enhanced with glosses and decorative elements, was obviously planned very carefully. The main text and commentaries were generally written in dark brown ink almost bordering on black. The initial words can contain other colours as well, such as red, green or orange/ochre.369 Sometimes the colours used within them even change from black to red.370 Small subheadings for the commandments are crowned with floral or ornamental objects in red371 or brownish-black ink.372 Various pictorial elements separate the comments from the main text here: yellow-and-red patterned banderoles, snakes and bars (seen on fols. 2r, 4v, 5v, 8v and 10r) along with shapes containing floral elements, plus circles. The scribe went about his work with creativity and showed considerable flexibility in the process – if there was no room to draw a whole circle, for example, he simply drew part of one instead (fol. 11r). If a gloss was written some way away from the words it related to in the main text, then a little symbol was inserted to indicate which point in the text it referred to.373 The bright colouring in the framing elements is absent on fols. 15–17, but some playfully drawn shapes can still be seen there.374 There are no pictures where the continuous text and comments have been written, but the catchwords in the bottom margin of the verso side of the last few folios of the quires are accompanied by numerous colourful images. The pages were reduced in size rather radically and only individual fragments of them are left now. 368 Names of witnesses were occasionally added in other manuscripts, too. There are some amusing names in a Bohemian SeMaK from the 14th century, for example: ‘Donkey, son of the ass’, ‘Wise, son of the fool’, and ‘Rich, son of the poor man’ (Budapest – Orszagos Szechenyi Konyvtar, fol. 6). Kohn, 1877, 95. 369 In this case, a chemical process has taken place over the centuries, which can also be seen in the blurry edges. 370 Fols. 7r, 20v and 21r. 371 Fols. 2r and 6v. 372 Fols. 7v, 8v and 13v. 373 Fol. 10v. 374 Fol. 15v.

100 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 32: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 11r, detail.

1.

Fol. 14v: the speckled head of an animal (a leopard?), floral decorations and two bulb- or spire-shaped elements (towers, perhaps?).

Figure 33: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 14v, detail.

2.

Fol. 22v, part of a unicorn and a tendril with leaves and two acorns:

Figure 34: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 22v, detail.

3.

Fol. 29v, part of a dragon and a tendril with flowers:

Figure 35: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 29v, detail.

6.3 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, Ingolstadt 1347 

 101

4. Fol. 38v, the spires of a large building:

Figure 36: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 38v, detail.

5.

Fol. 46v, the tips of a bird’s wings (?).

Figure 37: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 46v, detail.

6.

Fol. 62v, a small, undefinable corner:

Figure 38: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 62v, detail.

7.

Fol. 70v, a round object decorated with leaves (a plate or platter, perhaps?); the letters of the catchword can only be seen on this folio:

Figure 39: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 70v, decorated catchword.

The individual pictures are too fragmentary for us to say with any certainty whether they are a particular characteristic or specifically relate to the text.

102 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

The scribe’s personal preferences The part of the SeMaK that has survived to this day contains 188 positive and negative commandments. The precepts were not all treated with the same importance when his book was being designed; he created a kind of hierarchy by means of their layout and the shape and colouring of individual words. The individual commandments form part of a continuous text on some pages and are only separated from one another by the initial words written in a larger square script. Other initial words at the beginning of a new line sometimes mark the point where a new section or chapter starts. Apart from that, Yehuda bar Moshe Ari highlighted the word ‫( מעשה‬ma’asse = ‘story’, ‘event’, ‘once upon a time’) in four places375 to show that a story or an anecdote was about to follow.

Figure 40: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 7v, detail.

By designing the layout of the pages as he did, Yehuda Bar Moshe Ari lent the traditional division of the SeMaK into chapters and sections new importance. The positive commandment ‫‘ =( להגיד לבנו ליל ט”ו בניסן יציאת מצרים‬On the night of 15 Nissan, tell your son about the exodus from Egypt’) can be found on fol. 7v, for example, along with bans on necromancy, soothsaying and magic, which start with initial 375 Fols. 39r, 40v, 45r and 50v.

6.3 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, Ingolstadt 1347 

 103

words that are small and quite plain (see Figure 40). This commandment, which concerns Pesach – a festival celebrated together with one’s own family – has been given a more central meaning here than the previous precepts due to its special position and the size of its first word, ‫‘ =( להגיד‬Tell’). A break has also been created before the initial word ‫ להגיד‬in the oldest manuscript containing a copy of the SeMaK, viz. the North French Hebrew Miscellany (London, British Library, Add. 11639, fol. 569r). As in Yehuda bar Moshe Ari’s manuscript, there is a note in smaller letters saying that the section of the negative precepts concerned with the mouth is now finished, but since all the initial words in the North French Hebrew Miscellany are written in the same way, no visual hierarchy exists in the work. Yehuda bar Moshe Ari highlighted other initial words in a unique way that has nothing to do with how the SeMaK was divided into chapters. One of the most obvious cases is the colourful, oversized initial word ‫‘ =( שלא‬not to…’) on fol. 47v, which is the introduction to the commandment not to eat meat and drink milk together (see Figure 41). None of the initial words – not even those in the chapter headings – were highlighted as magnificently as this one. The letters extend over six lines and are in four different colours: red, yellow, green and black. In view of the complexity of the design work performed here, it is difficult not to get the impression that Yehuda had a special interest in this particular dietary rule. This work also differs from other SeMaK manuscripts in the scribe’s emphasis of an anecdote Isaac of Corbeil inserted, which relates to the commandment not to eat blood (from fol. 43v onwards). Yehuda used this anecdote to begin a new page, highlighting the first part of the very first sentence, ‫ומעשה‬, ‘And once upon a time, ...’ (fol. 45r, Figure 42). The text is concerned with a halakhic issue that can sometimes arise when salting a piece of meat causes the blood in it to be drawn out: One day, Rashi’s daughter was salting some meat. And once this had been put in a bowl with holes in it for the [time] necessary [for salting], it was put into a bowl without any holes. And there was a lot of juice [from the meat] in that, and Rashi permitted it, as the power of the salt had already lessened and would not have produced any more [blood].376

This particular text already appears in the oldest SeMaK manuscript (London, BL, Add. 11639) where it is an inconspicuous part of the main text, 377 as it is in all

376 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, fol. 45r. 377 London, BL, Add. 11639, fol. 595r.

104 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 41: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 47v.

the other SeMaK manuscripts. When compared to most of the other manuscripts and printed editions of the SeMaK, this exemplar contains a small but significant difference in the text. In this version, it says this:

6.3 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, Ingolstadt 1347 

 105

One day in Rashi’s house, meat was being salted in a bowl with holes in it.378

The latter version of the text is taken from the tosafot on the Talmud tractate Ḥulin 112b.379 The wording of the two versions of the text in Hebrew only differs slightly: instead of ‫‘ =( בת‬daughter’), it says ‫‘ =( בית‬house’) in the second one. A mistake by the copyist can be ruled out here as the verb in Yehuda’s text has a female ending, which makes it clear that Rashi’s daughter is being referred to. This is not an arbitrary change, however, as Rashi’s daughter is also named in the oldest SeMaK manuscript of all, the North French Hebrew Miscellany,380 and in later manuscripts as well.381 The difference may possibly be due to the author, R. Isaac of Corbeil, who explicitly wanted women to learn from his book as well as men.

Figure 42: Detail from Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, 45r. In red it says ‘Rashi’s daughter was salting’.

Prominent characteristics and comments The SeMaK that Yehuda bar Moshe Ari copied for home use gives us more of an insight into the scribe’s personal circumstances and likings than other manuscripts do. Yehuda wanted to create a versatile book that was also interesting to read. The complex page layout, his choice of colours, the carefully illuminated 378 Parma, BPP, parm 3158, fol. 121r. 379 Moznaim Publishing, ed., ‫מסכת חולין‬, Masekhet Ḥulin in ‫תלמוד בבלי‬, Talmud Bavli (Jerusalem: Moznaim Publishing, 2008); see 112b in particular. 380 Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil, 2003; see fol. 595r. 381 Paris, BNF, Cod. hébreu 643, fol. 108v, for example.

106 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

catchwords and the emphasis of the word ‫( מעשה‬ma’asse = ‘history’, ‘happening’, ‘once upon a time’), which was meant to catch the reader’s attention, are all evidence of this intention. Actually, it may well be that Yehuda bar Moshe Ari had his own family in mind as future readers of the book. The emphasis he put on dietary rules, the anecdote about Rashi’s daughter and his mentioning Josef bar Moshe and Shmuel bar Moshe, which were possibly his brothers’ names, could all indicate this.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 The codex Codicology and palaeography The Zurich SeMaK now known as BL, Add. 18684 is a relatively large book 325 × 255 mm in size and spanning a total of 355 folios. The work is actually a composite volume that includes the SeMaK written by R. Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil, supplemented by glosses by R. Moshe of Zurich (fols. 1–321). It also consists of an ethical work called ‫( מבחר הפנינים‬Mivhar ha-Peninim, i.e. ‘Choice of Pearls’), which is attributed to Solomon ibn Gabirol (c. 1021–c. 1057) (fols. 322–53). According to the colophon, the codex was finished in 1391/92. It is very likely this happened in Nuremberg due to the fact that the sample marriage contracts on fols. 87v and 88r contain the place names ‫‘ =( 'ר'ו'ן‬R[egensburg], W[ürzburg] and N[uremberg]’) and ‫‘ =( נורנבירק‬Nuremberg’).382 Besides that, the coat of arms depicted on fol. 93v is clearly the city of Nuremberg’s. The codex is made of parchment, and the hair and flesh sides have been processed so finely that they are indistinguishable. In general, the quires consist of quaternions. The way in which they are divided up hardly varies at all.383 The folios of each quire were all pricked together from the front at the outer and inside edges. The ruling was done on both sides using a plummet. The ink used for writing was also used for the drawings. The whole book has been written consistently in Ashkenazi semi-cursive script, except the shape of the initial words, which is strongly reminiscent of Gothic scripts.

382 Margoliouth rejected Zunz’s interpretation of the Hebrew place name, as the latter had said it was ‫טרנבריק‬, i.e. not Nuremberg, but Strasbourg; see Margoliouth, 1899–1935, vol. 2, 121. 383 The sixth gathering (fols. 41–47) consists of seven folios, the seventh gathering (fols. 48–51) of four, the eighth gathering (fols. 52–53) of two folios and the fourteenth gathering (fols. 252–257) of six folios.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 107

Scribes and their patrons Two different scribes produced the Zurich SeMaK found in BL, Add. 18684. Folios 1r–47v384 and 53r–123r (up to line 20) were made by an anonymous scribe, whereas folios 123r (from line 21) to 321v were produced by Jacob bar Moshe, who also wrote the colophon (321r). The latter tells us that this particular SeMaK was a work commissioned by a person called Shimon ben Shmuel.

The Zurich SeMaK As mentioned above, the SeMaK in the manuscript BL, Add. 18684 is a Zurich SeMaK. An earlier owner wrote a comment about this in the 15th century: ‘This book is called a “Zurich” because a learned man in Zurich enriched the text by adding new remarks from all [sorts of] books for every single commandment. It was named after the city of Zurich in Switzerland.’385

In his essay on the Zurich SeMaK, Leopold Zunz examined the manuscript BL, Add. 18684 very thoroughly. He focused on the various glosses that R. Moshe of Zurich had written along with other additional elements.386 The manuscript is roughly three times the length of a ‘normal’ SeMaK owing to the large number of explanatory notes it contains. The three-volume printed work edited by Har-Shoshanim-Rosenberg, which is based on the text of the London manuscript, is a useful resource for studying this SeMaK.387 As Jitzchak S. Lange has pointed out, its contents are exactly the same as those of the Ashkenazi manuscript MS parm 3158 (Parma, BPP) from 1380 and were either copied from it or are based on the same source.388

The pictures in the Zurich SeMaK, BL, Add. 18684 At first glance, the artistic design of the London manuscript of the Zurich SeMaK seems rather sparse, particularly as it was primarily intended for the purpose of studying, the numerous comments and commentaries bearing witness to this. On closer examination, though, it becomes apparent that the scribe actually took 384 Folios 48–52 were copied by a third hand and contain information concerning a calendar. 385 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 1v. 386 Ibid. 387 Isaac of Corbeil, Perez of Corbeil, Moshe of Zurich, 1980–1988. 388 Lange 1980, 112.

108 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

great care regarding the page layout and design of certain initial words. Individual letters were also decorated with small crowns and motifs of plants and animals, as we can see on fol. 58r (Figure 43):

Figure 43: Decorated initial letters, fol. 58r, London, BL, Add. 18684.

The Zurich SeMaK contains various illustrations on fifteen of its pages, fourteen of which are in the bottom margin of verso sides, accompanying the catchwords. All of these illustrations occur in the first part of the Zurich SeMaK and were drawn by the first (anonymous) scribe using the same blackish-brown ink he employed for the text. The images do not appear in the field used for the text, but in a separate area of their own. In the following section, I shall address the question of how far these pictures relate to the text and whether they merely follow pictorial conventions or should actually be regarded as spontaneous ideas the scribes had without any obvious relation to the wording of the Zurich SeMaK.389 The illuminated initial word on fol. 12r The Zurich SeMaK begins on fol. 12r with the first commandment, which starts with the illuminated word ‫‘ =( לידע‬to know or to realise that...’) (see Figure 44). The blackish-brown letters are written on a background of cubes drawn in 389 The illustrations accompanying the catchwords may relate to the text in an early SeMaK from 1317 (Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica, ebr. 147). This is the case on fol. 56v. The picture is from http://cja.huji.ac.il/browser.php?mode=treefriend&id=423&f=object, accessed on 23/12/2015.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 109

Figure 44: The initial word on fol. 12r, London, BL, Add. 18684.

red and blackish-brown ink and consisting of floral elements. Different kinds of figures occupy the space inside the letters. In this case, the outlines of the letters create an area in which the figures can exist – an ‘Existenzraum’ in Otto Pächt’s words.390 Basically, they were drawn by leaving their bodies blank and colouring in the space around them. Their faces and limbs have been drawn using the same dark brown ink. There are several dragons along with a sphinxlike creature, a lion, a dog, an ox, a griffin, a human face and a man who is crawling. The figures exhibit an aggressive dynamism: all of them are in motion, the lion and griffin are at odds with each other, one dragon is devouring another one, and the crawling human being seems to have the tail of the dragon being eaten in his mouth. At first glance, it is hard to imagine that the figures shown here could have some kind of relationship to the text. Drolleries within letters can be found in Ashkenazi book art ever since the 13th century.391 They occur in halakhic works, prayer books and in Bible manuscripts. The fabulous creatures in the Ashkenazi Bible manuscript BL, Add. 21160 from the 14th century actually go beyond the

390 Otto Pächt and Dagmar Thoss, Buchmalerei des Mittelalters: Eine Einführung (Munich: Prestel, 2004), 76–77. 391 In a 13th-century prayer book for Rosh Ha-Shanah and Yom Kippur, for example; London. BL, Add. 16916, fol. 48v.

110 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

outlines of the Hebrew letters, breaking out of them, as it were. It is not apparent whether they relate to the text ‫‘ =( ואלה שמות‬and these are the names’), which occurs at the beginning of Exodus; it seems the scribe concentrated more on drawing the figures than on linking them to the text:

Figure 45: London, BL, Add. 21160, fol. 63v, detail.

The SeMaK manuscript produced by Joseph Leroy (Paris, BNF, hébreu 643) also begins with an illustrated word, the letters of which contain outlines of mythical creatures (see Figure 46). The schematic figures primarily have a decorative character and lack the dynamism found in BL, Add. 18684.

Figure 46: Paris, BNF, hébreu 643, fol. 37v, detail.

In the Coburg Pentateuch (BL, Add. 19776) from 1390–1396, there is an illuminated initial word of a very similar style to the one in the Zurich SeMaK. The initial word Bereshit (‘In the beginning’) introduces the Masoretic notes on Genesis and is full of animals and fabulous creatures. These illustrations do not have an aggressive underlying tone at all, unlike those in the Zurich SeMaK:

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 111

Figure 47: London, BL, Add. 19776, fol. 190r, detail.

As opposed to the pictures in the manuscripts mentioned above, the figures in the Zurich SeMaK do not only have a decorative character. The motif of the human figure that appears to have a dragon’s tail in its mouth is reminiscent of obscaena (obscene depictions) in pictures drawn in the margins of Latin manuscripts. As Michael Camille writes, marginalia in Gothic book illumination also have a subversive character: ‘The illuminator usually followed the scribe, a procedure that framed his labor as secondary to, but also gave him a chance of undermining the always written Word’.392 In the vulgar motif of a person crawling towards a monster’s rump, the dividing line between human beings and animals is crossed, breaking a taboo, as Camille has also noted: ‘One of the most powerful statements that the monstrosities of marginal art make is that they violate the taboo that separates the human from the animal’.393 The monstrosity in the initial word ‫‘ =( לידע‬to know or to realise that…’), which contains the command to adhere to monotheism, a central element of Judaism, can hardly be regarded as mere decoration or humour. The depiction may be a visual comment on the wording of the first commandment in the SeMaK. This commandment begins with the sentence ‘Realise that the One who created Heaven and Earth is the only one who rules above and below and in all four directions of the world...’ and is supplemented by the remark that those philosophers who claim the world has no governor and is ruled by chance are lying and should not be listened to.394 Beginning with the belief that God controls

392 Camille, 1992, 22. 393 Ibid., 70. 394 The term ‘philosopher’ was always used in a pejorative sense in early rabbinical literature (see Daniel Krochmalnik, “Kynisches in der rabbinischen Literatur,” in Von Enoch bis Kafka. Festschrift für Karl E. Grözinger zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Manfred Voigts (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2002): 235–70, esp. p. 238). Philosophers were also referred to as ‘Epicureans’ in tannaitic literature, although heretics were generally meant rather than followers of Epicurus (see b

112 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

the world and rescued the People of Israel from the land of Egypt, every single person should believe in Redemption in the future, as ‘… after his death, [each] person is asked “Did you await salvation?” at the Last Judgement’.395 The crawling human being could be a depiction of the false philosopher or be taken as a visual warning of the consequences that disbelievers can expect to face one day. In the picture, the person is literally hanging on to what is evil, symbolised by the dragon. Dragons are known to have been depicted in Jewish book illumination ever since the first half of the 13th century. Even synagogues were decorated with reliefs containing dragons in the Middle Ages. In Jewish art, these mythical creatures were personifications of evil, just as they were in Christianity.396 The human figure writhing with the monster can also be seen in connection with Jewish-Christian polemics. In late medieval Christian art, monstrous figures did not just serve as expressions of sin, but to discredit those of a different faith.397 Obscene depictions of Jews became a feature of sculptures in public buildings from the early 13th century onwards. In Nuremberg, a ‘Judensau’ (German for ‘Jewish sow’), was put on the facade of the eastern choir in St Sebald Church around 1380.398 This sculpture, which is 7 m above ground, shows several Jews suckling at the sow’s teats, catching its excrement in a pot and attempting to feed it to it in a bowl. The Jews of Nuremberg, whose living quarters were very close to St Sebald Church, will no doubt have noticed this slanderous representation of them. The crawling human figure in the Zurich SeMaK could quite possibly be the scribe’s response to the abusive image on public display. Sanhedrin 99a–99b; Jenny R. Labendz, “Know what to answer the Epicurean: A diachronic study of the Apikoros in rabbinic literature,” Hebrew Union College Annual 74 (2003): 175–214 and Daniel Boyarin, Border Lines: The Partition of Judaeo-Christianity (Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 2004), 58). Isaac of Corbeil must have used the term ‘philosopher’ in this sense as well, as the Tosafists kept well away from philosophical studies in the 12th and 13th century (see Kanarfogel 1992, 69). 395 b Shabbat 31a. 396 Ilia Rodov, “Dragons: a symbol of evil in European synagogue decoration?,” Ars Judaica (2005): 63–84; see pp. 68–75 in this particular case. 397 Debra Higgs Strickland, Saracens, Demons, & Jews: Making Monsters in Medieval Art (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2003), 59. 398 The facades of numerous churches in Germany were ‘decorated’ with a Judensau from the 13th century onwards, and it became a highly influential anti-Jewish motif in German art. See Birgit Wiedl, “Laughing at the beast: the Judensau. Anti-Jewish propaganda and humor from the Middle Ages to the Early Modern Period,” in Laughter in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times. Epistemology of a Fundamental Human Behavior, Its Meaning, and Consequences, ed. Albrecht Classen (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010): 325–64; see p. 325 in particular. Regarding the use of the motif in the German-speaking area, see Isaiah Shachar, The Judensau. A Medieval Anti-Jewish Motif and Its History (London: Warburg Institute, 1974).

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

Figure 48: ‘Judensau’, Nuremberg, St Sebald Church.

 113

Figure 49: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 12r, detail.

The catchwords With all but one exception, the fourteen illuminated catchwords399 appear at regular intervals of eight pages. This is due to the way in which the quires are divided up in the book. The drawings are always at the bottom left of the margin and were made with the same ink as that used for writing. Like the figures depicted in the first word, many of the decorative elements in the catchwords can also be regarded as comments on what was written down. The personal characteristics of the scribe become more apparent here than they do in connection with decorating initial words. As already mentioned above, the margins beyond the text field were areas that he could shape more freely himself, a phenomenon that can also be found in the illumination of Gothic manuscripts.400 Hybrid creature on fol. 8v Folio 8v is part of the table of contents. This is where the individual laws of commandments 252 to 259 are presented. The catchword with the words ‫‘ =( דין דין‬law, law’) are underneath the entry on the precept forbidding Jews to demand interest on loans, ‫שלא להלות בריבית לישראל‬. A hybrid creature – part dragon, part horse – has a vine in its mouth with which it seems to be supporting itself, as it does not have any front legs. Its tail is wound around its own body and rises up over its

399 8v, 16v, 24v, 32v, 49v, 53v, 61v, 69v, 77v, 85v, 93v, 101v, 109v, 117v. 400 Randall, 1966, 20.

114 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 50: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 8v, detail.

back. The end of the creature’s tail is high up, reminiscent of a fleur-de-lis sceptre. The word ‫‘ =( דין‬law’) has been written on its body twice. The fleur-de-lis sceptre was a symbol of power and was widely employed as a motif for coins, sculptures, in stained glass and in book illumination. In these cases, kings were portrayed with a sceptre of this kind in one hand instead of an executioner’s sword whenever their role as a judge was emphasised.401 A depiction of a king passing judgement while holding a fleur-de-lis sceptre in his hand can also be found in Jewish book illumination, viz. in the Leipzig Maḥzor, where there is a scene in which King Nimrod is judging Abraham with a sceptre in his hand.402 Even if a loose connection does exist between the fleur-de-lis sceptre seen here and the words ‘law, law’, the illustration as a whole with the centaur-like animal does not seem to relate to the text at all. Building shown on fol. 16v The catchword is in commandment no. 12, ‫‘ =( להתפלל בכוונה‬Pray with kavanah [intention]’), which begins on fol. 15v, contains the words ‫‘ =( ואומ' ר"י‬and Rabbi Isaac says’) and refers to the extent to which one is permitted to repeat part of a prayer that was mistakenly left out if it is not necessary to repeat it. The illustration accompanying the catchword shows a magnificent town house with three spires. The words that the catchword contains have been incorporated into the 401 Heidelberg, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. Pal. germ. 164, fol. 010v, Sachsenspiegel, Landrecht zweites Buch: (1) Ldr. II 62 § 1, online: http://heidicon.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/id/34572. Accessed on 15/2/2016. 402 Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, MS Voll 1102/II, maḥzor, Worms, c. 1310, fol. 164v.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 115

Figure 51: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 16v, detail.

picture and are written on one side of the building. Part of a large front gate is shown on its longer side, above which the end of the wall can be seen, topped by battlements. There does not seem to be any direct link to the text here. Possibly, this elaborately designed building with its own defences was meant to be a synagogue. If this was, indeed, the case, then there would be an association between the picture and the main text after all. This is only a hypothesis, however, and cannot be backed up by any other evidence. A hairy creature shown on fol. 24v The next catchword is on the second page of commandment 32, ‫לעשות ציצית‬ (= ‘Make fringes’), which concerns the biblical obligation to produce tzitzit, or fringes (Numbers 15:38).

Figure 52: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 24v, detail.

116 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

On fol. 24v, there is a hairy creature at the bottom left that looks like a monkey, but has horns and wolf-like ears as well. This being seems to have donned a fur coat of sorts, and the beardless face peering out of it looks rather like a human’s (albeit a caricature of one). The figure’s right arm is wrapped around the back of a chair. The creature seems to be concentrating on something, but it is not clear what. To the left of the picture there is a letter in Hebrew, ‫( ז‬zayin), with a diacritical symbol above it denoting that it is a number; this refers to a gloss on the following page.403 It begins with a quotation from the tosafot on the Babylonian Talmud,404 enriched with commentaries on that work: Rav Yosef, who was blind, said: At first I would say: If someone told me that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who says a blind person is exempt from fulfilling the mitzvot, I would make a festive day for the sages, as I am not commanded and yet I perform the mitzvot. – comment by Rashi: he was blind – Now that I have heard what Rabbi Ḥanina says – ‘Greater is one who is commanded to do a mitzvah and performs it – comment by Rashi: […] someone who has an obligation and fulfils it is better, as he is more diligent and takes more care not to commit a transgression than a person who is not under any obligation. […] – than one who is not commanded to do a mitzvah and performs it’ – [I believe] the contrary: if someone told me that the halakhah is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, and a blind person is obligated in mitzvot, I would make a festive day for the sages. On the basis of this belief, Rabbenu Tam concluded that women were permitted to carry out the positive commandments that depend on time, although they were completely free [of them] and were not even obliged to do so by the sages.

There does not seem to be any direct link between the picture and the text. The hairy creature, which could portray anything from a devil to an ape or a wild man, clearly has nothing to do with making fringes. Did the artist want to remark on the fact that women could make them, perhaps? The mere notion of women possibly making fringes seemed so bizarre to the scribe that he got the idea of drawing a hirsute devil to put them off such thoughts. The subject seems to have sparked off some controversy,405 as a later scribe added a conflicting opinion once expressed by R. Meir of Rothenburg, writing it in black ink on the same page as the

403 In the printed edition: Isaac of Corbeil, Perez of Corbeil, Moshe of Zurich, 1980–1988, vol. 1, 106–7, n. 161. 404 b Kiddushin 31a. 405 For more on this controversy, see Avraham Grossman, Pious and Rebellious: Jewish Women in Medieval Europe (Brandeis: UPNE, 2004), 194 and Elisheva Baumgarten, Practicing Piety in Medieval Ashkenaz: Men, Women, and Everyday Religious Observance (Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 2014), 158.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 117

drawing406: ‘for it says the sons of Israel and not the daughters of Israel [are obliged to make tzitzit]’. Man with a crutch on fol. 32v

Figure 53: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 32v, detail.

Folio 32v is part of commandment no. 80, ‫‘ =( שלא לעבור על שבועת ביטוי‬That one does not break a vow of self-imposed restrictions’), which is based on Numbers 30:3. The scribe decorated the catchword with a motif that looks rather bizarre: a fashionably dressed man whose head is ‘impaled’ on his neck. In fact, his neck has practically been pushed into his mouth. With horns and animal’s ears on his head, his face seems to be a man’s, viewed from one side. He is balancing on one leg, as a crutch is tied to the other one at the knee. He is holding his right arm out to a lion, which is just mauling it. A rolled-up scroll is in his left hand, on which two words are written: ‘‫[‘ =( ’יודע שהיה‬had I] known that …’). This refers to the main text, which is concerned with the binding nature of vows and their absolution.

406 In the printed edition of the Zurich SeMaK, no distinction was made between the original glosses and this commentary, which was added later. This is why it appears as an original part of the Zurich SeMaK there. Isaac of Corbeil, Perez of Corbeil, Moshe of Zurich, 1980–1988, vol. 1, 106.

118 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

The drawing, in contrast, has no direct relationship to the main text, but is an illustration of the last gloss, which can be found on the same page.407 This text deals with the difficult question of the circumstances in which a vow is legally valid and permissible or is forbidden. A vow is only effective if it relates to something substantial – not to actions such as talking, eating or walking, in other words. The gloss refers to Chapter 1.4 in Nedarim (‘Vows’), a Mishnah tractate in the Talmud in which it says: ‘If someone says to his friend “konam [offering] is my mouth that speaks with you”, “[konam is] my hand that does work with you”, or “[konam is] my foot that walks with you”, [then] it is forbidden’.408 Theoretically speaking, these vows ought to have a binding quality since they relate to substantial things such as a person’s mouth, hand or foot, but they are still forbidden. The drawing in the margin at the bottom refers specifically to these three parts of the body. We can see from this that the artist who did the drawing was familiar with the content of the text. His depiction seems rather naive in a childlike way, though, as the obligation that went along with the vow has been translated literally. As Gabrielle Sed-Rajna has noted in connection with illustrations in maḥzor manuscripts, this simplified interpretation of the wording in the text is something of a problem: But their ‘message’, which at first sight seems to reflect the contents of the text which they illustrate, in fact reduces the meaning of the text to the level of plain, literal interpretation and, by doing so, may run counter to the intentions of the paytan.409

The illustration on fol. 32v goes beyond a literal interpretation of the text, as the obligation of debt that arises for the person taking the vow by involving his mouth, hand and foot is linked to draconian forms of punishment. The scribe was unable to draw on any existing iconographic tradition when it came to choosing which forms of punishment to depict for the guilty, and displayed extraordinary creativity. He chose not to list the forbidden vows one by one, but united them all in a single hybrid. By doing this, he was able to create a particularly shocking effect serving as a deterrent. Perhaps he had already seen similar pictures elsewhere in which the characteristics were reflected by the creature’s anatomy. Such hybrid creatures sometimes served as allegories in medieval Christian art, standing for

407 Ibid., 147–48, note 231, and note 9 in the manuscript. 408 Mishnah, Nedarim 1:4; Philip Blackman, Mishnayoth. Order Nashim (London: Mishna Press, 1953), 212. 409 Gabrielle Sed-Rajna, “The Image in the Text: Methodological Aspects of the Analysis of Illustrations and their Relation to the Text,” Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library 75 (1993): 25–32, esp. p. 28.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 119

the seven deadly sins, for instance.410 The pictures of the ‘figura mundi’ in the Krumlov Picture Codex from 1370 (Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 370; Figure 54)411 and the Metten Paupers’ Bible from 1414/15 are two examples of allegories.412

Figure 54: Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 370, fol. 155v.

Figure 55: Nuremberg, St Sebald Church, the ‘Prince of the World’ .

Although there are quite a number of parallels to these one-legged creatures, there is no evidence that the image of the man with the crutch was influenced by them. The portrayal of ‘Frau Welt’ (literally, ‘Lady World’), an allegorical figure, became more and more popular as printing spread in the 15th century, but as it had only just appeared by this point,413 it is doubtful whether our scribe could have had any access to Christian manuscripts. What he may well have seen, though, was a sculpture at St Sebald Church in Nuremberg from around 1330 portraying the ‘Prince of the World’, a beguiling but deceitful man of standing (Figure 55). Reprehensibility

410 André Utzinger, “Thomas Hobbes’ ‘Leviathan’: Anatomie eines Staats-Wesens, ” in Spinnenfuss und Krötenbauch. Genese und Symbolik von Kompositwesen, ed. Paul Michel (Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2013): 279–316, esp. pp. 279–302. 411 Vienna, ÖNB, cod. 370, fol. 155v. 412 Munich, BSB Clm 8201, fol. 95r. 413 Susanne Blöcker, Studien zur Ikonographie der Sieben Todsünden in der niederländischen und deutschen Malerei und Graphik: von 1450–1560 (Münster: LIT, 1993), 16.

120 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

is expressed in anatomical terms in his case as well: viewed from the front, he seems to be perfectly trustworthy with his one hand raised to swear an oath, but from behind, his deceitfulness is revealed, his rotting body having been eaten away and infested by snakes and toads. Hunting scene on fol. 40v

Figure 56: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 40v, detail.

Fol. 40v is part of commandment no. 95, ‫‘ =( להתאבל על ירושלים‬Mourn for Jerusalem’), the positive commandment to mourn on the Ninth of Av in memory of the destruction of the Temple. The commandment is spread over several folios (40r to 42r). The drawing in the margin at the bottom of folio 40v (see Figure 56) was made from the middle of the leaf to the left-hand margin. It shows a hunting scene that runs from right to left in the same direction as the Hebrew handwriting, which is customary in Jewish book art. The scene is dominated by a huntsman standing in the foreground, his face revealing crude features. He is wearing a hood with a headband around it and a fashionable patterned ‘Schecke’ (a close-fitting short jacket) over which a bugle is hanging. Armed with a long spear, the huntsman is also in charge of two dogs on leads. A greyhound is running ahead of him with its tongue hanging out of its mouth. It has already drawn close to its prey, a small hare smiling in a carefree way as it struts ahead of the hunters. Towards the front, the scene is framed by a tree trunk protruding from the ground. An open scroll is floating above it, bearing the word ‫‘ =( מבדיל‬separate’), which refers to the separation between ‘holy’ and ‘profane’. The surrounding section deals with the

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 121

question of what is supposed to happen if the Ninth of Av (Tisha B’Av), the Jewish day of mourning, occurs as Shabbat ends. Havdalah, the Jewish ritual that marks the end of Shabbat and the beginning of a new week, is shortened in this case or postponed. Only ‘Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe, Creator of the fire’s lights’ is said in this case – the blessing over aromatic spices is forgone and the blessing over wine is postponed until the following night. In the following section, we shall turn to the question of whether a connection could exist between the hunting scene depicted and the main text. Since scenes of this kind accompany widely differing texts and text genres in Jewish book illumination, it is easy to get the impression that the motif was used randomly without necessarily relating to the text at all. Saskia Dönitz writes this about the hunting scene on a piece of waste parchment from Hildesheim: The fact that the same motif is used in many liturgical manuscripts as decoration for various Piyyutim demonstrates that the motifs were part of a collection used again and again by manuscript illuminators, without any connection to the text.414

And yet there is some common ground among Jewish book illuminators regarding the point at which hunting scenes were added in such manuscripts. There is no question of the hunting scenes being of a ‘Jewish genre’, as the hare, which is not kosher, cannot be the prey that is being hunted in a Jewish context. The practice of hunting is condemned in the Talmud and early rabbinical literature.415 In the Bible, Nimrod and Esau were both regarded as men who rebelled against God; they were the embodiment of an antithesis against the spirit of Judaism. The Edomites, who were descendants of Esau,416 were referred to in the Hebrew Bible as eternal enemies of Israel.417 In the rabbinical literature following the Bar Kokhba revolt (132–135 CE), Edom was equated with heathen Rome. This parallel was transferred to Christian Rome following the Christianisation of the city in the 4th century. In medieval Jewish literature, Edom became a symbol of Christianity per se.418 In the Middle Ages, it may have been the case that some Jews went hunting – in fact, we have evidence that they employed falcons in hunts 414 Saskia Dönitz, “Puzzling the past: Reconstructing a mahzor from receipt wrappings,” in Genizat Germania: Hebrew and Aramaic Binding Fragments from Germany in Context, ed. Andreas Lehnardt (Leiden: Brill, 2010): 29–40; see p. 34 in this particular case. 415 W. Landau, “Ueber Thierquälerei nach den Grundsätzen des Judenthums,” Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums 12 (1863): 41–55 esp. p. 51. 416 Gen 36:8. 417 Ez 35:5. 418 Asaf Turgeman, “Mein Bruder ist ein Einzelkind: Die Esau-Darstellung in jüdischen Schriften des Mittelalters,” in Esau – Bruder und Feind, ed. Gerhard Langer (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009):135–153; see p. 144 in particular.

122 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

in France – but the rabbinical authorities in Ashkenaz roundly condemned hunting.419 R. Meir of Rothenburg wrote the following in a responsum: ‘But I, the author, say that anyone who hunts animals with dogs – as the goyim do – will not be permitted to take part in the Feast of Leviathan [on the Day of Judgement when his meat is eaten by the pious]’.420 Many hunting motifs in Jewish book art refer indirectly to the persecution of the Jewish people and the eschatological hopes that arose from that, and can sometimes be regarded as visual comments on Christian-Jewish polemics. Kurt Schubert, for example, has shown that the hunting scene in the Worms Maḥzor from 1272 (see Figure 57) had a polemic background and the devilish huntsman is representative of Christian society.421 The fleeing doe or stag symbolises the People of Israel, as Rahel Wischnitzer-Bernstein has pointed out.422

Figure 57: Jerusalem, JNUL, MS hebr. 4, 781, fol. 130v, detail.

The doe in the Song of Songs, which was seen as an allegory concerning the People of Israel, who were loved by God, experiences a shift in meaning in these pictures: in this case, it is a symbol of a people persecuted by the nations that

419 Leor Jacobi, “Jewish Hawking in Medieval France: Falconry, Rabbenu Tam, and the Tosafists,” Oqimta 1 (2013): 421–504, esp. pp. 475–76. 420 The passage refers to b Baba Batra 75a and Leviticus Rabbah 13:3; Meir of Rothenburg and Moses L. Bloch: ‫ספר שערי תשובות‬: Sefer Sheʿare Teshuvot MaHaRa˝M b[en] R[abbī] Barukh, Rabbi Meir′s von Rothenburg bisher unedirte Responsen nach Handschriften (Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1891), 7, No. 27. 421 Kurt Schubert, “Wikkuach-Thematik in den Illustrationen hebräischer Handschriften,” Journal of Jewish Art 12/13 (1986/1987): 247–56; see p. 248 especially. 422 Rahel Wischnitzer-Bernstein, Symbole und Gestalten der jüdischen Kunst (Berlin: Scholem, 1935), 79.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 123

deny God’s very existence.423 Like the doe in the Worms Maḥzor (Figure 57), which has already been seized by a hunting dog, there is hardly any chance of the deer being rescued in the Tripartite Maḥzor (South Germany, c. 1322) either (Figure 58).424 There are two huntsmen who are blowing a horn for the hunt at the same time, and the space on the folio is completely taken up by their dogs chasing their prey. Two of them have already sunk their fangs into the doe’s flanks, in fact:

Figure 58: London, BL, Add. 22413, fol. 49r, detail.

Hunting motifs are not just symbols of religious persecution, though: different stages of eschatological hope can be recognised in them as well. Katrin Kogman-Appel has called a small hunting scene in the Leipzig Maḥzor (c. 1310) a ‘variation of the traditional hunting motif’.425 A tired dog can be seen sniffing the trail left by a sprightly hare. In Kogman-Appel’s view, the preconditions for the arrival of the Messiah do not exist yet, but the picture implies that a better

423 Gabrielle Sed-Rajna, Le mahzor enluminé. Les voies de formation d’un programme iconographique (Leiden: Brill, 1983), 20. 424 London, BL, Ms Add. 22413, fol. 49r. 425 Katrin Kogman-Appel, “The Scales in the Leipzig Mahzor: Penance and Eschatology in Early Fourteenth-Century Germany,” in Between Judaism and Christianity: Art Historical Essays in Honor of Elisheva (Elisabeth) Revel-Neher, ed. Katrin Kogman-Appel and Mati Meyer (Leiden: Brill, 2009): 307–18; see p. 310 in particular.

124 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

age is about to begin, seeing as the hare has still not been caught and the dog has seemingly lost its ability to hunt (see Figure 110).426 In a large number of Pesach Haggadot, the fleeing doe has been replaced by a hare trying to escape pursuit. The allegory of hare-hunting developed in a similar way to the earlier model of the stag hunt.427 One of these hare-hunts was more significant than the others: the hunting scene in the Sephardic Rylands Haggadah from the 14th century.428 In this picture, the huntsman is accompanied by a white dog with black spots, a reference to the black-and-white habit worn by Dominican friars, who were not afraid to convert Jews to Christianity, even by force. In their religious zeal, they actually referred to themselves as ‘domini canes’ and were portrayed as Dalmatian dogs on a fresco in the Spanish Chapel of Santa Maria Novella in Florence (1365–68) – an allegory of the Triumphant Church and the Dominican Order.429 In the illuminated Haggadot produced in the German-speaking part of Europe, the motif of the hare hunt not only served as an allegory, but stood for the acronym ‫יקנה"ז‬, ‘YKNHZ’. This consisted of the initial letters of the words Yayin (the blessing over wine), Kiddush (the blessing to sanctify Shabbat and Jewish holidays), Ner (the blessing of light), Havdalah (the separation ritual marking the end of Shabbat and the beginning of the new week) and Zman (the blessing of time). If the end of Shabbat happens to be on a holiday, then the blessings are meant to be said in exactly the same order as ‘YKNHZ’, which is therefore a mnemonic device. As a joke, the Jews who lived in German-speaking areas pronounced the letters YKNHZ like ‘Jag en Has’ (roughly, yakenhaz), which literally means ‘hunt a hare’ in German.430 Since the hunting scene in the Zurich SeMaK is right next to the text that covers the Havdalah and even the catchword (‘separate’) relates to it, it could be assumed that the vox memoralis ‘YKNHZ’ has been visualised by this hunting scene. Such an interpretation is mere speculation, however, as the shortened ritual before the Ninth of Av, the day of mourning, differs from the one that takes place before a joyful feast day in a number of major ways, meaning that the mnemonic word YKNHZ needn’t be used here. Similarly, one should bear in mind that in Jewish book illumination, the hare-hunt only started being employed as a

426 Ibid. 427 Wischnitzer-Bernstein, 1935, 79. 428 Manchester, John Rylands Library, Hebr. 6, fol. 29. 429 Schubert, 1986/1987, 254. 430 Müller & Schlosser, 1898, 134.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 125

motif standing for YKNHZ in the 15th century431 – the oldest surviving depiction of the vox memoralis was by the artist Joel ben Simeon and was produced in Ulm in the second half of that century.432

Figure 59: London, BL, Add. 14762, fol. 4r, detail.

The manuscript of the Zurich SeMaK known as Add. 18684 is around 70 years older than the one produced by Joel ben Simeon. It cannot be ruled out that the acronym YKNHZ was already pronounced ‘Jag en Has’ at that time. If this is indeed the case, then an associative link may well have existed between the hare-hunt depictions and the act of Havdalah, although there is no hard proof that this hypothesis is right. What is more likely is that the hunting motif in the Zurich SeMaK should be interpreted as a symbol of the persecution of the People of Israel. This is actually the case in a hunting scene depicted in an early SeMaK. The illuminations in the siddur/SeMaK known as Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75, which was produced in the area around Lake Constance in South Germany, have been dated to 1312–1322 by Sarit Shalev-Eyni433 and have a representative character (see Figure 60). They are closely connected with the type of book art that developed in this region from 1300 and may possibly be from the same urban workshop that produced the illu431 Epstein, 1997, 17. According to Marc Michael Epstein, hare hunts only occur in Ashkenazic manuscripts from the 15th century onwards. This is correct in the case of the illuminated Haggadot that show hare hunts led by huntsmen. In the Laud Maḥzor, which was created in the 1270s, a hunting scene is depicted in which a stag is being hunted as well as a hare. 432 Katrin Kogman-Appel, “The Illustrations of the Washington Haggadah,” in The Washington Haggadah by Joel ben Simeon, ed. and transl. by David Stern and Katrin Kogman-Appel (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011): 52–120; see p. 85 in particular. 433 Shalev-Eyni, 2010, 189.

126 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

minations in the Gradual of St Katharinental.434 Christian artists worked on these commissioned books and manuscripts in close collaboration with the Jewish patrons and scribes.

Figure 60: Vienna, ÖNB, Hebr. 75, fol. 163r, detail.

Although the figures in the decorative hunting scene depicted in the Viennese siddur/SeMaK are all in motion, the scene still strikes one as being rather static, as the huntsman, his five dogs and the fleeing stag are entwined by a vine and held where they are by the individual loops of its winding tendrils. The hunting motif is actually part of the ornamentation of the initial word ‫‘ =( לאבד‬destroy’, ‘exterminate’), which introduces the second chapter. This next part contains the commandments on the body as per the Second Commandment, ‘Thou shalt have no other gods before me’. The first commandments of Chapter 2 are listed underneath the hunting scene: ‘Destroy the name of idolatry, break the Mazzevot in pieces, cut down Asherah’s groves, demolish her caves, push her altars over, wreck the devices of idolatry’. But it also says this: ‘Sanctify God’s name’ and ‘Hold fast to God’s name’. All of these commandments are concerned with the tense relationship Jews have towards the idolatrous nations. In the commandment on sanctifying God’s name, the conditions are described under which a Jew is obliged to die a martyr’s death. The fact that the Jewish patrons wished to have a hunting scene put on precisely this page must be seen in a particular context, viz. the tradition of including illustrations in Jewish prayer books, where the hunted hind or stag was a symbol of the People of Israel’s persecution.435 434 Shalev-Eyni, 2011, 21. 435 Shalev-Eyni, 2010, 76.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 127

The hunting scene in the Zurich SeMaK Add. 18684 can be seen in connection with the persecutions that the People of Israel had to suffer, as the commandment ‘Mourn for Jerusalem’ is directly related to the wanton destruction the Gentiles caused there. Besides that, a close connection also exists between the Ninth of Av and subsequent persecution of the Jews. This is apparent from the wording of the commandment ‘Mourn for Jerusalem’. The text begins with a list of Jewish days of fasting and continues with a quotation from the Babylonian Talmud:436 ‘When there is persecution, there will be fasting, [and] when there is peace, there will be a holiday’.437 Since Jews were repeatedly persecuted in the Middle Ages, the mourning associated with the Ninth of Av took on new relevance each time. In Ashkenaz, where they had constantly lost their rights and been the subject of persecution again and again ever since the First Crusade, it became a tradition on the Ninth of Av to think back on the latest catastrophes that had befallen them.438 Kinot (lamentations) were created that are still part of the liturgy for the Ninth of Av today, such as one that R. Meir of Rothenburg wrote to commemorate the burning of the Talmud in Paris in 1242:439 Question, burnt in the fire, about the wellbeing of the mourners, who long to live in the courtyard of your holy abode, who languish in the dust of the earth and suffer, who are disturbed by the burning of your scrolls they are darkened, without a glimmer, and hope for daylight to shine upon them and you […].440

The Jews living in Nuremberg at the end of the 14th century found themselves facing increasing hardship as time went on. They were still keenly aware of the expulsions and killings that had taken place in December 1349 when no less than

436 b Rosh Ha-Shanah 18b. 437 Isaac of Corbeil, Perez of Corbeil, Moshe of Zurich, 1980–1988, vol. 1, 187. 438 Ismar Elbogen, Der jüdische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung (Leipzig: Fock, 1913), 231. 439 See Chapter 2.1, Zarfat. 440 Gershom Scholem, “Translation of Sha’ali Serufa. A Medieval Lamentation,” in Lament in Jewish Thought. Philosophical, Theological, and Literary Perspectives, ed. Ilit Ferber and Paula Schwebel (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2014): 340–48, esp. p. 341.

128 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

562 Jewish citizens were murdered.441 Once that was done, the synagogue and Jewish living quarters were knocked down to make room for a new marketplace (the Hauptmarkt) and a fruit market.442 The few Jewish citizens who managed to survive were relocated to a much less desirable area on the outskirts of town where they lived in ghetto-like conditions. This Jewish quarter consisted of buildings located around a courtyard and could only be entered through two gatehouses.443 In 1385 they were shown quite plainly just how precarious their position was: the 34 Jewish money-lenders in the town were taken prisoner in connection with King Wenceslas’ cancellation of Christians’ debts to local Jews and were held until every single one of them had agreed to forfeit most of his outstanding loans.444 When the Zurich SeMaK Add. 18684 was produced in 1390, the King announced yet another cancellation of debts to Jewish money-lenders, but by that time only half of the financiers who had forfeited their promissory notes and pledges five years earlier were still living in Nuremberg.445 Owing to Jewish pictorial tradition, which took hunting scenes to be allegories concerning the persecution of God’s beloved People, it was easy for the scribe who produced the Zurich SeMaK to see the malicious huntsman as a symbol of the Jews’ violent opponents. Whatever he wanted to express with the little hare’s mysterious smile is unclear, however. Perhaps it was meant to be a look of resignation reflecting the Jewish community’s powerlessness in the face of destruction. Or does the hare actually feel a sense of superiority because it realises a better future is close at hand? That would explain why it is not trying to flee, at least. A dog and cat on fol. 53v Folio 53 contains a catchword consisting of four words in Hebrew: ‫כאילו שפכת דם‬ ‫‘ =( נקי‬as if you had spilt innocent blood’). The vertical lettering is on a sawn-off tree trunk flanked by a dog and cat, and both animals are touching the stump with a paw (Figure 61). The cat on the left has ruffled fur and is glowering at

441 Siegmund Salfeld, Das Martyrologium des Nürnberger Memorbuches (Berlin: L. Simion, 1898), 61–65 and 219–38. 442 Wolfgang Stromer, “Die Metropole im Aufstand gegen König Karl IV. Nürnberg zwischen Wittelsbach und Luxemburg, Juni 1348 – September 1349,” Mitteilungen des Vereins für Geschichte der Stadt Nürnberg 65 (1978): 55–90; see p. 80 in this particular case. 443 Toch, 1998, 35. 444 Arthur Süssmann, Die Judenschuldentilgungen unter König Wenzel, PhD thesis, University of Breslau, 1906; (Berlin: L. Lamm, 1907), 52–53. 445 Michael Toch, “Der jüdische Geldhandel in der Wirtschaft des deutschen Spätmittelalters: Nürnberg 1350–1499,” Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte 117 (1981): 283–310; see p. 299 in particular.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 129

Figure 61: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 53v, detail.

the reader, while the powerful-looking dog has raised its tail and is sticking its tongue out. The catchword was illustrated using the same brown ink that was employed to write the main text. In addition to that, two details were highlighted in red ink: the dog’s tongue is a reddish colour and the cat has red, bloodshot eyes. The surrounding text is connected with positive commandment no. 105, ‫‘ =( ללמוד תורה‬Learn Torah’). This precept is based on Deut 5:1, ‘Hear, O Israel, the statutes and the ordinances which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and observe to do them’. In this case, the reader is urged to praise the Torah and learn to love it. The joyful and even erotic aspect of studying the Torah is brought to the fore in verses such as this one: ‘A lovely hind and a graceful doe, let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; with her love be thou ravished always’.446 An explanation then follows – seamlessly – as to why it is essential to know the law. This is done by means of an anecdote taken from the Talmud tractate Derekh Erez Zuta447 in which Rabbi Akiva relates how he came to realise that studying the Torah is essential: ‘One day’, he said, ‘I came across a dead body by the roadside that nobody felt obliged to bury. I carried it roughly four miles before I came across a cemetery where I could bury it. When I told R. Eliezer and R. Joshua what had happened, they said to me: ‘Every single step you took is as if you had spilt [an] innocent [man’s] blood [in other words, it will be held against you like blood guilt].’

446 Prov 5:19. 447 DEZ 8:9.

130 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Akiva had not been aware of the fact that according to Jewish law, he should have buried the body where he had found it. If he had known what the Torah says on this point, he would not have made such a mistake. The artist was not interested in the episode about Rabbi Akiva and did not want to illustrate the commandment on learning the Torah either; rather, he limited himself to illustrating the wording ‘as if you had spilt an innocent man’s blood’. He associated it with aggression and violence and so decided on the picture of a dog and cat in a bitter confrontation, giving the two basically harmless animals a rather ferocious touch using red ink. By juxtaposing this image with the text, the commandment ‘Learn Torah’ involuntarily obtains an expanded meaning that goes well beyond what Isaac of Corbeil intended. A figure with a matzah and a goblet on fol. 61v

Figure 62: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 61v, detail.

The horizontal catchword on fol. 61v consists of the two words ‫‘ =( אינו שואל‬does not ask’). It is written inside commandment 142, ‫להגיד לבנו ליל ט"ו בניסן יציאת מצרים‬ (= ‘On the night before 15 Nissan, tell your son about the exodus from Egypt’), which is based on Exodus 13:8. This describes how one’s son should be instructed on the Seder on the eve of Pesach and be encouraged to play an active role in the Pesach ritual; any special aspects that come to light in the course of the evening should encourage the boy to ask questions. The participants at the Seder are supposed to lean to the left while they sit around the table (as people once did in ancient times). The son is supposed to be given four tumblers of wine, two before the meal

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 131

so that he asks [‘why is the second glass drunk beforehand?’].448 Then the sentence follows that contains the catchword, ‘does not ask’: ‘And even if the son does not ask, his father should explain it to him, as it is written “And thou shalt show thy son”’ (Exodus 13:8). The picture associated with it depicts a man half reclining and looking to the left, out of the picture. His rough facial features are shown in a side view. The red accentuation of his eyes and the inside of his mouth almost make him look demonic. An animal’s ear also seems to be sticking out above his left eye. The man’s head is covered with a gugel (a shoulder-length hood) and he is wearing a jacket like the huntsman’s on fol. 40v, but plainer, longer and not as tightly fitting. The jacket has buttons at the neck and on the sleeves. The man is also wearing a kind of belt bag below his left arm which has a touch of red around the rim. The hood around his face is outlined in red. He is holding a round object in his left hand and a nuppenbecher in his right hand (beakers of this kind became popular in South Germany in the late 13th century).449 There is also a tree stump with an axe rammed into it behind the man’s left leg. This illustration is clearly related to the text. The position of the man, who is half-reclining, is reminiscent of the leaning posture stipulated at Passover Seders.450 The round object in the man’s left hand looks as if it is a matzah and the glass beaker is no doubt his wine glass. A nuppenbecher being used this way can also be seen in the Ashkenazi Erna Michael Haggadah from the early 15th century (Figure 63). Exactly what the axe in the tree stump was used for is unclear, as it is not mentioned in the main text. Besides the grim expression on the man’s face, other associations come to mind regarding the wicked son, to name just one iconographic tradition – the young man who deliberately breaks his ties with the Jewish community in the Passover Haggadah by asking ‘What is this service to you?’ The story of the four sons in the Passover Haggadah – the wise son, the wicked son, the simple son and the son who does not know how to ask – demonstrates the different ways of approaching Jewish tradition. In Ashkenazi

448 This explanation is not contained in the SeMaK and comes from the Shulḥan Arukh: Josef Karo, Oraḥ Ḥayyim,‫אורח חיים‬, in Shulḥan Arukh, ‫( שולחן ערוך‬Jerusalem: El Hamekoroth, 1956); see para. 473, section 7, 108v. 449 Anne Schulz, Essen und Trinken im Mittelalter (1000–1300): Literarische, kunsthistorische und archäologische Quellen (Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter, 2011), 500–502. 450 To perform the ritual properly, he really ought to be lying in his left, which he is not doing here. It is unclear whether the man was pictured lying on the wrong side deliberately (a sign of artistic licence), as the Haggadot do differ in some respects (e.g. on fol. 19b of the Barcelona Haggadah, London, BL, MS Add. 14761).

132 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 63: Jerusalem, The Israel Museum, ms 181/18, fol. 10r.

Figure 64: Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebraicus 37, fol. 25r.

Haggadot, the wicked son is portrayed as a violent person, as a soldier or as a conceited young dandy. The oldest Ashkenazi pictures of the four different sons originate from the first part of the 15th century, such as those in Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 37 (the ‘Hamburg Miscellany’).451 In that manuscript, the rebellious son is not just a thug, though – drawn with his trousers falling down, he looks a ridiculous character (see Figure 64).

451 Zsófia Buda, Sacrifice and Redemption in the Hamburg Miscellany: The Illustrations of a Fifteenth-Century Ashkenazi Manuscript, PhD thesis in Medieval Studies (Budapest: Central European University, 2012), 101.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

Figure 65: Fol. 202v, Darmstadt, HLuHB, Cod. or. 13.

 133

Figure 66: Nuremberg, Stadtbibliothek, Mendel Housebook, Amb. 317.2°, fol. 61r (Mendel I).

Although the borderline between the simpleton and the wicked son seems to be blurred in this particular case, the statement it makes is still quite clear: although he is depicted as an imbecile, the wicked son is nevertheless an angry aggressor swinging a club at his own kin. In Jewish book art, weapons such as swords and spears are often attributes that the evil son possesses.452 This does not seem to fit in at all with the man reclining in our manuscript, though. He has no weapons on him whatsoever – all he is holding in his hands is a wine glass and a matzah, which both play a part in the Pesach ritual. We can therefore safely assume that the axe in the tree stump was not meant to be seen as a weapon, but simply as a tool; as a picture in the Hammelburg Maḥzor from 1348 shows us,453 an axe or hatchet could also be associated with a woodcutter’s work (Figure 65). An axe was also an attribute associated with carpenters, as illustrated in the Mendel Housebook from Nuremberg (one of the ‘Hausbücher’ of the ‘Zwölfbruderstiftung’ from 1437) where a carpenter is shown working with such tools (Figure 66). The jacket and belt bag that the carpenter is wearing are reminiscent of the clothing worn by the man in our manuscript. By depicting him as a craftsman, the artist possibly intended to make the reader think of a ‘simple’ 452 For example on fol. 5v of the Washington Haggadah, Washington, Library of Congress, which was finished in 1478. 453 Darmstadt, Hessische Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek, Cod. or. 13.

134 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

man of limited intellectual capacity. The words ‘and if the son does not ask…’ have an equivalent in the Passover Haggadah, viz. in the son ‘who does not know how to ask’. He was not depicted as a child in the Ashkenazi Haggadot, but as a simpleton or fool. In the Hamburg Miscellany (Hamburg, SUB, Codex Hebraicus 37), one can see the mental effort in the man’s face, and in the Washington Haggadah he is even wearing a jester’s cap complete with donkey’s ears (Figure 67).

Figure 67: Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebraicus 37, fol. 25r.

Figure 68: The Washington Haggadah, fol. 6r.

Seen in this light, the characteristics of the man depicted on fol. 61v take on a new dimension; he was not meant to look like a demon, but a dunce, and his face is not twisted by fury, but by plain incomprehension (Figure 69):

Figure 69: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 61v.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 135

Figure 70: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 69v.

A lion on fol. 69v The catchword on fol. 69v belongs to commandment no. 150, ‫לקשור תפילין של יד‬ (= ‘Bind a prayer strap round your hand’), which originally comes from Deuteronomy 6:4–8: Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one. And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be upon thy heart; and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes.454

The drawing above shows a side view of a lion with an arched back and a striking tail with four tufts of fur on end. Its mane reveals that it is a male.455 The lion is bending over three little cubs peeping out of a hole in the ground, its mouth stretched open. The catchword is on a half-preserved banner on which the word ‫היד‬ (= ‘the hand’) is written. The sentence it relates to goes: ‫ואם יניחם על היד יהיו לאחרים‬ ‫‘ =( לאות‬and if one wraps them round one’s arm, it is a sign to the others’).456 There does not seem to be any obvious link between the picture and the text written on folios 69v and 70r. The roaring lion looks terrifying – it seems as if the predator

454 Deut 6:4–8. 455 Michel Pastoureau, Das mittelalterliche Bestiarium (Darmstadt: Primus, 2013), 69. 456 Fol. 70r, note ‫א‬.

136 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

wants to eat its own cubs – but that seems to run counter to the positive commandment about putting on prayer straps. In medieval heraldry, the symbol that was used most widely was that of a lion.457 This majestic predator was regarded as the king of the animals in Jewish458 and Christian thinking alike and even became a popular attribute of secular rulers. Heraldic lions served as a model for the illustration on fol. 69v. The striking tail of the lion, which is decorated with a large tuft of hair in the middle, is reminiscent of the lions depicted in coats of arms used by the nobility in the Middle Ages.459 Lions with such tails can be found in Ashkenazi manuscripts from the 13th century onwards.460 One example from a SeMaK manuscript from 1337 is shown below – a heraldic lion wearing a crown (Figure 71):

  Figure 71: Munich, BSB, Cod. Hebr. 135, fol. 134v . Lions did not just conjure up positive associations, however – sometimes they were depicted as a symbol of injustice or cruelty.461 Christian animal symbolism linked the lion to a number of different roles. In the Physiologus, an early Christian bestiary which became very popular in the Middle Ages, the lion is regarded 457 Michel Pastoureau, ‘Quel est le roi des animaux?’, in Actes des congrès de la Société des historiens médiévistes de l’enseignement supérieur public. Le monde animal et ses représentations au moyen-âge (XIe – XVe siècles), ed. Francis Cerdan (Toulouse: Société des historiens médiévistes de l’enseignement supérieur public, 1984: 133–42, esp. p. 133. 458 b Ḥagigah 13b. 459 Such as the one belonging to Margrave Heinrich von Meissen, depicted in Codex Manesse, Heidelberg, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. Pal. germ. 848, fol. 14v, online: http://digi.ub.uniheidelberg.de/diglit/cpg848/0024. Accessed on 20/2/2016. 460 For example in the South German Maḥzor from 1270–1290; Budapest, Kaufmann Collection MS a388, http://kaufmann.mtak.hu/en/ms388/ms388-068v.htm. Accessed on 20/2/2016. 461 Dirk Jäckel, Der Herrscher als Löwe: Ursprung und Gebrauch eines politischen Symbols im Früh- und Hochmittelalter (Cologne: Böhlau, 2006), 119.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 137

as the personification of Christ.462 At the other end of the scale, lions were also linked with the devil.463 A comparison of this kind was made in the New Testament: ‘Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour’.464 In the bestiaries and early natural histories of the Middle Ages, various qualities and types of behaviour were described that lions supposedly had. The third quality named in the Physiologus is the following: When the lioness gives birth to her cubs, she brings them forth dead, and watches over them for three days, until their sire, arriving from the third day, breathes in their faces and gives them life. Thus the omnipotent Father, our Lord Jesus Christ, on the third day arose from the dead.465

The idea developed in the Physiologus that the lion cubs were stillborn and were only brought to life by their father breathing on them or roaring was frequently depicted in medieval bestiaries.466 In Konrad of Megenberg’s natural-history work Das Buch der Natur, which was produced between 1348 and 1350, for example, it says the following: Augustînus spricht, sô diu lewinn gepirt, sô slâfen die lewel drei tag unz der vater kümt, der schreit gar laut ob in, von dem geschrai erschrickent si und erwachent.467

The lion that roars at its cubs was repeatedly pictured in medieval bestiaries, one example being the Bestiaire d’amour rimet from the 13th–14th century (Paris, BNF, MS Français 1951). The illustration of the lion in the SeMaK manuscript Add. 18684 has a certain similarity to these depictions.

462 Sabine Obermaier, “Einführung und Überblick,” in Tiere und Fabelwesen im Mittelalter, ed. Sabine Obermaier (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2009): 1–25, esp. pp. 11–12. 463 Jäckel, 2006, 143. 464 1 Peter 5:8. 465 Willene B. Clark, A Medieval Book of Beasts. The Second-family Bestiary: Commentary, Art, Text and Translation (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2006), 120. 466 For example in Hildegard of Bingen, ‘Das Buch der Physika’, in Wisse die Wege. Ratschläge fürs Leben, ed. Johannes Bühler (Frankfurt/Main: Insel-Verlag, 1997), 130–71, esp. p. 165; Obermaier, 2009, 12. 467 Conradus de Megenberg, Das Buch der Natur: Die erste Naturgeschichte in deutscher Sprache (Stuttgart: Karl Aue, 1861), 143. English translation: ‘Augustine says: Once the lioness has given birth, the cubs sleep for three days until the father comes over. He shouts at them loudly [and] startled by this shouting they awaken’.

138 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 72: Fol. 18r, Paris, BNF, MS Français 1951.

Owing to their christological interpretations and anti-Jewish polemics, however,468 medieval bestiaries are hardly likely to have served as direct sources of inspiration for Jewish manuscripts, even though it was not the case that bestiaries always linked lions to Christ’s resurrection.469 Numerous stories and descriptions about lions certainly exist in Jewish writing, the midrashim and fables,470 but the motif of a lion roaring at its cubs does not seem to exist. There is no Jewish equivalent to the Physiologus either for that matter. The motif gradually took on a life of its own and became part of everyday culture. We can still spot it in church sculptures, frescoes and stained glass in choir stalls,471 and on floor tiles as well.472 The motif gained popularity in secular arts and crafts in the 14th century, too. Depictions of lions inspired by the Physiologus can be found on

468 Debra Higgs Strickland, “The Jews, Leviticus, and the Unclean in Medieval English Bestiaries,” in: Beyond the Yellow Badge: Anti-Judaism and Antisemitism in Medieval and Early Modern Visual Culture, ed. Mitchell B. Merback (Leiden: Brill, 2008): 203–32. 469 This link is missing in Konrad of Megenberg’s Buch der Natur, for example (1309–1374). Conradus de Megenberg, 1861, 143. 470 As in Kalonymos ben Kalonymos, Iggereth Baale Chajjim: Abhandlung über die Thiere von Kalonymos ben Kalonymos, oder, Rechtsstreit zwischen Mensch und Thier vor dem Gerichtshofe des Königs der Genien, ein arabisches Märchen, ed. Julius Landsberger (Darmstadt: Jonghans, 1882), 120–21; also see Aaron Moshe Singer, Animals in Rabbinic Teaching. The Fable, PhD thesis, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1979 (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1982), 151–65. 471 Like the choir stall in Bamberg Cathedral, end of the 14th c. 472 Felix Vongrey, “Ornamentierte mittelalterliche Bodenfliesen in Stift Lilienfeld,” Österreichische Zeitschrift für Denkmalpflege 26 (1972): 9–19.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 139

various medieval stove tiles,473 so it may well be that pictures of this kind were quite common in Jewish life. The motif was a common one in Nuremberg as well, as a depiction of a lion in the south aisle of St Sebald Church from 1310 shows (Figure 73).

Figure 73: A decorated boss in St Sebald Church, Nuremberg.

Lions were a popular motif in medieval Jewish culture and this also extended to architecture. At the end of the 11th century, the windows in the north wall of the synagogue in Cologne were decorated with depictions of lions and serpents.474 Aquamaniles – jugs used for washing one’s hands – became very popular in the Middle Ages and were used by Christians and Jews alike. One important place where they were produced was Nuremberg. This was where a type of lion was manufactured known as a ‘Flammenschweiflöwe’ (literally, a ‘flame-tail lion’), which has a number of bushy tufts of fur on its tail that look like flames.475 The lion depicted in MS Add. 18684 is similar to lion-shaped aquamanilia produced in Nuremberg around the year 1400. An aquamanile in the Bavarian National Museum (Bayerisches Staatsmuseum)476 has a tail made in a heraldic style with

473 Eva Roth Heege, “Zeugen spätgotischer Kachelöfen in Zug,” Mittelalter – Zeitschrift des Schweizerischen Burgenvereins 10 (2005): 60–61, esp. p. 60. 474 It is very likely that these pictures are not made of stained glass, as long believed, but they are actually three-dimensional representations made of stone. Ephraim Shoham-Steiner, ‫ עיטורי בית הכנסת“ של קלן בימי הביניים וההתנגדות להם‬:‫אריות ונחשים‬. The Struggle over the Lion and Snake Decorations of the Medieval Synagogue in Cologne,” Zion (2015): 175–205; see pp. 181–82 in this particular case. 475 Ursula Mende, “Nuremberg as a Center of Aquamanilia Production,” in Lions, Dragons, & Other Beasts. Vessels for Church and Table, ed. Peter Barnet (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006): 18–33. 476 Ibid., 18.

140 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

four tufts of fur above a grip, as shown in the illustration in MS Add. 18684, and a Flammenschweiflöwe being exhibited at the Metropolitan Museum in New York has tufts of fur on the back of its legs (see Figure 74).

Figure 74: An aquamanile (Metropolitan Museum, No. 1994.244).

Lion-shaped aquamaniles were particularly popular in synagogues and Jewish homes. The Hebrew blessing said after washing one’s hands is engraved on a Jewish aquamanile from the 14th/15th century in the form of a lion:477 ‘Blessed be the King of the Universe, who has instructed us to wash our hands’. The illustrator of MS Add. 18684 may possibly have associated the word ‘hand’ with this commandment and used an aquamanile in his house as a model for his drawing. Many pictures of lions in Jewish manuscripts are based on an iconographic tradition of their own. In the Hebrew Bible there are 150 passages about lions in some form or other – in descriptions, metaphors and allegories.478 The one that is probably best known is in Genesis 49:9, in which the tribe of Judah is compared to a lion: ‘Judah is a lion’s whelp; from the prey, my son, thou art gone up. He stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as a lioness; who shall rouse him up?’479 The lion of Judah 477 Vivian B. Mann, “‘New’ Examples of Jewish Ceremonial Art from Medieval Ashkenaz,” Artibus et Historiae 9 (1988): 13–24, esp. p. 16; The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore, http://art.thewalters.org/detail/19407/aquamanile-in-the-form-of-a-lion/; accessed on 20/2/2016. 478 Jehuda Feliks, S. David Sperling, “Lion,” in Encyclopaedia Judaica, second edition, ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik (Detroit: Macmillan Reference, 2007): vol. 13, 61–62; see p. 62 in particular. 479 Gen 49:9.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 141

became one of the most popular Jewish symbols of all.480 In Jewish culture, there is a long tradition of portraying these powerful and regal animals. In fact, even the Hebrew Bible mentions sculptures of lions on King Solomon’s throne: There were six steps to the throne, and the top of the throne was round behind; and there were arms on either side by the place of the seat, and two lions standing beside the arms. And twelve lions stood there on the one side and on the other upon the six steps; there was not the like made in any kingdom.481

King Solomon’s lions were also depicted in Ashkenazic book art as shown in the the Tripartite Maḥzor, Budapest, Kaufmann Collection, MS 343, (see Figure 75). Despite the large number of positive references, the lion can also seem violent and ambivalent in Jewish interpretations of the animal.482 The illustrator obviously associated lions with ferocity. The People of Israel are compared to a lioness and lion in Numbers 23:24: ‘Behold a people that riseth up as a lioness, and as a lion doth he lift himself up; he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey and drink the blood of the slain’.483 Drawing on the Midrash Tanḥuma484 and the Midrash Bamidbar, Rashi linked this passage in the Bible to obeying the mitzvot.485 He expressly mentioned putting on prayer straps in this context. In his Bible commentary, it says this: When they [the people of Israel] rise from their sleep in the morning they show themselves strong as a lioness and as a lion to “snatch at” the Divine precepts (to perform them immediately) – to clothe themselves with the Tallith, to read the Shema and to lay Tephillin.486

The mental association between putting on prayer straps and making oneself ‘as strong as a lion’ will no doubt have inspired the scribe to draw such a picture. Since washing one’s hands precedes the steps of putting on prayer straps and reciting ‘Hear, o Israel’,487 there was an associative link to the lion jug used for washing one’s

480 Berenbaum/Skolnik (eds.), 2007; see vol. 13, 62. 481 1 Kgs 10:19–20. 482 Epstein 1997, 110. 483 Num 23:24. 484 Tanchuma Buber Balak 23, Salomon Buber, ed., Midrasch Tanchuma. Ein agadischer Commentar zum Pentateuch von Rabbi Tanchuma ben Rabbi Abba, 2 vols. (Vilnius: Wittwe & Gebrüder Romm, 1865), vol. 2, Balak 23. 485 Bamidbar Rabba Balak 20, Mosheh Aryeh Mirkin: ‫מדרש רבה‬, Midrash Rabah, meforash perush madai ḥadash, be-tseruf ‘En ha-derash’, marʾeh meḳomot le-khol maʾamre ha-Midrash (Tel Aviv: Yavneh, 1986–1987), vols. 9–10, Bamidbar Rabba, Balak 20. 486 Rashi on Numbers 23:24, translation: M. Rosenbaum, A. M. Silbermann: Pentateuch with Targum Onkelos, Haphtaroth, Prayers for Sabbath and Rashi’s Commentary / translated into English and annotated. Numbers (London: Shapiro Vallentine, 1949). 487 b Berakhot 14b–15a.

142 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 75: Budapest, Kaufmann Collection, MS 343, fol. 183v.

hands. The scribe who created MS Add. 18684 drew on a dense network of cognitive associations when he worked on his depiction of the lion. What arose was a drawing with a specifically Jewish meaning, even though it was based on Christian models. A stag and its fawn on fol. 77v

Figure 76: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 77v.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 143

The catchword on fol. 77v says ‫שלא לעשות צלם‬: (= ‘Do not make any idols’). These words mark the beginning of the prohibition following fol. 78r (commandment no. 159) and refer to Leviticus 26:2 and Avodah Zarah, the tractate in the Babylonian Talmud: Thou shalt not make an image, as it says [in the Torah]: ‘Ye shall make you no idols’ [Lev 26:1]. And our teachers said: ‘It is forbidden even if it does not serve idolatry, but simply beauty’. [bT, Avodah Zarah, 41a] Only the image of man is forbidden, and only if this image stands out. If it is lowered or a symbolic figure, then it is allowed.

The catchword is illustrated with a stag and fawn jumping from the right to the left. The words are shown on a banner that the stag is holding in its muzzle. There is no direct link between the text and the words ‘Thou shalt not make unto thee an image’. The artist tried to create an indirect one to the text in his interpretation of the passage that followed, though. If only the picture of man’s image is forbidden, then depictions of animals must be allowed, he obviously thought. It is not just a coincidence that he chose a stag as the motif for his illustration. The stag was an ancient Jewish symbol. In the Mishnah, for example, it says: ‘Be strong as the leopard, (and) light as the eagle (and) fleet as the hart, and mighty as the lion to do the will of thy Father who is in Heaven’.488 Being a symbol of the fulfilment of religious duties, the stag in medieval Jewish art epitomised the People of Israel among the nations.489 A horse rider on fol. 85v

  Figure 77: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 85v. 488 Mishnah Avot 5:20; translation: Blackman, 1953, 537. 489 Wischnitzer-Bernstein, 1935, 79.

144 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

The catchword on fol. 85v says ‫‘ =( האומר לאשה‬one who says to a woman’) and is part of commandment no. 180, ‫‘ =( לקדש אשה‬To consecrate a woman’). It deals with the rules in religious law on getting engaged and getting married and contains two sample marriage contracts (fols. 87v and 88r). Drawing on individual passages from Kiddushin (= ‘Betrothals’) and Ketubbot (= ‘Weddings’), the two Talmud tractates, the passage explains under what circumstances a marriage contract is legally valid. Thanks to the numerous glosses provided, the scope of the commandment ‘To consecrate a woman’ grew considerably (it runs from fol. 82r to 90r). The catchword ‘One who says to a woman’ continues ‘You are hereby betrothed to me on condition that...’. These words appear in the Mishnah (Kiddushin 3:2), and a number of variations of them occur in the Talmud. The catchword refers to the first sentence on fol. 86r, which is taken from Ketubbot: ‘[In the case of] one who says to a woman “You are hereby betrothed to me on the condition that you have [no ability to claim] food, clothing, or conjugal rights from me”, she is betrothed and his stipulation is void’.490 The catchword is part of a vertical banderole accompanied by a horse and rider. The horse has a very long tail, is wearing a bridle and its hooves are shod. Compared to its rider, the animal is rather small, but even so, it seems to be stepping over a big stone quite happily. The beardless horseman has been drawn from the side and is looking ahead in a rather strained way. His hair, which is styled like a page’s, is partly covered by a hat decorated with a feather. He is wearing a short, fashionable ‘Schecke’ (jacket) with a row of buttons down the front and is holding the reins in his right hand; his left arm is bent behind him rather stiffly. A sword is hanging from the belt around his waist and he is wearing fancy spurs, one of which is shown clearly on his left shoe. Could this armed rider have been a Jew? Unlike older literature on the subject, researchers now think that some Jews did actually wear weapons in the Middle Ages.491 A small number of Jews led a knightly lifestyle in Ashkenaz,492 and Jewish swordsmen also wielded their weapons in combat from time to time.493 Nevertheless, it was uncommon for Jews to wear swords; indeed, it might even have been seen as a threat if they did.494

490 b Ketubbot 56a. 491 Christine Magin, “‘Waffenrecht’ und ‘Waffenverbot’ für Juden im Mittelalter. Zu einem Mythos der Forschungsgeschichte,” Aschkenas 13 (2003): 17–33. 492 Markus Wenninger, “Von jüdischen Rittern und anderen waffentragenden Juden im mittelalterlichen Deutschland,” in Aschkenas 13 (2003): 35–82, esp. pp. 42–46. 493 Ibid., 72–75. 494 Ibid., 75–77.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 145

Since most of the drawings in Add. 18684 relate to the main text in some way or other, the rider could be a young man who is out in search of a bride. The texts written on fols. 85v and 86r do not seem to contain any words that are directly relevant to the drawing, however. In the last gloss on fol. 86r, the author mentions a messenger looking for a bride, admittedly, but there is no evidence of the rider being an envoy. Perhaps the scribe intended to comment on the wording ‘on condition that’ in his drawing. The monstrous demand for the bride to go without food, clothing and sexual intercourse might have caused him to make the bridegroom seem ‘un-Jewish’ by giving him fashionable clothing, fancy spurs and a sword.495 Coats of arms on fol. 93v

Figure 78: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 93v.

The catchword on fol. 93v says ‫‘ =( לכתוב שם העיר‬write the name of the town’) and is part of the commandment no. 181, ‫‘ =( לגרש אשה‬disown a woman’ [i.e. get divorced]), which runs from fol. 90r to 97r. The provisions of Jewish divorce law are covered in this commandment, and in addition to this, there is a sample letter of divorce on fol. 96r and another on fol. 96v. The preceding folios explain exactly what a letter of divorce should contain and what form it should be in if it is to be valid. The content should include the names of the two parties involved, the

495 This is the case in the depictions of the ‘wicked son’ in the Pesach Haggadah. Pictures like these first occur in Sephardic Haggadot from the 14th century, such as the Barcelona Haggadah, London, BL, Add. 14761 (see the illustration on fol. 34v, for instance).

146 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

precise date of the divorce and the name of the town or city where the document was to be signed. A banner placed above two different coats of arms has been drawn around the catchword (Figure 78). The coat of arms on the left is divided into four quarters that are alternately black or white, and belongs to the burgrave of Nuremberg. It can also be seen on the Zurich armorial from 1330–1345 (Figure 79).

Figure 79: Zurich, Swiss National Museum, AG 2760, fol. 2r.

Figure 80: Nuremberg’s coat of arms.

The coat of arms on the right (Figure 78) is divided into two separate parts. Seen from the viewpoint of the shield bearer, the right-hand side of the shield depicts half of a black eagle and the left-hand side is divided by five lines running from sinister to dexter, i.e. from the bottom left to the top right. (Since the folio was cut down to a smaller size at some point, it is likely that the coat of arms originally contained three dark bars as well.) This coat of arms is reminiscent of the city of Nuremberg’s small coat of arms (Figure 80), although the stripes run in the other direction; this version of it has been divided into two parts ever since the mid-14th century.496 The scribe illustrated the words ‘write the name of the city’ in a simple way by using the city’s coat of arms as his motif. The fact that he specifically chose Nuremberg’s coat of arms and that the city is mentioned on fol. 87v and 88r of the marriage agreements indicates that he had a special relationship to this city.

496 Reinhold Schaffer, “Die Siegel und Wappen der Reichsstadt Nürnberg,“ in Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 10 (1937): 157–203, esp. pp. 182–83.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 147

A swan or goose on fol. 101v

Figure 81: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 101v, detail.

The catchword on fol. 101v consists of the following words: ‫‘ =( היוצאת בגט צריכה‬the one who leaves [the marriage] with a letter of divorce has to...’), which belong to commandment no. 190, ‫‘ =( קטנה שאין לה אב קרוביה‬A young girl who does not have a father’). The whole sentence reads as follows: ‘A young girl who is not of legal age, who does not have a father and who has been married off and is regarded as having been given to a man in the sages’ view only needs to declare her refusal [to be married to him] in order to leave him.’ Referring to Yevamot 107b and 108a of the Babylonian Talmud, this passage is concerned with the legal situation regarding child marriages and a minor’s right to annul a marriage. A declaration of refusal uttered by an underage child has a completely different status than a letter of divorce. It says the following: ‘And the minor girl who refuses [her husband] does not have to wait three months [before she can get married again], [whereas] one who leaves [her husband] by using a letter of divorce does’.497 The catchword ‘the one who leaves [the marriage] with a letter of divorce has to...’ is written on a banner that a large bird – possibly a swan or a goose – is holding in its beak. The bird’s plumage was decorated using tiny brush strokes that look like bristles on the animal’s body. This creates the impression that it might be a young animal. We cannot say for sure whether the scribe wanted to create a picture for the girl here, as he did not base his illustration on any known iconographic tradition.

497 London, BL, Add. 18684, fols. 101v–102r.

148 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Ducks or geese on fol. 109v

Figure 82: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 109v.

The catchword on fol. 109v says ‫‘ =( לכבס במועד‬To do the laundry on a day between the feast days’) and is part of precept no. 194, ‫‘ =( לא לעשות מלאכה בחול המועד‬Do not do any work on the days between the feast days’). This contains a discussion of the activities that are allowed or not allowed on the days between the first and last days of Passover and Sukkot; this discussion draws on the eleventh tractate in the Mishnah, called ‫( מועד קטן‬Mo‘ed Katan, i.e. ‘Minor Festival’), the tractate of the same name in the two Talmuds and the tosafot, and the Mishneh Torah by Maimonides. The restrictions on working on the days between Passover and Sukkot are not as comprehensive as those for Shabbat, and the Mishnah specifies exactly what activities are permitted and in what form. Doing the laundry is actually forbidden on the days between the feast days, but certain exceptions to the rule are allowed. The sentence from which the catchword is taken is this: ‘All of those who rise from the state of ritual impurity to purity are permitted to wash their clothes on the days between the festivals’. Goldschmidt comments on the respective passage in the Babylonian Talmud as follows: ‘This means climbing out of the mikvah here’.498 The drawing shows a bird with its three chicks. They are obviously waterfowl as they have webbed feet and could be ducks for this reason, also due to them having round heads and the length of their beaks. Since the necks of the birds are relatively long, though, they may be geese. All four birds are facing towards the left, in line with the flow of Hebrew letters in the text above them. The mother bird is holding a banderole in its beak containing the words ‘To do the laundry

498 b Mo‘ed Katan 14a; Lazarus Goldschmidt, ed. Der Babylonische Talmud: Nach der ersten zensurfreien Ausgabe unter Berücksichtigung der neueren Ausgaben und handschriftlichen Materials (Frankfurt am Main: Jüdischer Verlag 2002), vol. 4, 175, note 3.

6.4 London, BL, Add. 18684, Nuremberg (?), 1391/92 

 149

on a day between the feast days’. It is impossible to tell where the animals are because the illustrator only hinted at the background by drawing a few faint lines behind them. Perhaps the four birds are standing on a river bank or in the water. It may be that the scribe associated the waterfowl with a mikvah or doing the washing and attempted to create a link to the words on fols. 109v and 110r by means of this picture. A dragon on fol. 117v

Figure 83: London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 117v.

The catchword on fol. 117v says ‫‘ =( ברובו כשר‬kosher for the most part’) and is part of negative precept no. 199, ‫‘ =( שלא לאכול טריפה‬that no meat from a torn animal is to be eaten’), which is based on Exodus 22:30: ‘ye shall not eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field’.499 Since an animal with an internal injury that could lead to its death is regarded as being impure, it cannot be eaten. This is why the organs of an animal that has been slaughtered need to be examined very closely. After a lengthy description of injuries to the lungs, further organs are then covered, as we can see on fol. 117v, which deals with the spinal cord. The passage refers to Ḥullin, the third tractate in the Mishnah, which is concerned with the slaughtering of animals for meat,500 and to the tosafot, which define which injuries to an animal’s spinal cord count as fatal. On fols. 117v–118r, it says the following: ‘[Even] if the lower part of the spine near the tail and down to the end of the tail is largely perforated, [the meat can] still [be regarded] as kosher. And a bird is [regarded as being] kosher [if its spinal cord] has mainly been perforated between its wings’.501 499 Exod 22:30. 500 b Ḥullin 45b. 501 ‫ניקב חוט השדרה למטה לצד הזנב עד בין הפרשות ברובו מכאן ואילך כשר ובעוף עד בין אגפיים ברובו כשר‬, Isaac of Corbeil, Perez of Corbeil, Moshe of Zurich, 1980–1988, vol. 2, 253–54.

150 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

The drawing shows a dragon gripping one end of a banderole in its snout bearing the words ‘kosher for the most part’. In this side view, its head looks more like a dog’s with pointed ears. The dragon has an unshapely body covered in what appears to be fur drawn with hatched lines. The creature’s legs are hardly visible any more as part of the folio has been cut off. Its two large wings with flying membranes are attached to its body in such a way that they do not quite match. The tail of the dragon is drawn like a long vine and there is a ring around it not far from the animal’s body. Many depictions of dragons may have served the scribe as models, as this mythical creature was used widely as a motif in medieval art and handicrafts. Images of dragons with tails that turn into vines were particularly popular in South German manuscripts and appear in several prominent places in Cod. Hebr. 75, the SeMaK manuscript from Vienna (see Fig. 4).502 As in Christian art, Jewish illustrators regarded dragons as a symbol of evil, creatures trying to drive a wedge between Man and his relationship with God. The figure of the dragon was ‘domesticated’ in Jewish literature and art, however,503 and was linked to the eschatological hope that the power of the divine presence would drive all evil away.504 Bearing this in mind, it is not surprising, then, that dragons were sometimes depicted as supporting elements in synagogue architecture505 and book art.

Figure 84: Dresden, Sächsische Landesbibliothek – Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, MS A 46a, fol. 202v.

The dragon in the manuscript Add. 18684 seems to have nothing to do with such visual relationships. There does not appear to be any logical link between the depiction of a dragon and the laws on slaughtering animals mentioned in the text either. Nonetheless, there is a loose connection with the surrounding words ‘tail’ and ‘wings’, which are depicted much larger than one would expect in the image of a dragon. 502 Take Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75, 214v. 503 Marc Michael Epstein, ‘Harnessing the Dragon’, in Dreams of Subversions in Medieval Jewish Art and Literature (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997), 70–95; see 94–95 here. 504 Rodov, 2005, 84. 505 There were reliefs depicting dragons in the synagogue in Worms, for example; ibid., 73–75.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 151

Prominent features and comments The Zurich SeMaK in Add. 18684 stands out because of the very first word it contains, which is illuminated, and because of the pictures drawn in the margins, which refer to the main text in many different ways. Even though a link to the text cannot be identified clearly for roughly half of the drawings, we can still presume that the scribe-artist intended his pictures to relate to the words in the SeMaK again and again. Perhaps some of the drawings in the margins were meant to create associative links to individual expressions in it, regardless of the context the words were used in (cf. fols. 53v and 117v, for example), or perhaps the scribe used some of his pictures as a means of commenting on the text and not just to illustrate it (cf. fols. 32v and 61v). His pictures are influenced by the Jewish world (fol. 61v), everyday life and Christian iconography. He took these sources of inspiration, using them as templates, and gave them a specific Jewish meaning (fol. 69v). Besides that, he produced some creative new pictures – ones that did not link up with any existing traditions at all. The items of clothing, utensils and architectural elements shown in the illustrations give us some telltale hints about the culture in which the scribe lived. He obviously had close links to the city of Nuremberg, as we can see from the picture he drew of its coat of arms. Despite his sense of attachment to the majority culture, though, there are also signs of the scribe’s divergence from it in places; some examples of Jewish-Christian polemics can be seen in two pictures on fols. 12r and 40v, for instance. While he often portrayed complex subject matter on the one hand, on the other it is astonishing how he drew cats, dogs and dragons spontaneously in an almost childlike way.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy The codex Codicology and palaeography The codex is 260 mm long, 180 mm wide and its spine has a width of 27 mm. The pages are each 253 × 168 mm in size. There are 117 folios in the book altogether and the eleven quires are all quinternions. One leaf is missing between fols. 66 and 67 in the seventh quire. The hair and flesh sides of the parchment are easy to distinguish from one another. The flesh sides feel velvety and are considerably lighter in colour than the rougher hair sides, on which the hair follicles can still be seen. The order in which the hair and flesh sides have been put is not a uniform one: nine of the eleven quires begin with the flesh side and three with the hair side.

152 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

All of the folios were ruled in a uniform way. The original prick-marks for the lines are hardly visible any more and there are none on the inside edges of the pages either. Various tools were employed to rule lines: vertical lines were scored with a kind of metal pen, after which 28 horizontal lines were drawn lightly in thin ink on each folio. The last five folios up to fol. 119 were ruled, but do not actually contain any text. The leaves were written in black and two different types of red ink. The main text is written in a single column in black ink and takes up just over half the width of a page. It is flanked by short texts in the outer margin written in smaller letters, which makes the pages of the book look as if they have a frame around them. The main column has quite a complex structure if commentaries have been inserted as well, ranging from indented geometrical patterns to carmina figurata. The writing is in Ashkenazi semi-cursive script throughout the codex; square letters have only been used in the initial words and the two sample texts for the letter of divorce on fols. 48r–49v. The first letter of each mitzvah is up to four times bigger than the rest of the text. These letters, which are in red or black ink, have been decorated in a similar way to the initials one finds in Latin manuscripts. This is not the usual practice encountered in Jewish manuscripts, though, where panels were made in which the scribe decorated initial words. At the beginning of the manuscript, the initials were embellished with fine, plant-like decorations drawn in red ink. Further on in the book, the initials have not been decorated yet, but they were obviously going to be at some point because the scribe drew simple placeholders in the blank spaces. It is easy to lose one’s bearings in this particular manuscript, as the scribe did not just highlight the beginning of each mitzvah, but the initial letters of other words as well, which he made larger than usual and decorated. He did not put much effort into decorating the beginning of each chapter, though: these are only recognisable as such by the small headings and the initial letters of the sentences being slightly bigger than normal; they have not been highlighted by any extra decoration.506 The edge of the left-hand column on each folio is straight and regular. This effect was achieved by lengthening and shortening certain words and inserting graphical elements to fill up the space. Unlike the other manuscripts that have been discussed up till now, there are no catchwords at the bottom of the quires in Arch. Seld. A51. In this case, a classification principle was employed that not only included the order of the gatherings, but that of all the folios as well: the last word on the verso side of a folio was

506 The beginnings of the chapters are on fol. 10v (chap. 2), fol. 25r (chap. 3), fol. 39r (chap. 4) and fol. 91v (chap. 6). As for chapter 5, it is not clear where that actually begins.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 153

repeated again as the first word on the following (recto) side. These words remain in the existing columns and do not take up any extra space elsewhere. Provenance and classification of the place and time of completion In the year 1659, the manuscript, which had previously been owned by the English polymath John Selden (1584–1654), passed into the ownership of the Bodleian Library in Oxford. Like most of his books, Arch. Seld. A51 bears a motto written in Greek: περί παντός την ελευθερίαν (‘Liberty above all things’).507 Since Arch. Seld. A51 does not have a colophon, the codicological findings are particularly important for its classification. These indicate it was produced in Italy. The hair and flesh sides of the parchment are easy to distinguish, which corresponds to the type of production common in medieval Italy in which the natural differences between the two sides were always left untouched (apart from a few luxury manuscripts in the 15th century).508 The order the quires are in also indicates that the codex was produced in Italy. In the Middle Ages, it was customary in Hebrew book production for the individual quires of a work to begin on the hair side, the only exception being in Italy where the practice of beginning the quires on the flesh side became common practice at the end of the 13th century. (Over half the Hebrew manuscripts in Italy were produced this way in the 15th century.)509 The fact that the quires consist of quinternions is a further indication that the manuscript was made there, as this practice was used widely in Italy.510 Ruling vertical lines with a metal pen and horizontal lines with a quill was a mixed technique that spread across Italy in the 15th century.511 Even though it was uncommon for Ashkenazi and Sephardic scribes to draw lines on parchment in ink in their own countries, immigrants nevertheless used pieces of parchment with lines drawn with a quill. As Malachi Beit-Arié has suggested, these pieces of parchment may have been ready-made ‘mass products’ that were available from traders.512 The Ashkenazic script that the scribe employed is an indication that the manuscript was written by a Jewish immigrant from Ashkenaz. Another piece of evidence proving a link existed to Ashkenaz is the word ‫ בערן‬in the letter of divorce on fol. 48v, which has been dated to 1432 and is a place name. Neubauer identified

507 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol.1r (see Fig. 85); William Dunn Macray, Annals of the Bodleian Library Oxford. A.D. 1598–A.D. 1867 (Oxford: Rivingtons, 1868): 86–87. 508 Beit-Arié, 2018, 225–225. 509 Ibid., 4. 510 Ibid., 284. 511 Ibid., 409. 512 Ibid., 356.

154 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

it as Berne in his catalogue of Hebrew manuscripts in Oxford,513 and the online manuscript catalogue maintained by the National Library of Israel also states ‘Related place: Bern (Switzerland)’.514 This is rather problematic in a number of respects, however. First and foremost, we can rule out that the manuscript comes from Berne on codicological grounds and in view of the historical circumstances at the time it was produced, as we know that the Jews were banned from there ‘forever’ in 1427.515 What’s more, it is questionable whether the scribe really did have Berne in mind when he wrote ‫בערן‬, as he supplemented the Hebrew word with the name of a river: ‫איצא‬. This word has nothing to do with the River Aare, which flows through Berne in Switzerland; rather, it sounds more like the name of the river flowing through Verona: ‘Adige’ in Italian and ‘Etsch’ in German. As it turns out, the name ‘Bern’ was the German name for the city of Verona in the Middle Ages516 and was used this way in Hartmann Schedel’s Registrum huius operis libri cronicarum (‘Chronicle of the World’, aka the Nuremberg Chronicle) in 1493.517 The historical names for Berne and Verona have also caused some confusion elsewhere, namely when it came to interpreting the Hebrew transliteration used for the cities’ names.518 Unfortunately, the fact was overlooked that Ashkenazi Jews also used the German name ‘Bern’ when referring to Verona.519 Once Verona came under Venetian rule in 1408, Jewish money-lenders were able to settle down there, a step that the Councillor of Venice welcomed, declaring that Christian money-lenders had been charging an extortionate amount of

513 Adolf Neubauer, Catalogue of the Hebrew Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library and in the College Libraries of Oxford: Including Mss. in Other Languages, Which Are Written with Hebrew Characters, or Relating to the Hebrew Language or Literature; and a Few Samaritan Mss (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1886–1906), S. No. 878, 183. 514 http://web.nli.org.il/sites/NLIS/en/ManuScript/Pages/Item.aspx?ItemID=PNX_MANUSCRIPTS000091880, accessed on 27/2/2019. 515 Emil Dreifuss, Juden in Bern. Ein Gang durch die Jahrhunderte (Berne: Verbandsdruckerei-Betadruck, 1983), 15. 516 Ferdinand Vetter, “Und noch einmal: ‚Bern‘ ist Deutsch-Verona!,” Blätter für Bernische Geschichte, Kunst und Altertumskunde 4 (1908): 1–35; see p. 5 in particular. 517 Hartmann Schedel and Stephan Füssel (ed.), Weltchronik – 1493 (Cologne: Taschen, 2013), 68. 518 Chaim Lauer objected to Moritz Güdemann’s interpretation, pointing out that the Latin letter ‘V’ was never transcribed by the rabbis as ‫ ב‬in the early Middle Ages, but as ‫ו‬, and he gave a number of examples of ‫ וירונא‬as the transcription. Lauer, 1918, 20. 519 This happened in the ‘Book of Cows’, which was published in Yiddish in Verona in 1595. Cf. the title page and the second page of the introduction (which has no pagination). See Moshe N. Rosenfeld: The Book of Cows. A Facsimile Edition of the Famed ‘Kuhbuch’, Verona 1595; from a unique copy in a private collection (London: Hebraica Books, 1984).

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 155

interest in comparison.520 Up to their expulsion in 1499, Jews and Christians lived side by side in San Sebastiano, an area in the centre of the city.521 The scribe who copied the manuscript is unknown because a colophon is lacking, but individual names were highlighted in the texts, as on fol. 11v, where the names ‫( יצחק‬Isaac) and ‫( שלמה‬Salomo) stand out. Perhaps the scribe was called ‫( שמחה‬Simha), as this name was emphasised in numerous places522 and a little crown was drawn above it in a few cases.523

The texts The SeMaK, which fills the main column on each leaf, begins on fol. 1r and ends on fol. 114r. It is a complete copy of the work and ends with the negative precept ‫‘ =( שלא לבא על אשה נידה‬Do not have relations with a menstruating woman’), followed by rules concerning Ḥaliẓa, the ritual that frees the brother of a married but childless man from the obligation to marry his widow. This SeMaK does not have a table of contents and only a few of the mitzvot are numbered.524 In the second chapter, as in the Hamburg manuscript Cod. Hebr. 17, we find the rules that the sages made precede those of the Torah.525 These are the following commandments: ‘Mourn for Jerusalem’, ‘Mourn for your relatives’, ‘Look for something leavened [before Passover]’, ‘Do not seclude yourself with a woman’, ‘Do not seclude yourself with Gentiles’, ‘That a woman shall not wean the child of a Gentile woman’ and ‘That a woman shall not deliver the child of a Gentile woman’.526 A similar difference can be found in Chapter 3. In this case, three commandments from the sages that were concerned with time and normally come at the end of the

520 Güdemann, 1884, 246. 521 Isidore Singer and Umberto Cassuto, “Verona,” in The Jewish Encyclopedia: A Descriptive Record of the History, Religion, Literature, and Customs of the Jewish People from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, ed. Isidore Singer (New York/London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1901–1906), vol. 12, 420–421, esp. p. 420. 522 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 22r, fol. 24v, fol. 71v. 523 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol.13r and fol. 71r. Neubauer says fol. 75r–v even contains the acrostic ‫( שמחה בר שמואל הלוי שליט‬Simha bar Shmuel haLevi Shalit). This is difficult to confirm, though, as the dots that make up the acrostic are too small and faint to be sure now. There are other letters with dots as well that Neubauer overlooked. Neubauer, 1886; see no. 878, 183. 524 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fols. 1, 2, 35 and 36. 525 Fols. 10v–17v. 526 See Chapter 6,2, Contents, p. 91.

156 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

chapter have been moved forward: ‘Read the Esther scroll in the time allotted for it’, ‘Read the Torah in the time allotted for it’ and ‘Say the blessing before eating’.527 The beginning of the third chapter differs in a unique way: it starts on fol. 25r with the commandment ‫‘ =( לישב בסוכה‬Sit in the tabernacle’). This is an unusual start to the chapter, as it always begins with the commandment ‫‘ =( לקדש בכור‬Sanctify the first-born’) in the other SeMaK manuscripts and in the printed editions as well. This chapter is generally connected with the mitzvot on the mouth, whereas the beginning of the chapter in Arch. Seld. A51 bears the following title: ‘These are the positive commandments that are linked to time’. Not all of the subheadings are correct, either. On fol. 9r, for example, there is a carefully written sentence in calligraphic letters that goes: ‫‘ =( נשלמו מצות לא תעשה התלויין בלב אחל מצות עשה התלויין בזמן הזה‬End of the prohibitions concerned with the heart, [and] beginning of the positive commandments that are linked to the present’). The second part of the sentence does not make any sense, though, as by definition the SeMaK only contains mitzvot concerned with the present. The sentence ought to have ended this way, really: ‫‘ =( אחל מצות התלויין באוזן‬beginning of the commandments concerned with the ear’), as the precepts that relate to hearing follow at this point. If it is written too quickly, the word ‫‘ =( אוזן‬ear’) could only really be confused with ‫‘ =( זמן‬time’). Since the scribe misinterpreted the wording in his model so badly, though, perhaps he was just a hired copyist who did not understand the SeMaK very well (or was simply not very interested in its subject matter). The passages of the SeMaK contain commentaries by R. Perez and individual glosses added by R. Moshe of Zurich.528 The additions are written in the same column, but in smaller handwriting, and form various patterns, architectural objects, vases, heraldic motifs, plants and animals. In contrast, the texts that form a frame around the SeMaK – also in smaller writing – are not commentaries on the main text, but are concerned with quite different subjects: – Fols. 1v–76r: a siddur according to the Ashkenazi rite. – Fols. 76r–85r: ‫‘ =( מורה חטאים‬Leader of the Sinful’), a work on confession and repentance by Eleazar ben Yehuda of Worms. – Fols. 85v–106r: ‫( שערי דורא‬Sha‘arei Dura) by Isaac ben Meir Dueren (second half of the 13th century), which deals with the laws on forbidden food and on menstruant women. – Fols. 106r–112v: ‫‘ =( הלכות יין נסך ממהר״ם‬Maharam’s laws on libation wine’ [by R. Meir of Rothenburg?]).

527 Fols. 27v–28r. A difference of this kind can also be found in other manuscripts: London BL, Add. 14 (14th c.), London, David Sofer, Lon Sofer 7 (13th–14th c.), Zurich, BRAG, BRAG 115. 528 Ibid., 183.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 157

This choice of texts indicates it was from Ashkenaz, as they are all works by Ashkenazi Jews.

The design Arch. Seld. A51 is a particularly striking manuscript owing to its rich and varied design, yet so far, no-one has described its mise-en-page or any of the pictures it contains in the technical literature. The initial page, fol. 1r The initial page, fol. 1r (see Figure 85), begins with the first commandment, ‘Realise that the One who created Heaven and Earth is the only one who rules above’.529 The page stands out because it is so richly designed. A colourful miniature with an initial-word panel fills the whole top half of the page and continues along the outer margin of the bottom part as well, where it encloses the first eight lines of the SeMaK. The initial-word panel contains the word ‫‘ =( לידע‬to know or to realise that…’). The silver and gold letters are framed by a crimson vine with filigree tendrils. A blue background decorated with gold branches is inside and outside the initial-word panel, reminding one of a valuable brocade. Architectural elements in crimson seem to grow out of this blue background. A considerable number of plant motifs and a small stag bring the picture to life, but it is the two brown animals in the foreground that dominate it: a rising lion is standing opposite an equally big animal that is either licking its flank or biting it in a rather odd-looking twist. Between the two animals is some kind of plant with three tuberous roots. The picture is not very harmonic on the whole: the finely executed pen-and-ink drawing framing the initial-word panel has partly been coloured in and was possibly even painted over at a later date. Different kinds of coloured ink of varying quality were used here, as a few of the contours are now blurry and the areas painted in brown are flaky. The brown animals depicted in the foreground possibly indicate that part of the illustration was painted over later. The motif showing the two animals occurs again in a drawing on fol. 29v (see Figure 86), but the difference between the two illustrations is striking. The pictures look very different in terms of their detail, and certain features such as the lion’s mane disappeared altogether when the picture was painted over.

529 For more on this text, see Chapter 6.4, The illuminated initial word on fol. 12r.

158 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 85: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 1r.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 159

Figure 86: A detail in Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 29v.

The details of the creature that is twisting round are also clearer in the drawing. Its paws and tail are like the lion’s, but its head is long and narrow with pointed ears. It seems more like a dog in this case. There is a picture of a dog biting itself in a Haggadah from 1460 copied by Joel ben Simeon, which has certain similarities, such as the animal’s posture, its ears hanging down and its tail between its hind legs.

Figure 87: London, BL, Add. 14762, fol. 23v. Figure 88: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 29v.

160 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Since the motif of the lion and the twisting animal occurs several times in Arch. Seld. A51, the picture may have had a specific meaning. Unfortunately, we have still not discovered whether an original was used as a model for this copy and which original that was. Perhaps the depiction of the lion was a kind of family emblem and referred to the artist’s or patron’s own family in some way. Animals from a coat of arms presumably did not serve as models here, as the animals’ tails are not pointing up, but down and are between their hind legs. Since the tails of heraldic lions hardly ever point downwards,530 the picture may not have been inspired by heraldry at all, but by a sculpture of a lion; there was a sculpture of this kind at the Palazzo Vecchio in Florence once – of a lion whose tail snaked between its hind legs (see Figure 89).

Figure 89: Florence, Museo Bardini, Marzocco, 14th century.

The numerous towers on fol. 1r make one think of a town with its own defences. At the same time, the picture with all its architectural elements and the lion on the left remind one of pictures of arched gates found in Ashkenazi prayer books. A gate guarded by lions fills the very first page of the Worms Maḥzor from 1272 (see Figure 90),531 for example, and there is a portal with lions supporting its pillars in the 14th-century Padua Ashkenazi Maḥzor.532 In this context, the lions have a specifically Jewish meaning, as they play an important role in traditional Jewish thinking.533

530 Maximilian Gritzner, Handbuch der heraldischen Terminologie in zwölf (germanischen und romanischen) Zungen: Enthaltend zugleich die Haupt-Grundsätze der Wappenkunst (Nuremberg: Verlag von Bauer und Raspe, 1890), 82. 531 Jerusalem, JNUL, hebr. 4, 781, fol. 1v. 532 New York, Public Library, Heb. 225, fol. 353v. This illumination is a further example of a picture that was painted over at a later point. Sara Offenberg, “Illuminations of Kol Nidrei in Two Ashkenazi Mahzorim,” Ars Judaica 7 (2011): 7–16; see p. 11 in this case. 533 See Chapter 6.4, A lion on fol. 69v.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 161

Figure 90: Jerusalem, JNUL, MS hebr. 4, 781, fol. 1v, detail.

What’s more, upon seeing the first page of Arch. Seld. A51, the reader seems to be looking through a window into a garden of flowers in full bloom. The elaborate portrayal of garden-like landscapes is one of the hallmarks of Italo-Jewish book art in the Renaissance period. Nonetheless, the initial page of Arch. Seld. A51 is not completely under this influence; although produced in Italy, this manuscript does not display the perspectivity and plasticity that developed at that time in illuminated Jewish manuscripts. Certain parallels do exist with regard to the page layout and colouring of such manuscripts, however.

Figure 91: Vatican, BAV, Ross. 498, fol. 85v.

Figure 92: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 1r.

162 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

A tiny telltale sign reveals that the artist was in an Italian environment while he was illustrating the work: the building in the background has a tiled roof in the ‘monk and nun’ design (see Figure 93):

Figure 93: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol 1r.

This form of tiling was employed in Roman times and spread over the whole of Europe during the Middle Ages, but it was not very suitable in a Central European climate where there was a considerable amount of rain and snow in winter. For this reason, a flat tile was developed in the 8th century north of the Alps, which was better suited to the weather, particularly for buildings with steep roofs.534 During the Late Middle Ages, flat tiles became the norm for roofs of buildings in Southern Germany, replacing the traditional thatched roofs in towns, which easily caught fire in the summer.535 Regional differences with regard to roofing materials are evident in Jewish manuscript illumination, among other things. In most Italian manuscripts from the 14th century, one can see ‘monk and nun’ tiles on the buildings,536 whereas flat tiles were generally drawn in the German manuscripts in this period.537 The books that Joel ben Simeon illustrated are an exception, however – an artist who worked in South Germany and Northern Italy, he 534 J. Stark and B. Wicht, Geschichte der Baustoffe (Wiesbaden/Berlin: Bauverlag, 2013), 42. 535 Heinz Zanger, Dachschmuck aus gebranntem Ton (Suderburg-Hösseringen: Edition :anderweit Verlag, 2002), 13. 536 Jerusalem, Museum Israel, MS Rothschild 24, fol. 65r (Ferrara, c. 1470); Parma, BPP, MS Parm 3273, fol. 1v (Lombardy, 1460–65); Jerusalem, Museum Israel/New York, Metropolitan Museum, Mishneh Torah, 2013.495 (Northern Italy, 1475). 537 Second Nuremberg Haggadah, London, Collection of David Sofer (formerly Jerusalem, Schocken Lib. MS 24087) 9v, 11r, 17v (Germany, 1460–70); Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 37, 27v,

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 163

lived in both cultures and picked up elements of both artistic traditions.538 This can be seen in the Washington Haggadah, which he illustrated, as this contains pictures of buildings with ‘monk and nun’ tiled roofs as well as roofs covered by flat tiles.539 The picture of a relatively flat roof with monk and nun tiles on fol. 1r is a reflection of the architecture that was common south of the Alps, which tallies with codicologists’ classification of Arch. Seld. A51 as an Italian manuscript. Decorations in the margins The next depictions of people and animals follow just a few folios later on fol. 4v. The siddur written in the margin is accompanied by drawings of two dogs and a lute, both in crimson ink (Figure 94). The text begins with the second verse of Psalm 33, ‫‘ =( הודו לה' בכינור בנבל עשור‬Give thanks unto the LORD with [the] harp, Sing praises unto Him with the psaltery of ten strings’).540 Two rather dainty-looking dogs with floppy ears, long necks and wide collars are lying opposite one another, their mouths wide open. The initial word ‫‘ =( הודו‬Give thanks to’) written in square letters in crimson fills the space between their muzzles, as if they are holding it up for everyone to see. Psalm 33 is followed by Psalm 92, which begins as follows: ‫מזמו[ר] שיר ליום‬ -‫עשור ועלי‬-‫ בלילות עלי‬,‫השבת טוב להודות ליהוה ולזמר לשמך עליון להגיד בבוקר חסדך ואמונתך‬ ‫‘ =( נבל הגיון בכנור‬It is a good thing to give thanks unto the LORD, And to sing praises unto Thy name, O Most High; To declare Thy loving kindness in the morning, And Thy faithfulness in the night seasons, With an instrument of ten strings, and with the psaltery; With a solemn sound upon the harp’).541 These words are illustrated with a picture of a lute with a bent-back pegbox. The instrument appears to have five strings. Lutes with five chords were used in Italy until approximately 1500.542 The picture was clearly an attempt to illustrate the ideas expressed in the text realistically, unlike the pictures of the dogs that precede it, which have no relation to it at all. The section of the SeMaK on this double page has not been illustrated (aee Figure 95). However, there is a clear connection between the mitzvah ‫להתפלל‬ ‫‘ =( בכונה‬Pray with devotion’, fols. 3v–7v) and the siddur written around it. The scribe laid out the pages this way to emphasise the importance of the liturgy and 168v; Jerusalem, Museum Israel, The Yahuda Haggadah, MS 180/50, fol. 1v (Southern Germany 1470–80); Paris, BNF, Hébreu 1333, 10r. 538 Kogman-Appel, 2011, 62–86. 539 Washington, Library of Congress, Washington Haggada, fols. 19v and 22r. 540 Ps 33:2. 541 Ps 92:1–4. 542 Josef Zuth, Handbuch der Laute und Gitarre (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1978), 146.

164 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 94: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 4v, detail.

praying. The SeMaK is written in bigger letters here and is in a column in the middle of each folio, but nonetheless, it is the siddur that is dominant due to its decoration. The Passover Haggadah is part of the siddur. It begins on fol. 22r and ends on fol. 26r with the words of praise ‫‘ =( כי לו נאה כי לו יאה‬Because it is proper for Him, because it befits Him’).543 Only the last two folios of the Haggadah have been illustrated. An initial of the letter ‫( ש‬shin) is on fol. 25r.544 The initial still has

543 According to Zunz, this passage has only been part of the Passover Haggadah since the 15th century – see Leopold Zunz, Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, historisch entwickelt. Ein Beitrag zur Alterthumskunde und biblischen Kritik (Berlin: A. Asher, 1832), 126 – but it was actually incorporated into the English Passover Haggadot in the 13th century. Cf. David Kaufmann, “The Ritual of the Seder and the Agada of the English Jews before the Expulsion.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 4 (1892): 550–561, particularly p. 560. 544 Compared with initial words, initial letters are relatively rare in Hebrew manuscripts and were hardly used at all by scribes from Italy until the 1440s. Nurit Pasternak, “A Meeting Point of Hebrew and Latin Manuscript Production: A Fifteenth Century Florentine Hebrew Scribe, Isaac ben Ovadia of Forlì,” Scrittura e civiltà 25 (2001): 185–200, esp. p. 195.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 165

Figure 95: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fols. 4v–5r.

traces of gilt in it and is decorated with a pen-and-ink drawing in red. The picture that goes with it shows a slender jug that seems to be hovering over the initial and the spout of which is close to some kind of cup (Figure 96). The initial ‫ ש‬starts off the verse ‫שפוך חמתך על הגוים אשר לא ידעוך ועל הממלכות‬ ‫‘ =( אשר בשמך לא קראו‬Pour out Thy wrath upon the nations that know Thee not, and

Figure 96: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 25r.

166 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

upon the kingdoms that call not upon Thy name’).545 This verse is said on Passover Seders after pouring out the fourth glass of wine. The door is then opened to let Elijah in – the prophet who announces the Messiah’s arrival to everyone present. The words ‘Pour out Thy wrath’ have been part of the Passover Haggadah ever since the end of the 11th century. Under the influence of ongoing Jewish persecution in Ashkenaz, the idea of messianic salvation gradually became linked with the wish for divine revenge on the heathen nations.546 Around the year 1430, Ashkenazi Haggadot developed some iconography of their own in conjunction with the words ‘Pour out Thy wrath’ in Psalm 79:6 – the arrival of the messianic age was depicted by the Prophet Elijah riding on a donkey or the arrival of the Messiah himself (Figure 97).547 Apart from that, pictures were also drawn in which the central theme was revenge. In a German siddur from the 14th century, for instance, the initial word ‘Pour out’ is flanked by two devilish figures.548

Figure 97: Darmstadt, HLuHB,

   Cod. Or. 28, fol. 12v.

In the picture drawn on fol. 25r, we can see far more than just a literal depiction of the expression ‘Pour out’, as it refers to the pouring of the fourth cup of wine, a step linked with the hope that the Messiah will arrive soon. The jug can even be seen as an image of God’s wrath pouring out (over the heathens). In one illustration in an Ashkenazi Passover Haggadah from the 14th/15th century, for instance,

545 Ps 79:6. 546 Israel Jacob Yuval, Two Nations in Your Womb: Perceptions of Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008), 123–30. 547 Kogman-Appel 2011, 81. 548 Cambridge, University Library, MS Add. 662, fol. 48v.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 167

the artist drew a jug being emptied next to a picture of the Messiah descending over the enemies of the People of Israel.549 The text of the SeMaK on fol. 25r is dominated by the initial word ‫‘ =( לישב‬sit’) highlighted in red, which introduces the commandment ‘Sit in the tabernacle’ and the third chapter (see Figure 98). There is an indirect link to the Passover Haggadah here, which frames the text: like the feast of Pesach, the Feast of Tabernacles is one of the three Jewish pilgrimage festivals and also reminds people of their ancestors’ flight from Egypt in ancient times. The SeMaK initially quotes the passage in the Bible to which the commandment refers, for example: ‘Ye shall dwell in booths [for] seven days’.550 The reason subsequently mentioned in the biblical text – ‘[in order] that your generations may know that I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt’551 – was not repeated here explicitly, as it was presumed it would already be familiar to readers.552

Figure 98: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 25r.

Since the commandment ‘Sit in the tabernacle’ introduces the beginning of a new chapter in Arch. Seld. A51, the precept is generally attributed a special meaning. It is certainly possible that this spatial proximity to the Passover Haggadah was

549 Bruno Italiener, “Die illustrierte Pessach-Haggada,” in Die Darmstädter Pessach-Haggadah. Codex Orientalis 8 der Landesbibliothek zu Darmstadt aus dem 14. Jahrhundert, ed. Bruno Italiener (Leipzig: Karl W. Hiersemann, 1927): 1–41, esp. p. 38. 550 Lev 23:42. 551 Lev 23:43. 552 See Chapter 3.2 in this case.

168 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 99: Double page in Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51,fols. 25v–26r.

intentional.553 The commandment ‘Sit in the tabernacle’ continues on the next two folios, framed again by the Passover Haggadah. The double page on fols. 25v–26r is decorated particularly elaborately (Figure 99). R. Perez’ commentary has been written in geometrical shapes and vessels, and leafy plants drawn in red ink in the margins are growing out of it. When the book lies open at this double page, it is reminiscent of a garden in bloom or a decorated tabernacle. Perhaps the scribe had a tabernacle with branches on the roof in mind when he drew it, which is what is depicted in two manuscripts from Northern Italy.554

553 In the Italian Passover Haggadah known as Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 155, Pesach and the Feast of Tabernacles are also linked to one another. Folio 5r of that contains an illumination of a lulav (palm frond) and a hadass (branch of the myrtle tree). Shlomo Bistritzky, “Codex hebraicus 155,” in Manuscript Cultures 6. Ausstellungskatalog “Tora, Talmud, Siddur”, anlässlich der Ausstellung “Tora – Talmud – Siddur. Hebräische Handschriften der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg“ in der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg vom 18. September bis 26. Oktober 2014, Hamburg, ed. Irina Wandrey (Hamburg: SFB 950, 2014), 228–37, esp. p. 229. 554 London, BL, Add. 26968 (‘Forli Siddur’, originated in 1383), fol. 316v and Vatican, BAV, Cod. Rossiana 498, (originated in 1451–1475), fol. 85v.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

Figure 100: London, BL, Add. 26968, fol. 316v, detail.

 169

Figure 101: Vatican, BAV, Ross. 498, fol. 85v, detail.

Carmina figurata555 The commentaries on the SeMaK occasionally have a geometrical shape and create objects, heraldic symbols or animals. The first objects to be formed this way are on fols. 6r and 9v, where R. Perez’s remarks are in the shape of half a jug. There is no connection whatsoever between the shapes and the texts they contain, however.556 On fol. 28v there is a comment in the SeMaK that has been shaped like a goblet, the edges of which are decorated with drawings in red ink (see Figure 102). Motifs such as plants, a small dog and two human faces peering out from under a leaf make the decoration interesting and even amusing at times. The text refers to the commandment ‫‘ =( לברך על המזון לפניו‬Say the blessing before eating’), which starts on fol. 28r. Inside the goblet there is a comment by Perez of Corbeil that uses a quotation from Ḥallah, the Mishnah tractate, to outline the cases in which a blessing is to be said. There are no obvious links to the text in

555 The term carmen figuratum generally refers to a kind of poem whose appearance is linked to its wording in some way. (On the use of the term, see Christine Jakobi-Mirwald and Martin Roland, Buchmalerei. Terminologie in der Kunstgeschichte (Berlin: Reimer, 2008), 36 and Dalia-Ruth Halperin, Illuminating in Micrography: The Catalan Micrography Mahzor-MS Hebrew 8o 6527 in the National Library of Israel (Leiden: Brill, 2013): 11. In this case, the term is used in a wider sense as lines of text that fill in a particular shape (or rather, create an outline of one) and not as shapes that are linked to the text in some way. 556 On fol. 6r there is a comment by R. Perez on the commandment ‘Pray with devotion’ which is concerned with the question of what order the Minchah (mid-afternoon prayer) and Musaf (an additional prayer on Shabbat and holidays) are to be said in and the question of whether or not a light meal may be eaten before the Minchah. On fol. 9v, the comments relate to the rule about making tzitzit, or fringes.

170 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 102: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 28v.

this case or in any of the subsequent shapes (a tower on fol. 29r, a jug on fol. 29v and ciborium-like drinking vessels on fols. 29v, 57r and 68r, which are possibly spice towers). From fol. 70v onwards, individual shapes were filled in using a number of bright colours. The double page on 70v–71r features a calyx of a flower with a green and red lining, a heraldic lily and a heraldic bird of prey (see Figure 103). The texts inside and outside the shapes relate to the commandment ‫שלא לאכול‬ ‫‘ =( בשר בחלב‬Do not eat any meat together with milk’), which starts on fol. 69r. The shape of the lily is interesting here. Texts shaped like lilies can be found as carmina figurata in other Hebrew manuscripts as well, such as an Ashkenazi manuscript from the 13th century containing Nebiyim (the Prophets)557 and an Italian maḥzor from the 15th century (see Figure 105).558 The lily in Arch. Seld. 557 London, BL, Add. 26879, fol. 187r. 558 London, BL, Harley 5686, fol. 440r.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 171

Figure 103: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fols. 70v–71r.

A51 has some special characteristics, however: a red band is wrapped around the stem of the lily, and two stamens can be seen between the petals, like Florentine lilies (fleurs-de-lis) (Figure 106).559 Lilies of this kind are also depicted in the Italian Maḥzor. Compared to that, the lily in Arch. Seld. A51 contains a particularly puzzling detail: its petals do not end in floral elements, but sharp claws. There is no connection between the figure of the lily and the text it contains, but the lily does relate directly to the text surrounding it. The petals of the flower enclose the word ‫‘ =( הילכות‬religious laws’) written in large letters. In this case, the lily symbolises divine law, just like the fleur-de-lis sceptre in the London manuscript BL, Add. 18684.560 The title ‘Religious laws’ introduces various rules governing the separation of milk and meat, one example being the rule based on Ḥullin (the tractate on slaughtering animals) that says the udder of a slaughtered

559 This lily shape was stamped onto Florentine gold coins as of 1252; see Christoph Friedrich Weber, Zeichen der Ordnung und des Aufruhrs: heraldische Symbolik in italienischen Stadtkommunen des Mittelalters (Cologne/Weimar: Böhlau Verlag, 2011), 6–7. 560 See Chapter 6.4 here: hybrid creature on fol. 8v (Fig. 50).

172 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 104: London, BL, Add. 26879, fol. 187r, detail.

Figure 105: London, BL, Harley 5686, fol. 440r, detail.

Figure 106: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 70v, detail.

cow must be ripped open and drained of any milk561 and the laws on declaring the mixing of meat and milk to be unkosher. The sharp claws the lily seems to have could indicate how imperative it is to comply with the law. The list of laws continues on the folios that follow. On fol. 71r the lowered wings of a bird of prey one could find in a coat of arms span practically the whole column in which the SeMaK is written. The bird has a crown of feathers and there are what must be small bells fastened around its ankles. It cannot be an eagle, then, but it could well be a falcon.562 Falcons were also depicted in coats of arms in the Middle Ages – take the Strozzi’s crest, for instance, a patrician family in Renaissance Florence.563 On fol. 71v there are carmina figurata in the shape of a vase and a horse (Figure 108). The heavy-boned steed shown from the side is pacing with its head and tail lowered, and its right front hoof is raised. The horse is not drawn with realistic proportions, but is similar to other contemporary depictions of the

561 b Ḥullin 109a–109b. 562 Gritzner, 1890, 98–99. 563 Ingeborg Walter, Die Strozzi. Eine Familie im Florenz der Renaissance (Munich: C. H. Beck, 2011), 26.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

Figure 107: Monument to Sir John Hawkwood, Paolo Uccello, fresco, 1436; Florence, Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore.

 173

Figure 108: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Fol. 71v.

animal. Its head in particular – drawn with a human eye – is a typical drawing from the Quattrocento period of Italian history.564 What is also striking on this page is the word ‫‘ =( ברייה‬a creature’) written in large, bold letters, which introduces one of the laws on inadmissible combinations of certain foods. In this case, there is definitely not a link between the horse and the text, as the ‘creature’ meant here is a small, impure animal that can fall into food, thus making it impure. Two more carmina figurata come after this one on fol. 76r: an ox (Figure 109) and another horse. The prohibition ‫‘ =( שלא לאכול שלקות של גוים‬Do not eat anything that Gentiles have cooked’) has been written down here. The text in the drawing of the ox is a comment by R. Perez and relates to the preceding prohibition, ‫לא לאכול‬ ‫‘ =( חמץ בפסח‬Do not eat anything leavened on Pesach’). This comment refers to the question of how things should be made kosher for Passover. The standing ox – easy to identify by its horns and cloven hooves – is tilting its head slightly and sticking its tongue out. The position of its eyes and the animal’s long nose almost make its face look human. In Jewish book art, one can find numerous pictures of oxen that look like this. Livestock are not generally shown in such drawings, but other animals are that have a high symbolic value: the red cow, for example, the ashes of which were used for ritual cleaning 565 in biblical times,566 or a bull, which was one of the 564 Heinrich Weizsäcker, “Das Pferd in der Kunst des Quattrocento,” Jahrbuch der Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 7 (1886): 40–57, 157–72; see p. 43 in particular. 565 Num 19:2–10. 566 On fol. 76v of Jerusalem, Schocken Library, MS 13873, for example.

174 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 109: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 76r.

four living creatures in Ezekiel’s vision of God,567 or the mythical Behemoth.568 All of these animals can serve as pointers to the messianic age. When Maimonides wrote about the red cow, for instance, he said that a total of nine red cows would be sacrificed until the Second Temple was destroyed, while the tenth cow would be sacrificed by the Messiah himself.569 The four living creatures from Ezekiel’s vision symbolise the view of God’s throne. As Katrin Kogman-Appel has shown, the notions of penance and atonement that the Ashkenazi pietists had are reflected in the depiction in the Leipzig Maḥzor; according to these beliefs, the atoner will be received at God’s throne one day and the arrival of the Messiah can then begin if virtue and sin are in a state of balance.570 According to rabbinic tradition, the Behemoth, a huge, mythical creature, will be offered to the Righteous at the banquet for them together with the Leviathan and the Ziz on the advent of the Messiah.571

567 Ezek. 1:4–25; Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, B 32 inf., fol. 135v; Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, MS Voll 1102/I, maḥzor, Worms, c. 1310, fol. 31v. 568 Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, B 32 inf. , fol. 136r; Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, MS Voller 1102/II, fol. 181v. 569 Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Para Aduma, 4:3, in Moshe ben Maimon, ‫ספר טהרה‬, in ‫ הוא‬:‫משנה תורה‬ ‫היד החזכה‬, Mishneh Torah: Hu haYad Ha-Hazakah (Berlin: Julius Sittenfeld, 1862), 1–96, esp. p. 22. 570 Katrin Kogman-Appel 2012, 115. 571 Andreas Lehnardt, “Leviathan und Behemoth: Mythische Urwesen in der mittelalterlichen jüdischen Tradition,” in Tiere und Fabelwesen im Mittelalter, ed. Sabine Obermaier (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2009): 105–29.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 175

Figure 110: Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, MS Voll 1102/I, maḥzor, Worms, c. 1310, fol. 31v.

Since a horse is also portrayed next to the bull on fol. 76r, one might assume that the latter is not a mythical being, but simply a domestic animal. This impression is quickly forgotten upon turning the page, however: fol. 76v shows a colourful griffin572 with the body of a horse, feet with sharp talons and a fiery tail (see Figure 111). The short distance between the ox and griffin conjures up associations of the Behemoth and Ziz, the giant creature and bird that were also used as motifs in Jewish book art. These animals are depicted along with the Leviathan – the biblical sea monster – in a biblical manuscript kept at the Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan, Italy and originally produced in South Germany in the first half of the 13th century. Underneath these pictures we can see the banquet table for the Righteous in Paradise, who have the pleasure of eating the three huge animals. This is the oldest known depiction of the heavenly banquet and was made in connection with the coming of the Messiah when the world is about to end, a notion that Jews associated with the end of the fifth millennium of the Jewish calendar (in 1240).573 The myth of the messianic banquet was adapted so often in Jewish literature that it is impossible to trace the picture back to a specific written source.574 As Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi writes, messianic notions about the end of the world approaching were received positively by many Jews in Italy. The Italian 572 It contains a comment that R. Perez made on the preceding negative commandment ‫שלא‬ ‫‘ =( לאכול גבינות של גוים‬Do not eat any cheese from Gentiles’). The negative precept ‫שלא לשתות יין של‬ ‫‘ =( גוים‬Do not drink any wine from Gentiles’) starts underneath the griffin. 573 Sarit Shalev-Eyni, “Between Carnality and Spirituality: A Cosmological Vision of the End at the Turn of the Fifth Jewish Millennium,” Speculum 90 (2015): 458–82, esp. pp. 458–59. 574 Eva Frojmovic, “Feasting at the Lord’s Table,” Images 7 (2015): 5–21, esp. pp. 14–15.

176 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

Figure 111: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 76v.

Jews served as a kind of ‘eschatological news agency’ for other parts of the Jewish world, a role that was possibly favoured by the country’s geographical location; messianic and apocalyptic texts from other parts of the world were copied in Italy and then distributed further afield.575 The depiction of an ox and griffin in Arch. Seld. A51 may also have been the result of messianic hopes, in fact, and was possibly meant to be reminiscent of the banquet for the Righteous. The notion of the messianic banquet was rooted so firmly in Jewish minds in Northern Italy that by the 15th century it had become common practice to serve fish, meat and an egg in addition to the usual foods at Passover Seders,576 as these symbolically stood for the Leviathan, the Behemoth and the Ziz.577 The fact that the mythical Behemoth and Ziz were drawn in Arch. 575 Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi, “Messianic Impulses in Joseph ha-Kohen,” in Jewish Thought in the Sixteenth Century, ed. Bernard Dov Cooperman, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983): 460–87, esp. p. 486. 576 Evidence of this custom can be found in an Italian maḥzor from the late 13th century (Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 155, fol. 10r). Yael Zirlin, “The Problems of Identifying the Origin of a Manuscript: Hamburg, Cod. Hebr. 155,” Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies / ‫דברי‬ ‫ הקונגרס העולמי למדעי היהדות‬11 (1993): 33–37, esp. pp. 35–36. 577 Joseph Gutmann, “Leviathan, Behemoth and Ziz: Jewish Messianic Symbols in Art,” Hebrew Union College Annual 39 (1968): 219–30, esp. pp. 229–30.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 177

Figure 112: Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, B 32 inf. 1, fol. 136r.

Seld. A51 near the bans on consuming cheese and wine produced by Gentiles may have been intentional, as juxtaposing forbidden food and drink with the heavenly banquet is a way of emphasising the hope that the messianic age will finally begin. However, since the Leviathan is absent and there are no references to the three fabulous creatures in the texts, we cannot say with any certainty that the ox and griffin equate with the Behemoth and Ziz. The last figurative depiction can be found on fol. 87r. Two rampant lions facing each other are holding a crown with foliate decorations between their heads. This picture is particularly eye-catching in the book because of its colouring: the red tongues and ends of the lions’ tails, the orange legs and paws, and

178 

 6 Five manuscripts in detail

particularly the yellow manes of the animals are much more colourful than the preceding illustrations are.578

Figure 113: Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 87r.

The two animals actually form a single, closed shape since the ends of their tails and their heads are connected to each other, making them look like shield-bearers. Like the ox on fol. 76r, the lions have human noses and eyes and are looking beyond the picture, their tongues stretched out. A mitzvah is written above the lions, which is based on Deuteronomy 23:20: ‫‘ =( שלא להלוות בריבית‬Do not lend [money to a fellow Jew] at interest’). This text is continued in the area enclosed by the lions, and comments on money-lending with interest have been written directly in the lions’ bodies. Like the preceding carmina figurata, there is no direct link between the illustration and text here. Pairs of lions have been portrayed ever since Late Antiquity in ceremonial Jewish art, where they guard the Ark of the Covenant or Torah arks.579 As Marc Michael Epstein has pointed out, lions not only symbolised the Jewish people, 580

578 Part of the colouring may have been done at a later date, as the quality of the colours is quite different compared to the yellow used in the picture on fol. 71r. 579 As on the mosaic floor in the synagogue of Beit Alpha, which is from the 6th century. 580 See Chapter 6.4, with the lion on fol. 69v, 143–45.

6.5 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Northern Italy 

 179

but the Torah – there is a close orthographical link between the Aramaic term for Torah, ‫אוריתא‬, and the word ‫‘ =( אריותא‬two lions’).581 Bearing this in mind, the pair of lions depicted on fol. 87r may be an indication that the ban on lending money with interest is of biblical origin. It is not apparent why this negative precept was decorated with lions, but this might indicate that the person who commissioned the manuscript was in the interest business.

Prominent features and comments The manuscript now known as Arch. Seld. A51, which was produced in Italy in the 15th century, is from an immigrant from Ashkenaz, the telltale signs being the Ashkenazic script, the presence of a siddur according to the Ashkenazi rite, and the German name ‘Bern’ used for Verona. Little mistakes, the confusing structure of the SeMaK and the way in which it was decorated make it seem likely that the scribe did not have much of a connection to the text. In fact, he was obviously primarily interested in prayers and religious rituals and wanted to express this. In view of his preferences, the text of the SeMaK served as a source of material that he could adapt to his own needs in designing the manuscript. Consequently, he provided Chapter 3 with a new beginning so that it corresponded to the Passover Haggadah written in the margins. In addition to that, he thought the illustrations in the SeMaK ought to express messianic hopes. This can be seen in the illustration of the initial word ‫שפוך‬ (= ‘Pour out’), in which the wish for messianic salvation and divine revenge are both expressed. The pictures of the ox and griffin serving as reminders of the banquet for the Just in Paradise could also refer to messianic hopes. Obviously, very few pictures are clearly linked to a particular context today. In fact, it is easy to get the impression that the illustrations were added randomly. The various drawings in the margins – small dogs, musical instruments, foliage and carmina figurata filled with comments on the SeMaK, which are shaped like vases, heraldic motifs, plants, animals or mythical creatures – all of these elements give the manuscript a rather light-hearted character. And yet the artist’s intention was not as much to illustrate the texts as to create areas that had an overall effect on the visual appearance of the book when it was open.

581 Epstein 1997, 55–58.

7 Conclusion The main purpose of this study was to shed more light on the visual aspects of the scribal culture that once existed in medieval Ashkenaz. On the basis of the SeMaK manuscripts designed and decorated by the scribes themselves, it was shown how the copyists approached the texts and how far they went in adapting the visual presentation to suit their own preferences. SeMaK manuscripts were designed and decorated in many different ways, and there are a number of reasons why this happened. One of them is to do with the individualistic nature of Jewish book production in the Middle Ages, which gave scribes the freedom to give each copy of the SeMaK they produced a personal touch. They had various intentions in mind when it came to producing a copy of the work, ranging from the student who was given the task of copying a book by his teacher to the wealthy individual who saw the exercise as a creative and enjoyable way of making a book for himself or his family. Yehuda bar Moshe Ari, the scribe who created Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, chose to focus on family life and dietary rules by ordering individual passages of the SeMaK in a kind of visual hierarchy, for instance, whereas the scribe who produced the North Italian manuscript Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51 paid more attention to the siddur accompanying the work on Jewish law; in this case, it was not the SeMaK that he illustrated, but religious ceremonies and eschatological hopes. Pictures without any link to the SeMaK’s wording can also be found in KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, a Copenhagen manuscript in which the catchwords have been ‘decorated’ with what look like childish doodles. This is in stark contrast to the illustrations in the London manuscript BL, Add. 18684, which relate to the text in all sorts of ways. These depict aspects of the text, comment on them or tell related stories about them, with the SeMaK’s subject matter being expanded or compressed as necessary in the process. The wide range of pictures relating to the text in this manuscript indicate that the scribe who produced it felt it was important to come up with suitable images to illustrate the subjects. Another reason for the wide variety of designs is the striking difference between the contents of individual SeMaK manuscripts. This was not what Isaac of Corbeil had intended – he wanted his work to be distributed in a controlled way. Ironically, it was the SeMaK itself that harboured the seed that would lead to such changes in its design. R. Perez of Corbeil, who was once R. Isaac’s student, realised it was unsuitable for halakhic decision-making in its original form. Consequently, he added countless comments to explain its wording and encouraged his own students to carry on with their research and make notes. This is how different copies of the work started to arise from a very early stage. As the SeMaK spread further and further, additional changes were made to it, as a https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-007

182 

 7 Conclusion

considerable number of the scribes were well-educated men who felt the need to correct its wording and insert explanatory glosses where expedient. The idea that the SeMaK needed to be supplemented caused the scribes to read the work very closely, think about its meaning and modify it in places. On occasion, this could even affect its artistic design. It may not simply be a coincidence that the Zurich SeMaK (London, BL, Add. 18684) was enhanced with pictures that were visual comments on its contents, even though it is practically bursting with notes and commentaries in the margin. Owing to its wide distribution and the early creation of different versions of it, the SeMaK became a work that fulfilled a broad range of functions. It could serve as a luxury manuscript of a representative nature on the one hand, but also cover the most important areas of religious life when used in conjunction with a siddur, for instance. The SeMaK was read at home with one’s family, while it was also employed as a textbook in the yeshivot. Glossed editions of it such as the Zurich SeMaK enabled scholarly men to take a close look at the wording and look for answers to halakhic issues. The multiple purposes that the SeMaK was expected to cover were also an important reason for the materials and artistic design of it varying so much The large number of SeMaK manuscripts that still exist today is a telltale sign that this work was repeatedly copied by hand, especially in Ashkenaz. In a few cases, researchers have even been able to discover which manuscripts were created using the same original exemplar. Only the texts were copied, however – the pictures were ignored. Actually, the SeMaK was not usually illustrated at all, so it could not have served as a source of pictures for later copies. No conventions were established in terms of its design. It was this lack of established artistic paradigms that gave Jewish copyists so much scope for creativity – the ideal prerequisite for developing their own ‘visual culture’. In this case, the creative aspect of the artistic work scribes did was more significant than for illuminated manuscripts based on established practices of illustratio. The scribes drew inspiration for their artwork from all kinds of sources. Some pictures such as hunting scenes582 can be traced back to motifs used specifically in Jewish manuscript illumination, while others were inspired by the Christian environment in which the artists lived and worked. Not only books served as models for them, but also objects such as sculptures, coats of arms, coins and everyday items. This is why analysing these pictures enables researchers to draw conclusions about the material culture and daily life of medieval Jews. As Christian images were adopted, their iconographic significance changed. This is

582 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 202v and London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 40v.

7 Conclusion 

 183

most apparent in the picture of a lion on fol. 69v of the London manuscript BL, Add. 18684, in which the scribe used a motif from the Physiologus in a playful manner. The keen interest this scribe took in the surrounding culture is not only noticeable in the way he used its models, but in his creativity in ‘inventing’ new pictures like the hybrid creature on fol. 3v. Although each of the manuscripts covered here is unique and the scribes’ own preferences have been expressed in a subtle way in all of them, there are a number of common topics nevertheless. One of these is the subject of the Israelites’ liberation from Egypt, which is mentioned in the very first mitzvah in the SeMaK: ‘Beginning with the belief that God controls the world and rescued the People of Israel from the land of Egypt, every single person should believe in Redemption in the future’. The scribes obviously felt it was important to express this topic, which is so closely linked to the Passover festival, in an artistic way. The importance of the commandment ‘On the night of 15 Nissan, tell your son about the exodus from Egypt’ is emphasised in two of the manuscripts, for example.583 Apart from this, God’s vengeance upon the unbelievers was expressed visually when the Passover Haggadah was illustrated in the Oxford manuscript BOD, Arch Seld. A51. The connection between eschatological hopes and the wish for revenge that had formed in Ashkenaz was still on people’s minds because of the recurring persecution of Jews in Europe, and even spread to taly. A direct link to a specific time is not always obvious in pictures that were meant to illustrate the differences between Jews and Christians. The Jewish-Christian polemic expressed in the manuscript BL, Add. 18684, which is from 1391,584 was very topical at the time, however. In Nuremberg, where the manuscript was produced in all probability, the anti-Jewish discourse was expressed in a sculpture on the façade of a church. Besides that, the Jews of Nuremberg were robbed of their financial security when the King annulled debts they were owed by Christians twice, in 1385 and 1390. The manuscripts I have focused on in this study span over a century of Ashkenazi history and follow the SeMaK on its journey from Corbeil in France to Germany and from there to Italy. The halakhic work, which proved to be very popular in the Ashkenazi community, was subject to a number of transformations on the way. The scribes who copied it repeatedly approached the text in new ways and gave each of their manuscripts an unmistakable character by decorating them artistically and adding extra details or other touches of their own. People’s interest in the SeMaK started to decline in the Late Middle Ages, however, when it was

583 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339, fol. 7v and London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 61v. 584 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 12r.

184 

 7 Conclusion

still adapted frequently, but not copied as much as in the past. This decreasing interest can be seen in Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld A51, for example – a 15th-century manuscript that was richly illustrated, but in which hardly any attempt was made to link the artwork to the text. The most intense activity in terms of shaping the appearance of the SeMaK took place in the 14th century in Ashkenaz. This work was not limited to drawing ornate pictures and decorating folios, but was also concerned with the SeMaK’s content, which is particularly evident in the way pages were designed and the content set out.585 In this case, designing the SeMaK was essentially working at the interface between rabbinical scholarship and Ashkenazi book art, a phenomenon that helped the visual aspects of scribal culture to be developed freely.

585 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17 and Oxford, BOD, Opp. 339 are prime examples of this.

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-008

Magyar tudomanyos akademia

Magyar tudomanyos akademia

Orszagos Szechenyi Konyvtar

Orszagos Szechenyi Konyvtar

Trinity College

Trinity College

Austin

Berlin

Berlin

Berlin

Bologna

Bologna

Budapest

Budapest

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 Budapest

11 Budapest

12 Budapest

13 Cambridge

14 Cambridge

Magyar tudomanyos akademia

Biblioteca Universitaria

Archivio di Stato

SBB

SBB

SBB

The University of Texas

Universiteits-bibliotheek

Amsterdam

1

Library

Place

 

?

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

1343

14th–15th cent.

1386

Date of origin

F 12 24

F 18 40

fol. 5

fol. 6

Geniza 303

1490

16th cent.

14th cent. 1400?

14th–15th cent. 1340?

?

Kaufmann A 81 15th cent.

Kaufmann A 82 1418

Fr. 17

MS Ebr. 605

Or. fol. 4179

Or. Qu. 3

Or. fol. 383

v. 1

Ros 558

No.

Byz.

Seph.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Seph.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Provence?

Cologne?

1 – 148

126

fol. 52 – 240, 242, 244 Frag.

173

1 Frag.

261

281

2 Frag.

4 Frag.

1 Frag.

276

206

1 Frag.

275

Script Place of origin Fols

0C643

–

ZP005

ZP006

–

–

0P008

–

–

–

–

–

–

0F002

SfarData Key

186   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

University Library

University Library

University Library

University Library

University Library

University Library

University Library

University Library

Harvard University

Hebrew Union College

Hebrew Union College

Hebrew Union College

Bibliothèque municipale

16 Cambridge

17 Cambridge

18 Cambridge

19 Cambridge

20 Cambridge

21 Cambridge

22 Cambridge

23 Cambridge

24 Cambridge (Mass.)

25 Cincinnati

26 Cincinnati

27 Cincinnati

28 Colmar

29 Copenhagen KB

Trinity College

15 Cambridge

14th–15th cent.

Hebr. Add. 6

G 1736 / fr. 1

674

152

652

Heb. 39

Add. 380

Add. 562

Oo. 6.64

Dd. 13.7

Add. 2580

Add. 3127

Add. 381

13th–14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

1373

1393

1315

14th–15th cent.

14th–15th cent.

1322

1387

1396/7

1399

15th cent.

Add. 559–560 1401

R 14 62

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Rhineland

France?

Ashkenaz

Italy

Italy

252 incomplete

1 bifolio Frag.

270 incomplete

165

120 – 250

179

113v – 166v

155

131

34 – 146

1 – 144

63 – 309

119

1 – 249 incomplete

152 incomplete

(continued)

–

–

–

0D241

0D247

0D175

ZC236

ZC239

0C628

0C631

0C572

0C574

ZC252

0C578

–

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK   187

Archivio Storico Comunale

Biblioteka Jagiellonska

University Library

Biblioteca de San Lorenzo

Biblioteca Publica

Universitätsbibliothek

Stadtbibliothek und Stadtarchiv

SUB

SUB

SUB

SUB

SUB

SUB

31 Correggio

32 Cracow

33 Edinburgh

34 Escorial

35 Evora

36 Frankfurt

37 Friedberg

38 Hamburg

39 Hamburg

40 Hamburg

41 Hamburg

42 Hamburg

43 Hamburg

Library

Archivio Storico Comunale

Place

30 Correggio

 

(continued)

hebr. 152

hebr. 85

hebr. 100

hebr. 91

hebr. 151

hebr. 89

Frag. Hebr. 23

Qu. 12

CXXIV 2 – 47

G III 16

La.III 595

Fr. 5

25, 53

3.3, 27.3

No.

1324

1383

1408

1412

1469

17th cent.?

?

1404

15th cent.

14th cent. 1342?

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

Date of origin

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

?

Ashk.

?

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Trier?

127

19r – 197v

138 incomplete

2 – 195

1 – 156 (Papier)

206 – 384

Frag.

1 – 139

2 Frag.

152 incomplete

93

2 Frag.

16 Frag.

Frag.

Script Place of origin Fols

–

0G154

0G149

0G189

0G171

–

–

0Y753

–

ZS003

–

–

–

–

SfarData Key

188   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

SUB

SUB

SUB

SUB

SUB

SUB

Archivio Storico Comunale

Private collection

Universitätsbibliothek

JNUL

JNUL

JNUL

JNUL

44 Hamburg

45 Hamburg

46 Hamburg

47 Hamburg

48 Hamburg

49 Hamburg

50 Imola

51 Israel

52 Jena

53 Jerusalem

54 Jerusalem

55 Jerusalem

56 Jerusalem

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

13th–14th cent.

1292?

1298?

14th cent.

1318

8°4199.1 – 2

4°6702

Heb. 8°1956

14th–15th cent. (1415)

14th cent.

14th cent.

Heb. 8°5242 (3) c. 1300

Rec. adj. fol. 9

Mss. R.R. Film No. PH 5137

Fr. 14

hebr. 143

hebr. 98

hebr. 106

Levy 70

hebr. 128

hebr. 17

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Prov.?

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Krems an der Donau

Saumur

Germany

226r – 412v incomplete

193

207

2 Frag.

130

2 Frag.

9 Frag.

13 Frag.

137 incomplete

1r – 157r incomplete

199

19 – 158

179 – 260

(continued)

0A037

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

0G153

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK   189

Michael Krupp

Badische Landesbibliothek

Brotherton Library

Universitätsbibliothek

Universitätsbibliothek

BL

BL

BL

BL

BL

BL

BL

58 Jerusalem

59 Karlsruhe

60 Leeds

61 Leipzig

62 Leipzig

63 London

64 London

65 London

66 London

67 London

68 London

69 London

Library

JNUL

Place

57 Jerusalem

 

(continued)

Add. 18685

Add. 26982

Add. 23974

Harley 5529

Or. 10060

Add. 18828

Add. 18684

B.H.qu. 22

B.H. fol. 9

MS Roth 321

Reuchlin 11

4211

Heb. 28°558

No.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

14th cent.

Ashk.

Münster?

Nuremberg?

Germany

1r – 184r

263 incomplete

10 – 82

19r – 157r incomplete

183

140

1 – 331

80 incomplete

80

233

32 – 177

4 Frag.

96 incomplete

Script Place of origin Fols

14th cent. – 1391? Ashk.

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

1343

1392

14th–15th cent.

1305

1395

15th cent.

14th cent.

15th cent.

Date of origin

ZY440

ZC037

–

–

–

–

0C399

–

0G061

0C687

ZY684

–

–

SfarData Key

190   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

BL

BL

D. Sofer

D. Sofer

D. Weinmann

Montefiore Library

Montefiore Library

John Rylands University Library

John Rylands University Library

Biblioteca Ambrosiana

Biblioteca Ambrosiana

Archivio Capitolare

Archivio Capitolare

70 London

71 London

72 London

73 London

74 London

75 London

76 London

77 Manchester

78 Manchester

79 Milan

80 Milan

81 Modena

82 Modena

1527

?

14th cent.

13th–14th cent.

1279 / 1280

14th–15th cent.

65

16

A 80 Inf.

X 111 Sup

B 4907

31

14th–15th cent.

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.; 1341?

14th cent.

?

1346

123 Halber15th cent. stamm No: 149

122

5

26

7

Add. 11639

Harley 5584

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk./Italy?

France

4 Frag.

1 Frag.

1r – 100r

1r – 148v

1 Frag.

1 – 108

211 (paper) incomplete

264 (paper)

4 Frag.

4 Frag.

228 incomplete

546v – 640r

175 incomplete

–

–

(continued)

ZY276

–

–

YY061

ZC129

–

–

–

ZY072

ZC049

–

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK   191

Archivio della Curia Arcivescovile 37

Estense e universitaria

Estense e universitaria

Archivio di Stato

Archivio di Stato

Archivio di Stato

Archivio di Stato

Archivio di Stato

Archivio di Stato

Archivio di Stato

85 Modena

86 Modena

87 Modena

88 Modena

89 Modena

90 Modena

91 Modena

92 Modena

93 Modena

94 Modena

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.

15th cent.

?

1456

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.

14th–15th cent.

Date of origin

199, 200, 201, 14th cent. 202, 203, 205, 207, 497, 129.

425

522

495, 566

716

105

521

9.3 – 9.4

a.Q.9.23

Archivio della Curia Arcivescovile 42

No.

84 Modena

Library

Archivio della Curia Arcivescovile 17

Place

83 Modena

 

(continued)

Seph.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Seph.

Ashk.

Ashk.

20 Frag.

3 Frag.

12 Frag.

4 Frag.

10 Frag.

1 Frag.

10 Frag.

2 Frag.

Northern Italy? 148

2 Frag.

5 Frag.

1 Frag.

Script Place of origin Fols

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

SfarData Key

192   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

Archivio di Stato

Archivio di Stato

Russian State Library

Russian State Library

Russian State Library

Russian State Library

Russian State Library

Russian State Library

Russian State Library

Russian State Library

Russian State Library

BSB

BSB

BSB

95 Modena

96 Modena

97 Moscow

98 Moscow

99 Moscow

100 Moscow

101 Moscow

102 Moscow

103 Moscow

104 Moscow

105 Moscow

106 Munich

107 Munich

108 Munich

hebr. 368

hebr. 233

hebr. 135

Günz. 1087

Günz. 830

Günz. 1374

Günz. 348

Günz. 187

Günz. 1231

Günz. 683

Günz. 703

Günz. 986

193

187.1, 191

13th–14th cent.

?

1337

14th cent.

?

1282?

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.

1387

1477–1495

16th cent.

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.

Ashk.

Seph.?

Ashk.

Ashk.

?

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Paris? France

133 incomplete

196

141

1 Frag.

?

106

251

200 incomplete

183 incomplete

246

225

130 incomplete

2 Frag.

4+ 12 Fragmente

(continued)

–

–

ZG002

–

1.

ZR079

–

–

ZR085

–

ZY934

–

–

–

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK   193

M. Lehmann

M. Lehmann

M. Lehmann

M. Lehmann

M. Lehmann

JTS

JTS

JTS

JTS

JTS

JTS

110 New York

111 New York

112 New York

113 New York

114 New York

115 New York

116 New York

117 New York

118 New York

119 New York

120 New York

Library

BSB

Place

109 Munich

 

(continued)

Rab. 1079

MS 7246

Rab. 1489

Rab. 1032

MS 1069

Rab. 656

FR 17

D 129

D 103

D 67

D 145–146

hebr. 346

No.

1386

1386

1390

1391

15th cent.

1456

15th cent.

15th cent.

14th cent.

15th cent.

14th cent.

Date of origin

Ashk.

Ashk.

Prov.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Byz.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Lyon

Paris

Zurich

116 incomplete

11v – 108r, 112v – 114v

1 – 288 incomplete

182

214

Corinth Corneto 140 (paper)

2 Frag.

6 Frag.

2 Frag.

2 Frag.

75 incomplete

2 Frag.

Script Place of origin Fols

0D053

0D040

0D221

0D052

–

0D041

–

–

–

–

–

–

SfarData Key

194   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

JTS

JTS

JTS

JTS

JTS

JTS

JTS

JTS

Schneerson Library

Bibliotheque Seguier Municipale 26

Archivio Comunale

Archivio Comunale

123 New York

124 New York

125 New York

126 New York

127 New York

128 New York

129 New York

130 New York

131 New York

132 Nimes

133 Nonantola

134 Nonantola

231

232

1956

MS 5473

Rab. 2043

MS 4460

Rab. 651

Rab. 652

Rab. 654

MS 8219

Rab. 650

Rab. 1490

JTS

122 New York

Rab. 649

JTS

121 New York

14th–15th cent.

14th–15th cent.

14th–15th cent.

1545

15th cent.

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.; 1500?

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.

1340

1342

1384

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Seph.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Mainz

1 Frag.

1 Frag.

176

3 Frag.

2 Frag.

3 Frag.

100r – 230r

184 incomplete

193 incomplete

81 incomplete

330

238

165

154

(continued)

–

–

ZB041

–

–

–

ZD036

ZY971

–

–

–

0D039

0D149

ZD068

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK   195

Archivio Comunale

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

136 Nonantola

137 Oxford

138 Oxford

139 Oxford

140 Oxford

141 Oxford

142 Oxford

143 Oxford

144 Oxford

145 Oxford

146 Oxford

147 Oxford

Library

Archivio Comunale

Place

135 Nonantola

 

(continued)

14th cent.

14th cent.

Date of origin

15th cent.

1475

Hunt. 499

Mich. Add. 41

Opp. 335

Opp. 342

Opp. 339

Opp. 337

Opp. 336

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent. 1340

1309

1347

1382

1394

Arch. Seld. A.51 1432–1475

Opp. Add. fol. 40

Can. Or. 98

Lyell. Empt. 61 15th cent.

274 – 277

No.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Louvain (Leuven)?

Plauen

Ingolstadt

Andernach

Seph. Ashkenaz

Ashk.-Ital.

Ashk.-Ital.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

1v – 195r

141r – 455v

28r – 281r

1 – 192

1r – 85v incomplete

1 – 127

68 – 222

114

286

45 – 298

172 incomplete

2 Frag.

6 Frag.

Script Place of origin Fols

–

0C136

ZC327

0C134

0C137

0C138

–

ZC012

–

ZC315

–

–

–

SfarData Key

196   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

BOD

148 Oxford

149 Oxford

150 Oxford

151 Oxford

152 Oxford

153 Oxford

154 Oxford

155 Oxford

156 Oxford

157 Oxford

158 Oxford

159 Oxford

160 Oxford

Opp. 614

Heb.d.97

Heb.d.40

Mich. 200

Opp. 338

Opp. 78

Mich. 41

Opp. 340

Opp. 647

Marsh 574

Opp. 341

Mich. 502

Can. Or. 30

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.

1394?

13th–14th cent.

13th cent.

13th cent.

1297

1299

14th cent. 1388–1407

14th cent. 1327

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Germany

St. Symphorien?

Loches

France?

Andernach?

Camerino

France?

1r – 7v Frag.

15r – 18v Frag.

? Frag.

185 incomplete

1r – 159v

1r – 69r incomplete

218

1r – 124v

32r – 224v

202

427 incomplete

149

204

–

–

–

–

(continued)

ZC156

ZC174

0C136

0C135

ZC212

ZC150

–

ZC013

–

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK   197

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

BNF

162 Paris

163 Paris

164 Paris

165 Paris

166 Paris

167 Paris

168 Paris

169 Paris

170 Paris

171 Paris

172 Paris

173 Paris

174 Paris

175 Paris

176 Paris

Library

Alliance Israelite Universelle

Place

161 Paris

 

(continued)

heb. 379

heb. 384

heb. 643

heb. 646

heb. 383

heb. 388

heb. 382

heb. 387

heb. 385

heb. 386

heb. 380

heb. 1480

heb. 381

heb. 1394

heb. 390

H 482 A

No.

13th cent.

13th–14th cent.

13th–14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.

14th cent.

13th–14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

1342

1343

1393

15th cent.

1476

14th cent.

Date of origin

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Seph.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

France?

France

France

Kumnau? – Krummenau?

France?

Revel?

Germany

84

80

37 – 156

143v – 234r

197

190 incomplete

175

1v – 138v

162

203

1 – 142

1 – 170

184

137

1 – 251

52 – 200

Script Place of origin Fols

ZB070

–

ZB008

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

0B094

0B344

0B095

–

0B096

–

SfarData Key

198   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

BNF

BNF

Archivio di Stato

Archivio di Stato

BPP

BPP

BPP

BPP

BPP

BPP

BPP

BPP

BPP

BPP

BPP

177 Paris

178 Paris

179 Parma

180 Parma

181 Parma

182 Parma

183 Parma

184 Parma

185 Parma

186 Parma

187 Parma

188 Parma

189 Parma

190 Parma

191 Parma

Parm. 2102

Parm. 2908

Parm. 2907

Parm. 3161

Parm. 3158

Parm. 2765

Parm. 1943

Parm. 2265

Parm. 2767

Parm. 676

Parm. 3032

4514

10

heb. 391

heb. 389

14th cent.

1338

1342

1350

1380

1384

1387

15th cent.

1404

1409

1422

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

13th cent.

France?

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Germany

AshCamerino k.-Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

156 incomplete

1 – 134

170

1 – 127

234

129

305

240

131

182

136 incomplete

2 Frag.

2 Frag.

1r – 16r Frag.

219

(continued)

–

0E450

–

0E460

0E470

0E472

0E475

–

0E494

0E628

0E517

–

–

–

–

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK   199

Evr. II A 313/10 ?

14th–15th cent.

14th–15th cent.

15th cent.

14th cent.

1463

205 St Petersburg Russian National Library

2829

14th cent.

Evr. I 215

Biblioteca Casanatense

200 Rome

77

13th–14th cent.

204 St Petersburg Russian National Library

Archivio Storico del Comune

199 Pontremoli

Parm. 2766

1297

Evr. IV 105

BPP

198 Parma

Parm. 1940

14th cent.

203 St Petersburg Russian National Library

BPP

197 Parma

Parm. 3517

14th–15th cent.

Evr. IV 6

BPP

196 Parma

Parm. 3160

14th cent.

202 St Petersburg Russian National Library

BPP

195 Parma

Parm. 2107

14th cent.

14th cent.

Date of origin

C 61

BPP

194 Parma

Parm. 2458

Parm. 3159

No.

201 St Petersburg Inst. of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy

BPP

193 Parma

Library

BPP

Place

192 Parma

 

(continued)

?

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Seph.

Seph.

Ashk.

2 Frag.

70 incomplete

87 incomplete

88

115 incomplete

334

2 Frag.

31v – 218r

Corbeil? France 2v – 255r

90

135 incomplete

201 incomplete

188

131

Script Place of origin Fols

–

–

–

–

–

2.

–

ZE112

0E446

–

–

–

–

–

SfarData Key

200   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

Archivio della Cassa di Prisparmio 3.

Greenwood

Casa Professa

BAV

BAV

BAV

BAV

BAV

Barberini

Urbinati

ÖNB

ÖNB

ÖNB

208 Terni

209 Toronto

210 Valencia

211 Vatican

212 Vatican

213 Vatican

214 Vatican

215 Vatican

216 Vatican

217 Vatican

218 Vienna

219 Vienna

220 Vienna

hebr. 173

hebr. 12a

hebr. 166

ebr. 27

Or. 98

ebr. 324

ebr. 147

ebr. 247

ebr. 501

ebr. 165

[2]

4.

Bibliotheque Nationale et Univer- 4043 sitaire

14th–15th cent.

14th–15th cent.; 1402

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th cent.

14th–15th cent.; 1395–98

1317

1324

15th cent.

15th cent.

14th cent.

1390

?

1480?

Evr. II A 313/12 ?

207 Strasbourg

206 St Petersburg Russian National Library

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Byz.

Seph.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

?

France?

Canea (Crete)

Germany

Nördlingen

–

–

ZE252

0E153

–

–

–

0D271

–

–

–

139

(continued)

–

7 – 309, 386 – 416, ZJ011 496 – 498, 503

1r – 79v

184

96 incomplete

280r – 396v

118

184

195

61 – 220

181

150

1 Frag.

204 incomplete

2 Frag.

Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK   201

ÖNB

Zydowski Instytut Historyczny

Zydowski Instytut Historyczny

BRAG

BRAG

ZB

ZB

ZB

former: Jerusalem, Michael Krupp

222 Vienna

223 Warsaw

224 Warsaw

225 Zurich

226 Zurich

227 Zurich

228 Zurich

229 Zurich

230 unknown

Library

ÖNB

Place

221 Vienna

 

(continued)

4231

Heid. 52

Heid. 145

Heid. 51

182

115

38

204

hebr. 75

hebr. 180

No.

14th cent.

14th cent.

1341

1439

1392

14th–15th cent.

1396

15th cent.

13th–14th cent.

13th–14th cent.

Date of origin

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ashk.

Ital.

Ashk.

Ital.

4 Frag.

78 incomplete

76r – 166v, 167v – 170

71 – 73 Frag.

140

264 incomplete

1r – 61v incomplete

15 – 31 Frag.

142v – 274v

1r – 399v

Script Place of origin Fols

–

–

0L010

0L015

0C569

–

0Y508

–

ZJ009

–

SfarData Key

202   Appendix: Overview of manuscripts featuring the SeMaK

Bibliography Primary sources Azulai, Chaim Joseph David. ‫שם הגדולים‬, Shem ha-gedolim. Krotoschin: Monasch, 1843. Blackman, Philip. Mishnayoth: Order Nashim. London: Mishna Press,1953. Buber, Salomon, eds. Midrasch Tanchuma:Ein agadischer Commentar zum Pentateuch von Rabbi Tanchuma ben Rabbi Abba, 2 vols. Vilnius: Wittwe & Gebrüder Romm, 1865. Clark, Willene B. A Medieval Book of Beasts:The Second-family Bestiary / Commentary, Art, Text and Translation. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2006. Conradus de Megenberg. Das Buch der Natur: Die erste Naturgeschichte in deutscher Sprache. Stuttgart: Karl Aue, 1861. Dierauer, Johannes, ed. Chronik der Stadt Zürich: Mit Fortsetzungen. Basle: A. Geering, 1900. Dueren, Isaac ben Meir. ‫שערי דורא השלם‬: Shaʻare Dura ha-shalem. Jerusalem: Yerid ha-sefarim, 2003–2004. Eleazar of Worms. ‫ספר רקח‬: Sefer Rokeach. New York: Ely Rosenfeld, 2000. Goldschmidt, Lazarus, ed. Der Babylonische Talmud: Nach der ersten zensurfreien Ausgabe unter Berücksichtigung der neueren Ausgaben und handschriftlichen Materials. Frankfurt am Main: Jüdischer Verlag 2002. Higger, Michael, ed. Seven Minor Treatises: Sefer Torah Mezuzah Tefillin Zizit ' Abadim Kutim Gerim and Treatise Soferim II. New York: Bloch, 1930. Hildegard of Bingen. “Das Buch der Physika.” In: Wisse die Wege. Ratschläge fürs Leben, edited by Johannes Bühler, 130–171. Frankfurt/Main: Insel-Verlag, 1997. Horovitz, Hajim Sa'ul; Rabin, Israel, eds. Mechilta d’Rabbi Ismael: Cum variis lectionibus et adnotationibus. Frankfurt am Main: J. Kauffmann, 1931. Hugo de S. Victore. Adnotationes elucidatoriae in Pentateuchon, Patrologia Latina Database, 175 Col. 29A-86D, Ann Arbor, Michigan 1996–2017, http://gateway.proquest.com/ openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pld&rft_dat=xri:pld:ft:all:Z500113440, accessed on 1/11/2017. Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil. ‫ ספר עמודי גולה‬: Sefer ʻAmude ha-Golah. Constantinople: unknown publisher, 1509. Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil. “.‫ ”ספר מצות קטן‬In: The North French Hebrew Miscellany (British Library Add. MS 11639), edited by Jeremy Schonfield, fol. 546b–640b., London: Facsimile Editions, 2003. Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil; Perez of Corbeil; Moshe of Zurich. “‫הסמ” ק מצוריך‬: Ha’Semak mi-Zurich.” edited by Isaac Jacob Har-Shoshanim-Rosenberg. Jerusalem: Ha’Mahadir, 1980–1988. Kalonymos ben Kalonymos. “Iggereth Baale Chajjim: Abhandlung über die Thiere von Kalonymos ben Kalonymos, oder Rechtsstreit zwischen Mensch und Thier vor dem Gerichtshofe des Königs der Genien, ein arabisches Märchen,” edited by Julius Landsberger. Darmstadt: Jonghans, 1882. Karo, Josef. ‫שולחן ערוך‬: Shulḥan Arukh. Jerusalem: El Hamekoroth, 1956. – ; Isserles, Josef; Preisler, Zvi. ‫שלחן ערוך‬: Shulḥan Aruk. Jerusalem: Hotsaʼat Ketuvim, 1993.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-009

204 

 Bibliography

Linder, Amnon. The Jews in the Legal Sources of the Early Middle Ages. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1997. Löwinger, David Samuel; Abraham ben Mordechai Farissol. “ ‫ליקוטים מספר מגן אברהם‬. Likutim Misefer Magen Avraham.” Hazofeh 12 (1928): 277–297. Meir of Rothenburg and Bloch: Moses Löb, ‫ספר שערי תשובות‬, Sefer Sheʿare Teshuvot MaHaRa "M b[en] R[abbī] Barukh, Rabbi Meir’s von Rothenburg bisher unedirte Responsen nach Handschriften. Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1891. Meshulam Salman b. Ahron, ed. ‫תתלמוד בבלי‬, Talmud Bavli. Roter Schas. Sulzbach: Aharon ben Meshulam Zalman 1761. Mirkin, Mosheh Aryeh: ‫מדרש רבה‬, Midrash Rabah, meforash perush madai ḥadash, be-tseruf “En ha-derash”, marʾeh meḳomot le-khol maʾ amre ha-Midrash. Tel Aviv: Yavneh 1986–1987. Moshe ben Maimon. The Guide of the Perplexed, trans. Shelomoh Pines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963. – , ‫ספר משנה תורה יד החזקה‬, Book of Mishneh Torah Yod Ha-Hazakah, trans. Simon Glazer. New York: Maimonides Pub. Co., 1927. – , ‫ספר טהרה‬, in: ‫ הוא היד החזכה‬:‫משנה תורה‬, Mishneh Torah: Hu haYad Ha-Hazakah. Berlin: Julius Sittenfeld 1862, 1–96. Petrus Venerabilis. Adversus Iudaeos, edited by Yvonne Friedman, Turnhout: Brepols, 1985. Rosenbaum, M.; Silbermann, A. M.: Pentateuch with Targum Onkelos, Haphtaroth, Prayers for Sabbath and Rashi's Commentary / translated into English and annotated. London: Shapiro Vallentine 1946. Rosenfeld, Moshe N.: The Book of Cows. A Facsimile Edition of the Famed “Kuhbuch”, Verona, 1595; from a unique copy in a private collection. London: Hebraica Books, 1984. Roth, Ernst, ed. Cod. Hebr. 17 = Nr. 152. Kommentar zu den poetischen Gebetstexten (geschrieben 1317); Cod. Hebr. 61 = Nr. 153 Kommentar zum Gebetbuch und Machsor, Rabbi Elieser ben Nathan aus Mainz (12. Jh.) zugeschrieben beide in der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg. Jerusalem: unknown publisher 1980. Salfeld, Siegmund. Das Martyrologium des Nürnberger Memorbuches. Berlin: L. Simion, 1898. Schedel, Hartmann and Füssel, Stephan, ed.: Weltchronik – 1493. Cologne: Taschen, 2013. Scholem, Gershom. “Translation of Sha'ali Serufa. A Medieval Lamentation.” In Lament in Jewish Thought. Philosophical, Theological, and Literary Perspectives, edited by Ilit Ferber and Paula Schwebel, Berlin: de Gruyter, 2014, 340–48. Simson bar Zadok. ‫ספר תשב"ץ‬, Sefer Tashbez. Lemberg: D. H. Schrenzel, 1858. Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologica. II – II. New York: Cosimo, 2007. Wohlmuth, Josef, ed. Dekrete der ökumenischen Konzilien: Vol. 2: Konzilien des Mittelalters. Paderborn/Zurich: Schöningh, 2000.

Secondary literature Amit, Aaron. “The Curious Case of Tefillin: A Study in Ritual Blessings,” Jewish Studies Quarterly 15 (2008): 269–88. Assmann, Jan. Cultural Memory and Early Civilization: Writing, Remembrance, and Political Imagination. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016. Avrin, Leila. Scribes, Script, and Books: The Book Arts from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Chicago: American Library Association, 1991.

Bibliography 

 205

Barnavi, Eli. Stern, Frank; Charbit, Denis, Universalgeschichte der Juden: Von den Ursprüngen bis zur Gegenwart; ein historischer Atlas. Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 2004. Barzen, Rainer Josef. “Die SchUM-Gemeinden und ihre Rechtssatzungen: Geschichte und Wirkungsgeschichte,” In Die SchUM-Gemeinden Speyer – Worms – Mainz. Auf dem Weg zum Welterbe, edited by Pia Heberer, 23–36. Regensburg: Schnell & Steiner, 2012. Baskin, Judith R. “Dolce of Worms: The Lives and Deaths of an Exemplary Medieval Jewish Woman and Her Daughters.” In Judaism in Practice. From the Middle Ages through the Early Modern Period, edited by Lawrence Fine, 429–37. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2001. Battenberg, Friedrich. Das europäische Zeitalter der Juden: Zur Entwicklung einer Minderheit in der nichtjüdischen Umwelt Europas. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1990 1990. Baumgarten, Elisheva. Practicing Piety in Medieval Ashkena:. Men, Women, and Everyday Religious Observance. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 2014. Baumann, Winfried; Ertzdorff, Xenja von. Die Romane von dem Ritter mit dem Löwen. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1994. Beit-Arié, Malachi. Hebrew Codicology: Tentative Typology of Technical Practices Employed in Hebrew Dated Medieval Manuscripts. Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1976. – , Hebrew Codicology: Tentative Typology of Technical Practices Employed in Hebrew Dated Medieval Manuscripts. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1981. – , “Palaeographical Identification of Hebrew Manuscripts: Methodology and Practice.” Jewish Art 12–13 (1987): 15–44. – , “Transmissions of Texts by Scribes and Copyists: Unconscious and Critical Interferences.” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 75 (1993): 33–52. – "‫האם היו ספריות 'ציבוריות' יהודיות בימי הביניים? הצביון האינדיווידואלי של הפקת הספר העברי‬ ‫"וצריכתו‬, Zion 65 (2000): 441–45; see p. 445. – , Unveiled Faces of Medieval Hebrew Books: The Evolution of Manuscript Production – Progression or Regression? Jerusalem: Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2003. – , “How Scribes Disclosed their Names in Hebrew Manuscripts.” In Omnia in eo. Studies on Jewish Books and Libraries in Honour of Adri Offenberg : Celebrating the 125th Anniversary of the Bibliotheca Rosenthaliana in Amsterdam, edited by Irene Zwiep, 144–57. Leuven: Peeters, 2006. – , “The Script and Book Craft in the Hebrew Medieval Codex.” In Crossing Borders. Hebrew Manuscripts as a Meeting-Place of Cultures, edited by Piet van Boxel, 21–34. Oxford: The Bodleian Library, 2010. – , “The Individual Nature of Hebrew Book Production and Consumption.” In Manuscrits hébreux et arabes. Mélanges en l'honneur de Colette Sirat, edited by De Lange, Nicholas R. M. and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger, 17–28. Turnhout: Brepols, 2014. – , Hebrew Codicology: Historical and Comparative Typology of Hebrew Medieval Codices based on the Documentation of the Extant Dated Manuscripts from a Quantitative Approach. Preprint internet English version 0.2+ (November 2018). Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities 2018, http://web.nli. org.il/sites/NLI/English/collections/manuscripts/hebrewcodicology, accessed on 6/1/2019.

206 

 Bibliography

Benbassa, Esther. The Jews of France: A History from Antiquity to the Present. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999. Berenbaum, Michael and Skolnik, Fred, eds. Encyclopaedia Judaica. Second edition. Detroit: Macmillan, 2007. Berliner, Abraham. Aus dem Leben der deutschen Juden im Mittelalter: Zugleich als Beitrag für deutsche Culturgeschichte. Berlin: Poppelauer, 1900. – , Gesammelte Schriften. Frankfurt am Main: Georg Olms Verlag. Blöcker, Susanne. Studien zur Ikonographie der Sieben Todsünden in der niederländischen und deutschen Malerei und Graphik: von 1450–1560. Münster: LIT, 1993. Boyarin, Daniel. Border Lines: The Partition of Judaeo-Christianity. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 2004. Braudel, Fernand. Civilisation matérielle, économie et capitalisme: 15e–18e siècle. Paris: Poche, 1979. Birnbaum, Salomo Asher. The Hebrew Scripts. Leiden: Brill, 1954–1971. Bistritzky, Shlomo. “Codex hebraicus 155.” In Manuscript Cultures 6. Ausstellungskatalog “Tora, Talmud, Siddur”, anlässlich der Ausstellung “Tora – Talmud – Siddur: Hebräische Handschriften der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg” in der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg vom 18. September bis 26. Oktober 2014, edited by Irina Wandrey, 228–37. Hamburg: SFB 950, 2014. Bönnen, Gerold. “Die Stadtgemeinde und das jüdische Worms im späten Mittelalter.” In Jüdische Gemeinden und ihr christlicher Kontext in kulturräumlich vergleichender Betrachtung: Von der Spätantike bis zum 18. Jahrhundert, edited by Christoph Cluse, 309–40. Hanover: Verlag Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 2003. Buda, Zsofia. Sacrifice and Redemption in the Hamburg Miscellany: The Illustrations of a Fifteenth-Century Ashkenazi Manuscript, PhD thesis in Medieval Studies. Budapest: Central European University, 2012. Burmeister, Karl Heinz. Medinat Bodase. Constance: UVK, 1994–2001. Camille, Michael. Image on the Edge. The Margins of Medieval Art. London: Reaktion Books, 1992. Chazan, Robert. The Jews of Medieval Western Christendom, 1000–1500. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Chazan, Robert; Friedman, John; Hoff and Jean Connell. The Trial of the Talmud. Paris, 1240. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2012. Curschmann, Michael. “Wort – Schrift – Bild. Zum Verhältnis von volkssprachigem Schrifttum und bildender Kunst vom 12. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert.” In Mittelalter und frühe Neuzeit. Uebergänge, Umbrüche und Neuansätze, edited by Walter Haug, 378–470. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1999. Dönitz, Saskia. “Puzzling the Past. Reconstructing a Mahzor from Receipt Wrappings.” In Genizat Germania: Hebrew and Aramaic Binding Fragments from Germany in Context edited by Andreas Lehnardt, 29–40. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Dreifuss, Emil. Juden in Bern. Ein Gang durch die Jahrhunderte. Berne: VerbandsdruckereiBetadruck, 1983. Elbogen, Ismar. Der jüdische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung. Leipzig: Fock, 1913. Emanuel, Simcha. ‫ ספרים אבודים של בעלי התוספות‬.‫שברי לוחות‬, Fragments of the Table – Lost Books of the Tosaphists. Jerusalem: Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2006.

Bibliography 

 207

, “‫ פרק בתרבות הכתיבה באשכנז בימי הביניים‬.‫מגוף ראשון לגוף שלישי‬, From First to Third Person: A Study in the Culture of Writing in Medieval Ashkenaz.” 81 ‫תרביץ‬, (2012/2013): 431–457. Engel, Edna. “Calamus or Chisel: On the History of the Ashkenazic Script.” in Genizat Germania: Hebrew and Aramaic Binding Fragments from Germany in Context, edited by Andreas Lehnardt, 183–197. Leiden: Brill, 2010. – , “Script, History of Development.” In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, edited by Geoffrey Khan, 485–502. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2013. – , “Between France and Germany: Gothic Characteristics in Ashkenazi Script.” In Manuscrits hébreux et arabes: Mélanges en l’honneur de Colette Sirat, edited by De Lange, Nicholas R. M. and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger, 197–219. Turnhout: Brepols, 2014. – , “Immigrant Scribe’s Handwriting in Northern Italy from the Late Thirteenth to the MidSixteenth Century: Sephardi and Ashkenazi Attitudes toward the Italian Script.” In The Late Medieval Hebrew Book in the Western Mediterranean: Hebrew Manuscripts and Incunabula in Context, edited by Javier del Barco and Malachi Beit-Arié, 28–45. Leiden/ Boston: Brill, 2015. Epstein, Marc Michael. Dreams of Subversions in Medieval Jewish Art and Literature. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997. – , The Medieval Haggadah. Art, Narrative, and Religious Imagination. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010. Feliks, Jehuda; Sperling, S. David, “Lion.” In Encyclopaedia Judaica, second edition, edited by Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik, vol. 13, 61–62. Detroit: Macmillan, 2007. Fingernagel, Andreas; Haidinger, Alois. “Neue Zeugen des ‘Niederösterreichischen Randleistenstils’ in hebräischen, deutschen und lateinischen Handschriften.” Codices Manuscripti 39/40 (2002): 15–44. Freeman Sandler, Luc. ”The Study of Marginal Imagery: Past, Present, and Future.” Studies in Iconography 18 (1997): 1–49. Friedmann, Aron. “Zur Geschichte der Juden in Ingolstadt.” Bayerische israelitische Gemeindezeitung 6 (1926): 167–68. Frojmovic, Eva. “Early Ashkenazic Prayer Books and Their Christian Illuminators.” In Crossing Borders: Hebrew Manuscripts as a Meeting-Place of Cultures, edited by Piet van Boxel, 45–56. Oxford: The Bodleian Library, 2010. – , “Feasting at the Lord’s Table.” Images 7 (2015): 5–21. Fudeman, Kirsten Anne. Vernacular Voices: Language and Identity in Medieval French Jewish Communities. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010. Galinsky, Judah D. ‫ ייחודה של ספרות ההלכה של צפון צרפת במאה הי"ג‬.‫על הלכה וחברה‬, Halakha and Society: The Uniqueness of Thirteenth-Century Halakhic Literature in Northern France, talk on 5 Aug. 2009. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2009, https://youtu.be/ DPD3nGFqSAA?t=1h13m4s, accessed on 4/3/2019. – , “The Significance of Form: R. Moses of Coucy’s Reading Audience and his Sefer ha-Mizvot,” AJS Review 35 (2011): 293–321. – , ‫קורות חיים‬, Bar-Ilan 2012, http://talmud.biu.ac.il/node/243, accessed on 24/2/2016. – , “Between Ashkenaz (Germany) and Tsarfat (France): Two Approaches toward Popularizing Jewish Law.” In Jews and Christians in Thirteenth-Century France, edited by Elisheva Baumgarten and Judah D. Galinsky, 77–92. New York: Palgrave, 2015. – , “Rabbis, Readers, and the Paris Book Trade: Understanding French Halakhic Literature in the Thirteenth Century.” In Entangled Histories: Knowledge, Authority, and Jewish –

208 

 Bibliography

Culture in the Thirteenth Century, edited by Eisheva. Baumgarten, R. M. Karras et al., 73–89. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016. Genette, Gérard. Palimpsests. Literature in the Second Degree. Lincoln/London: University of Nebraska Press, 1997. – , Paratexts. Thresholds of Interpretation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Gilomen, Hans-Jörg. “Kooperation und Konfrontation: Juden und Christen in den spätmittelalterlichen Städten im Gebiet der heutigen Schweiz.” In Juden in ihrer Umwelt. Akkulturation des Judentums in Antike und Mittelalter, edited by Matthias Konradt and Simone Haeberli, 157–228. Schwabe, 2009. Golb, Norman. “The De Rossi Collection of Hebrew Manuscripts at the Biblioteca Palatina in Parma and its Importance for Jewish History.” Paper delivered at the VIIth Congress of the European Association of Jewish Studies (Amsterdam, 21–25 July 2002), https:// oi.uchicago.edu/sites/oi.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/shared/docs/Parma.pdf, accessed on 20/2/2016. Grabois, Aryeh. “The Hebraica Veritas and Jewish-Christian Intellectual Relations in the Twelfth Century,” Speculum 50 (1975): 613–34. Graus, František. Pest, Geissler, Judenmorde. Das 14. Jahrhundert als Krisenzeit. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, second edition, 1987. Gritzner, Maximilian. Handbuch der heraldischen Terminologie in zwölf (germanischen und romanischen) Zungen. Enthaltend zugleich die Haupt-Grundsätze der Wappenkunst. Nuremberg: Verlag von Bauer und Raspe, 1890. Gross, Abraham. Struggling with Tradition: Reservations about Active Martyrdom in the Middle Ages. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Gross, Henri. Gallia Judaica: Dictionnaire géographique de la France d’après les sources rabbiniques. Paris: Librairie Léopold Cerf, 1897. Grossman, Avraham. Pious and Rebellious: Jewish Women in Medieval Europe 2004. Brandeis: UPNE, 2004. – , Rashi. Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2012. Güdemann, Moritz. Geschichte des Erziehungswesens und der Cultur der Juden in Frankreich und Deutschland:Von der Begründung der jüdischen Wissenschaft in diesen Ländern bis zur Vertreibung der Juden aus Frankreich. Vienna: Hölder, 1880. – Geschichte des Erziehungswesens und der Cultur der Juden in Italien während des Mittelalters. Vienna: A. Hölder, 1884. Gutmann, Joseph. “Leviathan, Behemoth and Ziz: Jewish Messianic Symbols in Art.” Hebrew Union College Annual 39 (1968): 219–30. Halperin, Dalia-Ruth. Illuminating in Micrography: The Catalan Micrography Mahzor MS Hebrew 8o 6527 in the National Library of Israel. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Horowitz, Elliott. “The Way We Were: Jewish Life in the Middle Ages.” Jewish History 1 (1986): 75–90. Italiener, Bruno. “Die illustrierte Pessach-Haggada.” In Die Darmstädter Pessach-Haggadah. Codex Orientalis 8 der Landesbibliothek zu Darmstadt aus dem 14. Jahrhundert, Textband, edited by Bruno Italiener, 1–41. Leipzig: Karl W. Hiersemann, 1927. Isserles, Justine. “Les parallèles esthétiques des manuscrits hébreux ashkenazes de type liturgico-légal et des manuscrits latins et vernaculaires médiévaux.” In Manuscrits hébreux et arabes. Mélanges en l'honneur de Colette Sirat, edited by De Lange, Nicholas R. M. and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger, 77–113. Turnhout: Brepols, 2014.

Bibliography 

 209

Jäckel, Dirk. Der Herrscher als Löwe: Ursprung und Gebrauch eines politischen Symbols im Früh- und Hochmittelalter. Cologne: Böhlau, 2006. Jacobi, Leor. “Jewish Hawking in Medieval France: Falconry, Rabbenu Tam, and the Tosafists.” Oqimta 1 (2013): 421–504. Jakobi-Mirwald, Christine and Roland, Martin. Buchmalerei. Terminologie in der Kunstgeschichte. Berlin: Reimer, 2008. Janson, H. W. Apes and Ape Lore in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. London: Warburg Institute, 1952. Jordan, William Chester. The French Monarchy and the Jews: From Philip Augustus to the Last Capetians. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989. Kanarfogel, Ephraim. Jewish Education and Society in the High Middle Ages. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1992. – “German Pietism in Northern France: The Case of R. Isaac of Corbeil.” in: Hazon Nahum: Studies in Jewish Law, Thought, and History, presented to Dr. Norman Lamm on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, edited by Lamm, Norman and Gurock, Jeffrey S.: 207–27. New York: Michael Scharf Publication Trust, Yeshiva University Press, 1997. – , Peering through the Lattices: Mystical, Magical, and Pietistic Dimensions in the Tosafist Period. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2000. – , “Halakha and Metziut (Realia) in Medieval Ashkenaz: Surveying the Parameters and Defining the Limits.” The Jewish Law Annual (2003): 193–224. Katz, Jacob. Exclusiveness and Tolerance. Studies in Jewish-Gentile Relations in Medieval and Modern Times. New York/Toronto: Edwin Mellen Press, 1983. Kaufmann, David. “The Ritual of the Seder and the Agada of the English Jews before the Expulsion.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 4 (1892): 550–61. Kaufmann, Ingrid. “Jüdisches Leben im Spiegel des Zürcher SeMa”Q: Kleiderordnungen als Beispiel für die jüdisch-christliche Auseinandersetzung.” Judaica 67 (2011): 146–77. – , “The ‘Pillars of Exile’ by R. Yiṣḥaq of Corbeil. The Small Book of Commandments in Codex hebraicus 17, State and University Library Hamburg.” In Jewish Manuscript Cultures. Perspectives from Palaeography, Codicology, Provenance History, Material Analysis and Art History edited by Irina Wandrey: 422–442. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017. Kendrick, Laura. “Making Sense of Marginalized Images in Manuscripts and Religious Architecture.” In A Companion to Medieval Art. Romanesque and Gothic in Northern Europe, edited by Conrad Rudolph, 274–94. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006. Klein, Peter. “Rand- oder Schwellenphänomen? Zur Deutung der Randbilder in der mittelalterlichen Kunst.” In Grenze und Grenzüberschreitung im Mittelalter. 11. Symposium des Mediävistenverbandes vom 14. bis 17. März 2005 in Frankfurt an der Oder, edited by Ulrich Knefelkamp and Kristian Bosselmann, 166–87. Munich: Akademie Verlag, 2010. Kogman-Appel, Katrin. “Jewish Art and Non-Jewish Culture: The Dynamics of Artistic Borrowing in Medieval Hebrew Manuscript Illumination.” Jewish History 15 (2001): 187–234. – , “The Scales in the Leipzig Mahzor. Penance and Eschatology in Early FourteenthCentury Germany.” In Between Judaism and Christianity: Art Historical Essays in Honor of Elisheva (Elisabeth) Revel-Neher, edited by Katrin Kogman-Appel and Mati Meyer, 307–18. Leiden: Brill, 2009, – , “Jewish Art and Cultural Exchange: Theoretical Perspectives.” In Confronting the Borders of Medieval Art, edited by Jill Caskey, Adam S. Cohen and Linda Safran, 1–26. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2011.

210 

 Bibliography

, “The Illustrations of the Washington Haggadah.” In The Washington Haggadah by Joel ben Simeon, edited and translated by David Stern and Katrin Kogman-Appel, 52–120. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011. – , A Mahzor from Worms: Art and Religion in a Medieval Jewish Community. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012. Kohn, Samuel. “Die hebräischen Handschriften des ungarischen Nationalmuseums zu Budapest.” Magazin für die Wissenschaft des Judenthums 4 (1877): 76–104. Kristeller, Paul Oskar. “Jewish Contributions to Italian Renaissance Culture.” In Studies in Renaissance Thought and Letters, edited by Paul Oskar Kristeller, 215–26. Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1996. Krochmalnik, Daniel. “Kynisches in der rabbinischen Literatur.” In Von Enoch bis Kafka. Festschrift für Karl E. Grözinger zum 60. Geburtstag, edited by Manfred Voigts, 235–70. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2002. Kühnel, Harry. “Mentalitätswandel und Sachkultur: Zur Entstehung der Mode im 14. Jahrhundert.” In Menschen, Dinge und Umwelt in der Geschichte: Neue Fragen der Geschichtswissenschaft an die Vergangenheit, edited by Ulf Dirlmeier and Gerhard Fouquet, 102–27. St. Katharinen: Scripta-Mercaturae-Verlag, 1989. Labendz, Jenny R. “Know What to Answer the Epicurean: A Diachronic Study of the ‘Apikoros in Rabbinic Literature.” Hebrew Union College Annual 74 (2003): 175–214. Landau, W. “Ueber Thierquälerei nach den Grundsätzen des Judenthums.” Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums 12 (1863): 41–55. Lange, Jitzchak S. “ ‫לענין הסמ"ק מציריך‬.” Ale sefer 4 (1976/77): 178–79. – , “Zur rechtlichen Stellung des jüdischen Lehrers in Zürich vor 600 Jahren.” In 25 Jahre Jüdische Schule Zürich: Festschrift edited by Leo Levy, 108–122. Jerusalem: Koren, 1980 Lauer, Chaim. “Zur Geschichte des ‘Zürcher Semak’.” Jahrbuch der Jüdisch-Literarischen Gesellschaft 12 (1918): 1–36. Lechner, Karl. Das grosse Sterben in Deutschland in den Jahren 1348–51 und die folgenden Pestepidemien bis zum Schlusse des 14. Jahrhunderts. Innsbruck: Wagner, 1884. Lehnardt, Andreas. “Leviathan und Behemoth: Mythische Urwesen in der mittelalterlichen jüdischen Tradition.” In Tiere und Fabelwesen im Mittelalter edited by Sabine Obermaier, 105–29. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2009. Loewe, Raphael. “Description of the Texts.” In The North French Hebrew Miscellany: Companion Volume to an Illuminated Manuscript from Thirteenth-Century France in Facsimile, edited by Jeremy Schonfield, 193–284. London: Facsimile Editions, 2003. Ludwig, Andreas. “Materielle Kultur,” version 1.0, http://docupedia.de/zg/Materielle_ Kultur?oldid=106448, 30/5/2011, accessed on 20/2/2016. Macray, William Dunn. Annals of the Bodleian Library Oxford. A.D. 1598–A.D. 1867. Oxford: Rivingtons, 1868. Magin, Christine. “Wie es umb der iuden recht stet”: Der Status der Juden in spätmittelalterlichen deutschen Rechtsbüchern, PhD thesis, University of Göttingen, 1995. Göttingen: Wallstein-Verlag, 1999. – ,“ ‘Waffenrecht’ und ‘Waffenverbot’ für Juden im Mittelalter: Zu einem Mythos der Forschungsgeschichte.” Aschkenas 13 (2003): 17–33. Malkiel, David. “Destruction or Conversion: Intention and Reaction, Crusaders and Jews in 1096.” Jewish History 15 (2001): 257–80. – , Reconstructing Ashkenaz: The Human Face of Franco-German Jewry, 1000–1250. Stanford, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2009. –

Bibliography 

 211

Mann, Vivian B. “‘New’ Examples of Jewish Ceremonial Art from Medieval Ashkenaz.” Artibus et Historiae 9 (1988): 13–24. Margoliouth, George. Catalogue of the Hebrew and Samaritan Manuscripts in the British Museum. London: Trustees of the British Museum. 1899–1935. Mattes, Barbara. Jüdisches Alltagsleben in einer mittelalterlichen Stadt: Responsa des Rabbi Meir von Rothenburg, PhD thesis, Duisburg University 2001. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003. Mende, Ursula. “Nuremberg as a Center of Aquamanilia Production.” In Lions, Dragons, & Other Beasts. Aquamanilia of the Middle Ages, Vessels for Church and Table, edited by Peter Barnet, 18–33. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006. Metzger, Thérèse and Metzger, Mendel. Jewish Life in the Middle Ages: Illuminated Hebrew Manuscripts of the Thirteenth to the Sixteenth Centuries. New York: Alpine Fine Arts Collection, 1982. Michel, Paul. “Einführung.” In Spinnenfuss und Krötenbauch. Genese und Symbolik von Kompositwesen, edited by Paul Michel, 9–52. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2013. Mikat, Paul. Die Judengesetzgebung der merowingisch-fränkischen Konzilien. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1995. Moore, Rebecca. Jews and Christians in the Life and Thought of Hugh of St. Victor, PhD thesis, Marquette University. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1998. Müller, David Heinrich von and Schlosser, Julius von. “Die Bilderhaggaden der europäischen Sammlungen.” In Die Haggadah von Sarajevo: Eine spanisch-jüdische Bilderhandschrift des Mittelalters: Nebst einem Anhange von Prof. Dr. David Kaufmann in Budapest, edited by David Heinrich von Müller and Julius von Schlosser, 93–210. Vienna: Alfred Hölder, 1898. Müller, Jörg R. “Juden im Westen des Reiches: Einflüsse, Eigenständigkeiten und Wirkungen im hohen und späten Mittelalter.” In Zwischen Maas und Rhein: Beziehungen, Begegnungen und Konflikte in einem europäischen Kernraum von der Spätantike bis zum 19. Jahrhundert, edited by Franz Irsigler, 403–34. Trier: Kliomedia, 2006. Nashman Fraiman, Susan. “The Marginal Images of a Marginal People.” In Metamorphosis of Marginal Images: From Antiquity to Present Time, edited by Nurith Kenaan-Kedar, 103–18. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 2001. Neubauer, Adolf. Catalogue of the Hebrew Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library and in the College Libraries of Oxford: Including Mss. in Other Languages, Which are Written with Hebrew Characters, or Relating to the Hebrew Language or Literature; and a Few Samaritan Mss. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1886–1906. Nirenberg, David. “The Rhineland Massacres of Jews in the First Crusade: Memories Medieval and Modern.” In Medieval Concepts of the Past: Ritual, Memory, Historiography, edited by Gerd Althoff, 279–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. – , “Warum der König die Juden beschützen musste, und warum er sie verfolgen musste.” In Die Macht des Königs: Herrschaft in Europa vom Frühmittelalter bis in die Neuzeit, edited by Bernhard Jussen, 225–40 and 390–92. Munich: Beck, 2005. Obermaier, Sabine. “Einführung und Überblick.” In Tiere und Fabelwesen im Mittelalter, edited by Sabine Obermaier, 1–25. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2009. Offenberg, Sara. “Illuminations of Kol Nidrei in Two Ashkenazi Mahzorim.” Ars Judaica 7 (2011): 7–16. Olszowy-Schlanger, Judith and De Lange, Nicholas R. M. “Introduction.” In Manuscrits hébreux et arabes : Mélanges en l’honneur de Colette Sirat edited by Nicholas R. M. De Lange and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger, 9–14. Turnhout: Brepols, 2014.

212 

 Bibliography

Pächt, Otto and Thoss, Dagmar. Buchmalerei des Mittelalters: Eine Einführung. Munich: Prestel, 2004. Pasternak, Nurit. “A Meeting Point of Hebrew and Latin Manuscript Production: A FifteenthCentury Florentine Hebrew Scribe, Isaac ben Ovadia of Forlì.” Scrittura e civiltà 25 (2001): 185–200. Pastoureau, Michel. “Quel est le roi des animaux?” In Actes des congrès de la Société des historiens médiévistes de l'enseignement supérieur public. Le monde animal et ses représentations au moyen-âge (XIe–XVe siècles), edited by Francis Cerdan, 133–42. Toulouse: Société des historiens médiévistes de l'enseignement supérieur public 1984. – , Das mittelalterliche Bestiarium. Darmstadt: Primus, 2013. Patschovksy, Alexander. “Das Rechtsverhältnis der Juden zum deutschen König (9.–14. Jahrhundert): Ein europäischer Vergleich.” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Germanistische Abteilung 110 (1993): 331–71. Poliakov, Léon. “Das Zeitalter der Verteufelung und des Ghettos.” In Geschichte des Antisemitismus, vol. 2. Frankfurt a. M.: Athenäum, 1979. Randall, Lilian M.C. “Exempla as a Source of Gothic Marginal Illumination.” The Art Bulletin 39 (1957): 97–107. – , “The Snail in Gothic Marginal Warfare.” Speculum 37 (1962): 358–67. – , Images in the Margins of Gothic Manuscripts. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966. Reiner, Avraham (Rami). “Von Rabbenu Tam zu R. Isaak von Wien: Die Hegemonie der französischen Schule der Talmudwissenschaft im 12. Jahrhundert.” In Europas Juden im Mittelalter. Beiträge des internationalen Symposiums in Speyer vom 20.– 25. Oktober 2002, edited by Christoph Cluse, 301–10. Trier: Kliomedia, 2004. Richler, Benjamin. “ ‫על כתבי היד של "ספר היראה" המיוחס לרבי יונה גירונדי‬.” Ale Sefer 8 (1979/80): 51–59. Rodov, Ilia, Dragons. “A Symbol of Evil in European Synagogue Decoration?” Ars Judaica (2005): 63–84. Rohrbacher, Stefan and Schmidt, Michael. Judenbilder: Kulturgeschichte antijüdischer Mythen und antisemitischer Vorurteile. Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1991. Rosenthal, L., “Überlingen.” In Germania Judaica. Regional- und Lokalgeschichte, vol. 2, edited by Zvi Avneri, 838–42. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1968. Rossi, Giovanni Bernardo de. Mss. Codices hebraici Biblioth. Bibliothecae: Descripti et illustrati / accedit appendix qua continentur mss. codices reliqui al. linguarum, vol. III. Parma: Ex publico typographeo, 1803. Roth Heege, Eva. “Zeugen spätgotischer Kachelöfen in Zug.” Mittelalter – Zeitschrift des Schweizerischen Burgenvereins 10 (2005): 60–61. Rubin, Miri. Gentile Tales: The Narrative Assault on Late Medieval Jews. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. Sapir Abulafia, Anna. Christian-Jewish Relations, 1000–1300: Jews in the Service of Medieval Christendom. New York: Pearson Longman, 2011. Schaffer, Reinhold. “Die Siegel und Wappen der Reichsstadt Nürnberg.” Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 10 (1937): 157–203. Schapiro, Meyer. Romanesque Art. New York: Braziller, 1977. Schonfield, Jeremy. “Introduction.” In The North French Hebrew Miscellany: Companion Volume to an Illuminated Manuscript from Thirteenth-Century France in Facsimile, edited by Jeremy Schonfield,15–25. London: Facsimile Editions, 2003.

Bibliography 

 213

Schubert, Kurt. “Wikkuach-Thematik in den Illustrationen hebräischer Handschriften.” Journal of Jewish Art 12/13 (1986/1987): 247–56. Schulz, Anne. Essen und Trinken im Mittelalter (1000–1300): Literarische, kunsthistorische und archäologische Quellen. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter, 2011. Schrijver, Emile G. L. Towards a Supplementary Catalogue of Hebrew Manuscripts in the Bibliotheca Rosenthaliana: Theory and Practice, PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam 1993. Amsterdam: Edited by Emile G. L. Schrijver, 1993. Sed-Rajna, Gabrielle. Le mahzor enluminé: Les voies de formation d’un programme iconographique. Leiden: Brill, 1983. – , “Filigree Ornaments in 14th-Century Hebrew Manuscripts of the Upper Rhine.” Jewish Art 13 (1987): 45–54. – , “The Image in the Text: Methodological Aspects of the Analysis of Illustrations and their Relation to the Text.” Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library 75 (1993): 25–32. Shachar, Isaiah. The Judensau: A Medieval Anti-Jewish Motif and its History. London: Warburg Institute, 1974. Shalev-Eyni, Sarit. Jews Among Christians: Hebrew Book Illumination from Lake Constance. London: Harvey Miller Publishers, 2010. – , Kunst als Geschichte: Zur Buchmalerei hebräischer Handschriften aus dem Bodenseeraum; 13. Arye Maimon-Vortrag an der Universität Trier, 3 November 2010, Trier: Kliomedia, 2011. – , “Between Carnality and Spirituality: A Cosmological Vision of the End at the Turn of the Fifth Jewish Millennium.” Speculum 90 (2015): 458–82. Shatzmiller, Joseph. Cultural Exchange: Jews, Christians, and Art in the Medieval Marketplace. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013. Shoham-Steiner, Ephraim. “‫ עיטורי בית הכנסת של קלן בימי הביניים וההתנגדות להם‬: ‫אריות ונחשים‬: The Struggle over the Lion and Snake Decorations of the Medieval Synagogue in Cologne.” Zion (2015): 175–205. Shulvass, Moses Avigdor. Between the Rhine and the Bosporus: Studies and Essays in European Jewish History. Chicago: College of Jewish Studies Press, 1964. – , The Jews in the World of the Renaissance. Brill: Leiden, 1973. Simonsohn, Shlomo. “Trent.” In Encyclopaedia Judaica, second edition, edited by Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik, vol. 20, 131. Detroit: Macmillan, 2007. Singer, Aaron Moshe. Animals in Rabbinic Teaching: The Fable, PhD thesis, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1979. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1982. Singer, Isidore; Cassuto, Umberto. “Verona.” In The Jewish Encyclopedia. A Descriptive Record of the History, Religion, Literature, and Customs of the Jewish People from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, edited by Isidore Singer, vol. 12, 420–21. New York/London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1901–1906. Sirat, Colette. “Écriture sur pierre et écriture sur parchemin: Les Juifs de Paris au XIIIe siècle.” La revue du Louvre et des Musées de France 4 (1983): 249–54. – , Du scribe au livre : Les manuscrits hébreux au Moyen Age. Paris: CNRS éditions, 1994. – , “Le livre hébreu: Rencontre de la tradition juive et de l’esthétique française.” In Rashi et la culture juive en France du Nord au Moyen Age, edited by Gilbert Dahan, 243–59. Paris: Peeters, 1997. – , Hebrew Manuscripts of the Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

214 

 Bibliography

, “En vision globale: les juifs médiévaux et les livres latins.” Bibliologia 20 (2003): 15–23. – , “Looking at Latin Books, Understanding Latin Texts: Different Attitudes in Different Jewish Communities.” In Hebrew to Latin, Latin to Hebrew: The Mirroring of two Cultures in the Age of Humanism, Colloquium held at the Warburg Institute, London, October 2004, edited by Giulio Busi, 7–24. Turin: N. Aragno, 2006. – ; Dukan, Michèle. Ecriture et civilisations. Paris: CNRS, 1976. Soloveitchik, Haym. “Religious Law and Change: The Medieval Ashkenazic Example.” AJS Review 12 (1987): 205–21. – , ‫שו"ת כמקור היסטורי‬: The Use of Responsa as a Historical Source: A Methodological Introduction. Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center for Jewish History, 1990. – “Catastrophe and Halakhic Creativity: Ashkenaz – 1096, 1242, 1306 and 1298.” Jewish History 12 (1998): 71–85. – , “Piety, Pietism and German Pietism: ‘Sefer Ḥasidim I’ and the Influence of Ḥasidei Ashkenaz.” The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series 92 (2002): 455–93. – , “Halakhah, Hermeneutics, and Martyrdom in Medieval Ashkenaz.” Part I of II, The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series 94 (2004): 77–108. Stark, J.; Wicht, B. Geschichte der Baustoffe. Wiesbaden/Berlin: Bauverlag, 2013. Steinschneider, Moritz. Catalogus librorum Hebraeorum in Bibliotheca Bodleiana. Berolini: Friedlaender, 1852–1860. – , “Verkäufliche Handschriften.” Zeitschrift für hebräische Bibliographie 6 (1863): 92–96 – , Die hebräischen Handschriften der K. Hof- und Staatsbibliothek in München. Munich: Palm’sche Hofbuchhandlung, 1875. – , Catalog der hebräischen Handschriften in der Stadtbibliothek zu Hamburg und der sich anschliessenden in anderen Sprachen. Hamburg: O. Meissner, 1878. – , Vorlesungen über die Kunde hebräischer Handschriften, deren Sammlungen und Verzeichnisse. Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1897. – , Verzeichniss der hebraeischen Handschriften. Berlin: Asher, 1897. Stern, Moritz. Die israelitische Bevölkerung der deutschen Städte: Ein Beitrag zur deutschen Städtegeschichte; mit Benutzung archivalischer Quellen. Überlingen/Frankfurt am Main: J. Kauffmann, 1890. Sternthal, Michal. Hebrew Illuminated Manuscripts in the Austrian National Library of Vienna, adapted from a lecture presented by Michal Sternthal, Expedition Head, at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem, 13 December 1999. http://cja.huji.ac.il/Publications/NL15/ NL15-vienna.html, accessed on 20/2/2016. Strickland, Debra Higgs. Saracens, Demons, & Jews: Making Monsters in Medieval Art. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2003. – , “The Jews, Leviticus, and the Unclean in Medieval English Bestiaries.” In Beyond the Yellow Badge. Anti-Judaism and Antisemitism in Medieval and Early Modern Visual Culture, edited by Mitchell B. Merback, 203–32. Leiden: Brill, 2008. Stromer, Wolfgang. “Die Metropole im Aufstand gegen König Karl IV: Nürnberg zwischen Wittelsbach und Luxemburg, Juni 1348–September 1349.” Mitteilungen des Vereins für Geschichte der Stadt Nürnberg 65 (1978): 55–90. Süssmann, Arthur. Die Judenschuldentilgungen unter König Wenzel, PhD thesis, Breslau. 1906, Berlin: L. Lamm, 1907. –

Bibliography 

 215

Ta-Shema, Israel. “Rabbi Yéhiel de Paris : L’homme et l’oeuvre, religion et société (XIIIe siècle).” Annuaire – École pratique des hautes études, Section des sciences religieuses 99 (1990–1991): 215–19. – ,“ ‫ על קיצור הסמ"ג ועל ספרות הקיצורים‬,‫דברים על הסמ"ג‬.” In ‫ ההדיר והוסיף‬.‫קיצור ספר מצוות גדול‬ ‫מבוא והערות יהושע הורוביץ‬, Kitzur Semag, by Avraham ben Ephraim, 13–21. Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 2004. – , “Jehiel ben Joseph of Paris.” In Encyclopaedia Judaica, second edition, edited by Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik, vol. 11, 103. Detroit: Macmillan, 2007. Toch, Michael. “Der jüdische Geldhandel in der Wirtschaft des Deutschen Spätmittelalters: Nürnberg 1350–1499.” Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte 117 (1981): 283–310. – , Die Juden im mittelalterlichen Reich. Munich: Oldenbourg Verlag, 1998. – , The Economic History of European Jews: Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Treue, Wolfgang. Der Trienter Judenprozess: Voraussetzungen – Abläufe – Auswirkungen (1475–1588), PhD thesis, University of Trier. 1994, Hanover: Hahnsche Buchhandlungen, 1996. Tchernowitz, Chaim. ‫ תכונת חבוריהם ויסודי שיטותיהם בדרכי‬,‫ כולל שלשלת הפוסקים‬.‫תולדות הפוסקים‬ ‫ההוראה מתקופת הגאונים עד השלחן ערוך ונושאי כליו‬: Toledoth Ha-Poskim.New York, 1946–1947. Turgeman, Asaf. “Mein Bruder ist ein Einzelkind: Die Esau-Darstellung in jüdischen Schriften des Mittelalters.” In Esau – Bruder und Feind, edited by Gerhard Langer and Günter Stemberger, 135–53. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009. Twersky, Isadore. Introduction to the Code of Maimonides (Mishneh Torah). New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980. Urbach, Ephraim Elimelech. ‫ שיטתם‬,‫ חיבוריהם‬,‫ תולדותיהם‬.‫בעלי התוספות‬: The Tosaphots: Their History, Writings and Methods. Jerusalem: Mossad Bialik, 1980, 2nd edition. Utzinger, André. “Thomas Hobbes’ ‘Leviathan’. Anatomie eines Staats-Wesens.” In Spinnenfuss und Krötenbauch: Genese und Symbolik von Kompositwesen, edited by Paul Michel, 279–316. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2013. Van Banning, Joop. “Der Vatikan und der Ritualmord.” In Ritualmord. Legenden in der europäischen Geschichte, edited by Susanna Buttaroni, 61–84. Vienna: Böhlau, 2003. Vetter, Ferdinand. “Und noch einmal: ‘Bern’ ist Deutsch-Verona!” Blätter für Bernische Geschichte, Kunst und Altertumskunde 4 (1908): 1–35. Vongrey, Felix. “Ornamentierte mittelalterliche Bodenfliesen in Stift Lilienfeld.” Österreichische Zeitschrift für Denkmalpflege 26 (1972): 9–19. Walter, Ingeborg. Die Strozzi: Eine Familie im Florenz der Renaissance. Munich: C. H. Beck, 2011. Wandrey, Irina. “Codex hebraicus 17.” In Manuscript Cultures 6. Ausstellungskatalog “Tora, Talmud, Siddur”, anlässlich der Ausstellung “Tora – Talmud – Siddur. Hebräische Handschriften der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg” in der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg vom 18. September bis 26. Oktober 2014, edited by Irina Wandrey, 63–67. Hamburg: SFB 950, 2014. Wattenbach, Wilhelm. Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, second edition, 1875. Weber, Christoph Friedrich. Zeichen der Ordnung und des Aufruhrs: heraldische Symbolik in italienischen Stadtkommunen des Mittelalters. Cologne/Weimar: Böhlau Verlag, 2011. Weizsäcker, Heinrich. “Das Pferd in der Kunst des Quattrocento.” Jahrbuch der Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 7 (1886): 40–57, 157–72. Wenninger, Markus. “Von jüdischen Rittern und anderen waffentragenden Juden im mittelalterlichen Deutschland.” Aschkenas 13 (2003): 35–82.

216 

 Bibliography

Wiedl, Birgit. “Laughing at the Beast: The Judensau. Anti-Jewish Propaganda and Humor from the Middle Ages to the Early Modern Period.” In Laughter in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times. Epistemology of a Fundamental Human Behavior, its Meaning, and Consequences, edited by Albrecht Classen, 325–64. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010. Wild, Dölf; Böhmer Roland. Die spätmittelalterlichen Wandmalereien im Haus “Zum Brunnenhof” in Zürich und ihre jüdischen Auftraggeber, originally published in the report Zürcher Denkmalpflege, Stadt Zürich, 1995/1996. Zurich: F0-Publishing, 1997. Wischnitzer-Bernstein, Rahel. Symbole und Gestalten der jüdischen Kunst. Berlin: Scholem, 1935. Woolf, Jeffrey R. “Maimonides Revised: The Case of the Sefer Miswot Gadol.” The Harvard Theological Review 90 (1997): 175–203. – , “Some Polemical Emphases in the ‘Sefer Miṣwot Gadol‘ of Rabbi Moses of Coucy.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 89 (July–Oct. 1998): 81–100. , “Admiration and Apathy. Maimonides’‘Mishneh Torah’ in High and Late Medieval Ashkenaz.” In Be'erot Yitzhak. Studies in Memory of Isadore Twersky, edited by Jay Michael Harris, 427–53. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Center for Jewish Studies, 2005. – , “French Halakhic Tradition in the Late Middle Ages.” Jewish History 27 (2013): 1–20. Yerushalmi, Yosef Hayim. “Messianic Impulses in Joseph ha-Kohen.” In Jewish Thought in the Sixteenth Century, edited by Bernard Dov Cooperman, 460–87. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983. Yardeni, Ada. The Book of Hebrew Script:. History, Palaeography, Script Styles, Calligraphy & Design. London: The British Library, 2002. Yuval, Israel Jacob. Two Nations in Your Womb: Perceptions of Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. Zanger, Heinz. Dachschmuck aus gebranntem Ton. Suderburg-Hösseringen: Edition :anderweit Verlag, 2002. Zirlin, Yael. “The Problems of Identifying the Origin of a Manuscript: Hamburg, Cod. Hebr. 155.” Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies 11 ‫דברי הקונגרס העולמי למדעי היהדות‬ (1993): 33–37. Zunz, Leopold. “Der Zürcher Semak. Beilage V.” In Die Ritus des synagogalen Gottesdienstes. Geschichtlich entwickelt,by Leopold Zunz, 211–21. Berlin: J. Springer, 1859. – , Die Ritus des synagogalen Gottesdienstes. Geschichtlich entwickelt. Berlin: J. Springer, 1859. – , Die hebräischen Handschriften in Italien: Ein Mahnruf des Rechts und der Wissenschaft. Berlin: W. Adolf & Co., 1864. Zuth, Josef. Handbuch der Laute und Gitarre. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1978.

List of the manuscripts mentioned in this study SeMaK manuscripts AMSTERDAM Rosenthaliana, ROS 558 BERLIN SBB, Or. Qu. 3 CAMBRIDGE University Library, Add. 2580 COPENHAGEN KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6 HAMBURG SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17 SUB, Cod. Hebr. 89 LONDON BL, Add. 11639 BL, Add. 18828 BL, Add. 18684 BL, Add. 18685 BL, Add. 26982 David Sofer, Lon Sofer 7 Montefiore Library 122 MODENA Estense e universitaria, a.Q.9.23 MOSCOW RSL Guenzburg 1374 MUNICH BSB, Cod. Hebr. 135 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-010

218 

 List of the manuscripts mentioned in this study

NEW YORK JTS, MS 8227 OXFORD BOD, Arch. Seld. A51 BOD, Mich. 41 BOD, Mich. 200 BOD, Mich. 502 BOD, Opp. 336 BOD, Opp. 337 BOD, Opp. 339 BOD, Opp. 340 BOD, Opp. 341 BOD, Opp. 342 BOD, Opp. Add. fol. 40 PARIS BNF, hébreu 380 BNF, hébreu 643 PARMA BPP, Parm. 676 BPP, Parm. 1940 BPP, Parm. 2767 BPP, Parm. 3158 BPP, Parm. 3161 VATICAN BAV, ebr. 147 BAV, ebr. 324 VIENNA ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 12a ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75 ZURICH BRAG, Brag 115

List of the manuscripts mentioned in this study 

 219

Other manuscripts BUDAPEST Kaufmann Collection, MS A388 Kaufmann Collection, MS 343 CAMBRIDGE University Library, Add. 662 DARMSTADT HLuHB, Cod. Or. 13 HLuHB, Cod. Or. 28 DRESDEN Sächsische Landesbibliothek – Staats- und -Universitätsbibliothek, MS A 46a HAMBURG SUB, Cod. Hebr. 37 SUB, Cod. Hebr. 155 HEIDELBERG Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. Pal. germ. 164 Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. Pal. germ. 848 JERUSALEM JNUL, hebr.4, 781 Israel Museum, MS 180/50 Israel Museum, MS 181/18 Israel Museum, MS Rothschild 24 Israel Museum & Metropolitan Museum (New York), Mishneh Torah, 2013.495 Schocken Library, MS 13873 (now in private ownership) LEIPZIG Universitätsbibliothek, MS Voll 1102/I and II

220 

 List of the manuscripts mentioned in this study

LONDON BL, Add. 14761 BL, Add. 14762 BL, Add. 18424 BL, Add. 19776 BL, Add. 21160 BL, Add. 22413 BL, Add. 26879 BL, Add. 26968 BL, Harley 5686 David Sofer, The Second Nuremberg Haggadah (previously Jerusalem, Schocken Lib. MS 24087) MANCHESTER John Rylands Library, Hebr. 6 MILAN Biblioteca Ambrosiana, B 32 inf MUNICH BSB Clm 8201, fol. 85r NEW YORK Public Library, Heb. 224 Public Library, Heb. 225 NUREMBERG Stadtbibliothek, Hausbuch der Mendelschen Zwölfbruderstiftung, Amb. 317.2° PARIS BNF, MS Français 1951 PARMA BPP, MS Parm 3273 ST GALL Kantonsbibliothek, Vadianische Sammlung, VadSlg MS 302

List of the manuscripts mentioned in this study 

VATICAN BAV, Ross. 498 VIENNA ÖNB, cod. 370 WASHINGTON Library of Congress, Washington Haggadah ZURICH Schweizerisches Nationalmuseum, AG 2760

 221

Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30

SeMaK manuscripts by origin, © Picture: Ingrid M. Kaufmann   46 SeMaK manuscripts by date of origin, © Picture: Ingrid M. Kaufmann   47 First page of the SeMaK. London, BL, Add. 11639, fol. 546v, Public Domain   49 Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. Hebr. 75, 214v, © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek   57  58 Paris, BNF, hébreu 643, fol. 45r, © Bibliothèque Nationale de France  Oxford, BOD, MS Opp. 340, fol. 124v, © Bodleian Library   59 London, BL, Add. 18685, fol. 8v, Public Domain   59 Oxford, BOD, MS Opp. 337, fol. 127v, © Bodleian Library   59 Oxford, BOD, MS Opp. 339, fol. 70v, © Bodleian Library   59 Oxford, BOD, MS Mich. 502, fol. 32v, © Bodleian Library   64 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fol. 47v, © Bodleian Library   66 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fol. 48r, © Bodleian Library   66 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fol. 67r, © Bodleian Library   66 Oxford, BOD, Opp. 340, fol. 67r, © Bodleian Library   66 Amsterdam, Rosenthaliana, ROS 558, fol. 13r, © Bibliotheca Rosenthaliana   67 Paris, BNF, hébreu 643, fol. 101r, © Bibliothèque Nationale de France   70 Parma, BBP, Cod. Parm. 3158, fol. 92r, © Biblioteca Palatina di Parma   71 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6; on the left, fol. 85r (by scribe B), on the right, fol. 84v (by scribe A), © Photograph: Ingrid M. Kaufmann   75 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 250r (scribe C’s work?), © Photograph: Ingrid M. Kaufmann   77 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 103v, © Photograph: Ingrid M. Kaufmann   81 Catchwords in Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fols. 36v, 60v, 84v, 168v, 194v, 226v, © Photograph: Ingrid M. Kaufmann   83 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 210v, © Photograph: Ingrid M. Kaufmann   84 ‘Löwenpfennig’, 1250/1300, Habsburg Mint, © Fritz Rudolf Künker GmbH & Co. KG, Osnabrück and Lübke + Wiedemann KG, Leonberg   84 Copenhagen, KB, Cod. Hebr. Add. 6, fol. 202v, © Photograph: Ingrid M. Kaufmann   84 New York, Public Library, MS Heb. 224, fol. 333v, © New York, Public Library   84 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fol. 191r, © Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Hamburg   87 A decorative element in Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fol. 200r, © Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Hamburg   90 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fol. 187r, © Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Hamburg   93 London, BL, Add. 18424, fol. 38v, detail, Public Domain   95 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fol. 191r, detail, © Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Hamburg   95

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-011

224  Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39 Figure 40 Figure 41 Figure 42 Figure 43 Figure 44 Figure 45 Figure 46 Figure 47 Figure 48 Figure 49 Figure 50 Figure 51 Figure 52 Figure 53 Figure 54 Figure 55 Figure 56 Figure 57 Figure 58 Figure 59 Figure 60 Figure 61 Figure 62 Figure 63 Figure 64 Figure 65 Figure 66

 Figures

Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebr. 17, fols. 233v–234r, © Staats- und  97 Universitätsbibliothek, Hamburg  Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 11r, detail, © Bodleian Library   100 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 14v, detail. © Bodleian Library   100 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 22v, detail, © Bodleian Library   100 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 29v, detail, © Bodleian Library   100 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 38v, detail, © Bodleian Library   101 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 46v, detail, © Bodleian Library   101 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 62v, detail, © Bodleian Library   101 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 70v, decorated catchword, © Bodleian Library   101 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 7v, detail, © Bodleian Library   102 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, fol. 47v, © Bodleian Library   104 Detail from Oxford, Bodleian Library, Opp. 339, 45r. In red it says ‘Rashi’s daughter was salting’, © Bodleian Library   105 Decorated initial letters, fol. 58r, London, BL, Add. 18684, Public Domain   108 The initial word on fol. 12r, London, BL, Add. 18684, Public Domain   109 London, BL, Add. 21160, fol. 63v, detail, Public Domain   110 Paris, BNF, hébreu 643, fol. 37v, detail, © Bibliothèque Nationale de France   110 London, BL, Add. 19776, fol. 190r, detail, Public Domain   111 ‘Judensau’, Nuremberg, St Sebald Church, © Photograph: Axel Töllner   113 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 12r, detail, Public Domain   113 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 8v, detail, Public Domain   114 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 16v, detail, Public Domain   115 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 24v, detail, Public Domain   115 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 32v, detail, Public Domain   117 Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 370, fol. 155v, © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek   119 Nuremberg, St Sebald Church, the ‘Prince of the World’, © Photograph: Axel Töllner   119  120 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 40v, detail, Public Domain  Jerusalem, JNUL, MS hebr. 4, 781, fol. 130v, detail, © The National Library of Israel   122 London, BL, Add. 22413, fol. 49r, detail, Public Domain   123 London, BL, Add. 14762, fol. 4r, detail, Public Domain   125 Vienna, ÖNB, Hebr. 75, fol. 163r, detail, © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek   126 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 53v, detail, Public Domain   129 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 61v, detail, Public Domain   130 Jerusalem, The Israel Museum, ms 181/18, fol. 10r, © Photograph: Ardon Bar-Hama, The Israel Museum   132 Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebraicus 37, fol. 25r, © Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek,  132 Hamburg  Fol. 202v, Darmstadt, HLuHB, Cod. or. 13, Public Domain   133 Nuremberg, Stadtbibliothek, Mendel Housebook, Amb. 317.2°, fol. 61r (Mendel I), Public Domain   133

Figures 

Figure 67

 225

Hamburg, SUB, Cod. Hebraicus 37, fol. 25r, © Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Hamburg   134 Figure 68 The Washington Haggadah, fol. 6r, Library of Congess, Public Domain   134 Figure 69 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 61v, Public Domain   134 Figure 70 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 69v, Public Domain   135 Figure 71 Munich, BSB, Cod. Hebr. 135, fol. 134v, Public Domain   136 Figure 72 Fol. 18r, Paris, BNF, MS Français 1951, © Bibliothèque Nationale de France   138 Figure 73 A decorated boss in St Sebald Church, Nuremberg, © Photograph: Eberhard Holter, Nuremberg   139 Figure 74 An aquamanile (Metropolitan Museum, No. 1994.244), Public Domain   140 Figure 75 Budapest, Kaufmann Collection, MS 343, fol. 183v, © Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences   142 Figure 76 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 77v, Public Domain   142 Figure 77 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 85v, Public Domain   143 Figure 78 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 93v, Public Domain   145 Figure 79 Zurich, Swiss National Museum, AG 2760, fol. 2r, Public Domain   146 Figure 80 Nuremberg’s coat of arms, © Drawing: David Liuzzo, Wikimedia, Public Domain   146 Figure 81 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 101v, detail, Public Domain   147 Figure 82 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 109v, Public Domain   148 Figure 83 London, BL, Add. 18684, fol. 117v, Public Domain   149 Figure 84 Dresden, Sächsische Landesbibliothek – Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, MS A 46a, fol. 202v, © Photograph: http://digital.slub-dresden.de/id280760329; (CC-BY-SA 4.0)   150 Figure 85 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 1r, © Bodleian Library   158 Figure 86 A detail in Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 29v, © Bodleian Library   159 Figure 87 London, BL, Add. 14762, fol. 23v, Public Domain   159 Figure 88 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 29v, © Bodleian Library   159 Figure 89 Florence, Museo Bardini, Marzocco, 14th century, © Photograph: Ingrid M.  160 Kaufmann  Figure 90 Jerusalem, JNUL, MS hebr. 4, 781, fol. 1v, detail, © The National Library of Israel   161 Figure 91 Vatican, BAV, Ross. 498, fol. 85v, © Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana   161 Figure 92 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 1r, © Bodleian Library   161 Figure 93 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol 1r, © Bodleian Library   162 Figure 94 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 4v, detail, © Bodleian Library   164 Figure 95 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fols. 4v–5r, © Bodleian Library   165 Figure 96 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 25r, © Bodleian Library   165 Figure 97 Darmstadt, HLuHB, Cod. Or. 28, fol. 12v, Public Domain   166 Figure 98 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 25r, © Bodleian Library   167 Figure 99 Double page in Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51,fols. 25v–26r,  168 © Bodleian Library  Figure 100 London, BL, Add. 26968, fol. 316v, detail, Public Domain   169 Figure 101 Vatican, BAV, Ross. 498, fol. 85v, detail, © Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana   169

226  Figure 102 Figure 103 Figure 104 Figure 105 Figure 106 Figure 107 Figure 108 Figure 109 Figure 110 Figure 111 Figure 112 Figure 113

 Figures

 170 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 28v, © Bodleian Library  Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fols. 70v–71r, © Bodleian Library   171 London, BL, Add. 26879, fol. 187r, detail, Public Domain   172 London, BL, Harley 5686, fol. 440r, detail, Public Domain   172 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 70v, detail, © Bodleian Library   172 Monument to Sir John Hawkwood, Paolo Uccello, fresco, 1436; Florence, Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore, Wikimedia, Public Domain   173 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, Fol. 71v, © Bodleian Library   173 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 76r, © Bodleian Library   174 Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, MS Voll 1102/I, maḥzor, Worms, c. 1310, fol. 31v, Public Domain   175 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 76v, © Bodleian Library   176 Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, B 32 inf. 1, fol. 136r, © Biblioteca Ambrosiana   177 Oxford, BOD, Arch. Seld. A51, fol. 87r, © Bodleian Library   178

Index Abraham 114 Abraham bar Ephraim 36 Abraham ben Salomon de Bagnoles, the scribe 64 Abraham Berliner 14 Abraham Farissol 33, 204 Abraham Gross 15 Adolf Neubauer 153 Alsace-Lorraine 25 aquamanilia 139, 140 Asher ben Jehiel (Rosh) 78 Ashkenaz 1, 2, 4, 21, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32, 34, 45, 62, 63, 66, 77, 86, 89, 96, 122, 127, 144, 153, 157, 166 Augustine 137 Avignon 29, 33 Babylonian Talmud 31, 35, 116, 127, 143, 147, 148 Bavaria 28 Behemoth 175, 176, 178 Benjamin, the scribe 47 Berne 29, 154 Black Death. See Plague Bohemia 45 Chaim Tchernowitz 43 Champagne 25, 30, 48 Chillon Castle 29 Colette Sirat 3, 7, 8, 10, 17, 56, 81, 88, 96, 98, 205, 207, 208, 211 Constantinople 40, 46, 88 Corbeil 24, 88, 98 Cracow 40 Cremona 40, 41 David Malkiel 15, 27 Deggendorf 28 Derekh Erez Zuta 129 Dolce of Worms 61, 205 Edna Engel 8, 33, 62 Eleazar ben Yehuda of Worms 61, 156 Eliezer ben Samuel of Metz 37 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110574418-012

Elijah 166 Elliott Horowitz 8 Emperor Charles IV 29, 30 Emperor Frederick II 26 Emperor Henry IV 25 Emperor Louis IV 29 Ephraim Kanarfogel 15, 31, 37, 55, 80 Ephraim Urbach 15, 37, 73 Erfurt 25 Ernst Roth 89, 90 Esslingen 61 Évreux 25, 31 Exodus from Egypt 102, 130, 183 Falaise 25 Feast of Tabernacles. See Sukkot fleuronnée 92, 93 Florence 33, 124, 160, 172 France 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 31, 32, 36, 40, 45, 46, 62, 64, 88, 122 Franconia 28 Frederick II 27 Friedrich Battenberg 22, 26 Fulda 27 Gabrielle Sed-Rajna 17, 93, 118, 123 George Margoliouth 13 Germanany 72 German empire 25, 98 German Empire 22, 27, 28, 29 Germany 1, 2, 7, 9, 12, 30, 32, 45, 62, 78, 79, 86, 93, 112, 123, 125, 131, 162, 176, 183 Giovanni Bernardo De Rossi 13 Giovanni Pico della Mirandola 33 Ḥaim Joseph David Azulai 69 Hannah bat Menahem Zion, the scribe 67 Haym Soloveitchik 14, 19, 24, 31 Ḥaside Ashkenaz 15, 31, 37, 39 heraldry 136, 137, 146, 151, 160, 170, 172, 178 fleur-de-lis 114, 171 Hugh of Saint-Victor 23 Hunting 82, 84, 85, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128

228 

 Index

idolatry 42, 51, 55, 126, 143 Ingolstadt 52, 96, 98 Isaac ben Jacob Alfasi 35, 53, 54 Isaac ben Joseph of Corbeil 1, 2, 15, 16, 24, 31, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 47, 48, 50, 52, 78, 86, 88, 91, 96, 97, 103, 105, 106, 107, 112, 116, 117, 127, 130, 149, 181, 203, 209 Isaac of Düren 45 Israel Ta-Shema 15, 24 Jacob ben Meir Tam 23, 30, 116, 122, 209, 212 Jacob ben Moshe haLevi Molin (Maharil) 40 Jacob Katz 31 Jan Assmann 43, 204 Jehiel ben Joseph of Paris 24, 215 Jerusalem IX, X, 3, 14, 15, 16, 19, 26, 36, 38, 39, 40, 62, 68, 69, 82, 89, 91, 96, 105, 120, 127, 131, 155, 160, 163, 175, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 210, 214, 215, 220 Jitzchak Jakob Har-Shoshanim (Rosenberg) 39, 107, 203 Jitzchak S. Lange 14, 107 Joel ben Simeon 125, 159, 163, 210 John Selden 153 Josef Karo 40, 131 Joseph Colon ben Solomon Trabotto (Maharik) 40 Joseph Leroy, the scribe 56, 70, 110 Joshua Zeitlin 40 Judah D. Galinsky 16, 36, 38, 40, 207 Judith Olszowy-Schlanger 7, 8, 78, 81, 205, 207, 208, 211 Justine Isserles 8 Katrin Kogman-Appel 9, 17, 18, 123, 125, 175, 209, 210 Kiddush haShem 15, 55 King Armleder 28 King Louis IX 22 King Philip II 22 King Rudolf of Habsburg 26 King Solomon 141 King Wenceslas 30, 128 Konrad of Megenberg 137, 138 Kopys 40 Kurt Schubert 122

Lake Constance 9, 125, 213 Leopold Zunz 6, 14, 39, 107, 165, 216 Leviathan 122, 175, 176, 178 Lilian Randall 10 Lord Rindtfleisch 28 Lucy Freeman Sandler 11, 18 Maimonides 35, 36, 41, 148, 175, 204, 215, 216 Mainz 26, 30, 89, 204, 205 Malachi Beit-Arié 3, 7, 10, 17, 38, 55, 59, 62, 64, 65, 66, 78, 81, 98, 153, 207 Marc Michael Epstein 9, 12, 125, 150, 179 Meir ben Asher ha-Levi 68, 69 Meir of Rothenburg 24, 26, 39, 54, 78, 81, 117, 122, 127, 156, 204 Menahem ben Jacob Shalit, the scribe 72 Messiah 123, 166, 175, 176 Metz 47 Michael Camille 10, 11, 12, 18, 111, 206 Michal Sternthal 68, 214 Midrash Tanḥuma 141 Mishnah 118, 143, 144, 148, 149, 170 Mordechai b. Hillel ha-Kohen 54 Moritz Güdemann 14, 34, 154 Moritz Steinschneider 6, 14, 73, 92, 95 Moses Isserles 40 Moshe ben Isaac, the scribe 66, 67 Moshe ben Jacob of Coucy 24, 31, 36, 41 Moshe ben Jehiel, the scribe 70 Moshe of Zurich 39, 41, 52, 54, 72, 106, 107, 116, 117, 127, 149, 156, 203 Nicholas Donin 24 Nimrod 114, 121 Ninth of Av 120, 124, 127 Nuremberg 25, 106, 112, 113, 119, 127, 132, 133, 139, 146, 151, 154, 160, 163, 183, 208, 211, 220 Otto Pächt 109 Paris 21, 22, 23, 24, 36, 48, 56, 64, 88, 127 Passover. See  Pesach Passover Haggadah 131, 134, 165, 166, 167, 168, 180, 183

Index 

Perez ben Elia of Corbeil 16, 24, 39, 40, 41, 48, 50, 52, 53, 72, 76, 78, 85, 90, 96, 107, 116, 117, 127, 149, 156, 170, 173, 181, 203 persecution 2, 13, 25, 33, 34, 84, 122, 123, 125, 126, 127, 128, 166, 183 Pesach 79, 102, 103, 130, 131, 148, 166, 167, 174, 178 Peter the Venerable (Petrus Venerabilis) 23 Physiologus 136, 137, 138, 183 Plague 28, 29, 32, 89, 98 Plauen 46, 52 Pope Gregory IX 24 prayer straps 78, 85, 91, 136, 141 Rabbi Akiva 129, 130 Rahel Wischnitzer-Bernstein 122 red cow 174 red heifer. See  red cow Regensburg 26, 29, 31, 98, 106, 205 Rhineland 21, 22, 25, 26, 30, 40, 211 Rome 32, 121 Röttingen 28 Safed 40 Salomo A. Birnbaum 7 Samuel ben Meir (Rashbam) 30 Samuel Kohn 14 Samuel of Evreux 78 Sarit Shalev-Eyni 9, 69, 125, 177 Saskia Dönitz 121 Savoy 29 Sepharad 32 ShUM 26, 31 Simcha Emanuel 16 Simeon Kayyara 35 Simson ben Zadoq 93 Simson b. Zadoq 45, 86

 229

Solomon ben Isaac (Rashi) 30, 54, 85, 103, 105, 106, 116, 141 Solothurn 29 Spain 32 Speyer 26, 31, 205, 212 Sukkot 79, 148, 167, 168 Susan Nashman Fraiman 12 Tashbeẓ 86, 88, 93, 96 Thérèse and Mendel Metzger 8 Thomas of Aquin 44 Touques 25 Trento 34 Überlingen 68 Venice 32, 34, 154 Verona 154, 180 Worms 9, 25, 26, 30, 48, 61, 82, 86, 88, 89, 93, 114, 122, 123, 150, 160, 175, 203, 205, 206, 210 Würzburg 106 Yehoshua ben Abraham ha-Levi, the scribe 63 Yehuda, the son of the scholar R. Abraham, the patron 89 Yohanan Alemanno 33 Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi 177, 178 Zarfat 1, 2, 21, 30, 31, 127 Zechariah ben Moshe, the scribe 53 Ziz 175, 176, 178 Zofingen 29 Zurich 29, 54, 107 Zurich SeMaK 14, 15, 16, 39, 40, 41, 54, 55, 72, 106, 107, 125