RICHARD I COHEN | The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (original) (raw)
Festschrift by RICHARD I COHEN
Articles by RICHARD I COHEN
Rituals and customs had preoccupied Jews from the days of the Mishnah (c. 200), and during the Mi... more Rituals and customs had preoccupied Jews from the days of the Mishnah (c. 200), and during the Middle Ages Hebrew illuminated manuscripts sometimes depicted them; but the day-today behaviour of Jews rarely attracted interest among Christian writers. From the sixteenth century onwards, a plethora of stud ies on Jewish rituals appeared. In recent years much work has been done to docu ment and uncover this phenomenon, from the writings of Johannes Pfefferkorn (1469-1523) in the sixteenth century to those of the German Protestant theolo gian Johann Christian Bodenschatz (1717-1797); yet little attention has been given in this context to the Christian translators of the Mishnah, especially Johann Christoph Wagenseil (1633-1705) and Guiliehnus Surenhusius (1664-1729).' Both dealt with various Jewish customs that emerged from the tractates of the Mishnah, and they incorporated into their texts visual images depicting a range of Jewish rituals that often differed dramatically in their representations from those in previous and subsequent works published by both Christians and Jews. As will be shown in this essay, the illustrators of the Mishnah attempted to situate the tractates and the rituals within that historical context, even though some of the rituals and customs had more contemporary manifestations. Surenhusius decided to publish his vast undertaking with the Borstius firm of Amsterdam. No documentation exists to uncover the agreement made between them and the reason behind Surenhusius's decision to choose this firm over other publishing houses.^ By the 1660s the Dutch Republic had some 781 printers and ' The scholarly literature on this theme is vast.
TLGD FZQ]GO RHTOFSQ [JD RN OU GFHDU CHYQO G\Z]L HLFHQLO PH]D\ PH\Q L\C[ UHYZQN GL[HK OYC C[IU FQO... more TLGD FZQ]GO RHTOFSQ [JD RN OU GFHDU CHYQO G\Z]L HLFHQLO PH]D\ PH\Q L\C[ UHYZQN GL[HK OYC C[IU FQO GLDQHOHZD LS\Q UHYZQN ]LFHGL GL[HKTLG FQOH L\C[ UHYZQN GWH[LC J[IQ O\ VCLL[ Z[Q OYC RNH RGN RH\[EH RH[CD 5DHII GOG ]LS[FHQG GWH[LC J[IQ O\ PL[ZHJG LOHFEQ D]NS\ ODHLG [WT O\ HLN[HUQ FJC C[IU GLG PLQLOH [ZHJ O\ OFHQH GDH\J ]HQF H[HDU MWG HFHDNO (]UD 0HQGHOVRKQ DQG 0DUVKDOO 6 6FKDW] HGV ,PSHULDO 5XVVLD ± 6WDWH
IN his introduction to Early Modern Jewry, david ruderman reveals something of his intellectual a... more IN his introduction to Early Modern Jewry, david ruderman reveals something of his intellectual autobiography by relating to three seventeenth-century figures who inspired him in his scholarly path and had a significant impact on how he conceives of the early Modern as a distinct era in Jewish history. each figure is connected in some way to the italian port of venice. Though they differ considerably from one another, in their distinctive hybridity leon Modena, simone luzzatto, and Joseph shlomo delmedigo were each paradigmatic of the age.
Rituals and customs had preoccupied Jews from the days of the Mishnah (c. 200), and during the Mi... more Rituals and customs had preoccupied Jews from the days of the Mishnah (c. 200), and during the Middle Ages Hebrew illuminated manuscripts sometimes depicted them; but the day-today behaviour of Jews rarely attracted interest among Christian writers. From the sixteenth century onwards, a plethora of stud ies on Jewish rituals appeared. In recent years much work has been done to docu ment and uncover this phenomenon, from the writings of Johannes Pfefferkorn (1469-1523) in the sixteenth century to those of the German Protestant theolo gian Johann Christian Bodenschatz (1717-1797); yet little attention has been given in this context to the Christian translators of the Mishnah, especially Johann Christoph Wagenseil (1633-1705) and Guiliehnus Surenhusius (1664-1729).' Both dealt with various Jewish customs that emerged from the tractates of the Mishnah, and they incorporated into their texts visual images depicting a range of Jewish rituals that often differed dramatically in their representations from those in previous and subsequent works published by both Christians and Jews. As will be shown in this essay, the illustrators of the Mishnah attempted to situate the tractates and the rituals within that historical context, even though some of the rituals and customs had more contemporary manifestations. Surenhusius decided to publish his vast undertaking with the Borstius firm of Amsterdam. No documentation exists to uncover the agreement made between them and the reason behind Surenhusius's decision to choose this firm over other publishing houses.^ By the 1660s the Dutch Republic had some 781 printers and ' The scholarly literature on this theme is vast.
TLGD FZQ]GO RHTOFSQ [JD RN OU GFHDU CHYQO G\Z]L HLFHQLO PH]D\ PH\Q L\C[ UHYZQN GL[HK OYC C[IU FQO... more TLGD FZQ]GO RHTOFSQ [JD RN OU GFHDU CHYQO G\Z]L HLFHQLO PH]D\ PH\Q L\C[ UHYZQN GL[HK OYC C[IU FQO GLDQHOHZD LS\Q UHYZQN ]LFHGL GL[HKTLG FQOH L\C[ UHYZQN GWH[LC J[IQ O\ VCLL[ Z[Q OYC RNH RGN RH\[EH RH[CD 5DHII GOG ]LS[FHQG GWH[LC J[IQ O\ PL[ZHJG LOHFEQ D]NS\ ODHLG [WT O\ HLN[HUQ FJC C[IU GLG PLQLOH [ZHJ O\ OFHQH GDH\J ]HQF H[HDU MWG HFHDNO (]UD 0HQGHOVRKQ DQG 0DUVKDOO 6 6FKDW] HGV ,PSHULDO 5XVVLD ± 6WDWH
IN his introduction to Early Modern Jewry, david ruderman reveals something of his intellectual a... more IN his introduction to Early Modern Jewry, david ruderman reveals something of his intellectual autobiography by relating to three seventeenth-century figures who inspired him in his scholarly path and had a significant impact on how he conceives of the early Modern as a distinct era in Jewish history. each figure is connected in some way to the italian port of venice. Though they differ considerably from one another, in their distinctive hybridity leon Modena, simone luzzatto, and Joseph shlomo delmedigo were each paradigmatic of the age.
This is a convincing thesis: something clearly did change during France's dark years. That said, ... more This is a convincing thesis: something clearly did change during France's dark years. That said, there are problems with Broch's démarche. One problem concerns the concept of frustration, which is never clearly defined. With what-or with whom-were railway workers frustrated: the Vichy regime, Vichy authorities, the German occupiers, their superiors in the SNCF and beyond, wartime hardships, or something and someone else? Were railway workers more frustrated than others? If so, then why? Another problem concerns the expression of this frustration. There is the question of scope: in the case of sabotage, for example, it is not clear how extensive the phenomenon was before the lead-up to D-Day, nor whether it was primarily railway workers who sabotaged locomotives, freight cars, and tracks in the opening months of 1944. Broch relies on French sources for evidence, but it would be interesting to compare them with German sources, as the occupiers were hypersensitive to any signs of sabotage. In the chapter on protest, Broch focuses on "everyday resistance" evident in the "proliferation of acts of misconduct, disobedience, trickery, and even individual resistance" (125). But such acts are often difficult to measure and even to identify, to say nothing of the difficulties involved in assessing the political intent behind them. In the case of theft, Broch writes of an "epidemic," but the figures she cites (for France's southwest region) point to something less spectacular: a rise from just under 100 in 1939 to 250 in 1941 (97, 103-104). The phenomenon of theft also raises the question of alternative explanations. Occupied France, as Broch rightly emphasizes, suffered from growing shortages of almost all consumer (and other) goods-food, clothing, and so on. This situation gave railway workers, who enjoyed privileged access to scarce goods (and transport), enormous incentives to steal whether for personal consumption or for sale in wartime France's flourishing black markets. Indeed, what is striking is arguably not so much the rise in the number of thefts as its limited extent. On page 109 Broch provides a graph indicating a notable increase in thefts from the SNCF by non-SNCF employees from January 1942 to May 1944 but lower and stable numbers for SNCF workers and management. If, as it appears, the incentives and opportunities for theft were abundant, one question is why were SNCF employees seemingly less loath to steal than nonemployees? One answer might be in the lingering effects of the cheminots' prewar professional ethos.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, e... more All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.