Struggling with Tradition

The Brill Reference

Library of Judaism
Editors

J . Neusner (Bard College) H. Basser (Queens University)

A.J. Avery-Peck (College of the Holy Cross)
Wm.S. Green (University of Rochester) — G. Stemberger
(University of Vienna) — I. Gruenwald (Tel Aviv University)
M.I. Gruber (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev)
G.G. Porton (University of Illinois) —J. Faur (Bar Ilan University)

V O L U M E 19
Struggling with
Tradition
Reservations about Active Martyrdom
in the Middle Ages

by

Abraham Gross

' / 6 8‫' ל‬

BRILL
LEIDEN B O S T O N
2004
 Library o f C o n g r e s s C a t a l o g i n g - i n - P u b l i c a t i o n D a t a

Gross, Abraham.
Struggling with tradition : reservations about active martyrdom in the Middle Ages /
by Abraham Gross.
p. cm. — (The Brill reference library ofJudaism, ISSN 1571-5000 ; v. 19)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Contents: Active and passive martyrdom in Mainz 1096 — A halakhic and human
dilemma : the Ashkenazic struggle with its own traditions — The Iberian Peninsula
between 1391-1497.
ISBN 90-04-13853-6
1. Martyrdom—Judaism—History of doctrines—Middle Ages, 600-1500. I. Title.
II. Series.

BM645.M34G76 2004
296'.09'02—dc22
2004049682

ISSN 1571-5000
ISBN 90 04 13853 6

© C o p y r i g h t 2004 b y K o n i n k l i j k e Brill NV, L e i d e n , T h e N e t h e r l a n d s

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without prior written permission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided
that the appropriate fees are paid directly to T h e Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.

PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS

 ‫לנכדי‬
‫שקד ודניאל‬
‫״עטרת זקנים בני בנים ותפארת בנים אבותם״)משלי יז‪:‬ו(‬
 CONTENTS

PREFACE

CHAPTER ONE
Active and Passive Martyrdom in Mainz 1096 1

CHAPTER T W O
A Halakhic and H u m a n Dilemma: T h e Ashkenazic Struggle
with its O w n Tradition 19
Continuity of the Phenomenon and the Development of Traditions—
Halakhic References and Discussions—Conclusion

CHAPTER THREE
T h e Iberian Peninsula between 1391-1497 45
Active Martyrdom in 1391- -Ashkenazic Ideology of Martyrdom in
Sefarad during the 13th- 14th Centuries—Ashkenazic Ideology of
Martyrdom in Sefarad in the Fifteenth Century- Portugal 1493-1497
- The Sources—The Abduction of the Children: Between 1493 and
1497—The "Simple People of Israel" and the ‫״‬Heads of Israel":
Two Roads to Martyrdom in the Mass Forced-Conversion in Lisbon
—Summary

APPENDIX A
T h e Ideology of Active Martyrdom in Antiquity:
T h e Petronius Affair 87

APPENDIX Β
O n Revisionism, Reading Comprehension, and Academic
Aggressiveness: A Response to R a m Ben-Shalom 93

APPENDIX C
Hebrew Sources 101

APPENDIX D

T h e Historical Background of the Scroll of Amrafel 105

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 119

INDEX 129
 PREFACE

The events that unfolded in the Rhine Valley during the spring of
1096 might well be considered the most fertile historiographical ground
for students of medieval Jewish history. The attacks of the advancing
Crusaders on the Jewish communities in that area yielded a type of
an extraordinarily violent response on the part of the Jews which
seems to be unprecedented, at least during the Middle Ages. Some
of the communities performed collective active martyrdom by first
slaughtering their wives and children and then committing suicide.1
Such acts are recorded by Christian chroniclers, but as far as the
sources are concerned, we have here yet another outstanding precedent:
at least three detailed Hebrew chronicles also record the persecutions.
This stands out conspicuously in comparison to the meagre harvest of
historiographical works written by Jews in the Middle Ages. Many of
the studies concerning the events of 1096 have concentrated mainly on
such basic problems as the inter-relationship of these three chronicles
and their relationship to a possible early collection of sources or to an
Urtext.2 Modern scholarship in the last twenty five years questions the
reliability of the chronicles, and by reconstructing their tendentious-
ness prefer to study them as mid 12th century works which reflect
the cultural situation and needs stemming from inter-faith relations
of the communities half a century after the events themselves. Such
an approach is accompanied by a tendency to minimize the scope of
active martyrdom. Some of the martyrological anecdotes are interpreted
not as historical events but rather as literary creations in the context
of the inter-faith polemical atmosphere of two competing religions,
in which the Jews express a message of superiority. Those and other

1
Definition of Active Martyrdom: Normally, matryrdom is defined as the act of
being killed by the persecutor, while the martyr plays the passive role of willingly
accepting death for his religion or belief. Active martyrdom, therefore, includes cases
in which the victim plays an active role in the killing, namely, suicide a n d / o r killing
one's family members a n d / o r co-religionists.
2
No one solution is without its problems. See: A. Gross, "Al Ma'asei Kiddush
ha-Shem be-Magenza bi-Shenat 1096—Piyyutim u-Khroniqot," Yehudim Mut ha-^elav
[Y. Assis et al ed.]. Jerusalem, 2000, 174 η. 18. R. Chazan, "Christian and Jewish
Perceptions of 1096: A Case Study of Trier," Jewish History 13, 1999, 21 n. 5.
historians question the general martyrological thrust of the chronicles,
suggesting that there were more forced-converts to Christianity than
the chroniclers were willing to admit. Still others minimize the physi-
cal dimensions of the destruction, be it in the loss of human life or
property. 5 However, even the most extreme revisionists admit that not
all that is being related concerning the active martyrdom committed
is a later figment of someone's imagination.
Historians who accept in principle the information related in the
chronicles are faced with a vexing dilemma which Abraham Grossman
considers as "possibly the most problematic question." 4 According to
an undisputed Jewish legal ruling, which was formulated in the first
half of the second century A.D., one must choose a martyr's death
when faced with the choice of death or idolatry. 5 Jews considered
Christianity as idolatry, and consequently were bound by that rul-
ing to give their lives rather than convert. This is exemplified by the
classic Jewish martyrs such as Eleazar the Elder and by the seven
brothers, during the Antiochus Epiphanes persecutions (165 B.C.), and
Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Hanina ben Teradion, during the Hadrianic
persecutions (132-135 A.D.). They all died passively at the hands of
the enemy. But in 1096, German Jews died by their own hand. This
stands, it would seem, in contradiction to Jewish law, which demands
of one to die as a martyr for his religion but not to kill. Jewish law
prohibits suicide. Moreover, nowhere in the vast Jewish legal and
non-legal classical literature do we find anything that allows one to
kill his own wife or children. This would seem to amount not to an
act of martyrdom but to murder. 6 Indeed, that is how some shocked
Christians viewed those acts. If this is the case, then one must treat
the rabbinic attempts of the Tosafists in the twelfth century to identify
aggadic material as the sources for their ancestors actions as apolo-
getics. After all, one can also find pious sages among the martyrs.

5
R. Chazan, European Jewry and the First Crusade, Berkeley, 1987, 200. S. Schwartz-
fuchs, "Meqomam shel Mas'ei ha-Zelav be-Divrei Yemei Yisrael," Tarbut ve-Hevrah
be-Toldot Tisrael bi-Yemei ha-Bdnayim: Qovez Ma'amanm le-^jkhro shel H.H. Ben-Sasson,
Jerusalem, 1989, 251-67. A. Grossman, "Shorashav shel Kiddush ha-Shem be-Ash-
kenaz ha-Qedumah," Qedushat ha-Hayyim ve-Herufha-Nefesh: Qovei Ma'amarim le-^ikhro
shel Amir Yequtiel [Y. Gafni and A. Ravitzky ed.], Jerusalem, 1993, 100-5.
4
Grossman, Shorashav, 105.
5
B. Sanhédrin 74a.
6
H. Soloveitchik, "Religious Law and Change: The Ashkenazic Example", AJS
Review 12, 1987, 209.
What is more, this type of martyrdom formed a proud Ashkenazic
martyrological ethos, praised in an unprecedented corpus of liturgy.‫י‬
This persecution and martyrdom poetry was to become a pronounced
genre of liturgy, which lasted for many centuries in the Ashkenazic
cultural sphere that included Eastern Europe.
As we shall see, the Jewish communities in Germany did not invent
this type of martyrdom. It has been suggested that they knew of the
mass suicides in Masada in 73 A.D., that they were aware of aggadic
stories in praise of suicide in order to avoid sin, and that there is even
a halakhic Midrash which could support their suicide. 8 At least one
suicide case of three rabbis is known from tenth century Italy. 9 They
certainly did not deem their acts murderous or in contradiction to
the Halakhah.
However, beyond this question one might wonder how consensual
was the opinion concerning active martyrdom. This was certainly not a
common type of martyrdom transmitted through the major channels of
Jewish law. T h e classical martyrs like Rabbi Akiva and his comrades,
to whom the chronicles liken the 1096 martyrs, died passively at the
hands of the Romans. Throughout the period of active martyrdom
in Ashkenaz, reaching well into the fifteenth century, there are hints
in rabbinic literature that not everyone found active martyrdom
acceptable.
It is this aspect of the problem which our study will investigate,
namely: what can be said about the reservations and opposition to
active martyrdom? This is not merely a halakhically technical prob-
lern. The practice is much more complicated than passive martyrdom
and far more profound because it involves human conflicts. Halakhah
might give it legitimacy but it cannot dictate actions contrary to human
nature. We believe therefore that the history of active martyrdom is
one of conflict between a tradition, which beginning in 1096, formed a
central pillar of the Ashkenazic martyrological ethos, and the constant
re-evaluation and criticism of that same tradition.
In Chapter I we attempt to show through an analysis of the martyr-
dom of the Jewish community in Mainz that the picture, once closely

7
About 20(!) liturgical poems related directly to the 1096 persecutions are
extant.
8
See below Chapter 1.
9
J. Mann, Texts and Studies, Cincinnati, 1931, 24 (Grossman, Shorashav, 109-
examined, is more diverse than hitherto painted by historians. Chap-
ter II surveys and analyzes sources from the 13th- 16th centuries that
reveal an Ashkenazic society which, while keeping alive the practice,
is divided in its stance toward active martyrdom. 1 0 Chapter III turns
to examine active martyrdom in Spain from 1391, but in particular
during the persecutions of the Jews in Portugal during 1497. How did
it come about that some Iberian Jews adopted this type of "Ashke-
nazically" identified martyrdom? Was this practice adopted as a valid
martyrological solution by all?
In Appendix A we analyze the Petronius affair (40 A.D.) during
the Roman rule of Caligula, as related by Philo and Josephus. The
case of mass active martyrdom (in the eyes of the participants, of
course) in Masada which is well-known to us from Josephus, was also
well-known to German Jews from the tenth century book of Tossifon.
In our opinion, it was instrumental in shaping the Ashkenazic mar-
tyrological state of mind. This is not true for the Petronius affair of
which we have no good reason to believe that it had reached medieval
Ashkenazic Jewry. However, chronologically, it preceded the Masada
episode by over thirty years and the ideological seeds of the Masada
active martyrdom may be traced to it.11 Appendix Β is a response
to Ram Ben-Shalom who criticized some of my views included in
Chapter III. It concludes an exchange published in recent issues of
Tarbiz• Appendix C contains the Hebrew original texts discussed in
this book in translation. Megilat Amrafel is an important and unique

1(1
T h e recent most important article by Haym Soloveitchik has reached my
attention after this book was already in production and after pagination (Haym
Soloveitchik, "Halakhah, Hermeneutics, and Martyrdom in Medieval Ashkenaz (Part
I of II)," JQ/f 94, 77-108.) This lengthy article was designed primarily as a response
to critics of the author's earlier article on this subject ("Religious Law and Change:
T h e Medieval Ashkenazic Example," AJS Review 2, 1987, 205-21). O n the whole
I agree to his thesis about the indefensibility of slaughtering children as a halakhi-
cally legitimate act under the heading of Jewish martyrdom and of the crucial role
of 1096 in shaping consequent norms of practice and the Tosafists struggle to make
it halakhically sensible. I managed to insert short references intended mainly to draw
the reader's attention to some points of disagreement.
' 1 Chapter I was initially published as the first part of a Hebrew article entitled:
"Al Ma'asei Kiddush ha-Shem be-Magenza bi-Snat T a T N U , " Yehudim Mul ha-^elav
[Y. T. Assis et al ed.], Jerusalem, 2000, 171-83. Some changes resulting from new
studies were introduced. Part of Chapter III was published under the title: "Al ha-
Tismonet ha‫־‬Ashkenazit shel Kiddush ha-Shem be-Portugal bi-Shnat 1497," Tarbiz
64, 1995, 83-114. I thank the Magnes Press and Tarbiz for allowing me to publish
the English translations of the above-mentioned articles.
martyrological text which contains actual advice for potential martyrs
and a mystical sermon on the last chapter of Song of Songs. T h e last
appendix is comprised of an analysis of its historical background and
a full translation of it.
I want to express my gratitude to Professor Mayer Gruber and to
Professor Jacob Neusner who took personal interest in this monograph.
The editing skills of my dear friend, Mrs. Sarah Fine, are traceable
throughout this book. The Research and Publication Committee of the
Faculty of Humanities and Social Studies in the Ben-Gurion University
of the Negev generously supported this publication.

Lehavim
Marheshvan 5764—November 2003
 CHAPTER ONE

A C T I V E A N D PASSIVE M A R T Y R D O M IN M A I N Z 1096

As a short introductory note it is necessary to state that our basic

assumption is that many of the events depicted in the Hebrew chronicles
go back to an earlier Urtext a n d / o r a body of sources—such as written
reports sent to other communities—and contain a significant kernel
of historical truth. This is grounded in a detailed textual analysis,
and we have no doubt that anyone who allots the proper time and
effort for a painstaking examination of the texts will reach the same
conclusion. 1 It is true that each individual episode needs separate
attention and we do agree that certain anecdotes present difficulties
which can best be solved by turning to metaphoric‫"־‬anthropological"
approaches. Yet when we come to the specific subject matter of this
study, the similarity to the point of identity between the different
versions proves that the later editor(s) did not tamper with the texts.
We deal with the main event of martyrdom in Mainz, which should
be handled differently than the anecdotes of individual martyrs.-'
The event under scrutiny is the most central and most important
one as far as the phenomenon of active martyrdom in 1096 is con-
cerned. The chronicles describe in great detail the stages that led to
it, and add many individual anecdotes of martyrdom without sparing
gory, sometimes appalling, details. There is no doubt this, more than
any other tragic-heroic event which took place during the spring and
summer of that year in the Rhine Valley, left its tremendous impres-
sion on Ashkenazic Jewry.
Although Y. Baer has already divided and arranged the logical order
of events, we find that an additional analysis, placing the emphasis on
the development and crystallization of the collective decision in favor
of active martyrdom, is in order.

1
This, of course, has no bearing on the question of the inter-relations among
the three chronicles themselves.
2
We should add that, in our opinion, most of those are historically based, and
should not be treated lightly as imaginary events from which the modern historian
can glean only c ultural ideas expressed through images and language. This does not
dismiss out of hand the possibility of later embellishment and distortions, and even
completely fabricated anecdotes by later authors.
 T h e event, which took place in the palace of the Bishop, is the cen-
terpiece in the chronicle attributed to Rabbi Solomon bar Samson and
in the chronicle commonly known as the "Mainz Anonymous.' 5/‫ י‬The
narrative, related partially in the first person, is being told by a member
o f t h a t community. 4 We must add, however, that the description uses
the first person only in the initial phases of the negotiations, before
the fighting in the palace broke out, 5 but from this point on the third
person is used. It would seem that the original narrator—a member
of the community who was with them before the fighting—was not
present during the last stages which he describes. This is supported
by his comment about his sources. He tells his audience that he relies
on the testimony of forced converts [anusim], who remained in the
palace to the end. ()
The date was the 3 rd day of Sivan when the Jewish defenses, headed
by Qalonimos ben Meshulam, the Parnas, caved in and Count Emi-
cho's forces broke in through the inner gate. Now the chronicles tell
us what took place during those critical hours-moments among the
besieged Jews. 7
A simple literary division of the description shows the evolutionary
nature of the event. Here is the narrative in Chronicle A, which is the
most complete of the extant versions:

A. When the children of the sacred covenant saw that the decree had
been enacted and that the enemy had overcome them, they entered
the courtyard and all cried out together—elders, young men and
young women, children, manservants and maidservants—to their
Father in heaven. They wept for themselves and their lives. They
accepted upon themselves the judgement of Heaven. They said to
one another: "Let us be strong and suffer the yoke of the sacred
awe. For the moment the enemy will kill us, but the easiest of the
four deaths is by sword. We shall, however, remain alive; our souls
will be in paradise, in the radiance of the great light forever."

!
Henceforth: Chronicles A and B.
4
This has been noted by Baer, Gezerat T a T N U , 133-4.
1
Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 26, 28-9
'‫ י‬Ibid., 43. Another possibility is that the final editor had another source for the
palace scenes.
7
Chazan quotes this passage, which leads to the martyrological scenes in the
palace's rooms, but remarks only that, "such descriptions abound throughout the
chronicle" (R. Chazan, "The Hebrew First Crusade Chronicles: Further Reflections,"
AJS Review 3, 1978, 94).
 B. They said unreservedly, and willingly: "Ultimately, one must not
question the ways of the Holy One, blessed be He and blessed be
His Name, who gave us the Torah and the commandment to put to
death and to kill ourselves for the unity of His holy Name. Blessed
are we if we do His will. Blessed are all those who are killed and
slaughtered and die for the unity of His Name. They are destined
for the world to come and shall sit in the circle of the righteous,
Rabbi Akiva and his associates, "the pillars of the universe," who
were killed for His Name. What is more, a world of darkness will
be exchanged for a world of light, a world of pain for a world of
happiness, a transitory world for a world that is eternal and ever-
lasting."
C. Then they all cried out loudly, saying in unison: "Now let us tarry
no longer, for the enemy has already come upon us. Let us go
quickly and sacrifice ourselves before the Lord. Anyone who has
a knife should inspect it, that it not be defective. Then he should
come and slaughter us for the unification of the unique [God] who
lives forever. Subsequently he should cut his throat or should thrust
the knife into his belly."
D. The enemy, immediately upon entering the courtyard, found there
some of the perfectly pious with Rabbi Isaac ben R. Moses the
dialectician. He stretched out his neck and they cut off his head
immediately. 8 They [the pious] had clothed themselves in their
fringed prayer shawls and had seated themselves in the midst of the
courtyard in order to do speedily the will of their Creator. They did
not wish to flee to the chambers in order to go on living however
briefly. Rather, with love, they accepted upon themselves the judg-
ment of Heaven. The enemy rained stones and arrows upon them,
but they did not deign to flee. They struck down all those whom
they found there, with blows of sword, death and destruction.
E. In those chambers, when they saw this behavior on the part of those
saintly ones and that the enemy had come upon them, all cried
out; "There is nothing better than to offer ourselves as a sacrifice."
Women girded themselves with strength and slaughtered their sons
and daughters, along with themselves. Many men likewise gathered
strength and slaughtered their wives and their children and their
little ones. The tenderest and daintiest slaughtered [...]. 9

8
This sentence is out of place and belongs at the end of this paragraph. About this
rabbi and his wife, see: Germania Judaica [M. Bran ed.],I, Tübingen 1963, p. 194.
9
Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 31. Chazan, European Jewry, 253-4. The division into
paragraphs is ours. For minor variations between Chronicles A and C, see: Gross,
"Al Ma'asei Kiddush ha-Shcm be-Magenza bi-Shnat T a T N U : Piyyutim u-Khro-
We have here a highly dramatic and emotionally charged scene, which
is extremely significant because it tells us about the fateful decision-
making process of the Mainz community to commit collective active
martyrdom. I would go even as far as suggesting that, for the historian
who attempts to understand the thinking and mental state of that
community of besieged Jews, this is the most important passage in the
chronicles. O n e might choose to question the historical authenticity
of other stories about what happened in the chambers of the palace,
which can be classified as specific "acts of martyrs." But this scene,
being communal and public, remains, in our opinion, much more real
and authentic. 111 Now we must try to decipher the true significance
of the text, which is not without its complications.
First there is a description of several stages as indicated by our divi-
sion. In the first stage, we read about the collective lament of people
overpowered by external circumstances. As can be expected, they are
shaken and struck by profound sorrow and despair over their lives
which they are about to lose as a violent death approaches. Yet, they
express sincere theodicy, accept their cruel fate and resolve to face it
bravely: "Let us be strong and suffer the yoke of the sacred awe. For
the moment the enemy will kill us, but the easiest of the four deaths
is by sword. We will, however, remain alive; our souls will be in
paradise, in the radiance of the great light forever." The loss of one's
temporary, short life cannot be compared with the expected reward
in the eternal and divine "great light" of God in Paradise. As to the
suffering, they strengthen and encourage themselves, saying that death
by the enemies' sword is the fastest and therefore the least painful.
At this point there is nothing yet about active martyrdom. Only
later, in the second phase, still in the presence of all the members, we
read about a decision to hasten their death by collective suicide: "They
said unreservedly, and willingly: 'Ultimately, one must not question
the ways of the Holy One, blessed be He and blessed be His Name,
who gave us the Torah and the commandment to put to death and
to kill ourselves for the unity of His holy Name. Blessed are we if we

niqot," Yehudim Mul ha-^lav [Y. Assis et al ed.], Jerusalem, 2000, 173-4. For the use
of midrashic material of the chronicler in order to join the fate of these martyrs with
that of the classical ones, such as R. Akiva, see: M. Fishbane, The Kiss of God, Seatde
and London, 1994, pp. 72-74.
1(1
See now a systematic attempt to classify the reliability of various parts in the
chronicles by: D. Malkiel, "Vestiges of Conflict in the Hebrew Crusade Chronicles,"
Journal of Jewish Studies 53, 2001,"323-40.
do His will. Blessed are all those who are killed and slaughtered and
die for the unity of His Name'." 1 1 It is clear to them that this is God , s
will and commandment, and that this is the right place and situation
for them to carry it out. We note that the option of converting does
not seem to be the issue here at all, since they have already decided
to die by the enemies' sword, and have no doubt that they will go
through with this decision. This element does exist in the background,
but unlike the martyrological anecdotes which follow, here there is
no clear expression of it. 12 Their main concern now is to save them-
selves from death at the hand of the Gentiles. This is supported by
the Christian chronicler, Albert of Aachen, who describes the Jewish
response in Mainz:
The Jews, seeing that their Christian enemies were attacking them and
their children and were sparing no age, fell upon one another—broth-
ers, children, wives mothers and sisters— and slaughtered one another.
Horrible to say, mothers cut the throats of nursing children with knives
and stabbed others, preferring to perish thus by their own hands rather
than be killed by the weapons of the uncircumcised. 15

Now if it is true that they conceived of such acts as God's "command-

ment", then we must try to find a source for it. Anyone who has dealt
with this issue knows that there is nothing in Jewish classical Halakhah
which allows, let alone advocates the killing of one's own children as
a martyrological act. It is true that the author of our report used by
Chronicles A and B, knew the historiographical book of Yossifon, as

11
As to the awkward Hebrew expression used here for suicide, we go along with
Chazan , s translation. (See Gross, Al Ma'asei, 175 n. 21).
12
This element does exist, but only implicitly: "Then he should come and slaughter
us for the unification of the unique [God] who lives forever." Contrary to the collec-
tion of martyrological anecdotes to follow in the chronicle, in the description of this
main communal gathering there are no explicit expressions of slaughtering in order
to prevent conversion. In the beginning of the narrative on the events in Mainz,
where the days of fear and anxiety prior to the attack are described, we read that
their fear was to "die at the hands of God's enemies" (Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 28).
This seems to have been the initial and main aim of the Crusaders, as claimed by
Malkiel: Vestiges, 329-31. Idem, "Mekhir ha-Emunali be-TaTNU," Isadore Twersky
Memorial Volume (forthcoming). The first instance of this, is mentioned is by the martyrs
in the chambers: "Behold and see, our God, what we do for the sanctification of
Your holy Name, rather than deny You for a crucified one [...]" (Haberman, Sefer
Gezerot, 34. Chazan, European Jewry, 255).
13
Chazan, European Jewry, 70.
 evidenced by the use of unique expressions from that book, 14 where
we read about the collective suicides in Gamla and Masada, which
included women and children. 1 5 But although we know now that
the Jews in Germany had the highest regard for Tossifon, which they
considered a holy book and one that could serve as a model for actual
behavior, the question remains: how did the Jews of Mainz know
that it was God's "commandment"? It would seem that the biblical
account of King Saul on the Mount of Gilboa—which is mentioned
by post-1096 halakhists who attempted to explain the martyrdoms of
that year—was the most important source for those martyrs.
In order to understand it properly we should examine the relevant
verse in I Samuel 31,4: "Then said Saul to his armor bearer: Draw
your sword and thrust me through therewith; lest these uncircumcised
come and thrust me through and abuse me." I do not consider it far-
fetched that the Christian source, which reported to Albert about the
Jews' wish not to die at the hands of the "uncircumcised," received
the explanation for the collective self-slaughtering from Jews who had
been present at the palace but who had survived converting. 16
Moreover, later Christian sources, from the thirteenth and four-
teenth centuries, also use the term "uncircumcised" to designate the
Christian side, when they report that the Jews chose death at their own
hands, "when they saw that they could not escape the hands of the

14
Y. Baer "Sefer Yossifon ha-Ivri," [J. Gutmann and M. Schwabe ed.], Sefer
Dinaburg, Jerusalem, 1949, 192, 202. T h e expression "the great light" [ha-or ha-gadot\,
unique to Tossifon, appears in the chronicles in the following locations: Haberman,
Sefer Gezerot, 37, 97 (twice), 100. O n the possible source of the expression, see: Baer,
ibid., 192 η. 19.
15
See also, Grossman, Sh Ū rashav, 116-9. Idem, "Bein 1012 le-1096," 67-70.
1(1
It is self-evident that we cannot agree with I. Marcus 5 evaluation that, "Although
Albert correcdy sensed that Jewish mothers preferred to kill their own children 'rather
than be killed by the weapons of the uncircumcised,' he did not fully understand
the meaning of the Jewish reactions to the attacks." ("From Politics to Martyrdom:
Shifting Paradigms in the Hebrew Narratives of the 1096 Crusade Riots," Prooftexts 2,
1982, p. 41.) See also; M. Minti, "Kiddush ha-Shem be‫־‬Einei Nozrim be-Germania
bi-Yemei ha‫־‬Beinayyim," Zion 59, 1994, 223. Albert of Aachen did not have to sense
or guess why mothers killed their children. He had his sources. T h e consideration
of avoiding conversion did play a role, but is more conspicuous in the narratives of
active martyrdom (e.g. the Rachel anecdote)- a literary appendix permeated with
symbols and metaphors—which is entirely different from the text we focus on. We
also cannot go along with Marcus' generalization that the martyrdoms constituted
a daring and novel practice in that period, and that their justification is the major
uncircumcised." 1 ' Even if it is not entirely clear that the chroniclers
meant to suggest that the Jews did it in order to avoid torture and
death at the hands of the Christians, the association is to the biblical
story of King Saul.1!i
T o be sure, circumstances varied. In circumstances where battle
was a factor, as was the case in Mainz, the fear of death by the enemy
was the central factor. Such was the situation in York in 1 190, when
the mob was on the verge of breaking into the castle where the Jews
found shelter. In other cases, such as later libels, when the Jews decided,
for example, to die by fire, it was less out of a fear of being killed by
the Christians than having their children abducted or converted to
Christianity.
T h e York martyrdom is of particular interest to us now that we
understand what took place in Mainz. The most important historical
source for York is the chronicle of William of Newbury, who was on
hand when the event took place, and claims that his sources are Jewish
forced-converts. Here he tells us about the exhortation to martyrdom
by the Rabbi of the community:
Now there was there a certain old man, a most famous Doctor of the
Law [...] who, it is said, had come from beyond the sea to teach the

reason for the composition of the chronicles ("the narrators who chronicled their
actions had, by use of archetypal imagery, to justify the martyrs." Ibid., 41, 45.) The
simplicity with which it is written: "gave us the Torah and the commandment to
put to death and to kill ourselves for the unity of His holy Name" negates such an
explanation altogether. Moreover, one of the main foundations of Marcus' method
is that any detail which did not fit into the pre-conceived religio-literary scheme
was omitted (Ibid., 42), is contradicted by the fact that forced-conversions are not
concealed, by and large. If there is an apology to be found in the acts of the Mainz
martyrs, it is not for their active martyrdom but for the reason that drove them to
it. While in the narrative of the assembly in the Bishop's courtyard the reason is to
avoid torture and death at the hand of the enemy, we find a change in the individual
anecdotes—a separate literary unit after a poetic lament of the chronicler (Haber-
man, Sefer Gezerot, 31 -3). The emphasis there is on slaughtering and suicide in order
to avoid conversion, a higher motivation from a religious perspective than the fear
of corporeal torture and death by the enemy.
17
Minti, Kiddush ha-Shem, 223-4.
IH
The Latin source, cited by Minti, says: "ne traderentur manibus incircumci-
sorum." The case brought in front of Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg by a person who
slaughtered his wife and four sons reads: "He did so because they (i.e. wife and
children) had asked him when they had seen that the wrath had poured forth from
before God and the enemies started to kill the sons of the living God" (Sec, below,
chapter 2). There is no mention here of the conversion option. They wanted to avoid
being killed by the enemies.
 English Jews. He was honored by all and was obeyed by all as if he
had been one of the prophets. When, therefore, he was asked his advice
on that occasion, he replied: "God [...] orders us to die now for the
Law. And behold our death is at the door, unless, perchance, which
God forbid, you think of deserting the sacred Law for this brief space
of life, and choose a fate harsher than any death [...] namely, to live
as apostates in the deepest dishonor at the mercy of impious enemies
[...] we ought to select the easiest and most honorable form of death.
For if we fall into the hands of the enemy we shall die at their will
and amidst their jeers. [...] For many of our people in different times
of tribulation are known to have done the same, preferring a form of
choice most honorable to us."

Joseph Jacobs, who edited the English version of William's account,

is convinced that the contents of the sermon are fictitious, being
a figment of the churchman's imagination and literarily based on
Eleazar ben Yair's speech at Masada, which was well-known to him
from Josephus' account. 19 The rabbi, who allegedly gave this sermon,
was Rabbi Yom-Tov of Joigny, a Tossafist, who came from France
to York to serve as the Rabbi of the community. The motifs and the
expressions here are basically identical to what we have in the chronicle
about the Mainz affair in 1096. I believe that the Rabbi's sermon is
generally authentic and must be traced to the Mainz description we
analyzed above. 20
From later Jewish sources let us quote two. The first is a liturgi-
cal poem referring to the events in 1298, known as the "Rindfleisch
Persecutions." T h e poet who surveys the communities which were
destroyed, writes about the slaughter of the children by their mothers
in the attempt to save them from falling in cruel hands: "[...] and let
the uncircumcised not abuse me by every type of violent death [mitah
meshunah\rix
The second source is Joseph Hacohen who writes about the "Lepers
Persecutions" in 1321:

1 1
' Jacobs, The Jews, 126.
20
For a more detailed discussion, see the appendix in: A. Gross, "Hirhurim al
Hebetim Hilkhatiyim ve-lo Hilkhatiyim shel Kiddush ha-Shem bi-Shnat T a T N U , "
/. Twersfa Memorial Volume, Cambridge, Mass. (forthcoming). In the discussion of
fifteenth century Spain below, I show what could be a direct influence of the same
chronicle on mid 14lh c. cases of self-inflicted death by fire, committed by forced-
converts who were moved by a profound sense of anxiety and guilt.
21
S. Bernfeld, Sefer ha-Dema'ot II, Berlin, 1924, 57.
 It is also told that they seized forty Jews and put them in jail. And when
the Jews understood their situation, they chose from amongst them two
who volunteered to slaughter their brethren, so that the uncircumcised
would not abuse them. 2 ‫־‬

Let us now return to the halakhic p r o b l e m . T h e r e is a well-known

halakhic Midrash on Genesis 9:5, which teaches that in cases such as
K i n g Saul's one m a y c o m m i t suicide: "'But [ve-Akh] your blood of
your lives will I require' (Gen. 9:5). This includes one w h o strangles
himself. You might think that even one in the plight of Saul is m e a n t :
therefore we have 'But' [ΛΑΛ].23 In other words, the " B u t " was a d d e d
to teach us that that the T o r a h allows suicide in certain cases.
T h e r e are several Ashkenazic sources, which refer to this M i d r a s h
in the context of Kiddush ha-Shem, a n d some of t h e m discuss it. O n e
such discussion is in R a b b i A b r a h a m ben Azriel's Arugat ha-Bosem,
f r o m the beginning of the thirteenth century:

Thaddeus of Rome has expounded: "What (reason) did Hananiah,

Mishael, and Azariah see, that they delivered themselves [masru nafsham]
into the fiery furnace, for the Sanctification of the Name? They have
deduced it from the frogs (in Egypt) etc." And Rabenu Isaac of Dam-
piers brought up a difficult question against Rashi, who interprets, "what
did Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah see not to apply the principle of
'and you shall live by them' [ve-hai ba-hem]? And he (Rabbi Isaac) said:
Their act is understandable since it was in public [farhesia], in which case
it has been unanimously concluded in Sanhédrin (74a) that one must
sacrifice his life even for a minor commandment. Rabbi Ephraim of
Lunel expounded (differently): What did they see to give their lives and
die such a painful death? They could have killed themselves when they
heard about the decree, and such an act (of suicide is not punishable,
as it has been expounded [...]: "You might think that even one in the
plight of Saul is meant: therefore we have 'But'." 24

22
R. Joseph ha-Kohen, Emeq ha-Bakha, Cracow, 1895, 78. For additional examples
from Prague in 1389 and Vienna in 1421, see: Bernfeld, Sefer ha-Dema'ot II, 161, 168.
About the first event, see: Joseph Hakohen, Sefer Divrei ha-Tamim le-Malkhei £a1fat u-Beit
Otoman ha-Togar, Lemberg, 1859, 28b. O n the second, see: Shevet Yehudah [A. Shohat
cd.], Jerusalem, 1947, 92, and the editor's note, 193.
23
It is a principle of halakhic exegesis that the word AkJi is a limiting particle.
Bereshit Rabbah 34, 13 (Theodor-Albeck edition, 324. Soncino English translation,
London, 1961, 278-9.). See: Grossman, Shorashav, 113. Chazan, in his discussion
of the possible sources for the 1096 martyrdoms, treats this source as "aggadic"
{European Jewry, 155).
24
R. Abraham bar Azricl, Arugat ha-Bosem I, [E.E. Urbach ed.], Jerusalem, 1939,
222.
Although this Midrash only mentions suicide, Ashkenazic logic extended
it to include the slaughter of children. And if one is permitted to kill
his children to spare them death at the hands of the enemies, how
much more so is it allowed in order to prevent the death and eternal
damnation of the soul through conversion to a life in Christianity.
This process of extension from suicide to slaughter can be found in a
commentary by the Tosafists on the same verse in Genesis: "Because
in time of religious persecution [bi-she'at ha-shemad] one may surren-
der his life and kill himself. And those who slaughter a child [tinoq]
in times of religious persecutions bring their proof from here." 2 ' In a
society for which eternal life was so central a concern, and for which
Christianity was a sure ticket to Hell, one cannot question the logic
of that horrible act which in fact reflected feelings of love towards
the children. The parents felt it was their responsibility to save their
children from death by the sword of the "uncircumcised" as well as
from their deadly religion.21'
We suggest then that this was not a new form of post-1096 reasoning,
but that such arguments were already being heard during the events
of that year. As for Mainz, we must remember that the Jews there
were not the first to be attacked and during the few weeks until their
turn arrived, all possibilities were entertained. 27 They, and at least

25
Rabotenu Ba'alei ha-Tosafot al Hamishah Humshei Torah, Warsaw, 1876, 30. For
a full citation and discussion of this source see below, chapter 2.). H. Soloveitchik
refers to this source but does not discuss the midrash. ("Religious Law and Change:
The Medieval Ashkenazic Example," 4 7 ^ Review 2, 1987, p. 210 n. 8.) See also R.
Yom-Tov Isbili's discussion, in our chapter on Spain, below, chapter 3.
26
"If the afterlife is a fact, martyrdom is a bargain [...] A swift stroke of the sword
was perhaps seen as the greatest kindness that a parent could bestow upon a child"
(Soloveitchic, Halakhah, 105-6). Soloveitchic rests his case in rejecting the Midrash
on Saul's suicide as a valid halakhic source that would serve the basis for allowing
suicide on the totally different circumstances in 11111 century Germany where a forced
religious conversion was at stake. This, as he points out correcdy, was not the case
at all in the biblical story. The Philistines were not going to force him (or Samson)
to worship Dagon (ibid., 97). This is the reason for his insistence on the conversion
factor as the driving force behind parents' decision to kill their children. However,
as I tried to show, one cannot ignore the factor of abusive death by the hands of
the enemy, paralleling Saul's fears. In fact, even in the specific case brought before
Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg and analyzed by Soloveitchic (ibid., 99-101), this is the
expressed reason for the slaughter. This is why the case of Saul is quite relevant to
the issue at hand. T h e leap from avoiding death by the hand of the enemy to avoid-
ing conversion is not difficult to understand. In fact, Soloveitchic himself outlined
brilliantly this logic at length (ibid., 104-6).
27
The first attack on Speyer took place on the 8 l h of lyyar. O n the 10'1' the Jews of
the more knowledgeable among them, were aware of the halakhic
problematics of active martyrdom. Yet, it was only human that the
final decisions on how to act were taken in the last moments when
time had started to run out. 2 8
Normally, the Christians in chronicle A are called either oivim
(enemy) or to'im (peúgrìni).2‫ יי‬T h e r e are several incidents where the
term arelim (uncircumcised) is mentioned, and they allude to the bibli-
cal story of King Saul's death. 3 0 O n another occasion, the act itself
points to this source. It is told about the death of Rabbi Qalonimos
the Parnas, the commander of the Jewish fighting force that, accord-
ing to one rumor, "took his sword, stuck it in the ground and fell on
it stabbing himself in the stomach." According to the chronicler, he
chose for himself an honorable hero's death, emulating Saul. 31
In addition to the midrash, there might have been yet another source
which served as an inspiration for a suicide à-la-King Saul. We find
that in Tossifon, when the soldiers, hiding in the cave, try to convince
Josephus, their commander, to commit suicide together with them,

Worms who remained in their houses were attacked, and the rest, who found refuge at
the Bishop's courtyard, were attacked again on the 25 th (See: Baer, Gezerat T a T N U ,
131). There we find also scenes of active martyrdom, although the reports on this
community are relatively scanty. In Worms too, they had one-week pause between
attacks, in which they must have prepared themselves for the proper response. The
Mainz martyrdom was, as aforesaid, on the 3 rd of Swan.
28
See: D. Berger, "Heqer Rabanut Ashkenaz ha-Qedumah," Tarbiz 53, 1984,
484 n. 6. Berger refers to the midrash, which allows suicide under conditions similar
to King Saul's, and its extention to the killing of others in a responsum of Rabbi Meir
of Rothenburg (Teshuvot, Pesaqim u-Minhagim [Y.Z. Kahana ed.], Jerusalem, 1960, 54.
See below, chapter 2), and in the Tosafists commentary on Gen. 9:5. Berger believes
that "those people did not wrestle with the halakhic distinction between suicide and
slaughtering others, and, consequently, did not have a need to broaden the application
of the talmudic midrash." Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg's own understanding is a novelty
that his predecessors did not think of, but they did know the midrash. We have no
doubt that the obvious gap between suicide and murder did not escape them, but
their religious logic created the necessary bridge over this gap.
29
See; Chazan, European Jewry, 78.
30
See: Gross, Al Ma'asei, "!80. '
31
O u r attempt to show that the death scene of King Saul was fixed in the con-
sciousness of the 1096 martyrs fits in well with H.H. Ben-Sasson's emphasis on the
holy war motif in the 1096 martyrs' stories (including, of course, the martyrdom
of Qalonimos (H.H. Ben-Sasson, "Li-Megamot ha-Khronografiah ha-Yehudit shel
Yemei ha-Beinayyim," HistoHonim ve-Askolot Histonyot, Jerusalem, 1963, 43-5). Ben-
Sasson talks about the narrators perspective, but we are of the opinion that there is
no significant gap between the atmosphere prevalent in the martyrs circles and that
reflected in most of the stories in the chronicles.
t h e y b r i n g p r o o f s f r o m t h e B i b l e . A m o n g t h o s e , t h e y a d d u c e t h e fol-
lowing:

A n d w h a t of o u r king Saul a n d his son, J o n a t h a n , w h o fought for G o d ' s

p e o p l e a n d died for G o d ? Surely Saul could h a v e fled a n d lived, b u t
r a t h e r he despised life a n d chose d e a t h over it, w h e n he saw that his
p e o p l e w e r e b e i n g r o u t e d in battle a n d did not w a n t to be s e p a r a t e d
f r o m his b r e t h r e n , t o g e t h e r with his son, J o n a t h a n , the beloved a n d
the pleasant.

R i g h t a f t e r this t h e y r e m i n d J o s e p h u s :

A n d w h e r e is the holy T o r a h , w h i c h is c o n c e a l e d in y o u r h e a r t ? You, a

priest a n d a n o i n t e d o n e , w h o t a u g h t us the T o r a h , h o w could we love
o u r G o d with all o u r h e a r t a n d all o u r soul, if we are not willing to die
for his c o v e n a n t a l o n g with his servants w h o told us are killed for H i m ?
W a s not it not you w h o m a n y a time that a n y o n e w h o dies in battle
for G o d , his people, a n d his T o r a h will b e l o n g to G o d , that he will go
to the great light, a n d thus avoid the darkness? 5 2

N o w w e c a n b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d t h e significance of Biblical expressions

f r o m the d e a t h of Saul a n d f r o m the eulogy D a v i d p r o n o u n c e d over
h i m in t h e l i t u r g i c a l p o e t r y a s t h e y a r e u s e d in t h e w a k e o f t h e 1 0 9 6
persecutions a n d active m a r t y r d o m . 5 5 But m o r e importantly, w e are

‫ ־י‬Sefer Yossifon [D. Flusser ed.], Jerusalem, 1981, 312. Baer conjectured that the
author of Yossifon knew of the Midrash Rabbah on King Saul's suicide (Baer, Sefer Yossifon,
198). As we have noted above, this particular expression of the great light is unique to
Yossifon, and is used by the chronicles, in general—as already shown by Baer—and
in the passage describing the Mainz communal martyrdom. (Baer and Grossman
believe that Yossifon had an influence on the martyrs of 1096. (Baer, ibid.. Grossman,
Shorashav, 116-9) Soloveitchik, who mainly discusses the Tosafist's attitudes to this
phenomenon, ignores it completely. Ghazan mentions the Masada story in Yossifon,
but does not attribute to it any influence on the martyrs' acts. In his opinion one can
speak only about a literary influence on the chronicles (Chazan, European Jewry, 327
n. 33). Elsewhere, however, he agrees that, "it seems to me simplest to suggest that
the potent symbols in question did in fact circulate within the ranks of the martyrs
themselves." (Ibid., 116). In light of this statement it is difficult to understand why
he shies away from the self-evident conclusion, arrived by Baer and Grossman, that
Yossifon did in fact play a role in forming the martyrological behavior. O n e should
note also that in the Yossifon version of Eleazar's speech 111 Masada, we find: "And
we shall die courageously for God and not be arrested with chains and iron instru-
mcnts like slaves at the hands of the uncircumcised' (Yossifon, 429-30). Also the motifs
of the slaughter as a sacrifice and of this life in comparison to the eternal life after
death can be found there.
33
See: Gross, Al Ma'asei, 181.
in a position to understand the prayer of Av ha-Rahamim, which was
composed in memory of the victims-saints of the First Crusade. We
read the expression, which can be found in the chronicles and in the
liturgical poetry: "The beloved and the pleasant in their lives, even in
their death they were not divided." 34 This is, of course, a quotation
from David's eulogy. Even more significant, we continue to read in
the prayer: "They were swifter than eagles. They were stronger than
lions." This is also a quotation from David's eulogy over King Saul
and Jonathan, his son, who are mentioned in the beginning of the
verse in 2 Samuel 1:23. While one can certainly not learn from each
and every biblical allusion to King Saul's death scene—especially
when dealing with liturgical material—that they intended to hint at
the halakhic source which guided the acts of the martyrs, we are
allowed to conclude from all these references that they were conscious
of Saul's case, and that it served as a positive precedent.
But when the rabbis in the Rhineland, who composed the prayer
of Av ha-Rahamim, use the expression, "They were swifter than eagles.
They were stronger than lions," they clarify their intention quite explic-
itly: "to fulfill (literally: to do) the will of their Creator and the wish of their
Rock" namely, to carry out the cruel act of active martyrdom. The
emulation of the King Saul story was certainly in the minds of the
rabbis who composed this prayer. In this framework of a composed
prayer (unlike liturgical poetry), we believe that one must approach
each word and citation with great care, assuming that they have been
chosen carefully and not by casual association.
In order to complete the halakhic aspects of the Mainz collective
martyrdom let us return now to the courtyard of the palace. T h e
style of the chronicles succeeds in authentically transmitting to the
reader the tense atmosphere in the courtyard, which in turn resulted
in the decision on a more or less uniform response. This is described
as a behavior bordering on group hysteria: "Then they all cried out
loudly, saying in unison: "Now let us tarry no longer, for the enemy
has already come upon us. Let us go quickly and sacrifice ourselves
before the Lord. Anyone who has a knife should inspect it, that it not
be defective. Then he should come and slaughter us [...]."

‫״‬
See: Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 29. Seder Qinot le-Tish'ah be-Av left Minhag Polin
[D. Goldscmidt ed.j, Jerusalem, 1977, 95 line 43 (It appears in connection with the
Mainz martyrdom). Alahzor le-Tamim Nora'im [I). Goldscmidt ed.), Jerusalem, 1970,
674 line 17.
 Under such circumstances individual voices could not be heard.
Everybody, or so it seemed, cried out loudly in order to encourage and
be encouraged, on the way to the operative phase of the decision. The
direct result of the enthusiastic call for self-slaughter will come in the
fifth paragraph, where the slaughter in the chambers is described.
But between these two paragraphs the forth—the scene of the pas-
sive death of a group in the courtyard intercedes. What do we know
about that group? We are told that several people, among them Rabbi
Isaac bar Moses, wrapped in their prayer shawls awaited their death
by the swords of the enemy. In truth, they acted in accordance with
the original decision in paragraph two. The chronicler explains that
they had decided not to escape into the chambers in order to gain
a few more minutes of life. This we cannot accept! Halakhically one
must cling to life for as long as possible and hope to one's last breath
for Heaven's mercy, "even when a sharp sword is pointed at his neck."
It is true that we can find in the chronicles cases of yearning for mar-
tyrdom which overrides all other considerations. Yet, it is hardly likely
that this was Rabbi Isaac bar Moses' major concern. Furthermore, the
responsibility of a leader is with his community, especially in time of
crisis, and Jewish history, both medieval and modern, is replete with
examples concerning the proper course of action rabbis took under
similar circumstances. Moreover, the rest of the community—which
sacrificed their dear ones in a shocking manner—are depicted as
people who ran away in order to gain some insignificant amount of
time, and are said to be on a lower religious level than the passive
group. Finally, it goes against the narrator's description of the entire
community, as taking the brave decision to sanctify the Name in the
manner of offering sacrifices, as the climax of the heroic event. 5 ' In

,
'‫ י‬One might think of another possibility that Rabbi Isaac meant to slow down
the enemy in order to enable the rest of the community to prepare for the slaughter.
However, there is no hint of such an idea in the chronicle, although it would be a
positive and suitable act as far as the development of narrative. As to the checking
of the knives, mentioned in the earlier phase, we can find for this act a source in
the Midrash on the binding of Isaac story: "'And he took the ram etc.' It is there
that God promised him that whenever his descendents sacrificed burnt-offerings He
would accept them immediately. The sages said: If Abraham did not defer (his act
of slaughtering) in order to check the knife, Isaac would have been sacrificed. But
he did postpone it to check the knife, and immediately the compassion of the Holy
O n e blessed be He on Isaac arose [...]. And how do we know that he checked the
knife? It is written, 'And he took the knife,' and the sum of the letters is twelve like
the number of examinations of a slaughtering knife [···]" (Tanhuma 96:13).
order to understand fully the thinking of this group we should intro-
duce one more fragment into our puzzle. As mentioned above, the
story of the Mainz affair is not presented in chronological order, so
much so that Baer suggests the Urtext version of the Mainz account
was torn to pieces and reconstructed with much chronological distor-
tion. In a later section, devoted to individual martyrs, we again find
reference to this group:
It was then that Rabenu Isaac bar R. Moses and the rest of the rabbis
and notables with him sat in the courtyard of the bishop weeping, with
their necks outstretched, saying: When will the ruffians come so that we
may accept the sentence of Heaven [...]. 36

What we learn from this addition is that together with R. Isaac there
were "the rest of the rabbis and notables." This clarifies the picture
for us. This was the elite group of spiritual leadership in Mainz that
did not go up to the chambers. Rejecting the chroniclers' explanation
for their passivity, we believe that this act represents a martyrological
ideology. We have here a halakhic stand concerning the central issue:
performance of active martyrdom, which was decided upon and was
going to be implemented by the community. This was not the ideal
solution for the religious challenge they were faced with. We do not
mean to claim on the one hand that the rabbis opposed it, and on
the other we certainly cannot argue for a unified stand and ideol-
ogy of the Ashkenazic religious leadership in all the communities. It
seems that in Mainz they did not protest, nor did they suggest that it
was a sinful act. Yet it was not the ideal. Between the two extremes
of opposing it and elevating it to a level as the supreme act of mar-
tyrdom, surpassed by no other, there was a scholarly position which

M
' Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 33. T h e story that preceded our passage on Rabenu
Menahem bar J u d a h (Haberman united them in one paragraph) does not belong
here according to Baer's chronological arrangement. Baer also rightfully corrected the
name to Menahem bar David, in accordance with Chronicle C and the Memorbuch.
It appears after the eulogy, which sums up and bewails the Mainz martyrdom as a
whole, but it does not belong and does not open the section consisting of a group of
anecdotes about individual acts of martyrdom. Only following this passage does the
chronicler write: "And now I will tell of the great wonders which were performed
by those great righteous persons." It is therefore, quite clear that it is in the wrong
literary context. Baer's solution that the original chronicle was in front of the editor
"in torn pieces" can explain the mistaken location of Rabenu Menahem, but not
the repetitious reference to the R. Isaac bar Moses group, including the changes and
addition in this version (See: Baer: Gezerat T a T N U , 132 n. 27). O u r suggestion, not
without its flaws, is that the editor had in front of him yet another source.
might have commended it, but for the general public only. This is
the explanation for their silence on this issue during the assembly in
the bishop's courtyard. However, for others, the right thing to do was
to follow the classical martyrological models of Hanania, Mishael,
and Azaria, and the Ten Martyrs passive martyrdom which was
sanctified by Jewish halakhic tradition. 57
In his most recent article on Jewish martyrdom in 1096, A. Gross-
man expressed reservations about my conclusion as to the position of
rabbinical circles toward active martyrdom during the First Crusade. 58
He bases his argument on two points:
(a) that Rabenu Menahem bar David Halevi, a renowned scholar in
Mainz, encouraged the assembly of that community to take the path
of active martyrdom. Other rabbis, from communities secondary in
importance, who took part in the ritual of slaughtering, are described
as scholars and halakhic authorities and

(b) that it is difficult to imagine all those acts of active martyrdom taking
place if the rabbis had objected to the principle.

Grossman adds that the fact that the simple people are mentioned,
rather than the leaders, is intentional and clue to the wish of the
chronicler to impress upon his audience that even the common people
committed the most difficult acts of active martyrdom.
Indeed, I did not mean to include in my argument all of the Rhine-
land communities that participated in the ritual of active martyrdom,
nor did I suggest that there was an unequivocal objection of halakh-
ists to those acts. What is clear, relying on the chronicles, is that the
majority of the Mainz Jewish community leadership did not partici-
pate in the slaughtering. It would suffice for us to show that this was
the situation in Mainz, the model community and Torah center in
Ashkenaz. The chronicles do not attempt to hide this fact but rather
choose to explain it away in a manner which is unacceptable to us.
Moreover, Grossman's comment that we have no names of any major

" See also Chazan's observation that "R. Isaac bar Moses and his friends" rep-
resent "the more traditional and conservative attitude among the Jews" (R. Chazan,
Masa ha-^e.lav ha-Ruhon veha-Yehudim, Jerusalem, 2000, 68, 119. Cf.: Idem, European
Jewry, 107-8, 114).
38
A. Grossman, "Bein 1012 le-1096: Ha-Reqa ha-Tarbuti veha-Hevrati le-Kid-
dush 11a-Shem be-TaTNU," Yehudim Mul ha-^elav, 59-60. He based his criticism on
my oral presentation at the Dinnur Center, Jerusalem, 1996.
halakhic authority from Worms who is told to have performed active
martyrdom, only strengthens our argument, because it means that
we know of no rabbis from these two major communities who were
part of the self-slaughter.
Certainly one cannot deny that there were such rabbis. As Grossman
noted, the rabbi in Xanten preached for active martyrdom. Chronicle Β
supplies us with another anecdote in support of rabbinical participation
in active martyrdom (which is of import to the issue of the practice
of it before 1096).39
As for Rabenu Menahem bar David Halevi, his behavior only
serves to reinforce our argument. In Sefer Gimatnya'ot, composed by
Rabbi J u d a h he-Hasid, we find a passage which seems to relate to
this episode of martyrdom: "A great rabbi in (or: The great rabbi of)
Mainz wrapped himself in his prayer-shawl and said: 'Watch me and
do likewise.' He sat and recited the Shema and was killed stretching
out his neck saying, 'the Lord is our God, the Lord is one.'" 4 0 E.E.
Urbach identified this rabbi as Rabenu Menahem who, according to
the chronicle preached to the community about reciting the Shema.[i
We believe that it is Rabbi Isaac bar Moses who is referred to here.
If Urbach is right, then we have not even the name of one rabbi who
participated in the active martyrdom in Mainz. At any rate, perusing
the references in both Chronicles A and Β reveals that there is not
even one shred of evidence that Rabenu Menahem exhorted the com-
munity to perform active martyrdom. It was a sermon which intended
to urge everyone to remain faithful to his faith and to conquer all fears.
T h e chronicles tell that in the end, "they all shouted with one voice
and one heart; 'Shema Israel [...]."' 4 2 It is not clear at what stage this

M<
This story has the stamp of truth about it: "And there was there one rabbi
who was commonly known as 'the rabbi from France.' (We do not know his name.
They probably called him ^arfati, a name which can be found several times in the
Memorbuch.) And he told everybody: 'That is how we do it in our place.' He dug a
hole and recited the blessing al ha-shehitah, and died before God. All the people près-
cnt responded: 'Shema Israel [...]'." (Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 78).
40
M. Güdemann, Geschichte des Erziehungens und der Cultur der Juden in Frankreich und
Deutschland, Wien 1880, 151 n. 2. Ii has been recently published: D. Abrahams and I
Ta-Shma, Sefer Gimatnya'ot le-Rabi Yehudah he-Hasid, Los Angeles, 1998, 49a.
41
Arugat ha-Bosem [E.E. Urbach ed.] IV, Jerusalem, 1963, 183.
12
Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 33, 100. Baer has suggested that the lack of reference
to active martyrdom in the liturgical poems, written in the wake of 1096 and adopted
by the communities as part of the synagogual services, is due to the problem of this
sermon was delivered and, at any rate, the report does not end by
saying that they all ran to slaughter their families. What did Rabenu
Menahem himself do? It is likely that he joined the group of martyrs
who awaited their death at the hands of their enemies.
Beyond that (and chronologically beyond 1096) the significance of
Judah he-Hasid's historical information needs some attention. Appar-
endy, he understood the act of the "great rabbi in Mainz" as religious
instruction. He must have known that many of this "holy congregation"
died at their own hands, and yet he emphasizes the act and recommen-
dation of a rabbi who died passively. Moreover, we should pay attention
to the fact that in Sefer Hasidim—which contains not a few references
to Kiddush ha-Shem, most of which were written under the influence of
the 1096 events—there is not even one instance of, or reference to
active martyrdom! This is consistent with the indirect recommendation
in the short passage from Sefer Gimatriya'ot, and therefore it might not
be too far-fetched to interpret this as an intended omission.

practice from the rabbinic-halakhic point of view (Baer, Gezerat T a T N U , 138-9).

However, some of the poems do contain extreme descriptions of self-slaughter. Let
us also point out that some of the poets who omit any reference to this practice in
one poem do mention it, and even describe it vividly, in another. This issue is still
in need of closer examination. I hope to address it in a forthcoming critical edition
of the 1096 piyyutim.
 CHAPTER TWO

A HALAKHIC AND H U M A N DILEMMA:

THE ASHKENAZIC STRUGGLE
W I T H ITS O W N T R A D I T I O N

T h e Ashkenazic martyrological tradition in general and that of active

martyrdom in particular, were forged during the First Crusade events.
The traumatic situation the Jews were faced with and their defiant
response which were carved deep in its consciousness became the
foundation of its special martyrological ethos. T h e Jews made sure
that traces of 1096 would remain not only in the chronicles, a unique
medieval historiographical monument, but also in massive liturgical
additions and changes, and in a variety of customs. One may almost
speak of a memory industry. 1 Indeed, the martyrological tradition
of a few centuries traces its roots to 1096. In this respect, the First
Crusade was a watershed which served as the real basis for future
rabbinic decisions in matters of active martyrdom when they could
not find relevant halakhic references in a milleniun of halakhic lit-
erature. In the matter of slaughtering women and children as an act
of martyrdom, it was a clear case in which reality forcefully dictated
the course of tradition and Halakhahr
In the previous chapter we attempted to show that some halakhic
authorities during 1096, either refrained from granting wholehearted
approval to active martyrdom or they maintained silence on the issue.
Talmudic halakhic and aggadic sources advocate martyrdom in cer-
tain cases, but there was no hint that there could be any hypothetical
situation in which one could actively sacrifice his wife and children
on the altar of faith. No doubt, with respect to the standard man-
ner of halakhic decision-making—locating relevant references in the
halakhic literature and applying them to the problem at hand—such
acts bordered on murder. 3 After 1096, the very real and shocking self-

1
See: A. Gross, "Hirhurim al Hebetim Hilkhatiyim velo-Hilkhatiyim shel Kiddush
ha‫־‬Shem be-TaTNU," /. Twersky Memorial Volume, Cambridge, Mass (forthcoming).
2
H. Soloveitchik, "Religious Law and Change: T h e Ashkenazic Example," AJS
Review 12, 1987, 208-11.
5
Soloveitchic, Religious Law, 209.
 sacrifice of the Jews had to be taken into account by the generations
of halakhists who followed. A denunciation of whole communities,
sometimes including their religious leadership, was virtually out of
the question. It is clear that the norm of active martyrdom had to be
justified, if for no other reason than the fact that it had taken place.
Nonetheless, we argue that the issue was not setded. T h e controversy
continued into the next centuries until the practice waned and eventu-
ally disappeared. After all, it was not only halakhically problematic,
but also humanly appalling.

Continuity of the Phenomenon and the Development of Traditions

Some historians insist on the limited nature of the actual manifestation

of active martyrdom during the persecutions of 1096, branding the
Hebrew chronicles as literature based largely on the imagination of
later writers and redactors, who were guided by a tendentious agenda.
This, they claim, would render the chronicles unreliable as factual
information as far as the modern historian is concerned. Even if one
chooses to adopt this methodological restriction, one fact would remain
unshaken: the myth of T a T N U was not diminished. Northern and
central European Jews during the High Middle Ages were not affected
by modern historiographical critical attitudes and accepted the written
and oral traditions of martyrology without hesitation. So much so, that
the landmark martyrdom during 1096 resulted in a steady tradition
of active martyrdom which lasted a number of centuries.
Before turning our attention to an analysis of the positions regarding
active martyrdom, we will illustrate the chronological continuity of the
practice until its waning in the fifteenth century. We will also point
out some nuances of traditions which seem to be rooted in 1096.
In 1190 there were economic-religious oriented riots against the
Jews in York, England. Some of the Jews who found refuge in Clifford
Tower, decided to end their lives in a collective martyrdom at their
own hands. Both major sources which inform us of the events that
took place there, agree that the rabbi, Yom-Tov of Joigny, a French
Tosafist, had a central role in that decision. William of Newbury
relates in some detail that the rabbi delivered a sermon, which was,
in essence, an exhortation to martyrdom, and immediately after that,
the self-slaughter took place. 4 Rabbi Ephraim of Bonn writes: "And

' I.Jacobs, The Jews of Angevin England, London, 1893, 124-7.

Rabbi Yom-Tov stood up and slaughtered about sixty souls. Oth-
ers also took part in the slaughter. One ordered his only son to be
slaughtered [...]. Others were burned for the unity of their Creator.
T h e sum of the holy souls killed or burnt amounted to about one
hundred and fifty." 3 T h e contents of the rabbi's sermon seem to be
directly connected to the martyrdom scene in the bishop's courtyard
in Mainz, as described in the Hebrew chronicles. 6
We are informed of two cases of self-immolation as atonement
for Jews who were baptized during the persecution against them in
Konstanz in 1349. Sorely regretting their conversion, they decided to
commit suicide. Each of them set fire to his home and was burned to
death (in one case with his sons).7 It is possible that these acts draw
on a similar case of two Jews in Mainz in 1096.8
In a responsum of Rabbi Judah he-Hasid we read of a recommendation
to a man who had accepted baptism, to drown himself. The end of the
responsum reads: "And there was an apostate [meshumad] who said that
since he had sinned with water [i.e., been baptized], therefore he must
drown himself in water as atonement." 9 Ta-Shma asserts that there is
no testimony that "this sort of frightful penance was practiced before
the generation of the initiators of Hasidut Ashkenaz, and there is not a
shred of evidence for such an idea in our sources." But reviewing the
practices of the hasidim during 1096, we find a case that might have
been the one referred to by Rabbi Judah he-Hasid• In Neuss there was a
hasid, Rabbi Isaac Halevi, who was semi-conscious due to beatings by
enemies, and in that physical state they baptized him. When he real-
ized what had happened he went to the Rhine and drowned himself.
Driven by heavy guilt feelings for what took place, albeit without his
consent or even his knowledge, he spontaneously decided to cleanse
himself from the "stench" of the baptismal waters, which stuck to
him. He would purify his body by ritual immersion and his soul by
drowning. Such acts by the Jews in 1096 seem to have had a lasting

5
Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 128. Sefer ^ekhirah [A.M. Haberman ed.] Jerusalem,
1970, 35.
6
See above, chapter 1.
' Minti, "Kiddush ha-Shem," 219. Surveying post-twelvth century martyrdom
cases Minti brands fire as the preferred death by the Jews (221-2).
8
For a citation from one of the chronicles, see below p. 57.
9
I. Ta-Shma, "Hit'abdut ve-Rezah ha‫־‬Zulat al Kiddush ha-Shem," Yehudim Mut
ha-^elav, 153.
influence on patterns of behavior in the Ashkenazic cultural sphere
even after several generations. 10
J u d a h he-Hasid adduces as a midrashic textproof the story about
the nephew of Yose ben Yo'ezer who sentenced himself to death as
atonement. It is quite possible that Rabbi Jacob Weil of the fifteenth
century was influenced by this tradition of penance, which started in
1096 and was justified and supported by Rabbi J u d a h he-Hasid—in a
responsum, the background of which is not entirely clear. By and large,
it is about a Jew who had been killed by Christians in "a violent death
after great tortures," after handing himself over to them. Here is the
passage, relevant to our discussion:

Moreover, since he handed himself over to be killed, as you have writ-

ten, that someone had told him: Go outside [...] and hand yourself over
so that you will attain atonement, and he did so. Now since he gave
his life to attain atonement, he certainly attained it. Similarly, we find a
story brought in Bereshit Rabbah about the son of Yose ben Yo'ezer, who
behaved improperly and managed to execute himself in all four forms
of death used by Beit Din, and a Bat Qol was heard announcing that he
was summoned to life in the World to C o m e . "

In a selihah, composed by David bar Samson, dedicated to an event

of martyrdom in France during the thirteenth century, the poet
describes the self-slaughtering while giving some specific names of
the victims. He refers to the local rabbi's role: "At the gates there
stood Rabbi Joseph the Sage / He did not know his brethren but slit
the throats of / the sheep at the time of gathering / 'To sacrifice to
God I came'." 1 2 Again, the rabbi is assuming an active role in the
(ritual) slaughter. As we will see below, there is more evidence that
the role of the rabbi in such situations, to act as the chief communal
slaughterer, became to some extent a tradition. 13
The wave of riots against the Jews in 1298, known as the "Rindfleisch
Persecutions," was by far more comprehensive and devastating than the

111
It is worthwhile noting that the radical recommendations of penance by death,
found in R. J u d a h he-Hasid''s responsa did not find its way to Sefer Hasidim, as already
observed by J . Elboim, Teshuvat ha-Lev ve-Qabbalat Tisurim, Jerusalem, 1993, 15 n.
13.
11
She'elot u-Teshuvot MaHaRI Wal, Jerusalem, 1959, 77.
12
H. Schirmann, "Qinot al ha-Gezerot be-Erez Yisrael, Africa, Sefarad, Ashkenaz
ve-Zarfat," Qovez al Tad n.s. 3 [13] 1, 1940, 44.
13
Cf. Soloveitchic, Halakhah, 103 η. 57.
1096 persecutions. 14 Scores of communities were sacked and destroyed.
In various piyyution we read about, "The virgin daughter of my people
who should have become a bride with a bridal canopy, set the fire
and leaped into it [...]. Beautiful women [...] slit the throats of their
children [...]. On the same day she slaughtered herself and her son." 15
In the Memorbuch we read about Genenlin of Bamberg, "and the boy
Solomon ben Asher and three children whom she slaughtered," and
in Holfeld, "[...] and his son Rabbi Isaac with his wife and children,
and he slaughtered [them] in the ritual bath [ba-merhaz] together with
his children."1*' Christian sources, reporting these persecutions, also
inform of active martyrdom performed by the Jews. It is told that in
Wirtzburg, "when they realized that they would not be able to escape
the Christians, the Jews killed their wives, brothers, sisters, other rela-
tives and especially their children, casting all of them along with their
possessions into the fire." In one detailed anecdote we read:

O n e young, beautiful Jewish woman was captured by her neighbors,

who promised to save her if she would agree to accept baptism. The
town elders summoned her, comforted her gently, and told her: "We
will get you a husband and property and free you from all sorts of taxes
and levies." The woman responded: "Allow me time until tomorrow
to give my answer." [...] The next day the woman returned with a
shining countenance and in an outwardly happy tone, declared: "You
should know, gentlemen, that I have slit my children's throats. I have
also distributed my possessions among those I have designated. Now
I am submitting my body to you, and you can do with it as you wish.
Be informed that I despise the worship of your god and that for the
past seven years, I have placed his image in my shoes under my feet to
disgrace him [...] They called Rindfleisch right away and handed her
over to him. His servants, the torturing hangmen, brought her to the
area of execution and there she died willingly.17

14
As for 1096, the trend of decreasing the number of victims and comprehensive
physical damage of the communities has become increasingly accepted by scholars.
See: Chazan, European Jewry and the First Crusade, Berkeley, 1987, 200. S. Schwartzfuchs,
"Meqomam shel Mas'ei ha-Zelav be-Divrei Yemei Yisrael," Tarbut ve-Hewah be-Toldot
Tisrael bi-Temei ha-Beinayim: Qovez Ma'amarim le-^ikhro shel H.H. Ben-Sasson, Jerusalem,
1989, 251-67. Grossman, Shorashav, 100-5.
15
Haberman, Sefer Gezerot, 224-5.
S. Salfeld, Das Martyrologium des Nürnberger Memorbuches, Berlin, 1898, pp. 50-1.
The slaughter in the Jewish ritual bath might be symbolic of the rejection of Chris-
tian baptism.
'‫ י‬M. Minti, "Kiddush ha-Shem be-Einei No?rim be-Germania bi-Yemei ha-
Beinayyim," Zion 59, 1994, 238.
Mary Minti describes this story as "historically reliable from the per-
spective of the Wirtzburg persecutions in 1298," while on the other
hand, she sees in it a narrative whose "historical veracity is doubt-
ful," and talks about the "creator of the story." We need not accept
all the details in this account as historically authentic, but we must
emphasize that it contains no puzzling or problematic element. If it
was a Jewish text, one might have claimed that it contained literary
motifs from the famous story of Rabbi Amnon of Mainz, who asked
the bishop to grant him three days in order to respond to his conver-
sion proposal, or from the Rachel narrative in the 1096 chronicles,
where she slaughters her children out of a sense of religious duty
combined with the sorrow of a mother for the future of her children.
But our narrative comes from a Christian source, which should be
taken as independent of Hebrew hagiography. Also, the trampling
of the Cross in one's shoe is neither a unique to that woman, nor to
this narrative. 18
About twenty years later, the "Lepers Persecutions" swept through
parts of France. Rabbi Joseph Hakohen informs us that:
Many chose to kill each other [...] drawing lots among them to deter-
mine who would kill his brethren. All of them died there. The last two
who remained, threw themselves from the tower to the ground and
died as well. 19

Christian sources from the era of the Black Death in the middle of
the fourteenth century confirm that the practice of active martyrdom
continued, and historiographically reinforce the piyyutim, which docu-
mented the persecutions and acts of martyrdom from 1096. These
often included the names of the victims/martyrs. T h e murder and
destruction of European Jewry, during which many communities were
uprooted and annihilated, did not leave much in terms of Jewish
prose documentation. T h e lists in the Memorbucher do not mention
individual names any longer, but only the names of communities that
were decimated. However, Christian sources supply us with enough

18
O n various forms of desecration and abuse of the Cross by Jews, see recently:
E. Horowitz, "Ha-Zelav ha-Doqer," Jehudim Mul ha-^elav, 118-40. On spitting on
the Cross in Witzburg itself some 150 years earlier, see; ibid, 123.
19
R.Joseph Hakohen, Emeq ha-Bakha, 73.
information to determine that active martyrdom was no rare occasion
during the Black Death. 2 0
In Prague, on the final day of Passover 1389, religious riots against
the Jews broke out, in the course of which they were offered the choice
of conversion or death. Most of the Jews died as martyrs. In a selihah
of Rabbi Avigdor Qara we read: "Anyone who was soft-hearted, his
son slaughtered him / and [even] the mother's compassion did not
seek to help her child to escape / [...] / the old teacher, the man of
rank amongst his people / so that they would not abuse him, hurried
/ to slaughter his sons and the members of his household with him
/ it is for that [reason] that my heart trembled and moved out of its
place." 21
One of the great persecutions, which left its imprint in the responsa
literature, took place in Austria in 1421. Rabbi Israel Isserlein talks
about "the well known imprisonment and the Austrian persecution,
owing to our sins, which took place from the tenth day of Sivan one
hundred and eighty (1420) until the ninth day of Nissan one hundred
and eighty one (142l)." 22 From a short account originally written in
Yiddish, we learn about the course of events in some detail. On the
advice of an apostate it was decided to abduct all Jewish youth up to
the age of fifteen and baptize them by force. The scheme was revealed
by a Jewish woman who had "dealings with one of the officials." At
this point,
The Jews shouted loudly: "Alas, they are going to defile our pure and
holy children, God forbid," and they reached a decision to take their
own lives for the sanctification of God. They drew lots and it came out
that the hasid Rabbi Jonah Hakohen would carry it out. This happened
on the festival of Sukkot (Tabernacles). The rabbi stood in front of the
Holy Ark and the entire congregation asked for forgiveness from each
other, recited confession, and were slaughtered before the Holy Ark in
the men's section. Also the women were slaughtered in the women's
section for the sanctification of God. There was one woman remaining
who asked Rabbi Jonah to slaughter her through the window of the
women section. Then, Rabbi Jonah, having no strength left to slaughter
himself, removed all the beams in the synagogue, put them in a pile and

20
Minti, "Kiddush ha-Shem," 217-9.
21
S. Bernfeld, Sefer ha-Dema'ot, 161.
22
Terumat ha-Deshen, Warsaw, 1882, 44a, no. 241. See also: Minti, "Kiddush
ha-Shem", 219-20.
 poured all of the oil on them Then he asked God for forgiveness, since
what he had done was for the sake of Heaven. He sat on the altar and
set fire to it from below. When the flames rose, he killed himself. 5 ‫־‬

We have no way of verifying the details of this account. However,

there are some which are known to us from the 1096 chronicles and
liturgical poetry, as well as from the martyrological tradition which
has subsequently developed. Drawing lots to choose the slaughterer is
known from previous cases. The death ritual, chosen by Rabbi Jonah,
reminds us of the case of Isaac bar David, the Parnas from Mainz,
who killed his children and set fire to the synagogue. 24 Of interest
is the continuation of the sacrificial ritual, a central motif in 1096.
Rabbi J o n a h constructs an altar from the internal wooden beams of
the synagogue, lights the flame and places himself on the pyre, in order
to slaughter himself and give himself up as a burnt-offering. We read
that he asked for forgiveness from God for all "his acts [ma'asav]." It
is not entirely clear whether this refers to the burning down of the
synagogue only, or for the slaughtering as well. It is conceivable that
he had some feelings of remorse over the killing, not being sure that
he had done the proper thing. 25
At the same time the Hussite revolt was raging in Bohemia and
the Jews suffered from persecutions. In one case, where the readiness
for martyrdom did not materialize, we are told:
[...] as I saw then, because I was at the time in the house of Rabbi
Nathan, may he rest in peace, and I was told that they were there [...]
in grave danger. Rabbi Nathan had gathered many children and put
them in his wife's care, commanding her to be on the alert so that if
she should hear him shout, she was to be ready to slaughter all the
children he had left in her care. But a miracle happened and they
were saved. 26

The rabbi who initiated the gathering of the children and who took
it upon himself (and his wife) to slaughter them, was Rabbi Nathan
Eger, one of the important rabbinical authorities in Bohemia during

23
Bernfeld, Sefer ha-Dema'ot, 169.
24
See the long narrative of this anecdote in Chronicle A (Haberman, Sefer Gezerot,
37-8).
25
See below, the responsum of R. Meir of Rothenburg.
26
I. Yuval, "Yehudim, Hussitim ve-Germanim al pi ha-Khronikah 'Gilgul Benei
Hushim'," gort 54, 1989, 316.
the first half of the fifteenth century. 27 Not only did the rabbi see
in slaughtering children a legitimate form of martyrdom, but so did
the writer of the chronicle, Rabbi Zalman of St. Goar, an eminent
disciple of Rabbi Jacob Moelin (.MaHaRIL). 28
We can, without much difficulty, add cases of active martyrdom
until the fourteenth century. However, to the best of my knowledge,
there are no instances, after the ones mentioned above, in the Ashke-
nazie cultural realm in the fifteenth century. There is one exception
in 1492. 29 It took place during a particularly complicated case of Host
desecration libel, which led to the conviction of about thirty Jews and
their sentencing to death at the stake. 30
Throughout the period lasting until the nineteenth century we
find many cases of suicides by fire, drowning, strangulation and by
sword. This was prevalent among individuals who were jailed and
faced interrogation-related tortures, various libels, or during riots and
persecutions, when they wanted to avoid the difficult religious trial
of baptism or death, men afraid of being abused by the enemy and
women who wanted to avoid being raped. But we no longer find the
killing of children such as it was carried out in 1096.

27
See about R. Zalman of St. Goar: I. Yuval, Hakhamim be-Doram: Ha-Alanhigut
ha-Ruhanit shel Tehudei Germaniah be-Shilhei Temei ha-Beinayim, Jerusalem, 1989, 173.
28
Yuval, Yehudim, 276-7. Concerning the readiness of Jews for self-sacrifice, it
would seem that the chronicler tries to argue that the Jews were no less pious than
the Hussites who voluntarily jumped into the pyre in which J a n Huss' was burnt. One
of the manuscripts refers to this spontaneous act as martyrdom, but using the Jewish
terminology: "And in the same scene of the fire, the rest of the priests [galahim], out
of their own initiative, said: 'We will also die' [...], jumped into the flames for the
sanctification of the Name [Kiddush ha-Shem] and were consumed" (Ibid., 310, and
also, 284 n. 34). O n courting martyrdom, a characteristic of Christian martyrdom,
see my monograph: Spirituality and Law: Courting Martyrdom in Christianity and Judaism
(forthcoming).
29
L. Zunz, Die synagogale Poesie des Mittelalters, Frankfurt am Main, 1920, 52. L.
Donath, Geschichte der Juden in Mecklenburg, Leipzig, 1874.
30
Bernfeld, Sefer ha-Dema'ot, 298. For a detailed discussion of the contradictions
between the sources as to the exact number of victims, see: Qalman. D. Horowitz,
Qedoshei Yisrael va-Harugav, 1904, Ms. Institute for Oriental Studies, St. Petersburg,
no. B397, entry: Aharon ben Mordekhai) In a Yizkor list of the victims of this event
we find: "May God remember the souls of the city of Mecklenburg : R. Aaron bar
Mordekhai and his holy son, R. Mendeln, and R. Aaron and his holy son R. Mekhel,
and his wife whose name was Hendeln, slaughtered herselfand her three children."
(On the events in Portugal during 1497 see below, chapter 3.)
 Halakhic References and Discussions

References to active martyrdom as a halakhic issue are quite limited.

The first, most famous and most authoritative one is that of Rabenu
Jacob Tarn in the Tosafot on B. Avodah £ara, 18a. The context is that
of Rabbi Hanina ben Teradion's execution by the Romans for the
public study of Torah. While Rabbi Hanina is burning at the stake,
wrapped with the Torah scroll, his students suggest that he hasten
his death by opening his mouth. T o this, he answers: "It is preferable
that the O n e who has given the soul will take it instead of dying by
one's own hand." In the Tosafot we read: "Rabenu T a m says that if
one is afraid that the Gentiles will force him to sin [ya'avirum la-averah],
for example by torture that he would not be able to resist, then it is
a mizvah to hurt (kill) himself, as in the case found in (tractate) Gittin
of the children who were captured for immoral purposes [qalon\
and threw themselves into the sea." Although he talks only about
suicide, he was understood by some as also recommending the kill-
ing of others. 31 It is difficult to find any apologetic overtones in this
short halakhic instruction. Some of the later halakhic sources would
polemicize, criticize, or at the very least, recoil both religiously and
emotionally from this radical form of response that had become an
accepted practice in Ashkenaz, to the conversion trial.
Haim Soloveitchik has emphasized the halakhic confusion of the
Tosafists in their attempts to explain the actions of their ancestors
and rabbis. If for suicide there were some sources, mostly aggadic,
killing children could be accepted on the basis of "reason" alone, as
an extension of permitted suicide. 32 Soloveitchik maintains that the
acceptance and justification of active martyrdom was all-inclusive
among the vast majority of Ashkenazic authorities. True, there is
one exception from the Tosafists school who voiced a strong objec-
tion, but at the end of the day, he concluded that such "protests are
anonymous or from men of no consequence." 3 3 It is this assertion
about the attitude of Ashkenazic halakhists to this painful issue that
we want to re-examine in the following pages. W'e will begin with a
passage, cited by Soloveitchik:

31
Soloveitchik, "Religious Law," 210 n. 8.
32
Gross, "Al Ma'asei," 179.
33
Soloveitchik, "Religious Law," 210 n. 8.
 [...] to teach us that if one is afraid of being tortured and he will not be
able to endure it and subsequently, pass the trial, he may kill himself. It
is from here that those who slaughter the children [ha-tinoqot] in times
of religious persecution [shemad] bring proof [for their practice].
And there are those who forbid it and interpret thus: [... | That is to say
that one may never kill oneself, and Saul did it without the permission
of the sages. (Rabbi S. bar Abraham Ukhman)
There was a case of a rabbi who slaughtered many children during
religious persecutions because he was afraid that they would be forced
to convert. And there was with him another rabbi who was very angry
with him (to the extent) that he called him a "murderer." And that rabbi
said: "If I am right, may this rabbi die a violent death \mitah meshunah].
Indeed, that is what happened. The idolators caught him, stripped off
his skin and put sand between his skin and his flesh. After that the
persecutions were stopped. Had he not slaughtered those children, they
would have been saved. 54

We read here that the case of King Saul's suicide, according to the
Midrash, which served as a proof text for "those who slaughter the
children in times of religious persecution bring proof [for their prac-
tice]," and we have already pointed to the centrality of it for those
who allowed or even recommended active martyrdom. 5 '
However, we are interested here more in the opinion of those who
objected to this practice and forbade it. It is true that this opinion
is represented here in the name of an unknown Tosafist who, as
Soloveitchik noted, was certainly not one of the central pillars of
Ashkenazic Halakhah during the period of the Tosafists. But he was
not alone. T h e text reads in the plural: "And there are those who
forbid it." Put another way, there are "those who do not slaughter
the children." Moreover, let us stress that this opinion is defiantly
against Rabenu Tarn's authoritative stance, which was believed to
extend beyond suicide to the slaughtering of others. If we may rely on
the testimony of this text, then there was indeed an objection to the
widely accepted halakhic attitude towards active martyrdom among
halakhists in the twelfth a n d / o r thirteenth century. From a literary
point of view it was almost "underground" and was not expressed in

34
Rabotenu Ba'aleiha-Tosafot alHamuhah Humshei Torah, Warsaw, 1877, 30. See also:
Rabbi Aharon of Lunel, Orhot Hayyim II [M. Schlezinger ed.], Berlin, 1902, 26.
35
Above, chapter I.
halakhic texts of the period. This should come as no surprise. After
all, this was hardly a trivial matter but rather, a major topic in the
ongoing historical existence of Ashkenazic Jewry. In maintaining such
a stand, those rabbis were hurling a murder charge—it is "murderer"
that the rabbi is called by his colleague—at their ancestors who were
believed to be righteous and saintly, and whose acts of self-sacrifice
had become supremely heroic models for emulation, be it through
oral traditions, liturgical poetry, Memorbucher, or references in halakhic
writings. 36 T h e end of the story, seems to indicate very clearly the
attitude of the editor. The brutal death of the rabbi-slaughterer proves
it. The information added at the end about the fact that the children
could have been saved were it not for the rabbi's zeal, would appear
to provide further proof that he and his way, were wrong, but not the
halakhic argument per se.
This passage from the Tosafists commentary on the Torah is the
most explicit objection raised against active martyrdom. However,
there are more sources that reveal a pervading atmosphere of doubt
concerning this issue in Ashkenaz during this period.
In the Nüremberg Memorbuch, found among the victims in the perse-
cution in Koblenz on "the fifteenth of Nissan, twenty five" (1265) was
the "wife of Rabbi Abraham bar Moses and his children who were
slaughtered." 37 The case of this wretched Jew who had slaughtered his
family, was brought to Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg (MaHaRaM):
One Jew asked MaHaRaM, whether he needed to do penance for the
slaughtering of his wife and children on a day of massacre in Koblenz,
the town of bloodshed. He did so because they had asked him to when
they saw that God was unleashing his wrath and the enemy had started
to murder the childlren of the living God for the sanctification of the
Name. He wanted to kill himself together with them, but God saved
him through some Gentiles.

MaHaRaM responded to him: I do not have a definite answer to this

query. It is clear that one is permitted to take his own life for the sane-
tification of the Name, as the sages said [...] 3 8 and there are many such

35
For a sharp invective against rabbis who objected to the recital of piyyutim
during prayer and were silenced to the point of complete anonymity of their iden-
tity and even of their argumentation, see: I. Ta-Shma, Minhag Ashkenaz ha-Qadmon,
Jerusalem, 1992, 90.
37
Salfeld, Martyrologium, 15.
38
Here MaHaRaM brings three proofs; the Aiidrash about King Saul, the story
about the four hundred children who were captured and shipped to Rome (B. Gittin,
 examples. But concerning the slaughter of others one must look very
hard into this matter to find evidence which allows it. However, such
an act became widely accepted as permissible, and we have heard of
many great authorities who slaughtered their sons and daughters. Also,
Rabenu Qalonimos (bar Judah) wrote about it [asah ken. Literally: did
so] in the dirge which begins with the words amarti she'u meni.M

Thus, anyone who requires him to do penance, would thereby vilify the
pious men of former days [ha-hasidim ha-Hshonim]. And since his inten-
tions were good and out of the abundance of his love for our Creator
did he harm his loved ones, and they also begged him (to kill them) [...]
one should not deal harshly with him. 40

The Jew was asking whether he needs to do penance to expiate the

slaughter of his family. In the summation of his responsum, MaHaRaM
says that, "anyone who requires him to do penance, would thereby
vilify the pious men of former days." We learn from this that there
was a cadre of people who thought that he acted improperly, or
that the father himself, suffering from a guilty conscience, initiated
the query. It is also possible that Rabbi Meir, anticipated the critical
reactions of the Jewish "street."
The striking feature of this responsum is its halakhically indecisive
nature. MaHaRaM states so in an opening declaration: "I do not now
have a definite answer to this query.' 5 The solution to the question
put to him is problematic, since halakhic sources normally available to
the rabbi are non-existent. MaHaRaAf s stand is particularly of interest
since the issue of active martyrdom was not new and he was aware
that, "such an act became widely accepted as permissible." MaHaRaM
certainly had occasion to reflect on this practice previously.
For suicide as a form of martyrdom, he has no problem answering,
using materials such as the King Saul case and the story of the four
hundred children which were known to him from earlier discussions of

57b), and the story about the mother of the seven sons who climbed up to the roof,
jumped off and died, while a Bat Qol approved of the act (ibid.). The original story is
about the Antiochian persecutions (167 B.C.) and appears in the Books of Maccabees.
The Talmud shifts it to the Hadrianic persecutions (132-135 A.D.).
*‫ יי‬Here MaHaRaM tries halfheartedly to bring an original proof from the Midrash
about King Saul. He does this by extending the exception of Saul to the beginning
of the biblical verse as well which deals with plain murder: in cases such as Saul's
one can even murder.
4(1
Teshuvot, Pesaqim u-Alinhagim [Y.Z. Kahana ed.], Jerusalem, 1960, 54. I have
used some of the translation supplied in: I. Agus, Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg II, Phila-
delphia, 1947, 679.
the problem. But for the dilemma at hand, he could not adduce any
halakhic precedents or explicit halakhic tradition. Very gendy he writes:
"But concerning the slaughter of others one must look very hard into
this matter to find evidence that would allow it." The best he could
do was to reach one definite conclusion: that there is no tradition of
halakhic ruling which brands active martyrdom as murder. But since
one needs no evidence to declare that an act of killing is forbidden,
the normal ruling that must follow is that it is murder.
At this point MaHaRaM, who cannot avoid an authoritative answer,
writes hesitantly: "However, such an act became widely accepted as
permissible, and we have heard of many great authorities who slaugh-
tered their sons and daughters," and that Qalonimos wrote a liturgical
poem about the 1096 slaughterers with admiration.
Here MaHaRaM adds an ingenious interpretation of the Midrash,
which excludes cases like King Saul's from the religious prohibition of
suicide. He suggests the exclusion, learned from the word "But", can
be extended to the second part of the biblical verse which deals with
murder, and thus we learn that there is an exclusion from murdering
others as well in situations such as King Saul's and forced conversion.
As David Berger noted, MaHaRaM is the origin of this novel interpreta-
tion. His predecessors did not think of it and allowed the slaughtering
without any halakhic precedent. 41 The subtext of this responsum tells us
that if he had had to decide in a halakhic vacuum without carrying the
heavy burden of Ashkenazic tradition and practice, MaHaRaM would
have not permitted active martyrdom on the basis of his novel inter-
pretation of the Midrash. In short, the only reason he is lenient with the
slaughtering father is that "anyone who requires him to do penance,
would thereby vilify the pious men of former days." 42 MaHaRaM, he
greatest Ashkenazic halakhic decisor of his generation, surrenders to
a tradition which he cannot adequately justify. 4 5
We must also consider the fact that MaHaRaM is asked after the
fact. He receives a question concerning the man after he has killed his

41
D. Berger, "Heqer Rabanut Ashkenaz ha-Qedumah," Tarbiz 53, 1984, 484
n. 6.
42
O n this halakhic concept, see: E. Kanarfogel, "Halakhah and Metziut (Realia)
in Medieval Ashkenaz: Surveying the Parameters and Defining the Limits," The Jewish
Law Annual 14, 2003, 213 n. 58.
43
His style, decision making and reasoning are quite similar to the discussion of
active martyrdom by R. Yom-Tov Isbili in the early fourteenth century Spain (See
below, chapter 3).
 concepts in the history of the Jews in Spain and in his skill in utilizing
medieval text as historical sources, but also (once again) a continuous
stream of misreading, misinterpretation, and misrepresentation of
points made throughout my article. While the latter seem to reflect
an uncontrolled deeply-seated personal turbulence, the former calls
for some brief comments.
RBS believes to have identified in my criticism of his thesis a sort
of historiography which ignores circumstances external to medieval
Judaism, which are reflected in developments and changes in Hispano-
Jewish culture and society. I, in turn, am of the opinion that the main
difference between us lies in weighing and balancing evidence and in
the ability to distinguish between the issues. T h e following comments
should suffice to illustrate this. I will touch only on a few of the major
historiographical points upon which RBS based his case. Some, but
certainly not all, of the distortions and misunderstandings of my criti-
cism on his part will be mentioned in the footnotes.

Judah Halevi, the Reconquista and 1391

RBS flaunts J u d a h Halevi's poems which mention Kiddush ha-Shem,

believing that they constitute and provide the beginning of an endur-
ing Sefardic tradition and consciousness of martyrdom. Moreover, in
his counter-argument, he continues to assert that Jewish martyrs in
1391 responded to the martyrology of the Spanish Christian warriors
of the Reconquista.
Upon close scrutiny of Halevi's relevant poems and one prose sup-
plication [baqashah], from which RBS extracted some moving lines
about anti-Jewish riots during the Reconquista (RBS 2, 281), it is clear
that there is nothing novel there and that one cannot find any sig-
nificant addition to the most famous observation of Halevi: ‫בין צבאות‬
‫ אנחנו נופלים‬/ ‫[ ה ם כי ילחמו ב מ ל ח מ ת ם‬...]/ ‫ א ב ד צבאי ונעדר‬/ ‫שעיר וקדר‬
‫במפלתם‬. 2 His poems do not reflect a situation of shemad, a death or

2
"Aqonen al mar tla'otai," in Dov Yarden, Shirei ha-Qodesh le-Rabi Tehudah Halevi
III, Jerusalem, 1986, 693. Also the few lines quoted by RBS from a very long wed-
ding poem are less than impressive when taken in the context of the specific poem
itself and in the wider context of the genre, of which we count about 60 poems.
None of them deal with martyrdom, rendering RBS' reference a drop in the bucket.
T o suggest that such a poem constitutes a serious link in an imaginary chain of
martyrological awareness and tradition must surely be dismissed as ludicrous. For a
conversion choice, given by the persecutors but rather of riots whose
aims were killing, destruction and plundering of the Jews, the likes
of which we encounter in Moslem Granada in the time of Yehosef
ha-Naggid (1066).3 Moreover, contrary to RBS's claim, there is no
significance whatsoever to the fact that Jewish tradition endowed each
Jew killed by a gentile with the crown of martyrdom (RBS 2, 283-4).
From an historiographical perspective the opposite is true, because it
means that not every case in which Kiddush ha-Shem is mentioned refers
to Jews who have been killed due to their unrelenting devotion and
loyalty to their faith. Consequentiy, when Halevi uses such terminology
one may not surmise that in those persecutions the Jews were given
the option of conversion.
In juxtaposition to the clear historical context of Halevi's poetry
about the Jewish national suffering due to the Reconquista in Spain, the
suggestion that we should link the ideal and the practice of Kiddush
ha-Shem in late 14th century Spain to the Reconquista is hypothetical and
forced, at best. One must stretch the imagination very far to see any
massive influence, direct or indirect, of Halevi in some of his remote
and all but forgotten poems on the martyrs of 1391. In the sea of
texts that RBS schemed to drown us in, I cannot find one fragment
of evidence that would suggest a connection between the events of
martyrdom then and a Spanish-Christian-martyrological-militaristic
ideology which blew over from a war of conquest-liberation which was
all but forgotten. Yet, RBS insists on sentences such as: "The Jews
who chose martyrdom in 1391 [...] announced in their actions that
just as their Christian neighbours have been ready to travel as far as
the Holy Land or mainly to Moslem Granada in order to fight and
die as martyrs for their God, so also the Jews give their lives for their
God and are ready to die willingly and even to commit suicide." 4

balanced, sensible and careful use of this poem see: Y. Hacker, "Im Shakhahnu Shem
Eloheinu va-Nifros Kapeinu le-El Zar—Gilgulah shel Parshanut al Reqa ha-Mezi'ut
bi-Sefarad bi-Yemei ha-Beinayyim," <í0« 57, 1992, 253.
3
If I understood RBS correctly, then he admits that the wedding poem has
nothing to do with active martyrdom (RBS 2, 280). His claim that "according to
Gross, J u d a h Halevi heard of the martyrdom of the Jews in Ashkenaz" (Ibid., 282)
is utterly baseless. I have never suggested such a thing.
4
RBS 1, 264. Inter alia, with one stroke of his pen (and probably, unintention-
ally), RBS setdes a vexing historiographical problem discussed widely among First
Crusade Jewish historians: on what did the Jews in Germany rely when they took
their own lives during their attacks by the Crusaders, adopting it as a legitimate
form of martyrdom?
 Nachmanides and the Beginning of Ashkenazic Influence

RBS opposes my thesis as to the centrality of the Ashkenazic influence

on Jewish martyrdom in Spain. He finds it difficult to comprehend
why I am trying to "limit the discussion to the subject of suicide or
self-slaughter/' while Kiddush ha-Shem is not limited to this type of
death (RBS 2, 281). This forces me to explain the obvious.
One way to prove whether there was an external influence on Span-
ish Kiddush ha-Shem, is by identifying characteristics of that external
element. I know of two main elements of the tradition of martyrdom
which developed in Ashkenaz. One of them is active martyrdom. I hope
that RBS would agree that there is no such "creature" in Christian
martyrdom. If we cannot find such an independent element in the
history of the Jews in Spain and in the writings of their early scholars,
we can assume that late references to it in Spain reflect Ashkenazic
religious-cultural infiltration.
Nachmanides was a religious leader of outstanding stature and of
extreme importance in Spain in his generation and in generations to
come. I believe that he was also a key figure in the chronology of the
Ashkenazic influence in the topic under discussion. For some mysteri-
ous reason that escapes me, RBS insists that that the burden of proof
lies with anyone who claims that Nachmanides was under Ashkenazic
influence. This he says knowing full well that Nachmanides refers to
"human sacrifices on the alter of faith" (RBS 2, 293). In a low keyed

In assessing Spanish traditions and attitudes to Kiddush ha-Shem one must discuss
the fact that the memory of the religious persecutions and mass conversions during
the Visigothic period (7th century) and Almohade period (mid 12th century) was alive
in 14 th -15 th century Spain. This was a legacy, which must have had some influence
on the Jews in 1391 and did not contribute anything to the spirit of martyrdom. O n e
cannot find such a discussion by RBS.
In the endless stream of baffling misreadings of my comments we find the follow-
ing. I had made the point that there is no mention in Hebrew polemical literature of
Christian martyrdom. In response RBS points out that in the liturgical poetry written
in the wake of 1391, one can find lines in praise of the heroism of the Jewish martyrs.
Yet again RBS, in his eagerness to find mistakes in my article, falls into an errant
reading: "Gross is wrong in asserting that Profet Duran and Hasdai Crescas wrote
before the waves of conversion." (Ibid., 296). I was not. A more careful reading of
that paragraph and the one preceding it would have revealed that I referred to the
conversion waves in the years 1411-1414 (Gross 2, 274-5).
A final example of RBS's misunderstanding to be mentioned here is his reading
of the title of my article (RBS 2, 279). This might not be relevant to the contents of
our historiographical debate, but certainly points to a disturbing trend.
response he nevertheless sticks to his error: "True, Nachmanides
had been influenced by the Tosafists. However their doctrines were
not decisive in his worldview. T h e schools in Spain and in Provence
influenced him greatly" (RBS 2, 294). I fail to see the relevance of
this statement to our topic.
Moreover, a second characteristic of Ashkenazic martyrdom we
point to in our first response to RBS, is the religious allowance for
stringencies. Contrary to Ashkenazic scholars, Maimonides was of
the opinion that the Torah commandment of "and you should live
by them" serves as a barrier against excessive martyrdom. Therefore,
if one faces a situation of "die or transgress," commandments which
the Halakhah does require him to die for, one cannot exercise self-
imposed religious extremism and choose to die. Maimonides censors
such practices in sharp and unequivocal language, and chooses to do
so in his opening paragraph of the laws of martyrdom, so that the
reader might wonder who he had in mind. In my article on Jewish
martyrdom in Portugal during 1497,1 commented that in the course of
the 14th century a change started to take place and Spanish halakhists
rejected this Maimonidean stand (Gross 1, 98 n. 46, 104 n. 66). Now,
we find that already Nachmanides (mid 13th century) sided with the
Ashkenazic view on this point. 5 T o the best of my knowledge, Nach-
manides is the first Spanish authority to disagree with Maimonides
on this point. 6

' Pemshei ha-Ramban al Masekhet Shabat, 49a. Hidushei ha-Ramban le-Masekhet Ketubot
[I. Shvat ed.], Jerusalem, 1990, 107-8, 148. Still about Nachmanides, to my criticism
that RBS misinterpreted him, we find RBS responding: "Nachmanides' words in
Sefer ha-Ge'ulah [...] might indeed be interpreted as relating to daily Kiddush ha-Shem
(suffering, polemics)" (RBS 2, 293). Two comments are in order: 1. They cannot be
understood any other way, certainly not in the sense of martyrdom, as misunderstood
by RBS. 2. T h e meaning of this Kiddush ha-Shem has nothing to do with suffering but
with patterns of ethical behaviour in dealing with non-Jews which are designed to
draw their sympathy to and even love of the Jewish faith.
RBS's presentation of my interpretation of Maimonides and the Spanish tradition
of martyrdom, (RBS 2, 295-6) is long and marred by his mispresentation of it. A closer
reading and paying attention to nuances, would have obviated some of his remarks.
I never said that "We have in Maimonides' stance an explicit recommendation for
conversion," not in the Moslem context and certainly not in the Christian. I merely
meant to criticize RBS' absurd statement that Maimonides somehow contributed to
"the performance of suicides" during 1391 (RBS 1, 234).
6
I might add that it would seem that in Nachmanides "Supplication on the
Ruins of Jerusalem," where he talks about active martyrdom, we find a possible
Ashkenazic literary influence. We read there: ‫ ב ד מ י ה מ ת ב ו ס ס ת‬/ ‫ונפשם מ ת ע ל ס ת‬
 Demography of Forced Converts in Spain and Ashkenaz

RBS claims that he does not attempt to belittle the number of conver-
sions to Christianity in 1391. So be it, although this statement is not
in full logical agreement with his efforts, spread over many pages, to
show that the dimensions of Kiddush ha-Shem constituted a conspicuous
phenomenon. In light of this, I can offer a joint conclusion, utilizing
a carefully formulated evaluation in an article RBS relies heavily on:
"The persecutions and riots [...] caused most of the Jews in many
important communities in the Iberian peninsula to convert .[...] And
although there were individuals and groups who died as martyrs in
various cities in Castile, Catalunia and Valencia during those days,
the testimonies of contemporaries show that the central phenomenon
was that of mass conversion and not of Kiddush ha-Shem."7
Now I would refer with the utmost brevity to Ashkenaz. Recendy
some of the scholars of the events of 1096 have invested much energy
in the attempt to discover more conversion cases of individuals or, at
least, of hints to religious doubts and conversion tendencies. At the
end of the day, it seems to me exorbitant and tendentious to claim for
a tie between Ashkenaz and Spain in this respect. Generally, I might
add, it would be very beneficial to broaden the chronological scope
and to include in the discussion, the martyrology of Ashkenazic Jewry
in response to the bloody persecutions which accompanied its history
over the centuries following 1096. 8

‫[ ו ה ם ששים ו ש מ ח י ם‬...]. This is very close to Qalonimos bar Yehuda's poem on the
martyrs of 1096: ‫ ת ב ו ס ת ם ע ל י ה ם ב א ה ב‬/ ‫ש ו ח ט י ם ה א ב ו ת בניהם ו ב ד מ י ה ם מ ת ב ו ס ס י ם‬
‫[ ליחד שמך ד צ י ם ו ש מ ח י ם‬...] ‫"( מ ת ע ל ס י ם‬Et ha-qol qol Ya'aqov" in Mahazor U-Yamim
Nora'im II [D. Goldschmidt ed.], Jerusalem, 1970, 646).
7
Hacker, "Im Shakhahnu," 259. It is difficult to think of a more careful formula-
tion. I was wrong in stating that we know of cases of active martyrdom in Zaragoza
(RBS 2, 287). Consequendy, the list is even shorter, containing mainly Toledo and
Barcelona.
8
RBS tried to draw some comfort and encouragement from a recent article by
Kenneth Stow (K. Stow, "Conversion, Apostasy, and Apprehensiveness: Emicho of
Flonheim and the Fear of the Jews in the Twelfth Century," Speculum 76, 2001, 911-
33. RBS 2, 285-6). In this article Stow did not mean to say anything novel about the
conversions, known very well to all from the Hebrew chronicles. Concerning Mainz
and Cologne, it would be, in my opinion, exaggerated to claim that there were many
conversion cases, or that the chronicles deal with forced converts no less than with the
martyrs (Stow, 918-9, 925). It would seem that there were more such cases in Worms,
and according to one chronicle some did so in order to save their children who had
been taken from them. This reminds us of the well-planned Portuguese attempts
 In sum, RBS has constructed his arguments on wobbly foundations.
Some of the problematic points, not detailed here, have been left for
critical scholars who face the difficult task of penetrating the clouds
of verbosity in RBS ; s articles. 9
Generally, problems of comprehension and carelessness cover his
reading of my response to his long ardcle from beginning to end. Herein
might be hidden the roots of his aggressive and unbecoming style.
There is a story about an important statesman whose speeches bore
the following notes in the margin: "This argument is not convincing.
It will be necessary to raise my voice and hit the podium."

to convert the Jews at the end of the 15th century (Above, chapter 3). Concerning
Trier, all sources report several cases of active martyrdom, but what happened to
most of the community resembles what was to take place in Portugal 400 years later
(mainly according to the description of E. Qapsali), that the Christians did not kill
them, but prevented them from taking their own lives and finally used physical force
to baptize them (R. Chazan, "Christian and Jewish Perceptions of 1096: T h e Case of
Trier," Jewish History 13/2, 1999, pp. 15-16,18. Gross 1, 94 n. 30). What took place
in Regensburg, according to the apologetic presentation in one of the chronicles,
and according to the hinted account found in Sefer Hasidim (Y. Hacker, "Li-Gzerat
T a T N U , " Zjon 31, 1966, 230-1), reflects the influence of a religious leader and the
subsequent hasty, improvised and collective baptism in the river.
RBS, waving Stows tentative footnote suggestion (933 n. 76), concludes that the
relative number of martyrs was inflated in the Ashkenazic collective memory based
on the fact that the forced converts returned to Judaism. This, just like almost every
historiographical hypothesis in this field, would depend on the dating of the chronicles.
Consequently, if we assume (as I do) that the gist of the accounts have been written
relatively close to the events themselves then Stow's conjecture becomes less appeal-
ing. In addition, he would have to argue that all the poems, which describe the mass
martyrdom of 1096 are late as well, or alternatively, to disqualify the historiographical
validity of this genre un bloc.
9
See: J T Berakhot, 5, 32, 39b. Concerning the connection that existed, or not,
between philosophy and conversions in Spain, RBS points to the loyalty of the refugees
of the 1492 expulsion "who did not choose conversion, and among them we find
philosophers and scientists such as R. Isaac Abravanel and Abraham Zacut (RBS
1, 271). On this I commented that Zacut was a qabbalist and one cannot expect to
find an influence of his professional career (mathematician and astronomer) on his
religious devoutness. O n such a point, so basic to the understanding of the place of
spiritual trends in the history of the Jews in Spain, RBS insists and replies that the
definition of Zacut as a "scientist" is preferable to mine (as qabbalist), relying on the
fact that "his contemporaries called him 'the great iztagniri or 'the erudite tokhen"
(RBS 2, 291 n. 50). This needs no farther comment. Though it has nothing to do
with RBS's major theses, this minor example speaks volumes of his awkward and
embarrassing understanding of fundamental concepts and elements which should be
evaluated by any historian of Spanish Jewry.
 ‫‪APPENDIX C‬‬

‫‪HEBREW SOURCES‬‬

‫‪This appendix contains Hebrew texts which are cited or referred to in‬‬
‫‪.the book. The pagination refers to the text's location in this book‬‬

‫‪p):.‬‬ ‫כרוניקה א‪ ,‬ת ת נ ״ ו ) ‪2‬‬

‫כשראו בני ברית ק ד ש כי נגזרה הגזירה ונצחום ה א ו י ב י ם ונכנסו בחצר ויצעקו‬

‫כולם יחד ז ק נ י ם ובחורים בתולות וילדים עבדים ושפחות ל א ב י ה ם שבשמים‪,‬‬
‫ובכו עליהם ועל ח י י ה ם והצדיקו עליהם א ת דין שמים‪ ,‬ואמרו זה ל ז ה ‪ :‬נ ת ח ז ק‬
‫ונסבול עול ה י ר א ה הקדושה‪ ,‬כי לפי שעה יהרגו אותנו ה א ו י ב י ם ו ק ל ה ש ב מ י ת ו ת‬
‫ארבע בחרב‪ ,‬ונהיה ח י י ם וקיימים‪ ,‬נפשותינו בגן עדן ב א י ס פ ק ל ר י א ה מ א י ר ה‬
‫הגדולה לעולמי עד‪.‬‬
‫ויאמרו בלב שלם ובנפש חפיצה‪ :‬סוף דבר אין להרהר א ח ר מ י ד ת ה ק ד ו ש ברוך‬
‫ה ו א וברוך שמו‪ ,‬שנתן לנו תורתו וציווי להמיתנו ולהרוג אותנו על יחוד שמו‬
‫הקדוש‪ .‬אשרינו א ם נעשה רצונו‪ ,‬ואשרי כל מ י שנהרג ונשחט וימות על יחוד‬
‫שמו‪ ,‬ו י ה א מ ז ו מ ן לעולם ה ב א וישב ב מ ח י צ ה א ח ת עם ה צ ד י ק י ם ‪ ,‬ר' עקיבא‬
‫וחביריו הנהרגים על שמו‪...‬‬
‫ואז צעקו כולם בקול גדול ל א מ ר כ א ח ד ‪ :‬מ ע ת ה אין לנו לעכב יותר‪ ,‬כי ה א ו י ב י ם‬
‫כבר ב א י ם עלינו‪ .‬נלך ב מ ה ר ה נעשה ונקריב עצמינו קרבן לפני הי‪ .‬וכל מ י שיש לו‬
‫מ א כ ל ת יבדוק א ו ת ה שלא ת ה י ה פגומה ויבוא וישחוט אותנו על קידוש יחיד חי‬
‫העולמים‪ ,‬ואחר כך י ש ח ו ט א ת עצמו בגרונו או ידקור ה ס כ י ן בבטנו‪.‬‬
‫והאויבים מ י ד כשנכנסו בתוך ה ח צ ר מ צ א ו שם ק צ ת מ ן ה ח ס י ד י ם גמורים עם‬
‫רבינו י צ ח ק ב״ר מ ש ה עוקר הרים‪ ,‬ו ה ו א פשט צוארו וחתכו ראשו תחילה‪.‬‬
‫ונתעטפו ב ט ל י ת ו ת המצויינות וישבו ל ה ם בתוך ה ח צ ר ל מ ה ר לעשות רצון יוצרם‪,‬‬
‫ולא רצו לברוח תוך ה ח ד ר ה לחיות חיי שעה‪ ,‬כי מ א ה ב ה קיבלו עליהם דין שמים‪.‬‬
‫וישליכו עליהם ה א ו י ב י ם אבנים וחיצים ולא חששו לנוס‪ ,‬ויכו כל א ו ת ם אשר‬
‫מ צ א ו א ו ת ם שם מ כ ת חרב והרג ואבדן‪.‬‬
‫ו א ו ת ם שבחדרים כשראו א ת ה מ ע ש ה ה ז ה מ א ל ו ה צ ד י ק י ם והאויבים שבאו‬
‫עליהם כבר צעקו כולם‪ :‬עוד אין כאלהינו טוב מ ל ה ק ר י ב קרבן נפשינו‪ .‬ושם חגרו‬
‫נשים בעוז מ ת נ י ה ן וישחטו בניהן ובנותיהן וגם עצמן‪ .‬וגם אנשים רבים א י מ צ ו‬
‫כ ח וישחטו נשיהם ובניהם ו ט פ ם ]‪[...‬‬
 ‫מדרש בראשית רבה לד)‪:(p. 9‬‬

‫"ואך את דמכם וגוי"‪ ,‬אזהרה לחונק עצמו‪ .‬יכול כשאול ת״ל אך‪ .‬יכול כחנניה‬
‫מישאל ועזריה ת״ל אך"‬

‫ר' אברהם ב״ר עזריאל‪ ,‬ערוגת הבושם)‪:(p. 9‬‬

‫כמי שאומר בפי מקום שנהגו )פסחים נג ב(‪ ,‬דרש תודוס איש רומי‪ ,‬מה ראו‬
‫חנניה מישאל ועזריה שמסרו נפשם לתוך כבשן האש נשאו קל וחומר בעצמן‬
‫מצפרדעים וכוי ]‪ [...‬ורבי' יצחק מדנפיר הקשה באותה דרשה על פר״ש שפי'‬
‫מה ראו שלא דרשו וחי בהם‪ ,‬והקשה דהתם פרהסיא הוה ומסקינן לכולי עלמי‬
‫בסנהדרין)עד א( חייב למסר עצמו על מצוה קלה‪ .‬הרי אפרים דלוניר פי' בפרק‬
‫מקום שנהגו‪ ,‬מה ראו למסור עצמן במיתה קשה כזו‪ ,‬שהיה להרוג עצמן כששמעו‬
‫שהגזירה יוצאה ואין עונש בזה‪ ,‬דדרשינן במכילתי' )הכוונה לבראשית רבה( אך‬
‫דמכם לנפשותיכם אדרוש‪ ,‬יכול כשאול שהרג את עצמו‪ ,‬ת״ל אך‪.‬‬

‫יוסיפון)‪:(p. 12‬‬

‫ואיה מלכינו שאול ויהונתן בנו אשר נלחמו בעד עם ה' וימותו על הי ועל עמו‪,‬‬
‫הלא יכול שאול לחיות ולהמלט ולא חפץ בחיים כי אם בחר מות מחיים כאשר‬
‫ראה כי נגף עמו במלחמה‪ ,‬על כן לא נפרד מאחיו גם הוא גם יהונתן בנו הנאהבים‬
‫והנעימים ]‪ [...‬ואיה התורה הקדושה הצפונה בלבבך‪ ,‬הלא אתה כהן ומשוח אשר‬
‫למדתנו את התורה‪ ,‬איך נוכל לאהוב את אלהינו בכל לבבינו ובכל נפשנו אם לא‬
‫נמות על בריתו עם עבדיו הנהרגים על שמו‪ .‬הלא אתה העדותה בנו פעמים רבות‬
‫לאמר כי כל האיש אשר ימות במלחמה על ה' ועל עמו ועל תורתו יהיה בגורל‬
‫חלק ה' ללכת אל האור הגדול לבלתי ראות את החשך המחשיך‪.‬‬

‫כרוניקה א‪ ,‬תתנ״ו)‪:(p. 15‬‬

‫אז היו רבנו יצחק ב״ר משה ושאר הרבנים והחשובים עמו‪ ,‬והיו יושבים בחצר‬
‫ההגמון ובוכים וצוארם פשוט והיו אומרים‪ :‬מתי יבא השודד ונקבל עלינו דין‬
‫שמים‪ ,‬וכבר ערכנו עקידות ועשינו מזבחות על שמו‪.‬‬

‫ר' יעקב מבונא)‪: (p. 20‬‬

‫ויעמוד הרב ר' יום טוב וישחט כסי נפשות‪ .‬וגם אחרים שחטו‪ .‬ויש שציוה לשחוט‬
‫בנו יחידו אשר לא נסה כף רגלו הצג על הארץ מהתענג ומרוך‪ .‬ויש מהם שנשרפו‬
‫על יחוד בוראם‪ .‬ויהי מספר ההרוגים והשרופים כק״ן נפשות קדושים‪.‬‬
 ‫כרוניקה א‪ ,‬תתנ״ו)‪:(pp. 21 n. 8, 57‬‬
‫ב' ח ס י ד י ם נוצלו בו ביום כי ציחנום בעל כ ר ח ם שם ה א ח ד מר אורי ושם השני‬
‫מר י צ ח ק ושתי בנותיו עמו‪ .‬וגם ה ם קדשו ה ש ם מ א ו ד וקבלו עליהן מ י ת ה משונה‬
‫אשר לא כתובה בכל התוכחת)!( כי בערב שבועות ש ח ט מר י צ ח ק ב״ר דוד הפרנס‬
‫שתי בנותיו עמו והצית א ש בביתו ומיד הלכו ה ו א ומר אורי עמו לבית ה כ נ ס ת‬
‫לפני ארון ה ק ו ד ש וימותו שם לפני ה ' כי נשרפו שם בלב שלם‪.‬‬

‫ספר ה מ ק צ ו ע ו ת ) ‪:(pp. 22 η. 10, 5 6‬‬

‫וכיוצא בזה מ י שבא אליו רוח רעה ועבר וכפר בתורת מ ש ה ו מ א ס במצות ה '‬
‫א ל ה י ישראל והלך בשרירות לבו ונתנחם והלך וקבל מיתי משונה ב מ ק ו ם שעבר‬
‫עבירה כל ישראל מחוייבי' לשמוח עליו כ ש מ ח ' יין כי ה מ ת יהיה חי לעלם‬
‫ולעלמי עולמים‪.‬‬

‫תשובות ר' י ה ו ד ה ה ח ס י ד ) ‪:(p. 2 1‬‬

‫ש א י ל ה ‪ :‬א ם י מ י ת א ד ם עצמו עבור עוונותיו‪ ,‬א ם עובר על זה " א ך א ת ד מ כ ם‬

‫לנפשותיכם אדרוש"‪ .‬תשובה‪ :‬דטוב ה ו א ל א ד ם א ם י מ י ת עצמו עבור עוונותיו‪,‬‬
‫שכך מצינו ברי אליעזר בן דורדיא ש ה מ י ת עצמו עבור עוונותיו‪ ,‬ו י צ א ת בת קול‬
‫ו א מ ר ה אשריך וכוי‪ .‬וגם מצינו בבראשית רבה בבן א ח ו ת ו של ר' יוסי בן יועזר‬
‫]‪ [...‬ן מ ש ו מ ד א ח ד או']מר[ ה ו א ח ט א ב מ י ם לפיכך ה ט ב י ע עצמו ב מ י ם להיות לו‬
‫לכפרה‪.‬‬

‫כרוניקה א‪ ,‬תתנ״ו)‪:(pp. 22 η. 10, 57‬‬

‫וגם ח ס י ד א ח ד ה י ה לשם ור' י צ ח ק הלוי שמו‪ ,‬ויסרוהו ביסורים קשים‪ .‬וכאשר‬

‫ראו עינויו וציחנוהו בעל כרחו‪ ,‬כי מ ן ה מ כ ו ת אשר הכוהו לא ה י ה יודע עד מה‪.‬‬
‫וכשעמד על דעתו‪ ,‬ח ז ר בעוד שלשת י מ י ם והלך לקלוניא ונכנס בביתו ו ה מ ת י ן‬
‫מעט‪ ,‬ר ק שעה א ח ת ‪ ,‬והלך לנהר ריינוס וטבע עצמו בנהר‪ .‬ועליו ועל כיוצא בו‬
‫נאמר‪ ,‬מבשן אשיב אשיב מ מ צ ו ל ו ת י ם וגוי‬

‫ש ו ״ ת מ ה ר ״ י ווייל)‪:(p. 22‬‬

‫ועוד כיון ש מ ס ר עצמו ל מ י ת ה כמו שכתבת‪ ,‬ש א מ ר לו מ א ן ד ה ו א תלך לחוץ מ ן‬

‫ה ח י ר ו ת ו מ ס ו ר עצמך כדי שיהיה לך כפרה‪ ,‬וכן עשה‪ .‬וכיון ש מ ס ר עצמו ל מ י ת ה‬
‫כדי שיהיה לו כפרה ודאי יש לו כפרה‪ .‬וכה״ג מ י י ת י עובדא בב״ר‪ :‬בנו של יוסף בן‬
‫יועזר שלא נהג כשורה ועשה בעצמו ד' מ י ת ו ת ב״ד י צ ת ה בת קול ו א מ ר ה מ ז ו מ ן‬
‫לחיי העולם הבא‪.‬‬
 ‫ש מ ש ו ן " ) ‪:(p. 2 2‬‬

‫בשערים ]עמד[ ה ח כ ם ר' יוסף ‪ /‬ו א ת א ח י ו ל א הכיר וישסף ‪ /‬ה מ ק נ ה עת ה א ס ף‬

‫‪. /‬לזבוח ל ה ' ב א ת י‬

‫ר׳ מ ש ה ב״ר אלעזר)‪:(p. 23‬‬

‫ב ת ו ל ת ב ת עמי ה ר א ו י ה לאפריון וכלה‪ ,‬ה צ י ת ה א ת ה א ו ר ו ק פ צ ה בו ונפלה ]‪[...‬‬

‫נשים יפהפיות תכרענה ילדיהן ת פ ל ח נ ה ]‪ [...‬ש ח ט ה ביום א ח ד א ו ת ה ו א ת בנה‬

‫ממורבוך)‪:(p. 23‬‬

‫ונער ש ל מ ה בר א ש ר וג׳ י ל ד י ם א ש ר ש ח ט ה בידה״‪ [...] .‬ובנו ר׳ י צ ח ק ו א ש ת ו ויל‬

‫‪.‬דיו ו ש ח ט עצמו במרחץ וילדיו‬

‫ר׳ יוסף ה כ ה ן ) ‪:(p. 2 4‬‬

‫ויבחרו רבים להרוג א י ש א ת א ח י ו ]‪ [...‬כ א ש ר עשו ה י ה ו ד י ם א ש ר נ ח ב א ו ב ק א ש ט י ל‬

‫ש א ר א ז י ן א ש ר השליכו גורל ביניהם ל ר א ו ת מ י יהרוג א ת אחיו‪ .‬ו י מ ו ת ו כ ל ם בעת‬
‫‪.‬ההיא‪ ,‬ושניים א ש ר נשארו ב א ח ר ו נ ה נפלו מ ע ל ה מ ג ד ל א ר צ ה ו י מ ו ת ו גם שניהם‬

‫ס ל י ח ה לר' אביגדור ק ר א ‪ ,‬פראג)‪:(p. 24‬‬

‫כן רך הלבב בנו ישחטנו ‪ /‬ו ה א ם לא נכמרו ר ח מ י ה על בנה למלטנו ‪ /‬ת ר ו מ ה מ א ת‬

‫כל א י ש א ש ר ידבנו ‪ /‬א ם זכר א ם נ ק ב ה ת מ י ם יקריבנו ]‪ [...‬מ ו ר ה ז ק ן ונשוא פנים‬
‫בעמו ‪ /‬לבלתי יתעוללו בו נזדרז בעצמו ‪ /‬ל ש ח ו ט א ת בניו ובני ביתו עימו ‪ /‬א ף‬
‫‪.‬לזאת י ח ר ד לבי ויתר מ מ ק ו מ ו‬

‫ר' זלמן מ ס נ ט ג ו א ר ) ‪:(p. 2 6‬‬

‫כ א ש ר א ז ר א י ת י כי ה י י ת י ב א ו ת ו ה פ ע ם ש ם בבית מ ה ״ ר נתן ע״ה‪ ,‬ו א מ ר ו לי שהיו‬

‫ש ם בשע' עליית בני בליעל ב ס כ נ ה גדולה עד שקיבץ מ ה ״ ר נתן הנ״ל הרבי ילדיי‬
‫ו ה פ ק י ד ' ביד א ש ת ו הרבנית וציוה עליה מ ת י ש ת ש מ ע ק ו ל צ ע ק ת ו א ז ת ה י י זריזה‬
‫‪.‬ומוכנת ל ש ח ו ט א ת כ ל ה י ל ד י ם ש ה פ ק י ד בידה‪ .‬ו א י ת ר ח ש נ י ס א שנצלו‬

‫ר ש י מ ת יזכור)‪:(p. 27, η. 30‬‬

‫יזכור א ל ה י ם א ת נ ש מ ו ת מ ד י נ ו ת מעקלנבורג ר' א ה ר ן ב״ר מ ר ד כ י ובנו ה ק ד ו ש‬

‫ר' מענדלן ור' א ה ר ן ובנו ה ק ד ו ש ר' מ י כ ל ו א ש ת ו ש ש ח ט ה ע צ מ ה ושלשת בניה‬
‫‪.‬ששמה הענדלן‬
 ‫פירושי בעלי ה ת ו ס פ ו ת לתורה )‪:(p. 29‬‬

‫ואך א ת ד מ כ ם וגוי‪ ,‬א ז ה ר ה לחונק א ת עצמו‪ .‬ואמרו בב״ר יכול אפיי כחנניה‬
‫מ י ש א ל ועזריה‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪ .‬פירוש‪ ,‬יכול אפילו כמו אלו שמסרו עצמן לקידוש ה ש ם‬
‫שלא יוכל לחבול בעצמו א ם ה ו א ירא שלא יוכל בעצמו לעמוד בניסיון‪ ,‬ת ״ ל‬
‫אך‪ ,‬כי בשעת ה ש מ ד יכול ל מ ס ו ר עצמו ל מ י ת ה ולהרוג עצמו‪ .‬וכן בשאול בן ק י ש‬
‫ש א מ ר לנערו‪ ,‬שלוף חרבך ודוקרני בה וכוי‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪ ,‬ש א ם ירא א ד ם ש מ א יעשו‬
‫לו יסורין ק ש י ם שלא יוכל לסבול ולעמוד בנסיון שיכול להרוג א ת עצמו‪ .‬ו מ כ א ן‬
‫מביאין ראיה א ו ת ן ששוחטין התינוק[ות] בשעת השמד‪.‬‬
‫ויש שאוסרין ומפרשין כן‪ :‬יכול כחנניה וחביריו שכבר נמסרו למיתה‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪,‬‬
‫אבל אינו יכול להרוג א ת עצמו‪ .‬יכול כשאול ש מ ס ר עצמו למיתה‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪ .‬פי'‬
‫שאינו יכול לחבול בעצמו כלל‪ ,‬ושאול שלא ברשות ח כ מ י ם עשה‪ .‬מ ה ר ״ ש בר‬
‫א ב ר ה ם ה מ כ ו נ ה אוכמן‪.‬‬
‫ומעשה ברב א ח ד ש ש ח ט הרבה תינוקות בשעת ה ש מ ד כי ה י ה ירא שיעבירום על‬
‫דת‪ .‬ו ה י ה רב א ח ד עמו והיה כועס עליו ביותר וקוראו רוצח‪ ,‬והוא לא ה י ה חושש‪.‬‬
‫ו א מ ר א ו ת ו רב‪ :‬א ם כדברי יהרג אותו רב ב מ י ת ה משונה‪ .‬וכן היה‪ ,‬שתפסוהו‬
‫עכו״ם והיו פושטין עורו ונותנין חול בין העור והבשר‪ .‬ו א ח ״ כ נ ת ב ט ל ה הגזרה‪,‬‬
‫ו א ם לא ש ח ט אותן ה ת י נ ו ק ו ת היו ניצולין‪.‬‬

‫שו״ת מ ה ר ״ ם מרוטנבורג)‪:(p. 30‬‬

‫יהודי א ח ד שאל מ ה ר ״ מ שיחיה‪ ,‬א ם צריך כפרה על ש ש ח ט א ש ת ו ודי בניו ביום‬

‫הרג רב בקופלינש עיר ה ד מ י ם ‪ ,‬כי כך ביקשוהו יען ראו כי יצא ה ק צ ף מלפני ה '‬
‫והתחילו ה א ו י ב י ם להרוג בני א ל חי הנהרגים על קידוש הי‪ .‬וגם ה ו א רצה להרוג‬
‫א ת עצמו ב מ י ת ת ם ‪ ,‬א ל א שהצילו ה ' על ידי גוים‪.‬‬
‫וכתב לו‪ :‬לא ידענא שפיר מ ה אידון ביה‪ ,‬כי ודאי ההורג עצמו על ייחוד ה ' רשאי‬
‫לחבול בעצמו‪ .‬ו א מ י ‪ :‬יכול כשאול‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪ .‬ואמרינן מעשה בדי מ א ו ת ילדים‬
‫וילדות שנשבו לקלון ]‪ [...‬א ף גם ה י א עלתה לגג ונפלה ומתה‪ ,‬י צ ת ה בת ק ו ל‬
‫ו א מ ר ה ‪ :‬א ם הבנים שמחה‪ .‬וכהנה רבות‪.‬‬
‫אבל ל ש ח ו ט א ח ר י ם צריך עיון ל מ צ ו א ראייה להתיר ]‪ [...‬מיהו דבר ז ה פ ש ט‬
‫היתירו ומצאנו שהרבה גדולים שהיו שוחטין א ת בניהם ו א ת בנותיהם‪ .‬וגם רבי'‬
‫קלונימוס עשה כן בקינה ה מ ת ח ל ת ‪ :‬א מ ר ת י שעו מני‪.‬‬
‫ונ״ל להביא ראייה להתיר דכי היכי ד א מ ' יכול כשאול ת ״ ל אך‪ ,‬ה"נ נימא‬
‫דההורג א ת חברו על קידוש ה ש ם מותר‪ ,‬ד ב ה ה ו א ק ר א כתיב‪ ,‬ומיד ה א ד ם ומיד‬
‫איש וגוי‪ .‬ואך דרישא ד ק ר א ק א י אכולי' ק ר א דבתר' ]‪[...‬‬
‫ומי שמטעינו כפרה ה ו א מ ו צ י א לעז על ה ח ס י ד י ם הראשונים‪ .‬ואחרי שכוונת יצרו‬
‫ה י ה ל ט ו ב ה ; מרוב א ה ב ת יוצרינו יתברך שמו פגע ונגע ב מ ח מ ד עיניו‪ .‬גם ה ם חילו‬
‫פניו על כ כ ה ]‪ [...‬ואין ל ה ח מ י ר עליו כלל‪.‬‬
 ‫ר' מ ש ה מ ק ו ר ב י ל ) ב ש ם ראבי״ה()‪:(p. 33‬‬

‫ו א ו ת ם ה ק ד ו ש י ם ששחטו עצמן וזרעם כשבאו לידי נסיון מפני שלא רצו ל ס מ ו ך‬

‫על דעתן ד א מ ר ו רבותינו‪ ,‬א ל ת א מ י ן בעצמך עד יום מ ו ת ך ) א ב ו ת ב ד(‪ ,‬והיו י ר א י ם‬
‫שיעבירום הגוים על ד ת ויהיה ש ם ש מ י ם מ ת ח ל ל על ידיהם‪ ,‬כולם יש ל ה ם ח ל ק‬
‫לעולם ה ב א ו ק ד ו ש י ם גמורים ה ם כדדרשינן‪ ,‬ואך א ת ד מ כ ם לנפשותיכם אדרוש‪,‬‬
‫יכול כ מ ע ש ה שאול ת ל מ ו ד לומר‪ ,‬א ך )בראשית רבה לד(‪ .‬ושנינן פרק הניזקין‪,‬‬
‫מ צ א ו ד' מ א ו ת ילדים שנשבו באשקלון)!( והטילו עצמן לים לפי שלא י ה א שם‬
‫ש מ י ם מ ת ח ל ל על ידיהם‪ ,‬ו י צ א ה בת קול ו א מ ר ה ‪ :‬כולם ק ד ו ש י ם מ ז ו מ נ י ם לעולם‬
‫ה ב א )גיטין נז ב(‪ .‬ואין ל ה ק ש ו ת מרבי חנינא בן תרדיון בפרק ק מ א דעבודה‬
‫זרה )דף יח א( שלא רצה לפתוח פיו כדי ש ת צ א ב ט ה ר ה ו א מ ר מ ו ט ב שיטלנה‬
‫מ י שנתנה ו א ל א ח ב ל אני בעצמי‪ ,‬שאני רבי חנינא שכבר ה ו צ ת בחבילי זמורות‬
‫שהקיפו ה א ו י ב י ם סביביו וידע בעצמו שלא י ה א ש ם ש מ י ם מ ת ח ל ל על ידו‪ .‬ו מ כ א ן‬
‫ס מ כ ו ל ש ח ו ט הילדים בשעת גזירה שאינם יודעים בין ט ו ב לרעה לפי שאנו י ר א י ם‬
‫פן ישתקעו בין הגוים בגויותן כשיגדלו מ ו ט ב שימותו ז כ א י ם ו א ל ימותו חייבים‬
‫שכן מצינו גבי בן סורר ומורה שעל ש ם שסופו ל ל ס ט ם הבריות ומחלל שבתות‬
‫לפיכך ה ו א בסקילה‪ .‬עד כ א ן לשון ה א ב י העזרי‪.‬‬

‫ר' שלום מנוישטט)‪:(p. 35‬‬

‫א ש ה א ח ת שלחה מ מ ד י נ ת פול״ן א ל מ ה ״ ר שלום‪ ,‬איך ש ה י ת ה בעיר שטריגו״ם‬

‫בשעת הגזירה בשבת‪ ,‬ו ש ח ט ה ילדיה ולבסוף נמלטה‪ ,‬ו ש א ל ה ל מ ה ״ ר שלום‬
‫שאינה צריכה לשום תשובה ו א ד ר ב ה כדין עשתה וכהוגנת עשתה‪.‬‬

‫ר' מ נ ח ם מירזבורג)‪:(p. 36‬‬

‫דין מ י ש ש ח ט א ש ת ו ובניו בשעת גזירה אין ל ה ח מ י ר עליו כלל‪ ,‬כ״ש ש א ד ם רשאי‬

‫להרוג עצמו על קידוש השם‪.‬‬

‫ר' ש ל מ ה לוריא)מהרש״ל()‪:(p. 38‬‬

‫ו ק ״ ו ש א ס ו ר בשעת גזירה ל ש ח ו ט א ת בניו כדי שלא י ט מ א ו א ו ת ם בשמד‪ .‬כי‬

‫אפילו בעצמו אין א ד ם רשאי לחבול בעצמו‪ ,‬ק ״ ו באחרים‪ .‬ו מ ס ת מ א א ם א י נ ם‬
‫ראוים וזוכים לכך יחזרו מ ע צ מ ן ועכשיו הן א נ ו ס י ם ופטורי' לגמרי‪ .‬וג"כ רוב‬
‫ה א נ ו ס י ם חוזרים א ח ר כ מ ה שנים‪ ,‬ולפעמים בניהם חוזרים‪.‬‬

‫ר' ח ס ד א י ק ר ש ק ש )‪:(p. 48‬‬

‫]‪ [...‬י״ז בתמוז ח מ ת ה ' נ ת כ ה על עיר ה ק ו ד ש אשר מ ש ם ת צ א תורה ודעת ה ' ה י א‬

‫ק ה ל ת טוליטולה‪ ,‬ויהרגו ב מ ק ד ש ה ' כ ה ן ונביא‪ .‬ש מ ה קדשו א ת ה ש ם ברבים‬
‫רבניה‪ ,‬ה ם זרע הכשר והנבחר‪ ,‬זרע ר' אשר זצ״ל ה ם ובניהם ותלמידיהם‪ .‬גם‬
‫ש ם המירו רבים לא יכלו לעמוד על נפשם‪.‬‬

‫ר' יעקב אבן אלבנה‪ " ,‬ק י נ ה עלי ט ל י ט ל ה " ) ‪:(p. 4 8‬‬

‫ורב י ה ו ד ה ת ח י ל ה‬
‫אשר ה י ה איש ת ה י ל ה‬
‫הקריב א ש ת ו לעולה‬
‫ובניו בקרב ישראל]‪[...‬‬

‫וציר נאמן של ק ה י ל ה‬
‫ש ח ט עצמו ת ח י ל ה‬
‫ל ז א ת א ז ע ק יללה‬
‫א ל שאול ו א ל בית ישראל ]‪[...‬‬

‫ושלמה א ח י ה ו‬
‫ה ע ת אשר ר א ה ו‬
‫מתגלל בדם ויעש גם ה ו א‬
‫כאשר עשה ישראל‬

‫והאיש מ ש ה בן אשר‬
‫ה ק ד י ש עצמו כאשר‬
‫ר א ה א ת כל אשר‬
‫עשה א ל ה י ם ל מ ש ה ולישראל‬

‫ר' י ח י א ל בן ה ר א ״ ש )‪:(p. 48‬‬

‫ת מ ו ז ‪ /‬בך נדרשו עם א ל לפסל ומ־ ‪ /‬ס כ ה ונשתמדו יחד ק ה ל ו ת י‬

‫ת מ ו ז ‪ /‬בך הרגו א ב ו ת לבנים לבל ‪ /‬ד ת ם ימירון ל ד ת צרי ושונאותי‬

‫ר' ח ס ד א י ק ר ש ק ש ) ‪:(p. 4 9‬‬

‫יום שבת אחריו שפך ה ' כאש ח מ ת ו נער מ ק ד ש ו וחלל נזר תורתו ה י א ק ה ל ת‬
‫ברצלו״נה אשר הובקעה ה י ו ם ה ה ו א ובאו מ ס פ ר ההרוגים כמו מ א ת י י ם ו ח מ י ש י ם‬
‫נפשות‪ .‬וכל יתר ה ק ה ל נסו א ל ה מ ג ד ל ושם נמלטו והאויבים בזזו כל מ ס י ל ו ת‬
‫ה י ה ו ד י ם והציתו א ש ב ק צ ת ם ‪ [...] .‬א ז י ק ם שאון דלת ה ע ם והמון רבה על נכבדי‬
‫ה מ ד י נ ה וילחמו עם ה י ה ו ד י ם אשר במגדל עם ק ש ת ו ת ו ב ל ס ט ר א ו ת ויכום ו י כ ת ו ם‬
‫ש מ ה במגדל‪ .‬רבים קדשו ה ' ב ת ו כ ם בני יחידי חתן‪ ,‬שה ת מ י ם העליתיו לעולה‪,‬‬
‫א צ ד י ק עלי הדין ו א ת נ ח ם לטוב ח ל ק ו ולנעימת גורלו‪ .‬ו מ ה ם רבים ששחטו עצמם‪,‬‬
‫ו מ ה ם הפילו ע צ מ ם מ ה מ ג ד ל ולא הגיעו לחצי ה מ ג ד ל עד שנעשו א ב ר י ם אברים‪.‬‬
‫‪.‬וקצת יצאו מ ש ם וקדשו א ת ה ש ם ברחוב‪ .‬וכל ה ש א ר המירו‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם זכות)‪:(p. 49‬‬

‫וכל ז א ת ה מ ש פ ח ה נקראו ק ד ו ש י ם כי בכל ש מ ד ו ת קדשו ה ש ם וכ״ש ר' י ה ו ד ה‬

‫ה ק ד ש ח ת ן רבינו יעקב שעשה ד' ט ו ר י ם נהרג על קידוש ה ש ם ה ו א ו ח מ ו ת ו‬
‫]‪ [...‬ואשתו וכל בניו והרגו זה לזה‪ ,‬זה הכלל א י נ ם ח ס י ן על ע צ מ ם בייחוד ה ש ם‬
‫‪.‬ונקראו ק ד ו ש י ם‬

‫פרופט דוראן)אפודי()‪:(p. 50‬‬

‫ו ז ה ה מ י ן מ ן הכפרה מ י ו ח ד יותר ל צ ד י ק י ם הנהרגים על ק ד ו ש ת ה ' ואשר מ ס ר ו‬

‫ע צ מ ם ל מ י ת ה על ק ד ו ש ת שמו ועל א ה ב ת ו לקדושי עליון רעיך אבי ה ח כ מ י ם‬
‫הרבנים ה ח ס י ד י ם שלשת הרועים אשר בגירונה העיר ק ב ר ו ת אבותיך ויתר‬
‫ה ק ד ו ש י ם אשר היו שם ו ז ו ל ת ם מ ן ה מ ק ו מ ו ת אשר מ ת ו בחרב ובלהבה אשר‬
‫‪ [...].‬אחשוב ז כ ו ת ם הגין על ה ש א ר י ת ה נ מ צ א‬

‫רמב״ן)‪:(p. 52‬‬

‫צ ד י ק י ם ו ת מ י מ י ם ‪ [...] /‬ו ת ח ת החרב נתנו ר א ש ם ‪ /‬יקריבו לפניך עולה ]‪[...‬‬

‫וזבחים ‪ /‬וזבחי א ד ם ‪ ,‬ויעשו לריח ניחוחים ‪ /‬א ת ה ר א ש ו א ת ה נ ת ח י ם ‪ /‬ו ה ם‬
‫ששים ו ש מ ח י ם ‪ /‬זה י א מ ר ]‪ / [...‬א ק ר י ב א ת עצמי וחלבי ודמי ונתחי וראשי ‪/‬‬
‫ו א ת ן בכורי פשעי פרי בטני ח ט א ת נפשי ‪ /‬ונפשם מ ת ע ל ס ת ‪ /‬ב ד מ י ה מ ת ב ו ס ס ת‬
‫]·‪[·.‬‬

‫ר' יום טוב אשבילי)ריטב״א()‪:(p. 53‬‬

‫כתוב בגליוני ה ת ו ס פ ו ת ש ה י ה א ו מ ר ר ״ ת ז״ל ד ה י כ א ש מ ת י י ר א שלא יכריחוהו‬

‫לעבור על ד ת מ ו ת ר לחבול בעצמו‪ .‬והכי א י ת א ב מ ד ר ש ) ב ר א ש י ת רבה לד יג( כתיב‬
‫א ך א ת דמכם‪...‬יכול אפילו כשאול מלך ישראל פי' שחבל בעצמו מפני שהיה‬
‫מ ת י י ר א ש מ א יעבידוהו על ד ת ת ל מ ו ד לומר א ך מיעט‪ .‬דבכי ה א י גוונא שרי‪.‬‬
‫ו מ כ א ן לומדים ל ש ח ו ט הנערים בגזרות מפני העברת הדת‪ .‬ע"כ מ צ א ת י בגליוני‬
‫ה ת ו ס פ ו ת ו ה ם דברים שצריכין ת ל מ ו ד ועיון גדול‪ ,‬א ל א שכבר הורה זקן‪ .‬ושמענו‬
‫בשם גדולי צרפת שהתירו כן ה ל כ ה למעשה‪.‬‬

‫ספר כף ה ק ט ו ר ת ) ‪:(p. 5 6‬‬

‫לידע ולהודיע מ ה ט ו ב ה עושה בישראל כל מ י שעומד בנסיון ו מ ת על יחוד שמו‬

‫של ק ב ״ ה ה ק ד ו ש א ז י הפנים ה מ א י ר י ' עומדי' בפניי צ ו ח ק ו ' וכל ה כ י ת ו ' של ימין‬
‫ב ק י ל ו ס ו ב ש מ ח ה וברננה וכל דבור ודבור שיוצא מ ה פ נ י ' הנוראי' נבראי' כ מ ה‬
‫מיני מ ל א כ י י שהן כ ל ם מ ל א כ י ר ח מ י י לשמש ה צ ד י ק ה ז ה ‪ .‬ולכן כל איש ישראל א ו‬
‫א ש ה א ו ת י נ ו ק ה מ ק ד ש שמו של ק ב ״ ה ו מ ת א ו נשרף א ו נצלב כל ישראל ח י י ב י ם‬
‫ל ה ס פ ד עליהם וכן בתי כ נ ס י ו ת ובתי מדרשות‪ .‬ו א ם בעל א ש ה ה ו א א ש ת ו ל א‬
‫ת נ ש א לעולי עבור כבודו של ק ב ״ ה ועבור כ ב ו ד ם של ישראל ו א ם נשא לא תגרש‪.‬‬

‫ס פ ר ה מ ק צ ו ע ו ת ) ‪:(p. 5 6‬‬

‫כתוב בספר ה מ ק צ ו ע ו ת מ י שנהרג על ק י ד ו ש ה ש ם ועל יחוד ה ש ם יתברך ]‪[...‬‬

‫ו מ ס ר עצמו ל מ י ת ה ונהרג א ו נצלב א ו נשרף על ק י ד ו ש ה ש ם כיון ש ק י ד ש ה ש ם‬
‫בגופו ובנפשו כל ישראל חייבין לקרוע עליו ו ל ה ת א ב ל עליו ולהספידו בבתי‬
‫כ נ ס י ו ת ובבתי מ ד ר ש ו ת ו א ש ת ו לא ת נ ש א עולמית מ ש ו ם כבוד ש מ י ם ו מ ש ו ם‬
‫כבודו‪ ,‬ו א ם נ ש א ת ל א ת צ א י ‪.‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם זכות)‪:(p. 58‬‬

‫וכלם עמדו ב ש מ ד ו ת ק ש ט י ל י י א על ת ל ם בעבודת ה ש ם י ת ' ובתורתו‪ .‬גם אני‬

‫ה ש ם ב ״ ה זכני ש א ק ד ש שמו עם ש מ ו א ל בני‪ ,‬ובאנו ל א פ ר י ק א והיינו שבויים שני‬
‫פעמים‪ .‬ה ש ם למען ח ס ד י ו ורחמיו הגדולים ישלים לי ולזרעי ש י ה י ה א ח ר י ת נ ו‬
‫לעבודת ה ש ם י ת ' ו י ת ' ולתורתו וישים ח ל ק נ ו עם ה צ ד י ק י ם בג״ע ו ב ת ח י י ת‬
‫ה מ ת י ם ולבנין בית מ ק ד ש ו אכי״ר‪.‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם זכות)‪:(p. 59‬‬

‫וראוי ל ה ב י א בכאן כפי זמננו שראינו צ ד י ק י ם שהרגו ע צ מ ם ובניהם כדי שלא‬

‫י ו צ י א ו ם על כ ר ח ם מ ת ו ר ת ה ' ש ז ה ה י ה מ ו ת ר ודבר ק ד ו ש כי ב ת ל מ ו ד כשבאו‬
‫ספינות מ י ל ד י ם וילדות שנשבו לקלון לרומי א מ ר ו ל א דיינו מ ה שהכעסנו בארץ‬
‫א ל א שגם בחייל ו א מ ר ו א ם נשליך עצמינו ל י ם ‪ /‬אנו ה ו ל כ י ם לעה״ב ודרש ל ה ם‬
‫ז ק ן א ח ד א מ ר ה ' מבשן אשיב וכוי והשליכו עצמן ה י ל ד ו ת ונשאו ק ״ ו ה ז כ ר י ם‬
‫וכוי והשליכו עצמן לים )בבלי גיטין נז ב(‪ .‬ובפרק ה נ ז ק י ן ו ב פ ס ק י ת ו ס פ ו ת בשעת‬
‫גזרות מ ו ת ר להרוג עצמו כשדואג מ ן היסורין ו ה ר א י ה קפצו כ ל ם ונפלו וכוי‪.‬‬
‫ו ה א ד א מ ר ב ע ״ ז ) ד ף יח א( ברי חנינא בן תרדיון מ ו ט ב שיטלנה מ י שנתנה ו א ל‬
‫יחבול בעצמו שיפתח פיו לאש‪ ,‬ה כ א י ר א י ם היו מ י ס ו ר י ם כ ד א מ ר י נ ן א ל מ ל א נגדו‬
‫לחנניה וחביריו וכוי ועוד על כ ר ח ם של ת י נ ו ק ו ת היו מענין א ו ת ם ולא היו הורגין‬
‫א ו ת ם ‪ .‬ו ה מ ר ד כ י כ ת ב בסוף פ ״ ק דע״ז על ענין ר' חנינא בן תרדיון‪ ,‬כ ת ב ר' יוסף‬
‫מ י ה ו ה י כ א שמיסרין א ו ת ו וירא שלא יוכל לעמוד בנסיון מותר‪ .‬א ב ל אני ה כ ו ת ב‬
‫יש לי יותר ר א י ה מ ז ה ה מ ע ש ה של פ ט י ר ת רבי ב ה ה ו א כ ו ב ס שלא נזדמן ביום‬
‫ה ה ו א להיו' בקבורתו של רבי ושמע כי מ י ש ה י ה ש ם בקבורתו זוכה לחיי ה ע ה ״ ב‬
‫שעלה לגג והפיל עצמו ו מ ת שהרג עצמו בעבור שלא נזדמן ל ה י ו ת ש ם ל ק י י ם‬
‫ה מ צ ו ה ו י צ א ת ב ״ ק ש ה ו א מ ז ו מ ן לחיי ה ע ה ״ ב בלי שום דין ועונש כ מ ו שפירשו‬
‫ב ז ה )בבלי כ ת ו ב ו ת קג ב ובתוספות שם(‪ .‬וכן י ו ק י ם איש צרידות בן א ח ו ת ו של‬
‫יוסי בן יועזר שהרג עצמו‪.‬‬
‫וכ״ש בזמן ה ש מ ד ו ת שלא לחלל ה ש ם ולהיות מ ק ד ש ה ש ם כ מ ו ר' י ה ו ד ה בן השר‬
‫אשר ה ק ד ו ש בטוליטולא שנת ק נ ״ א שהרגו ע צ מ ם ה ו א ואשתו ו ח מ ו ת ו א ש ת ר'‬
‫יעקב בעל הטורים‪ .‬וכן בפורטוגל ה ח כ ם ר' י צ ח ק בן צחין מבונילייא דילא שיירא‬
‫ובניו בשנת נז״ר‪ .‬וכן א מ ר ו בסנהדרין‪ ,‬ו א ך א ת ד מ כ ם וכוי יכול כשאול שלא‬
‫יתעללו בו הערלים ת ״ ל א ך מיעט‪ .‬וכן שמשון בן מנוח שידענו שזכה לחיי ה ע ה ״ ב‬
‫בזכות עין א ח ד כ מ ו שאמרו ז״ל‪.‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם זכות)‪:(p. 71‬‬

‫ו ה י ה ש מ ד גדול בשנה ה ה י א שלא ה י ה מעולם‪ .‬וערב שבת הגדול נגזר שיוציאו‬

‫נערים ונערות מ ה כ ל ל מ א י ב ו ר א ובכל מ ל כ ו ת פורטוגל‪ .‬ו ה י ת ה צ ע ק ה גדולה‬
‫באיבורא א ל ה מ ל ך שלא ה י ת ה כמוה‪ ,‬ו ב פ ס ח באו ולקחו כל הילדים והילדות‬
‫ונתפשטה הגזרה כי אפילו ל ז ק נ י ם מוציאין מ ן הכלל על כרחם‪ ,‬והרבה מ ת ו על‬
‫ק ד ו ש ת ה ש ם שהיו מ מ י ת י ן עצמן‪.‬‬

‫ר' אליהו קפשאלי)‪:(p. 72‬‬

‫ויהי ב ל ו ק ח ם הגוים בני ה י ה ו ד י ם נשתמדו רבים לאין מ ס פ ר כי לא יכלו לעמוד‬

‫ב ז א ת הגזרה כי כידוע שרחמי ה א ב מרובין על הבן וכי‪ .‬ו ח ל ק מ ה ם קדשו ש ם‬
‫ש מ י ם ועמדו ב ק ד ו ש ת ם ופרי בטן לא ירחמו על בנים לא ת ח ו ס עינם ולא נעו ולא‬
‫זעו מ ד ת ם ואמונתם‪...‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם סבע)‪:(p. 75‬‬

‫ואיך ע ת ה כששמע כרוז ה מ ל ך שכל מ י שיש לו בת או א ח ו ת שיביאה א ל ה מ ל ך‬

‫ל ה י ו ת ה נבעלת לערל עע״ז‪ ,‬ל מ ה לא שם עצמו בסכנה להוליכה א ל ארץ גזרה לבא‬
‫במערות צורים ובנקיקי ס ל ע י ם עד יעבור זעם‪ ,‬או להוליכה למלכות א ח ר ת ‪ .‬ו א ס‬
‫א ״ א לא ז ה ולא זה ה נ ה ראינו בעינינו ב מ ל כ ו ת פורטוגל בזמן הגירוש‪ ,‬שלקחו‬
‫הבנים והבנות באונס להעבירם על ד ת ולהמירם‪ ,‬שהיו ח ו נ ק י ם ע צ מ ם ו ש ו ח ט י ם‬
‫ע צ מ ם ונשותיהם‪ ,‬ובפרט בראשונה שהגזרה לא פ ש ט ה א ל א בבנים ובנות היו‬
‫ל ו ק ח י ם הבנים והבנות ומשליכים א ו ת ם בבורות ל ה מ י ת ם בחייהם‪ ,‬א ו ל ח ו נ ק ם‬
‫ו ל ש ו ח ט ם ולא שיראו א ו ת ם עובדים ע״ז‪ .‬ו ל מ ה לא עשה מרדכי א ' מ א ל ו הדברים‬
‫שעשו ק ט נ י ישראל בפורטוגל‪ ,‬וראוי ה י ה למרדכי ליהרג על דבר כ ז ה ]‪[...‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם סבע)‪:(p. 77‬‬

‫א ח " כ ה כ נ י ס ו ם כ ל ם לחצר א ח ד כ מ ו עשרת אלפים יהודים וכלם ה כ ר י ח ו ם‬

‫ופיתום להמיר ד ת ם ‪ ,‬ובדי י מ י ם לא נשארו ארבעים בין אנשים ונשים‪.‬‬
 ‫ר' א ב ר ה ם ארדוטיאל)‪:(p. 79‬‬

‫ולא נתקררה ד ע ת ו ) ש ל המלך( עד ששלח ידו ב ח כ מ י ם ועשה ב ה ם שפטים ועינה‬

‫א ו ת ם בכל מיני עינוים ו א ס ר א ו ת ם בכבלי ברזל‪ .‬ורבים מן ה י ה ו ד י ם המירו ד ת ם‬
‫שלא יכלו לעמוד בנסיונם ו מ ה ם תלו ע צ מ ם ו מ ה ם מ ס ר ו ע צ מ ם על ק ד ו ש ת שמו‬
‫יתברך ובראשם הרב ה ק ד ו ש ה ח ס י ד בנפש ט ה ו ר ה וגוף נקי כאלישע בעל כנפים‬
‫]בבלי שבת מ ט א[ ה ו א הרב ר' שמעון מ י מ י ז״ל ש מ ס ר עצמו ה ו א וביתו וכל אשר‬
‫לו אנשים ונשים וטף ו מ ת בתוך ה ס ו ה ר בעינויים גדולים‪ .‬ו ה ח כ ם ה ח ס י ד ה ק ד ו ש‬
‫הרי ש ם טוב ל א ר מ ה שעברו עליו כ מ ה עינויים כ מ ו שאמרנו ק ו ד ם שהכניסוהו‬
‫לסוהר ו א ח ר כך הוציאוהו והצילו ה ק ב ״ ה נפשו מ מ ו ת ובא למלכות פ א ס ה ו א‬
‫והרב רבי יעקב לואל והרי א ב ר ה ם סבאע‪.‬‬
 APPENDIX D

THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE

SCROLL OF AMRAFEL

In Chapter 3 I dealt with the Scroll of Amrafel, a treatise attributed to

Rabbi Abraham Ben Eliezer Halevi. The author refers to a certain
tradition, originated in thirteenth century Ashkenaz, or possibly earlier,
which demonstrates how should a Jew act when facing the choice of
conversion or death. A comprehensive re-examination of the sermon
that survived from this treatise, led me to draw some new conclusions
regarding its historical background, and regarding the Ashkenazic
connections of its author.
The meager remnants of this essay, a total of less than three printed
pages, were published by Gershom Scholem more than seventy years
ago. 1 Scholem depicts the contents of the Scroll as "fire chiseling utter-
ances [...] undoubtedly, one of the best and more exalted sermons I
had come across in the qabbalistic literature [...]. This is a sermon
about the death of the martyrs who sacrificed their lives for the sane-
tification of the Name which was, undoubtedly, relevant in the times
of the Inquisition and its trials." 2 I do not question here the author-
ship of Abraham Halevi, and there is also an indication that it was
composed in Spain prior to the expulsion. 3 O n the other hand, I will
attempt to prove that his ideas, which were used freely by the most
important of historians, were misunderstood as far as the historical
context of this sermon is concerned. 4
The sermon is divided into two main parts, indicated by content and

1
G. Scholem, "Haqirot Hadashot al Rabi Avraham Ben Eliezer Halevi', Qrryat
Sefer 7, 1930-1931, 153-155.
2
Ibid.. See also: M. Fishbane, The Kiss of God, Seatde & London, 1994, p. 55.
3
See below, n. 20.
4
Fishbane, too, follows Scholem on this issue. The only scholar who handled this
with some degree of prudence, as far as I am aware, is M. Saperstein, even though
he treated it only implicitly and gave no alternative explanation (M. Saperstein, "A
Sermon on the Akedah from the Generation of the expulsion and Its Implication
for 1391," Exile and Diaspora: Studies in the History of the Jewish People Presented to Professor
Haim Beinart [A. Mirsky et al ed.], Jerusalem, 1991, 115.
style. The first part is the practical part which deals with the prepa-
ration of the Jew for an event in which he might be facing a Kiddush
ha-Shem situation, and it is composed of three sections. Initially, the
author informs the reader about a "tradition of sages and martyrs, ‫יי‬
according to which everyone who would "focus his mind at that hour
on the honorable and awesome Name between his eyes and will make
up his mind to sanctify Him, [...] he can rest assured that he will be
able to endure the test, trusting in God. He will not feel the pain of
the beating and torture, nor will he tremble (with the fear) of death."
T h e second section (In Scholem's edition it is joined to the first one.)
deals with "the order of taking the resolution to sanctify the Name,"
and he cites what he had found "written by one of the Hasidim that
his answer should be: 'What do you want from me? Am I not a Jew?
A Jew I am and as a Jew shall I die! A Jew! A Jew! A Jew! And then
he should resolve to (be true to) what he has his lips and mouth
uttered [...]. It is then that he will not feel the pain of the tortures
they inflict on him." Scholem already noted the Ashkenazic origin of
this idea, from the school of Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg, and possibly
even earlier. 5
In the last paragraph of this part the author contends that whoever
recites the Shema, mornings and evenings, with the correct intention
"and resolves to devote his own body and soul to Him as well as his
wife's and children's," or (also) during NefilatApayim following the Vidui,
while "saying: '1 commit my soul to You, Ο Lord' (Psalm 25:1), and
entrusts his soul to his God," 6 it is considered as if he actually gave his

5
Scholem, 441-442, and see the references of David Tamar, Qiiyat Sefer 33, 1958,
376-377; ibid., 34 1959, 397.
6
About the Sefardic custom to recite Psalm 25 while prostrating, see, for instance:
Abudraham Hashalem, Jerusalem, 1963, 119. Also, in the writings of Rabbi Abraham
Halevi's contemporary: "And some are accustomed to say it every day as supplica-
tion accompanied by nefilat apayim" [Qaf ha-Qetoret, Ms. Paris 845, 69b. And cf.: Tur
Orah Hayim, no. 131). And see: Y. M. Elenbogen, Ha-Tfilah be-Tisrael be-Hitpathutah
ha-Historit, Tel-Aviv, 1972, 60. Generally, this is s Sefardic custom, while in Ash-
kenaz they used to recite Psalm 6. Regarding the confession [vidui] said before the
nefilat apayim, a custom based on the ^phar, see: Daniel Sperber, Minhagei Tisrael 3,
Jerusalem, 1994, 177. The source of the connection between reciting Psalm 25 to
the readiness to give away one's soul appears for the first time in the Zphar II, 200b,
202b, and £ohar III, 121-122a. About the evolution of the custom of reciting Psalms
and its connection to self-sacrifice of one's soul, see: Y. Verdiger, Sheruta Diilota in:
Zlota de-Avraham 1, 1960, 348. O n e example of the development of this idea among
the qabalists of Zafed in the 16th century, see: Rabbi Haim Vital, Sha'ar ha-Kavanot
!,Jerusalem, 305, 310-311.
life for God's sake and all his sins are expiated, "since he resolved to
die [le-hashlim nafsho] for his God and this is considered as if he died,
gone and was annihilated from this world." About the intention to give
away one's soul while reciting the Shema, which originates—as far as
we know—in R. Yonah Gerondi (Catalunia, mid 12th century), was
recendy extensively discussed in a comprehensive article. 7 One could
speculate that there is a connection, and not an accidental one, to the
parallel idea about the recommended intention during the reciting
of Psalm 25 in the Nefilat Apayim prayer, which first appears in the
Zohar (where the issue of intention while reciting of the Shema is also
appears), about one generation after Yonah Gerondi.
The second part, as noted by Scholem, is a "sermon based on Song
of Songs 8:5-7, which makes use of ideas that were expressed already
in the Midrash ha-Ne'elam, Hayn Sarah, 125b, expounding these verses." 8
Rabbi Abraham expounds these verses as referring to the soul of the
martyr which goes up to its God which, due to its love, dedicated
itself for him and agreed to suffer to the point that it rises from the
desert, which is the underworld, to heaven while "she is falling apart
[mitpareqet9] and drops down limb for limb and piece for piece," as the
result of the tortures it had undergone for His sake. The love of God
and devotion to Him make the martyr physically indifferent to pain
so that "many waters," namely, multitudes of troubles and hardships,
"cannot quench love." Indeed, that righteous may boast in this great
act in which "he surrenders his body to the consuming fire and all
the other harsh tortures I mentioned above." The sermon ends with
depiction of the merit and place of the righteous amidst those who
sanctified the Name, like "the martyrs of Lydda and (other) martyrs
[harugei melukhah]." from the classical age of Kiddush ha-Shem in "the
generation of persecutions."
Now, there is here room for discussing the historical background of
this sermon. It is rather simple to understand the reasons that caused
scholars to inadvertently associate them with the Spanish Inquisition.
T h e Scroll of Amrafel was written in Spain, in the last quarter of the
fifteenth century and not earlier, since the author was born around

7
Y. Hacker, "Kelum Hu'ataq Kiddush ha-Shem el Tehum ha-Ru'ah Liqrat ha-
Et ha-Hadashah," Qedushat ha-Hayyim ve-Heruf ha-Nefesh: Qovei Ma'amarim le-^ikhro shel
Amir Yequtiel [Y. Gafni and A. Ravitzky ed.], Jerusalem, 1993, 221-232.
8
Scholem, 152. Rabbi Abraham actually is concerned with the homiletical inter-
pretation of other verses. See also: Fishbane, 58-59.
9
I amended here: mitpareqet for mitrapeqet.
 1460. During the eighth decade of that century, the first decade of
the activity of the Inquisition (literally: "interrogation," "investigation".
Hebrew: haqirah), they started to burn New Christians ofjewish origin
in their so-called Auto da Fé (Act of Faith). The multiple use of words
like "fire" and "flames" were the words connecting the sermon to the
reality in Spain. It seems that such dominant motifs obscured others
and prevented a clearer sight of the historical reality that was in the
background of composing the Scroll. We do not suggest to disregard
or to underestimate it; it might also be that such motifs are the basis
of the treatise title, since a very well known Midrash expounds: "And it
was in the days of Amrafel [...]" who determined and thrown Abra-
ham into the fiery furnace." 1 0 However, one must pay attention to
the fact that these words appear only in the last part of the sermon,
and even there—almost exclusively in the interpretation of verses of
Song of Songs 8:6-7, in which we find the description of love as "the
flashes thereof are flashes of fire, a very flame of the Lord [...] many
waters cannot quench love."
There is little doubt that the author knew what was taking place in
the dark cellars of the Holy Office and that he was familiar with its
procedures and ground rules. This supposition in itself is sufficient for
questioning the thesis as if he aims his exhortation to martyrdom to
the victims of this institution. As is well known, that the Inquisitorial
system used methods of extreme tortures in its attempts to reveal the
acts and religious allegiance that the New Christians, on their part,
attempted to conceal; once a complete confession as to his heretical
deeds and beliefs was extracted to the satisfaction of his interrogators,
there would no longer be need for any additional torture; judges would
have prescribed his penance, had he expressed any remorse and wish
to return to the bosom of the Church, or to death penalty at the stake,
had he persisted in his obstinacy. What point, then, is there to the
author's introduction of the Ashkenazic tradition in the second section
of the first part? Let us examine the complete paragraph:

This is the order of taking the resolution to sanctify the Name when they
come to torment him and interrogate him [yish'aluhu ve-yidreshuhu], and
tell him that if he converts \yamir kevodo] they will let him go and will
not hurt him, or that he should let them know what he wants. Behold
this is what I have found written by one of the Hassidim that his answer
should be: "What do you want from me? Am I not a Jew? A Jew I am

10
Bereshit Rabah, 41 (Theodore-Albeck Edition), Jerusalem, 1965, 408.
 and as a Jew I shall die! A Jew! A Jew! A Jew!5' And then he should
resolve to (be true to) what he has his lips and mouth uttered and be
ready and sure that he is going to sanctify his Creator and not profane
his God's Name. It is than that he will not feel the pain of the tortures
they inflict on him. And this is the secret alluded to by the prophet
Isaiah: "One shall say: '1 am the Lord's. And another shall call himself
by the name ofJacob. And another shall subscribe with his hand unto
the Lord, and surname himself by the name of Israel."

First, it would be unthinkable that the Inquisition would offer the

accused to "let them know what he wants," namely, to let them know
of his terms or conditions. More importandy, this regime had no aim
of converting. The issue of conversion is utterly and unquestionably of
no relevance, but rather the confession of the New Christian regarding
his heretical Jewish affiliation. It is precisely at the moment that the
accused admits to his Jewish loyalty that tortures cease! If so, then there
is no reasonable connection between the //05.rá&-Ashkenazic advice
given by the author to help one withstand tortures when faces with
torture-generated temptation to convert, and the conditions of those
accused of "judaizing" by the Inquisition. How are we to understand
the phrase "and tell him that if he converts [yamir kevodo] they will let
him go and will not hurt him"?
Furthermore, had our author referred to the anusim, it would have
indicated his ignorance of their religious condition. Anyone who is
aware of their limited "judaizing" and restricted acquaintance with
Jewish practices and cognizance, would describe the author's tone
as absolutely pathetic. How are we to understand a Jewish rabbi,
who tries to advise the descendants of the anusim, in Hebrew, how
to achieve supreme concentration and devequt through qabbalistic
means? And, supposedly, some of them did know and even recited
the Shema twice a day (see the end paragraph of the first part)—how
could our author ever think that the masses of those anusim pray the
Amidah prayer, followed by the Vidui and Nefilat Apayim? It would be
against our familiarity with the author's late manuscripts and letters,
most of which deal with Messianism; these, teach not only of the
curiosity and interest of the author in what was happening not only
in his vicinity but also around the world, and all that not without a
measure of criticism. We deal here with a well-informed person, not
with a qabbalist whose daily existence is wholly within the supernal
spheres, detached from reality. 11

11
See: I. Robinson, "Two Letters of Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi," in: I. Twersky
 All of the above considered, it seems that one must entirely reject
the opinion that the anusim were the author's destined audience. O n
the other hand, if we are to carefully examine the details of torments,
the author refers to toward the end of the sermon, saying "all the other
harsh tortures I mentioned above," while trying to interpret them in
the context of tortures applied in this era—an aperture is opened for
us to unveil the real historical context of the sermon:
[...] And the righteous, who dwell in the innermost chamber of the King
where bliss has its habitation, say about the soul of this martyr: "Who
is this (soul) that comes up from the lower world—which is likened to
the wilderness where there is nothing but serpents and adders, scorpions
and thirst—and for the love of its Beloved its body falls to pieces [peraqim
peraqim] due to the multitude of trials it was subjected to. They tear its
flesh by hot pincers or hack it to pieces by swords.

It seems that the torments mentioned at the end of the phrase were so
far read and understood metaphorically, due to the mythical character
of the beginning of the phrase, and herein lies the core of the problem.
If we do not view this phrase as a metaphor, we must ask ourselves
whether these torments were the fate of some of the Inquisition's
condemned victims. T h e answer to this question is utterly negative.
T h e series of torments led by this institution were committed under
interrogations, and these means, or any similar ones, were not used.
At the time of execution no tortures were carried out. There had been
a death penalty through fire. T h e condemned person could choose a
lighter death by accepting Christianity (as many did). In such a case
he would be garroted before his body is burned.
We do know, however, of the practice of such methods of torture
within the Holy Roman Empire. These torture were part of the penal
system and not of the interrogation procedure in which different kind
of torments, primarily stretching the body and dislocating its organs,
were used. It is explicit in the Carolina, the criminal code of King
Charles V, from 1532, but it is known that these torments were in
use already during the fifteenth century. 12 In an elegy dedicated to

(ed.) Studies in Medieval Jewish History and Literature, vol. 2, Cambridge, Mass., 1984,
408-410; Abraham Gross, "Aseret ha-Shvatim u-Malchut Prester John—Shemu'ot
ve-Hipusim Lifnei Gerush Sefarad ve-Aharav", Peamim 48, 1991, 29.
12
Professor Esther Cohen from the Hebrew University informed me of icono-
graphic evidence, particularly from cities in south Germany (and as we shall show
below, there is also explicidy written evidence). O n the other hand, these torments
the victims of one libel, probably from the beginning of that century,
we find the phrase: "and with white-hot pincers they gathered your
flesh5' [uvi-zvat melubenet laqtu besarkha].13 In the Blood Libel of Endingen,
in 1470, the three brothers accused of murdering a Christian child
were burned. Eight years later, in March 10, 1478, in the Host Libel
in Passau, on the banks of the Danube, two of the sentenced people
were condemned to death at the stake. They were also sentenced to
have their flesh pinched with white-hot pincers before being burned,
a punishment that was saved for extremely severe cases.14 Likewise,
the death penalty of "hacking it to pieces by swords" did exist in this
region in that period; I assume that the author's reference is to quar-
tering—the dissection of the condemned into quarters. 15
Examined from this angle, one could conclude from the very
beginning of the first part that our Scroll discusses torments that
were applied to people as part of the punishment—not as part of the
interrogation procedure. Rabbi Abraham Halevi talks about "such a
man, when they take him out in order to torment him through most
horrible tortures—as they did to the holy (martyrs) that are on the

are not mentioned in early collections of the medieval practices from the thirteenth
century, like the Schwabenspiegel and the Sachsenspiegel.
13
S. Benfeld, Sefer Hadma'ot, vol. 2, Berlin, 1896, p. 174, and laso: there, p. 173,
175, 178.
14
See: R. Po-Chia Hsia, The Myth of Ritual Murder, New Haven & London, 1988,
25, 26, 51. In the infamous Blood Libel of Trent in 1475, Shemuel was destined
to be taken out in a carriage to the site of execution to have his flesh ripped οίΓ in
white-hot pincers, and later to be burned (Idem, Trent 1475: Stories of Ritual Murder
Trial, New York, 1992, 67). Others were sentenced to breaking their bodies on the
wheel, and only then to be burnt.
15
See: R. van Dülmen, Theatre of Horror: Crime and Punishment in Early Modern
Germany, Cambridge, 1990, 92-94. This penalty was considered to be the harshest
of punishments. According to the author, this penalty was saved mainly for traitors
and conspirators, who attempted to assassin the king. However, he does not mention
any such penalty handed to a Jew. Clues for such peculiar death penalty we find in
phrases Hebrew like: "cut" or "torn" [nigzru, ne'eqru] (See: A. M. Haberman, Sefer
Gzerot Ahkenaz ve-^aifat, Jerusalem, 1945, 191-192). It is worthwhile noting the German
drawing from the end of the fourteenth century, published by G. Kisch. The drawing
deals in the upper part of it with the sight of a Jew hanging among monkeys. At the
lower part of the drawing it shows a person whose arms and legs are tied to four
horses—it was the original method of dissecting the body, as noted by Dülman, but
due to 'inefficiency' they moved to using a knife and axe. If the subject of this part
is also a Jew, it could be the proof to that the discussed form of death was applied to
Jews too (G. Kisch, "The Jewish Execution in Medieval Gremany," Historia Judaica 5,
1943, plate 2, after p. 108). About the torments in white-hot pincers, see: Dülman,
78; about the breaking of the body with a wheel—ibid., 95.
earth,' 5 meaning, when taking him out to the public area, the place of
execution. 16 In this manner one should also interpret the reference to
the death penalty by fire of the "martyr who makes up his mind to die
for his God," and to "and surrenders his body to consuming fire," as a
reality about which our author heard from Ashkenaz. This we say, in
spite of the possibility that at the time of composing the sermon there
might have been already anusim burning at the inquisitorial stakes.
It would seem that other violent sorts of death, mentioned by
Rabbi Abraham Halevi, are such that he could have read about in
literature originated in Ashkenaz, if not from occurrences of his own
generation. In the dialogue between the righteous and his Creator,
the righteous replies:
Set me as a seal upon Your heart, as a seal upon Your arm, and do not
forget me ever. Remember the love with which I loved you, for even
if they kill me for my love to you, I shall not feel a thing "for love is
as strong as death." Indeed, even if they buried me alive this would be
as naught to me, for my zeal for the honor of Your Name is "as fierce
as the grave."

We read about the live burial of "Rabbi Shemaryah the Hassid" in

First Crusade Hebrew chronicles. 17 However, perhaps there is no
need to go that far back in history, since the punishment discussed

16
According to this interpretation, Fishbane's translation for this sentence (Kiss
of God, 53) must be corrected. About the process of degradation through dragging
one tied to a carriage in the city's streets, customary in the Holy Roman Empire,
see: Hsia (Myth, 26-7, n. 14). According to & Judenspiel, written about the Blood Libel
in Trent, the three brothers were undressed, wrapped in leather of catde, tied to
horses' tails and dragged to the place of execution. It appears that such instance is
the case of the martyrs' death in Pforzheim in 1267: "they were slaughter, drag and
wheeled" [nitbhu, nigreru ve-ne'ejhu] (Haberman, ibid.). It is possible that the phrase
"the holy (martyrs) that are on the earth," in the Scroll refers to the victims of various
libels in that period, despite the fact that the end of the sentence ties it in with the
'sons of the holy Hannah' from the period of Hasmonean rebellion. The sentence
is based on Psalm 17:3; the Midrash associates it with the suffering of the martyrs
in the "generation of religious persecutions [doro shel shmad] (.Midrash Tehilim 16:4 [S.
Buber's edition, 121]). There were, as is well known, Jews who could not face the
tortures in the events mentioned above, be it during the interrogations or before
execution, and ended up converting to Christianity in order to gain a relatively easier
and faster death. They are probably the ones the author refers to at the end of his
opening paragraph (after his recommendation to concentrate and focus on the Name
as a method of blocking pain). See below, 123.
17
Haberman, 51, 80.
was conventional in Germany of the High Middle Ages.18 We have
found also that this penalty was applied to Jews. In the middle of
the fourteenth century we read in a Tizkor prayer: "Remember [...]
those who were killed, drowned, burnt, hung, [...] strangled and
buried alive." 19
Let us now return to the end of the third section of the first part.
In this paragraph, the author informs his audience of the tradition he
had found by "one of the Hassidim," concerning the prescribed verbal
response of the Jew when facing the choice between sanctifying the
Name and death. Rabbi Abraham ends the paragraph with an over-
tone which endows his message with urgency. One must pay special
attention to this, since herein lies the reason for writing the sermon:
Behold it is worthwhile spreading these words among the Children of
Israel, a people near unto Him, for this is a generation of religious
persecutions [doro shel shmad\ and it is of great import that such a car-
dinal idea [ha-iqar ha-zeh] will not be hidden from every person who

18
Dülman, 88-89. T h e author notes that the killing of children was punishable
by burying the murderer alive. If so, could Shemaryah's form of death be a result of
having killed his own children? This form of death penalty for murdering children is
not mentioned in the discussion of this issue in: M. Minti, "Kidush ha-Shem be-Einei
No?rim be-Germanya bi-Yemei ha-Beinayim," £ion, 59, 1994, 237, n. 118.
19
Bernfeld, Sefer ha-Dma'ot, 106. thus far, I have no unequivocal interpretation
for the verse "[...] and he dies amidst the wicked" (Isa. 53:9), which the author
uses in the beginning of his sermon on the verses from Song of Songs. See Rashi's
interpretation of this verse (Y. Baer, Rashi veha-Me?iut ha-Historit shel Zemano,"
Tarbiz, 20, 1949, 326). Regarding the phrase 'to make up his mind to die for his
God' [le-hashlim nafsho le-elohim] it is worthwhile mentioning that its source is mainly in
Ashkenaz. Although 'to make up one's mind' in the sense of complete devotion and
preparedness for death appears already in the Midrash (for example, Tanhuma, Va-
et'hanan, 6), but it is very rare (See: E. Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit 15, New
York and London, 1959, 7183). In the twelfth century we find it several times in the
Chronicle attributed to Shlomo ben Shimshon (Haberman, 37, 42) and in Ashkenazi
liturgy (L. Zunz, Literaturgeschichte der synagogaten Poesie, Berlin, 1865, 641-642). Among
the extensive liturgical poetry that was composed in the aftermath of the First Crusade
(1096) we find it in a Seliha of Rabbi Eliezer bar Nathan (Haberman, 85) and in an
elegy by Qalonimos bar Yehuda (Seder ha-Qinot le-Tishah be-Av [D. Goldsmidt ed.],
Jerusalem, 1977, 107, line 29; 108, line 41). Afterwards, this phrase becomes routine
in the memorial literature for those who died for the sanctification of the Name; in
prayers, in piyyutim and in chronicles, till the eighteenth century. Zunz notes its usage
by Hakalir and of the Midrash Asarah Harugei Malkhut. The author of Sefer Tosifon too
uses it in the same sense (Sefer Tossifon [D. Flusser ed.], Jerusalem, 1977, 314). The
literary transition to medieval Ashkenaz is, then, visible. About the evolution of the
phrase, see: S. Lieberman, "Roman Legal Institutions in Early Rabbinics and the
Acta Martyrum," JQR 35, 1944-1945, 52.
 surnames himself by the name of Israel for who knows what a day
may bring forth.
Even this closing sentence proves that the issues discussed are not
connected to the fate of the anusin and the Inquisition. The author
addresses here "every person who surnames himself by the name of
Israel," meaning—whose Judaism is externally expressed and well
known to everyone around, a Judaism which is not kept a secret or
is questioned by others. As is well known, the Inquisition dealt with
the removal of any phenomenon of heresy within Christianity, and
it could not have harmed "every person who surnames himself by
the name of Israel." T h e source of scholarly misunderstanding in
the interpretation of the historical background—implied in this para-
graph—stems from the phrase "generation of religious persecutions"
[doro shel shmad]. It was very convenient to explain it as the reaction
to the events that occurred in the author's surroundings. Our sug-
gestion is slighdy different. Rabbi Abraham Halevi, observing all the
occurrences in the Jewish world, particularly regarding the spread of
Blood Libels in Europe during the 1470's, alongside the atmosphere
that was prevalent in Spain, came to the conclusion that his genera-
tion is a "generation of religious persecutions" [doro shel shmad]. Seeing
what happened in other places he feared of the dangerous prospects
faced by his coreligionists in Spain: religious coercion of individuals in
a fashion similar to that of Europe. Indeed, most of these libels took
place in Ashkenaz, but such ideas were not unfamiliar in Spain. T h e
evidence for our author's realistic sense was embodied, eventually, in
the infamous Blood Libel of the "Holy Child of La-Guardia," which
took place two years before the Expulsion. 20

20
Baer reckons that the inquisitors in this trial were affected by external occur-
rences, particularly the Blood Libel in Trent (Y. Baer, Toldot Hayehudim bi-Sefard h-
Nozrit, Tel-Aviv, 1959, 549, n. 131). About the potential of a Blood Libel in Spain one
could learn from the propaganda of Alfonso d'Espina, who informs his Old Christian
audience that such an event took place in Valladolid in 1454, but the Jews managed
to silence the affair because of their great influence. T h e conclusion we have drawn
relies on the premise that the Scroll of Amrafel was written in Spain. This view, as
aforesaid, is also the view of G. Scholem, but it is not clear how did his supposition
regarding the Inquisition as being the historical background affected his assumption
that it was authored in Spain. Scholem does base the dating of composition on cal-
culations which are wrapped in much doubt (See my article in Tarbiz 64, 1995, 114
n. 21). His circumstantial evidence is insufficient for drawing bibliographical conclu-
sions for our discussion. Should the origin of the Scroll be found to be in Portugal
(whereto, presumably, the author moved after the Spanish expulsion in 1492), or in
 The Scroll of Amrafel
Translation 2 ‫י‬

It is a tradition among the sages [hakhamim] that a person who resolves

[gomer be-libo] to sacrifice himself for the honor of His honorable
Name—come what will and transpire what may—such a man will
not feel any pain of the beatings which torment other people who
have not made such a decision wholeheartedly. Such a man, when
they take him out in order to torment him through most horrible
tortures—as they did to the holy (martyrs) that are on the earth, and
to the excellent handsome young men, the sons of the saindy Hannah
who lived in the time of the priests that came near to the Lord, the
mighty men who fought the wars of the Lord—if he focuses his mind
at that hour on the honorable and awesome Name between his eyes
and will resolve to sanctify Him, and (if) his eyes will see the Holy
O n e of Israel and (if) he will cleave \yadbiq] his mind and thought
to Him, so that the holy Name will become a burning fire and its
sparkling letters will extend on the wholeness of the world, or if he
is able (at least) to grow the letters) to the best of his ability, he can
rest assured that he will be able to endure the test, trusting in God.
He will not feel pain of the beating and torture, nor will he tremble
(with the fear) of death. And although this may sound contradictory
to reason, behold this is known by experience and it is a tradition of
scholars upright martyrs. (And this is a matter for the faithful only),
for this is of the ways of the Lord which the just do walk in but trans-
gressors do stumble therein.
This is the order of taking the resolution to sanctify the Name when
they come to torment him and interrogate him [yish'aluhu ve-yidre-

some other Christian country in which he might have gone through, our claims would
remain with no significant change, and we shall only have to add to the list of libels
the event that took place in Spain in 1490. Should it be found out that the author
has written the Scroll toward the end of his wanderings, being in Muslim counties,
we would be obliged to say that he had probably written it for Jews under Christian
rule in Europe. (About his updated knowledge of the events in Germany during the
Reformation, while living in Jerusalem, see above, n. 10). In any case, we would be
able to stick to the reconstruction of the historical background we have offered.
2
' T h e Scroll of Amrafel has been translated almost in its entirety by Michael Fish-
bane in his monograph: The Kiss of God: Spiritual and Mystical Death in Judaism, Seatde
& London, 1994, 53, 54-6, 79-80. Here I present a complete English version of it.
By and large I accepted Fishbane's translation. My reading of the text difTers here
and there from his.
shuhu], and tell him that if he converts [yamir kevodo] they will let him
go and will not hurt him, or that he should let them know what he
wants. Behold this is what I have found written by one of the hasidim
that his answer should be: "What do you want from me. Am I not
a Jew? A Jew I am and as a J e w shall a die! A Jew! A Jew! A Jew!"
And then he should resolve to (be true to) what he has his lips and
mouth uttered and be ready and sure that he is going to sanctify his
Creator and not profane his God , s Name. It is then that he will not
feel the pain of the tortures they inflict on him. And this is the secret
alluded to by the prophet Isaiah: "One shall say: '1 am the Lord's.
And another shall call himself by the name of Jacob. And another
shall subscribe with his hand unto the Lord, and surname himself by
the name of Israel'" (44:5).
Behold it is worthwhile spreading these words among the Children
of Israel, a people near unto Him, for this is a generation of religious
persecutions [doro shel shmad] and it is of great import that such a car-
dinal idea [ha-iqar ha-zeh] will not be hidden from every person who
surnames himself by the name of Israel for who knows what a day
may bring forth (Proverbs 27:1) and what is the end of man.
It is also important to know, make known, and be aware that the
person who recites the Shemah each morning and evening and focuses
on the proper and correct intention while proclaiming the love of God
and His unity and resolves to devote his own body and soul to Him
as well as his wife's and children's, and to love Him with all his heart,
soul, and might, even when he prostrates himself [be-noflo alpanav] after
standing alive before the Lord (Leviticus 16:10) to confess his sins and
says: "I commit my soul to You, Ο Lord" (Psalm 25:1), and entrusts
his soul to his God, and upon Him 22 he sets his soul, and his spirit and
breath he gathers to himself as if he were going to his eternal resting
place [beit olamo]—truly such a person has ensured his share in (the
eternal) life and will go to be enlightened with the light of life along
with all the righteous, pious, and saints (or: martyrs) who sanctify the
Holiness ofJacob and praise the Lord of Israel. Moreover, all the sins
which normally would go unatoned until the day of death shall be
atoned for at that time, since he resolved to die [le-hashlim nafsho] for
his God and this is considered as if he died, gone and was annihilated
from this world. And this is a great thing: for so the King established,
and on this the poet who was inspired by the spirit of the Lord cried

22
I amended the text from ve-Elohav to ve-elav.
out, saying: "For Your sake we are killed all the day, and are counted
as sheep brought for the slaughter" (Psalm 44:23).
And perhaps it is concerning the soul of the martyr who devotes
his life [ha-mashlim nafsho] for God whom he loves at all times, and
he dies amidst the wicked, and surrenders his body to consuming fire
that the sage (King Solomon) said in his wisdom: "Who is this that
comes up from the wilderness, leaning [mitrapeqet] for her beloved"
(Song 8:5). For God's word is pure: she is falling apart [mitpareqet23]
and drops down limb for limb and piece for piece. And the righteous,
who dwell in the innermost chamber of the King where bliss has
its habitation, say about the soul of this martyr: "Who is this (soul)
that comes up from the lower world—which is likened to the wilder-
ness where there is nothing but serpents and adders, scorpions and
thirst—and for the love of its Beloved its body falls to pieces [peraqim
peraqim] due to the multitude of trials it was subjected to. They tear
its flesh by hot pincers or hack it to pieces by sword. And the King,
the Lord of peace, for love of whom she suffers all this, looks down
from His dwelling and says about the righteous (martyr) whose soul
is ascending to Him: "Behold you are pure and upright. I have born
you this day (anew) and 'awakened you under the apple tree,' in the
Orchard of Apples. Your holy soul is (now) pure before your Mother,
the Throne of My Glory, whence it was hewn and formed like a flock
of ewes. For where the Throne is, the Mother of all souls, there your
mother was in travail and bore you' (Song 8:5).
And the righteous (martyr) answers his Creator: "Set me as a seal
upon Your heart, as a seal upon Your arm" (ibid. 8:6), and do not
forget me ever. Remember the love with which I loved you, for even
if they kill me for my love to You, I shall not feel a thing 'for love is
as strong as death,' (ibid.). Indeed, even if they buried me alive this
would be as nought to me, for my zeal for the honor of Your Name is
'as fierce as the grave' (ibid.). And even if they burn me and cast me
into a fiery furnace, this too is nothing compared to my love to You,
for my love to You is a wonder wrought upon me and burns within
me like the sight of flaming torches, "the flashes thereof are flashes of
fire, a very flame of the Lord" (ibid.). How, then, could my soul be
impressed by that fire while the fiery flame of your love is overflowing
within me? And 'mighty' troubles and hardships, which are compared

25
I amended here: mitpareqet for mitrapeqet.
to 'water,' 'cannot quench the' flame of my 'love' (ibid., 8:7) And
though trouble come as a 'flood' (ibid.) the spirit of the Lord inspires
me to devote myself to You. I am not speaking of my property or
wealth, for 'wealth is less than nothing,' and if anyone should boast
that he gave 'all the substance of his house for love,' those who are
perfected, those who approach God, 'would surely scorn him' (Song
8:7). For this has no value to them, and they hold the treasures of the
world in contempt."
This is what one may truly boast of, if he surrenders his body to the
consuming fire and all the other harsh tortures I mentioned above.
Behold such a man the Lord will account it unto him and place him
as a seal upon His right arm and wear him like a seal on His heart.
His soul shall shine in God's light and there is no eye that has seen the
goodness which is stored for it. This is because his eminence and glory
are great and his soul will reside with those that pitch on the east side
toward the sunrise, Moses and Aaron, or with princes that have gold,
who filled their houses with silver, 24 and with those who dwell among
plantations and hedges, the martyrs of Lydda and (other) martyrs
[iharugei melukhah]. T h e existence of the entire world is worthwhile for
such a soul and its works shall be praised in the gates.

24
A figurative interpretation of J o b 3:15.
 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ashtor E., The Jews of Moslem Spain I, Philadelphia 1973. Mal'akhi ed., Lod, 1986,
pp. 31-56.
Baer Y., "Sefer Yossifon ha-Ivri," Q. Gutmann and M. Schwabe ed.], Sefer Dinaburg,
Jerusalem, 1949,
, "Gezerat T a T N U , " Sefer Assaf, 1953, 126-40.
Ben-Sasson H.H., "Hasidei Ashkenaz al Haluqat Qinyanim Homriyim u-Nekhasim
Ruhaniyim bein Benei ha-Adam," ζίοη 35, 1970, 61-79.
Chazan R., "Christian and Jewish Perceptions of 1096: A Case Study of Trier,"
Jewish History 13 (2), 1999, 9-22.
—, "The Early Development of Hasidut Ashkenaz," JQR 75, 1985, pp. 199-
211.
, European Jewry and the First Crusade, Berkeley, 1987.
Frend W.H.C., Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church: A Study of a Conflict from
the Maccabees to Donatus, Oxford.
Ginzburg L., Aggadot ha-Yehudim II, Ramat Gan 1967.
Gregory B., Salvation at Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modem Europe, Cambrigde,
Mass., 1999.
Gross Α., "AI Ha-Tismonet ha-Ashkenazit shel Kiddush ha-Shem be-Portugal bi-
Shenat 1497," Tarbiz 64, 1995, pp. 83-114.
, Iberian Jewry from Twilight to Dawn, Leiden, 1995.
, "Ta'amei Mizvat Milah—Zeramim ve-Hashpa'ot Historiyot," Da'at 21,
1988, 25-47.
- , "Hirhurim al Hebetim Hilkhatiyim ve-lo Hilkhatiyim shel Kiddush ha-Shem bi-
Shnat T a T N U , " /. Twersky Memorial Volume, Cambridge, Mass. (forthcoming).
, "Al Ma'asei Kiddush ha-Shem be-Magenza bi-Shenat 1096—Piyyutim u-Khro-
niqot," Tehudim Mut ha-^elav [Y. Assis et al ed.]. Jerusalem, 2000, 171-87.
, "Gerona: A Cradle of Jewish Learning and Spirituality," Materia giudaica
VI, 2001, 161-6.
Grossman Α., "Bein 1012 le-1096: Ha-Reqa ha-Tarbuti veha-Hevrati le-Kiddush
ha-Shem be-TaTNU," Tehudim Mul ha-^elav, Jerusalem, 2000, 55-73.
Haberman A.M., Sefer Gezerot Ashkenaz ve-£a1fat, Jerusalem, 1971.
Hacker Y., "Kelum Hu'ataq Kiddush ha-Shem el T e h u m ha-Ru , ah Liqrat ha-Et
ha-Hadashah," Qedushat ha-Hayyim ve-Heruf ha-Nefesh [Y. Gafni and A. Ravitzky
ed.], Jerusalem, 1993, 221-32.
, "Li-Gzerat T a T N U (1096)," Qon 31, 1966, 28-31.
Herr M.D., "Persecution and Martyrdom in Hadrian Days," Scripta Hierosolymitana
23, 1972, 85-125.
Joseph ha-Kohen, Divrei ha-Tamim le-Malkhei Zarfat u-Malkhei Beit Otoman ha-Togar II,
Lemberg, 1859.
Judah he-Hasid, Sefer Hasidim [R. Margaliot ed.], Jerusalem, 1957.
, Sefer Hasidim [A. Wistinetsky ed.], Berlin, 1891.
Katz J ‫" ״‬Bein T a T N U 1e-TaH-TaT," Sefer ha-Tovel le-Tizhaq Baer, 1961, pp. 318-
37.
 , Bein Yehudim le-Goyyim, Jerusalem, 1977.
, Masoret u-Mashber: Ha-Hevrah ha-Yehudit be-Moza'ei Yemei ha-Beinayim, Jeru-
salem, 1958.
Malkiel D., "Vestiges of Conflict in the Hebrew Crusade Chronicles " ,Journal of Jewish
Studies 53, 2001, 323-40.
Marcus I., "Mi-Deus Vult ve-ad Re?on ha-Bore," Yehudim Mul ha-gelav: Gezerot
TaTNU ba-Historiah uva-Historiografiah [Edited by Y.T. Assis et al], Yerusalem,
2000, 92-100.
, Piety and Society, Leiden, 1980.
Mind M., "Kiddush ha-Shem be-Einei N0?rim be-Germaniah bi-Yemei ha-Beina-
yim," ζίοη 59, 1994, 209-66.
Philo of Alexandria, Embassy to Gaius, in LCL, Philo ed. F.H. Colson, Cambridge,
Mass. 1962.
Safrai S., "Kiddush ha-Shem be-Toratam shel ha-Tana'im," Sefer /fkaron le-Y1zhaq
Baer[Zi0n 43), 1979-81, 28-42.
Salfeld S., Das Martyrologium des Nürenberger Memorbuches, Berlin, 1898.
Saperstein M., "A Sermon on the Akedah from the Generation of the expulsion
and Its Implication for 1391," Exile and Diaspora: Studies in the History of the Jewish
People Presented to Professor Haim Beinart [A. Mirsky et al ed.], Jerusalem, 1991,
103-26.
Sapir-Abulafia Α., "The Interrelationship Between the Hebrew Chronicles of the
First Crusade," Journal of Semitic Studies 27, 1982, pp. 221-39.
Scholem G., Shabetai gvi veha-Tenu'ah h-Shabeta'it bi-Yemei Hayav vol. I, Tel Aviv,
1957.
Schwartzfuchs S., "Meqomam shel Mas'ei ha-Zelav be-Divrei Yemei Yisrael," Tarbut
ve-Hevrah be-Toldot Tisrael bi-Yemei ha-Beinayim: Qovez Ma'amaHm le-Qkhro shel H.H.
Ben-Sasson, Jerusalem, 1989, 251-67.
Septimus B., "Narboni and Shem Τον on Martyrdom," Studies in MedievalJewish History
and Literature II [I. Twersky ed.], Cambridge, Mass. 1984, 447-455.
Shohat Α., "Kiddush ha-Shem be-Hagutam shel Megorashei Sefarad u-Mequbalei
Zefat," Milkemet Qodesh u-Martirologiah, Jerusalem, 1968, 131-45.
Soloveitchic Η., "Bein Hevel Arav le‫־‬Hevel Edom," Kedushat ha-Hayyim ve-Heruf ha-
Nefesh [I. Gafni and A. Ravitzky ed.], Jerusalem, 1993, 149-52.
—, "Religious Law and Change: T h e Ashkenazic Example", 47*^ Review 12,
1987, 205-21.
, "Halakhah, Hermeneuücs, and Martyrdom in Medieval Ashkenaz (Part I
of II)," JQR 94, 77-108.
Ta-Shma I., "Hit'abdut ve-Re?ah ha-Zulat al Kiddush ha-Shem: Li-She'elat Meqomah
shel ha-Agadah be-Masoret ha-Psiqah ha-Ashkenazit," Yehudim Mul ha-£elav:
Gezerot TaTNU ba-Historia uva-Historiografia [Y. Assis et al ed.], Jerusalem, 2000,
150-6.
Tishbi Y., Meshihiyut be-Dor Gerushei Sefarad u-Portugal, Jerusalem, 1985.
 INDEX

A Cologne 57, 98 η. 8
Aaron (Mecklenburg) 27 n. 30 Cordoba 48
Aaron bar Mordekhai (Mecklenburg) 27 Correa, Gaspar 58 η. 44
n. 30 Coutinho, Fernando 69, 71 n. 87, 72,
Aaron of Lunel 29 n. 34 76
Abraham (Patriarch) 14 n. 35 Crescas, Hasdai 47, 48, 49, 63, 64,
Abraham ben Azriel 9 96 n. 4
Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi 55, 113fF. Cuenca 74 n. 95
Abraham bar Moses (Koblenz) 30
Abraham Isaac Halevi (Gerona) 50 D
Abravanel, Isaac 99 n. 9 Dapiera, Solomon 50 n. 21
Akiva viii, ix, 3, 41, 77 η. 102, 80, 84 David bar Samson (France) 22
Albert of Aachen 5, 6 Duran Profiat (Profet) 49, 96 n. 4
Almohades 45-6, 96 n. 4
Amnon of Mainz 24 Ε
Amrafel (biblical) 116 Eleazar ben Yair 8, 12 n. 32, 88
Antiochus Epiphanes viii, 31 n. 38, 92 Eleazar the Elder (Hasmonean) viii
anusim (Forced Converts) viii, 2, 8 n. 20, Eliezer bar Yoel Halevi (RABIaH) 34
38-9, 47, 48, 58 n. 44, 65 n. 74, 75, n. 46, 38
117-8, 120, 122 Eliezer bar Nathan (RABaN) 57
Arama, Isaac 64 Elqabe?, Solomon 45, 70 n. 84
Ardutiel, Abraham 70 n. 84, 79-80, 83 Emicho, Count 2
Arelim (uncircumsized) 5, 6, 7 n. 18, 9-11, Endingen 119
60 Ephraim of Bonn 20
Arugat ha-Bosem 9 Ephraim of Lunel 9
Arzilla 81 Espina, Alfonso de 122 η. 20
Asher ben Yehi'el (ROSH) 48, 54, 63, Estremoz 71 η. 87
Asheri Family (Toledo) 48-9, 63, 83 Esztergom 35
Austria 25 Evora 71
Auto da Fé 116 Ezra (Gerona) 50
Av ha-Rahamim 13, 51
Avignon 47 F
Azriel (Gerona) 50 Farage, Isaac ibn 68 n. 80
Fez 46, 78 n. 104
Β Forced Converts, see: anusim
Bamberg 23
Barcelona 48, 49, 98 n. 7 G
Black Death 24-5,41,47 Gama, Vasco da 58 n. 46
Bernaldes, Andres 74 n. 95 Gaius Caligula 89
Bohemia 26 Gamla 6, 87
Genenlin (Bamberg) 23
Bonafed, Solomon 50 n. 21 Gerona 49-50, 52 "
Gerondi, Jonah 50, 52, 54, 55, 115
C Gerondi, Nissim 50, 83 n. 121
Carolina 118 Gerondi, Reuven ben Nissim 47
Catalunia 55 Gezerot QaNA (1391 Persecutions) 47
Childhood 43
Gôis, Damiäo de 69, 71 η. 87, 72-3,
76-7 η. 101
Granada 45, 95
Great Light 2, 4, 6 η. 14
Great Revolt (68 A.D.) 92
Guimaràes 68, 75
H Konstanz 21
Hadrianic Persecuüons viii, 31 η. 38
Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah 9,
16, 80
Hanina ben Teradion viii, 28, 33, 59,
61,84
Hannah (Hasmonean), 31 n. 38, 120
n. 16, 123
Hasmonean Revolt 87, 92, 120
Hayyat Judah 66
Hendeln (Mecklenburg) 27 n. 30
Holfeld 23
Hungary 35 n. 52
Huss, J a n 27 n. 28
Hussites 26-7
I Mainz ix, Iff., 26, 40, 41, 84, 98 n. 8
Inquisition 74 n. 95, 113, 115, 116,
117, 122 n. 20
Isaac (Holfeld) 23
Isaac (Patriarch) 14 n. 35
Isaac bar David (Mainz) 26, 41, 57
Isaac bar Moses 3, 14-5, 16 n. 37, 17
Isaac ben £ahin (Bofiillia de la Sierra)
60, 79
Isaac Halevi (Neuss) 21
Isaac of Dampiers 9
Isbili, Yom-Tov (RITBA) 32 n. 43, 52-
3, 5 4 , 6 1
Isserlein, Israel 25
Italy ix
J Mendeln ben Aaron (Mecklenburg)
Jacob ben Albeneh 48
Jacob ben Asher (Toledo) 48
Jacob T a m 28, 38, 39, 53
Jerusalem 87
J o â o II, King of Portugal 70 n. 85
J o n a h Hakohen (Austria) 25-6
Joseph Hakohen 8, 24, 76
Joseph the Sage (France) 22
Josephus Flavius χ, 8, 11-2, 88-9, 91
J u d a h ben Asher (Toledo) 48, 60
J u d a h Halevi 94-5
Judah he-Hasid 17, 18, 21-2, 57-8
Judenspiel 120 n. 16
Κ
Kafha-Qetoret 56-8
Koblenz 30
L
Lepers Persecution 8, 24
Lerma Shem-Tov 80
Lisbon 66, 68, 72 η. 89, 75-7, 79, 80-3
Liturgical poetry, see: Piyyul
Loal, Jacob 80
Luria, Solomon (MaHaRSHaL) 37-40,
42, 43
Lydda, Martyrs of 126
M
M a H a R a M , see Meir of Rothenburg
M a H a R I L , see Moelin, Jacob
MaHaRSHal, see Luria, Solomon
Majorca 48
Manuel, King of Portugal 67, 69, 71
ns. 85 and 89, 71 n. 87, 71 n. 89,
73, 74, 76-7 n. 101,79,80-2
Masada ix, x, 6, 8, 12 n. 32, 62 n. 62,
88, 89 n. 2, 91-2
Mechel ben Aaron (Mecklenburg) 27
n. 30
Mecklenburg 27 n. 30
Meir of Rothenburg (.MaHaRaM)7 n.
14, 10 n. 26, 11 n. 28, 30-3, 36,41,
55, 114
Meme, Shimon 67, 77 n. 102, 79, 81,
82, 83
Memorbüch 15, 17, 23, 24, 30
27 n. 30
Menahem bar J u d a h (Mainz) 15 n. 36
Menahem bar David Halevi (Mainz)
16-8
Menahem Merzburg 36
Menahem Recanati 35
Messianism 117
Moelin, Jacob (MaHaRIL) 27, 35
Mordekhai (biblical) 74-5, 83 n. 121
Moses of Corbeil (SeMaQ} 33, 39
Moses of Zürich 33 Resende, Garcia de 70 η. 85
Moses ben Eleazar 23 Rindfleisch Persecutions 8, 23
Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides) 62 Ritual knife 14 n. 35
n. 62, 64, 80, 83 η. 121,84 η. 124, ROSH, see Asher ben Yehi'el
97
Moses ben Nahman (RaMBaN, S
Nachmanides) 50, 51, 54, 96-7 S. Abraham bar Ukhman (Urman?)
Moya, Ginés de 74 η. 95 29, 40
Sachsenspiegel 199 η. 12
Ν Saba, Abraham 56 n. 36, 67, 70 n. 84,
Narboni, Moses 52 η. 28, 64 74-8, 80, 83
Nathan Eger 26 Samson (biblical) 60
Nefilat Apayim 114, 117 Samson bar Zadoq 55
Neuss 21, 57 Samuel ha-Naggid 45
Säo Tomé 70 η. 84
Ο Saul (King of Israel) 6, 7, 9, 11-3, 29,
Os Estàos 76 η. 99,77 η. 101, 31-2, 33 n. 4 5 , 3 7 , 5 3 , 60,87
Osorio, Geronimo 69, 73 η. 93, 77 η. Scroll ofAmrafel x, 55, 113-126
101 Sefer Hasidim 18, 22 n. 10, 58 n. 43
Sefer Gimatriya'ot 17, 18
Ρ S e M a Q , see Moses of Corbeil
Passau 119 Seville 48
Petronius 87, 89fT. Shalom of Neustadt 35
Philo χ, 88-91 Shaprut, Hisdai ibn 45
Pina, Rui de 70 n. 85 Shem-Tov ben Joseph 64
Piyyut ix, 17, 18 n. 42, 22, 24, 25, 30 n. Shem-Tov ben Shem-Tov 61 n. 54
3 6 , 3 1 , 4 7 , 121 n. 19 Shema 17, 55, 56 n. 36, 65 n. 74, 78 n.
Pforzheim 120 η. 16 104, 114-5, 124
Poland 53-6, 37 Shemaryah (Cologne) 120
Prague 25 Sicarii 88, 89 n. 2
Ptolemais (Akre) 89 Schwabenspiegel 199 η. 12
Solomon ben Asher (Bamberg) 23
Q. Solomon bar Samson 2, 57 n. 40
Qalonimos bar Judah (Mainz) 31, 32, Speyer 10 η. 27
98 n. 6
Qalonimos bar Meshulam (Mainz) 2, Τ
11,41 Ten Martyrs 16
Qapsali, Elijah 69, 70 n. 84, 72, 73 n. Thaddeus of Rome 9
95, 80-3, 99 n. 8 Toledo 48, 54, 59, 60, 61, 63, 83, 98
Qara, Avigdor 25 n. 7
Torture 118-21, 125
R Trent 119 η. 14, 120 η. 16, 122 η. 20
RABaN, see Eliezer bar Nathan Trier 99 η. 8
Rabenu Tam, see: Jacob T a m Turkey 74 η. 95
RABlaH, see Eliezer bar Yoel Halevi
Rachel (Mainz) 6 n. 16, 24 U
RaMBaN, see Moses ben Nahman Uri bar Isaac (Mainz) 57
Razis (Hasmonean) 87 Usque, Samuel 69, 70 n. 84, 76
Reconquista 46, 94-5
Regensburg 99 n. 8
V Yehoseph ha-Naggid 45, 95
Valencia 48 Tizkor 27 n. 30, 121
Valladolid 122 n. 20 Yodpat87
Verga, Solomon ibn 60 n. 54, 63, 64 n. Yom-Tov o f j o i g n y 8, 20-1
67, 70 n. 84, York 7, 20, 54
Vidui 114, 117 Yose ben Yoezer 22, 60
Vienna 35-6 Yoqim of Zridot 60
Yossifon χ, 5, 6, 11, 12 n. 32, 62 n. 62,
W 88, 89 n. 2, 121 n. 19
Weil, Jacob 22, 36 n. 54
WUliam of Newbury 7, 20 Ζ
Wirtzburg 23-4 Zacut, Abraham 49, 58-63, 67, 71-2,
Worms 11 η. 27, 17,98 η. 8 73 n. 95, 79, 99 n. 9
Zalman of St. Goar 27
Χ Zamora 68
Xanten 17 Zaragoza 50 n. 21, 98 n. 7
Zarfati 17 n. 39
Y Zeus 88
Ya'ave?,Joseph 77 η. 102
 THE BRILL REFERENCE LIBRARY
OF
JUDAISM
T h e Brill Reference Library ofJudaism presents research on fundamental problems in the study of the
authoritative texts, beliefs and practices, events and ideas, of the Judaic religious worldfromthe sixth century
BCE to the sixth century CE. Systematic accounts ofprincipal phenomena, characteristics of Judaic life, works
of a theoretical character, accounts of movements and trends, diverse expressions of thefaith, new translations
and commentaries of classical texts - all willfind a place in the Library.

1. Neusner, Jacob, The Halakhah. An Encyclopaedia of the Law of Judaism.

5 Vols. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11617 6 (set)
Vol. I. Between Israel and God. Part A. ISBN 90 04 11611 7
Vol. II. Between Israel and God. Part B. Transcendent Transactions: Where
Heaven and Earth Intersect. ISBN 90 04 11612 5
Vol. III. Within Israel's Social Order. ISBN 90 04 11613 3
Vol. IV Inside the Walls of the Israelite Household. Part A. At the Meeting of
Time and Space. ISBN 90 04 11614 1
Vol. V Inside the Walls of the Israelite Household. Part B. The Desacra-
lization of the Household. ISBN 90 04 11616 8
2. Basser, Herbert W, Studies in Exegesis. Christian Critiques ofJewish Law and
Rabbinic Responses 70-300 C.E. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11848 9 '
3. Neusner, Jacob, Judaism's Story of Creation. Scripture, Halakhah, Aggadah.
2000. ISBN 90 04 11899 3
4. Aaron, David H., Biblical Ambiguities. Metaphor, Semantics and Divine
Imagery. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12032 7
5. Neusner, Jacob, The Reader's Guide to the Talmud. 2001.
ISBN 90 04 1287 0.
6. Neusner, Jacob, The Theology of the Halakhah. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12291 5.
7. Schwartz, Dov, Faith at the Crossroads. A Theological Profile of Religious
Zionism. Translated by Batya Stein. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12461 6
8. Neusner, Jacob, The Halakhah: Historical and Religious Perspectives. 2002.
ISBN 90 04 12219 2
9. Neusner, Jacob, How the Talmud Works. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12796 8
10. Gruenwald, Ithamar, Rituals and Ritual Theory in Ancient Israel. 2003.
ISBN 90 04 12627 9
11. Boyarin, Daniel, Sparks of the logos Essays in Rabbinic Hermeneutics. 2003.
ISBN 90 04 12628 7
12. Neusner, Jacob, The Idea of History in Rabbinic Judaism. 2004.
ISBN 90 04 13583 9
13. Neusner, Jacob, The Perfect Torah. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13033 0
14. Neusner, Jacob, Rabbinic Narrative. A Documentary Perspective. Volume One:
Forms, Types and Distribution of Narratives in the Mishnah, Tractate Abot
and the Tosefta. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13023 3
15. Neusner, Jacob, Rabbinic Narrative. A Documentary Perspective. Volume Two:
Forms, Types and Distribution of Narratives in Sifra, Sifré to Numbers,
 and Sifré to Deuteronomy. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13034 9
16. Neusner, Jacob, Rabbinic Narrative. A Documentary Perspective. Volume Three
Forms, Types and Distribution of Narratives in Song of Songs Rabbah
and Lamentations Rabbah and a Reprise of Fathers According to Rabbi
Nathan Text A. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13035 7
17. Neusner, Jacob, Rabbinic Narrative. A Documentary Perspective. Volume Four, The
Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13036 5
18. Gruber, Mayer I., Rashi's Commentary on Psalms. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13251 1
19. Gross, Abraham, Struggling with Tradition. Reservations about Active Martyr-
dom in the Middle Ages. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13853 6

ISSN 1571-5000
 concepts in the history of the Jews in Spain and in his skill in utilizing
medieval text as historical sources, but also (once again) a continuous
stream of misreading, misinterpretation, and misrepresentation of
points made throughout my article. While the latter seem to reflect
an uncontrolled deeply-seated personal turbulence, the former calls
for some brief comments.
RBS believes to have identified in my criticism of his thesis a sort
of historiography which ignores circumstances external to medieval
Judaism, which are reflected in developments and changes in Hispano-
Jewish culture and society. I, in turn, am of the opinion that the main
difference between us lies in weighing and balancing evidence and in
the ability to distinguish between the issues. T h e following comments
should suffice to illustrate this. I will touch only on a few of the major
historiographical points upon which RBS based his case. Some, but
certainly not all, of the distortions and misunderstandings of my criti-
cism on his part will be mentioned in the footnotes.

Judah Halevi, the Reconquista and 1391

RBS flaunts J u d a h Halevi's poems which mention Kiddush ha-Shem,

believing that they constitute and provide the beginning of an endur-
ing Sefardic tradition and consciousness of martyrdom. Moreover, in
his counter-argument, he continues to assert that Jewish martyrs in
1391 responded to the martyrology of the Spanish Christian warriors
of the Reconquista.
Upon close scrutiny of Halevi's relevant poems and one prose sup-
plication [baqashah], from which RBS extracted some moving lines
about anti-Jewish riots during the Reconquista (RBS 2, 281), it is clear
that there is nothing novel there and that one cannot find any sig-
nificant addition to the most famous observation of Halevi: ‫בין צבאות‬
‫ אנחנו נופלים‬/ ‫[ ה ם כי ילחמו ב מ ל ח מ ת ם‬...]/ ‫ א ב ד צבאי ונעדר‬/ ‫שעיר וקדר‬
‫במפלתם‬. 2 His poems do not reflect a situation of shemad, a death or

2
"Aqonen al mar tla'otai," in Dov Yarden, Shirei ha-Qodesh le-Rabi Tehudah Halevi
III, Jerusalem, 1986, 693. Also the few lines quoted by RBS from a very long wed-
ding poem are less than impressive when taken in the context of the specific poem
itself and in the wider context of the genre, of which we count about 60 poems.
None of them deal with martyrdom, rendering RBS' reference a drop in the bucket.
T o suggest that such a poem constitutes a serious link in an imaginary chain of
martyrological awareness and tradition must surely be dismissed as ludicrous. For a
conversion choice, given by the persecutors but rather of riots whose
aims were killing, destruction and plundering of the Jews, the likes
of which we encounter in Moslem Granada in the time of Yehosef
ha-Naggid (1066).3 Moreover, contrary to RBS's claim, there is no
significance whatsoever to the fact that Jewish tradition endowed each
Jew killed by a gentile with the crown of martyrdom (RBS 2, 283-4).
From an historiographical perspective the opposite is true, because it
means that not every case in which Kiddush ha-Shem is mentioned refers
to Jews who have been killed due to their unrelenting devotion and
loyalty to their faith. Consequentiy, when Halevi uses such terminology
one may not surmise that in those persecutions the Jews were given
the option of conversion.
In juxtaposition to the clear historical context of Halevi's poetry
about the Jewish national suffering due to the Reconquista in Spain, the
suggestion that we should link the ideal and the practice of Kiddush
ha-Shem in late 14th century Spain to the Reconquista is hypothetical and
forced, at best. One must stretch the imagination very far to see any
massive influence, direct or indirect, of Halevi in some of his remote
and all but forgotten poems on the martyrs of 1391. In the sea of
texts that RBS schemed to drown us in, I cannot find one fragment
of evidence that would suggest a connection between the events of
martyrdom then and a Spanish-Christian-martyrological-militaristic
ideology which blew over from a war of conquest-liberation which was
all but forgotten. Yet, RBS insists on sentences such as: "The Jews
who chose martyrdom in 1391 [...] announced in their actions that
just as their Christian neighbours have been ready to travel as far as
the Holy Land or mainly to Moslem Granada in order to fight and
die as martyrs for their God, so also the Jews give their lives for their
God and are ready to die willingly and even to commit suicide." 4

balanced, sensible and careful use of this poem see: Y. Hacker, "Im Shakhahnu Shem
Eloheinu va-Nifros Kapeinu le-El Zar—Gilgulah shel Parshanut al Reqa ha-Mezi'ut
bi-Sefarad bi-Yemei ha-Beinayyim," <í0« 57, 1992, 253.
3
If I understood RBS correctly, then he admits that the wedding poem has
nothing to do with active martyrdom (RBS 2, 280). His claim that "according to
Gross, J u d a h Halevi heard of the martyrdom of the Jews in Ashkenaz" (Ibid., 282)
is utterly baseless. I have never suggested such a thing.
4
RBS 1, 264. Inter alia, with one stroke of his pen (and probably, unintention-
ally), RBS setdes a vexing historiographical problem discussed widely among First
Crusade Jewish historians: on what did the Jews in Germany rely when they took
their own lives during their attacks by the Crusaders, adopting it as a legitimate
form of martyrdom?
 Nachmanides and the Beginning of Ashkenazic Influence

RBS opposes my thesis as to the centrality of the Ashkenazic influence

on Jewish martyrdom in Spain. He finds it difficult to comprehend
why I am trying to "limit the discussion to the subject of suicide or
self-slaughter/' while Kiddush ha-Shem is not limited to this type of
death (RBS 2, 281). This forces me to explain the obvious.
One way to prove whether there was an external influence on Span-
ish Kiddush ha-Shem, is by identifying characteristics of that external
element. I know of two main elements of the tradition of martyrdom
which developed in Ashkenaz. One of them is active martyrdom. I hope
that RBS would agree that there is no such "creature" in Christian
martyrdom. If we cannot find such an independent element in the
history of the Jews in Spain and in the writings of their early scholars,
we can assume that late references to it in Spain reflect Ashkenazic
religious-cultural infiltration.
Nachmanides was a religious leader of outstanding stature and of
extreme importance in Spain in his generation and in generations to
come. I believe that he was also a key figure in the chronology of the
Ashkenazic influence in the topic under discussion. For some mysteri-
ous reason that escapes me, RBS insists that that the burden of proof
lies with anyone who claims that Nachmanides was under Ashkenazic
influence. This he says knowing full well that Nachmanides refers to
"human sacrifices on the alter of faith" (RBS 2, 293). In a low keyed

In assessing Spanish traditions and attitudes to Kiddush ha-Shem one must discuss
the fact that the memory of the religious persecutions and mass conversions during
the Visigothic period (7th century) and Almohade period (mid 12th century) was alive
in 14 th -15 th century Spain. This was a legacy, which must have had some influence
on the Jews in 1391 and did not contribute anything to the spirit of martyrdom. O n e
cannot find such a discussion by RBS.
In the endless stream of baffling misreadings of my comments we find the follow-
ing. I had made the point that there is no mention in Hebrew polemical literature of
Christian martyrdom. In response RBS points out that in the liturgical poetry written
in the wake of 1391, one can find lines in praise of the heroism of the Jewish martyrs.
Yet again RBS, in his eagerness to find mistakes in my article, falls into an errant
reading: "Gross is wrong in asserting that Profet Duran and Hasdai Crescas wrote
before the waves of conversion." (Ibid., 296). I was not. A more careful reading of
that paragraph and the one preceding it would have revealed that I referred to the
conversion waves in the years 1411-1414 (Gross 2, 274-5).
A final example of RBS's misunderstanding to be mentioned here is his reading
of the title of my article (RBS 2, 279). This might not be relevant to the contents of
our historiographical debate, but certainly points to a disturbing trend.
response he nevertheless sticks to his error: "True, Nachmanides
had been influenced by the Tosafists. However their doctrines were
not decisive in his worldview. T h e schools in Spain and in Provence
influenced him greatly" (RBS 2, 294). I fail to see the relevance of
this statement to our topic.
Moreover, a second characteristic of Ashkenazic martyrdom we
point to in our first response to RBS, is the religious allowance for
stringencies. Contrary to Ashkenazic scholars, Maimonides was of
the opinion that the Torah commandment of "and you should live
by them" serves as a barrier against excessive martyrdom. Therefore,
if one faces a situation of "die or transgress," commandments which
the Halakhah does require him to die for, one cannot exercise self-
imposed religious extremism and choose to die. Maimonides censors
such practices in sharp and unequivocal language, and chooses to do
so in his opening paragraph of the laws of martyrdom, so that the
reader might wonder who he had in mind. In my article on Jewish
martyrdom in Portugal during 1497,1 commented that in the course of
the 14th century a change started to take place and Spanish halakhists
rejected this Maimonidean stand (Gross 1, 98 n. 46, 104 n. 66). Now,
we find that already Nachmanides (mid 13th century) sided with the
Ashkenazic view on this point. 5 T o the best of my knowledge, Nach-
manides is the first Spanish authority to disagree with Maimonides
on this point. 6

' Pemshei ha-Ramban al Masekhet Shabat, 49a. Hidushei ha-Ramban le-Masekhet Ketubot
[I. Shvat ed.], Jerusalem, 1990, 107-8, 148. Still about Nachmanides, to my criticism
that RBS misinterpreted him, we find RBS responding: "Nachmanides' words in
Sefer ha-Ge'ulah [...] might indeed be interpreted as relating to daily Kiddush ha-Shem
(suffering, polemics)" (RBS 2, 293). Two comments are in order: 1. They cannot be
understood any other way, certainly not in the sense of martyrdom, as misunderstood
by RBS. 2. T h e meaning of this Kiddush ha-Shem has nothing to do with suffering but
with patterns of ethical behaviour in dealing with non-Jews which are designed to
draw their sympathy to and even love of the Jewish faith.
RBS's presentation of my interpretation of Maimonides and the Spanish tradition
of martyrdom, (RBS 2, 295-6) is long and marred by his mispresentation of it. A closer
reading and paying attention to nuances, would have obviated some of his remarks.
I never said that "We have in Maimonides' stance an explicit recommendation for
conversion," not in the Moslem context and certainly not in the Christian. I merely
meant to criticize RBS' absurd statement that Maimonides somehow contributed to
"the performance of suicides" during 1391 (RBS 1, 234).
6
I might add that it would seem that in Nachmanides "Supplication on the
Ruins of Jerusalem," where he talks about active martyrdom, we find a possible
Ashkenazic literary influence. We read there: ‫ ב ד מ י ה מ ת ב ו ס ס ת‬/ ‫ונפשם מ ת ע ל ס ת‬
 Demography of Forced Converts in Spain and Ashkenaz

RBS claims that he does not attempt to belittle the number of conver-
sions to Christianity in 1391. So be it, although this statement is not
in full logical agreement with his efforts, spread over many pages, to
show that the dimensions of Kiddush ha-Shem constituted a conspicuous
phenomenon. In light of this, I can offer a joint conclusion, utilizing
a carefully formulated evaluation in an article RBS relies heavily on:
"The persecutions and riots [...] caused most of the Jews in many
important communities in the Iberian peninsula to convert .[...] And
although there were individuals and groups who died as martyrs in
various cities in Castile, Catalunia and Valencia during those days,
the testimonies of contemporaries show that the central phenomenon
was that of mass conversion and not of Kiddush ha-Shem."7
Now I would refer with the utmost brevity to Ashkenaz. Recendy
some of the scholars of the events of 1096 have invested much energy
in the attempt to discover more conversion cases of individuals or, at
least, of hints to religious doubts and conversion tendencies. At the
end of the day, it seems to me exorbitant and tendentious to claim for
a tie between Ashkenaz and Spain in this respect. Generally, I might
add, it would be very beneficial to broaden the chronological scope
and to include in the discussion, the martyrology of Ashkenazic Jewry
in response to the bloody persecutions which accompanied its history
over the centuries following 1096. 8

‫[ ו ה ם ששים ו ש מ ח י ם‬...]. This is very close to Qalonimos bar Yehuda's poem on the
martyrs of 1096: ‫ ת ב ו ס ת ם ע ל י ה ם ב א ה ב‬/ ‫ש ו ח ט י ם ה א ב ו ת בניהם ו ב ד מ י ה ם מ ת ב ו ס ס י ם‬
‫[ ליחד שמך ד צ י ם ו ש מ ח י ם‬...] ‫"( מ ת ע ל ס י ם‬Et ha-qol qol Ya'aqov" in Mahazor U-Yamim
Nora'im II [D. Goldschmidt ed.], Jerusalem, 1970, 646).
7
Hacker, "Im Shakhahnu," 259. It is difficult to think of a more careful formula-
tion. I was wrong in stating that we know of cases of active martyrdom in Zaragoza
(RBS 2, 287). Consequendy, the list is even shorter, containing mainly Toledo and
Barcelona.
8
RBS tried to draw some comfort and encouragement from a recent article by
Kenneth Stow (K. Stow, "Conversion, Apostasy, and Apprehensiveness: Emicho of
Flonheim and the Fear of the Jews in the Twelfth Century," Speculum 76, 2001, 911-
33. RBS 2, 285-6). In this article Stow did not mean to say anything novel about the
conversions, known very well to all from the Hebrew chronicles. Concerning Mainz
and Cologne, it would be, in my opinion, exaggerated to claim that there were many
conversion cases, or that the chronicles deal with forced converts no less than with the
martyrs (Stow, 918-9, 925). It would seem that there were more such cases in Worms,
and according to one chronicle some did so in order to save their children who had
been taken from them. This reminds us of the well-planned Portuguese attempts
 In sum, RBS has constructed his arguments on wobbly foundations.
Some of the problematic points, not detailed here, have been left for
critical scholars who face the difficult task of penetrating the clouds
of verbosity in RBS ; s articles. 9
Generally, problems of comprehension and carelessness cover his
reading of my response to his long ardcle from beginning to end. Herein
might be hidden the roots of his aggressive and unbecoming style.
There is a story about an important statesman whose speeches bore
the following notes in the margin: "This argument is not convincing.
It will be necessary to raise my voice and hit the podium."

to convert the Jews at the end of the 15th century (Above, chapter 3). Concerning
Trier, all sources report several cases of active martyrdom, but what happened to
most of the community resembles what was to take place in Portugal 400 years later
(mainly according to the description of E. Qapsali), that the Christians did not kill
them, but prevented them from taking their own lives and finally used physical force
to baptize them (R. Chazan, "Christian and Jewish Perceptions of 1096: T h e Case of
Trier," Jewish History 13/2, 1999, pp. 15-16,18. Gross 1, 94 n. 30). What took place
in Regensburg, according to the apologetic presentation in one of the chronicles,
and according to the hinted account found in Sefer Hasidim (Y. Hacker, "Li-Gzerat
T a T N U , " Zjon 31, 1966, 230-1), reflects the influence of a religious leader and the
subsequent hasty, improvised and collective baptism in the river.
RBS, waving Stows tentative footnote suggestion (933 n. 76), concludes that the
relative number of martyrs was inflated in the Ashkenazic collective memory based
on the fact that the forced converts returned to Judaism. This, just like almost every
historiographical hypothesis in this field, would depend on the dating of the chronicles.
Consequently, if we assume (as I do) that the gist of the accounts have been written
relatively close to the events themselves then Stow's conjecture becomes less appeal-
ing. In addition, he would have to argue that all the poems, which describe the mass
martyrdom of 1096 are late as well, or alternatively, to disqualify the historiographical
validity of this genre un bloc.
9
See: J T Berakhot, 5, 32, 39b. Concerning the connection that existed, or not,
between philosophy and conversions in Spain, RBS points to the loyalty of the refugees
of the 1492 expulsion "who did not choose conversion, and among them we find
philosophers and scientists such as R. Isaac Abravanel and Abraham Zacut (RBS
1, 271). On this I commented that Zacut was a qabbalist and one cannot expect to
find an influence of his professional career (mathematician and astronomer) on his
religious devoutness. O n such a point, so basic to the understanding of the place of
spiritual trends in the history of the Jews in Spain, RBS insists and replies that the
definition of Zacut as a "scientist" is preferable to mine (as qabbalist), relying on the
fact that "his contemporaries called him 'the great iztagniri or 'the erudite tokhen"
(RBS 2, 291 n. 50). This needs no farther comment. Though it has nothing to do
with RBS's major theses, this minor example speaks volumes of his awkward and
embarrassing understanding of fundamental concepts and elements which should be
evaluated by any historian of Spanish Jewry.
 ‫‪APPENDIX C‬‬

‫‪HEBREW SOURCES‬‬

‫‪This appendix contains Hebrew texts which are cited or referred to in‬‬
‫‪.the book. The pagination refers to the text's location in this book‬‬

‫‪p):.‬‬ ‫כרוניקה א‪ ,‬ת ת נ ״ ו ) ‪2‬‬

‫כשראו בני ברית ק ד ש כי נגזרה הגזירה ונצחום ה א ו י ב י ם ונכנסו בחצר ויצעקו‬

‫כולם יחד ז ק נ י ם ובחורים בתולות וילדים עבדים ושפחות ל א ב י ה ם שבשמים‪,‬‬
‫ובכו עליהם ועל ח י י ה ם והצדיקו עליהם א ת דין שמים‪ ,‬ואמרו זה ל ז ה ‪ :‬נ ת ח ז ק‬
‫ונסבול עול ה י ר א ה הקדושה‪ ,‬כי לפי שעה יהרגו אותנו ה א ו י ב י ם ו ק ל ה ש ב מ י ת ו ת‬
‫ארבע בחרב‪ ,‬ונהיה ח י י ם וקיימים‪ ,‬נפשותינו בגן עדן ב א י ס פ ק ל ר י א ה מ א י ר ה‬
‫הגדולה לעולמי עד‪.‬‬
‫ויאמרו בלב שלם ובנפש חפיצה‪ :‬סוף דבר אין להרהר א ח ר מ י ד ת ה ק ד ו ש ברוך‬
‫ה ו א וברוך שמו‪ ,‬שנתן לנו תורתו וציווי להמיתנו ולהרוג אותנו על יחוד שמו‬
‫הקדוש‪ .‬אשרינו א ם נעשה רצונו‪ ,‬ואשרי כל מ י שנהרג ונשחט וימות על יחוד‬
‫שמו‪ ,‬ו י ה א מ ז ו מ ן לעולם ה ב א וישב ב מ ח י צ ה א ח ת עם ה צ ד י ק י ם ‪ ,‬ר' עקיבא‬
‫וחביריו הנהרגים על שמו‪...‬‬
‫ואז צעקו כולם בקול גדול ל א מ ר כ א ח ד ‪ :‬מ ע ת ה אין לנו לעכב יותר‪ ,‬כי ה א ו י ב י ם‬
‫כבר ב א י ם עלינו‪ .‬נלך ב מ ה ר ה נעשה ונקריב עצמינו קרבן לפני הי‪ .‬וכל מ י שיש לו‬
‫מ א כ ל ת יבדוק א ו ת ה שלא ת ה י ה פגומה ויבוא וישחוט אותנו על קידוש יחיד חי‬
‫העולמים‪ ,‬ואחר כך י ש ח ו ט א ת עצמו בגרונו או ידקור ה ס כ י ן בבטנו‪.‬‬
‫והאויבים מ י ד כשנכנסו בתוך ה ח צ ר מ צ א ו שם ק צ ת מ ן ה ח ס י ד י ם גמורים עם‬
‫רבינו י צ ח ק ב״ר מ ש ה עוקר הרים‪ ,‬ו ה ו א פשט צוארו וחתכו ראשו תחילה‪.‬‬
‫ונתעטפו ב ט ל י ת ו ת המצויינות וישבו ל ה ם בתוך ה ח צ ר ל מ ה ר לעשות רצון יוצרם‪,‬‬
‫ולא רצו לברוח תוך ה ח ד ר ה לחיות חיי שעה‪ ,‬כי מ א ה ב ה קיבלו עליהם דין שמים‪.‬‬
‫וישליכו עליהם ה א ו י ב י ם אבנים וחיצים ולא חששו לנוס‪ ,‬ויכו כל א ו ת ם אשר‬
‫מ צ א ו א ו ת ם שם מ כ ת חרב והרג ואבדן‪.‬‬
‫ו א ו ת ם שבחדרים כשראו א ת ה מ ע ש ה ה ז ה מ א ל ו ה צ ד י ק י ם והאויבים שבאו‬
‫עליהם כבר צעקו כולם‪ :‬עוד אין כאלהינו טוב מ ל ה ק ר י ב קרבן נפשינו‪ .‬ושם חגרו‬
‫נשים בעוז מ ת נ י ה ן וישחטו בניהן ובנותיהן וגם עצמן‪ .‬וגם אנשים רבים א י מ צ ו‬
‫כ ח וישחטו נשיהם ובניהם ו ט פ ם ]‪[...‬‬
 ‫מדרש בראשית רבה לד)‪:(p. 9‬‬

‫"ואך את דמכם וגוי"‪ ,‬אזהרה לחונק עצמו‪ .‬יכול כשאול ת״ל אך‪ .‬יכול כחנניה‬
‫מישאל ועזריה ת״ל אך"‬

‫ר' אברהם ב״ר עזריאל‪ ,‬ערוגת הבושם)‪:(p. 9‬‬

‫כמי שאומר בפי מקום שנהגו )פסחים נג ב(‪ ,‬דרש תודוס איש רומי‪ ,‬מה ראו‬
‫חנניה מישאל ועזריה שמסרו נפשם לתוך כבשן האש נשאו קל וחומר בעצמן‬
‫מצפרדעים וכוי ]‪ [...‬ורבי' יצחק מדנפיר הקשה באותה דרשה על פר״ש שפי'‬
‫מה ראו שלא דרשו וחי בהם‪ ,‬והקשה דהתם פרהסיא הוה ומסקינן לכולי עלמי‬
‫בסנהדרין)עד א( חייב למסר עצמו על מצוה קלה‪ .‬הרי אפרים דלוניר פי' בפרק‬
‫מקום שנהגו‪ ,‬מה ראו למסור עצמן במיתה קשה כזו‪ ,‬שהיה להרוג עצמן כששמעו‬
‫שהגזירה יוצאה ואין עונש בזה‪ ,‬דדרשינן במכילתי' )הכוונה לבראשית רבה( אך‬
‫דמכם לנפשותיכם אדרוש‪ ,‬יכול כשאול שהרג את עצמו‪ ,‬ת״ל אך‪.‬‬

‫יוסיפון)‪:(p. 12‬‬

‫ואיה מלכינו שאול ויהונתן בנו אשר נלחמו בעד עם ה' וימותו על הי ועל עמו‪,‬‬
‫הלא יכול שאול לחיות ולהמלט ולא חפץ בחיים כי אם בחר מות מחיים כאשר‬
‫ראה כי נגף עמו במלחמה‪ ,‬על כן לא נפרד מאחיו גם הוא גם יהונתן בנו הנאהבים‬
‫והנעימים ]‪ [...‬ואיה התורה הקדושה הצפונה בלבבך‪ ,‬הלא אתה כהן ומשוח אשר‬
‫למדתנו את התורה‪ ,‬איך נוכל לאהוב את אלהינו בכל לבבינו ובכל נפשנו אם לא‬
‫נמות על בריתו עם עבדיו הנהרגים על שמו‪ .‬הלא אתה העדותה בנו פעמים רבות‬
‫לאמר כי כל האיש אשר ימות במלחמה על ה' ועל עמו ועל תורתו יהיה בגורל‬
‫חלק ה' ללכת אל האור הגדול לבלתי ראות את החשך המחשיך‪.‬‬

‫כרוניקה א‪ ,‬תתנ״ו)‪:(p. 15‬‬

‫אז היו רבנו יצחק ב״ר משה ושאר הרבנים והחשובים עמו‪ ,‬והיו יושבים בחצר‬
‫ההגמון ובוכים וצוארם פשוט והיו אומרים‪ :‬מתי יבא השודד ונקבל עלינו דין‬
‫שמים‪ ,‬וכבר ערכנו עקידות ועשינו מזבחות על שמו‪.‬‬

‫ר' יעקב מבונא)‪: (p. 20‬‬

‫ויעמוד הרב ר' יום טוב וישחט כסי נפשות‪ .‬וגם אחרים שחטו‪ .‬ויש שציוה לשחוט‬
‫בנו יחידו אשר לא נסה כף רגלו הצג על הארץ מהתענג ומרוך‪ .‬ויש מהם שנשרפו‬
‫על יחוד בוראם‪ .‬ויהי מספר ההרוגים והשרופים כק״ן נפשות קדושים‪.‬‬
 ‫כרוניקה א‪ ,‬תתנ״ו)‪:(pp. 21 n. 8, 57‬‬
‫ב' ח ס י ד י ם נוצלו בו ביום כי ציחנום בעל כ ר ח ם שם ה א ח ד מר אורי ושם השני‬
‫מר י צ ח ק ושתי בנותיו עמו‪ .‬וגם ה ם קדשו ה ש ם מ א ו ד וקבלו עליהן מ י ת ה משונה‬
‫אשר לא כתובה בכל התוכחת)!( כי בערב שבועות ש ח ט מר י צ ח ק ב״ר דוד הפרנס‬
‫שתי בנותיו עמו והצית א ש בביתו ומיד הלכו ה ו א ומר אורי עמו לבית ה כ נ ס ת‬
‫לפני ארון ה ק ו ד ש וימותו שם לפני ה ' כי נשרפו שם בלב שלם‪.‬‬

‫ספר ה מ ק צ ו ע ו ת ) ‪:(pp. 22 η. 10, 5 6‬‬

‫וכיוצא בזה מ י שבא אליו רוח רעה ועבר וכפר בתורת מ ש ה ו מ א ס במצות ה '‬
‫א ל ה י ישראל והלך בשרירות לבו ונתנחם והלך וקבל מיתי משונה ב מ ק ו ם שעבר‬
‫עבירה כל ישראל מחוייבי' לשמוח עליו כ ש מ ח ' יין כי ה מ ת יהיה חי לעלם‬
‫ולעלמי עולמים‪.‬‬

‫תשובות ר' י ה ו ד ה ה ח ס י ד ) ‪:(p. 2 1‬‬

‫ש א י ל ה ‪ :‬א ם י מ י ת א ד ם עצמו עבור עוונותיו‪ ,‬א ם עובר על זה " א ך א ת ד מ כ ם‬

‫לנפשותיכם אדרוש"‪ .‬תשובה‪ :‬דטוב ה ו א ל א ד ם א ם י מ י ת עצמו עבור עוונותיו‪,‬‬
‫שכך מצינו ברי אליעזר בן דורדיא ש ה מ י ת עצמו עבור עוונותיו‪ ,‬ו י צ א ת בת קול‬
‫ו א מ ר ה אשריך וכוי‪ .‬וגם מצינו בבראשית רבה בבן א ח ו ת ו של ר' יוסי בן יועזר‬
‫]‪ [...‬ן מ ש ו מ ד א ח ד או']מר[ ה ו א ח ט א ב מ י ם לפיכך ה ט ב י ע עצמו ב מ י ם להיות לו‬
‫לכפרה‪.‬‬

‫כרוניקה א‪ ,‬תתנ״ו)‪:(pp. 22 η. 10, 57‬‬

‫וגם ח ס י ד א ח ד ה י ה לשם ור' י צ ח ק הלוי שמו‪ ,‬ויסרוהו ביסורים קשים‪ .‬וכאשר‬

‫ראו עינויו וציחנוהו בעל כרחו‪ ,‬כי מ ן ה מ כ ו ת אשר הכוהו לא ה י ה יודע עד מה‪.‬‬
‫וכשעמד על דעתו‪ ,‬ח ז ר בעוד שלשת י מ י ם והלך לקלוניא ונכנס בביתו ו ה מ ת י ן‬
‫מעט‪ ,‬ר ק שעה א ח ת ‪ ,‬והלך לנהר ריינוס וטבע עצמו בנהר‪ .‬ועליו ועל כיוצא בו‬
‫נאמר‪ ,‬מבשן אשיב אשיב מ מ צ ו ל ו ת י ם וגוי‬

‫ש ו ״ ת מ ה ר ״ י ווייל)‪:(p. 22‬‬

‫ועוד כיון ש מ ס ר עצמו ל מ י ת ה כמו שכתבת‪ ,‬ש א מ ר לו מ א ן ד ה ו א תלך לחוץ מ ן‬

‫ה ח י ר ו ת ו מ ס ו ר עצמך כדי שיהיה לך כפרה‪ ,‬וכן עשה‪ .‬וכיון ש מ ס ר עצמו ל מ י ת ה‬
‫כדי שיהיה לו כפרה ודאי יש לו כפרה‪ .‬וכה״ג מ י י ת י עובדא בב״ר‪ :‬בנו של יוסף בן‬
‫יועזר שלא נהג כשורה ועשה בעצמו ד' מ י ת ו ת ב״ד י צ ת ה בת קול ו א מ ר ה מ ז ו מ ן‬
‫לחיי העולם הבא‪.‬‬
 ‫ש מ ש ו ן " ) ‪:(p. 2 2‬‬

‫בשערים ]עמד[ ה ח כ ם ר' יוסף ‪ /‬ו א ת א ח י ו ל א הכיר וישסף ‪ /‬ה מ ק נ ה עת ה א ס ף‬

‫‪. /‬לזבוח ל ה ' ב א ת י‬

‫ר׳ מ ש ה ב״ר אלעזר)‪:(p. 23‬‬

‫ב ת ו ל ת ב ת עמי ה ר א ו י ה לאפריון וכלה‪ ,‬ה צ י ת ה א ת ה א ו ר ו ק פ צ ה בו ונפלה ]‪[...‬‬

‫נשים יפהפיות תכרענה ילדיהן ת פ ל ח נ ה ]‪ [...‬ש ח ט ה ביום א ח ד א ו ת ה ו א ת בנה‬

‫ממורבוך)‪:(p. 23‬‬

‫ונער ש ל מ ה בר א ש ר וג׳ י ל ד י ם א ש ר ש ח ט ה בידה״‪ [...] .‬ובנו ר׳ י צ ח ק ו א ש ת ו ויל‬

‫‪.‬דיו ו ש ח ט עצמו במרחץ וילדיו‬

‫ר׳ יוסף ה כ ה ן ) ‪:(p. 2 4‬‬

‫ויבחרו רבים להרוג א י ש א ת א ח י ו ]‪ [...‬כ א ש ר עשו ה י ה ו ד י ם א ש ר נ ח ב א ו ב ק א ש ט י ל‬

‫ש א ר א ז י ן א ש ר השליכו גורל ביניהם ל ר א ו ת מ י יהרוג א ת אחיו‪ .‬ו י מ ו ת ו כ ל ם בעת‬
‫‪.‬ההיא‪ ,‬ושניים א ש ר נשארו ב א ח ר ו נ ה נפלו מ ע ל ה מ ג ד ל א ר צ ה ו י מ ו ת ו גם שניהם‬

‫ס ל י ח ה לר' אביגדור ק ר א ‪ ,‬פראג)‪:(p. 24‬‬

‫כן רך הלבב בנו ישחטנו ‪ /‬ו ה א ם לא נכמרו ר ח מ י ה על בנה למלטנו ‪ /‬ת ר ו מ ה מ א ת‬

‫כל א י ש א ש ר ידבנו ‪ /‬א ם זכר א ם נ ק ב ה ת מ י ם יקריבנו ]‪ [...‬מ ו ר ה ז ק ן ונשוא פנים‬
‫בעמו ‪ /‬לבלתי יתעוללו בו נזדרז בעצמו ‪ /‬ל ש ח ו ט א ת בניו ובני ביתו עימו ‪ /‬א ף‬
‫‪.‬לזאת י ח ר ד לבי ויתר מ מ ק ו מ ו‬

‫ר' זלמן מ ס נ ט ג ו א ר ) ‪:(p. 2 6‬‬

‫כ א ש ר א ז ר א י ת י כי ה י י ת י ב א ו ת ו ה פ ע ם ש ם בבית מ ה ״ ר נתן ע״ה‪ ,‬ו א מ ר ו לי שהיו‬

‫ש ם בשע' עליית בני בליעל ב ס כ נ ה גדולה עד שקיבץ מ ה ״ ר נתן הנ״ל הרבי ילדיי‬
‫ו ה פ ק י ד ' ביד א ש ת ו הרבנית וציוה עליה מ ת י ש ת ש מ ע ק ו ל צ ע ק ת ו א ז ת ה י י זריזה‬
‫‪.‬ומוכנת ל ש ח ו ט א ת כ ל ה י ל ד י ם ש ה פ ק י ד בידה‪ .‬ו א י ת ר ח ש נ י ס א שנצלו‬

‫ר ש י מ ת יזכור)‪:(p. 27, η. 30‬‬

‫יזכור א ל ה י ם א ת נ ש מ ו ת מ ד י נ ו ת מעקלנבורג ר' א ה ר ן ב״ר מ ר ד כ י ובנו ה ק ד ו ש‬

‫ר' מענדלן ור' א ה ר ן ובנו ה ק ד ו ש ר' מ י כ ל ו א ש ת ו ש ש ח ט ה ע צ מ ה ושלשת בניה‬
‫‪.‬ששמה הענדלן‬
 ‫פירושי בעלי ה ת ו ס פ ו ת לתורה )‪:(p. 29‬‬

‫ואך א ת ד מ כ ם וגוי‪ ,‬א ז ה ר ה לחונק א ת עצמו‪ .‬ואמרו בב״ר יכול אפיי כחנניה‬
‫מ י ש א ל ועזריה‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪ .‬פירוש‪ ,‬יכול אפילו כמו אלו שמסרו עצמן לקידוש ה ש ם‬
‫שלא יוכל לחבול בעצמו א ם ה ו א ירא שלא יוכל בעצמו לעמוד בניסיון‪ ,‬ת ״ ל‬
‫אך‪ ,‬כי בשעת ה ש מ ד יכול ל מ ס ו ר עצמו ל מ י ת ה ולהרוג עצמו‪ .‬וכן בשאול בן ק י ש‬
‫ש א מ ר לנערו‪ ,‬שלוף חרבך ודוקרני בה וכוי‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪ ,‬ש א ם ירא א ד ם ש מ א יעשו‬
‫לו יסורין ק ש י ם שלא יוכל לסבול ולעמוד בנסיון שיכול להרוג א ת עצמו‪ .‬ו מ כ א ן‬
‫מביאין ראיה א ו ת ן ששוחטין התינוק[ות] בשעת השמד‪.‬‬
‫ויש שאוסרין ומפרשין כן‪ :‬יכול כחנניה וחביריו שכבר נמסרו למיתה‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪,‬‬
‫אבל אינו יכול להרוג א ת עצמו‪ .‬יכול כשאול ש מ ס ר עצמו למיתה‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪ .‬פי'‬
‫שאינו יכול לחבול בעצמו כלל‪ ,‬ושאול שלא ברשות ח כ מ י ם עשה‪ .‬מ ה ר ״ ש בר‬
‫א ב ר ה ם ה מ כ ו נ ה אוכמן‪.‬‬
‫ומעשה ברב א ח ד ש ש ח ט הרבה תינוקות בשעת ה ש מ ד כי ה י ה ירא שיעבירום על‬
‫דת‪ .‬ו ה י ה רב א ח ד עמו והיה כועס עליו ביותר וקוראו רוצח‪ ,‬והוא לא ה י ה חושש‪.‬‬
‫ו א מ ר א ו ת ו רב‪ :‬א ם כדברי יהרג אותו רב ב מ י ת ה משונה‪ .‬וכן היה‪ ,‬שתפסוהו‬
‫עכו״ם והיו פושטין עורו ונותנין חול בין העור והבשר‪ .‬ו א ח ״ כ נ ת ב ט ל ה הגזרה‪,‬‬
‫ו א ם לא ש ח ט אותן ה ת י נ ו ק ו ת היו ניצולין‪.‬‬

‫שו״ת מ ה ר ״ ם מרוטנבורג)‪:(p. 30‬‬

‫יהודי א ח ד שאל מ ה ר ״ מ שיחיה‪ ,‬א ם צריך כפרה על ש ש ח ט א ש ת ו ודי בניו ביום‬

‫הרג רב בקופלינש עיר ה ד מ י ם ‪ ,‬כי כך ביקשוהו יען ראו כי יצא ה ק צ ף מלפני ה '‬
‫והתחילו ה א ו י ב י ם להרוג בני א ל חי הנהרגים על קידוש הי‪ .‬וגם ה ו א רצה להרוג‬
‫א ת עצמו ב מ י ת ת ם ‪ ,‬א ל א שהצילו ה ' על ידי גוים‪.‬‬
‫וכתב לו‪ :‬לא ידענא שפיר מ ה אידון ביה‪ ,‬כי ודאי ההורג עצמו על ייחוד ה ' רשאי‬
‫לחבול בעצמו‪ .‬ו א מ י ‪ :‬יכול כשאול‪ ,‬ת ״ ל אך‪ .‬ואמרינן מעשה בדי מ א ו ת ילדים‬
‫וילדות שנשבו לקלון ]‪ [...‬א ף גם ה י א עלתה לגג ונפלה ומתה‪ ,‬י צ ת ה בת ק ו ל‬
‫ו א מ ר ה ‪ :‬א ם הבנים שמחה‪ .‬וכהנה רבות‪.‬‬
‫אבל ל ש ח ו ט א ח ר י ם צריך עיון ל מ צ ו א ראייה להתיר ]‪ [...‬מיהו דבר ז ה פ ש ט‬
‫היתירו ומצאנו שהרבה גדולים שהיו שוחטין א ת בניהם ו א ת בנותיהם‪ .‬וגם רבי'‬
‫קלונימוס עשה כן בקינה ה מ ת ח ל ת ‪ :‬א מ ר ת י שעו מני‪.‬‬
‫ונ״ל להביא ראייה להתיר דכי היכי ד א מ ' יכול כשאול ת ״ ל אך‪ ,‬ה"נ נימא‬
‫דההורג א ת חברו על קידוש ה ש ם מותר‪ ,‬ד ב ה ה ו א ק ר א כתיב‪ ,‬ומיד ה א ד ם ומיד‬
‫איש וגוי‪ .‬ואך דרישא ד ק ר א ק א י אכולי' ק ר א דבתר' ]‪[...‬‬
‫ומי שמטעינו כפרה ה ו א מ ו צ י א לעז על ה ח ס י ד י ם הראשונים‪ .‬ואחרי שכוונת יצרו‬
‫ה י ה ל ט ו ב ה ; מרוב א ה ב ת יוצרינו יתברך שמו פגע ונגע ב מ ח מ ד עיניו‪ .‬גם ה ם חילו‬
‫פניו על כ כ ה ]‪ [...‬ואין ל ה ח מ י ר עליו כלל‪.‬‬
 ‫ר' מ ש ה מ ק ו ר ב י ל ) ב ש ם ראבי״ה()‪:(p. 33‬‬

‫ו א ו ת ם ה ק ד ו ש י ם ששחטו עצמן וזרעם כשבאו לידי נסיון מפני שלא רצו ל ס מ ו ך‬

‫על דעתן ד א מ ר ו רבותינו‪ ,‬א ל ת א מ י ן בעצמך עד יום מ ו ת ך ) א ב ו ת ב ד(‪ ,‬והיו י ר א י ם‬
‫שיעבירום הגוים על ד ת ויהיה ש ם ש מ י ם מ ת ח ל ל על ידיהם‪ ,‬כולם יש ל ה ם ח ל ק‬
‫לעולם ה ב א ו ק ד ו ש י ם גמורים ה ם כדדרשינן‪ ,‬ואך א ת ד מ כ ם לנפשותיכם אדרוש‪,‬‬
‫יכול כ מ ע ש ה שאול ת ל מ ו ד לומר‪ ,‬א ך )בראשית רבה לד(‪ .‬ושנינן פרק הניזקין‪,‬‬
‫מ צ א ו ד' מ א ו ת ילדים שנשבו באשקלון)!( והטילו עצמן לים לפי שלא י ה א שם‬
‫ש מ י ם מ ת ח ל ל על ידיהם‪ ,‬ו י צ א ה בת קול ו א מ ר ה ‪ :‬כולם ק ד ו ש י ם מ ז ו מ נ י ם לעולם‬
‫ה ב א )גיטין נז ב(‪ .‬ואין ל ה ק ש ו ת מרבי חנינא בן תרדיון בפרק ק מ א דעבודה‬
‫זרה )דף יח א( שלא רצה לפתוח פיו כדי ש ת צ א ב ט ה ר ה ו א מ ר מ ו ט ב שיטלנה‬
‫מ י שנתנה ו א ל א ח ב ל אני בעצמי‪ ,‬שאני רבי חנינא שכבר ה ו צ ת בחבילי זמורות‬
‫שהקיפו ה א ו י ב י ם סביביו וידע בעצמו שלא י ה א ש ם ש מ י ם מ ת ח ל ל על ידו‪ .‬ו מ כ א ן‬
‫ס מ כ ו ל ש ח ו ט הילדים בשעת גזירה שאינם יודעים בין ט ו ב לרעה לפי שאנו י ר א י ם‬
‫פן ישתקעו בין הגוים בגויותן כשיגדלו מ ו ט ב שימותו ז כ א י ם ו א ל ימותו חייבים‬
‫שכן מצינו גבי בן סורר ומורה שעל ש ם שסופו ל ל ס ט ם הבריות ומחלל שבתות‬
‫לפיכך ה ו א בסקילה‪ .‬עד כ א ן לשון ה א ב י העזרי‪.‬‬

‫ר' שלום מנוישטט)‪:(p. 35‬‬

‫א ש ה א ח ת שלחה מ מ ד י נ ת פול״ן א ל מ ה ״ ר שלום‪ ,‬איך ש ה י ת ה בעיר שטריגו״ם‬

‫בשעת הגזירה בשבת‪ ,‬ו ש ח ט ה ילדיה ולבסוף נמלטה‪ ,‬ו ש א ל ה ל מ ה ״ ר שלום‬
‫שאינה צריכה לשום תשובה ו א ד ר ב ה כדין עשתה וכהוגנת עשתה‪.‬‬

‫ר' מ נ ח ם מירזבורג)‪:(p. 36‬‬

‫דין מ י ש ש ח ט א ש ת ו ובניו בשעת גזירה אין ל ה ח מ י ר עליו כלל‪ ,‬כ״ש ש א ד ם רשאי‬

‫להרוג עצמו על קידוש השם‪.‬‬

‫ר' ש ל מ ה לוריא)מהרש״ל()‪:(p. 38‬‬

‫ו ק ״ ו ש א ס ו ר בשעת גזירה ל ש ח ו ט א ת בניו כדי שלא י ט מ א ו א ו ת ם בשמד‪ .‬כי‬

‫אפילו בעצמו אין א ד ם רשאי לחבול בעצמו‪ ,‬ק ״ ו באחרים‪ .‬ו מ ס ת מ א א ם א י נ ם‬
‫ראוים וזוכים לכך יחזרו מ ע צ מ ן ועכשיו הן א נ ו ס י ם ופטורי' לגמרי‪ .‬וג"כ רוב‬
‫ה א נ ו ס י ם חוזרים א ח ר כ מ ה שנים‪ ,‬ולפעמים בניהם חוזרים‪.‬‬

‫ר' ח ס ד א י ק ר ש ק ש )‪:(p. 48‬‬

‫]‪ [...‬י״ז בתמוז ח מ ת ה ' נ ת כ ה על עיר ה ק ו ד ש אשר מ ש ם ת צ א תורה ודעת ה ' ה י א‬

‫ק ה ל ת טוליטולה‪ ,‬ויהרגו ב מ ק ד ש ה ' כ ה ן ונביא‪ .‬ש מ ה קדשו א ת ה ש ם ברבים‬
‫רבניה‪ ,‬ה ם זרע הכשר והנבחר‪ ,‬זרע ר' אשר זצ״ל ה ם ובניהם ותלמידיהם‪ .‬גם‬
‫ש ם המירו רבים לא יכלו לעמוד על נפשם‪.‬‬

‫ר' יעקב אבן אלבנה‪ " ,‬ק י נ ה עלי ט ל י ט ל ה " ) ‪:(p. 4 8‬‬

‫ורב י ה ו ד ה ת ח י ל ה‬
‫אשר ה י ה איש ת ה י ל ה‬
‫הקריב א ש ת ו לעולה‬
‫ובניו בקרב ישראל]‪[...‬‬

‫וציר נאמן של ק ה י ל ה‬
‫ש ח ט עצמו ת ח י ל ה‬
‫ל ז א ת א ז ע ק יללה‬
‫א ל שאול ו א ל בית ישראל ]‪[...‬‬

‫ושלמה א ח י ה ו‬
‫ה ע ת אשר ר א ה ו‬
‫מתגלל בדם ויעש גם ה ו א‬
‫כאשר עשה ישראל‬

‫והאיש מ ש ה בן אשר‬
‫ה ק ד י ש עצמו כאשר‬
‫ר א ה א ת כל אשר‬
‫עשה א ל ה י ם ל מ ש ה ולישראל‬

‫ר' י ח י א ל בן ה ר א ״ ש )‪:(p. 48‬‬

‫ת מ ו ז ‪ /‬בך נדרשו עם א ל לפסל ומ־ ‪ /‬ס כ ה ונשתמדו יחד ק ה ל ו ת י‬

‫ת מ ו ז ‪ /‬בך הרגו א ב ו ת לבנים לבל ‪ /‬ד ת ם ימירון ל ד ת צרי ושונאותי‬

‫ר' ח ס ד א י ק ר ש ק ש ) ‪:(p. 4 9‬‬

‫יום שבת אחריו שפך ה ' כאש ח מ ת ו נער מ ק ד ש ו וחלל נזר תורתו ה י א ק ה ל ת‬
‫ברצלו״נה אשר הובקעה ה י ו ם ה ה ו א ובאו מ ס פ ר ההרוגים כמו מ א ת י י ם ו ח מ י ש י ם‬
‫נפשות‪ .‬וכל יתר ה ק ה ל נסו א ל ה מ ג ד ל ושם נמלטו והאויבים בזזו כל מ ס י ל ו ת‬
‫ה י ה ו ד י ם והציתו א ש ב ק צ ת ם ‪ [...] .‬א ז י ק ם שאון דלת ה ע ם והמון רבה על נכבדי‬
‫ה מ ד י נ ה וילחמו עם ה י ה ו ד י ם אשר במגדל עם ק ש ת ו ת ו ב ל ס ט ר א ו ת ויכום ו י כ ת ו ם‬
‫ש מ ה במגדל‪ .‬רבים קדשו ה ' ב ת ו כ ם בני יחידי חתן‪ ,‬שה ת מ י ם העליתיו לעולה‪,‬‬
‫א צ ד י ק עלי הדין ו א ת נ ח ם לטוב ח ל ק ו ולנעימת גורלו‪ .‬ו מ ה ם רבים ששחטו עצמם‪,‬‬
‫ו מ ה ם הפילו ע צ מ ם מ ה מ ג ד ל ולא הגיעו לחצי ה מ ג ד ל עד שנעשו א ב ר י ם אברים‪.‬‬
‫‪.‬וקצת יצאו מ ש ם וקדשו א ת ה ש ם ברחוב‪ .‬וכל ה ש א ר המירו‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם זכות)‪:(p. 49‬‬

‫וכל ז א ת ה מ ש פ ח ה נקראו ק ד ו ש י ם כי בכל ש מ ד ו ת קדשו ה ש ם וכ״ש ר' י ה ו ד ה‬

‫ה ק ד ש ח ת ן רבינו יעקב שעשה ד' ט ו ר י ם נהרג על קידוש ה ש ם ה ו א ו ח מ ו ת ו‬
‫]‪ [...‬ואשתו וכל בניו והרגו זה לזה‪ ,‬זה הכלל א י נ ם ח ס י ן על ע צ מ ם בייחוד ה ש ם‬
‫‪.‬ונקראו ק ד ו ש י ם‬

‫פרופט דוראן)אפודי()‪:(p. 50‬‬

‫ו ז ה ה מ י ן מ ן הכפרה מ י ו ח ד יותר ל צ ד י ק י ם הנהרגים על ק ד ו ש ת ה ' ואשר מ ס ר ו‬

‫ע צ מ ם ל מ י ת ה על ק ד ו ש ת שמו ועל א ה ב ת ו לקדושי עליון רעיך אבי ה ח כ מ י ם‬
‫הרבנים ה ח ס י ד י ם שלשת הרועים אשר בגירונה העיר ק ב ר ו ת אבותיך ויתר‬
‫ה ק ד ו ש י ם אשר היו שם ו ז ו ל ת ם מ ן ה מ ק ו מ ו ת אשר מ ת ו בחרב ובלהבה אשר‬
‫‪ [...].‬אחשוב ז כ ו ת ם הגין על ה ש א ר י ת ה נ מ צ א‬

‫רמב״ן)‪:(p. 52‬‬

‫צ ד י ק י ם ו ת מ י מ י ם ‪ [...] /‬ו ת ח ת החרב נתנו ר א ש ם ‪ /‬יקריבו לפניך עולה ]‪[...‬‬

‫וזבחים ‪ /‬וזבחי א ד ם ‪ ,‬ויעשו לריח ניחוחים ‪ /‬א ת ה ר א ש ו א ת ה נ ת ח י ם ‪ /‬ו ה ם‬
‫ששים ו ש מ ח י ם ‪ /‬זה י א מ ר ]‪ / [...‬א ק ר י ב א ת עצמי וחלבי ודמי ונתחי וראשי ‪/‬‬
‫ו א ת ן בכורי פשעי פרי בטני ח ט א ת נפשי ‪ /‬ונפשם מ ת ע ל ס ת ‪ /‬ב ד מ י ה מ ת ב ו ס ס ת‬
‫]·‪[·.‬‬

‫ר' יום טוב אשבילי)ריטב״א()‪:(p. 53‬‬

‫כתוב בגליוני ה ת ו ס פ ו ת ש ה י ה א ו מ ר ר ״ ת ז״ל ד ה י כ א ש מ ת י י ר א שלא יכריחוהו‬

‫לעבור על ד ת מ ו ת ר לחבול בעצמו‪ .‬והכי א י ת א ב מ ד ר ש ) ב ר א ש י ת רבה לד יג( כתיב‬
‫א ך א ת דמכם‪...‬יכול אפילו כשאול מלך ישראל פי' שחבל בעצמו מפני שהיה‬
‫מ ת י י ר א ש מ א יעבידוהו על ד ת ת ל מ ו ד לומר א ך מיעט‪ .‬דבכי ה א י גוונא שרי‪.‬‬
‫ו מ כ א ן לומדים ל ש ח ו ט הנערים בגזרות מפני העברת הדת‪ .‬ע"כ מ צ א ת י בגליוני‬
‫ה ת ו ס פ ו ת ו ה ם דברים שצריכין ת ל מ ו ד ועיון גדול‪ ,‬א ל א שכבר הורה זקן‪ .‬ושמענו‬
‫בשם גדולי צרפת שהתירו כן ה ל כ ה למעשה‪.‬‬

‫ספר כף ה ק ט ו ר ת ) ‪:(p. 5 6‬‬

‫לידע ולהודיע מ ה ט ו ב ה עושה בישראל כל מ י שעומד בנסיון ו מ ת על יחוד שמו‬

‫של ק ב ״ ה ה ק ד ו ש א ז י הפנים ה מ א י ר י ' עומדי' בפניי צ ו ח ק ו ' וכל ה כ י ת ו ' של ימין‬
‫ב ק י ל ו ס ו ב ש מ ח ה וברננה וכל דבור ודבור שיוצא מ ה פ נ י ' הנוראי' נבראי' כ מ ה‬
‫מיני מ ל א כ י י שהן כ ל ם מ ל א כ י ר ח מ י י לשמש ה צ ד י ק ה ז ה ‪ .‬ולכן כל איש ישראל א ו‬
‫א ש ה א ו ת י נ ו ק ה מ ק ד ש שמו של ק ב ״ ה ו מ ת א ו נשרף א ו נצלב כל ישראל ח י י ב י ם‬
‫ל ה ס פ ד עליהם וכן בתי כ נ ס י ו ת ובתי מדרשות‪ .‬ו א ם בעל א ש ה ה ו א א ש ת ו ל א‬
‫ת נ ש א לעולי עבור כבודו של ק ב ״ ה ועבור כ ב ו ד ם של ישראל ו א ם נשא לא תגרש‪.‬‬

‫ס פ ר ה מ ק צ ו ע ו ת ) ‪:(p. 5 6‬‬

‫כתוב בספר ה מ ק צ ו ע ו ת מ י שנהרג על ק י ד ו ש ה ש ם ועל יחוד ה ש ם יתברך ]‪[...‬‬

‫ו מ ס ר עצמו ל מ י ת ה ונהרג א ו נצלב א ו נשרף על ק י ד ו ש ה ש ם כיון ש ק י ד ש ה ש ם‬
‫בגופו ובנפשו כל ישראל חייבין לקרוע עליו ו ל ה ת א ב ל עליו ולהספידו בבתי‬
‫כ נ ס י ו ת ובבתי מ ד ר ש ו ת ו א ש ת ו לא ת נ ש א עולמית מ ש ו ם כבוד ש מ י ם ו מ ש ו ם‬
‫כבודו‪ ,‬ו א ם נ ש א ת ל א ת צ א י ‪.‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם זכות)‪:(p. 58‬‬

‫וכלם עמדו ב ש מ ד ו ת ק ש ט י ל י י א על ת ל ם בעבודת ה ש ם י ת ' ובתורתו‪ .‬גם אני‬

‫ה ש ם ב ״ ה זכני ש א ק ד ש שמו עם ש מ ו א ל בני‪ ,‬ובאנו ל א פ ר י ק א והיינו שבויים שני‬
‫פעמים‪ .‬ה ש ם למען ח ס ד י ו ורחמיו הגדולים ישלים לי ולזרעי ש י ה י ה א ח ר י ת נ ו‬
‫לעבודת ה ש ם י ת ' ו י ת ' ולתורתו וישים ח ל ק נ ו עם ה צ ד י ק י ם בג״ע ו ב ת ח י י ת‬
‫ה מ ת י ם ולבנין בית מ ק ד ש ו אכי״ר‪.‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם זכות)‪:(p. 59‬‬

‫וראוי ל ה ב י א בכאן כפי זמננו שראינו צ ד י ק י ם שהרגו ע צ מ ם ובניהם כדי שלא‬

‫י ו צ י א ו ם על כ ר ח ם מ ת ו ר ת ה ' ש ז ה ה י ה מ ו ת ר ודבר ק ד ו ש כי ב ת ל מ ו ד כשבאו‬
‫ספינות מ י ל ד י ם וילדות שנשבו לקלון לרומי א מ ר ו ל א דיינו מ ה שהכעסנו בארץ‬
‫א ל א שגם בחייל ו א מ ר ו א ם נשליך עצמינו ל י ם ‪ /‬אנו ה ו ל כ י ם לעה״ב ודרש ל ה ם‬
‫ז ק ן א ח ד א מ ר ה ' מבשן אשיב וכוי והשליכו עצמן ה י ל ד ו ת ונשאו ק ״ ו ה ז כ ר י ם‬
‫וכוי והשליכו עצמן לים )בבלי גיטין נז ב(‪ .‬ובפרק ה נ ז ק י ן ו ב פ ס ק י ת ו ס פ ו ת בשעת‬
‫גזרות מ ו ת ר להרוג עצמו כשדואג מ ן היסורין ו ה ר א י ה קפצו כ ל ם ונפלו וכוי‪.‬‬
‫ו ה א ד א מ ר ב ע ״ ז ) ד ף יח א( ברי חנינא בן תרדיון מ ו ט ב שיטלנה מ י שנתנה ו א ל‬
‫יחבול בעצמו שיפתח פיו לאש‪ ,‬ה כ א י ר א י ם היו מ י ס ו ר י ם כ ד א מ ר י נ ן א ל מ ל א נגדו‬
‫לחנניה וחביריו וכוי ועוד על כ ר ח ם של ת י נ ו ק ו ת היו מענין א ו ת ם ולא היו הורגין‬
‫א ו ת ם ‪ .‬ו ה מ ר ד כ י כ ת ב בסוף פ ״ ק דע״ז על ענין ר' חנינא בן תרדיון‪ ,‬כ ת ב ר' יוסף‬
‫מ י ה ו ה י כ א שמיסרין א ו ת ו וירא שלא יוכל לעמוד בנסיון מותר‪ .‬א ב ל אני ה כ ו ת ב‬
‫יש לי יותר ר א י ה מ ז ה ה מ ע ש ה של פ ט י ר ת רבי ב ה ה ו א כ ו ב ס שלא נזדמן ביום‬
‫ה ה ו א להיו' בקבורתו של רבי ושמע כי מ י ש ה י ה ש ם בקבורתו זוכה לחיי ה ע ה ״ ב‬
‫שעלה לגג והפיל עצמו ו מ ת שהרג עצמו בעבור שלא נזדמן ל ה י ו ת ש ם ל ק י י ם‬
‫ה מ צ ו ה ו י צ א ת ב ״ ק ש ה ו א מ ז ו מ ן לחיי ה ע ה ״ ב בלי שום דין ועונש כ מ ו שפירשו‬
‫ב ז ה )בבלי כ ת ו ב ו ת קג ב ובתוספות שם(‪ .‬וכן י ו ק י ם איש צרידות בן א ח ו ת ו של‬
‫יוסי בן יועזר שהרג עצמו‪.‬‬
‫וכ״ש בזמן ה ש מ ד ו ת שלא לחלל ה ש ם ולהיות מ ק ד ש ה ש ם כ מ ו ר' י ה ו ד ה בן השר‬
‫אשר ה ק ד ו ש בטוליטולא שנת ק נ ״ א שהרגו ע צ מ ם ה ו א ואשתו ו ח מ ו ת ו א ש ת ר'‬
‫יעקב בעל הטורים‪ .‬וכן בפורטוגל ה ח כ ם ר' י צ ח ק בן צחין מבונילייא דילא שיירא‬
‫ובניו בשנת נז״ר‪ .‬וכן א מ ר ו בסנהדרין‪ ,‬ו א ך א ת ד מ כ ם וכוי יכול כשאול שלא‬
‫יתעללו בו הערלים ת ״ ל א ך מיעט‪ .‬וכן שמשון בן מנוח שידענו שזכה לחיי ה ע ה ״ ב‬
‫בזכות עין א ח ד כ מ ו שאמרו ז״ל‪.‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם זכות)‪:(p. 71‬‬

‫ו ה י ה ש מ ד גדול בשנה ה ה י א שלא ה י ה מעולם‪ .‬וערב שבת הגדול נגזר שיוציאו‬

‫נערים ונערות מ ה כ ל ל מ א י ב ו ר א ובכל מ ל כ ו ת פורטוגל‪ .‬ו ה י ת ה צ ע ק ה גדולה‬
‫באיבורא א ל ה מ ל ך שלא ה י ת ה כמוה‪ ,‬ו ב פ ס ח באו ולקחו כל הילדים והילדות‬
‫ונתפשטה הגזרה כי אפילו ל ז ק נ י ם מוציאין מ ן הכלל על כרחם‪ ,‬והרבה מ ת ו על‬
‫ק ד ו ש ת ה ש ם שהיו מ מ י ת י ן עצמן‪.‬‬

‫ר' אליהו קפשאלי)‪:(p. 72‬‬

‫ויהי ב ל ו ק ח ם הגוים בני ה י ה ו ד י ם נשתמדו רבים לאין מ ס פ ר כי לא יכלו לעמוד‬

‫ב ז א ת הגזרה כי כידוע שרחמי ה א ב מרובין על הבן וכי‪ .‬ו ח ל ק מ ה ם קדשו ש ם‬
‫ש מ י ם ועמדו ב ק ד ו ש ת ם ופרי בטן לא ירחמו על בנים לא ת ח ו ס עינם ולא נעו ולא‬
‫זעו מ ד ת ם ואמונתם‪...‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם סבע)‪:(p. 75‬‬

‫ואיך ע ת ה כששמע כרוז ה מ ל ך שכל מ י שיש לו בת או א ח ו ת שיביאה א ל ה מ ל ך‬

‫ל ה י ו ת ה נבעלת לערל עע״ז‪ ,‬ל מ ה לא שם עצמו בסכנה להוליכה א ל ארץ גזרה לבא‬
‫במערות צורים ובנקיקי ס ל ע י ם עד יעבור זעם‪ ,‬או להוליכה למלכות א ח ר ת ‪ .‬ו א ס‬
‫א ״ א לא ז ה ולא זה ה נ ה ראינו בעינינו ב מ ל כ ו ת פורטוגל בזמן הגירוש‪ ,‬שלקחו‬
‫הבנים והבנות באונס להעבירם על ד ת ולהמירם‪ ,‬שהיו ח ו נ ק י ם ע צ מ ם ו ש ו ח ט י ם‬
‫ע צ מ ם ונשותיהם‪ ,‬ובפרט בראשונה שהגזרה לא פ ש ט ה א ל א בבנים ובנות היו‬
‫ל ו ק ח י ם הבנים והבנות ומשליכים א ו ת ם בבורות ל ה מ י ת ם בחייהם‪ ,‬א ו ל ח ו נ ק ם‬
‫ו ל ש ו ח ט ם ולא שיראו א ו ת ם עובדים ע״ז‪ .‬ו ל מ ה לא עשה מרדכי א ' מ א ל ו הדברים‬
‫שעשו ק ט נ י ישראל בפורטוגל‪ ,‬וראוי ה י ה למרדכי ליהרג על דבר כ ז ה ]‪[...‬‬

‫ר' א ב ר ה ם סבע)‪:(p. 77‬‬

‫א ח " כ ה כ נ י ס ו ם כ ל ם לחצר א ח ד כ מ ו עשרת אלפים יהודים וכלם ה כ ר י ח ו ם‬

‫ופיתום להמיר ד ת ם ‪ ,‬ובדי י מ י ם לא נשארו ארבעים בין אנשים ונשים‪.‬‬
 ‫ר' א ב ר ה ם ארדוטיאל)‪:(p. 79‬‬

‫ולא נתקררה ד ע ת ו ) ש ל המלך( עד ששלח ידו ב ח כ מ י ם ועשה ב ה ם שפטים ועינה‬

‫א ו ת ם בכל מיני עינוים ו א ס ר א ו ת ם בכבלי ברזל‪ .‬ורבים מן ה י ה ו ד י ם המירו ד ת ם‬
‫שלא יכלו לעמוד בנסיונם ו מ ה ם תלו ע צ מ ם ו מ ה ם מ ס ר ו ע צ מ ם על ק ד ו ש ת שמו‬
‫יתברך ובראשם הרב ה ק ד ו ש ה ח ס י ד בנפש ט ה ו ר ה וגוף נקי כאלישע בעל כנפים‬
‫]בבלי שבת מ ט א[ ה ו א הרב ר' שמעון מ י מ י ז״ל ש מ ס ר עצמו ה ו א וביתו וכל אשר‬
‫לו אנשים ונשים וטף ו מ ת בתוך ה ס ו ה ר בעינויים גדולים‪ .‬ו ה ח כ ם ה ח ס י ד ה ק ד ו ש‬
‫הרי ש ם טוב ל א ר מ ה שעברו עליו כ מ ה עינויים כ מ ו שאמרנו ק ו ד ם שהכניסוהו‬
‫לסוהר ו א ח ר כך הוציאוהו והצילו ה ק ב ״ ה נפשו מ מ ו ת ובא למלכות פ א ס ה ו א‬
‫והרב רבי יעקב לואל והרי א ב ר ה ם סבאע‪.‬‬
 APPENDIX D

THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE

SCROLL OF AMRAFEL

In Chapter 3 I dealt with the Scroll of Amrafel, a treatise attributed to

Rabbi Abraham Ben Eliezer Halevi. The author refers to a certain
tradition, originated in thirteenth century Ashkenaz, or possibly earlier,
which demonstrates how should a Jew act when facing the choice of
conversion or death. A comprehensive re-examination of the sermon
that survived from this treatise, led me to draw some new conclusions
regarding its historical background, and regarding the Ashkenazic
connections of its author.
The meager remnants of this essay, a total of less than three printed
pages, were published by Gershom Scholem more than seventy years
ago. 1 Scholem depicts the contents of the Scroll as "fire chiseling utter-
ances [...] undoubtedly, one of the best and more exalted sermons I
had come across in the qabbalistic literature [...]. This is a sermon
about the death of the martyrs who sacrificed their lives for the sane-
tification of the Name which was, undoubtedly, relevant in the times
of the Inquisition and its trials." 2 I do not question here the author-
ship of Abraham Halevi, and there is also an indication that it was
composed in Spain prior to the expulsion. 3 O n the other hand, I will
attempt to prove that his ideas, which were used freely by the most
important of historians, were misunderstood as far as the historical
context of this sermon is concerned. 4
The sermon is divided into two main parts, indicated by content and

1
G. Scholem, "Haqirot Hadashot al Rabi Avraham Ben Eliezer Halevi', Qrryat
Sefer 7, 1930-1931, 153-155.
2
Ibid.. See also: M. Fishbane, The Kiss of God, Seatde & London, 1994, p. 55.
3
See below, n. 20.
4
Fishbane, too, follows Scholem on this issue. The only scholar who handled this
with some degree of prudence, as far as I am aware, is M. Saperstein, even though
he treated it only implicitly and gave no alternative explanation (M. Saperstein, "A
Sermon on the Akedah from the Generation of the expulsion and Its Implication
for 1391," Exile and Diaspora: Studies in the History of the Jewish People Presented to Professor
Haim Beinart [A. Mirsky et al ed.], Jerusalem, 1991, 115.
style. The first part is the practical part which deals with the prepa-
ration of the Jew for an event in which he might be facing a Kiddush
ha-Shem situation, and it is composed of three sections. Initially, the
author informs the reader about a "tradition of sages and martyrs, ‫יי‬
according to which everyone who would "focus his mind at that hour
on the honorable and awesome Name between his eyes and will make
up his mind to sanctify Him, [...] he can rest assured that he will be
able to endure the test, trusting in God. He will not feel the pain of
the beating and torture, nor will he tremble (with the fear) of death."
T h e second section (In Scholem's edition it is joined to the first one.)
deals with "the order of taking the resolution to sanctify the Name,"
and he cites what he had found "written by one of the Hasidim that
his answer should be: 'What do you want from me? Am I not a Jew?
A Jew I am and as a Jew shall I die! A Jew! A Jew! A Jew! And then
he should resolve to (be true to) what he has his lips and mouth
uttered [...]. It is then that he will not feel the pain of the tortures
they inflict on him." Scholem already noted the Ashkenazic origin of
this idea, from the school of Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg, and possibly
even earlier. 5
In the last paragraph of this part the author contends that whoever
recites the Shema, mornings and evenings, with the correct intention
"and resolves to devote his own body and soul to Him as well as his
wife's and children's," or (also) during NefilatApayim following the Vidui,
while "saying: '1 commit my soul to You, Ο Lord' (Psalm 25:1), and
entrusts his soul to his God," 6 it is considered as if he actually gave his

5
Scholem, 441-442, and see the references of David Tamar, Qiiyat Sefer 33, 1958,
376-377; ibid., 34 1959, 397.
6
About the Sefardic custom to recite Psalm 25 while prostrating, see, for instance:
Abudraham Hashalem, Jerusalem, 1963, 119. Also, in the writings of Rabbi Abraham
Halevi's contemporary: "And some are accustomed to say it every day as supplica-
tion accompanied by nefilat apayim" [Qaf ha-Qetoret, Ms. Paris 845, 69b. And cf.: Tur
Orah Hayim, no. 131). And see: Y. M. Elenbogen, Ha-Tfilah be-Tisrael be-Hitpathutah
ha-Historit, Tel-Aviv, 1972, 60. Generally, this is s Sefardic custom, while in Ash-
kenaz they used to recite Psalm 6. Regarding the confession [vidui] said before the
nefilat apayim, a custom based on the ^phar, see: Daniel Sperber, Minhagei Tisrael 3,
Jerusalem, 1994, 177. The source of the connection between reciting Psalm 25 to
the readiness to give away one's soul appears for the first time in the Zphar II, 200b,
202b, and £ohar III, 121-122a. About the evolution of the custom of reciting Psalms
and its connection to self-sacrifice of one's soul, see: Y. Verdiger, Sheruta Diilota in:
Zlota de-Avraham 1, 1960, 348. O n e example of the development of this idea among
the qabalists of Zafed in the 16th century, see: Rabbi Haim Vital, Sha'ar ha-Kavanot
!,Jerusalem, 305, 310-311.
life for God's sake and all his sins are expiated, "since he resolved to
die [le-hashlim nafsho] for his God and this is considered as if he died,
gone and was annihilated from this world." About the intention to give
away one's soul while reciting the Shema, which originates—as far as
we know—in R. Yonah Gerondi (Catalunia, mid 12th century), was
recendy extensively discussed in a comprehensive article. 7 One could
speculate that there is a connection, and not an accidental one, to the
parallel idea about the recommended intention during the reciting
of Psalm 25 in the Nefilat Apayim prayer, which first appears in the
Zohar (where the issue of intention while reciting of the Shema is also
appears), about one generation after Yonah Gerondi.
The second part, as noted by Scholem, is a "sermon based on Song
of Songs 8:5-7, which makes use of ideas that were expressed already
in the Midrash ha-Ne'elam, Hayn Sarah, 125b, expounding these verses." 8
Rabbi Abraham expounds these verses as referring to the soul of the
martyr which goes up to its God which, due to its love, dedicated
itself for him and agreed to suffer to the point that it rises from the
desert, which is the underworld, to heaven while "she is falling apart
[mitpareqet9] and drops down limb for limb and piece for piece," as the
result of the tortures it had undergone for His sake. The love of God
and devotion to Him make the martyr physically indifferent to pain
so that "many waters," namely, multitudes of troubles and hardships,
"cannot quench love." Indeed, that righteous may boast in this great
act in which "he surrenders his body to the consuming fire and all
the other harsh tortures I mentioned above." The sermon ends with
depiction of the merit and place of the righteous amidst those who
sanctified the Name, like "the martyrs of Lydda and (other) martyrs
[harugei melukhah]." from the classical age of Kiddush ha-Shem in "the
generation of persecutions."
Now, there is here room for discussing the historical background of
this sermon. It is rather simple to understand the reasons that caused
scholars to inadvertently associate them with the Spanish Inquisition.
T h e Scroll of Amrafel was written in Spain, in the last quarter of the
fifteenth century and not earlier, since the author was born around

7
Y. Hacker, "Kelum Hu'ataq Kiddush ha-Shem el Tehum ha-Ru'ah Liqrat ha-
Et ha-Hadashah," Qedushat ha-Hayyim ve-Heruf ha-Nefesh: Qovei Ma'amarim le-^ikhro shel
Amir Yequtiel [Y. Gafni and A. Ravitzky ed.], Jerusalem, 1993, 221-232.
8
Scholem, 152. Rabbi Abraham actually is concerned with the homiletical inter-
pretation of other verses. See also: Fishbane, 58-59.
9
I amended here: mitpareqet for mitrapeqet.
 1460. During the eighth decade of that century, the first decade of
the activity of the Inquisition (literally: "interrogation," "investigation".
Hebrew: haqirah), they started to burn New Christians ofjewish origin
in their so-called Auto da Fé (Act of Faith). The multiple use of words
like "fire" and "flames" were the words connecting the sermon to the
reality in Spain. It seems that such dominant motifs obscured others
and prevented a clearer sight of the historical reality that was in the
background of composing the Scroll. We do not suggest to disregard
or to underestimate it; it might also be that such motifs are the basis
of the treatise title, since a very well known Midrash expounds: "And it
was in the days of Amrafel [...]" who determined and thrown Abra-
ham into the fiery furnace." 1 0 However, one must pay attention to
the fact that these words appear only in the last part of the sermon,
and even there—almost exclusively in the interpretation of verses of
Song of Songs 8:6-7, in which we find the description of love as "the
flashes thereof are flashes of fire, a very flame of the Lord [...] many
waters cannot quench love."
There is little doubt that the author knew what was taking place in
the dark cellars of the Holy Office and that he was familiar with its
procedures and ground rules. This supposition in itself is sufficient for
questioning the thesis as if he aims his exhortation to martyrdom to
the victims of this institution. As is well known, that the Inquisitorial
system used methods of extreme tortures in its attempts to reveal the
acts and religious allegiance that the New Christians, on their part,
attempted to conceal; once a complete confession as to his heretical
deeds and beliefs was extracted to the satisfaction of his interrogators,
there would no longer be need for any additional torture; judges would
have prescribed his penance, had he expressed any remorse and wish
to return to the bosom of the Church, or to death penalty at the stake,
had he persisted in his obstinacy. What point, then, is there to the
author's introduction of the Ashkenazic tradition in the second section
of the first part? Let us examine the complete paragraph:

This is the order of taking the resolution to sanctify the Name when they
come to torment him and interrogate him [yish'aluhu ve-yidreshuhu], and
tell him that if he converts \yamir kevodo] they will let him go and will
not hurt him, or that he should let them know what he wants. Behold
this is what I have found written by one of the Hassidim that his answer
should be: "What do you want from me? Am I not a Jew? A Jew I am

10
Bereshit Rabah, 41 (Theodore-Albeck Edition), Jerusalem, 1965, 408.
 and as a Jew I shall die! A Jew! A Jew! A Jew!5' And then he should
resolve to (be true to) what he has his lips and mouth uttered and be
ready and sure that he is going to sanctify his Creator and not profane
his God's Name. It is than that he will not feel the pain of the tortures
they inflict on him. And this is the secret alluded to by the prophet
Isaiah: "One shall say: '1 am the Lord's. And another shall call himself
by the name ofJacob. And another shall subscribe with his hand unto
the Lord, and surname himself by the name of Israel."

First, it would be unthinkable that the Inquisition would offer the

accused to "let them know what he wants," namely, to let them know
of his terms or conditions. More importandy, this regime had no aim
of converting. The issue of conversion is utterly and unquestionably of
no relevance, but rather the confession of the New Christian regarding
his heretical Jewish affiliation. It is precisely at the moment that the
accused admits to his Jewish loyalty that tortures cease! If so, then there
is no reasonable connection between the //05.rá&-Ashkenazic advice
given by the author to help one withstand tortures when faces with
torture-generated temptation to convert, and the conditions of those
accused of "judaizing" by the Inquisition. How are we to understand
the phrase "and tell him that if he converts [yamir kevodo] they will let
him go and will not hurt him"?
Furthermore, had our author referred to the anusim, it would have
indicated his ignorance of their religious condition. Anyone who is
aware of their limited "judaizing" and restricted acquaintance with
Jewish practices and cognizance, would describe the author's tone
as absolutely pathetic. How are we to understand a Jewish rabbi,
who tries to advise the descendants of the anusim, in Hebrew, how
to achieve supreme concentration and devequt through qabbalistic
means? And, supposedly, some of them did know and even recited
the Shema twice a day (see the end paragraph of the first part)—how
could our author ever think that the masses of those anusim pray the
Amidah prayer, followed by the Vidui and Nefilat Apayim? It would be
against our familiarity with the author's late manuscripts and letters,
most of which deal with Messianism; these, teach not only of the
curiosity and interest of the author in what was happening not only
in his vicinity but also around the world, and all that not without a
measure of criticism. We deal here with a well-informed person, not
with a qabbalist whose daily existence is wholly within the supernal
spheres, detached from reality. 11

11
See: I. Robinson, "Two Letters of Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi," in: I. Twersky
 All of the above considered, it seems that one must entirely reject
the opinion that the anusim were the author's destined audience. O n
the other hand, if we are to carefully examine the details of torments,
the author refers to toward the end of the sermon, saying "all the other
harsh tortures I mentioned above," while trying to interpret them in
the context of tortures applied in this era—an aperture is opened for
us to unveil the real historical context of the sermon:
[...] And the righteous, who dwell in the innermost chamber of the King
where bliss has its habitation, say about the soul of this martyr: "Who
is this (soul) that comes up from the lower world—which is likened to
the wilderness where there is nothing but serpents and adders, scorpions
and thirst—and for the love of its Beloved its body falls to pieces [peraqim
peraqim] due to the multitude of trials it was subjected to. They tear its
flesh by hot pincers or hack it to pieces by swords.

It seems that the torments mentioned at the end of the phrase were so
far read and understood metaphorically, due to the mythical character
of the beginning of the phrase, and herein lies the core of the problem.
If we do not view this phrase as a metaphor, we must ask ourselves
whether these torments were the fate of some of the Inquisition's
condemned victims. T h e answer to this question is utterly negative.
T h e series of torments led by this institution were committed under
interrogations, and these means, or any similar ones, were not used.
At the time of execution no tortures were carried out. There had been
a death penalty through fire. T h e condemned person could choose a
lighter death by accepting Christianity (as many did). In such a case
he would be garroted before his body is burned.
We do know, however, of the practice of such methods of torture
within the Holy Roman Empire. These torture were part of the penal
system and not of the interrogation procedure in which different kind
of torments, primarily stretching the body and dislocating its organs,
were used. It is explicit in the Carolina, the criminal code of King
Charles V, from 1532, but it is known that these torments were in
use already during the fifteenth century. 12 In an elegy dedicated to

(ed.) Studies in Medieval Jewish History and Literature, vol. 2, Cambridge, Mass., 1984,
408-410; Abraham Gross, "Aseret ha-Shvatim u-Malchut Prester John—Shemu'ot
ve-Hipusim Lifnei Gerush Sefarad ve-Aharav", Peamim 48, 1991, 29.
12
Professor Esther Cohen from the Hebrew University informed me of icono-
graphic evidence, particularly from cities in south Germany (and as we shall show
below, there is also explicidy written evidence). O n the other hand, these torments
the victims of one libel, probably from the beginning of that century,
we find the phrase: "and with white-hot pincers they gathered your
flesh5' [uvi-zvat melubenet laqtu besarkha].13 In the Blood Libel of Endingen,
in 1470, the three brothers accused of murdering a Christian child
were burned. Eight years later, in March 10, 1478, in the Host Libel
in Passau, on the banks of the Danube, two of the sentenced people
were condemned to death at the stake. They were also sentenced to
have their flesh pinched with white-hot pincers before being burned,
a punishment that was saved for extremely severe cases.14 Likewise,
the death penalty of "hacking it to pieces by swords" did exist in this
region in that period; I assume that the author's reference is to quar-
tering—the dissection of the condemned into quarters. 15
Examined from this angle, one could conclude from the very
beginning of the first part that our Scroll discusses torments that
were applied to people as part of the punishment—not as part of the
interrogation procedure. Rabbi Abraham Halevi talks about "such a
man, when they take him out in order to torment him through most
horrible tortures—as they did to the holy (martyrs) that are on the

are not mentioned in early collections of the medieval practices from the thirteenth
century, like the Schwabenspiegel and the Sachsenspiegel.
13
S. Benfeld, Sefer Hadma'ot, vol. 2, Berlin, 1896, p. 174, and laso: there, p. 173,
175, 178.
14
See: R. Po-Chia Hsia, The Myth of Ritual Murder, New Haven & London, 1988,
25, 26, 51. In the infamous Blood Libel of Trent in 1475, Shemuel was destined
to be taken out in a carriage to the site of execution to have his flesh ripped οίΓ in
white-hot pincers, and later to be burned (Idem, Trent 1475: Stories of Ritual Murder
Trial, New York, 1992, 67). Others were sentenced to breaking their bodies on the
wheel, and only then to be burnt.
15
See: R. van Dülmen, Theatre of Horror: Crime and Punishment in Early Modern
Germany, Cambridge, 1990, 92-94. This penalty was considered to be the harshest
of punishments. According to the author, this penalty was saved mainly for traitors
and conspirators, who attempted to assassin the king. However, he does not mention
any such penalty handed to a Jew. Clues for such peculiar death penalty we find in
phrases Hebrew like: "cut" or "torn" [nigzru, ne'eqru] (See: A. M. Haberman, Sefer
Gzerot Ahkenaz ve-^aifat, Jerusalem, 1945, 191-192). It is worthwhile noting the German
drawing from the end of the fourteenth century, published by G. Kisch. The drawing
deals in the upper part of it with the sight of a Jew hanging among monkeys. At the
lower part of the drawing it shows a person whose arms and legs are tied to four
horses—it was the original method of dissecting the body, as noted by Dülman, but
due to 'inefficiency' they moved to using a knife and axe. If the subject of this part
is also a Jew, it could be the proof to that the discussed form of death was applied to
Jews too (G. Kisch, "The Jewish Execution in Medieval Gremany," Historia Judaica 5,
1943, plate 2, after p. 108). About the torments in white-hot pincers, see: Dülman,
78; about the breaking of the body with a wheel—ibid., 95.
earth,' 5 meaning, when taking him out to the public area, the place of
execution. 16 In this manner one should also interpret the reference to
the death penalty by fire of the "martyr who makes up his mind to die
for his God," and to "and surrenders his body to consuming fire," as a
reality about which our author heard from Ashkenaz. This we say, in
spite of the possibility that at the time of composing the sermon there
might have been already anusim burning at the inquisitorial stakes.
It would seem that other violent sorts of death, mentioned by
Rabbi Abraham Halevi, are such that he could have read about in
literature originated in Ashkenaz, if not from occurrences of his own
generation. In the dialogue between the righteous and his Creator,
the righteous replies:
Set me as a seal upon Your heart, as a seal upon Your arm, and do not
forget me ever. Remember the love with which I loved you, for even
if they kill me for my love to you, I shall not feel a thing "for love is
as strong as death." Indeed, even if they buried me alive this would be
as naught to me, for my zeal for the honor of Your Name is "as fierce
as the grave."

We read about the live burial of "Rabbi Shemaryah the Hassid" in

First Crusade Hebrew chronicles. 17 However, perhaps there is no
need to go that far back in history, since the punishment discussed

16
According to this interpretation, Fishbane's translation for this sentence (Kiss
of God, 53) must be corrected. About the process of degradation through dragging
one tied to a carriage in the city's streets, customary in the Holy Roman Empire,
see: Hsia (Myth, 26-7, n. 14). According to & Judenspiel, written about the Blood Libel
in Trent, the three brothers were undressed, wrapped in leather of catde, tied to
horses' tails and dragged to the place of execution. It appears that such instance is
the case of the martyrs' death in Pforzheim in 1267: "they were slaughter, drag and
wheeled" [nitbhu, nigreru ve-ne'ejhu] (Haberman, ibid.). It is possible that the phrase
"the holy (martyrs) that are on the earth," in the Scroll refers to the victims of various
libels in that period, despite the fact that the end of the sentence ties it in with the
'sons of the holy Hannah' from the period of Hasmonean rebellion. The sentence
is based on Psalm 17:3; the Midrash associates it with the suffering of the martyrs
in the "generation of religious persecutions [doro shel shmad] (.Midrash Tehilim 16:4 [S.
Buber's edition, 121]). There were, as is well known, Jews who could not face the
tortures in the events mentioned above, be it during the interrogations or before
execution, and ended up converting to Christianity in order to gain a relatively easier
and faster death. They are probably the ones the author refers to at the end of his
opening paragraph (after his recommendation to concentrate and focus on the Name
as a method of blocking pain). See below, 123.
17
Haberman, 51, 80.
was conventional in Germany of the High Middle Ages.18 We have
found also that this penalty was applied to Jews. In the middle of
the fourteenth century we read in a Tizkor prayer: "Remember [...]
those who were killed, drowned, burnt, hung, [...] strangled and
buried alive." 19
Let us now return to the end of the third section of the first part.
In this paragraph, the author informs his audience of the tradition he
had found by "one of the Hassidim," concerning the prescribed verbal
response of the Jew when facing the choice between sanctifying the
Name and death. Rabbi Abraham ends the paragraph with an over-
tone which endows his message with urgency. One must pay special
attention to this, since herein lies the reason for writing the sermon:
Behold it is worthwhile spreading these words among the Children of
Israel, a people near unto Him, for this is a generation of religious
persecutions [doro shel shmad\ and it is of great import that such a car-
dinal idea [ha-iqar ha-zeh] will not be hidden from every person who

18
Dülman, 88-89. T h e author notes that the killing of children was punishable
by burying the murderer alive. If so, could Shemaryah's form of death be a result of
having killed his own children? This form of death penalty for murdering children is
not mentioned in the discussion of this issue in: M. Minti, "Kidush ha-Shem be-Einei
No?rim be-Germanya bi-Yemei ha-Beinayim," £ion, 59, 1994, 237, n. 118.
19
Bernfeld, Sefer ha-Dma'ot, 106. thus far, I have no unequivocal interpretation
for the verse "[...] and he dies amidst the wicked" (Isa. 53:9), which the author
uses in the beginning of his sermon on the verses from Song of Songs. See Rashi's
interpretation of this verse (Y. Baer, Rashi veha-Me?iut ha-Historit shel Zemano,"
Tarbiz, 20, 1949, 326). Regarding the phrase 'to make up his mind to die for his
God' [le-hashlim nafsho le-elohim] it is worthwhile mentioning that its source is mainly in
Ashkenaz. Although 'to make up one's mind' in the sense of complete devotion and
preparedness for death appears already in the Midrash (for example, Tanhuma, Va-
et'hanan, 6), but it is very rare (See: E. Ben-Yehuda, Milon ha-Lashon ha-Ivrit 15, New
York and London, 1959, 7183). In the twelfth century we find it several times in the
Chronicle attributed to Shlomo ben Shimshon (Haberman, 37, 42) and in Ashkenazi
liturgy (L. Zunz, Literaturgeschichte der synagogaten Poesie, Berlin, 1865, 641-642). Among
the extensive liturgical poetry that was composed in the aftermath of the First Crusade
(1096) we find it in a Seliha of Rabbi Eliezer bar Nathan (Haberman, 85) and in an
elegy by Qalonimos bar Yehuda (Seder ha-Qinot le-Tishah be-Av [D. Goldsmidt ed.],
Jerusalem, 1977, 107, line 29; 108, line 41). Afterwards, this phrase becomes routine
in the memorial literature for those who died for the sanctification of the Name; in
prayers, in piyyutim and in chronicles, till the eighteenth century. Zunz notes its usage
by Hakalir and of the Midrash Asarah Harugei Malkhut. The author of Sefer Tosifon too
uses it in the same sense (Sefer Tossifon [D. Flusser ed.], Jerusalem, 1977, 314). The
literary transition to medieval Ashkenaz is, then, visible. About the evolution of the
phrase, see: S. Lieberman, "Roman Legal Institutions in Early Rabbinics and the
Acta Martyrum," JQR 35, 1944-1945, 52.
 surnames himself by the name of Israel for who knows what a day
may bring forth.
Even this closing sentence proves that the issues discussed are not
connected to the fate of the anusin and the Inquisition. The author
addresses here "every person who surnames himself by the name of
Israel," meaning—whose Judaism is externally expressed and well
known to everyone around, a Judaism which is not kept a secret or
is questioned by others. As is well known, the Inquisition dealt with
the removal of any phenomenon of heresy within Christianity, and
it could not have harmed "every person who surnames himself by
the name of Israel." T h e source of scholarly misunderstanding in
the interpretation of the historical background—implied in this para-
graph—stems from the phrase "generation of religious persecutions"
[doro shel shmad]. It was very convenient to explain it as the reaction
to the events that occurred in the author's surroundings. Our sug-
gestion is slighdy different. Rabbi Abraham Halevi, observing all the
occurrences in the Jewish world, particularly regarding the spread of
Blood Libels in Europe during the 1470's, alongside the atmosphere
that was prevalent in Spain, came to the conclusion that his genera-
tion is a "generation of religious persecutions" [doro shel shmad]. Seeing
what happened in other places he feared of the dangerous prospects
faced by his coreligionists in Spain: religious coercion of individuals in
a fashion similar to that of Europe. Indeed, most of these libels took
place in Ashkenaz, but such ideas were not unfamiliar in Spain. T h e
evidence for our author's realistic sense was embodied, eventually, in
the infamous Blood Libel of the "Holy Child of La-Guardia," which
took place two years before the Expulsion. 20

20
Baer reckons that the inquisitors in this trial were affected by external occur-
rences, particularly the Blood Libel in Trent (Y. Baer, Toldot Hayehudim bi-Sefard h-
Nozrit, Tel-Aviv, 1959, 549, n. 131). About the potential of a Blood Libel in Spain one
could learn from the propaganda of Alfonso d'Espina, who informs his Old Christian
audience that such an event took place in Valladolid in 1454, but the Jews managed
to silence the affair because of their great influence. T h e conclusion we have drawn
relies on the premise that the Scroll of Amrafel was written in Spain. This view, as
aforesaid, is also the view of G. Scholem, but it is not clear how did his supposition
regarding the Inquisition as being the historical background affected his assumption
that it was authored in Spain. Scholem does base the dating of composition on cal-
culations which are wrapped in much doubt (See my article in Tarbiz 64, 1995, 114
n. 21). His circumstantial evidence is insufficient for drawing bibliographical conclu-
sions for our discussion. Should the origin of the Scroll be found to be in Portugal
(whereto, presumably, the author moved after the Spanish expulsion in 1492), or in
 The Scroll of Amrafel
Translation 2 ‫י‬

It is a tradition among the sages [hakhamim] that a person who resolves

[gomer be-libo] to sacrifice himself for the honor of His honorable
Name—come what will and transpire what may—such a man will
not feel any pain of the beatings which torment other people who
have not made such a decision wholeheartedly. Such a man, when
they take him out in order to torment him through most horrible
tortures—as they did to the holy (martyrs) that are on the earth, and
to the excellent handsome young men, the sons of the saindy Hannah
who lived in the time of the priests that came near to the Lord, the
mighty men who fought the wars of the Lord—if he focuses his mind
at that hour on the honorable and awesome Name between his eyes
and will resolve to sanctify Him, and (if) his eyes will see the Holy
O n e of Israel and (if) he will cleave \yadbiq] his mind and thought
to Him, so that the holy Name will become a burning fire and its
sparkling letters will extend on the wholeness of the world, or if he
is able (at least) to grow the letters) to the best of his ability, he can
rest assured that he will be able to endure the test, trusting in God.
He will not feel pain of the beating and torture, nor will he tremble
(with the fear) of death. And although this may sound contradictory
to reason, behold this is known by experience and it is a tradition of
scholars upright martyrs. (And this is a matter for the faithful only),
for this is of the ways of the Lord which the just do walk in but trans-
gressors do stumble therein.
This is the order of taking the resolution to sanctify the Name when
they come to torment him and interrogate him [yish'aluhu ve-yidre-

some other Christian country in which he might have gone through, our claims would
remain with no significant change, and we shall only have to add to the list of libels
the event that took place in Spain in 1490. Should it be found out that the author
has written the Scroll toward the end of his wanderings, being in Muslim counties,
we would be obliged to say that he had probably written it for Jews under Christian
rule in Europe. (About his updated knowledge of the events in Germany during the
Reformation, while living in Jerusalem, see above, n. 10). In any case, we would be
able to stick to the reconstruction of the historical background we have offered.
2
' T h e Scroll of Amrafel has been translated almost in its entirety by Michael Fish-
bane in his monograph: The Kiss of God: Spiritual and Mystical Death in Judaism, Seatde
& London, 1994, 53, 54-6, 79-80. Here I present a complete English version of it.
By and large I accepted Fishbane's translation. My reading of the text difTers here
and there from his.
shuhu], and tell him that if he converts [yamir kevodo] they will let him
go and will not hurt him, or that he should let them know what he
wants. Behold this is what I have found written by one of the hasidim
that his answer should be: "What do you want from me. Am I not
a Jew? A Jew I am and as a J e w shall a die! A Jew! A Jew! A Jew!"
And then he should resolve to (be true to) what he has his lips and
mouth uttered and be ready and sure that he is going to sanctify his
Creator and not profane his God , s Name. It is then that he will not
feel the pain of the tortures they inflict on him. And this is the secret
alluded to by the prophet Isaiah: "One shall say: '1 am the Lord's.
And another shall call himself by the name of Jacob. And another
shall subscribe with his hand unto the Lord, and surname himself by
the name of Israel'" (44:5).
Behold it is worthwhile spreading these words among the Children
of Israel, a people near unto Him, for this is a generation of religious
persecutions [doro shel shmad] and it is of great import that such a car-
dinal idea [ha-iqar ha-zeh] will not be hidden from every person who
surnames himself by the name of Israel for who knows what a day
may bring forth (Proverbs 27:1) and what is the end of man.
It is also important to know, make known, and be aware that the
person who recites the Shemah each morning and evening and focuses
on the proper and correct intention while proclaiming the love of God
and His unity and resolves to devote his own body and soul to Him
as well as his wife's and children's, and to love Him with all his heart,
soul, and might, even when he prostrates himself [be-noflo alpanav] after
standing alive before the Lord (Leviticus 16:10) to confess his sins and
says: "I commit my soul to You, Ο Lord" (Psalm 25:1), and entrusts
his soul to his God, and upon Him 22 he sets his soul, and his spirit and
breath he gathers to himself as if he were going to his eternal resting
place [beit olamo]—truly such a person has ensured his share in (the
eternal) life and will go to be enlightened with the light of life along
with all the righteous, pious, and saints (or: martyrs) who sanctify the
Holiness ofJacob and praise the Lord of Israel. Moreover, all the sins
which normally would go unatoned until the day of death shall be
atoned for at that time, since he resolved to die [le-hashlim nafsho] for
his God and this is considered as if he died, gone and was annihilated
from this world. And this is a great thing: for so the King established,
and on this the poet who was inspired by the spirit of the Lord cried

22
I amended the text from ve-Elohav to ve-elav.
out, saying: "For Your sake we are killed all the day, and are counted
as sheep brought for the slaughter" (Psalm 44:23).
And perhaps it is concerning the soul of the martyr who devotes
his life [ha-mashlim nafsho] for God whom he loves at all times, and
he dies amidst the wicked, and surrenders his body to consuming fire
that the sage (King Solomon) said in his wisdom: "Who is this that
comes up from the wilderness, leaning [mitrapeqet] for her beloved"
(Song 8:5). For God's word is pure: she is falling apart [mitpareqet23]
and drops down limb for limb and piece for piece. And the righteous,
who dwell in the innermost chamber of the King where bliss has
its habitation, say about the soul of this martyr: "Who is this (soul)
that comes up from the lower world—which is likened to the wilder-
ness where there is nothing but serpents and adders, scorpions and
thirst—and for the love of its Beloved its body falls to pieces [peraqim
peraqim] due to the multitude of trials it was subjected to. They tear
its flesh by hot pincers or hack it to pieces by sword. And the King,
the Lord of peace, for love of whom she suffers all this, looks down
from His dwelling and says about the righteous (martyr) whose soul
is ascending to Him: "Behold you are pure and upright. I have born
you this day (anew) and 'awakened you under the apple tree,' in the
Orchard of Apples. Your holy soul is (now) pure before your Mother,
the Throne of My Glory, whence it was hewn and formed like a flock
of ewes. For where the Throne is, the Mother of all souls, there your
mother was in travail and bore you' (Song 8:5).
And the righteous (martyr) answers his Creator: "Set me as a seal
upon Your heart, as a seal upon Your arm" (ibid. 8:6), and do not
forget me ever. Remember the love with which I loved you, for even
if they kill me for my love to You, I shall not feel a thing 'for love is
as strong as death,' (ibid.). Indeed, even if they buried me alive this
would be as nought to me, for my zeal for the honor of Your Name is
'as fierce as the grave' (ibid.). And even if they burn me and cast me
into a fiery furnace, this too is nothing compared to my love to You,
for my love to You is a wonder wrought upon me and burns within
me like the sight of flaming torches, "the flashes thereof are flashes of
fire, a very flame of the Lord" (ibid.). How, then, could my soul be
impressed by that fire while the fiery flame of your love is overflowing
within me? And 'mighty' troubles and hardships, which are compared

25
I amended here: mitpareqet for mitrapeqet.
to 'water,' 'cannot quench the' flame of my 'love' (ibid., 8:7) And
though trouble come as a 'flood' (ibid.) the spirit of the Lord inspires
me to devote myself to You. I am not speaking of my property or
wealth, for 'wealth is less than nothing,' and if anyone should boast
that he gave 'all the substance of his house for love,' those who are
perfected, those who approach God, 'would surely scorn him' (Song
8:7). For this has no value to them, and they hold the treasures of the
world in contempt."
This is what one may truly boast of, if he surrenders his body to the
consuming fire and all the other harsh tortures I mentioned above.
Behold such a man the Lord will account it unto him and place him
as a seal upon His right arm and wear him like a seal on His heart.
His soul shall shine in God's light and there is no eye that has seen the
goodness which is stored for it. This is because his eminence and glory
are great and his soul will reside with those that pitch on the east side
toward the sunrise, Moses and Aaron, or with princes that have gold,
who filled their houses with silver, 24 and with those who dwell among
plantations and hedges, the martyrs of Lydda and (other) martyrs
[iharugei melukhah]. T h e existence of the entire world is worthwhile for
such a soul and its works shall be praised in the gates.

24
A figurative interpretation of J o b 3:15.
 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ashtor E., The Jews of Moslem Spain I, Philadelphia 1973. Mal'akhi ed., Lod, 1986,
pp. 31-56.
Baer Y., "Sefer Yossifon ha-Ivri," Q. Gutmann and M. Schwabe ed.], Sefer Dinaburg,
Jerusalem, 1949,
, "Gezerat T a T N U , " Sefer Assaf, 1953, 126-40.
Ben-Sasson H.H., "Hasidei Ashkenaz al Haluqat Qinyanim Homriyim u-Nekhasim
Ruhaniyim bein Benei ha-Adam," ζίοη 35, 1970, 61-79.
Chazan R., "Christian and Jewish Perceptions of 1096: A Case Study of Trier,"
Jewish History 13 (2), 1999, 9-22.
—, "The Early Development of Hasidut Ashkenaz," JQR 75, 1985, pp. 199-
211.
, European Jewry and the First Crusade, Berkeley, 1987.
Frend W.H.C., Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church: A Study of a Conflict from
the Maccabees to Donatus, Oxford.
Ginzburg L., Aggadot ha-Yehudim II, Ramat Gan 1967.
Gregory B., Salvation at Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modem Europe, Cambrigde,
Mass., 1999.
Gross Α., "AI Ha-Tismonet ha-Ashkenazit shel Kiddush ha-Shem be-Portugal bi-
Shenat 1497," Tarbiz 64, 1995, pp. 83-114.
, Iberian Jewry from Twilight to Dawn, Leiden, 1995.
, "Ta'amei Mizvat Milah—Zeramim ve-Hashpa'ot Historiyot," Da'at 21,
1988, 25-47.
- , "Hirhurim al Hebetim Hilkhatiyim ve-lo Hilkhatiyim shel Kiddush ha-Shem bi-
Shnat T a T N U , " /. Twersky Memorial Volume, Cambridge, Mass. (forthcoming).
, "Al Ma'asei Kiddush ha-Shem be-Magenza bi-Shenat 1096—Piyyutim u-Khro-
niqot," Tehudim Mut ha-^elav [Y. Assis et al ed.]. Jerusalem, 2000, 171-87.
, "Gerona: A Cradle of Jewish Learning and Spirituality," Materia giudaica
VI, 2001, 161-6.
Grossman Α., "Bein 1012 le-1096: Ha-Reqa ha-Tarbuti veha-Hevrati le-Kiddush
ha-Shem be-TaTNU," Tehudim Mul ha-^elav, Jerusalem, 2000, 55-73.
Haberman A.M., Sefer Gezerot Ashkenaz ve-£a1fat, Jerusalem, 1971.
Hacker Y., "Kelum Hu'ataq Kiddush ha-Shem el T e h u m ha-Ru , ah Liqrat ha-Et
ha-Hadashah," Qedushat ha-Hayyim ve-Heruf ha-Nefesh [Y. Gafni and A. Ravitzky
ed.], Jerusalem, 1993, 221-32.
, "Li-Gzerat T a T N U (1096)," Qon 31, 1966, 28-31.
Herr M.D., "Persecution and Martyrdom in Hadrian Days," Scripta Hierosolymitana
23, 1972, 85-125.
Joseph ha-Kohen, Divrei ha-Tamim le-Malkhei Zarfat u-Malkhei Beit Otoman ha-Togar II,
Lemberg, 1859.
Judah he-Hasid, Sefer Hasidim [R. Margaliot ed.], Jerusalem, 1957.
, Sefer Hasidim [A. Wistinetsky ed.], Berlin, 1891.
Katz J ‫" ״‬Bein T a T N U 1e-TaH-TaT," Sefer ha-Tovel le-Tizhaq Baer, 1961, pp. 318-
37.
 , Bein Yehudim le-Goyyim, Jerusalem, 1977.
, Masoret u-Mashber: Ha-Hevrah ha-Yehudit be-Moza'ei Yemei ha-Beinayim, Jeru-
salem, 1958.
Malkiel D., "Vestiges of Conflict in the Hebrew Crusade Chronicles " ,Journal of Jewish
Studies 53, 2001, 323-40.
Marcus I., "Mi-Deus Vult ve-ad Re?on ha-Bore," Yehudim Mul ha-gelav: Gezerot
TaTNU ba-Historiah uva-Historiografiah [Edited by Y.T. Assis et al], Yerusalem,
2000, 92-100.
, Piety and Society, Leiden, 1980.
Mind M., "Kiddush ha-Shem be-Einei N0?rim be-Germaniah bi-Yemei ha-Beina-
yim," ζίοη 59, 1994, 209-66.
Philo of Alexandria, Embassy to Gaius, in LCL, Philo ed. F.H. Colson, Cambridge,
Mass. 1962.
Safrai S., "Kiddush ha-Shem be-Toratam shel ha-Tana'im," Sefer /fkaron le-Y1zhaq
Baer[Zi0n 43), 1979-81, 28-42.
Salfeld S., Das Martyrologium des Nürenberger Memorbuches, Berlin, 1898.
Saperstein M., "A Sermon on the Akedah from the Generation of the expulsion
and Its Implication for 1391," Exile and Diaspora: Studies in the History of the Jewish
People Presented to Professor Haim Beinart [A. Mirsky et al ed.], Jerusalem, 1991,
103-26.
Sapir-Abulafia Α., "The Interrelationship Between the Hebrew Chronicles of the
First Crusade," Journal of Semitic Studies 27, 1982, pp. 221-39.
Scholem G., Shabetai gvi veha-Tenu'ah h-Shabeta'it bi-Yemei Hayav vol. I, Tel Aviv,
1957.
Schwartzfuchs S., "Meqomam shel Mas'ei ha-Zelav be-Divrei Yemei Yisrael," Tarbut
ve-Hevrah be-Toldot Tisrael bi-Yemei ha-Beinayim: Qovez Ma'amaHm le-Qkhro shel H.H.
Ben-Sasson, Jerusalem, 1989, 251-67.
Septimus B., "Narboni and Shem Τον on Martyrdom," Studies in MedievalJewish History
and Literature II [I. Twersky ed.], Cambridge, Mass. 1984, 447-455.
Shohat Α., "Kiddush ha-Shem be-Hagutam shel Megorashei Sefarad u-Mequbalei
Zefat," Milkemet Qodesh u-Martirologiah, Jerusalem, 1968, 131-45.
Soloveitchic Η., "Bein Hevel Arav le‫־‬Hevel Edom," Kedushat ha-Hayyim ve-Heruf ha-
Nefesh [I. Gafni and A. Ravitzky ed.], Jerusalem, 1993, 149-52.
—, "Religious Law and Change: T h e Ashkenazic Example", 47*^ Review 12,
1987, 205-21.
, "Halakhah, Hermeneuücs, and Martyrdom in Medieval Ashkenaz (Part I
of II)," JQR 94, 77-108.
Ta-Shma I., "Hit'abdut ve-Re?ah ha-Zulat al Kiddush ha-Shem: Li-She'elat Meqomah
shel ha-Agadah be-Masoret ha-Psiqah ha-Ashkenazit," Yehudim Mul ha-£elav:
Gezerot TaTNU ba-Historia uva-Historiografia [Y. Assis et al ed.], Jerusalem, 2000,
150-6.
Tishbi Y., Meshihiyut be-Dor Gerushei Sefarad u-Portugal, Jerusalem, 1985.
 INDEX

A Cologne 57, 98 η. 8
Aaron (Mecklenburg) 27 n. 30 Cordoba 48
Aaron bar Mordekhai (Mecklenburg) 27 Correa, Gaspar 58 η. 44
n. 30 Coutinho, Fernando 69, 71 n. 87, 72,
Aaron of Lunel 29 n. 34 76
Abraham (Patriarch) 14 n. 35 Crescas, Hasdai 47, 48, 49, 63, 64,
Abraham ben Azriel 9 96 n. 4
Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi 55, 113fF. Cuenca 74 n. 95
Abraham bar Moses (Koblenz) 30
Abraham Isaac Halevi (Gerona) 50 D
Abravanel, Isaac 99 n. 9 Dapiera, Solomon 50 n. 21
Akiva viii, ix, 3, 41, 77 η. 102, 80, 84 David bar Samson (France) 22
Albert of Aachen 5, 6 Duran Profiat (Profet) 49, 96 n. 4
Almohades 45-6, 96 n. 4
Amnon of Mainz 24 Ε
Amrafel (biblical) 116 Eleazar ben Yair 8, 12 n. 32, 88
Antiochus Epiphanes viii, 31 n. 38, 92 Eleazar the Elder (Hasmonean) viii
anusim (Forced Converts) viii, 2, 8 n. 20, Eliezer bar Yoel Halevi (RABIaH) 34
38-9, 47, 48, 58 n. 44, 65 n. 74, 75, n. 46, 38
117-8, 120, 122 Eliezer bar Nathan (RABaN) 57
Arama, Isaac 64 Elqabe?, Solomon 45, 70 n. 84
Ardutiel, Abraham 70 n. 84, 79-80, 83 Emicho, Count 2
Arelim (uncircumsized) 5, 6, 7 n. 18, 9-11, Endingen 119
60 Ephraim of Bonn 20
Arugat ha-Bosem 9 Ephraim of Lunel 9
Arzilla 81 Espina, Alfonso de 122 η. 20
Asher ben Yehi'el (ROSH) 48, 54, 63, Estremoz 71 η. 87
Asheri Family (Toledo) 48-9, 63, 83 Esztergom 35
Austria 25 Evora 71
Auto da Fé 116 Ezra (Gerona) 50
Av ha-Rahamim 13, 51
Avignon 47 F
Azriel (Gerona) 50 Farage, Isaac ibn 68 n. 80
Fez 46, 78 n. 104
Β Forced Converts, see: anusim
Bamberg 23
Barcelona 48, 49, 98 n. 7 G
Black Death 24-5,41,47 Gama, Vasco da 58 n. 46
Bernaldes, Andres 74 n. 95 Gaius Caligula 89
Bohemia 26 Gamla 6, 87
Genenlin (Bamberg) 23
Bonafed, Solomon 50 n. 21 Gerona 49-50, 52 "
Gerondi, Jonah 50, 52, 54, 55, 115
C Gerondi, Nissim 50, 83 n. 121
Carolina 118 Gerondi, Reuven ben Nissim 47
Catalunia 55 Gezerot QaNA (1391 Persecutions) 47
Childhood 43
Gôis, Damiäo de 69, 71 η. 87, 72-3,
76-7 η. 101
Granada 45, 95
Great Light 2, 4, 6 η. 14
Great Revolt (68 A.D.) 92
Guimaràes 68, 75
H Konstanz 21
Hadrianic Persecuüons viii, 31 η. 38
Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah 9,
16, 80
Hanina ben Teradion viii, 28, 33, 59,
61,84
Hannah (Hasmonean), 31 n. 38, 120
n. 16, 123
Hasmonean Revolt 87, 92, 120
Hayyat Judah 66
Hendeln (Mecklenburg) 27 n. 30
Holfeld 23
Hungary 35 n. 52
Huss, J a n 27 n. 28
Hussites 26-7
I Mainz ix, Iff., 26, 40, 41, 84, 98 n. 8
Inquisition 74 n. 95, 113, 115, 116,
117, 122 n. 20
Isaac (Holfeld) 23
Isaac (Patriarch) 14 n. 35
Isaac bar David (Mainz) 26, 41, 57
Isaac bar Moses 3, 14-5, 16 n. 37, 17
Isaac ben £ahin (Bofiillia de la Sierra)
60, 79
Isaac Halevi (Neuss) 21
Isaac of Dampiers 9
Isbili, Yom-Tov (RITBA) 32 n. 43, 52-
3, 5 4 , 6 1
Isserlein, Israel 25
Italy ix
J Mendeln ben Aaron (Mecklenburg)
Jacob ben Albeneh 48
Jacob ben Asher (Toledo) 48
Jacob T a m 28, 38, 39, 53
Jerusalem 87
J o â o II, King of Portugal 70 n. 85
J o n a h Hakohen (Austria) 25-6
Joseph Hakohen 8, 24, 76
Joseph the Sage (France) 22
Josephus Flavius χ, 8, 11-2, 88-9, 91
J u d a h ben Asher (Toledo) 48, 60
J u d a h Halevi 94-5
Judah he-Hasid 17, 18, 21-2, 57-8
Judenspiel 120 n. 16
Κ
Kafha-Qetoret 56-8
Koblenz 30
L
Lepers Persecution 8, 24
Lerma Shem-Tov 80
Lisbon 66, 68, 72 η. 89, 75-7, 79, 80-3
Liturgical poetry, see: Piyyul
Loal, Jacob 80
Luria, Solomon (MaHaRSHaL) 37-40,
42, 43
Lydda, Martyrs of 126
M
M a H a R a M , see Meir of Rothenburg
M a H a R I L , see Moelin, Jacob
MaHaRSHal, see Luria, Solomon
Majorca 48
Manuel, King of Portugal 67, 69, 71
ns. 85 and 89, 71 n. 87, 71 n. 89,
73, 74, 76-7 n. 101,79,80-2
Masada ix, x, 6, 8, 12 n. 32, 62 n. 62,
88, 89 n. 2, 91-2
Mechel ben Aaron (Mecklenburg) 27
n. 30
Mecklenburg 27 n. 30
Meir of Rothenburg (.MaHaRaM)7 n.
14, 10 n. 26, 11 n. 28, 30-3, 36,41,
55, 114
Meme, Shimon 67, 77 n. 102, 79, 81,
82, 83
Memorbüch 15, 17, 23, 24, 30
27 n. 30
Menahem bar J u d a h (Mainz) 15 n. 36
Menahem bar David Halevi (Mainz)
16-8
Menahem Merzburg 36
Menahem Recanati 35
Messianism 117
Moelin, Jacob (MaHaRIL) 27, 35
Mordekhai (biblical) 74-5, 83 n. 121
Moses of Corbeil (SeMaQ} 33, 39
Moses of Zürich 33 Resende, Garcia de 70 η. 85
Moses ben Eleazar 23 Rindfleisch Persecutions 8, 23
Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides) 62 Ritual knife 14 n. 35
n. 62, 64, 80, 83 η. 121,84 η. 124, ROSH, see Asher ben Yehi'el
97
Moses ben Nahman (RaMBaN, S
Nachmanides) 50, 51, 54, 96-7 S. Abraham bar Ukhman (Urman?)
Moya, Ginés de 74 η. 95 29, 40
Sachsenspiegel 199 η. 12
Ν Saba, Abraham 56 n. 36, 67, 70 n. 84,
Narboni, Moses 52 η. 28, 64 74-8, 80, 83
Nathan Eger 26 Samson (biblical) 60
Nefilat Apayim 114, 117 Samson bar Zadoq 55
Neuss 21, 57 Samuel ha-Naggid 45
Säo Tomé 70 η. 84
Ο Saul (King of Israel) 6, 7, 9, 11-3, 29,
Os Estàos 76 η. 99,77 η. 101, 31-2, 33 n. 4 5 , 3 7 , 5 3 , 60,87
Osorio, Geronimo 69, 73 η. 93, 77 η. Scroll ofAmrafel x, 55, 113-126
101 Sefer Hasidim 18, 22 n. 10, 58 n. 43
Sefer Gimatriya'ot 17, 18
Ρ S e M a Q , see Moses of Corbeil
Passau 119 Seville 48
Petronius 87, 89fT. Shalom of Neustadt 35
Philo χ, 88-91 Shaprut, Hisdai ibn 45
Pina, Rui de 70 n. 85 Shem-Tov ben Joseph 64
Piyyut ix, 17, 18 n. 42, 22, 24, 25, 30 n. Shem-Tov ben Shem-Tov 61 n. 54
3 6 , 3 1 , 4 7 , 121 n. 19 Shema 17, 55, 56 n. 36, 65 n. 74, 78 n.
Pforzheim 120 η. 16 104, 114-5, 124
Poland 53-6, 37 Shemaryah (Cologne) 120
Prague 25 Sicarii 88, 89 n. 2
Ptolemais (Akre) 89 Schwabenspiegel 199 η. 12
Solomon ben Asher (Bamberg) 23
Q. Solomon bar Samson 2, 57 n. 40
Qalonimos bar Judah (Mainz) 31, 32, Speyer 10 η. 27
98 n. 6
Qalonimos bar Meshulam (Mainz) 2, Τ
11,41 Ten Martyrs 16
Qapsali, Elijah 69, 70 n. 84, 72, 73 n. Thaddeus of Rome 9
95, 80-3, 99 n. 8 Toledo 48, 54, 59, 60, 61, 63, 83, 98
Qara, Avigdor 25 n. 7
Torture 118-21, 125
R Trent 119 η. 14, 120 η. 16, 122 η. 20
RABaN, see Eliezer bar Nathan Trier 99 η. 8
Rabenu Tam, see: Jacob T a m Turkey 74 η. 95
RABlaH, see Eliezer bar Yoel Halevi
Rachel (Mainz) 6 n. 16, 24 U
RaMBaN, see Moses ben Nahman Uri bar Isaac (Mainz) 57
Razis (Hasmonean) 87 Usque, Samuel 69, 70 n. 84, 76
Reconquista 46, 94-5
Regensburg 99 n. 8
V Yehoseph ha-Naggid 45, 95
Valencia 48 Tizkor 27 n. 30, 121
Valladolid 122 n. 20 Yodpat87
Verga, Solomon ibn 60 n. 54, 63, 64 n. Yom-Tov o f j o i g n y 8, 20-1
67, 70 n. 84, York 7, 20, 54
Vidui 114, 117 Yose ben Yoezer 22, 60
Vienna 35-6 Yoqim of Zridot 60
Yossifon χ, 5, 6, 11, 12 n. 32, 62 n. 62,
W 88, 89 n. 2, 121 n. 19
Weil, Jacob 22, 36 n. 54
WUliam of Newbury 7, 20 Ζ
Wirtzburg 23-4 Zacut, Abraham 49, 58-63, 67, 71-2,
Worms 11 η. 27, 17,98 η. 8 73 n. 95, 79, 99 n. 9
Zalman of St. Goar 27
Χ Zamora 68
Xanten 17 Zaragoza 50 n. 21, 98 n. 7
Zarfati 17 n. 39
Y Zeus 88
Ya'ave?,Joseph 77 η. 102
 THE BRILL REFERENCE LIBRARY
OF
JUDAISM
T h e Brill Reference Library ofJudaism presents research on fundamental problems in the study of the
authoritative texts, beliefs and practices, events and ideas, of the Judaic religious worldfromthe sixth century
BCE to the sixth century CE. Systematic accounts ofprincipal phenomena, characteristics of Judaic life, works
of a theoretical character, accounts of movements and trends, diverse expressions of thefaith, new translations
and commentaries of classical texts - all willfind a place in the Library.

1. Neusner, Jacob, The Halakhah. An Encyclopaedia of the Law of Judaism.

5 Vols. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11617 6 (set)
Vol. I. Between Israel and God. Part A. ISBN 90 04 11611 7
Vol. II. Between Israel and God. Part B. Transcendent Transactions: Where
Heaven and Earth Intersect. ISBN 90 04 11612 5
Vol. III. Within Israel's Social Order. ISBN 90 04 11613 3
Vol. IV Inside the Walls of the Israelite Household. Part A. At the Meeting of
Time and Space. ISBN 90 04 11614 1
Vol. V Inside the Walls of the Israelite Household. Part B. The Desacra-
lization of the Household. ISBN 90 04 11616 8
2. Basser, Herbert W, Studies in Exegesis. Christian Critiques ofJewish Law and
Rabbinic Responses 70-300 C.E. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11848 9 '
3. Neusner, Jacob, Judaism's Story of Creation. Scripture, Halakhah, Aggadah.
2000. ISBN 90 04 11899 3
4. Aaron, David H., Biblical Ambiguities. Metaphor, Semantics and Divine
Imagery. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12032 7
5. Neusner, Jacob, The Reader's Guide to the Talmud. 2001.
ISBN 90 04 1287 0.
6. Neusner, Jacob, The Theology of the Halakhah. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12291 5.
7. Schwartz, Dov, Faith at the Crossroads. A Theological Profile of Religious
Zionism. Translated by Batya Stein. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12461 6
8. Neusner, Jacob, The Halakhah: Historical and Religious Perspectives. 2002.
ISBN 90 04 12219 2
9. Neusner, Jacob, How the Talmud Works. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12796 8
10. Gruenwald, Ithamar, Rituals and Ritual Theory in Ancient Israel. 2003.
ISBN 90 04 12627 9
11. Boyarin, Daniel, Sparks of the logos Essays in Rabbinic Hermeneutics. 2003.
ISBN 90 04 12628 7
12. Neusner, Jacob, The Idea of History in Rabbinic Judaism. 2004.
ISBN 90 04 13583 9
13. Neusner, Jacob, The Perfect Torah. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13033 0
14. Neusner, Jacob, Rabbinic Narrative. A Documentary Perspective. Volume One:
Forms, Types and Distribution of Narratives in the Mishnah, Tractate Abot
and the Tosefta. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13023 3
15. Neusner, Jacob, Rabbinic Narrative. A Documentary Perspective. Volume Two:
Forms, Types and Distribution of Narratives in Sifra, Sifré to Numbers,
 and Sifré to Deuteronomy. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13034 9
16. Neusner, Jacob, Rabbinic Narrative. A Documentary Perspective. Volume Three
Forms, Types and Distribution of Narratives in Song of Songs Rabbah
and Lamentations Rabbah and a Reprise of Fathers According to Rabbi
Nathan Text A. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13035 7
17. Neusner, Jacob, Rabbinic Narrative. A Documentary Perspective. Volume Four, The
Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13036 5
18. Gruber, Mayer I., Rashi's Commentary on Psalms. 2003. ISBN 90 04 13251 1
19. Gross, Abraham, Struggling with Tradition. Reservations about Active Martyr-
dom in the Middle Ages. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13853 6

ISSN 1571-5000